it but not Evident And therefore he is after forced to confesse That the soule somtimes assents not to the Miracles but in great timidity which cannot stand with cleere Evidence And after againe That the soule may renounce the Doctrine formerly confirmed by Miracles unlesse some inward and supernaturall Light be given c. And neither can this possibly stand with Evidence And therefore Bellarmine goes no farther then this Miracula esse sufficientia efficacia ad novam fidem persuadendam L. 4. de Notis Eccles. c. 14. §. 1. To induce and perswade but not to Convince And Thomas will not grant so much for he sayes expresly Miraculum non est sufficiens Causa inducens Fidem Quia videntium unum idem Miraculâ—… quidam credunt quidam non Tho. 2. 2. q. 6. A. 1. c. And Ambros. Catharin in Rom. 10. 15. is downe-right at Nulla fides est habenda signo Examinanda sunt c. Anastasius Nicanus Episcopus apud Baron ad An. 360. num 21 Non sunt necessaria signâ—… vera sidet c. Suarez defens Fidei Catho L. 1. c. 7. Nu. 3. Infallâ—…ble nor Inseparable Markes of Truth in Doctrine Not Infallible For they may be Marks of false Doctrine in the highest degree d Deut. 13. 1 2 3. 2. Thess. 2. 9. S. Marc. 13. 22. Deut. 13. Not proper and Inseparable For e Operatio Virtutum alteri datur 1. Cor. 12. 10. To one and another he saith not to al. Damonia fugare Mortuâ—…s suscitare c. dedit quibusdam Discipulis suis quibusdam non dedit That is to doe Miracles S. Aug. Serm. 22. de Verbis Apost 〈◊〉 5. all which wrote by Inspiration did not confirm their Doctrine by Miracles For we do not finde that David or Solomon with some other of the Prophets did any neither were any wrought by S. Iohn the Baptist †S. Ioh. 10. 41. S. Ioh. 10. So as Credible Signes they were and are still of as much forceto us as 't is possible for things on the credit of Relation to be For the Witnesses are many and such as spent their lives in making good the Truth which they saw But that the Workers of them were Divinely and Infallibilly inspired in that which they Preacht and writ was still to the †Here it may be observed how warily A. C. carries himselfe For when hee hath said That a cleare Râ—…lation was made to the Apostles which is most true And so the Apostles knew that which they taught simpliciter à priori most Demonstratively from the Prime Cause God himselfe Then hee addes p 51. I say cleare in attestante That is the Revelation of this Truth was cleare in the Apostles that witnessed it But to make it knowledge in the Auditors the same or like Revelation and as cleare must be made to them For they could have no other knowing Assurance Credible they might and had So A. C. is wary there but comes not home to the Businesse And so might have held his peace For the Question is not what cleare Evidence the Apostles had but what Evidence they had which heard them Hearers a matter of Faith and no more evident by the light of Humane Reason to men that lived in those Dayes then to us now For had that beene Demonstrated or beene cleare as Prime Principles are in its owne light both they and we had apprehended all the Mysteries of Divinity by Knowledge not by Faith But this is most apparent was not For had the Prophets or Apostles been ordered by God to make this Demonstratively or Intuitively by Discourse or vision appeare as cleare to their Auditors as to themselves it did that Whatsoever they taught was Divine and Infallible Truth all men which had the true use of Reason must have beene forced to yeeld to their Doctrine a Esay 53. 1. Esay could never have beene at Domine quis Lord who hath believed our Report Esay 53. Nor b Ier 20. 7. Ieremy at Domine factus sum Lord I am in derision daily Ier. 20. Nor could any of S. Pauls Auditors have mocked at him as some of them did * Acts 17. 32. And had Zedcchiah and the people seene it as clearely as Ieremy himselfe did that the word he spake was Gods word and Infallible Ierusalem for oughâ—… we know had not beene layd desolate by the Chaldean But because they could not see this by the way of knowledge and would not believe it by way of Faith they and that City perished together Jer. 38. 17. Act. 17. for Preaching the Resurrection if they had had as full a view as S. Paul himselfe had in the Assureance which God gave of it in and by the Resurrection of Christ. vers 31. But the way of Knowledge was not that which God thought fittest for mans Salvation For Man having sinned by Pride God thought fittest to humble him at the very root of the Tree of Knowledge and make him deny his understanding and submit to Faith or hazard his happinesse The Credible Object all the while that is the Mysteries of Religion and the Scripture which containes them is Divine and Infallible and so are the Pen-men of them by Revelation But we and all our Fore-Fathers the Hearers and Readers of them have neither * Nemo pius nisi qui Scripturae credit S. Aug. L. 26. cont Faustum c. 6. Now no Man believes the Scripture that doth not believe that it is the Word of God I say which doth not believe I doe not say which doth not know oportâ—…t quod Credatur Authoritati eorum quibus Revelatio facta est Tho p. 1. q. 1. A. 8. ad secundum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 C c. Quod vero Animam habemus unde manis stâ—…m Si enim Uisibilibus credere velâ—… de Deo de Angelis de mente de Anima dubitabis sic tibi omnia veritatis dogmata deperibunt Et certè si manifestis credere velis Invisibilibus magis quam Uisibilibus credere oportet Liâ—…et enim admirabile sit dictum verum tamâ—…n apud mentem habentes valde certum vel in confesso Ex homil 13 S Chryâ—…ost in S. Mat. To. 1. Edit Fronto Paris 1630. knowledge nor vision of the Prime Principles in or about them but * Faith only And the Revelation which was cleare to them is not so to us nor therefore the Prime Tradition it selfe delivered by them Sixthly That hence it may be gathered that Pun. 6. the Assent which we yeeld to this maine Principle of Divinity That the Scripture is the Word of God is grounded vpon no Compelling or Demonstrative Ratiocination but relyes upon the strength of Faith more then any other Principle whatsoever †And this is the Ground of that which I said before §. 15. Nu. 1. That the Scripture only and not any unwritten Tradition was the â—…oundation of our Faith Namely when the Authority of
Felicity and then leave him utterly destitute of all Instrumentall Helps to make the Attainment possible since * Deus natura nihil frustrà faciunt Arist. L. 1. de Coelo T. 32. frustra autem est quod non potest habere suum usuÌ„ Thom. ibid. God and Nature do nothing but for an end And Helpe there can bee none sufficient but by Revelation And once grant mee that Revelation is necessary and then I will appeale to Reason it selfe and that shall prove abundantly one of these two That either there was never any such Revelation of this kinde from the worlds beginning to this day And that will put the frustrà upon God in point of mans Felicitie Or that the Scriptures which wee now embrace as the Word of God is that Revelation And that 's it we Christians labour to make good against all Atheisme Prophanenesse and Infidelity Last of all To prove that the Booke of God which Pun. 8. we honour as His Word is this necessary Revelation of God and his Truth which must and is alone able to leade us in the way to our eternall Blessednesse or else the world hath none comes in a Cloud of witnesses Some for the Infidel and some for the Beleever Some for the VVeake in Faith and some for the Strong And some for all For then first comes in the Tradition of the Church the present Church so 't is no Hereticall or Schismaticall Beliefe Then the Testimony of former Ages so 't is no New Beliefe Then the consent of Times so 't is no Divided or partiall Beliefe Then the Harmony of the Prophets and them fulfilled so 't is not a * 2 Pet. 1. 16. Devised but a forespoken Beliefe Then the successe of the Doctrine contained in this Booke so 't is not a Beliefe stisted in the Cradle but it hath spread through the world in despite of what the world could doe against it And increased from weake and unlikely Beginnings to incredible Greatnesse Then the Constancy of this Truth so 't is no Moone-Beliefe For in the midst of the worlds Changes it hath preserved it's Creede entire through many generations Then that there is nothing Carnall in the Doctrine so 't is a Chast Beliefe And all along it hath gained kept and exercised more power upon the minds of men both learned and unlearned in the increase of vertue and repression of vice then any Morall Philosophie or Legall Policy that ever was Then comes the inward Light and Excellency of the Text it self and so 't is no darke or dazling Beliefe And 't is an Excellent Text For see the riches of Naturall knowledge which are stored up there as well as Supernaturall Consider how things quite above Reason consent with things Reasonable Weigh it well what Majesty lyes there hid under Humility a Quasi quidam fluvius est planus Altus in quo Agnus ambulet Elephas naâ—…et S. Greg. Prâ—…fat in Lib. Moralium c. 4. What Depth ther is with a Perspicuity unimitable What b In Lege Domini voluntas ejus Psa. 1. 2. Dulcior super mel favum Psa 18. 11. passim Delight it works in the Soule that is devoutely excercised in it how the c Multa dicuntur submissâ—…s humirepeÌ„tibus animis ut accommodatiùs per humana in Divina consurgant Multa etiam figuratè ut studiosa mens quaesitis exerceatur utiliùs uberiùs laetetur inventis S. Aug. de Mor. Ec. Cat. c. 17. Sed nihil sub spirituali sensu continetur Fidei necessarium quod Scriptura per Literalem sensum alicubi manifeste non tradat Tho. p. 1. q. 1. A. 10 ad 1. Sublimest wits finde in it enough to amaze them while the c simplest want not enough to direct them And then we shall not wonder if with the assistance of d Credimus c. sicut ob alia multa certiora Argumenta quà m est Testimonium Ecclesia tum propter hoe potissimum quòd Spiritus Sanctus nobis intùs has esse Dei voces persuadeat Whitaker Disput de Sa. Scrip. Controvers 1. q. 3. c. 8. Gods Spirit who alone workes Faith and Beliefe of the Scriptures and their Divine Authority as well as other Articles wee grow up into a most Infallible Assurance such an Assurance as hath made many lay downe their lives for this Truth such as that * Though an Angell from Heaven should Preach unto us another Gospell we would not believe Gal. 1. 8. Him or it No though wee should see as great and as many Miracles done over againe to disswade us from it as were at first to win the world to it To which firmnesse of Assent by the Operation of Gods Spirit the Will conferres as much or more strength then the Vnderstanding Clearenesse the whole Assent being an Act of Faith and not of Knowledge And therefore the Question should not have beene asked of mee by F. How I knew But vpon what Motives I did believe Scripture to bee the VVord of God And I would have him take heed lest hunting too close after a way of Knowledge hee loose the way of Faith and teach other men to loose it too So then the Way lyes thus as farre as it appeares Pun. 9. to me The Credit of Scripture to bee Divine Resolves finally into that Faith which wee have touching God Himselfe and in the same order For as that so this hath Three maine Grounds to which all other are Reducible The First is the Tradition of the Church And this leades us to a Reverend perswasion of it The Second is The light of Nature And this shewes us how necessary such a Revealed Learning is and that no other way it can be had * Cum Fides infallibili veritati innitaâ—… Et ideo cum impossibile sit de vero demonstrari Contrarium sequitur omnes Probationes qua contra fidem inducuntur non posse esse Demonstrationes sed solubilia Argumenta Tho. p. 1. q. A. 1. 8. c. Nay more that all Proofes brought against any Point of Faith neither are nor can be Demonstrations but soluble Arguments The Third is The light of the Text it selfe in Conversing wherewith wee meet with the †Fidei ultima Resolutio est in Deum illuminantem S. Aug. cont Fund c. 14. Spirit of God inwardly inclining our hearts and sealeing the full Assurance of the sufficiency of all Three unto us And then and not before wee are certaine That the Scripture is the VVord of God both by Divine and by Infallible Proofe But our Certainty is by Faith and so voluntary not by Knowledge of such Principles as in the light of Nature can enforce Assent whether we will or no. I have said thus much upon this great Occasion because this Argument is so much pressed without due respect to Scripture And I have proceeded in a Syntheticall way to build up the Truth for the benefit of the Church
but his owne fiction For the most †Si demus errare non posse Ecclesiam in rebus ad salutem necessariis hic sensus noster est Idco hoc esse quia abdicatâ omni suâ sapientiâ à Spiritu Sancto doceri se per Uerbum Dei patitur Calv. L. 4. Inst c. 8. §. 13. And this also is our sense Uide sup §. 21. Nu. 5. Learned Protestants grant it But if he meane that the whole Church cannot Erre in any one Point of Divine Truth in generall which though by sundry Consequences deduced from the Principles is yet a Point of Faith and may proove dangerous to the Salvation of some which believe it and practise after it as his words seeme to import especially if in these the Church shall presume to determine without her proper Guide the Scripture as * Nostra sententia est Ecclesiam absolutè non posse errare nec in rebus absolutè necessariis nec in aliis quae credenda vel facienda nobis proponit sive habeantur expressè in Scripturis sive non Bellar. L. 3. dc Eccl. Mil. c. 14. §. 5. Bellarm. sayes She may and yet not Erre Then perhaps it may be said and without any wrong to the Catholike Church that the Whole Militant Church hath erred in such a Point of Divine Truth and of Faith Nay A. C. confesses expresly in his very next A. C. p. 58. words That the VVhole Church may at some time not know all Divine Truths which afterwards it may learne by study of Scripture and otherwise So then in A. C s. judgement the Whole Militant Church may at some time not know all Divine Truths Now that which knows not all must be ignorant of some and that which is ignorant of some may possibly erre in one Point or other The rather because he confesses the knowledge of it must be got by Learning and Learners may mistake and erre especially where the Lesson is Divine Truth out of Scripture out of Difficult Scripture For were it of plain and easie Scripture that he speakes the Whole Church could not at any time be without the knowledge of it And for ought I yet see the VVhole Church Militant hath no greater warrant against Not erring in then against Not knowing of the Points of Divine Truth For in S. Ioh. 16. S. Iohn 16. 13. There is as large a Promise to the Church of knowing all Points of Divine Truth as A. C. or any Iesuite can produce for Her Not erring in any And if She may be ignorant or mistaken in learning of any Point of Divine â—…ruth Doubtiesle in that state of Ignorance she may both Eâ—…re and teach her Error yea and teach that to be Divine Truth which is not Nay perhaps teach that as a Matter of Divine Truth which is contrary to Divine Truth Alwayes provided it be not in any Point simply Fundamentall of which the Whole Catholike Church cannot be Ignorant and in which it cannot Eire as hath * §. 21. Nu. 5. â—…efore beene prooved As for the Places of Scripture which A C. cites to proove that the Whâ—…l Church cannot Erre Generally in A. C p. 57. any one Point of Divine Truth be it Fundamentall or not they are known Places all of them and are alledged by A. C. three severall times in this short Tract and to three severall purposes Here to proove That A. C. p. 57. the Vniversall Church cannot erre Before this to prove A. C. p. 53. that the Tradition of the present Church cannot Erre After this to prove that the Pope cannot Erre He should A. C. p. 5. 73 have done well to have added these Places a fourth time to proove that Generall Councels cannot Erre For so doth both * Staple Relect. praef aâ—… Lâ—…ctoreÌ„ Stapleton and †Bellar. L. 2. de Concil c. 2. Bellarmine Sure A. C. and his fellowes are hard driven when they must fly to the same Places for such different purposes For A Pope may Erre where a Councell doth not And a Generall Councell may Erâ—…e where the Catholike Church cannot And therefore it is not likely that these Places should serve alike for all The first Place is Saint Matthew 16. There Christ told Saint Peter S. Mat. 16. 18. and we believe it most assuredly That Hell Gates shall never be able to prevaile against his Church But that is That they shall not prevaile to make the Church Catholike Apostatize and fall quite away from Christ or Erre in absolute 〈◊〉 which amounts to as much But the Promise reaches not to this that the Church shall never Erre no not in the lightest matters of Faith For it will not follow Hell Gates shall not prevaile against the Church Therefore Hellish Divells shall not tempt or assault and batter it And thus Saint a Pugnare potest Expugnari non potest S. Aug. L. de Symb. ad Catecum c. 6. Augustine understood the place It may fight yea and bee wounded too but it cannot be wholly overcome And Bellarmine himselfe applies it to proove * Bellar L. 3. de Eccl Milit. c. 13. §. 1. 2. That the Visible Church of Christ cannot deficere Erre so as quite to fall away Therefore in his judgement this is a true and a safe sense of this Text of Scripture But as for not Erring at all in any Point of Divine Truth and so making the Church absolutely Infallible that 's neither a true nor a safe sense of this Scripture And t is very remarkable that whereas this Text hath beene so much beaten upon by Writers of all sorts there is no one Father of the Church for twelve hundred yeares after Christ the Counterseit or Partiall Decretalls of some Popes excepted that ever concluded the Infallibility of the Church out of this Place but her Non deficiency that hath beene and is justly deduced hence And here I challenge A. C. and all that partie to shew the contrary if they can The next Place of Scripture is Saint Matthew 28. S. Mat. 28. 〈◊〉 The Promise of Christ that hee will bee with them to the end of the VVorld But this in the generall voyce of the * S Hil. in Psal. 124. Prosp. L. 2. de Vocat Gent. c. 2. Leo. Ser. 2. de Resur Dom. c. 3. Ep. 31. Isidor in Iosu. 12. Fathers of the Church is a promise of Assistance and Protection not of an Infallibility of the Church And †In omnibus quae Ministris suis commisit exequenda S. Leo. Epist. 91. c. 2. Pope Leo himself enlarges this presence and providence of Christ to all those things w ch he committed to the execution of his Ministers But no word of Infallibility is to be found there And indeed since Christ according to his Promise is present with his Ministers in all these things and that one and a Chiefe of these All is the preaching of his Word to the People
