times and places In respect of its forme so likewise it hath sundrie considerations for the forme of it is Either 1. Internall which is the misticall vnion which the members thereof haue with Christ and through Christ one with another which vnion is wrought by faith 2. Externall which is the vniformity the parts haue one to another in the profession of the truth and the right administration of the Sacraments which truth and right administration wee say must be if not in all points whatsoeuer yet at least in all points fundamentall and necessarie to saluation Now to bring this home to my argument the Church Catholick of these foure wayes that it may be considered is not visible at all three wayes and the fourth it is not alwayes so clearely visible as that the visibilitie should serue for a note whereby to come to the knowledge of the vniuersalitie and perpetuitie of the Church It is not visible at all First in respect of its matter taken in the full Latitude thereof excluding no times no places nor any condition of men In which sense by the Tridentine catechismes owne confession it is taken in the Creed For nothing is visible which is not present I may remember times past or read of men absent or coniecture things to come but I can see onely those things which are present Secondly it is not visible at all in respect of its inward forme which is the misticall vnion of the members with Christ and one another wrought by faith for this is rooted in the heart and the heart of man God onely seeth Thirdly not in respect of its outward forme which as it enters the Creed is not onely an outward profession of a Doctrine or Discipline but a profession of the same vnder the notion of truth and that the Church in this sense is inuisible Gregorie de Valentia confesseth in his 3. Tom. vpon Thomas and 1. disput and Bellarmine in his 3. booke de Eccles and 15. chap. where he saith In Ecclesia aliquid videri aliquid credi videmus eum caelum hominum qui est Ecclesia sed quod isle caetus sit ipsa vera Christi Ecclesia non videmus sed credimus That is in the Church something is beleeued and something seene wee see that companie of men which is the Church but that this company is the true Church wee doe not see it but beleeue it Againe the Church considered in her most fauourable sense for the Papists that is according to her matter which are men and that againe in a limitted acception not as shee is taken in her Latitude and extent for the whole but in respect of her parts onely with reference to their proper times and places yet in this sense I say is not so cleerely visible at all times as to haue her visibilitie to serue for a note whereby to know it to be Catholicke and vniuersal For Not a sufficiens ac propria ad dignoscendum Ecclesiam omnino necesse est vt sit omni hominum generi atque conditioni accommodatum it is Gregorie de Valentia's own rule in the place aboue cited q. 1. punct 7. § 15. that is that for a sufficient and proper note to know the Church it is necessarie that the note bee fit for all sorts and conditions of men and that all men bee qualified and capable to discerne the Church by it But the Church euen in this sense by his owne confession in the 16. § is sometimes so tost with the flouds of error schismes and persecutions that to the vnskilfull and such as cannot prudently weigh the reasons of times and circumstances it is hard to bee knowne so that by consequence the Visibilitie of it is not alwaies so apparant vnto all sorts of men as to serue for a note or proofe of the Church as Catholicke To make our argument yet more pregnant let vs but aske where the Church was in the time that the Arrian heresie ouerspread and hee will tell you out of Hierom that the ship of it was almost sunke and out of Hilarie that it was then non in tectis exteriori pompa querenda sed potius in carceribus speluncis not to be sought for in buildings or outward pompe but in Prisons and Caues Aske Turrecremata and others where the Church was in the passion of our Sauiour and they will tell you that it remayned only in the Virgin Marie which they say is signified in the Church of Rome by the putting out of all the Tapers saue one onely in the celebration of the passion Nay Bellarmine though hee oppugnes this opinion of Turrecremata's the most hee can yet he is contented to concurre with Abulensis in this that howsoeuer the Apostles might beleeue yet he thinkes that the Virgin Mary onely had fidem explicitam an explicite beliefe of Christs resurrection without which the Apostle saith that our faith is vaine we are yet in our sinnes 1. Cor. 15. Now grant that the Apostles beleeued as well as Marie yet if their beliefe was but implicit their profession could not be visible idem est non esse non apparere it is all one not to bee and not to appeare in this case Nay aske Bellarmine but how the Church shall be in the dayes of Antichrist and he will answer in his third booke de Rom. Pont. and seuenth chap. that it is certaine the persecution then shall bee so great that all publike ceremonies of Religion and Sacrifices shall cease How vniustly then doe the Papists deale with vs in this question touching modum cognoscendi the manner of knowing the Church to bee Catholike that is vniuersall and perpetuall by tying vs to proue it a posteriori instancing who were the Professors who the Pastors what their Names where they abode in all Ages as if ignorance of a thing were a Cause sufficient to make it not to be or Gods promise were not a gage strong enough for such an incredulous generation as theirs is vnlesse there were Registers to shew how and in what manner he kept his word Certainly if God in his wisedome had thought these kinde of proofes necessarie for his Church hee would haue erected an Office and Officers for the purpose now hee hath giuen vs indeed his Royall promise that it shall be so but no promise hath he giuen that there shall be Scribes in all Ages to commit to writing the names and persons of those by whom it came to be so If therefore a Papist should in this manner question me Where was your Church before Luther or what Professors of your doctrine were there or what assemblies of men professing the same faith that you doe euer since the time of our Sauiour vntill this present I would thus answere him out of the Creed That the Church of which I am a member was before Luther that there were assemblies of men professing the same faith that I doe and that
