Selected quad for the lemma: knowledge_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
knowledge_n faith_n know_v revelation_n 1,335 5 9.6714 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A15091 A defence of the Way to the true Church against A.D. his reply Wherein the motives leading to papistry, and questions, touching the rule of faith, the authoritie of the Church, the succession of the truth, and the beginning of Romish innouations: are handled and fully disputed. By Iohn White Doctor of Diuinity, sometime of Gunwell and Caius Coll. in Cambridge. White, John, 1570-1615. 1614 (1614) STC 25390; ESTC S119892 556,046 600

There are 34 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

is quenched the light and zeale and comfortable assurance thereof is taken away and all sorts of people are imboldened to security negligence in seeking that quantity of knowledge whereto God hath enabled them to attaine So that hereby the people of God in whom p Col. 3.16 his word ought to dwell plentifully with all manner of knowledge q Ro. 10.10 that should be able both to beleeue with the heart and confesse with their mouth to saluation r Heb. 5. vlt. that through long custome should haue their wits exercised to discerne both good and euill ſ 1 Pet. 3.15 that should be alway ready to giue an answer to euery one that asketh a reason of the hope that is in them are turned into sencelesse Idols that can neither heare nor see nor vnderstand the which kind of ignorance the ancient Church neuer allowed Thirdly we cōdemne the defining of faith yea entire Catholicke faith by this kind of beleeuing for albeit the faith knowledge of the best of Gods children be intangled as Caluin hath freely confessed with the relickes of much ignorance when many things beleeued necessary to saluation are not yet distinctly vnderstood yet there is a progres increase in knowledge wherby the dullest ignorantest of Gods children are inlightned more and more vntill they reach that quantity of apprehension that the commandement of faith requires In which sense we allow the faith of any man liuing specially the vnlearned to be implicite First when he knowes and apprehends in generall the substantiall articles belonging to faith which are contained in the Scriptures and rule of faith Secondly when the ignorance is only in the particulars whereby the said generall articles are demonstrated as a lay man beleeuing the Vnity and Trinity of Persons in God yet is not able to expresse or conceaue the difference betweene the essence and the Persons nor the different manner of persons proceeding 3. When withall he vses the meanes to increase in knowledge by searching the Scriptures and hearing the word preached and in the meane time obediently submits himselfe to the ministry and direction of the Church herein The implicite faith of such persons as haue this threefold disposition concurring in them we condemne not but this is not it which our aduersaries pleade for who defēd that it is enough to assent to the Church though all this be wanting that is to say to professe himselfe a Romane Catholicke beleeuing as the present Church holds without any knowledge of the things in themselues 8 Note lastly that the distinct knowledge of things beleeued which against this implicitie of faith we require is the knowledge of that which God hath reuealed not of the essence and reason of the things For the vnderstanding whereof we must consider that the Scriptures and Church by their proposition reueale the points of faith vnto vs and bid vs learne beleeue thē as that there is one God the maker of all things and one mediator Iesus Christ that was conceaued by the Holy Ghost borne of the virgine Marie and as followes in the Rule of Faith Which things thus mentioned vnto vs are profound mysteries and haue many abstruse and secret notions belonging to them as for example the deepe reasons of the Trinitie in the Godhead and the Vnion of the two natures in Christ Now when we require knowledge to be ioyned with the faith of these things we meane the knowledge of the Reuelation not of the reason and whole nature of the things reuealed for is any man so presumptuous as to imagine that a supernaturall obiect beleeued by faith reuealed by God can by discourse of reason be reduced to naturall vnderstanding the Apostle t 1. Cor. 2.14 saying The naturall man perceaues not the things of God neither can he know them Or do our aduersaries imagine the knowledge we require to be such as is in humane sciences where conclusions are demonstrated by their principles and things are comprehended in their causes and properties Haue they that power ouer their people to make them beleeue that we require for example men to be able to vnderstand and vtter the manner and reasons how God is one How 3. in Person How the dead shall be raised againe How our nature subsists in the word How the redemption of mankinde could be wrought by the sufferings and death of the Sonne of God How the Sacraments confer Grace How man could be predestinate before the world was made We do not require the world to know these things u 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Theodor. de prouid l. 10 sub fin which are reserued to the beatificall vision in the life to come but onely in such sort and measure as is reuealed which is by conceauing that God is one that the Persons are 3. that the dead shall be raised againe c. and such things concerning them as may without error be vnderstood * Deut. 29 29. For secret things belong to the Lord our God but things reuealed belong to vs and to our children for euer * The state of the question The true state of the question therefore touching implicite faith is whether the beleeuer besides his generall assenting to the Church and Scripture be also bound to haue in himselfe a distinct knowledge of things propounded him to beleeue so that he can according to any true notion of conceauing apprehend and conceaue that which is reuealed to him in which question the distinction of Necessary as the meanes and Necessary by the command is friuolous because whatsoeuer is omitted against Gods commandement is sinne and consequently damnable without repentance and therefore if knowledge be commanded it is also the meanes of Saluation so farre foorth as the obseruation of the commandements is the meanes But our aduersaries apply this distinction which in some question is of good vse in this place to lay their people a sleepe on their pillow when they shall heare knowledge to be commanded but yet not as a Necessary meanes Now there be twenty wayes to escape from a commandement 9 These things thus premised now I answer my aduersaries arguments made for implicite faith against distinct knowledge The first that I dispute so whotly against that which M. Wootton admits is false For M. Wootton admits no more then he insinuates in his conclusion that a generall beleefe of some points may suffice some persons without danger of damnation and this pleases me well enough for I haue shewed this not to be the question but let my aduersary deale sincerely and hold him to that which is taught in his Church and it will please himselfe neuer a whit When that doctrine allowes ignorance in all points and the other which is somewhat honester allowes it in more points and defines the ignorance otherwise then M. Wootton will do My aduersary therefor hath not M. Wootton on his side nor against me but directly with me
aliquos viros spirituales tantopere in exercitus spiritualibus in familiaritate diuina proficere vt absque vlla temeritate possint rectè absque vlla haesitatione credere se inuenisse gratiam remissionem peccatorum apud Deum Andr. Vega. pro Concil p. 313. our aduersaries some few Iesuites excepted who are but one and an vpstart faction against the maior part in the Romane Church freely yeeld unto First that a iustified man may haue such certainty of the remission of his sinnes as is void of all feare and doubting in the same manner as any man may certainely know there is such a place as Rome Constantinople London Do. Bannes y In Tho. 22. q. 18. art 4. concl 3. The same sayes Tolet. in Rom. 5. v. 5. p. 225. sayes Our hope whereby we looke for Saluation is and is called simplie such as cannot deceiue vs and firme and safe both in the Scripture and in the doctrine of the Church because through the diuine promise and power of Gods mercy whereupon it leanes it can no more deceiue vs then faith in whose testimony it is founded Martin Isengren hath written a whole booke of purpose to shew this point in it he hath these words z Eisengren pro conc Trid. de certit grat p. 228. I haue many a time and often visited the sicke and bene with them that haue died and no man can report of me but that as soone as they had declared their repentance I exhorted them with all diligence to haue an VNDOVBTED AND CERTAINE CONFIDENCE that our most mercifull God would for the merit of his Sonne WITHOVT ALL DOVBT forgiue them their sinnes and after this life giue them his heauenly kingdome yea he sayes a Pag. 217. All the chiefest Diuines of the Church of Rome whose writings for that purpose he had read and searched though they did not allow a man to be altogether secure and free from all care and heedfulnesse yet * Vniuersi vno ore all of them with one voice teach that we must NOT TREMBLE OR MISTRVST BVT HAVE A FIRME HOPE AND CERTAINE CONFIDENCE b Omnes orthodoxi receptique theologi quotquot tam inde ab Apostolorum temporibus ad hunc vsque annum vixerint p. 254. and he adds that this is the doctrine of all the Schoolemen and Fathers that haue bene since the Apostles whose testimonies and words he alledges at large c Dionys Areo pagit Cypr. Ambr. Augusti Chrysost Cyril Basil Theodor. Leo. Gregor Roman Pius 5. Sixt. Senensis Mich. Medina Anselm Bernard Magist Thom. Scot. Altisiodor Reyner Alexand. Lyra. Bonauent Dionys Carthus Gabr. Pelbart Biga Gotshal Thesaur Hos Ruard Louaniens Caietan Roffens Ecch. Nausca Cassal Soto Canis Vega. Castro Torrēs Theses Cathol disput adu Wittemberg to the number of more then 40. Whereby the reader may iudge of my Aduersaries learning and religion that hauing derided such testimonies and signes of our being in Gods fauour as Isengren auerres to be infallible d Reply p. 58. concludes that the perswasion which any Protestant hath that their sinnes are forgiuen is a fond presumptuous fiction of their owne heart but Isengren e Vbi sup p. 217. answers that such fantasticall companions not vnderstanding the truth of things babble of that whereof they can giue no sufficient reason Secondly when it is demanded whence this certainty so free from doubting and feare arises they grant it arises from the light of the Scripture that is to say the promises of mercy and forgiuenes reuealed in the Scripture beget and produce it in the heart of man Ruard f Ruard att 9. pag. 121. sayes Though it be inferiour to the certainty of faith yet it DEPENDS VPON THE SENTENCES OF THE SCRIPTVRE and therefore faith infused mediatly inclines vnto it Casalius saies g Cassal quadrip inst p. 221. l. 2. c. 8. This confidence arises by hauing respect to the diuine conditionall promises and to the conditions that they require Vega following the doctrine of Bacon the Carmelite h Vega pro Cōcil l. 9 c. 47. pag. 321. Is credit cui aliquid sine vlla haesitatione certum persuasum est Catech Roman pag. 17. saies This assurāce is not the assurāce of faith but an assurance following faith yet saith he if that will serue the turne to call it the assurance of faith I WILL NOT GREATLY STRIVE but that there may be peace and we may all agree in one I will grant that you require and willingly yeeld my selfe These men as learned as euer liued in the Church of Rome you see deny not this certainty of faith or knowledge following faith howsoeuer the said faith be not so intent and strong in apprehending that obiect as it is in beleeuing that which is immediatly reuealed and expressely written For what habite or facultie is there in the soule whereby to receiue and apply the promises of the Gospell touching the benefits of Christ for our redemption but onely faith For although the holy Ghost not tying himselfe to termes do a 1. Ioh. 4.13 3.14 sometime call it knowledge yet calling it b Rom 6.8 1. Ioh. 4.16 againe beleeuing alone or beleeuing and knowing it is manifest that he intends such a knowledge as not onely flowes from the principles of faith but also is reduced to the same habite and this onely which the holy Ghost teaches in termes so expresse and formall might serue to stop the mouthes of all our aduersaries if they had not set themselues to resist euen Gods owne Spirit when it speakes against their corruptions For with what other eies can the soule behold the heauenly light of the Gospell How shall that confidence assurance certaintie which is created by the mixture of the light of the Scripture with light of a good conscience renued by the holy Ghost belong to any humane knowledge when the Scripture sayes expresly i Gal. 3.14 The promise of the Spirit is receiued by faith and wheresoeuer in all the Bible the Gospell is reuealed men are called vpon to beleeue I will not deny but faith hath his degrees and can beleeue some things more resolutely then other and one time is stronger then at another but this is it I vrge that if there be granted a certainety of a mans owne speciall standing in grace which certainty arises by the Scriptures it must needes also be granted that it is a worke or effect of faith this is confirmed by the courage and constancy of Martyrs and by the admirable resolution that we see in good men when they die Saint Ambrose k In Psal 118. serm 7. pag. 641. saies we see innocent persons in this world ioyfully to runne towards iudgement to hate delaies to hasten their triall whereas the guilty flie from it and he giues the reason Because the iust man knowes eternall life the fellowship of Angels the crowne of his good merits is laied vp
Syllogisme here set downe Whereto I answered First granting the maior and acknowledging it to be a point of faith necessary to be beleeued that the Canonicall bookes which the Church vses are true diuine Scripture but I denied the second proposition that they cannot be proued so to be by themselues secluding Church authority and tradition And I distinguish for the Authority and direction of the Church is Gods outward ordinance to teach vs as a condition how to see the Scripture to be diuine but not the thing whereby they are prooued so to be and whereon our faith leaneth but this diuinity the Church as a bare Minister out of the Scripture it selfe prooues to be in the Scripture not by her owne authority that vpon her word and testimony either onely or particularly it should be taken for Scripture rather then the books of other men In the same manner that a man shewes a star giuing light to it selfe which yet another cannot see till the man point to it Or as a dead mans will kept in the Register of necessity must be sought there and thence receiued yet all the authority of that court which is great and ample specially in preseruing records neither makes nor prooues the will to be legitimate but is onely a requisite condition to bring it forth and vs to the sight and knowledge of it the will proouing it selfe by the hand and seale of him that made it affixed to it So it is with the word of God which we do not ordinarily see to be the word of God vntill the Church teach and traine vs vp therein But when it hath done the arguments whereby it is proued so to be and the authority whereupon I beleeue it are contained in the word it selfe which I expound and confirme by this that euermore and perpetually the Church by the Scripture it selfe and by no other argument prooues it to be diuine to those she teaches and vpon that ground at the first receiued them for such her selfe and many times it fals out as with some Atheists and Pagans that where no Church authority ministry or perswasion is vsed by onely reading of the Scripture it selfe in respect of the outward meanes a man coms to faith which could not be if the Scripture it selfe had not conuinced him forsomuch as an Atheist or vnbeleeuer will not be perswaded by any thing but that which he euidently sees to be Gods owne word and this perswasion arises in him from the very booke it selfe without Church authority 3 And this is yet confirmed by that which the Iesuites teach against the Anabaptists Swinkfieldians holding the motions of their inward spirit to be Gods word for Bellarmine c De verb. Dei l. 1. c. 1. 2. sayes that to the faithfull acknowledging the Scripture to be Gods word it may be prooued out of the Scripture it selfe that the Scripture is the word of God Molhusine and Gretsers d Gretser def Bellar. l. 1. c. 2. pag. 34. D. words are these It is manifest that Bellarmine onely affirmes that it may be prooued OVT OF THE SCRIPTVRES THEMSELVES and the Canonicall books thereof onely TO THE FAITHFVLL who receiue and reuerence them for such that the word of God is not the inward spirit whereof fantasticall men boast but the word of God is truly it which is contriued in those books which the faithfull hold for Canonicall In which words they say three things First that the faithfull who acknowledge the Scripture to be Gods word are they persons of whom they speake not such as receiue it not Secondly that to such it may be prooued that not the inward spirit of fantasticall men but the Canonicall Scripture is the word of God Wherein they affirme two things may be prooued A Negatiue that the inward spirit is not Gods word and an Affirmatiue that Gods word is truely it which is contained in the Canonicall books of the Scripture Thirdly that both this Negatiue and this Affirmatiue may be proued out of the Scriptures themselues Hence I reasō thus To the godly that receiue and acknowledge the Scripture this affirmatiue that Gods word is it which is contained in the Canonicall Bookes of the Scripture may be proued out of the Scriptures themselues therefore the Scripture it selfe can proue it selfe to be the word of God Therefore that the Scripture it the very word of God is contained in the Scripture because otherwise it could not be proued so to be out of the Scripture it selfe Therefore all things needfull are contained in this Scripture No wrangling can auoid this If to such as receiue them it may be proued out of themselues that these Bookes are the word of God then this point that these bookes are diuine Scripture is contained in Scripture and the cause why some see it not is their owne indisposition and vnbeleefe wherewith the Scripture must not be charged but to such as receiue these Bookes the Iesuits affirme it may be proued out of themselues that they are the word of God that is without all Church authoritie which is externall and not in the Scripture 4 Secondlie this being admitted that it is a a point of faith necessary to be beleeued that the Canonical Books are diuine and then againe that they could not be shewed so to be out of themselues yet doth it not follow ineuitably that all points of faith are not contained in them for the question is not whether the Scripture be Gods word or no which is granted of all hands but whether being confessed so to be it containe all such verities as a Christian man is bound to know in such measure that there is no point to be beleeued that is not contained therein The reason is because the Scriptures are the principles of diuine knowledge and the faith thereof * Not in nature but in proportion like the credite we yeed to the rules of humane sciences which are knowne and beleeued of themselues without any further demonstration And as the kings lawes containe all things whatsoeuer the subiect is bound to do and yet the said lawes not prouing themselues to be of authoritie but supposing it to be known before and otherwise are not thereby proued to be vnperfect or defectiue but being receiued then there is nothing wanting in them that is necessary for the common-wealth and as in all arts and sciences that we learne the rules and precepts thereof need not proue themselues for that which is the generall rule of other things is not ruled it selfe in the same kinde and yet it were folly to say they were therefore imperfect So may it be said to be in the Scripture supposing it had no more light thereby to authorize it selfe then Princes lawes and humane principles haue that it containes all points of faith though it were not expressed that it selfe is the word of God For the readier vnderstanding whereof let the Reader againe cast his eie vpon the occasion
all points contained in Scripture all which are points of faith and consequently are points necessary to be beleeued either expressely and in particular or implicitely and in generall vnder paine of damnation Indeed I do grant and neuer did deny but that there are some points necessary to be particularly knowne of all sorts necessitate medij and some necessary to be known necessitate praecepti In which points implicite beleefe doth not suffice but expresse particular knowledge is required by Catholicke Diuines to be ioyned to the assent of our faith Whereby appeareth that M. White doth vtter two grosse vntruthes 2 White p. 5. 7. when he saies that we vtterly refuse knowledge and that the Colliars faith is canonized for our Creed In other points so farre as we neither know nor haue sufficient meanes to know them we may well commend the Colliars faith in beleeuing in generall as the Church beleeueth For in this generall act is infolded a vertuall or implicite beleefe of all points both in regard a generall includeth all particulars contained in it as also for that this particular act of beleeuing the Church eo ipso in that we are moued vnto it by the authority of diuine reuelation as the primary or formall cause and by the authoritie of the Church it selfe as a necessary condition or the secondary cause doth so dispose the minde of the beleeuer that he is ready to beleeue euerie other point reuealed by God and propounded by the Church Againe * Pag. 140. Thirdly whereas M. White 3 White p. 5. requireth particular knowledge to be ioyned with the assent of faith as though he meant that one could not beleeue any point of faith which he did not first expressely and in particular know this his assertion is not onely contrarie to his fellow M. Wotton Wotton p. 46. who admitteth a generall or implicite beleefe of some points which we do not in particular know 1. Cor. 13. v. 2. but it is also against the Scriptures Fathers and naturall reason it selfe In the Scriptures we haue that not onely Faith and knowledge Heb. 11. v. 1. are 2. distinct things but also that faith is of things not apparant or not knowne and that faith doth captiuate the vnderstanding for the seruice of Christ 2. Cor. 10 v. 5. Rom. 10. v. 16. requiring an obedience in the beleeuer all which were not verified if expresse particular distinct knowledge were presupposed before beleefe or if beleefe and such knowledge were all one thing The Fathers do not onely distinguish faith and knowledge but do also affirme Faith to be without knowledge of things beleeued Iren. l. 2. c. 45. It is better saith Irenaeus that one that knoweth nothing beleeue God and perseuere in his loue which doth quicken a man then by subtilties of questions and by much speech to fall into impietie Not to know saith S. Hilary that which thou must beleeue Hilar. l. 5. de Trin. ante medium Aug. Ep. 102. ad Euodium doth not so much require pardon as reward because it is the greatest stipend of faith to hope for those things which thou knowest not If saith Saint Augustine Christ was borne onely for those that can discerne these things with certaine knowledge in vaine almost do we labour in the Church which he saith in regard the common sort cannot with all the preaching in the world discerne with certaine knowledge the high and hard Mysteries of the blessed Trinitie Incarnation and other such mysteries of faith and therefore not the viuacitie or quickenesse of vnderstanding saith the same Saint Augustine but the simplicitie of beleeuing Aug. cont Fund c. 4. Tract 40. in Ioan. doth make the common sort of people most safe And againe he saith of some they did not beleeue because they knew but they beleeued that they might know And in the same place he asketh what is faith but to beleeue that thou seest not Conformable to which also he saith Serm. 120. de tempore After we haue receiued Baptisme we say I am a faithfull man I beleeue that which I know not Reason also and experience it selfe teacheth that beleefe and knowledge are distinct and that beleefe doth not necessarily presuppose knowledge but is rather sometimes an antecedent to it Insomuch that euen in naturall things the Philosopher acknowledgeth that one that learneth must beleeue before he come to knowledge M. White may aske how one can assent to the veritie which he doth not first apprehend or know I answer that some apprehension at least confuse rude and generall I do not deny to be requisite in the assent of faith but expresse particular distinct or cleare apprehension or knowledge is not necessary otherwise not onely the common sort but the learnedest in the world might despaire of saluation● in regard they could not beleeue the mysterie of the blessed Trinity which no man in this life can distinctly and clearely vnderstand and know and yet all sorts of men are bound to beleeue it explicite and much lesse could they beleeue both it and all other mysteries contained in the whole corps of the holy Scripture all which are necessary to be beleeued in one sort or other explicite or implicite as hath bene proued and yet no one learned man hath particular distinct knowledge of euerie truth contained in the Scriptures Quis enim est hic laudabimus eum 1 FOr the reducing of this wilde discourse into some order and the better discerning of the controuersie you are to note that the Iesuite in the beginning of his Treatise laied downe 4. propositions touching faith out of the which he would spin his motiues to Papistry the first is that Faith is necessary to saluation The second that this faith is but only one The third that it must be infallible The fourth that it must be entire extending it selfe to all points vniuersally This conclusion I graunted in one sense and denied in another That our beleefe must be entire whole and sound in all points by obtaining a particular distinct knowledge of the same in our selues that so our faith might include an apprehension and knowledge of that we beleeue as well as an assent in the will I granted but if his meaning were that which then I suspected and now he bewraies that the implicite faith taught by the Iesuites and schoolemen destitute of knowledge and onely beleeuing as the Church beleeues were this entire faith so necessary and infallible then I denied it and gaue my reasons and a Dig. 2. in a speciall Digress shewed and confuted it All which he passes by and onely mentions as you see my bare assertion against his implicite faith but what I said in describing it confuting it and shewing the drift and purpose of it he touches not though it concerned his cause more then that which he replies to This is his method whereto he cleaues in all his booke to reply entirely to
