make them pale for feare and therefore he would affixe it though I for my part will thinke he doe it not so much to terrifie vs as to gull his owne with the name of the Church If he had in any good fashion defended the exposition and application he made of it k THE WAY § 15. Reply pag. 223 in his Treatise he might haue vsed it the better and it would haue made vs the more afraid but hauing left it in the lash where I answered it he is not worthy so faire a text should come vnder his title Neuerthelesse there is good vse to be made of it against himselfe For if the Church be the pillar of truth and the Papacie which he striues for in his Reply be the pillar of lies then it will follow the Papacie is not the Church The first proposition is his text The second neither his Reply nor Treatise can put by The conclusion therefore is the truth And so the Text may keep his place to good purpose 5 On the backside of the same page hee hath placed in Latin and English this sentence of Saint Austin de vtil cred c. 8. If thou seeme to thy selfe to be sufficiently tossed to wit in doubts questions or controuersies of faith and wouldest make an end of these labours follow the way of the Catholicke discipline which did proceed from Christ himselfe by the Apostles euen vnto vs and from hence shall be deriued to posteritie I guesse his minde was to allude to the title of my booke which I called THE WAY and because therein I defend the way of the Scripture followed by the vniuersall Church which he likes not therefore he brings S. Austin reuoking vs to the way of Catholicke discipline This man sure hath a strange apprehension * Denique addimus Ecclesiam quae nunc Pontifici Romano obtemperat ture ac merito Catholicae nomen sibi vendicare eademque ratio ne fidem eius Catholicam esse censendam appellandam Suar. de fens si◠Cathol aduers Anglic. sect err l. 1. c. 12. nu 9. to thinke that wheresoeuer the Fathers vse the word Catholicke they vnderstand thereby this New-Roman-Catholicke and when they speake of Catholicke discipline they vnderstand his Church proposition determined by the Pope when they affirme nothing else but the doctrine contained and written in the Scriptures to be Catholicke and the discipline whereby men are directed both in faith and manners So S. Austin expounds himselfe l Cap. 6. in the same place Beleeue me whatsoeuer is in those SCRIPTVRES is loftie and diuine THERE is altogether IN THEM the truth and discipline most accommodate for the renewing and repairing of our mindes and so qualified that there is NO MAN BVT FROM THENCE HE MAY DRAW THAT WHICH IS SVFFICIENT for him if to the drawing he come deuoutly and godly as true religion requires So also Theophilus Alexandrinus m Epist 1. Pas chal pag. 377. cals the medicines taken out of the holy Scriptures for the curing of heresies the ecclesiasticall discipline The WAY to the Church therefore and S. Austins WAY of Catholicke discipline are both one because they both are the way of the Scripture and that sufficient and easie way which the simplest that is may finde though the Pope with his authoritie and traditions intermeddle not and he that will seeke the Catholicke discipline by Saint Austins consent must do it in the SCRIPTVRE which I doubt will not greatly please this Iesuite who hath spent all his time in groping for it about the Popes stoole he being the man when all is done that must determine this discipline and * Cum Pontisex definit Ecclesia per caput suum loquitur Suar. vbi sup c. 2◠nu 7. the mouth whereby their Catholicke Church must vtter and expound it 6 In the next page followes a Table of the contents of his booke and after that a short Preface to the Reader wherein first he commends his booke that I confuted and his Method vsed therein to bring men to resolution and then shewes how he was vrged by our writing against it to this Reply excusing himselfe for the plainesse of his stile and concluding with a grieuous complaint of our vnsincere dealing which he proceeds to shew in that which followes The Commendation that he giues his Method may not be denied for we allow Apes to hugge their yong ones and heretickes to conceit their owne deuices and I must confesse it is good round Method indeed for the purpose and profitable for them to be followed For if you will see it this it is Good Eue for your soules health I were readie to shed my best bloud and therefore haue ventured my life as you see vpon the entertainment you know of such as I find in the hiding roomes to bring you home to the Catholicke Church your Method is this Close vp your eies and examine nothing but obstinately renouncing the Protestants and stopping your eares against the Scriptures in all things beleeue vs who on my owne word are the Church of God and submitting your selfe to the direction of your ghostly father without more adoe be resolute and you shall easily be perswaded of our Roman faith This is a good sure Method to resolution and makes many resolute indeed and the Iesuite hauing found by experience how kindly it works with good natures had reason to commend it though in any indifferent iudgement it be a poore one as will appeare The rest of his Preface is trash come we to that which is materiall 7 After the Preface to shew my vnsincere dealing whereof he complaines he makes a title of examples of grosse vntruths gathered out of M Woottons and M. Whites bookes by which the discreete reader may see how little sinceritie or care of truth they haue had and consequently how little credit is to be giuen to their writings and hauing dispatched M. Wootton he comes to me with these words Now to come to M. White whose booke is said to do much more harme among the simple then M. Woottons doth I hope I shall lay open such foule want of sinceritie and care of truth in him as it will plainly appeare that those which shall hereafter take harme by giuing credence to his words or writings shall shew themseluis to be very simple indeed So that in all probabilie he should haue some great matter to shew that makes so large an offer and yet euery one of these examples will proue in the scanning so many testimonies of his owne weaknesse and immodesty when hauing had the book foure yeares in his hands and so many of his consorts to ioyne with him in replying all which time their rage against it and desire to discredit it and vowes to confute it appeared well enough yet now at the last can obiect no other examples of vntruth then these And that we may know he comes furnished he cals for a railing roome to brawle in
of such a man is to be followed in interpretatioÌ„ of Scripture or otherwise as the rule of faith or as a sufficient infallible means to leade men and to direct them in the knowledge of matters which are to be beleeued by faith Now this being the sense of my conclusion let vs heare how my aduersaries will answer my proofes 5 First he grants that a priuate man assisted by the holy Ghost may interpret Scripture truly and infallibly against a company as big as the Romane Church supposing the said company were not so assisted but it is not to be thought that the holy Ghost forsakes the Catholick Church to assist any who interpret contrary to it Which I thinke too and therfore neuer denied his coÌ„clusion nor gaine-said the arguments whereby he confirmed it in this generall sense But when these priuate men were expounded to be the reformed Churches and their Pastors and this holy Catholicke vniuersall Christian Church vnderstood to be the Papacy and the Romish faction then I affirmed that priuate men might haue the Spirit of God and his truth and the Church want it But that I be not mistaken and that the Reader may vnderstand wherein I and my aduersaries differ Note that the name of the Church may be taken 3. waies First for the whole company of such as professe Christ and his Gospell collectiuely in all ages and places which is most properly and really the Catholicke vniuersall Church So expressely o Princip doctr pag. 99. 101. edit Ascens an 1532. Waldensis This is the Catholicke Apostolicke Church of Christ meant in the Creed the mother of beleeuers whose faith cannot faile not any speciall Church Not the African as Donatus said not the particular Romane Church but the vniuersall Church not assembled in a generall Councell which we know hath sometime erred but the Catholicke Church of Christ dispersed through the whole world since the Baptisme of Christ by the Apostles and their successors to these times is it which containes the true faith and holds the certain truth in the midst of all errors Secondly for any part of this Catholicke Church in this or that time or contrey as the particular Churches of Greece Rome Corinth or any assembly of Bishops congregated in a Councell either generall or particular Thirdly for the Papacy or Romish Church peculiarly containing that faction which imbraces the Romish religion and liues vnder the Popes subiection In which sense my aduersary and all Papists alway vse the name of the Church p Est coetus hominum eiusdem Christianae fidei professione corundem Sacramentorum communione colligatus sub reginunt legitimorum Pastorum ac precipuè vnius Christi in terris Vicarij Romani Pontificis excluduntur schismatici qui habent fidem in sacramenta sed non subsunt legitimo Pastori Bell. de eccl milit c. 2. Est visibilis hominum câ—etus sub Christo apite â—â—us in terris Vicario â—astore ac summo Pontifice agens Simanch Cath. instit tâ—t 24. n. 1. defining it by this Romish faith with subiection to the Pope and excluding from it all that refuse the Papacy The which distinction being thus laied I propound my answer and that we say touching the point in the fourth proposition First No man or company of men beleeuing and expounding the Scripture contrary to that which the vniuersall Church in the first sence hath alway beleeued and expounded can be assured they haue the assistance of Gods Spirit but the contrary they may assure themselues they are led by the spirit of error The reason is for no truth can be reuealed to any but that which is in this Church for if it be not in it so that the Church neuer knew or beleeued it then it cannot be the truth For q 1. Tim. 3.15 the Church is the pillar and ground of truth and so a priuate man holding it must needs hold an error Secondly A priuate man and priuate companies of men may be and many times are so assisted by the holy Ghost that they may beleeue and expound the Scripture truly against a particular Church or Councell of Bishops either generall or particular The reason is for God hath left his truth with his Church therein to remaine for euer but not infallibly euery parcell of his truth with euery part or assembly of the Church But his prouidence and promises to his Church are sufficiently vpholden if he so support the true faith that it alway remaine in some of the Church Therefore a particular Church or councell of Bishops may at some time and in some points erre and then it cannot be denied but others may see the truth against them this proposition our aduersaries dare not denie nor do not Thirdly a priuate man and priuate companies of men beleeuing and expounding the Scripture onely against the Papacie may be infallibly assured they are assisted by the holy Ghost The reason is because this Papacie is no part of Gods truth but the late inuentions of men added vnto it Fourthly Priuate men and priuate companies of men beleeuing and expounding contrarie to the Papacie resist not the true Church of Christ nor any part of it The reason is for the Papacie being nothing else but a disease or excrement breeding in the Church must not be expounded to be the Church it selfe as a wenne or leprosie growing on the bodie is not the bodie it selfe and he that cuts off the wen or purges away the leprosie cannot be said to resist or wrong the bodie 6 These foure propositions thus laid downe it is manifest my aduersarie doth but cauill in this place For if his conclusion intended no more but that priuate men must not be thought to know the truth and the true Catholick Church to be in error no man would speake against him But the sence of his conclusion is against the three last of my propositions That no man can be thought inspired of God or to haue the truth when he expounds Scripture as Luther and his did contrary to the church of Rome in which sence onely I dispute against him and in no other Not affirming that priuate men may see the truth and the Catholicke vniuersall Church not see it but onely that priuate men beleeuing contrary to that which my aduersarie meanes by the Catholicke vniuersall Church may haue the truth on their side and be infallibly sure therof without holding any thing contrary to the vnamine interpretation of the precedent or liuing Pastors of the sound part of the Catholicke Church CHAP. XXXIII 1. How a priuate man is assured he vnderstands and beleeues aright touching the last and highest resolution of faith 2. Luthers reiecting the Fathers 3. Occhams opinion that no man is tied to the Pope or his Councels 4. The Beraeans examined the doctrine that they were taught 5. The faith of the beleeuer rests vpon diuine infused light 6. M. Luther sought reformation with all humilitie 7. Scripture is the
demonstration by some other principle in a higher art more euident to vs. Here are two vntruths For first there is no higher art then themselues Thomas i Vbi supra sayes The sacred Scripture hath no higher science The setting vp of the Pope and his Church aboue it to giue it authoritie as a higher science giues to a lower is a blasphemous practise of Antichrist Bozius k Boz de sign eccl tom 2. pag. 439. writeth that the Scripture is not to be reckoned among such principles as before all things are to be credited but it is proued and confirmed by the Church as by a certaine principle which hath authoritie to reiect and allow Scripture Let the Reader by these words of Bozius a famous Papist conster my aduersaries meaning in this place if he chance to say he meanes not as I charge him Againe it is false that the Church is more euident to vs then the Scripture in that sense that belongs to this question I see indeed the Church that teaches me before I beleeue the Scripture to be diuine supposing I were a Pagan that as yet had not receiued the Scripture but I beleeue the Scripture to be diuine and am conuinced in my conscience that it is the word of God before I can beleeue the Church sayes true For I cannot beleeue it sayes true but vpon the grounds of Scripture which it offers me and therefore consequently the truth of the Scripture is more euident then the truth of the Church In which case it is as when a man stands in the doore with a torch in his hand to giue light to such as need where he holds out the torch indeed yet he puts no light into it nor does any thing but onely hold it before them The Church-authoritie in ministring to vs doth no more to the Scripture then this man doth to his torch I wil yet vse a more familiar conparison whereby the Reader shall see how absurdly my aduersary holds the Church to be more euident then the Scriptures and to giue them authoritie which they haue not of themselues because it propounds and perswades them vnto vs. Seius owes Caius mony vpon a bond that vpon trust and for the better keeping thereof is put into the hands of Titius For the proofe of this debt it is necessary that Titius bring forth the bond but when he hath done I demand whence hath the bond his credit How is it proued to be Seius his true deed rather then a counterfet Not by Titius his authoritie because he brings it forth but by it self in that the hand and seale thereof manifest themselues to be Seius his Titius that keeps it is but a means to bring it forth But what if Seius denie the debt that Caius be enforced to sue him and by law to cast him who giue Caius the right and makes Seius his debtor and who makes the bond of force doth the Iudge before whom the cause is tried The simplest man in the countrey will not say so for the bond both proues it self and giues Caius his right and make Seius a debtor when the Iudge onely giues it execution and declares no more but that which was in the bond before Let the Scripture be compared to this bond and let my aduersary put me to proue that it is the word of God as Caius is put to proue his bond and it wil manifestly appeare that though the Church haue some ministery in propounding it yet that ministery or authoritie call it what you will doth no more then the Iudge in this case doth It is not a principle aboue the Scripture or more euident whereby the truth thereof is proued as the Iudges authoritie proues not the bond 6 Our aduersaries when they haue wrangled what they can are inforced to confesse thus much in that they grant the last and highest resolution of our faith to be into the authoritie of the Scripture And let the Reader diligently obserue how it comes about In euery controuersie and article of faith they say they are moued by the authoritie of the Church they beleeue the Trinitie the Incarnation the Scripture to be Gods true word because God hath so reuealed by the infallible authoritie of the Church But how come they to know this authority to be infallible by what motiue doth the spirit of God induce them to beleeue it l Can loc p 48. Stapl princip doctr pag. 318. Tripl aduer Whica pag. 184 188. Greg. Val. tom 3. pag 31. Rodeâ— Delgad de auth Script pag. 51. Pezant comm in Tho. pag. 479. They confesse expresly it is the reuelation of the Scripture giuing testimonie to the Church which reuelation is beleeued for it selfe and for no other therfore the highest and last reason light authoritie mouing a man to beleeue the things of faith the sence of the Scripture the authority of the Church and al is contained in the Scripture it selfe For thus I reason The reuelation of the Scripture is beleeued for it selfe therefore the Scripture is a principle indemonstrable by any other and euident in it selfe therefore it is not beleeued by Tradition vpon the authoritie of the Church but for it selfe therfore this point that the Scripture is Gods word is contained in the scripture therfore the Scripture is al-sufficieÌ„t wants nothing that is needful to be beleeued 7 Hitherto I haue expounded the maner how the Scriptures are said to be Principles that are to be admitted immediatly without discourse of other arguments and how this their authoritie is not founded vpon nor demonstrated by the authoritie of the Church and how Church-authoritie is onely a condition and ministery to offer them vnto vs. Now I come to answer his argument wherby he would proue them not to be euident to vs the which is but a poore one For S. Paul doth not say Faith is the argument of things not euident as the vulgar Latin cited in the margent translates but of things that are not seene Now things may be euident and appeare manifestly to the vnderstanding though they be not seene when they are euident otherwise by any light or discourse to the vnderstanding The which kind of euidence and that also which is by sence may stand with faith for the declaration whereof note first that a thing is euident m Jn assensis principiorum scientiae humanitus inuentae est coactio propter euidentiam speculationis quia in eu intellectus euidenter conclusionem intuetur speculatur August Anconit q. â—9 arâ— 4. ad 1. when it moues the vnderstanding so sufficiently that it cannot chuse but assent vnto it note secondly that a thing may be euident three wayes first when it is sensible as that which we apprehend by our outward sense secondly when by the light of nature it is manifest by it selfe as two equall numbers put together make an equall Thus the first principles and notions of nature are euident Thirdly when it