euer since the time of our Sauiour vnto this present I doe beleeue with the same faith and vpon the same grounds that I beleeue the Catholike Church because I beleeue our Church of England to be a member of the Catholike and this I beleeue a priori that is for the promise sake made in the Scriptures that it shall bee so But where our Church was before Luther or who were the Professors of it euer since the time of our blessed Sauiour vntill this present is no part of my Creed There is not a syllable in it which inuites me to proceed that way Doe I say I beleeue the vniuersalitie of Christs Church and must my foundation be such onely as can breed in me but an opinion or naked hope doe I begin in Faith and with the Galathians must I end in the flesh that is with sense Doe I build with one hand a Church Catholike which cannot bee seene and with the other must I draw it in a Map or point it out to the eye Nay set the Church as Catholike aside and consider it but in her parts which consideration of it belongs not to the Creed yet in this sense also is the Church at sometimes so obscured that by our Aduersaries owne confession none but the prudent and wise are able to discerne it The Church is I confesse compared in the Reuelation to a woman clothed with the Sunne in Isaiah to a Citie built vpon an Hill and by the Fathers to the Moone the Sunne the Moone and a Hill are things most easie to be discerned yet we know this Sunne may be obscured with a Clowd an Hill may be hid with a mist and the Moone as Saint Austen in his 119. Epist alluding to the Church obserueth hath her wanes and eclipses in the time of her peregrination SECT II. The second way whereby one may know the Church to be Catholike or Vniuersall IF any should mistake me and thinke that pressing so earnestly the preeminencie of knowing the Church to be Catholike and Vniuersall a priori that is from the promises made vnto it in the Scriptures we doe suspect our proofs a posteriori from the Professors of our Religion in all Ages to be either none or weake let them know that we want not those who haue scored out varietie of sufficient paths to proceed this way also which howsoeuer they bee not like the testimonie of our Sauiour to beget a faith yet are they like the testimonie of the Samaritan woman to induce a credulitie For not to tyre you with large discourses which were to exceed my limits onely for satisfaction herein to the reasonable and impartiall Hearer let vs take along with vs these few considerations 1. The first that we are to distinguish betweene our affirmatiues that is such things as are purely affirmed by vs and our negatiues such as in whole or in part we denie betweene which there is a great difference to be made in all sciences For affirmatiue propositions onely are the proper parts and ingredients of a discipline Negatiues are admitted say Logicians not so much by way of Precept as of Cautell and of Commentaries to vindicate the other from misconstruction 2. The second that such affirmatiues of ours as are established by our Church of England at least such as concerne the foundation of faith haue beene in all ages professed by the Church of Rome it selfe For explication whereof we are to obserue that the Popes Arithmetick which he vseth in calculating the articles of faith is not substraction but addition what wee purely affirme the Popish writers for the most part doe affirme the same the difference is that they affirme somewhat more then wee doe They denie not so much that our affirmations are truth as that they say we affirme not all the truth wherevpon they vsually stile vs in their writings Negatiuists For example sake Wee agree on both sides the Scriptures to be the Rule of Faith the Bookes of the old Testament written in Hebrew to bee Canonicall that we are iustified by Faith that God hath made two receptacles for mens soules after death Heauen and Hell that God may bee worshipped in spirit without an Image that wee are to pray vnto God by Christ that there be two Sacraments that Christ is really receaued in the Lords Supper that Christ made one oblation of himselfe vpon the Crosse for the redemption propitiation and satisfaction for the sinnes of the whole world In a word where they take the Negatiue part as in with-holding the Cup from the Laytie forbidding the administration of the Sacraments in the vulgar tongue and restrayning the marriage of Priests yet euen in these they condescend vnto vs for the lawfulnesse of the things in themselues and in respect of the Law of God and oppose them onely in regard of their necessitie and conueniencie and for that the Church of Rome hath otherwise ordayned But see our affirmations content them not To the Scriptures they adde and equalize vnwritten Traditions To the Hebrew Canon the Apocrypha To Faith in the act of Iustification Workes To Heauen and Hell Purgatorie Limbus Patrum and Limbus Puerorum To the worship of God in spirit Images To prayer to God by Christ inuocation and intercession of Saints To Baptisme and the Lords Supper fiue other Sacraments To the realitie of Christ in the Sacrament his corporall presence To the sacrifice of Christ vpon the Crosse the sacrifice in the Masse with other like and these we denie 3. The third that our affirmations by the iudgement of the Church of Rome haue beene in all ages deemed sufficient to saluation so that our Negatiues take not away any doctrine the explicit beliefe whereof is absolutely necessarie For first in regard of knowledge the Schoolemen hold that much lesse is needfull to bee explicitly beleeued then what is contayned in our affirmations For whereas wee entertayne and embrace amongst our affirmatiue articles not onely the doctrine of the three Creedes but also sundrie other assertions as may appeare by the booke of Articles and Homilies established in our Church Albertus Magnus on the contrarie with Bonauenture Richardus and Durandus thinke that so much onely of the Creed is necessarie as the Church solemnizeth in her holidayes Thomas Aquinas Scotus Gabriel Biel and Pope Adrian the sixth which goe farther thinke it needfull to beleeue but the whole Creed and Alexander ab Hales which goes farthest thinkes that one need but adde to the Apostolicall Creed the Nicen and Athanasian to make a compleat beleeuer quanquam hoc nimis durum videtur though this seemes too hard an imposition saith Gregorie de Valentia in his third Tom. vpon Thom. 1. disp although one wade no farther therein then the proper sense and haue no great distinct knowledge of the matters Nay Bellarmine is so confident in this point that he sticks not to say that the Apostles themselues neuer vsed to preach openly
