that Proposition in terminis So here the very Foundation of A. C ' s. Dilemma fals off For I say not That onely the Points of the Creed are Fundamentall whether expressed or not expressed That all of them are that I say And yet though the Foundation of his Dilemma be fallen away I will take the boldnesse to tell A. C. That if I had said That those Articles onely which are expressed in the Creed are Fundamentall it would have beene hard to have excluded the Scripture upon which the Creed it selfe in every Point is grounded For nothing is supposed to shut out its owne Foundation And if I should now say that some Articles are Fundamentall which are infolded in the Creed it would not follow that therefore some unwritten Traditions were Fundamentall Some Traditions I deny not true and firme and of great both Authority and Vse in the Church as being Apostolicall but yet not Fundamentall in the Faith And it would be a mighty large fold which should lap up Traditions within the Creed As for that Tradition That the Bookes of holy Scriptures are Divine and Infallible in every part I will handle that when I come to the proper place * §. 16. N. 1. for it F. I asked how then it happened as M. Rogers saith that the English Church is not yet resolved what is the right sense of the Article of Christs Descending into Hell B. The English Church never made doubt that § 12 I know what was the sense of that Article The words are so plaine they beare their meaning before them Shee was content to put that a Art 3. Article among those to which she requires Subscription not as doubting of the sense but to prevent the Cavils of some who had beene too busie in Crucifying that Article and in making it all one with the Article of the Crosse or but an Exposition of it And surely for my part I thinke the Church of England is better resolved of the right sense of this Article then the Church of Rome especially if shee must be tryed by her Writers as you try the Church of England by M. Rogers For you cannot agree whether this Article be a meere Tradition or whether it hath any Place of Scripture to vvarrant it a Scotus in 1. D. 11. q. 1. Scotus and b Stapleton Relect. Con. 5. q. 5. Art 1. Stapleton allow it no footing in Scripture but c Bellarm 4. de Christo. c. 6. 12. Scripturae passim hoc docent Bellarmine is resolute that this Article is every where in Scripture and d Thom. 2 â—…ae q. 1. A 9 ad 1. Thomas grants as much for the whole Creed The Church of England never doubted it and S. e S. Aug. Ep. 99. Augustine prooves it And yet againe you are different for the sense For you agree not Whether the Soule of Christ in triduo mortis in the time of his Death did go downe into Hell really and was present there or vertually and by effects only For g Tho. p. 3. q. 52. A. 2. c. per suam essentiam Thomas holds the first and h Dur in 3. d. 22. q. 3. Durand the later Then you agree not Whether the Soule of Christ did descend really and in essence into the lowest pit of Hell and Place of the Damned as i Bellar. L. 4. do Christo. c. 16. Bellarmine once held probable and prooved it or really only into that place or Region of Hell which you call Limbum Patrum and then but vertually from thence into the Lower Hell to which k Bellar. Recog p. 11. Bellarmine reduces himselfe and gives his reason because it is the l Sequuntur enim Tho. p. 3. Q. 52. A. 2. common Opinion of the Schoole Now the Church of England takes the words as they are in the Creed and believes them without farther Dispute and in that sense which the ancient Primitive Fathers of the Church agreed in And yet if any in the Church of England should not be throughly resolved in the sense of this Article Is it not as lawfull for them to say I conceive thus or thus of it yet if any other way of his Descent be found truer then this I deny it not but as yet I know no other as it was for m Non est pertinaciter asserendum quin Anima Christi per alium modum nobis ignotum potuerit descendere ad Infernum Nec nos negamus alium modum esse for sit an veriorem sed fatemur nos illum ignor arc Durand in 3. sent Dist. 22. q. 3. Nu. 9. Durand to say it and yet not impeach the Foundation of the Faith F. The Bishop said That M. Rogers was but a private man But said I if M. Rogers writing as he did by publike Authority be accounted only a private man c. B. I said truth when I said M. Rogers was a private § 13 man And I take it you will not allow every speech of every man though allowed by Authority to have his Bookes Printed to be the Doctrine of the Church of Rome * And this was an Ancient fault too for S. Augustine checks at it in his time Noli colligere calumnias ex Episcoporum scriptis sive Hillarii sive Cypriani Agrippini Primò quia hoc genus literarum ab Authoritate Canonis distinguendum est Non enim sic leguntur tanquam it a ex iis testimonium proferatur ut contrà sentire non liceat sicubi fortè aliter sentirent quà m veritas postulat S. Aug. Ep. 48. c. And yet these were farre greater men in their generations then M. Rogers was This hath beene oft complained of on both sides The imposing particular mens assertions upon the Church yet I see you meane not to leave it And surely as Controversies are now handled by some of your party at this day I may not say it is the sense of the Article in hand but I have long thought it a kinde os descent into Hell to be conversant in them I would the Authors would take heed in time and not seeke to blinde the People or cast a mist before evident Truth least it cause a finall descent to that place of Torment But since you will hold this course Stapleton was of greater note with you then M. Rogers his exposition of Notes upon the Articles of the Church of England is with us And as he so his Relection And is it the Doctrine of the Church of Rome which Stapleton affirmes †Stapl. Cont. 5. q. 5. A. 1. The Scripture is silent that Christ descended into Hell and that there is a Catholike and an Apostolike Church If it be then what will become of the Popes Supremacie over the whole Church Shall he have his Power over the Catholike Church given him expresly in Scripture in the a S. Mat. 16. 19. Keyes to enter and in b S. Ioh. 21. 15. Pasce
assurance and for which we have no warrant at all in Scripture while wee in the meane time neglect the ordinary way and meanes commanded by Christ. Secondly 't is very neare an Expression in Scripture it selfe For when S. Peter had ended that great Sermon of his Act. 2. he Act. 2. 38 39. applies two comforts unto them Vers. 38. Amend your lives and be baptized and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost And then Verse 39. hee inferres For the promise is made to you and to your children The Promise what Promise What Why the Promise of Sanctification by the Holy Ghost By what meanes Why by Baptisme For 't is expresly Be baptized and ye shall receive And as expresly This promise is made to you and to your children And therefore A. C. may finde it if he will That the Baptisme of Infants may be directly concluded out of Scripture For some of his owne Party a Nullum excipit non Iudaeum non Gentilem non Adultum non Puerum c. Ferus in Act. 2. 39. Ferus and b Et ad Filios vestros quare debent consentire quum ad usum rationis perveniunt ad implenda promissa in Baptismo c. Salm. Tract 14. upon the place Salmeron could both find it there And so if it will doe him any pleasure he hath my Answer which he saith he would be glad to know 'T is true a Bellar. L. 4. de Verbo Dei c. 9. §. 5. Bellarmine presses a maine Place out of S. Augustine and he urges it hard S. b S. Aug. Gen. ad Lit. c. 23. Consuetudo Matris Ecclesia in Baptizandis parvulis nequaquam spernenda est nec omninò credenda nisi Apostolica esset Traditio Augustine's words are The Custome of our Mother the Church in Baptizing Infants is by no meanes to be contemned or thought superfluous nor yet at all to be believed unlesse it were an Apostolicall Tradition The Place is truly cited but seemes a great deale stronger than indeed it is For first 't is not denyed That this is an Apostolicall Tradition and therefore to be believed But secondly not therefore onely Nor doth S. Augustine say so nor doth Bellarmine presse it that way The truth is it would have beene somewhat difficult to finde the Collection out of Scripture onely for the Baptisme of Infants since they do not actually believe And therefore S. Augustine is at nec credenda nisi that this Custome of the Church had not been to be believed had it not been an Apostolicall Tradition But the Tradition being Apostolicall led on the Church easily to see the necessary Deduction out of Scripture And this is not the least use of Tradition to lead the Church into the true meaning of those things which are found in Scripture though not obvious to every eye there And that this is S. Augustine's meaning is manifest by himself who best knew it For when he had said c Cur Antiquam fidei Regulam frangere conaris S. Aug. Ser. 8. de ver Apos c. 8. Hoc Ecclesia semper tenuit Ib. Ser. 10. c. 2. as he doth That to baptize children is Antiqua fidei Regula the Ancient Rule of Faith and the constant Tenet of the Church yet he doubts not to collect and deduce it out of Scripture also For when Pelagius urged That Infants needed not to be baptized because they had no Originall Sin S. Augustine relies not upon the Tenet of the Church only but argues from the Text thus a Quid necessarium habuit Infans Christum si non aegrotat S. Matth. 9. 12. Quid est quod dicis nisi ut non accedant ad Iesum Sed tibi clamat Iesus Sine Parvulos venire ad me S. Aug. in the fore-cited places What need have Infants of Christ if they be not sicke For the sound need not the Physitian S. Mat. 9. And againe is not this said by Pelagius ut non accedant ad Iesum That Infants may not come to their Saviour Sed clamat Iesus but Iesus cries out Suffer Little ones to come unto me * S. Marc. 10. 14. S. Mar. 10. And all this is fully acknowledged by b Nullus est Scriptor tam vetustus qui non ejus Originem ad Apostolorum seculum pro certo referat Calv. 4. Inst. c. 16 §. 8. Calvine Namely That all men acknowledge the Baptisme of Infants to descend from Apostolicall Tradition †Miserrimum alylum foret si pro Defensione Paedubaptismi ad nudam Ecclesiae authoritatem fugere cogeremur Calv. 4. Inst. c. 8. §. 16. And yet that it doth not depend upon the bare and naked Authority of the Church Which he speakes not in regard of Tradition but in relation to such proofe as is to be made by necessary Consequence out of Scripture over and above Tradition As for Tradition * §. 15. Num. 1. A. C. p. 49. I have said enough for that and as much as A. C. where 't is truly Apostolicall And yet if any thing will please him I will add this concerning this particular The Baptizing of Infants That the Church received this by c Orig in Rom 6 6. tom 2 p. 543. Pro hoc Ecclesia ab Apâ—…stolis Traditionem suscepit etiaÌ„ parvulis BaptismuÌ„ dare Et S. Aug. Ser. 10. de verb. Apos c. 2. Hoc Ecclesia à MajoruÌ„ side percepit And it is to be observed that neither of these Fathers nor i believe any other say that the Church received it à Traditione solâ or à Majorum side sola as if Tradition 〈◊〉 exclude collection of it out of Scripture Tradition from the Apostles By Tradition And what then May it not directly be concluded out of Scripture because it was delivered to the Church by way of Tradition I hope A. C. will never say so For certainly in Doctrinall things nothing so likely to be a Tradition Apostolicall as that which hath a * Yea and Bellarmine himself avers Omnes Traditiones c. contineri in Scripturis in universali L. 4. de verb. Det non scripto c. 10. §. Sic etiam And S. Basil. Serm. de fide approves only those Agrapha quae non sunt aliena à piâ secunduÌ„ ScripturaÌ„ Sententid root and a Foundation in Scripture For Apostles cannot write or deliver contrary but subordinate and subservient things F. I asked how he knew Scripture to be Scripture and in particular Genesis Exodus c. These are believed to be Scripture yet not proved out of any Place of Scripture The Bishop said That the Books of Scripture are Principles to be supposed and needed not to be proved B. I did never love too curious a search into § 16 that which might put a man into a wheele and circle him so long betweene proving Scripture by Tradition and Tradition by Scripture till the Divell finde a meanes to dispute him into Infidelity and make him believe neither I
Divine Authority into internall Arguments found in the Letter it selfe though found by the Helpe and Direction of Tradition without and Grace within And the resolution that is rightly grounded may not endure to pitch and restit selfe upon the Helpes but upon that Divine Light which the Scripture no Question hath in it selfe but is not kindled till these Helps come Thy word is a Light d Psal. 119. 105. Sanctarum Scripturarum Lumen S. Aug. L. de verâ Relig. c. 7. Quid Lucem Scripturarum vanis umbris c. S. Aug. L. de Mor. Eccl. Cathol c. 35. so David A Light Therefore it is as much manifestativum sui as alterius a manifestation to it selfe as to other things which it shewes but still not till the Candle be Lighted not till there hath beene a Preparing Instruction What Light it is Children call the Sunne and Moone Candles Gods Candles They see the light as well as men but cannot distinguish betweene them till some Tradition and Education hath informed their Reason And * 1 Cor. 2. 14. animalis homo the naturall man sees some Light of Morall counsell and instruction in Scripture as well as Believers But he takes all that glorious Lustre for Candle-light and cannot distinguish betweene the Sunne and twelve to the Pound till Tradition of the Church and Gods Grace put to it have cleared his understanding So Tradition of the present Church is the first Morall Motive to Beliefe But the Beliefe it selfe That the Scripture is the Word of God rests †Orig. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 1. went this way yet was he a great deale nearer the prime Tradition then we are For being to proove that the Scriptures were inspired from God he saith De hoc assignabimus ex ipsis Divinis Scripturis quae nos competenter movcrint c. upon the Scripture when a man findes it to answer and exceed all that which the Church gave in Testimony as will after appeare And as in the Voyce of the Primitive and Apostolicall Church there was a Principaliter tamen etiam hîc credimus propter Deum non Apoâ—…olos c. Henr. à Gand. Sum. A. 9. q. 3. Now if where the Apostles themselves spake ultimata resolutio Fidei was in Deum not in ipsos per se much more shall it be in Deum then in praesentem Ecclesiam and into the writings of the Apostles then into the words of their Successors made up into a Tradition simply Divine Authority delivering the Scripture as Gods Word so after Tradition of the present Church hath taught and informed the Soule the Voyce of God is plainly heard in Scripture it selfe And then here 's double Authority and both Divine that confirmes Scripture to be the Word of God Tradition of the Apostles delivering it And the internall worth and argument in the Scripture obvious to a soule prepared by the present Churches Tradition and Gods Grace The Difficulties which are pretended against this are not many and they will easily vanish For first you pretend we go to Private Revelations for Light to know Scripture No we do not you see it is excluded out of the very state of the Question and we go to the Tradition of the present Church and by it as well as you Here we differ we use the Tradition of the present Church as the first Motive not as the Last Resolution of our Faith We Resolve onely into d Calv. Instit. 1. c. 5. §. 2. Christiana Ecclesia Prophetarum scriptis Apostolorum praedicatione initio fundata fuit ubicunque reperietur ea Doctrina c. Prime Tradition Apostolicall and Scripture it selfe Secondly you pretend we do not nor cannot know the prime Apostolicall Tradition but by the Tradition of the present Church and that therefore if the Tradition of the present Church be not Gods unwritten Word and Divine we cannot yet know Scripture to be Scripture by a Divine Authority Well Suppose I could not know the prime Tradition to be Divine but by the present Church yet it doth not follow that therefore I cannot know Scripture to be the Word of God by a Divine Authority because Divine Tradition is not the sole and onely meanes to prove it For suppose I had not nor could have full assurance of Apostolicall Tradition Divine yet the morall perswasion reason and force of the present Church is ground enough to move any reasonable man that it is fit he should read the Scripture and esteeme very reverently and highly of it And this once done the Scripture hath then In and Home-Arguments enough to put a Soule that hath but ordinary Grace out of Doubt That Scripture is the Word of God Infallible and Divine Thirdly you pretend that we make the Scripture absolutely and fully to be knowne Lumine suo by the Light and Testimony which it hath in and gives to it selfe Against this you give reason for your selves and proofe from us Your Reason is If there be sufficient Light in Scripture to shew it selfe then every man that can and doth but read it may know it presently to be the Divine Word of God which we see by daily experience men neither do nor can First it is not absolutely nor universally true There is a And where Hooker uses this very Argument as he doth L. 3. §. 8. his words are not If there bee sufficient Light But if that Light bee Evident sufficient Light therefore every man may see it Blinde men are men and cannot see it and b 1 Cor. 2. 14. sensuall men in the Apostles judgement are such Nor may we deny and put out this Light as insufficient because blinde eyes cannot and perverse eyes will not see it no more then we may deny meat to be sufficient for nourishment though men that are heart-sicke cannot eat it Next we do not say That there is such a full light in Scripture as that every man upon the first sight must yeeld to it such Light as is found in Prime Principles Every whole is greater than a Part of the same and this The same thing cannot be and not be at the same time and in the same respect These carrie a naturall Light with them and evident for the Termes are no sooner understood then the Principles themselves are fully knowne to the convincing of mans understanding and so they are the beginning of knowledge which where it is perfect dwels in full Light but such a full Light we do neither say is nor require to be in Scripture and if any particular man doe let him answer for himselfe The Question is onely of such a Light in Scripture as is of force to breed faith that it is the Word of God not to make a perfect knowledge Now Faith of whatsoever it is this or other Principle is an Evidence a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well as Knowledge and Heb. 11. 1. the Beliefe is firmer then any Knowledge can
speake of the Written Word and so lie crosse to Stapleton as is mention'd But to returne If A. C. will he may but I cannot believe That a Definition of the Church which is made by the expresse Word of God and another which is made without so much as a probable Testimony of it or a cleare Deduction from it are made firme to us by one and the same Divine Revelation Nay I must say in this case that the one Determination is firme by Divine Revelation but the other hath no Divine Revelation at all but the Churches Authority onely 2. Secondly I cannot believe neither That all Determinations of the Church are sufficiently applied by one and the same full Authority of the Church For the Authority of the Church though it be of the same fulnesse in regard of it self and of the Power which it commits to Generall Councels lawfully called yet it is not alwayes of the same fulnesse of knowledge and sufficiency nor of the same fulnesse of Conscience and integrity to apply Dogmata Fidei that which is Dogmaticall in the Faith For instance I thinke you dare not deny but the Councell of Trent was lawfully called and yet I am of opinion that few even of your selves believe that the Councell of Trent hath the same fulnesse with the Councell of Nice in all the fore-named kinds or degrees of fulnesse Thirdly suppose That all Determinations of the Church are made firme to us by one and the same Divine Revelation and sufficiently applied by one and the same full Authority yet it will not follow that they are all alike Fundamentall in the Faith For I hope A. C. himselfe will not say that the Definitions of the Church are in better condition than the Propositions of Canonicall Scripture Now all Propositions of Canonicall Scripture are alike firme because they all alike proceed from Divine Revelation but they are not all alike Fundamentall in the Faith For this Proposition of Christ to S. Peter and S. Andrew Follow me and I will make you fishers of men a S. Matth. 4. 19 is as firm a Truth as that which he delivered to his Disciples That he must die and rise againse the third day b S. Matth. 16. 21 For both proceed from the same Divine Revelation out of the mouth of our Saviour and both are sufficiently applied by one and the same full Authority of the Church which receives the whole Gospell of S. Matthew to be Canonicall and infallible Scripture And yet both these Propositions of Christ are not alike Fundamentall in the Faith For I dare say No man shall be saved in the ordinary way of salvation that believes not the Death and the Resurrection of Christ. And I believe A. C. dares not say that No man shall be saved into whose Capacity it never came that Christ made S. Peter and Andrew fishers of men And yet should he say it nay should he shew it sub annulo Piscatoris no man will believe it that hath not made shipwrack of his Common Notions Now if it be thus betweene Proposition and Proposition issuing out of Christ's own Mouth I hope it may well be so also betweene even Iust and True Determinations of the Church that supposing them alike true and firme yet they shall not be alike Fundamentall to all mens beliefe F. Secondly I required to know what Points the Bishop would account Fundamentall He said all the Points of the Creed were such B. Against this I hope you except not For § 11 since the a Tertull. Apol. contra Gentes c. 47. de veland virg c. 1. S. August Serm. 15. de Temp. cap. 2. Ruffin in Symb. apud Cyprian p. 357. Fathers make the Creed the Rule of Faith b Alb. Mag. in 1. Sent. D. 11. A. 7. since the agreeing sense of Scripture with those Articles are the two Regular Precepts by which a Divine is governed about the Faith since your owne Councell of c Concil Trident Sess. 3. Trent decrees That it is that Principle of Faith in which all that professe Christ doe necessarily agree Fundamentum firmum unicum not the firme alone but the onely Foundation since it is Excommunication d Bonavent ibid. Dub. 2. 3. in literam ipso jure for any man to contradict the Articles contained in that Creed since the whole Body of the Faith is so contained in the Creed as that the e Thom. 2. 2ae q. 1. Art 7. c. substance of it was believ'd even before the comming of Christ though not so expresly as since in the number of the Articles since f Bellar. L. 4. de Verb. Dei non Script c. 11. §. Primum est Bellarmine confesses That all things simply necessary for all mens salvation are in the Creed and the Decalogue what reason can you have to except And yet for all this everything Fundamentall is not of a like nearenesse to the Foundation nor of equall Primenesse in the Faith And my granting the Creed to be Fundamentall doth not deny but that there are g Tho. 2. 2ae q. 1. A. 7. C. quaedam prima Credibilia certaine prime Principles of Faith in the bosome whereof all other Articles lay wrapped and folded up One of which since Christ is that of S. h 1. S. Iohn 4. 2. Iohn Every spirit that confesseth Iesus Christ come in the flesh is of God And one both before the comming of Christ and since is that of S. Paul i Heb. 11. 6. He that comes to God must believe that God is and that he is a rewarder of them that seeke him Here A. C. tels you That either I must meane that those Points are onely Fundamentall which are expressed A. C. p. 46. in the Creed or those also which are infolded If I say those onely which are expressed then saith he to believe the Scriptures is not Fundamentall because 't is not expressed If I say those which are infolded in the Articles then some unwritten Church Traditions may be accounted Fundamentall The truth is I said and say still that all the Points of the Apostles Creed as they are there expressed are Fundamentall And therein I say no more than some of your best Learned have said before me But I never either said or meant That they onely are Fundamentall That they are a Conc. Trident. Sess. 3. Fundamentum unicum the only Foundation is the Councell of Trent's 't is not mine Mine is That the Beliefe of Scripture to be the Word of God and infallible is an equall or rather a preceding Prime Principle of Faith with or to the whole Body of the Creed And this agrees as before I told the Iesuite with one of your owne great Masters Albertus Magnus b In 1. Sent. D. 11. A. 7. Regula Fidei est concors Scriptururum sensus cum Articulis Fidei Quia illis duobus regularibus Praeceptis regitur Theologus who is not farre from
