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
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
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
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
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
better being of faith or perfection and consummation of Saints and as well in points necessarie to the well being or perfection of faith as simply to the being thereof they should not differ from vs about what points the church is infallible For we doe not say that she is infallible in points which are not necessarie to any nor necessarie in any sorte to the being or wel being or Stapâ—et Contr. 4. q. 2. not 7. Ad Eâ—â—lesiae infâ—l ibilitatem in docendo satis â—st vt sit in fallibilis in substantiâ fidet publico dogma te rebus ad salutem nocessarijs Et ad 4. argumentum iâ—faâ—libilâ—tas docentis Eccâ—efiae pont tur tantum in rebus ad salutem necessaris The like saith Bellarm l 4. de Pont. c. 5. Canus l. 5 c. 5. Patribus Synodi Spiritus 〈◊〉 non est praesens in omnibus sedinrebus solùm ad salutem necessarijs perfection of Christian faith as manie scholastical subtilties are as Stapleton professeth Contr. 4. q. 2. notab 7. For as in natural things God giueth not superfluities but only what is necessarie to the being or perfection of them so nether in supernatural matters But as he is not defectiue in natural things for necessaries ether for their simply being or their perfection so much lesse is he defectiue in supernatural matters according as these are of more importance then those and more regarded of him And Protestants by saying that God hath made his Church infallible only in things necessarie to all men and necessarie to her verie being make him les liberal in supernatural matters then in natural Besides o See infra 〈◊〉 6. n. 1. Chillingw c. 2. p. 54. saieth that the scripture can end all controuersies touching things necessarie and verie profitable And ib. p. 98. What one of the Euangelists hath more then an other is only profitable and not necessarie And if God hath giuen diuine infallibilitie to the scripture and Euangelists not only for necessarie points but also for such as are profitable why should we thinke that he hath not giuen to his Church the like infallibilitie not onely for simply necessarie points but also for profitable as all are which make to the edification of Christs bodie and consummation of saints vnto a perfect man as all true points Morton â—om 1. Apologa l. 2. c. 9 Quasi â—erè nou fit fidei dogma quod piriâ—us S. omnibus eredendum propinauis of faith doe For who can denie that all true points of faith reuealed clearly by God are of the integritie and perfection of faith and are profitable for vs to beleue otherwise to what end were they so reuealed And if God reuealed them clearly he would haue them beleued and if beleued he would appoint on earth some infallible authoritie to propose them which not being in the scripture must needs be in the church I ad also How al pointâ— of faith are necessarie that though al points of faith be not simply necessarie by reason of the matter which is to be beleued they al are simply necessarie by reason of the formal cause which is diuine reuelation sufficiently proposed for that is simply necessarie to be beleued in whatsoeuer it proposeth How the principal and the instrument are â—one and how different 12. The twelft ground is that as the principal agent and the instrument are but one entire cause in Kinde to witt efficient but in order and degree are far different Different causes to witt Principal and Instrumental so the authoritie of God and of the Apostles in matters of faith were one and the same entire cause of diuine faith to witt formal but in order and degree were twoe and far different for the one was principal the other ministerial one increate the other create one absolutely necessarie the other not absolutely necessarie the one sufficient of it self to beget diuine faith the other not sufficient of it self And this vnitie betwixt the authoritie of God and of the Apostles our Sauiour expressed when he said Luke c. 10. Who heareth you heareth me which could not be true vnles he and his Apostles were in some sort one and the same speaker as the king and his Embassadour are And this same Protestants sometymes confess For thus Caluin in Ioan. 20. v. 21. He bids the Apostles succeed into the same function which he had of his father he imposeth on them the same person he giueth them the same right Christ communicateth with his Apostles the same authoritie which he had of his father Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 3. c. 5. The Apostles did consigne the Canon not as men but as the person of God And lib. 1. de script p. 61. Becaus Christ left earth he gaue his office to preachers And pa. 71. I denie not that Pastors doe in some sort bear the person of God And the distinction also between these twoe authorities Christ expressed when he said Ioan. 16. The holie Ghost shal bear witnes of me and yee also shal bear witnes In which words he expresseth two witnesses ad twoe testimonies And the same did the Apostles when they said Act. c. 15. It hath seemed to the holie Ghost and to vs to lay no other burden vpon you but these where they express twoe imposers of the same burden the holie Ghost and themselues and twoe authorities of imposing it one of the holie Ghost the other of themselues For they could not impose that burden without they had authoritie distinct from the authoritie of the holie Ghost though not separate from it And the same for vnitie and distinction of the authoritie of the holie Ghost and of the Church I say of the Church that the authoritie of God and of his Church is one and the same in kinde The entire formal cause of faith in ordinarie course see infra c. 11. n. 1. of causing diuine faith but far different in credit and degree of causing it though in ordinarie course neuer separated For in ordinarie course the entire formal cause of diuine faith is Gods and his churches authoritie togeither or God speaking by his Church And the Churches authoritie being one entire cause of diuine faith with Gods authoritie her authoritie must needs be in matters of faith diuine and infallible for a fallible authoritie cannot be one cause in kinde of beleef with an infallible authoritie but a quite different kinde of cause And if these grounds be compared with the grounds of Protestants for which they limit the infallibilitie of Gods Church to onely fundamental points and to mere humane infallibilitie they will appeare yet more firme and solid For theyr grounds are not founded vpon any ends of the Church expressed in scripture as these are but founded onely vpon their own ends which are only to delude the texts of Scripture which attribute infallibilitie to the Church in al points of faith by saying that they are meant of fundamental points onely
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
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
