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
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
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
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
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 Protestants had to make that Rent or Division if I did not grant that they made it Why truly in this reasonable demand I will satisfie him I did it partly because I had granted in the generall that Corruption in Manners was no sufficient cause of Separation of one Particular Church from another and therefore it lay upon me at least to Name in generall what was And partly because he and his Partie will needes have it so that we did make the Separation And therefore though I did not grant it yet amisse I thought it could not be to Declare by way of Supposition that if the Protestants did at first Separate from the Church of Rome they had reason so to doe For A. C. himselfe confesses A. C. p. 56. That Error in Doctrine of the Faith is a just Cause of Separation so just as that no Cause is just but that Now had I leasure to descend into Particulars or will to make the Rent in the Church wider 't is no hard matter to proove that the Church of Rome hath erred in the Doctrine of Faith and dangerously too And I doubt I shall afterwards descend to Particulars A. C. his Importunity forcing me to it F. Which when the Generall Church would not Reforme it was lawfull for Particular Churches to Reforme themselves B. Is it then such a strange thing that a Particular § 24 Church may reforme it selfe if the Generall will not I had thought and do so still That in Point of Reformation of either Manners or Doctrine it is lawfull for the Church sinoe Christ to doe as the Church before Christ did and might do The Church before Christ consisted of Iewes and Proselytes This Church came to have a Separation upon a most ungodly Policie of a 3. Reg. 12. 27. Ieroboam's so that it never peeced together againe To a Common Councell to reforme all they would not come Was it not lawfull for Iudah to reforme her selfe when Israel would not joyne Sure it was or els the Prophet deceives me that sayes expresly b Hos. 4. 15. Though Israel transgresse yet let not Iudah sinne And S. Hierome c Super Haereticis prona intelligentia est S. Hier Ibid. expounds it of this very particular sinne of Heresie and Errour in Religion Nor can you say that d Non tamen cessavit Deus populum hunc arguere per Prophetas Nam ibi extiter unt Magni illi insignes Prophetae Elias Elizaeus c. S. Aug. L. 17. de Civit. Dei c. 22. Multi religiosè intra se Dei cultum habebant c. De quo numero eorumvè Posteris septem illa miâ—…ia fuisse statuo qui in Persecutione sub Achabo Deum sibi ab Idololatriâ immunes reservârunt nec genua ante Baal flexerunt Fran. Monceius L. 1. de Vit. Aureo c. 12. Israel from the time of the Separation was not a Church for there were true Prophets in it e 3. Reg. 17. sub Achabo Elias and f 4. Reg. 3. sub Iehoram filio Achabi Elizaeus and others and g 3. Reg. 19. 18. thousands that had not bowed knees to Baal And there was salvation for these which cannot be in the Ordinary way where there is no Church And God threatens h Hos. 9. 17. to cast them away to wander among the Nations and be no Congregation no Church therefore he had not yet cast them away in Non Ecclesiam into No-Church And they are expresly called the People of the Lord in i 4. Reg. 9. 6. Iehu's time and so continued long after Nor can you plead that Iudah is your part and the Ten Tribes ours as some of you doe for if that bee true you must grant that the Multitude and greater number is ours And where then is Multitude your numerous Note of the Church For the Ten Tribes were more then the two But you cannot plead it For certainly if any Calves be set up they are in Dan and in Bethel They are not ours Besides to reforme what is amisse in Doctrine or Manners is as lawfull for a Particular Church as it is to publish and promulgate any thing that is Catholike in either And your Question Quo Judice lies alike against both And yet I thinke it may be proved that the Church of Rome and that as a Particular Church did promulgate an Orthodoxe Truth which was not then Catholikely admitted in the Church namely The Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Sonne If she erred in this Fact confesse her Errour if she erred not why may not another Particular Church doe as shee did A learned Schoole-man of yours saith she may †Non oportuit ad hac cos vocare quum Authoritas fuerit publicandi apud siaâ—… Romanam pracipuè cùm unicuique ctiam particulari Ecclesiaeliceat id quod Catholicum est promulgare