traditum est S. Cypri ad Pompeium cont Epist. Stephan princ tradere non traditum make a Tradition of that which was not delivered to her and by some of Them then She is unfaithful to God and doth not servare depositum faithfully keepe that which is committed to her Trust. * 1 Tim. 6. 20. and 2 Tim. 1. 14. 1 Tim. 6. And her Sonnes which come to know it are not bound to obey her Tradition against the c Si ipsa Ecclesia contraria Scripturae diceret Fidelis ipsi non crederet c. Hen. a Gand. Sum. p. 1. A. 10. q. 1. And Bellarmiâ—…e himselfe that he might the more safely defend himselfe in the Cause of Traditions sayes but how truly let other men Iudge Nullam Traditionem admittimus contra Scripturam L. 4. 〈◊〉 Verbo Dei c. 3. §. Deindè commune Word of their Father For wheresoever Christ holds his peace or that his words aâ—…e not Registred I am of S. d S. Aug. Tom. 96. in 〈◊〉 Ioh. in illâ—… Ferba Multa habeo dicere sed non potestis portare modò Augustines Opinion No man may dare without rashnesse say they were these or these So there were many unwritten Words of God which were never delivered over to the Church and thereâ—…ore never made Tradition And there are many Traditions which cannot be said to be the unwritten word of God For I believe a Learned Romanist that will weigh before he speakes will not easily say That to Annoint or use Spittle in Baptisme or to use three Dippings in the use of that Sacrament or diverse other like Traditions had their Rise from any Word of God unwritten Or if he be so hardy as to say so 't is gratis dictum and he will have enough to doe to prove it So there may be an unwritten Word of God which is no Tradition And there are many Traditions which are no unwritten Word of God Therfore Tradition must be taken two wayes Either as it is the Churches Act delivering or the Thing thereby delivered and then 't is Humane Authority or from it and unable infallibly to warrant Divine Faith or to be the Object of it Or els as it is the unwritten Word of God and then where ever it can be made to appeare so 't is of divine and infallible Authority no question But then I would have A. C. consider where he is in A. C. p. 49. this Particular He tels us We must know infallibly that the Bookes of Holy Scripture are Divine and that this must be done by unwritten Tradition but so as that this Tradition is the Word of God unwritten Now let him but prove that this or any Tradition which the Church of Rome stands upon is the Word of God though unwritten and the businesse is ended But A. C. must not thinke that because the Tradition of the Church tels me these Bookes are Verbum Dei Gods A. C. p. 50. Word and that I do both honour and believe this Tradition That therefore this Tradition it selfe is Gods Word too and so absolutely sufficient and infallible to worke this Beliefe in me Therefore for ought A. C. hath yet added we must on with our Inquiry after this great Businesse and most necessary Truth 2. For the second way of proving That Scripture should be fully and sufficiently knowne as by Divine and Infallible Testimony Lumine proprio by the resplendency of that Light which it hath in it selfe onely and by the witnesse that it can so give to it selfe I could never yet see cause to allow a Hook l. 2. §. 4 For as there is no place in Scripture that tels us Such Books containing such and such Particulars are the Canon and infallible Will and Word of God So if there were any such place that were no sufficient proofe For a man may justly aske another Booke to beare witnesse of that and againe of that another and where ever it were written in Scripture that must be a part of the Whole And no created thing can alone give witnesse to it selfe and make it evident nor one part testifie for another and satisfie where Reason will but offer to contest Except those Principles onely of Naturall knowledge which appeare manifest by intuitive light of understanding without any Discourse And yet they also to the weaker sort require Induction preceding Now this Inbred light of Scripture is a thing coincident with Scripture it selfe and so the Principles and the Conclusion in this kind of proofe should be entirely the same which cannot be Besides if this inward Light were so cleare how could there have beene any variety among the Ancient Believers touching the Authority of S. a Euseb. L. 2. c. 27. fine Edit Basil. 1549. Iames and S. Jude's Epistles and the b Euseb. L. 3. c. 25. Apocalyps with other Bookes which were not received for diverse yeares after the rest of the New Testament For certainly the Light which is in the Scripture was the same then which now it is And how could the Gospell of S. Bartholomew of S. Thomas and other counterfeit peeces obtaine so much credit with some as to be received into the Canon if the evidence of this Light were either Universall or Infallible of and by it selfe And this though I cannot approve yet me thinks you may and upon probable grounds at least For I hope no †Except A. C. whose boldness herein I cannot but pitie For he denies this light to the Scripture and gives it to Tradition His words are p. 52. Tradition of the Church is of a company which by its owne light shewes it selfe to bee infallibly assisted c. Romanist will deny but that there is as much light in Scripture to manifest and make ostension of it selfe to be infallibly the written Word of God as there is in any Tradition of the Church that it is Divine and infallibly the unwritten Word of God And the Scriptures saying from the mouthes of the Prophets b Isa 44. passina Thus saith the Lord and from the mouthes of the a Act. 28. 25. Apostles that the Holy Ghost spake by them are at least as able and as fit to beare witnesse to their owne Verity as the Church is to beare witnesse to her owne Traditions by bare saying they come from the Apostles And your selves would never go to the Scripture to prove that there are Traditions b 2. Thess. 2. 15. Iude vers 3. as you do if you did not thinke the Scripture as easie to be discovered by inbred light in itselfe as Traditions by their light And if this be so then it is as probable at the least which some of ours affirme That Scripture may bee knowne to bee the Word of God by the Light and Lustre which it hath in it selfe as it is which you c In your Articles delivered to D. W. to be answered And A. C. p. 52. affirme That a
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
hope this is no part of your meaning Yet I doubt this b Qui conantur sidem destruere sub specie Questionis difficilis aut fortè indissolubilis c. Orig. Q. 35. in S. Matth. Question How doe you know Scripture to be Scripture hath done more harme than you will be ever able to helpe by Tradition But I must follow that way which you draw me And because it is so much insisted upon by you and is in it self a c To know that Scriptures are Divine and infallible in every part is a Foundation so necessary as if it bee doubtfully question'd all the Faith built upon Scripture fals to the ground A. C. p. 47. Necesse est nôsse extare Libros aliquos vere Divinos Bellarm. L. 4. de verb. Dei non scripto c. 4. §. Quarto necesse Et etiam libros qui sunt in manibus esse illos Ibid. §. Sexto oportet matter of such Consequence I will sift it a little farther Many men labouring to settle this great Principle in Divinity have used diverse meanes to prove it All have not gone the same way nor all the right way You cannot be right that resolve Faith of the Scriptures being the Word of God into onely Tradition For onely and no other proofe are equall To prove the Scripture therefore so called by way of Excellence to be the Word of God there are severall Offers at diverse proofes For first some flie to the Testimony and witnesse of the Church and 1. her Tradition which constantly believes and unanimously delivers it Secondly some to the Light 2. and the Testimony which the Scripture gives to it selfe with other internall proofes which are observed in it and to be found in no other Writing whatsoever Thirdly some to the Testimony of the Holy 3. Ghost which cleares up the light that is in Scripture and seales this Faith to the soules of men that it is Gods Word Fourthly all that have not imbrutished 4. themselves and sunke below their species and order of Nature give even Naturall Reason leave to come in and make some proofe and give some approbation upon the weighing and the consideration of other Arguments And this must be admitted if it be but for Pagans and Infidels who either consider not or value not any one of the other three yet must some way or other bee converted or left without excuse Rom. 1. and that is Rom. 1. 20. done by this very evidence 1. For the first The Tradition of the Church which is your way That taken and considered alone it is so farre from being the onely that it cannot be a sufficient Proofe to believe by Divine Faith that Scripture is the Word of God For that which is a full and sufficient proofe is able of it selfe to settle the soule of man concerning it Now the Tradition of the Church is not able to doe this For it may bee further asked why wee should believe the Churches Tradition And if it be answered we may believe Because the Church is infallibly governed by the Holy Ghost it may yet be demanded of you How that may appeare And if this be demanded either you must say you have it by speciall Revelation which is the private Spirit you object to other men or else you must attempt to prove it by Scripture a Esse aliquas veras Traditiones demonstratur ex Scripturis Bellar L. 4 de verbo Dei non Scripto c. 5. and A. C p. 50. proves Tradition out of 2 Thes. 2. as all of you doe And that very offer to prove it out of Scripture is a sufficient acknowledgement that the Scripture is a higher Proofe then the Churches Tradition w ch in your own Grounds is or may be Questionable till you come thither Besides this is an Inviolable ground of Reason * Arist. 1. Post. c. 2. T. 16. Per Pacium Quocirca si 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 propter prima scimus credimus illa quoque scimus credimus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 magis quia per illa scimus credimus etiam posteriora That the Principles of any Conclusion must be of more credite then the conclusion it self Therefore if the Articles of Faith The Trinity the Resurrection and the rest be the Conclusions and the Principles by which they are prooved be only Ecclesiasticall Tradition it must needs follow That the Tradition of the Church is more infallible then the Articles of the Faith if the Faith which we have of the Articles should be finally Resolved into the Veracity of the Churches Testimony But this †Eorum errorem dissimulare non possum qui asserunt fidern Nostram cò tanquà m in ultimam credendi causam reducendam esse Vt Credamus Ecclesiam esse Veracem c. M. Canus L. 2. de Locis c. 8. §. Cui tertium your Learned and wary men deny And therefore I hope your selfe dare not affirme Againe if the Voyce of the Church saying the Bookes of Scripture commonly received are the Word of God be the formall Object of Faith upon which alone absolutely I may resolve my selfe then every man not only may but ought to resolve his Faith into the Voyce or Tradition of the Church for every man is bound to rest upon the proper and formall Object of the Faith But nothing can bee more evident then this That a man ought not to resolve his Faith of this Principle into the sole Testimony of the Church Therefore neither is that Testimony or Tradition alone the formall Object of Faith * Uox Ecclesiae non est formale Obiectum Fidei Stapl. Relect. Cont 4. q. 3. A. 2. Licet in Articulo Fidei Credo Ecclesiam fortè contineatur hoc totum Credo ea quae docet Ecclesia tamen non intelligitur necessariò quod Credo docenti Ecclesiae tanquam Testi insallibili ibid. Vbi etiam rejicit Opinionem Durandi Gabr. Et Waldens L. 2 Doctr. Fidei Art 2. c. 21. Num. 4. Testimonium Ecclesiae Catholicae est Objectum Fidei Christianae Legislatio Scripturae Canonica subjicitur tamen ipsi sicut Testis Iudici Testimonium Veritati c. Canus Loc. Lib. 2. cap. 8. Nec si Ecclesia aditum nobis prabet ad hujusmodi Libros Sacros cognoscendos protinus ibi acquiescendum est sed ultrà â—…portet progredi Solidà Dei veritate niti c. The Learned of your owne part grant this †Although in that Article of the Creed I believe the Catholike Church peradventure all this be contained I believe those things which the Church teacheth yet this is not necessarily understood That I believe the Church teaching as an Infallible Witnesse And if they did not confesse this it were no hard thing to prove But here 's the cunning of this Devise All the Authority's of Fathers Councels nay of Scripture too b Omnis ergo Ecclesiastica Authoritas cùm sit ad
other And even in those Fundamentall Things in which the Whole Vniversall Church neither doth nor can Erre yet even there her Authority is not Divine because She delivers those supernatural Truths by Promise of Assistance yet tyed to Meanes And not by any speciall Immediate Revelation which is necessarily required to the very least Degree of Divine Authority And therefore our †Hook l. 3. §. 9 VVorthies do not only say but prove That all the Churches Constitutions are of the nature of Humane Law a Stapl. Relect. Con. 4. q. 3. A. 1. 2. And some among you not unworthy for their Learning prove it at large That all the Churches Testimony or voyce or Sentence call it what you will is but suo modo or aliquo modo not simply but in a manner Divine Yea and A. C. himselfe A. C. p. 51. after all his debate comes to that and no further That the Tradition of the Church is at least in some sort Divine and Infallible Now that which is Divine but in a sort or manner bee it the Churches manner is aliquo modo non Divina in a sort not Divine But this Great Principle of Faith the Ground and Proofe of whatsoever else is of Faith cannot stand firme upon a Proofe that is and is not in a manner and not in a manner Divine As it must if we have no other Anchor then the Externall Tradition of the Church to lodge it upon and hold it steddy in the midst of those waves which daily beate upon it Now here A. C. confesses expresly That to prove the Bookes of Scripture to bee Divine we must bee A. C. p. 49. warranted by that which is Infallible Hee confesses farther that there can be no sufficient Infallible Proofe of A. C. p. 50. this but Gods Word written or unwritten And he gives his Reason for it Because if the Proofe be meerely Humane and Fallible the Science or Faith which A. C. p. 51. is built upon it can be no better So then this is agreed on by mee yet leaving other men to travell by their owne way so bee they can come to make Scripture thereby Infallible That Scripture must bee knowne to bee Scripture by a sufficient Infallible Divine Proofe And that such Proofe can be nothing but the Word of God is agreed on also by me Yea and agreed on for me it shall be likewise that Gods Word may be written and unwritten For Cardinall †Verbum Dei non est tale nec habet ullam Authoritatem quia scriptum est in membranis sed quia à Deo profectum est Bellar. l. 4 de Verb. Dei 2 §. Ecclesiasticae Traditiones Bellarmine tells us truly that it is not the writing or printing that makes Scripture the Word of God but it is the Prime Vnerring Essentiall Truth God himselfe uttering and revealing it to his Church that makes it Verbum Dei the Word of God And this Word of God is uttered to men either immediately by God himselfe Father Sonne and Holy Ghost and so 't was to the Prophets and Apostles Or mediately either by Angels to whom God had spoken first and so the Law was given * Lex ordinata per Angelos in manu 〈◊〉 Gal. 3 19. Gal. 3. and so also the Message was delivered to the Blessed Virgin a S. Luk. 1. 0. S. Luke 1. or by the Prophets b The Holy Ghost c. which spake by the Prophets in Symb. Nicen. and Apostles and so the Scriptures were delivered to the Church But their being written gave them no Authority at all in regard of themselves VVritten or unwritten the VVord was the same But it was written that it might bee the better c Nam Psiudoprophetae etiam viventibus adâ—…c Apostolis multas fingebant corruptelas sub â—…oc praetextu titulo quasi ab Apostolis vivà veccessent traditae propter hanc ipsâ—…m causam Apostoli Doctrinam suam coeperunt Literis comprehendere Ecclesiis commendare Chem. Exam. Concil Trid. de Traditionibus sub octavo genere Tradit And so also Iansâ—…n Comment in S. Ioh 5. 47. Sicut enim firmius est quod mandatur Literis ita est culpabiliâ—…s majus non credere Scriptis quam non credere Verbis preserved and continued with the more integrity to the use of the Church and the more faithfully in our d Labilis est memoria ideo indigâ—…mus Scripturâ Dicendum quod verum est sed hoc non habet nisi ex inundantia peccatorum Hent a Gand. Sum. p. 1 Ar. 8. q. 4. sine Christus ipse de pectore morituro Testamentum transfert in tabulas diù duraturas Optat. L 5. Christus ipse non transtulit sed ex Optati sew entiâ Ejus Inspiratione si non Iussâ—… Apostoli transtulerunt Memories And you have been often enough told were truth and not the maintaining of a party the thing you seek for that if you will shew us any such unwritten word of God delivered by his Prophets and Apostles we will acknowledge it to be Divine and Infallible So written or unwritten that shall not stumble us But then A. C. must not tell us at least not thinke we shall swallow it into our Beliefe that every thing which he sayes is the unwritten VVord of God is so indeed I know Bellarmine hath written a whole Booke * Bellar. L. 4. De Verbo Dei non script De Verbo Dei non scripto of the Word of God not written in which he handles the Controversie concerning Traditions And the Cunning is to make his weaker Readers believe that all that which He and his are pleased to call Traditions are by and by no lesse to be received and honoured then the unwritten word of God ought to be Whereas 't is a thing of easie knowledge That the unwritten VVord of God and Tradition are not Convertible Termes that is are not all one For there are many Vnwritten VVords of God which were never delivered over to the Church for ought appeares And there are many Traditions affirmed at least to be such by the Church of Rome which were never warranted by any unwritten Word of God First That there are many unwritten words of God which were never delivered over to the Church is manifest For when or where were the words which Christ spake to his Apostles during the a Acts 1. 3. forty dayes of his Conversing with them after his Resurrection first delivered over to the Church or what were the unwritten Words He then spake If neither Heâ—… nor His Apostles or Evangelists have delivered them to the Church the Church ought not to deliver them to her Children Or if she doe b Annunciare aliquid Christianis Catholicis praeter id quod acceperunt nunquam licuit nusquam licet nunquam licebit Vincen. Lir. c. 14. Et praeâ—…ipit nihil aliu â—…innovari nisi quo 〈◊〉
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
is in Scripture it selfe is not bright enough it cannot beare sufficient witnesseto itselfe The Testimonie of the Holy Ghost that is most infallible but ordinarily it is not so much as considerable in this Question which is not how or by what meanes we believe but how the Scripture may be proposed as a Credible Object fit for Beliefe And for Reason no man expects that that should proove it it doth service enough if it enable us to disproove that which misguided men conceive against it If none of these then be an Absolute and sufficient meanes to prove it either we must finde out another or see what can bâ—… more wrought out of these And to all this again A. C. sayes nothing For the Tradition of the Church then certaine it is wee must distinguish the Church before wee can judge right of the Validity of the Tradition For if the speech bee of the Prime Christian Church the Apostles Disciples and such as had immediate Revelation from Heaven no question but the Voyce and Tradition of this Church is Divine not aliquo modo in a sort but simply and the Word of God from them is of like Validity written or delivered And against this Tradition of which kinde this That the Bookes of Scripture are the Word of God is the most generall and uniforme the Church of England never excepted And when S. †L. 1. cont Epis. Fund c. 5. Ego vero non crederem Evangelio nisi me Catholicae Ecclesiae commoveret Authoritas Augustine said I would not believe the Gospell unlesse the Authority of the Catholike Church mooved mee which Place you urged at the Conference though you are now content to slide by it some of your owne will not endure should be understood save * Occham Dial. p. 1. L. 1. c. 4. Intelligitur solum de Ecclesiâ—… qua fuit tempore Apostolorum of the Church in the time of the Apostles only and a Biel. lect 2â—… in C. Missâ—… A tempore Christi Apostolorum c. And so doth S. August take Eccles. Contra Fund some of the Church in Generall not excluding after-ages But sure to include Christ and his Apostles And the certainety is there abundance of certainety in it selfe but how farre that is evident to us shall after appeare But this will not serve your turne The Tradition of the present Church must bee as Infallible as that of the Primitive But the contrary to this is prooved * §. 16. Nu. 6. before because this Voyce of the present Church is not simply Divine To what end then serves any Tradition of the present Church To what Why to a very good end For first it serves by a full consent to worke upon the mindes of unbelievers to move them to reade and to consider the Scripture which they heare by so many Wise Learned and Devoute men is of no meaner esteeme then the Word of God And secondly It serves among Novices Weaklings and Doubters in the Faith to instruct and confirme them till they may acquaint themselves with and understand the Scripture which the Church delivers as the Word of God And thus againe some of your owne understand the fore-cited Place of S. Augustine I would not believe the Gospell c. * Sive Infâ—…les sive in Fide Novitii Can. Loc. L. 2. c 8. Neganti aut omnino nescientâ—… Scripturam Stapl. Relect. Cent. 4. q. 1. A 3. For he speakes it either of Novices or Doubters in the Faith or else of such as were in part Infidels You at the Conference though you omit it here would needs have it that S. Augustine spake even of the †Quid si fateamur Fideles etiam Ecclesiae Authoritate commoveri ut Scripturas recipiant Non tamen inde sequitur eos hoc modo penitus 〈◊〉 aut nullâ aliâ fortioreque ratione induci Quis autem Christianus est quem Ecclesia Christi commâ—…dans Scripturam Christi non commoveat Whitaker Disp. de sacrâ Scripturá Contro 1. q 3. c. 8. vbt 〈◊〉 locum hunc S. Aug. faithfull which I cannot yet thinke For he speakes to the Manichees and they had a great part of the Infidell in them And the words immediately before these are If thou shouldest finde one Qui Evangelio nondum credit which did not yet believe the Gospell what wouldest thou doe to make him believe a Et ibid. Quibus obtemperavi dicentibus Credite Evangelio Therefore he speakes of himselfe when he did not believe Ego verò non Truly I would not c. So to these two ends it serves and there need be no Question between us But then every thing that is the first Inducer to believe is not by and by either the Principall Motive or the chiefe and last Object of Beliefe upon which a man may rest his Faith Vnlesse we shall be of b Certum est quod tenemur credere omnibus contentis in Sacro Canone quia Ecclesia credit ex caratione soluÌ„ Ergo per prius magis tenemur Credere Ecclesiae quam Evangelio Almain in 3. Dist. 24 Conclus 6. Dub. 6. And to make a shew of proof for this he falsifies S Aug. most notoâ—…ously and reads that known place not Nisi me commoveret as all read it but compelleret Patet quia dicit Augustinus Evangelio non CredereÌ„ nisi aa hoc me compelleret Ecclesiae Au. horitas Ibid. And so also Gerson 〈◊〉 In Declarat veritatum quae credendae sunt c. part 1 p. 414. §. 3. But in a most ancient Manuscript in Corp. Ch. Colledge Library in Cambridge the words are Nisi me commoveret c. Lacobus Almain's Opinion That we are per prius magis first and more bound to believe the Church then the Gospell Which your own Learned men as you may see by c Canus L. 2. de Locis c. 8. fo 34. b. §. 16. Num. 6. Mel. Canus reject as Extreame foule and so indeed it is The first knowledge then after the Quid Nominis is knowne by Grammer that helpes to open a mans understanding and prepares him to bee able to Demonstrate a Truth and make it evident is his Logicke But when he hath made a Demonstration he resolves the knowledge of his Conclusion not into his Grammaticall or Logicall Principles but into the Immediate Principles out of which it is deduced So in this Particular a man is probably led by the Authority of the present Church as by the first informing induceing perswading Meanes to believe the Scripture to be the Word of God but when he hath studied considered and compared this Word with it selfe and with other Writings with the helpe of Ordinary Grace and a minde morally induced and reasonably perswaded by the Voyce of the Church the Scripture then gives greater and higher reasons of Credibility to it selfe then Tradition alone could give And then he that Believes resolves his last and full Assent That Scripture is of
