to be found in the Councell of Trent Sess 4. which is the place I alledged ere-while It is committed singularly to Peter and his successors that they should teach all men what is to bee held concerning the doctrine of faith For the expounding whereof he saith a little after Sect. Si etiam that The Lord speakes of a singular office of teaching the whol Church by appointing and decreeing what is to be beleeued of all men And againe he saith that The Councels Popes execute the office of a Iudge committed Cap. 10. Sect. Respond aliud est to them by God What the Office of a Iudge is he shews in the same place a few lines before To explication after the manner of a Iudge there is authoritie required A Iudge deliuereth his sentence as a thing that necessarily must be followed To conclude hee tells vs in the same tenth chapter that Sect. Septiâ—um argumentum Christians who are sure the Church cannot erre in expounding the doctrine of faith are bound to receiue that doctrine and not to doubt whether those things be so or no. This matter Bellarmine makes plaine to all men by shewing the manner of this Office in this sort The Scripture for Cap. 10. Sect. Respondeâ— Christus It selfe needs not the witnes of men for it is most true in it selfe whether it be vnderstood or not but for our sake it needs the witnes of the Church because otherwise wee are not certaine what bookes are sacred and diuine nor what is the true and proper meaning In the same Chapter he giues vs to vnderstand what manner of foundation the testimony of the church is The word of God deliuered by the Prophets and Apostles is the first Sect. Respondeo Ad hoc foundation of our faith for therefore we beleeue whatsoeuer we beleeue because God hath reuealed it by his Prophets and Apostles But we adde that besides this first foundation there is another secondary foundation needfull to wit the testimony of the Church for we know not certainly what God hath reuealed but by the testimony of the Church Therefore our faith cleaueth to Christ the first truth reuealing those mysteries as to the first foundation It cleaues also to Peter that is to the Pope propounding and expounding these mysteries as to a secondary foundation And to make the matter yet more plaine he speakes thus in the same tenth chap. Sect. Respondeo verbum We are to know Sect. Respondeâ— verbum that a Proposition or article of faith is concluded in such a Syllogisme as this Whatsoeuer God hath reuealed in the Scriptures is true But this God hath reuealed in the Scriptures Therefore this is true Of the first of these Propositions no man makes any question The second is held for certaine truth amongst all Catholikes for it is grounded vpon the testimony of the Church that is the Councell or the Pope By which it appeares how little Mr. Fisher vnderstands the doctrine whereof he makes profession or how vnaduisedly he deliuereth his opinion For whereas Bellarmine will haue a two-fold foundation primary and secondary Mr. Fisher will acknowledge but one namely the authority of God speaking by the mouth of the church Christian beleefe saith hee ought onely to bee Treat of Faith in the Preface Sect of which point grounded vpon the authority of God speaking by the mouth of the Church We haue seene Bellarmines opinion of this matter which indeed agrees very well with the words of the Councell where it challengeth the office of interpreting the Scriptures For in that clayme it presumes that the diuine truth is already reuealed and that it is the first foundation of our faith to which the office of the Church is added which is but a secondary foundation Now by these places of the Counceâ—l and Bellarmine it is cleare that The foundation of the Romish faith is the authority of the Church This foundation of faith say wee is false and erroneous That our Sauiour Christ and his Prophets and Apostles are the foundation of faith wee beleeue and acknowledge and in this we and they agree That secondary foundation which lyeth in the authority and testimony of the church we refuse as false and naught and in this lyeth the true difference betwixt vs and them in this point as besides other De Script quaest 5. cap. 3. Apol. part 2. chap. 3. diuis 2. 11 Dr. Whitaker hath noted and the reuerend B. Iewell And this indeed is the main reason why we may not ioyn with them If they demand of vs VVhy we receiue not this authority of the church for a foundation of faith VVe answer Because we find no commission in the word of God wherby any such office is conueyed vnto it Neither deale wee herein any otherwise then reason and law direct men to do in the like case For is any man so destitute of reason or so ignorant of the law that he would receiue a man for L. Chancellour L. Treasurer or Lord Chiefe Iustice that were not able to shew any commission for the hauing and executing such an office And shall wee in a businesse of such importance that concernes our free-hold not onely for our present being of the church but for our future becomming heires of glory in heauen giue credit to men vpon their bare word without sight of their commission VVerfore doth our Lord and Sauiour so often in the Scriptures plead his authority from God warranted by the old Testament and vpbraid the Iewes with lightnesse and folly for being ready to receiue one that should come in his owne name If then the Papists would haue vs beleeue that their church is appointed to bee a foundation let them shew their warrant for it and we will accept it and build our faith vpon it But we looke that their commission should be very plain and certaine because it is of such a matter as no naturall reason can conceiue to be true For who would imagine or beleeue that the Apostles who had a little before receiued full power of order and iurisdiction ioyntly and equally with Peter as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth should suddenly De Rom. Poâ—t lib. 1. cap. 12. Sect. vt autem haue their authority abridged and be made subiect to Peter yea to his successors too as it fell out with S. Iohn to learne of them which wee bookes of Scripture and what was the meaning of the seuerall places or texts and what was true what false in Diuinity Besides the matter it selfe is of such importance by their doctrine that without the constant beliefe thereof and obedience according thereto there is no possibility of saluation For Whosoeuer saith Bellarmine will not be sed by Peter De verb. Dei lib 3. cap. 5. Sect. quartum that is learne of him or his successors as iudges and determiners what he is to take for matter of faith and what is the sense of the Scripture is none