Alb. Mag. in 1. Dist. 11. A. 9. The Church of Rome needed not to call the Grecians to agree upon this Truth fince the Authority of publishing it was in the Church of Rome especially since it is lawfull for every particular Church to promulgate that which is Catholike Nor can you say he m anes Catholike as fore determined by the Church in generall for so this Point when Rome added Filioque to the Creed of a Generall Councell was not And how the Grecians were used in the after-Councell such as it was of Florence is not to trouble this Dispute But Catholike stands there for that which is so in the nature of it and Fundamentally Nor can you justly say That the Church of Rome did or might do this by the Pope's Authority over the Church For suppose he have that and that his Sentence be Infallible I say suppose both but I give neither yet neither his Authority nor his Infallibility can belong unto him as the particular Bishop of that Sea but as the * Non errare convenit Papa â—…t est Caput Bell. L. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 3. Ministeriall Head of the whole Church And you are all so Iodged in this that †L. 2. de Christo. c. 21. §. Quando autem So you cannot finde Record of your own Truths which are farre more likely to be kept but when Errours are crept in we must bee bound to tell the place and the time and I know not what of their Beginnings or els they are not Errours As if some Errours might not want a Record as well as some Truth Bellarmine professes he can neither tell the yeare when nor the Pope under whom this Addition was made A Particular Church then if you judge it by the Schoole of Rome or the Practice of Rome may publish any thing that is Catholike where the whole Church is silent and may therefore Reforme any thing that is not Catholike where the whole Church is negligent or will not But you are as jealous of the honour of Rome as a
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
Reformation or a free Councell And the * Leo 10. Bull. Inn. 8. 1520. Pope himselfe to shew his Charity had declared and pronounced the Appellants Hereticks before they were Condemned by the Councell I hope an Assembly of Enemies are no Lawfull Councell and I thinke the Decrees of such a one are omni jure nulla and carry their Nullity with them through all Law Againe is that Councell Generall that hath none of the Easterne Churches Consent nor presence there Are all the Greekes so become Non Ecclesia no Church that they have no Interest in Generall Councels Iâ—… numbers indeed among the Subscribers sixe Greekes They might be so by Nation or by Title purposely given them but dare you say they were actually Bishops of and sent from the Greeke Church to the Councell Or is it to be accounted a Generall Councell that in many Sessions had scarce Ten Archbishops or Forty or Fifty Bishops present And for the West of Christendome nearer home it reckons one English S. Assaph But Cardinall Poole was there too And Fnglish indeed he was by birth but not sent to that Councell by the King and Church of England but as one of the †Concil Trid. Sess. 5. Popes Legates And so we finde him in the fift Session of that Councell but neither before nor after And at the beginning of the Councell he was not Bishop in the Church of England and after he was Archbishop of Canterburie he never went over to the Councell And can you prove that S. Assaph went thither by Authority There were but few of other Nations and it may be some of them reckoned with no more truth then the Greekes In all the Sessions under Paul the third but two French-men and sometimes none as in the sixt under Iulius the third when Henr. 2. of France protested against that Councell And in the end it is well known how all the French which were then a good part held off till the Cardinall of Loraigne was got to Rome As for the Spaniards they laboured for many things upon good Grounds and were most unworthily over-borne To all this A. C. hath nothing to say but That it is not Necessary to the Lawfulnesse and Generalnesse of a A. C. p. 61. Councell that all Bishops of the World should be actually present subscribe or consent but that such Promulgation be made as is morally sufficient to give notice that such a Councell is called and that all may come if they will and that a Major part at least of those that are present give assent to the Decrees I will forget that it was but p. 59. in which A. C. p. 59. A. C. speakes of all Pastours and those not onely summoned but gathered together And I will easily grant him that 't is not necessary that all Bishops in the Christian world be present and subscribe But sure 't is necessary to