to feede when he is in and when he had fed to c S. Luk. 22. 35. Confirme and in all these not to erre and faile in his Ministration And is the Catholike Church in and over which he is to do all these great things quite left out of the Scripture Belike the Holy Ghost was carefull to give him his power Yes in any case but left the assigning of his great Cure the Catholike Church to Tradition And it were well for him if he could so prescribe for what he now Claymes But what if after all this M. Rogers there sayes no such thing As in truth he doth not His words are d Rogers in Art Eccle. Angl. Art 3. All Christians acknowledge He descended but in the interpretation of the Article there is not that consent that were to be wished What is this to the Church of England more then others And againe e Ibid. Till we know the native and undoubted sense of this Article is M. Rogers We the Church of England or rather his and some others Iudgement in the Church of England Now here A. C. will have somewhat againe to say though God knowes 't is to little purpose 'T is A. C. p. 47. that the Iesuite urged M. Roger's Booke because it was set out by Publike Authority And because the Booke beares the Title of the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England A. C. may undoubtedly urge M. Rogers if he please But he ought not to say that his Opinion is the Doctrine of the Church of England for neither of the Reasons by him expressed First not because his Booke was publikely allowed For many Bookes among them as well as among us have beene Printed by publike Authority as containing nothing in them contrary to Faith and good manners and yet containing many things in them of Opinion only or private Iudgement which yet is farre from the avowed Positive Doctrine of the Church the Church having as yet determined neither way by open Declaration upon the words or things controverted And this is more frequent among their Schoolemen then among any of our Controversers as is well knowne Nor secondly because his Booke beares the Title of the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England For suppose the worst and say M. Rogers thought a little too well of his owne paines and gave his Booke too high a Title is his private Iudgement therefore to be accounted the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England Surely no No more then I should say every thing said by * Angelici D. S. Tho. Summa Thomas or †Celebratissimi Patris Dom. Bonaventurae Doctoris Seraphici in 3. L. Sent. Disputata Bonaventure is Angelicall or Seraphicall Doctrine because one of these is stiled in the Church of Rome Seraphicall and the other Angelicall Doctor And yet their workes are Printed by Publike Authority and that Title given them Yea but our private Authors saith A. C. are not allowed for ought I know in such a like sorte to expresse A. C. p. 47. our Catholike Doctrine in any matter subject to Question Here are two Limitations which will goe farre to bring A. C. off whatsoever I shall say against him For first let me instance in any private man that takes as much upon him as M. Rogers doth he will say he knew it not his Assertion here being no other then for ought he knowes Secondly If he be unwilling to acknowledge so much yet he will answer 't is not just in such a like sort as M. Rogers doth it that is perhaps it is not the very Title of his Booke But well then Is there never a Private man allowed in the Church of Rome to expresse your Catholike Doctrine in any matter subject to question What not in any matter Were not Vega and Soto two private men Is it not a mâ—…tter subject to Question to great Question in these Dayes Whether a man may be certaine of his Salvation câ—…rtitudine fidei by the certainty of Faith Doth nâ—…t * Bellar. Lib. 3. de Justificat c. 1. 14. Bellarmine make it a Controversie And is it not a part of your Catholike Faith if it be determined in the †Huic Concilio Catholici omnes ingenia sua judicia sponte subjiciunt Bellar. 3. de Justif. c. 3. §. Sed Concilii Tridâ—…i Councell of Trent And yet these two great Friers of their time Dominicus Soto and Andreas Vega a Hist. Concil Trident. Lib. 2. p. 245. Edit Lat. Leidae 1622. were of contrary Opinions and both of them challenged the Decree of the Councell and so consequently your Catholike Faith to be as each of them concluded and both of them wrote Bookes to maintaine their Opinions and both of their Bookes were published by Authority And therefore I think 't is allowed in the Church of Rome to private men to expresse your Catholike Doctrine and in a matter subject to Question And therefore also if another man in the Church of England should be of a contrary Opinion to M. Rogers and declare it under the Title of the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England this were no more then Soto and Vega did in the Church of Rome And I for my part cannot but wonder A. C. should not know it A. C. p. 47. For he sayes that for ought he knowes Private men are not allowed so to expresse their Catholike Doctrine And in the same Question both Catharinus and Bellarmine b Bellar. L. 3. de Iustif. c. 3. take on them to expresse your Catholike Faith the one differing from the other almost as much as Soto and Vega and perhaps in some respect more F. But if M. Rogers be only a private man in what Book may we finde the Protestants publike Doctrine The Bishop answered That to the Booke of Articles they were all sworne B. What Was I so ignorant to say The Articles § 14 of the Church of England were the Publike Doctrine of all the Protestants Or that all Protestants were sworne to the Articles of England as this speech seems to imply Sure I was not Was not the immediate speech before of the Church of England And how comes the Subject of the Speech to be varied in the next lines Nor yet speake I this as if other Protestants did not agree with the Church of England in the chiefest Doctrines and in the maine Exceptions which they joyntly take against the Romane Church as appeares by their severall Confessions But if A. C. will say as he doth that because there was speech before of the Church of A. C. p. 47. England the Iesuite understood mee in a limited sense and meant only the Protestants of the English Church Bee it so ther 's no great harme done †And therfore A. C. needs not make such a Noise about it as he doth p. 48 but this that the Iesuite offers to enclose me too much For I did not
say that the Booke of Articles only was the Continent of the Church of Englands publike Doctrine She is not so narrow nor hath she purpose to exclude any thing which she acknowledges hers nor doth she wittingly permit any Crossing of her publike Declarations yet she is not such a shrew to her Children as to deny her Blessing or Denounce an Anathema against them if some peaceably dissent in some Particulars remoter from the Foundation as your owne Schoole men differ And if the Church of Rome since she grew to her greatnesse had not beene so fierce in this Course and too particular in Determining too many things and making them matters of Necessary Beliefe which had gone for many hundreds of years before only for things of Pious Opinion Christendome I perswade my selfe had beene in happier peace at this Day then I doubt we shall ever live to see it Well but A. C. will proove the Church of England a Shrew and such a Shrew For in her Booke * Can. 5. of Canons A. C. p. 48. She Excommunicates every man who shall hold any thing contrary to any part of the said Articles So A. C. But surely these are not the very words of the Canon nor perhaps the sense Not the Words for they are Whosoever shall affirme that the Articles are in any part superstitious or erroneous c. And perhaps not the sense For it is one thing for a man to hold an Opinion privately within himselfe and another thing boldly and publikely to affirme it And againe 't is one thing to hold contrary to some part of an Article which perhaps may bee but in the manner of Expression and another thing positively to affirme that the Articles in any part of them are superstitious and erroneous But this is not the Maine of the Businesse For though the Church of England Denounce Excommunication as is a Can. 5. before expressed Yet She comes farre short of the Church of Rome's severity whose Anathema's are not only for 39. Articles but for very many more * Concil Trident. above one hundred in matter of Doctrine and that in many Poynts as farre remote from the Foundation though to the farre greater Rack of mens Consciences they must be all made Fundamentall if that Church have once Determined them whereas the Church A. C. p. 45. of England never declared That every one of her Articles are Fundamentall in the Faith For 't is one thing to say No one of them is superstitious or erroneous And quite another to say Every one of them is fundamental and that in every part of it to all mens Beliefe Besides the Church of England prescribes only to her owne Children and by those Articles provides but for her owne peaceable Consent in those Doctrines of Truth But the Church of Rome severely imposes her Doctrine upon the whole World under paine of Damnation F. And that the Scriptures only not any unwritten Tradition was the Foundation of their Faith B. The Church of England grounded her Positive § 15 Articles upon Scripture and her Negative doe refute there where the thing affirmed by you is not affirmed by Scripture nor directly to be concluded out of it And here not the Church of England only but all Protestants agree most truly and most strongly in this That the Scripture is sufficient to salvation and containes in it all things necessary to it The Fathers a S. Basil. de verâ piâ fide Manifesta defectio Fidei est importare quicquam eorum quae scripta non sunt S. Hilar. L. 2. ad Const. Aug. Fidem tantùm secundum ca quae scripta sunt desider autem hoc qui repudiat Antichristus est qui simulat Anathema est S. Aug. L. 2. de Doctr. Christian. c. 9. In iis quae apertè in Scriptura posita sunt inveniuntur illa omnia quae continent sidem mâ—…resque vivendi And to this place Bellarm L. 4. de verbo Dei non scripto c. 11. saith that S. Augustine speakes de illis Dogmatibus quae necestaria sunt omnibus simpliciter of those Points of faith which are necessary simply for all men So farre then he grants the question And that you may know it fell not from him on the suddaine he had said as much before in the beginning of the same Chapter and here he confirmes it againe are plaine the b Sâ—…tus Proleg in sent q. 2. Scriptura sufficienter continet Doctrinam necessariam Uiatori Thom. 2. 2ae q. 1. A. 10. ad 1. In Doctrina Christi Apostolorum veritas fidei est suffi ientèr explicata And he speakes there of the written Word Schoolemen not strangers in it And have not we reason then to account it as it is The Foundation of our Faith And c Scripturam Fundamentum esse columnam Fidei fatemur in suo genere i. can genere Testimoniorum in materia Credendorum Relect. Con. 4. q. 1. Ar. 3. in fine Stapleton himselfe though an angry Opposite confesses That the Scripture is in some sort the Foundation of Faith that is in the nature of Testimony and in the matter or thing to be believed And if the Scripture be the Foundation to which we are to goe for witnesse if there be Doubt about the Faith and in which we are to find the thing that is to be believed as necessary in the Faith we never did nor never will refuse any Tradition that is Universall and Apostolike for the better Exposition of the Scripture nor any Definition of the Church in which she goes to the Scripture for what she teaches and thrusts nothing as Fundamentall in the Faith upon the world but what the Scripture fundamentally makes materiam Credendorum the substance of that which is so to be believed whether immediatly and expresly in words or more remotely till a cleare and full Deduction draw it out Against the beginning of this Paragraph A. C. excepts And first he sayes 'T is true that the Church of England grounded her Positive Articles upon Scripture A. C. p. 48. That is 't is true if themselves may be competent Iudges in their owne Cause But this by the leave of A. C. is true without making our selves Iudges in our owne Cause For that all the Positive Articles of the present Church of England are grounded upon Scripture we are content to be judged by the joynt and constant Beliefe of the Fathers which lived within the first foure or five hundred yeares after Christ when the Church was at the best and by the Councels held within those times and to submit to them in all those Points of Doctrine Therefore we desire not to be Iudges in our owne Cause And if any whom A. C. cals a Novellist can truly say and maintaine this he will quickly proove himselfe no Novellist And for the Negative Articles they refute where the thing affirmed by you is either not affirmed in
Scripture or not directly to be concluded out of it Vpon this Negative ground A. C. inferres againe That the Baptisme of Infants is not expresly at least not evidently affirmed in Scripture nor directly at least not A. C. p. 49. demonstratively concluded out of it In which case he professes he would gladly know what can be answered to defend this doctrine to be a Point of Faith necessary for the salvation of Infants And in Conclusion professes he cannot easily guesse what Answer can be made unlesse we will acknowledge Authority of Church-Tradition necessary in this Case And truly since A. C. is so desirous of an Answer I will give it freely And first in the Generall I am no way satisfied with A. C. his Addition not expresly at least not evidently what means he If he speake of the Letter of the Scripture then whatsoever is expresly is evidently in the Scripture and so his Addition is vaine If he speake of the Meaning of the Scripture then his Addition is cunning For many things are Expresly in Scripture which yet in their Meaning are not evidently there And what e're hee meane my words are That our Negative Articles refute that which is not affirmed in Scripture without any Addition of Expresly or Evidently And he should have taken my words as I used them I like nor change nor Addition nor am I bound to either of A. C s. making And I am as little satisfied with his next Addition nor directly at least not demonstratively concluded out of it For are there not many things in Good Logicke concluded directly which yet are not concluded Demonstratively Surely there are For to be directly or indirectly concluded flowes from the Moode or Forme of the Syllogisme To be demonstratively concluded flowes from the Matter or Nature of the Propositions If the Propositions be Prime and necessary Truths the Syllogisme is demonstrative and scientificall because the Propositions are such If the Propositions be probable onely though the Syllogisme be made in the clearest Moode yet is the Conclusion no more The Inference or Consequence indeed is cleare and necessary but the Consequent is but probable or topicall as the Propositions were Now my words were onely for a Direct Conclusion and no more though in this case I might give A. C. his Caution For Scripture here is the thing spoken of And Scripture being a Principle and every Text of Scripture confessedly a Principle among all Christians whereof no man a Habitus enim Pidâ—…i 〈◊〉 se habet in ordine ad Theologiam siâ—…ut se habit Habitus intelleclus ad Scâ—…s humnas M. Canus L 2. de Loc. c. 8. desires any farther proofe I would faine know why that which is plainely and apparently that is by direct Consequence proved out of Scripture is not Demonstratively or Scientifically proved If at least he think there can be any Demonstration in Divinity and if there can be none why did he add Demonstratively Next in Particular I answer to the Instance A. C. p. 49. which A. C. makes concerning the Baptisme of Infants That it may be concluded directly and let A. C. judge whether not demonstratively out of Scripture both that Infants ought to be baptized and that Baptisme is necessary to their Salvation And first that Baptisme is necessary to the Salvation of Infants in the ordinary way of the Church without binding God to the use and meanes of that Sacrament to which he hath bound us †S. Aug. expresly of the Baptisme of Infants l. 1. de Pecâ—…ato Meâ—… Râ—…ss c. 30. Et 〈◊〉 2. c 27. Et L. 3. de Aâ—… ejus Origine c 13. Nay they of the Romane Party which urge the Baptisme of Infants as a matter of Faith and yet not to be concluded out of Scripture when they are not in eager pursuit of this controversie but look upon truth with a more indifferent eye confesse as much even the Learned st of them as we ask Adâ—…â—…dum autem Salvato em dum dâ—…cit Nisi quis renatus c. neâ—…ssitatem 〈◊〉 omnibus at prâ—…de Parvulos debere renasâ—…i ex aquâ—… Spiritu Iansen Harm in Euang. c. 20. So here 's Baptismo Necessary for Infants and that Necessity imposed by our Saviour and not by the Church onely Hâ—… nâ—…llo alio quà m hoc Scripturae testimonio probare possunt Infantes essé baptizandos Mald. in S. Ioh. 3. 5. So Maldonat confesses that the Hereticks we know whom he meanes can prove the Baptisme of Infants by no Testimony of Scripture but this which speech implies That by this Testimony of Scripture it is and can be proved and therefore not by church-Church-Tradition only And I would faine know why Bellâ—… L. 1. de Baptism C. 8. §. 5. should bring three Arguments out of Scripture to prove the Baptisme of Infants Habemus in Scripturis tria argumenta c. if Baptisme cannot be proved at all out of Scripture but only by the Tradition of the Church And yet this is not Bellarmine's way alone but Suaâ—… in Tho. p. 3 q 68. Disput. 25. Sect. 1. §. 2. Ex Scripturâ possunt vaâ—… Argumenta sumi ad consirmandum Paed 〈◊〉 Et fiâ—… c And Gâ—…g de 〈◊〉 L. de Bapt s. Parâ—…um c. 2. §. 1. And the Pope himselfe Innocent 3. L. 3 Dâ—… 〈◊〉 it 42. Cap Majores And they all jump with S. Amb. L. 10. Epist. 84. ad Demâ—…dem â—…nem who expresly assirmes it Paedobaptismum esse Constitutionem Salvator is And proves it out of S. Joh. 3. 5. is expresse in S. Iohn 3. Except a man be borne againe of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdome of God So no Baptisme no Entrance Nor can Infants creepe in any other ordinary way And this is the received Opinion of all the Ancient Church of Christ a Infanâ—…s â—…os esse Originalis peccati iâ—…o baptizandos esse Antiquam Fidei Regulam vocat S. Aug. Ser. 8. de ver Apos c. 8. Et nâ—…mo vobis susurret doctrinas aliâ—…nas hoâ—… Ecclesia semper habuit semper tâ—…nuit hoc a majorum side recepit c. S. Aug. Ser. 10. de verb. Apost c. 2. S. Ambâ—…os L. 10. Ep. 84. cirâ—…a medium Et S. Chrysost. Hom. dâ—… Adam Eva. Hoc praedicat Ecclesia Catholica ubique dissusa And secondly That Infants ought to bee baptized is first plaine by evident and Direct Consequence out of Scripture For if there be no Salvation for Infants in the ordinary way of the Church but by Baptisme and this appeare in Scripture as it doth then out of all Doubt the Consequence is most evident out of that Scripture That Infants are to be baptized that their Salvation may be certaine For they which cannot b Egi causam corum qui pro se loqui non possunt c. S. Aug. Serm. 8. de verb. Apost c. 8. help themselves must not be left onely to Extraordinary Helpes of which wee have no
