direct places of Scripture as Catholiks bring for the infallibilitie of the Church onely prudential motiues To say nothing of the testimonie of Fathers conuincent reasons and plain confession of Protestants which hereafter we shal bring for the same purpose 6. To al the former proofes of the infallibilitie of the Church taken out of holie Scripture I wil add one taken from the Apostles Creed or Symbol which c Caluin 2. Instit. c. 16. §. 8. Vvhitaker l. 3. de script c. 3 sect 1. Protestants say is an Epitome of the Scripture ad conteineth al fundamental points of faith For in that we profess to beleue the holie Catholik Church And holie she cannot be if she sinfully err in anie point of faith becaus euerie sinful error in faith is heresie and euerie heresie a sin which excludeth out of heauen Nor Catholik she could be if she err sinfully or not sinfully in anie matter of faith becaus Catholik includeth orthodoxie that is right beleef as is euident becaus Catholik is opposit to heretik as also becaus the Fathers affirme it as d L. 1. in Gen. Epist. 48. S. Austin S. e Catâ—chesi â—8 Cyril S. f Epist 5. Pation and g Optatus l. 1. others And namely S. h L. de vniâ—ate Austin sayeth that though Christians were spred ouer the world and yet did not beleue aright they were not Catholiks Which sheueth that Catholik doth not include onely diffusion but also Orthodoxie And if the Church be euermore orthodox she is euermore vnerring in matters of faith and we professing in our Creed that she is euer Catholik profess that she iâ— euer vnerring in matters of faith which is to be as infallible as we mean and as Laude sec 21. § 5. saieth wel If we wil keep vp our Creed the whole militant Church must be holie And holie she cannot be if she sinfully err anie waie against faith which is the foundation of al holines SEAVENT CHAPTER That the true Church of God is a sufficient and infallible Proposer â—f al points of faith proued by the holie Fathers 1. S. Ireney l. 3. c. 4. It is easie to receaue the truth from the Church seing the Apostles haue most fully deposited in her as in a rich store-house al things belonging to truth Whitaker Contr. 1. q. 6. c. 12. p. 389. saieth we grant this But indeed they are far from granting it as shal presently appeare Chillingworth c. 2. n 148. answereth that though S. Ireney say The Apostles deposited al truth in the Church yet he saieth not that she shal alwaies keep al truth For the Apostles deposited al truth in particular persons and Churches and yet these kept it not alwaies But S. Ireney not onely saieth that the Apostles deposited al truth in the Church but as in a riche store-house and that it is easie to receaue Vincent Ecclesia sedula cauta dâ—positorum apud se dogmatum custos it from her which he nether saied nor could saie of anie particular persons or Churches And for to be a rich store house of al truth from which is easie to receaue it is to be a sufficient and infallible keeper and Proposer of al truth And Whitaker c. citato p. 388. confesseth that S. Ireney did appeale from scripture to Church and to Apostolical tradition and saieth that heretiks are to be refuted by tradition Which is to confess that S. Ireney thouht the Churches tradition infallible for els he had betraied the Christiâ—n cause in appealing from an infallible Proposer to a fallible and had taught that heretiks were to be refuted by fallible meanes 2. S. Athanasius epist ad Epictetum disputing against Arians saieth we must answer onely which alone sufficeth these things are not of the Church nor our Ancestors thought so Behold the authoritie i Contrà Vvhitaker l. 2. de script p. 239. alone of the Church accounted sufficient to refure heretiks and if sufficient surely infallible 3. S. Chrysostom in 2. Thessal c. 2. It is a tradition of the Church ask no more which words are so plain for the sufficiencie and infallibilitie of the Churchestradition as it made Whitaker c. cit p. 391 to crie It is au inconsiderate speech and vnworthie Church infallible in vniuersal traditions of so greata Father and Chillingworth c. 3. n. 45. to confess that the Church is â—nfallible in her vniuersal traditions but not saieth he in al her decrees or definitions of controuersie But what word of God warranteth the Churches Infallibilitie in her traditions and not in her definitions of faith Besids Chillingworth c. 2. n. 25. and els where often and Protestants generally denie anie tradition of the Church to be infallible becaus nothing is infallible wiâ—h them but the written word of God and tradition is not written I add also that S. Chrysostom saieth not it is an vniuersal tradition but simply It is a tradition 4. Basil l. de Spiritu sancto c. 27. What things are obserued and preached of vs we haue receaued partly by written doctrin partly by the Apostles deliuered to vs in misterie and both these haue equal vertue to pietie Behold traditions of the Apostles not written and they of equal vertue to pietie with their written doctrin and he addeth that the Ghospel without tradition of the Church would haue no force but be a smal or bare letter To Which Whitaker c. cit p. 390. saieth If k So Keâ—â—nitiu part 1. §. 148. Basil were aliue he would without doubt not acknowledg this sentence which deserueth to be cast out and condemned of al pious men Which is plainly to confess that S. Basil thought the Churches tradition to be a sufficient proposal of points of faith and without it the Scripture would be to no purpose 5. Tertullian l. Praescrip c. 16. teacheth that we ought not to dispute against Heretiks out of Scripture but out of tradition Whitaker c. cit p. 392 answereth that he spake of such heretiks as denied the Scripture and therfore as Ireney did appealed from Scripture to the Church But first it is fals that Tertullian spake onely of such heretiks as denied Tertul. appealed from scripture to the Church the Scripture For he plainly speaketh of al such as denie ether the scripture or corrupted the true sense of it as al heretiks doe Secondly I ask when Tertullian appealed from Scripture to Church did he appeale to some sufficient and infallible proof of faith or no If he did we haue what we desire if not he betraied the Christian cause and taught vs to leaue the onely infallible means of refuting heretiks and to take a fallible 6. S. Cyprian l. de Vnitate The spouse of Christ cannot be made an adulteress and if she cannot be made an Adulteress she is infallible in faith 7. Hierom. l. contra Vigilantium I reiect al Doctrins contrarie to the Church and with open mouth condemn them And dialogo contra Lucifer I
p. 376. and c. 14. p. 399. Contro The onelie sufficient means 2. q. 5. c. 6. 9. Chillingworth c. 2. n. 3. scriptures be the sole Iudge of Controuersies that is the sole rule for man to iudg them Sole Rule by And he inscribeth that Chapter thus scripture the onely rule wherby to iudg of Controuersies Where § 32. he saieth I cannot know anie doctrin to be a diuine and supernatural truth or a part of Christianitie but onely becaus the scripture saies so And where saieth the Scripture that it self is the word of God Who wil see more Protestants may read Zuinglius in Hospin part 2. Histor fol. 23. Bernenses ibid. fol. 52. Beza Apol. contra Sanitem p. 289. and in Colloq Montisbel p. 10. Whitaker l. 1 de Script p. 146. l. 3. p. 483. l. 9. contra Dureum sec 64. Morton to 2. Apologiae l. 1. c. 45. 46. 47. 49. l. 5. c. 12. he saieth Matters of faith must relie onely on the light of the letters of faith Martyr in Disput Oxon p. 143. and Pareus Colleg. Theol. 3. disp 2. affirme that Scripture is the onely Onelie external infallible means external infallible means to get faith and as necessarie to the saluation of the Church as meat to life as also Pareus before said and Whitaker also White in his Defense p. 69. The whole rule of the Churches iudgment Vvhole Rule is onely scripture onely scripture onely scripture and nothing but scripture SECOND SECTION Protestants sometimes denie it PRotestants doe diuers waies denie Scripture to be the sole or entire rule of faith First in formal termes For thus Chillinhworth c. 2. n. 8. p. 55. when Protestants affirme against Papists that the scripture is a perfect rule of faith their meaning is not that by scripture al things absolutly may be proued which are to be beleued For it can neuer be proued by scripture to Not al things absolutely a Gainsayer that there is a God or that the Book called the scripture is the word of God Ibid. n. 155. p. 114. scripture is not a Iudge of Controuersies but a Rule to iudge them by and that not an absolutly perfect Rule but as perfect Not an absolutey perfect Rule as a written Rule can be which must alwaies need something els which is ether euidently true oreuidently credible to giue attestation to it See also n. 156. Feild l 4. de Eccles c. 15. we doe not so make the scripture the Rule of our faith but that other things in their kinde are Rules likewise in such sort as it is not safe without respect had vnto Not safe by Sctipture alâ—ne them to iudg of things by Scripture alone Hooker l. 1 § 14. Albeit scripture doe profess to contein in it al things which are necessarie to saluation yet the meaning cannot be simply of al things Not simply al things necessarie which are necessarie Secondly they confess that Scripture is no sufficient Rule to beleue that it self is the word of God or who are Schismatiks Hooker l. 2. § 4. It is not the word of God which Scripture can not assure vs that it iâ— the word of God doth or possibly can assure vs that it is the word of God By what then are you infallibly assured Is it by the word of man Laude Relat. sec 16. p. 70. There is no place in scripture which tels vs that such books conteining such and particulars No place in Scâ—iptuâ—e are the Canon and infallible wil and word of God And p. 69. That scripture should be fully and sufficiently known as by diuine and infallible testimonie lumine proprio by resplendencie of that light which it hath in it self onely and by the witnes that it can so giue to it self I could neuer yet see cause to allow P. 80. The light which is in Scripture itself is not bright enough it cannot beare sufficient witnes to itself P. 88. Where he Hooker speaks so Can not bear witnes to it self sensibly that Scripture cannot beare witnes to it self nor one parte of it to an other that is grounded vpon nature which admits no created thing to be witnes to it self and is acknowledged by our Sauior Sec. 25. n. 6. The Iudge shal be the Scripture and the Primitiue Church Primitiue Church iudge Chillingworth c. 2. n. 11. p. 52. Scripture we say is the rule to iudge controuersies by yet not al simply but al the controuersies of Christians of those that are already agreed vpon this first Not al controuersies by Scripture principle That the Scripture is the word of God n. 27. When Scripture is affirmed to be the rule by which al controuersies of religion are to be decided those are to be excepted out of this generalitie which concern the Scripture it self Ibid. Your Negatiue Conclusion That these questions Not controuersies â—bâ—ut Scripture it self touching Scripture are not decidable by Scripture you needed not haue cited anie reason to proue it it is euident by itself Which he often repeateth as n. 29. 46. 52. 156. And n. 27. The question whether scuh or such a book be Onely by the Church Canonical scripture affirmatiuely cannot be decided but onely by the testimonie of the ancient Churches And n. 35. you demand whether that by the Churches Assured by the Church consent they are assured what scriptures are Canonical I answer yes they are so And wheras you infer from Church iudge of the Scripture hence This is to make the Church Iudge I haue told you already that of this controuersie we make the Church Iudge Feild l. 4 de Eccles c. 7. To him that doubteth of both old andnew Testament we must not alleadg the authoritie of ether of these but some other thing Morton to 2. Apol. l. 5. c. 14. It is that which we wold haue That Scripture is to be accounted Iudge of those who beleue the scripture Which is plainly to confess that it is not Iudge of al. And Ibid. c. 10. We account not scripture the onely but the supreme Interpreter Not onely Scripture And c. 57. Protestants doe not so make the scripture the supreme Iudge of Controuersies as therfore they refuse the iudgment of Councels And l. 3. de Missa c. 3. The Iudgment of sense in Sense a ground of Protest fâ—ith sensible obiects is a notable ground of faith Whitaker Contro 1. q. 5. c. 6. He leeseth his labor who out of scripture disputeth against those that denie the scripture Against such we must dispute out of the testimonie of the Church or vse other arguments l. 1. de Script p. 92. The Creed of the Apostles is the rule of faith Creed is the rule Plessie of the Church c. 3. The question with the Donatists was more for matter of fact then of right as who had first failed in Charitie offended the Schisme not decided by Scripture Communion opened the gate
cause the chief principle or ground of faith and into which diuine faith is resolued Whitaker Contro 1. q. 6. c. 7. I grant that Ireney saieth some had Faith had without Scripture faith and no Scripture some Barbarians for a time had no Scripture For some time doctrin may be kept entire without writing Scripture not simply necessarie Hence he concludeth That scriptures are not simply necessarie Right And the same generally al Protestants confess And Contro 2. q. 5. c. 18. p. 548. Manie may be good Christians who neuer read scripture Ibid. q 3. c. 3. p. 320. It may be that there be manie Christians who know not the Canon of Scripture nor euer saw anie books But if Scripture were the formal cause and ground of faith faith could neuer be in anie men nor in anie time without Scripture and Scripture would be simply necessarie to faith For the formal cause of faith is alwaies necessarie to faith and simply necessarie to it becaus it is the cause or motiue for which we beleue And faith in ordinarie course cannot be but for the external formal cause of it or thus The formal cause of beleuing must be known or be beleued of al men and in al times But Scripture is not so Therfore it is not the formal cause of faith and much less the last and vttermost formal cause of faith Zuinglius in Exegesi to 2. fol. 347. We doe not think that faith can Zuinglius had his faith not out of Scripture be gathered out of words of Scripture but that words which are proposed are vnderstood by faith the Mistress Ibid. How I pray you should we gather faith of word seing we must not come to interpret Scripture but being strengthned with faith And ibid. Respons ad sermonem Lutheri fol. 372. Faith cannot be discussed or learned by words but God is the teacher of it and after we haue known it of him then we may see the same also in words Oecolampadius in Hospin parte 2. historiae Sacram. fol. 70. I my self Nor Oeâ—olaâ—padius come not to Scripture but first armed with faith Behold two principal Patriarcks of the Sacramentarians got not their faith by Scripture but by Enthusiasmes and if they got it not by Scripture surely Scripture was not the formal cause not the principal motiue not the onely sufficient means not the ground or last resolution of their faith What was then the ground or into what did these men resolue their faith but into some special priuat reuelation of which thus Whitaker l. 1. de Scrip. p. 91. It is schismatical fanatical furious to boast of or catch reuelations now beside the Scripture See Laude sec 16. p. 71 72. 73. 74 TWELFH CHAPTER VVhether Protestants had the Scriptures from Catholiks or no FIRST SECTION Protestants sometimes affirme LVther in c. 1. Galat. to 5. fol. 293. We had indeed the scripture Protestants had the Scripture from Papists and the sacraments from the Papists In 16. Ioan. to 4. German fol. 227. We are forced to grant that we receaued the holie scipture Baptisme sacraments and office of preaching from them Papists otherwise what should we haue known of al these things Whitaker Contro 2. q. 5. c. 14. Papists haue the scripture Baptisme Catechisme the articles of faith the ten Commandements the Lords praier and these things came from them to vs. Doue of Recusancie p. 13. We hould the Creed of the Apostles of Athanasius of Nice of Ephesus of Constantinople which the Papists also doe hould and the same bible which we receaued from them Scusselburg to 8. Catal. Heret p. 439. We denie not that Luther saieth that in Poperie is al Christian good and from thence came to vs. Spalatensis lib. contra Suarem c. 1. n. 34. Albeit England had the scripture the Creeds and Catholik Councels first from the Church of Rome yet c. See Alsted l. de notis Ecclesiae c. 21. p. 231. Iames Andrewes l. contra Hosium p. 3â—6 We denie not that we receaued the scriptures from you Papists Thus they and others also but by what honest way or means they had the Scripture from vs none of them telleth nor can tel And therfore they cannot clear themselues from plain theft or Sacriledg SECOND SECTION Sometimes denie it CHillingworth c. 2. n. 2. p. 52. Not from Papists Nether is that true which you pretend That we possess the Scripture from you or take it vpon the integritie of your custodie But from whome els then Catholiks they possess the Scripture nether he telleth nor anie Protestant can tel Nay himself c. 6. § 73. saieth we confess with him Luther that in the Papacâ—e are manie good things which haue come from them to vs. Sutlif in his answer to the Catholiks Supplication c. 7 n. 13. we receaued not the scriptures nor our seruice orrites from them Papists Fulk in his Refutation of Rastel p. 802. we know from whome we haue receaued the Gospel not from the Papists THIRTEENTH CHAPTER VVhether Catholiks make great account of Scripture and proue their doctrin out of it or no FIRST SECTION Protestants sometimes affirme HOspinian parte 1. Histor Sacram l. 3. p. 216. Thou hearest Reader that the book of the Gospel is had in great reuerence of Papists How greatly Catholiks honor Scripture and much honored of them Thou hearest the Reading of the Gospel to be rehearsed religiously in their Temples Thou hearest that they incense it with Frankincense and other odors yea euerie word of it euerie letter or tittle to be accounted most holie Thou hearest that the Hearers rise vp and stand at the reading of it Finally thou hearest other ceremonies to be vsed at this reading of the Gospel Luther in Math. 5. apud Morton to 2. Apol. l. 5. c. 16. The Pope and The Pope relieth on Scripture sect masters and we who relie on the scriptures doe in one sorte boast of the Gospel and word of God And apud Scoppium in Ecclesiastico c. 10. The Papists as wel as we do boast of God and his word and both alike cite scriptures and of this we agree and of Iustification they bring al most in numerable places of scripture Caluin in Luc. 22. v. 28. The Papists Papists stick fast to Scripture are foolishly superstitious whiles they stick fast to the words of Scripture 4. Instit c 17. § 20. The good Maisters that they may seem literate forbid to depart anie whit from the letter And he calleth Catholiks Catchers of sillabes froward and stubborn exacters of the letter foolish and ridiculous maisters of the letter Potter sec 5. p. 13. They Papists â—retend Scripture in euerie controuersie pretend scripture in each controuersie against vs. White in his Way p. 32. and 19. citeth these words out of Sanders l. of the Rock of the Church which was Most plain Scripture printed 80 yeares since We haue most plain scripture in al points for
honor and reuerence as the Queen and plainly Goddess of traditions And l. 1. c 36. relateth the foresaid words of Brentius and alloweth them Feild of the Church l 4. c. 20. Though we reiect the vncertain and vain traditions of the Papists yet we receaue the number and names of the Authors of books diuine and Canonical as deliuered by tradition The number authors and integritie of the partes of these books of Scripture we receaue as deliuered by Integritie of Scripture beleued by Tradition tradition Bel in his Downfal art 7. p 134. We receaue this tradition that the Scripture is the word of God p. 135. And so this tradition is not excepted but virtually included in our affirmation Moulins of Traditions c. 3. and 2◠we reiect not al traditions for Scripture itself is a tradition Carleton in Consensu de Scriptura c. 9. I wil say freely what I think I think there are some Apostolical traditions euer conserued and to be conserued iu the Church For Austin said not in vain what the whole Church obserueth c. So he proued Baptisme of Infants to be an Apostolical tradition so also before him Origen From Apostolical traditiou we receaued the true Canon of Scripture and the true sense of the Canon From hence the Church doth celebrate the Lords day Canon and sense of it receaued by Tradition Aretius loco 33. calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Apostles Creed what books are Canonical which is the true exposition of scripture Item Vniuersal traditions necessarie to be obserued are the Apostles Creed which books be Canonical which is the true exposition of the chiefest places of scripture Laude Relat sec 16. p. 104. when the Fathers say we are to relie vpon scripture onely they are neuer to Note this be vnderstood with exclusion of Tradition in what case soeuer it may be had not but that the Scripture is abundantly sufficient in and to it self for al things but becaus it is deep and may be drawn into different senses and so mistaken if anie man wil presume vpon his own strenght and go single without the Church sec 11. p. 44. Some traditions I denie not true and firme and of great both authoritie and vse in the Church as being Apostolical And why is not the Churches tradition concerning Scripture one of these Ibid. As for that tradition That the books of holie Scripture are diuine I wil handle that hereafter And sec 16. cit p. 81. Against this tradition That the books of Scripture are the word of God the Church of England neuer excepted Sess 15. p. 57. It is not denied that this baptisme of infants is an apostolical tradition and therfore note to be beleued Protestants in Colloq Ratisb sess 11. Our aduersaries bring that tradition of Scripture of which there is no Controuersie at al among vs. And sess 1. We grant that Moyses books are Moyses that this is a tradition by the testimonie of the Church which could witnes that Moyses books were put into the Ark. Chillingworth c. 2. § 45. The Canon of Scripture as we receaue it is built vpon vniuersal tradition The Canon is built vpon vniuersal Tradition Vniuersal Tradition rule of Controuersies § 155. Vniuersal tradition is the Rule to iudge al Controuersies by § 114. It is vpon the authoritie of vniuersal tradition that we wold haue them beleue Scripture And though sometimes he teach that this vniuersal tradition is but humane and fallible and consequently Supra c. 2. sect 2. grant his faith of the Scripture and al that is in it is but humane and fallible as we haue seen before yet c. 3. n. 45. he auoucheth it to be as infallible as the Scripture For thus he writeth you were to proue the Church infallible not in her traditions which wee willingly grant if they be as vniuersal as the tradition of the vndoubted books of Scripture is to Vniuersal tradition as infallible a◠Scripture be as infallible as the Scripture is Ibid. § 46. If you can of anie thing make it appeare that it is tradition we wil seek no farther Hooker also l. 3 § 8. If Infidels or Atheists chance at anie time to cal it Scripture in question this giueth vs occasion to sift what reason there is wherby the testimonie of the Church concerning scripture and our own perswasion which scripture itself hath confirmed may be proued a truth infallible Lo the Churches testimonie is a truth infallible And we may rest our assurance vpon a truth infallible and such is more then an inducement to faith Brentius also in the words afore cited saieth the Churches tradition concerning Scripture is certain firme and vndoubted And Morton saieth Protestants reuerence it as it were the Goddess of traditions 7. Moreouer they grant that it is a point of faith That scripture or the Bible is the word of God and as such it is put in their Confessions of faith Nay Hooker l. 1. § 14. saieth Of Anglica art 6. Gallica art 3. Belgica art 4. things necessarie the verie chiefest is to know what books we are bound to esteem holie l. 3. § 8. The main principle whervpon our beleif of al things therin conteined is that the scriptures Protestants main Principle are Oracles of God himself Laude Relat sec 11. § 2. calleth it prime principle of faith sec 16. § 2. Great principle in Diuinitie § 6. Great principle of faith the ground and proof of whatsoeuer is of faith P. 104. Cheifest principle P. 110. Main principle of Diuinitie Chillingworth c. 2. § 11. First principle Whitaker l. 2. de Scriptura p. 218. It is most of al necessarie that the certain Canon of scriptures be vndoubted among Christians Vshers Reioinder p. 63 Of al things this is most sure and ought to be beleued that the scripture is the word of God But this most necessarie most sure this prime this great this main point of faith is no written word of God For thus Laude sec 16. p. 70. There is no place in scripture which tels vs that such books conteining such and such particulars are the Canon and infallible wil and word of God Hooker l 1. § 14. Being perswaded by other means that these Scriptures are the Oracles of God Note themselues doe then teach vs the rest l. 4. § 4. It is not the word of God which doth or possibly can assure vs that we do wel to think it is in his word White in his Way p. 48. The certaintie of the Scripture is not written indeed with letters in anie particular place or book therof And I hope it is not written with Ciphers See more of their like Confessions supra c. 5. sec 2. 8. And yet Hooker l. 5. § 21. saieth We haue no word of God but the Scripture No word of God for their main Principle Whitaker Contro 2. q. 5. c. 18. We acknowledg no other word then written what doctrin soeuer is
