miscarriage hath power to represent her selfe in another Bodie or Councell and to take order for what was amisse eyther practised or concluded So here is a meanes without infringing any lawfull Authoritie of the Church to preserue or reduce Vnitie and yet graunt as the B. did and as the Church of England doth That a Generall Councell may erre And this course the Church tooke did call and represent her selfe in a new Councell and define against the Hereticall Conclusions of the former as in the case at Ariminum and the second of Ephesus is euident 4. The next thing I consider is Suppose a Generall Councell infallible in all things which are of Faith If it prooue not so but that an Error in the Faith be concluded the same erring Opinion that makes it thinke it selfe infallible makes the Error of it seeme irreuocable And when Truth which lay hid shall be brought to light the Church who was lulled asleepe by the Opinion of Infallibilitie is left open to all manner of Distractions as it appeares at this day And that a Councell may erre besides all other instances which are not few appeares by that Error of the Councell of Constance And one instance is enough to ouerthrow a Generall be it a Councell Christ instituted the Sacrament of his Bodie and Bloud in both kinds To breake Christs Institution is a damnable Error and so confessed by Stapleton The Councell is bold and defines peremptorily That to communicate in both kinds is not necessarie with a Non obstante to the Institution of Christ. Consider with me Is this an Error or not Bellarmine and Stapleton and you too say it is not because to receiue vnder both kinds is not by Diuine Right No no sure For it was not Christs Precept but his Example Why but I had thought Christs Institution of a Sacrament had beene more than his Example onely and as binding for the Necessaries of a Sacrament the Matter and Forme as a Precept Therefore speake out and denie it to be Christs Institution or else graunt with Stapleton It is a damnable Error to goe against it If you can prooue that Christs Institution is not as binding to vs as a Precept which you shall neuer be able take the Precept with it Drinke yee All of this which though you shift as you can yet you can neuer make it other than it is A Binding Precept But Bellarmine hath yet one better Deuice than this to saue the Councell Hee saith it is a meere Calumnie and that the Councell hath no such thing That the Non obstante hath no reference to Receiuing vnder both kinds but to the time of Receiuing it after Supper in which the Councell saith the Custome of the Church is to be obserued Non obstante notwithstanding Christs Example How foule Bellarmine is in this must appeare by the words of the Councell which are these Though Christ instituted this venerable Sacrament and gaue it his Disciples after Supper vnder both kinds of Bread and Wine yet Non obstante notwithstanding this it ought not to be consecrated after Supper nor receiued but fasting And likewise that though in the Primitiue Church this Sacrament was receiued by the faithfull vnder both kinds yet this Custome that it should be receiued by Lay-men onely vnder the kind of Bread is to be held for a Law which may not be refused And to say this is an vnlawfull Custome of Receiuing vnder one kind is erroneous and they which persist in saying so are to be punished and driuen out as Heretikes Now where is here any slander of the Councell The words are plaine and the Non obstante must necessarily for ought I can yet see be referred to both Clauses in the words following because both Clauses went before it and hath as much force against Receiuing vnder both kinds as against Receiuing after Supper Yea and the after-words of the Councell couple both together in this reference for it followes Et similiter And so likewise that though in the Primitiue Church c. And a man by the Definition of this Councell may be an Heretike for standing to Christs Institution in the very matter of the Sacrament And the Churches Law for One kind may not be refused but Christs Institution vnder Both kinds may And yet this Councell did not erre No take heed of it But your Opinion is yet more vnreasonable than this For consider any Bodie Collectiue be it more or lesse vniuersall whensoeuer it assembles it selfe Did it euer giue more power to the Representing Bodie of it than binding power vpon all particulars and it selfe too And did it euer giue this power any otherwise than with this Reseruation in Nature That it would call againe and reforme yea and if need were abrogate any Law or Ordinance vpon iust cause made euident to it And this Power no Bodie Collectiue Ecclesiasticall or Ciuill can put out of it selfe or giue away to a Parliament or Councell or call it what you will that represents it And in my Consideration it holds strongest in the Church For a Councell hath power to order settle and define Differences arisen concerning the Faith This Power the Councell hath not by any immediate Institution from Christ but it was prudently taken vp in the Church from the Apostles Example So that to hold Councels to this end is apparant Apostolicall Tradition written but the Power which Councels so held haue is from the whole Catholike Church whose members they are and the Churches Power from God And this Power the Church cannot further giue away to a Generall Councell than that the Decrees of it shall bind all particulars and it selfe but not bind the Church from calling againe and in the after calls vpon iust cause to order yea and if need be to abrogate former Acts I say vpon iust cause For if the Councell be lawfully called and proceed orderly and conclude according to the Rule the Scripture the whole Church cannot but approoue the Councell and then the Definitions of it can neuer be questioned after And the Power of the Church hath no wrong in this so long as no Power but her owne may meddle or offer to infringe any Definition of hers made in her representatiue Bodie a lawfull Generall Councell And certaine it is no Power but her owne may doe this Nor doth this open any gappe to priuate spirits For all Decisions in such a Councell are binding And because the whole Church can meet no other way the Councell shall remaine the Supreame Externall Liuing Temporarie Ecclesiasticall Iudge of all Controuersies Onely the whole Church and shee alone hath power when Scripture or Demonstration is found and peaceably tendered to her to represent her selfe againe in a new Councell and in it to order what was amisse Nay your Opinion is yet more vnreasonable For you doe not onely make the Definition of a Generall Councell but the Sentence
commanded points of Controuersie to bee decided according to the rule of holy Scriptures as I shall heereafter make manifest in this Treatise yea sometimes the doctrine of one sound member of the Church hath beene a Soueraigne meanes to conuert errants and consequently to reforme such as were misled by errour Neither is reformation vnreasonable or impossible although they which reprooue others are themselues exorbitant in some things because the same must bee performed not by accomodation to the humor of Reproouers but according to the diuine rule wherein all things are straight and perfect Lastly when the Roman Church it selfe is in Schisme and Combustion which hapned at the Councell of Constance and Basill and in the dayes of Antipopes shall no reformation be required because the Parties litigant being of contrarie opinions the same cannot be proportioned according to euery ones seuerall humour The second reason taken from Councells Customes c. is deficient in both the parts For neither are the Romish doctrines to wit Communion in one kind Popes pardons Latin Seruice Purgatorie Apocryphall Scriptures Vulgar Translation preferred before the Originall Text Transubstantiation c. defined by any generall Councell or deriued from the Apostles or Primitiue Church by custome and vniuersall consent And later Councells and Customes must giue place to holy Scripture Yea according to S. Augustine no vnderstanding man did euer make the Councells of Bishops equall to Sacred Scripture And some of our learned Aduersaries confesse That a generall Councell of Popes Cardinalls and Bishops is not of equall Authority with the Colledge of the Apostles Others also of them affirme That such Councels are fallible and subiect to errour The third reason wherein it is affirmed That Protestants forsaking the common rule of Faith present the world with Scriptures vnderstood by priuate Illumination is grounded vpon a false suggestion for we assume to our selues no other Illumination than only of ordinarie grace and we maintaine no other exposition of Scripture as diuine but such as is deliuered by the holy Ghost in the Scripture And the sence of holy Scripture deliuered by the Primitiue Church is followed by Protestants with farre more respect than by Romists But our Aduerfaries are the men who dissembling the same in words doe in truth maintaine priuate Illumination For they affirme That the Bishops of Rome haue infallibilitie of Iudgement by the immediate inspiration of the Holy Ghost and not by the studie and meditation of holy Scripture IESVIT Wherefore there beeing no possibilitie that the Catholike part could gaine Peace to Christendome by any yeelding vnto our Aduersaries either reasonable or vnreasonable whither should louers of Concord turne themselues but vnto your gracious Maiestie that haue in your Power the Affections of Protestants and therefore would bee the fittest Instrument for their Re-vnion with the Romane Church The God of Charitie hath put into your Maiesties Heart a desire of Vnitie of the Church and in your Hand an Oliue-Bough-Crowne of Peace which you may set on the Head of Christendome which wearie of endlesse Contention poureth foorth vnto your Maiestie her Suppliant Complaint Quem das finem Rex magne laborum And seeing nothing hindereth but that your selfe are not yet satisfied in some Doctrines of the Roman Church particularly in the Nine Points your Maiestie hath set downe in writing J humbly present vnto your Maiestie these my poore Labours for your satisfaction so much desired of the Christian World And to the end that this my Answere may be in it selfe more solid and better accepted of your Maiestie before J descend vnto particulars J thinke best first to shew in generall the Romane to bee the onely true Church For this was the Occasion and Subiect of the Conference betwixt Dr White and mee ANSWER What a vast and impossible I will not heere say impious enterprise doe you in the depth of your sublimated wit cast vpon our Gracious Soueraigne Must his Maiestie haue the Office of a Proctor and Factor for the Court of Rome nay of a Lieutenant of the Papall Forces to revnite all Protestants to the Church of Rome Had you meant the procuring of a Free Generall Coancell of all Christendome or at least of all the Westerne Church for the reducing eyther of the Deuiate parts home to the Truth or the exasperated parts to a more charitable complying in things indifferent or tollerable in which discussion as well the Papacie it selfe as other matters might bee subiect to Tryall such a Worke might be fit for a Church-man to mooue and for his Majestie to affect than whom no Prince no nor priuate Christian is more forward in Zeale and furnished in Wisedome to purge the Distempers and heale the Wounds of the Christian Church But your former words shew the frensie of the Demand when you fore-lay this for a Ground Satis imperitè nimis obstinatè That those particular Enormities that wee Protestants call to haue reformed are the verie Foundations of the Vnitie of Faith Catholike Principles c. And so this your dreamed Re-vnion must bee not to come on your part one step towards vs but our running headlong to you which is no other than a slauish subjection of all Churches to the Papacie and the trampling Gods Truth and Gods People vnder the foot of the vnerrable vncontroulable Grand Seigniour of the seuen-Hilled Citie It seemeth you haue forgotten or would extinguish the validitie and memorie of his Majesties most judicious Writings in maintenance of Orthodoxe Religion and of the Libertie of Christendome and shaking the verie Foundations of Papall Corruptions and Tyrannie Otherwise you neuer would thus boldly and leaudly call to so puissant a Champion in the Lords Battailes to sound Retreat To whom the state of Christendome to speake in your phrase poureth foorth her Suppliant Complaint but to an end opposite to your Projects Qua Roma patet fera regnat Erinnis In facinus iurasce putes Dent ocius omnes Quas Meruere pati sic stat sententia poenas TOVCHING THE NECESSITIE OF VNderstanding the Qualitie of the ROMAN CHVRCH IESVIT Thinke best first to shew in generall the Roman to be the onely true Church For this was the occasion and subiect of the conference betwixt Dr. WHITE and me and is the most important and manifest point of controuersie in which all other are inuolued ANSVVER THe most important Neither most nor important at all to all but onely to those who are either inuolued in that Church or vexed by it If people may attaine saluation without knowing the qualitie of the Romane Church then it is not of all Questions and Controuersies most important to know whether the Romane Church is the true Church or not But many people may bee saued without this knowledge for all they may attaine saluation which are baptised and which beleeue and repent Mark 16 16. Acts 2 38. and which haue all the ordinarie meanes of Saluation