Divine Authority into internall Arguments found in the Letter it selfe though found by the Helpe and Direction of Tradition without and Grace within And the resolution that is rightly grounded may not endure to pitch and restit selfe upon the Helpes but upon that Divine Light which the Scripture no Question hath in it selfe but is not kindled till these Helps come Thy word is a Light d Psal. 119. 105. Sanctarum Scripturarum Lumen S. Aug. L. de verâ Relig. c. 7. Quid Lucem Scripturarum vanis umbris c. S. Aug. L. de Mor. Eccl. Cathol c. 35. so David A Light Therefore it is as much manifestativum sui as alterius a manifestation to it selfe as to other things which it shewes but still not till the Candle be Lighted not till there hath beene a Preparing Instruction What Light it is Children call the Sunne and Moone Candles Gods Candles They see the light as well as men but cannot distinguish betweene them till some Tradition and Education hath informed their Reason And * 1 Cor. 2. 14. animalis homo the naturall man sees some Light of Morall counsell and instruction in Scripture as well as Believers But he takes all that glorious Lustre for Candle-light and cannot distinguish betweene the Sunne and twelve to the Pound till Tradition of the Church and Gods Grace put to it have cleared his understanding So Tradition of the present Church is the first Morall Motive to Beliefe But the Beliefe it selfe That the Scripture is the Word of God rests †Orig. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 1. went this way yet was he a great deale nearer the prime Tradition then we are For being to proove that the Scriptures were inspired from God he saith De hoc assignabimus ex ipsis Divinis Scripturis quae nos competenter movcrint c. upon the Scripture when a man findes it to answer and exceed all that which the Church gave in Testimony as will after appeare And as in the Voyce of the Primitive and Apostolicall Church there was a Principaliter tamen etiam hîc credimus propter Deum non Apoâ—…olos c. Henr. à Gand. Sum. A. 9. q. 3. Now if where the Apostles themselves spake ultimata resolutio Fidei was in Deum not in ipsos per se much more shall it be in Deum then in praesentem Ecclesiam and into the writings of the Apostles then into the words of their Successors made up into a Tradition simply Divine Authority delivering the Scripture as Gods Word so after Tradition of the present Church hath taught and informed the Soule the Voyce of God is plainly heard in Scripture it selfe And then here 's double Authority and both Divine that confirmes Scripture to be the Word of God Tradition of the Apostles delivering it And the internall worth and argument in the Scripture obvious to a soule prepared by the present Churches Tradition and Gods Grace The Difficulties which are pretended against this are not many and they will easily vanish For first you pretend we go to Private Revelations for Light to know Scripture No we do not you see it is excluded out of the very state of the Question and we go to the Tradition of the present Church and by it as well as you Here we differ we use the Tradition of the present Church as the first Motive not as the Last Resolution of our Faith We Resolve onely into d Calv. Instit. 1. c. 5. §. 2. Christiana Ecclesia Prophetarum scriptis Apostolorum praedicatione initio fundata fuit ubicunque reperietur ea Doctrina c. Prime Tradition Apostolicall and Scripture it selfe Secondly you pretend we do not nor cannot know the prime Apostolicall Tradition but by the Tradition of the present Church and that therefore if the Tradition of the present Church be not Gods unwritten Word and Divine we cannot yet know Scripture to be Scripture by a Divine Authority Well Suppose I could not know the prime Tradition to be Divine but by the present Church yet it doth not follow that therefore I cannot know Scripture to be the Word of God by a Divine Authority because Divine Tradition is not the sole and onely meanes to prove it For suppose I had not nor could have full assurance of Apostolicall Tradition Divine yet the morall perswasion reason and force of the present Church is ground enough to move any reasonable man that it is fit he should read the Scripture and esteeme very reverently and highly of it And this once done the Scripture hath then In and Home-Arguments enough to put a Soule that hath but ordinary Grace out of Doubt That Scripture is the Word of God Infallible and Divine Thirdly you pretend that we make the Scripture absolutely and fully to be knowne Lumine suo by the Light and Testimony which it hath in and gives to it selfe Against this you give reason for your selves and proofe from us Your Reason is If there be sufficient Light in Scripture to shew it selfe then every man that can and doth but read it may know it presently to be the Divine Word of God which we see by daily experience men neither do nor can First it is not absolutely nor universally true There is a And where Hooker uses this very Argument as he doth L. 3. §. 8. his words are not If there bee sufficient Light But if that Light bee Evident sufficient Light therefore every man may see it Blinde men are men and cannot see it and b 1 Cor. 2. 14. sensuall men in the Apostles judgement are such Nor may we deny and put out this Light as insufficient because blinde eyes cannot and perverse eyes will not see it no more then we may deny meat to be sufficient for nourishment though men that are heart-sicke cannot eat it Next we do not say That there is such a full light in Scripture as that every man upon the first sight must yeeld to it such Light as is found in Prime Principles Every whole is greater than a Part of the same and this The same thing cannot be and not be at the same time and in the same respect These carrie a naturall Light with them and evident for the Termes are no sooner understood then the Principles themselves are fully knowne to the convincing of mans understanding and so they are the beginning of knowledge which where it is perfect dwels in full Light but such a full Light we do neither say is nor require to be in Scripture and if any particular man doe let him answer for himselfe The Question is onely of such a Light in Scripture as is of force to breed faith that it is the Word of God not to make a perfect knowledge Now Faith of whatsoever it is this or other Principle is an Evidence a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well as Knowledge and Heb. 11. 1. the Beliefe is firmer then any Knowledge can
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
more Credit then hee can give them But that which followes I cannot approve to wit That the Lawfully sent Preachers of the Gospell are Gods Legats and the Scriptures Gods Letters which hee hath appointed his Legates to deliver and expound So farre 't is well but here 's the sting That these Letters doe warrant that the People may heare and give Credit to these Legats of Christ as to Christ the King himselfe Soft this is too high a great deale No * Will A. C. maintaine that any Legate à Latere is of as great Credit as the Pope himselfe Legate was ever of so great Credit as the King Himselfe Nor was any Priest never so lawfully sent ever of that Authority that Christ himselfe No sure For yee call mee Master and Lord and yee doe well for so I am saith our Saviour S. Iohn 13. And certainly this did not suddenly S. Iohn 13. 13. drop out of A. C ' s. Penne. For hee tould us once before That this Company of men which deliver the present Churches Tradition that is the lawfully sent A. C. p. 52. Preachers of the Church are assisted by Gods Spirit to have in them Divine and Infallible Authority and to bee worthy of Divine and Infallible Credit sufficient to breed in us Divine and Infallible Faith Why but is it possible these men should goe thus farre to defend an Error bee it never so deare unto them They as Christ Divine and Infallible Authority in them Sufficient to breed in us Divine and Infallible Faith I have often heard some wise men say That the Iesuite in the Church of Rome and the Precise party in the Reformâ—…d Churches agree in many things though they would seeme most to differ And surely this is one For both of them differ extreamely about Tradition The one in magnifying it and exalting it into Divine Authority The other vilifying and depressing it almost beneath Humane And yet even in these different wayes both agree in this consequent That the Sermons and Preachings by word of mouth of the lawfully sent Pastors and Doctors of the Church are able to breed in us Divine and Infallible Faith Nay are the * For this A. C. sayes expresly of Tradition p. 52. And then he addes that the Promise for this was no lesse but rather more Expresly made to the lawfully sent Pastors and Doctors of the Church in all ages in their teaching by word of mouth then in writing c. p. 53. very word of God So A. C. expresly And no lesse then so have some accounted of their owne factious words to say no more then as the †For the freeing of factious and silenced Ministers is termed the Restoring of Gods Word to â—…s Liberty In the Godly Author of the late Newes from Ipswich p. 5. Word of God I ever tooke Sermons and so doe still to be most necessary Expositions and Applications of Holy Scripture and a great ordinary meanes of saving knowledge But I cannot thinke them or the Preachers of them Divinely Infallible The Ancient Fathers of the Church preached farre beyond any of these of either faction And yet no one of them durst thinke himselfe Infallible much lesse that whatsoever hee preached was the VVord of God And it may be Obserued too That no men are more apt to say That all the Fathers were but Men and might Erre then they that thinke their owne preachings are Infallible The next thing after this large Interpretation of A C. which I shall trouble you with is That this method and manner of proving Scripture to bee the VVord of God which I here use is the same which the Ancient Church ever held namely Tradition or Ecclesiasticall Authority first and then all other Arguments but especially internall from the Scripture it selfe This way the Church went in S. Augustine's a And S. Aug. himselfe L. 13. contr Faustum c. 5. proves by an Internall Argument the fulfilling of the Prophets Scriptura saith he quae fidem suam rebus ipsis probat quae per temporum successiones hac impleri c. And Hen. a Gand. Par. 1. Sum. A. 〈◊〉 q. 3. cites S. Aug. Book de vera Religione In which Book though these Foure Arguments are not found iâ—… Termes together yet they fill up the scope of the whole Book Time He was no enemy to Church-Tradition yet when hee would prove that the Authour of the Scripture and so of the whole knowledge of Divinity as it is supernaturall is Deus in Christo God in Christ he takes this as the All-sufficient way and gives foure proofes all internall to the Scripture First The Miracles Secondly That there is nothing carnall in the Doctrine Thirdly That there hath been such performance of it Fourthly That by such a Doctrine of Humility the whole world almost hath beene converted And whereas ad muniendam Fidem for the Defending of the Faith and keeping it entire there are two things requisite Scripture and Church-Tradition b Duplici modo muniri fideÌ„ c. Primò Divinae Legis Authoritate tum deinde Ecclesia Catholicae Traditione cont Har. c. 1. Vincent Lirinens places Authority of Scriptures first and then Tradition And since it is apparent that Tradition is first in order of time it must necessarily follow that Scripture is first in order of Nature that is the chiefe upon which Faith rests and resolves it selfe And your owne Schoole confesses this was the way ever The Woman of a S. Ioh. 4. Samaria is a knowne Resemblance but allowed by your selves For b Hen. à Gand. Sum. Par. 1. A. 10. q 1. Sic quotidie apudillos qui forts sunt intrat Christus per mulierem i. Ecclesiam credunt per istam famam c. Gloss. in S. Ioh. cap. 4. quotidâ—…è daily with them that are without Christ enters by the woman that is the Church and they believe by that fame which she gives c But when they come to heare Christ himselfe they believe his words before the words of the Woman For when they have once found Christ c Ibid. Plus verbis Christi in Scripturae credit quam Ecclesiae testificanti Quia propter illam jam credit Ecclesiae Et si ipsa quidem contraria Scripturae diceret ipsi non crederet c. Primam fidem tribuamus Scripturis Canonicis secundam sub ista Definitionibus Consuctudinibus Ecclesiae Catholicae post ist as studiosis viris non sub poena perfidiae sed proterviae c. Walden Doct. Fid. To. 1. L. 2. Art 2. c. 23. Nu. 9. they do more believe his words in Scripture then they do the Church which testifies of him because then propter illam for the Scripture they believe the Church And if the Church should speake contrary to the Scripture they would not believe it Thus the Schoole taught then And thus the Glosse commented then And when men have tyred themselves hither they must come
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
the satisfaction of all men Christianly disposed Whereas had I desired only to rid my hands of these Captious Iesuites for certainly this Question was Captiously asked it had beene sufficient to have restored the Question thus How doe you know the Testimony of the Church by which you say you know Scripture to be the Word of God to be Divine and Infallible If they proove it by Scripture A. C. p. 53. Et vid. §. 16. N. 28. as all of them doe and as A. C. doth how doe they know that Scripture to be Scripture It is but a Circular Assurance of theirs by which they found the Churches Infallibility upon the Testimonie of the Scripture And the Scriptures Infallibility upon the Testimony of the Church That is upon the Matter the Churches Infallibility upon the Churches Infallibility But I labour for edification not for destruction And now by what I have here said I will weigh my Answer and his Exception taken against it F. The Bishop said That the Books of Scripture are Principles to be Supposed and needed not to be Proved B. Why but did I say That this Principle The § 17 Books of Scripture are the Word of God is to be supposed as needing no Proof at al to a Naturall man Or to a man newly entring upon the Faith yea or perhaps to a Doubter or Weakling in the Faith Can you think me so weake It seemes you doe But sure I know there is a great deale of difference betweene Ethnicks that deny and deride the Scripture and men that are Born in the Church The first have a farther way about to this Principle The other in their very Christian Education sucke it in and are taught so soone as they are apt to learne it That the Books commonly called The Bible or Scripture are the Word of God And I dealt with you †Dixi sicut â—…i congruâ—… ad quâ—…â—…bam c. S Aug. l. 1. Retract c. 13. as with a Christian though in Errour while you call Catholike The Words before spoken by me were That the Scripture onely not any unwritten Tradition was the Foundation of Faith The Question betweene us and you is Whether the Scripture do containe all necessary things of Faith Now in this Question as in all Nature and Art the Subject the Scripture is and must be a Nor is it such a strange thing to heare that Scripture is such 〈◊〉 supposeâ—…d Principle among Chriâ—…ians Quod à Scriptura evidenter deduâ—…itur est evidenter verum suppositis Scripturis Bellarm. L. 4. de Eccl. Milit. c. 3. §. 3. supposed The Quaere between the Romane-Catholikes and the Church of England being onely of the Praedicate the thing uttered of it Namely whether it containe all Fundamentals of Faith all Necessaries for Salvation within it Now since thâ—… Question proposed in very forme of Art proves not but b De Subjecto enim quaeritur semper non Subjectiâ—…n ipsum supposes the Subject I thinke I gave a satisfying Answer That to you and me and in this Question Scripture was a Supposed Principle and needed no Proofe And I must tell you that in this Question of the Scriptures perfect Continent it is against all Art yea and Equity too in Reasoning to call for a Proofe of That here which must go unavoydably supposed in this Question And if any man will be so familiar with Impiety to Question it it must be tryed in a preceding Question and Dispute by it self Yet here not you onely but c L. 4. de verb. Dei c. 4. §. Quarâ—…ò necesse est 〈◊〉 the lesuite here apud A. C. p. 49. Bellarmine and others run quite out of the way to snatch at Advantage F. Against this I read what I had formerly written in my Reply against M. Iohn White Wherein I plainely shewed that this Answer was not good and that no other Answer could be made but by admitting some Word of God unwritten to assure us of this Point B. Indeed here you read out of a Booke which § 18 you called your owne a large Discourse upon this Argument But surely I so untied the knot of the Argument that I set you to your Book againe For your selfe confesse that against this you read what you had formerly written Well! what ere you read there certaine it is you do a great deale of wrong to M. Hooker a L. 3 §. 8. and my selfe that because we call it a Supposed or Presumed Principle among Christians you should fall by and by into such a b Whereas Bellarm. sayes expresly that in the Controversies betweene you and us Non agitur de Metaphysicis subtilitatibus quae sinc periculo ignorari interdum cum laude oppugnari possunt c. Bellarm. Praefat. Operibus praefix §. 3. Metaphysicall Discourse to prove That that which is a c His omnibus Questionibut praemittenda est Controversia de Verbo Dei Neque enim disputari potest nisi priùs in aliquo Communi Principio cum Adversariis conveniamus Convenit autem inter nos omues omninò Haereticos Verbum Dei esse Regulam fidei ex quâ de Dogmatibus judicandum sit esse Commune Principium ab omnibus concessum unde Argumenta ducantur c. Bellarm. Praefat. Operib prafix §. ult And if it be Commune Principium ab omnibus concessum then I hope it must be taken as a thing supposed or as a Praecognitum in this Dispute betweene us Praecognitum fore-knowne in Science must be of such light that it must be knowne of and by it selfe alone and that the Scripture cannot be so knowne to be the Word of God I will not now enter againe into that Discourse having said enough already how farre the Beame which is very glorious especially in some parts of Scripture gives light to prove it selfe You see neither Hooker nor I nor the Church of England for ought I know leave the Scripture alone to manifest it selfe by the light which it hath in it selfe No but when the present Church hath prepared and led the way like a preparing Morning-Light to Sun-shine then indeed we settle for our Direction but not upon the first opening of the morning Light but upon the Sun it selfe Nor will I make needlesse enquiry how farre and in what manner a Praecognitum or Supposed Principle in any Science may be proved in a Higher to which that is subordinate or accepted in a Prime Nor how it may in Divinity where Prae as well as Post-cognita things fore as well as after-knowne are matters and under the manner of Faith and not of Science strictly Nor whether a Praecognitum a presupposed Principle in Faith which rests upon Divine Authority must needs have as much and equall Light to Naturall Reason as Prime Principles have in Nature while they rest upon Reason Nor whether it may justly bee denied to have sufficient Light because not equall Your owne Schoole †Colligitur apertà ex
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
and after that by Pope Stephen and after both in the first b Can. 1. Councell of Carthage yet no one word is there in that Councell which mentions this as an Error That hee thought Pope Stephen might erre in the faith while he proclaimed he did so In which though the particular Censure which he passed on Pope Stephen was erroneous for Stephen erred not in that yet the Generall which results from it namely That for all his being in the Popedome he might erre is most true 2. The second Father which Bellarmine cites is S. Ierome d Attamen scito Romanam sidem Apostolica vove laudatam ejusmodi praestigias non recipere etiamsi Angelus aliter annunciet quà m semel praedicatum est Pauli authoritate munitam non posse mutari S. Hicron L. 3. Apol. contra Ruffinum Tom. 2. Edit Paris 1534. sol 84. K. Peradventure it is here to be read jam si For so the place is more plaine and more strong but the Answer is the same His words are The Romane Faith commended by the Apostle admits not such praestigia's deceits and delusions into it though an Angell should preach it otherwise than it was preach'd at first and being armed and fenced by S. Paul's authority cannot be changed Where first I will not doubt but that S. Ierome speakes here of the Faith For the Praestigiae here mentioned are afterwards more plainely expressed For he tels us after a Deinde ut Epistolas contra te ad Orientem mitteret cauterium tibi Haereseós inureret Diceretque libros Origenis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 à te translatos simplici Ecclesiae Romanae plebi traditos ut fidei veritatem quam ab Apostolo didicerant per te perderent S. Hicron ibid. fol. 85. K. That the Bishop of Rome had sent Letters into the East and charged Heresie upon Ruffinus And farther that Origen's Books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were translated by him and delivered to the simple people of the Church of Rome that by his meanes they might loose the verity of the Faith which they had learned from the Apostle Therefore the Praestigiae before mentioned were the Cunning Illusions of Ruffinus putting Origen's Book under the Martyr Pamphilus his name that so he might bring in Heresie the more cunningly under a name of Credit and the more easily pervert the Peoples Faith So of the Faith he speakes And secondly I shall as easily confesse that S. Ierome's speech is most true but I cannot admit the Cardinal's sense of it For he imposes upon the word Fides For by Romana Fides the Romane Faith he will understand the Particular Church of Rome Which is as much as to say Romanos Fideles the Faithfull of that Church And that no wilie Delusions or Cousenage in matter of Faith can be imposed upon them Now hereupon I returne to that of S. Cyprian If Fides Romana must signifie Fideles Romanos why may not Perfidia before signifie Perfidos Especially since these two words are commonly used by these Writers as Termes a Qui cum Fidei dux esse non potuit perfidiae existat S. Cyprian L. 1. Epist. 7. Fidem perfidi c. Ibid. Facti sunt ex Ovibus Vulpes ex fidelibus perfidi Optatus L. 7. Quomodo iis prosit quum baptizantur Parentum Fides quorum iis non potest obesse perfidia S. Aug. Epist. 23. Quantò potiùs Fides aliena potest consulere parvulo cui sua perfidia c. S. Aug. L. 3. de lib. Arbit c. 23. Opposite And therefore by the Law of Opposition may interpret each other proportionably So with these great Masters with whom 't is almost growne to be Quod volumus rectum est what we please shall be the Authours meaning Perfidia must signifie absolutely Errour in Faith or Misbeliefe But Fides must relate to the Persons and signifie the Faithfull of the Romane Church And now I conceive my Answer will proceed with a great deale of Reason For Romana Fides the Romane Faith as it was commended by the Apostle of which S. Ierome speakes is one thing and the Particular Romane Church of which the Cardinall speakes is another The Faith indeed admits not Praestigias wilie delusions into it if it did it could not be the Whole and Vndefiled Faith of Christ which they learned from the Apostle And which is so fenced by Apostolicall Authority as that it cannot be changed though an Angell should preach the contrary But the Particular Church of Rome hath admitted Praestigias diverse crafty Conveyances into the Faith and is not fenced as the Faith it selfe is And therefore though an Angell cannot contrary that yet the bad Angell hath sowed tares in this By which meanes Romana Fides though it be now the same it was for the words of the Creed yet it is not the same for the sense of it Nor for the super and praeter-structures built upon it or joyned unto it So the Romane Faith that is the Faith which S. Paul taught the Romanes and after commended in them was all one with the Catholike Faith of Christ. For S. Paul taught no other than that One. And this one can never be changed in or from it selfe by Angell or Divell But in mens hearts it may receive a change And in particular Churches it may receive a change And in the particular Church of Rome it hath received a change And yee see S. Hierome himselfe confesses that the Pope himselfe was afraid b Ne fidei veritatem quam ab Apostolo didicerant per te perderent ut suprà ne perderent least by this Art of Ruffinus the People might loose the verity of the Faith Now that which can be lost can be changed For usually Habits begin to alter before they be quite lost And that which may be lost among the People may be lost among the Bishops and the rest of the Clergie too if they looke not to it as it seemes they after did not at Rome though then they did Nay at this time the whole Romane Church was in danger enough to swallow Origen's Booke and all the Errors in it comming under the Name of Pamphilus and so S. Ierome himselfe expresly and close upon the Place cited by Bellarmine For he desires a Muta titulum Romanam simplicitatem tanto periculo libera ibid. fol. 84. K. Ruffinus to change the Title of the Booke that Error may not be spread under the specious Name of Pamphilus and so to free from danger the Romane simplicity Where by the way Romane unerring Power now challenged and Romane simplicity then feared agree not very well together 3. The third Father alledged by Bellarmine is a Uetus Roma ab antiquis temporibus habet rectam Fidem semper eam retinet sicut decet Urbem quae toti Orbt prâ—…sidet semper de Deo integram fidem habere Greg. Naz. in Carmine de vità suà Ante medium p. 9. Edit
Paris 1609. S. Gregory Nazianzen And his words are that Ancient Rome from of old hath the right Faith and alwayes holds it as becomes the City which is Governesse over the whole World to have an entire faith in and concerning God Now certainly it became that City very well to keepe the Faith sound and entire And having the Government of a great part of the World then in her power it became her so much the more as her Example thereby was the greater And in S. Gregory Nazianzen's time Rome did certainly hold both rectam integram fidem the right and the whole entire Faith of Christ. But there is nor Promise nor Prophecy in S. Gregory that Rome shall ever so doe For his words are plaine semper decet it alwayes becomes that great City to have and to hold too integram Fidem the entire Faith But at the other semper 't is b The words in the Greeke are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Haec quidem fuit diu nunc adhuc est recti grada 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Est So S. Gregory sayes but of an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or a retinebit he sayes nothing retinet that City from of old holds the right faith yet but he saith not retinebit semper that the City of Rome shall retaine it ever no more then it shall ever retaine the Empire of the World Now it must be assur'd that it shall ever hold the entire faith of Christ before we can be assured That that Particular Church can never erre or be Infallible Besides these the Cardinall names Cyrillus and Ruffinus but he neither tells us where nor cites their words Yet I thinke I have found the most pregnant place in S * Petram opinor per agnominationem nihil aliud quà m inconcustam firmissimam Discipuli fidem vocavit In quà Ecclesia Christi ita fundata firmata esset ut non laberetur esset inexpugnabilis inferorum portis in perpetuuâ—… manens S. Cyril Alex. Dial. de Trin. l. 4. p. 278. Parisiis An. 1604. Cyril and that makes clearly against him For I finde expresly these three things First that the Church is Inexpugnable and that the Gates of Hell shall never prevaile against it but that it shall in perpetuum manere remaine for ever And this all Protestants grant But this That it shall not fall away doth not secure it fromall kinds oferror Secondly Bellarmine quotes S. Cyril for the Particular Romane Church and S. Cyril speakes not of the Romane at all but of the Church of Christ that is the Catholike Church Thirdly that the Foundation and firmenesse which the Church of Christ hath is placed not in or upon the * Et ego dico tibi i. tuae Confessioni quâ mihi diâ—…isti Tu es Christus c. Dion Carthus in S. Mat. 16. 18. Et super hanc Petram i. Fidei hujus sirmitatem fundamentum Vel super hanc Petram quam confessus es i. super Meipsum Lapidem Angularem c. Ibid. Person much lesse the Successor of S. Peter but upon the * faith which by Gods Spirit in him he so firmely professed which is the Common received Opinion both of the Ancient Fathers and the Protestants Vpon this Rocke that is upon this faith will I build my Church S. Matth. 16. So here 's all the Good he hath gotten S. Matt. 16. 18. by S. Cyril unlesse he can cite some other place of S. Cyril which I believe he cannot And for Ruffinus the Place which Bellarmine aimes at is in his Exposition upon the Creed and is quoted in part the b Bellar. L. 4. de Rom. Pont. Cap. 3. §. penult Chapter before But when all his words shall be laid together they will make no more for Bellarmine and his Cause then the former Places have done c Illud non importunè commonendum puto quod in diversis Ecclesiis aliqua in his verbis inveniunt ur adjecta In Ecclesiâ tamen Vrbis Romae hoc non deprehenditur factum Pro eo arbritror quod neque Haeresis ulla illic sumpsit exordium mos ibi servatur antiquus eos qui gratiam Baptismi suscepturi sunt publicò id est Fidelium populo audiente Symbolum reddere Et utique adjectionem unius saltem Sermonis eorum qui praecesserunt in Fide non admittit auditus In caeteris autem Locis quantum intelligi datur propter nonnullos Haereticos addita quaedam videntur per quae novellae Doctrinae sensus crederetur excludi c. Ruffin in Exposit. Symbol ut habetur inter Opera S. Cypriani Praefat. Expos. Ruffinus his words then runne thus Before I come to the Words of the Creed this I thinke fit to warne you of That in divers Churches some things are found added to the words of the Creed But in the Church of the City of Rome this is not found done And as I thinke it is for that no Haeresie did take its rise or beginning there And for that the old Custome is there observed Namely that they which are to receive the grace of Baptisme doe publikely repeate the Creed in the hearing of the People who would not admit such Additions But in other places as farre as I can understand by reason of some Hereticks some things were added but such as were to exclude the sense of their Novell Doctrine Now these words make little for Bellarmine who cites them and much against Ruffinus that uttered them They make little for Bellarmine First because suppose Ruffinus his speech to be true yet this will never follow In Ruffinus his time no Haeresie had taken its beginning at Rome therefore no Haeresie hath had rooting there so many hundred yeares since Secondly Bellarmine takes upon him there to proove That the particular Church of Rome cannot erre Now neither can this be concluded out of Ruffinus his words First because as I said before to argue from Non sumpsit to Ergo sumere non potest No Haeresie hath yet begun there therefore none can begin there or spring thence is an Argument drawne Ab actu ad Potentiam negative from the Act to the Power of Being which every Novice in Learning can tell proceeds not Negatively And Common Reason telles every man 't is no Consequence to say Such a thing is not or hath not beene Therefore it cannot be Secondly because though it were true that no Haeresie at all did ever take its beginning at Rome yet that can never proove that the particular Church of Rome can never erre which is the thing in Question For suppose that no Haeresie did ever beginne there yet if any that began elswhere were admitted into that Church it is as full a proofe That that Church can erre as if the Haeresie had beene hatched in that Nest. For that Church erres which admits an Haeresie into it as well as that which broaches it Now Ruffinus sayes no more