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is reproach or infamie So that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies the holding of the entire Faith in such holinesse of life and conversation as is without all infamy and reproach That is as our English renders that Creed exceeding well Which Faith unlesse a man do keep whole and * Sic Ecclesia dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eph. 5. 27. in veteri Glossario Immaculatus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 undefiled even with such a life as Momus himselfe shall not be able to carpe at So Athanasius who certainly was passing able to expresse himselfe in his owne language in the beginning of that his Creed requires That we keepe it entire without diminution and undefiled without blame And at the end that we believe it faithfully without wavering But Inviolate is the mistaken word of the old Interpreter and with no great knowledge made use of by A. C. And then fourthly though this be true Divinity that he which hopes for salvation must believe the whole Creed and in the right sense too if he be able to comprehend it yet I take the true and first meaning of Inviolate could Athanasius his word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 have signified so not to be the holding of the true sense but not to offer violence or a forced sense or meaning upon the Creed which every man doth not that yet believes it not in a true sense For not to believe the true sense of the Creed is one thing But 't is quite another to force a wrong sense upon it Fiftly a reason would be given also why A. C. is so earnest for the whole faith and bawkes the word which goes with it which is holy or undefiled For Athanasius doth alike exclude from salvation those which keepe not the Catholike Faith holy as well as these which keepe it not whole I doubt this was to spare many of his †§. 33. Nu. 6. holy Fathers the Popes who were as farre as any the very lewdest among men without exception from keeping the Catholike Faith holy Sixtly I agree to the next part of his Exposition That a man that will be saved must believe the whole Creed for the true formall reason of divine Revelation For upon the Truth of God thus revealed by himselfe lies the Infallible certainty of the Christian Faith But I do not grant that this is within the Compasse of S. Athanasius his word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor of the word Inviolate But in that respect 't is a meere straine of A. C. And then lastâ—…y though the whole Catholike Church be sufficient in applying this to us and our Beliefe not our Understanding which A. C. is at A. C. p. 70. againe yet Infallible She is not in the proposall of this Revelation to us by every of her Pastours Some whereof amongst you as well as others neglect or forget at least to feed Christ's sheepe as Christ and his Church hath fed them But now that A. C. hath taught us as you see the meaning of S. Athanasius in the next place he tels us A. C. p. 70. That if we did believe any one Article we finding the same formall Reason in all and applied sufficiently by the same meanes to all wou'd easily believe all Why surely we do not believe any one Article onely but all the Articles of the Christian Faith And we believe them for the same formall Reason in all namely Because they are revealed from and by God and sufficiently applied in his Word and by his Churches Ministration But so long as they do not believe all in this sort saith A. C. Looke you He A. C. p. 70. tels us we do not believe all when we professe we do Is this man become as God that he can better tell what we believe them we our selves Surely we do believe all and in that sort too Though I believe were S. Athanasius himselfe alive againe and a plaine man should come to him and tell him he believed his Creed in all and every particular he would admit him for a good Catholike Christian though he were not able to expresse to him the formall reason of that his beliefe Yea but saith A. C. while they will as all Heretickes doe make choice of what they will and what they A. C. p. 70. will not believe without relying upon the Infallible Authority of the Catholike Church they cannot have that one saving Faith in any one Article Why but whatsoever Hereticks doe we are not such nor do we so For they which believe all the Articles as once againe I tell you we do make no choice And we do relie upon the Infallible Authority of the Word of God and the whole Catholike Church And therefore we both can have and have that one saving Faith which believes all the Articles entirely though we cannot believe that any particular Church is infallible And yet againe A. C. will not thus be satisfied but on he goes and adds That although we believe the same A. C. p. 71. truth which other good Catholikes doe in some Articles yet not believing them for the same formall reason of Divine Revelation sufficiently applied by Infallible Church Authority c. we cannot be said to have one and the same Infallible and Divine Faith which other good Catholike Christians have who believe the Articles for this formall Reason sufficiently made knowne to them not by their owne fancy nor the fallible Authority of humane deductions but by the Infallible Authority of the Church of God If A. C. will still say the samething I must still give the same answer First he confesses we believe the same Truth in some Articles I pray marke his phrase the same Truth in some Articles with other good Catholike Christians so farre his pen hath told Truth against his will for he doth not I wot well intend to call us Catholikes and yet his pen being truer then himselfe hath let it fall For the word other cannot be so used as here it is but that we as well as they must be good Catholikes For he that shall say the old Romans were valiant as well as other men supposes the Romans to be valiant men And he that shall say The Protestants believe some Articles as well as other good Catholikes must in propriety of speech suppose them to be good Catholikes Secondly as we do believe those some Articles so do we believe them and all other Articles of Faith for the same formall reason and so applied as but just * §. 38. Nu. 13. before I have expressed Nor do we believe any one Article of Faith by our own fancy or by fallible Authority of humane deductions but next to the Infallible Authority of God's Word we are guided by his Church But then A. C. steps into a Conclusion whither we cannot A. C. p. 71. follow him For he sayes that the Articles to be believed must be sufficiently made
comes this short of Bâ—…asphemy to make the Trinity and Pâ—…y things alike and equally Credible Yea but A. C. will give you a Reason why no man may 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 much lesse deny any thing that A C. â—…7 is defiâ—…ed by a Generall Councell And his Reason is Because every such doubt and denyall is a breach from the one saving faith This is a very good reason if it bee true But how appeares it to be true How why it takes away saith A. C. Infallible credit from the Church and so the Divine Revelation being not sufficiently applyed it cannot according A. C. p. 71. to the ordinary course of Gods providence breed Infallible Beliefe in us VVhy but deliberately to douâ—…t and constantly to deny upon the grounds and in the manner * §. 38. N. 15. aforesaid doth not take away Infallible credit from the whole Church but onely from the Definition of a Generall Councell some way or other missed And that in things not absolutely Necessary to all mens salvation For of such things †Though every Thing Defined to bee a Divine Truth in Generall Councels is not absolutely necessary to bee expresly known and actually believed by all sorts c. A. C. p. 71. A. C. here speakes expresly Now to take away Infallible credit from some Definitions of Generall Councels in things not absolutely necessary to salvation is no breach upon the one saving faith which is necessary nor upon the Credit of the Catholike Church of Christ in things absolutely necessary for which onely it had Infallible Assistance promised So that no breach being made upon the faith nor no credit which ever it had being taken from the Church the Divine Revelation may bee and is as sufficiently applyed as ever it was and in the ordinary course of Gods providence may breed as Infallible beliefe in things necessary to salvation as ever it did But A. C. will proove his Reason before given and therefore hee askes us out of Saint Paul A. C. p. 71. Rom. 10. How shall men believe unlesse they heare How shall they heare without a Preacher And how shall they Rom. 10. 14. 15. preach to wit Infallibly unlesse they bee sent that is from God and infallibly assisted by his Spirit Here 's that which I have twise at least spoken to already namely That A. C. by this will make every Priest in the Church of Rome that hath Learning enough to preach and dissents not from that Church an Infallible Preacher which no Father of the Primitive Church did ever assume to himselfe nor the Church give him And yet the Fathers of the Primitive Church were sent and from God were assisted and by God and did sufficiently propose to men the Divine Revelation and did by it beget and breed up Faith saving Faith in the Soules of men Though * Aliâ—…s ab 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Se ripâ—… 〈◊〉 legâ—… 〈◊〉 saâ—…ctitate 〈◊〉 prapoâ—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ver 〈◊〉 pâ—…teÌ„ 〈◊〉 ipsi ita 〈◊〉 vel scripsâ—… Tho. 〈◊〉 q 1. A. 8. ad 2. Ex S. Aug. Ep. 19. Miâ—…i 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Demonstr 〈◊〉 accipias ex saâ—…ris Liâ—…eris S. Cyril 〈◊〉 Caâ—… 4. no one among them since the Apostles was an Infallible Preacher And A. C. should have done very well here to have made it manifest That this Scripture How shall they preach to wit Infallibly is so interpreted by Union Consent of Fathers and Definitions of Councels as hee a A. C. p. 70. bragged before that they use to interpret Scripture For I doe not finde How shall they Preach to wit †〈◊〉 Apostoli 〈◊〉 possunt intelligi ae Fide infusa illa 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Deocreata est non est ex 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 haec apertissimè colligitur ex Bâ—… 3. sent D. 23 q. 2. A. 2. Conclus 1. Ergo Fides acquisiea necessaria est â—…d sed prater Acquisitam Infusa etiam requiritur non solum propter Intentionem Act us sedetiam propter Assensum Certâ—…nern Quia non potest esse firmus Assensus à Fide acquisita Quia per cam nullus credit alicui nisi 〈◊〉 scit posse fâ—…lli fallers licet credâ—… cum non Uelle fallere Scotus in 3. sent D. 23. q. unica Therefore in the judgement of your owne Schoole your Preachers can both deceive and be deceived And therefore certainly are not Infallible And M. Canus very expresly makes this but an Introduction to Infallible faith Primum ergo id statno juxta Commâ—…em Legem aliqua exterior a humâ—…a inciâ—…â—…ta 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 esse 〈◊〉 ad Evangelii fidem 〈◊〉 Quomodo enim crâ—…nt ei quem non audierâ—…t c. Canus L. 2. de Lâ—…is c. 8. §. Primum ergo Et iterum St Fides infusa ita Fidei acquisitae niteretur tanquam suo fundamento ipsum Fundamentum Fiaâ—… nostra non esset Divina sed Humana Veritas Ibid § Cut tertium Therefore surely A. C. abâ—…ses this place of the Apostle very boldly Infallibly to bee the Comment of any one of the Fathers or any other approved Author And let him shew it if he can After this for I see the good man is troubled and forward and backward he goes he fals immediately A. C. p. 7â—… upon this Question If a whole generall Councell defining what is Divine Truth be not believed to be sent and assisted by Gods Spirit and consequently of Infallible Credit what man in the World can bee said to bee of Infallible Credit Well first A. C. hath very ill lucke in fitting his Conclusion to his Premises and his Consequent to his Antecedent And so 't is here with him For a Generall Councell may be assisted by God's Spirit and in a great measure too and in a greater then any private man not inspired and yet not consequently be of Inâ—… Credit for all assistance of God's Spirit reaches not up to Infallibility I hope the Ancient Bishops and Fathers of the Primitive Church were assisted by God's Spirit and in a plentifull measure too and yet A. C. himselfe will not say they were Infallible And secondly for the Question itselfe If a Generall Councell be not what man in the world can be said to be of Infallible Credit Truly I 'le make you a ready Answer No man Not the Pope himselfe No Let God and his word be true and every man a lyer Rom. 3. for so more or lesse every man will Rom. 3. 4. be found to be And this is neither dammage to the Church nor wrong to the person of any But then A. C. asks a shrewder Question then this If such a Councell lawfully called continued and confirmed A. C. p. 71. may erre in defining any one Divine Truth how can we be Infallibly certaine of any other Truth defined by it For if §. 10. N. 15. it may erre in one why not in another and another and so in all 'T is most true if such a Councell may erre in one it may
in another and another and so in all of like nature I say in all of like nature And A. C. may remember he expressed himselfe a little before to A. C. p. 71. speake of the Defining of such Divine Truths as are not absolutely necessary to be expresly knowne and actually believed of all sorts of men Now there is there can be no necessity of an Infallible certainty in the whole Catholike Church and much lesse in a Generall Councell of things not * §. 21. N. 5. absolutely necessary in themselves For Christ did not intend to leave an Infallible certainty in his Church to satisfie either Contentious or Curious or Presumptuous Spirits And therefore in things not Fundamentall not Necessary 't is no matter if Councels erre in one and another and a third the whole Church having power and meanes enough to see that no Councell erre in Necessary things and this is certainty enough for the Church to have or for Christians to expect especially since the Foundation is so strongly and so plainely laid downe in Scripture and the Creed that a modest man might justly wonder why any man should run to any later Councell at least for any Infallible certainty Yet A. C. hath more Questions to aske and his next is How we can according to the ordinary Course be A. C. p. 72. Infallibly assured that it erres in one and not in another when it equally by one and the same Authority defines both to be Divine Truth A. C. taking here upon him to defend M. Fisher the Jesuite could not but see what I had formerly written concerning this difficult Question about Generall Councels And to all that being large he replied little or nothing Now when he thinks that may be forgotten or as if it did not at all lie in his way he here turnes Questionist to disturbe that businesse and indeed the Church as much as he can But to this Question also I answer againe If any Generall-Councell doe now erre either it erres in things absolutely necessary to Salvation or in things not necessary If it erre in things Necessary we can be infallibly assured by the Scripture the Creeds the foure first Councels and the whole Church where it erres in one and not in another If it be in non necessariis in things not necessary 't is not requisite that we should have for them an infallible assurance As for that which followes it is notoriously both cunning and false 'T is false to suppose that a Generall Councell defining two things for Divine Truths and erring in one but not erring in another doth define both equally by one and the same Authority And 't is cunning because these words by the same Authority are equivocall and must be distinguished that the Truth which A. C. would hide may appeare Thus then suppose a Generall Councell erring in one point and not in another it doth define both and equally by the same delegated Authority which that Councell hath received from the Catholike Church But it doth not define both and much lesse equally by the same Authority of the Scripture which must be the Councels Rule as well as private mens no nor by the same Authority of the whole Catholike Church who did not intentionally give them equall power to define Truth and errour for Truth And I hope A C. dares not say the Scripture according to which all Councels that will uphold Divine Truth must Determine doth equally give either ground or power to define Errour and Truth To his former Questions A. C. adds That if we leave this to be examined by any private man this examination not being Infallible had need to be examined by another A. C p. 72. and this by another without end or ever comming to Infallible certainty necessarily required in that one faith which is necessary to salvation and to that peace and unity which ought to be in the Church Will this inculcating the same thing never be left I told the lesuite a §. 32. N. 5. §. 33. Consid. 7. Nu. 4. before that I give no way to any private man to be Iudge of a Generall Councell And there also I shewed the way how an erring Councell might be rectified and the peace of the Church either preserved or restored without lifting any private spirit above a Councell and without this processe in Infinitum which A. C. so much urges and which is so much declined in all b Arist. 1. Post Tex 6 4. Metaph T. 14. Sciences For as the understanding of a man must alwaies have somewhat to rest upon so must his Faith But a c §. 38 Nu. 〈◊〉 private man first for his owne satisfaction and after for the Churches if he have just cause may consider of and examine by the a Hic non loquimur de Decisione seu Determinatione Doctrinali quae ad unumquemque virum peritum spectare dignoscitur sed de Authoritativâ Iudiciali c la. Almain L. de Author Eccl. c. 10. princ Iudgement of discretion though not of power even the Definitions of a Generall Councell But A. C. concludes well That an Infallible certainty is necessary for that one Faith which is necessary to salvation And of that as I expressed b §. 38. Num. 1. before a most infallible certainty we have already in the Scripture the Creeds and the foure first Generall Councels to which for things Necessary and Fundamentall in the Faith we need no assistance from other Generall Councels And some of your c Sunt qui nescio quà ducti ratione sentiunt non esse opus Generali Concilio De Constantiensi loquitur dicentes omnia bene à Patribus nostris Ordinata ac Constituta modò ab omnibus legitimè fideliter servarentur Fatemur equidem id ipsum esse verissimum Tamen cùm nihil fere servetur c. Pet. de Aliaco L. de reformat Eccles. fine So that after-Councels are rather to Decree for Observance then to make any new Determinations of the Faith owne very honest and very Learned were of the same Opinion with me And for the peace and unity of the Church in things absolutely necessary we have the same infallible direction that wee have for Faith But in Things not necessary though they be Divine Truths also if about them Christian men doe differ 't is no more then they have done more or lesse in all Ages of the Church and they may differ and yet preserve the d Non omnis Error in his qua fidei sunt est aut Infidelitas aut Haeresis Holkot in 1. Sent. q. 1. ad 4. K. One necessary Faith and e Scimus quosdam quod semel imbiberint nolle deponere nec proposstum suum facilè mutare sed salvo inter Collegas pacis concordiae vinculo quaedam propria quae apud se semel sint usurpata retinere Quâ in re nec nos vim cuiquam facimus aut legem
force me to dissent And in that Case I shall do it without Contempt too This onely I will say b Nemini in sua causa eredendum nisi conformitter ad Legem Divinam Naturalem Canouicam loquatur So Io. Gerson the Doctors of Paris cited in Lib. Anon. de Ecclesiastica Politica Potestate c. 16. Ed. Paris 1612. Now these Popes doe not speak here conformably to these Lawes That Sixe Popes concurring in opinion shall have lesse waight with me in their own Cause than any other Sixe of the more Ancient Fathers Indeed could I swallow b L. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 3. Bellarmines Opinion That the Popes Iudgement is Infallible I would then submit without any more adoe But that will never downe with me unlesse I live till I doate which I hope in God I shall not Other Proofes than these Bellarmine brings not to prove that the Particular Church of Rome cannot erre in or from the Faith And of what force these are to sway any Iudgement I submit to all indifferent Readers And having thus examined Bellarmines Proofes That the Particular Church of Rome cannot erre in Faith I now returne to A. C. and the A. C. p. 42. Iesuite and tell them that no Iesuite or any other is ever able to prove any Particular Church Infallible But for the Particular Church of Rome and the Pope with it erred it hath And therefore may erre Erred I say it hath in the Worship of Images and in altering Christs Institution in the blessed Sacrament by taking away the Cup from the People and diverse other particulars as shall appeare at †§. 33. Consid. 7. Num. 5. 12 after And as for the Ground which is presumed to secure this Church from Errour 't is very remarkable How the c Romanae Ecclesia Particularis non potest errare persistente Romae Apostolicá sede Propositio haec est verissima fortasse tam vera quam illa prima de Pontifice L. 4 de Rom. Pont. c. 4. §. 2. And that first proposition is this Summus Pontifex cum totam Ecclesiam docet in his quae ad fidem pertinent nullo casu errare potest Ibid. c. 3. §. 1. Learned Cardinall speakes in this Case For he tells us that this Proposition So long as S. Peter's Chaire is at Rome that Particular Church cannot erre in the Faith is verissima most true and yet in the very next words 't is Fortasse tam vera peradventure as true as the former that is That the Pope when he teaches the whole Church in those things which belong to the faith cannot erre in any case What is that Proposition most true And yet is it but at a peradventure 't is as true as this Is it possible any thing should be absolutely most true and yet under a Peradventure that it is but as true as another truth But here without all Peradventure neither Proposition is true And then indeed Bellarmine may say without a Fortasse That this proposition The Particular Church of Rome cannot erre so long as the Sea Apostolike is there is as true as this The Pope cannot erre while he teaches the whole Church in those things which belong to the Faith For neither of them is true But he cannot say that either of them is verissima most true when neither of them hath Truth 2. Secondly if the Particular Church of Rome be Infallible and can neither erre in the Faith nor fall from it then it is because the Sea Apostolike cannot be transferred from Rome but must ever to the consummation of the World remaine there and keepe that Particular Church from erring Now to this what sayes Bellarmine what why he tells us a Pia probabilissima Sententia est Cathedram Petri non posse separari à Româ proinde Romanam Ecclesiam absolutè non posse errare vel deficere L. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 4. §. Quod nihilominus That it is a pious and most probable Opinion to thinke so And he reckons foure Probabilities that it shall never be remov'd from Rome And I will not deny but some of them are faire Probabilities But yet they are but Probabilities and so unable to convince any man Why but then what if a man cannot thinke as Bellarmine doth but that enforced by the light of his understanding he must thinke the quite contrary to this which Bellarmine thinks pious and so probable What then Why then b Contraria sententia nee est Haeretica nee manifestè erronea L. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 4. §. At socundum Bellarmine himselfe tells you that the quite contrary Proposition to this namely That S. Peter's Chayre may be severed from Rome and that theâ—… that Particular Church may erre is neither Haereticall nor manifestly erroneous So then by Bellarmines owne Confession I am no Haereticke nor in any manifest error if I say as indeed I doe and thinke it too that 't is possible for S. Peter's Chaire to be carried from Rome and that then at least by his owne argument that Church may erre Now then upon the whole matter and to returne to A. C. If that Lady desired to rely upon a A. C. p. 42. particular infallible Church 't is not to be found on earth Rome hath not that gift nor her Bishop neither And Bellarmine who I thinke was as able as any Champion that Church hath dares not say t is either Haeresie or a manifest error to say That the Apostolike Sea may be removed thence and That Church not only erre in Faith but also fall quite away from it Now I for my part have not ignorance enough in me to believe That that Church which may Apostatize at some one time may not erre at another Especially since both her erring and failing may arise from other Causes besides that which is mention'd by the Cardinall And if it may erre 't is not Infallible F. The Question was Which was that Church A friend of the Ladies would needs defend That not only the Romane but also the Greek Church was right B. When that Honourable Personage answered § 4 I was not by to heare But I presume He was so farre from granting that only the Romane Church was right as that He did not grant it right And that He tooke on him no other Defence of the poore Greeke Church then was according to truth F. I told him That the Greeke Church had plainly changed and taught false in a Poynt of Doctrine concerning the Holy Ghost and That I had hear'd say that even His Majestie should say That the Greeke Church having erred against the Holy Ghost had lost the Holy Ghost B. You are very bold with His Majesty to § 5 relate Him upon Heare-say My Intelligence serves me not to tell you what His Majestie said But if he said it not you have beene too credulous to believe and too suddaine to report it Princes deserve and were
