be a prudent or pious act without seing seeiming supernatural signes so obuious to all kind of people that they may if reflected vpon exclude all prudent doubts of our being mistaken because they must dispose us to fix our thoughts so firmly vpon Gods goodness and veracity that we assent with greater assurance to what the Church sayes and its signes shew than if we had seen it not because the Church sayes it or because the signs confirm its testimony but because we rationaly iudge it impossible that God would permit such an appearance and testimony to be falsly fathered vpon himself or permit vs to be deceiued by signs so likely to be supernatural Q. How can a certainty only moral of God being the Author of the commission and doctrin of the Church be a solid and sufficient ground for acts of Christian faith wherby we belieue without the least doubt and by consequence with more than moral certainty or assurance that God is Author of the commission and doctrin of the Church How can any prudent act of our vnderstanding assent to more than it doth see or assent with greater assurance than there is appearance of the truth An intellectual act or assent being an intellectual sight of the truth of the obiect To say therfore that by acts of faith we assent to more than we see or with greater assurance then there is appearance of the truth is as much as to say that by acts of faith we see more than we see and belieue more firmly than we can A. The answer of this obiection is that assent being no more than an interior yeelding a thing to be as dissent is an interior denying it to be the assent of the mind is not alwayes an intellectual sight of the truth of its obiect It is not alwayes the same thing in the soul to say a thing is so and to see it is so For if these two were the same the soul could neuer assent or rely vpon authority nor be mistaken in any assent because it is neuer mistaken in its sight of the truth Besides this opinion that confounds the assent of faith with the sight of the truth whether it be in proper causes or by its connexion with the euidence of Gods reuelation takes away the obscurity liberty and merit of Christian faith because à cleer sight of the truth by whatsoeuer means it coms is not compatible with those attributes St Paul tells vs that faith is an argument of things not appearing and surely if they do not appeare by faith they are not seen by an act of faith More A great proportion of the supernaturality of faith and of its merit consists in ouer comming the difficulty we find not only in examining the motiues and in adhering with the will but in assenting with the vnderstanding to the truth and to the existence of its reuelation as to that of the Trinity Incarnation c. But if our assent of faith were an intellectual sight of the truth or of the existence of Diuine reuelation of those mysteries such an assent could not inuolue nor we find therin any intellectual difficulty for what intellectual difficulty can there be in saying inwardly it is so if we see it is so There is rather a necessity in such a case of saying it is so Faith is so far from being an intellectual sight of the verities belieued or assented vnto that the less cleerly you see the truth or the reuelation credited so it be prudently credible the greater your faith is Therfore Christ reproacht St Thomas for not belieuing the Resurrection vntill he had seen with his eyes Christ resuscitated â—oan 20. And told him they were happy that belieued and did not see what they believed Now the reason why faith and sight or knowledge are so opposit is because the nature and notion of faith is to supply and by consequence it doth suppose the want of sight or knowledge Hence it is that many say faith and knowledge are no more consistent one with the other than the want and not want of the same thing And indeed this notion of faith is well grounded because experience doth conuince and all confess our human nature to be so imperfect that it stands in need of Christian faith to supply the want of knowledge touching Diuine mysteries And euen in worldly affairs we must in most rely for want of cleerer knowledge vpon the authority and testimony of lawfull witnesses and take their word for legal euidence which as it is a sufficient proof of what they testify so is it a demonstration of the imperfection of our vnderstandings and that most of our human assents and iudicial sentences are not intellectual sights of the truth itself but humble submissions to the authority and knowledge of others which we belieue though for ought we euidently know we may be misinformed by their mistake or malice But the supernatural signes of the Catholik Church do shine so cleerly vpon the same that not any who reflects vpon them and relyes vpon Gods veracity can prudently entertain the least feare or doubt of being mistaken in its authority or misled by its doctrin notwithstanding that we do not cleerly see the Diuine trust of the Church or the infallible truth of its Tenets But though the assent of Christian faith be not an intellectuall sight of the truth reuealed or of the Diuine reuelation it doth suppose at least in our Predecessors sensations or an intellectual sight of som seemingly supernatural signs which being credibly reported to us by Tradition are sufficient to gain so much credit and authority for the Church wherin they appear'd as that whoeuer doth not belieue its testimony and assenteth or yeeldeth not to its doctrin as Diuine is iustly condemned by Christ himself in his last words to the Apostles Marc. 16. v. 16. and therfore tells them that his Church shall haue visible and supernatural signes wherby it may be easily discerned from all heretical Assemblies som wherof he specified as power to cast out Deuills to cure diseases to speak vnknowen languages to rid people of serpents These besides others related in Scripture as the Conuersion of Nations to Christianity the continual succession and sanctity of Doctrin and Doctors the spirit of profecy and many such miraculous marks ioyned with profound humility and eminent virtues are so far aboue all heathens and heretiks pretended morality and sanctity that when their saints are compared with canonized Catholiks they appeare to be but hypocritical sycophants puff'd vp with that secret pride so proper to all sectaries preferring their own priuat interpretation of scripture before the publik sense and practise of a visible and miraculous Church Vve conclude therfore that an assent of Christian faith is not an intellectuall sight of the truth reuealed nor of the reuelation and yet the faithfull do assent to both with no less assurance than if it had bin a cleer sight of both because euery
assent of Christian faith is grounded vpon and directed by this truth Gods goodness and veracity will neuer countenance falsood with miracles nor permit errors in a Church whose authority and testimony is confirmed with such marks of his Diuine ministery and fauor as the Congregation of the Roman Catholiks is This shall be in the ensuing section more particularly proued SECT VNICA OF THE RESOLVTION AND RVLE of Catholik faith and vvhether this or Heresy be consistent vvith a cleer euidence of Gods revelation Q. Notwithstanding you haue told me that the assent of faith is rather a submission or yeelding of our vnderstanding to the Diuine authority than a sight or euidence of the same authority or reuelation yet other Roman Catholik Authors hold the contrary because they say that the tradition or testimony of the Church is the rule or motiue of Catholik Faith Now this tradition affirming that the faithfull deliuered to one an other from age to age from yeare to yeare the same doctrin in euery particular which the Roman Catholiks now hold and that they deliuered that doctrin not as the doctrin or opinions of men but as the word and reuelation of God it is as impossible we should not see this doctrin to haue bin reuealed by God as it is that a tradition so vniuersal wherin euery man was so particularly concerned and which hath bin conueyed by such euident sensations as that of hearing preaching seing practising and professing our faith by the most significant words and actions can be fallacious or false or that such multitudes could forget or would alter the doctrin of this year which they had receiued as Diuine the yeare before A. I know that the Author of sure footing hath writ with great zeal som Treatises vpon this subiect and hath so confounded those who assert only a moral certainty in Faith that they can not vindicat themselues from the Atheism wherunto their principles and bare probability of Christianity leads and wherwith the aforesaid Author doth vnanswerably charge them But because he took or reuiued this way thinking that by no other the certainty of Christian faith can be made out nor the Socinians argument against the possibility of assenting by an act of faith with more assurance than appearance of the truth answered and that I belieue both these difficulties may and ought to be solued otherwise I make vse of other principles for the resolution and rule of faith Q. Vvhat is the resolution of faith A. It is an orderly retrogradation from the assent or act of faith to its first motiue or to that which moued or made vs assent Q. Vvhat is the Rule of faith A. It is that which directs vs to that motiue and to assent or belieue as Christians Q. Is not the rule and the motiue of faith the same thing A. Many confound the one with the other But they are diferent things The motiue of faith is Gods veracity The rule of faith is the Testimony or Tradition of the Church Faith doth not fallow the nature of its rule if it did we could not call it a Diuine virtue because the testimony or Tradition of the Church which is its rule is human It s called Diuine faith because it is specified by and relyes wholy vpon Gods veracity and therfore is a Diuine virtue Q. Ought not the rule of faith be an infallible direction to the motiue of faith Ought it not also be of such a nature as to manifest cleerly its own infallibility to euery one that will examin the nature of Tradition which is the rule of faith A. It ought to be an infallible direction in itself otherwise it might lead vs out of the way but that infallibility ought not be more manifest to vs than the infallibility of faith itself The reason is because a Rule as such is but a direction and one may be infallibly directed though himself doth not Know it as a seaman who obeyes the Pilot commanding him to steer his ship by such and such land marks It is no necessary part or property of a Rule to euidence it s own infallibility unless the thing wherunto we are directed be self euident and uisible as we see in the rules and instruments of Mecanik arts But if the truth of that obiect or act wherunto a Rule directs us be of its own nature obscure and not obuious to our senses but rather aboue the reach and sight of our understanding then the truth or infallibility of the Rule ought not to appeare cleerly to us for if it did the Rule hauing a necessary connexion a parte rei with the act or obiect wherunto it directs it would cleerly discouer to us the truth of that obiect or act which is supposed to be obscure This is explained by examples A man that is purblind or trauells by night may be safely and infallibly directed or led between precipices or through an vncouth and vnknown path though he doth not see his own safety nor the skil of his Guide or the certainty of his way T is sufficient for his satisfaction and encouragement to beare patiently the incommodiousness of his iourney that being credibly informed he belieues his Guide is skilfull and honest T is so in our iourney to Heauen Vve do belieue that the rule of our faith which is Catholik Tradition is infallible by virtue of Gods particular assistance and protection though we do not cleerly see or know it is so Vve belieue also that euery assent of Christian Faith is infallibly true though we can no more see its infallibility than we can the truth of its obiect v. g. of the Trinity Diuinity of Christ Transubstantiation c. So that there ought not be greater or cleerer euidence required for the infallibility of the rule of faith than for the infallibility of the truth of faith this being the end and the other but subseruient to it Tradition therfore euen as it is sealed with all the signs of the Church doth not make cleerly euident to us that God reuealed any article of faith or any point of Christianity nay not that fundamental one of Christs Diuinity for though Catholik Tradition and the signes and miracles of the Church may make it cleerly euident to us that Christ reuealed our faith and doctrin yet they do not make it cleerly euident to us that Christ was God or that God reuealed Christianity witness all the heresies of witty and learned men in all ages against Christs Diuinity and euery one Knowes that against cleer euidence their can be no heresy Q. The Church being our Guide of faith if som Doctors therof do not see cleerly the way how can we be led to heauen How can they induce heretiks to follow them or assure them that the saying of our sauior will not be verified in us si caecus caecum ducat or that our Doctors are not like the Scribes and Pharisies caeci estis duces coecorum A. The greatest