the Generalnesse of a Councell that some be †Ut aliqui mittantur advcniant conveniant c. Bellar L. 1. de Concil c. 17. §. Quarta ut saltem there and authorized for all Particular Churches And to the freedome of a Councell that all that come may come safe And to the Lawfulnesse of a Councell that all may come uningaged and not fastened to a fide before they sit downe to argue or deliberate Nor is such a Promulgation as A. C. mentions sufficient but onely in Case of Contumacy and that where they which are called and refuse to come have no just Cause for their not comming as too many had in the Case of Trent And were such a Promulgation sufficient for the Generalnesse of a Councell yet for the Freedome and the Lawfulnesse of it it were not F. So said I would Arrians say of the Councell of Nice The B. would not admit the Case to be like B. So indeed you said And not you alone It is § 28 the Common Objection made against all that admit not every latter Councell as fully as that Councell of Nice famous through all the Christian world In the meane time nor you nor they consider that the Case is not alike as I then told you If the Case be alike in all why doe not you admit that which was held at Ariminum and the second of Ephesus as well as Nice If you say as yours doe It was because the Pope approved them not That 's a true Cause but not Adequate or full For it was because the Whole Church refused them * §. 26. N. 1. with whom the Romane Prelate standing then entire in the Faith agreed and so for his Patriarchate refused those Councels But suppose it 〈◊〉 that these Syâ—…s were not admitted because the Pope refused them yet this ground is gamed That the Câ—…e is not alike for mens Assent to all Councells And if you looke to have this granted That the Pope must coâ—…me or the Councel's not lawfull we have farre more reason to looke that this be not denied Thâ—…t Scripture must not be departed from in a Here A. C. tels us that the 〈◊〉 thought so of the 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Namely that they departed from 〈◊〉 and Sense of Scripture They said to â—…deed But the Testimony of the whole Clutch both then and sinâ—… went wâ—… the Councell against the Arrian So is it not â—…ere against the Protestant â—…or I râ—…t For they offer to be tâ—…ed by that very Councell of Nice and all the 〈◊〉 Councells and Fathers of the Châ—… within the first foure hundred yeares and somewhat farther letter or necessary sense or the Councell is not lawfull For the Consent and Confirmation of Scripture is of farre greater Authority to make the Councell Authenticall and the Decisions of it de fide then any Confirmation of the Pope can bee Now of these two the Councell of Nâ—…e we are sure had the first the 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 and you say it had the second the 〈◊〉 Confirmation The Councell of Trent we are able to prove had not the first and so we have no reason to respect the second And to what end do your Learâ—… Men maintaine that a Councell may make a Conclusion de sâ—…e though it be simply b So Staplâ—… often but the Fathers quite otherwise 〈◊〉 extra Evangeliâ—…m sâ—…nt 〈◊〉 sâ—…am Hâ—… L. 2. 〈◊〉 Câ—… extra out of aâ—…l â—…nd oâ—… Scrâ—…ure but out of a Iealousie at least that this of Trent and some others have in their Determinâ—…s left both â—…ter and Sense of Scripture Shew this against the Councell of Nice and I will grant so much of the Case to be like But what will you say if c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L. 2. 〈◊〉 Syâ—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Niâ—…linum Constâ—… required That 〈◊〉 thus brought into Question 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 by Testimony out of Scripture And the 〈◊〉 of the 〈◊〉 Councell never refused that â—…e And what will you say if they professe they depart not from it 〈◊〉
Animas reâ—…runt Pet. Matt. Loc. Com. Class 3. Ca. 15. Nu 4. they utterly deny any Resurrection of the Body after Death So with them that Article of the Creed is gone Now then if any man will guide his Faith by this Rule of A. C. The Consent of dissenting Parties or the Confession of the Adverse Part hee must denie the Resurrection of the Body from the Grave to Glory and believe none but that of the Soule from sinne to Grace which the Adversaries Confesse and in which the Dissenting Parties agree Punct 3. Thirdly in the great Dispute of all others about the Vnity of the Godhead All dissenting parties Iew Turke and Christian Among Christians Orthodoxe and Anti-Trinitarian of old And in these later times Orthodoxe and Socinian that Horrid and mighty monster of all Heresies agree in this That there is but one God And I hope it is as necessary to believe one God our Father as one Church our Mother Now will A. C. say here 't is safest believing as the dissenting Parties agree or as the Adverse Parties Confesse namely That there is but one God and so deny the Trinity and therewith the Sonne of God the Saviour of the world Fourthly in a Point as Fundamentall in the Faith as Punct 4. this Namely whether Christ be true and very God For which very Point most of the a Hebr. 11. 