OF THE AL-SVFFICIENT EXTERNAL PROPOSER OF MATTERS OF FAITH DEVIDED INTO TVVO BOOKES IN THE FIRST Is proued that the true Church of God is the Al-sufficient external Proposer of matters of Faith IN THE SECOND Is shewed the manifold vncertanities of Protestants concerning the scripture and how scripture is or is not an entire Rule of Faith By C. R. Doctor of Diuinitie 1. Timothe 4. The Church of the liuing God the pillar and ground of truthe At PARIS M. DC LIII THE PREFACE to the Reader 1. NAtural reason gentle Twoe waies to learn truthe Reader teacheth vs that what we can not know by ourselues we should learne by authoritie of others and according as their authoritie is vndoubted or probable toyeeld assured or probable assent therto and the same reason teacheth vs also that as the See infra l. 2. c. 8. sect 1. clear sight of God in heauen is supernatural to vs and far aboue the reach of our reason so is also the right way therto Wherfore as S. Devâ—â—l â—redendi 〈◊〉 16. 8. 17. Augustin rightly sayeth if God wil haue men come to him in heauen he must needs haue instituted some authoritie on earth for to direct them assuredlie in the right way becaus by reason we cannot finde way to heauen known by authoritie out that way Which authoritie must be infallible because otherwise it could not assuredlie direct vs as also becaus it is to direct vs by diuine faith which is altogether infallible And herein is Gods goodnes to be admired that he would bring men to heauen rather by authoritie and faith then by knowledg and reason becaus euerie one can beleeue but not euerie one konw hard matters And in al that is hitherto saied Catholiks and Protestants generally agree The controuersie between them is in whome God hath setled this assured authoritie for to direct and guide vs infallibly in our way to heauen 2. For Catholiks say that as God Authoritie setled in men at the first set this authoritie in his Prophets and Apostles so becaus they were not to liue with vs for euer he continueth it in his Church which he hath made his spouse the mother and mistres of the faithful the pillar and ground of truth his mistical body wherof Christ is head and the Holy Ghost the Soule who is to teach her all truth and in whose heart is alwaies Gods Word beleued in her mouth his word preached and in her hands his word written But Protestants becaus they can shew no Church before Luther who taught in substance the same waie to heauen which they doe as I haue otherwere Lib. 2. de Authore Protestâ— Ecclesia shewed by their own plaine and manifold confessions are forced to denie that God hath setled this infallible authoritie in his Church for to direct vs and guide vs infalliblie to heauen and doe grant her no more authoritie in matters of faith then a whâ—tat Cont. 1. q. 5. c. 20. l. 1. dâ— script 144. l. 2. p. 254. â—71 l 3. p. 435. mere humane enen in the b Laude sec 16. n. 26. 61. most fundamental points of al. Naie some of them saïe she hath c whitat Cont. 1. q. 3 c. 3. l. 1. de script p. 153. l. 2. p. 235. Caluin Actor 15 v. 28. See infra l. 2. c. 10. sec 2. and l. 1. c. 2. §. 8. no authoritie at al in matters of faith So they abase the authoritie or rather take awaie al authoritie in matters of faith from their Mother and Mistres in faith from the spouse of Christ from the pillar and ground of truth from her whose head Christ is and whose soule is the Holie Ghost who teacheth her al truth And this The roote of al heresie is the true roote of al heresies not to beleue that the true Church of God the pillar an t ground of truth whome the Holie Ghost teacheth al truth is an infaillible guide apointed by God to direct vs assuredly to heauen For euerie one would follow her none would oppose her whome they confess to be an infallible Guide 3. Protestants grant euerie one of the Prophets or Apostles to haue been infallible in matters of faith and yet cannot shew so mainie nor so plaine testimonies of Scripture for their infallibilitie as we can shew for the infallibilitie of the Church But al infallibilitie in matter of faith they wil put in the scripture as vsually al d Tâ—rtul dâ— prâ—wr c 15. Hilar l. ad Constant. August epâ—s 222. Hâ—eron in Galat. 〈◊〉 Sed infrâ— l. 2. c. 14. seq heretiks did because they wil vnderstand that as thy please and so indeed put al infallibilitie in themselues though nether scripture saith that itselfe is infallible nor was it written for aboue 2000. yeares before Moyses nor was it in al places or times when and where infallible faith was nor itself can shew the way to heauen to them that cannot read it nor sheweth that which Protestants account the most fundamental point of faith or al other points so clearly as it neede no interpreter See infra l. 2. c. 4. see 2. as we shal hear Protestants themselues confess 4. And can any reasonable man perswade himself that God hath setled al infallible authoritie forto direct men assuredly to heauen in that which he conffessth God neuer saied is infallible nor it was in al times or places where and when men were infallibly guided in their way to heauen which cannot by it self guide the greatest part of men which teacheth them not the most necessaire point of al nor al points so clearly as it need not some interpreter and yet say they withal God hath not giuen vs any infallible interpreter I add also that who follow it for their onlie guide in matters of faith haue no constancie nor vnitie in faith nor yet any hope of vnitie Is such â e See infra l. 1. c. 8. n. 6. one mens onelie assured guide to heauen 5. We produce the express word of God that his true Church is the pillar and ground of truthe and that the holie Ghost teacheth her al truth let Protestants produce the like express word of God that the book called scripture is the pillar and ground of truth and that it teacheth al truth You must saieth f Cont. Pra. â—eam l. 11. Tertullian proue as clearly as I doe Bring á proof like to mine And S. Augustin Read as plaine words as these are which we read to you Doe l. de vnis c. 6. 14. not bring vs your consequences or inferences of which we may â—ay with S. Augustin g Serm. 14. de verb. Apost This is a humane argument not diuine authoritie h See iâ—fra l. 25. 3. sâ—c 1. Protestants vse to say that al things necessarie to be beleued are expresly in scripture and need no inference and that faith relieth not on argument but on authoritie let
p. 408. Faith surely relieth vpon Authoritie-Authoritie is the foundation of faith And p. ibid. principium credende ab externa authoritate pendet 509. To beleue sâ—me Authoritie is necessarie nor can anie thing be beleued without Authoritie And l. 1. p. 50. That thou saiest our faith relieth vpon testmonies not vpon arguments I grant Laude Relat. sec 38. p. 345. We doe not beleue one article of faith by fallible authoritie of humane deductions And heereupon they define diuine faith to be an Assent to diuine reuelations vpon the authoritie of the reuealer And hence it followeth that Protestants cannot beleue either Melancthoâ— in proediâ—amento qualitaâ—is â—hillingw c. 11. p. 35. Protestâ—nts can haue no formal faith of theyr bibles The Bible to be the word of God or Their copies thereof to be incorrupt for anie light they conceaue to be in them or for the maiestie or stile of them or for the excellencie of the matter becaus none of these is anie formal Authoritie or veracitie but they are qualities of the word of God which qualities may cause Knowledg or opinion accordingly as they are certain or only probable signs of Gods word but cannot cause formal faith And that Protestants haue not formal faith of the scripture they seem some times to confess For thus laude Relat. Protestant last resolution is into arguments sect 1â— p. 83. 84. 85. 101. He that beleues â—esolues his last and full assent Tâ—at the scripture is of diuine authoritie into internal arguments found in the letter it self Loe Protestants last resolution is not into authoritie but into arguments And Pottersec 5. p. 8. That the scripture is of diuine authoritie the beleuer seeth â—y that glorious beam of diuine light * Laudep 8â— 114. 115. 118. 121. 123. 3â—0 which shines in scripture and by manie internal arguments found in the letter it selfe Whitaker lib. 1. de script p. 15. We beleue for the truth of the thing which is taught or for the diuinitie of the doctrine it self So also pag. 56. 88. Which is in effect to confess that they do not formally beleue but know or as Potter speaketh see that the bible is of diuine authoritie because their assurance that the bible is of diuine authoritie is not lastly resolued into authoritie but into arguments taken out of scripture or into the lighâ—e the diuinitie or truth of the doctrin in it whereas faith is not lastly resolued into arguments or truth or light but Fides est non apparentium Heb. 11. into authoritie nor is discursiue but is a simple assent of things not appearing for authoritie 3. The third ground is that only diuine Authoritie or veracitie can be anie true formal obiect or formal cause of diuine faith This likewise is euident For humane or fallible authoritie is not sufficient to cause diuine and infallible faith Becaus the authoritie for which we beleue must be at least as sure as our beleef like as the premises for which we know the conclusion must be as sure as the conclusion And no c See infra 12. c. 8. sâ—c 〈◊〉 authoritie but diuine can be so sure as diuine faith is which implieth contradiction to be false And this Protestants confess For thus Whitaker l. 3. de scriptura p. †sic etiam p. 509. 415. Such as the doctrin and religion is which we profess heauenly and diuine such also must the reason and authoritie of beleuing be And p. 392. Our faith must rely vpon an externall infallible means And l. 1. p. 166. The effect doth not surpass the cause Potter sect 5. p. 40. diuine faith must haue a diuine foundation And Chillingw c. 2. n. 154. None can build an infallible faith vpon motiues that are not infallible as it were a great and heauie burden vpon a foundation that hath not strength proportionable And the same saieth laude sec 16. n. 5. sec 33 p. 248. Potter sec 5. p. 7. Field l. 4. of the Church c. 2. and others And hence we inferre that the authoritie or testimonie of the church in matters of faith is diuine becaus as we shal d See infrâ— c. 15. n. 6. proue and Protestants sometimes confess it is a true cause of diuine faith 4. The fourth ground is that for the authoritie of Gods church to be diuine it need not rely vpon immediat reuelation from God but his special and effectuall assistance wil suffice thereto First becaus it cannot be proued that immediat reuelation is absolutely necessarie Secondly it were derogatorie to Gods omnipotencie as if he could not make anie infallible but in one manner Thirdly becaus S. e c. 1. v 3. f Lâ—ude sec 16. p. 91. Luke professeth that what he wrote was by hear-say of such as had conuersed with Christ Fourthly becaus Protestants some times confess that such and so great assistance of Christ and of the holie Ghost as is purposely giuen to that effect is enough to make the authoritie of anie companie of men diuine and infallible 5 The fist ground is that an authoritie Authoritie truly â—â—n ne is a sufficient external cause of diuine faith diuinely infallible may be a sufficient external formal cause of diuine faith subordinat to Gods authoritie which is the principal formal cause thereof This is certain For what greater certaintie or infallibilitie can diuine faith require in its external and subordinat cause then to be truly diuine Becaus al diuine authoritie effectually assisted by God to tell nothing but truth neuer lieth as diuine faith is neuer fals and therefore is a sufficient foundation external and subordinat to Gods authoritie on which diuine faith may rely 6. The sixt ground is that veritie Verities distinct from veraâ—itie or authoritie is distinct from Authoritie and veracitie For veritie is the material object of faith and that which faith beleueth Authoritie or veracitie is the formal obiect or that for which faith beleueth veritie Wherefore veritie cannot be beleued for it self both because it hath not of it self the formal cause of beleef which is Authoritie or veracitie as also becaus that veritie which faith beleueth hath not of it self any motiue to procure assent because it is vnseen and vnapparent in it self and Formal Authoritie or veracitâ—e is noâ— in words or writings onely is apparent in Authoritie 7. The seauenth ground is that though veritie can be in words or writings as in signs thereof yet Authoritie or verâ—citie which is the formal cause of beleuing veritie cannot be in words or in writings taken by themselues For Authoritie is in some Author and veracitie in one that is verax and euerie Author or veraâ— is some intellectual person who vttereth veritie and who for his authoritie or veracitie deserueth and causeth beleef of that The formal cause of faith is the authoritie of the reuealer veritie which he vttereth Besides diuine faith as al dogrant is beleef of some diuine truth reuealed
327. The testimonie of the church of it self is wholy and meerly humane And l. 1. p. 112. The authoritie of the matters of the church is of no moment p. 16. An Protestants deny all authoritie of the Church in matters of faith argument taken from the bare testimonie of the Cburch to confirme anie point of faith is fond vnfit and vnforcible to perswade l. 3. p. 482. The testimonie of the church vnles it be strengthned by scripture is not worth a farthing in matters of faith And l. 2. p. 235. The Church hath no authoritie in matters of faith but all is Gods alone And ibid. In matters of faith and engendring faith the Church hath no authoritie at all And to this blasphemous denial of the churches authoritie in matters of faith m See infra c. 16. n. 5. Chillingworth addeth that no certain Church vniuersal or particular is infallible euen in fundamental points but onely that there shal be always some vncertain men who shal hold al the fundamental points 3. The ninth ground is that as the Apostles may be considered as they were so manie honest men and â—o no doubt theyr authoritie was but humane or as Apostles diuinely assisted in matters of faith and so their authoritie was diuine as Protestants confess infra c. 4. so the church of God may be considered as so manie honest and vertuous men and so doubtles her authoritie is but humane and fallible or as she is the Church of God the pillar and ground of truth guided by Christ her head and effectually assisted by the holie Ghost and so we say her authoritie in matters of faith is diuine and infallible though not in that high degree as the Apostles was But Protestans when they say that the authoritie of the Church is but humane in matters of faith consider her only as she is such men wherein they proceed as if speaking of a man they should consider only his bodie not thinking of his head or Soule For the true church The church is a misticall bodie whereof Christ is the head and the holie Ghost the soule of Christ is a misticall bodie whereof Christ is the head and the holie Ghost the soule and in matters of faith is guided by this head and effectually assisted by this soule according to Christs manifest and expresse promise as we shall see heereafter and therefore in such matters hath diuine and infallible authoritie from hersaid head and soule And what maruel that a bodie whereof Christ is head and the holie Ghost the soule hath truly diuine authoritie that is be truely and effectually assisted by its diuine head and soule to propose nothing as of faith but what is truth And Vvhat iâ— meant by diuine authoritie of the Church to be thus truly and effectually diuinely assisted is all the diuine authoritie which we attribute to the church and is both sufficient and necessarie for the ends for which God appointed her as we shall see presently 10. The tenth ground are the ends The end for which God gaue diuine infallibilitie to his church for which God gaue diuine infallibilitie to his Church and her Pastors which if they be well considered wil clearly shew that he hath giuen her and them diuine infallibilitie in matters of faith For he hath made his church the pillar and ground of diuine truth 1. Timoth. 3. which she cannot be without diuine infallibilitie in diuine truth And becaus he made her pillar and ground not of a part of diuine truth but simply of diuine truth and that fundamental points are but a part of diuine truth and the least part too he made her diuinely infallible not onely in fundamental points but in all points which he would haue be beleued with diuine faith And this our Sauiour expressed more fully when he said to his Apostles that he would send them the holie Ghost for to teach them all Ioâ—n 14. §. 16 Matt. 16. things all truth Likewise because Christ hath made his church so firme and strong as the gates of hel cannot preuail against her and that euerie sinful error in any point of faith is formal haeresie and a * gate Greg. in psal 5. pâ—niâ— Portae inferi hâ—reses sunt of hel destructiue of the church as I shewed parte 1. l. 2. c. 6. therefore he hath giuen his church diuine infallibilitie in all matters of faith for to resist any haeresie in what point of faith soeuer And in like manner because God hath made the Pastors Ends for which God gaue diuine infallibilitie to the Pastors of his church the external cause and his instrument and means of engendring diuine infallible faith Rom. 10. he hath giuen them diuine infallibilitie in all matters of faith because no inferior infallibilitie would suffice as I shewed n. 3. And likewise because he hath made them his instruments and means not to engender a parte of faith as fundamental points are but all faith becaus the Apostle saith not how shall they beleue funâ—amental points without hearing a preacher but simply how shall shey beleue he hath giuen them diuine authoritie and infallibilitie for all points which â—e are to beleue And in like sort because God hath giuen Pastors and Doctors not Ephes c. 4. only for the fouÌ„datioÌ„ of the bodie of Christ or for the making of Saints but also for the edification or building of Christs bodie and câ—nsummation or perfection of Saints vnto a perfect man and that fundamental points cannot doe all this but not fundamental points as they are true points of diuine faith so they are necessarie to the building of Christs bodie and Not fundamental points are of the perfection of faith consummation of his Saints vnto a perfect man therefore he hath giuen them diuine authoritie and infallibilitie euen in not fundamental points And the Apostle though no doubt he had taught the Thessalonians al fundamental points yet he desired to add those things which he said were wanting to their faith which 1. Thessal c. 3. was to consummat or perfect theyr faith And as far as the edification of Christs bodie and consummation of faith extendeth so far extendeth the Pastors diuine infallibilitie which is giuen to them for this end 11. And hence riseth the eleuenth ground which is that seing n Caluin 4. Instit. c. 〈◊〉 § 3. c 2. §. 1. c. 8. Vvitaker Contr. 2 q 4. c 2 â—otter sess Ep. 22. Protestants forced by the euidencie of truth doe confesse that the Church is infallible in necessarie points of faith if they would grant that she is infallible as well in points necessarie to anie men as in points necessarie to all men and in points as wel necessarie by reason of the formal cause of beleef which is diuine reuelation sufficiently proposed though they be not necessarie by reason of their matter which is to be beleued though by reason also of that they be necessarie to the