blindness in faith is to pretend a cleer sight of its rules infallibility The Catholik Church acording to St Paul and the Scriptures is a Congregation of men who do not see what they belieue and are led and directed by the holy Ghost in matters of doctrin This Church is euery particular mans immediat Guide because we follow it and hold fast to its testimony and tradition but this Church also hath a Guide the holy Spirit which leads it as Christ sayes into all truth by continualy directing it and assisting in its definitions and decrees Vvhen the four first general Councells defin'd the Diuinity of Christ and of the holy Ghost they did not cleerly see nor demonstrat against heretiks the truth of that doctrin or that God reuealed it For if they had the heretiks could not haue continued heretiks in their iudgments It s therfore fufficient that in the Catholik Church there be Doctors and arguments to demonstrat that all Dissenters or heretiks by not submitting to its doctrin and authority go against reason and the obligation all men haue to embrace that religion which is most likely to be Diuine in regard of greater appearance therin of supernatural signs which Christ sayd his Church should haue than in any other To ground therfore the certainty of Christian Faith or of its rule vpon any euidence which faith itself declares to be fallacious and fallible as it doth declare the euidence of our senses and sensations is in the article of Transubstantiation is to destroy Christianity and therfore Tradition as receiuing its certainty from our sensations can not be a sufficient ground for the certainty of Christian faith Q. I pray resolue your Catholik faith vnto its motiue A. That is don by answering questions Thus. Vvhy do you belieue the mystery of the Trinity or Transubstantiation Because God who can not deceiue nor be deceiued reuealed it How do you know God reuealed it If you speake of cleer knowledge I do not know that God reuealed it But if you will speake properly as a Christian or as a man that vnderstands what we mean by Faith you must not ask how I know but how or why do I belieue that God reuealed it Then I will answer that the testimony or tradition of the Church confirmed with seemingly supernatural signs testifying that God reuealed those mysteries makes it euidently credible he did reueal them But because I know my vnderstanding is so imperfect that I can not pretend to infallibility and my senses are so fallacious that by our sensations we are often mistaken and that faith itself tells us so in the article of Transubstantiation I cant no assent to this article or to the mystery of the Trinity or to any other pretended to be euidently reuealed by virtue of self euident Tradition and infallible sensations with that certainty which Christianity requires vntill I reflect and rely altogether vpon Gods veracity and apply it to the aforesaid testimony and Tradition of the Roman Catholik Church which declares that itself is authorised by God and shews for that authority seemingly supernatural signs to propose as reuealed by him those mysteries and all the other particulars of our Faith Vvhen I compare and apply the Diuine veracity to this testimony of the Church authorised by those signs I assent to all shee proposeth as reuealed by God by this act Notvvithstanding I do not see any cleer euidence or infallible connexion betvven the testimony or signs of the Church and Gods reuealing its doctrin yet because Gods veracity and his auersion from falsood is infinit I do belieue as certainly as I do that God is infinitly inclined to truth that he neuer did nor neuer vvill permit the least falsood to be so authenticaly proposed as his reuelation or vvord as I see euery point of the Roman Catholick doctrin is proposed by the tradition and signs of that Church This general assent is applyed to euery particular article Heer you see that the motiue of our Chatholik Faith is not the Tradition or testimony of the Church but only Gods veracity You see also that the tradition of the Church is the rule of our Faith because it helps and directs vs to reflect and rely more vpon the motiue which is Gods veracity than upon Tradition itself Lastly you see there is no impossibility in assenting by an act of faith with more assurance than there is appearance or euidence of the truth assented vnto because the assurance is not taken from nor grounded vpon the appearance but vpon Gods veracity and his infinit inclination to truth Hence followeth 1. That whosoeuer denyes any one article of Faith whether fundamental or not fundamental belieueth none at all with Diuine or Christian Faith because he slights the motiue therof which is Gods infinit inclination to truth and auersion from falsood to that degree as to be persuaded the Diuinity can permit falsood to be so credibly fatherd vpon itself as the Roman Catholik Church doth its doctrin with so seeming supernatural signs and so constant a Tradition The motiue of Faith being thus once slighted none that so slights it can belieue any thing for its sake or upon its score 2. It followeth That the Tradition and Miracles of the Catholik Church do not make it cleerly euident to us that God reuealed any one article of Christian Faith nay not that fundamental one of the Diuinity of Christ For though Tradition makes it cleerly euident to us there was such a man as Christ and such prodigies as his Miracles and that him self say'd he was God yet that Tradition and those prodigies do not make it cleerly euident to us as it did not to the Iewes that Christ was realy God For if this had bin cleerly euidenc'd to them or us neither Iewes nor Socinians or any other ancient heretiks could haue bin obstinat or heretiks in their iudgments against Christs Diuinity Q. If I do not see an infallible connexion between the assent or rule of Faith and Gods reuelation I must needs see there is no infallible connexion and may say the assent of Faith may be false seing Tradition which is the rule of that assent is fallible On the other side I must sa yt he assent of Faith can not be false So that if Tradition be not so self euident as from it to conclude cleerly the impossibility of Faiths falsood it must be granted that I see Faith is and is not infallible and that Tradition is and is not an infallible Rule A. Though I do not see any infallible connexion between Gods reuelation and the Tradition of the Church or any other rule directing to belieue what he realy â—eueald or which is the same between the assent of Faith and the rule of Faith yet it doth not follow that I must see or say there is no necessary connexion between them For at the same time I do not see that necessary connexion or infallibility I do belieue there is that
connexion though I see it not nay t is therfore I can belieue it because I do not see it Faith requiring that what is belieued be not seen It would indeed be a contradiction to say I see and do not see the infallibility of Tradition or of Faith but t is not any to say I do not see and do belieue that infallibility It may be as well sayd a man who is blind and infallibly or securely led by a knowing Guide through a dangerous way doth see his ruin or danger because he doth not see his own safety or the infallibility of his Guide though he belieues himself secure from all danger Q. Is it not cleerly euident that God can not permit falfood to be so authenticaly proposed in his name as the Roman Catholik Church doth her doctrin by so continued a tradition and so surprising signs as her miracles sanctity conuersion of Nations c. A. Though I am of opinion God can not permit such an appearance of Diuine truth to be a mistake yet our vnderstandings being so imperfect it would be presumption in vs to define or pretend to demonstrat what God can do or not do Vve only know he can not sin But we do â—ot know scientificaly whether he may not 〈◊〉 to punish the sins of some permit the Church to err and the world to be deluded by their cleerest and most frequent â—ensations wherupon as our Aduersary sayeth the certainty of Catholik Tradition is grounded And though both Scripture and Tradition say the Church shall neuer fail or err yet we do not pretend to cleer euidence that either Scripture or Tradition is Gods word SVBSECT HOVV A MAN MAY ASSENT in matters of Faith vvith more assurance than there is appearance of the truth Q. If it be not cleerly euident to us by the tradition of the Roman Catholik Church nor by Gods veracity that he reuealed its doctrin how can we assent or belieue with infallible certainty or assurance that God reuealed it Is it in our power or euen in Gods power to make vs affirm inwardly and certainly any thing we not knowing whether it be so or no How therfore can we affirm inwardly and certainly the truth of the Trinity or that God reueald it if we know it not cleerly either by Gods veracity or by the tradition of the Church A. Assents grounded vpon authority differ in this from assents grounded vpon cleer knowledge that the certainty of these are deriued from and measured by the cleer sight and euidence we haue of their truth or of the obiects being as they are affirm'd to be But the certainty of assents grounded vpon authority is not deriued from or measured by any cleer euidence or sight of their truth but by the persuasion we haue of the persons we belieue his knowledge and inclination to truth Now all men who admit of a God being most certainly persuaded that he is infinitly inclined to truth they may and ought to assent with the greatest assurance and certainty imaginable that God did realy reueale all that which the Church proposeth as Diuine doctrin for though wee do not see this truth in the mystery or matter deliuered by Catholik tradition nor in that euidence which our sensations giue to tradition itself yet by reflecting vpon Gods infinit auersion from falsood and vpon our own persuasion of his infinit veracity and seing so great an appearance of his being deeply engaged and concerned for the truth of a Churches testimony that lookes so like his own affirming the doctrin to be Diuine we are bound in conscience to belieue without the least doubt or at least we are bound to endeauor to belieue without doubt which must be a rational endeauor seing our obligation of endeauoring is so euident to us that God is the Author of the Roman Catholik doctrin and hath reueald it for if he had not he would neuer permit the same to be so plausibly and probably proposed as Diuine by Miracles and other signs of the Church that prudent and learned men must sin in being obstinat against its doctrin and testimony And this is that we mean when we say that we apply the Diuine veracity to euery particular point of faith not by seing the reuelation itself in the tradition or testimony of the Church for then we could not deny its doctrin was reueald nor be heretiks but by hauing so much