cause of this Separation lyeth in the Church of Rome namely the cup of abomination in the whores hand which is their haereticall and schismaticall religion Vpon this foundation of these learned men I set this frame of disputation Euery erroneous faith is to be refused The faith of the Church of Rome is an erroneous faith Therefore the faith of the Church of Rome is to be refused Can there be any question made of the first part or proposition of this reason when the holy Apostle Saint Iude exhorts all men without exception of person time or matter to striue for the faith delivered to the Saints Iudev 3. But how striue we for that faith which is the reuealed truth of God if we can be content to beleeue errours which are against the truth Yea what doe we else by holding errours for truth but adde to the diuine reuelation giuen by the Lord God himselfe contrary to his charge Deut. 4. 2. You shall put nothing to the word that I command you The second part which we call the assumption or minor Deutr. 4. 2. is that wherein all the doubt lieth for what is the Church of Rome the worse for granting that an erroneous faith is to be refused vnles their faith can be proued erroneous And whereas I say in my question and disputation erroneous rather then hereticall I doe it od of purpose because I would shunne all needlesse wrangling about the word for it seemes to many somewhat doubtfull what is properly to be called heresy For my part I can not see that any false proposition deliuered for an Article of faith can be lesse then heresie I doubt not but a man may thinke somthing to be true which is false be no heriticke buâ— he thâ— shall obstinately hold such a point for an Article of faith necessarily to be beleeued by all men vpon paine of damnation cannot for ought I see be freed from heresie As for the errours of the Papists Dr. Reynolds Dr. Whitakers and Mr. Perkins as we haue seene make no doubt to call them heresies Now that we may the better vnderstand whether the faith of the Church of Rome be erroneous or no we must enquire how the truth and falsenesse of faith is to be discerned which we cannot doe either better or otherwise then by considering how the Article of faith or proposition enioyned to be beleeued agreeth with the diuine testimonie concerning that point or Article for the diuine testimonie is the thing or rule to which the Article must be applied and by which it must be squared so that if it agree wholy with it it is true if in any part it differ from that testimonie it is false and erroneous This Sess 14. caâ— Decret de necessitate satiffaction is Decâ—ct de sacram paenitentiae can 6. description of errour and falsehood in matters of faith is warranted by the Councell of Trent where they make falsehood consist in differing from the word of God and That which differs from the institution of Christ is called an humane tradition and therefore is erroneous According to this declaration of a false and erroneous faith I proceed now to shew that the faith of the Church of Rome is false and erroneous That faith which hath a false and ertoneous foundation is false and erroneous Wherein first I take it for granted that Faith must haue an extrinsecall foundation out of the shings themfelues which are to be beleeved This outward and extrinsecall foundation is the credit and authority of him that delivereth those things for true and requires assent or agrement to them Secondly I hold it for certaine and agrred vpon by all that faith is true or false according to the foundation whereon it stands as the diuine restimonie begets a diuine faith an humane testimonie breeds an humane which may thus appeare What makes the faith of the ancient heathen and the now heathenish Turks and all sorts of Infidels who beleeue that there is but one God to be humane false and erroneous and the faith of Christians concerning the same point to be diuine and true but the diuerse foundations of these faiths the former depending vpon the coniectures and testimonies of men the other arising out of the witnesse of God himselfe To come nearer home why doe the Papists denie that wee are of their faith although they confesse wee hold the very same Articles of the Creed that they professe and aagree with them in most points of religion but for that we haue not the same foundation of our faith which they haue of theirs It is then the goodnesse or badnesse of the foundation that make the faith good or bad so that where the foundation is false the faith whatsoeuer it be cannot be true The proposition thus prooued I will adde the assumptition to it The foundation of the faith of the Church of Rome is false and erroneous For the foundation of their faith is the authority of the Pastors of their Church as it Sect. 4. Decret de edit scriptur sect praeterea is manifest by the Councell of Trent It is the office of the Church saith the Councel to giue sentence of the true meaning and sense of the Scriptures Now by the Church they meane the Pastours of the Church as their continuall practise declareth no man being suffered to giue a voice in any Councell but their Bishops whom onely they hold to be the Pastours of the Church By true sense and meaning they vnderstand the doctrine of faith which is nothing else but the Word of God truly vnderstood By the Scriptures they meane euery particular place of Scripture for if they should meane some places onely there could be no certainty in this their decree vnlesse they had determined what particular places they are whereof the Church may giue sentence These things thus declared I dispute thus They that haue the office to determine which is the true faith their authority is the foundation of Faith But the Church hath the office to determine which is the true faith as it appeares by the words of the Councell ere-while recited Therfore the authority of the Church is the foundation of their faith That the Church of Rome claimes this authority it may further appeare by those titles whcih it vsurpeth in the said Councell that The Bishop of Rome is Gods Vicar on Sess 6. de reformat cap. 1. Sess 14. de poenitentia cap. 7. Sess 7. de Baptism Can. 3. Sess 22. de sacrificio missae cap. 8 De verbo dei lib. 3. cap. 3. Sâ—ct Tota igitur Cap. 5. Sect. Ex his earth The Church of Rome is the mother and mistris of all Churches Yea euerie man may plainly see that Bellarmine teacheth the same things of the church of Rome The Church is the iudge of the true sense of the Scripture and all controuersies By Church hee vnderstands the Pope with a Councell and this he saith is expresly