better being of faith or perfection and consummation of Saints and as well in points necessarie to the well being or perfection of faith as simply to the being thereof they should not differ from vs about what points the church is infallible For we doe not say that she is infallible in points which are not necessarie to any nor necessarie in any sorte to the being or wel being or Stapâ—et Contr. 4. q. 2. not 7. Ad Eâ—â—lesiae infâ—l ibilitatem in docendo satis â—st vt sit in fallibilis in substantiâ fidet publico dogma te rebus ad salutem nocessarijs Et ad 4. argumentum iâ—faâ—libilâ—tas docentis Eccâ—efiae pont tur tantum in rebus ad salutem necessaris The like saith Bellarm l 4. de Pont. c. 5. Canus l. 5 c. 5. Patribus Synodi Spiritus 〈◊〉 non est praesens in omnibus sedinrebus solùm ad salutem necessarijs perfection of Christian faith as manie scholastical subtilties are as Stapleton professeth Contr. 4. q. 2. notab 7. For as in natural things God giueth not superfluities but only what is necessarie to the being or perfection of them so nether in supernatural matters But as he is not defectiue in natural things for necessaries ether for their simply being or their perfection so much lesse is he defectiue in supernatural matters according as these are of more importance then those and more regarded of him And Protestants by saying that God hath made his Church infallible only in things necessarie to all men and necessarie to her verie being make him les liberal in supernatural matters then in natural Besides o See infra 〈◊〉 6. n. 1. Chillingw c. 2. p. 54. saieth that the scripture can end all controuersies touching things necessarie and verie profitable And ib. p. 98. What one of the Euangelists hath more then an other is only profitable and not necessarie And if God hath giuen diuine infallibilitie to the scripture and Euangelists not only for necessarie points but also for such as are profitable why should we thinke that he hath not giuen to his Church the like infallibilitie not onely for simply necessarie points but also for profitable as all are which make to the edification of Christs bodie and consummation of saints vnto a perfect man as all true points Morton â—om 1. Apologa l. 2. c. 9 Quasi â—erè nou fit fidei dogma quod piriâ—us S. omnibus eredendum propinauis of faith doe For who can denie that all true points of faith reuealed clearly by God are of the integritie and perfection of faith and are profitable for vs to beleue otherwise to what end were they so reuealed And if God reuealed them clearly he would haue them beleued and if beleued he would appoint on earth some infallible authoritie to propose them which not being in the scripture must needs be in the church I ad also How al pointâ— of faith are necessarie that though al points of faith be not simply necessarie by reason of the matter which is to be beleued they al are simply necessarie by reason of the formal cause which is diuine reuelation sufficiently proposed for that is simply necessarie to be beleued in whatsoeuer it proposeth How the principal and the instrument are â—one and how different 12. The twelft ground is that as the principal agent and the instrument are but one entire cause in Kinde to witt efficient but in order and degree are far different Different causes to witt Principal and Instrumental so the authoritie of God and of the Apostles in matters of faith were one and the same entire cause of diuine faith to witt formal but in order and degree were twoe and far different for the one was principal the other ministerial one increate the other create one absolutely necessarie the other not absolutely necessarie the one sufficient of it self to beget diuine faith the other not sufficient of it self And this vnitie betwixt the authoritie of God and of the Apostles our Sauiour expressed when he said Luke c. 10. Who heareth you heareth me which could not be true vnles he and his Apostles were in some sort one and the same speaker as the king and his Embassadour are And this same Protestants sometymes confess For thus Caluin in Ioan. 20. v. 21. He bids the Apostles succeed into the same function which he had of his father he imposeth on them the same person he giueth them the same right Christ communicateth with his Apostles the same authoritie which he had of his father Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 3. c. 5. The Apostles did consigne the Canon not as men but as the person of God And lib. 1. de script p. 61. Becaus Christ left earth he gaue his office to preachers And pa. 71. I denie not that Pastors doe in some sort bear the person of God And the distinction also between these twoe authorities Christ expressed when he said Ioan. 16. The holie Ghost shal bear witnes of me and yee also shal bear witnes In which words he expresseth two witnesses ad twoe testimonies And the same did the Apostles when they said Act. c. 15. It hath seemed to the holie Ghost and to vs to lay no other burden vpon you but these where they express twoe imposers of the same burden the holie Ghost and themselues and twoe authorities of imposing it one of the holie Ghost the other of themselues For they could not impose that burden without they had authoritie distinct from the authoritie of the holie Ghost though not separate from it And the same for vnitie and distinction of the authoritie of the holie Ghost and of the Church I say of the Church that the authoritie of God and of his Church is one and the same in kinde The entire formal cause of faith in ordinarie course see infra c. 11. n. 1. of causing diuine faith but far different in credit and degree of causing it though in ordinarie course neuer separated For in ordinarie course the entire formal cause of diuine faith is Gods and his churches authoritie togeither or God speaking by his Church And the Churches authoritie being one entire cause of diuine faith with Gods authoritie her authoritie must needs be in matters of faith diuine and infallible for a fallible authoritie cannot be one cause in kinde of beleef with an infallible authoritie but a quite different kinde of cause And if these grounds be compared with the grounds of Protestants for which they limit the infallibilitie of Gods Church to onely fundamental points and to mere humane infallibilitie they will appeare yet more firme and solid For theyr grounds are not founded vpon any ends of the Church expressed in scripture as these are but founded onely vpon their own ends which are only to delude the texts of Scripture which attribute infallibilitie to the Church in al points of faith by saying that they are meant of fundamental points onely
and partly to defend themselues from the authoritie of the Church in points wherein they oppose her by saying that her authoritie in anie points what soeuer is but human and fallible also in such points as they oppose her p See Chillingw c. 3. p. 146. 172. c. 2. p. 86 laude sect 16. p 93. 91. 231. Some say that the Church is efficaciter or efficaciously assisted by God in fundamental points and therefore is infallible in them but is only merely The Church is assisted efficaciously in â—l points of faith sufficiently assisted in not fundamental points and therefore fallible in them But besids that this distinction of Gods efficacious and sufficient assistance in this matter is new and therefore iustly suspected as naught it is also voluntarie without sufficient ground and therefore irrational Besids it granteth that the Church is diuinely infallible in fundamental points For to be diuinely infallible is no more but to be diuinely assisted efficaciously more ouer it maketh the Churches authoritie euen in fundamental points to be vncertain For if she be fallible in not fundamental points of faith clearely reuealed for such al true points of faith are and points but obscurely and darkely reuealed are but matters of opinion how shal we be certain that she is not fallible in fundameÌ„tal points seing not fundamental points if they be points of faith are as clearly reuealed as the fundamental as S. Augustin saieth of the scripture that if it lie in any point it may be suspected in al. It maketh also the Churches infallibilitie vnuseful to vs becaus none know which are al the fundamental points necessarie to be actually beleued of euerie one which not To omit that there are no vnfundamental points of faith in the Protestants sense but al true points of faith are fundamental to the verie being of sauing faith and to be beleued actually if they be sufficiently proposed or virtually though they be not so proposed And to omit also that meer sufficient assistance which is neuer efficient Sufficient neuer efficient iâ— vain were vain becaus as Philosophers say that power is vain which is neuer reduced to act and is such a power as is no where els to be found and also that fully sufficient and not efficacious implie contradiction For though fully sufficient assistance may be not efficient for want of our cooperation Not distinct from efficacious or coÌ„curse yet it is alwayes efficacious becaus efficacious as it is distinct from efficient is no more but what hath ful power or vertue to worke and such is that which is sufficient But whether there be anie difference betwixt sufficient and efficacious assistance or none God hath really and effectually made his Church the pillar and ground of truth and so strong that the gates of hel shal not preuail against her and therefore he hath giuen her efficacious or effectual assistance in al points of faith and so hath made her diuinely infallible in al such points For as Chillingw c. 3. p. 145. saieth wel The Apostles could not be the Churches foundations without freedome from error in al those things which they deliuered constantly as certain reuealed truthes So I say the Church could not be the pillar and ground of truth without freedome from error in al things she deliuereth as points of diuine truth 13. And out of these grounds first we may clearly see that the true Church of God is diuinely infallible in all points which she proposeth to be beleued with diuine faith Secondly we may easily answer al the obiections of Protestants to the contrarie Thirdly we may see what litle cause Laude had sec 16. p. 91. to make such a wonder that Catholicks should say that the present true Church of God is diuinely infallible in al matters of faith seing by diuinely infallible they mean no more then diuinely assisted efficaciously to propose nothing to be beleued but what is truth But rather we Iust wonder that the Churche of Christ should not be diuinely infallible may wonder that rational Christians wil deny her to be diuinely infallible or which is alone diuinely assisted efficaciously whom they cannot deny to be the mother of the faithfull the spouse of Christ whose head is Christ and whose soule is the holie Ghost who teacheth her al things and al truth who is the pillar and ground of truth and against whom the verie gates of hel shal not preuail Is not such a one diuinely assisted efficaciously And whome themselues confess to be infallible in fundamental points For can she be humanely Vvhitaker cont 1. q. 3. c. 11. l. 3. descript p. 19 laude Relat. sect 16. p. 65. infallible in such high matters 14. Some Protestants vrge vs much to tel whether the authoritie or infallibilitie of the Church in matters of faith be meerly diuine or no. To whom I answer that if by diuine they mean diuine in it self as hauing How the testâ—monie of the Church is diuine and now not anie diuinitie in it self we say it is not diuine meerly nor at al for it is a create authoritie as was also the authoritie of the Prophets and Apostles but if by diuine they mean diuinely instituted and diuinely assisted efficaciously not to err in matters of faith it is meâ—rly diuine it is infallible meerly by Gods efficacious assistance and not by any natural knowledg or industrie of the Church Though she must vse humane industrie as was vsed in the Councel of the Apostles Act. 15. Lastely it is wel to be noted that when we say we beleue for Gods authoritie or veracitie we mean not therby that we beleue becaus God doth efficiently cause our beleef namely by lightining our vnderstanding or stirring vp our wil to beleue becaus Gods authoritie or veracitie is no efficient cause of our beleef but onely à formal cause therof and also becaus he is in like sorte efficient cause of our hope or Charitie as he is of our beleef and yet he is not cause of them by his authoritie but our meaning is that we beleue not for anie thing which God worketh in vs but for his authoritie or veracitie which is in himselfe And therfore they say noâ— Canuâ— l 2. c. 4. Vvhitaker l. 1. descript p. 23. wel who say we beleue becaus we are moued therto by special instinct from God or that our faith is lastely resolued into such special internal instinct For such special instinct can not be anie formal cause of our beleef but onely an efficient cause therof and faith is not lastly resolued into anie efficient cause but onely into some formal besids that instinct is peculiar to him in whome it is wheras the motiue or reason of Catholik faith is common to al who haue such faith more ouer it is not euident credible by it self that such special instinct is from God and faith is to be resolued into some cause which is euidently credible as is the