veneration for Gods veracity that whensoeuer it seemes to be so publikly engaged and prudently belieued as we see it is in the Roman Catholik Church God speakes or reuealeth what it proposeth as his word Q. Methinks the veneration we haue for God and his veracity ought rather oblige vs not to assent to any doctrin as spoken or reuealed by him vnless it be cleerly euident to vs that he spoke or reuealed it for if we do otherwise we expose his holy name to contempt and ourselues to damnation by uenturing to father what we fancy vpon God when perhaps he neuer sayd or reuealed what we imagined A. It s a prerogatiue due to soueraignty and a fortiori to the Deity to speake and command by Ministers and inferior officers which beare the badges of the royal authority And it is not only a disrespect but obstinacy and rebellion not to obey lawes and commands so authenticaly proposed So likewise it must be not only a sin of disrespect and contempt but of heretical obstinacy not to belieue that God speakes or commands by the Roman Catholik Church when its testimony and tradition of hauing Gods trust and authority to declare that he speakes or reueales its doctrin is authenticaly proposed by signs so supernatural in appearance that no human authority is so authentik and no other Church can or dares pretend to the like The more soueraign is any superiority and veracity the greater obligation there is in subiects not to exact for their obedience therunto or belief therof cleerer euidence of its commanding than is usual and sufficient in human affairs when Princes proclaim or command And the more infallible the veracity of him is who claimes the authority if this be authenticaly proposed the greater is the obligation of assenting inwardly therunto without cleerer euidence that it proceeds from the infallible Author of the same than such a moral certainty as the signs of the Church create this being the cleerest that is consistent with the nature liberty obscurity and obsequiousness of Christian Faith Q. Ought there not to be in the true Church an euident and conclusiue argument against heretiks and Pagans to let them see their obstinacy by shewing cleerly to them that God reuealed what they deny to be true or to be matter of Faith A. If men were to be saued by Demon. strations or cleer knowledges deduced one from the other what you say were fit and necessary But God hauing decreed to saue men by Faith rather than by science by a meritorious and free rather than a necessary or
demonstratiue assent of him self being the Author and Reuealer of the Christian doctrin it is so far from being fit the Doctors of his Church should conuict Pagans or heretiks by cleerly euidencing to them God reuealed the sauing truthes that it is not possible For though som Diuines haue sayd Faith is consistent with cleer euidence of God hauing reuealed the truth of its obiect because forsooth though the belieuer doth see the truth and by consequence can not doubt of it or be an heretik yet he doth not see it in its proper causes but only in Gods reuelation notwithstanding I say this vnwary opinion of som schoolmen themselues can not well reconcile with it the merit obscurity liberty and obsequiousness of Christian Faith nor shew how 't is possible for any learned Catholik or other man to be an heretik in his iudgment because the malice of Heresy this being an error in the understanding as well as obstinacy in the will consists in doubting or denying inwardly that God did reueal such an article of Faith but if euery learned Catholik doth see by virtue of tradition that he did realy reueal it he can not see nor say the contrary in his mind and by consequence can not be an heretik And yet it s granted on all sides that any learned man without forgetting any part of his learning or knowledge may be an heretik Besides the assent and certainty of Christian Faith doth not enter further vpon its obiect than to say it exists or that the act of Faith is true it medles not with why it exists or with any of its proper or particular causes that is with any reasons why the obiect exists or why the act of Faith is true it is grounded only vpon Gods reuelation and this sayes no more than it is so all other reasons and causes are impertinent as to the nature and vse of Faith Faith being an imperfect knowledge and a total relying vpon the Diuine authority and not vpon the knowledge of proper or any other causes Now it is impossible that the obscurity and nature of Faith can be more or so much destroyd by subsequent euidence impertinent to its end and nature than by an euidence that immediatly and directly opposeth and is inconsistent with its motiue its merit and nature If the act of Faith be not consistent with the cleer sight or euidence of its truth in the proper and particular causes notwithstanding those causes are not its motiue nor considered or toucht by the act or assent of Faith how can its merit obscurity or nature consist and continue with a cleer sight of its truth or of its motiue or which is the same with euidence of the Diuine reuelation This sight or euidence being as destructiue of the obscurity and difficulty wee meet with in assenting to the mysteries and of the trust we repose in God by belieuing which is no less essential to Faith than its truth as it is directly oppofit to the state of obscurity wherin we must be if we trust his word deliuered to vs by the Church as also to the darkness and desguise he must speake to vs in if he will haue vs trust him and merit by Faith or indeed belieue him at all for men do not belieue when they assent to a truth they see or can not deny And it is impossible for them to see that God who is truth itself speakes or reuealeth any mystery without seing also t is truth he speakes or reueals Our aduersaries seem to make the Montebanks saying seing is belieuing the rule of Diuine Faith Q. Vvhy should not the merit of Faith be consistent with the cleer euidence of the truth therof in its proper causes or with cleer euidence of Gods reuealing the mystery belieued Is it not sufficient for a meritorious assent that the VVill applyed the vnderstanding to cleer the difficulties which might retard or suspend the act of Faith before its actual assent Must this assent also meet with obscurity and ouercom a difficulty in saying and not seing that God reuealed what it assents vnto after all our former pains taken in finding out the rule of Faith and examining the nature of Catholik Tradition A. The chief merit of Christian Faith consists in ouercomming the difficulty we find in assenting to more than we see or with more assurāce than wee see there is euidence of truth If we did see or certainly know that God reuealed what we assent vnto by the act of Faith we could not haue that difficulty in assenting to the mysteries therof which we find by experiēce for what difficulty can there be in saying inwardly God reuealed the Trinity or the Trinity is true if we see that God reuealed that mystery and by an immediat consequence that it is true Therfore the proper and immediat merit of an act of Faith as such doth consist in ouercoming the difficulty of actualy assenting that God reuealed the mystery or matter we belieue he did reueale though we see not his reuelation nor any necessary connexion between it and the doctrin tradition or testimony of the Church As for those other difficulties antecedent to this and to the act of Faith which we ouercom and are rather dispositions to make our selues fit to belieue by remouing the obstacles of education and custom or by examining the nature of Tradition and the motiues of credibility than immediat acts of Faith the merit that results from ouercoming those difficulties is not the proper and immediat merit of Faith itself because it is antecedent to it for after all our aforesaid inquiry and examination of the rule and motiues of Faith we find still a great difficulty in assenting actualy or belieuing that God reuealed what Tradition affirms he did this our own experience doth demonstrat and it may be proued by diuers places of holy Scripture as that of Luc. 19. when one hauing bin credibly informed and perhaps seen how Christ wrought many miracles he desired Christ to dispossess his son of a dumb Deuil Christ told him if he could belieue he would deliuer his son from that spirit Vvithout doubt the Father found great difficulty in the very act of Faith whereby he belieued Christs power for though he sayd I do belieue yet he cried out adding Lord help my incredulity And yet this man was very well disposed and informed of Christs power and miracles before he brought his son to him otherwise he would not have taken so much pains to follow him and present his son before him And indeed incredulity as obstinacy also doth suppose as much information and euidence of the motiues of credibility and of the rule of Faith or Tradition as is requisit for the actual assent of Faith otherwise none could be called incredulous or obstinat for not belieuing The faithfull therfore merit and ouercom a great difficulty by the very act of Faith after that all other difficulties precedent to it are cleered or ouercom And
application to such as claim to be the Kings Ministers and Messengers because a King can not giue to his subiects greater euidence then moral that he trusts and employs such men with declaring his pleasure and commands But God without any inconueniency to himself may giue cleer and conclusiue euidence to euery indiuidual person that himself reueald the doctrin which the Church proposeth as Diuine And therfore it seems to be uery agreable to reason that in the Church there be som Doctors who may demonstrat or proue by conclusiue euidence against the wittiest Doubters that he hath don so de facto by virtue of Tradition seing cleer knowledge is not only the surest but the most connatural way for rational Creatures to arriue to the happy end we all ayme at by our Faith and actions A. If God can iustly oblige the wittiest men of the vvorld underpain of damnation to content themselues with moral euidence when they haue no greater of such and such men being their Princes and Parents and in consequence therof to submit unto them and their Ministers or Messengers their outward actions of greatest importance sure he may justly oblige under pain of damnation the same men to content themselues with a moral euidence if he be pleased to giue no greater for submitting their iudgments by a most certain belief to his reuelations and authority claimd by the Church and shewing for it marks so supernatural of the Diuine trust and truth that they can not be prudently questioned as counterfeit For as the imperfection of our human nature and Knowledge as also the Prerogatiue of Soueraignty and superiority makes it uery reasonable and natural enough to us to be subiect and directed in our outward actions by a sole moral euidence when we haue no greater so the same imperfection and Gods infinit Excellency doth demonstrat that it is most reasonable and natural to us to be directed in our inward acts and assents by supernatural moral euidence when God is pleased to giue us no greater seing we haue no right or reason to exact it in truths which are obscure to us and the Knowledge of them is aboue our merit and capacity Such are not only the mysteries of our Faith but the Diuine reuelation of them or vvhich is the same Gods communication of his thoughts and Councells to such slaues and pittifull Creatures as we are Christ told the Apostles Ioan. 15. he called them his friends because he communicated to them all vvhich he had heard from his Father And euery Catholik Knowes that Gods friendship or fauor is a supernatural gift which human nature could not expect as due to it We haue no right or reason therfore to exact or expect that God would not haue us belieue whatsoeuer the Church proposeth with moral euidence as being reuealed by him unless wee see the Diuine reuelation applyd to that proposal by cleer and conclusiue euidence Moral euidence is sufficient to damn us if we deny to proceed therupon in order to a