that Proposition in terminis So here the very Foundation of A. C ' s. Dilemma fals off For I say not That onely the Points of the Creed are Fundamentall whether expressed or not expressed That all of them are that I say And yet though the Foundation of his Dilemma be fallen away I will take the boldnesse to tell A. C. That if I had said That those Articles onely which are expressed in the Creed are Fundamentall it would have beene hard to have excluded the Scripture upon which the Creed it selfe in every Point is grounded For nothing is supposed to shut out its owne Foundation And if I should now say that some Articles are Fundamentall which are infolded in the Creed it would not follow that therefore some unwritten Traditions were Fundamentall Some Traditions I deny not true and firme and of great both Authority and Vse in the Church as being Apostolicall but yet not Fundamentall in the Faith And it would be a mighty large fold which should lap up Traditions within the Creed As for that Tradition That the Bookes of holy Scriptures are Divine and Infallible in every part I will handle that when I come to the proper place * §. 16. N. 1. for it F. I asked how then it happened as M. Rogers saith that the English Church is not yet resolved what is the right sense of the Article of Christs Descending into Hell B. The English Church never made doubt that § 12 I know what was the sense of that Article The words are so plaine they beare their meaning before them Shee was content to put that a Art 3. Article among those to which she requires Subscription not as doubting of the sense but to prevent the Cavils of some who had beene too busie in Crucifying that Article and in making it all one with the Article of the Crosse or but an Exposition of it And surely for my part I thinke the Church of England is better resolved of the right sense of this Article then the Church of Rome especially if shee must be tryed by her Writers as you try the Church of England by M. Rogers For you cannot agree whether this Article be a meere Tradition or whether it hath any Place of Scripture to vvarrant it a Scotus in 1. D. 11. q. 1. Scotus and b Stapleton Relect. Con. 5. q. 5. Art 1. Stapleton allow it no footing in Scripture but c Bellarm 4. de Christo. c. 6. 12. Scripturae passim hoc docent Bellarmine is resolute that this Article is every where in Scripture and d Thom. 2 â—…ae q. 1. A 9 ad 1. Thomas grants as much for the whole Creed The Church of England never doubted it and S. e S. Aug. Ep. 99. Augustine prooves it And yet againe you are different for the sense For you agree not Whether the Soule of Christ in triduo mortis in the time of his Death did go downe into Hell really and was present there or vertually and by effects only For g Tho. p. 3. q. 52. A. 2. c. per suam essentiam Thomas holds the first and h Dur in 3. d. 22. q. 3. Durand the later Then you agree not Whether the Soule of Christ did descend really and in essence into the lowest pit of Hell and Place of the Damned as i Bellar. L. 4. do Christo. c. 16. Bellarmine once held probable and prooved it or really only into that place or Region of Hell which you call Limbum Patrum and then but vertually from thence into the Lower Hell to which k Bellar. Recog p. 11. Bellarmine reduces himselfe and gives his reason because it is the l Sequuntur enim Tho. p. 3. Q. 52. A. 2. common Opinion of the Schoole Now the Church of England takes the words as they are in the Creed and believes them without farther Dispute and in that sense which the ancient Primitive Fathers of the Church agreed in And yet if any in the Church of England should not be throughly resolved in the sense of this Article Is it not as lawfull for them to say I conceive thus or thus of it yet if any other way of his Descent be found truer then this I deny it not but as yet I know no other as it was for m Non est pertinaciter asserendum quin Anima Christi per alium modum nobis ignotum potuerit descendere ad Infernum Nec nos negamus alium modum esse for sit an veriorem sed fatemur nos illum ignor arc Durand in 3. sent Dist. 22. q. 3. Nu. 9. Durand to say it and yet not impeach the Foundation of the Faith F. The Bishop said That M. Rogers was but a private man But said I if M. Rogers writing as he did by publike Authority be accounted only a private man c. B. I said truth when I said M. Rogers was a private § 13 man And I take it you will not allow every speech of every man though allowed by Authority to have his Bookes Printed to be the Doctrine of the Church of Rome * And this was an Ancient fault too for S. Augustine checks at it in his time Noli colligere calumnias ex Episcoporum scriptis sive Hillarii sive Cypriani Agrippini Primò quia hoc genus literarum ab Authoritate Canonis distinguendum est Non enim sic leguntur tanquam it a ex iis testimonium proferatur ut contrà sentire non liceat sicubi fortè aliter sentirent quà m veritas postulat S. Aug. Ep. 48. c. And yet these were farre greater men in their generations then M. Rogers was This hath beene oft complained of on both sides The imposing particular mens assertions upon the Church yet I see you meane not to leave it And surely as Controversies are now handled by some of your party at this day I may not say it is the sense of the Article in hand but I have long thought it a kinde os descent into Hell to be conversant in them I would the Authors would take heed in time and not seeke to blinde the People or cast a mist before evident Truth least it cause a finall descent to that place of Torment But since you will hold this course Stapleton was of greater note with you then M. Rogers his exposition of Notes upon the Articles of the Church of England is with us And as he so his Relection And is it the Doctrine of the Church of Rome which Stapleton affirmes †Stapl. Cont. 5. q. 5. A. 1. The Scripture is silent that Christ descended into Hell and that there is a Catholike and an Apostolike Church If it be then what will become of the Popes Supremacie over the whole Church Shall he have his Power over the Catholike Church given him expresly in Scripture in the a S. Mat. 16. 19. Keyes to enter and in b S. Ioh. 21. 15. Pasce
to feede when he is in and when he had fed to c S. Luk. 22. 35. Confirme and in all these not to erre and faile in his Ministration And is the Catholike Church in and over which he is to do all these great things quite left out of the Scripture Belike the Holy Ghost was carefull to give him his power Yes in any case but left the assigning of his great Cure the Catholike Church to Tradition And it were well for him if he could so prescribe for what he now Claymes But what if after all this M. Rogers there sayes no such thing As in truth he doth not His words are d Rogers in Art Eccle. Angl. Art 3. All Christians acknowledge He descended but in the interpretation of the Article there is not that consent that were to be wished What is this to the Church of England more then others And againe e Ibid. Till we know the native and undoubted sense of this Article is M. Rogers We the Church of England or rather his and some others Iudgement in the Church of England Now here A. C. will have somewhat againe to say though God knowes 't is to little purpose 'T is A. C. p. 47. that the Iesuite urged M. Roger's Booke because it was set out by Publike Authority And because the Booke beares the Title of the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England A. C. may undoubtedly urge M. Rogers if he please But he ought not to say that his Opinion is the Doctrine of the Church of England for neither of the Reasons by him expressed First not because his Booke was publikely allowed For many Bookes among them as well as among us have beene Printed by publike Authority as containing nothing in