grieuous penaltie to depart out of Babylon and spirituall Sodome Apoc. 18.4 and Chap. 11.8 Saint Paul speaking of such as teach diuerse doctrine from the Apostles saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Depart from such from their assembly and Church Reade Acts 19. 8. 1. Corinth 10. 14. 2. Cor. 6. 14 15 17. Hos. 10. 17. The Roman Church in those things wherein wee departed from it was shamefully corrupted it did not onely forsake bur depraue and persecute the truth of God the leprosie thereof was incurable for it would not iudge it selfe nor bee reprooued by others nor reforme the least errour but desperately followed the Canon Si Papa c And none might inioy life and breath within her Precincts which would not obey her Traditions These Romuleans vnlesse they were blinded like Elymas could not be ignorant at least of some of their errours and corruptions but they chose rather in their Tridentine Synode to proclaime and propugne apertly or couertly all their antient forgeries than to compassionate the distressed and 〈◊〉 Christian world by mittigating or condescending according to truth in the smallest matters It had beene most facile for them without any preiudice or dammage to themselues to haue permitted the Communion of the holy Eucharist in both kindes the publicke 〈◊〉 of God in a knowne and vnderstood Language to haue abolished the adoration of Images c. But their Luciferian pride and mallice was so transcendent that they rather presumed to obtrude new Scandalls vpon the Christian World than to vse the least Moderation for the peace of the Church And euer since that Synod they haue proceeded from euill to worse obscuring and out-facing the Truth with Forgerie and Sophistrie They haue conspired against Kingdomes and States they haue surpassed professed Infidels in perfidious Stratagemes and immane Crueltie Lastly whereas they expelled vs by Excommunication and chased vs away from them by Persecution yet this Romane Aduocate taxeth vs of Schisme and Apostasie neuer remembring what S. Augustine long since deliuered The Sacriledge of Schisme is then committed when there is no iust cause of separation Or what some of his owne part haue said The Sheepe are not bound to be subiect to any Shepheard which is become a Wolfe or is aduerse to the saluation of the Flocke IESVIT Which also plainely will appeare to any man of vnderstanding that casts vpon her an impartiall eye For is she not conspicuously one the professors thereof agreeing in all points of Faith howsoeuer they differ about small vndefined Questions ANSVVER Externall Vnitie is found amongst Infidels and the Turkes being more in number than Papists neuer disagree amongst themselues touching matters of their Religion Shall wee then say as the Iesuit doth It will plainely appeare to any man of vnderstanding that casts his eye vpon Turkie that the same hath Veritie because it is conspicuously one Saint Augustine saith That Iewes Heretikes and Infidels obserue Vnitie against Vnitie S. Bernard Alia est vnitas Sanctorum alia facinorosorum The Vnitie of Saints is one thing and the Vnitie of wicked men Deceiuers another S. Hilarie Vnitas fidei vnitas perfidiae There is Vnitie of Faith and there is likewise perfidious and faithlesse Vnitie S. Gregorie saith That the ministers of Antichrist shall cleaue together like the skales of Leuiathan Therefore because externall Vnitie is in it selfe a thing common and Iewes and Mahometists enioy the same more apparently than many Christians our Aduersarie must prooue that his Church hath Veritie before his argument taken from externall Vnitie can be of any force Neither is Papisticall Vnitie so entire and absolute as this man gloryeth for Papalls disagree both in Doctrine and Manners They differ concerning the supreame Authoritie of the Church Whether it be in the Pope or in the Generall Councell They differ in the matter of Free-will and Grace They differ concerning the manner of the Conception of the Virgin Marie There are three Opinions among them concerning the Temporall dominion of Popes Some say he hath direct Temporall power some say indirect some say hee hath none but by the free Donation of Princes and that Princes were euill aduised in yeelding him so much And moderne Popes disagree with the antient concerning the Dignitie of vniuerfall Bishop adoration of Images Transubstantiation Communion in both kinds and the merit of Good workes Also they themselues complaine of grieuous hatred and discord reigning generally among them and some of them say There is greater Concord among Gentiles And when they colour these palpable Dissentions pretending that they are readie to submit themselues to the iudgement of the Pope First this Iudge and Vmpire is many times a Peace-breaker and no Peace-maker an Ismael in the Christian World whose hand is against euerie man and euerie mans hand is against him Secondly Vnitie which is founded on blind Obedience is onely an Vnitie of Pollicie and not of true Faith Thirdly this submission maketh not actuall Concord and miserable Dissention both intestine and forraine at home and abroad rageth betweene Popes and Princes and betweene one Popish Faction and another The Guelphes and Gibellines the Papalls and Imperialls are as famous in Histories for their Discord as the sonnes of Cadmus and when Papistrie was most potent the Christian World was most distracted IESVIT Apparently vniuersall so spread ouer the World with Credit and Authoritie that whole Mankind may take sufficient notice of her and her Doctrine for the embracing thereof ANSWER The Roman is a particular Church and not vniuersall it is onely an vnsound member of the whole and not the whole Rom. 1. 6. S. Paul saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Among whom are yee also But a Church which is but one amongst the rest cannot be the whole and vniuersall Church It is as absurd to say that the Romane Church is the vniuersall Church as to affirme that England is the vniuersall World If the vniuersall Church be taken properly or absolutely it comprehendeth both the Triumphant and Militant Church Augustine Enchir. cap. 56. and 61. Couaruuias Resol Lib. 4. cap. 14. If it be taken restrictiuely it is the whole Church Militant of each Age. If Catholike be taken for that which is Orthodoxall in Faith and which holdeth no diuision with the common Bodie of Christianitie according to which notion the Fathers tearme particular Churches Catholike then neyther is this Title proper to the Romane Church alone neyther can Papists iustly assume the name of Catholike vntill they haue proued their Faith to be Orthodoxall and iustified themselues from being the Authors of Discord in the Christian World And to answere that which followeth although the Romane Church is spread ouer sundrie parts of the World because some people professing the Romane Faith trauaile or reside in many Countreyes and exercise their Religion where they trauaile or liue yet this
Protestants vrge against vs make against their custome of making Images so that with no probabilitie or ingenuitie they thereupon mislike vs. if by the vse of Images there bee no danger of hurt to ignorant people which may not with very ordinarie diligence of Pastours and Teachers be preuented and otherwise the vtilities very great then there is no reason of iust mislike of this custome But this supposition is true as in the same order I will indeauour to shew in the soure Particulars ANSVVER This Aduocate of Imagerie should first of all haue declared what hee vnderstandeth by Worship of Images whether Veneration onely largely taken or Adoration properly so called Veneration may signifie externall Regard and Reuerence of Pictures such as is giuen to Churches and sacred Vessels and to ornaments of sacred places and according to this notion many haue approoued or tollerated worship of Images which denie Adoration Adoration properly taken among Schoolemen signifieth a yeelding of honour to things Worshipped by recognition of their dignitie and excellencie and by religious submission of Bodie and Soule to wit by inward motion of the Will and externall deedes and gestures of Honour as Kneeling Kissing Censing holding vp the hands c. The worshipping of Images in this manner by Religious Adoration either primarie or secondarie absolute or respectiue is neither grounded on the prime Principles of Nature and Christianitie neither was the same practised by the antient Catholicke Church But on the contrarie it is a superstitious dotage a palliate Idolatrie a remainder of Paganisme condemned by sacred Scripture censured by Primatiue Fathers and a Seminarie of direfull contention and mischiefe in the Church of Christ. First The Scriptures of the Old Testament are so apparantly against Adoration of Images Exod. 20.5 Leuit. 26.1 Deut. 5. 9. Psal. 106. 19. Esay 2. 8. Mich. 5. 13. that the best learned Papists themselues affirme the same to haue beene prohibited vnto the Iewes Aquinas saith The making of Images to bee worshipped was prohibited in the Old Law The same is affirmed by Alexander Hales Albertus Bonauenture Marsilius Rich. Mediauilla Gerson Abulensis and it is also the Tenet of many later Schoolemen to wit Soto Corduba Cabrera Palacius Tapia Oleaster c. Secondly The brasen Serpent was a figure of Christ Ioh. 3.14 The same was formed by Gods Commandement Num. 21.9 And yet the worship thereof being as Vasques saith no other than such as Romists vse towards their Images was vnlawfull 2. Kings 18.4 Thirdly The Scriptures of the New Testament neither expresly nor by Consequent maintaine the worship of Images Neither is there in all the Apostles Doctrine any abrogation of the Negatiue Precept deliuered to the Iewes concerning the Worship of Images And therefore the same Law is Morall and obligeth Christians as it did the Iewes Fourthly the worship of Images was not practised or held lawfull by the Primitiue Fathers And Gregorie the great six hundred yeares after Christ condemned the same The Councel of Frankford seuen hundred ninetie and foure yeres after Christ opposed the definition of the second Nicen Synod concerning worship of Images as besides more antient Historians Cassander and some other Pontificians affirme Agobardus the BB. of Lyons who liued as Ado saith about the yeare 815 in his Booke de Picturis Imaginibus saith That none of the antient Catholickes thought that Images were to be worshipped or adored and deliuering his owne iudgement he saith Nemo se fallat c. Let no man beguile himselfe whosoeuer worshippeth any Picture or moulten or carued Statue neither honoureth God himselfe nor Angels or Saints but Idols Fifthly many latter Pontificians haue condemned the worshipping of Images according as the same was practised by the vulgar and maintained by Aquinas and other principall Scholemen Holcoth saith No adoration is due to an Image neither is it lawfull to worship any Image Cassander writeth in this manner The opinion of Thomas Aquinas who holdeth that Images are to bee worshipped as their Samplers is disliked by sounder Scholemen and they affirme that the same is not very safe vnlesse it be qualified with fauourable interpretation Among these is Durand and Holcoth Gabriell Biel reporteth the opinion of them which say that an Image neither as it is considered in it selfe materially nor yet according to the nature of a Signe or Image is to bee worshipped Peresius Aiala saith All Scholemen in a manner hold that the Image of Christ and the Images of Saints are to be worshipped with the same adoration that their Samplers but they produce so farre as I haue seene no sound proofe of this Doctrine to wit neither Scripture nor Tradition of the Church nor common consent of Fathers nor the determination of a generall Councell or any other effe-Cuall reason sufficient to persuade Beleeuers Sixthly the varietie of opinions and the palpable discord among Pontificians concerning the manner of adoring Images their sandie and disjointed consequences their forging and purging Authors their knottie and labyrinthian distinctions wherein they ambush themselues and out face euident Truth are sensible arguments of corrupt and vnsound Doctrine in this Article of adoration of Images IESVIT §. 1 Worship of Images consequent out of the Principles of Nature and Christianitie AN Image is a distinct and liuely pourtraiture of some visible and corporall thing parts of the Jmage corresponding to the parts of the thing represented more or lesse particularly according as the Image is more or lesse distinct and liuely ANSVVER THis definition may perchance agree to some Images to wit to the pictures of persons visible creatures which were taken from the immediate beholding of the Prototype but not to such Images as are made by coniecture or vpon fabulous and Apocriphall reports such as are the Images of Christ and of the Prophets Apostles and many other Saints drawne and pourtrayed many ages since their departure out of the world Papists besides many other formes depaint the blessed Virgin like the Queene of Heauen with a crowne of Starres and clothed with the Sunne and treading the Moone vnder her feet This and the like Images are false represents neither haue they direct and immediate correspondence to the parts and qualities of the persons represented And whereas the Iesuit tearmeth an Image meaning such as is vsed in his Church A distinct and liuely pourtraiture c. he should rather haue said A confused and dead pourtraiture for who is able to deliuer a distinct and liuely Picture truely resembling Christs humane bodie or the countenance feature and proportion of many other Saints deceased And Clemens Alexandrinus speaking of a painted Image doth not call it liuely but saith that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a dead matter formed by a workemans hand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But we saith he