Apostles words to the particular Church of Ephesus is not sufficient both becaus the pronoune Thou Which is their Ground is not in the Greek text which alone Protestants account c See infra l. 2 c. 9. sect 2. authentical as also becaus S. Timothe conuersed in the vniuersal Church as euerie citizen conuerseth in the cittie though he liue not in euerie parte therof d Iunius l. 3. de eccles c. 14. â—liâ—nsis Respons-ad Bellarm c. 14. Others therfore distinguish the word pillar and saie that the Church is not the pillar on which diuine truth relieth but such a pillar as truth is put vpon to be read as in old time Edicts were put vpon pillars to be read This shift also is new not found in anie ancieÌ„t author nor grouÌ„ded in anie word of the text nay plainly contrarie to the meaning therof For the Church is saied to be such a pillar as Ground is and Ground is not to laie truth or Edicts vpon but to vphold things And so plain it is that the Church is here called a pillar of truth becaus it vpholdeth it amongst men as Caluin vpon this place saieth Becaus in Contr. 3. q. 5. c. 2. Fundamentum sustinet e dificium Reinolds Confer p. 557. respect of men she susteineth truth Whitaker contr 2. q. 4. c. 2. She is like to a pillar in this that as a pillar doth sustâ—in the whole building and make it more firme so the Church doth sustein and vphold truth And ibid. q. 1. c. 13. It belongeth to a pillar to sustein others in truth Nether do these men who grant the Church to be such a pillar as susteineth truth amongst men differ from Catholiks about the Churches susteining truth amongst men but about the manner how she doth sustein it to wit whether by onely preaching truth as they would or by preaching and by her authoritie also of testifying as Catholiks teach For a pillar and ground is to be relied on But to this purpose al is one by what meanes she susteins infallible truth For if she sustein infallible truth by teaching it she must be infallible in teaching it Beside if truth be alwaies tied to the Church she is alwaies infallible 4. Others distinguish the word d Moulins cont Peron c. 13. Chilling c. 3. p. 177. Vsheâ—â— Reionder p. 25. Is and say that the Apostles meaning is not that the Church is the pillar of truth but oâ—ely that she ought to be or it is the dutie of the Church to be the pillar of truth This exposition is as the former new and voluntarie and therfore a plain shift to delude the text and contrarie to the Apostles words who saieth not what is the dutie of the Church or what she ought to be but what she is Nether could it be her dutie to vphold truth if she were not made infallible For it were impossible for her to performe it e Vvhitaker contr 2. q. 4. c. 2. Others therfore distinguish the word Truth into necessarie and not necessarie and grant that the Church is the pillar and ground of al necessarie truth But as I haue said and must often say albeit onely the principal articles of faith be necessarie to diuine faith and saluation by reason of the matter which is to be beleued yet al articles of faith are also necessarie by reason of the formal cause for which they are to be beleued which is diuine reuelation sufficiently proposed and which is most necessarie to diuine faith and which is denied if anie article of faith be not beleued I add also that al articles of faith euen by reason of the matter which they conteine are necessarie to the better being of faith and of the faithful or as the Apostle speaketh to the consummation of Saints Seing therfore al articles of faith be two waies necessarie there is no reason to limit the Apostles speech to anie certaine articles especially when as Morton saieth in his Grand Imposture c. 2. sec 6. It is the law of allawes Non Rule not to distinguish See Gerlaâ—hius tom 2. dâ—sput 24. distinguendum vbi lex non distinguit Which he repeateth ibid. c. 13. and tom 2. Apol. l. 2. c. 22. Moreouer seeing none knoweth precisely which points are fundamental or absolutly necessarie to be actually beleued of euerie one which not it were to no purpose for vs that the Church were infallible in fundamental points only becaus we know not which are al the fundamental points and notknowing which they are we caÌ„not know in which points of faith the Church is infallible in which not And then what good would her Infallibilitie which is giuen to her for our good doe to vs I add also that Protestants are not â—See part 1. l. 1. c. 7. constant whether the Church be infalliblein fundameÌ„tal points or no. And that if indeed the Church were infallible in fundamental points her authoritie as I saied before were in such points diuine and we might giue her authoritie as a iust secondarie cause of our beleuing them and in them relie on her authoritie as vpon a sure pillar or ground of faith both which Protestants The Churches preaching a â—â—â—se of faith denie 5. Our second proof of the Infallibilitie of the Church in al points of faith shal be taken from that in scripture her preaching is saied to be a cause and that necessarie in or dinarie course of diuine and infallible faith Rom. 10. v. 14. How shal they beleue whome they haue not heard And how shal they heare with out a preacher How shal they preach vnles they be sent Therfore faith is of hearing In which words the Churches preaching is made a cause and that necessarie in ordinarie course of infallible faith and faith is saied to be of hearing her preaching the word of God Wherfore thus I argue in forme The necessarie cause in ordinarie course of infallible faith is infallible The Churches preaching is the necessarie cause in ordinarie course of infallible faith Therfore her preaching is infallible The Maior is euident becaus a humane and fallible cause cannot produce a diuine and infallible effect And g See sup n. 2. as Whitaker l. 1. de scrip p. 166. The effect doth not surpass the cause And less can it be a necessarie cause therof becaus what is fallible cannot be necessarie for what is fallible maie faile and what is necessarie to faith cannot faile Besides al grant that the extraordinarie cause of infallible faith by the preaching of the Apostles and Prophets was infallible as we shewed in the fourth Chapter n. 5. and why not also the ordinarie cause by the preaching of the Church seeing the end of both preachings is the same to wit infallible faith For if ordinarie fallible aâ—thoritie in the Church can cause infallible faith what need had God to giue infallible authoritie to the Prophets and Apostles for that end The minor to wit that the Churches preaching
no firme or solid foundation of my beleef in anie thing Nor likewise no firme or solid Rule 6. Fiftly they grant that the voice Cause of diuine faith authoritie or testimonie of the Church is a true cause of diuine faith Whitaker l. 1. de Scriptura p. 118. The Church is Mother of beleuers P. 121. The Church by preaching the Gospel begot vs to Christ P. 175. I denie not that the voice of the Church is an instrumental cause of beleuing l. 3. c. 441. I exclude not the testimonie of the Church from a cause of beleuing if by cause you mean an instrument P. 442. Thou tellest what kinde of instrument the Church is to wit not dumb or dead but in which is its proper motion and vertue And who denieth this or knoweth not the necessitie or vertue of this instrument Ibid. p. 425. The Church is Mistress of faith Item faith is the effect of the Churches testimonie And contr 2. q. 5. c. 19. The Church maketh faithful by preaching of the word And l. 1. de Scrip. p. 145. out of both testimonies Spirit and Church faith is in some sort inflamed and burneth Contr. 1. q. 3. c. 3. God reuealeth truth by the Church c. 11. We confess God speaketh by the God speaketh by the Church Church And generally al Protestants confess that the Church is the Mother of the faithful and a mother is a true cause of her Children And if the Church be the mother of the faithful doe beget the faithful if her voice her testimonie be an instrumental cause of diuine faith if she haue a proper vertue in producing faith if diuine faith be the effect of her testimonie and by her preaching she make faithful Surely If the effect be diuine the cause is diuine she hath a diuine power or vertue For as Whitaker confesseth l. 1. de Scripturâ p. 166. The effect surpasseth not the cause and l. 3. § 415. Such as the doctrin and religion is which we professâ— such also must the cause and authoritie of beleuing be So also Potter sec 5. p. 7. Field of the Church l. 4. c. 2 Chillingworth c. 2. n 154. c. 3. n. 33. But the effect of the Church is truly diuine to wit diuine faith Therfore also her testimonie and is truly diuine And indeed how can we diuinely and infallibly beleue for a humane and fallible testimonie How can diuine faith be the effect of a humane testimonie SIXTEENTH CHAPTER That Protestants doe diuers vvaies grant that the Authoritie or Testimonie of the Church is a formal cause of diuine faith 1. THis followeth first out of that they granted the authoritie of the Church in matters of Sâ—p c. 15. n. 2. faith to be diuine For doubtles if it be diuine it may be some formal cause of diuine faith Nay they think as is before shewed that if it be diuine it may be the vltimate formal cause of diuine faith But otherwise they grant it also For first they confess that the cause why they beleue the Scripture is the authoritie of the Church Whitaker l. 2. de Scriptura p. 320. I grant indeed that the Ratio credendâ— est propâ—er quam credimus Vvhitaker l. 3. de Scrip. p 442. 459. Scripture is to be receaued becaus 〈◊〉 is receaued of the Church P. 312. Al Christians are moued by the authoritie of the Church to beleue the Gospel Cont. 1. q. 3. c. 9. Al these Fathers what other thing doe they proue then that the Gospel is to be receaued becaus it hath alwaies been receaued of the Church and some books to be reiected becaus the Church alwaies Becaus reiected them This we most willingly grant Ibid. sec 5. p. 322. we beleue them For. to be canonical not for the onelie testimonie or authoritie of the By. Church to beleue these books to be canonical And ibid. c. 1. This way seems For. tolerable that Scripture is diuine in it self but not acknowledged for such but for the testimonie of the Church Laude Relat. sec 15. p. 57. T is not denied that this baptisme of Infants is an Apostolical Therfore tradition and therfore to be beleued Chillingworth c. 2. p. 73. we must receaue the sacred canons vpon Vpon the credit of Gods Church Ibid. we wil Becaus say with Athanasius That onely fowr Gospels are to be receaued becaus the Canons of the holie Catholik Church vnderstand of al ages since the perfection of the Canons haue so determined Ibid. p. 62. We beleue the Scripture vpon Vpon the credibilitie of vniuersal tradition And c. 3. p. 140. We haue sufficient certaintie From. of Scripture from vniuersal tradition And what can those causal particles Becaus By For Vpon From Therfore in this matter signifie but a formal cause of beleef 2. Hooker l. 2. § 4. There is some pause wheron to rest our assurance of Pause to rest assurance or the Scripture beside the Scripture and some other thing which may assure vs. And this pause wheron to rest our assurance and which can assure vs of the Scripture he saieth l. 5. § 8. is the authoritie of the Church And what is that which is a pause wheron we rest the assurance of our beleef but some formal cause of our beleef Laude Relat. sec 16. p. 119. The credit of the Scripture to be diuine Main ground hath three main grounds The first is the tradition of the Church And is not that which is a main ground of beleef some formal cause of beleef And sec 38. p. 344. we relie vpon the infallible authoritie of the word of God and Relie vpon the whole Catholik Church And is not that some formal cause of beleef vpon which we relie as we doe vpon the word of God Couel art 4. p. Doubtless it is a tolerable opinion in the Church of Rome that the Scriptures are holie and diuine in themselues but so esteemed of vs for the authoritie of the Church And is not that For. for which we esteem the Scriptures to be diuine some formal cause of our esteem of them The like hath Whitaker contr 1. q. 3. c. 1. who also l. 1. de Script p. 23. saieth That the question between him and D. Stapleton was whether we are to beleue For. the Scripture to be diuine onely for the testimonie of the Church or rather for the inward persuasion of the holie Ghost The same he saieth contr 1. q. 3. c. 1. Wherin he plainly supposeth that we are to beleue the Scripture to be diuine for the authoritie of the Church and onely denieth that we are to beleue so for it alone Which al Catholiks also denie And contr 1. q. 3. c. 3. saieth Manie beleued Christ for the testimonie of Ihon. And c. 5. p. 322. we beleue them to be canonical not onely for the authoritie of the Church Then partly for her authoritie Ibid. It followeth not that we know
or beleued with diuine faith EIGHTENTH CHAPTER Hovv vve are to ansvver that question VVherfore or hovv vve beleue or knovv the Church to be Infallible 1. OVT of that which hath been hitherto saied is clearly answered that question How or Wherfore we beleue or know the true Church of God to be absolutly infallible in al which she teacheth as matter of faith Laude sec 16. p. 60. saieth The tradition of the Church taken alone cannot be a sufficient proof to beleue by diuine faith that Scripture is the word of God For that which is a ful and sufficient proof is able of it self to settle the soule of man which Tradition is not alone able to doe For it may be further asked why we should beleue the Churches Tradition And if it be answered Becaus the Church is infallibly gouerned by the holie Ghost it may be demanded How that may appeare And if thâ—â— be demanded ether you must say you haue it by special Reuelation or els you must attempt to proue it by Scripture And the verie offer to proue it by Scripture is a sufficient acknoâ—ledgment that the Scripture is a higher proof then the Churches tradition which in your own ground is or may be questionable til you come thither Besids it is an inuiolable ground of reason that the Principles of anie conclusion Thus he whose words I haue related at large that I might not seem to dissemble the difficultie 2. First therfore we must note that Beleef and Knowledg are different For Beleef is a simple assent for the authoritie of the speaker Knowledg if it be not of such things as are euident of themselues as that the whole is greater then a parte and such like is discursiue inferring one thing out of an other Therfore these are different questions Wherfore we know the Church to be infallible in al matters of faith and Wherfore we beleue her to be so infallible And we wil answer to both questions differently and distinctly To the question Wherfore we beleue the Chrch to be infallible I answer that if you demand the material Gods vocal word the material obiect of faith obiect of my beleef therof it is Gods vocal word vttered to me by the Church For as is shewed before out of the Apostle Faith is of hearing and Hearing is by the vocal word of God vttered by the Church And for this vocal word of God as his testimonie the Church was beleued to be infallible before there was anie Scripture and of the aforesaied Barbarians who had no Scripture and could be so beleued though al Scripture should perish And this Luther and other Protestants before cited doe confess when they say The Church is conceaued bred by the vocal word of God Supra c. 14. â— 1. and 3. 3. And if you ask the formal obiect for whose authoritie we beleue the Church to be thus infallible I answer For the authoritie of God principally and for the authoritie of the Church which is the pillar and ground of faith subordinatly As we beleue what the Embassador saieth principally for the King who sent him and subordinatly for the authoritie of the Embassador himself as apointed by the king And as before anie Scripture was written Prophets were beleued not for anie Scripture but principally for the authoritie of God who sent them and secondarily for their own Prophetical authoritie instituted by God Wherfore we need not as Laude thinketh proue the Church to be infallible ether by special reuelation or by Scripture as Chillingworth saieth c. 3. p. 141. Becaus beside the priuat word of God which is by special reuelation and his publik written word Publik vocal word of God Videsup c. 14. n. 1. which is Scripture there is also his publik vocal word which he vttereth and speaketh by the mouth of the Church as wel as there is his written word which he wrot by Vvhitak l 3. descript p. 414. Spiritus per as Ecclesia loquitur â—ic etiam cont 1. q. 3. c. 11. cont 2. q. 4. c. 2. Quâ— ecclesiam audiunt Christum ipsum audiunt the hands of his prophets and Euangelists And Gods word by whom soeuer it is ether spoke nor written is of equal authoritie and his vocal word equally to be beleued as his written Wherfore we haue no need to proue the Church to be infallible by the Scripture as there was no need nor possibilitie by it to proue that or anie other point of faith before anie Scripture was written vnles it be against such heretiks as beleue the Scripture but beleue not the Church But Catholiks doe onely confirme their faith which before they had of the infallibilitie of the Church by Gods vocal Gods vocal word confirmed by his written word vttered by the Church by his written word of the Scripture As we vse to be confirmed in the beleef of a thing which a man doth not only say by word of mouth but also by writing 4. And moreouer it is not alwaies necessarie as laude thinks that the mean of knowing be more known then the thing known by it as when they mutually make each other known as Relatiues and the Cause and proper Effect doe For in these a Circle is not vitious As from a Father we proue a sonn and from a sonn à Father From Rational Risible and from Risible Rational from the suns rising the Daie and from the Daie the suns rising And as Whitaker saieth contr 1. q. 3. c. 3. of the old and new Testament Something 's mutually proue each other The old and new Testament doe mutually confirme one the other In other matters this mutual confirmation would not auaile but in this it auaileth much For none is so fit a witnes of God and of his word as God in his word And contro 2. q. 5. c. 18. As the cause doth bring forth and shew the effect so the effect in like manner doth illustrat the cause Ibid. c. 9. Relatiues are not before or after one the other And lib. 3. contra Dureum sec 3. doth this seem ridiculous to the to seek the word out of the word White in his Defense p. 301. It is no more a Circle in vs to proue our Spirit by the Scripture and again to be assured of the Scripture by the Spirit then it is in discours to goe too and and fro between causes and effects The like he hath in his way p. 117. Field in his Appendice part 2. p. 16. That the cause may be proued by the effect and the effect by the cause and that such a kinde of argumentation is not a circulation but a demonstratiue regress that two causes may becauses ether of other we make no question Caluin 1. Instit c. 9. § 3. God hath ioyned together the certaintie of his word and Spirit with a mutual knot The samesay I of Gods vocal word vttered by the Church and his written word signed by the Euangelists that