37. Cyrillus Alexandrinut malè audivit quod Ammonium Martyrem appellavit quem constitit temeritatis poenas dedisse non Necessitate negandi Christi in tormentis esse mortuum Socr. Hist. Eccl. L. 7. c. 14. Martyrs in the Primitive Church laid down their lives The dissenting Parties here were the Orthodoxe Believers who affirme Hee is both God and Man for so our Creed teaches us And all those Hereticks which affirme Christ to bee Man but denie him to bee God as the b Optatus L. 4. Cont. Parmen Arrians and c Tertul. L. de Prascrip c. 48. Carpocratians and d Tertul. Ibid. Cerinthus and e Tertul. L. de Carne Christi c. 14. Hebion with others and at this day the f Si ad Iesu Christi respicias Essentiam at que Naturam non nisi Hominem eum fuisse constantèr affirmaâ—…us Volkelius Lib. 3. de Religione Christianâ cap. 1. Socinians These dissenting Parties agree fully and clearely That Christ is Man Well then Dare A. C. sticke to his Rule here and say 't is safest for a Christian in this great Point of Faith to governe his Beliefe by the Consent of these dissenting Parties or the Confession and acknowledgement of the Adverse Partie and so settle his Beliefe that Christ is a meere Man and not God I hope hee dares not So then this Rule To Resolve a mans Faith into that in which the Dissenting Parties agree or which the Adverse Part confesses is as often false as true And false in as Great if not Greater Matters then those in which it is true And where 't is true A. C. and his fellowes dare not governe themselves by it the Church of Rome condemning those things which that Rule proves And yet while they talke of Certainty nay of Infallibility lesse will not serve their turnes they are driven to make use of such poore shifts as these which have no certainty at all of Truth in them but inferre falshood and Truth alike And yet for this also men will be so weake or so wilfull as to be seduced by them I told you * §. 35. Nu. 2. fine before That the force of the preceding Argument lies upon two things The one expressed and that 's past the other upon the Bye which comes now to be handled And that is your continuall poore Out-cry against us That we cannot be saved because we are out of the Church Sure if I thought I were out I would get in as fast as I could For we confesse as well as you That a Extra Ecclesiam veminem Vivificat Spiritus Sanctus S. Aug. Epist. 5 0. ad finem Field L. 1. de Eccles. c. 13. Vna est Fidelium Vniversalis Ecclesia extra quam nullus salvatur Conc Lateran Can. 1. And yet even there there is no mention of the Romane Church Out of the Catholike Church of Christ there is no Salvation But what do you meane by Out of the Church Sure out of the b And so doth A. C. too Out of the Catholiâ—… Romane Church there is no Possibility of Salvaâ—…on A C. p. 65. Romane Church Why but the Romane Church and the Church of England are but two distinct members of that Catholike Church which is spread over the face of the earth Therefore Rome is not the House where the Church dwels but Rome it selfe as well as other Particular Churches dwels in this great Universall House unlesse you will shut up the Church in Rome as the Donatists did in Africke I come a little lower Rome and oâ—…her Nationall Churches are in this Vniversall Catholike House as so many * And Daughter Sion was God's owne phrase of old of the Church Isa. 1. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hyppol Orat. de Consum mundi Et omnis Ecclesia Virgo appellata est S. Aug. Tr. 13. in S. Ioh. Daughters to whom under Christ the care of the Houshold is committed by God the Father and the Catholike Church the Mother of all Christians Rome as an Elder Sister †For Christ was to be preached to all Nations but that Preaching was to begin at Ierusalem S. Luc. 24. 47. according to the Prophesie Mic. 4. 2. And the Disciples were first called Christians at Antioch Act. 11. 