this charge doth not so much as imply the appointing of an office because feeding is many times enioyned where there is no singular office ordained but the executing of an office commanded which had before been appointed So the Apostle Peter 1. Peter 5. 2. chargeth th 〈…〉 were already 1 Pet. 5. 2. Ministers to feed the flicke of God And the Apostle Paul Acts 20. 28. giues the like charge to the Elders or Ministers of Act. 10. 28. Ephesus Take heed to your selues and to all the flocke to feed the Church of God And this Dr. Reynolds well obserued Dr. Reynolds against â—art Chap. 3. diuis 2. and vrged against Hart You say true wee might therefore with good reason refuse this proposition till it be proued But I will deale more kindly with Bellarmine and shew that Luther truely affirmed there was no new office erected by those words but the execution of one formerly appointed enioyned If this feeding be the teaching for which all the Apostles had commission Mark 16 15. Goe ye into all the world and Mark 16. 15. preach the Gospell to euery creature Iohn 20. 23. Whose sinnes soeuer ye remit they are remitted to them then is it not the erecting of a new office for this was at our Sauiours third appearing to his Disciples Iohn 20. 13. that at his first Ioh. 20. Ioh. 20. 19. Bellarm. de pont Rom. lib. 1. cap. 12. Sect. Dices c. 19. 20. when as Bellarmine affirmeth they had power giuen them both of iudisdiction to gouerne and of order to execute their sacrificing Priesthood And it had beene a thing not beseeming our Sauiours wisdome to giue a new Commission when there was no need nor occasion of so doing Yea to say the truth it had beene altogether in vaine because the former being as sufficient and in force there could be no place for this later But this feeding Ioh. 21. 15. is the teaching for which they had commission Mark. 16. 15. Ioh. 20. 23. For wee finde no other kinde of feeding but this one practised by the Apostles in the new Testament namely feeding by way of reuealing This appeareth touching the Scriptures Bellarm. de Coâ—cil authorit lib 2. cap. 12. Sect. Obseruandum c. and Sect. Diâ—untur Counc Trent Sess 4 decretde Canon scripturatum 2. Tim. 4. 15. The Scriptures were giuen by inspiration 2. Pet. 1. 21. Holy men of God spake as they were moued by the holy Ghost as Bellarmine also confesseth The Scripture is the word of God immediatly reuealed The holy writers had immediate reuelation and writ the words of God As for traditions which the church of Rome makes a second part of the diuine testimony or word of God by their owne confession they are also by reuelation for so saith the Councell of Trent Traditions were either receiued by the Apostles from the mouth of our Sauiour or deliuered by themselues the holy Ghost enditing them Indeed this feeding Ioh. 21. 15. is nothing else but an exhortation or charge for the performance of that duty which was enioyned in that Commission Mark 16. 15. That it was such an exhortation the manner of deliuering the words sheweth which is by repeating the same thing three seuerall times For this course is very fit to make an impression of a duty commanded no way beseeming the giuing of a Commission Besides it answereth to Peters denying of his Master thrice as Cyril noteth in Ioh. Because Cyril supra Ioh. lib. 12. cap. 64. he denied him thrice at his passion therefore there is a threefold confession of loue required of him A threefold confession saith S. Austin answereth to a threefold negation that the tongue may Aug. Tract in Ioh. 123. expresse as much loue as it did feare Adde hereunto that our Lord calls for the performance of this duty as a proofe of Peters loue to him wherein hee had failed more then the rest because he had made more protestation of it then the rest For thus lies the reason If thou loue me as thou hast professed thou doest shew thy loue by the performing of the duty of feeding But what proofe had it beene of Peters loue to our Sauiour to become the visible Monarch of the whole Church Well might the giuing of such an office argue our Sauiours loue to Peter but the taking it vpon him could not testifie any great loue of his to our Sauiour For who would haue refused such an offer The burthen of teaching was laid vpon the other Apostles as well as vpon him the honour of the Supremacy if this were true was appropriated to him yea the rest of the Apostles who before were equall to him were now made inferiour and subiect to him Lastly in giuing a commission the authority of him that giues is ordinarily expressed alwaies implyed Mat. 28. 18 19. All power is giuen to me in heauen and earth Goe therefore and teach all nations Ioh. 20. 21 22 23. As my father sent me so send I you receiue the holy Ghost whose sins c. But here although as they say it is the onely place that speaks of this commission there is no authority either expressed or implyed onely as Cyrill saith It was a duty of loue to feed as it had beene formerly a proofe of feare to deny What else then can this Feeding be but the teaching which was enioyned all the Apostles at our Sauiours first appearing to them Whereupon I may safely conclude that the word neither necessarily nor in any likelihood of reason importeth the erection of any new office in the Church Let vs now proceed to debate the second point yet with this memorandum that although it be neuer so plainly proued yet Bellarmines proposition of a new office appointed Ioh. 21. 15. is false because the first point contained in it of a singular office here ordained is neither true nor likely The thing now to be discussed is this Feeding Christs sheepe Ioh. 21. 15. is teaching This sentence is plainly deliuered by Bellarmine in that proposition as he that looks vpon it cannot choose but see and proued also by two reasons the former that Reasonable sheepe are fed by teaching the latter that The Lord saith by Ieremy I will giue you Pastors according to my heart which Ier. 3. 15. shall feed you with knowledge and vnderstanding But these proofes might haue been spared for we acknowledge that Feeding is Teaching But for the fuller discussing of this matter wee must remember that Bellarmine as we saw chap. 4. numb 9. telleth vs Teaching is double by reuealing or propounding things reuealed Wee say that the teaching here spoken of is by reuelation not by propounding matters already reuealed as they would haue it But if they will haue vs yeeld to it they must proue it and not take it for granted as Bellarmine doth For without it be proued as I signified chap. 6. numb 6. his proposition cannot be true It is therfore