hope this is no part of your meaning Yet I doubt this b Qui conantur sidem destruere sub specie Questionis difficilis aut fortè indissolubilis c. Orig. Q. 35. in S. Matth. Question How doe you know Scripture to be Scripture hath done more harme than you will be ever able to helpe by Tradition But I must follow that way which you draw me And because it is so much insisted upon by you and is in it self a c To know that Scriptures are Divine and infallible in every part is a Foundation so necessary as if it bee doubtfully question'd all the Faith built upon Scripture fals to the ground A. C. p. 47. Necesse est nôsse extare Libros aliquos vere Divinos Bellarm. L. 4. de verb. Dei non scripto c. 4. §. Quarto necesse Et etiam libros qui sunt in manibus esse illos Ibid. §. Sexto oportet matter of such Consequence I will sift it a little farther Many men labouring to settle this great Principle in Divinity have used diverse meanes to prove it All have not gone the same way nor all the right way You cannot be right that resolve Faith of the Scriptures being the Word of God into onely Tradition For onely and no other proofe are equall To prove the Scripture therefore so called by way of Excellence to be the Word of God there are severall Offers at diverse proofes For first some flie to the Testimony and witnesse of the Church and 1. her Tradition which constantly believes and unanimously delivers it Secondly some to the Light 2. and the Testimony which the Scripture gives to it selfe with other internall proofes which are observed in it and to be found in no other Writing whatsoever Thirdly some to the Testimony of the Holy 3. Ghost which cleares up the light that is in Scripture and seales this Faith to the soules of men that it is Gods Word Fourthly all that have not imbrutished 4. themselves and sunke below their species and order of Nature give even Naturall Reason leave to come in and make some proofe and give some approbation upon the weighing and the consideration of other Arguments And this must be admitted if it be but for Pagans and Infidels who either consider not or value not any one of the other three yet must some way or other bee converted or left without excuse Rom. 1. and that is Rom. 1. 20. done by this very evidence 1. For the first The Tradition of the Church which is your way That taken and considered alone it is so farre from being the onely that it cannot be a sufficient Proofe to believe by Divine Faith that Scripture is the Word of God For that which is a full and sufficient proofe is able of it selfe to settle the soule of man concerning it Now the Tradition of the Church is not able to doe this For it may bee further asked why wee should believe the Churches Tradition And if it be answered we may believe Because the Church is infallibly governed by the Holy Ghost it may yet be demanded of you How that may appeare And if this be demanded either you must say you have it by speciall Revelation which is the private Spirit you object to other men or else you must attempt to prove it by Scripture a Esse aliquas veras Traditiones demonstratur ex Scripturis Bellar L. 4 de verbo Dei non Scripto c. 5. and A. C p. 50. proves Tradition out of 2 Thes. 2. as all of you doe And that very offer to prove it out of Scripture is a sufficient acknowledgement that the Scripture is a higher Proofe then the Churches Tradition w ch in your own Grounds is or may be Questionable till you come thither Besides this is an Inviolable ground of Reason * Arist. 1. Post. c. 2. T. 16. Per Pacium Quocirca si 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 propter prima scimus credimus illa quoque scimus credimus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 magis quia per illa scimus credimus etiam posteriora That the Principles of any Conclusion must be of more credite then the conclusion it self Therefore if the Articles of Faith The Trinity the Resurrection and the rest be the Conclusions and the Principles by which they are prooved be only Ecclesiasticall Tradition it must needs follow That the Tradition of the Church is more infallible then the Articles of the Faith if the Faith which we have of the Articles should be finally Resolved into the Veracity of the Churches Testimony But this †Eorum errorem dissimulare non possum qui asserunt fidern Nostram cò tanquà m in ultimam credendi causam reducendam esse Vt Credamus Ecclesiam esse Veracem c. M. Canus L. 2. de Locis c. 8. §. Cui tertium your Learned and wary men deny And therefore I hope your selfe dare not affirme Againe if the Voyce of the Church saying the Bookes of Scripture commonly received are the Word of God be the formall Object of Faith upon which alone absolutely I may resolve my selfe then every man not only may but ought to resolve his Faith into the Voyce or Tradition of the Church for every man is bound to rest upon the proper and formall Object of the Faith But nothing can bee more evident then this That a man ought not to resolve his Faith of this Principle into the sole Testimony of the Church Therefore neither is that Testimony or Tradition alone the formall Object of Faith * Uox Ecclesiae non est formale Obiectum Fidei Stapl. Relect. Cont 4. q. 3. A. 2. Licet in Articulo Fidei Credo Ecclesiam fortè contineatur hoc totum Credo ea quae docet Ecclesia tamen non intelligitur necessariò quod Credo docenti Ecclesiae tanquam Testi insallibili ibid. Vbi etiam rejicit Opinionem Durandi Gabr. Et Waldens L. 2 Doctr. Fidei Art 2. c. 21. Num. 4. Testimonium Ecclesiae Catholicae est Objectum Fidei Christianae Legislatio Scripturae Canonica subjicitur tamen ipsi sicut Testis Iudici Testimonium Veritati c. Canus Loc. Lib. 2. cap. 8. Nec si Ecclesia aditum nobis prabet ad hujusmodi Libros Sacros cognoscendos protinus ibi acquiescendum est sed ultrà â—…portet progredi Solidà Dei veritate niti c. The Learned of your owne part grant this †Although in that Article of the Creed I believe the Catholike Church peradventure all this be contained I believe those things which the Church teacheth yet this is not necessarily understood That I believe the Church teaching as an Infallible Witnesse And if they did not confesse this it were no hard thing to prove But here 's the cunning of this Devise All the Authority's of Fathers Councels nay of Scripture too b Omnis ergo Ecclesiastica Authoritas cùm sit ad
traditum est S. Cypri ad Pompeium cont Epist. Stephan princ tradere non traditum make a Tradition of that which was not delivered to her and by some of Them then She is unfaithful to God and doth not servare depositum faithfully keepe that which is committed to her Trust. * 1 Tim. 6. 20. and 2 Tim. 1. 14. 1 Tim. 6. And her Sonnes which come to know it are not bound to obey her Tradition against the c Si ipsa Ecclesia contraria Scripturae diceret Fidelis ipsi non crederet c. Hen. a Gand. Sum. p. 1. A. 10. q. 1. And Bellarmiâ—…e himselfe that he might the more safely defend himselfe in the Cause of Traditions sayes but how truly let other men Iudge Nullam Traditionem admittimus contra Scripturam L. 4. 〈◊〉 Verbo Dei c. 3. §. Deindè commune Word of their Father For wheresoever Christ holds his peace or that his words aâ—…e not Registred I am of S. d S. Aug. Tom. 96. in 〈◊〉 Ioh. in illâ—… Ferba Multa habeo dicere sed non potestis portare modò Augustines Opinion No man may dare without rashnesse say they were these or these So there were many unwritten Words of God which were never delivered over to the Church and thereâ—…ore never made Tradition And there are many Traditions which cannot be said to be the unwritten word of God For I believe a Learned Romanist that will weigh before he speakes will not easily say That to Annoint or use Spittle in Baptisme or to use three Dippings in the use of that Sacrament or diverse other like Traditions had their Rise from any Word of God unwritten Or if he be so hardy as to say so 't is gratis dictum and he will have enough to doe to prove it So there may be an unwritten Word of God which is no Tradition And there are many Traditions which are no unwritten Word of God Therfore Tradition must be taken two wayes Either as it is the Churches Act delivering or the Thing thereby delivered and then 't is Humane Authority or from it and unable infallibly to warrant Divine Faith or to be the Object of it Or els as it is the unwritten Word of God and then where ever it can be made to appeare so 't is of divine and infallible Authority no question But then I would have A. C. consider where he is in A. C. p. 49. this Particular He tels us We must know infallibly that the Bookes of Holy Scripture are Divine and that this must be done by unwritten Tradition but so as that this Tradition is the Word of God unwritten Now let him but prove that this or any Tradition which the Church of Rome stands upon is the Word of God though unwritten and the businesse is ended But A. C. must not thinke that because the Tradition of the Church tels me these Bookes are Verbum Dei Gods A. C. p. 50. Word and that I do both honour and believe this Tradition That therefore this Tradition it selfe is Gods Word too and so absolutely sufficient and infallible to worke this Beliefe in me Therefore for ought A. C. hath yet added we must on with our Inquiry after this great Businesse and most necessary Truth 2. For the second way of proving That Scripture should be fully and sufficiently knowne as by Divine and Infallible Testimony Lumine proprio by the resplendency of that Light which it hath in it selfe onely and by the witnesse that it can so give to it selfe I could never yet see cause to allow a Hook l. 2. §. 4 For as there is no place in Scripture that tels us Such Books containing such and such Particulars are the Canon and infallible Will and Word of God So if there were any such place that were no sufficient proofe For a man may justly aske another Booke to beare witnesse of that and againe of that another and where ever it were written in Scripture that must be a part of the Whole And no created thing can alone give witnesse to it selfe and make it evident nor one part testifie for another and satisfie where Reason will but offer to contest Except those Principles onely of Naturall knowledge which appeare manifest by intuitive light of understanding without any Discourse And yet they also to the weaker sort require Induction preceding Now this Inbred light of Scripture is a thing coincident with Scripture it selfe and so the Principles and the Conclusion in this kind of proofe should be entirely the same which cannot be Besides if this inward Light were so cleare how could there have beene any variety among the Ancient Believers touching the Authority of S. a Euseb. L. 2. c. 27. fine Edit Basil. 1549. Iames and S. Jude's Epistles and the b Euseb. L. 3. c. 25. Apocalyps with other Bookes which were not received for diverse yeares after the rest of the New Testament For certainly the Light which is in the Scripture was the same then which now it is And how could the Gospell of S. Bartholomew of S. Thomas and other counterfeit peeces obtaine so much credit with some as to be received into the Canon if the evidence of this Light were either Universall or Infallible of and by it selfe And this though I cannot approve yet me thinks you may and upon probable grounds at least For I hope no †Except A. C. whose boldness herein I cannot but pitie For he denies this light to the Scripture and gives it to Tradition His words are p. 52. Tradition of the Church is of a company which by its owne light shewes it selfe to bee infallibly assisted c. Romanist will deny but that there is as much light in Scripture to manifest and make ostension of it selfe to be infallibly the written Word of God as there is in any Tradition of the Church that it is Divine and infallibly the unwritten Word of God And the Scriptures saying from the mouthes of the Prophets b Isa 44. passina Thus saith the Lord and from the mouthes of the a Act. 28. 25. Apostles that the Holy Ghost spake by them are at least as able and as fit to beare witnesse to their owne Verity as the Church is to beare witnesse to her owne Traditions by bare saying they come from the Apostles And your selves would never go to the Scripture to prove that there are Traditions b 2. Thess. 2. 15. Iude vers 3. as you do if you did not thinke the Scripture as easie to be discovered by inbred light in itselfe as Traditions by their light And if this be so then it is as probable at the least which some of ours affirme That Scripture may bee knowne to bee the Word of God by the Light and Lustre which it hath in it selfe as it is which you c In your Articles delivered to D. W. to be answered And A. C. p. 52. affirme That a
apparent Principle of their own For Example It is an apparent Principle and with them That God or the Absolute prime Agent cannot be forced out of any Possession For if He could be forced by another Greater He were neither Prince nor Absolute nor b Si vim spectes Deus Valentissimus est Arist. de Mundo cap. 7. Domini Moderatores omniuÌ„ Cic. 2. de Leg. God in their owne Theologie Now they must grant That that God and Christ which the Scripture teaches and we believe is the only true God and no other with him and so deny the Deity which they worshipped or else deny their owne Principle about the Deity That God cannot be commanded and forced out of possession For c Ipse Saturnus Serapis Jupiter quicquid Daemonum colitis victi dolore quòd sunt cloquuntur Nec utique in turpitudinem sui uonnullis praesertim vestrorum assistentibus mentiuntur Ipsis testibus esse eos Daemones de se verum confitentibus credite Adjurati enim per Deum verum solùm inviti c. Arnob 8. contra Gent Or Minutius Foelix as is now thought their Gods Saturne and Serapis and Iupiter himselfe have beene adjured by the Name of the true and only God and have beene forced out of the bodies they possessed and confessed themselves to be foule and seduceing Divels And their Confession was to be supposed true in poynt of Reason For they that were adored as Gods would never belie themselves into Divels to their owne reproach especially in the presence of them that worshipped them were they not forced This many of the Vnbelievers saw therefore they could not in very force of Reason but they must either deny their God or deny their Principle in Nature Their long Custome would not forsake their God and their Reason could not forget their Principle If Reason therefore might judge among them they could not worship any thing that was under Command And if it be reasonable to doe and believe this then why not reasonable also to believe That Scripture is his Word given to teach himselfe and Christ since there they find Christ d S. Mat. 12 22 doing that and e S. Mat. 16. 17 giving power to doe it after which themselves saw executed upon their Divell-Gods Besides whereas all other written Lawes have scarce had the honour to be duly observed or constantly allowed worthy approbation in the Particular places where they have beene established for Lawes this Law of Christ and this Canon of Scripture the container of it is or hath beene received in almost * Si Libri quoquo modo se habent sancti tamen Divinarum rernm pleni prope totius generis humani confessione diffamantur c. S. Aug. de Vtil Cred c. 7. Scriptura summà dispositione Providentiae super omnes omnium Gentium Literas omnia sibi genera ingeniorum humanorum Divinâ—… Excellens Authoritate subjecit S. Aug. 11. de Civit. Dei c. 1. At in omni orbe torrarum in omni Graciâ universis Nationibus innumerisunt immensi qui relictis Patriis Legibus c. ad observantiam Mosis Christi c. Origen 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cap. 1. all Nations under Heaven And wheresoevet it hath beene received it hath been both approved for Vnchangeable good and believed for Infallible verity This perswasion could not have beene wrought in men of all sorts but by working upon their Reason unlesse wee shall thinke all the VVorld unreasonable that received it And certainly God did not give this admirable faculty of Reasoning to the soule of man for any cause more prime then this to discover or to Iudge and allow within the Sphere of its owne Activity and not presuming farther of the way to Himselfe when and howsoever it should bee discovered One great thing that troubled Rationall men was that which stumbled the Manichee an Heresie it was but more then halfe Pagan namely That somewhat must be believed before much could be knowne Wise men use not to believe but what they know And the Manichcee * Irâ—…idere in Catholicae Fidei disciplinâ quod juberentur homines credere non autem c. S. Aug. 1. Retrac c. 14. scorned the Orthodox Christian as light of Beliefe promising to leade no Disciple after him but upon evident knowledge This stumbles many but yet the Principle That somewhat must be believed before much can be knowne stands firme in Reason still For if in all Sciences there be some Principles which cannot be prooved if Reason be able to see this and confesse it if almost all Artists have granted it if in the Mathematicks where are the Exactest Demonstrations there be Quaedam postulata some things to be first Demanded and granted be fore the Demonstration can proceed Who can justly deny that to Divinity A Science of the Highest Object God Himselfe which he easily and reasonably grants to inferiour Sciences which are more within his reach And as all Sciences suppose some Principles without prooving so have they almost all some Text some Authority upon which they rely in some measure and it is Reason they should For though these Sciences make not their Texts Infallible as Divinity doth yet full consent and prudent Examination and long continuance have wonne reputation to them and setled reputation upon them very deservedly And were these Texts more void of Truth then they are yet it were fit and reasonable to uphold their credit that Novices and young Beginners in a Science which are not able to worke strongly upon Reason nor Reason upon them may have Authority to believe till they can learne to Conclude from Principles and so to know Is this also reasonable in other Sciences and shall it not be so in Theologie to have a Text a Scripture a Rule which Novices may be taught first to believe that so they may after come to the knowledge of those things which out of this rich Principle and * And therefore S. Aug. 2. de Doct. Christ. c. 8. would have men make themselves perfect in reading the Letter of the Scripture even before they understood it Eas not as habeat etsi nondum intellectu tamen lectione duntaxat No question but to make them ready against they understood it And as Schoole-Masters make their Schollers conne their Grammer-rules by heart that they may be ready for their use when they better understand them Treasure are Deduceable I yet see not how right Reason can deny these Grounds and if it cannot then a meere Naturall man may be thus farre convinced That the Text of God is a very Creditle Text. Well these are the foure wayes by most of which men offer to proove the Scripture to bee the Word of God as by a Divine and Infallible Warrant And it seemes no one of these doth it alone The Tradition of the present Church is too weake because that is not absolutely Divine The Light which
be because it rests upon Divine Authority which cannot deceive whereas Knowledge or at least he that thinks he knowes is not ever certaine in Deductions from Principles †§. 16. 〈◊〉 13. But the Evidence is not so deere For it is c Heb. 11. 1. of things not seene in regard of the Object and in regard of the Subject thatsees it is in d 1 Cor. 13. 12. And A. C. confesses p. 52. That this very thing in Question may be known infallibly when 't is knowne but obscurely Et Scotus in 3. Dist. 23 q. 1. fol. 41. B. Hoc modo sacile est videre quomodo â—…ides est cum aenigmate obscuritate Quia Habitus Fidei non credit Articulum esse verum ex Evidentia Objâ—…cti sed propter hoc quod assentit veracitati infâ—…ndentis Habitum in hoc revelantis Credibilia aenigmate in a Glasse or darke speaking Now God doth not require a full Demonstrative Knowledge in us that the Scripture is his Word and therefore in his Providence hath kindled in it no Light for that but he requires our Faith of it and such a certaine Demonstration as may fit that And for that he hath left sufficient Light in Scripture to Reason and Grace meeting where the soule is morally prepared by the Tradition of the Church unlesse you be of Bellarmine's e Bellar. l. 3. de Eccles. c. 14. Credere 〈◊〉 esse divinaâ—… Scripturas non est omninò necessarium ad salutem I will not breake my Discourse to risâ—…e this speech of Bellarmine it is bad enough in the best sense that favour it selfe can give it For if he meane by omninò that it is not altogether or simply necessary to believe there is Divine Scripture and a written Word of God that 's false that being granted which is among all Christians That there is a Scripture And God would never have given a Supernaturall unnecessary thing And if he meanes by omninò that it is not in any wise necessary then it is sensibly false For the greatest upholders of Tradition that ever were made the Scripture very necessary in all the Ages of the Church So it was necessary because it was given and given because God thought it necessary Besides upon Romane Grounds this I thinke will follow That which the Tradition of the present Church delivers as necessary to believe is omninò necessary to salvation But that there are Divine Scriptures the Tradition of the present Church delivers as necessary to believe Therefore to believe there are Divine Scriptures is omninò be the sense of the word what it can necessary to Salvation So Bellarmine is herein foule and unable to stand upon his owne ground And he is the more partly because he avouches this Proposition for truth after the New Testament written And partly because he might have seene the state of this Proposition carefully examined by Gandavo and distinguished by Times Sum. p. 1. A. 8. q. 4. fine Opinion That to believe there are any Divine Scriptures is not omninò necessary to Salvation The Authority which you pretend against this is out of a Lib. 1. §. 14. Hooker Of things necessary the very chiefest is to know what Bookes we are bound to esteeme Holy which Point is confessed impossible for the Scripture it selfe to teach Of this b Protest Apol. Tract 1. §. 10. N. 3. Brierly the Store-house for all Priests that will be idle and yet seeme well read tels us That c L. 2. §. 4. Hooker gives a very sensible Demonstration It is not the Word of God which doth or possibly can assure us that wee doe well to thinke it is His Word for if any one Booke of Scripture did give Testimony to all yet still that Scripture which giveth credit to the rest would require another to give credit unto it Nor could we ever come to any pause to rest our assurance this way so that unlesse beside Scripture there were something that might assure c. And d L. 2. §. 7. L. 3. §. 8. this he acknowledgeth saith Brierly is the Authority of Gods Church Certainely Hooker gives a true and a sensible Demonstration but Brierly wants fidelity and integrity in citing him For in the first place Hooker's speech is Scripture it selfe cannot teach this nor can the Truth say that Scripture it selfe can It must needs ordinarily have Tradition to prepare the minde of a man to receive it And in the next place where he speaks so sensibly That Scripture cannot beare witnesse to it selfe nor one part of it to another that is grounded upon Nature which admits no created thing to bee witnesse to it selfe and is acknowledged by our Saviour e S. Ioh. 5. 31. He speakes of himselfe as man If I beare witnesse to my selfe my witnesse is not true that is is not of force to bee reasonably accepted for Truth But then it is more then manifest S. Ioh. 8. 13. that Hooker delivers his Demonstration of Scripture alone For if Scripture hath another proofe nay many other proofes to usher it and lead it in then no question it can both prove and approve it selfe His words are So that unlesse besides Scripture there be c. Besides Scripture therefore he excludes not Scripture though he call for another Proofe to lead it in and help in assurance namely Tradition which no man that hath his braines about him denies In the two other Places Brierly falsifies shamefully for folding up all that Hooker sayes in these words This other meanes to assure us besides Scripture is the Authority of Gods Church he wrinkles that Worthy Authour desperately and shrinkes up his meaning For in the former place abused by Brierly no man can set a better state of the Question betweene Scripture and Tradition then Hooker doth a L. 2. §. 7. His words are these The Scripture is the ground of our Beliefe The Authority of man that is the Name he gives to Tradition is the Key which opens the doore of entrance into the knowledge of the Scripture I aske now when a man is entred and hath viewed a house and upon viewing likes it and upon liking resolves unchangeably to dwell there doth he set up his Resolution upon the Key that let him in No sure but upon the goodnesse and Commodiousnesse which he sees in the House And this is all the difference that I know betweene us in this Point In which do you grant as you ought to do that we resolve our Faith into Scripture as the Ground and we will never deny that Tradition is the Key that lets us in In the latter place Hooker is as plaine as constant to himselfe and Truth b L. 3. §. 8. His words are The first outward Motive leading men so to esteeme of the Scripture is the Authority of Gods Church c. But afterwards the more wee bestow our Labour in reading or learning the Mysteries thereof the