virtually it is the Church of Rome and the Pope the Church of Rome representatiuely is the Colledge of Cardinals but virtually the Pope who is the head of the Church Pelaeottus f De consist part 1. qu. 3. pag. 19. The Pope alone may do not onely that which is granted to all and singular Prelates in the Church but also more then they all g Respons moral p. 44. n 4. Comitol The power of Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction is not in the vniuersality of the Church as in the true subiect but in the Prelates thereof and in the Bishops of Rome as in the fountaine whence it flowes vnto all other Ministers of the new Testament Albertine h Coroll pag. 251. saies The Bishop of Rome is the rule of faith into which Rule all the articles of our faith are lastly resolued as into the formall reason whereby they are propounded to vs. Gretser i Defens Bell. to 1. p. 1450. B. saies when we affirme the Church to be the iudge of all controuersies of faith by the Church we vnderstand the Bishop of Rome who for the time being gouernes the ship of the militant Church and by liuely voice doth clearely and expressely expound his iudgement to them that seeke to him Zumel k Disput var. tom 3. p. 49 D. saies I beleeue that the chiefe Priest and Bishop of the Church the Pope who is the master of our faith cannot but attaine the truth of faith nor can be deceaued or erre if as chiefe Bishop and master of the faith he set downe his determination so that vnlesse a man be afraid of the truth there is no cause why he should feare the Popes determination It is idle therefore and sordid that the Repliar saies by the Church he meant the Pope but secondarily as it is ridiculous to say the Church is the rule indefinitely and abstracting from all time or per ampliationem which are termes deuised onely to besot the ignorant that they should not smell his heresie for if his Church be the rule he must needes meane such a Church as he thinkes in all ages and times successiuely to haue bene inuested with that authority and that Church is the Pope alone that miserable iudge of whom their owne men say h Do. Bann to 3. p. 106. b. It is no Catholicke faith but an opinion very probable that he is S. Peters successor and the most iudicious confesse i Alph. l. 1. c. 4. Hadrian pag. 26. ad 2. he may erre * August Anconit sum qu. 5. art 1 Iacobat de conc l. 4. art 1. Occh Dialog 1. part l. 6. 2. part c. 69. inde Cusan de concord cath l. 2. c. 17. Panorm de elect C. signif not 7. Zabarell tract de schismat Gerson de auferibil Pap. consid 10. inde and be deposed for heresie A.D. § 1. Pag. 205. That the doctrine of the Apostles was for their life time the rule and meanes First I say that my conclusion being vnderstood as in this Chapter I principally meant cannot be denied to be true for it cannot be denied but that the doctrine as deliuered by the Apostles themselues being for the time they liued the Church in such sense as here I take the name Church was such a rule and meanes as here we seeke for For first it is knowne to be infallible Secondly it was easie to be vnderstood c. Thirdly it was vniuersall c. Since therefore these 3. conditions requisite in the rule of faith are found in the doctrine and teaching of the Apostles it cannot be denied but that the diuine doctrine as deliuered by them in their life time either by word or writing was the rule and meanes which God ordained to instruct men in faith Taking therfore my conclusion in the chiefely intended sense I suppose that my aduersaries will neither deny it to be true nor the reason by which I proue it to be good 2 This discourse needed not for no Protestant denies the doctrine of the Apostles to be the rule either for their time or the time succeeding to the world ende I graunt therefore the Repliar his assertion and inferre thereupon that his Popes determinations and the doctrine of his Romish Church is not the rule of faith because they agree not with that which he here confesses was the rule in the Apostles time vnlesse he will maintaine when he replies againe that the rule is not one and the same at all times as k Cusan ep 2.7 his Cardinall writes that the Scripture is fitted to the time and variably vnderstood so that at one time it is expounded according to the fashion of the Church and when that fashion is changed the sense of the Scripture is also changed Againe Magalian a Iesuite I thinke yet liuing l Magal op Hierarch in tit p. 61. n. 6. saies Though it were granted that the wordes of Paule Tit. 1.6 containe a precept to marrie yet seeing Paule gaue it by his owne authority it were no diuine but an Ecclesiasticall precept which the Church may change yea abrogate and much more dispense with Marke what trickes heretickes haue to change the Apostles doctrine when it fits not their Church then the Apostles gaue it by their owne authority which I note that the Reader may perceaue there is no sincerity in the Repliars words For albeit he grants here the Apostles doctrine be the rule yet he meanes it to be the rule but for their owne time because the Pope may vnder colourable pretences expound it that is in plaine English change it when he will as his Cardinall and Iesuite here affirme A D. § 2. That the doctrine of the succeeding Pastours of the Church Pag. 207. is the rule and meanes The chiefe controuersie is about my conclusion as in a secondary sense it may be meant of the succeeding Pastors of the Church In which sense I affirme that like as the diuine doctrine not as contained in onely Scripture or as gathered thence by natural wit or priuate spirit but as deliuered by the Apostles or the Apostles as deliuering this doctrine was the rule and meanes ordained by God to instruct all men liuing in their daies in all matters of faith So the same doctrine not as contained in onely Scripture nor as gathered thence by naturall wit or priuate spirit but as deliuered by Pastors of the succeeding Church or those Pastors as deliuering this doctrine is the rule and meanes ordained by God to instruct all men liuing in succeding ages in all points of faith 3 This assertion I will grant as I did the former namely that the doctrine of the Pastors of the true Church such as succeed the Apostles is the rule and meanes of faith but the reader shall note two trickes that the Iesuite puts vpon him in the Proposition hereof First that affirming the doctrine of the succeeding Pastors of the Church to be the rule he saies not
it is impudencie to denie his conclusion so apparently proued on the other side we dare not grant it for feare of the people Here is neuer a true word First his conclusion is not proued For the arguments which he propounded to demonstrate it he hath not followed nor vpholden but leauing them in the field behind him he runs away without so much as looking behind him and in all his Reply rescues not one of them Secondly his conclusion is iustly denied and without impudencie for it is no impudencie to denie that which cannot be proued but it is impudencie to require men to beleeue that which hath no proofe He speakes of his proofes as he doth of his Church all is eminent illustrous apparent plaine visible to all when yet no man sees them Thirdly the reason why we grant not the Church to be in his sence visible is not for feare of the people nor because we cannot giue the Professors of our faith in euery age but because it is the truth which with all his boasting he cannot remoue for albeit the Church neuer failes but abides perpetually visible in some degree to the end yet is there not alway therein a visible companie by profession and gouernment distinct from the rest that is free from the generall corruption that preuailes in the Church of which company onely the question is He maintaining that the Church cannot erre nor be subiect to any such corruption but hath alway in it eminent professors and speciall congregations that are neuer infected with any part of the corruption nor need reformation which persons and congregations appeare as visibly and distinctly to all men as worldly kingdomes are distinctly seene and knowne and we holding the Church to be perpetuall onely because there are alway in the world which hold the true worship of God and to be visible in regard it may at all times be seene though heresie may so preuaile and persecution so arise that a visible companie shall not appeare which is not in some measure touched with the common errors or needs not repentance and reformation All which is so true that I challenge the Replier and prouoke the zealousest of my aduersaries to say ingenuously if the learned Papists alledged Digress 17. say not in effect as much themselues 2 Our answer therefore is direct and plaine both to the conclusion and the reasons and so direct that the Iesuite hath no stomack to reply but exceeding grosly falsly expounds affixes a meaning to vs that we neuer meant First he says we distinguish two seuerall Churches whereof we call the one the Catholicke Church mentioned in the Creed containing onely the elect the other the Militant Church containing as part of the Catholick the professors of the true faith whether good or bad beleeuers or hypocrites elect or reprobate Next he sayes the reason why we thus distinguish two seuerall Churches is that when we are hunted out of the one we may runne into the other This he expounds something more plainly That which as I guesse for he hath no certaintie of what he sayes driues them to admit such a Church militant distinguisht from the Catholicke is least if none should be said to pertaine to the Church but onely the elect it would follow that men might despaire of attaining true faith which is not had but by the teaching of the Church for as much as they could neuer know who are elected Thirdly he says this Militant Church which other Protestants commonly call the visible Church M. White will needs defend to be sometimes inuisible That these things may the better be vnderstood and answered note FIRST that by the word Church taken in his full latitude The Church we meane the whole companie of all those whom God calls to the knowledge and profession of his truth and so to saluation Of which calling and separation from the rest of the world liuing in Atheisme and idolatry without the knowledge or acceptation of those supernatural verities that leade to God it hath the denomination and is called the Church as if you should say a companie called or gathered forth of the rest of the world But one church Note SECONDLY that the Church absolutely and simply considered in this latitude is but One as the state and company of the kingdome of Great Brittain is but one in as much as all and euery one called to this grace of how different state qualities or condition soeuer belong one way or other to this companie for the faith being but one and the maner of calling by reuealing the same but one the companies that receiue and professe it how many soeuer respectiuely yet absolutely and abstracting from particular conditions of times and persons can be but one Note THIRDLY that in the Church being absolutely but one there are sundry differences and respects that is to say the persons called to the faith of Christ are of diuers sorts as the kingdome of Great Brittain being but one yet is diuers waies considered For some part of the Church being reduced from the state of this mortall life reignes with God in heauen and is glorified with that glorie whereto it was called when it was here on earth The triumphant Church This we call the Triumphant Church because as triumphers they enioy the reward due to conquerers The other part of the Church is that which successiuely in all ages liues here in this world professing that it desires to follow the Triumphant The militant Church and enioy eternall life this we call the Church Militant because it lies as it were in the campe fighting against the world the diuell and the flesh vnder the banner of Christ waiting for the victorie But among these againe there are two sorts of people the first all such as are called effectually The Church of the elect these are the elect onely whom God not onely calls but inspires also effectually to obey his calling and to liue holy and vnblameable in such sort that they shal infallibly be saued in the life to come The inuisible Church This company we call the inuisible Church because God onely sees who are his we can see the men and by their fruits hope they are Gods elect but to speake precisely no mortall eie can discerne them to be Gods elect but God alone by reason hypocrites and the reprobate do many times resemble them in shew and profession The second sort of the Militant Church are hypocrites and vnsound members that are not called effectually but disobey the truth whereof they make profession such are heretickes schismatickes and all the wicked that will not obey the truth whom we call the false and malignant church The malignant Church Note FOVRTHLY that howsoeuer the elect liuing here vpon earth and effectually called be inuisible in the sence deliuered yet when we say the Church militant is sometimes inuisible we meane it of the Church Militant that liues in
should fall on the Inquisitors as the diuell had promised him we felt no fire touch vs but himselfe was soone burnt and consumed to ashes TO THE READER HItherto my aduersarie hath prosecuted the defence of the twelue first Chapters of his Treatise where he giues ouer and proceeds no further Now followes the SECOND PART of his Booke Pag. 251. which he entitles AN APPENDIX TO THIS FIRST PART OF REPLY wherein an issue or triall is made whereby may be seene whether Catholicks or Protestants be the true VISIBLE CHVRCH wherein he first sets downe as he entitles it A CATALOGVE OF THE NAMES OF SOME CATHOLICK PROFESSORS to shew that the Romane Church hath bin as the true Church must be continually visible in all ages since Christ And then after the Catalogue A CHALLENGE TO PROTESTANTS Pag. 265. requiring them to make a like Catalogue of the Professors of their faith in all ages since Christ as he hath it downe a catalogue of his Church His Catalogue is nothing else but a chronologicall Table containing and representing the names of all the POPES and the most DOCTORS and ancient Fathers and some GENERAL COVNCELS and many PROFESSORS as he cals them of the Romane faith which in euery age haue bin in the Church to this day distinguishing the ages by centuries of yeares and vnder euery centurie placing the Popes Fathers Councels and Professors that liued were therein In the first centurie he names our blessed Sauiour Christ with his Apostles and Euangelists and the Churches of Rome Corinth Galatia with the rest of the Apostolick Churches In the second and so forward be sets downe the ancient Fathers of the Primitiue Church with the Martyrs Councels holy men and nations conuerted that were in euery age successiuely till he come to the yeare 1600. The folly and error of this his Table stands in fiue things first that he assumes these persons Councels and nations to himselfe as professing his Popish faith who were indeed eminent members of the Church in their times but neuer either professed or saw that part of his Romane faith which we haue cast off For how ridiculous is it to say that our Sauiour and his Apostles and the rest that follow for a thousand yeares beleeued and professed as the Iesuites now do or as the Trent Councell hath decreed in the Canons and new Creed thereof The second is that the persons named in the first ages till 800 or a 1000 yeares after Christ not onely professed not the Papacie but beleeued professed that which directly destroyes it They held that which the Church of Rome holds according to the Scriptures and wherein the Papists and we consent but the things in time and by peece-meale added to the truth wherein we differ from them they held not but the contrary Let the Iesuite therefore shew a catalogue of such as in those times professed and beleeued not onely what the Church of Rome beleeues aright but what it holds against vs in the seuerall articles of our difference The third is that diuers Councels especially latterward which resisted the Papacie comming on are omitted as those of Constantinople Frankford Pisa Constance Basil c. and many famous eminent Doctors omitted that professed directly against diuers articles of the now Church of Rome The fourth is that many false and fabulous Saints are named and things set downe out of Legends that can never be proued as the tale of the Iewes of Berytum conuerted by a bleeding Crucifixe and such like The last is that divers Popes for many yeares together namely in the ninth age succeeded not but entred violently and disorderly and very many especially in the latter ages are excepted against vpon diuers points purposely let downe in * Digr 53. my former writing His Catalogue therefore is to no purpose as shall fully appeare in that which follower for euen we our selues lay claime to so much of it as is true and if he will giue vs leaue to adde the names of some others that liued after the 800 yeares we will exhibite this very Catalogue our selues and no other saue that the Legend Saints and the Friars and apostaticall Popes and Iesuites with such traitors as Allen was we need not Next after the Catalogue ensues the CHALLENGE TO PROTESTANTS that they shew the like Catalogue But this is idle For we shew the same if he will permit vs to supply some wants in the latter ages professing the Church of Rome it selfe in all ages to haue bin the visible Church of God as I haue shewed in * From ch 36. forward that which goes before though the Papacie therein were not the Church After his challenge containing onely one leafe the whole matter whereof is the same that I haue answered in the sixe last chapters he propounds certaine obiections which he thought might be made against his Catalogue thereby to give colour to the succession of his Poperie The which obiections with his answers to them I will set downe and handle as I haue done the rest of his Reply and so proceed CHAP. XLII An obiection against the Repliers Catalogue Diuers Articles condemned by the Fathers mentioned in the Catalogue that the Church of Rome now vses What consent there is betweene Antiquitie and Papistrie A. D. My aduersaries will obiect Pag. 267. that all there which I set downe in my Catalogue especially those of the Primitiue age were not professors of our religion in regard as they will say there be diuers points held by vs now adayes whereof no mention is made in the writings of the Fathers of that age To this I answer first retorting more strongly the argument against Protestants who falsly and absurdly challenge as M. Iewell did the Fathers of the first sixe hundred yeares or as M. White doth the whole Christian Church of the first eight hundred yeares to be Protestants And I say that Protestants do hold diuers points now adayes whereof either no mention is made in the writings of the Fathers of those ages or if any mention be made it is expresly contrary to Protestants and for vs and this sometimes with vnanime consent whereas Protestants are neuer able to shew for themselues and against vs in any point such an vnanime consent of those Fathers BEfore he retort the obiection or be too busie with B. Iewels 600 yeares and M. Whites 800 I would haue him to be better aduised what they obiect For touching the Fathers of those times three things will be granted him First that diuers maine articles of the now Romish faith which we reiect are mentioned most amply and frequently in their writings For example the Popes PRIMACIE and being vniuersall Bishop aboue all other Bishops is mentioned by Gregorie himselfe a Pope in the first age and a Per elationem pompatici sermonis Christâ— sibi studet membra subiugare lib. 4. ep 36. Quis rogo in hoc tam peruerso vocabulo
VISIBLE profession of the Romish faith for so much as nothing is VISIBLE that cannot be shewed in their writings Thirdly this answer debarres our aduersaries for euer from alledging the Fathers for their Romish faith which I shew thus First the Iesuites promise is that he will assigne a continuall visible Church professing his now Romane faith for that is the thing vndertaken to name in all ages the names of such as successiuely professed the religion now maintained by the Church of Rome Secondly to effect this he sets downe his catalogue containing the Bishops Doctors and Councels that were in the first 600 yeares Thirdly we obâ—ect that these Bishops Doctors and Councels in diuers things that is to say in all the substantiall points wherein the Church of Rome and we dissent beleeued not as the now Church of Rome doth because such points are not mentioned in their writings To this he answers that they held more either explicitè or implicitè then is expresly to be found in their writings This answer supposeth one of these three things either that they both held and writ expresly those diuers things which we denie or that they writ them not but held them explicitè or that they writ them not nor held them explicitè but held them onely implicitè The first he grants they did not but answers that they beleeued diuers things they writ not Neither is the second for what they held explicitè they writ But the third that they held diuers points of Papistrie onely implicitè is the answer Now this is it that laies all those points of Papistrie on Gods cold earth and shewes them not to haue bene knowne to the Fathers For a Rosel v. Fides n. 2 Altisiod l 3 tract 3. c. 1. q. 5 Dionys 3. d. 25. qu. vnic to beleeue implicitè is to beleeue as the Church beleeues as when a man is demanded whether Christ be borne of the virgin Marie or whether there be one God and three persons he answers that he cannot tell but beleeues touching these things as the Church holdeth And as the Repliar himselfe here expounds it To beleeue whatsoeuer was reuealed by God in word or writing to the Church diuers particulars whereof are not necessary to be knowne or written expresly at all times but this vnfolded faith shall be vnfolded as necessity shall require that is when some heresie arises oppugning the truth of the point which is thus implicitely beleeued Hence it followes that he confesses these Fathers Doctors and Bishops mentioned in the first 600 yeares of this catalogue knew not professed not defended not taught not diuers points of the now Romane faith because in their times they were not points of faith but made so since and therfore by his owne confession they held them onely in this sence that they beleeued and taught whatsoeuer the Church should after their time vnfold by which deuice they may also be said to haue beleeued and visibly professed that the Moone is made of a greene cheese or any thing that the Church of Rome shall hereafter deuise whatsoeuer it be for they implicitely beleeued all the faith of the Church and this coyning of new doctrines shall be but vnfolding some part of the Churches faith that was infolded before and so the Fathers shall be iustified to haue beleeued any thing and the Romane Church to haue bin visibly succeeding in them that neuer