which in all its right conditions may give a man satisfactory resolving certainty of mind 4. To this is necessary I. That the Thing have intrinsecally the requisites of an Object II. That it have extrinsecally the necessary concomitant conditions § 4. I. To the Nature of a perceptible Object it is necessary 1. That it be something whose nature is within the reach of the perceiving faculty and not out of its orbe as spirits are to sense 2. That it have a perceptible degree or Magnitude For the Minima rerum are not perceptible to man 3. That it be Hoc aliquid a distinct being or unum as its called 4. That it have a special congruence to the special perceiving faculty For Light must be seen and not heard and so of the rest In a word that it be Ens Vnum Verum Bonum thus agreeably conditioned And the contraries reductively or rather the Propositions about them § 5. II. To the Accidents and Extrinsick Conditions which go to make up Evidence it is necessary 1. That the Object have a due Position or site 2. That it have a due distance neither too far off nor too near 3. And a due Medium as the air is to the sight and hearing 4. And a due abode or stay For neither sense perceiveth motion perfectly swift nor the Intellect things absolutely instantaneous that have no Time of continuance § 6. Because Objective Certainty is Relative to Subjective I must add what is necessary to that I. On the part of sense II. Of the Intellect I. To true sensible perception it is necessary 1. That the sensitive faculty of the soul intend the business Else the Organs will be as a Lute not touched as we see in hard Students that hear not the Clock at hand 2. It is necessary that the spirits which are actuated in sensation be present and sufficient for their part 3. It is necessary that the Organs be in a competent soundness 4. It is necessary that it be the proper Organ that is used which agreeth with the object not the eye to hearing c. 5. That the sense be not oppressed by Impediments II. And further to Intellective perception 1. Of things sensible It is necessary 1. That the thing be truly perceived by the sense 2. And truly Imagined and therefore that the Imagination have a Competent soundness 3. That the soul be Attentive to to the matter and not alienated 4. That the internal sense Imagination and Sensitive-memory be in a fit state of vicinity conjunction or union for the Intellect to operate on and with them 5. That the Intellect it self be in act according to its formal Virtue 2. But to the Intellection of our own Immanent Acts of Intellection and Volition there is no more necessary but that such Acts be and then we can Intuitively perceive them 3. And by easie collection the Intellect without further help of sense can gather that I that understand and will am sure I have a Power so to do For nothing doth that which it cannot do And hereby I apprehend that there are Intellective Volitive Agents and what they are § 7. It is here supposed that God hath not a Voice to speak by as man hath but yet that he can cause a voice at his pleasure either by the use of a creature that naturally hath a voice or by the motion of other creatures a thousand waies of which it is not needful for us to be acquainted § 8. When God revealeth his mind not by voice but by inward Inspiration it carrieth its own notifying Evidence with it which no man can formally conceive of but he that hath it But this is the case of Prophetical persons only and not of us § 9. In this Question How to know that a Revelation is of God It is supposed that the Revelation it self that is the notifying sign whether Voice Writing or other Act or thing be known already For we must first know that such a thing really is before we can know whence it is And this is afterward to be spoken of § 10. And here it is not enough to know that God is some way a Cause of that Act Voice or Writing For no doubt but he is a universal cause at least of all the Real beings and actions in the world But we must be sure that he is the Determining Cause of this special and individual act or thing as such so as that he may properly be called The Author of it and it be called His work § 11. And here Negatively 1. We have not sensible Evidence ascertaining us that these words or signs are the word of God Sense is not the perceiver of this as it is of light heat motion c. § 12. 2. Therefore neither doth the Intellect perceive it by the sense as it doth these sensed things forementioned § 13. 3. Nor is it the object of Immediate Intellective Intuition or known as we know the acts of the soul it self by Immediate perception as that we Think Know Will and Feel § 14. 4. Nor do we alwaies at least know it as we do self-evident Principles which a man using Reason about them cannot choose but understand § 15. 5. Nor are all the Parts of Divine Revelations notified to us with equal Certainty nor altogether by the same media nor are they all of equal necessity to be known to be Divine and so to be believed § 16. But Affirmatively 1. We know these Revelations to be Divine as we know the Truth of Conclusions by Virtue of the Evidence of their Premises 2. And this variously as the Consequence is more or less evident and certain § 17. 1. Supposing that we are Certain that there is a God whether as a self-evident Principle or as the Certainest of Conclusions and so that he is Perfect and therefore True we are certain as of a most neer and Evident Conclusion that all Gods Works are his Revelations to man which are within our reach that is That they are signs by which God Revealeth Himself and his Will to us The Glass in which he must here be seen The Divinity of this Natural Revelation is past doubt But all the doubt is of the sense of it § 18. 2. There are Naturally Evident Verities in the Scriptures which upon the first considerate hearing we may be sure are true As that there is a God that he is One that he is Infinite Perfect most Powerful Wise and Good the Beginning Governor and End of all things that he is our Owner Actor Ruler Benefactor and End That we ought to Love him Please and Obey him above all others with all our hearts and Powers The whole Body of the necessary Law of Nature is there conteined and so is known by a double Revelation § 19. 3. There are other points which are so greatly congruous to the common experience of mankind as that they have also a Certainty in the thing from that experience As the common