controuerted or doubtfull But personall succession may bee found in a false Church as appeareth by the Iewish Church in the time of the Pharisees and by the Churches of the East in the dayes of the Arrians and our Aduersaries affirme the Greeke Church to be vnsound notwithstanding it is apparently descended from the Apostles by a lineall succession of Bishops Cardinall Bellarmine perceiuing the weight of the former Argument departeth from the common opinion of other Papists saying That although personall succession alone or by it selfe is not a proper note of a true Church yet the absence thereof prooueth a nullitie of the Church in them which want it But if this be so then personall and locall succession must bee expuged out of the Calendar of Churches notes for all proper notes argue and demonstrate their subiect both 〈◊〉 and negatiuely also they demonstrate the same of themselues without the assistance of other things If therefore externall succession prooueth not a true Church except right Faith bee concurring and if as Bellarmine teacheth it rather serueth to prooue there is not the true Church where it wanteth than to argue a true Church where it is then the same is not proper and conuertible and consequently it is no essentiall marke because to bee proper and conuertible are of the being of notes according to the Cardinals owne description It is likewise remarkeable that the ancient Fathers doe not onely or principally vnderstand personall succession when they mention succession in their writings because they argue affirmatiuely from succession and not negatiuely onely Therefore Romists in this disputation shall doe well to begin with the questions which concerne Doctrine and prooue that they haue succession of Doctrine in all those Articles wherein they oppose other Churches before they mention locall and personall succession but the manner of these men is to obserue a contrarie proceeding and from the latter to conclude the former which is against good reason and against the Custome and manner of the ancient Fathers IESVIT For how can the Tradition of Christian doctrine be eminently and notoriously Apostolicall if the Church deliuering the same hath not a manifest and conspicuous pedigree or deriuation from the Apostles which is a conuincing argument vsed by Saint Augustine how can we thinke that we 〈◊〉 receiued manifestly Christ if wee 〈◊〉 not also 〈◊〉 manifestly his Church It is a Principle of Phylosophie Propter quod vnumquodque tale illud magis But the name of Christ his glory his vertue and miracles are to the world famously knowne from age to age by reason of the Church and her preaching that in her first Pastours saw them with their eyes Ergo This Church must needes be more famous more illustrious as able to giue fame vnto the being and Doctrine and actions of Christ. ANSVVER I haue shewed in the former Section that the visible Church is principally called Apostolicall because it imbraceth the doctrine of the holy Apostles And euerie Church is Apostolicall so farre foorth onely as it consenteth with the Apostles in Doctrine Sacraments Inuocation and in that which is substantiall in Ecclesiasticall policie And in a precedent Section I haue declared That the visible Church may at some times bee more or lesse Apostolicall holy c. But it is not at any time simply or principally Apostolicall because it hath externall personall succession Occham a famous Schooleman and some others with him affirme That a true and Apostolicall Church may consist of a few lay people and if all the Prelates and Clerkes throughout the world should become hereticall God may raise vp Pastours either extraordinarily or else hereticall Bishops 〈◊〉 Pastours the Church may be reformed by them But to the Argument I answere as followeth First if the same were wholly granted nothing could bee concluded against the Church of England from it because the Bishops and Pastours of this Church are able to exhibite a Pedigree or deriuation both of their Ministerie and Doctrine from the Apostles 1. Of Ministerie in that they haue for substance the same descent of externall Ordination which the Romane Church hath 2. Of Doctrine because they maintaine the Primitiue Faith and accord in the same with the soundest part of the Catholicke Church in all ages And where we may seeme to discent from the Antient the same is either in things humane and adiaphorous or in matters which were not fully discussed or in points which were not deliuered by an vnanimous consent or in things which are reprooued by plaine demonstration of holy Scripture and wherein the Fathers permit libertie of dissenting and the Papists themselues take the like libertie Secondly the Iesuits Interrogation How can the Tradition of Christian Doctrine be eminently and notoriously Apostolicall if the Church deliuering the same hath not a manifest and perspicuous pedigree or deriuation from the Apostles is answered this may be performed two waies 1. By the historie and monuments of the Primatiue Church whose descent and pedigree from the Apostles was perspicuous 2. The same may be made manifest by the Scriptures of the Apostles which are diuine and authenticall Records of all Apostolicall Doctrine and contain in themselues many liuely and effectuall Arguments proouing to such as read and examine them with diligence and vnderstanding that they are the Doctrine of the holy Ghost and consequently the worke of the Apostles And the maiestie and lustre of heauenly Doctrine is such that if it be propounded by meane and obscure persons it will appeare illustrious euen as a rich Iewell if the same be deliuered by a poore Artificer doth manifest his owne worth and therefore the sequell of the Iesuits Argument is denied for it followeth not because the Doctrine of Christ must be illustrious that the Church which deliuereth the same must be alwaies so Thirdly S. Augustine in the place obiected Epist. 48. confuteth the Donatists which confined the Church vniuersall to one countrie only excluding the rest of the world from the communion thereof against this error he saith How can wee thinke that we haue receiued Christ made manifest if we haue not also receiued his Church made manifest From hence nothing can be inferred but that we receiue the true Church not only at one time or in one place but at all times and in all places where it is manifest and that Christ is reuealed and made manifest by the Doctrine of the Apostles and that this Doctrine must be preached although not at one time yet successiuely throughout the whole world But all this which S. Augustine speaketh being granted prooueth not that the true Church shall be notoriously eminent and visible at all times neither doth this Father say that Christ cannot bee manifest but by such a Church only as can lineally deriue her pedigree by Records and Tables from the Apostles And howsoeuer Papists boast of their owne pedigree yet when their
prime foundation of Christianitie is Christ himselfe 1. Cor. 3. 11. 1. Pet. 2.6 The Church is the seruant and Spouse of Christ the House of God whereof Christ himselfe is the grand Lord and Builder But wee haue learned in the Gospell That the seruant is not greater than his Lord Ioh. 13. 16. Hereupon S. Augustine Enchyrid cap. 56. Good order requireth that the Church be placed after the Trinitie as an House after the Inhabiter his Temple after God and the Citie after the Founder And if the Aduersarie replie That although it be a lesse Article in regard of the Obiect yet the denyall thereof is of greater consequence because it maketh men guiltie of Heresie c. I answere Granting that the denyall of the whole Article being rightly expounded maketh men Heretickes but I denie that a Christian which beleeueth this Article is no Hereticke if hee beleeue and maintaine any Errour against the plaine Doctrine of the holy Scripture which hee knoweth or which hee is bound Necessitate 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 to know beleeue and maintaine Saint Hierom vpon the Galathians saith Whosocuer to wit in waightie points vnderstandeth the Scriptures otherwise than the sence of the holy Ghost whereby they were written requireth may bee called an Hereticke although hee depart not out of the Church Tertullian saith Whatsoeuer in points Diuine and Sacred is repugnant to Veritie is Heresie Albertus saith Hee is an Hereticke which followeth his owne opinion and not the iudgement of the Scripture Occham Hee is an Hereticke which with a pertinacious minde imbraceth any Errour the contradictorie doctrine whereof is contained in holy Scripture Two things constitute an Hereticke First Errour and false Doctrine as the materiall Secondly Malicious and pertinacious adhearing to the same or defending the same as the formall A man may haue both these without any explicite denying the Article of the Catholicke Church For the Trueth which hee gainesayeth may be plainely deliuered in the holy Scripture and hee may reade the same and haue sufficient meanes to know it in the Scripture and maliciously or inordinately resist the holy Ghost speaking by the Scriptures Act. 7.51 Our Sauiour condemneth some for Heretickes calling them false Prophets Murtherers and Theeues Mat. 7.15 Ioh. 10.5 Not because they opposed the present Church for some of these were principall Rulers of the Iewish Church Mat. 23.1 but because they taught and beleeued contrarie to the Scriptures Mat. 22.29 Saint Augustine d. Bapt. c. Don. li. 4. c. 16. speaketh not altogether as the Iesuit 〈◊〉 him but saith onely That hee would not affirme of such a person who being baptised in the 〈◊〉 Church beleeued as Photinus the hereticke did supposing the same to be Catholicke Faith that he was an hereticke he absolutely affirmeth not that such a person was no Hereticke but that hee would not pronounce him an Hereticke before hee was conuicted And hee speaketh of Heretickes not as they were in foro coeli according to the iudgement of God but in foro Ecclesiae according to Ecclesiasticall Censure Neither doth hee speake of persons sufficiently conuicted by plaine euidence of holy Scripture and maliciously and inordinately resisting the Truth but of simple Errants misled and seduced through ignorance or infirmitie Doctor Field whose learned Treatise of the Church is nibbled at by Papists but yet remaines vnanswered by them is censured by this Obiectour for saying without any Proofe that an Errant against a fundamentall point is an Hereticke though he erre without pertinacie But the Iesuit reporteth amisse when hee saith Doctor Field deliuered this Assertion without Proofe for in the Margine of his Booke he confirmeth the same by the testimonies of Gerson and Occham two famous Doctors of the Roman Church And it is remarkeable that the Iesuit censuring the Doctour himselfe produceth no Argument out of diuine Authoritie to confirme his owne Position but resteth onely vpon the single testimonie of one Father which as I haue alreadie shewed speaketh not to his purpose IESVIT Hence Jinferre that Protestants erre fundamentally according to the second kind of erring to wit in the manner in all points they hold against the Romane Church which I haue prooued to be the true Catholicke Church For he that holds any priuate opinion so stiffely as rather than forsake them he denyes and abandons the Catholike Church a mayne Article of his Creed erreth fundamentally as is cleare But Protestants hold their priuate opinions so stifly as thereupon they haue denied and abandoned the Catholicke Church to wit the Romane ANSWER The mayne Proposition of this Section to wit Protestants 〈◊〉 fundamentally according to the second kinde of erring c. is denied and the Assumption of the Syllogisme whereby the Obiectour laboureth to prooue the same is palpably vntrue For Protestants maintaine no priuate opinion either stiffely or remissely whereby they haue denied and abandoned the true Catholicke Church First They maintaine no doctrine as matter of Faith but that which is deliuered in holy Scripture and which consenteth with the Primitiue Church either expresly or virtually But such doctrine is not priuate opinion because the holy Ghost which is the supreame gouernour and directour of the Church and the Prophets and Apostles which were inspired from heauen are the Authours thereof Secondly The Romane Church is not the Catholicke Church but an vnsound part of the generall visible Church as it is prooued by the Learned of our part whereunto the Aduersaries haue as yet made no replie IESVIT Neither doth it import that they retaine the word hauing reiected the sence seeing not the letter of the Creed pronounced but the matter beleeued makes men Christians Neither is it enough to say that they beleeue the Church of the Elect seeing the Church of the Creed is not the Church of the onely Elect a meere fancie but the visible and conspicuous Church continuing from the Apostles by sucsion of Bishops which thus I prooue ANSWER We retaine both the words and the sence of the Article and the Catholicke Church in the Apostles Creed in respect of the militant part thereof is a Church of right beleeuers and especially of iust and holie persons and principally and intentionally and as it comprehendeth both the militant and triumphant the congregation of all the elect for this Church is the mysticall and liuing bodie which Christ saueth Ephes. 5. 23. It is the Church of the first borne which are written in Heauen Heb. 12.23 It is the Church builded vpon the Rocke against which the gates of Hell shall not preuaile either by Haeresie Temptation or mortall Sinne Math. 16. 18. Math. 7.24 And if it be a meere fancie to hold this then Gregorie the Great with many other of the antiēt Fathers were fantasticks for teaching in this manner But the Church of the Creed is not alwaies the Church Hierarchicall for the Church in the