nothing 2 That which he sayes is two things First he repeates and expounds his conclusion Next he touches some small portion of that I said concerning it In repeating his conclusion first he sayes he meant it against such as thinke it sufficient to beleeue some few articles onely though they deny or doubt of others which yet the Church beleeues yea rashly and obstinately denies them who these men are he names not but he meanes the Protestants Because they deny such points as the Church of Rome which he meanes by his Catholicke Church vntruly propounds vnto them For they must be the persons intended that deny any thing which the Roman Church holds for an article of faith as the Popes primacy Purgatory Images and the rest which in b Commonly printed with the Trent Councell inserted in the WAY praef n. 15. the new Creed of the Trent Councell are made articles of faith But the Protestants answer readily that they confesse no point at all may be denied or doubted of either obstinately or rashly or at all that is a point of faith reuealed in the word of God but the things holden and propounded by the Church of Rome against them are the false doctrines and heresies of Antichrist ridiculously called the faith of the Catholicke Church Then expounding his conclusion he shewes in what manner faith must beleeue all things that it may be entire and he sayes either expresly or implicitely wherein he bewrayes that which I suspected and signified in my answer for his conclusion being that faith must be entire and sound stedfastly beleeuing all things reuealed I c The WAY pag. 5. answered that this might be granted in a true sense But peraduenture his mind ran vpon a further matter which his Church teaches about infolded faith meaning thereby that howsoeuer he affirmed that we are bound to beleeue all points of faith as well one as other yet that might be done sufficiently by beleeuing as the Church beleeues without knowledge of any thing that is beleeued the which my suspition he grants in this place to be true and so his conclusion which at the first carried so good a semblance of binding men to the knowledge of particular verities and made so honest a proffer against ignorance is now resolued into this sense that by an intire faith you are bound to beleeue all things the which is done by knowing nothing but onely beleeuing implicitely as the Church of Rome beleeues Let a man neuer trouble himselfe with inquiring into the mysteries of Christian religion or controuersies of faith but onely say d Rhem. annot Luc. 12.11 he will liue and die in that faith which the Catholicke Church teaches and this Church can giue a reason of the things beleeued This is the equiuocating tongue of the Church of Rome that can ambush it selfe in words and vnder faire speeches conceale no small wickednes 3 His arguments in maintenance of this implicite faith are fiue First the authority of M. Wootton who seemes to speake against me next because to get expresse knowledge of all points contained in Scripture which are points necessary to be beleeued is impossible at least for vnlearned men Thirdly faith and knowledge are two distinct things faith being of things not knowne captiuating the vnderstanding therefore this distinct knowledge is not presupposed before Fourthly reason and experience teach that beleefe and knowledge are distinct beleefe not presupposing knowledge but going before it Fiftly the Fathers Irenaeus Hilary Austin affirme faith to be sufficient without knowledge Afore I answer his arguments note fiue things First what our aduersaries meane hy implicite or infolded faith and it is nothing else but a blind assent of the mind to whatsoeuer the Church of Rome beleeues without any knowledge at all of the things themselues e Occh. dialog part 1. l. 3. c. 1. p. 18. Dur. 3. d. 25. q. 1. ●abr ibi Notab 2. Do. Bann 22. pag. 349. The Schoolemen deliuer it in finer termes that it is the assent of the minde to some generall or vniuersall thing wherein many particulars are included with will to beleeue nothing that is contrary thereunto but the meaning is that to the essence and nature of this entire faith the distinct knowledge or apprehension of any particular truth or article is not required but onely resolution and profession to be of the Churches beleefe whatsoeuer it be in the same manner that I reported the Colliars faith Thus any man by an implicite faith beleeues the articles of Religion and particular mysteries of our faith touching the Vnity and Trinity of the Godhead the Incarnation and Office of Christ the nature of Faith the practise of Repentance the Resurrection the Sacraments Redemption of mankinde state of sinne and the last Iudgement when he will beleeue and hold touching these things as the Church of Rome doth and yet in the meane time his vnderstanding in no measure penetrates into these articles nor can distinctly explicate or conceiue them Altisiodorensis f Sum. l. 3. tract 3. c. 1. qu. 5. saies To beleeue implicitely is to beleeue in this generall that whatsoeuer the Church beleeues is true Dionysius g 3. de 25. qu. vnic p. 215. This is infolded faith to beleeue in generall all that our Holy mother the Church beleeues Summa Rosella h V. Fides n. 1. quem refert Bann vbi sup To beleue all that which our mother the Church beleeues and holds as when a Christian man is asked whether Christ were borne of the virgine Marie or whether there be one God and three Persons and he answers that he cannot tell but beleeues touching these matters as the Church holdeth This is the definition of entire faith which the Iesuite saies extends it selfe vniuersally to all points at least implicitely Note Secondly what the things are and which be the points that our aduersaries teach to be sufficiently beleeued by this infolded faith The Reply seemes to affirme that it is allowed onely in some points which a man for want of sufficient meanes cannot know I grant saith he and neuer did deny but that there are some points necessary to be particularly knowne of all sorts Necessitate medij and some necessary to be knowne Necessitate praecepti In which points implicite beleefe doth not suffice but expresse particular knowledge is required by Catholicke Diuines to be ioyned to the assent of our faith in other points so farre as we neither know nor haue sufficient meanes to know them we may well commend the Colliars faith in beleeuing in generall as the Church beleeueth In which wordes my aduersarie seemes to allow implicite faith only in some few cases and charges me with two grosse vntruthes because I say the Papists vtterly refuse knowledge and Canonize the Colliars implicite faith for their Creed But he should haue obserued that which was vnder his eyes and affixed to my words alledged whereby I proued what I said I alledged Iacobus
against himselfe To the second that my opinion for the knowledge of all points of faith one as well as another is intollerable because it is impossible for vnlearned men to get expresse knowledge of all points contained in Scripture I answer that my words alleadged do not affirme the necessity of knowing all things reuealed as that Iacob had a lame leg or Abraham two wiues but all points of our faith expounding faith not as he doth for euery thing that is reuealed but of the substantiall articles of faith which the vnlearnedst that are may learne and vnderstand if they will vse the Ministry of the Church and exercise their wits therin as the word requires x The story may be seene in● Acts and Monum of the Ch. The Church of Rome had experience of this at the sacking of Mirandula Chabriers where not the elder sort alone but the very children of lay men whom vnmercifully they assassinated and butchered were found in knowledge to parallel the Doctors that examined them And Iustine against Trypho y Dial. cum Tryph. sayes of his time that such as could no letter on the booke vnderstood all the mysteries of faith And this is manifest by the places of Chrysostome Theodorit and Eusebius following My aduersary therefore must hold him to that obiect of faith that I speake of and then shew it is impossible to be apprehended which he cannot do And whereas he sayes He graunts and neuer did deny but there are some points necessary to be particularly knowne of all sorts wherein implicite beleefe doth not suffice but expresse particular knowledge is required by Catholicke Diuines I answer that when I spake against implicite faith demanding To what purpose should God propound all the points of our faith one as well as another vnlesse his will were that we should learne them all I knew not what my aduersary would grant or deny but hauing shewed that the Colliars faith was canonized by no small fooles in his Church and commended for sufficient in all points I vsed this reason against it which I confirmed by a text of Scripture and a speech of Saint Austine And if my aduersary conuinced thereby relinquish that rude opinion requiring expresse particular knowledge at least in some points if not Necessitate medij yet Necessitate praecepti this to requite his kindnesse to M. Wootton I gratefully accept and wish him that when he writes againe he will ingenuously expresse what those his some points are and how far foorth the commandement of faith ties vs to know them For these things may be so expounded that what in words is granted in effect shall be denied and then the Pope may commend his towardlinesse z Nub. as the woman doth her daughter in Aristophanes * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A goodly sparke with a tongue that will strike on both sides 10 And whether he meane this or that yet my report that the Church of Rome vtterly refuses knowledge and that the Colliars faith is canonized for the Papists Creed should not haue bene called a grosse vntruth vntill my reasons whereuppon I grounded it had bene answered or at least mentioned but that it is a priuiledge and speciall indulgence that my aduersary hath obtained to reply without making any answer For is not the Colliars faith so reported and commended by the Authors whom I cited that any may fee they allowed it in all points whatsoeuer whether there were means to know them or no means doth not Staphylus a By this faith of the Colliar euery vnlearned man may try the spirits of men whether they be of God or no By this faith he may resist the Diuell and iudge the true interpretation from the false ●iscerne the Catholicke from the hereticall Minister the true doctrine from the forged Fred. Staphyl apol pag. 53. make it the best kind of faith that is and the rest whom I quoted in the margent propose it as the best forme of beleeuing any thing whatsoeuer and yet the Iesuite replies as if they allowed it onely in some few points so far as we nether know nor haue sufficient meanes to know them But his owne words immediately following in defence of this faith touching such things that in this generall action is infolded a particular or implicite beleefe of all points in asmuch as a generall includeth all particulars and beleeuing the Church disposes the minde c. bewraies that he holds the same thing that I obiected For this is the very reason that the grossest maintainers of implicite faith vse to defend it against them that require the knowledge questioned 11 To his third argument That faith and knowledge are 2. distinct things therefore there may be true faith without any distinct knowledge of the things beleeued I answer that the knowledge which I require is not of the essence and reason of the things beleeued but of their proposition and that concerning them which is reuealed as I haue distinguished and therefore I deny the consequence For though such knowledge be not faith but a habit distinct from it yet it concurres to the habit of faith in as much as no man can assent to that whereof he neuer heard for b Ro. 10.14 how shall they beleeue in him of whom they haue not heard The knowledge that hath no ingredience into faith is the knowledge of that which is not reuealed for faith not onely goes before such knowledge but also vtterly repels it neuer admitting any penetration into Gods secret mysteries for c 1. Cor. 2.9 the things which the eye hath not seene nor the eare heard nor can enter into the heart of man hath God prepared for them that loue him And in this sence all the texts of Scripture and places of the Fathers quoted by my aduersary against knowledge are vnderstood and so I answer his last argument For it was the constant and vniforme doctrine of the ancient Church that how soeuer faith apprehends mysteries not to be inquired into yet the proposition and doctrine of all the articles of faith must distinctly be conceaued that a man be able to vnderstand what they are Saint Chrysostome d Hom. 16. in Ioh. rebuking this ignorance proceedes into this discourse which plainely shewes that he was of this minde We beleeue saith he In the Father and the Sonne and the holy Ghost The resurrection of our bodies and euerlasting life If a Gentile aske you who is this Father who is this Sonne this holy Ghost are there 3. Gods what would you say to this what answer would you make how would you dissolue his obiections And when you should stand dumbe to these things suppose he should bring in another question touching the resurrection whether you should rise againe in this or in another bodie if he should demaund why Christ came in the flesh rather at this time then in the former ages what if he should pose vs in such and
presume to attaine faith without vsing the meanes Secondly to helpe such as despaire when they either know not that there is such a meanes or vnderstand not what in particular it is To take away presumption and desperation he layes downe this conclusion touching the rule of faith the which when he afterward defines to be his Romane Church speaking by the mouth of the Pope you may perceaue what a ready way he takes to keepe men from Presumption and Desperation 2 But whatsoeuer his intent were he sayes I grant him 4. things which is in a manner as much as he desires First that there is such a rule left Secondly that by this rule we may be infallibly instructed what is to be holden for true faith Thirdly that the cause why men misse the truth is because they either finde it not or obey it not Fourthly this rule is of such nature that it is able to direct al men yea the simplest and vnlearnedst aliue The which I granted him then and by these presents do grant againe vpon condition he will not be proud of that I giue him without any vantage to his purpose as if he had obtained some great boone but hold him to my grant mannerly and incroach no further For I gaue him warning that if he meant such a rule as all men at all times may haue accesse vnto as being concealed from none but visible and reuealed or manifest to all places ages and persons I would not grant it him for the reasons there expressed the which my exception in this place he calles vnorderly running before the Hare and in his next Section answers by expounding himselfe that he did not meane it should be actually manifest but onely such as * Doth he meane I ma●uell in his Potentia remota whereof pag. 165. below c. 26. might be knowne but I ranne not before the Hare for I hunted a Foxe that was closely stealing to the wood in which game good Fox-hunters say it is not against the law to crosse the way and marke his headding For his head is to the wood in euery conclusion aiming at nothing but to traine by degrees such as follow him into his visible Church and the Popes authority ruling therein and therefore I distinguisht the diuers sences of his words being acquainted before with old Reinard Gregory of Valence in whose steppes I saw the Reply to tread and shewed which was true and which false that there might be no ambiguity And although he answer that I mistake him when I thought his meaning was this rule should be manifest and actually knowne to all yet I am not satisfied for though I giue him leaue to expound himselfe and accept his exposition yet what I suspected necessarily followes still of that he saies afterward as I then obserued for g Treat c. 10. in the WAIE §. 13. he defines the teaching of the Church to be the rule and this Church he maintaines to be such as not onely is of it nature visible and such as may be seene but h Treat c. 12. in the WAIE §. 18. inde manifest and actually knowne to all places ages and persons in the world And it followes manifestly of that if you say that sometime the Church could not be knowne nor be a meanes whereby the true faith might be knowne then men liuing at such time should want the meanes and so it were not vniuersally true that God would haue all men saued and come to the knowledge of his truth He that saies the Church is the Rule and such a rule as all men vniuersally may at all times know meanes that the rule is manifest and actually knowne to all this meaning he disclaimes and I am satisfied with it yet it followes violently vpon his owne wordes 3 Thirdly from the 4. things I graunt he gathers 3. things more First that No man must presume or once hope to attaine to true faith without finding and following the rule thereof ordained by God Secondly that No man neede to despaire though he be neuer so vnlearned or simple but by seeking finding and follwing this rule he may be sufficiently instructed in faith Thirdly that it concernes euery one careful of his saluation to seek follow this rule for his instruction in the faith which is necessary to saluation These three I likewise yeeld him though they be not that which he principally almes at to encourage him because it will be some little honesty for him when his friends reade his booke to shew them what materiall points he hath extorted from M. White but the gift is not great my aduersary will returne the whole 7. backe againe in exchange for one single one that I can name him CHAP. XXV The text of 1. Tim. 2.4 God willes all men to be saued c. expounded The diuers expositions that are giuen of those wordes Gods antecedent will as they call it is not his will formally The antecedent consequent will of God expounded diuers wayes A.D. § 1. Concerning the meaning of the Apostles wordes Pag. 145. GOD WIL ALL MEN TO BE SAVED c. First it is certaine that the meaning of the Apostles words is not that God hath an absolute effectuall will and decree to saue euery man or to bring euery man in particular to the knowledge of the truth or to the knowledge of that ●●●diate rule and meanes which he hath ordained to instruct men in faith This is euident because if there were any such absolute and effectuall will and decree in God then since his will is alwaies fulfilled all should effectually be saued or should actually come to the knowledge of the truth or at least to the knowledge of that Rule and meanes which God hath ordained to instruct men in faith which euident experience telleth vs not to be true By which my assertion M. White may see how much he mistaketh when he thinkes me to meane that the Rule and Meanes ordained by God is not onely as I speake visible that is such as may be assigned and knowne White pag. 9. but also manifested as M. White speaketh that is such as is actually knowne to all places ages and persons in the world Secondly whereas there are diuers expositions of these wordes of the Apostle giuen by good authors the chiefe question betwixt me and my aduersaries is about the exposition of S. Damascen S. Thomas and many other learned Diuines who hold that the Apostle saying that God will all men to be saued meaneth that God hath an Antecedent will to saue euery man although considering the sinnes of men he he hath a consequent will to condemne some This exposition my Aduersaries mislike either in their ignorance because they do not vnderstand it aright or for that they adhere to some part of Caluines error about Praedestination with which it cannot stand Wherefore to instruct their ignorance in this point and to deliuer them or at least others
1. d. 39. qu. vnic Ioh. Bassol 1. d. 38. Dom. Bann 1. part ou 14. art 13. pag. 450. God foresees all contingent effects to come in his owne determination of the causes thereof and therefore foreseeing the contingent operation of our will he determines it to the effect Secondly Else there should be two seuerall beginnings of one and the same effect in asmuch as mans will should begin to worke as soone as God and concurre to the effect willed as principally as God Thirdly The will of man is but Gods x Quid dubitamus fateri nos miseras creaturas esse instrumenta Dei cum Deo per Deum operari sicut instrumentum operatur cum artifice per artificem à quo mouetur excitatur applicatur ad agendum Fra Sylu. expl p. 35. instrument whereby God works his owne pleasure but euery one that vses an instrument mooues applies and determines it to his owne will Fourthly And it is a secondary and subordinate cause vnder the first cause which is God and exceedes not the measure of second causes but if it were not determined by the first cause it should be all one with the first cause it selfe for first and second causes differ in their eleuation the second being alway mooued to their effect by the first and in their operation reduced to the motion of the vniuersall cause which is God Fiftly therefore the Scripture saies y Ier. 10.23 The way of man is not in himselfe neither is it in man to direct his own steps but z God giues a new heart x Ier. 31.33 32 39. Ezech. 11.19 36.26 and puts a new spirit into men and takes away their stony heart and giues them a heart of flesh and puts his Spirit into them and causes them to walke in his statutes and to keepe and do them a 1. Cor. 12.16 He workes all things in all men b Ph. 2.13 He workes in vs both the will and the deed c Pro. 21.1 The Kings heart is in the hands of God and he turnes it whither soeuer it pleaseth him d Exod. 7 3. 9.12 1 6. Rom. 9.17 He stirres vp Pharao hardens his heart for he hath mercie on whom he wil whō he wil he hardens The meaning wherof e Can. loc l. 2. c. 4. ad 7. Tolet in Ioh. 12 annot 22. Perer. select disp in Exod. 11. disp 6. 8. our aduersaries grant to be that God hardens the wicked partly by forsaking them withholding his grace whereby they should be preserued from hardening partly by working many things within thē and about them whereupon they become hardened and so consequently determines their will f Minimè periculosum iudico si PERMISSIONI NON NIHIL ADDAMVS quod nec actio propriè Dei sit nec sola permissio Can loc p. 24. further then by bare permitting it so that it may truly be said that mans minde and will g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hom. Odyss Augustinus sententiam Homeri approbat Zum vv qq 3. p pag. 120. A. is such as it pleaseth God to giue him Whence I infer and so will end God is not mooued consequently by any thing which himselfe as a superior cause mooues and determines to the effect But God himselfe as a superiour cause mooues and determines the will of man to the effect or that which it wils whether good or ill Therefore God is not consequently mooued by the good or ill vse of the will of man Therefore the good vse of mans will foreseene mooued not God to elect him and the euill vse of mans will foreseene was not the cause that God reprobated him therefore God had no such antecedent will to saue the reprobate if they would by their freewill vse and receiue his grace aright Therefore Gods decree touching the saluation and reprobation of men is lastly and finally resolued into his owne pure will as into the first and highest cause thereof To the Reader WHatsoeuer followes in the Reply from this place to that wherewith I begin the next Chapter is but a continuance of the matter of Predestination transcribed out of Becanus his Enchiridion wherewith I haue nothing to do For albeit that which he quarrels in M. Caluine be no more then were easily defended and then many Schoolemen haue written long since yet I haue propounded to meddle with no more of the Booke then directly touches what I writ it being a taske for him that knowes not the price of time to stand answering euery thing that fals from a Seminarie especially when we plainely see them to be set a-worke onely with barking for I dare say themselues conceite no substance in their books to interrupt and detaine men from better duties then is the answering of their vnsauory writings farced with rudenesse and intemperance and vnworthy for their immodesty to beare the name of Christian Authors CHAP. XXVI 1. The properties of the rule of faith described 2. None follow priuate spirits more then our Aduersaries 3. How the rule must be vnpartiall and of Authority A. D. Pag. 173 Concerning the sixt Chapter hauing shewed in the former Chapter that Almighty God of his part hath prouided a meanes necessary and sufficient to the saluation of all sorts yea of all men and consequently that he hath prouided some rule and meanes sufficient to instruct men of all sorts in that one infallible entire faith which is necessary to saluation In this Chapter I did set downe certaine conditions of this rule and meanes by which men that seeke may be directed towards the finding of it My Aduersaries do not deny that the rule and meanes must in some sence haue these three properties which here I speake of For the first to wit infallibility M. White saith White pag. 10. that faith must be with full assurance and perswasion the which saith he we cannot obtaine vnlesse the rule giue it vs. Now it is certaine that the rule and meanes which here I speake of cannot giue infallible assurance if it selfe were not infallible and knowne or such as may bee knowne to be infallible For nothing can giue more then it selfe hath neither can it breed more certainety in our knowledge then it selfe is or may be knowne to haue For the second to wit easinesse to be knowne or vnderstood of all sorts M. Wootton interpreteth Wootton p. 74. that it must be such as may be knowne although with paines As for some paines I shall not gainesay For I did neuer dreame that one might attaine knowledge of matters of faith by onely dreaming as M. Wootton seemeth to interprete my meaning Onely I would not haue it so difficult or hard as that it should be morally impossible for any sort of men hauing sought found and attended to the rule and meanes without miraculous illumination or extraordinary and excessiue difficulty to vnderstand the determinate meaning of it In which M. White