vnder the signes of bread and wine If there bee no such commandement of our Sauiours then 1 There is no Masse 2 The vertue of the bloody sacrifice is not applyed by the sacrifice of the Masse 3 The sacrifice of the Masse is not truely propitiatory All which are propounded for Articles of saith by the forenamed Councill sess 22. de sacrificio Messae I might say the like of many other points but these may suffice It remaineth that I proue the proposition which must be done by handling the points seuerally First therefore I thus begin with the first The sauing truth or verity taught by Christ and his Apostles Concil Trid. Sess 4. decret de Can. Script is contained saith the Councill in written bookes or in the Scriptures or in vnwritten traditions In this proposition or Article wee must vnderstand that the Scriptures and traditions are made diuers parts of that record wherein the sauing truth is contained so that neither of these parts containeth all but the one some the other some which appeareth plainly by the Council it selfe where describing Traditions it saith that They are not writen that They were receiued by word of mouth from the Apostles and were deliuered to them either by our Sauiour or by his spirit and haue beene so conueyed from hand to hand to the present Church And indeed if this were not the Councils meaning they said nothing at all against vs who make no question but that the ChristiaÌ„s which liued presently after the Apostles did truely gather diuers points out of the Scriptures which haue worthily beene receiued and maintained from time to time Such for instances were these points that our Lord Iesus is true God that the holy Ghost is true God that our Sauiour Christ consisteth of two distinct natures that He is but one person not two These points the Christians rightly drew out of the Scriptures For they bee not expressed there in so many words and these were acknowledged to bee Articles of faith by the foure first generall Councils against Arius Macedonius Eutiches and Nestorius Of this kind there are many traditions in the Church and will daily be more as it shall please God to blesse the labors of his seruants in the reading vnderstanding of the Scriptures Of these we dispute not but onely of such as are not comprised in the Scriptures It would also bee obserued that the Councill saith not barely and simply truth but sauing truth which in all likelihood was put into the decree because we grant that some things concerning rites and ceremonies were deliuered by Bellar de verbo Dei non scripto l. 4 c 3. Sect Secundo dissidemus our Lord or his Apostles which are not recorded in the Scriptures as Bellarmine confesseth Lastly whereas the Councill saith the sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles wee must inquire whether they meane vniuersally and wholly whatsoeuer our Sauiour and his Apostles taught not any one sentence excepted or onely so much as was intended for the perpetuall vse of the Church That it meaneth absolutely all sauing truth so taught it may be probably gathered out of the very words of the Councill For it saith that The preaching of Christ and his Apostles is the fountaine of all sauing truth and by and by addeth which truth is contained in written bookes and vnwritten traditions which is all one as if the Councill should haue said in plaine termes All sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles is contained in written books and vnwritten traditions Thus haue we the meaning of the Councill now that it may appeare what is true in it what false I will draw it into seuerall propositions namely these 3. 1 All sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles is recorded for future ages 2 Some sauing truth is contained in written bookes 3 Some sauing truth is comprehended in vnwritten traditions The two latter propositions viz. the second and third are manifestly in tâ—at article of the Councell the first of the three is necessarily implyed For if some things taught by them remaine not to posterity then all sauing truth so taught is not to be found in the Scripture and tradition because some of it is not at all recorded In the second proposition that Some truth taught by Christ and his Apostles is contained in the Scripture wee wholly agree with them and say farther in particular that All such truths are containd therein as the Lord appointed for the saluation of the Elect in all ages And this is the meaning of our Diuines when they say that All things necessary to saluation are comprehended in the Scriptures Which is manifest by Dr. Reynolds for D. Reynolds proface to his sixe conclusions at conclusion first D Whitaker de script q. 6. c. 6. saying that The Lord teacheth the Church all things necessary to saluation he expoundeth necessary to saluation thus which lead the faithfull to saluation and life And Dr. Whitaker propounding our opinion of the same matter in the same manner interpreteth necessary to saluation in these words by the way of life signifying thereby that Those things are necessary to saluation which teach vs the way to euerlasting life Reuerend B. Iewell speakes to the same purpose B. Iewells Apol. part .. 2. c. 9. diuis 1. that The Scriptures doe fully comprehend all things whatsoeuer bee needfull for our health and that they be the very might and strength of God to attaine to saluation Whereby it is manifest that Bellarmine dealt falsly and De verbo Dei non scripte l. 4. l. 3. Sect. Controversia deceitfully when he propounded the question The controversie saith he betwixt vs and the Heretickes is that we say The whole doctrine necessary to faith and manners is not contained in the Scriptures expresly and therefore besides the written word of God there is also an vnwritten word of God required that is to say Diuine and Apostolicall traditions Wherefore I will leaue Bellarmine with his frauds and debate the point as it is deliuered in the Councell of Trent For the first that All sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles is recorded for future ages Bellarmine bringeth no proofe and yet he could not choose but see that there is no necessity in the point it selfe why we should take it for true For it might well be that our Sauiour and his Apostles taught some things which tended to the saluation of some particular men not of all men and therfore might be left vnrecorded without any losse or damage to the Church Therefore we may iustly call for proofe of a point so vncertaine that is made by Bellarmine a matter of faith The third proposition at numb 5. is that Some sauing truth is comprehended in tradition For the better vnderstanding and cleering whereof wee are first to learne what vnwritten traditions are Which the Councell of Trent teacheth vs. Vnwritten traditions are things endicted by our
Concil Trident. Sess 4. decret de canon script Sauiour by word of mouth or by the holy Ghost and kept in the Church by continuall succession We may content our selues with this description without seeking any explication out of Bellarmine or any other because Bellarmines definition that A tradition is a doctrine not written by the first author thereof is so far from making the meaning of the Councell of Trent plaine that indeed it doth rather more obscure Bellarm. de verb. Deâ—l 4. c. 2. Sect. Vocatur it The Councell setteth downe no distribution of traditions but this that some of them concerne faith some manners But Bellarmine wearieth himselfe and his Reader with a number of distribâ—â—ions which as I said of his description are of no vse but to darken the question Tradition being thus vnderstood I say that third proposition is false and the contradictory thereof true No sauing truth taught by Christ or his Apostles is contained in vnwritten traditions which may thus appeare If no part of the Scripture refer vs to tradition for some part of Gods word not contained in the said Scriptures then haue we no reason to seeke for any part thereof in tradition For the Scriptures doe send vs to the scriptures for the knowledge of sauing truth Ioh. 5. 39. Search the Scriptures for in them ye thinke to haue eternall life And the Apostle Paul 2 Tim. 3. 15. saith that The 2 Tim. 3. 