OF THE AL-SVFFICIENT EXTERNAL PROPOSER OF MATTERS OF FAITH DEVIDED INTO TVVO BOOKES IN THE FIRST Is proued that the true Church of God is the Al-sufficient external Proposer of matters of Faith IN THE SECOND Is shewed the manifold vncertanities of Protestants concerning the scripture and how scripture is or is not an entire Rule of Faith By C. R. Doctor of Diuinitie 1. Timothe 4. The Church of the liuing God the pillar and ground of truthe At PARIS M. DC LIII THE PREFACE to the Reader 1. NAtural reason gentle Twoe waies to learn truthe Reader teacheth vs that what we can not know by ourselues we should learne by authoritie of others and according as their authoritie is vndoubted or probable toyeeld assured or probable assent therto and the same reason teacheth vs also that as the See infra l. 2. c. 8. sect 1. clear sight of God in heauen is supernatural to vs and far aboue the reach of our reason so is also the right way therto Wherfore as S. Devâ—â—l â—redendi 〈◊〉 16. 8. 17. Augustin rightly sayeth if God wil haue men come to him in heauen he must needs haue instituted some authoritie on earth for to direct them assuredlie in the right way becaus by reason we cannot finde way to heauen known by authoritie out that way Which authoritie must be infallible because otherwise it could not assuredlie direct vs as also becaus it is to direct vs by diuine faith which is altogether infallible And herein is Gods goodnes to be admired that he would bring men to heauen rather by authoritie and faith then by knowledg and reason becaus euerie one can beleeue but not euerie one konw hard matters And in al that is hitherto saied Catholiks and Protestants generally agree The controuersie between them is in whome God hath setled this assured authoritie for to direct and guide vs infallibly in our way to heauen 2. For Catholiks say that as God Authoritie setled in men at the first set this authoritie in his Prophets and Apostles so becaus they were not to liue with vs for euer he continueth it in his Church which he hath made his spouse the mother and mistres of the faithful the pillar and ground of truth his mistical body wherof Christ is head and the Holy Ghost the Soule who is to teach her all truth and in whose heart is alwaies Gods Word beleued in her mouth his word preached and in her hands his word written But Protestants becaus they can shew no Church before Luther who taught in substance the same waie to heauen which they doe as I haue otherwere Lib. 2. de Authore Protestâ— Ecclesia shewed by their own plaine and manifold confessions are forced to denie that God hath setled this infallible authoritie in his Church for to direct vs and guide vs infalliblie to heauen and doe grant her no more authoritie in matters of faith then a whâ—tat Cont. 1. q. 5. c. 20. l. 1. dâ— script 144. l. 2. p. 254. â—71 l 3. p. 435. mere humane enen in the b Laude sec 16. n. 26. 61. most fundamental points of al. Naie some of them saïe she hath c whitat Cont. 1. q. 3 c. 3. l. 1. de script p. 153. l. 2. p. 235. Caluin Actor 15 v. 28. See infra l. 2. c. 10. sec 2. and l. 1. c. 2. §. 8. no authoritie at al in matters of faith So they abase the authoritie or rather take awaie al authoritie in matters of faith from their Mother and Mistres in faith from the spouse of Christ from the pillar and ground of truth from her whose head Christ is and whose soule is the Holie Ghost who teacheth her al truth And this The roote of al heresie is the true roote of al heresies not to beleue that the true Church of God the pillar an t ground of truth whome the Holie Ghost teacheth al truth is an infaillible guide apointed by God to direct vs assuredly to heauen For euerie one would follow her none would oppose her whome they confess to be an infallible Guide 3. Protestants grant euerie one of the Prophets or Apostles to haue been infallible in matters of faith and yet cannot shew so mainie nor so plaine testimonies of Scripture for their infallibilitie as we can shew for the infallibilitie of the Church But al infallibilitie in matter of faith they wil put in the scripture as vsually al d Tâ—rtul dâ— prâ—wr c 15. Hilar l. ad Constant. August epâ—s 222. Hâ—eron in Galat. 〈◊〉 Sed infrâ— l. 2. c. 14. seq heretiks did because they wil vnderstand that as thy please and so indeed put al infallibilitie in themselues though nether scripture saith that itselfe is infallible nor was it written for aboue 2000. yeares before Moyses nor was it in al places or times when and where infallible faith was nor itself can shew the way to heauen to them that cannot read it nor sheweth that which Protestants account the most fundamental point of faith or al other points so clearly as it neede no interpreter See infra l. 2. c. 4. see 2. as we shal hear Protestants themselues confess 4. And can any reasonable man perswade himself that God hath setled al infallible authoritie forto direct men assuredly to heauen in that which he conffessth God neuer saied is infallible nor it was in al times or places where and when men were infallibly guided in their way to heauen which cannot by it self guide the greatest part of men which teacheth them not the most necessaire point of al nor al points so clearly as it need not some interpreter and yet say they withal God hath not giuen vs any infallible interpreter I add also that who follow it for their onlie guide in matters of faith haue no constancie nor vnitie in faith nor yet any hope of vnitie Is such â e See infra l. 1. c. 8. n. 6. one mens onelie assured guide to heauen 5. We produce the express word of God that his true Church is the pillar and ground of truthe and that the holie Ghost teacheth her al truth let Protestants produce the like express word of God that the book called scripture is the pillar and ground of truth and that it teacheth al truth You must saieth f Cont. Pra. â—eam l. 11. Tertullian proue as clearly as I doe Bring á proof like to mine And S. Augustin Read as plaine words as these are which we read to you Doe l. de vnis c. 6. 14. not bring vs your consequences or inferences of which we may â—ay with S. Augustin g Serm. 14. de verb. Apost This is a humane argument not diuine authoritie h See iâ—fra l. 25. 3. sâ—c 1. Protestants vse to say that al things necessarie to be beleued are expresly in scripture and need no inference and that faith relieth not on argument but on authoritie let
If anie obey not our word note him And 1. Ioan. 4. v. 6. who knoweth God heareth vs who is not of God heareth not vs In this we know the spirit of truth and spirit of error Where doubtles he speaketh of infallible knowledg of God by hearing him and infallible knowledg could not haue been by hearing him if he had not been infallible in teaching Gods truth And these testimonies of scripture doe not only proue that God can giue to men diuine and infallible authoritie or veracitie but also that he hath giuen it to some 4. That the holie Fathers thought that God can giue diuine or infallible authoritie or veracitie to men wil be euident out of their testimonies a Infra c. 7. hereafter brought to proue that he hath giuen such to the Church And Reason conuinceth that he can giue such authoritie or veracitie to men because it implieth not contradiction For what contradiction can be pretended that God can if he please effectually assist some so that they teach nothing in matters of faith but truth as he efficaciously assisteth the elect that they cannot be led into error Math. 24. And his effectual assistance maketh their authoritie or veracitie to be so diuine Infallible as we desire and is sufficient to be an external ministerial or subordinat cause of diuine and infallible faith For it implieth contradiction that who is efficaciously assisted by God to say but truth should lie And I take it to be so euident that God can giue such authoritie or veracitie to his Church or to men as I think scarce anie Protestant wil haue the face â—o denie it For this is not to make men or the Church Primam veritatem prime veritie as Whitaker fondly argueth l. 2. de scrip p. 230. but only a secondarie veritie or veracitie subordinat and depending vpon Gods prime veritie or veracitie If God can giue to men endles eternitie and yet not make them Gods why can he not also giue them infallible veritie or veracitie and yet not make them Gods or Prime veritie If he can make weakmen not to fall why can he not make the Church not to err in points of faith If he can make that the elect who are the principal part of the Church shal not be led into error Matth. 24 why can he not make the Church it self § 45. Naye so manifest it is See infra c. 15. and Cal uin in Luc. 10. v. 16. that God can giue to men this kinde of diuine veracitie or infallibilitie as Protestants themselues sometimes confess that he hath giuen it to men For thus Whitaker l. 3. de scripturâ p. 395. The testimonie of the holie Diuine Ghost is internal of the Apostles external both in their kindâ—s diuine Sufficient l. 2. p. 310. the authoritie alone of the Apostles sufficed to cause faith l. 1. p. 46. The Apostles authoritie was so great that you might safely beleue their preaching for it self P. 49. though the Apostles were men yâ—t they were so extraordinarily gouerned of the holie Ghost Râ—lied on their testimonie that most certaine faith relied on their testimonie P. 51. The Apostles for their fulnes of the holie Ghost by certaine Marks deserued assured authoritie so as we beleue them alone Controu 2 q. 3. c. 5. the Apostles did consigne the canon as most certaine organs of the holie Ghost endued with diuine authoritie l. 1. de Scrip. c. 8. p. 86. it was safe to Diuine beleue Paul but speaking Laude Relat of the Controu sec 16. p. 81. If the speech be of the prime Christian Church the Apostles disciples and such as had immediat reuelation from heauen no question but the voice and tradition of this Church is diuine not Simply dâ—uine aliquo modo in a sort but simply P. 84. In the voice of the primitiue and Apostolical Church there was simply diuine authoritie P. 85. we resolue only into Resolue into Apostolical tradition prime tradition Apostolical and scripture it self P. 91. Euerie assistance of Christ and the blessed Spirit is not enough to make the authoritie of anie companie of men diuine and infallible but such and so great an assistance only as is purposely giuen to that effect Such an assistance the Prophets vnder the old testament and the Apostles vnder the New had P. 102. we haue a double diuine Diuine testimonie altogeither infallible to confirme to vs that scripture is the word of God The first is the tradition of the Apostles themselues The other the Scripture it self And into these we doe and may safely resolue our faith Sec. Safely resolue into Tradition 18. p. 123. The Prophets testimonie was diuine Sec. 33. p. 239. Al the places Diuine ether speak of the Church including the Apostles as al of them doe and then al grant the voice of the Church is Gods voice diuine and Infallible Potter sec 5. p. 5. The prime Church I call that which included Christ and the Apostles who had immediat reuelation Simply diuine from heauen the voice and testimonie of their Church is simply diuine and Infallible Ibid. p. 30. Their general Councels authoritie is immediatly deriued and delegated from Christ sec 1. p. 25. The high preist in cases of moment had a certaine priuiledg from error if he consulted the diuine oracle by the iudgement of Vrim or by the breast plate of iudgment wherin were Vrim and Thummim wherby he had an absolutly infallible direction If anie such Absolutely infallible promise of God to assist the Pope could be produced his decisions might then iustly pass for oracles without examination Behold the high Priest in cases of moment had a priuiledg from error had an absolutly infallible direction and if the Pope had such his decisions might pass for oracles Humfrey ad Rat. 3. Camp p. 214. Rock of faith we confess the Apostolik Church to be the rock of our faith Chillingworth c. 2. paragrapho 138. we saie that Infallibilitie continued in the Church euen togeither with the scripture so long as Christ and his Apostles were liuing And parag 155. As the Apostles persons whiles they were liuing were the only iudges of controuersies so their writings now they are dead are the onlie Rule to iudg them by Feild lib. 4. of the Greater then scripture Church c 11. If the comparison be made between the Church including the Euangelists we denie not but the Church is of greater authoritie antiquitie and excellencie then the scripture of the new testament White in his waie p. 74. The Apostles teaching was infallible Behold the authoritie the testimonie the voice the tradition of the Prophets Apostles Euangelists and of the Primitiue Church is altogeither infallible is diuine not in a sorte but simply as Gods voice is a sufficient cause of faith is to be beleued for it self for which alone we may beleue into which we maie resolue our faith the rock of faith
and the Apostles and Euangelists were of greater authoritie and excellencie then the scripture of the new testament And neuertheles the Prophets Apostles Euangelists and Primitiue Church were men Wherfore God not only can but hath giuen to men authoritie infallible simply diuine made their voice his voice made it a sufficient cause of diuine faith and such as into it we maie resolue our faith 6. To al these confessions of Protestants that the authoritie and veracitie of the Prophets Apostles Euangelists and Primitiue Church was diuine and infallible I add that generally Protestants confes that the true Church of God of what time soeuer is Infallible in fundamental points of faith as I shewed parte 1. l. 1. c. 7. And they must needs confes it vnles they wil say the Church of the time since the Apostles is perishable For if it be errable in fundamental points it is perishable becaus fundamental points are essential points and without which the Church cannot stand no more then a house can stand without a fundation as is euident and themselues confess And besides if it should not hold al points necessarie to Saluation which can neuer agree to the true Church of God it should faile of the end for which God instituted it which was to bring men to saluation Now this Infallibilitie of the Church in fundameÌ„tal points cannot be natural as issuing from the nature of the men who are the Church as is manifest Therfore it is supernatural and diuine proceeding from Gods special assistance and vertue of Christs promise that she doe not err in such points And if Churches Infallibilitie in fundamental points be supernatural and diuine proceeding from Gods special and effectual assistance to that purpose it may iustly be giuen as a sufficient external cause why we beleue any fundamental point as that the scripture is the word of God See Vvitaâ—er l. 3. de script p. 4 28. Wherfore ether Protestants must denie this to be a fundamental point of their faith which yet some of them account so fundamental as that vpon it their beleif of alother points dependeth or they cannot denie but that we may beleue with diuine faith that the scripture is the word of God becaus the present Church doth testifie so and that her authoritie is not only an Introduction or inducement to beleue the scripture to be the word of God as b Vvhitaker l. 2. descrip p. 234. Potter sec 5. p. 8 Hooler l. 3. §. 8. Laude sec 5. n. 25. Chilling c. 3. p. 150. they vse to say but a true and sufficient external cause therof For it cannot be denied but that infallible diuine authoritie or veracitie can be in its order a sufficient cause of infallible and diuine faith And if the Churches infallibilitie in some points of faith be diuine voluntarie and vaine it is to denie it to be such in al points of fâ—ith For if she be fallible in some points of faith what assurance can we haue that she is diuinely infallible in others as S. Augustin rightly said of the scripture Besides her diuine infallibilitie in onely fundamental points were to no purpose for us seing we know not certainly which are those fundamental points which not Moreouer al points of faith sufficiently proposed are equally to be beleued of vs with diuine faith and therfore there must be diuine authoritie in the proposer for them al. I add also that Protestants teach that the word or voice of a minister absoluing a penitent is infallible and Protestants make ministers voâ—â—e Gods voiâ—e equiualent to Gods voice and as much to be beleued as if God spoke to him from heauen as is to be seen in the Apologie of the Confess of Auspurg c. de poenitentia Perkins Cathol reform Cont. 3. c. 3. Fulk of Priesthood p. 168. And if one Ministers voice be such much more the voice of the Church 7. And out of these confessions of Protestants of the infallible and diuine authoritie of the Prophets Apostles Euangelists we maie see First how fondly some c Vvhitaker l. 1. descrip p. 24. â—26 l. 3. p. 419. cont 2. q. 4. c. 1. Laude sect 16. n. 6. Petter sec 5. Châ—lling c. 3. n. 50. Protestants argue The present Church is men Therfore it is not infallible in matters of faith As if the Prophets Apostles Euangelists had not been men Secondly how vntruly Laude saieth sec 16. p. 65. That special immediat reuelation is necessarily required to the verye least degree of diuine authoritie For besids that he affirmeth that without all proof it is manifestly refuted by their grant of infallibilitie of the present Church in fundamental points For if she be infallible in such highe and diuine points she is such without immediat diuine reuelation Besids himself sec tit p. 51. granteth that such and so great assistance of Christ and his Holie Ghost as is purposâ—ly giuen to that effect is enough to make the authoritie Vvhat assistance suffieth to make â—uine infâ—llibilitie of anâ—e companie of men diuine and infallible And if such and so great assistance wil suffice to make infallible and diuine authoritie then special immediat reuelation is not needful for that purpose And surely it were greatly to restraine the Omnipotencie of God that he cannot giue the verie least degree of diuine authoritie but by special reuelation and that what so euer special assistance of his without that were not sufficient to that purpose Moreouer S. Luke c. 1. professeth to haue written his Ghospel by hearsay Thirdly we maiesee how impiously wrote Whitaker controu 2. q. 5. c. 11. The Apostles are not simply to be Protestants wil examin the Apostles heard but to be examined to the Rule of scripture l. 1. de script c. 10. sec 8. No mans testimonie of God and of his word can be sufficient And l. 3. c. 19. p. 500. I beleue Moises but not for Moises The like he hath ib. p. 402. 404. and other where often Ibid. c. 8. p. 409. The Apostles giue al authoritie of iudging to the Scriptures take none to themselues l. 2. p. 294. Nether Pauls nor the Apostles authoritie was reason or Rule of beleuing l. 1. c. 2. p. 41. Noman beleued for Ihons testimonie onely c. 7. p. 78. The command to heare the Apostles was not simple for what soeuer they shold say Simple obedience and beleef is due to Christ onely l. 3. c. 3. p. 383. Nones but Gods testimonie of himself is sufficient And Laude Relat. sec 16. p. 107. were the Apostles liuing and should tel vs that they spake and writ the verie Oracles of God yet this were but their own testimonie of themselues and so alone not able to enforce beleif on others For wil they haue the Apostles to be examined and their testimonie vnsufficient which they haue granted to be simply diuine the voice of God altogeither infallible to be beleued for it self sufficient to cause faith and into
which we may resolue our faith For as Whitaker himself saieth l. 1. de script p. 45. if it once appeare that the voice of the Church is the voice of God it were impietie not to beleue what she teacheth For it were to cal in question Gods authoritie And l. 3. de scriptura p. 428. wil you not be content with diuine iudgment or wil you except against infallible iudgment Besids the Church being built vpon the authoritie of the Prophets and Apostles Ephes 2. and Apocal. 21. if that be not sufficient al Christian faith is built vpon an vnsufficient foundation and so is fallible But to this vnchristian impietie are they by little and little lead by their denial of the Churches infallibilitie in al matters which she proposeth vs of faith For who compareth the dignitie of the Spouse of Christ with anie singular Prophet or Apostle or the loue of Christ to his Spouse with his loue to anie singular Prophet or Apostle or the scriptures testimonies of his efficacious assistance to his Spouse for not erring in faith with the testimonies of his like assistance to anie singular Prophet or Apostle wil easily see that the denial of the Churches infallibilitie wil lead him to doubt or denie the Infallibilitie of anie singular Prophet or Apostle and the denial of that wil lead to the denial of al infallible certaintie of Christian faith to which it hath already lead Chillingworth as is to be seen in him c. 2. § 24. and 154. and otherwhere often And if it be true See infra l. 2. c. 8. sec 2. which his three Approuuers the cheifest Doctors of Oxford say that he teacheth nothing contrarie to the doctrine of their English Church their English Church hath not infallible or diuine faith But of this we shal speak more hereafter Now let vs proue out of Scripture that the true Church of Christ which soeuer she is is infallible in al points of faith Finally Protestants teach that a ministers word absoluing one is as infallible as Gods word as is to be seen in Apologia Confess Augustanae c. de Poenitentia Confess Bohem. c. 14 Caluin 10 v. 16. Perkins in Reform Catholik cont 3. c. 3. and others FIFT CHAPTER That the true Church of God is a sufficient and infallible Proposer of al vvhich she proposeth as points of faith proued by vvhat she is saied to be in Scripture 1. TWO waies we may proue the Infallibilitie of the true Church of God in al points which she proposeth as of faith out of Scripture the one is by what she or her Pastors are there saied to be the other by what God in Scripture hath promised to her The first way we wil take in this Chapter and the second in the next In the Scripture the true Church of God is saied first to be the pillar and ground of truth secondly her preaching is saied to be a cause of faith Thirdly her pastors are saied to be witnesses of Gods truth Fourthly their voice is saied to be Christs voice Fiftly they are saied to be put to keepe the faithful constant in faith out of al which we wil euidently proue her infallibilitie in al matters which she proposeth as of faith 2. The Apostle 1. Timot. 3. v. 15. saieth which is the Church of the liuing God the Pillar and Ground of truth Which words doe not onely proue the Church to be infallible but also that she is an external formal cause of diuine truth concerning vs or which commeth al to one of our beleif of it becaus on what our beleif of diuine truth relieth as on a pillar or ground that is some formal cause therof But her infallibilitie I proue out thence in forme thus what is the Pillar and Ground of diuine and infallible truth is diuinely infallible in such truth The Church is such therfore she is diuinely infallible in diuine truth The Minor is the Apostles The Maior is euident For a humane and fallible pillar or Ground is not able to See â—uprae 2. n. 3. vphold diuine and infallible truth as is euident and Chillingworth confesseth c. 2. § 154. in these words None can build an infallible faith vpon motiues that are not infallible as it were a great and heauie burden vpon a foundation that hath not strength proportionable And the same he hath c. 1. n. 7. And also Whitaker l. 1. de Script p. 166. l. 3. p. 392. 415 Field l. 4. de Eccles c. 2. Laude sec 33. p. 248. Potter sec 5. p. 7. And as the same Chillingworth saieth wel c. 3. § 33. The Apostles could not be the Churches foundation without freedom from error in al those things which they deliuered constantly as certaine reuealed truthes so I say the Church could not be the pillar and Ground of truth to the faithful without fredom from error in al things which she constantly deliuereth as certain reuealed truthes Nether can it be imagined how the Scripture could by a clearer metaphor haue affirmed the Infallibilitie of the Church in matters of faith then by saying that she is the pillar and Ground of diuine truth For who can imagin that God would not make her infallible whome he maketh the Pillar and Ground of his truth Neuertheless Protestants seek manie waies to elude the clearness of this text some by distinguishing the word Church Some by distinguishing the word Pillar some by distinguishing the word Is and some by distinguishing the word truth And Chillingworth c. 3. § 76. p. 176. wil haue Timothe not the Church to be called the pillar and ground of truth Which varietie of shifts doth sufficiently confute them 3. a Vvhitaker cont 2. q. 2. c. 2. â—ulk in 1. Timot. 3. Field l. 4. de Eâ—cle c. 4. Some say the Apostle speaketh not of the vniuersal Church but onely of the particular Church of Ephesus becaus he saieth S. Timothe conuersed in the Church which is the pillar of truth But this shift first is new not found in anie ancient author Secondly is contrarie to the Apostles word For he vseth the word Church absolutly and Protestants translate it The Church which as is clear and b Laude Reâ— lat p. 128. 141. Chilâ—ing p. 263. themselues confess signifieth the whole Church and not a parte of the Church as a particular Church is Thirdly it is contrarie to his meaning For no particular Church is the pillar and Ground of truth becaus euerie particular Church is fallible Fourthly it is contrarie to the Fathers For S. Hierom in c. 26. Iob. saieth The Church which is the congregation of al Saints the pillar and ground of truth Fiftly it is against themselues For Whitaker contr 2. q. 3. c. 2. denieth that by the Church 1. Timoth. 3. is meant anie particular Church but wil haue it to be their inuisible and Catholike Church and so doth Iuel part 1. Apolog. c. 9. § 1. and others Sixtly the ground or pretence of their limitation of the
