say that the Booke of Articles only was the Continent of the Church of Englands publike Doctrine She is not so narrow nor hath she purpose to exclude any thing which she acknowledges hers nor doth she wittingly permit any Crossing of her publike Declarations yet she is not such a shrew to her Children as to deny her Blessing or Denounce an Anathema against them if some peaceably dissent in some Particulars remoter from the Foundation as your owne Schoole men differ And if the Church of Rome since she grew to her greatnesse had not beene so fierce in this Course and too particular in Determining too many things and making them matters of Necessary Beliefe which had gone for many hundreds of years before only for things of Pious Opinion Christendome I perswade my selfe had beene in happier peace at this Day then I doubt we shall ever live to see it Well but A. C. will proove the Church of England a Shrew and such a Shrew For in her Booke * Can. 5. of Canons A. C. p. 48. She Excommunicates every man who shall hold any thing contrary to any part of the said Articles So A. C. But surely these are not the very words of the Canon nor perhaps the sense Not the Words for they are Whosoever shall affirme that the Articles are in any part superstitious or erroneous c. And perhaps not the sense For it is one thing for a man to hold an Opinion privately within himselfe and another thing boldly and publikely to affirme it And againe 't is one thing to hold contrary to some part of an Article which perhaps may bee but in the manner of Expression and another thing positively to affirme that the Articles in any part of them are superstitious and erroneous But this is not the Maine of the Businesse For though the Church of England Denounce Excommunication as is a Can. 5. before expressed Yet She comes farre short of the Church of Rome's severity whose Anathema's are not only for 39. Articles but for very many more * Concil Trident. above one hundred in matter of Doctrine and that in many Poynts as farre remote from the Foundation though to the farre greater Rack of mens Consciences they must be all made Fundamentall if that Church have once Determined them whereas the Church A. C. p. 45. of England never declared That every one of her Articles are Fundamentall in the Faith For 't is one thing to say No one of them is superstitious or erroneous And quite another to say Every one of them is fundamental and that in every part of it to all mens Beliefe Besides the Church of England prescribes only to her owne Children and by those Articles provides but for her owne peaceable Consent in those Doctrines of Truth But the Church of Rome severely imposes her Doctrine upon the whole World under paine of Damnation F. And that the Scriptures only not any unwritten Tradition was the Foundation of their Faith B. The Church of England grounded her Positive § 15 Articles upon Scripture and her Negative doe refute there where the thing affirmed by you is not affirmed by Scripture nor directly to be concluded out of it And here not the Church of England only but all Protestants agree most truly and most strongly in this That the Scripture is sufficient to salvation and containes in it all things necessary to it The Fathers a S. Basil. de verâ piâ fide Manifesta defectio Fidei est importare quicquam eorum quae scripta non sunt S. Hilar. L. 2. ad Const. Aug. Fidem tantùm secundum ca quae scripta sunt desider autem hoc qui repudiat Antichristus est qui simulat Anathema est S. Aug. L. 2. de Doctr. Christian. c. 9. In iis quae apertè in Scriptura posita sunt inveniuntur illa omnia quae continent sidem mâ—…resque vivendi And to this place Bellarm L. 4. de verbo Dei non scripto c. 11. saith that S. Augustine speakes de illis Dogmatibus quae necestaria sunt omnibus simpliciter of those Points of faith which are necessary simply for all men So farre then he grants the question And that you may know it fell not from him on the suddaine he had said as much before in the beginning of the same Chapter and here he confirmes it againe are plaine the b Sâ—…tus Proleg in sent q. 2. Scriptura sufficienter continet Doctrinam necessariam Uiatori Thom. 2. 2ae q. 1. A. 10. ad 1. In Doctrina Christi Apostolorum veritas fidei est suffi ientèr explicata And he speakes there of the written Word Schoolemen not strangers in it And have not we reason then to account it as it is The Foundation of our Faith And c Scripturam Fundamentum esse columnam Fidei fatemur in suo genere i. can genere Testimoniorum in materia Credendorum Relect. Con. 4. q. 1. Ar. 3. in fine Stapleton himselfe though an angry Opposite confesses That the Scripture is in some sort the Foundation of Faith that is in the nature of Testimony and in the matter or thing to be believed And if the Scripture be the Foundation to which we are to goe for witnesse if there be Doubt about the Faith and in which we are to find the thing that is to be believed as necessary in the Faith we never did nor never will refuse any Tradition that is Universall and Apostolike for the better Exposition of the Scripture nor any Definition of the Church in which she goes to the Scripture for what she teaches and thrusts nothing as Fundamentall in the Faith upon the world but what the Scripture fundamentally makes materiam Credendorum the substance of that which is so to be believed whether immediatly and expresly in words or more remotely till a cleare and full Deduction draw it out Against the beginning of this Paragraph A. C. excepts And first he sayes 'T is true that the Church of England grounded her Positive Articles upon Scripture A. C. p. 48. That is 't is true if themselves may be competent Iudges in their owne Cause But this by the leave of A. C. is true without making our selves Iudges in our owne Cause For that all the Positive Articles of the present Church of England are grounded upon Scripture we are content to be judged by the joynt and constant Beliefe of the Fathers which lived within the first foure or five hundred yeares after Christ when the Church was at the best and by the Councels held within those times and to submit to them in all those Points of Doctrine Therefore we desire not to be Iudges in our owne Cause And if any whom A. C. cals a Novellist can truly say and maintaine this he will quickly proove himselfe no Novellist And for the Negative Articles they refute where the thing affirmed by you is either not affirmed in
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
his abodc on Earth And this Promise of his spirituall presence was to their Successors else why to the end of the world The Apostles did not could not live so long But then to the * Rabanus Manr goes no furrher then that to the End some will alwayes bee in the world fit for Christ by his Spirit and Grace to inhabit Divina mansione inhabitatione digni Rab. in S. Mat. 28. 19 20. Pergatis habentes Dominum Protectorem Ducem saith S. Cypr. L. 4. Epist. 1. But he doth not say How farre sorth And loquitur Fidelibus sicut uni Corpcri S. Chrysost. Homil in S. Matth. And if S Chrysost. inlarge it so farre I hope A. C. will not extend the Assistance given or promised here to the whole Body of the Faithfull to an Infallible and Divine Assistance in every of them as well as in the Pastors and Doctors Successors the Promise goes no further then I am with you alwayes which reaches to continuall assistance but not to Divine and Infallible Or if he think me mistaken let him shew mee any One Father of the Church that extends the sense of this Place to Divine and Infallible Assistance granted hereby to all the Apostles Successors Sure I am Saint †In illis donâ—… quibus salus aliorum quaeritur qualia sunt Prâ—…phetiae interpretationes Sermanum c. Spiritus Sanctus nequaquam semper in Pradicatorib us permanet S. Greg. L. 2. Moral c 29. prin Edit Basil. 1551. Gregory thought otherwise For hee saies plainly That in those Gifts of God which concern other mens salvation of which Preaching of the Gospell is One the Spirit of Christ the Holy Ghost doth not alwayes abide in the Preachers bee they never so lawfully sent Pastors or Doctors of the Church And if the Holy Ghost doth not alwayes abide in the Preachers then most certainly he doth not abide in them to a Divine Infallibility alwayes The Third Place is in S. Iohn 14. where Christ sayes S. Iohn 14. 16. The Comforter the Holy Ghost shall abide with you for ever Most true againe For the Holy Ghost did abide with the Apostles according to Christs Promise there made and shall abide with their Successors for ever to * Iste Consolator non auferetur à Vobis sicut subtrahitur Humaint as mea per mortem sed aternalitèr erit Vobiscum hic per Grasiam in futuro per Gloriam Lyra. in S. John 14. 16 You see there the Holy Ghost shal be present by Consolation and Grace not by Infallible Assistance comfort and preserve them But here 's no Promise of Divine Infallibility made unto them And for that Promise which is made and expresly of Infallibility Saint Iohn 16. though not S. Ioh. 16. 13. cited by A. C. That 's confined to the Apostles onely for the setling of thâ—…m in all Truth And yet not simply all For there are some Truths saith a Omnem veritatem Non arbitror in hac vita in cujusquam mente compleri c. S. Augustin in S. Ioh Tract 96. versus fin Saint Augustine which no mans Soule can comprehend in this life Not simply all But b Spiritus Sanctus c. qui eos doceret Omnem Veritatem quam tunc cum iis loquebatur portare non poterant S. Ioh. 16. 12 13. S. Augustin Tract 97. in S. Ioh. prin all those Truths quae non poterant portare which they were not able to beare when Hee Conversed with them Not simply all but all that was necessary for the Founding propagating establishing and Confirming the Christian Church But if any man take the boldnesse to inlarge this Promise in the fulnesse of it beyond the persons of the Apostles themselves that will fall out which Saint c Omnes vel insipientissimi Haeretici qui se Christianos vocars volunt audacias figmentorum suorum quas maximè exhorret sensus humanus hac Occasione Evangelicae sententiae colorare comentur c. S. Augustin T. 97. in S. Ioh. circamed Augustine hath in a manner prophecyed Every Heretick will shelter himselfe and his Vanities under this Colour of Infallible Veritie I told you a * Num. 26. A. C. p. 52. little before that A. C. his Penne was troubled and failed him Therefore I will helpe to make out his Inference for him that his Cause may have all the strength it can And as I conceive this is that hee would have The Tradition of the present Church is as able to worke in us Divine and Infallible Faith That the Scripture is the VVord of God As that the Bible or Bookes of Scripture now printed and in use is a true Copie of that which was first written by the Penne-men of the Holy Ghost and delivered to the Church 'T is most true the Tradition of the present Church is a like operative and powerfull in and over both these workes but neither Divine nor Infallible in either But as it is the first morall Inducement to perswade that Scripture is the Word of God so is it also the first but morall still that the Bible wee now have is a true Copie of that which was first written But then as in the former so in this latter for the true Copie The last Resolution of our Faith cannot possibly rest upon the naked Tradition of the present Church but must by and with it goe higher to other Helpes and Assurances Where I hope A. C. will confesse wee have greater helpes to discover the truth or falshood of a Copie then wee have meanes to looke into a Tradition Or especially to sift out this Truth that it was a Divine and Infalliâ—…le Revelation by which the Originals of Scripture were first written That being fatre more the Subject of this Inquiry then the Copie which according to Art and Science may be examined by former preceding Copies close up to the very Apostles times But A. C. hath not done yet For in the last place hee tells us That Tradition and Scripture A. C. p. 53. without any vicious Circle doe mutually confirme the Authority either of other And truly for my part I shall easily grant him this so hee will grant mee this other Namely That though they doe mutually yet they doe not equally confirme the Authority either of other For Scripture doth infallibly confirme the Authority of Church Traditions truly so called But Tradition doth but morally and probably confirme the Authority of the Scripture And this is manifest by A. C ' s. owne Similitude For saith he 't is as a Kings Embassadors word of mouth and His Kings Letters beare mutuall witnesse to each other Iust so indeed For His Kings Letters of Credence under hand and seale confirme the Embassadors Authority Infallibly to all that know Seale and hand But the Embassadors word of mouth confirmes His Kings Letters but onely probably For else Why are they called Letters of Credence if they give not him