which we may resolue our faith For as Whitaker himself saieth l. 1. de script p. 45. if it once appeare that the voice of the Church is the voice of God it were impietie not to beleue what she teacheth For it were to cal in question Gods authoritie And l. 3. de scriptura p. 428. wil you not be content with diuine iudgment or wil you except against infallible iudgment Besids the Church being built vpon the authoritie of the Prophets and Apostles Ephes 2. and Apocal. 21. if that be not sufficient al Christian faith is built vpon an vnsufficient foundation and so is fallible But to this vnchristian impietie are they by little and little lead by their denial of the Churches infallibilitie in al matters which she proposeth vs of faith For who compareth the dignitie of the Spouse of Christ with anie singular Prophet or Apostle or the loue of Christ to his Spouse with his loue to anie singular Prophet or Apostle or the scriptures testimonies of his efficacious assistance to his Spouse for not erring in faith with the testimonies of his like assistance to anie singular Prophet or Apostle wil easily see that the denial of the Churches infallibilitie wil lead him to doubt or denie the Infallibilitie of anie singular Prophet or Apostle and the denial of that wil lead to the denial of al infallible certaintie of Christian faith to which it hath already lead Chillingworth as is to be seen in him c. 2. § 24. and 154. and otherwhere often And if it be true See infra l. 2. c. 8. sec 2. which his three Approuuers the cheifest Doctors of Oxford say that he teacheth nothing contrarie to the doctrine of their English Church their English Church hath not infallible or diuine faith But of this we shal speak more hereafter Now let vs proue out of Scripture that the true Church of Christ which soeuer she is is infallible in al points of faith Finally Protestants teach that a ministers word absoluing one is as infallible as Gods word as is to be seen in Apologia Confess Augustanae c. de Poenitentia Confess Bohem. c. 14 Caluin 10 v. 16. Perkins in Reform Catholik cont 3. c. 3. and others FIFT CHAPTER That the true Church of God is a sufficient and infallible Proposer of al vvhich she proposeth as points of faith proued by vvhat she is saied to be in Scripture 1. TWO waies we may proue the Infallibilitie of the true Church of God in al points which she proposeth as of faith out of Scripture the one is by what she or her Pastors are there saied to be the other by what God in Scripture hath promised to her The first way we wil take in this Chapter and the second in the next In the Scripture the true Church of God is saied first to be the pillar and ground of truth secondly her preaching is saied to be a cause of faith Thirdly her pastors are saied to be witnesses of Gods truth Fourthly their voice is saied to be Christs voice Fiftly they are saied to be put to keepe the faithful constant in faith out of al which we wil euidently proue her infallibilitie in al matters which she proposeth as of faith 2. The Apostle 1. Timot. 3. v. 15. saieth which is the Church of the liuing God the Pillar and Ground of truth Which words doe not onely proue the Church to be infallible but also that she is an external formal cause of diuine truth concerning vs or which commeth al to one of our beleif of it becaus on what our beleif of diuine truth relieth as on a pillar or ground that is some formal cause therof But her infallibilitie I proue out thence in forme thus what is the Pillar and Ground of diuine and infallible truth is diuinely infallible in such truth The Church is such therfore she is diuinely infallible in diuine truth The Minor is the Apostles The Maior is euident For a humane and fallible pillar or Ground is not able to See â—uprae 2. n. 3. vphold diuine and infallible truth as is euident and Chillingworth confesseth c. 2. § 154. in these words None can build an infallible faith vpon motiues that are not infallible as it were a great and heauie burden vpon a foundation that hath not strength proportionable And the same he hath c. 1. n. 7. And also Whitaker l. 1. de Script p. 166. l. 3. p. 392. 415 Field l. 4. de Eccles c. 2. Laude sec 33. p. 248. Potter sec 5. p. 7. And as the same Chillingworth saieth wel c. 3. § 33. The Apostles could not be the Churches foundation without freedom from error in al those things which they deliuered constantly as certaine reuealed truthes so I say the Church could not be the pillar and Ground of truth to the faithful without fredom from error in al things which she constantly deliuereth as certain reuealed truthes Nether can it be imagined how the Scripture could by a clearer metaphor haue affirmed the Infallibilitie of the Church in matters of faith then by saying that she is the pillar and Ground of diuine truth For who can imagin that God would not make her infallible whome he maketh the Pillar and Ground of his truth Neuertheless Protestants seek manie waies to elude the clearness of this text some by distinguishing the word Church Some by distinguishing the word Pillar some by distinguishing the word Is and some by distinguishing the word truth And Chillingworth c. 3. § 76. p. 176. wil haue Timothe not the Church to be called the pillar and ground of truth Which varietie of shifts doth sufficiently confute them 3. a Vvhitaker cont 2. q. 2. c. 2. â—ulk in 1. Timot. 3. Field l. 4. de Eâ—cle c. 4. Some say the Apostle speaketh not of the vniuersal Church but onely of the particular Church of Ephesus becaus he saieth S. Timothe conuersed in the Church which is the pillar of truth But this shift first is new not found in anie ancient author Secondly is contrarie to the Apostles word For he vseth the word Church absolutly and Protestants translate it The Church which as is clear and b Laude Reâ— lat p. 128. 141. Chilâ—ing p. 263. themselues confess signifieth the whole Church and not a parte of the Church as a particular Church is Thirdly it is contrarie to his meaning For no particular Church is the pillar and Ground of truth becaus euerie particular Church is fallible Fourthly it is contrarie to the Fathers For S. Hierom in c. 26. Iob. saieth The Church which is the congregation of al Saints the pillar and ground of truth Fiftly it is against themselues For Whitaker contr 2. q. 3. c. 2. denieth that by the Church 1. Timoth. 3. is meant anie particular Church but wil haue it to be their inuisible and Catholike Church and so doth Iuel part 1. Apolog. c. 9. § 1. and others Sixtly the ground or pretence of their limitation of the
time but of infallible Pastors themselues And when I say the Pastors of the Church are infallible I meane not that euerie Pastor is infallible farther then he agreeth with the Church no more then when I say The Church is infallible or perpetual I meane that euerie member of the Church is such becaus The Pastors signifieth the bodie or companie of them as o Chilling p. 263. Laudep 128. 141. The Church signifieth the whole bodie therof And these foure arguments hitherto brought are a prâ—ori taken from the end for which the scripture saieth the Church was instituted by God For becaus he made the Church the pillar and ground of diuine truth he gaue her to that end diuine Infallibilitie Becaus he made the Churches preaching the ordinarie means of begetting diuine infallible faith he gaue her to that end diuine infallibilitie in matters of faith becaus he made her Pastors witnesses of diuine truth he gaue them for that end diuine infallibilitie in testifying that truth Becaus he put Pastors for to consummate Saints and keep them vnited and constant in diuine faith he gaue them for that end diuine infallibilitie in matters of faith becaus both Church and Pastors without diuine infallibilitie had been vnfit and vnable to attaine to those ends as is euideÌ„t by it self and confessed by Protestants here aboue n. 2 and 5. 9. The fift argument shal be taken out of that our Sauior saied of the Pastors of the Church Luke 10. v. 16. who heareth you heareth me who despiseth Pastors one teacher with Christ you despiseth me Out of which words I argue thus in forme who are one teacher with Christ are infallible teachers of Christs doctrin The Pastors of the Church are one teacher with Christ Therfore they are infallible teachers of his doctrin The Maioris euident For Fallible and infallible teachers are not one but quite different kinds of teachers the Minor also is manifest For if they were not one Teacher with Christ it would not follow that who heareth them heareth Christ For different teachers may haue different hearers And I note that Christ saied not who heareth your Vvitaker contâ— 2 q. 4. who hear the Church hear Christ himself doctrin heareth my doctrin but who heareth you heareth me Therby making not onely his Pastors doctrin and his doctrin one but also making them and him one teacher of his doctrin which is much more For a priuat mans doctrin may be al one with Christs doctrin but be not one Teacher with Christ becaus he is not a Teacher appointed by Christ to speak for him as Pastors are Some Protestants answer Chilling c. 3. n. 72. that these words of Christ are meant onely of the Apostles who were indeed both infallible Teachers and one Teacher with Christ but not so their Successors But this limitation of Christs meaning to the Apostles alone First is new becaus no ancient author is alleadged for it Secondly it can haue no other ground in the text but becaus the words were spoken onely to the Apostles which is no reasonable ground For so al power of preaching and ministring Sacraments should haue been proper to the Apostlâ—s Thirdly it is contrarie to the end of Christs speech For as Christ made the Apostles Teachers of his doctrin for the good of the Church so he made them also one with himself for the same end Wherfore as he made Pastors successors of his Apostles in being Teachers for the good of the Church so he made them successors of the Apostles in being one Teacher with him for the good of the Church and therfore are such as long as the Church continueth Fourthly the latter part of this speech of Christ is meant of the successors of the Apostles For who despiseth them despiseth Christ as wel as who despiseth the Apostles Therfore the former part who heareth you heareth me is also meant of the successors of the Apostles Fiftly it is contrarie to the Fathers For S. Cyprian Epist 69. saieth Christ saieth to his Apostles and therby to al Pastors who succeed the Apostles by successiue ordination who heareth you heareth mee Lastly it is contrarie to diuers Protestants who p Laude sec 16. p. 25. grant that these words are meant both of the Apostles and their Successors but say p some of them differently to wit absolutly in the Apostles and conditionally in their Successors namely so long and so far as you speak my words and not your own 10. But this exposition is as the former new and without anie ground in the text and therfore an irrational elusion of Christs words Secondly it maketh Christ to equiuocate vsing the same words differently without anie expression of his different vsage Thirdly the latter part of Christs speech to wit who despâ—seth you c. is meant absolutly aswel of the Pastors as of the Apostles For absolutly who despiseth Christs Pastors despiseth him as wel as if they despised his Apostles becaus they are his legats as wel as the Apostles were Fourthly it is contrarie to the end of Christs speech which was to giue both to the Apostles and to their successors assurance to teach his doctrin and to People to heare and beleue them becaus they were one Teacher with himself Which end were frustrat in the successors of his Apostles if his meaning were not absolute to them as wel as to the Apostles For what assurance should ether the Pastors haue in teaching or people in hearing them if Christs words depend vpon an vncertain coÌ„dition Assurance requireth an absolute promise and seeing Christ meant to assure both the Apostles and their teaching and people in hearing them he must needs meane absolutly both of Apostles and their successors Fiftly it implieth contradiction to be one Teacher with Christ and not to be absolutly infallible in teaching his doctrin For how can he who is one Teacher with an infallible Teacher be not absolutly infallible Besids it is one thing to teach infallible doctrin and an other to be infallible in teaching infallible doctrin And one thing is to heare Christs doctrin and to heare Christ Priuat men may teach infallible doctrin yet are not infallible in teaching it and who heareth them heareth Christs Vvhitaker l. 3. desâ—rip p. 414. Spiritus per os Eâ—â—lesiae loquitur so cont 1. q 3. c. 11. doctrin but yet heareth not Christ becaus Christ hath not appointed them to speak for him nor speaketh by them But whom Christ appointeth to speak for him as he doth Pastors they do both teach infallible doctrin and are infalible in teaching it and who heareth them not onely heareth Christs doctrin but also heareth Christ himself becaus he heareth them whom Christ hath â—pointed to speak for him and by whome he speaketh And it implieth contradiction that they should not be absolutly infallible whom Christ appointeth speakers or teachers for him and speaketh by them or whome hearing we heare Christ Wherfore Thus I argue Christ
Scripture to be the word of God by some authoritie that is absolutly diuine and he proueth it thus For if they be warranted vnto vs by anie authoritie less then diuine then al things conteined in them which haue no greater assurance then the scripture in which they are read are not obiects of diuine beleif and that once granted wil enforce vs to yeeld that al the articles of Christian beleef haue no greater assurance then humane or moral faith or credulitie can affoord Thus he both confesseth and proueth that the Scriptures must be proued to be the word of God by some infallible diuine proof and that such a proof can be nothing but a word of God and by some authoritie that is absolutly diuine But where this word of God by which the scripture is to be proued is where this absolutly diuine authoritie is out of the Church he cannot tel For himself saieth sec 16. cit p. 70. There is no place in Scripture which tells vs that such books conteining such and such particulars are the word of God And p. 88. Scripture cannot bear witness to it self nor one parte of it to an other White also in his way p. 48. The certaintie of the scripture is not written indeed with letters in anie particular place or book of the scripture So there is no written word of God that See infâ—a l. 〈◊〉 c. 6 sec 2. auoucheth the Scripture to be the word of God And vnwritten word of God they admit none Wherefore Laude flieth to a diuine light in See infra l. 2. c. 5 sec 2. scripture which saieth he after the present Church hath testified the Scripture to be the word clearly sheweth to vs that it is the word of God But beside that this light is feigned as we shal see more hereafter light is no word of God which Laude requireth to pâ—â—ue the scripture by but a quali 〈…〉 of the word of God nor is anie formal obiect of beleef which authoritie or veracitie onely is but is obiect of science or of vision And so this light is nether the material obiect of faith nor sufficient proof of the Scripture becaus it is no word of God nor anie formal obiector cause of faith becaus it is no authoritie Wherefore Chillingworth finding no surer motiue to beleue the Scripture then the testimonie of the Church and yet not granting that to be infallible granteth that consequence which Laud would auoid See l. 2. 〈◊〉 8. sec 2. to wit that al their assurance that the Scripture is Gods word and of al things conteined in it is but humane and fallible and so Protestants faith is not diuine or infallible and may deceaue them An other main inconueniencie is that if the Catholik A fallible Church menâ— force to professor in faith or to forsake her communion Church could err in matters of faith she might force vs to profess her error if she exacted â—t as a condition of her communâ—â—â— which were great sin or so forsake her communion which were to put our selues out of the state of Saluation becaus there is no saluation out of the Church as there Caluin 4. Inst. c. 1. §. 