faith or needfull to be followed And so from that place to pag. 57 I disputed that the Scripture ALONE is the rule of faith that is to say That rule which my Aduersary in his fourth ground had said God had prouided whereby euery man learned and vnlearned may sufficiently be instructed WHAT is to be holden for the true faith Now he complaines that the State is peruerted the question not being whether Scripture be the rule of faith but whether Scripture alone be the rule and meane ordained of God to breed all faith And he notes two points wherein it is peruerted First in that I so affirme and defend the Scripture to be the rule as if he and his sectaries excluded it from being the rule in any sort which he sayes they do not For they hold the Scripture as propounded by the Church to be part of it I answer that I knew well enough they confessed the Scripture to be part of the rule and the Diuine doctrine which is the whole rule to be some of it written But I knew also that they denied it to be the whole rule ioyning therewith vnwritten traditions and the Popes Decretals which they call Church authority I knew also they allowed it to be no part of the rule but as and in such sence as the Church of Rome should please to propound it and I saw his conclusion in termes denying the Scripture alone to be the rule whereby men may sufficiently be instructed WHAT the faith is therefore I disputed directly opposite to all this that the Scripture alone without traditions is the whole rule to shew vs WHAT is to be holden for faith and nothing but the Scripture this is close to the question For albeit he yeelds it to be the rule in a sort because as his Church propounds it it containes part of the rule yet he denies it to be that whole and entire rule that his conclusion inquires of and so is to be disputed against as well as if he denied it to be any part of the rule at all Againe he holds two things First affirmatiuely that the Scripture is one part of the rule then negatiuely that the Scripture alone is not all the rule Both these are contradictory to my assertion The Scripture alone is the rule My assertion therefore affirming what he denies and denying what he affirmes containes the true state of the question and his inuoluing the matter with all this cauilling tends onely to the couering of his doctrine the loathsome visage whereof he is ashamed should be seene 3 The second point wherein he sayes the question is peruerted is in that I take the rule of faith otherwise then he doth For whereas he by that word rule meanes such a rule as not onely is sufficient to REVEALE all diuine truths that are to be beleeued but also to BREED or produce in vs the faith whereby we beleeue them I he sayes vnderstand such a rule onely as is sufficient to reueale the diuine verities though it be not sufficient to breed in vs faith and assent thereunto And it is true that I vnderstand such a rule indeed the Church wherein I liue onely beleeuing the sufficiency of the Scripture to containe all the obiect of faith but not to enable vs to beleeue it or vnderstand it ordinarily without the ministry of the Church and other meanes But this peruerts not the question * The state of the question touching Scripture ALON● for about the meanes there is no question but the question is whether Scripture alone excluding all Church traditions and authority comprehend the whole obiect or matter of faith that is to say All that we are bound to know beleeue and doe for our saluation though it be granted that to breed or produce faith and knowledge of that which is in the Scripture the Ministry of the Church and the helpe of Gods Spirit and our owne industry must concurre For our Aduersaries deny this and hold their runagate traditions and Church authority to be necessary not onely for the expounding and confirming to vs that which is in the Scripture if any one chance to deny it or not to see it but for the supplying of infinite articles of faith which are no waies at all comprised in the Scripture but vpon the said authority are to be receiued as well as that which is reuealed in the Scripture The Iesuite speakes as if he thought his Church authority to consist more in breeding faith and leading men to beleeue what is written then in adding any thing to the measure of the diuine verities contained in the Scripture and indeed sometime there be of his side that will plainely say so He that writ the defence of the Censure a Def. of the Cens pag. 141. NOTE THIS and inquire whether all Papists will stand to it sayes it is to be noted that the question betweene vs and the Protestants is of EXPRESSE SCRIPTVRE ONELY and not of any far fet place which by interpretation may be applied to a controuersie For this contention began betweene vs vpon this occasion that when we alledged diuers weighty places and reasons out of the Scripture for proofe of inuocation of Saints praier for the dead Purgatory and some other controuersies our aduersaries reiected them for that they did not plainely and expresly decide the matter Whereupon came this question whether all matters of beleefe are plainely and expresly in Scripture or not which they affirme and we deny And this he sayes is is the true state of the question Gretser b Defens Bellar tom 1. l. 4. c. 4. p. 1598. sayes These things may be proued by Scripture but not sufficiently not effectually by Scripture alone without tradition but onely probably The which if my aduersary and his Church did hold constantly and in good earnest I would confesse I had peruerted the state of the question But they do not but hold many things belonging to faith to be wanting and no way at all neither openly nor expresly nor consequently contained in the Scripture Dominicus Bannes c D. Dann 22. Tho. p. 302. All things which pertaine to Catholicke faith are not contained in the Canonicall books either manifestly or obscurely nor all those things which Christ and his Apostles taught and ordained for the instructing of his Church and confirming of the faith were committed to the holy Scriptures and the contrary is open heresie Melchior Canus d Can. loc p. 151 There are many things belonging to the doctrine and faith of Christians which are contained in the sacred Scriptures neither manifestly nor obscurely Cardinall Hosius e Hos confess Polon p. 383. The greater part of the Gospell by a great deale is come to vs by tradition very little of it being written in the Scripture Peresius f Peres de tradit p. 4. Tradition is taken so that it is distinguisht against the doctrine which is found in the Canonicall bookes of the
bee in some points which formerly were held as points of faith rather then in the doctrine of the blessed Trinity and Incarnation is because these mysteries are more necessary to be expresly knowne of all sorts then some other points of faith are and consequently men are as they are bound more carefull to get expresse knowledge of them according to the knowne sence expositiō of the Church which Church also hath more expresly determined what is to be holden in these points then in some others which although necessary to be beleeued explicitè or implicitè are not so necessary to be expresly knowne of all sorts 1 IF it cannot be denied as the Repliar denies it not but that in the writings of particular men liuing in these latter ages in the Church of Rome and following the Papacy there be found diuers errors contrary to the faith of the ancient Fathers it must be granted that all such must be wiped out of the catalogue because a So the Reply in the former Chapter n. 1. which is p. 269. of his Reply by promise none are to stand there but onely such as kept the doctrine of the Fathers without innouation Which being done the last 600 yeares at the least will be blanke and the Repliar must seeke new names to furnish them for there is not a particular person named frō an 1000 to an 1600 in the catalogue which had not diuers errors cōtrary to the former faith of the Fathers which the Reader without more ado shall know by this that there is not a boke extant that they writ but our aduersaries at this day haue either purged or forbiddē it or else censured reiected diuers things written in it Which needed not if they had bene those succeeding Pastors which alway maintained the corps of Christian doctrine so grauely talked of a little before And that which the Repliar answers satisfies not the obiection For it is true The Catholicke Church builds not her faith vpon priuate Doctors opinions but the Romane Church which the Repliar contends for and whose succession he demonstrates in his catalogue consists in no other but such Doctors that held such priuate opinions and such people as followed them therein or else let him name if he can any one of his Doctors that held not such priuate opinions or any other Church of his that consisted not in these A man may easily see he can neuer winde himselfe out of this straight And let it be granted also that they were ready to renounce these opinions thus holden against the former faith and to submit themselues to the Church yet the former difficulty returns againe for whether they were thus ready or no yet they swarued from the faith of the Fathers no matter with what minde when the Repliar so confidently bills them in his catalogue for such as preserued the whole corps of the reuealed truth without innouation Thereby vndertaking to name such as in all things trod in the steps of the Fathers without any error that should need submission Againe where and in whom was this Church whereto they were so ready to submit themselues who should reforme them when themselues were the Church for example when Gregory the 7. that was Pope in the 10 age Eugenius the 3. and Boniface the 8. in the 12. Vrbanus 6. and Iohn 22. in the 13. Gregory 12. Iohn 23. Eugenius 4. in the 14. age by schisme error and heresie innouated the faith where was their submission to the Church how could it be when themselues were heads of the Church and how was it done when contrariwise they made opposition against all such as admonished them But the third thing he answers that those priuate D D. deliuer not their said opinions as points of faith is false because they are in such points as are now controuerted betweene vs and the Church of Rome which the Repliar I presume will allow to be no other but points of faith 2 This I had to say touching the obiection as the Repliar hath set it downe fraudulently and maimedly whereas if he had proposed it effectually as we obiected all his answer were impertinent For we say that not onely in particular mens writings are found many things contrary to the former faith of the Fathers but in the doctrine of the Church it selfe as it is practised and expounded by such as are deputed thereunto The which I demonstrated throughout my Booke in euery controuersie by alleadging the wordes of the chiefest and most eminēt writers in the Church of Rome expounding the doctrine holden in the said Church There being indeed very little of their religion but some or other among them so expound it and so teach the Church-meaning therein that it is easie to see the ancient faith to be innouated thereby And I care not though my aduersary begin his answer with a little confidence It seemes M. White hath with great paines raked together all the riffe raffe and odde opinions and spent his time in seeking the sinkes and sweeping together odde sentences of some Catholicke authors c. For his leane and lancke cause had neede of bombast but whosoeuer shall enquire what M. White alleadged shall well perceaue the Popish D D. whom he hath raked together to be the eminentest men that were in the Church of Rome and their doctrine and opinions cited so farre as I haue refused it to be riffe raffe indeed and such as lies in sinkes and sweepings but yet such riffe raffe as the Romish Church it selfe now turned into a sinke of all filthy heresie pestered with the sweepings of all the false doctrine and errors of old heretickes maintaines and offers to the world for sound religion as I haue shewed in the beginning of this booke where the speech of Mic. Bayus the onely instance that the Repliar thought good to make of my charging his Church with priuate Doctors opinions which he will not deny to be part of the riffe raffe and sweepings here mentioned is proued to containe no other matter then is generally holden by others and to be the doctrine of the Church of Rome as certainely as any other that himselfe can assigne to be the doctrine 3 This therefore is it I say that the errors obiected to the Doctors and Schoolemen of the Church of Rome and the manifold absurdities which I haue obserued in them alleadging their wordes in my Booke are a sufficient argument to proue the Church of Rome wherein they liued and whose Pastors they were to hold contrary to the Fathers and to be departed from the Apostolicke faith And all this furniture of wordes to the contrary is but a desperate shift to auoide the inconuenience that followes vpon it For first the vniuersall faith of the Catholicke Church is not discredited by the priuate opinions of particular Authors This I graunt and will yeeld my selfe to be both vaine and shallow witted if the things I haue alleadged out of Popish Authors be
A DEFENCE OF THE WAY TO THE TRVE CHVRCH against A. D. his Reply Wherein The MOTIVES leading to Papistry And QVESTIONS touching the RVLE of Faith The AVTHORITIE of the Church The SVCCESSION of the Truth and The BEGINNING of Romish Innouations are handled and fully disputed By IOHN WHITE Doctor of Diuinity sometime of Gunwell and Caius Coll. in Cambridge I intreate and desire you all that setting aside what this or that man thinkes touching these matters you will inquire what the Scripture saies concerning them Chrysost in 2. Cor. hom 13. LONDON Printed for WILLIAM BARRET dwelling in Pauls Church-yard at the signe of the three Pigeons 1614. TO THE KINGS MOST EXCELLENT MAIESTIE IAMES BY THE grace of God King of great Brittaine France and Ireland defender of the Faith MOst dread and renowned Soueraigne may it please your excellent Maiestie Such is the power of true Religion and the hope that all men haue to be deliuered from error and their naturall miserie and to attaine supernaturall and eternall good thereby that they which haue tasted it cleaue vnto it more then to all the hopes of this life beside The law of thy mouth Psal 119. saith Dauid is better to me then thousands of gold and siluer This is the reason why the cause of religion and the state of our Church this day vnder your Highnesse most happy gouernement is so deare and acceptable to vs that the opposition and violence of our greatest enemies can neuer make vs weary of defending it but as the seruants of Isaac Gen. 26. when the Canaanites stopped their wels opened them againe and would neuer yeeld the inheritance of their master to the heards men of Gerar no more can we endure the truth of religion to be choaked with Popish heresies or the inheritance of our Lord to be taken from vs by the Swaines of Rome Nazianz orat 2. de Pace Gods blessed truth being of that value that in defence thereof his meekest seruants will stir and the mildest fight before it shall be indamaged by their forbearance Our assurance through Gods mercy of that we professe and the benefite of our faith and the certaine knowledge of our aduersaries vngodly and reprobate practises against it is such that no course of theirs can discourage vs no contention beate vs off no importunity make vs shrinke from that which we know to be the truth Aen. Sylu hist Bohem. When a certaine iester set on by others as it was thought in the presence of the king of Hungary spake to a Noble man of Prage touching his religion because he fancied not the Romish Seruice but was addicted to Rochezana a follower of Husse the Noble man gaue him this answer If thou speake of thy selfe thou art not the man thou conterfets and so I will answer thee as I would a wise man if by others setting on it is meete I satisfie them Heare me therefore Euery man vseth Church ceremonies agreeable to his faith and offers such sacrifices as he beleeues are acceptable with God it is not in our owne power to beleeue what we will THE MINDE OF MAN CONQVERED WITH POWERFVLL REASONS WILLING OR NILLING IS TAKEN CAPTIVE I am sufficiently resolued of the religiō I follow if I follow thine I may deceaue men but God that searches the hearts I cannot deceaue nor yet is it fit I should be like to thee one thing becomes a Iester and another thing a Nobleman this you may take to your selfe or report if you please to them that set you a worke This zeale of the truth and conscience surprised with the authority thereof is it which leades forward so many learned men of all sorts into contention with the Papists and constraines them both by vehement preaching and open writings to oppose them who neuer cease to corrupt the faith and poyson all sorts of people with discontent and violent hatred against their brethren and by the working of Iesuites and Seminaries much after the fashion of Antheninus the Mathematitian mentioned in Agathias to shake all the quarters of your kingdomes in which course through long practise and some conniuency and for want of straiter execution of the lawes against them the dangerous sequel whereof we will daily pray God to turne aside they are growne so vehement and fierie that scarce any part of our faith can please them no not the truthes that we hold in common with themselues nor any part of your Highnesse gouernment because it is not holdē in capite of the Pope Athenae The Stoikes beleeuing that none but a wise man could do any thing well concluded that therefore none but a wise man could make good pottage or season a messe of broth well and because in their conceite their master Zeno was the wisest of all men they concluded againe that the broth could not be good if it were not made after Zenoes direction whose vse was to prescribe to the twelfth part of a Coriander seed possible that he might haue primatum ollae or least the cookes of Lacedaemon should exempt themselues from his iurisdiction This Hildebrandine humor of ouerruling all things so possesseth our Aduersaries that now the Church of England hath neither God nor faith nor religion the King of England no crowne no dominion no subiects the state no iustice no lawes no gouernement because the Pope giues not the ingredients or confirmes them not I am the meanest person and least able of many and the best I can do falles short of that which these exquisite times require Theodor. de prouid l. 8. Theodorite saies The maiesty of things depends not a little vpon the manner of handling them and therefore such as meddle with any high argument haue neede of great power both of tongue and conceit because such as weigh the force of words more then the nature of things iudge of the things according to the weight or weakenesse of the words But the condition of the place where sometime I liued trāsported with much superstition and importuned with Romish Priests and their bookes and sometime their libelles set vpon our Church doores drew vpon me a necessity of doing what I was able when for diuers yeares I was inforced by priuate writings and conference to maintaine or expound what I preached openly The benefite whereof I found to be such both in stablishing my owne conscience and recouering the people and repelling such as seduced them that I was easily drawne forward to proceede and much of my time to bestow in dealing with the Seminaries vntill at the length it is now come to this that I am inforced in the open veiw of the world what I haue spoken in the eare Mat. 10.27 secretly that to publish on the house-top and now againe the second time to do that which I thought at the first to do but once My owne priuate condition is not such that I should greatly care what any man write against me all that
which must be acknowledged when tyrants and such as feare not God by their euill gouernement and neglect of religion many times darken the aire and hinder the raine and make the fields barren and riuers empty Pliny enquiring the reason why the fields adioyning to Rome in old time were so fruitfull saies It was because they were tilled by the chiefe gouernours such as Fabritius and Cincinnatus were Ipsorum tunc manibus Imperatorum colebantur agri gaudente terra vomere laureato triumphali aratore Which your Maiesty doing so painefully with your owne hands in a more noble field the Church of God all godly minded shall bid God speed the plow and daily waite till the briars and thornes be rooted out and the dew of Gods grace fall on the barren part that the Plowman may neuer be wearie nor his hand weake nor his workmen vnfaithful to him but all that are about him and his Noble seruants by his example may giue ouer sleeping and put their hand without looking backe to the same worke that the enuious man that soweth tares may be driuen forth and their owne houses may be the greenest and cleanest part of the field till he come that shall giue end and rest to euery labour and recompence beyond all that can be thought the workmans trauell and binding the good corne in sheaues cast the tares into vnquenchable fire God euermore continue and increase his mercies to your Highnesse and lay your enemies at your feete that you may see an end of all dissentions and stablish peace and vnity in the Church Your Maiesties most humble subiect IOHN WHITE To the Reader IT is now fiue yeares since I published a booke called THE WAY TO THE TRVE CHVRCH wherein my purpose was nothing else but onely to shew the weakenesse and insufficiency of those Motiues which leade so many to Papistrie and to bring to triall such reasons as the Iesuites and Seminaries ground themselues vpon in perswading their people against vs making it more then plaine that the corruptions of the Church of Rome are maintained and the communion of our Church in the doctrine preaching and the Sacraments thereof is refused by such as follow the Papacy vpon weake and false grounds that cannot be defended This poore booke it seemes hath not a little incensed my Aduersary and discontented many that yet should follow reason and the truth of things and not be transported with rumor and common impression For man being a noble creature endued with reason and faculty to discourse and hauing a rule left him of God whereby to examine things should not tie his faith and conscience to the authority or person of any more then the truth and the reason and euidence of that be saies will beare him out It was neuer heard of in the world till now of late yeares that the Pope and his definitions were the rule of faith or that men were bound to follow whatsoeuer he should appoint but the Church of God euery where till tyranny oppressed it examined his doctrine accepting and allowing that which agreed with the sacred Scriptures and the first antiquity and reiecting the rest and albeit many errors had long prescription yet the godly still held them to that rule of our Sauiour BVT FROM THE BEGINNING IT WAS NOT SO. Mat. 19.8 Our Aduersaries therefore may in some points possible pretend antiquitie but PRIORITIE which is the first and best antiquitie they cannot in any one thing wherein they refuse vs and whether the zealous and resolued Recusants will beleeue it or no yet it is certainely true there is no one point of Papistry Catholicke that is to say such as hath bene from the beginning generally receiued as an article of faith by the vniuersall Church And though it be granted that many parts of his religion haue long continued in the world yet were they neuer the certaine or generall doctrines of the Church but the corruptions of some therein which in time and by degrees obtained that strength and credit which now they haue it being the easiest thing of a thousand for the Pope and his clergie sitting at the sterne when themselues had once imbraced them with their strength and learning to giue them authority in the world when Mahomet himselfe by policy and tyrannie was able in time to spread abroad and a vniuersally the doctrine of his Alchoran which now is 800 yeare old and is followed by many and great nations as close as Papistrie is either in England or Italy But whē the Scripture makes it plaine that FROM THE BEGINNING IT WAS NOT SO and the Histories and monuments of antiquity and the bookes of the elder Papists and such as were chiefe in the Church of Rome beare witnesse that these things were misliked and in all ages complained of and that which the Church of England now professes was the faith of most godly men and holy Bishops though the power of the gouernors in the Church of Rome increasing they were suppresed they do but deceiue themselues that thinke our faith a new faith or the points of Papistrie the old religion I haue as well as I haue bene able and as diligently as I could with an vnpartiall eie and many teares to God for his direction in the businesse and with a heart hating contention and possessed as much as any mans liuing with desire of peace and vnity whereof my 17 yeares residence in Lancashire can giue plentifull witnesse read the Scriptures and trauelled through the writings of the Fathers and obserued the course of former times and well aduised my selfe of that which the learned of the Church of Rome in later times haue written from the elder Schoolemen to the later Iesuites though with all humility I acknowledge my selfe to be the meanest of any that haue taken this course and much lament my owne weaknesse yet am I readie whensoeuer God the Iudge of all secrets and the terrible reuenger of falsehood and partiality shall call me foorth of this world to testifie that my faith and religion and the points thereof maintained in my writings and preaching is the truth agreeable to the first antiquity and the contrary defended by the Iesuites and followed by Romish Recusants error and vncatholicke And if any persons presumed to be learned on the other side haue either in their life or death shewed extraordinary zeale for their Roman faith I desire I may be allowed my owne knowledge both of some such persons and of their iudgement and outward cariage and not be importuned to follow that which vnskilfull and vnable and partiall friends haue apprehended rather then my owne cleare knowledge both of them and their cause And if the Church of Rome haue in it diuers learned betweene whom and vs my Aduersaries will indure no comparison that write against vs yet my certaine experience of their manner of writing one against another and against knowne antiquitie and their strange maintenance of the foulest and
vs where is there among all the Texts that can be alledged one rule or example that we should pray thus to a liuing mā as they do to a Saint Saue me ô Sauior redeeme me ô redeemer and as is the praiers that I alledged If one of the theeues vpon the Crosse when our Sauiour died should thus haue praied to b Ioh. 19.25 the holy Virgine standing by as the Friar lately did in France when he was to be executed for murdering a man to haue his wife c The praier of a Friar vpon the scaffold when he died for a murther in France an 1609. Boter comment l. 16. p. 300. But ô thou the solace of such as are in miserie our Loadstarre in the middest of this raging sea the aduocate of men the Arke of the Testament the altar of sinners by thy suffrages ô Virgine effect with thy Sonne that I may haue my desire would the Iesuits I maruell commend his deuotion as the reporter doth the Friars zeale or if this example fume into the Iesuits head were it lawfull for a man vpon his death-bed to inuocate the liuing standing by as the d Fra. Ximenius of Toledo Gomec de reb Ximen l. 7. pag. 242. great Archbishop did the dead when he died himselfe to be his Patronesse All the Saints but aboue all the mother of God Michael the Archangell Peter and Paule Iames and S. Francis or if at an open Sessions at the Councell of Trent Sato or Mus or one of the Friars should haue begun hs Sermon with a praier to Cardinall Barrhomaeo sitting by mutatis mutandis as e Stephanus Arch. Patracēs in conc Later sub Leo. p. 621. an Archbishop sometime began his at the Councell of Lateran with his f Omnium splēdot decus perenne Virginum lumen genetrix superni Gloria humani generis Maria Vnica nostri Sola tu Virgo dōina●s astris Sola tu terrae maris atque coeli lumen inceptis faueas rogamus inclita nostris Vt queam sacros reserare sensus qui latēt chartis nimiū seueris ingredi celsae duce te benignae Maenia terrae inuocation of the Blessed Virgine O blessed Charles our Churches hope and glorie of our fading light The best of all our Cardinals in Consistory shining bright Thou onely shewest the way that leads to heauens blisse vertues lore Thy life our safest loadstarre is to guide vs to the heauenly shore I pray thee giue me of thy grace and fill me with thy verities that I may boldly speake in place and beate downe Luthers heresies If I say the Friar should haue made such a prayer to him would not his fellow Cardinals haue enuied his deitie thought that inuocation would haue come soone enough after his death when he had bene Sainted The liuing therefore are not praied vnto nor intreated to pray to God or make intercession for vs nor any waies made mediatours by their intercession and merits as the dead are for that were against the office of Christ but only as feeling members of this state that see and know the wants each of other and that haue a calling from God thereto they ioyne their praiers to the rest of the body no mans merits or aduocation being interposed but euerie one with and for others immediatly flying to Iesus Christ 6 A third reason why it is lawfull to intreate the praiers of the liuing rather then the dead is for that the liuing whō we intreate to pray for vs vnderstand and see our particular wants and are in state to take knowledge of our desire to be praied for as when Saint Paule bad the people pray for him they heard and vnderstood him what he desired which the Saints in heaven departed though full of glorie and great indowments do not And here it is not enough to bring coniectures and with shew of wordes and disputations to leade our iudgement as in this cause our aduersaries haue taken great paines to pull vpon themselves a learned error but afore I can pray in this fashion to the dead with faith if all other difficulties were cleared I must haue a sure ground in my conscience that they heare me And he that will perswade me to beleeue they do must not come with Iffs and And 's and Metaphysicall speculations and the seeming opinions of men but with that which may bring full assurance and may support faith as the Holy Ghost doth g 1. Tim. 1.15 This is a true saying and worthie of all men to be receiued h Ioh. 4.22 We worship that we know i 2. Cor. 4 3. We approoue ourselues to euery mans conscience Let it be made thus sure vnto vs that when I pray the Saints heare me and it shall willingly be receiued and beleeued This reasō doth not immediatly proceed to shew that praying to the dead robbes Christ of his office but onely that it is against faith which being shewed thence it will easily be concluded that then Christ is robbed of his office because all prayer against faith is against Christs mediatorship in some part of the latitude thereof Now if it so please the reader let vs see what assurance the Church of Rome can giue that the Saints know our praiers 7 First it is cleare that in all the Scripture there is nothing to prooue it but the contrary For k 2. Reg. 22.20 whē Iosiah should die God told him his eies should not see the euill which he would bring vpon Ierusalem And Salomon l Eccl. 9 5. saies the dead know nothing at all And m Es 63 16. the Prophet in a praier he makes to God saies Thou art our Father though Abraham be ignorant of vs and Israel knowes vs not the which texts shew manifestly that the dead haue as little knowledge of our state here as we haue of theirs there Or if it were otherwise God would somewhere haue reuealed it especially the reuelation thereof being so necessary for the confirmation of this point touching inuocation which n Superfluum videtur abeis ordinariè petere vs pro nobis oreni quia non possunt ordinariè cognoscere quid agamus in particulari Bellar. de purgat l. 2. c. 15. §. praetere a animae by the Iesuites owne confession is in vaine where they do not ordinarily as in Purgatory heare our prayers the which for the most part being seated in o Plerunque hoc negotium plus gemitibus quam sermonibus agitur plus flet● quam affatu August epist 121. c. 10. the heart and thence immediatly without any noise of words ascending vp who can vnderstand them but he that searches the heart which Philo p 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Philo iudae pag. 328. Paris sayes is the musicall and loud instrument of our voice and is heard by no mortall creature but onely by him that is immortall and vnbegotten 8 Secondly our aduersaries could neuer giue themselues satisfaction