as easie and reasonable for vs to refuse his argument grounded vpon that which we deny as for him to affirme that he cannot proue Yet that we may deale more kindly with him then he doth with vs wee will giue him a reason of our answer which is that None of the Apostles did euer vse any other kind of teaching then reuealing If they deny this let them shew that any Apostle did euer informe the Church that This or that booke was scripture that this or that tradition was by diuine authority that this or that place had this or that sense And that this information of theirs was not by way of reuelation that is of immediate inspiration and motion from God wherby they were freed from all errour If they cannot doe this as I am out of doubt they cannot it must needs be granted that they taught onely by reuelation not otherwise They will perhaps obiect Act. 15. 7. but in vaine For the Apostles doe not there expound any place of Scripture formerly written or propound matters already reuealed by God but by the immediate inspiration of the holy Ghost resolue and enioyne what was to be done in that case So that their determination was a law then first giuen by way of reuelation from God not by way of interpreting and propounding what the Lord had formerly deliuered For it is manifest that the Lord hath no where taught in the old Testament the new was not then written that the Gentiles conuerted to the faith were to abstain from strangled things and from blood to the forbidding wherof the holy Ghost directed them immediately vpon that occasion for that time From which after a time he freed them by the like direction and reuelation giuen to the Apostle S. Paul and by him to the Church Rom. 14. And that this decree of the Apostles was made by reuelation and inspiration of the holy Ghost * De Rom. Pons lib. 4. cap. 25. Sect. Respondeâ— ad primum Bellarmine himselfe grants Yea the Apostles in that same place seeme to take a contrary course to that which if they had expounded the former Scriptures or propounded things formerly deliuered they must haue followed For as it appeareth by debating of the point by Iames and Peter the old testament absolutely Act. 15. freed the Gentiles conuerted from the ceremoniall law Why tempt ye God saith Peter Vers 10. to lay a yoake on the Disciples neckes which neither our fathers nor wee were able to beare Yet the Apostles by this decree of theirs bind them to part of that law by enioyning them Vers 20. 29. To obstaine from blood and that that is strangled Which they might not haue done if they had propounded matters already resolued of and not followed the immediate reuelation and direction of the holy Ghost To this I may adde the manner of this charge giuen by the Apostles which is by inspiration from the holy Ghost whose authority in this case they alledge It seemed good to the holy Ghost not thus saith Moses Dauid or the Lord by this or that Prophet Therfore in that Councel the Apostles did reueale what was to be done not propound what formerly had beene reuealed And yet this is the onely place in all the new Testament wherein there is any shew of Feeding by expounding and propounding otherwise then by reuelation CHAP. VII Of the two latter points in Bellarmines Propositions HAuing found the two former points to be light and false I come now to weigh the third which is set downe as plainly as either of the former that Feeding Christs sheepe Ioh. 21. 15. is teaching the whole Church There hath beene enough said already to discredit and disable the proposition yet I will goe forward that it may appeare what truth there is in it Bellarmine laboureth De Rom. Pont. lib. 1. cap. 16. much to proue that by Christs Sheepe in this place all Christians whatsoeuer are signified But what needeth all this adoe Wee neuer meant to deny it neither doth our granting or his prouing of it any thing at all helpe them or hinder vs. For there is nothing meant in this place by teaching but reuealing as I shewed in the former chap. numb 10 11 12. But this the church of Rome claimes not but striueth tooth and naile for such a teaching as consisteth in expounding and propounding things reuealed yea I will grant him both proposition and assumption in the tearmes wherein they are deliuered Because the whole Church was to bee instructed by the feeding here spoken of and no man had or hath liberty either to refuse as vntrue or not to obey as needlesse any thing that should be deliuered according to this commandement Feed my sheepe The more doth Bellarmin wrong vs in saying that we denie that the whole Church is meant by the name of sheepe in this place For whereas our Diuines say that Peter was made a particular not an vniuersall Bishop they meane not thereby to deny his authority to teach all Nations whatsoeuer and all congregations in all nations as occasion was offered but onely to signifie that hee had no commission giuen by those or any other words to be soueraigne Bishop of the whole Church as they speake in the words going a little Sect. Primum before As for that of Iohn 21. 15. they shew that those words can argue no such authority because then Paul might not haue had the same office among the Gentiles which Peter had among the Iewes so that the vniuersality denied in that and other places by our Diuines is an authority of feeding those who were ioyned with him in the same commission of feeding and had equall authority with him to reueale the truth of God to all the sheepe of Christ without exception which Caluin expresseth thus If the Caluin Institut lib. 4. c. 6. n. 4. same authority be granted to all which was promised to one wherin shall he be aboue his fellowes in office As for n. 7. which Bellarmine quoteth Caluin doth neither mention nor signifie that place Iohn 21. 15. therein There remaineth the fourth poynt to be considered that seeding Christs sheepe Iohn 21. 15. is teaching by way of iudging or determining what is to be beleeued of all men This also is expressed in plaine termes and is of as much importance as any of the other three His proofe is that wee cannot better vnderstand it then in that sense I see not why I may not grant him this without any inconuenience For indeed the Apostles feeding either by word of mouâ—h or writing was by way of sentence so that no man might deny or doubt of any thing which they deliuered Neither was there any higher court to which there might be any appeale from their sentence but all men were absolutely bound to beleeue and obey whatsoeuer they taught and commanded This wee grant and herein we would agree with Bellarmine if this were all he meaneth But he