his abodc on Earth And this Promise of his spirituall presence was to their Successors else why to the end of the world The Apostles did not could not live so long But then to the * Rabanus Manr goes no furrher then that to the End some will alwayes bee in the world fit for Christ by his Spirit and Grace to inhabit Divina mansione inhabitatione digni Rab. in S. Mat. 28. 19 20. Pergatis habentes Dominum Protectorem Ducem saith S. Cypr. L. 4. Epist. 1. But he doth not say How farre sorth And loquitur Fidelibus sicut uni Corpcri S. Chrysost. Homil in S. Matth. And if S Chrysost. inlarge it so farre I hope A. C. will not extend the Assistance given or promised here to the whole Body of the Faithfull to an Infallible and Divine Assistance in every of them as well as in the Pastors and Doctors Successors the Promise goes no further then I am with you alwayes which reaches to continuall assistance but not to Divine and Infallible Or if he think me mistaken let him shew mee any One Father of the Church that extends the sense of this Place to Divine and Infallible Assistance granted hereby to all the Apostles Successors Sure I am Saint †In illis donâ—… quibus salus aliorum quaeritur qualia sunt Prâ—…phetiae interpretationes Sermanum c. Spiritus Sanctus nequaquam semper in Pradicatorib us permanet S. Greg. L. 2. Moral c 29. prin Edit Basil. 1551. Gregory thought otherwise For hee saies plainly That in those Gifts of God which concern other mens salvation of which Preaching of the Gospell is One the Spirit of Christ the Holy Ghost doth not alwayes abide in the Preachers bee they never so lawfully sent Pastors or Doctors of the Church And if the Holy Ghost doth not alwayes abide in the Preachers then most certainly he doth not abide in them to a Divine Infallibility alwayes The Third Place is in S. Iohn 14. where Christ sayes S. Iohn 14. 16. The Comforter the Holy Ghost shall abide with you for ever Most true againe For the Holy Ghost did abide with the Apostles according to Christs Promise there made and shall abide with their Successors for ever to * Iste Consolator non auferetur à Vobis sicut subtrahitur Humaint as mea per mortem sed aternalitèr erit Vobiscum hic per Grasiam in futuro per Gloriam Lyra. in S. John 14. 16 You see there the Holy Ghost shal be present by Consolation and Grace not by Infallible Assistance comfort and preserve them But here 's no Promise of Divine Infallibility made unto them And for that Promise which is made and expresly of Infallibility Saint Iohn 16. though not S. Ioh. 16. 13. cited by A. C. That 's confined to the Apostles onely for the setling of thâ—…m in all Truth And yet not simply all For there are some Truths saith a Omnem veritatem Non arbitror in hac vita in cujusquam mente compleri c. S. Augustin in S. Ioh Tract 96. versus fin Saint Augustine which no mans Soule can comprehend in this life Not simply all But b Spiritus Sanctus c. qui eos doceret Omnem Veritatem quam tunc cum iis loquebatur portare non poterant S. Ioh. 16. 12 13. S. Augustin Tract 97. in S. Ioh. prin all those Truths quae non poterant portare which they were not able to beare when Hee Conversed with them Not simply all but all that was necessary for the Founding propagating establishing and Confirming the Christian Church But if any man take the boldnesse to inlarge this Promise in the fulnesse of it beyond the persons of the Apostles themselves that will fall out which Saint c Omnes vel insipientissimi Haeretici qui se Christianos vocars volunt audacias figmentorum suorum quas maximè exhorret sensus humanus hac Occasione Evangelicae sententiae colorare comentur c. S. Augustin T. 97. in S. Ioh. circamed Augustine hath in a manner prophecyed Every Heretick will shelter himselfe and his Vanities under this Colour of Infallible Veritie I told you a * Num. 26. A. C. p. 52. little before that A. C. his Penne was troubled and failed him Therefore I will helpe to make out his Inference for him that his Cause may have all the strength it can And as I conceive this is that hee would have The Tradition of the present Church is as able to worke in us Divine and Infallible Faith That the Scripture is the VVord of God As that the Bible or Bookes of Scripture now printed and in use is a true Copie of that which was first written by the Penne-men of the Holy Ghost and delivered to the Church 'T is most true the Tradition of the present Church is a like operative and powerfull in and over both these workes but neither Divine nor Infallible in either But as it is the first morall Inducement to perswade that Scripture is the Word of God so is it also the first but morall still that the Bible wee now have is a true Copie of that which was first written But then as in the former so in this latter for the true Copie The last Resolution of our Faith cannot possibly rest upon the naked Tradition of the present Church but must by and with it goe higher to other Helpes and Assurances Where I hope A. C. will confesse wee have greater helpes to discover the truth or falshood of a Copie then wee have meanes to looke into a Tradition Or especially to sift out this Truth that it was a Divine and Infalliâ—…le Revelation by which the Originals of Scripture were first written That being fatre more the Subject of this Inquiry then the Copie which according to Art and Science may be examined by former preceding Copies close up to the very Apostles times But A. C. hath not done yet For in the last place hee tells us That Tradition and Scripture A. C. p. 53. without any vicious Circle doe mutually confirme the Authority either of other And truly for my part I shall easily grant him this so hee will grant mee this other Namely That though they doe mutually yet they doe not equally confirme the Authority either of other For Scripture doth infallibly confirme the Authority of Church Traditions truly so called But Tradition doth but morally and probably confirme the Authority of the Scripture And this is manifest by A. C ' s. owne Similitude For saith he 't is as a Kings Embassadors word of mouth and His Kings Letters beare mutuall witnesse to each other Iust so indeed For His Kings Letters of Credence under hand and seale confirme the Embassadors Authority Infallibly to all that know Seale and hand But the Embassadors word of mouth confirmes His Kings Letters but onely probably For else Why are they called Letters of Credence if they give not him
more Credit then hee can give them But that which followes I cannot approve to wit That the Lawfully sent Preachers of the Gospell are Gods Legats and the Scriptures Gods Letters which hee hath appointed his Legates to deliver and expound So farre 't is well but here 's the sting That these Letters doe warrant that the People may heare and give Credit to these Legats of Christ as to Christ the King himselfe Soft this is too high a great deale No * Will A. C. maintaine that any Legate à Latere is of as great Credit as the Pope himselfe Legate was ever of so great Credit as the King Himselfe Nor was any Priest never so lawfully sent ever of that Authority that Christ himselfe No sure For yee call mee Master and Lord and yee doe well for so I am saith our Saviour S. Iohn 13. And certainly this did not suddenly S. Iohn 13. 13. drop out of A. C ' s. Penne. For hee tould us once before That this Company of men which deliver the present Churches Tradition that is the lawfully sent A. C. p. 52. Preachers of the Church are assisted by Gods Spirit to have in them Divine and Infallible Authority and to bee worthy of Divine and Infallible Credit sufficient to breed in us Divine and Infallible Faith Why but is it possible these men should goe thus farre to defend an Error bee it never so deare unto them They as Christ Divine and Infallible Authority in them Sufficient to breed in us Divine and Infallible Faith I have often heard some wise men say That the Iesuite in the Church of Rome and the Precise party in the Reformâ—…d Churches agree in many things though they would seeme most to differ And surely this is one For both of them differ extreamely about Tradition The one in magnifying it and exalting it into Divine Authority The other vilifying and depressing it almost beneath Humane And yet even in these different wayes both agree in this consequent That the Sermons and Preachings by word of mouth of the lawfully sent Pastors and Doctors of the Church are able to breed in us Divine and Infallible Faith Nay are the * For this A. C. sayes expresly of Tradition p. 52. And then he addes that the Promise for this was no lesse but rather more Expresly made to the lawfully sent Pastors and Doctors of the Church in all ages in their teaching by word of mouth then in writing c. p. 53. very word of God So A. C. expresly And no lesse then so have some accounted of their owne factious words to say no more then as the †For the freeing of factious and silenced Ministers is termed the Restoring of Gods Word to â—…s Liberty In the Godly Author of the late Newes from Ipswich p. 5. Word of God I ever tooke Sermons and so doe still to be most necessary Expositions and Applications of Holy Scripture and a great ordinary meanes of saving knowledge But I cannot thinke them or the Preachers of them Divinely Infallible The Ancient Fathers of the Church preached farre beyond any of these of either faction And yet no one of them durst thinke himselfe Infallible much lesse that whatsoever hee preached was the VVord of God And it may be Obserued too That no men are more apt to say That all the Fathers were but Men and might Erre then they that thinke their owne preachings are Infallible The next thing after this large Interpretation of A C. which I shall trouble you with is That this method and manner of proving Scripture to bee the VVord of God which I here use is the same which the Ancient Church ever held namely Tradition or Ecclesiasticall Authority first and then all other Arguments but especially internall from the Scripture it selfe This way the Church went in S. Augustine's a And S. Aug. himselfe L. 13. contr Faustum c. 5. proves by an Internall Argument the fulfilling of the Prophets Scriptura saith he quae fidem suam rebus ipsis probat quae per temporum successiones hac impleri c. And Hen. a Gand. Par. 1. Sum. A. 〈◊〉 q. 3. cites S. Aug. Book de vera Religione In which Book though these Foure Arguments are not found iâ—… Termes together yet they fill up the scope of the whole Book Time He was no enemy to Church-Tradition yet when hee would prove that the Authour of the Scripture and so of the whole knowledge of Divinity as it is supernaturall is Deus in Christo God in Christ he takes this as the All-sufficient way and gives foure proofes all internall to the Scripture First The Miracles Secondly That there is nothing carnall in the Doctrine Thirdly That there hath been such performance of it Fourthly That by such a Doctrine of Humility the whole world almost hath beene converted And whereas ad muniendam Fidem for the Defending of the Faith and keeping it entire there are two things requisite Scripture and church-Church-Tradition b Duplici modo muniri fideÌ„ c. Primò Divinae Legis Authoritate tum deinde Ecclesia Catholicae Traditione cont Har. c. 1. Vincent Lirinens places Authority of Scriptures first and then Tradition And since it is apparent that Tradition is first in order of time it must necessarily follow that Scripture is first in order of Nature that is the chiefe upon which Faith rests and resolves it selfe And your owne Schoole confesses this was the way ever The Woman of a S. Ioh. 4. Samaria is a knowne Resemblance but allowed by your selves For b Hen. à Gand. Sum. Par. 1. A. 10. q 1. Sic quotidie apudillos qui forts sunt intrat Christus per mulierem i. Ecclesiam credunt per istam famam c. Gloss. in S. Ioh. cap. 4. quotidâ—…è daily with them that are without Christ enters by the woman that is the Church and they believe by that fame which she gives c But when they come to heare Christ himselfe they believe his words before the words of the Woman For when they have once found Christ c Ibid. Plus verbis Christi in Scripturae credit quam Ecclesiae testificanti Quia propter illam jam credit Ecclesiae Et si ipsa quidem contraria Scripturae diceret ipsi non crederet c. Primam fidem tribuamus Scripturis Canonicis secundam sub ista Definitionibus Consuctudinibus Ecclesiae Catholicae post ist as studiosis viris non sub poena perfidiae sed proterviae c. Walden Doct. Fid. To. 1. L. 2. Art 2. c. 23. Nu. 9. they do more believe his words in Scripture then they do the Church which testifies of him because then propter illam for the Scripture they believe the Church And if the Church should speake contrary to the Scripture they would not believe it Thus the Schoole taught then And thus the Glosse commented then And when men have tyred themselves hither they must come
The Key that lets men in to the Scriptures even to this knowledge of them That they are the Word of God is the Tradition of the Church but when they are in d In sacrâ Scripturâ Ipse immediatè loquitur fidelibus Ibid. They heare Christ himselfe immediately speaking in Scripture to the Faithfull e S. Iohn 10. 4. And his Sheepe doe not onely heare but know his voice And then here 's no vicious Circle indeed of prooving the Scripture by the Church and then round about the Church by the Scripture Onely distinguish the Times and the Conditions of men and all is safe For a Beginner in the Faith or a Weakling or a Doubter about it begins at Tradition and proves Scripture by the Church But a man strong and growne up in the Faith and understandingly conversant in the Word of God proves the Church by the Scripture And then upon the matter we have a double Divine Testimony altogether Infallible to confirme unto us That Scripture is the Word of God The first is the Tradition of the Church of the Apostles themselves who delivered immediately to the world the Word of Christ. The other the Scripture it selfe but after it hath received this Testimony And into these we doe and may safely Resolve our Faith a Quod autem credimus posterioribus circa quos non apparent virtutes Divinae hoc est Quia non praedicant alia quà m quae illi in Scriptis certissimis reâ—…iquerunt Qua constat per midios in nullo fuisse vitiata ex consensione concordi in eis omnium succedentium usque ad tempora nostra Henr. à Gand. Sum. P. 1. A. 9. q. 3. As for the Tradition of after Ages in and about which Miracles and Divine Power were not so evident we believe them by Gandavo's full Confession because they doe not preach other things then those former the Apostles left in scriptis certissimis in most certaine Scripture And it appeares by men in the middle ages that these writings were vitiated in nothing by the concordant consent in them of all succeeders to our owne time And now by this time it will be no hard thing to reconcile the Fathers which seeme to speake differently in no few places both one from another and the same from themselves touching Scripture and Tradition And that as well in this Point to prove Scripture to be the Word of God as for concordant exposition of Scripture in all things else When therefore the Fathers say b Scripturas habemus ex Traditione S. Cvril Hier. Catech. 4. Multa quae non inveniuntur in Literis Apostolorum c. non nisi ab illis tradita commendata creduntur S. Aug. 2. de Baptism contra Denat c. 7. We have the Scripture by Tradition or the like either They meane the Tradition of the Apostles themselves delivering it and there when it is knowne to be such we may resolve our Faith Or if they speake of the Present Church then they meane that the Tradition of it is that by which we first receive the Scripture as by an according Meanes to the Prime Tradition But because it is not simply Divine we cannot resolve our Faith into it nor settle our Faith upon it till it resolve it selfe into the Prime tradition of the Apostles or the Scripture or both and there we rest with it And you cannot shew an ordinary consent of Fathers Nay can you or any of your Quarter shew any one Father of the Church Greeke or Latine that ever said We are to resolve our Faith that Scripture is the Word of God into the Tradition of the present Church And againe when the Fathers say we are to relie upon Scripture a Non aliundè scientia Coelestium S. Hilar L. 4. dc Trinit Si Angelus dc Coelo annunciaverit praeterquam quod in Scripturis c. S. Aug. L. 3. cont Petil. c. 6. onely they are never to bee understood with Exclusion of Tradition in what causes soever it may be had b Quùm sit perfectus Scripturarum Canon sibique ad omnia satis superque sufficiat c. Vin. Lir. contra Haeres c. 2. And if it be sibi ad omnia then to this To prove it self at least after Tradition hath prepared us to receive it Not but that the Scripture is abundantly sufficient in and to it self for all things but because it is deepe and may be drawne into different senses and so mistaken if any man will presume upon his owne strength and go single without the Church To gather up whatsoever may seeme scattered in this long Discourse to prove That Scripture is the Word of God I shall now in the Last Place put all together that so the whole state of the Question may the better appeare First then I shall desire the Reader to consider Pun. 1. that every Rationall Science requires some Principles quite without its owne Limits which are not proved in that Science but presupposed Thus Rhetoricke presupposes Grammar and Musicke Arithmeticke Therefore it is most reasonable that c Omnis Scientia praesupponit fidem aliquam S. Prosper in Psalm 123. And S. Cynl Hierosol Catechesi 5. shewes how all things in the world do side consistere Therefore most unreasonable to deny that to Divinity which all Sciences nay all things challenge Namely somethings to be presupposed and believed Theologie should be allowed to have some Principles also which she proves not but presupposes And the chiefest of these is That the Scriptures are of Divine Authority Secondly that there is a great deale of difference Pun. 2. in the Manner of confirming the Principles of Divinity and those of any other Art or Science whatsoever For the Principles of all other Sciences doe finally resolve either into the Conclusions of some Higher Science or into those Principles which are per se nota known by their own light and are the Grounds and Principles of all Science And this is it which properly makes them Sciences because they proceed with such strength of Demonstration as forces Reason to yeeld unto them But the Principles of Divinity resolve not into the Grounds of Naturall Reason For then there would be no roome for Faith but all would bee either Knowledge or Vision but into the Maximes of Divine Knowledge supernaturall And of this we have just so much light and no more then God hath revealed unto us in the Scripture Thirdly That though the Evidence of these Supernaturall Pun. 3. Truths which Divinity teaches appeares not so manifest as that of the Naturall a Si vis credere manifestis invisibilibus magis quà m visibilibus oportet credere Licet dictum sit admirabile verum est c. S. Chrysostom Hom. 46. ad Pot. And there he proves it Aliae Scientiae certitudinem habent ex Naturali Lumine Rationis Humanae quae decipi potest Haec autem ex Luminc Divinae Scientiae quae decipi non potest