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
explicandi Emanationem Sp. S. quà m in ipsá re c. Iodocus Clictoveus in Damase L 1. Fid Orth. c. 11. Et quidam ex Graecis concedunt quòd sit á Filio vel ab eo prostuat Thom. p. 1. q. 36. A. 2. C. Et Thomas ipse dicit Sp. S. procedere mediatè à Filio ib. A. 3. ad 1. salâ—…em ratione Personarum Spirantium Respondeo cum Bessarione Gennadio Damascenum non negâsse Sp. S. procedere ex Filio quod ad rem attinet quùm dixerit Spiritum esse Imaginem Filii per Filium sed existimásse tutiùs dici per Filium quà m ex Filio quantum ad modum loquendi c. Bellarm. L. 2. de Christo c. 27. §. Respondeo igitur Et Tollet in S. Iohn 15. Ar. 25. Lutheran Resp. ad Resp. 2. Ieremiae Patriarchae The Master and his Schollers agree upon it The Greeks saith he confesse the Holy Ghost to bee the Spirit of the Son with the Apostle Galath 4. and the Spirit of truth S. Iohn 16. And since Non est aliud it is not another thing to say The Holy Ghost is the Spirit of the Father and the Sonne then that He is or proceeds from the Father and the Sonne in this They seeme to agree with us in candem Fidei sententiam upon the same Sentence of Faith though they differ in words Now in this cause where the words differ but the Sentence of Faith is the same d Eadem penitùs Sententia ubi suprà Clictov penitùs eadem even altogether the same Can the Point be fundamentall You may make them no Church as e Bellarm. 4. de Notis Eccl. cap. 8. §. Quod autem apud Graecos Bellarmine doth and so deny them salvation which cannot be had out of the true Church but I for my part dare not so do And Rome in this Particular should be more moderate if it be but because this Article Filióque was added to the Creed by her selfe And 't is hard to adde and Anathematize too It ought to be no easie thing to condemne a man of Heresie in foundation of faith much lesse a Church least of all so ample and large a Churchas the Greeke especially so as to make them no Church Heaven Gates were not so easily shut against multitudes when S. Peter wore the Keyes at his owne girdle And it is good counsell which a Lib. 3. cont Hares fol. 93. A. 〈◊〉 vidcant ht qui famile de haerest pronumiant quaÌ„ facile etiam ipsi errent Et intelligant non esse tam leviter de Haeresi censenduÌ„ c. In verbo Beatitudo Alphonsus à castro one of your owne gives Let them consider that pronounce easily of Heresie how easie it is for themselves to erre Or if you will pronounce consider what it is that separates from the Church simply and not in part only I must needs professe that I wish heartily as well as b Iunius Animad in Bellar. cont 2. L. 3. c. 23. others that those distressed men whose Crosse is heavie already had beene more plainly and moderately dealt withall though they thinke a diverse thing from us then they have beene by the Church of Rome But hereupon you say you were forc'd F. Whereupon I was forced to repeate what I had formerly brought against D. White concerning Points Fundamentall B. Hereupon it is true that you read a large § 10 Discourse out of a Booke printed which you said was yours The Particulars all of them at the least I do not now remember nor did I then approve But if they be such as were formerly brought against Doctor White they are by him formerly answered The first thing you did was the * P. First righting the Sentence of S. Austine Ferendus est Disputator errans c. Here A. C. p. 44. tells us very learnedly that my corrupt Copy hath righting instead of reading the Sentence of S. Austine Whereas I here use the word righting not as it is opposed to reading as any man may discerne A. C. palpably mistakes but for doing right to S. Austine And if I had meant it for writing I should not have spelled it so righting of S. Augustine which Sentence I doe not at all remember was so much as named in the Conference much lesse was it stood upon and then righted by you Another place of S. Augustine indeed was which you omit But it comes after about Tradition to which I remit it But now you tell us of a great Proofe made out of this †By which is proved That all poynts Defined by the Church are Fundamentall Place For these words of yours containe two Propositions One That all Poynts defined by the Church are Fundamentall The other That this is proved out of this Place of S. Augustine 1. For the first That all Poynts defined by the Church are fundamentall It was not the least meanes by which Rome grew to her Greatnesse to blast every Opposer she had with the name of Hereticke or Schismaticke for this served to shrivel the credit of the Persons And the Persons once brought into contempt and ignominie all the good they desired in the Church fell to dust for want of creditable Persons to backe and support it To make this Proceeding good in these later yeares this Course it seemes was taken The Schoole that must maintaine and so they doe That all Points Defined by the Church are thereby a Your owne word Fundamentall b Inconcussâ fide ab omnibus Thom. 2. 2ae q. 1. Art 10. C. necessary to be believed c Sco us 1. Sent. d. 11. q. 1. of the substance of the Faith and that though it be determined quite d Ecclesiae Voces etiam extra Scripturam Stap. Relect. Con. 4. q. 1. Ar. 3. Quae maturo judicio definivit c. Solidum est etiamsi nullo Scripturarum aut evidenti aut probabili testimonio confirmaretur bid Extra Scripturam And then e Et penes Cercopes Victoria sit Greg. Naz. de Differen vitae Cercopes 1. Astutos veteratoriae improbitat is Episcopos qui artibus suis ac dolis omnia Concilia perturbabant Schol. ib. leave the wise and active Heads to take order that there be strength enough ready to determine what is fittest for them But since these men distinguish not nor you betweene the Church in generall and a Generall Councell which is but her Representation for Determinations of the Faith though I be very slow in sifting or opposing what is concluded by Lawfull Generall and consenting Authority though I give as much as can justly be given to the Definitions of Councels truly Generall nay suppose I should grant which I doe not That Generall Councells cannot erre yet this cannot downe with me That all Poynts even so defined are Fundamentall For Deductions are not prime and native Principles nor are Superstructures Foundations That which is a
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
another intùs est is not another contrary thing but is contained within the Bowels and nature of that which is interpreted from which if the Declaration depart it is faulty and erroneous because instead of Declaring it gives another and contrary c Hoc semper nec quicquam praeterea Vin. Lyr. c. 32. sense Therefore when the Church declares any thing in a Councell either that which she declares was intùs or extrà in the Nature and verity of the thing or out of it If it were extrà without the nature of the thing declared then the Declaration of the thing is false and so farre from being Fundamentall in the Faith d In novâ Haeresi Veritas prius erat de Fide et si non ita deâ—… rata Scotus in 1. D. 11. q. 〈◊〉 fine Haeretici multa quae erâ—… implicita sidei nostra compâ—… runt explicare Bonavent in 〈◊〉 D. 11. A. 1. Q. 1. ad finem Tho. 1. q. 36. A. 2. ad 2. Quamvis Apostolica Sedes aut Generale Concilium de Haeresi censere possit non tamen ideò Assertio aliqua erit Haeresis qui. Ecclesia definivit sed quia 〈◊〉 dei Catholica repugnat Ecclesia siquidèm suâ definitione 〈◊〉 facit talem Assertionem esse Haeresin quùm etiamsi ipsa non definivisset esset Haeresis sed id efficit ut paeteat c. Alphon à Castro L. 1. Advers Haeres c. 8. fol. 21. D. If it were intùs within the Compasse and nature of the thing though not open and apparent to every eye then the Declaration is true but not otherwise Fundamentall than the thing is which is declared for that which is intùs cannot be larger or deeper than that in which it is if it were it could not be intùs Therefore nothing is simply Fundamentall because the Church declares it but because it is so in the nature of the thing which the Church declares And it is a slight and poore Evasion that is commonly used that the Declaration of the Church makes it Fundamentall quoad nos in respect of us for it doth not that neither For no respect to us can varie the Foundation The Churches Declaration can binde us to peace and externall Obedience where there is not expresse Letter of Scripture and sense agreed on but it cannot make any thing Fundamentall to us that is not so in its owne nature For if the Church can so adde that it can by a Declaration make a thing to be Fundamentall in the faith that was not then it can take a thing away from the Foundation and make it by Declaring not to be Fundamentall which all men grant no power of the Church can doe e Ecclesia non amputat necessaria non apponit superâ—…ua Vin. Lir. c. 32. Deut. 4. 2. For the power of adding any thing contrary and of detracting any thing necessary are alike forbidden * Thom. Supp q. 6. A. 6. C. and alike denyed Now nothing is more apparent then this to the eye of all men That the Church of Rome hath determined or declared or defined call it what you will very many things that are not in their owne nature Fundamentall and therefore neither are nor can be made so by her adjudging them Now to all this Discourse That the Church hath not power to make any thing Fundamentall in the Faith that intrinsecally and in its owne nature is not such A. C. is content to say nothing 2. For the second That it is prooved by this place of S. Augustine That all Poynts defined by the Church are Fundamentall You might have given me that Place cited in the Margin and eased my paines to seeke it but it may be there was somewhat in concealing it For you doe so extraordinarily right this Place that you were loth I thinke any body should see how you wrong it The place of S. Augustine is this against the Pelagians about Remission of Originall sinne in Infants * August Serm. 14. de verb. Apost c. 12. Fundata res est In aliis Quastionibus non diligentèr digestis nondum plenâ Ecclesiae Authoritate sirmatis ferendus est Disputator errans ibi ferendus est error non tantum progredi debet ut etiam Fundamentum ipsum Ecclesiae quatere moliâ—… This is a thing founded An erring Disputer is to be borne with in other Questions not diligently digested not yet made firme by full Authority of the Church there error is to be borne with but it ought not to goe so farre that it should labour to shake the Foundation it selfe of the Church This is the Place but it can never follow out of this Place I thinke That every thing defined by the Church is Fundamentall For first he speakes of a Foundation of Doctrine in Scripture not a Church definition This appeares for few lines before he tels us b Ibid. cap. 20. There was a Question moved to S. Cyprian Whether Baptisme was concluded to the eight Day as well as Circumcision And no doubt was made then of the c Origine Peccati beginning of sin and that d Ex eâ re unde nulla erat Quaestio soluta est exorta Quaestio out of this thing about which no Question was mooved that Question that was made was Answered And e Hoc de Fundamento Ecclesiae sumpsit ad confirmandum Lapidem nut antem againe That S. Cypryan tooke that which he gave in answer from the Foundation of the Church to confirme a stone that was shaking Now S. Cyprian in all the Answer that he gives hath not one word of any Definition of the Church therefore ea res That thing by which he answered was a Foundation of prime and setled Scripture-Doctrine not any Definition of the Church Therefore that which he tooke out of the Foundation of the Church to fasten the stone that shooke was not a Definition of the Church but the Foundation of the Church it selfe the Scripture upon which it is builded as appeareth in the f Concil Milevit c. 2. Milevitane Councell where the Rule by which Pelagius was condemned is the Rule of g Rom. 5. 15. Scripture Therefore Saint Augustine goes on in the same sense That the Disputer is not to be borne any longer that shall h Vt Fundamentum ipsum Ecclesiae quatere moliatur endeavour to shake the Foundation it selfe upon which the whole Church is grounded Secondly if S. Augustine did meane by Founded and Foundation the definition of the Church because of these words This thing is Founded this is made firm by full Authority of the Church and the words following these to shake the foundation of the Church yet it can never follow out of any or all these Circumstances and these are all That all Poynts defined by the Church are Fundamentall in the faith For first no man denies but the Church is a c 1 Tim. 3. 15. Foundation That things defined
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
things which are but Accessory c. Hooker L. 3. Eccl. Pol. §. 3. Fundamentall in the Faith to all men And secondly the whole Discourse here is concerning Faith as it is taken Objectivè for the Object of Faith and thing to be Beleeved but that Faith by which Christ is said to dwell in our hearts is taken Subjectivè for the Habit and Act of Faith Now to confound both these in one period of speech can have no other ayme than to confound the Reader But to come closer both to the Iesuite and his Defender A. C. If all Poynts made firme by full Authority of the Church be Fundamentall then they must grant that every thing determined by the Councell of Trent is Fundamentall in the Faith For with them 't is firme and Catholike which that Councell Decrees Now that Councell decrees b Si quis dixerit Ordines ab Episcopis collatos sine populi vel potestatis saecularis consensu aut vocatione irritos esse Anathema sit Con. Trid. Sess. 23. Can. 7. That Orders collated by the Bishop are not void though they be given without the Consent or calling of the People or of any secular Power And yet they can produce no Authour that ever acknowledged this Definition of the Councell Fundamentall in the Faith 'T is true I do not grant that the Decrees of this Councell are made by full Authority of the Church but they do both grant and maintaine it And therefore 't is Argumentum ad hominem a good Argument against them that a thing so defined may be sirme for so this is and yet not Fundamentall for so this is not But A. C. tels us further That if one may deny or doubtfully dispute against any one Determination of the A. C. p. 45. Church then he may against another and another and so against all since all are made firme to us by one and the same Divine Revelation sufficiently applied by one and the same full Authority of the Church which being weakened in any one cannot be firme in any other First A. C. might have acknowledged that he borrowed the former part of this out of a Cont. Haer. c. 31. Abdicatà enim qualibet parte Catholici Dogmatis alia quoque at que item alia c. Quid aliud ad extremum sequetur nisi ut totum pariter repudictur Vin. Lir. And as that Learned Father uses it I subscribe to it but not as A. C. applies it For Vincentius speaks there de Catholico Dogmate of Catholike Maximes and A. C. will force it to every Determination of the Church Now Catholike Maximes §. 30. N. 21. which are properly Fundamentall are certaine Prime Truths deposited with the Church and not so much determined by the Church as published and manifested and so made firme by her to us For so b Ecclesia Deâ—…sitorum apud se Dogmatum Custos c. Denique quid unquam Conciliorum Decretis enisa est nisi ut quod antea simpliciter credebatur hoc idem postea diligentiùs crederetur c. Vin. Lir. cont Harcs c. 32. Vincentius expresly Where all that the Church doth is but ut hoc idem quod anteà that the same thing may be believed which was before Believed but with more light and cleerenesse and in that sense with more firmenesse than before Now in this sense give way to a Disputator errans every cavilling Disputer to deny or quarrell at the Maximes of Christian Religion any one or any part of any one of them and why may he not then take liberty to do the like of any other till he have shaken all But this hinders not the Church her selfe nor any appointed by the Church to examine her owne Decrees and to see that she keepe Dogmata deposita the Principles of Faith unblemished and uncorrupted For if she do not so but that c Vin. Lir. cont haer c. 31. Impiorum turpium Errorum Lupanar ubi erat antè castae incorruptâ—… Sacrarium Veritatis Novitia veteribus new Doctrines bee added to the old the Church which is Sacrarium Veritatis the Repository of Verity may be changed in lupanar errorum I am loth to English it By the Church then this may nay it ought to be done however every wrangling Disputer may neither deny nor doubtfully dispute much lesse obstinately oppose the Determinations of the Church no not where they are not Dogmata Deposita these deposited Principles But if he will be so bold to deny or dispute the Determinations of the Church yet that may be done without shaking the Foundation where the Determinations themselves belong but to the Fabricke and not to the Foundation For a whole Frame of Building may be shaken and yet the Foundation where it is well lay'd remaine firme And therefore after all A. C. dares not say the Foundation is shaken but onely in a sort And then 't is as true that in a sort A. C. p. 46. it is not shaken 2. For the second part of his Argument A. C. must pardon me if I dissent from him For first all Determinations of the Church are not made firme to us by one and the same Divine Revelation For some Determinations of the Church are made firme to us per a Vin. Lir. cont Haer. c. 32. chirographum Scripturae by the Hand-writing of the Scripture and that 's Authenticall indeed Some other Decisions yea and of the Church too are made or may be if b Relect. cont 4. q. 1. Art 3. Etiamsi nullo Scripturarum aut evidenti aut probabili Testimonio c. Stapleton informe us right without an evident nay without so much as a probable Testimony of Holy-Writ But c Non potest aliquid certum esse certitudine fidei nisi aut immediatè contineatur in Uerbo Dei aut ex Uerbo Dei per evidentem consequentiam deducatur Bellar. L. 3. de Justifica c. 8. §. 2. Bellarmine fals quite off in this and confesses in expresse termes That nothing can be certaine by Certainty of Faith unlesse it be contained immediately in the Word of God Or be deduced out of the Word of God by evident Consequence And if nothing can be so certaine then certainly no Determination of the Church it selfe if that Determination be not grounded upon one of these either expresse Word of God or evident Consequence out of it So here 's little Agreement in this great Point betweene Stapleton and Bellarmine Nor can this be shifted off as if Stapleton spake of the Word of God written and Bellarmine of the Word of God unwritten as he cals Tradition For Bellarmine treats there of the knowledge which a man hath of the Certainty of his owne Salvation And I hope A. C. will not tell us There 's any Tradition extant unwritten by which particular men may have assurance of their severall Salvations Therefore Bellarmine's whole Disputation there is quite beside the matter Or els he must
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
to feede when he is in and when he had fed to c S. Luk. 22. 35. Confirme and in all these not to erre and faile in his Ministration And is the Catholike Church in and over which he is to do all these great things quite left out of the Scripture Belike the Holy Ghost was carefull to give him his power Yes in any case but left the assigning of his great Cure the Catholike Church to Tradition And it were well for him if he could so prescribe for what he now Claymes But what if after all this M. Rogers there sayes no such thing As in truth he doth not His words are d Rogers in Art Eccle. Angl. Art 3. All Christians acknowledge He descended but in the interpretation of the Article there is not that consent that were to be wished What is this to the Church of England more then others And againe e Ibid. Till we know the native and undoubted sense of this Article is M. Rogers We the Church of England or rather his and some others Iudgement in the Church of England Now here A. C. will have somewhat againe to say though God knowes 't is to little purpose 'T is A. C. p. 47. that the Iesuite urged M. Roger's Booke because it was set out by Publike Authority And because the Booke beares the Title of the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England A. C. may undoubtedly urge M. Rogers if he please But he ought not to say that his Opinion is the Doctrine of the Church of England for neither of the Reasons by him expressed First not because his Booke was publikely allowed For many Bookes among them as well as among us have beene Printed by publike Authority as containing nothing in them contrary to Faith and good manners and yet containing many things in them of Opinion only or private Iudgement which yet is farre from the avowed Positive Doctrine of the Church the Church having as yet determined neither way by open Declaration upon the words or things controverted And this is more frequent among their Schoolemen then among any of our Controversers as is well knowne Nor secondly because his Booke beares the Title of the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England For suppose the worst and say M. Rogers thought a little too well of his owne paines and gave his Booke too high a Title is his private Iudgement therefore to be accounted the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England Surely no No more then I should say every thing said by * Angelici D. S. Tho. Summa Thomas or †Celebratissimi Patris Dom. Bonaventurae Doctoris Seraphici in 3. L. Sent. Disputata Bonaventure is Angelicall or Seraphicall Doctrine because one of these is stiled in the Church of Rome Seraphicall and the other Angelicall Doctor And yet their workes are Printed by Publike Authority and that Title given them Yea but our private Authors saith A. C. are not allowed for ought I know in such a like sorte to expresse A. C. p. 47. our Catholike Doctrine in any matter subject to Question Here are two Limitations which will goe farre to bring A. C. off whatsoever I shall say against him For first let me instance in any private man that takes as much upon him as M. Rogers doth he will say he knew it not his Assertion here being no other then for ought he knowes Secondly If he be unwilling to acknowledge so much yet he will answer 't is not just in such a like sort as M. Rogers doth it that is perhaps it is not the very Title of his Booke But well then Is there never a Private man allowed in the Church of Rome to expresse your Catholike Doctrine in any matter subject to question What not in any matter Were not Vega and Soto two private men Is it not a mâ—…tter subject to Question to great Question in these Dayes Whether a man may be certaine of his Salvation câ—…rtitudine fidei by the certainty of Faith Doth nâ—…t * Bellar. Lib. 3. de Justificat c. 1. 14. Bellarmine make it a Controversie And is it not a part of your Catholike Faith if it be determined in the †Huic Concilio Catholici omnes ingenia sua judicia sponte subjiciunt Bellar. 3. de Justif. c. 3. §. Sed Concilii Tridâ—…i Councell of Trent And yet these two great Friers of their time Dominicus Soto and Andreas Vega a Hist. Concil Trident. Lib. 2. p. 245. Edit Lat. Leidae 1622. were of contrary Opinions and both of them challenged the Decree of the Councell and so consequently your Catholike Faith to be as each of them concluded and both of them wrote Bookes to maintaine their Opinions and both of their Bookes were published by Authority And therefore I think 't is allowed in the Church of Rome to private men to expresse your Catholike Doctrine and in a matter subject to Question And therefore also if another man in the Church of England should be of a contrary Opinion to M. Rogers and declare it under the Title of the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England this were no more then Soto and Vega did in the Church of Rome And I for my part cannot but wonder A. C. should not know it A. C. p. 47. For he sayes that for ought he knowes Private men are not allowed so to expresse their Catholike Doctrine And in the same Question both Catharinus and Bellarmine b Bellar. L. 3. de Iustif. c. 3. take on them to expresse your Catholike Faith the one differing from the other almost as much as Soto and Vega and perhaps in some respect more F. But if M. Rogers be only a private man in what Book may we finde the Protestants publike Doctrine The Bishop answered That to the Booke of Articles they were all sworne B. What Was I so ignorant to say The Articles § 14 of the Church of England were the Publike Doctrine of all the Protestants Or that all Protestants were sworne to the Articles of England as this speech seems to imply Sure I was not Was not the immediate speech before of the Church of England And how comes the Subject of the Speech to be varied in the next lines Nor yet speake I this as if other Protestants did not agree with the Church of England in the chiefest Doctrines and in the maine Exceptions which they joyntly take against the Romane Church as appeares by their severall Confessions But if A. C. will say as he doth that because there was speech before of the Church of A. C. p. 47. England the Iesuite understood mee in a limited sense and meant only the Protestants of the English Church Bee it so ther 's no great harme done †And therfore A. C. needs not make such a Noise about it as he doth p. 48 but this that the Iesuite offers to enclose me too much For I did not