the holy Ghost communicating it selfe to this and the subsequent and that chiefely for two reasons The one to teach vs that the principall obiect of our faith is God himselfe considered in vnitie of Essence and Trinitie of persons and therefore to each of the persons there is either a Beleeue prefixed or the Particle in set before to shew that on them we are to build the certaintie and assurance of our hope but as for these Articles of the Church the forgiuenesse of sinnes the Resurrection of the body and the like they being creatures are but the secondarie obiects of our Faith not to be trusted vpon immediately in themselues but onely vnder God and through God and therefore haue not a Credo a Beleeue a part to themselues but prefixt to one of the persons I beleeue in the holy Ghost The other to set out and diuide by this meanes vnto euery of the persons an appropriate and speciall worke For as God the father hath Creation in the Articles attributed vnto him and the Sonne Redemptionem merito Redemption by the merit of his Death and Passion vnto him so the holy Ghost by the Beleeue which is prefixt to his Article and is in part of sense to be conuei'd vnto the following hath the application of our redemption Virtute efficacia by his vertue and efficacie appropriated vnto him also to wit The sanctifying of the holy Catholicke Church the vniting of the members in a communion with their head the infusion of iustifying faith which apprehends the remission of sinnes the quickning of the dead in the Resurrection and the conferring of life both vitam gratiae the life of Grace and vitam gloriae the life of glorie in the world to come So then the act of faith I beleeue which belongs to this Article of the Church is to bee fetch'd and deriued from the preceding Article of the holy Ghost And yet because it descends not in the same forme and garbe of sense altogether which it beares there but something altered and transfigured the question will be what act it properly imports in this place towards his obiect the holy Catholicke Church For the better resoluing whereof we must necessarily call to minde that ancient distinction of Saint Austens and the Schoolemen touching Credere to beleeue That there is 1. Credere in aliquem to beleeue and put ones trust confidence in one 2. Credere alicui to beleeue or giue credit to one 3. Credere aliquem to beleeue that one is in being or to beleeue that one is after this or that manner in being The first of these which is Credere in aliquem to beleeue in one doth virtually indeed include the other two for one cannot beleeue in one but he must presuppose that hee is and that hee is to be credited but yet the proper obiect of it is bonum a thing as it is good and the formall act which it exerciseth is chiefly an act of the will whereas the rest haue rather for their obiect verum a thing as it is true and the act which they exercise appertaines onely to the vnderstanding but with this difference that when I say credo alicui I giue credit to ones saying the act of faith hath relation to his obiect as to obiectum formale a kind of principle for whose sake and cause I beleeue but when I say Credo aliquem I beleeue that one is in being the act of faith hath relation here to his obiect as onely to obiectum materiale or quod as the Schoolemen speake a conclusion which it beleeues and not as to the motiue or inducement for which it beleeues Now to bring this home to the marke The Church of Rome and we doe agree that the beleeue which is prefixt to the Article of the holy Ghost doth not communicate it selfe with the restriction caused by the Particle in to this Article of the Church and the rest which follow it for that were to beleeue in them and then no difference should be made betweene the Creator and the Creatures but simply and without addition and the question is what act it now exerciseth whether such an one as whereby our faith hath relation to the Catholicke Church as onely to a materiall obiect or bare conclusion which it beleeues by reason wherof we may say Credo Ecclesiam I beleeue that there is a Catholicke Church or moreouer such as whereby our faith may reflect vpon the Church as a formall obiect cause and principle for whose sake it yeelds credit and assent to all other things so that thereby though not expresly yet tacitly is implied Credo Ecclesiae I yeeld faith beliefe To the Catholicke Church The Iesuites howsoeuer they would palliate the matter and make shew that the Church is onely a condition and not a formall cause of our beliefe yet others of them speake more plainely what the rest ayme at For Scotus and Biel to whom Canus ioynes Durand doe teach that our faith is last resolued into the authoritie of the Church and Stapleton yet more punctually affirmes that this Article of the Church is inserted into the Creede Tanquam medium credendi alia omnia as the onely meanes whereby we beleeue all other things importing thus much Credo illa omnia quae Deus per Ecclesiam me docet I beleeue all those things which God teacheth me by the Church Whereby we may easily collect that the Papists by this Credo Ecclesiam I beleeue that there is a Church doe vnderstand also Credo Ecclesiae I yeeld faith and beliefe to the Church We for our parts doe reuerence the name and testimonie of the Church we acknowledge it to bee of all humane the greatest wee confesse moreouer that the Catholicke Church in the whole neuer hath erred nor euer shall erre in fundamentall points the prouidence of God sustayning it In regard whereof it hath the promise of our Sauiour that the gates of Hell shall not preuaile against it that the spirit shall lead it into all truth and it is called by the Apostle the pillar of truth as who would say that it retayneth a sauing profession of heauenly truth and vpholdeth the same against all the stratagems of Satan and his complices But that it is not either in it selfe or in this place to be taken for the formall cause of our beliefe that is the foundation of our faith vpon whose credit and authoritie wee are wholy to depend I shall by these following reasons drawen out of the Creed it selfe easily make apparant First by the Grammaticall construction of this Credo I beleeue which when it imports to yeeld credit or assent to a thing is not ioyned with an Accusatiue case as here in the Creede but with a Datiue whereas wee say not Credo Ecclesiae but Credo Ecclesiam to shew that the Creede in this place implies veritatem in essendo a beliefe of the Churches being and not veritatem in significando