intercessions to the Virgin Marie with diuine Prayers Hee affirmeth also that in Saint Augustines dayes Inuocation of Saints was not vsed in the common Seruice of the West Church And descending to the 600. yeeres he saith Inuocation of Saints among the Latines was not brought into the publicke Seruice and Letanies of the Church vntill the dayes of Pope Gregorie the first Lastly the forme and manner of Saintly Inuocation in the 600 yeere differed extreamely from that which was vsed by Papals in latter times and this is confirmed by Chemnitius setting downe verbatim many Collects and formes of deuotion vsed in latter dayes which were antiently vnheard of Secondly The Fathers which you cite in your Margine to prooue the Doctrine of Inuocation of Saints and Martyrs to haue beene a matter of faith from the dayes of Constantine are Gregorie Nyssen St. Basil Theodorit St. Ambrose St. Hierom and St. Augustine but hauing perused the places I finde not that these Fathers either deliuered this Doctrine as matter of Catholicke Faith or affirme the Practise thereof to haue beene necessarie and vniuersall or that they spake of such Worship and Inuocation of Saints as is practised in the seruice of your Church But as places may bee noted in some Fathers touching inuocation of Saints deceased or which argue that they requested Saints to assist them with their Prayers at least in generall and so farre foorth as they had knowledge of their necessities So likewise other Sentences are found in their writings maintaining the sole Inuocation of God by Christ and condemning Inuocation of Angels and Saints deceased according to the manner now vsed in the Romane Church Theoderit vpon the Colossians cap. 2. condemneth worshipping and Inuocation of Angels St. Ambrose saith Tu solus Dominus inuocandus es c. Thou Lord onely art to bee inuocated St. Hierom Nullum inuocare id est in nos orando vocare nisi Deum debemus We ought to inuocate that is by Prayer to call into vs none but God And in another place Whatsoeuer I shall vtter seemeth dumbe because hee Nepotian being defunct heareth me not St. Augustine Non sit nobis Religio cultus hominum mortuorum Let not the worship of persons defunct be our Religion Saint Athanasius Nunguam quispiam precaretur aliquid accipere a Patre Angelis vel ab vllis rebus creatis No man would euer pray to receiue any 〈◊〉 from the Father and from the Angels or from any other creature Thirdly That which the Iesuit affirmeth concerning Aerius and Vigilantius is false for neither of these is ranked among Heretickes by Philastrius Epiphanius St. Augustine or by any of the antient Fathers because they denied Inuocation of Saints departed and Popish Prateolus himselfe maketh not this doctrine any of Aerius his errours and treating of Vigilantius he produceth onely Lindanus and Hosius two most partiall Pontificians affirming him to haue beene condemned of heresie for this cause Wherefore our Aduersarie prooueth himselfe a weake Antiquarie when he affirmeth that Aerius and Vigilantius were condemned of heresie because they denyed Inuocation of Saints deceased Fourthly The Magdeburgians which in the third Centurie obserue Non obscura vestigia c some not very obscure traces or footsteps in the writings of the Doctors of this age concerning Inuocation of Saints speake of the least degree and kind of Inuocation to wit Compellation and besides they probably suspect that suppositious Sentences haue beene inserted into the Bookes of antient Fathers Lastly Ireneus stileth the Virgin Marie The Aduocate of Euah not in regard of her Intercession for Euah and her children after her decease and departure out of the world but because of that which she performed in beleeuing and obeying the heauenly message which the Angel Gabriel brought vnto her Luke 1.38 for hereby she became a blessed Instrument of conceiuing and bearing Christ Iesus and by this obedience the blessed seed was brought into the world by her whereby the fall of Euah and her children was repaired And thus shee was the Aduocate or Comforter of Euah and her children by bearing Christ and not because she was inuocated as a Mediator after her death by Euahs children IESVIT Neither can Protestants denie this to haue beene the Doctrine of the Fathers but seeke to discredit them as if they had been various vncertaine contradictorious in this point But seeing Antiquitie that hath perused their workes now more than 1300 yeeres neuer noted such contradictions in them Christian wisedome and charitie will neuer be so persuaded of the Fathers by Protestants specially their Allegations being such as may easily be explicated so as they make nothing at all against this Catholicke Custome ANSVVER Protestants maintaine that inuocation of Saints can be no Article of Faith although it were manifest that some Fathers liuing since or before the daies of Constantine had beleeued or practised the same for euery Article of Christian Faith must be grounded vpon diuine Reuelation But all opinions of the Fathers are not diuine Reuelation and the holy Fathers do not challenge to themselues infallibilitie of iudgement neither do our Aduersaries yeeld the same vnto them Therefore a surer foundation must be laid to proue Adoration and Inuocation of Saints to be a necessarie duetie than a few scattered opinatiue sentences of Ecclesiasticall writers Neuerthelesse Protestants are able to giue satisfaction concerning the iudgement of Antiquitie in this point And we haue prooued that the eldest Fathers for those ages in which Egesippus saith The Church continued a Virgin taught no such Doctrine Secondly no generall Councel nor yet any particular Councell confirmed by a generall did euer authorise or decree inuocation of Saints as it is now maintained by Papals to haue beene a necessarie duetie or practise Thirdly there be sundrie Principles and other passages in the Bookes of the Fathers by which this doctrine may be confuted IESVIT For all they say in this kind is reduced to these fiue heads First That Saints are not inuocated by Faith as authors of the benefits we craue ANSWER Our Aduersarie hath collected fiue Expositions to elude such testimonies as we produce out of antiquitie First whereas many Fathers treading in the steps of holy Scripture affirme that religious prayer is a proper worship belonging to the sacred Trinitie and by this argument they conclude against the Arians and Macedonians that Christ Iesus and the holy Ghost are verie God because Christians beleeue in them and pray vnto them The Iesuit telleth vs that the Fathers intend only that we may not inuocate creatures by faith as authors of the benefits we craue But if this glosse or solution be sufficient then the Argument of the Fathers concludeth not against the Arians that Christ is God because he is inuocated for the Arian vsing the Iesuits distinction may replie That Christ is inuocated as a Mediator and as
in the bodies of St. Peter and the three yong men St. Luke c. 4.30 affirmeth not that our Sauiours bodie was inuisible but that he passed thorow the midst of the people and yet admitting that he was then inuisible the cause might be in the peoples eyes Luke 24. 16. or in the Aire and not in his bodie Genes 19. 11. Neither is actuall grauitie or actuall combustibilitie or visibilitie so inseparable from a bodie as circumscription and distinction of parts Lastly For a bodie to bee resplendent and to shine as the Sunne in glorie is not repugnant to the nature of the bodie but is of the perfection and happinesse thereof Matth. 13. 43. But that an indiuiduall bodie may bee in many places at once and in diuers formes and according to diuers actions and haue no reference to place nor any properties inward or outward of a true bodie is not Diuine veritie but an audacious fiction or rather an incongruous dreame and contradictorie Chymera But that is verified in this Question of the Romists which Ireneus saith Multa male oportet interpretari eos qui vnum non volunt rectè intelligere They are compelled to expound many things amisse which will not vnderstand one thing aright IESVIT § 2. Transubstantiation belongs to the substance of the Reall Presence THis J prooue That belongs to the substance of this Mysterie of the reall Presence which being denied and taken away the words of Christ This is my Bodie cannot be true taken in the literall sence in which sence they are to be taken as hath beene shewed But without granting Transubstantiation the words of Christ cannot be true taken in the literall sence Ergo Transubstantiation belongs to the substance of this Mysterie of the reall Presence The Minor is prooued Because these words This is my Bodie signifie that the thing the Priest holds in his hand is truely really and substantially the bodie of Christ for in this Proposition This is my Bodie the Verb est signifies a coniunction betweene this in the Priests hand and the bodie of Christ and being a Verb substantiue taken in his proper signification it signifies a substantiall Identitie betweene this in the Priests hands and the bodie of Christ. But this in the Priests hands being before Consecration bread a thing substantially distinct from the bodie of Christ cannot by consecration bee made substantially the bodie of Christ as the Fathers teach it is without some substantiall alteration or change and what other substantiall change can make bread to become truely the bodie of Christ beside substantiall conuersion of the same into his Bodie ANSVVER You cannot demonstrate that our Sauiours words must be expounded literally for the Instance of the cup Luke 22.20 besides other Arguments choakes you and therefore the mayne ground of your Doctrine being sandie the Arguments inferred vpon the same are infirme The waight of the first Argument lyeth in this Proposition Our Sauiours words cannot bee expounded literally vnlesse the Romish Doctrine of Transubstantiation bee granted I answere First if Transubstantiation were admitted the words of Christ This is my bodie This Cup is the New Testament in my blood cannot bee litterall for where there is any figure or trope the speech is not literall but in the Sacramentall words there is some figure or trope by our Aduersaries confession Secondly If the said words be vnderstood litterally then the bodie of Christ is properly broken and his blood properly shed in the Eucharist for Saint Paul saith This is my bodie which is broken for you 1. Cor. 11.24 Saint Luke This cup is the New Testament in my blood which is shed for you But the bodie of Christ is not properly broken nor his blood properly shed in the holy Eucharist Thirdly It is an improper speech to say This is my bodie that is the thing contained vnder these formes is by conuersion and substantiall Transmutation my bodie but Papists maintaining Transubstantiation expound Christs words in this or in some other manner whereby they depart from the proprietie of the letter therefore in the Doctrine of Transubstantiation they depart from the letter of the words and consequently they make the same figuratiue IESVIT But some may obiect That as a man shewing a leather purse full of gold may truely say this is gold or a paper wrapt vp full of siluer may say this is siluer so the bodie of Christ being vnder consecrated bread wee may truely say This is the bodie of Christ though the substance of bread remaine ANSWER Many famous scholemen teach that the doctrine of Consubstantiation to wit such a presence as maintaineth the substance of Bread and Wine to remaine together with the Bodie and Bloud of Christ is in it selfe more probable and were rather to be followed than the doctrine of Transubstantiation but onely because of the contrarie definition of the Romane Church and some of these Doctors hold that the opinion of Transubstantiation is not verie antient And Card. Caietan affirmeth that secluding the authoritie of the Roman Church there is nothing in the Scripture which may compell one to vnderstand the words properly IESVIT I answer that when substances are apt of their nature and ordained by vse to containe other substances then shewing the substance that containes we may signifie the substance contained as in the former examples The reason is because their naturall aptitude to containe other things being vulgarly knowne mans vnderstanding straight passes from the consideration of the substances containing to thinke of the thing contained therein But when substances are not by nature and custome ordained to containe others we cannot by shewing them demonstrate another because their outward forme signifies immediately the substance contained in them For example one puts a peece of gold in an apple and shewing it cries this is gold in rigor of speech he sayes not true because the sence of his word is that the thing demonstrated immediately by the formes and accidents of that apple is gold Yea put the case that one should say this is gold shewing a peece of paper vnfolded in a manner not apt to containe any thing in it he should not say true though by some deuise hee had put secretly into it a peece of gold because when the paper is shewed displaied and not as containing something in it and yet is tearmed gold the proper sence of that speech is that the substance immediatly contained vnder the accidents of paper is gold although it be couered with other accidents than those that vsually accompanie the nature of gold Wherefore the proposition of Christ This is my Bodie being spoken of a thing that naturally is not apt nor by custome ordained to containe an humane bodie it cannot be vnderstood litterally but of the subiect immediately contained vnder and demonstrated by the accidents and outward semblance of Bread Now the thing that lyes hidden immediately vnder the accidents
