side and checks the Pope and all his counsels thereby to inuite them to peace and vnity they know that we inuocate one God and beleeue all the articles of the Creed and rule of faith and preach and presse godlinesse of life without partiality punishing sinne and rewarding well doing as much as can be done in any kingdome or state that themselues allow they haue seene within the memory of man innumerable soules giuing their life for the testimony of that we beleeue onely we differ in diuers articles which potent and skilfull aduersaries at seuerall times in ages past brought into the Church let our writings be vnpartially weighed and the Scriptures be diligently read and the first Antiquity well considered and it will appeare they are in an error and kept in bondage thereto onely through the subtilty and cunning of their masse Priests God of his goodnesse open their eyes and eares that they may embrace the truth and come forth of Babylon and shaking off their superstition content themselues with the Testament of Iesus Christ to whom be all honour and power ascribed for euer Amen xij Maij 1614. A Table of the Questions and Controuersies either purposely and largely handled or by occasion briefly falling out betweene my Aduersary and me in this Defence A ANtichrist and his persecution with the time of his Reigne as the Papists hold it pag. 361. and 378. Apocrypha not Canonicall Scripture pag. 61. and 62. in the marg Assurance of grace and saluation Chap. 16. Antecedent and Consequent will of God pag. 212. Authoritie of the Church and Scripture Chap. 30. nu 4. B Baptisme of infants by Scripture pag. 151. nu 3. The Bull against Mich. Baius pag. 48. nu 5. C Catholicke discipline what pag. 5. Church defined and distinguished pag. 365. nu 2. The visiblenesse of the Church at large Chap. 37.38.39 In what sense the Church Militant is sometime inuisible pag. 355. 360. 373. Hypocrites not true members of the Church pag. 369. Where the Church was before Luther 386. 390. 394. How the Church is subiect to error pag. 421. nu 2. Councels subiect to error Chap. 47. Charles the Emperor his booke against Images pag. 458. nu 5. Conception of the B. Virgin in sin Chap. 49. Communion in one kinde Chap. 55. E Celebration of Easter pag. 150. nu 2. Erre the Church may erre pag. 421. nu 2. And how Councels Chap. 47. Errors came in by degrees into the Church pag. 519. nu 1. F Fathers their consent with Protestants pag. 410. and Chap. 45. They professed not Papistrie Chap. 43. The Papists manner of reiecting them pag. 177. Fundamentall and not Fundamentall points of faith Chap. 17. Frankford Councell against images Chap. 48. G Grace assurance of grace Chap. 16. Gregory what faith he taught pag. 433. H Hypocrites no true members of the Church pag. 369. Hildebrands doctrine touching the Popes power ouer Princes pag. 27. nu 2. inde I Iesuites when and to what purpose ordained pag. 13. The maintainers of turbulencie and treasons pag. 25. and 81. Charged with purging bookes pag. 56. and 72. with inhumanitie pag. 87. with training vp their people in ignorance pag. 54. and 92. Inuocation of Saints by praier Chap. 13. and 14 Implicite faith and all the doctrine of the Papists touching the same Chap. 23. Image worship and the doctrine of Rome touching the same pag. 453. and 528. and Chap. 53. Iustification of the Gentiles Chap. 22. nu 1. L The Laitie forbidden the Scripture pag. 479. Permitted in ancient time to reade them Chap. 51. Luther whence he had his assurance and who taught him pag. 320. nu 8. His reiecting the Fathers pag. 310. nu 2. He sought reformation with all humility pag. 317. Where the Church was afore his time pag. 386. and 390. and 394. M Marriage of Priests Chap. 52. and Chap. 58. nu 2. Masse Priests see Iesuites Masse pag. 74. and Chap. 58. nu 5. Merits Chap. 7. and Chap. 58. nu 4. N The second Nicen Councell Chap. 48. O Originall sin pag. 530. nu 6. P Peters being at Rome and being Bishop of Rome pag. 534. nu 2. Pope how many Princes he hath bin Traitor to pag. 34. nu 3. The Papists make him the rule of faith and iudge of all pag. 67. and 79. and 299. and Chap. 34. and 35. His supremacy chap. 54. and pag. 525. His succeeding of Peter pag. 537. nu 2. and 3. He hath erred and bene an Hereticke euen in Cathedra pag. 543. nu 7. Purging of bookes pag. 56. and 72. Praier to Saints Chap. 13. and 14. For the dead Chap. 57. nu 3. Protestant religion whether it bring men to desperation p. 401. nu 8. Pardons Chap. 57. nu 2. Purgatory Chap. 57. nu 2. Priests mariage Chap. 52. and Chap. 58. nu 2. Predestination whether for grace foreseene pag. 220. nu 10. inde Predetermination of mans will by Gods will pag. 236. nu 21. Papists cast off the Fathers pag. 177. maintaine saluation without the knowledge of Christ pag. 162. haue changed the ancient faith pag. 339. purged the ancient writings pag. 56. and 72. R Rome a whore pag. 11. n. 2. Romane Clergy their couetousnesse Ch. 4. nu 1. and Ch. 5. Their charity pag. 23. nu 3. Reall presence pag. 76. Rule of Faith and the properties thereof Ch. 26. and Ch. 35 nu 6. S Scripture put downe pag. 9. and 65. and 79. and 250. Translation thereof into the vulgar tongue pag. 63. and Ch. 51. Such translations forbidden the laity pag. 479. nu 2. Scripture proues and expounds it selfe Ch. 19. and 20. and 32. The sufficiency thereof against Traditions Ch. 27. and 30. and 31. and pag. 274. Obscurity and perspicuity of it Ch. 29. The light of it pag. 280. What certainty or infallibility there is in translations Ch. 28. How particular men are assured of the sense of the Scripture pag. 314. Spirits priuate Ch. 32. and pag. 315. Saints their inuocation Ch. 13. and 14. How they are supposed to heare vs. pag. 105. Sufficient grace whether giuen to all pag. 231. nu 15. Succession of the true Faith in the Church how it was Ch. 44. Succession of the Romish faith set forth in Catalogues how answered pag. 406. Seruice in an vnknowne language Ch. 50. T Transubstantiation Ch. 56. Traditions preferred and Scripture put downe pag. 9. 65. 79. 250. Treasonable doctrine and traiterous practises defended by Papists pag. 27. inde Translation of the Scripture into the mother tongues pag. 63. See Scripture V Vacancy in the Sea of Rome pag. 541. nu 5. Virginity of the B. virgine Mary pag. 149. nu 1. Woman Pope pag. 542. nu 6. Scripture expounded at large 1. Tim. 2.4 God will all men to be saued pag. 210. nu 4. 2. Tim. 3.15 All Scripture is inspired of God c. Chap. 31. 1. Cor. 14. Ch. 50. THE CONTENTS OF THE SEuerall Chapters of this Booke CHAP. 1. THe title of A. D. his Reply
d Syllog Whatsoeuer he taught by word of mouth the same by his Epistles he reuoked to their memory But he taught al things beloÌging to faith by word of mouth Therefore by his Epistles he reuoked the same to memory But his Epistles are written therfore by writing he reuoked to their memorie all things beloÌging to faith Therefore all things belonging to faith are written is from the demonstration of holy inspired Scriptures b Iren. l. 3 c. 1. For the disposing of our saluation we haue not knowne by any other but those by whom the Gospell came vnto vs the which then they preached but afterward by Gods appointment they deliuered vnto vs in the Scriptures to be the foundatioÌ and pillar of our faith And c Ibid. c. 2. WheÌ hereticks are conuinced out of the Scriptures they fal to accusing them as if they were not right nor from authoritie because they are variably spoken and from them the truth cannot be found of those that know not Tradition inasmuch as this truth was not deliuered by writing but by word of mouth Thus speakes the ancient Church in expresse termes pointing to our aduersaries whereby the Reader may iudge which of vs beare most good will to the Church and Scriptures and if the Iesuite will yeeld to that Nicephorus q writes in his Ecclesiasticall historie that whatsoeuer S. Paul being present taught by word of mouth among the Corinths Ephesians Galatians Colossians Philippians Thessalonians Iewes Romanes and many other townes whereunto the holy Ghost sent him and whom he begat in the faith of Christ the same being absent by his Epistles sent to them he compendiously reuoketh into their memorie Then forasmuch as the Apostles preached nothing to any but what they set downe in the Epistles the Protestants haue good reason to admit onely Scripture because it containes all the preaching of the Apostles whatsoeuer Let the Iesuite in the course of his studies and all Papists in the heate of their zeale marke these and such like our grounds and well consider them Pag. 32. A.D. As concerning his second mark wherein he says the very face of our Church is cleane contrary to the first antiquitie if he mean that there is some accidentall difference either in personall qualities of particular men or in some point of outward estate and manner of gouernment betwixt the first primitiue age or infancie of the Church and that other estate which after it had and now hath when it is at full growth this is not an argument sufficient to make men doubt of our religion more then to see some accidental alteration betwixt the infancy elder age of a man is any argument sufficient to make one doubt whether he be substantially the same man or no but if he meane that there is any substantiall difference in any doctrine of faith his assertion is very false as I declare in the Appendix annexed to this my Reply where particular answer is made to the chiefe matters against which here he taketh exception 8 I meane and expresse so much that betweene the present Roman Church and the ancient there is a substantiall difference in many doctrines of faith and not such an accidentall difference onely as the Iesuite mentions And because I desire no man to credit my bare word I named the Hierarchie of the Church of Rome consisting in the state and iurisdiction of the Roman cleargie which is simply the substantiallest point that they count of and foure other points and my speech was of that latitude that it chargeth them with innouation in all the rest the booke it selfe afterward shewing it in particular so fully and directly that all the Iesuites in England dare not lay railing and cauilling aside and answer what I said temperately and ingeniously for that which the Iesuite sayes in the Appendix he hath made particular answer is vntrue he hath answered particularly to nothing nor can he But knowing his sectaries were either so slothfull that they would not reade his booke so far or so forgetfull that when they came to the Appendix this matter would be out of their head he was bold in this place to promise what he neuer meant there to pay though whatsoeuer he say there is sufficiently answered I am sorie at my heart for my countrimen that haue these tricks put vpon them to seduce and peruert them I beseech them by the mercies of Iesus Christ that as I penned my booke out of my loue to them and desire of their saluation for the which I would sacrifice my life and all the hopes I haue in this world so they will faithfully examine how the contents thereof are answered by this Reply who if I be not deceiued is farre vnable to meddle with these things CHAP. X. 1. The practise of the Papists in purging bookes 2. The sacrifice of the Masse and Reall presence denied 4. Points of Papistrie absurd 6. The Pope Lords it ouer all Papists need pay no debts May be traitors to murther Princes 7. Iesuites plotters in the Powder-treason The Popes dispensing with sinne 8. A meditation for all Papists A. D. M. Whites third marke is set downe by him in these words Pag. 31. There is no point of our faith but many learned in their owne Church hold it with vs. And no point of Papistrie that we haue reiected but some of themselues haue misliked as well as we And this saith he may be demonstrated in all the questions that are betweene vs and they know it c. Thus farre are M. Whites words The which containe in them so many blacke lies as there are instances which may be giuen of particular points both of Catholicke doctrine reiected by Protestants and not misliked by any of our selues and of Protestant doctrine not patronized nor held by any learned men of our Church And to omit other instances I aske M. White how many learned men of our Church haue denied the Masse to containe a Sacrifice in such sort as Protestants do denie How many also will he finde to affirme that Christ his blessed bodie is onely figuratiuely in the Sacrament or in such sort that the reall substance of it is no nearer them that receiue the Sacrament then heauen is to earth as by the Caluinists is held against the Romane Church Let M. White for his credit produce if he can many or any learned men of our Church which hold in these points with Caluinists against the Romane faith As for the Index expurgatorius which M. White mentioneth and the practise and vse of it our Authors haue sufficiently answered namely N.D. in his Warnword and the author of the booke called the Grounds of the old and new religion in his answer to M. Crashaw annexed to the said booke 1 THat which I said I shewed in my book where in euery controuersie that fell out betweene vs I haue produced popish writers one against another either iustifying our doctrine or crossing
may be said This I must or I may beleeue vpon the tradition and authority of the Church though it be not any way reuealed in the Scripture The which assertion of ours hath 2. parts the one affirmatiue that the Scripture alone and absolutely considered in it owne Latitude and extent containeth all things belonging to faith without defect This is proued a Digr 3. 1 2. in the way The other Negatiue that the Churches authoritie is neither needfull nor able to supply any necessary or new point of faith that is not contained in the Scripture I deny it not to be ordinarily a necessary condition for the knowing and beleeuing that which the Scripture reueales for b Ro. 10.14 How shall they heare that they may beleeue without a Preacher c Act. 8.31 How can we vnderstand except we haue a guide d Mal 3.7 for the Priests lips should preserue knowledge and at his mouth they should seeke the Law for he is the Messenger of the Lord of hoasts I onely deny it to be the rule and foundation of faith or so much as the last infallible and cleare ground whereupon the beleeuer in any point that he beleeues restes himselfe The which to hold proportion with the Iesuit in this place I onely proue by the Papists owne principles to wit that the proposition of the Church is e Grego Val. tom 3. disp 1. q. 1. punct 1. pag. 32. §. sit nunc Sexta neither the last and clearest motiue whereupon our faith staies but there are higher and clearer then it which can be nothing but the immediate supernaturall light of the verities beleeued themselues shining vpon our hearts from the Scripture whereunto the light of Church authority when it hath reuealed the doctrine contained in Scripture to vs giues place as all lesser lights do when a greater begins to shine 2 Secondly I answer that from this Principle of ours Nothing may be beleeued but what is set downe in Scripture expressely or may be gathered from thence by good consequence it doth not follow that a particular man as Luther or White cannot beleeue the promises of Gods speciall mercie touching his owne saluation because though Luther or Whites name be not expressely set downe in the promise yet that which is set downe is so offered to vs that being penitent beleeuers and iustified and standing in grace whereof there is an infallible assurance f THE WAIâ Digr 43. by our aduersaries owne confession we may conclude our owne particular Saluation from thence and must indeuour to beleeue it This part of my answer affirmes 2. things First that a penitent sinner iustified and eleuated into the state of grace may infallibly proue or gather the assurance of his Saluation by good consequence from the Scripture Secondly that this assurance thus to be gathered appertaines to those verities which are beleeued by the habite of faith I do not say any man can at all times so firmely and without feare of the contrary beleeue his owne reconciliation with God as he can the first articles of faith that are expressely and immediately reuealed I onely affirme that he beleeues it by the habite of supernaturall faith and is bound to endeuour and vse the meanes that he may beleeue it 3 The first point I haue purposely shewed g Digr 40. n. 39. 4â n. 10. in the THE WAIE and confirmed by the confession of diuers of our Aduersaries whither I referre the Iesuit that he may see how and in what manner this assurance is gathered Onely I will here admonish the reader that if the penitent beleeuer could not by necessary consequence of Scripture and true application of the generall promises of the Gospell to his owne particular person conclude his saluation he were in no wise bound to beleeue it but now when he hath receiued the Testimony of Gods Spirit within him crying Abba Father the power of the same Spirit in his body and soule renuing him and producing the effectes of sauing grace the Faith of Christ whereby he giues consent to the Gospell the life of Christ whereby he liues not himselfe but Christ liues in him the power of his death whereby he dies to the world and sinne when finally in truth and conscience he performes all the conditions that the Scripture requires and feeles within him those very signes whereby the Gospell describes the elect it may not be doubted but by good consequence both in matter and forme he may conclude his owne saluation It is no where written in the Bible that Luther or Caluine shall rise at the last day yet the Reply will allow them to beleeue it by consequence from that which is written All men shall rise It is no where written that this Iesuite shall come into Iudgement and giue an account of this his faith and the waies wherein he walkes yet I presume he beleeues it by faith in that by consequence it necessarily followes of that Article He shall come to iudge the quicke and the dead In the same manner a penitent sinner examining himselfe concludes his owne saluation from the Scripture that sayes h Marc. 16.16 Rom. 10.9 Euery one that repents and beleeues shall be saued Therefore if there be any certainty of a mans owne repentance of his being in Grace of the testimony of Gods Spirit and i Paret Lombarâum nec vâluâsse nec doââisse vt doâerentur Christian de peccatorum remissione gratia Dei vita aeterna perpetuo dubitare aut diffidere quemad modum re vera nec vllus Orthodoxus sani iudicij Ecclesiastes inter Pontificios quod equidem sciam vnquam illud docuit Mart. Eisengren defens Concil Trid. de cert grat p. 216. fie vpon that mouth that will say there is none when the Scripture k 2. Co. 13.5 biddes vs Try our selues touching them it must needes be yeelded that there is a certainty likewise of his saluation 4 The second point that the remission of our sinnes and eternall life is beleeued by Faith is cleare vpon 4. points 1. because in the Creed those 2. Articles are made the obiect of Faith therefore the penitent sinner applies them to himselfe by the same habit 2. l Aliqui Catholici existimarunt posse vnumquemque credete fide diuina sine peculiari reuelatione dimissa sibi esse peccata Vasqu 12. disp 200. n. 5. Many learned Papists confesse so much Fisher of Rochester m Roffenf opusc de fid miserecord dei axiom 10. If we will enter into heauen we must not come with a double heart or wauering Faith but with that which is ALTOGETHER VNDOVBTING and MOST CERTAINE For to doubting minds there is no way open Gropper and the Diuines of Collen n Antididag c. de iustif §. proditum est p. 29. We are iustified by Faith whereby WITHOVT DOVBTING we firmely beleeue that our sinnes who are truely penitent are forgiuen vs for Christ
Ecclesiam Dei posse de assertione non vera facere veram aut de non non falsam Turrecâem sum de Eccl. l 4. part 2. c. 3. ad 6. our aduersaries denie the latter is not sufficient to make the Scripture onely probable in that howsoeuer for want of Church authoritie a man may not see such texts to proue the virginitie of Marie or the Baptisme of children yet the proofe is in them within their owne latitude and if there be any such matter in them at all then is it in them more then probably because no diuine testimonie is probable but necessarie but Gretser and the Church of Rome vse their traditions as Alchymists do the Philosophers stone with the touch of it they turne any mettall into gold or as Painters do Allum to giue tincture to their colours CHAP. XIX 1. 2. How the Churches authoritie proues the Scripture 3. The Iesuits plainely confesse that the Scriptures alone prooues it selfe to be Gods word 4. The Scriptures are Principles indemonstrable in any superior science 6. All other testimony resolued into the testimony of the Scripture 7. Touching Euidence and the Compossibility thereof with faith A. D. I will insist in that example which I propounded Pag. 68. in the treatise and thus I dispute All sorts both Catholickes and Protestants do beleeue and hold it a point necessary to be beleeued that S. Mathewes S. Marks Gospell c. are true diuine Scripture and that these particular bookes which the Church vseth are the same true Scripture at least in sense and substance which was set downe by those holy writers But these points are not expressed in Scripture nor secluding Church authority and tradition so contained as that they can be proued euidently and necessarily out of any sentence of Scripture Ergo all points necessary to be beleeued are not so contained in Scripture as Protestants say they are M. Wotton and M. White both struggle with this argument as other Protestants haue done before theÌ but when they haue done said all one may easily see how they sticke fast in the mire To omit their impertinent speeches there are onely two things which to the purpose they do or can directly say viz. either they must deny these to be points of faith necessary to be beleeued or else they must shew how one may prooue these points euidently out of some sentence of Scripture For if they admit that these be points of faith necessary to be beleeued and that these cannot be prooued out of Scripture it followeth ineuitably that all points of faith necessary to be beleeued cannot be prooued by Scripture and that their Principle is false which saith nothing is necessary to be beleeued as a point of saith which cannot be prooued euidently by Scripture M. White saith that like as in other sciences White pag. 47. there are some Principles indemonstrable so in matters of faith it is a Principle to be supposed that Scripture is Diuine and so no maruell if it cannot be prooued as other points of faith are To this I reply that Principles in sciences are either euident to vs and knowne by the onely light of nature and so neede no proofe but onely declaration of terms or words in which they be vttered or if they be not euident to vs they must be demonstrated either in the same science or in some superior science by some other Principle more euident to vs. But that these books which are in the Bible are diuine Scripture is * If it were euident how is it onely beleeued by faith For S. Paul calls faith argumentum non apparentium Heb. 11. v. 1. not euident therefore if M. Whites similitude be good it must be demonstrated by some other Principle more euidently vnto vs that these books which are in the Bible be diuine Scripture Secondly I aske whether this point of doctrine that S. Mathewes Gospell c. is diuine Scripture be such a Principle of faith as it selfe is also a point necessary to be beleeued and that by the same infallible faith by which we beleeue the blessed Trinity Or that it is so a Principle as it selfe is not to be beleeued at all by faith or by the same faith by which wee beleeue the blessed Trinity If the first be said then either the opinion of Protestants who say nothing is to be necessarily beleeued as a point of faith which cannot be prooued out of the Scripture is false or else this is not a Principle indemonstrable as M. White affirmeth If rhe second be said then it followeth that Protestants do not beleeue by faith S. Mathewes S. Marks Gospell c. nor any other booke in the Bible to be diuine Scripture and consequently not hauing assurance of diuine faith in this point they cannot haue any faith at all in any other points since other points being not otherwise in a Protestants iudgement points of faith then as they are conclusions prooued out of Scripture cannot be more assuredly knowne then Scripture it selfe which is the onely Premise or Principle whence Protestants deduce all other points of their faith 1 MY Aduersary in a In THE WAY §. 9. but in his printed booke cap. 7. his treatise that I answered to shew that the Scripture is not the Rule whereby to find and iudge of true faith obiected the insufficiencie and imperfection thereof because there be diuers questions and points of faith not contained and determined therein Which he endeuours to proue by this argument here set downe Whereto I answered directly and in forme as b THE WAY §. 9. n. 3. inde the booke will shew The which my answer in this place he replies to as you see after his ordinary manner with bragging and saying nothing and casting out a few insolent speeches The Protestants struggle with this argument One may easily see how they sticke in the mire Onely two things to the purpose It seems M. White saw the weakenes of his answer c wherto I answer 2 First he sayes we struggle with this argument and sticke in the mire which in some sense I may not deny for when I vndertooke this Iesuit I struggled with a dunghill and therefore * Hoc scio pro certo quod si cuÌ stercâre c. no maruell if for my penance I sticke in the mire both here and in many other places of this reply his bragging and railing and facing it out with nothing when yet all this with many shall be accepted for sound diuinity being such as will bemire and weary any man in the world that desires nothing but the truth Otherwise my answer was direct and plaine for the point he is to proue is that the Scripture alone containes not nor determines the whole obiect of our faith but diuers points needfull to be beleeued are wanting in it and must be supplied by the authority and tradition of the Church his reason to proue this is the
Syllogisme here set downe Whereto I answered First granting the maior and acknowledging it to be a point of faith necessary to be beleeued that the Canonicall bookes which the Church vses are true diuine Scripture but I denied the second proposition that they cannot be proued so to be by themselues secluding Church authority and tradition And I distinguish for the Authority and direction of the Church is Gods outward ordinance to teach vs as a condition how to see the Scripture to be diuine but not the thing whereby they are prooued so to be and whereon our faith leaneth but this diuinity the Church as a bare Minister out of the Scripture it selfe prooues to be in the Scripture not by her owne authority that vpon her word and testimony either onely or particularly it should be taken for Scripture rather then the books of other men In the same manner that a man shewes a star giuing light to it selfe which yet another cannot see till the man point to it Or as a dead mans will kept in the Register of necessity must be sought there and thence receiued yet all the authority of that court which is great and ample specially in preseruing records neither makes nor prooues the will to be legitimate but is onely a requisite condition to bring it forth and vs to the sight and knowledge of it the will proouing it selfe by the hand and seale of him that made it affixed to it So it is with the word of God which we do not ordinarily see to be the word of God vntill the Church teach and traine vs vp therein But when it hath done the arguments whereby it is proued so to be and the authority whereupon I beleeue it are contained in the word it selfe which I expound and confirme by this that euermore and perpetually the Church by the Scripture it selfe and by no other argument prooues it to be diuine to those she teaches and vpon that ground at the first receiued them for such her selfe and many times it fals out as with some Atheists and Pagans that where no Church authority ministry or perswasion is vsed by onely reading of the Scripture it selfe in respect of the outward meanes a man coms to faith which could not be if the Scripture it selfe had not conuinced him forsomuch as an Atheist or vnbeleeuer will not be perswaded by any thing but that which he euidently sees to be Gods owne word and this perswasion arises in him from the very booke it selfe without Church authority 3 And this is yet confirmed by that which the Iesuites teach against the Anabaptists Swinkfieldians holding the motions of their inward spirit to be Gods word for Bellarmine c De verb. Dei l. 1. c. 1. 2. sayes that to the faithfull acknowledging the Scripture to be Gods word it may be prooued out of the Scripture it selfe that the Scripture is the word of God Molhusine and Gretsers d Gretser def Bellar. l. 1. c. 2. pag. 34. D. words are these It is manifest that Bellarmine onely affirmes that it may be prooued OVT OF THE SCRIPTVRES THEMSELVES and the Canonicall books thereof onely TO THE FAITHFVLL who receiue and reuerence them for such that the word of God is not the inward spirit whereof fantasticall men boast but the word of God is truly it which is contriued in those books which the faithfull hold for Canonicall In which words they say three things First that the faithfull who acknowledge the Scripture to be Gods word are they persons of whom they speake not such as receiue it not Secondly that to such it may be prooued that not the inward spirit of fantasticall men but the Canonicall Scripture is the word of God Wherein they affirme two things may be prooued A Negatiue that the inward spirit is not Gods word and an Affirmatiue that Gods word is truely it which is contained in the Canonicall books of the Scripture Thirdly that both this Negatiue and this Affirmatiue may be proued out of the Scriptures themselues Hence I reasoÌ thus To the godly that receiue and acknowledge the Scripture this affirmatiue that Gods word is it which is contained in the Canonicall Bookes of the Scripture may be proued out of the Scriptures themselues therefore the Scripture it selfe can proue it selfe to be the word of God Therefore that the Scripture it the very word of God is contained in the Scripture because otherwise it could not be proued so to be out of the Scripture it selfe Therefore all things needfull are contained in this Scripture No wrangling can auoid this If to such as receiue them it may be proued out of themselues that these Bookes are the word of God then this point that these bookes are diuine Scripture is contained in Scripture and the cause why some see it not is their owne indisposition and vnbeleefe wherewith the Scripture must not be charged but to such as receiue these Bookes the Iesuits affirme it may be proued out of themselues that they are the word of God that is without all Church authoritie which is externall and not in the Scripture 4 Secondlie this being admitted that it is a a point of faith necessary to be beleeued that the Canonical Books are diuine and then againe that they could not be shewed so to be out of themselues yet doth it not follow ineuitably that all points of faith are not contained in them for the question is not whether the Scripture be Gods word or no which is granted of all hands but whether being confessed so to be it containe all such verities as a Christian man is bound to know in such measure that there is no point to be beleeued that is not contained therein The reason is because the Scriptures are the principles of diuine knowledge and the faith thereof * Not in nature but in proportion like the credite we yeed to the rules of humane sciences which are knowne and beleeued of themselues without any further demonstration And as the kings lawes containe all things whatsoeuer the subiect is bound to do and yet the said lawes not prouing themselues to be of authoritie but supposing it to be known before and otherwise are not thereby proued to be vnperfect or defectiue but being receiued then there is nothing wanting in them that is necessary for the common-wealth and as in all arts and sciences that we learne the rules and precepts thereof need not proue themselues for that which is the generall rule of other things is not ruled it selfe in the same kinde and yet it were folly to say they were therefore imperfect So may it be said to be in the Scripture supposing it had no more light thereby to authorize it selfe then Princes lawes and humane principles haue that it containes all points of faith though it were not expressed that it selfe is the word of God For the readier vnderstanding whereof let the Reader againe cast his eie vpon the occasion
whereof all this question rises 5 Our Aduersaries holding many points of religion which we refuse we require them to shew vs the said points in the Scriptures if they will either haue vs to beleeue them or free themselues from heresie their Tradition their Purgatory their Masse their Latine seruice their Transubstantiation their Images their seuen Sacraments their Inuocation of Saints and all the rest wherein we differ * This is shewed c. 28. n. 3. Their answer is that many diuine truthes and articles of faith are not contained in the Scriptures but reuealed by Tradition and Church authoritie which are to be receiued and beleeued as well as that which is written * The original cause why the Papists set a foot the question touching the insufficiency of the Scripture This is the originall reason why they stand thus against the sufficiency of the written word for their Church authoritie and to proue this they vse the Argument here propounded by the Reply and descant with it as you see Which is an impertinent kinde of proceeding when this point whether the Bookes contained in holy writ be Gods word is no question betweene vs but agreed vpon of all hands but the question is touching other speciall articles Images adoration halfe communion and such like a number more whether not being contained in the Scripture men are bound to beleeue them For touching these things it is properly that we say Nothing is necessary to be beleeued as a point of faith which cannot be prooued euidently by Scripture And therefore this argument is impertinent For where we affirme all points of faith to be comprised within the body of the Scripture we distinguish first of the things which we say are comprised for albeit we firmely hold the diuine truth and authoritie of these Bookes to be euident in themselues yet the points that we meane in this question are touching other matters for neither they nor we deny the Scripture but both they and we deny many things to be contained in it Secondly then againe of the manner how things are comprised for all other things are comprised in Scripture as the duty obedience of subiects is in the kings lawes and as true speaking is contained in Grammar or the right forme of resoluing in Logicke but this one point is so contained as light is in the Sunne or sweete in hony and according to the same notion whereby the authoritie of the Law and truth of Principles is contained in themselues This is it which very briefly I answered in * THE WAIE § 9. 3. digr 11. n. 17. two seuerall places of my Booke Now let us see what the Iesuite replies to it To this saith he I reply that principles insciences are either euident to vs and knowne by the onely light of nature and so neede no proofe but onely declaration of termes or words in which they be vttered or if they be not euident to vs they must be demonstrated either in the same science or in some superiour science by some other principle more euident to vs. But that these Bookes which are in the Bible are diuine Scripture is not euident therefore if M. Whites similitude be good it must be demonstrated by some other principle more euident to vs that these Bookes which are in the Bible be diuine Scripture The substance of his Reply is that all principles are either euident of themselues or not euident such principles as are euident he grants need no prouing but the Scriptures are principles of religioÌ not euident of themselues but such as need to be demonstrated to be Gods word by some other principle in a higher science more euident to vs both denying them to be euident and also to be made so by onely declaring the words wherein they are vttered And to proue this he saies in the margent if it were euident that these Bookes in the Bible are diuine Scripture how is it onely beleeued by faith for Saint Paule cals faith ArgumentuÌ non apparentium Heb. 11.1 1. My answer is that the Scriptures are principles euident of themselues to those that haue the Spirit of God and such as need not to be proued by Church authoritie but onely to be reuealed and expounded according to that which is in themselues This my answer to helpe the reader out of the Iesuits perplexed discourse I will lay downe and explicate in 3. propositions First the Scripture in diuinitie hath the same office that principles haue in sciences that as the rules and principles of Grammar teach all true speaking and as the elements of Arithmeticke teach all right numbring so the doctrine contained in the Scriptures teaches all true faith Secondly as they are the principles of religion and rule of faith so they enioy the same priuiledge that principles do in forren Professions that is to be receiued and assented to for themselues without discourse For e Atist Poster c. 1. no humane science proues it owne principles or disputes against him that denies them and although the principles of an inferiour science may be demonstrated in a superiour yet this befalles not that which is the highest as the Metaphysicks which hauing no superiour science neither stands to demonstrate it selfe nor to receiue demonstration from another but our vnderstanding assents immediatly to the principles thereof and so goes forward by them to discerne of other things In the same manner the Scripture hauing no superiour science or rule aboue it is like these principles receiued for it selfe and is not occupied in prouing it selfe and the principles therin contained but shewing other things by them it selfe must be assented to without discourse by faith before we can argue out of it Thirdly all demonstration and proofe of principles is onely voluntary not necessarie against him that denies them as in Musicke the Musitian demonstrates his precepts not thereby to teach his arte but to conuince him that denies it Hence appeares the insufficiency of my aduersaries reply First in that he saies principles are not euident but need demonstration that so the Scriptures being yeelded to be the principles of religion yet they should not be receiued vnlesse they proue themselues vntill the authoritie of the Church come There is no man acquainted with f Principia per seipsa nata sunt cognosci reliqua verò per principia Arist prio l. 2 c. 18. idem Procl in Euclid l. 2. c. 2. humane art will say so His owne Thomas g Tho. 1. part q. 1. art 8. sayes that like as other sciences do not argue to proue their owne principles but out of the principles argue to shew other things so the sacred doctrine doth not argue to proue the owne principles but from them proceeds to shew something The same is said by h Capreol prol in 1. part q. 1. pag. 24. Greg. Valent. tom 1. pag. 50. a. others Next it is false that the Scripture is like those principles which need
Euangelij nullum ex hac parte impedimentum erit quo minus qui alia praecepta naturalia seruauerint iustificentur saluentur Pro Concil pag 59. l. 6. c. 19. 20. D. WESTON sayes of this opinion susceperunt eam nonnulli sententiam etiam orthodoxi iuxta ac doctissimi viri de Tripl hom offic l. 3. c. 22. pag. 324. Whereby a man may see what account they make of the repliers proposition Note S. Austins censure of this opinion An forte istis qui exhibuerunt terrenae patriae Babilonicam dilectionem virtute ciuili non vera sed verisimili daemonibus vel humanae gloriae seruierunt Fabricijs videlicet Regulis Fabijs Scipionibus Camillis ceterisque talibus sicut infantibus qui sine baptismate moriuntur prouisuri estis aliquem locum inter damnationem regnumque coelorum vbi non sint in miseria sed in beatitudine sempiterna qui Deo non placuerunt cui sine fide placere impossibile est quam nec in operibus nec in corde habuerunt NON OPINOR PERDITIONEM VESTRAM VSQVAM AD ISTAM POSSE IMPVDENTIAM PROSILIRE introducens genus hominum quod Deo placere possit sine Christi fide lege naturae HOC EST VNDE VOS MAXIME CHRISTIANA DETESTATVR ECCLESIA l. 4. cont Iul. cap. 3. are the principall men that haue liued of late times in the Church of Rome i Nec hactenus aliquid sit determinatum per sanctam matrem Ecclesiam Cassal pag. 51. neither hath the Church determined to this day any thing against them The Iesuites conclusion therefore that faith is necessary to saluation is not beleeued among his owne but he sets it downe against vs partly to insinuate that we thinke the contrary and partly to lay a ground for his Roman heresies which afterward he assumes to be this faith Neuerthelesse my granting it to be true hath pleased him because in his ignorance he knew not the contrary to be so currant as it is and so he sayes no more to me about it A. D. Concerning the second Chapter The conclusion of this Chapter to wit that faith necessary to saluation is but one Pag 133. was meant against them that thinke they may be saued in any religion or with whatsoeuer faith without care whether it be this or that Protestant or Catholicke c. This conclusion is granted by both the Ministers 2 This conclusion as the former was laid as a ground to build the Papacy on which afterward is made the thing whereby this one faith is defined and therefore it was intended against vs who yet abhorre the opinion that allowes saluation to any Religion more then Papists do and leaue it to k Alcho p. 10. 40. CantacuzeÌ in Maho. orat 2. n. 10. Turkes and l Philastr Brixiens de haeres in Rheto. p. 28. Hereticks requiring our aduersaries not by such aequiuocating insinuations as this is to traduce vs but to speake the truth of vs and in such points as we truly differ in modesty to confute vs which though it be difficulte yet the enterprising thereof is not so odious as this base and abiect aequiuocating is but whosoeuer the conclusion was bent against I deny it not and so he saies no more to me about it Pag. 135. A. D. Concerning the Third Chapter The conclusion of this Chapter to wit that Faith is infallible was directed against such as thinke this or that to be true faith but do not rest infallibly assured thereof This conclusion is graunted as the former were by both my aduersaries saue that M. Wotton mislikes c. 3 My granting of this conclusion you see contents him that he leaues me and turnes vpon M. Wotton as he did in the two former chapters and this he doth stilly without any noise as if there were no more worke for him in the rest that I said and so he goes slily forward to another matter But in the place cited besides the granting of his conclusion I noted in the proofe he brought for it a Romish tricke that makes Gods word whence faith hath infallibility to be the Popes decretals and Traditions and I so noted and shewed in a Digression that if my aduersary would haue dealt really and haue had his conclusion truly vnderstood he should in this place haue confessed whether the Traditions I mentioned were not part of that word that makes faith certaine and infallible The which he might not deny and therefore he saies nothing to it because if he should discouer the Popes Traditions to be equall with the Scriptures in supporting faith then what he said in his conclusion he should vnsay in the explication of it For though faith must be certaine yet all men know that if it be grounded on Traditions that are vncertaine it cannot be so and therefore he goeth slily forward and stirs not this point And in this fashion he turnes his backe vpon all my Booke and onely at randon pickes out from the rest that goes with them such parcels as he thought himselfe best able to deale with CHAP. XXIII Touching the implicite faith that is taught in the Church of Rome 3. How defined by them 7. In what sense the Protestants mislike or allow it 9. Arguments made for it answered 11. The ancient Church allowed it not A.D. Concerning the fourth Chapter * Pag. 137. My principall conclusion in this chapter to wit that Faith must be intire is against such as thinke it sufficient to beleeue one or two or some few articles of Christian faith thinking it not needfull vnder paine of damnation to beleeue all but rather thinke they may doubt of or deny other points although knowne to be held as points of faith by the Catholicke Church Against whom I affirme that Faith must be intire and it must extend it selfe vniuersally to all points either expressely or implicitely and that it is damnable to deny rashly especially obstinately any one point which one either knoweth or in regard he hath it sufficiently propounded by the Church ought to know to be reuealed by God Against this my conclusion both my aduersaies do oppose themselues Againe * Pag. 139. Secondly whereas I insinuate a generall or implicite beleefe of some points of faith to suffice some persons at least in some cases M. Wotton admitteth it which I gratefully accept but cannot see how this will please his fellow M. White who so hoatly disputeth against implicite beleefe as it seemeth of any point of faith 1 White pag. 7. when he asketh to what purpose should God propound all the points of our faith one as well as another if his will were not that we should learne all This opinion of M. Whites if he meane it so vniuersally as his wordes sound is intollerable and such as might driue at least vnlearned men to despaire of saluation in regard it is impossible for them without miracle to get expresse knowledge of
infallible rule of faith as it is also the ordinary sufficient meanes ordained by God to breed faith in men My aduersaryes for their better aduantage take the question in the first sense whereas they ought to take it in the second sense in regard I so take it in the fift Chapter vnto which this Chapter hath reference For whereas in the foure first Chapters I had set downe for a certaine ground that one infallible entire faith was necessary to saluation in the first Chapter I proued that God had ordained some rule and meanes that is some such rule as was also a meanes sufficient to breed this one infallible entire faith in all sorts of men yea quantum ex se in all men In the sixt Chapter I set downe certaine conditions of this rule and meanes and consequently when in this seuenth Chapter I deny Scripture alone to be the rule I must needes meane that it is not the rule which is also a sufficient ordinary meanes of which all my speech went before Now in this true sense my aduersaries do not gainesay but conuicted by the euidence of truth yeeld that Scripture alone is not the rule taking the rule as it signifieth that which is so a rule as it is also the ordinary sufficient meanes to breed faith in men as here I take it The Scripture it selfe saith M. Wootton is a rule Wootton p. 66. or meanes made effectuall to some by reading without any outward helpe of man but this is not the ordinary course that God hath appointed for the instruction of the people Pag. 89. in the knowledge of his truth therefore if we say at any time Scripture alone is the rule of faith by ALONE we seuer it from the traditions and authoritie of men not from their Ministry and ascribe sufficiently vnto it in respect of the matter to be beleeued not simply of the meanes to bring men to beleeue And againe we require besides onely expresse wordes of Scripture the Ministry and industry of man together and conclude points of doctrine out of that which is written in Scripture White pag. 23. M. White although he seeme to make the doctrine it selfe of Scripture to be the rule the letter of the original or translation to be a meanes which like a vessell presenteth vnto vs this rule yet to the purpose of the question in my sense he granteth that the Ministry is the ordinary meanes Pag. 116. whereby we may learne the faith of Christ and that no man can of himselfe attaine the knowledge thereof but as the Church teacheth him excepting some extraordinary cases Whereby I euidently conclude that both M. Wootton and M. White yeeld to the principall conclusion of this Chapter to wit that Scripture alone whether taken for the originall or translation is not the rule of faith in such sense as I here speake of the rule of faith Idle therefore and impertinent is most of their long and tedious discourse vpon this Chapter which consequently I pretermit as vnworthie of any reply if any thing here brought by them and pretermitted by me seeme contrary to my conclusion it is such as is answered ordinarily by Catholicke Authors or such as these my aduersaries themselues if they wil not contradict this which is yeelded to by themselues ought to answer vnto as well as I. 1 HEre I must repeate my old complaint that I am forced to renew in euery question that falles out betweene vs that my aduersary omits and dissembles the whole substance of my writing and onely descants vpon some few remnants that he rends out here and there wisely foreseeing either that his cause would abide no triall or himselfe was not the man that was able to make the triall For though he could well enough translate and transcribe another man writing and patch it together when he had done to make a pamphlet yet the defence he must leaue to his Author being belike some student * A.D. Student in diuinitie as he professes himselfe that is proceeded no higher then translations and yet will serue the turne to beare the name of a Catholicke writer This abiect course which now adayes that side cleaues to as deuoutly as to their faith bewrayes the misery of their side to say no more and so I follow him whither the winde and the tide carrie me For he that rides a iade must take his owne pace or go afoote 2 First he sayes his Aduersaries either ignorantly or wilfully peruert the state of the question else they could haue had no colour to make so long discourse The which is no vnprofitable way when he cannot defend his question to picke a quarrel to the state And possible he hath learned it by poâching in D. Stapletons bookes who in his time made good vse of this tricke But how was the question mistaken He saies his question was not whether Scripture be the rule of faith but whether Scripture alone be the rule and meanes to breed faith For the trial of this I must intreate the Reader to take knowledge how things stand betweene vs though I haue once or twise already vpon like occasions repeated it The Iesuite in his Treatise that I answered beginnes with certaine propositions which he sayes are to be supposed and set downe for certaine and assured grounds First that no man can be saued without the true faith Secondly that this faith is but one neither can men be saued in any other Thirdly that this faith must be infallible and certaine so that the beleeuer be fully perswaded of the truth thereof Fourthly that it must be whole and entire beleeuing rightly all points one as well as another Fifthly that God hath ordained a certaine rule or meane whereby all men learned and vnlearned may be instructed in this faith and infallibly taught WHAT is to be holden for the true faith and WHAT not Sixtly that this rule must haue three conditions First infallibility to be certaine without deceiuing vs. Secondly easines that it may be plainely knowne of all sorts of men Thirdly latitude that by it we may know absolutely all points needfull to be learned Then a In THE WAY §. 5. and in his printed treatise p. 17. concl 1. he proceeds to inquire what in particular is the thing which may be assigned to be this rule whereto he answers in foure conclusions the first whereof is this whereabout he now contends The Scripture alone especially as it is translated * In his printed copie it is Specially as it is by Protestants translated into the English tongue into the English tongue cannot he this rule This I denied in another conclusion opposite to it vsing the words of the publike articles of our Church The Scripture comprehended in the Canonicall bookes of the old and new Testament is the rule of faith so far that whatsoeuer is not read therein or cannot be proued thereby is not to be accepted as any point of
faith or needfull to be followed And so from that place to pag. 57 I disputed that the Scripture ALONE is the rule of faith that is to say That rule which my Aduersary in his fourth ground had said God had prouided whereby euery man learned and vnlearned may sufficiently be instructed WHAT is to be holden for the true faith Now he complaines that the State is peruerted the question not being whether Scripture be the rule of faith but whether Scripture alone be the rule and meane ordained of God to breed all faith And he notes two points wherein it is peruerted First in that I so affirme and defend the Scripture to be the rule as if he and his sectaries excluded it from being the rule in any sort which he sayes they do not For they hold the Scripture as propounded by the Church to be part of it I answer that I knew well enough they confessed the Scripture to be part of the rule and the Diuine doctrine which is the whole rule to be some of it written But I knew also that they denied it to be the whole rule ioyning therewith vnwritten traditions and the Popes Decretals which they call Church authority I knew also they allowed it to be no part of the rule but as and in such sence as the Church of Rome should please to propound it and I saw his conclusion in termes denying the Scripture alone to be the rule whereby men may sufficiently be instructed WHAT the faith is therefore I disputed directly opposite to all this that the Scripture alone without traditions is the whole rule to shew vs WHAT is to be holden for faith and nothing but the Scripture this is close to the question For albeit he yeelds it to be the rule in a sort because as his Church propounds it it containes part of the rule yet he denies it to be that whole and entire rule that his conclusion inquires of and so is to be disputed against as well as if he denied it to be any part of the rule at all Againe he holds two things First affirmatiuely that the Scripture is one part of the rule then negatiuely that the Scripture alone is not all the rule Both these are contradictory to my assertion The Scripture alone is the rule My assertion therefore affirming what he denies and denying what he affirmes containes the true state of the question and his inuoluing the matter with all this cauilling tends onely to the couering of his doctrine the loathsome visage whereof he is ashamed should be seene 3 The second point wherein he sayes the question is peruerted is in that I take the rule of faith otherwise then he doth For whereas he by that word rule meanes such a rule as not onely is sufficient to REVEALE all diuine truths that are to be beleeued but also to BREED or produce in vs the faith whereby we beleeue them I he sayes vnderstand such a rule onely as is sufficient to reueale the diuine verities though it be not sufficient to breed in vs faith and assent thereunto And it is true that I vnderstand such a rule indeed the Church wherein I liue onely beleeuing the sufficiency of the Scripture to containe all the obiect of faith but not to enable vs to beleeue it or vnderstand it ordinarily without the ministry of the Church and other meanes But this peruerts not the question * The state of the question touching Scripture ALONâ for about the meanes there is no question but the question is whether Scripture alone excluding all Church traditions and authority comprehend the whole obiect or matter of faith that is to say All that we are bound to know beleeue and doe for our saluation though it be granted that to breed or produce faith and knowledge of that which is in the Scripture the Ministry of the Church and the helpe of Gods Spirit and our owne industry must concurre For our Aduersaries deny this and hold their runagate traditions and Church authority to be necessary not onely for the expounding and confirming to vs that which is in the Scripture if any one chance to deny it or not to see it but for the supplying of infinite articles of faith which are no waies at all comprised in the Scripture but vpon the said authority are to be receiued as well as that which is reuealed in the Scripture The Iesuite speakes as if he thought his Church authority to consist more in breeding faith and leading men to beleeue what is written then in adding any thing to the measure of the diuine verities contained in the Scripture and indeed sometime there be of his side that will plainely say so He that writ the defence of the Censure a Def. of the Cens pag. 141. NOTE THIS and inquire whether all Papists will stand to it sayes it is to be noted that the question betweene vs and the Protestants is of EXPRESSE SCRIPTVRE ONELY and not of any far fet place which by interpretation may be applied to a controuersie For this contention began betweene vs vpon this occasion that when we alledged diuers weighty places and reasons out of the Scripture for proofe of inuocation of Saints praier for the dead Purgatory and some other controuersies our aduersaries reiected them for that they did not plainely and expresly decide the matter Whereupon came this question whether all matters of beleefe are plainely and expresly in Scripture or not which they affirme and we deny And this he sayes is is the true state of the question Gretser b Defens Bellar tom 1. l. 4. c. 4. p. 1598. sayes These things may be proued by Scripture but not sufficiently not effectually by Scripture alone without tradition but onely probably The which if my aduersary and his Church did hold constantly and in good earnest I would confesse I had peruerted the state of the question But they do not but hold many things belonging to faith to be wanting and no way at all neither openly nor expresly nor consequently contained in the Scripture Dominicus Bannes c D. Dann 22. Tho. p. 302. All things which pertaine to Catholicke faith are not contained in the Canonicall books either manifestly or obscurely nor all those things which Christ and his Apostles taught and ordained for the instructing of his Church and confirming of the faith were committed to the holy Scriptures and the contrary is open heresie Melchior Canus d Can. loc p. 151 There are many things belonging to the doctrine and faith of Christians which are contained in the sacred Scriptures neither manifestly nor obscurely Cardinall Hosius e Hos confess Polon p. 383. The greater part of the Gospell by a great deale is come to vs by tradition very little of it being written in the Scripture Peresius f Peres de tradit p. 4. Tradition is taken so that it is distinguisht against the doctrine which is found in the Canonicall bookes of the