saied absolutly and without anie condition as wel of the successors of the Apostles as of the Apostles themselues who heareth you heareth me Therfore absolutly and without anie condition both Apostles and their successors are infallible For we cannot be deceaued by Christ by anie way that we heare him The antecedent is euident by Christs words which are absolute and haue no condition anie more for the Apostles Successors then for the Apostles themselues The consequence also is euident For who absolutly are such as hearing them we heare Christ are absolutly infallible And this consequence those Protestants saw who denied these words to be at al meant of the Apostles Successors For they saw that if Christ saied absolutly of them as wel as of the Apostles who heare you heare me Laude p. 65. 91. they must need be absolutly and not meerly conditionally infallible Lastly ProtestaÌ„ts do not grant euen conditional diuine infallibilitie but onely humane to Pastors and yet Christ here speaketh of diuine infallibilitie for such was the infallibilitie of the Apostles and such must needs be theirs whome who heareth heareth Christ For who are such as who heareth them heareth Christ are such as Christ speaketh by and such as Christ speaketh by are doubtles infallible For Christ cannot speak vntruthes by anie whom soeuer L. 1. de scrip p. 109. And as Whitaker saieth What is the Church speaking the word of God but the mouth and tongue of God 11. And al the aforesaied places of Scripture and arguments made proue indifferently that the true Church of God can no way err in points of faith ether vincibly or inuincibly others peculiarly proue that she cannot err vincibly or sinfully in anie point of faith As where Scripture testifieth that Hel gates Math. 19. O â—eae 2. Rom. 13. 1. Cor. 12. Michea 4. Lucaâ— 57. Psal 2. 27. 32. Hebr. 32. Galat. 4. shal not preuaile against her or calleth her the Spouse of Christ the bodie of Christ Christs kingdom Christs Inheritance Christs Temple our mother which bringeth vs forth to Christ For sinful error in anie point of faith is the sin of Heresie which is a gate of Hel and S. Gâ—egor in psâ—l 5. Poeniten which destroieth both the vnitie and substance of sauing faith and of the true Church as we haue proued at large parte 1. l. 2. c. 2. seqq and need not here repeate For hauing clearly proued already that the true Church cannot err at al in points of faith we need not proue that she cannot err in them vincibly or sinfully Wherfore we wil now proue out of Gods promises made in the Scripture to the Church that she cannot err in points of faith SIXT CHAPTER That the true Church of God is infallible in al points of faith proued by Gods promises to her 1. IOAN c. 14. v. 16. Christ saieth I wil request my father and he wil giue you an other Paraclet for to abide with you for euer And v 26. The Paraclet The Holie Ghost whome the Father wil send in my name shal teach you al things and suggest vnto you al things whatsoeuer I shal say vnto you And c. 16. c. 13. when the holie spirit of truth shal come he shal teach you al truth Behold a most large promise of Christ to the Church that the Holie Ghost shal be for euer with the Church and shal both teach and suggest her al things al things what soeuer Christ shal say Al truth Therfore she cannot err in anie thing which Christ taught or in anie truth And Whitaker cont 1. q. 3. c. 11. calleth these most clear and most certain testimonies To this Protestants make three answers al opposit one to the other The first Vvhitaker â—ont 2. q. 4. c. 2. Laude seâ— 25. p. 165. Pâ—tter seâ— 5. p. 59. Chilling c. 3. § 71. and most common is that Christ promiseth not that the Holie Ghost shal teach the Church al truth of faith but onely al truth which is absolutly necessarie to al. This limitation of al truth of faith to al truth absolutly necessarie to al First is new for no ancient Author is alleadged for it Secondly it is voluntarie For it hath no ground in the text but is voluntarily shaped according to their opinion That the Church cannot err in fundamental points but in other points she may Thirdly it is violent for it is as to expound al truth by not al truth Fourthly it is iniurious to the Apostles to whome it was personally made as if Christ had not here promised to teach them al truth of faith whatsoeuer but onely fundamental Fiftly it is contrarie to the Fathers For Phoebadus l. contra Arianos saieth when Christ saieth al truth surely he excludeth none Sixtly al points of faith are absolutly necessarie to al to be beleued at least virtually and also actually if they be sufficiently proposetd as we haue clearly proued in the former q D 2. c. 3. 1 lb. l. 2. c. 3. parte and Protestants sometimes confess And though there be but some points which are absolutly necessarie to be beleued actually of al yet seing as Protestants confess none knoweth precisely which they are what good would it doe to Christians to know that the Church cannot err in them Do not Protestants confess that al diuine reuelations without exception are necessarie to be beleued when they are sufficiently proposed as I shewed parte 1. l. 1. c. 25. N'ay doe not they confess that al diuine reuelations are fundamental to faith when they are sufficiently proposed as I shewed ibid. l. 2. c. 25. How then can they think that the Church can err in anie point of faith sufficiently proposed Doth not Chillingworth in his answer to the preface n. 6. say that we are bound See Pâ—tter â—c 7. p. 103. by the loue of God and the loue of truth to be zelous on defence of truths that are anie way profitable though not simply necessarie to Saluation Our Sauior himself hauing assured vs that he that shal break one of his least commandments and shal so teach men shal be called the least in the kingdom of heauen And wil not Christ teach his Church al truthes profitable to saluation or suffer her to teach contrarie to anie of his least commandements Doth not Whitaker Controu 2. q. 4. c. 2. say that the Church erreth not in those things which are necessarie to anie And are such things absolutly necessarie to al men Doth not Laude Relat. sec 38. n. 25. say that beside the foundation common to al there be things necessarie to manie particular mens Saluation and wil Christ suffer the Church to err in things necessarie to manie particular mens saluation As he doth if he suffer her not to err but in the foundation common to al. I omit here Laude his fond distinction sec 16. n. 28 That Christ promised an infallible assistance to his Apostles but onely a fitting assistance to their successors
Scripture to be the word of God by some authoritie that is absolutly diuine and he proueth it thus For if they be warranted vnto vs by anie authoritie less then diuine then al things conteined in them which haue no greater assurance then the scripture in which they are read are not obiects of diuine beleif and that once granted wil enforce vs to yeeld that al the articles of Christian beleef haue no greater assurance then humane or moral faith or credulitie can affoord Thus he both confesseth and proueth that the Scriptures must be proued to be the word of God by some infallible diuine proof and that such a proof can be nothing but a word of God and by some authoritie that is absolutly diuine But where this word of God by which the scripture is to be proued is where this absolutly diuine authoritie is out of the Church he cannot tel For himself saieth sec 16. cit p. 70. There is no place in Scripture which tells vs that such books conteining such and such particulars are the word of God And p. 88. Scripture cannot bear witness to it self nor one parte of it to an other White also in his way p. 48. The certaintie of the scripture is not written indeed with letters in anie particular place or book of the scripture So there is no written word of God that See infâ—a l. 〈◊〉 c. 6 sec 2. auoucheth the Scripture to be the word of God And vnwritten word of God they admit none Wherefore Laude flieth to a diuine light in See infra l. 2. c. 5 sec 2. scripture which saieth he after the present Church hath testified the Scripture to be the word clearly sheweth to vs that it is the word of God But beside that this light is feigned as we shal see more hereafter light is no word of God which Laude requireth to pâ—â—ue the scripture by but a quali 〈…〉 of the word of God nor is anie formal obiect of beleef which authoritie or veracitie onely is but is obiect of science or of vision And so this light is nether the material obiect of faith nor sufficient proof of the Scripture becaus it is no word of God nor anie formal obiector cause of faith becaus it is no authoritie Wherefore Chillingworth finding no surer motiue to beleue the Scripture then the testimonie of the Church and yet not granting that to be infallible granteth that consequence which Laud would auoid See l. 2. 〈◊〉 8. sec 2. to wit that al their assurance that the Scripture is Gods word and of al things conteined in it is but humane and fallible and so Protestants faith is not diuine or infallible and may deceaue them An other main inconueniencie is that if the Catholik A fallible Church menâ— force to professor in faith or to forsake her communion Church could err in matters of faith she might force vs to profess her error if she exacted â—t as a condition of her communâ—â—â— which were great sin or so forsake her communion which were to put our selues out of the state of Saluation becaus there is no saluation out of the Church as there Caluin 4. Inst. c. 1. §. 4. Vvhitaker contr 2. q. 5. c. 3. was not out of the Arck of Noe Wherby we see that the Infallibilitie of the Church and Necessitie of being in the Church doe mutually infer one the other 7. To al these proofs out of Reason I may add that Reason forceth Protestants to confess that the Church is infallible in fundamental points and if it were not to haue some pretence to refuse the Churches iudgment in some points it wold force them to confess that she is also infallible in Not-fundamental points and making fundamental or Not-fundamental which they please they take pretence to admit or refuse the Churches iudgment-in which points they please And this is the true ground of their denial of the Churches diuine Infallibilitie in al points of faith which to haue discouered is to haue refuted I may add also that for more then 2000. yeares God Protestants make she Church more infallible in the law of nature then after gaue infallibilitie to his Church and that he neuer said that he wold take it from her and that the Church is not less infallible now then it was before Moyses but rather founded as the Apostles saieth in better promises NINTH CHAPTER Some of the Protestants arguments against the Infallibilitie of the true Church of God in matters of faith ansvvered 1. PRotestants heap vp great store of Arguments but no express testimonie of Scripture against the Infallibilitie of the Church in matters of faith that so they may by number supplie the weakness of them and if not conuince the Reader yet confound him wherfore I wil not relate them al but the chiefest by answer to which the Reader may see how he may answer the rest The first argument is this The Church may a Vvhitaker cont 2. q. 4. 6. 2. 3. Chilling c. 5. n. 93. err in matters of manners therfore also in matters of faith I answer that if they mean in the Antecedent of the vniuersal Church I distinguish of damnably erring or venially erring and denie that the whole Church can damnably err in manners becaus that would make her not holie and so that article of our Creed I beleue the holie Catholik Church should be fals and as Laude said sec 25 § 5. The whole militant Church is holie and so we beleue Item If we wil keep vp our Creed the whole militant Church must be holie Secondly I denie the consequence For etror in manners destroieth onely a qualitie of the Church which is holiness and without which the substance of the Church may be but sinful error in faith destroieth her b See part 1. l. 2. c. 6. substance and maketh her no true Church of God but a fals and heretical Church becaus sinful error in faith is the sin of heresie And also euen euerie sinless error in faith destroieth the end for which the Church is instituted which is to be a sure and vndoubted c See sup c. 2. n. 2. and c. 8 n. 2. Guide in matters of faith and to perswade them which she could not if she erred in anie point of faith For as S. d Epist. 8. 9. Austin saieth of the Scripture if anie error were found in anie point of her doctrin her doctrin in other points would be vnsure and suspected of error Besids we might argue thus against Protestants the Church may err fundamentally in manners Therfore also fundamentally in faith 2. A second argument is that the Church may for some time be ignorant of some points of faith Therfore may also err I distinguish the antecedent of points of faith necessarie necessitate medij or Adesse fidei and then I denie it For then she should not be a sufficient guide of faith or of points not so necessarie and
both books alike Which Present Church authoritie made Whitaker contr 1. q. 3. c. 7. to say we may be forced by the authoritie of the Church to beleue these books to be Canonical And if forced to beleue by authoritie of the Church then the authoritie of the Church is a most effectual and sufficient cause of infallible beleif And in the same place S. Austin I would not beleue the Gospel vnles the Authoritie of the Catholik Church did moue me which clearly testifieth the necessitie of the Churches proposal and made Whitaker q. cit c. 8. to grant that it is true we should not beleue the Gospel vnles thâ— Catholik Church did propose it But S Austin saieth more If the Catholik Churches authoritie did not moue me And it is far more for Catholik authoritie to moue vs to beleue then for the Church onely to propose Men of no authoritie may propose but authoritie which moueth to beleue the Gospel and with out which we cannot beleue the Gospel must needs be necessarie and infallible authoritie For beleif of the Gospel is infallible and such must be the authoritie that so moueth vs to it as without which we cannot beleue Commonly Protestants answer that S. Austin spake these words of himself as he was an heretik But this cannot be becaus as he was an heretik he did not beleue the authoritie it self of the Catholik Church and therfore as such he could not be moued to beleue the Scripture for her authoritie For how could he be moued to beleue the Scripture for that which it self he did not beleue Secondly becaus he saieth not non credidissem as Morton tom Apol. l. 1 c. 37 falsly citeth him but non crederem which words properly are to be vnderstood of him as he was minded at that present And al a August de Doctrina l. 3 c. 10. 11. Tertul de â—arnâ— Christi c. 13 15. words are to be vnderstood according to their proprietie if the contrarie be not manifest For otherwise we should be vncertain how to vnderstand men And it is not manifest that S. Austin did not vse those his words according to their proprietie Wherfore Morton loco cit granteth that S. Austin maketh the Church the meanes by which a Catholik beleueth and the reason without which not which sufficeth for my present purpose to shew the necessitie of the Churches proposal for the meanes by which and reason without which not are necessarie Thirdly becaus afterward S. Austin addeth The authoritie of Catholiks being weakned I can no more beleue the Gospel which he spake plainly of himself as he was then a Catholik and shew that his beleef of the Gospel euen both then and for the time after depended on the authoritie of the Church I add also that though S. Austin had saied the foresaied word of himself onely as he was an heretik yet it would thence follow that the proposal and authoritie of the Church is at least necessarie to begin beleif of the Gospel howsoeuer it be not necessarie for to continue it And it cannot be saied that is is necessarie so onely as an inducement or disposition to such beleef becaus as S. b L. de vtil cred c. 11. Austin saieth That we know we owe to reason that we beleue to authoritie So that as Reason is the formal cause of our knowledg so is Authoritie the formal cause of our beleef and such cause of our beleef of the Gospel is the authoritie of the Catholik Church such not principal but subordinate to Gods authoritie Chillingworth c. 2. § 54 p. 54. p. 73. and § 97. p. 88. saieth That S. Austin by Catholik Church meanerh the Church of al ages including Christ and the Apostles But nether proueth he that nor can tel how S. Austin could be infallibly certain of the testimonie of the Church of Christ and the Apostles time but by the testimonie of the Church of his time Which if it were not infallible he could not be infallibly certain of the testimonie of the Church of Christ and the Apostles time Beside S. Austin sheweth that he meaneth of the authoritie of the present Church in saying The Catholik authoritie doth commend to me both books alike And l. 1. contra Crescon c. 33. The truth of Scripture is held when we doe what now seemeth to the whole Church Which is plainly ment of the present Church The same S. Austin as is before cited saieth l. 10. de Gen. ad literam c. 23. That baptisme of Infants were not to be beleued vnles it were an Apostolical tradition And l. 2. de baptismo c. 4. that he durst not defend the baptisme giuen by heretiks vnles he were assured by the authoritie of the Church Therfore he thought the authoritie of the Church necessarie to beleue those points of faith Vincentius l. 1. c. 2. Here possibly one may demand when the rule of Scripture is perfect and in it self more then enough sufficient vnto al things what need is there to ioine vnto it the authoritie of the Churches sense And he answereth this is becaus al men doe not take it in one sense therfore it is necessarie that the line of interpretation be directed according to the rule of Ecclesiastical and Catholik sense Behold the sense of the Church necessarie to vnderstand the Scripture rightly And the same Vincent 16. c. 41. It is necessarie that the vnderstanding of the holie Scripture be directed according to the onely rule of the Churches sense And if the vnderstanding of the Scripture must be directed according to the sense of the Church doubtles the sense of the Church is necessarie THIRTEENTH CHAPTER That the true Church of God is a necessarie proposer of al points of faith proued by reason grounded in Scripture 1. FIrst What is Gods ordinarie meanes of teaching faith is in ordinarie course necessarie to haue faith Gods ordinarie means of teaching faith is by the Church therfore his means of teaching by the Church is in ordinarie course necessarie The Maior seemeth euident by it self and the Minor is proued by those places Rom. 10. Faithis of hearing lawful preaching Ephes 4. God hath put Pastors for consummation of Saints 1. Tim. 5. The Church is the pillar and ground of truth and so euident as Whitaker l. 1. de Scrip. p. 73. saieth That the ordinarie manner by which God teacheth is by the Church I willingly grant 2. Secondly becaus nether Scripture nor reading of Scripture is a necessarie cause of engendring faith in ordinarie course Therfore the preaching of the Church is such a means For there is doubtles some ordinarie means instituted by God which in ordinarie course is necessarie and if not Scripture nor reading of Scripture surely the Church and her preaching For no other can be reasonably imagined The Antecedent I proue becaus as I saied before for manie ages before Moyses there was no Scripture at al nor for some yeares after Christ was there anie Scripture of
like Protestants also who being enforced by Scripture confess that concerning men the Church susteineth truth must needs Supra c. 5. n. 3. confess that she is to be beleued of men for herself For doubtles the susteiner of truth is to be beleued for himself Besids Chillingworth c. 2. n. 25. 1â—9 and 154. granteth that Vniuersal tradition credible of itself See sup c. 10. n. 37. c. 15. â— 5. Vniuersal tradition is credible of it self and therfore fit to be rested on So that something beside Scripture is credible of itself And Laude Relat. sec 19. p. 124. saieth A man may be assured by Ecclesiastical and humane proof And p. 125. Certain it is that by humane authoritie consent and proof a man may be assured infallibly that the Scripture is the word of God The same hath Potter sec 5. p. 7. who addeth ibid. p. 6. That the testimonie of the present Church is the highest humane authoritie And is not the highest humane authoritie and that which can assure vs infallibly credible of it self As in matters known by reason some are intelligible by them selues so in matters of beleef some are credible by themselues els there wold be an endles process in such matters Beside some are witnesses without al exception and if anie be such surely the true Church of God and witnesses without al exception are credible for them selues But here we must beware of being deceaued becaus as Protestants grant to the Church no other authoritie then humane so they can grant her to be beleued for herself with no other kinde of faith then humane Wheras as the Apostles had two kinds of authorities the one humane as they were honest and vertuous men the other diuine as they were specially assisted by the holie Ghost so the true Church of God hath the same two kinds of authorities humane as it is so ancient so great so learned so vertuous a companie of men and diuine as it is specially assisted by the holie Ghost in al matters of faith And so she is to be beleued for her self both with humane and diuine faith as the Apostles were to be beleued and the humane authoritie is no doubt a great disposition to the beleef of the diuine authoritie And surely sith we must needs grant that ether the true Church of God is credible with diuine faith that she is the true Church of God for her self or that these Copies which we haue written by fallible men are credible for themselues that they are the word of God and conformable to their originals no man of iudgment can think but that rather the Church of God is so credible for herself then such copies as we haue written by fallible men For beside al other proofes these Copies nether doe nor can testifie of themselues that they are the word of God or agreable to the original writings of the Prophets or Apostles as the true Church of God both can and doth testifie of herself that she is the true Church of God and the same with that which was instituted by Christ 3. Hence it is euident that Catholiks prouing to themselues the Church by the Scripture and the Scripture by the Church commit no vicious Circle For they first proue the Church by her own diuine authoritie and likewise the Scripture by the same authoritie and they doe but confirme the authoritie of the Church by the Scripture And to heretiks who denie the true Church but admit the Scripture as did the Donatists they proue the Church by the Scripture and to other Heretiks who denie Scriptures as did the Manichees they proue the Scripture by the Church And therfore in prouing the Church and the Scripture one by the other commit no vitious Circle ether in their proof to themselues or to Heretiks For to themselues they proue the Scripture to be the word of God by authoritie of the Church as by the external and secondarie formal motiue of faith and confirme their beleef of the Church by the Scripture as by a material obiect of faith which is the word of God So that two waies they auoid a vitious Circle first becaus they first beleue the Church for her own authoritie as for a secondarie and subordinat authoritie to Gods authoritie and doe but confirme their beleef of the Church by the Scripture So that beleef of the Scripture to be Gods word dependeth necessarily in ordinarie course of the Churches authoritie but beleef of the Church to be the Church of God doth not necessarily depend vpon the testimonie of the Scripture but onely is confirmed therby Secondly becaus they proue the Church by the Scripture otherwise then they proue the Scripture by the Church For they proue the Scripture by the authoritie of the Church as by a witnes and as by the external formal motiue of faith secondarie and subordinate to Gods authoritie as the Primitiue Christians proued the Scripture by the authoritie of the Apostles and they proue the Church by the Scripture as by a material obiect of faith which is Gods word and not as by a witness but as by a testimonie of a witnes And to proue things by Gods word and by authoritie instituted by God are different kinds of proofes and shew that there is no vitious Circle If anie say that we proue the Church by the authoritie of Gods word I answer that authoritie properly is of some person and truth and veritie is in his word so we proue the Church by the truth of Scripture but the Scripture we proue by the authoritie of the Church And as for our proof also of the Church by Scripture and of the Scripture by the Church to Heretiks we commit no vitious circle becaus we proceed so with different heretiks For to such heretiks as admit Scripture but denie the Church we proue the Church by Scripture and to such as admit the Church but denie Scripture we proue Scripture by the Church 4. And hence also appeareth how falsly saied Chillingworth c. 2. n. 35. That our Churches authoritie is built lastly and wholy vpon prudentiaâ— motiues Which he repeateth again n. 70. For her authoritieis built lastly vpon Gods institution which we know by her infallible testimonie and confirme it by Scripture Falsly also he saied c. 3. n. 27. For the infallibilitie Vniuersal tradition is Gods vocal word of the Church no proof can be pretended for it but incorrupted places of Scripture For the Churches infallibilitie is built principally vpon Gods authoritie and secondarily vpon her own which is instituted by God as the Apostles infallibilitie was built secondarily vpon their own authoritie Prudential motiues are but rational motiues or dispositions to faith they are nether the principal nor subordinat formal cause of diuine faith For diuine Authoritie is the formal motiue of faith prudential motiues make knowledg or opinion not faith and at most can make the Churches authoritie to be euidently credible but cannot make it to be credited
or beleued with diuine faith EIGHTENTH CHAPTER Hovv vve are to ansvver that question VVherfore or hovv vve beleue or knovv the Church to be Infallible 1. OVT of that which hath been hitherto saied is clearly answered that question How or Wherfore we beleue or know the true Church of God to be absolutly infallible in al which she teacheth as matter of faith Laude sec 16. p. 60. saieth The tradition of the Church taken alone cannot be a sufficient proof to beleue by diuine faith that Scripture is the word of God For that which is a ful and sufficient proof is able of it self to settle the soule of man which Tradition is not alone able to doe For it may be further asked why we should beleue the Churches Tradition And if it be answered Becaus the Church is infallibly gouerned by the holie Ghost it may be demanded How that may appeare And if thâ—â— be demanded ether you must say you haue it by special Reuelation or els you must attempt to proue it by Scripture And the verie offer to proue it by Scripture is a sufficient acknoâ—ledgment that the Scripture is a higher proof then the Churches tradition which in your own ground is or may be questionable til you come thither Besids it is an inuiolable ground of reason that the Principles of anie conclusion Thus he whose words I haue related at large that I might not seem to dissemble the difficultie 2. First therfore we must note that Beleef and Knowledg are different For Beleef is a simple assent for the authoritie of the speaker Knowledg if it be not of such things as are euident of themselues as that the whole is greater then a parte and such like is discursiue inferring one thing out of an other Therfore these are different questions Wherfore we know the Church to be infallible in al matters of faith and Wherfore we beleue her to be so infallible And we wil answer to both questions differently and distinctly To the question Wherfore we beleue the Chrch to be infallible I answer that if you demand the material Gods vocal word the material obiect of faith obiect of my beleef therof it is Gods vocal word vttered to me by the Church For as is shewed before out of the Apostle Faith is of hearing and Hearing is by the vocal word of God vttered by the Church And for this vocal word of God as his testimonie the Church was beleued to be infallible before there was anie Scripture and of the aforesaied Barbarians who had no Scripture and could be so beleued though al Scripture should perish And this Luther and other Protestants before cited doe confess when they say The Church is conceaued bred by the vocal word of God Supra c. 14. â— 1. and 3. 3. And if you ask the formal obiect for whose authoritie we beleue the Church to be thus infallible I answer For the authoritie of God principally and for the authoritie of the Church which is the pillar and ground of faith subordinatly As we beleue what the Embassador saieth principally for the King who sent him and subordinatly for the authoritie of the Embassador himself as apointed by the king And as before anie Scripture was written Prophets were beleued not for anie Scripture but principally for the authoritie of God who sent them and secondarily for their own Prophetical authoritie instituted by God Wherfore we need not as Laude thinketh proue the Church to be infallible ether by special reuelation or by Scripture as Chillingworth saieth c. 3. p. 141. Becaus beside the priuat word of God which is by special reuelation and his publik written word Publik vocal word of God Videsup c. 14. n. 1. which is Scripture there is also his publik vocal word which he vttereth and speaketh by the mouth of the Church as wel as there is his written word which he wrot by Vvhitak l 3. descript p. 414. Spiritus per as Ecclesia loquitur â—ic etiam cont 1. q. 3. c. 11. cont 2. q. 4. c. 2. Quâ— ecclesiam audiunt Christum ipsum audiunt the hands of his prophets and Euangelists And Gods word by whom soeuer it is ether spoke nor written is of equal authoritie and his vocal word equally to be beleued as his written Wherfore we haue no need to proue the Church to be infallible by the Scripture as there was no need nor possibilitie by it to proue that or anie other point of faith before anie Scripture was written vnles it be against such heretiks as beleue the Scripture but beleue not the Church But Catholiks doe onely confirme their faith which before they had of the infallibilitie of the Church by Gods vocal Gods vocal word confirmed by his written word vttered by the Church by his written word of the Scripture As we vse to be confirmed in the beleef of a thing which a man doth not only say by word of mouth but also by writing 4. And moreouer it is not alwaies necessarie as laude thinks that the mean of knowing be more known then the thing known by it as when they mutually make each other known as Relatiues and the Cause and proper Effect doe For in these a Circle is not vitious As from a Father we proue a sonn and from a sonn à Father From Rational Risible and from Risible Rational from the suns rising the Daie and from the Daie the suns rising And as Whitaker saieth contr 1. q. 3. c. 3. of the old and new Testament Something 's mutually proue each other The old and new Testament doe mutually confirme one the other In other matters this mutual confirmation would not auaile but in this it auaileth much For none is so fit a witnes of God and of his word as God in his word And contro 2. q. 5. c. 18. As the cause doth bring forth and shew the effect so the effect in like manner doth illustrat the cause Ibid. c. 9. Relatiues are not before or after one the other And lib. 3. contra Dureum sec 3. doth this seem ridiculous to the to seek the word out of the word White in his Defense p. 301. It is no more a Circle in vs to proue our Spirit by the Scripture and again to be assured of the Scripture by the Spirit then it is in discours to goe too and and fro between causes and effects The like he hath in his way p. 117. Field in his Appendice part 2. p. 16. That the cause may be proued by the effect and the effect by the cause and that such a kinde of argumentation is not a circulation but a demonstratiue regress that two causes may becauses ether of other we make no question Caluin 1. Instit c. 9. § 3. God hath ioyned together the certaintie of his word and Spirit with a mutual knot The samesay I of Gods vocal word vttered by the Church and his written word signed by the Euangelists that