them contrary to Faith and good manners and yet containing many things in them of Opinion only or private Iudgement which yet is farre from the avowed Positive Doctrine of the Church the Church having as yet determined neither way by open Declaration upon the words or things controverted And this is more frequent among their Schoolemen then among any of our Controversers as is well knowne Nor secondly because his Booke beares the Title of the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England For suppose the worst and say M. Rogers thought a little too well of his owne paines and gave his Booke too high a Title is his private Iudgement therefore to be accounted the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England Surely no No more then I should say every thing said by * Angelici D. S. Tho. Summa Thomas or †Celebratissimi Patris Dom. Bonaventurae Doctoris Seraphici in 3. L. Sent. Disputata Bonaventure is Angelicall or Seraphicall Doctrine because one of these is stiled in the Church of Rome Seraphicall and the other Angelicall Doctor And yet their workes are Printed by Publike Authority and that Title given them Yea but our private Authors saith A. C. are not allowed for ought I know in such a like sorte to expresse A. C. p. 47. our Catholike Doctrine in any matter subject to Question Here are two Limitations which will goe farre to bring A. C. off whatsoever I shall say against him For first let me instance in any private man that takes as much upon him as M. Rogers doth he will say he knew it not his Assertion here being no other then for ought he knowes Secondly If he be unwilling to acknowledge so much yet he will answer 't is not just in such a like sort as M. Rogers doth it that is perhaps it is not the very Title of his Booke But well then Is there never a Private man allowed in the Church of Rome to expresse your Catholike Doctrine in any matter subject to question What not in any matter Were not Vega and Soto two private men Is it not a mâ—…tter subject to Question to great Question in these Dayes Whether a man may be certaine of his Salvation câ—…rtitudine fidei by the certainty of Faith Doth nâ—…t * Bellar. Lib. 3. de Justificat c. 1. 14. Bellarmine make it a Controversie And is it not a part of your Catholike Faith if it be determined in the †Huic Concilio Catholici omnes ingenia sua judicia sponte subjiciunt Bellar. 3. de Justif. c. 3. §. Sed Concilii Tridâ—…i Councell of Trent And yet these two great Friers of their time Dominicus Soto and Andreas Vega a Hist. Concil Trident. Lib. 2. p. 245. Edit Lat. Leidae 1622. were of contrary Opinions and both of them challenged the Decree of the Councell and so consequently your Catholike Faith to be as each of them concluded and both of them wrote Bookes to maintaine their Opinions and both of their Bookes were published by Authority And therefore I think 't is allowed in the Church of Rome to private men to expresse your Catholike Doctrine and in a matter subject to Question And therefore also if another man in the Church of England should be of a contrary Opinion to M. Rogers and declare it under the Title of the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England this were no more then Soto and Vega did in the Church of Rome And I for my part cannot but wonder A. C. should not know it A. C. p. 47. For he sayes that for ought he knowes Private men are not allowed so to expresse their Catholike Doctrine And in the same Question both Catharinus and Bellarmine b Bellar. L. 3. de Iustif. c. 3. take on them to expresse your Catholike Faith the one differing from the other almost as much as Soto and Vega and perhaps in some respect more F. But if M. Rogers be only a private man in what Book may we finde the Protestants publike Doctrine The Bishop answered That to the Booke of Articles they were all sworne B. What Was I so ignorant to say The Articles § 14 of the Church of England were the Publike Doctrine of all the Protestants Or that all Protestants were sworne to the Articles of England as this speech seems to imply Sure I was not Was not the immediate speech before of the Church of England And how comes the Subject of the Speech to be varied in the next lines Nor yet speake I this as if other Protestants did not agree with the Church of England in the chiefest Doctrines and in the maine Exceptions which they joyntly take against the Romane Church as appeares by their severall Confessions But if A. C. will say as he doth that because there was speech before of the Church of A. C. p. 47. England the Iesuite understood mee in a limited sense and meant only the Protestants of the English Church Bee it so ther 's no great harme done †And therfore A. C. needs not make such a Noise about it as he doth p. 48 but this that the Iesuite offers to enclose me too much For I did not
Testificandum de Christo Legibus ejus vilior est Christi legibus Scripturis Sanctis necessariò postponenda Wald. L. 2. Doct. Fidei Art 2. cap. 21. Numb 1. though this be contrary to their owne Doctrine must bee finally Resolved into the Authority of the Present Romane Church And though they would seeme to have us believe the Fathers and the Church of old yet they will not have us take their Doctrine from their owne Writings or the Decrees of Councels because as they say wee cannot know by reading them what their meaning was but from the Infallible Testimony of the present Romane Church teaching by Tradition Now by this two things are evident First That they ascribe as great Authority if not greater to a part of the Catholike Church as they doe to the whole which wee believe in our Creede and which is the Society of all Christians And this is full of Absurdity in Nature in Reason in All things That any c Totum est majus suâ parte Etiamsi Axioma sit apud Euclâ—…dem non tamen ideò Geometricum put andum est quia Geometres to utitur Vtitur enim tota Logica Ram in Schol. Matth. And Aristotle vindicates such Propositions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from being vsurped by Particular Sciences 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Quia conveniunt omni Eâ—…ti non alicui Generi separatim 4. Metapb cap. 3. T. 7. Part should bee of equall worth power credit or authority with the Whole Secondly that in their Doctrine concerning the Infallibility of their Church their proceeding is most unreasonable For if you aske them Why they believe their whole Doctrine to be the sole true Catholike Faith Their Answer is Because it is agreeable to the Word of God and the Doctrine and Tradition of the Ancient Church If you aske them How they know that to be so They will then produce Testimonies of Scripture Councells and Fathers But if you aske a third time By what meanes they are assured that these Testimonies doe indeed make for them and their Cause They will not then have recourse to Text of Scripture or Exposition of Fathers or phrase and propriety of Language in which either of them were first written or to the scope of the Author or the d Intelligentia dictorum ex causis est assumenda dicendi quia non Sermonires sed Rei Sermo est subjectus S. Hilar. L. 4. de Trin. Ex materiâ dicti dirigendus est sensus Tert. L. de Resur carnis c. 37. Causes of the thing uttered or the Conference with like e Uidendo differentias Similium ad Similia Orig. Tract 19 in S Matth. Places or the Anteceden's f Recolendum est unde venerit ista Sententia qua illam superiora pepererint quibúsque connexa dependeat S. Aug. Ep. 29 Solet circumstantia Scriptura illuminare Sementiam S. Aug. L. 83. Quaest. q. 69. and Consequents of the same Places g Quae ambiguè obscurè in nonnullis Scripturae Sacrae locis dicta videntur per ea quae alibi certa indubitata habentur dâ—…clarantur S Basil in Regulis contractis Reg. 267. Manifestiora quaeque praevaleant de incertis certiora praescribant Tert. L. de Resur c. 19 21. S. Aug. L. 3. De Doct Christ. c. â—…6 Moris est Scripturarum obscuris Manifesta subnectere quod prius sub aenigmatibus dixerint apertâ voce proferre S. Hieron in Esa 19. princ Uide §. 