the good of the Church which was to continue after the Apostles Thus we haue refuted the Protestants three answers to this promise of Christ and shewed them to be mere shifts Nay indeed they turne Christs most bountiful promise made vnto his Church to nothing for to what purpose is it to teach the Church al fundamental or absolutly necessarie truths and not tel her which are those truths To what purpose were it to teach the Church vneffectually as Reprobates are taught To what purpose were it that the Apostles alone were taught al truth if the Church also were not taught it who is to teach vs as they taught her 4. An other promise of Infallibilitie in matters of faith made to the Church is Isaiae 59. v. 21. This is my Conuenant with the saieth our lord my spirit which is in the and my words which I haue put in thy mouth shal not depart from thy mouth and from the mouth of thy sred and from the mouth of thy seeds seed saith our Lord from hence forward and for euer Which words are not a command as Moulins would haue it but a conuenant or promise and that absolute not conditional as Plessiae wold and doe plainly promise to the Church continual infallibilitie and infallibilitie for euer and in al the words of God which he hath put in her mouth and are so plain as Whitaker contr 2. q. 5. c. 19. saied This place doth shew that true preaching of the word shal be in the Church perpetual Yet l. 1. de Scrip. p. 133. he saieth this promise was not made to the teaching Church but to the whole Church that is the elect But first this distinction of the teaching Church and the elest Church hath no ground in the text and therfore is a voluntarie and irrational shift Secondly words put in thy mouth shew plainly that it is made to the teaching Church and as Whitaker before cited shew that true preaching of the word shal be perpetual in the Church Thirdly if this promise be made to the whole elect Church it comprehendeth some parte at least of the teaching Church For alwries some of the teaching Church are Elect and so there are alwaies some preachers of al points of faith in the Church I omit their vsual shift of their distinction of Fundamental and not fundamental points of faith both becaus there are no not fundamental points in their sense that is not necessarie to sauing faith true Church and Saluation but al are fundamental to those ends that is necessarie to be beleued at least virtually and also actually if they be sufficiently proposedâ— And also becaus z See part 1 l. 1. c. 7. Protestants doe not constantly defend that the Church is infallible in fundamental points and a See infra l. 2 c. 10. sect 2. generally they say that she is not infallible in their most fundamental point of al to wit that scripture is the word of God and al of them denie her to be diuinely infallible in anie point of faith what soeuer And God in these words plainly testifieth that he wil make her diuinely infallible becaus he wil put his word in her mouth and make that it shal neuer depart from her which is to make her diuinely infallible as he made the Prophets or Euangelists For I cal that diuinely infallible which is infallible by Gods diuine assistance and not by anie natural insight of truth and natural fidelitie in telling it And such diuine infallibilitie God hath promised to his Church in the foresaid words of the Prophet or that can not be promised by anie words which men can speak or hear 5. And now Gentle Reader I pray thee consider First how manie places to omit others for breuitie sake I haue brought for the diuine infallibilitie of the true Church of God in al matters of faith secondly how directly they affirme the said infallibilitie so as they need no inference of ours though I haue reduced some of them to sillogistical forme becaus b Beza in Colloq mont p. 95. 96. 98. Hunnius de Condit disput thesi 18. Vvhitaker Prâ—â— Controu Morton part 2. Apol. l. 1. 〈◊〉 49. Fulco de Sucâ—es p. 493. Chilling c. 3. n. 43. Protestants do require it Thirdly how clearly that Protestants are forced to inuent so manie so new so contrarie one to the other so voluntarie and so violent expositions Fourthly how against so manie so direct so plain places of Scripture which teach the infallibilitie of the Church in al points of faith Protestants cannot bring one place of Scripture which directly so much as seemeth to teach that she is fallible in points of faith as may be seen in Whitaker contro 2. q 4. c. 3. and other Protestants who write of this matter but al their arguments are ether taken wholy from mere natural reason or at least partly from natural reason which euidently sheweth that they can haue no diuine and infallible faith that the Church is fallible in points of faith becaus the conclusion followeth the weaker part wheras Catholiks haue express and clear scripture for her infallibilitie and consequently good ground for diuine faith of it The most they can bring out of Scripture for their purpose are some examples which are the same which the Donatists brought for the perishing of the Church as may be seen in S. Augustin l. de Vnitate c. 13. to which he there fully answereth and indeed do rather proue the perishing of the Church then her erring in faith and therfore must be answered as wel of Protestants as of Catholiks For as Whitaker saieth Contro 2. q. 3. c. 1. He is mad that saieth the Church can Perish And ibid. c. 2. who denieth that the Church is founded for euer and to continue perpetually he is no Christian Morton in his replie for defence of his apologie p. 90. It is madness to say that the whole visible Church can faile and Chillingworth c. 3. § 11. we beleue the Catholik Church can not perish Though this he beleue not infallible For in answer to the preface § 18. he saieth the contrarie doctrin I doe at no hand beleue to be a damnable heresie And c. 5. § 41. Nether is it certain that the doctrin of the Churches failing is reâ—ugnant to the Creed Fiftly consider how vntruly wrote Chillingworrh c. 2. § 28. of Catholiks you yourselues doe not so much as pretend to enforce to the beleif hereof Infallibilitie of the Church by anie proofs infallible and conuincing but onely to induce vs to it by such as are by your confession onely probable motiues § 35. your faith euen of the foundation of your faith yoâ—r Churches authoritie is built lastly and wholy vpon prudential motiues And § 70. The faith of Papists relies alone vpon their Churches infallibilitie That there is anie Church infallible and that theirs is it they pretend not to beleue but onely vpon prudential motiues Are so manie so plain so
both books alike Which Present Church authoritie made Whitaker contr 1. q. 3. c. 7. to say we may be forced by the authoritie of the Church to beleue these books to be Canonical And if forced to beleue by authoritie of the Church then the authoritie of the Church is a most effectual and sufficient cause of infallible beleif And in the same place S. Austin I would not beleue the Gospel vnles the Authoritie of the Catholik Church did moue me which clearly testifieth the necessitie of the Churches proposal and made Whitaker q. cit c. 8. to grant that it is true we should not beleue the Gospel vnles thâ— Catholik Church did propose it But S Austin saieth more If the Catholik Churches authoritie did not moue me And it is far more for Catholik authoritie to moue vs to beleue then for the Church onely to propose Men of no authoritie may propose but authoritie which moueth to beleue the Gospel and with out which we cannot beleue the Gospel must needs be necessarie and infallible authoritie For beleif of the Gospel is infallible and such must be the authoritie that so moueth vs to it as without which we cannot beleue Commonly Protestants answer that S. Austin spake these words of himself as he was an heretik But this cannot be becaus as he was an heretik he did not beleue the authoritie it self of the Catholik Church and therfore as such he could not be moued to beleue the Scripture for her authoritie For how could he be moued to beleue the Scripture for that which it self he did not beleue Secondly becaus he saieth not non credidissem as Morton tom Apol. l. 1 c. 37 falsly citeth him but non crederem which words properly are to be vnderstood of him as he was minded at that present And al a August de Doctrina l. 3 c. 10. 