not be without an head at Peters death and after Therefore some must succeed Peter in his pastorall office Here Bellarmine perceiued that we were like enough to deny the proposition because the disiunction in it is naught for that Christ the head of the church continued to be the head thereof at Peters death and shall do so for euer Therfore he telleth vs it is not sufficient for the Church to haue Christ for head but that the Scripture maketh mention of another head of the Church his reason lyeth thus The head 1 Cor. 12. 12. is not Christ for that head 1 Cor. 12. 12. hath need of the members which is not true of Christ The head 1 Cor. 12. 12. is the head of the Church Therefore there is some head of the Church which is not Christ Wee easily yeeld the proposition is true and therfore Bellarmine needed not haue troubled himselfe to proue it especially since his proofe is no better For our Sauiour considered as the Mediatour the head of the Church cannot say to the Members which make the body I haue no neede of you although as he is God he hath absolutely no need of any of them The assumption that the head 1 Cor. 12. 12. is the head of the Church we refuse as false And how doth Bellarmine proue it As he doth many other points by saying so But this will not serue our turne in a matter of faith Belike he looketh we should disproue it Though it be no orderly course of disputation yet I say in a word the head in that 21 verse in which the words quoted by Bellarmine signifies the naturall head to which the principall members in the church are resembled which as principall as they are cannot be without the feet that is the meanest members And this interpretation is warranted by Chrysostome and Theophilact who by head vnderstand those which had receiued greater gifts So that indeed the place containeth a comparison wherein the coniunction of the parts of the mysticall body is declared by the like in the naturall body There are two other arguments in the same chapter Sect. Sexto and Sect. Denique the one is drawne from the succession of the high Priests in the old Testament the other from the necessity of monarchicall gouernment in the church But they are so sleight and idle that I should but wast time labour and paper to meddle with them where-I thus end this third point and this Chapter CHAP. X. Of Feeding committed to Peters Successours THe fourth and last point to be considered in Bellarmines 1 Chapt. 5 num 5. chap. 8. num assumption is this Feeding Ioh. 21. is committed to Peters Successors also This we say is vntrue and will make it appeare to bee 1. Ioh. 21. 25. so by answering the arguments he bringeth to proue it Bellarm. leverbo De il b. 3 cap 5. Sect. Quartum The first whereof is in this manner Either our Sauiour when he required Peter to feed his sheepe Ioh. 21. spake also to his successors or else he prouided for his church for twenty fiue yeares onely and not to the end of the world But when he required Peter to feed his sheepe Iohn 21. he prouided for his Church not for fiue and twenty years onely but to the end of the world Therefore Ioh. 21. he spake also to Peters successors Concerning the assumption we say that wee are out of doubt our Sauiour by those words prouided for his church to the end of the world For hee thereby required Peter to publish the Gospell by reuealing it Now this reuealing or preaching of the Gospell by reuelation is and shall be of great vse to the Church in all ages and times so long as the world shall enduâ—e And in this sensâ— I grant the assumption but in Bellermines sense that our Sauiour prouided for his Church by instituting such an Office as hee fancieth which the whole argument presumeth I deny the assumption and proposition too Indeed the proposition is vtterly false our Lord prouided for the Church to the end of the world though hee spake not at all in that place to Peters successors For in those words hee tooke order for the reuealing of the Gospell which reuelation of Peters containeth prouision for the Church to the end of the world There is a second argument of Bellarmines to the same Bellarm. do Pont. Rom. l. 2 cap. 12. Sect. quinto purpose In which words Christ committed all his sheepe both for place and time to Peter in those he spoke to Peters successors also for Peter was not to liue alwaies in the flesh But in those words Ioh. 21. Christ committed all his sheepe both for place and time to Peter For it behoued our Sauiour to haue no lesse care of vs then of our Predecessors Therefore in those words Iohn 21. Christ spake to Peters successors also Of the assumption which speaketh of our Lords committing his sheepe to Peter by those words there hath beene enough said already in the former chapter which needeth no repetition The proposition I reiect as false For our Sauiour might well by those words commit all his sheepe for place and time to Peters Feeding by the doctrine of the Gospell to be reuealed which was to continue as by Gods blessing it hath done and shall doe no lesse to vs and our posterity then to our predecessors from time to time whereby hee sheweth his care of vs as well as of them Now for a conclusion of this fourth point and a full satisfaction to this whole argument drawn from those words Iohn 21. 15. I will propound a reason or two out of the text it selfe by which it shall appeare if not necessarily yet with as great likelihood as any thing Bellarmine hath brought in this question that our Lord spake to Peter onely and not to his successors also Of them to whom those words were spoken our Sauiour demanded whether they loued him or no. Of Peterâ— successors Christ did not demand whether they loued him or no for they neither were there in presence nor at all in being in the world Therefore to Peters successours those words were not spoken He to whom those words were spoken had giuen occasion that our Sauiour should repeat this question thrice For it is not likely that our Lord would haue repeated them so often if there had not beene occasion giuen and wee finde iust occasion of repeating them thrice in Peters denying him thrice But Peters successors had giuen no occasion of the threefold repetition for they neither were at that time nor had beene before in the world Therefore to Peters successors those words were not spoken Thus haue I at the last examined this argument of Bellarmines with all the proofes of euery seuerall part thereof whereby it hath appeared I doubt not to euery iudicious and vnpartiall Reader that there is no force in it to proue that the Church or Pope hath a
