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
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
them keep this in this main controuersie legant let them read in Scripture not themselues infer out of Scripture that God hath set al infallible authoritie for matters of faith in Scripture and we wil beleue them as i l. de vnitate c. 17. S. Augustin saied in the like case to the donatists and k laude Relat sec 33. Chillirg p. 3 33 Protestants saie in the dislike to vs or I wil els say with the same S. Augustin I beleue what God saieth not l de vnita c. 11. what vaine heretiks babble or what fallible men infer 6. Nay Protestants are so far from reading in Scripture that in it is al infallible authoritie for matters of faith as themselues m seâ— infra l. 2. c. 5. sec 2. confess â—hat by Scripture al things absolutâ—ly cannot be proued which are to be beleued That Scripture is not an absolutly perfect Rule of controuersies that it cannot decide the question of Schisme that it is not safe to iudge al things by scripture alone that it doth not contein simply al things which are necessarie to saluation that it cannot assure vs that it is the word of God That it needeth an interpreter for some points of faith Which are to far from the nature of an al-sufficient infallible guide of men in matters of faith and so far from the nature of an al-sufficient rule in matters of faith as I think no iudicious Protestant can in his iudgment ioine them together For it is plain contradiction to be Al-sufficient and to be deficient in so main and so manie points 7. And not with standing though Hou scripture is necessarie and a rule in Scripture be not that Al-sufficient authoritie which God hath instituted on earth for to direct men by right faith to heauen nor it be the entire or the necessarie Rule â—or the very being of infallible faith yet it is necessarie to the better being of faith and a sufficient Rule both for al fundamental or al simply necessarie points of faith and also for the most points of Christian faith and à mediate rule for al of them And this being al that for which Scripture was written and which it ought to haue it is to be accounted a perfect â—ule becaus euerie thing is perfect when it hath al that it ought to haue And herein we grant more perfection to Scripture then Protestants doe both because we teach that it containeth al that we account absolutly necessarie or fundamental to saith Protestants say it teacheth not that which they account the most fundamental point of al to wit that it self is the word of God and also becaus we say that eâ—her immediatâ—ly or mediatly it teacheth clearly al points of faith what soeuer in that it sendeth vs to the true Church which teacheth clearly al points But Protestants say that nether immediatly nor mediatly it teacheth some clearly and sendeth vs not to any infallible interpreter So that S. Augustin l. 1. cont Creson c. 33. we grant both more vniuerâ—alitie and also more claritie to Scripure then Protestants do though they wold seem to maâ—e more of scripture them we doe but in truth make so litle of the Scripture as Chilling 〈◊〉 2. 6. 32. v. 9. some of them teach that we are not bound vnder paine of damnation to beleue the diuine authoritie of Scâ—ipture Nay say that the Scripture is none of the material obiects of faith that we haâ—e as great reason to beleue there was a King Henrie VIII as that which is saied in Sâ—ripture of Christ suffering See infra l. 2. c. 8. sec 2. and c. 15. n. 2 vnder Pontius Pilat which is in effect to say we haâ—e as great reason to beleue some men as to beleue God For not al but some men say there was a King Henrie VIII and both God and in a manner al men say thar Christ suffered vnder Pontius Pilat INDEX OF THE CHAPTERS OF the first Book I. IN which is enplicated the question touching the iâ—fallibilitie of the Church II. In which are set down the rational grounds of what is saied in this treatise concerning the Church III. What conditions are necessarie to the Al-sufficient external Proposer of points of faith IV. That God can giue to men a diuine infallibilitie or veracitie in proposing matters of faith V. That the true Church of God is a sufficient and infallible Proposâ—r of al which she proposeth as points of faih proued by what she is saied to be in Scripture VI. That the true Church of God is infallibilible in al she proposeth as points of faith proued by Gods promises to her in Scripture VII That the true Church of God is an infallible proposer of matters of faith proued by the holie Fathers VIII That the true Church of God is infallible in matters of faith proued by Reason IX Some of the protestants reasons against the infallibilitie of the true Church of God in matters of faith answered X. That the true Church of God is infallible in matters of faith proued by manifold coufessions of protestants XI That the true Church of God is in ordinarie Course a necessarie Propeposer of al points of faith proued by holy Fathers XII That the true Church of God is a necessarie