Scripture or not directly to be concluded out of it Vpon this Negative ground A. C. inferres againe That the Baptisme of Infants is not expresly at least not evidently affirmed in Scripture nor directly at least not A. C. p. 49. demonstratively concluded out of it In which case he professes he would gladly know what can be answered to defend this doctrine to be a Point of Faith necessary for the salvation of Infants And in Conclusion professes he cannot easily guesse what Answer can be made unlesse we will acknowledge Authority of Church-Tradition necessary in this Case And truly since A. C. is so desirous of an Answer I will give it freely And first in the Generall I am no way satisfied with A. C. his Addition not expresly at least not evidently what means he If he speake of the Letter of the Scripture then whatsoever is expresly is evidently in the Scripture and so his Addition is vaine If he speake of the Meaning of the Scripture then his Addition is cunning For many things are Expresly in Scripture which yet in their Meaning are not evidently there And what e're hee meane my words are That our Negative Articles refute that which is not affirmed in Scripture without any Addition of Expresly or Evidently And he should have taken my words as I used them I like nor change nor Addition nor am I bound to either of A. C s. making And I am as little satisfied with his next Addition nor directly at least not demonstratively concluded out of it For are there not many things in Good Logicke concluded directly which yet are not concluded Demonstratively Surely there are For to be directly or indirectly concluded flowes from the Moode or Forme of the Syllogisme To be demonstratively concluded flowes from the Matter or Nature of the Propositions If the Propositions be Prime and necessary Truths the Syllogisme is demonstrative and scientificall because the Propositions are such If the Propositions be probable onely though the Syllogisme be made in the clearest Moode yet is the Conclusion no more The Inference or Consequence indeed is cleare and necessary but the Consequent is but probable or topicall as the Propositions were Now my words were onely for a Direct Conclusion and no more though in this case I might give A. C. his Caution For Scripture here is the thing spoken of And Scripture being a Principle and every Text of Scripture confessedly a Principle among all Christians whereof no man a Habitus enim Pidâ—…i 〈◊〉 se habet in ordine ad Theologiam siâ—…ut se habit Habitus intelleclus ad Scâ—…s humnas M. Canus L 2. de Loc. c. 8. desires any farther proofe I would faine know why that which is plainely and apparently that is by direct Consequence proved out of Scripture is not Demonstratively or Scientifically proved If at least he think there can be any Demonstration in Divinity and if there can be none why did he add Demonstratively Next in Particular I answer to the Instance A. C. p. 49. which A. C. makes concerning the Baptisme of Infants That it may be concluded directly and let A. C. judge whether not demonstratively out of Scripture both that Infants ought to be baptized and that Baptisme is necessary to their Salvation And first that Baptisme is necessary to the Salvation of Infants in the ordinary way of the Church without binding God to the use and meanes of that Sacrament to which he hath bound us †S. Aug. expresly of the Baptisme of Infants l. 1. de Pecâ—…ato Meâ—… Râ—…ss c. 30. Et 〈◊〉 2. c 27. Et L. 3. de Aâ—… ejus Origine c 13. Nay they of the Romane Party which urge the Baptisme of Infants as a matter of Faith and yet not to be concluded out of Scripture when they are not in eager pursuit of this controversie but look upon truth with a more indifferent eye confesse as much even the Learned st of them as we ask Adâ—…â—…dum autem Salvato em dum dâ—…cit Nisi quis renatus c. neâ—…ssitatem 〈◊〉 omnibus at prâ—…de Parvulos debere renasâ—…i ex aquâ—… Spiritu Iansen Harm in Euang. c. 20. So here 's Baptismo Necessary for Infants and that Necessity imposed by our Saviour and not by the Church onely Hâ—… nâ—…llo alio quà m hoc Scripturae testimonio probare possunt Infantes essé baptizandos Mald. in S. Ioh. 3. 5. So Maldonat confesses that the Hereticks we know whom he meanes can prove the Baptisme of Infants by no Testimony of Scripture but this which speech implies That by this Testimony of Scripture it is and can be proved and therefore not by Church-Tradition only And I would faine know why Bellâ—… L. 1. de Baptism C. 8. §. 5. should bring three Arguments out of Scripture to prove the Baptisme of Infants Habemus in Scripturis tria argumenta c. if Baptisme cannot be proved at all out of Scripture but only by the Tradition of the Church And yet this is not Bellarmine's way alone but Suaâ—… in Tho. p. 3 q 68. Disput. 25. Sect. 1. §. 2. Ex Scripturâ possunt vaâ—… Argumenta sumi ad consirmandum Paed 〈◊〉 Et fiâ—… c And Gâ—…g de 〈◊〉 L. de Bapt s. Parâ—…um c. 2. §. 1. And the Pope himselfe Innocent 3. L. 3 Dâ—… 〈◊〉 it 42. Cap Majores And they all jump with S. Amb. L. 10. Epist. 84. ad Demâ—…dem â—…nem who expresly assirmes it Paedobaptismum esse Constitutionem Salvator is And proves it out of S. Joh. 3. 5. is expresse in S. Iohn 3. Except a man be borne againe of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdome of God So no Baptisme no Entrance Nor can Infants creepe in any other ordinary way And this is the received Opinion of all the Ancient Church of Christ a Infanâ—…s â—…os esse Originalis peccati iâ—…o baptizandos esse Antiquam Fidei Regulam vocat S. Aug. Ser. 8. de ver Apos c. 8. Et nâ—…mo vobis susurret doctrinas aliâ—…nas hoâ—… Ecclesia semper habuit semper tâ—…nuit hoc a majorum side recepit c. S. Aug. Ser. 10. de verb. Apost c. 2. S. Ambâ—…os L. 10. Ep. 84. cirâ—…a medium Et S. Chrysost. Hom. dâ—… Adam Eva. Hoc praedicat Ecclesia Catholica ubique dissusa And secondly That Infants ought to bee baptized is first plaine by evident and Direct Consequence out of Scripture For if there be no Salvation for Infants in the ordinary way of the Church but by Baptisme and this appeare in Scripture as it doth then out of all Doubt the Consequence is most evident out of that Scripture That Infants are to be baptized that their Salvation may be certaine For they which cannot b Egi causam corum qui pro se loqui non possunt c. S. Aug. Serm. 8. de verb. Apost c. 8. help themselves must not be left onely to Extraordinary Helpes of which wee have no
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
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
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
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 *
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
mee I humbly submitted to that which I hope was Gods Motion in Your Majesties And having thus layd all that Concernes this Discourse before your Gracious and most Sacred Majesty I most humbly present you with the Booke it selfe which as I heartily pray You to protect so doe I wholly submit it to the Church of England with my Prayers for Her Prosperity and my Wishes that I were able to doe Her better Service I have thus acquainted Your Majesty with all Occasions which both formerly and now againe have led this Tract into the light In all which I am a faithfull Relater of all Passages but am not very well satisfied who is now my Adversary M. Fisher was at the Conference Since that I finde A. C. at the print And whether These be two or but One Jesuite I know not since scarce One amongst them goes under One Name But for my owne part and the Error is not great if I mistake I thinke they are One and that One M. Fisher. That which induces me to thinke so is First the Great Inwardnesse of A. C. with M. Fisher which is so great as may well be thought to neighbour upon Identity Secondly the Stile of A. C. is so like M. Fishers that I doubt it was but one and the same hand that moov'd the penne Thirdly A. C. sayes expresly That the Jesuite himselfe made the Relation of the first A. C. p. 67. Conference with D. VVhite And in the Title Page of the Worke That Relation as well as This is said to be made by A. C. and published by VV. I. Therefore A. C. and the Iesuite are one and the same person or els one of these places hath no Truth in it Now if it be M. Fisher himselfe under the Name of A. C. then what needs these * Preface to the Relation of this Conference by A. C. words The Jesuite could be content to let passe the Chaplaines Censure as one of his Ordinary persecutions for the Catholicke Faith but A. C. thought it necessary for the Common Cause to defend the sincerity and Truth of his Relation and the Truth of some of the Chiefe Heads contained in it In which Speech give me leave to observe to your Sacred Majesty how grievously you suffer him and his Fellowes to he persecuted for the Catholicke Faith when your poore Subject and Servant cannot set out a true Copie of a Conference held with the Jesuite jussu Superiorum but by and by the man is persecuted God forbid I should ever offer to perswade a Persecution in any kind or practise it in the least For to my remembrance I have not given him or his so much as course Language But on the other side God forbid too That your Majesty should let both Lawes and Discipline sleepe for feare of the Name of Persecution and in the meane time let M. Fisher and his Fellowes Angle in all parts of your Dominions for your Subjects If in your Grace and Goodnesse you will spare their Persons Yet I humbly beseech You see to it That they be not suffer'd to lay either their Weeles or baite their Hookes or cast their Nets in every streame lest that Tentation grow both too generall and too strong I know they have many Devices to worke their Ends But if they will needs be fishing let them use none but * And S. Aug. is very full against the use of 〈◊〉 retiâ—… unlawfull Nets And saith the Fishermen theselves have greatest cause to take heed of them S. Aug. L. de Fide Oper. c. 17. Lawfull Netts Let 's have no dissolving of Oathes of Allegiance No deposing no killing of Kings No blowing up of States to settle Quod Volumus that which faine they would have in the Church with many other Nets as dangerous as these For if their Profession of Religion weâ—…e as goood as they pretend it is if they cannot Compasse it by Good Meanes I am sure they ought not to atttempt it by Bad. For if they will doe evill that good may come thereof the Apostle tells me Their Damnation's just Rom. 3. Rom. 3. 8. Now as I would humbly Beseech Your Majesty to keepe a serious Watch upon these Fisher-men which pretend S. Peter but fish not with His Net So would I not have You neglect another sort of Anglers in a Shallower Water For they have some ill Nets too And if they may spread them when and where they will God knowes what may become of it These have not so strong a Backe abroad as the Romanists have but that 's no Argument to suffer them to encrease They may grow to equall Strength with Number And Factious People at home of what Sect or fond Opinion soever they be are not to be neglected Partly because they are so Neare And 't is ever a dangerous Fire that begins in the Bed-straw And partly because all those Domesticke Evills which threaten a Rent in Church or State are with far more safety prevented by VVisdome then punished by Justice And would men consider it right they are far more beholding to that man that keepes them from falling then to him that takes them up though it be to set the Arme or the Leg that 's broken in the Fall In this Discourse I have no aime to displease any nor any hope to please all If I can helpe on to Truth in the Church and the Peace of the Church together I shall be glad be it in any measure Nor shall I spare to speake Necessary Truth out of too much Love of Peace Nor thrust on Vnnecessary Truth to the Breach of that Peace which once broken is not so easily soder'd againe And if for Necessary Truths sake onely any man will be offended nay take nay snatch at that offence which is not given I know no fence for that 'T is Truth and I must tell it 'T is the Gospell and I must preach it 1 Cor. 9. And far safer it is in this 1 Cor. 9. 16. Case to beare Anger from men then a VVoe from God And where the Foundations of Faith are shaken be it by Superstition or Prophanenesse he that puts not to his hand as firmely as he Can to support them is too wary and hath more Care of himselfe then of the Cause of Christ. And 't is a VVarinesse that brings more danger in the end then it shunnes For the Angell of the Lord issued out a Curse against the Inhabitants of Meroz because they came not to helpe the Lord to helpe the Lord against the mighty Iudg. 5. I know 't is a Great ease to let every Thing be as it will and every Iudg. 5. 23. man beleeve and doe as he list But whether Governors in State or Church doe their duty therewhile is easily seene since this is an effect of no King in Israel Iudg. 17. Iudg. 17. 6. The Church of Christ upon Earth may bee compared to a Hive of Bees and that can bee