26. And therefore there was a Church there before ever S. Peter came thence to settle One at Rome Nor is it an Opinion destitute either of Authority or Probability That the Faith of Christ was preached and the Sacraments administred here in England before any settlement of a Church in Rome For S. Gildas the Ancientest monument we have and whom the Romanists themselves reverence sayes expresly That the Religion of Christ was received in Britannie Tempore ut scimus summo Tiberii Caesaris c. In the later time of Tiberius Caesar Gildas deexcid Brit. whereas S. Peter kept in Iewrie long after Tiberius his death Therefore the first Conversion of this Iland to the Faith was not by S. Peter Nor from Rome which was not then a Church Against this Rich. Broughton in his Ecclesiasticall History of Great Britaine Centur. 1. C. 8. §. 4. sayes expresly That the Protestants do freely acknowledge that this Clause of the time of Tiberius tempore summo Tiberii Caesaris is wanting in other Copies of that holy Writer and namely in that which was set forth by Pol. Virgil and others Whereas first these words are expresse in a most faire and ancient Manuscript of Gildas to be seene in S t. Rob. Cotton's Study if any doubt it Secondly these words are as expresse in
tantum ut omnes Mandato suo obediant licitum est Catholicis facere Quià praestant solum Obedientia officium Sin jubeat ut eo Symbolo fimul Religionem Haereticam profiteantur parere non debent Quares iterum An liceat Catholico obedire modò publicè asseveret se id efficere solùm ut Principi suo obediat non ut sectam hareticam profiteatur I Respondeo Quidam id licere arbitrantur ne bona ejus publicentâ—…r vel Vita eripiatur Quod sanè probabiliter dici videtur Azorius Instit. Moral p. 1. L 8. c. 27 p. 1299. Edit Paris 1616. Azorius affirmes this in expresse termes And what doe you think can he prove it Nay not Azorius onely but other Priests and Iesuites here in England either teach some of their Proselytes or els some of them learn it without teaching That though they be perswaded as this Lady was that is though they be Romane Catholikes yet either to gaine honour or save their purse they may goe to the Protestant Church just as the Iesuite here sayes The Lady did out of frailty and feare to offend the King Therefore I pray A. C. if this be grosse dissimulation both with God and the world speake to your fellowes to leave perswading or practising of it and leave men in the profession of Religion to bee as they seeme or to seeme and appeare as they are Let 's have no Maske worne here A. C s. second Reason why one so perswaded as that Lady was might not goe to the Protestant Church is Because that were outwardly A. C. p. 73. to professe a Religion in Conscience knowne to bee false To this I answer first that if this Reason be true it concernes all men as well as those that be perswaded as the Lady was For no man may outwardly professe a Religion in conscience knowne to bee false For with the bea rt man believeth to righteousnesse and with the mouth hee confesseth to salvation Rom. 10. Rom. 10. 10. Now to his owne salvation no man can confesse a knowne false Religion Secondly if the Religion of the Protestants be in conscience a knowne false Religion then the Romanists Religion is so too for their Religion is the same Nor do the Church of Rome and the Protestants set up a different Religion for the Christian Religion is the same to both but they differ in the same Religion And the difference is in certaine grosse corruptions to the very endangering of salvation which each side sayes the other is guilty of Thirdly the Reason given is most untrue for it may appeare by all the former Discourse to any Indifferent Reader that Religion as it is professed in the Church of England is nearest of any Church now in being to the Primiâ—…ive Church And therefore not a Religion knowne to be false And this I both doe and can prove were not the deafenesse of the Aspe upon the eares of seduced 〈◊〉 58. 4. Christians in all humane and divided parties whatsoever After these Reasons thus given by him A. C. tels me That I neither doe nor can prove any superstition A. C. p. 73. or errour to be in the Romane * I would A. C. would call it the Romane Perswasion as some understanding Romanists do Religion What none at all Now truly I would to God from my heart this were true and that the Church of Rome were so happy and the whole Catholike Church thereby blessed with Truth and Peace For I am confident such Truth as that would soone either Command Peace or †For though I spare their Names yet can I not agree in Iudgement with him that sayes in Print God be praised for the disagreement in Religion Nor in Devotion with him that prayed in the Pulpit That God would teare the Rent of Religion wider But of S. Greg. Naz. Opinion I am 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Non studemus paci in detrimentum verae Doctrinae ut facilitatis Mansuetudinis