Scripture is first yeelded unto For all other necessary Poynts of Divinity may by undenyable Discourse bee inferred out of Scripture it selfe once admitted but this concerning the Authority of Scripture not possibly But must either be prooved by Revelation which is not now to bee expected Or presupposed and granted as manifest in it selfe like the Principles of natâ—…rall knowledge which Reasm alone will never Grant Or by Tradition of the Church both Prime and Present with all other Ratinall Helpes preceding or accompanying the internall Light in Scripture it selfe which though it give Light enough for Faith to believe yet Light enough it gives not to bee a convincing Reason and proofe for knowledge And this is it which makes the very entrance into Divinity inaccessible to those men who standing high in the Opinion of their owne wisdome will believe nothing but that which is irrefragably prooved from Rationall Principles For as Christ requires a Deniall of a mans selfe that he may be able to follow him S. Luke 9 So as great a part as any of S. Luke 9. 23. this Denyall of his Whole-selfe for so it must bee is the denyall of his Vnderstanding and the composing of the unquiet search of this Grand Inquisitor into the Secrets of Him that made it and the over-ruleing the doubtfulnesse of it by the fervency of the a Intellectus Credentis determinatur per Voluntatem non per Rationem Tho. 2. 2. q. 2. A. 1. ad tertium And what power the Will hath in Case of mens Believing or not Believing is manifest Jer. 44. But this is spoken of the Will compared with the Vnderstandinâ—… onely leaving the Operations of Grace free over Both. Will. Seventhly That the knowledge of the Supreme Pun. 7. Cause of all which is God is most remote and the most difficult thing Reason can have to do with The Quod sit That there is a God b Communis enim sententia est Patrum Theologorum aliorum demonstrari posse naturali ratione Deum esse Sed à postâ—…riori per effectus Sic Tho. p. 1. q. 2. A. 2. Et Damasâ—… L. 1. Orth. Fid. c. 3. Almain in 3. sent D. 24 q. 1. But what may be demonstrated by naturall reason by natural light may the same be known And so the Apostle himselfe Rom. 1. 20. Invisibilia Dei à Creatur â mundi per ca quae facta sunt intellecta conspiciuntur And so Calvin most clearely L. 1. Inst c. 5. §. 1. Aperire Oculos nequeunt quin aspicere cum coguntur though Bellarmine would needes be girding at him L. 4. de Grat. Lib. Arbit c 2. Videtur autem Ratio iis quae apparent attestari Omnes enim homines de Diis ut ille loquitur habent existimationem Arist. L. 1. de Coelo T. 22. bleare-eyed Reason can see But the c Damasc. L. 1. Ortho. Fid. c. 4. Quid sit what that God is is infinitely beyond all the fathoms of Reason He is a Light indeed but such as no mans Reason can come at for the Brightnes d 1 Tim. 6. 16. Et ne Vâ—…stigium sic accedendi 〈◊〉 S. Aug. nisi augeas imaginari ne cogitationis lucem soliâ—… innumerabiliter vel quid aliud c. L. 8 de Tâ—…in c. 2 Solus modus accedendi Preces sunt Boet. de consolâ—… Philos. L. 5. prosa 3. 1 Tim. 6. If any thing therefore bee attainable in this kinde it must bee by c Prater Scientias Philosophicas necesse est ut ponatur alia Scientia 〈◊〉 revelata de iis quae hominis captum 〈◊〉 Tho. p. 1. q. 1 A. 1. Revelation And that must bee from Himselfe for none can Reveale but f And therefore Bid is exâ—…sse That God could not reveale any thing that is to come nisi illud esset a Deo praesâ—…um sâ—…u praevisum i. e. unlesse God did fully comprehend that which He doth reveale Biel in 3. sent D. 239. 2. A. 1. hee that Comprehends And g Nullus Intellectus Creatus videndo Deum potest cogno 〈◊〉 omâ—…ia quae Deus sacit vel potest saccre Hoc enim esset Comprehendere ejus virtutem c. Tho. p. 1. q. 12. A. 8. C. Ad Argumentum Quod Deus ut Speculum est Et quod Omnia quae sieri possunt in co resplendent Respondet Thom. Quod non est necessarium quod videns speculum omnia in speculo videat nisi speculum visu suo comprâ—…hendat Tho. p. 1. q. 12. A. 8. a 12. Now no man can comprehend this Glasse which is God Himselfe none doth or can comprehend God but Himselfe And when he doth Reveale yet He is no farther discernable then h Deus enim est Speculum voluntarium revelans quae quod vult alicui beato non est Speculum naturalitèr repraesentans omnia Biel. Suppl in 4. Sent. D. 49. q. 3. propos 3. Himself pleases Now since i For if Reason well put to its search did not finde this out how came Arist. to assirme this by rationa l disquisition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Restat ut mens sola extrinsecùs accedat eaque sola divina sit nibil enim cum ejus Actione communicat Actio corporalis Aâ—…st l. 2. de gen Anim. c. 3. This cannot be spoken of the Soule were it mortall And therefore I must needs be of Paulus Benius his opinion who sayes plainly and proves it too Turpiâ—…r assixam à quibâ—…sdam Aristoteli Mortalitatis Animae Opinionem Benius in Timaeum Platonis Decad. 2ae L. 3. Reason teaches that the Soule of man is immortal and k For it Reason did not dictate this also whence is it that Aristotle disputes of the way and meanes of attaining it L. 1. Moral c. 9. And takes on him to proove That Felicity is rather an Honourable then a Commendable thing c. 12. And after all this he addes Deo 〈◊〉 tota vita est hominibus autem catenus quatenus similitudo quaedam ejusmodi Operationis ipsis in est Arist. l. 10. Moral c. 8. capeable of Felicity And since that Felicity consists in the Contemplation of the highest Cause w ch againe is God himselfe And since Christ therin Confirmes that Dictate that mans eternal Happines is to know God and Him whom he hath sent S. k S. Iohn 17. 3. Ultima Beatitudo hominis consistit in quadam supernaturali visione Dei Ad hanc autem visiâ—…m Homo pertingere non potest nisi per modum Addisâ—…is à Deo Doctore Omnis qui audit a Patre didicit S. Iohn 6. 45. Thom. 2. 2. q. 2. A. 3. in c. Ioh. 17. And since nothing can put us into the way of attaining to that Contemplation but some Revelation of Himselfe and of the way to himselfe I say since all this is so It cannot reasonably be thought by any prudent man that the All-wise God should create man with a Desire of
Felicity and then leave him utterly destitute of all Instrumentall Helps to make the Attainment possible since * Deus natura nihil frustrà faciunt Arist. L. 1. de Coelo T. 32. frustra autem est quod non potest habere suum usuÌ„ Thom. ibid. God and Nature do nothing but for an end And Helpe there can bee none sufficient but by Revelation And once grant mee that Revelation is necessary and then I will appeale to Reason it selfe and that shall prove abundantly one of these two That either there was never any such Revelation of this kinde from the worlds beginning to this day And that will put the frustrà upon God in point of mans Felicitie Or that the Scriptures which wee now embrace as the Word of God is that Revelation And that 's it we Christians labour to make good against all Atheisme Prophanenesse and Infidelity Last of all To prove that the Booke of God which Pun. 8. we honour as His Word is this necessary Revelation of God and his Truth which must and is alone able to leade us in the way to our eternall Blessednesse or else the world hath none comes in a Cloud of witnesses Some for the Infidel and some for the Beleever Some for the VVeake in Faith and some for the Strong And some for all For then first comes in the Tradition of the Church the present Church so 't is no Hereticall or Schismaticall Beliefe Then the Testimony of former Ages so 't is no New Beliefe Then the consent of Times so 't is no Divided or partiall Beliefe Then the Harmony of the Prophets and them fulfilled so 't is not a * 2 Pet. 1. 16. Devised but a forespoken Beliefe Then the successe of the Doctrine contained in this Booke so 't is not a Beliefe stisted in the Cradle but it hath spread through the world in despite of what the world could doe against it And increased from weake and unlikely Beginnings to incredible Greatnesse Then the Constancy of this Truth so 't is no Moone-Beliefe For in the midst of the worlds Changes it hath preserved it's Creede entire through many generations Then that there is nothing Carnall in the Doctrine so 't is a Chast Beliefe And all along it hath gained kept and exercised more power upon the minds of men both learned and unlearned in the increase of vertue and repression of vice then any Morall Philosophie or Legall Policy that ever was Then comes the inward Light and Excellency of the Text it self and so 't is no darke or dazling Beliefe And 't is an Excellent Text For see the riches of Naturall knowledge which are stored up there as well as Supernaturall Consider how things quite above Reason consent with things Reasonable Weigh it well what Majesty lyes there hid under Humility a Quasi quidam fluvius est planus Altus in quo Agnus ambulet Elephas naâ—…et S. Greg. Prâ—…fat in Lib. Moralium c. 4. What Depth ther is with a Perspicuity unimitable What b In Lege Domini voluntas ejus Psa. 1. 2. Dulcior super mel favum Psa 18. 11. passim Delight it works in the Soule that is devoutely excercised in it how the c Multa dicuntur submissâ—…s humirepeÌ„tibus animis ut accommodatiùs per humana in Divina consurgant Multa etiam figuratè ut studiosa mens quaesitis exerceatur utiliùs uberiùs laetetur inventis S. Aug. de Mor. Ec. Cat. c. 17. Sed nihil sub spirituali sensu continetur Fidei necessarium quod Scriptura per Literalem sensum alicubi manifeste non tradat Tho. p. 1. q. 1. A. 10 ad 1. Sublimest wits finde in it enough to amaze them while the c simplest want not enough to direct them And then we shall not wonder if with the assistance of d Credimus c. sicut ob alia multa certiora Argumenta quà m est Testimonium Ecclesia tum propter hoe potissimum quòd Spiritus Sanctus nobis intùs has esse Dei voces persuadeat Whitaker Disput de Sa. Scrip. Controvers 1. q. 3. c. 8. Gods Spirit who alone workes Faith and Beliefe of the Scriptures and their Divine Authority as well as other Articles wee grow up into a most Infallible Assurance such an Assurance as hath made many lay downe their lives for this Truth such as that * Though an Angell from Heaven should Preach unto us another Gospell we would not believe Gal. 1. 8. Him or it No though wee should see as great and as many Miracles done over againe to disswade us from it as were at first to win the world to it To which firmnesse of Assent by the Operation of Gods Spirit the Will conferres as much or more strength then the Vnderstanding Clearenesse the whole Assent being an Act of Faith and not of Knowledge And therefore the Question should not have beene asked of mee by F. How I knew But vpon what Motives I did believe Scripture to bee the VVord of God And I would have him take heed lest hunting too close after a way of Knowledge hee loose the way of Faith and teach other men to loose it too So then the Way lyes thus as farre as it appeares Pun. 9. to me The Credit of Scripture to bee Divine Resolves finally into that Faith which wee have touching God Himselfe and in the same order For as that so this hath Three maine Grounds to which all other are Reducible The First is the Tradition of the Church And this leades us to a Reverend perswasion of it The Second is The light of Nature And this shewes us how necessary such a Revealed Learning is and that no other way it can be had * Cum Fides infallibili veritati innitaâ—… Et ideo cum impossibile sit de vero demonstrari Contrarium sequitur omnes Probationes qua contra fidem inducuntur non posse esse Demonstrationes sed solubilia Argumenta Tho. p. 1. q. A. 1. 8. c. Nay more that all Proofes brought against any Point of Faith neither are nor can be Demonstrations but soluble Arguments The Third is The light of the Text it selfe in Conversing wherewith wee meet with the †Fidei ultima Resolutio est in Deum illuminantem S. Aug. cont Fund c. 14. Spirit of God inwardly inclining our hearts and sealeing the full Assurance of the sufficiency of all Three unto us And then and not before wee are certaine That the Scripture is the VVord of God both by Divine and by Infallible Proofe But our Certainty is by Faith and so voluntary not by Knowledge of such Principles as in the light of Nature can enforce Assent whether we will or no. I have said thus much upon this great Occasion because this Argument is so much pressed without due respect to Scripture And I have proceeded in a Syntheticall way to build up the Truth for the benefit of the Church
Tho. p. 1. q. 1. A. 5. ad 1. Et Articulorum Fidei veritas non potest nobis esse evidens absolutè Bellar. L. 4. de Eccles. Mil. c. 3. §. 3. grants That in us which are the Subjects both of Faith and Knowledge and in regard of the Evidence given in unto us there is lesse Light lesse Evidence in the Principles of Faith then in the Principles of Knowledge upon which there can be no doubt But I think the Schoole will never grant That the Principles of Faith even this in Question have not sufficient Evidence And you ought not to do as you did without any Distinction or any Limitation deny a Praecognitum or Prime Principle in the Faith because it answers not in all things to the Prime Principles in Science in their Light and Evidence a thing in it self directly against Reason Well though I do none of this yet first I must tell you that A. C. here steps in againe and tels me That though a Praecognitum in Faith need not be so clearely knowne as a Praecognitum in Science yet there must be this proportion betweene them that whether it be in Science or in Faith the Praecognitum or thing supposed as knowne must be priùs cognitum first knowne and not need another thing pertaining to that Faith or Knowledge to be knowne before it But the Scripture saith he needs Tradition to goe before it and introduce the knowledge of it Therefore the Scripture is not to be supposed as a Praecognitum and a thing fore-knowne Tru'y I am sorrie to see in a man very learned such wilfull mistakes For A. C. cannot but perceive by that which I have clearely laid downe * §. 17. 18. Nu. 2. before That I intended not to speake precisely of a Praecognitum in this Argument But when I said Scriptures were Principles to be supposed I did not I could not intend They were priùs cognitae knowne before Tradition since I confesse every where That Tradition introduces the knowledge of them But my meaning is plaine That the Scriptures are and must be Principles supposed before you can dispute this Question †And my immediate Words in the Conference upon which the Iesuite asked How I knew Scripture to be Scripture were as the â—…esuite himselfe relates it apud A. C. p. 48. That the Scripture onely not any unwritten Tradition was the Foundation of our Faith Now the Scripture cannot be the onely Foundation of Faith if it containe not all things necessary to Salvation Which the Church of Rome denying against all Antiquity makes it now become a Question And in regard of this mâ—… Aâ—…ver was That the Scriptures are and must be Principles supposed and praecognitae before the handling of this Question Whether the Scriptures containe in them all things necessary to Salvation Before which Question it must necessarily be supposed and granted on both sides That the Scriptures are the Word of God For if they be not 't is instantly out of all Question that They cannot include all Necessaries to Salvation So 't is a Praecognitum not to Tradition as A C. would cunningly put upon the Cause but to the whole Question of the Scriptures sufficiency And yet if he could tie me to a Praecognitum in this very Question and proveable in a Superiour Science I thinke I shall go very neare to prove it in the next Paragraph and intreat A. C. to confesse it too And now having told A. C. this I must secondly follow him a little farther For I would faine make it appeare as plainly as in such a difficulty it can be made what wrong he doth Truth and himself in this Case And it is the common fault of them all For when the Protestants answer to this Argument which as I have shew'd can properly have no place in the Question betweene us about Tradition †Hook L. 3 §. 8. they which grant this as a Praecognitum a thing foreknown as also I do were neither ignorant nor forgetfull That things presupposed as already known in a Science are of two sorts For either they are plaine and fully manifest in their owne Light or they are proved and granted already some former knowledge having made them Evident This Principle then The Scriptures are the Oracles of God we cannot say is cleare and fully manifest to all men simply and in self-Light for the Reasons before given Yet we say after Tradition hath beene our Introduction the Soule that hath but ordinary Grace added to Reason may discerne Light sufficient to resolve our Faith that the Sun is there This Principle then being not absolutely and simply evident in it selfe is presumed to be taught us otherwise And if otherwise then it must be taught in and by some superiour Science to which Theologie is subordinate Now men may be apt to think out of Reverence That Divinity can have no Science above it But your owne Schoole teaches me that it hath * Hoc modo sacra Doctrina est Scientia quia â—…dit ex Principiis notis Lumine superioris Scientia quae scilicet est Scientia Dei Beatorum Tho. p. 1. q. 1. a. 2. And what sayes A. C. now to this of Aquinas Is it not cleare in him that this Principle The Scriptures are the Word of God of Divine and most Infallible Credit is a Praecognitum in the knowledge of Divinity and proveable in a superiour Science namely the Knowledge of God and the Blessed in Heaven Yes so cleare that as I told you he would A. C. confesses it p. 51. But he adds That because no man ordinarily sees this Proofe therefore we must go either to Christ who saw it clearely Or to the Apostles to whom it was clearely revealed or to them wholy Succession received it from the Prime Secrs So now because Christ is ascended and the Apostles gone into the number of the Blessed and made in a higher Degree partakers of their knowledge therefore we must now onely goe unto then Successours and borrow light from the Tradition of the present Church For that we must do And 't is so farre well But that we must relie upon this Tradition as Divine and Infallible and able to breed in us Divine and Insallible Faith as A. C. adds p. 51 52. is a Proposition which in the times of the Primitive Church would have beene accounted very dangerous as indeed it is For I would fame know why leaning too much upon Tradition may not mislead Christians as well as it diâ—… the Iewes But they saith S. Hilarie Traditionis savore Legis praecepta transgressi sunt Can. 14. in S. Mat. Yet to this height are They of Rome now growne That the Traditions of the present Church are infallible And by out-fâ—…cing the Truth lead many after them And as it is Jer. 5. 31. The Prophets prophesie untruths anâ—… the Priests receive gifts and my people delight therein what will become of this in the end The sacred Doctrine
then A. C. tels us That Particular Churches must in A. C. p. 58. that Case as Irenaeus intimateth have recourse to the Church of Rome which hath more powerfull Principality and to †And after hee saith p. 58. that the Bishop of Rome is and ought to bee the Iudge of particular Churches in this Case her Bishop who is chiefe Pastour of the whole Church as being S. Peter's Successour to whom Christ promised the keyes S. Matth. 16. for whom he prayed that his Faith might not faile S. Luke 22. And whom he charged to seed and governe the whole Flocke S Iohn 21. And this A. C. tels us he shall never refuse to doe in such sort as that this neglect shall be a Iust Cause for any Particular Man or Church under Pretence of Reformation in Manners or Faith to make a Schisme or Separation from the Whole Generall Church Well first you see where A. C. would have us If any Particular Churches differ in Points of Divine Truth they must not Iudge or Condemne each other saith he No take heed of that in any case That 's the Office of the Universall Church And yet he will have it That Rome which is but a Particular Church must and ought Iudge all other Particulars Secondly he tels us this is so Because the Church of Rome hath more Powerfull Principality then other Particular Churches and that her Bishop is Pastour of the Whole Church To this I answer that it is most true indeed the Church of Rome hath had and hath yet more Powerfull Principality then any other Particular Church But she hath not this Power from Christ. The Romane Patriarch by Ecclesiasticall Constitutions might perhaps have a Primacy of Order But for Principality of Power the Patriarchs were as even as equall as the a Summa Potestas Ecclesiastica non est data solum Petro sedetiam aliis Apostolis Omnes enim poterant dicere illud S. Pauli Solicitu la omnium Ecclesiarum c. 2. Cor. 11. 28. Bellar. L. 1. de Rom. Pont. c. 9. §. Respondâ—… Pontificatum Where then is the difference betweene S. Peter and the rest In this saith Bellarmin Ibid. Quta hec Potestas data est Petro ut Ordinario Pastori cui perpetuo succederetur Aliis verò tanquà m Delegatis quibus non succederetur This is handsomely said to men easie of beliefe But that the Highest Power Ecclesiasticall confessed to be given to the other Apostle as well as to S. Peter was given to S. Peter onely as to an Ordinary Pastour whose Successours should have the same Power which the Successours of the rest should not have can never bee prooved out of Scripture Nay I will give them their own Latitude it can never be proved by any Tradition of the whole Catholike Church And till it be proved Bellarmines handsome Expression cannot be believed by me For S. Cyprian hath told me long since that Episcopatus Vnus est for as much as belongs to the Calling as well as Apostolatus L. de simp. Praelato Apostles were before them The Truth is this more Powerfull Principality the Romane Bishops b §. 25. Nu. 12. got under the Emperours after they became Christian and they used the matter so that they grew big enough to oppose nay to depose the Emperours by the same power which they had given them And after this other Particular Churches especially here in the West submitted themselves to them for succour and Protections sake And this was one maine Cause which swelled Rome into this more Powerfull Principality and not any Right given by Christ to make that c Lib. 1. de Rom. Pont. c. 9. §. Augustmu Epistola Prelate Pastour of the whole Church I know Bellarmine makes much adoe about it and will needs fetch it out of d S. Aug. Epist. 162. In Romaná Ecclesiâ—… emper Apostolicae Cathedrae viguit Principatas S. Augustine who sayes indeed That in the Church of Rome there did alwaies flourish the Principality of an Apostolicke Chaire Or if you will the Apostolicke Chaire in relation to the West and South parts of the Church all the other foure Apostolicke Chaires being in the East Now this no man denies that understands the state and story of the Church And e Quia Opinio invaluit fundâ—…tam esse hanc Ecclesiam à S. Petâ—… Jtaque in Occidente Sedes Apostolica Honoris 〈◊〉 Calv. L. 4. c. 6. §. 16. Calvin confesses it expresly Nor is the Word Principatus so great nor were the Bishops of those times so little as that Principes and Principatus are not commonly given them both by the a Princeps Ecclesiae S. H. lar 18. de Trin. Prin. And he speakes of a Biâ—…hop in generall Greg. Nazianz. Orat. 17. Ascribuntur Episcopo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Imperium Thronus Principatus ad regimâ—…n Aâ—…imarum Et 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hujusmodi Imperium And he also speaks of a Bishop Greg. Nazian Orat. 20. Nor were these any Titles of pride in Biâ—…hops then For S. Greg. Nazianz. who challenges these Titles to himselfe Orat. 17. was so devout so mild and so humble that rather then the Peace of the Church should be broken he freely resigned the Great Patriarchate of Constantinople and retired and this in the First Councell of Constantinople and the Second Generall Greeke and the Latine Fathers of this great and Learnedest Age of the Church made up of the fourth and fist hundred yeares alwaies understanding Principatus of their Spirituall Power and within the Limits of their severall Iurisdictions which perhaps now and then they did occasionally exceed And there is not one word in S. Augustine That this Principality of the Apostolike Chaire in the Church of Rome was then or ought to be now exercised over the whole Church of Christ as Bellarmine insinuates there and as A. C. would have it here And to prove that S Augustine did not intend by Principatus here to give the Romane Bishop any Power out of his owne Limits which God knowes were farre short of the whole Church I shall make it most manifest out of the very same Epistle For afterwards saith S. Augustine when the pertinacy of the Donatists could not be restrained by the African Bishops only b Pergant ad Fratres Collegas nostros transmarinarum Ecclesiarum Episcopos c. S. Aug. Ep 162. they gave them leave to be heard by forraigne Bishops And after that he hath these words c An fortè non debuit Romanae Ecclesiae Melciades Episcopus cum Collegis transmarinis Episcopis illud sibi usurpare judicium quod ab Afris septuaginta ubi Primas Tigisitanus praesedit fuerit terminaetum Quid quod nec ipse usurpâ—…vit Rogatus quippe Imperator Iudices misit Episcopos qui cum â—…o sederent de totâ illâ Causà quod justum videretur statuerent c. S. Aug. Ibid. And yet peradventure Melciades the Bishop of