26. Nu. 4. or the Exâ—…osition of the darke and doubtfull Places of Scripture by the undoubted and manifest With divers other Rules given for the true knowledge and understanding of Scripture which do frequently occurre in h S. Aug. L. 3. de Doctr. Christianâ S. Augustine No none of these or the like helpes That with them were to Admit a Private Spirit or to make way for it But their finall Answer is They know it to be so because the present Romane Church witnessethit according to Tradition So arguing à primo ad ultimum from first to last the Present Church of Rome and her Followers believe her owne Doctrine and Tradition to bee true and Catholike because she professes it to be such And if this bee not to proove idem per idem the same by the same I know not what is which though it be most absurd in all kind of learning yet out of this I see not how 't is possible to winde themselves so long as the last resolution of their Faith must rest as they teach upon the Tradition of the present Church only It seemes therefore to mee very necessary * And this is so necessary that Bellarmine confesses that if Tradition which he relies upon be not Divine He and his can have no Faith Non habemus fidem Fides enim verbo Dei nititur L. 4. de verbo Dei c. 4. §. At si ita est And A. C. tells us p. 47. To know that Scripture is Divine and Infallible in every part is a Foundation so necessary as if it be doubtfully questioned all the Faith built upon Scripture falls to the ground And he gives the same reason for it p. 50. which Belarmine doth that we bee able to proove the Bookes of Scripture to bee the Word of God by some Authority that is absolutely Divine For if they bee warranted unto us by any Authority lesse then Divine then all things contained in them which have no greater assurance then the Scripture in which they are read are not Objects of Divine beliefe And that once granted will enforce us to yeeld That all the Articles of Christian Beliefe have no greater assurance then Humane or Morall Faith or Credulity can afford An Authority then simply Divine must make good the Scriptures Infallibility at least in the last Resolution of our Faith in that Poynt This Authority cannot bee any Testimony or Voyce of the * Ecclesiam spiritu afflatam esse certè credo Non ut veritatâ—…m authoritatemve Libris Canonicis triâ—…uat sed ut doc eat illos non alios esse Canonicos Nec fi aditum nobis praebet ad hujusmodi sacros Librâ—…s cognoscendos protinus ibi acquiescendum est sed ultra oportet progredi solidâ Dei veritate niti Quâ ex re intelligitur quid sibi volucrit Augustinus quam ait Evangelio non crederem nisi c. M. Canus L. 2. de Locis c. 8 fol. 34. b. Non docet fundatam esse Evangelii fidem in Ecclesiae Authoritate sed c. Ibid. Church alone For the Church consists of men subject to Error And no one of them fince the Apostles times hath beene assisted with so plentifull a measure of the Blessed Spirit as to secure him from being deceived And all the Parts being all liable to mistaking and sallible the VVhole cannot possibly bee Infallible in and of it self and priviledged from being deceived in some Things oâ—…
indeed can he include 〈◊〉 For he speakes of that Word of God upon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reâ—…cks consent But concerning Traditions they â—…ll consent not That they are a Rule of Faith Therâ—… he speakes not of them Romanists dare not deny but this Rule is â—…aine and that it is 〈◊〉 â—…ntly Knowne in 〈◊〉 â—…lest Places of 〈◊〉 â—…uch as are 〈◊〉 to Salvation none of the Ancients did ever 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—…here's an Infallible Rule Nor need there be such feare 〈◊〉 Private Spirit in these manifest things which beâ—… 〈◊〉 read or heard teach themselves Indeed you 〈◊〉 had need of some other Iudge and he a pâ—…opitious one to crush the Pope's more powerfull â—…rincipality out of Pasce oves feed my sheepe And yet this must be the meaning if you will have it whether Gideon's fleece bee wet or dry Iudg. 6. that is whether there be dew Iudg. 6. enough in the Text to water that sense or no. But I pray when God hath left hisâ—… Church this Infallible Rule what warrant have you to seeke another You have shewed us none yet what e're you thinke you have And I hope A. C. cannot thinke it followes that Christ our Lord hatâ—… provided no Rule to determine necessary Controversies because hee hath not provided the Rule which he would have Besides let there be such a living Iudge as A. C. would have and let the * For so he affirmes p. 58. Pope be he yet that is not sufficient against the malice of the Divell and impious men to keepe the Church at all Times from Renting even in the Doctrine of Faith or to soder the Rents which are made For Oportet esse Haereses 1. Cor. 11. Heresies there will be and Heresies properly there cannot 1. Cor. 11. 19. be but in Doctrine of the Faith And what will A. C. in this Case do Will he send Christ our Lord to provide another Rule then the Decision of the Bishop of Rome because he can neither make Unity nor Certainty of Beliefe And as 't is most apparent he cannot doe it de facto so neither hath he power from Christ over the Whole Church to doe it nay out of all doubt 't is not the least reason why de facto he hath so little successe because de Iure he hath no power given But since A. C. requires another Iudge besides the Scripture and in Cases when either the time is so difficult that a Generall Councell cannot be called or the Councell so set that they will not agree Let 's see how he proves it 'T is thus every earthly kingdome saith he when matters cannot be composed by a Parliament which cannot A. C. p. 60. be called upon all Occasions why doth he not adde here And which being called will not alwaies be of one minde as he did adde it in Case of the Councell hath besides the Law Bookes some living Magistrates and Judges and above all one visible King the Highest Iudge who hath Authority sufficient to end all Controversies and settle Unity in all Temporall Affaires And shall we thinke that Christ the wisest King hath provided in his kingdome the Church onely the Law-bookes of the Holy Scripture and no living visible Iudges and above all one Chiefe so assisted by his Spirit as may suffice to end all Controversies for Vnity and Certainty of Faith which can never be if every man may interpret Holy Scripture the Law-Bookes as he list This is a very plausible Argument with the Many But the foundation of it is but a †Qua subtilissime de hoc disputari possunt ità ut non similitudinibus quae plerunque fallunt sed rebus ipsis satisfiat c. S. Aug. L. de Quant Animae c. 32. Whereupon the Logicians tell us rightly that this is a Fallacy unlesse it be taken reduplicativè i. e. de similibus qua similia sunt And hence Arist. himself 2. Top. Loc. 32. sayes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rursum in Similibus si similitèr se habent Similitude and if the Similitude hold not in the maine the Argument's nothing And so I doubt it will proove here I 'le observe Particulars as they lie in order And first he will have the whole Militant Church for of that we speake a Kingdome But this is not certaine For they are no meane ones which thinke our Saviour Christ left the Church Militant in the Hands of the Apostles and their Successours in an Aristocraticall or rather a Mixt Government and that the Church is not a When Gerson writ his Tract De Auferibilitate Pape sure hee thought the Church might continue in a very gooâ—… Being without a Monarchicall Head Therefore in his Iudgement the Church is not by any Command or Institution of Christ Monarchicall Gerson par 1. pag. 154. When S. Uierom wrote thus Ubicuaque fuerit Episcopus sive Romae sive Eugubii sive Constantinopoli sive Rhegit sive Alexandriae sive Tanis ejusdem meriti cjusdem est Sacerdotii S. Hieron Epist. ad Evagrium doubtlesse he thought not of the Romane Bishops Monarcâ—…y For what Bishop is of the same Merit or of the same Degree in the Priesthood with the Pope as things are now carried at Rome Affirmamus etiam Patribus Graecis Latinis ignot as esse voces de Petro aut Papa Monarcha Monarchia Namquod in superioribus obscrvabamus reperiri obsâ—…rvabamus dictiones positas pro Episcopatu nihil hoc ad râ—…m facit 〈◊〉 Casaub. Excrcitatione 15. ad Annales Eccles. Baron §. 