most certain though not cleer assent of the truth of the mystery Marc. vlt. as well as of the existence of the revelation As for what you say concerning the nature of Tradition viz. that it may with conclusiue euidence manifest and demonstrat if the dispute be managed by a witty man an infallible and cleer connexion with the Diuine reuelation of the Roman Catholik Faith because it leads us from age to age and yeare to yeare up along to Christ who is God and preacht our Faith to this I answer two things 1. That the Tradition of the Catholik Church whether we speake of it as it is a Congregation of Knowing and honest men before we believe or suppose it assisted by the holy Ghost or whether we speake of it euen after we suppose it to be so assisted it can not demonstrat or proue by conclusiue euidence that God reuealed any one article of our Catholik Faith though it may proue by conclusiue euidence that Christ did because that Tradition only proues that Christ sayd he was God and that the Apostles belieued so but goes no further in prouing Christs Diuinity than by testifying his Miracles which do not demonstrat or euidently conclude his Diuinity though they demonstrat our obligation of belieuing it 2. I answer that though Tradition doth not demonstrat or euidently conclude Christs Diuinity and by consequence can not demonstrat or cleerly conclude that his reuelation of our Faith was Diuine yet it is a conclusiue argument ad hominem against Protestants and all who confess Christs Diuinity that God reuealed all the articles of the Roman Catholik Church because they confess Christ is God And in this sense the Author of the sure footing of Faith vindicated c. argues unanswerably against his Aduersaries for the conclusiue euidence by virtue of Tradition of Gods reuealing supposing Christ to be God euery article of the Roman Catholik Faith And therfore seing he hath as I am credibly informed thus explaind himself he deserues rather great commendation than that seuere Censure which the Author of Religion and Gouernment giues of his doctrin thinking he agreed with Manicheans and Protestants in making cleer euidence the motiue and rule of Christian belief For the Author of sure footing utterly disauowes and abhorres as leading to Heresy and Atheism this Proposition which som imagined he maintained as following out of his Principles No Catholik or at least no learned or vvitty person is bound to assent or belieue vvith Christian Faith any article the Catholik Church proposeth as reuealed by God unless it be demonstrated or concluded by cleer and euident reason that God reuealed the same article Q. Do not som Catholik Diuines teach that cleer Euidence of the Reuelation is consistent vvith our Catholik Faith A. No. Som of them teach the Angels before their fall and Adam in the state of innocency had and euen the Deuils now haue euidence that it was God who reuealed to them the supernatural Mysteries they belieued and few extend this priuilege to the Prophets and Apostles inspired immediatly by God without outward preaching See Fr. Dominic Bannes 2.2 q. â— a. 1. Estius in 4. lib. Sentent lib. 2. dist 23. paragr 6. But not any one Diuine I could see or heare of sayes that cleer euidence of God reuealing our Catholik Faith which according to Saint Paul Rom. 10. coms by hearing Fides ex auditu and the preaching or testimony of the Church is consistent with the same OF THE DIFFERENCE BETVVEN certainty sprung from the sight of Truth and certainty grounded upon Trust The later excludes cleer enidence of the truth and is the certainty required in Christian Faith Q. I find it uery reasonable if possible all men should belieue with the greatest assurance and certainty imaginable that God reuealed euery article both great and smale which the Church doth propose as reuealed by him though there were no cleerer euidence than moral for such a
first and cleerest notions and principles of mankind it must be sayd that nothing hath not only proportion with somthing but also that nothing and somthing haue the same properties and work the same effects and by consequence that there is no difference or distance between such contradictions as nothing and somthing being and not being existent and not existent Q. I see that the existence and vnity of God is much more cleere than Atheists pretend but me thinks the same argument wherby you proue Gods vnity concludes the impossibility of the Trinity for if there can not be two or more things infinitly perfect it must be granted that either the Father son and holy Ghost are not things or beings distinct one from the other or if they be that they are not infinitly perfect A. To this question or obiection there are two answers The first and best is that God were not infinitly perfect if such imperfect creatures as we know our selues to be could comprehend his excellencies and mysteries And though as rational creatures we ought euen in what we belieue be directed by reason yet that reason which is our guide can lead us no further in many things than to persuade vs submit to credible authority which is the testimony of a Church or Congregation authentikly authorised by God to beare witness that he reuealed such and such mysteries Though the truth of these mysteries be not intelligible or visible to our human vnderstandings it were want of vnderstanding to doubt of them or to deny them because there is not any one truth more cleer to vs nor more obuious by vndeniable experiments to all mankind than this that there are many truthes wherof our human vnderstandings can giue no reason Now if this be so in human and ordinary things why should we presume or pretend that the mystery of the Trinity is not true because we forsooth can not comprehend its truth The second answer is this the Father the son and holy Ghost haue but one being or nature common to all three and therfore they are equaly powerfull equaly wise equaly good and eternall and by consequence but one God But because this diuine nature or essence hath three different manners of being and that euery one of these three manners is identified with and inseparable from the Deity though distinct one from the other there must be three distinct persons the first is called the Father the second is called the son the third is called the holy Ghost This may be explained by two similitudes 1. is that of a body which hath three dimensions longitude latitude and profundity distinct one from the other but not from the body 2. is that ordinary example of our soul which is but one being though it hath three different manners of being the first manner is to know the second is to wish or wil the third is to remember Though these three manners or modes of being are very different in themselues yet they are not things distinct from the soul Q. But how can this be applyed to the Trinity A. Thus. It must be granted that in the Deity we may consider and truly t is so the Diuine nature first as hauing from itself alone all knowledge and all perfections 2. this same Deity may be considered as knowing or reflecting vpon its own knowledge and perfections 3. it may be considered as infinitly louing itself and its infinit perfections The Deity therfore or the Divine nature as it is the fountain of infinit fecundity and the original principle or giuer is called the Father The same Deity as it is considered not the fountain but as if it were the riuer that flowes from that fountain or the chanel that receiues its own knowledge and perfections is called the son The same Deity as it is infinitly beloued by the Father and the son is called the holy Ghost which holy Ghost proceedeth as wel from the son as from the Father because each of those two persons equaly loue one an other and the Deity whence it followeth that the Greekes error of the procession of the holy Ghost from the Father alone and not from the son is not only blasphemy but nonsense because it is impossible that such a Father should not loue such a son and that such a son should not loue his Father they both hauing the same nature and the same perfections This is sufficient of so sublime a mystery the truth wherof though it can not be cleerly comprehended by so imperfect creatures as we are yet our human reason may with some probability and proportion shew that the vnity of the Diuine nature doth no more exclude the Trinity of persons than the vnity of a body doth exclude its three dimensions or the vnity of the soul it s three faculties CHAP. II. OF THE IMMORTALITY of the soul Q. Is the immortality of the soul an article of Christian Religion A. Yes because in the Creed we belieue the life euerlasting Q. May this article be proued by natural reason A. yes if you will admit there is any such thing as reason in man For reason is that faculty wherby a man finds himself naturaly directed and inclined to raise his thoughts aboue and beyond the reach of his senses and to correct and contradict his own sensations when he discouers that they are as false and fallacious as dayly experience doth manifest in familiar examples v. g. of oares that seem to bend or break in the water of sophisticated wine that seemes to be natural of false colours of mad dreames and imaginations that in our sleep or in a melancoly humor seem to be rational discourses and real obiects and other innumerable mistakes which are rectified either by reflexions of our own or by the rules of perspectiue philosophy and other sciences inuented by men to discern the difference that is between the true existence and the false appearance of things Q. How do you inferr that the soul is immortal because reason which is the soul or a faculty therof doth direct and incline men to correct the fallacy of their sensations and to raise their thoughts aboue and carry them beyond the reach of our senses A. Sensation being a cooperation or a ioynt operation of the body and soul through the organization or ministery of our senses if the soul or its faculty of reason doth correct and contradict som of these sensations and finds them to be false or fallacious it is manifest that the soul may and sometimes doth operat not only independently of the body but contrary to those appearances which seemd to be real whilst we were in it and were directed by them or belieued our senses and by consequence the soul is immortal because the immortality of the soul is nothing else but its independency of the boby in acting and existing and if it acts against our sensations when it is in the body questionless it may act without them or independently of