Foundation for all cannot be one and another to different Christians in regard of it selfe for then it could be no common Rule for any nor could the soules of men rest upon a shaking foundation No If it be a true Foundation it must be common to all and firme under all in which sense the Articles of Christian Faith are Fundamentall And f Quum exim una cadem sides sit neque is qui multum de ipsà dicere potest plusquam oportet dicit neque qui parùm ipsam imminuit Iren. L. 1. advers haeres c. 3. Ireneus layes this for a ground That the whole Church howsoever dispersed in place speakes this with one mouth He which among the Guides of the Church is best able to speake utters no more then this and lesse then this the most simple doth not utter Therefore the Creed of which he speaks is a common is a constant Foundation And an Explicite faith must be of this in them which have the use of Reason for both Guides and simple people All the Church utter this Now many things are defined by the Church w ch are but Deductions out of this which suppose them deduced right move far from the Foundation without which Deductions explicitly believed many millions of Christians go to Heaven and cannot therefore be Fundamentall in the faith True Deductions from the Article may require necessary beliefe in them which are able and do go along with them from the Principle to the Conclusion But I do not see either that the Learned do make them necessary to all or any reason why they should Therfore they cannot be FundameÌ„tall yet to some mens Salvation they are necessary Besides that which is Fundamentall in the Faith of Christ is a Rocke immoveable and can never be varied Never a Resolutio Occhami est quòd nâ—… tota Ecclesia nec Concilium Generale nec summus Pontifex potest facere Articulum quod non suit Articulus Sed in dubiis propositionibus potest Ecclesia determinare an sint Cathilicae c. Tamen sic determinando non facit quod sint Catholicae quum prius essent ante Ecclesiae Determinationem c. Almain in 3. D. 25. Q. 1. Therefore if it be Fundamentall after the Church hath defined it it was Fundamentall before the Definition els it is mooveable and then no Christian hath where to rest And if it be immooveable as b Regula Fidei una omnino est solailla immobilis irreformabilis Tertul. de Virg. vel cap. 1. In hac fide c. Nihil transmutare c. Athan. Epist. ad Iovin de side indeed it is no Decree of a Councell be it never so Generall can alter immooveable Verities no more than it can change immooveable Natures Therefore if the Church in a Councell define any thing the thing defined is not Fundamentall because the Church hath defined it nor can be made so by the Definition of the Church if it be not so in it selfe For if the Church had this power she might make a New Article of the Faith c Occham Almain in 3. Sent. D. 25. q. 1. which the Learned among your selves deny For the Articles of the Faith cannot increase in substance but onely in Explication d Thom. 2. 2. q. 1. Ar. 7. C. And for this I 'le be judg'd by Bellarmine f Fides Divina non ideo habet certitudinem quia toti Ecclesiae communis est sed quia nititur Authoritate Dei qui nec falli nec fallere potest quum sit ipsa Veritas L. 3. de Justif. c. 3. §. Quod verò Concilium Probatio Ecclesiae facit ut omnibus innotescat Objectum Fidei Divinae esse revelatum à Deo propter hoc certum indubitatum non autem tribuit firmitatem verbo Dei aliquid revelantis Ibid. §. At inqust who disputing against Amb. Catharinus about the certainty of Faith tels us That Divine Faith hath not its certainty because 't is Catholike .i. common to the whole Church but because it builds on the Authority of God who is Truth it self and can neither deceive nor be deceived And he addes That the Probation of the Church can make it known to all that the Object of Divine Faith is revealed from God and therefore certaine and not to be doubted but the Church can adde no certainty no firmenesse to the word of God revealing it Nor is this hard to be farther proved out of your owne Schoole For a Scotus in 1. Sent. D. 11. q. 1. Scotus professeth it in this very particular of the Greeke Church If there be saith he a true reall difference betweene the Greekes and the Latines about the Point of the Procession of the Holy Ghost then either they or we be verè Haeretici truly and indeed Hereticks And he speakes this of the old Greekes long before any Decision of the Church in this Controversie For his instance is in S. Basil and Greg. Nazianz. on the one side and S Ierome Augustine and Ambrose on the other And who dares call any of these Hereticks is his challenge I deny not but that Scotus adds there That howsoever this was before yet ex quo from the time that the Catholike Church declared it it is to be held as of the substance of Faith But this cannot stand with his former Principle if he intend by it That whatsoever the Church defines shall be ipso ficto and for that Determination's sake Fundamentall For if before the Determination supposing the Difference reall some of those Worthies were truly Hereticks as he confesses then somewhat made them so And that could not be the Decree of the Church which then was not Therefore it must be somwhat really false that made them so and fundamentally false if it made them Hereticks against the Foundation But Scotus was wiser than to intend this It may be he saw the streame too strong for him to swim against therfore he went on with the doctrine of the Time That the Churches Sentence is of the substance of Faith But meant not to betray the truth For he goes no further than Ecclesia declaravit since the Church hath declared it which is the word that is used by diverse b Bellarm. L. 2. de Conc. Auth. c. 12. Concilia cùm definiunt non faciunt aliquid esse infallibilis veritatis sed declarant Explicare Bonavent in 1. d. 11. A. 1. q. 1. ad sinem Explanare declarare Tho 1. q. 36. A. 2. ad 2. 2. 2. q. 1 A. 10. ad 1. Quid unquam aliud Ecclesia Câ—… ili rum Decretis enisa est nisi ut quod anica simplicitèr credebatur hoc idem postea diligentiùs crederetur Vin. Lyr. cont 〈◊〉 c. 32 Now the a Sent. 1. D. 11 Master teaches and the b Alb. Mag. in 1. Sent. D. 11 Art 7. Schollers too That every thing which belongs to the Exposition or Declaration of
speake of the Written Word and so lie crosse to Stapleton as is mention'd But to returne If A. C. will he may but I cannot believe That a Definition of the Church which is made by the expresse Word of God and another which is made without so much as a probable Testimony of it or a cleare Deduction from it are made firme to us by one and the same Divine Revelation Nay I must say in this case that the one Determination is firme by Divine Revelation but the other hath no Divine Revelation at all but the Churches Authority onely 2. Secondly I cannot believe neither That all Determinations of the Church are sufficiently applied by one and the same full Authority of the Church For the Authority of the Church though it be of the same fulnesse in regard of it self and of the Power which it commits to Generall Councels lawfully called yet it is not alwayes of the same fulnesse of knowledge and sufficiency nor of the same fulnesse of Conscience and integrity to apply Dogmata Fidei that which is Dogmaticall in the Faith For instance I thinke you dare not deny but the Councell of Trent was lawfully called and yet I am of opinion that few even of your selves believe that the Councell of Trent hath the same fulnesse with the Councell of Nice in all the fore-named kinds or degrees of fulnesse Thirdly suppose That all Determinations of the Church are made firme to us by one and the same Divine Revelation and sufficiently applied by one and the same full Authority yet it will not follow that they are all alike Fundamentall in the Faith For I hope A. C. himselfe will not say that the Definitions of the Church are in better condition than the Propositions of Canonicall Scripture Now all Propositions of Canonicall Scripture are alike firme because they all alike proceed from Divine Revelation but they are not all alike Fundamentall in the Faith For this Proposition of Christ to S. Peter and S. Andrew Follow me and I will make you fishers of men a S. Matth. 4. 19 is as firm a Truth as that which he delivered to his Disciples That he must die and rise againse the third day b S. Matth. 16. 21 For both proceed from the same Divine Revelation out of the mouth of our Saviour and both are sufficiently applied by one and the same full Authority of the Church which receives the whole Gospell of S. Matthew to be Canonicall and infallible Scripture And yet both these Propositions of Christ are not alike Fundamentall in the Faith For I dare say No man shall be saved in the ordinary way of salvation that believes not the Death and the Resurrection of Christ. And I believe A. C. dares not say that No man shall be saved into whose Capacity it never came that Christ made S. Peter and Andrew fishers of men And yet should he say it nay should he shew it sub annulo Piscatoris no man will believe it that hath not made shipwrack of his Common Notions Now if it be thus betweene Proposition and Proposition issuing out of Christ's own Mouth I hope it may well be so also betweene even Iust and True Determinations of the Church that supposing them alike true and firme yet they shall not be alike Fundamentall to all mens beliefe F. Secondly I required to know what Points the Bishop would account Fundamentall He said all the Points of the Creed were such B. Against this I hope you except not For § 11 since the a Tertull. Apol. contra Gentes c. 47. de veland virg c. 1. S. August Serm. 15. de Temp. cap. 2. Ruffin in Symb. apud Cyprian p. 357. Fathers make the Creed the Rule of Faith b Alb. Mag. in 1. Sent. D. 11. A. 7. since the agreeing sense of Scripture with those Articles are the two Regular Precepts by which a Divine is governed about the Faith since your owne Councell of c Concil Trident Sess. 3. Trent decrees That it is that Principle of Faith in which all that professe Christ doe necessarily agree Fundamentum firmum unicum not the firme alone but the onely Foundation since it is Excommunication d Bonavent ibid. Dub. 2. 3. in literam ipso jure for any man to contradict the Articles contained in that Creed since the whole Body of the Faith is so contained in the Creed as that the e Thom. 2. 2ae q. 1. Art 7. c. substance of it was believ'd even before the comming of Christ though not so expresly as since in the number of the Articles since f Bellar. L. 4. de Verb. Dei non Script c. 11. §. Primum est Bellarmine confesses That all things simply necessary for all mens salvation are in the Creed and the Decalogue what reason can you have to except And yet for all this everything Fundamentall is not of a like nearenesse to the Foundation nor of equall Primenesse in the Faith And my granting the Creed to be Fundamentall doth not deny but that there are g Tho. 2. 2ae q. 1. A. 7. C. quaedam prima Credibilia certaine prime Principles of Faith in the bosome whereof all other Articles lay wrapped and folded up One of which since Christ is that of S. h 1. S. Iohn 4. 2. Iohn Every spirit that confesseth Iesus Christ come in the flesh is of God And one both before the comming of Christ and since is that of S. Paul i Heb. 11. 6. He that comes to God must believe that God is and that he is a rewarder of them that seeke him Here A. C. tels you That either I must meane that those Points are onely Fundamentall which are expressed A. C. p. 46. in the Creed or those also which are infolded If I say those onely which are expressed then saith he to believe the Scriptures is not Fundamentall because 't is not expressed If I say those which are infolded in the Articles then some unwritten Church Traditions may be accounted Fundamentall The truth is I said and say still that all the Points of the Apostles Creed as they are there expressed are Fundamentall And therein I say no more than some of your best Learned have said before me But I never either said or meant That they onely are Fundamentall That they are a Conc. Trident. Sess. 3. Fundamentum unicum the only Foundation is the Councell of Trent's 't is not mine Mine is That the Beliefe of Scripture to be the Word of God and infallible is an equall or rather a preceding Prime Principle of Faith with or to the whole Body of the Creed And this agrees as before I told the Iesuite with one of your owne great Masters Albertus Magnus b In 1. Sent. D. 11. A. 7. Regula Fidei est concors Scriptururum sensus cum Articulis Fidei Quia illis duobus regularibus Praeceptis regitur Theologus who is not farre from
other And even in those Fundamentall Things in which the Whole Vniversall Church neither doth nor can Erre yet even there her Authority is not Divine because She delivers those supernatural Truths by Promise of Assistance yet tyed to Meanes And not by any speciall Immediate Revelation which is necessarily required to the very least Degree of Divine Authority And therefore our †Hook l. 3. §. 9 VVorthies do not only say but prove That all the Churches Constitutions are of the nature of Humane Law a Stapl. Relect. Con. 4. q. 3. A. 1. 2. And some among you not unworthy for their Learning prove it at large That all the Churches Testimony or voyce or Sentence call it what you will is but suo modo or aliquo modo not simply but in a manner Divine Yea and A. C. himselfe A. C. p. 51. after all his debate comes to that and no further That the Tradition of the Church is at least in some sort Divine and Infallible Now that which is Divine but in a sort or manner bee it the Churches manner is aliquo modo non Divina in a sort not Divine But this Great Principle of Faith the Ground and Proofe of whatsoever else is of Faith cannot stand firme upon a Proofe that is and is not in a manner and not in a manner Divine As it must if we have no other Anchor then the Externall Tradition of the Church to lodge it upon and hold it steddy in the midst of those waves which daily beate upon it Now here A. C. confesses expresly That to prove the Bookes of Scripture to bee Divine we must bee A. C. p. 49. warranted by that which is Infallible Hee confesses farther that there can be no sufficient Infallible Proofe of A. C. p. 50. this but Gods Word written or unwritten And he gives his Reason for it Because if the Proofe be meerely Humane and Fallible the Science or Faith which A. C. p. 51. is built upon it can be no better So then this is agreed on by mee yet leaving other men to travell by their owne way so bee they can come to make Scripture thereby Infallible That Scripture must bee knowne to bee Scripture by a sufficient Infallible Divine Proofe And that such Proofe can be nothing but the Word of God is agreed on also by me Yea and agreed on for me it shall be likewise that Gods Word may be written and unwritten For Cardinall †Verbum Dei non est tale nec habet ullam Authoritatem quia scriptum est in membranis sed quia à Deo profectum est Bellar. l. 4 de Verb. Dei 2 §. Ecclesiasticae Traditiones Bellarmine tells us truly that it is not the writing or printing that makes Scripture the Word of God but it is the Prime Vnerring Essentiall Truth God himselfe uttering and revealing it to his Church that makes it Verbum Dei the Word of God And this Word of God is uttered to men either immediately by God himselfe Father Sonne and Holy Ghost and so 't was to the Prophets and Apostles Or mediately either by Angels to whom God had spoken first and so the Law was given * Lex ordinata per Angelos in manu 〈◊〉 Gal. 3 19. Gal. 3. and so also the Message was delivered to the Blessed Virgin a S. Luk. 1. 0. S. Luke 1. or by the Prophets b The Holy Ghost c. which spake by the Prophets in Symb. Nicen. and Apostles and so the Scriptures were delivered to the Church But their being written gave them no Authority at all in regard of themselves VVritten or unwritten the VVord was the same But it was written that it might bee the better c Nam Psiudoprophetae etiam viventibus adâ—…c Apostolis multas fingebant corruptelas sub â—…oc praetextu titulo quasi ab Apostolis vivà veccessent traditae propter hanc ipsâ—…m causam Apostoli Doctrinam suam coeperunt Literis comprehendere Ecclesiis commendare Chem. Exam. Concil Trid. de Traditionibus sub octavo genere Tradit And so also Iansâ—…n Comment in S. Ioh 5. 47. Sicut enim firmius est quod mandatur Literis ita est culpabiliâ—…s majus non credere Scriptis quam non credere Verbis preserved and continued with the more integrity to the use of the Church and the more faithfully in our d Labilis est memoria ideo indigâ—…mus Scripturâ Dicendum quod verum est sed hoc non habet nisi ex inundantia peccatorum Hent a Gand. Sum. p. 1 Ar. 8. q. 4. sine Christus ipse de pectore morituro Testamentum transfert in tabulas diù duraturas Optat. L 5. Christus ipse non transtulit sed ex Optati sew entiâ Ejus Inspiratione si non Iussâ—… Apostoli transtulerunt Memories And you have been often enough told were truth and not the maintaining of a party the thing you seek for that if you will shew us any such unwritten word of God delivered by his Prophets and Apostles we will acknowledge it to be Divine and Infallible So written or unwritten that shall not stumble us But then A. C. must not tell us at least not thinke we shall swallow it into our Beliefe that every thing which he sayes is the unwritten VVord of God is so indeed I know Bellarmine hath written a whole Booke * Bellar. L. 4. De Verbo Dei non script De Verbo Dei non scripto of the Word of God not written in which he handles the Controversie concerning Traditions And the Cunning is to make his weaker Readers believe that all that which He and his are pleased to call Traditions are by and by no lesse to be received and honoured then the unwritten word of God ought to be Whereas 't is a thing of easie knowledge That the unwritten VVord of God and Tradition are not Convertible Termes that is are not all one For there are many Vnwritten VVords of God which were never delivered over to the Church for ought appeares And there are many Traditions affirmed at least to be such by the Church of Rome which were never warranted by any unwritten Word of God First That there are many unwritten words of God which were never delivered over to the Church is manifest For when or where were the words which Christ spake to his Apostles during the a Acts 1. 3. forty dayes of his Conversing with them after his Resurrection first delivered over to the Church or what were the unwritten Words He then spake If neither Heâ—… nor His Apostles or Evangelists have delivered them to the Church the Church ought not to deliver them to her Children Or if she doe b Annunciare aliquid Christianis Catholicis praeter id quod acceperunt nunquam licuit nusquam licet nunquam licebit Vincen. Lir. c. 14. Et praeâ—…ipit nihil aliu â—…innovari nisi quo 〈◊〉