a beliefe of the Churches saying Stapleton notwithstanding would faine find an cuasion from this argument saying that to yeeld beliefe to the affirmations of the Church is the Theologicall sense of the Creede though it bee not the Grammaticall much like as Bellarmine who endeauouring to proue Purgatorie from these words of Christ Matth. 12. It shall not be forgiuen him neither in this world nor in the world to come Confesseth in the end that it followes not indeed according to the rules of Logicke but onely according to the rule of Prudence as if forsooth the Arts were contradictorie to Diuinitie and not subordinate vnto it and that one might not iustly suspect something to bee amisse in that house where the Mistresse and her hand maides are at variance Secondly I argue from the word Catholicke in the Creede which by the Tridentine Catechismes owne confession signifying the Flocke as well as the Pastors and excluding no time no persons nor any condition of men is not possible to be seene nor capable to be heard nor able to bee consulted with and therefore according to the sense which the Church beleeues in this place it is absurd to conceiue that these words Credo Ecclesiam I beleeue that there is a Church should bee equiualent to these Credo Ecclesiae I yeeld faith and beliefe to the Church But for breuities sake omitting other proofes as more behoofull for those which write large Tracts than for my selfe who desire to obserue as neere as I can the lawes of Catechising my third reason shall bee drawen from the word Church which being by the Papists inuolued with so many contrarieties and contradictions from it I thus argue That which is to be the foundation of my faith and to which I am to yeeld assent in all things that must be a thing certainely knowne and determined what it is It is not sufficient to be acquainted with the word but wee must also vnderstand the thing for faith is not verball but reall neither are we conueied to heauen by bare sounds as by Magicke spels but by truths and verities which are couched vnder them But according to the Papists owne assertions this Church which they here would make to be the foundation of their faith and to which say they we are to yeeld assent in all things is not to them a thing as yet certainely knowne and determined what it is which by these Gradations following I shall demonstrate SECT III. The Romanists distractions touching the Church set downe in eight Gradations THe Church is deuided by some of the Popish Doctors into the Church 1. Essentially which they make to be the Conuocation of all that beleeue in Christ 2. Representatiue which they say are either the Bishops assembled in a generall Councell as most doe affirme or the Colledge of Cardinals as Siluester Prierias imagines 3. Virtually which they conceiue to be the Pope The first Gradation 1. NOw graunt the Church to be such a Pillar of truth that who so heares it cannot erre yet First it is not determined by Popish writers which is that Church to whose Oracles and definitiue sentence we are to listen 1. The Glosse vpon Gratians Decrees which containe the Popes owne lawes and constitutions asking the question what Church it is to be meant off when it is said that the Church cannot erre answeres that it is to be meant not of the Pope but of the Congregation of the faithful that is the Church Essentially 2. But this opinion of the Church is generally by almost all the Papists reiected for being the iudge of Controuersies and consequently the foundation of our faith the reasons are First because such a multitude dispersed farre and wide throughout the face of the earth cannot be so marshalled as to haue their opinions calculated Secondly because the greater part of these are Lay-people whose apprehensions oftentimes reach not vnto the matters controuerted Lastly because there is no promise made either to the flocke or to the Pastors and doctors of the Church that a greater part of them shal not erre but only that all of them shal not erre Wherefore though the whole Church in this sense cannot erre errore personali with a personall error yet Bellarmine in his fourth Booke De Rom. Pont. and fourth Chapter tels vs that we must seeke out for one that cannot erre errore iudicali with a iudiciall errour Some therefore of the Papists are of opinion that the Church in this sense as it is taken for the iudge of controuersies and foundation of faith is the Church representatiue in a generall Councell of Bishops no matter whether with the Pope or without him because the Pope say they though he be the head of all Christians and all Churches in seuerall yet is he not of all the Church assembled in a Councell togeather And of this opinion besides those which Bellarmine reckons vp as Cardinalis Cameracensis Ioh. Gerson Iacobus Almanus Nic. Cusanus Panormitanus Cardinalis Florentinus and Abulensis we may ioyne Ocham Driedo the Bishops assembled in the generall Councels of Constance and Basill and in a word the Vniuersitie of Paris as Coriolanus in his Preface to the Councels Praelud 5. doth confesse 3. But many of the later Papists and especially the Iesuites perceiuing that the former opinion touching the Authoritie of a generall Councell aboue the Pope howsoeuer the contrarie bee not yet determined doth indeed ouerthrow the verie faith of the Popes Primacie and finding as they say no promise made to a generall Councell without the Pope for that the Church is to be built vpon the rocke and not the rocke vpon the Church they doe concurre that the Church whose definitiue sentence wee are bound to beleeue is nothing else but the Church virtually that is the Pope whereby they delude and impose vpon the world more than euer for whilst they boast of the Church their Mother they meane and intend nothing else thereby but onely the Pope their father The second Gradation BVt secondly graunt for the Church at the Iesuites request that it be the Pope vpon which we are to relie yet is it not agreed vpon by them for the manner whether it bee the Pope alone or whether the Pope in an assembly of the Church representatiue and again whether this Church representatiue be the Colledge of Cardinals or whether a generall Councell 1. For no meane Writers amongst them doe hold that the Pope may erre if hee define without a generall Councell as besides many of the Parisiens Alphonsus a Castro and Pope Adrian the sixth doe auerre that we may see not onely priuate men but also Popes themselues to haue suspected the Papall authoritie in this point And here though Bellarmine vaunts that all Catholickes doe conspire in this that when the Pope defines any thing in a generall Councell hee is then out of danger of erring either in faith or generall