Proposer of al points of faith proued by Reason XIII That the true Church of God is a necessarie proposer of al points of faith proued by plain confessions of Protestants XIV That Protestants grant the Churches authoritie to be diuinâ— XV. That Protestants grant it to be a supernatural cause of saith XVI How a vicious circle is auoided in prouing the Church by the Scripture and the scripture by the Church XVII How we are to answer that question How know yoâ— the Scripture to be the word of Gode XVIII That the true Church of God doth clearly and vniuersally propose al points of faith XIX Which is a sufficient Proposal of the Church for points of faith INDEX Of the Chapters of the second Book I. PRocestants vncertain which books be canonical Scripture II. Protestants vncertain whither al that is in scripture be plain and easie to be vnderstood or no. III. Protestants vncertain whether al things necessarie to be beleued be actually in scripture or no. IV. Protestants vncertain whether al things necessarie to be beleued be clearly in scripture or no. V. Protestants vncertain whether scripture be the onlie and entire Rule of faith or no. VI. Protestants vncertain whether scripture of itself do sufficiently shew it self to be the word of God or no. VII Protestants vncertain whether scripture be a true Iudge of Controuersies or no. VIII Protestants vncertain whether scripture be to be beleued to be Gods word with infallible asseurance or no. IX Protestants vncertain whether translated scripture be Authentical or no. X. Protestants vncertain whether scripture be to be beleued to be the word of God only for the Churches testimonie or no. XI Protestants
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
vncertain whether scripture be the formal cause of their beleuing whatsoeuer they beleue or no. XII Protestants vncertain whether they had the scripture from Catâ—oliks or no. XIII Protestants vncertain whether Catholiks make great account of scripture and proue their doctrin by it or no. XIV That scripture taken by it self without the atâ—estation of the Church cannot sufficiently propose to vs anie thing to be beleued with diuine faith XV. That scripture though beleued to be the word of God doth not sufficiently propose al points of faith XVI That Scripture doth not sufficienly propose anie point of faith to al men capable of external proposal XVII That scripture hath not proposed points of faith in al times when faith was XVIII That scripture hath not proposed points of faith in al places where faith was XIX That scripture doth not clearly enough propose al points of faith XX. That the proposal of scripture is not in ordinarie course necessarie to diuine faith XXI That the scripture conta ineth the summ of Christian faith XXII That the scripture teacheth plainly the summ of Christian faith XXIII That the scripture is necessarie to the better being of Christian faith XXIV Protestants arguments that the scripture conteineth al points of faith answered OF THE AL-SVFFICIENT EXTERNAL PROPOSER OF POINTS OF FAITH FIRST BOOK THE STATE OF THE question concerning the Infalibilitie of the Church explicated FIRST CHAPTER IN the former part of this work which was of the distinction of fundamental and not fundamental points of faith I shewed that there are no such fundamental points of faith as Protestants imagin to wit such as if they be beleued suffice to haue a sauing beleefe to be a true member of the Church and to be in the way of saluation though other points of faith sufficiently proposed be not beleued nor any such not fundamental points of faith as if they be sufficiently proposed be not necessarie and fundamental to a sauing faith to a true member of the Church why treated of the sufficient Proposer and to the way of saluation but that a sufficient proposal of what points of faith soeuer doth binde to beleue them al and euerie one of them vnder pain of losse of sauing faith of being a true member of the Church and of being in the way of saluation It remaineth that we sheâ— who is this â—l-sufficient Proposer of points of faith and which is a sufficient Proposal of them And becaus as we shal proue hereafter the Church is this Al-sufficient external Proposer of points of faith and that she cannot be such vnless she be infallible in al points of faith it is requisit before we proceed to explicate what we vnderstand by the Church what by her infallibilitie what by matters of faith and what by necessarie to al and euerie one 2. First therefore by the Church what is meant by The Church we vnderstand not anie particular Church whatsoeuer either of the cittie of Rome or of anie particular Prouince and mâ—ch less anie particular person what soeuer but only the whole vniuersal or Catholike Church of Christ and we only â—n quire whether she be infallible in al points vhich she teacheth as points of diuine faith not regarding for this present whether also anie particular Church or person be infallible or no becaus it wil suffice to our purpose that the whole Church be so infallible