12. p. 378. §. 11 p. 360. diserte asserit probat Ecclesiae Regimen Aristocraticum fuisse Monarchicall otherwise then the Trumphant and Militant make one Body under Christ the Head And in this sense indeed and in this onely the Church is a most absolute Kingdome And the very Expressing of this sense is a full Answer to all the Places of Scripture and other Arguments brought by b Bellar. L. a. de Concil c. 16. §. 1 2 3. Bellarmine to prove that the Church is a Monarchie But the Church being as large as the world Christ thought it fitter to governe it Aristocratically by Diverse rather then by One Vice Roy. And I believe this is true For all the time of the first three hundred yeares and somewhat better it was governed Aristocratically if we will impaitially consider how the Bishops of those times carried the whole Businesse of admitting any new consecrated Bishops or others to or rejecting them from their Communion For I have carefully Examined this for the first sixe hundred yeares even to and within the time of S. Gregory the great c S. Greg. L. 9. Epist. 58. L. 12. Epist. 15. Who in the beginning of the seventh hundred yeare sent such Letters to Augustine then Archbishop of Canterburie and to d S. Greg. L. 9. Epist. 61. Quirinus and other Bishops in Ireland And I finde That the Literae Communicatoriae which certified from one Great
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
Foundation for all cannot be one and another to different Christians in regard of it selfe for then it could be no common Rule for any nor could the soules of men rest upon a shaking foundation No If it be a true Foundation it must be common to all and firme under all in which sense the Articles of Christian Faith are Fundamentall And f Quum exim una cadem sides sit neque is qui multum de ipsà dicere potest plusquam oportet dicit neque qui parùm ipsam imminuit Iren. L. 1. advers haeres c. 3. Ireneus layes this for a ground That the whole Church howsoever dispersed in place speakes this with one mouth He which among the Guides of the Church is best able to speake utters no more then this and lesse then this the most simple doth not utter Therefore the Creed of which he speaks is a common is a constant Foundation And an Explicite faith must be of this in them which have the use of Reason for both Guides and simple people All the Church utter this Now many things are defined by the Church w ch are but Deductions out of this which suppose them deduced right move far from the Foundation without which Deductions explicitly believed many millions of Christians go to Heaven and cannot therefore be Fundamentall in the faith True Deductions from the Article may require necessary beliefe in them which are able and do go along with them from the Principle to the Conclusion But I do not see either that the Learned do make them necessary to all or any reason why they should Therfore they cannot be FundameÌ„tall yet to some mens Salvation they are necessary Besides that which is Fundamentall in the Faith of Christ is a Rocke immoveable and can never be varied Never a Resolutio Occhami est quòd nâ—… tota Ecclesia nec Concilium Generale nec summus Pontifex potest facere Articulum quod non suit Articulus Sed in dubiis propositionibus potest Ecclesia determinare an sint Cathilicae c. Tamen sic determinando non facit quod sint Catholicae quum prius essent ante Ecclesiae Determinationem c. Almain in 3. D. 25. Q. 1. Therefore if it be Fundamentall after the Church hath defined it it was Fundamentall before the Definition els it is mooveable and then no Christian hath where to rest And if it be immooveable as b Regula Fidei una omnino est solailla immobilis irreformabilis Tertul. de Virg. vel cap. 1. In hac fide c. Nihil transmutare c. Athan. Epist. ad Iovin de side indeed it is no Decree of a Councell be it never so Generall can alter immooveable Verities no more than it can change immooveable Natures Therefore if the Church in a Councell define any thing the thing defined is not Fundamentall because the Church hath defined it nor can be made so by the Definition of the Church if it be not so in it selfe For if the Church had this power she might make a New Article of the Faith c Occham Almain in 3. Sent. D. 25. q. 1. which the Learned among your selves deny For the Articles of the Faith cannot increase in substance but onely in Explication d Thom. 2. 2. q. 1. Ar. 7. C. And for this I 'le be judg'd by Bellarmine f Fides Divina non ideo habet certitudinem quia toti Ecclesiae communis est sed quia nititur Authoritate Dei qui nec falli nec fallere potest quum sit ipsa Veritas L. 3. de Justif. c. 3. §. Quod verò Concilium Probatio Ecclesiae facit ut omnibus innotescat Objectum Fidei Divinae esse revelatum à Deo propter hoc certum indubitatum non autem tribuit firmitatem verbo Dei aliquid revelantis Ibid. §. At inqust who disputing against Amb. Catharinus about the certainty of Faith tels us That Divine Faith hath not its certainty because 't is Catholike .i. common to the whole Church but because it builds on the Authority of God who is Truth it self and can neither deceive nor be deceived And he addes That the Probation of the Church can make it known to all that the Object of Divine Faith is revealed from God and therefore certaine and not to be doubted but the Church can adde no certainty no firmenesse to the word of God revealing it Nor is this hard to be farther proved out of your owne Schoole For a Scotus in 1. Sent. D. 11. q. 1. Scotus professeth it in this very particular of the Greeke Church If there be saith he a true reall difference betweene the Greekes and the Latines about the Point of the Procession of the Holy Ghost then either they or we be verè Haeretici truly and indeed Hereticks And he speakes this of the old Greekes long before any Decision of the Church in this Controversie For his instance is in S. Basil and Greg. Nazianz. on the one side and S Ierome Augustine and Ambrose on the other And who dares call any of these Hereticks is his challenge I deny not but that Scotus adds there That howsoever this was before yet ex quo from the time that the Catholike Church declared it it is to be held as of the substance of Faith But this cannot stand with his former Principle if he intend by it That whatsoever the Church defines shall be ipso ficto and for that Determination's sake Fundamentall For if before the Determination supposing the Difference reall some of those Worthies were truly Hereticks as he confesses then somewhat made them so And that could not be the Decree of the Church which then was not Therefore it must be somwhat really false that made them so and fundamentally false if it made them Hereticks against the Foundation But Scotus was wiser than to intend this It may be he saw the streame too strong for him to swim against therfore he went on with the doctrine of the Time That the Churches Sentence is of the substance of Faith But meant not to betray the truth For he goes no further than Ecclesia declaravit since the Church hath declared it which is the word that is used by diverse b Bellarm. L. 2. de Conc. Auth. c. 12. Concilia cùm definiunt non faciunt aliquid esse infallibilis veritatis sed declarant Explicare Bonavent in 1. d. 11. A. 1. q. 1. ad sinem Explanare declarare Tho 1. q. 36. A. 2. ad 2. 2. 2. q. 1 A. 10. ad 1. Quid unquam aliud Ecclesia Câ—… ili rum Decretis enisa est nisi ut quod anica simplicitèr credebatur hoc idem postea diligentiùs crederetur Vin. Lyr. cont 〈◊〉 c. 32 Now the a Sent. 1. D. 11 Master teaches and the b Alb. Mag. in 1. Sent. D. 11 Art 7. Schollers too That every thing which belongs to the Exposition or Declaration of