Testificandum de Christo Legibus ejus vilior est Christi legibus Scripturis Sanctis necessariò postponenda Wald. L. 2. Doct. Fidei Art 2. cap. 21. Numb 1. though this be contrary to their owne Doctrine must bee finally Resolved into the Authority of the Present Romane Church And though they would seeme to have us believe the Fathers and the Church of old yet they will not have us take their Doctrine from their owne Writings or the Decrees of Councels because as they say wee cannot know by reading them what their meaning was but from the Infallible Testimony of the present Romane Church teaching by Tradition Now by this two things are evident First That they ascribe as great Authority if not greater to a part of the Catholike Church as they doe to the whole which wee believe in our Creede and which is the Society of all Christians And this is full of Absurdity in Nature in Reason in All things That any c Totum est majus suâ parte Etiamsi Axioma sit apud Euclâ—…dem non tamen ideò Geometricum put andum est quia Geometres to utitur Vtitur enim tota Logica Ram in Schol. Matth. And Aristotle vindicates such Propositions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from being vsurped by Particular Sciences 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Quia conveniunt omni Eâ—…ti non alicui Generi separatim 4. Metapb cap. 3. T. 7. Part should bee of equall worth power credit or authority with the Whole Secondly that in their Doctrine concerning the Infallibility of their Church their proceeding is most unreasonable For if you aske them Why they believe their whole Doctrine to be the sole true Catholike Faith Their Answer is Because it is agreeable to the Word of God and the Doctrine and Tradition of the Ancient Church If you aske them How they know that to be so They will then produce Testimonies of Scripture Councells and Fathers But if you aske a third time By what meanes they are assured that these Testimonies doe indeed make for them and their Cause They will not then have recourse to Text of Scripture or Exposition of Fathers or phrase and propriety of Language in which either of them were first written or to the scope of the Author or the d Intelligentia dictorum ex causis est assumenda dicendi quia non Sermonires sed Rei Sermo est subjectus S. Hilar. L. 4. de Trin. Ex materiâ dicti dirigendus est sensus Tert. L. de Resur carnis c. 37. Causes of the thing uttered or the Conference with like e Uidendo differentias Similium ad Similia Orig. Tract 19 in S Matth. Places or the Anteceden's f Recolendum est unde venerit ista Sententia qua illam superiora pepererint quibúsque connexa dependeat S. Aug. Ep. 29 Solet circumstantia Scriptura illuminare Sementiam S. Aug. L. 83. Quaest. q. 69. and Consequents of the same Places g Quae ambiguè obscurè in nonnullis Scripturae Sacrae locis dicta videntur per ea quae alibi certa indubitata habentur dâ—…clarantur S Basil in Regulis contractis Reg. 267. Manifestiora quaeque praevaleant de incertis certiora praescribant Tert. L. de Resur c. 19 21. S. Aug. L. 3. De Doct Christ. c. â—…6 Moris est Scripturarum obscuris Manifesta subnectere quod prius sub aenigmatibus dixerint apertâ voce proferre S. Hieron in Esa 19. princ Uide §. 26. Nu. 4. or the Exâ—…osition of the darke and doubtfull Places of Scripture by the undoubted and manifest With divers other Rules given for the true knowledge and understanding of Scripture which do frequently occurre in h S. Aug. L. 3. de Doctr. Christianâ S. Augustine No none of these or the like helpes That with them were to Admit a Private Spirit or to make way for it But their finall Answer is They know it to be so because the present Romane Church witnessethit according to Tradition So arguing à primo ad ultimum from first to last the Present Church of Rome and her Followers believe her owne Doctrine and Tradition to bee true and Catholike because she professes it to be such And if this bee not to proove idem per idem the same by the same I know not what is which though it be most absurd in all kind of learning yet out of this I see not how 't is possible to winde themselves so long as the last resolution of their Faith must rest as they teach upon the Tradition of the present Church only It seemes therefore to mee very necessary * And this is so necessary that Bellarmine confesses that if Tradition which he relies upon be not Divine He and his can have no Faith Non habemus fidem Fides enim verbo Dei nititur L. 4. de verbo Dei c. 4. §. At si ita est And A. C. tells us p. 47. To know that Scripture is Divine and Infallible in every part is a Foundation so necessary as if it be doubtfully questioned all the Faith built upon Scripture falls to the ground And he gives the same reason for it p. 50. which Belarmine doth that we bee able to proove the Bookes of Scripture to bee the Word of God by some Authority that is absolutely Divine For if they bee warranted unto us by any Authority lesse then Divine then all things contained in them which have no greater assurance then the Scripture in which they are read are not Objects of Divine beliefe And that once granted will enforce us to yeeld That all the Articles of Christian Beliefe have no greater assurance then Humane or Morall Faith or Credulity can afford An Authority then simply Divine must make good the Scriptures Infallibility at least in the last Resolution of our Faith in that Poynt This Authority cannot bee any Testimony or Voyce of the * Ecclesiam spiritu afflatam esse certè credo Non ut veritatâ—…m authoritatemve Libris Canonicis triâ—…uat sed ut doc eat illos non alios esse Canonicos Nec fi aditum nobis praebet ad hujusmodi sacros Librâ—…s cognoscendos protinus ibi acquiescendum est sed ultra oportet progredi solidâ Dei veritate niti Quâ ex re intelligitur quid sibi volucrit Augustinus quam ait Evangelio non crederem nisi c. M. Canus L. 2. de Locis c. 8 fol. 34. b. Non docet fundatam esse Evangelii fidem in Ecclesiae Authoritate sed c. Ibid. Church alone For the Church consists of men subject to Error And no one of them fince the Apostles times hath beene assisted with so plentifull a measure of the Blessed Spirit as to secure him from being deceived And all the Parts being all liable to mistaking and sallible the VVhole cannot possibly bee Infallible in and of it self and priviledged from being deceived in some Things oâ—…
more wee finde that the thing it selfe doth answer our received opinion concerning it so that the former inducement prevailing somewhat with us before doth now much more prevaile when the very thing hath ministred farther Reason Here then againe in his Iudgement Tradition is the first Inducement but the farther Reason and Ground is the Scripture And Resolution of Faith ever settles upon the Farthest Reason it can not upon the First Inducement So that the State of this Question is firme and yet plaine enough to him that will not shut his eyes Now here after a long silence A. C. thrusts himselfe in againe and tels me That if I would A. C. p. 52. consider the Tradition of the Church not onely as it is the Tradition of a Company of Fallible men in which sense the Authority of it as himselfe confesses is but Humane and Fallible c. But as the Tradition of a Company of men assisted by Christ and his Holy Spirit in that sense I might easily finde it more then an Introduction indeed as much as would amount to an Infallible Motive Well I have considered The Tradition of the present Church both these wayes And I finde that A. C. confesses That in the first sense the Tradition of the Church is meere humane Authority and no more And therefore in this sense it may serve for an Introduction to this Beliefe but no more And in the second sense as it is not the Tradition of a Company of men onely but of men assisted by Christ and His Spirit In this second sense I cannot finde that the Tradition of the present Church is of Divine and Infallible Authority till A. C. can prove That this Company of men the Romane Prelates and their Clergie he meanes are so fully so cleerely so permanently assisted by Christ and his Spirit as may reach to Infallibility much lesse to a Divine Infallibility in this or any other Principle which they teach For every Assistance of Christ and the Blessed Spirit is not enough to make the Authority of any Company of men Divine and infallible but such and so great an Assistance onely as is purposely given to that effect Such an Assistance the Prophets under the Old Testament and the Apostles under the New had but neither the High-Priest with his Clergie in the Old nor any Company of Prelates or Priests in the New since the Apostles ever had it And therefore though at the entreaty of A. C. I have considered this very A. C. p. 52. well yet I cannot no not in this Assisted sense thinke the Tradition of the present Church Divine and Infallible or such Company of men to be worthy of Divine and infallible Credit and sufficient to breed in us Divine and Infallible Faith Which I am sorrie A. C. should affirme so boldly as he doth What A. C. p. 52. That Company of men the Romane Bishop and his Clergie of Divine and Infallible Credit and sufficient to breed in us Divine and Infallible Faith Good God! Whither will these men goe Surely they are wise in their generation but that makes them never a whit the more the Children of light a S. Luke 16. 8. S. Luke 16. And could they put this home upon the world as they are gone farre in it what might they not effect How might they and would they then Lord it over the Faith of Christendome contrary to b 1. S. Pet. 5. 3. S. Peter's Rule whose Successours certainly in this they are not But I pray if this Company of men be infallibly assisted whence is it that this very Company have erred so dangerously as they have not only in some other things but even in this Particular by equaling the Tradition of the present Church to the written Word of God Which is a Doctrine unknowne to the a S. Basil goes as farre for Traditions as any For he sayes Parem vim habent ad pictatem L. de Sp. Sanct. c. 27. But first he speaks of Apostolicall Tradition not of the Tradition of the Present Church Secondly the Learned take exceptions to this Booke of S. Basil as corrupted BP Andr. Opusc. cont Peron p. 9. Thirdly S. Basil himself Ser. de Fide professes that he uses somtimes Agrapha sed ca solùm quae non sunt aliona à piâ secundum Scripturam sententiâ So he makes the Scripture their Touch-stone or tryall And therefore must of Necessity make Scripture superior in as much as that which is able to try another is of greater force and superiour Dignity in that use then the thing tried by it And Stapleton himselfe confesses Traditionem recentiorem posteriorem sicut particularem nullo modo cum Scripturâ vel cum Traditionibus priùs à se explicatis comparandam esse Stapleton Relect. Controv. 5. q. 5. A. 2. Primitive Church and which frets upon the very Foundation it selfe by justling with it So belike he that hath but halfe an indifferent eye may see this Assisted Company have erred and yet we must wink in obedience and think them Infallible But. A. C. would have me consider againe That A. C. p 52. it is as easie to take the Tradition of the present Church in the two fore-named senses as the present Scriptures printed and approved by men of this Age. For in the first sense The very Scriptures saith he considered as printed and approved by men of this Age can be no more then of Humane Credit But in the second sense as printed and approved by men assisted by God's Spirit for true Copies of that which was first written then we may give Infallible Credit to them Well I have considered this too And I can take the Printing and Approving the Copies of Holy-Writ in these two senses And I can and do make a difference betweene Copies printed and approved by meere morall men and men assisted by Gods Spirit And yet for the Printing onely a skilfull and an able morall man may doe better service to the Church then an illiterate man though assisted in other things by God's Spirit But when I have considered all this what then The Scripture being put in writing is a thing visibly existent and if any errour be in the Print 't is easily corrigible by b Ut §. 18. Nu. 4. Eâ—… S. Aug. L. 32. cont Faustum 〈◊〉 1â—… former Copies Tradition is not so easily observed nor so safely kept And howsoever to come home to that which A. C. inferres upon it namely That the A. C. p. 53. Tradition of the present Church may be accepted in these two senses And if this be all that he will inferre for his penne here is troubled and forsakes him whether by any checke of Conscience or no I know not I will and you see have granted it already without more adoe with this Caution That every Company of men assisted by Gods Spirit are not assisted to this height to be Infallible by Divine Authority For all this
A. C. will needes give a needlesse Proofe of the Businesse Namely That there is the Promise of Christs and his Holy Spirits continuall presence and A. C. p. 53. assistance S. Luke 10. 16. Mat. 28. 19 20. Ioh 14. 16. not only to the Apostles but to their Successors also the lawfully sent Pastors and Doctors of the Church in all Ages And that this Promise is no lesse but rather more expresly to them in their Preaching by word of mouth then in writing or reading or printing or approoving of Copies of what was formerly written by the Apostles And to all this I shall briefly say That there is a Promise of Christ's and the Holy Spirits continuall presence and assistance I do likewise grant most freely that this Promise is on the part of Christ and the Holy Ghost most really and fully performed But then this Promise must not be extended further then 't was made It was made of Continuall presence and assistance That I grant And it was made to the Apostles and their Successors That I grant too But in a different Degree For it was of Continuall and Infallible Assistance to the Apostles But to their Successors of Continuall and fitting assistance but not Infallible And therefore the lawfully sent Pastors and Doctors of the Church in all Ages have had and shall have Continuall Assistance but by A. C ' s. leave not Infallible at least not Divine and Infallible either in writing reading printing or approving Copies And I believe A C is the first that durst affirme this I thought he would have kept the Popes Prerogative intire that He only might have been Infallible And not He neither but in Cathedrâ sate down and well advised And well Advised Yes that 's right * Nam multa sunt Decretales haereticae sicut dicit Ocham Et firmiter hoc Credo sed non licet dogmatizare Oppositum quoniam sunt determinatae nisi manifestè constet c. Ia. Almain in 3. Sent. D. 24 q. unica Conclus 6. Dub. 6 fine and Alphon. à Castro also both sayes and prooves Câ—…lestinum Papam errasse non ut privatam Personam sed ut Papam L. 1. advers Har. c. 4. and the Glosse Confesses Eum errare posse in C. 24. q. 1. C. A Recta ergo But he may be sate and not well Advised even in Cathedrâ And now shall we have all the Lawfully sent Pastors and Doctors of that Church in all ages Infallible too Here 's a deale of Infallibility indeed and yet error store The truth is the Iesuites have a Moneths minde to this Infallibility And though A. C. out of his bounty is content to extend it to all the lawfully sent Pastors of the Church yet to his owne Society quostionlesse he meanes it chiefly As did the Apologist to whom Casaubon replyes to Fronto Ducaeus The words of the †Nam in fide quidem Iesuitam errare non posse atque adeo esse hoc unicum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cateris qua solent à Poetis plurima commemorari posthà c annumerandum si nescis mi Fronto puto nescire docebo te ab Apologist a doctus hoc ipsum disertis verbis affirmante Sic ille cap. 3. Ejus exemplaris quod ad Sereniss Regem fuit missum pagina 119. Iungantur in nnum ait dies cum necte teâ—…ebrae cum luce calidum cum frigido sanitas cum morbo vita cum morte erit tum spes aliqua posse in caput Iesuitae haeresin cadere Isa. Casaubon Ep. ad Front Ducaum Lond. 1611. Apologist are Let day and night life and death be joyned together and then there will be some hope that Heresie may fall upon the person of a Iesuite Yea marry this is something indeed Now we know where Infallibility is to be found But for my present Occasion touching the Lawfully sent Pastors of the Church c. I will give no other Confutation of it then that M. Fisher and A. C. if they be two men are lawfully sent Pastors and Doctors of the Church at least I am sure they 'll assume they are and yet they are not Infallible which I thinke appeares plaine enough in some of their errors manifested by this Discourse and elsewhere Or if they do hold themselves Infallible let them speake it out as the Apologist did As for the Three Places of Scripture which A. C. cites they are of old alledged and well knowne A. C. p. 53. in this Controversie The First is in S. Luke 10. S. Luk. 10. 16. where Christ saith He that heareth you heareth me This was absolutely true in the a Per quod docet quicquid per Sanctos Apostolis dicitur acceptandum esse quia qui illos audit Christum audit c. S. Cyrillus Et Dominus dedit Apostolis suis potestatem Evangelii per quos Veritatem idest Dei Filium cognoâ—…imus c. Quibus dixit Dominus Qui ves audit c. Iraeneus praefat in L. 3. advers Haer. sine Apostles who kept themselves to that which was revealed by Christ. But it was to be but Conditionally true in their b Dicit ad Apostolos ac per hoc ad Omnes Praepositos qui Apostolis vicarià Ordinatione succedunt S. Cyprian L. 4. Epist. 9. But S. Cyprian doth not say that this speech of our Saviours was equaliter dictum alike and equally spoken and promised to the Apostles and the succeeding Bishops And I believe A. C. will not dare to say in plaine and expresse Termes That this speech He that heareth you heareth me doth as amply belong to every Romane Priest as to S. Peter and the Apostles No a great deale of Difference will become them well Successors He that heareth you heareth me That is so long and so * Bee yee followers of me even as I am of Christ. 1 Cor. 11. 1. and 1 Thes. 1. 6. farre as you c And so Vener Beda expresly both for hearing the word and for contemning it I or neither of these saith hee belong only to them which saw our Saviour in the flesh but to all hodiè quoque but with this limitation if they heare or despise Evangelii verba not the Preachers owne Beda in S. Luke 10. 15. 16. speak my words and not your own For d S. Mat. 28. 20. where the Command is for Preaching the Restraint is added Go saith Christ and teach all Nations But you may not preach all things what you please but althings which I have commanded you The Publication is yours the Doctrine is mine And where the Doctrine is not mine there your Publication is beyond or short of your Commission The Second Place is in S. Matth. 28. There Christ sayes againe e S. Mat. 28. 19. 20. I am with you alwayes unto the end of the world Yes most certaine it is present by his Spirit For else in bodily presence Hee continued not with his Apostles but during
esso non potest hos esse Libros Canonicos Wal. Doct. fid l. 2. a. 2. c. 20. cui subesse non potest falsum into which no falshood can come but by a Divine Testimony This Testimony is absolute in Scripture it selfe delivered by the Apostles for the Word of God and so sealed to our Soules by the operation of the Holy Ghost That which makes way for this as an b Canus Loc. l. 2 c. 8. facit Ecclesiam Causam sine quanon Introduction and outward motive is the Tradition of the present Church but that neither simply Divine nor sufficient alone into which we may resolve our Faith but only as is †§. 16. before expressed And now to come close to the Particular The time was before this miserable Rent in the Church of Christ which I thinke no true Christian can looke upon but with a bleeding heart that you and Wee were all of One Beliefe That beliefe was tainted in tract and corruption of times very deepely A Division was made yet so that both Parts held the Creed and other Common Principles of Beliefe Of these this was one of the greatest †Inter omnes penè constat aut certè id quod satis est inter me illos cum quibus nunc agitur convenit hoc c. Sic in aliâ Causá cont Manichaos S. Aug. L. de Mor. Eccl. Cath. c. 4. That the Scripture is the VVord of God For our beliefe of all things contained in it depends upon it Since this Division there hath beene nothing done by us to discredit this Principle Nay We have given it all honour and ascribed unto it more sufficiency even to the containing of all things necessary to salvation with * Vin. Lir. cont Hares c. 2. Satis super que enough and more then enough which your selves have not done do not And for begetting and setling a Beliefe of this Principle we goe the same way with you and a better besides The same way with you Because we allow the Tradition of the present Church to be the first induceing Motive to embrace this Principle onely we cannot goe so farre in this way as you to make the present Tradition alwayes an Infallible VVord of God unwritten For this is to goe so farre in till you be out of the way For Tradition is but a Lane in the Church it hath an end not only to receive us in but another after to let us out into more open and richer ground And We go a better way then you Because after we are moved and prepared and induced by Tradition we resolve our Faith into that Written Word and God delivering it in which we finde materially though not in Termes the very Tradition that led us thither And so we are sure by Divine Authority that we are in the way because at the end we find the way proved And doe what can be done you can never settle the Faith of man about this great Principle till you rise to greater assurance then the Present Church alone can give And therefore once againe to that known place of S. Augustine * Contr. Epist. Fund c. 5. The words of the Father are Nisi commoveret Vnlesse the Authority of the Church mooved me but not alone but with other Motives eâ—…se it were not commovere to move together And the other Motives are Resolvers though this be Leader Now since we goe the same way with you so farre as you goe right and a better way then you where you go wrong we need not admit any other Word of God then We doc And this ought to remaine as a Presupposed Principle among all Christians and not so much as come into this Question about the sufficiency of Scripture betweene you and us But you say that F. From this the Lady called us and desiring to heare VVhether the Bishop would grant the Romane Church to be the Right Church The B. granted That it was B One occasion which mooved Tertullian to § 20 write his Booke de Praescript adversùs Haereticos was That he * Pamel in Summar Lib Uiaens Disputationibus â—…ihil ant parum profici saw little or no Profit come by Disputations Sure the Ground was the same then and now It was not to deny that Disputation is an Opening of the Vnderstanding a sifting out of Truth it was not to affirme that any such Disquisition is in and of it selfe unprofitable If it had S. Stephen a Acts 6 9. would not have disputed with the Cyrenians nor S. Paul with the b Acts. 9. 29. Grecians first and then with the Iewes c Acts 19. 17. and all Commers No sure it was some Abuse in the Disputants that frustrated the good of the Disputation And one Abuse in the Disputants is a Resolution to hold their own though it â—…e by unworthy means and disparagement d Debilitaetur generosa indoles conjecta in argutias Sen. Aep 48. of truth And so I finde it here For as it is true that this Question was asked so it is altogether false that it was asked in this * Here A. C. hath nothing to say but that the Iesuite did not affirme That the Lady askâ—…d this Question in this or any other precise forme No why the words preceding are the Iesuites own Therefore if these were not the Ladies words he wrongs her not I him forme or so Answâ—…red There is a great deale of Difference especially as Romanists handle the Question of the Church between The Church and A Church and there is some betvveene a True Church and a Right Church vvhich is the vvord you use but no man else that I knovv I am sure not I. For The Church may import in our Language The only true Church and perhaps as some of you seeme to make it the Root and the Ground of the Catholike And this I never did grant of the Romane Church nor ever meane to doe But A Church can imply no more then that it is a member of the Whole And this I never did nor ever will deny if it fall not absolutely away from Christ. That it is a True Church I granted also but not a Right as you impose upon me For Ens and Verum Being and True are convertible one with another and every thing that hath a Being is truly that Being which it is in truth of Substance But this word Right is not so used but is referd more properly to perfection in Conditions And in this sense every thing that hath a true and reall Being is not by and by Right in the Conâ—…itions of it A man that is most dishonest and unworthy the name a very Thiefe if you will is a True man in the verity of his Essence as he is a Creature endued with Reason for this none can steale from him nor he from himselfe but Death But he is not therefore a Right or an upright man And a Church that is
exceeding corrupt both in Manners and Doctrine and so a dishonour to the Name is yet a True Church in the verity of Essence as a Church is a Company of men which professe the Faith of Christ and are Baptized into His Name But yet it is not therefore a Right Church either in Doctrine or Manners It may be you meant cunningly to slip in this word Right that I might at unwares grant it Orthodox But I was not so to be caught For I know well that Orthodox Christians are keepers of integrity and followers of right things so a Integritatis custodes recta sectantes De vera Relig. c. 5. S Augustine of which the Church of Rome at this day is neither In this sense then no Right that is no Orthodox Church at Rome And yet no Newes it is that I granted the Romane Church to be a True Church For so much very learned Protestants b Hooker l. 3. §. 1. Iunius l. de Ec. c. 17. Falluntur qui Ecclesiam negant quiâ—… Papatus in ea est Reynold Thes. 5. Negat tantum esse Catholicam vel sanuÌ„â—…jus membrum Nay the very Separatists grant it Fr. Johnson in his Treatise called A Christian Plea Printed 1617. p. 123. c. have acknowledged before me and the Truth cannot deny it For that Church which receives the Scripture as a Rule of Faith though but as a partiall and imperfect Rule and both the Sacraments as Instrumentall Causes and Seales of Grace though they adde more and misuse these yet cannot but be a True Church in essence How it is in Manners and Doctrine I would you would looke to it with a single eye c Si tamen bono ingenio Pictas Pax quaeda mentis accedat sine quá de sanctis rebus nihil prorsus intelligi potest S. Aug. de Vâ—… Cred. c. 18. For if Piety and a Peaceable mind be not joyned to a good understanding nothing can be knowne in these great things Here AC tells us That the Iesuite doth not say that the Lady asked this Question in this or any other precise forme A. C. p. 53. of words But saith the Iesuite is sure her desire was to know of me whether I would grant the Romane Church to be the right Church And how was the Iesuite sure the Lady desired to heare this from me Why A. C. tells us that too For he addes That the Iesuite had particularly spoken with her before A. C. p. 54. and wished her to insist upon that Poynt Where you may see and 't is fit the Clergie of England should consider with what cunning Adversaries they have to deale who can finde a way to d And after A. C. saith againe p. 54. that the Lady did not aske the Question as if she meant to be satisfied with hearing what I said So belike they take Caâ—…tion before hand for that too That what ever we say unlesse we grant what they would have their Proâ—…elytes shall not be satisfied wiâ—…hit prepare their Disciples and instruct them before hand upon what Poynts to insist that so they may with more ease slide that into their hearts and consciences which should never come there And this once known I hope they will the better provide against it But A. C. goes on and tells us That certainly A. C. p. 54. by my Answer the Ladies desire must needs be to beare from me not whether the Church of Rome were a right Church c. but whether I would grant that there is but one holy Catholike Church and whether the Romane Church that is not only that which is in the City or Diocesse of Rome but all that agreed with it be not it About A Church and The Church I have said enough †§. 20. N. 1. before and shall not repeat Nor is there any need I should For A. C. would have it The Church The One Holy Catholike Church But this cannot be granted take the Roman Church in what sense they please in City or Diocesse or all that agree with it Yet howsoever before I leave this I must acquaint the Reader with a perfect Iesuitisme In all the Primitive Times of the Church a Man or a Family or a Nationall Church were accounted Right and Orthodox as they agreed w th the Catholike Church But the Catholike was never then measured or judged by Man Family or Nation But now in the Iesuites new schole The One Holy * And though Stapleton to magnifie the Church of Rome is pâ—…eased to say Apud veteres pro codem habit a fuit Ecclesia Romana Ecclesia Catholica yet he is â—…o modest as to give this Reason of it Quia ejus Communio erat evident èr certissimè cum tota Catholicá Relect. Con. 1. q. 5. A. 3. Lo The Comâ—…union of the Romane was then with the Catholike Church not of the Catholike with iâ—… Anâ—… S. Cyprian imployed his Legates Caldonius and Fortunatus not to bring the Catholike Church o the Communion of Rome buâ—… Rome to the Catholike Church Elaborarâ—…nt ut ad Cath licae Ecclesiae unitatâ—…m 〈◊〉 Corporis membra 〈◊〉 c Now the Memâ—…ers of this Râ—… and tâ—…rne Body were they of Rome then in an open Schisme betweene Cornâ—…ius and Novatian S. Cypr. L. 2. Epist. 10. Catholike Church must bee measured by that which is in the City or Diocesse of Rome or of them which agreed with it and not Rome by the Catholike For so A. C. sayes expresly The Laâ—…y would know of me not whether that were the Catholike Church to which Rome agreed but whether that were not the Holy Catholike Church which agreed with Rome So upon the matter belike the Christian Faith was committed to the Custody of the Romane not of the Catholike Church And a man cannot agree with the Catholike Church of Christ in this new Doctrine of A. C. unlessâ—… he agree with the Church of Rome but if he agree with that all 's safe and he is as Orthodox as he need be But A. C. is yet troubled about the forme of the Ladies Question And he will not have it That She desired to know whether I would grant the Romane Church to be the Right Church Though these be her words according to the Iesuites owne setting downe but he thinkes the Question was Whether the Church of Rome was not the Right Church not Be not but was not Was not That is was not once or in time past the Right A. C. p. 54. Church before Luther and others made a breach from it Why truly A. C. needed not have troubled himselfe halfe so much about this For let him take his Choise It shall be all one to me whether the Question were asked by Be or by Was For the Church of Rome neither is nor was the Right Church as the Lady desired to heare A Particular Church it is and was and in some times right and in some times wrong