and also because the infallibilitie of anie particular Church or person may be disputed salua fidei compage as S. Augustin speaketh 3. The second point to be explicated what by infallibilitiâ— is Infallibilitie by which we mean not freedome both from al actual error and also from al possibilitie of error as is in God euen by his nature but only freedome from al actual error in matters of faith by Gods efficacious assistance Bellarm. l 6. degraâ—â—s 4. Grâ—tia effi cax adiunctâ—m habet infallibilitatem non necessitatem abstracting whether there be also freedome from al possibilitie of error in such matters or no. And this is that kinde of infallibilitie which we attribute to Gods true Church and which is both necessarie and sufficient to her for to be a fit external proposer of faith Necessarie becaus if she were not in some sort infallible in matters of faith her proposal of such matters would not be sufficient to engender infallible faith of them And also sufficient to be an external Proposer of such matters subordinat to God who is the principal proposer of them For as it implieth contradiction that diuine faith should beleue any thing that is not true so likewise it implieth contradiction that she who by Gods assistance is free from al actual errors in matters of faith should actâ—ally errin them and therefore she is a sufficient external ground and pillar to stand or relie vpon And hence it appeareth See infra c. 9. n. 3. how superfluous it were to proue that the Church hath no possibilitie to err ether near or remote in matters of faith seing freedome from actual error in them by Gods efficacious assistance sufficeth to an external proposer of them And that the true Church of God hath this kinde of freedome from error in matters of faith is clear by Christs promises by the testimonies of the Prophets and Apostles by the attestation of the holie Fathers by the light of reason and by the confessions some times of the learnedest Protestants as we shal shew hereafter 4. The third particle to be explicated whaâ— is meaÌ„t by matters of faith is Matters of faith By which we mean only such matters as the Church proposeth to be beleued with diuine faith not such as she proposeth to be beleued with humane faith as are the liues of saints in the Breuiarie their miracles Reliques aâ—d such like 5. The fourth particle is necessarie what by Necessarie to saluation to saluation In which particle a Potter sec 5. p. 16 19. 21. laude sec 21. p. 140. â—60 seqq Protestants commonly agree with Catholiks in words that the Church is infallible but indeed they desagree two ways For first they mean onâ—ly such points of faith as by reason of the matter are b whitaker cont 2. q. 4. l. 2. Caluin 4. Institut c. 8. potter sec 5. p. 19. 23. laude p. 355 357. 358. absolutely necessarie as the passion and Resurrection of Christ and such like and not also such as are necessarie to Saluation by reason they are clearly reuealed by God and sufficiently proposed to vs. For Catholiks hold that the Church is infaillible in matters of faith which are any way necessarie to Saluation though only by reason of their clear reuelation and sufficient proposal Becaus if we beleue not al things litle orgreat clearly reuealed by God and sufficiently proposed to vs as from God we doe not beleue God to be faithful in al his words which yet to beleue is most necessarie to salâ—ation Secondely
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
Proposal of matters of faith and therfore not Proposers 3. The second condition necessarie to a sufficient external Proposer of points of faith instituted by God is that his authoritie be c See infra 〈◊〉 5. n. 2. diuine or diuinely assisted as the Apostles was and infallible in Proposing them The reason is becaus points of faith are supernatural and diuine and to be beleued so assuredly as we ought to d See infra 62. 6. 8. sec 1. curse an Angel if he saied the contrarie Galat. 1. And therfore no humane or natural authoritie but that which passeth Angelical authoritie and is supernatural and diuine is apt or sufficient to cause such assurance of diuine matters And this e Vvitaker l. 1. descrip p. 392. 415. Potter sect 5. p 7. See infra l. 5. n. 5. and l. 2. c. 11. n. 1. Protestants grant For becaus they think the scripture onely hath diuine and infallible authoritie they make it alone the assured Proposer of points of faith Besides by a sufficient Proposer we mean such á one as proposeth matters of faith so sufficiently as matters of diuine faith require and whose proposal is such as it bindeth men to beleue with diuine faith what he proposeth and such it could not be vnless his authoritie in proposing were infallible diuine or diuinely assisted efficaciously 4. The third condition is sufficient claritie in his proposing points of faith The reason is becaus if he donot clearly enough propose vnto vs the points of faith we cannot be assured what he proposeth or what we are to beleue 5. The fourth condition is that his Proposal be necessarie in ordinarie course