15. Scripture is able to make vs wise to saluatioÌ„ And wold not the scripture trow we haue sent vs to tradition for supply of that which was wanting in it if there had beene any supply to be had therein For it was as easie and as orderly for the Scripture to referre vs to tradition as to it selfe and as well beseeming the wisdome and prouidence of God to haue sent vs to both parts of his word by the Scriptures as to the one of them yea it was a great deale more needfull For no man could doubt but he was to haue recourse to the Scriptures because they were knowne to be the word of God But who could haue imagined that the Lord God teaching vs so plentifully in the Scriptures would leaue out some part of the sauing truth and not so much as giue vs any inkling thereof nor direct vs where we might finde it But they tell vs the Scripture doth put vs ouer for some of the diuine truth to vnwritten traditions Let vs see and examine the places that are brought to this purpose by Bellarmine Bellarm. de verb. Dei non scripto l. 4. c. 5. Sect. Ac primum who made choise of the best places that had beene or could be alledged in this matter The first wherof is thus to be concluded Those things which our Sauiour spake of Ioh. 16. 12. and Ioh. 16. 12. and 21. 25. 21. 25. Act. 1. 3. are comprehended in tradition For they are not written and it is not credible that the Apostles which heard them did not deliuer them to the Church Surely they were neither so enuious that they would not nor so forgetfull that they could not But those things which he spake in those places were sauing truths Therefore some sauing truths taught by Christ or his Apostles are contained in tradition Ere I answer to this argument particularly I must note in general that euery proposition of euery argument brought in this question must be certainly and euidently true because the point concluded is an article of faith which must be either expresly set downe by the holy Ghost or collected from the word of God by manifest and necessary consequence Therefore if we finde any proposition in any argument that is not in such sort true the conclusion cannot be an Article of faith because of those premises but is only at the most probable as they are Particularly I say of this argument that no Article of faith can bee concluded by it because the proposition or Maior with the proofe of it are at the most but probable as the examining of the reason will shew Either our Sauiors speeches theâ—e mentioned are contained in tradition or else they remaine not at all to posterity But they remaine to posterity for the Apostles did not omit the recording of them since they were neither enuious nor forgetfull Therefore our Sauiours speeches there mentioned are contained in tradition First this argument presumeth that whatsoeuer our Sauiour spake was some way or other committed to posterity And this was the first proposition in this doctrine of the Council denied by vs n. 5. 7. therfore Bellar. doth but play the sophister by begging the question proueth nothing Secondly I answer that if I should grant him that he beggeth yet his pâ—oposition would be false For the disiunction is nought What if I say those speeches of our Sauiour neither perished nor remaine in tradition but are recorded in some part of the Apostles writings in the new TestimeÌ„â— For since our Sauior promised Ioh. 16. 13. to send them his spirit which should lead them into all truth and Ioh. 14. 26 bring to their remembrance all things which he had told theÌ„ and performed what he promised Acts 2. 3. It is more then likely that they did coÌ„mend the things to posterity which he caused theÌ„ to remember for why else were they brought to their remembrance But wee find no other course that euâ—r they tooke to deliuer the Gospell to posterity but writing Why then should these points be kept vnwritten Suâ—ely they are neither greater mysteries nor smaller matters then some that are written The proposition then is either false or doubtfull and the assumption little better For how can Bellarmine tell whether those matters be recorded in any of the Apostles writings or no vnlesse he know what they were as he will not for very shame say he doth But If we doubt of it he would make vs beleeue wee accuse the Apostles of envie or negligence God forbid We will grant him any thing almost rather then lay such an imputation upon those glorious instruments of our salvation We haue a better way to answer then so namely that Bellarmine commeth short of his reckonig either of negligence or enuy What needeth that It may well be that they did not record every one of our Saviour speeches because they had no commission to leaue them on record and they were to doe according to their comission being to deliver the word of God as they were inspired by the holy Ghost not to set downe every thing they could remember as men doe that follow their owne naturall discretion Neither can Bellarmine any way make good the assumption of the principall Syllogisme negatiue that Those things which our Lord spake of in those places were saving truths except he can certainely tell what they were CHAP. XIII Of Bellarmines second and third Arguments to proue vnwritten traditions BEllarmines second argument in the place aboue named
That which the Apostle commanded the Thessalouians to keepe was a sauing faith Therefore some sauing truth is contained in tradition There is no end of Bellarmines begging We must deny as before that whatsoeuer the Apostles taught is recorded and come to posteritie To the proposition I answer in particular that being vnderstood of that time when the Apostle writ that Epistle it is true he had then deliuered some things by word of mouth and not written them and those hee commandeth them to keepe But what proofe can Bellarmine make that those things were not written afterwards The assumption is not easily to be proued that those things were sauing truth Why doth not Bellarmine tell vs what they were Me thinks he dareth not so much as guesse at them otherwise he would let vs know at the least what his Catholickes worthily take them to be Would any man dally thus in a matter of faith to bee beleeued vpon paine of damnation Bellarmine will make amends for the want of weight in his reasons by the number of them and he propoundeth his fift thus to bee deliuered Bellar. ubi supra sect quaitam That which was committed to Timothy 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2. is contained in tradition That which was there committed to Timothy is a sauing 1. Tim. 6. 20. 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2. truth Therefore some sauing truth is contained in tradition Here he beggeth againe as before but wee cannot grant that whatsoeuer the Apostles preached is remaining vpon record to posteritie If that were granted yet should I thinke the proposition no sufficient warrant for an Article of faith Therefore Bellarmine offereth proofe of it on this maner That which Timothy had heard of Saint Paul 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2 and was to deliuer to faithfull men able to teach other also that is contained in tradition But that which was committed to Timothy 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2 he had heard of Saint Paul and was to deliuer to faithfull men able to teach other also Therefore that which was committed to Timothy 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2 is contained in tradition Least wee should deny the first part or Proposition of this Syllogisme because the things so delivered and given in charge by the Apostle might be matter for the present vse of the Church and such as needed not to be alwayes knowne Bellarmine