What Successe this Great Distemper caused by the Collision of two such Factions may have I know not I cannot Prophesie This I know That the use which Wise men should make of other mens falles is not to fall with them And the use which Pious and Religious men should make of these great Flawes in Christianity is not to Joyne with them that make them nor to helpe to dislocate those maine Bones in the Body which being once put out of Ioynt will not easily be set againe And though I cannot Prophesie yet I feare That Atheisme and Irreligion gather strength while the Truth is thus weakned by an Vnworthy way of Contending for it And while they thus Contend neither part Consider that they are in a way to induce upon themselves and others that Contrary Extreame which they seeme most both to feare and oppose Besides This I have ever Observed That many Rigid Professors have turn'd Roman Catholikes and in that Turne have beene more Iesuited then any other And such Romanists as have chang'd from them have for the most part quite leaped over the Meane and beene as Rigid the other way as Extremity it selfe And this if there be not both Grace and VVisdome to governe it is a very Naturall Motion For a Man is apt to thinke he can never runne farre enough from that which he once begins to hate And doth not Consider therewhile That where Religion Corrupted is the thing he hates a Fallacy may easily be put upon him For he ought to hate the Corruption which depraves Religion and to runne from it but from no part of Religion it selfe which he ought to Love and Reverence ought hee to depart And this I have Observed farther That no One thing hath made Conscientious men more wavering in their owne mindes or more apt and easie to be drawne aside from the sincerity of Religion professed in the Church of England then the Want of Uniforme and Decent Order in too many Churches of the Kingdome And the Romanists have beene apt to say The Houses of God could not be suffer'd to lye so Nastily as in some places they have done were the True worship of God observed in them Or did the People thinke that such it were 'T is true the Inward VVorship of the Heart is the Great Service of God and no Service acceptable without it But the Externall worship of God in his Church is the Great VVitnesse to the World that Our heart stands right in that Service of God Take this away or bring it into Contempt and what Light is there left to shine before men that they may see our Devotion and glorifie our Father which is in Heaven And to deale clearely with Your Majesty These Thoughts are they and no other which have made me labour so much as I have done for Decency and an Orderly settlement of the Externall Worship of God in the Church For of that which is Inward there can be no Witnesse among men nor no Example for men Now no Externall Action in the world can be Uniforme without some Ceremonies And these in Religion the Ancienter they bee the better so they may fit Time and Place Too many Over-burden the Service of God And too few leave it naked And scarce any Thing hath hurt Religion more in these broken Times then an Opinion in too many men That because Rome had thrust some Vnnecessary and many Superstitious Ceremonies upon the Church therefore the Reformation must have none at all Not considering therewhile That Ceremonies are the Hedge that fence the Substance of Religion from all the Indignities which Prophanenesse and Sacriledge too Commonly put upon it And a Great Weaknesse it is not to see the strength which Ceremonies Things weake enough in themselves God knowes adde even to Religion it selfe But a farre greater to see it and yet to Cry Them downe all and without Choyce by which their most hated Adversaries climb'd up and could not crie up themselves and their cause as they doe but by them And Divines of all the rest might learne and teach this VVisdome if they would since they see all other Professions which helpe to beare downe their Ceremonies keepe up their owne therewhile and that to the highest I have beene too bold to detaine Your Majesty so long But my Griefe to see Christendome bleeding in Dissention and which is worse triumphing in her owne Blood and most angry with them that would study her Peace hath thus transported me For truely it Cannot but grieve any man that hath Bowells to see All men seeking but as S. Paul foretold Phil. 2. Their owne things and not the things which are Phil. 2. 21. Jesus Christs Sua Their owne surely For the Gospell of Christ hath nothing to doe with them And to see Religion so much so Zealously pretended and called upon made but the Stalking-Horse to shoote at other Fowle upon which their Ayme is set In the meane time as if all were Truth and Holinesse it selfe no Salvation must be possible did it lye at their Mercy but in the Communion of the One and in the Conventicles of the Other As if either of these now were as the Donatists of old reputed themselves the only men in whom Christ at his comming to Judgment should finde Faith No saith * S. Aug. Epist. 48. S. Augustine and so say I with him Da veniam non Credimus Pardon us I pray we cannot beleeve it The Catholike Church of Christ is neither Rome nor a Conventicle Out of that there 's no Salvation I easily Confesse it But out of Rome there is and out of a Conventicle too Salvation is not shut up into such a narrow Conclave In this ensuing Discourse therefore I have endeavour'd to lay open those wider-Gates of the Catholike Church confined to no Age Time or Place Nor knowing any Bounds but That Faith which was once and but once for all deliver'd to the Saints S. Jude 3. And in my pursuite of this way I have searched after and deliver'd S. Iod. 3. with a single heart that Truth which I professe In the publishing whereof I have obeyed Your Majesty discharg'd my Duty to my power to the Church of England * 1 S. Pet. 3. 15. Given account of the Hope that is in me And so testified to the world that Faith in which I have lived and by God's blessing and favour purpose to dye But till Death shall most unfainedly remaine Your Majesties most faithfull SUBJECT and most Humble and Obliged SERVANT W. CANT A RELATION Of the Conference betweene WILLIAM LAWD Then L. Bishop of S. Davids now Lord Arch-Bishop of CANTERBURY AND M. Fisher the Jesuite by the command of KING JAMES Of ever Blessed Memorie With an Answer to such Ecceptions as A. C. takes against it F The Occasion of this Conference was B THe Occasion of this Third § 1 Conference you should know fufficiently You were an Actor in it as well as in two
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
by it are founded upon it And yet hence it cannot follow That the thing that is so founded is Fundamentall in the Faith For things may be d Mos fundatissimus S. Aug. Ep. 28. founded upon Humane Authority and be very certaine yet not Fundamentall in the Faith Nor yet can it follow This thing is founded therefore every thing determined by the Church is founded Again that which followes That those things are not to be opposed which are made firme by full Authority of the Church cannot conclude they are therefore Fundamentall in the Faith For full Church Authority alwayes the time that included the Holy Apostles being past by and not comprehended in it is but Church Authority and Church Authority when it is at full sea is not simply e Staple Rebect cont 4. q. 3. A. 1. Divine therefore the Sentence of it not fundamentall in the Faith And yet no erring Disputer may be endured to shake the foundation which the Church in Councell layes But plaine Scripture with evident sense or a full Demonstrative Argument must have Roome where a wrangling and erring Disputer may not be allowed it And ther 's f Quae quidem si tam manifesta monstratur ut in dubium venire non possit praeponenda est omnibus illis rebus quibus in Catholicâ teneor Ita si aliquid apertissimum in Evangelio S. Aug. contra Fund c. 4. neither of these but may Convince the Definition of the Councell if it be ill founded And the Articles of the faith may easily proove it is not Fundamentall if indeed and verily it be not so And I have read some body that sayes is it not you That things are fundamentall in the Faith two wayes One in their Matter such as are all things which be so in themselves The other in the Manner such as are all things that the Church hath Defined and determined to be of Faith And that so some things that are de modo of the manner of being arc of Faith But in plaine truth this is no more then if you should say some things are Fundamentall in the faith and some are not For wrangle while you will you shall never be able to proove that any thing which is but de modo a consideration of the manner of being only can possibly be Fundamentall in the faith And since you make such a Foundation of this Place I will a little view the Mortar with which it is laid by you It is a venture but I shall finde it a Ezek. 13. 11. untempered Your Assertion is All poynts defined by the Church are Fundamentall Your proofe this Place Because that is not to be shaken which is setled by b Plenâ Ecclesiae Authoritate full Authority of the Church Then it seemes your meaning is that this poynt there spoken of The remission of Originall sinne in Baptisme of Infants was defined when S. Augustine wrote this by a full Sentence of a Generall Councell First if you say it was c 1. 2. de Author Concil c. 5. §. A solis particularibus Bellarmine will tell you it is false and that the Pelagian Heresie was never condemned in an Oecumenicall Councell but only in Nationalls But Bellarmine is deceived For while the Pelagians stood out impudently against Nationall Councels some of them defended Nestorius which gave occasion to the first d Can. 1. 4. Ephesine Councell to Excommunicate and depose them And yet this will not serve your turne for this Place For S. Augustine was then dead and therefore could not meane the Sentence of that Councell in this place Secondly if you say it was not then Defined in an Oecumenicall Synode Plena authoritas Ecclesiae the full Authority of the Church there mentioned doth not stand properly for the Decree of an Oecumenicall Councell but for some Nationall as this was condemned in a * Concil Milevit Can. 2 Nationall Councell And then the full Authority of the Church here is no more then the full Authority of this Church of †Nay if your owne Capellus be true De Appell Eccl Afric c. 2. n. 5. It was â—…ut a Provinciall of Numidia not a Plenary of Africk Africk And I hope that Authority doth not make all Points defined by it to be Fundamentall You will say yes if that Councell be confirmed by the Pope And then I must ever wonder why S. Augustine should say The full Authority of the Church and not bestow one word upon the Pope by whose Authority only that Councell as all other have their fulnesse of Authority in your Iudgement An inexpiable Omission if this Doctrine concerning the Pope were true But here A. C. steps in againe to helpe the Iesuite and he tells us over and over againe That all A. C. p. 45. points made firme by full Authority of the Church are Fundamentall so firme he will have them and therefore fundamentall But I must tell him That first 't is one thing in Nature and Religion too to be firme and another thing to be fundamentall These two are not Convertible T is true that every thing that is fundamentall is firme But it doth not follow that every thing that is firme is fundamentall For many a Superstructure is exceeding firme being fast and close joyned to a sure foundation which yet no man will grant is fundamentall Besides what soever is fundamentall in the faith is fundamentall to the Church which is one by the vnity a Almain in 3. Sent. Dis. 25. q. 2. A Fide enim unà Ecclesia dicitur una of faith Therefore if every thing Defined by the Church be fundamentall in the faith then the Churches Definition is the Churches Foundation And so upon the matter the Church can lay her owne foundation and then the Church must be in absolute and perfect Being before so much as her Foundation is laide Now this is so absurd for any man of learning to say that by and by after A. C. is content to affirm not only that the prima Credibilia the Articles of Faith but all which so pertaines to Supernaturall Divine and Infallible Christian Faith as that thereby Christ doth dwell in our hearts c. is the Foundation of the Church under Christ the Prime Foundation And here he 's out againe For first all which pertaines to Supernaturall Divine and Infallible Christian Faith is not by and by b Aliquid pertinet ad Fidem dupliciter Uno modo directè sicut ea quae nobis sunt principalitèr divinitùs tradita ut Deum esse Trinum c. Et circa haec opinari falsum hoc ipso inducit Haeresin c. Alio modo indirectè Ex quibus consequitur aliquid contrarium Fidei c. Et in his aliquis potest falsum opinari absque periculo Haeresis donec Sequela illa ei innotescat c. Tho. p. 1. q. 32. A. 4. C. There are things Necessary to the Faith and
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
that Proposition in terminis So here the very Foundation of A. C ' s. Dilemma fals off For I say not That onely the Points of the Creed are Fundamentall whether expressed or not expressed That all of them are that I say And yet though the Foundation of his Dilemma be fallen away I will take the boldnesse to tell A. C. That if I had said That those Articles onely which are expressed in the Creed are Fundamentall it would have beene hard to have excluded the Scripture upon which the Creed it selfe in every Point is grounded For nothing is supposed to shut out its owne Foundation And if I should now say that some Articles are Fundamentall which are infolded in the Creed it would not follow that therefore some unwritten Traditions were Fundamentall Some Traditions I deny not true and firme and of great both Authority and Vse in the Church as being Apostolicall but yet not Fundamentall in the Faith And it would be a mighty large fold which should lap up Traditions within the Creed As for that Tradition That the Bookes of holy Scriptures are Divine and Infallible in every part I will handle that when I come to the proper place * §. 16. N. 1. for it F. I asked how then it happened as M. Rogers saith that the English Church is not yet resolved what is the right sense of the Article of Christs Descending into Hell B. The English Church never made doubt that § 12 I know what was the sense of that Article The words are so plaine they beare their meaning before them Shee was content to put that a Art 3. Article among those to which she requires Subscription not as doubting of the sense but to prevent the Cavils of some who had beene too busie in Crucifying that Article and in making it all one with the Article of the Crosse or but an Exposition of it And surely for my part I thinke the Church of England is better resolved of the right sense of this Article then the Church of Rome especially if shee must be tryed by her Writers as you try the Church of England by M. Rogers For you cannot agree whether this Article be a meere Tradition or whether it hath any Place of Scripture to vvarrant it a Scotus in 1. D. 11. q. 1. Scotus and b Stapleton Relect. Con. 5. q. 5. Art 1. Stapleton allow it no footing in Scripture but c Bellarm 4. de Christo. c. 6. 