Scripture Bellarmine g Bell. de verb. Dei lib. 4. c. 1. The name of tradition is applied by Diuines to signifie onely vnwritten doctrine Alphonsus h Alphons à Castr adu haer lib 1. c. 5. This is to be laid for a most sound foundation that the traditions of the vniuersall Church and the determinations thereof in things concerning faith are of no lesse authority then the sacred Scripture it selfe though there be no Scripture to proue them Hessels of Louan i Hessel expli symb c. 69. p. 38. The Apostles neuer intended by their writing to commit to writing the whole doctrine of faith but as necessity vrged them what in their absence they could not teach that they committed to writing Costerus the Iesuite k Coster enchirid p. 43. It was neuer the mind of Christ either to commit his mysteries to parchment or that his Church should depend on paper writings Lindane l Lind. panopl. pag. 4. We Catholickes teach that Christians are to beleeue many things which are to be acknowledged for Gods word that are not contained in the Scripture and many things finally to be receiued with the same authoritie wherewith those doctrines of faith are receiued which are contained in holy writ Rodericus Delgado m Roderic dosm de autor Script l. vlt. p. 63 Albeit these things are not found written in the Bible yet they must no lesse be obserued by the godly that they may fulfill the precepts and firmely beleeue the mysteries of the heauenly faith Doctor Stapleton n Staplet princip doctr l. 12. cap. 5. There both were among the Iewes and are among vs very many things religiously performed in the worship of God and also necessary to saluation and necessarily to be beleeued which yet are not comprehended in the Scriptures but are approued or commended to vs ONELY by the authority of the Church Gregory of Valentia o Valent. tom 3. p. 258. D. All the controuersie is whether the Apostles by word of mouth WITHOVT WRITING deliuered any such doctrines as now affoord an infallible argument for the determining of the controuersies of faith in the Church These wordes of our aduersaries make it more then plaine that the Church of Rome holds the Scriptures vnsufficient not onely in respect of breeding faith or bringing men to know and beleeue it ordinarily which we grant but also in respect of containing it in themselues which we deny And that my aduersary holds the same thing I will prone directly For ha-laid downe 4. grounds First that true faith is necessary Secondly that this faith is onely one Thirdly that this faith must be certaine Fourthly and entire in all points he addes the fift that it must not be doubted but God hath prouided and left some certaine rule and meanes whereby euery man may in all points and questions be sufficiently and infallibly instructed WHAT is to be holden for true faith and then immediately he puts the question what in particular may be assigned to be this rule wherto he answers in his first conclusion The Scripture alone especially as translated into English cannot be this rule Which I denied Therefore his question was touching the sufficiency of the Scripture as the said sufficiency is opposed to vnwritteÌ traditioÌ not as it is distinguished against the requisite condition of the meanes to be vsed for the vnderstanding of the Scripture And this I confirme for my aduersary saies they hold the Scripture to be part of the rule because it is part of the doctrine of the Church immediatly reuealed by God but yet there are many substantiall points of faith not contained in them Yea p Pag. 67. Reply his expresse words are The question is betwixt vs and Protestants whether God did reueale any thing to the Prophets and Apostles necessary to be beleeued which is not now expressed or so contained in the Scripture that by euident and necessary consequence excluding all tradition and Church authority it may be gathered out of some sentence expresly set downe in the Scripture I did not therefore peruert the state of the question but my Aduersary hauing nothing else to say thought good by this shift to rid himselfe from that which he saw could not be answered 4 Neuerthelesse pleasing himselfe with his owne conceite he concludes that conuicted with the euidence of truth I haue yeelded to his conclusion in that sence wherein he meant it That Scripture alone is not the rule of faith And therefore all my discourse is idle and impertinent I answer two things first if his conclusion The Scripture alone is not this rule which almighty God hath prouided whereby euery man may sufficiently be instructed WHAT is to be holden for true faith meane no more but onely to adde the Ministry of the Church and mens owne industry to the Scripture as the meanes for the ordinary vnderstanding and beleeuing that which is written in it in this sence the Scripture alone is the rule whereby to iudge whatsoeuer matter belongs to faith but Scripture alone is not the ordinary rule and meanes by it selfe to kindle in vs the true knowledge and faith of that which it containes without the Ministrie of the Church and other things be ioyned with it for the learning of it then I grant it and require the Iesuite againe in lieu thereof either to renounce his traditions or else confesse they haue no other vse but onely to helpe to expouÌd and teach that which is wholly contained in the Scripture without any power to supply any defect of doctrine that may be supposed to be therein And when he hath done the next treatise of faith he writes to distinguish a little better betweene the Rule and the Meanes of applying it and not say that is no sufficient rule whereby to be instructed WHAT is faith and WHAT not which onely is not a sufficient meanes to bring men to faith without the subordinate condition of such meanes as is required in the application of any rule Secondly I answer that his conclusion meanes more viz. That Scripture alone is vnperfect and defectiue 2. waies The first in that without other meanes it doth not ordinarily breed or draw foorth in vs assent to that it reueales nor so much as make vs see the reuelation to be And therefore there needes the Church by her Pastor to teach and perswade vs and there needes the Spirit of God and industrie in our selues This way no Protestant euer denied The second is in that it alone containes not all Gods word or all such truth as he hath reuealed necessarily to be beleeued but onely one small and obscure part thereof the best part or at least some part being by Tradition onely vnwritten This way we deny with open mouth and the Iesuite holds it and in the place now controuerted hugges it in his armes and therefore I discoursed against him as I did and in no other sense and so consequently it is
HOC NOBIS SIT SATIS INDVBIVM APVD LITERATOS HABERI NVLLVM ESSE IN TERRIS IVDICIVM QVOD ERRARE LABI DECIPI NON POSSIT Pic. Mirand apolog pro Sauanarol l. 1. c. 1. infallible and sufficient to breed infallible assurance and so easie to be knowne and vnderstood of all sorts that all may ordinarily direct themselues thereby onely by diligent attending and assenting to it and this is the rule of faith that in this place he meanes wherein if he meane good earnest this question is at an end and the Scripture is granted to be the rule for he will allow that to be the rule which by the helpe of grace supposed is sufficient to direct all sorts onely by diligent attending and yeelding assent to it now such is the Scripture alone that the grace of God supposed onely by diligent attendance and assent vnto it it is sufficient and therefore also you see the necessitie and requisite condition of vsing diligence by my aduersaries owne words hinders not the Scriptures from being the rule of faith euen in his owne sence as himself vnderstands the rule of faith for such as is both infallible and sufficient to breed infallible assurance in vs and so easie to be knowne and vnderstood that all sorts of men may direct themselues in all points of faith onely by diligent attending and assenting to it because onely diligent attention and assenting being added on our behalfe to the helpe of Gods grace it may thereby be determinately vnderstood of all sorts in all things needfull to be knowne 3 But he sayes that as in a common wealth besides the written lawes there are vnwritten customes which interprete the written law and liuing magistrates that haue authoritie to interprete both written and vnwritten lawes and to compell men to his sence without which the written lawes were not a sufficient rule and meanes to preserue good order in the state because through the peruersnesse of men they would be misvnderstood so in the Church beside the written Scriptures there must be admitted some vnwritten traditions to interprete the Scriptures and some liuing magistrate the Pope to propound and expound the Scriptures and to compell men to take the sence that he giues because the Scriptures are not so plaine but they may be misvnderstood c. This comparison and the conclusion of it I denie for albeit meanes must be ioyned with the Scripture yet this Church-authoritie and these vnwritten traditions are none of the meanes but onely that which I haue named for there needs no meanes to supply any matter of faith that is wanting in the Scripture but onely to open our eyes that we may see what is therein whereas these traditions and this Church-magistracie are supposed to be necessarie for the adding of innumerable things to be beleeued that are not contained in the Scripture as I haue * Ch. 27. n. 3. shewed My aduersarie therefore plainly shewes the difference that is betweene vs and discouers what he meanes when he pretends the Church and her authoritie for this rule of faith he expounds transparently to be the Pope with his traditions and to him giues that which is denied in the Scriptures plenarie power partly out of the Scripture partly out of his Decretals to propound to all men the matter of their faith and compell them to take his sence be it true or false This is the Antichristian bondage whereinto the man of Rome will bring all the world and the hellish pride wherin he aduanceth himself to sit as God in the Church exalting his owne will lawes aboue the wil and lawes of the eternall God and subiecting Gods blessed word to his cursed will which his base a Coâceruauârunt sibi magistros ad desideria sua non vâ ab eu discerent quod facere deberent sed vt eorum studio calliditate iâââniretâr ratio qua licereâ id quod liberes Spoken of the Popes clawbacks by Concil delect Card. sub init Parasites for their backes and bellies so much striue for which we execrate as hell and leaue to the Diuell from whence it first appeared vnto the world ciuill states and the commonwealths of this world may haue such vnwritten customes and allow this authority to magistrates but God hath left no such traditions to his Church nor set any such head ouer it thus to expound the Scriptures or to determinate the sense thereof but all his whole will is written and out of the Scripture it selfe is to be reuealed imparted to particular men when any doubt arises by the ministry of the Church either in ordinary preaching or in the Councels of godly orthodoxall Bishops b That a Councel is the highest tribunall vpon earth and aboue the Pope affirmed by Iustinian in praetermiss per Anto. Cont. p. 11. Phot. Nomocan tit 9 c 1 6. The Councels of Pisa Const Basil and the Vniuersity of Paris to this day See to this purpose Card Florent tract de Scism Anto. de Rosell monarch tract de concil Mich. Cezen lit ad imperat part 12. sub sin Ioh. Fran. Pic. Mirand apol pro Sauanaro l. 1. c. 1. to the which the Pope and his rabble if they will know the truth and be saued ought to subiect themselues as well as the poorest Christian that liues and the written word is so absolute and sufficient to direct them herein and his spirit so infallibly ready to guide them if they will vse the meanes that there is no more to be required for the full manifestation of any thing needfull for any man whatsoeuer and c CertuÌ est quod possit errare etiam in ijs quae tangum fidem haeresim per suam determinationem aut decretalem asserendo Hadrian 4. de sacra consit p. 26. see below this authority of the Pope it selfe when all is done is faine to be reiected 4 Thirdly whereas I said out of Chrysostome that howsoeuer some part of the Scripture be obscure yet some places are so plaine and easie to vnderstand that euery man by reading may know the meaning which speech I extend to so many places as are sufficient to teach vs all things needfull to saluation in this sense that the whole rule of faith is set downe in plaine places of Scripture which any man of himselfe by reading may vnderstand requiring still the grace of God and diligence in searching he replies three things The which afore I answer the Reader must note that the words he opposes are Chrysostomes and what I said I proued by many arguments the last whereof was the testimonie of the ancient Fathers who say in expresse words as much as I. The which arguments he answers not a word to and therefore replying vpon my conclusion he opposes through me the plaine Scripture the ancient Church and his owne writers by all which I confirmed that I said 5 First he sayes that albeit some places are plaine yet it doth not
assurance and the assurance of all other things beleeued is wrought and bred in the heart by the Spirit of God principally and then by the alone words of the Scripture ioyned therewith as by the formal beginning of that my assurance and by the ministry of the Church onely as Gods ordinance appointed to helpe me to attaine and recouet that sence and assurance that by meanes of this helpe arises in me from the Scripture it selfe though many times and very ordinarily this is done without all motion of the Church whatsoeuer by onely reading as I haue often said in case when men are either conuerted from Athisme or confirmed in the truth without hearing or knowing of the Church by onely reading CHAP. XXX Touching the Al-sufficiency of the Scripture to the matter of faith 2. It shewes it selfe to be Gods word Luthers denying Saint Iames his Epistle 3. How the Papists expound the light of the Scripture 4. What they and what we hold about the authority of the Church 6. How expresse Scripture is required A. D. § 3. Pag. 187. The Scripture containeth not all points of faith concerning my third reasoÌ I wish the reader to obserue that I do not attribute any imperfection to the Scripture when I proue that it containeth not all points of faith For want of perfection in a thing is not to be accounted an imperfection vnlesse it can be shewed that the perfection which wanteth doth necessarily pertaine to the nature of the thing or at least is due and ought to be in it as my aduersaries will neuer be able to shew that to containe all points of faith doth necessarily pertaine to the nature of Scripture or is due or ought to be in it This being noted I need say little in confirmation of this argument as hauing vrged it sufficiently against M. Wootton and M. White in the introduction in such sort as they will neuer be able sufficiently to answer it Onely here I will aske one question of M. White White p. 48. who telleth vs that the Scripture manifesteth it selfe to be diuine in regard the vertue and power that sheweth it selfe in euery line and leafe of the Bible proclaimeth it to be the word of the eternall God and the sheepe of Christ discerne the voice and light thereof as men discerne light from darkenesse c. If this be so how chanceth it that his illuminated Luther whom doubtlesse M. White will account one of the sheepe of Christ could not see that S. Iames his Epistle was diuine Scripture by the vertue and power that sheweth it selfe in euery line and leafe of it no lesse then in other places of Scripture shall he be accounted illuminated or rather starke blinde that could not discerne light from darkenesse And shall not M. White also be accounted not so much blinde as braine-sicke that fancieth to himself such a light to shine in euery leafe and line of the Bible that euery one that is the sheepe of Christ discerneth it no otherwise then he that hath corporall eye-sight discerneth outward light from darkenesse True it is there is the vertue and power of God in the Scripture there is puritie and perfection of matter maiestie of speech power ouer the conscience certaintie of Prophecies c. but these do not shine like light to our vnderstanding till it be illuminated with the light of faith as euery one euen of the elect is not at all times indued with faith nor then neither vnlesse those things be propounded duly mediatè or immediatè by the authoritie of the Church vpon which being like a candlesticke the light of the Scripture must be set or else it will not according to the ordinary course of Gods prouidence sufficiently shine and appeare vnto vs in such sort as to giue infallible assurance Wootton p. 89. White pag. 46. that it is the word of God It troubleth M. wootton M. White both that I say there be diuers substantiall points which are not expressely set nowne and determined in Scripture which they being conuinced with euidence of the matter cannot deny to be so but say they this is not the question But by their leaues this was first the question when their Grandfather Luther was so hoate to haue expresse Scripture See Gretz in defens Bellar. tom 1 in li. 4. de verbo Dei non scripto cap. 3. See introduct q. 2. as that he would haue all expressed euen in wordes Afterwards indeed when his fury cooled a litle he thought it sufficient if all were expressed though not in so many sillables yet in sense And now of late our new Ministers seeing that this also cannot be defended haue made the question whether all be contained in Scripture that is either expressely or so as without Church authoritie or Traditions al necessary points of doctrine may be necessarily euidently or by good consequence deduced out of that which is expressed in Scripture In which sense also they will be neuer able to shew that all points and namely those which I mentioned in my third argument Wootton p. 93. are contained in onely Scripture but must be forced to run to tradition and Church authority if they will haue sufficient assurance of them 1 THe third thing obiected against the Scripture was Imperfection that it containes not the whole matter of faith but many things else are needfull to be knowne and beleeued that are not written therein For though he spake somwhat reseruedly There be diuers questions of faith which are not EXPRESSLY set downe yet his meaning is There be diuers particular points to be beleeued which are contained therein neither expressely nor anyway at all but receiued vpon sole Tradition and Church authoritie as I haue a Ch. 27. n. 2. shewed and his Introduction here mentioned affirmes which being a grosse and blasphemous assertion therefore to couer the odiousnesse of it here in the first place he saies that by affirming the Scripture not to containe all points of faith he doth not attribute any imperfection to it And how I maruell will he perswade vs this when it is impossible it should be perfect that leaues vs vnperfect in the faith and reueals but a portioÌ of that which yet of necessitie must be known to saluation his reason is because his aduersaries will neuer be able to shew that to containe all points of faith doth belong to the nature and perfection of Scripture But I answer it pertaines to the perfection of the Scripture and is due to the nature thereof to containe all things because it selfe sayes so and there can be no other infallible or conuenient reuelation And b Propounded in the WAY Digr 3. 13. many testimonies and arguments euince it which my aduersary not being able to answer hath well and wisely passed by with silence And therefore denying this they attribute imperfection to it For to deny that which the Scripture is is to make it imperfect Athanasius
nos certos faciat Grego de Valent tom 3. pag. 117. c. Verus Scripturae sensus inest Scripturae sicut signatum signo sed media certa explorata infallibilia quibus sensus iste eruitur non est ipsa Scriptura sed traditio Ecclesiastica vox definitio Ecclesiae seu eius qui Ecclesiae vice Christi praesidet Grets defens Bellar. tom 1. p. 1970. c. This is the finall euasion that the Iesuites vse against this argument in defence of their traditions and Popes authority against the sufficiency of the Scripture that the Scriptures haue in them a shining light and are as the Protestants say able to proue themselues to be the word of God and containe their true sense in themselues but this light we see not and this true sense we know not and this assurance that they are Gods word or that this is the true sense we cannot haue in the Scripture it selfe but by the meanes of Traditions and the Popes authoritie shewing and propounding these things to vs. As a candle though hauing light in it selfe yet shewes light to none when it is hid vnder a bushell but when it is set vpon a Candlesticke I answer 2. things First as I haue often said this authority and teaching of the Church is not alway nor simply necessary to shew all men the light of the Scripture or so much as to point to it for either by the immediate light of Gods Spirit or by the light of nature it may be knowne to be Gods word as by the light of nature it is knowne that God is whereupon it followes plainely that the Scripture alone as the Rule hath this light in it selfe and from it selfe shewes it else it could not in this manner without Church proposition shine to any Secondly I grant that ordinarily for the seeing and discerning of the euideÌce perfection purity power sence all this light that is in the Scripture the proposition of the Church is necessary as a candlesticke to hold it forth but then this proposition may be expounded two waies one way to signifie such authority as by and from it selfe induces me to beleeue afore I see any authority in the Scripture and together with the authority of the Scripture the twofold authority of the Church and Scripture concurring to the moouing of my vnderstanding as when two men concurre as one formall beginning to the carrying and moouing of a blocke This Church proposition thus expounded I vtterly deny to be either needfull or possible Secondly it may be expounded for the Ministry of the Church by her Pastors and people reuealing the Scriptures to them that know them not and teaching the nature sense and meaning thereof But this ministry is but a bare condition adding no light sense authority or matter to the Scripture but onely leading vs to see it Of which Ministery there is no question betweene vs for all Protestants grant The authority or ministery of the Church supposes no want of light in the Scripture and vse it but the question is whether all the articles and whole nature of faith be contained in Scripture alone excluding vnwritten traditions though the Ministery of the Church be needfull as an instrument to shew teach and expound the Scripture as a candlesticke is needfull to shew the candle For the vse of this Ministry and requisite condition of all other meanes that are to be vsed supposes no want or defect in the obiect whereabout they are applied but onely produces it to his operation as the setting of a candle vpon the socket addes no light to it that was wanting in it selfe but onely remoues some impediments that hinder the standers by from seeing and the opening of a window to let in light makes not the Sunne imperfect or but a partiall light And if our aduersaries intended no more but this there were an end of the controuersie for no Protestant euer denied the necessity of Church ministry in this sense but freely confesse it although the authority * See it expounded Chap. 35. n. 1. inde and here immediatly after in nu 4. mentioned we renounce 4 For the better explication of this my answer and that the Reader may see how impertinent it is that my Aduersary sayes Note FIRST that o The quest betweene vs the Papists about the Churches authority the question is not whether some meanes be ordinarily required to the vnderstanding of the Scripture and the producing of faith in such as reade and vse it nor whether the Scripture worke infallible assurance immediatly in all men for in some it doth without the operation and coming betweene of the Church ministery For we hold it doth not But the point is whether this authority of the Church supply any article of faith or matter needfull to saluation that is wanting in the Scripture so that it may be said as my Aduersary alway speaketh the Scripture alone is but a part of the rule of faith which God hath left to instruct men what is to be holden for faith and there be many substantiall points belonging to faith which are contained in Scripture alone nether expresly nor thence to be deduced by consequence but to be supplied by tradition and Church authority and so the question is not about the expediency or condition of the meanes but about the perfection and sufficiency of the thing it selfe Note SECONDLY that my aduersary from the necessity of the means concludes the insufficiency of the thing thus The light of the Scripture shines not to vs the true sense of the Scripture is not infallibly assured vnto vs without the meanes of the Church The Scripture therefore is vnsufficient not containing all things needfull not instructing vs WHAT is to be holden for matter of faith as if a man should say the light of the candle appeares not to vs but when it is set on a candlesticke therefore there is much light that is wanting in the candle and is supplied by the candlesticke Note THIRDLY what the things properly are which our aduersaries attribute to the Church in comparing it with the Scripture They are there first to be a meanes to reueale and expound the Scripture to vs and to breed the faith thereof in our consciences Secondly to be the Foundation of our faith in this sense that we do beleeue this to be Scripture and this to be the true sense of the Scripture and this to be the matter of faith onely because the Church expounds the Scripture so Thirdly to supply vnto vs many articles of faith absolutely needfull to saluation that are wanting in the Scripture out of tradition and by the said tradition to expound the Scripture These two latter points they infer on of the first which is the incroching consequence that I except against in that the authority wherein God hath placed his Church is not in respect of the Scripture but in respect of vs being a bare Minister to the
saluation Therefore it is sufficient How doth it now appeare so plainely that it proues nothing the first proposition is manifest of it selfe the second is as manifest for all that the Apostle affirmes is of the Scripture alone and of nothing else for of Scripture alone he saies it is able to make wise to saluation it is profitable to teach to reproue to instruct to correct that the man of God may be perfect the conclusion therfore must needs be true Secondly he saies the Apostle speakes of the old Testament yea of euery parcell of Scripture yet M. White will not say that now specially the old Testament without the New or euery parcell of the old it selfe is alone sufficient for all the said purposes whereto M. White answers that he neither speakes of the old Testament alone nor of any one parcell either of old or new separated from the rest but of the whole in this sense all the whole Scripture taken together is able c. And if the Iesuits and D. Stapleton whom this man traces had not renounced all truth they would not say it when that which the Apostle auouches of the Scripture cannot agree to euery parcel alone but to all together for what one parcell performes all these effects to make wise to saluation to teach to reproue to instruct to correct to make perfect the Scripture is so vnderstood as that all these things may truly be affirmed of it but these things cannot truely be affirmed of the parcels alone Ergo. 4 Thirdly he saies the word PROFITABLE must not expound the word ABLE or if it be the word ABLE doth not signifie that the Scripture is so able as to worke that effect without any other meanes or helpes concurring with it but at the most it imports a great degree of profitablenesse This is no answer to this argument But to another that he hath not expressed I said therefore thirdly though very briefly By the word able the other word profitable must be expounded Which I thus put into forme that which is PROFITABLE by being ABLE is sufficient the Scripture is so PROFITABLE that it is ABLE to make vs wise to saluation Ergo it is sufficient He first denies the Minor and saies the word profitable is not to be expounded by the word Able but he seemes to be dazeled For that which is able to make wise to saluation must needes be able to make absolute and perfect because perfection consists in being wife to saluation but the Scripture alone is able to make wise to saluation Ergo. Next he saies that supposing the word PROFITABLE be expounded by the word ABLE thus Scripture is able to make one absolute and perfect yet the meaning is not that it is able without other helpes and meanes concurring with it but at the most that it is very profitable and if it be sufficient yet this sufficiency is not that whereof our question is but in a certaine limited kinde to wit of written Scripture That is to say if by able to make vs wise to saluation be meant that the Scriptures are sufficient yet it is not meant that alone they are sufficient as the Protestants hold but with a limitation so far as Scripture can be sufficient In which his answer he plainely discouers himselfe to be foundred and spent For our question is not whether the Scripture alone without vsing the Ministery of the Church or our owne industry or such meanes as God hath appointed for the finding our and vnderstanding of that which is contained in it be sufficient for Bread and Drinke and all manner of food is not sufficient to sustaine mans life if he take no paines to get it or if he be not able to swallow and digest it and my aduersaries owne Church and traditions with all their royalties are not sufficient vnlesse men take paines to finde them and be so mad as to beleeue them and so blinde as to let them downe but the question is of their latitude and extent viz. whether the written Scripture containe in expresse words or sense the whole and entire doctrine of faith and good life so that the Church by her authoritie and traditions may adde no point of faith that is wanting in the Scripture This appeares to be the question by my aduersaries own words and the words of the Diuines in his Church Now the Apostle saying the Scripture is able to make one wise to saluation affirmes the sufficiency of it alone without any other helpe or meanes to supply any doctrine or matter of faith not contained therein because there is no more needfull but to be wise to saluation and that wisdome the Scripture is able to instruct vs in Which ability is not limited to certaine points but extended to all the whole obiect of faith by the word For thus I reason He speakes of the Scripture alone and nothing else therefore the Scripture alone is able to make wise to saluation therefore it is so profitable and in such sort to make absolute and perfect to euery good worke that it can do it For it is able Therefore it alone is sufficient Therefore this sufficiency is so limited to written Scripture that it is perfectly and wholy contained in it 5 The second part of my aduersaries answer in his discourse to the text alleadged was that the Scripture is said to be profitable because it commendes to vs the authority of the Church This his answer I opposed with 7. arguments But when I repeated it I put in the word sufficient thus He saies they be profitable and SVFFICIENT because they commend vnto vs the Churches authority the addition of which word you see he distasts and makes a vantage of thereby to put off the answer to sixe of my arguments That the Prouerbe might be true it s an ill winde but blowes some men profite for vnder that pretence he takes occasion to cauill and put off that he could not answer For first the word might well be put in without any preiudice to his sense For if their profitablenesse lie in commending to vs the Church authoritie then their sufficiency lyes there too and so I might well make him say they be profitable and sufficient because they coÌmend vnto vs the Churches authority Secondly it is idle that he saies my obiections are ouerthrown Only by reading his words aright leauing out the word sufficient For let him looke vpon them againe and he shall finde they ourthrow his exposition of profitable as well as if he had expounded sufficient in the same manner But my aduersary will take a small occasion to shun an argument 6 Onely to the sixth he replies for whereas I said the meaning cannot be that they are profitable because they commend vnto vs the Churches authority because the Apostle saies they are able to make the man of God perfect that is the Pastor himselfe the Pope the Councell and all and it were absurd to say that the
haue said A. D. Whereas I obiect that sectaries and the Diuell himselfe doth alledge words of Scripture Pag. 202. White pag. 64. M. White granteth it but saith he either they alledge not true Scripture or not truly applied as also they alledge the authority of the Church but either not the true Church or the true Church not truly Testimonium hoc veruÌ est This which M. White granteth is the very truth and wanteth nothing but that he apply it to his priuate men Luther and Caluin and to his owne selfe Partiality will not suffer him to apply it thus but there is no reason that he should be iudge it is more fit that the iudgement of this matter be left to the Catholicke Church which he confesseth to be taught of God White pag. 63. 10 If my answer be true that when sectaries or the Diuell alledge Scripture or the Church they do it not truly let the Repliar giue ouer bragging and shew really that the Protestants haue not alledged these things truly And if it be no reason we be iudges our selues no more is it that the Pope and Papacy which k Nomine Ecclesiae intelligimus eius caput id est Romanum Pontificem Grego de Valent pag. 24. tom 3. Quod autem haec regula animata rationalis sit summus Pontifex non est hic locus proprius probandi Fra. Albertin Coroll p. 251. c. No maruell now though the Catholicke Church were so fast talked of he meanes by the Catholick Church be iudge but were it at that that we might haue a free Councell assembled and holden as Councels were of ancient time where the Pope and his faith might be tried as well as we it would soone appeare the Protestants haue not bene partiall in their cause when the late Trent Councell it selfe had come nearer vs then it did if it had not bene managed by Machiauellisme more then religion and the greatest tyranny and cosenage and villany vsed in it that euer stirred in any publicke busines CHAP. XXXIIII 1 The Papists pretending the Church haue a further meaning then the vulgar know 2 The Popes will is made the Churches act 3 Base traditions expounded to be diuine truth A. D. Concerning the tenth Chapter both my Aduersaries make maine opposition against the conclusion of this Chapter Pag. 202. one reason whereof is that they do not or will not rightly vnderstand what I meant when here I say the doctrine of the Church is the rule of faith note therefore first whereas the name Church may be taken seuerall waies Intro q. 3. according to that which I noted in the Introduction whereas also in euery one of these senses it may be taken either as it is generally in all ages or as it is particularly in this or that determinate age my Aduersaries omitting all other senses principally vnderstand me to meane by the name Church the Pope or Pastours of this present age whereas in this Chapter I do not at least ex professo or primarily intend to speake of the Church in this sense but rather do speake of the Church in a more generall indefinite and indeterminate sense as it signifieth one or other companie of men liuing either in all ages or in one or other age who in one or other sense may be called the Church the doctrine whereof say I is the rule and meanes ordained by God to instruct all sorts of men in all matters of faith Note secondly that by the doctrine of the Church I do not vnderstand any Friars dreames White pag. 3 as M. White dreameth nor humane traditions especially opposite to Scripture but diuine doctrine including therein both the written diuine Scripture and the vnwritten diuine traditions and the true diuine interpretation of them both as by word writing signes or otherwise it is or may be propounded and deliuered to vs by the authority of the Church all which although it may worthily be called diuine doctrine as being first reuealed by God here I call Church-doctrine because as it was first reuealed and committed to the keeping of Prophets and Apostles who in their time were chiefe and principall members of the militant Church so by Gods ordinance it was to be propounded and deliuered to other men by the same Prophets Apostles and others their successors as they are Doctors and Pastors of the same Church Note thirdly that by the rule of faith I meane such a rule as is also a sufficient outward meanes ordained and set apart by God to instruct all sorts of men in all points of faith which consequently must haue those three conditions or properties of the rule set downe and declared in the sixt Chapter viz that it must be infallible easie to be vnderstood of all sorts and vniuersall or such as may sufficiently resolue one in all points of faith Note fourthly that when I say the doctrine of the Church is the rule of faith I do not vnderstand that the doctrine as seuered from the Church or the Church as diuided from the doctrine is the rule of saith but that the doctrine as deliuered by the Church or the Church as deliuering doctrine is that rule and meanes which God hath ordained to instruct men in faith Note fifthly that to proue the doctrine of the Church to be the rule of faith in such sort as now I haue said it might suffice for this Chapter that it be shewed that at least once or in one age there were one or other company of liuing men in one or other sense called the Church who were ordained by God and set apart to instruct all sorts of men in all points of faith being for that purpose in their doctrine and teaching furnished with these three conditions which are requisite in the rule of faith for this being shewed in this Chapter I shall easily shew in the next that the same is to be said of some or other company continuing in all ages In this Chapter therefore I chiefly vndertake to proue that once or in one age there was a company of liuing men who in one sense may be called the Church whom God specially appointed as a meanes sufficient quantuÌ ex se to instruct all men in all matters of faith being for that purpose furnished with the three conditions or properties of the rule of faith 1 THe conclusion of this Chapter was that the infallible rule which we ought obediently to follow in all points of faith is the doctrine and teaching faith and beleefe of the true Church his meaning wherein he saies I would not or did not rightly vnderstand Let vs therefore see how I vnderstood it My answer was that we would freely grant this conclusion if the meaning were no more but that the doctrine and faith of the vniuersall Church is the rule of faith but there is a higher matter meant First that the Churches word and authority without grounding the same on the Scripture is the rule
AND IN THE WRITINGS OF THESE MEN TOVCHING THE SCRIPTVRES SACRAMENTS CHVRCH POPE COVNCELS TRANSVBSTANTIATION IMAGES INVOCATION OF SAINTS IVSTIFICATION GOOD WORKS c. WAS THE DOCTRINE OF THE CHVRCH AND PROFESSED BY THE BISHOPS OF ROME FATHERS AND COVNCELS EXPRESSED IN THE FIRST 800 YEARES OF THIS CATALOGVE this is our obiection whereto the Replier answers that he can retort it more strongly against the Protestants c. But this is but wind and so let it passe and come we forward to the substance of his answer CHAP. XLIII 1. Whatsoeuer the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued is expressed in their bookes 2. The Replier is driuen to say they held much of his religion onely implicitely What implicite faith is according to the Papists The death of Zeuxis The Fathers write that which cannot stand with Papistrie Pag. â67 A. D. Secondly I answer that to say there be diuers points held by vs whereof no mention is made in those ancient Fathers is no good argument to proue that which we hold was not holden by them For this is Argumentum ab authoritate negatiua which argument is of no force to proue this point vnles it be first proued that those Fathers held nothing explicitè or implicitè which is not expresly to be fouÌd in their writings But this my aduersaries will neuer be able to proue Now on the contrary side we can shew good reasons or at least probable presumptions sufficient to proue first that they held more then is expressed in their writings Secondly that they held explicitè or implicitè the same in all points of doctrine which we hold First I say we haue reason to thinke that they held more then is expressed in their writings because since ordinarily the writings of these Fathers were not by them set out of purpose to expresse in particular euery thing that they held implicitè or explicitè concerning all matters of faith but rather were written vpon some speciall occasion it is to be thought that their writings contain only some parts of the doctrine to wit so much of it as was that requisite to be written vpon that special occasion The which is confirmed euen by experience of these our times in which although learned men do ordinarily set downe more expresly in Catechismes bookes of controuersies c what the Catholik faith is in diuers points then formerly it hath bin set downe as they haue more occasion by reason of more heresies daily arising then learned men of former ages when those heresies were not haue had Yet no learned man now adaies writeth euery thing which explicitè or implicitè he beleeueth to be the Catholick faith For euery Catholicke man beleeueth explicitè or implicitè all that is contained in Scriptures and traditions in that he beleeueth whatsoeuer was reuealed by God to the Apostles deliuered by them in word or writing to the Catholicke Church and which the Church in Scriptures and vnwritten traditions propoundeth and deliuereth to vs diuers particulars whereof are not necessary to be expresly knowne to or written by any particular learned man of any age but are alwaies preserued at least in the implicite or infolded faith of the Church the which infolded faith of the Church may and shall be vnfolded the holy Ghost still assisting and suggesting all the aforesaid reuealed truth as necessitie shall require that the truth should be in any point expresly declared which necessitie chiefly is when some new heresie ariseth oppugning particularly the truth of that point 1 HEre he sayes the Fathers named in his Catalogue might hold what the church of Rome holds though there be no mentioÌ therof in their writings because they might hold that which is not expresly in their writings We had thought vntil now that this had bin a plain demonstration The ancient Fathers in all their writings make no mention of diuers points of the Popish religion Ergo they held them not Or thus What religion the Fathers held that they mention in their writings But the Popish religion they mention not in their writings Ergo they held not the Popish religion But he hauing good experience that the second proposition is true denies the first and will shew either by good reasons or probable presumptions that they held more then they mention and expresse in their bookes Wherein at once he hath destroyed his Catalogue and laid his religion open to the scorne of women and children For if the Fathers in all their writings handled nothing but the cause of religion teaching expounding and defending it against Iewes Gentiles hereticks schismatickes whereby they could not but mention what they held and yet neuer mentioned diuers points of Poperie it is plaine they neuer held them But the Iesuite sayes this is Argumentum ab authoritate negatiua which is not good they might hold either explicitè or implicitè that which they haue not expressed Wherein you must marke his tergiuersation For to shew a visible Church in all ages professing openly his Romane faith that all men may see it he tenders this catalogue But when we bid him proue that the Fathers of the first 600 or 800 yeares beleeued and professed that part of his Romane faith which the Church of England reiects that it may appeare so to vs and we may see it he sayes he can shew good reasons and presumptions that they beleeued more then is expressed in their writings whereas he should shew by their WRITINGS that they held and beleeued as the Romish Church now doth because it is impossible to shew what they held but by their writings and himselfe sayes in another place We cannot haue any certaintie of things past but by the writings of those times And if he will haue his Church to be so visible in the Fathers time and those Fathers to be so eminent members thereof good reason men see it yet see it they cannot by presumptions but by their writings 2 But he sayes We haue reason to thinke that they held more then expressed in their writings forsomuch as no man writes euery thing which explicitè or implicitè he beleeues I answer though it be granted that both they and we in all our writings may omit some things not belonging to faith or religion yet many articles of faith such as our aduersaries say theirs are the deniall whereof they call schisme and damnable herersie and persecute with fire sword and gun-powder cannot but be expressed for so much as such articles are simply needfull vnto saluation and are the grounds and conclusions of all theologicall writing and discourse Secondly it is impertinent to the obiection which denies the Fathers of the first 600 yeares to haue done that which the Catalogue sayes they did professed VISIBLY as the Romane Church now doth which obiection is not satisfied by saying they might explicitè or implicitè professe that they neuer writ because no man writes all he beleeues but by shewing in their writings this
dayes Thirdly that diuerse particular points of our doctrine are acknowledged by learned Protestants to haue bene taught by the ancient Fathers namely Vowes Reall presence c. For all which the said Protestant Apology citeth the names and bookes and oftentimes the very words of the learned Protestants as may be seene and I wish the Reader for his more satisfaction to see Lastly that our Church holdeth the very same and no other faith in substance then that which was held by the ancient Church may appeare by the very nature as I may say of our Church whose property and condition is not to inuent of new or to alter any doctrine in any matter of faith but to receiue humbly and obediently at the hands of our present Pastours what they in like manner learned of their predecessors and still to hate and resist all innouation in any matter of faith no lesse then a deadly poison as knowing that the least infection of any new inuented heresie or alteration in matter of faith doth corrupt and adulterate the whole faith and taketh away infallible authoritie and credite from the Church Wherefore our Pastors haue bene like men appointed to watch very vigilant in noting reprehending resisting and condemning all innouation in faith and sometimes casting incorrigible members out of the Church euen for a word or two profanely innouated contrary to the custome and faith of the Church The which course being duly obserued as chiefely by Gods prouidence and partly by humane diligence it hath bene and shall be still obserued it is not possible that there should be such alteration in religion or difference betwixt the faith and doctrine of the ancient and present Pastours of the Church as our aduersaries ignorantly or maliciously obiect For as Vincencius Lyrinensis saith Vincent Lyr. l. aduersus haereses Vincentius Lyr. contra haereses c. 32. the Church of Christ is a carefull keeper of religion committed to her charge she neuer changeth or altereth in any thing she diminisheth nothing nothing she addeth to wit as a doctrine of faith True it is that by reason of heresies arising the Pastors and doctors of the Church in latter ages haue had occasion to write more largely and expressely about diuerse points then was done in former times when no such heresies were and that for confutatioÌ of those heresies and more explication of the formerly receiued faith these Pastours and Doctors haue vsed some kinde of more significant words then formerly were vsed in which sort the terme of ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã was brought in against those who denied Christ our Sauiour to be true God and ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã against those who denied our blessed Lady to be the mother of God and transubstantiation against those who denied the conuersion of the substance of bread into the substance of the body of our Lord. The which tearmes although they may seeme to smell of noueltie yet indeed are not of that prophane sort of nouelty of voices or wordes which the Apostle wisheth to be auoided because the sence of these wordes is not different from the faith and phrase vsed formerly by the Church but do onely explicate more plainely or signifie more fully and clearely that which was formerly beleeued and taught by the Church which kinde of explication of the ancient faith to be lawfull and allowable Vincent Lyrin cont haer c. 2. we may learne out of Vincentius Lyrinensis who although a most true louer of antiquitie alloweth such new explicatioÌ of the faith as we may see in his goldeÌ Treatise where hauing declared excellently by that saying of the Apostle Cap. 28.29 30. O Timothy keepe the Depositum c. that nothing is to be innouated in faith he sheweth how this notwithstanding Cap. 32. the ancient faith may in processe of time be more explained and that for more easie vnderstanding of it to an old article of faith we may giue a new name 1 HEre are foure reasons to proue that the ancient Fathers held the same doctrine of faith that is now professed in the Church of Rome and one obiection answered that he thinkes will be made against him His first reason is the testimony of Coccius a Cum ab ineunte aetate incidisset in praeceptores Lutheranos adhuc inuenis in eiusmodi haereticorum Academijs versatus c. Posseuin ap v. Iod. Cocc an apostata who in his Thesaurus settes downe the Fathers point by point with vnanime consent testifying against the Protestants Wherein he much forgets himselfe for if Coccius set downe the Fathers point by point what needed the Repliar haue graunted b Ch. 44. a little before that there be diuers points held by his side now adaies whereof there is no mention in the writings of the Fathers yet they held them because either explicitely or implicitely they held many points that they haue not expressely mentioned let these two be reconciled They held some things onely implicitely by an infolded faith not mentioning them expressely and yet Coccius sets them downe point by point testifying against the Protestants For those points which they held onely infoldedly Coccius cannot set downe in their owne wordes point by point I answer therefore that Coccius with his * Spatio 24. annoruÌ Posseu twenty foure yeares studie hath not done this that my Repliar reports he hath collected together the wordes of the Fathers and such places as his side vses for the confirmation of their hereticall opinions but the vnanime and certaine consent in the now current Romane faith he hath not shewen and the Reader shall know it by this that in the controuersies betweene vs they many times deny the authority of the Fathers and c Ind. expurg Belg pag. 12. professe so to do yea to excuse and extenuate their errors by deuising shifts and to fainesome fit sense for their owne purpose vnto them when they are opposed against them by vs in our disputations And why haue they thus purged and corrupted their writings and why do they allow nothing to be the sense of their wordes but what the Pope and his Clergy allowes to be the sense Is it not palpable hypocrisie to do all this and yet to bragge of their vnanime consent against vs Coccius therefore out of the Fathers whom they haue CORRVPTED PVRGED COVNTERFETTED and COINED may bring places which being fraudulently expounded and shuffled may giue colour to Papistrie but by the true writings of the true Fathers truely expounded as themselues meant the present faith of Rome in the articles which they hold against vs and as they expound them cannot be confirmed no not in one point and let no man hope the contrarie as may appeare by these examples following Of the sufficiency of the Scripture without traditions Saint Basil d De Fid. p. 394. graec Basil sayes It is a manifest falling from the faith and an argument of arrogancy either to abrogate any of
