iustifie their departure How could he say this since he did not graunt that they did depart There is difference betweene departure and causelesse thrusting from you for out of the Church is not in your power to thrust vs Thinke on that And so much the B. said expressely then That which the B. did ingenuously confesse was this That Corruption in Manners onely is no sufficient cause to make a seperation in the Church Nor is it It is a truth agreed on by the Fathers and receiued by Diuines of all sorts saue by the Cathari to whom came the Donatist and the Anabaptist against which Caluin disputes it strongly And Saint Augustine is plaine There are bad Fish in the Net of the Lord from which there must be euer a seperation in heart and in manners but a corporall seperation must be expected at the Sea shore that is the end of the World And the best Fish that are must not teare and breake the Net because the bad are with them And this is as ingenuously confessed for you as by the B. For if Corruption in Manners were a iust cause of actuall seperation of one Church from another in that Catholike Bodie of Christ the Church of Rome hath giuen as great cause as any since as Stapleton graunts there is scarce any sinne that can be thought by man Heresie onely excepted with which that Sea hath not beene foulely stayned especially from eight hundred yeeres after Christ. And he need not except Heresie into which Biel grants it possible the Bishops of that Sea may fall And Stella and Almain grants it freely that some of them did fall and so ceased to be Heads of the Church and left Christ God be thanked at that time of his Vicars Defection to looke to his Cure himselfe F. But saith he beside Corruption of Manners there were also Errors in Doctrine B. This the B. spake indeed And can you prooue that he spake not true in this But the B. added though here againe you are pleased to omit That some of her Errors were dangerous to saluation For it is not euerie light Error in disputable Doctrine and Points of curious Speculation that can be a iust cause of seperation in that admirable Bodie of Christ which is his Church for which he gaue his Naturall Bodie to be rent and torne vpon the Crosse that this Mysticall Bodie of his might be One. And S. Augustine inferres vpon it That he is no way partaker of Diuine Charitie that is an enemie to this Vnitie Now what Errors in Doctrine may giue iust cause of seperation in this Bodie were it neuer so easie to determine as I thinke it is most difficult I would not venture to set it downe least in these times of Discord I might be thought to open a Doore for Schisme which I will neuer doe vnlesse it be to let it out But that there are Errors in Doctrine and some of them such as endanger saluation in the Church of Rome is euident to them that will not shut their eyes The proofe whereof runs through the particular Points that are betweene vs and so it is too long for this discourse which is growne too bigge alreadie F. Which when the generall Church would not reforme it was lawfull for particular Churches to reforme themselues I asked Quo Iudice Did this appeare to be so B. Is it then such a strange thing that a particular Church may reforme it selfe if the generall will not I had thought and doe so still That in point of Reformation of either Manners or Doctrine it is lawfull for the Church since Christ to doe as the Church before Christ did and might doe The Church before Christ consisted of Iewes and Proselytes this Church came to haue a seperation vpon a most vngodly Policie of 〈◊〉 so that it neuer pieced together againe To a Common Councell to reforme all they would not come Was it not lawfull for Iudah to reforme her selfe when Israel would not ioyne Sure it was or else the Prophet deceiues me that sayes exactly Though Israel transgresse yet letnot Iudah sinne And S. Hierome expresses it in this verie patticular sinne of Heresie and Error in Religion Nor can you say that Israel from the time of the seperation was not a Church for there were true Prophets in it Elias and Elizaeus and others and thousands that had not bowed knees to Baal And there was saluation for these which cannot be where there is no Church And God threatens to cast them away to wander among the Nations and be no Congregation no Church therefore he had not yet cast them away into Non Ecclesiam into no Church And they are expressely called the people of the Lord in Iehu's time and so continued long after Nor can you plead that Iudah is your part and the Ten Tribes ours as some of you doe for if that be true you must graunt that the Multitude and greater number is ours And where then is Multitude your numerous Note of the Church But you cannot plead it For certainely if any Calues be set vp they are in Dan and Bethel they are not ours Besides to reforme what is amisse in Doctrine or Manners is as lawfull for a particular Church as it is to publish and promulgate any thing that is Catholike in either And your Question Quo iudice lyes alike against both And yet I thinke it may be prooued that the Church of Rome and that as a particular Church did promulgate an Orthodoxe Truth which was not then Catholikely admitted in the Church namely The Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Sonne If shee erred in this Fact confesse her Error if shee erred not Why may not another Church doe as shee did A learned Schooleman of yours saith she may The Church of Rome needed not to call the Grecians to agree vpon this Truth since the Authoritie of publishing it was in the Church of Rome especially since it is lawfull for euerie particular Church to promulgate that which is Catholike Nor can you say he meanes Catholike as fore-determined by the Church in generall for so this Point when Rome added Filioque to the Creed of a Generall Councell was nor And how the Grecians were vsed in the after Councell such as it was of Florence is not to trouble this Dispute but Catholike stands there for that which is so in the 〈◊〉 of it and fundamentally Nor can you iustly say That the Church of Rome did or might doe this by the Popes Authoritie 〈◊〉 the Church For suppose he haue that and that his Sentence be infallible I say suppose both but I giue neither yet neither his Authoritie nor his 〈◊〉 can belong vnto him as the particular Bishop of that See but as the 〈◊〉 Head of the whole Church And you are all so lodged in this that Bellarmine professes he can neither tell the