vnderstood her doctrine Is this then the meaning of the catalogue that so gloriously he displaies and are all those brags shew vs a visible Church in all ages as we do you our faith is no other but what the ancient Doctors held what they held I hold what they taught I teach what they beleeued I beleeue resolued into this poore shift They beleeued as we do at least implicitely Is this the antiquitie of our Romish Church and can her age be painted no better then thus Were so many diuerse points of her faith beleeued by the ancient Church onely infoldly and vpon condition If this Romane Church after 600 or 1000 yeares should vnfold them where then is the visibilitie of these things in the Church of the Fathers and the light thereof that shined so clearly in their daies Zeuxis the painter b Zuing Theat pag. 1201. they say choked him selfe with laughing at the picture of an old woman that he had drawne in a table His owne conceit with beholding the wrinkles and shadowes and lookes he had set vpon her face so affected him that he which had but a little before drawne the beautie and youth of Helena to the admiration of others with a foolish counterfet of old age killed himselfe And I am perswaded that our aduersaries this Replier and his fellows when they behold the picture of this good old wife their mother the Papacie how ridiculously they haue drawne it making her to looke elder then she is by so many hundred yeares and hanging it forth for the counterfet of antiquitie cannot at the least but smile at their owne deuice to thinke how they mocke both others and themselues if they make not others burst with laughter But to quit this deuice of the Fathers holding implicitely that which is not expressed in their writings let my replier consider that they not onely make no mention of the things which we denie but they write that which by all consequence and discourse ouerthrowes them Though therfore we allow them a litle of the implicite faith which God wot they neuer dreamed of it being a deuice of the latter School-men to serue another purpose yet they could not implicitè beleeue any thing which would be opposite to that they mention and hold expresly as those things are opposite which the Replier confesses to be the diuers things they beleeued implicitè and their Church hath now vnfolded against new heresies that are arisen Thus I reason the Fathers held contrary to that which the Church of Rome now holds ergo they beleeued it not implicitly For implicite faith holds nothing that is coÌ„trary to that which is explicite Again if they only held implicitely what the Church of Rome now holds and not explicitely hence it followes that the Romane faith in such points cannot be visibly shewed in the Fathers for to be visible and to be onely implicitè are contrary in as much as no man can see or discerne that which is implicite so the Romish faith may be shewed in a catalog of Turks as wel as in a catalog of the Fathers by the Iesuits distinctioÌ„ CHAP. XLIIII 1. The whole Christian faith deliuered to the Church hath succeeded in all ages yet many corruptions haue sometime bene added How and in what sence the Church may erre 2. A Catalogue assigned of those in whoÌ„ the Protestants faith alway remained 3. What is required to the reason of successioÌ„ Pag. 268. A. D. Secondly I said that the ancient Fathers of the Primitiue Church did hold explicitè or
implicitè all points of faith that we hold This will appeare by these ensuing considerations First it is certaine that the Apostles taught the whole corpse of Christian doctrine partly by word partly by writing which as a sacred depositum was commended by S. Paul to S. Timothy and other succeeding Bishops and Pastors of the Church to be maintained alwaies in the Church against all profane innouation of heresies in these words O Timothy keepe the depositum auoiding the profane nouelties of voices oppositions of falsly called knowledge which diuers promising haue erred about the faith The which words * Aduers haer c. 17. Vincentius Lyrinensis expoundeth thus Who saith he at this day hath the place of Timothy but either the whole Church or especially the whole bodie of Prelats who ought themselues to haue the whole knowledge of diuine religion and also to instruct others And a litle after What is meant by this Depositum it is saith he that which is committed to thee not that which is inuented by thee that which thou hast receiued not that which thou hast deuised a thing not of wit but of learning not of priuate vsurpation but of publicke tradition a thing brought to thee not a thing brought forth of thee wherein thou must not be an author but a keeper not an institutor but a secretor not a leader but a follower Keepe the Depositum preserue the talent of the Catholicke faith pure and sincere that which is committed to thee let that remain with thee and that deliuer vnto the people To the same purpose S. Irenaeus saith * l. 3. c. 14. We must not seeke the truth among others which is easie to receiue from the Church when the Apostles haue most fully laid vp all the truth in it as in a rich treasure house Also the same Irenaeus saith * l. 4. c. 43. We must heare and obey those Priests who haue succession from the Apostles who with succession of their Episcopall function haue receiued the Charisma of truth Now supposing that this sacred depositum of the whole corpse of the reuealed truth is preserued in one or other succession of Pastors of one or other companie of Christians called the Church either it must be granted that it was preserued in that succession of Pastors which my catalogue sheweth or else I must require my aduersaries to set forth another catalogue of Pastors vnto whom this sacred depositum was committed and from whom we may receiue it as need shall require For to say that the diuine truth committed to the custody of the Pastors whom God hath appointed to be alwaies in the Church of purpose to preserue men from wauering in faith Eph. 4 v. 13.14 and from being caried about with euery wind of false doctrine did at any time wholy or in part by contrary error faile in them vniuersally in such sort that there should not in all ages be sound one or other company of Pastors and Priests whom we could know still to keep the Depositum inuiolate and entire and whom consequently according to Irenaeus his saying we ought to obey as being men l. 4. ◠4. who with succession of their Episcopall function receiued also the Charisma of truth if I say this were so that Gods truth all or in part had explicitè and implicitè perished from the mouth of all knowne Priests and Pastors Gods ordinance it selfe who for the generall good of the Church appointed these Pastors had bin deficient or had failed of the intended effect Eph. 4. v. 13.14 For how should men be preserued from wauering in faith or from being caried about with euery wind of false doctrine by Pastors appointed to be for that purpose vnto the worlds end if in some ages no such Pastors were or were not to be knowne or being knowne to be the Pastors yet did vniuersally faile to preserue the entire formerly receiued truth by beleeuing and teaching and so making the people beleeue contrary errors If this were so the holy Ghost had failed to teach the Church all truth and consequently Christs promise had not bin performed which said that the Spirit of truth shall teach all truth Ioh. 16. v. 13. Some Pastors therefore alwaies are in the Church who without spot or wrinkle of any error in faith shall preserue the entire truth and by the assistance of Christ and his holy Spirit shall be able as need shall require to vnfold and deliuer to the people the same truth thereby to preserue them from falling into error and from wauering in faith 1 THat the Apostles taught the whole bodie of Christian doctrine and commended the same to the succeeding Pastors of the Church to be alway maintained without innouation and that as Vincentius and Irenaeus speake the faithfull people of the Church were to be taught the truth by these Pastors shall be granted for what the Apostles reuealed and deliuered from Iesus Christ the same they intended should be continued for euer in the Church But this proues not that the ancient Fathers of the Primitiue Church held all things that the Church of Rome now holds vnlesse my aduersarie can shew that euery thing holden in the Church of Rome is part of the Bodie of that Christian doctrine which the Apostles commended to their successors For ouer besides the truth reuealed by the Apostles the church of Rome successiuely by degrees in these last 800 years especially hath brought in diuers pernicious and damnable errors and corruptions touching Traditions Transubstantiation Images Iustification the Masse the Popes primacie the worship of Saints innumerable other points wherin we haue forsaken it the which corruptions not belonging to the bodie of Christian doctrine which the Apostles taught but being a disease that bred in the body of the Church must not be said to haue bin the faith of the Fathers who receiued nothing from the Apostles but that doctrine which is contained in the canon of the Bible besides which doctrine if either the Fathers or Pastors of the Church succeeding taught any thing it must be reiected as no part of the Depositū mentioned Thus my answer is plain that the Apostles deliuered to their successors to be preserued against all innouation the whole Christian doctrine but the seuerall articles of the now Romish faith which we haue cast off are no part of that Christiā doctrine Secondly my aduersarie replies that it was the mind of the Apostles and the ordinance of God not onely that the whole bodie of the truth should be preserued in some successiō or other but also that it should be preserued so inuiolate and entire that no contrary error should be taught with it which being supposed he sayes it must be granted that it hath bin so preserued in that succession of Pastors which his Catalogue sheweth because the Protestāts are able to shew no other Pastors His whole discourse affirmes two things the first that the bodie of Christian
those things that are written in the Scriptures or to bring in any thing that is not written Of images Epiphanius e Ep. ad Ioh. Ierosol sayes It is against the authority of the Scripture that the image of a man should hang in the Church And * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the making of statues resembling the images of the dead he calls an idolatrous and a diuellish practise And speaking of worshipping the image of the blessed Virgin which now is so commonly seene painted and attired f Pingitur cincinnis exculta vestibus ornatissimis pompa adeo inani structa vt illi etiam vniones ab auribus pendeant quod nemo possit sine stomacho aspicere Paleot de imag pag. 253. in the fashion like a Lady yea g Vestientes dominam nostram Magdalenam alias sanctas ornamentis profanis vanis ac meretricijs quibus etiam pudicae matronae sese vestire vererentur Nauar manual c. 11. n. 23. like a Curtisan and keeps such a court at Lauretto in the same place where h Leand. Albert descript Ital. in Picen pag. 428. sometime Iuno kept hers he addes that thereby men are drawne a whoring from God the body of Mary being holy but not God and shee an honorable Virgin but not giuen to be adored but her selfe adoring him that shee bare in her wombe Of the Supremacy which now the Pope vses ouer all other Bishops Gregorie who in his third argument the Repliar sayeth professed his religion i Lib 6. ep 30. sayes he will confidently auouch him to be the forerunner of Antichrist whosoeuer he be that desires to be called vniuersall Bishop proudly preferring himselfe before others Of images of the Trinity Gregory the second k 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epist ad Leo. Isaur Imp. sayes they may not be made Of Purgatory it is cleare that the Greeke Church neuer beleeued it So saith Nilus l 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nil de purgat p. 118. l. 1. Our Fathers neuer taught vs Purgatory neither did the Easterne Church euer beleeue it Roffensis m Artic. 18. No man now doubts of Purgatory and yet among the ancient there is little or no mention made of it yea the Greekes to this day beleeue it not and the Latins haue not with one consent conceiued the truth of this thing For the beleefe of Purgatory was not so needfull for the Primitiue Church as now it is Of the number of Sacraments which n Trid. conc sess 7. can 1. our Aduersaries will needs haue to be seauen Cassander o Consult art 13. §. de numero sacram sayes we do not reade the other Sacraments confirmation matrimony orders penance vnction by those ancient writers to be cōprehended in any certaine number nor shall you hastily find any before Peter Lumbard that determined any certaine or definite number of them Of the peoples receiuing the cup in the Sacrament p 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Clē const p 145. Venet. the constitutions of Clemens say Let the whole Laity in order with feare and reuerence receiue the cup. By which few examples the Reader may discerne how vntrue it is that Coccius hath particularly set downe point by point the ancient Fathers with vnanime consent against the Protestants who hath brought nothing out of them to that purpose which is not clearely and sufficiently answered by * Jn the most waighty controuersies he is answered by M. Perkins in his Problema our Diuines in euery controuersie 2 His second argument is the testimony of those that writ the Centuries Who being themselues famous Protestants testifie this to be so in many points This argument was obiected in q THE WAY §. 44 Digr 47. his Treatise and fully answered and therfore should not haue bene repeated againe before my answer had bene auoided Yet a little I will satisfie him First if the Magdeburgenses acknowledge the Fathers in many points to be for the Papists which they no where do yet that is not all the Fathers with vnanime consent point by point in all points Some particular Fathers the Repliar knowes well enough speake that which hath no vnanime consent of the rest and their priuate opinions may giue colour to many things and yet will not reach from point to point Next it is false that is here reported of the Centuries They testifie no more but what they thought that Fathers held corruptly and themselues iudged to be errors and blemishes in their writings There is no Romish writer at this day but he doth the same Baronius in his Annals purposely intended against the Centuries hath not left one Father or one ancient history vncensured but still charges it with some error and blemish or other But my Aduersary sayes the things which the Centuries say were blemishes in the Fathers are such points as the Church of Rome now holds whereby it should seeme that in many things they testifie with the Church of Rome against the Protestants I answer first that in some points as the diligentest that are may sometime ouersee and now and then they mistake and call that the opinion or the error of a Father that is not This kind of ouersight we perceiue and pardon in our Aduersaries themselues Secondly diuers things noted by them for errors in the Fathers are not holden by the Church of Rome but are censured also by our Aduersaries themselues as well as by the Centuries Thirdly diuers points in particular Fathers are taxed which belong to that which is now holden in the Church of Rome but this iustifies not the Papists first because in such points there is no vnanime consent of all the Fathers or all the Church but onely the vnsetled and ambulatory opinions of some priuate Doctors Next what these Doctors deliuered touching such points is holden otherwise and to other intents and purposes now in the Church of Rome as their praying for the dead which the Centuries iustly note for a blemish was not with opinion of Purgatory as now it is in Rome Thirdly the mystery of iniquity began to worke in the primitiue Church whereby the fathers themselues though Bishops of the Church and most holy men yet but men sometime were deceiued and brought into error in some things thus it is written of Papias r Baron an 118 n. 2. 6. a Bishop of great authority in the Church and famous for the holines of his life that by misunderstanding ſ Apoc. 20.4 a Text in the reuelation t Prateol elench haeret l. 3. n. 17. Hiero. de scripto c. 18. he gaue occasion of the millenary heresie afterward condemned in the Church yet his credite and estimation was such that many great men followed him Nepos Irenaeus Victorinus Tertullian Lactantius Apollinarius Coracion and diuers others For being a man as u 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb hist eccle l. 3. c. vlt. Eusebius sayes
Papists to explicate proue their transubstantiation that it is confessed to be too grosse and meerly false if the words be vnderstood as they sound of the bodie of Christ So the Glosse Nisi sanc intelligas verba Berengarij in maiorem incides haeresim quà m ipse habuit §. Dentibus Turrecremata Nec iste modus loquendi est tenendus Ibi. nu 1. §. Respondeo Hervaeus Quod quidem vocabulum vt sc à dentibus tereatur non est extendendum sed exponendum restringendum vt sit sensus non quod corpus verum Christi teratur dentibus sed quod illae species sub quibus realiter est tereantur dentibus Et ideo est alia opinio communior verior c. 4. d. 10. qu. 1. pag. 17. But this Glosse is proued vntrue by this that the words thus expounded containe nothing against Berengarius opinion who had denied onely the grosse and reall presence of Christs flesh it was sometime therefore beleeued by some bodie in the Church of Rome belike that his blessed bodie touching the place and maner of presence was as far from them that receiue the Sacrament as heauen is from earth This for the reall and spirituall presence If the Iesuite dare put his Transubstantiation to the triall let him looke into m Digress 49. nu 9. THE WAY and hearken what many of his owne learned men say of it and when he hath done let him take a view of the poore answer that in this his Reply he hath made vnto them Pag. 32. A.D. The fourth marke is set downe by M. White in these words The most points of Papistrie are directly and at the first sight absurd and against common sence and the law of nature If he meane that they seeme at the first sight absurd c. to the seduced people of his sect who neither beleeue nor rightly vnderstand either the things by vs beleeued or the reason or authoritie for which we beleeue them then it may be he saith true but nothing to the purpose For if this were a sufficient marke to make vs misdoubt our religion by the like reason other heretickes or infidels who do not beleeue the mysteries of the blessed Trinitie the Incarnation c. might thinke to make vs misdoubt the truth of these mysteries because they who neither beleeue these mysteries nor rightly vnderstand them nor the reasons and motiues which make vs beleeue them will say that these mysteries are directly and at first sight absurd c. yet in truth they are not absurd nor against but aboue our reason and sense so I say to M. White although other points of our religion seeme to him absurd yet in truth they are not absurd neither are they contrary to but at most aboue the reach of naturall reason 4 I do not obiect against the religion of the Papacie that it is but aboue the reach of reason For many mysteries of the true faith are so the which we must beleeue and n Nec quisquam potest intelligentiam Dei apprehendere nisi qui toto se despecto conuersus ad sapientiam Dei omnem quaerendi ratiocinationem transtuleriâ— ad credendi fideÌ„ Oros l. 6. c. 1. not examine by sence but that many points thereof are absurd and directly against sence and the light of nature which no peece of true religion is as for example that a man endued with reason should fall downe and adore and inuocate an image o Shewed in THE WAY §. 50. n. â—6 51. n 7. and below chap. 54. the which in the Church of Rome is taught and practised As many other points are as absurd as it But if it be true which the Iesuite sayes that they are mysteries which we vnderstand not being a seduced people not acquainted with the authority whereupon they are beleeued that is another matter that I knew not before for they are to blame that will demand reason for the mysteries of Rome that haue authoritie beyond reason p Apoc. 17.5 whose forehead hath the word Mysterie written in it and I had forgotten q Quia in his quae vult ei est pro ratione voluntas Nec est qui ei dicat cur ita facis Gloss §. Veri c. Quanto de transl ep Sacrilegij instaâ— esset disputare de facto suo Glos §. Quis enim d. 40. Non nos Jta nos ad iudices reuocas ac si nescires omnia iura in scrinio pectoris nostri collecata esse sic flat sententia Loco cedant omnes Pontifex sum Paul 2. Platin. p. 304. a rule in his law that forbids men to aske any reason of his doings But in the mean time where are the Iesuites r Introd q. 4. p. 100. prudentiall motiues without which nothing ought to be beleeued because the vnderstanding cannot assent to the thing propounded without some probable motiue For religion bids not men be stockes A. D. And one cause why the common sort of Protestants do at the first sight thinke them absurd is because they haue not heard points of our doctrine truly related and declared as our Authors declare them nor the reasons and authorities set downe for which we beleeue them but haue heard such ignorant or malicious Ministers as M White make false relation of points of absurd doctrine to be held by vs which we do not hold but abhorre As to go no further M. White falsely relateth in this very place that we hold the Pope to haue right to Lord it ouer the Scriptures Fathers Councels Church and all the world That we teach also men to murther the King to pay no debts to blow vp the Parliament to dispense with murther and whoredome c. These and such like be not points of our doctrine but shamelesse and slanderous vntruths by which simple people are drawne by ignorant or malicious Ministers to mislike our doctrine in generall and to be apt to haue a worse conceit of euery point of it in particular especially at the first sight then by due examination they shall finde it to deserue 5 Not Protestants onely thinke Poperie absurd but many Papists also censuring the points I haue named and misliking them shew plainly that I spake true yet the Reply sayes the cause why the common sort of Protestants thinke Poperie absurd is because they heare not the points of Papistrie truly related but their ignorant and malicious Ministers charge them to hold what they hold not This is false for first these Protestants that thus condemne Papistrie do dayly reade the Papists owne bookes which are not restrained and prohibited with a The reading and vse of Lutheran bookes forbidden not onely the vulgar but all others of what state degree order or condition soeuer they be though Bishops Archbishops or greater onely the Jnquisitors are excepted by a Decretall of Iulius the 3. See Sept. Decr. l. 5. tit 4. de lib. prohib c. 2. that seueritie wherewith