pravity of mans nature and the great necessity that we have of Deliverance by Pardon and Sanctification the malice and endeavour of Devils or evil spirits to tempt us from God and destroy us the need of Gods continual help against them and our selves with such like And these also we have a double Revelation of § 20. 4. The Principal part of the Supernatural Revelations are so exceeding congruous to those which are of Natural and Experienced Certainty and are so aptly adjoyned to them and have so Divine a design and tendency apparent in them as that they are the more easily believed § 21. 5. And the main frame of the book hath so much of the same spirit and design and is adapted to the Communication of these principal parts that is the Essentials of Christianity and thereto so compaginated as that the Belief of the said Estials maketh it the more easie to believe that the whole system of books is of God § 22. 6. But where we are uncertain of any thing whether it be really a part of that book or system as some questioned Books some various Readings some Texts whose sense is not understood we must needs be equally uncertain whether those be the word of God § 23. 7. But that Medium which ascertaineth us that these supernatural Revelations are indeed Divine I mean the proper Truths of Christianity must be something which is Lower or is Notius prius cognitum better known than Christianity and known in order of Evidence before it For all proof of conclusions must be from something first and better known § 24. 8. These things which are sooner and better known than the supernatural Revelation can be nothing but Natural Revelations by Gods works in the Nature of things compared and our natural experience For there is nothing else antecedent to be a medium of proof The forementioned natural Verities about God and Holiness carry their own Evidence with them either as first principles or as certain conclusions And the Essentials of Christianity have a self-commending Goodness which rendreth them sweet to a man that is already a true Believer and desireable to all truly rational men and the Congruencie rendreth it credible supposing further proof But that really the Incarnation Deity Life Satisfaction Resurrection Ascension Offices and Coming of Christ are truth with the Trinity of persons and such other points must be proved by some more notorious Medium proving that they are Divine assertions which must be some Natural Verities § 25. 9. Therefore the Ascertianing Inference must be this that If this be not a Divine Revelation then some Certain Natural Verity must be denied which at last will amount to the denying of a God § 26. 10. Here the Matter of fact is supposed to be known by sight and other senses to the first Christians and the first Churches where Christ and his Apostles and multitudes of other Christians wrought them And to be known by Certain History to those that saw them not And the existence of the Persons Words and Books is supposed known the same way And on this supposition we infer that These Impressions of Divine Power Wisdom and Goodness set upon this Doctrine and all these Miracles by Christ and multitudes of his servants wrought in attestation of it and all this sanctification of all true Believers by this word through the world are either done by Gods will or against his will If they be done by his will he is the Author of them and approver And seeing it is evident that they are to the common capacity of mankind so notorious a signification that God is the Author or approver of that word which be so evidently and wonderfully attesteth if yet this word prove false mankind is unavoidably deceived and Governed in the greatest concernments and business of all his life by this deceit For he hath no principle no means left him to know that these are not Divine attestations nor to disoblige him from judgeing them so to be But if God shall thus necessitate mankind to a false belief and thereby Govern him while in Nature he hath taught man to value Truth and hate Lying he must do this either for want of Power to do otherwise or for want of Wisdom to do otherwise or for want of Will and Goodness to do otherwise And if he wanted any of these he is not God Or if he Govern not the world himself but permit some Evil Spirit to do all this he is not God For to be God is to be the Supream Governor and to be every where the nearest universal Agent These consequences being plain though there are vain Objections which I must not stay to answer we certainly infer There is a God who is the perfect Governour of the world and therefore is Gracious True and Iust and therefore doth not rule even the best of men by unavoidable deceit and falshood and therefore this word is True which he so notoriously owneth and attesteth as aforesaid § 27. And hence it is that we take our selves bound about the Sacrament to believe that all mens senses are not deceived because if they be man hath no remedy For God hath made our sense the perceiver of things sensible and if it be not a Certain perceiver we have no Certainer nor other about those objects And if the apprehensions of sense be uncertain having all the natural requisites then all Gods Miracles by which he attested the word as well as the word it self are so And if it be not contrary to Gods perfection Veracity and Justice to deceive all mens senses in the Sacrament we cannot prove it contrary to them to deceive them by Miracles § 28. As an unbeliever is not so well disposed to receive the Gospel as a holy person after is and recipitur ad modum recipientis so usually a more wavering belief goeth before a fuller Certainty And the holier and more experienced any man is the more he is Certain of the truth of the Gospel because he hath the witness in himself in the Gust and Certain Effects of it But yet there is that Evidence of Truth which Preachers may and must use to the Conviction of Infidels to bring them to true belief § 29. The holy Scripture Containing all the Divine Revelations belonging to Religion compleatly Essentials Integrals and Accidentals the parts of it are not of equal necessity to us All that truly have the Essentials in Head and Heart and Life shall be saved yea though culpably they understand not other points as plainly revealed and so believe them not to be Divine For this is the Covenant of Grace No wonder then if many less necessary parts are less evident § 30. We have a fuller Evidence that all these Miracles Prophesies and subsequent operations of the Sanctifying Spirit do attest the New Covenant and Substance of the Gospel than we have that they attested every book e.g. the Chronicles the Canticles c. or