yeere when nor the Pope vnder whom this Addition was made A particular Church then if you iudge it by the Schoole of Rome or the Practise of Rome may publish any thing that is Catholike where the whole Church is silent and may therefore reforme any thing that is not Catholike where the whole Church is negligent or will not But you are as iealous of the honour of Rome as Capellus is who is angrie with Baronius about certaine Canons in the second Mileuitan Councell and saith That he considered not of what consequence it was to graunt to particular Churches the power of making Canons of Faith without consulting the Romane See which as hee saith and you with him was neuer lawfull nor euer done But suppose this were so the B. his speech was not Not consulting but in case of neglecting or refusing Besides you must be put in remembrance too that the B. spake at that time and so must all that will speake of that Exigent of the Generall Church as it was for the most part forced vnder the Gouernment of the Romane See and this you vnderstand well enough for in your verie next words you call it the Romane Church Now I make no doubt but that as the vniuersall Catholike Church would haue reformed her selfe had shee beene freed of the 〈◊〉 yoake so while shee was vnder that yoake the Church of Rome was if 〈◊〉 the onely yet the chiefe hinderance of Reformation And then in this sense it is more than cleare That if the Romane Church will neither reforme nor suffer Reformation it is lawfull for any particular Church to reforme it selfe so long as it doth it peaceably and keepes it selfe to the Foundation F. Which Question I asked as not thinking it equitie that Protestants in their owne Cause should be Accusers Witnesses and Judges of the Romane Church B. You doe well to tell the reason now why you asked this Question the B. sayes you did not 〈◊〉 it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Conference if you had you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 receiued your Answere It is most true No man in common 〈◊〉 ought to be suffered to be Accuser Witnesse and 〈◊〉 in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But is there not 〈◊〉 little 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 too that any man that is accused should be the Accused and yet Witnesse and Iudge in his owne Cause 〈◊〉 If the first may hold no man shall be Innocent and if the last none will be Nocent And what doe we here with in their owne Cause against the Roman Church Why is it not your owne too against the Protestant Church And if it be a cause common to both as certaine it is then neither part alone may be Iudge If neither alone may iudge then either they must be iudged by a Third which stands indifferent to both and that is the Scripture Or if there be a iealousie or doubt of the sense of Scripture they must either both repaire to the Exposition of the Primitiue Church and submit to that or both call and submit to a Generall Councell which fhall be lawfully called and fairely and freely held to iudge the difference according to Scripture which must be their Rule as well as priuate mens F. I also asked Who ought to iudge in this case The B. said a Generall Councell B. And surely What greater or surer Iudgement you can haue where sense of Scripture is doubted than a Generall Councell I doe not see Nor doe you doubt for you adde F. I told him That a Generall Councell to wit of Trent had alreadie iudged not the Romane Church but the Protestants to hold Errors That saith the B. was not a lawfull Councell B. It is true that you replyed for the Councell of Trent And the B. his answere was not onely That that Councell was not Legall in the necessarie conditions to be obserued in a Generall Councell but that it was no Generall Councell which againe you are content to omit Consider it well First Is that Councell Legall the Abettors whereof maintaine publikely That it is lawfull for them to conclude any Controuersie and make it be de Fide and so in your iudgement Fundamentall though it haue not I doe not say now the written Word of God for warrant either in expresse Letter or necessarie sense and deduction as all vnerring Councels haue had and as all must haue that will not erre but not so much as probable Testimonie from it nay quite Extra without the Scripture Nay more Is that Councell Legall where the Pope the chiefe person to be reformed shall sit President in it and be chiefe Iudge in his owne Cause against all Law Diuine Naturall and Humane In a place not free but in or too neere his owne Dominion To which all were not called that had deliberatiue or 〈◊〉 voyce In which none had Suffrage but such as were sworne to the Pope and the Church of Rome and professed Enemies to all that called for Reformation or a free Councell And the Pope himselfe to shew his Charitie had declared and pronounced the Appellants Heretikes before they were condemned by the Councell I hope an Assembly of Enemies are no lawfull Councell And I thinke the Decrees of such a One are omni iure nulla and carrie their nullitie with them through all Law And againe Is that Councell Generall that hath none of the Easterne Churches consent nor presence there Are all the Greekes so become non Ecclesia no Church that they haue no interest in Generall Councels It numbers indeed among the Subscribers sixe Greekes they might be so by Nation or by Title purposely giuen them but dare you say they were actually Bishops of and sent from the Greeke Church to the Councell Or is it to be accounted a Generall Councell that in many Sessions had scarce ten Archbishops or fortie or fiftie Bishops present And for the West of Christendome neerer home it reckons one English S. Asaph but Cardinall Poole was there too English indeed he was by birth but not sent to that Councell by the King and Church of England but as one of the Popes Legats for at the beginning of the Councell he was not Bishop in the Church of England and after he was Archbishop of Canterburie hee neuer went ouer to the Councell And can you prooue that S. Asaph went thither by Authoritie There were but few of other Nations and it may be some of them reckoned with no more truth than the Greekes In all the Sessions vnder Paul the third but two Frenchmen and sometimes none as in the Sixt vnder Iulius the third when Henry the second of France protested against that Councell And in the end it is well knowne how all the French which were then a good partie held off till the Cardinall of Lorraine was got to Rome As for the Spaniards they laboured for many things vpon good grounds and were most vnworthily ouer-borne F. So said I would Arrians say of the Councell of Nice The B. would not