Cardinall 〈◊〉 saith That indulgences are granted onely for pennance imposed by the Church and so according to this opinion they release people onely of saying a certaine number of 〈◊〉 or from fasting certaine houres or from bestowing a few pence on the poore And it was a common opinion in the dayes of Albertus and Henricus de 〈◊〉 that Popes Pardons were onely pious Fraudes What indulgence is it then for 〈◊〉 Pontificians to Father this Popish Cosenage vpon the holy Apostles and Primitiue Church Thirdly I haue perused the place of S. Cyprian obiected by the Aduersarie and two other Epistles of the like argument wherein I finde that the Martyrs intreated the Church for mitigation of Paenance imposed vpon some offenders but neither doe the Martyrs themselues affirme That they had made Satisfaction for the temporall paine of sinne neither did S. Cyprian grant any other indulgence than from the paenance inioyned by the Canons of the Church in manner before rehearsed But if the Iesuit will obtaine his purpose he must prooue out of Antiquitie that the Church in those dayes maintained a common treasure of Satisfactions an application of the same to people defunct whose soules were frying in Purgatorie and that the Roman Pope was the onely or principall Key-bearer and Barterer of this Treasurie I reade of certaine Popes that they granted pardons of 〈◊〉 hundred dayes and of foure thousand dayes and of eleuen thousand yeares to all people which should rehearse S. 〈◊〉 his prayer and the 〈◊〉 Maria and one other Prayer to the blessed Virgin Our Aduersarie is reputed learned by his owne part and perhaps he hath the gift of working wonders I intreat him out of his owne vast reading or else from Father 〈◊〉 his storehouse to parallell this Romish liberall practise with some historie out of Antiquitie And if he please further to demonstrate that the antient Church had taxes and 〈◊〉 for summes of money vpon particular crimes to be solued to the Publicans of the Ecclesiasticall Roman Tribute in lieu of Pardons or for absolution he shall by disclosing to the world in what old Wall or Vault such vncouth Iewels are to be found highly aduance the reputation of his Roman pennance and pardons and for my part he shall haue leaue to squeese from his spirituall children what money he can vnder that title whereas in the meane time he and his fellowes by false pretence of Antiquitie doe but cheate their simple Lay-Catholikes of their coyne whereof no small summes are transported out of the Kingdome by such like glosses and trickes Fourthly for want of better testimonie the Obiector would prooue the antient vse of Pardons out of lapsed Tertullian for if this man being fallen from the Church opposed them then they were in vse in that age I answer the Aduersary might haue learned of Pamelius That the Indulgences which Tertullian oposed were the same whereof Cyprian speaketh Epist. 10 11 12. to wit relaxation of Canonicall censures and paenance to Adulterers and other notorious sinnes vpon the request of Martyrs being in prison and yet aliue Now it seemed to this Father to be vnlawfull both that the Martyrs should be Intreatours and that the Church should graunt Absolution tosuch persons or vse relaxation of censures imposed by the discipline of those times And it is to be obserued that this Father speaketh of liuing Martyrs and not of Martyrs defunct and of releasing censures and forgiuing faults in this world onely and not in Purgatorie But the Aduersarie is so farre from being able to prooue Popes pardons in Tertullians dayes that he cannot prooue the same to haue had any being in the dayes of Peter Lombard or Hugo Victor IESVIT I shall not need particularly to refell the vulgar obiections against this Doctrine which all proceed vpon mistaking and impugne what we neuer dreamed of They prooue that Christ onely dyed for the world and redeemed Mankind and not any Saint who doubts therof That we are sanctifyed and washed from the staine of sinne by the blood of the Lambe not of any Saint We confesse it They bring the testimonies of S. Leo and of S. Augustine That the Saints receiued Crownes of God gaue not Crownes vnto others but onely Christ we neuer did nor will deny it That onely in Christ we dye to sinne and are raysed againe soule and body vnto eternall life we neuer taught the contrarie for the Satisfactions of Saints haue not vertue to redeeme the world nor to satisfie for the guilt of sinne nor to take men out of the power of darkenesse nor to iustifie soules by infusion of grace nor to purchase for men crownes of Glorie nor to rayse men from life to death but only shew they are auaileable vnto one transitory effect which men might were they feruent obtaine by their owne industrie ioyned with diuine grace to wit the Remission of temporall paine which vertue also comes from the merits of Christ and his most pretious blood in and by the Satisfactions of Saints applyed to worke the aforesaid temporall releasement from which temporall seruitude the children of God may through his gratious assistance by good workes redeeme themselues or by Satisfactions of their fellow Citizens and Saints be redeemed Though this temporarie Redemption compared with the Redemption of Christ deserue not that Tytle ANSWER It is an errour to ascribe any effect to the operations of men which is proper to the death of Christ But to make Satisfaction to diuine Iustice for any punishment of sinne eternall or temporall is an effect proper to the death of Christ. For the holy Scripture teacheth expresly that all spirituall redemption is immediately wrought by the bloud of Christ Heb. 1. 3. When he had by himselfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 purged our sinnes Col. 2. 15. triumphing ouer them in himselfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And whereas our Aduersaries restraine these and the like places to the staine and eternall guilt of sinne the Apostle Col. 2. 14. affirmeth That Christ blotted out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the hand writing of decrees contayned in the law that was against vs and tooke it out of the way nailing it to his Crosse and that by himselfe Heb. 1.3 Col. 2.15 but the temporarie punishment of sinne is contayned within the latitude of the Law Leuit. 26.14 Deut. 28.15 c. Therefore Christ Iesus our Sauiour immediately and by himselfe and not mediately by the passions of Saints wiped out and remooued out of the way the malediction of temporarie punishment as well as the guilt of eternall When Daniel himselfe one of the most holy Prophets prayed for the remission of his owne sinnes and of the transgressions of his people and made supplication to God for remission of temporall paines and plagues he offereth not his owne merits or Satisfaction but saith Dan. 9.7 Oh Lord righteousnesse belongeth vnto thee but
Whether you haue related the two former truly appeares by Dr Whites Relation or Exposition of them The B. was present at none but this third of which he is readie by me to giue the Church an account But of this third whether that were the cause which you alledge he cannot tell You say F. It was obserued That in the second Conference all the speech was about particular matters little or none about a continuall infallible visible Church which was the chiefe and onely Point in which the person doubting required satisfaction as hauing formerly settled their mind That it was not for them or any other vnlearned persons to take vpon them to iudge of particulars without depending vpon the Iudgement of the true Church B. The opinion of that person in this was neuer opened to the B. And it is very fit the people should looke to the Iudgement of the Church before they be too busie with particulars But yet neither Scripture nor any good Authoritie denyes them some moderate vse of their owne vnderstanding and iudgement especially in things familiar and euident which euen ordinarie Capacities may as easily vnderstand as reade And therefore some particulars a Christian may iudge without depending F. That person therefore hauing heard it granted in the first Conference That there must be a continuall visible Companie euer since Christ teaching vnchanged Doctrine in all fundamentall Points that is Points necessarie to Saluation desired to heare this confirmed and proofe brought which was that continuall infallible visible Church in which one may and out of which one cannot attaine Saluation And therefore hauing appointed a time of meeting betweene a B. and me and thereupon hauing sent for the B. and me before the B. came the doubting persons came first to the roome where I was and debated before me the aforesaid Question and not doubting of the first part to wit That there must be a continuall visible Church as they had heard graunted by Dr White and L. K. c. B. What Dr White and L. K. graunted neyther the B. nor I heard But I thinke both graunted a continuall and a visible Church neyther of them an infallible at least in your sense And your selfe in this Relation speake distractedly For in these few Lines from the beginning hither twice you adde infallible betweene continuall and visible and twice you leaue it out But this concerneth Dr W. and he hath answered it F. The Question was Which was that Church One would needs defend That not onely the Romane but also the Greeke Church was right B. When that Honourable Personage answered I was not by to heare But I presume hee was so farre from graunting that onely the Romane Church was right as that he did not graunt it right and that hee tooke on him no other defence of the poore Greeke Church than was according to Truth F. I told him That the Greeke Church had plainely changed and taught false in a Point of Doctrine concerning the Holy Ghost and that I had heard say that euen his Maiestie should say That the Greeke Church hauing erred against the Holy Ghost had lost the Holy Ghost B. You are very bold with his Maiestie to relate him vpon hearesay My intelligence serues me not to tell you what his Maiestie said but if hee said it not you haue beene too credulous to beleeue and too suddaine to report it Princes deserue and were wont to haue more respect than so If his Maiestie did say it there is truth in the speech the error is yours onely by mistaking what is meant by loosing the Holy Ghost For a particular Church may be said to loose the Holy Ghost two wayes or in two degrees The one when it looses such speciall assistance of that blessed Spirit as preserues it from all dangerous errors and finnes and the temporall punishment which is due vnto them And in this sense the Greeke Church lost the Holy Ghost for they erred against him they sinned against God and for this or other sinnes they were deliuered into another Babylonish Captiuitie vnder the Turke in which they yet are and from which God in his mercie deliuer them The other is when it looses not onely this assistance but all assistance ad hoc to this that they may remaine any longer a true Church And so Corinth and Ephesus and diuers others haue lost the Holy Ghost But in this sense the whole Greeke Church lost not the Holy Ghost for they continue a true Church in substance to and at this day though erroneous in the point which you mention F. The said person not knowing what to answer called in the B. who sitting downe first excused himselfe as one vnprouided and not much studied in Controuersies and desiring that in case he should faile yet the Protestant Cause might not be thought ill of B. The B. indeed excused himselfe and he had great reason so to doe But his Reason being grounded vpon his Modestie for the most part he is willing I should let you insult at your pleasure This onely by the way It may be fit others should know the B. had no information where the other Conferences brake off no instruction what should be the ground of this third Conference nor the full time of foure and twentie houres to bethinke himselfe whereas you make the sifting of these and the like Questions to the very Branne your dayly worke and came throughly furnished to the businesse Saint Augustine said once Scio me inualidum esse I know I am weake and yet he made good his Cause And the B. preferring the Cause before his Credit was modest and reasonable For there is no reason the weight of that whole Cause should rest vpon any one particular and great reason that the personall defects of any man should presse him but not the Cause F. It hauing a hundred better Schollers to maintaine it than he To which I said There were a thousand better Schollers than I to maintaine the Catholike Cause B. The B. in this had neuer so poore a conceit of the Protestants Cause as to thinke they had but a hundred better than he to maintaine it That which hath a hundred may haue as many more as it pleases God to giue and more than you And the B. shall euer be glad that the Church of England which at this time if his memorie reflect not amisse he named may haue farre more able defendants than himselfe he shall neuer enuie them but reioyce for her And hee makes no question but that if hee had named a thousand you would haue multiplyed yours into ten thousand for the Catholike Cause as you call it And this confidence of yours hath euer beene fuller of noyse than proofe But you admonish againe F. Then the Question about the Greeke Church being proposed I said as before that it had erred B. Then I thinke the Question about the Greeke Church was proposed But after you had with confidence