Question to which an Answer was challenged CHAP. I. Of the Quality of this Question and Challenge p. 1. CHAP. II. The Explication of some Terms in it A Scheme of Divine Revelations What matter of Fact is Of several senses and sorts of Certainty of Principles Media Determinations Unity of Faith p. 5. CHAP. III. The briefest and summary Answer to the Confused Question p. 13. CHAP. IV. The many Questions confounded in his one Quest. 1. What are the Revelations of God in controversie p. 22. CHAP. V. Quest. II. Whether the Papists grant all Divine Revelations to be true p. 25. CHAP. VI. Quest. III. What Certainty we have what is a real Revelation of God Where the Nature and Conditions of Objective and Subjective Sensible and Intelligible Certainty are opened p. 30. CHAP. VII Quest. IV. What Certainty have we of the Copies p. 43. CHAP. VIII Quest. V. What Certainty have we of the Canonical Book p. 45. CHAP. IX Quest. VI. What Certainty have we of the truth of Translations p. 48. CHAP. X. Quest. VII What Certainty have we of the true sense of the Text. p. 51. CHAP. XI Quest. VIII What Vnity of Faith may be expected to be conserved by these Certainties p. 54. CHAP. XII Quest. IX What Determination is necessary to this Certainty and Vnity p. 57. CHAP. XIII What the Papists ascertaining Medium or Determination is and why we cannot trust our souls on it Where are fourty Reasons briefly named for the use of them that seek for Truth proving not only the utter uncertainty but the notorious falshood of this Determination which is cried up as the only proof of Certain faith But I doubt not but many Papists that fear God indeed do practically build their faith on better ground however this be cried up by Disputers p. 60. ERRATA Page 23. line 21. read bulk p. 47. l. 7. r. did but. p. 64. l. 16. r. by Clemens p. 98. l. 18. r. Superiour p. 107. l. 2. r. Certainty p. 109. l. 9. r. be is CHAP. I. Of the Quality of this Question SIR § 1. YOU may see by this Paper with the ordinary disputing of this sort of men that it is not without cause that we have suspected the hand of the Papists in many of the defences of the Infidel cause and questionings of the foundations of the Christian faith which this age is troubled with They have so long plaid the Infidels in jeast till they have made such a swarm of serious Infidels as will prove neither the honour nor comfort of such seducers in the end I know that this Paper it self hath a more modest aspect but the tendencie of it is the same as of the rest But I hope God will turn all their endeavours to our advantage and teach Christians bet-better to consider the foundations of their faith that they may not only be able to defend it against an Infidel or Papist but which is of more universal and frequent necessity to defend it against the inward suggestions of Satan the enemy of Christ and us § 2. Therefore I think it most profitable to answer this Question in such a manner as shall tend not only to silence the Caviller but as may best satisfie such as doubt and stablish men about the cause it self and therefore to be larger than this Imposer desireth that I may be plain § 3. The fraud which this Quaerist is guilty of is manifold and manifest to any discerning Reader 1. In the choice of his subject For he knoweth for it 's easily known that it hath not pleased God to make the mysteries of our faith so evident as things sensible are and that the difficulties which are in and about the Christian cause are such as give advantage to carnal unbelievers to find many words to say against it and that maketh it the hardest work of Preachers to convince unbelievers or else the Gospel had been received by more than the sixth part of the world before this day Now these juglers would lay all the difficulties which are in the Christian cause as such upon the Reformers cause alone as if all this were nothing to them but the cause of Popery were wholly free from them or at least they could answer such questions better than we can do And so when such a fellow as Hobbs or Benedictus Spinosa in his Tractatus Theologico-politicus shall stretch their wits to disgrace the Scripture and the Christian cause all this shall seem only to fall upon the Protestants whereas if we could not better defend Christianity than the present principles of Popery enable them to do we must confess that the Infidel were far hardlier answered than any Sectary that we have to deal with § 4. 2. And his next fraud lieth in casting all the positive defence and proof on us that he may have nothing to do but assault Religion and manage the Infidels objections against us He offereth not to tell you himself what their uniting certainty of Divine Revelations is and to make it good but to put you upon the proving task § 5. 3. And his fraud is evident in the multitude of Questions which he thrusteth together into one which any man of wit knoweth cannot have one answer but must have many as the Questions are many § 6. 4. And yet he will oblige the Answerer to avoid tedious discourses that so if his many questions have not one short answer he may have the evading pretence that It is a tedious discourse § 7. 5. And there is evident fraud in his ambiguous terms As his opposing matter of fact only to matter of right and so making many heterogeneals to fall under matter of fact His confused and unexplained use of the terms Principle Medium determinining Certainty Vnity in faith c. § 8. 6. Lastly There is much fraud in his many insinuated suppositions As 1. That the Truth of this proposition that Whatsoever God saith is true c. is a matter of meer right as distinct from the rest mentioned as matters of fact 2. That the sense of the words is a matter of fact as the truth of them is not 3. That Papists agree with us that every Revelation of God is most certainly true 4. That the Ebionites Valentinians c. who questioned the Scripture books were Christians 5. That these matters have here a final determination 6. That this is necessary to Certainty and Unity in the faith By all which it appeareth that this Question is intended or used at least as a Soul-trap and a Fool-trap CHAP. II. The Explication of some Terms § 1. THat he may be satisfactorily answered these Terms must be necessarily explained and distinguished of 1. Revelation 2. Matter of fact 3. Certainty 4. Principle 5. Medium 6. Determining 7. Unity in faith § 2. I. Either he taketh Revelation generally as containing natural and supernatural Revelation 2. Or specially for supernatural Revelation only Because he distinguisheth not we must suppose him to take it