whole Councell depended vpon him and his confirmation was then vnknowne and I verily thinke at this day not beleeued by your selues 5. Fiftly it must be considered If a Generall Councell may erre Who shall iudge it S. Augustine is at priora à posterioribus Nothing sure that is lesse than a Generall Councell Why but this yet layes all open to vncertainties and makes way for a Whirlewind of a priuate spirit to ruffle the Church No neither of these First all is not open to Vncertainties For Generall Councels lawfully called and ordered and lawfully proceeding are a great and an awfull Representation and cannot erre in matters of Faith if they keepe themselues to Gods Rule and attempt not to make a new of their owne and are with all submission to be obserued by euerie Christian where Scripture or euident Demonstration come not against it Nor doth it make way for the Whirlewind of a priuate spirit For priuate spirits are too giddie to rest vpon Scripture and too headie and shallow to be acquainted with demonstratiue Arguments And it were happie for the Church if shee might neuer be troubled with priuate spirits till they brought such Arguments I know this is hotely obiected against Hooker The Author calls him a wise Protestant yet turnes thus vpon him If a Councell must yeeld to a demonstratiue proofe Who shall iudge whether the Argument that is brought be a Demonstration or not For euerie man that will kicke against the Church will say the Scripture he vrges is euident and his Reason a Demonstration And what is this but to leaue all to the wildnesse of a priuate spirit Can any ingenuous man reade this passage in Hooker and dreame of a priuate spirit For to the Question Who shall iudge Hooker answers as if it had beene then made An Argument necessarie and demonstratiue is such saith hee as being proposed to any man and vnderstood the mind cannot chuse but inwardly assent vnto it So it is not enough to thinke or say it is demonstratiue The light then of a Demonstratiue Argument is the euidence which it selfe hath in it selfe to all that vnderstand it Well but because all vnderstand it not If a Quarrell be made who shall decide it No question but a Generall Councell not a priuate spirit first in the intent of the Author for Hooker in all that discourse makes the Sentence of the Councell binding and therefore that is made Iudge not a priuat spirit And then for the Iudge of the Argument it is as plaine For if it be euident to any man then to so many learned men as are in a Councell doubtlesse And if they cannot but assent it is hard to thinke them so impious that they will define against it And if that which is euident to any man is not euident to such a graue Assembly it is no Demonstration and the producers of it ought to rest and not to trouble the Church Nor is this Hookers alone nor is it newly thought on by vs It is a ground in Nature which Grace doth euer set right neuer vndermine And S. Augustine hath it twice in one Chapter That S. Cyprian and that Councell at Carthage would haue presently yeelded to any one that would demonstrate Truth Nay it is a Rule with him Consent of Nations Authoritie confirmed by Miracles and Antiquitie S. Peters Chaire and Succession from it Motiues to keepe him in the Catholike Church must not hold him against Demonstration of Truth which if it be so clearely monstrated that it cannot come into doubt it is to be preferred before all those things by which a man is held in the Catholike Church Therefore an euident Scripture or Demonstration of Truth must take place euerie where but where these cannot be had there must be submission to Authoritie And doth not Bellarmine himselfe graunt this For speaking of Councels he deliuers this Proposition That Inferiors may not iudge whether their Superiors and that in a Councell doe proceed lawfully or not But then hauing bethought himselfe that Inferiors at all times and in all causes are not so to be cast off hee addes this Exception Vnlesse it manifestly appeare that an intollerable Error be committed So then if such an Error be and be manifest Inferiors may doe their dutie and a Councell must yeeld vnlesse you will accuse Bellarmine too of leaning to a priuate spirit for neither doth hee expresse who shall iudge whether the Error be intollerable This will not downe with you but the Definition of a Generall Councell is and must be infallible Your fellowes tell vs and you can affirme no more That the voyce of the Church determining in Councell is not Humane but Diuine That is well Diuine then sure infallible Yea but the Proposition stickes in the throat of them that would vtter it It is not Diuine simply but in a manner Diuine Why but then sure not infallible because it may speake loudest in that manner in which it is not Diuine Nay more The Church forsooth is an infallible Foundation of Faith in a higher kind than the Scripture For the Scripture is but a Foundation in testimonie and matter to be beleeued but the Church as the efficient cause of Faith and in some sort the verie formall Is not this Blasphemie Doth not this knocke against all euidence of Truth and his owne grounds that sayes it Against all euidence of Truth For in all ages all men that once admitted the Scripture to be the Word of God as all Christians doe doe with the same breath graunt it most vndoubted and infallible But all men haue not so iudged of the Churches Definitions though they haue in greatest obedience submitted to them And against his owne grounds that sayes it For the Scripture is absolutely and euerie way Diuine the Churches Definition is but suo modo in a sort or manner Diuine But that which is but in a sort can neuer be a Foundation in a higher degree than that which is absolute and euerie way such Therefore neyther can the Definition of the Church be so infallible as the Scripture much lesse in altiori genere in a higher kind than the Scripture But because when all other things faile you flye to this That the Churches Definition in a Generall Councell is by Inspiration and so Diuine and infallible my hast shall not carrie me from a little Consideration of that too 6. Sixtly then If the Definition of a Generall Councell be infallible then the infallibilitie of it is either in the Conclusion and in the Meanes that prooue it or in the Conclusion not the Meanes or in the Meanes not the Conclusion But it is infallible in none of these Not in the first The Conclusion and the Meanes For there are diuers deliberations in Generall Councels where the Conclusion is Catholike but the Meanes by which they prooue it not firme therefore not infallible Not