another intùs est is not another contrary thing but is contained within the Bowels and nature of that which is interpreted from which if the Declaration depart it is faulty and erroneous because instead of Declaring it gives another and contrary c Hoc semper nec quicquam praeterea Vin. Lyr. c. 32. sense Therefore when the Church declares any thing in a Councell either that which she declares was intùs or extrà in the Nature and verity of the thing or out of it If it were extrà without the nature of the thing declared then the Declaration of the thing is false and so farre from being Fundamentall in the Faith d In novâ Haeresi Veritas prius erat de Fide et si non ita deâ—… rata Scotus in 1. D. 11. q. 〈◊〉 fine Haeretici multa quae erâ—… implicita sidei nostra compâ—… runt explicare Bonavent in 〈◊〉 D. 11. A. 1. Q. 1. ad finem Tho. 1. q. 36. A. 2. ad 2. Quamvis Apostolica Sedes aut Generale Concilium de Haeresi censere possit non tamen ideò Assertio aliqua erit Haeresis qui. Ecclesia definivit sed quia 〈◊〉 dei Catholica repugnat Ecclesia siquidèm suâ definitione 〈◊〉 facit talem Assertionem esse Haeresin quùm etiamsi ipsa non definivisset esset Haeresis sed id efficit ut paeteat c. Alphon à Castro L. 1. Advers Haeres c. 8. fol. 21. D. If it were intùs within the Compasse and nature of the thing though not open and apparent to every eye then the Declaration is true but not otherwise Fundamentall than the thing is which is declared for that which is intùs cannot be larger or deeper than that in which it is if it were it could not be intùs Therefore nothing is simply Fundamentall because the Church declares it but because it is so in the nature of the thing which the Church declares And it is a slight and poore Evasion that is commonly used that the Declaration of the Church makes it Fundamentall quoad nos in respect of us for it doth not that neither For no respect to us can varie the Foundation The Churches Declaration can binde us to peace and externall Obedience where there is not expresse Letter of Scripture and sense agreed on but it cannot make any thing Fundamentall to us that is not so in its owne nature For if the Church can so adde that it can by a Declaration make a thing to be Fundamentall in the faith that was not then it can take a thing away from the Foundation and make it by Declaring not to be Fundamentall which all men grant no power of the Church can doe e Ecclesia non amputat necessaria non apponit superâ—…ua Vin. Lir. c. 32. Deut. 4. 2. For the power of adding any thing contrary and of detracting any thing necessary are alike forbidden * Thom. Supp q. 6. A. 6. C. and alike denyed Now nothing is more apparent then this to the eye of all men That the Church of Rome hath determined or declared or defined call it what you will very many things that are not in their owne nature Fundamentall and therefore neither are nor can be made so by her adjudging them Now to all this Discourse That the Church hath not power to make any thing Fundamentall in the Faith that intrinsecally and in its owne nature is not such A. C. is content to say nothing 2. For the second That it is prooved by this place of S. Augustine That all Poynts defined by the Church are Fundamentall You might have given me that Place cited in the Margin and eased my paines to seeke it but it may be there was somewhat in concealing it For you doe so extraordinarily right this Place that you were loth I thinke any body should see how you wrong it The place of S. Augustine is this against the Pelagians about Remission of Originall sinne in Infants * August Serm. 14. de verb. Apost c. 12. Fundata res est In aliis Quastionibus non diligentèr digestis nondum plenâ Ecclesiae Authoritate sirmatis ferendus est Disputator errans ibi ferendus est error non tantum progredi debet ut etiam Fundamentum ipsum Ecclesiae quatere moliâ—… This is a thing founded An erring Disputer is to be borne with in other Questions not diligently digested not yet made firme by full Authority of the Church there error is to be borne with but it ought not to goe so farre that it should labour to shake the Foundation it selfe of the Church This is the Place but it can never follow out of this Place I thinke That every thing defined by the Church is Fundamentall For first he speakes of a Foundation of Doctrine in Scripture not a Church definition This appeares for few lines before he tels us b Ibid. cap. 20. There was a Question moved to S. Cyprian Whether Baptisme was concluded to the eight Day as well as Circumcision And no doubt was made then of the c Origine Peccati beginning of sin and that d Ex eâ re unde nulla erat Quaestio soluta est exorta Quaestio out of this thing about which no Question was mooved that Question that was made was Answered And e Hoc de Fundamento Ecclesiae sumpsit ad confirmandum Lapidem nut antem againe That S. Cypryan tooke that which he gave in answer from the Foundation of the Church to confirme a stone that was shaking Now S. Cyprian in all the Answer that he gives hath not one word of any Definition of the Church therefore ea res That thing by which he answered was a Foundation of prime and setled Scripture-Doctrine not any Definition of the Church Therefore that which he tooke out of the Foundation of the Church to fasten the stone that shooke was not a Definition of the Church but the Foundation of the Church it selfe the Scripture upon which it is builded as appeareth in the f Concil Milevit c. 2. Milevitane Councell where the Rule by which Pelagius was condemned is the Rule of g Rom. 5. 15. Scripture Therefore Saint Augustine goes on in the same sense That the Disputer is not to be borne any longer that shall h Vt Fundamentum ipsum Ecclesiae quatere moliatur endeavour to shake the Foundation it selfe upon which the whole Church is grounded Secondly if S. Augustine did meane by Founded and Foundation the definition of the Church because of these words This thing is Founded this is made firm by full Authority of the Church and the words following these to shake the foundation of the Church yet it can never follow out of any or all these Circumstances and these are all That all Poynts defined by the Church are Fundamentall in the faith For first no man denies but the Church is a c 1 Tim. 3. 15. Foundation That things defined