enough not spared to say That what the B. would not acknowledge in this cause you would wring and extort from him then indeed you said as before that it had erred And this no man denyed But euerie Error denyes not Christ the Foundation or makes Christ denie it or thrust it from the Foundation F. The B. said That the Error was not in Point fundamentall B. The B. was not so peremptorie His speech was That diuers learned men and some of your owne were of opinion That as the Greekes expressed themselues it was a Question not simply Fundamentall The B. knowes and acknowledges that Error of denying the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Sonne to be a grieuous Error in Diuinitie And sure it would haue grated the Foundation if they had so denyed the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Sonne as that they had made an inequalitie betweene the Persons But since their forme of speech is That the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father by the Sonne and is the Spirit of the Sonne without making any difference in the consubstantialitie of the Persons the B. dares not denie them to be a true Church for this though he confesses them an erroneous Church in this particular Now that diuers learned men were of opinion That à Filio per Filium in the sense of the Greeke Church was but a Question in modo loquendi in manner of speech and therefore not fundamentall is euident The Master and his Schollers agree vpon it The Greekes saith hee confesse the holy Ghost to be the Spirit of the Sonne with the Apostle Galat. 4. and the Spirit of Truth S. Ioh. 16. And since Non est aliud It is not another thing to say The Holy Ghost is the Spirit of the Father and the Sonne then that he is or proceeds from the Father and the Sonne in this they seeme to agree with vs in eandem Fidei Sententiam vpon the same Sentence of Faith though they differ in words Now in this cause where the words differ but the sentence of Faith is the same 〈◊〉 eadem euen altogether the same Can the Point be fundamentall You may make them no Church as Bellarmine doth and so denie them saluation which cannot be had out of the true Church but the B. dares not It ought to be no easie thing to condemne a man of Heresie in foundation of Faith much lesse a Church least of all so ample and large a Church as the Greeke especially so as to make them no Church Heauen Gates were not so easily shut against multitudes when S. Peter wore the Keyes at his owne Girdle And it is good counsaile which Alphonsus à Castro one of your owne giues Let them consider that pronounce easily of Heresie how easie it is for themselues to erre Or if you will pronounce consider what it is that seperates from the Church simply and not in part onely I must needs professe that I wish heartily as well as others that those distressed men whose Crosse is heauie alreadie had beene more plainely and moderately dealt withall though they thinke a diuerse thing from vs than they haue beene by the Church of Rome But hereupon you say you were forced F. Whereupon I was forced to repeat what I had formerly brought against Dr. White concerning Points Fundamentall B. Hereupon it is true that you read a large discourse out of a Booke printed which you said was yours The particulars all of them at the least the B. tells me he doth not now remember and is sure he did not then approoue But if they be such as were formerly brought against 〈◊〉 White they are by him formerly answered The first thing you did was the righting of S. Augustine Which Sentence the B. doth not at all remember was so much as named in the third Conference much lesse was it stood vpon and then righted by you Another place of S. Augustine indeed was which you omit but the place of it comes after about Tradition to which I remit it But you tell vs of a great proofe made out of this place These words containe two Propositions One That all Points defined by the Church are Fundamentall The other That this is prooued out of this place of S. Augustine 1. For the first That all Points defined by the Church are Fundamentall It was not the least meanes by which Rome grew to her Greatnesse to blast euerie Opposer shee had with the name of Heretike or Schismatike for this serued to shriuell the credit of the persons and the persons once brought into contempt and ignominie all the good they desired in the Church fell to dust for want of creditable persons to backe and support it To make this proceeding good in these later yeeres this course it seemes was taken The Schoole that must maintaine and so they doe That all Points defined by the Church are thereby Fundamentall necessarie to be beleeued of the substance of the Faith and that though it be determined quite Extra Scripturam And then leaue the wise and actiue heads to take order that there be strength enough readie to determine what is fittest for them But since these men distinguish not nor you betweene the Church in generall and a Generall Councell which is but her Representation for determinations of the Faith the B. though he be very slow in sifting or opposing what is concluded by lawfull generall and consenting Authoritie though hee giue as much as can be giuen to the definitions of Councels truly generall nay suppose hee should graunt which hee doth not That Generall Councels cannot erre yet this cannot downe with him That all Points euen so defined are Fundamentall For Deductions are not prime and Natiue Principles nor are Superstructures Foundations That which is a Foundation for all cannot be one and another in different Christians for then it could be no constant Rule for any nor could the soules of men rest vpon a shaking Foundation No If it be a true Foundation it must be common to all and firme vnder all in which sense the Articles of Christian Faith are Fundamentall And Irenaeus layes this for a ground That the whole Church howsoeuer dispersed in place speakes this with one mouth Hee which among the Guides of the Church is best able to speake vtters no more than this and lesse than this the most simple doth not vtter Therefore the Creed of which hee speakes is a common is a constant Foundation and an Explicite Faith must be of this in them which haue the vse of Reason for both Guides and simple people all the Church vtter this Now many things are defined by the Church which are but Deductions out of this which suppose them deduced right mooue farre from the Foundation without which Deductions explicitely beleeued many millions of Christians goe to Heauen and cannot therefore be Fundamentall in the Faith True
to a soule prepared by the present Churches Tradition and Gods grace The Difficulties which are pretended against this are not many and they will easily vanish 1. First you pretend wee goe to priuate Reuelations for Light to know Scripture No wee doe not you see it is excluded out of the very state of the Question and wee goe to the Tradition of the present Church and by it as well as you Here wee differ wee vse this as the first Motiue not as the last Resolution of our Faith wee resolue onely into prime Tradition Apostolicall and Scripture it selfe 2. Secondly you pretend wee doe not nor cannot know the prime Apostolicall Tradition but by the Tradition of the present Church and that therefore if the Tradition of the present Church be not Gods vnwritten Word and Diuine we cannot yet know Scripture to be Scripture by a Diuine Authoritie First suppose I could not know the prime Tradition to be Diuine but by the present yet it doth not follow that then I cannot know Scripture to be Scripture by a Diuine Authoritie because Diuine Tradition is not the sole and onely meanes to prooue it For suppose I had not nor could haue full assurance of Apostolicall Tradition Diuine yet the morall persuasion reason and force of the present Church is ground enough to mooue any reasonable man that it is fit hee should reade the Scripture and esteeme very reuerently and highly of it And this once done the Scripture hath then In and Home Arguments enough to put a soule that hath but ordinarie Grace out of doubt That Scripture is the Word of God infallible and Diuine Secondly Next the present Tradition though not absolutely Diuine yet by the helpe of Diuine Arguments internall to the Scripture is able to prooue the very prime Tradition for so long as the present agrees both with the prime Tradition and with the Scripture it selfe deliuered by it as in this it is found and agreed vpon that it doth and Hell it selfe is not able to belch out a good Argument against it it is a sufficient testimonie of the Scriptures Authoritie not by or of it selfe because not simply Diuine but by the prime Tradition and Scripture vpon which it grounds while it deliuers And both these are absolutely Diuine 3. Thirdly you pretend that wee make the Scripture absolutely and fully to be knowne Lumine suo by the Light and Testimonie which it hath in and giues to it selfe Against this you giue reason and proofe from our selues Your reason is If there be sufficient Light in Scripture to shew it selfe then euerie man that can and doth but reade it may know it presently to be the Diuine Word of God which we see by dayly experience men neither doe nor can First it is not absolutely nor vniuersally true There is sufficient Light therefore euerie man may see it Blind men are men and cannot see it and sensuall men in the Apostles iudgement are such Nor may wee denie and put out this Light as insufficient because blind Eyes cannot and peruerse Eyes will not see it no more than we may denie meat to be sufficient for nourishment though men that are heart-sicke cannot eate it Next wee doe not say That there is such a full Light in Scripture as that euerie man vpon the first sight must yeeld to it such Light as is found in prime Principles Euerie whole is greater than a part of the same and this The same thing cannot be and not be at the same time and in the same respect These carrie a naturall Light with them and euident for they are no sooner vnderstood than fully knowne to the conuincing of mans vnderstanding and so they are the beginning of knowledge which where it is perfect dwells in full Light but such a full Light wee doe neyther say is nor require to be in Scripture and if any particular man doe let him answere for himselfe The Question is onely of such a Light in Scripture as is of force to breed Faith that it is the Word of God not to make a perfect Knowledge Now Faith of whatsoeuer it is this or other Principle it is an Euidence as well as a Knowledge and a firmer and surer Euidence than any Knowledge can haue because it rests vpon Diuine Authoritie which cannot deceiue whereas Knowledge or at least he that thinkes he knowes is not euer certaine in deductions from Principles I say firmer Euidence but not so cleare For it is of things not seene in regard of the Obiect and in regard of the Subiect that sees it is in aenigmate in a Glasse or darke speaking Now God doth not require a full demonstratiue Knowledge in vs that the Scripture is his Word and therefore in his prouidence kindled in it no Light for that but he requires our Faith of it and such a certaine Demonstration as may fit that And for that he hath left sufficient Light in Scripture to Reason and Grace meeting where the soule is morally prepared by the Tradition of the Church vnlesse you be of Bellarmine's opinion That to beleeue there are any Diuine Scriptures is not omninò necessarie to saluation The Authoritie which you pretend is out of Hooker Of things necessarie the verie chiefest is to know what Bookes wee are bound to esteeme holy which Point is confessed impossible for the Scripture it selfe to teach Of this Brierly the Store-house for all Priests that will be idle and yet seeme well read tells vs That Hooker giues a verie sensible Demonstration It is not the Word of God which doth or possibly can assure vs that we doe well to thinke it is his Word for if any one Booke of Scripture did giue testimonie to all yet still that Scripture which giueth credit to the rest would require another to giue credit vnto it Nor could wee euer come to any pause to rest our assurance this way so that vnlesse beside Scripture there were something that might assure c. And this he acknowledgeth saith Brierly is the Authoritie of Gods Church Certainely Hooker giues a true and a sensible Demonstration but Brierly wants fidelitie and integritie in citing him For in the first place Hookers speech is Scripture it selfe cannot teach this nor can the Truth say that Scripture it selfe can It must needs ordinarily haue Tradition to prepare the mind of a man to receiue it And in the next where hee speakes so sensibly That Scripture cannot beare witnesse to it selfe nor one part of it to another that is grounded vpon Nature which admits no created thing to be witnesse to it selfe and is acknowledged by our Sauiour If I beare witnesse to my selfe my witnesse is not true i. not of force to be reasonably accepted for Truth But then it is more than manifest that Hooker deliuers his Demonstration of Scripture alone For if Scripture hath another proofe to vsher it and lead it in then no