downe all with his hands and fight with Iupiter with his new termes and larger explications he coniures the old faith out of the Church His golden Vincentius hath another point to this purpose that the Repliar ouersees d Monitor c. 30 It is lawfull that those ancient articles of heauenly doctrine be dressed and filed and polished but villanie to change them villanie to maime and curtall them Let them receaue if you will euidence light distinction but withall let them hold their fulnesse integritie and proprietie This rule the Church of Rome hath not obserued but contrary thereunto it hath not onely expounded the articles of the ancient faith corruptly but also added many new articles which in the ancient Church were neuer knowne CHAP. XLVI 1 The errors broached by the later Diuines of the Church of Rome 2 Their errors maintained by that Church And their writings to good purpose alledged by the Protestants 3 How that which they speake for the Protestants is shifted off 5 One reason why we alledge their sayings 6 That which is said in excuse of their disagreement answered A. D. The second obiection My Aduersaries may secondly obiect that all this notwithstanding it cannot be denied Pag. 274. but that in particular mens writings set out in these latter ages there haue bene are found diuers errors coÌtrary to the former faith of the Fathers To iustifie the truth of this obiection it seemeth that M. White hath with great paines raked together all the riffe-raffe and odde opinions he could finde in any particular Catholicke Authors as thinking be like this way to discredit the Catholicke cause But he is very shallow witted if hee thinke by this meanes to ouerthrow or shake the vniuersall faith of the Catholicke Church Introduct quest 3. For as I noted in the Introduction the Catholicke Church doth not binde her faith vpon any priuate Doctors opinion nor indeed do those priuate Doctors deliuer their said opinions as any points of their owne or other mens faith euen then when in these their priuate opinions they hold this or that matter to pertaine to faith which other men thinke not to pertaine to faith but rather submit all their opinions as hereticall Doctors which haue no faith but priuate opinions wil not to the faith iudgement and censure of the Catholicke Church being also ready to renounce any of their opinions whensoeuer by lawfull definitiue sentence of the present Pastours or otherwise they may perceiue them to be contrary to the ancient faith of the Church Hence M. White may see how vainely he hath spent his time in seeking the sinkes and sweeping together so many odde sentences of some Catholicke Authors as here and there he noteth in his writings the which haue no more force against the sincere vnity of doctrine of faith maintained by the authority of our Church then that heape of filth and ordure of ill life of some particular men which he hath scraped together doth proue against the sanctitie of the profession of the Catholicke Church And it is maruaile that the man hath so little wit as to labour so much either in shewing the contrariety of opinions among Catholickes which altogether is impertinent to the vnity of their faith or in discouering the faults of some leude persons which is altogether impertinent to the sanctity of the profession of the Church especially when if he did but looke into the bosome of his owne Protestant congregation and particularly into the life and doctrine of the very primitiue parents thereof he may finde it no lesse but all circumstances considered namely of the smalnesse of the number of men and the little space of time since it came into the world c. far more faulty in either kinde And so he ought to haue bene affraid least when he had said all against Catholickes that his blind zeale or malice could deuise that the shame would be returned so much the more against his Euangelicall brethren some of which as Luther confesseth haue bene for their ill liues far worse then euen themselues were when they were Papists and as I may boldly say for odde errors absurd and impious opinions far worse then any Papists Which their absurd and impious opinions who list to reade he may finde set downe in Caluino-Turcismo and other Authors See Caluino-Turcismus and may oppose them to these which M. White relateth with this aduantage that whereas if by ignorance or passion some Catholicke writers hold any vnfit opinions yet actually or virtually they submit them to the faith and censure of the Church and so are not to be thought obstinately to erre in faith but in priuate opinion about some matter not sufficiently knowne to them to be contrary to the faith of the Catholicke Church But Protestant Doctors who haue no other faith but their owne firmely setled opinion gathered as it seemeth to them out of Scripture who also will not neither actually nor virtually submit these their opinions to the faith and censure of any Church ours or their owne may by their erronious opinions obstinately mainteined against the Church be conuinced of so many absurd and impious obstinate errors in faith as they haue absurd and impious opinions grounded as it seemeth to them vpon Scriptures White p. 349. But it seemeth M. White regardeth not what may be obiected against his brethren so that he may say something against vs and therefore in one place he doth in effect vrge this argument against vs If the ancient Catholicke truth did continue among vs in all points then there could not be among our Doctors variety of opinions in any point no more then there is in the doctrine of the blessed Trinity or Incarnation I answer first that this may better be vrged against the Protestants who as appeareth in Caluino-Turcismo haue not onely vncertainty and variety of opinions in other points but euen about the doctrine of the blessed Trinity and Incarnation neither haue they any such sufficient meanes as we haue to take away this variety of opinions Secondly I answer that the variety of opinions which is among our Doctors either is not in matters pertaining to faith or if the matter pertaine to faith the varietie is not in the substance of the point but in some circumstance which may be held this or other waies without preiudice to faith or if in some rare case any priuate Doctors hold opinion against the substance or circumstance so far as pertaineth to faith this is in ignorance and with readines to put away this opinion so soone as they vnderstand the contrary to pertaine to faith by some euident proofe of Scripture or tradition or by declaration of the present Church which is an argument that although they erre in opinion yet they erre not in implicite beleefe euen of the very point wherein through ignorance they do erre in opinion Now the reason why this ignorance and consequently variety of opinion may
See Io. Marian. tract pro vulg edit c. 13 23. Matth. Aquar in Capreo prol pag 7. PERFORMED WITH AS GOOD ADVICE AND BY AS LEARNED AND GODLY MEN AS EVER IOYNED TOGETHER IN SVCH A WORKE SINCE TRANSLATION WAS VSED And if some priuate men skilfull in the learned tongues as Wickliffe or Tindall for example when better meanes failed translated the Bible of themselues so did Aquila Theodotion Symmachus Origen Ierom Lucian Isychius and d Fuere autem pene innume rabiles olim editiones Latinae Posseu appar v Biblia p. 223. innumerable others and diuers also lately in the Church of Rome Saint Austin e De Doct. Chr. l. 2. c. 11. sayes They which turned the Scripture out of the Hebrew tongue into Greeke may be reckoned but the Latin interpreters cannot by any meanes for in the first times of the faith as a Greeke booke of the Scriptures came into any mans hands that thought himselfe to haue some little facultie in both the tongues he would be bold to translate it the which thing truly did more helpe then hinder the vnderstanding c. In which words of Saint Austin besides the customes of those times in translating the Bible that in euery place the vulgar might vse it which I presume my Iesuite will grudge at we see they translated then as boldly and commonly and more then any among vs now do Or if the Iesuite will not allow vs the priuiledge of that time yet he may not for shame obiect that to our Church which is done in his owne where Vatablus Munster Pagnin Montanus and others men as priuate as any translator among vs haue translated or corrected the text out of the learned tongues and which I commend to the Iesuites good memorie and contemplation and to the consideration of all the Papists in England their translations agree with ours and differ from the vulgar Latin as much as ours Pag. 30. A.D. Now although we hold that Scripture is not the onely rule yet this doth not argue that we be enemies to the Scripture or that we are voide of all meanes to secure vs of the truth For first we hold the holy Scripture to be one rule yea a principall rule of our faith which we should not do if we were enemies to the Scripture And one reason why we hold something else besides Scripture to be with Scripture the rule of our faith is partly because so we learne out of the Scripture as in the Treatise and this my Reply will appeare partly because we find it necessarie to admit some other infallible rule and * This infallible meanes is the authoritie of the Church Fathers Councels and Pope which iâ so farre from being yeelded by our selues to be subiect to error in any point of doctrine authoratiuely concluded that euen M. White himselfe who here affirmeth the Church Fathers Councels and Pope to be yeelded by our selues to be subiect to errour doth a few pages before acknowledge that it is a principle of our owne that a generall Councell cannot erre so carelesse this man was what he said or vnsaid so he might seeme to say something against vs. A.D. meanes which may infallibly assure vs both what Bookes be Scripture and what translation and what interpretation is to be followed for finding out the diuine truth contained in Scripture 4 This is his reason why the Church of Rome denies the Scripture to be the whole rule of faith for the vnderstanding whereof haue your eye vpon my words I said that one of their practises against the Scripture is their depriuing it from being the totall rule of faith and I added that hereby they left themselues vtterly voide of all meanes to secure their faith by and to finde the truth inasmuch as the Church the Fathers the Councels the Pope himselfe which is all the rule they can pretend are subiect to error and so by themselues confessed to be To this he replies three things first that they hold the Scripture to be one rule yea a principall rule of our faith which they would not do if they were enemies to the Scripture I answer distinctly three things first sometime some of them when they are pressed cannot shift theÌselues say as the Iesuit here doth the Scripture is the rule and the principall rule too yea more so Bellar. Tho. Antonine others whose words I haue reported in THE WAY Secondly howsoeuer some of them sometime speake thus yet againe others allow it to be but a part of the rule that is to say such as containes but one part of things belonging to faith Thus you see the Iesuit expounds himselfe in his next words we hold something else beside Scripture to be with Scripture the rule of faith Becan f Circ Caluin pag 278. sayes The totall and full rule of our faith is Scripture and Tradition both together and this is defined in g Sess 4. the Trent Councell And it is enough to shew their contempt and disdaine of the Scripture when thus they accuse it of imperfection and match base and vncertaine traditions with it Therefore vntill they can proue first that this defect is in the Scripture next that this defect is supplied by Traditions and then thirdly that these whereof they boast are the true Traditions proceeding from the same Spirit that the Scripture doth and left of God to supply this defect of the Scripture they can neuer shake off the imputation layed vpon them that they be enemies to the Scripture Thirdly they do not hold the Scripture to be a principall rule neither as the Iesuite speakes Would they did for their owne sakes but the Iesuite knowes it is holden to be the least part of the rule The Bishops of the Councell of Basil h Concil Basil p. 104. Bin. say The authoritie of an vniuersall Tradition or of a Councell is equall with the authoritie of the Scripture Caesar Baronius i An. 53. n. 11. Tradition is the foundation of the Scriptures and excels them in this that the Scriptures cannot subsist vnlesse they be strengthened by Tradition but Tradition hath strength enough without the Scriptures Cardinall Hosius k Conf Polon pag. 383. The least part of the Gospell is written and the greater part by farre is come to vs by Tradition Gregorie the 13. l D. 40. Si Papa in annot Men do with such reuerence respect the Apostolicall seate of Rome that they rather desire to know the ancient institution of Christian religion from the Popes mouth then from the holy Scriptâre and they onely enquire what is his pleasure and according to it they order their life and conuersation And if it be obserued how these Traditions in euery question and point of religion are preferred before the Scripture this that I say wil appeare to be true which they would not do if they were not mortall enemies to the Scripture and slaues to the Popes absolute will 5
them c. And it cannot be answered saith he that these are the customes of a few simple people for this which I say is generall through the countrey the whole body of the common people Popishly addicted practising nothing else vntill it please God by the Ministry of the Gospell to conuert them yea the most men and women deuoted to Papistrie though well borne and brought vp for ciuill qualities and of good place in the countrey yet lie plunged in this ignorance This is the Ministers lying relation which I thought fit to recite something at large as being such and so grosse of it selfe as it will without any thing said by me sufficiently discredit it selfe And I maruell with what face he that in his last Marke hath so soberly preached against intemperate and vnchristian proceeding grosse lying vncharitable railing c can now come sit as it were on an Ale-bench and relate such notorious ridiculous and slanderous vntruthes Vnto which first I say that notwithstanding all the conuersation I haue had this many yeares with Catholicks of diuers sorts rich and poore old and yong learned and vnlearned in the South and in the North I may protest that vntill I read them in M. Whites booke I neuer heard of any one of these examples to be vsed by any Catholike nor indeed did I euer before here of any one of these absurd formes of prayer to be so much as extant in the world Secondly I say that diuerse Catholikes of far better credit then M. White liuing in that very countrey where M. White liueth and hauing farre more inward conuersation with Catholikes which liue thereabouts then he is like to haue haue bene demanded what their knowledge was about this point and no one of them did know any Catholike man or woman that did vse to say their prayers in such a ridiculous sort But admit the Minister had met at the Ale-house some drunken old man or some doting old wife of whom he might perchance receiue this ridiculous rotten stuffe to say nothing of what better knowledge of the necessary points of Faith such persons in their better wit and sense might haue I aske M. White whether he thinke that these few examples be sufficient to iustifie this generall assertion wherein he saith their praiers and traditions of this sort are infinite and the ceremonies they vse in all their actions nothing inferiour to the Gentiles in number and strangenes What Haue we infinite prayers and traditions like the white pater noster little creed c Do we vse also ceremonies not onely in some but absolutely in all our actions And are these ceremonies nothing not a iot inferiour to the Gentiles in number and strangenes Surely this is strange and so strange that he were a strange man who would beleeue it especially hauing neuer seene nor obserued any such matter but what man is there who although he liued neuer so long in company of Catholikes did or could see or obserue any such matter yet M. White forsooth will needs perswade vs that any man that conuerseth with Catholikes may easily obserue it Well let vs go forwarward and beleeue if we can that M. White with Lynceus eies hath seene or obserued that which no other person nor we our selues haue seene nor possibly can see and obserue At least good M. White giue us leaue to answer that if you haue seene and obserued some such matter yet it is not in all of vs nor in the most of vs nor in many especially of eminent qualitie or note among vs but at the most in some one or few simple people whose ignorance to attribute to vs generally or indefinitely would smell rankely of brutish ignorance or aboundant malice Nay saith M. White it cannot be answered that these are the customes of a few simple people for this that I say is generall throughout the countrie the whole body of the people Popishly addicted practising nothing else vntill it please God by the ministrie of the Gospell to conuert them yea the most men and women deuoted to Papistrie though well borne and brought vp for ciuill qualities and of good place in the countrie yet lie plunged in this ignorance And say you so Sir Minister indeed Do you say that these customs be generall throughout the couÌtry Do you also say that the whole body of the common people popishly addicted do practise nothing else but Creezum zuum little creed white pater noster c And this not for some short while till themselues by their owne wit or some other of the wiser sort of Catholickes perceiue and correct this foolish custome but absolutely all the while they continue Catholikes vntill which seldome happeneth to sound Catholikes they be conuerted or rather peruerted by the Protestant Ministry Do you also say that besides the whole bodie of the common people yea euen the most men and women deuoted to Papistrie though well borne and brought up for ciuill qualities and of good place in the countrie yet lie plunged in this ignorance Do you Sir Minister say all this Surely if you say it and will stand to it you deserue the whetstone For if this be not a grosse lie I know not what is If you haue a face to affirme this worthily may your countrymen wonder and say as a person of good esteeme and place in that your country hath affirmed that many of your countrimen hauing read this part of your booke haue wondered and said What truth may we thinke can be expected in the processe of this mans booke whilest he citeth Authors which few haue meanes sufficiently to examine or when he telleth of things done in former times or forraigne countries when we finde him so shamelesse and impudently false in relating home matters so contrary to our certaine and direct knowledge 1 LEt the contumelies and intemperance be swept out and the matter be considered our Seminaries haue their disease that voide their excrements at their mouth and Rome that breeds them is a a Apoc. 17.1 19.2 Pro. 30.20 whore that neither can blush nor abide with any patience to heare of her qualities That which I writ touching this prodigious ignorance of the people that liue in Papistry and the manner of their prayers is true when all the Iesuites in England haue railed at it what they can and all the faces that they can set vpon it shall neuer outface that which for 17. yeares together I had daily experience of and saw with my eies I protest in the words of Bernard b Epist 42. pag. 804. of naked things I haue spoken nakedly nether do I vncouer secrets but reprooue shameles filthines Would God these things were done privately and in chambers would wee alone saw and heard them would we might not be credited when we vtter them would the Noes of our time had left vs any thing wherewith we might couer them Now when the word round about sees these things
bad vnder pretence of aduancing the Gospell or the glory of God especially if they thinke that they may lawfully maintaine it by writing apparent and knowne vntruthes the better to defend it If I say there be any Protestant writers of such seared consciences I would wish they would plainely tell vs this their minds that so those poore soules who haue bene hitherto seduced may the better see how vnsound the Potestant Religion is which cannot be maintained but with apparent vntruths vttered by their writers either without due care of conscience or against their knowledge and conscience or with hauing such bad consciences as to thinke it lawfull to lie in this their cause pretended by them to be for the aduancement of Gods glory and of the Gospell or which is all one or worse to thinke one cannot lye too much in defence of this their Protestant cause or Gospell 5 This is a poore motion and proceeds from no great conceit yet I will satisfie it vpon condition he will rest satisfied with my answer Let this content you and beare not your selues in hand to the contrary we know our cause to be Gods owne truth which you haue corrupted with innumerable heresies patched thereunto and we not onely defend it as we do with a good conscience against you but wee would thinke it our greatest happines if the cause should so require to shed our blood in defence of it and it ioyes our hearts to see the weapons wherewith you fight against vs lying railing pride rage treason sedition fire and powder which is a signe that you are not of God this our cause we will maintaine with zeale and synceritie which shall be tried not by your calumnies but by the thing it selfe And I am so far from seduâing any that I would giue my life for the reclaiming of those whom you haue seduced and bewitched with meere cozenage and impostures And as I hate lying to defend Gods truth so can I not but vpbraide them that run headily into Papistry afore they know how things stand betweene vs when vpon iust triall it will fall out that in the maine question betweene the Church of Rome and vs our aduersaries vphold themselues with meere imposture To the Reader HItherto reaches that which my Aduersary hath written against the Epistle and Preface of my booke now in the next place before he fall to replying vpon the booke it selfe he inserts an Introduction as he calles it containing a Declaration of the word Faith the which bebeginnes pag. 49. where his exceptions to the said Preface and epistle end And forasmuch as it is a new discourse intended * Since I see M. A Wotton to be either of so dull capacity of wit that he cannot conceiue or rather of so captious disposition of will that he will needes doubt and make a question what I meant by the word faith I haue thought good not onely to declare what I meant by the word but also by this action to set downe certaine points of doctrine pertaining to the thing signified by the word pag 49. of his Reply as it should seeme against M. Wotton and is no Reply to me but a superfluous and impertinent collection rudely and obscurely peeced together for the outfacing of that which he was not able formally to answer I would therefore cast away no time in medling with it but onely defend my selfe against such places thereof as touch my Booke because I will not be in his debt for a word Those places onely I haue here set downe in order as they lie in his Discourse with my Answer to them CHAP. XVI Touching assurance of Grace and Beleeuing a mans owne saluation 1. Perfection of the Scripture and necessitie of the Church Ministrie 2. 3. How the iustified conclude their saluation from the Scripture 4. The iustified haue the assurance of faith This is declared Full assurance voide of doubting taught by the most in the Church of Rome 5. Touching Perseuerance A. D. Now that it doth not at all appertaine to that kind of verities Pag. 57. which are to be beleeued by faith I proue out of the Protestants owne Principles to wit that * That this proofe must be by necessarie consequence without all authoritie of the Church is insinuated by White pag. 46 nothing is to be beleeued by faith but what is expressely set downe in Scripture or so contained that without all Church authoritie it may be euidently and by good consequence proued out of Scripture But the promise of Gods speciall mercie applied absolutely and in particular to Luther Caluine c. is neither expressed nor in manner aforesaid contained in Scripture Therefore it is not a verity to be beleeued by faith by the Protestants owne Principles 1 IN this Chapter where these words lye he discourses of the obiect of faith and inquires what the things are which belong to it and must be beleeued to no purpose intruding himselfe vpon an impertinent question touching the beleefe of a mans owne saluation and in this period he affirmes that it is against the Protestants owne Principles to beleeue it Because by their Principles nothing may be beleeued but what is set downe in Scripture either expressely or by good consequence which the saluation or remission of sinnes to Luther Caluine White or any particular man is not And to shew this to be our Principle he saies in the margent that M. White in such a place insinuats that nothing may be receiued as a point of faith vnlesse it can be proued by necessary consequence of Scripture without all authoritie of the Church meaning as I suppose that I require no Church authoritie to assure a man any thing but intend such things onely to be beleeued as may be proued at least by consequence of Scripture without the authoritie of the Church I answer 2. things First that in the place alleadged I deny no authority of the Church that is dâe vnto it but onely against them that charge the Scripture with insufficiency as if they wanted many things needfull to be beleeued which must be supplied by the Tradition and Authority of the Church I affirme that whatsoeuer is needfull to be knowne beleeued or done is contained in Scripture and by the same ALONE may absolutely be determined The meaning whereof is that what Ministrie and power soeuer the Church hath to teach and rule vs in the vse of the Scripture and points of faith which authority no Protestant will deny to belong to the true Church or to be needfull yet all things whatsoeuer belong to faith and the Church by any authoritie may propose vnto vs are contained in the Scripture and may be proued thereby alone the said Church authoritie being onely a requisite condition subordinate for the readier attaining to the sence and vse of the Scripture but no rule or principle either aboue or with the Scripture whereinto any mans faith in any point is resolued so that it
for him The l Heb. 11.36 Scripture reports how many of the children of God were tried by mocking and scourging by bonds and prisonment they were stoned hewen apeeces tempted they wandered vp and downe destitute and afflicted All which the Apostle saies they did by faith and confidence of the Promises and yet their assurance was no other nor otherwise begotten then the ordinary assurance of all Gods children which is concluded by ioyning the light of their conscience kindled by the holy Ghost to the immediate light of the conditions reuealed in the Scriptures 5 That which our Aduersaries assigne to be the cause why a man cannot be sure of his saluation because no man is sure of his Perseuerance is easily answered by affirming likewise that the grace of perseuerance with other gifts is giuen all the elect in their iustification For S. Paule m Rom. 8.38 sayes he was certaine of it and what he in that place auouches of himselfe belongs to others as well as himselfe by the confession of n Staplet de iustif l. 9. c. 13. Tolet. in Rom. 8. v. vlt. our strongest aduersaries and he auouches not onely that Gods loue to him but more properly that his loue to God shall neuer faile o Perer. in Ro. 5. d 12. n. 59. The Iesuit also confesses it to be the doctrine of p De Bono perseuerant Saint Austine that grace is giuen by Christ whereby not onely man may perseuere but ââlso that he shall perseuere q ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Chrysost hom 9. in Rom. The fauorits of Princes are aduanced to honour and riches but their preseuerance therein is vncertaine But it is not so with the grace of God bestowed in Iustification and therefore we may beleeue as well our Perseuerance as our Grace And if the iustified be certaine of the grace of Iustification that he hath then may he be certaine and well assured of his Perseuerance because it is a grace purchased vs by Christ and included in that Peace which the iustified by faith haue with God through him or else let him shew that can where any firme and setled peace of minde is where there is vncertainty and doubtfulnesse touching Perseuerance r Concil Trid. sess 6. can 22. Vega pro Concil l. 12. cap. 23. Barth Mediâ 12. qu. 109. art 10. ad 3. Greg. de Valent. tom 2. pag. 849. c. And that it is in the power of a iustified man with Gods helpe to perseuere in grace to the end is defined by the Trent Councell and holden to be the doctrine of all Catholikes which power a 1. Pet. 5.1 Saint Peter also testifies to be reduced into act by the almightie power of God keeping him * ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã as with a garrison through faith to saluation according to that of b Ier. 32.40 the Prophet I will put my feare into their hearts that they shall not depart from me Which ouerthrowes all them that make the vncertaintie of Perseuerance a reason against the certainty of saluation CHAP. XVII Concerning points Fundamentall and not Fundamentall The distinction expounded and defended 4. Who shall iudge what is Fundamentall and what not A iest at the election of Pope Leo the tenth A. D. * White p. 100. M. White by the foundation or points fundamentall Pag 66. vnderstandeth all truthes which are necessary for the saluation of all men but this definition is not found in * Act. 4.12 1. Cor. 3.11 Ephes 2.19 the texts of Scripture cited by him in the margent Neither doth it helpe the matter for the question may still be how many and which truthes those be which be necessarie The which questioÌ if we leaue to be determined by euerie mans priuate spirit or particular iudgement we shall either haue no point of faith to be accouÌted a point fundamentall in regard the ignorance of some may be such that they may thinke a man may be saued by morall good life although through ignorance he beleeue nothing at all or else we may haue so many fundamentall points of faith as it shall please euerie braine-sicke fellow to hold to be necessary to saluation The which how great confusion it will breed in the Church euery man of meane capacity may easily see And therfore euery man ought to see how necessary it is that the determinatioÌ of this necessary question be not left to the priuate spirit or particular iudgement of this or that man but to the iudgement of the Catholike Church accounting with S. Austine all those points which are diligently digested and confirmed by full authority of the same Church to be fundameÌtall or to pertaine to the foundation and consequently to be such as must necessarily be beleeued actually or vertually by all men and such as may not doubtfully be disputed of and much lesse rashly and obstinately be denied by any man 1 OVr doctrine is that in the things reuealed in the Scripture and belonging to the obiect of faith there is a difference whereby some are more necessary to be knowne and without error to be vnderstood then othersome For though it be lawfull for no man either to misbeleeue or obstinately not to beleeue any thing that is writteÌ yet the simple ignorance or error in many things hinders not saluation nor the substance of Faith but either a priuate man or a whole particular Church thus ignorant or erring either inuincibly or not affectedly and obstinately in such things and yet holding others aright hath sauing faith and is in the state of grace This difference of things arises from 3. respects First of the commandement enioyning and vrging the knowledge of one thing more then the knowledge of another as for example the knowledge of Christ crucified more then the knowledge of his Genealogy for though both be reuealed alike yet not both vnder the like penalty Secondly of the nature and condition of the things when this doth more properly and necessarilie belong to saluation then that for without the knowledge of story of Gedeon I may be saued but without the knowledge of Christs nature and office I cannot Thirdly of their vse WheÌ one thing is the foundatioÌ and ground that giues light and subsistence to another as the knowledge of Christs office merits brings light to the vnderstanding of the doctrine touching our owne vnworthinesse c. Out of these respects and degrees of things that are beleeued as they stand in order one to another and in vse to vs we call some FVNDAMENTALL and some NOT FVNDAMENTALL not with relation to our faith so much as to our knowledge in as much as it is daÌgerous to misdoubt the truth of any thing that is reuealed to us if it were but a 2. Sam. 24.9 1. Chro. 21.5 Whether the number of the children of Israell able to beare armes when Dauid numbred them were 1500000 though no man will say an error or ignorance in this matter were
against sauing faith A Fundamentall point therefore is that which belongs to the substance of faith and is so reuealed and so necessary that there can be no saluation without the knowledge and explicit faith thereof of which nature are the things contained in the articles of our faith a point not Fundamentall is that which directly belongs not to the way of Saluation neither doth error or ignorance therein make void or destoy that which is Fundamentall Forsomuch as such a point is reuealed but for the manifestation of the other and is beleeued but in order to the other as that Abraham had so many children Paul had a cloke The dead pray for the liuing c wherein it may fall out that we may erre or be ignorant and yet the faith not preiudiced 2 I know none of our Aduersaries that deny this distinction but vse and explicate it as well as we though none such as this Iesuite is be growne so peruerse and malepart that they will endure nothing that we say be it neuer so true b 22. q. 2. art 5. DicenduÌ quod fidei obiectum per se est id per quod homo beatus efficitur Per accidens auteÌ aut secundario se habeât ad obiectum virtutis omnia quae in sacra Scriptura continentur sicut quod AbrahaÌ habuit duos filios c. Thomas hauing deuided the obiect of faith into that which is so by it selfe and that which is by accident and secondarily defines the first to be that whereby a man is made blessed and saued the latter that which is reuealed whatsoeuer it be as that Abraham had two sonnes and Dauid was the sonne of Iesse c Dialog 1. part l. 2. c. 2. pag. 6. Occham sets downe three differences of verities to be beleeued Some touching God and Christ whereon principally depends our Saluation as that there is one God and three persons that Christ is God and man that he suffered and died and rose againe c. Some whereon our Saluation depends not so principally which though we beleeue yet do they not * Non directè sed indirecte quod ammodo ad salutem humani generis pertinere noscuntur so directly belong to our Saluation as many things written of Pharaoh c Of the third sort such as are not reuealed but either agree with that which is reuealed or follow manifestly of it And d Vbi sup c. 11. pag. 9. Sunt quidam Moderni dicentes quod multae assertiones sunt quae in rei veritate aduersantur diuinae Scripturae quae tamen ab Ecclesia minimè sunt damnandae nec sint inter haereses numerandae he reports it to haue bene an opinion in the Church in his time that many assertions which in truth of the matter were against the Scripture yet were not condemned by the Church nor counted heresie Espencaeus e Espencae in 2 Tim digress 17. p 119. discoursing of things to be knowne and beleeued sayes The infolded faith of simple people will serue well enough in such things as are the obiect of faith onely BY ACCIDENT and in subtile considerations that arise about the Scripture but in those things which OF THEMSELVES are the obiect of faith whereby men are led to happines they need an vnfolded faith the Colliars faith will do no good f Mag 3. d. 23. ibi Scholast coÌmuniter Tho. Bonau DuraÌd Ricard Dionys Gabr. Occh. q. 8. Bann 22. q. 2. art 8 dub 2. Ouand 4. d. 13. prop. 12. Eymeâic director part 1. q. 2. ad 8. ibi Scoliast Pezant 22 p. 504. a. Syluest sum v. fides nu 6. Simanch cachol instit tit 28. nu 20. Pic. Mirand de fid ord credend theor 12. p. 286. All the Casenists and Schoolemen that haue written touching the nature of heresie and the measure of Catholicke faith agree that there is a certaine measure and quantity of faith without which none can be saued but euery thing reuealed belongs not to this measure and it is enough to beleeue somethings onely by the Colliars faith The which doctrine doth euidently allow our distinction that some things are Fundamentall and some not for no Protestant thinks any point to be so not Fundamentall but that euery man is bound with humility and reuerence to accept it whensoeuer the knowledge and necessity thereof shall be offered him by the Church which is all our aduersaries require in their infolded faith 3 This distinction by g THE WAY pag. 110. me onely touched and that by the way briefly vpon another occasion the Iesuite in this chapter frowardly cauils at and in this place wrangles with the definition that I gaue of points Fundamentall because it is not found in the words of the Scripture that I cited for it in the margent Whereto I answer three things First h Act. 4.12 1. Cor. 3.11 Eph. 2.19 the Scriptures cited shew the knowledge expresse faith of Christs death to be absolutely necessary for all men and two of the places call the matter of this knowledge a foundation Therefore such a point as is absolutely to be knowne and rightly holden of all which euery point reuealed is not may be called a Foundation or Fundamentall point Therfore againe such as by the like confession of our aduersaries some men and all men of some times may erre in or be ignorant of without preiudice of Saluation may be called a point not Fundamentall whence it followes againe that my distinction is grounded well enough vpon the places cited in the margent Secondly I answer that how scornefully soeuer Iesuites thinke of the Scripture yet we Protestants had as lieffe borrow our conclusions distinctions and words wherein we expresse them from it as from the stinking puddles of rotten Schoolemen or new found mint of vpstart Iesuites Thirdly my aduersary himselfe in this very chapter acknowledges the distinction if it bee not applyed to a wrong end to be good For first touching the termes thereof Fundamentall not Fundamentall He finds theÌ in S. Austin True it is S. Austin insinuates a distinction of some points Fundamentall and some not Fundamentall Therefore the words are according to Saint Austin and that is well Next in the matters themselues also he sayes Catholicke Diuines make some distinction and hold some to be more necessary to be actually and expresly knowne of all sorts then other therefore he quarrels at that which himselfe confesses to be the truth There be some humours loue to be doing if it be but to keepe their hand in vre * Maiol dies Canic I haue read of one that had so vsed himselfe to pilfring that he would pick his owne purse and steale things out of his owne closet The Iesuite seems to be of that kindred that will quarrell and keepe a wrangling with the doctrine of his owne Church rather then he will cease from his contentious spirit 4 Yet the saddle somewhere pinches him and
it may be the easing of him may do him good He complains this distinction when it is granted will not helpe the matter neither for the question may still be how many and which truthes those be that are necessary the which question if we leaue to be determinated by euery priuate spirit either we shall haue no point to be counted Fundamentall in regard the ignorance of some may be such that they may thinke a man may be saued by morall good life although through ignorance he beleeue nothing at all or else so many as shall please euery brainsicke fellow The determination therefore of this necessary question is to be left to the iudgement of the Catholicke Church that all such points that are confirmed by full authority of the said Church he receiued for such as must necessarily be beleeued by all men Wherein first I blame his discretion for where I mentioned the distinction I had no cause to inquire whose the authority is to iudge what is Fundamentall and what otherwise but assuming it as a thing iudged already I onely mentioned it affirming some points to be Fundamentall and some otherwise How it helps the matter therefore I had nothing to do in that my words were not vsed in this question Next I pittie his wretched state that in no controuersie running betweene vs no not so much as in this a poore distinction can preuaile vnlesse his owne Church and the Pope therein for * Shewed plainely below cap 35. 36. that he meanes by the authority of the Catholicke Church be made the iudge This is a very meane shift when a question depends betweene vs and them to put the Scripture and the consent of the Ancient Church by and require themselues to be iudges Thirdly this question as all other matters belonging to faith must be iudged by no mans priuate spirit but by the Catholicke Church of Christ as the Iudge and by the Scripture onely as the Rule and if they be no competent Iudges who through ignorance may thinke a man may be saued by morall good life though he beleeue nothing at all then away with the Church of Rome and let it be acknowledged as erroneous as any priuate spirit i See cap. 22. n. 1. wherein it is frequently holden that the Gentiles were iustified and might be saued onely by their morall life without beleeueing any thing at all Fourthly supposing the Protest left the determining of this question to priuate spirit which they do not but to the true Church of God following the Scripture yet let my Iesuite answer if the practise of his owne Church be not as bad where the Pope hath power k See cap. 36. n. 3. to make a new article of faith and that to be a Fundamentall point belonging to faith at one time which is not so at another so that all men shall then be bound to beleeue it which before were free to beleeue it l Scot. 4. d. 11. q. 3 §. ad argu Tonstall de verit corp p 46. as it hath already bene practised in the point of transubstantiation and may when the Pope will in the points of m Dico primò veritatem hanc sc virginem esse conceptam sine peccato originali posse definiti ab Ecclesia quando id expedire indicauerit probatur Nam imprimis EcclesiaÌ posse controuersiam hanc in alterutram partem decidere apertè supponunt Sixtus 4. Pius 5. Suar. tom 2. disp 3. sect 6. the conception of the B. Virgin and n Paul Benc Eugub l. de effic auxil c. 1. the concourse of Gods grace with mans wil and the o Staplet Princip doctr l. 9. c. 4. Relect. coÌtro 5. q. 2. art 4. Canonizing of Hermes or Clement into the sacred Scripture In which case his Holinesse might possible if not be brain-sicke which betides yonger men which Popes commonly are not vnlesse it be sometime when the yong Cardinââ are in an humor to elect a Bennet or Iohn or * When Leo the tenth a yong man was elected in the Conclaue Alphonsus Petrucius a yong Cardinall proclaimed his election at the window Pontificem habemus Leonem decimum ac viuant vigeantque iuniores Pap. Masso in LeoÌ 10. he should haue cried by the order Annutiâ vobis gaudium magnum Papam habemus Marcell sacr cerem pag. 19 Leo yet doâe at least by vertue of his age or for his recreation play the vice of a Play as p Alex. ab Alexand. genial dicr l. 3. c. 21. Amasis the King of Egipt would sometime do among his Courtiers and as q Aelian var. hist l. 12. c. 15. Agesilaus ride vpon a sticke among his children to make them sport the which comparisons howsoeuer his creatures will take vnkindly yet all the world knowes his Consistorie hath bene a stage whereon he hath many a time and often plaied these parts ere now as formally as the priuatest spirit or braine-sickest companion aliue can do and so I leaue him CHAP. XVIII 1. Touching the perpetuall virginity of Mary 2. The celebration of Easter 3. The Baptisme of Infants The Iesuits halting 4. And the Scriptures sufficiency A. D. I for breuitie sake will omit to vrge other points Pag. 68. which Protestants beleeue with vs viz the perpetuall virginitie of the blessed Virgine against the errour of Heluidius White pag. 12. the celebration of Easter on the Sunday against those heretikes that denied it the Baptisme of Infants against Anabaptists who will not allow it c. 1 HEre my name is cited in the Margent and the page of my Booke as if I had written or some way insinuated that these 3. points were matters of faith and yet not contained in the Scripture But I writ nothing that sounds that way neither in the place cited nor any where else yet because I will misse no place where he cites me I answer he affirmes 3. things First that we hold the perpetuall virginity of the blessed Virgine the Celebration of Easter vpon the Sunday and the Baptisme of Infants to be a For that is the question expressed by himselfe a litle before pag. 67. of his Repl. points of faith necessary to be beleeued ââcondly that these 3. are not contained in Scripture Thirdly that we beleeue all this with the Papists Wherein there is neuer a true word For to the first the perpetuall virginity of the Virgine Marie after the birth of our Sauiour as well as before we beleeue as a probable and likely truth but not as a matter of faith the which if my aduersarie mislike I require him to forbeare me and answer Saint Basil with whom we consent b ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Basil pa. 233. graec Froben an 1551. That she denyed not the workes of mariage to her husband after the birth of her Sonne though it nothing hinder godly doctrine yet what was done after without medling with it let vs leaue to the
doctrine of this Mystery But whatsoeuer my aduersarie will haue to be thought of is c August de temp serm 6. Theodor. in Ezech pag. 486. Anibr in Luc. l. 2. c. 1. §. in men sc l. 10. c. 23. §. stabant au tem Epist l. 1. ep 5. 7. Basil vbi sup Hiero. in Ezec. 44. §. conuertit adu Heluid Epiphan l. 3 haer 78. sermo de laud. S. Mar. in Bibl. S. PatruÌ tom 7. pag. 26. edit 1. Hesych Chrysip ser de Maria ibi p. 33 inde Andrae Ierosolym serm de salutat Angel ibid. pag. 241. Proclus Cyzecen homil in Concil Ephes pag. 251. graec Commel in See Zuingl tom 3. pag. 233. the ancient Fathers brought the Scripture to proue it that if it were a matter of faith it should in their opinion be beleeued because it were contained in the Scripture 2 The celebration of Easter vpon the Sonday likewise is no point of faith but only a seemely and ancient ceremony of the Church d ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Socrat. l 5. c. 22. pag 249. Steph. at the first not thought so necessary as the Iesuits now affirme it to be specially the holding of it on that day for e Euseb hist l. 5. c. 23. the Churches of Asia held it on the 14. day of the moneth whether it were Sonday or not * ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã by an old tradition f See Euseb ibid. inde l. 7 c. vlt. Socr. vbi sup Cassiod l. 9. c. 38 Niceph. l 12 c. 33. 34. Beda aequinoct vernal tom 2. Gab. Prateol Elench haer verb. quatuordecimani The which many Catholike Bishops as Polycarp Thraseas Irenaeus Sagaris Melito Polycrates Anatolius and diuers others many yeares together maintained which they would not haue done being all godly Bishops of the Catholike Church if the custome of the Westerne Church to keepe it on the Sonday had bene an article of faith g Alphons âdu haer v. Pascha Our aduersaries also confesse their custome were at this day lawfull but for the determination of the Church h Refert Beda rat temp c. 45. ibi Ramesiens gloss pag. 15. edit Basil per Heruag an 1563. Theophilus Caesariensis an ancient Father tels how the French Church in those daies alwaie kept it on the 8. of the Calends of Aprill which is the 25. of March what day of the weeke soeuer it fell because Christ arose on that day And with vs i Bed hist Angl. l. 2. c. 2 19. l. 3. c. 25 l. 5. c 22. The like disagreement among the Spaniards and French and others testified by Sigeb pag. 83. Cron. Caluis Cronolog an 546. the old Britons and Scots celebrated it not on that day that is now vsed whereby it is cleare that the holding of Easter on such a day is not Catholike And whereas the Iesuit sayes the celebrating it on a Sonday is not contained in the Scripture he saies truly yet the Church of Rome maintaining that order in old time thought otherwise as he may see in k To be seene in Bede de veân aequinoct sub fin pag. 346. a Councell holden about that matter in Pope Victors time where the Scripture is roundly alleadged for it against the Asian B.B. 3 The Baptisme of Infants which is his third example we confesse to be an article of faith but we do not confes that it is not contained in the Scripture we say the contrary as appeares by our l Caluin instit l. 4. c. 16. instruct adu Anabapt art 1. writings against the Anabaptists yea the Papists theÌselues ordinarily vse to grouÌd it on the scripture This truth m De bapt c. 8. saies Bellar. is proued by three kindes of arguments The first is taken from the Scripture This is proued by the Scripture n Tom. 4. pag. 597. b. saies Gregory of Valentia the like is done by o Tho. 3. part q. 68. art 9. lansen concord c. 20. 100 Suarez tom 3. disp 25. sect 1 Henriquez sum moral de bapt c. 21. Vasquez in 3. part Tho. disp 149. nu 6. Tolet. in Ioh. 3. ann 10. Maldon in Ioh. 3. n. 20. In Math. 19. v. 14. he hath these wordes illud fortissimum apertissimum testimonium quo semper Ecclesia vt Infantes baptizarit adducta est Nisi quis renatus est c. many others which is woorth the readers obseruation because at other times when they deale against vs they will cry out it is a tradition vnwritten Let them go for egregious impostors by my consent that against the Anabaptists can proue by Scripture that which they make vs beleeue is but by tradition Beggars for halting at the townes end and going vpright when they are in the Alehouse are set in the stocks and nailed to the Pillorie but Iesuits counterfeiting after the same fashion in a higher matter one while with Scripture 3. arguments at once out of Scripture a most powerfull and plaine testimony of Scripture for the baptizing of children another while with their leg in a string no crosse but tradition and Church authority are made the guides of many mens faith p Nec pedibus ad insistendum idoneis Pet. Mâff vit Loiol l. 1. c. 2 ââbiae contractae breuitas rectè illum incedere prohibuit Ribad vit Ignat. l. 1. c. 1. The halting of Ignatio that created them was a type of the halting religion of his creatures 4 That which Gretser q Defens Bellarm tom 1. l. 4. c. 4. sub sin pag. 1598. Ingolst answers hereunto will not cleare them he saies these things may be proued by Scripture but not sufficiently not effectually by Scripture alone without tradition but onely probably This is against the authority and nature of the Scripture for it is the word of God therefore whatsoeuer is proued trulie thereby is proued effectually and sufficiently and not onely probably and this in respect of vs which is confirmed for r 1. Ioh. 5.9 the witnesse of God is greater then the testimony of man therefore if these things be to be proued at al out of the Scripture they are proued to vs and that effectually because whatsoeuer God saith he saith to vs and that not only probably but necessarily and euidently which if we see not then it is by reason of some indisposition in vs allowing tradition or Church authority to take away this indisposition and to expound and declare these Scriptures to these purposes yet is it not true that the Iesuite saies for then the said tradition and authoritie puts and driues some further meaning and sense into them then was in them before or it onely declares and expounds it The former Å¿ Occh dial 1. part l. 2 c. 14. Alphonâ adu haer l. 1. c. 8. Dicimus enim quod quantum ad ea quae ad fidem pertinent Romanum Pontificem nec totam
demonstration by some other principle in a higher art more euident to vs. Here are two vntruths For first there is no higher art then themselues Thomas i Vbi supra sayes The sacred Scripture hath no higher science The setting vp of the Pope and his Church aboue it to giue it authoritie as a higher science giues to a lower is a blasphemous practise of Antichrist Bozius k Boz de sign eccl tom 2. pag. 439. writeth that the Scripture is not to be reckoned among such principles as before all things are to be credited but it is proued and confirmed by the Church as by a certaine principle which hath authoritie to reiect and allow Scripture Let the Reader by these words of Bozius a famous Papist conster my aduersaries meaning in this place if he chance to say he meanes not as I charge him Againe it is false that the Church is more euident to vs then the Scripture in that sense that belongs to this question I see indeed the Church that teaches me before I beleeue the Scripture to be diuine supposing I were a Pagan that as yet had not receiued the Scripture but I beleeue the Scripture to be diuine and am conuinced in my conscience that it is the word of God before I can beleeue the Church sayes true For I cannot beleeue it sayes true but vpon the grounds of Scripture which it offers me and therefore consequently the truth of the Scripture is more euident then the truth of the Church In which case it is as when a man stands in the doore with a torch in his hand to giue light to such as need where he holds out the torch indeed yet he puts no light into it nor does any thing but onely hold it before them The Church-authoritie in ministring to vs doth no more to the Scripture then this man doth to his torch I wil yet vse a more familiar conparison whereby the Reader shall see how absurdly my aduersary holds the Church to be more euident then the Scriptures and to giue them authoritie which they haue not of themselues because it propounds and perswades them vnto vs. Seius owes Caius mony vpon a bond that vpon trust and for the better keeping thereof is put into the hands of Titius For the proofe of this debt it is necessary that Titius bring forth the bond but when he hath done I demand whence hath the bond his credit How is it proued to be Seius his true deed rather then a counterfet Not by Titius his authoritie because he brings it forth but by it self in that the hand and seale thereof manifest themselues to be Seius his Titius that keeps it is but a means to bring it forth But what if Seius denie the debt that Caius be enforced to sue him and by law to cast him who giue Caius the right and makes Seius his debtor and who makes the bond of force doth the Iudge before whom the cause is tried The simplest man in the countrey will not say so for the bond both proues it self and giues Caius his right and make Seius a debtor when the Iudge onely giues it execution and declares no more but that which was in the bond before Let the Scripture be compared to this bond and let my aduersary put me to proue that it is the word of God as Caius is put to proue his bond and it wil manifestly appeare that though the Church haue some ministery in propounding it yet that ministery or authoritie call it what you will doth no more then the Iudge in this case doth It is not a principle aboue the Scripture or more euident whereby the truth thereof is proued as the Iudges authoritie proues not the bond 6 Our aduersaries when they haue wrangled what they can are inforced to confesse thus much in that they grant the last and highest resolution of our faith to be into the authoritie of the Scripture And let the Reader diligently obserue how it comes about In euery controuersie and article of faith they say they are moued by the authoritie of the Church they beleeue the Trinitie the Incarnation the Scripture to be Gods true word because God hath so reuealed by the infallible authoritie of the Church But how come they to know this authority to be infallible by what motiue doth the spirit of God induce them to beleeue it l Can loc p 48. Stapl princip doctr pag. 318. Tripl aduer Whica pag. 184 188. Greg. Val. tom 3. pag 31. Rodeâ Delgad de auth Script pag. 51. Pezant comm in Tho. pag. 479. They confesse expresly it is the reuelation of the Scripture giuing testimonie to the Church which reuelation is beleeued for it selfe and for no other therfore the highest and last reason light authoritie mouing a man to beleeue the things of faith the sence of the Scripture the authority of the Church and al is contained in the Scripture it selfe For thus I reason The reuelation of the Scripture is beleeued for it selfe therefore the Scripture is a principle indemonstrable by any other and euident in it selfe therefore it is not beleeued by Tradition vpon the authoritie of the Church but for it selfe therfore this point that the Scripture is Gods word is contained in the scripture therfore the Scripture is al-sufficieÌt wants nothing that is needful to be beleeued 7 Hitherto I haue expounded the maner how the Scriptures are said to be Principles that are to be admitted immediatly without discourse of other arguments and how this their authoritie is not founded vpon nor demonstrated by the authoritie of the Church and how Church-authoritie is onely a condition and ministery to offer them vnto vs. Now I come to answer his argument wherby he would proue them not to be euident to vs the which is but a poore one For S. Paul doth not say Faith is the argument of things not euident as the vulgar Latin cited in the margent translates but of things that are not seene Now things may be euident and appeare manifestly to the vnderstanding though they be not seene when they are euident otherwise by any light or discourse to the vnderstanding The which kind of euidence and that also which is by sence may stand with faith for the declaration whereof note first that a thing is euident m Jn assensis principiorum scientiae humanitus inuentae est coactio propter euidentiam speculationis quia in eu intellectus euidenter conclusionem intuetur speculatur August Anconit q. â9 arâ 4. ad 1. when it moues the vnderstanding so sufficiently that it cannot chuse but assent vnto it note secondly that a thing may be euident three wayes first when it is sensible as that which we apprehend by our outward sense secondly when by the light of nature it is manifest by it selfe as two equall numbers put together make an equall Thus the first principles and notions of nature are euident Thirdly when it