Christ as offered vpon the Cross is a general fountain of graces and pardons and the foundation of the sacrifices of the old as well as of the new Testament wherof they all were but types or figures therfore that Diuine and bloudy sacrifice of the Cross can not be so peculiarly attributed to the law of grace as to be called the proper sacrifice of the Christian and Catholik Church Q. Is not the sacrifice of the Cross and the sacrifice of the Mass the same sacrifice A. They differ not in the substance because the same Christ is offerd in both and Christ himself is the chief Priest in Both. But they differ in the manner for in the sacrifice of the Mass Christ is offered vnder the species or appearance of bread and wine and in the Cross he was offered in his own shape Q. If the substance of the sacrifice be the same what need is there of that of the Mass is it not sufficient that Christ offered himself vpon the Cross once for all A. It is a general rule grounded vpon reason and the concurrence or custom of all Nations which euer professed any Religion that euery particular Religion must haue its sacrifice peculiar to itself because Religion being Diuine worship and sacrifice being an action professing the Diuinity of that which is worshipt it inuolues a contradiction to say Religion and no sacrifice or to say that a religion can continue and the sacrifice therof not continue Seing therfore the Christian and Catholik Religion doth continue and that the bloudy sacrifice of the Cross or Christs passion doth not continue the sacrifice of the Cross can not be the proper and peculiar sacrifice of the Christian Religion and Catholik Church Q. It is not sufficient that the effects of the sacrifice of the Cross continue in the Church though Christ suffered but once for the cause may be sayd to continue in its effects A. It can not be properly sayd that the cause continues in its effects Otherwise it might be properly sayd that the Priestood and sacrifice of Noe after the deluge chap. 8. Gen doth yet continue because the effect therof viz. the assurance of not suffering an other deluge doth and will continue vntill the end of the world Q. If all the sins of the world be pardoned or at least be sufficiently satisfied for by the sacrifice of the Cross what vse is there for the sacrifice of the Mass or how can it be a propitiatory sacrifice in virtue wherof sins are pardon'd and satisfied for A. It is not against the sufficiency or infinitness of the sacrifice of the Cross that sins be forguien and satisfied for by the sacrifice of the Mass not only because the same Christ is offered in both sacrifices but because the sacrifice of the Mass is a commemoration of that of the Cross and doth apply the sufficiency of the same to the pardon of particular sins that were not committed before Christs passion as we say of Baptism and other Sacraments And if the sacrifices of the old testament were propitiatory in virtue of Christs passion before he came to the world there can be no ground to deny that the sacrifice of the Mass is a Propitiatory sacrifice in virtue of the same passion after that he sufferd CHAP. IV. OF THE CHVRCH OF GOD and of Diuine faith Q. Though I know that they who worship God as he commands are his Church yet there being so many Congregations of Christians pretending themselues alone to be those worshipers and the true Church or at least a part therof I would willingly know whether there be any certain and cleer signes wherby the true Church and its members may be discerned from all false and heretical Congregations and what signes these are I am satisfied that any two or more Congregations dissenting in any doctrin can not constitute that Catholik Church out of which there is no saluation because such Congregations can not haue either vnity or verity in that doctrin wherin they disagree and by consequence seing God who is truth itself and infinitly auers from falsood can no more countenance or confirm with supernatural signs the least than the greatest falsood that Church or Churches which propose contradictory Tenets whether fundamental or not fundamental can no more be the Catholik or part therof than God can forfeit his veracity or incline and oblige men to belieue contradictory points wherof one must needs be false A. That there are certain and cleer signes wherby the true Catholik Church of God may be discerned from all false and heretical Congregations is as euident as Gods veracity and his inclination to truth or as it is that God did not institute a Church wherin there could be no peace concord or order but all must haue bin disorder confusion and dissention For if the testimony of euery of those Congregations were as credible by supernatural signs of their being the true Church as they are confident in their pretentions of being so the most learned and prudent men might liue and dye safely in the state of perplexity and all the world at best must haue bin seekers or sceptiks and there being no reason in such a case to belieue why rather one sect than an other should be the true Church Therfore God being the Author of truth peace order and vnity his Church can not be a Congregation of dissenting or perplexed people changing from one faith to an other for want oâ— discernable and supernatural signes which none but the true Church ought to haue to the end all men may find it out and therby be directed to embrace the true Diuine worship and doctrin These signes must be supernatural that is signes aboue the sphere and power of natural causes at least they must seem so not only to the vulgar people but to the wisest men and greatest Doctors after a diligent scrutiny and mature consideration of all causes and circumstances because they must be such as produce in us an euident obligation of belieuing that God alone is the Author of the Doctrin proposed as Diuine and that he hath authorised that Church to propose the same The signs must not only be obseruable but obuious to euery vulgar comprehension and perceptible euen by our senses The reason is because many of the mysteries which are to be belieued with Diuine faith exceed human capacity and therfore as well the learned as the ignorant are to be instructed therin by the Church and must take its testimony for a sufficient proof of their obligation to belieue without doubting that God reuealed those things which it proposeth in his name and they can not comprehend though they be credibly reuealed Now to belieue that things so difficult as many mysteries which the Church proposeth are true and reuealed by God and that any man or Congregation of men is authorised by his Diuine authority to propose and press such things vpon our vnderstandings this belief I say can not
in ouercoming this last great difficulty consists chiefly the supernaturality which is most peculiar to the act of Faith Heretiks therfore may be conuicted of obstinacy and heresy though they do not cleerly see nor we euidently conclude by tradition or any thing else that God reuealed what they deny or doubt of and the Church proposeth as reuealed by him For heresy doth not consist in an impossibility but it would be one if it were requisit that learned heretiks be obstinat against a cleer and conclusiue euidence of God hauing reuealed what they deny or doubt of How can any passion or pride blind a learned heretik if it depriues him not wholy of his wits and then he can not sin or be an heretik so far as to make him deny or doubt of what he sees euidently concluded God sayd or reuealed That were to deny God is God or the existence of a Deity A learned heretik therfore can not be better or more cleerly conuicted of heretical obstinacy than by our euidently concluding against him that he is obliged in conscience to auoyd the threatned danger of damnation if he doth not belieue the Church whose testimony is confirmed with Miracles to assent to that doctrin as Diuine which is deliuered by Catholik Tradition and confirmed by the motiues of credibility though it be not cleerly euident that its doctrin is Diuine or its tradition infallible More of this hereafter Now I will proue the euident obligation all men who are informed of our Faith haue to belieue the doctrin of the Roman Catholik Church as Diuine as also how they are obliged in conscience to inform themselues therof CHAP. V. HOVV THE MIRACLES OF THE Roman Church euidently conuict all its Aduersaries of damnable obstinacy and hovv a credible report of them obligeth all men to inform themselues of those miracles and doctrin confirmed by them and that of all Christian Congregations the Roman Catholik alone is the true Catholik Church Q. Supposing the Catholik Church can not be composed of all or any two Congregations dissenting in the least point of doctrin as hath bin proued in the precedent Chapter I desire to know which of them all is that one true Catholik Church we ought to belieue according to that article of the Apostles Creed I belieue in the holy Catholik Church and out of which there is no saluation A. You know the true Catholik Church is only that Congregation of Christians which hath the signs Christ sayd Marc. 16. should follow the true belieuers and that those signes are the casting out of Deuills not by coniuring but in the name of Christ the gift of tongues the conuersion of Nations to Christianity the curing of diseases raising of the dead and other supernatural marks of Gods trust and truth committed only to the ministery of that Church and by which marks iâ— must be discerned from all false Congregations pretending to be either the whole or a part of the Catholik Church Q. Out of your discourse I gather that all the markes of the true Catholik Church are reduced to miracles because supernatural sanctity the conuersion of Nations to Christianity the gift of profecy c. are as great miracles as the casting out of Deuills curing diseases raising the dead and the gift of tongues But it is a common saying among Protestants that miracles are ceased in the Church and som Catholiks grant they are so few and wrought in those remote regions of Iapan and China that you can hardly meet with one who did euer see a miracle How therfore can miracles be the marks wherby euery man may be directed to know the true Catholik Church if few or none see them A. I grant that all the marks of the Catholik Church must be miraculous otherwise they were not fit motiues for prudent men to submit their iudgments to the testimony or ministery of that Church as to the Church of God But miracles are not ceased nor confind to those remote regions of Iapan and China There is not a Catholik Nation in the world which doth not shew som things at least so like supernatural miracles that as wise and wary men as any in Christendom belieue them to be so And such Protestants as pretend they are not can not with any probability shew that the matter of fact is false or that the manner of working them is fraudulent or natural seing therfore Christ himself assures vs that supernatural miracles shall follow the true belieuers and that vntill the end of the world there will be true belieuers and by consequence a Catholik Church we are bound in conscience to belieue that only is the true Church wherin we see or at least heare credibly reported there are true miracles or things so like true miracles that as wise and as wary men as any in the world after a seuere scrutiny and serious study mistake them for true miracles notwithstanding they know that vpon their not being mistaken in so important a matter doth depend their euerlasting happiness or misery Dr Dovvnham in hiâ— Treatise of Antichrist l. 1. c. 9. pag. 111. saith neither Turks nor Ievves nor any other Churches of Christians but only the Pope and Church of Rome do vaunt of miracles Q. Is there but one Congregation of Christians that pretends to such miracles A. No. Q. Vvhich is that A. The Roman Catholik Q. If all other Christian Congregations be against the Roman Catholik and that in euery Christian Congregation there be as wise and wary men and as willing to be saued as any Roman Catholiks why should any man be bound in conscience to belieue the Roman Catholik miracles are true when as great or a greater number of wise and learned men do maintain they are not true miracles A. Vvhen learned parties agree in the fact of an accident so extraordinary that no natural cause therof after diligent scarch can be knowen but seemes to be aboue the power of all natural causes and human industry doubtless the party which belieues the fact to be supernatural or a miracle deserues to be credited before all which contradict the same and can giue no good reason for their contradiction 1. Because in som Christian Congregation or other there must be true miracles otherwise Christs words Marc. 16. can not be verified And seing no other Christian Congregation but the Roman Catholik pretends at least vpon so publik and probable grounds to haue true miracles the Roman Catholik is to be credited in this point before all others 2. It is not consistent with Gods infinit veracity to permit so publik and probable an appearance of true miracles for confirming falsood as the appearance of miracles in the Roman Catholik Church is For that veracity is an inclination to truth and an auersion from falsood and by consequence the Diuine veracity being infinit inuolues an infinit auersion from falsood But an infinit auersion from falsood is not consistent with Gods permission of so probable