shall please God farther to enlighten one as in the question of the authoritie of the Scriptures the knowing of the Instrument or Pen-man whether it bee Saint Matthew or Saint Paul is not simply so requisite as to know the principall Authour which is God nor to determine punctually of the wordes so oblieging as to beleeue the sense nor againe of the sense of some places and texts as of other all are to striue vnto perfection but as the difference is in the gifts of arte grace and nature so shall the difference be in the measure of the knowledge of all or some The third trick and sleight of theirs which they put vpon the people in this kinde is that bidding them to vrge vs to proue the Scriptures to bee the Word of God or that they are cleare and easie in points necessarie to saluation and knowing that the chiefe proofes vpon which we rest are embowelled in the very body of the Text itselfe first they forbid the lay people to reade the Scriptures vnlesse they obtayne speciall licence from the Bishop or Inquisitor to doe it as appeares by the fourth rule of prohibited bookes which is at the end of the Tridentine Councell And the granting of these licences is now againe taken away by Clement the eighth as may bee seene in his Index of prohibited bookes printed at Paris by Laurentius Sonius and cited also by Iustinianus a Priest of the Congregation of the Oratorie lib. 1. de Scriptura cap. 9. Secondly because they know that some people will bee itching notwithstanding this prohibition to looke into the Scriptures and to see whether matters bee so as wee affirme them to bee therefore they crie downe our Bibles and present a Bible of their owne translation which to argue the obscuritie of the Scriptures they patch vp with such gallimaufrie and inke-horne termes that an ordinarie man may bee confounded with the strangenesse of the wordes As in the old Testament publisht by the Colledge of Doway in stead of Fore-skin they put Prepuce Gen. 17. for Passeouer Phase for vnleauened bread Azims Exod. 12. for high places Excelses 2. King 15. for the holy of holyest Sancta Sanctorum 1. Chr. 6. Nor are they lesse ridiculous in the new Testament set forth by the Colledge of Rhemes where you haue these English wordes piping hot out of the Popes mint Depositum Exinanited Parasceue Didragmes Neophyte Gratis with the spirituals of wickednesse in the Celestials and many more labouring by what meanes they can as our learned Fulke shewes in his Preface to that Testament to suppresse the light of Truth vnder one pretence or another Their fourth stratagem is that after their lay disciples haue giuen so loud a defiance to our Cause as may make simple standers by conceiue so great a crie must needes carrie some wooll with it then if by chance any of the companie vndertake to answere them to fetch them off againe with aduantage by making it knowne afore-hand vnto their Pupils that howsoeuer they may bragge it is forbidden yet vnto a lay man vnder paine of excommunication to dispute of matters of faith which constitution is in the Popes owne Decretals and Emanuel Sa hath it in his Aphorismes voce fides By which meanes they both barre vs after iust prouocation to informe and satisfie their adherents and with all cherish presumption in their followers as not being silenced by the weaknesse of their cause but by the command of their Superiors Their fifth deuice is that if notwithstanding the prohibition to dispute aboue mentioned some of their lay Auditors should be so hardie as to venture a skirmish then to diuert them from reasoning out of the Scriptures least the light thereof should some manner of way or other display it selfe they busie their heads with questions aboue their capacitie as where was our Church before Luther what the exposition of the Doctors in all Ages what the Doctrine of the Fathers Councells and Schoolemen which is the common Theame of this Age hoping that either a few old wiues fables or fragments of antiquitie shall serue to puffe vp their men with conceit of victorie where they finde not equall opponents or where they doe yet they shall not abate thereby any whit of their courage as being for want of artes and languages vnable to see the point of the weapon which is darted at them I meane the truth of those things which are alleaged Their sixt deuice is that if any of their laytie notwithstanding those prohibitions and this diuersion will presume so farre vpon the indulgencie of their ghostly Fathers as to hazard a dispute out of the Bible yet to doe it with aduantage enough on their side they counsell him to make no thrusts but to lie onely vpon the ward and therein to enioyne vs to shew the articles of Faith established in our Church in iust so many wordes and syllables in the Scriptures and as if grace destroyed nature to forbid vs the benefit of Reason or Consequences 1. If we infer any thing by way of consequence they tell vs that wee violate that which wee haue promised to the World which is to proue all our Assertions out of the pure Word of God Whereas according to the grand principle of Logicke De omni de nullo a truth deduced out of another truth is acknowledged to bee contayned therein for otherwise it could not bee drawne from thence So that to bee in the Word of God is to bee the Word of God As Gregorie de Valentia saith of the more distinct conceptions of any obiect that they are contayned implicitly in the more generall as particulars are in vniuersalls And therefore Bellarmine speaking of matters of faith makes those things as well to bee knowne by certaintie of faith which are deduced by necessarie consequences from the Scriptures as those which are immediatly contayned therein 2. If we deduce an article from premises whereof any one proposition is not in the Bible though otherwise it be a principle of nature as for example that a body cannot be in two places at the same time they aske how such a Conclusion can bee of faith or how wee can auerre that our articles of faith are proued out of the pure Word of God considering that a Conclusion takes his efficacie not from one but from both the premises Which argument concludes our Aduersaries as much if not more then it doth vs. For the maynest principle of their to wit That those which professe the faith vnder the Bishop of Rome are the Church of Christ cannot be deduced by Bellarmines logick but search made in the Court Rolls of Nature and by borrowing an Euidence from thence to supply the place of one of the premisses But to speake more punctually we say that those principles of Nature which we imploy in this kinde are also vertually included in the Scriptures though not expresly As hee that faith Socrates is a