The Key that lets men in to the Scriptures even to this knowledge of them That they are the Word of God is the Tradition of the Church but when they are in d In sacrâ Scripturâ Ipse immediatè loquitur fidelibus Ibid. They heare Christ himselfe immediately speaking in Scripture to the Faithfull e S. Iohn 10. 4. And his Sheepe doe not onely heare but know his voice And then here 's no vicious Circle indeed of prooving the Scripture by the Church and then round about the Church by the Scripture Onely distinguish the Times and the Conditions of men and all is safe For a Beginner in the Faith or a Weakling or a Doubter about it begins at Tradition and proves Scripture by the Church But a man strong and growne up in the Faith and understandingly conversant in the Word of God proves the Church by the Scripture And then upon the matter we have a double Divine Testimony altogether Infallible to confirme unto us That Scripture is the Word of God The first is the Tradition of the Church of the Apostles themselves who delivered immediately to the world the Word of Christ. The other the Scripture it selfe but after it hath received this Testimony And into these we doe and may safely Resolve our Faith a Quod autem credimus posterioribus circa quos non apparent virtutes Divinae hoc est Quia non praedicant alia quà m quae illi in Scriptis certissimis reâ—…iquerunt Qua constat per midios in nullo fuisse vitiata ex consensione concordi in eis omnium succedentium usque ad tempora nostra Henr. à Gand. Sum. P. 1. A. 9. q. 3. As for the Tradition of after Ages in and about which Miracles and Divine Power were not so evident we believe them by Gandavo's full Confession because they doe not preach other things then those former the Apostles left in scriptis certissimis in most certaine Scripture And it appeares by men in the middle ages that these writings were vitiated in nothing by the concordant consent in them of all succeeders to our owne time And now by this time it will be no hard thing to reconcile the Fathers which seeme to speake differently in no few places both one from another and the same from themselves touching Scripture and Tradition And that as well in this Point to prove Scripture to be the Word of God as for concordant exposition of Scripture in all things else When therefore the Fathers say b Scripturas habemus ex Traditione S. Cvril Hier. Catech. 4. Multa quae non inveniuntur in Literis Apostolorum c. non nisi ab illis tradita commendata creduntur S. Aug. 2. de Baptism contra Denat c. 7. We have the Scripture by Tradition or the like either They meane the Tradition of the Apostles themselves delivering it and there when it is knowne to be such we may resolve our Faith Or if they speake of the Present Church then they meane that the Tradition of it is that by which we first receive the Scripture as by an according Meanes to the Prime Tradition But because it is not simply Divine we cannot resolve our Faith into it nor settle our Faith upon it till it resolve it selfe into the Prime tradition of the Apostles or the Scripture or both and there we rest with it And you cannot shew an ordinary consent of Fathers Nay can you or any of your Quarter shew any one Father of the Church Greeke or Latine that ever said We are to resolve our Faith that Scripture is the Word of God into the Tradition of the present Church And againe when the Fathers say we are to relie upon Scripture a Non aliundè scientia Coelestium S. Hilar L. 4. dc Trinit Si Angelus dc Coelo annunciaverit praeterquam quod in Scripturis c. S. Aug. L. 3. cont Petil. c. 6. onely they are never to bee understood with Exclusion of Tradition in what causes soever it may be had b Quùm sit perfectus Scripturarum Canon sibique ad omnia satis superque sufficiat c. Vin. Lir. contra Haeres c. 2. And if it be sibi ad omnia then to this To prove it self at least after Tradition hath prepared us to receive it Not but that the Scripture is abundantly sufficient in and to it self for all things but because it is deepe and may be drawne into different senses and so mistaken if any man will presume upon his owne strength and go single without the Church To gather up whatsoever may seeme scattered in this long Discourse to prove That Scripture is the Word of God I shall now in the Last Place put all together that so the whole state of the Question may the better appeare First then I shall desire the Reader to consider Pun. 1. that every Rationall Science requires some Principles quite without its owne Limits which are not proved in that Science but presupposed Thus Rhetoricke presupposes Grammar and Musicke Arithmeticke Therefore it is most reasonable that c Omnis Scientia praesupponit fidem aliquam S. Prosper in Psalm 123. And S. Cynl Hierosol Catechesi 5. shewes how all things in the world do side consistere Therefore most unreasonable to deny that to Divinity which all Sciences nay all things challenge Namely somethings to be presupposed and believed Theologie should be allowed to have some Principles also which she proves not but presupposes And the chiefest of these is That the Scriptures are of Divine Authority Secondly that there is a great deale of difference Pun. 2. in the Manner of confirming the Principles of Divinity and those of any other Art or Science whatsoever For the Principles of all other Sciences doe finally resolve either into the Conclusions of some Higher Science or into those Principles which are per se nota known by their own light and are the Grounds and Principles of all Science And this is it which properly makes them Sciences because they proceed with such strength of Demonstration as forces Reason to yeeld unto them But the Principles of Divinity resolve not into the Grounds of Naturall Reason For then there would be no roome for Faith but all would bee either Knowledge or Vision but into the Maximes of Divine Knowledge supernaturall And of this we have just so much light and no more then God hath revealed unto us in the Scripture Thirdly That though the Evidence of these Supernaturall Pun. 3. Truths which Divinity teaches appeares not so manifest as that of the Naturall a Si vis credere manifestis invisibilibus magis quà m visibilibus oportet credere Licet dictum sit admirabile verum est c. S. Chrysostom Hom. 46. ad Pot. And there he proves it Aliae Scientiae certitudinem habent ex Naturali Lumine Rationis Humanae quae decipi potest Haec autem ex Luminc Divinae Scientiae quae decipi non potest
of Divinity in this sort is a Science because it proceeds out of Principles that are knowne by the light of a Superiour Knowledge which is the Knowledge of God and the Blessed in Heaven In this Superiour Science this Principle The Scriptures are the Oracles of God is more then evident in full light This Superiour Science delivered this Principle in full revealed Light to the Prophets and Apostles †Non creditur Deus esse Author bujus Scientiae quia Homines hoc testati sunt in quantum Homines nudo Testimonio Humano sed in quantum circa eos effulsit virtus Divina â—…sa Deus iis sibi ipsi in eis Testimonium pâ—…buit Hen. à Gand. Sum. P. 1. A. 9. q. 3. This Infallible Light of this Principle made their Authority derivatively Divine By the same Divine Authoriâ—…y they wrote and delivered the Scripture to the Church Therefore from them immediately the Church received the Scripture and that uncorrupt though not in the same clearenesse of Ligâ—…t which they had And yet since no sufficient Reason hath or can be given that in any Substantiall thing it hath beene * Corruâ—…pi non possunt quia in manibus sunt omnium Christianorum Et quisquis hoc primitùs ausus esset multorum Codicum vetustiorum collatione confutaretur Maximè quia non unâ—… linguá sea multis continetur Scriptura Nonnullae autem Codicum mendositates vel de Antiquioribus vel de Linguá praecedente emendantur S. Aug. L. 32. cont Faustum c. 16. Corrupted it remaines firme at this day and that proved in the most Supreme Science and therefore now to bee supposed at least by all Christians That the Scripture is the Word of God So my Answer is good even in strictnesse That this Principle is to be supposed in this Dispute Besides the Iewes never had nor can have any other Proofe That the Old Testament is the Word of God then we have of the New For theirs was delivered by Moses and the Prophets and ours was delivered by the Apostles which were Prophets too The Iewes did believe their Scripture by a Divine Authority For so the Iewes argue themselves a S. Iohn 9. 29. S. Ioh. 9. We know that God spake with Moses b Maldonat in S. Ioh. 9. It aque non magis errare posse eum sequentes quà m si Deum ipsum sequerentur And that therefore they could no more erre in following Moses then they could in following God himselfe And our Saviour seemes to inferre as much c S. Ioh. 5. 47. S. Ioh. 5. where he expostulates with the Iewes thus If you believe not Moses his Writings how should you believe Me Now how did the Iewes know that God spake to Moses How why apparently the same way that is before set downe First by Tradition So S. d Hom. 57. iâ—… S. Ioh. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysostome We know why By whose witnesse do you know By the Testimony of our Ancestors But he speakes not of their immediate Ancestors but their Prime which were Prophets and whose Testimony was Divine into which namely their Writings the Iewes did Resolve their Faith And even that Scripture of the Old Testament was a e 2. S. Pet. 1. 19. Light and a shining Light too And therefore could not but be sufficient when Tradition had gone before And yet though the Iewes entred this way to their Beliefe of the Scripture they do not say f S. Chrys. ubi suprà 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Audivimus We have heard that God spâ—…ke to Moses but We know it So they Resolved their Faith higher and into a more inward Principle then an Eare to their immediate Ancestors and their Tradition And I would willingly learne of you if you can shew it me where ever any one Iew disputing with another about their Law did put the other to prove that the Old Testament was the Word of God But they still supposed it And when others put them to their Proofe this way they went And yet you say F. That no other Answer could be made but by admitting some Word of God unwritten to assure us of this Point B. I thinke I have shewed that my Answer is § 19 good and that no other Answer need be made If there were need I make no Question but another Answer might be made to assure us of this Point though we did not admit of any Word of God unwritten I say to assure us and you expresse no more If you had said to assure us by Divine Faith your Argument had beene the stronger But if you speake of Assurance onely in the generall I must then tell you and it is the great advantage which the Church of Christ hath against Infidels a man may be assured nay infallibly assured by Ecclesiasticall and Humane Proofe Men that never saw Rome may be sure and infallibly believe That such a Citie there is by Historicall and acquired Faith And if Consent of Humane Storie can assure me this why should not Consent of Church-storie assure me the other That Christ and his Apostles delivered this Body of Scripture as the Oracles of God For Iewes Enemies to Christ they beare witnesse to the Old Testament and Christians through almost all Nations †Tant a hominum temporum consensione firmatum S. Aug. L. de Mor. Eccles Cath. c. 29. Is Libri quoquo modo se habent sancti tamen Divinarum Rerum pleni prope totius generis humani Confessione diffamantur c. S. Aug. de util cred c. 7. L. 13. cont Faust. c. 15. give in evidence to both Old and New And no Pagan or other Enemies of Christianity can give such a Worthy and Consenting Testimonie for any Authoritie upon which they rely or almost for any Principle which they have as the Scripture hath gained to it self And as is the Testimony which it receives above all * Super omnes omnium Gentiâ—… Literas S. Aug. 11. de Civit. Dei c. 1. Writings of all Nations so here is assurance in a great measure without any Divine Authority in a Word written or Vnwritten A great assurance and it is Infallible too Only then we must distinguish Infallibility For first a thing may be presented as an infallible Object of Beliefe when it is true and remaines so For Truth quà talis as it is Truth can not deceive Secondly a thing is said to be Infallible when it is not only true and remains so actually but when it is of such invariable constancy and upon such ground as that no Degree of falshood at any time in any respect can fall upon it Certain it is that by Humane Authority Consent and Proofe a man may be assured infallibly that the Scripture is the Word of God by an acquired Habit of Faith cui non su'est falsum under which nor Error nor falshood is But he cannot be assured infallibly by Divine Faith a Incertum
Councell which shall be lawfully called and fairely and freely held with indifferency to all parties And that must judge the Difference according to Scripture which must be their Rule as well as Private Mens And here after some lowd Cry against the Pride and Insolent madnesse of the Protâ—…stants A. C. addes That A. C. p. 58. the Church of Rome is the Principall and Mother Church And that therefore though it be against common equity that Subjects and Children should be Accusers Witnesses Iudges and Executioners against their Prince and Mother in any case yet it is not absurd that in some Cases the Prince or Mother may Accuse Witnesse Iudge and if need be execute Iustice against unjust and rebellious Subjects or evill Children How farre forth Rome is a Prince over the whole Church or a Mother of it will come to be shewed at after In the meane time though I cannot grant her to be either yet let 's suppose her to be both that A. C s. Argument may have all the strength it can have Nor shall it force me as plausible as it seemes to weaken the just power of Princes over their Subjects or of Mothers over their Children to avoid the shocke of this Argument For though A. C. may tell us 't is not absurd in some Cases yet I would faine have him name any one Moderate Prince that ever thought it just or tooke it upon him to be Accuser and VVitnesse and Iudge in any Cause of moment against his Subjects but that the Law had Libertie to Iudge betweene them For the great Philosopher tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Arist. Eto c. 6. That the Chiefe Magistrate is Custos juris the Guardian and keeper of the Law and if of the Law then both of that equity and equality which is due unto them that are under him And even Tiberius himselfe in the Cause of Silanus when Dolabella would have flatter'd him into more power then in wisdome he thought fit then to take to himselfe he put him off thus No †Minui Jura quoties gliscat Potestas nec utendum Imperio ubi Legibus agi possit Tacit. L. 3 Annal. the Lawes grow lesse where such Power enlarges Nor is absolute Power to be used where there may be an orderly proceeding by Law And for * Heb. 12. 9. Parents 't is true when Children are young they may chastise them without other Accuser or VVitnesse then themselves and yet the children are to give them reverence And 't is presumed that naturall affection will prevaile so far with them that they will not punish them too much For all experience tells us almost to the losse of Education that they * God used Samuel as a Messenger against Eli for his overmuch indulgence to his sonnes 1 Sam. 3. 13. And yet Samuel himselfe committed the very same fault concerning his own sonnes 1 Sam. 8. 3. 5. And this Indulgence occasioned the Change of the Civill government as the former was the losse of the Priesthood punish them too little even when there is cause Yet when Children are growne up and come to some full use of their owne Reason the Apostles Rule is †Coloss. 3. 21. Colos. 3. Parents provoke not your Children And if the Apostle prevaile not with froward Parents there 's a Magistrate and a Law to relieve even a sonne against a Crimini ci Tribunus inter eatera dabat quod filium juvenem nullius probri compertum extorrem urbe domo penatibus foro luce congressu aequalium prohibituÌ„ in opus servile propè in carcerem atque in ergastulum dederit Liv. dec 1. l. 7. unnaturall Parents as it was in the Case of T. Manlius against his over Imperious Father And an expresse Law there was among the Iewes Deut. 21. when Children Deut. 21. 19. were growne up and fell into great extremities that the Parents should then bring them to the Magistrate and not be too busie in such cases with their own Power So suppose Rome be a Prince yet her Subjects must be tryed by Gods Law the Scripture And suppose her a Mother yet there is or ought to be Remedy against her for her Children that are growne up if she forget all good Nature and turne Stepdame to them Well the Reason why the Iesuite asked the Question Quo Iudice Who should be Iudge He sayes was this Because there 's no equity in it that the Protestants should be Iudges in their owne Cause But now upon more Deliberation A. C. tells us as if he A. C. p. 57. knew the Iesuites minde as well as himselfe as sure I thinke he doth That the Iesuite directed this Question chiefly against that speech of mine That there were Errors in Doctrine of Faith and that in the Generall Church as the Iesuite understood my meaning The Iesuite here tooke my meaning right For I confesse I said there were Errours in Doctrine and dangerous ones too in the Church of Rome I said likewise that when the Generall Church could not or would not Reforme such it was Lawfull for Particular Churches to Refâ—…rme themselves But then I added That the Generall Church not universally taken but in these Westerne parts fell into those Errours being swayed in these latter Ages by the predominant Power of the Church of Rome under whose Government it was for the most part forced And all men of understanding know how oft and how easily an Over-potent Member carries the whole with it in any Body Naturall Politick or Ecclesiasticall Yea but A. C. telles us That never any Competent Iudge did so censure the Church And indeed that no Power A. G. p. 57. on Earth or in Hell it selfe can so farre prevaile against the Generall Church as to make it Erre generally in any one Point of Divine Truth and much lesse to teach any thing by its full Authority to be a Matter of Faith which is contrary to Divine Truth expressed or involved in Scriptures rightly understood And that therefore no Reformation of Faith can be needfull in the Generall Church but only in Particular Churches And for proofe of this he cites S. Mat. 16. and 28. S. Luk. 22. S. Iohn 14. and 16. In this trouâ—…lesome and quarrelling Age I am most unwilling to meddle with the Erring of the Church in generall The Church of England is content to passe that over And though * Art 19. She tels us That the Church of Rome hath Erred even in matters of Faith yet of the Erring of the Church in generall She is modestly silent But since A. C. will needs have it That the whole Church did never generally Erre in any one Point of Faith he should doe well to Distinguish before he be so peremptory For if he mean no more then that the whole Vniversal Church of Christ cannot universally Erre in any one Point of Faith simply necessary to altmens salvation he fights against no Adversary that I know
then A. C. tels us That Particular Churches must in A. C. p. 58. that Case as Irenaeus intimateth have recourse to the Church of Rome which hath more powerfull Principality and to †And after hee saith p. 58. that the Bishop of Rome is and ought to bee the Iudge of particular Churches in this Case her Bishop who is chiefe Pastour of the whole Church as being S. Peter's Successour to whom Christ promised the keyes S. Matth. 16. for whom he prayed that his Faith might not faile S. Luke 22. And whom he charged to seed and governe the whole Flocke S Iohn 21. And this A. C. tels us he shall never refuse to doe in such sort as that this neglect shall be a Iust Cause for any Particular Man or Church under Pretence of Reformation in Manners or Faith to make a Schisme or Separation from the Whole Generall Church Well first you see where A. C. would have us If any Particular Churches differ in Points of Divine Truth they must not Iudge or Condemne each other saith he No take heed of that in any case That 's the Office of the Universall Church And yet he will have it That Rome which is but a Particular Church must and ought Iudge all other Particulars Secondly he tels us this is so Because the Church of Rome hath more Powerfull Principality then other Particular Churches and that her Bishop is Pastour of the Whole Church To this I answer that it is most true indeed the Church of Rome hath had and hath yet more Powerfull Principality then any other Particular Church But she hath not this Power from Christ. The Romane Patriarch by Ecclesiasticall Constitutions might perhaps have a Primacy of Order But for Principality of Power the Patriarchs were as even as equall as the a Summa Potestas Ecclesiastica non est data solum Petro sedetiam aliis Apostolis Omnes enim poterant dicere illud S. Pauli Solicitu la omnium Ecclesiarum c. 2. Cor. 11. 28. Bellar. L. 1. de Rom. Pont. c. 9. §. Respondâ—… Pontificatum Where then is the difference betweene S. Peter and the rest In this saith Bellarmin Ibid. Quta hec Potestas data est Petro ut Ordinario Pastori cui perpetuo succederetur Aliis verò tanquà m Delegatis quibus non succederetur This is handsomely said to men easie of beliefe But that the Highest Power Ecclesiasticall confessed to be given to the other Apostle as well as to S. Peter was given to S. Peter onely as to an Ordinary Pastour whose Successours should have the same Power which the Successours of the rest should not have can never bee prooved out of Scripture Nay I will give them their own Latitude it can never be proved by any Tradition of the whole Catholike Church And till it be proved Bellarmines handsome Expression cannot be believed by me For S. Cyprian hath told me long since that Episcopatus Vnus est for as much as belongs to the Calling as well as Apostolatus L. de simp. Praelato Apostles were before them The Truth is this more Powerfull Principality the Romane Bishops b §. 25. Nu. 12. got under the Emperours after they became Christian and they used the matter so that they grew big enough to oppose nay to depose the Emperours by the same power which they had given them And after this other Particular Churches especially here in the West submitted themselves to them for succour and Protections sake And this was one maine Cause which swelled Rome into this more Powerfull Principality and not any Right given by Christ to make that c Lib. 1. de Rom. Pont. c. 9. §. Augustmu Epistola Prelate Pastour of the whole Church I know Bellarmine makes much adoe about it and will needs fetch it out of d S. Aug. Epist. 162. In Romaná Ecclesiâ—… emper Apostolicae Cathedrae viguit Principatas S. Augustine who sayes indeed That in the Church of Rome there did alwaies flourish the Principality of an Apostolicke Chaire Or if you will the Apostolicke Chaire in relation to the West and South parts of the Church all the other foure Apostolicke Chaires being in the East Now this no man denies that understands the state and story of the Church And e Quia Opinio invaluit fundâ—…tam esse hanc Ecclesiam à S. Petâ—… Jtaque in Occidente Sedes Apostolica Honoris 〈◊〉 Calv. L. 4. c. 6. §. 16. Calvin confesses it expresly Nor is the Word Principatus so great nor were the Bishops of those times so little as that Principes and Principatus are not commonly given them both by the a Princeps Ecclesiae S. H. lar 18. de Trin. Prin. And he speakes of a Biâ—…hop in generall Greg. Nazianz. Orat. 17. Ascribuntur Episcopo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Imperium Thronus Principatus ad regimâ—…n Aâ—…imarum Et 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hujusmodi Imperium And he also speaks of a Bishop Greg. Nazian Orat. 20. Nor were these any Titles of pride in Biâ—…hops then For S. Greg. Nazianz. who challenges these Titles to himselfe Orat. 17. was so devout so mild and so humble that rather then the Peace of the Church should be broken he freely resigned the Great Patriarchate of Constantinople and retired and this in the First Councell of Constantinople and the Second Generall Greeke and the Latine Fathers of this great and Learnedest Age of the Church made up of the fourth and fist hundred yeares alwaies understanding Principatus of their Spirituall Power and within the Limits of their severall Iurisdictions which perhaps now and then they did occasionally exceed And there is not one word in S. Augustine That this Principality of the Apostolike Chaire in the Church of Rome was then or ought to be now exercised over the whole Church of Christ as Bellarmine insinuates there and as A. C. would have it here And to prove that S Augustine did not intend by Principatus here to give the Romane Bishop any Power out of his owne Limits which God knowes were farre short of the whole Church I shall make it most manifest out of the very same Epistle For afterwards saith S. Augustine when the pertinacy of the Donatists could not be restrained by the African Bishops only b Pergant ad Fratres Collegas nostros transmarinarum Ecclesiarum Episcopos c. S. Aug. Ep 162. they gave them leave to be heard by forraigne Bishops And after that he hath these words c An fortè non debuit Romanae Ecclesiae Melciades Episcopus cum Collegis transmarinis Episcopis illud sibi usurpare judicium quod ab Afris septuaginta ubi Primas Tigisitanus praesedit fuerit terminaetum Quid quod nec ipse usurpâ—…vit Rogatus quippe Imperator Iudices misit Episcopos qui cum â—…o sederent de totâ illâ Causà quod justum videretur statuerent c. S. Aug. Ibid. And yet peradventure Melciades the Bishop of