4. Vvhitaker contr 2. q. 5. c. 3. was not out of the Arck of Noe Wherby we see that the Infallibilitie of the Church and Necessitie of being in the Church doe mutually infer one the other 7. To al these proofs out of Reason I may add that Reason forceth Protestants to confess that the Church is infallible in fundamental points and if it were not to haue some pretence to refuse the Churches iudgment in some points it wold force them to confess that she is also infallible in Not-fundamental points and making fundamental or Not-fundamental which they please they take pretence to admit or refuse the Churches iudgment-in which points they please And this is the true ground of their denial of the Churches diuine Infallibilitie in al points of faith which to haue discouered is to haue refuted I may add also that for more then 2000. yeares God Protestants make she Church more infallible in the law of nature then after gaue infallibilitie to his Church and that he neuer said that he wold take it from her and that the Church is not less infallible now then it was before Moyses but rather founded as the Apostles saieth in better promises NINTH CHAPTER Some of the Protestants arguments against the Infallibilitie of the true Church of God in matters of faith ansvvered 1. PRotestants heap vp great store of Arguments but no express testimonie of Scripture against the Infallibilitie of the Church in matters of faith that so they may by number supplie the weakness of them and if not conuince the Reader yet confound him wherfore I wil not relate them al but the chiefest by answer to which the Reader may see how he may answer the rest The first argument is this The Church may a Vvhitaker cont 2. q. 4. 6. 2. 3. Chilling c. 5. n. 93. err in matters of manners therfore also in matters of faith I answer that if they mean in the Antecedent of the vniuersal Church I distinguish of damnably erring or venially erring and denie that the whole Church can damnably err in manners becaus that would make her not holie and so that article of our Creed I beleue the holie Catholik Church should be fals and as Laude said sec 25 § 5. The whole militant Church is holie and so we beleue Item If we wil keep vp our Creed the whole militant Church must be holie Secondly I denie the consequence For etror in manners destroieth onely a qualitie of the Church which is holiness and without which the substance of the Church may be but sinful error in faith destroieth her b See part 1. l. 2. c. 6. substance and maketh her no true Church of God but a fals and heretical Church becaus sinful error in faith is the sin of heresie And also euen euerie sinless error in faith destroieth the end for which the Church is instituted which is to be a sure and vndoubted c See sup c. 2. n. 2. and c. 8 n. 2. Guide in matters of faith and to perswade them which she could not if she erred in anie point of faith For as S. d Epist. 8. 9. Austin saieth of the Scripture if anie error were found in anie point of her doctrin her doctrin in other points would be vnsure and suspected of error Besids we might argue thus against Protestants the Church may err fundamentally in manners Therfore also fundamentally in faith 2. A second argument is that the Church may for some time be ignorant of some points of faith Therfore may also err I distinguish the antecedent of points of faith necessarie necessitate medij or Adesse fidei and then I denie it For then she should not be a sufficient guide of faith or of points not so necessarie and
then I distinguish also of sinful ignorance and sinles ignorance I denie the Antecedent for sinful ignorance is heresie or equiualent to it ignorance not sinful I grant the Antecedent but denie the consequence For error in faith whether sinful or sinles includeth vntruth and so is contrarie to the end of the Church which as saied is to be a sure guide in matters of faith and sure she cannot be who proposeth anie thing as of faith which ether is not of faith or is contrarie to faith for that were vntruth But simple ignorance of some point of faith not so necessarie is not repugnant to a sufficient and sure guide in matters of faith nor includeth anie vntruth As it is not against the assurednes of Scripture that it teacheth not al that is of faith as it would be if it taught anie the least error or vntruth For simple ignorance or not teaching something includeth no vntruth but mere vnknowledg or not teaching that truth but error includeth vntruth which cannot be in a sure Guide as the true Church Some ignorance is but against the peâ—fection of the Church of God alwayes is Wherfore ignorance of some not so necessarie truth would be against the perfection of the Church but al error whatsoeuer sinful or not sinful in anie point whatsoeuer of faith would destroie the end of the Church 3. The third argument may be this Vvhitaker cont 2 q. 4. c. 3. Laude sec 16 p. 65. Chilling c. 3. n. 70. euerie member of the Church may err in faith Therfore the whole Church I denie the consequence both becaus God hath not made euerie member of the Church the pillar and ground of truth as he hath made the Church nor made promise of infallible assistance to euerie member of the Church and also becaus he hath not instituted euerie member of the Church for an infallible and sure Guide in matters of faith as he hath instituted the Church And if this note of the essence of the Church which is to be a societie in Christs true faith and not onely in some parte of his faith and the end of the Church which is to be a sure and vndoubted Guide in matters of faith be wel obserued we shal easily both defend the Churches infallibilitie and also solue the Protestants obiections against it A fourth argument may be taken out of that which Chillingworth saieth c. 3. § 30. p. 144. The Churches dependance on the Apostles So also Tailo in lâ—bertie of propheâ—ing sect 6 n. 1. rule is voluntarie for it is in the power of the Church to deuiate from this rule being but an aggregation of men of which euerie one has free wil. To which I answer first that this would equally proue that the Apostles were not infallible becaus they had free wil nor the Church infallible in fundamental points secondly I answer that by the Churches Infallibilitie mean not anie natural or absolute infallibilitie as in God but such as Christ saieth Matt. c. 24. is in the Elect who though of their nature may be led into error yet through Gods efficacious assistance can not And possibilitie of erring by nature and impossibilitie of erring by Gods efficacious assistance may stand together as they did in the Apostles For this impossibilitie or necessitie of not erring is as logitians speak onely consequentiae non consequentis And necessitie of Necessitie of consequence not of consequent consequence doth not repugne to libertie or freedom For as of my seing one walk it followeth necessarily that he walk and yet he walketh freely so of Gods efficacious assistance of the Church not to err it necessarily followeth that she err not and neuertheles she freely erreth not And the reason is becaus Gods efficacious assistance altereth not mâ—n smanner of working which is to work freely but onely assuredly maketh them to Gods assistance caâ—â—oth assurednes not necessitie work And assurednes of the work may wel stand with free manner of working it becaus the work and the manner of working it are different things It sufficeth that God who is the principal worker wil haue it done and that he by his omnipotencie can effect it assuredly as wel by a free secondarie Agent as by a necessarie Agent for who resisteth his wil 4. Wherfore now Gentle Reader compare our reasons for the Infallibilitie of the Church in matters of faith with the Protestants Reasons to the contrarie and our solutions of their arguments with their solutions of ours and thou shalt finde a main difference For one of our Reasons is taken a priori as Philosophers speak from the definitions of the true Church giuen by Scripture Fathers and Protestants themselues wheras Protestants nether bring nor can bring anie Reason for the fallibilitie of the Church out of her definition For what colour of her fallibilitie can be drawn from that she is a Societie in Profession of the true faith of Christ and communion of his Sacraments but rather for her Infallibilitie An other of our arguments is also taken a priorâ— from the final cause or end of the Church which is to be a sure Guide to saluation by right faith in Christ which end can afford no colour of proof of her fallibilitie Our third Argument also is a Priori from the formal external cause of diuine faith which must needs be infallible as faith is wherof it is cause which formal external cause of infallible faith affoordeth no colour of fallibilitie Our fourth argument is taken from Christs gift And our fift a Posteriori from â—he manie and great ill consequences which necessarily follow of the denial of the Churches Infallibilitie wheras Protestants can infer no inconneniencie at al out of our auouching her infallibilitie in points of faith But their best reasons against the Churches Infallibilitie are taken from similitudes which are indeed Dissimilitudes between error in manners and error in faith between ignorance of some point of faith and error in some point of faith between euerie member of the Church and the whole Church And as for our solutions of their arguments they are satisfactorie and scientifical becaus they are taken from the nature and the end of the true Church and shew a plain difference betwixt those things which ProtestaÌ„ts think to be like Wheras Protestants can giue no such satisfactorie or scientifical answer to our Arguments taken of the definition or end of the Churh but doe voluntarily glose the definition and end of the Church as if her essence were onely a societie in profession of some parte of Christs doctrin and Protestants destroie both the esse ce and the end of the Church her end to be a sure Guide onely in some parte therof to wit in the fundamental or principal parte which is indeed to make her a parte of Christs Church and truly not his Church nor anie sure guide at al But now let vs proue the Churches Infallibilitie out of Protestants
P. 76. Faith is of scriptures heard P. 108. Faith is begotten not of testimonie of the Church but onely out of scripture P. 122. The The â—â—elie sufficient means scripture is the most strong the most effectual I ad also now the onely sufficient means to beleue P. 130. Our faith relieth vpon the scriptures alone P. 165. scriptures are the foundations of our faith P. 167. The scripture is the beginning of beleuing The same he hath p. 168. P. 173. The formal cause of our Scripture the formal cause of beleef faith is not the voice of the Church but Gods word reuealed in the scriptures Potter sec 5 p. 8. The principal motiue and last obiect of beleif is the diuine last obiect authoritie of the scripture it self P. 10. The cheif principle ground on which faith rests and for which it firmely The ground of faith assents vnto those truths which the Church propounds is the diuine reuelation made in scripture sec 7. p. 95. The creed conteines onely the material The formal obiect obiect of faith The scripture is further the formal obiect of faith or the motiue and ground whervpon faith is grounded being both the obiectâ—m quod in respect of things therin reuealed and obiectum Obiectum quod and quâ— quo in respect of that diuine veritie and authoritie which reueals them Laude Relat. sec 16. p. 84. Tradition of the present Church is the first moral motiue to beleue but the beleif it self That the scripture is the word of God rests vpon the scripture P. 89. Doe Faith resolued into Scripture you grant as you ought to doe that we resolue our faith into scripture as the ground and we wil neuer denie that Tradition is the key that letts vs in Sec. 18. p. 123. The Prophets testimonie was diuine into which namely their writings the Iewes did resolue their faith Hooker l. 2. § 7. Scripture is The ground of al beleef the ground of al beleif Chillingworth c. 3. § 32. p. 149. I can not know anie doctrin to be a diuine and supernatural truthe but becaus the scripture saies so And where saies it that it is the word of God Vttermost formal cause of faith Morton to 2. Apol. l. 1. c. 37. Papists are forced against their wil to grant that thè vttermost formal cause of Catholik faith doth not consist in the authoritie of the Church but in scripture Ib. The diuine authoritie of the scripture by vertue of the holie Ghost doth imprint in the minds of the hearers the last formal Last formal cause cause of faith And l 5. c. 11. scripture is to the faithâ—ul the supreme Iudge euen concerning vs in which our consciences doe last rest In his Appeal l. Last rest and resolution 3. c 15. sec 5. In the doctrin of scripture mens consciences may take their last rest and resolution White in his Table before his way The last resolution of our faith is into the authoritie of the scripture And yet they cannot denie but the authoritie of the Scripture is create For they were written by men And so the formal cause the vttermost formal cause the last formal cause the last rest Create authoritie the vttermost formal cause of Protest faith the last resolution of their faith is create authoritie and not Prima veritas it self as they pretend and condemn Catholiks for onely saying that the create authoritie of the true formal cause but say not as Protestants say of Scripture the vttermost the last formal cause the last resolution of our faith Besids Protestants make Protestants inferences out of humane Principles the last resolution of their faith their own Inferences partly out of some humane principle to be equal and equiualent vnto express Scripture or word of God as is shewed before c. 3 sec 2. and so make their own Inferences and those partly out of humane Principles the formal cause the vttermost the last formal cause that into which their faith is last resolued and withal teach that L. 1. c. 18 n. 1. the Inference cannot be more certain then the Principle out of which it is inferred How then can their faith haue more certaintie then humane as Chillingworth confessed c. 8. sec 2. SECOND SECTION Sometimes denie it CHillingworth c. 2. n. 159. p. 116. For other reasons I conceaue this doctrin that Scripture is the rule of faith Not fundamental becaus if a man should beleue Christian religion Scripture no fâ—ndamental doctrin wholy and entirely and liue according to it such a man though he should not know or not beleue the Scripture to be a rule of faith no nor to be the word of God my opinion is he may be saued so that the books of Scripture are not so much the obiects of our faith as the instruments of conueying it to our vnderstanding and not so much of the being of Christian doctrin as requisit to the welbeing of it Ireneus tels vs of some barbarous nations that beleued the doctrin of Christ and yet beleued not the Scripture to be the word of God For they neuer heard of it and faith comes of hearing God requiring of vs vnder pain of damnation onely Not damnabâ—e not to beâ—eue the Scripture to beleue the verities therin conteined and not the diuine authoritie of the books wherin they are conteined Ibid. n. 32. p. 65. Which Scripture we beleue not finally and for it self but for the matter conteined in it We Scripture not last obâ—â—st of faith are to beleue it not as the last obiect of out faith but as the means of it Ibid. Natural reason built on principles common Natural â—eason last â—eâ—oluâ—◠〈◊〉 of â—rotest faith to al men is the last resolution of our faith of the Scripture into which the Churches authoritie is but the first inducement n. 115. p. 96. By you as wel as by Protestants al is finally resolued into reason Baro in his Apologie pro disput de obiecto fidei p. 48. Laicks beleue the doctrin which is proposed to them to be beleued to be in the Protest beleue Scripture but with 〈…〉 ne faith Scripture onely with humane faith Behold first That Scripture is the rule of faith is no fundamental doctrin Secondly one may be saued though the beleue not the Scripture to be the word of God Thirdly books of Scripture are not so much obiects of our faith as instruments therof Fourthly are not so much of the being of Christian faith as of the wel being of it Fiftly God requires not vnder pain of damnation to beleue the diuine authoritie of Scripture Sixtly we beleue not the Scripture finally and for it self Seauently It is not the last obiect of faith Eightly natural reason is the last resolution of Protestants faith of the Scripture Ninthly Laicks beleue their doctrin to be in the Scripture but with humane faith And can that which is such be the formal