Generally But you will understand the mater the better if I distinguish of Revelation Revelation is either I. Objective or the bare proposal of the Object II. Effective Illumination of the mind The first only is here spoken of In Objective Revelation we have to consider I. The Efficient cause viz. 1. Principall which is God 1 As the Author or first Cause of Nature 2. As the Cause of Gratious extraordinary Light II. Subservient I. Persons 1. Christ as man the Teacher of the Church and Messenger of God 2. His Ministers 1. Angels 2. Men. 1. Publick 1. Parents Oeconomical 2. Ecclesiastical 1. Inspired 2. Instructed 3. Magistrates 2. Private Neighbours and Friends II. Things Considered I. Singly 1. In the matter and so they are 1. Signs Natural viz. All Gods works 2. Signs Artificial viz. Writings c. 3. Signs Mixt viz. Vocal Words 2. In the manner of causing them 1. Naturally as the works and Law of Nature 2. Supernaturally and extraordinarily II. Conjunct and duly ordered as they make up just evidence Viz. 1. Things in their notifying conditions 2. Words 1. Simple Terms 2. Propositions 3. Discourses II. The Matter of Divine Revelations signified for the Matter signifying is before spoken of is I. Beings substantial 1. Created 2. The Creator II. The Modes or Accidents of Beings substantial which are 1. Physical and Hyperphysical 2. Moral Especially 1. Truth 2. Right or Dueness 3. Goodness And reductively and by accident All their contraries III. The form of Revelation is Evidence or the Notifying Aptitude which includeth 1. The Sense or Meaning as True 2. As Perceptible IV. The Terminus and Ends of Revelation to joyn them for brevity are 1. The sense and its Perception 1. External 2. Internal the Imagination 2. The higher faculties 1. The Intellect and its perception 2. The Will and its Complacencie or Displicence All this goeth to make up Divine Revelation And do you think we can give you one only Medium of it in a word § 3. II. Matter of fact is a phrase sometime used so largely as to signifie the Reality of any Being that is existent as such But ordinarily it signifieth something practised or done as such If he here take it in the first sense then the verity of this proposition Whatsoever God saith is True is as much matter of fact as the sence of that Proposition But if he mean the later neither of them is matter of fact And yet he saith that the said Proposition is matter of Right As if the Truth of a Proposition and Gods Right to be believed were formally the same And yet he saith that the sense is matter of fact § 4. III. The word Certainty is very ambiguous Lest he complain of needless distinction I will only remember you 1. That as Certainty is Objective and Subjective so it is the Objective Certainty that we have here to enquire of But so as it is the means of Subjective Certainty But withal to remember that to Subjective Certainty that we our selves may be sure there is need of much more than Objective Certainty viz. that the soul and faculties be 1. Rightly disposed 2. And duly excited and applied c. 2. Of Objective Certainty you must note that the word is sometimes taken for meer Verity and Reallity And so the word Infallible is used for that which verily is and whosoever apprehendeth it so to be is not deceived And so all Truth is Certain and Infallible Truth But usually besides Truth the word Certainty and infallibility denoteth the evidence of that Truth by which it is not alwaies actually but aptitudinally notified to us This evidence is either sensible or Intelligible as the sense or the intellect is to be the perceiver of it Where you must distinguish the Physical Evidence of the Thing or Incomplex Object from the Logical Evidence of Complex Objects And here between the Evidence of self-evident Principles and of Conclusions whose Evidence is derivative But especially you must note wherein it is that certainty of Intelligible evidence formally consisteth which is in a certain degree of evidence And 1. It is not every low degree For though all Truth be equally Truth and infallible so that no man is deceived that receiveth it yet we use not to call that Certainty of evidence which is apt only to give them some dark probability and leave the mind in hesitant doubtfulness 2. And yet it is not only that degree of evidence which must help us to a perfect apprehension which is to be called Certainty For then no man should be certain in this world For no man hath such a degree of apprehension but more may be added to the clearness of it 3. Therefore certainty must be denominated from a middle degree which is when the evidence is not only True for the confidentest apprehension of a falshood is no certainty but also so Clear as is apt to give a satisfying quieting resolving apprehension to the mind yea though it should be sometimes molested with some doubts 4. And therefore seeing such or none is our certainty here it followeth that Certainty hath divers degrees as the satisfaction of the mind is more or less And that we are not equally certain of all that we are certain of You will find necessary use of these distinctions about this controversie § 5. IV. And what he meaneth by Principle I know not 1. There is a Physical or Hyperphysical Principle of Being and there is a natural principle of notification and there is a Logical principle of notification 1. Our intellective faculties are the natural apprehending principle 2. The spirit of God is the supream moving principle of Influx 3. The intrinsick and adherent evidence of the thing in it self is the natural notifying principle which is as various as things are 4. The Premises as inferring the conclusion are the Logical Principles of derivative certainty § 6. V. And I scarce know what he meaneth by Medium he seemeth to take it for the same with Principle There are media essendi which I suppose he meaneth not means to make us Articles of faith or to make them True but rather the media cognoscendi But these are necessarily more than one 1. There are the media by which we hear the word and receive the Bible as it is 2. There are the media by which we come to understand the sense of the words 3. There are the media by which we know the difference between the several parts of the Book the more certain and the more doubtful and the different copies and readings and the different translations 4. There are the media by which we know that these Doctrines and these Books are the same which were delivered to the Churches by the Apostles c. 5. There are the media by which we know that Miracles were wrought by Christ and his Apostles and other Christians in confirmation of the Gospel 6. And there are the media by which we