and plausible an appearance of true miracles to confirm any false doctrin as we see in the Roman Catholik Church Therfore if the miracles of the Roman Catholik Church be not true Gods infinit veracity as also his goodness and prouidence may be questioned This may be explained to the vulgar sort by a similitude Suppose there were in som shire or town of England or Scotland a company of men acting in the Kings name as his priuy or great Councell with all the formes and formalities therof as a Lord Chancellor or Commissioner Tresurer Secretaries members of Parliament Clerks c. and that a considerable part of the Nation obeyed their orders and commands as men authorised by the King who is not ignorant of these publik proceedings and by consequence can not be rationaly thought auerse but rather seem to approue of them especialy if he be able without danger of disturbance to hinder and humble this pretended Councell by declaring them to be but a counterfeit Assembly of Cheats and Rebells and by punishing them accordingly A King I say that might hinder such a counterfeit Parliament or Councell from abusing himself and his subiects by so seeming a legal authority and yet would not can not be thought to haue any truth goodness or iustice because by his conniuance at those impostures which he might haue discouerd without trouble or inconueniencies he doth countenance and confirm that Councell as commissioned by himself This may be easily and aptly applied to the Roman Catholik Church which is inuested with so many miraculous marks of Gods authority and therfore doth act by a warant so seemingly Diuine that Gods bare permission of such a cheat as Protestants suppose the Roman Catholik Church to be would conclude his want of prouidence goodness and veracity and by consequence there can be no excuse or rational hopes of saluation for Protestants or any others that will not submit their iudgment to a Church and doctrin so publikly commissioned and confirmed by Gods great seal Miracles as yet shall more particularly appeare in the ensuing sections SECT I. VVHETHER THE CREDIBLE and constant report there is of true miracles vvrought in the Roman Catholik Church be a sufficient euidence to conuict of damnable obstinacy and heresy such as stight them or vvill not heare of them Q. Is it then vpon this ground of not belieuing the Roman Catholik miracles which are recounted by the ancient Fathers or others Roman Catholiks say that we Protestants are obstinat heretiks and that such of vs as dye not members of your Church are damned Is not this a foolish and vncharitable opinion A. One of the grounds of that censure is the Definition of Heresy which is an error in the understanding and obstinacy in the vvill against any truth or authority that is sufficienly proposed as Diuine Now the great appearance and moral euidence there is of the Roman Catholik Church together with its tradition doth sufficiently propose or declare its doctrine and authority to be Diuine For though it be not demonstratiuely euident that the Roman Catholik miracles are true miracles nor that its tradition and testimony is infallible yet it is moraly euident and by consequence sufficiently euident that its doctrin is Diuine and that God is Author of the same it being confirmed by such Miracles and that by them he doth authorise that Church as Princes do their officers by letters patents under their great seale Miracles being the great seale wherwith Gods Ministery and doctrin is made authentik Q. Vvhat is moral euidence of a miracle A. Moral euidence of a miracle is so credible and so constant a report therof that to deny or doubt of the fact reported argues imprudence in the dissenter and renders his caution of not belieuing both rash and ridiculous because it destroyes at least all historical and human Faith Q. May not a man belieue History and rely vpon human authority though he belieues not the stories of the most authentik Roman Catholik miracles A. No if he discourseth consequently and according to the rules of reason wherof one principal is that the same cause produceth the same effects and the same authority the same assent or belief If therfore the same ancient Fathers or Authors vpon whose testimony or tradition you rely for belieuing a miracle of Christian religion in genral or of the Trinity or Incarnation in particular recount the like miracles of Transubstantiation prayer to Saints or Purgatory you are rash and irrational in contemning that same authority which you credited in as difficult a subiect and as much aboue your comprehension for you ought to belieue both the miracles and mysteries or neither Q. Is moral euidence of true miracles sufficient to conuict of damnable obstinacy and heresy all such as slight that euidence and will not examin the grounds and effects therof A. Yes The reason is 1. because they are a sufficient euidence that the doctrin confirmed by them is Diuine 2. because Christs miracles were only moraly not demonstratiuely euident as miracles for if they had bin demonstratiuely euident as such none of the Iewes could deny them to be Diuine or could think they were wrought by the power of Beelzebub And though it was but moraly euident that Christs miracles were true miracles yet that moral euidence was sufficient to conuict the incredulous Iewes of damnable obstinacy and heresy Q. I desire to Know what it is you call damnable obstinacy A. Damnable obstinacy is a setled resolution of remaining in your own opinion of religion or a neglect of inquiring into the grounds of any other notwithstanding the prudent doubts you haue or would haue had if you had not bin carless of being saued in the way wherin you haue bin educated or made choice of Q. I do agree with you that if one doubts of the truth of his own religion he will be damnd unless he inquires into it or som other untill he doth what he can to be satisfied but I can not be persuaded that a man is bound to doubt of that religion wherin he hath bin bred because he heares of miracles wrought in an other unless his own be so absurd or inconsequent that he must doubt of its truth whether he will or no. A. There are two sorts of doubts 1. is a doubt which occurrs to ourselues by our own observation 2. is a doubt not started by ourselues but by som other more learned in matters of religion and as much to be credited and as litle to be suspected of hauing any design but our saluation in our change of opinion as he whom we most confide in Doubts of our own obseruation are very ordinary being grounded vpon the most obuious occurrences as a publik change of Religion either vpon the score of conscience or interest this last is as suspicious euen to the dullest comprehensions as the other is edifying Not only the change into a thriuing religion but constancy in a persecuted one doth
that they can be saued by Protestancy Q. I see you are of opinion that no Protestant at all can be saued Vvhat Can none of them haue inuincible ignorance Is there so cleer and obuious an euidence of the Roman Catholik being the true Church that none can pretend nor plead ignorance of that truth A. That out of the true Church there is no saluation is a maxim of Faith wherin the holy Fathers agree That the same Church is so visible and preferable before all others that euen the most stupid may as easily see it as a Citty vpon a mountain and therfore are commanded to repair to it is manifest in Scripture That the Roman Catholik hath those cleer marks of Gods fauor which persuade the most scrupulous it is the true Church of God hath bin in the 4. Chapter demonstrated by us and appeareth by those supernatural signs of miracles sanctity conuersion of Nations to Christianity c. which shine in it and haue set it out so gloriously in all ages and places of the world since the preaching of the Apostles That in England there is any corner or person wherin common sense can be so burried or curiosity so dead as to be ignorant of these things and others deliuered by tradition from age to age and year to year is not credible But in case there be any Protestant so neer a beast as not to reflect vpon any thing he sees or heareth of his own or of our Religion his Baptisme will saue him if he did not loose by a mortal sin the grace which he receiued in and by that Sacrament And this is all the comfort I can giue my Protestant friends whose saluation I more heartily wish than those do who delude them with larger opinions Q. This is but very cold comfort Vvill not God grant to som poor ignorant Protestant an act of contrition at least in the last hour A. I think not But if he doth to any it is to som of those stupid Creatures I last spoke of As for others who haue wit and wayes to consider and reflect vpon those doubts which occurr to themselues or are raised in them by the discourse of others their obstinacy or affected ignorance in not listening or inquiring into a matter so important and so easily resolued makes them incapable of so great a fauor as an act of contrition And as for those ernest or bigot Protestants they are in greatest danger of any and furthest from contrition because hauing a cleerer Knowledge of their own religion and spending much time in the meditation therof they must needs haue great doubts if they do not stifle them in their first birth by diuerting their thoughts to more pleasing obiects and by auoyding all occasions of discoursing of protestancy as commonly they do especialy when they perceiue there is any likelihood of laying open the weakness of its principles and the wickedness of the first Reformers Besides an act of contrition inuolues Faith hope and charity and these Protestants not hauing Faith but rather an auersion against hearing of it are not in a disposition fit for contrition which is the greatest grace God doth to his most eminent seruants and the Saints of his own Church Q. Methinks this is very hard I can not as yet comprehend why a deuout Protestant may not be capable of an act of contrition Is protestancy so abominable in the sight of God that he will not turn his mercifull eye towards Protestants Is it wors than other great sins which God doth pardon Is it heresy And if it be may not an heretik haue an act of contrition Is the malice of heresy so great as to exclude Gods mercy A. Vvithout doubt Heresy is the greatest of sins and yet excludes not Gods mercy but an Heretiks conuersion precedes contrition this not being compatible vvith heresy I vvill briefly tell you vvherin consists the malice of heresy and leaue yourself to iudge vvhether protestancy be Heresy The malice of Heresy consists in the contempt of Gods veracity And Gods veracity consists in an infinit inclination to truth An infinit inclination to truth is not consistent vvith a permission of falsood credibly fathered and fastned upon him that permits it if he can easily hinder the same Now the malice of heresy consists in hauing so mean an opinion of Gods veracity or of his inclination to truth that he vvould permit a Church so credibly pretending to be his own as the Roman Catholik doth by its miracles its sanctity its conuersion of Nations to Christianity and other supernatural marks to impose upon the vvorld in his name for so many ages false doctrin for true vvheras it vvas in his power euery moment of all that time to discouer and declare the cheat and disown the doctrin And yet he did not either That our miracles father our doctrin upon God is easily proued for though the first Protestant Reformers and their successors cry out against som of our miracles as false yet they are forc't to confess som of them are true and vve joyn with them in censuring false miracles as such and punish them who feign them as Malefactors Against our conuersion of Nations to Christianity a confessed mark of the true Church they haue nothing to say and as litle against the succession and sanctity of our Doctrin and Doctors Notwithstanding this credible and indeed conuincing appearance of our miracles and of the Roman Catholik Church being the true one commissioned by God to instruct his people yet the Protestants will not belieue it nor submit their iudgments to so authentik an authority nor hearken to the Diuine voice manifesting itself by the cleerest signs and euidence that is consistent with the freedom merit and obscurity of Christian Faith Vvhether this obstinacy be not heresy let the Protestants themselues iudge and examin whether to slight the testimony and signs of such a Church be not a contempt of Gods veracity as supposing he can permit falsood to be so plausibly fatherd upon him as wee see the Roman Catholik doctrin hath bin for so many ages and throughout all parts of the world CHAP. VII OF THE MINISTERY OF THE Church and of the nullity of that of England AS it is necessary that Gods Church should haue visible signs wherby it may be discerned from all heretical Congregations so it is acknowledged that in the same there is a Ministery caracterised with such publik ceremonies and authentik testimonies that there can be no danger of counterfeiting a mission or vocation so sacred In the Christian Church the Ministers are called Bishops and Priests Both are consecrated by a real imposition of Episcopal hands and other ceremonies which haue bin practised in the Church euer since the Apostles from whom by a continual succession the Episcopal caracter must descend and be proued otherwise no credit is to be giuen to any persons claiming to be Bishops of whose ordination Priestood dependeth It was the misfortune of the