of all doubt neither First because many Learned men have challenged many Popes for teaching Heresy and that 's against the true Faith And that which so many Learned Men have affirmed is not out of all doubt Or if it be why does Bellarmine take so much paines to confute and disproove them as †Bellar. L. 4. de Ro. Pont. c. 8. he doth Secondly because Christ obtained of his Father every thing that he prayed for if he prayed for it absolutely and not under a Condition Father I know thou hearest me alwayes S. Iohn 11. Now Christ here prayed absolutely for S. Peter Therefore whatsoever he S. Iohn 11. 42. asked for him was granted Therfore if Christ intended his Successors as well as himselfe his Prayer was granted for his Successors as well as for himselfe But then if Bellarmine will tell us absolutely as he doth * Donum hoc loco Petro impetratum etiam ad Successores pertinet Bel. L. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 3. §. Quarto Donum hoc That the whole Gift obtained by this Prayer for S. Peter did belong to his Successors and then by and by after breake this Gift into two parts and call the first part into doubt whether it belongs to his Successors or no he cannot say the second part is out of all doubt For if there be reason of doubting the one there 's as much reason of doubting the other since they stand both on the same foot The Ualidity of Christ's Prayer for Saint Peter Yea but Christ charged S. Peter to governe and feede his whole flocke S. Iohn 21. Nay soft 'T is but his Sheepe S. Iohn 21. 15. and his Lambes and that every Apostle and every Apostles Successor hath charge to doc * Mat. 28. 29 S. Mat. 10. 17. The same power and charge is gâ—…en to them al. A. C. p. 58. S. Matth. 28. But over the whole Flocke 〈◊〉 find no one Apostle or Successor set And 't is a poore shift to say as A C doth That the Bishop of Rome is set over the whole Flocke because both over Lambes and Sheep For in every flock that is not of barren Weathers there are Lamâ—…s and Sheepe that is †And this seemes to me to allâ—…de to that of S. Paul 1 Corinth 3 2. and Heb. 5. 12. Some are sed with milke and some with stronger meat The Lambes with milke and the Sheepe with stronger meate But here A. C. followes Pope Hildebrand close who in the Case of the Emperor then asked this Question Quando Christus Ecclesiam suam Petro commisit dixit Pasce Oves meas excepitne Reges Plat. in vita Greg 7. And certainly Kings are not exempted from being fed by the Church But from being spoyled of their Kingdomes by any Church-men that they are weaker and stronger Christians not People and Pastors Subjects and Governouâ—…s as A. C. expounds it to bring the Necks of Princâ—…s under Romane Pride And if Kings bee meant yet then the command is Pasce feed them But Deponere or Occiure to depose or kill them is not Pascere in any sense Lanii id est non Pastori that 's the Butchers not the Shepheards part If a Sheep go astray never so far 't is not the Shepheards part to kill him at least if he doe non pascit dum occidit he doth not certainly feede while he killes And for the Close That the Bishop of Rome shall never refuse to feed and governe the whole stock in such sort as A. C. p. 58. that neither particular Man nor Church shall 〈◊〉 just Cause under pâ—…etence of Reformation in Manners or Faith to make a Sâ—…paration from the whole Church By A. C s. favour this is meere begging of the Question He sayes the Pope shall ever governe the Whole Church so as that there shall be no just Cause given of a Separation And that is the very Thing which the Protestants charge upon him Namely that he hath governed if notthe Whole yet so much of the Church as he hath beene able to bring under his Power so as that he hath given too just Cause of the present continued separation And as the Corruptions in the Doctrine of Faith in the Church of Rome were the Cause of the first Separation so are they at this present day the Cause why the separation continues And further I for my part am cleare of Opinion that the Errours in the Doctrine of Faith which are charged upon the whole Church at least so much of the whole as in these parts of Europe hath beene kept under the Romane Iurisdiction have had their Originall and Continuance from this that so much of the Vniversall Church which indeed they account All hath forgotten her owne Liberty and submitted to the Romane Church and Bishop and so is in a manner forced to embrace all the Corruptions which the Particular Church of Rome hath contracted upon itself And being now not able to free her selfe from the Romane Iurisdiction is made to continue also in all her Corruptions And for the Protestants they have made no separation from the Generall Church properly so called for therein A. C. said well the Popes Administration can give no Cause to separate from that but A. C. p. 58. their Separation is only from the Church of Rome and such other Churches as by adhering to her have hazarded themselves and do now miscall themselves the Whole Catholike Church Nay even here the Protestants have not left the Church of Rome in her Essence but in her Errours not in the Things which Constitute a Church but only in such Abuses and Corruptions as work toward the Dissolution of a Church F. I also asked who ought to judge in this Case The B. said a Generall Councell B. And surely What greater or surer Iudgement you can have where sense of Scripture is doubted § 26 then a Generall Councell I doe not see Nor doe you doubt And A. C. grants it to be a most Competent A. C. p. 59. Iudge of all Controversies of Faith so that all Pastors be gathered together and in the Name of Christ and pray unanimously for the promised assistance of the Holy Ghost and make great and diligent search and examination of the Scriptures and other Grounds of Faith And then Decree what is to bee held for Divine Truth For then saith he 't is Firme and Insallible or els there is nothing firm upon earth As faire as this Passage seems and as freely as I have granted that a Generall Councell is the best Judge on earth where the sense of Scripture is doubted yet even in this passage there are some things Considerable As first when shall the Church hope for such a Generall Councell in which all Pastors shall be gathered together there was never any such Generall Councell yet nor doe I believe such can be had So that 's supposed in vaine and you might have learn'd this of *
this Pope which now sits or any other that hath beene or shall be is Infallible For he is not Infallible unlesse he be Pope and he is not Pope unlesse he be in Holy Orders And he cannot be so unlesse he have received those Holy Orders and that from one that had Power to Ordaine And those Holy Orders in your Doctrine are a Sacrament And a Sacrament is not perfectly given if he that Administers it have not intentionem faciendi quod facit Ecclesia an intention to doe that which the Church doth by Sacraments Now who can possibly tell that the Bishop which gave the Pope Orders was first a man qualified to give them and secondly so devoutly set upon his Worke that he had at the Instant of giving them an Intention and purpose to doe therein as the Church doth Surely none but that Bishop himselfe And his testimony of himselfe and his owne Act such especially as if faulty he would be loth to Confesse can neither give Knowledge nor Beliefe sufficient that the Pope according to this Canon is in Holy Orders So upon the Whole matter let the Romanists take which they will I give them free choyce either this Canon of the Councell of Trent is false Divinity and there is no such Intention necessary to the Essence and Being of a Sacrament Or if it be true it is impossible for any man to know and for any advised man to Believe That the Pope is Infallible in â—…is Iudiciall Sentences in things belonging to the Faith And so here againe a Generall Councell at least such an One as that of Trent is can Erre or the Pope is not Infallible But this is an Argument ad Hominem good against your Partie onely which maintaine this Councâ—…ll But the plaine Truth is Both are Errours For neither is the Bishop of Rome Infallible in his Iudicialls about the Faith Nor is this Intention of either Bishop or Priest of Absolute Necessity to the Essence of a Sacrament so as to make void the gracious Institution of Christ in case by any Tentation the Priests Thoughts should wander from his Worke at the Instant of using the Essentials of a Sacrament or have in him an Actuall Intention to scorne the Church And you may remember if you please that a Neopolitan †Minorensis Episcopus suit Bishop then present at Trent disputed this Case very learnedly and made it most evident that this Opinion cannot be defended but that it must open a way for any unworthy Priest to make infinite Nullities in Administration of the Sacraments And his Arguments were of such strength * L 2. Hist. Trident p 276. 277. Lâ—…idae An. 1622 ut caeteros Theologos dederint in stuporem as amazed the other Divines which were present And concluded That no Internall Intention was required in the Minister of a Sacrament but that Intention which did appeare Opere externo in the VVorke it selfe performed by him And that if hee had unworthily any wandring thoughts nay more any contrary Intention within him yet it neither did nor could hinder the blessed effect of any Sacrament And most certaine it is if this be not true besides all other Inconveniences which are many no man can secure himselfe upon any Doubt or trouble in his Conscience that he hath truly and really beene made partaker of any Sacrament whatsoever No not of Baptisme and so by Consequence be left in Doubt whether he be a Christian or no even after he is Baptised Wheras 't is most impossible That Christ should so order his Sacraments and so leave them to his Church as that poore Believers in his Name by any unworthinesse of any of his Priests should not be able to know whether they have received His Sacraments or not even while they have received them And yet for all this such great lovers of Truth and such Carefull Pastors over the Flock of Christ were these Trent Fathers that they regarded none of this but went on in the usuall track and made their Decree for the Internall Intention and purpose of the Priest and that the Sarcament was invalid without it Nay one Argument more there is and from your owne Grounds too that makes it more then manifest That the Pope can erre not Personally only but Iudicially also and so teach false Doctrine to the Church which a Summus Pontifâ—… quum 〈◊〉 Ecclesiam â—…ct in his quae al Fidem pertinent nullo casu â—…rrare potest Bel. l. 4. De Ro. Pâ—…t c. 3. §. 1. Bellarmine tels us No Pope hath done or can doe And a Maxime it is with you That a Generall Councell can erre if it be not confirmed by the Pope b Concilia Genâ—…ralia à Pontifiâ—… Consirmata 〈◊〉 non possunt 〈◊〉 L. 2. de Con. c. 2. §. 1. But if it be confirmed then it cannot erre Where first this is very improper Language For I hope no Councell is Confirmed till it be finished And when 't is finished even before the Popes Confirmation be put to it either it hath Erred or not erred If it have Erred the Pope ought not to Confirme it and if he do t is a void Act. For no power can make falshood Truth If it have not Erred then it was True before the Pope Confirmed it So his Confirmation addes nothing but his owne Assent Therefore his Confirmation of a Generall Councell as you will needs call it is at the most Signum non Causa A Signe and that such as may faile but no Cause of the Councels not Erring But then secondly if a Generall Councell Confirmed as you would have it by the Pope have Erred and so can Erre then certainly the Pope can Erre Iudicially For he never gives a more solemne Sentence for Truth then when he Decrees any thing in a Generall Councell Therefore if he have Erred and can Erre there then certainly he can Erre in his Definitive Sentence about the Faith and is not Infallible Now that he hath Erred and therefore can Erre in a Generall Councell Confirmed in which he takes upon him to teach all Christendome is most cleere and evident For the Pope teaches in and by the a Conc. Lateran Can. 1. Councell of Lateran Confirmed by Innocent the third Christ is present in the Sacrament by way of Transubstantiation And in and by the b Concil Constan Sess. 13. Councell of Constance the Administration of the Blessed Sacrament to the Laity in one kinde notwithstanding Christs Institution of it in both kindes for all And in and by the c Concil Trid. Sess. 25. Decret de Invotatione Councell of Trent Invocation of Saints and Adoration of Images to the great Scandall of Christianity and as great hazard of the Weake Now that these Particulars among Many are Errours in Divinity and about the Faith is manifest both by Scripture and the Iudgement of the Primitive Church For Transubstantiation first That was never heard of in the Primitive Church nor
known unto us by the Infallible Authority of the Church of God that is of men Infallibly assisted by the Spirit of God as all lawfully called continued and confirmed Generall Councels are assisted That the whole Church §. 21. Nu. 5. of God is infallibly assisted by the Spirit of God so that it cannot by any error fall away totally from Christ the Foundation I make no doubt For if it could the gates of hell had prevailed against it which our Saviour assures me S. Matth. 16. they shall never be able to doe Matth. 16. 18. But that all Generall Councels be they never so lawfully called continued and confirmed have Infallible Assistance I utterly deny 'T is true that a Generall Councell de post facto after 't is ended and admitted by the whole Church is then Infallible for it cannot erre in that which it hath already clearely and truly determined without Errour But that a Generall Councell à parte ante when it first sits down and continues to deliberate may truly be said to be Infallible in all its after-determinations whatsoever they shall be I utterly deny And it may be it was not without cunning that A. C. shuffled these words together Called Continued and Confirmed for be it never so lawfully called and continued it may erre But after 't is confirmed that is admitted by the whole Church then being found true it is also Infallible that is it deceives no man For so all Truth is and is to us when 't is once knowne to be Truth But then many times that Truth which being known is necessary and Infallible was before both contingent and fallible in the way of proving it and to us And so here a Generall Councell is a most probable but yet a fallible way of inducing Truth though the Truth once induced may be after 't is found necessary and Infallible And so likewise the very Councell it selfe for that particular in which it hath concluded Truth But A. C. must both speake and meane of a Councell set downe to deliberate or els he sayes nothing Now hence A. C. gathers That though everything defined to be a Divine Truth in Generall Councels is not absolutely A. C. p. 71. necessary to be expresly knowne and actually believed as some other Truths are by all sorts yet no man may after knowledge that they are thus defined doubt deliberately much lesse obstinately deny the Truth of any thing so defined Well in this Collection of A. C. First we have this granted That every thing defined in Generall Councels is not absolutely necessary to be expresly knowne and actually believed by all sorts of men And this no Protestant that I know denies Secondly it is affirmed that after knowledge that these Truths are thus defined no man may doubt deliberately much lesse obstinately deny any of them Truly Obstinately as the word is now in common use carries a fault along with it And it ought to be farre from the temper of a Christian to be obstinate against the Definitions of a Generall Councell But that he may not upon very probable grounds in an humble and peaceable manner deliberately doubt yea and upon Demonstrative grounds constantly deny even such Definitions yet submitting himselfe and his grounds to the Church in that or another Councell is that which was never till now imposed upon Believers For 't is one thing for a man deliberately to doubt and modestly to propose his Doubt for satisfaction which was ever lawfull and is many times necessary And quite an other thing for a man upon the pride of his owne Iudgement * S. 32. N. 5. to refuse externall Obedience to the Councell which to doe was never Lawfull nor can ever stand with any Government For there is all the reason in the world the Councell should be heard for it selfe as well as any such Recusant whatsoever and that before a Iudge as good as it selfe at least And to what end did †S. Aug. L. 2. de Bapt. cont Donat c. 3. Ipsaque plenaria sape priora à posterioribus emendari S. Augustine say That one Generall Councell might be amended by another the former by the Later if men might neither denie nor so much as deliberately doubt of any of these Truths defined in a Generall Councell And A. C. should have done well to have named but one ancient Father of the Primitive Church that ever affirmed this * S. 21. N. 5. For the Assistance which God gives to the whole Church in generall is but in things simply necessary to eternall Salvation therefore more then this cannot be given to a Generall Councell no nor so much But then if a Generall Councell shall forget it selfe and take upon it to define things not absolutely necessary to bee expresly knowne or actually believed which are the things which A. C. here speakes of In these as neither Generall Councell nor the whole Church have infallible Assistance so have Christians liberty modestly and peaceably and upon just grounds both deliberarely to doubt and constantly to deny such the Councels Definitions For instance the Councell of Florence first defined Purgatory to be believed as a Divine Truth and matter of Faith a I know the Greekes subscribed that Councell Sed in illo Concilio Graeca Ecclesiae diu restitit Pet. Mart. Loc. com classe tertiâ c. 9. nu 13. Et in ultimâ Sessione istius Concilii Graeci dixerunt se sine Authoritate totius Ecclesiae Orientalis Quaestionem aliam tractare non posse praeter illam de processione Sp. Sancti Postea verò consentiente Imperatore tractârunt de aliis c. Florent Concil Sess. ult apud Nicolinum To. 4. p. 894. c. This savours of some art to bring in the Greeks Howsoever this showes enough against Bellarmine That all the Greekes did not constantly teach Purgatory as he assirms L. 1. de Purgat c. 11. §. De tertio modo if that Councell had Consent enough so to define it This was afterwards deliberately doubted of by the Protestants after this as constantly denied then confirmed by the b Con. Trid. Sess. 25. in Bullâ Pii 4. super formà Iuramenti professionis Fidei Councell of Trent and an Anathema set upon the head of every man that denies it And yet scarce any Father within the first three hundred yeares ever thought of it I know a Omnes veteres Graeci Latini ab ipso tempore ApostoleruÌ„ constanter docuerunt Purgatorium esse Bel. L. 1. de Purg. c 11 §. De tertio modo Bâ—…llarmine affirmes it boldly That all the Fathers both Greeke and Latine did constantly teach Purgatory from the very Apostles times And where he brings his Proofs out of the Fathers for this Point he divides them into two Rancks b Bel. Lib 1 de Purg c 6 §. 1. In the first he reckons them which affirme Prayer for the dead as if that must necessarily inferre Purgatory Whereas