receive them as such because the Pope and his Council as the only Judges say they are such Of which more anon CHAP. V. Quest. II. Whether it be true that the Papists grant us that all Divine Revelations are true § 1. Answ. YES if you will first take their bare word what are Divine Revelations 2. And will take in this word in the sense that God intends them 3. And will allow them to speak contradictions For thus 1. They can tell you when they have a mind that Gods plainest Revelations are none of his Revelations 2. And that whatever Evidence of truth or sense there is in the signs revealing God intendeth something contrary 3. And that that is his revelation which is contrary to his Revelation § 2. For instance The first fundamental Revelation of God to man is unto our senses of things sensible and thereby Intelligible to our understandings Now we cannot get the Papists assent that these Divine Revelations are certainly true yea they say that daily they are certainly false God made Sense God made the Intellect God made the Medium and God made the object In the Lords Supper all the sound senses of all men living Christians and Heathens Papists and Protestants perceive Bread and Wine by seeing smelling touching and tasting Yet the Papists say and their Priests swear that there is no Bread and Wine and that God by another Revelation hath certified us that this Revelation to sense and the Intellect by sense is false He that will not swear that there is no Bread shall be no Priest He that will not renounce this Divine Revelation in Nature and all his senses and all mens senses is a Heretick to be burnt and damned All Temporal Lords that will suffer such as thus renounce not sense and sensible Revelation are to be excommunicate and deprived of their dominions and their subjects absolved from their oaths of allegiance All this is in the Council of Lateran sub Innoc. 3. Can. 1. 3. And the Trent Oath and Council Is this now a Divine Revelation or not If not then they that heard Christ speak and saw his Miracles and saw him after his Resurrection had none For their senses might be all deceived if all mens now may § 3. And if God intendeth here the quite contrary to the Evidence even of sensible natural signs how can they ever prove that he doth not so in his word too even in Hoc est corpus meum and in every article of the faith Certainty lieth in Evidence and if all the declaring evidence may be false because of the contrary intent then who knoweth what is true or whether ever God said true to man § 4. And here Revelations are pretended against Revelation yea the superstruct against the fundamental the consequent against the antecedent the less certain against the more certain yea certain forgery fathered on God against his Certain Natural Revelations For 1. We are men before we are Christians we have sense before we have faith We can have no certainty of faith but by means of the Certainty of sense For we cannot tell that there is any man or book in the world nor that ever we saw a letter or heard a word What then shall we believe 2. And they have nothing but pretended Miracles against this Constant Evident Natural Revelation For every Priest how sottish and wicked soever to turn Bread into no Bread and Wine into no Wine when he list For all the Priests in the world these sixteen hundred years to do this every week or each day that they celebrate their Mass publickly or privately must needs be an undeniable Miracle if true being as much beyond all natural power as raising Lazarus from death And to make these miracles as universal constant and easie as Gods worship in the Assembly is to turn Miracles into the familiarest of Gods dealings And hath not all this need of good proof to prove Gods natural Revelations to be as ordinarily and universally false 3. Yea the Miracle is doubled while the accidents remain They deny them to be the Accidents of Christs body and blood If they are Accidents then it is either of Bread or of Nothing An Accident of Bread which is no bread the Quantity and Colour of bread which is no bread or of wine which is no Wine is a plain contradiction If they be the Accidents of nothing the Quantity of nothing the weight of nothing the locality of nothing the colour tast smell of nothing all these are as plain contradictions Then God must be said by his Omnipotence to cause Contradictories and to work constant Miracles for that end and all to prove his Natural Revelation false § 5. And what cogent Evidence bringeth them to all this Why Hoc est corpus meum No more than Davids I am a worm and no man or Christs I am the vine and ye are the branches and Pauls that Rock was Christ Though paul becometh Christs expositor and three times in the three next verses 1 Cor. 11. calleth it Bread after the Consecration And the old Fathers as often as Edmundus Albertinus hath shewed in folio Yet because the foresaid Later an and Trent Council have in the later end of the world new made this Article of the Papists faith by their exposition of Christs words contrary to St. Paul all Christs fore-revelation in nature must go for falshoods and God daily worketh Miracles to deceive all the common senses of the world when yet no word or Miracle can be believed but on supposition of the certainty of senses § 6. This his blind supposition called me to premise that you may see how far Papists and we are or are not agreed that all Gods Revelations are true and how impossible it is for them to know what is a Divine Revelation or when Gods meaning is agreeable to his Revelations These are things neer and plain and weighty CHAP. VI. Quest. III. What Certainty we have what is a real Revelation of God § 1. Answ. AS I have before partly distinguished of Certainty I will now tell you as to some sorts what it is that goeth to make up Certainty and then how much and what of this we have § 2. I suppose you to remember that it is not subjective Certainty in our selves that we speak of but Objective which may be at hand when men see it not And that it is not meer Truth which we now speak of but the Evidence of Truth or its perceptibility and that neither the lowest nor only the highest degree but any of the various degrees which truly satisfie quiet and resolve the soul. § 3. And that Objective Infallibility or Certainty is 1. Not only that which deceiveth no man which receiveth it for that 's the case of all truth 2. Nor yet that which no man can be deceived about for that is nothing at all that I remember unless it be me cogitare vel sentire 3. But it is that