11. Tertul de â—arnâ— Christi c. 13 15. words are to be vnderstood according to their proprietie if the contrarie be not manifest For otherwise we should be vncertain how to vnderstand men And it is not manifest that S. Austin did not vse those his words according to their proprietie Wherfore Morton loco cit granteth that S. Austin maketh the Church the meanes by which a Catholik beleueth and the reason without which not which sufficeth for my present purpose to shew the necessitie of the Churches proposal for the meanes by which and reason without which not are necessarie Thirdly becaus afterward S. Austin addeth The authoritie of Catholiks being weakned I can no more beleue the Gospel which he spake plainly of himself as he was then a Catholik and shew that his beleef of the Gospel euen both then and for the time after depended on the authoritie of the Church I add also that though S. Austin had saied the foresaied word of himself onely as he was an heretik yet it would thence follow that the proposal and authoritie of the Church is at least necessarie to begin beleif of the Gospel howsoeuer it be not necessarie for to continue it And it cannot be saied that is is necessarie so onely as an inducement or disposition to such beleef becaus as S. b L. de vtil cred c. 11. Austin saieth That we know we owe to reason that we beleue to authoritie So that as Reason is the formal cause of our knowledg so is Authoritie the formal cause of our beleef and such cause of our beleef of the Gospel is the authoritie of the Catholik Church such not principal but subordinate to Gods authoritie Chillingworth c. 2. § 54 p. 54. p. 73. and § 97. p. 88. saieth That S. Austin by Catholik Church meanerh the Church of al ages including Christ and the Apostles But nether proueth he that nor can tel how S. Austin could be infallibly certain of the testimonie of the Church of Christ and the Apostles time but by the testimonie of the Church of his time Which if it were not infallible he could not be infallibly certain of the testimonie of the Church of Christ and the Apostles time Beside S. Austin sheweth that he meaneth of the authoritie of the present Church in saying The Catholik authoritie doth commend to me both books alike And l. 1. contra Crescon c. 33. The truth of Scripture is held when we doe what now seemeth to the whole Church Which is plainly ment of the present Church The same S. Austin as is before cited saieth l. 10. de Gen. ad literam c. 23. That baptisme of Infants were not to be beleued vnles it were an Apostolical tradition And l. 2. de baptismo c. 4. that he durst not defend the baptisme giuen by heretiks vnles he were assured by the authoritie of the Church Therfore he thought the authoritie of the Church necessarie to beleue those points of faith Vincentius l. 1. c. 2. Here possibly one may demand when the rule of Scripture is perfect and in it self more then enough sufficient vnto al things what need is there to ioine vnto it the authoritie of the Churches sense And he answereth this is becaus al men doe not take it in one sense therfore it is necessarie that the line of interpretation be directed according to the rule of Ecclesiastical and Catholik sense Behold the sense of the Church necessarie to vnderstand the Scripture rightly And the same Vincent 16. c. 41. It is necessarie that the vnderstanding of the holie Scripture be directed according to the onely rule of the Churches sense And if the vnderstanding of the Scripture must be directed according to the sense of the Church doubtles the sense of the Church is necessarie THIRTEENTH CHAPTER That the true Church of God is a necessarie proposer of al points of faith proued by reason grounded in Scripture 1. FIrst What is Gods ordinarie meanes of teaching faith is in ordinarie course necessarie to haue faith Gods ordinarie means of teaching faith is by the Church therfore his means of teaching by the Church is in ordinarie course necessarie The Maior seemeth euident by it self and the Minor is proued by those places Rom. 10. Faithis of hearing lawful preaching Ephes 4. God hath put Pastors for consummation of Saints 1. Tim. 5. The Church is the pillar and ground of truth and so euident as Whitaker l. 1. de Scrip. p. 73. saieth That the ordinarie manner by which God teacheth is by the Church I willingly grant 2. Secondly becaus nether Scripture nor reading of Scripture is a necessarie cause of engendring faith in ordinarie course Therfore the preaching of the Church is such a means For there is doubtles some ordinarie means instituted by God which in ordinarie course is necessarie and if not Scripture nor reading of Scripture surely the Church and her preaching For no other can be reasonably imagined The Antecedent I proue becaus as I saied before for manie ages before Moyses there was no Scripture at al nor for some yeares after Christ was there anie Scripture of
expresly in Scripture may read Kemnitius 2. parte Exam. tit de Sacram. ibid. tit de Missa 3. parte tit de Inuocat Sanctor l. de duabus naturis c. 30. apud Hospin in concordia discordi c. 47. Gerlachius to 2. disput 24. Heshusius apud Hospin l. cit c. 46. and l de reali praesentia contra Caluinum Scusselburg to 8. Catalog p. 64. and 520 Heidelbergenses in Colloquio Mulbrunen si act 11. Sadeel praefat Respons ad art abiurat p. 403. Tract de sacrificio c. 3. King Iames in Basilicon Doron part 1. Morton 1. part Apol. l. 2. c. 9. Lobechius disp 23. And what they mean by Express termes Couel art 2. p. 20. declareth thus we cal that expressliteral mention Vvhat Protestants means by Express which is set down in plain termes and not inferred by way of consequence And the same is euident by the words of Hunnius Whitaker Fulk and King Iames which we shal presently citie So that nothing is express in Scripture if it needeth our inference and nothing matter of faith which needeth our inference out of Scripture if ether al points of faith be express in Scripture as the aforesaid Protestants teach or we beleue not anie one article of faith by fallible authoritie of humane deductions as Laude saieth Relat. sec 38. p. 345. or as Whitaker saieth l. 1. de script p. 50. That thou saiest our faith relieth vpon testimonies not arguments I grant And generally al Protestants when they refuse to beleue anie point or vrge vs to proue out of Scripture what they refuse to beleue not require and exact express words of Scripture as is to be seen in their writings about sacrifice Transubstantion Inuocation of Saints and the like In so much as Morton 1. parte Apol. l. 2. c. 9. alleadgeth these words of Bellarmin for to shew the consent of Protestant They al teach that al things necessarie to saluation are expresly conteined inscriptures And Morton addeth What Protestants think and how much they consent thou hast shewed But when themselues are to proue anie thing controuerted out of Scripture they sing an other song as shal by and by appear Besids manie Protestants argue that such a thing is not becaus it is not express in Scripture So