commission from our Lord Iesus to teach the whole Church by way of iudging and determining what is to be beleeued of all men and what is not It will bee looked for perhaps that I should proceed to the discussing of some other that are brought for the proofe of this question But I thinke it would bee but lost labour for Bellarmine who was as able as any Popish writer that hath dealt with this matter and had allowance of that he wirt especially in a point that so nearely touched the Popes free-hold if not from the Consistory immediately yet with the knowledge thereof from the office appointed for that purpose in Rome setteth vp his rest vpon that place in Iohn and telleth vs confidently that Then onely Peter receiued the keyes of the kingdome as principall Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. lib. 1. c. 12. Sect. vt autem and ordinary gouernour when he heard those words Feede my sheepe and then also as he saith the charge of the rest of the Apostles his brethren was committed to him Therefore since we require a commission for such an office and that is either here or no where to bee found to what purpose should we examine other arguments which can proue no such matter Now that we haue good reason to call for the sight of a commission by which such an office should be erected no reasonable man can doubt if he consider what himselfe would doe if any man should challenge to himselfe the authority of the Lord Chancellor or Lord Treasurer of England would he take his word without knowledge of his commission vnder the broad seale And why then should wee be so simple as in a businesse of such importance to take the word of a Cardinall for the Popes prerogatiue Master Fisher the Iesuit after some other Papists alleageth for the proofe of this commission Mat. 28. 19. Goe teach all Nations But Bellarmine hath disclaimed and disproued all commission in that place and that not without reason For he saith Then onely he receiued the keyes of the Bellar. de Rom. Pont. l. 1. c. 12. Sect. Vt autem Kingdome as principall and ordinarie gouernour when he heard Feed my sheepe In this he disclaimeth it his disproofe is that the commission Mat. 28. 19. is all one with that Ioh. 20. 21. as that which by Bellarmines confession Sect. Dices containeth power both of order and iurisdiction which is also conueyed to the Apostles Math. 28. 20. Goe teach and baptize And this Master Fisher must needs acknowledge if he will haue that place be a commission for the Popes authority As for that Iohn 20. 21. the power there was not committed seuerally to Peter alone but to all the Apostles as to Legates not to ordinary pastors as Bellarmine noteth All other Sect. Vt autem places of Scripture brought by the Papists to this purpose are of the same kind and concerne all the Apostles as well as Peter wherefore all this considered I hold it altogether needlesse to meddle with those other eight arguments of Bellarmines which indeed are of another kinde and perswade my selfe that I haue said enough of that weake foundation of the Papists faith the authority of the Church in person of the Pope for the time being Whereupon I infer my former conclusion that The saith of the Church of Rome is erroneous and false euen in the very foundation of it and therefore to bee refused and reiected of all men CHAP. XI Containing a second proofe that the faith of the Church of Rome is erroneous and false SVch as the foundation of the Romish faith is such is the faith it selfe namely false and erroneous as I will shew by the argument that followes in the seuerall parts of it If some of the Articles of the faith of the Church of Rome bee false and erroneous then the faith of that Church is false and erroneous But some of the Articles of the faith of the Church of Rome are false and erroneous Therefore the faith of the Church of Rome is false and erroneous Lest any man should hastily except against the consequence of the proposition as if I went about to proue the whole by the part which may not bee I must intreat him to remember that as I noted before in this question wee take the faith of the Church of Rome for one intire thing because of that one bond the authority of the Church or Pope by which all the parts of it are so ioyned together that they all make but one body By reason of which bond he that refuseth any one part reiecteth the whole For by that his refusall he accuseth their Church of errour and failing in determining matters of faith and so ouerthroweth the very foundation of their faith Besides the denying of any one such Article let it bee in it selfe of neuer so small importance draweth vpon the denyer that Anathema or curse which seizeth on all them which are not of the faith of the Church of Rome Wherefore I may presume without presumption that the consequence is good seeing euery Article is equally and alike a matter of faith My assumption I will make good by setting downe out of the Councill of Trent diuers Articles of the Romish saith which are false and erroneous and these they are 1 The sauing verity or truth taught by Christ and his Apostles is contained in written bookes or Scriptures and vnwritten traditions Concil Trident. Sess 4. decret de Canon Scripturae 2 The bookes of Iudith Tobit Ester chap. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16. Wisdome Ecclesiasticus Baruch Daniel chap. 3. 13 14. Macchabees 1 2. are canonicall scripture d. decret de scriptur 3 The whole bookes of Scripture and euery part of them as they are in the vulgar Latine edition are to be receiued for sacred and canonicall d. decret de scriptur 4 It is the office of the Church to iudge of the true sense or interpretation of the sacred or holy Scriptures d. sess 4. de edit vsu librorum sacrorum Sect. insuper 5 The Bishop of Rome is Gods Vicar on earth Sess 6. decret de reform cap. 1. and sess 14. de poenitentia cap. 7. 6 The Church of Rome is the mother and Mistris of all Churches Sess 7. de baptis can 3. and sess 13. de extrem vnct cap. 3. and sess 22. de sacrif missae cap. 8. 7 Grace bestowed in baptisme doth take away whatsoeuer hath the true proper nature of sin sess de pec orig can 5. 8 Concupiscence in the regenerate is not truely and properly sinne d. canon 5. 9 Man doth freely assent to and cooperate or worke together with Gods exciting and cooperating grace so that he can also reiect or refuse the same grace Sess 6. de iustif cap. 5. And dessent if he will can 4. 10 The onely formall cause of iustification is iustice or righteousnesse inhaerent d. sess de iustit cap. 7. 11 By keeping the commandements of the