12. Scripturae passim hoc docent Bellarmine is resolute that this Article is every where in Scripture and d Thom. 2 â—…ae q. 1. A 9 ad 1. Thomas grants as much for the whole Creed The Church of England never doubted it and S. e S. Aug. Ep. 99. Augustine prooves it And yet againe you are different for the sense For you agree not Whether the Soule of Christ in triduo mortis in the time of his Death did go downe into Hell really and was present there or vertually and by effects only For g Tho. p. 3. q. 52. A. 2. c. per suam essentiam Thomas holds the first and h Dur in 3. d. 22. q. 3. Durand the later Then you agree not Whether the Soule of Christ did descend really and in essence into the lowest pit of Hell and Place of the Damned as i Bellar. L. 4. do Christo. c. 16. Bellarmine once held probable and prooved it or really only into that place or Region of Hell which you call Limbum Patrum and then but vertually from thence into the Lower Hell to which k Bellar. Recog p. 11. Bellarmine reduces himselfe and gives his reason because it is the l Sequuntur enim Tho. p. 3. Q. 52. A. 2. common Opinion of the Schoole Now the Church of England takes the words as they are in the Creed and believes them without farther Dispute and in that sense which the ancient Primitive Fathers of the Church agreed in And yet if any in the Church of England should not be throughly resolved in the sense of this Article Is it not as lawfull for them to say I conceive thus or thus of it yet if any other way of his Descent be found truer then this I deny it not but as yet I know no other as it was for m Non est pertinaciter asserendum quin Anima Christi per alium modum nobis ignotum potuerit descendere ad Infernum Nec nos negamus alium modum esse for sit an veriorem sed fatemur nos illum ignor arc Durand in 3. sent Dist. 22. q. 3. Nu. 9. Durand to say it and yet not impeach the Foundation of the Faith F. The Bishop said That M. Rogers was but a private man But said I if M. Rogers writing as he did by publike Authority be accounted only a private man c. B. I said truth when I said M. Rogers was a private § 13 man And I take it you will not allow every speech of every man though allowed by Authority to have his Bookes Printed to be the Doctrine of the Church of Rome * And this was an Ancient fault too for S. Augustine checks at it in his time Noli colligere calumnias ex Episcoporum scriptis sive Hillarii sive Cypriani Agrippini Primò quia hoc genus literarum ab Authoritate Canonis distinguendum est Non enim sic leguntur tanquam it a ex iis testimonium proferatur ut contrà sentire non liceat sicubi fortè aliter sentirent quà m veritas postulat S. Aug. Ep. 48. c. And yet these were farre greater men in their generations then M. Rogers was This hath beene oft complained of on both sides The imposing particular mens assertions upon the Church yet I see you meane not to leave it And surely as Controversies are now handled by some of your party at this day I may not say it is the sense of the Article in hand but I have long thought it a kinde os descent into Hell to be conversant in them I would the Authors would take heed in time and not seeke to blinde the People or cast a mist before evident Truth least it cause a finall descent to that place of Torment But since you will hold this course Stapleton was of greater note with you then M. Rogers his exposition of Notes upon the Articles of the Church of England is with us And as he so his Relection And is it the Doctrine of the Church of Rome which Stapleton affirmes †Stapl. Cont. 5. q. 5. A. 1. The Scripture is silent that Christ descended into Hell and that there is a Catholike and an Apostolike Church If it be then what will become of the Popes Supremacie over the whole Church Shall he have his Power over the Catholike Church given him expresly in Scripture in the a S. Mat. 16. 19. Keyes to enter and in b S. Ioh. 21. 15. Pasce
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
Tho. p. 1. q. 1. A. 5. ad 1. Et Articulorum Fidei veritas non potest nobis esse evidens absolutè Bellar. L. 4. de Eccles. Mil. c. 3. §. 3. grants That in us which are the Subjects both of Faith and Knowledge and in regard of the Evidence given in unto us there is lesse Light lesse Evidence in the Principles of Faith then in the Principles of Knowledge upon which there can be no doubt But I think the Schoole will never grant That the Principles of Faith even this in Question have not sufficient Evidence And you ought not to do as you did without any Distinction or any Limitation deny a Praecognitum or Prime Principle in the Faith because it answers not in all things to the Prime Principles in Science in their Light and Evidence a thing in it self directly against Reason Well though I do none of this yet first I must tell you that A. C. here steps in againe and tels me That though a Praecognitum in Faith need not be so clearely knowne as a Praecognitum in Science yet there must be this proportion betweene them that whether it be in Science or in Faith the Praecognitum or thing supposed as knowne must be priùs cognitum first knowne and not need another thing pertaining to that Faith or Knowledge to be knowne before it But the Scripture saith he needs Tradition to goe before it and introduce the knowledge of it Therefore the Scripture is not to be supposed as a Praecognitum and a thing fore-knowne Tru'y I am sorrie to see in a man very learned such wilfull mistakes For A. C. cannot but perceive by that which I have clearely laid downe * §. 17. 18. Nu. 2. before That I intended not to speake precisely of a Praecognitum in this Argument But when I said Scriptures were Principles to be supposed I did not I could not intend They were priùs cognitae knowne before Tradition since I confesse every where That Tradition introduces the knowledge of them But my meaning is plaine That the Scriptures are and must be Principles supposed before you can dispute this Question †And my immediate Words in the Conference upon which the Iesuite asked How I knew Scripture to be Scripture were as the â—…esuite himselfe relates it apud A. C. p. 48. That the Scripture onely not any unwritten Tradition was the Foundation of our Faith Now the Scripture cannot be the onely Foundation of Faith if it containe not all things necessary to Salvation Which the Church of Rome denying against all Antiquity makes it now become a Question And in regard of this mâ—… Aâ—…ver was That the Scriptures are and must be Principles supposed and praecognitae before the handling of this Question Whether the Scriptures containe in them all things necessary to Salvation Before which Question it must necessarily be supposed and granted on both sides That the Scriptures are the Word of God For if they be not 't is instantly out of all Question that They cannot include all Necessaries to Salvation So 't is a Praecognitum not to Tradition as A C. would cunningly put upon the Cause but to the whole Question of the Scriptures sufficiency And yet if he could tie me to a Praecognitum in this very Question and proveable in a Superiour Science I thinke I shall go very neare to prove it in the next Paragraph and intreat A. C. to confesse it too And now having told A. C. this I must secondly follow him a little farther For I would faine make it appeare as plainly as in such a difficulty it can be made what wrong he doth Truth and himself in this Case And it is the common fault of them all For when the Protestants answer to this Argument which as I have shew'd can properly have no place in the Question betweene us about Tradition †Hook L. 3 §. 8. they which grant this as a Praecognitum a thing foreknown as also I do were neither ignorant nor forgetfull That things presupposed as already known in a Science are of two sorts For either they are plaine and fully manifest in their owne Light or they are proved and granted already some former knowledge having made them Evident This Principle then The Scriptures are the Oracles of God we cannot say is cleare and fully manifest to all men simply and in self-Light for the Reasons before given Yet we say after Tradition hath beene our Introduction the Soule that hath but ordinary Grace added to Reason may discerne Light sufficient to resolve our Faith that the Sun is there This Principle then being not absolutely and simply evident in it selfe is presumed to be taught us otherwise And if otherwise then it must be taught in and by some superiour Science to which Theologie is subordinate Now men may be apt to think out of Reverence That Divinity can have no Science above it But your owne Schoole teaches me that it hath * Hoc modo sacra Doctrina est Scientia quia â—…dit ex Principiis notis Lumine superioris Scientia quae scilicet est Scientia Dei Beatorum Tho. p. 1. q. 1. a. 2. And what sayes A. C. now to this of Aquinas Is it not cleare in him that this Principle The Scriptures are the Word of God of Divine and most Infallible Credit is a Praecognitum in the knowledge of Divinity and proveable in a superiour Science namely the Knowledge of God and the Blessed in Heaven Yes so cleare that as I told you he would A. C. confesses it p. 51. But he adds That because no man ordinarily sees this Proofe therefore we must go either to Christ who saw it clearely Or to the Apostles to whom it was clearely revealed or to them wholy Succession received it from the Prime Secrs So now because Christ is ascended and the Apostles gone into the number of the Blessed and made in a higher Degree partakers of their knowledge therefore we must now onely goe unto then Successours and borrow light from the Tradition of the present Church For that we must do And 't is so farre well But that we must relie upon this Tradition as Divine and Infallible and able to breed in us Divine and Insallible Faith as A. C. adds p. 51 52. is a Proposition which in the times of the Primitive Church would have beene accounted very dangerous as indeed it is For I would fame know why leaning too much upon Tradition may not mislead Christians as well as it diâ—… the Iewes But they saith S. Hilarie Traditionis savore Legis praecepta transgressi sunt Can. 14. in S. Mat. Yet to this height are They of Rome now growne That the Traditions of the present Church are infallible And by out-fâ—…cing the Truth lead many after them And as it is Jer. 5. 31. The Prophets prophesie untruths anâ—… the Priests receive gifts and my people delight therein what will become of this in the end The sacred Doctrine
erre if he keepe his chaire which yet he affirmes L. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 4. §. 2. Protestants so you will but understand it s not erring in Absolute Fundamentall Doctrines And therefore 't is true also that there can bee no just Cause to make a Schisme from the whole Church But here 's the Iesuite's Cunning. The whole Church with him is the Romane and those parts of Christendome which subject themselves to the Romane Bishop All other parts of Christendome are in Heresie and Schisme and what A. C. pleases Nay soft For another Church may separate from Rome if Rome will separate from Christ. And so farre as it separates from Him and the Faith so farre may another Church sever from it And thâ—…s is all that the Learned Protestants doe or can say And I am sure all that ever the Church of England hath either said or done And that the whole Church cannot erre in Doctrines absolutely Fundamentall and Necessary to all mens Saâ—…vation besides the Authority of these Protestants most of them being of prime ranke seemes to me to be cleare by the Promise of Christ S. Matth. 16 â—…hat the gates of Hell shall not prevaile S. Matth. 16. 18. against it Whereas most certaine it is that the Gates of Hell prevaile very farre against it if the Whole Militant Church universally taken can Erre from or in the Foundation But then this Power of not Erring is not to be conceived as if it were in the Church primò per se Originally or by any power it hath of it selfe For the Church is constituted of Men and Humanum est errare all men can erre But this Power is in it partly by the vertue of this Promise of Christ and partly by the Matter which it teacheth which is the unerring Word of God so plainely and manifestly delivered to her as that it is not possible she should universally fall from it or teach against it in things absolutely necessary to Salvation Besides it would be well waighed whether to believe or teach otherwise will not impeach the Article of the Creed concerning the Holy Catholike Church which we professe we believe For the Holy Catholike Church there spoken of containes not onely the whole Militant Church on earth but the whole Triumphant also in Heaven For so †Ecclesia hic tota accipiâ—…da est non solum ex parâ—…e quà pâ—…rinatur â—…terris c. vâ—…tiam ex illa parte quae in coelâ—… c. S. Aug. Eâ—…hir c 56. S. Augustine hath long since taught me Now if the whole Catholike Church in this large extent be Holy then certainly the whole Militant Church is Holy as well as the Triumphant though in a far lower degree in as much as all * Nemo ex toto Sanctus Optat. L 7 contra Parmen Sanctification all Holinesse is imperfect in this life as well in Churches as in Men. Holy then the whole Militant Church is For that which the Apostle speakes of Abraham is true of the Church which is a Body Collective made up of the spirituall seed of Abraham Rom. 11. If the root be holy so are the branches Well then the whole Militant Church is Holy Rom. 11. 