Beza in Confess c. 5. sec 5. Heshusius l. de reali praesentiâ Iacobus Andreae contra Hosium p. 169. Kemnitius 2. parte Exam. p. 229. Gerlachius to 2. disput 24. Chilling Praeface n. 10. and others which plainly sheweth That sometimes they require to a point of faith that it be expresly in Scripture SECOND SECTION Sometimes denie it PRotestants in the Conference at Ratisbon sess 3. p. 95. This Rule shal stand against al the Gates of Hel Nothing is to be admitted as a dogme or article of religion but what is expressed in scripture or may be drawn from thence in good Consequence Sess 11. p. 356. Not onely those things are extant in scripture which are there in express words but also those which may be thence deduced by good Consequence Sess 13. p. 386. I finally conclude that Good consequence sufficeth nothing is to be beleued in worship articles and dogmes which is not ether expresly conteined in scripture or may in good consequence be drawn from it Wirtenbergenses Respon 1. ad Patriarcham Constantinop We embrace al those things which may be proued out of scripture in good Consequence Confession of England art 6. The holie scripture conteineth al things necessarie to saluation so that what is not read in it nor can be proued out of it is not to be required of anie to be beleued as an article of faith or as necessarie to saluation Pareusl 1. de Iustificat c 16. That we must vaunt of the express word of God and recal al our dogâ—nes to this one Express word of God not alwaies required head is an express lie King Iames Respon ad Cardinal Peron p. 401. We haue set down that only those things are to be thought necessarie to saluation which ether are expresly conteined in the word of God or haue been drawn from it by necessarie consequence And p. 392. The King calleth those simply necessarie which ether the word of God expresly commandeth to be beleued or done or which the ancient Church hath inferred out of the word of God by necessarie consequence Iuel in his Defense of the Apologie c. 9. p. 54. we say not that al Not al points plainly expressed cases of doubt are by manifest and open words plainly expressedin the Scriptures for so there should need no exposition But we say there is no cause in Religion so dark and doubtful but it may be necessarily proued or reproued by our collection and conference of the Scriptures Cartwrightin Whitgifts Defense p. 82. Manie things are both commanded and forbidden of the which there is no express mention in the word which Manie commanded things not expressed are as necessarie to be followed or auoided as those wherof express mention is made Which saieth Whitgift I take to derogate much from the perfection of the Scripture to be mere Papistical Whitaker Contro 1. q. 6. c. 9. Whatsoeuer is inferred or gathered out of Scripture though hardly al such the ancient Fathers most truly said was written And Controu 4. q. 4. c. 1. It is al one to be expresly in Scripture Alone to be expressed and infâ—rred and to be euidently inferred out of Scripture Fulk in answer to Clarks ouerthrow p. 659. We are willing to acknowledg and admit necessarie Collection to be of as great authoritie as Of as great authoriâ—â—e the express word of the Scripture In Reioinder to Bristow p. 97. Bristow slandereth me to affirme that in al matters onely euident scripture must be brought and heard which I neuer affirmed P. 88. I meane by onely Scripture whatsoeuer is taught by plain As good words or may be gathered by necessarie conclusion which is as good as express words So also 2. Thessal 2. not 19. and de Success p. 74. White in Defense of his way p. 288. No Protestant affirmes al things to be written expresly Laude in his Relation sec 38. p. 332. It is enough to ground beleef vpon necessarie consequence out of Scripture as wel as vpon express text As wel Potter sec 5. p. 3. That this diuine Reuelation for al necessarie points is sufficiently and clearly made in the Scriptures ether in express termes or by manifest deductions is the constant doctrin of Antiquitie euen til the latter times Chillingworth in his Preface n. 28. I beleue al things euidently conteined in them Scriptures al things euidently or euen probably deducible from them Morton to 2. Apol. l. 1. c. 41. Euen probably inferred Those things which are deriued from Scripture by necessarie consequence are to be held for written traditions See ib. l. 5. c. 9. Chamier l. 13. de fide c. 10. n 12. It is not the word of
God onely which is expressed in scriptures or preached in the Church but also what necessarily followeth out of it Gomarus apud Costerum in Apologia p. 75. There is no question between vs whether al things which are to be beleued are express in holie Scripture The like say Beza Respons ad Acta Colloq Montisbel part 2. p. 46. Morton to 2. Apol. l. 1. c. 41. 52. 53. l. 5. c. 9. Field l. 4. c. 20. Pareus l. 1. de Iustificat c 16. Riuet Contr. tract 1. sec 18. Moulins de fugis Arnoldi c. 1. and generally al Protestants when they themselues are put to proue anie point out of Scripture as is to be seen of the Caluinists in Colloq Frankendalensi art 12. fol. 549. 552. Particularly here I note What Fulk saieth that their Inferences out of Scripture are as Good and of as great authoritie are as Gods express words Laude That what is grounded vpon their Consequences is as wel as As wel vpon express text Which is to equalize their Inferences to Gods express words And White loco cit Are they not as wel conclusions of Scripture which are deduced By Protestants by true discourse as which are expressed verbatim Perkins of the Creed col 737. We must know that a lawful consequence drawn out of Scripture is as wel the word of God as that which is expressed Al wel in words Whitaker It is al one to be expresly and to be inferred They condemn vs for saying that Alone Gods word tradid is equal to his Written Potter sec 1. p. 14. To the word of God she Rom. Church addes and equals her own traditions Laude Relat. sec 16. p. 91. Equaling the tradition of the present Church to the written word of Gods Frets vpon the verie foundation it self by iustling with it And they wil haue their Consequences and Inferences as good as Gods express word When we say that the Churches traditions are equal to Gods word we mean nothing but that one word of God is equal to an other For we profess that both of them came immediatly from God one by tradition the other by writing But when they say that their inferences are equal to Gods word they must needs Protestants make fallible mens Inferences Gods word mean that fallible mens Inference and that out of one humane principle too is equal to Gods word For they cannot denie but their Inferences are fallible mens Inferences becaus they are not made by God but by fallible men onely Perkins also in his Reformed Catholik Controu 3. c. 3. and Caluin in Lucae 10. v. 16. make the Ministers word equiualent Confessio Bâ—â—em c. 14. Apologia Confess August c. de Poenitentia to Gods promise and a sufficient ground of faith And Peter Martyr praefat l. de Euchar professeth that the Base strength and foundation of his opinion of the Eucharist Make humane principles ground of their faith is That it is proper to the Deitie to be euerie where and to the humane nature to be in a certain place So the basis and ground of their faith concerning the Eucharist is partly their humane principle For express Scripture they can pretend none FOVRTH CHAPTER VVhether al necessarie points