vnder the signes of bread and wine If there bee no such commandement of our Sauiours then 1 There is no Masse 2 The vertue of the bloody sacrifice is not applyed by the sacrifice of the Masse 3 The sacrifice of the Masse is not truely propitiatory All which are propounded for Articles of saith by the forenamed Councill sess 22. de sacrificio Messae I might say the like of many other points but these may suffice It remaineth that I proue the proposition which must be done by handling the points seuerally First therefore I thus begin with the first The sauing truth or verity taught by Christ and his Apostles Concil Trid. Sess 4. decret de Can. Script is contained saith the Councill in written bookes or in the Scriptures or in vnwritten traditions In this proposition or Article wee must vnderstand that the Scriptures and traditions are made diuers parts of that record wherein the sauing truth is contained so that neither of these parts containeth all but the one some the other some which appeareth plainly by the Council it selfe where describing Traditions it saith that They are not writen that They were receiued by word of mouth from the Apostles and were deliuered to them either by our Sauiour or by his spirit and haue beene so conueyed from hand to hand to the present Church And indeed if this were not the Councils meaning they said nothing at all against vs who make no question but that the ChristiaÌ„s which liued presently after the Apostles did truely gather diuers points out of the Scriptures which haue worthily beene receiued and maintained from time to time Such for instances were these points that our Lord Iesus is true God that the holy Ghost is true God that our Sauiour Christ consisteth of two distinct natures that He is but one person not two These points the Christians rightly drew out of the Scriptures For they bee not expressed there in so many words and these were acknowledged to bee Articles of faith by the foure first generall Councils against Arius Macedonius Eutiches and Nestorius Of this kind there are many traditions in the Church and will daily be more as it shall please God to blesse the labors of his seruants in the reading vnderstanding of the Scriptures Of these we dispute not but onely of such as are not comprised in the Scriptures It would also bee obserued that the Councill saith not barely and simply truth but sauing truth which in all likelihood was put into the decree because we grant that some things concerning rites and ceremonies were deliuered by Bellar de verbo Dei non scripto l. 4 c 3. Sect Secundo dissidemus our Lord or his Apostles which are not recorded in the Scriptures as Bellarmine confesseth Lastly whereas the Councill saith the sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles wee must inquire whether they meane vniuersally and wholly whatsoeuer our Sauiour and his Apostles taught not any one sentence excepted or onely so much as was intended for the perpetuall vse of the Church That it meaneth absolutely all sauing truth so taught it may be probably gathered out of the very words of the Councill For it saith that The preaching of Christ and his Apostles is the fountaine of all sauing truth and by and by addeth which truth is contained in written bookes and vnwritten traditions which is all one as if the Councill should haue said in plaine termes All sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles is contained in written books and vnwritten traditions Thus haue we the meaning of the Councill now that it may appeare what is true in it what false I will draw it into seuerall propositions namely these 3. 1 All sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles is recorded for future ages 2 Some sauing truth is contained in written bookes 3 Some sauing truth is comprehended in vnwritten traditions The two latter propositions viz. the second and third are manifestly in tâ—at article of the Councell the first of the three is necessarily implyed For if some things taught by them remaine not to posterity then all sauing truth so taught is not to be found in the Scripture and tradition because some of it is not at all recorded In the second proposition that Some truth taught by Christ and his Apostles is contained in the Scripture wee wholly agree with them and say farther in particular that All such truths are containd therein as the Lord appointed for the saluation of the Elect in all ages And this is the meaning of our Diuines when they say that All things necessary to saluation are comprehended in the Scriptures Which is manifest by Dr. Reynolds for D. Reynolds proface to his sixe conclusions at conclusion first D Whitaker de script q. 6. c. 6. saying that The Lord teacheth the Church all things necessary to saluation he expoundeth necessary to saluation thus which lead the faithfull to saluation and life And Dr. Whitaker propounding our opinion of the same matter in the same manner interpreteth necessary to saluation in these words by the way of life signifying thereby that Those things are necessary to saluation which teach vs the way to euerlasting life Reuerend B. Iewell speakes to the same purpose B. Iewells Apol. part .. 2. c. 9. diuis 1. that The Scriptures doe fully comprehend all things whatsoeuer bee needfull for our health and that they be the very might and strength of God to attaine to saluation Whereby it is manifest that Bellarmine dealt falsly and De verbo Dei non scripte l. 4. l. 3. Sect. Controversia deceitfully when he propounded the question The controversie saith he betwixt vs and the Heretickes is that we say The whole doctrine necessary to faith and manners is not contained in the Scriptures expresly and therefore besides the written word of God there is also an vnwritten word of God required that is to say Diuine and Apostolicall traditions Wherefore I will leaue Bellarmine with his frauds and debate the point as it is deliuered in the Councell of Trent For the first that All sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles is recorded for future ages Bellarmine bringeth no proofe and yet he could not choose but see that there is no necessity in the point it selfe why we should take it for true For it might well be that our Sauiour and his Apostles taught some things which tended to the saluation of some particular men not of all men and therfore might be left vnrecorded without any losse or damage to the Church Therefore we may iustly call for proofe of a point so vncertaine that is made by Bellarmine a matter of faith The third proposition at numb 5. is that Some sauing truth is comprehended in tradition For the better vnderstanding and cleering whereof wee are first to learne what vnwritten traditions are Which the Councell of Trent teacheth vs. Vnwritten traditions are things endicted by our