famam colligamus Et rursum Pacem colimus legitimè pâ—…gnantes c. Orat. 32. confound Peace-Breakers But is there no Superstition in Adoration of Images None in Invocation of Saints None in Adoration of the Sacrament Is there no errour in breaking Christs own Institution of the Sacrament by giving it but in one kinde None about Purgatorie About Common Prayer in an unknowne tongue none These and many more are in the Romane Religion if you will needs call it so And 't is no hard worke to prove every of these to be Errour or Superstition or both But if A. C. think so meanely of me that though this be no hard worke in it selfe yet that I such is my weakenesse cannot prove it I shall leave him to enjoy that opinion of me or what ever else he shall be pleased to entertaine and am farre better content with this his opinion of my weaknesse then with that which followes of my pride for he adds That I cannot A. C. p. 73. prove any Errour or Superstition to be in the Romane Religion but by presuming with intolerable pride to make my selfe or some of my fellowes to be Iudge of Controversies and by taking Authority to censure all to be Superstition and Errour too which sutes not with my fancy although it be generally held or practised by the Vniversall Church Which saith he in S. Augustine's judgement is most 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What not prove any Superstition any Errâ—…ur at Rome but by Pride and that 〈◊〉 Truly I would to God A. C. saw my heart and all the Pride that lodges therein But wherein doth this Pride appeare that he censures me so deeply Why first in this That I cannot prove any Errour or Superstition to be in the Romane Religion unlesse I make my selfe or 〈◊〉 of my fellowes Iudge of Controversies Indeed if I tooke this upon me I were guilty of great Pride But A C. knowes well that before in this Conference which he undertakes to Answer I am so farre from making my selfe or any of my fellowes Iudge of Controversies that a §. 33. §. 26. Nu. 1. 11. I absolutely make a lawfull and free Generall Councell Iudge of Controversies by and according to the Scriptures And this I learned from b Praeponitur Scripturae c. S. Aug. L. 2. de Bapt. cont Donat c. 3. S. Augustine with this That ever the Scripture is to have the prerogative above the Councell Nay A. C. should remember here that c §. 32. Nu. 5. A. C. p. 63. he himselfe taxes me for giving too much power to a Generall Councell and binding men to a strict Obedience to it even in Case of Errour And therefore sure most innocent I am of the intolerable pride which he is pleased to charge upon me and he of all men most unfit to charge it Secondly A. C. will have my pride appeare in this A. C. p. 73. that I take Authority to censure all for
the Romane Church with his Colleagues the Transmarine Bishops non debuit ought not usurpe to himselfe this Iudgment which was determined by seventy African Bishops Tigisitanus sitting Primate â—…nd what will you say if he did not usurpe this Power For the Emperour being desired sent Bishops Iudges which should sit with him and determine what was just upon the whole Cause In which Passage there are very many things Observeable As first that the Romane Prelate came not in till there was leave for them to go to Transmarine Bishops Secondly that if the Pope had come in without this Leave it had been an Usurpation Thirdly that when he did thus come in not by his owne Proper Authority but by Leave there were other Bishops made Iudges with him Fourthly that these other Bishops were appointed and sent by the Emperour and his Power that which the Pope will least of all indure Lastly least the Pope and his Adherents should say this was an Usurpation in the Emperour * Ad cujus Cuvanâ—…ds quâ rationem Deo redditurus est res illa maximè pertinebat S. Aug. Epist 162. S. Augustine tels us a little before in the same Epistle still that this doth chiefly belong ad Curam ejus to the Emperours Care and charge and that He is to give an Account to God for it And Melciades did sit and Iudge the Businesse with all Christian Prudence and Moderation So at this time the Romane Prelate was not received as Pastour of the whole Church say A. C. what he please Nor had he any Supremacy over the other Patriarchs And for this were all other Records of Antiquity silent the Civill Law is proofe enough And that 's a Monument of the Primitive Church The Text there is †Nam contra horum Antistitum de Patriarchis loquitur Sententias non esse locum Appellationi à Majoribus nostris â—…itutum est â—…od L 1. Tit. 4. L. 29. ex â—…ditions Gothofredi Si non rata habuerit â—…traque Pars qua judicata sunt tunc Beatissimns Patriarcha Dioceseôs illius â—…ter eos audiat c. Nullâ parte ejus Sententiae contradicere valente Authen Coâ—…at 9. Tit. 15. C. 22. A Patriarchâ non datur Appellatio From a Patriarch there lies no Appeale No Appeale Therefore every Patriarch was alike Supreme in his owne Patriarchate Therefore the Pope then had no Supremacie over the whole Church Therefore certainely not then received as Universall Pastour And S. Gregory himselfe speaking of Appeales and expresly citing the Lawes themselves sayes plainly * Et ille scilicet Patriarcha secundum Canones Leges prâ—…bent finem And there hee cites the Novell its selfe S. Greg. L. 11. Judict 6. Epist. 