telleth us that by those things so heard and so to be committed the vnderstanding of the sense of the scriptures and other doctrine is signified so that the whole force of his Argument lyeth in this interpretation which he never offereth to proue Therefore vnlesse we will take his bare word for proofe wee are as farre to seeke as we were before Now that we haue no reason to doe so I thinke it may appeare by those things which I will now propound to the consideration of all reasonable men First then I would know oâ— Bellarmine whether by Vnderstanding of the sense he meane generall rules for the vnderstanding of it or the sense of particular places Secondly I demaund whether he deliuered to him the sense oâ— euery place of Scripture or of some onely Whether he answer this or that I aske thirdly what is become of those rules and expositions How will he proue to vs that they haue beene continued from time to time till now If they haue not beene continued what haue wee to do with them who dispute onely of such traditions as are in the possession and vse of the present Church Fourthly is it likely euen in Bellarmines iudgement that Saint Paul would take vpon him to instruct Timothy in the sense of any place of Scripture when as the office of interpreting the Scripture is committed by the Councell of Trent to the Church that is as Bellarmine expoundeth it to Peter and his successours Did he meane ambitiously to vsurpe Peters office or to send him to Peter or his successours to learne of them whether the interpretation he had giuen were true or no. Touching the second part of the first Syllogisme that Those thinges which were committed to Timothy were sauing truths Bellarmine saith nothing which argueth that he knew not what to say What reason haue we then to imagine that they were sauing truths or that this argument concludeth any thing for the doctrine of the Councell of Trent concering traditions There is yet one argument more in the same fift chapter thus to be concluded Those things which Iohn had to write 2. Ioh. 11 and Bellar. ubi supra Sect. ultimum testimonium 3. Ioh. 14. are contained in tradition for he saith he would not write them But those things which he had then to write were sauing truths taught by the Apostles Therefore some sauing truths taught by the Apostles are contained in tradition I am inforced here also to repeate my former answer that Bellaâ—mine still takes it for granted that whatsoeuer the Apostles taught is continued to posteritie which we denie and no papist can proue His assumption or minor is to weake to beare vp the weight of an Article of faith vnlesse he be able to â—â—ll 〈◊〉 certainly what the things were which the Apostle would not write and to whom hee did or at the least that hee did afterward deliuer them to some body from whom the Church hath receiued them Till we know what they were how shall we be sure they were part of the sauing truth CHAP. XV. Of two other arguments of Bellarmine VVEE haue done with the fift Chapter and are now to examine two arguments set downe chap. 4 the former I frame thus That there are Scriptures that these we haue he they is â— Bellar de verbo Dei non scripto cap. 4 Sect. quarto quinto Soxio contained in tradition For we cannot find them in the Scriptures But that there are Scriptures that these wee haue are they is part of sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles Therefore some sauing truthes taught by Christ and his Apostles are contained in tradition It hath appeared by my answer to Bellarmines arguments that he can find no place of Scripture that sendeth vs to tradition for any part of sauing truth taught by our Lord or his Apostles Wee might therefore conclude that there are no such traditions without troubling our selues any further But that we may dit vp the mouths of the Papists wee will bestow a little time and paines in these arguments If there had beene no more intended by the Councell of Trent in the decree touching tradition but to signifie that these three points are contained in tradition the danger had not beene great for then both the number and the particulars had been determined but the Papists by vertue of that Article take authoritie to thrust what they list vpon the Church and warrant it by tradition Thus much to the argument in generall Particularly I answer
that the first part of it and the proofe thereof suppose that those two propositions There are Scriptures These we haue be they are formally that is expresly contained either in the Scriptures or tradition But this say we is false they are contained formally in neither where then shall we finde them Radically and originally in the Scriptures themselues which of themselues afford iust occasion to all men to conceiue both that There are Scriptures and that These are they They are contained formally in the apprehension of euery mans vnderstanding that beleeueth them and that this beleife is diuine faith not humane coniecture it appeareth because it is wrought in men by a speciall prouidence of God which perswadeth and draweth men to acknowledge the things to be as they are in themselues and is farther grounded vpon the diuine authoritie vertually affirming that they are both true indeed And yet wee make not a priuate spirit the ground or rule of our faith or the iudge to determine what is matter of faith what is not As Bellarmine slandereth vs and Bellar de verbo Dei non scripto lib. 3. cap. 5. Sect. Norum cap. 9. sect quod 〈◊〉 after him Mr. Fâ—sher and other But wee onely attribute to that speciall prouidence the office of in lightening and mouing the vnderstanding in lightened to giue assent to the bookes of Scripture that they are the word of God as indeed and truth they are Now to this assent it moueth vs by many reasons fit and effectuall for such a worke as namely by the continuall consent and testimonie of the Church by the matter deliuered in the bookes them selues by the stile or maner of deliuering it and the like as diuers of our diuines haue shewed at large and that this assent of ours is a true faith it is very manifest because it conceiueth of the thing deliuered as in truth it is which is the very rule of truth and wherein the nature of truth consisteth The assumption is false The last proposition is not part of sauing truth taught by our Sauiour Christ and his Apostles Neither all nor any of the Apostles for ought appeareth in the word did euer set downe a Catalogue of the Bookes of the New or Old Testament neither indeede was it possible for any of them to doe it but S. Iohn who out liued them all and writt after them all As for S. Iohn he neither might nor could doe it because that was onely Peters office or his successors to declare which were Scriptures and which were not as we learned out of Bellar. Chap. 3. 11. 