all points contained in Scripture all which are points of faith and consequently are points necessary to be beleeued either expressely and in particular or implicitely and in generall vnder paine of damnation Indeed I do grant and neuer did deny but that there are some points necessary to be particularly knowne of all sorts necessitate medij and some necessary to be known necessitate praecepti In which points implicite beleefe doth not suffice but expresse particular knowledge is required by Catholicke Diuines to be ioyned to the assent of our faith Whereby appeareth that M. White doth vtter two grosse vntruthes 2 White p. 5. 7. when he saies that we vtterly refuse knowledge and that the Colliars faith is canonized for our Creed In other points so farre as we neither know nor haue sufficient meanes to know them we may well commend the Colliars faith in beleeuing in generall as the Church beleeueth For in this generall act is infolded a vertuall or implicite beleefe of all points both in regard a generall includeth all particulars contained in it as also for that this particular act of beleeuing the Church eo ipso in that we are moued vnto it by the authority of diuine reuelation as the primary or formall cause and by the authoritie of the Church it selfe as a necessary condition or the secondary cause doth so dispose the minde of the beleeuer that he is ready to beleeue euerie other point reuealed by God and propounded by the Church Againe * Pag. 140. Thirdly whereas M. White 3 White p. 5. requireth particular knowledge to be ioyned with the assent of faith as though he meant that one could not beleeue any point of faith which he did not first expressely and in particular know this his assertion is not onely contrarie to his fellow M. Wotton Wotton p. 46. who admitteth a generall or implicite beleefe of some points which we do not in particular know 1. Cor. 13. v. 2. but it is also against the Scriptures Fathers and naturall reason it selfe In the Scriptures we haue that not onely Faith and knowledge Heb. 11. v. 1. are 2. distinct things but also that faith is of things not apparant or not knowne and that faith doth captiuate the vnderstanding for the seruice of Christ 2. Cor. 10 v. 5. Rom. 10. v. 16. requiring an obedience in the beleeuer all which were not verified if expresse particular distinct knowledge were presupposed before beleefe or if beleefe and such knowledge were all one thing The Fathers do not onely distinguish faith and knowledge but do also affirme Faith to be without knowledge of things beleeued Iren. l. 2. c. 45. It is better saith Irenaeus that one that knoweth nothing beleeue God and perseuere in his loue which doth quicken a man then by subtilties of questions and by much speech to fall into impietie Not to know saith S. Hilary that which thou must beleeue Hilar. l. 5. de Trin. ante medium Aug. Ep. 102. ad Euodium doth not so much require pardon as reward because it is the greatest stipend of faith to hope for those things which thou knowest not If saith Saint Augustine Christ was borne onely for those that can discerne these things with certaine knowledge in vaine almost do we labour in the Church which he saith in regard the common sort cannot with all the preaching in the world discerne with certaine knowledge the high and hard Mysteries of the blessed Trinitie Incarnation and other such mysteries of faith and therefore not the viuacitie or quickenesse of vnderstanding saith the same Saint Augustine but the simplicitie of beleeuing Aug. cont Fund c. 4. Tract 40. in Ioan. doth make the common sort of people most safe And againe he saith of some they did not beleeue because they knew but they beleeued that they might know And in the same place he asketh what is faith but to beleeue that thou seest not Conformable to which also he saith Serm. 120. de tempore After we haue receiued Baptisme we say I am a faithfull man I beleeue that which I know not Reason also and experience it selfe teacheth that beleefe and knowledge are distinct and that beleefe doth not necessarily presuppose knowledge but is rather sometimes an antecedent to it Insomuch that euen in naturall things the Philosopher acknowledgeth that one that learneth must beleeue before he come to knowledge M. White may aske how one can assent to the veritie which he doth not first apprehend or know I answer that some apprehension at least confuse rude and generall I do not deny to be requisite in the assent of faith but expresse particular distinct or cleare apprehension or knowledge is not necessary otherwise not onely the common sort but the learnedest in the world might despaire of saluationâ in regard they could not beleeue the mysterie of the blessed Trinity which no man in this life can distinctly and clearely vnderstand and know and yet all sorts of men are bound to beleeue it explicite and much lesse could they beleeue both it and all other mysteries contained in the whole corps of the holy Scripture all which are necessary to be beleeued in one sort or other explicite or implicite as hath bene proued and yet no one learned man hath particular distinct knowledge of euerie truth contained in the Scriptures Quis enim est hic laudabimus eum 1 FOr the reducing of this wilde discourse into some order and the better discerning of the controuersie you are to note that the Iesuite in the beginning of his Treatise laied downe 4. propositions touching faith out of the which he would spin his motiues to Papistry the first is that Faith is necessary to saluation The second that this faith is but only one The third that it must be infallible The fourth that it must be entire extending it selfe to all points vniuersally This conclusion I graunted in one sense and denied in another That our beleefe must be entire whole and sound in all points by obtaining a particular distinct knowledge of the same in our selues that so our faith might include an apprehension and knowledge of that we beleeue as well as an assent in the will I granted but if his meaning were that which then I suspected and now he bewraies that the implicite faith taught by the Iesuites and schoolemen destitute of knowledge and onely beleeuing as the Church beleeues were this entire faith so necessary and infallible then I denied it and gaue my reasons and a Dig. 2. in a speciall Digress shewed and confuted it All which he passes by and onely mentions as you see my bare assertion against his implicite faith but what I said in describing it confuting it and shewing the drift and purpose of it he touches not though it concerned his cause more then that which he replies to This is his method whereto he cleaues in all his booke to reply entirely to
nothing 2 That which he sayes is two things First he repeates and expounds his conclusion Next he touches some small portion of that I said concerning it In repeating his conclusion first he sayes he meant it against such as thinke it sufficient to beleeue some few articles onely though they deny or doubt of others which yet the Church beleeues yea rashly and obstinately denies them who these men are he names not but he meanes the Protestants Because they deny such points as the Church of Rome which he meanes by his Catholicke Church vntruly propounds vnto them For they must be the persons intended that deny any thing which the Roman Church holds for an article of faith as the Popes primacy Purgatory Images and the rest which in b Commonly printed with the Trent Councell inserted in the WAY praef n. 15. the new Creed of the Trent Councell are made articles of faith But the Protestants answer readily that they confesse no point at all may be denied or doubted of either obstinately or rashly or at all that is a point of faith reuealed in the word of God but the things holden and propounded by the Church of Rome against them are the false doctrines and heresies of Antichrist ridiculously called the faith of the Catholicke Church Then expounding his conclusion he shewes in what manner faith must beleeue all things that it may be entire and he sayes either expresly or implicitely wherein he bewrayes that which I suspected and signified in my answer for his conclusion being that faith must be entire and sound stedfastly beleeuing all things reuealed I c The WAY pag. 5. answered that this might be granted in a true sense But peraduenture his mind ran vpon a further matter which his Church teaches about infolded faith meaning thereby that howsoeuer he affirmed that we are bound to beleeue all points of faith as well one as other yet that might be done sufficiently by beleeuing as the Church beleeues without knowledge of any thing that is beleeued the which my suspition he grants in this place to be true and so his conclusion which at the first carried so good a semblance of binding men to the knowledge of particular verities and made so honest a proffer against ignorance is now resolued into this sense that by an intire faith you are bound to beleeue all things the which is done by knowing nothing but onely beleeuing implicitely as the Church of Rome beleeues Let a man neuer trouble himselfe with inquiring into the mysteries of Christian religion or controuersies of faith but onely say d Rhem. annot Luc. 12.11 he will liue and die in that faith which the Catholicke Church teaches and this Church can giue a reason of the things beleeued This is the equiuocating tongue of the Church of Rome that can ambush it selfe in words and vnder faire speeches conceale no small wickednes 3 His arguments in maintenance of this implicite faith are fiue First the authority of M. Wootton who seemes to speake against me next because to get expresse knowledge of all points contained in Scripture which are points necessary to be beleeued is impossible at least for vnlearned men Thirdly faith and knowledge are two distinct things faith being of things not knowne captiuating the vnderstanding therefore this distinct knowledge is not presupposed before Fourthly reason and experience teach that beleefe and knowledge are distinct beleefe not presupposing knowledge but going before it Fiftly the Fathers Irenaeus Hilary Austin affirme faith to be sufficient without knowledge Afore I answer his arguments note fiue things First what our aduersaries meane hy implicite or infolded faith and it is nothing else but a blind assent of the mind to whatsoeuer the Church of Rome beleeues without any knowledge at all of the things themselues e Occh. dialog part 1. l. 3. c. 1. p. 18. Dur. 3. d. 25. q. 1. âabr ibi Notab 2. Do. Bann 22. pag. 349. The Schoolemen deliuer it in finer termes that it is the assent of the minde to some generall or vniuersall thing wherein many particulars are included with will to beleeue nothing that is contrary thereunto but the meaning is that to the essence and nature of this entire faith the distinct knowledge or apprehension of any particular truth or article is not required but onely resolution and profession to be of the Churches beleefe whatsoeuer it be in the same manner that I reported the Colliars faith Thus any man by an implicite faith beleeues the articles of Religion and particular mysteries of our faith touching the Vnity and Trinity of the Godhead the Incarnation and Office of Christ the nature of Faith the practise of Repentance the Resurrection the Sacraments Redemption of mankinde state of sinne and the last Iudgement when he will beleeue and hold touching these things as the Church of Rome doth and yet in the meane time his vnderstanding in no measure penetrates into these articles nor can distinctly explicate or conceiue them Altisiodorensis f Sum. l. 3. tract 3. c. 1. qu. 5. saies To beleeue implicitely is to beleeue in this generall that whatsoeuer the Church beleeues is true Dionysius g 3. de 25. qu. vnic p. 215. This is infolded faith to beleeue in generall all that our Holy mother the Church beleeues Summa Rosella h V. Fides n. 1. quem refert Bann vbi sup To beleue all that which our mother the Church beleeues and holds as when a Christian man is asked whether Christ were borne of the virgine Marie or whether there be one God and three Persons and he answers that he cannot tell but beleeues touching these matters as the Church holdeth This is the definition of entire faith which the Iesuite saies extends it selfe vniuersally to all points at least implicitely Note Secondly what the things are and which be the points that our aduersaries teach to be sufficiently beleeued by this infolded faith The Reply seemes to affirme that it is allowed onely in some points which a man for want of sufficient meanes cannot know I grant saith he and neuer did deny but that there are some points necessary to be particularly knowne of all sorts Necessitate medij and some necessary to be knowne Necessitate praecepti In which points implicite beleefe doth not suffice but expresse particular knowledge is required by Catholicke Diuines to be ioyned to the assent of our faith in other points so farre as we neither know nor haue sufficient meanes to know them we may well commend the Colliars faith in beleeuing in generall as the Church beleeueth In which wordes my aduersarie seemes to allow implicite faith only in some few cases and charges me with two grosse vntruthes because I say the Papists vtterly refuse knowledge and Canonize the Colliars implicite faith for their Creed But he should haue obserued that which was vnder his eyes and affixed to my words alledged whereby I proued what I said I alledged Iacobus
is quenched the light and zeale and comfortable assurance thereof is taken away and all sorts of people are imboldened to security negligence in seeking that quantity of knowledge whereto God hath enabled them to attaine So that hereby the people of God in whom p Col. 3.16 his word ought to dwell plentifully with all manner of knowledge q Ro. 10.10 that should be able both to beleeue with the heart and confesse with their mouth to saluation r Heb. 5. vlt. that through long custome should haue their wits exercised to discerne both good and euill Å¿ 1 Pet. 3.15 that should be alway ready to giue an answer to euery one that asketh a reason of the hope that is in them are turned into sencelesse Idols that can neither heare nor see nor vnderstand the which kind of ignorance the ancient Church neuer allowed Thirdly we coÌdemne the defining of faith yea entire Catholicke faith by this kind of beleeuing for albeit the faith knowledge of the best of Gods children be intangled as Caluin hath freely confessed with the relickes of much ignorance when many things beleeued necessary to saluation are not yet distinctly vnderstood yet there is a progres increase in knowledge wherby the dullest ignorantest of Gods children are inlightned more and more vntill they reach that quantity of apprehension that the commandement of faith requires In which sense we allow the faith of any man liuing specially the vnlearned to be implicite First when he knowes and apprehends in generall the substantiall articles belonging to faith which are contained in the Scriptures and rule of faith Secondly when the ignorance is only in the particulars whereby the said generall articles are demonstrated as a lay man beleeuing the Vnity and Trinity of Persons in God yet is not able to expresse or conceaue the difference betweene the essence and the Persons nor the different manner of persons proceeding 3. When withall he vses the meanes to increase in knowledge by searching the Scriptures and hearing the word preached and in the meane time obediently submits himselfe to the ministry and direction of the Church herein The implicite faith of such persons as haue this threefold disposition concurring in them we condemne not but this is not it which our aduersaries pleade for who defeÌd that it is enough to assent to the Church though all this be wanting that is to say to professe himselfe a Romane Catholicke beleeuing as the present Church holds without any knowledge of the things in themselues 8 Note lastly that the distinct knowledge of things beleeued which against this implicitie of faith we require is the knowledge of that which God hath reuealed not of the essence and reason of the things For the vnderstanding whereof we must consider that the Scriptures and Church by their proposition reueale the points of faith vnto vs and bid vs learne beleeue theÌ as that there is one God the maker of all things and one mediator Iesus Christ that was conceaued by the Holy Ghost borne of the virgine Marie and as followes in the Rule of Faith Which things thus mentioned vnto vs are profound mysteries and haue many abstruse and secret notions belonging to them as for example the deepe reasons of the Trinitie in the Godhead and the Vnion of the two natures in Christ Now when we require knowledge to be ioyned with the faith of these things we meane the knowledge of the Reuelation not of the reason and whole nature of the things reuealed for is any man so presumptuous as to imagine that a supernaturall obiect beleeued by faith reuealed by God can by discourse of reason be reduced to naturall vnderstanding the Apostle t 1. Cor. 2.14 saying The naturall man perceaues not the things of God neither can he know them Or do our aduersaries imagine the knowledge we require to be such as is in humane sciences where conclusions are demonstrated by their principles and things are comprehended in their causes and properties Haue they that power ouer their people to make them beleeue that we require for example men to be able to vnderstand and vtter the manner and reasons how God is one How 3. in Person How the dead shall be raised againe How our nature subsists in the word How the redemption of mankinde could be wrought by the sufferings and death of the Sonne of God How the Sacraments confer Grace How man could be predestinate before the world was made We do not require the world to know these things u ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã c. Theodor. de prouid l. 10 sub fin which are reserued to the beatificall vision in the life to come but onely in such sort and measure as is reuealed which is by conceauing that God is one that the Persons are 3. that the dead shall be raised againe c. and such things concerning them as may without error be vnderstood * Deut. 29 29. For secret things belong to the Lord our God but things reuealed belong to vs and to our children for euer * The state of the question The true state of the question therefore touching implicite faith is whether the beleeuer besides his generall assenting to the Church and Scripture be also bound to haue in himselfe a distinct knowledge of things propounded him to beleeue so that he can according to any true notion of conceauing apprehend and conceaue that which is reuealed to him in which question the distinction of Necessary as the meanes and Necessary by the command is friuolous because whatsoeuer is omitted against Gods commandement is sinne and consequently damnable without repentance and therefore if knowledge be commanded it is also the meanes of Saluation so farre foorth as the obseruation of the commandements is the meanes But our aduersaries apply this distinction which in some question is of good vse in this place to lay their people a sleepe on their pillow when they shall heare knowledge to be commanded but yet not as a Necessary meanes Now there be twenty wayes to escape from a commandement 9 These things thus premised now I answer my aduersaries arguments made for implicite faith against distinct knowledge The first that I dispute so whotly against that which M. Wootton admits is false For M. Wootton admits no more then he insinuates in his conclusion that a generall beleefe of some points may suffice some persons without danger of damnation and this pleases me well enough for I haue shewed this not to be the question but let my aduersary deale sincerely and hold him to that which is taught in his Church and it will please himselfe neuer a whit When that doctrine allowes ignorance in all points and the other which is somewhat honester allowes it in more points and defines the ignorance otherwise then M. Wootton will do My aduersary therefor hath not M. Wootton on his side nor against me but directly with me
against himselfe To the second that my opinion for the knowledge of all points of faith one as well as another is intollerable because it is impossible for vnlearned men to get expresse knowledge of all points contained in Scripture I answer that my words alleadged do not affirme the necessity of knowing all things reuealed as that Iacob had a lame leg or Abraham two wiues but all points of our faith expounding faith not as he doth for euery thing that is reuealed but of the substantiall articles of faith which the vnlearnedst that are may learne and vnderstand if they will vse the Ministry of the Church and exercise their wits therin as the word requires x The story may be seene inâ Acts and Monum of the Ch. The Church of Rome had experience of this at the sacking of Mirandula Chabriers where not the elder sort alone but the very children of lay men whom vnmercifully they assassinated and butchered were found in knowledge to parallel the Doctors that examined them And Iustine against Trypho y Dial. cum Tryph. sayes of his time that such as could no letter on the booke vnderstood all the mysteries of faith And this is manifest by the places of Chrysostome Theodorit and Eusebius following My aduersary therefore must hold him to that obiect of faith that I speake of and then shew it is impossible to be apprehended which he cannot do And whereas he sayes He graunts and neuer did deny but there are some points necessary to be particularly knowne of all sorts wherein implicite beleefe doth not suffice but expresse particular knowledge is required by Catholicke Diuines I answer that when I spake against implicite faith demanding To what purpose should God propound all the points of our faith one as well as another vnlesse his will were that we should learne them all I knew not what my aduersary would grant or deny but hauing shewed that the Colliars faith was canonized by no small fooles in his Church and commended for sufficient in all points I vsed this reason against it which I confirmed by a text of Scripture and a speech of Saint Austine And if my aduersary conuinced thereby relinquish that rude opinion requiring expresse particular knowledge at least in some points if not Necessitate medij yet Necessitate praecepti this to requite his kindnesse to M. Wootton I gratefully accept and wish him that when he writes againe he will ingenuously expresse what those his some points are and how far foorth the commandement of faith ties vs to know them For these things may be so expounded that what in words is granted in effect shall be denied and then the Pope may commend his towardlinesse z Nub. as the woman doth her daughter in Aristophanes * ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã A goodly sparke with a tongue that will strike on both sides 10 And whether he meane this or that yet my report that the Church of Rome vtterly refuses knowledge and that the Colliars faith is canonized for the Papists Creed should not haue bene called a grosse vntruth vntill my reasons whereuppon I grounded it had bene answered or at least mentioned but that it is a priuiledge and speciall indulgence that my aduersary hath obtained to reply without making any answer For is not the Colliars faith so reported and commended by the Authors whom I cited that any may fee they allowed it in all points whatsoeuer whether there were means to know them or no means doth not Staphylus a By this faith of the Colliar euery vnlearned man may try the spirits of men whether they be of God or no By this faith he may resist the Diuell and iudge the true interpretation from the false âiscerne the Catholicke from the hereticall Minister the true doctrine from the forged Fred. Staphyl apol pag. 53. make it the best kind of faith that is and the rest whom I quoted in the margent propose it as the best forme of beleeuing any thing whatsoeuer and yet the Iesuite replies as if they allowed it onely in some few points so far as we nether know nor haue sufficient meanes to know them But his owne words immediately following in defence of this faith touching such things that in this generall action is infolded a particular or implicite beleefe of all points in asmuch as a generall includeth all particulars and beleeuing the Church disposes the minde c. bewraies that he holds the same thing that I obiected For this is the very reason that the grossest maintainers of implicite faith vse to defend it against them that require the knowledge questioned 11 To his third argument That faith and knowledge are 2. distinct things therefore there may be true faith without any distinct knowledge of the things beleeued I answer that the knowledge which I require is not of the essence and reason of the things beleeued but of their proposition and that concerning them which is reuealed as I haue distinguished and therefore I deny the consequence For though such knowledge be not faith but a habit distinct from it yet it concurres to the habit of faith in as much as no man can assent to that whereof he neuer heard for b Ro. 10.14 how shall they beleeue in him of whom they haue not heard The knowledge that hath no ingredience into faith is the knowledge of that which is not reuealed for faith not onely goes before such knowledge but also vtterly repels it neuer admitting any penetration into Gods secret mysteries for c 1. Cor. 2.9 the things which the eye hath not seene nor the eare heard nor can enter into the heart of man hath God prepared for them that loue him And in this sence all the texts of Scripture and places of the Fathers quoted by my aduersary against knowledge are vnderstood and so I answer his last argument For it was the constant and vniforme doctrine of the ancient Church that how soeuer faith apprehends mysteries not to be inquired into yet the proposition and doctrine of all the articles of faith must distinctly be conceaued that a man be able to vnderstand what they are Saint Chrysostome d Hom. 16. in Ioh. rebuking this ignorance proceedes into this discourse which plainely shewes that he was of this minde We beleeue saith he In the Father and the Sonne and the holy Ghost The resurrection of our bodies and euerlasting life If a Gentile aske you who is this Father who is this Sonne this holy Ghost are there 3. Gods what would you say to this what answer would you make how would you dissolue his obiections And when you should stand dumbe to these things suppose he should bring in another question touching the resurrection whether you should rise againe in this or in another bodie if he should demaund why Christ came in the flesh rather at this time then in the former ages what if he should pose vs in such and
seemeth to yeeld me for he saith that the rule must be easie White pag. 10. and plaine to all sorts of men learned and vnlearned to wit which vse the meanes and are diligent in attending to it and be enlightened with the Spirit of God to all such saith he it is plaine be they neuer so vnlearned to the rest it is not Neither is it saith he a necessary condition of the rule so to be not because it is obscure at any time but for that sometimes men haue not eyes to see into it c. This which he hath said of being enlightened with the spirit had need to be declared If he meane that one must be first endued with faith and in that sence lightned with the Spirit before he can vnderstand the determinate sence and meaning of that which is appointed by God to be the ordinary rule and meanes to instruct men in faith then it is false that to be enlightened with the Spirit is required as a necessary condition for so one must be supposed to haue faith before he can by the ordinary meanes be first instructed in faith so the ordinary meanes were needlesse for the end to which it was appointed For what need were there of an outward ordinary meanes to instruct men first in faith when they are already supposed to be by the spirit sufficiently enlightned with faith If he meane onely that the Spirit of God must assist and concur with mans vnderstanding in a speciall manner to enable the vnderstanding to apprehend the instruction propounded by the meanes and to make it yeeld assent of faith so I shall not striue with him as hauing in * Introd q. 6. the Introduction affirmed as much Onely I would haue him note FIRST that it is not the Protestants spirit whose illumination is required to true faith as o Ibid. there I haue shewed SECONDLY that the true Spirit of God whose assistance is necessary is ready through the merits of our Sauiour Christ to assist all men sufficiently to the attaining of the truth and that no man who hath receiued exciting grace to moue him to seeke find and attend vnto the ordinary rule and meanes appointed by God for mens instruction in matters of faith need feare want of necessary assistance of Gods Spirit to concurre with him but rather had need to feare least himselfe be wanting to the gracious assistance of Gods Spirit in being negligent to concurre with it so much as he may and ought and least in steed of following Gods Spirit he suffers himselfe to be misled with the spirit of Sathan transfiguring himselfe into an Angell of light whose propertie is to withdraw men from the secure ordinary meanes of the doctrine of the Church to follow priuate instincts so coloured with seeming sentences of Scripture as though they were the very instincts of the holy Ghost The third propertie to wit vniuersality is meant that the rule and meanes doth extend it selfe to all points of faith so far as it is or may be necessary to saluation In which sence I do not perceiue my Aduersaries to gainesay Onely the question is WHETHER and HOW all points of faith be necessary to saluation The which question I haue resolued in the Introduction and in the fourth Chapter where I do determine all points of faith to be necessary to be beleeued explicitè or implicitè of all sorts and that none is indifferent or such as may be lawfully misbeleeued especially obstinately at any time by any persons and that although all be not necessary to be knowne at all times expresly by all persons yet they are or may be necessary so to be knowne at least at sometimes and by some persons in the Church and consequently there must be an vniuersall ordinary rule and meanes sufficient to instruct and to resolue all sorts of men in all points of faith at such times and in such sort as need shall require thereby to hinder men from misbeleeuing any and which may tell them determinately when controuersies arise whether this or that point be necessary to be knowne and beleeued expresly by all or onely some of the Church and by whom Besides these three properties of the rule and meanes White pag. 10. M. White would haue other two But either they are not necessary or else they be sufficiently included in these which I haue set downe For if the rule bee knowne to be infallible it little skilleth to our present purpose whether there be any higher rule whereupon it doth depend or no or whether the case which is to be ruled by it concerne the thing it selfe which is assigned for the rule or some other thing for where infallibility is partiality need not be feared neither need one seeke a higher rule when he knoweth the rule which he hath to be infallible 1 MY Aduersaries last conclusion was that the rule of faith must haue three properties 1 To be infallible that shall not deceiue vs. 2 Easie to be vnderstood of all sorts of men learned and vnlearned 3 Vniuersall to shew what is the truth in all points Touching my answer hereto he sayes foure thing FIRST that I grant these three properties to be required in the Rule in some sence The first that it must be infallible and the last that it must be vniuersall I grant simply without any limitation and this is true SECONDLY touching the second condition of being easie he expounds himselfe that he meanes so easie that without miraculous illumination or extraordinary and excessiue difficulty any sort of men may vnderstand the meaning of it and sayes M. White seemes also to yeeld him this The which I did in these words The rule is easie and plaine to all sorts of men learned and vnlearned that vse the meanes and are diligent in attending it and be inlightned by the Spirit of God to such it is plaine be they neuer so vnlearned to the rest it is not nether is it a necessary condition of the rule so to be not because it selfe is obscure at any time but for that sometimes men haue not eyes for want of diligence or Gods illumination to see into it for all meanes and rules are vaine vnles God giue eyes to see This exposition wherby I declared in what sence the rule must be vnderstood to be easie he distinguishes and sayes If I meane no more but that the Spirit of God must helpe our vnderstanding in a speciall manner to enable it to apprehend and yeeld to that which the rule propounds he will not contend with me But if my meaning be that a man must first haue faith and in that sence be inlightned before he can vnderstand the meaning of the rule then he sayes my saying is false and sets downe a proposition against it that to be endued with faith is not required as a necessary condition to the easines of the rule which is a needlesse limitation For first I mentioned not
sufficient for the vnderstanding of Latin because it is not sufficient vnlesse the learner go to schoole and heare his master teach him And though it be granted that the ministery of men and rules of art and knowledge of tongues be all subiect to error yet doth it not follow that by them we cannot attaine infallible assurance of our translations as I haue shewed in * THE WAY §. 6. n. 3. my answer to this argument where it was first propounded whither I referre my aduersary that if he would haue dealt really should not haue here repeated his old argument but haue ingenuously replied what he had to say to it but that had bene labour CHAP. XXIX 1. Touching the obscuritie of the Scripture 2. The necessitie of meanes to be vsed for the vnderstanding of the Scriptures proues not their obscuritie 3. Traditions debarred A Councell is aboue the Pope 4. 5. The Scripture of it selfe easie to all that vse it as they should 6. 7. The certen sence of the Scripture and the assurance thereof is not by TraditioÌ Pag. 183. A. D. § 2. That Scripture alone is obscure Concerning the second reason about the obscuritie of Scripture it is to be vnderstood that I do not speake of the obscuritie of Scripture as though I meant that it could not by any meanes be vnderstood WottoÌ pag. 74. as M. Wotton seemeth willing to mis-vnderstand me neither do I charge the Scripture it selfe with any fault or imperfection when I say it is obscure but do acknowledge rather that it is the perfection of Scripture the highnesse and maiestie of the matter and the strangenesse of the stile on the one side and the weaknesse and ignorance and sometimes peruersnesse of mens wits on the other side which maketh it obscure But whence soeuer the cause of obscuritie proceedeth which is impertinent to my purpose the onely thing which I am to proue is that de facto it is obscure or at least not so easie as the rule and meanes that should ordinarily breed infallible faith in all sorts ought to be And this my second reason conuinceth it being most euident that Scripture alone is not so easie neither to vnlearned nor learned men The which White pag. 25. 39. 36. M. White seemeth to grant when he requireth so many other euen outward meanes and helpes besides the inward spirit to the vnderstanding of the Scripture Among which outward meanes and helpes I enquire for one which is on the one side infallible and sufficient to breed infallible assurance and on the other side so easie to be determinately knowne and vnderstood of all sorts as that all men may grace supposed ordinarily direct themselues in matters of faith onely by diligent attending and yeelding assent vnto it For such is that which for the present I call the rule of faith or the rule and meanes by which all sorts may without other meanes ne detur processus in infinitum be sufficiently instructed in all matters of faith If M. Wotton and M White impertinently to this our purpose wil needs striue to haue the Scripture called in some other sence the rule of faith I will not striue with them but do freely grant it may be so called as good written lawes are or may be called the rule of manners in a commonwealth But as besides good written lawes in a commonwealth there are required ordinarily both good vnwritten customes and a good liuing Magistrate hauing authoritie to propound and interprete both written lawes and vnwritten customes without which the written lawes alone were not a sufficient rule and means to preserue good manners in a commonwealth in regard the lawes cannot be so plaine but that considering the weaknesse ignorance and peruersitie of men they may and would be misunderstood and wrested to a wrong sence which inconuenience is remedied partly by vnwritten customes which do best interprete the written lawes partly by the authoritie of the liuing magistrate who may by authoritie declare which is the right sence and may compell men to execute written lawes according to that sence Euen so in the Church besides the diuine infallible written Scriptures there must be admitted some diuine infallible vnwritten traditions and some alwayes liuing magistrate hauing infallible authoritie to propound and expound the Scriptures without which the written Scriptures alone were not a sufficient rule and meanes to preserue infallible faith in the Church because the Scriptures are not so plaine but that considering the weaknesse ignorance and peruersnes of men they may be and as experience ordinarily teacheth are misunderstood and wrested to a wrong sence which inconuenience without miracle cannot be remedied vnlesse we admit vnwritten traditions which are the best ordinary interpreters of Scripture and some liuing magistrate hauing infallible authoritie who may when controuersies arise infallibly declare which is the right sence and who by that authoritie may compell men to take them in that sence M. Wotton and M. White both grant the obscuritie of Scriptures in some places but they both affirme that in some other places the Scripture is perspicuous and plaine Wotton pa 70. White pag. 33. 36. in so much that M Wotton saith Many places of Scripture are so euident that a child cannot mistake the meaning of them And M. White saith citing S. Chrysost euery man of himself by reading may vnderstand To this I reply first that although some places of Scripture be more plaine then others and are and may be called absolutely plain partly for that they be set downe in proper and not figuratiue speech partly in that to them who haue once learned the true interpretation of the Church they seeme so plaine as they need nothing but reading or hearing to make them plaine partly for that some places are so plaine as they need nothing to make them plainly vnderstood of a very child but this generall rule told vs by the Church that the words in such places are to be plainly vnderstood as they sound yet this notwithstanding it doth not follow that the Scripture alone euen in those most plaine places is the rule and meanes which should instruct men in faith because sith some places seeming proper and plaine are not to be taken as the words sound but are oftentimes to be vnderstood by a figure what man without some infallible meanes besides seeming plainnesse of the words can be infalliby assured euen in most plaine places that he vnderstandeth the right sence especially when the most plaine places that are may be and ordinarily are either by weaknesse ignorance or peruersnesse of men wrested to a wrong sence as we see that most plaine place where our Sauiour pronounceth This is my bodie to be by Caluinists wrested to a figuratiue sence Besides therefore the bare letter of Scripture though neuer so plaine to haue infallible assurance of the sence there is required some other infallible rule and meanes to assure vs when and where the
ground of true assurance 8. Who the Pastors were of whom Luther learned his faith 9. His conference with the Diuell 10. By the Church the Papists meane onely the Pope A.D. To the reason alledged by me and namely to that point of it wherein I say Pag. 200. that a priuate man who presuming to be inspired by the spirit doth oppose himselfe against the Church neither can know himselfe or can assure others that his spirit is infallible M. White answereth denying this to be true For saith he the Scripture is a light and knowne by the sonnes of light and by it they may be assured Now they that be thus assured are infallibly sure they be taught by the holy Ghost for all Scripture is inspired of God and containeth the teaching of the holy Ghost To this I reply asking how in particular Luther for example could by Scripture assure himselfe or others that he was taught by the Spirit of God It seemeth by M. Whites answer that this assurance came by this or the like Syllogisme Whatsoeuer is taught by Scripture is infallibly taught by the Spirit of God But I Luther am taught by Scripture this and that point viz. that I am iustified by onely Faith c. Ergo I Luther am infallibly assured and may assure others that in these points of doctrine although contrary to the doctrine of the vniuersall visible Church I am taught by the Spirit of God But who seeth not the weaknesse of this proofe when all the certaintie thereof is finally resolued into Luthers owne priuate and particular iudgement in his owne case which cannot be proued to be infallible by saying he was assisted in his iudgement by the Spirit of God but by begging the question and supposing that which is the point that needeth most proofe to wit that he is in those points taught by the Scripture or that he is assisted by the Spirit to interprete aright He iudged so it is true but his iudgement is fallible and is so much the more to be suspected to be false by how much he did prize and ouerweene his owne iudgement in his owne cause when with intollerable pride he preferred it so contemptuously before the iudgement of a thousand Augustines and Cyprians and of other most worthy and learned Doctors of the Catholicke Church 1 HE that opposes himselfe against the true Catholicke Church holding contrary to the vniuersall doctrine thereof can giue no assurance either to himselfe or others that his Spirit is infallible this is true but when Luther and the rest opposed themselues against the Church of Rome which is the Papacie this was no presumption but the worke of Gods Spirit in them whereof they might infallibly be assured themselues and giue infallible assurance to others My reason was this The Scripture is a light and knowne by the sonnes of light and by it they may be assured now they that be thus assured are infallibly sure they are taught by the holy Ghost For all Scripture is inspired of God and containeth the teaching of the holy Ghost To this he replies that then the assurance which they haue arises by such a Syllogisme as he hath set downe Whereto I answer granting that it doth saue that in the conclusion there is more although contrary to the doctrine of the vniuersall visible Church then he was able with all his skill to contriue into the premisses But he replies that Luther could haue no certaintie of the second proposition that he was in those points taught by the Scripture when he taught against the vniuersall Church The which reply grants that a priuate man may haue infallible assurance he is taught by the Scripture and assisted by Gods Spirit so long as the thing he holds is not against the vniuersall Church But holding this or that point against the Church he can haue no such assurance I answer first that Luther and the priuate men whom he meanes taught nothing contrary to the vniuersall Church much lesse did they frame to themselues in their mind the conclusion of this Syllogisme that their conscience should checke them as if they had taught contrary to the vniuersall Church or felt themselues so taught by the Scripture that withall they felt the true Church to be against them They felt no such thing but categorically they concluded I am infallibly sure that in this point of iustification for example I am taught by the Scripture Secondly I answer that Luther and euery priuate Protestant beleeuing Iustification by onely Faith and all the rest that our Church holdeth against the Papacie haue infallible assurance they are taught by the Scripture the which assurance is bred by the plaine and euident places of Scripture and the vniuersall teaching of the true Church confirming the same whereto the Spirit of God giues witnesse inwardly in their conscience But this he sayes is the question that should be proued that Luther had these things on his side I answer there is in this life no further or after proofe aboue these things a For albeit the proposition and ministerie of the Church concurre as a condition yet the authoritie of God himselfe speaking in the Scripture induces vs to beleeue in as much as all the authoritie which the Church hath with a beleeuer is because the said beleeuer sees and vnderstands by the Scripture that it is the true Church c. Jassisse Deum vt Ecclesiae credamus non ex Ecclesiae authoritate suspendimus veluti propria aut sola ne quidem in genere causae externae huius fidei nostrae causa sed partim ex Scripturis manifestissimis quibus ad Ecclesiae magisterium remittimur partim ex ipso fideâ symbolo Stapl. Triplicat pag. 279. the finall and formall resolution of faith being into the authoritie and light of the Scripture and Gods Spirit speaking therein so farre foorth that our b For the Iesuites say the proposition of the Church is beleeued vpon the testimonie of the Scripture the Scripture is beleeued for it selfe Si quis rogatur quare credat si sermo sit de ratione formali assentiendi Dicat se id credere quia Deus reuelauit Si rursus interrogetur vnde cognoscat Deum reuelasse Respondeat se id clare non nosse credere tamen fide infallibili ob infallâbilem tamen propâsitionem Ecclesiae tanquam conditionem ad idâredendum requisitam Quaeres vnde cognoscatur propositioneÌ Ecclesiae esse infallibilem similiter respondeat se id credere fide infallibili ob authoritatem Scripturae testimonium perhibentis Ecclesiae cuâ authoritati reuelationi ob seipsam crâdit Alex. Pezânt in Tho. 22. p 479. B. Greg. de Val. toÌ 3. p. 31. They that hold the authoritie of the Church to be the hiest reâson inducing vs to beleeue fall into two grosse absurdities 1. because so our faith shall not be diuine being grounded on the authority of men 2. because this authority of the Church
My aduersarie therefore maintaining the doctrine of the Church to be the rule of faith * Suarez the Iesuit shames not to tell the king of England in his late writing against him that The authoritie of the Trent Councell which all the world knowes was mooued by the Pope in the same manner that Puppet motions are mooued by such as shew them is the authoritie of the vniuersall Catholicke Church Defens fid Cathol adu Angl. sect lib. 1. c. 9. nu 7. meanes nothing by the Church but THE POPE HIMSELFE and they that yeeld themselues to be led by the Romane Church must depend solely vpon his will and word 3 To the second this diuine doctrine of the Church which the Repliar saies is the rule of our faith is by himselfe expounded to include not onely the written Scripture but vnwritten traditions also and such decrees and interpretations both of Scripture and tradition as the Pope shall reueale and propound hence it followes that any Friars dreame may be thrust vpon vs as an article of faith necessary to saluation because these traditions and interpretations and this authoritie of the Pope containe many such dreames that is to say the Pope and his Church vnder pretence that they are diuine traditions and all power to propose matters of faith belongs to him may and doth require vs to beleeue lyes and errors and albeit the Iesuite affirme these traditions and interpretations of his Church to be reuealed by God to the Apostles and their successors the Doctors and Pastors of the Church as part of that diuine and Church doctrine which he would haue receaued o Pari pietatis affectu ac reuerentia suscipit veneratur Conc. Trid. sess 4. with the same obedience and affection wherewith we receaue the Scripture yet this is false For the whole obiect of our faith is contained in the Scripture alone as I shewed in the third Digression and because he denies that any such dreames can be contained in the doctrine of his Church thus I reason For whatsoeuer the Pope shall definitiuely propound to be beleeued that is the doctrine of the Church But he may definitiuely propound the very dreames of a Friar this I proue The bookes of i Baro. an 159. n 4. ind expurg Hispa p. 149. d. 15. Sanct. Romana Hermes and k Phot. Biblioth p. 156. edit Graec. Haschel Balâam respon p. 363 in Iure Graeco Rom. tom 1. Zâonar in Apost can vlt. Perer. Ioh. 13. disp 30. Clemens Constitutions are Apochryphall counterfet and vnsound writings but D. Stapleton l Hos similes libros in canoneÌ sacrae Scripturae si praesens Ecclesia referret nulla ratio obstat quin eos pro Canonicis admittere debeamus Relect. pag. 514. saies he may put these bookes into the Canon of the Bible and so binde men to beleeue them by diuine faith therefore he may define and make to be matter of faith that which is vnsound and no better then a dreame Againe Canus and Caietan m Refert Fra. Suar. tom 2. p. 30. a. affirme the opinion of the virgine Maries conception without sinne to be godly and probable in shew but false and vncertaine indeede Yet n Suar. ibi Vas qu. in 3. part Tho. to 2. p. 45. the Iesuits say the Pope may define it when he will Thirdly o Grego Val. analys fid pag. 325. they hold the authority of the Church in defining to be in the Pope who may determine the things of faith whether he vse care and diligence therin or not but he that defines without any care taking or diligeÌce vsed may chance specially if he be a Friar p To the number of 52. Azor institut moral tom 2. l. 5. c 44. as many Popes are to thrust his Friars dreames vpon the Church Fourthly the Canon law q Gl Marg. c quanto de translatione sayes He may make something of nothing and make that a sentence which is none Lastly r Suar vbi sup the Iesuites hold that a supernaturall truth may be so implicitely contained in tradition or Scripture that * Canisius reports that in Paris in the Vniuersities of Spaine and elsewhere no man is admitted to any degree in diuinitie vnlesse he sweare that he will hold the Immaculate conception of the virgine Marial lib. 1. c. 7. Such trickes as this will make this consent swell and increase as fast as the mountaine the common consent of the Church increasing whereby oftentimes the Holy Ghost expounds traditions and Scriptures the Church may at last bring in her definition which shall haue the force of a reuelation The two doores of sleepe Å¿ ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Hom. Odiss Ï. mentioned so much in the Poets let not in more dreames then this doctrine doth lyes heresies into the world for whensoeuer the Church of Rome will bring in a new doctrine the implicite traditions and the increase of the Churches consent may be pretended 4 * Ad. 3. To the third he notes no more But what he said in his treatise and I granted in such sense as I layed downe in my answer And this noting it againe is needles and impertinent to the matter in hand which is not touching the quality but the quiddity of the rule 5 * Ad. 4. To the fourth we know well enough that the Church and the doctrine go together but it is false that the Church as deliuering doctrine is the rule For the doctrine is the rule and the Church that which teaches both vs and it selfe according to it as the Iudge expounding and executing the law is not the rule together with the law but the law is the rule it selfe and the iudge is the kings officer to apply it but hauing no authority ouer or beside it And yet allowing the contrary and all that the Repliar sayes still in his conceite the Pope with his definitions shall be this Church and this doctrine which he thus conioynes to be the rule 6 To the fift to proue the doctrine of the Church to be the rule of saith in such sort as the Repliar hath said Ad. 5. it is not sufficieÌt to shew that at least once or in some one age there hath bene a company of men called the Church in one sense or other ordained by God and furnisht with conditions to teach men the faith for the Repliar hath said that the doctrine of the Church is the rule of faith in such sort as it includes not onely the written Scriptures but vnwritten traditions and the interpretation of them both by Church authority Where two things are affirmed first that vnwritten traditions are part of the doctrine that is the rule Secondly that our faith is built t Non quid dicatur sed quis dicat attendendum Staplet Princ. pag. 364. Relect. p. 429. on the authority of the Church Neither of these is proued by shewing that which is