of the Pope infallible nay more infallible than it For any Generall Councell may erre with you if the Pope confirme it not So belike this Infallibilitie rests not in the Representatiue Bodie the Councell nor in the whole Bodie the Church but in your Head of the Church the Pope of Rome Now the B. may aske you To what end such a trouble for a Generall Councell Or wherein are wee neerer to Vnitie if the Pope confirme it not You answere though not in the Conference yet elsewhere That the Pope erres not especially 〈◊〉 Sentence in a Generall Councell And why especially Doth the deliberation of a Councell helpe any thing to the Conclusion Surely no for you hold the Conclusion Propheticall the meanes fallible and fallible Deliberations cannot aduance to a Propheticke Conclusion And iust as the Councell is in Stapletons iudgement for the Definition and the Proofes so is the Pope in the iudgement of Melch Canus and them which followed him Propheticall in the Conclusion The Councell then is called but onely in effect to heare the Pope giue his Sentence in more State Else what meanes this of Stapleton The Pope by a Councell ioyned vnto him acquires no new Power or Authoritie or certaintie in iudging no more than a Head is the wiser by ioyning the offices of the rest of the members to it than it is without them Or this of Bellarmine That all the firmenesse and infallibilitie of a Generall Councell is onely from the Pope not partly from the Pope and partly from the Councell So belike the Presence is necessarie not the Assistance Which Opinion is the most groundlesse and worthlesse that euer offered to take possession of the Christian Church And I am persuaded many learned men among your selues scorne it at the very heart You professe after That you hold nothing against your Conscience I must euer wonder much how that can be true since you hold this of the Popes Infallibilitie especially by being Propheticall in the Conclusion If this be true Why doe you not lay all your strength together all of your whole Societie and make this one Proposition euident All Controuersies about matter of Faith are ended and without anie great trouble to the Christian World if you can make this good Till then this shame will follow you infallibly and eternally That you should make the Pope a meere man Principium Fidei a Principle of Faith and make the mouth of Christs Vicar sole Iudge both of his Word be it neuer so manifest and of his Church be shee neuer so learned and carefull of his Truth The Conference growes to an end and I must meet it againe ere wee part For you say F. After this we all rising the doubting Person asked the B. Whether shee might be saued in the Romane Faith Hee answered Shee might B. What Not one Answere perfectly related The Bishops Answere to this was generall for the ignorant that could not discerne the Errors of that Church so they held the Foundation and conformed themselues to a Religious life But why doe you not speake out what the B. added in this particular That it must needs goe harder with the doubting partie euen in point of Saluation because the said partie had beene brought to vnderstand verie much in these controuerted Causes of Religion And a man that comes to know much had need carefully bethinke himselfe that hee oppose not knowne Truth against the Church that made him a Christian. For Saluation may be in the Church of Rome and yet they not find it that make sure of it F. I bad the Person doubting marke that B. This Answer I am sure troubles not you But it seemes you would faine haue it lay a Load of Enuie vpon the B. that you professe you bad the doubting partie so carefully Marke that Well you bad the said person Marke that For what For some great matter or for some new Not for some new sure For the Protestants haue euer beene readie for Truth and in Charitie to graunt as much as might be And therefore from the beginning many learned men graunted this So that you need not haue put such a serious Marke that vpon the speech of the B. as if none before him had or none but hee would speake it And if your Marke that were not for some new matter was it for some great Yes sure it was For what greater than Saluation But then I pray Marke this too That Might be saued graunts but a Possibilitie no sure or safe way to Saluation The Possibilitie I thinke cannot be denyed the Ignorants especially because they hold the Foundation and suruey not the Building And the Foundation can deceiue no man that rests vpon it But a secure way they cannot goe that hold with such corruptions when they know them Now whether it be wisedome in such a point as Saluation is to forsake a Church in the which the ground of Saluation is firme to follow a Church in which it is possible one may be saued but verie probable one may doe worse if he looke not well to the Foundation iudge yee I am sure S. Augustine thought it was not and iudged it a great sinne in point of Saluation for a man to preferre incerta certis incertainties and naked possibilitiesbefore an euident and certaine course And you your selues in the point of condignitie of Merit write it and preach it boysterously to the people but are content to die renouncing the condignitie of all your owne Merits and trust to Christs If you will not venture to die as you liue liue and beleeue in time as you meane to die And one thing more because you bid Marke this let me remember to tell for the benefit of others Vpon this verie Point That wee acknowledge an honest ignorant Papist may be saued you and your like worke vpon the aduantage of our Charitie and your owne want of it to abuse the weake For thus I am told you worke vpon them You see the Protestants at least manie of them confesse there may be Saluation in our Church wee absolutely denie there is Saluation in theirs therefore it is safer to come to ours than to stay in theirs to be where almost all graunt saluation than where the greater part of the World denie it This Argument is verie preuayling with men that cannot weigh it and with women especially that are put in feare by violent though causelesse denying Heauen vnto them But it is stronger in the cunning than the true force of it For all Arguments are verie moouing that lay their ground vpon the Aduersaries Confession especially if it be confessed and auouched to be true But if you would speake truly and say Manie Protestants indeed confesse there is Saluation possible to be attained in the Romane Church but yet the Errors of that Church are so manie and some such as weaken the Foundation that it is verie hard to goe that way to