9. Pâ—â—ar ubi supra sect dâ—nique The second and last argument lieth thus This Proposition There is no word of God besides that which is written is contained in tradition not written This proposition is a sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles Therefore some sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles is contained in tradition not written First it is to be considered that Bellarmine bringeth this assumption as a proposition of ours and from thence concludeth for the Church of Rome against vs For if hee brought it as his owne and acknowledged by him for true he should thereby gaine say the Councell of Trent affirming that There is some part of the word of God contained in tradition which is not to be found in the Scriptures But in this Bellarmine doth vs wrong for although we say that there is no word of God but that which is contained in the Scriptures as a Rellar de verbo Dei lib. 4. cap. 3. Sect. adipsi Bellarmin alleageth out of b Caluin Instit lib 4. cap. 8. â— 8. Caluin yet we say uot that this proposition is a sauing truth taught by Christ his Apostles neither indeed need we say so For by that propositioÌ„ we only deny that which the CouÌ„cell affirmeth and set it downe as a contradictory thereto and Bellarmine himselfe in the place for enamed bringeth it to the same end The reason of our deniall is that the Scripture doth no where send vs to tradition nor hath any word to that purpose as hath appeared in the former disputation And this reason is very sufficient because nothing is to be receiued for an Article of faith but that which is taught in the word of God The like answer is to be made to the proposition If it be true in Bellarmines iudgement then the doctrine of the Church of Rome in his iudgement is salfe For the Councell of Tâ—ent teacheth that There is some word of God contained in tradition but this proposition affirmes that There is no word of God besides that which is written If Bellarmine would father it vpon vs he accuseth vs falsly For we neuer saiâ— nor thought that that proposition was contained in tradition but perhaps he thinketh it will follow vpon that wee say but in so thinking hee thinkes idly for we doe no more hereby but denie that which they say and neither do nor neede affirme that it is contained either in the Scriptures or in tradition It is enough for vs in matter of faith to refuse whatsoeuer is not taught in the Scriptures But it may be said that this proposition There is no word of God besides that which is written is either true or false we grant it because it is certainely true that in euerie contradiction properly so called the one proposition is true the other false What of this It will farder be said If it be false then the contradictory to it which we hold is true We grant this too what more If this be true it is contained either in the Scripture or in tradition This we denie It may be true and yet contained in neither of them For the truth of this proposition is not positiue whereby one thing is affirmed of or ioyned to another but negatiue by which one thing is denied of or seuered from another Now propositions of this kinde are then true when the things comprehended in them are indeed seuered the one from the other for then the proposition speaketh of the thing as it is Therefore it is enough to make this negatiue proposition true that the Scripture is silent in that which they affirme and doth not ioyne Heb. 1. 5. them together as they doe And this is the ground of those negatiue disputations wee find in the Scriptures P. Iewels answ to Dâ— Coles second 〈◊〉 let O. P. especially To which of the Angells said be c. He that desireth to see more of this may reade the reuerend Bishop Iewel in his answer to Dr. Cole I should now goe on according to the order followed in the Councell of Trent to examine the rest of the Articles set downe by me chap. 11. num 3. But for this time I thinke it enough that I haue debated these two questions because if these proue false as I trust they haue done all the other differences betwixt vs and the
cause of this Separation lyeth in the Church of Rome namely the cup of abomination in the whores hand which is their haereticall and schismaticall religion Vpon this foundation of these learned men I set this frame of disputation Euery erroneous faith is to be refused The faith of the Church of Rome is an erroneous faith Therefore the faith of the Church of Rome is to be refused Can there be any question made of the first part or proposition of this reason when the holy Apostle Saint Iude exhorts all men without exception of person time or matter to striue for the faith delivered to the Saints Iudev 3. But how striue we for that faith which is the reuealed truth of God if we can be content to beleeue errours which are against the truth Yea what doe we else by holding errours for truth but adde to the diuine reuelation giuen by the Lord God himselfe contrary to his charge Deut. 4. 2. You shall put nothing to the word that I command you The second part which we call the assumption or minor Deutr. 4. 2. is that wherein all the doubt lieth for what is the Church of Rome the worse for granting that an erroneous faith is to be refused vnles their faith can be proued erroneous And whereas I say in my question and disputation erroneous rather then hereticall I doe it od of purpose because I would shunne all needlesse wrangling about the word for it seemes to many somewhat doubtfull what is properly to be called heresy For my part I can not see that any false proposition deliuered for an Article of faith can be lesse then heresie I doubt not but a man may thinke somthing to be true which is false be no heriticke buâ— he thâ— shall obstinately hold such a point for an Article of faith necessarily to be beleeued by all men vpon paine of damnation cannot for ought I see be freed from heresie As for the errours of the Papists Dr. Reynolds Dr. Whitakers and Mr. Perkins as we haue seene make no doubt to call them heresies Now that we may the better vnderstand whether the faith of the Church of Rome be erroneous or no we must enquire how the truth and falsenesse of faith is to be discerned which we cannot doe either better or otherwise then by considering how the Article of faith or proposition enioyned to be beleeued agreeth with the diuine testimonie concerning that point or Article for the diuine testimonie is the thing or rule to which the Article must be applied and by which it must be squared so that if it agree wholy with it it is true if in any part it differ from that testimonie it is false and erroneous This Sess 14. caâ— Decret de necessitate satiffaction is Decâ—ct de sacram paenitentiae can 6. description of errour and falsehood in matters of faith is warranted by the Councell of Trent where they make falsehood consist in differing from the word of God and That which differs from the institution of Christ is called an humane tradition and therefore is erroneous According to this declaration of a false and erroneous faith I proceed now to shew that the faith of the Church of Rome is false and erroneous That faith which hath a false and ertoneous foundation is false and erroneous Wherein first I take it for granted that Faith must haue an extrinsecall foundation out of the shings themfelues which are to be beleeved This outward and extrinsecall foundation is the credit and authority of him that delivereth those things for true and requires assent or agrement to them Secondly I hold it for certaine and agrred vpon by all that faith is true or false according to the foundation whereon it stands as the diuine restimonie begets a diuine faith an humane testimonie breeds an humane which may thus appeare What makes the faith of the ancient heathen and the now heathenish Turks and all sorts of Infidels who beleeue that there is but one God to be humane false and erroneous and the faith of Christians concerning the same point to be diuine and true but the diuerse foundations of these faiths the former depending vpon the coniectures and testimonies of men the other arising out of the witnesse of God himselfe To come nearer home why doe the Papists denie that