16. and so we believe Why but will it not follow then Thaâ—… the whole Militant Church cannot possibly erre in the Foundations of the Faith That she may erre in Superstructures and Deductions and other by and unnecessary Truths if her Curiosity or other weaknesse carry her beyond or cause her to fall short of her Rule no doubt need be made But if She can erre either from the Foundation or in it She can be no longer Holy and that Article of the Creed is gone For if She can erre quite from the Foundation then She is nor Holy nor Church but becomes an Infidell Now this cannot be For †Dum Christus or at in Excelso Návicula id est Eâ—…clesia â—…tur fluctibus in profundo c sed quia Christus orat non potest mergi S. Aug. Serm 14 de Verb. Domi. c 2. Et Bâ—…llar L. 3 ac Eccle Milit c. 13. Praesidiâ—… Christi fulâ—…itur Ecclâ—…siae perpetuitas ut inter turbulentas aâ—…itationes formiâ—…abiles mâ—…tus c. salva tamâ—…n maneat Câ—… L. 2. Instit c. 15. §. 3. Ipsa Symboli 〈◊〉 admonemur perpetuam residâ—…re in Ecclesia Christi remission m Peccatorum Calv. L. 4. Inst. c. 1. §. 17. Now remission of sins cannot be perpetuall in the Church if the Church it selfe be 〈◊〉 perpetuall But the Church it selfe cannot be perpetuall if it fall away all Divine Ancient and Moderne Romanists and Reformers agree in this That the whole Militant Church of Christ cannot fall away into generall Apostacy And if She Erre in the Foundation that is in some one or more Fundamentall Poynts of Faith then Shee may bee a Church of Christ still but not Holy but becomes Hereticall And most certain it is that no * Spiritus Sanctificationis non pâ—…ost inveniri in Haereticorum mentibus S. Hierom in Ierom. 10. Assemâ—…ly be it never so generall of such Hereticks is or can be Holy Other Errors that are of a meaner alay take not Holinesse from the Church but these that are dyed in graine cannot consist with Holinesse of which Faith in Christ is the very Foundation And therefore if we will keepe up our Creed the whole Militant Church must be still Holy For if it be not so still then there may be a time that Falsum may subesse Fidei Catholicae that falshood and that in a high degree in the very Article may be the Subject of the Catholike Faith which were no lesse then Blasphemy to affirme For we must still believe the Holy Catholike Church And if She be not still Holy then at that time when She is not so we believe a Falshood under the Article of the Catholike Faith Therefore a very dangerous thing it is to cry out in generall termes That the whole Catholike Militant Church can Erre and not limit nor distinguish in time that it can erre indeed for Ignorance it hath and Ignorance can Erre But Erre it cannot either by falling totally from the Foundation or by Hereticall Error in it For the Holinesse of the Church consists as much if not more in the Verity of the Faith as in the Integrity of Manners taught and Commanded in the Doctrine of Faith Now in this Discourse A. C. thinkes he hath met with me For he tells me that I may not only safely grant A. C. p. 56. that Protestants made the Division that is nâ—…w in the Church but further also and that with a safe Confidence as one did was it not you saith he That it was ill done of those who did first made the Separation Truly I doe not now remember whether I said it or no. But because A. C. shall have full satisfaction from me and without any Tergiversation if I did not
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
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
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
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
the Church of Christ. And this is said to have amounted into a formall Separation from the Church of Rome and to have continued for the space of somewhat more then one hundred yeares Now that such a Separation there was of the African Church from Rome and a Reconciliation after stands upon the Credit and Authority of two publike Instruments extant both among the Ancient Councels The one is an a Epist. Bonifacii 2. apud Nicol. To. 2. Concil p. 544. Epistle from Boniface the second in whose time the Reconciliation to Rome is said to be made by Eulalius then Bishop of Carthage but the Separation Instigante Diabolo by the Temptation of the Divil The other is an b Exemp PrecuÌ„ apud Nicolin Ibid. p. 525. Exemplar PrecuÌ„ or Copie of the Petition of the same Eulalius in which he damnes and curses all those his Predecessors which went against the Church of Rome Amongst which Eulalius must needes Curse S. Augustine And Pope Boniface accepting this Submmission must acknowledge that S. Augustine and the rest of that Councell deserved this Curse and dyed under it as violating Rectae Fidei Regulam the Rule of the Right Faith so the Exemplar Precum beginnes by refusing the Popes Authority I will not deny but that there are divers Reasons given by the Learned Romanists and Reformed Writers for and against the Truth and Authority of both these Instruments But because this is too long to be examin'd here I wil say but this and then make my use of it to my present purpose giving the Church of Rome free leave to acknowledge these Instruments to be true or false as they please That which I shall say is this These Instruments are let stand in all Editions of the Councels and Epistles Decretall As for Example in the Old Edition by Isidor Anno. 1524. And in another Old Edition of them Printed Anno. 1530. And in that which was published by P Crabbe Anno. 1538. And in the Edition of Valentinus Ioverius Anno. 1555. And in that by Surius Anno. 1567. And in the Edition at Venice by Nicolinus Anno. 1585. And in all of these without any Note or Censure upon them And they are in the Edition of Binius too Anno. 1618. but there 's a Censure upon them to keepe a quarter it may be with * Baron Annal. An. ad 4 9. Nu. 93. 94. Baronius who was the first I think that ever quarrelled them and he doth it tartly And since †Ualde mihi illa Epistola suspecta sunt Bellar. L. 2. de Ro. Pont. c. 25. § Respondeo primum Sed si fortè illa Epistola verae sunt nihil enim affirmâ—… c. Ibid. § ult Bellarmine followes the same way but more doubtfully This is that which I had to say And the Vse which I shall make of these Instruments whether they be true or false is this They are either true or false that is of necessity If they be false then Boniface the Second and his Accomplices at Rome or some for them are notorious Forgers and that of Records of great Consequence concerning the Government and Peace of the whole Church of Christ and to the perpetual Infamie of that Sea and all this foolishly and to no purpose For if there were no such Separation as these Records mention of the Africane Churches from the Romane to what end should Boniface or any other counterfeit an Epistle of his owne and a Submission of Eulalius On the other side if these Instruments be true as the sixth Councell of Carthage against all other Arguments makes me incline to believe they are in Substance at least though perhaps not in all Circumstances then 't is manifest that the Church of Africk separated from the Church of Rome That this Separation continued above one hundred yeares That the Church of Africke made this Separation in a Nationall Councell of their owne which had in it two hundred and seventeene Bishops That this Separation was made for ought appeares only because they at Rome were too ready to entertaine Appeales from the Church of Africke as appeares in the Case of * And so the Councell of Carthage sent word to Pope Calestine plainly that in admitting such Appeales he brake the Decrees of the Councell of Nice Epist. Concil Africa ad Calestinum c. 105. Apud Nicolin Tom. 1. Concil p. 844. Apiarius who then appealed thither That S. Augustine Eugenius Fulgentius and all those Bishops and other Martyrs which suffered in the Uandalike Persecution dyed in the time of this Separation That if this Separation were not just but a Schisme then these Famous Fathers of the Church dyed for ought appeares in Actuall and unrepented Schisme †Planè ex Ecclesiae Catholicae albo Expâ—…ngenda fâ—…issent Sâ—…nctorum Africanorum Martyrum Agâ—…ina qui in persecutione Vandalica pro Fide Catholica c. Baron Ann. 419. Num. 93. Et Binius In Notis ad Epist. Bomfacii 2. ad Eulalium and out of the Church And if so then how comes S. Augustine to be and be accounted a Saint all over the Christian world and at Rome it selfe But if the Separation were just then is it farre more lawfull for the Church of England by a Nationall Councell to cast off the Popes Vsurpation as * §. 24. Nu. 5. She did then it was for the African Church to separate Because then the African Church excepted only against the Pride of Rome †Belâ—… 2. de Ro. Pont. c. 25. §. 2. in Case of Appeales and two other Canons lesse materiall But the Church of England excepts besides this Grievance against many Corruptions in Doctrine belonging to the Faith with which Rome at that time of the African Separation was not tainted And I am out of all doubt that S. August and those other Famous men in their generations durst not thus have separated from Rome had the Pope had that powerfull Principality over the whole Church of Christ And that by Christs owne Ordinance and Institution as A. C. pretends he had A. C. p. 58. I told you a little * §. 25. Nu. 10. before that the Popes grew under the Emperors till they had over-grown them And now lest A. C. should say I speake it without proofe I will give you a briefe touch of the Church-story in that behalfe And that from the beginning of the Emperors becomming Christians to the time of Charles the Great which containes about five hundred yeares For so soone as the Emperors became Christian the Church which before was kept under by persecutions began to be put in better order For the calling and Authority of Bishops over the Inferiour Clergie that was a thing of kâ—…owne use and benefit for Preservation of Unity and Peace in the Church And so much †Quòd autem postea Vxus electus est qui cateris praporerâ—…ur in Schismatis remedium fallum est ne unusquisque ad se trahens Christi
S. Ioh. 14. 16. This Spirit shall abide with you for ever And e S. Mat. 28. 20. Behold I am with you to the end of the world To these others add f S. Mat. 16. 18. The founding of the Church upon the Rocke against which the gaes of Hell shall not prevaile And Christ's Trayer for S. Peter * S. Luk. 22. 32. That his Faith faile not And Christ's promise That †S. Mat. 18. 20. where two or three are gathered together in his Name hee will bee in the midst of them And that in the * Act. 15 28. Acts It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us For the first which is Leading into all truth and that for ever a Prosp. de vocat Gent. L. t. c. 10. All is not alwaies universally taken in Scripture Nor is it here simply for All Truth For then a Generall Councell could no more erre in matter of Fact then in matter of Faith in which yet b Bellarm. 2. de Conc. c. S. §. Respondeo quidam Where he saith Vbi Queftio est de Facto non de Iure c. In ejusmodi Judiciu Concilium errare posse non est dubium your selves grant it may erre But into Alt c Dubium est an illud docebit omnta S. Ioh. 14. 26. referendum sit ad illud Quaecunque dixi vobis quasi non aliud docturum Spiritum Sanctum dicat quà m quod ipse ante à docuisset non repugnabo si quis it a velit interpretari c. Maldonat in S. Ioh. 14. Truth is a limited All Into all Truth absolutely necessary to Salvation And this when they suffer themselves to be led by the Blessed Spirit by the Word of God And all Truth which Christ had before at least fundamentally delivered unto them d S. Ioh. 16. 14. He shall receive of mine and shew it unto you And againe e S. Ioh. 14. 26. He shall teach you all things and bring all things to your Remembrance which I have told you And for this necessary Truth too the Apostles received this Promise not for themselves and a Councell but for themselves and the f Bellarm. 2. de Con. c. 9. §. Alteram Assistentia Sp. Sancti non est propter Concil sed universam Ecclesiam Whole Catholike Church of which a Councell be it never so generall is a very little part Yea and this very Assistance is not so absolute nor in that manner to the whole Church as it was to the Apostles neither doth Christ in that place speake directly of a Councell but of His Apostles Preaching and Doctrine As for Christ's being with them unto the end of the world the Fathers are so various that in the sense of the Ancient Church we may understand him present in a S. Aug. Tr. â—…0 in S. Ioh. Isidor 1. Sent. cap. 14. Majesty in b S. Hilar. in Psalm 124. Iustin. Martyr Dial. cum Triphone Prosp. Epist. ad Demetriadem Power in Ayd and c S Hilar. in Psal. 124. Prosper Lib. 2. de Voc. Gent. cap. 2. Leo Serm. 2. de Resurrect Dom. cap. 3. Isidor in Ios. c. 12. Assistance against the Difficulties they should find for preaching Christ which is the native sense as I take it And this Promise was made to support their weakenesse As for his Presence in teaching by the Holy Ghost d S. Cyril lib. 7. Dial. de Trin. Prosper Epist. ad Demetriadem few mention it and no one of them which doth speakes of any Infallible Assistance farther then the succeeding Church keepes to the Word of the Apostles as the Apostles kept to the Guidance of the Spirit Besides the e S. Hilar. in Psal. 124. S. Cyril L. 7. Dial. de Trin. S. Aug. 6. de Gen ad Lit. c. 8. S. Leo Serm. 10. de Nat. Dom. c. 5. Isid. in Ios. c. 12. In all which places Vobiscum is either interpreted cum suis or Fidelibus or Universà Ecclesiâ Fathers referre their Speech to the Church Universall not to any Councell or Representative Body And f Hoc colligiâ—…ur sed quaeritur non quid colligitur sed quid 〈◊〉 voluit Malâ—… in S. Mat. 28. Maldonate adds That this His presence by teaching is or may be a Collection from the place but is not the Intention of Christ. For the Rocke upon which the Church is founded which is the next Place we dare not lay any other Foundation then g 1. Cor. 3. 