for him The l Heb. 11.36 Scripture reports how many of the children of God were tried by mocking and scourging by bonds and prisonment they were stoned hewen apeeces tempted they wandered vp and downe destitute and afflicted All which the Apostle saies they did by faith and confidence of the Promises and yet their assurance was no other nor otherwise begotten then the ordinary assurance of all Gods children which is concluded by ioyning the light of their conscience kindled by the holy Ghost to the immediate light of the conditions reuealed in the Scriptures 5 That which our Aduersaries assigne to be the cause why a man cannot be sure of his saluation because no man is sure of his Perseuerance is easily answered by affirming likewise that the grace of perseuerance with other gifts is giuen all the elect in their iustification For S. Paule m Rom. 8.38 sayes he was certaine of it and what he in that place auouches of himselfe belongs to others as well as himselfe by the confession of n Staplet de iustif l. 9. c. 13. Tolet. in Rom. 8. v. vlt. our strongest aduersaries and he auouches not onely that Gods loue to him but more properly that his loue to God shall neuer faile o Perer. in Ro. 5. d 12. n. 59. The Iesuit also confesses it to be the doctrine of p De Bono perseuerant Saint Austine that grace is giuen by Christ whereby not onely man may perseuere but â—â—lso that he shall perseuere q 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost hom 9. in Rom. The fauorits of Princes are aduanced to honour and riches but their preseuerance therein is vncertaine But it is not so with the grace of God bestowed in Iustification and therefore we may beleeue as well our Perseuerance as our Grace And if the iustified be certaine of the grace of Iustification that he hath then may he be certaine and well assured of his Perseuerance because it is a grace purchased vs by Christ and included in that Peace which the iustified by faith haue with God through him or else let him shew that can where any firme and setled peace of minde is where there is vncertainty and doubtfulnesse touching Perseuerance r Concil Trid. sess 6. can 22. Vega pro Concil l. 12. cap. 23. Barth Mediâ— 12. qu. 109. art 10. ad 3. Greg. de Valent. tom 2. pag. 849. c. And that it is in the power of a iustified man with Gods helpe to perseuere in grace to the end is defined by the Trent Councell and holden to be the doctrine of all Catholikes which power a 1. Pet. 5.1 Saint Peter also testifies to be reduced into act by the almightie power of God keeping him * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as with a garrison through faith to saluation according to that of b Ier. 32.40 the Prophet I will put my feare into their hearts that they shall not depart from me Which ouerthrowes all them that make the vncertaintie of Perseuerance a reason against the certainty of saluation CHAP. XVII Concerning points Fundamentall and not Fundamentall The distinction expounded and defended 4. Who shall iudge what is Fundamentall and what not A iest at the election of Pope Leo the tenth A. D. * White p. 100. M. White by the foundation or points fundamentall Pag 66. vnderstandeth all truthes which are necessary for the saluation of all men but this definition is not found in * Act. 4.12 1. Cor. 3.11 Ephes 2.19 the texts of Scripture cited by him in the margent Neither doth it helpe the matter for the question may still be how many and which truthes those be which be necessarie The which questioÌ„ if we leaue to be determined by euerie mans priuate spirit or particular iudgement we shall either haue no point of faith to be accouÌ„ted a point fundamentall in regard the ignorance of some may be such that they may thinke a man may be saued by morall good life although through ignorance he beleeue nothing at all or else we may haue so many fundamentall points of faith as it shall please euerie braine-sicke fellow to hold to be necessary to saluation The which how great confusion it will breed in the Church euery man of meane capacity may easily see And therfore euery man ought to see how necessary it is that the determinatioÌ„ of this necessary question be not left to the priuate spirit or particular iudgement of this or that man but to the iudgement of the Catholike Church accounting with S. Austine all those points which are diligently digested and confirmed by full authority of the same Church to be fundameÌ„tall or to pertaine to the foundation and consequently to be such as must necessarily be beleeued actually or vertually by all men and such as may not doubtfully be disputed of and much lesse rashly and obstinately be denied by any man 1 OVr doctrine is that in the things reuealed in the Scripture and belonging to the obiect of faith there is a difference whereby some are more necessary to be knowne and without error to be vnderstood then othersome For though it be lawfull for no man either to misbeleeue or obstinately not to beleeue any thing that is writteÌ„ yet the simple ignorance or error in many things hinders not saluation nor the substance of Faith but either a priuate man or a whole particular Church thus ignorant or erring either inuincibly or not affectedly and obstinately in such things and yet holding others aright hath sauing faith and is in the state of grace This difference of things arises from 3. respects First of the commandement enioyning and vrging the knowledge of one thing more then the knowledge of another as for example the knowledge of Christ crucified more then the knowledge of his Genealogy for though both be reuealed alike yet not both vnder the like penalty Secondly of the nature and condition of the things when this doth more properly and necessarilie belong to saluation then that for without the knowledge of story of Gedeon I may be saued but without the knowledge of Christs nature and office I cannot Thirdly of their vse WheÌ„ one thing is the foundatioÌ„ and ground that giues light and subsistence to another as the knowledge of Christs office merits brings light to the vnderstanding of the doctrine touching our owne vnworthinesse c. Out of these respects and degrees of things that are beleeued as they stand in order one to another and in vse to vs we call some FVNDAMENTALL and some NOT FVNDAMENTALL not with relation to our faith so much as to our knowledge in as much as it is daÌ„gerous to misdoubt the truth of any thing that is reuealed to us if it were but a 2. Sam. 24.9 1. Chro. 21.5 Whether the number of the children of Israell able to beare armes when Dauid numbred them were 1500000 though no man will say an error or ignorance in this matter were
it may be the easing of him may do him good He complains this distinction when it is granted will not helpe the matter neither for the question may still be how many and which truthes those be that are necessary the which question if we leaue to be determinated by euery priuate spirit either we shall haue no point to be counted Fundamentall in regard the ignorance of some may be such that they may thinke a man may be saued by morall good life although through ignorance he beleeue nothing at all or else so many as shall please euery brainsicke fellow The determination therefore of this necessary question is to be left to the iudgement of the Catholicke Church that all such points that are confirmed by full authority of the said Church he receiued for such as must necessarily be beleeued by all men Wherein first I blame his discretion for where I mentioned the distinction I had no cause to inquire whose the authority is to iudge what is Fundamentall and what otherwise but assuming it as a thing iudged already I onely mentioned it affirming some points to be Fundamentall and some otherwise How it helps the matter therefore I had nothing to do in that my words were not vsed in this question Next I pittie his wretched state that in no controuersie running betweene vs no not so much as in this a poore distinction can preuaile vnlesse his owne Church and the Pope therein for * Shewed plainely below cap 35. 36. that he meanes by the authority of the Catholicke Church be made the iudge This is a very meane shift when a question depends betweene vs and them to put the Scripture and the consent of the Ancient Church by and require themselues to be iudges Thirdly this question as all other matters belonging to faith must be iudged by no mans priuate spirit but by the Catholicke Church of Christ as the Iudge and by the Scripture onely as the Rule and if they be no competent Iudges who through ignorance may thinke a man may be saued by morall good life though he beleeue nothing at all then away with the Church of Rome and let it be acknowledged as erroneous as any priuate spirit i See cap. 22. n. 1. wherein it is frequently holden that the Gentiles were iustified and might be saued onely by their morall life without beleeueing any thing at all Fourthly supposing the Protest left the determining of this question to priuate spirit which they do not but to the true Church of God following the Scripture yet let my Iesuite answer if the practise of his owne Church be not as bad where the Pope hath power k See cap. 36. n. 3. to make a new article of faith and that to be a Fundamentall point belonging to faith at one time which is not so at another so that all men shall then be bound to beleeue it which before were free to beleeue it l Scot. 4. d. 11. q. 3 §. ad argu Tonstall de verit corp p 46. as it hath already bene practised in the point of transubstantiation and may when the Pope will in the points of m Dico primò veritatem hanc sc virginem esse conceptam sine peccato originali posse definiti ab Ecclesia quando id expedire indicauerit probatur Nam imprimis EcclesiaÌ„ posse controuersiam hanc in alterutram partem decidere apertè supponunt Sixtus 4. Pius 5. Suar. tom 2. disp 3. sect 6. the conception of the B. Virgin and n Paul Benc Eugub l. de effic auxil c. 1. the concourse of Gods grace with mans wil and the o Staplet Princip doctr l. 9. c. 4. Relect. coÌ„tro 5. q. 2. art 4. Canonizing of Hermes or Clement into the sacred Scripture In which case his Holinesse might possible if not be brain-sicke which betides yonger men which Popes commonly are not vnlesse it be sometime when the yong Cardinâ—â— are in an humor to elect a Bennet or Iohn or * When Leo the tenth a yong man was elected in the Conclaue Alphonsus Petrucius a yong Cardinall proclaimed his election at the window Pontificem habemus Leonem decimum ac viuant vigeantque iuniores Pap. Masso in LeoÌ„ 10. he should haue cried by the order Annutiâ— vobis gaudium magnum Papam habemus Marcell sacr cerem pag. 19 Leo yet doâ—e at least by vertue of his age or for his recreation play the vice of a Play as p Alex. ab Alexand. genial dicr l. 3. c. 21. Amasis the King of Egipt would sometime do among his Courtiers and as q Aelian var. hist l. 12. c. 15. Agesilaus ride vpon a sticke among his children to make them sport the which comparisons howsoeuer his creatures will take vnkindly yet all the world knowes his Consistorie hath bene a stage whereon he hath many a time and often plaied these parts ere now as formally as the priuatest spirit or braine-sickest companion aliue can do and so I leaue him CHAP. XVIII 1. Touching the perpetuall virginity of Mary 2. The celebration of Easter 3. The Baptisme of Infants The Iesuits halting 4. And the Scriptures sufficiency A. D. I for breuitie sake will omit to vrge other points Pag. 68. which Protestants beleeue with vs viz the perpetuall virginitie of the blessed Virgine against the errour of Heluidius White pag. 12. the celebration of Easter on the Sunday against those heretikes that denied it the Baptisme of Infants against Anabaptists who will not allow it c. 1 HEre my name is cited in the Margent and the page of my Booke as if I had written or some way insinuated that these 3. points were matters of faith and yet not contained in the Scripture But I writ nothing that sounds that way neither in the place cited nor any where else yet because I will misse no place where he cites me I answer he affirmes 3. things First that we hold the perpetuall virginity of the blessed Virgine the Celebration of Easter vpon the Sunday and the Baptisme of Infants to be a For that is the question expressed by himselfe a litle before pag. 67. of his Repl. points of faith necessary to be beleeued â—â—condly that these 3. are not contained in Scripture Thirdly that we beleeue all this with the Papists Wherein there is neuer a true word For to the first the perpetuall virginity of the Virgine Marie after the birth of our Sauiour as well as before we beleeue as a probable and likely truth but not as a matter of faith the which if my aduersarie mislike I require him to forbeare me and answer Saint Basil with whom we consent b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Basil pa. 233. graec Froben an 1551. That she denyed not the workes of mariage to her husband after the birth of her Sonne though it nothing hinder godly doctrine yet what was done after without medling with it let vs leaue to the
d Luc. 1 70. God spake by the mouth of his holy Prophets therefore it is expresly written that all the bookes of Scripture are Gods word Any man may see this answer to be full his question being touching this Scripture that we vse and haue in our hand where therein it was written that it selfe is Gods word For I answer that it is written in these three places whereof he hath here rehearsed two Now he replies that he doth not onely enquire how we proue in generall that there is any diuine Scripture at all but how we proue these bookes which the Church now vses to be the same that those men writ whose titles they beare which he sayes cannot be proued by the Scriptures alledged because it may still be doubted whether these bookes that we vse as the Gospell of Matthew and Marke for example be part of that Scripture which the texts alledged affirme to be inspired of God and it must likewise be proued that these texts that affirme this are themselues the word of God Whereto I answer first that granting these places to proue some diuine Scripture to be and to be inspired of God it must be granted that the Scripture may be proued so to be by the Scripture it selfe For these sentences All Scripture is giuen by inspiration Holy men spake as they were moued by the holy Ghost and such like places could not proue so much as in generall that any bookes at all whether it were these that we vse or no are diuine Scripture if themselues were not diuine I say they could not proue it truly and effectually they might say it but they could not proue it because that which shall proue it must it selfe first be a diuine testimonie Secondly prouing some diuine Scripture to be and to be inspired they proue this that we vse to be such because they so mention the Scripture they speake of that it appeares to be this that we vse and it is agreed vpon of all hands that there is no scripture but this and therefore speaking of some scripture they speake of this This is my argument That Scripture whereof the sentences alledged speake is proued thereby to be diuine But the sentences alledged speake of the same Scripture that we vse For the Church hath alwayes vnderstood it so The sentences therefore alledged proue this Scripture that we vse to be diuine And so my aduersaries demaund is satisfied I enquire not onely how it is proued by Scripture that there is some diuine Scripture which is inspired by God but that these bookes in particular are that Scripture For if it giue any testimonie at all to any Scripture at all it is to these bookes in particular which are now vsed in that it describes these bookes neither are there or haue there bene any other nor dares the Church of Rome it selfe hitherto canonize any other howsoeuer some therein think it may 2 To this my aduersarie replies that before these sentences can sufficiently proue the Scripture to be diuine they must themselues be supposed to be diuine which cannot be proued by themselues if Tradition be excluded I answered this e Digr 12. in my Booke whereto he hath replied neuer a word but stands dumbe and offers the Reader that which I answered in stead of a Reply to my answer neuerthelesse I answer againe that all places in the Scripture which affirme the Scripture to be Gods word are proued to be Gods word by themselues and their owne light and not by Tradition or Church-authoritie which is but the ministerie whereby God reueales the proofe to vs and it selfe is iudged by the Scripture For if the Church-authoritie make them to be canonicall and diuine * For that is it properly that the Papists say Bellar. Stapl. Grego to vs then it is either by adding truth diuinitie authoritie to them which they had not before in themselues by diuine inspiration or onely by declaring and reuealing to vs that truth diuinitie and authoritie which they haue immediatly from God of themselues before the Church approued them that we might see and confesse it The former our aduersaries will not say or if they will it is Atheisme worse then blasphemie for so all our faith and the highest reason mouing vs to beleeue should not be diuine reuelation but humane authoritie and the Scripture which of it selfe had no truth or diuine inspiration should be canonized by men If the latter which our aduersaries dare not denie then who sees not that they proue themselues and in themselues haue diuine authoritie immediatly from God the Church-authoritie in approuing them being nothing else but bare ministerie in respect of the Scripture though in regard of vs it be authoritie in helping vs to see that which is in themselues When the King stampes coine and signes it with his image and superscription he puts that valew and currentnesse into it that was not there before Thus a small peece of copper of it selfe originally not worth a penie may be made worth sixe pence Thus the Church authorizes not the Scripture Stapleton f Staplet relect pag. 505. in explicat art sayes The Church approues not the Scripture the first way by making it sacred diuine for this approbation it hath onely from the holy Ghost the author thereof of whom alone it hath to be sacred and not humane nor the second way by making that through her iudgement it should be accepted for true and worthy credit because that which is in the Scripture is the diuine truth BY IT SELFE AND IS NOT MADE TRVE BY THE APPROBATION OF THE CHVRCH But the third way in that by the force of her approofe and iudgement they are accepted of the faithfull for sacred and diuine and infallible true And thus we beleeue these Scriptures to be Canonicall for the testimonie of the Church The King sends a commission vnder seale by a messenger this messenger giues no authoritie to the commission but is the Kings minister authorized to propound it to the subiects Thus the Church giues testimonie to the Scriptures that it is diuine and no otherwise and it selfe fetches this testimonie from the Scripture and all the authoritie thereof is lastly resolued into the testimonie of the Scripture 3 Next these Scriptures are proued to be diuine by their owne light shining and by their owne vertue shewing it selfe in them as sweetnesse is knowne by it owne taste and the Sunne seene by it owne light and as the Kings coine is knowne by his image vpon it and the fathers voice is knowne to his children by the sound and fashion thereof so are these Scriptures by the heauenly light image and sound inspired into them knowne to be the word of God The aduersaries against whom I deale haue here with Turks and Infidels debarred me from alledging Scripture to proue it selfe and therefore I will shew it otherwise Canus a Papist g Can. loc l. 2. c. 8. pag. 13.