whereof notwithstanding it behooues vs INWARDLY THROVGH FAITH TO BE CERTIFIED BY THE TESTIMONY OF THE HOLY GHOST o Enchirid. Colon c. de iustificat §. Non habeo p. 139. For we confesse it to be the truth that it is also required for a mans iustification that a man CERTAINELY BELEEVE not onely generally that such as are truly penitent haue their sinnes forgiuen by Christ but also that they are forgiuen THE MAN HIMSELFE THAT BELEEVES for Christ by Faith And p Ibid. §. sed hic againe No mans sinnes are pardoned vnlesse he beleeue that he hath obtained pardon by Christ Ruard the Dean of Louan is q Vasqu 12. disp 200. n. 35. reported to hold that without reuelation a man may haue that assurance of his iustification which shall be without feare or doubting but he holds more r Ruard explic artic Louan art 9. p 119. that if any simple man being persuaded BELEEVE out of this will of God towards vs for his Sonne in whom he hath giuen vs all things that his sinnes are forgiuen him by Christ and this CERTAINELY and as it were OVT OF THE WORD OF GOD and thereupon is touched with true loue to God wholly submitting himse●● to him who thus hath preuented him with his loue and repenting him of his sinnes it is very likely that he that is thus affected doth truely obtaine the pardon of his sinnes and is made the sonne of God The same speciall faith is taught vs by ſ Ioh. Bacon Catharin quos refert Perer select disp tom 2. in Roman 8. d. 7. nu 27. 30. others and it is the highest assurance that can be For t Fidei cognitio sola visione beata inferior est claritate aequalis certitudine reliquis omnibus alijs scientijs longe superior atque certior Pined in Iob 19.25 n. 1. p. 96. the knowledge of faith is inferiour to the blessed vision which the Saints in heauen haue onely in clearenes but it is equall in certainety and far aboue and more certaine then all other knowledges 3. It is u Certa est ex fide conclusio illata ex vna credita altera euidenti neque dubitare si maxime cup●rem valerem quin mihi certum esset ex side me esse in gratia si quidem hoc colligere possem ex vna credita altera mihi euidenti hoc ita esse sic suadeo Primo multae sunt propositiones de fide quae non aliter possunt probari essè de fide nisi quia sequuntur euidenter ex creditis saltem cum aliqua propositione euidenti secundum lumen naturale Andrae Vega. pro Concil l. 9. c. 39. p. 289. This is the doctrine of others also Scot. 3 d. 35. qu. vnit Cano. Loc. l. 12. c 2. pag. 258. Medina 12. q. 112. art 5. Albertin Coroll p. 261. nu 11. a principle common among our Aduersaries that euery conclusion issuing from one promise reuealed expresly in the Scripture and another clearely and certainely knowne otherwise and by euident or good consequence added to it belongs to faith and is beleeued by no other habit then of faith As for example all the dead shall rise Luther is dead therefore Luther shall rise Euery one that begets really differs from him that is begotten the Father begets the Sonne therefore the Father really differs from the Sonne Here both the conclusions are such verities as belongs to faith For Luther beleeued he should rise and all we beleeue the Father really differs from the Sonne yet neither of them are expresly reuealed or written in the Scripture as it is not that Luther or White shall be saued or haue their sinnes pardoned but the Minor proposition in the first discourse and the Maior in the second are knowne otherwise and by good connexion added to that which is written and therefore the conclusion is beleeued by faith So it is in this discourse euery theologicall cōclusion belongs to faith but the assurance of the remission of a mans owne sinnes is a theologicall conclusion therefore it belongs to faith The first proposition is manifest The second is prooued thus All that are penitent and beleeue haue the remission of sinnes assured them the which proposition is of faith because it is immediatly reuealed Esay the 1.16.17.18 Act. 3.19 Rom. 10.9 Ezek. 18.21 But I repent and beleeue this proposition is euident and certaine to him that doth so For Repentance and Faith are infallibly knowne to the iustified that haue them Mark 9.24 Es 38.3 1 Ioh. 3.21 The conclusion therefore I haue the remission of sin assured me is a theologicall conclusion belonging to faith Vega saies A conclusion inferred of one thing beleeued and another that is euident is certaine by faith I cannot doubt if I would neuer so faine but it should be certaine vnto me by faith that I were in grace if I could collect it from one thing beleeued and another thing euident vnto me and that this is so I thus perswade For there are many propositions of faith which cannot otherwise be prooued to be of faith but because they do euidently follow of those things that are beleeued at least with some proposition euident according to naturall light And indeede how many propositions of faith are there that cannot be shewed so to be * Alberti● Coroll p. 226. n. 8. Vega vbi supr but because they follow euidently of that which is beleeued Thus our aduersaries hold the decrees of a Councell and the Popes determinations to be matters of faith and yet suppose one proposition whence they issue to be but humane Thus they beleeue by diuine faith that Paul the 5 is right Pope and that the Trent Councell was a lawfull Councell and yet that the election of Paul was Canonicall or the manner of the assembly of Trident lawfull they confesse is had onely by humane faith that may be deceiued They must therefore grant the Protestants as much that the remission of a mans own sinnes which in all in different iudgement a penitent sinner iustified by Christ may as well conclude from the Scripture as our aduersaries can the Canonicall election of the Pope or the lawfull māner of assembling the Trent Councell is a truth * Haec mihi sententia firma insedit Pontificem Romanum ab eis desectū quibus ius est eligendi quē est Christiana complexa Ecclesia verissimum Christi esse Vicarium idque ea side cui nullum potest subesse salsum ab vnoquoque credi oportere Paul Comitol resp moral l. 1. q. 99. n. 2. p. 212. to be beleeued by faith Fourthly this must be granted vpon two other points that x Soto apolog c. 2. Ruard ar● 9. p. 119. Cassal de quadriparr instit l. 2 c. 8. Staplet ●e iustific l. 9. c 11. Peter select q. in Ioh. 14. disp 18. Maturè tamen omnibus hinc inde pe●satis probabilius profecto esse crediderim posse
for him The l Heb. 11.36 Scripture reports how many of the children of God were tried by mocking and scourging by bonds and prisonment they were stoned hewen apeeces tempted they wandered vp and downe destitute and afflicted All which the Apostle saies they did by faith and confidence of the Promises and yet their assurance was no other nor otherwise begotten then the ordinary assurance of all Gods children which is concluded by ioyning the light of their conscience kindled by the holy Ghost to the immediate light of the conditions reuealed in the Scriptures 5 That which our Aduersaries assigne to be the cause why a man cannot be sure of his saluation because no man is sure of his Perseuerance is easily answered by affirming likewise that the grace of perseuerance with other gifts is giuen all the elect in their iustification For S. Paule m Rom. 8.38 sayes he was certaine of it and what he in that place auouches of himselfe belongs to others as well as himselfe by the confession of n Staplet de iustif l. 9. c. 13. Tolet. in Rom. 8. v. vlt. our strongest aduersaries and he auouches not onely that Gods loue to him but more properly that his loue to God shall neuer faile o Perer. in Ro. 5. d 12. n. 59. The Iesuit also confesses it to be the doctrine of p De Bono perseuerant Saint Austine that grace is giuen by Christ whereby not onely man may perseuere but ●●lso that he shall perseuere q 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost hom 9. in Rom. The fauorits of Princes are aduanced to honour and riches but their preseuerance therein is vncertaine But it is not so with the grace of God bestowed in Iustification and therefore we may beleeue as well our Perseuerance as our Grace And if the iustified be certaine of the grace of Iustification that he hath then may he be certaine and well assured of his Perseuerance because it is a grace purchased vs by Christ and included in that Peace which the iustified by faith haue with God through him or else let him shew that can where any firme and setled peace of minde is where there is vncertainty and doubtfulnesse touching Perseuerance r Concil Trid. sess 6. can 22. Vega pro Concil l. 12. cap. 23. Barth Medi● 12. qu. 109. art 10. ad 3. Greg. de Valent. tom 2. pag. 849. c. And that it is in the power of a iustified man with Gods helpe to perseuere in grace to the end is defined by the Trent Councell and holden to be the doctrine of all Catholikes which power a 1. Pet. 5.1 Saint Peter also testifies to be reduced into act by the almightie power of God keeping him * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as with a garrison through faith to saluation according to that of b Ier. 32.40 the Prophet I will put my feare into their hearts that they shall not depart from me Which ouerthrowes all them that make the vncertaintie of Perseuerance a reason against the certainty of saluation CHAP. XVII Concerning points Fundamentall and not Fundamentall The distinction expounded and defended 4. Who shall iudge what is Fundamentall and what not A iest at the election of Pope Leo the tenth A. D. * White p. 100. M. White by the foundation or points fundamentall Pag 66. vnderstandeth all truthes which are necessary for the saluation of all men but this definition is not found in * Act. 4.12 1. Cor. 3.11 Ephes 2.19 the texts of Scripture cited by him in the margent Neither doth it helpe the matter for the question may still be how many and which truthes those be which be necessarie The which questiō if we leaue to be determined by euerie mans priuate spirit or particular iudgement we shall either haue no point of faith to be accoūted a point fundamentall in regard the ignorance of some may be such that they may thinke a man may be saued by morall good life although through ignorance he beleeue nothing at all or else we may haue so many fundamentall points of faith as it shall please euerie braine-sicke fellow to hold to be necessary to saluation The which how great confusion it will breed in the Church euery man of meane capacity may easily see And therfore euery man ought to see how necessary it is that the determinatiō of this necessary question be not left to the priuate spirit or particular iudgement of this or that man but to the iudgement of the Catholike Church accounting with S. Austine all those points which are diligently digested and confirmed by full authority of the same Church to be fundamētall or to pertaine to the foundation and consequently to be such as must necessarily be beleeued actually or vertually by all men and such as may not doubtfully be disputed of and much lesse rashly and obstinately be denied by any man 1 OVr doctrine is that in the things reuealed in the Scripture and belonging to the obiect of faith there is a difference whereby some are more necessary to be knowne and without error to be vnderstood then othersome For though it be lawfull for no man either to misbeleeue or obstinately not to beleeue any thing that is writtē yet the simple ignorance or error in many things hinders not saluation nor the substance of Faith but either a priuate man or a whole particular Church thus ignorant or erring either inuincibly or not affectedly and obstinately in such things and yet holding others aright hath sauing faith and is in the state of grace This difference of things arises from 3. respects First of the commandement enioyning and vrging the knowledge of one thing more then the knowledge of another as for example the knowledge of Christ crucified more then the knowledge of his Genealogy for though both be reuealed alike yet not both vnder the like penalty Secondly of the nature and condition of the things when this doth more properly and necessarilie belong to saluation then that for without the knowledge of story of Gedeon I may be saued but without the knowledge of Christs nature and office I cannot Thirdly of their vse Whē one thing is the foundatiō and ground that giues light and subsistence to another as the knowledge of Christs office merits brings light to the vnderstanding of the doctrine touching our owne vnworthinesse c. Out of these respects and degrees of things that are beleeued as they stand in order one to another and in vse to vs we call some FVNDAMENTALL and some NOT FVNDAMENTALL not with relation to our faith so much as to our knowledge in as much as it is dāgerous to misdoubt the truth of any thing that is reuealed to us if it were but a 2. Sam. 24.9 1. Chro. 21.5 Whether the number of the children of Israell able to beare armes when Dauid numbred them were 1500000 though no man will say an error or ignorance in this matter were
against sauing faith A Fundamentall point therefore is that which belongs to the substance of faith and is so reuealed and so necessary that there can be no saluation without the knowledge and explicit faith thereof of which nature are the things contained in the articles of our faith a point not Fundamentall is that which directly belongs not to the way of Saluation neither doth error or ignorance therein make void or destoy that which is Fundamentall Forsomuch as such a point is reuealed but for the manifestation of the other and is beleeued but in order to the other as that Abraham had so many children Paul had a cloke The dead pray for the liuing c wherein it may fall out that we may erre or be ignorant and yet the faith not preiudiced 2 I know none of our Aduersaries that deny this distinction but vse and explicate it as well as we though none such as this Iesuite is be growne so peruerse and malepart that they will endure nothing that we say be it neuer so true b 22. q. 2. art 5. Dicendū quod fidei obiectum per se est id per quod homo beatus efficitur Per accidens autē aut secundario se habe●t ad obiectum virtutis omnia quae in sacra Scriptura continentur sicut quod Abrahā habuit duos filios c. Thomas hauing deuided the obiect of faith into that which is so by it selfe and that which is by accident and secondarily defines the first to be that whereby a man is made blessed and saued the latter that which is reuealed whatsoeuer it be as that Abraham had two sonnes and Dauid was the sonne of Iesse c Dialog 1. part l. 2. c. 2. pag. 6. Occham sets downe three differences of verities to be beleeued Some touching God and Christ whereon principally depends our Saluation as that there is one God and three persons that Christ is God and man that he suffered and died and rose againe c. Some whereon our Saluation depends not so principally which though we beleeue yet do they not * Non directè sed indirecte quod ammodo ad salutem humani generis pertinere noscuntur so directly belong to our Saluation as many things written of Pharaoh c Of the third sort such as are not reuealed but either agree with that which is reuealed or follow manifestly of it And d Vbi sup c. 11. pag. 9. Sunt quidam Moderni dicentes quod multae assertiones sunt quae in rei veritate aduersantur diuinae Scripturae quae tamen ab Ecclesia minimè sunt damnandae nec sint inter haereses numerandae he reports it to haue bene an opinion in the Church in his time that many assertions which in truth of the matter were against the Scripture yet were not condemned by the Church nor counted heresie Espencaeus e Espencae in 2 Tim digress 17. p 119. discoursing of things to be knowne and beleeued sayes The infolded faith of simple people will serue well enough in such things as are the obiect of faith onely BY ACCIDENT and in subtile considerations that arise about the Scripture but in those things which OF THEMSELVES are the obiect of faith whereby men are led to happines they need an vnfolded faith the Colliars faith will do no good f Mag 3. d. 23. ibi Scholast cōmuniter Tho. Bonau Durād Ricard Dionys Gabr. Occh. q. 8. Bann 22. q. 2. art 8 dub 2. Ouand 4. d. 13. prop. 12. Eyme●ic director part 1. q. 2. ad 8. ibi Scoliast Pezant 22 p. 504. a. Syluest sum v. fides nu 6. Simanch cachol instit tit 28. nu 20. Pic. Mirand de fid ord credend theor 12. p. 286. All the Casenists and Schoolemen that haue written touching the nature of heresie and the measure of Catholicke faith agree that there is a certaine measure and quantity of faith without which none can be saued but euery thing reuealed belongs not to this measure and it is enough to beleeue somethings onely by the Colliars faith The which doctrine doth euidently allow our distinction that some things are Fundamentall and some not for no Protestant thinks any point to be so not Fundamentall but that euery man is bound with humility and reuerence to accept it whensoeuer the knowledge and necessity thereof shall be offered him by the Church which is all our aduersaries require in their infolded faith 3 This distinction by g THE WAY pag. 110. me onely touched and that by the way briefly vpon another occasion the Iesuite in this chapter frowardly cauils at and in this place wrangles with the definition that I gaue of points Fundamentall because it is not found in the words of the Scripture that I cited for it in the margent Whereto I answer three things First h Act. 4.12 1. Cor. 3.11 Eph. 2.19 the Scriptures cited shew the knowledge expresse faith of Christs death to be absolutely necessary for all men and two of the places call the matter of this knowledge a foundation Therefore such a point as is absolutely to be knowne and rightly holden of all which euery point reuealed is not may be called a Foundation or Fundamentall point Therfore againe such as by the like confession of our aduersaries some men and all men of some times may erre in or be ignorant of without preiudice of Saluation may be called a point not Fundamentall whence it followes againe that my distinction is grounded well enough vpon the places cited in the margent Secondly I answer that how scornefully soeuer Iesuites thinke of the Scripture yet we Protestants had as lieffe borrow our conclusions distinctions and words wherein we expresse them from it as from the stinking puddles of rotten Schoolemen or new found mint of vpstart Iesuites Thirdly my aduersary himselfe in this very chapter acknowledges the distinction if it bee not applyed to a wrong end to be good For first touching the termes thereof Fundamentall not Fundamentall He finds thē in S. Austin True it is S. Austin insinuates a distinction of some points Fundamentall and some not Fundamentall Therefore the words are according to Saint Austin and that is well Next in the matters themselues also he sayes Catholicke Diuines make some distinction and hold some to be more necessary to be actually and expresly knowne of all sorts then other therefore he quarrels at that which himselfe confesses to be the truth There be some humours loue to be doing if it be but to keepe their hand in vre * Maiol dies Canic I haue read of one that had so vsed himselfe to pilfring that he would pick his owne purse and steale things out of his owne closet The Iesuite seems to be of that kindred that will quarrell and keepe a wrangling with the doctrine of his owne Church rather then he will cease from his contentious spirit 4 Yet the saddle somewhere pinches him and
is manifestly gathered from that which of it selfe is manifest as that a stone cannot moue vpward of it selfe naturally because all heauie things naturally moue downeward Hence it is plaine that * Albeit faith rest not vpon that eu dence but vpon duine reuelatiō Fides non elicit actus suos mediante discursu sed sicut visus immediate fertur in obiectum sub ratione lucid●●ta etiam fulei habitus in suum obiectum sub ratione diuinae reuelationis The contrary whereof is Manichisme Putaru●t nihil amplius esse ●re dendum quàm quod possit euidenti ratione demonstrari August de vtil credend c. 1. tom 6. many obiects of faith may also be euident because that which is beleeued may also in some respect be seene as Peter that beleeued Christ yet also saw him Or otherwise be knowne by the light of nature or gathered from that which is knowne as that there is a God And before I read this in my aduersaries margent I neuer knew but there was a compossibilitie of faith and euidence in diuers respects whereby they might both stand together in the same man about the same obiect Eymericus n Eymeric Directo part 1. q. 2 n. 2. sayes We may know the vnitie of the Deitie by naturall reason yet we beleeue one God Delgado o De Author Script pag. 51. Many diuine things touching God which are receiued by faith may also be found out by naturall reason Caietan p Caiet 22. qu. 175. art 3. sayes though Paul were rapt into the third heauens where he saw things which before hee beleeued yet the habit of faith touching those things remained in him still c. Faith and knowledge q Mayro 3. d. 23. art 6. pag. 13 sayes Francis Mayronis are habits that may stand together Faith by authoritie reuealed knowledge by euident demonstration Thus it is no contradiction that the same obiect be beleeued by authoritie and euidently knowne by demonstration Altisiodorensis r Altisiod sum l. 3. pag. 273. According to diuers apprehensions the same thing is knowne and beleeued beleeued and doubted ſ Mag. 3. d. 24. Alexand. 3. part qu. 79. m. 3. Tho. 22. qu. 2. art 4. cont Gent l. 1. c. 4 Occh. 3. q. 8. art 4. c. Duran prol sent pag. 4 c. Ricard 3. d. 24. q. 5. pag. 85. Gabr. 3. d 24. qu. vnic art 2. concl 2. Henric. Albert. Bonau Tarantas quos refert sequitur Dionys 3. d. 24. Simanch cath instit tit 28 n. 18. Rectè porro Caiet ex hoc loco Pauli argumentatur esse nonnulla quae de Deo euidenter cognosci demonstratiue probari queant Perer. select disp in Roma pag. 83. The principallest Schoole-men that are do all hold thus which I would not haue noted so curiously but to beate the confidence of my aduersary thus peremptorily auouching against me that he knowes not For albeit faith exceeds the dimension of reason yet reason is subordinate to it as sense is to vnderstanding And therefore as it is no inconuenience to say we vnderstand the same things we see no more is it to say we beleeue that which is euident in diuers respects How many things are we commanded in the Scripture to beleeue which yet we can demonstrate by reason as that there is a God and the immortalitie of the soule For as one may reueale a thing to another two wayes together first by shewing him a light to see it and then by proposing some externall signe or marke whereby to finde it or some image or description whereby to conceiue it so God hath shewed vs the Scripture to be diuine not onely by the light that shines in it whereby we beleeue it but also by the outward contexture of it containing the image of the diuine wisedome and puritie as the principles of sciences shew their owne authoritie The place cited out of the Hebrewes is answered by that I haue said CHAP. XX. 1. A continuation of the same matter touching the Churches authoritie in giuing testimonie to the Scriptures 2. The Scripture proues it selfe to be Gods word 3. The light of the Scripture 4. 5. How we are assured of the Scripture by the Spirit 6. The reason why some see not the light of the Scripture 7. The Papists retiring to the Spirit 8. And casting off the Fathers A Councell is aboue the Pope The Pope may erre A.D. It seemeth M. White saw the weaknesse of this his first answer Pag. 70. White pag. 47. and therefore not standing vpon it he secondly attempteth to proue Scripture to be diuine out of the Scripture For saith he S Paul 1 1. Tim. 3 v. 16 saith All Scripture is giuen by inspiration of God and S. Peter 2 2. Pet. 1. v. 20. saith no prophesie in the Scripture is of priuate interpretation but the holy men of God spake as they were moued by the holy Ghost Against this I reply that my argument doth not enquire onely how we proue in generall that there is any diuine Scripture at all which is all that these or any such like sentences can proue but chiefly I aske how we proue these books in particular which the Church now vseth bearing the titles of S. Matthews S. Marks Gospel c. to be diuine Scripture to be the same which was written by those writers whose title they beare For vpon the certain beliefe hereof dependeth the certaintie of other points proued out of these bookes Now it is certaine that this is not proued by those sentences of Scripture since it may be true that there is some diuine Scripture and that all true diuine Scripture was inspired by God and yet if we seclude Tradition and Church-authoritie the question may still be whether S. Matthewes S. Markes Gospell c. especially these in particular which are now vsed are part of that Scripture which these sentences speake of Secondly I say that before these sentences proue sufficiently that there is any diuine Scripture at at all these sentences themselues must be supposed to be diuine the which cannot sufficiently be proued either by themselues or any other like sentences if we exclude Tradition which doth shew that they be diuine 1 All this I answered in the words of my Booke a Digress 12. immediatly following these words that he hath cited and that so briefly directly that nothing could be spoken plainer To proue the imperfection of the Scripture he had said it was no where expresly set downe and determined in Scripture that these bookes are the true word of God this in particular of euerie Booke holden for Scripture we shall not finde expresly written in any part of the Scripture Whereto I answered that it was written expresly that b 2. Tim. 3.16 All Scripture is giuen by inspiration and c 2. Pet. 1.20 No Scripture is of priuate interpretation but the holy men of God spake as they were moued by the holy Ghost