Definition of a Generall Councell Consid. 6. be infallible then the infallibility of it is either in the Conclusion and in the Meanes that prove it or in the Conclusion not the Meanes or in the Meanes not the Conclusion But it is infallible in none of these Not in the first The Conclusion and the Meanes For there are diverse Deliberations in Generall Councels where the Conclusion is Catholike but the Meanes by which they prove it not infallible Not in the second The Conclusion and not the Meanes For the Conclusion must follow the nature of the Premisses or Principles out of which it is deduced therefore if those which the Councell uses be sometimes uncertaine as is proved before the Conclusion cannot be infallible Not in the third The Meanes and not the Conclusion For that cannot but be true and necessary if the Meanes be so And this I am sure you will never grant because if you should you must deny the Infallibility which you seeke to establish To this for I confesse the Argument is old but can never be worne out nor shifted off your great Master a Relect. Cont. 4. q. 2. ad Argâ—… 1â—… Stapleton who is miserably hamper'd in it and indeed so are you all answers That the Infallibility of a Councell is in the second Course that is b And herein I must needs Commend your Wildome For you have had many Popes so ignorant 〈◊〉 ignorant as that they have beene â—…o way able to sift and Examine the Meanes And therefore you doe most advisedly make them infallible in the Conclusion without the Meanes §. 39. Nu. 8. It is infallible in the Conclusion though it be uncertaine and fallible in the Meanes and Proofe of it How comes this to passe It is a thing altogether unknowne in Nature and Art too That fallible Principles can either father or mother beget or bring forth an infallible Conclusion Well that is granted in Nature and in all Argumentation that causes Knowledge But we shall have Reasons for it c Ibid. Not. 4. First because the Church is discursive and uses the weights and moments of Reason in the Meanes but is Propheticall and depends upon immediate Revelation from the Spirit of God in delivering the Conclusion It is but the making of this appeare and all Controversie is at an end Well I will not discourse here To what end there is any use of Meanes if the Conclusion be Propheticall which yet is justly urged for no good cause can be assigned of it If it be Propheticall in the Conclusion I speake still of the present Church for that which included the Apostles which had the Spirit of Prophecie and immediate Revelation was ever Propheticke in the Definition but then that was Infallible in the Meanes too Then since it delivers the Conclusion not according to Nature and Art that is out of Principles which can beare it there must be some supernaturall Authority which must deliver this Truth That say I must be the Scripture For if you flie to immediate Revelation now the Enthusiasme must be yours But the Scriptures which are brought in the very Exposition of all the Primitive Church neither say it nor enforce it Therefore Scripture warrants not your Prophesie in the Conclusion And I know no other thing that can warrant it If you think the Tradition of the Church can make the world beholding to you Produce any Father of the Church that sayes This is an Vniversall Tradition of the Church That her Definitions in a Generall Councell are Propheticall and by immediate Revelation Produce any one Father that sayes it of his own Authority That he thinks so Nay make it appeare that ever any Prophet in that which he delivered from God as Infallible Truth was ever discursive at all in the Meanes Nay make it but probable in the ordinary course of Prophecie and I hope you go no higher nor will I offer at God's absolute Power That that which is discursive in the Meanes can be Prophetick in the Conclusion and you shall be my great Apollo for ever In the meane time I have learned this from a Prophetae audiebant à Deo interiùs inspirante Tho. 2. 24. q. 5. A. 1. ad 3. yours That all Prophecie is by Vision Inspiration c. And that no Vision admits Discourse That all Prophecie is an Illumination not alwayes present but when the Word of the b The word of the Lord came unto me is common in the Prophets Lord came to them and that was not by Discourse And yet you c Stapl. Relect. Cont. 4. q. 2. p. 473. say againe That this Prophetick Infallibility of the Church is not gotten without study and industry You should do well to tell us too why God would put his Church to study for the Spirit of Prophecie which never any Particular Prophet was put unto d Propheticam Revelationem nullo pacto haberi posse vel ope Naturae vel studio Contra Avicennam Algazalem Averrocm c. Fran. Picus 2. Praenot c. 4. And whosoever shall study for it shall do it in vaine since Prophecie is a e 1. Cor. 12. 10. Gift and can never bee an acquired Habit. And there is somewhat in it that Bellarmine in all his Dispute for the Authority of Generall Councels dares not come at this Rocke f L. 2. de Conc. c. 12. He preferres the Conclusion and the Canon before the Acts and the Deliberations of Councels and so do we but I do not remember that ever he speaks out That the Conclusion is delivered by Prophecie or Revelation Sure he sounded the shore and found danger here He did sound it For a little before he speaks plainly would his bad Cause let him be constant * Concilia noâ—… habent neque scribunt immediatas Revelationes c sed ex Verbo Dei per ratiocinationeÌ„ dcducunt Conclusiones Bellar. l. 2 de Concil A. 12. §. At Concilia non Councels do deduce their Conclusions What from Inspiration No But out of the Word of God and that per ratiocinationem by Argumentation Neither have they nor do they write any immediate Revelations The second Reason why a Stap. Jb. p. 374 Stapleton will have it Propheticke in the Conclusion is Because that which is determined by the Church is matter of Faith not of Knowledge And that therefore the Church proposing it to be believed though it use Meanes yet it stands not upon Art or Meanes or Argument but the Revelation of the Holy Ghost Els when we embrace the Conclusion proposed it should not be an Assent of Faith but an Habit of Knowledge This for the first part That the Church uses the Meanes but followes them not is all one in substance with the former Reason And for the later part That then our admitting the Decree of a Councell would be no Assent of Faith but an Habit of Knowledge what great inconvenience is there if it be granted For
as if this were Translocation rather then Transubstantiation So in this charge upon him I am not alone And faine would be shift off this but it will not be But while he is at it he runs into two pretty Errours beside the maine one The first is That the body of Christ in the Sacrament begins to be non ut in loco sed ut substantia sub Accidentibut Now let Bellarm. or A. C. for him give me any one Instance That a Bodily Substance under Accidents is or can be any where and not ut in loco as in some place and he sayes somwhat The second is That some Fathers and others seeme he sayes but I see it not to approve of his manner of speech of Conversion by Adduction And he tels us for this that Bonaventure sayes expresly In Transubstantiatione fit ut quod erat alicubi sine sui mutations sit alibi Now first here 's nothing that can be drawne with Cart-ropes to prove conversion by Adduction For if there be Conversion there must be Change And this is fine mutatione sui And secondly I would faine know how a Body that is alicubi shall be alibi without change of it selfe and yet that this shall be rather Transubstantiation then Translocation Besides 't is a Phrase of very sowre Consequence should a man squâ—…eze it which Bellar. uses there even in his Recognition Panis transit in Corpus Christi Bellarmines struggle about it w ch yet in the end cannot bee or bee called Transubstantiation and is that which at this day is a †A Scandall and a grievous one For this grosse Opinion was but confirmed in the Councell of Lateran It had got some footing in the Church the two blinde ages before For Berengarius was made recant in such Termes as the Romanists are put to their shifts to excuse Bellar. L. 3. de Euchar. c. 24. §. Quartum Argumentum For he sayes expresly Corpus Christi posse in Sacramento sensualitèr manibus Sacerdotum tractari frangi fidelium dentibus atteri Decr. par 3. de Consecratione Dist. 2. C. Ego Berengarius Now this Recantation was made about the yeare 1050. And the Councell of Lateran was in the yeare 1215. Betâ—…ene this grosse Recantation of Berengarius and that Councell the great Learned Physitian and Philosopher Averroes lived and tooke scandall at the whole Body of Christian Religion for this And thus he saith Mundum peragravi c. non vidi Sectam deteriorem aut magis fatuam Christianâ quia Deum quem colunt dentibus devorans Espeneaeus L. 4. de Euchar adoratione c. 3. scandall to both Iew Gentile and the Church of God * NUM 4. A. C. p. 69. For all this A. C. goes on and tels us That they of Rome cannot be proved to depart froÌ„ the Foundation somuch as ProtestaÌ„ts do So then We have at last a Confession here that they may be prooved to depart from the Foundation though not so much or so farre as the Protestants doe I do not meane to answer this and prove that the Romanists do depart as farre or farther from the Foundation then the Protestants for then A. C. would take me at the same lift and say I granted a departure too Briefly therefore I have named here more Instances then one In some of which they have erred in the Foundation or very neare it But for the Church of England let A. C. instance if he can in any one point in which She hath departed from the Foundation Well that A. C. will do For he sayes The Protestants erre against the Foundation by denying Infallible A. C. p. 69. Authority to a Generall Councell for that is in effect to deny Infallibility to the whole Catholike Church a §. 33. Consid. 4. Nu 1. No there 's a great deale of difference betweene a Generall Councell and the whole Body of the Church And when a Generall Councell erres as the second of Ephesus did out of that great Catholike Body another may be gathered as was then that of Chalcedon to doe the Truth of Christ that right which belongs unto it Now if it were all one in effect to say a Generall Councell can erre and that the Whole Church can erre there were no Remedy left against a Generall Councell erring b §. 33. Consid. 7. Nu. 4. which is your Case now at Rome and which hath thrust the Church of Christ into more straits then any one thing besides But I know where you would be A Generall Councell is Infallible if it be confirmed by the Pope and the Pope he is Infallible els he could not make the Councell so And they which deny the Councels Infallibility deny the Pope's which confirmes it And then indeed the Protestants depart a mighty way from this great Foundation of Faith the Popes Infallibility But God be thanked this is only from the Foundation of the present Romane Faith as A. C. and the Iesuite call it not from any Foundation of the Christian A. C. p. 68. Faith to which this Infallibility was ever a stranger From Answering A. C. fals to asking Questions I thinke he meanes to try whether he can win any thing upon me by the cunning way A multis Interrogationibus simul by asking many things at once to see if any one may make me slip into a Confession inconvenient And first he asks How Protestants admitting no Infallible Rule of Faith but A. C. p. 69 Scripture onely can be infallibly sure that they believe the same entire Scripture and Creed and the Foure first Generall Councels and in the same incorrupted sense in which the Primitive Church believed 'T is just as I said Here are many Questions in one and I might easily be caught would I answer in grosse to them all together but I shall go more distinctly to worke Well then I admit no ordinary Rule left now in the Church of Divine and Infallible Verity and so of Faith but the Scripture And I believe the entire Scripture first by the Tradition of the Church Then by all other credible Motives as is before expressed And last of all by the light which shines in the Scripture it selfe kindled in Believers by the Spirit of God Then I believe the entire Scripture Infallibly and by a Divine Infallibility am sure of my Object Then am I as sure of my Believing which is the Act of my Faith conversant about this Object For no man believes but he must needs know in himselfe whether he believes or no and wherein and how farre he doubts Then I am infallibly assured of my Creed the Tradition of the Church inducing and the Scripture confirming it And I believe both Scripture and Creed in the same uncorrupted sense which the Primitive Church believed them and am sure that I do so Believe them because I crosse not in my Beliefe any thing delivered by the Primitive Church And this againe I am sure of
because I take the Beliefe of the Primitive Church as it is expressed and delivered by the Councels and Ancient Fathers of those times As for the Foure Councels if A. C. aske how I have them that is their true and entire Copies I answer I have them from the Church-Tradition onely And that 's Assurance enough for this And so I am fully as sure as A. C. is or can make mee But if hee aske how I know infallibly I believe them in their true and uncorrupted sense Then I answer There 's no man of knowledge but hee can understand the plaine and simple Decision expressed in the Canon of the Councell where 't is necessary to Salvation And for all other debates in the Councels or Decisions of it in things of lesse moment 't is not necessary that I or any man else have Infallible Assurance of them though I thinke 't is possible to attaine even in these things as much Infallible Assurance of the uncorrupted sense of them as A. C. or any other Iesuites have A C. askes againe What Text of Scripture tels That Protestants now living do believe all this or that all A. C. p. 69. this is expressed in those particular Bibles or in the Writings of the Fathers and Councels which now are in the Protestants hands Good God! Whither will not a strong Bias carrie even a learned Iudgement Why what Consequence is there in this The Scripture now is the onely Ordinary Infallible Rule of Divine Faith Therefore the Protestants cannot believe all this before mentioned unlesse a particular Text of Scripture can be shewed for it Is it not made plaine before how we believe Scripture to be Scripture and by Divine and Infallible Faith too and yet wee can shew no particular Text for it Beside were a Text of Scripture necessary yet that is for the Object and the thing which we are to believe not for the Act of our believing which is meerely from God and in our selves and for which wee cannot have any Warrant from or by Scripture more then that we ought to believe but not that we in our particular do believe The rest of the Question is farre more inconsequent Whether all this bee expressed in the Bibles which are in Protestants hands For first we have the same Bibles in our hands which the Romanists have in theirs Therefore either we are Infallibly sure of ours or they are not Infallibly sure of theirs For we have the same Booke and delivered unto us by the same hands and all is expressed in ours that is in theirs Nor is it of moment in this Argument that we account more Apocryphall then they do For I will acknowledge every Fundamentall point of Faith as proveable out of the Canon as we account it as if the Apocryphall were added unto it Secondly A. C. is here extremely out of himselfe and his way For his Question is Whether all this be expressed in the Bibles which we have All this All what why before there is mention of the foure Generall Councels and in this Question here 's mention of the Writings of the Fathers and the Councels And what will A. C. look that we must shew a Text of Scripture for all this and an expresse one too I thought and doe so still 't is enough to ground Beliefe upon * Nâ—…n potest aliquid certum esse certitudire Fidei nisi aut immediate contineatur in verbo Dei aut ex verbo Dei per evidentem Consequentiam deducatur Bellar. L. 3. de Iustif. c. 8 §. 2. Necessary Consequence out of Scripture as well as upon expresse Text. And this I am sure of that neither I nor any man else is bound to believe any thing as Necessary to Salvation be it found in Councels or Fathers or where you will †Nec ego Nicaenum nec tu debes Ariminense tanquà m praejudicaturus proferre Concilium Nec ego hujus Authoritate nec tu illius detineris Scripturarum Au thoritatibus c. Res cum re Causa cum causâ Ratio cum ratione concertet S. Aug. L. 3. cont Maximinum c. 14. Testimonia Divina in fundamento ponenda sunt S. Aug. L. 20. de Civ Dei c. 1. Quia principia hujus Doctrinae per Revelationens habentur c. Tho. p. 1. q. 1. A. 8. ad 2. Solis Scriptur arum Libris Canonicis didâ—… hunc honorem deferre ut nullum Authorem corum in scribendo errâsse aliquid firmissimè credam Alios autem ita lego ut quant alibet sanctitate doctrináque praepolleant non ideò verum putem quod ipsi it à senserunt vel scripserunt S. Aug. Epist. 19. if it be Contrary to expresse Scripture or necessary Consequence from it And for the Copies of the Councels and Fathers which are in our hands they are the same that are in the hands of the Romanists and delivered to Posterity by Tradition of the Church which is abundantly sufficient to warrant that So we are as Infallibly sure of this as 't is possible for any of you to bee Nay are wee not more sure For wee have used no Index Expurgatorius upon the Writings of the Fathers * Sixtus Senens in Epist. ad Pium quintum as you have done So that Posterity hereafter must thanke us for true Copies both of Councels and Fathers and not you But A. C goes on and askes still Whether Protestants bee Infallibly sure that they rightly understand the A. C. p. 69. sense of all which is expressed in their Books according to that which was understood by the Primitive Church and the Fathers which were present at the foure first Generall Councels A. C. may aske everlastingly if hee will aske the same over and over againe For I pray wherein doth this differ from his †§. 38. N. 5. first Question save only that here Scripture is not named For there the Question was of our Assurance of the Incorrupted sense And therefore thither I refer you for Answer with this That it is not required either of us or of them that there should be had an Infallible assurance that wee rightly understand the sense of all that is expressed in our Bookes And I thinke I may believe without sinne that there are many things expressed in these Bookes for they are theirs as well as ours which A. C. and his Fellowes have not Infallible assurance that they rightly understand in the sense of the Primitive Church or the Fathers present in those Councels And if they say yes they can because when a difficulty crosses them they believe them in the Churches sense Yet that dry shift will not serve For beliefe of them in the Churches sense is an Implicit Faith but it works nothing distinctly upon the understanding For by an Implicite Faith no man can be infallibly assured that hee doth rightly understand the sense which is A. C s. Question whatever perhaps he may rightly believe And an Implicite
punished till the Uitiosity of it be consumed Purgatorio igne So the Translation renders it but in the Originall it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is in a fire that sleeps not which for ought appeares may bee understood of a Fire that is eternall whereas the fire assigned to Purgatory shall cease Besides S. Gregory sayes plainly The Soule cannot suffer by fire but in the Body and the Body cannot be with it till the Resurrection Therefore e S. Greg. Orat 3. de Resurrect Christi hee must needs speak of a fire after the Resurrection which must bee either the Fire of the Generall Conflagration or Hell Purgatory he cannot meane VVhere according to the Romish Tenet the Soule suffers without the Body The truth is Divers of the Ancient especially Greekes which were a little too much acquainted with Plato's Schoole †Noâ—… expedit philosophari alâ—…s c. Orig. L. 6 cont Celsuâ—… philosophized and disputed upon this and some other Points with much Obscurity and as little Certainty So upon the whole matter in the fourth and fist hundred yeare you see here 's none that constantly and perspicuously affirme it And as for S. Augustine he a Constat Animas pâ—…rgari post banc vitam S. Augustin Lib. 21. Civ Dâ—…i c. 24. vide said and b Justorum flagella non iâ—…nt post mortem sed definunt Et Anima mix in Paradisum c. S. Aug. Contr. Foeliciaâ—… c. 15. Et duo tantum loca esse c. S. Aug. Ser. 10. ae verb. Apost c. 15. Et L. 21. de Civ Dei c. 16 fine Negat nisi sit Ignis ille in Consummatione saculi unsaid it and c Quari potest c. S. Aug. in Enchirid. c. 69. Forsitan verum est c. S. Aug. L. 21. de Civ Dei c. 26. Quid S. Paulus senserit 1 Cor. 3. de Igne illo malo intelligentiores dâ—…ctiores audire S. Aug. L. de Fide Oper. c. 16. at the last left it doubtfull which had it then been received as a Point of Faith he durst not have done Indeed then in S. Gregory the Great 's time in the beginning of the sixt Age Purgatory was growne to some perfection For S. d S. Greg. in Psal. 3. Poenitentialem princ Gregory himself is at Scio 't was but at Puto a little before I know that some shall bee Expiated in Purgatory flames And therefore I will easily give Bellarmine all that follow For after this time Purgatory was found too warme a businesse to be suffered to Coole again And in the after Ages more were frighted then led by proof into the Beliefe of it Now by this we see also That it could not be a Tradition For then we might have traced it by the smoke to the Apostles times Indeed Bellarm. would have it such a Tradition For hee tels us out of S. Quod Vniversa tenet Ecclesia nec Conciliis institutum sed semper retentum est non nisi Authoritate Apostolicâ traditum rectissimè creditur S. Aug. L. 4. de Bapt. cont Donatist c. 24 Nec ad Summâ—…s Pontifices referri potest Addit Melch. Canus L. 3 de Locis c. 4. prin Augustine That that is rightly believed to be delivered by Apostolicall Authority which the whole Church holds and hath ever held and yet is not Instituted by any Councell And hee addes That Purgatory is such a Tradition so Constantly held in the whole Church Greeke and Latine And †Non invenimus initium hujus dogmatis sed omnes veteres Graeci Latini c. Bellar. L. 1. de Purg. c. 11. §. De tertio mode that wee doe not finde any beginning of this Beliefe Where I shall take the boldnesse to Observe these three things First that the Doctrine of Purgatory was not held ever in the whole Catholike Church of Christ. And this appeares by the proofes of * L. 1. de Purg. c. 6. Bellarmine himselfe produced and I have †§. 38. N. 16. before examined For there 't is manifest that scarce two Fathers directly affirme the beliefe of Purgatory for full six hundred yeares after Christ. Therefore Purgatory is no Matter of Faith nor to be believed as descending from Apostolicall Authority by S. Augustine's Rule Secondly that we can finde a beginning of this Doctrine and a Beginner too namely Origen And neither Bellarmine nor any other is able to shew any one Father of the Church that said it before him Therefore Purgatory is not to bee believed as a Doctrine delivered by Apostolicall Authority by Bellarmines owne rule For it hath a Beginning Thirdly I observe too that Bellarmine cannot well tell where to lay the foundation of Purgatory that it may be safe For first hee labours to found it upon Scripture To that end a Bellar. L. 1. de Purgat c. 3. 4 hee brings no fewer then ten places out of the Old Testament and nine out of the New to proove it And yet fearing lest these places bee strained as indeed they are and so too weake to bee laid under such a vast pile of Building as Purgatory is b De tertio modo perspicuum est c. Bel. L. 1 de Purgat c. 11. §. Tertiò ex Verbo c. §. De tertio modo c. he flies to unwritten Tradition And by this Word of God unwritten he sayes 't is manifest that the Doctrine of Purgatory was delivered by the Apostles Sure if Nineteene places of Scripture cannot proove it I would be loth to fly to Tradition And if Recourse to Tradition bee necessary then certainly those places of Scripture made not the proofe they were brought for And once more how can Bâ—… say here That woe finde not the Bâ—… 〈◊〉 of this Article when hee had said before that hee had found it in 〈◊〉 places of Scripture For if in these places hee could not finde the beginning of the Doctrine c Pâ—…y hee is fâ—…se while be sayes he did And if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it there then hee is faâ—…e here in saying we finde no beginning of it And for all his Bâ—… of Oâ—…s 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 Greeke 〈◊〉 Pâ—… Yet Aâ—… a Câ—… 〈◊〉 honestly and plainly and 〈◊〉 us That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 Writers is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 Greeks And he addes That 〈◊〉 Purgatory And what now I pray after all this may I not so much as deliberately 〈◊〉 of this because 't is now Dâ—… and but now in a manner and thus No sure So A. C. 〈◊〉 you Doubt No. For when you had fooled the 〈◊〉 of Sâ—… back to Rome there you either made him say or â—…d it for him â—…for in Prinâ—… and under his Name That since 〈◊〉 defined by the Châ—… a man 〈◊〉 much bound to believe there is a Purgatory as that there is a Trinity 〈◊〉 Persâ—… in the Godhead How farre