virtually it is the Church of Rome and the Pope the Church of Rome representatiuely is the Colledge of Cardinals but virtually the Pope who is the head of the Church Pelaeottus f De consist part 1. qu. 3. pag. 19. The Pope alone may do not onely that which is granted to all and singular Prelates in the Church but also more then they all g Respons moral p. 44. n 4. Comitol The power of Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction is not in the vniuersality of the Church as in the true subiect but in the Prelates thereof and in the Bishops of Rome as in the fountaine whence it flowes vnto all other Ministers of the new Testament Albertine h Coroll pag. 251. saies The Bishop of Rome is the rule of faith into which Rule all the articles of our faith are lastly resolued as into the formall reason whereby they are propounded to vs. Gretser i Defens Bell. to 1. p. 1450. B. saies when we affirme the Church to be the iudge of all controuersies of faith by the Church we vnderstand the Bishop of Rome who for the time being gouernes the ship of the militant Church and by liuely voice doth clearely and expressely expound his iudgement to them that seeke to him Zumel k Disput var. tom 3. p. 49 D. saies I beleeue that the chiefe Priest and Bishop of the Church the Pope who is the master of our faith cannot but attaine the truth of faith nor can be deceaued or erre if as chiefe Bishop and master of the faith he set downe his determination so that vnlesse a man be afraid of the truth there is no cause why he should feare the Popes determination It is idle therefore and sordid that the Repliar saies by the Church he meant the Pope but secondarily as it is ridiculous to say the Church is the rule indefinitely and abstracting from all time or per ampliationem which are termes deuised onely to besot the ignorant that they should not smell his heresie for if his Church be the rule he must needes meane such a Church as he thinkes in all ages and times successiuely to haue bene inuested with that authority and that Church is the Pope alone that miserable iudge of whom their owne men say h Do. Bann to 3. p. 106. b. It is no Catholicke faith but an opinion very probable that he is S. Peters successor and the most iudicious confesse i Alph. l. 1. c. 4. Hadrian pag. 26. ad 2. he may erre * August Anconit sum qu. 5. art 1 Iacobat de conc l. 4. art 1. Occh Dialog 1. part l. 6. 2. part c. 69. inde Cusan de concord cath l. 2. c. 17. Panorm de elect C. signif not 7. Zabarell tract de schismat Gerson de auferibil Pap. consid 10. inde and be deposed for heresie A.D. § 1. Pag. 205. That the doctrine of the Apostles was for their life time the rule and meanes First I say that my conclusion being vnderstood as in this Chapter I principally meant cannot be denied to be true for it cannot be denied but that the doctrine as deliuered by the Apostles themselues being for the time they liued the Church in such sense as here I take the name Church was such a rule and meanes as here we seeke for For first it is knowne to be infallible Secondly it was easie to be vnderstood c. Thirdly it was vniuersall c. Since therefore these 3. conditions requisite in the rule of faith are found in the doctrine and teaching of the Apostles it cannot be denied but that the diuine doctrine as deliuered by them in their life time either by word or writing was the rule and meanes which God ordained to instruct men in faith Taking therfore my conclusion in the chiefely intended sense I suppose that my aduersaries will neither deny it to be true nor the reason by which I proue it to be good 2 This discourse needed not for no Protestant denies the doctrine of the Apostles to be the rule either for their time or the time succeeding to the world ende I graunt therefore the Repliar his assertion and inferre thereupon that his Popes determinations and the doctrine of his Romish Church is not the rule of faith because they agree not with that which he here confesses was the rule in the Apostles time vnlesse he will maintaine when he replies againe that the rule is not one and the same at all times as k Cusan ep 2.7 his Cardinall writes that the Scripture is fitted to the time and variably vnderstood so that at one time it is expounded according to the fashion of the Church and when that fashion is changed the sense of the Scripture is also changed Againe Magalian a Iesuite I thinke yet liuing l Magal op Hierarch in tit p. 61. n. 6. saies Though it were granted that the wordes of Paule Tit. 1.6 containe a precept to marrie yet seeing Paule gaue it by his owne authority it were no diuine but an Ecclesiasticall precept which the Church may change yea abrogate and much more dispense with Marke what trickes heretickes haue to change the Apostles doctrine when it fits not their Church then the Apostles gaue it by their owne authority which I note that the Reader may perceaue there is no sincerity in the Repliars words For albeit he grants here the Apostles doctrine be the rule yet he meanes it to be the rule but for their owne time because the Pope may vnder colourable pretences expound it that is in plaine English change it when he will as his Cardinall and Iesuite here affirme A D. § 2. That the doctrine of the succeeding Pastours of the Church Pag. 207. is the rule and meanes The chiefe controuersie is about my conclusion as in a secondary sense it may be meant of the succeeding Pastors of the Church In which sense I affirme that like as the diuine doctrine not as contained in onely Scripture or as gathered thence by natural wit or priuate spirit but as deliuered by the Apostles or the Apostles as deliuering this doctrine was the rule and meanes ordained by God to instruct all men liuing in their daies in all matters of faith So the same doctrine not as contained in onely Scripture nor as gathered thence by naturall wit or priuate spirit but as deliuered by Pastors of the succeeding Church or those Pastors as deliuering this doctrine is the rule and meanes ordained by God to instruct all men liuing in succeding ages in all points of faith 3 This assertion I will grant as I did the former namely that the doctrine of the Pastors of the true Church such as succeed the Apostles is the rule and meanes of faith but the reader shall note two trickes that the Iesuite puts vpon him in the Proposition hereof First that affirming the doctrine of the succeeding Pastors of the Church to be the rule he saies not
answered Digression 48. yet here I answer againe that the Protestant faith so far as it differeth from that which the Church of Rome holds against vs continued alwaies not in the aire but in men and those men were such as liued in the Church of Rome it selfe constantly holding the foundation of Christian Religion though the same men were corrupted also some more some lesse with those errors that we refuse The rest of this Chapter meddles with nothing I writ but is spent in prouing that the Church whose doctrine is the rule continues in all ages vnto the worlds end not onely the true Church abides for euer vnto the end but that Church doth so whose doctrine is the rule to teach vs as if there were a true Church of Christ whose doctrine were not the rule in such sense as I haue expounded the doctrine of the Church to be the rule This is partly to be saying somewhat when he could not reply to that I said and partly to perswade his people that we hold the contrary I detest his rudenesse and lament their bondage and slauery A. D. M. White granteth Pag. 233. White p. 63. that those Scriptures which I alledge in the treatise proue well Christs abiding alway with the Church whereupon is inferred the continuance of the Church in all ages therefore he will not or ought not deny but that they proue also that there is teaching of true doctrine of faith in the Church not onely for the Apostles time or for sixe or eight hundred yeares after but absolutely for all ages I grant all this and if he beg hard I will giue him more that the doctrine of the Church thus taught in all ages is the rule of faith that all men ought to follow But he is so far bankrupt and behind hand that no reasonable thing will helpe him For still this Church supposes not his Pope nor his Papacy and this doctrine meanes not his traditions nor any thing taught in the Church besides the Scripture nor doth this being the rule intend any such authority or soueraignty of the Church aboue the Scripture as he pleads for but only the Ministry of the Church vnder Christ and his Scriptures in propounding the faith to particular beleeuers and confirming the same to their hearts and consciences by the sole authority of the Scriptures themselues as I haue often touched CHAP. XXXVII Not the Church but the Scripture is the rule 2. The question touching the visiblenesse of the Church proceeds of the Militant Church 3. 4. 5. In what sense we say the Militant Church is sometime inuisible 5. The Papists thinke the Church shall be inuisible in the time of Antichrist Their contradictions touching Antichrist breefly noted A. D. Concerning the twelfth Chapter By that which hath bene said in the two precedent Chapters it is apparant enough Pag. 234. that there is in all ages a certaine company called the Church whose doctrine is the ordinary rule and meanes ordained by God to instruct all men in all matters of faith and that by the said doctrine and teaching of the true Church euery one is to learne what is and what is not to be holden for the true faith not doubting but that the doctrine of faith which is commended and caught vs by the said true Catholicke Church is the right faith The which being so euery one may see how necessary it is to seeke find and follow the iudgement of the true Church as being a most necessary meanes without which none can expect to attaine that one infallible entire faith which is necessary to saluation This seemeth in a sort to be granted by M. White For although he pleade hard to haue Scripture alone to be the (a) White p. 13. 14. 15. rule holding the letter it selfe to be the (b) Pag. 12. vessell which presenteth thu rule which he (c) Pag. 31. coÌpareth to the Carpenters square to the precepts of art to the law of the Land yet as he cannot deny that a child cannot do any thing with the Carpenters square nor an vnlearned man with a booke wherein is contained precepts of art or with a lawbooke but the square must be applied by a cunning Carpenter the precepts of art must be expounded by a learned maister the law must be declared by a skilfull Lawier or propounded by an authorized Iudge Euen so he must grant that the Scripture it selfe although it be a good rule yet if it were as he would haue it the onely rule must be applied expounded declared and propounded not by euery man woman and child but by the authority as we say or by the Ministry as my Aduersaries say of the Church White p. 110. Pag. 93. and that so necessarily that euen as M. White affirmeth except in some extraordinary cases no man can of himselfe attaine to the knowledge of faith but as the Church teacheth him in regard as otherwhere he confesseth the Church is a subordinate meanes for the bringing of men to saluation in that God teacheth his elect by the ministry thereof Neither saith he can any man be the child of God except first he be conceiued in the wombe of the Church So we see euen in M. Whites opinion how necessary it is for euery one to seeke finde and follow the teaching of the true Church 1 THat which he sayes I granted in a sort I grant againe and yet will still pleade and proue the Scripture alone to be the rule and nothing else For though a child can do nothing with a square nor an vnlettered man with a booke yet still the square and contents of the booke are the rule and not the Carpenter and the Iudge they are onely Ministers to apply the rule and subordinate conditions requisite for the due vse of the rule and to be ruled by it themselues if at any time as sometime they may they erre in working So is it in few words with the Church and Scriptures And albeit I affirmed as he saith and it be my opinion that it is necessary to find and follow the teaching of the Church yet is it not my opinion that the vniuersall Church teaches any doctrine that is not written in Scripture or God by the Church teaches those vnwritten traditions or that the Church exceeds the condition of a bare Minister vnder the Scriptures Which Ministry being acknowledged M. White will allow it any authority and power to teach informe perswade correct represse particular men that my Aduersaries will demand but they require Church authority aboue the Scripture and make vnwritten traditions and the Popes Decretals equall with the Scripture and place all the power and faculty of the Church in the Pope and when they haue done allow no particular man or Church to call any of these things in question This is it the Repliars teeth water at and which by M. Whites concessions he would recouer but he shall neuer get it nor all the
which must be acknowledged when tyrants and such as feare not God by their euill gouernement and neglect of religion many times darken the aire and hinder the raine and make the fields barren and riuers empty Pliny enquiring the reason why the fields adioyning to Rome in old time were so fruitfull saies It was because they were tilled by the chiefe gouernours such as Fabritius and Cincinnatus were Ipsorum tunc manibus Imperatorum colebantur agri gaudente terra vomere laureato triumphali aratore Which your Maiesty doing so painefully with your owne hands in a more noble field the Church of God all godly minded shall bid God speed the plow and daily waite till the briars and thornes be rooted out and the dew of Gods grace fall on the barren part that the Plowman may neuer be wearie nor his hand weake nor his workmen vnfaithful to him but all that are about him and his Noble seruants by his example may giue ouer sleeping and put their hand without looking backe to the same worke that the enuious man that soweth tares may be driuen forth and their owne houses may be the greenest and cleanest part of the field till he come that shall giue end and rest to euery labour and recompence beyond all that can be thought the workmans trauell and binding the good corne in sheaues cast the tares into vnquenchable fire God euermore continue and increase his mercies to your Highnesse and lay your enemies at your feete that you may see an end of all dissentions and stablish peace and vnity in the Church Your Maiesties most humble subiect IOHN WHITE To the Reader IT is now fiue yeares since I published a booke called THE WAY TO THE TRVE CHVRCH wherein my purpose was nothing else but onely to shew the weakenesse and insufficiency of those Motiues which leade so many to Papistrie and to bring to triall such reasons as the Iesuites and Seminaries ground themselues vpon in perswading their people against vs making it more then plaine that the corruptions of the Church of Rome are maintained and the communion of our Church in the doctrine preaching and the Sacraments thereof is refused by such as follow the Papacy vpon weake and false grounds that cannot be defended This poore booke it seemes hath not a little incensed my Aduersary and discontented many that yet should follow reason and the truth of things and not be transported with rumor and common impression For man being a noble creature endued with reason and faculty to discourse and hauing a rule left him of God whereby to examine things should not tie his faith and conscience to the authority or person of any more then the truth and the reason and euidence of that be saies will beare him out It was neuer heard of in the world till now of late yeares that the Pope and his definitions were the rule of faith or that men were bound to follow whatsoeuer he should appoint but the Church of God euery where till tyranny oppressed it examined his doctrine accepting and allowing that which agreed with the sacred Scriptures and the first antiquity and reiecting the rest and albeit many errors had long prescription yet the godly still held them to that rule of our Sauiour BVT FROM THE BEGINNING IT WAS NOT SO. Mat. 19.8 Our Aduersaries therefore may in some points possible pretend antiquitie but PRIORITIE which is the first and best antiquitie they cannot in any one thing wherein they refuse vs and whether the zealous and resolued Recusants will beleeue it or no yet it is certainely true there is no one point of Papistry Catholicke that is to say such as hath bene from the beginning generally receiued as an article of faith by the vniuersall Church And though it be granted that many parts of his religion haue long continued in the world yet were they neuer the certaine or generall doctrines of the Church but the corruptions of some therein which in time and by degrees obtained that strength and credit which now they haue it being the easiest thing of a thousand for the Pope and his clergie sitting at the sterne when themselues had once imbraced them with their strength and learning to giue them authority in the world when Mahomet himselfe by policy and tyrannie was able in time to spread abroad and a vniuersally the doctrine of his Alchoran which now is 800 yeare old and is followed by many and great nations as close as Papistrie is either in England or Italy But wheÌ the Scripture makes it plaine that FROM THE BEGINNING IT WAS NOT SO and the Histories and monuments of antiquity and the bookes of the elder Papists and such as were chiefe in the Church of Rome beare witnesse that these things were misliked and in all ages complained of and that which the Church of England now professes was the faith of most godly men and holy Bishops though the power of the gouernors in the Church of Rome increasing they were suppresed they do but deceiue themselues that thinke our faith a new faith or the points of Papistrie the old religion I haue as well as I haue bene able and as diligently as I could with an vnpartiall eie and many teares to God for his direction in the businesse and with a heart hating contention and possessed as much as any mans liuing with desire of peace and vnity whereof my 17 yeares residence in Lancashire can giue plentifull witnesse read the Scriptures and trauelled through the writings of the Fathers and obserued the course of former times and well aduised my selfe of that which the learned of the Church of Rome in later times haue written from the elder Schoolemen to the later Iesuites though with all humility I acknowledge my selfe to be the meanest of any that haue taken this course and much lament my owne weaknesse yet am I readie whensoeuer God the Iudge of all secrets and the terrible reuenger of falsehood and partiality shall call me foorth of this world to testifie that my faith and religion and the points thereof maintained in my writings and preaching is the truth agreeable to the first antiquity and the contrary defended by the Iesuites and followed by Romish Recusants error and vncatholicke And if any persons presumed to be learned on the other side haue either in their life or death shewed extraordinary zeale for their Roman faith I desire I may be allowed my owne knowledge both of some such persons and of their iudgement and outward cariage and not be importuned to follow that which vnskilfull and vnable and partiall friends haue apprehended rather then my owne cleare knowledge both of them and their cause And if the Church of Rome haue in it diuers learned betweene whom and vs my Aduersaries will indure no comparison that write against vs yet my certaine experience of their manner of writing one against another and against knowne antiquitie and their strange maintenance of the foulest and
vnworthiest things that are and my knowledge of the meanes whereby and the ends whereto they are trained vp to this writing and my daily exercise in their bookes haue long since remooued from me all opinion of them and taught me that learning as beawty can play the baude and make them loue it that shall fall by it and inamoured of it that little know the danger of it Let the seuerall points of their faith which with that learning they maintaine be well vnderstood and considered for the most vnderstand them not and let the manner of their proceeding in that they defend be iudiciously looked into and it will easily appeare that learning and wit Gen. 38. like Thamar hath prostituted her selfe and sits in the highway and so she may haue children she will deceiue Iudah her owne father And when all learning and the ripest wits and holiest Diuines the Church of Rome hath are now wholly imploied in maintaining the Popes power ouer Princes absoluing subiects from their alleagiance excusing equiuocating and the POWDER-TREASON and making the actors Martyrs and dissoluing the very ioints and bands whereby the world and Christian society is holden together it is high time to let the authoritie of mens persons alone and looke another while into the reasons and causes they maintaine and when they haue found the truth to cease from contending and labour by obedience and submission therunto to bring glory to God that our tongues may professe and our liues glorifie his heauenly Maiestie Hauing therefore written in my former booke to this effect and plainely shewed all this and much more that my countreymen and the people of our nation if they pleased might see the triall of things it is fallen out that the Romish side findes it selfe in an extraordinary manner touched therewith after many rumors vowes to confute me at last about 18. monethes since I receaued this Reply which here thou seest And although I take no pleasure in contentious writings but as time shall shew if I continue my course and God giue meanes intend that which shall cleare the controuersies without contention yet when I had heard many reports of something that would be done with effect against me I was willing to giue satisfaction againe least the ignorant might be perswaded something was writteÌ indeed that could not be answered It is not vnlikely but others also for they haue more helps meanes and leasure then I haue as soone as they can be furnished wil be doing more may yet be written for so he sends me word that writ the last Triumph of Purgatory an Author that sure will ouerthrow the Chariot and lay all in the mire if he be set to driue it and so I haue bene often told and sent word and therefore if any shall chance to write in forme and without passion whereof this man is full and with modesty will say what he thinks speaking directly and home to that I haue said without declining or shrinking from the point that presses him that I may finde him an honest minded man and not a Mercurialist I will gratifie him againe with the same that he brings and freely reuoke and confesse any error that he shall shew to haue escaped me If I be otherwise dealt with that nothing be sought but the disgrace of my persoÌ vndirect discrediting of my booke it is likely that I shall take my resolution from the circumstances of my aduersary when I see him and do as his booke against me shall deserue In the meane time be admonished of 4. things touching this Reply and my owne Defence First that whereas he hath in the same booke written against M. wootton a learned Diuine as well as me I meddle onely with that which concernes my selfe and therefore taking his booke before me I answer onely the passages that are against me Next all that I meddle with is set downe verbatim as it lies and the number of his page in the margent ouer against his text Then I haue in this sort gone through his whole booke til within a little of the end which containing no new matter but the same that I had occasion to answer diuers times afore I would lose no time about it Fourthly I haue answered fully and directly to euery word he saieth by which diligence I haue benefited the Reader so much that howsoeuer my Aduersary may seeme meane and vnworthy confuting yet he shall not lose his labour in reading but finde my paines bestowed profitably vpon him such as he is who yet to giue him his due though he raile hard and vnciuilly and write an obscure and vnpleasing stile hath replied with all the best and sutablest arguments he could finde in Stapleton Bellarmine and Valentia touching the points depending and onely failes in replying to that which I had answered before Hereafter let me intreate the good and courteous Reader if he will vouchsafe to vse my writings not to iudge of them but by his owne triall and examination For they haue secretly to their wel-willers laid imputations vpon them who being surprised with conceit are afraid to make the triall or to meete the truth The quotations for example or Authors alledged may be challenged reported to be false yet this Reply hath charged but onely one in all his booke and they which haue bene lowdest and earnestest may finde in such a multitude possible some to proue that the diligentest writer may be ouerseene but the substance they cannot discredit If I haue erred in any thing or mistaken an Author I acknowledge my selfe to be a man that may erre and I humbly submit what I haue done not onely to the Church wherein I liue but to euery moderate and peaceable minded man therein yea I will with all respect of his person heare and aduise of any thing that an aduersary shall informe me of if he will hold the rules of Christian truth and charity and go forward with me in that course to seeke the truth which all men see euermore to be lost where words and wrangling giue the sound And I intreate euen those that cleaue most to the Church of Rome to perswade themselues that whatsoeuer I haue written is for their sakes that if it were possible they might discerne the truth offered them and the wickednesse of the Iesuites that leade them I maligne no mans person I hate none that is among them but being called to be a Preacher of the Gospell I am desirous to bestow my spare houres in maintenance of that I preach and for the which I were ready to sacrifice my life much more to bestow my time and trauell that if it might so please God we might be all as one and the state and gouernement wherein we liue be no longer tossed and intangled with our disagreements They cannot but see that God by establishing the Kings throne and blessing it against the malice vnnatural practises of their Church giues testimony on our
the vnlearned know them to be sincere The new translation lately set foorth by the Kings authoritie defended Momus in his humor The subordination of meanes Chap. 29. Touching the obscuritie of the Scripture The necessitie of meanes to be vsed for the vnderstanding of the Scripture proues not the obscuritie Traditions debarred A Councell is aboue the Pope The Scripture of it selfe easie to all that vse it as they should The certaine sence of the Scripture and the assurance thereof is not by tradition Chap. 30. Touching the all-sufficiencie of Scripture to the matter of faith It shewes it selfe to be Gods word Luthers denying S. Iames epistle How the Papists expound the light of the Scripture What they and what we hold about the authoritie of the Church How expresse Scripture is required Chap. 31. Wherein the place 2. Tim. 3.15 alledged to proue the fulnesse and sufficiencie of the Scripture alone is expounded and vrged against the Iesuites cauils Chap. 32. Touching priuate spirits that expound against the Church Such priuate expositions refused by the Protestants And yet the Papists haue no other All teaching is to be examined euen by priuate men Certaine propositions shewing how the Church teaching may be or may not be examined and refused Chap. 33. How a priuate man is assured he vnderstands and beleeues aright touching the last and highest resolution of faith Luthers reiecting the Fathers Occhams opinion that no man is tied to the Pope or his Councels The Beraeans examined the doctrine that they were taught The faith of the beleeuer rests vpon diuine infused light M. Luther sought reformation with all humilitie Scripture is the grounds of true assurance Who the Pastors were of whom Luther learned his faith His conference with the Diuel By the Church the Papists meane onely the Pope Chap. 34. The Papists pretending the Church haue a further meaning then the vulgar know The Popes will is made the Churches act Base traditions expounded to be diuine truth Chap. 35. The Papists pretending the Church meane onely the Pope How and in what sence they vnderstand the doctrine of the Apostles to be the rule of faith They hold that the Pope may make new articles of faith And that the Scripture receiues authoritie from him Vnlearned men may see the truth when the Pope and his crew sees it not And they may iudge of that they teach The Iesuites dare not answer directly Chap. 36. An entrance into the question touching the visibilitie of the Protestant Church in the former ages Wherein it is briefly shewed where and in whom it was Chap. 37. Not the Church but the Scripture is the rule The question touching the visiblenesse of the Church proceeds of the Militant Church In what sence we say the Militant Church is sometime inuisible The Papists thinke the Church shall be inuisible in the time of Antichrist Their contradictions touching Antichrist breefly noted Chap. 38. The Papists cannot proue the Church to be alway visible in that sence wherein we denie it The diuerse considerations of the Church distinguished His quarrels made for our doctrine touching the Churches seuerall states answered The faithfull onely are true members of the Church Vpon what occasion the question touching the visiblenesse of the Church first began Chap. 39. The Papists are enforced to yeeld the same that we say touching the inuisiblenesse of the Church Their doctrine touching the time of Antichrists reigne And the state of the Militant Church at some times Arguments for the perpetuall visiblenesse of the Church answered In whom the true Church consisted before Luthers time Chap. 40. Againe touching the visiblenesse of the Church and in what sence we say it was inuisible Many things innouated in the Church of Rome The complaints of Vbertine and Ierome of Ferrara All the Protestants faith was preserued in the middest of the Church of Rome A iest of the Terinthians What religion hath bred desperation Chap. 41. A narration of a popish Doctor and professor of diuinitie in the Church of Rome translated out of Acosta de temp nouissimis lib. 2. cap. 11. and Maiolus dies canicul tom 2. pag. 89. and inserted for answer to that wherewith the Iesuite reproches our Church in the last words of his precedent replie Chap. 42. An obiection against the Repliars Catalogue Diuers articles condemned by the Fathers mentioned in the Catalogue that the Church of Rome now vses What consent there is betweene antiquitie and papistrie Chap. 43. Whatsoeuer the Fathers of the primitiue Church beleeued is expressed in their bookes The Repliar is driuen to say they held much of his religion onely implicitely What implicite faith is according to the Papists The death of Zeuxis The Fathers writ that which cannot stand with papistrie Chap. 44. The whole Christian faith deliuered to the Church hath succeeded in all ages yet many corruptions haue sometime bene added how and in what sence the Church may erre A Catalogue assigned of those in whom the Protestants faith alway remained What is required to the reason of succession Chap. 45. The Fathers are not against the Protestants but with them Touching the Centuries reiecting of the Fathers The cause of some errors in the Fathers Gregories faith and conuerting England The Papists haue bene formall innouators How they excuse the matter Chap. 46. The errors broached by the later Diuines of the Church of Rome Their errors maintained by that Church and their writings to good purpose alledged by Protestants How that which they speake for the Protestants is shifted of One reason why we alledge their sayings That which is said in excuse of their disagreement answered Chap. 47. Councels haue erred and may erre What manner of Councels they be that the Papists say cannot erre It is confessed that both Councels and Pope may erre Chap. 48. Touching the Councels of Neece the second and Frankford How the Nicene decreed images to be adored What kind of Councell it was And what manner of one that of Frankford was Frankford coÌdemned the second Nicene Touching the booke of Charles the Great and of what credit it is Chap. 49. The ancient Church held the blessed Virgin to haue bene conceiued in sinne The now Church of Rome holds the contrary Chap. 50. Touching Seruice and praier in an vnknowne language The text 1. Cor. 14. expounded and defended against Bellarmine The ancient Church vsed praier in a knowe language Chap. 51. The Church of Rome against all antiquitie forbids the laie people the vse of the Scripture in the vulgar language The shifts vsed by the Papists against reading spitefull speeches against it Testimonies of antiquitie for it The Repliars reason against it Chap. 52. The mariage of Priests and Bishops lawfull and allowed by antiquitie Some examples hereof in the ancient Church The restraint hereof is a late corruption Priests were maried euen in these westerne parts a thousand yeares after Christ Chap. 53. Wherein is handled the doctrine of the Church of Rome touching the
worship of images and the distinctions whereby the same is maintained are examined And our aduersaries finally conuicted of giuing Gods honor to their images The ancient Church was against image worship Chap. 54. The Popes supremacy was not in the ancient Church neither is it acknowledged at this day by many Papists Nunne Brigets speech touching the Pope And Cyrils riddle Chap. 55. The Communion in ancient time was ministred to the people in both kinds An innouation in this point in the Church of Rome The pretences vsed against the Cup. Chap. 56. Touching Transubstantiation It was made an article of faith by the Lateran Councell 1200 yeares after Christ How it came in by degrees The Fathers neuer beleeued nor knew it Chap. 57. Touching the first coming in of errors into the Church with the Persons Time and Place Purgatory and pardons not knowne in the ancient Church nor in the Greeke Church to this day The true reason why the ancient prayed for the dead Chap. 58. The Popes supremacy Single life of Votaries The worship of images The merite of workes The sacrifice of the Masse And the Popish doctrine touching originall sinne all of them innouations The disagreement of Papists in their religion And namely in their doctrine of originall sinne Chap. 59. Obiections against the outward succession of the Pope Touching Peters being at Rome His Pastorall office what it was Whether there be any diuine authoritie for the Popes succession Not certaine what Popes haue succeeded one another Vacancies diuers times in the Sea of Rome The storie of the woman Pope of what credite The Pope hath bene an heriticke and erred è Cathedra The Pope succeeds by Simonie and violence Such succession is a nullitie by his owne law The Pharisees in Moses chaire how A. D. defends the succession of an ASSE Many Popes at once Vrbanus his crueltie towards the Cardinals What the Protestants say touching the succession of the Church of Rome Good Reader in the printing of this Booke some faults are committed some whereof are not great but the rest noted with this marke * concerne the sence or reading more materially The marginall quotations some excepted I could not correct but hope they are reasonable perfect Correct them as followeth The first number signifieth the page the second the line Page 3. line 26. shreene skreene 8. 12 it is good it is a good 11 25. downe downe 14. 11. vse vseth 16.14 Lonel Louel 20 11.* her mot er our mother * and it was when it was 24 19. Cuyckins Cuyckius 34 5 * the king Now may the king how may 15. * possible impossible 36.5 not so much not much 38 11.* seauenth second 45. 26. Anard Ruard 60. 2 * of minde of winde 71. 3 ingeniously ingenuously 80. 27 * serueth seemeth 81 16. * against him his against his 86. 26. compiled fraud fraud compiled 94. 35. * see see 103. 13. Sato Soto 105. 15 * vncerten And vncerten and 106. 11. please pleaseth 109. 1. * to heauen to haue 112.28 the like the life 113 5 * in cause in state 116 1 * charging Chargeth 138. 9 * one promise on praemis 145. 20. none now 14â 10. * Casenists Casuists 148. 10. this a poore this poore 14 and them put it forth 34. to beleeue not to beleeue 156. 27. contriued contained 157.30 yeed yeeld 174 4 * in themselues in the Scripture 180. 35. * visible inuisible 181 14.* inuisible members inuisible the members 188. â6 answer for answer For. 192. 23. that which the which 194. 11 Henriquex Henriquez 199. 33. * Eusebius Justine Martyr 200. 20. daughter sonne 213 9 * this of God this will of God 12. as they call such as they call 226. 21. or* his purp for his purp 228. 5. none noe 229. 18. * no mans one mans 230 2. by othes by others 12 * the works euââ the sinne euen of corrupt masse was not but was 238. 29. * deliberate not deliberate 245. 34. * the cause since the conscience 259. 29. * He replies sec he replies Secondly 264. 23. saies it ouer saith it ouer and ouer 265. 25. or translation of translation 275. 28. * motion notion 286. 31. lastly put it out and set the figure 7 that followes there 287. 16. conceiued conteined 21. dives diuerse 299. 1. * what heresies what he replies 304. 35. * in the fourth proposition in fower propositions 311. 3 is is it is it 315. 9. * first and last hiest and last 318. 12. RIGHR RIGHT 319. 26. may do can do 335. 16 knownes not knowes not 341. 20. we might impart we impart 367. 32. * vniuersall vniuocall 368. 7 manner matter 373. 21. held in the substance nor held the substance 381. 37. euer by euen by 403. 18. them them that them that 414. 30 * yet many yet the maine 437.9 Nanâus Nonnus 448. 26. Councell Councels 460. 15. had bene haue bene 471. 24. * as the profite all the profite 485. 18. * Then I haue Thus J haue 450. 8. And expounds how and he expounds how 505. 6. not with not onely with 504. 23. * to any other to âââther 511. 31. * be reuolued be renewed 513. 33. * shewed them thawed them 527. 17. that contrary the contrary 529. 4. * Againe whether Againe whereas 532 1.* that it is sinne some that it is sinne 11. That it some that it 13. That it some that it 544 4 * alleadged alleadging 29. VNLERA VNLEAR In the Margent I obserued by the way Pag. â7 letter c c. 52. Ch. 53. 23. r orthodonograph orthodoxagraph 24. * see c. 53. see Ch. 52. 38. r Sano Saxon. 67. c. Chap. 35. 1 Ch. 34. 1. 35. â 77. â * Ch. 54. Ch. 53. 95. d ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 108. u put forth the whole quotation ** 113. d Abulens parad l. 34. Abul parad l. c. 34. 121. * came to come to * 133. line 15. action occasion * 148. * cap. 35. and 36. chap. 34. and 35. * 158 * cap. 28.3 chap. 27. 3. * 194. * see vers see Gerson 261. e Philocrat Philostrat 280. i noted afore noted afore pag. 62 in the marg 528. â Abul in Sent. Abul in Deuteron THE WAY TO THE TRVE CHVRCH defended against A.D. his Reply CHAP. 1. 1. The title of A.D. his reply A wonder not farre from Rome 2. Writers not putting their names to their bookes censured by the Iesuites The Popes iester 3. The name of Minister and Priest 4. Church the pillar of truth 5. The way of Catholick discipline is the way of the Scripture 6. The Iesuits Method in perswading to Papistrie 7. The maner of A.D. his replying and his promise to raile THis A.D. hauing taken my booke into his correction intitles what he hath written against it A REPLY made vnto M. Anthonie Wootton and M. Iohn White MINISTERS wherein it is shewed that they haue not sufficiently answered the TREATISE OF FAITH and wherein also the truth of the chiefe points of the said TREATISE is
to his sect is to expose religion to euident danger but Christians are not bound nor may with the euident danger of religion tolerate an vnbeleeuing King When Kings and Princes become heretickes or hinder religion they may be iudged by the Church and be deposed from the gouernement neither is there any wrong done them if they be deposed If any Prince of a sheepe become a wolfe that is to say of a Christian become an hereticke the pastor of the Church by excommunication may driue him away and withall commaund the people that they follow him not and so depriue him of his dominion ouer his subiects g Cap. 8. § Praeterea cogere Any Bishop whatsoeuer much more the Prince of Bishops may exercise temporall power ouer them that haue receiued temporall power ouer other h Tract de potest sum Pont. adv Gul. Barcl pag. 97. When the Pope sees a Christian Prince infected with heresie by the sentence of excommunication he separates him from the companie of the godly and least he infect others he absolues his subiects from the oath of their alleagiance and if need so require he commaunds them vnder the paine of the same excommunication that they neither reckon of him nor obey him as their King i An. â089 n. 11. Caesar Baronius alledges and commends out of Ivo a Breue of Pope Vrbane the second wherein it is pronounced that they are no homicides who kill such as are excommunicate For we do not iudge them to be murderers who burning with the zeale of their Catholicke Mother against such as are excommunicate happen to haue killed any of them Gregorie 7 commonly called Pope Hildebrand k Baro. an 1076 n. 32. Gregor 7. epist l. 2. ep 55. set downe these among the Popes priuiledges that the Pope may vse the armes of the Empire that Princes must kisse his feete that it is lawfull for him to depose Emperors that he is no Catholicke man nor so to be accounted that agrees not with the Church of Rome that he may absolue subiects from their fidelitie to the wicked Suarez the Iesuite in his l Def sid Cath. adu Angl. sect erro l. 6. c. 4. nu 18. late booke against the King writes thus It is to be said that after the sentence condemnatorie is giuen against the King by lawfull authoritie touching the depriuing him of his kingdome or which is all one when by sentence his crime is declared to be such as by the law hath such a penaltie imposed then he that hath pronounced the sentence or he to whom it is committed may depriue the King of his kingdome euen by killing him if either he cannot otherwise do it or if the sentence be iustly extended to this punishment If the Pope depose the King yet he may not be killed or expelled but by those onely to whom he shall commit the doing thereof but if he commit the execution to no bodie then it belongs to him that is lawfull successor of the kingdome or if there be no successor it shall appertaine to the kingdome it selfe and therefore as I said onely his lawfull successor if he be a Catholicke hath that authoritie to kill or depose him or if he neglect it or there be no successor then the communitie of the kingdome so that it be Catholicke succeeds in that right thus to kill or expell him Let the Reader here note not onely that the Pope and his Church teach and command the murder of Gods annointed Kings which any heart not stupified with Atheisme and reprobate sence would tremble at but appropriate the doing thereof to Papists alone challenging the right of committing so execrable wickednesse to appertaine to none but Romish Catholickes and disdaining that any should haue a hand in doing this execrable mischiefe against the King but onely a follower of the Popes religion This is the doctrine that I mentioned and meant when I said their religion was full of doctrine teaching conspiracie against the State stirring subiects vp to treason and rebellion For when m Rex autem Jacobus vt in libro primo probauimus a crimine infidelitatis sâu haeresis apostasiae excusari non potest Suar. ibid. c 6. nu 10. the King by reason of his religion is made an heretick and reputed a persecutor of the Church and disobedient to the Pope and the Pope not onely hath power but is also bound by his place to excommunicate depriue and depose such and to absolue the subiects from their obedience to them yea howsoeuer to rid the world of them as of tyrants it being the dutie of all and that vnder paine of damnation and as they will be counted good Catholickes to obey the Pope in all things against the King Now may any Papist warrant his religion from the imputation and what securitie can he giue to the State what pawne to his Soueraigne for his loyaltie that the King and his State may be certen he will neuer practise or stirre against them For if the Pope by right may do all this and he beleeue as his religion teaches that he is bound in all things to obey the Pope as the supreme Pastor of his soule and monarch of the world he must whensoeuer occasion shall be offered do his vttermost to fubuert the present State and to plant the Popes religion and iurisdiction I will suffer my selfe per possibile to be perswaded that many Recusants and some Masse-priests loue the King and are true hearted to the State and wil neuer consent to trechery but this is that I say they cannot do this out of the principles of their owne religion which teaches them to obey the Pope against all the world or if they say the Pope erres and his Diuines speake vntruly in these points what infallible assurance can they haue that they erre not and misleade them not in the rest of their religion Let it be well and seriously considered if it be not possible that they which vniustly and erroniously condemne the oath of alleagiance do as erroniously condemne the faith which by that oath they say is ratified They shall giue me leaue to thinke for my part that as his Maiestie by the confession of so many Papists holds the truth against the Pope in the matter of the oath so he holds the same truth against him in the matter of his faith and they that deceiue the Papists in forbidding them to take the oath deceiue them no lesse in forbidding them to come to Church and communicate with our religion 3 The Popes practise hath bene answerable to his doctrine in regard whereof I said as I did that he and his clergie were no better then so many Beares and Tygars the fatall enemies of Princes and their people to sucke their bloud The which because the Reply outfaces with passion I will demonstrate by examples and then let the Reader iudge if euer any sauage Beare or Tygar filled his den with the
Protestant writes For a This made the Protestants Apologie so often quoted in A. D his Reply swell so big a few priuate and doubtfull places are culled out of the writings of our men and obiected to the whole body of our Church by our aduersaries as our doctrine But the Iesuite writing in his b THE WAY §. 6. Treatise that all Catholicke learned men acknowledge the Popes definitiue sentence and submit their iudgement thereunto who would thinke that Baius so learned a man should maintaine any thing against that which the Pope allowes specially being one of those that were at the Councell of Trent and knew the mind thereof and printed his booke three yeares after Secondly when I writ I had Baius c De merit op printed at Louan by John Bogard an 1565. in 8. his booke by me and knew nothing but I might alledge it he was a popish Doctor and the Kings publicke Reader and Deane of the Vniuersitie of âouan one that was a principall Diuine of the Trent Councell but three yeares before his booke priuiledged by the King of Spaine and no where in all the Indices that I haue seene either forbidden to be read or commanded to be purged as those bookes are which the Church of Rome mislikes in good earnest I answer thirdly that what I alledged out of Baius is the doctrine of the Church of Rome and the Iesuites this I will proue and then answer the Iesuites arguments to the contrary 2 First I say that the Church of Rome holds whatsoeuer I alledged out of Baius For I gathered no more out of his words but that the saluation of our soules is expected for the merit of workes and not to be ascribed to the merit of Christ onely This is the current doctrine of Rome contained in the words of the Trent Councell alledged by the Reply to go no further Next Michael Baius words considered in themselues as they sound containe the doctrine of the Church of Rome for any thing that the Iesuite can shew to the contrary And if it be obiected that other Papists write otherwise and confute him I care not for that for they write at this day one against another in euery point of their faith and agree in nothing in the questions of Predestination the concourse of Gods helpe with inferiour causes Praedeterminations the Popes primacie taking the oath of allegiance worship of Images Free-will Transubstantiation Antichrist Latin seruice and yet all the Iesuites liuing cannot proue this to be their Churches doctrine rather then that And therefore as touching his aduersaries that deale against him Baius his opinion may be the Trent opinion as well as theirs nay better for he was there present when the doctrine of merits was concluded and agreed vpon and his booke alledges the Councell on his side 3 But I will shew that the words of Baius affirme no more then other Papists maintaine They containe onely three propositions First that our works merit This propositioÌ they all hold as the Iesuite will confesse and it is enough to euacuate the merit of Christ and translate it to our selues and so consequently to damne him that holds it because by merit is meant such a worthinesse in the worke as of it owne nature by the way of d Dico Deum reddendo vitam aeternam seruare iustitiam commutatiuam Pezant 1.2 q. 114. pag. 468. Dicendum est in Deo esse proprium attributum iustitiae habens quandam conuenientiam formalem âisi analogam cum iustitia commutatiua creata raetione cuius propria for malis iustitia commutatius dici potest licet à rigore huius iustitiae prout est in creaturis aliquando discrepat differat in obiecto formali suo Atque hanc iustitiam maximo Deus exercet in retribuendis praemijs meâââ rum vel condignis satisfactionibus acceptandis Suar. opusc disp de iustit Dei sect 2. n 27. COMMVTATIVE IVSTICE deserues eternall life And it is no matter though they will answer that the Grace of God makes vs able to do these workes for so much Baius also sayes for himselfe but the point is that if eternall life be giuen properly by an act of commutatiue iustice to my worke done by what Grace soeuer then saluation is neither the sole nor proper effect of Christs death The second proposition contained in Baius words is that Christ onely made vs able to do good workes but such workes being done then the reward is giuen not for the merit of Christ but for the condignitie of the worke This is holden by others Vasquez e 12. q. 114 disp 222. n. 30 pag. 917. sayes When the workes of a iust man condignely merit eternall life as the wages and reward that is equall to them there is no need that the condigne merit of another such as the merit of Christ is come betweene that vnto them should be rendred eternall life for the merit of euery iust man in respect of the man himselfe hath some thing peculiar which the merit of Christ hath not namely to make the man himselfe iust and worthy eternall life that he may worthily obtaine the same but the merit of Christ albeit most worthy to obtaine eternall life for vs of God yet hath not this efficacie and vertue to make vs formally iust and worthy eternall life but men by vertue deriued from him attaine this effect in themselues This doctrine allowes saluation and blessednes to vs in the same maner that God in the couenant of works rendred it to Adam or to the Angels for f Ipsa igitur Gratia etiam homini reparando fuit necessaria quia non alia stantem Angelum à ruina potuit custodire nisi illa qua lapsum hominem post ruinam potuit reparare Vna est in vtroque Gratia operata in hoc vt surgeret in illo ne caderet in illo ne vulneretur in flo vt sânaretur ab hoc infirmitatem repulit illum infirmari non sinit illius esca istius medicina Fulgent ad Trasim l 2. pag. 269. Adam ante lapsum non fuit per vtres suas naturales praecisè etiam cum Dei generali influentia sufficiens ad igendum aliquem actum moraliter bonum seu vere virtuosunt quinimo vltra praedicta fuit sibi necessarium aliud Dei auxilium speciale Gregor Arim. 2. d. 29. q. 1 concl 2. pag. 107. See Mag. 2. d. 29. Ibi Tho. Argent art 3. Dur. qu. 1. Capreol qu. 1. concl 3. 4. Suar. tom 1. disp 42. sect 1. §. Dico tamen they also had the grace of God to enable them to worke as we haue the merits of Christ but that grace went no further The third proposition contained in Baius words is that good workes haue the reward of eternall life due vnto them not of grace but of their owne nature because God in the beginning by the law of nature appointed the reward to be
56. hereticall and temerarious or further then as he held it with violence and passion Let him reade the Bull and he shall finde therein many propositions that himselfe will not condemne The second is that as an euill worke of his nature merits eternall death so a good worke of it owne nature merits eternall life yet t Sicut se habet culpa ad poenam ita opus virtutis ad gloriam Sed culpa ex condigno meretur poenam ergo actus virtutis ex condigno meretur vitaem aeternam Tho. 2. d. 27. art 3. Quae quidem satis indicant non minus sempiternam foelicitatem iustorum esse praeclaris operibus debitam quà m aeternos cruciatus eorum sceleribus qui noÌ nouerunt Deum Andrad orthod expl pag. 517. God giues as wel euerlasting life and glory to men for and according to their good workes as he giues damnation for the contrary workes Rhem annot Rom. 2. n. 6. this is generally holden among all their Diuines The eight proposition is that in such as are redeemed by the grace of Christ there can be found no good merit which is not freely giuen to him that is vnworthy yet the Iesuite sayes here that all our workes merit by the grace of Christ which is false if the Bull censure truly for to haue no merit but such as is freely giuen to him that is vnworthy and to haue merits that are not freely giuen but the partie is worthy are contrary The 14 is that our workes at the last iudgement shall receiue no ampler reward then by the iust iudgement of God they deserue yet Vega u De Iustificat q. 5. holds this opinion The 30 is that no tentation can be resisted without the grace of Christ yet x Abulens in Matth 19. q. 178. Gregor Arimin 2. d. 28. Cassal quadrip instit par 1. l 1 c. 25. Bellarm. grat lib. arb l. 5. c. 7. many Schoole men hold it The like may be shewed in other propositions there censured and yet commonly holden by the learned in the Church of Rome whereupon I conclude that the Bull is no sufficient argument to proue the place I cited out of Baius not to be the doctrine of the Church of Rome but the Iesuite would vse the name thereof to serue the present turne when he had no true vnderstanding of the drift and purpose of it CHAP. VIII 1. The Papacie brought in by Satan 2. The Iesuites spirit of contradiction 3. The Church of Rome reuolted The fiue Patriarchs were equall at the first 4. Plaine Scripture against the Papacie 5. The ignorance of popish laitie 6. Corruption of writings by the Papists 7. Reformation desired long afore it came 8 9. Aduice giuen to A.D. A. D. In the same Preface I finde many other notable vntruths Pag. 27. as § 3. where he affirmeth that the Papacie was brought in by Satan at the first and is still continued onely to seduce the world 1 BY the Papacie I meane all that masse of innumerable errours in doctrine and Church-gouernement wherein they differ from vs and of it I do confidently affirme as a §. 48. n. 1. I expound in THE WAY that in processe of time it grew as a scabbe or a disease in the Church which in the beginning knew no such faith and forsomuch as b Mat. 13.25 all innouations are tares the enemy that sowes tares among the wheate is the diuell therefore I affirmed and yet doe that the Papacie was brought in by the diuell as all other heresies were And forsomuch as c Parum enim interest an cum daemone quis habitet an cum viro Apostata Effrem test pag 793. Mihi certe ille nunquam aliud quà m diabolus erit quia Arianus est Hilar cont Auxe sub fin there is little or no difference betweene the Diuell and an Apostata or an hereticke therefore I adde that to communicate with the Papacie is to follow d 1. Tim. 4.1 the doctrine of diuels A. D. And againe Pag 28. that Catholickes seeke nothing but to be contrary to Protestants and euen hate the name of peace 2 I did not onely say this but I shewed it also first by relating the paines that in vaine and to no purpose hath bin taken with them to bring them to reconciliation and namely at the conference at Regenspurge where diuers points being agreed it is well knowne how Ecchius a man of an vnquiet spirit e See his Apol. adu Bucer sup act colloq Ratispon laboured to dissolue the agreement and discredit all that was done with the Emperour and States that had taken so much paines therein Then by the froward words of two Iesuites Bellarmine and Maldonate whereto I adde a third as refractary as they Lorin a Iesuite hauing related the iudgement of sixe great learned men against the vulgar Translation in a certaine place f Comment in 2. Pet. 1. pa. 62â sayes They please him not for this cause because he would haue Catholickes more fauourable to the vulgar Translation and more to abhorre the sence of heretickes That is to say rather then they shall agree with vs in the truth he would haue them follow the old Mumpsimus in a lie This is the malepart spirit in our aduersaries that I speake of whereby the Reader may guesse what loue they haue to peace when vpon hatred against vs because they will not be said to yeeld they will not accept of that which themselues thinke may be truth Pag. 28. A.D. Also § 6. where he affirmeth that the present Romane Church in wholy departed in the questions controuerted from the ancient and retaineth nothing but the title and that the ancient Church of Rome professed the same faith which Protestants now professe 3 This matter is purposely shewed in g Digr 49. 51 THE WAY and handled at large in this Defence and it is not onely true but so easie also to be shewed that the Iesuite durst not so much as looke in the face that which I here added to demonstrate it He thinkes his deniall is confutation enough and so it is possible with his followers that reade his Reply but list not to heare what I added to make my word good First out of Pelusiot how a Church may lose the faith and yet retaine her name still As Lais many a day after she was turned curtizan yet was called Lais still and then out of Balsamon and Nicephorus two Patriarkes in the Greeke Church That in ancient time the Pope had not this primacie nor Rome the royaltie that now they haue To them I adde another testimonie out of Theodore Stuclites h Lib. 2. ep 129. ad Leo. Sacell The diuine and heauenly points of faith are committed to none but those to whom Christ said Whatsoeuer you binde vpon earth shall be bound in heauen and whatsoeuer you shall loose vpon earth shall be loosed in heauen But who are