11. Christ Christ laid his h Eph. 2. 20. Apostles no question but upon Himselfe With these S. Peter was laid no man questions and in prime place of Order would his claiming Successours be content with that as appeares and diverse Fathers witnesse by his Particular designement Tu es Petrus But yet the Rocke even there spoken of is not S. Peter's Person either onely or properly but the Faith which he professed And to this besides the Evidence which is in Text and Truth the i S. Ignatius Fp. ad Philadelph Qui suam firmavit Ecclesiam super Petrâ—…m aedificatione spirituali S. Hilar. l. 6. dâ—… Trin. Super hanc igitur Confessionis Petram Ecclesiae ad fiâ—…atio est Et paulo pòst Haec Fid s Ecclesiae fundamentum est S. Greg. Nyss. de Trin. adversus Iudaeos Super hanc Petram adificabo Ecclesiam meam super Confessionem videlicet Christi S. Isid. Pelus Epist. l. 1. Epist. 235. Vt hac ratione certam omnibus Confessionem traderet quam ab eo inspiratus Petrus tanquam Basin ac Fundamentum â—…ecit super quod Dominus Ecclesiam suam extruxit S. Cyril Alex. de Trin. L. 4. Petram opinor per agnominationem aliud nihil quà m inconcussam firmissimam Discipuli fidem vocavit in quâ Ecclesia Christi ita fundata firmata esset ut non laberetur c. B. Theodor. in Cant. Petram appellat fidei pietatem veritatis professionem c. Et super hanc Petram adisicabo Ecclesiam meam S. Greg. Ep. l. 3. Ep. 33. In vera side persâ—…stite vitam vestram in Petram Ecclesiae hoc est in Confessione B. Petri Apostolorum Principis solidate Theophylact in Matth. 16. Super cum adificavit Ecclesiam quia enim confessus erat c. quòd haec Confessio fundamentum erit c. S. Aug. in 1. Ep. S. Ioh. tract 10. Quid est super hanc Petram Super hanc Fidem super id quod dictum est Tues c. S. Bas. Seleuc. Orat. 25. Hanc Confessionem cùm nominâsset Christus Petram Petrum nuncupat eum qui primùm illam est confessus donans illi hanc appellationem tanquam insigne monumentum hujus confessionis Haec enim est reverâ Pietatis Petra haec salutis basis c. S. Iacob Liturg. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 26. c. And some which joyne the Person of S. Peter professe it is propter robur
I think it is undoubted Truth That one and the same Conclusion may be Faith to the Believer that cannot prove and Knowledge to the Learned that can And b Cont. Fund c. 4. S. Augustine I am sure in regard of one and the same thing even this the very Wisdome of the Church in her Doctrine ascribes Vnderstanding to one sort of men and Beliefe to another weaker sort And c Tho. p. 1. q. 2. A. 2. ad 1. Nihil prohibet illud quod secundùm se demonstrabile est scibile ab aliquo acciti ut Credibile qui Demonstrationem non capit Thomas goes with him Now for further satisfaction if not of you yet of others this may well be thought on Man lost by sin the Integrity of his Nature and cannot have Light enough to see the way to Heaven but by Grace This Grace was first merited after given by Christ this Grace is first kindled in Faith by which if we agree not to some Supernaturall Principles which no Reason can demonstrate simply we can never see our way But this Light when it hath made Reason submit it self cleares the Eye of Reason it never puts it out In which sense it may be is that of a L. 3. Rationabilu ubique diffusa Optatut That the very Catholike Church it selfe is reasonable as well as diffused every where By which b Ut ipsâ fide valentiores facti quod credimus intelligere mereannur non jam hominibus sed Deo intrinsecùs mentem nostram firmante illuminante S. Aug. cont Epist Fundamenti c. 14. Reason inlightened which is stronger then Reason the Church in all Ages hath beene able either to convert or convince or at least c Omnia genera Ingeniorum subdita Scripturae S. Aug. L. 22. cont Faust. cap. 96. stop the mouthes of Philosophers and the great men of Reason in the very Point of Faith where it is at highest To the present occasion then The first immediate Fundamentall Points of Faith without which there is no salvation as they cannot be proved by Reason so neither need they be determined by any Councell nor ever were they attempted they are so plaine set downe in the Scripture If about the sense and true meaning of these or necessary deduction out of these Prime Articles of Faith Generall Councels determine any thing as they have done in Nice and the rest there is no inconvenience that one and the same Canon of the Councell should be believed as it reflects upon the Articles and Grounds indemonstrable and d Almain 3. D. 24. q. 1. Tho. 2. 2a q. 1. A. 5. C. Id quod est scitum ab uno homine etiam in statu via est ab alio Creditum qui hoc Demonstrare non novit yet knowne to the Learned by the Meanes and Proofe by which that Deduction is vouched and made good And againe the Conclusion of a Councell suppose that in Nice about the Consubstantiality of Christ with the Father in it selfe considered is indemonstrable by Reason There I believe and assent in Faith But the same Conclusion e Concilium Nicanum deduxit Conclusionem ex Scripturis Bellar 2. de Concil c. 12. §. Sic etià m if you give me the Ground of Scripture and the Creed and somewhat must be supposed in all whether Faith or Knowledge is demonstrable by naturall Reason against any Arrian in the world And if it be demonstrable I may know it and have an Habit of it And what inconvenience in this For the weaker sort of Christians which cannot deduce when they have the Principle granted they are to rest upon the Definition only and their Assent is meere Faith yea and the Learned too where there is not a Demonstration evident to them assent by Faith onely and not by knowledge And what inconvenience in this Nay the necessity of Nature is such that these Principles once given the understanding of man cannot rest but it must be thus And the †S. Pet. 3. 15. Apostle would never have required a man to be alle to give a Reason and an account of the hope that is in him if he might not be able to know his account or have lawfull interest to give it when he knew it without prejudicing his Faith by his knowledge And suppose exact knowledge and meere Beliefe cannot stand together in the same Person in regard of the same thing by the same meanes yet that doth not make void this Truth For where is that exact knowledge or in whom that must not meerely in points of Faith believe the Article or Ground upon which they rest But when that is once believed it can demonstrate many things from it And Definitions of Councels are not Principia Fidei Principles of Faith but Deductions from them And now because you aske Wherein are we nearer Consid. 7. to unity by a Councell if a Councell may erre Besides the Answer given I promised to consider which Opinion was most agreeable with the Church which most able to preserve or reduce Christian Peace The Romane That a Councell cannot erre Or the Protestants That it can And this I propose not as a Rule but leave the Christian world to consider of it as I doe First then I Consider Whether in those Places of Scripture before mentioned or any other there bâ—…e promised to the present Church an absolute Infallibility Or whether such an Infallibility will not serve the turne as * Relect. Cont. 4. q. 2. Notab 3 Exacta Omnimodâ Infallibilitate non indiget sed satis est semel acceptis c. Stapleton after much wrigling is forced to acknowledge One not every way exact because it is enough if the Church doe diligently insist upon that which was once received and there is not need of so great certainty to open and explicate that which lyes hid in the seed of Faith sowne and deduce from it as to seeke out and teach that which was altogether unknowne And if this be so then sure the Church of the Apostles required guidance by a greater degree of Infallibility then the present Church which yet if it follow the Scripture is Infallible enough though it hath not the same degree of Certainty which the Apostles had and the Scripture hath Nor can I tell what to make of Bellarmine that in a whole Chapter disputes five Prerogatives in Certainty of Truth a L. 2 de Con. c. 12. §. ult Cùm utraque sint infallibilis veritatis aquè certa dici possunt that the Scripture hath above a Councell and at last Concludes That They may be said to be equally certain in Infallible Truth The next thing I Consider is Suppose this not Exact but congruous Infallibility in the Church Is it not residing according to Power and Right of Authority in the whole Church and in a Generall Councell only by Power deputed b Nam si Ecclesiae Vniversitati non
or Crimes are against Points Fundamentall or of great Consequence Els S. Paul would not have given the Rule for Excommunication 1 Cor. 5. Nor Christ 1 Cor. 5. 5. himselfe have put the man that will not heare and Obey the Church into the place and condition of an Ethnick and a Publican as he doth S. Mat. 18. And Salomon's S Mat. 18. 17. Rule is generall and he hath it twice My Son forsake not the teaching or instruction of thy Mother Now this is either spoken and meant of a naturall Mother And her Prov. 18. Uid S. Aug. 2. Conf. e. 3. and Prov. 6. 20. Eccluâ—… 3. 3. Prov. 15. 20. Authority over her Children is confirmed Ecclus. 3. And the foole will be upon him that despiseth her Prov. 15 Or'tis extended also to our Mystiâ—…all and Spirituall Mother the Church And so the Geneva b For sake not thy Mothers instruction that is the Teaching of the Church where in the faithfull are begotten by the incorruptible seed of Gods Word Annot. in Prov 1. 8. Note upon the Place expresses it And I cannot but incline to this Opinion Because the Blessings which accompany this Oâ—…edience are so many and great as that they are not like to be the fruits of Obedience to a Naturall Mother onely as Salomon expresses them all Prov. * Prov. 6. 21 6. And in all this here 's no Exception of the Mothers erring For Mater errans an erring Mother looses neither the right nor the power of a Mother by her error And I marvell what Sonne should shew reverence or Obedience if no Mother that hath erred might exact it 'T is true the Sonne is not to follow his Mothers error or his Mother into Error But 't is true too 't is a grievous crime in a Sonne to cast off all obedience to his Mother because at some time or in some things she hath fallen into error And howsoever this Consideration meetes with this Inconvenience as well as the rest For suppose as I said in the whole Catholike Militant Church an absolute Infallibility in the prime Foundations of Faith absolutely necessary to Salvation And then though the Mother Church Provinciall or Nationall may erre yet if the Grand-Mother the whole Vniversall Church cannot in these necessary things all remaines safe and all Occasions of Disobedience taken from the possibility of the Churches erring are quite taken away Nor is this Mother lesse to be valued by her Children because in some smaller things age had filled her face fuller of wrinkles For where 't is said that Christ makes to himselfe a Church without spot or wrinkle Eph. 5. That is not understood of the Ephes. 5. 27. Church Militant but of the Church Triumphant * In id progrediuntur Pelagiani ut dicant vitam Iustorum in hoe seculo nullum omnino habere peccatum ex his Ecclesiam Christi in hac mortalitate perfici ut sit omnino sine maculâ rugâ Quasi non sit Christi Ecclesia quae in toto terrarum orbe clamat ad Deum Dimitte nobis deâ—…ita nostra c. S. Aug. L. de Haeresibus Haer. 88. And to maintaine the contrary is a Branch of the spreading Heresy of Pelagianisme Nor is the Church on earth any frâ—…er from wrinkles in Doctrine and Discipline then she is from Spots in Life and Conversation The next thing I consider is Suppose a Generall Councell infallible in all things which are of Faith If it prove not so but that an Error in the Faith be concluded the same erring Opinion that makes it thinke it selfe infallible makes the Error of it seeme irrevocable And when Truth which lay hid shall be brought to light the Church who was lulled asleepe by the opinion of Infallibility is left open to all manner of Distractions as it appeares at this day And that a Councel may erre besides al other instances which are not few appeares by that Error of the Councell of a Sess. 13. Constance And one Instance is enough to overthrow a Generall be it a Councell b S. Matth. 26. Christ instituted the Sacrament of his Body and Blood in both Kinde 1 Cor. 11. 23. To breake Christs Institution is a damnable Error and so confessed by c Returne of Vntruths vpon Mr. Ieweil Ar. 2. untruth 49. Stapleton The Councel is bold and defines peremptorily That to communicate in both kindes is not necessary with a Non obstante to the Institution of Christ. Consider now with me Is this an Error or not d 4. De Eucharist c. 26. Bellarmine and Stapleton and you too say 't is not because to receive under both kindes is not by Divine Right No no sure For it was not Christs e Bellarm. ibid. §. Vicesimo proferunt Precept but his Example Why but I had thought Christs Institution of a Sacrament had beene more then his Example only and as binding for the Necessaries of a Sacrament the Matter and Forme †And now lately in a Catechisme printedat Paris 1637. without the Authors Name 't is twice affirmed thus The Institution of a Sacrament is of it selfe a Command Conference 14. p. 244. And againe p. 260. Institution is a Precept as a Precept Therefore speake out and deny it to bee Christs Institution or els grant with Stapleton It is a damnable Error to goe against it If you can prove that Christs Institution is not as binding to us as a Precept which you shall never be able take the Precept with it g S. Matth. 26. 1 Cor. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Liturg. S. Chrysost. Drinke ye All of this which though you shift as you can yet you can never make it other then it is A binding Precept But Bellarmine hath yet one better Devise then this to save the Councell He saith it is a meere Calumny and that the Councell hath no such thing That the Non obstante hath no reference to Receiving under both kindes but to the time of receiving it after Supper in which the Councell saith the Custome of the Church is to be observed Non obstante notwithstanding Christs Example How foule Bellarmine is in this must appeare by the Words of the Councell which are these * Licet Christus post Coenam instituerit suis Discipulis administraverit sub utrâque specie Panis Uini hoc venerabile Sacramentum tamen hoc Non obstante non debet confici post Coenam nec recipi nifi a jejunis Here Bellarmine stayes and goes no farther but the Councell goes on Et similitèr quòd licèt in Primitivâ Ecclesiâ Sacramenta reciperentur sub utrâque Specie à fidelibus tamen haec Consuetudo ut à Laicis sub Specie Panis tantum suscipiatur habenda est pro Lege quam non licet reprobare Et asserere hanc esse illicitam est Erroneum Et pertinacitèr asserentes sunt arcendi tanquam Haretici Sess. 13. Though