question it can both prooue and approoue it selfe His words are So that vnlesse besides Scripture there be c. Besides Scripture therefore he excludes not Scripture but calls for another proofe to lead it in namely Tradition which no man that hath braines about him denyes In the two other places Brierly falsifies shamefully for folding vp all that Hooker sayes in these words This other meanes to assure vs besides Scripture is the Authoritie of Gods Church he wrinkles that worthie Author desperately and shrinkes vp his meaning In the former place abused by Brierly no man can set a better state of the question betweene Scripture and Tradition than Hooker doth His words are these The Scripture is the ground of our Beleefe The Authoritie of man that is the name he giues to Tradition is the Key which opens the doore of entrance into the knowledge of the Scripture I aske now when a man is 〈◊〉 and hath viewed a house and by viewing likes it and vpon liking resolues vnchangeably to dwell there doth he set vp his resolution vpon the Key that let him in No sure but vpon the goodnesse and commodiousnesse which he sees in the house And this is all the difference that I know betweene vs in this Point In which doe you grant as yee ought to doe that wee resolue our Faith into Scripture as the Ground and wee will neuer denie that Tradition is the Key that lets vs in In the latter place Hooker is as plaine as constant to himselfe and Truth His words are The first outward motiue leading men so to esteeme of the Scripture is the Authoritie of Gods Church c. But afterwards the more we bestow our labour in reading or learning the Mysteries thereof the more we find that the thing it selfe doth answer our receiued opinion concerning it so that the former inducement preuailing somewhat with vs before doth now much more preuaile when the verie thing hath ministred further reason Here then againe in his iudgement is Tradition the first inducement but the farther Reason and Ground is the Scripture and resolution of Faith euer settles vpon the farthest Reason it can not vpon the first inducement So that the state of this Question is firme and plaine enough to him that will not shut his eyes The last thing I shall trouble you with is That this method and manner of proouing Scripture to be the Word of God is the same which the antient Church euer held namely Tradition or Ecclesiasticall Authoritie first and then internall Arguments from the Scripture it selfe The first Church of Christ the Apostles themselues had their warrant from Christ their Tradition was euerie way Diuine both in the thing they deliuered and in the manner of their witnessing it But in after-times of the Church men prooue Scripture to be the Word of God by internall Arguments as the chiefe thing vpon which they resolue though Tradition be the first that mooues them to it This way the Church went in S. Augustine's time He was no enemie to Church-Tradition yet when he would prooue that the Author of the Scripture and so of the whole knowledge of Diuinitie as it is supernaturall is Deus in Christo God in Christ he takes this as the all-sufficient way and giues foure proofes all internall to the Scripture first The Miracles secondly That there is nothing carnall in the Doctrine thirdly That there hath beene such performance of it fourthly That by such a Doctrine of Humilitie the whole World almost hath beene conuerted And whereas ad muniendam fidem for the defending of the Faith and keeping it entire there are two things requisite Scripture and Church-Tradition Vincent Lirinensis places Authoritie of Scriptures first and then Tradition And since it is apparant that Tradition is first in order of Time it must necessarily follow that Scripture is first in order of Nature that is the chiefe vpon which Faith rests and resolues it selfe And your owne Schoole confesses this was the way euer The woman of Samaria is a knowne resemblance but allowed by your selues For quotidie dayly with them that are without Christ enters by the Woman that is the Church and they beleeue by that fame which she giues c. But when they come to heare Christ himselfe they beleeue his words before the words of the woman For when they haue once found Christ they doe more beleeue his words in Scripture than they doe the Church which testifies of him because then propterillam for the Scripture they beleeue the Church and if the Church should speake contrarie to the Scripture they would not beleeue it Thus the Schoole taught then and thus the Glosse commented then And when men haue tyred themselues hither they must come The Key that lets men in to the Scriptures euen to this knowledge of them that they are the Word of God is Tradition of the Church but when they are in they heare Christ himselfe immediately speaking in Scripture to the Faithfull And his Sheepe doe not onely heare but know his voyce To conclude then wee haue a double Diuine Testimonie altogether infallible to confirme vnto vs that Scripture is the Word of God The first is the Tradition of the Church of the Apostles themselues who deliuered immediately to the World the Word of Christ the other the Scripture it selfe but after it hath receiued this Testimonie And into these wee doe and may safely resolue our Faith As for the Tradition of after ages in and about whom Miracles and Diuine power were not so euident we beleeue them because they doe not preach other things than those former the Apostles left in scriptis certissimis in most certaine Scripture And it appeares by men in the middle ages that these Writings were vitiated in nothing by the concordant consent in them of all succeedors to our owne time And now by this time it will be no hard thing to reconcile the Fathers which seeme to speake differently in no few places both one from another and the same from themselues touching Scripture and Tradition and that as well in this Point to prooue Scripture to be the Word of God as for concordant exposition of Scripture in all things else When therefore the Fathers say Wee haue the Scripture by Tradition or the like either they meane the Tradition of the Apostles themselues deliuering it and there when it is knowne we may resolue our Faith or if they speake of the present Church then they meane that the Tradition of it is that by which wee first receiue the Scripture as by an according meanes to the prime Tradition But because it is not simply Diuine wee resolue not our Faith into it nor settle our Faith vpon it till it resolue it selfe into the prime Tradition of the Apostles or the Scripture or both and there we rest with it And you cannot shew an ordinarie consent of Fathers nay Can you or any
of the Pope infallible nay more infallible than it For any Generall Councell may erre with you if the Pope confirme it not So belike this Infallibilitie rests not in the Representatiue Bodie the Councell nor in the whole Bodie the Church but in your Head of the Church the Pope of Rome Now the B. may aske you To what end such a trouble for a Generall Councell Or wherein are wee neerer to Vnitie if the Pope confirme it not You answere though not in the Conference yet elsewhere That the Pope erres not especially 〈◊〉 Sentence in a Generall Councell And why especially Doth the deliberation of a Councell helpe any thing to the Conclusion Surely no for you hold the Conclusion Propheticall the meanes fallible and fallible Deliberations cannot aduance to a Propheticke Conclusion And iust as the Councell is in Stapletons iudgement for the Definition and the Proofes so is the Pope in the iudgement of Melch Canus and them which followed him Propheticall in the Conclusion The Councell then is called but onely in effect to heare the Pope giue his Sentence in more State Else what meanes this of Stapleton The Pope by a Councell ioyned vnto him acquires no new Power or Authoritie or certaintie in iudging no more than a Head is the wiser by ioyning the offices of the rest of the members to it than it is without them Or this of Bellarmine That all the firmenesse and infallibilitie of a Generall Councell is onely from the Pope not partly from the Pope and partly from the Councell So belike the Presence is necessarie not the Assistance Which Opinion is the most groundlesse and worthlesse that euer offered to take possession of the Christian Church And I am persuaded many learned men among your selues scorne it at the very heart You professe after That you hold nothing against your Conscience I must euer wonder much how that can be true since you hold this of the Popes Infallibilitie especially by being Propheticall in the Conclusion If this be true Why doe you not lay all your strength together all of your whole Societie and make this one Proposition euident All Controuersies about matter of Faith are ended and without anie great trouble to the Christian World if you can make this good Till then this shame will follow you infallibly and eternally That you should make the Pope a meere man Principium Fidei a Principle of Faith and make the mouth of Christs Vicar sole Iudge both of his Word be it neuer so manifest and of his Church be shee neuer so learned and carefull of his Truth The Conference growes to an end and I must meet it againe ere wee part For you say F. After this we all rising the doubting Person asked the B. Whether shee might be saued in the Romane Faith Hee answered Shee might B. What Not one Answere perfectly related The Bishops Answere to this was generall for the ignorant that could not discerne the Errors of that Church so they held the Foundation and conformed themselues to a Religious life But why doe you not speake out what the B. added in this particular That it must needs goe harder with the doubting partie euen in point of Saluation because the said partie had beene brought to vnderstand verie much in these controuerted Causes of Religion And a man that comes to know much had need carefully bethinke himselfe that hee oppose not knowne Truth against the Church that made him a Christian. For Saluation may be in the Church of Rome and yet they not find it that make sure of it F. I bad the Person doubting marke that B. This Answer I am sure troubles not you But it seemes you would faine haue it lay a Load of Enuie vpon the B. that you professe you bad the doubting partie so carefully Marke that Well you bad the said person Marke that For what For some great matter or for some new Not for some new sure For the Protestants haue euer beene readie for Truth and in Charitie to graunt as much as might be And therefore from the beginning many learned men graunted this So that you need not haue put such a serious Marke that vpon the speech of the B. as if none before him had or none but hee would speake it And if your Marke that were not for some new matter was it for some great Yes sure it was For what greater than Saluation But then I pray Marke this too That Might be saued graunts but a Possibilitie no sure or safe way to Saluation The Possibilitie I thinke cannot be denyed the Ignorants especially because they hold the Foundation and suruey not the Building And the Foundation can deceiue no man that rests vpon it But a secure way they cannot goe that hold with such corruptions when they know them Now whether it be wisedome in such a point as Saluation is to forsake a Church in the which the ground of Saluation is firme to follow a Church in which it is possible one may be saued but verie probable one may doe worse if he looke not well to the Foundation iudge yee I am sure S. Augustine thought it was not and iudged it a great sinne in point of Saluation for a man to preferre incerta certis incertainties and naked possibilitiesbefore an euident and certaine course And you your selues in the point of condignitie of Merit write it and preach it boysterously to the people but are content to die renouncing the condignitie of all your owne Merits and trust to Christs If you will not venture to die as you liue liue and beleeue in time as you meane to die And one thing more because you bid Marke this let me remember to tell for the benefit of others Vpon this verie Point That wee acknowledge an honest ignorant Papist may be saued you and your like worke vpon the aduantage of our Charitie and your owne want of it to abuse the weake For thus I am told you worke vpon them You see the Protestants at least manie of them confesse there may be Saluation in our Church wee absolutely denie there is Saluation in theirs therefore it is safer to come to ours than to stay in theirs to be where almost all graunt saluation than where the greater part of the World denie it This Argument is verie preuayling with men that cannot weigh it and with women especially that are put in feare by violent though causelesse denying Heauen vnto them But it is stronger in the cunning than the true force of it For all Arguments are verie moouing that lay their ground vpon the Aduersaries Confession especially if it be confessed and auouched to be true But if you would speake truly and say Manie Protestants indeed confesse there is Saluation possible to be attained in the Romane Church but yet the Errors of that Church are so manie and some such as weaken the Foundation that it is verie hard to goe that way to