for the authoritie of the reuealer or as Chillingworth c. 1. p. 35. saieth an assentto diuine reuelation vpon the authoritie of the reuealer And the same saieth laude sec 38. p. 344. Potter sect 5. p. 3. and others But a Reuealer is a person intelligent Therefore the authoritie of some person intelligent is the formal cause of faith and not anie words or writings which are rather the external reuelation then the reuealer And hence it is that though in holie Scripture there be diuine veritie and that which is to be beleued with diuine faith yet if scripture be taken alone by it self meerely as it is such words or writings it hath no formal authoritie or veracitie to cause its veritie to be beleued For as such it is neither anie intellectuall person nor hath any intellectuall person adioned to it for whose authoritie it should be beleued Wherefore wel said Stapleton Controu 3. q. 1. ar 2. credimus scripturam non scripturae becaus scripture hath in it self truth which is beleued but not authoritie for which it is beleued And likewise wel wrote Chillingw c. 2. p. 69. That the diuinitie of a writing cannot Note this be known for it self alone but by some extrinsecal authoritie you need not proue for no wise man denieth it And ibid. p. 114. A written rule must always need something els which either is euidently true or euidently credible to giue attestation to it And laude sect 16. p. 88. Scripture cannot bear witnes to it self nor one part of it to an other The same saieth Hooker l. 2. § 4. And g See infra l. 1. c. 14. Protestants generally confess that the scripture cannot be beleued of vs without the attestation of the Church The true cause whereof is that scripture of it self hath no authoritie but al the authoritie for which it is beleued is out of it self to wit in God who is author of it and in his Church who is witnes to it And when graue authors attribute authoritee to the scripture ether by authoritie they mean veritie or they take not scripture by it sels alone but as it is the scripture of God As in like manner they say the scripture saiâ—th this teacheth this affirmeth this speaketh this meaning God by scripture But Gods authoritie alone doth not in ordinarie course engender faith and we seeke that authoritie on earth without which Gods authoritie alone wil not in ordinarie course engender diuine faith of the scripture or of any thing els which authoritie euidently and confessedly is not in the scripture it self 8. The eight ground is that to a Four things in a proposer Proposer of points of faith properly so called there be long foure things 1. is his person 2. his Authoritie to propose such matters 3. his proposal which is his words or writings And 4 the truth proposed and signified by his words or writings For a Propoâ—er of matters of faith is a Preacher who proposeth or preacheth ether by word onely as most of the Apostles did or by writings also as S. Paul and some other Apostles Netherwords nor writings are proposers did And as their words were no Proposers but that by which they proposed so nether were theire writings anie Proposers but were that by which they proposed And of all the four said things only the twoe last are in the scripture and therefore it cannot be properly the Proposâ—r of faith but onely the Proposal if we consider the words and the Proposed if we consider the truth which the words signifie But al the foure are in the Church of God And Protestants cannot denie that she is a person or persons nor that her words or writings are her Proposals or the truth signified by them her truth Proposed Nether do they whereim Protestants grant diuine authoritie to the Châ—râ—h deny that she hath diuine authoritie to propose matters of faith as to teach Gods word and administer his Sacraments giuen to her in the last of S. Mathew onely they denie that her authoritie to testifie or persuade that which she teacheth is infallible and sufficient as an external and subordinat cause to engender diuine beleef of what she teacheth In which they do not consequently why Protestants de not speake consequently proceed For first how can the authoritie of the Church be diuine in proposing Gods word and be not infallible in proposing it secondly how can she haue diuine and infallible authoritie to preach Gods word and not haue the like authoritie to testifie and perswade that it is Gods word which she preacheth seing persuation that it is Gods word which she preacheth Persuasion is the end of preaching is the end of her preaching as is euident and Whitaker confesseth in these words l. 2. de scriptura p. 281. Preaching is instituted for persuation Would God giue to his Church diuine auctoritie for the means and not for the end seing The end more desired then 〈◊〉 the means euerie rational desirer desireth more the end then the means Thirdly Protestants grant that God hath giuen diuine authoritie to the Pastors of his Church for to gouern her Whitaker l. 2. de scrip p. 246. Ministers of the Church are iâ—strvments of the holy Ghost enduâ—d with diuine authoritie to gouern the Church committed to them And if Pastors haue diuineauthoritie to gouern the Church haue they not also diuine authoritie to persuade her that it is Gods word which they teach her Is not diuine authoritie as necessarie to Pastors for to persuade the Church as to gouern it and right beleef as necessarie to the Church as good gouernment More ouer Chillingw c. 2. p. 105. Protestants generally confess that the church of God is infallible in fundamental points and so infallible that it implieth contradiction that she should err in them And how can she be so infallible in them and be not infallible by Gods special and effectual assistance can the church of her own nature or power be infallible in such high matters aboue nature and reason Nay it seems so absurd euen to Protestants themselues to deny the church of God to haue diuine authoritie to testifie Gods truth as sometimes they deny it but restritctly as i Laude sec 16. 19. and 10. that it is not simplâ— diuine not absolutely diuine or that she is not k Potter sec 5. p. â—5 I whitaker Contr. 1. q. 3. c. 11. absolutly infallible and confess that the iudgment of the church is in some sorte diuine and call it a slander that they say the iudgment of the church is meer humane But in truth they make her authoritie in matters of faith meer humane yea less and none at al. For thus Whitaker Contr. 1. q. 5. c. 10. In the church thou shalt finde nothing but humane and therefore vncertain l. 3. de script p. 395. The perpetual testimonie of the church as far as it is of the Church is but humane testimonie p.
of the Fathers in his Preface Sâ—â— his thâ—s 5. p. 106. to his conclusions The Fathers who denie the Church of Rome may err gain say vs indeed but they gain say the Ghospel too Pardon me o Cyprian I would beleue thee gladly but that beleuing thee I should not beleue the word of God Al the testimonies of the Fathers for the Roman Church are of two sortes the one of them true but clean beside the purpose the other to purpose enough but vntrue And in verse bidds Auant al yee who on the Fathers saws depend Thus plainly he confesseth the Fathers to be against him touching the Infallibilitie of the Church Out of which testimonies of Fathers and confession of Protestants euident it is that it is an vniuersal tradition that the true Church of God is infallible in al matters which she professeth as of faith And therfore if as hereafter Protestants say they admit vniuersal traditions in al matters where it can be had and that vniuersal tradition is the key the introduction to al diuine truthes that for it they beleue the Scripture to be the word of God and that it is as infallible as the Scripture they cannot denie the true Church of God to be infallible in al matters which she proposeth as of faith EIGHT CHAPTER That the true Church of God is infallible in al points of faith proued by Reason 1. THE Infallibilitie of the Church of God which soeuer she is in al points of faith is so euident as it is not onely testified by scripture and Fathers but also conuinced by light of Reason And therfore falsly saied Chillingwort c. 3. § 27. p. 141. For the Infallibilitie of the Church no proof can be pretended but incorrupted places of Scripture The first Reason we wil take from the definition or description of the true Church giuen by scripture Fathers and Protestants For the Scripture Acts. 2. v. 42. describeth the true Church of Christ to be à companie of men pâ—rseuering in the doctrin of the Apostles and communion of Sacraments And doubtles a Church perseuering in them is infallible The Fathers as Protestants Confess are wont to vnderstand by a Moulins cont Peron l. 1. c. 2. the Church which oftentimes they cal Catholik the whole societie of Christians orthodox and sound in faith vnited together in Communion But a Church Orthodox and sound in faith is infallible so long as she remaineth such Protestants also as we shewed pars 1. l. 2. c. 6. put in the definition of the true Church that she profess the pure and entire word of God and they giue puritie in doctrin for an essential note of her But a Church of whose definition it is and whose essential note is to profess pure and entire doctrin is infallible in profession therof And what some may say that they mean onely of puritie of doctrin in fundamental points is refuted c. 6. citato 2. The second argument may be taken from the ends for which God instituted à Church on earth And to omit those ends which we brought out of Scripture c. 5. as to be the pillar and ground of truth to be the ordinarie means of begetting infallible faith to be Gods witnes of infallible faith to consummate and keep the faithful vnited and constant in infallible faith an other end is that she is instituted as an infallible and b Vvhitaker l. 3. de script 〈◊〉 392. Pottâ—r sect 5. p. 7. necessarie means to bring men to saluation by faith Hope and Charitie And Faith sisignifieth whole faith not a parte onely as fundamental articles are Therfore she is as infallible in teaching al points of faith as in teaching al points of hope or Charitie She is also instituted to be a mother to conceaue and beare Children to God by the infallible word of God to be their Mistress and c Laude sect 38. p. 345. Guide in faith That she is the mother of the faithful The Apostle testifieth Galat 4. v. 26. and Caluin confesseth 4. Instit c. 1. § 4. where he saieth Let vs learn by the onelie title of Mother The Church mother and mistâ—es of the faithful how profitable yea how necessarie it is to know her seing there is no entrance into life vnles she conceaue vs in her wombe vnles she beare vs nourish vs with her duggs c. Whitaker l. 1. de scriptura p. 87. I am a disciple of the Church I acknowledg the Church for my Mother The Church truly is mother of the faithful And p. 72. The Church is truly mistress and Guide of our faith P. 128. we honor the Churâ—h as mother Nurse Tutress Teacher we heare and respect her as our perpetual Mistress P. 153. None denieth the Church to be a Mistress of her own We denie not but a Mistreshipp was giuen to the Church l. 2. p. 234. I confess the Church is to be heard as a mistress and her iudgment also to be followed But the sure means of infallible faith instituted by God The Mother of Christians in infallible faith instituted by God the Mistress or Guide of infallible faith instituted by God must needs be infallible both becaus of Gods institution and for the infallibilitie of the end For a fallible Mistress or guide is as good as none for to learn infallible truth or to attein to infallible securitie or as Chillingworth saieth c. 6. § 20. A doubtful Guide is A fallible Guide naught worth for mens direction as good as none at al. And c. 1. n. 7. I grant that this means in the Church to decide controuersies in faith and Religion must be endued with an vniuersal infallibilitie in whatsoeuer it propoundeth for a diuine truth And to say as Protestants doe that she is a sure guide but in fundamental points cannot stand with her fallibilitie in other points For as S. d Epist 8. and 9. Difference of Maisters in faith and science Austin saieth of the Scriptur if it faile in anie point it becoms doubtful in al so say of the Church If she can faile in some points of faith she is doubtful in al. And here must be wel noted the diffeence of Masters or Mistresses in sciences and in faith For Masters or Mistresses of sciences doe shew their schollers the truth of things in the things themselues and so they are but shewers of the truths which they teach not perswaders of it but Masters or Mistresses of mattets to be beleued doe not make their disciples see the truths which they teach in themselues but in their own authoritie and their authoritie is the formal cause of perswading them those truths Wherfore if Protestants would indeed grant the Church to be Mistress of Christians in matters of faith they must needs grant that in her authoritie they see the truthes which they beleue and for her authoritie are persuaded of them but indeed they doe not distinguish between à Mistress in faith and in science which is a
authoritie with which in ordinarie course it maketh one total or entire formal cause of faith SEAVENTENTH CHAPTER Hovv a vicious circle is auoided in prouing the Scripture by the Church and the Church by the Scripture 1. PRotestants greatly obiect to Catholiks that they Laude sect 16. p. 64. 116. Châ—ling c. 2. n. 118. c. 3. n. 27. Field l. 4. c. 7 Morton 10. 1. Apol. l. 1. c. 55 make a vicious circle becaus they proue the Church by the Scripture and likewise the Scripture by the Church Wheras themselues vse the same proof and haue the same difficultie and auoidles apparently as we shal make manifest a vicious circle For as is euident by their confessions relate din the fourteenth Chapter commonly they teach that the testimonie of the Church is necessarie to beleue the Scripture to be the word of God and that it cannot be known to be such by its own light alone and yet they proue the Church to be the true Church onely by the scripture Laude Relat. sec 16. p. 38. and 102. thinketh to See inâ—â—a l. 2. c. 6. seâ— 2. auoid a vicious circle thus That though they doe mutually yet they doe not equally confirme the authoritie ether of other For the Scripture doth infallibly confirme the authoritie of the tradition of the Church but tradition doth but morally and probably confirme the authoritie of the Scripture But first it is fals that the Church doth but probably confirme the authoritie of the Scripture For as we haue shewed before the Churches testimonie is a sufficient external and ministerial means to beget diuine faith and the holie Fathers also proued sufficiently the diuine veritie of Scripture against such as denied anie parte of it by the authoritie of the Church and it were to expose the credit of Scripture to the laughter of Infidels to say that it cannot be proued otherwise then probably and that al Christian faith of what is in scripture relieth vpon onely probable proof that the scripture Seesup c. 8. n. 13. is the word of God Besids it is euidently fals and no way proued that after the Church hath probably proued that the Scripture is the word of God the Scripture it self sheweth a clear light that it is the the word of God For that the Scripture hath such a clear light ether before the Churches testimonie or after is merely faigned without al proof and if it had it would not cause faith in vs that it is the word of God becaus faith is of things not appearing but science or knowledg Moreouer seing Laude and Protestants generally confess that the Church is infallible in fundamental points they cannot consequently say that she is not infallible in this point That the Scripture is the word of God becaus they account this the Hooker l. 1. §. 14. Laudesest 11. p. 43. sect 16. p. 59. 65. 110. See infral 2. 6. 11. sect 1. fundation of al other points whatsoeuer And what is infallible affordeth an infallible and more then a moral and probable proof Besids this circle were vicious becaus the proof were not equal on ether side For on the Scriptures side it were infallible and on the Churches side but fallible And we ask for an infallible proof of Scripture as wel as of the Church becaus we must be infallibly assured of both and to giue vs a fallible proof of the Scripture by the Church were to delude vs. Finally I ask if the Scripture doe infallibly confirme the tradition of the Church as Laude saieth how doth the tradition of the Church onely probably confirme the authoritie of the Scripture can not that which is infallibly proued or confirmed make an infallible proof of some other thing 2. But Catholiks far more clearly auoid al vicious circles For euerie circular proof is not vicious but that onely wherby our knowledg is no way bettered For the effect may be proued a priori or propter quid by the cause and the cause a posteriori or quia by the effect and say that our diuine faith of the Church nether first riseth nor dependeth of the certaine of the Scripture but onely is confirmed by the Scripture but that the certaintie of the Scripture both first riseth and stil dependeth for vs on the authoritie of the Church For the true Church of God whosoeuer she is was beleued more then two thousand yeares before there was anie Scripture and she hath sufficient authoritie to testifie of herself This we proue by al the waies by which we proued that she is a sufficient proposer of al points of faith For if of al euen of herself that she is the true Church For this is a point and a principal one of faith Besids the foresaid proofs not onely proue that she is a sufficient proposer of points of faith but also that she is such of herself or of her own authoritie giuen to her by God For if of her preaching faith riseth if she be the pillar and ground of truth if she be a witnes apointed by God if her voice be one with the voice of Christ her authoritie is diuine and she is euen for herself to be beleued as the Apostles were to be beleued for Sup. c. 4 â— 5. themselues The Fathers also who by her authoritie proued the Scriptures against such heretiks as denied them and as they thought sufficiently and infallibly surely did think that she was to be beleued for her own authoritie For by Scripture they could not proue her against such as denied Scripture Reason also confirmeth the same For if a Disciple of Christ be to be beleued for himself why not the Spouse of Christ one mistical person with him whose head he is and whose soule is the holie Ghost And if S. Paul could say I Paul say vnto you If you be circumcised Galat. 5. Christ wil not profit you Why not the Church Whitaker l 1. de Script p. 86. saieth who haue such a Spirit as Paul had may by some iudgment testifie their Spirit And contr 1. q. 3. c. 3. Paul doth aproue his epistles with his own name and iudgment The old and new Testament doe confirme and signe one the other In other causes this mutual confirmation is naught worth But in this it is much worth becaus none is so fit a witnes of God and of his word as God himself in his word And why may we not say the same of the Church and Scripture which he saieth of the old and new Testament becaus none is so fit a witnes of God and of his Church and of his word as God in his Church and in his word If S. Iohn could say of himself we know that his testimonie is true why may not the Spouse C. 21. of Christ who is one mistical person with him and whose head he is to whome he promised the assistance of the Holie Ghost to teach her al truth and the Holie Ghost is her soule say the