is in Scripture it selfe is not bright enough it cannot beare sufficient witnesseto itselfe The Testimonie of the Holy Ghost that is most infallible but ordinarily it is not so much as considerable in this Question which is not how or by what meanes we believe but how the Scripture may be proposed as a Credible Object fit for Beliefe And for Reason no man expects that that should proove it it doth service enough if it enable us to disproove that which misguided men conceive against it If none of these then be an Absolute and sufficient meanes to prove it either we must finde out another or see what can bâ—… more wrought out of these And to all this again A. C. sayes nothing For the Tradition of the Church then certaine it is wee must distinguish the Church before wee can judge right of the Validity of the Tradition For if the speech bee of the Prime Christian Church the Apostles Disciples and such as had immediate Revelation from Heaven no question but the Voyce and Tradition of this Church is Divine not aliquo modo in a sort but simply and the Word of God from them is of like Validity written or delivered And against this Tradition of which kinde this That the Bookes of Scripture are the Word of God is the most generall and uniforme the Church of England never excepted And when S. †L. 1. cont Epis. Fund c. 5. Ego vero non crederem Evangelio nisi me Catholicae Ecclesiae commoveret Authoritas Augustine said I would not believe the Gospell unlesse the Authority of the Catholike Church mooved mee which Place you urged at the Conference though you are now content to slide by it some of your owne will not endure should be understood save * Occham Dial. p. 1. L. 1. c. 4. Intelligitur solum de Ecclesiâ—… qua fuit tempore Apostolorum of the Church in the time of the Apostles only and a Biel. lect 2â—… in C. Missâ—… A tempore Christi Apostolorum c. And so doth S. August take Eccles. Contra Fund some of the Church in Generall not excluding after-ages But sure to include Christ and his Apostles And the certainety is there abundance of certainety in it selfe but how farre that is evident to us shall after appeare But this will not serve your turne The Tradition of the present Church must bee as Infallible as that of the Primitive But the contrary to this is prooved * §. 16. Nu. 6. before because this Voyce of the present Church is not simply Divine To what end then serves any Tradition of the present Church To what Why to a very good end For first it serves by a full consent to worke upon the mindes of unbelievers to move them to reade and to consider the Scripture which they heare by so many Wise Learned and Devoute men is of no meaner esteeme then the Word of God And secondly It serves among Novices Weaklings and Doubters in the Faith to instruct and confirme them till they may acquaint themselves with and understand the Scripture which the Church delivers as the Word of God And thus againe some of your owne understand the fore-cited Place of S. Augustine I would not believe the Gospell c. * Sive Infâ—…les sive in Fide Novitii Can. Loc. L. 2. c 8. Neganti aut omnino nescientâ—… Scripturam Stapl. Relect. Cent. 4. q. 1. A 3. For he speakes it either of Novices or Doubters in the Faith or else of such as were in part Infidels You at the Conference though you omit it here would needs have it that S. Augustine spake even of the †Quid si fateamur Fideles etiam Ecclesiae Authoritate commoveri ut Scripturas recipiant Non tamen inde sequitur eos hoc modo penitus 〈◊〉 aut nullâ aliâ fortioreque ratione induci Quis autem Christianus est quem Ecclesia Christi commâ—…dans Scripturam Christi non commoveat Whitaker Disp. de sacrâ Scripturá Contro 1. q 3. c. 8. vbt 〈◊〉 locum hunc S. Aug. faithfull which I cannot yet thinke For he speakes to the Manichees and they had a great part of the Infidell in them And the words immediately before these are If thou shouldest finde one Qui Evangelio nondum credit which did not yet believe the Gospell what wouldest thou doe to make him believe a Et ibid. Quibus obtemperavi dicentibus Credite Evangelio Therefore he speakes of himselfe when he did not believe Ego verò non Truly I would not c. So to these two ends it serves and there need be no Question between us But then every thing that is the first Inducer to believe is not by and by either the Principall Motive or the chiefe and last Object of Beliefe upon which a man may rest his Faith Vnlesse we shall be of b Certum est quod tenemur credere omnibus contentis in Sacro Canone quia Ecclesia credit ex caratione soluÌ„ Ergo per prius magis tenemur Credere Ecclesiae quam Evangelio Almain in 3. Dist. 24 Conclus 6. Dub. 6. And to make a shew of proof for this he falsifies S Aug. most notoâ—…ously and reads that known place not Nisi me commoveret as all read it but compelleret Patet quia dicit Augustinus Evangelio non CredereÌ„ nisi aa hoc me compelleret Ecclesiae Au. horitas Ibid. And so also Gerson 〈◊〉 In Declarat veritatum quae credendae sunt c. part 1 p. 414. §. 3. But in a most ancient Manuscript in Corp. Ch. Colledge Library in Cambridge the words are Nisi me commoveret c. Lacobus Almain's Opinion That we are per prius magis first and more bound to believe the Church then the Gospell Which your own Learned men as you may see by c Canus L. 2. de Locis c. 8. fo 34. b. §. 16. Num. 6. Mel. Canus reject as Extreame foule and so indeed it is The first knowledge then after the Quid Nominis is knowne by Grammer that helpes to open a mans understanding and prepares him to bee able to Demonstrate a Truth and make it evident is his Logicke But when he hath made a Demonstration he resolves the knowledge of his Conclusion not into his Grammaticall or Logicall Principles but into the Immediate Principles out of which it is deduced So in this Particular a man is probably led by the Authority of the present Church as by the first informing induceing perswading Meanes to believe the Scripture to be the Word of God but when he hath studied considered and compared this Word with it selfe and with other Writings with the helpe of Ordinary Grace and a minde morally induced and reasonably perswaded by the Voyce of the Church the Scripture then gives greater and higher reasons of Credibility to it selfe then Tradition alone could give And then he that Believes resolves his last and full Assent That Scripture is of
more wee finde that the thing it selfe doth answer our received opinion concerning it so that the former inducement prevailing somewhat with us before doth now much more prevaile when the very thing hath ministred farther Reason Here then againe in his Iudgement Tradition is the first Inducement but the farther Reason and Ground is the Scripture And Resolution of Faith ever settles upon the Farthest Reason it can not upon the First Inducement So that the State of this Question is firme and yet plaine enough to him that will not shut his eyes Now here after a long silence A. C. thrusts himselfe in againe and tels me That if I would A. C. p. 52. consider the Tradition of the Church not onely as it is the Tradition of a Company of Fallible men in which sense the Authority of it as himselfe confesses is but Humane and Fallible c. But as the Tradition of a Company of men assisted by Christ and his Holy Spirit in that sense I might easily finde it more then an Introduction indeed as much as would amount to an Infallible Motive Well I have considered The Tradition of the present Church both these wayes And I finde that A. C. confesses That in the first sense the Tradition of the Church is meere humane Authority and no more And therefore in this sense it may serve for an Introduction to this Beliefe but no more And in the second sense as it is not the Tradition of a Company of men onely but of men assisted by Christ and His Spirit In this second sense I cannot finde that the Tradition of the present Church is of Divine and Infallible Authority till A. C. can prove That this Company of men the Romane Prelates and their Clergie he meanes are so fully so cleerely so permanently assisted by Christ and his Spirit as may reach to Infallibility much lesse to a Divine Infallibility in this or any other Principle which they teach For every Assistance of Christ and the Blessed Spirit is not enough to make the Authority of any Company of men Divine and infallible but such and so great an Assistance onely as is purposely given to that effect Such an Assistance the Prophets under the Old Testament and the Apostles under the New had but neither the High-Priest with his Clergie in the Old nor any Company of Prelates or Priests in the New since the Apostles ever had it And therefore though at the entreaty of A. C. I have considered this very A. C. p. 52. well yet I cannot no not in this Assisted sense thinke the Tradition of the present Church Divine and Infallible or such Company of men to be worthy of Divine and infallible Credit and sufficient to breed in us Divine and Infallible Faith Which I am sorrie A. C. should affirme so boldly as he doth What A. C. p. 52. That Company of men the Romane Bishop and his Clergie of Divine and Infallible Credit and sufficient to breed in us Divine and Infallible Faith Good God! Whither will these men goe Surely they are wise in their generation but that makes them never a whit the more the Children of light a S. Luke 16. 8. S. Luke 16. And could they put this home upon the world as they are gone farre in it what might they not effect How might they and would they then Lord it over the Faith of Christendome contrary to b 1. S. Pet. 5. 3. S. Peter's Rule whose Successours certainly in this they are not But I pray if this Company of men be infallibly assisted whence is it that this very Company have erred so dangerously as they have not only in some other things but even in this Particular by equaling the Tradition of the present Church to the written Word of God Which is a Doctrine unknowne to the a S. Basil goes as farre for Traditions as any For he sayes Parem vim habent ad pictatem L. de Sp. Sanct. c. 27. But first he speaks of Apostolicall Tradition not of the Tradition of the Present Church Secondly the Learned take exceptions to this Booke of S. Basil as corrupted BP Andr. Opusc. cont Peron p. 9. Thirdly S. Basil himself Ser. de Fide professes that he uses somtimes Agrapha sed ca solùm quae non sunt aliona à piâ secundum Scripturam sententiâ So he makes the Scripture their Touch-stone or tryall And therefore must of Necessity make Scripture superior in as much as that which is able to try another is of greater force and superiour Dignity in that use then the thing tried by it And Stapleton himselfe confesses Traditionem recentiorem posteriorem sicut particularem nullo modo cum Scripturâ vel cum Traditionibus priùs à se explicatis comparandam esse Stapleton Relect. Controv. 5. q. 5. A. 2. Primitive Church and which frets upon the very Foundation it selfe by justling with it So belike he that hath but halfe an indifferent eye may see this Assisted Company have erred and yet we must wink in obedience and think them Infallible But. A. C. would have me consider againe That A. C. p 52. it is as easie to take the Tradition of the present Church in the two fore-named senses as the present Scriptures printed and approved by men of this Age. For in the first sense The very Scriptures saith he considered as printed and approved by men of this Age can be no more then of Humane Credit But in the second sense as printed and approved by men assisted by God's Spirit for true Copies of that which was first written then we may give Infallible Credit to them Well I have considered this too And I can take the Printing and Approving the Copies of Holy-Writ in these two senses And I can and do make a difference betweene Copies printed and approved by meere morall men and men assisted by Gods Spirit And yet for the Printing onely a skilfull and an able morall man may doe better service to the Church then an illiterate man though assisted in other things by God's Spirit But when I have considered all this what then The Scripture being put in writing is a thing visibly existent and if any errour be in the Print 't is easily corrigible by b Ut §. 18. Nu. 4. Eâ—… S. Aug. L. 32. cont Faustum 〈◊〉 1â—… former Copies Tradition is not so easily observed nor so safely kept And howsoever to come home to that which A. C. inferres upon it namely That the A. C. p. 53. Tradition of the present Church may be accepted in these two senses And if this be all that he will inferre for his penne here is troubled and forsakes him whether by any checke of Conscience or no I know not I will and you see have granted it already without more adoe with this Caution That every Company of men assisted by Gods Spirit are not assisted to this height to be Infallible by Divine Authority For all this
it but not Evident And therefore he is after forced to confesse That the soule somtimes assents not to the Miracles but in great timidity which cannot stand with cleere Evidence And after againe That the soule may renounce the Doctrine formerly confirmed by Miracles unlesse some inward and supernaturall Light be given c. And neither can this possibly stand with Evidence And therefore Bellarmine goes no farther then this Miracula esse sufficientia efficacia ad novam fidem persuadendam L. 4. de Notis Eccles. c. 14. §. 1. To induce and perswade but not to Convince And Thomas will not grant so much for he sayes expresly Miraculum non est sufficiens Causa inducens Fidem Quia videntium unum idem Miraculâ—… quidam credunt quidam non Tho. 2. 2. q. 6. A. 1. c. And Ambros. Catharin in Rom. 10. 15. is downe-right at Nulla fides est habenda signo Examinanda sunt c. Anastasius Nicanus Episcopus apud Baron ad An. 360. num 21 Non sunt necessaria signâ—… vera sidet c. Suarez defens Fidei Catho L. 1. c. 7. Nu. 3. Infallâ—…ble nor Inseparable Markes of Truth in Doctrine Not Infallible For they may be Marks of false Doctrine in the highest degree d Deut. 13. 1 2 3. 2. Thess. 2. 9. S. Marc. 13. 22. Deut. 13. Not proper and Inseparable For e Operatio Virtutum alteri datur 1. Cor. 12. 10. To one and another he saith not to al. Damonia fugare Mortuâ—…s suscitare c. dedit quibusdam Discipulis suis quibusdam non dedit That is to doe Miracles S. Aug. Serm. 22. de Verbis Apost 〈◊〉 5. all which wrote by Inspiration did not confirm their Doctrine by Miracles For we do not finde that David or Solomon with some other of the Prophets did any neither were any wrought by S. Iohn the Baptist †S. Ioh. 10. 41. S. Ioh. 10. So as Credible Signes they were and are still of as much forceto us as 't is possible for things on the credit of Relation to be For the Witnesses are many and such as spent their lives in making good the Truth which they saw But that the Workers of them were Divinely and Infallibilly inspired in that which they Preacht and writ was still to the †Here it may be observed how warily A. C. carries himselfe For when hee hath said That a cleare Râ—…lation was made to the Apostles which is most true And so the Apostles knew that which they taught simpliciter à priori most Demonstratively from the Prime Cause God himselfe Then hee addes p 51. I say cleare in attestante That is the Revelation of this Truth was cleare in the Apostles that witnessed it But to make it knowledge in the Auditors the same or like Revelation and as cleare must be made to them For they could have no other knowing Assurance Credible they might and had So A. C. is wary there but comes not home to the Businesse And so might have held his peace For the Question is not what cleare Evidence the Apostles had but what Evidence they had which heard them Hearers a matter of Faith and no more evident by the light of Humane Reason to men that lived in those Dayes then to us now For had that beene Demonstrated or beene cleare as Prime Principles are in its owne light both they and we had apprehended all the Mysteries of Divinity by Knowledge not by Faith But this is most apparent was not For had the Prophets or Apostles been ordered by God to make this Demonstratively or Intuitively by Discourse or vision appeare as cleare to their Auditors as to themselves it did that Whatsoever they taught was Divine and Infallible Truth all men which had the true use of Reason must have beene forced to yeeld to their Doctrine a Esay 53. 1. Esay could never have beene at Domine quis Lord who hath believed our Report Esay 53. Nor b Ier 20. 7. Ieremy at Domine factus sum Lord I am in derision daily Ier. 20. Nor could any of S. Pauls Auditors have mocked at him as some of them did * Acts 17. 32. And had Zedcchiah and the people seene it as clearely as Ieremy himselfe did that the word he spake was Gods word and Infallible Ierusalem for oughâ—… we know had not beene layd desolate by the Chaldean But because they could not see this by the way of knowledge and would not believe it by way of Faith they and that City perished together Jer. 38. 17. Act. 17. for Preaching the Resurrection if they had had as full a view as S. Paul himselfe had in the Assureance which God gave of it in and by the Resurrection of Christ. vers 31. But the way of Knowledge was not that which God thought fittest for mans Salvation For Man having sinned by Pride God thought fittest to humble him at the very root of the Tree of Knowledge and make him deny his understanding and submit to Faith or hazard his happinesse The Credible Object all the while that is the Mysteries of Religion and the Scripture which containes them is Divine and Infallible and so are the Pen-men of them by Revelation But we and all our Fore-Fathers the Hearers and Readers of them have neither * Nemo pius nisi qui Scripturae credit S. Aug. L. 26. cont Faustum c. 6. Now no Man believes the Scripture that doth not believe that it is the Word of God I say which doth not believe I doe not say which doth not know oportâ—…t quod Credatur Authoritati eorum quibus Revelatio facta est Tho p. 1. q. 1. A. 8. ad secundum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 C c. Quod vero Animam habemus unde manis stâ—…m Si enim Uisibilibus credere velâ—… de Deo de Angelis de mente de Anima dubitabis sic tibi omnia veritatis dogmata deperibunt Et certè si manifestis credere velis Invisibilibus magis quam Uisibilibus credere oportet Liâ—…et enim admirabile sit dictum verum tamâ—…n apud mentem habentes valde certum vel in confesso Ex homil 13 S Chryâ—…ost in S. Mat. To. 1. Edit Fronto Paris 1630. knowledge nor vision of the Prime Principles in or about them but * Faith only And the Revelation which was cleare to them is not so to us nor therefore the Prime Tradition it selfe delivered by them Sixthly That hence it may be gathered that Pun. 6. the Assent which we yeeld to this maine Principle of Divinity That the Scripture is the Word of God is grounded vpon no Compelling or Demonstrative Ratiocination but relyes upon the strength of Faith more then any other Principle whatsoever †And this is the Ground of that which I said before §. 15. Nu. 1. That the Scripture only and not any unwritten Tradition was the â—…oundation of our Faith Namely when the Authority of