and then in some things right and in some things wrong But The Right Church or The Holy Catholike Church it never was nor ever can be And therefore was not such before Luther and Others either left it or were thrust from it A Particular Church it was But then A. C. is not distinct enough here neither For the Church of Rome both was and was not a Right or Orthodox Church before Luther made a Breach from it For the word Ante Before may looke upon Rome and that Church a great way off or long before and then in the Prime times of it it was a most Right and Orthodox Church But it may looke also nearer home and upon the immediate times before Luther or some Ages before that And then in those times * Câ—… infiniti Abusus Schismata quoque Haereses per totum nunc Christianum Orbem invalescant Ecclesiam Dei legitimâ indigere Reformatione nemini non apertum erit Pet. de Aliaco Card. Cameracensis L. de Refor Ecclesiae And if Schismeâ—… and Heresies did then invade the whole Christian world let A. C. consider how Rome scaped free And I thinke Cameracensis was in this Propheticall For sixty yeares and more before Luther was borne and so before the great troubles which have since fallen upon all Christendome he used these words in the Booke which himselfe delivered up in the Councell of Constance Nisi celeriter fiat Reformatio aâ—…deo dicere quod licet magna sint quae videmus tamen in brevi incomparabiliter majora videbimus Et post ista tonitrua tam horrenda majora alia audienâ—…s c. Cam. l. de Refor Eccle. And it will hardly sinke into any mans judgement that so great a man as Pet. de Aliaco was in that Church should speake thus if he did not see some errors in the Doctrine of that Church as well as in Manners Nay Cassander though he lived and dyed in the Communion of the Church of Rome yet found fault with some of her Doctrines Consulta Artic. 21. 22. And Pope Iulius the third Professed at Bononia in Sacramentorum Ecclesiae ministerium innumerabiles Abusus irrepsissâ—… Espenâ—…us in Tit. 1. and yet he was one of the Bishops nay the chiefe Legat in the Councell of Trent Rome was a Corrupt and a tainted Church farre from being Right And yet both these times Before Luther made his Breach So here A. C. should have beene more distinct For the word Before includes the whole time before Luther in part of which time that Church of Rome was Right and in other part whereof it was wrong But A. C. addes yet That I suspected the Lady would inferre if once that Church were Right what hindred it now to be Since that did not depart A. C. p. 54. from the Protestant Church but the Protestant Church from it Truly I neither suspected the Inference would be made nor feare it when it is made For 't is no Newes that any Particular Church Romane as well as another may once have beene Right and afterwards wrong and in farre worse case And so it vvas in Rome after the enemy had sowed tares among the wheat †S. Mat. 13. 25. S Mat. 13 But whether these Tares were sovven vvhile their Bishops slept or vvhether * For A. C. knowes well what strange Doctrines are charged upon some Popes And all Bellarmines labour though great and full of art is not able to wash them cleane Bellarm. L. 4. dâ—… Rom. Pont. c. 8. c. Et Papas quosdam graves errores seminâsse in Ecclesia Christi luâ—…arius est Et probâ—…ur à laco Almain Opusc. de Autho. Ecclesiae c. 10. And Cassander speakes it out more plaâ—…ly Vâ—…inam Illi He speaks of the Biâ—…hops and Rectors in the Romane Church à quâ—…bus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—…sset non Ipsi Superstâ—…num Auctores â—…sent â—…el 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Animis homâ—…um simpliâ—…um aliquando 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Coâ—…sulta Art 21. 〈◊〉 finem They themselves did not helpe to sovv them is too large a Disquisition for this Place So though it were once Right yet the Tares which grow thick in it are the Cause why 't is not so now And then though that Church did not depart from the Protestants Church yet if it gave great and just Cause for the Protestant Church to depart from the Errours of it while it in some Particulars departed from the Truth of Christ it comes all to one for this Particular That the Romane Church which was once right is now become wrong by embracing Superstition and Errour F. Farther he confessed That Protestants had made a Rent and Division from it B. I confesse I could here be heartily a Grave omninò crimen sed defensionem longinquam non requirit satis est enim negare sicâ—…t pro Ecclesiâ olim S. Aug. de Util. Cred. c. 5. angry but § 21 that I have resolved in handling matters of Religion to leave all gall out of my Ink For I never granted that the Romane Church either is or was the right Church 'T is too true indeed that there is a miserable Rent in the Church and I make no Question but the best men doe most bemoane it b Hanc quae respectu hominum Ecclesia dicitur observare 〈◊〉 Communionem colere debemus Calv. Inst. 4. c. 1 nor is he a Christian that would not have Vnity might he have it with Truth But I never said nor thought §. 7. that the Protestants made this Rent The Cause of the Schisme is yours for you thrust us from you because we called for Truth and Redresse of Abuses For a c Rectè scias nos secisse recedendo à vobis c. Lucif L. de Non conveniendo cum Haereticis He speakes of the Arrians and I shall not compare you with them nor give any Offence that way I shall onely draw the generall argument from it thus If the Orthodoxe did well in departing from the Arrians then the Schisme was to be imputed to the Arrians although the Orthodoxe did depart from them Otherwise if the Orthodoxe had beene guilty of the Schisme he could not have said Rectè scias nos fecisse recedendo For it cannot be that a man should do well in making a Schisme There may be therefore a necessary separation which yet incurres not the blame of Schisme And that is when Doctrines are taught contrary to the Catholike Faith Schisme must needs be theirs whose the Cause of it is The Woe runs full out of the mouth of * S. Mat. 18. 7. Christ ever against him that gives the Offence not against him that takes it ever But you have by this carriage given me just cause never to treat with you or your like but before a Iudge or a Iurie But here A. C. tels me I had no cause to be angry either with the Jesuite or my selfe Not with the Iesuite A. C. p. 55 56. for he
writ downe my words in fresh memory and upon speciall notice taken of the Passage and that I did say either Iâ—…dem or aequipollentibus verbis either in these or equivalent words That the Protestants did make the Râ—…nt or Division from the Romane Church What did the Iesuite set downe my words in fresh memory and upon speciall notice taken and were they so few as these The Protestants did make the Schisme and yet was his memory so short that he cannot tell whether I uttered this iisdem or aequipollentibus verbis Well I would A. C. and his Fellowes would leave this Art of theirs and in Conferences which * A. C. p. 57. they are so ready to call for impose no more upon other men then they utter And you may observe too that after all this full Assertion that I spake this iisdem or aequipollentibus verbis A. C. concludes thus The Iesuite tooke speciall notice in fresh memory and is sure he related at A. C. p. 55. least in sense just as it was uttâ—…red What 's this At least in sense jâ—…st as it was uttered Do not these two Enterfeire and shew the Iesuite to be upon his shuffling pace For if it were just as it was uttered then it was in the very forme of words too not in sense onely And if it were but At least in sense then when A. C. hath made the most of it it was not just as 't was uttered Besides at least in sense doth not tell us in whose sense it was For if A. C. meane the Iesuite's sense of it he may make what sense he pleases of his owne words but he must impose no sense of his upon my words But as he must leave my words to my selfe so when my words are uttered or written he must leave their sense either to me or to that genuine Construction which an Ingenuous Reader can make of them And what my words of Grant were I have before expressed and their sense too Not with my selfe That 's the next For A. C. sayes 't is truth and that the world knowes it that the A. C. p. 56. Protestants did depart from the Church of Rome and got the name of Protestants by protesting against it No A. C. by your leave this is not truth neither and therefore I had reason to be angry with my selfe had I granted it For first the Protestants did not depart For departure is voluntary so was not theirs I say not theirs taking their whole Body and Cause together For that some among them were peevish and some ignorantly zealous is neither to be doubted nor is there Danger in confessing it Your Body is not so perfect I wot well but that many amongst you are as pettish and as ignorantly zealous as any of Ours You must not suffer for these nor We for those nor should the Church of Christ for either Next the Protestants did not get that Name by Protesting against the Church of Rome but by Protesting and that when nothing else would serve †Conventus suit Ordinum Imperii Spirae Ibi Decretum factum est ut Edictum Wormatiense observaretur contra Novatores sic appellare placuit ut omnia in integrum restituantur sic nulla omnino Reformatio Contra hoc Edictum solennis fuit Protestatio Aprilis 16. An. Ch. 1529. Et hinc ortum pervulgatum illud Protestantium nomen Se. Calvis Chron. ad An. 1529. Thâ—…s Protestation therefore was not simply against the Romane Church but against the Edict which was for the restoring of all things to their former estate without any Râ—…formation against her Errours Superstitions Do you but remove them from the Church of Rome and our Protestation is ended and the Separation too Nor is Protestation it selfe such an unheard of thing in the very heart of Religion For the Sacraments both of the Old and New Testament are called by your owne Schoole Visible Signes protesting the Faith Now if the Sacraments be Protestantia Signes Protesting why may not men also and without all offence be called Protestants since by receiving the true Sacraments and by refusing them which are corrupted they doe but Protest the sincerity of their Faith against that Doctrinall Corruption which hath invaded the great Sacrament of the Eucharist and other Parts of Religion Especially since they are men a Quibus homo fidem suam protestaretur Tho. p. 3. q. 61. A. 3. 4. C. which must protest their Faith by these visible Signes and Sacraments But A. C. goes on and will needs have it that the Protestants were the Cause of the Schisme For A. C. p. 56. saith he though the Church of Rome did thrust them from her by Excommunication yet they had first divided themselves by obstinate holding and teaching opinions contrary to the Romane Faith and Practice of the Church which to do S. Bernard thinks is Pride and S. Augustine Madnesse So then in his Opinion First Excommunication on their Part was not the Prime Cause of this Division but the holding and teaching of contrary Opinions Why but then in my Opinion That holding and teaching was not the Prime Cause neither but the Corruptions and Superstitions of Rome which forced many men to hold and teach the contrary So the Prime Cause was theirs still Secondly A. C s. words are very considerable For he charges the Protestants to be the Authours of the Schisme for obstinate holding and teaching Contrary Opinions To what I pray Why to the b I know Bellarm. quotes S. Ierome Sciro Romanam Fidem c. suprà §. 3. Nu. 9. But there S. Ierome doth not call it Fidem Romanam as if Fides Romana and Fides Catholica were convertible but he speakes of it in the Concrete Romana Fides i. Romanorum Fides qua laudata suit ab Apostolo c. Ro. 1. 8. S. Hieron Apol. 3. cont Ruffin That is that Faith which was then at Rome when S. Paul commended it But the Apostles commending of it in the Romanes at one time passes no deed of Assurance that it shall continue worthy of Commendations among the Romans through all tâ—…mes Romane Faith To the Romane Faith It was wont to be the Christian Faith to which contrary Opinions were so dangerous to the Maintainers But all 's Romane now with A. C. and the Iesuite And then to countenance the Businesse S. Bernard and S. Augustine are brought in whereas neither of them speak of the Romane and S. Bernard perhaps neither of the Catholike nor the Romane but of a Particular Church or Congregation Or if he speake of the Catholike of the Romane certainly he doth not His words are Quae major superbia c. What greater pride then that one man should preferre his judgement before the whole Congregation of all the Christian Churches in the world So A. C. as out of Saint Bernard †Quae major superbia quà m ut unus homo toti Congregationi judicium
suum praeferat tanquam ipse solus Spiritum Dei habeat S. Bern. Serm. 3. ae Resurr But Saint Bernard not so For these last words of all the Christian Churches in the world are not in Saint Bernard And whether Toti Congregationi implie more in that Place then a Particular Church is not very manifest Nay I thinke 't is plaine that hee speakes both of and to that particular Congregation to which he was then preaching And I believe A. C. will not easily finde where tota Congregatio the whole Congregation is used in S. Bernard or any other of the Fathers for the whole Catholike Church of Christ. And howsoever the meaning of S. Bernard be 't is one thing for a private man Iudicium suum praeferre to preferre and so follow his private Iudgement before the Whole Congregation which is indeed Lepra proprii Consilii as S. Bernard there cals it the proud Leprosie of the Private Spirit And quite another thing for an Intelligent man and in some things unsatisfied modestly to propose his doubts even to the Catholike Church And much more may a whole Nationall Church nay the whole Body of the Protestants doe it And for S Augustine the Place alledged out of him is a knowne Place And he speakes indeed of the Whole Catholike Church And he * Similiter etiam siquid horum tota per Orbem frequentat Ecclesia Nam hinc quin it a faciendum fit disput are Insolentissimae Insaniae est S. Aug. Epist. 118. c. 5. sayes and hee sayes it truly 'T is a part of most insolent madnesse for any Man to dispute whether that bee to bee done which is usually done in and thorough the whole Catholike Church of Christ. Where first here 's not a word of the Romane Church but of that which is tota per Orbem all over the World Catholike which Rome never yet was Secondly A. C. applies this to A. C. p. 56. the Romane Faith whereas S. Augustine speakes there expresly of the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church and a Quaeris quid per quintam Feriam ultime hebdom adis Quadragesimae fiers debet An offerendum sit manè c. S. Aug. Ibid. particularly about the Manner of Offering upon Maundy-Thursday whether it be in the Morning or after Supper or both Thirdly 't is manifest by the words themselves that S. Augustine speakes of no Matter of Faith there Romane nor Catholike For Frequentat and b And so Bellarmine most expresly But then he adds Universam Ecclesiam non posse errare non solùm in Credendo sed nec in Operando praesertim in Ritu Cultu Divino L 4. de Verb. Dei c. 9. §. 4 And if this be true what is it to Rome Faciendum are for Things done and to be done not for Things believed or to be believed So here 's not One Word for the Romane Faith in either of these Places And after this I hope you will the lesse wonder at A. C s. Boldnesse Lastly a right sober man may without the least Touch of Insolency or Madnesse dispute a Businesse of Religion with the Romane either Church or Prelate As all men know c Euseb. L. 5. Hist. Eccl. c. 26 Et Socrat. L. 5. Hist. c. 22. Irenaeus did with Victor so it bee with Modesty and for the finding out or Confirming of Truth free from Vanity and purposed Opposition against even a Particular Church But in any other way to dispute the Whole Catholike Church is just that which S Augustine cals it Insolent Madnesse But now were it so that the Church of Rome were Orthedoxe in all things yet the Faith by the Jesuite's leave is not simply to be called the Romane but the Christian and the Catholike Faith And yet A. C. will not understand A. C. p. 56. this but Roman and Catholike whether Church or Faith must be one and the same with him and therefore inferres That there can be no just Cause to make a Schisme or Division from the whole Church For the whole Church cannot universally erre in Doctrine of Faith That the whole Church cannot universally erre in the Doctrine of Faith is most true and 't is granted by diverse †Quaestio est An Ecclesia totalis toteliter 〈◊〉 1. pro omnibus simul Electis dum sunt Membra Mâ—…tis Ecclesiae possint errare vel in totâ fiâ—…e vel in gravi aliquo fidei puncto Et respondemus simplicitèr 〈◊〉 esse impossibile Keckerm Syst. Theol. p. 387 Edit Hannoviae An. 1602. Calvinus caeteri Haeretici concedunt Ecclesiam absolutè non posse deficcre Sed dicunt intelligi debere de Ecclesia Inviâ—… Bellarm. L. 3. de Eccles Milit. c. 13. §. 1. But this Exception of Bellarmine's that the Protestants whom out of his Liberality he cals Hereticks speake of the Inâ—…isible Church is meerely frivolous For the Church of the Elect is in the Church of them that are Called and the Invisible Church in the Visible Therefore if the whole Church of the Elect cannot erre in Fundamentals the whole Visible Church in which the same Elect are cannot erre Now that the Invisible Church of the Elect is in the Visible is manifest out of S. Aug. Ipsa est Ecclesia quae intra sagenam Dominicam cum malis piscibus natat S. Aug. Epist. 48. Grana sunt inter illam palcam quando Area cum videretur tota palea putabatur S. Aug. in Psal. 121. And this is proved at large by Hooker L. 3. Eccles. Pol. §. 1. For els the Elect or Invisible Church is tyed to no duty of Christianity For all such Duties are required of the Church as 't is Visible and performed in the Church as 't is Visible And D r. Field speakes as plainly we hold it impossible that the Church should ever by Apostasie and Misbeliefe wholly depart from God c. So we hold that it never fals into Heresie So that Bellarmine is as much to be blamed for idle and needlesse busying himselfe to prove That the Visible Church never fals into Heresie which we most willingly grant Field L. 4. de Eccles. c. 2. Taking the Church for all the Beleevers now living and in things necessary to be knowne expresly Ibid. And Bellarmine himself adds Calvinus dicit hanc Propositionem Ecclesia non potest errare veram esse si intelligatur cum duplici restrictione Prima est si non proponat Dogmata extra Scripturam c. And indeed Calvin doth say so L. 4 Instit. c. 8. §. 13. Secunda est si intelligatur de solâ Ecclesiâ Universali non autem de Representativâ Bellar. L. 3. de Eccl. Milit c. 14. §. 2. And I hope it is as good and a better Restriction in Calvin To say the Catholike Church cannot erre if it keepe to the Scripture then for Bellarmine to say The particular Church of Rome cannot erre because of the Pope's residing there or the Pope cannot
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
est aut quaelibet alia Ecclesiae communis Generalis Hispaniâ—… Galliciae Synodus celebretur c. Conc. Tolet. 4. Can. 3. They Decree That if there happen a Cause of Faith to be setled a Generall that is a Nationall Synod of all Spaine and Gallicia shall be held thereon And this in the yeare 643. Where you see it was then Catholike Doctrine in all Spaine that a Nationall Synod might be a Competent Iudge in a Cause of Faith And I would faine know what Article of the Faith doth more concerne all Christians in generall then that of Filioque And yet the Church of Rome her selfe made that Addition to the Creed without a Generall Councell as I have shewed e §. 24. Nu. 2. already And if this were practised so often and in so many places why may not a Nationall Councell of the Church of England doe the like as Shee did For Shee cast off the Pope's Vsurpation and as much as in her lay restored the King to his right That appeares by a a The Institution of a Christian man printed An. 1534. Booke subscribed by the Bishops in Henry the eight's time And by the b In Synodo Londinâ—…nsi Sess. 8. Die Veneris 29. Ianuarii An. 1562. Records in the Arch-bishop's Office orderly kept and to be seene In the Reformation which came after our c And so in the Reformation under Hezekiah 2. Chron. 29 under Iosia 4 Reg. 23. And in the time of Reccarcdus King of Spaine the Reformation there proceeded thus Quùm gloriosissimus Princeps omnes Regiminâ—… sui Pontifices in unum convenire mandâ—…sset c. Conâ—…il Tolet. 3. Can. 1. Cùm convemssemus Sacerdotes Domini apud urbem Toletanâ—… ut Râ—…giis imperiis atque jussis commoniti c. Concil Tolet. 4. in princ apud Caraâ—…zam And boâ—…h these Synods did treat of Matters of Faith Princes had their parts and the Clergy theirs And to these Two principally the power and direction for Reformation belongs That our Princes had their parts is manifest by their Calling together of the Bishops and others of the Clergie to consider of that which might seeme worthy Reformation And the Clergie did their part For being thus called together by Regall Power they met in the Nationall Synod of sixty two And the Articles there agreed on were afterwards confirmed by Acts of State and the Royall Assent In this Synod the Positive Truths which are delivered are more then the Polemicks So that a meere Calumnie it is That we professe only a Negative Religion True it is and we must thanke Rome for it our Confession must needs containe some Negatives For we cannot but deny that Images are to be adored Nor can we admit Maimed Sacraments Nor grant Prayers in an unknowne tongue And in a corrupt time or place 't is as necessary in Religion to deny falshood as to assert and vindicate Truth Indeed this latter can hardly be well and sufficiently done but by the former an Affirmative Verity being ever included in the Negative to a Falshood As for any Errour which might fall into this as any other Reformation if any such can be found then I say 't is most true Reformation especially in Cases of Religion is so difficult a worke and subject to so many Pretensions that 't is almost impossible but the Reformers should step too farre or fall too short in some smaller things or other which in regard of the farre greater benefit comming by the Reformation it selfe may well be passed over and borne withall But if there have beene any wilfull and grosse errours not so much in Opinion as in Fact †Quisquis occasione hujus Legis quam Regesterra Christo servientes ad emendandam vestram impietatem promulgaverunt res proprias vestras cupide appetit displicet nobis Quisquis denique ipsas res pauperum vel Baâ—…licas Congregationum c. non per Iustitiam sed per Avaritiamtenet displicet nobis S. Aug. Epist. 48. versus finem Sacriledge too often pretending to reforme Superstition that 's the Crime of the Reformers not of the Reformation and they are long since gone to God to answer it to whom I leave them But now before I go off from this Point I must put you in remembrance too That I spake at that time and so must all that will speak of that Exigent of the Generall Church as it was for the most part forced under the Government of the Romane Sea And this you understand well enough For in your very next words you call it the Romane Church Now I make no doubt but that as the Vniversall Catholike Church would have reform'd her selfe had she beene in all parts freed of the Romane Yoke so while she was for the most in these Westerne parts under that yoke the Church of Rome was if not the Onely yet the Chiefe Hindrance of Reformation And then in this sense it is more then cleare That if the Romane Church will neither Reform nor suffer Reformation it is lawfull for any other Particular Church to Reform it selfe so long as it doth it peaceably and orderly and keeps it selfe to the Foundation and free from * And this a Particular Church may doe but not a Schisme For a Schisme can never be peaceable nor orderly and seldome free from Sacriledge Out of which respects it may be as well as for the grâ—…evousnesse of the Crime S. Aug. cals it Sacrilegium Schismatis L. 1 de Bapt. cont Donat. c. 8. For usually they go together Sacriledge F. I asked Quo Iudice did this appeare to bee so VVhich Question I asked as not thinking it equity that Protestants in their own Cause should be Accusers VVitnesses and Iudges of the Romane Church B You doe well to tell the reason now why you § 25 asked this Question For you did not discover it at the Conference if you had you might then have received your Answer It is most true No man in common equity ought to be suffered to be Accuser Witnesse and Iudge in his owne Cause But is there not as little reason and equity too that any man that is to be accused should be the Accused and yet VVitnesse and Iudge in his owne Cause If the first may hold no man shall be Innocent and if the last none will be Nocent And what doe we here with in their owne Cause against the Romane Church Why Is it not your owne too against the Protestant Church And if it be a Cause common to both as certaine it is then neither Part alone may be Iudge If neither alone may judge then either they must be judged by a * §. 21. Nu. 9. Third which stands indifferent to both and that is the Scripture or if there be a jealousie or Doubt of the sense of the Scripture they must either both repaire to the Exposition of the Primitive Church and submit to that or both call and submit to a Generall