they mutually confirme each other yet with this difference that the true Church giueth sufficient testimonie to her self sufficient I say to beleue her with diuine faith to be the true Church of God becaus her authoritie in matters of faith is diuine as the Apostles was and therfore needeth not the testimonie of the Scripture to be beleued to be such as Christ gaue sufficient testimonie to himself Ioan. 5. S. Ihon Baptist to himself If particular men were credible of themselues why not the whole Church of God Math. 3. S. Ihon Euangelist to himself Ioan. 21. and S. Paul to himself Galat. 1. 2. Cor. 4. and so doth the pillar and ground of truth to her self But the Scripture giueth not sufficient testimonie of it self to be infallibly beleued to be Gods word but needeth authoritie of some infallible Author or Person becaus Scripture is onely the material obiect which is to be beleued and authoritie is the formal obiect or cause of beleef without which there can be no true or formal beleef but onely science or opinion For as S. Austin saieth That we beleue we owe to authoritie And Whitaker l. 3. de Script p. 408. Faith relieth vpon authoritie Authoritie is the foundation of faith Yet Scripture being beleued to be Gods word is a sufficient testimonie to confirme the beleef already had of the Church and also to produce such beleef in those who beleue not the Church And thus much for answer to that question How we beleue the Church to be infallible For we first beleue the Church God speaketh by the mouth of the Church Vvhitaker l. 3 de Scrip 414. so also Contr. 1 q. 3. c. 11. see c. 4. n. 4. and c. 14. n. 1. to be infallible for Gods vocal word vttered by the Church And we are confirmed in that beleef for Gods written word in the Scripture And to Catholiks we giue Gods vocal word as the first subordinat cause of that our beleef but to such as beleue the Scripture and not the Church we giue onely Gods written word And therfore no maruel if to Protestants who admit not the authoritie of Gods Church or his vocal word we proue the infallibilitie of the Church onely by Scripture wheras if they did equally admit as wel Gods vocal word as his written word or his true Church as his Scripture we might without anie vitious Circle at al mutually proue Gods vocal word by his written word and his written by his vocal and his Church by his Scripture and his Scripture by his Church becaus Gods testimonie is sufficient for proof of whatsoeuer and by what means soeuer it be vttered to wit by speech by writing or howsoeuer els Wherfore this is no vitious Circle God saieth by his Church that God speaketh by his Church Vvhitaker supra such Scripture is his word Therfore it is so God saieth by his Scripture that such are his Church Therfore they are so 5. And as for answer to the question How know you the true Church to be infallible in al matters of faith I say that beside the reasons grounded in Scripture giuen before we may giue a natural reason therof For as S. Austin saieth rightly If God haue L. de vâ—il cred c. 16. prouidence of mankinde he hath on earth setled some authoritie on which we relying may mount to him And this authoritie must not be blinde or deceiptful in matters of saluation as al matters of faith are as al fallible authoritie is and therfore is infallible in al such matters And as the same S. Austin saieth of the Scripture that if the lest lie be found in it the authoritie of al the rest faileth so if in the authoritie which God hath setled on earth for matters of Saluation there were found anie error we could not securely relie vpon it And the same reason teacheth vs that if God would setle this infallible authoritie on earth in anie he would setle it in his Church who is his beloued Spouse and Mother of the Faithful whome he hath apointed to conceaue them by the diuine seed of his word to beare nourish and guide them in their way to saluation For who can be imagined to be more fit to be infallible in matters of Saluation then the spouse of God the mother Nurse and Guide of the Faithful Would God apoint to mankinde a blinde or deceiptful guide to saluation surely no if he effectually meant to saue mankinde Nether wil it suffice to grant as Protestants doe that the Church is infallible in fundamental points first becaus there are no fundamental points 〈◊〉 their sense that is such as suffice to saluation though others sufficiently proposed be not beleued Secondly becaus if as S. Austin saied of the Scripture she lie in some points of faith we cannot be sure she doth not in others Wherfore wel saied Chillingworth c. 3. n. 36. An authoritie subiect to error can be no stable or firme foundation of my beleef in anie thing Thirdly becaus Protestants cannot tel which precisely are such fundamental points as they imagin and therfore cannot be certain in which points the Church erreth not Fourthly becaus they say the Church is fallible euen in their most fundamental point of al which is That Scripture is the word of God and sometimes also in other fundamental points as is shewed parte 1. l. 1. c. 7. Fiftly Chillingworth denieth that there is anie one certain Church vniuersal or particular which is infallible euen in fundamental points but onely that there are alwaies some vncertain men who hold al the fundamental points and therfore denieth that anie certain Church is an infallible Guide euen in fundamentals and saieth c. 2 n 139. p. 105. you must know there is a wide difference between infallible in No certain Church infaâ—lible euen â—â—fundamental points fundamentals and being an Infallible guide euen in fundamentals and we vtterly denie the Church to be the latter For to say so were to oblidge ourselues to finde some certain societie of men of whome we might be certain that they nether doe nor can err in fundamentals nor in declaring what is fundamental what not fundamental and consequently to make anie Church an infallible Guide in fundamentals would be to make it infallible in al things which Note this she proposeth and requireth to beleued Which he often times repeateth c. 3. as n. 39. 55. 58. and 60. where he addeth that it is falsly supposed that they grant that in some certain points No certain Church to be obeied vnder pain â—f damnation fundamental some certain Church is infallibly assisted and vnder pain of damnation to be obeyed So that no certain Church vniuersal or particular is ether an infallible Guide or to be beleued or obeyed vnder pain of damnation euen in fundamental points Beside The Church and Some Church are different For The Church signifieth the whole true Church as himself confesseth c. 5. n. 26. p. 263. or The
onely true Church as Laude saieth sec 20 p. 128 and Some Church signieth some indeterminate partilar Church Therfore The Church cannot be said to be infallible in fundamentals if onely Some Church be so For Some Church is not The Church 6. Nether can this necessarie authoritie setled by God for mankinde be said to be in Scripture becaus Scripture was nether in al times for there was none before Moises nor in al places for in S. Ireneyes time there were manie good Christians See infrâ— c. 20. who had no Scripture nor can serue immediatly by it self for al kinds of men For scripture can not immediatly by it self teach those who are blinde or cannot read as moâ—st men cannot And to teach of guide them by the reading of men who are fallible were no infallible guidance Besides Protestants confess that Scripture is hard to be vnderstood and needeth Interpreters euen in matters of faith in which See infral 2 c. 4. sec 2. and c. 2. sec 2 matters it cannot be a sufficient guide For as Chillingworth c. 1. n. 6. saieth of a Rule Both these Properties are required to be a perfect rule both to be so compleat as to need no addition and to be so euident as to need no Interpretation so I say of a Guide or authoritie to direct if it be not euident it is no sufficient guide or authoritie becaus without euidencie it cannot serue for sure direction Moreouer Scripture cannot but improperly be called a guide but as a Rule may be called a Guide or a Iudge For properly a Guide or Iudge is a liuing person who may direct by Rule But of this we shal speak more hereafter 7. And out of al which hath been said in this Chapter appeareth how wrongfully Laude said first that we must know the Church to be infallible ether by special reuealation or by Scripture For there is a third way to wit by Gods vocal word vttered by the Church it self as when the Apostles liued we might haue known them to be infallible by their own testimonie which was Gods vocal word Secondly he falsly saieth that to proue the Church by the Scripture is a sufficient acknowledgment that the Scripture is of a higher proof For Christ and the Apostles proued their doctrin out of the old testament and yet the old testament was not a higher proof then their doctrin And in like sorte the Fathers proued Scripture by the Church and as I said before Relatiues and such as mutually and equally make each other known are of equal proof each to other Thirdly how wrongly he saied that it is an inuiolable ground of reason that the principles of anie conclusion must be of more credit then the conclusion it self For this is not true in Relatiues and such others as are equally known and equally infer one the other And that principle is true onely in such Consequents as are not as wel known as the Antecedents but known onely for the Antecedents as most consequents are as may appeare out of that Maxime of which that principle dependeth to wit Propter quod vnumquodque tale illud magis Which is plainly meant of that which is the sole cause of the knowlegd of an other But Scripture is nether the sole cause nor yet the first cause of our assurance of the true Church but the first cause is principally Gods authoritie and secondarily the Churches diuine authoritie instituted by him as it was in his Apostles and also Gods vocal testimonie or word vttered by his Church and Gods written testimonie signed in Scripture by his diuine Scribes is but a confirmation of our assurance of his true Church And God may wel confirme by writing what he hath spoken and yet be equally credited by what he speaketh as by what he writeth becaus his veracitie is infinit and equally infallible in both And hitherto we haue sufficiently proued that Gods true Church which soeuer she is wanteth not ether Infallibilitie or necessitie required to be the sufficient external Proposer of faith apointed by God it resteth that we shew that she wanteth nether sufficient Claritie nor vniuersalitie requisite to be that external Proposer and to shew which proposal of hers is sufficient and requisit for to cause faith NINETENTH CHAPTER That the true Church of God doth clearly and vniuersally propose al points of faith 1. IN the third Chapter we shewed that foure conditions are necessarie to the al sufficient external Proposer of al points of faith to wit Infallibilitie Necessitie Claritie and Vniuersalitie and hitherto we haue proued that the true Church of God hath the two first conditions It remaineth that we also shew that she hath also the two latter to wit Claritie in clearly proposing what is to be beleued and Vniuersalitie in proposing it to al who are capable of external proposal and in al times and places where faith is to be proposed 2 And for Claritie it is euident that the Church of God clearly enough proposeth to her Children and to others what they are to beleue and if anie doubt arise of her meaning she calleth General Councels and expresseth it more clearly as was seen in the Councel of Nice ad others And as for Vniuersalitie of time and place it is euident that it agreeth to Gods true Church becaus she hath been in al times and is dispersed al the world ouer whersoeuer faith is preached And the like is of her proposing al points of faith 3. And finally that in the true Church is lawful sending to preach points of faith is vndoubted And so haue we proued that the true Church of God which soeuer she is hath al the conditions requisit to the al or absolute sufficient external proposer of al points of diuine faith which God wil haue men to beleue and consequently is that al sufficient external proposer of faith which we ought to seek TWENTITH CHAPTER VVhich is a sufficient proposal of the Church for points of faith 1. A sufficient proposal of the Church for points of faith is when she clearly declareth a matter to be of faith or when she condemneth the contrarie as heresie and excludeth out of her communion al obstinat or pertinacious mainteiners of it See D. Stapleton l. 1. de Principijs c. 11. But onely Excommunication doth not conuince that the Church accounteth it Heresie becaus she may excommunicate euen for holding doctrines that are temerarious or scandalous THE SECOND BOOK OF THE EXTERNAL PROPOSER OF POINTS OF FAITH THE PREFACE 1. ALBEIT Scripture cannot be properly called a Proposer of points of faith becaus a Proposer properly is an intellectual person as the word it self euidently sheweth and much less can it be the Proposer apointed by God as necessarie in ordinarie course to engender diuine faith becaus such a Proposer is a Preacher lawfully sent of God by hearing of whom diuine faith is engendred as is euident by the Apostle Rom. 10. and Scripture nether is a
God onely which is expressed in scriptures or preached in the Church but also what necessarily followeth out of it Gomarus apud Costerum in Apologia p. 75. There is no question between vs whether al things which are to be beleued are express in holie Scripture The like say Beza Respons ad Acta Colloq Montisbel part 2. p. 46. Morton to 2. Apol. l. 1. c. 41. 52. 53. l. 5. c. 9. Field l. 4. c. 20. Pareus l. 1. de Iustificat c 16. Riuet Contr. tract 1. sec 18. Moulins de fugis Arnoldi c. 1. and generally al Protestants when they themselues are put to proue anie point out of Scripture as is to be seen of the Caluinists in Colloq Frankendalensi art 12. fol. 549. 552. Particularly here I note What Fulk saieth that their Inferences out of Scripture are as Good and of as great authoritie are as Gods express words Laude That what is grounded vpon their Consequences is as wel as As wel vpon express text Which is to equalize their Inferences to Gods express words And White loco cit Are they not as wel conclusions of Scripture which are deduced By Protestants by true discourse as which are expressed verbatim Perkins of the Creed col 737. We must know that a lawful consequence drawn out of Scripture is as wel the word of God as that which is expressed Al wel in words Whitaker It is al one to be expresly and to be inferred They condemn vs for saying that Alone Gods word tradid is equal to his Written Potter sec 1. p. 14. To the word of God she Rom. Church addes and equals her own traditions Laude Relat. sec 16. p. 91. Equaling the tradition of the present Church to the written word of Gods Frets vpon the verie foundation it self by iustling with it And they wil haue their Consequences and Inferences as good as Gods express word When we say that the Churches traditions are equal to Gods word we mean nothing but that one word of God is equal to an other For we profess that both of them came immediatly from God one by tradition the other by writing But when they say that their inferences are equal to Gods word they must needs Protestants make fallible mens Inferences Gods word mean that fallible mens Inference and that out of one humane principle too is equal to Gods word For they cannot denie but their Inferences are fallible mens Inferences becaus they are not made by God but by fallible men onely Perkins also in his Reformed Catholik Controu 3. c. 3. and Caluin in Lucae 10. v. 16. make the Ministers word equiualent Confessio Bâ—â—em c. 14. Apologia Confess August c. de Poenitentia to Gods promise and a sufficient ground of faith And Peter Martyr praefat l. de Euchar professeth that the Base strength and foundation of his opinion of the Eucharist Make humane principles ground of their faith is That it is proper to the Deitie to be euerie where and to the humane nature to be in a certain place So the basis and ground of their faith concerning the Eucharist is partly their humane principle For express Scripture they can pretend none FOVRTH CHAPTER VVhether al necessarie points of faith be euidently or clearly conteined in Scripture FIRST SECTION Protestants sometimes affirme ONe thing it is to be conteined actually in Scripture an other to be conteined clearly For something may be conteined actually and yet obscurely and therfore we make these distinct Chapters Protestants in Colloq Ratisbon p. 20. We acknowledg that by Gods Plainely and clearly goodness whatsoeuer are necessarie to saluation are plainly enough and clearly put before our eies in both especially in the New Testament Caluin contra Versipellem p. 358. I stoutly affirme that Heretiks are ouercomen by open Scriptures l. de scandalis Clear p. 101. We receaue nothing but what is proued with clear and sound testimonies of Scripture Beza l. Quaestionum Resp vol. 1. Theol. p. 673. The dogmes of true religion are plainly enough and clearly Plainely and clearly explaned in holie writ In Confess c. 4. sec 25. The Apostles and Euangelists haue so written those things which they haue written as the dullest and most ignorant of al men may thence perceaue vnles themselues doe hinder whatsoeuer sufficeth for their Saluation Zanchius l. 1. Epistolarum p. 16. Whatsoeuer is necessarie to saluation al that is plainly conteined in holie writ And p. 98. The places of holie Scripture from whence the dogmes of Christian Need no clearer expression religion are taken are so clear and open as they need no more diligent or clearer expression Academia Nemausiensis Resp ad Iesuitas Tournonios Rupellae 1584. p. 531. Hence it followeth that al matters of faith are plainly and clearly conteined in that written word that is in the writings of the Prophets and Apostles Moulins in his Buckler sec 94. Al difficulties being set aside that which in Scripture remaineth clear and needeth no interpretation is sufficient to saluation Needeth no interpretation In his answer to Card. Peron l. 1. c. 1. The articles in which the substance of religion consisteth are proposed Need no interpretation in scripture in so clear termes as they need no Interpretation So also de Iudice Contro c. 17. Piscator in Thesibus l. 1. c. 1. we say that al dogmes of faith are clearly deliuered in scripture Whitgift in Defence c. p. 573. what is this els but together with the Papists to condemn the scriptures of Plainely and clearly expressed obscuritie as though al things necessarie to saluation were not plainly and clearly expressed in them p. 367. we are wel assured that Christ in his word hath fully and plainly comprehended al things requisite to faith and good life Fully Fulk Answer to the Preface of the Rhemes testament so manie partes of scriptures as are able to instruct vs to saluation are so plain and easie Vnderstood of euerie reader or hearer as they may be vnderstood ofeuerie one that readeth or heareth them Whitaker Contro 1. q. 4. c. 1. These are ouraxiomes First that scriptures are so plain as they may be read of the people and of the vnlearned with some fruit and profit Secondly that al things necessarie to saluation are proposed in scripture in plain words Ibid. Inplain words c. 4. Hence it followeth that al things necessarie to saluation are manifest in scripture which is the ground of our Defense which he often repeateth Manifest And q. 5. c. 7. We may gather the true As certainly as if God spoke to vs. sense out of scripture no less certainly then if god himself spake to vs. Morton to 2. Apol. l. 2. c. 19. That is the question whether al those things which are necessarie to saluation be so plain in Scripture as the Faithful Vven to the mostignorant euen the most ignorant may be
P. 76. Faith is of scriptures heard P. 108. Faith is begotten not of testimonie of the Church but onely out of scripture P. 122. The The â—â—elie sufficient means scripture is the most strong the most effectual I ad also now the onely sufficient means to beleue P. 130. Our faith relieth vpon the scriptures alone P. 165. scriptures are the foundations of our faith P. 167. The scripture is the beginning of beleuing The same he hath p. 168. P. 173. The formal cause of our Scripture the formal cause of beleef faith is not the voice of the Church but Gods word reuealed in the scriptures Potter sec 5 p. 8. The principal motiue and last obiect of beleif is the diuine last obiect authoritie of the scripture it self P. 10. The cheif principle ground on which faith rests and for which it firmely The ground of faith assents vnto those truths which the Church propounds is the diuine reuelation made in scripture sec 7. p. 95. The creed conteines onely the material The formal obiect obiect of faith The scripture is further the formal obiect of faith or the motiue and ground whervpon faith is grounded being both the obiectâ—m quod in respect of things therin reuealed and obiectum Obiectum quod and quâ— quo in respect of that diuine veritie and authoritie which reueals them Laude Relat. sec 16. p. 84. Tradition of the present Church is the first moral motiue to beleue but the beleif it self That the scripture is the word of God rests vpon the scripture P. 89. Doe Faith resolued into Scripture you grant as you ought to doe that we resolue our faith into scripture as the ground and we wil neuer denie that Tradition is the key that letts vs in Sec. 18. p. 123. The Prophets testimonie was diuine into which namely their writings the Iewes did resolue their faith Hooker l. 2. § 7. Scripture is The ground of al beleef the ground of al beleif Chillingworth c. 3. § 32. p. 149. I can not know anie doctrin to be a diuine and supernatural truthe but becaus the scripture saies so And where saies it that it is the word of God Vttermost formal cause of faith Morton to 2. Apol. l. 1. c. 37. Papists are forced against their wil to grant that thè vttermost formal cause of Catholik faith doth not consist in the authoritie of the Church but in scripture Ib. The diuine authoritie of the scripture by vertue of the holie Ghost doth imprint in the minds of the hearers the last formal Last formal cause cause of faith And l 5. c. 11. scripture is to the faithâ—ul the supreme Iudge euen concerning vs in which our consciences doe last rest In his Appeal l. Last rest and resolution 3. c 15. sec 5. In the doctrin of scripture mens consciences may take their last rest and resolution White in his Table before his way The last resolution of our faith is into the authoritie of the scripture And yet they cannot denie but the authoritie of the Scripture is create For they were written by men And so the formal cause the vttermost formal cause the last formal cause the last rest Create authoritie the vttermost formal cause of Protest faith the last resolution of their faith is create authoritie and not Prima veritas it self as they pretend and condemn Catholiks for onely saying that the create authoritie of the true formal cause but say not as Protestants say of Scripture the vttermost the last formal cause the last resolution of our faith Besids Protestants make Protestants inferences out of humane Principles the last resolution of their faith their own Inferences partly out of some humane principle to be equal and equiualent vnto express Scripture or word of God as is shewed before c. 3 sec 2. and so make their own Inferences and those partly out of humane Principles the formal cause the vttermost the last formal cause that into which their faith is last resolued and withal teach that L. 1. c. 18 n. 1. the Inference cannot be more certain then the Principle out of which it is inferred How then can their faith haue more certaintie then humane as Chillingworth confessed c. 8. sec 2. SECOND SECTION Sometimes denie it CHillingworth c. 2. n. 159. p. 116. For other reasons I conceaue this doctrin that Scripture is the rule of faith Not fundamental becaus if a man should beleue Christian religion Scripture no fâ—ndamental doctrin wholy and entirely and liue according to it such a man though he should not know or not beleue the Scripture to be a rule of faith no nor to be the word of God my opinion is he may be saued so that the books of Scripture are not so much the obiects of our faith as the instruments of conueying it to our vnderstanding and not so much of the being of Christian doctrin as requisit to the welbeing of it Ireneus tels vs of some barbarous nations that beleued the doctrin of Christ and yet beleued not the Scripture to be the word of God For they neuer heard of it and faith comes of hearing God requiring of vs vnder pain of damnation onely Not damnabâ—e not to beâ—eue the Scripture to beleue the verities therin conteined and not the diuine authoritie of the books wherin they are conteined Ibid. n. 32. p. 65. Which Scripture we beleue not finally and for it self but for the matter conteined in it We Scripture not last obâ—â—st of faith are to beleue it not as the last obiect of out faith but as the means of it Ibid. Natural reason built on principles common Natural â—eason last â—eâ—oluâ—◠〈◊〉 of â—rotest faith to al men is the last resolution of our faith of the Scripture into which the Churches authoritie is but the first inducement n. 115. p. 96. By you as wel as by Protestants al is finally resolued into reason Baro in his Apologie pro disput de obiecto fidei p. 48. Laicks beleue the doctrin which is proposed to them to be beleued to be in the Protest beleue Scripture but with 〈…〉 ne faith Scripture onely with humane faith Behold first That Scripture is the rule of faith is no fundamental doctrin Secondly one may be saued though the beleue not the Scripture to be the word of God Thirdly books of Scripture are not so much obiects of our faith as instruments therof Fourthly are not so much of the being of Christian faith as of the wel being of it Fiftly God requires not vnder pain of damnation to beleue the diuine authoritie of Scripture Sixtly we beleue not the Scripture finally and for it self Seauently It is not the last obiect of faith Eightly natural reason is the last resolution of Protestants faith of the Scripture Ninthly Laicks beleue their doctrin to be in the Scripture but with humane faith And can that which is such be the formal