copies which the Authors writ and whereby that should be tried that we say So that in the ages to come when the old copies shall be worne out and their New-purged ones shall haue gotten a little antiquitie these desperate Termagants will resolutely deny that euer any such thing was written or any such purging vfed so it shal be generally maintained that the things that the Iesuites and censors haue clapt into their bookes were written by the authors themselues If this can be answered what do pillories and papers ordained for forgers when not a poore parchment of euidence but the deeds and euidences of the Christian world shall thus be forged and all antiquitie be Iesuited and reduced by this practise to the new cut 2 In the meane time I answer the Iesuite that I wil stand to my offer if he will let the triall be made by bookes vnpurged such as are the true copies that the authors published that there is no point of our faith but many learned in their owne Church hold it with vs and no point of Papistrie that we haue reiected but some of them haue misliked it as well as we and his two instances of the Masse and Reall presence I accept though I haue answered them a Pag. 158. letter m. 178. lett e. 379. lett f. in THE WAY so directly that it was his best policie to dissemble it and to require me for my credit to do that which I had done alreadie For to his first demand How many learned men of our Church haue denied the Masse to containe a sacrifice in such sort as Protestants do denie I answered b Vbi sup in two seuerall places For the vnderstanding whereof and the applying my said answer to this place the Protestants denie that Christ in his last Supper which the Iesuite absurdly calls the Masse offered any propitiatorie sacrifice properly so called according to the reall notion of the word sacrifice of his bodie and bloud This I shewed by the testimonie c Can. loc l. 12. c. 13. Suar. com 3. d. 84. f. 2. Azor instit moral tom 1. l. 10. c. 18. of three seuerall Papists to be denied by some Catholickes in the Councell of Trent and they consequently denie as we do that the Priest offers any such sacrifice d Christus ea quae ab alijs obseruanda instituit ipse primitùs obseruarit Tho 3. q. 81. art 1.0 In hac quaestione initium sumendum est ex facto Christi quod exemplar est actioniâ nostrae fundamentum ac primum initium huius mysterij Fra. Suar. vbi sup pag. 949. because the Priest now doth no more then Christ did then in his Supper They therefore that denie Christ offered any sacrifice denie it also in the Priest And then I alledged a discourse of Thomas where he propounds the question Whether in this Sacrament Christ be immolated that is sacrificed and his answer is that the celebration of this Sacrament is called the sacrificing of Christ for two causes First because images are vsed to be called by the names of the things whose images they be as when we behold a picture on a table we say this is Cicero Now the celebration of this Sacrament is a certaine image representing the passion of Christ which is his true sacrificing and therefore is called the sacrificing of Christ Next in regard of the effect of Christs passion because by this Sacrament we are made partakers of the benefit of our Lords passion In which words making no mention of such reall and vnbloudie sacrificing as the Church of Rome now teaches it is more then plaine that he beleeued it not For if he had he would haue vttered it as fully as he doth other things Besides these I ad the Master of Sentences who e If we talke of all Diuinitie the bookes of Peter Lombard Master of the Sentences is held to be the first methodicall worke that drew all diuinitie into a certaine forme Walsing p. 128. professing to set downe all the points of Diuinitie most exactly as our aduersaries say yet no where in all his booke mentions this kinde of sacrifice but f 4. d. 12 §. Post haec quaeritur propounding the question Whether that which the Priest doth in the Eucharist be properly said to be a sacrifice or immolation and whether Christ be dayly sacrificed or were onely once sacrificed his answer is To this it may briefly be said that which is offered and consecrated by the Priest is called a sacrifice and an oblation because it is a memoriall and representation of the true sacrifice and holy immolation made vpon the altar of the crosse and Christ died once vpon the Crosse and was there sacrificed in himselfe but he is dayly sacrificed in the Sacrament because the remembrance of that which is once done is retained These words shew plainely that some learned men in the Romane Church haue denied the Masse to containe a sacrifice euen in such sort as Protestants denie it 3 So there be also that affirme the reall substance of Christs bodie to be no nearer them that receiue the Sacrament then heauen is to the earth as the Caluinists hold For Picus Mirandulus g Conclus pag 64. nu â4 pag 65. nâ 20. sayes the bodie of Christ is sacramentally on the altar but locally in heauen and one bodie cannot be in diuers places at once And the opinion of the Caluinists is no otherwise then h Effectum tandem vt in hanc insaniam prorumperet Berengarius vt verum corpus sanguinem Christi non esse an pane vino docuerit haec haeresis apud Heluetios hoc nostro tempore per Caluinum reuocatae est Prateol Elenc verbo Berengarius Berengarius and yet Waldensis i Sacrament Eucharist c. 19. pag. 17. tom 2. writes that there were many that with the Church of Rome condemned Berengarius for his maner of speaking which yet thought as he did And k THE WAY pâg 349. I alledged a saying of l 4. d. 10. q. 1. §. Quantum Scotus that from the beginning since the matter of this Sacrament was beleeued it hath euer bene beleeued that Christs bodie is not moued out of his place in heauen that it might be here in the Sacrament and yet it was not in the beginning so manifestly beleeued as touching this conuersion Where Scotus affirmes that it hath not alway bene beleeued that the bodie of Christ is moued out of heauen to be in the Sacrament * Note touching the forme of recantation prescribed to Berengarius by Pope Nicolas wherein the Pope enioynes him to say J confesse the bread and wine after consecration to be the true body and bloud of Christ and to be sensibly handled in the hands of the Priest yea broken and chewed with the teeth of the faithfull Which words are read de Consec d. 2 ego Bereng and pressed by the
Graffius a Friar lately writing from Capua i Decis aurear l. 2. c. 8. nu 16. that euery Christian is not bound to know the articles of faith explicitely but only Cleargy meÌ I cited Antonine an Archbish and a Saint in the Church of Rome k Sum. mor. part 1. tit 5. c 2. §. 1. who reporting the tale of the Colliar first saies that a great Doctor being demanded what he beleeued answered as the Church and being further demanded what the Church beleeued answered that it beleeued the articles contained in the Creed And then falles to commending that faith which shewes that he thought it was the entirest beleeuing eueÌ of the Creed to do it by implicite faith I alledged Pighius and Hosius the Cardinall who l Pigh hier l. 1. c. 5. Hos cont Brent l. 3 p. 146 in the places cited affirme that it is the safest way to hold a mans selfe to the faith of the Church though it should erre in the faith And that this Colliars faith is more safe then any meditation or exercise in the Scripture And whosoeuer shall view the places Hosius especially shall well perceiue that I speake the truth which I will yet iustifie further by shewing Catholicke Diuines as my aduersaries stiles a packe of heretikes to teach that it is sufficient by this implicite faith to beleeue euen the principall articles of faith contained in the Creed m Tract de fid William the B. of Paris n L. 3. tract 3. c. 1. qu. 5. Altisiodorensis o V. Fides nu 1. Summa Rosella and others p refeât D. Ban. 22. qu. 2. art 8. § Dubitatur secundo hold that it is not necessary to beleeue any article of faith expressely but it is enough to beleeue all that our mother the Church beleeues and holds So that if a man were demanded whether Christ were borne of the Virgine and whether there were one God and 3. Persons he might sufficiently answer I cannot tell but I beleeue as the Church holds and this faith would iustifie and saue him The Iesuits q Lorin in Act. Apost p. 438. 1. b. Grego de Valent. tom 3. disp 1. qu. 2. punct 4. pag. 311. A. report that it is the opinion of many Authors in the Church of Rome that the explicite faith of Christ as he is true God and man and the Redeemer of mankinde euen after the sufficient publishing of the Gospell is not necessary necessitate medij either for Iustification or saluation and he cites Richardus Mediauillanus Vega and Soto Which is true for these are Vegaes expresse words r Pro. Concil TrideÌt l. 6. c. 15. p. 92. edit Colon 1572. It is to be affirmed that men are so iustified by the faith of the Mediator that yet the vnfolded faith neither of this article nor of any other must be thought requisite vnto iustice because the explicite faith of other articles belonging either to Speculation or morall life suffices thereunto and this is it which our Diuines commonly teach when they say the Faith of one mediator either vnfolded or infolded is enough for iustificatioÌ neither can they hold otherwise that thinke as Å¿ Reported before c. 22. n. 1. many in the Romane Church do the Gentiles without any knowledge of Christ or supernaturall faith at all may be saued 5 I know well enough some of our aduersaries speake otherwise and seeme to require a more vnfolded faith whose doctrine I will not conceale t Eymeric part 1. q. 7. n. 8 The Directorie of the Inquisitors out of u 22. qu. 2. art 5. Aquinas saies A man is bound explicitely to beleeue the articles of faith but other points of faith onely implicitely That which * D. Bann vbi sup Alexand Pezant 22. q. 2. art 8. disp 1. Greg. Val. tom 3. disp 1. qu. 2. punct 3. 4. 5. Vasqu 12. disp 121. others speake more at large First * These are the Propositions of Pezantius a Iesuite Schoolman that in the state both afore and after sinne it was necessary for all of yeares of discretion both by the command and necessity of the meanes to beleeue some supernaturall thing by explicite faith Secondly The things thus to be beleeued are all points needfull for the ordering of their life as to beleeue there is a God and his diuine prouidence and the immortality of the soule that he is the Creator Rewarder and Gouernor of all Thirdly that now in the state of the Gospell it is also necessary to beleeue in Christ as the Redeemer of mankinde by faith explicite Fourthly by the Commandement all are bound to beleeue explicately the Mysterie of the Incarnation and the Trinitie the principall articles of faith contained in the Creed which by themselues pertaine to the substance of faith and some other things which tend to direct them in working aright But what those articles of the Creed are which thus belong to the substance of faith Pezant saies the Doctors are not agreed but he laies downe his owne iudgement that they are the articles touching the Vnitie Essence and Trinitie of the Persons in the Godhead touching the Creation the Remission of sinnes Eternall life the Natiuitie Passion Resurrection and Second comming of Christ the Sacraments of Baptisme Eucharist and Confession the precepts also of Faith Hope and Charity the ten Commandements and Praiers deliuered in the Catechisme It is also probable he saies that all good Catholickes should beleeue explicitely the virginity of Mary that they may worship her but it is certain that the article touching the Church that there is but one congregation thereof which is of the faithfull * Were you there Sir that obey the Pope Christs Vicar must be beleeued explicitely and some say also certaine traditions touching the signe of the Crosse and the adoration of Saints and Images This is the largest and most particular explication that I finde in any of them touching the things that all men vnlearned as well as learned are bound either by Commandement or absolute necessity to beleeue by faith explicite Yea the Scholiast vpon the Directory of the Inquisition x Pag. 60. requires the articles of faith to be gotten perfectly without Booke which the Iesuits y Grego Val. p. 320. c Pezant pag. 505. d. deny But how shall I know this is the doctrine of their Church how will my aduersary assure me that other Diuines in his Church as Catholicke as these are of the same minde that I might truely say I mistooke them when I said they vtterly refuse knowledge and canonize the Colliar If they would hold them euery where and constantly to this it were a good step to an end in this controuersie and our doctrine were iustified that particular knowledge is to be ioyned with the assent of faith and we must not so beleeue the Church but that we be able also in some measure to conceiue and penetrate the things themselues If my
aduersarie will vrge me with this and stand vpon it that it is the doctrine of his Church I will not striue with him onely I will commend 2. things to his consideration First how he will pleade the saluation of innumerable lay people I will not say in Lancashire but in France Spaine and Italy euery where that haue no knowledge of these things but onely beleeue as the Church beleeues whom the Church of Rome hath hitherto trained vp in this implicite faith of the Colliar how will he excuse the Colliar whom Staphylus commends so that knew not these things and what if it should fall out that the Gentleman his friend whom he mentions z A person of good esteeme and place in that your country p. 39. Repl. before in this Reply being catechized by his ghostly father should be able to say no more then the Colliar Next that euen the Iesuites and these Diuines who make shew to maintaine this explicite faith yet vtter that besides that vnanswerably makes for the implicite in all articles Henriquex a De sin hom c. 17. n. 1. lit x. sayes A man may be iustified by the implicite faith of Christ * Si planè contritus cum plena satisfactione vel cum martyrio aut indulgentia plenaria decedat and if he die be saued also with a pardon b Relect. de Sacram. part 2. q. 2. concl 3. Canus and c In Tho. 22. q. 2. art 8. dub vlt. concl 1. Bannes affirme that the explicite faith or distinct knowledge of Christ is not necessary as a meanes to iustifie vs. And Bannes d Concl. 4. addes that it were neither heresie nor error nor rashnes nor scandall to auouch that a man may also in the same manner be saued because iustification being the last disposition to glory it is very probable that he which is iustified by an implicite faith may also by the same faith without alteration be saued Vasquez e In Tho. 12. q. 2. disp 121. c. 2. sayes He doubts not but many countrie people without fault are ignorant of some necessary mysteries Vega f Pro concil pag. 92. sayes as I alledged before It is to be affirmed that men are so iustified by the faith of the Mediator that yet the vnfolded faith neither of this article nor of any other must be thought requisite vnto iustice because the explicite faith of other articles belonging either to speculation or morall life suffices thereunto I could alledge many other such doctrines but these are enough to shew my aduersary that his Diuines deale but doubly in our point of implicite faith and such as make faire offer against it yet are fast friends to the Colliar 6 Note thirdly concerning the persons who they be that our aduersaries allow to beleeue implicitly who are bound to expresse knowledge Mediauillanus g 3. d. 25 p. 89. edit Venet. per Laz. Soard 1508. sayes that such as are superiors in the Church must haue a fuller knowledge concerning faith then inferiours So that I beleeue such superiours are bound to beleeue all the articles of faith expresly though euery one of theÌ be not bound to beleeue their number or artificiall distinction Syluester h Sum Syluest v. fides n. 6. sayes Euery one that hath cure of soules as Prelates Priests Prophets Doctors and Preachers are bound expresly to beleeue the whole distinction of the articles of faith according to their substance but others are not so bound i Direct Inquisit part 1. q. 4. n. 3. Eymericus out of k 22. q. 2. art 6. Thomas Prelats and Curats are bound to haue the expresse faith and knowledge of all the articles of faith wherefore the explication of things to be beleeued is not alike in respect of all sorts of men necessary to saluation because Superiors which haue the charge of instructing others are bound to beleeue expresly more things then others are l 22. q. 2. art 8. disp vnic sub sin Pezantius thinks thus of the matter that Bishops are bound * A hard taske for the Boy Bishops mentioned by Gerson and others see Vers sign ruin Eccl. sign 3. 8. Pic. Mirand orat ad Leo. and for some men Bishops too mentioned by Theod. Niem nemor Semita de scism p. 66. Cathar n. specul haeret p. 71. Clemang de stat Eccl. p. 15. 30. concil delect card Alliac reform Eccl. consid 3. and for some Popes also See specul Pontif. p. 110. and possible for our yong Iesuites and Seminaries to say nothing of the old Mas Priests in times past expresly to know the articles of Faith contained in the Creed and Scripture and in the definitions of the Church so that they can both expound teach and perswade them Simple Priests must know those things that belong to the making of the Sacrament and other things contained in the Creed Preachers such things as are necessary to teach the people how to beleeue and liue parish Priests are not bound to be so perfit in the knowledge of the articles of faith that they can assoile hard questions but it is sufficient if they can instruct their charge in such things as they are tied to beleeue and do and if they haue sufficient knowledge of the Cases of Conscience And so the implicite knowledge and faith is admitted onely in the vnlearned Laity and not in Clergie men of any sort if our aduersaries will hold them to their doctrine but they dubble and perseuere not in it as will appeare by viewing the places of the Archbishop and the Cardinal whom m The WAY §. 2. n. 6. I alledged in my booke 7 Note fourthly that the things which we mislike and speake against in this matter of implicite faith are these First that in teaching of it the Church of Rome seemes manifestly to seeke her owne soueraignty euen aboue the Scripture in the consciences of men rather then the true knowledge of God and his will To what purpose they do this n 2. Th. 2.4 apoc 18.7 I sit a Queene we are not ignorant but we see it tends to the stupifying of the word by blind and brutish obedience that there need be no trauell in religion it selfe but onely a religious care that the Church of Rome be not offended Whereunto whosoeuer will cleaue resolutely to obey all her drudgery and tyrannie that man by some fine distinction or other and that by the Iesuites themselues and such as talke most of explicite knowledge shall be iustified to be of an entire faith extending it selfe vniuersally to all points one as wel as another though he were as ignoraÌt as a sheepe or as mad as o Suid. v. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Amphistides in Suidas that could not tell fiue nor whether his father or his mother bare him Secondly we mislike that ignorance so much condemned by the word of God should thus be bolstered out whereby true faith
the like things how great punishment is laid vp for vs that by being able to answer nothing nor to dissolue these questions should be the authors of error to them that walke in darkenesse for if they so trauell day and night to be able to speake against our religion how shall we escape vnlesse we haue skill to beate backe such assaults Thus 1 1. Pet. 3. Peter commands Be alwaie ready to satisfie euery one that demands a reason of your faith and hope and 2 Col. 3. Paule Let the word of Christ dwell plentifully in you But what will these foolish drones answer forsooth that euery simple soule is blessed and 3 Pro 10. This is one of the Papists reasons for the Colliars faith note Chrysostomes answer he that walkes simply walkes surely But this is the cause of all euill that not many know how to bring in the testimonies of the Scripture opportunely For in that place alleadged simple is not to be vnderstood for a foole that knowes nothing but for one that is not euill or crafty c. These wordes of Chrysostome shew against all exception that Gods words vpon paine of punishment requires a distinct knowledge of the points of our faith in such measure that if an ignorant man or a cauiller should question with vs about them we might be able to expound manifest them which by the Colliars and my aduersaries impicite faith we could not do Theodorit hath a narration which may fully satisfie any man what kinde of knowledge the Christian Church then practised Euery where e De curand affect l. 5. sub fin saith he you may see these points of our faith to be knowne not onely by them who are masters in the Church and teachers of the people but euen of Coblers Smithes and Weauers and all kinde of artificers and of women also which get their liuing with their hands yea maid seruants and waiting women husbandmen also do very well know them and Ditchers and Neat-heards and woodsetters All these may ye finde discoursing of the Trinitie and the Creation of things and as skilfull in the nature of man as Plato or Aristotle f Iustin Martyr requires the same distinct knowledge in all ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Dial. cum Tryph. p. 249. This Relation of Theodorit makes it cleare that in those dayes the doctrine of beleeuing as the Church beleeues by implicite faith was not receaued but the Christians generally euen the most vnlearned obtained and practised the same distinct knowledge that here my aduersary disputes against and impugnes with the names of the Fathers that onely speake against the curious and arrogant inquiring into mysteries CHAP. XXIIII Touching the necessitie and nature of the rule of faith 2. And how it is reuealed communicated to all men that none need to despaire A. D. Concerning the fift Chapter Pag. 143. the conclusion of this Chapter to wit that God hath prouided some ordinary rule and meanes by which all sorts as well vnlearned as learned may be instructed sufficiently in that one infallible entire faith which is necessary to saluation serueth chiefely for those who either presume to attaine this faith without vsing any endeuour in seeking or following some ordinary rule and meanes or else despaire in regard they know not what in particular this rule and meanes is nor perhaps in generall that there is at all any ordinarie rule and meanes at least accommodated to their capacitie prouided by God by which they may be sufficiently instructed in faith To take away therfore the foresaid presumption of some and despaire of others in this Chapter I onely intended to proue in generall that there is some certaine ordinary rule and meanes ordained by God which if one neglect to seeke finde and follow according to the ordinary course of Gods prouidence he may not be he neuer so learned or wise presume or hope to attaine true faith and which whosoeuer doth diligently seeke happily finde and obediently follow be he neuer so vnlearned or simple he need not despaire or doubt but may rest assured that he shall attaine vnto it My aduersaries do not seeme to deny this my conclusion so farre as it doth properly belong to this Chapter but fearing what may follow of it they oppose against that sence which they imagine I intended afterward to draw out of it But this is vnorderly to runne before the hare Let vs now onely speake to the purpose of the present Chapter M. White expressely * White pag. 8. 9. graunteth and M. Wootton doth not deny that there is some certaine rule and meanes appointed by God and left in the world to instruct men in faith Secondly M. White granteth that by this rule and meanes we may be infallibly instructed what is to be holden for true faith Thirdly he yeeldeth that the onely cause why a man misseth of the truth is either because he doth not finde the rule or hauing found it he will not obey it Fourthly he saith that the rule is left indifferently to all in this sense that it is of such nature that it is able to direct any man be he neuer so simple and that the most vnlearned aliue may vnderstand and conceiue it sufficiently for his saluation Thus farre M. White granteth and this is in a manner as much as I need desire to be granted concerning the principall conclusion of this Chapter For hence followeth first that no man may presume to attaine faith without finding and following some certaine or ordinary rule and meanes ordained by God Secondly that no man for want of learning or by reason of his simplicity c. neede to despaire but that by seeking finding following some certain rule meanes appointed by God be shall be sufficiently instructed in faith Thirdly that euery one carefull of saluation may see how much it importeth to seeke finde and follow this rule and meanes as expecting by it only by it according to the ordinary course of Gods Prouidence to be sufficiently instructed what is to be holden for that one infallible entire true faith which is necessary to saluation 1 MY aduersaries fift conclusion was that as one entire faith is necessary to saluation so God who willes the saluation of all men hath prouided and left an ordinary rule and meanes whereby they may be informed which and what this faith is This conclusion he visites in this place to see how his aduersaries haue vsed it and first he repeates it then he telles his purpose in laying it downe next he reports what I said to it though scarse truly Fourthly he telles what followes of that which he findes I haue granted him and so lastly leaues the onely difficulty that I obiected against it vnassoiled and leaps into a wilde-goose chase nothing to the point about Praedestination whither M. White meanes not to follow him His purpose in propounding it he saies was first to admonish such as
containeth no materiall error For I would faine know how they who neither haue the authenticall originall or if they had cannot reade and much lesse vnderstand and compare the translation with it neither do admit infallible authoritie in the Church to assure them can be infallibly assured that the translation doth not containe any substantiall error To this M. White answereth White pag. 25. that we know this by the same infallible meanes wherby we know other articles of beliefe namely by the light of the doctrine translated the testimony of the Spirit the ministery of the word the rules of are the knowledge of tongues and such like Here is a faire flourish of words but answer me good M. White directly to the point Are all of these ioyntly or euery one seuerally or onely some of these necessary sufficient to breed in vs infallible assurance of an article of faith All are not necessary For else how shall poore vnlearned men do who want rules of art knowledge of tongues and such like Euery one seuerally is not sufficient For neither knowledge of tongues rules of art nor the Protestant ministery are of themselues infallible and consequently cannot be of themselues sufficient to breed such infallible assurance in vs as is requisite in an article of faith Well then it remaineth that onely some of these to wit the light of doctrine translated and the testimonie of the Spirit are euen according to the ordinary course the only necessary and of themselues the sole sufficient meanes to breed this assurance but this not For then it wold follow that euery one learned and vnlearned that had the Spirit of God by the onely light of the doctrine it self without any other help should infallibly vnderstand the Greeke and Hebrew text either read by themselues or pronounced by a Minister which is most false and yet that it followeth wel is apparent because true doctrine shineth as wel yea better if M. White say true in the Originall White pag. 26. then in the English Translations We saith M. White know the diuine doctrine to be one and the same Pag. 27. immediatly in the Originall more obscurely in the Translations and God as the same M. White saith directeth the children of light by the holy Ghost who openeth their hearts that they know his voice from all others and that the light of his truth may shine vnto them Now if the light of the diuine doctrine do shine as well and better in the Hebrew and Greeke text then in the English translations and that all which be children of light haue the eies of their heart so opened as they can discerne Gods voice froÌ all others and that the light of his truth shineth vnto theÌ what need is there then of any other either priuate or publick meanes to open their eies to see this light when the holy Ghost doth sufficiently open them Or if he say the holy Ghost doth not open them sufficiently without othâr meanes then the light of the doctrine and the testimony of the Spirit are not the onely necessary and alone sufficient meanes to assure vs infallibly of any article of faith namely that this or that means must be assigned sufficient to breed in vs infallible assuraÌce which it self cannot do vnles it selfe be and be knowne or at least may be knowne to be infallible in it selfe and infallibly to open and direct our eyes to the seeing of the infallible truth which fallible ministery of meÌ fallible rules of art fallible knowledge of tongs or such like infallibly do not 1 HIs reason why the Scriptures traÌslated into English caÌnot be the rule of faith is because our translations are full of errors Wherby he says his mind is not to deny the true Scripture in the originall or in the translation to be infallible but only the ordinary English translations My a THE WAY §. 5. nu 2 §. 6. nu 2. 4. 8. answer was the same that D. Stapleton b Relect. pag. 525. makes for the vulgar Latin that in respect of the words onely there might be some error but in respect of the sence there is none For if the words of the traÌslation be not so perfect as they might yet that hinders not the truth of the matter nor the integritie of the sence For the vulgar Latin canonized by c Sess 4. the Trent Councell and d In those words J do not denie the true Scripture either in the Originall or in the Translation to be infallible granted by the Iesuite himselfe to be infallible is not free from error and corruption in words Mariana e Tract pro edit vulg Multa superius in Hebraicis Graecis codicibus vtti esse ostendimus multae mendacia in rebus minutis eorum pars aliquae non exigua in nostra editione vulgata extat c. 21. pag. 103. says There be many corruptions in the Hebrew and Greeke bookes which are the originall and many lies in small matters no small part whereof is also in the vulgar It may safely therfore be yeelded that our English translations as all other translations in the world whatsoeuer are not infallible nor free from all errors in words and yet the sence and matter of the Scripture translated which is the rule be stil maintained to be infallible This my answer yeelding such a kind of erroniousnes in words my aduersary obiects to M. Wotton who belike in his answer to this argument demanding what English Protestant euer affirmed that our translations were infallible or tooke them for the rule He replies secondly what means M. White then to say the Scripture translated into English is infallibly true in respect of the matter M. White answers that his meaning in so saying was to accord with M. Wotton by distinguishing betweene the words and the contents of the translations M. Wotton denying the words to be the rule and I affirming the matter contained in the words so to be What contradiction is this when he grants our translatioÌs as al humane means are to be subiect to error in one sence and I deny them to be subiect in another 2 This my assertion that our English translations as touching the matter contained in them are infallible howsoeuer there be varietie among them in words stile he entertaines after his accustomed maner with some passioÌ For expouÌding my self that I wold not maintain this or that mans editioÌ but the Scriptures wel and faithfully translated in such maner as our Church allows them he cals this a starting hole neuer remeÌbring how himself wil not defend this or that edition in his own Church but wil retire to those editions that are approued as also the primitiue Church permitted varietie of translations and yet followed the purest as neare as it could iudge of theÌ for the time being I wil therfore say it again that OVR ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS AS TOVCHING THE MATTER CONTAINED THEREIN ARE INFALLIBLE AND
we say that the Church free from grosse and foule corruptions is not alway to be seene where or in whom it is Whereto if you adde that which l Epist de pacif Venet. ad Reg. Franc. 1607. April 5. Cardinall Perone lately writ to the French King that it is vncertaine whether God will suffer the Catholicke religion to be oppressed in Italie and driuen out of all Europe into another Hemisphere the case will be clearer For if the Pope and his drudgerie may be expulsed Italy and twentie Geneuahs planted there as the Cardinall speaks beleeue me that would bring the Romane faith to as low a size as euer the Protestants was and our aduersaries would be as inuisible as their fellowes The last is enough to shew that I peruert not the question For I denie and shewed in my answers to all his arguments that howsoeuer the Church consists of men that may be seene and these men know one another where they liue yet there is no such eminencie in any of them that the world can tell who or where they be that in the Church hold the true faith without corruption but they may be so hidden by persecutions heresies increasing in the church that no man shall discerne them and that they can haue no open or vncorrupted exercise of religion wherein I haue shewed our aduersaries themselues driuen by the necessitie of the truth to come home to vs. Digress 17. A. D. Now taking the question in this sence Pag. 236. my conclusion of this chapter was that the Church is neuer quite inuisible but alwaies visible This I proued by diuers reasons which stand still in force against my aduersaries supposing the state of the question be rightly vnderstood as first I meant it and as now I haue declared it The truth of which my conclusion I further confirme by the authoritie of Saint Augustine who * Ep. 48. hauing said as euen now I cited that the Church is sometimes obscured with multitude of scandals he addeth but euen then she is eminent in her most firme members Secondly I confirme the same by experience of ancient and present times because euen in times of greatest persecution vnder the heathen Emperors euen when the Church hath seemed to be ouerwhelmed with heresies euen when it was said that the world did maruell to see it selfe become Arian euen when it seemed to be rent in peeces with schismes euen when it hath bene most blemished with ill liues of the true professors themselues euen in the most obscure and ignorant ages wherein there was least number of teachers and writers there was alwayes a companie of true professing Christians so visible as that at least some in all ages whom God stirred vp to be eminent men opposing themselues by word or example or both as a wall for the house of God were actually apparent euen to the world or at least being knowne to Christians themselues as my aduersaries seeme to grant that the true Professors alwaies are they or some of them might and may be assigned by Christians to such as desire to know them as after I shall shew which sufficeth to proue the Church visible in such sence as I here make the question In what sence the Church militant is said to be sometime inuisible 5 The question is not of the visiblenesse of the church taking the word Church for the Militant church of God wherein the true faith is preserued and whose sound doctrine is the rule of all faith for we denie it not but onely as it signifies such therein as are free from the generall apostacie and corruptions which now and then preuaile in and all ouer the church For in the first sence we say the Church is visible because the companies of those which professe and hold the substance of faith howsoeuer many errors besides may be added thereto are alway manifest but in the second sence we say it may be inuisible inasmuch as at some times yea for a long time together no part thereof nor any companie therein can be discerned to be free from the corruption preuailing but a time may come when things are so reformed and the doctrine of the Church so reduced to the first Apostolicke veritie by putting away the apostacie and innouations that for some ages before there hath not bene knowne in all the Church any companie enioying or practising the said doctrine thus purged and reformed This being all that I hold touching the inuisiblenesse of the Church his reason concludes nothing against me as will appeare by viewing a In THE WAY §. 18. inde my answers To the place of Saint Austine I answer that it makes for me in the first words expresly The Church is sometimes obscured with multitudes of scandals and in the latter words the firme members wherein the Church is eminent are not such as are totally free from all abuses and corruptions belonging to apostacie but such as in the middest of corruption still retaine the principall points of Christian faith and among many errors yet eminently hold the substance of sauing doctrine and such we grant alway were in the middest of the Papacie which is OVR VISIBLE CHVRCH THAT WAS BEFORE LVTHERS TIME To his other reason of experience of ancient and present times I haue answered also in my booke and here answer againe that it is false meaning by those true professing Christians stirred vp of God and eminent men opposing themselues such as opposed themselues against all error For there neuer wanted in any persecution schisme or heresie those which professed the true faith euen visibly in that which substantially belonged to the faith and was sufficient to saluation but there haue not alway bene visibly to be seene those that eminently opposed or refused euery corruption or were preserued from such error as was afterward lawfully reformed and done away For the church of Rome being made the seate of Antichrist b 2. Thess 2 6. Apoc. 17. Valde verisimile est Irenae l. 5. c 30. as the holy Ghost foretold it was impossible there should be any visible companie so eminent or perfect that the generall contagion should not though not mortally in some measure touch them as c Act. 1.6 the Iudaisme of the times wherein Christ liued generally corrupted all the Apostles who yet for all that remained eminent members of the Church And if my aduersary thinke his Pope not to be Antichrist or the persecution of Antichrist whosoeuer he be not able thus far to preuaile against the Church let him descend when he will into that question and he will find himselfe as weake there as here the rather because I know no learned man of his side but confesses the same inuisiblenesse of the Church in Antichrists time that I maintaine Telesphorus the Hermite d Lib. de magn tribul pag. 32. edit Venet. per Soard an 1516. sayes The sacrifice and oblation shall faile the Ecclesiasticall
the world and outwardly professes the faith of Christ whether they therein that do it be the elect or others for we onely speake of the place and companie where the truth is professed and may be found which may well be where the wicked and the elect are mingled together Note FIFTHLY that the Church is called Catholick or vniuersal in two sences first the Church taken in his full latitude Catholicke Church for the whole company of all that are called both in heauen and in earth visible and inuisible elect and hypocrites is called the Catholicke Church in as much as it comprehends all that haue bene called to the profession of the Catholick faith then againe for so much as any part may synecdochically be termed after the name of the whole it sometimes fals out that the Militant Church or any part of it iâ called the Catholick as well as the Militant and Triumphant together But when the elect alone most perfectly haue the Catholicke faith and not onely vse the faith ministerie and Sacraments reuealed but also enioy the effectâ and benefits thereof which the false Church neuer doth hence it comes that they principally and as the vniuersall members thereof are called the Catholicke Church mentioned in the Creed a Alià s omnes homines etiam infideles etiaÌ damnati dicerentur pertinere ad corpus Ecclesiae tanquam eius meÌbra quod est absurdum Turrecrem sum l. 4. part 2. c. 20. ad 6. idem l. 1. c. 57. the rest in very deed and truth not being of the Church at all for Bellarmine b De Eccl. l. 3. c. 10. pag. 13â d sayes The Church chiefly and in her intention gathers together onely the faithfull but when dissemblers and such as beleeue not truly are mingled that fals out besides the intention of the Church for if she could know them she would neuer admit them or being admitted she would presently exclude them Againe c Ibi. pag 141. a Heretickes faining themselues to be Catholickes are not of the Church indeed but onely in reputation and outward appearance 3 This being the manner how we distinguish and hold touching the Church and the manner thereof now I answer that which the Rplier hath reported * Ad. 1. To the first it is false and malicious that we make two Churches for the Catholicke Church mentioned in the Creed and the Militant make but one Church which in one sence is called Catholick and Militant in another For the multiplication of diuers states degrees and relations belonging to a thing multiplies not the essence of the things as he that deuides the world into parts or distinguishes the climates or shews the diuersitie of the inhabitants doth not distinguish seuerall worlds but affirmes diuers states and conditions in one and the same world I am ashamed when I reade d See Staplet relect pag. 36. our aduersaries that should haue learning and shamefac'dnesse or at least ordinarie wit thus wrangling with vs as if we made two Churches * Ad 2. To the second it is likewise false and fitter for a parasite that sets himselfe onely to boast and reproach then for a diuine For our answer is plaine and direct that the Church considered in such state as it is ordained and fit to teach men the true faith and as mortall men can haue accesse to it which belongs onely to the Militant state is sometimes so ouerwhelmed with persecutions ând heresies that a true Church entirely teaching the faith of Christ without errors and freely vsing the word Sacraments and Ecclesiasticall discipline apart from the rest of the Church cannot be seene in all the world And our aduersaries arguments being applied to this neither hunt nor pursue vs so but we can answer them without flying into the Church of the elect for we do not say that the elect alone are thus obscured but euen all whether elect or reprobate that openly hold the state mentioned in this sence that not onely the elect are inuisible not to be discerned with mortall eye for they are alwaies so in this world but the whole Church Militant containing both elect and others is at some times so defaced and obscured that the world cannot see where the substance of faith is holden without errors mingled And so it is meerly vntrue that the Replier sayes touching our flying to the Church of the elect For as I answered in e Pag. 100. THE WAY though we hold the Catholicke Church mentioned in the Creed euery member whereof is saued to be inuisible because God alone sees who are elected yet the Church thus considered is not it that we speake of in this question but the Militant whereof we say it IS ALWAY manifest to the world but a companie therein that needs not reformation is NOT ALWAY manifest And whereas he sayes we will neuer be able sufficiently to proue the Church spoken of in the Creed and in the Scripture where the promises of the Spirit are made to the Church to containe none but the elect he is deceiued For though this be not materiall to the point in hand and without any disaduantage to our cause might be granted yet the best learned of his owne side say as we do that none are simply absolutely and vniuocally of the Church but the elect alone as I haue shewed immediatly before For f Eph. 5.23 Col. 1.18 the Church being nothing else but the bodie of Christ and Christ being the Sauiour of his bodie how shall hypocrites and other euill men whom he neuer saues be truly said to be his Church And when g Jtaque neque pro illu qui non saluantur obtulis suam passionem qui nunquam participauerunt ipsius merita neque pro eis qui iustificati non sunt Patrem orauit Christus Non pro mundo inquit rogo sed pro eis quos dedisti mihi Dicitur autem mortuus esse pro omnibus quia mors illius sufficiens fuit ad satisfaciendum pro omnibus Omnium delictis pro innumerabilibus alijs si essent ad perducendum omnes homines ad Dei gratiam And. Vega. pro concil l. 4 c. 10. pag 49. the effects and power of Gods calling and the benefits of his grace and the redemption of Christ reach no further then to the elect alone neuer touching the wicked that l ue among them how can the wicked either perfectly or properly be long to the Church But as I said this is not materiall to the point in hand and therefore I will not diuert into it our assertion being that not the elect alone are alway inuisible but sometimes also all the congregations of the world wherein they liue and professe Christ are so corrupted or oppressed that albeit the substance of sauing faith contained in the Creed and rule of faith be retained in them yet there is no congregation visible that hath not diuers corruptions needing reformation hanging on them
ordinarily haue to publish the profession of other religions which tend to Gods dishonor And that wheras it was prophecied of the Church that it should be more ample and glorious then the Synagogue of the Iewes was in the most flourishing estate it should be so far from being more ample and glorious that it were sometime more narrow or lesse conspicuous then the Synagogue of the Iewes euer was or now is in her ruinate estate Moreuer it were a notable hinderance to the good of innumerable * Because the knowledge of the Church is necessarie for all those which will be saued therefore our Sauiour said that she could not be hidden Aug. ep 170. soules which by teaching and conuersation of the faithfull might most easily be conuerted to the faith who otherwise for want of hearing or possibility to heare that there were any such religion should through ignorance perish Thirdly the Church is bound by the negatiue precept of profession of faith neuer to deny Christ or the truth of his religion nor to professe outwardly the rites and ceremonies of any contrary religion by which abstaining from Seruice and ceremonies of other Religions the Church could not especially for any long time liue so secret but it should be noted and knowne as we see Catholickes to be at this day detected by their refusal to come to Protestant seruice and sermons and as Protestants in Queene Maries daies were notified by abstaining from Catholicke seruice and Sacraments 4 This which he notes thirdly containes three arguments to shew the nature of the Church to be such that it cannot be secret from the world at least so long a time as the Protestants pleade for an inuisible Church First because it is bound to actuall and outward profession Next it should be lesse conspicuous then the Synagogue of the Iewes which were against the Prophecyes Thirdly innumerable soules should perish for want of Church teaching when they could not see the Church Ad. 3. The last of these reasons I answered in the WAY Ad. 2. whereto because he replies nothing I refer both him and his Reader To the second I answer that the glory and praeminence of the Church aboue the Synagogue prophesied stands not in the perpetuall visiblenes thereof as our aduersaries define visiblenes 1. Esa 60. 11. Act 10.11 but in foure other things First the compasse and limits which was no longer to be confined within Iudaea 2. Ioh. 4.23 but inlarged to all nations Secondly the manner of worship which should not be any longer carnal and typicall 3. Heb. 8.6 but spirituall Thirdly the dignity of the Ghospell and the promises annexed thereunto aboue the law and the promises thereof wherein the Iewes were trained vp Fourthly 4. Heb. 12.28 cum 27. in the continuance thereof which was to be not till a certaine time as the Synagogue was but for euer to the worlds end Thus it was promised that the Church should exceed the Synagogue which promise may well stand with that which we say for the apostasie that preuailed a 2. Th. 2.3 Apoc 9.2 12.6 13.14 17.2 was also prophecied which being at the highest yet the Church lost not these prerogatiues but her faith continued still to be Catholicke in those that vpheld the substantiall articles thereof all ouer the world howsoeuer the apostasie brought in many and dangerous heresies that were holden besides in the Church as the Synagogue also sometimes was ouerwhelmed with the like corruptions 5 His first reason is Ad. 1. because the Church is bound by a negatiue precept neuer to deny Christ or his religion or to abstaine from the seruice and ceremonies thereof but outwardly to professe the faith To this I answered in b §. 19. my Booke that the Church neither failes to professe outwardly the faith which in heart it beleeues nor yet is made visible and knowne to all by this profession The reason is because the members of the Church professing the substance of faith as c 1. Reg. 19.18 the 7000. in Israel did that bowed not the knee to Baal whom Elias saw not when persecution and preuailing error will not suffer them to do it in the purest manner in all points yet this is outward profession and satisfies the commandement which requires no more but 2. things first that we professe openly to the world as long as the same wil suffer vs and be ready to seale the faith thus professed with our bloud when by necessary circuÌstances of time and place we shall be called thereunto secondly that when persecution or inuincible ignorance or any other impediment hinders that this cannot be done yet we professe one to another and maintaine the faith wheresoeuer or how few soeuer so farre as we haue meanes to vnderstand To this my aduersary replies that indeede the rites and ceremonies of seruice and sacraments whereby he meanes the profession mentioned in as much as by the exercize of these things Christ is professed may though hardly be done in secret but the Church is bound to another kind of actuall profession before the world I answer 2. things First himselfe knew this absolutely taken to be false and therefore he recalles himselfe and yeeldes againe that all the members of the Church are not bound at all times actually to shine in this maner but then when Gods glory and the good of soules requires This he borrowed of his Thomas whose words shall be this part of my answer For the Church and the seuerall members thereof are neuer so hidden or ouerwhelmed with error but in time and place necessarily requiring the same they professe the substance euen outwardly and suffer sometime for the same and thus did many professe the Protestants faith in all ages and therefore the Iesuite trifles away the time when he standes to proue it necessary that euen alway some or other should professe outwardly for we graunt it and that there are some eminent Christians if not in state yet in faith and truth at all times and these loue God feare not the world but regard his honour and desire to publish his truth and what yee will and yet still these men may be oppressed with some corruptions and hindered by persecution that few can marke or discerne them and so contemptible in the world that the most will not beleeue them by reason the externall greatnesse and opinion of their persecutors wherto by all subtiltie and tyrannie they haue aspired shall dazell the eies of men that they cannot discerne the truth * Where the Protestants Church was before Luthers daies Secondly I answer that euen the members of the Church of Rome it selfe as the Bishops of France and England with their congregations for example professed thus outwardly to all the world the Christian faith for albeit they were some of them more and some lesse corrupted with the Apostacy vniuersally spread ouer the Church and had entertained the abuses that
satisfaction he may repairâ to that I writ And wheras the Iesuite notes that the true Church being a light and visible it cannot be but Gods prouidence and humane diligence would prouide some record of histories to find it this is true and shall be yeelded him and let our reformed Churches of the Protetestants neuer be counted part of the Catholicke Church if all Ecclesiasticall records in the world beginning with the new Testament and so descending by the writings of the ancient Fathers till you come to the very times of Luther do not shew the articles of their faith to haue bene professed in the Church of Rome as I haue often said its selfe and that which we haue cast off and wherein the Iesuites and wee differ this day to be no part of the ancient faith but late innouations brought in by faction that it was lawfull for vs to put them away and reduce things to the first antiquity And this I say not to ground our faith on humane reports but to testifie that I grant such prouidence of God for the confirming our faith though if such Histories were wanting as they are not it should not moue vs so long as we haue the Scriptures to iustifie our doctrine wherewith whatsoeuer consents is the truth whether Histories which are but a humane testimony and vnable to authorize or support faith mention the succession thereof or not But when my aduersary will needs haue it that one chiefe vse of History is to shew the continuance of the Church that seeing thereby this continuance we might know it to be the Church of God and not finding it we might know thereby that it is not the Church I will not striue with him but acknowledge the prouidence of God and industry of man who hath left the records of History to confirme our faith and freely grant our religion to be false if the continuall descent thereof from Christ cannot by such record be shewed Wherein we are so resolute that next the euidence of the sacred Scripture this is our greatest motiue against the Trentisme and Iesuitisme of the now Church of Rome that by all histories and writings of record we find it to be an innouation against the ancient religion and a rabble of heresies from time to time added and brought in to that which in the beginning was professed in the Church of God and if any man be so inamoured of Rome as to imagine that part of the religion thereof which we haue forsaken as the Supremacy Transubstantiation Traditions Latine seruice and the rest to be come in a continuall lineall descent from Christ downe through all ages to these times he will finde himselfe deceiued when he makes the triall or if he be so vnlearned that he cannot make this triall or so besotted with the conceite of Papistry that he will not or so oppressed with the craft of such as this Repliar is that he cares not yet it satisfies me and giues my soule contentment against the day of my death that reading all manner of ancient records Councels Fathers Church Histories Greeke and Latine though I haue not read all I find Papistry to be none of the ancient religion vniformely imbraced in the Church but an heresie brought in by the packing and ambitious policy of some growing as a Leprosie successiuely one peece after another to it And reading the later Diuines and Schoolemen that writ since the 11 age I finde as in the former the whole substance of the Protestants saith deliuered but touching the rest wherein the Church of Rome and we dissent and which we haue put away as the Masse Transubstantiation Purgatory Images Freewill Merits Supremacy c I finde no vnitie or certainety among them but all things inuolued with contradictions and vncertainety that it is easie to discerne the said points to be no parcell of the ancient Catholicke Apostolicke faith It is an ancient complaint of a Vbertin de Casal tract de 7. stat eccl c. 3. p. 65. The same thing touching the Schoolmen and Diuines of the Church of Rome is reported and complained of by Sauanarola a Friar liuing sometime in Florence Multi hodiernis temporibus qui volunt videri legis Doctores ac defensores conuersi sunt in vaniloqutum obsenratum est insipiens cor eorum Dicentes enim se esse sapientes stulti facti sunt quia relicta sacrarum literarum simplicitate ad Gentilitatem se penitus conuerterunt adulterantes verbum Dei impleuerunt chartas superbissimis obscuritatibus vanissimisque verborum ornatibus ac stulta apud Deum sapientia pompaque rhethoricorum verborum Deo odiosa nec non infinitis quaestionibus inexplicabilibus ac inutilibus quae mergunt homines in interitum audientesque subuertunt in vestimentis ouium volentes videri fidei defensores factè sunt populo Dei lupi rapaces Dicunt enim se philosophiae operam dare vt melius sacras scripturas quas nunquam legere volunt intelligant meliusque veritatem Dei fidemque defendant Sed reuera quaerunt quae sua sunt non quae Jesu Christi semper addiscentes vt dicit Apostolus nunquam ad veritatis scientiam pâruenientes Qui dixerunt ait Propheta linguam nostram magnificabimus labia nostra à nobis sunt Quis noster dominus est Et tantum hic morbus increuit vt Ecclesiae Praelatos Presbyteros clericos Religiosos ac Seculares totumque populum Christianum tabefecerit Adeo autem inueteratus est vt non solùm glorientur Christiani tumenti animo de Gentilium literisextollant semtipsos sed quod peius est Paganorum scientias qui in vanitate sensus sui ambulantes nihil putabant verum nisi esset inflaium verborum compositione ornatorum non verentur praepouere scientiae Dei à quo est omnium scientia quilinguas mutorum aperit facitque disertas Et multi hodiè in tantam vâsââiam blasphemiamque prorumpunt vt sacras Scripturas rugato naso subsannantes ita despiciant irrideant vt èarum sectatores putent pro nihilo habendos Adeo enim Princeps huius seculi excaecauit eos vt tanquam mente capti nihil seiant se omnium rerum sapientiam apprehendisse arbitrentur Taceo de muliis qui cultum Dei fidemque abnegarunt Hicron Sauanarol de ord scient l. 3. subsiti pag. 13 edit Venet. apud Aurel Pincium an 1534. Vbertin a Carthusian touching the Friars and Schoolemen that by mingling Paganish errors with the principles of faith they had blowne away the truth of the Gospell and he sayes The falling star that had the key giuen him to open the bottomles pit was certaine eminent learned and later religious men falling into earthly desires and the curious sciences of Pagans and into diuers sectes They had great witts to open and extoll the doctrine of Aristotle and Auerroes and studying in a manner nothing else they deuised deepe and gulfelicke opinions