54. That the Patriarch is to put a finall end to those Causes which come before him by Appeale from Bishops and Archbishops but then he adds a Si dictum fuâ—…it quòd nec Metropolitanum habeat nec Patriarcham dicendum est quòd à Sede Apostolicâ quae omnium Ecclesiarum Caput est causa andienda est c. S. Greg. Ibid. That where there is nor Metropolitan nor Patriarch of that Diocesse there they are to have recourse to the Sea Apostolike as being the Head of all Churches Where first this implies plainely That if there bee a Metropolitan or a Patriarch in those Churches his Iudgement is finall and there ought to be no Appeale to Rome Secondly 'T is as plaine That in those Ancient times of the Church-Government Britaine was never subject to the Sea of Rome For it was one of the b Notitia Provinciarum Occidentalium per Guidum Pancirolum l. 2. c. 48. Sixe Diocesses of the West Empire and had a Primate of its owne Nay c Hunc cunctis Liberalium Artium disciplinis eruditum pro Magistro teneamus quasi Comparem velut alterius Orbis Apostolicum Patriarcham c. Io. Capgravius de Vitis Sanctorum in vitâ S. Anselmi Et Guil. Malmesburiens de Gestis Pontificum Anglorum p. 223. Edit Francof 1601. Iohn Capgrave one of your owne and Learned for those times and long before him William of Malmesburie tell us That Pope Urbane the second at the Councell held at Bari in Apulia accounted my Worthy Predecessour S. Anselme as his owne Compeere and said he was as the Apostolike and Patriarch of the other world So he then termed this Iland Now the Britains having a Primate of their owne which is greater then a Metropolitan yea a d Ibi Cantuariae id est prima Sedes Archiepiscopi habetur qui est totius Anglia Primas Patriarcha Guil. Malmesburiensis in Prolog Lib. 1. de Gestis Pontificum Anglorum p. 195. Patriarch if you will He could not be Appealed from to Rome by S. Gregorie's owne Doctrine Thirdly it will be hard for any man to proove there were any Churches then in the World which were not under some either Patriarch or Metropolitane Fourthly if any such were 't is gratis dictum and impossible to be proved that all such Churches where ever seated in the world were obliged to depend on Rome For manifest it is that the Bishops which were Ordained in places without the Limits of the Romane Empire which places they commonly called * praterea qui sunt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Baâ—…barico Episcopi à Sanctissimo Throno Sanctissima Constantinopolitanae Ecclesia Ordinentur Codex Canonum Ecclesia universae Can. 206. And Iustellus proves it there at large that by in Barbarico in that Canon is meant In Solo Barbarorum Annot. Ibid. Barbarous were all to be Ordained and therefore most probable to be governed by the Patriarch of Constantinople And for Rome's being the Head of all Churches I have said enough to that in diverse parts of this Discourse And since I am thus fallen upon the Church of Africk I shall borrow another reason from the Practice of that Church why by Principatus S. Augustine neither did nor could meane any Principality of the Church or Bishop of Rome over the Whole Church of Christ. For as the Acts of Councels and Stories go the African Prelates finding that all succeeding Popes were not of Melciades his temper set themselves to assert their owne Liberties and held it out stoutly against Zozimus Boniface the first and Caelestine the first who were successively Popes of Rome At last it was concluded in the sixt Councell of Carthage wherein were assembled two hundred and seventeene Bishops of which S. Augustine himselfe was one that they would not give way to such a manifest incroachment upon their Rights and Liberties and thereupon gave present notice to Pope Coelestine to forbeare sending his Officers amongst them †Ne fâ—…mosum typhum seculi in Ecclesiam Christi videatur inducere c. Epist Conc. Afric ad Papam Coelestinum primum Apud Nicolin To. 1. Concil p. 844. least he should seeme to induce the swelling pride of the world into