all points contained in Scripture all which are points of faith and consequently are points necessary to be beleeued either expressely and in particular or implicitely and in generall vnder paine of damnation Indeed I do grant and neuer did deny but that there are some points necessary to be particularly knowne of all sorts necessitate medij and some necessary to be known necessitate praecepti In which points implicite beleefe doth not suffice but expresse particular knowledge is required by Catholicke Diuines to be ioyned to the assent of our faith Whereby appeareth that M. White doth vtter two grosse vntruthes 2 White p. 5. 7. when he saies that we vtterly refuse knowledge and that the Colliars faith is canonized for our Creed In other points so farre as we neither know nor haue sufficient meanes to know them we may well commend the Colliars faith in beleeuing in generall as the Church beleeueth For in this generall act is infolded a vertuall or implicite beleefe of all points both in regard a generall includeth all particulars contained in it as also for that this particular act of beleeuing the Church eo ipso in that we are moued vnto it by the authority of diuine reuelation as the primary or formall cause and by the authoritie of the Church it selfe as a necessary condition or the secondary cause doth so dispose the minde of the beleeuer that he is ready to beleeue euerie other point reuealed by God and propounded by the Church Againe * Pag. 140. Thirdly whereas M. White 3 White p. 5. requireth particular knowledge to be ioyned with the assent of faith as though he meant that one could not beleeue any point of faith which he did not first expressely and in particular know this his assertion is not onely contrarie to his fellow M. Wotton Wotton p. 46. who admitteth a generall or implicite beleefe of some points which we do not in particular know 1. Cor. 13. v. 2. but it is also against the Scriptures Fathers and naturall reason it selfe In the Scriptures we haue that not onely Faith and knowledge Heb. 11. v. 1. are 2. distinct things but also that faith is of things not apparant or not knowne and that faith doth captiuate the vnderstanding for the seruice of Christ 2. Cor. 10 v. 5. Rom. 10. v. 16. requiring an obedience in the beleeuer all which were not verified if expresse particular distinct knowledge were presupposed before beleefe or if beleefe and such knowledge were all one thing The Fathers do not onely distinguish faith and knowledge but do also affirme Faith to be without knowledge of things beleeued Iren. l. 2. c. 45. It is better saith Irenaeus that one that knoweth nothing beleeue God and perseuere in his loue which doth quicken a man then by subtilties of questions and by much speech to fall into impietie Not to know saith S. Hilary that which thou must beleeue Hilar. l. 5. de Trin. ante medium Aug. Ep. 102. ad Euodium doth not so much require pardon as reward because it is the greatest stipend of faith to hope for those things which thou knowest not If saith Saint Augustine Christ was borne onely for those that can discerne these things with certaine knowledge in vaine almost do we labour in the Church which he saith in regard the common sort cannot with all the preaching in the world discerne with certaine knowledge the high and hard Mysteries of the blessed Trinitie Incarnation and other such mysteries of faith and therefore not the viuacitie or quickenesse of vnderstanding saith the same Saint Augustine but the simplicitie of beleeuing Aug. cont Fund c. 4. Tract 40. in Ioan. doth make the common sort of people most safe And againe he saith of some they did not beleeue because they knew but they beleeued that they might know And in the same place he asketh what is faith but to beleeue that thou seest not Conformable to which also he saith Serm. 120. de tempore After we haue receiued Baptisme we say I am a faithfull man I beleeue that which I know not Reason also and experience it selfe teacheth that beleefe and knowledge are distinct and that beleefe doth not necessarily presuppose knowledge but is rather sometimes an antecedent to it Insomuch that euen in naturall things the Philosopher acknowledgeth that one that learneth must beleeue before he come to knowledge M. White may aske how one can assent to the veritie which he doth not first apprehend or know I answer that some apprehension at least confuse rude and generall I do not deny to be requisite in the assent of faith but expresse particular distinct or cleare apprehension or knowledge is not necessary otherwise not onely the common sort but the learnedest in the world might despaire of saluationâ— in regard they could not beleeue the mysterie of the blessed Trinity which no man in this life can distinctly and clearely vnderstand and know and yet all sorts of men are bound to beleeue it explicite and much lesse could they beleeue both it and all other mysteries contained in the whole corps of the holy Scripture all which are necessary to be beleeued in one sort or other explicite or implicite as hath bene proued and yet no one learned man hath particular distinct knowledge of euerie truth contained in the Scriptures Quis enim est hic laudabimus eum 1 FOr the reducing of this wilde discourse into some order and the better discerning of the controuersie you are to note that the Iesuite in the beginning of his Treatise laied downe 4. propositions touching faith out of the which he would spin his motiues to Papistry the first is that Faith is necessary to saluation The second that this faith is but only one The third that it must be infallible The fourth that it must be entire extending it selfe to all points vniuersally This conclusion I graunted in one sense and denied in another That our beleefe must be entire whole and sound in all points by obtaining a particular distinct knowledge of the same in our selues that so our faith might include an apprehension and knowledge of that we beleeue as well as an assent in the will I granted but if his meaning were that which then I suspected and now he bewraies that the implicite faith taught by the Iesuites and schoolemen destitute of knowledge and onely beleeuing as the Church beleeues were this entire faith so necessary and infallible then I denied it and gaue my reasons and a Dig. 2. in a speciall Digress shewed and confuted it All which he passes by and onely mentions as you see my bare assertion against his implicite faith but what I said in describing it confuting it and shewing the drift and purpose of it he touches not though it concerned his cause more then that which he replies to This is his method whereto he cleaues in all his booke to reply entirely to
nothing 2 That which he sayes is two things First he repeates and expounds his conclusion Next he touches some small portion of that I said concerning it In repeating his conclusion first he sayes he meant it against such as thinke it sufficient to beleeue some few articles onely though they deny or doubt of others which yet the Church beleeues yea rashly and obstinately denies them who these men are he names not but he meanes the Protestants Because they deny such points as the Church of Rome which he meanes by his Catholicke Church vntruly propounds vnto them For they must be the persons intended that deny any thing which the Roman Church holds for an article of faith as the Popes primacy Purgatory Images and the rest which in b Commonly printed with the Trent Councell inserted in the WAY praef n. 15. the new Creed of the Trent Councell are made articles of faith But the Protestants answer readily that they confesse no point at all may be denied or doubted of either obstinately or rashly or at all that is a point of faith reuealed in the word of God but the things holden and propounded by the Church of Rome against them are the false doctrines and heresies of Antichrist ridiculously called the faith of the Catholicke Church Then expounding his conclusion he shewes in what manner faith must beleeue all things that it may be entire and he sayes either expresly or implicitely wherein he bewrayes that which I suspected and signified in my answer for his conclusion being that faith must be entire and sound stedfastly beleeuing all things reuealed I c The WAY pag. 5. answered that this might be granted in a true sense But peraduenture his mind ran vpon a further matter which his Church teaches about infolded faith meaning thereby that howsoeuer he affirmed that we are bound to beleeue all points of faith as well one as other yet that might be done sufficiently by beleeuing as the Church beleeues without knowledge of any thing that is beleeued the which my suspition he grants in this place to be true and so his conclusion which at the first carried so good a semblance of binding men to the knowledge of particular verities and made so honest a proffer against ignorance is now resolued into this sense that by an intire faith you are bound to beleeue all things the which is done by knowing nothing but onely beleeuing implicitely as the Church of Rome beleeues Let a man neuer trouble himselfe with inquiring into the mysteries of Christian religion or controuersies of faith but onely say d Rhem. annot Luc. 12.11 he will liue and die in that faith which the Catholicke Church teaches and this Church can giue a reason of the things beleeued This is the equiuocating tongue of the Church of Rome that can ambush it selfe in words and vnder faire speeches conceale no small wickednes 3 His arguments in maintenance of this implicite faith are fiue First the authority of M. Wootton who seemes to speake against me next because to get expresse knowledge of all points contained in Scripture which are points necessary to be beleeued is impossible at least for vnlearned men Thirdly faith and knowledge are two distinct things faith being of things not knowne captiuating the vnderstanding therefore this distinct knowledge is not presupposed before Fourthly reason and experience teach that beleefe and knowledge are distinct beleefe not presupposing knowledge but going before it Fiftly the Fathers Irenaeus Hilary Austin affirme faith to be sufficient without knowledge Afore I answer his arguments note fiue things First what our aduersaries meane hy implicite or infolded faith and it is nothing else but a blind assent of the mind to whatsoeuer the Church of Rome beleeues without any knowledge at all of the things themselues e Occh. dialog part 1. l. 3. c. 1. p. 18. Dur. 3. d. 25. q. 1. â—abr ibi Notab 2. Do. Bann 22. pag. 349. The Schoolemen deliuer it in finer termes that it is the assent of the minde to some generall or vniuersall thing wherein many particulars are included with will to beleeue nothing that is contrary thereunto but the meaning is that to the essence and nature of this entire faith the distinct knowledge or apprehension of any particular truth or article is not required but onely resolution and profession to be of the Churches beleefe whatsoeuer it be in the same manner that I reported the Colliars faith Thus any man by an implicite faith beleeues the articles of Religion and particular mysteries of our faith touching the Vnity and Trinity of the Godhead the Incarnation and Office of Christ the nature of Faith the practise of Repentance the Resurrection the Sacraments Redemption of mankinde state of sinne and the last Iudgement when he will beleeue and hold touching these things as the Church of Rome doth and yet in the meane time his vnderstanding in no measure penetrates into these articles nor can distinctly explicate or conceiue them Altisiodorensis f Sum. l. 3. tract 3. c. 1. qu. 5. saies To beleeue implicitely is to beleeue in this generall that whatsoeuer the Church beleeues is true Dionysius g 3. de 25. qu. vnic p. 215. This is infolded faith to beleeue in generall all that our Holy mother the Church beleeues Summa Rosella h V. Fides n. 1. quem refert Bann vbi sup To beleue all that which our mother the Church beleeues and holds as when a Christian man is asked whether Christ were borne of the virgine Marie or whether there be one God and three Persons and he answers that he cannot tell but beleeues touching these matters as the Church holdeth This is the definition of entire faith which the Iesuite saies extends it selfe vniuersally to all points at least implicitely Note Secondly what the things are and which be the points that our aduersaries teach to be sufficiently beleeued by this infolded faith The Reply seemes to affirme that it is allowed onely in some points which a man for want of sufficient meanes cannot know I grant saith he and neuer did deny but that there are some points necessary to be particularly knowne of all sorts Necessitate medij and some necessary to be knowne Necessitate praecepti In which points implicite beleefe doth not suffice but expresse particular knowledge is required by Catholicke Diuines to be ioyned to the assent of our faith in other points so farre as we neither know nor haue sufficient meanes to know them we may well commend the Colliars faith in beleeuing in generall as the Church beleeueth In which wordes my aduersarie seemes to allow implicite faith only in some few cases and charges me with two grosse vntruthes because I say the Papists vtterly refuse knowledge and Canonize the Colliars implicite faith for their Creed But he should haue obserued that which was vnder his eyes and affixed to my words alledged whereby I proued what I said I alledged Iacobus
all the gates of hell not onely ouer the sayings of men though holy men or deceitful custom Gods word is ouer all The diuine Maiestie is of my side that I care not if a thousand Austins a thousand Cyprians a thousand King Harry-churches stood against me God can neither deceiue nor be deceiued Austin and Cyprian as all the elect may erre and haue erred In all these words there is nothing spoken simply against the Fathers but comparatiuely if a thousand Fathers were against the Scriptures he would rather stand to the Scripture wherein he speakes most godly and honestly that d Gal. 1. if an Apostle or an Angell from heauen farre greater then a thousand Austins and Cyprians should preach otherwise let him be accursed Neither Saint Paul nor Luther granted the Angels or Doctors of the Church to preach otherwise then they did but if any man would pretend and oppose their names and preaching against the Scripture let them be accursed the word of God is aboue all that I care not if a thousand Austins and a thousand Cyprians stood against me which is the truth and our aduersaries say as much themselues Baronius e An. 31. n. 213. Though the Fathers whom for their high learning we worthily call the Doctors of the Church were endued with the grace of the holy Ghost aboue others yet in expounding the Scripture the Catholicke Church doth not alway and in all things follow them D. Marta f De iurisdict part 1. pag. 273. The common opinion of the Doctors is not to be regarded when the contrary opinion fauours the power of the Popes keyes or a pious cause And I haue shewed g THE WAY digr 47. elsewhere that this is the common practise of our aduersaries They speake not alway so zealously and plainly as Luther doth but for substance they say the same that he doth h Yesterday Ecchius brought against me Gregory Ambrose Chrysostome to whom I then answered nothing I will therefore now say what I then forgot opposing the rule of diuine Augustine that the savings of all writers must be iudged by the sacred Scripture whose authoritie is greater then the authoritie of all men Not that I condemne the iudgement of the most illustrious Fathers but I imitate those that come nearest to the Scriptures and if the Scripture be plaine I embrace it before them all Tom. 1. disput Lips cum Ecch. pag 263. Wittemb I mention the opinion of Austin not to defame or detract froÌ„ that holy man but because it is good necessary that these holy Fathers be sometime found like our selues men that the glorie of God may stand firme c. Jâ— Genesc 21 pag. 255. tom 6. Wittemb who thought also as reuerently of the Fathers as any man is bound to do 3 But it was not Luthers going against the Fathers that discontented our aduersaries it was his resisting the Popes Canons and the faith of the Church of Rome which they shrowded vnder the name of the Fathers wherein by their owne diuinitie he might be guiltlesse Peraduenture i Dialog tract 2. part 2. c. vult pag. 180. col 3. edit Lugdun per Ioh. â—rech an 1494. saith Occham one might say that simple men ought to beleeue nothing but what the Pope and Cardinals deliuer to be beleeued explicately and should be content with things common not presuming vpon their owne vnderstanding to beleeue any thing explicitely but what the Pope and Cardinals deliuer vnto them but HE THAT SHOVLD AFFIRME THESE THINGS WERE AN INVENTOR OF NEW ERRORS For though simple men be not ordinarily tied to beleeue explicitely but onely those things which are by the Cleargie declared to be so beleeued yet SIMPLE MEN READING THE DIVINE SCRIPTVRE BY THE SHARPNES OF REASON MAY SEE SOME THING THAT THE POPE AND CARDINALS HAVE NOT DECLARED EVIDENTLY TO FOLLOW OF THE SCRIPTVRE in which case they can and must explicitely beleeue and ARE NOT BOVND TO CONSVLT WITH THE POPE AND CARDINALS FORASMVCH AS THEY ARE BOVND TO PREFERRE THE HOLY SCRIPTVRE BEFORE THEM ALL. If all the Papists in the world can shew Luther did any more then Occham here allowes euery simple man to do I am much deceiued And if he did no more then by their owne iudgements he might doe then away with these friuolous and emptie exclamations against Luther and let vs heare no more of them A. D. But saith M. White Scripture promiseth Pag 201. that euery doctrine is of God which consenteth to it and this consent a man may know infallibly or else in vaine had the Bereans searched c. I answer that I do not denie but a man may know doctrine to consent to Scripture but I aske how he may know this by onely Scripture interpreted by ones owne iudgment or priuate spirit I hope I haue shewed the contrary neither will M. White be euer able to proue that the 1 Act. 17.11 Beraeans had infallible certaintie onely by the Scripture interpreted by their owne priuate iudgement or that 2 Es 8.20 the Prophet sent any for infallible certaintie to the law and testimonie expounded onely by priuate iudgement or that 3 Luc 1 4. Saint Luke or f Col. 2.2 Saint Paul whom he alledgeth meant that men should haue infallible assurance by onely Scripture interpreted by priuate iudgement or spirit 4 I neuer intended that any man could haue infallible assurance of that he beleeues onely by Scripture interpreted by his owne priuate iudgement all that I affirme is that priuate men may examine any doctrine that is publickly taught by whosoeuer and by Scripture alone as by a certaine rule they may be assured of the truth This is plainly euinced by the texts alledged For the Beraeans hearing the Apostles preach yet searched the Scripture dayly whether those things were so and therefore beleeued In which example the matter examined is the things that the Apostles preached The rule whereby this was examined is the Scripture alone which in the text is distinguished from the Apostles preaching and ministery and authoritie and opposed against them for by it the Beraeans examined them The persons that did this were a priuate people subiect to the Pastors of the Church as much as any can be The end why they did thus examine the doctrine was to see if it consented with the Scripture The euent and issue of their examining was Therefore many of them beleeued Whereby it is cleare that a priuate man by the Scripture alone may be able to iudge of any thing that is publickly taught and by the Scripture alone be infallibly assured if he hold the truth Not the Scripture alone excluding the condition of the meanes whereby God makes the sense thereof knowne but the Scripture alone as the rule of faith excluding all authoritie of the Church and Pastors Nor the Scripture interpreted by a mans owne iudgement and priuate spirit but by it selfe truly according to the manifest rule