man faith also by consequence that Socrates is a substance that he is a liuing creature and that hee is reasonable because Man contaynes all these things in his nature So the Scripture saying that Christ hath a body saith by consequence that according to his humane condition he is finite and being finite hath a limited and bounded existencie and therefore cannot bee in many places at the same instant For arte in this is grounded vpon nature and in nature the immediate cause implyes the effect the species the genus the subject the properties the whole the parts one contrarie remooues the other so that these Maximes of Philosophie are but dilated verities being before contractedly contayned in the Letter and adde not any thing to the Scriptures fulnesse but onely are displayed by the vnderstanding facultie as the species and formes of an obiect are by a perspectiue glasse multiplyed and made more visible 3. If we presse them with the force and necessitie of our consequence they bid them demand of vs whether we cannot erre in the deducing of a Consequence if we say we cannot then to tell vs that we oppugne a doctrine of our owne which determineth that the Church may erre and if wee say wee may then they will them to aske vs how wee can build an article of faith vpon a Consequence which by our owne confession is fallible To which wee say first that a posse ad esse non valet argumentum from a possibilitie of erring to an actuall erring an argument will not follow Againe the necessitie of a Consequence depends not vpon the person of him which deduceth it but vpon the intrinsecall vnion and reall affinitie betweene the termes of the Antecedent and Consequent But lastly because they presse vs to shew how we can assure our selues that in this or that particular Consequence we doe not erre considering that there is no subiect wherein we do not acknowledge that we may erre Let me aske them againe how any of them can assure themselues that they know the meaning of the Church in any one article of faith considering that there is none of them in particular the Pope in his chaire excepted which may not by their owne Tenets mistake a word or misse-conceiue the Churches meaning Sure if this reason were of force wee should for the same Cause take away all certaintie of knowledge which comes by the sense which was the error of the Academikes and Pirrhonians For what sense is there which at sometimes by reason of the Medium Organ or Object is not lyable to erre and be deceiued But as Nature which Philosophers say is not defectiue in things necessarie hath for the remedying of these inconueniences endowed man with reason common notions and principles whereby hee is able to iudge of the due site habitude and disposition of things so the God of Nature which is also the God of Grace and knowes the necessitie of his children giues vnto them besides that portion of reason common notions and principles aboue-mentioned the spirit also of discretion for the spirituall man iudgeth all things 1. Cor. 2. So Saint Iohn These things haue I written vnto you concerning them that seduce you but the anointing which you haue receiued of him teacheth you all things 1. Ioh. 2. 26. 4. If the Consequence bee so euident that they cannot for shame denie it then they counsell them to aske vs where the Scripture saith in expresse termes that whatsoeuer followeth by euident and necessarie consequence from her Pages is an article of faith Where they hope to choake vs with an equiuocall acception of the word article For an article of faith is sometimes taken strictly for one of those verities which so neerly touch the foundation of faith that a man cannot be saued vnlesse he expresly know and beleeue it sometimes largely for any Catholike truth whatsoeuer If they take it in the former sense they fight with their owne shadowes for which of our men euer said that whatsoeuer followeth from the Scriptures by euident and necessarie consequence is in such manner and sense an article of faith But if they take it in the latter sense wee need not runne farre for Texts to proue that such consequences are articles of faith and require according to the nature of the subiect and euidence of the deduction a beliefe either explicit or implicit of them because that conclusions as I shewed before lye hid in their principles as a kernell in the shell and that consequences are materially in their premises and being in them are to be esteemed part of them and therefore he which is bound to an absolute beliefe of the one is bound also at least conditionally that is vpon the appearance of the euidence of the consequence to beleeue the other 5. If wee dispute syllogistically they bid them tell vs that not the Scriptures but Aristotle prescribes rules for syllogismes and that Aristotles rules cannot binde the faith As though syllogisticke formes were principall causes of the truth of things and not onely instruments whereby the Truth which was before and might otherwise by naturall Logick and the strength of the common apprehension be perceiued is made somewhat the more easie and apparant For many Conclusions follow necessarily in regard of the matter which are vicious in regard of the forme Galen inuented a fourth figure which others reiect And therefore wee build no more vpon Aristotle in matters of faith then an house is built vpon the Carpenters Hammer Square or Rule which are neither whole nor part of the building though otherwise they conduce thereunto as instruments 6. If wee stop their mouthes either with manifest Texts of Scripture or pregnant consequences then they bid them demand of vs Who shal be iudge Which is a peece of Sophistrie beyond the Deuils who being taken tardie by our Sauiour in misse-quoting places of Scripture forgot to aske the question Who shal be iudge This cauill is squint-eyed and lookes three wayes at once If we say the Holy Ghost then they vpbraid vs with flying to priuate spirits and making our selues Iudges in our owne cause If we say the Scriptures they reply that the Scriptures are not sufficient to execute the place being mute and wanting a voyce to declare which amongst many senses is their owne and if we say the Church then they conceiue the victorie to runne on their side and think we haue granted them their Conclusion But what if we make neither the one nor the other sitting alone to be this Iudge but acknowledge a Concurrency though not equall in all of them and that Concurrency though not to the enacting of the sentence as it is considered in se in it selfe yet to the publication of it quoad nos as it hath reference to vs What then shall become of these sequells And so it is indeed For howsoeuer we make one supreme Iudge in this high Court of Veritie yet wee doe not imagine