S. August Enchirid. c. 5.6 c. Donatist Lib. 7. cap. 50. Wicked people may be called Gods House because of externall calling and visible profession 2. Tim. 2. 20. Sed non sunt de compage domus They are not of the frame of the House Heb. 3. 6. August d. Bapt. Lib. 7. cap. 50. All they which couet earthly things preferring worldly felicitie before God they which seeke their owne and not those things which are Iesus Christs ad vnam Ciuitatem illam pertinent quae dicitur Babylonia mystice habet Regem Diabolum belong onely to that Citie which in a mysterie is called Babylon and hath the Deuill the Head Aug. sup Psal. 61. Wicked persons saith S. Augustine Epist. 50. figuram membri tenent retaine the figure or outward shape of a member sed reuera corpus Domini non sunt but they are not in truth the bodie of Christ August d. Doct. Christ. Lib. 3. cap. 32. In corpore Christi non sunt quod est Ecclesia They are not in the bodie of Christ which is the Church August c. Crescon Lib. 2. cap. 21. But they which are not of the Body of Christ nor of the house of God really and in truth doe not constantly preserue or faithfully deliuer Apostolicall Traditions neither are they one or holy nor yet such as the Spirit of God infallibly and alwayes directeth in their publicke Doctrine OBSERVAT. V. The qualities of vnitie holinesse veritie Apostolicall succession and other the like are not alwayes found in the true Church equally or in the same degree and measure of perfection but according to a latitude and inequalitie of intension and remission and more or lesse so that although the sounder part of the Church hath alwayes the substance of truth sanctitie and vnitie yet this veritie of Doctrine vnitie of Charitie sanctitie of Manners is greater larger and more sincere and perfect in some persons and ages of the Church than in others These qualities were in their greatest perfection when the Apostles themselues liued they were in great measure in the ages immediately abutting vpon the Apostles But the holy Fathers complaine of the decrease and decay of them in after times And Papists deplore the extreme diminution of them in their dayes OBSERVAT. VI. It falleth out sometimes in the outward state of the visible Church that wicked persons which are not sound parts of Gods house nor liuing members of Christs mysticall bodie being more in number and greater in power doe possesse the chiefe places of publicke Iudicature and Ecclesiasticall gouernment and being thus exalted and withall abetted by worldly power and swarmes of time-feruers whom they aduance and honour to accomplish their owne ends it may heereby fall out that the outward state of the visible Church shall be ordered and swayed according to the lust and will of wicked rulers And then good men may be disgraced depressed and persecuted the simple and they which are negligent vnlearned and secure may be deluded and errour and superstition craftily and couertly be brought in and that is fulfilled which Gregory saith Dum mali praepositi suam contra veritatem honorem exigunt ab omni rectitudine corda sequentium abducunt When wicked rulers seeke their owne glory more than truth they misleade their followers from all course of righteousnesse This happened in the Iewish Church when the Scribes and Pharises and other hypocrites and errants were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 master-builders Math. 21.41 And the euill seruant beareth rule in the houshold and oppresseth his fellow-seruants Matth. 24. 49. Diotrophes excommunicates and vsurpes according to his owne will 3. Ep. Ioh. 9. 10. The Arrians in the dayes of Constantius and Valence did all the former in the greater part of the Christian world The same happened in the Church of Rome especially after the thousand yeere one man vsurped ouer the Christian world making himselfe on earth chiefe and sole commander ouer things diuine and humane his power was so exorbitant and boundlesse that he trode vpon the necke of kings throning and dethroning crowning and decrowning them as himselfe listed his dominion was so absolute and vast as that no man might reprooue or withstand him All men were reputed heretickes or schismatickes which would not say and sweare as he commanded in Synods and Councels causes were transacted according to his will and remission of sinnes and right to life eternall were intailed to his chaire IESVIT This principle is consequent vpon the former and out of it sixe things may be clearely prooued First that there is alwayes a true Church of Christ in the world for if there be no meanes for men to know that Scriptures and other substantiall Articles came from Christ and his Apostles and so consequently from God but the Tradition of the Church then there must needs be in all ages a Church receiuing and deliuering these Traditions else men in some ages since Christ should haue beene destitute of the ordinarie meanes of saluation because they had not meanes to know assuredly the substantiall Articles of Christianitie without assured faith whereof no man is saued ANSVVER By true Church we may vnderstand either an vniuersall maltitude of Beleeuers totally in respect of all persons or distributiuely in regard of them which principally rule and command free from errour in publicke doctrine Or else a choise and select number of Beleeuers liuing either in the common fellowship of the generall visible Church or vnited in particular Congregations by themselues teaching and professing right Faith in all capitall points and readie to imbrace all diuine Truth when the same is manifested vnto them If the name of true Church be taken in the first sense or for an Hierarchicall Church wherein the principall commanders teach and maintaine truth intirely and sincerely then the Proposition to wit There is alwayes a true Church of Christ in the world is denied for it is possible that the greater Prelates to wit Popes Cardinals mitred Bishops and Abbots of which the Hierarchicall Church principally consisteth shall bee reprobates blinde guides a generation of vipers wolues in sheepes cloathing and such as being armed with the title of the Church persecute the true Church And that this is possible it appeareth First by the example of the arch-rulers of the Iewish Church which in some ages corrupted true Religion and persecuted the seruants of God 2. Chron. 36. 14. Moreouer all the chiefe of the Priests and the people transgressed very much after all the abominations of the heathen and polluted the house of the Lord c. v. 16. They mocked the messengers of God and dospised his word and misused his Prophets c. Reade 2. Kings 16. 11 16. Ierem. 2.8 Esay 56.10 Malach. 2.8 Ierem. 20.1 23.1 2. Machab. 4.10 Ezek. 34.4 Mark 6.35 Math. 3.7 Matth. 23. 13. Luk. 12. 1. Matth.