Binnius Surius or any others the subscribed Names to all the Councils and then peruse the Maps and Topography of the Roman Empire and the notitias Episcopatuum even Aub. Myraeus famed for a feigner and you will see that all the Councils were made up of the subjects of the Empire alone or such as had been thereto accustomed while they were their subjects and but few of them unless some odd Bishop that no man knows what he was Indeed when Scythia and Persia wanted help they placed a Bishop in an Imperial City neer Scythia as Tomis and Persia and gave him leave to help the Country as far as he could and called him Bishop of Scythia or Persia. But what is this to a true General Council representing all the Churches in the world on the terms as Dr. Holden honestly requireth If you have a mind to laugh at the mans Ignorance in Cosmographie you may read Mr. Iohnson alias Terrets Reply to me which I am not so idle yet as to answer confuting me by instances out of Thracia and such like But the thing is most Evident in History that as the Scots call the meeting of their Ministers a General Assembly meaning of that Kingdom and not of all the world so the Councils in the Empire were called General only as to that Empire and not to all the world which I am ready to make good to any man that can understand History The Pope was by one Prince made the chief Patriarch of that Imperial Church as the Kings of England preferred the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury And four others they joined with him of which one claimed Primacy when the Imperial seat was removed thither never dreaming of a Divine right else he could never have laid that claim And the Councils were only as our Convocations and seldom extended to half the Empire And little did those Emperours think that thence their subject Popes and Councils would claim Supremacy at the Antipodes and turn the orbis Romanus to orbis terrarum XVIII There never will be nor must be nor can be a true General Council in the world I have fully proved it in the second part of my Key for Catholicks Read it there or Choose XIX Your Popes and Councils have made no determination at all of many of the matters in your Question Where have they determined which are the true Copies of the Hebrew and Greek Text Do you call us for our only Certainty to a Determination that was never made to this day O for Modesty and Conscience Where have they determined which are the right among all the various Readings What need Lucas Brugensis Alba and so many others search after this with so much industry if the Pope have determined it Where have they determined which are the only Currant or true Translations however they have extolled the Vulgar Latine Is Montanus and other such Condemned Where are all the Translators differences reconciled by the decision of Pope or Council When did they determine the Controversies of Commentators of the sence of a thousand Texts of Scripture I must confess that a just indignation ariseth in me at the reading of such soul-cheating snares where men have the Impudence to perswade us that we can be sure of none of our faith unless we be sure of Copies Translations c. by that Authority that never durst nor did determine of the many remaining Controversies thereabout And where hath the Pope or Council given us a Grammar or Lexicon to know the true sense of words by for the future Fathers differ Papists differ the world is disagreed of the sense of words and many Texts The Pope hath an infallible skill and power with his Council to decide all and will not Was there ever a crueller wickeder wight in flesh To see all this difference and darkness and not vouchsafe to speak a few words or write one Infallible Commentary to end them Just as if the plague or feaver were common and one Physicion would say all men shall die that will not believe that I can cure all men when in the mean time he will not cure those that do believe it What is it that your Pope and Councils are to determine Is it the great Essentials of Religion We thank them for notthing Cannot we know that there is a God and a Christ till the Pope judge it Have we not the Sacramental Covenant of Grace the Creed Lords Prayer and Decalogue surely delivered before any Pope or Council judged of them Or is it of the hard controverted points Do it then and let us see that you can do it XX. Hath the Pope power to judge in utramque partem either way or only one way May he judge that there is a God or no God a Christ or no Christ a Heaven or no Heaven a Scripture or none at his pleasure If so must we believe him if he be for the Negative Take you that Certainty we will have none of it Or is he only to Iudge truly and then only to be believed that there is a God a Christ a Scripture c. So may and must every Teacher yea and every Christian Judge If you say that he cannot go besides the truth General Councils and Pope Adrian himself said otherwise XXI The Pope and his Council differ from the Council of Laodicea and the ancient Church upon this very Question What is the word of God even of the Canon of the Scripture For full proof whereof I refer you to Bishop Cousins Book which bringeth full testimony from antiquity XXII The use of Authority is not to disclose all Verities but to Govern Societies in the management of them If the King of Rome could prove himself King of all the world that would but enable him to Govern the world When one man that is at his footstool that is