That which the Apostle commanded the Thessalouians to keepe was a sauing faith Therefore some sauing truth is contained in tradition There is no end of Bellarmines begging We must deny as before that whatsoeuer the Apostles taught is recorded and come to posteritie To the proposition I answer in particular that being vnderstood of that time when the Apostle writ that Epistle it is true he had then deliuered some things by word of mouth and not written them and those hee commandeth them to keepe But what proofe can Bellarmine make that those things were not written afterwards The assumption is not easily to be proued that those things were sauing truth Why doth not Bellarmine tell vs what they were Me thinks he dareth not so much as guesse at them otherwise he would let vs know at the least what his Catholickes worthily take them to be Would any man dally thus in a matter of faith to bee beleeued vpon paine of damnation Bellarmine will make amends for the want of weight in his reasons by the number of them and he propoundeth his fift thus to bee deliuered Bellar. ubi supra sect quaitam That which was committed to Timothy 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2. is contained in tradition That which was there committed to Timothy is a sauing 1. Tim. 6. 20. 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2. truth Therefore some sauing truth is contained in tradition Here he beggeth againe as before but wee cannot grant that whatsoeuer the Apostles preached is remaining vpon record to posteritie If that were granted yet should I thinke the proposition no sufficient warrant for an Article of faith Therefore Bellarmine offereth proofe of it on this maner That which Timothy had heard of Saint Paul 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2 and was to deliuer to faithfull men able to teach other also that is contained in tradition But that which was committed to Timothy 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2 he had heard of Saint Paul and was to deliuer to faithfull men able to teach other also Therefore that which was committed to Timothy 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2 is contained in tradition Least wee should deny the first part or Proposition of this Syllogisme because the things so delivered and given in charge by the Apostle might be matter for the present vse of the Church and such as needed not to be alwayes knowne Bellarmine telleth us that by those things so heard and so to be committed the vnderstanding of the sense of the scriptures and other doctrine is signified so that the whole force of his Argument lyeth in this interpretation which he never offereth to proue Therefore vnlesse we will take his bare word for proofe wee are as farre to seeke as we were before Now that we haue no reason to doe so I thinke it may appeare by those things which I will now propound to the consideration of all reasonable men First then I would know oâ— Bellarmine whether by Vnderstanding of the sense he meane generall rules for the vnderstanding of it or the sense of particular places Secondly I demaund whether he deliuered to him the sense oâ— euery place of Scripture or of some onely Whether he answer this or that I aske thirdly what is become of those rules and expositions How will he proue to vs that they haue beene continued from time to time till now If they haue not beene continued what haue wee to do with them who dispute onely of such traditions as are in the possession and vse of the present Church Fourthly is it likely euen in Bellarmines iudgement that Saint Paul would take vpon him to instruct Timothy in the sense of any place of Scripture when as the office of interpreting the Scripture is committed by the Councell of Trent to the Church that is as Bellarmine expoundeth it to Peter and his successours Did he meane ambitiously to vsurpe Peters office or to send him to Peter or his successours to learne of them whether the interpretation he had giuen were true or no. Touching the second part of the first Syllogisme that Those thinges which were committed to Timothy were sauing truths Bellarmine saith nothing which argueth that he knew not what to say What reason haue we then to imagine that they were sauing truths or that this argument concludeth any thing for the doctrine of the Councell of Trent concering traditions There is yet one argument more in the same fift chapter thus to be concluded Those things which Iohn had to write 2. Ioh. 11 and Bellar. ubi supra Sect. ultimum testimonium 3. Ioh. 14. are contained in tradition for he saith he would not write them But those things which he had then to write were sauing truths taught by the Apostles Therefore some sauing truths taught by the Apostles are contained in tradition I am inforced here also to repeate my former answer that Bellaâ—mine still takes it for granted that whatsoeuer the Apostles taught is continued to posteritie which we denie and no papist can proue His assumption or minor is to weake to beare vp the weight of an Article of faith vnlesse he be able to â—â—ll 〈◊〉 certainly what the things were which the Apostle would not write and to whom hee did or at the least that hee did afterward deliuer them to some body from whom the Church hath receiued them Till we know what they were how shall we be sure they were part of the sauing truth CHAP. XV. Of two other arguments of Bellarmine VVEE haue done with the fift Chapter and are now to examine two arguments set downe chap. 4 the former I frame thus That there are Scriptures that these we haue he they is â— Bellar de verbo Dei non scripto cap. 4 Sect. quarto quinto Soxio contained in tradition For we cannot find them in the Scriptures But that there are Scriptures that these wee haue are they is part of sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles Therefore some sauing truthes taught by Christ and his Apostles are contained in tradition It hath appeared by my answer to Bellarmines arguments that he can find no place of Scripture that sendeth vs to tradition for any part of sauing truth taught by our Lord or his Apostles Wee might therefore conclude that there are no such traditions without troubling our selues any further But that we may dit vp the mouths of the Papists wee will bestow a little time and paines in these arguments If there had beene no more intended by the Councell of Trent in the decree touching tradition but to signifie that these three points are contained in tradition the danger had not beene great for then both the number and the particulars had been determined but the Papists by vertue of that Article take authoritie to thrust what they list vpon the Church and warrant it by tradition Thus much to the argument in generall Particularly I answer