the satisfaction of all men Christianly disposed Whereas had I desired only to rid my hands of these Captious Iesuites for certainly this Question was Captiously asked it had beene sufficient to have restored the Question thus How doe you know the Testimony of the Church by which you say you know Scripture to be the Word of God to be Divine and Infallible If they proove it by Scripture A. C. p. 53. Et vid. §. 16. N. 28. as all of them doe and as A. C. doth how doe they know that Scripture to be Scripture It is but a Circular Assurance of theirs by which they found the Churches Infallibility upon the Testimonie of the Scripture And the Scriptures Infallibility upon the Testimony of the Church That is upon the Matter the Churches Infallibility upon the Churches Infallibility But I labour for edification not for destruction And now by what I have here said I will weigh my Answer and his Exception taken against it F. The Bishop said That the Books of Scripture are Principles to be Supposed and needed not to be Proved B. Why but did I say That this Principle The § 17 Books of Scripture are the Word of God is to be supposed as needing no Proof at al to a Naturall man Or to a man newly entring upon the Faith yea or perhaps to a Doubter or Weakling in the Faith Can you think me so weake It seemes you doe But sure I know there is a great deale of difference betweene Ethnicks that deny and deride the Scripture and men that are Born in the Church The first have a farther way about to this Principle The other in their very Christian Education sucke it in and are taught so soone as they are apt to learne it That the Books commonly called The Bible or Scripture are the Word of God And I dealt with you †Dixi sicut â—…i congruâ—… ad quâ—…â—…bam c. S Aug. l. 1. Retract c. 13. as with a Christian though in Errour while you call Catholike The Words before spoken by me were That the Scripture onely not any unwritten Tradition was the Foundation of Faith The Question betweene us and you is Whether the Scripture do containe all necessary things of Faith Now in this Question as in all Nature and Art the Subject the Scripture is and must be a Nor is it such a strange thing to heare that Scripture is such 〈◊〉 supposeâ—…d Principle among Chriâ—…ians Quod à Scriptura evidenter deduâ—…itur est evidenter verum suppositis Scripturis Bellarm. L. 4. de Eccl. Milit. c. 3. §. 3. supposed The Quaere between the Romane-Catholikes and the Church of England being onely of the Praedicate the thing uttered of it Namely whether it containe all Fundamentals of Faith all Necessaries for Salvation within it Now since thâ—… Question proposed in very forme of Art proves not but b De Subjecto enim quaeritur semper non Subjectiâ—…n ipsum supposes the Subject I thinke I gave a satisfying Answer That to you and me and in this Question Scripture was a Supposed Principle and needed no Proofe And I must tell you that in this Question of the Scriptures perfect Continent it is against all Art yea and Equity too in Reasoning to call for a Proofe of That here which must go unavoydably supposed in this Question And if any man will be so familiar with Impiety to Question it it must be tryed in a preceding Question and Dispute by it self Yet here not you onely but c L. 4. de verb. Dei c. 4. §. Quarâ—…ò necesse est 〈◊〉 the lesuite here apud A. C. p. 49. Bellarmine and others run quite out of the way to snatch at Advantage F. Against this I read what I had formerly written in my Reply against M. Iohn White Wherein I plainely shewed that this Answer was not good and that no other Answer could be made but by admitting some Word of God unwritten to assure us of this Point B. Indeed here you read out of a Booke which § 18 you called your owne a large Discourse upon this Argument But surely I so untied the knot of the Argument that I set you to your Book againe For your selfe confesse that against this you read what you had formerly written Well! what ere you read there certaine it is you do a great deale of wrong to M. Hooker a L. 3 §. 8. and my selfe that because we call it a Supposed or Presumed Principle among Christians you should fall by and by into such a b Whereas Bellarm. sayes expresly that in the Controversies betweene you and us Non agitur de Metaphysicis subtilitatibus quae sinc periculo ignorari interdum cum laude oppugnari possunt c. Bellarm. Praefat. Operibus praefix §. 3. Metaphysicall Discourse to prove That that which is a c His omnibus Questionibut praemittenda est Controversia de Verbo Dei Neque enim disputari potest nisi priùs in aliquo Communi Principio cum Adversariis conveniamus Convenit autem inter nos omues omninò Haereticos Verbum Dei esse Regulam fidei ex quâ de Dogmatibus judicandum sit esse Commune Principium ab omnibus concessum unde Argumenta ducantur c. Bellarm. Praefat. Operib prafix §. ult And if it be Commune Principium ab omnibus concessum then I hope it must be taken as a thing supposed or as a Praecognitum in this Dispute betweene us Praecognitum fore-knowne in Science must be of such light that it must be knowne of and by it selfe alone and that the Scripture cannot be so knowne to be the Word of God I will not now enter againe into that Discourse having said enough already how farre the Beame which is very glorious especially in some parts of Scripture gives light to prove it selfe You see neither Hooker nor I nor the Church of England for ought I know leave the Scripture alone to manifest it selfe by the light which it hath in it selfe No but when the present Church hath prepared and led the way like a preparing Morning-Light to Sun-shine then indeed we settle for our Direction but not upon the first opening of the morning Light but upon the Sun it selfe Nor will I make needlesse enquiry how farre and in what manner a Praecognitum or Supposed Principle in any Science may be proved in a Higher to which that is subordinate or accepted in a Prime Nor how it may in Divinity where Prae as well as Post-cognita things fore as well as after-knowne are matters and under the manner of Faith and not of Science strictly Nor whether a Praecognitum a presupposed Principle in Faith which rests upon Divine Authority must needs have as much and equall Light to Naturall Reason as Prime Principles have in Nature while they rest upon Reason Nor whether it may justly bee denied to have sufficient Light because not equall Your owne Schoole †Colligitur apertà ex
of Divinity in this sort is a Science because it proceeds out of Principles that are knowne by the light of a Superiour Knowledge which is the Knowledge of God and the Blessed in Heaven In this Superiour Science this Principle The Scriptures are the Oracles of God is more then evident in full light This Superiour Science delivered this Principle in full revealed Light to the Prophets and Apostles †Non creditur Deus esse Author bujus Scientiae quia Homines hoc testati sunt in quantum Homines nudo Testimonio Humano sed in quantum circa eos effulsit virtus Divina â—…sa Deus iis sibi ipsi in eis Testimonium pâ—…buit Hen. à Gand. Sum. P. 1. A. 9. q. 3. This Infallible Light of this Principle made their Authority derivatively Divine By the same Divine Authoriâ—…y they wrote and delivered the Scripture to the Church Therefore from them immediately the Church received the Scripture and that uncorrupt though not in the same clearenesse of Ligâ—…t which they had And yet since no sufficient Reason hath or can be given that in any Substantiall thing it hath beene * Corruâ—…pi non possunt quia in manibus sunt omnium Christianorum Et quisquis hoc primitùs ausus esset multorum Codicum vetustiorum collatione confutaretur Maximè quia non unâ—… linguá sea multis continetur Scriptura Nonnullae autem Codicum mendositates vel de Antiquioribus vel de Linguá praecedente emendantur S. Aug. L. 32. cont Faustum c. 16. Corrupted it remaines firme at this day and that proved in the most Supreme Science and therefore now to bee supposed at least by all Christians That the Scripture is the Word of God So my Answer is good even in strictnesse That this Principle is to be supposed in this Dispute Besides the Iewes never had nor can have any other Proofe That the Old Testament is the Word of God then we have of the New For theirs was delivered by Moses and the Prophets and ours was delivered by the Apostles which were Prophets too The Iewes did believe their Scripture by a Divine Authority For so the Iewes argue themselves a S. Iohn 9. 29. S. Ioh. 9. We know that God spake with Moses b Maldonat in S. Ioh. 9. It aque non magis errare posse eum sequentes quà m si Deum ipsum sequerentur And that therefore they could no more erre in following Moses then they could in following God himselfe And our Saviour seemes to inferre as much c S. Ioh. 5. 47. S. Ioh. 5. where he expostulates with the Iewes thus If you believe not Moses his Writings how should you believe Me Now how did the Iewes know that God spake to Moses How why apparently the same way that is before set downe First by Tradition So S. d Hom. 57. iâ—… S. Ioh. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysostome We know why By whose witnesse do you know By the Testimony of our Ancestors But he speakes not of their immediate Ancestors but their Prime which were Prophets and whose Testimony was Divine into which namely their Writings the Iewes did Resolve their Faith And even that Scripture of the Old Testament was a e 2. S. Pet. 1. 19. Light and a shining Light too And therefore could not but be sufficient when Tradition had gone before And yet though the Iewes entred this way to their Beliefe of the Scripture they do not say f S. Chrys. ubi suprà 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Audivimus We have heard that God spâ—…ke to Moses but We know it So they Resolved their Faith higher and into a more inward Principle then an Eare to their immediate Ancestors and their Tradition And I would willingly learne of you if you can shew it me where ever any one Iew disputing with another about their Law did put the other to prove that the Old Testament was the Word of God But they still supposed it And when others put them to their Proofe this way they went And yet you say F. That no other Answer could be made but by admitting some Word of God unwritten to assure us of this Point B. I thinke I have shewed that my Answer is § 19 good and that no other Answer need be made If there were need I make no Question but another Answer might be made to assure us of this Point though we did not admit of any Word of God unwritten I say to assure us and you expresse no more If you had said to assure us by Divine Faith your Argument had beene the stronger But if you speake of Assurance onely in the generall I must then tell you and it is the great advantage which the Church of Christ hath against Infidels a man may be assured nay infallibly assured by Ecclesiasticall and Humane Proofe Men that never saw Rome may be sure and infallibly believe That such a Citie there is by Historicall and acquired Faith And if Consent of Humane Storie can assure me this why should not Consent of Church-storie assure me the other That Christ and his Apostles delivered this Body of Scripture as the Oracles of God For Iewes Enemies to Christ they beare witnesse to the Old Testament and Christians through almost all Nations †Tant a hominum temporum consensione firmatum S. Aug. L. de Mor. Eccles Cath. c. 29. Is Libri quoquo modo se habent sancti tamen Divinarum Rerum pleni prope totius generis humani Confessione diffamantur c. S. Aug. de util cred c. 7. L. 13. cont Faust. c. 15. give in evidence to both Old and New And no Pagan or other Enemies of Christianity can give such a Worthy and Consenting Testimonie for any Authoritie upon which they rely or almost for any Principle which they have as the Scripture hath gained to it self And as is the Testimony which it receives above all * Super omnes omnium Gentiâ—… Literas S. Aug. 11. de Civit. Dei c. 1. Writings of all Nations so here is assurance in a great measure without any Divine Authority in a Word written or Vnwritten A great assurance and it is Infallible too Only then we must distinguish Infallibility For first a thing may be presented as an infallible Object of Beliefe when it is true and remaines so For Truth quà talis as it is Truth can not deceive Secondly a thing is said to be Infallible when it is not only true and remains so actually but when it is of such invariable constancy and upon such ground as that no Degree of falshood at any time in any respect can fall upon it Certain it is that by Humane Authority Consent and Proofe a man may be assured infallibly that the Scripture is the Word of God by an acquired Habit of Faith cui non su'est falsum under which nor Error nor falshood is But he cannot be assured infallibly by Divine Faith a Incertum
Faith and an Infallible understanding of the same thing under the same Considerations cannot possibly stand together in the same man at the same time A. C. hath not done asking yet But he would farther know Whether Protestants can be Infallibly sure that all and onely those points which Protestants account A. C. p. 69. Fundamentall and necessary to be expressely knowne by all were so accounted by the Primitive Church Truly Vnity in the Faith is very Considerable in the Church And in this the Protestants agree and as Vnisormely as you and have as Infallible Assurance as you can have of all points which they account Fundamentall yea and of all which were so accounted by the Primitive Church And these are but the Creed and some few and those Immediate deductions from it And †Tert. praescript adversus Haeres c. 13. c Tertullian and * Ruffin in Symb. Ruffinus upon the very Clause of the Catholike Church to decypher it make a recitall only of the Fundamentall Points of Faith And for the first of these the Creed you see what the sense of the Primitive Church was by that famous and knowne place of a Et neque qui valde potens est in dicendo ex Ecclesiae Praefectis alia ab his dicet c. Neque debilis in dicendo hanc Traditionem imminuet Quùm euim una cadem fides sit ueque is qui multum de eâ dicere potest plusquam oportet dicit neque qui parum ipsam imminuit Irenae L. 1. Adv. Haer. c. 2. 3. Et S. Basil. Serm. de Fide To. 2. p. 195. Edit Bafil 1505. Vna Immobilis Regula c. Tert. de veland Virg. c. 1. Irenaeus where after hee had recited the Creed as the Epitome or Briefe of the Faith he addes That none of the Governors of the Church be they never so potent to Expresse themselves can say alia ab his other things from these Nor none so weake in Expression as to diminish this Tradition For since the Faith is One and the same He that can say much of it sayes no more then he ought Nor doth he diminish it that can say but little And in this the Protestants all agree And for the second the immediate Deductions they are not formally Fundamentall for all men but for such b Quantum ad prima Credibilia quae sunt Articuli Fidei tenetur homo Explicitè credere sicut tenetur habere fidem Quantum autem ad alia Credibilia c. non tenetur Explicitè credere nisi quando hoc ci constiterit in Doctrinâ Fidei contineri Tho. 2. 2 q. 2. A. 5. c. Potest quis Errare Credendo oppositum Alicui Articulo subtill ad cujas sidem explicitam non â—…mnis teuentur Holkot in 1. sent q. 1. ad quartum as are able to make or understand them And for others t is enough if they doe not obstinatâ—…ly or Schismatically refuse them after they are once revealed Indeed you account many things Fundamentall which were never so accounted in any sense by the Primitive Church such as are all the Decrees of Generall Councels which may be all true but can never be all Fundamentall in the Faith For it is not in the power of * Resolutio Ocbam est Quod nec tota Ecclesiae nec Concilium Generale nâ—… suminus Pontifex potest facere Artiâ—…ulum quod non suit Articulus Articulus cuim est ex co solo qui à Deo Revelatuâ—… est Almain in 3. sent D. 15. q. unica Coâ—…clus 4. Dub 3. the whole Church much lesse of a Generall Councell to make any thing Fundamentall in the Faith that is not contained in the Letter or sense of that common Faith which was once given and but once for all to the Saints S. Lude 3. But if it be A. C's meaning to call S. Iude vers 3. for an Infallible Assurance of all such Points of Faith as are Decreed by Generall Councels Then I must bee bold to tell him All those Decrees are not necessary to all mens salvation Neither doe the Romanists themselves agree in all such determined Points of Faith Be they determined by Councels or by Popes For Instance After those Bookes which wee account Apochryphall were †Concil Trid Sess 4. defined to bee Canonicall and an Anathema pronounced in the Case a Six Senens Biblioth Sanct. L. 1. Sixtus Senensis makes scruple of some of them And after b Non est necessariò credendum Detâ—…minatis per Sum Pontificem c. Aimain in 3. sent D. 24. q. unica Conclus 6. Dubio 6. fine Pope Leo the tenth had defined the Pope to be aboue a Generall Councell yet many Romane Catholikes defend the Contrary And so doe all the Sorbonists at this very day Therefore if these be Fundamentall in the Faith the Romanists differ one from another in the Faith nay in the Fundamentals of the Faith And therefore cannot have Infallible Assurance of them Nor is there that Unity in the Faith amongst them which they so much and so often boast of For what Scripture is Canonicall is a great point of Faith And I believe they will not now Confesse That the Popes power over a Generall Councell is a small one And so let A. C. looke to his owne Infallible Assurance of Fundamentals in the Faith for ours God be thanked is well And since he is pleased to call for a particular Text of Scripture to proove all and every thing of this nature which is ridiculous in it selfe and unreasonable to demand as hath beene * §. 38. N. 6. shewed yet when he shall bee pleased to bring forth but a particular knowne Tradition to proove all and every thing of this on their side it will then be perhaps time for him to call for and for us to give farther Answer about particular Texts of Scripture After all this Questioning A. C. inferres That I had need seeke out some other Infallible Rule and meanes by A. C. p. 69. which I may know these things infalliâ—…ly or else that I have no reason to be so confident as to adventure my soule that one may be saved living and dying in the Protestant faith How weake this Inference is will easily appeare by that which I have already said to the premises And yet I have somewhat left to say to this Inference also And first I have lived and shall God willing dye in the Faith of Christ as it was professed in the Ancient Primitive Church and as it is professed in the present Church of England And for the Rule which governes me herein if I cannot bee confident for my soule upon the Scripture and the Primitive Church expounding and declaring it I will be confident upon no other And secondly I have all the reason in the world to be confident upon this Rule for this can never deceive me Another that very other which A. C. proposes
Tradition may be knowne to be such by the light which it hath in it selfe which is an excellent Proposition to make sport withall were this an Argument to be handled merrily 3. For the third Opinion and way of proving either some thinke that there is no sufficient warrant for this unlesse they fetch it from the Testimony of the Holy Ghost and so looke in vaine after speciall Revelations and make themselves by this very Conceit obnoxious and easie to be led by all the whisperings of a seducing private spirit or els you would faine have them think so For your side both upon this and other Occasions do often challenge That we resolve all our Faith into the Dictates of a * A Iesuite under the name of T S. set out a Booke An. 1630. which he called The Triall of the Protestant private Spirit private Spirit from which we shall ever prove our selves as free if not freer than you To the Question in hand then Suppose it agreed upon that there must be a d Ut Testimonia Scripturae certam inaubitatam fidem praestent necessarium videtur ostendere quod ipsae Divinae Scripturae sint Dei Spiritu inspiratae Orig. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Divine Faith cui subesse non potest falsum under which can rest no possible errour That the Bookes of Scripture are the written Word of God If they which goe to the testimony of the Holy Ghost for proofe of this doe meane by Faith Objectum Fidei the Object of Faith that is to bee believed then no question they are out of the ordinary way For God never sent us by any word or warrant of his to looke for any such speciall and private Testimony to prove which that Booke is that we must believe But if by Faith they meane the Habit or Act of Divine infused Faith by which vertue they doe believe the Credible Object and thing to bee believed then their speech is true and confessed by all Divines of all sorts For Faith is the gift * 1. Cor. 12. 3. 4. Datur nobu a Deo c. S. Aug. in Psal. 87. of God of God alone and an infused †Quia homo assentiendo eis quae sunt fidâ—…i clevatur supra Naturam suam oportel quòd hoc inâ—…t ei ex supernaturali pâ—…incipio intâ—…riùs movente quod est Dens Tho. 2 2 ae q. 6. A. 1. c. And your owne Divines agree in this That Fides acquisita is not sufficient for any Article but there must be Fides infusa before there can be Divine Certainty Fides acquisita innititur conjecturis humanis Ad quem modum Saraceni suis Praeceptoribus Iudaei suis Rabinis Gentâ—…s suis Philosophs omnes suis Maj ribus inharent non sic Christians sed per interius lumen infusum à Spiritu Sancto quo firmissimè certissimè moventur ad credenâ—…m c. Canus L. 2. Locor c. 8. §. I am si hac Habit in respect whereof the Soule is meerely recipient And therefore the sole Infuser the Holy Ghost must not beâ—… excluded from that worke which none can doe but Hee For the Holy Ghost as * Symb. Nicen. The Holy Ghost spake by the Prophets c. Et 1. S. Pet. 2. 21. Quis modus est quo doces animas ea quae futura sunt Docuistâ—… enim Prophetas tuos S. Aug. L. 11. Confess c. 19. Hee first dictated the Scripture to the Apostles b Nec enim Ecclesiae Testimonium aut Judicium praedicamus Dei Spiritum vel ab Ecclâ—…sia doceâ—…te vol à nobis audientibus excludimus sed utrobique disertè includimus c. Stapl. trip contr Whitak c. 3. So did he not leave the Church in generall nor the true members of it in particular without Grace to believe what himself had revealed and made Credible So that Faith as it is taken for the vertue of Faith whether it be of this or any other Article c Fides quae caepit ab Ecclesia Testimonio quatenus proponit inducit ad Fidem deâ—…nit in Deo intùs revelante intùs docente quod forts Ecclesia pradicavit Stapl. Relect. Cont. 4. q. 3. a. 2. When grave and learned men doe sometimes hold that of this Principle there is no proofe but by the Testimony of the Spirit c. I thinke it is not their meaning to exclude all outward Proofes c but rather this That all other meanes are uneffectuall of themselves to worke Faith without the speciall Grace of God Hook c. Lib. 3. §. 8. though it receive a kinde of preparation or Occasion of Beginning from the Testimony of the Church as it proposeth and induceth to the Faith yet it ends in God revealing within and teaching within that which the Church preached without For till the Spirit of God move the Heart of man he cannot believe be the Object never so Credible The speech is true then but quite d De habitu Fidei quoad fieri ejus generationem quùm à Deo immediatè solo Dono gratuito infusus est Nihil ad Quastionem nisi quoad hoc quod per Scriptura inspectionem c. Henr. à Gand. Sam. a. 10. q. 1. lit D. out of the State of this Question which inquires onely after a sufficient meanes to make this Object Credible and fit to be believed against all impeachment of folly and temerity in Beliefe whether men do actually believe it or not For which no man may expect inward private Revelation without the externall means of the Church unlesse perhaps the e Stapl. Relect. Cont. 4. Q. 3. A. 2. Doth not onely affirme it but proves it too à paritate rationis in case of necessity where there is no Contempt of the externall meanes case of Neceâ—…ity be excepted when a man lives in such a time place as excludes him from all ordinary means in which I dare not offer to shut up God from the foules of men nor to tie him to those ordinary waies and means to which yet in great wisdome and providence He hath tied and bound all mankind Private Revelation then hath nothing ordinarily to doe to make the Object Credible in this That Scripture is the Word of God or in any other Article For the Question is of such outward and evident meanes as other men may take notice of as well as our selves By which if there arise any Doubting or Infirmity in the Faith others may strengthen us or we affoord meanes to support them Whereas the a Quid cum singulis agitur Deus scit qui agit ipsi cum quibus agitur sciunt Quid autem agatur cum genere Humano per Historiam commendari volâ—…it per Prophetiam S. Aug. de vera Relig. c. 25. Testimony of the Spirit and all private Revelation is within nor felt nor seen of any but him that hath it So that hence can be drawn no proofe to