wee are of their faith although they confesse wee hold the very same Articles of the Creed that they professe and aagree with them in most points of religion but for that we haue not the same foundation of our faith which they haue of theirs It is then the goodnesse or badnesse of the foundation that make the faith good or bad so that where the foundation is false the faith whatsoeuer it be cannot be true The proposition thus prooued I will adde the assumptition to it The foundation of the faith of the Church of Rome is false and erroneous For the foundation of their faith is the authority of the Pastors of their Church as it Sect. 4. Decret de edit scriptur sect praeterea is manifest by the Councell of Trent It is the office of the Church saith the Councel to giue sentence of the true meaning and sense of the Scriptures Now by the Church they meane the Pastours of the Church as their continuall practise declareth no man being suffered to giue a voice in any Councell but their Bishops whom onely they hold to be the Pastours of the Church By true sense and meaning they vnderstand the doctrine of faith which is nothing else but the Word of God truly vnderstood By the Scriptures they meane euery particular place of Scripture for if they should meane some places onely there could be no certainty in this their decree vnlesse they had determined what particular places they are whereof the Church may giue sentence These things thus declared I dispute thus They that haue the office to determine which is the true faith their authority is the foundation of Faith But the Church hath the office to determine which is the true faith as it appeares by the words of the Councell ere-while recited Therfore the authority of the Church is the foundation of their faith That the Church of Rome claimes this authority it may further appeare by those titles whcih it vsurpeth in the said Councell that The Bishop of Rome is Gods Vicar on Sess 6. de reformat cap. 1. Sess 14. de poenitentia cap. 7. Sess 7. de Baptism Can. 3. Sess 22. de sacrificio missae cap. 8 De verbo dei lib. 3. cap. 3. Sâ—ct Tota igitur Cap. 5. Sect. Ex his earth The Church of Rome is the mother and mistris of all Churches Yea euerie man may plainly see that Bellarmine teacheth the same things of the church of Rome The Church is the iudge of the true sense of the Scripture and all controuersies By Church hee vnderstands the Pope with a Councell and this he saith is expresly
Church of Rome will easily be decided to the confirmation of the truth we maintaine and the ouerthrow of their false and erroneous faith I haue alreadie in another disputation in Latine discouered and proued the erroneousnesse of the faith of that Church in the seuenth and tenth Articles of the eleuenth Chapter before mentioned touching grace and iustification The like I will doe in the rest if it please God to giue me opportunitie and abilitie CHAP. XVI An answer to those things which the Church of Rome bringeth against the necessitie of separating from it ALthough the point propounded by me to be disputed is sufficiently proued by that which hath past and all men may see a necessitie of separating from the Church of Rome yet that the truth may be the more cleere and all mens consciences the better satisfied and fortified against the deuises of the Romish seducers I haue thought good to examine two principall motiues of theirs by which they mis-lead many that are simple or carelesse and in handling of them I will take the same course that hetherto I haue followed for the more plainnesse and certaintie in iudging what is true what false The former of the two is this Euery man must receiue his faith by the teaching of the Romish Church That it may appeare what force there is in this to conclud any thing for the Church of Rome against the question hetherto disputed I will apply it to the matter in question and answer to it accordingly They that must receiue their faith by the teaching of the Church of Rome must ioyne in faith with that Church Euery man must receiue his faith by the teaching of the Church of Rome Therefore euery man must ioyne in faith with the Church of Rome The proposition or first part of this reason I acknowledge for true because the teaching of the Church of Rome giueth being to the faith of that Church The assumption is false being grounded vpon that false foundation that The Pope of Rome is to feede the whole Church as Peters successour by determining what is matter of faith what is not But this appeared to be manifestly false chap. 8. and 10. wherein I propounded and handled the question The second deuise is commonly deliuered by way of question Where was your Church before Luther Now this question implyeth a negation as if they should say The Protestants Church was not before Luther This must be applied to the point in question after this sort Euery man must ioyne in faith either with the Church of Rome or with the Protestant Church But no man may ioyne in faith with the Protestants Church Therefore euery man must ioyne in faith with the Church of Rome Let the proposition passe for true to which we may iustly adde an assumption contrary to theirs No man may ioyne in faith with the Church of Rome and this assumption is alreadie made good by the foregoing disputation through this whole treatise which hath shewed that the faith of the Church of Rome is false and erroneous But to answer directly to their assumption we say it is vtterly false and the contrary to it euidently true that Euery man is bound to ioyne in faith with the Protestants Church For our faith is nothing else but Euery article or proposition to be assented to or beleeued as true vpon the authoritie of God the reuealer of them by his holy seruants the Prophets and Apostles The Articles which we assent to or beleeue in this sort are either expressely set downe in the Scriptures in direct words so that the sense of them cannot reasonably be doubted of or else gathered and concluded from such places by necessarie consequence so that if the one be true the other must needs be true also Whatsoeuer proposition is not of this nature we allow not for an article of faith how likely soeuer it seeme to be Now in this faith of ours there can be no danger seeing whatsoeuer proposition is plainely expressed in the Scripture or necessarily concluded from it is vndoubtedly the diuine reuelation which is the onely foundation of true faith More particularly I say touching the said assumption that it must be vnderstood of the Protestants faith so far forth as it differeth from the faith of the Church of Rome else by it they should disswade men from the faith of their owne Church Besides It is to be considered that this assumption supposeth that the Protestants haue a faith opposite to the faith of the Church of Rome Which is vtterly false All the opposition we make to them is by refusing their faith not by deliuering any of our owne and by ansswering to their arguments so that we hold the negatiue part of the contradiction in all points wherein we dissent from them although in some we adde a contrarie affirmatiue where the Scripture affirmeth that which they denie For example they say The Pope is Gods Vicar This we oppose by saying that The diuine reuelation doth not teach vs that the Pope is Gods Vicar Againe they deliuer this for an Article of faith that Concupiscence in the regenerate is not properly sinne To this we answer by way of opposition as to the former The diuine reuelation doth