of faith contained and reuealed in Scripture it selfe 5 The difficultie is when I vpon the authoritie of the Scripture as I verily perswade my selfe beleeue contrary to the Church of Rome or any other presumed to be the true Church how it shall appeare to my selfe and others that I expound and vnderstand the Scriptures aright and not according to my own priuate spirit For answer whereto note first that this demand lies as well against the Beraeans and the rest of Gods people mentioned by Luke and Paul in the texts alledged as against the Protestants For they reiecting something that they were perswaded was not in the Scripture or receiuing that which they saw agreeable to the Scripture might be demanded how they were infallibly assured they had the true sence of the Scripture And a false Apostle when they should by the Scripture examine and reiect his doctrine might cauill as A.D. here doth and say they expounded it after their owne priuate spirit In which case the godly beleeuers could refer themselues to no other rule but onely leaue the truth still to be iudged by the Scripture by all such as would examine it Note secondly that the same difficultie presses our aduersaries For when they haue shewed and vrged the authoritie of the Church and their chiefe Pastor therin what they can yet this authoritie they cannot maintaine to be such as they hold but by the Scripture k Vbi sup liâ— b. Pezantius and k Vbi sup liâ— b. Greg. of Valence You wil ask how the proposition of the Church is known to be infallible Let him that is thus demanded answer He beleeues it by an infallible faith for the authoritie of the Scripture giuing witnesse to the Church which authoritie and reuelation he beleeues for it selfe albeit the proposition of the Church as a requisite condition be needfull thereunto I know not many of our aduersaries some l Durand 3 d 24. qu. 1. d. 25 q. 3. ibi Scot. Alm. Gabr. few Schoolmen excepted that hold the authoritie of the Church to be the formall reason of faith or the first and last cause of beleeuing but the authoritie of God himselfe reuealing these things which authoritie being something distinguished from the Church and aboue it can be no where manifested but in the Scripture Now when they alledge Scripture we may tell them againe they alledge it after their owne spirit which obiection may be multiplied as often as they multiply their discourses out of Scripture Thirdly therefore for satisfaction of the difficultie I beleeue and am assured of that I hold by infused faith God by a supernatural light reuealing and infusing the certaintie of that I beleeue partly by shewing to my vnderstanding out of the Scripture partly by stirring vp and inclining my will to assent vnto it and en brace it The which knowledge and assurance of mind when any man challenges as if it were but a priuate conceit subiect to error I can say no more but that which euery man sayes for his faith that so all true faith may be destroyed in that m For the beleeuer assents not by discourse to the matters of faith reuealed as by the formall reason of beleeuing but by simple cleaning adhering to theÌ„ faith neuer drawing forth her act by meanes of discourse but if discourse be vsed it is rather a conditioÌ„ helping to apply faith to it obiect Mat. 16.17 2. Cor. 10.5 Heb. 11.1 Fides secundùm se coÌ„siderata quod attinet ad causaÌ„ efficientem reuocanda est in motioneÌ„ diuinaeÌ„ lumenque diuinuÌ„ siue in habitum fidei Christiana fides etiam vt est in nobis reuocatur in DeuÌ„ mouentem diuinuÌ„que lumen Lud. Carb sum tom 3. c. 3. l. 1. pag. 6. no mans faith ascends aboue this infused illumination or can be demonstrated to be certaine by euident reasons n Tho. 1. part q 1. art 8 DuraÌ„ prolog sent qu. 1. pag 4. h. that shall conuince all gainsayers but onely there be forcible motiues to induce vnto it though when his reasons that thus beleeues shall be examined and his grounds of Scripture duly weyed by true Christians in a Councell or otherwise all that gainsay him may easily be confuted And this is the thing that we say for Luther and Scripture against the Papacie A. D. Yet saith M. White the Papists cannot denie but there is a heauenly light c. It is true Pag. 201. that Catholicks grant inward testimony of the Spirit to giue infallible assurance But what spirit is that which they thinke giueth this infallible assurance Not priuate spirit but the Spirit which is common to the Church the Spirit which inclineth men to humilâ—tie order and vnitie as in * Qu 6. the Introduction I haue shewed To whom also do they think infallible assurance to be giuen by the Spirit Not to euery one that presuming himselfe to be elect and to haue the Spirit shall rush without reuerence into the sacred text expounding it as he listeth or as it shall be suggested by priuate spirit but to such as with order humilitie and respect of vnitie reade and interprete Scripture as they learne it to be interpreted by the infallible authoritie of the Pastors of Gods Church Those that do otherwise though they may seeme to themselues to be infallibly sure yet indeed they are not as not hauing any substantiall ground to assure them which may not in like maner and with as probable colour be alledged by others whom although perswading themselues to be infallibly sure M. White himselfe wil grant to be deceiued in this their perswasion M. White * White pag. 62. 63. saith that his priuate men be assured by Scripture So say they M. White saith his men haue the witnesse of the holy Ghost So say they M. White saith his men were taught by the Pastors of the true Church This he saith indeed and so if they would be impudent they might say But whereas M White saith that his priuate men let Luther and Caluin be examples were taught by the Pastors if he meane they were taught by the Pastors those speciall points wherein they dissent from vs it is maruell that euen his owne blacke face blusheth not to vtter such a shamelesse vntruth Let M. White name if he can what Pastors those were that taught Luther and Caluin these new doctrines vnlesse he will allow the Diuell to be a Pastor whom Luther * Luth. de miss angul confesseth to haue taught him his doctrine against the Masse 6 If there be as the Replier grants a heauenly light in the things themselues that are beleeued and an inward testimonie of the Spirit that can giue infallible assurance to the beleeuer this is as much as we require for then this light and testimonie wheresoeuer and in whomsoeuer it be is sufficient as I said to assure the conscience of the truth of the things beleeued whosoeuer gainsay them and
ordinarily haue to publish the profession of other religions which tend to Gods dishonor And that wheras it was prophecied of the Church that it should be more ample and glorious then the Synagogue of the Iewes was in the most flourishing estate it should be so far from being more ample and glorious that it were sometime more narrow or lesse conspicuous then the Synagogue of the Iewes euer was or now is in her ruinate estate Moreuer it were a notable hinderance to the good of innumerable * Because the knowledge of the Church is necessarie for all those which will be saued therefore our Sauiour said that she could not be hidden Aug. ep 170. soules which by teaching and conuersation of the faithfull might most easily be conuerted to the faith who otherwise for want of hearing or possibility to heare that there were any such religion should through ignorance perish Thirdly the Church is bound by the negatiue precept of profession of faith neuer to deny Christ or the truth of his religion nor to professe outwardly the rites and ceremonies of any contrary religion by which abstaining from Seruice and ceremonies of other Religions the Church could not especially for any long time liue so secret but it should be noted and knowne as we see Catholickes to be at this day detected by their refusal to come to Protestant seruice and sermons and as Protestants in Queene Maries daies were notified by abstaining from Catholicke seruice and Sacraments 4 This which he notes thirdly containes three arguments to shew the nature of the Church to be such that it cannot be secret from the world at least so long a time as the Protestants pleade for an inuisible Church First because it is bound to actuall and outward profession Next it should be lesse conspicuous then the Synagogue of the Iewes which were against the Prophecyes Thirdly innumerable soules should perish for want of Church teaching when they could not see the Church Ad. 3. The last of these reasons I answered in the WAY Ad. 2. whereto because he replies nothing I refer both him and his Reader To the second I answer that the glory and praeminence of the Church aboue the Synagogue prophesied stands not in the perpetuall visiblenes thereof as our aduersaries define visiblenes 1. Esa 60. 11. Act 10.11 but in foure other things First the compasse and limits which was no longer to be confined within Iudaea 2. Ioh. 4.23 but inlarged to all nations Secondly the manner of worship which should not be any longer carnal and typicall 3. Heb. 8.6 but spirituall Thirdly the dignity of the Ghospell and the promises annexed thereunto aboue the law and the promises thereof wherein the Iewes were trained vp Fourthly 4. Heb. 12.28 cum 27. in the continuance thereof which was to be not till a certaine time as the Synagogue was but for euer to the worlds end Thus it was promised that the Church should exceed the Synagogue which promise may well stand with that which we say for the apostasie that preuailed a 2. Th. 2.3 Apoc 9.2 12.6 13.14 17.2 was also prophecied which being at the highest yet the Church lost not these prerogatiues but her faith continued still to be Catholicke in those that vpheld the substantiall articles thereof all ouer the world howsoeuer the apostasie brought in many and dangerous heresies that were holden besides in the Church as the Synagogue also sometimes was ouerwhelmed with the like corruptions 5 His first reason is Ad. 1. because the Church is bound by a negatiue precept neuer to deny Christ or his religion or to abstaine from the seruice and ceremonies thereof but outwardly to professe the faith To this I answered in b §. 19. my Booke that the Church neither failes to professe outwardly the faith which in heart it beleeues nor yet is made visible and knowne to all by this profession The reason is because the members of the Church professing the substance of faith as c 1. Reg. 19.18 the 7000. in Israel did that bowed not the knee to Baal whom Elias saw not when persecution and preuailing error will not suffer them to do it in the purest manner in all points yet this is outward profession and satisfies the commandement which requires no more but 2. things first that we professe openly to the world as long as the same wil suffer vs and be ready to seale the faith thus professed with our bloud when by necessary circūstances of time and place we shall be called thereunto secondly that when persecution or inuincible ignorance or any other impediment hinders that this cannot be done yet we professe one to another and maintaine the faith wheresoeuer or how few soeuer so farre as we haue meanes to vnderstand To this my aduersary replies that indeede the rites and ceremonies of seruice and sacraments whereby he meanes the profession mentioned in as much as by the exercize of these things Christ is professed may though hardly be done in secret but the Church is bound to another kind of actuall profession before the world I answer 2. things First himselfe knew this absolutely taken to be false and therefore he recalles himselfe and yeeldes againe that all the members of the Church are not bound at all times actually to shine in this maner but then when Gods glory and the good of soules requires This he borrowed of his Thomas whose words shall be this part of my answer For the Church and the seuerall members thereof are neuer so hidden or ouerwhelmed with error but in time and place necessarily requiring the same they professe the substance euen outwardly and suffer sometime for the same and thus did many professe the Protestants faith in all ages and therefore the Iesuite trifles away the time when he standes to proue it necessary that euen alway some or other should professe outwardly for we graunt it and that there are some eminent Christians if not in state yet in faith and truth at all times and these loue God feare not the world but regard his honour and desire to publish his truth and what yee will and yet still these men may be oppressed with some corruptions and hindered by persecution that few can marke or discerne them and so contemptible in the world that the most will not beleeue them by reason the externall greatnesse and opinion of their persecutors wherto by all subtiltie and tyrannie they haue aspired shall dazell the eies of men that they cannot discerne the truth * Where the Protestants Church was before Luthers daies Secondly I answer that euen the members of the Church of Rome it selfe as the Bishops of France and England with their congregations for example professed thus outwardly to all the world the Christian faith for albeit they were some of them more and some lesse corrupted with the Apostacy vniuersally spread ouer the Church and had entertained the abuses that