for vs to haue faith The reason is becaus if his Proposal were not necessarie to vs for to haue faith he were not the ordinarie External Proposer instituted by God without whose concurse God wil not in ordinarie course produce faith 6. The fift condition is that he be vniuersal for time for place for points of faith and for al kindes of men capable of External Proposal The reason is becaus the external Proposer without whose concurse God wil not in ordinarie course engender faith must propose al points of faith must be present in al times when God engendereth faith in al places where he engendereth faith and present to al kinds of men capable of external Proposal in whome he engendereth faith And otherwise he were not the ordinarie external Proposer without whose concurse God in ordinarie course wil not engender faith And we enquire who is this ordinarie external Proposer of points of faith becaus onely he is necessarie to be known Now of al these conditions onely Infallibilitie and claritie in some points agree to scripture as is euident by it self and we shal proue more hereafter and therfore it is not the ordinarie External Proposer necessarie to be sought and they al agree to the true Church as we shal proue euidently by Gods holie assistance And we wil begin with her Infalibilitie in matters of faith For that she is a companie of Intellectual persons needs no proof which we wil proue by plain places of Scripture testimonies of Holie Fathers reason grounded in Scripture and open Confessions of learned Protestants Becaus the denial of the Churchs Infallibilitie in matters of faith is the formal cause of al Heresies and Infidelitie as her Infallibilitie or veracitie in matters of faith is the formal external cause of al diuine faith For she being by testimonie of the Holie Scripture apointed by God to be the pillar ground and witness of diuine truth must needs be the formal External cause of our beleife of diuine truth without which God ordinarily wil not engender faith and consequently The rote of al Heresie the denial of the Infallibilitie of this pillar ground and witness must needs be a formal cause of al heresie or Infidelitie opposit to beleif of diuine truth and of Hereticks vncertaintie what they are to beleue firmely and vndoubtedly For who leaue the pillar ground and testimonie of truth can neuer be firmely setled Wheras Catholicks relying firmely vpon this pillar and standing fast vpon this ground setled by God and testimonie appointed by him are firme and constant in their faith and iustly giue it for a sufficient secoÌ„darie reason of what they beleue because the pillar ground and testimonie of truth is most iustly giuen for such a sufficient reason of our beleuing truth Yet before we proue the Churches diuine veracitie or infallibilitie in matters of faith we wil proue that God can giue to men such a diuine veracitie or infallibilitie becaus this is some step to proue that he hath giuen it at least it remoueth a great impediment of beleuing that he hath giuen it and besides it maketh the testimonies wherwith we wil afterwards proue that he hath giuen such Infallibilitie to be more vndoubted FOVRTH CHAPTER That God can giue to men a diuine veracitie or Infallibilitie in proposing matters of faith 1. THERE be two kinds of diuine Infallibilitie the one Twoe kindes of diuine Infallib litie increate and intrinsecally diuine which is in God himself who is the prime veracitie the other create and but extrinsecally diuine in that it is diuinely and efficaciously assisted by God to teach nothing but truth and therfore but analogically called diuine as a holesome medicin is tearmed healthfull And in this sorte was the authoritie of the Prophets and Apostles diuine and is the authoritie or veracitie of the true Church of God in matters of faith The former diuine authoritie or veracitie is the principal alone sufficient and absolutly necessarie cause of diuine faith the latter is but secondarie not alone sufficient nor simply necessarie cause of diuine faith but onely a sufficient external subordinat cause and necessarie onely in ordinarie course yet both these authorities or veracities are so Infallible as it implieth contradiction that ether of them should teach anie vntruth And as for the former that need no proaf and the like is manifest of the latter For it is plain contradiction that one diuinely ad effectually assisted by God to teach truth should teach vntruth And therfore this latter kinde of veracitie may be a sufficient external and subordinate cause of diuine and infallible faith such as implieth contradiction to be fals For a diuine veracitâ—â—â— or authoritie which implieth contradiction to See infra c. 5. n. 7. teach vntruth may be a sufficient external cause of such faith as implieth contradiction to be fals and may be iustly giuen as such for a sufficient cause of our beleef And this is that kinde of diuine authoritie or veracitie which we say God can giue to men and which he hath giuen to his Church in matters of faith Neuertheless we doe not make the Infallibilitie of the Church equal to the Infallibilitie of the Prophets and Apostles for their Infallibilitie was by immediate reuelation from God and sufficient to propose euen new points