Graffius a Friar lately writing from Capua i Decis aurear l. 2. c. 8. nu 16. that euery Christian is not bound to know the articles of faith explicitely but only Cleargy mē I cited Antonine an Archbish and a Saint in the Church of Rome k Sum. mor. part 1. tit 5. c 2. §. 1. who reporting the tale of the Colliar first saies that a great Doctor being demanded what he beleeued answered as the Church and being further demanded what the Church beleeued answered that it beleeued the articles contained in the Creed And then falles to commending that faith which shewes that he thought it was the entirest beleeuing euē of the Creed to do it by implicite faith I alledged Pighius and Hosius the Cardinall who l Pigh hier l. 1. c. 5. Hos cont Brent l. 3 p. 146 in the places cited affirme that it is the safest way to hold a mans selfe to the faith of the Church though it should erre in the faith And that this Colliars faith is more safe then any meditation or exercise in the Scripture And whosoeuer shall view the places Hosius especially shall well perceiue that I speake the truth which I will yet iustifie further by shewing Catholicke Diuines as my aduersaries stiles a packe of heretikes to teach that it is sufficient by this implicite faith to beleeue euen the principall articles of faith contained in the Creed m Tract de fid William the B. of Paris n L. 3. tract 3. c. 1. qu. 5. Altisiodorensis o V. Fides nu 1. Summa Rosella and others p refe●t D. Ban. 22. qu. 2. art 8. § Dubitatur secundo hold that it is not necessary to beleeue any article of faith expressely but it is enough to beleeue all that our mother the Church beleeues and holds So that if a man were demanded whether Christ were borne of the Virgine and whether there were one God and 3. Persons he might sufficiently answer I cannot tell but I beleeue as the Church holds and this faith would iustifie and saue him The Iesuits q Lorin in Act. Apost p. 438. 1. b. Grego de Valent. tom 3. disp 1. qu. 2. punct 4. pag. 311. A. report that it is the opinion of many Authors in the Church of Rome that the explicite faith of Christ as he is true God and man and the Redeemer of mankinde euen after the sufficient publishing of the Gospell is not necessary necessitate medij either for Iustification or saluation and he cites Richardus Mediauillanus Vega and Soto Which is true for these are Vegaes expresse words r Pro. Concil Tridēt l. 6. c. 15. p. 92. edit Colon 1572. It is to be affirmed that men are so iustified by the faith of the Mediator that yet the vnfolded faith neither of this article nor of any other must be thought requisite vnto iustice because the explicite faith of other articles belonging either to Speculation or morall life suffices thereunto and this is it which our Diuines commonly teach when they say the Faith of one mediator either vnfolded or infolded is enough for iustificatiō neither can they hold otherwise that thinke as ſ Reported before c. 22. n. 1. many in the Romane Church do the Gentiles without any knowledge of Christ or supernaturall faith at all may be saued 5 I know well enough some of our aduersaries speake otherwise and seeme to require a more vnfolded faith whose doctrine I will not conceale t Eymeric part 1. q. 7. n. 8 The Directorie of the Inquisitors out of u 22. qu. 2. art 5. Aquinas saies A man is bound explicitely to beleeue the articles of faith but other points of faith onely implicitely That which * D. Bann vbi sup Alexand Pezant 22. q. 2. art 8. disp 1. Greg. Val. tom 3. disp 1. qu. 2. punct 3. 4. 5. Vasqu 12. disp 121. others speake more at large First * These are the Propositions of Pezantius a Iesuite Schoolman that in the state both afore and after sinne it was necessary for all of yeares of discretion both by the command and necessity of the meanes to beleeue some supernaturall thing by explicite faith Secondly The things thus to be beleeued are all points needfull for the ordering of their life as to beleeue there is a God and his diuine prouidence and the immortality of the soule that he is the Creator Rewarder and Gouernor of all Thirdly that now in the state of the Gospell it is also necessary to beleeue in Christ as the Redeemer of mankinde by faith explicite Fourthly by the Commandement all are bound to beleeue explicately the Mysterie of the Incarnation and the Trinitie the principall articles of faith contained in the Creed which by themselues pertaine to the substance of faith and some other things which tend to direct them in working aright But what those articles of the Creed are which thus belong to the substance of faith Pezant saies the Doctors are not agreed but he laies downe his owne iudgement that they are the articles touching the Vnitie Essence and Trinitie of the Persons in the Godhead touching the Creation the Remission of sinnes Eternall life the Natiuitie Passion Resurrection and Second comming of Christ the Sacraments of Baptisme Eucharist and Confession the precepts also of Faith Hope and Charity the ten Commandements and Praiers deliuered in the Catechisme It is also probable he saies that all good Catholickes should beleeue explicitely the virginity of Mary that they may worship her but it is certain that the article touching the Church that there is but one congregation thereof which is of the faithfull * Were you there Sir that obey the Pope Christs Vicar must be beleeued explicitely and some say also certaine traditions touching the signe of the Crosse and the adoration of Saints and Images This is the largest and most particular explication that I finde in any of them touching the things that all men vnlearned as well as learned are bound either by Commandement or absolute necessity to beleeue by faith explicite Yea the Scholiast vpon the Directory of the Inquisition x Pag. 60. requires the articles of faith to be gotten perfectly without Booke which the Iesuits y Grego Val. p. 320. c Pezant pag. 505. d. deny But how shall I know this is the doctrine of their Church how will my aduersary assure me that other Diuines in his Church as Catholicke as these are of the same minde that I might truely say I mistooke them when I said they vtterly refuse knowledge and canonize the Colliar If they would hold them euery where and constantly to this it were a good step to an end in this controuersie and our doctrine were iustified that particular knowledge is to be ioyned with the assent of faith and we must not so beleeue the Church but that we be able also in some measure to conceiue and penetrate the things themselues If my
aduersarie will vrge me with this and stand vpon it that it is the doctrine of his Church I will not striue with him onely I will commend 2. things to his consideration First how he will pleade the saluation of innumerable lay people I will not say in Lancashire but in France Spaine and Italy euery where that haue no knowledge of these things but onely beleeue as the Church beleeues whom the Church of Rome hath hitherto trained vp in this implicite faith of the Colliar how will he excuse the Colliar whom Staphylus commends so that knew not these things and what if it should fall out that the Gentleman his friend whom he mentions z A person of good esteeme and place in that your country p. 39. Repl. before in this Reply being catechized by his ghostly father should be able to say no more then the Colliar Next that euen the Iesuites and these Diuines who make shew to maintaine this explicite faith yet vtter that besides that vnanswerably makes for the implicite in all articles Henriquex a De sin hom c. 17. n. 1. lit x. sayes A man may be iustified by the implicite faith of Christ * Si planè contritus cum plena satisfactione vel cum martyrio aut indulgentia plenaria decedat and if he die be saued also with a pardon b Relect. de Sacram. part 2. q. 2. concl 3. Canus and c In Tho. 22. q. 2. art 8. dub vlt. concl 1. Bannes affirme that the explicite faith or distinct knowledge of Christ is not necessary as a meanes to iustifie vs. And Bannes d Concl. 4. addes that it were neither heresie nor error nor rashnes nor scandall to auouch that a man may also in the same manner be saued because iustification being the last disposition to glory it is very probable that he which is iustified by an implicite faith may also by the same faith without alteration be saued Vasquez e In Tho. 12. q. 2. disp 121. c. 2. sayes He doubts not but many countrie people without fault are ignorant of some necessary mysteries Vega f Pro concil pag. 92. sayes as I alledged before It is to be affirmed that men are so iustified by the faith of the Mediator that yet the vnfolded faith neither of this article nor of any other must be thought requisite vnto iustice because the explicite faith of other articles belonging either to speculation or morall life suffices thereunto I could alledge many other such doctrines but these are enough to shew my aduersary that his Diuines deale but doubly in our point of implicite faith and such as make faire offer against it yet are fast friends to the Colliar 6 Note thirdly concerning the persons who they be that our aduersaries allow to beleeue implicitly who are bound to expresse knowledge Mediauillanus g 3. d. 25 p. 89. edit Venet. per Laz. Soard 1508. sayes that such as are superiors in the Church must haue a fuller knowledge concerning faith then inferiours So that I beleeue such superiours are bound to beleeue all the articles of faith expresly though euery one of thē be not bound to beleeue their number or artificiall distinction Syluester h Sum Syluest v. fides n. 6. sayes Euery one that hath cure of soules as Prelates Priests Prophets Doctors and Preachers are bound expresly to beleeue the whole distinction of the articles of faith according to their substance but others are not so bound i Direct Inquisit part 1. q. 4. n. 3. Eymericus out of k 22. q. 2. art 6. Thomas Prelats and Curats are bound to haue the expresse faith and knowledge of all the articles of faith wherefore the explication of things to be beleeued is not alike in respect of all sorts of men necessary to saluation because Superiors which haue the charge of instructing others are bound to beleeue expresly more things then others are l 22. q. 2. art 8. disp vnic sub sin Pezantius thinks thus of the matter that Bishops are bound * A hard taske for the Boy Bishops mentioned by Gerson and others see Vers sign ruin Eccl. sign 3. 8. Pic. Mirand orat ad Leo. and for some men Bishops too mentioned by Theod. Niem nemor Semita de scism p. 66. Cathar n. specul haeret p. 71. Clemang de stat Eccl. p. 15. 30. concil delect card Alliac reform Eccl. consid 3. and for some Popes also See specul Pontif. p. 110. and possible for our yong Iesuites and Seminaries to say nothing of the old Mas Priests in times past expresly to know the articles of Faith contained in the Creed and Scripture and in the definitions of the Church so that they can both expound teach and perswade them Simple Priests must know those things that belong to the making of the Sacrament and other things contained in the Creed Preachers such things as are necessary to teach the people how to beleeue and liue parish Priests are not bound to be so perfit in the knowledge of the articles of faith that they can assoile hard questions but it is sufficient if they can instruct their charge in such things as they are tied to beleeue and do and if they haue sufficient knowledge of the Cases of Conscience And so the implicite knowledge and faith is admitted onely in the vnlearned Laity and not in Clergie men of any sort if our aduersaries will hold them to their doctrine but they dubble and perseuere not in it as will appeare by viewing the places of the Archbishop and the Cardinal whom m The WAY §. 2. n. 6. I alledged in my booke 7 Note fourthly that the things which we mislike and speake against in this matter of implicite faith are these First that in teaching of it the Church of Rome seemes manifestly to seeke her owne soueraignty euen aboue the Scripture in the consciences of men rather then the true knowledge of God and his will To what purpose they do this n 2. Th. 2.4 apoc 18.7 I sit a Queene we are not ignorant but we see it tends to the stupifying of the word by blind and brutish obedience that there need be no trauell in religion it selfe but onely a religious care that the Church of Rome be not offended Whereunto whosoeuer will cleaue resolutely to obey all her drudgery and tyrannie that man by some fine distinction or other and that by the Iesuites themselues and such as talke most of explicite knowledge shall be iustified to be of an entire faith extending it selfe vniuersally to all points one as wel as another though he were as ignorāt as a sheepe or as mad as o Suid. v. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Amphistides in Suidas that could not tell fiue nor whether his father or his mother bare him Secondly we mislike that ignorance so much condemned by the word of God should thus be bolstered out whereby true faith
the like things how great punishment is laid vp for vs that by being able to answer nothing nor to dissolue these questions should be the authors of error to them that walke in darkenesse for if they so trauell day and night to be able to speake against our religion how shall we escape vnlesse we haue skill to beate backe such assaults Thus 1 1. Pet. 3. Peter commands Be alwaie ready to satisfie euery one that demands a reason of your faith and hope and 2 Col. 3. Paule Let the word of Christ dwell plentifully in you But what will these foolish drones answer forsooth that euery simple soule is blessed and 3 Pro 10. This is one of the Papists reasons for the Colliars faith note Chrysostomes answer he that walkes simply walkes surely But this is the cause of all euill that not many know how to bring in the testimonies of the Scripture opportunely For in that place alleadged simple is not to be vnderstood for a foole that knowes nothing but for one that is not euill or crafty c. These wordes of Chrysostome shew against all exception that Gods words vpon paine of punishment requires a distinct knowledge of the points of our faith in such measure that if an ignorant man or a cauiller should question with vs about them we might be able to expound manifest them which by the Colliars and my aduersaries impicite faith we could not do Theodorit hath a narration which may fully satisfie any man what kinde of knowledge the Christian Church then practised Euery where e De curand affect l. 5. sub fin saith he you may see these points of our faith to be knowne not onely by them who are masters in the Church and teachers of the people but euen of Coblers Smithes and Weauers and all kinde of artificers and of women also which get their liuing with their hands yea maid seruants and waiting women husbandmen also do very well know them and Ditchers and Neat-heards and woodsetters All these may ye finde discoursing of the Trinitie and the Creation of things and as skilfull in the nature of man as Plato or Aristotle f Iustin Martyr requires the same distinct knowledge in all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dial. cum Tryph. p. 249. This Relation of Theodorit makes it cleare that in those dayes the doctrine of beleeuing as the Church beleeues by implicite faith was not receaued but the Christians generally euen the most vnlearned obtained and practised the same distinct knowledge that here my aduersary disputes against and impugnes with the names of the Fathers that onely speake against the curious and arrogant inquiring into mysteries CHAP. XXIIII Touching the necessitie and nature of the rule of faith 2. And how it is reuealed communicated to all men that none need to despaire A. D. Concerning the fift Chapter Pag. 143. the conclusion of this Chapter to wit that God hath prouided some ordinary rule and meanes by which all sorts as well vnlearned as learned may be instructed sufficiently in that one infallible entire faith which is necessary to saluation serueth chiefely for those who either presume to attaine this faith without vsing any endeuour in seeking or following some ordinary rule and meanes or else despaire in regard they know not what in particular this rule and meanes is nor perhaps in generall that there is at all any ordinarie rule and meanes at least accommodated to their capacitie prouided by God by which they may be sufficiently instructed in faith To take away therfore the foresaid presumption of some and despaire of others in this Chapter I onely intended to proue in generall that there is some certaine ordinary rule and meanes ordained by God which if one neglect to seeke finde and follow according to the ordinary course of Gods prouidence he may not be he neuer so learned or wise presume or hope to attaine true faith and which whosoeuer doth diligently seeke happily finde and obediently follow be he neuer so vnlearned or simple he need not despaire or doubt but may rest assured that he shall attaine vnto it My aduersaries do not seeme to deny this my conclusion so farre as it doth properly belong to this Chapter but fearing what may follow of it they oppose against that sence which they imagine I intended afterward to draw out of it But this is vnorderly to runne before the hare Let vs now onely speake to the purpose of the present Chapter M. White expressely * White pag. 8. 9. graunteth and M. Wootton doth not deny that there is some certaine rule and meanes appointed by God and left in the world to instruct men in faith Secondly M. White granteth that by this rule and meanes we may be infallibly instructed what is to be holden for true faith Thirdly he yeeldeth that the onely cause why a man misseth of the truth is either because he doth not finde the rule or hauing found it he will not obey it Fourthly he saith that the rule is left indifferently to all in this sense that it is of such nature that it is able to direct any man be he neuer so simple and that the most vnlearned aliue may vnderstand and conceiue it sufficiently for his saluation Thus farre M. White granteth and this is in a manner as much as I need desire to be granted concerning the principall conclusion of this Chapter For hence followeth first that no man may presume to attaine faith without finding and following some certaine or ordinary rule and meanes ordained by God Secondly that no man for want of learning or by reason of his simplicity c. neede to despaire but that by seeking finding following some certain rule meanes appointed by God be shall be sufficiently instructed in faith Thirdly that euery one carefull of saluation may see how much it importeth to seeke finde and follow this rule and meanes as expecting by it only by it according to the ordinary course of Gods Prouidence to be sufficiently instructed what is to be holden for that one infallible entire true faith which is necessary to saluation 1 MY aduersaries fift conclusion was that as one entire faith is necessary to saluation so God who willes the saluation of all men hath prouided and left an ordinary rule and meanes whereby they may be informed which and what this faith is This conclusion he visites in this place to see how his aduersaries haue vsed it and first he repeates it then he telles his purpose in laying it downe next he reports what I said to it though scarse truly Fourthly he telles what followes of that which he findes I haue granted him and so lastly leaues the onely difficulty that I obiected against it vnassoiled and leaps into a wilde-goose chase nothing to the point about Praedestination whither M. White meanes not to follow him His purpose in propounding it he saies was first to admonish such as
faith but the illumination of Gods Spirit whereof faith is an effect 2. Himselfe in those words the Spirit of God must assist and concur with mans vnderstanding not onely in generall to preserue the faculty thereof but in a speciall manner to enable it to apprehend and yeeld confesses as much as I said or could meane taking my words in all their latitude 3. If faith be taken in one particular sence as sometimes it is for the receiuing of diuine illumination into the heart as a darke roome when the window is opened or a candle is brought in receiues light then it is true * ●rgo ante fidem absque fide intelligi Scripturas posse affirmas Hoc si tibi absurdum non videtur plus quam Pelagia nus es D. Stapl. de author script c. 8. §. 16. that the heart must be endued with faith before any man can vnderstand the rule and yeeld his assent to it vnlesse he will hold Pelagianisme neither doth my Aduersaries argument conclude any thing against this for the vsing of the rule and this faith go together as the opening of the eye and light concur to seeing Therefore as he that seekes a thing in a blind roome first opens the window and lets in light and then applies his eye with the helpe of that meanes to the obiect so though it be supposed that faith cannot be had before the rule instruct vs yet this light of Gods Spirit which is the beginning of faith as the medium whereby the rule is vnderstood goes in order before it As in all our sences * Nihil agit in distans nisi primo agat in medium Allias ●●●ct de anim c. 8. part 3. the way from the sence to the obiect is disposed by the medium But if faith be taken in the whole extent for the knowledge and assent of all that which is reuealed then I grant the rule must go before 2 Thirdly touching illumination of the Spirit which we both agree is necessary for the vsing and vnderstanding of the Rule he will haue 2. things noted First that this is not the Protestants spirit Whereunto I answer it is neither the Protestant nor Romish nor any priuate spirit much lesse the Popes spirit a Shewed Ch. 35. whereby alone they breathe that thus charge others with priuate spirits but the Spirit of God that is b 1 Cor. 12.6 giuen to euery man to profit withal Secondly that this Spirit of God is ready to assist all men at least sufficiently to the attaining of the truth and that no mā whō grace hath excited to vse the rule need feare any want thereof but all men rather had need feare least themselues be wanting to concurre with this Spirit and least in stead of following the Spirit of God they suffer themselues as all they do that follow the Church of Rome to be misled by the spirit of Satan transfiguring himselfe into an Angell of light c. The which I am also well pleased to note and commend backe againe to himselfe and all of his sect who refusing the light of the Scripture that so euidently detects their errors haue suffered themselues to be seduced by the spirit of Antichrist * Apoc. 13.13 who hath transfigured himselfe into an Angell of light and broaching his owne priuate conceits yet colours all with the stile of S. Peters successour and seeming authority and spirit of the Church when the Primum mobile of all Papistry is now become the Iesuited Popes sole instinct 3 Fourthly he mislikes that besides these 3. properties of the Rule I would haue other two Vnpartiality that it be addicted to no side and Authority to conuince that there might be no appeale from it But these conditions I added for the better explication of the rest and to exclude the Church of Rome which is so partiall that it begges to be it owne iudge and so vnable to support the cause since that the clearest definitions thereof are still called in question by themselues as c Digr 36. I made demonstration The which being the true reasons of his mislike he dissembles and onely replies that these conditions are either not necessary or else included in the other 3. the former of which is not true the latter that they be included in the condition of infalliblenesse I will not contend about onely I noted them for the more distinct and particular explication of that which must belong to the Rule And so in this point there shall be no variance CHAP. XXVII 1. The Repliers terginersation 2. 3. The state of the question touching the sufficiency of the Scripture alone and the necessity of the Church Ministrie 3. The speeches of diuers Papists against the perfection of the Scripture 4. In what sence Scripture alone is not sufficient Pag. 177. A. D. Concerning the seuenth Chapter if my aduersaries did not ignorantly or wilfully peruert the state of the question they could not haue had colour to make so long discourse about this Chapter as they do both make My question was not whether Scripture be the rule of faith but whether it alone be the rule and meanes ordained by God to breed in men that one infallible entire Faith which is necessary to saluation This my question my aduersaries peruert FIRST in that they would gladly as it seemeth make men beleeue that we exclude Scripture from being in any sort the rule of faith and thereupon * Pag. 10 11. M. Wootton maketh speciall opposition betwixt the Scripture which they assigne and the doctrine of the Church which we assigne for the rule of faith whereas we make no such opposition at all but hold the Scripture as propounded to vs by the Church to be part of that which in the tenth Chapter I call the rule of faith For by the doctrine of the Church which there I cal the rule of faith I do not meane any humane doctrine as humane is distinguished from Diuine but do account the same doctrine whether written or vnwritten which is called diuine because it was first immediatly reuealed by God to the Prophets and Apostles to be also Church doctrine because it is propounded interpreted and applyed in particular to vs by the Pastours of the Church This my aduersary might haue vnderstood euen by the very title of this Chapter in regard I said not the Scripture is not the rule of faith but Scripture ALONE is not the rule of faith SECONDLY they peruert the state of the question in that they take the rule of faith otherwise then I do and otherwise then according to the drift of the precedent Chapters wherupon this present Chapter doth depend they ought to do For whereas there may be distinguished in this matter First that which is a rule of faith but not the ordinary sufficient meanes ordained by God to breed faith in men viz the diuine reuealed verities as they are in themselues Secondly that which is so an