not say that Concupiscence in the regenerate is not properly sin Yea in this point we say further the Scripture saith it is properly sinne but our opposition to them in this point stands in this that the Scripture doth not say it is not properly sinne so that though there were no word to the contrarie of it in Scripture yet that proposâ—â—on of theirs were vtterly false By which it is manifest that in those things wherein we dissent from them we haue not articles of faith contrarie to the articles of faith which they propound but onely deny that Those they would thrust vpon vs are articles of faith If any man obiect as Stapleton and Wright doe that Our religion is negatiue we answer that if they meane we hold no articles of faith which are affirmatiue they charge vs vntruely for we consent with them in many affirmatiue articles of faith As for those points wherein we dissent from them it is no fault in vs to hold the negatiue for there is no other way for vs to oppose the errours they bring for matters of faith but by denying them to be matters of faith So theÌ„ this is that they auouch in the former assuÌ„ption No man may ioyne in faith with the Protestants Churches in those points wherein they dissent from the Faith of the Church of Rome The reason is because the faith of the Protestants in those points is false which they thus proue The true faith hath been professed so publikely in all ages since the Apostles that the professors of it from age to age may be named The Protestants faith hath not been so publikely professed in all ages since the Apostles that the professors of it from age to age may be named Therefore
nor shifting by willfull mistaken I began to declare the meaning of the termes in which I propounded my question but because I purposed to examine the matter in two seuerall disputations I forbare to expound the last words till I should come to the particular debating of the second point Now I am to enter vpon it and must therefore shew what I meane by those words Vpon paine of damnation and then proue that the faith of the Church of Rome is to be refused vpon so grieuous a penaltie Those words Vpon paine of damnation are not so to bee vnderstood as if I tooke vpon me to pronounce sentence of condemnation against all that beleeue as the Church of Rome teacheth but I would thereby giue all men to vnderstand that the beleeuing of that doctrine as matter of faith is a thing in it selfe damnable and such as maketh a man liable to damnation How it shall fall out with particular men in the euent I neither know nor meane to enquire Onely I say againe that their mis-beliefe is a sinne which setteth them in the state of damnation Now hauing proued alreadie that their faith is erroneous I shall not neede to make many words about the point For the Church of Rome against which I dispute holdeth it for a ruled case that an erroneous faith is damnable Wherefore else doe they thunder out so many Iâ—ai 8. 20. curses in the Councell of Trent against all that shall conceiue otherwise of the matters of faith determined by that Councell then is therein decreed Notwithstanding that I may the better perswade all men to keepe good watch for feare they be suddenly surprized or vnawares intrapt by the great army of locusts the Priests and Iesuites which haue almost couered the Land from sea to sea I will bestow a little paines to giue them warning of the danger There are two wayes by which sinne leadeth a man into to the state of damnation the one is the desert or fitnesse it hath to procure damnation the other is the actuall meriting or deseruing of damnation Into the former sinne casteth a man off it selfe Into the latter he falleth as by sinne so by the ordinance or decree of God who hath layd a penalty of damnation upon it Out of this I raise this disputation against receiuing the faith of the Romish Church That which maketh a man vncleane in Gods sight hath a fitnesse to procure damnation For vncleane things are vnmeete for the presence of God and consequently are meete for damnation But the faith of the Church of Rome maketh a man vncleane in the sight of God For it is erroneous in so high a nature that it maketh a man guiltie of treason against God by installing the Pope in the Throane of God giuing him power and authoritie to determine as a iudge what is matter of faith what not without commission or warrant from God as I haue shewed in the former part of this disputation Neither doe they onely giue him authoritie to interprete the Scriptures but also allow him to set vp a forge where he hammers what he list and venteth it to be receiued vpon paine of damnation for the word of the euer liuing 2. Thes 2. 4. God What is it To sit in the Temple of God shewing himselfe that he is God if this be not And are not they accessaries to this high treason that acknowledge this authoritie and yeeld obedience to it How can it then reasonably be denied that there is a worthinesse and fitnesse in the faith of the Church of Rome to procure damnation hereupon it followeth that euery one that ioyneth in faith with the Church of Rome is lyable to damnation There remaineth nothing now but the ordinance or decree of God to appoint damnation as a punishment of this sinne according to the desert thereof but that was passed long since by the Lord himselfe You shall put nothing to the word which I command you The penaltie is expressed Deut. 4. 2 12 30. Revel 21. 18. If any man shall adde to those things God shall adde to him the plagues that are written in this Bookâ— But more plaine The Lord shall send them strong delusions that they 2. Thes 2. 11. 12. should beleeue lyes that all they might be damned which beleeued not the truth Behold the Lord wrappeth them vp in damnation by his sentence that beleeue lyes that is false and erroneous doctrine not agreeable to the truth which they ought to beleeue What is wanting then to make the faith of the Church of Rome damnable and the professours thereof lyable to damnation when both the thing it selfe deserueth it and the Lord hath decreed that they which beleeue it should haue according to their desert I might as our writers commonly doe adde to that which hath beene said diuers foule and grosse errors which seeme more specially to touch the glory of God and secretly to vndermine the very foundation of our saluation namely the Mediatorship of our Lord and Saviour Iesus Christ But this as I take it will more plainly appeare and be more throughly inforced against them in the particular handling of the seuerall Articles to which I reserue it Neither will I enter into the common way of prouing popery to be damnable because it is Antichristianisme much hath beene disputed by our men to this purpose and it is like enough that much more may and will be added to their disputations But the controuersie is long and requireth more time then I can now afford it onely this I will say for the present that as his Maiestie hath prudently obserued there is no Church State nor man that hath beene since the penning of the Reuelation to whom those things foretold by the Apostle from the mouth of the Lord Iesus can in any reasonable sort agree but the Church and Pope of Rome alone And it is vtterly against reason to imagin that the Lord Iesus would direct Iohn to spend so many words in deliuering prophecies for some three yeares and a halfe in the end of the world and leaue so many yeares betwixt vnspoken of wherein such strange matters haue befallen the Church It is manifest that the Historie is prophetically continued for the first 300 yeares at the least and of that because it seemeth not much to concerne them the Papists make no great doubt he that will take the paines to reade the whole aduisedly may easily discerne that our Lord continueth his discourse to his beloued Disciple of such things as were to fall out to the very end of the world I forbeare to shew how vnlikely that I may speake most fauourably of the point because it hath some collourable allowance from antiquitie I will not say how vnpossible it is that any man should imagine hee can deceiue Christians as Antichrist by their conceite must doe or force them generally to denie the Lord Iesus and take himselfe to be either God or any man