of faith be euidently or clearly conteined in Scripture FIRST SECTION Protestants sometimes affirme ONe thing it is to be conteined actually in Scripture an other to be conteined clearly For something may be conteined actually and yet obscurely and therfore we make these distinct Chapters Protestants in Colloq Ratisbon p. 20. We acknowledg that by Gods Plainely and clearly goodness whatsoeuer are necessarie to saluation are plainly enough and clearly put before our eies in both especially in the New Testament Caluin contra Versipellem p. 358. I stoutly affirme that Heretiks are ouercomen by open Scriptures l. de scandalis Clear p. 101. We receaue nothing but what is proued with clear and sound testimonies of Scripture Beza l. Quaestionum Resp vol. 1. Theol. p. 673. The dogmes of true religion are plainly enough and clearly Plainely and clearly explaned in holie writ In Confess c. 4. sec 25. The Apostles and Euangelists haue so written those things which they haue written as the dullest and most ignorant of al men may thence perceaue vnles themselues doe hinder whatsoeuer sufficeth for their Saluation Zanchius l. 1. Epistolarum p. 16. Whatsoeuer is necessarie to saluation al that is plainly conteined in holie writ And p. 98. The places of holie Scripture from whence the dogmes of Christian Need no clearer expression religion are taken are so clear and open as they need no more diligent or clearer expression Academia Nemausiensis Resp ad Iesuitas Tournonios Rupellae 1584. p. 531. Hence it followeth that al matters of faith are plainly and clearly conteined in that written word that is in the writings of the Prophets and Apostles Moulins in his Buckler sec 94. Al difficulties being set aside that which in Scripture remaineth clear and needeth no interpretation is sufficient to saluation Needeth no interpretation In his answer to Card. Peron l. 1. c. 1. The articles in which the substance of religion consisteth are proposed Need no interpretation in scripture in so clear termes as they need no Interpretation So also de Iudice Contro c. 17. Piscator in Thesibus l. 1. c. 1. we say that al dogmes of faith are clearly deliuered in scripture Whitgift in Defence c. p. 573. what is this els but together with the Papists to condemn the scriptures of Plainely and clearly expressed obscuritie as though al things necessarie to saluation were not plainly and clearly expressed in them p. 367. we are wel assured that Christ in his word hath fully and plainly comprehended al things requisite to faith and good life Fully Fulk Answer to the Preface of the Rhemes testament so manie partes of scriptures as are able to instruct vs to saluation are so plain and easie Vnderstood of euerie reader or hearer as they may be vnderstood ofeuerie one that readeth or heareth them Whitaker Contro 1. q. 4. c. 1. These are ouraxiomes First that scriptures are so plain as they may be read of the people and of the vnlearned with some fruit and profit Secondly that al things necessarie to saluation are proposed in scripture in plain words Ibid. Inplain words c. 4. Hence it followeth that al things necessarie to saluation are manifest in scripture which is the ground of our Defense which he often repeateth Manifest And q. 5. c. 7. We may gather the true As certainly as if God spoke to vs. sense out of scripture no less certainly then if god himself spake to vs. Morton to 2. Apol. l. 2. c. 19. That is the question whether al those things which are necessarie to saluation be so plain in Scripture as the Faithful Vven to the mostignorant euen the most ignorant may be
p. 376. and c. 14. p. 399. Contro The onelie sufficient means 2. q. 5. c. 6. 9. Chillingworth c. 2. n. 3. scriptures be the sole Iudge of Controuersies that is the sole rule for man to iudg them Sole Rule by And he inscribeth that Chapter thus scripture the onely rule wherby to iudg of Controuersies Where § 32. he saieth I cannot know anie doctrin to be a diuine and supernatural truth or a part of Christianitie but onely becaus the scripture saies so And where saieth the Scripture that it self is the word of God Who wil see more Protestants may read Zuinglius in Hospin part 2. Histor fol. 23. Bernenses ibid. fol. 52. Beza Apol. contra Sanitem p. 289. and in Colloq Montisbel p. 10. Whitaker l. 1 de Script p. 146. l. 3. p. 483. l. 9. contra Dureum sec 64. Morton to 2. Apologiae l. 1. c. 45. 46. 47. 49. l. 5. c. 12. he saieth Matters of faith must relie onely on the light of the letters of faith Martyr in Disput Oxon p. 143. and Pareus Colleg. Theol. 3. disp 2. affirme that Scripture is the onely Onelie external infallible means external infallible means to get faith and as necessarie to the saluation of the Church as meat to life as also Pareus before said and Whitaker also White in his Defense p. 69. The whole rule of the Churches iudgment Vvhole Rule is onely scripture onely scripture onely scripture and nothing but scripture SECOND SECTION Protestants sometimes denie it PRotestants doe diuers waies denie Scripture to be the sole or entire rule of faith First in formal termes For thus Chillinhworth c. 2. n. 8. p. 55. when Protestants affirme against Papists that the scripture is a perfect rule of faith their meaning is not that by scripture al things absolutly may be proued which are to be beleued For it can neuer be proued by scripture to Not al things absolutely a Gainsayer that there is a God or that the Book called the scripture is the word of God Ibid. n. 155. p. 114. scripture is not a Iudge of Controuersies but a Rule to iudge them by and that not an absolutly perfect Rule but as perfect Not an absolutey perfect Rule as a written Rule can be which must alwaies need something els which is ether euidently true oreuidently credible to giue attestation to it See also n. 156. Feild l 4. de Eccles c. 15. we doe not so make the scripture the Rule of our faith but that other things in their kinde are Rules likewise in such sort as it is not safe without respect had vnto Not safe by Sctipture alâ—ne them to iudg of things by Scripture alone Hooker l. 1 § 14. Albeit scripture doe profess to contein in it al things which are necessarie to saluation yet the meaning cannot be simply of al things Not simply al things necessarie which are necessarie Secondly they confess that Scripture is no sufficient Rule to beleue that it self is the word of God or who are Schismatiks Hooker l. 2. § 4. It is not the word of God which Scripture can not assure vs that it iâ— the word of God doth or possibly can assure vs that it is the word of God By what then are you infallibly assured Is it by the word of man Laude Relat. sec 16. p. 70. There is no place in scripture which tels vs that such books conteining such and particulars No place in Scâ—iptuâ—e are the Canon and infallible wil and word of God And p. 69. That scripture should be fully and sufficiently known as by diuine and infallible testimonie lumine proprio by resplendencie of that light which it hath in it self onely and by the witnes that it can so giue to it self I could neuer yet see cause to allow P. 80. The light which is in Scripture itself is not bright enough it cannot beare sufficient witnes to itself P. 88. Where he Hooker speaks so Can not bear witnes to it self sensibly that Scripture cannot beare witnes to it self nor one parte of it to an other that is grounded vpon nature which admits no created thing to be witnes to it self and is acknowledged by our Sauior Sec. 25. n. 6. The Iudge shal be the Scripture and the Primitiue Church Primitiue Church iudge Chillingworth c. 2. n. 11. p. 52. Scripture we say is the rule to iudge controuersies by yet not al simply but al the controuersies of Christians of those that are already agreed vpon this first Not al controuersies by Scripture principle That the Scripture is the word of God n. 27. When Scripture is affirmed to be the rule by which al controuersies of religion are to be decided those are to be excepted out of this generalitie which concern the Scripture it self Ibid. Your Negatiue Conclusion That these questions Not controuersies â—bâ—ut Scripture it self touching Scripture are not decidable by Scripture you needed not haue cited anie reason to proue it it is euident by itself Which he often repeateth as n. 29. 