by it are founded upon it And yet hence it cannot follow That the thing that is so founded is Fundamentall in the Faith For things may be d Mos fundatissimus S. Aug. Ep. 28. founded upon Humane Authority and be very certaine yet not Fundamentall in the Faith Nor yet can it follow This thing is founded therefore every thing determined by the Church is founded Again that which followes That those things are not to be opposed which are made firme by full Authority of the Church cannot conclude they are therefore Fundamentall in the Faith For full Church Authority alwayes the time that included the Holy Apostles being past by and not comprehended in it is but Church Authority and Church Authority when it is at full sea is not simply e Staple Rebect cont 4. q. 3. A. 1. Divine therefore the Sentence of it not fundamentall in the Faith And yet no erring Disputer may be endured to shake the foundation which the Church in Councell layes But plaine Scripture with evident sense or a full Demonstrative Argument must have Roome where a wrangling and erring Disputer may not be allowed it And ther 's f Quae quidem si tam manifesta monstratur ut in dubium venire non possit praeponenda est omnibus illis rebus quibus in Catholicâ teneor Ita si aliquid apertissimum in Evangelio S. Aug. contra Fund c. 4. neither of these but may Convince the Definition of the Councell if it be ill founded And the Articles of the faith may easily proove it is not Fundamentall if indeed and verily it be not so And I have read some body that sayes is it not you That things are fundamentall in the Faith two wayes One in their Matter such as are all things which be so in themselves The other in the Manner such as are all things that the Church hath Defined and determined to be of Faith And that so some things that are de modo of the manner of being arc of Faith But in plaine truth this is no more then if you should say some things are Fundamentall in the faith and some are not For wrangle while you will you shall never be able to proove that any thing which is but de modo a consideration of the manner of being only can possibly be Fundamentall in the faith And since you make such a Foundation of this Place I will a little view the Mortar with which it is laid by you It is a venture but I shall finde it a Ezek. 13. 11. untempered Your Assertion is All poynts defined by the Church are Fundamentall Your proofe this Place Because that is not to be shaken which is setled by b Plenâ Ecclesiae Authoritate full Authority of the Church Then it seemes your meaning is that this poynt there spoken of The remission of Originall sinne in Baptisme of Infants was defined when S. Augustine wrote this by a full Sentence of a Generall Councell First if you say it was c 1. 2. de Author Concil c. 5. §. A solis particularibus Bellarmine will tell you it is false and that the Pelagian Heresie was never condemned in an Oecumenicall Councell but only in Nationalls But Bellarmine is deceived For while the Pelagians stood out impudently against Nationall Councels some of them defended Nestorius which gave occasion to the first d Can. 1. 4. Ephesine Councell to Excommunicate and depose them And yet this will not serve your turne for this Place For S. Augustine was then dead and therefore could not meane the Sentence of that Councell in this place Secondly if you say it was not then Defined in an Oecumenicall Synode Plena authoritas Ecclesiae the full Authority of the Church there mentioned doth not stand properly for the Decree of an Oecumenicall Councell but for some Nationall as this was condemned in a * Concil Milevit Can. 2 Nationall Councell And then the full Authority of the Church here is no more then the full Authority of this Church of †Nay if your owne Capellus be true De Appell Eccl Afric c. 2. n. 5. It was â—…ut a Provinciall of Numidia not a Plenary of Africk Africk And I hope that Authority doth not make all Points defined by it to be Fundamentall You will say yes if that Councell be confirmed by the Pope And then I must ever wonder why S. Augustine should say The full Authority of the Church and not bestow one word upon the Pope by whose Authority only that Councell as all other have their fulnesse of Authority in your Iudgement An inexpiable Omission if this Doctrine concerning the Pope were true But here A. C. steps in againe to helpe the Iesuite and he tells us over and over againe That all A. C. p. 45. points made firme by full Authority of the Church are Fundamentall so firme he will have them and therefore fundamentall But I must tell him That first 't is one thing in Nature and Religion too to be firme and another thing to be fundamentall These two are not Convertible T is true that every thing that is fundamentall is firme But it doth not follow that every thing that is firme is fundamentall For many a Superstructure is exceeding firme being fast and close joyned to a sure foundation which yet no man will grant is fundamentall Besides what soever is fundamentall in the faith is fundamentall to the Church which is one by the vnity a Almain in 3. Sent. Dis. 25. q. 2. A Fide enim unà Ecclesia dicitur una of faith Therefore if every thing Defined by the Church be fundamentall in the faith then the Churches Definition is the Churches Foundation And so upon the matter the Church can lay her owne foundation and then the Church must be in absolute and perfect Being before so much as her Foundation is laide Now this is so absurd for any man of learning to say that by and by after A. C. is content to affirm not only that the prima Credibilia the Articles of Faith but all which so pertaines to Supernaturall Divine and Infallible Christian Faith as that thereby Christ doth dwell in our hearts c. is the Foundation of the Church under Christ the Prime Foundation And here he 's out againe For first all which pertaines to Supernaturall Divine and Infallible Christian Faith is not by and by b Aliquid pertinet ad Fidem dupliciter Uno modo directè sicut ea quae nobis sunt principalitèr divinitùs tradita ut Deum esse Trinum c. Et circa haec opinari falsum hoc ipso inducit Haeresin c. Alio modo indirectè Ex quibus consequitur aliquid contrarium Fidei c. Et in his aliquis potest falsum opinari absque periculo Haeresis donec Sequela illa ei innotescat c. Tho. p. 1. q. 32. A. 4. C. There are things Necessary to the Faith and
things which are but Accessory c. Hooker L. 3. Eccl. Pol. §. 3. Fundamentall in the Faith to all men And secondly the whole Discourse here is concerning Faith as it is taken Objectivè for the Object of Faith and thing to be Beleeved but that Faith by which Christ is said to dwell in our hearts is taken Subjectivè for the Habit and Act of Faith Now to confound both these in one period of speech can have no other ayme than to confound the Reader But to come closer both to the Iesuite and his Defender A. C. If all Poynts made firme by full Authority of the Church be Fundamentall then they must grant that every thing determined by the Councell of Trent is Fundamentall in the Faith For with them 't is firme and Catholike which that Councell Decrees Now that Councell decrees b Si quis dixerit Ordines ab Episcopis collatos sine populi vel potestatis saecularis consensu aut vocatione irritos esse Anathema sit Con. Trid. Sess. 23. Can. 7. That Orders collated by the Bishop are not void though they be given without the Consent or calling of the People or of any secular Power And yet they can produce no Authour that ever acknowledged this Definition of the Councell Fundamentall in the Faith 'T is true I do not grant that the Decrees of this Councell are made by full Authority of the Church but they do both grant and maintaine it And therefore 't is Argumentum ad hominem a good Argument against them that a thing so defined may be sirme for so this is and yet not Fundamentall for so this is not But A. C. tels us further That if one may deny or doubtfully dispute against any one Determination of the A. C. p. 45. Church then he may against another and another and so against all since all are made firme to us by one and the same Divine Revelation sufficiently applied by one and the same full Authority of the Church which being weakened in any one cannot be firme in any other First A. C. might have acknowledged that he borrowed the former part of this out of a Cont. Haer. c. 31. Abdicatà enim qualibet parte Catholici Dogmatis alia quoque at que item alia c. Quid aliud ad extremum sequetur nisi ut totum pariter repudictur Vin. Lir. And as that Learned Father uses it I subscribe to it but not as A. C. applies it For Vincentius speaks there de Catholico Dogmate of Catholike Maximes and A. C. will force it to every Determination of the Church Now Catholike Maximes §. 