Errour and Superstition which sutes not with my own fancy But how can this possibly be since I submit my judgement in all humility to the Scripture interpreted by the Primitive Church and upon new and necessary doubts to the judgement of a lawfull and free Generall Councell And this I do from my very heart and do abhorre in matters of Religion that my own or any private mans fancy should take any place and least of all against things generally held or practised by the Vniversall Church which to oppose in such things is certainly as d S. Aug. Epist. â—…8 〈◊〉 5. S. Augustine cals it Insolentissimae insaniae an Attempt of most insolent madnesse But those things which the Church of England charges upon the Romane Party to be superstitious and erroneous are not held or practised in or by the universall Church generally either for time or place And now I would have A. C. consider how justly all this may be turned upon himselfe For he hath nothing to pretend that there are not grosse Superstitions and Errours in the Romane Perswasion unlesse by intolerable pride he will make himselfe and his Party Iudge of Controversies as in effect he doth for he will be judged by none but the Pope and a Councell of his ordering or unlesse he will take Authority to free from Superstition and Errour whatsoever sutes with his fancy though it be even Superstition it selfe and run crosse to what hath been generally held in the Catholike Church of Christ Yea though to do so be in S. Augustine's judgement most insolent madnesse And A. C. spake in this most properly when he called it taking of Authority For the Bishop and Church of Rome have in this particular of judging Controversies indeed taken that Authority to themselves which neither Christ nor his Church Catholike did ever give them Here the Conference ended with this Conclusion And as I hope God hath given that Lady mercy so I heartily pray that he will be pleased to give all of you a Light of his Truth and a Love to it that you may no longer be made Instruments of the Pope's boundlesse Ambition and this most unchristian * §. 33. Nu 6. braine-sick device That in all Controversies of the Faith he is Infallible and that by way of Inspiration and Prophecie in the Conclusion which he gives To the due Consideration of which and God's mercy in Christ I leave you To this Conclusion of the Conference between me and the Iesuite A. C. sayes not much But that which he doth say is either the selfe same which he hath said already or els is quite mistaken in the businesse That which he hath said already is this That in matters A. C. p. 73. of Faith we are to submit our judgements to such Doctors and Pastors as by Visible Continuall Succession without change brought the Faith downe from Christ and his Apostles to these our dayes and shall so carrie it to the end of the world And that this Succession is not found in any other Church differing in Doctrine from the Romane Church Now to this I have given a full Answer a §. 57. Nu. 3 4. already and therefore will not trouble the Reader with needlesse and troublesome repetition Then he brings certaine places of Scripture to prove the Pope's Infallibility But to all these places I have likewise answered b §. 25. Nu. 5. before And therefore A. C. needed not to repeat them againe as if they had been unanswerable One Place of Scripture onely A. C. had not urged before either for proofe of this Continued Visible Succession or for the Pope's Infallibility Nor doth A. C. distinctly A. C. p. 73. set down by which of the two hee will prove it The Place is c Epheâ—… 4. 11. Ephes. 4. Christ ascending gave some to be Apostles some Prophets some Euangelists some Pastors and Teachers c. for the edification of the Church Now if he do mean to prove the Pope's Infallibility by this place in his Pastorall Iudgement Truly I doe not see how this can possibly be Collected thence d Pontificatus Summus disertè positus est ab Apostolo in illis verbis Eph. 4. 11. in illis clarioribus 1. Cor. 12. 28. Ipse posuit in Ecclesia primùm Apostolos c. Bellar. L. 1. de Ro. Pont. c. 1. §. Respondeo Pontificatum And he gives an excellent reason for it Siquidem summa potestas Ecclesiastica non solùm data est Petro sedetiam aliis Apostolis Ibid. So belike by this Reason the Apostle doth clearely expresse the Popedome because all the rest of the Apostles had as much Ecclesiasticall Power as S. Peter had But then Bellarmine would salve it up with this That this Power is given Petro ut Ordinarie Pastori cui succederetur aliis verò tanquam Delegatis quibus non succederetur Ibid. but this is meere Begging of the Question and will never be granted unto him And in the meane time we have his absolute Confession for the other That the Supreme Ecclesiasticall Power was not in S. Peter alone but in all the Apostles Christ gave some to be Apostles for the Edification of his Church Therefore S. Peter and all his Successours are infallible in their Pastorall Iudgment And if he meane to prove the Continued Visible Succession which he saith is to he found in no Church but the Romane there 's a little more shew but to no more purpose A little more shew Because it is added †Eph. 4. 13. verse 13. That the Apostles and Prophets c. shall continue at their worke and that must needs be by succession till we all meet in Vnity and perfection of Christ. But to no more purpose For t is not said that they or their Successors should Continue at this their worke in a Personall uninterrupted Succession in any one Particular Church Romane or other Nor ever will A. C. bee able to proove that such a Succession is necessary in any one particular place And if he could yet his owne words tell us the Personall Succession is nothing if the Faith be not brought downe without change from Christ and his Apostles to this day and so to the end of the world Now here 's a peece of cunning too The Faith A. C. p. 73. brought down unchanged For if A. C. meane by the Faith the Creed and that in Letter 't is true the Church of Rome hath received and brought downe the Faith unchanged from Christ and his Apostles to these our dayes But then t is apparently false That no Church differing from the Romane in Doctrine hath kept that Faith unchanged and that by a visible and continued Succession For the Greek Church differs from the Romane in Doctrine and yet hath so kept that Faith unchanged But if he meane by the Faith unchanged and yet brought down in a continuall visible Succession not only the Creed in Letter but in Sense
traditum est S. Cypri ad Pompeium cont Epist. Stephan princ tradere non traditum make a Tradition of that which was not delivered to her and by some of Them then She is unfaithful to God and doth not servare depositum faithfully keepe that which is committed to her Trust. * 1 Tim. 6. 20. and 2 Tim. 1. 14. 1 Tim. 6. And her Sonnes which come to know it are not bound to obey her Tradition against the c Si ipsa Ecclesia contraria Scripturae diceret Fidelis ipsi non crederet c. Hen. a Gand. Sum. p. 1. A. 10. q. 1. And Bellarmiâ—…e himselfe that he might the more safely defend himselfe in the Cause of Traditions sayes but how truly let other men Iudge Nullam Traditionem admittimus contra Scripturam L. 4. 〈◊〉 Verbo Dei c. 3. §. Deindè commune Word of their Father For wheresoever Christ holds his peace or that his words aâ—…e not Registred I am of S. d S. Aug. Tom. 96. in 〈◊〉 Ioh. in illâ—… Ferba Multa habeo dicere sed non potestis portare modò Augustines Opinion No man may dare without rashnesse say they were these or these So there were many unwritten Words of God which were never delivered over to the Church and thereâ—…ore never made Tradition And there are many Traditions which cannot be said to be the unwritten word of God For I believe a Learned Romanist that will weigh before he speakes will not easily say That to Annoint or use Spittle in Baptisme or to use three Dippings in the use of that Sacrament or diverse other like Traditions had their Rise from any Word of God unwritten Or if he be so hardy as to say so 't is gratis dictum and he will have enough to doe to prove it So there may be an unwritten Word of God which is no Tradition And there are many Traditions which are no unwritten Word of God Therfore Tradition must be taken two wayes Either as it is the Churches Act delivering or the Thing thereby delivered and then 't is Humane Authority or from it and unable infallibly to warrant Divine Faith or to be the Object of it Or els as it is the unwritten Word of God and then where ever it can be made to appeare so 't is of divine and infallible Authority no question But then I would have A. C. consider where he is in A. C. p. 49. this Particular He tels us We must know infallibly that the Bookes of Holy Scripture are Divine and that this must be done by unwritten Tradition but so as that this Tradition is the Word of God unwritten Now let him but prove that this or any Tradition which the Church of Rome stands upon is the Word of God though unwritten and the businesse is ended But A. C. must not thinke that because the Tradition of the Church tels me these Bookes are Verbum Dei Gods A. C. p. 50. Word and that I do both honour and believe this Tradition That therefore this Tradition it selfe is Gods Word too and so absolutely sufficient and infallible to worke this Beliefe in me Therefore for ought A. C. hath yet added we must on with our Inquiry after this great Businesse and most necessary Truth 2. For the second way of proving That Scripture should be fully and sufficiently knowne as by Divine and Infallible Testimony Lumine proprio by the resplendency of that Light which it hath in it selfe onely and by the witnesse that it can so give to it selfe I could never yet see cause to allow a Hook l. 2. §. 4 For as there is no place in Scripture that tels us Such Books containing such and such Particulars are the Canon and infallible Will and Word of God So if there were any such place that were no sufficient proofe For a man may justly aske another Booke to beare witnesse of that and againe of that another and where ever it were written in Scripture that must be a part of the Whole And no created thing can alone give witnesse to it selfe and make it evident nor one part testifie for another and satisfie where Reason will but offer to contest Except those Principles onely of Naturall knowledge which appeare manifest by intuitive light of understanding without any Discourse And yet they also to the weaker sort require Induction preceding Now this Inbred light of Scripture is a thing coincident with Scripture it selfe and so the Principles and the Conclusion in this kind of proofe should be entirely the same which cannot be Besides if this inward Light were so cleare how could there have beene any variety among the Ancient Believers touching the Authority of S. a Euseb. L. 2. c. 27. fine Edit Basil. 1549. Iames and S. Jude's Epistles and the b Euseb. L. 3. c. 25. Apocalyps with other Bookes which were not received for diverse yeares after the rest of the New Testament For certainly the Light which is in the Scripture was the same then which now it is And how could the Gospell of S. Bartholomew of S. Thomas and other counterfeit peeces obtaine so much credit with some as to be received into the Canon if the evidence of this Light were either Universall or Infallible of and by it selfe And this though I cannot approve yet me thinks you may and upon probable grounds at least For I hope no †Except A. C. whose boldness herein I cannot but pitie For he denies this light to the Scripture and gives it to Tradition His words are p. 52. Tradition of the Church is of a company which by its owne light shewes it selfe to bee infallibly assisted c. Romanist will deny but that there is as much light in Scripture to manifest and make ostension of it selfe to be infallibly the written Word of God as there is in any Tradition of the Church that it is Divine and infallibly the unwritten Word of God And the Scriptures saying from the mouthes of the Prophets b Isa 44. passina Thus saith the Lord and from the mouthes of the a Act. 28. 25. Apostles that the Holy Ghost spake by them are at least as able and as fit to beare witnesse to their owne Verity as the Church is to beare witnesse to her owne Traditions by bare saying they come from the Apostles And your selves would never go to the Scripture to prove that there are Traditions b 2. Thess. 2. 15. Iude vers 3. as you do if you did not thinke the Scripture as easie to be discovered by inbred light in itselfe as Traditions by their light And if this be so then it is as probable at the least which some of ours affirme That Scripture may bee knowne to bee the Word of God by the Light and Lustre which it hath in it selfe as it is which you c In your Articles delivered to D. W. to be answered And A. C. p. 52. affirme That a
others And Miracles are not sufficient alone to prove it unlesse both They and the Revelation too agree with the Rule of Scripture which is now an unalterable Rule by b Gal. 1. 8. man or Angell To all this A. C. sayes nothing save that I seeme not to admit of an infallible Impulsion of a private Spirit ex parte subjecti A. C. p. 52. without any infallible Reason and that sufficiently applied ex parte objecti which if I did admit would open a gap to all Enthusiasmes and dreames of fanaticall men Now for this yet I thank him For I do not onely seeme not to admit but I doe most clearely reject this phrensie in the words going before 4. The last way which gives c Utitur tamâ—… sacra Doctrina Ratione Humanâ non quidem ad probandum Fidem ipsam sed ad manifest andum aliqua alia quae traduntur in hac Doctrina Tho. p. 1. q. 1. A. 8. ad 2. Passibus rationis novus homo tendit in Deum S. Aug. de vera Relig. c. 26. Passibus veruÌ„ est sed nec aequis nec solis Nam Invisibilia Dei altiori modo quantum ad plura pâ—…rcipitg Fides quà m Ratio naturalis ex Creaturis in Deum procedens Tho. 2. 2. q. 2. A. 3. ad 3. Reason leave to come in and prove what it can may not justly be denied by any reasonable man For though Reason without Grace cannot see the way to Heaven nor believe this Booke in which God hath written the way yet Grace is never placed but in a reasonable creature and proves by the very seat which it hath taken up that the end it hath is to be spirituall eye-water to make Reason see what by †Animalis homo non percipit 1. Cor. 2. 14. Nature onely it cannot but never to blemish Reason in that which it can comprehend Now the use of Reason is very generall and man do what he can is still apt to search and seeke for a Reason why he will believe though after he once believes his Faith growes d Quia scientiae certitudinem habent ox naturali lumine Rationis humanae quae potest errare Theologia autem quae docet Objectum Notitiam Fidei sicut Fidem ipsam certitudinem habet ex lumine Divinae scientiae quae decipi non potest Tho. p. 1. q. 1. A. 5. c. Vt ipsà fide valentiores facti quod credimus intelligere mereamur S. Aug. cont Ep. Manichaei dictam Fundamentum c. 14. Hoc autem it a intelligendum est ut scientia certior sit Certitudine Evidentiae Fides verò certior Firmitate Adhaesionis Majus lumen in Scientia majus Robur in Fide Et hoc quia in Fide ad Fidem Actus imperatus Voluntatis concurrit Credere enim est Actus Intellectus Vero assentiontis productus ex Voluntatis Imperio Biel. in 3. Sent. d. 23. q. 2. A. 1. Unde Tho. Intellectus Credentis determinatur ad Unum non per Rationem sed per Voluntatem ideo Assensus hic accipitur pro Actu Intellectus secundum quod à Voluntate determinatur ad Vnum 2. 2. q. 2. A. 1. ad 3. stronger than either his Reason or his Knowledge and great reason for this because it goes higher and so upon a safer Principle than either of the other can in this life In this Particular the Bookes called the Scripture are commonly and constantly reputed to bee the Word of God and so infallible Verity to the least point of them Doth any man doubt this The world cannot keepe him from going to weigh it at the Ballance of Reason whether it bee the Word of God or not To the same Weights hee brings the Tradition of the Church the inward motives in Scripture it selfe all Testimonies within which seeme to beare witnesse to it and in all this there is no harme the danger is when a man will use no other Scale but Reason or preferre Reason before any other Scale For the Word of God and the Booke containing it refuse not to bee weighed by a Si vobis rationi veritati consentanca videntur in pretio habete c. de mysteriis Religionis Iustin. Mart. Apol. 2. Igitur si fuit dispositio Rationis c. Tertull. L de Carne Christi c. 18. Rationabile est credere Deum esse Autorem Scripturae Henr. a Gand. Sum To. 1. Ar. 9. q. 3. Reason But the Scale is not large enough to containe nor the Weights to measure out the true vertue and full force of either Reason then can give no supernaturall ground into which a man may resolve his Faith That Scripture is the Word of God infallibly yet Reason can go so high as it can prove that Christian Religion which rests upon the Authority of this Booke stands upon surer grounds of Nature Reason common Equity and Iustice than any thing in the World which any Infidell or meere Naturalist hath done doth or can adhere unto against it in that which he makes accounts or assumes as Religion to himselfe The Ancient Fathers relied upon the Scriptures no Christians more and having to doe with Philosophers men very well seene in all the subtilties which Naturall Reason could teach or learne They were often put to it and did as often make it good That they had sufficient warrant to relie so much as They did upon Scripture In all which Disputes because they were to deale with Infidels they did labour to make good the Authority of the Booke of God by such Arguments as unbelievers themselves could not but thinke reasonable if they weighed them with indifferency For though I set the Mysteries of Faith above Reason which is their proper place yet I would have no man thinke They contradict Reason or the Principles thereof No sure For Reason by her own light can discover how firmely the Principles of Religion are true but all the Light shee hath will never bee able to finde them false Nor may any man thinke that the Principles of Religion even this That Scriptures are the Word of God are so indifferent to a Naturall eye that it may with as just cause leane to one part of the Contradiction as to the other For though this Truth That Scripture is the Word of God is not so Demonstratively evident a priori as to enforce Assent yet it is strengthen'd so abundantly with probable Arguments both from the Light of Nature it selfe and Humane Testimony that he must be very wilfull and selfe-conceited that shall dare to suspect it Nay yet farther a Hook L. 3. §. 8. Si Plato ipse viveret me interrogantem non aspernaretur c. S. Aug. de verá Relig. c. 3. Vide amus quatenus Ratio potest progredi á visibilibus ad invisibilia c. Ibid. c. 29. It is not altogether impossible to proove it even by Reason a Truth infallible or else to make them deny some