46. 52. 156. And n. 27. The question whether scuh or such a book be Onely by the Church Canonical scripture affirmatiuely cannot be decided but onely by the testimonie of the ancient Churches And n. 35. you demand whether that by the Churches Assured by the Church consent they are assured what scriptures are Canonical I answer yes they are so And wheras you infer from Church iudge of the Scripture hence This is to make the Church Iudge I haue told you already that of this controuersie we make the Church Iudge Feild l. 4 de Eccles c. 7. To him that doubteth of both old andnew Testament we must not alleadg the authoritie of ether of these but some other thing Morton to 2. Apol. l. 5. c. 14. It is that which we wold haue That Scripture is to be accounted Iudge of those who beleue the scripture Which is plainly to confess that it is not Iudge of al. And Ibid. c. 10. We account not scripture the onely but the supreme Interpreter Not onely Scripture And c. 57. Protestants doe not so make the scripture the supreme Iudge of Controuersies as therfore they refuse the iudgment of Councels And l. 3. de Missa c. 3. The Iudgment of sense in Sense a ground of Protest fâ—ith sensible obiects is a notable ground of faith Whitaker Contro 1. q. 5. c. 6. He leeseth his labor who out of scripture disputeth against those that denie the scripture Against such we must dispute out of the testimonie of the Church or vse other arguments l. 1. de Script p. 92. The Creed of the Apostles is the rule of faith Creed is the rule Plessie of the Church c. 3. The question with the Donatists was more for matter of fact then of right as who had first failed in Charitie offended the Schisme not decided by Scripture Communion opened the gate
they denie the Vulgar latin to be authentical becaus it is a Translation For as Whitaker c. 8. cit sayeth An Interpreter translateth authentical Scripture but maketh not his Translation authentical Scripture See Morton to 2. Apol. l. 1. c. 14. p. 71. White in his Way p. 23. The conclusion Translation not a Rule That the English translation is not the Rule may be granted P. 1â— Al translations be to be tried by the original Hebrew and Greek And a Rule is not to be ruled it self Morton in Whites Defense c. 28. p. 259. What English Protestant euer No infallible affirmed that our Translations were infallible or took them for the Rule Tailor in his libertie of prophesing sec 4. n. 7. Is there anie man that hath translated perfectly or expounded Nor authentik infallibly No translation challengeth such a praerogatiue as to be authentik but the vulgar latin Pareus Colleg. Theol. 2. D. 1. We say that onely the Hebrew edition of the old testament and the Greek of the New is authentical Sic etiam Collegio 1. D. 14. Moulins of the Iudge of Contro part 2. c. 6. p. 378. Common sense telleth that translations are not to be receaued but as far as they are agreable to the originals TENTH CHAPTER VVhether the Scripture be to be beleued to be the vvord of God onely for the testimonie of the Church FIRST SECTION Protestants sometimes affirme SPalatensis l. 7. de Repub. c. 1. n. 9. To enquire which books are Canonical The Church hath that alone singular and onely rule that the Vniuersal Church ask herself and what she in actual exercise holdeth seek and plainly know And l. contra Suarem c. 1. n. 34. I shew that nether Councels nor Popes nor Fathers nor Church can otherwise define which books be Canonical which not but by the onely testimonie of the whole Church Chillingworth c. 2. n. 7. The question Onely by the Church whether such or such a book be Canonical Scripture cannot be decided affirmatiuely but onely by the testimonie of the ancient Church The like he hath n. 35. 42. And ibid. n. 1â—4 It is vpon the authoritie of vniuersal tradition that we would haue them beleue the Scripture See him supra c. 8. sect 2. And c. 1. n. 7. I grant that Christ hath founded a visible Church stored with al help necessarie to saluation particularly with sufficient meanes to beget and conserue faith to mantein vnitie and compose schismes to discouer and condemn heresies and to determin al controuersies in religion which were necessarie to be determined I grant that this means to decide controuersies in faith and religion must be endued with an vniuersal infallibilitie in whatsoeuer it propoundeth for a diuine truth C. 2. n. 3. It is superfluous for you to proue out of S. Athanasius and S. Austin that we must receaue the sacred Canon vpon the credit of Gods Church vnderstanding by Church the credit of tradition We wil say with Athanasius that onely four Gospels are to be receaued becaus the Canons of the holie and Catholik Church vnderstand of al ages since the perfection of the Canon haue so determined Whitaker l. 1. de script p. 46. We cannot beleue but by the testimonie of the Church as by the ordinarie means SECOND SECTION Protestants sometimes denie it LAude in his Relation sec 16. n. 1. p. 60 The tradition of the Church taken and considered alone is Tradition of the Church not sufficient so far from being the onelie that it can not be a sufficient proof to beleue by diuine faith that Scripture is the word of God n. 19. p. 80. The Tradition of the present Church is too weak becaus it is not absolutly diuine Ibid. 25 p. 88. If Scripture hath an other proof nay manie other Scripture can approue â—t self proofs to vsher it and lead it in then no question it can proue and approue it self Potter sec 5. p. 6. The testimonie of present Church though it be not the last resolution of our faith yet it is the first external motiue to it It is the key or dore which lets men into the knowledg of diuine misteries But the faith of a Christian finds not in al Not â—nie sure ground this anie sure ground wheron finally to rest or setle itself til it arise to greater assurance then the present Church alone can giue The same must al Protestants say who ether teach that the testimonie of the Church is fallible or that the Scripture hath a sufficient light to shew it self to be Gods word Humfrey ad Rat. 3. Campiani p. 210. We say that an argument taken from the authoritie of the Church simply Churches authoritie litle worth in our Academic is little worth effecteth nothing p. 212. No firme firme and irrefragable argument can be taken from the Church militant Brefly no argument firme and solid is taken from aniâ— Church vnles it be the Apostolik Whitaker Controu 1. q. 3. c. 3. Scripture known without the Church Without the Churches iudgment it may be known to be Christs voice and true Scripture Cont. 2. q. 5. c. 18. It is most fals that we cannot beleue this to be true Scripture