30. N. 21. which are properly Fundamentall are certaine Prime Truths deposited with the Church and not so much determined by the Church as published and manifested and so made firme by her to us For so b Ecclesia Deâ—…sitorum apud se Dogmatum Custos c. Denique quid unquam Conciliorum Decretis enisa est nisi ut quod antea simpliciter credebatur hoc idem postea diligentiùs crederetur c. Vin. Lir. cont Harcs c. 32. Vincentius expresly Where all that the Church doth is but ut hoc idem quod anteà that the same thing may be believed which was before Believed but with more light and cleerenesse and in that sense with more firmenesse than before Now in this sense give way to a Disputator errans every cavilling Disputer to deny or quarrell at the Maximes of Christian Religion any one or any part of any one of them and why may he not then take liberty to do the like of any other till he have shaken all But this hinders not the Church her selfe nor any appointed by the Church to examine her owne Decrees and to see that she keepe Dogmata deposita the Principles of Faith unblemished and uncorrupted For if she do not so but that c Vin. Lir. cont haer c. 31. Impiorum turpium Errorum Lupanar ubi erat antè castae incorruptâ—… Sacrarium Veritatis Novitia veteribus new Doctrines bee added to the old the Church which is Sacrarium Veritatis the Repository of Verity may be changed in lupanar errorum I am loth to English it By the Church then this may nay it ought to be done however every wrangling Disputer may neither deny nor doubtfully dispute much lesse obstinately oppose the Determinations of the Church no not where they are not Dogmata Deposita these deposited Principles But if he will be so bold to deny or dispute the Determinations of the Church yet that may be done without shaking the Foundation where the Determinations themselves belong but to the Fabricke and not to the Foundation For a whole Frame of Building may be shaken and yet the Foundation where it is well lay'd remaine firme And therefore after all A. C. dares not say the Foundation is shaken but onely in a sort And then 't is as true that in a sort A. C. p. 46. it is not shaken 2. For the second part of his Argument A. C. must pardon me if I dissent from him For first all Determinations of the Church are not made firme to us by one and the same Divine Revelation For some Determinations of the Church are made firme to us per a Vin. Lir. cont Haer. c. 32. chirographum Scripturae by the Hand-writing of the Scripture and that 's Authenticall indeed Some other Decisions yea and of the Church too are made or may be if b Relect. cont 4. q. 1. Art 3. Etiamsi nullo Scripturarum aut evidenti aut probabili Testimonio c. Stapleton informe us right without an evident nay without so much as a probable Testimony of Holy-Writ But c Non potest aliquid certum esse certitudine fidei nisi aut immediatè contineatur in Uerbo Dei aut ex Uerbo Dei per evidentem consequentiam deducatur Bellar. L. 3. de Justifica c. 8. §. 2. Bellarmine fals quite off in this and confesses in expresse termes That nothing can be certaine by Certainty of Faith unlesse it be contained immediately in the Word of God Or be deduced out of the Word of God by evident Consequence And if nothing can be so certaine then certainly no Determination of the Church it selfe if that Determination be not grounded upon one of these either expresse Word of God or evident Consequence out of it So here 's little Agreement in this great Point betweene Stapleton and Bellarmine Nor can this be shifted off as if Stapleton spake of the Word of God written and Bellarmine of the Word of God unwritten as he cals Tradition For Bellarmine treats there of the knowledge which a man hath of the Certainty of his owne Salvation And I hope A. C. will not tell us There 's any Tradition extant unwritten by which particular men may have assurance of their severall Salvations Therefore Bellarmine's whole Disputation there is quite beside the matter Or els he must
speake of the Written Word and so lie crosse to Stapleton as is mention'd But to returne If A. C. will he may but I cannot believe That a Definition of the Church which is made by the expresse Word of God and another which is made without so much as a probable Testimony of it or a cleare Deduction from it are made firme to us by one and the same Divine Revelation Nay I must say in this case that the one Determination is firme by Divine Revelation but the other hath no Divine Revelation at all but the Churches Authority onely 2. Secondly I cannot believe neither That all Determinations of the Church are sufficiently applied by one and the same full Authority of the Church For the Authority of the Church though it be of the same fulnesse in regard of it self and of the Power which it commits to Generall Councels lawfully called yet it is not alwayes of the same fulnesse of knowledge and sufficiency nor of the same fulnesse of Conscience and integrity to apply Dogmata Fidei that which is Dogmaticall in the Faith For instance I thinke you dare not deny but the Councell of Trent was lawfully called and yet I am of opinion that few even of your selves believe that the Councell of Trent hath the same fulnesse with the Councell of Nice in all the fore-named kinds or degrees of fulnesse Thirdly suppose That all Determinations of the Church are made firme to us by one and the same Divine Revelation and sufficiently applied by one and the same full Authority yet it will not follow that they are all alike Fundamentall in the Faith For I hope A. C. himselfe will not say that the Definitions of the Church are in better condition than the Propositions of Canonicall Scripture Now all Propositions of Canonicall Scripture are alike firme because they all alike proceed from Divine Revelation but they are not all alike Fundamentall in the Faith For this Proposition of Christ to S. Peter and S. Andrew Follow me and I will make you fishers of men a S. Matth. 4. 19 is as firm a Truth as that which he delivered to his Disciples That he must die and rise againse the third day b S. Matth. 16. 21 For both proceed from the same Divine Revelation out of the mouth of our Saviour and both are sufficiently applied by one and the same full Authority of the Church which receives the whole Gospell of S. Matthew to be Canonicall and infallible Scripture And yet both these Propositions of Christ are not alike Fundamentall in the Faith For I dare say No man shall be saved in the ordinary way of salvation that believes not the Death and the Resurrection of Christ. And I believe A. C. dares not say that No man shall be saved into whose Capacity it never came that Christ made S. Peter and Andrew fishers of men And yet should he say it nay should he shew it sub annulo Piscatoris no man will believe it that hath not made shipwrack of his Common Notions Now if it be thus betweene Proposition and Proposition issuing out of Christ's own Mouth I hope it may well be so also betweene even Iust and True Determinations of the Church that supposing them alike true and firme yet they shall not be alike Fundamentall to all mens beliefe F. Secondly I required to know what Points the Bishop would account Fundamentall He said all the Points of the Creed were such B. Against this I hope you except not For § 11 since the a Tertull. Apol. contra Gentes c. 47. de veland virg c. 1. S. August Serm. 15. de Temp. cap. 2. Ruffin in Symb. apud Cyprian p. 357. Fathers make the Creed the Rule of Faith b Alb. Mag. in 1. Sent. D. 11. A. 7. since the agreeing sense of Scripture with those Articles are the two Regular Precepts by which a Divine is governed about the Faith since your owne Councell of c Concil Trident Sess. 3. Trent decrees That it is that Principle of Faith in which all that professe Christ doe necessarily agree Fundamentum firmum unicum not the firme alone but the onely Foundation since it is Excommunication d Bonavent ibid. Dub. 2. 