him to speake but by writing nor that writing to bee ordinarily read and declared without an Herald The principall Iudge wee say is God himselfe from whom proceedes the knowledge of all supernaturall truths whatsoeuer The instruments whereby hee communicates them vnto vs are threefold first his Spirit whereby he speakes inwardly vnto vs both enlightning vs to behold and perswading vs to beleeue the sense and meaning of his mysteries Yet is not this a priuate spirit because it reueales not ought vnto vs besides the publicke writing nor ordinarily without the ministerie of the Church For to speake more clearely a spirit may be termed priuate Either 1. Ratione Principij in regard of the author and efficient from whence it comes 2. Ratione Subiecti in regard of the subiect or person in which it dwells 3. Ratione Medij in regard of the meanes which it vseth Now the spirit wherby we iudge of diuine truths howsoeuer it may bee termed priuate in regard of the Subiect or Person wherin it inhabites hee being haply as most men are of a priuat condition yet we allow it not to bee priuate either in regard of the meanes which it vseth which are the reading of the Scriptures publike ministerie of the Church Councells Fathers c. or in respect of the Author efficient thereof which is the Holy Ghost the common father of light and grace at which kind of spirit Saint Peter specially aymes when hee saith no Scripture is of priuate interpretation 2. Pet. 1. The second instrument whereby God declares his sentence is the Scripture which is the only outward infallible rule whereby Controuersies may be resolued and decided and is not to be accounted imperfect or vnsufficient for this purpose because all men are not able to pry forth with into the meaning thereof throughout or for that it wants vocall organs to expresse which amidst varietie of senses attributed vnto it is his owne For it promiseth not to doe this but to those who are enlightned with the spirit and which make right vse of the publike meanes as the ministerie of the Church reading of Authors comparing of places and the like Logicians telling vs that an instrument is then sayd to be sufficient not when it serues for all vses and in all manners whatsoeuer but when it serues to such an end and in such sort applyed as the principall efficient hath ordainedit as a writing is then sufficiently legeable if those which haue eyes and a will therunto can read it though to the blind and negligent it seeme otherwise The third instrument whereby God publisheth his decrees is the Church and in it the Bishops and Pastors thereof whether assembled in Councels or otherwise considered in their ordinarie ministerie This holds the place of an Herald and howsoeuer it stands not in equipage with the two former yet God hath commanded vs to heare it and promised that it shall neuer erre in fundamentall points either totally or finally So that in summe the totall and plenary indicature of matters of Faith belongs to the Holy Ghost whereby the Iudge of these things properly taken is he alone the gift of his spirit the Scriptures and the Church are but partiall instruments of promulgation seruing onely as seuerall trunkes and pipes whereby his decree arriues at the eares of our vnderstanding yet if any shall compare the outward instruments together the Church and the Scriptures and demand by which of the two it is that the Holy Ghost speakes properly as hee is iudge of Controuersies and on which wee are finally to rest for his infallible sentence I answer not the Church but the Scriptures First in respect of their dignity because the Scriptures are the immediate worke of God dictated by his Spirit Whereas the expositions of the Church proceed not immediately from God but mediating the voice of the Scriptures Secondly in respect of their certainty for the church is subiect to error the Scriptures are not Againe the truth in regard of the Scriptures is fixt and therefore easie to be there found shee being alwayes lodged in the same bookes but in regard of the Church it is Ambulatorie and therefore needes more search to discouer it there as not being entayled either to chaire place or person Thirdly in respect of the order and manner of knowing them for howsoeuer by a confused knowledge the Church may bee notior Scripturis knowen better then the Scriptures and-before them yet according to a distinct knowledge are the Scriptures notiores Ecclesia knowne better and sooner then the Church for the true Scriptures are knowne by their owne light but the true Church is not knowne but by the light of the Scriptures The conceit that the Church must be accompanied with infallibilitie if to no other end yet to make a finall end of Controuersies vpon earth is ridiculous for if they suppose a finall end of Controuersies amongst all men whatsoeuer first they suppose that which shall neuer be whilest the Church is militant vpon earth for the Apostle tells vs that there must be heresies 1. Cor. 11. Secondly they present a meanes vncompetent to compasse that which they designe by naming the Church of Rome to that office both in that she is a partie and hath not as yet cleared her title to that dignitie and in that infallibilitie in the Iudge is not sufficient to compose differences in supernaturall matters without grace in the hearer which is no coyne that comes out of the Popes treasurie nor hear be that growes in his Garden but raines from heauen where and what measure God pleaseth On the other side if more particularlie they require an end of Controuersies amongst those whom God hath elected and that so farre as is necessarie for the saluation of their soules it is needlesse to attribute infallibilitie to the Church for the seruing of this Cure because to them God supplyes the infallible assurance of his truth by meanes more excellent and agreeable to the nature of his spirituall Kingdome to wit by his Wisedome in furnishing them with a rule both able to bee knowne by its notes and characters and also sufficient to decide all necessarie questions that may at any time be incident by his Grace enabling them to see the truth and demonstrating the certaintie thereof to their consciences and by his Prouidence raising vp faithfull Pastors in one place or other to prepare open and display those verities and decisions to the flocke Many like cratchets to these and answered by the same grounds doe issue daily out of the Iesuits warehouse as for example if wee produce one place of Scripture to proue the meaning of another they bid them call vpon vs to alleadge a third place which shall say that this place ought to bee expounded by that as if wee needed a Text to proue God no lyar or that he doth not contradict himselfe If in disputing vpon any subiect we goe about to destroy their Assertion they will them