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
Whitaker contro 1. q. 3. c. 11. and l. 1. de Script c. 3. p. 44. and l. 2. c. 10. sec 4. Pareus l. 3. de Iustif c. 3. and 8. to which I ad that Beza in colloquio Montisbelg p. 407. saieth of extraordinarie means by which faith is infused we haue no testimonie in Scripture Wherfore they can haue no faith that Luther had his faith by anie extraordinarie means or otherwise then Suencfeldius Anabaptists and Enthusiasts pretend that they had theirs And hence also appeareth that Protestants nether take the right way which God hath apointed and the Scripture plainly declareth for to learn true faith and diuine truth by Protestants take noâ— the right way to get right faith nor wil learn them of those whome God hath apointed to teach and shew them For the onely way which God in ordinarie course hath apointed and the Scripture declareth to learn true faith by is by hearing Rom. 10. and the persons whome they are to hear are lawfully sent Preachers ibidem the Successors of those of whome Christ saied Who heareth yee heareth me Luke 10. and whome he hath put in his Church for consummation of Saints Ephes 4. and whome he hath made the pillar and ground of truth 1. Timoth. 3. But Protestants seek truth by their reading or by their discoursing or inference and not of Pastors or of the pillar or ground of truth and therfore no meruel if they neuer finde truth whiles they wil not seek it how and where it is to be found For where should truth be sought or found but at the pillar and grouÌ„d of truth And who seek it not there are neuer like to finde diuine faith but at most humane beleef And Chillingworih therfore often times L 36. 37. 62. 73. 112. 117. professeth that Protestants haue onely humane and moral certaintie such as they haue of profane stories no infallible or certainly vnerring beleef and that they haue as great reason to beleue there was a Heurie eight as that Iesus Christ suffered vnder Pontius Pilat To such prophane credulitie or rather incredulitie are they fallen who seek not truth at the pillar and ground of truth which is the Church Vvhitaker l. 1. descrip p. p. 8. 43. Chilâ—ng c. 2. n. 12. but profess that they wil first seek truth and then the Church which is as much as if they said they wil seek first the end and afterwards the onely means to come to it But now let vs proue that Protestants doe some times grant that the authoritie of the Church is euen diuine or diuinely infallible FIFTEENTH CHAPTER That Protestants doe diuers vvaies confess that the authoritie of the Church in matters â—f faith is diuine or diuinely infallible 1. IN the former Tenth Chapter we shewed that Protestants doe often times confess that the Church is infallible at lest in fundamental points of faith now we wil shew that some times they confess that she is also diuinely infallible that is infallible by Gods diuine efficacious assistance And indeed it cannot be conceaued how she can be infallible in anie kinde of supernatural and diuine matters and not be diuinely infallible in them that is infallible by Gods diuine efficacious assistance For by herself or her natural power she cannot so much as know them much less be infallible in them 2. Caluin in Luc. 10. The testimonie of our Saluation giuen by men sent of God is no less then if he spoke from heauen The same saieth confessio Bohemica c. 14. Apologia Confess Augustanae c. de Poenitentia perkins in Reformed Catholik cont 3. c 3. and others Whitaker l. 3 de Script p. 4â—6 when the Church giueth testimonie to the Scriptures surely this testimonie is diuine because God is the author Testimonie of the Church diuine of this testimonie Behold the testimonie of the Church is diuine and that becaus God is Author of it Nether can he by the testimonie of the Church mean the truth testified by her becaus that were to equiuocate and also to grant no more her testimonie to be diuine then is the testimonie of anie priuat man of the Scriptures Wherfore by the Churches testimonie he must needs mean The Churches testification of the Scriptures or her act of testifying them to be diuine and so is no priuat mans testification diuine though he testifie the same which the Church testifieth And contr 1. q. 3. c. 11. Stapleton saieth the iudgment Iudgement of the Church diuine of the Church is diuine be it so let the iudgment of the Church be diuine We enquire not now whether the iudgment of the Church be diuine in it self but how we know that it is diuine Which supposeth that the Iudgment of the Church is diuine for we cannot know that it is diuine if it be not such indeed And ibid. we confess that the iudgment of the Chuch is in some sorte diuine not simply but in some parte when the testimonie of the Church conspireth with the testimonie of the holie Ghost then we confess it is diuine Where