be no excuse before that dreadfull Iudge who takes no other euidence but that of our own conscience This only we must consult in matters of Eternity and not think that a Clergy or Religion established by a temporal law is lawfull though it should be called legal by an Act of Parlament Q. Sir I haue seen the Registers of Lambeth you would haue me suspect as forged I assure you I see no sign of forgery in them And as for Bishop Iuels not answering Doctor Harding demand concerning the first Protestant Bishops and particularly Parkers Consecrator perhaps he thought it an idle question and underualued so weak an obiection A. Forged Registers are often the most formal all counterfeit ware standing in need of being set forth with great artifice Vve haue seen Registers and Records of publik Courts of Iudicature so artificialy changed and corrupted that nothing but their not being produced many years before when they were called for could conclude the forgery Doctor Harding called for the Registers of the first protestant Bishops Consecration as well as for the Consecraters name Neither did B. Iuel contemn this demand as you imagin He went as far in the answer as he durst He answered 1. that the first protestant Bishops in the beginning of Queen Elizabeths reign were consecrated in due form by Archbishop Parker their Metropolitan But being again pressed by Harding to name Parkers Consecrator he put off that impertinent question wherof the whole controuersy and the credit of the Church of England depended by a wild digression and long discourse of the ancient Bishops being consecrated without aquainting the Pope But sure Mr Iuel might aquaint Doctor Harding with the name of him who consecrated Parker as well as he named Parker for Consecrator of the other Bishops and certainly would if Parker himself had bin realy consecrated by a Bishop If you do not belieue my relation read Doctor Hargings bookes against Iuel and Iuels own Apology for the Church of England where they treat of this particular Q. Gentlemen I would to God you did agree among yourselues and not break the Layties heads with your disputes You haue put so many doubts into mine that I can hardly belieue any thing On both sides you seem to bee honest and learned men therfore I think my best way is to continue in the Church of England and trust in God that I shall not be damn'd for not being of that of Rome untill I be better satisfied that the points wherin it differs from ours are necessary for saluation And this requiring longer time the particulars being so many than I am like to liue t' is not credible God would oblige me or any other illiterat person to spend our dayes rather in controuersies than in prayer and good works and in the end be as litle satisfied with ourselues as our and your Clergy are with one an other Yourselues grant that implicit Faith is sufficient for such ignorant people as I am that Faith I am sure I haue for I do belieue all that God reuealed though I do not know what it is he reuealed or whether he hath apointed the Church of Rome rather than that of England to instruct the world and inform us of his reuelations And truly I belieue a man may be saued without troubling himself to know which of them it is that God hath apointed for our instruction prouided we be redy to be members therof when that shall be made cleer to us by better arguments than I am able to inquire after A. This is so dangerous doctrin that I iudge it worth my pains to shew yet further the obligation the most illiterat men haue to search after the true Church and how easiâ—y they may find it out by visible signs and how you may without any help but that of common sense be satisfied of the truth of euery particular point of doctrin wherin Roman Catholiks differ from Protestants And all this in the space of less than two houres time Q. Nay Sir if you perform your undertaking I deserue to be damn'd for all Eeternity if I will nor hear you for so short a time as two hours I pray Sir proceed CHAP. VIII HOVV EVERY ILLITERAT PERSON may easily and in the space of two houres find out the true Church and the truth of euery point of doctrin controuerted betvveen Catholiks and Protestants VVHen the people of Israel were most diuided in matters of Religion 3. Reg. 8. the Prophet Elias made a motion to them of cleering the truth by that famous dogmatical Miracle of burning an Ox upon the Altar without kindling the fire under it This cleer and compendious way was hugely approued of by the multitude as suting best with their capacities for they needed not learning to dispute their eyes were sufficient Iudges and they had so much common sense as to know that God would not permit a falsood to be confirmd by a miracle in so publik a trial wherin his Veracity was so particularly concerned The Prophets therfore of Baal durst not refuse so fair an offer as Elias made in their presence and I hope the Protestant Clergy will be ashamed to refuse mine Let us not delude the people with school subtilities or obscure texts of scripture If the Church of England or Scotland or any other reformed one be the true Church and its doctrin the true doctrin let that be tried by miracles I shall try ours of Rome by that test I challenge then all the Bishops and Ministers of the Church of England and all others of the Reformation or all the Protestants of the world to work or mention any one miracle euer yet wrought by any Protestant to confirm any one point of doctrin wherin they differ from the Roman Catholik Gentlemen summon your Sinods search into all histories profane and sacred set your heads together and produce at least som probable testimony of as much as one miracle to grace your Reformations And if you can not find undoubted miracles at least shew som thing that lookes like a miracle som thing that may be mistaken for one wherof the falsood or fraud hath not bin as yet discoured such as you say many of ours are Perhaps you will pretend that your Protestants are not so easily foold with false miracles as our Roman Catholiks But this must be a gift and priuilege of your priuat spirit for the Spaniards Italians and French are not by nature so dull as our Northen Protestants and are as loath to be cheated out of their moneys by Masses Miracles Pilgrimages and other pretexts of deuotion as you are And yet they belieue such Miracles as haue bin motiues for the Popes or people to Canonize our Saints and those also wherby Heathens and heretiks haue bin conuerted to our Religion Q. I doubt not Sir but that the Catholiks are as unlikely and loath to be imposed vpon as Protestants therfore I would fain heare som of those undeniable miracles
broacht by the VValdenses S. Bern. Ep. 241. ad Tolos saith vve thank God for that our comming to you vvas not in uain our stay indeed vvas short vvith you but not nnfruitfull the truth being by us made manifest non solū in Sermone sed etiam in vi tute not only by preaching but also by povver of vvorking Miracles the Vvolues are deprended Apostolici Henricians and others These two last Sects had infected a great part of France especialy about Tolouse their chief errors vvere against Transubstantiation Prayers to Saints and the same vvhich Protestants hold in our dayes and we haue mentioned in the title of this Chapter The Pope sent a Legat and St Bernard to confute them In this Mission amongst innumerable others he vvrought the ensuing Miracle not only vvritten by his Disciple Godifridus who was an eye witness ther of but recorded in the other Histories of that time and insinuated by St Bernard himself in his 241. Epistle to the people of Tolouse to the end they might be constant in the manifest doctrin vvhich he had preacht against the Henricians vvhom Protestants challenge as members and Martyrs of the Protestant Church as euery one may see in their Catalogue of the vvitnesses of truth printed 1597. and in M. Symondes upon the Reuelations pag. 142. and 143. The Miracle is recounted by Godefridus invitâ Bern. l. 3. c. 5. and by others of the same time as followeth There is a place in the Country of Tolosa called Sarlatum vvhere after the Sermon vvas don they offerd to he seruant of God as euery vvhere the use vvas many loaues to bless vvihich he lifting up his hand and making the sign of the Cross in Gods name blessing sayd thus In this you shall Knovv that these things are true vvhich vvee and that those other are false vvhich the heretiks labor to persuade you that vvhosoeuer they be of your diseased persons that tast the loaues they shall be healed to the end you may Knovv us to be the true Minister of God The Bishop of Chartres a great friend to the Saint thinking this proposition too general told the people they vvere to understand it conditionaly so they did cate of the loaues vvith Faith St Bernard sudenly replied My Lord I do not mean so my meaning and saying is that all sick folks vvho vvill eat of those loaues shall recouer their health to the end it may be Knovven vve are Gods true Ministers And acordingly it fell out not one diseased person that did eat of the bread mist of being eured and the Miracle being thus diuulged by its effects so huge a multitude of people came to thank and admire the Saint that he declined the common roads and vvent by by wayes to Tolouse vvhere at the instance of the Catholiks and to further confute the aforesaid hetesies against Transubstantiation Mass Purgatory prayer to Saints vvorship of Images c. he vvith giuing his benediction to a paralitik priest that lay a dying in the College of St Saturnin restored him to so perfect health that the Priest vvho also vvas called Bernard sudenly rose out of his bed vvhere he had bin immoueable a long time followed the Saint and begd of him to be admitted into the number of his Monks vvhich vvas granted and afterwards liued amongst them very religiously and vvas at length Abot of Valdeau Vvith these Miracles the heretiks vvere confounded and so many conuerted that their seducer Henricus hid himself and finding no refuge among those who formerly had followed him he was taken prisoner and presented in chains before the Bishop Q. If God wrought such Miracles as these for the conuersion of the Henricians and other heretiks as you call them of that age why may not we Protestants expect that he will do the same for our conuersion if we be in errors I am sure we desire to saue our Souls And certainly God is as willing to saue us as any others I wish we could see such Miracles wrought by any Bernard or other Saint Vve should soon be Papists A. One of the reasons vvhy God doth not vvork now such Miracles for the conuersion of Protestants is because he hath vvrought them for the Henricians For the same errors against Transubstantiation Mass Prayer to Saints Vvorship of Images c. being common to both sects the same Miracles confute both equaly and may