but by the testimonie of the Church l. 2. de Script p. 280. who is led with the proper testimonie of the Church doth follow but humane testimonie And ibid. saieth it is mere humane l. 1. p. 112. The voice of the maisters of the Church may be publik but Pastors authoritie of no moment their authoritie is but priuat that is of no moment l. 1. de Scriptura p. 16. An argument which is taken from the bare testimonie of the Church for to confirme the Scriptures or anie parcel therof I say is vnualid vneffectual vnfit to perswade l. 2. p. 235. â—he Church hath Hath no authoritie in matters of faith no authoritie in matters of faith l. 3. p. 345. The iudgment of the Church considered by itself is mere humane Caluin in Act. 15. v. 28. Fond Papists think there is some authoritie in the Church ELEVENTH CHAPTER VVhether Scripture be the formal cause of Protestants beleuing vvhatsoeuer they belleue as of faith FIRST SECTION Protestants sometimes affirme 1. WHitaker l. 1. de Scriptura c. 5. sec vlt. p. 58. Whatsoeuer we beleue Vvhatsoeuer they beleue is foâ— Scripture we beleue for the scripture which is the external cause of faith I mantein that in kinde of external cause we beleue not for the testimonie of the Church but for the authoritie and testimonie of the scripture it self which alone in the ministerie of the Church is the external principal cause of faith For faith riseth not of the testimonie it self of the Church but onely of the authoritie and diuinitie of the scripture And p. Onely for Scripture 69. Not for the authoritie of the Church by which we are taught but for the authoritie of the scripture it self we acknowledg the scripture
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
no diuine light in them Likewise if the light were onely in the original letters of Scripture as Hebrew and Greek no translated Scripture should haue this light and so none should know the Scripture to be Gods word but who know Hebrew and Greek Moreouer both Fathers teach and Protestants S. Hierom. Galat 1 Vvhâ—tâ—ker l 2 cont Dur. sec 1. confess that Scripture consisteth in the sense not in the letter or words of Scripture As Wotton in Whites Defense c. 28. p. 259. denieth the words to be the Rule of faith And White ibid. affirmeth the matter conteined in the words so to be Nay Whitaker himself l. 3. de Scrip. c. 4. p. 39â— saieth Nether doe I put most certain diuinitie in the written letter And surely writing or letters giue no diuine authoritie to Gods word For Gods word is of the same authoritie written and vnwritten as is euident and Protestants confess How then can writing or letters giue anie true light or brightnes to Gods word Finally I add that e Sup l 1. c. 10. n. 6. faith cannot be resolued into arguments becaus it is not discursiue but onely into authoritie For it is a simple assent to the saying for the authoritie of the saier And onely the word of God or which God hath said can be beleued with diuine faith And no collection or inference of man out of the character or letter of God is Gods word and therfore cannot be the obiect or formal cause of diuine faith Nor is this feigned light in the sense of the Scripture becaus then by it we could not beleue euerie parte of the Scipture to be Gods word For as Protestants before confessed it Sup. c. 2. sect 2. were impudencie and madnes to say that anie know the true sense of euerie parte of Scripture which is beleued to be Gods word S. Austin Epist 119. professed that there is more in Scripture which he knew not then which he knew And Whitaker l. 2. de Script p. 220. 235. saieth The Eunuch though he vnderstood not the Scriptures yet he acknowledged them and certainly knew them to be diuine And l. 1. p. 156. God hath so framed his speech that though pious men doe not alwaies clearly see what he speaketh yet they clearly see by the verie speech that it is God who speaketh What diuine light of honestie haue those words to Osee Take a fornicarian and make sonnes of fornication What diuine light of humanitie haue those words to Abraham sacrifice thy sonne what diuine light of truth haue those words that Balaams ass spake to him And the like of manie more 5. Furthermore the Deuisers of this sufficient internal light of the Scripture are not wel resolued whether not withstanding this light it need be proued infallibly that Scripture is the word of God For Laude sec 16. p. 64 saieth It seemes to mâ— very necessarie that we be able to proue the books of scripture to be the word of God by some authoritie that is absolutly diuine And ibid. p. 66. Scripture must be proued by some word of God This is agreed on by me that scripture must be known to be scripture by a sufficient infallible diuine proof And that such proof can be nothing but the word of God is agreed also by me Thus he confesseth that notwithstanding anie light in the Scripture it must be infalliby proued to be the word of God and that such proof can be none but some word of God Which if he wold constantly hold he must needs grant that there is some vnwritten word of God by which the Scripture must be proued to be his word Neuertheles himself soon after p. 104. saieth It is most But Protestants can not proue it so reasonable that Theologie should be allowed to haue some principle which she proues not but presupposes and the chiefest of these is Tat the scriptures are of diuine authoritie And the same he repeateth p. 110. Potter also sec 5. p. 26. Al Christians in the world confess the authoritie of scripture to be a Principle indemonstrable yet are we by them Papists perpetually vrged to proue that authoritie and that by scripture And Whitaker l 1. de Script 106. What Pastor euer laboreth to proue that it is God who speaketh in scriptures He by his right requireth that this be granted to him So that the chiefest principle of Protestants Theologie and that on which dependeth their beleif of al they beleue cannot be infallibly proued but must be praesupposed and freely granted and consequently they can beleue nothing infallibly as Laude p. 64. cit wel inferred For as generally Protestants teach we Sup. l. 1. c. 18. n. 1. can haue no greater certaintie of the inference then we haue of the Principle out of which we inferr it And herevpon Chillingworth as before we shewed c. 8. sec 2. consequently granted that Protestants haue but humane and moral assurance of what they beleue And as Laude saieth sec 16. p. 59. This question how doe you know scripture to be scripture driueth some of them into infidelitie Such fruits they see come of their denying the Churches infallibilitie in al matters of faith 6. Finally this sufficient internal light of the Scripture great or less hath no sufficient ground For the pretended ground therof is that the Scripture is called a light psal 118. To which I answer First That arguments taken from Metaphors Arguments taken from meâ—aphors are deceitful or similitudes are most subiect to deceipt becaus the true similitude may be easily mistaken Secondly it is not saied that the scripture or Written word and much less Al scripture is a light but simply The word of God which may be wel vnderstood ether of the word preached Gal. 1. Without which there is no faith Rom. 10. or of the ingrafted word which can saue our soules Iacobi 1. or of the word written in the hearts of the faithful Hierem. 31. Thirdly I say that the word of God is called a light not becaus it sheweth Vvhy Gods word called a light it self to be the word of God as light sheweth it self to be light but becaus it sheweth the way to heauen And therfore it is called a light to our feet which can not see but follow And in this sorte Iob. 2. 29. saieth He was an eye to the blinde not that the blinde could see him but follow his directions The like I say to that other place 2. Petri c. 1. Where he likeneth Prophetical speech to a lamp shining in a dark place For nether speaketh he of al scripture but onely of Prophesies nether likeneth he them to a lamp in that this is seen by it self but ether becaus Prophesies gaue but a darksome light of Christ in respect of the Gospel or becaus they directed to Christ as a lamp directeth in a darksome roome In like sorte the Apostles were called the light of the world Math. 5. Not becaus the world