more Wise and Learned may know better than he and his Council too what 's true or false XXIII Your very foundation is a Contradiction in its self What do you make a Pope to be but the Vicar of Christ And mark Reader can any man be sure that he speaks true as Pope or Christs Vicar that never knew that he was Pope or Christs Vicar Or can any man believe that Christ hath an Infallible Vicar before he believe in Christ himself and that he is Infallible It 's a contradiction to believe the Pope as his Vicar or Pope before we believe Christ. If you believe that the Pope hath Power or Infallibility you must believe that Christ gave it him And if you believe that he gave it him it must be by some Revelation that he gave it and that you must believe it And can you believe that Revelation that made him Pope or Infallible before you believe any Revelation XXIV The same contradiction there is in believing a Council or the Church before you believe Divine Revelation For you cannot know till you believe Divine Revelation that Council or Church have any such
of faith For both waies is the Measure of faith exceeded and men deviate from the continence of the Holy Scripture which expresseth the Measure of faith And this Measure God assisting we will hold that we may write or teach nothing dissonant from the Holy Scripture But if by ignorance or inadvertencie we should write any thing let it be ipso facto esteemed as not written And so on And Prolog q. 1. his description of Theologie is 1. For a habit by which we only or principally assent to those things that are delivered in Scripture and as they are there delivered And so Theologie differs not from faith The reason of which is because the things that are delivered in the Scripture are so only held by Divine Authority Scotus Prolog Q. 2. doth conclude p. 7. that the Doctrine of the Canonical Scripture is sufficient to the attainment of our end And that the Holy Scripture containeth sufficiently the Doctrine necessary to a Viator a man in this life II. And to prove this Scripture to be true he giveth us these ten proofs which I must not repeat at large 1. From the predictions of Scripture which God only could do 2. From their notable concord 3. He proveth that their own Doctrine against Lying and such like prove that the writers lied not 4. From the great diligence and concord of the Receivers 5. From the Rationability of the Contents 6. From the unreasonableness of all other waies 7. From the stability of the Church 8. From the Miracles which God would never affix to a lie which he largely urgeth 9. From the testimony of aliens and adversaries 10. That God would not give up those to a lie who so seek him with all their hearts as many Christians do Abundance of their Authors more I could cite who thus argue for the truth of Scripture and not from an Authoritative decision of a Pope or Council only And what in this they give to them at other times doth but shew that their foundation was so much weaker than ours CHAP. III. That where the Learned Papists differ from us they are so far from building on a Certainer foundation that so far they are forced to deny all Certainty of faith TO prove this it may suffice to mind the Learned Reader how even the most judicious as Greg. Armin. Prolog Estius and commonly most Schoolmen deny a proper Certainty of Evidence to faith Not only that the Object is not Evident to sense which all confess but that the truth of the conclusion is not Demonstrable and that Faith is a pious act of the Election of the will which were not meritorious if it had rational demonstration or evidence And that it is but opinion which is resolved into humane Authority and yet that they believe the Scripture to be Gods word and this or that to be the sense meerly because the Church holdeth it I cannot stay to cite many Plain Durandus shall be instead of all Who Prolog q. 1. saith p. 6. c. 1. Faith which resteth on humane Authority differeth not from opinion because the place from humane authority is topical and an argument thence taken is the weakest And therefore the faith which resteth on that authority is the weakest opinion But pag. 9. of the faith which resteth on Gods authority he granteth us that it may stand with Science of many of the same things and that Divine authority and demonstrative reason may concur to cause the same assent But p. 10. he dissenteth from them that hold that Gods attestations were such to those that saw Christs Miracles and Resurrection c. as certainly proved the truth of his Godhead and so of his word which is Aquinas his honest Doctrine 3. q. 43. act 4. against which Durandus writeth this And because it is us as well as Aquinas that he opposeth I will briefly confute his reasons The first is Because Demonstration necessitateth the understanding to believe But many that saw Lazarus raised c. believed not Christ to be God c. Therefore Miracles were not a sufficient demonstration Answ. Not sufficient to all things but sufficient to do their own part By this you would prove that there is no demonstration of any thing almost in the world For there is almost nothing which convinceth all men I distinguish therefore of a disposed and an indisposed understanding And as to the later I deny the major Demonstrations constrein not millions of undisposed Intellects Recipitur ad modum recipientis What need any other proof than your oft mentioned denial of Bread in the Eucharist Because millions deny the perception of all mens Senses and Intellects thereby are not things sensible demonstrable or evident Can you hope to bring more cogent proof And yet this is rejected And so were Christs miracles The second is Gregory Faith hath no merit where humane reason hath experience and there is Science Answ. A falshood as easily denied as asserted without proof If by Merit you mean Rewardableness For it is only Natural involuntary necessity which evacuateth moral Good or Evil. The will may shew its virtue or vice in receiving or rejecting Objective ascertaining Evidence The third is that it was not known of it self that this miracle attested the truth of what Christ said But whether per se or by consequence it is a most evident certainty that a man yea abundance of men that assert such a point of unspeakable consequence to the world doing abundance of open notorious miracles as professed witnesses or proofs of their Doctrine could not