by Iudgment he cannot mean the truth iudged by the Church but her act of iudging both for what we said of testimonie of the Church as also becaus he saieth her iudgment is not simply diuine wheras Gods truth iudged by the Church is simply diuine and not onely in parte And the same Whitaker l. 2. de Script c. 7. p. 246. Ministers of the Church are instruments of the holie Ghost and endued with diuine Ministers endued with diuine authoritie authoritie to gouern the Church committed to them Where is plainly granted to Ministers diuine authoritie to gouern the Church and if to gouern why not also diuine authoritie to testifie that to be diuine truth which they teach Is it not as necessarie to the Church to be rightly taught as to be rightly gouerned And if as necessarie why not diuine authoritie granted as wel for the one as for the other And Authoritie of sâ—ripture equal to Christ contro 1. q. 3. c. 11. p. 328. The authoritie of the Scripture is no less then the authoritie of Christ himself And yet the Scripture is a create thing as wel as the Church is Powel l. de Adiaphoris p. 7. Such indifferent things as by the Church haue been lawfully and orderly instituted are so far humane as they are also diuine therfore haue more then humane authoritie yea plainly diuine And if things instituted by the Things instituted by the Church plainely diuine Church haue plainly diuine authoritie surely she hath diuine authoritie to institute them For humane authoritie can institute nothing which is plainly diuine Nether do I think that anie iudicious Protestant wil denie that the Authoritie of the Church to preach Gods word and administer his Sacraments is truly diuine becaus our Sauiour Mathew the last saieth Al power in heauen and earth is giuen to me wherfore going teach al nations baptizing them c. And what
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
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
not written that we say is bastard Beza in Rom. 1. v. 17. Christians acknowledg no other obiect of faith but the written word of God Perkins in his Reform Cath. Contro 20. c. 2. We acknowledg the onely written word of God Wherfore ether there is some point of faith nay the cheifest point of al an vnwritten word of God or this point That the scripture is the word of God is no point of faith with Protestants Which Chillingworth c. 2. § 4. seemeth plainly to teach where he saieth The controuersies wherin the scripture it self is the subiect of the question cannot be determined but by natural reason § 32. The scripture is none of the material obiects of our faith Scripture no material obiect of faith § 51. Tradition by which Scripture is known is a Principle not in Christianitie but in reason § 159. God requireth of vs vnder pain of damnation onely to beleue the verities therin conteined not the diuine authoritie of the books wherin they are conteined And the same insinuate Whitaker Hooker and White cited supra c. 8. sec 2. Who say that Scripture may be known by reason and light of nature to be the word of God So that the most necessarie most sure prime great main ground of Protestants faith is a principle of natural reason and no obiect of diuine faith or which we are bound to beleue vnder pain of damnation Surely I see not how Protestants can make agree these two main points of their doctrin There is no word of God vnwritten necessarie to be beleued and That scripture is the word of God is a word of God vnwritten necessarie to be beleued The first is the common doctrin of al Protestants who therfore denie that there is anie tradition that is word of God vnwritten necessarie to be beleued and say the Scripture is the perfect and entire rule of faith conteining al that is necessarie to be beleued The second also is their vsual doctrin For that with them it is a word of God That the Scripture is the word of God is euident both becaus they put the Canon of Scripture in their Confessions of faith as a parte of their beleif and Sup n. 7. also because Laude loco cit calleth it a prime principle of faith And Vsher That of al things this ought to be beleued And seing they say their beleif of al other points dependeth on this I suppose they wil not denie this to be a point of faith or Gods word and say it is but a humane principle or word of man That this point is not written is euident For no where it can be shewed and also because Laude White and others cited supra c. 5. sec 2 confess that it is no where written in Scripture And if it were anie where written we could proue Scripture by itself which Whitaker Feild Hooker Couel Chillingworth and others cited c. 5. doe denie And that they account this point necessarie to be beleued I need not proue becaus they account it the most necessarie of al and on which dependeth whatsoeuer els they beleue 9. An other proof that the Scripture doth not sufficiently propose al points of faith may be taken from the Protestants confession That they cannot deduce most of their points of faith in which they differ from vs out of Scripture