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
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
perpetuum Scripturâ testante errabit Quòd Rom. Pontifex si Canonic è suerit ordinatus meritis B. Petri indubit an t èr efficitur sanctus Quòd à fidelitate Iniquorum subditos potest absolvere Gregory the seventh in the great power which he now uses in and over these parts of the ChristiaÌ„ world Thirdly A. C. knowing 't is not enough to say this That the Pope is Pastour of the whole Church labours to prove it And first he tels us that Irenaeus intimates so much but he doth not tell us where And he is ' much scanted of Ancient Proofe if Irenaeus stand alone Besides Irenaeus was a Bishop of the Gallicane Church and a very unlikely man to Captivate the Liberty of that Church under the more powerfull Principality of Rome And how can we have better evidence of his Iudgement touching that Principality then the Actions of his Life When Pope Victor Excommunicated the Asian Churches 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 †Euseb. L. 5. c. 25. all at a blow was not Irenaeus the Chiefe man that reprehended him for it A very unmeet and undutifull thing sure it had been in Irenaeus in deeds to taxe him of rashnesse and inconsideratenesse whom in words A. C. would have to be acknowledged by him The Supreme and Infallible Pastour of the Vniversall Church But the Place of Irenaeus which A. C. meanes I thinke is this whâ—…â—…he uses these words indeed but short of A. C s. sense of it †Adhanc Ecclesiam propter potentiorem Principalitatem necesse est â—…mnem convenire Ecclesiam 1. e. eos qui sunt undique sideles In quá semper ab his qui sunt undique conservata est ea quae est ab Apostolu Traditio Iren. L. 3. c. 3. To this Church he speakes of Rome propter potentiorem principalitatem for the more powerfull Principality of it 't is necessary that every Church that is the faithfull undique round about should have recourse Should have recourse so A. C. translates it And what doth this availe him A. C. p. 58. Very great reason was there in Irenaeus his time That upon any Difference arising in the Faith omnes undique Fideles all the Faithfull or if you will all the Churches round about should have recourse that is resort to Rome being the Imperiall City and so a Church of more powerfull Principality then any other at that time in those parts of the world Well Will this exalt Rome to be the Head of the Church Vniversall What if the States and Policies of the world be much changed since and this Conveniâ—…ncy of resorting to Rome be quite ceased Then is not Rome devested of her more powerfull Principality But the meaning of A C. is We must so have recourse to Rome as to submit our Faith to hers And then not onely in Irenaeus his time but through all times reforme Our selves by her Rule That is all the Faithfull not undique round about but ubique every where must agree with Rome in point of Faith This he meanes and Rome may thank him for it But this Irenaeus saith not nor will his words beare it nor durst A C. therfore construe him so but was content to smooth it over with this ambiguous phrase of having recourse to Rome Yet this is a place as much stood upon by them as any other in all Antiquity And should I grant them their owne sense That all the faithfull everywhere must agree with Rome which I may give but can never grant yet were not this saying any whit prejudiciall to us now For first here 's a powerfull Principality ascribed to the Church of Rome And that no man of learning doubts but the Church of Rome had within its owne Patriarchate and Iurisdiction and that was very large containing a Ed. Brierwood of the Iurisdiction and Limits of the Patriarchs in the time of the Nicen Councel Ad. Qu. 1. M. S. all the Provinces in the Diocesse of Italy in the old sense of the word Diocesse which Provinces the Lawyers and others terme Suburbicarias There were ten of them The three Ilands Sicily Corsica and Sardinia and the other seven upon the firme land of Italie And this I take it is plaine in Ruffinus For he living shortly after the Nicene Councell as he did and being of Italy as he was he might very well know the Bounds of that Patriarchs Iurisdiction as it was then practised b Apud Alexandriam ut in urbe Româ vetusta consuetudo servetur ut ille Aegypti ut hic SuburbicariarnÌ„ Ecclesiarum selicitudinem gerat Russin L. 1. Eccles. Hist. c. 6. And he sayes expresly That according to the old Custome the Romane Patriarchs Charge was confined within the Limits of the Suburbicarian Churches To avoid the force of this Testimony c Peron L. 2. of his Reply c. 6. Cardinall Peron layes load upon Ruffinus For he charges him with Passion Ignorance and Rashnesse And one peece of his Ignorance is That hee hath ill translated the Canon of the Councell of Nice Now be that as it may I neither do nor can approve his Translation of that Canon nor can it be easily proved that he purposely intended a Translation All that I urge is that Ruffinus living in that time and Place was very like well to know and understand the Limits and Bounds of that Patriarchate of Rome in which hee lived Secondly heres That it had potentiorem a more powerfull Principality then other Churches had And that the Protestants grant too and that not onely because the Romane Prelate was Ordine primus first in Order and Degree which some One must be to avoid Confusion †Quia cùm Orientales Gracae Ecclesiae Afrcanae etiam multis inter se Opinionum dissentionibus 〈◊〉 haec sedatior aliis minùs turbulenta fuerit Calv. L. 4. Justit c. 6. §. 16. But also because the Romane Sea had wonne a great deale of Credit and gained a great deale of Power to it selfe in Church Assaires Because while the Greeke yea and the African Châ—…rches too were turbulent and distracted with many and dangerous Opinions the Church of Rome all that while and a good while after Irenaeus too was more calme and constant to the Truth Thirdly here 's a Necessity say they required That every Church that is the faithfull which are every where agree with that Church But what simply with that Church what ever it doe or believe No nothing lesse For Irenaeus addes with that Church in quâ in which is conserved that Tradition which was delivered by the Apostles And God forbid but it should be necessary for all Churches and all the faithfull to agree with that Ancient Apostolike Church in all those Things in which it keepes to the Doctrine and Discipline delivered by the Apostles In Irenaeus his time it kept these better then any other Church and by this in part obtained potentiorem Principalitate a Greater
Siomnes nullum fuit hactenus Concilium Generale neque etiam videtur deinceps suturum Bcl. 1. de Coâ—…c c. 17. §. 1. Bellarmine if you will not believe me Next saith he If all these Pastors pray unanimously for the promised Assistance of the Holy Ghost Why but if all Pastors cannot meet together all cannot pray together nor all search the Scriptures together nor all upon that Search Decree together So that is supposed in vaine too Yea but Thirdly If all that meet doe pray unanimously What then All that meet are not simply All. Nor doth the Holy Ghost come and give his Assistance upon every Prayer that is made unanimously though by very many Prelates or other Faithfull People met together unlesse all other Requisites as well as Vnanimity to make their prayer to bee heard and granted bee observed by them So that an Vnanimous Prayer is not adequately supposed and therefore Concludes not But lastly how far a Generall Councell if all A. C s. Conditions bee observed is firm and Infallible that shall be more fully discussed at †§. 33. Consil 1. after In the meane time these two words Firme and Infallible are ill put together as Synonima's For there are some things most Infallible in themselves which yet could never get to be made firme among men And there are many things made firm by Law both in Churches Kingdomes which yet are not Infallible in themselves So to draw all together to settle CoÌ„troversies in the Church there is a Visible Iudge and Infallible but not living And that is the * And this was thought a sufficient â—…udge too when Christians were as humble as learned I am sure Optatus thought so Quaeren li sunt Iudices Si Christiani de utraque parte dari non possunt quia studâ—…s veritas impeditur De forts quaerendus est Iudex Si Paganus non potest nosse Christiana Secreta Si Iudaeus inimicus est Christiani Baptismatis Ergo in terris de hac re nullum poterit reporiri Iudiciis De Caelo quaerendus est Iudex Sed ut quid pulsamus ad Coelum quum habemus hîc in Evangelio Testamentum inquam quia hoc loco recâ—…e possunt terrena coelestibus comparari talc est quod quivis hominum habens numerosos siltos his quamdiu pater praesens est ipse imperat singulis non est adhuc necessarium Testamâ—…ntuÌ„ Sic Christus quamdiu praesens in terris suit quamvis nec modo desit pro tempore quicquid necessarium crat Apostolis Imperavit Sed quomodo terrenus Pater dum se in consinio senserit mortis timens ne post mortem suam ruptà pace litigent fratres adhibitis Testibus Uoluntatem suam de Pectore morituro transfert in Tabulas diu duraturas Et si fuâ—…rit inter fratres contentio nata non itur ad Tumulum sed quaeritur TestamentuÌ„ qui Tumulo quiescit tacitus de Tabulis loquitur Vivus cujus est TestamentuÌ„ in caelo est Ergo Voluntas ejus velut in Testamento sic in Evangelio inquiratur Opt. l. 5. adv Parm. This pregnant Place of Optatus That the Scripture is the Iudge of Divine Truth when ever it is questioned though Baldwin dare not deny yet he would faine slide both by it and by a paralell place as full in S. Aug. in Psal. 21. Expositione 〈◊〉 with this shift that S. Augustine in another place had rather use the Testimony of Tradition that is the Testimony Nuncupativi potius quâm Scripti Testamenti of the Nuncupative rather then the Written Will of Christ. Baldwin in Optat. L. 5. But this is a meere shift First because it is Petitio principii the meere begging of the Question For we deny any Testament of Christ but that which is written And A. C. cannot thew it in any one Father of the Church that Christ ever left behind him a Nuncupative obligatory Will Secondly because nothing is more plaine in these two Fathers Optatus and S. Augustine then that both of them appeale to the Wrrtten Will and make that the Iudge without any Exception when a matter of Faith comes in Question In Optat. the words are Habemus in Evangelio we have it in the Gospell And in Evangelio inquiratur Let it be inquired in the Gospell And Christ put it in tabulas diu duraturas into Written and lasting Instruments In S. Augustine the words are Our Father did not dye intestate c. And Tabulae aperiantur Let his Will his written Instruments be opened And Legantur Uerbamortui let the words of him that dyed be read And againe Aperi Legamus Open the Will and let us reade And Legamus quid litigamus Why do we strive Let 's read the Will And againe Aperi Testamentum lege Open the Will read All which Passages are most expresse and full for his Written Will and not for any Nuncupative Wil as Baldwin would put upon us And Hart who takes the same way with Baldwin is not able to make it out as appeares by D. Reynolds in his Conference with Hart. c. divis 1. p. 396. c. Scripture pronouncing by the Church And there is a visible and a Living Iudge but not Infallible And that is a Generall Councell lawfully called and so proceeding But I know no formall Confirmation of it needfull though A. C. require it * §. 28. N. 1. And so plainly S. Augustine speaking of S. Cyprians Errour about Rebaptization c. sayes Illis temporibus antequà m Plenarii Concilii sententiae quid in hac re sequendum esset t ot ius Ecclesiae Consensio confirmasset Uisum est ei cum c. L. 1. de Bapt. cont Donatist c. 18. So here is first Sententia Concilii And then the Confirmation of it is totius Ecclesiae Consensio the Consent of the whole Church yeelding unto it And so Gerson Concurrente Vniversali totius Ecclesiae consensu c. In Declaratione Ueritatum quae credenda sunt c. §. 4. For this that the Pope must confirme it or else the Generall Councell is invalid is one of the Romane Novelties For this cannot be shewed in any Antiquity void of just Exception The truth is the Pope as other Patriarchs and great Bishops used to doe did give his assent to such Councels as he approoved But that is no Corroboration of the Councell as if it were invalid without it but a Declaration of his consenting with the rest §. 33. Consid. 4. Nu. 6. but onely that after it is ended the Whole Church admit it bee it never so tacitely In the next Place A. C. interposes new matter quite out of the Conference And first in case of Distractions A. C. p. 59 60. and Disunion in the Church he would know what is to be done to Re-unite when a Generall Councell which is acknowledged a fit Iudge cannot be had by reason of manifold impediments Or if being called will not bee of one minde
Patriarch or Christian Bishop which did confirm the Canons of the Councell of Irent and Anathematize them which admitted them not and I will confesse they speake home to the Comparison between the Councels els a blinde man may see the difference and 't is a vast one But here A. C. makes account he hath found a better reply to this and now tels us that neither French nor Spanish nor Schismaticall Greekes did agree with Protestants A. C p. 62. in those Points which were defined in that Councell especially after it was Confirmed by the Pope as appeares by the Censure of Ieremias the Greeke Patriarch Who agreed with the Protestants in the Points defined by that Councell as he speakes or rather â—…o speake properly against the Points there defined I know not And for ought A. C. knowes many might agree with them in heart that in such a Councell durst not open themselves And what knowes A. C. how many might have beene of their Opinion in the maine before the Councell ended had they beene admitted to a faire and a free Dispute And it may be too some Decrees would have beene more favourable to them had not the care of the Popes interest made them sowrer For else what mean these words Especially after it was confirmed by the Pope As for Ieremtas 't is true his Censure is in many things against the Protestants But I finde not that that Censure of his is warranted by any Authority of the Greeke Church Or that he gave the Protestants any hearing before he passed his Censure And at the most it is but the Censure of a Schismatick in A. C. owne Iudgement And for his flourish which followes that East and West would Condemne Protestants for Hereticks I would he would forbeare prophecying till both parts might meet in a free Generall Councell that sought Christ more then themselves But I finde the Iesuite hath not done with me yet but addes F. In fine the B. wished That a Lawfull Generall Councell were called to end Controversies The Persons present said That the King was inclined thereunto and that therefore we Catholikes might doe well to concurre B. And what say you to my Wish you pretend § 30 great love to the Truth would you not have it found Can you or any Christian be offended that there should be a good end of Controversies Can you think of a better end then by a Generall Councell And if you have a most Gracious King inclined unto it as you say it was offered how can you acquit your selves if you doe not consent Now here A. C. marvels what A. C. p. 62. kind of General Councel I would have and what Rules I would have observed in it which are morally like to be observed and make an end of Controversies better then their Catholike Generall Councels Truly I am not willing to leave A. C. unsatisfied in any thing Nor have I any meaning to trouble the Church with any New Devisings of mine Any Generall Councell shall satisfie me and I presume all good Christians that is lawfully called continued and ended according to the same course and under the same * Ex iis Conciliis quae omnium consensu Generalia fuerunt qualia sunt quatuor prima Et ex consuetudine Ecclesiae colligimus quatuor Conditiones requiri sufficere Bellar. 1. de Con. c. 17. §. 2. Conditions which Generall Councels observed in the Primitive Church which I am sure were Councels Generall and Catholike what ever yours bee But I doubt that after all noyse made about these Requisite Conditions A. C. and his Fellowes will be found as much if not more defective in performance of the Conditions then in the conditions themselves Well the Iesuite goes on for all this F. I asked the B. whether hee thought a Generall Ccuncell might erre He said it might B. I presume you doe not expect I should enter into the Proofe of this Controversie Whether a Generall § 31 Councell may erre in Determination or not Your selfe brought no proofe that it cannot and till that bee brought my speech is good that it can and yet I hope to bee found no Infringer of any Power given by Christ to his Church But it seemes by that which followes you did by this Question Can a generall Councell Erre but seeke to winne ground for your other which followes F. If a Generall Councell may erre what nearer are wee then said I to unity after a Councell hath determined Yes said he although it may erre yet we should be bound to hold with it till another come to reverse it B Whether a Generall Councell may erre or not § 32 is a Question of great Consequence in the Church of Christ. To say it cannot erre leaves the Church not only without Remedy against an errour once Determined but also without sense that it may need a Remedy and so without care to seeke it which is the misery of the Church of Rome at this day To say it can erre seemes to expose the members of the Church to an uncertainty and wavering in the Faith to make unquiet Spirits not only to disrespect former Councels of the Church but also to slight and contemne whatsoever it may now Determine into which Errour some Opposers of the Church of Rome have fallen And upon this is grounded your Question Wherein are we nearer to unity if a Councell may erre But in relating my answer to this you are not so candid For my words did not sound as yours seeme to doe That wee should â—…old with the Councell erre or not erre till another came to reverse it As if Grounds of Faith might vary at the Racket and be cast of each side as a cunning hand might lay them You forget againe omit at least and with what minde you best know the Caution which I added For I said The Determination of a Generall Councell erring was to stand in force and to have externall Obedience at the least yeelded to it till * §. 33. Confid 5. Nu. 1. 2. And the Râ—…son of this is Because to have a General Councel deceived is not impossible But altogether impossible it is that Demonstratiâ—…e Râ—…ason or Testimony Diâ—…ine should deceâ—…ve Hooker L. 2. Ec. Pol. § 7. Evidence of Scripture or a Demonstration to the Contrary made the Errour appeare and untill thereupon †In which case Maldoâ—… puts in the shâ—…ewdest Arg ment Namely that this way we should never have a certaine end of Controversies For to try whether any thing were Decreed according to the Word of God by one General Councel we â—…ould need another Couâ—…ll And thâ—…n anoâ—…her to try that And so in 〈◊〉 So our faith should never have where to settle and rest it selfe Malâ—…n S. Mat. 1â—… 20. But to this I answer That the Aâ—…nt Church tooke this way as will afterward appeare in S. Augustine Next here is no uncâ—…rtainty at all For no 〈◊〉 Coâ—…cell lawfully called and so
prâ—…ng can be questioned in another unlesse it to tall out that 〈◊〉 Scriptuâ—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 appeare against it Buâ—… eâ—…t 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thâ—…se aâ—…e â—…o 〈◊〉 and manâ—…t and â—…ving the it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whâ—… or 〈◊〉 wiâ—…h 〈◊〉 without a Councell §. 33. 〈◊〉 5. Nâ—… 1. 2. another Councell of equall authority did reverse it And indeed I might have returned upon you againe If a Generall Councell not Confirmed by the Pope may erre which you affirme to what end then a Generall Councell And you may Answer yes For although a Generall Councell may erre yet the Pope as Head of the Church cannot An excellent meanes of unity to have all in the Church as the Pope will have it what ever Scripture say or the Church thinke And then I pray to what end a Generall Councell Will his Holinesse be so holy as to confirme a Generall Councell if it Determine against him And as for * 〈◊〉 L 4. dâ—… 〈◊〉 Pâ—…t â—…7 §. 3. c. Bellarmines reasons why a Generall Councell should be usefull if not necessary though the Pope bee Iâ—…fallible they are so weake in Part and in part so unworthy that I am sory any necessity of a bad cause should force so learned a man to make use of them Here A. C. tels mee The Caution mentioned as omitted makes my Answer werse then the Iesuite related A. C. p. 63. â—…4 it And that in two things First in that the Iesuite relates it thus Although it may erre but the Caution makes it as if it did actually erre Secondly in that the Iesuite relates That wee are bound to hold it till another come to reverse it that is wâ—…e not knowing whether it doe erre or not but onely that it may erre But the Caution puts the Case so as if the Determination of a Generall Councell actually erring were not ipso jure invalid but must stand in force and have externall Obedience yeelded to it till not onely morall Certainty but Evidence of Scripture or a Demonstration to the Contrary make the errour appeare And when it appeares wee must yeeld our Obedience till a Councell of equall Authority reverse it which perhaps will not bee found in an whole Age. So either the Iesuite relates this speech truly or lesse disgracefully And A. C. thinkes that upon better Iudgement I Will not allow this Caution Truly I shall not thanke the Iesuite for any his kindnesse here And for the Caution I must and doe acknowledge it mine even upon advisement and that whether it make my Answer worse or better And I thinke farther that the Iesuite hath no great Cause to thanke A. C. for this Defence of his Relation First then the Iesuite so sayes A. C. doth in his Relation make it but a supposition That a Generall Councell A. C. p. 63 may erre But the Caution expresses it as actually erring True But yet I hope this Expression makes no Generall Councell actually erre And then it comes all to one whether I suppose that such a Councell may erre or that it doe erre And 't is fitter for clearing the Difficulties into which the Church fals in such a Case to suppose and more then a supposition it is not a Generall Councell * Synodum Generalem aliquoties errâsse percepimus Wald. L. 2. de Doctrin Fidri Art 2. c. 19. §. 1. actually erring then as only under a Possibility of Erring For the Church hath much more to doe to vindicate it selfe from such an Errour actually being then from any the like Errour that might be Secondly A. C. thinkes he hath got great advantage A. C. p. 63. by the words of the Caution in that I say A Generall Councell erring is to stand in force and have externall Obedience at least so farre as it consists in silence Patience and forbearance yeelded to it till Evidence of Scripture or a Demonstration to the Contrary make the Error appeare and untill therupon another Councell of equal Authority did reverse it Well! I say it again But is there any one word of mine in the Caution that speakes of our knowing of this Errour Surely not one that 's A. C s. Addition Now suppose a Generall Councell actually Erring in some Point of Divine Truth I hope it will not follow that this Errour must bee so grosse as that forthwith it must needes be knowne to private men And doubtlesse till they know it Obedience must be yeelded Nay when they know it if the Errour be not manifestly against Fundamentall verity in which case a Generall Councell can not easily erre I would have A C. and all wise men Consider Whether Externall Obedience be not even then to be yeelded For if Controversies arise in the Church some end they must have or they 'll teare all in sunder And I am sure no wisdome can thinke that fit Why then say a Generall Councell Erre and an Erring Decree be ipso jure by the very Law it selfe invalid I would have it wisely considered again whether it be not fit to allow a Generall Councell that Honour and Priviledge which all other Great Courts have Namely That there be a Declaration of the Invalidity of its Decrees as well as of the Laws of other Courts before private men can take liberty to refuse Obedience For till such a declaration if the Councel stand not in force A. C sets up Private Spirits to controll Generall Councels w ch is the thing he so often and so much cryes out against in the Protestants Therefore it may seeme very fit and necessary for the Peace of Christendome that a Generall Councell thus erring should stand in force till Evidence of Scripture or a Demonstration make the Errourto appeare * It is not long since A C. compared Councels to Parliaments it was but p. 60. And I hope a Parliament and the Acts of it must stand in force thoughsomthing bemistaken in them or found hurtfull till another Parliament of equal Authority reverse it and them For I presume you will not have any inferiour Authority to abrogate Acts of Parliament as that another Councell of equall Authority reverse it For as for Morall Certainty that 's not strong enough in Points of Faith which alone are spoken of here And if another Councell of equall Authority cannot be gotten together in an Age that is such an Inconvenience as the Church must beare when it happens And far better is that inconvenience then this other †§. 33. Consid. 4. N. 1. that any Authority lesse then a Generall Councell should rescinde the Decrâ—…es of it unlesse it erre manifestly and intolera'ly Or that the whole Church upon peaceable and just complaint of this Errour neglect or refuse to call a Councell and examine it And there come in Nationall or Provinciall Councels to a § 24. Nu. 1. reforme for themselves But no way must lye open to private men to b §. 38. Nu. 15. Refuse obedience till the Councell be heard
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