the Catholik faith And himself addeth In al controuersies the Papists with whom we deale crie Plain euident manifest scripture P. 49. he citeth Bellarmin l. 1. de Verbo Dei c. 2. saying other means may deceaue me but nothing is more known nothing more certain then the scriptures that it were the greatest madnes in the world not to beleue them P. 64. some of them say the scripture is the rule and the principal Papists make Scripture a Rule rule too yea more as Bellarmin and others P. 15. Papists grant that al other authoritie is finally resolued into the authoritie of Scripture P. 17. We admit the Scripture on al hands and al the question between vs is about the Church In his Defense p. 162. Our Aduersaries Papists grant the last and highest resolutions of our faith to be into the authoritie of the Scripture Which he repeateth p. 309. 310. 3â—5 Laude sec 16. n. 24. The greatest vpholders of Tradition that euer were made the Scripture vâ—ry necessarie in al ages of the Church sec 20 n. 3. p. 120. The Roman Churches receâ—â—ues the scripture as Rule of faitâ— Iuâ—l Defense of A Rule the Apologie part 1. p. 65. p. 129. You Harding say the scriptures are so clear of your side Luther in psal 22. tom So clear on their side 3. fol. 343. We cannot ouercome the Papists bring a huge number of places of scripture for works Plessie in his preface to his book of the Church When in the time of our Fathers men began to protest openly against the abuses and traditions of the Romish Church by the authoritie of Gods word they that were then accounted famous for learning in that Church as Ecbius Cocleus Prierias and others laboured al they could to defend the said abuses by the holie scripture Behold how from the verie beginning of Protestancie Catholiks sought to defend their doctrin by Scripture Morton also tom 2. Apol l. 5. c. 21. relateth this words of Roffensis against Luther The words of the Gospel make most plainly for vs al fight for vs more clearly then More clearly then the sun the sun And ibid. l. 1. c. 37 citeth this Note of the Rhemist Testament Ioan. 4. This woman Mystically being the Church it is here signified that they which at the first beleue becaus the Church teacheth so afterward be much confirmed finding it in the Scripture also And ibid. Morton addeth yee see then that your last resolution is founded in the authoritie of the Scriptures Whitaker Contro 1. q. 1. c. 1. Papists extol the scriptures and we higly Papists extol the Scripture esteeme them and there is no controuersie that we ought to search the scriptures but how we should search them Kemnice in Epist dedicat 1. partis Exam. The Papists at this time put al the strenght and Defense of their cause in the matter of the scripture and Tradition Thus Catholiks esteem and speak of holie Scripture wheras far otherwise Luther postilla in Domin 8. post Trinitatem fol. 301. said The scripture is the book of Heretiks Christianus Protestants say Scripture is the book of Heretikr ad Portum l. contra Verronem tom 5. Rupellae p. 31 Luther said most truly that scripture is the book of heretiks The same Luther postilla in Epiphaniam It is true that Heretiks are made by occasion of scripture Daile in his Apologie c. 5. Papists reuerence the Gospels and Epistles of the Apostles as diuine bookes SECOND SECTION Sometimes denie it APologie of the Church of England parte 4. c. 18. d. 1. These men Papists alwaie abhor and flie the word of God euen as the theef flyes the gallowes Ibid. These men bid the holie scripture away as dum and fruitles Item They burn the scriptures and cal them the books of Heretiks The like hath Whitaker ad Rat. 5. 6. Campiani And Contro 1. q. 6. c. vlt. Contr. 2. q. 5. c. 6. And l. 2. de Scrip. c. 6 sec 3. And Morton tom 2. Apol. l. 1. c. 47. Martyr in 1. Cor. 15. Papists leaue no place ether to God or scripture Caluin in Gal. 1. v. 8. The Papists do furiously vex the pure and simple doctrin of the Gospel In Ioan. 4. v. 20. The Papists giue no place to Prophets or Apostles Act. 17. v. 2. Papists think nothing can be certainly gathered out of scripture Contra Anabapt p. 412. The Papists say that the holie scriptures Vide Caluin in â—oan 6. v. 60. c. 8. v. 12. 39. c. 17. v. 20. are to be let goe Luther in l. de Consilijs The Pope burieth the holie scripture in durt and dust Morton to 2. Apol. l. 1. c. 33. Cardinal Hosius was not ashamed to say impiously See his Appeal l. 5. c. 28. sâ—c 2. Tom 2. Apol. l. 5 c. 13. Potter sect 5. p. 3. It had been better if Scripture had not been written Yet ibid. confesseth This I haue read of Hosius but not in Hosius But he is ashamed to tel where he read it to wit in Iuels Apologie of the Church of England parte 4 where Iuels best excuse of a manifest lie is that some of his lying brethren had told that leud lie before him Read Cope Dial. 6. c. 19. of this faceles lie of Iuel And Hardings answer to the Apologie Hosius de Verbo Dei Bellarm. Praefat in tom 2. White in his Way p. 18. They know and confess the most and greatest points of their religion euen wel nigh al wherin they dissent from vs haue no foundation on the scripture And in his Epistle Dedicatorie Al their speâ—ch is of the Church no mention of the scriptures nor God their Father but their Mother the Church And in his Defense p. 61. accuseth Catholiks of Enmitie rebellion and contempt of scriptures Ibid. p. 346. The words of the scripture itself the Replier and his Complices despise and reuile But it is wel that both himself and his fellowes do giue him the lie herein as we saw in the former section Vshers Reionder p. 1. Papists flie from the Scripture euen as the dog flieth from the whip wherwith he is beaten they speak euil of it But now hauing shewed the manifold and main vncertainties and contradictions of Protestants touching Scripture let anie iudicious Reader iudge whether Protestants can rationally say or think that the Scripture is the onely Iudge or onelie Rule or onelie sufficient Proposer of points of faith apointed by God for to direct and guide vs assuredly and infallibly in matters of assured and infallible faith but now let vs set down Catholiks certain and constant doctrin concerning the same Onely let vs remember luthers word vpon the fift psalme No Heretiks were ouercomen by force or craft but by mutual dissension nether doth Christ fight otherwise with them then by sending amongst them the spirit of giddines and dissension FOVRTEENTH CHAPTER That Scripture taken by it self alone vvithout attestation of the Church that it is the
letter or vvord of God cannot sufficiently propose to men anie thing to be beleued vvith diuine and infallible faith 1. THat Scripture taken by it self alone without attestation of the Church that it is the letter or word of God doth not sufficiently propose to vs or to speak more properly that in Scripture or by Scripture alone is not sufficiently proposed to vs anie thing to be beleued with diuine and infallible faith is euident becaus al the Scriptures sufficient proposal a Sup c. 1◠sect 1 dependeth on this that it self is the word of God And b Sup. c. 5. sect 1. it self saieth not anie where that it is the word of God and if it did anie where say it that saying would require an other word of God to say the same of it and so forward without end And this is so clear as Hooker l. 2. § 4. Laude Relat. sec 16. p. 70. and 88. Potter sec 5. and Chillingworth c. 2. doe both grant it and proue it and likewise al other c Sup. c. 6. sect 2. Protestants who grant that the light of the Scripture is not so great that without the Church shew it to vs we can see it And indeed al Protestants should grant the same who confess as we related l. 1. c. 14. that the preaching of the Church is necessarie to engender diuine faith For if that be necessarie as we haue proued l. 1. c. 11. 12. 13. 14. we cannot beleue the Scripture to be the word of God before the Church preach it to vs. 2. But it is against those Protestants who as we related supra c. 6. sec 1. auouch that Scripture in it self hath such and so much diuine light as by it self alone it can be infallibly known to be the word of God But beside that this great light is denied by most of their fellowes as is shewed c. 6. cit sec 2. and feigned without al sufficient ground as shal hereafter appeare it may be clearly refuted For as Laude loco cit p. 7. saieth wel If this inward light were so clear how could there haue been anie varietie among the ancient Beleuers touching the authoritie of S. Iames and S. Iudes epistle and the Apocalyps For certainly the light which is in the Scripture was the same then which is now And I add How could the Lutherans not see this light in S. Iames Epistle as wel as the Caluinists Nether can it be pretended that this is becaus the Holie Ghost doth not sufficiently lighten their eyes becaus this light may be seen euen by natural reason as Whitaker Hooker White and other taught supra c. 8. sec 2. 3. Besids this light great or less is not fit or apt to the end for which it was feigned For it was feigned to defend that beleif That Scripture is the word of God dependeth not on the testimonie of the Church but proceedeth of the Scripture it self And clear light cannot cause beleif Light causeth not faith but sight or vision which is of things not appearing Hebrewes 11. but onely causeth certain knowledg or vision And not light but onely authoritie is the formal obiect of faith For as the Apostle saieth Faith is of hearing not of sight And S. Austin l. devtilitate Credendi c. 11. That we beleue we owe to authoritie So that light wanteth both the material obiect of faith which is Things not appearing Haebrae 11. and also the formal obiect which is Authoritie And therfore Whitaker l. 2. de Script p. 227. 319. 235. l. 1. p. 77. 116. 122. often times granteth that though certain knowledg That the Scripture is the word of God may be had without the testimonie of the Church yet denieth that diuine faith therof can be had without the Churches preaching becaus the Apostle saieth plainly How shal they beleue without à Preacher And Faith is of hearing And Potter sec 5. p. 8. That Scripture is of diuine authoritie the Beleuer sees by that glorious beam of diuine light which shines in Scripture and by manie internal arguments found in the letter it self So this light breedeth sight not faith Beside How doe Beleuers How doe Beleuers se◠see If therfore the Scripture can sufficiently propose nothing to be beleued with diuine faith til it self be beleued with diuine faith to be the word of God as is certain the natural knowledg or vision which one may haue that the Scripture is the word of God without the Churches testimonie serueth not to the end for which it was deuised Besids I hope they wil not say that their diuine faith That al that is in Scripture is true is resolued into natural Sup c. 8 se 1. knowledg That the Scripture is the word of God as Chillingworth seemeth to say c. 2. p. 53. 72. For so the ground and foundation of diuine and infallible faith should be natural humane and fallible knowledg Moreouer this internal light is no word of God but at most a qualitie of the word of God and nothing can be the material obiect of diuine faith and beleued but what is the word of God or saied of God Wherfore ether they must shew where God hath saied that Scripture is the word of God or they can neuer beleue it with diuine faith or they must say that they can beleue that with diuinefaith which God hath neuer saied which is most absurd And into this absurditie al Protestants must fal who say they beleue with diuine faith that the Scripture is the word of God and yet denie that there is anie vnwritten word of God which saieth That the Scripture is the word of God d Sup. c. 5. sect 2. For doubtles there is no such written word as themselues confess 4. Moreouer this light great or less is ether in the letter or words of the Scripture or in the sense therof Some Protestants seem to say that it is in the letter or words For thus Whitaker l. 1. de Scrip. p. 25 We beleue the Scriptures for the most diuine character P. 88. That they Scripture known by the words are the Scriptures is known by the stile and phrase P. 104. The Scripture doth shew à certain kinde of diuinitie in the verie words phrase and in al the forme of the speech And p. 113. That it came from God is euident by the inscription the hand the seal the things and al the letter◠And Contro 1. q. 6 c. 9. As if by the verie inscription to the Romans it were not euident that it is Pauls And Laude sec 16 p. 83. He that beleues resolues his last and ful assent That the Scripture is of diuine authoritie into internal arguments found in the letter it self But beside that this internal light in the words of Scripture is merely feigned it is clearly refuted becaus so al men should see it who can read the Scripture And also becaus the words of Scripture are such as men first inuented and haue
could see them to be Apostles of themselues but becaus they gaue to others the light of faith and pietie And thus much for this first proof that Scripture cannot sufficiently shew it self to be the word of God for want of the material obiect of diuine faith which is Gods saying that it is his word For God no where saieth in Scripture that Scripture is his word and what God faieth diuine faith cannot beleue 7. An other argument to the same purpose may be taken from the Scriptures not hauing in it self the formal obiect of faith which is authoritie For albeit Scripture in it self contein most diuine and infallible veritie yet taken by it self as it is such words and such sense it hath not proper authoritie becaus Authoritie is in an Author and an Author is a Rational or intellectual Person saying something which for his authoritie or credit we beleue And Veritie which we beleue is in his speech Authoritie or Veracitie for which we beleue is in his person Likewise we cannot beleue but for some witnes who testifieth that which we are to beleue and a witnes doubtles is an intellectual person distinct from his testimonie or that which he witnesseth And Scripture is no intellectual person but the testimonie of God who is supreme witnes of it Wherfore it is no formal cause of our beleef as a witnes is but onely the material obiect which is to be beleued Besids the Character or stile of Scripture or the doctrin or maiestie therof being not authoritie or veracitie they cannot cause formal faith or beleif but at most opinion or knowledg For as we haue often repeated out of S. Austin That we beleue we owe to Authoritie Which is so euident as Whitaker l. 3 de Scriptura p. 408. saieth Faith relieth vpon authoritie Authoritie is the foundation of faith And p. 509. To beleue some Authoritie is necessarie Wherfore wel wrote Stapleton Contro 3. q. 1. art 2. The word of God it self written or vnwritten is not of it self and properly à mean to beleue but is that which is beleued Is not the formal obiect of faith or anie parte therof but is the material obiect For the word speaketh not but is heard by the voice of God or of the Church speaking and faith is of hearing the word of God And therfore properly Scripturam credimus non Scripturae And in like manner Potter sec 7. p. 95. saieth The Creed conteines onely the material obiect of faith not the formal And yet it conteines the words and sense of Scripture Wherfore the Scripture it self containes not the formal obiect of faith but onely the material which is diuine veritie And when graue Authors attribute authoritie to Scripture ether they take authoritie for veritie or credibilitie to be beleued or they speak figuratiuely attribâ—ting by prosopopeia a person to the Scripture as is vsual when men speak of writings to speak of them as if they were the writers So we say the Scripture speaketh saieth teacheth and such like meaning God by the Scripture doth so Or els they take not Scripture by it self but with the writer therof And so no doubt it hath authoritie not in it self but adioined to it to wit as it is the Scripture of God or word of God But this authoritie is the increate authoritie of God himself beside which we must haue in ordinarie course à create authoritie for to beleue with diuine faith and this create authoritie is not in the Scripture but in the Church and much less is in the Scripture Prima vâ—ritas as Whitaker saieth l. 3. de Scripturâ p. 485. 509. For so it shold not be a made or created thing but God himself And hence appeareth that Protestants beleuing what they beleue merely becaus they finde â—up c. 11. â—ect 1. it in Scripture and making Scripture their formal and vttermost cause of their beleif haue no formal faith becaus they beleue not for anie formal authoritie or veracitie but for seeming veritie of the things which they finde in Scripture which seeming veritie may cause opinion but not true and formal faith But to admit that the original hand writings of the Prophets and Apostles known to be theirs had authoritie sufficient to beget diuine faith how can mere copies of their writings and those made by fallible men as al Bibles now extant are made by ordinarie writers or Printers haue Copies of authentical writings are not authentical of themselues such authoritie vnles they be signed or testified by some authentical person that they are agreable to the Originals Are mere Copies of neuer so authentical writings made by priuate men but not testified by anie of sufficient credit that they are agreable to the originals of sufficient credit to beget humane vndoubted beleif in anie court of Iustice And wil we haue mere copies of the Prophets or Apostles writings made by fallible and ordinarie men to be of themselues alone of sufficient credit to beget diuine faith can not vndoubted humane faith be gotten by such mere copies not attested by anie authentical person and can vndoubted diuine faith becaused by such copies made by fallible men cannot reasonably be accouÌ„ted infallible vnles they be attested by some infallible person and it is the attestation of the infallible person which maketh them infallibly credible to vs. Wherfore out of that which I haue hitherto said I argue Vvhat is onely the material obiect of faith is not the formal thus in forme What is onely thematerial obiect of faith or is onely beleued cannot be also the formal obiect of faith and the reason of beleuing That which is the word of God written or vnwritten is onely the material obiect of faith and what is beleued Therfore it can not be also the formal obiect and reason of beleuing The Maior is euident The Minor I proue becaus the word of God taken by it self hath no formal authoritie And onely formal authoritie is the formal obiect of faith and reason of beleuing And here is the difference betwixt the word of God and the Prophets Apostles and Church of God that these haue formal diuine authoritie in themselues and therfore are not onely material obiects of faith and beleued to be Prophets Apostles Difference between Scripture and Church and Church of God but also are formal external reasons of beleuing what they say themselues are or what els they propose 8. A third proof that Scripture of it self cannot sufficiently propose it self to be the word of God is becaus the authoritie of the true Church is the formal external cause for which in ordinarie course the Scripture is beleued with diuine faith to be the word of God This is euident out of those places in Scripture which we cited before l. 1. c. 11. and 12. which not onely proue the necessitie of the Churches preaching the Scripture to be Gods word for to be beleued as such but also proue the verie authoritie
haue by the Scripture For example the doctrin of seauen Sacraments which we haue by tradition is no more credible of itself then anie other point of faith which we haue by Scripture But if we speak formally of Tradition as it is an act of the Church that is of itself credible becaus that includeth the deliuerie of doctrin by the liuelie or liuing voice of the Church Which voice of the Church is euident to vs and her authoritie maketh the doctrin which she deliuereth credible But the Scripture is deliuered to vs by dead letters and it is not euident to vs that the Prophets or Apostles were the Enditers of those letters and therfore it hath not their authoritie adioined to it as the voice of the Church hath her authoritie adioined to it and so the Scripture not hauing the authoritie of the Authors therof so annexed to it as Tradition hath the authoritie of the Church it can not be so credible of itself Hence also is answered that question which Chillingworth in his Answer to the Preface n. 25. p. Chillingwort the question answered 18. and c. 3. p. 162. saieth He desired to be resolued by manie of our side but neuer could to wit why an implicit faith in Christ and in his word shold not suffice as wel as implicit faith in our Church Becaus it implieth that in ordinarie course there should be diuine faith in Christ and in his word without faith in his Church Christ and his word include not al that is necessarie in ordinarie course to diuine faith becaus faith is of hearing à lawful Preacher Rom. 10. But faith in his Church includeth al that is in ordinarie course necessarie to diuine faith For we can not beleue in Christs Church but we must beleue in Christs and in his word Heretiks say they beleue in Christ and in his word but that wil not suffice them becaus they doe not beleue Vhosoeuer beloue in Christ Church beleue in Christ but not contrariewise also in his Church But whosoeuer beleue in his Church beleue in him but not contrariwise whosoeuer beleue in Christ so as Heretiks doe beleue also in his Church wherfore implicit faith in Christs Church may suffice becaus that necessarily concludeth faith in Christ but al kinds of faith in Christ as that of Heretiks doth not include faith in his Church 12. As for the authoritie of Fathers to proue that the Scripture of it self without the attestation of the Church can propose nothing sufficiently to be beleued with diuine faith it may suffice what before l. 1. c. 7. we cited out of S. Basil that Scripture without tradition of the Church would haue no force but be like a bare letter and out of S. Austin that he could not beleue the Gospel if the authoritie of the Church were weakened And as for Protestants confessions it may also suffice what we cited out of them l. 1. c. 14. and here l. 2. c. 5. and 6. That the Church is a necessarie introduction the key the dore which lets vs into the knowledg of the Scripture And c. 5. That we cannot refel schismatiks or Heretiks who denie the Scripture out of Scripture For if the Church be such euident itis that without the Church the Scripture cannot be beleued to be Gods word and til it be beleued to be Gods word it can not sufficiently propose anie thing to vs to be beleued with diuine faith FIFTEENTH CHAPTER That Scripture though beleued to be Gods vvord doth not sufficiently propose to men al points of faith 1. THat Scripture though beleued to be Gods word doth not sufficiently propose to vs al points of faith is euident First becaus as is proued in the former Chapter it doth not at al propose to vs this point of faith That it self is the wodr of God which yet is a point of a Confess Angl. art 6. Gall. art 3 Belg. art 4. faith necessarie to be beleued yea in the b Sup. c. 11. sec 1. Protestants opinion the chiefest point of al as on which dependeth their beleif of al the rest If anie obiect that the Scripture being beleued to be Gods word it need not propose itself to be Gods word I answer that I speak not what the Scripture need not doe but what it doth not Caluin 1. Instit c. 7. 8. where he endeauoreth to proue Scripture to be Gods word bringeth no word of God to proue it but proueth it out of the qualities of Scripture to wit dignitie veritie conformitie antiquitie and such like And so doth Whitaker Contro 1. q. 3 c. 3. and yet there confesseth c Item l. 1. de Sript p 21. that these arguments cannot persuade these books to be Canonical And the same saieth Caluin c. 7. cit § 4. And what cannot perswade doth not sufficiently propose to make beleif For beleif cannot be without persuasion Besids these arguments make not faith but science 2. Secondly the Scripture itself saieth There are some necessarie traditions not written 2. Thessalon 2. v. 15. Hold the traditions which you haue learnt ether by speech or by our Epistle Whitaker Contro 1. q. 6. c. 10. confesseth that Protestants answer diuersly whose answers becaus himself refuteth we wil for breuities sake omit His answer is that d So Peâ—kins Cath Refor cont 7. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Barom An. 53. there were some necessarie traditioÌ„s not written when this Epistle was written Let Whitaker shew as plain testimonie of Scripture that al was written after You must proue as plainly out of Scripture as we proue as Tertullian saied to Praxeas c. 11. Secondly becaus the Fathers as S. Chrysostom Oecumenius Theophilact vpon this place S Basil l de Spiritu Sancto c 29. S. Epiphanius haeresi 61. and S. Damascen l. 4. de fide c. 17. out of this place do proue that euen in their times there were necessarie traditions not written 3. Thirdly becaus there are diuers points of faith which nether are expresly in Scripture nor can be euidently and necessarily inferred out of it But for breuities sake I wil speak of one onely which is the perpetual virginitie of our Blessed Ladie For that is a point of faith as is clear Perpetual Virginitie of our B. Ladie a point of faith becaus both Iouinian and Heluidius were condemned as Heretiks for denying it as is euident out of S. Ambrose Epist 7. S. Epiphanius haeresi 78. S. Hierom. l. contra Heluidium S. Austin haeresi 84. Gennadius l. de Ecclesiast dogmat c. 68. And doth anie now know what is a point of faith or what is true heresie better then al these Fathers Nay then al the Church of their time which condemned partly tacitly partly openly the aforesaid Heretiks S. Basil homil de humana generatione Christi saieth The eares of those who loue Christ cannot suffer to here that the Mother of God at anie time left to be a Virgin S. Epiphanius loc cit calleth it