VISIBLE profession of the Romish faith for so much as nothing is VISIBLE that cannot be shewed in their writings Thirdly this answer debarres our aduersaries for euer from alledging the Fathers for their Romish faith which I shew thus First the Iesuites promise is that he will assigne a continuall visible Church professing his now Romane faith for that is the thing vndertaken to name in all ages the names of such as successiuely professed the religion now maintained by the Church of Rome Secondly to effect this he sets downe his catalogue containing the Bishops Doctors and Councels that were in the first 600 yeares Thirdly we obâect that these Bishops Doctors and Councels in diuers things that is to say in all the substantiall points wherein the Church of Rome and we dissent beleeued not as the now Church of Rome doth because such points are not mentioned in their writings To this he answers that they held more either explicitè or implicitè then is expresly to be found in their writings This answer supposeth one of these three things either that they both held and writ expresly those diuers things which we denie or that they writ them not but held them explicitè or that they writ them not nor held them explicitè but held them onely implicitè The first he grants they did not but answers that they beleeued diuers things they writ not Neither is the second for what they held explicitè they writ But the third that they held diuers points of Papistrie onely implicitè is the answer Now this is it that laies all those points of Papistrie on Gods cold earth and shewes them not to haue bene knowne to the Fathers For a Rosel v. Fides n. 2 Altisiod l 3 tract 3. c. 1. q. 5 Dionys 3. d. 25. qu. vnic to beleeue implicitè is to beleeue as the Church beleeues as when a man is demanded whether Christ be borne of the virgin Marie or whether there be one God and three persons he answers that he cannot tell but beleeues touching these things as the Church holdeth And as the Repliar himselfe here expounds it To beleeue whatsoeuer was reuealed by God in word or writing to the Church diuers particulars whereof are not necessary to be knowne or written expresly at all times but this vnfolded faith shall be vnfolded as necessity shall require that is when some heresie arises oppugning the truth of the point which is thus implicitely beleeued Hence it followes that he confesses these Fathers Doctors and Bishops mentioned in the first 600 yeares of this catalogue knew not professed not defended not taught not diuers points of the now Romane faith because in their times they were not points of faith but made so since and therfore by his owne confession they held them onely in this sence that they beleeued and taught whatsoeuer the Church should after their time vnfold by which deuice they may also be said to haue beleeued and visibly professed that the Moone is made of a greene cheese or any thing that the Church of Rome shall hereafter deuise whatsoeuer it be for they implicitely beleeued all the faith of the Church and this coyning of new doctrines shall be but vnfolding some part of the Churches faith that was infolded before and so the Fathers shall be iustified to haue beleeued any thing and the Romane Church to haue bin visibly succeeding in them that neuer vnderstood her doctrine Is this then the meaning of the catalogue that so gloriously he displaies and are all those brags shew vs a visible Church in all ages as we do you our faith is no other but what the ancient Doctors held what they held I hold what they taught I teach what they beleeued I beleeue resolued into this poore shift They beleeued as we do at least implicitely Is this the antiquitie of our Romish Church and can her age be painted no better then thus Were so many diuerse points of her faith beleeued by the ancient Church onely infoldly and vpon condition If this Romane Church after 600 or 1000 yeares should vnfold them where then is the visibilitie of these things in the Church of the Fathers and the light thereof that shined so clearly in their daies Zeuxis the painter b Zuing Theat pag. 1201. they say choked him selfe with laughing at the picture of an old woman that he had drawne in a table His owne conceit with beholding the wrinkles and shadowes and lookes he had set vpon her face so affected him that he which had but a little before drawne the beautie and youth of Helena to the admiration of others with a foolish counterfet of old age killed himselfe And I am perswaded that our aduersaries this Replier and his fellows when they behold the picture of this good old wife their mother the Papacie how ridiculously they haue drawne it making her to looke elder then she is by so many hundred yeares and hanging it forth for the counterfet of antiquitie cannot at the least but smile at their owne deuice to thinke how they mocke both others and themselues if they make not others burst with laughter But to quit this deuice of the Fathers holding implicitely that which is not expressed in their writings let my replier consider that they not onely make no mention of the things which we denie but they write that which by all consequence and discourse ouerthrowes them Though therfore we allow them a litle of the implicite faith which God wot they neuer dreamed of it being a deuice of the latter School-men to serue another purpose yet they could not implicitè beleeue any thing which would be opposite to that they mention and hold expresly as those things are opposite which the Replier confesses to be the diuers things they beleeued implicitè and their Church hath now vnfolded against new heresies that are arisen Thus I reason the Fathers held contrary to that which the Church of Rome now holds ergo they beleeued it not implicitly For implicite faith holds nothing that is coÌtrary to that which is explicite Again if they only held implicitely what the Church of Rome now holds and not explicitely hence it followes that the Romane faith in such points cannot be visibly shewed in the Fathers for to be visible and to be onely implicitè are contrary in as much as no man can see or discerne that which is implicite so the Romish faith may be shewed in a catalog of Turks as wel as in a catalog of the Fathers by the Iesuits distinctioÌ CHAP. XLIIII 1. The whole Christian faith deliuered to the Church hath succeeded in all ages yet many corruptions haue sometime bene added How and in what sence the Church may erre 2. A Catalogue assigned of those in whoÌ the Protestants faith alway remained 3. What is required to the reason of successioÌ Pag. 268. A. D. Secondly I said that the ancient Fathers of the Primitiue Church did hold explicitè or
implicitè all points of faith that we hold This will appeare by these ensuing considerations First it is certaine that the Apostles taught the whole corpse of Christian doctrine partly by word partly by writing which as a sacred depositum was commended by S. Paul to S. Timothy and other succeeding Bishops and Pastors of the Church to be maintained alwaies in the Church against all profane innouation of heresies in these words O Timothy keepe the depositum auoiding the profane nouelties of voices oppositions of falsly called knowledge which diuers promising haue erred about the faith The which words * Aduers haer c. 17. Vincentius Lyrinensis expoundeth thus Who saith he at this day hath the place of Timothy but either the whole Church or especially the whole bodie of Prelats who ought themselues to haue the whole knowledge of diuine religion and also to instruct others And a litle after What is meant by this Depositum it is saith he that which is committed to thee not that which is inuented by thee that which thou hast receiued not that which thou hast deuised a thing not of wit but of learning not of priuate vsurpation but of publicke tradition a thing brought to thee not a thing brought forth of thee wherein thou must not be an author but a keeper not an institutor but a secretor not a leader but a follower Keepe the Depositum preserue the talent of the Catholicke faith pure and sincere that which is committed to thee let that remain with thee and that deliuer vnto the people To the same purpose S. Irenaeus saith * l. 3. c. 14. We must not seeke the truth among others which is easie to receiue from the Church when the Apostles haue most fully laid vp all the truth in it as in a rich treasure house Also the same Irenaeus saith * l. 4. c. 43. We must heare and obey those Priests who haue succession from the Apostles who with succession of their Episcopall function haue receiued the Charisma of truth Now supposing that this sacred depositum of the whole corpse of the reuealed truth is preserued in one or other succession of Pastors of one or other companie of Christians called the Church either it must be granted that it was preserued in that succession of Pastors which my catalogue sheweth or else I must require my aduersaries to set forth another catalogue of Pastors vnto whom this sacred depositum was committed and from whom we may receiue it as need shall require For to say that the diuine truth committed to the custody of the Pastors whom God hath appointed to be alwaies in the Church of purpose to preserue men from wauering in faith Eph. 4 v. 13.14 and from being caried about with euery wind of false doctrine did at any time wholy or in part by contrary error faile in them vniuersally in such sort that there should not in all ages be sound one or other company of Pastors and Priests whom we could know still to keep the Depositum inuiolate and entire and whom consequently according to Irenaeus his saying we ought to obey as being men l. 4. â 4. who with succession of their Episcopall function receiued also the Charisma of truth if I say this were so that Gods truth all or in part had explicitè and implicitè perished from the mouth of all knowne Priests and Pastors Gods ordinance it selfe who for the generall good of the Church appointed these Pastors had bin deficient or had failed of the intended effect Eph. 4. v. 13.14 For how should men be preserued from wauering in faith or from being caried about with euery wind of false doctrine by Pastors appointed to be for that purpose vnto the worlds end if in some ages no such Pastors were or were not to be knowne or being knowne to be the Pastors yet did vniuersally faile to preserue the entire formerly receiued truth by beleeuing and teaching and so making the people beleeue contrary errors If this were so the holy Ghost had failed to teach the Church all truth and consequently Christs promise had not bin performed which said that the Spirit of truth shall teach all truth Ioh. 16. v. 13. Some Pastors therefore alwaies are in the Church who without spot or wrinkle of any error in faith shall preserue the entire truth and by the assistance of Christ and his holy Spirit shall be able as need shall require to vnfold and deliuer to the people the same truth thereby to preserue them from falling into error and from wauering in faith 1 THat the Apostles taught the whole bodie of Christian doctrine and commended the same to the succeeding Pastors of the Church to be alway maintained without innouation and that as Vincentius and Irenaeus speake the faithfull people of the Church were to be taught the truth by these Pastors shall be granted for what the Apostles reuealed and deliuered from Iesus Christ the same they intended should be continued for euer in the Church But this proues not that the ancient Fathers of the Primitiue Church held all things that the Church of Rome now holds vnlesse my aduersarie can shew that euery thing holden in the Church of Rome is part of the Bodie of that Christian doctrine which the Apostles commended to their successors For ouer besides the truth reuealed by the Apostles the church of Rome successiuely by degrees in these last 800 years especially hath brought in diuers pernicious and damnable errors and corruptions touching Traditions Transubstantiation Images Iustification the Masse the Popes primacie the worship of Saints innumerable other points wherin we haue forsaken it the which corruptions not belonging to the bodie of Christian doctrine which the Apostles taught but being a disease that bred in the body of the Church must not be said to haue bin the faith of the Fathers who receiued nothing from the Apostles but that doctrine which is contained in the canon of the Bible besides which doctrine if either the Fathers or Pastors of the Church succeeding taught any thing it must be reiected as no part of the DeposituÌ mentioned Thus my answer is plain that the Apostles deliuered to their successors to be preserued against all innouation the whole Christian doctrine but the seuerall articles of the now Romish faith which we haue cast off are no part of that ChristiaÌ doctrine Secondly my aduersarie replies that it was the mind of the Apostles and the ordinance of God not onely that the whole bodie of the truth should be preserued in some successioÌ or other but also that it should be preserued so inuiolate and entire that no contrary error should be taught with it which being supposed he sayes it must be granted that it hath bin so preserued in that succession of Pastors which his Catalogue sheweth because the ProtestaÌts are able to shew no other Pastors His whole discourse affirmes two things the first that the bodie of Christian
doctrine coÌmitted to the Pastors of the church doth not at any time faile either in whole or part but is preserued inuiolate and entire from all errors growing thereto The second that the Protestants can shew no other succession of Pastors whereto this doctrine was committed then is contained in his catalogue Hence he concludes that his now church of Rome holds nothing but what the ancient Fathers held I answer to the second touching the Catalogue that for the first 600 yeares we approue it confessing the Pastors and Christians mentioned therein to haue bin the true Church And for the rest of the ages to this day we will allow the Catalogue with three limitations first that the Pastors and people therein named be confessed to haue kept the faith lesse purely then they of the former ages so that the lower they succeeded the more they were corrupted Secondly that from the 800. yeare specially such Pastours and people be added euery one in their place as misliked and resisted the corruptions of the Church of Rome growing on and vpheld the purer doctrine in such manner as I briefly touched in THE WAY Digress 52 Thirdly that the legend Saints Antichristian Popeâ lying stories and the Popes creatures whose succession we need not be wiped out and the ordinary Pastors liuing in communion with the Church of Rome Greece Armenia and such like though we allow not euery singular and speciall man be supplied Let the Catalogue be reformed and vndertaken in this manner and the Pastors and the people contained therein shall be yeelded to be the same that Christ and his Apostles committed the truth to and in the meane time the Repliar doth but trouble himselfe and seduce his Reader wheÌ he beares him in hand that we desire to shew other Pastors or people besides these all Protestants freely affirming their faith to haue succeeded euen in the Church of Rome it selfe though the errors thereof were no part of their faith but the inuentions of men added thereunto 2 But the first thing affirmed that the Christian doctrine committed to the Pastours of the Church cannot faile in any degree or part thereof but is alway preserued inuiolate and entire from all error is false For albeit it be the commandemeÌt of God and were the desire of the blessed Apostles that it should be so How the Church cannot erre yet as I haue shewed the euent teaches that sometime it falls out otherwise in the same manner that it is Gods ordinance that no man should sinne and yet all men do sinne So that all that can be said of the Church and the Pastors thereof by vertue of the promise is that neither it nor they shall vniuersally all of them at any time faile in the beleefe profession of those truths which are absolutely and simply necessary to saluation though many Pastors and people reputed for the best part of the Church may erre and sometime also persist in ioyning mortall errors with the truth many ages together what time no Pastors or people at all shall appeare to hold the faith so entire but some corruptions not hindering saluation shall be holden therewith the which assertion as it ouerthrowes all the Iesuites discourse in this place so is it true that our Aduersaries grant neither the whole nor any part of the Church to be free from error but so far forth as it followes the Pope who himselfe by their like confession may erre and be deposed for herâsie Beside if Gods ordinance or the Apostles intendiment did warrant the Pastors of the Church that they should not erre at least vniuersally how comes it to passe that euen euery Doctor in his Catalogue from Dyonisius and Ignatius to Stapleton and Bellarmine haue had their errors all his Councels haue had theirs and the most of his Popes haue decreed one against another and there is not one Diuine in all his Catalogue not his dearest Thomas of Aquin but he will confesse him to haue erred yet erre he should not if the prouidence of God were to preserue the Doctors of his Church from all error in the degree that the Replie sayes The truth therefore succeeds continually in the Church without ceasing but first Not alway in all nor in the highest Pastors Secondly Nor alway without corruption Thirdly Nor at all times entire and inuiolate from all error but sometime a vniuersall apostasy may so ouerflow the Church that nothing shall remaine free from error but onely the necessary and fundamentall points of faith the which points do not therefore lose their succession because many corruptions are receiued taught with theÌ much lesse do those corruptions succeed with the truth from the Apostles but the Pastors people thus corrupted shew themselues not to haue kept his couenant who will saue them that haue perseuered in the foundation and be merciful to them that haue erred of inuincible ignorance and forgiue them that haue repented of their errors and damme them whether Pastors or people that with tyranny and contumacy haue maintained the corruptions 3 The Iesuites reasons to proue that the Pastours of the Church cannot erre and that the true faith cannot be corrupted are answered already in THE WAY § 14. A.D. Wherefore if my Aduersaries will deny the catalogue of Pastors Pag. 270. which I haue set downe to be of such as haue alway preserued the foresaid sacred Depositum of the truth entire and inuiolate I require first that they will assigne another Catalogue of such as did continually preserue it whole and without change Also I require that they assigne the first Pastour of my Catalogue which failed in preseruing the truth setting downe âhall the point of doctrine wherein he erred and naming other Pastâââs who resisted and continued to resist Lastly I require that they assigne not as their manner is White digr 51. 52. and as M. White doth such particulars as they may see ordinarily answered and refuted by Catholicke Authors but some plaine instances which neuer were yet nor cannot be answered or refuted Which my demands if they cannot satisfie as I am sure they cannot euery discreet man carefull of his soule will see that it is not safe to forsake this reuerend ranke and orderly succession of knowne Pastours to follow such a phantasticall Platonicall Idaea of an inuisible company of professing Protestants White p. 338. which M. White imagineth to haue alwaies bene as euery other Hereticke might imagine the professors of his sect to haue bene or to run after such a rabble of ragged hereticks as the same M. White assigneth for emineÌt meÌbers of the ProtestaÌt Church White ib. pag. 394. the which neither haue interrupted succession or continuance in time or place nor vniformity in doctrine with the ancient Church or one with another or with the Protestants of his age This foresaid consideration may suffice to let any indifferent man see that the same doctrine of faith which the ancient
Fathers held is holden at this day by Pastors of our Church or at least may stay him from thinking that the same faith is not holden If all that view his foresaid considerations proue indifferent either to the cause or of indifferent iudgement that which is holden this day by the Pastors of the Repliars Church will not be deemed the same doctrine which the ancient Fathers held I say vpon his foresaid considerations it cannoy be deemed so he may haue new considerations or something else in store to stay men and if I meet it it shall be answered but this foresaid is too absurd for first I deny not the Catalogue of Pastors for the first 600 yeares whereof the question in this place is to be of such as preserued the truth inuiolate but affirme those very persons to haue bin the true Pastors of the true Church would my selfe giue them vp for a catalogue of such assigne no other but I require the Repliar to make it manifest against the obiection that they held as their iudgment and professed as their faith those speciall points of Popery that we renounce And let him not reply that they held and professed them at least implicitè but say ingenuously whether they be to be found in their books for example Transubstantiation the sacrifice of the Masse the worship of images the Popes primacy and Monarchy ouer the world The which point not being shewed in his foresaid considerations but directly auoided by a coÌceit of their beleeuing at least implicitè how may an indifferent man see or by staying neuer so long hope to see the Papacy in the Fathers 4 Againe he sayes if his aduersaries will deny the Catalogue of Pastors which he hath set downe to be of such as haue preserued the truth he must require them to assigne another of their owne And Secondly to note the first Pastor in his Catalogue that failed in preseruing the truth And Thirdly in assigning our Catalogue not to assigne such as are ordinarily answered by Catholicke authors but some plaine instances which his demand if it caÌnot be answered as he is sure it cannot then the Repliar concludes euery discreet man may if he will driue out his owne wit to make roome for Ad 1 his To the first all the Papists aliue cannot by good discourse driue vs to assigne a Catalogue it being sufficient to say that no doctrine wants lineall succession that accords with the Scripture neuerthelesse for the first 600 yeares we assigne the Church wherein the Fathers liued and for the rest to this day we will assigne no other Catalogue theÌ the Church of Rome it selfe wherin many of those whom the Repliar hath couched in his Catalogue professed the foundation of the truth that wee Ad 2 maintaine To the second I answered in THE WAY so fully Ad 3 that the Iesuite had no list to reply To the third those particular men whom we name and this blatant beast calls a rabble of ragged heretickes were Gods deare children and better professors of the truth then the reuerend ranke of his Popes and Friars who were and yet are nothing else but the great Antichrist that was prophesied should fit in the Church of God among whom these men and many ordinary Pastors and people of the Church of Rome liuing and holding the foundation of faith and in the agony of their conscience renouncing the damnable heresies of the Papacy it cannot be denied but the Church of Rome it selfe affoords vs a Catalogue sufficient For the Repliar is too simple and deceaues himselfe if he thinke we place the Church onely in Berengarius Wickliffe Husse Ierome the Waldenses and the rest of that sort But we name them as some particular eminent members in the Church of Rome for so we terme all these westerne parts by reason of the Patriarchie lesse corrupted then were many others and vnto them we adde all others in the said Church that held the articles of faith either in solid or in part though it were Occham Gerson Armachanus Cesenas Ardeus Potho Sauanarola or any such for albeit they held many errors yet the truth among their errors was preserued and I affirme that it is sufficient for the succession of the Church and being of the faith if the parts thereof and all the seuerall particulars belonging to saluation can be shewed to haue bene held in any Church albeit no one man in the same or in the world can be shewed to haue holden them all entirely himselfe That * Prot. Apolog. tract 2. c. 2. sect 3.4.5.6 7. our aduersaries may see they do but trifle away the time when they labour so contentiously to shew that Wicklife or Husse or the Albingenses differed in some things from vs no member of the Church in the world being at all times free from euery spot and wrinkle of error CHAP. XLV 1. The Fathers are not against the Protestants but with them 2. Touching the Centuries reiecting of the Fathers The cause of some errors in the Fathers 3. Gregories Faith conuerting England 4. The Papists haue bene formall innouators 5. How they excuse the matter A. D. In which point if he desire to be more fully satisfied Pag. 271. let him reade Iodocus Coccius his Booke intituled Catholicus thesaurus controuersiarum in which he shall see particularly set downe point by point the ancient Fathers with vnanime consent testifying for vs against Protestants The which to be so in many points the Magdeburgians being themselues famous Protestants do likewise testifie who hauing taken great paines in seeking ancient histories and monuments of the Fathers writings to see if they could finde any testimony of authority to countenance their cause are forced at last to acknowledge the ancient Fathers to testifie in many things against them and for vs all which their testimonies they thinke to wipe away with saying that these were the errors or blemishes of these Fathers which is as good a iest as if a guilty person being desirous to cleare himselfe at the barre by the witnesse of honest men and hauing diligently sought and finding that all honest men will beare witnesse against him yet to make a shew wil needs bring in a number of honest substantial men bidding them to giue their verdit of purpose that when they all haue deliuered the truth See the Protestants Apology where these points are haÌdled largely Tract 1 sect 1. deinceps he may forsooth say they all lie or are deceaued This also to be so is shewed in the Protestants Apologie where particularly is proued out of diuerse learned Protestant writers first that the faith we professe is the same that Saint Gregory professed and by Saint Austine the Monke taught vs English men at our first conuersion Secondly that the same faith was vniuersally professed for sundry ages before and namely that it agreed in substance with the first faith to which the Brittans were conuerted in the Apostles
must distinguish for Gregory and Austine no doubt taught many points that were true and wherein we consent with them yea the substance of sauing faith but some things they innouated wherein the Church of Rome now followes them adding to the wordes of wholesome doctrine their owne corrupt opinions the first we graunt was professed before and was the faith of the Brittans at their first conuersion but not the latter And herein appeares the cunning and fraude of our aduersaries that by the testimonies of such as affirme Gregoryes faith in things of the first kind to be Apostolik go about to proue it to be such also in things of the latter kinde The Repliar therefore hath to proue that not the truthes which they taught but the additions which they brought in wherein the Protestants refuse them were the substance of their faith and that whereto our nation was conuerted in the Apostles time Which they can neuer do Thirdly that diuers particular points of the Papists doctrine are acknowledged by learned Protestants to haue bene taught by the ancient Fathers as Vowes Reall presence c. is answered before in the second obiection touching the Centuries And by the D. of Winchester in his booke against Briarly b Prot. App. l. 2. c. 1. inde where the particular instances are examined And if the Repliar and his Author will make good their assertion they must proue that the Fathers with one consent taught these things and withall so meant and expounded them as they are now meant and expounded in the Papacy Let this be done in those points that we refuse and good reason the game be theirs But if these learned Protestants do no more but note the particular corruptions that crept into particular writings and Churches whereby our aduersaries haue taken occasion to increase them they must not be said to acknowledge either that these things were the Catholicke doctrine of the whole Church or that they were intended and beleeued as the Romane Church now beleeues them 4 His fourth and last argument is because forsooth it is not the condition of the Romane Church to inuent or alter any doctrine but humbly and obediently to maintaine what they haue receaued from their predecessors to hate innouation to note reprehend resist all innouation in faith that it cannot be possible there should be any difference betweene the faith of the Fathers and the doctrine of the Church of Rome as the Protestants ignorantly and maliciously obiect And indeed if that part of the Church of Rome which we haue refused I meane the Papacy were the true vniuersall Church he said well for it is against the property of that Church to dissent from any part of the ancient faith as he hath well obserued out of his Gregory and Vincentius but how will he proue that side and faction in the Church of Rome which is charged with innouating and dissenting to be the true Church how shall the reader be assured that these heards of Popes Cardinals Prelats Monkes Friars Iesuites are those faithfull Pastors whose nature is not to innouate when all the world hath discouered them and their doctrine to be nothing else but weedes and excrements arising in the Church Is there not an assertion a Greg. Val. p. 96. tom 3. in the Spaniard quoted that saies By the vnfolded act of faith the same things haue not alway bene beleeued but diuers points in the progresse of time haue bene manifest and beleeued Doth not Austine of Ancona b Sum. de eccl pot q. 59. art 3. say the Pope may make a new Creed multiply the articles of faith and put more points vnder each article then were before This is enough to shew the vntruth of that the Replyar saies for vnder the pretence of the Pope and his Church power to vnfold that which the Fathers and auncient Church beleeued infoldedly and to make new articles they haue altered and innouated all things and their pestilent and palpable heresies are made a part of the old Churches infolded faith and these men being the formallest innouators that euer were yet must be said to dissent from the Fathers in nothing because whatsoeuer they daily inuent and innouate the Fathers held at least implicitely Vnhappie Rome c See Ph. Camerar tom 2. c. 10. whose certen name was neuer publikely knowne and whose certen doctrine to the worlds end can neuer be determined but still it may multiplie and diminish d Solin Poly. hist c. 1. The Gentile Romanes were persuaded the eternitie of Rome should consist in the concealing of the true name thereof and therefore Valerius Soranus was executed because he told the name and our Catholicke Romanes haue placed all their hope of enduring in concealing their faith vnder the veile of infolded faith Hold ye fast to this conceite ye braue Romanists and you may boldly reproch them all with ignorance that deny the consent of your doctrine with the Fathers 5 This obiection the Repliar saw coming for his conscience told him the present Church of Rome had increased that which the Fathers taught and therefore he answers that true it is the Doctors of his Church haue written more largely about diuers points then was done in former times But this was for the confutation of heresies rising and for the more explication of the formerly receaued faith and they haue vsed more significant words then formerly were vsed but yet the sense of such words differs not from the faith and phrases formerly vsed but onely explicate more plainely that which was formerly beleeued by the Church which kinde of explication Vincentius allowes in his golden Treatise But all this is vntrue and is briefely answered the Church of Rome and the D D. therein since the Fathers time haue done more then either the explicating of the ancient faith or giuing new names to old articles They haue innouated diminished corrupted the substance of the articles themselues as I shewed particularly a Dig. 19. 51 in the WAY euen in this very point of transubstantiation And this pretence of vsing more significant words by reason of heresies rising is but a cloke for the treachery the greatest heretickes that arose being themselues and the words deuised being the engines to aduance their heresies the sense whereof hath no agreement with the faith of the Fathers which being too scant for him that would sit as God in the Church of God must be inlarged by dispensations explications determinations new articles fulnesse of power and what not The contents of the Scripture were not enough to hold themselues to that which is expressed therein b Alphons haer v. eccl 3. nâ were to play the foole and to destroy all Christian religion The Pope is like Typhaeus the giant in Nannus c ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Dionys l. 2. pag. 36. that must haue a higher rooffed firmament to walke vnder and bigger starres to giue him light or else he would put
bee in some points which formerly were held as points of faith rather then in the doctrine of the blessed Trinity and Incarnation is because these mysteries are more necessary to be expresly knowne of all sorts then some other points of faith are and consequently men are as they are bound more carefull to get expresse knowledge of them according to the knowne sence expositioÌ of the Church which Church also hath more expresly determined what is to be holden in these points then in some others which although necessary to be beleeued explicitè or implicitè are not so necessary to be expresly knowne of all sorts 1 IF it cannot be denied as the Repliar denies it not but that in the writings of particular men liuing in these latter ages in the Church of Rome and following the Papacy there be found diuers errors contrary to the faith of the ancient Fathers it must be granted that all such must be wiped out of the catalogue because a So the Reply in the former Chapter n. 1. which is p. 269. of his Reply by promise none are to stand there but onely such as kept the doctrine of the Fathers without innouation Which being done the last 600 yeares at the least will be blanke and the Repliar must seeke new names to furnish them for there is not a particular person named froÌ an 1000 to an 1600 in the catalogue which had not diuers errors coÌtrary to the former faith of the Fathers which the Reader without more ado shall know by this that there is not a boke extant that they writ but our aduersaries at this day haue either purged or forbiddeÌ it or else censured reiected diuers things written in it Which needed not if they had bene those succeeding Pastors which alway maintained the corps of Christian doctrine so grauely talked of a little before And that which the Repliar answers satisfies not the obiection For it is true The Catholicke Church builds not her faith vpon priuate Doctors opinions but the Romane Church which the Repliar contends for and whose succession he demonstrates in his catalogue consists in no other but such Doctors that held such priuate opinions and such people as followed them therein or else let him name if he can any one of his Doctors that held not such priuate opinions or any other Church of his that consisted not in these A man may easily see he can neuer winde himselfe out of this straight And let it be granted also that they were ready to renounce these opinions thus holden against the former faith and to submit themselues to the Church yet the former difficulty returns againe for whether they were thus ready or no yet they swarued from the faith of the Fathers no matter with what minde when the Repliar so confidently bills them in his catalogue for such as preserued the whole corps of the reuealed truth without innouation Thereby vndertaking to name such as in all things trod in the steps of the Fathers without any error that should need submission Againe where and in whom was this Church whereto they were so ready to submit themselues who should reforme them when themselues were the Church for example when Gregory the 7. that was Pope in the 10 age Eugenius the 3. and Boniface the 8. in the 12. Vrbanus 6. and Iohn 22. in the 13. Gregory 12. Iohn 23. Eugenius 4. in the 14. age by schisme error and heresie innouated the faith where was their submission to the Church how could it be when themselues were heads of the Church and how was it done when contrariwise they made opposition against all such as admonished them But the third thing he answers that those priuate D D. deliuer not their said opinions as points of faith is false because they are in such points as are now controuerted betweene vs and the Church of Rome which the Repliar I presume will allow to be no other but points of faith 2 This I had to say touching the obiection as the Repliar hath set it downe fraudulently and maimedly whereas if he had proposed it effectually as we obiected all his answer were impertinent For we say that not onely in particular mens writings are found many things contrary to the former faith of the Fathers but in the doctrine of the Church it selfe as it is practised and expounded by such as are deputed thereunto The which I demonstrated throughout my Booke in euery controuersie by alleadging the wordes of the chiefest and most emineÌt writers in the Church of Rome expounding the doctrine holden in the said Church There being indeed very little of their religion but some or other among them so expound it and so teach the Church-meaning therein that it is easie to see the ancient faith to be innouated thereby And I care not though my aduersary begin his answer with a little confidence It seemes M. White hath with great paines raked together all the riffe raffe and odde opinions and spent his time in seeking the sinkes and sweeping together odde sentences of some Catholicke authors c. For his leane and lancke cause had neede of bombast but whosoeuer shall enquire what M. White alleadged shall well perceaue the Popish D D. whom he hath raked together to be the eminentest men that were in the Church of Rome and their doctrine and opinions cited so farre as I haue refused it to be riffe raffe indeed and such as lies in sinkes and sweepings but yet such riffe raffe as the Romish Church it selfe now turned into a sinke of all filthy heresie pestered with the sweepings of all the false doctrine and errors of old heretickes maintaines and offers to the world for sound religion as I haue shewed in the beginning of this booke where the speech of Mic. Bayus the onely instance that the Repliar thought good to make of my charging his Church with priuate Doctors opinions which he will not deny to be part of the riffe raffe and sweepings here mentioned is proued to containe no other matter then is generally holden by others and to be the doctrine of the Church of Rome as certainely as any other that himselfe can assigne to be the doctrine 3 This therefore is it I say that the errors obiected to the Doctors and Schoolemen of the Church of Rome and the manifold absurdities which I haue obserued in them alleadging their wordes in my Booke are a sufficient argument to proue the Church of Rome wherein they liued and whose Pastors they were to hold contrary to the Fathers and to be departed from the Apostolicke faith And all this furniture of wordes to the contrary is but a desperate shift to auoide the inconuenience that followes vpon it For first the vniuersall faith of the Catholicke Church is not discredited by the priuate opinions of particular Authors This I graunt and will yeeld my selfe to be both vaine and shallow witted if the things I haue alleadged out of Popish Authors be
the backe side d In THE WAY §. 38. He said the Protestants were euidently more wicked then in old time e §. 40. And their doctrine such as could not but leade to all loosenesse and liberty all true holinesse was in Rome which was a signe it was the true Church Against this insolency I opposed the digression that seems so much to offend his stomacke against which whatsoeuer he oppose it will be small aduantage to him so long as whatsoeuer he shall say either against our Euangelicall brethren or our primitiue parents will proue but the reports of a Gifford or a Bolseâke or a Cochlaeus that is to say a Knight of the Post one of their one side and our vowed enemie whereas whatsoeuer we produce shall be out of his owne writers and as famous and credible men as any they haue in their Church And the things reported shall touch their crowne and the Top-gallant of their Church 6 M. White therefore grants that he regards not what can be obiected against his brethren vpon this ground because he knowes no more can be obiected then is obiected already and hath so much insight into matters that withouâ either blind zeale or malice or deuising he can vie turnes and obiect againe to better purpose his knowledge in the historie of Popish times and experience of Romish sanctitie being such that he will not exchange it hastily for twise as much as is writteÌ in the Repliars Caluino-Turcismus Briarly against the Protestants And so to come in againe with the Repliar the conclusion shall be the same that is said a THE WAY pag. 347. in my booke quoted in his margent It had not bene possible the Popish D D. should haue spoken so waueringly and vncertainely if that they say in the points of their faith had bene alway vniuersall in the Church when in things alwaies beleeued as the Trinitie and Incarnation they speake resolutely enough And my aduersaries discourse to the contrary is nothing to the purpose For first what varietie of opinions soeuer be among vs and whatsoeuer he can vrge and how little meanes soeuer we haue to take away this varietie that answers not my argument as b THE WAY §. 33. 34. I answered this recrimination to the full in my first writing whither I refer him The second that this varietie of opinions among his D D. is not in matters of faith is denied and answered a little before c N. 1. 4 twise ouer and this is but a tricke put vpon the ignorant that they should not stumble at these innouations and to hide the same from being espied The third that the things wherein their D D. dissent and are not so certaine as they are in the articles of the Trinitie and the Incarnation are not so necessarie to be expresly knowne nor so expresly determined by the Church whereupon men haue not bene so carefull to get this knowledge of them which is the cause why they vary rather in them then in the matter of the Trinitie or Incarnation confesses three things first that the articles of Papistry as Transubstantiation for example is not so necessarie to be knowne as the mysterie of the Trinitie or of the Incarnation Secondly that the Church hath not so expresly determined them Thirdly men are not bound to be so carefull in getting the expresse knowledge of them This is the same that I said They were not therefore so vniuersally receiued in the Church And confirmes my assertion in this place that they are not to be visibly seene and read in the writings of the Doctors of the primitiue Church For being neither necessary to be knowne nor expresly determined nor such as men thought themselues bound to learne how should they write them And if they writ them not it will be but labor lost for the Repliar to go about to proue they beleeued them his implicite beleeuing is too short and then if they beleeued them not downe comes the catalogue and the Church of Rome which I beleeue expresly will proue the seate of Antichrist and mother of heresies thus to maintaine that which the ancient Church neither writ nor read nor yet beleeued CHAP. XLVII 1 Councells haue erred and may erre 2 What manner of Councells they be that the Papists say cannot erre 3 It is confessed that both Councels and Pope may erre A.D. The third obiection Thirdly my Aduersaries may obiect errors to haue bene not onely in priuate Doctors Pag. 277. but also in the decrees of Councells This stale obiection is answered I know not how often by Catholicke authors The summe of the answer is that either the Councels which may be obiected by my Aduersaries were not generall Councels lawfully called continued and confirmed or that which is by my Aduersaries accounted an error either was no error or was not definitiuely concluded the error rather being in my Aduersaries or other whom they haue followed who may either ignorantly account that an error which is none or corruptly cite the words or misinterprete the minde of the Councels alledging that to haue bene defined by this or that Councell which is not So that it pertaineth to my aduersaries if they wil obtaine any thing by this obiectioÌ not onely to say this Councell and the other Councell haue erred but they must proue the Councell whose error they shall obiect to haue bene a generall Councell lawfully called continued and confirmed And that the error is an error in faith and that this error was concluded by the definitiue sentence of the Councell truly cited without corruption and truly interpreted according to the minde of the Councell 1 THat Councels of Bishops may erre is a truth as I noted in a §. 15. n. 6. 44 n. 6. the WAY the Replie denies not for Panormitan b Panorm de elect c. Signif saies In things concerning faith a Councell is aboue the Pope and yet a Councell may erre and sometime hath erred Waldensis c Doctr. sid tom 1. l. 2. c. 19. sayes A particular Church though it were the particular Romane Church is not that Church that cannot erre in faith but the vniuersall Church not as it is assembled in a generall Councell which we haue perceiued sometimes to erre but the Catholicke Church of Christ dispersed ouer all the world from the baptisme of Christ by the Apostles and their successors to these daies is it Dominicus Iacobatius d Iacobat de concil l. 10 art 7. ad â p. 731. sayes A particular Church yea a Councell representing the vniuersall Church may erre But that which we obiect in this place is properly and most especially against the latter Councels holden since the time that the Papacie preuailed in the Church of Rome these last 800 yeares though the same also be true of many holden before For such Councels haue erred and iudged erroniously whose doctrine our Aduersaries ought to giue vs leaue to examine
whether it agree with the faith of the Apostolique Church and not oppresse vs with the name of their Councels And when we shew not onely particular Doctors in the Church of Rome to haue erred but their chiefest Councels also such as were those of Neece Lateran Florence Constance and Trent they are bound to quit them or not to deny our obiection 2 Therefore he grants that some kinde of Councell may erre and haue erred but he denies that Councels which haue bene generall and lawfully called and confirmed by the Pope can erre For this is the new distinction now in fashion Yet the meaning is not that a Councell either generall or called or lawfully called by the Pope himselfe or holden by his Legate is free from error vnlesse the Pope ratifie it vpon which ratification he thinkes all the authoritie of Councels must depend 1. Can. Loc l. 5. c. 4 concl 1. Staple relect controu 6. q. 3. art 4 2 Can. concl 2. Stapl. vbi sup The conclusions of his Doctors are these 1. A generall Councell not assembled nor confirmed by the Popes authoritie may erre in the faith 2. A generall Councell assembled by the Popes authoritie may erre in the faith 3. A generall Councell 3 Can. c. 5. Azor institut to 2. l. 5. c 12. Dom. Bann p. 135. concl 2. 4 Can c. 4. concl 3. Bellar. de Concil l. 2. c. 2. duely called and celebrated by the authority of the Popes Legates but yet not confirmed by the Popes authority may erre 4. A generall Councell confirmed by the Popes authority cannot erre My aduersarie answers by the last of these conclusions and biddes me proue the Councell whose errour is obiected to haue bene lawfully called continued and confirmed But this shall not need at this time because the Councels whose errors we most obiect he will confesse are such as the Pope hath confirmed And though I beleeue neither the calling continuance nor confirmation of Councels depends on the Pope yet will I be so farre from denying these Councels whose errours I obiect to be confirmed by him that I auouch their errours chiefely to haue sprong from his intermedling and vsurped authority ouer the Bishops therein who had lesse erred and more maintained the truth if he had lesse medled The Councels therefore charged with innouating the ancient faith are such as our aduersaries can take no exception to but whether they were generall or nationall called or not called continued or not continued by the Pope the Pope allowes them they being the soundest Councels that he least allowes 3 All the question will be whether the things obiected be errours for he thinkes it can be no errour that the Pope confirmes But he deceaues himselfe if he thinke the Popes authority can free Councels from erring e Papa in casu haeresis est ipso iute priuatuâ Papatu Dom. Iacobat de Concil l. 10. art 7. p. 727 d. who himselfe may erre and be an hereticke the contrary whereof was neuer taught in the Church of Rome till of late time certaine parasites to gratifie the Pope and make their faction strong began to teach it For Waldensis f Wald. vbi sup saies None of these neither a Synod of Bishops nor a common decree in the Church of Rome nor peraduenture a generall Councell of the Fathers of the world is the Catholicke symbolicall Church mentioned in the Creed nor challengeth faith to be giuen vnto it Alphonsus g Adu Haer. l. 1. c. 4. calles them impudent flatterers that ascribe to the Pope the gift of not erring The Vniuersity of Paris alway hath maintained this against the Court of Rome whereof it seemes the prouerbe grew * Dici solet articulos ParisieÌses non transire montes Alph. Ã . Caât l. 1. c. 8. that the articles of Paris go not beyond the Alps. The Cardinall of Florence h Zabar de schism p. 703. edit Basil 1566 saies the Fulnesse of power is in the Pope but yet so that he erres not for if he erre then a Councell hath to do to conuert him wherein the fulnesse of power is as in the foundation Neither can the Pope by his constitution or by any other way make resistance in this point because so the Church should be subuerted And whatsoeuer our aduersaries hold or will graunt the thing it selfe is cleare that he and his Councels haue erred and of a Pastor is turned into an hereticke the greatest that euer was and this we prooue by the Scripture and doctrine of the Primitiue Church in all the controuersies depending betweene vs. Next whether the things obiected be errours or no must be tried by the word of God and iudged by the Catholicke Church and not by the peremptory censure of such as my Replyar is our assertion therefore is that the worship of images for example decreed by the Councell of Neece the communion in one kinde decreed by the Councell of Constance and the seuerall points which wee reiect in the Councels of Lateran Vienna Constance Trent Florence Colen Millan and the rest of that kinde are errours and damnable heresies contrary to the faith of the ancient Church Which assertion we proue by shewing the same points to be against the Scripture first and then repugnant to that which the ancient Fathers with vnanime consent taught and defended in their time Which the Repliar must not thinke to out-face with saying we ignorantly account that an errour which is none or corruptly cite the words or misinterpret the minde of the Councell for we both alleadge the wordes and minde of the Councels truly and challenge nothing in them to be erronious but what is contrary to the word of God and many learned in the Church of Rome confesse to be so as well as we as shall appeare in that which insues touching the second Nicen Councell approued by Pope Adrian and yet accused and refused as erronious in that which Adrian approued by all the Churches of these Westerne parts in another Councell vnder Charles the Great holden at Frankford CHAP. XLVIII Touching the Councels of Neece the Second and Frankeford 2. How the Nicene decreed images to be adored 3. What kinde of Councell it was 4. And what manner of one that of Frankeford was Frankeford condemned the Second Nicen 5. Touching the Booke of Charles the Great and of what credite it is A.D.M. White maketh his faire flourish about the Second Nicen Councell condemned as he endeauoureth to proue by the Councell of Frankeford Pag. 278. Wh. in his Praef to the reader for defining that the same adoration and seruice ought to be giuen to images of Saints which is giuen to the diuine Trinity But first the Nicene Councell which indeed was a generall Councell did not define that images were to be worshipped with honour onely due to God which supposeth that men must accompt images Gods This grosse conceite could neuer haue entred into any Christian mans minde who knoweth