that the first part of it and the proofe thereof suppose that those two propositions There are Scriptures These we haue be they are formally that is expresly contained either in the Scriptures or tradition But this say we is false they are contained formally in neither where then shall we finde them Radically and originally in the Scriptures themselues which of themselues afford iust occasion to all men to conceiue both that There are Scriptures and that These are they They are contained formally in the apprehension of euery mans vnderstanding that beleeueth them and that this beleife is diuine faith not humane coniecture it appeareth because it is wrought in men by a speciall prouidence of God which perswadeth and draweth men to acknowledge the things to be as they are in themselues and is farther grounded vpon the diuine authoritie vertually affirming that they are both true indeed And yet wee make not a priuate spirit the ground or rule of our faith or the iudge to determine what is matter of faith what is not As Bellarmine slandereth vs and Bellar de verbo Dei non scripto lib. 3. cap. 5. Sect. Norum cap. 9. sect quod 〈◊〉 after him Mr. Fâ—sher and other But wee onely attribute to that speciall prouidence the office of in lightening and mouing the vnderstanding in lightened to giue assent to the bookes of Scripture that they are the word of God as indeed and truth they are Now to this assent it moueth vs by many reasons fit and effectuall for such a worke as namely by the continuall consent and testimonie of the Church by the matter deliuered in the bookes them selues by the stile or maner of deliuering it and the like as diuers of our diuines haue shewed at large and that this assent of ours is a true faith it is very manifest because it conceiueth of the thing deliuered as in truth it is which is the very rule of truth and wherein the nature of truth consisteth The assumption is false The last proposition is not part of sauing truth taught by our Sauiour Christ and his Apostles Neither all nor any of the Apostles for ought appeareth in the word did euer set downe a Catalogue of the Bookes of the New or Old Testament neither indeede was it possible for any of them to doe it but S. Iohn who out liued them all and writt after them all As for S. Iohn he neither might nor could doe it because that was onely Peters office or his successors to declare which were Scriptures and which were not as we learned out of Bellar. Chap. 3. 11. 9. Pâ—â—ar ubi supra sect dâ—nique The second and last argument lieth thus This Proposition There is no word of God besides that which is written is contained in tradition not written This proposition is a sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles Therefore some sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles is contained in tradition not written First it is to be considered that Bellarmine bringeth this assumption as a proposition of ours and from thence concludeth for the Church of Rome against vs For if hee brought it as his owne and acknowledged by him for true he should thereby gaine say the Councell of Trent affirming that There is some part of the word of God contained in tradition which is not to be found in the Scriptures But in this Bellarmine doth vs wrong for although we say that there is no word of God but that which is contained in the Scriptures as a Rellar de verbo Dei lib. 4. cap. 3. Sect. adipsi Bellarmin alleageth out of b Caluin Instit lib 4. cap. 8. â— 8. Caluin yet we say uot that this proposition is a sauing truth taught by Christ his Apostles neither indeed need we say so For by that propositioÌ„ we only deny that which the CouÌ„cell affirmeth and set it downe as a contradictory thereto and Bellarmine himselfe in the place for enamed bringeth it to the same end The reason of our deniall is that the Scripture doth no where send vs to tradition nor hath any word to that purpose as hath appeared in the former disputation And this reason is very sufficient because nothing is to be receiued for an Article of faith but that which is taught in the word of God The like answer is to be made to the proposition If it be true in Bellarmines iudgement then the doctrine of the Church of Rome in his iudgement is salfe For the Councell of Tâ—ent teacheth that There is some word of God contained in tradition but this proposition affirmes that There is no word of God besides that which is written If Bellarmine would father it vpon vs he accuseth vs falsly For we neuer saiâ— nor thought that that proposition was contained in tradition but perhaps he thinketh it will follow vpon that wee say but in so thinking hee thinkes idly for we doe no more hereby but denie that which they say and neither do nor neede affirme that it is contained either in the Scriptures or in tradition It is enough for vs in matter of faith to refuse whatsoeuer is not taught in the Scriptures But it may be said that this proposition There is no word of God besides that which is written is either true or false we grant it because it is certainely true that in euerie contradiction properly so called the one proposition is true the other false What of this It will farder be said If it be false then the contradictory to it which we hold is true We grant this too what more If this be true it is contained either in the Scripture or in tradition This we denie It may be true and yet contained in neither of them For the truth of this proposition is not positiue whereby one thing is affirmed of or ioyned to another but negatiue by which one thing is denied of or seuered from another Now propositions of this kinde are then true when the things comprehended in them are indeed seuered the one from the other for then the proposition speaketh of the thing as it is Therefore it is enough to make this negatiue proposition true that the Scripture is silent in that which they affirme and doth not ioyne Heb. 1. 5. them together as they doe And this is the ground of those negatiue disputations wee find in the Scriptures P. Iewels answ to Dâ— Coles second 〈◊〉 let O. P. especially To which of the Angells said be c. He that desireth to see more of this may reade the reuerend Bishop Iewel in his answer to Dr. Cole I should now goe on according to the order followed in the Councell of Trent to examine the rest of the Articles set downe by me chap. 11. num 3. But for this time I thinke it enough that I haue debated these two questions because if these proue false as I trust they haue done all the other differences betwixt vs and the