needed he to interpret the places of Scripture which were of him if they had been of themselues clear enough to beget faith And yet the knowledg of Christ is a point most necessarie Fourthly holie Fathers frequently say that the Scripture is obscure or hard to be vnderstood whose testimonies I omit for breuities sake And to say they meane not of anie point of faith as Protestants say is mere voluntarie Fiftly if the Scripture were plain enough in al points of faith there would need no gift of Interpretation for points faith For to what end need Interpretation where there is claritie enough to breed faith 2. Finally this is so euident as Whitaker Contro 1. q. 4. c. 1. saieth When he Bellarmin maketh this See sup c. 〈◊〉 sect 2. the state of the question whether Scripture of itself be so clear as without Interpretation it sufficeth of itself to end and decide al Controuersies of faith he fighteth without an aduersarie For in this he hath not vs for Aduersaries And ibid. They say but falsly that we think that Scripture without interpretation sufficeth to decide al Controuersies Behould Scripture of itself and without Interpretation sufficeth not to end al Controuersies of faith Caluin also 4. Instit c. 7. § 25. being vrged that the words of the institution of the Eucharist did plainly teach the real and substantial presence of Christ answereth As if you could cast the gift of Interpretation out of the Church which giueth light to the word So that the Scripture doth not clearly enough teach what the Eucharist is without the light Interpretation And yet it is a great point of faith And the same is euident in the dissentions of Protestans about so manie points of faith For they being forsooth holie men would not gainsay clear Scripture At least true learned and holie men could hardly fal into anie errors in faith becaus al points therof were clearly set down in Scripture And yet S. Hierom. l. 2. contra Pelagium and S. Austin l. 2. de Baptis c. 1. 5. l. 3. c. 14. and De dono perseuerantiae c. 21. say it is hard euen for the best learned not to fal into some such errors And we see it in S. Cyprian and his Fellowes and in others 3. Protestants Confessions that al points of faith are not clear enough in Scripture may be seen supra c. 2. sec 2. and c. 4. sec 2. TWENTITH CHAPTER That the Scriptures proposal is not necessarie in ordinarie course to haue diuine faith 1. THat the Scriptures proposal of points of faith is not necessarie in ordinarie course to haue diuine faith is euident First becaus the Scripture no where saieth it Secondly becaus the Scripture is not the external formal cause of faith as we haue shewed that the authoritie of the Church is Thirdly becaus diuine faith was for more then a Caluin 1. Instit c. 6. §. 2. See supra c. 17. 18. 2000. yeares before there was anie Scripture Fourthly becaus euen after Scripture was there was in S. b L. 3. c. 7. Irenes time faith among some barbarous nations where was no Scripture And this is so euident that although Protestants must needs say the contrarie becaus commonly they teach as we saw c. 11. sec 1. that Scripture is the vtmost formal cause of their faith without which cause vndoubtedly there can be no formal faith yet sometimes they confess it Whitaker Contro 1. q 6. c. 7. Hence he concludeth Therfore scriptures are not simply necessarie Rightly And it is clear out of which Protestants grant that there was diuine faith in the world for 2000. yeares before anie Scripture was and since Christ also where there was no Scripture which conuinceth that Scripture nether of its nature nor of Gods institution is an absolutly necessarie means in ordinarie course to haue faith For then the Barbarians of whome L. 3. c. 4. S. Ireney speaketh could not haue had diuine faith And Chillingworth c. 2. n. 159. saieth scripture is not so much of the being of Christian doctrin as requisit to the wel being of it And Vvhy Scripture is not the sufficient Proposer out of al which we haue hitherto saied of Scripture it is euident that it is not the Al sufficient Proposer instituted by God for to beleue with diuine faith For first it is no intellectual person as doubtles a proper Proposer of points of faith is Secondly it proposeth not al points which God wil haue vs to beleue with diuine faith Thirdly it doth not propose clearly enough al the points of faith which it proposeth Fourthly it proposeth not points of faith to al kindes of men who are capable of external proposal Fiftly it hath not been in al times nor in al places when and where diuine faith was Sixtly in ordinarie course it is not necessarie to haue diuine faith Al which agree to the proper Proposer of points of faith instituted by God But now hauing seen what the Scripture is not let vs see what it is For though it be not the proper Proposer of faith instituted by God yet it hath manie excellent properties conducing to that end ONE AND TWENTITH CHAPTER That the Scripture conteineth the summ of Christian faith and al things that are necessarie to be beleued of al kinds of men explicitly 1. THat the Scripture conteineth the summe of Christian faith and al things necessarie to be explicitly beleued of al kinds of men is manifest First becaus it conteineth the misterie of the Trinitie the Incarnation and al the Articles of the Apostles Creed Secondly becaus the Scripture professeth this For Ioan. 20. v. 51. it is said These are written that you may beleue that Iesus is Christ the sonn of God and that beleuing you may haue life in his name And S. Luke c. 1. It seemed good vnto me hauing diligently attained to al things from the beginning to write to thee in order good Teophilus that thou maist know the veritie of those words wherof thou hast been instructed Where it seemes that both S. Ihon and S. Luke profess that they wrote in their Gospel the summe of Christian faith and al that is absolutly necessarie to saluation Rom. 15. v. 4. Whatsoeuer are written are written for our learning that by patience and comfort of scriptures we may haue hope And if we may haue hope why not faith 2. And this Fathers teach as we shal see in the next Chapter And this is al which some Protestants a Laude sect 17. p. 117. Potter sect 4. p. 96. Morton to 2. Apol. l. 1. c. 19 Vvhite Defense c 29. p. 270. Plessie de Eccles c. 4. p. 85. Sum of religion desire though in words they wil seem to say more Whitaker Contro 1. q. 6. c. 6. We affirme that the summe of our Religion is written Q. 4. c. 4. If he confess that the knowledg of Christ is manifest in Scripture surely we desire no more For this is as
August serm 194. de Temp. See more infâ—a c. 24. Laude sec 11. § 11. Plessie de Eccles c. 4. Leo Epist â—om 13. See him 〈◊〉 de vnit c. 1. 3. 5. 7. 10. 11. 16. 18. 20. Fathers Regula fidei And of ordination the Councel of Trent sess 23. c. 3. saieth that by the testimonie of Scripture it is manifest that grace is giuen by ordâ—nation And sess 13. c. 1. professeth that Christ gaue his Bodie to his Apostles in plain and express words and in a most manifest sense And proueth al most al its Decrees of faith by manifest places of Scripture The same also teacheth S. Austin l. 2. de peccatorum meritis c. vlt I beleue that herein the authoritie of scriptures would be most clear if man could not be ignorant of it without loss of promised saluation And l. 2 de Doctrina Christiana c. 9. In those things which are plainly set down in scripture are found al which contein faith and manner of life In which words I note those If man that is if man could not be ignorant of it without loss of Saluation which clearly shew that he speaketh of things necessarie to be actually beleued of al men And in the second place he saieth not which contein al faith but which is necessarie to saluation and which before he had called Regula credendi And l. 3. c. 2. he saieth the Rule of faith is gathered out of the plainer places of scripture And the Rule of faith or Rule of beleif conteineth not al faith but al that is absolutly necessarie to Saluation For a Rule is not to contein but to regulate al. Regula dicta est eo quod recte ducit nec aliquem trahit D. 3. apuâ— Gratian. aliorsum 2. Nether is this contrarie to that which Fathers and Catholiks say that the Scriptures are hard or obscure First becaus to say that the Scriptures are easie for the summ of Christian faith and points by Gods apointment absolutly necessarie to be beleued explicitly of al is not to say absolutly that the Scriptures are easie but onely that they are easie in some parte and that a smal one too Secondly becaus a way may be said dangerous if in some parte it be so though not in al partes so the Scripture may be said hard and obscure if in some parte it be such Thirdly becaus though the Scripture may be easie to be vnderstood yet it may be hard to be infallibly sure that we rightly vnderstand it without the assurance of the Church THREE AND TWENTITH CHAPTER That the Scripture is necessarie to the better being of Christian faith 1. THat Scripture is necessarie to the better being of Christian faith is euident both by what the Apostle saieth 2. Tim. 3. Al scripture diuinely inspired is profitable to teach to reproue to instruct c. and also by what hath been saied in the former Chapter that it teacheth al points fundamental or absolutly necessarie to be beleued explicitly of al that it teacheth the most points of Christian faith in sending vs to the Church which teacheth them al. Besids it helpeth to remember better what we are to beleue it describeth what is the true Church and which are the Notes and giueth testimonie to her And it is a main confirmation of the true Christian faith and a great confutation of heresies contrarie to it and the onely armes proper to Christians which they haue against most heretiks For they denying the Infallibilitie of the Church Councels or Fathers and reiecting al testimonie of miracles leaue the true Christian Church no proper armes to fight against them but the Scripture which God hath made to be of so great esteem among Christians as S. Austin saieth None wil refuse Scripture who wil be accounted in anie sort a Christian And otherwhere No Christian wil goe against scripture no quiet man against the Church no man in his wits against reason And Vincentius Lyrinensis c. 39. addeth we must ether impugne older heresies only with scripture or auoid them being condemned by General Councels Moreouer it is not likelie that ether the holie Writers would haue been so careful to write or the Church to conserue the holie Scripture if it had not been thought to haue been in some sorte necessarie to Christian faith And what great necessitie soeuer some Protestants pretend that there is of Scripture Whitaker confesseth that there is no absolute necessitie of it and that some parte of Scripture helpeth though not to the being yet to the better being of faith And Chillingworth that it is not so much of the being of Christian doctrin as requisit to the wel being of it as we shewed c. 11. sec 2. which is but in other termes to say as we doe that it is but necessarie to the better being of Christian faith and religion So that indeed they make no greater necessitie of Scripture then we doe whatsoeuer they pretend in words as we shewed before that they say that the Scripture conteineth not so much as we say nor is more clear then we say it is yet becaus sometimes they pretend the contrarie we wil now answer to their obiections FOVRE AND TWENTITH CHAPTER Protestants arguments out of Scripture that it conteineth al points of faith ansvvered 1. THeir chiefest place out of Scripture that it conteineth al points of faith is 2. Tim. 3. Al scripture diuinely inspired is profitable to teach to reproue to correct to instruct in iustice that the man of God be perfect instructed to euerie good work out of which they inferr that the Scripture sufficiently teacheth al points of faith Catholiks answer First that S. Paul speaketh onely of the old Testament is as euident becaus much of the Newâ— was not then written as also becaus he saieth that Timothy had known it from his Childhood and he had not known the New Testament from his Childhood And if Protestants wil say the Old testament sufficiently teacheth al points of faith they make the New Testament needles which none of them dare say at least it were not necessarie For how can the New testament be necessarie if the old be sufficient And I think they wil not say the New Testament is not necessarie And that S. Paul speaketh of the New testament Protestants nether proue nor can proue wheras we proue plainly that he speaketh onely of the old Testament 2. Their second answer is that the Apostle saieth not that the Scripture is sufficient but onely saieth profitable And a thing may be profitable which is not sufficient Their third is that the Apostle saieth not that the Scripture is profitable to teach al things to correct al things to reproue al things to instruct in al things but simply to teach to correct to reproue to instruct so that by to euerie good work he comprehendeth not euerie particular good work but al kinds of good works as are teaching correcting reprouing instructing And so three waies they answer sufficiently
to this argument to which Whitaker Contro 1. q. 6. c. 14. saieth no Papist euer answered suffictently or can answer 3. The Protestants second place is Galat. 1 where is saied If anie Euangelize to you be side what we haue Euangelized let him be Anathema Catholiks answer that the Apostle by Beside meaneth so beside as is contrarie First becaus both the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Latin Praeter is vsually so taken And Whitaker Contro 1. q. 6. c. 14. saieth I grant that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may wel be translated contra Secondly becaus els he should haue accursed S. Ihon who after this wrote his Apocalyps in which there are some things which S. Paul neuer told to the Galathians Thirdly becaus the Fathers Ambrose Hierom Chrysostom Theophilact Oecumenius Austin so plainly expound it as Whitaker loco cir saieth we need not answer them And S. Chrysostom eypoundeth it of such an addition to the Scripture which ouerturneth ether al or anie parte of the Gospel And S. Austin tract 98. in Ioan proueth it becaus otherwise S. Paul had accursed himself who desired to come again to the Thessalonians that he might haue adde what was wanting to their faith Fourthly becaus the Apostle there speaketh of a thing which was not onely beside but also contrarie to what he had preached to wit the keeping of the law of Moises which he called an other Gospel And of it and such like he said iustly that he deserued to be accursed who should teach beside what he had preached to the Galathians to whome being but rude it is not like he had as then preached al points of faith whatsoeuer I may ad also that Traditions are not beside the Scripture becaus the Scripture teacheth them mediatly in sending vs to the Church whome it testifieth to teach al truth In which sense it may be S. Austin l. 3. contra Petilian c. 6. saied that he were Anathema who shold teach anie thing which belongeth to our faith and life beside that which we haue receaued in the legal and Euangelical scripture becaus al that belongeth to our faith or life is mediatly in Scripture though perhaps by beside he mean contrarie as he doth tract 98. cit and l. 17. contra Faustum c. 3. and l. 23. c. 7. For in the aforesaid place he speaketh of flying schisme contravnitatem Christi which is not only beside but indeed contrarietoholie Scripture And Whitaker Contro 1. q. 6. c. 14. euen vrging this place of the Apostle saieth Traditions agreable to scripture are to be receaued and who receaue them not are condemned These Fathers speake of Traditions agreable to scriptures So that Traditions agreable to Scripture are not condemned here by the Apostle and approued by Fathers and admitted by Protestants 4. As for what they alleadge out of some Fathers that Scripture conteineth al things necessarie proueth no more then what we haue said before that it conteineth the summe of Christian faith al things that are necessarie to be explicitly beleued of euerie one and the greatest parte of the rest and mediatly al points of faith whatsoeuer but not that it conteineth immediatly al points whatsouer For S. Hilaire l. 2. de Trinit speaking of the forme of Baptisme saieth what is it that is not conteined in that sacrament of mans saluation Hierom. praefat in libros Paralipomenon Al learning of scripture is conteined in this book S. Austin serm 194. serm 130. The Creed conteineth al the mysteries of our faith Nor the Fathers only speak thus but euen both Catholiks and Protestants also For Catechismus ad Parachos in Praefat. § 12. saith the Apostles Creed conteineth al things that are to be beleued and our Lords praier al that is asked The like saieth the Caluinist French Catechisme Luther in c. 15. Genesis that Melchisedechs speech to Abraham conteineth al that can be said of Religion Caluin 3. Instit c. 20. § 48. The Lords praier conteineth al that we are to ask of God And in Math. 16. v. 18. That Peters Confession conteineth the whole summ of our saluation Which kinde of speeches no man vnderstandeth of euerie particular thing that we are to beleue or ask of God Besids manie Protestants doe grant that Scripture doth not contein euerie particular point of faith no not their most fundamental point of al which is that itself is the word of God And Laude cited l. 2. c. 5. sec 2. saieth that when the Fathers say we are to relie vpon Scripture onely they are neuer to be vnderstood with exclusion of Tradition in whatsoeuer it may be had and that without the Churches help we may mistake the Scripture And Feild ibid. That they doe not make the Scripture the rule of their faith but that other things in their kinde are Rules likewise in such sorte as it is not safe without respect had vnto them to iudge of things by the Scripture alone And also White cited l. 1. c. 10. That the Doctrin of the Church is an infallible Rule and the Rule of faith And Baro ibid. That Tradition is an infallible Rule And Chillingworth ibid. That vniuersal Tradition is as infallible as the Scripture And out of this is also answered that the Fathers cal Scripture The Rule or A Rule of faith For they cal also the Apostles Cred so As Tertullian l. Praescrip c. 13. S. Austin serm de Symbolo S. Ireney l. 1. c. 1. S. Epiphanius haeres 31. and others And Protestants as Kemnice in locis p. 10. Perkins in his reformed Catholik at the end and vpon the Creed in the beginning and Plessie de Eccles c. 8. saieth The Fathers cal it ordinarily the Rule of faith Potter sec 7. p. 78. 89. And yet mean not that it conteineth immediatly al points of faith whatsoeuer Nay a Rule is not to contein al faith but to regulate al. 5. Hence also may be answered what Protestants obiect that if the Scripture contein not al points of faith whatsoeuer it should be imperfect For imperfect is that onely which hath not al that it ought to haue And Scripture hath al the points of faith which it ought to haue and therfore is perfect As the Creed conteineth al that it ought to haue and therfore is a perfect Rule though it contein not absolutly al points of faith whatsoeuer And yet Chillingworth cited aboue c. 5. granteth that Scripture is not absolutly a perfect Rule But seeing Scripture and the Creed haue al for which they were made both are to be accounted perfect Rules and not to be accounted imperfect becaus they haue not something for which they were not made It sufficeth that they can sufficiently rule al that for ruling of which they were made And Protestants suppose but neuer can proue that ether the Creed was made or the Scripture written to rule immediatly al points of faith whatsoeuer Nay some of them confess the contrarie as we shewed before c. 5. sec 2. who must as wel answer what is brought to proue the Scripture to contein immediatly al points of faith whatsoeuer or to be the immediat Rule of al points of faith as we Faults of Print to be Corrected Page 4. lin 13. know cor known ibid. lin 24. wete cor were P. 12. lin 1. mate cor make P. 42. lin 16. sels cor self P. 80. lin 17. ad cor and. P. 94. lin 14. as cor is P. 101. lin vlt. vs. cor as P. 157. lin 2. ir cor is P. 189. lin 9. after sinles ignorance ad of sinful ignorance P. 217. lin 18. lightly cor highly P. 223. in margine Et. cor Est P. 259. lin 21. enough cor is enough P. 260. lin 6. is diuine cor is not diuine P. 330. lin 19. beleue not dele not P. 343. lin 12. ad be P. 352. lin 23. ad such P. 260. lin 5. dele and. P. 481. lin 3. add of P. 489. lin 18. fof cor for P. 502. lin 11. adde cor added
for the authoritie of the reuealer or as Chillingworth c. 1. p. 35. saieth an assentto diuine reuelation vpon the authoritie of the reuealer And the same saieth laude sec 38. p. 344. Potter sect 5. p. 3. and others But a Reuealer is a person intelligent Therefore the authoritie of some person intelligent is the formal cause of faith and not anie words or writings which are rather the external reuelation then the reuealer And hence it is that though in holie Scripture there be diuine veritie and that which is to be beleued with diuine faith yet if scripture be taken alone by it self meerely as it is such words or writings it hath no formal authoritie or veracitie to cause its veritie to be beleued For as such it is neither anie intellectuall person nor hath any intellectuall person adioned to it for whose authoritie it should be beleued Wherefore wel said Stapleton Controu 3. q. 1. ar 2. credimus scripturam non scripturae becaus scripture hath in it self truth which is beleued but not authoritie for which it is beleued And likewise wel wrote Chillingw c. 2. p. 69. That the diuinitie of a writing cannot Note this be known for it self alone but by some extrinsecal authoritie you need not proue for no wise man denieth it And ibid. p. 114. A written rule must always need something els which either is euidently true or euidently credible to giue attestation to it And laude sect 16. p. 88. Scripture cannot bear witnes to it self nor one part of it to an other The same saieth Hooker l. 2. § 4. And g See infra l. 1. c. 14. Protestants generally confess that the scripture cannot be beleued of vs without the attestation of the Church The true cause whereof is that scripture of it self hath no authoritie but al the authoritie for which it is beleued is out of it self to wit in God who is author of it and in his Church who is witnes to it And when graue authors attribute authoritee to the scripture ether by authoritie they mean veritie or they take not scripture by it sels alone but as it is the scripture of God As in like manner they say the scripture saiâ—th this teacheth this affirmeth this speaketh this meaning God by scripture But Gods authoritie alone doth not in ordinarie course engender faith and we seeke that authoritie on earth without which Gods authoritie alone wil not in ordinarie course engender diuine faith of the scripture or of any thing els which authoritie euidently and confessedly is not in the scripture it self 8. The eight ground is that to a Four things in a proposer Proposer of points of faith properly so called there be long foure things 1. is his person 2. his Authoritie to propose such matters 3. his proposal which is his words or writings And 4 the truth proposed and signified by his words or writings For a Propoâ—er of matters of faith is a Preacher who proposeth or preacheth ether by word onely as most of the Apostles did or by writings also as S. Paul and some other Apostles Netherwords nor writings are proposers did And as their words were no Proposers but that by which they proposed so nether were theire writings anie Proposers but were that by which they proposed And of all the four said things only the twoe last are in the scripture and therefore it cannot be properly the Proposâ—r of faith but onely the Proposal if we consider the words and the Proposed if we consider the truth which the words signifie But al the foure are in the Church of God And Protestants cannot denie that she is a person or persons nor that her words or writings are her Proposals or the truth signified by them her truth Proposed Nether do they whereim Protestants grant diuine authoritie to the Châ—râ—h deny that she hath diuine authoritie to propose matters of faith as to teach Gods word and administer his Sacraments giuen to her in the last of S. Mathew onely they denie that her authoritie to testifie or persuade that which she teacheth is infallible and sufficient as an external and subordinat cause to engender diuine beleef of what she teacheth In which they do not consequently why Protestants de not speake consequently proceed For first how can the authoritie of the Church be diuine in proposing Gods word and be not infallible in proposing it secondly how can she haue diuine and infallible authoritie to preach Gods word and not haue the like authoritie to testifie and perswade that it is Gods word which she preacheth seing persuation that it is Gods word which she preacheth Persuasion is the end of preaching is the end of her preaching as is euident and Whitaker confesseth in these words l. 2. de scriptura p. 281. Preaching is instituted for persuation Would God giue to his Church diuine auctoritie for the means and not for the end seing The end more desired then 〈◊〉 the means euerie rational desirer desireth more the end then the means Thirdly Protestants grant that God hath giuen diuine authoritie to the Pastors of his Church for to gouern her Whitaker l. 2. de scrip p. 246. Ministers of the Church are iâ—strvments of the holy Ghost enduâ—d with diuine authoritie to gouern the Church committed to them And if Pastors haue diuineauthoritie to gouern the Church haue they not also diuine authoritie to persuade her that it is Gods word which they teach her Is not diuine authoritie as necessarie to Pastors for to persuade the Church as to gouern it and right beleef as necessarie to the Church as good gouernment More ouer Chillingw c. 2. p. 105. Protestants generally confess that the church of God is infallible in fundamental points and so infallible that it implieth contradiction that she should err in them And how can she be so infallible in them and be not infallible by Gods special and effectual assistance can the church of her own nature or power be infallible in such high matters aboue nature and reason Nay it seems so absurd euen to Protestants themselues to deny the church of God to haue diuine authoritie to testifie Gods truth as sometimes they deny it but restritctly as i Laude sec 16. 19. and 10. that it is not simplâ— diuine not absolutely diuine or that she is not k Potter sec 5. p. â—5 I whitaker Contr. 1. q. 3. c. 11. absolutly infallible and confess that the iudgment of the church is in some sorte diuine and call it a slander that they say the iudgment of the church is meer humane But in truth they make her authoritie in matters of faith meer humane yea less and none at al. For thus Whitaker Contr. 1. q. 5. c. 10. In the church thou shalt finde nothing but humane and therefore vncertain l. 3. de script p. 395. The perpetual testimonie of the church as far as it is of the Church is but humane testimonie p.