by anie necessarie Inference but by adding to Scripture some humane principle As they caÌ„not infer out of that saying of Scripture Doe this in Commemoration of me that the Eucharist is not substantially the bodie of Christ but by adding this humane principle A Commemoration cannot be substantially the thing which is commemorated And the like wil appeare in their proof of other their points of faith if they be brought into syllogistical forme And how can that be saied to propose See Vvhites 〈◊〉 16 p. 138. sufficiently al points of faith which doth but partly propose them and needeth the addition of another How can it be called the perfect rule of faith which needeth addition seening we haue shewed before out of the Fathers and their own confession that a Rule needeth no addition C. 5. sect 2. Nay how can they say they beleue those conclusions as points to be infallibly beleued which they being fallible men doe also infer partly out of fallible and humane principles seeing as Laude saieth sec 16. § 3. This is an inuiolable See him sect 19. p. 125. ground of reason That the principle of anie conclusion must be of more credit then the conclusion itself And the same say Whitaker Contro 2. q. 5. c. 18. l. 〈◊〉 de Script p. 166. 392. 416. Potter sec 5. p 14. 15 33. 40 Morton to 2. Apol. l. 1. c. 37. Chillingworth Fallible Principles can neuer produce an infallible conclusion c. 2. p. 57. and others commonly Thus haue we proued that Scripture doth not sufficiently propose al points of faith now we wil proue that it doth not propose to al men SIXTEENTH CHAPTER That Scripture doth not sufficiently propose points of faith to al men capable of external proposal 1. THat Scripture doth not sufficiently propose points of faith to al men who are capable of external proposal is euident in the blinde and those who cannot read For the blinde cannot so much as see the letters of the Scripture and those who cannot read cannot see their signification or what they signifie Therfore Scripture of itself doth propose nothing sufficiently vnto them If anie answer that Scripture may be read to them and so propose sufficiently to them I reply First that if Scripture cannot propose to them but by some others reading of it of itself alone it cannot propose and so can be no Rule of faith to them becaus a Rule needeth no help to direct And yet White in his Defense c. 24. p. 105. saith This Rule of faith is of such nature as it is able to direct al men yea the simplest and vnleaâ—nedest aline Secondly that according to Protestants al men are fallible and may read wrong ether of purpose or of ignorance And the Scriptures proposal were not infallible if it vsed a fallible help Surely the blinde or ignorant men can haue no greater assurance then moral that the Reader readeth true For what diuine infallible assistance can he be thought to haue in reading true And it were madness to say he hath diuine assistance in reading true and to denie that the true Church of God hath the like assistance in teaching true 2. And as D. Potter saieth sec 5. p. 7. The assent of diuine faith is absolutly diuine which requires an obiect and motiue so infallibly true as that it nether hath nor can possibly admit anie mixture of error or falshood And he should haue said it cannot possibly admit anie mixture of fallibilitie And doubtles anie particular mans reading is fallible How then can the blinde or ignorant men haue faith absolutly diuine whose motiue is Gods
cause the chief principle or ground of faith and into which diuine faith is resolued Whitaker Contro 1. q. 6. c. 7. I grant that Ireney saieth some had Faith had without Scripture faith and no Scripture some Barbarians for a time had no Scripture For some time doctrin may be kept entire without writing Scripture not simply necessarie Hence he concludeth That scriptures are not simply necessarie Right And the same generally al Protestants confess And Contro 2. q. 5. c. 18. p. 548. Manie may be good Christians who neuer read scripture Ibid. q 3. c. 3. p. 320. It may be that there be manie Christians who know not the Canon of Scripture nor euer saw anie books But if Scripture were the formal cause and ground of faith faith could neuer be in anie men nor in anie time without Scripture and Scripture would be simply necessarie to faith For the formal cause of faith is alwaies necessarie to faith and simply necessarie to it becaus it is the cause or motiue for which we beleue And faith in ordinarie course cannot be but for the external formal cause of it or thus The formal cause of beleuing must be known or be beleued of al men and in al times But Scripture is not so Therfore it is not the formal cause of faith and much less the last and vttermost formal cause of faith Zuinglius in Exegesi to 2. fol. 347. We doe not think that faith can Zuinglius had his faith not out of Scripture be gathered out of words of Scripture but that words which are proposed are vnderstood by faith the Mistress Ibid. How I pray you should we gather faith of word seing we must not come to