now conuince Protestants as vvell as they did anciently the Henricians of heretical and damnable obstinacy And therfore it s not likely Protestants vvould becom Papists though they had seen an other St Bernard work the same Miracles to confirm the Roman Catholik Faith against Protestancy that in effect hauing bin don against it in the case of the Henricians I am the more apt to belieue the sight of such Prodigies vvould not conuert you because your Protestant Authors grant the matter of fact of St Bernards Miracles against the Henricias doctrin and of S. Dominik against the Albigēses Tenets wherin these also agreed vvith Protestants and only answer that they vvere Antichristian Miracles wrought by the Deuills power to confirm the Idolatry of the Mass and Images c. or at least they were feigned by idle Monks Take it in their own words See the Cēturists and Osiander in Epitom cent 9.10.11 pag. 213. The Miracles vvhich superstitious Monks relate are either feigned by themselues or vvrought by Satans enchantments and therfore ought to be enlisted amongst Antichrists Miracles because they vvere vvrought to confirm manifest Idolatry and to establish the vvicked vvorship of Images veneration of Reliques Inuocation of Saints sacrifice of Mass c. True it is that Osiander speaking of Saint Bernards Miracles Cent. 12. pag. 310. saith Not that I think St Bernard vvas a Magitian but that I think it probable Satan vvrought the Miracles vvherby the Saint himself and others vvere deceiued And this is the common answer all Protestants giue to our Miracles when they can not deny the fact nor discouer any fraud And certaintly they would giue now the same answer to the most euident and undeniable Miracles if any were wrought before theyr eyes Q. Am I who can not read or understand Latin and other languages wherin all this you say and quote is written bound to belieue the matter of fact and conform therunto my Faith Vvhat if a Protestant Minister or Bishop tells me all you say are lyes Vvhom must I belieue Or am I obliged under pain of damnation to suspect his sincerity and doctrin if he will not encounter you or any other who offers to make good vvhat you say by shewing the passages in the books themselues I confess I think I am Howeuer I pray tell me vvhat I ought to do in such a case A. You see how in less than two hours time you may know by your Bishops or Ministers carriage and courage in examining any plain book that relates Miracles and matter of fact vvhether the Protestant Religion be
reuelation But how is it possible that scrupulous and acute Wits or Doubters can assent to Gods reuealing the articles of Christianity or to any truth with greater assurance then there is appearance and euidence of the same Is not euidence and assurance or certainty the same thing in our intellectual assents At least are they not so connected with one an other that they can not be separated or one be greater then the other A. Any thing which is uery reasonable must be possible because reason can not lead to or approue of an impossibility How possible and feasible it is to assent with infallible assurance and the greatest certainty for so we must assent in matters of Faith with only moral euidence is cleer in the scriptures especialy Iohn 20. where Christ our Sauior reprehended St Thomas for not belieuing with the assurance and certainty of Diuine Faith the mystery of the Resurrection though he had but moral euidence for it the testimony of the Apostles not as yet confirmed in grace Christ also Marc. ult reproacht with obstinacy and incredulity against Faith the Apostles themselues for not being content with that sole moral euidence of the Resurrection which they had from the testimony of the three Maries and the two Disciples of Emaus And certainly Christ would not find fault with St Thomas or the Apostles for not doing an impossibility It s possible therfore to belieue by an assent of Faith with more assurance and certainty then there is appearance of the truth or euidence of the Reuelation I confess it is uery difficult to shew how this is don But if wee distinguish the assurance or certainty we haue of truth by seing the truth in itself from the assurance or certainty we haue therof by putting our trust in an other or relying upon his knowledge and integrity we shall find this point much more easy then hitherto hath appeard to most both Diuines and Philosophers The assurance and certainty of our intellectual assents which is produced by the sight either intellectual or sensual of the Truth itself inuolues cleer euidence therof But the assurance and certainty of the Truth which is an effect of the Trust and esteem we haue of an others Veracity integrity power and wisdom is so farr from including a cleer sight or euidence of the truth that it excludes it For Trust is no more consistent with our exacting the possession sight or cleer euidence of that vvherwith vve trust an other than it is vvith doubts cautions and suspitions of his integrity or power Vpon this notion and the true nature of Trust excluding sight or cleer euidence of the thing trusted is grounded that saying I le trust such a man no further than I see him that is I vvill not trust him at all This supposed We may easily comprehend how its possible to belieue or to assent by an act of our Christian Faith with more assurance then appearance or euidence either of the truth or of the Diuine Reuelation Because to belieue or to assent by an act of our Christian Faith is to trust God for his reuelation as well as for the truth reuealed for we belieue God did reueal the mystery and so we must trust him for the reuelation also But if we see the reuelation euidently applied to the mystery reuealed we can not trust him for either seing the truth of the mystery is inseparable and necessarily connected with Gods reuelation therof and we can not trust God for the truth of one of two things that vve know are necessarily connected unless vve trust him for both Therfore if the reuelation be cleerly euident to us by Tradition vve can not trust God for it nor for the truth of the mystery we know is necessarily connected therwith Hence doth follow 1. that seing vve can not trust God for the truth of the mystery reuealed unless vve trust him also for the reuelation vve can not belieue either or any thing the Catholik Church proposeth as matter of Faith if vve exact for that belief conclusiue and cleer euidence that God reuealed the same It followeth 2. That by exacting cleer or conclusiue euidence of the Reuelation to belieue the mystery or matter proposed by the Church we do not only mistrust Gods veracity and goodness but preferr the vvord and veracity of euery honest man before his as it is proposed to us by the Church For vvhen vve heare any honest man speak though vvee do not see the truth of his vvords nor any thing else necessarily connected vvith that truth yet vve belieue him and take his bare vvord for our assent and assurance of the truth But vve will not take Gods word deliuered to us by the Church unless vve see his reuelation which is necessarily connected with the truth of the mystery proposed And in this consists most of the obstinacy and malice of Heresy It followeth 3. That the obstinacy of Heresy is not alwayes grounded upon the passion or inclination of men to sensual pleasures and those nices which Christian Faith shocks and condemns but takes its rise also from the difficulty we find in assenting to any thing without euidence or in trusting euen God for the truth of things vvhich seem to be unlikely Christs Resurrection vvas a thing much desired by Saint Thomas and the Apostles and by consequence they vvere willing enough to belieue it And yet because they thought it an unlikely matter St Thomas vvould not belieue the other Apostles nor these the Disciples of Emaus and the three Maries vvhen they assured them Christ vvas resuscitated And this is the reason why there haue bin so many speculatiue heresies as that of the Arrians against Christs consubstantiality and that of the Greekes against the procession of the holy Ghost c. True it is that the Lutheran and other modern Heresies haue their principal source from sensual pleasures and lendness of life yet no liberty is more bewitching then that of opining euen in speculation and therfore the Church hath bin troubled with confuting many speculatiue heresies in former ages I conclude this Appendix with this aduertisment that many mistakes among Controuersors are occasioned by their not being vvell grounded in School Diuinity especialy in that part of it which treates of the Nature of Faith and Heresy Som confound the Motiues of Faith vvith the Motiues of Credibility as they do the euidence of these vvith that of the Diuine Reuelation and the euidence of this with that of our obligation to belieue it and fancy that the Authors who pretend to demonstrat Christianity or the truth of the Roman Catholik Religion intend to demonstrat God reuealed those mysteries and doctrin vvheras they go no further than to endeauor to demonstrat the reasonableness and obligation of belieuing the same by the euidence of the Motiues of credibility Some of late as Fisher Rushworth and others in England haue attempted to demonstrat or cleerly conclude the euidence of the Diuine reuelation by the certainty of the human Tradition of the Church and therupon ground the certainty of Diuine Faith As their zeal is to be commended so they are to be aduertised that the certainty of Faith must be supernatural and by consequence must haue a higher and more infallible Motiue than the euidence of human Tradition grounded upon that of our senses as all Diuines confess and euen these modern Authors seem to grant I heare a bold Spaniard went further and pretends that Christian Faith is science because the reuelation is euidently concluded from the Motiues of credibility Miracles c. and because St Paul sayes Scio cui credidi certus sum This is but a Spanish conceit Perhaps Saint Paul in his rapt to the third Heauen might haue euidence of the Diuine Reuelation But vve heare of no others that went so far to find out that knowledge I see there are Escobars and Dianas in speculatiue Theology as vvell as in Moral and I think speculatiue errors are more dangerous than large cases of conscience because these carry a certain horror and discredit a long vvith them but erroneous speculations if new seem to vulgar comprehensions especialy of the weaker sex to sauor of wit and many would fain seem witty upon any score euen in matters of Faith wherin the greatest wits must submit to authority and be commanded by the vvill piously affected and supernaturaly assisted to belieue more than we see or comprehend Yet the Spaniard is consequent enough in his error by saying Faith is science For if it be euident that whatsoeuer God reuealed is true and it be euident that God reuealed the Trinity or Transubstantiation it must needs be euident and by consequence Science that these mysteries are true and therfore no man who penetrats these termes can deny their Truth For my part I wish this opinion were true it would be a great ease to all Catholiks vvho find much difficulty in belieuing the articles of Faith So that the Authors and Abettors of Traditionary euidence haue this aduantage of their Aduersaries that we desire they may haue the better of us in this Dispute and if they haue not it must be want of Reason on their side not any preiudice or obstinacy on ours But vve haue this aduantage of them that we may with more ease conuince heretiks euen the wittiest of heresy and obstinacy than they can because its easier to demonstrat or euidently conclude that a man is bound to bilieue God reuealed a mystery of Faith than it is to demonstrat or euidently conclude he did actualy reueale it as it is easier to proue you are bound to belieue this man is your Father than that realy he is so And if we conclude euidently the first we convince the wittiest Diffenters or Disputers in the world of heresy and obstinacy if they do not submit their iudgments and belief to that of the Church