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
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
much as we desire Ibid. If by al the scripture he mean the summe of doctrin necessarie to euerie one for saluation then we Knowledg of Christ Necessarie to euerie one acknowledg the argument and say it is al clear Againe If he confess that the scripture is like an open book for the misteries of our Redemption truly we haue not to demand anie more For thence wil follow that al things are manifest in scripture which are necessarie to saluation which is the ground of our Defense Morton to 1. Apol. l. 2. c. 9. after he had cited out of Coster these words We denie not but that the chiefest points of faith necessarie to euerie ones saluation are clearly enough set down in scripture saieth A pure and right doctrin of Protestants And in his Appeal l. 2. c. 28. scriptures be Al fundamental points the perfect treasurie of al fundamental Principles of faith Musculus in locis tit de Nomine Dei p. 425. Al things could not be namely expressed in scripture which desire of Gods glorie doth require it sufficeth that the summe of them Sum and general rules and certain general rules should be inserted in scripture to which we might frame al our life Humphrey ad Rat. 2 dam Campiani p. 114. We know that cases or points of law cannot be set down in lawes as Aristotle and Lawyers say wel yet the summ of al religion Summe of religion and al heads of faith are conteined in those writings out of which al our dogmes may be fully and abundantly drawn as out of fountaines Caluin l. 2. de lib. arbit p. 151. Not al sermons were taken word for word yet their Gospel was faithfully drawn into a summe which may fully suffice vs. 3. Now that Catholiks teach that Stat. leâ—on l 13. de Principijs c. 6. Bellar. l. 4. de Verbo Dei c. 11. Gordon Cont. 1. c. 21. 32. the summ of Christian religion and al things necessarily to be beleued explicitly of al men are conteined in Scripture Protestants themselues confess For thus Rainolds in the Preface to his Conclusions citeth out of the Preface of Gregorie 13. in Biblia Regia In these Books See Vvhitâ—k Cont 2 q. 5. c. 20. Morton to 2. Apol l. 1. c. 19. in 〈◊〉 p. 317. Châ—lling c. 〈◊〉 §. 80. are explaned al the Misteries of our religion And ibid saieth The Church of Rome itself doth acknowledg that the whole doctrin religion and faith which leadeth the Faithful to saluation and life by the true worship of God is conteined in Gods word Whitaker Contro 1. q. 6. c. vlt. Bellarmin confesseth Vvhole doctrin of religion Al dogmes simply necessarie to al. Vvhite Vvay p â—3 and in Defense 〈◊〉 35. Potter sect 4. p 95. that al Dogmes simply necessarie to al men are had in the Scripture Laude Relat. sec 11. n. 1. Bellarmin confesseth that al things simply necessarie for al mens saluation are in the Creed and the Decalogue See him sec 20. n. 3. See also Chillingworth c. 2. n. 144. c. 3. n. 80. Potter sec 4. p. 95. sec 5. p 4. 13. 4. Wherfore the true difference between vs is not whether al things simply necessarie to be explicitly beleued or al necessarie to euerie one be in Scripture but whether al things anie way necessarie or necessarie to anie men be in Scripture For they wil haue al points that are of faith to be ether actually conteined in Scripture or to be clearly inferred out of it as we shewed supra c. 9. sec 1. Nay Rainolds in his first Conclusion defendeth that the Scripture teacheth whatsoeuer is behooful for saluation which he often repeateth so that Vvhatsoeuer is behooful they wil haue not onely al things necessarie but also al things behooful to saluation to be conteined in Scripture And neuertheles they confess that it doth not teach that itself is the word of God which with them is the most fundamental point of al. Wheras we confess that it conteineth al which we acknowledg to be fundamental that is by Gods institution absolutly necessarie to saluation so that in effect we grant more to Scripture then they doe though they in words giue more to it then we 5. I add also that the Scripture sufficiently teacheth the far greater parte of points of faith This I proue becaus the Fathers heretofore and other Catholiks since haue confuted al most al the heresies that haue risen by plain testimonies of Scripture Herevpon Catholik writers as we heard Protestants Confess c. 13. sec 1. say they haue plain Scripture in al places for the Catholik faith an in al Controuersies crie Plain euident manifest Scripture And herevpon also both Fathers and Catholiks sometimes by the word Scripture vnderstand the whole word of God becaus it conteineth the far greater and principaller parte of the word of God Catholiks saieth Stapleton Act. 17. v. 2. expresly teach that the far greatest parte and in general In general al doctrin of faith al doctrin of faith may be and must be gathered out of Scriptuie 6. Moreouer I add that the Scripture teacheth mediatly euerie point of faith becaus it sendeth vs to the Church which teacheth vs al points of faith S. Austin l. 1. cont Crescon c. 33. Albeit of this matter there be no example brought out of holie Scriptures yet euen in this matter the truth of the same holic Scriptures is held when we doe what b Present Church now seemeth to the whole Church which the authoritie of the same Scriptures doth commend that seing the holie scripture cannot deceaue whosoeuer feareth to be deceaued by the obscuritie of this question let him of it ask the same Church which the holie Scripture sheweth without al doubt And the like he saieth in other places And Protestants in Colloq Ratisb sess 6. p. 144. confess That it seemeth a faire saying By means of the infallible authoritie of the Church al matters of faith or manners may be deduced out of scripture Hence appareth how vntruly D. Potter sec 5. p. 12. saied of vs They teach that much of the obiect or matter of faith is not conteined in Scripture anie way TWO AND TWENTITH CHAPTER That the Scripture teacheth plainly enough the summ of Christian faith and al things absolutly necessarie to be beleued explicitly 1. THat Scripture teacheth plainly enough the summ of Christian faith and al things absolutly necessarie to be beleued explicitly I proue becaus as is shewed in the former Chapter it teacheth al such points and that it teacheth them clearly enough appereth by that it teacheth them in the plain and vsual sense of these words which is to teach plainly enough as can be by writing And this may be shewed by Induction though al the Articles of the Apostles Creed which a Catechimus Trident p. 13. conteineth al the points which are absolutly necessarie to be beleued explicitly and is called of the b