and Bishops And in this Councell he condemned Peter Lombard and in him his Opinion about the Incarnation And therefore of necessity either Pope Alexander erred and that in Cathedrâ as Pope in Condemning him Or Pope Innocentius in restoring him The truth is Pope Alexander had more of Alexander the Great then of S. Peter in him And being accustomed to warlike Imployments he understood not that which Peter Lombard had written about this Mystery And so He and his Learned Assistants Condemned him unjustly And whereas you professe * Apud A. C. p. 68. after That you hold nothing against your Conscience I must ever wonder much how that can be true since you hold this of the Pope's Infallibility especially as being Propheticall in the Conclusion If this be true why doe you not lay all your strength together all of your whole Society and make this one Proposition evident For all Controversies about matters of Faith are ended and without any great trouble to the Christian World if you can but make this one Proposition good That the Pope is an Infallible Iudge Till then this shame will follow you infallibly and eternally That you should make the Pope a meere man Principium Fidei a Principle or Authour of Faith and make the mouth of him whom you call Christ's Vicar sole Iudge both of Christ's Word be it never so manifest and of his Church be she never so Learned and carefull of his Truth And for Conclusion of this Point I would faine know since this had beene so plaine so easie a way either to prevent all Divisions about the Faith or to end all Controversies did they arise why this briefe but most necessary Proposition The Bishop of Rome cannot erre in his Iudiciall Determinations concerning the Faith is not to be found either in Letter or sense in any Scripture in any Councell or in any Father of the Church for the full space of a thousand yeares and more after Christ For had this Proposition been true and then received in the Church how weake were all the Primitive Fathers to prescribe so many Rules and Cautions for avoydance of Heresie as Tertullian and Vincentius Lirinensis and others do and to indure such hard Conflicts as they did and with so many various Haereticks To see Christendome so rent and torne by some distempered Councels as that of Ariminum the second of Ephesus and others Nay to see the whole world almost become Arrian to the amazement of it selfe And yet all this time not so much as call in this Necessary Assistance of the Pope and let the world know That the Bishop of Rome was infallible that so in his Decision all differences might cease For either the Fathers of the Church Greeke as well as Latine knew this Proposition to be true That the Pope cannot Erre Iudicially in matters belonging to the Faith or they knew it not If you say they knew it not you charge them with a base and unworthy Ignorance no wayes like to over-cloud such and so many Learned men in a Matter so Necessary and of such infinite use to Christendome If you say they knew it and durst not deliver this Truth how can you charge them which durst die for Christ with such Cowardise towards his Church And if you say they knew it and with-held it from the Church you lay a most unjust Load upon those Charitable Soules which loved Christ too well to imprison any Truth but likely to make or keepe peace in his Church Catholike over the world But certainly as no Divine of worth did then dreame of any such Infallibility in Him so is it a meere dreame or worse of those Moderne Divines who affirme it now a The wilde Extent of the Popes Infallibility and Jurisdiction is a Mistake These are the Words of a Great Romane Catholike uttered to my selfe But I will spare his Name because he is living and I will not draw your Envy upon him And as b Puto quòd ipsi etiam rideant quum hoc audiunt tamen nifi hoc dicant quod erabescant si dicant non habent omninò quod dicant Sed quid ad nos Nâ—…ini invidemus Legant nobis hoc de Scripturis Sanctis credimus S. August de Vnit. Eccl. c. 17. S. Augustine somtimes spake of the Donatists and their absurd limiting the whole Christian Church to Africa onely so may I truly say of the Romanists confining all Christianity to the Romane Doctrine governed by the Pope's Infallibility I verily perswade my selfe That even the Jesuites themselves laugh at this And yet unlesse they say this which they cannot but blush while they say they have nothing at all to say But what 's this to us we envy no man If the Pope's Decision bee infallible Legant Let them read it to us out of the Holy Scripture and wee 'l believe it In the meane time take this with you that most certaine it is That the Pope hath no Infallibility to attend his Cathedrall Iudgement in Things belonging to the Faith For first besides the silence of Impartiall Antiquity Diverse c Papa non solùm Errore Personali sed Errore Iudiciali potest errare in Materia Fidei Almain L. de Author Eccles. c. 10. of your Owne confesse it yea and proove it too by sundry Instances Secondly there is a great Question among the Learned both Schoole-men and Controversers Whether the Pope comming to bee an Hereticke may bee Deposed And 't is learnedly disputed by d L. 2. de Rom. Font c. 30. Bellarmine The Opinions are different For the e Si sit à Fide de vius Dist. 40. Can. Si Papa Canon-Law saies expresly He may be judged and deposed by the Church in Case of Heresie †Iure Divino Papatu privatus est c. Io. de Turrecrem L. 4. Par. 2. c. 20. Et Bellar. L. 2. de Re. Pent. c. 30. Io. de Turrecremata is of Opinion That the Pope is to be deposed by the Church so soone as he becomes an Hereticke though as yet not a manifest one Because he is already deprived by Divine Right And recites another opinion That the Pope cannot be deposed though be fall into secret or manifest Heresie * Papa factus Hareticus non est ipso facte vel jure Divino vel humano depositus sed deponendus Cajet Tract de Author Papa Concilii c. 20. Cajetan thinkes that the Pope cannot be deposed but for a manifest Heresie and that then he is not deposed ipso facto but must be deposed by the Church †Papa Hareticus manifestus per se desinit esse Papa Caput c. Et tum potest ab Ecclesiâ Iudicari puniri Bellar. L. 2. de Rom. Pont. c. 30. §. Est ergo quinta Bellarmines owne Opinion is That if the Pope become a manifest Hereticke he presently ceases to be Pope and Head of the Church and may then be Iudged and
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
well meaning man that is misted and believes an Hereticke Yet here let mee adde this for fuller Expression This must bee understood of such Leaders and Hereticks as c S. Mat. 18. 17. Qui oppugnant Regulam Veritatis S. Aug. L. de Haeresibus versùs finem refuse to heare the Churches Instruction or to use all the meanes they can to come to the knowledge of the Truth For else if they doe this Erre they may but Heretickes they are not as is most manifest in d Cyprianus Beatus Martyr S. Aug. L. 1. de Bapt. cont Donatist c. 18. S. Cyprian's Case of Rebaptization For here though he were a maine Leader in that Errour yet all the whole Church grant him safe and his e Donatista verò qui de Cypriani Authoritate fibi carnaliter blandiuntur S. Aug. L. 1. de Bapt. cont Donat. c. 18. nimiâ—…â—…iseri nisi se corrigant à semetipsis omninò daâ—…ati qui hoc in tanto viro eligunt imitari Ibid. c. 19. Followers in danger of damnation But if any man be a Leader and a Teaching Heretick and will add f Rei falsitatis circa accusatum Coecilianum deprehensi Donatistae pertinaâ—… dissentione firmatâ schisma in Haeresâ—… verterunt S. Aug. L. de Haeres Haer. 69. Et Tales sub Vocabulo Christiano doctrinae resistunt Christianae S. Aug. L. 18. 〈◊〉 Civ Dei c. 51. prin Schisme to Heresie and bee obstinate in both he without repentance must needs bee lost while many that succeed him in the Errour onely without the Obstinacie may bee saved For they which are missed and swayed with the Current of the time hold the same Errours with their misleaders yet not supinely but with all sober diligence to finde out the Truth Not pertinaciously but with all readinesse to submit to Truth so soone as it shall bee found Not uncharitably but retaining an internall Communion with the Whole Visible Church of Christ in the Fundamentall Points of Faith and performance of Acts of Charity not factiously but with an earnest desire and a sincere endeavour as their Place and Calling gives them meanes for a perfect Vnion and Communion of all Christians in Truth as well as Peace I say these however misled are neither Hereticks nor Schismaticks in the sight of God and are therefore in a state of Salvation And were not this true Divinity it would go very hard with many poore Christian soules that have been and are misled on all sides in these and other Distracted times of the Church of Christ Whereas thus habituated in themselves they are by God's mercy safe in the midst of those waves in which their Misleaders perish I pray you Marke this and so by God's Grace will I. For our * Qui et fi ipsi postmodum ad Ecclesiam râ—…eunt restituere tamen eos seoum reâ—…are non possunt qui ab iis seducti sunt foris morte praeventi extra Ecclesiam sine Communicatione pace perierunt quorum Animae in die Iudicii de ipsorum manibus expetentur qui perditionis Authores duces extiterunt S. Cypr. L. 2. Epist. 1. reckoning will bee heavier if wee thus mislead on either side then theirs that follow us But I see I must look to my selfe for you are secure For F. D. White said I hath secured mee that none of our Errours be damnable so long as we hold them not against our Conscience And I hold none against my Conscience B. It seemes then you have two Securities § 37 D. White 's Assertion and your Conscience What Assurance D. White gave you I cannot tell of my selfe nor as things stand may I rest upon your Relation It may be you use him no better then you do mee And sure it is so For I have since spoken with D. White the late Reverend B. of Ely and he avovvs this and no other Answer He was asked in the Conserence betweene you Whether Popish Errours were Fundamentall To this he gave an Answer by Distinction of the Persons which held and professed the Errours Namely that the Errours were Fundamentall reductivè by a Reducement if they which embraced them did pertinaciously adhere to them having sufficient meanes to be better informed Nay farther that they were materially and in the very kinde and Nature of them Leaven Drosse a 1 Cor. 3. 12. Hay and Stubble Yet he thought withall that such as were misled by education or long custome or over valuing the Soveraignty of the Roman Church and did in simplicity of heart embrace them might by their generall Repentance and Faith in the Merit of Christ attended with Charity and other Uertues finde mercy at Gods hands But that he should say signanter and expresly That none either of yours or your Fellowes Errours were damnable so long as you hold them not against Conscience that he utterly disavowes You delivered nothing to extort such a Confession from him And for your selfe he could observe but small love of Truth few signes of Grace in you as be told me Yet he will not presume to judge you or your salvation It is the b S Iohn 12. 48. Word of Christ that must judge you at the later day For your Conscience you are the happier in your Errour that you hold nothing against it especially if you speak not against it while you say so But this no man can know but your selfe c 1 Cor. 2. 11. For no man knowes the thoughts of a man but the Spirit of a man that is within him to which I leave you To this A. C. replyes And first he grants that D. White did not signanter and expresly say these precise A. C. p 67. words So then here 's his plaine Confession Not these precise words Secondly he saith that neither did D. White signanter and expresly make the Answer above mentioned But to this I can make no Answer since I was not present at the first or second Conference Thirdly he saith that the Reason which moved the Iesuite to say D. White had secured him was because the said Doctor had granted in his first Conference with the Iesuite these things following First That there must be one or other Church continually visible Though D. White late Bishop of Ely was more able to Answer for himselfe yet since he is now dead and is thus drawne into this Discourse I shall as well as I can doe him the right which his Learning and Paines for the Church deserved And to this first I grant as well as he That there must be some one Church or other continually visible Or that the Militant Church of Christ must alwayes be visible in some Particulars or Particular at least expresse it as you please For if this be not so then there may be a time in which there shall not any where be a visible Profession of the Name of Christ which is contrary to the whole scope and promise of the Gospell Well