authoritie both of God and of his Church in matters of faith and therfore the resolution of our beleef into ether of them is sufficient and rational For as when a King sendeth an Embassadour to tel vs some thing we beleue with humane faith what is told vs for the authoritie of them both as for one entire adioint cause of our beleef yet differently prinpally for the Kings authoritie and secondarily for the authoritie of his faithful Embassador so what we beleue with diuine faith we beleue for the authoritie both of God and of his Church as for one entire and total cause of our beleef but principally for the authoritie of God See infra c. 11 n. 1. and secondarily for the authoritie of his Church but with this difference that the King nether giueth nor increaseth the fidelitie of his Embassador but God giueth to his Church al the fidelitie she hath for matters of faith Wherfore al Christian faith is lastly resolued into Christs outward speach to his Church and into her outward speaking to vs both which speakers and speakings are but one in such sorte as is *q Sup. n. 12. before declared And when the Apostle saied Rom. 10. Faith is of hearing he meant not of hearing internally by inspiration Vvitaker cont 2. q. 4. c. 2 who hear the Church heaâ— Christ him â—elf but of hearing externally by preaching and doubtles meant of a last resolution of faith For hearing Christes lawful Preachers we heare him as before we shewed And the resolution of diuine faith into the Churches authoritie is both sufficient becaus her authoritie in matters of faith is plainly diuine and is also agreable to mens manner of getting faith who in ordinarie course are to haue their faith not from God immediatly speaking to them but from the Church immediatly speaking to them from God and therfore their faith is to be resolued immediatly into the authoritie of the Church and mediatly into the authoritie of God Wherfore wel saied Bellarmin l. 6. de Grat. lib. arb c. 3. Catholiks haue infallible faith becaus what they beleue they beleue becaus God saied it and that God said it they beleue becaus the Church testifieth it For what we beleue Christ told it to his Church and she hauing euer continued til our time telleth it vnto vs. And seing Protestants grant that faith may be welresolued into the authoritie of the r Infra c. 4. 〈◊〉 8. Apostles or of the s L. 2. c. 11. sect 1. scripture or vniuersal tradition becaus though their t Infra c. 10. n. 3. 6. 7. 9. authoritie be create yet by Gods efficacious assistance it is plainly diuine and infallible they shold not denie that faith may be also resolued into the authoritie of the Church becaus it is create authoritie seing Christ hath most clearly promised to assist his Church most efficaciously and also that the Apostle testifieth Rom. 10. That Faith hath its being from hearing the preaching of the Church And euerie thing is rightly resolued into that of which it hath its verie being especially seing the voice of the Church is the voice of Christ and that hearing her we hear him THIRD CHAPTER VVhat conditions are necessarie to the Al-sufficient external Proposer of pointes of faith appointed by God 1. CATHOLICKS and Protestants agree that there Twoe kindes of Proposers of faith are two kindes of Proposer of points of faith vnto men The one Internal who proposeth them internally to our mindes The other external who proposeth them externally to our senses Secondly they agree that the Internal Proposer is the Holie Ghost and the external some instituted by him Thirdly they agree that the Internal Proposer can by himself alone sufficiently propose al points of faith to vs and engender faith in vs without concurse of the external Proposer Fourethly they agree that ordinarilâ—y the Internal Proposer neuer proposeth points of faith to our mindes nor engendereth faith in vs but with the concurse and proposal of the external Proposer Fiftly they agree that the External Proposer can no way engender diuine faith in vs without the concurse of the internal So that they agree in al points touching the Internal Proposer and also concerning the External Proposer that there is such a one instituted of God that his concurse ordinariely is necessarie and that he cannot engender faith without concurse of the Internal Proposer but they disagree about the conditions necessarie to such an external Proposer and who he is but if we finde out the conditions necessarie to such a Proposer we shal easily finde who he is 2. The first condition necessarie to a sufficient external Proposer of Conditions necessarie to the external Proposer points of faith is that he be some intellectual person or Companie of Intellectual Persons This is euident out of the very word it self For a Propâ—ser signifieth a person who proposeth And also becaus to propose points to be beleued is an act of vnderstanding and as our Sauiour saied to the first Proposers instituted by himself is to teach and preach or as the Apostle also speaketh to preach and to teach or Math. vlt. Marc. vlt. Rom. 10. preach are acts of vnderstanding Secondly becaus as we shal proue hereafter the external Proposer is instituted by God for to moue men to beleue points of faith for his authoritie and al authoritie properly speaking is in some intellectual person Whervpon when the Apostle saied Rom. 10. How shal they beleue without à Preacher he added that the Preacher must be lawfully sent which lawful sending giueth him authoritie or credit that he is worthie to be beleued in what he proposeth Thirdly becaus vnles we make the proposer to be some Person or persons we confound Proposer with proposal which are things clearly distinct and the Proposer is some person his Proposal is his word or writing so that a word or writing is no Proposer but onely à Proposal If anie obiect that the Church is proposed in the Apostles Creed to be beleued as wel as other points of faith are and being a thing proposed it cannot be the Proposer of al points of faith I denie the consequence For the Church being a companie of intellectual persons it can propose it self to be beleued to be the true Church as the Prophets and the Apostles proposed themselues to be such as wel as anie other thing which they preached But a dead writing caÌ„not sufficiently propose it self as a Sup. c. 2. n. 5. Chillingworth before confessed and others b L. 2. c. 6. sect 2. hereafter wil confess of the scripture And the reason hereof is becaus a writing hath not of it self anie formal authoritie Besides though the Proposer and proposed may sometimes be the same thing yet the Proposer and Proposal cannot because the Proposal is that wher with the Proposer proposeth what is to be beleued as the writings of the Prophets or Apostles were their
for beside that it is a new and groundles distinction it is contrarie to the end of Christs promise For no assistance in matters of â—nfallible faith is fitting but that which is infallible But out of the aforesaid sayings of Protestants it is euident First that some times they grant and indeed must grant that the Church is infallible in more points then are absolutly fundamental to al men 2. that in what points she is infallible she is in them diuinitus or diuinely infallible becaus she is such by Christs foresaid promise and the Holie Ghosts special assistance 3. That in saying the Church is infallible onely in necessaries they should not dissent from Catholiks if by necessaries they would mean necessaries to alsortes of men and both for the being and better being of faith as no doubt the Apostle meant Ephes 4. by consummation of Saints and edification of the bodie of Christ For Catholiks do not think that that the Church is infallible in things altogether vnnecessarie as manie scholastical subtiltiesare 2. Their second answer is that though the Holie Ghost teach the Laude sect 25. n. 5. Chilling c. 3. §. 71. Church al truth anie way necessarie to Saluation yet it followeth not that she learneth al such truth becaus God complaineth of some that they had eyes and would not see had eares and stopped them This answer also is new and not grounded in anie word of Christ but voluntarie and irrational and iniurious to the Apostles as if they had not learnt al truth which the Holie Ghost taught them and also to the Holie Church as if she would not learne al the truth which the Holie Ghost teacheth her but were like to those reprobats who would not see nor heare Gods voice and blasphemous against Christ as if he would not promise and against the Holie Ghost as if he wold not more effectually teach the Apostles and Church then he doth teach Reprobates But before we haue proued that the Holie Ghost teacheth the Church efficaciously 3. Their third answer is that this Vvhitaker l. 1. de Script p. 77. Laud. sec 16. p. 97. Chilling c. 3. §. 72. Moulins Buâ—ler p. 51. promise was made to the Apostles onely whome indeed the Holie Ghost taught al truth of faith and who also learnt it but not to the Church or Successors of the Apostles This answer is new nor sufficiently grounded in the text as shal by and by appeare but contrarie to Christs express words of his Promise for euer For the Apostles were not to abide here for euer Contrarie to the end of his Promise which was for the good of the Church and therfore was to continue so long as the Church continueth For it was cheifly for the good of the Church that the Holie Ghost was to teach al truth Contrarie to the Fathers as we shal see in the next Chapter And finally contrarie to Protestants For thus Laude sec 16. p. 93. 96. It was made to the Apostles and their suecessors sec 25. p. 161. A large promise to the Church of knowing al points of truth And sec 33 p. 231 for necessarie truth the Apostles receaued this promise for themselues and the whole Church P. 232. The Fathers refer their speech to the Church vniuersal And Potter sec 5. p. 18. That promise was made to the Apostles in behoof of the Church and is verified in the vniuersal Church And t â—tem Cont. 2. q. 1. c. 1. Laudesect 16 p. 96. Whitaker controu 3. q. 6. c. 2. saieth that those words For euer conuince it as in truth they doe becaus the Apostles were not to be here for euer Neuertheles Chillingworth c. 3. § 74. answereth that by for euer here is not meant eternally but continually for the time of the Apostles liues becaus for euer is sometimes so taken in Scripture But fondly for in those places the v Tertul. de â—estor â—3 matter sheweth that for euer signifieth til death But the like is not here for the reasons already giuen and al words are to be vnderstood properly vnles the contrarie be manifest as the x Tertul de Carne â—hriâ— c. 13. 15. 24. de restor c. 18. Cont. Praxec 13. Augustin l. 3. dâ— Doctrin c 10. 11. Hâ—larius l. 1. 2. 4. 5. 7. Fathers teach and reason sheweth For els al vnderstanding of words should become voluntarie as men would haue it And yet Chillingworth § 75. saieth I presume I haue shewed sufficiently that this For euer hinders not but that the promise may be appropriated to the Apostles when he hath out of a few places and those vnlike as being of a quite different matter wrested a word from its proper and vsual signification to an improper and vnusual merely for to defend his heresie For the matter is quite different becaus in the places brought by Chillingworth speech is of some particuler persons who nether in themselues nor in their successors could continue eternally and therfore for euer in them must needs be mant For their life wheras the Apostles continue in their successors eternally and therfore For euer spoken to them them for the good of the Church is to be vnderstood eternally as properly and vsually it signifieth But it is the common sophistical manner of arguing among Protestaut writers to argue from some few particular improper vse of words in some matter against the proper and vsual sense of them euen in a different and dislike matter which is a verie Sophistical kinde of arguing and wel to be noted For by that nothing can be assuredly proued out of scripture Besids Christ here so promiseth the assistance of the Holie Ghost for euer as Math. 28. he promiseth his own assistance for euer but that he promiseth Laude sect 16. p. 29. eternally For he saieth Going teach al nations baptizing c. And I am with you al daies til the end of the world to wit with you teaching and baptizing Which sheweth Christs assistance for euer with his Pastors in their teaching Chillingworths proofs that this promise was made to the Apostles alone be caus in them some words pertein to them alone proue no more then that the promise was in words made to them alone but not meant to them alone As Christs promise to S. Peter Math. 16. that the Church should be built on him and that he should haue the keyes of heauen was made to him alone yet not meant to him alone but to his successors also and commandment was giuen to him alone Ioan. 21. to feed Christs sheep and yet not meant to him alone but to his successors also Math. 18. that what the Apostles should Promises are to be measured by their end loose on earth should be loosed in heauen was made onely to them but meant also to their successors and the like is of manie others such And the reason of al is one and the same becaus al these promises were made to the Apostles for
authoritie with which in ordinarie course it maketh one total or entire formal cause of faith SEAVENTENTH CHAPTER Hovv a vicious circle is auoided in prouing the Scripture by the Church and the Church by the Scripture 1. PRotestants greatly obiect to Catholiks that they Laude sect 16. p. 64. 116. Châ—ling c. 2. n. 118. c. 3. n. 27. Field l. 4. c. 7 Morton 10. 1. Apol. l. 1. c. 55 make a vicious circle becaus they proue the Church by the Scripture and likewise the Scripture by the Church Wheras themselues vse the same proof and haue the same difficultie and auoidles apparently as we shal make manifest a vicious circle For as is euident by their confessions relate din the fourteenth Chapter commonly they teach that the testimonie of the Church is necessarie to beleue the Scripture to be the word of God and that it cannot be known to be such by its own light alone and yet they proue the Church to be the true Church onely by the scripture Laude Relat. sec 16. p. 38. and 102. thinketh to See inâ—â—a l. 2. c. 6. seâ— 2. auoid a vicious circle thus That though they doe mutually yet they doe not equally confirme the authoritie ether of other For the Scripture doth infallibly confirme the authoritie of the tradition of the Church but tradition doth but morally and probably confirme the authoritie of the Scripture But first it is fals that the Church doth but probably confirme the authoritie of the Scripture For as we haue shewed before the Churches testimonie is a sufficient external and ministerial means to beget diuine faith and the holie Fathers also proued sufficiently the diuine veritie of Scripture against such as denied anie parte of it by the authoritie of the Church and it were to expose the credit of Scripture to the laughter of Infidels to say that it cannot be proued otherwise then probably and that al Christian faith of what is in scripture relieth vpon onely probable proof that the scripture Seesup c. 8. n. 13. is the word of God Besids it is euidently fals and no way proued that after the Church hath probably proued that the Scripture is the word of God the Scripture it self sheweth a clear light that it is the the word of God For that the Scripture hath such a clear light ether before the Churches testimonie or after is merely faigned without al proof and if it had it would not cause faith in vs that it is the word of God becaus faith is of things not appearing but science or knowledg Moreouer seing Laude and Protestants generally confess that the Church is infallible in fundamental points they cannot consequently say that she is not infallible in this point That the Scripture is the word of God becaus they account this the Hooker l. 1. §. 14. Laudesest 11. p. 43. sect 16. p. 59. 65. 110. See infral 2. 6. 11. sect 1. fundation of al other points whatsoeuer And what is infallible affordeth an infallible and more then a moral and probable proof Besids this circle were vicious becaus the proof were not equal on ether side For on the Scriptures side it were infallible and on the Churches side but fallible And we ask for an infallible proof of Scripture as wel as of the Church becaus we must be infallibly assured of both and to giue vs a fallible proof of the Scripture by the Church were to delude vs. Finally I ask if the Scripture doe infallibly confirme the tradition of the Church as Laude saieth how doth the tradition of the Church onely probably confirme the authoritie of the Scripture can not that which is infallibly proued or confirmed make an infallible proof of some other thing 2. But Catholiks far more clearly auoid al vicious circles For euerie circular proof is not vicious but that onely wherby our knowledg is no way bettered For the effect may be proued a priori or propter quid by the cause and the cause a posteriori or quia by the effect and say that our diuine faith of the Church nether first riseth nor dependeth of the certaine of the Scripture but onely is confirmed by the Scripture but that the certaintie of the Scripture both first riseth and stil dependeth for vs on the authoritie of the Church For the true Church of God whosoeuer she is was beleued more then two thousand yeares before there was anie Scripture and she hath sufficient authoritie to testifie of herself This we proue by al the waies by which we proued that she is a sufficient proposer of al points of faith For if of al euen of herself that she is the true Church For this is a point and a principal one of faith Besids the foresaid proofs not onely proue that she is a sufficient proposer of points of faith but also that she is such of herself or of her own authoritie giuen to her by God For if of her preaching faith riseth if she be the pillar and ground of truth if she be a witnes apointed by God if her voice be one with the voice of Christ her authoritie is diuine and she is euen for herself to be beleued as the Apostles were to be beleued for Sup. c. 4 â— 5. themselues The Fathers also who by her authoritie proued the Scriptures against such heretiks as denied them and as they thought sufficiently and infallibly surely did think that she was to be beleued for her own authoritie For by Scripture they could not proue her against such as denied Scripture Reason also confirmeth the same For if a Disciple of Christ be to be beleued for himself why not the Spouse of Christ one mistical person with him whose head he is and whose soule is the holie Ghost And if S. Paul could say I Paul say vnto you If you be circumcised Galat. 5. Christ wil not profit you Why not the Church Whitaker l 1. de Script p. 86. saieth who haue such a Spirit as Paul had may by some iudgment testifie their Spirit And contr 1. q. 3. c. 3. Paul doth aproue his epistles with his own name and iudgment The old and new Testament doe confirme and signe one the other In other causes this mutual confirmation is naught worth But in this it is much worth becaus none is so fit a witnes of God and of his word as God himself in his word And why may we not say the same of the Church and Scripture which he saieth of the old and new Testament becaus none is so fit a witnes of God and of his Church and of his word as God in his Church and in his word If S. Iohn could say of himself we know that his testimonie is true why may not the Spouse C. 21. of Christ who is one mistical person with him and whose head he is to whome he promised the assistance of the Holie Ghost to teach her al truth and the Holie Ghost is her soule say the
Preacher nor is in ordinarie course necessarie to engender diuine faith as we shal clearly proue hereafter neuertheless becaus the letter of Scripture is a Proposal of points of faith though we cannot properly enquire whither Scripture propose al points of faith becaus that is the parte of a Proposer yet we may wel enquire whether in Scripture or by Scripture al points of faith which are anie wayes necessarie te be beleued of anie kinde of men be sufficiently proposed as Protestants commonly affirme and Catholiks euer deny So that whether the letter of Scripture be a Proposal of points of faith or a Proposer of them we may enquire whether by Scripture al such necessarie points be sufficiently proposed or no. Yet before we enquire this we wil shew the vncertaintie of Protestants touching al things belonging to Scripture that euen therby it may clearly appeare that howsoeuer they say that the Scripture is the Iudge the entire Rule or Al-sufficient Proposer of al matter of faith they can indeed think nothing less FIRST CHAPTER VVhether S. Iames Epistle be Canonical Scripture and Gods vvord or no FIRST SECTION Protestants sometimes affirme CALVIN in praefat in epistolam â—acobi I doe willingly without controuersie embrace it Epistle of S. Iames becaus I finde no sufficient cause to reiect it Whitaker ad Rationem 1. Campiani We receaue it and number it among the Canonical books For whatsoeuer Luther or anie other thought of it yet our Churches doe willingly embrace it Contro 1. q. 1. c. 16. our Church receaueth al and onely those books of the New testament which the Councel of Trent receaued If Luther and others who follow Luther otherwise thought or wrote of some books of the New testament as the Epistles of Iames and Iude let them answer for themselues Nether need we cite anie more becaus both the French English and Holland Confessions account S. Iames Epistle Canonical SECOND SECTION Protestants sometimes denie LVther in c. 22. Genes to 6. fol. 282. Iames concludeth il It Luther said S. Iames dâ—ated followes not as Iames doateth Therfore the fruits doe iustifie Let therfore our aduersaries be packing with their Iames And praefat in Epistol Iacobi I doe not think this was written of anie Apostle for this cause For it is directly against S. Paul and al other Scripture it attributeth Iustification to works Melancthon de sacris Concionibus to 2. fol. 23. If it cannot be mitigated with some exposition as that of Iames you see c. such simply are not to be receaued Magdeburgians Cent. 1. c. 4. The Epist of Iames doth not a little stray S. Iames ascribeth iustification to workes from the Apostolical doctrin whiles it adscribeth iustification to works and not to faith alone And Cent. 2. c. 4. The Epistle of Iames adscribeth iustice to works against S. Paul and al other Scriptures Pomeranus the first Protestant Pastor of Wittenberg in c. 4. Epist S. Iames erreth ad Rom. By this place thou maiest espie the error of the Epistle of Iames in Iâ—â—erreth ridiculously which thou seest a wicked argument beside that he ridiculously inferreth he citeth Scripture against Scripture which the Spirit cannot suffer Wherfore it cannot be numbred among the books which preach iustice Confessio Heluetica c. 15. The same he S. Iames saied not contradicting the Apostle otherwise he were to be reiected Which they would neuer say if they were assured that it were Gods word For I suppose they would not reiect Gods word in anie caâ—e Musculus in locis Tit. de Iustificatione they obiect to vs the places of Iames. But whosoeuer he was though â—e taught differently from Paul he could not preiudice truth And he addeth Impertiâ—ently That he impertinently bringeth in the example of Abraham that he abuseth the word Faith and setteth down a sentence different from Apostolical doctrin And Tit. de Scripturis plainly aâ—uocheth that he holdeth it not for Authentical Hence it is euident that Protestants agree not about their Canon or Rule of their faith For Lutherans reiect S. Iames Epistle as also diuers others which Caluinists account parte of the Rule of their faith and parte of Gods word Euident also that Caluinists must iudge their brothers Lutherans to haue a most desperate cause For as Whitaker writeth Respon ad Rat. 1. Campiani who cannot defend their religion vnles they laie violent hands vpon the Scripture and break the sacred authoritie of diuine books they must needs haue a naughtie and desperate cause But so doe al Protestants who denie S. Iames Epist Morton to 2. Apol. l. 1. c. 1. Al corruption of Gods word deserueth Gods thunderbolt And the same Whitaker l. 2. de Script p. 218. It is most of al necessarie that the Sic etiam cont 1. q. 3. c. 3. A certain Canon most necessarie certain Canon of Scriptures be vndoubted among Christians But so it is among Protestants For they are not agreed about the certain Canon of Scriptures And yet as Laude saieth sec 38. n. 8. What scripture is Canonical is a great point of faith Sec. 3. n. 12. If she the Church at this day reckons vpmore books within the Canon then heretofore she did then she is changed in a main point of faith the Canon of scripture And Hooker l. 1. § 14. Of things necessarie the very chiefest is to know what books we are bound to esteeme holie See infra c. 15. n. 7. SECOND CHAPTER VVhether al things that are in Scripture be plain and easie to be vnderstood or no FIRST SECTION Protestants sometimes affirme LVther de seruo arbitrio to 2. fol. 426. It is published by the wicked Sophisters that some things in Scripture are hard and that al are not open Ibid. fol. 440. I say of al the No parte of Scripture obscure Scripture I wil not haue anie part of it to be saied obscure In psal 37. to 3. fol. 10. If anie of their Papists number appeal and say we need the exposition of Fathers the Scriptures are obscure Thou shalt answer that this is fals No book in al the world is more clearly written then the Scripture which if it be compared with al other books is like to the sun before al other light Whervpon said Tailor in his Epistle dedicat of his libertie of Prophesing p. 47. so confident Luther sometimes was as he said he could expound al Scripture Gerlachius to 1. Disp 1. p. 9. We say al the Scripture is so clear as it Al scripture clear needeth no interpretation at al. Zanchius de Scriptura to 8. col 408. How can the Scripture be called obscure in anie parte of it Et col 409. If the Scripture be not obscure in anie parte as we shewed before much less in In euerie parte those things which are necessarie to Saluation Whitaker contro 1. q. 4. p. 341. Al the Scripture The whole Scripture is plain and clear Plessie of the Church c. 5. p.