Fathers held is holden at this day by Pastors of our Church or at least may stay him from thinking that the same faith is not holden If all that view his foresaid considerations proue indifferent either to the cause or of indifferent iudgement that which is holden this day by the Pastors of the Repliars Church will not be deemed the same doctrine which the ancient Fathers held I say vpon his foresaid considerations it cannoy be deemed so he may haue new considerations or something else in store to stay men and if I meet it it shall be answered but this foresaid is too absurd for first I deny not the Catalogue of Pastors for the first 600 yeares whereof the question in this place is to be of such as preserued the truth inuiolate but affirme those very persons to haue bin the true Pastors of the true Church would my selfe giue them vp for a catalogue of such assigne no other but I require the Repliar to make it manifest against the obiection that they held as their iudgment and professed as their faith those speciall points of Popery that we renounce And let him not reply that they held and professed them at least implicitè but say ingenuously whether they be to be found in their books for example Transubstantiation the sacrifice of the Masse the worship of images the Popes primacy and Monarchy ouer the world The which point not being shewed in his foresaid considerations but directly auoided by a cōceit of their beleeuing at least implicitè how may an indifferent man see or by staying neuer so long hope to see the Papacy in the Fathers 4 Againe he sayes if his aduersaries will deny the Catalogue of Pastors which he hath set downe to be of such as haue preserued the truth he must require them to assigne another of their owne And Secondly to note the first Pastor in his Catalogue that failed in preseruing the truth And Thirdly in assigning our Catalogue not to assigne such as are ordinarily answered by Catholicke authors but some plaine instances which his demand if it cānot be answered as he is sure it cannot then the Repliar concludes euery discreet man may if he will driue out his owne wit to make roome for Ad 1 his To the first all the Papists aliue cannot by good discourse driue vs to assigne a Catalogue it being sufficient to say that no doctrine wants lineall succession that accords with the Scripture neuerthelesse for the first 600 yeares we assigne the Church wherein the Fathers liued and for the rest to this day we will assigne no other Catalogue thē the Church of Rome it selfe wherin many of those whom the Repliar hath couched in his Catalogue professed the foundation of the truth that wee Ad 2 maintaine To the second I answered in THE WAY so fully Ad 3 that the Iesuite had no list to reply To the third those particular men whom we name and this blatant beast calls a rabble of ragged heretickes were Gods deare children and better professors of the truth then the reuerend ranke of his Popes and Friars who were and yet are nothing else but the great Antichrist that was prophesied should fit in the Church of God among whom these men and many ordinary Pastors and people of the Church of Rome liuing and holding the foundation of faith and in the agony of their conscience renouncing the damnable heresies of the Papacy it cannot be denied but the Church of Rome it selfe affoords vs a Catalogue sufficient For the Repliar is too simple and deceaues himselfe if he thinke we place the Church onely in Berengarius Wickliffe Husse Ierome the Waldenses and the rest of that sort But we name them as some particular eminent members in the Church of Rome for so we terme all these westerne parts by reason of the Patriarchie lesse corrupted then were many others and vnto them we adde all others in the said Church that held the articles of faith either in solid or in part though it were Occham Gerson Armachanus Cesenas Ardeus Potho Sauanarola or any such for albeit they held many errors yet the truth among their errors was preserued and I affirme that it is sufficient for the succession of the Church and being of the faith if the parts thereof and all the seuerall particulars belonging to saluation can be shewed to haue bene held in any Church albeit no one man in the same or in the world can be shewed to haue holden them all entirely himselfe That * Prot. Apolog. tract 2. c. 2. sect 3.4.5.6 7. our aduersaries may see they do but trifle away the time when they labour so contentiously to shew that Wicklife or Husse or the Albingenses differed in some things from vs no member of the Church in the world being at all times free from euery spot and wrinkle of error CHAP. XLV 1. The Fathers are not against the Protestants but with them 2. Touching the Centuries reiecting of the Fathers The cause of some errors in the Fathers 3. Gregories Faith conuerting England 4. The Papists haue bene formall innouators 5. How they excuse the matter A. D. In which point if he desire to be more fully satisfied Pag. 271. let him reade Iodocus Coccius his Booke intituled Catholicus thesaurus controuersiarum in which he shall see particularly set downe point by point the ancient Fathers with vnanime consent testifying for vs against Protestants The which to be so in many points the Magdeburgians being themselues famous Protestants do likewise testifie who hauing taken great paines in seeking ancient histories and monuments of the Fathers writings to see if they could finde any testimony of authority to countenance their cause are forced at last to acknowledge the ancient Fathers to testifie in many things against them and for vs all which their testimonies they thinke to wipe away with saying that these were the errors or blemishes of these Fathers which is as good a iest as if a guilty person being desirous to cleare himselfe at the barre by the witnesse of honest men and hauing diligently sought and finding that all honest men will beare witnesse against him yet to make a shew wil needs bring in a number of honest substantial men bidding them to giue their verdit of purpose that when they all haue deliuered the truth See the Protestants Apology where these points are hādled largely Tract 1 sect 1. deinceps he may forsooth say they all lie or are deceaued This also to be so is shewed in the Protestants Apologie where particularly is proued out of diuerse learned Protestant writers first that the faith we professe is the same that Saint Gregory professed and by Saint Austine the Monke taught vs English men at our first conuersion Secondly that the same faith was vniuersally professed for sundry ages before and namely that it agreed in substance with the first faith to which the Brittans were conuerted in the Apostles
say the people might not reade that which they had in their owne language b Act 15 21. which they daily heard read in their Synagogues and c Deut. 6.7 which they must rehearse continually to their families d 2. Tim. 3.15 and wherein they brought vp their children from their infancy Secondly he saies either they containe no precept or but a conditional precept or licence that when they would not beleeue Christ himselfe they might search the Scripture Faine he would say absolutely it is no precept because it would serue his turne better But belike he read in his Cyrill e In Ioh. l. 3 c. 4 that the common and receaued expopositionis that with a certen COMMAND our Sauiour stirres them vp to search the Scripture Athanasius f Tom 2 p. 248. Commelin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saies He COMMANDED them to search the Scripture g Aschet p. 599. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Basil wheÌ„ a COMMANDEMENT is giuen vs let vs obey our Lord saying Search the Scripture h Ho 40. 39. in Ioh. Chrysostome he COMMANDS to digge deepe into the Scripture he sends them away to the Scripture i Pag. 343. in Ioh. Euthymius He COMMANDS them to search k Iansen concord c. 36. Peter seleâ—â— disp to 4. in Ioh. 5. d. 20. Our aduersaries confesse this to be the commonest exposition and some of them the best l In Ioh. 5. Maldonat the Iesuite Cyrill thinkes the word SEARCH not to be the imperatiue but the indicatiue mood but Chrysostom Theophylact. Austine I thinke ALL GRAVE AVTHORS except Cyrill do BETTER thinke it to be the imperatiue And this is confirmed by manifest reason For in case of error the Iewes and all men are bound by precept to haue recourse to such meanes as can reforme them But the Repliar is content it be a precept so he may haue the hammering of it First therefore he saies It s but a conditionall precept or rather a licence that seeing they would not beleeue our Sauiour himselfe they might search the Scripture which they did beleeue This is transparently against the Fathers yet it will serue my turne and vtterly destroy his cause For such a licence the Pope and the Inquisitors will neuer grant as Clement 8. hath professed And if our Sauiour when the Iewes beleeued not him permitteâ— them to search the Scripture then by this text when the People beleeue not the Pope but misdoubt his doctrine he must giue licence to them to reade the Scripture which he will neuer do Gretser to helpe the Repliar a little m Tom. 1. pag. 893. c. answers There is not the same reason of Christians that there was of the Iewes and why so the Iewes beleeued not in Christ but opposed both his doctrine and person whereas he that is a true Christian beleeues Christ and honours him This is true that is said both of the Iewes and Christians but this difference is no reason why a beleeuing Christian may not search the Scripture as well as an vnbeleeuing Iew. For the Christian though he beleeue in Christ yet is ignorant of much of his wil or weake in faith or assailed with heresies increasing in the world or desirous to confirme himselfe and others in the truth in which cases let the Iesuite shew why Christ for the curing of the Iew should allow him to reade the Scripture and yet debar the Christian whose state needes the support of the Scripture one way as much as the state of the Iew doth another Nay this is a good argument against himselfe and my Repliar For if the reason why the laity may not reade the Scripture be because our Sauiour hath commanded vs not to giue holy things to dogges nor to cast pearles before hogges and the Iewes not beleeuing Christ but opposing his doctrine and person be more dogges and hogges then Christians hence it will follow roundly that the Scripture is to be permitted to Christians much more then to the Iewes because the Iewes were permitted to reade the Scriptures though they were dogges and hogges 5 Secondly he sayes that allowing it to containe an absolute precept which he doth as a child kisses the rod for he must do it if he wil follow the coÌ„sent of the Doctors yet being an affirmatiue precept it obliges not all meÌ„ nor at all times but may be limited to particular times as to the time of the Primitiue Church to particular persons as now only the Clergy and other circumstances which the Church of Rome shal think meet I answer affirmatiue precepts first binde all persons to whom they are giuen Secondly they binde at all such times as the matter therein contained agrees vnto Thirdly they receiue limitation or restraint from none but from the lawgiuer himselfe in all which properties they agree with negatiue commandemeÌ„ts therefore omitting all intricate discourse touching this matter the precept of searching the Scripture binding in this manner it is sufficient for the allowance thereof to the people For first they that cannot reade may fulfill it by hearing it read Searching being restrained no more to the one then to the other Secondly there is none but by searching that is to say by diligent labour may vnderstand them in their mother tongue better then in Hebrew Because I haue shewed many times ouer that the articles of faith and rules of good life are set downe so plainely that the simplest may vnderstand them vnlesse he will make lay people so sencelesse that they haue not the common light of nature Thirdly we binde not euery man to reade all the Scriptures and at all houres doing nothing else because there is no such thing in the precept Then I haue satisfied his questions and admit a limitation in things wherein the precept limits it selfe but how followes this Affirmatiue precepts haue their limitations therefore the Pope may limit them Or this Circumstances limit precepts therefore the Church of Rome vpon her Antichristian circumstances may restraine the precept of Christ Or this Some lawfull and legitimate circumstances may stay the execution of an affirmatiue precept therefore the malicious and desperate imputations layed vpon the people or some misdemeanors committed by them indeed may lawfully debarre the people from hauing the Scripture any more Away with these circumstances and giue vs substance CHAP. LII 1 The mariage of Priests and Bishops lawfull and allowed by Antiquitie 2 Some examples hereof in the ancient Church The restraint hereof is a late corruption Priests were married euen in these Westerne parts a thousand yeares after Christ Pag. 281. A. D. Fourthly touching the mariage of Priests M. White citeth * See Bellar. de cleric c. 19. Prot Apol. tract 1. sect 3. n. 1. sect 7. tract 2. c. 1. sect 3. a mistaken sentence out of the Apostle and boldly affirmeth after his fashion that mariage of Priests was ordinarily in the Primitiue Church But he
speech of Purgatory or none at all and the Latines in the West Church did not all of them together receaue the truth of this matmatter but by little and little neither indeed was the faith either of Purgatory or pardons so needful in the Primitiue Church as now it is We neede no more then this confession of our aduersaries and testimony of the Greeke Church to shew the nouelty of this doctrine 3 And that which the Reply hath added in his margent Prayer for the dead which supposes the beleefe of Purgatory learned Protestants graunt to haue bene generall in the Church long before Saint Austines time is most weake for whatsoeuer learned Protestants say touching the antiquity of prayer for the dead which is impertinent now to be debated it is not true that the vse thereof supposes Purgatory which I will shew most euidently that the Reply may bewaile his cause when he sees no medicine applied to it can recouer or do it good For the Greekes praied for the dead and yet as you haue heard they beleeued not Purgatory And d See the Liturgies of Iames. Basil Chrysost and the rest in the praiers mentioned they praied for * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lit. Iacob the martyrs the B Virgine Iohn Baptist and for all the righteous from Abel to that day yet neither they nor the Church of Rome euer thought them to be in Purgatory Not the Martyres for e Bell. Purg. l. 2. c. 1. they are exempted by priuiledge Not f Rhem. on act 1. the B. Virgine for she had no sinne to purge but was carried immediately to heauen Not the iust from Abel to Christ for g Tho. Argenti 3. d. 22. art 4 p. 35. Gabr. ib. dub 3. Christ at his descent emptied Purgatorie It remaines therefore that their praying for the dead was not because they thought any to be in Purgatorie but by way of commemoration onely So sayes Cabasilas h Nicol. Cabasil exposic Liturg c 33. p. 503. in Bibl. S Pat. edit 1. in his exposition The Priest giues God thankes and offers supplication laying downe the causes of the thankesgiuing and the matter of the supplication The causes of thankesgiuing are the Saints The matter of the supplication are they who are not yet consummate but haue need of prayer For which Saints he offers this reasonable seruice as A THANKES GIVING to God and aboue all the rest for the B. Mother of God who exceedes all sanctity * Nihil pro eis orat Therefore the Priest PRAIES FOR NOTHING for them but rather praies to them that he may be holpen by their praiers * Haec quidem verba habent supplicationeÌ„ ostendunt autem etiam gratiarum actionem Deum praedicant These wordes containe supplication but shew thankesgiuing and praise God the benefactor of mankinde by remembring the persons whom he hath sanctified and almost consummated saying Giue vs the grace which already thou hast giuen the Saints to sanctifie vs as thou hast sanctified them before who are of the same kinde with vs. It was not therefore with an opinion of purgatory that the ancient praied for the dead but in expectation of the resurrection and in remembrance of Gods goodnesse toward them who had begun to glorifie them the consummation whereof they desired For it was a general opinioÌ„ of the Church of those times that the soules of the Saints departed saw not God nor should see him by beatificall vision till the day of iudgement in which regard they praied for the dead that their glorie might be consummate as all faithfull people pray for that good which they beleeue is to come the certaine fruition whereof they apprehend Bartlemew Medina writing vpon Thomas i Bart. Medin 12. qu. 4. art 5. p. 56. edit Bergom an 1586. saies that Almost all the ancient Fathers Iames in his Liturgie Ireneus Iustine Tertullian Clemens Origen Lactantius Victorine Prudentius Ambrose Chrysostome Augustine Theodorit Arethas Oecumenius Theophylactus Euthymius Bernard at the first sight but in the scanning of their wordes both he and the rest of his fellowes bewray it to be at the second sight too deny that the soules of the Saints see God vntill the day of iudgement The like is testified by k Sixt. Senens Bibl. lib. 6. ann 345. Perer. in Gen. l. 3 n. 45. Bellarm. â—e eccl triumph cap. 1. Vieg in Apoc. pag. 334. Riber ibi pag. 198. lun tom 2. pag. 1587. others the triall whereof the curious reader may see in Sixtus Senensis who hath collected together both the names and wordes of the Fathers to that effect that it is the vainest conceit that can be to imagine the ancient Church by praying for the dead intended a Purgatory when they assumed it for certaine that the dead came not into the presence of God till the last day l Luce clarius constat quia perfectorum animae mox vt huius carnis exeunt in celestibus sedibus recipiuntur Flor. Magistr exposit Missae pag. 65â— Which being an error no maruell if they erred in what they built vpon it nothing being sound that is built on a false foundation CHAP. LVIII 1. The Popes Supremacy 2. Single life of votaries 3. The worship of images 4. The Merite of workes 5. The sacrifice of the Masse 6. And the Popish doctrine touching originall sinne all of them innouations 5. The disagreement of Papists in their religion 7. And namely in their doctrine of originall sinne A. D. Secondly he names the Popes Supremacy which he 1 White pag. 376. saieth Pag. 288. began in Boniface the third But how false his assertion is appeareth by that which is shewed by not onely Catholicke but also Protestant Authors Thirdly he nameth Priests marriages to haue bene first restrained by Siricius This also to be false he may learne by 2 Concil Carth 2. can 2 see Prot. apol tr 1 sec 7 nu 3. the Councel of Carthage which signifieth that Priests were restrained from company of wiues long before Siricius his daies euen by the Apostles themselues Siricius might vpon occasion renew the prohibition as also Gregory the seuenth might but the first Authors of that doctrine or practise they were not Fourthly he nameth worship of images to haue bene first brought in by the Nicen Councell But this Councell was so farre from being 3 See Prot. apol tr 1. sec 3. n. 12. the first author of this doctrine as it expressely saith it followed in this point the doctrine of the holy Fathers and Tradition of the Catholicke Church in which the holy Ghost doth inhabite Concerning that which M. White saith 4 White pag. 378. Conc. Nicen 2. touching images see Bellarmine de imag C 8. Fiftly he nameth the doctrine 5 White p. 379. See Bellar. l. 5. de iustif c 2. 3 4 Greg. de Val. tom 2. disp 8. q. 6. p. 2. 4. of Merite of workes to haue begun lately by