infallible rule of faith as it is also the ordinary sufficient meanes ordained by God to breed faith in men My aduersaryes for their better aduantage take the question in the first sense whereas they ought to take it in the second sense in regard I so take it in the fift Chapter vnto which this Chapter hath reference For whereas in the foure first Chapters I had set downe for a certaine ground that one infallible entire faith was necessary to saluation in the first Chapter I proued that God had ordained some rule and meanes that is some such rule as was also a meanes sufficient to breed this one infallible entire faith in all sorts of men yea quantum ex se in all men In the sixt Chapter I set downe certaine conditions of this rule and meanes and consequently when in this seuenth Chapter I deny Scripture alone to be the rule I must needes meane that it is not the rule which is also a sufficient ordinary meanes of which all my speech went before Now in this true sense my aduersaries do not gainesay but conuicted by the euidence of truth yeeld that Scripture alone is not the rule taking the rule as it signifieth that which is so a rule as it is also the ordinary sufficient meanes to breed faith in men as here I take it The Scripture it selfe saith M. Wootton is a rule Wootton p. 66. or meanes made effectuall to some by reading without any outward helpe of man but this is not the ordinary course that God hath appointed for the instruction of the people Pag. 89. in the knowledge of his truth therefore if we say at any time Scripture alone is the rule of faith by ALONE we seuer it from the traditions and authoritie of men not from their Ministry and ascribe sufficiently vnto it in respect of the matter to be beleeued not simply of the meanes to bring men to beleeue And againe we require besides onely expresse wordes of Scripture the Ministry and industry of man together and conclude points of doctrine out of that which is written in Scripture White pag. 23. M. White although he seeme to make the doctrine it selfe of Scripture to be the rule the letter of the original or translation to be a meanes which like a vessell presenteth vnto vs this rule yet to the purpose of the question in my sense he granteth that the Ministry is the ordinary meanes Pag. 116. whereby we may learne the faith of Christ and that no man can of himselfe attaine the knowledge thereof but as the Church teacheth him excepting some extraordinary cases Whereby I euidently conclude that both M. Wootton and M. White yeeld to the principall conclusion of this Chapter to wit that Scripture alone whether taken for the originall or translation is not the rule of faith in such sense as I here speake of the rule of faith Idle therefore and impertinent is most of their long and tedious discourse vpon this Chapter which consequently I pretermit as vnworthie of any reply if any thing here brought by them and pretermitted by me seeme contrary to my conclusion it is such as is answered ordinarily by Catholicke Authors or such as these my aduersaries themselues if they wil not contradict this which is yeelded to by themselues ought to answer vnto as well as I. 1 HEre I must repeate my old complaint that I am forced to renew in euery question that falles out betweene vs that my aduersary omits and dissembles the whole substance of my writing and onely descants vpon some few remnants that he rends out here and there wisely foreseeing either that his cause would abide no triall or himselfe was not the man that was able to make the triall For though he could well enough translate and transcribe another man writing and patch it together when he had done to make a pamphlet yet the defence he must leaue to his Author being belike some student * A.D. Student in diuinitie as he professes himselfe that is proceeded no higher then translations and yet will serue the turne to beare the name of a Catholicke writer This abiect course which now adayes that side cleaues to as deuoutly as to their faith bewrayes the misery of their side to say no more and so I follow him whither the winde and the tide carrie me For he that rides a iade must take his owne pace or go afoote 2 First he sayes his Aduersaries either ignorantly or wilfully peruert the state of the question else they could haue had no colour to make so long discourse The which is no vnprofitable way when he cannot defend his question to picke a quarrel to the state And possible he hath learned it by po●ching in D. Stapletons bookes who in his time made good vse of this tricke But how was the question mistaken He saies his question was not whether Scripture be the rule of faith but whether Scripture alone be the rule and meanes to breed faith For the trial of this I must intreate the Reader to take knowledge how things stand betweene vs though I haue once or twise already vpon like occasions repeated it The Iesuite in his Treatise that I answered beginnes with certaine propositions which he sayes are to be supposed and set downe for certaine and assured grounds First that no man can be saued without the true faith Secondly that this faith is but one neither can men be saued in any other Thirdly that this faith must be infallible and certaine so that the beleeuer be fully perswaded of the truth thereof Fourthly that it must be whole and entire beleeuing rightly all points one as well as another Fifthly that God hath ordained a certaine rule or meane whereby all men learned and vnlearned may be instructed in this faith and infallibly taught WHAT is to be holden for the true faith and WHAT not Sixtly that this rule must haue three conditions First infallibility to be certaine without deceiuing vs. Secondly easines that it may be plainely knowne of all sorts of men Thirdly latitude that by it we may know absolutely all points needfull to be learned Then a In THE WAY §. 5. and in his printed treatise p. 17. concl 1. he proceeds to inquire what in particular is the thing which may be assigned to be this rule whereto he answers in foure conclusions the first whereof is this whereabout he now contends The Scripture alone especially as it is translated * In his printed copie it is Specially as it is by Protestants translated into the English tongue into the English tongue cannot he this rule This I denied in another conclusion opposite to it vsing the words of the publike articles of our Church The Scripture comprehended in the Canonicall bookes of the old and new Testament is the rule of faith so far that whatsoeuer is not read therein or cannot be proued thereby is not to be accepted as any point of
Scripture Bellarmine g Bell. de verb. Dei lib. 4. c. 1. The name of tradition is applied by Diuines to signifie onely vnwritten doctrine Alphonsus h Alphons à Castr adu haer lib 1. c. 5. This is to be laid for a most sound foundation that the traditions of the vniuersall Church and the determinations thereof in things concerning faith are of no lesse authority then the sacred Scripture it selfe though there be no Scripture to proue them Hessels of Louan i Hessel expli symb c. 69. p. 38. The Apostles neuer intended by their writing to commit to writing the whole doctrine of faith but as necessity vrged them what in their absence they could not teach that they committed to writing Costerus the Iesuite k Coster enchirid p. 43. It was neuer the mind of Christ either to commit his mysteries to parchment or that his Church should depend on paper writings Lindane l Lind. panopl. pag. 4. We Catholickes teach that Christians are to beleeue many things which are to be acknowledged for Gods word that are not contained in the Scripture and many things finally to be receiued with the same authoritie wherewith those doctrines of faith are receiued which are contained in holy writ Rodericus Delgado m Roderic dosm de autor Script l. vlt. p. 63 Albeit these things are not found written in the Bible yet they must no lesse be obserued by the godly that they may fulfill the precepts and firmely beleeue the mysteries of the heauenly faith Doctor Stapleton n Staplet princip doctr l. 12. cap. 5. There both were among the Iewes and are among vs very many things religiously performed in the worship of God and also necessary to saluation and necessarily to be beleeued which yet are not comprehended in the Scriptures but are approued or commended to vs ONELY by the authority of the Church Gregory of Valentia o Valent. tom 3. p. 258. D. All the controuersie is whether the Apostles by word of mouth WITHOVT WRITING deliuered any such doctrines as now affoord an infallible argument for the determining of the controuersies of faith in the Church These wordes of our aduersaries make it more then plaine that the Church of Rome holds the Scriptures vnsufficient not onely in respect of breeding faith or bringing men to know and beleeue it ordinarily which we grant but also in respect of containing it in themselues which we deny And that my aduersary holds the same thing I will prone directly For ha-laid downe 4. grounds First that true faith is necessary Secondly that this faith is onely one Thirdly that this faith must be certaine Fourthly and entire in all points he addes the fift that it must not be doubted but God hath prouided and left some certaine rule and meanes whereby euery man may in all points and questions be sufficiently and infallibly instructed WHAT is to be holden for true faith and then immediately he puts the question what in particular may be assigned to be this rule wherto he answers in his first conclusion The Scripture alone especially as translated into English cannot be this rule Which I denied Therefore his question was touching the sufficiency of the Scripture as the said sufficiency is opposed to vnwrittē traditiō not as it is distinguished against the requisite condition of the meanes to be vsed for the vnderstanding of the Scripture And this I confirme for my aduersary saies they hold the Scripture to be part of the rule because it is part of the doctrine of the Church immediatly reuealed by God but yet there are many substantiall points of faith not contained in them Yea p Pag. 67. Reply his expresse words are The question is betwixt vs and Protestants whether God did reueale any thing to the Prophets and Apostles necessary to be beleeued which is not now expressed or so contained in the Scripture that by euident and necessary consequence excluding all tradition and Church authority it may be gathered out of some sentence expresly set downe in the Scripture I did not therefore peruert the state of the question but my Aduersary hauing nothing else to say thought good by this shift to rid himselfe from that which he saw could not be answered 4 Neuerthelesse pleasing himselfe with his owne conceite he concludes that conuicted with the euidence of truth I haue yeelded to his conclusion in that sence wherein he meant it That Scripture alone is not the rule of faith And therefore all my discourse is idle and impertinent I answer two things first if his conclusion The Scripture alone is not this rule which almighty God hath prouided whereby euery man may sufficiently be instructed WHAT is to be holden for true faith meane no more but onely to adde the Ministry of the Church and mens owne industry to the Scripture as the meanes for the ordinary vnderstanding and beleeuing that which is written in it in this sence the Scripture alone is the rule whereby to iudge whatsoeuer matter belongs to faith but Scripture alone is not the ordinary rule and meanes by it selfe to kindle in vs the true knowledge and faith of that which it containes without the Ministrie of the Church and other things be ioyned with it for the learning of it then I grant it and require the Iesuite againe in lieu thereof either to renounce his traditions or else confesse they haue no other vse but onely to helpe to expoūd and teach that which is wholly contained in the Scripture without any power to supply any defect of doctrine that may be supposed to be therein And when he hath done the next treatise of faith he writes to distinguish a little better betweene the Rule and the Meanes of applying it and not say that is no sufficient rule whereby to be instructed WHAT is faith and WHAT not which onely is not a sufficient meanes to bring men to faith without the subordinate condition of such meanes as is required in the application of any rule Secondly I answer that his conclusion meanes more viz. That Scripture alone is vnperfect and defectiue 2. waies The first in that without other meanes it doth not ordinarily breed or draw foorth in vs assent to that it reueales nor so much as make vs see the reuelation to be And therefore there needes the Church by her Pastor to teach and perswade vs and there needes the Spirit of God and industrie in our selues This way no Protestant euer denied The second is in that it alone containes not all Gods word or all such truth as he hath reuealed necessarily to be beleeued but onely one small and obscure part thereof the best part or at least some part being by Tradition onely vnwritten This way we deny with open mouth and the Iesuite holds it and in the place now controuerted hugges it in his armes and therefore I discoursed against him as I did and in no other sense and so consequently it is
apparant I yeelded not his conclusion in the whole sence but onely in a part For view my words The Ministerie of the Church is the ordinary meanes whereby we may learne the faith of Christ And no man can of himselfe attaine to the knowledge thereof but as the Church teaches him except it be in some extraordinary cases How will my Iesuite conclude frō hence that therefore I yeeld his conclusion as it is vnderstood the second way which way I haue shewed immediately before both his Church and himselfe vnderstand it Doth he that saies the kings Iustices are t●● ordinary meanes whereby to learne the matter of ciuill obedience and that no subiect can ordinarily attaine to the knowledge of the law vnlesse some body publish it yeeld therfore that the law alone is not the rule of the said obedience and subiection prescribing the measure and qualitie thereof but the Iustices also and such as acquaint vs with the law are part of the rule yea the greater and more certaine part No man will say so when all men see the Magistrate to be but the executioner and minister of the law to teach publish and execute that which is in the law it selfe and the Booke of the law to containe the whole and entire obiect of obedience that no subiect is bound to any obedience or to the doing of any thing whatsoeuer the Magistrate might happen to impose vpon him but that onely which is contained in the law either expressely or thence to be gathered by true consequence And so my Iesuits vaunt of our yeelding and impertinent discourses relishes but of the Souldier that created him and his vaunting Order though his putting vs ouer to his other Catholicke Authors be scarse souldier-like but tastes more of the Creeple He vses this often and I confesse it is a good short cutte home-wardes if a man be empty but it sinkes him that vses it into the lowest bottome of contempt to giue the onset with conclusions and principles and then to maintaine them with boasting and ignorance If we were not well acquainted with this transparent cowardlinesse in our busiest Aduersaries it would leauen the most setled patience that is among vs. CHAP. XXVIII Touching our English translations of the Bible Their sinceritie and infalliblenesse 2. How the vnlearned know them to be sincere The new Translation lately set foorth by the Kings authority defended Momus in his humor 4. The subordination of means Pag. 179. A. D. § 1. That English translations of Scripture are not infallible concerning my first reason it is to be obserued that I do not deny the true Scriptures either in the originall or in the translation to be infallible but onely I proue the ordinary English translations which ordinarily Protestants call the Scriptures not to be infallible nor consequently to be Wootton pag. 68. as some make them the onely sufficient rule and means to breed faith M. Wootton asketh what English Protestant euer affirmed that they were infallible or tooke them for the rule To this I reply first that I could wish these his questions could not be answered with affirming that many thousand poore soules that haue and can onely reade English Bibles think the texts which they reade in thē to be Gods word and consequently the infallible truth and so take them for a rule of their faith that wbat they finde written there they most firmly beleeue what they finde not there they will not beleeue Secondly if the English translation be not accounted infallible nor the rule of faith by some Protestants I aske first what M. White meaneth to say White pag. 25. the Scripture translated into English is infallibly true in respect of the matter Secondly I aske what infallible rule and meanes haue at least vnlearned Protestants whereupon to build their faith It cannot be said that the truth of the reuealed doctrine in it selfe is their rule For this is the thing that should be beleeued and is not the rule and meanes whereby men are to be directed to attain beliefe The first Hebrew or Greeke originall text immediatly written by the holy writers cannot be their rule For first where is this to be found or how shall they be sure if they find it that it is the very authenticall or originall and not a transumpt Or if a transumpt may also serue so that it be incorrupt how shall they know infallibly secluding Church-authoritie that that copie which they haue is incorrupt when they neuer saw the first authenticall nor euer did or are able to compare them together Finally suppose they had a copie well agreeing with the originall what nearer were they attaining faith by it since they cannot vnderstand it White pag. 25. M White is so farre from disclaiming from English translations as M. Wotton doth that he will needs defend them to be infallible in the matter contained in them in so much that with a bold brazen face he saith Martin cannot giue one instance of the sence corrupted Pag. 26. And although he seeme to leaue himselfe a starting hole by saying that he doth not defend tbis or that mans edition but the Scriptures wel and faithfully translated accounting it sufficient that there be some translations faithfull and agreeing with the originall in the Church Ibid. yet presently after he taketh vpon him to defend the varieties of translations saying that this varietie hath bene in words and stile and not in any materiall point of the sence Now how false this bold and blind answer is the Reader may easily perceiue if he will reade not onely M. Gregory Martins discouerie but also M. Reynolds refutation of M. Whitaker and the Grounds of the new Religion which bookes neither are or can so be answered by M. Fulke and his fellow Protestants to helpe him but still it wil be iustified and made plaine that not onely one but many instances may be giuen of the sence corrupted The which is not onely proued by our Diuines but also confessed by Protestants themselues One of which said Broughtons epistle to the Lords of the Councell Carlile in his booke that Christ went not downe into hell that the English Bible was full of errors And what errors Onely in stile or words Nay M. Carlile saith that our English Translators in many places detort the Scriptures from the right sence and that they haue corrupted and depraued the sence obscured the truth deceiued the ignorant Which their confession if it were not also acknowledged for truth by others what need were there after so many varieties of translations that with so much cost care and scandal to the Protestant cause they must needs haue order by publik authority to coine a new translatiō of the Bible different frō all English translatiōs that haue bin before the which also when it cometh forth will not be of infallible authoritie more then the former neither can at least vnlearned men be infallibly assured that it
containeth no materiall error For I would faine know how they who neither haue the authenticall originall or if they had cannot reade and much lesse vnderstand and compare the translation with it neither do admit infallible authoritie in the Church to assure them can be infallibly assured that the translation doth not containe any substantiall error To this M. White answereth White pag. 25. that we know this by the same infallible meanes wherby we know other articles of beliefe namely by the light of the doctrine translated the testimony of the Spirit the ministery of the word the rules of are the knowledge of tongues and such like Here is a faire flourish of words but answer me good M. White directly to the point Are all of these ioyntly or euery one seuerally or onely some of these necessary sufficient to breed in vs infallible assurance of an article of faith All are not necessary For else how shall poore vnlearned men do who want rules of art knowledge of tongues and such like Euery one seuerally is not sufficient For neither knowledge of tongues rules of art nor the Protestant ministery are of themselues infallible and consequently cannot be of themselues sufficient to breed such infallible assurance in vs as is requisite in an article of faith Well then it remaineth that onely some of these to wit the light of doctrine translated and the testimonie of the Spirit are euen according to the ordinary course the only necessary and of themselues the sole sufficient meanes to breed this assurance but this not For then it wold follow that euery one learned and vnlearned that had the Spirit of God by the onely light of the doctrine it self without any other help should infallibly vnderstand the Greeke and Hebrew text either read by themselues or pronounced by a Minister which is most false and yet that it followeth wel is apparent because true doctrine shineth as wel yea better if M. White say true in the Originall White pag. 26. then in the English Translations We saith M. White know the diuine doctrine to be one and the same Pag. 27. immediatly in the Originall more obscurely in the Translations and God as the same M. White saith directeth the children of light by the holy Ghost who openeth their hearts that they know his voice from all others and that the light of his truth may shine vnto them Now if the light of the diuine doctrine do shine as well and better in the Hebrew and Greeke text then in the English translations and that all which be children of light haue the eies of their heart so opened as they can discerne Gods voice frō all others and that the light of his truth shineth vnto thē what need is there then of any other either priuate or publick meanes to open their eies to see this light when the holy Ghost doth sufficiently open them Or if he say the holy Ghost doth not open them sufficiently without oth●r meanes then the light of the doctrine and the testimony of the Spirit are not the onely necessary and alone sufficient meanes to assure vs infallibly of any article of faith namely that this or that means must be assigned sufficient to breed in vs infallible assurāce which it self cannot do vnles it selfe be and be knowne or at least may be knowne to be infallible in it selfe and infallibly to open and direct our eyes to the seeing of the infallible truth which fallible ministery of mē fallible rules of art fallible knowledge of tongs or such like infallibly do not 1 HIs reason why the Scriptures trāslated into English cānot be the rule of faith is because our translations are full of errors Wherby he says his mind is not to deny the true Scripture in the originall or in the translation to be infallible but only the ordinary English translations My a THE WAY §. 5. nu 2 §. 6. nu 2. 4. 8. answer was the same that D. Stapleton b Relect. pag. 525. makes for the vulgar Latin that in respect of the words onely there might be some error but in respect of the sence there is none For if the words of the trāslation be not so perfect as they might yet that hinders not the truth of the matter nor the integritie of the sence For the vulgar Latin canonized by c Sess 4. the Trent Councell and d In those words J do not denie the true Scripture either in the Originall or in the Translation to be infallible granted by the Iesuite himselfe to be infallible is not free from error and corruption in words Mariana e Tract pro edit vulg Multa superius in Hebraicis Graecis codicibus vtti esse ostendimus multae mendacia in rebus minutis eorum pars aliquae non exigua in nostra editione vulgata extat c. 21. pag. 103. says There be many corruptions in the Hebrew and Greeke bookes which are the originall and many lies in small matters no small part whereof is also in the vulgar It may safely therfore be yeelded that our English translations as all other translations in the world whatsoeuer are not infallible nor free from all errors in words and yet the sence and matter of the Scripture translated which is the rule be stil maintained to be infallible This my answer yeelding such a kind of erroniousnes in words my aduersary obiects to M. Wotton who belike in his answer to this argument demanding what English Protestant euer affirmed that our translations were infallible or tooke them for the rule He replies secondly what means M. White then to say the Scripture translated into English is infallibly true in respect of the matter M. White answers that his meaning in so saying was to accord with M. Wotton by distinguishing betweene the words and the contents of the translations M. Wotton denying the words to be the rule and I affirming the matter contained in the words so to be What contradiction is this when he grants our translatiōs as al humane means are to be subiect to error in one sence and I deny them to be subiect in another 2 This my assertion that our English translations as touching the matter contained in them are infallible howsoeuer there be varietie among them in words stile he entertaines after his accustomed maner with some passiō For expoūding my self that I wold not maintain this or that mans editiō but the Scriptures wel and faithfully translated in such maner as our Church allows them he cals this a starting hole neuer remēbring how himself wil not defend this or that edition in his own Church but wil retire to those editions that are approued as also the primitiue Church permitted varietie of translations and yet followed the purest as neare as it could iudge of thē for the time being I wil therfore say it again that OVR ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS AS TOVCHING THE MATTER CONTAINED THEREIN ARE INFALLIBLE AND
words seeming plaine are to be vnderstood properly as they sound and when they are to be taken in a figuratiue or improper sence This say I is not to be learned sufficiently in the bare letter of Scripture alone but is to be learned of the Church according to that worthy saying of Vincentius Lyrinensis Vincent Lyr. cont haeres c. 2. Because all men do not take the holy Scripture for the height of it in one and the same sence but diuers men interpret the sayings of it diuersly in so much that almost so many different sences may seeme possible to be drawne from it as there are diuers men c. Therefore it is very necessarie that the line of Propheticall and Apostolicall interpretation be directed according to the rule of Ecclesiasticall and Catholicke sence True it is that by other probable meanes viz. rules of art knowledge of tongues obseruation of circumstances conference of places c. one but not euery lay-man woman and childe euen of M Wotton and M. Whites owne parish may probably finde out when the words are and when they are not to be vnderstood properly but infallibly in such sort as to build thereupon infallible assent of faith one cannot without infallible interpretation had either immediatly by reuelation of the Spirit which is not ordinarily to be expected or by infallible authoritie of the Church True it is also that ordinarily Diuines hold it for a certaine rule that words of Scripture are to be vnderstood properly as they sound vnlesse to auoide some absurditie we be compelled to interprete by a figure But when such an absurditie occurreth that ought to compell vs to interprete plaine words of Scripture by a figure and when not although reason it selfe may probably know which probable knowledge may suffice for direction of manners yet infallibly in such sort as is required to the assent of faith reason alone not assisted by Church authoritie cannot at the least alwayes tell sith many things may seeme absurd to our priuate sence and reason which in truth are not absurd as in the mystery of the blessed Trinitie may plainly appeare and contrariwise many things may seeme in reason not absurd which in true Diuinitie are absurd and most false 1 HIs second reason against the Scriptures being the rule of faith was their obscuritie because they faile in the second condition of the rule being of themselues alone so obscure and vnknowne both to the vnlearned and learned that no man can thereby alone be sufficiently directed This reason was handled § 7 and 8. where I answered the argument whereby he prosecuted it and euery word also that he replies here which makes me to wonder with what conscience he followes his cause when that he sayes here being answered he shrinks from replying and onely repeates his old argument againe and yet intitles his booke a Reply when he replies nothing but conceales all from his Reader that I answered neuerthelesse that he sayes I will answer againe 2 First he tels in what sence he holds the Scripture to be obscure and how farre forth Not that it cannot by any meanes be vnderstood or that it is any imperfection in the Scripture to be obscure but the perfection rather the onely thing he goes about to proue being that de facto it is obscure or at the least not so easie as the ordinary rule of faith ought to be which is denied and confuted not denying some parts to be obscure as many prophecies and mysteries therein nor affirming any of it to be so effectuall to our vnderstanding that without the motion of Gods Spirit and vse of the meanes euery man can effectually vse it to his saluation for I neuer denied the requisite condition of Gods grace and the Churches teaching and our owne endeuour to open our vnderstanding euen in the plainest Scripture that is but I onely affirme all things concerning faith and good life needfull to be knowne to be so plainly set downe therein that the vnlearnedst man aliue vsing the meanes which is not the Church-authoritie intended by my aduersary and being enlightned with Gods Spirit may sufficiently vnderstand them to his saluation which is enough to make it a rule perfect entire and as easie as is possible for a rule to be for the finding out and deciding whatsoeuer matter belongs to faith For howsoeuer some things in the Scripture the knowledge whereof is not simply necessary to saluation be very obscure and doubtfull yet the whole rule of our faith needfull to all men is set downe so plainly that it may be vnderstood of all men allowing them some eleuation and onely supposing them to haue the light of grace and to take that paines in searching that is ordinarily required in the vse of any rule and in the execution of any meanes whatsoeuer It seemes my aduersarie would conclude from hence that therefore I grant Scripture alone not to be so easie as the rule of faith ought to be because I require so many euen outward meanes and helpes for the vnderstanding thereof beside the helpe of Gods Spirit within vs. But he is deceiued and deceiues his Reader for I expounded my selfe that it is not necessarie the rule be so easie and effectuall that no helpe shall be needfull for the applying it to our conscience but the perfection and easinesse of it stands in this that a man vsing diligence and eleuated by grace from his naturall ignorance shall finde therein absolutely and plainly all things whatsoeuer he is bound to know and beleeue and needs not that the Church by her authoritie and traditions should adde any thing to it that is not contained in it And that this condition of vsing meanes and outward helpes takes not away the reason of a rule he must confesse by his owne principles for let his Church-teaching and authoritie his owne Helena be the rule yet afore any man can determinately know it or vnderstand and yeeld to it he must I hope haue the grace of the Spirit and seeke it out and diligently attend what it teaches him which is as much as we require for the vnderstanding of the Scriptures This therefore is a vaste partialitie in my Iesuite that he will conclude a thing cannot be a sufficient rule or meanes that requires the helpe of grace and a mans owne industrie in the applying it when themselues holding their Church to be the rule yet confesse that no man can heare the voice thereof not vnderstand nor yeeld assent to it without the very same meanes that we require for the vnderstanding of the Scriptures What voice what complaint what querimonie shall we vtter against this peruersnesse against this spirit of contradiction But my aduersarie sayes that among these outward meanes and helpes which M. White requires to the vnderstanding of the Scripture besides the Spirit of God there must be one an outward meanes which is * There is no such outward infalible means in this life