they mutually confirme each other yet with this difference that the true Church giueth sufficient testimonie to her self sufficient I say to beleue her with diuine faith to be the true Church of God becaus her authoritie in matters of faith is diuine as the Apostles was and therfore needeth not the testimonie of the Scripture to be beleued to be such as Christ gaue sufficient testimonie to himself Ioan. 5. S. Ihon Baptist to himself If particular men were credible of themselues why not the whole Church of God Math. 3. S. Ihon Euangelist to himself Ioan. 21. and S. Paul to himself Galat. 1. 2. Cor. 4. and so doth the pillar and ground of truth to her self But the Scripture giueth not sufficient testimonie of it self to be infallibly beleued to be Gods word but needeth authoritie of some infallible Author or Person becaus Scripture is onely the material obiect which is to be beleued and authoritie is the formal obiect or cause of beleef without which there can be no true or formal beleef but onely science or opinion For as S. Austin saieth That we beleue we owe to authoritie And Whitaker l. 3. de Script p. 408. Faith relieth vpon authoritie Authoritie is the foundation of faith Yet Scripture being beleued to be Gods word is a sufficient testimonie to confirme the beleef already had of the Church and also to produce such beleef in those who beleue not the Church And thus much for answer to that question How we beleue the Church to be infallible For we first beleue the Church God speaketh by the mouth of the Church Vvhitaker l. 3 de Scrip 414. so also Contr. 1 q. 3. c. 11. see c. 4. n. 4. and c. 14. n. 1. to be infallible for Gods vocal word vttered by the Church And we are confirmed in that beleef for Gods written word in the Scripture And to Catholiks we giue Gods vocal word as the first subordinat cause of that our beleef but to such as beleue the Scripture and not the Church we giue onely Gods written word And therfore no maruel if to Protestants who admit not the authoritie of Gods Church or his vocal word we proue the infallibilitie of the Church onely by Scripture wheras if they did equally admit as wel Gods vocal word as his written word or his true Church as his Scripture we might without anie vitious Circle at al mutually proue Gods vocal word by his written word and his written by his vocal and his Church by his Scripture and his Scripture by his Church becaus Gods testimonie is sufficient for proof of whatsoeuer and by what means soeuer it be vttered to wit by speech by writing or howsoeuer els Wherfore this is no vitious Circle God saieth by his Church that God speaketh by his Church Vvhitaker supra such Scripture is his word Therfore it is so God saieth by his Scripture that such are his Church Therfore they are so 5. And as for answer to the question How know you the true Church to be infallible in al matters of faith I say that beside the reasons grounded in Scripture giuen before we may giue a natural reason therof For as S. Austin saieth rightly If God haue L. de vâ—il cred c. 16. prouidence of mankinde he hath on earth setled some authoritie on which we relying may mount to him And this authoritie must not be blinde or deceiptful in matters of saluation as al matters of faith are as al fallible authoritie is and therfore is infallible in al such matters And as the same S. Austin saieth of the Scripture that if the lest lie be found in it the authoritie of al the rest faileth so if in the authoritie which God hath setled on earth for matters of Saluation there were found anie error we could not securely relie vpon it And the same reason teacheth vs that if God would setle this infallible authoritie on earth in anie he would setle it in his Church who is his beloued Spouse and Mother of the Faithful whome he hath apointed to conceaue them by the diuine seed of his word to beare nourish and guide them in their way to saluation For who can be imagined to be more fit to be infallible in matters of Saluation then the spouse of God the mother Nurse and Guide of the Faithful Would God apoint to mankinde a blinde or deceiptful guide to saluation surely no if he effectually meant to saue mankinde Nether wil it suffice to grant as Protestants doe that the Church is infallible in fundamental points first becaus there are no fundamental points 〈◊〉 their sense that is such as suffice to saluation though others sufficiently proposed be not beleued Secondly becaus if as S. Austin saied of the Scripture she lie in some points of faith we cannot be sure she doth not in others Wherfore wel saied Chillingworth c. 3. n. 36. An authoritie subiect to error can be no stable or firme foundation of my beleef in anie thing Thirdly becaus Protestants cannot tel which precisely are such fundamental points as they imagin and therfore cannot be certain in which points the Church erreth not Fourthly becaus they say the Church is fallible euen in their most fundamental point of al which is That Scripture is the word of God and sometimes also in other fundamental points as is shewed parte 1. l. 1. c. 7. Fiftly Chillingworth denieth that there is anie one certain Church vniuersal or particular which is infallible euen in fundamental points but onely that there are alwaies some vncertain men who hold al the fundamental points and therfore denieth that anie certain Church is an infallible Guide euen in fundamentals and saieth c. 2 n 139. p. 105. you must know there is a wide difference between infallible in No certain Church infaâ—lible euen â—â—fundamental points fundamentals and being an Infallible guide euen in fundamentals and we vtterly denie the Church to be the latter For to say so were to oblidge ourselues to finde some certain societie of men of whome we might be certain that they nether doe nor can err in fundamentals nor in declaring what is fundamental what not fundamental and consequently to make anie Church an infallible Guide in fundamentals would be to make it infallible in al things which Note this she proposeth and requireth to beleued Which he often times repeateth c. 3. as n. 39. 55. 58. and 60. where he addeth that it is falsly supposed that they grant that in some certain points No certain Church to be obeied vnder pain â—f damnation fundamental some certain Church is infallibly assisted and vnder pain of damnation to be obeyed So that no certain Church vniuersal or particular is ether an infallible Guide or to be beleued or obeyed vnder pain of damnation euen in fundamental points Beside The Church and Some Church are different For The Church signifieth the whole true Church as himself confesseth c. 5. n. 26. p. 263. or The
we challeng not Ibid. § 154. you content not yourselues with a moral certaintie of things you beleue p. 113. Moral certaintie sufficient Me thinks you should require onely a moral and modest assent to them points of faith and not a diuine as you cal it and infallible faith Ibid. § 159. p. 116. God requireth of vs vnder pain of damnation onely to beleue the verities therin Scripture conteined and not the diuine authoritie of the books wherin Not diuine authoritie of Scripture they are conteined We haue I beleue as great reason to beleue there was such a man as Henrie the Eight King of England as that Iesus Christ suffered vnder Pontius Pilat C 6. § 3. p. 325. That there is required of vs a As great reason for beleef of K. Hen. as of Christ. knowledg of them points of faith and an adherence to them as certain as that of sense or science that such a certaintie is required of vs vnder pain of damnation this I haue demonstrated to be a great error and of dangerous and pernicious consequence § 5. p. 327. Men may talke their pleasure of an absolute and most infallible certaintie but did they generally beleue that obedience to Christ were the onely way to present and eternal felicitie but as much as Caesars Commentaries or the historie of Salust I beleue the liues of most men Papists and Protestants would be better then they are And therfore it followes from your own reason that faith which is not a most certain and infallible knowledg may be true and sauing faith C. 7. § 7. p. 389. In requiring that this faith should be diuine and Dangerous that faith must be infallible infallible you cast your Credents into infinit perplexitie Erasmus on the 2. and 27. of Mathew There is no fear that al the authoritie of the Scripture shold fall if anie error were found in it Luther called the Scripture The books of Heretiks Protestants in Colloq Ratisbon sess 11. say that we must distinguish betwene the faith wherwith we beleue points necessarie to saluation and historical faith wherwith we beleue the Scripture to be the word of God And historical faith is not diuine faith vnles they wil make manie kinds of diuine faith And they add that there is not equal reason of beleuing that scripture is Gods word and that Christ is Incarnate And Whitaker l. 1. de Script p. 88. who haue no other faith but historical doe no more beleue Christ then the Diuels Moulins in his Bucler sec 4. p. 13. Properly speaking articles Scripture no doctrin of Christian religion of faith are doctrins of Christian religion and in this sense the Canon of Canonical books is no article of faith So that the Canon of Scripture is no doctrin of Christian religion White in his Defense c. 30. p. 282. scripture ether by the immediate light Scripture known by â—ight of nature of Gods spirit or by the light of nature may be known to be Gods word And if by the light of nature without diuine faith Hooker l. 3. § 8. we know by reason that the scripture is the word of God By reason Whitaker aforsaid l. 1. de Script p. 25. The most diuine character of the scripture doth most plainly tel al that ether haue receaued the Holie Ghost or are imbued with mean understanding By mean vnderstanding that it came from God And if mean vnderstanding suffice without the Holie Ghost there need no diuine faith to beleue it And ibid. p. 122. Who hath reason and wil vse it may therby most easily discern these diuine books from mens books P. 150. Scriptures By onelie reading may be known by onely reading And in praefat ad Staplet The Scripture giueth so clear a testimonie of its diuiniâ— tie that who read it with a smal attention and iudgment cannot be ignorant that it is diuine And p. 77. vnles he be doltish l. 2. p. 235. Scriptures may be acknowledged and held without the testimonie of the Spirit NINTH CHAPTER VVhether translated Scripture be authentical FIRST SECTION Protestants sometimes affirme WHite in his Way to the Church p. 12. I say the Scripture translated into English Translated Scripture rule of faith is the Rule of faith whervpon I relying haue not a humane but a diuine authoritie And p. 27. The doctrin conteined in the Scripture is a light and so abideth into what language soeuer it be translated and therfore the children of light know it and discern it Ibid. So the vnlearned man is secured not vpon the Churches credit and authoritie but by the ministerie which teacheth him he is directed to the light itself And this Ministerie we haue and vse for our Translations but they that obey it know the Translation and so proportionably The matter of Scripture sheweth it self al articles of faith to be infallible becaus the matter therof appeares to them as a candle in a lantern shewing it self in its own light And in his table before his book The Scriptures translated into English are the Rule of faith And in his Defense of his Way c. 28. p. 266. Though it be granted that the Ministerie of men and rules of art and knowledg of tonges be al subiect to error yet doth it not follow that by them we cannot obtein infallible assurance of our translations Chillingworth c. 2. § 32. we beleue the Scripture not finally Matter of Scripture known by it self and for itself but for the matter conteined in it And so al Protestants should say seing when they exhort the common people to the reading of their translated Bibles they bear them in hand that it is the word of God and that their translation of the word of God is authentical and worthie to be beleued for it self Besids they did the people beleue what they teach them becaus it is in their Bibles and so make their Bibles the rule and ground of their peoples faith And no other infallible rule of faith their common people can pretend to haue Moreouer if they make the matter or true sense of Scripture the rule of faith as commonly they doe they cannot denie but Scripture truly translated hath the same matter which the original hath SECOND SECTION Sometimes denie it WHitaker Contro 1. q. 2. c. 7. We make no edition of Scripture authentical but the Hebrew in the old and the Greek in the New Testament Translations if No translation authentical they agree we allow them if they differ we reiect them Ibid. c. 8. We doe doe not say that we must stand to our translations as authentical of themselues but we appeal to the fountaines onely as truly authentical C. 9. Authentical Scripture must come imediatly from the Holie Ghost C. 10. onely authentical is Canonical Et ibid. q. 5. c. 9. The ignorance of the original toungs Hebrew and Greek hath caused manie errors And thus al Protestants should say becaus