confessionis Iustin. Mart. Dial. cum Tryph. S. Chrysost. Hom. 2. in Psal. 50. S. Amb. L. 10. in S. Luc. c. 24. And S. Greg. gives it for a Rule when Petra is read in the singular number and so it is here Christus est Christ is signified Fathers come in with very full consent And this That the Gates of Hell shall not prevaile against it is not spoken of the Not erring of the Church principally but of the Not a Non deficit S. Bern. Ser. 79. in Cant. And Bellarmine himselfe going to prove Ecclesiam non posse deficere begins with this very place of Scripture L. 3. de Eccl. c. 13. falling away of it from the Foundation Now a Church may erre and dangerously too and yet not fall from the Foundation especially if that of b L. 3. de Eccl. c. 14. §. Quinto si esset Multa sunt de Fide quae non sunt absolutè necessaria ad salutem Bellarmine be true That there are many things even de fide of the Faith which yet are not necessary to Salvation Besides even here againe the Promise of this stable edification is to the whole Church not to a Councell at least no farther then a Councell builds as a Church is built that is upon Christ. The next Place is Christ's Prayer for S. Peter's Faith The native sense of which Place is That Christ prayed and obtained for S. Peter perseverance in the grace of God against the strong temptation which was to winnow him above the rest But to conclude an Infallibility hence in the Pope or in his Chaire or in the Romane Sea or in a Generall Councell though the Pope bee President I finde no one Ancient Father that dare adventure it And a Lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. cap. 3. Bellarmine himselfe besides some Popes in their owne Cause and that in Epistles counterfeit or falsely alledged hath not a Father to name for this sense of the Place till he come downe to Chrysologus Theophylact and S. Bernard of which Chrysologus his speech is but a flash of Rhetoricke and the other two are men of yesterday compared with Antiquity and lived when it was God's great grace and learned mens wonder the corruption of the time had not made them corrupter then they are And b 2. 2 ae q. 2. A. 3. Probat enim ex his verbis Fidem Ecclesiae Vniversalis non posse deficere Thomas is resolute That what is meant here beyond S. Peter's Person is referred to the whole Church And the Glosse upon the Canon Law is more peremptorie then he even to the Deniall that it is c Causa 24. q. 1. C. A Recta Non de Papa quia Papa potest errare meant of the Pope And if this Place warrant not the Popes Faith where is the Infallibility of the Councell that in your Doctrine depends upon it The next Place is Bellarmines choice one his first and he sayes 't is a d Testimonia propria sunt tria Primum est Matth. 18. c. Bellar. L 2. de Concil c. 2. §. 4. Sed contrà Firmitas Conciliorum propriè non innititur his verbis Stapl. Relect. Controvers 6. q 4. A. 4 ad 4 um Locus hio non debet huc propriè accommodari Valentia in Tho. To. 3. Disput 1. R. 1. Puncto 7. §. 45. proper place for Proofe of the Infallibility of Generall Councels This Place is Christ's Promise Where two or three are gathered together in my name there am I in the midst of them e S. Mat. 18. 19. 20. S. Mat. 18. And he tels us The strength of the Argument is not taken from these words alone but as they are continued with the former and f Additâ Argumentatione à Minori ad Majus c. Bellar. L. 2. de Concil c 2. §. 4. Et Stapl. Relect. Cont. 6. q. 3. A. 4. that the Argument is drawne à Mâ—…nori ad Majus from the lesse to the Greater Thus g Siduo vel tres congregati in nomine meo obtinent semper quod petunt à Deo c. Bellat ibid. §. 5. If two or three gathered together in my Name do alwaies obtaine that which they aske at God's hands to wit wisdome and knowledge of those things which are necessary for them How much more shall all the â—…ops gathered together in a Councell alwaies obtaine wisdome and knowledge to Iudge those things which belong to the Direction of the whole Church I answer First 't is most true that here is little strength in these words alone For though the Fathers make different interpretations of this Place of Scripture yet * S. Chrys. Hom. 61. in S. Mat. 18. ubi duo vel tres pari spiritu voluntate collecti sunt c. Theoph. in S. Mat. 18. S. Cyprian L. 4. Epist. 4. S. Hilâ—… in S. Mat. 18. most of them agree in this That this Place is to be understood of Consent in Prayer And this is manifest enough in the Text it selfe Secondly I think there is as little strength in them by the Argument drawne A Minori ad Majus And that I prove two wayes First because though that Argument hold in Naturall and Necessary Things yet I doubt it holds not either in Voluntary or Promised things or things which depend upon their Institution For he that Promises the lesse doth not hereby promise the greater and he which will doe the Lesse will not alwaies doe the greater Secondly because this Argument from the Lesse to the greater can never follow but where and so farre as the thing upon which the Argument is founded agrees to the lesse For if it do not alwayes agree to the lesse it cannot Necessarily passe from thence to the greater Now that upon which this Argument is grounded here is Infallible hearing and granting the Prayers of two or three met together in the Name of Christ. But this Infallibility is not alwaies found in this Lesse Congregation where two or three are gathered together For they often meet and pray yet obtaine not because there are diverse other Conditions necessarily required as S. Chrysostome †Quemodo igitur à Patre cuncta non consequentur Quia multae sunt Causae non impetrandi c. S. Chrysost. Hom. in S Matth. 18. Et Bellar. ipse Si congregari in nomine Christi sit Nota Ecclesiae non erit quomodocunque congregari Sic enim onines Haereses Schismata congregantur in nomine Christi Sed c. L. 4. de Notis Ecclesiae c. 2. §. Tertius non observes to make the Prayers of a Congregation heard beside their gathering together in the Name of Christ. And therefore it is not extended to a greater Congregation or Councell unlesse the same Conditions be still observed Neither doth Christs Promise Ero in Medio I will be in the midst of them inferre That they the greater or the Lesse three or three hundred have all even
aliorum salutem expetunt c. Quidigitur mirum si in hoc Concilio fuerit Spiritus Sanctus c. Nos aliter Convenimus 〈◊〉 cum magnâ pompâ—… nâ—…sque ipsos quâ—…rimus atque nobispollicemur nihil nobis non licere de Plenitudine Potestatis Et quomodo Sp. Sanctus ejusmodi Concilia probare possit Fetus in Act. 15. 7 One of their owne who tels us plainly That the Apostles in their Councell delt very prudently did not precipitate their Iudgement but waighed all things For in Matters of Faith and which touch the Conscience it is not enough to say Volumus Mandamus We Will and Command And thus the Apostles met together in simplicity and singlenesse seeking nothâ—…ng but God and the Salvation of men Anâ—… what wonder if the Holy Ghost were present in such a Councell Nos alitèr But we meet otherwise in great pompe and seeke our selves and promise our selves that we may doe any thing out of the Plenitude of our power And how can the Holy Ghost allow of such meetings And if not allow or approove the Meetings then certainly not concurre to make every thing Infallible that shall be concluded in them And for all the Places together waigh them with indifferency and either they speake of the Church including the Apostles as all of them doe And then All grant the Uoyce of the Church is Gods Voyce Divine and Infallible Or else they are Generall unlimited and applyable to private Assemblies as well as Generall Councels which none grant to be Infalliâ—…le but some mad Enthusiasts Orels they are limited not simply into All truth but All necessary to salvation in which I shall easily grant a Generall Councell cannot erre suffering it selfe to be led by this Spirit of Truth in the Scripture and not taking upon it to lead both the Scripture and the Spirit For Suppose these Places or any other did promise Assistance even to Infallibility yet they granted it not to every Generall Councell but to the Catholike Body of the Church it selfe and if it be in the whole Church principally then is it in a Generall Councell but by Consequent as the Councell represents the Whole And that which belongs to a thing by consequent doth not otherwise nor longer belong unto it then it consents and cleaves to that upon which it is a consequent And therefore a Generall Councell hath not this Assistance but as it keepes to the whole Church and Spouse of Christ whose it is to heare His word and determine by it And therefore if a Generall Councell wil go out of the Churches way it may easily goe without the Churches Truth Fourthly I Consider That All agree That the Consid. 4. Church in Generall can never erre from the Faith necessary to Salvation No Persecution no Temptation no †S. Mat. 16 18. Gates of Hell whatsoever is meant by them can ever so prevaile against it For all the Members of the Militant Church cannot erre either in the whole Faith or in any Article of it it is impossible For if all might so erre there could be no union betweene them as Members and Christ the Head And no Vnion betweene Head and Members no Body and so no Church which cannot be But there is not the like consent That * Ecclesia Vniversalis fideÌ„ habet indefectibilem c. Non quidem in Generali Synodo congregata quam aliquoties errâsse percepimus c. Wald. L. 2. Doct. Fid. Ar. 2. c. 19. §. 1. §. 38. N. 4. Generall Councels cannot erre And it seemes strange to me the Fathers having to doe with so many Hereticks and so many of them opposing Church Authority that in the condemnation of those Hereticks this Proposition even in termes A Generall Councell cannot erre should not be found in any one of them that I can yet see Now suppose it were true That no Generall Councell had erred in any matter of moment to this day which will not be found true yet this would not have followed that it is therefore infallible and cannot erre I have no time to descend into Particulars therefore to the Generall still S. Augustine a Aug. L. 2. de Bapt. contra Donat cap. 3. puts a Difference betweene the Rules of Scripture and the Definitions of men This Difference is Praeponitur Scriptura That the Scripture hath the Prerogative That Prerogative is That whatsoever is found written in Scripture may neither be doubted nor disputed whether it be true or right But the Letters of Bishops may not only be disputed but corrected by Bishops that are more learned and wise then they or by Nationall Councels and Nationall Councels by Plenary or Generall And even b Ipsaque Plenaria saepâ—… priora à posterioribus emendari Plenary Councels themselves may be amended the former by the later It seemes it was no newes with S. Augustine that a Generall Councell might erre and therefore inferiour to the Scripture which may neither be doubted nor disputed where it affirmes And if it be so with the Definition of a Councell too as Vox Ecclesia â—…Word est ut non de 〈◊〉 judicenius rectene an secùs docuerit So. Stap. Relect c. 4 q. 1. Aâ—… Stapleton would have it That that may neither be doubted nor disputed Where is then the Scriptures Prerogative I know there is much shifting about this Place but it cannot be wrastled off b De Regulis Morum Disciplinâ Relect. Con. 6. q. 3. A. 4. Stapleton sayes first That S. Augustine speaks of the Rules of Manners and Discipline And this is Bellarmines last shift Both are out and Bellarmine in a Contradiction Bellarmine in a Contradiction For first he tels us Generall Councels cannot erre in c L. 2. de Concil c. 2. Princip Precepts of Manners and then to turne off Saint Augustine in this Place hee tels us That if Saint Augustine doth not speake of matter of Fact but of Right and of universall Questions of Right then he is to be understood d Ib. cap. 7. §. Potest etiam of Precepts of Manners not of Points of Faith Where he hath first runne himselfe upon a Contradiction and then we have gained this ground upon him That either his Answer is nothing or els against his owne state of the Question A Generall Councell can erre in Precepts of Manners So belike when Bellarmine is at a shift A Generall Councell can and cannot erre in Precept of Manners And Both are out For the whole Dispute of Saint Augustine is against the Errour of Saint Cyprian followed by the Donatists which was an Errour in Faith Namely That true Baptisme could not be given by Hereticks and such as were out of the Church And the Proofe which Stapleton and Bellarmine draw out of the subsequent words e Quando aliquo rerum experimeÌ„to quod clausum erat aperitur VVhen by any experiment of things that which was shut is opened is too weake For
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
punished by the Church Bellarmine hath disputed this very learnedly and at large and I will not fill this Discourse with another mans labours The use I shall make of it runnes through all these Opinions and through all alike And truly the very Question it selfe supposes that A Pope may be an Heretick For if he cannot be an Heretick why doe they question whether he can be Deposed for being One And if he can be one then whether he can be deposed by the Church Before he be manifest or not till after or neither before nor after or which way they will it comes all to one for my purpose For I question not here his Deposition for his Heresie but his Heresie And I hope none of these Learned men nor any other dare deny but that if the Pope can be an Hereticke he can erre For every Heresie is an errour and more For 't is an Errour ofttimes against the Errants knowledge but ever with the pertinacie of his Will Therefore out of all even your owne Grounds If the Pope can be an Heretick he can erre grosly he can erre wilfully And he that can so Erre cannot bee Infallible in his Iudgement private or publike For if he can be an Hereticke he can and doubtlesse will Iudge for his Heresie if the Church let him alone And you your selves maintaine his Deposition lawfull to prevent this I verily believe a Pighius L. 4. Ecclesiastica Hierarchia c. 8. Alb. Pighius foresaw this blow And therefore he is of Opinion That the Pope cannot become an Hereticke at all And though b Communis Opinio est in contrarium Bellar L. 2. de Ro. Pont. c. 30. §. 2. Bellarmine favour him so farre as to say his Opinion is probable yet he is so honest as to adde that the common Opinion of Divines is against him Nay though c L. 4. de Ro. Pont. cap. 11. he Labour hard to excuse Pope Honorius the first from the Heresie of the Monothelites and sayes that Pope Adrian was deceived who thought him one yet d Tamen non possumus negare quin Adrianus cum Romano Concilio imò tota Synodus octava Generalis senserit in causâ Haresis posse Rom. Pontificem judicari Adde quod esset miserrima Conditio Ecclesia si Lupum manifestè grassantem pro Pastore agnoscere cogeretur Bellar L. 2. de Ro. Pont. c 30. §. 5. He confesses That Pope Adrian the second with the Councell then held at Rome and the eight Generall Synod did thinke that the Pope might be judged in the Cause of Heresie And that the condition of the Church were most miserable if it should be constrained to acknowledge a Wolfe manifestly raging for her Shepheard And here againe I have a Question to aske whether you believe the eight Generall Councell or not If you believe it then you see the Pope can erre and so He not Infallible If you believe it not then in your Iudgement that Generall Councell erres and so that not Infallible Thirdly It is altogether in vaine and to no use that the Pope should be Infallible and that according to your owne Principles Now God and Nature make nothing in vaine Therefore either the Pope is not Infallible or at least God never made him so That the Infallibility of the Pope had he any in him is altogether vaine and uselesse is manifest For if it be of any use 't is for the setling of Truth and Peace in the Church in all times of her Distraction But neither the Church nor any member of it can make any use of the Popes Infallibility that way Therefore it is of no use or benefit at all And this also is as manifest as the rest For before the Church or any particular man can make any use of this Infallibility to settle him and his Conscience hee must either Know or Believe that the Pope is Infallible But a man can neither Know nor Believe it And first for Beliefe For if the Church or any Christian man can believe it he must believe it either by Divine or by Humane Faith Divine Faith cannot be had of it For as is before prooved it hath no Ground in the written Word of God Nay to follow you closer it was never delivered by any Tradition of the Catholike Church And for Humane Faith no Rationall man can possibly believe having no Word of God to over-rule his Vnderstanding that he which is Fallible in the meanes as a Staple Relect. cont 4. q. 2. Notab 4. your selves confesse the Pope is can possibly be Infallible in the Conclusion And were it so that a Rationall man could have Humane Faith of this Infallibility yet that neither is nor ever can be sufficient to make the Pope Infallible No more then my strong Beliefe of another mans Honesty can make him an Honest man if he be not so Now secondly for Knowledge And that is altogether impossible too that either the Church or any Member of the Church should ever know that the Pope is Infallible And this I shall make evident also out of your owne Principles For your b Omnia Sacramenta tribus persiciuntur c. Decret Eugenii 4 in Concil Fleren Councell of Florence had told us That three things are necessary to every Sacrament the Matter the Forme of the Sacrament And the Intention of the Priest which Administers it that he intends to do as the Church doth Your c Con. Trid. Ses. 7. Can. 1. Councell of Trent confirmes it for the Intention of the Priest Vpon this Ground be it Rocke or Sand it is all one for you make it Rocke and build upon it I shall raise this Battery against the Popes Infallibility First the Pope if he have any Infallibility at all he hath it as he is Bishop of Rome and S. Peters Successor Bellaâ—… L 4. de Ro. Pent. c. 3. § 〈◊〉 Pâ—…vilegium est This is granted Secondly the Pope cannot be Bishop of Rome but he must be in holy Orders first And if any man be chosen that is not so the Election is void ipso facto propter errorem Personae for the Errour of the Person †Constantinus ex Laiâ—…o Papa circa Ann. 767. ejectus Papatu Et Steph 3. qui successit habito Concilio statuit ne quis nisi per Gradus Ecclesiasticos ascendens Pontifiâ—…atuÌ„ occupare auderet sub paenâ Anathematis Decret Dist. 79. c. Nullus This is also granted Thirdly He that is to be made Pope can never be in Holy Orders but by receiving them from One that hath Power to Ordaine This is notoriously knowne So is it also that with you Order is a Sacrament properly so called And if so then the Pope when he did receive the Order of Deacon or Priesthood at the hands of the Bishop did also receive a Sacrament Vpon these Grounds I raise my Argument thus Neither the Church nor any Member of the Church can know that
was necessary after Baptisme formally given by the Church So this Proposition In Point of Faith and Salvation it is safest for a man to take that way which the differing Parties agree in or which the Adversary Confesses is you see both true and false as men have cunning to apply it and as the matter is about which it is Conversant And is therefore no Proposition able or fit to settle a Conclusion in any sober mans minde till the Matter contained under it bee well scanned and examined And yet as much use as you would make of this Proposition to amaze the weake your selves dare not stand to it no not where the matter is undenyably true as shall appeare in divers Particulars beside this of the Eucharist But before I adde any other particular Instances I must tell you what A. C. sayes to the two A. C. p. 65. former For he tels us These two are nothing like the present case Nothing That is strange indeed Why in the first of those Cases concerning the Donatists your Proposition is false And so farre from being safest that it was no way safe for a man to take that way of Beliefe and so of Salvation which both parts agreed on And is this nothing Nay is not this full and home to the present case For the present case is this and no more That it is safest taking that way of Beliefe which the differing Parties agree on or which the Adversary Confesses And in the second of those Cases concerning the Eucharist your Proposition indeed is true not by the Truth which it hath in it selfe Metaphysically and in Abstract but only in regard of the matter to which it is applyed yet there you desert your owne Proposition where it is true And is this nothing Nay is not this also full and home to the present case since it appeares your Proposition is such as your selves dare not bide by either when it is true or when it is false For in the Case of Baptisme administred by the Donatist the Proposition is false and you dare not bide by it for Truths sake And in the case of the Eucharist the Proposition is true and yet you dare not bide by it for the Church of Romes sake So that Church with you cannot erre and yet will not suffer you to maintaine Truth which not to doe is some degree of Errour and that no small one Well A. C. goes on and gives his Reasons why these two Instances are nothing like the present Case A. C. p. 65. For in these Cases saith hee there are annexed other Reasons of certainly knowne perill of damnable Schisme and Heresie which wee should incurre by consenting to the Donatists denyall of true Baptisme among Catholikes and to the Protestants denyall or doubting of the true substantiall Presence of Christ in the Eucharist But in this Case of Resolving to live and dye in the Catholike Romane Church there is confessedly no such perill of any damnable Heresie or Schisme or any other sinne Here I have many Particulars to observe upon A. C. and you shall have them as briefly as I can set them downe And first I take A. C. at his word that in Punct 1. the case of the Donatist should it bee followed there would bee knowne perill of damnable Schisme and Heresie by denying true Baptisme to be in the Orthodoxe Church For by this you may see what a sound proposition this is That where two Parties are dissenting it is safest believing that in which both Parties agree or which the Adversary confesses for here you may see by the case of the Donatist is confessed it may leade a man that will universally leane to it into knowne and damnable Schisme and Heresie An excellent Guide I promise you this is it not Nor secondly are these though A. C. calles them Punct 2. A. C. p. 65. so annexed Reasons For hee calls them so but to blaunch the matter as if they fell upon the proposition ab extra accidentally and from without Whereas they are not annexed or pinned on but flow naturally out of the Proposition it selfe For the Proposition would seeme to be Metaphysicall and is applyable indifferently to any Common Beliefe of dissenting Parties be the point in difference what it will Therfore if there be any thing Hereticall Schismaticall or any way evill in the Point this proposition being neither Vniversally nor necessarily true must needes cast him that relyes upon it upon all these Rocks of Heresie Schisme or what ever else followes the matter of the Proposition Thirdly A. C. doth extremely ill to joyne these Cases of the Donatists for Baptisme and the Protestant for Punct 3. A. C. p. 66. the Eucharist together as he doth For this Proposition in the first concerning the Donatists leades a man as is confessed by himselfe into knowne and damnable Schisme and Heresie but by A. C s. good leave the later concerning the Protestants and the Eucharist nothing so For I hope A. C. dare not say That to believe the true * Caterùm his absurditatibus sublatis quicquid ad Exprimendam veram substantialemque Corporis ac sanguinis Domini Communicationem qua sub sacris Coenae symbolis fidelibus exhibetur facere potest libeuter recipio Calvin L 4. Inst. c. 17. §. 19. In Coenae mysterio per symbola Panis Vini Christus verè nobis exhibetur c. Et nos participes substantiae ejus facti sumus Ibid. §. 11. substantiall Presence of Christ is either knowne or damnable Schisme or Heresie Now as many and as Learned †§. 35. N 3. Protestants believe and maintaine this as doe believe possibility of Salvation as before is limited in the Romane Church Therefore they in that not guilty of either knowne or damnable Schisme or Heresie though the Donatists were of both Fourthly whereas he imposes upon the Protestants The denyall or doubting of the true and Reall Presence of Punct 4. A. C. p. 66. Christ in the Eucharist he is a great deale more bold then true in that also For understand them right and they certainly neither deny nor doubt it For as for the Lutheran as they are commonly called their very Opinion of Consubstantiation makes it knowne to the world that they neither deny nor doubt of his true and Reall Presence there And they are Protestants And for the Calvinists if they might bee rightly understood they also maintaine a most true and Reall Presence though they cannot permit their judgement to be Transubstantiated And they are Protestants too And this is so knowne a Truth that a Bellarm. L. 1 de Euchar. c 2. §. Quinto dicit Sacrameâ—… saepe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 de Corpus Christian Coenâ—… adesse sea 〈◊〉 adesse nunquam 〈◊〉 quod legerim nifi forte loquuntur de Coenâ quae fit in Calo c. And that he meanes to brand Protestants under the name of Sacramentarii is plaine For he sayes the Councell of
Trent opposed this word realiter Figmento Calvinistico to the Calvinisticâ—…ll figment Ibid. Bellarmine confesses it For hee saith Protestants do often grant that the true and reall Body of Christ is in the Eucharist But he adds That they never say so farre as he hath read That it is there â—…ruly and Really unlesse they speake of the Supper which shall be in Heaven Well first if they grant that the true and Reall Body of Christ is in that Blessed Sacrament as Bellarmine confesses they doe and 't is most true then A. C. is false who charges all the Protestants with deniall or doubtfulnesse in this Point And A. C. p 65. secondly Bellarmine himselfe also shewes here his Ignorance or his Malice Ignorance if he knew it not Malice if he would not know it For the Calvinists at least they which follow Calvine himself do not onely believe that the true and reall Body of Christ is received in the Eucharist but that it is there and that we partake of it verè realiter which are b Calv. in 1. Cor. 10. 3. verè c. in 1. Cor. 11. 24. realiter Vids suprà Num. 3. Calvine's owne words and yet Bellarmine boldly affirmes that to his reading no one Protestant did ever affirme it And I for my part cannot believe but Bellarmine had read Calvine and very carefully he doth so frequently and so mainly Oppose him Nor can that Place by any Art be shifted or by any Violence wrested from Calvine's true meaning of the Presence of Christ in and at the blessed Sacrament of the Fucharist to any Supper in Heaven whatsoever But most manifest it is that Quod legerim for ought I have read will not serve Bellarmine to Excuse him For he himselfe but in the very c Bellar. L. 1. de Eucharistia c. 1. §. Secundo docet Chapter going before quotes foure Places out of Calvine in which he sayes expresly That we receive in the Sacrament the Body and the Blood of Christ Verè truly So Calvine sayes it foure times and Bellarmine quotes the places and yet he sayes in the very next Chapter That never any Protestant said so to his Reading And for the Church of England nothing is more plaine then that it believes and teaches the true and reall Presence of Christ in the * The Body of Christ is given taken and eaten in the Supper of the Lord onely after an Heavenly and Spirituall manner And the meanes whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten is Faith Eccl. Ang. Art 28. So here 's the Manner of Transubstantiation denied but the Body of Christ twice affirmed And in the prayer before Consecration thus Grant us Gracious Lord so to eat the Flesh of thy deare Sonne Jesus Christ and to drinke his Blood c. And againe in the second Prayer or Thanksgiving after Consecration thus We give thee Thanks for that thou dost vouchsafe to feed us which have duly received these holy Mysteries with the spirituall food of the most precious Body and Blood of thy Sonne our Saviour Jesus Christ c. Eucharist unlesse A. C. can make a Body no Body and Blood no Blood as perhaps he can by Transubstantiation as well as Bread no Bread Wine no Wine And the Church of England is Protestant too So Protestants of all sorts maintain a true and reall Presence of Christ in the Eucharist and then where 's any known or damnable Heresie here As for the Learned of those zealous men that died in this Cause in Q. Maries dayes they denied not the Reall Presence simply taken but as their Opposites forced Transubstantiation upon them as if that and the Reall Presence had beene all one Whereas all the Ancient Christians ever believed the one and none but moderne and superstitious Christians believe the other If they do believe it for I for my part doubt they do not And as for the Vnlearned in those times and all times their zeale they holding the Foundation may eat out their Ignorances and leave them safe Now that the Learned Protestants in Q. Maries dayes did not denie nay did maintaine the Reall Presence will manifestly appeare For when the Commissioners obtruded to Io. Frith the Presence of Christ's naturall Body in the Sacrament and that without all figure or similitude Io. Frith acknowledges †Io. Fox Marâ—…rolog To. 2. London 1597. pag. 943. That the inward man doth as verily receive Christ's Body as the outward man receives the Sacrament with his Mouth And he addes a Fox ibid. That neither side ought to make it a necessary Article of Faith but leave it indifferent Nay Archbishop Cranmer comes more plainely and more home to it then Frith For if you understand saith b Cranmer apud Fox ibid. p. 1301. he by this word Really Reipsâ that is in very deed and effectually so Christ by the Grace and efficacy of his Passion is indeed and truly present c. But if by this word Really you understand c I say Corporalitèr Corporally for so Bellarmine hath it expresly Quod autem Corporalitèr propriè sumatur Sanguis Caro c. probari potest omnibus Argumentis c. Bellar. L. 1. de Eucharist c. 12. §. Sed tota And I must bee bold to tell you more then That this is the Doctrine of the Church of Rome For I must tell you too that Bellarmine here contradicts himselfe For he that tels us here that it can be proved by many Arguments that we receive the Flesh and the Blood of Christ in the Eucharist Corporaliter said as expresly before had he remembred it that though Christ be in this Blessed Sacrament verè realiter yet saith he non dicemus Corporaliter i. e. co modo quo suâ naturâ existunt Corpora c. Bellar. L. 1. de Euchar. c. 2. §. Tertia Regula So Bellarm. here is in a notorious Contradiction Or els it will follow plainly out of him That Christ in the Sacrament is existent one way and received another which is a grosse absurdity And that Corporaliter was the Doctrine of the Church of Rome and meant by Transubstantiation is farther plaine in the Booke called The Institution of a Christian man set forth by the Bishops in Convocation in Hen. 8. time An 1534 Cap. Of the Sacrament of the Altar The words 〈◊〉 Unaâ—…r the forme and figure of Bread and Wine the very Body and Blood of Christ is Corporally really c. exhibited and received c. And Aquinas expresses it thus Quia tamen substantia Corporis Christi realiter non dâ—…iditur à sua quantitate dimensivâ ab aliis 〈◊〉 â—…bus indè est quod ex virealis Concomitantiae est in hoc Sacramento tota quantitas dimensiva Corporis Christi omnia Accidentia ejus Tho. p. 3. q. 76. Ar. 4. c. Corporaliter Corporally in his naturall and Organicall Body under the Formes of Bread and Wine 't