be because it rests upon Divine Authority which cannot deceive whereas Knowledge or at least he that thinks he knowes is not ever certaine in Deductions from Principles †§. 16. 〈◊〉 13. But the Evidence is not so deere For it is c Heb. 11. 1. of things not seene in regard of the Object and in regard of the Subject thatsees it is in d 1 Cor. 13. 12. And A. C. confesses p. 52. That this very thing in Question may be known infallibly when 't is knowne but obscurely Et Scotus in 3. Dist. 23 q. 1. fol. 41. B. Hoc modo sacile est videre quomodo â—…ides est cum aenigmate obscuritate Quia Habitus Fidei non credit Articulum esse verum ex Evidentia Objâ—…cti sed propter hoc quod assentit veracitati infâ—…ndentis Habitum in hoc revelantis Credibilia aenigmate in a Glasse or darke speaking Now God doth not require a full Demonstrative Knowledge in us that the Scripture is his Word and therefore in his Providence hath kindled in it no Light for that but he requires our Faith of it and such a certaine Demonstration as may fit that And for that he hath left sufficient Light in Scripture to Reason and Grace meeting where the soule is morally prepared by the Tradition of the Church unlesse you be of Bellarmine's e Bellar. l. 3. de Eccles. c. 14. Credere 〈◊〉 esse divinaâ—… Scripturas non est omninò necessarium ad salutem I will not breake my Discourse to risâ—…e this speech of Bellarmine it is bad enough in the best sense that favour it selfe can give it For if he meane by omninò that it is not altogether or simply necessary to believe there is Divine Scripture and a written Word of God that 's false that being granted which is among all Christians That there is a Scripture And God would never have given a Supernaturall unnecessary thing And if he meanes by omninò that it is not in any wise necessary then it is sensibly false For the greatest upholders of Tradition that ever were made the Scripture very necessary in all the Ages of the Church So it was necessary because it was given and given because God thought it necessary Besides upon Romane Grounds this I thinke will follow That which the Tradition of the present Church delivers as necessary to believe is omninò necessary to salvation But that there are Divine Scriptures the Tradition of the present Church delivers as necessary to believe Therefore to believe there are Divine Scriptures is omninò be the sense of the word what it can necessary to Salvation So Bellarmine is herein foule and unable to stand upon his owne ground And he is the more partly because he avouches this Proposition for truth after the New Testament written And partly because he might have seene the state of this Proposition carefully examined by Gandavo and distinguished by Times Sum. p. 1. A. 8. q. 4. fine Opinion That to believe there are any Divine Scriptures is not omninò necessary to Salvation The Authority which you pretend against this is out of a Lib. 1. §. 14. Hooker Of things necessary the very chiefest is to know what Bookes we are bound to esteeme Holy which Point is confessed impossible for the Scripture it selfe to teach Of this b Protest Apol. Tract 1. §. 10. N. 3. Brierly the Store-house for all Priests that will be idle and yet seeme well read tels us That c L. 2. §. 4. Hooker gives a very sensible Demonstration It is not the Word of God which doth or possibly can assure us that wee doe well to thinke it is His Word for if any one Booke of Scripture did give Testimony to all yet still that Scripture which giveth credit to the rest would require another to give credit unto it Nor could we ever come to any pause to rest our assurance this way so that unlesse beside Scripture there were something that might assure c. And d L. 2. §. 7. L. 3. §. 8. this he acknowledgeth saith Brierly is the Authority of Gods Church Certainely Hooker gives a true and a sensible Demonstration but Brierly wants fidelity and integrity in citing him For in the first place Hooker's speech is Scripture it selfe cannot teach this nor can the Truth say that Scripture it selfe can It must needs ordinarily have Tradition to prepare the minde of a man to receive it And in the next place where he speaks so sensibly That Scripture cannot beare witnesse to it selfe nor one part of it to another that is grounded upon Nature which admits no created thing to bee witnesse to it selfe and is acknowledged by our Saviour e S. Ioh. 5. 31. He speakes of himselfe as man If I beare witnesse to my selfe my witnesse is not true that is is not of force to bee reasonably accepted for Truth But then it is more then manifest S. Ioh. 8. 13. that Hooker delivers his Demonstration of Scripture alone For if Scripture hath another proofe nay many other proofes to usher it and lead it in then no question it can both prove and approve it selfe His words are So that unlesse besides Scripture there be c. Besides Scripture therefore he excludes not Scripture though he call for another Proofe to lead it in and help in assurance namely Tradition which no man that hath his braines about him denies In the two other Places Brierly falsifies shamefully for folding up all that Hooker sayes in these words This other meanes to assure us besides Scripture is the Authority of Gods Church he wrinkles that Worthy Authour desperately and shrinkes up his meaning For in the former place abused by Brierly no man can set a better state of the Question betweene Scripture and Tradition then Hooker doth a L. 2. §. 7. His words are these The Scripture is the ground of our Beliefe The Authority of man that is the Name he gives to Tradition is the Key which opens the doore of entrance into the knowledge of the Scripture I aske now when a man is entred and hath viewed a house and upon viewing likes it and upon liking resolves unchangeably to dwell there doth he set up his Resolution upon the Key that let him in No sure but upon the goodnesse and Commodiousnesse which he sees in the House And this is all the difference that I know betweene us in this Point In which do you grant as you ought to do that we resolve our Faith into Scripture as the Ground and we will never deny that Tradition is the Key that lets us in In the latter place Hooker is as plaine as constant to himselfe and Truth b L. 3. §. 8. His words are The first outward Motive leading men so to esteeme of the Scripture is the Authority of Gods Church c. But afterwards the more wee bestow our Labour in reading or learning the Mysteries thereof the
It must follow That Christ should be present with all his Ministers that Preach his word to make them Insallible which daily Experience tells us is not so The third Place urged by A C is S. Luke 22. Where the Prayer of Christ S. Luke 22. 3â—… will effect no more then his Promise hath performed neither of them implying an Insallibility for or in the Church against all Errours whatsoever And this almost all his owne side confesse is spoken either of S. Peters person only or of him and his Successors * Bellar. L. 4. de Ro. Pont c 3. §. Est igitur tertia Hee understood the place of both S. Peter and his Successors or both Of the Church it is not spoken and therefore cannot prove an unerring Power in it For how can that Place prove the Church cannot Erre which speakes not at all of the Church And 't is observable too that when the Divines of Paris expounded this Place that Christ here prayed for S. Peter as he represented the VVhole Catholike Church and obtained for it that the Faith of the Catholike Church nunquam deficeret should never so erre as quite to fall away †Quae Expositio falsa est Primò quia c. Bell. ibid. §. 2. And he sayes t is false because the Parisiâ—…ns expounded it of the Church only Uolunt enim prosolâ Ecclesiae esse â—…ratum Ibid. §. 1. Bellarmine is so stiffe for the Pope that he sayes expresly This Exposition of the Parisians is false and that this Text cannot be meant of the Catholike Church Not be meant of it Then certainly it ought not to be alledged as Prooâ—…e of it as here it is by A. C. The fourth Place named by A. C. is S. Iohn 14. And the consequent Place to it A. C. p. 57 S. Ioh. 14. 16. 17. S. Iohn 10. 13. S. John 16 These Places containe an other Promise of Christ concerning the comming of the Holy Ghost Thus That the Comforter shall abide with them forever That this Comforter is the Spirit of Truth And That this Spirit of Truth will lead them into all Truth Now this Promise as it is applyed to the Church consisting of all Believers which are and have beene since Christ appeared in the Flesh including the Apostles is a Field L. 4. de Eccles. c. 2. free from all errâ—…ur and ignorance of Divine things absolute and without any Restriction For the Holy Ghost did lead them into all Truth so that no Errour was to be found in that Church But as it is appliable to the whole Church Militant in all succeeding times so the Promise was made with a Limitation b And Theodoret proceeds farther and sayes Neque divini Prophetae neque mirabiles Apostoli omnia praesciverunt Quae cunque enim expediebant ea illis significavit gratia Spiritûs Theod. in 1. Tim. 3. v. 14 15. namely that the Blessed Spirit should abide with the Church for ever and lead it into all Truth but not simply into all Curious Truth no not in or about the Faith but into all Truth necessary to Salvation And against this Truth the Whole Catholike Church cannot erre keeping her self to the Direction of the Scripture as Christ hath appointed her For in this very Place where the Promise is made That the Holy Ghost shall teach you all things 't is added that He shall bring all things to their remembrance What simply all things No But all things which Christ had told them S. Joh. 14. So there is a Limitation S. Ioh. 14. 26. put upon the words by Christ himselfe And if the Church will not erre it must not ravell Curiously into unnecessary Truths which are out of the Promise nor follow any other Guide then the Doctrine which Christ hath left behinde him to governe it For if it will come to the End it must keepe in the Way And Christ who promised the Spirit should lead hath no where promised that it shall follow its Leader into all Truth and at least Infallibly unlesse you will Limit as before So no one of these Places can make good A. C s. Assertion That the Whole Church cannot erre Generally in any one Point of Divine Truth In Absolute Foundations c §. 21. Nu. 5. she cannot in Deductions and Superstructures she may Now to all that I have said concerning the Right which Particular Churches have to Reforme themselves when the Generall Church cannot for Impediments or will not for Negligence which I have prooved at large a § 24 N 1 2 c. A. C. p. 57. before All the Answer that A. C. gives is First Quo Judice Who shall be Iudge And that shall bee the Scripture and the * Si de modica Quaestione Disceptatio esset nonne oporteret in Antiquissimas recurrere Ecclesias in quibus Apostoli conversati sunt ab its de praesenti Quaestione sumere quod certum liquidum est Quid autem si neque Apostoli quidem Scripturas reliquissent nobis nonne oportebat Ordinem sequi Traditionis c. Irenaeus L. 8. advers Hares c. 4. Primitive Church And by the Rules of the one and to the Integrity of the other both in Faith and Manners any Particular Church may safely Reforme it selfe Secondly That no Reformation in Faith can be needfull in the Generall Church but only in Particular Churches In which Case also he saith Particular Churches may not A. C p. 58. take upon them to Judge and Condemne others of Errours in Faith Well how farre forth Reformation even of Faith may be necessary in the Generall Church I have expressed c §. 25. Nu. 4. already And for Particular Churches I do not say that they must take upon them to Iudge or Condemne others of Errour in Faith That which I say is They may Reforme themselves Now I hope to Reforme themselves and to Condemne others are two different Workes unlesse it fall out so that by Reforming themselves they do by consequence Condemne any other that is guilty in that Point in which they Reforme themselves and so farre to Iudge and Condemne others is not onely lawfull but necessary A man that lives religiously doth not by and by sit in Iudgement and Condemne with his mouth all Prophane Livers But yet while he is silent his very Life condemnes them And I hope in this Way of Judicature A. C. dares not say 't is unlawfull for a particular Church or man to Condemne another And farther whatsoever A. C. can say to the contrary there are diverse Cases where Heresies are knowne and notorious in which it will be hard to say as he doth That A. C. p. 58. one Particular Church must not Iudge or Condemne another so farre forth at least as to abhorre and protest against the Heresie of it Thirdly If one Particular Church may not Iudge or Condemne another what must then be done where Particulars need Reformation What Why
Siomnes nullum fuit hactenus Concilium Generale neque etiam videtur deinceps suturum Bcl. 1. de Coâ—…c c. 17. §. 1. Bellarmine if you will not believe me Next saith he If all these Pastors pray unanimously for the promised Assistance of the Holy Ghost Why but if all Pastors cannot meet together all cannot pray together nor all search the Scriptures together nor all upon that Search Decree together So that is supposed in vaine too Yea but Thirdly If all that meet doe pray unanimously What then All that meet are not simply All. Nor doth the Holy Ghost come and give his Assistance upon every Prayer that is made unanimously though by very many Prelates or other Faithfull People met together unlesse all other Requisites as well as Vnanimity to make their prayer to bee heard and granted bee observed by them So that an Vnanimous Prayer is not adequately supposed and therefore Concludes not But lastly how far a Generall Councell if all A. C s. Conditions bee observed is firm and Infallible that shall be more fully discussed at †§. 33. Consil 1. after In the meane time these two words Firme and Infallible are ill put together as Synonima's For there are some things most Infallible in themselves which yet could never get to be made firme among men And there are many things made firm by Law both in Churches Kingdomes which yet are not Infallible in themselves So to draw all together to settle CoÌ„troversies in the Church there is a Visible Iudge and Infallible but not living And that is the * And this was thought a sufficient â—…udge too when Christians were as humble as learned I am sure Optatus thought so Quaeren li sunt Iudices Si Christiani de utraque parte dari non possunt quia studâ—…s veritas impeditur De forts quaerendus est Iudex Si Paganus non potest nosse Christiana Secreta Si Iudaeus inimicus est Christiani Baptismatis Ergo in terris de hac re nullum poterit reporiri Iudiciis De Caelo quaerendus est Iudex Sed ut quid pulsamus ad Coelum quum habemus hîc in Evangelio Testamentum inquam quia hoc loco recâ—…e possunt terrena coelestibus comparari talc est quod quivis hominum habens numerosos siltos his quamdiu pater praesens est ipse imperat singulis non est adhuc necessarium Testamâ—…ntuÌ„ Sic Christus quamdiu praesens in terris suit quamvis nec modo desit pro tempore quicquid necessarium crat Apostolis Imperavit Sed quomodo terrenus Pater dum se in consinio senserit mortis timens ne post mortem suam ruptà pace litigent fratres adhibitis Testibus Uoluntatem suam de Pectore morituro transfert in Tabulas diu duraturas Et si fuâ—…rit inter fratres contentio nata non itur ad Tumulum sed quaeritur TestamentuÌ„ qui Tumulo quiescit tacitus de Tabulis loquitur Vivus cujus est TestamentuÌ„ in caelo est Ergo Voluntas ejus velut in Testamento sic in Evangelio inquiratur Opt. l. 5. adv Parm. This pregnant Place of Optatus That the Scripture is the Iudge of Divine Truth when ever it is questioned though Baldwin dare not deny yet he would faine slide both by it and by a paralell place as full in S. Aug. in Psal. 21. Expositione 〈◊〉 with this shift that S. Augustine in another place had rather use the Testimony of Tradition that is the Testimony Nuncupativi potius quâm Scripti Testamenti of the Nuncupative rather then the Written Will of Christ. Baldwin in Optat. L. 5. But this is a meere shift First because it is Petitio principii the meere begging of the Question For we deny any Testament of Christ but that which is written And A. C. cannot thew it in any one Father of the Church that Christ ever left behind him a Nuncupative obligatory Will Secondly because nothing is more plaine in these two Fathers Optatus and S. Augustine then that both of them appeale to the Wrrtten Will and make that the Iudge without any Exception when a matter of Faith comes in Question In Optat. the words are Habemus in Evangelio we have it in the Gospell And in Evangelio inquiratur Let it be inquired in the Gospell And Christ put it in tabulas diu duraturas into Written and lasting Instruments In S. Augustine the words are Our Father did not dye intestate c. And Tabulae aperiantur Let his Will his written Instruments be opened And Legantur Uerbamortui let the words of him that dyed be read And againe Aperi Legamus Open the Will and let us reade And Legamus quid litigamus Why do we strive Let 's read the Will And againe Aperi Testamentum lege Open the Will read All which Passages are most expresse and full for his Written Will and not for any Nuncupative Wil as Baldwin would put upon us And Hart who takes the same way with Baldwin is not able to make it out as appeares by D. Reynolds in his Conference with Hart. c. divis 1. p. 396. c. Scripture pronouncing by the Church And there is a visible and a Living Iudge but not Infallible And that is a Generall Councell lawfully called and so proceeding But I know no formall Confirmation of it needfull though A. C. require it * §. 28. N. 1. And so plainly S. Augustine speaking of S. Cyprians Errour about Rebaptization c. sayes Illis temporibus antequà m Plenarii Concilii sententiae quid in hac re sequendum esset t ot ius Ecclesiae Consensio confirmasset Uisum est ei cum c. L. 1. de Bapt. cont Donatist c. 18. So here is first Sententia Concilii And then the Confirmation of it is totius Ecclesiae Consensio the Consent of the whole Church yeelding unto it And so Gerson Concurrente Vniversali totius Ecclesiae consensu c. In Declaratione Ueritatum quae credenda sunt c. §. 4. For this that the Pope must confirme it or else the Generall Councell is invalid is one of the Romane Novelties For this cannot be shewed in any Antiquity void of just Exception The truth is the Pope as other Patriarchs and great Bishops used to doe did give his assent to such Councels as he approoved But that is no Corroboration of the Councell as if it were invalid without it but a Declaration of his consenting with the rest §. 33. Consid. 4. Nu. 6. but onely that after it is ended the Whole Church admit it bee it never so tacitely In the next Place A. C. interposes new matter quite out of the Conference And first in case of Distractions A. C. p. 59 60. and Disunion in the Church he would know what is to be done to Re-unite when a Generall Councell which is acknowledged a fit Iudge cannot be had by reason of manifold impediments Or if being called will not bee of one minde
prâ—…ng can be questioned in another unlesse it to tall out that 〈◊〉 Scriptuâ—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 appeare against it Buâ—… eâ—…t 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thâ—…se aâ—…e â—…o 〈◊〉 and manâ—…t and â—…ving the it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whâ—… or 〈◊〉 wiâ—…h 〈◊〉 without a Councell §. 33. 〈◊〉 5. Nâ—… 1. 2. another Councell of equall authority did reverse it And indeed I might have returned upon you againe If a Generall Councell not Confirmed by the Pope may erre which you affirme to what end then a Generall Councell And you may Answer yes For although a Generall Councell may erre yet the Pope as Head of the Church cannot An excellent meanes of unity to have all in the Church as the Pope will have it what ever Scripture say or the Church thinke And then I pray to what end a Generall Councell Will his Holinesse be so holy as to confirme a Generall Councell if it Determine against him And as for * 〈◊〉 L 4. dâ—… 〈◊〉 Pâ—…t â—…7 §. 3. c. Bellarmines reasons why a Generall Councell should be usefull if not necessary though the Pope bee Iâ—…fallible they are so weake in Part and in part so unworthy that I am sory any necessity of a bad cause should force so learned a man to make use of them Here A. C. tels mee The Caution mentioned as omitted makes my Answer werse then the Iesuite related A. C. p. 63. â—…4 it And that in two things First in that the Iesuite relates it thus Although it may erre but the Caution makes it as if it did actually erre Secondly in that the Iesuite relates That wee are bound to hold it till another come to reverse it that is wâ—…e not knowing whether it doe erre or not but onely that it may erre But the Caution puts the Case so as if the Determination of a Generall Councell actually erring were not ipso jure invalid but must stand in force and have externall Obedience yeelded to it till not onely morall Certainty but Evidence of Scripture or a Demonstration to the Contrary make the errour appeare And when it appeares wee must yeeld our Obedience till a Councell of equall Authority reverse it which perhaps will not bee found in an whole Age. So either the Iesuite relates this speech truly or lesse disgracefully And A. C. thinkes that upon better Iudgement I Will not allow this Caution Truly I shall not thanke the Iesuite for any his kindnesse here And for the Caution I must and doe acknowledge it mine even upon advisement and that whether it make my Answer worse or better And I thinke farther that the Iesuite hath no great Cause to thanke A. C. for this Defence of his Relation First then the Iesuite so sayes A. C. doth in his Relation make it but a supposition That a Generall Councell A. C. p. 63 may erre But the Caution expresses it as actually erring True But yet I hope this Expression makes no Generall Councell actually erre And then it comes all to one whether I suppose that such a Councell may erre or that it doe erre And 't is fitter for clearing the Difficulties into which the Church fals in such a Case to suppose and more then a supposition it is not a Generall Councell * Synodum Generalem aliquoties errâsse percepimus Wald. L. 2. de Doctrin Fidri Art 2. c. 19. §. 1. actually erring then as only under a Possibility of Erring For the Church hath much more to doe to vindicate it selfe from such an Errour actually being then from any the like Errour that might be Secondly A. C. thinkes he hath got great advantage A. C. p. 63. by the words of the Caution in that I say A Generall Councell erring is to stand in force and have externall Obedience at least so farre as it consists in silence Patience and forbearance yeelded to it till Evidence of Scripture or a Demonstration to the Contrary make the Error appeare and untill therupon another Councell of equal Authority did reverse it Well! I say it again But is there any one word of mine in the Caution that speakes of our knowing of this Errour Surely not one that 's A. C s. Addition Now suppose a Generall Councell actually Erring in some Point of Divine Truth I hope it will not follow that this Errour must bee so grosse as that forthwith it must needes be knowne to private men And doubtlesse till they know it Obedience must be yeelded Nay when they know it if the Errour be not manifestly against Fundamentall verity in which case a Generall Councell can not easily erre I would have A C. and all wise men Consider Whether Externall Obedience be not even then to be yeelded For if Controversies arise in the Church some end they must have or they 'll teare all in sunder And I am sure no wisdome can thinke that fit Why then say a Generall Councell Erre and an Erring Decree be ipso jure by the very Law it selfe invalid I would have it wisely considered again whether it be not fit to allow a Generall Councell that Honour and Priviledge which all other Great Courts have Namely That there be a Declaration of the Invalidity of its Decrees as well as of the Laws of other Courts before private men can take liberty to refuse Obedience For till such a declaration if the Councel stand not in force A. C sets up Private Spirits to controll Generall Councels w ch is the thing he so often and so much cryes out against in the Protestants Therefore it may seeme very fit and necessary for the Peace of Christendome that a Generall Councell thus erring should stand in force till Evidence of Scripture or a Demonstration make the Errourto appeare * It is not long since A C. compared Councels to Parliaments it was but p. 60. And I hope a Parliament and the Acts of it must stand in force thoughsomthing bemistaken in them or found hurtfull till another Parliament of equal Authority reverse it and them For I presume you will not have any inferiour Authority to abrogate Acts of Parliament as that another Councell of equall Authority reverse it For as for Morall Certainty that 's not strong enough in Points of Faith which alone are spoken of here And if another Councell of equall Authority cannot be gotten together in an Age that is such an Inconvenience as the Church must beare when it happens And far better is that inconvenience then this other †§. 33. Consid. 4. N. 1. that any Authority lesse then a Generall Councell should rescinde the Decrâ—…es of it unlesse it erre manifestly and intolera'ly Or that the whole Church upon peaceable and just complaint of this Errour neglect or refuse to call a Councell and examine it And there come in Nationall or Provinciall Councels to a § 24. Nu. 1. reforme for themselves But no way must lye open to private men to b §. 38. Nu. 15. Refuse obedience till the Councell be heard