and magnifie the antient Oecumeniall Councells affirming that they honour them as the holy Euangelists yet when they make against them they regard them no more as one of their owne part affirmeth than a couent of women pratling and chatting in a common bath stoue or Weauers shop And this is apparant by their 〈◊〉 or falsifying the Councells of Nice Constantinople and Chalcedon when the same equal the Patriarke of Constantinople or other Patriarchall Seas to the Roman or forbid the imposition of single life vpon the Clergie as also by the Councells of Basill and Constance decreeing that the Popes sentence is fallible Cardinall Cusanus treating of generall Councells deliuereth these ten Positions following First That a perfect or compleate generall Councell consisteth of all the Patriarckes and prime Gouernours of the Church Secondly That a Councell which is celebrated by the Romane Pontife and those which are subiect to him onely or excluding others is a particular Councell Thirdly A generall Councell may bee celebrated although the Pope refuse to ioyne and concurre by his presence and consent Fourthly All which meet in Councells ought to haue free audience and libertie orderly to debate and determine matters in question Fiftly Whatsoeuer must oblige as diuine vpon the determination of Councells ought to be confirmed by the authoritie of holy Scripture Sixthly No Councells are legitimate wherein priuate respects are maintained vnder pretext of Faith and Religion Seuenthly The Romane Bishop hath not that power which many flatterers heape vpon him to wit that he alone is to determine and others onely to consult or aduise Eightly It is without all question That a generall Councell properly taken is both superiour to the rest of the Patriarchs and also to the Romane Pope Ninthly Experience of things doth manifest That a plenarie vniuersall Councell may be deficient and wee reade that many Councels lawfully assembled haue erred Tenthly Whiles we defend That the Pope is not vniuersall Bishop but onely the first Bishop ouer others and whiles wee ground the power of sacred Councels vpon the consent of the whole Assembly and not vpon the Pope we maintaine Truth and giue to euerie one his due honour And then concluding the former Positions the Cardinall saith I obserue little or nothing in antient Monuments which agreeth not to these my Assertions With this Cardinall agree many other famous Papists Occham Panormitan Almaine Cassander Ferus c. and among the rest Occham deliuereth these Positions First That all generall Councels are inferiour to the holy Scriptures and that when S. Gregorie saith That he honoureth the foure first generall Councels like as the foure Euangelists this must be vnderstood not of equalitie but of similitude Matth. 5. 48. Secondly Councels are not called generall because they are congregated by the authoritie of the Romane Pope and that if Princes and Lay-men please they may be present and haue to deale with matters treated of in generall Councels Thirdly Ecclesiasticall Dignitie as it maketh not men holy so it conferreth not infallibilitie of Iudgement Fourthly A generall Councell or that Congregation which is commonly reputed a generall Councell by the World may erre in matters of Faith Ioh. Ferus commenting vpon the Acts chap. 15. compareth the Apostles Councell with moderne and saith In matters of Faith and things which concerne the Conscience it is not sufficient to say We will and command but you must consider in what manner the Apostles deale in their Assembly They come together in simplicitie of heart seeking onely Gods glorie and the saluation of others no meruaile therefore if the Spirit of God was in this Councell But our meeting is in another manner namely with great pompe and seeking our selues and promising to our selues licence vpon fullnesse of Power to doe any thing And this being so how is it possible for the Spirit of God to approue such Assemblies Seeing therefore by the confession of these learned Papists latter Councels celebrated by the meere and absolute authoritie of the Pope are neither vniuersall nor of infallible Iudgement and as experience testifieth Papall Councels are neyther free nor proceed in debating and deciding matters controuerted according to the authoritie of the holy Scripture and that of later yeeres and especially since Pope Gregorie the seuenth they haue wholly intended their owne priuacie it is a malicious Censure which this Lojolist casteth vpon the Protestants in charging them with fundamentall Heresie for opposing the infallible authoritie of such Councels and consequently with deiecting the foundation of Vnitie in Gods Church Protestants haue alwayes desired a lawfull generall Councell for the concluding of differences in Religion and they are most readie and resolute to submit themselues to the determination thereof and they yeeld the same honour and authoritie to all such Councels which the antient Church in the dayes of Constantine the Great Theodosius and Martianus and which S. Augustine did yea which the more impartiall Romanes themselues in precedent Ages haue done But the present Papalls will not endure a lawfull and impartiall Councell and vnlesse themselues may be both Accusers and Iudges and proceed as their forefathers the Pharisees did against the Apostles determining all things by the Modell of their owne Cabala they will admit no tryall by Councels nor any other meanes of Pacification for restoring the common Vnitie of the Christian Church IESVIT THirdly their denying of the Primacie of S. Peter and his Successor the Foundation which Christ laid of his Church necessarie for the perpetuall gouernment thereof Matth. 16. 18. ANSWER PRotestants deny not the Primacie of S. Peter but they yeeld vnto him both as he was an Apostle Primacie of Spirituall Authoritie and Iurisdiction ouer the Vniuersall Church Matth. 28.20 Ioh. 20.21 And also respectiuely to the other Apostles which were his Compeeres and Equals in regard of all Apostolicall Authoritie Primacie of Calling Order Grace Gifts c. And the place of Saint Matthew chap. 16.18 prooueth not Saint Peter to haue beene a visible Monarch ouer the whole Church First Our Sauiour affirmeth not plainely and literally that hee will build his Church vpon him but vpon the Rocke which hee confessed verse 16 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vpon this Rocke and not vpon this Peter Non dictum est illi Tu es Petra sed Tu es Petrus Petra autem erat Christus It was not said vnto him Thou art the Rocke but Thou art Peter for the Rocke was Christ. August Retract Lib. 1. cap. 21. Secondly If hee had affirmed expressely That hee would build his Church vpon him yet hee saith not exclusiuely that hee would build the same onely vpon him but in other places hee conioyneth the