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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
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
too And not that only but all the Doctrinall Points about the Faith which have beene Determined in all such Councels as the present Church of Rome allowes * Aud so also Bellarm. Sexta nota est Conspiratio in Doctrinâ cum Ecclesiâ Antiquâ L. 4 de Notis Eccle. c. 9. §. 1. as most certainly he doth so meane and 't is the Controversie betweene us then 't is most certaine and most apparent to any understanding man that reads Antiquity with an impartiall eye that a Visible Continuall Succession of Doctors and Pastors have not brought downe the Faith in this sense from Christ and his Apostles to these dayes of ours in the Romane Church And that I may not bee thought to say and not to prove I give Instance And with this that if A. C. or any Iesuite can prove That by a Visible Continued Succession from Christ and his Apostles to this day either Transubstantiation in the Eucharist Or the Eucharist in one kinde Or Purgatory Or worship of Images Or the Intention of the Priest of Necessity in Baptisme Or the Power of the Pope over a Generall Councell Or his Infallibility with or without it Or his power to Depose Princes Or the Publike Prayers of the Church in an unknowne tongue with divers other Points have beene so taught I for my part will give the Cause Beside for Succession in the generall I shall say this 'T is a great happinesse where it may be had Visible and Continued and a great Conquest over the Mutability of this present world But I do not finde any one of the Ancient Fathers that makes Locall Personall Visible and Continued Succession a Necessary Signe or Mark of the true Church in any one place And where Vincentius a Vin. Lir. cont Har. c. 4. Lirinensis cals for Antiquity Vniversality and Consent as great Notes of Truth hee hath not one word of Succession And for that great Place in * Hâc Ordinatione Successione ea quae est ab Apostolis in Ecclesiâ Traditio veritasis praeconiatio pervenit usque ad nos Et est plenissima haec Ostensio Vnam eandem Vivificatricem fidem esse quae in Ecclesiâ ab Apostolis usque nunc sit conservata tradita in veritate Iren. L. 3. Advers Haer. c. 3. Irenaeus where that Ancient Father reckons the Succession of the Bishops of Rome to Eleutherius who sate in his time and saith That this is a most full and ample Proofe or Ostension Vivificatricem Fidem that the Living and Life-giving Faith is from the Apostles to this day Conserved and delivered in Truth And of which Place †Per hanc Successionem confundi omnes Haereticos Bellarmin L. 4. aé Notis Eccles c. 8. §. 1. There 's no such word round in Irenaeus Bellarmine boasts so much Most manifest it is in the very same Place that * Testimonium his perhâ—…bent quae sunt in Asiâ Ecclesiae Omnes qui usque adhuc Successerunt Polycâ—…po Iren. I. 3 advers Haere c. 3. Constat omnem Doctrinam quae cum illis Ecclesiis Apostolicis Matricibus Originalibus Fidei conspiret Veritati doputandam Tettul de praescript advers Haeret. c. 21. Ecclesia posteriores non minùs Apostolicae deputantur pro consanguiinitate Doctrinae Ibid c 32. Ecclesia non in Parietibus consistit c. Ecclesia autem illic erat ubi fides verae erat S. Hieron in Psal. 133. Irenaeus stood as much upon the Succession of the Churches then in Asia and of Smyrna though that no prime Apostolicall Church where Polycarpus sate Bishop as of the Succession at Rome By which it is most manifest that it is not Personall Succession only and that tyed to one Place that the Fathers meant but they taught that the Faith was delivered over by Succession in some places or other still to their present time And so doubtlesse shall be till Time be no more I say The Faith But not every Opinion true or false that in tract of time shall cleave to the Faith And to the Faith it selfe and all its Fundamentals we can shew as good and full a Succession as you And we pretend no otherwise to it then you do save that We take in the Greeks which you do not Only we reject your grosse superstitions to which you can shew no Succession from the Apostles either at Rome or elsewhere much less any one uninterrupted And therfore he might have held his peace that says It is evident that the Roman Catholike Church only hath had a Constant and uninterrupted Succession of Pastors and Doctors and Tradition of Doctrine from Age to Age. For most evident it is That the Tradition of Doctrine hath received both Addition and Alteration since the first five hundred yeares in which †Antiqua Ecclesia primis quingentis Annis vera Ecclesia fuit proinde ApostolicaÌ„ DoctrinaÌ„ retinuit Bel. L. 4. de Notis Eccles c. 9 §. 1. Bellarmine confesses and B. Iewell maintains the Churches Doctrine was Apostolicall And once more before I leave this Point Most evident it is That the Succession which the Fathers meant is not tyed to Place or Person but 't is tyed to the Verity of Doctrine For so a Ad hanc formam provocabuntur ab illis Ecclestis quae lic èt nullum ex Apostolis vel Apostolicis Authorem suum proferunt ut multò posteriores quae denique quotidie instituuntur tamen in eadem fide conspirantes non minùs Apostolicae deputantur pro consanguinitate Doctrine â—…ertul de praescript c. 32. Tertullian expresly Beside the order of Bishops running downe in Succession from the beginning there is required Consanguinitas Doctrinae that the Doctrine be allyed in blood to that of Christ and his Apostles So that if the Doctrine bee no kinne to Christ all the Succession become strangers what nearnesse soever they pretend And * Illis Presbyteris obediendum est qui cum Episeopatus Successione Charisma acâ—…perunt Ueritatis Iren. Lib. 4. cap. 43. Irenaeus speaks plainer then he We are to obey those Presbyters which together with the Succession of their Bishopricks have received Charisma Veritatis the gift of truth Now Stapleton being prest hard with these two Authorities first a Successio nec Locorum tantum est nec personarum sed etiam vera sana Doâ—…rinae Stapl. â—…elect Controver 1. q. 4 A. 2. Notab 1. Confesses expresly That Succession as it is a Note of the true Church is neither a Succession in place only nor of Persons only but it must be of true and sound Doctrine also And had hee stayed here no man could have said better But then he saw well he must quit his great Note of the Church-Succession That he durst not doe Therefore he beginnes to cast about how hee may answer these Fathers and yet maintaine Succession Secondly therefore he tels us That that which these Fathers say do nothing weaken Succession
Definition of a Generall Councell Consid. 6. be infallible then the infallibility of it is either in the Conclusion and in the Meanes that prove it or in the Conclusion not the Meanes or in the Meanes not the Conclusion But it is infallible in none of these Not in the first The Conclusion and the Meanes For there are diverse Deliberations in Generall Councels where the Conclusion is Catholike but the Meanes by which they prove it not infallible Not in the second The Conclusion and not the Meanes For the Conclusion must follow the nature of the Premisses or Principles out of which it is deduced therefore if those which the Councell uses be sometimes uncertaine as is proved before the Conclusion cannot be infallible Not in the third The Meanes and not the Conclusion For that cannot but be true and necessary if the Meanes be so And this I am sure you will never grant because if you should you must deny the Infallibility which you seeke to establish To this for I confesse the Argument is old but can never be worne out nor shifted off your great Master a Relect. Cont. 4. q. 2. ad Argâ—… 1â—… Stapleton who is miserably hamper'd in it and indeed so are you all answers That the Infallibility of a Councell is in the second Course that is b And herein I must needs Commend your Wildome For you have had many Popes so ignorant 〈◊〉 ignorant as that they have beene â—…o way able to sift and Examine the Meanes And therefore you doe most advisedly make them infallible in the Conclusion without the Meanes §. 39. Nu. 8. It is infallible in the Conclusion though it be uncertaine and fallible in the Meanes and Proofe of it How comes this to passe It is a thing altogether unknowne in Nature and Art too That fallible Principles can either father or mother beget or bring forth an infallible Conclusion Well that is granted in Nature and in all Argumentation that causes Knowledge But we shall have Reasons for it c Ibid. Not. 4. First because the Church is discursive and uses the weights and moments of Reason in the Meanes but is Propheticall and depends upon immediate Revelation from the Spirit of God in delivering the Conclusion It is but the making of this appeare and all Controversie is at an end Well I will not discourse here To what end there is any use of Meanes if the Conclusion be Propheticall which yet is justly urged for no good cause can be assigned of it If it be Propheticall in the Conclusion I speake still of the present Church for that which included the Apostles which had the Spirit of Prophecie and immediate Revelation was ever Propheticke in the Definition but then that was Infallible in the Meanes too Then since it delivers the Conclusion not according to Nature and Art that is out of Principles which can beare it there must be some supernaturall Authority which must deliver this Truth That say I must be the Scripture For if you flie to immediate Revelation now the Enthusiasme must be yours But the Scriptures which are brought in the very Exposition of all the Primitive Church neither say it nor enforce it Therefore Scripture warrants not your Prophesie in the Conclusion And I know no other thing that can warrant it If you think the Tradition of the Church can make the world beholding to you Produce any Father of the Church that sayes This is an Vniversall Tradition of the Church That her Definitions in a Generall Councell are Propheticall and by immediate Revelation Produce any one Father that sayes it of his own Authority That he thinks so Nay make it appeare that ever any Prophet in that which he delivered from God as Infallible Truth was ever discursive at all in the Meanes Nay make it but probable in the ordinary course of Prophecie and I hope you go no higher nor will I offer at God's absolute Power That that which is discursive in the Meanes can be Prophetick in the Conclusion and you shall be my great Apollo for ever In the meane time I have learned this from a Prophetae audiebant à Deo interiùs inspirante Tho. 2. 24. q. 5. A. 1. ad 3. yours That all Prophecie is by Vision Inspiration c. And that no Vision admits Discourse That all Prophecie is an Illumination not alwayes present but when the Word of the b The word of the Lord came unto me is common in the Prophets Lord came to them and that was not by Discourse And yet you c Stapl. Relect. Cont. 4. q. 2. p. 473. say againe That this Prophetick Infallibility of the Church is not gotten without study and industry You should do well to tell us too why God would put his Church to study for the Spirit of Prophecie which never any Particular Prophet was put unto d Propheticam Revelationem nullo pacto haberi posse vel ope Naturae vel studio Contra Avicennam Algazalem Averrocm c. Fran. Picus 2. Praenot c. 4. And whosoever shall study for it shall do it in vaine since Prophecie is a e 1. Cor. 12. 10. Gift and can never bee an acquired Habit. And there is somewhat in it that Bellarmine in all his Dispute for the Authority of Generall Councels dares not come at this Rocke f L. 2. de Conc. c. 12. He preferres the Conclusion and the Canon before the Acts and the Deliberations of Councels and so do we but I do not remember that ever he speaks out That the Conclusion is delivered by Prophecie or Revelation Sure he sounded the shore and found danger here He did sound it For a little before he speaks plainly would his bad Cause let him be constant * Concilia noâ—… habent neque scribunt immediatas Revelationes c sed ex Verbo Dei per ratiocinationeÌ„ dcducunt Conclusiones Bellar. l. 2 de Concil A. 12. §. At Concilia non Councels do deduce their Conclusions What from Inspiration No But out of the Word of God and that per ratiocinationem by Argumentation Neither have they nor do they write any immediate Revelations The second Reason why a Stap. Jb. p. 374 Stapleton will have it Propheticke in the Conclusion is Because that which is determined by the Church is matter of Faith not of Knowledge And that therefore the Church proposing it to be believed though it use Meanes yet it stands not upon Art or Meanes or Argument but the Revelation of the Holy Ghost Els when we embrace the Conclusion proposed it should not be an Assent of Faith but an Habit of Knowledge This for the first part That the Church uses the Meanes but followes them not is all one in substance with the former Reason And for the later part That then our admitting the Decree of a Councell would be no Assent of Faith but an Habit of Knowledge what great inconvenience is there if it be granted For