aliorum salutem expetunt c. Quidigitur mirum si in hoc Concilio fuerit Spiritus Sanctus c. Nos aliter Convenimus 〈◊〉 cum magnâ pompâ—… nâ—…sque ipsos quâ—…rimus atque nobispollicemur nihil nobis non licere de Plenitudine Potestatis Et quomodo Sp. Sanctus ejusmodi Concilia probare possit Fetus in Act. 15. 7 One of their owne who tels us plainly That the Apostles in their Councell delt very prudently did not precipitate their Iudgement but waighed all things For in Matters of Faith and which touch the Conscience it is not enough to say Volumus Mandamus We Will and Command And thus the Apostles met together in simplicity and singlenesse seeking nothâ—…ng but God and the Salvation of men Anâ—… what wonder if the Holy Ghost were present in such a Councell Nos alitèr But we meet otherwise in great pompe and seeke our selves and promise our selves that we may doe any thing out of the Plenitude of our power And how can the Holy Ghost allow of such meetings And if not allow or approove the Meetings then certainly not concurre to make every thing Infallible that shall be concluded in them And for all the Places together waigh them with indifferency and either they speake of the Church including the Apostles as all of them doe And then All grant the Uoyce of the Church is Gods Voyce Divine and Infallible Or else they are Generall unlimited and applyable to private Assemblies as well as Generall Councels which none grant to be Infalliâ—…le but some mad Enthusiasts Orels they are limited not simply into All truth but All necessary to salvation in which I shall easily grant a Generall Councell cannot erre suffering it selfe to be led by this Spirit of Truth in the Scripture and not taking upon it to lead both the Scripture and the Spirit For Suppose these Places or any other did promise Assistance even to Infallibility yet they granted it not to every Generall Councell but to the Catholike Body of the Church it selfe and if it be in the whole Church principally then is it in a Generall Councell but by Consequent as the Councell represents the Whole And that which belongs to a thing by consequent doth not otherwise nor longer belong unto it then it consents and cleaves to that upon which it is a consequent And therefore a Generall Councell hath not this Assistance but as it keepes to the whole Church and Spouse of Christ whose it is to heare His word and determine by it And therefore if a Generall Councell wil go out of the Churches way it may easily goe without the Churches Truth Fourthly I Consider That All agree That the Consid. 4. Church in Generall can never erre from the Faith necessary to Salvation No Persecution no Temptation no †S. Mat. 16 18. Gates of Hell whatsoever is meant by them can ever so prevaile against it For all the Members of the Militant Church cannot erre either in the whole Faith or in any Article of it it is impossible For if all might so erre there could be no union betweene them as Members and Christ the Head And no Vnion betweene Head and Members no Body and so no Church which cannot be But there is not the like consent That * Ecclesia Vniversalis fideÌ„ habet indefectibilem c. Non quidem in Generali Synodo congregata quam aliquoties errâsse percepimus c. Wald. L. 2. Doct. Fid. Ar. 2. c. 19. §. 1. §. 38. N. 4. Generall Councels cannot erre And it seemes strange to me the Fathers having to doe with so many Hereticks and so many of them opposing Church Authority that in the condemnation of those Hereticks this Proposition even in termes A Generall Councell cannot erre should not be found in any one of them that I can yet see Now suppose it were true That no Generall Councell had erred in any matter of moment to this day which will not be found true yet this would not have followed that it is therefore infallible and cannot erre I have no time to descend into Particulars therefore to the Generall still S. Augustine a Aug. L. 2. de Bapt. contra Donat cap. 3. puts a Difference betweene the Rules of Scripture and the Definitions of men This Difference is Praeponitur Scriptura That the Scripture hath the Prerogative That Prerogative is That whatsoever is found written in Scripture may neither be doubted nor disputed whether it be true or right But the Letters of Bishops may not only be disputed but corrected by Bishops that are more learned and wise then they or by Nationall Councels and Nationall Councels by Plenary or Generall And even b Ipsaque Plenaria saepâ—… priora à posterioribus emendari Plenary Councels themselves may be amended the former by the later It seemes it was no newes with S. Augustine that a Generall Councell might erre and therefore inferiour to the Scripture which may neither be doubted nor disputed where it affirmes And if it be so with the Definition of a Councell too as Vox Ecclesia â—…Word est ut non de 〈◊〉 judicenius rectene an secùs docuerit So. Stap. Relect c. 4 q. 1. Aâ—… Stapleton would have it That that may neither be doubted nor disputed Where is then the Scriptures Prerogative I know there is much shifting about this Place but it cannot be wrastled off b De Regulis Morum Disciplinâ Relect. Con. 6. q. 3. A. 4. Stapleton sayes first That S. Augustine speaks of the Rules of Manners and Discipline And this is Bellarmines last shift Both are out and Bellarmine in a Contradiction Bellarmine in a Contradiction For first he tels us Generall Councels cannot erre in c L. 2. de Concil c. 2. Princip Precepts of Manners and then to turne off Saint Augustine in this Place hee tels us That if Saint Augustine doth not speake of matter of Fact but of Right and of universall Questions of Right then he is to be understood d Ib. cap. 7. §. Potest etiam of Precepts of Manners not of Points of Faith Where he hath first runne himselfe upon a Contradiction and then we have gained this ground upon him That either his Answer is nothing or els against his owne state of the Question A Generall Councell can erre in Precepts of Manners So belike when Bellarmine is at a shift A Generall Councell can and cannot erre in Precept of Manners And Both are out For the whole Dispute of Saint Augustine is against the Errour of Saint Cyprian followed by the Donatists which was an Errour in Faith Namely That true Baptisme could not be given by Hereticks and such as were out of the Church And the Proofe which Stapleton and Bellarmine draw out of the subsequent words e Quando aliquo rerum experimeÌ„to quod clausum erat aperitur VVhen by any experiment of things that which was shut is opened is too weake For
their own and are with all submission to be observed by every Christian where Scripture or evident Demonstration come not against them Nor doth it make way for the Whirlewind of a private Spirit For Private Spirits are too giddy to rest upon Scripture and too heady and shallow to be acquainted with Demonstrative Arguments And it were happy for the Church if she might never be troubled with Private Spirits till they brought such Arguments I know this is hotly objected against c Praefat. p. 29. Hooker the d Dialogus â—…ctus Deus Rex Authour cals him a e Cordatus Protestans Wise Protestant yet turnes thus upon him If a Councell must yeeld to a Demonstrative Proofe Who shall Iudge whether the Argument that is brought be a Demonstration or not For every man that will kicke against the Church will say the Scripture he urges is evident and his Reason a Demonstration And what is this but to leave all to the wildenesse of a Private Spirit Can any ingenuous man read this Passage in Hooker and dreame of a Private Spirit For to the Question Who shall judge Hooker answers as if it had beene then made f Praef. p. 29. And therefore A. C. is much to blame after all this to talk of a pretext of seeming evident Scripture or Demonstration As he doth p 59. An Argument necessary and Demonstrative is such saith he as being proposed to any man and understood the minde cannot chuse but inwardly assent unto it So it is not enough to thinke or say it is Demonstrative The Light then of a Demonstrative Argument is the Evidence which it selfe hath in it selfe to all that understand it Well but because all understand it not If a Quarrell be made Who shall decide it No Question a § 32. Nu. 2. but a Generall Councell not a Private Spirit first in the intent of the Authour for Hooker in all that Discourse makes the Sentence of the Councell b Praesat p. 28. binding and therefore that is made Judge not a Private Spirit And then for the Judge of the Argument it is as plaine For if it be evident to any man then to so many Learned men as are in a Councell doubtlesse And if they cannot but assent it is hard to thinke them so impious that they will define against it And if that which is thought evident to any man be not evident to such a grave Assembly it is probable 't is no Demonstration and the producers of it ought to rest and not to trouble the Church Nor is this Hooker's alone nor is it newly thought on by us It is a Ground in Nature which Grace doth ever set right never undermine And c 2 de Bapt cont Don. cap. 4. S. Augustine hath it twice in one Chapter That S. Cyprian and that Councell at Carthage would have presently yeelded to any one that would d Uni verum dicenti demonstr anti demonstrate Truth Nay it is a Rule with e Cont. Fund cap. 4. him Consent of Nations Authority confirmed by Miracles and Antiquity S. Peters Chaire and Succession from it Motives to keepe him in the Catholike Church must not hold him against Demonstration of Truth f Quae quidem si tam manifesta monâ—…ratur ut in dubtum â—…enire non possit praeponenâ—…a est omâ—…ibus ills rebus quiius in Catholica 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aciquid apertissimâ—… in Euangelâ—… 〈◊〉 c. 4. which if it bee so clearely demonstrated that it cannot come into doubt it is to be preferred before all those things by which a man is held in the Catholike Church Therefore an evident Scripture or Demonstration of Truth must take place every where but where these cannot be had there must be Submission to Authority And doth not Bellarmine himselfe grant this For speaking of Councels he delivers this Proposition That Inferiours may not judge whether their Superiours and that in a Councell do proceed lawfully or not But then having bethought himselfe that Inferiours at all times and in all Causes are not to be cast off he adds this Exception a L. 2 de Concil c. 8. §. Alii dicunt Cencilium Nisi manifestissimè constet intolerabilem Errorem committi Unlesse it manifestly appeare that an intolerable Errour be committed So then if such an Errour be and be manifest Inferiours may do their duty and a Councell must yeeld unlesse you will accuse Bellarmine too of leaning to a Private Spirit for neither doth he expresse who shall judge whether the Errour be intolerable This will not downe with you but the Definition of a Generall Councell is and must be infallible Your Fellowes tell us and you can affirme no more That the Voice of the Church determining in Councell is not b Stapl. Relect. Cont. 4. Q. 3. Ar. 1. Humane but Divine That is well Divine then sure Infallible yea but the Proposition stickes in the throat of them that would utter it It is not Divine simply but in a c Divina suo modo Ibid. And so A. C. too who hath opened his mouth very wide to proove the Succession of Pastors in the Church to be of Divine and infallible Authority yet in the close is forced to add At least in some sort p. 51. manner Divine Why but then sure not infallible because it may speak lowdest in that manner in which it is not Divine Nay more The Church forsooth is an infallible Foundation of Faith d In altiori genere viz. in geners causae efficientis atque adeò aliquâ exparte formalis Ibid. Q. 4. Ar. 3. in an higher kinde then the Scripture For the Scripture is but a Foundation in Testimony and Matter to be believed but the Church as the efficient cause of Faith and in some sort the very formall Is not this Blasphemie Doth not this knock against all evidence of Truth and his owne Grounds that sayes it Against all evidence of Truth For in all Ages all men that once admitted the Scripture to be the Word of God as all Christians doe doe with the same breath grant it most undoubted and infallible But all men have not so judged of the Churches Definitions though they have in greatest Obedience submitted to them And against his owne Grounds that sayes it For the Scripture is absolutely and every way Divine the Churches Definition is but suo modo in a sort or manner Divine But that which is but in a sort can never be a Foundation in an Higher Degree then that which is absolute and every way such Therefore neither can the Definition of the Church be so infallible as the Scripture much lesse in altiori genere in a higher kinde then the Scripture But because when all other things faile you flie to this That the Churches Definition in a Generall Councell is by Inspiration and so Divine and infallible My haste shall not carrie mee from a little Consideration of that too Sixtly then If the
est data ulla Authoritas ergo nec Concilio Generali quatenus Ecclesiam Vniversalem repraesentat Bellar. L. 2. de Concil c. 16. §. Quod si Ecclesiae with Mandate to determine The Places of Scripture with Expositions of the Fathers upon them make me apt to believe this S. Peter saith S. Augustine c Petrus personam Ecclesiae Catholicae sustinet huic datae sunt claves quùm Petro datae De Agon Chr. c. 30. did not receive the Keyes of the Church but as sustaining the Person of the Church Now for this Particular suppose the Key of Doctrine be to let in Truth and shut out Error and suppose the Key rightly used infallible in this yet this Infallibility is primely in the Church in whose person not strictly in his owne S. Peter received the Keyes But here Stapleton layes crosse my way againe and would thrust me out of this Consideration He * Rel. Cont. 6. q. 3. A. 5. Sed propter Primatum quem gerebat Ecclesiae ideoque etsi finalitèr Ecclesia accepit tamen formalitèr P â—…trus accepit grants that S. Peter received these Keyes indeed and in the Person of the Church but saith he that was because he was Primate of the Church And therefore the Church received the Keyes finally but S. Peter formally that is if I mistake him not S. Peter for himselfe and his Successors received the Keyes in his owne Right but to this end to benefit the Church of which he was made Pastor But I keepe in my Consideration still and I would have this considered whether it be ever read in any Classicke Author That to receive a thing in the Person of another or sustaining the Person of another is onely meant finally to receive it that is to his good and not in his Right I should thinke he that receives any thing in the Person of another receives it indeed to his good and to his use but in his right too And that the primary and formall right is not in the receiver but in him whose person he sustaines while he receives it A man purchases Land and takes possession of it by an Attourney I hope the †Non est idem possidere alieno Nomine possidere Nam possidet cujus nomine possidetur Procurator aliena rei praestat Ministerium L. Quod meo 18. in Princ. H. de acquir Possess Celsus Attourney being the hand to receive it Instrumentally and no more shall take nor Vse nor right from the Purchaser A Man marries a Wife by a * Quando Matrimonium fit per Procuratorem Procurator est tantùm Conditio sine quâ non Sanch. de matrim L. 〈◊〉 Dispat 11. q. 4. Nu. 28. p. 128. Proxy This is not unusuall among great Persons But I hope he that hath the Proxy and receives the woman with the Ceremonies of Mariage in the Others Name must also leave her to be the Others Wife who gave him power to receive her for him This stumbling-blocke then is nothing and in my Consideration it stands still That the Church in Generall by the hands of the Apostles and their Successors received the Keyes and all Power signified by them and by the assistance of Gods Spirit may be able to use them but still in and by the same hands and perhaps to open and shut in some things infallibly when the Pope and a Generall Councell too forgetting both her and her Rule the Scripture are to seek how to turne these Keyes in their wards The third Particular I Consider is Suppose in the whole Catholike Church Militant an absolute Infallibility in the Prime Foundations of Faith absolutely necessary to Salvation and that this Power of not erring so is not * Non omnia illa que tradit Ecclesia sub Desinitione judiciali i. in Concilio sunt de Necessitate Salutis credenda sed illa duntaxat quae sic tradit concurrente Universali totius Ecclesiae consensu implicitè vel explicitè verè vel interpretativè Gerson Tract de Declaratione veritatum quae credenda sunt c. §. 4. par 1. p. 414. communicable to a Generall Councell which represents it but that the Councell is subject to errour This supposition doth not onely preserve that w ch you desire in the Church an Infallibility but it †Possit tamen contingere quòd quamvis Generale Concilium definiret aliquid contra Fidem Ecclesia Dei non exponeretur periculo Quia possit contingere quòd congregati in Concilio Generali essent pauci viles tam in re quà m in hominum reputatione respectu illorum quâ—… ad illud Concilium Generale minimè convenissent Et tunc illorum levitèr Error exâ—…irparetur per multitndinem meliorum sapientiorum famosiorum illis Quibut etiam multitudo simplicium adhaereret magis c. Och. Dial. P. 3. l. 3. c. 13. meets w th all inconveniences w ch usually have done and daily do perplexe the Church And here is still a Remedy for all things For if Private respects if * Many of these were potent at Ariminum and Seleucia Bandies in a Faction if power and favour of some parties if weaknesse of them which have the mannaging if any unfit mixture of State Councels if any departure from the Rule of the Word of God if any thing else sway and wrench the Councell the Whole a Determinationibus quae à Concilio vel Pontisice Summo siunt super iis dubitationibus quae substantiam sidci concernunt necessariò â—…redendum est dum Vniversalis Ecclesia non reclamet Fr. Pic. Mirand Theor. 8. Church upon evidence found in expresse Scripture or demonstration of this miscariage hath power to represent her selfe in another Body or Councell and to take order for what was amisse either practised or concluded So here is a meanes without any infringing any lawfull Authority of the Church to preserve or reduce unity and yet grant as I did and as the b Artic. 21. Church of England doth That a Generall Councell may erre And this course the Church heretofore took for she did cal and represent her self in a new Councell and define against the Heretical Conclusions of the former as in the case at Ariminum and the second of Ephesus is evident and in other Councels named by †Bel. L. 2. de Concil c 16. §. Tertio Concililium sine Papâ Bellarmine Now the Church is never more cunningly abused then when men out of this Truth that she may erre infer this falshood that she is not to be Obeyed For it will never follow She may erre Therefore She may not Govern For he that sayes Obey them which have the Rule over you and submit your selves for they watch for your soules a Heb. 13. 17. Heb. 13. Commands Obedience and expresly ascribes Rule to the Church And this is not only a Pastorall Power to teach and direct but a Praetorian also to Controll and Censure too where Errors