must be thus ordered a Bellar. de verbo Dei non script lib. 4. cap. 5. sect Secundum testâ— monâ—im The ordinances which the Apostle speaketh of 1. Cor. 11. 2 are not written for they concerne the manner of praying and receiuing the Sacraments and these we find not written any where The ordinances which the Apostle there speaketh of are sauing truths for he commendeth the Corinthians for keeping them Therefore some sauing truths are contained in vnwritten tradition The proposition taketh it for granted that whatsoeuer the Apostles taught is committed to posteritie But this we denie as I shewed cap. 12. n. 7. How then shall this argument proue that the conclusion is an article of faith Well admit it were true yet is the proposition vncertaine as the proofe sheweth For out of doubt it is noâ— manifest of it selfe The proofe lieth thus Whatsoeuer was deliuered to the Apostles and is not found written any where that is kept in vnwritten tradition The ordinances the Apostle speaketh of were deliuered by him and are not found written any where Therefore the ordinances the Apostle speaketh of are kept in vnwritten tradition The proposition of this Syllogisme is vntrue For although it be not found yet it may be written diuers things are contained in the Scriptures which are not knowne to be there contained but may in time be manifested as I signified cap. 11. n. 2. Now concerning the principall assumption n. 1. The ordinances which c. I answer that it is neither cleere in it selfe nor proued by Bellarmine For euery precept of the Apostle the keeping whereof deserueth commendation it is not therefore a sauing truth Obedience to any commandement or aduise of an Apostle touching but a rite or ceremony yea the smallest matter that can be imagined though it be no sauing truth deserueth due coÌ„mendation and Bellermin hath nothing else in this disputation that may be applied to the proofe of that point But say we grant Bellarmine that the precepts signified verse 2. are sauing truths as we may doe with great likely hood vnderstanding thereby the doctrine deliuered in the former part of the Epistle to that 11. Chapter What will it auaile him seeing the assumption then will conuince the proposition of falsehood because the precept is there written Therefore this second argument is to as small purpose as the former I come to the third argument in the same place Those things which the Apostle disposed 1. Cor. 11. 34. Bellar. de verbo Dei non scripto lib. 4. cap. 5. sect alteram quastioâ—em are contained in tradition for we find them not written any where But the things he there disposed were sauing truth Therefore some sauing truth is contained in tradition Both the faults of the former proposition are in this also first that he taketh it for granted that whatsoeuer the Apostles taught is recorded which we alwaies denie Secondly that he saith confidently these things are not written and yet knowes not what they are so that he may find them and not know of it Let vs passe by the proposition yet will Bellarmine come short of his conclusion because the assumption is full of doubt for how will he be able to proue that the things disposed by the Apostle were sauing truth He confesseth that some of them were matters belonging to rits ceremonies but he telleh vs with all that Catholiks worthily thinke that he deliuered also some greater matters concerning the ordination of Ministers the sacrifice of the Alter and the matter and forme of other Sacraments and hee addeth that The hereticks cannot disproue them That we may the better iudge of these worthy thoughts of Bellarmins Catholickes we will set his reason in frame Whatsoeuer Catholickes worthily thinke and hereticks cannot disproue that is to be holder for true But that the Apostles disposed of those weightie matters Catholickes worthily thinke and the hereticks cannot disproue Therefore that the Apostles disposed of those weightie matters it is to be holden for truth A stout argument and well worthy such Catholickes who seeth not the absurditie of the maior Truth is not to be measured by their affirmation or conceite and our vnablenesse to disproue but by the adaequation or full agreement of the thing and our apprehension of it For a man then onely speaketh the truth of a thing when hee speaketh as the thing is indeede But the assumption presumeth we cannot disproue it That were hard Why should not our saying we thinke he did not meane those matters be as good a disproofe of it as their saying you thinke he did is a proofe Such answers are good enough for such arguments But surely me thinketh we may bring some likelyhood of reason for our opinion For who would imagine that the Apostle would spend so many lines as he doth in this chapter about matters of so small importance as long haire and bare heads which were not for the perpetuall practise of the Church as experience sheweth and put off matters of so great weight till his comming to them which might haue been neuer And that they may not say we conjecture this without any likelihood as Bellarmins Catholiks worthily doe let them heare what Chrysostome saith upon the place He Chrysost Homil. 28. ad 1. Cor. 11. meaneth either some other things or the same that he hath mentioned For seeing it was likely that they would bring other cases and he could not redresse althings by letters Let those things saith he that I haue admonished you of be obserued and if any other thing need redresse let is be referred till my comming He speaketh as I said either of the same thing or some matter not greatly urgent He speaketh saith Theophilact of some other faults of Theophilact ad 1. Cor. 11. theirs which had need of correcting or of some which he had mentioned It is likely saith he that some men are praparing to defend themselues against that which I haue said but in the meane time let thom obserue that I haue charged them to keepe ad 1. Cor 11. When he had written of those things that were more necessary he reserueth the rest for his praesence with them The Interlinear glosse expoundeth it thus Other things concerning the Sacrament I will order when I come but you might not be without direction for those things that I haue deliuered ad 1. Cor. 11. Other things saith Lombard which perteine to order in the same Sacrament I will order when I come ad 1. Cor. 11. Other things which are not of so great danger I will order â—â—resence Thomas ad 1. Cor. 11. CHAP. XIIII Of some other Arguments of Bellarmine to the same purpose LET vs see if Bellarmines fourth reason be any better then the former That which the Apostle commanded the Thessalonians to Bellar. ubi supra Sect. tertium keepe 2. Thess 2. 15. is contained in tradition for it was not written but deliuered by word of mouth