interpret Scripture but being strengthned with faith And ibid. Respons ad sermonem Lutheri fol. 372. Faith cannot be discussed or learned by words but God is the teacher of it and after we haue known it of him then we may see the same also in words Oecolampadius in Hospin parte 2. historiae Sacram. fol. 70. I my self Nor Oeâ—olaâ—padius come not to Scripture but first armed with faith Behold two principal Patriarcks of the Sacramentarians got not their faith by Scripture but by Enthusiasmes and if they got it not by Scripture surely Scripture was not the formal cause not the principal motiue not the onely sufficient means not the ground or last resolution of their faith What was then the ground or into what did these men resolue their faith but into some special priuat reuelation of which thus Whitaker l. 1. de Scrip. p. 91. It is schismatical fanatical furious to boast of or catch reuelations now beside the Scripture See Laude sec 16. p. 71 72. 73. 74 TWELFH CHAPTER VVhether Protestants had the Scriptures from Catholiks or no FIRST SECTION Protestants sometimes affirme LVther in c. 1. Galat. to 5. fol. 293. We had indeed the scripture Protestants had the Scripture from Papists and the sacraments from the Papists In 16. Ioan. to 4. German fol. 227. We are forced to grant that we receaued the holie scipture Baptisme sacraments and office of preaching from them Papists otherwise what should we haue known of al these things Whitaker Contro 2. q. 5. c. 14. Papists haue the scripture Baptisme Catechisme the articles of faith the ten Commandements the Lords praier and these things came from them to vs. Doue of Recusancie p. 13. We hould the Creed of the Apostles of Athanasius of Nice of Ephesus of Constantinople which the Papists also doe hould and the same bible which we receaued from them Scusselburg to 8. Catal. Heret p. 439. We denie not that Luther saieth that in Poperie is al Christian good and from thence came to vs. Spalatensis lib. contra Suarem c. 1. n. 34. Albeit England had the scripture the Creeds and Catholik Councels first from the Church of Rome yet c. See Alsted l. de notis Ecclesiae c. 21. p. 231. Iames Andrewes l. contra Hosium p. 3â—6 We denie not that we receaued the scriptures from you Papists Thus they and others also but by what honest way or means they had the Scripture from vs none of them telleth nor can tel And therfore they cannot clear themselues from plain theft or Sacriledg SECOND SECTION Sometimes denie it CHillingworth c. 2. n. 2. p. 52. Not from Papists Nether is that true which you pretend That we possess the Scripture from you or take it vpon the integritie of your custodie But from whome els then Catholiks they possess the Scripture nether he telleth nor anie Protestant can tel Nay himself c. 6. § 73. saieth we confess with him Luther that in the Papacâ—e are manie good things which haue come from them to vs. Sutlif in his answer to the Catholiks Supplication c. 7 n. 13. we receaued not the scriptures nor our seruice orrites from them Papists Fulk in his Refutation of Rastel p. 802. we know from whome we haue receaued the Gospel not from the Papists THIRTEENTH CHAPTER VVhether Catholiks make great account of Scripture and proue their doctrin out of it or no FIRST SECTION Protestants sometimes affirme HOspinian parte 1. Histor Sacram l. 3. p. 216. Thou hearest Reader that the book of the Gospel is had in great reuerence of Papists How greatly Catholiks honor Scripture and much honored of them Thou hearest the Reading of the Gospel to be rehearsed religiously in their Temples Thou hearest that they incense it with Frankincense and other odors yea euerie word of it euerie letter or tittle to be accounted most holie Thou hearest that the Hearers rise vp and stand at the reading of it Finally thou hearest other ceremonies to be vsed at this reading of the Gospel Luther in Math. 5. apud Morton to 2. Apol. l. 5. c. 16. The Pope and The Pope relieth on Scripture sect masters and we who relie on the scriptures doe in one sorte boast of the Gospel and word of God And apud Scoppium in Ecclesiastico c. 10. The Papists as wel as we do boast of God and his word and both alike cite scriptures and of this we agree and of Iustification they bring al most in numerable places of scripture Caluin in Luc. 22. v. 28. The Papists Papists stick fast to Scripture are foolishly superstitious whiles they stick fast to the words of Scripture 4. Instit c 17. § 20. The good Maisters that they may seem literate forbid to depart anie whit from the letter And he calleth Catholiks Catchers of sillabes froward and stubborn exacters of the letter foolish and ridiculous maisters of the letter Potter sec 5. p. 13. They Papists â—retend Scripture in euerie controuersie pretend scripture in each controuersie against vs. White in his Way p. 32. and 19. citeth these words out of Sanders l. of the Rock of the Church which was Most plain Scripture printed 80 yeares since We haue most plain scripture in al points for
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