reading of them be instructed to pietie and Heretiks euen the most learned sufficiently refâ—ted by them And to 1. l. 2. c. 9. He calleth it pure and plain Protestant doctrin That the principal points of faith necessarie to the saluation of al are clearly conteined in scripture See his Appeal l. 2. c. 7. sec 9. Euidently Chillingworth in the preface n. 30. 33. 37. Al things necessarie to saluation are euidently conteined in scripture And n. 37. he saieth That is the base and adequat foundation of his answer and that al Protestants vnanimously profess and mantain it c. 2. n. 157. p. 115. In a word al things necessarie to beleued are euidently conteined in scripture and what is not there euidently conteined can not be necessarie to be beleued Ibid. n. 11. p. 58. The scripture in things necessarie we pretend is plain P. 83. n. 84. If you speak of plain places and in such al Need no Interpreter necessarie things are conteined we are sufficiently certain of the meaning of them nether need they anie interpteter p. 59. n. 12. Thoses places which contein things necessarie and wherin error were dangerous need no infallible Interpreter becaus they are plain C. 6. p. 375. we want no vnitie nor meanes to procure it in things necassarie Plain places of scripture and such as need no interpretation are our meanes to obtein it c. 3. n. 52. p. 159. Protestants agree that the scripture euidently containes al things necessarie to saluation Plessie of the Church c. 4. p. 108. Euidently He who hath mercifully vouch safed to saue his people and who onely may be called a true Father would make his couenant with them in as plain termes and express clauses as could be deuised Ibid. There is nothing more clear or As plain and express as could be deuised more plain then the doctrin of saluation White in his Way p. 31. The scriptures plainly determin al points of faith As plainly as anie can p. 32. He can name no one necessarie article of our saith but the word teacheth it as plainly as himself can P. 39. The scripture by its own light perswadeth as and in alcases doubts questions and coutrouersies clearly testifieth with vs or against vs. And in his Defense c. 31. p. 294. The question is whether the written scripture conteines in express words or sense the whole and entire doctrin of faith and good life Vshers Reioinder p. 114. scriptures are sufficient for the final determination of al questions of faith Tailor in his libertie of Prophesing sec 3. n. 1. Al the articles of faith are clearly and plainly set down in scripture sec 5. n. 2. scripture in its plain Expression is an abundant rule of faith and manners SECOND SECTION Sometimes denie it PRotestants in Colloq Ratisbon in Respons ad testimonia Patrum p. 470. None of vs euer dreamed that the scripture is so clear and easie as anie man may straight as it were at the first sight and without help of teachers vnderstand it Whitaker Contro 1. q. 4. c. 1. when Bellarmin maketh this to be the state of the question whether the scripture be of it self so plain as without interpretation Needeth Interpretation for matters of faith it sufficeth of it self to end and determin al controuersies of faith he fighteth without an aduersarie For in this matter he hath not vs Aduersaries They say but falsly that we think that al things in scriptures are plain and that they suffice without â—â—edeth Interpretation For controuersies Interpretation to end al controuersies C. 2. God would haue the holie Misteries of his word to be imparted to pure and holie men not to be cast before hoggs and doggs C. 3. when they proue that there is great difficultie to vnderstand the Scriptures they dispute not against vs. l. 2. de Scrip. c. 4. sec 4. p. 229. The Eunuch without Phillip nether beleued nor vnderstood what was sufficient For matter of saluation to saluation Laude Relat. sec 39. n. 9. Scripture interpreted by the Primitiue Church General Councel judge and a lawful and free General Councel determining according to these is Iudge of Controuersies Dauenantius de Iudice c. 15. We defend not which the Papists impose vpon vs the doctrin of faith conteined in Scripture to be so plain and perspicuous Needeth an Interpreter for doctrin of faith that it need not at al the help of an Interpreter or Doctor And need not this needful Interpreter to be infallible in interpreting And who is such if not the Church FIFT CHAPTER VVhether Scripture be the sole and entire Rule of al Christian beleif or no FIRST SECTION Protestants sometimes affirme PRotestants in Colloq Ratisbon Thesi 1. p. 19. We vndoubtedly acknowledg the word of God conteined in the writings of the Prophets Euangelists and Apostles to be the sole certain and infallible rule square and measure of doctrin worship and Christian Sole Rule faith The Confession of Basil art 1. Canonical Scripture alone conteineth perfectly Perfectly al pie tie al manner of life Confessio Belgica art 7. We beleue this holie Scripture to contein most perfectly al the wil of God and that in it are abundantly taught al those things whatsoeuer be necessarie to be beleued of Abundantly men for to obtein saluation Caluin ad art 20. Paris p. 2 9. We determin that right faith is grounded in the Scriptures onely In Confess p. Onely 107. Our saluation relieth on Scriptures onely We embrace it for the onely rule of faith In Refutat Catalani p. 383. We beleue and with a loud voice doe euermore crie that the Gospel is the onely rule by which al must be reformed Onelierule Daneus Contro 7. p. 1350. The onely foundation of Christian faith is the word of God and that alone written Hospinian parte 2. Histor Sacram fol. 23. The Magistrate of Zurich commanded that hereafter they propound no other thing to their Churches but the pure mere word of God conteined Mere written word in the words of the Prophets and Apostles K. Iames Resp ad Card. Peron p. 397. The king iudgeth that before aâ— things alagrâ—e of this Rule That points of faith and whatsoeuer deserueth necessarily Alone to be beleued be taken out of Scripture alone Laude Relat. § 17. p. 117. The Scripture Onely onely is the foundation of faith Potter sec 6. p. 65. Scripture the onely foundaiion and rule of faith Pareus Collegio Theol. 3. d. 2. scripture in this time is no les necessarie to the saluation of the Church then meat for the life Scripture as necessarie as meal for life of man And Collegio 9. d. 4. scripture now is necessarie not onely to the wel being of the Church but euen to her being Whitaker l. 1. de Scrip. c. 11. sec 1. scripture is the onely sufficient means to beleue So Contro 1. q. 3. c. 10. q. 6. c. 9.
word read by a particular fallible man If anie answer that Reading to them is but à condition of their beleuing but the whole motiue is Gods word which is written I replie First that their beleif dependeth vpon this condition and how can infallible faith depend vpon à condition which is fallible Secondly that thus the word Read and not Written must be the formal cause of their beleif And so Scripture is not the formal cause of their faith For Scripture is onely the word written I ask therfore what is the external formal cause of the blinde and ignorant mens beleif of that which is in Scripture For some such external cause there must be as Whitaker l. 1. de Scrip. c. 6. p. 64. Potter and others grant not the doctrin it self For that is the material obiect of their faith and the thing which is beleued Nor the writing of it or letters of the Scripture For that they perceaue or vnderstand not Nor the Reading For that is fallible 3. If anie say that the doctrin is both the material and formal cause of their beleif becaus it is credible for itself I replie First that this Credibilitie for itself or internal light in the doctrin is feigned and refuted heretofore in that we said before c. 14. of the Scripture Secondly that assent to doctrin for itself cannot be faith becaus faith is an assent for authoritie of some that proposeth doctrin Thirdly that thus Scripture or writing is no formal cause of beleif as Protestants said before c. 11. sec 1. but meerly doctrin is that cause and that writing is but a conseruer or pointer to diuine doctrin but no cause at al of beleuing it Let them then not say that Scripture is the principal external formal cause of their beleuing what they beleue but confess that Scripture or writing of diuine doctrin serues them to no more then Reading serues the blind or ignorant who as they haue the same faith which the learned so must they haue the same external formal cause of faith which they haue but that al the formal cause of their beleuing what they finde in Scripture is the internal light of the doctrin it self and that they haue no external formal cause of their beleif of it and that writing or reading of it doth but point to the veritie or light of the doctrin as they say of the Churches testimonie of the Scripture that it doth but point at the word of God which is to destroie al formal faith which is an assent for authoritie and to become Enthusiasts and to make al Christian doctrin ridiculous to Infidels in telling them that Christians haue no external formal cause why they beleue ether the Scripture to be written by Gods inspiration or that which is in it to be Gods doctrin beside the Scripture or doctrin itself And that as the Church doth but point to the diuinitie of the Scripture but is no formal cause of our beleuing it to be diuine So the Scripture doth but point at the diuinitie of the doctrin which it conteineth but is no formal cause of beleuing it to be diuine doctrin Nether can they giue a good reason why they should say that Gods writing should be credible of be credible of itself to be Gods writing and need onely the Churches pointing to it for to beleue that it is Gods writing and that Gods doctrin should not be credible of itself to be his doctrin and need onely the Scriptures pointing to it that it is his doctrin For why should not Gods doctrin be as credible of itself to be his writing And so al external formal causing of beleif is gon and onely pointing to the obiect of beleeif is left And Protestants must not say that they beleue anie thing becaus it is in Scripture but onely pointeth to what they beleue as they say they beleue not Scripture to be the word of God becaus the Church testifieth that it is so but for it self being pointed to by the Church See Chillingworth supra c. 11. sec 2. SEAVENTENTH CHAPTER That the Scripture hath not proposed points of faith in al times vvhen faith vvas had 1. THat Scripture hath not proposed points of faith in al times when points of faith were beleued is euident For there was no Scripture til Moises and yet therewas true faith euer before since Adam Whitaker Contro 1. q. 6. c. 7. I grant that there is no Scripture ancienter then Moises books and that religion remained pure al that time without Scripture Ibid. c. 16 I grant that God from Adam to Moises kept Religion kept by tradition more then 2000. years doctrin deliuered by liuing voice that is traditions not written Item c. 7. cit Some barbarous men for a time wanted Scripture For a time doctrin may be kept entire without writing Item q. 3. c. 10. I grant there was a time when the word was not written and then was the Church Kemnice 1. parte Exam. tit de Scriptura p. 14. From the beginning of the world for 2450. yeares heauenly Moulins of Tradition c. 17. doctrin by diuine voice reuealed was proposed and from hand deliuered without Scripture diuinely inspired And ibid. p. 41. It is clear that the Apostles for some first yeares deliuered and spread Apostolik doctrin without anie writing of theirs by onely liuelie voice 2. Chillingworth c 2 n. 159. Ireneus tels vs of some barbarous Nations that beleued the doctrin of Christ and yet beleued not the Scripture to be the word of God For they neuer heard of it and faith comes of hearing 3. Dauenant de Iudice c. 5. We grant that before Moyses the word of God Before Moyses Tradition was sufficient not written and propagated to Posteritie by continual tradition was a sufficient Rule of faith Rainolds Conclus 1. God reuealed his wil without writing to Adam and from Adams time til Moises 4. And was the Church of God for 2400. years before Christ infallible in al points of faith and is she not after Christ infallible in the most fundamental point of al concerning Scripture was the tradition of the Church for al that time an infallible rule of faith and it is not now Is the Church since Christs Hebr. 7. time of worse condition then it was then or did men in that time ordinarily beleue ether without some external means or motiue which is Prophetical and miraculous or did they beleue infallibly for the tradition of the Church at that time which was fallible Whitaker l. 1. de Script p. 64. saieth We ask which is that external cause for which we must beleue For there must Some external cause infallible be some external cause seing faith is not bred in vs nor produced of the Holie Ghost without external causes vnles miraculously and is of hearing And l. 3. c. 10. p. 415. As the Doctrin and religion which we profess is heauenlie and diuine such also must be the reason and
much as we desire Ibid. If by al the scripture he mean the summe of doctrin necessarie to euerie one for saluation then we Knowledg of Christ Necessarie to euerie one acknowledg the argument and say it is al clear Againe If he confess that the scripture is like an open book for the misteries of our Redemption truly we haue not to demand anie more For thence wil follow that al things are manifest in scripture which are necessarie to saluation which is the ground of our Defense Morton to 1. Apol. l. 2. c. 9. after he had cited out of Coster these words We denie not but that the chiefest points of faith necessarie to euerie ones saluation are clearly enough set down in scripture saieth A pure and right doctrin of Protestants And in his Appeal l. 2. c. 28. scriptures be Al fundamental points the perfect treasurie of al fundamental Principles of faith Musculus in locis tit de Nomine Dei p. 425. Al things could not be namely expressed in scripture which desire of Gods glorie doth require it sufficeth that the summe of them Sum and general rules and certain general rules should be inserted in scripture to which we might frame al our life Humphrey ad Rat. 2 dam Campiani p. 114. We know that cases or points of law cannot be set down in lawes as Aristotle and Lawyers say wel yet the summ of al religion Summe of religion and al heads of faith are conteined in those writings out of which al our dogmes may be fully and abundantly drawn as out of fountaines Caluin l. 2. de lib. arbit p. 151. Not al sermons were taken word for word yet their Gospel was faithfully drawn into a summe which may fully suffice vs. 3. Now that Catholiks teach that Stat. leâ—on l 13. de Principijs c. 6. Bellar. l. 4. de Verbo Dei c. 11. Gordon Cont. 1. c. 21. 32. the summ of Christian religion and al things necessarily to be beleued explicitly of al men are conteined in Scripture Protestants themselues confess For thus Rainolds in the Preface to his Conclusions citeth out of the Preface of Gregorie 13. in Biblia Regia In these Books See Vvhitâ—k Cont 2 q. 5. c. 20. Morton to 2. Apol l. 1. c. 19. in 〈◊〉 p. 317. Châ—lling c. 〈◊〉 §. 80. are explaned al the Misteries of our religion And ibid saieth The Church of Rome itself doth acknowledg that the whole doctrin religion and faith which leadeth the Faithful to saluation and life by the true worship of God is conteined in Gods word Whitaker Contro 1. q. 6. c. vlt. Bellarmin confesseth Vvhole doctrin of religion Al dogmes simply necessarie to al. Vvhite Vvay p â—3 and in Defense 〈◊〉 35. Potter sect 4. p 95. that al Dogmes simply necessarie to al men are had in the Scripture Laude Relat. sec 11. n. 1. Bellarmin confesseth that al things simply necessarie for al mens saluation are in the Creed and the Decalogue See him sec 20. n. 3. See also Chillingworth c. 2. n. 144. c. 3. n. 80. Potter sec 4. p. 95. sec 5. p 4. 13. 4. Wherfore the true difference between vs is not whether al things simply necessarie to be explicitly beleued or al necessarie to euerie one be in Scripture but whether al things anie way necessarie or necessarie to anie men be in Scripture For they wil haue al points that are of faith to be ether actually conteined in Scripture or to be clearly inferred out of it as we shewed supra c. 9. sec 1. Nay Rainolds in his first Conclusion defendeth that the Scripture teacheth whatsoeuer is behooful for saluation which he often repeateth so that Vvhatsoeuer is behooful they wil haue not onely al things necessarie but also al things behooful to saluation to be conteined in Scripture And neuertheles they confess that it doth not teach that itself is the word of God which with them is the most fundamental point of al. Wheras we confess that it conteineth al which we acknowledg to be fundamental that is by Gods institution absolutly necessarie to saluation so that in effect we grant more to Scripture then they doe though they in words giue more to it then we 5. I add also that the Scripture sufficiently teacheth the far greater parte of points of faith This I proue becaus the Fathers heretofore and other Catholiks since haue confuted al most al the heresies that haue risen by plain testimonies of Scripture Herevpon Catholik writers as we heard Protestants Confess c. 13. sec 1. say they haue plain Scripture in al places for the Catholik faith an in al Controuersies crie Plain euident manifest Scripture And herevpon also both Fathers and Catholiks sometimes by the word Scripture vnderstand the whole word of God becaus it conteineth the far greater and principaller parte of the word of God Catholiks saieth Stapleton Act. 17. v. 2. expresly teach that the far greatest parte and in general In general al doctrin of faith al doctrin of faith may be and must be gathered out of Scriptuie 6. Moreouer I add that the Scripture teacheth mediatly euerie point of faith becaus it sendeth vs to the Church which teacheth vs al points of faith S. Austin l. 1. cont Crescon c. 33. Albeit of this matter there be no example brought out of holie Scriptures yet euen in this matter the truth of the same holic Scriptures is held when we doe what b Present Church now seemeth to the whole Church which the authoritie of the same Scriptures doth commend that seing the holie scripture cannot deceaue whosoeuer feareth to be deceaued by the obscuritie of this question let him of it ask the same Church which the holie Scripture sheweth without al doubt And the like he saieth in other places And Protestants in Colloq Ratisb sess 6. p. 144. confess That it seemeth a faire saying By means of the infallible authoritie of the Church al matters of faith or manners may be deduced out of scripture Hence appareth how vntruly D. Potter sec 5. p. 12. saied of vs They teach that much of the obiect or matter of faith is not conteined in Scripture anie way TWO AND TWENTITH CHAPTER That the Scripture teacheth plainly enough the summ of Christian faith and al things absolutly necessarie to be beleued explicitly 1. THat Scripture teacheth plainly enough the summ of Christian faith and al things absolutly necessarie to be beleued explicitly I proue becaus as is shewed in the former Chapter it teacheth al such points and that it teacheth them clearly enough appereth by that it teacheth them in the plain and vsual sense of these words which is to teach plainly enough as can be by writing And this may be shewed by Induction though al the Articles of the Apostles Creed which a Catechimus Trident p. 13. conteineth al the points which are absolutly necessarie to be beleued explicitly and is called of the b
no diuine light in them Likewise if the light were onely in the original letters of Scripture as Hebrew and Greek no translated Scripture should haue this light and so none should know the Scripture to be Gods word but who know Hebrew and Greek Moreouer both Fathers teach and Protestants S. Hierom. Galat 1 Vvhâ—tâ—ker l 2 cont Dur. sec 1. confess that Scripture consisteth in the sense not in the letter or words of Scripture As Wotton in Whites Defense c. 28. p. 259. denieth the words to be the Rule of faith And White ibid. affirmeth the matter conteined in the words so to be Nay Whitaker himself l. 3. de Scrip. c. 4. p. 39â— saieth Nether doe I put most certain diuinitie in the written letter And surely writing or letters giue no diuine authoritie to Gods word For Gods word is of the same authoritie written and vnwritten as is euident and Protestants confess How then can writing or letters giue anie true light or brightnes to Gods word Finally I add that e Sup l 1. c. 10. n. 6. faith cannot be resolued into arguments becaus it is not discursiue but onely into authoritie For it is a simple assent to the saying for the authoritie of the saier And onely the word of God or which God hath said can be beleued with diuine faith And no collection or inference of man out of the character or letter of God is Gods word and therfore cannot be the obiect or formal cause of diuine faith Nor is this feigned light in the sense of the Scripture becaus then by it we could not beleue euerie parte of the Scipture to be Gods word For as Protestants before confessed it Sup. c. 2. sect 2. were impudencie and madnes to say that anie know the true sense of euerie parte of Scripture which is beleued to be Gods word S. Austin Epist 119. professed that there is more in Scripture which he knew not then which he knew And Whitaker l. 2. de Script p. 220. 235. saieth The Eunuch though he vnderstood not the Scriptures yet he acknowledged them and certainly knew them to be diuine And l. 1. p. 156. God hath so framed his speech that though pious men doe not alwaies clearly see what he speaketh yet they clearly see by the verie speech that it is God who speaketh What diuine light of honestie haue those words to Osee Take a fornicarian and make sonnes of fornication What diuine light of humanitie haue those words to Abraham sacrifice thy sonne what diuine light of truth haue those words that Balaams ass spake to him And the like of manie more 5. Furthermore the Deuisers of this sufficient internal light of the Scripture are not wel resolued whether not withstanding this light it need be proued infallibly that Scripture is the word of God For Laude sec 16. p. 64 saieth It seemes to mâ— very necessarie that we be able to proue the books of scripture to be the word of God by some authoritie that is absolutly diuine And ibid. p. 66. Scripture must be proued by some word of God This is agreed on by me that scripture must be known to be scripture by a sufficient infallible diuine proof And that such proof can be nothing but the word of God is agreed also by me Thus he confesseth that notwithstanding anie light in the Scripture it must be infalliby proued to be the word of God and that such proof can be none but some word of God Which if he wold constantly hold he must needs grant that there is some vnwritten word of God by which the Scripture must be proued to be his word Neuertheles himself soon after p. 104. saieth It is most But Protestants can not proue it so reasonable that Theologie should be allowed to haue some principle which she proues not but presupposes and the chiefest of these is Tat the scriptures are of diuine authoritie And the same he repeateth p. 110. Potter also sec 5. p. 26. Al Christians in the world confess the authoritie of scripture to be a Principle indemonstrable yet are we by them Papists perpetually vrged to proue that authoritie and that by scripture And Whitaker l 1. de Script 106. What Pastor euer laboreth to proue that it is God who speaketh in scriptures He by his right requireth that this be granted to him So that the chiefest principle of Protestants Theologie and that on which dependeth their beleif of al they beleue cannot be infallibly proued but must be praesupposed and freely granted and consequently they can beleue nothing infallibly as Laude p. 64. cit wel inferred For as generally Protestants teach we Sup. l. 1. c. 18. n. 1. can haue no greater certaintie of the inference then we haue of the Principle out of which we inferr it And herevpon Chillingworth as before we shewed c. 8. sec 2. consequently granted that Protestants haue but humane and moral assurance of what they beleue And as Laude saieth sec 16. p. 59. This question how doe you know scripture to be scripture driueth some of them into infidelitie Such fruits they see come of their denying the Churches infallibilitie in al matters of faith 6. Finally this sufficient internal light of the Scripture great or less hath no sufficient ground For the pretended ground therof is that the Scripture is called a light psal 118. To which I answer First That arguments taken from Metaphors Arguments taken from meâ—aphors are deceitful or similitudes are most subiect to deceipt becaus the true similitude may be easily mistaken Secondly it is not saied that the scripture or Written word and much less Al scripture is a light but simply The word of God which may be wel vnderstood ether of the word preached Gal. 1. Without which there is no faith Rom. 10. or of the ingrafted word which can saue our soules Iacobi 1. or of the word written in the hearts of the faithful Hierem. 31. Thirdly I say that the word of God is called a light not becaus it sheweth Vvhy Gods word called a light it self to be the word of God as light sheweth it self to be light but becaus it sheweth the way to heauen And therfore it is called a light to our feet which can not see but follow And in this sorte Iob. 2. 29. saieth He was an eye to the blinde not that the blinde could see him but follow his directions The like I say to that other place 2. Petri c. 1. Where he likeneth Prophetical speech to a lamp shining in a dark place For nether speaketh he of al scripture but onely of Prophesies nether likeneth he them to a lamp in that this is seen by it self but ether becaus Prophesies gaue but a darksome light of Christ in respect of the Gospel or becaus they directed to Christ as a lamp directeth in a darksome roome In like sorte the Apostles were called the light of the world Math. 5. Not becaus the world