When I heare Anaxagoras I beleue him then comes Melissus and Parmenides and I know not how I change my minde * Quonsque tandem talia edoceor verum tamen nihil addisco How long shall I thus be taught and yet neuer taught to learne the truth 〈…〉 Thus he flouted the Philosophers that would say as much to our aduersaries and iustly might for any certainty they haue to rest vpon in any thing they hold against vs. Let them take the Councell that Vigilius gaue such as they are m Contr. Eutych l. 2. p. 555. Seeing both of you are coÌ„trary to your selues it s not amisse if both of you yeeld to confesse the truth with vs. You are deuided farre asunder the way you haue left is in the middest Come hither vnto vs one of you this way the other that way and meete together Let the one go into the others opinion so that he leaue not his owne let that which you hold priuately be common among you The contempt of which aduise is it that in all ages hath made hereticks so notorious for their disagreements with themselues that this hath bene obserued for the marke of their heresie They are deuided n Paschas comment in Lament l. 4. c. 4. pag. 74. saith Paschasius one from another through the singularity of their wicked inuentions and are able to agree neither with themselues nor with the Catholicke beleeuers of the Church 6 In the last place I named their doctrine of originall sin affirming that it was not vniuersall in former ages nor is not to this day agreed vpon This proues directly that it is not the same which the Apostles and Primitiue Church taught Because what they taught must be certainely knowne and agreed vpon which this their doctrine is not there being yet no certainety what the point is that the Church of Rome holds touching this matter The Reply answers that I cannot name the first author of any thing which the Church of Rome vniuersally holds touching this matter as a point of faith Meaning belike that the opinion of this or that Doctor may be a late deuise but not that which the Church holds I answer the Church of Rome cannot deny but our first Parents left the effect of their sinne in all mankinde their posterity a Eph. 2.3 whereby they are borne the children of wrath which effect is called originall sinne but what it holds vniuersally as a point of faith touching the nature and forme of this sin the Repliar cannot assigne that when he had assigned it I might try whether I could name the first author thereof or no. But let him giue me any definition of originall sinne holden in his Church whether vniuersally or priuately against that which the Church of England teaches and though possible it may fall out that I cannot name the first author thereof yet I will shew it not to haue bene the Catholicke doctrine of the Primitiue Church whereupon it will follow consequently that it is an alteration wherein the now church of Rome beleeues not as did the Primitiue Church In this varietie of opinions therefore I made choise of Bellarmine as most likely to be that which should be the point of faith and vniuersall and shewed it not to be so but to be a late deuice without antiquitie or vniuersalitie But my aduersary craftily forbearing to name what he holds to be the vniuersall doctrine of his Church and making shew as if Bellarmines opinion were not it bids me name the point of faith holden by his Church vniuersally and then shew the first author Because the question is not about priuate Doctors opinions but about the doctrine of faith vniuersally and authoritatiuely taught by the Church Wherein he deales neither plainly nor directly for if neither the opinion of Bellarmine nor of Catharinus which were all I named holden against vs be that which vniuersally authoritatiuely is taught by his Church he should haue named what it is that I might haue shewed it not to be catholicke 7 The truth is * Tantae est doctorum hominuÌ„ varietas inconstantia vt vix vlla alia in re maior Peltan de orig pecc p. 80. there is such varietie and inconstancie and shuffling of opinions touching this point of originall sinne that for his life he cannot tell what his Church holds and which is safest to follow which is an vnanswerable argument that the true faith they haue forsaken and minced into lend and absurd opinions The Councell of Trent b Sess 5. speakes warily and reseruedly defining nothing but leauing all sorts to their owne opinion Andradius c Orthod expl l. 3. p. 216. sayes The Councell of Trent when it had defined originall sinne to be sinne truly proper to euery one yet of set purpose forbore to speake of the proper reason thereof the which thing was also done by other Councels long before which delivering no certaine and expresse reason of originall sinne left it free for euery one to follow his opinion Hereupon it is that there are so many opinions 1 Dur. 2. d â—0 q. 1. Tap. art 2. p. 69. Cathar tract de orig pec disp 6. p. 150. some hold that it is not sinne properly nor can be imputed by reason it came by the will of another 2 Pigh contro 1. p. 29. Apol. p. 34. inde that it is sinne but not our sinne but that which Adam did whereby he made himselfe and his posteritie sinners 3 Roffâ—ns art 2 p. 29. Altisiod sum p. 97 col 4. Some that it is onely the guilt which lies vpon mankind for Adams sin being thereby excluded from eternall life without the mercie of God 4 Biel. 2. d. 30. q. 2. conc 6. Gre Arim. 2. p. 114. Aureol 2. d. 30. art 2. p. 284. Some that it is a corrupt or diseased qualitie in the soule deriued thereinto by the corruption of the flesh 5 Mag. 2. d. 30. Alexand. quem resert Dionys 2. p. 4â—8 col 2. Some that it is the concupiscence that is in vs to euill not euery inclination but that which is in the mind or will 6 Occh. 2. q. vlt. lit v. Scot. 2. d. 3. §. Circa istam Some that it is onely the priuation or destitution of the originall iustice that was in Adam and should be in all men 7 Tho. 12 q. 82. art 3. Bonau quem refert Dionys 2. p. 489 Capreol 2. pag. 495. ad 4. That it is formally the priuation of originall iustice but materially it is concupiscence 8 Sot de nat grat c 9. Azor. sum part 1. p. 287. That it stands wholly in the want or depriuation not of the habit of originall iustice as the sixt opinion affirmes but of that subiection vnto God and vnion of mind with him which all men should haue had if Adam had not transgressed Which of all these is that which the Replier
whereby vnanswerably it followes that there was no visible head of the Church infallibly knowne all that time but according to our Aduersaries owne principles the Church wanted meanes to instruct and confirme her people in the faith yea the liuing rule of faith ceased and was ouerthrowne in these schismes The Iesuite replies that in all these schismes either the true Pope was knowne or if he were not yet there was meanes to cleare the doubt by electing a new The first of these is false that in all the schismes the true Pope was knowne For in some of them there were so many learned men and Princes of the earth following each part deuided one against another that it was impossible there should be any certainety And my Aduersarie could not haue instanced with me in a worse then in Vrbanus whose reputation was so small by reason of a Whereof reade Theodor à Niem de schism l. 1. c. 2. the manner of his entrance and gouernment that he was generally nicknamed Turbanus and so odious to his Cardinals that in reuenge b Ibi. cap. 51. Pandulf Collenut hist Neapolit l. 5. p. 233. some he tormented vpon the racke in base and miserable fashion and afterward tied vp in sackes and so drowned them and others he baked in an ouen and carried them when he had done vpon mules before him when he trauelled with their Cardinal hats vpon them Now it is a rule among our c Petr. Cresper sum Cathol fid verb. Disciplinae pag. 180. Aduersaries themselues that a doubtfull Pope is to be accounted for no Pope The succession therefore failed all the time of these schismes And albeit as the Reply speaketh there was meanes by a Councell to elect a new Pope yet what successe these meanes had he may perceiue by the stories of the Councels of Pisa Constance and Basil whereof this last d Aen. Sylu. comment de Gest Basil Concil lib. 2. deposed Eugenius and elected the Duke of Sauoy calling him Faelix the fift and yet our aduersaries still hold the succession in Eugenius yea the Replier hath put him in his Catalogue and left Faelix out which by this his rule he should not haue done And besides though a Councell may depose the schismatickes and elect a new Pope yet who shall he that is thus elected succeed or how can a Councell or any other meanes that shall be vsed peece together the interruption past that it may truly be said the succession was neuer broken Martin was elected by the Councell of Constance but let the Iesuite and Gregory of Valence his master of whom he hath borrowed all that he sayes answer whom he succeeded whether Vrban and his successors or Clement and his which side soeuer he takes he cannot rid himselfe For Clement and they that followed him in his time are thrust out of the catalogue and Vrbane with those that followed him put in yet the said Vrban in his time was thought no right Pope and Eugenius that immediatly followed this Martin was deposed by the Councell of Basil 13 The Iesuites hope therefore that he hath answered the obiections will faile him things may wittily and cunningly be pretended but let euery man that will stablish his conscience in the truth enquire whether the reason of true succession can hold where such things as these fall out and whether it be possible or can stand with Gods prouidence that a succession planted for such purposes as our aduersaries pretend this of Rome to be shall be furnished and peeced out with boyes women hereticks ignorant and vnlettered dotards simoniacall intruders and so many times diuers of them at once Two things therefore touching this matter of succession are the truth First that the outward and personall succession of Bishops in the Church of Rome is not so entire as is pretended but hath bene defiled and poisoned with so many disorders that it is as lame a succession as any is wheresoeuer in the world Their catalogues assigned and drawne to exhibite to the vulgar people looke smooth on the outside and nothing but well is discerned in them but examine the particulars and enquire into the histories of their succession and there was neuer any thing so patched and peeced together as they Secondly the succession of doctrine is the true succession and is not tied to that which is in place and persons and therefore let not the Iesuites blaze out their catalogues of names vntill they can prooue the corruptions which they haue added to religion wherein onely we forsake the Church of Rome were holden and beleeued by the persons named For what foolery is it to make a catalogue of Iesus Christ Saint Peter all the Apostles and Euangelists the virgin Marie and the whole Church of the first six hundred yeares as if these had professed what the Pope and his rabble now teach did these adore images vse the Communion in one kind beleeue Purgatorie did these teach it lawfull for the Pope to excommunicate depose murder the Kings of the earth Are not all these things against their expresse doctrine Let our aduersaries retire backe to modestie and truth and giue ouer their courses There are two parts of their religion One wherein they and we agree as that there is one God three persons one redeemer Iesus Christ that the Scripture Canonicall is Gods word that the dead shall rise and all the rest wherein we consent Another part of their religion is it which we and all the reformed Churches haue cast off as Images Transubstantiation Purgatorie Traditions and a hundred such like points The Catalogue assigned sufficiently shewes the former part both for them and vs against all Iewes and Gentiles that denie it The latter part they cannot shew to haue bene holden by the persons named vntill many ages after Christ as they came in by degrees in all which time the truth maintained by the Protestants against them was holden still and the Papacie was but a faction in the Church opposing the sounder part thereof And so the visible Church of Rome it selfe is it wherein the Protestants faith in all ages hath bene professed for the substance thereof Vincat veritas I. Wh.
may define contrary to that they all writ as the B. Virgin not to be conceiued in sin and so they shall beleeue iust that they beleeued not and the direct contrary CHAP. LVII 1 Touching the first coming in of errors into the Church with the persons Time and Place 2 Purgatory and pardons not knowne in the ancient Church nor in the Greeke Church to this day 3 The true reason why the ancient praied for the dead Pag. 287. A. D. To conclude it is not enough for M. White to name these eight or any other points of our doctrine and to say that we hold or practise contrary to the doctrine of the ancient Church but I must require him to set downe the time place persons and other circumstances of this supposed innouation which circumstances are commonly noted in Histories when any such innouation against the vniuersall doctrine of the Church did arise This my demand 1 White Digr 5. pag. 374. M. White who will it seemeth sticke at nothing taketh vpon him to satisfie by naming seauen points of our religion offering to shew the time when and manner how they got into the Church And thereupon first he nameth pardons and purgatory the vse whereof he sayeth came lately into the Church To this I answer first that he nameth not the particular Time Place not Persons that first brought in the vse of pardons and purgatory and so he saieth nothing to the purpose Secondly I answer that our questions is not so much about the vse of pardons and purgatory as whether the doctrine which holdeth purgatory to be and pardons duely vsed to be lawfull came in of late contrary to the former doctrine of the Church Now M. White will neuer be able to shew that that Church did at any time vniuersally beleeue that 2 Concerning praier for the dead which supposeth the beleefe of Purgatory learned Protestants grant it to haue bene general in the Church long before S. Austins time as may be seene in the Protest Apol. tract 1. sect 2. nu 4. purgatory was not or that pardons duely vsed were vnlawfull or that the doctrine concerning the substance of these points was first brought in of late naming the first time place or persons which brought it in contrary to the former faith and shewing who resisted it as an heresie and who continued to resist it 1 HAuing no power to answer the examples I gaue of the Church of Romes now holding contrary to the ancient Church he concludes that it is not enough to name the points or to say they hold contrary to the doctrine of the ancient Church vnlesse I set downe the Time Places Persons and other circumstances of the innouations as Histories vse to note them when any such innouations arises and therefore he must require me to set them downe I answer it is sufficient that I haue shewed the points not to haue bene holden by the ancient Church For if the ancient Church held them not what skills it when or by whom they were brought in when they were brought in since the times of the ancient Church for that which was not at the first is not Catholike but by some at some time was brought in contrary to that which is Catholicke And a THE WAY §. 50. n. 5 6. I haue shewed that there be many confessed changes wherein these circumstances cannot bee shewed Neuerthelesse for example b THE WAY Digr 51. I named him seauen points and the circumstances of Time Place and Persons of their getting in whereof the vse of PARDONS was the first He replies that I haue not named the particular time place nor persons that brought them in and therefore say nothing to the purpose Here let the Reader iudge whether hauing shewed out of the confession of his owne writers that they are not from the Apostles times not expressed in the Scripture or Fathers nor brought to our knowledge by their authority but lately come into the Church this be not enough for what is not from the Apostles times came in since there is the Time when What came in lately was not vsed in the Primitiue Church There is the Time againe what is not mentioned by the Scripture Fathers and ancient Church was deuised by innouators there is the Persons What the Scriptures and Pastors of the Church reueals not that growes vp as cockle and weed in the Church there is the place Let me adde to the rest whom I alledged in the Digression the words of B. Fisher c Art 28 p. 86. b. Pardons therefore began AFTER men had a while trembled at the torments of Purgatory I haue therefore brought euidence sufficient to proue pardons to be an innouation because it proues they were not vsed in the ancient Church nor reuealed by the Apostles 2 He replies that the question is not so much about the VSE of pardons and purgatory as whether the DOCTRINE that holds them came in of late CONTRARY to the doctrine of the Church And I answer againe affirmatiuely that it did For the vse is founded on the doctrine and the doctrine cannot be without vse There was no vse ergo there was no doctrine But M. White will neuer be able to shew that the Church beleeued there was no Purgatory or that pardons were not lawfull This is follie for how should M. White shew the Church condemned that which was not yet in rerum natura no man being able to speake of that which is not in being If pardons therefore were not M. White must be pardoned if he cannot shew how the Church condemned them And touching Purgatory though it be much ancienter yet neither did the Catholicke Church beleeue it There were some in the Church that conceited such a thing and the Fathers began in Saint Austines time but a Non redarguo quia forsitan verum est c. Aug ciuit l. 21. c. 26. see Enchirid. c. 69. and the Apol of the Gre. p. 132. waueringly and without any resolute certainety to mention it but it was not beleeued in their daies as a matter of faith that he which denied it should be an hereticke as it is now beleeued in the Church of Rome Besides the East Church beleeued it not to this day therefore the vniuersall Church beleeued it not Heare their owne words in an Apology written touching this matter b Apol. Graec. p. 119. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We haue not receaued from our Doctors that there is any such Purgatory or temporary punishment by fire and we know the East Church neuer thought so Heare also what the B. of Rochester c Art 18. p. 86. b. saies No true beleeuer NOW doubts of Purgatory whereof notwithstanding among the ancient there is very litle or no mention at all The Greekes also to this day do not beleeue there is a Purgatory Let whose will reade the commentaries of the ancient Greekes and so farre as I see he shall finde very rare