worke for my pen it seemes A. C. will not say 't is a worke b And yet before in this Conference apud A. C. pag. 42. the Iesuitè whom he defends hath said it expresly That all those points are Fundamentall which are necessary to salvation for his But he tels us * A. C. p. 72. 'T is to be learned of the One Holy Catholike Apostolike alwaies Visible and Infallible Romane Church Titles enough given to the Romane Church and I wish she deserved them all for then we should have peace But 't is farre otherwise One she is as a particular Church but not The One. Holy she would be counted but the world may see if it will not blinde it self of what value Holinesse is in that Court and Countrey Catholike she is not in any sense of the word for she is not the c Romana Ecclesia particularis Bellar. L. 4. de Ro. Pout c. 4. §. 1. Catholica autem est illae quae diffusa est per universum Orbem S. Cyril Hieroâ—…ol Cetech 18. Universall and so not Catholike in extent Nor is shee sound in Doctrine and in things which come neare upon the Foundation too so not a Catholica enim dicitur Ecclesia illa quae universalitèr docet sine ullo dâ—…ctu vel differentia dogmatum S. Cyril Hierolol Catech 18. Unde Augustinus subscripsit se Episcopum Catholicae Ecclesiae Hipponiregicusis L. 1. de Act is cum Foelice Maniâ—…h c. 20. Ft l 2. c. 1. Et Catholica Alexandrinorum Soz. l. 1. Htst. c. 9. Et l 2. c. 3. And so every particular Church is or may be called Catholike and that truly so long as it teaches Catholike Doctrine In which sense the Particular Romane Church was called Catholike so long as it taught all and onely those things to be De Fide which the Catholike Church it selfe maintain'd But now Rome doth not so Catholike in Beliese Nor is she the Prime Mother Church of Christianity b Supra §. 35. Nu 9. Other Churches beside the Romane are called Matres and Originales Ecelesiae as in Tertul. de praescrip advers hares c. 21. Et Ecclesiae Hiâ—…rosolymitana quae aliarum omnium Mater 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Theodoret. L. 5 Hist. Eccl. c. 9. ex Lâ—…bello Synodico à Concil Constantinop 2. transmisse ad Concilium sub Damaso tum Romae coactum Et Constantinopolitana Ecclesiae dicitur omnium aliarum Capus Cod. L 1. Tit. 2. Leg. 24. That is not simply of all Churches but of all in that Patriarchate And so Rome is the Head of all in the Romane Patriarchate Ierusalem was that and so not Catholike as a Fountaine or Originall or as the Head or Root of the Catholike And because many Romanists Object here though A. C. doth it not that S. Cyprian called the c 〈◊〉 Ecclesiae Catholike 〈◊〉 Matricem agnâ—…rent tencrent S. Cyp. L. 4. Epist. 8. Romane Church the Root and Matrix of the Catholike Church of Christ I hope I shall have leave to explaine that difficult place also First then S. Cyprian names not Rome That stands onely in the Margiu and was placed there as his particular judgement led d Edit Basiliens 1530. And Simanca also applies this speech of S. Cyprian to Rome ' Tis. 24. §. 17. And to also Pâ—…lius upon this place of S 〈◊〉 But they wrong him him that set out S. Cyprian Secondly the true story of that Epistle and that which led S. Cyprian into this Expression was this Cornelius then chosen Pope expostulates with S. Cyprian That his Letters to Rome were directed onely to the Clergy there and not to Him and takes it ill as if S. Cyprian had thereby seemed to disapprove his Election S. Cyprian replies That by reason of the Schisme moov'd then by Novatian it was uncertaine in Africk which of the Two had the more Canonicall right to the Sea of Rome and that therfore he nam'd him not But yet that during this uncertainty he exhorted all that sailed thither ut Ecclesiae Catholicae Radicem Matricem agnoscerent tenerent That in all their carriage they should acknowledge and so hold themselves unto the Vnity of the Catholike Church which is the Root and Matrix of it and the only way to avoid participation in the Schisme And that this must be S. Cyprian's meaning I shall thus proove First because This could not be his meaning or Intention That the Sea of Rome was the Root or Matrix of the Catholike Church For if hee had told them so hee had left them in as great or greater difficulty then hee found them For there was then an Open and an Apparent Schisme in the Church of Rome Two Bishops Cornelius and Novatian Two Congregations which respectively attended and observed them So that a perplexed Question must needs have divided their thoughts which of these Two had beene that Root and Matrix of the Catholike Church Therefore had S. Cyprian meant to pronounce Rome the Root and Matrix of the Catholike Church hee would never have done it at such a time when Rome it selfe was in Schisme Whereas in the other sense the Counsell is good and plaine Namely That they should hold themselves to the Vnity and Communion of the Catholike Church which is the Roote of it And then necessarily they were to suspend their Communion there till they saw how the Catholike Church did incline to approove or disapproove the Election of the One or the Other And thus S. Cyprian frees himselfe to Cornelius from the very least Touch of Schisme Secondly Because this sense comes home to * Baron Annal. 254. Numb 64. where hee cites this Epistle Baronius For hee affirmes That S. Cyprian and his Colleagues the African Bishops did Communionem suspendere suspend their Communion untill they heard by Caldonius and Fortunatus whose the undoubted right was So it seems S. Cyprian gave that Counsell to these Travellers which himselfe followed For if Rome during the Schisme and in so great uncertainty had yet beene Radix Ecclesiae Catholicae Root of the Catholike Church of Christ I would faine know how S. Cyprian so great and famous an Assertor of the Churches Unity durst once so much as thinke of suspending Communion with her Thirdly Because this sense will be plaine also by other Passages out of other Epistles of S. Cyprian For writing to Iubaianus an Africane Bishop against the Novatians who then infested those parts and durst Rebaptise Catholike Christians he saith thus †Nos autem qui Ecclesiae Unius Caput Radâ—…cem tenemus pro certo scimus credimus nihil extra Ecclesiam licere Baptismatis quod est unum Caput nos esse ubi ipse Baptizatus priùs fuerat quando Divinae Vnitatis Rationem veritateÌ„ tâ—…bat S. Cypr. ad Iubain Epist. 73. Edit Pamel But we who hold the head and Root of One Church doe know for
certaine and believe that nothing of this is lawfull out of the Catholike Church And that of Baptisme which is but One we are the Head where he himselfe was at first Baptized when hee held the Ground and Verity of Divine Vnity Now I conceive 't is all one or at least as Argumentative to all purposes to be Caput or Radix Baptismatis Head or Root of Baptisme as Head or Root of the Church For there 's but One Baptisme as well as but One Church and that is the entrance into this And S. Cyprian affirmes and includes himselfe Nos esse Caput that we are the Head of Baptisme Where yet I pray observe it he cannot by Nos We meane his own Person though if he did he were the more Opposite to Rome much lesse can he meane the Romane Church as it is a Particular and stands separate from others For then how could he say Nos esse Caput that we are the Head Therefore he must needs meane the Vnity and Society of the Church Catholike which the Novatians had then left and wherof he and his Church were still members Besides most manifest it is that he cals that Church Caput Baptismatis the Head of Baptisme where Novatian was Baptized they are his own words and probable it is that was Rome Because that Schismatick was a Romane Priest And yet for all this S. Cyprian sayes Nos esse Caput Baptismatis that we are the Head of Baptisme though he were at Carthage By which it is plain That as Caput is paralell to Radix and Matrix So also that by Caput the head of Baptisme he includes together with Rome all the other members of the Church Vniversall Again S. * Elaborarent ut ad Catholica Ecclesiae unit ateÌ„ scissi corpores membra componerent Christianae Charitatis vinculuÌ„ copularent Sed quoniam diversae partis obstinata inflexibilis pertina iâ—… non tantum radicis Matris sinum atque complexum recusavit sed etiam gliscente in pejus recrudescente discordiâ Episcopum sibi constituit c. S. Cyprian L. 2. Epist. 10. Cyprian writes to Cornelius and censures the schismaticall Cariage of the Novatians at Rome And tels him farther that he had sent Caldonius and Fortunatus to labour Peace in that Church that so they might be reduced to and composed in the Vnity of the Catholike Church But because the Obstinate and inflexible pertinacy of the other Party had not only refused Radicis Matris sinum the bosome of their Mother and embracings of their Root but the Schisme increasing and growing raw to the worse hath set up a Bishop to it selfe c. Where 't is observable and I think plaine That S. Cyprian imployed his Legats not to bring the Catholike Church to the communion of Rome but Rome to the Catholike Church Or to bring the Novatians not only to Communicate with Cornelius but with the Church Vniversall which was therefore Head and Root in S. Cyprian's judgement even to Rome it self as well as to all other Great Ancient or even Apostolicall Churches And this is yet more plaine by the sequell For when those his Legats had laboured to bring those Schismaticks to the Vnity of the Catholike Church yet he complaines their Labour was lost And why Why because recusabant Radicis Matris sinum they refused the Bosome of the Root and the Mother Therefore it must needs be that in S. Cyprian's sense these two Vnitas Catholicae Ecclesiae the unity of the Catholike Church And Radicis or Matricis Sinus or Complexus the Bosome or Embracing of the Root or the Mother are all one And then Radix and Matrix are not words by which he Expresses the Romane Sea in particular but he denotes by them the Unity of the Church Catholike Fourthly Because * Tâ—… at tanta Ecclesia Vna est illa ab Apostolis prima ex quà Omnes Sic omnes 〈◊〉 omnes Apostolica dumunam omnes probant Vnitatem Tert de praes advers 〈◊〉 c. 20. Porro Vnam esse primam Apostolicam ex quâ reliquae Hanc nulli let a assigit B. Rhenanus Annot. in Argumento Tertul de praescript c. Nulli loco Therefore not at Rome But these words Hanc nulli loco assigit deleantur sayes the Spanish Inquisition upon Rhenanus printed at Madrid An 1584. Tertullian seemes to mee to agree in the same sense For saith he these so many and great Churches founded by the Apostles taken all of them together are that One Church from the Apostles out of which are All. So all are First and all Apostolike while they all allow and prove Vnam Vnitatem One Vnity Nor can any possibly understand this of any Particular Church but subordinately As S. Gregory Nazian sayes the Church of Caesarea was a Gregory Naz. sâ—… the Church of Casaria was Mater prope omniâ—… Ecclesiarum Epist. 18. Mater the Mother of almost all Churches which must needs be understood of some Neighbouring Churches not of the whole Catholike Church And where b Pamel in Tertul de praescript advers Haeres c. 21. Nu. 129. Pamelius speakes of Originall and Mother Churches he names six and others and Rome in the last place Therfore certainly no Particular Church can bee the Root or Matrix of the Catholike But she is rooted in her own Vnity downe from the Apostles and no where els extra Deum And this is farther manifest by the Irreligious act of the Emperor Adrian For he intending to root out the faith of Christ took this course Hee Consecrated Simulacrum Iovis the Image of Iupiter in the very place where Christ suffer'd and prophaned Bethlehem with the Temple of Adonis c Vi quasi Radix FundamentuÌ„ Ecclesiae tolleretur si in iis locis Iaâ—…la colerentur in quibus Christus natus est c. S. Paulinus Epist. 〈◊〉 ad Seâ—…um To this end that the Root as it were and the foundation of the Church might be taken away if in those places Idols might bee worshiped in which Christ himself was born and suffered c. By which it is most evident That either Ierusalem was the Root of the Catholike Church if any Particular Church were so Or rather that Adrian was deceived as being an Heathen he well might in that he thought the Vniversall Church had any particular or Locall Root of its Being Or that he could destroy it all by laying it wast in any one place whatsoever And S. Augustine I think is full for this That the Catholike Church must have a Catholike Root or Matrix too For * Hareses omnes de illà 〈◊〉 tanquam 〈◊〉 tainutilia de Vite praeâ—… 〈◊〉 autem maner 〈◊〉 Radice suâ c. S. Aug. de lymb ad Catechumer L. 1. c. 6. he tels us That all Heresies whatsoever went out de illâ out of the Catholike Church For de illâ there can be out of no other For all Heresies
how farre every man must believe as it relates to the possibility or impossibility of his salvation in every particular And that which the Church cannot teach men cannot learne of her She can teach the Foundation and men were happy if they would learne it and the Church more happy would she teach nothing but that as necessary to Salvation for certainly nothing but that is Necessary Now then whereas after all this the Iesuite tels us that F. Upon this and the precedent Conferences the Lady rested in judgement fully satisfied as she told a confident Friend of the Truth of the Romane Churches faith Yet upon frailty and feare to offend the King she yeelded to goe to Church for which she was after very sorry as soâ—… of her friends can testifie B. This is all personall And how that Honourable § 39 Lady was then setled in Conscience how in Iudgement I know not This I think is made cleare enough That that which you said in this and the precedent Conferences could settle neither unlesse in some that were setled or setling before As little do I know what she told any confident friend of her approoving the Roman cause No more whether it were frailty or feare or other Motive that made her yeeld to go to Church nor how sorry shee was for it nor who can testifie that sorrow This I am sure of if shee repent and God forgive her other sinnes she will more easily be able to Answer for her comming to Church then for her leaving of the Church of England and following the superstitions and errours which the Romane Church hath added in Point of Faith and the Worship of God For the Lady was then living when I answered thus Now whereas I said the Lady would farre more easily be able to answer for her comming to Church A. C. p. 73. then for her leaving the Church of England To this A. C. excepts and sayes That I neither prove nor can prove that it is lawfull for one perswaded especially as the Lady was to goe to the Protestant Church There 's a great deale of cunning and as much malice in this passage but I shall easily pluck the sting out of the Tayle of this Waspe And first I have proved it already through this whole Discourse and therefore can prove it That the Church of England is an Orthodoxe Church And therefore with the same labour it is proved that men may lawfully goe unto it and communicate with it for so a man not onely may but ought to doe with an Orthodoxe Church And a Romanist may communicate with the Church of England without any Offence in the Nature of the thing thereby incurred But if his Conscience through mis-information checke at it he should do well in that Case rather to informe his Conscience then for sake any Orthodoxe Church whatsoever Secondly A. C. tels me plainly That I cannot prove that a man so perswaded as the Lady was may goe to the Protestant Church that is That a Romane Catholike may not goe to the Protestant Church Why I never went about to proove that a Romane Catholike beiug and continuing such might against his Conscience goe to the Protestant Church For these words A man perswaded as the Lady is are A. C s. words they are not mine Mine are not simply that the Lady might or that she might not but Comparative they are That she might more easily answer to God for comming to then for going from the Church of England And that is every way most true For in this doubtfull time of hers when upon my Reasons given shee went againe to Church when yet soone after as you say at least shee was sorrie for it I say at this time she was in heart and resolution a Romane Catholike or she was not If she were not as it seemes by her doubting shee was not then fully resolved then my speech is most true that she might more easily answer God for comming to Service in the Church of England then for leaving it For a Protestant shee had beene and for ought I knew at the end of this Conference so she was and then 't was no sin in it selfe to come to an Orthodoxe Church nor no sinne against her Conscience she continuing a Protestant for ought which then appeared to mee But if she then were a Romane Catholike as the Jesuite and A. C. seeme confident she was yet my speech is true too For then she might more easily answer God for comming to the Church of England which is Orthodoxe and leaving the Church of Rome which is superstitious then by leaving the Church of England communicate with all the superstitions of Rome Now the cunning and the malignity of A. C. lies in this he would faine have the world think that I am so Indifferent in Religion as that I did maintaine the Lady being conscientiously perswaded of the Truth of the Romish Doctrine might yet against both her conscience and against open and avowed profession come to the Protestant Church Neverthelesse in hope his cunning malice would not be discovered against this his owne sense that is and not mine he brings diverse Reasons As first 't is not lawfull for one affected as that Lady was that is for one that is resolved of the Truth of the Romane Church to goe to the Church of England there and in that manner to serve and worship God Because saith A. C. that were to halt on both sides to serve two Masters and to dissemble with God and the world Truly I say the A. C. p. 73. same thing with him And that therefore neither may a Protestant that is resolved in Conscience that the profession of the true Faith is in the Church of England goe to the Romish Church there and in that manner to serve and worship God Neither need I give other Answer because A. C. urges this against his owne fiction not my assertion Yet since he will so doe I shall give a particular Answer to each of them And to this first Reason of his I say thus That to Believe Religion after one sort and to practise it after another and that in the maine points of worship the Sacrament and Invocation is to halt on both sides to serve two Masters and to dissemble with God and the world And other then this I never taught nor ever said that which might inferre the Contrary But A. C. give me leave to tell you your fellow Iesuite * Quintò quaeritur An ubi Catholici unà cum Haereticis versantur licitum sit Catholico adiâ—… Templa ad quae Haeretici conveniunt eorum interesse Conventibus c. Respondeo Sirei Naturam spectemus non est per se malum sed suà naturâ indifferens c. Ec postea Si Princeps haeresi laboret jubeat subditos Catholicos sub poena Mortis vel Confiscationis bonorum frequentare templa Haereticoâ—… quid tum faciendum Respondeo si jubeat
Errour and Superstition which sutes not with my own fancy But how can this possibly be since I submit my judgement in all humility to the Scripture interpreted by the Primitive Church and upon new and necessary doubts to the judgement of a lawfull and free Generall Councell And this I do from my very heart and do abhorre in matters of Religion that my own or any private mans fancy should take any place and least of all against things generally held or practised by the Vniversall Church which to oppose in such things is certainly as d S. Aug. Epist. â—…8 〈◊〉 5. S. Augustine cals it Insolentissimae insaniae an Attempt of most insolent madnesse But those things which the Church of England charges upon the Romane Party to be superstitious and erroneous are not held or practised in or by the universall Church generally either for time or place And now I would have A. C. consider how justly all this may be turned upon himselfe For he hath nothing to pretend that there are not grosse Superstitions and Errours in the Romane Perswasion unlesse by intolerable pride he will make himselfe and his Party Iudge of Controversies as in effect he doth for he will be judged by none but the Pope and a Councell of his ordering or unlesse he will take Authority to free from Superstition and Errour whatsoever sutes with his fancy though it be even Superstition it selfe and run crosse to what hath been generally held in the Catholike Church of Christ Yea though to do so be in S. Augustine's judgement most insolent madnesse And A. C. spake in this most properly when he called it taking of Authority For the Bishop and Church of Rome have in this particular of judging Controversies indeed taken that Authority to themselves which neither Christ nor his Church Catholike did ever give them Here the Conference ended with this Conclusion And as I hope God hath given that Lady mercy so I heartily pray that he will be pleased to give all of you a Light of his Truth and a Love to it that you may no longer be made Instruments of the Pope's boundlesse Ambition and this most unchristian * §. 33. Nu 6. braine-sick device That in all Controversies of the Faith he is Infallible and that by way of Inspiration and Prophecie in the Conclusion which he gives To the due Consideration of which and God's mercy in Christ I leave you To this Conclusion of the Conference between me and the Iesuite A. C. sayes not much But that which he doth say is either the selfe same which he hath said already or els is quite mistaken in the businesse That which he hath said already is this That in matters A. C. p. 73. of Faith we are to submit our judgements to such Doctors and Pastors as by Visible Continuall Succession without change brought the Faith downe from Christ and his Apostles to these our dayes and shall so carrie it to the end of the world And that this Succession is not found in any other Church differing in Doctrine from the Romane Church Now to this I have given a full Answer a §. 57. Nu. 3 4. already and therefore will not trouble the Reader with needlesse and troublesome repetition Then he brings certaine places of Scripture to prove the Pope's Infallibility But to all these places I have likewise answered b §. 25. Nu. 5. before And therefore A. C. needed not to repeat them againe as if they had been unanswerable One Place of Scripture onely A. C. had not urged before either for proofe of this Continued Visible Succession or for the Pope's Infallibility Nor doth A. C. distinctly A. C. p. 73. set down by which of the two hee will prove it The Place is c Epheâ—… 4. 11. Ephes. 4. Christ ascending gave some to be Apostles some Prophets some Euangelists some Pastors and Teachers c. for the edification of the Church Now if he do mean to prove the Pope's Infallibility by this place in his Pastorall Iudgement Truly I doe not see how this can possibly be Collected thence d Pontificatus Summus disertè positus est ab Apostolo in illis verbis Eph. 4. 11. in illis clarioribus 1. Cor. 12. 28. Ipse posuit in Ecclesia primùm Apostolos c. Bellar. L. 1. de Ro. Pont. c. 1. §. Respondeo Pontificatum And he gives an excellent reason for it Siquidem summa potestas Ecclesiastica non solùm data est Petro sedetiam aliis Apostolis Ibid. So belike by this Reason the Apostle doth clearely expresse the Popedome because all the rest of the Apostles had as much Ecclesiasticall Power as S. Peter had But then Bellarmine would salve it up with this That this Power is given Petro ut Ordinarie Pastori cui succederetur aliis verò tanquam Delegatis quibus non succederetur Ibid. but this is meere Begging of the Question and will never be granted unto him And in the meane time we have his absolute Confession for the other That the Supreme Ecclesiasticall Power was not in S. Peter alone but in all the Apostles Christ gave some to be Apostles for the Edification of his Church Therefore S. Peter and all his Successours are infallible in their Pastorall Iudgment And if he meane to prove the Continued Visible Succession which he saith is to he found in no Church but the Romane there 's a little more shew but to no more purpose A little more shew Because it is added †Eph. 4. 13. verse 13. That the Apostles and Prophets c. shall continue at their worke and that must needs be by succession till we all meet in Vnity and perfection of Christ. But to no more purpose For t is not said that they or their Successors should Continue at this their worke in a Personall uninterrupted Succession in any one Particular Church Romane or other Nor ever will A. C. bee able to proove that such a Succession is necessary in any one particular place And if he could yet his owne words tell us the Personall Succession is nothing if the Faith be not brought downe without change from Christ and his Apostles to this day and so to the end of the world Now here 's a peece of cunning too The Faith A. C. p. 73. brought down unchanged For if A. C. meane by the Faith the Creed and that in Letter 't is true the Church of Rome hath received and brought downe the Faith unchanged from Christ and his Apostles to these our dayes But then t is apparently false That no Church differing from the Romane in Doctrine hath kept that Faith unchanged and that by a visible and continued Succession For the Greek Church differs from the Romane in Doctrine and yet hath so kept that Faith unchanged But if he meane by the Faith unchanged and yet brought down in a continuall visible Succession not only the Creed in Letter but in Sense
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
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