Scriptures make the Church perfect by cōmending it to it self for thē the Apostles should speak thus by my aduersaries exposition the Scriptures are profitable to make the Church perfect by commending to it the authority of the Church and yet he defendes it First because it sendes them Pastors Pope Councell and all to the interpretations of Councels and Fathers of the ancient Church But then I demand how did they make perfect the ancient Church it selfe the first Councels and Fathers of whom the Apostle speakes as well as of the latter for they had none to retire to but the Scripture onely Secondly because the Pastors of the Church sustaine two persons one as publike Pastors authorized to teach another as priuate men needing instruction themselues and so the Apostle saies the Scripture sends them as priuate men to themselues considered as publike men inabled as need shall require to define the truth in any point the which is an irkesome answer to any that shall consider it for although a Pastor be considered these 2. waies yet it is false that is assumed that he which as a priuate man erres and is ignorant yet as a publike person is able to direct himselfe and others and define the truth this I say is a trick to mocke an ape with though it be all the shift they haue to defend the Pope from being a formall hereticke and yet admitting it to be true that the Pastors of the Church considered as priuate men are sent to themselues considered as publike men yet it cannot be true that the Scripture makes thē perfect this way by sending and commending them to themselues because the perfection auouched is the effect of that teaching that reprouing that correcting that instructing which is contained in the Scripture it selfe and not in the authoritie of man whither the Scripture is imagined to send vs. For all that the Apostle in this text affirmes is of the Scripture alone as appeares 7 Besides my argument I alleadged some testimonies of Chrysostome and certaine Papists to iustifie my exposition wherein they affirme as much out of the text as I doe whereto he replies that the said testimonies must either be explicated to mean that the Scriptures are able to instruct vs with the meanes of Church authority or else be taken without limitation if they be thus explicated they proue nothing against him if they be taken without limitation they proue as much against vs as against him I answer to the first the testimonies are to be seene and the words thereof are so full that they cannot be thus explicated as for example Chrysostome in his words expounds S. Paul to distinguish the Scripture against his owne ministry Thou hast the Scripture to teach thee in steed of me if thou desire to know anything there thou maiest learne it that which can teach vs in steed of the Church Pastours can teach vs without their authority if God as Antonin says hath spokē but once that in the Scriptures that so fully that he speakes no more how can the meaning be that other authority should be ioyned with them for so God should speake twice once in the Scriptures another time in the Church and in the Scripture so far from fully that he needs speake againe in the Church The like may be said to the other testimonies but I refer the iudgement to the conscience of the Reader To the second if these words be taken without limitation that alone without any means ioyned to thē they are able to instruct vs they proue as much against me as against him that its maruell I should haue so little iudgement I demand and why so I pray because then they will make as much against our Church ministery as against his Church authority which had bene spoken to the point if we by Church ministry had meant either the same or as much as he doth by Church authority but when his Church authority intends a supply of that which is wanting in the Scripture by traditions our Church ministry no more but a simple cōdition of vsing the meanes to make vs see that which is contained in thē which ministry also we do not hold to be alway vnto all persons necessary he may let our iudgements alone and take a new reckoning of his owne that is so simple as to make alike things that are so far vnlike his Church authority and our Church ministry CHAP. XXXII Touching priuate spirits that expound against the Church 1. Such priuate expositions refused by the Protestants 2. And yet the Papists haue no other All teaching is to be examined euen by priuate men 5. Certaine propositions shewing how the Church teaching may be or may not be examined and refused Pag. 196. Wootton p. 110 White pag. 62. A.D. Concerning the ninth Chapter M. Wootton and M. White both seeme to disclaime from immediate teaching of priuate spirits and consequently seeme to grant the substance of the conclusion of this Chapter in such sense as it was principally intended by me yet wheresoeuer they be vrged to tell how they infallibly know that there is any Scripture at all and that these and no other bookes be Canonicall Scripture and that this or that is the true interpretation and sense of this or that text of holy Scripture vpon which questions well resolued the whole frame of their faith doth depend after alledging other reasons drawne from rules of art and knowledge of tongues c. which they know to be infallible they must be forced finally to flie for infallible assurance either to the immediate teaching of their priuate spirit or else to run the round betwixt Scripture and priuate spirit in such sort as I haue shewed in the Introduction Introd q. 6. and hence it seemeth to proceed that they both thought fit to make answer to my reasons which they needed not to haue done if the conclusion of this Chapter had no waies bene contrary to their doctrine White pag. 59. 60. M. White before he begin to answer my reasons distinguisheth a double meaning of the word priuate which I put in my conclusion and saith that if I meant it as it is opposed ô strange opposition to diuine and spirituall I said well but vsing it as we Catholickes do as it is opposed to common he saith that a priuate man may so be assisted with the Holy Ghost that he may interprete Scripture truely and infallibly against a company as big as the Roman Church 1 HIs third conclusion touching the rule of faith was that no priuate man who perswadeth himselfe to be specially instructed by the spirit can be this rule of faith specially so far foorth as he teaches or beleeues contrary to the receiued doctrine of the Catholicke Church the which I granted to be true but admonished the Reader withall that he had a further reach therein then yet he made shew of For his intent was to condemne all particular men and
of such a man is to be followed in interpretatiō of Scripture or otherwise as the rule of faith or as a sufficient infallible means to leade men and to direct them in the knowledge of matters which are to be beleeued by faith Now this being the sense of my conclusion let vs heare how my aduersaries will answer my proofes 5 First he grants that a priuate man assisted by the holy Ghost may interpret Scripture truly and infallibly against a company as big as the Romane Church supposing the said company were not so assisted but it is not to be thought that the holy Ghost forsakes the Catholick Church to assist any who interpret contrary to it Which I thinke too and therfore neuer denied his cōclusion nor gaine-said the arguments whereby he confirmed it in this generall sense But when these priuate men were expounded to be the reformed Churches and their Pastors and this holy Catholicke vniuersall Christian Church vnderstood to be the Papacy and the Romish faction then I affirmed that priuate men might haue the Spirit of God and his truth and the Church want it But that I be not mistaken and that the Reader may vnderstand wherein I and my aduersaries differ Note that the name of the Church may be taken 3. waies First for the whole company of such as professe Christ and his Gospell collectiuely in all ages and places which is most properly and really the Catholicke vniuersall Church So expressely o Princip doctr pag. 99. 101. edit Ascens an 1532. Waldensis This is the Catholicke Apostolicke Church of Christ meant in the Creed the mother of beleeuers whose faith cannot faile not any speciall Church Not the African as Donatus said not the particular Romane Church but the vniuersall Church not assembled in a generall Councell which we know hath sometime erred but the Catholicke Church of Christ dispersed through the whole world since the Baptisme of Christ by the Apostles and their successors to these times is it which containes the true faith and holds the certain truth in the midst of all errors Secondly for any part of this Catholicke Church in this or that time or contrey as the particular Churches of Greece Rome Corinth or any assembly of Bishops congregated in a Councell either generall or particular Thirdly for the Papacy or Romish Church peculiarly containing that faction which imbraces the Romish religion and liues vnder the Popes subiection In which sense my aduersary and all Papists alway vse the name of the Church p Est coetus hominum eiusdem Christianae fidei professione corundem Sacramentorum communione colligatus sub reginunt legitimorum Pastorum ac precipuè vnius Christi in terris Vicarij Romani Pontificis excluduntur schismatici qui habent fidem in sacramenta sed non subsunt legitimo Pastori Bell. de eccl milit c. 2. Est visibilis hominum c●etus sub Christo apite ●●us in terris Vicario ●astore ac summo Pontifice agens Simanch Cath. instit t●t 24. n. 1. defining it by this Romish faith with subiection to the Pope and excluding from it all that refuse the Papacy The which distinction being thus laied I propound my answer and that we say touching the point in the fourth proposition First No man or company of men beleeuing and expounding the Scripture contrary to that which the vniuersall Church in the first sence hath alway beleeued and expounded can be assured they haue the assistance of Gods Spirit but the contrary they may assure themselues they are led by the spirit of error The reason is for no truth can be reuealed to any but that which is in this Church for if it be not in it so that the Church neuer knew or beleeued it then it cannot be the truth For q 1. Tim. 3.15 the Church is the pillar and ground of truth and so a priuate man holding it must needs hold an error Secondly A priuate man and priuate companies of men may be and many times are so assisted by the holy Ghost that they may beleeue and expound the Scripture truly against a particular Church or Councell of Bishops either generall or particular The reason is for God hath left his truth with his Church therein to remaine for euer but not infallibly euery parcell of his truth with euery part or assembly of the Church But his prouidence and promises to his Church are sufficiently vpholden if he so support the true faith that it alway remaine in some of the Church Therefore a particular Church or councell of Bishops may at some time and in some points erre and then it cannot be denied but others may see the truth against them this proposition our aduersaries dare not denie nor do not Thirdly a priuate man and priuate companies of men beleeuing and expounding the Scripture onely against the Papacie may be infallibly assured they are assisted by the holy Ghost The reason is because this Papacie is no part of Gods truth but the late inuentions of men added vnto it Fourthly Priuate men and priuate companies of men beleeuing and expounding contrarie to the Papacie resist not the true Church of Christ nor any part of it The reason is for the Papacie being nothing else but a disease or excrement breeding in the Church must not be expounded to be the Church it selfe as a wenne or leprosie growing on the bodie is not the bodie it selfe and he that cuts off the wen or purges away the leprosie cannot be said to resist or wrong the bodie 6 These foure propositions thus laid downe it is manifest my aduersarie doth but cauill in this place For if his conclusion intended no more but that priuate men must not be thought to know the truth and the true Catholick Church to be in error no man would speake against him But the sence of his conclusion is against the three last of my propositions That no man can be thought inspired of God or to haue the truth when he expounds Scripture as Luther and his did contrary to the church of Rome in which sence onely I dispute against him and in no other Not affirming that priuate men may see the truth and the Catholicke vniuersall Church not see it but onely that priuate men beleeuing contrary to that which my aduersarie meanes by the Catholicke vniuersall Church may haue the truth on their side and be infallibly sure therof without holding any thing contrary to the vnamine interpretation of the precedent or liuing Pastors of the sound part of the Catholicke Church CHAP. XXXIII 1. How a priuate man is assured he vnderstands and beleeues aright touching the last and highest resolution of faith 2. Luthers reiecting the Fathers 3. Occhams opinion that no man is tied to the Pope or his Councels 4. The Beraeans examined the doctrine that they were taught 5. The faith of the beleeuer rests vpon diuine infused light 6. M. Luther sought reformation with all humilitie 7. Scripture is the
of faith contained and reuealed in Scripture it selfe 5 The difficultie is when I vpon the authoritie of the Scripture as I verily perswade my selfe beleeue contrary to the Church of Rome or any other presumed to be the true Church how it shall appeare to my selfe and others that I expound and vnderstand the Scriptures aright and not according to my own priuate spirit For answer whereto note first that this demand lies as well against the Beraeans and the rest of Gods people mentioned by Luke and Paul in the texts alledged as against the Protestants For they reiecting something that they were perswaded was not in the Scripture or receiuing that which they saw agreeable to the Scripture might be demanded how they were infallibly assured they had the true sence of the Scripture And a false Apostle when they should by the Scripture examine and reiect his doctrine might cauill as A.D. here doth and say they expounded it after their owne priuate spirit In which case the godly beleeuers could refer themselues to no other rule but onely leaue the truth still to be iudged by the Scripture by all such as would examine it Note secondly that the same difficultie presses our aduersaries For when they haue shewed and vrged the authoritie of the Church and their chiefe Pastor therin what they can yet this authoritie they cannot maintaine to be such as they hold but by the Scripture k Vbi sup li● b. Pezantius and k Vbi sup li● b. Greg. of Valence You wil ask how the proposition of the Church is known to be infallible Let him that is thus demanded answer He beleeues it by an infallible faith for the authoritie of the Scripture giuing witnesse to the Church which authoritie and reuelation he beleeues for it selfe albeit the proposition of the Church as a requisite condition be needfull thereunto I know not many of our aduersaries some l Durand 3 d 24. qu. 1. d. 25 q. 3. ibi Scot. Alm. Gabr. few Schoolmen excepted that hold the authoritie of the Church to be the formall reason of faith or the first and last cause of beleeuing but the authoritie of God himselfe reuealing these things which authoritie being something distinguished from the Church and aboue it can be no where manifested but in the Scripture Now when they alledge Scripture we may tell them againe they alledge it after their owne spirit which obiection may be multiplied as often as they multiply their discourses out of Scripture Thirdly therefore for satisfaction of the difficultie I beleeue and am assured of that I hold by infused faith God by a supernatural light reuealing and infusing the certaintie of that I beleeue partly by shewing to my vnderstanding out of the Scripture partly by stirring vp and inclining my will to assent vnto it and en brace it The which knowledge and assurance of mind when any man challenges as if it were but a priuate conceit subiect to error I can say no more but that which euery man sayes for his faith that so all true faith may be destroyed in that m For the beleeuer assents not by discourse to the matters of faith reuealed as by the formall reason of beleeuing but by simple cleaning adhering to thē faith neuer drawing forth her act by meanes of discourse but if discourse be vsed it is rather a conditiō helping to apply faith to it obiect Mat. 16.17 2. Cor. 10.5 Heb. 11.1 Fides secundùm se cōsiderata quod attinet ad causā efficientem reuocanda est in motionē diuinaē lumenque diuinū siue in habitum fidei Christiana fides etiam vt est in nobis reuocatur in Deū mouentem diuinūque lumen Lud. Carb sum tom 3. c. 3. l. 1. pag. 6. no mans faith ascends aboue this infused illumination or can be demonstrated to be certaine by euident reasons n Tho. 1. part q 1. art 8 Durā prolog sent qu. 1. pag 4. h. that shall conuince all gainsayers but onely there be forcible motiues to induce vnto it though when his reasons that thus beleeues shall be examined and his grounds of Scripture duly weyed by true Christians in a Councell or otherwise all that gainsay him may easily be confuted And this is the thing that we say for Luther and Scripture against the Papacie A. D. Yet saith M. White the Papists cannot denie but there is a heauenly light c. It is true Pag. 201. that Catholicks grant inward testimony of the Spirit to giue infallible assurance But what spirit is that which they thinke giueth this infallible assurance Not priuate spirit but the Spirit which is common to the Church the Spirit which inclineth men to humil●tie order and vnitie as in * Qu 6. the Introduction I haue shewed To whom also do they think infallible assurance to be giuen by the Spirit Not to euery one that presuming himselfe to be elect and to haue the Spirit shall rush without reuerence into the sacred text expounding it as he listeth or as it shall be suggested by priuate spirit but to such as with order humilitie and respect of vnitie reade and interprete Scripture as they learne it to be interpreted by the infallible authoritie of the Pastors of Gods Church Those that do otherwise though they may seeme to themselues to be infallibly sure yet indeed they are not as not hauing any substantiall ground to assure them which may not in like maner and with as probable colour be alledged by others whom although perswading themselues to be infallibly sure M. White himselfe wil grant to be deceiued in this their perswasion M. White * White pag. 62. 63. saith that his priuate men be assured by Scripture So say they M. White saith his men haue the witnesse of the holy Ghost So say they M. White saith his men were taught by the Pastors of the true Church This he saith indeed and so if they would be impudent they might say But whereas M White saith that his priuate men let Luther and Caluin be examples were taught by the Pastors if he meane they were taught by the Pastors those speciall points wherein they dissent from vs it is maruell that euen his owne blacke face blusheth not to vtter such a shamelesse vntruth Let M. White name if he can what Pastors those were that taught Luther and Caluin these new doctrines vnlesse he will allow the Diuell to be a Pastor whom Luther * Luth. de miss angul confesseth to haue taught him his doctrine against the Masse 6 If there be as the Replier grants a heauenly light in the things themselues that are beleeued and an inward testimonie of the Spirit that can giue infallible assurance to the beleeuer this is as much as we require for then this light and testimonie wheresoeuer and in whomsoeuer it be is sufficient as I said to assure the conscience of the truth of the things beleeued whosoeuer gainsay them and
that obscured the Euangelicall light yea by this practise of mingling Aristotle with their treatises of Diuinity they had corrupted and reiected all the articles of faith beside the vnity of the Deity And touching their vehemency and industry in following their opinions he sayes that which is worth the noting The voice of their wings that is to say of their opinions which they presume to be high and lofty in wonderfull contentions outcries and raging is like the voice of wheeles or a tumultuous army running in war this was a Friars report long agoe and my owne knowledge of these things giues me assurance and resolution whatsoeuer any man sayes to the contrary whose ignorance and peruersenesse I will neuer suffer to preiudice my certaine and familiar knowledge Pag. 247. A. D. By this which now I haue noted appeareth that the true militant Church or company of the true professors of the Gospell which as M. White White p. 87. 337. 338. Wootton pag. 164. and M Wootton grant must continue alwaies cannot at any time be altogether inuisible especially in such sort and for so long a time as they would haue the Protestant professors which were onely two called Nullus and Nemo that is to say in truth not one at all before Martin Luther to haue inuisibly continued professing the whole faith without change in all Countries or at least in one or other corner they cannot for want of Histories forsooth tell where the truth is no where in the world And consequently by this appeareth that this idle conceite of an inuisible company of professing Protestants continuing in all ages is a plaine Platonicall Idaea or poeticall Chymaera in plaine English a meere imaginary fiction inuented by Protestants to serue as a shift to bleare the eye of the simple and to make a shew of saying something to the argument grounded vpon the authority of a continuall visible Church which presseth them so much when indeed they can say nothing to it Durum telum necessitas ignoscite Need hath no law you must pardon them 2 By that which he hath noted he sayes it appeares that the Militant Church or company of true Professors cannot at any time be altogether inuisible specially in such sort or so long a time as they say the Protestant Professors were The things he noted may be reduced to eight propositions in all First that the Church in the infancy or beginning thereof was very small like a graine of Mustardseed and toward the end also in Antichrists time shall be much decaied both in the number of professors and in the visiblenesse of the outward state Secondly that this notwithstanding yet in all ages betwixt the beginning and the end it is a great multitude spread ouer the world Thirdly that the Church is not actually seene at all times by all men Fourthly that yet it is visible that is such as may be seene and knowne by all if the impediments be not on their part that should see it and by prudent and diligent inquirie may be discerned at all times And in the greatest obscurity the world may see and distinguish some eminent members therein Fifthly that it cannot alwaie practise the rites of diuine worship publikely but is forced sometime to doe it in priuate Sixthly that yet it neuer wants ordinary Pastours nor the practise of rites appertaining to the Sacraments and diuine worshippe Seuenthly which practise and inward state of the Church shall neuer be so secret but notice shall be had of it euen by Infidels and enemies and the records thereof shall remaine in Histories Eightly that it is the nature of the Church to be in this manner visible for diuers considerations These propositions containe the substance of that he noted whereupon he inferres 2. things First that the militant Church cannot at any time be altogether inuisible Next that it cannot be inuisible in such sort or so long a time as M. White saies the professors of the Protestant religion were The first I graunt him to be true and he neede not so often haue inferred it when it is not our assertion that the Church at any time is simply absolutely or altogether inuisible but onely secundum quid and respectiuely in comparison of the reformed state thereof The second is false that it cannot be inuisible in such sort or so long as we say for we say it was inuisible in this sort that at some times there was no congregation of people in the world visibly professing the faith and visibly administring the Sacraments and Church discipline without much superstition and corruption or heresie practised therewith I say visibly in my aduersaries sense that is so as this congregation was a great multitude spread ouer the world whose faith and administration thus incorrupted infidels and enemies had knowledge of and Histories recorded and wherein some eminent men might be discerned euen by the world for the contrary is true that all publike assemblies thus entirely without superstition professing or holding the faith and Ecclesiasticall gouernement may be oppressed and extinguished And thus I graunt the true Churches whose sound and necessary faith we hold failed throughout the world nor do I here intend or affirme that there were no particular eminent persons that held or professed the faith entirely for substance all errors not being mortall or no singular professions of men that were of our religion and refused the Papacy for there were many such in all ages though Nullus and Nemo be left out but our assertion proceedes of such congregations as we call particular Churches and this is enough to excuse the qualitie and condition of our Church in former times and to refell the vaine bragges of our aduersaries touching the externall succession of the Church of Rome For if this proposition be true which it must be vntill the Repliar can refell it The Church militant here on earth may be so oppressed with persecution and infected with heresie that at sometimes there can no particular congregation thereof be seene in all the world either publikely or priuately professing the true faith entirely without heresie and exercizing the preaching of the Gospell and administration of the Sacraments and discipline without corruption hence it will follow that the Protestants graunting this of their Churches disaduantage not their religion and our aduersaries boasting of their multitude and glorious succession may be the Ministers of Antichrist 3 But the Iesuite saying that we conceit an inuisible company of professing Protestants is mistaken For I noted to him that we do not hold a definite number of persons distinct from the members of the Church of Rome and liuing apart in another society by themselues in secret as it were * Of whom Ioh. Paris tract de Antich p. 46. the 7. sleepers lying hid in a mountaine but we affirme this company liued in the middest of the Church of Rome it selfe and were the visible professours thereof First some that kept themselues