do this but by Gods extraordinary providence And that if this be not to be taken for a Divine Testimony we know of none that mortals are capable of nor a possibility of the worlds escaping the deceit as caused unresistibly by God His Answers to this are not worthy the repeating The same Author li. 3. d. 23. q 7. Enquiring of the Certainty of faith whether it be certainer than Science brings in the several answers of others 1. That there is a Certainty of Evidence and this Science hath and a Certainty of Adhesion and this Faith hath But this he rejecteth and sheweth truly that Adhesion is not properly Certainty and also that the fullest Evidence causeth the closest Adhesion 2. That Faith hath most Certainty in se in the thing and Science most Certainly quoad nos as to us But the vanity of this he truly sheweth For to be Certain in it self and not to us is but to be True And all things True are equally True But no truth is Certain to us or Credible without revelation to us And as he saith The Certainty of Act or habit is not from the Certainty of the object in it self but from the mode which the habit putteth as to the person and the act No way therefore saith he is the act or habit called Certain unless it be certain as to us Therefore he is forced to conclude that many habits and acts of
Science are Certainer to us than faith and its act and that both extensively Science having both certainty of Evidence and Adhesion if that be Certainty And intensively for Science hath no doubt permixt as faith oft hath And he is forced to conclude his faith into the further uncertainty following CHAP. IV. That the most Learned Doctors of the Church of Rome resolve their faith in earnest or jeast into such an Inspiration of the Pope and Prelates in Council as the Apostles had and so are meer Fanaticks And this against notorious sense and experience THe said Durandus saith ib. li. 3. d. 23. p. 573. Nothing is more certain than experience to which the resolution of other things is made that we may have the fuller certainty But experience telleth us that there is Bread after consecration And that he took the belief of humane authority for the weakest opinion I told you before And v. 12. he saith How are we sure that God saith what we believe Non nisi quia sic tenet Ecclesia Only because the Church so holdeth Which he brings to prove that Divine Authority is not surest to us And Ocham Quod l. 5. q. 31. so answereth the question Whether the substance of Bread remain after consecration as I verily believe he did but Ironically jear them and shew that he durst not speak his thoughts Mentioning three opinions The first that the substance of bread which was there before is after the body of Christ I think he meaneth Durandus opinion condemned by Bellarmine c. he rejecteth The second saith he that the substance of bread and wine cease to be and the accidents only remain and under them Christs body begins to be is the common opinion of all Divines which I hold for the determination of the Church and not for any other reason The third that there remaineth the substance of bread and wine with Christs body would be very reasonable if the Churches determination were not contrary for that opinion solveth and avoideth all the difficulties which arise from seperating the accidents from the subject And the contrary to it is not had out of the Canon of the Bible nor doth it include any contradiction for Christs body to consist with the substance of bread any more than with the accidents And after more answering the argument of Mass-miracles by every Priest he saith Sometime about some things there must more Miracles be put though it might be done by fewer and that because it pleaseth God And the Church knoweth this by some Revelation that so it is and therefore the Church hath so determined Either he jeareth them or else he professeth that their faith even of daily miracles against common sense is resolved into a Revelation which the Church hath of that which is not in the Bible which must be Prophetically The like you have in Paludanus Durandus save that he leaveth them as aforesaid Scotus c. I will end with learned Rada who Vol. 4. Contr. 7. a. 1. pag. 164 165. having shewed that This is my Body will not in its own proper sense infer what Aquinas and others gather saith Yet indeed now we must not take that sense but as the Church taught by the Holy Ghost understandeth those words For the Scriptures are expounded by that spirit which they were made by And so it must be supposed that the Catholick Church by that spirit which delivered us the faith even taught by the Holy Ghost so expounded and exploded the first sense and chose this being that other was not true as to the remaining of the substance of bread after consecration But this sense he chose which is true and so delivered by our Lord himself as it is solemnly declared C. firmiter c. And he concludeth that This is my body is not enough to convince a Heretick but as understood by the Church by that spirit by which they were given and delivered they exclude the substance of bread O all men of common sense and reason in the world we appeal to your humanity in the Controversie between the Papists and us While they assert a Miracle by every Priest every day that he masseth in all the world and deny the truth of Gods primary natural Revelation to all mens common senses they resolve their faith of the Certainty of all this not into the Scripture but into such an Inspiration of the Holy Ghost as the Scriptures themselves were written by The Scripture must not be our proof of this Inspiration but must be proved by it We must believe that thus every wicked Pope and the Prelates of the major vote in his packt Councils have this Inspiration When they do no Miracles they live so much worse than other Ministers of Christ that the Reforming of them hath long been the vain wish and attempt of the Christian world They murder the servants of Jesus in their Inquisitions and yet we must lay all our faith and salvation on it that they have all a Prophetical spirit Well If it be proved Certainly to the world that the Pope and his Church are all Prophets or Inspired by the Holy Ghost as the Apostles were then I declare that the Papists are in the right If not I will be no willing Subject of the KING of Rome while he so abuseth the Word the Church the Honour of the Churches King FINIS