excludes no sort or condition of men There is neither Iew nor Greeke there is neither Bond nor Free there is neither Male nor Female for yee are all one in Christ Iesus saith the Apostle Gal. 3. 3. Thirdly in respect of time because it shall neuer cease nor faile but continue in one place or other vntill the last day according to that promise of our Sauiour that hee would be with vs alwayes euen vnto the end of the world Matth. 28. Thus you see modum essendi the manner of the Church Catholikes being but modus cognoscendi the manner of knowing it is more questionable for on it depends that great question of our dayes wherein the Iesuites so triumph concerning the perpetuitie and visibilitie of our Church in all Ages For our better progresse wherein wee are to note that a thing may bee knowne two manner of wayes Viz. 1. The one a priori that is by arguments drawne from causes or principles which force an assent to a thing though as yet one sees not the truth of the same by experience Thus from that principle in Philosophie that heauie things tend downewards to the center I know that a plummet of lead would fall to the center of the earth if no thicke or grosse body interposed it selfe although I neuer saw any conclusion or practice of the fame Thus from that principle in Diuinitie that there is a resurrection of the body I beleeue that who euer lye buried in their Sepulchres shall rise againe although mine eyes were neuer witnesses of any such resurrection 2. The other a posteriori that is by arguments drawn from the effects to the cause or by grounding ones knowledge and certaintie vpon the sense of an experiment as when one beleeues that the fire is hot because hee feeles it burne or that the Sea is salt because he tastes it brinish Both these haue their vses being rightly and with due circumspection applyed but they are not alwayes and in all subiects alike demonstratiue and therefore the question will bee which of them the Creed requires for the procuring of a firme beliefe and assent to this article of the Catholike Church I must confesse that arguments a posteriori that is from testimonies of men pointing out by name the Professors and vpholders of any Religion in all Ages is a great motiue and inducement to perswade that such a Religion is Catholike that is vniuersall in respect of place persons and time and that the Church professing such a Religion is of the like amplitude and antiquitie But yet this is not that modus cognoscendi that manner of knowing the true Church to be Catholike which is proper to the Creed or by which Faith cleaues vnto it and beleeues it as an article of saluation that manner of knowing it to be so is onely a priori by diuine principles that is by Gods promises made vnto it in the Scriptures where wee reade that of Christs Kingdome there shall be no end Psal 2. that the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it Matth. 16. and that our Sauiour will continue with vs vnto the end Math. 28. these are the pedigrees of Christs Church by these it proues it selfe to be of an ancient stemme that it had noble Progenitors he which playes the Herald and points out the seuerall descents of her sonnes with their lots and portions in all Ages he may somewhat illustrate the Church Catholike he cannot strengthen or confirme it hee may bee a Thomas Didimus which will not beleeue vnlesse hee sees hee cannot bee any of those blessed of our Sauiour which see not and yet beleeue Ioh. 20. Now that the Catholicisme of the Church that is the vniuersalitie duration and perpetuitie thereof so farre as it enters the Creed is to bee knowne onely a priori by the promises made in the Scriptures vnto it and not a posteriori that is by instances shewing the visible Professors of the same in all Ages I shall not neede to trauaile farther then the Creed it selfe to make it good My first reason shall be drawne from the condition of the Church Catholike as it is an article of our Creed and as we say I beleeue the Catholike Church From whence I thus argue Whatsoeuer wee are to beleeue as an article of the Creed the same must bee endowed with these foure conditions The first that the proofe of it be perfect for otherwise if it prooue but in part it cannot suffice for an article of faith The second that the ground vpon which it depends be some diuine and infallible principle for otherwise it may create an opinion in one but it cannot beget a faith Thirdly that all those who are bound to beleeue it be capable of the manner of prouing it as Valentia requires in these cases And lastly that it bee not the obiect of sense For Faith saith the Apostle to the Hebrewes chap. 11. is the euidence of things not seene and Thom. Aquin. 2◠2◠q. 1. saith plainly vt fidei obiectum sit aliquod visum fieri non potest it cannot bee that the obiect of faith should bee any thing seene But the proofe of the vniuersalitie of the Church which is a posteriori by the seuerall visible Professors of the same first is no perfect proofe for it depends vpon the testimonie of Doctors whereof in some ages few haue written and those which haue written haue not written of all points so that their consent in diuers Articles is rather charitably presumed than certainely knowne Secondly it is no proofe depending vpon diuine and infallible principles but vpon the testimonie and credit of men who may erre and bee deceiued Thirdly it is not a proofe of which all men are capeable for it consists partly of the voluminous writings of Historians partly of the immense dictates of the Fathers partly of the perplexe and inextricable subtilties of the Schoole-men to which few haue time and meanes all not capacitie to attaine Lastly by demonstrating the vniuersality and perpetuitie of the Church from the visibilitie of it it makes the Church as Catholicke to bee the obiect of the sense and so by consequence makes it to bee no Article of Faith My second reason shal be drawen from the nature of the Church Catholick in it selfe and the incapability of it to be subiect to arguments a posteriori that is of sense visibility it being not properly or if properly yet not alwaies snfficiently visible for this purpose Forthe better vnderstāding wherof we must premise some distinctions touching the Church Catholicke The Catholicke Church may bee considered either in respect of its 1. Matter of which it is composed which are men 2. Forme In respect of its Matter so it may be taken either according to its full Latitude and extent excluding no time no places nor any condition of men or in a limited sense in respect of its parts and those considered not together but seuerally with relation to their proper