implicitè all points of faith that we hold This will appeare by these ensuing considerations First it is certaine that the Apostles taught the whole corpse of Christian doctrine partly by word partly by writing which as a sacred depositum was commended by S. Paul to S. Timothy and other succeeding Bishops and Pastors of the Church to be maintained alwaies in the Church against all profane innouation of heresies in these words O Timothy keepe the depositum auoiding the profane nouelties of voices oppositions of falsly called knowledge which diuers promising haue erred about the faith The which words * Aduers haer c. 17. Vincentius Lyrinensis expoundeth thus Who saith he at this day hath the place of Timothy but either the whole Church or especially the whole bodie of Prelats who ought themselues to haue the whole knowledge of diuine religion and also to instruct others And a litle after What is meant by this Depositum it is saith he that which is committed to thee not that which is inuented by thee that which thou hast receiued not that which thou hast deuised a thing not of wit but of learning not of priuate vsurpation but of publicke tradition a thing brought to thee not a thing brought forth of thee wherein thou must not be an author but a keeper not an institutor but a secretor not a leader but a follower Keepe the Depositum preserue the talent of the Catholicke faith pure and sincere that which is committed to thee let that remain with thee and that deliuer vnto the people To the same purpose S. Irenaeus saith * l. 3. c. 14. We must not seeke the truth among others which is easie to receiue from the Church when the Apostles haue most fully laid vp all the truth in it as in a rich treasure house Also the same Irenaeus saith * l. 4. c. 43. We must heare and obey those Priests who haue succession from the Apostles who with succession of their Episcopall function haue receiued the Charisma of truth Now supposing that this sacred depositum of the whole corpse of the reuealed truth is preserued in one or other succession of Pastors of one or other companie of Christians called the Church either it must be granted that it was preserued in that succession of Pastors which my catalogue sheweth or else I must require my aduersaries to set forth another catalogue of Pastors vnto whom this sacred depositum was committed and from whom we may receiue it as need shall require For to say that the diuine truth committed to the custody of the Pastors whom God hath appointed to be alwaies in the Church of purpose to preserue men from wauering in faith Eph. 4 v. 13.14 and from being caried about with euery wind of false doctrine did at any time wholy or in part by contrary error faile in them vniuersally in such sort that there should not in all ages be sound one or other company of Pastors and Priests whom we could know still to keep the Depositum inuiolate and entire and whom consequently according to Irenaeus his saying we ought to obey as being men l. 4. ● 4. who with succession of their Episcopall function receiued also the Charisma of truth if I say this were so that Gods truth all or in part had explicitè and implicitè perished from the mouth of all knowne Priests and Pastors Gods ordinance it selfe who for the generall good of the Church appointed these Pastors had bin deficient or had failed of the intended effect Eph. 4. v. 13.14 For how should men be preserued from wauering in faith or from being caried about with euery wind of false doctrine by Pastors appointed to be for that purpose vnto the worlds end if in some ages no such Pastors were or were not to be knowne or being knowne to be the Pastors yet did vniuersally faile to preserue the entire formerly receiued truth by beleeuing and teaching and so making the people beleeue contrary errors If this were so the holy Ghost had failed to teach the Church all truth and consequently Christs promise had not bin performed which said that the Spirit of truth shall teach all truth Ioh. 16. v. 13. Some Pastors therefore alwaies are in the Church who without spot or wrinkle of any error in faith shall preserue the entire truth and by the assistance of Christ and his holy Spirit shall be able as need shall require to vnfold and deliuer to the people the same truth thereby to preserue them from falling into error and from wauering in faith 1 THat the Apostles taught the whole bodie of Christian doctrine and commended the same to the succeeding Pastors of the Church to be alway maintained without innouation and that as Vincentius and Irenaeus speake the faithfull people of the Church were to be taught the truth by these Pastors shall be granted for what the Apostles reuealed and deliuered from Iesus Christ the same they intended should be continued for euer in the Church But this proues not that the ancient Fathers of the Primitiue Church held all things that the Church of Rome now holds vnlesse my aduersarie can shew that euery thing holden in the Church of Rome is part of the Bodie of that Christian doctrine which the Apostles commended to their successors For ouer besides the truth reuealed by the Apostles the church of Rome successiuely by degrees in these last 800 years especially hath brought in diuers pernicious and damnable errors and corruptions touching Traditions Transubstantiation Images Iustification the Masse the Popes primacie the worship of Saints innumerable other points wherin we haue forsaken it the which corruptions not belonging to the bodie of Christian doctrine which the Apostles taught but being a disease that bred in the body of the Church must not be said to haue bin the faith of the Fathers who receiued nothing from the Apostles but that doctrine which is contained in the canon of the Bible besides which doctrine if either the Fathers or Pastors of the Church succeeding taught any thing it must be reiected as no part of the Depositū mentioned Thus my answer is plain that the Apostles deliuered to their successors to be preserued against all innouation the whole Christian doctrine but the seuerall articles of the now Romish faith which we haue cast off are no part of that Christiā doctrine Secondly my aduersarie replies that it was the mind of the Apostles and the ordinance of God not onely that the whole bodie of the truth should be preserued in some successiō or other but also that it should be preserued so inuiolate and entire that no contrary error should be taught with it which being supposed he sayes it must be granted that it hath bin so preserued in that succession of Pastors which his Catalogue sheweth because the Protestāts are able to shew no other Pastors His whole discourse affirmes two things the first that the bodie of Christian
into France whereupon in the time of the Emperour Charles the great and by the appointment of the Apostolicke sea a generall Councell called by the Emperour was celebrated at Francford in France which ACCORDING TO THE TRACT OF THE SCRIPTVRE AND TRADITION OF OVR ELDERS DESTROYED AND VTTERLY ABDICATED THAT FALSE SYNOD OF THE GREEKES whereof a large booke which in my youth I read in the pallace by the said Emperour was sent to Rome by certaine Bishops Nothing can be plainer then this testimonie against all the Replier hath said The like is written in p Ado chron an 792. Rog. Houed contin Bed an 792. Auent aun Boio p g 253. Ai●noin pa 450. Visperg pa. 187 Rhegin pag 30 many histories besides And after the death of Charles his sonne Lodowicke held a Councell at Paris which is extant about the same matter of Images wherein the decrees of Nice and the booke written by Adrian in defence thereof against the Councell of Frankford are againe condemned which shewes that the Councell of Frankford had done the same before Hincmarus q Vbi sup sayes By the authoritie of this Councell of Frankford the worship of Images was not a little suppressed but yet Adrian and other Bishops perseuering in their opinion and r Suarum pupparum cultum vehementius promouerunt promoting more vehemently the worship of their puppets after the death of Charles his sonne Lewis in a certaine booke inueyed farre more sharply against the worship of Images then Charles had done The Councell of Paris it selfe ſ Concil Paris pag. 19. Francfurt an 1596. in 8. sayes The Epistle of our Lord Adrian the Pope which he directed to Constantine and Irene for the setting vp of Images we made to be read before vs and as farre as we could perceiue as he iustly reprehends those which haue presumed to breake and abolish the images of Saints so himselfe is knowne to haue done indiscreetly in commanding them superstitiously to be worshipped For which cause also he assembled a Councell and by his authoritie decreed and that vnder an oath that they should be set vp and worshipped when it is lawfull indeed to erect them but vtterly vnlawfull to worship them The same Councell of Paris t Pag. 130. affirmes that it would haue hurt neither faith hope nor charitie if no image at all had bene painted or made throughout the world It is certaine therefore that the Councell of Nice was condemned by the Councels of Frankford and Paris both 5 But the Replier sayes All that is found touching this condemnation is but in a forged booke ascribed falsely to Charles This is vntrue twise ouer First because as I haue now shewed many others say it as well as the Booke of Charles Next I proued directly against Cope and the Iesuites that the booke is not forged and Bellarmine and Baronius confessing it to containe the Acts of Frankeford and the Councell condemned therein to be the second Nicene without all doubt testifieth so much It seemes that the pen-man was Albinus our countriman u Trithem de script in Alb. Sixt. Senen l. 4. Hittorp praef ad Lect. de diuin offic Rom. who was very great with Charles and his instructer in all kinde of learning and one of the famousest men in those times For thus writ w Annal. par 1. pag. 405. Roger Houeden and x Flor. hist pag. 215. Matthew Westminster Charles the king of Fraunce sent into England a booke of the Councell which was directed to him from Constantinople In which booke alas for griefe many things are found inconuenient and contrarie to the faith But especially that it was decreed by the consent of almost all the Easterne Doctors no lesse then three hundred or aboue this was the second Nicene Councell that images should be adored which the Church of God altogether abhorreth against which thing Albinus wrote an Epistle maruellously confirmed with the authoritie of the Scripture and in the name of the Bishops and Nobles brought the same with the booke to the King of France Albinus therefore it seemes penned it the Bishops and State approoued it and the Emperour ratified and published it This makes it of more authoritie then if the Emperour alone had done it But who penned it it is impertinent when Bellarmine and Baronius graunt it containes the acts of the Councell of Francford and no man may doubt but the Councell therein condemned is the second Nicene For this is enough to prooue the Nicene Councell to be condemned by the Councell of Frankford whosoeuer were the author of Charles his booke That which the Replier obiects touching the Constantinopolitane Councell named in stead of the Nicene helpes him not Bellarmine y De imag l. 21 c. 14. §. Neque obstat answers Constantinople is set downe in stead of Nice through vnskilfulnesse or want of memorie And z An. 794. n. 33. Baronius though he hold the councell of Constantinople that decreed images should be broken is meant there yet he grants the councell of Nice is meant and condemned also And it must needs be as Bellarmine sayes for though Constantinople be named yet it is added that there it was decreed that images should be worshipped which was not done in the Constantinopolitane but in the Nicene councell All which being put together the testimonies I meane whereby the booke is proued to be Charles his and the Councell meant to be the second Nicene it appeares plainly that the booke is authenticall and the author thereof both knew well enough what the Constantinopolitane and Frankford decreed and set downe the Canon neither by heare-say nor at aduenture nor yet by the imagination of his owne head but with good aduice and vpon certaine knowledge It being the vainest point of a thousand to imagine that Albine and the whole Cleargie of England France Germanie and Italie with the Nobilitie and States should condemne a thing which they vnderstood not and now after eight hundred yeares the true knowledge of all things should come by some reuelation belike to a few arrogant Iesuites who yet can agree in nothing about the same I admonish the Repliar by this example wherein he hath sped so vnluckily not to thinke to deface the truth with boldnesse and bragging but to giue way to the truth and in seeking it to tie himselfe to no mans deuice till he haue better assurance of it For there is scarce one example of antiquitie that we produce against them but his Iesuites are deuided in their answers and speake so contrary one to another that it is easie to see they intend nothing but to be obstinate and resolute And so the example of the second Nicene councell shewes that the Popes councels how generall or approoued soeuer haue erred in defining by the iudgement of the whole Christian world and their errors had beene controlled in former ages as well as the Protestants now controll them so that the things wherein
vpon their authorities of Scripture prouing it no otherwise then thus 2 The same is to be said of his Fathers who will proue as little vnlesse as the Scripture is allowed the Church declaration so they also be allowed their c Ind. Exp. Belg c. vt liber Bertrami pious and commodious and deuised expositions so that for all the Replies confidence the ground that Transubstantiation hath either in the Scripture or antiquitie shall be this in the end There is for it sound authoritie both of Scripture and Fathers if you will allow the church of Rome who is a partie to declare the sence of the Scripture and her Diuines the Iesuites a facultie to giue the Fathers a sence if not true yet fit and pious and to deuise tricks which they neuer meant thus it may be proued soundly though when all is done it may still be doubted whether it be so or no as the learnedst and acutest in the Church it selfe still do doubt it Which being the case then the coniectures will no longer be M. Whites but his aduersaries and the best ground he can yeeld for his doctrine And whereas he addes in his margent that Briarly hath shewed in his Prot. Apolog. that euen Protestants far better learned then M. White will be in hast grant Transubstantiation was beleeued long before the Lateran Councel M. White answers that the parenthesis touching his learning is true neither can he refuse the comparison but he renders to God his most humble thankes that he so farre inferiour to so many yet hath done that which is sufficient for the maintenance of the truth against Romish heresies and the Replier finds himself so galled with it that it may be he will say to his fellowes as b Iud. 9.54 Abimelec wounded by a woman did to his page Draw thy sword and slay me that it be not said a woman slue Abimelec But yet the rest is false as c Prot. ap p. 94. n. 3. inde ad 22. the Deane of Winchester hath fully shewed in his answer and the vttermost that either the Centuries or the other Protestants alledged say is not that Transubstantiation was beleeued long before the Lateran Councell but that before that time in the writings of some particular Doctors there are some formes of speech which possible they like not so well as seeming to giue courage a●●● boldnesse to them who afterward abusing euery thing to their owne errors would vse them to confirme their Transubstantiation but that they grant the doctrine now taught in the Church of Rome touching Transubstantiation was beleeued is a base vntruth no way to be gathered from their words For Transubstantiation had his growth by degrees First the Fathers without so much as dreaming of it onely to increase the reuerence and to suppresse the prophanation thereof vsed vehement and hyperbolicall speeches of the Sacrament Secondly in time a kinde of reall presence began to be conceited Thirdly then what these men could finde in antiquity that sounded that way they wrested to their opinion Fourthly till at the last in the Councell of Lateran it was confirmed as an article that must be receiued and had a name giuen it in token it was new borne 3 The reason assigned in the Replie for that which Lateran did containes matter worth the marking First before contrary heresies rose the Church had no occasion to make expresse determination This fully ouerthrowes himselfe For if no determination were made then was it no article necessary to be beleeued if no article nor necessary how could there be any heresie against it when a Dico hactenus nihil esse in hac controuersia ab Ecclesia definitum ideoque sententiam non esse de fide Suar. 2. to p. 30 e. nothing is an article that is not defined nor b Postquam autem propositio aliqua patefacta est per determinationem Ecclesiae esse contratia fidei secundum se quoad nos haeretica denominatur Caict. 22. q. 11. art 1. See Silu. v. haec 1. n. 4 can loc l. 12. c. 12. nothing heresie but what is against a definition Secondly men were not bound to know it so expresly as they were after the determination Therefore it was not determined till the Lateran Councell therefore it was no article of the ancient Church faith therefore it is not expresly or manifestly conceiued in the Scripture or Fathers Therefore they do but trifle that alledge them for it These consequences proceed in the thing as well as the name cannot be auoided But all did and all were bound euen from the beginning to beleeue it at least implicite But this is a beggarly shift for if it was beleeued but in the vertue of that article I beleeue the Catholicke Church then the Church was but with child of it for 1200 yeares till the Pope her midwife brought her abed of it and so the Fathers had neither faith nor knowledge of it then but beleeued whatsoeuer the Church should hereafter define this they neuer beleeued but held constantly the Church of Rome and a generall Councell might define an error and if they beleeued no more what treachery is it to proue by their writing what they neuer knew and what they could not mention but lay hidden in the bosome of the Church to be reuealed at the Councell of Lateran But what will not this man say that auouches such as held contrary to Transubstantiation as indeed the ancient Church did yet did also beleeue it by implicite faith How doth a man belieue that which he beleeues not he answers by resolution and readinesse to yeeld to the church they might beleeue that which in their ignorance they erred in Let vs make an end then the Reply hath got the victory The Fathers and the Church her selfe might for 1200 yeares be ignorant of Transubstantiation yea hold contrary to it or not expresse it in their writings and yet beleeue it too and their writings be full of testimonies for it in euery age because they were not obstinate but had implicite faith infolded in the generall assent that euery Catholicke giues to that article I beleeue the Catholicke Church By which faith they beleeued contrary to that they writte This Reader is our Aduersaries case and the last end of their antiquity not in this point of Transubstantiation alone but in all the rest they boast of succession and Doctors and Councels and Antiquity and Catalogues and yet these D D. and Councels in the Catalogue held these things but implicite and that must be enough to stop the Protestants mouth Sure this is one of the wittiest and acutest distinctions that euer I read For thereby I can proue all the ancient D D. to haue taught and beleeued flat contrary to all they writ For first I will make the present Church of Rome the Catholicke Church Then I will say they beleeued that article I beleeue the Catholicke Church Now the Church of Rome
calls the vniuersall doctrine of the Church authoritatiuely taught I cannot define nor himselfe determine when all these haue bene and yet are holden in his Church and haue their patrons who will all of them maintaine that his owne opinion is the doctrine of the Church This therefore is it I said that had their doctrine touching originall sin bin the truth anciently taught in the Apostles Church it could not haue bene thus often changed and remoued from opinion to opinion till the opinions be multiplied to as many as there be Doctors 8 And this example shewes how friuolous the common answer is that their differences are not in points of faith but in by-matters not determined wherein it is lawfull to hold any part For this difference is in a point defined though not by any Popish councell yet by the word of God or whether it be defined or no it is in a matter wherein they hold against vs bearing men in hand that they can shew catalogues and whole companies in all ages that held therein with them FOR WE DO NOT SO MVCH CARE TO SHEW THEIR DIVISIONS TO BE IN THE SVBSTANCE OF THEIR FAITH albeit they haue infinite such AS TO MAKE CLEARE DEMONSTRATION THAT THEY AGREE IN NOTHING WHICH THEY HOLD AGAINST THE PROTESTANTS The which kind of disagreement is sufficient to shew the things we haue refused in their Church to be matters broacht and brought in which neuer had the generall approbation of the Church That wherewith he concludes we can shew diuers points of the Protestants faith directly contrary to the ancient Church is a stale vntruth already sufficiently confuted in euery passage He can referre vs to his Coccius and Bellarmine but himselfe I thinke can shew little of his owne knowledge being one of them whom not knowledge but rumour and popularitie haue carried to the Popes side CHAP. LIX Obiections against the outward succession of the Pope 1. Touching Peters being at Rome 2. His pastorall office what it was 3. Whether there be any diuine authoritie for the Popes succession 4. Not certaine what Popes haue succeeded one another 5. Vacancies diuers in the Sea of Rome 6. The storie of the woman Pope of what credit 7. 8. The Pope hath bene an hereticke and erred è Cathedra 10. The Pope succeeds by Simonie and violence Such succession is a nullitie by his owne law 11. The Pharisees in Moses chaire how A. D. defends the succession of an ASSE 12. Many Popes at once 13. Vrbanus his crueltie toward the Cardinals 13. What the Protestants say touching the succession of the Church of Rome A.D. The fifth obiection Lastly Pag. 289. my aduersaries may obiect against the Romane succession which in this Catalogue I mention FIRST that it is not certaine that euer S. Peter was at Rome SECONDLY that we haue no diuine but onely humane proofe that the Bishop of Rome White pag. 416 Pag. 418. pag 419. pag. 421. rather then he of Antioch is S. Peters successor THIRDLY admitting that S. Peter had one to succeed him in Rome it is not certaine who this was which succeeded him and who afterward succeeded one another FOVRTHLY the Sea hath bene voide a good while together FIFTLY a woman was once Pope SIXTLY diuers Popes haue bene hereticks SEVENTHLY some haue entred into the Popedome by simonie and violence c. EIGHTLY there haue bene 30 schismes and therefore it is vncertaine who was the right Pope To the FIRST I answer that so many ancient * See the Fathers cited for this point in the Rhem. Test annot Rom. 16 Fathers do witnes and so many monuments yet remaining do testifie that S. Peter was at Rome and died there that it is great ignorance and impudencie to denie it 1 THe obiections here mentioned the first excepted I proposed Digress 53. and they clearely shew that the outward succession of Bishops in the Romane Church is neither so entire nor perfect as is pretended Our aduersaries neuer haue done with vrging the lineall succession of their Popes frō S. Peter to this day making it a signe of the Church and concluding from it that they alone are the Bishops and Pastors of the world which haue preserued the truth from all corruption and innouation Which outward succession in some degree the Protestants denie not onely they affirme two things against it that the same is to be found in other Churches as well as in the Church of Rome and that it hath bene so tainted and interrupted with defects of all sorts that it can proue nothing against vs but rather shewes manifestly that the ancient faith and gouernment commended by Christ to his Church hath bene changed as will appeare by viewing the seuerall things that are obiected 2 To the first he answers that so many ancient Fathers and monuments yet remaining testifie S. Peter to haue bene at Rome and died there that it is ignorance and impudencie to denie it He affirmes three things First that we denie Peter to haue bene at Rome This is vntrue Let the writings of our a D. Fulk answ to the Rhem. Rom. 16. nu 4. D. Rainol conser c. 6. diuis 3. D. Whitak controu 4. ● 3. c. ● Iun. contr 3. l. 2. c. 5. Diuines be viewed and they denie it not but the vttermost they say is that the reasons and testimonies brought out of antiquity whereupon his being there is grounded are vncertaine and may sensibly be dissolued If b Whose demonstrations that Peter was neuer at Rome are printed by Illyricus with his boke called Refut inuectiu Bruni printed at Basil an 1566. by Oporin Velenus or some speciall men with him haue brought the matter in question it was free for them so to do and almost necessarie for the bolting out of the truth all things in antiquitie touching the same being perplexed with such difficulties that it were able to make any man misdoubt it Yet the Protestants are not curious and the Church of Rome gaines not a straw by it Secondly that the ancient Fathers testifie he was at Rome This I grant but yet all the Papists liuing cannot reconcile their testimonies nor maintaine either that he came thither in such a time or stayed there so long as is reported The which consideration hath mooued as learned Papists themselues as euer were any to doubt of his being there at all if my aduersarie thinke them so impudent that do it Marsilius Patauinus * Marsil defens Pacis part 2. c. 16. printed at Basil in fol. saies that by the Scripture it cannot be conuinced either that he was Bishop of Rome or euer was at Rome at all And then considering the Ecclesiasticall histories that affirme it he so doth it that it plainely appeares he beleeued them not Whence it followes that his being there was a common opinion but not certaine forsomuch as it was grounded on no surer testimonie then these circumstances of Time were The first that saies he sate