admit the case to be like B. So indeed you said And not you alone It is the common Obiection made against all that admit not euerie later Councell as that Councell of Nice famous through all the Christian World In the meane time nor you nor they consider that the case is not alike as the B. told you If the case be alike in all Why doe not you admit that which was held at Ariminum and the second of Ephesus as well as Nice If you say as yours doe It was because the Pope approoued them not I will put off the inualiditie of this Answere to a sitter time in the meane space suppose it true and strong this ground is gained That the case is not alike for consent to all Councels And if you looke to haue this graunted That the Pope must confirme or the Councell's not lawfull we haue farre more reason to looke that this be not denyed That the Scripture must not be departed from in Letter or necessarie Sense or the Councell's not lawfull And the consent and confirmation of Scripture is of farre greater Authoritie to make the Councell Authenticall and the decisions of it de Fide than any confirmation of the Popes The Councell of Nice had the first you say We are sure it had the second The Councell of Trent we are able to prooue had not the second and so wee haue no reason to respect the first And to what end doe your learned men maintaine That a Councell may make a Conclusion de Fide though it be simply Extrà out of all bound of Scripture but out of a iealousie at least that this of Trent and some others haue in their determinations left both Letter and Sense of Scripture Shew this of Nice and the B. will graunt so much of the case to be like But what will you say if Constantine required That things brought into question should be answered and solued by Testimonie out of Scripture And the Bishops of the Nicene Councell neuer refused that Rule And what will you say if they professe they depart not from it but are readie by manie Testimonies of Diuine Scripture to demonstrate their Faith Is the case then alike betwixt it and Trent But you say the B. pretended somewhat else for his not admitting the case to be like F. Pretending that the Pope made Bishops of purpose for his side But this the Bishop prooued not B. No nor had he reason to take on him to prooue what he said not He knowes it will be expected he should prooue what hee saith and it is hard to prooue the purpose of the Popes heart For if it be prooued that hee made Bishops at that time that some of them were titular onely and had no liuelyhood to subsist but out of his Purse and so must hang at the strings of it that some of these thus made were sent to the Councell and sure not without their Errand yet if the Pope will say he neither made nor sent them to ouer-rule the Holy Ghost at that meeting or of purpose for his side as no question but it will be said Who can prooue it that is not a Surueyor of the Heart But though the Popes heart cannot be seene yet if these and the like presumptions be true it is a great signe that Trent was too corrupt and factious a meeting for the Holy Ghost to be at And sure the case in this not alike at Nice That which 〈◊〉 B. said was That Trent could be no indifferent Councell to the Church the Pope hauing made himselfe a strong partie in it And this the B. prooued though you be here not onely content to omit but plainely to denie the proofe For did not the B. prooue it thus and you answered not That there were more Italian Bishops there than of all Christendome besides more yea more than double And this he prooued out of the Councell it selfe which you had in your hand in Decimo Sexto but had no great heart to looke it For where the number of Prelates are expressed that had Suffrage and Vote in that Councell the Italians are set downe to be 187 and all the rest make but 83. So there were more Italian Bishops by 104 than of all the rest of Christendome Sure the Pope did not meane to be ouer-reached in this Councell And whatsoeuer became of his infallibilitie otherwise he might this way be sure to be infallible in whatsoeuer hee would haue determined So the B. prooued this sufficiently For if it were not to be sure of a side giue any satisfying reason Why such a potent partie of Italians more than double to the whole Christian World should be there Shew me the like for Nice and I will giue it that the case is alike betweene these two Councels But you haue not yet done with the B. You adde F. In fine the B. wished That a lawfull Generall Councell were called to end Controuersies The persons present said That the King was enclined thereunto and that therefore wee Catholikes might doe well to concurre B. And what say you to the Bishops wish You pretend great loue to the Truth would you not haue it found Can you or any Christian be offended that there should be a good end of Controuersies Can you thinke of a better end than by a Generall Councell And if you haue a most gracious King enclined vnto it as you say it was offered how can you 〈◊〉 your selues if you doe not consent Yes it seemes you can for you say againe F. I asked the B. Whether he thought a Generall Councell might 〈◊〉 He said It might B. I presume you doe not looke the B. or I for him should enter into a proofe of this Controuersie Whether a Generall Councell may erre in determination or not Your selfe brought no proofe that it cannot and till that be brought the Bishop his speech is good that it can And yet he hopes to be found no infringer of any power giuen by Christ to his Church But it seemes by that which followes you did by this Question Can a Generall Councell erre but seeke to win ground for your other which followes F. If a Generall Councell may erre What neerer are wee then said I to vnitie after a Councell determined Yes said he although it may erre yet we should be bound to hold with it till another come to reuerse it B. Whether a Generall Councell may erre or not is a Question of great consequence in the Church of Christ. To say it cannot erre leaues the Church not onely without remedie against an Error but also without sense that it may need a remedie and so without care to seeke it which is the miserie of the Church of Rome at this day To say it can erre seemes to expose the members of the Church to an vncertaintie and wauering in the Faith makes vnquiet spirits not onely disrespect former Councels of the Church but also slight and contemne