Heauen especially to them that haue had the Truth manifested the heart of this Argument were broken Besides the force of this Argument lyes vpon two things one expressed the other vpon the By. First That which is expressed is Wee and our Aduersaries consent That there is saluation to some in the Romane Church What would you haue vs as malicious at least as rash as your selues are to vs and denie you so much as possibilitie of saluation If wee should wee might make you in some things straine for a Proofe But wee haue not so learned Christ as eyther to returne euill for euill in this headie course or to denie Saluation to some ignorant silly Soules whose humble peaceable obedience makes them safe among any part of men that professe the Foundation Christ. And therefore seeke not to helpe our cause by denying this comfort to silly Christians as you most fiercely doe where you can come to worke vpon them And this was an old Tricke of the Donatists For in the Point of Baptisme Whether that Church or in the part of Donatus they 〈◊〉 all to be baptised among them Why because both parts 〈◊〉 that 〈◊〉 was true 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 which that peeuish Sect most vniustly denyed the sound part as S. Augustine deliuers it I would aske now Had not they Orthodoxe Baptisme among them because the Donatists denyed it iniuriously Or should the Orthodoxe against Truth haue denyed Baptisme among the Donatists to crie 〈◊〉 with them Or that their Argument might not be the stronger because both parts graunted But marke this how farre you runne from all common Principles of Christian Peace as well as Christian Truth while you denie Saluation most vniustly to vs from which you are further off your selues Besides if this were or could be made a concluding Argument I pray why doe not you beleeue with vs in the Point of the Eucharist For all sides agree in the Faith of the Church of England That in the most blessed Sacrament the worthie Receiuer is by his Faith made spiritually partaker of the true and Reall Bodie and Bloud of Christ truly and really and of all the benefits of his Passion Your 〈◊〉 adde a manner of this his presence Transubstantiation which manie denie and the Lutherans a manner of this presence Consubstantiation which more denie If this Argument be good then euen for this consent it is safer communicating with the Church of England than with the Romane or Lutheran because all agree in this Truth not in any other Opinion And therefore if you will force the Argument to make that the safest way of Saluation which differing parts agree on Why doe you not yeeld to the force of the same Argument in the 〈◊〉 of the Sacrament one of the most immediate meanes of Saluation where not onely the most but all agree Secondly The other vpon the By which helpesthis Argument is your continuall poore Out-crie against vs That wee cannot be saued because wee are 〈◊〉 of the Church Sure if I thoughtI were out I would get in as fast as I could But what doe you meane by Out of the Church Sure out of the Romane Church Why but the Romane Church and the Church of England are but two distinct members of that Catholike Church which is spread ouer the face of the Earth Therefore Rome is not the House where the Church dwells but Rome it selfe as well as other particular Churches dwells in this great Vniuersall House vnlesse you will shut vp the Church in Rome as the Donatists did in Africke I come a little lower Rome and other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are in this 〈◊〉 to whom 〈◊〉 Christ the care of the Household is committed by God the Father and the Catholike Church the Mother of 〈◊〉 Christians Rome as an elder Sister had a great 〈◊〉 committed vnto her in and from the prime times of the Church and to her Bishop in her but at this time to 〈◊〉 passe manie 〈◊〉 that 〈◊〉 formerly beene in the House England and some other Sisters of hers are fallen out in the House What then Will the Father and the Mother God and the Church 〈◊〉 one Child out because another is angrie with it Or when did Christ giue that Power to the Elder Sister 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and her 〈◊〉 the Bishop there should thrust out what Child 〈◊〉 pleased Especially when shee her selfe is 〈◊〉 accused to haue giuen the offence that is taken in the House Or will not both Father and Mother be sharper to her for this vniust and vnnaturall vsage of her younger Sisters but their 〈◊〉 Children Nay is it not the next way to make them 〈◊〉 her out of doores that is so 〈◊〉 to the rest It is well for all Christian men and Churches that the Father and Mother of them are 〈◊〉 so 〈◊〉 as some would haue them And Saluation need not be feared of any 〈◊〉 Child 〈◊〉 outing from the Church because this Elder 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are discouered in the House and 〈◊〉 growne 〈◊〉 for it to them that complayned But as Children crie when they are awaked so doe you and 〈◊〉 with all that come 〈◊〉 you And 〈◊〉 confesses That yee were in 〈◊〉 dead sleepe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 much 〈◊〉 when the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you Now if you can prooue that Rome is 〈◊〉 the Catholike Church it selfe as you commonly call it speake out and 〈◊〉 it In the meane time you may 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 too if you will and it seemes you doe for here you forget 〈◊〉 what the B. said to you 〈◊〉 The doubting Person said the B. to me may be better saued in it than you B. 〈◊〉 that is easier than you than 〈◊〉 man that knowes so much of Truth and opposes against it as you and your 〈◊〉 doe How farre you know Truth other men may iudge by your proofes and causes of Knowledge but how 〈◊〉 you oppose it when it is knowne that is within and no man can know but God and your selues Howsoeuer where the Foundation is but held there for ordinarie men it is not the 〈◊〉 of vnderstanding but the simplicitie of beleeuing that makes them safe For Saint Augustiue speakes there of men in the Church and no man can be simply said to be out of the visible Church that is baptized and holds the Foundation And as it is the simplicitie of beleeuing that makes them safe yea safest so is it sometimes a quicknesse of vnderstanding that louing it selfe and some by respects too well makes men take vp an vnsafe way about the Faith So that there is no question but manie were saued in corrupted times of the Church when their Leaders vnlesse they repented before death were lost And Saint Augustines Rule will be true That in all Corruptions of the Church there will euer be a difference betweene an Heretike and a plaine well-meaning man that is mis-led and beleeues an Heretike I pray you Marke this and so by Gods grace will I. For our Reckoning will bee
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those things which are behind or wanting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the afflictions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Christ in my flesh 〈◊〉 his body which is the Church The first part of these words prooueth that S. Paul suffered for the Collossians But because he might suffer for the confirmation of their faith or as an example of patience or by way of persecution because he preached the Gospell to them and other Churches it cannot be concluded that hee suffered to make satisfaction for their sinnes Secondly The next words conclude not Satisfaction for Christs Afflictions and Passions are of two kinds Some Personall and in his owne flesh Some By Sympathie and compassion in his members The first are satisfactorie the second are exemplarie purgatiue probatiue or for the edifying of the Church S. Paul supplyed not or perfected not the first Esa. 63.3 for then Christs sufferings vpon the Crosse were imperfect but both S. Paul and all other iust persons which patiently beare affliction and indure the Crosse supply and accomplish that which is yet wanting in Christ as he is considered in a mysticall vnion to his Church Christ saith to Saul Act. 9.4 Saul Saul Why persecutest thou me and v. 5. I am Iesus whom thou persecutest S. Augustine and S. Gregorie say That Christ and the Church are one mysticall Body Therefore when the members suffer the head suffers and the afflictions of the members are the afflictions of Christ 2. Cor. 1. 5. 1. Cor. 12. 12. It is also remarkeable that not onely the Fathers but the maior part of Popish Doctors expound this Scripture in such sort that it serueth not at all to maintaine Papall Indulgences And Estius a moderne Pontifician saith That whereas 〈◊〉 of his part straine the Text of S. Paul to prooue Satisfactions and Indulgences himselfe is of mind that the said Doctrine cannot effectually be prooued by this place The other place 2. Cor. 12. 15. I wil verie gladly spend and be spent for you or as the Rhemists translate I most gladly will bestow and will my selfe moreouer be bestowed for your soules affoordeth no argument for Satisfactions and Pardons Caietan Estius Iustinian and other Popish expositors themselues deliuer the sence of this Text in manner following S. Paul manifesteth his paternall affection to the Corinthians saying I am readie not only as a Father to bestow all that I haue vpon you so farre am I from seeking any thing of yours but also to spend my life for you Now by what Art or Engine can Papists extort Pardons or Satisfactions out of this Text doth it follow that if Saint Paul be readie to spend himselfe life and state for the good of his flocke therefore there is a rich stocke and treasure of superabundant Passions and Satisfactions laid vp by S. Paul to bee spent by the Corinthians at their need Surely our Aduersarie intended rather to deride the world than to giue men satisfaction when he presented vs with such inconsequent stuffe But the Iesuit secondeth his former inference by a testimonie of Origen I answer Origen in the place obiected speaketh of purging sinne it selfe by the passions of Martyres and not of the temporall mulct or paine of sinne onely But the bloud of Martyres purgeth not sinne it selfe by way of condigne Satisfaction our Aduersaries being witnesses but at the vttermost by way of Deprecation now Deprecation and Satisfaction properly taken are of diuers natures The place of S. Augustine is strained against his meaning for this Father speaketh of all the members of Christ which suffer for their Masters cause But in our Aduersaries Tenet all that suffer for Christ haue not superabundant Satisfactions but onely some And this Father is so farre from maintaining workes of Supererogation as that he saith Pro modulo nostro exoluimus quod debemus pro posse virium nostrarum quasi canonem passionum inferimus c. According to our small measure we pay that which we are obliged vnto and according to our power we cast in as it were the stint of our passions but they which pay a stint and render that whereunto of right they are obliged haue not superaboundant Passions or workes of Supererogation IESVIT This was the practise of the Primitiue Church which at the petition of constant confessours in prison did release the penalties that sinners were inioined to performe to satisfie non onely the discipline of the Church but also the wrath of God after the remission of sinne still continuing vnto the infliction of temporall paine as appeareth by the testimonie of S. Cyprian And that this relaxation of temporall paine was done by applying the abundant satisfaction of holy Confessours and designed Martyres vnto the poenitents that receiued indulgence at their intercessions appeares by Tertullian For hee falling from the Church into the errours of Montanus whereof one was That for Christians sinning after Baptisme there was no remission of sinne refutes the Catholique custome of remitting penalties vnto sinners for the merits of Martyres speaking thus Let it suffice the Martirs that they haue cancelled and satisfied their owne sinnes Jt is ingratitude or pride for one prodigally to cast abroad vpon others that which as a great benefit was bestowed vpon him And speaking vnto the Martir saith Jf thou bee a sinner how can the oyle of thy lampe suffice both for thee and mee By which haereticall impugnation appeares that the Catholicke Doctrine then was that men might satisfie one for another and that the abundant satisfactions of some that suffered exceedingly as Martirs were applied for the Redemption of some others more remisse and negligent not from eternall but onely temporall punishment ANSWER You are an vnfaithfull Relatour of the practise of the Primitiue Church which was as followeth After foule and enormous knowne offences committed by Christians and especially after denying the Faith or Sacrificing to Idols offendours were put to a grieuous and long Penance It fell out sometimes that there was iust reason why the rigour of Penance should be mittigated either in respect of the kinde of duresse imposed or in regard of the length and continuance Which fauour the Bishops and Pastours of each Church not the Romane onely had authoritie by the Canons to grant as they saw iust cause This mitigation and relaxation of Penance was called by the name of Pardon and Indulgence and in the same there was no buying or selling no reference to Purgatorie Secondly Whereas you pretend that Popes Pardons were in vse in the Primitiue Church many of your owne part controll your impudencie to wit Durand Antonine Maior Roffensis Angelus de Clauasio Cassander And 〈◊〉 denyes That the Church hath any Treasurie 〈◊〉 of the merits of Christ and of the Saints The 〈◊〉 is maintained by Angelus de Clauasio