letter or vvord of God cannot sufficiently propose to men anie thing to be beleued vvith diuine and infallible faith 1. THat Scripture taken by it self alone without attestation of the Church that it is the letter or word of God doth not sufficiently propose to vs or to speak more properly that in Scripture or by Scripture alone is not sufficiently proposed to vs anie thing to be beleued with diuine and infallible faith is euident becaus al the Scriptures sufficient proposal a Sup c. 1◠sect 1 dependeth on this that it self is the word of God And b Sup. c. 5. sect 1. it self saieth not anie where that it is the word of God and if it did anie where say it that saying would require an other word of God to say the same of it and so forward without end And this is so clear as Hooker l. 2. § 4. Laude Relat. sec 16. p. 70. and 88. Potter sec 5. and Chillingworth c. 2. doe both grant it and proue it and likewise al other c Sup. c. 6. sect 2. Protestants who grant that the light of the Scripture is not so great that without the Church shew it to vs we can see it And indeed al Protestants should grant the same who confess as we related l. 1. c. 14. that the preaching of the Church is necessarie to engender diuine faith For if that be necessarie as we haue proued l. 1. c. 11. 12. 13. 14. we cannot beleue the Scripture to be the word of God before the Church preach it to vs. 2. But it is against those Protestants who as we related supra c. 6. sec 1. auouch that Scripture in it self hath such and so much diuine light as by it self alone it can be infallibly known to be the word of God But beside that this great light is denied by most of their fellowes as is shewed c. 6. cit sec 2. and feigned without al sufficient ground as shal hereafter appeare it may be clearly refuted For as Laude loco cit p. 7. saieth wel If this inward light were so clear how could there haue been anie varietie among the ancient Beleuers touching the authoritie of S. Iames and S. Iudes epistle and the Apocalyps For certainly the light which is in the Scripture was the same then which is now And I add How could the Lutherans not see this light in S. Iames Epistle as wel as the Caluinists Nether can it be pretended that this is becaus the Holie Ghost doth not sufficiently lighten their eyes becaus this light may be seen euen by natural reason as Whitaker Hooker White and other taught supra c. 8. sec 2. 3. Besids this light great or less is not fit or apt to the end for which it was feigned For it was feigned to defend that beleif That Scripture is the word of God dependeth not on the testimonie of the Church but proceedeth of the Scripture it self And clear light cannot cause beleif Light causeth not faith but sight or vision which is of things not appearing Hebrewes 11. but onely causeth certain knowledg or vision And not light but onely authoritie is the formal obiect of faith For as the Apostle saieth Faith is of hearing not of sight And S. Austin l. devtilitate Credendi c. 11. That we beleue we owe to authoritie So that light wanteth both the material obiect of faith which is Things not appearing Haebrae 11. and also the formal obiect which is Authoritie And therfore Whitaker l. 2. de Script p. 227. 319. 235. l. 1. p. 77. 116. 122. often times granteth that though certain knowledg That the Scripture is the word of God may be had without the testimonie of the Church yet denieth that diuine faith therof can be had without the Churches preaching becaus the Apostle saieth plainly How shal they beleue without à Preacher And Faith is of hearing And Potter sec 5. p. 8. That Scripture is of diuine authoritie the Beleuer sees by that glorious beam of diuine light which shines in Scripture and by manie internal arguments found in the letter it self So this light breedeth sight not faith Beside How doe Beleuers How doe Beleuers se◠see If therfore the Scripture can sufficiently propose nothing to be beleued with diuine faith til it self be beleued with diuine faith to be the word of God as is certain the natural knowledg or vision which one may haue that the Scripture is the word of God without the Churches testimonie serueth not to the end for which it was deuised Besids I hope they wil not say that their diuine faith That al that is in Scripture is true is resolued into natural Sup c. 8 se 1. knowledg That the Scripture is the word of God as Chillingworth seemeth to say c. 2. p. 53. 72. For so the ground and foundation of diuine and infallible faith should be natural humane and fallible knowledg Moreouer this internal light is no word of God but at most a qualitie of the word of God and nothing can be the material obiect of diuine faith and beleued but what is the word of God or saied of God Wherfore ether they must shew where God hath saied that Scripture is the word of God or they can neuer beleue it with diuine faith or they must say that they can beleue that with diuinefaith which God hath neuer saied which is most absurd And into this absurditie al Protestants must fal who say they beleue with diuine faith that the Scripture is the word of God and yet denie that there is anie vnwritten word of God which saieth That the Scripture is the word of God d Sup. c. 5. sect 2. For doubtles there is no such written word as themselues confess 4. Moreouer this light great or less is ether in the letter or words of the Scripture or in the sense therof Some Protestants seem to say that it is in the letter or words For thus Whitaker l. 1. de Scrip. p. 25 We beleue the Scriptures for the most diuine character P. 88. That they Scripture known by the words are the Scriptures is known by the stile and phrase P. 104. The Scripture doth shew à certain kinde of diuinitie in the verie words phrase and in al the forme of the speech And p. 113. That it came from God is euident by the inscription the hand the seal the things and al the letter◠And Contro 1. q. 6 c. 9. As if by the verie inscription to the Romans it were not euident that it is Pauls And Laude sec 16 p. 83. He that beleues resolues his last and ful assent That the Scripture is of diuine authoritie into internal arguments found in the letter it self But beside that this internal light in the words of Scripture is merely feigned it is clearly refuted becaus so al men should see it who can read the Scripture And also becaus the words of Scripture are such as men first inuented and haue
could see them to be Apostles of themselues but becaus they gaue to others the light of faith and pietie And thus much for this first proof that Scripture cannot sufficiently shew it self to be the word of God for want of the material obiect of diuine faith which is Gods saying that it is his word For God no where saieth in Scripture that Scripture is his word and what God faieth diuine faith cannot beleue 7. An other argument to the same purpose may be taken from the Scriptures not hauing in it self the formal obiect of faith which is authoritie For albeit Scripture in it self contein most diuine and infallible veritie yet taken by it self as it is such words and such sense it hath not proper authoritie becaus Authoritie is in an Author and an Author is a Rational or intellectual Person saying something which for his authoritie or credit we beleue And Veritie which we beleue is in his speech Authoritie or Veracitie for which we beleue is in his person Likewise we cannot beleue but for some witnes who testifieth that which we are to beleue and a witnes doubtles is an intellectual person distinct from his testimonie or that which he witnesseth And Scripture is no intellectual person but the testimonie of God who is supreme witnes of it Wherfore it is no formal cause of our beleef as a witnes is but onely the material obiect which is to be beleued Besids the Character or stile of Scripture or the doctrin or maiestie therof being not authoritie or veracitie they cannot cause formal faith or beleif but at most opinion or knowledg For as we haue often repeated out of S. Austin That we beleue we owe to Authoritie Which is so euident as Whitaker l. 3 de Scriptura p. 408. saieth Faith relieth vpon authoritie Authoritie is the foundation of faith And p. 509. To beleue some Authoritie is necessarie Wherfore wel wrote Stapleton Contro 3. q. 1. art 2. The word of God it self written or vnwritten is not of it self and properly à mean to beleue but is that which is beleued Is not the formal obiect of faith or anie parte therof but is the material obiect For the word speaketh not but is heard by the voice of God or of the Church speaking and faith is of hearing the word of God And therfore properly Scripturam credimus non Scripturae And in like manner Potter sec 7. p. 95. saieth The Creed conteines onely the material obiect of faith not the formal And yet it conteines the words and sense of Scripture Wherfore the Scripture it self containes not the formal obiect of faith but onely the material which is diuine veritie And when graue Authors attribute authoritie to Scripture ether they take authoritie for veritie or credibilitie to be beleued or they speak figuratiuely attribâ—ting by prosopopeia a person to the Scripture as is vsual when men speak of writings to speak of them as if they were the writers So we say the Scripture speaketh saieth teacheth and such like meaning God by the Scripture doth so Or els they take not Scripture by it self but with the writer therof And so no doubt it hath authoritie not in it self but adioined to it to wit as it is the Scripture of God or word of God But this authoritie is the increate authoritie of God himself beside which we must haue in ordinarie course à create authoritie for to beleue with diuine faith and this create authoritie is not in the Scripture but in the Church and much less is in the Scripture Prima vâ—ritas as Whitaker saieth l. 3. de Scripturâ p. 485. 509. For so it shold not be a made or created thing but God himself And hence appeareth that Protestants beleuing what they beleue merely becaus they finde â—up c. 11. â—ect 1. it in Scripture and making Scripture their formal and vttermost cause of their beleif haue no formal faith becaus they beleue not for anie formal authoritie or veracitie but for seeming veritie of the things which they finde in Scripture which seeming veritie may cause opinion but not true and formal faith But to admit that the original hand writings of the Prophets and Apostles known to be theirs had authoritie sufficient to beget diuine faith how can mere copies of their writings and those made by fallible men as al Bibles now extant are made by ordinarie writers or Printers haue Copies of authentical writings are not authentical of themselues such authoritie vnles they be signed or testified by some authentical person that they are agreable to the Originals Are mere Copies of neuer so authentical writings made by priuate men but not testified by anie of sufficient credit that they are agreable to the originals of sufficient credit to beget humane vndoubted beleif in anie court of Iustice And wil we haue mere copies of the Prophets or Apostles writings made by fallible and ordinarie men to be of themselues alone of sufficient credit to beget diuine faith can not vndoubted humane faith be gotten by such mere copies not attested by anie authentical person and can vndoubted diuine faith becaused by such copies made by fallible men cannot reasonably be accouÌ„ted infallible vnles they be attested by some infallible person and it is the attestation of the infallible person which maketh them infallibly credible to vs. Wherfore out of that which I haue hitherto said I argue Vvhat is onely the material obiect of faith is not the formal thus in forme What is onely thematerial obiect of faith or is onely beleued cannot be also the formal obiect of faith and the reason of beleuing That which is the word of God written or vnwritten is onely the material obiect of faith and what is beleued Therfore it can not be also the formal obiect and reason of beleuing The Maior is euident The Minor I proue becaus the word of God taken by it self hath no formal authoritie And onely formal authoritie is the formal obiect of faith and reason of beleuing And here is the difference betwixt the word of God and the Prophets Apostles and Church of God that these haue formal diuine authoritie in themselues and therfore are not onely material obiects of faith and beleued to be Prophets Apostles Difference between Scripture and Church and Church of God but also are formal external reasons of beleuing what they say themselues are or what els they propose 8. A third proof that Scripture of it self cannot sufficiently propose it self to be the word of God is becaus the authoritie of the true Church is the formal external cause for which in ordinarie course the Scripture is beleued with diuine faith to be the word of God This is euident out of those places in Scripture which we cited before l. 1. c. 11. and 12. which not onely proue the necessitie of the Churches preaching the Scripture to be Gods word for to be beleued as such but also proue the verie authoritie
of the Church to be necessarie for to beleue it For faith is said to be of hearing of the word of God lawfully preached The Church is called the pillar and ground of truth she is accounted Gods witnes her voice Christs voice her Pastors are accounted Gods Legats and apointed by God to keep men constant in faith Al which doe shew not onely that the Churches preaching is necessarie to beleue but that also her authoritie or testimonie is necessarie And al authoritie or testimonie is a formal cause of beleif becaus That we beleue Chilling c. 1. n. 7. we ow to authoritie And Protestants define faith to be an assent to diuine Reuelations vpon the authoritie of the Reuealer And doubtles à Reuealer is a liuing and intellectual person not a dead letter Whitaker also as I before cited Authoritie is the foundation of faith â—aith relieth vpon authoritie Herevpon S. Austin l. contra Epist Fundam c. 4. and 5. professeth that authoritie held him in the Catholik Church That Christ by miracles got authoritie and by Authoritie deserued beleef That religion can no way be rightly gotten but by authoritie And otherwhere De vtil cred c. 17. Epist 5. 6. that in the Church is the height the top the castle of authoritie and that her authoritie is most firme And l. 2. contra Crescon c. 32. I receaue not what Cyprian held of baptizing heretiks becaus the Church doth not receaue it l. 2. de Doctrin Christiana c. 8. The books of wisdom and Ecclesiasticus are to be accounted Prophetical becaus they haue been admitted into authoritie l. contra Epist Fund c. 5. Which books of the Acts I must needs beleue if I beleue the Gospel becaus both Books Catholiks authoritie doth alike commend vnto me In which places he plainly maketh the authoritie of the Catholik Church a sufficient external cause of his beleif or not beleif 9. Reason also sheweth the same For if God would haue vs to beleue his misteries it is most likelie he would apoint on earth some external authoritie subordinat to his supreme authoritie for which we should beleue them Whervpon S. Austin l. de vtilit Credendi c. 16. saied If God haue Prouidence of mankinde we ought not to despaire but that he hath apointed some authoritie on which we relying as on a sure step may mount to God And this authoritie he saieth is the authoritie of the Church But the authoritie on which we relie is doubtles some formal cause of our beleif Protestants also sometimes confess the same For thus Chillingworth c. 2. Scripture beleued for the Churches authoritie p. 96. It is vpon the authoritie of vniuersal tradition that we would haue them beleue Scripture The same he hath p. 69. Whitaker Contro 1. q. 3. c. 7. We are forced by the Churches Forced to beleue authoritie to beleue these books to be Canonical And if her authoritie can force vs to beleue it is a sufficient cause of beleef And l. 1. de Script p. 15. We may be forced by the authoritie of the Church to acknowledg the Scripture P. 72. The Church is Mistres and Guide of our faith P. 87. I am à Disciple of the Church I acknowledg her my Mother P. 46. We cannot beleue but by the testimonie of the Church as by the ordinarie meanes P. 62. We are led to beleue first by the authoritie of the Church P. 68. I most willingly grant the external iudgment of the Church to be the help and means ordained by God and necessarie for vs to engender nourish and confirme faith And l. 2. p. 234. The Authoritie of the Church is a certain introduction to beleue P. 289. Catholik authoritie commending both books Austin was necessarily induced to beleue both books The same we must doe For what book soeuer such authoritie shal commend to vs we must needs beleue it P. 320. I grant the Scripture is to be receaued becaus it is receaued of the Church Contr. 1. q. 3. c. 2. The Church is a witnes of holie writ C. 5. By tradition Tradition conuâ—nceth and authoritie of the Church it may be conuinced which books be Canonical C. 9. what other doe al those Fathers proue then that Scripture is to be receaued becaus it was alwaies receaued of the Church And doth not Becaus giue a cause of beleif And Hooker Laude Potter cited l. 1. c. 14. grant that the testimonie of the present Church is the key or dore that lets men into the Scripture Laude Relat sec 16. p. 102. euen to this knowledg of them that they are the word of God And Spalatensis and Chillingworth c. 10. libri primi add that such a book cannot be known to be Canonical Scripture but by the testimonie of the Church But authoritie testimonie iudgment are formal causes of beleif And if Protestants doe think that the authoritie Sâ—p l. 1. c. 14. of the Church is no formal cause of faith why should they teach that the Churches preaching is necessarie to faith and that the preaching teaching or proposing by priuat men would not suffice For priuat men may propose al the Church proposeth onely they cannot propose anie thing with such authoritie 10. And hence appeareth euidently that the true Church and her authoritie must alwaies in ordinarie course be beleued before Scripture becaus her authoritie is the formal external cause of the beleif of the Scripture And also that falsly wrote Whitaker l. 2. de Scrip. p. 235. The Church hath no authoritie in matters of faith Ibid. p. 228. The testimonie of the Church is no cause of faith And l. p. 122. The So Laude Relat. sec 1. p. 117. Taude sec 16. p. 106. Scripture is now the onely sufficient meaÌ„s to beleue And Contr. 2. q. 5. c. 18. Faith doth not depend vpon the authoritie of the Church And ibid. c. 20. The Scripture is more manifest then the Church And Chillingworth c. 2. p. 57. we say euerie man is to chuse his religion first and then his Church For beside what we haue proued Whitaker himself hath granted That the authoritie of the Church is an introduction to faith That we are first led to beleue by her authoritie and that her So laude sec 16. p. 89. Hooker l. 2. §. 7. Potter sect 5. testimonie is the ordinarie and necessarie means to engender faith That her authoritie causeth faith and therfore her authoritie must first of al be beleued becaus it is an introduction à first leader à necessarie means to ingender faith or as others say the key or dore to faith 1â— And out of that which hath been said in this Chapter is easily solued that question why is tradition Vvhy Traditionerodible of it self aâ—d not Scripture of itself Credible and not Scripture I answer That if we speak of tradition materially that is of the doctrin which we haue by tradition that is no more credible of itself then is the doctrin which we