Nationall Councels and Nationall Councels by 〈◊〉 or Generall And euen Plenarie Councels themselues may be amended the former by the latter It seemes it was no newes with S. Augustine that a Generall Councell might erre and therefore inferior to the Scripture which may neither be doubted nor disputed where it affirmes And if it be so with the definition of a Councell too as Stapleton would haue it That that may neither be doubted nor disputed Where is then the Scriptures Prerogatiue I know there is much shifting about this place but it cannot be wrastled off Stapleton sayes first That S. Augustine speakes of the Rules of Manners and Discipline And this is Bellarmines last shift Both are out and Bellarmine in a Contradiction Bellarmine in a Contradiction For first hee tells vs Generall Councels cannot erre in Precepts of Manners and then to turne off S. Augustine in this place he tells vs That if S. Augustine doth not speake of matter of Fact but of Right and of vniuersall Questions of Right then he is to be vnderstood of Precepts of Manners not of Points of Faith Where he hath first runne himselfe vpon a Contradiction and then wee haue gayned this ground vpon him That either his Answere is nothing or else against his owne state of the Question A Generall Councell can erre in Precepts of Manners and both are out For the whole dispute of S. Augustine is against the Error of Cyprian followed by the 〈◊〉 That true Baptisme could not be giuen by Heretikes and such as were out of the Church And the proofe which Stapleton and Bellarmine draw out of the subsequent words When by any experiment of things that which was shut is opened is too weake For experiment there is not of Fact nor are the words conclusum est as if it were of a Rule of Discipline concluded as Stapleton cites them but a further experiment or proofe of the Question in hand and pertaining to Faith which was then shut vp and as S. Augustine after speakes wrapped vp in cloudie darkenesse Next Stapleton will haue it That if S. Augustine doe speake of a Cause of Faith then his meaning is that latter Generall Councels can mend that is explicate more perfectly that Faith which lay hid in the Seed of antient Doctrine He makes instance That about the Diuinitie of Christ the Councell of Ephesus explicated the first of Nice Chalcedon both of them Constance Chalcedon And then concludes In all which things none of these Councels taught that which was erroneous An excellent Conclusion These Councels and These in this thing taught no Error and were onely explained Therefore no Councell can erre in any matter of Faith or therefore S. Augustine speakes not of an emendation of Error but of an explanation of Sense whereas euerie Eye sees neither of these can follow Now that S. Augustine meant plainely That euen a Plenarie Councell might erre and that often for that is his word and that in matter of Faith and might and ought so to be amended in a latter Councell I thinke will thus appeare First his word is Emendari amend which properly supposes for Error and faultinesse not explanation And S. Augustine needed not goe to a word of such a forced sense nor sure would especially in a Disputation against Aduersaries Next S. Augustines Dispute is against S. Cyprian and the Councell held at Carthage about Baptisme by Heretikes in which point that Nationall Councell erred as all now agree And S. Augustines deduction goes on Scripture cannot be other than right that is the prerogatiue of it but Bishops may and be Reprehended for it if peraduenture they erre from the Truth and that either by more learned Bishops or by Prouinciall Councels Here Reprehension and that for deuiation from the Truth is I hope Emendation properly and not Explanation onely Then Prouinciall Councels they must yeeld to Generall and to yeeld is not in case of Explanation onely Then it followes that euen Plenarie Councels themselues may be amended the former by the latter still retayning that which went before If peraduenture they erred or made deuiation from the Truth And if this be not so I would faine know why in one and the same tenure of words in one and the same continuing Argument and deduction of S. Augustine Reprehendi should be in proper sense and à veritate deuiatum in proper sense and Cedere in proper sense and onely Emendari should not be proper but stand for an Explanation If you say the reason is because the former words are applyed to men and Nationall Councels both which may erre but this last to Generall Councels which cannot erre this is most miserable begging of the Principle and thing in question Againe S. Augustine concludes there That the Generall Councell preceding may be amended by Generall Councels that follow When that is knowne which lay hid before Not as Stapleton would haue it lay hid as in the Seed of antient Doctrine onely and so needed nothing but explanation but hid in some darkenesse or ambiguitie which led the former into error and mistaking as appeares For S. Augustine would haue this amendment made without sacrilegious Pride doubtlesse of insulting vpon the former Councell that was to be amended and without swelling Arrogancie sure against the weakenesse in the former Councell and without contention of Enuie which vses to accompanie mans frailetie where his or his friends error is to be amended by the latter Councell and in holy Humilitie in Catholike Peace in Christian Charitie no question that a Schisme be not made to teare the Church as here the Donatists did while one Councell goes to reforme the Lapse of another if any be Now to what end should this learned Father be so zealous in this worke this highest worke that I know in the Church Reuiewing and surueying Generall Councels to keepe off Pride and Arrogancie and Enuie and to keepe all in Humilitie Peace and Charitie if after all this noyse he thought latter Councels might doe nothing but amend that is explaine the former That shift which Bellarmine addes to these two of Stapleton is poorest of all namely That S. Augustine speakes of vnlawfull Councels and it is no question but they may be amended as the second Ephesine was at Calcedon for this Answere giues vp the case For it graunts That a Councell may erre and be amended in Doctrine of Faith and in case it be not amended condemned and reiected by the Church as this of Ephesus and diuerse others were And as for that meere Tricke of the Popes Instruction Approbation or Confirmation to preserue it from Error or ratifie it that it hath not erred the most antient Church knew it not Hee had his Suffrage as other great Patriarkes had and his Vote was highly esteemed not onely for his place but for worth too as Popes were then But that the