we refuse the church of Rome are nothing else but the corruptions and abuses that came in by the faction of some and were opposed by the sounder part of the Church as they grew and came in CHAP. XLIX 1.2 The ancient Church held the blessed Virgin to haue bene conceiued in sinne 3. The now Church of Rome holds the contrary Pag. 279. A. D. The fourth obiection Fourthly my aduersary M. White obiecteth eight points wherein as he saith the Church holdeth contrary to that which it hath formerly held to wit the conception of the virgin Marie Latin Seruice reading Scriptures Priests marriages Images Supremacie Communion in one kinde Transubstantiation To this I answer here onely briefly and in generall referring the Reader for more particulars to other Catholicke authors who ex professo write of these points First concerning the conception of the blessed virgin Marie it neuer was vniuersally held by the ancient Church as a point of faith that she was conceiued in sinne For if it had bene so held Saint Augustine would neuer haue pronounced so absolutely as he doth that when question is concerning sinne he would haue no mention of the blessed Virgin Neither is it now held by vs as a point of faith that she was not conceiued in sinne this being one of those points in which according to Saint Augustine an erring disputer is to be borne withall in regard the question is not diligently digested nor confirmed by full authoritie of the Church 1 THe Replier in his Treatise that I answered to proue his Romane church Catholicke a In THE WAY §. 46. 47. vsed this reason because it had still professed without change the same faith which hath bene continually since the Apostles without denying any point of doctrine which in former times was vniuersally receiued and bad vs prooue the contrary if we could To this I answered first generally and then in the 49 Digression particularly I obiected the eight points here mentioned shewing that the church of Rome holds therein contrary to that which formerly was holden Now he replies that his answer shall be but briefe and in generall referring the Reader to other Catholicke authors that purposely haue writ of these points But when he made his challenge I supposed he would haue tried them with me himselfe not by referring me to his Catholicke authors whose writings the reader hath no meanes to suruey but by bringing what he thought good out of them and letting the reader see what the issue would be betweene vs. But seeing he durst not put his cause to that kind of triall my answer shall be like his argument That I also referre the Reader to other learned men who ex professo haue answered whatsoeuer his authors haue written of these points And what himselfe hath said I will answer that the reader shall wel perceiue my instances were sufficient to shew that the church of Rome now holds contrary to that which formerly was holden and beleeued 2 First touching the conception of the blessed Virgin he sayes it was neuer vniuersally held by the ancient Church as a point of faith that she was conceiued in sinne nor is it now held in the Church of Rome as a point of faith that she was not conceiued in sinne Let vs make short worke Both these are false First it was held as a point of faith that is to say as a part of the religion and profession of those times that she was conceiued and borne in sinne as all others are This I proue by his owne authors Paulus Cortesius in his writing vpon the Sentences directed to Pope Iulius b 3. d. 4. pag. 65 sayes that one Vincentius produces 260 witnesses affirming her to be conceiued in sinne Cardinall Turrecremata c De consecr d. 4 Firmissimè â 11. affirmes that all the Doctors in a manner hold it and that himselfe had gathered together the testimonies of three hundred to that effect noting the places and words wherein they affirme it Dominicus Bannes d 1 part qu. 1. dub 5. §. Arguitur secundo pag. 89. Venet. sayes It is the generall consent of the holy Doctors that she was conceiued in sinne and yet the contrarie opinion is holden in the Church to be not onely probable but verie godly This is plaine dealing He sayes that which is contrary to the vnanime consent of all the Fathers is now holden by the Church as the more profitable and godly opinion The like is confessed by e Bonan 3. d. 3. art 1. qu. 2. Arimin 2. d. 30. qu. 2. art 1. Capreol 3. d. 3. art 1. Caietan opusc de concept Cano loc l. 7. c. 1. others as fully To f De nat grat c 36. the place alledged out of Austin Gregorius Ariminensis g Art 3. ad 1. answers that he meanes it onely of actuall sinne In which doctrine Saint Austin is not constant neither for he sayes h De perfect iustit cont Celest sub sin elsewhere Whosoeuer he be that thinkes there haue bene or are any man or any men excepting onely the Mediator of God and men to whom the remission of their sinne was not necessarie he goes against the Scripture and the Apostles Romanes 5. And the Fathers mentioning the text of Iohn 2.4 Woman what haue I to do with thee affirme in effect that she was a sinner Saint Austin i Tulit admonitionem Filij expauescat Filij inuentutem de Symb. l. 2. c. 5. sayes Christ admonished her and bids her feare her Sonne Athanasius k ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã orat 4. aduer Arian pag. 281. sayes he checkt her Euthymius l Corripuit eam in Ioh 2. pag. 320. he rebuked her Chrysostome m Asperiora hac verba indignatio hom 20. in Ioh. that he was angrie at her Irenaeus n Repelleni eius intempestinam festinationem l. 3. c. 18. that he repelled her vnseasonable hastinesse Theophylact o ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã in Ioh. 2. that he child her not without cause Few of the ancient Fathers this is the confession p Comm. in Ioh. 2. nu 11. of Maldonat a Iesuite but either openly say or obscurely signifie that there was some fault or error in her They thought therefore she was a sinner actually which could not haue bin if originall sinne which is the fountaine of actuall had not bin in her 3 Next the Church of Rome now holds the contrarie whether as a point of faith or no the reader shall iudge presently 1 Below in the letters First it is holden expresly contrary to that which the Fathers held that she had no originall sinne 2 Can. Bân vbi sup Next I presume no Papist will denie it to be defended in the Church as a godly opinion 3 Suar. tom 2. d. 3 s 6. pro. 1. Vasq 3 d. 1â7 n. 148. Thirdly the Church may define it when she will 4 Vasq
vbi sup Fourthly the Feast of the Conception which imports she was without sinne is celebrated 5 Vasq vbi sup In which regard sayes Vasquez it would seeme verie strange to me if the Church should euer define she was conceiued in sinne when by her authoritie she hath alreadie commaunded the Feast of the Conception in token she was not conceiued in sinne and the common consent of Catholicks both vulgar and Diuines contending for the immaculate conception without sinne Suarez q Vbi sup prop. 4. sayes Sixtus Quartus did much fauour it whose decree the Councell of Trent approues and the whole Church doth vehemently leane to it that now the contrarie can haue either none at all or no firme or euident foundation But the truth is it is fully defined in the Councell of Basill Hitherto r Sess 36. sayes the Councell a difficult question hath bene made touching the Conception of the glorious Virgin We hauing diligently seene and examined the reasons define and declare that the doctrine which teaches her neuer to haue bene actually subiect to sinne but alwayes free from it and from all actuall sinne to be consonant to the religion OF THE CHVRCH AND CATHOLICKE DOCTRINE and that it shall be lawfull for no man hereafter to teach the contrarie moreouer we renew the ordinance made for the celebrating of this holy conception on the 6. of the Ides of December Whereby we see how false it is that it is not held as a point of faith For building themselues vpon this decree and vpon Å¿ Cum Praeexcelsa Graue nimis in extrau comm another of Sixtus Quartus whereto the t Sess 5. §. Declarat tamen Councell of Trent manifestly giues way by confirming the conceit u Almain Clictouae Titlem reported by Vasq Suar. vbi sup the forwarder sort of our aduersaries affirme it resolutely to be a point of faith defined by the Church But whether it be true or no that the faith of their Church is nothing but what this froward generation will confesse to be defined by the Pope by this it is plaine that touching this point the Pastors and Doctors and people of the Romane church differ from antiquitie Vasquez w Communis consensus Catholicorum non solùm imperiti vulgi sed etiam Doctorum Theolâgorum pro immaculata conceptione pugnat Vasq vbi sup sayes expresly Not onely that vnskilfull vulgar but the Doctors and Diuines and all Catholickes with one consent fight for the immaculate conception What immodestie is it now to denie that to be the Churches faith which is thus holden and to say it is not diligently digested that is thus concocted in the conceits not onely of the vulgar but of the Doctors and Diuines and all Catholickes with one consent in the Church of Rome CHAP. L. 1. Touching Seruice and Prayer in an vnknowne language 2. The Text of 1. Cor. 14. expounded and defended against Bellarmine 7. The ancient Church vsed prayer in a knowne language A. D. Secondly touching Latin Seruice although M. White say as it is easie to say that all antiquitie is against vs in this point Pag. 279. White p. 343. yet he will neuer be able to proue solidely that the ancient Church did condemne this our practise The words of the Apostle which he alledgeth proue nothing to the purpose as is shewed by Bellarmine and as for other authors which he citeth they do not disallow this this our practise Bellar. l. 2. de verb. Del. c 16. or account it vnlawfull whereas both by reason and authoritie our authors shew it to be both lawfull and laudable See Bellarmine lib. 2. de verbo Dei cap. 15. 1 THe vse of the Church of Rome to haue the publicke Seruice and Prayers and ministration of Sacraments in an vnknowne tongue is well enough knowne This I affirmed to be against antiquitie and a point wherein they haue altered the faith of the ancient Church And first I alledged the words of Saint Paul then the testimonie and confession of other Ecclesiasticall writers to all which he answers nothing but referres me to Bellarmine In which absurd course if I would imitate him I might also referre him to such as haue answered Bellarmine and the reader that expected to see the thing tried betweene vs should be deluded Neuerthelesse I will doe my best to bring this broode of darknesse to the light and euery thing that I haue said to the triall that the truth may appeare and the shame be theirs that turne their backes 2 First he sayes I will neuer be able soundly to proue that the auncient Church condemned this their practise I answer the Apostle condemnes it in the words a 1. Cor. 14.7 alledged If an instrument of musicke make no distinction in the sound how shall it be knowne what is piped or harped So likewise you vnlesse by the language you vtter words that haue signification how shall it be vnderstood what is spoken for you shall speake in the aire I will pray and sing with the spirit and I will pray and sing with the vnderstanding also Else when thou blessest with the Spirit how shall he that occupies the roome of the vnlearned say Amen at thy giuing of thankes seeing he knowes not what thou sayest I had rather in the Church to speake fiue words with my vnderstanding that I might also instruct others then a thousand words in a strange tongue No enemie that the Church of Rome hath can more fully condemne Seruice in an vnknowne language nor in more effectuall termes speake against it For be requires all that which is done in the Church be it Exhortation Prophecie Singing Expounding or Praying to be done in a language that the people present vnderstands and rebukes the contrary All that the Replier sayes hereto is that Bellarmine hath shewed these words proue nothing Which is his policie to auoide the scanning of them for he knowes all the learned of his side be so deuided in their answer to these words that whatsoeuer he should say would fall out to be contrary to that which others affirme For the auoiding of which inconuenience he referres vs to Bellarmine as if in him we should find a iust answer and full satisfaction But he abuses the Reader as shall plainly appeare by propounding the summe and substance of all that Bellarmine sayes to the place First he sayeth It is certaine the Apostle in a great part of this chapter speakes not of the reading of the Scripture nor concerning the Seruice of the Church but of certaine spirituall exhortations and conferences then vsed Touching this point how true or false soeuer it be I will not greatly stand with him but then it is as certaine that in a great part of this Chapter he speakes of Church-seruice and prayers and of reading the Scripture as well as of spirituall conferences and collations So his patron Gretser that hath lately vndertaken to defend all his
beyond Salomon come to my Court and OVT WITH YOVR PVRSES AND YOV SHALL FINDE DAMNATION TO YOVR SOVLES And f SIMVLTVM STABIT SVPER âOS DIADE RVTILANTE VT TIBI EâFVNDANT ELECTRVM EA PROPT ER RVDES MIGINA MANDENT VIRODERE ET BLACE BLICIAE ALLVDE BâNT TVNC CELIBES ET BLASCONES LVGERE CVâ ROBOAM Bâ BLENONES MIXTOS DORTONIBVS RIDERE CVM IEROBOAM pag. 11. the riddle of Cyril the Monke reported by g Telesph de Cusent l. de magnis tribul Venet. 1516. Telesphorus in his booke of prophecies may be expounded The diuell shall make a Pope with a worme in his head a sort of hungry parasites laughing at his heels CHAP. LV. 1. The Communion in ancient time was ministred to the people in both kinds 2. An innouation in this point in the Church of Rome 3. The pretences vsed against the Cup. A. D. Seuenthly concerning the Communion in one kind I answer Pag. 286. that the practise of the ancient Church it selfe did vse sometimes receiuing in one kind as is shewed by 1 See Greg. de Valent. tom 4. disp 6. q. 8. p. 5. §. 8. 9. Catholicke authors and although it vsed also receiuing in both kinds yet this proueth not that to receiue in one kind is contrary to the law of God but rather that it was by the law of God left indifferent Now in matters left indifferent by the law of God the practise of the Church may be different in different times or places according to the difference of occurring motiues and reasons and all good Which answer may be applied in case M. White shew other differences in the ancient and present Church practise which to shew is altogether impertinent to this our question where we are to see onely whether there be any practise or point of doctrine maintained by the present Church contrary to the law of God or contrary to the doctrine of faith held vniuersally by the ancient Church 1 THe communion in one kind I shewed to be contrary to the practise and doctrine of the ancient Church For a Mat. 26.27 Christ ordained it in both kinds and b 1. Cor. 11.28 commanded the vse of it in both kinds Chrysostome c Hom. 18. in 2. Cor. sayes There is wherein the Priest differs not from the people as in the participation of the sacred mysteries * ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Idem Ieron in Soph. l. sub init where one Body and one Cup is exposed to all alike And innumerable places might be brought out of antiquitie and be added to that which I but briefly toucht in the Digress but it shall not need for I presume no man will denie d Defens lib. de offic pij viri vnder the name of Veran Modest Pacimont p. 138. Cassanders words to be true This vse of our Lords bloud together with his bodie in the ministration hath the institution of Christ and the custome of the whole Church aboue a thousand yeares and of all the East to this day The consideration wherof moues the minds of many men religious and truly Catholicke vehemently to wish and labour that by some generall constitution this so ancient and long continued custome of ministring the Sacraments wholy might be reuolued The Reply answers it was left indifferent by the law of God and therefore the Primitiue Church vsed it also sometimes in one kind as Greg. Valence hath shewed This I denie Gregorie hath raked together all the places he could heare of in antiquitie to giue some colour to ministration in one kind and hath most leudly bestowed his wit to auoid the authorities that shew the contrary but it cannot be proued either that the thing is indifferent or that the Church solemnely in the congregations vsed but one kind as the Church of Rome now doth or that the practise of such particular persons as he pretends was according to the doctrine of the Church which are the things whereupon the true iudgement of this question depends 2 But this it is the B. of Rome and his Church are now growne to that height of presumption that whatsoeuer Christ instituted and practised himselfe and commended to his Church and the Church accordingly practised and taught many generations after him yet by vertue of the chaire and vnder pretence that he hath power to dispence and vary in diuers things any thing may be altered without changing the ancient faith But say good student say directly what reason can be assigned why the vse of the cup should be lesse commanded by Christ then the vse of the bread and why Christ should be thought to haue left the cup indifferent more then the bread The words in the institution sound alike for both the companie to whom he ministred receiued both and were bidden to vse both If the cup be not necessarie because no lay people were among them then by the same argument neither is the bread necessary I will onely vse the testimonie of Cyprian to proue that our Lord left not this mattter mutable or indifferent he a Ep. 68. edit Morel sayes Know ye that we are admonished in offering the cup to keepe the Lords tradition that nothing be done by vs but that which the Lord did for vs that the cup which is offered be offered mingled with wine Here Gregorie * Pag. 1002. A. answers that Cyprian affirmes no more but that when the cup is giuen it must be giuen in the same matter that Christ did not affirming the cup should be giuen to all This that the reader may haue a taste of his doings because the Reply referres me to him is but a tricke for he affirmes both not onely that we must offer it in such matter but that we must offer it For if that which Christ did were the reason why it should be offered in such a matter then is it also a reason why it must be offered And that this was Cyprians mind appeares by b Ep. 54. 63. another text where he and diuers more to the number of fortie Bishops appointed the Communion to be giuen in both kinds to the Christians in persecution giue this reason For how do we teach or prouoke them in the confession of his name to shed their bloud if we denie them the bloud of Christ when they are readie to fight or how shall we make them fit for the cup of martyrdome if we do not first admit them in the Church to drinke the cup of our Lord by the right of communion They thought the cup necessary for such as should shed their bloud for Christ but such are all men and at all times the cup therefore they thought necessary for all Againe all haue right to it it is not therefore indifferent 3 The reasons why the Church of Rome restraines the cup are needfull to be knowne I will take onely them that Tolet c In 1. Ioh. 6. ann 27. confirmed by Suarez Quia vix posset
may define contrary to that they all writ as the B. Virgin not to be conceiued in sin and so they shall beleeue iust that they beleeued not and the direct contrary CHAP. LVII 1 Touching the first coming in of errors into the Church with the persons Time and Place 2 Purgatory and pardons not knowne in the ancient Church nor in the Greeke Church to this day 3 The true reason why the ancient praied for the dead Pag. 287. A. D. To conclude it is not enough for M. White to name these eight or any other points of our doctrine and to say that we hold or practise contrary to the doctrine of the ancient Church but I must require him to set downe the time place persons and other circumstances of this supposed innouation which circumstances are commonly noted in Histories when any such innouation against the vniuersall doctrine of the Church did arise This my demand 1 White Digr 5. pag. 374. M. White who will it seemeth sticke at nothing taketh vpon him to satisfie by naming seauen points of our religion offering to shew the time when and manner how they got into the Church And thereupon first he nameth pardons and purgatory the vse whereof he sayeth came lately into the Church To this I answer first that he nameth not the particular Time Place not Persons that first brought in the vse of pardons and purgatory and so he saieth nothing to the purpose Secondly I answer that our questions is not so much about the vse of pardons and purgatory as whether the doctrine which holdeth purgatory to be and pardons duely vsed to be lawfull came in of late contrary to the former doctrine of the Church Now M. White will neuer be able to shew that that Church did at any time vniuersally beleeue that 2 Concerning praier for the dead which supposeth the beleefe of Purgatory learned Protestants grant it to haue bene general in the Church long before S. Austins time as may be seene in the Protest Apol. tract 1. sect 2. nu 4. purgatory was not or that pardons duely vsed were vnlawfull or that the doctrine concerning the substance of these points was first brought in of late naming the first time place or persons which brought it in contrary to the former faith and shewing who resisted it as an heresie and who continued to resist it 1 HAuing no power to answer the examples I gaue of the Church of Romes now holding contrary to the ancient Church he concludes that it is not enough to name the points or to say they hold contrary to the doctrine of the ancient Church vnlesse I set downe the Time Places Persons and other circumstances of the innouations as Histories vse to note them when any such innouations arises and therefore he must require me to set them downe I answer it is sufficient that I haue shewed the points not to haue bene holden by the ancient Church For if the ancient Church held them not what skills it when or by whom they were brought in when they were brought in since the times of the ancient Church for that which was not at the first is not Catholike but by some at some time was brought in contrary to that which is Catholicke And a THE WAY §. 50. n. 5 6. I haue shewed that there be many confessed changes wherein these circumstances cannot bee shewed Neuerthelesse for example b THE WAY Digr 51. I named him seauen points and the circumstances of Time Place and Persons of their getting in whereof the vse of PARDONS was the first He replies that I haue not named the particular time place nor persons that brought them in and therefore say nothing to the purpose Here let the Reader iudge whether hauing shewed out of the confession of his owne writers that they are not from the Apostles times not expressed in the Scripture or Fathers nor brought to our knowledge by their authority but lately come into the Church this be not enough for what is not from the Apostles times came in since there is the Time when What came in lately was not vsed in the Primitiue Church There is the Time againe what is not mentioned by the Scripture Fathers and ancient Church was deuised by innouators there is the Persons What the Scriptures and Pastors of the Church reueals not that growes vp as cockle and weed in the Church there is the place Let me adde to the rest whom I alledged in the Digression the words of B. Fisher c Art 28 p. 86. b. Pardons therefore began AFTER men had a while trembled at the torments of Purgatory I haue therefore brought euidence sufficient to proue pardons to be an innouation because it proues they were not vsed in the ancient Church nor reuealed by the Apostles 2 He replies that the question is not so much about the VSE of pardons and purgatory as whether the DOCTRINE that holds them came in of late CONTRARY to the doctrine of the Church And I answer againe affirmatiuely that it did For the vse is founded on the doctrine and the doctrine cannot be without vse There was no vse ergo there was no doctrine But M. White will neuer be able to shew that the Church beleeued there was no Purgatory or that pardons were not lawfull This is follie for how should M. White shew the Church condemned that which was not yet in rerum natura no man being able to speake of that which is not in being If pardons therefore were not M. White must be pardoned if he cannot shew how the Church condemned them And touching Purgatory though it be much ancienter yet neither did the Catholicke Church beleeue it There were some in the Church that conceited such a thing and the Fathers began in Saint Austines time but a Non redarguo quia forsitan verum est c. Aug ciuit l. 21. c. 26. see Enchirid. c. 69. and the Apol of the Gre. p. 132. waueringly and without any resolute certainety to mention it but it was not beleeued in their daies as a matter of faith that he which denied it should be an hereticke as it is now beleeued in the Church of Rome Besides the East Church beleeued it not to this day therefore the vniuersall Church beleeued it not Heare their owne words in an Apology written touching this matter b Apol. Graec. p. 119. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã We haue not receaued from our Doctors that there is any such Purgatory or temporary punishment by fire and we know the East Church neuer thought so Heare also what the B. of Rochester c Art 18. p. 86. b. saies No true beleeuer NOW doubts of Purgatory whereof notwithstanding among the ancient there is very litle or no mention at all The Greekes also to this day do not beleeue there is a Purgatory Let whose will reade the commentaries of the ancient Greekes and so farre as I see he shall finde very rare
the Schoolemen But how 6 See the Protest apol tr 1. sect 3. n. 6. false this is the authorities of the Scriptures and auncient Fathers alleadged for this point by our Diuines do abundantly testifie Sixthly he nameth the Masse But he neither nameth nor can truly name the time when the place where or person which since Christ was first Author of the substance of it consisting onely in consecration oblation and consumption of the sacred host As for other additions which he mentioneth they are impertinent in regard they are not any substantiall part of the Masse If he vrge them not as substantiall parts of the Masse but as being in his opinion substantiall errours brought in contrary to the ancient faith I must require him to set downe not onely when and by whom they were added as ceremonies to the Masse but when and by whom they were at first inuented and taught and who did resist and continue to resist them as innouations in faith the which he is neuer able to shew Seuenthly he nameth 7 White p 284. Originall sinne But he doth not nor cannot name the first Author of any thing held about this matter 8 See Iod. Coccius Bellar. de Notis Eccl. c. 6. vniuersally by our Church as a point of faith and therefore he wasteth wordes anh speaketh nothing to the purpose when he rehearseth this or that Doctors opinion in this or any other point Because here onely my question is not about priuate Doctors opinions bu about doctrine of faith vniuersally and authoriratiuely taught by the Church of which kinde my 9 Worton p. 393. White p. 415. aduersaries cannot shew any one point held by vnanime consent of the ancient Church contrarie to that which is holden now by our Church as a point of faith whereas we can and do shew diuers points held in that manner by the ancient Church directly contrary to that which is holden by Protestants as points of their faith 1 THe Reply needes not so often distinguish betweene priuate opinions and the doctrine of faith vniuersally taught by the Church For euery one of the examples giuen in the Digression shew that the Church of Rome now holds against the vniuersall doctrine of the Church in former times Touching the Popes SVPREMACY I said diuers things whereof that concerning Boniface was but one I shewed out of good Authors that in ancient time he had superioritie neither ouer Kings Councels nor Bishops out of the Romane Patriarchie but was in all things like to other Patriarks concerning iurisdiction To all which the Replie saies not a word but onely answers touching Boniface that it is false I say the supremacie began in him But if it be false then his owne authors whom I alledged should haue bene answered For we Protestants make account that when wee prooue that we say by the testimonies of the chiefest of our Aduersaries themselues there is reason we be discharged and our assertion credited But this matter of Bonifaces getting the supremacie of Phocas is so plaine and witnessed so generally by all Histories that it was the desperatest answer that could be made to say it is false I shewed a Digr 27. n. 31. lett m. in another place before that this is the generall report of all Historiographers Anastasius Luitprand P. Diaconus Martinus Polonus Marianus Scotus Otho Frisingensis Rhegino Albo Floriacensis Platina Vrspergensis Sabellicus Nauclerus Duarenus all whose testimonies to denie with one word it is false is a good ready and easie way but it will not so easily remoue the euidence and whereas he addes that the falsehood of my assertion is shewed not onely by Catholicke but by Protestant authors referring the Reader to Briarlies Apologie I must intreate him to mend that fault for there is not one Protestant alledged that denies my assertion or affirmes the Pope had the Primacy before Boniface And indeed but that tyrants are seene by experience to hold fast a man conuersant in antiquitie would wonder how our Aduersaries for shame should auouch this Primacie I shewed in the 27 Digression that the Church gouernment was equally deuided among all the Patriarks and the B. of Rome was confined within his owne limits And restrained from taking appeals out of other countries He had no authority ouer generall councels either to call them or be president or to ouerrule them himselfe acknowledged the name and state of a vniuersall B. to be Antichristian b Euseb de vit Constant l. 2. c. 52. inde l. 3. c. 6.16.62 l. 4. c. 18.36.41 orat ad Sanct. caet post sin l. 4. Socrat l. 5. Proaem Iustin edict de fid orthod in iur graeco tom 1. pag. 521. Nouell 123. Nouel Heraclij Basilij Leonis Nicephori aliorum in iur graecor tom 1. Ausegis statut Ecclesiam Caroli Ludouici Isid cod Leg. Wisigoth l. 2. tit 1. c. 11.29 30. l. 3. tit 4. c vlt. l. 4. tit 5. c. 6. l 5. And the Emperors and Kings of the Catholicke Church did so ordinarily command and prescribe the things belonging to religion that it amaseth me to see it denied And if there were any superiority in those daies of one Patriarke ouer another the Greekes wil as confidently speake for their Patriarke at Constantinople as our Aduersaries do for the Pope and Anna Porphyrogenita in her historie with others a ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã pag. 31. Graecorum plerique à Chalcedonensi Synodo principatum Ecclesiasticum Constantino politanis tributum esse putabant Haesch Not. p. 179. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Leo. Constant Tit. 3. n. 9 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã in inr Graecorom to 2. p. 85. say it expresly My assertion therefore that the beginning of the Popes supremacie ouer other Bishops was in Boniface must stand till the authorities whereuppon it stands be taken away which the breath of a Seminary cannot do 2 Thirdly touching Priests mariage he saies its false that Siritius first restrained it but he that shall reade histories and obserue the course of things shall finde it to be most true And I for my part can iustifie it no otherwise and therefore I alledged fiue authors for that I said all of them Papists whose testimonie if the Replies bare word be enough to infringe I can say no more but thinke it good being a Masse Priest when his bare word shall make that false which is iustified by many witnesses But he saies I may learne by the 2 Councell of Carthage can 2 that Priests were restrained from companie of wiues long before Siritius daies euen by the Apostles themselues I answer the name and canon of this Councell is notably abused First it was not holden before Siritius time but vnder him Secondly the canon alledged cannot be prooued to be a canon of the Councell made by all the B B. but a motion or bill put vp by Aurelius wherein he moues that they which attended on the Sacraments be continent
When I heare Anaxagoras I beleue him then comes Melissus and Parmenides and I know not how I change my minde * Quonsque tandem talia edoceor verum tamen nihil addisco How long shall I thus be taught and yet neuer taught to learne the truth ãâ¦ã Thus he flouted the Philosophers that would say as much to our aduersaries and iustly might for any certainty they haue to rest vpon in any thing they hold against vs. Let them take the Councell that Vigilius gaue such as they are m Contr. Eutych l. 2. p. 555. Seeing both of you are coÌtrary to your selues it s not amisse if both of you yeeld to confesse the truth with vs. You are deuided farre asunder the way you haue left is in the middest Come hither vnto vs one of you this way the other that way and meete together Let the one go into the others opinion so that he leaue not his owne let that which you hold priuately be common among you The contempt of which aduise is it that in all ages hath made hereticks so notorious for their disagreements with themselues that this hath bene obserued for the marke of their heresie They are deuided n Paschas comment in Lament l. 4. c. 4. pag. 74. saith Paschasius one from another through the singularity of their wicked inuentions and are able to agree neither with themselues nor with the Catholicke beleeuers of the Church 6 In the last place I named their doctrine of originall sin affirming that it was not vniuersall in former ages nor is not to this day agreed vpon This proues directly that it is not the same which the Apostles and Primitiue Church taught Because what they taught must be certainely knowne and agreed vpon which this their doctrine is not there being yet no certainety what the point is that the Church of Rome holds touching this matter The Reply answers that I cannot name the first author of any thing which the Church of Rome vniuersally holds touching this matter as a point of faith Meaning belike that the opinion of this or that Doctor may be a late deuise but not that which the Church holds I answer the Church of Rome cannot deny but our first Parents left the effect of their sinne in all mankinde their posterity a Eph. 2.3 whereby they are borne the children of wrath which effect is called originall sinne but what it holds vniuersally as a point of faith touching the nature and forme of this sin the Repliar cannot assigne that when he had assigned it I might try whether I could name the first author thereof or no. But let him giue me any definition of originall sinne holden in his Church whether vniuersally or priuately against that which the Church of England teaches and though possible it may fall out that I cannot name the first author thereof yet I will shew it not to haue bene the Catholicke doctrine of the Primitiue Church whereupon it will follow consequently that it is an alteration wherein the now church of Rome beleeues not as did the Primitiue Church In this varietie of opinions therefore I made choise of Bellarmine as most likely to be that which should be the point of faith and vniuersall and shewed it not to be so but to be a late deuice without antiquitie or vniuersalitie But my aduersary craftily forbearing to name what he holds to be the vniuersall doctrine of his Church and making shew as if Bellarmines opinion were not it bids me name the point of faith holden by his Church vniuersally and then shew the first author Because the question is not about priuate Doctors opinions but about the doctrine of faith vniuersally and authoritatiuely taught by the Church Wherein he deales neither plainly nor directly for if neither the opinion of Bellarmine nor of Catharinus which were all I named holden against vs be that which vniuersally authoritatiuely is taught by his Church he should haue named what it is that I might haue shewed it not to be catholicke 7 The truth is * Tantae est doctorum hominuÌ varietas inconstantia vt vix vlla alia in re maior Peltan de orig pecc p. 80. there is such varietie and inconstancie and shuffling of opinions touching this point of originall sinne that for his life he cannot tell what his Church holds and which is safest to follow which is an vnanswerable argument that the true faith they haue forsaken and minced into lend and absurd opinions The Councell of Trent b Sess 5. speakes warily and reseruedly defining nothing but leauing all sorts to their owne opinion Andradius c Orthod expl l. 3. p. 216. sayes The Councell of Trent when it had defined originall sinne to be sinne truly proper to euery one yet of set purpose forbore to speake of the proper reason thereof the which thing was also done by other Councels long before which delivering no certaine and expresse reason of originall sinne left it free for euery one to follow his opinion Hereupon it is that there are so many opinions 1 Dur. 2. d â0 q. 1. Tap. art 2. p. 69. Cathar tract de orig pec disp 6. p. 150. some hold that it is not sinne properly nor can be imputed by reason it came by the will of another 2 Pigh contro 1. p. 29. Apol. p. 34. inde that it is sinne but not our sinne but that which Adam did whereby he made himselfe and his posteritie sinners 3 Roffâns art 2 p. 29. Altisiod sum p. 97 col 4. Some that it is onely the guilt which lies vpon mankind for Adams sin being thereby excluded from eternall life without the mercie of God 4 Biel. 2. d. 30. q. 2. conc 6. Gre Arim. 2. p. 114. Aureol 2. d. 30. art 2. p. 284. Some that it is a corrupt or diseased qualitie in the soule deriued thereinto by the corruption of the flesh 5 Mag. 2. d. 30. Alexand. quem resert Dionys 2. p. 4â8 col 2. Some that it is the concupiscence that is in vs to euill not euery inclination but that which is in the mind or will 6 Occh. 2. q. vlt. lit v. Scot. 2. d. 3. §. Circa istam Some that it is onely the priuation or destitution of the originall iustice that was in Adam and should be in all men 7 Tho. 12 q. 82. art 3. Bonau quem refert Dionys 2. p. 489 Capreol 2. pag. 495. ad 4. That it is formally the priuation of originall iustice but materially it is concupiscence 8 Sot de nat grat c 9. Azor. sum part 1. p. 287. That it stands wholly in the want or depriuation not of the habit of originall iustice as the sixt opinion affirmes but of that subiection vnto God and vnion of mind with him which all men should haue had if Adam had not transgressed Which of all these is that which the Replier
calls the vniuersall doctrine of the Church authoritatiuely taught I cannot define nor himselfe determine when all these haue bene and yet are holden in his Church and haue their patrons who will all of them maintaine that his owne opinion is the doctrine of the Church This therefore is it I said that had their doctrine touching originall sin bin the truth anciently taught in the Apostles Church it could not haue bene thus often changed and remoued from opinion to opinion till the opinions be multiplied to as many as there be Doctors 8 And this example shewes how friuolous the common answer is that their differences are not in points of faith but in by-matters not determined wherein it is lawfull to hold any part For this difference is in a point defined though not by any Popish councell yet by the word of God or whether it be defined or no it is in a matter wherein they hold against vs bearing men in hand that they can shew catalogues and whole companies in all ages that held therein with them FOR WE DO NOT SO MVCH CARE TO SHEW THEIR DIVISIONS TO BE IN THE SVBSTANCE OF THEIR FAITH albeit they haue infinite such AS TO MAKE CLEARE DEMONSTRATION THAT THEY AGREE IN NOTHING WHICH THEY HOLD AGAINST THE PROTESTANTS The which kind of disagreement is sufficient to shew the things we haue refused in their Church to be matters broacht and brought in which neuer had the generall approbation of the Church That wherewith he concludes we can shew diuers points of the Protestants faith directly contrary to the ancient Church is a stale vntruth already sufficiently confuted in euery passage He can referre vs to his Coccius and Bellarmine but himselfe I thinke can shew little of his owne knowledge being one of them whom not knowledge but rumour and popularitie haue carried to the Popes side CHAP. LIX Obiections against the outward succession of the Pope 1. Touching Peters being at Rome 2. His pastorall office what it was 3. Whether there be any diuine authoritie for the Popes succession 4. Not certaine what Popes haue succeeded one another 5. Vacancies diuers in the Sea of Rome 6. The storie of the woman Pope of what credit 7. 8. The Pope hath bene an hereticke and erred è Cathedra 10. The Pope succeeds by Simonie and violence Such succession is a nullitie by his owne law 11. The Pharisees in Moses chaire how A. D. defends the succession of an ASSE 12. Many Popes at once 13. Vrbanus his crueltie toward the Cardinals 13. What the Protestants say touching the succession of the Church of Rome A.D. The fifth obiection Lastly Pag. 289. my aduersaries may obiect against the Romane succession which in this Catalogue I mention FIRST that it is not certaine that euer S. Peter was at Rome SECONDLY that we haue no diuine but onely humane proofe that the Bishop of Rome White pag. 416 Pag. 418. pag 419. pag. 421. rather then he of Antioch is S. Peters successor THIRDLY admitting that S. Peter had one to succeed him in Rome it is not certaine who this was which succeeded him and who afterward succeeded one another FOVRTHLY the Sea hath bene voide a good while together FIFTLY a woman was once Pope SIXTLY diuers Popes haue bene hereticks SEVENTHLY some haue entred into the Popedome by simonie and violence c. EIGHTLY there haue bene 30 schismes and therefore it is vncertaine who was the right Pope To the FIRST I answer that so many ancient * See the Fathers cited for this point in the Rhem. Test annot Rom. 16 Fathers do witnes and so many monuments yet remaining do testifie that S. Peter was at Rome and died there that it is great ignorance and impudencie to denie it 1 THe obiections here mentioned the first excepted I proposed Digress 53. and they clearely shew that the outward succession of Bishops in the Romane Church is neither so entire nor perfect as is pretended Our aduersaries neuer haue done with vrging the lineall succession of their Popes froÌ S. Peter to this day making it a signe of the Church and concluding from it that they alone are the Bishops and Pastors of the world which haue preserued the truth from all corruption and innouation Which outward succession in some degree the Protestants denie not onely they affirme two things against it that the same is to be found in other Churches as well as in the Church of Rome and that it hath bene so tainted and interrupted with defects of all sorts that it can proue nothing against vs but rather shewes manifestly that the ancient faith and gouernment commended by Christ to his Church hath bene changed as will appeare by viewing the seuerall things that are obiected 2 To the first he answers that so many ancient Fathers and monuments yet remaining testifie S. Peter to haue bene at Rome and died there that it is ignorance and impudencie to denie it He affirmes three things First that we denie Peter to haue bene at Rome This is vntrue Let the writings of our a D. Fulk answ to the Rhem. Rom. 16. nu 4. D. Rainol conser c. 6. diuis 3. D. Whitak controu 4. â 3. c. â Iun. contr 3. l. 2. c. 5. Diuines be viewed and they denie it not but the vttermost they say is that the reasons and testimonies brought out of antiquity whereupon his being there is grounded are vncertaine and may sensibly be dissolued If b Whose demonstrations that Peter was neuer at Rome are printed by Illyricus with his boke called Refut inuectiu Bruni printed at Basil an 1566. by Oporin Velenus or some speciall men with him haue brought the matter in question it was free for them so to do and almost necessarie for the bolting out of the truth all things in antiquitie touching the same being perplexed with such difficulties that it were able to make any man misdoubt it Yet the Protestants are not curious and the Church of Rome gaines not a straw by it Secondly that the ancient Fathers testifie he was at Rome This I grant but yet all the Papists liuing cannot reconcile their testimonies nor maintaine either that he came thither in such a time or stayed there so long as is reported The which consideration hath mooued as learned Papists themselues as euer were any to doubt of his being there at all if my aduersarie thinke them so impudent that do it Marsilius Patauinus * Marsil defens Pacis part 2. c. 16. printed at Basil in fol. saies that by the Scripture it cannot be conuinced either that he was Bishop of Rome or euer was at Rome at all And then considering the Ecclesiasticall histories that affirme it he so doth it that it plainely appeares he beleeued them not Whence it followes that his being there was a common opinion but not certaine forsomuch as it was grounded on no surer testimonie then these circumstances of Time were The first that saies he sate
presume to attaine faith without vsing the meanes Secondly to helpe such as despaire when they either know not that there is such a meanes or vnderstand not what in particular it is To take away presumption and desperation he layes downe this conclusion touching the rule of faith the which when he afterward defines to be his Romane Church speaking by the mouth of the Pope you may perceaue what a ready way he takes to keepe men from Presumption and Desperation 2 But whatsoeuer his intent were he sayes I grant him 4. things which is in a manner as much as he desires First that there is such a rule left Secondly that by this rule we may be infallibly instructed what is to be holden for true faith Thirdly that the cause why men misse the truth is because they either finde it not or obey it not Fourthly this rule is of such nature that it is able to direct al men yea the simplest and vnlearnedst aliue The which I granted him then and by these presents do grant againe vpon condition he will not be proud of that I giue him without any vantage to his purpose as if he had obtained some great boone but hold him to my grant mannerly and incroach no further For I gaue him warning that if he meant such a rule as all men at all times may haue accesse vnto as being concealed from none but visible and reuealed or manifest to all places ages and persons I would not grant it him for the reasons there expressed the which my exception in this place he calles vnorderly running before the Hare and in his next Section answers by expounding himselfe that he did not meane it should be actually manifest but onely such as * Doth he meane I maâuell in his Potentia remota whereof pag. 165. below c. 26. might be knowne but I ranne not before the Hare for I hunted a Foxe that was closely stealing to the wood in which game good Fox-hunters say it is not against the law to crosse the way and marke his headding For his head is to the wood in euery conclusion aiming at nothing but to traine by degrees such as follow him into his visible Church and the Popes authority ruling therein and therefore I distinguisht the diuers sences of his words being acquainted before with old Reinard Gregory of Valence in whose steppes I saw the Reply to tread and shewed which was true and which false that there might be no ambiguity And although he answer that I mistake him when I thought his meaning was this rule should be manifest and actually knowne to all yet I am not satisfied for though I giue him leaue to expound himselfe and accept his exposition yet what I suspected necessarily followes still of that he saies afterward as I then obserued for g Treat c. 10. in the WAIE §. 13. he defines the teaching of the Church to be the rule and this Church he maintaines to be such as not onely is of it nature visible and such as may be seene but h Treat c. 12. in the WAIE §. 18. inde manifest and actually knowne to all places ages and persons in the world And it followes manifestly of that if you say that sometime the Church could not be knowne nor be a meanes whereby the true faith might be knowne then men liuing at such time should want the meanes and so it were not vniuersally true that God would haue all men saued and come to the knowledge of his truth He that saies the Church is the Rule and such a rule as all men vniuersally may at all times know meanes that the rule is manifest and actually knowne to all this meaning he disclaimes and I am satisfied with it yet it followes violently vpon his owne wordes 3 Thirdly from the 4. things I graunt he gathers 3. things more First that No man must presume or once hope to attaine to true faith without finding and following the rule thereof ordained by God Secondly that No man neede to despaire though he be neuer so vnlearned or simple but by seeking finding and follwing this rule he may be sufficiently instructed in faith Thirdly that it concernes euery one careful of his saluation to seek follow this rule for his instruction in the faith which is necessary to saluation These three I likewise yeeld him though they be not that which he principally almes at to encourage him because it will be some little honesty for him when his friends reade his booke to shew them what materiall points he hath extorted from M. White but the gift is not great my aduersary will returne the whole 7. backe againe in exchange for one single one that I can name him CHAP. XXV The text of 1. Tim. 2.4 God willes all men to be saued c. expounded The diuers expositions that are giuen of those wordes Gods antecedent will as they call it is not his will formally The antecedent consequent will of God expounded diuers wayes A.D. § 1. Concerning the meaning of the Apostles wordes Pag. 145. GOD WIL ALL MEN TO BE SAVED c. First it is certaine that the meaning of the Apostles words is not that God hath an absolute effectuall will and decree to saue euery man or to bring euery man in particular to the knowledge of the truth or to the knowledge of that âââdiate rule and meanes which he hath ordained to instruct men in faith This is euident because if there were any such absolute and effectuall will and decree in God then since his will is alwaies fulfilled all should effectually be saued or should actually come to the knowledge of the truth or at least to the knowledge of that Rule and meanes which God hath ordained to instruct men in faith which euident experience telleth vs not to be true By which my assertion M. White may see how much he mistaketh when he thinkes me to meane that the Rule and Meanes ordained by God is not onely as I speake visible that is such as may be assigned and knowne White pag. 9. but also manifested as M. White speaketh that is such as is actually knowne to all places ages and persons in the world Secondly whereas there are diuers expositions of these wordes of the Apostle giuen by good authors the chiefe question betwixt me and my aduersaries is about the exposition of S. Damascen S. Thomas and many other learned Diuines who hold that the Apostle saying that God will all men to be saued meaneth that God hath an Antecedent will to saue euery man although considering the sinnes of men he he hath a consequent will to condemne some This exposition my Aduersaries mislike either in their ignorance because they do not vnderstand it aright or for that they adhere to some part of Caluines error about Praedestination with which it cannot stand Wherefore to instruct their ignorance in this point and to deliuer them or at least others
those things that are written in the Scriptures or to bring in any thing that is not written Of images Epiphanius e Ep. ad Ioh. Ierosol sayes It is against the authority of the Scripture that the image of a man should hang in the Church And * ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the making of statues resembling the images of the dead he calls an idolatrous and a diuellish practise And speaking of worshipping the image of the blessed Virgin which now is so commonly seene painted and attired f Pingitur cincinnis exculta vestibus ornatissimis pompa adeo inani structa vt illi etiam vniones ab auribus pendeant quod nemo possit sine stomacho aspicere Paleot de imag pag. 253. in the fashion like a Lady yea g Vestientes dominam nostram Magdalenam alias sanctas ornamentis profanis vanis ac meretricijs quibus etiam pudicae matronae sese vestire vererentur Nauar manual c. 11. n. 23. like a Curtisan and keeps such a court at Lauretto in the same place where h Leand. Albert descript Ital. in Picen pag. 428. sometime Iuno kept hers he addes that thereby men are drawne a whoring from God the body of Mary being holy but not God and shee an honorable Virgin but not giuen to be adored but her selfe adoring him that shee bare in her wombe Of the Supremacy which now the Pope vses ouer all other Bishops Gregorie who in his third argument the Repliar sayeth professed his religion i Lib 6. ep 30. sayes he will confidently auouch him to be the forerunner of Antichrist whosoeuer he be that desires to be called vniuersall Bishop proudly preferring himselfe before others Of images of the Trinity Gregory the second k ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Epist ad Leo. Isaur Imp. sayes they may not be made Of Purgatory it is cleare that the Greeke Church neuer beleeued it So saith Nilus l ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Nil de purgat p. 118. l. 1. Our Fathers neuer taught vs Purgatory neither did the Easterne Church euer beleeue it Roffensis m Artic. 18. No man now doubts of Purgatory and yet among the ancient there is little or no mention made of it yea the Greekes to this day beleeue it not and the Latins haue not with one consent conceiued the truth of this thing For the beleefe of Purgatory was not so needfull for the Primitiue Church as now it is Of the number of Sacraments which n Trid. conc sess 7. can 1. our Aduersaries will needs haue to be seauen Cassander o Consult art 13. §. de numero sacram sayes we do not reade the other Sacraments confirmation matrimony orders penance vnction by those ancient writers to be coÌprehended in any certaine number nor shall you hastily find any before Peter Lumbard that determined any certaine or definite number of them Of the peoples receiuing the cup in the Sacrament p ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã c. CleÌ const p 145. Venet. the constitutions of Clemens say Let the whole Laity in order with feare and reuerence receiue the cup. By which few examples the Reader may discerne how vntrue it is that Coccius hath particularly set downe point by point the ancient Fathers with vnanime consent against the Protestants who hath brought nothing out of them to that purpose which is not clearely and sufficiently answered by * Jn the most waighty controuersies he is answered by M. Perkins in his Problema our Diuines in euery controuersie 2 His second argument is the testimony of those that writ the Centuries Who being themselues famous Protestants testifie this to be so in many points This argument was obiected in q THE WAY §. 44 Digr 47. his Treatise and fully answered and therfore should not haue bene repeated againe before my answer had bene auoided Yet a little I will satisfie him First if the Magdeburgenses acknowledge the Fathers in many points to be for the Papists which they no where do yet that is not all the Fathers with vnanime consent point by point in all points Some particular Fathers the Repliar knowes well enough speake that which hath no vnanime consent of the rest and their priuate opinions may giue colour to many things and yet will not reach from point to point Next it is false that is here reported of the Centuries They testifie no more but what they thought that Fathers held corruptly and themselues iudged to be errors and blemishes in their writings There is no Romish writer at this day but he doth the same Baronius in his Annals purposely intended against the Centuries hath not left one Father or one ancient history vncensured but still charges it with some error and blemish or other But my Aduersary sayes the things which the Centuries say were blemishes in the Fathers are such points as the Church of Rome now holds whereby it should seeme that in many things they testifie with the Church of Rome against the Protestants I answer first that in some points as the diligentest that are may sometime ouersee and now and then they mistake and call that the opinion or the error of a Father that is not This kind of ouersight we perceiue and pardon in our Aduersaries themselues Secondly diuers things noted by them for errors in the Fathers are not holden by the Church of Rome but are censured also by our Aduersaries themselues as well as by the Centuries Thirdly diuers points in particular Fathers are taxed which belong to that which is now holden in the Church of Rome but this iustifies not the Papists first because in such points there is no vnanime consent of all the Fathers or all the Church but onely the vnsetled and ambulatory opinions of some priuate Doctors Next what these Doctors deliuered touching such points is holden otherwise and to other intents and purposes now in the Church of Rome as their praying for the dead which the Centuries iustly note for a blemish was not with opinion of Purgatory as now it is in Rome Thirdly the mystery of iniquity began to worke in the primitiue Church whereby the fathers themselues though Bishops of the Church and most holy men yet but men sometime were deceiued and brought into error in some things thus it is written of Papias r Baron an 118 n. 2. 6. a Bishop of great authority in the Church and famous for the holines of his life that by misunderstanding Å¿ Apoc. 20.4 a Text in the reuelation t Prateol elench haeret l. 3. n. 17. Hiero. de scripto c. 18. he gaue occasion of the millenary heresie afterward condemned in the Church yet his credite and estimation was such that many great men followed him Nepos Irenaeus Victorinus Tertullian Lactantius Apollinarius Coracion and diuers others For being a man as u ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Euseb hist eccle l. 3. c. vlt. Eusebius sayes