3. in literam ipso jure for any man to contradict the Articles contained in that Creed since the whole Body of the Faith is so contained in the Creed as that the e Thom. 2. 2ae q. 1. Art 7. c. substance of it was believ'd even before the comming of Christ though not so expresly as since in the number of the Articles since f Bellar. L. 4. de Verb. Dei non Script c. 11. §. Primum est Bellarmine confesses That all things simply necessary for all mens salvation are in the Creed and the Decalogue what reason can you have to except And yet for all this everything Fundamentall is not of a like nearenesse to the Foundation nor of equall Primenesse in the Faith And my granting the Creed to be Fundamentall doth not deny but that there are g Tho. 2. 2ae q. 1. A. 7. C. quaedam prima Credibilia certaine prime Principles of Faith in the bosome whereof all other Articles lay wrapped and folded up One of which since Christ is that of S. h 1. S. Iohn 4. 2. Iohn Every spirit that confesseth Iesus Christ come in the flesh is of God And one both before the comming of Christ and since is that of S. Paul i Heb. 11. 6. He that comes to God must believe that God is and that he is a rewarder of them that seeke him Here A. C. tels you That either I must meane that those Points are onely Fundamentall which are expressed A. C. p. 46. in the Creed or those also which are infolded If I say those onely which are expressed then saith he to believe the Scriptures is not Fundamentall because 't is not expressed If I say those which are infolded in the Articles then some unwritten Church Traditions may be accounted Fundamentall The truth is I said and say still that all the Points of the Apostles Creed as they are there expressed are Fundamentall And therein I say no more than some of your best Learned have said before me But I never either said or meant That they onely are Fundamentall That they are a Conc. Trident. Sess. 3. Fundamentum unicum the only Foundation is the Councell of Trent's 't is not mine Mine is That the Beliefe of Scripture to be the Word of God and infallible is an equall or rather a preceding Prime Principle of Faith with or to the whole Body of the Creed And this agrees as before I told the Iesuite with one of your owne great Masters Albertus Magnus b In 1. Sent. D. 11. A. 7. Regula Fidei est concors Scriptururum sensus cum Articulis Fidei Quia illis duobus regularibus Praeceptis regitur Theologus who is not farre from
is in Scripture it selfe is not bright enough it cannot beare sufficient witnesseto itselfe The Testimonie of the Holy Ghost that is most infallible but ordinarily it is not so much as considerable in this Question which is not how or by what meanes we believe but how the Scripture may be proposed as a Credible Object fit for Beliefe And for Reason no man expects that that should proove it it doth service enough if it enable us to disproove that which misguided men conceive against it If none of these then be an Absolute and sufficient meanes to prove it either we must finde out another or see what can bâ—… more wrought out of these And to all this again A. C. sayes nothing For the Tradition of the Church then certaine it is wee must distinguish the Church before wee can judge right of the Validity of the Tradition For if the speech bee of the Prime Christian Church the Apostles Disciples and such as had immediate Revelation from Heaven no question but the Voyce and Tradition of this Church is Divine not aliquo modo in a sort but simply and the Word of God from them is of like Validity written or delivered And against this Tradition of which kinde this That the Bookes of Scripture are the Word of God is the most generall and uniforme the Church of England never excepted And when S. †L. 1. cont Epis. Fund c. 5. Ego vero non crederem Evangelio nisi me Catholicae Ecclesiae commoveret Authoritas Augustine said I would not believe the Gospell unlesse the Authority of the Catholike Church mooved mee which Place you urged at the Conference though you are now content to slide by it some of your owne will not endure should be understood save * Occham Dial. p. 1. L. 1. c. 4. Intelligitur solum de Ecclesiâ—… qua fuit tempore Apostolorum of the Church in the time of the Apostles only and a Biel. lect 2â—… in C. Missâ—… A tempore Christi Apostolorum c. And so doth S. August take Eccles. Contra Fund some of the Church in Generall not excluding after-ages But sure to include Christ and his Apostles And the certainety is there abundance of certainety in it selfe but how farre that is evident to us shall after appeare But this will not serve your turne The Tradition of the present Church must bee as Infallible as that of the Primitive But the contrary to this is prooved * §. 16. Nu. 6. before because this Voyce of the present Church is not simply Divine To what end then serves any Tradition of the present Church To what Why to a very good end For first it serves by a full consent to worke upon the mindes of unbelievers to move them to reade and to consider the Scripture which they heare by so many Wise Learned and Devoute men is of no meaner esteeme then the Word of God And secondly It serves among Novices Weaklings and Doubters in the Faith to instruct and confirme them till they may acquaint themselves with and understand the Scripture which the Church delivers as the Word of God And thus againe some of your owne understand the fore-cited Place of S. Augustine I would not believe the Gospell c. * Sive Infâ—…les sive in Fide Novitii Can. Loc. L. 2. c 8. Neganti aut omnino nescientâ—… Scripturam Stapl. Relect. Cent. 4. q. 1. A 3. For he speakes it either of Novices or Doubters in the Faith or else of such as were in part Infidels You at the Conference though you omit it here would needs have it that S. Augustine spake even of the †Quid si fateamur Fideles etiam Ecclesiae Authoritate commoveri ut Scripturas recipiant Non tamen inde sequitur eos hoc modo penitus 〈◊〉 aut nullâ aliâ fortioreque ratione induci Quis autem Christianus est quem Ecclesia Christi commâ—…dans Scripturam Christi non commoveat Whitaker Disp. de sacrâ Scripturá Contro 1. q 3. c. 8. vbt 〈◊〉 locum hunc S. Aug. faithfull which I cannot yet thinke For he speakes to the Manichees and they had a great part of the Infidell in them And the words immediately before these are If thou shouldest finde one Qui Evangelio nondum credit which did not yet believe the Gospell what wouldest thou doe to make him believe a Et ibid. Quibus obtemperavi dicentibus Credite Evangelio Therefore he speakes of himselfe when he did not believe Ego verò non Truly I would not c. So to these two ends it serves and there need be no Question between us But then every thing that is the first Inducer to believe is not by and by either the Principall Motive or the chiefe and last Object of Beliefe upon which a man may rest his Faith Vnlesse we shall be of b Certum est quod tenemur credere omnibus contentis in Sacro Canone quia Ecclesia credit ex caratione soluÌ„ Ergo per prius magis tenemur Credere Ecclesiae quam Evangelio Almain in 3. Dist. 24 Conclus 6. Dub. 6. And to make a shew of proof for this he falsifies S Aug. most notoâ—…ously and reads that known place not Nisi me commoveret as all read it but compelleret Patet quia dicit Augustinus Evangelio non CredereÌ„ nisi aa hoc me compelleret Ecclesiae Au. horitas Ibid. And so also Gerson 〈◊〉 In Declarat veritatum quae credendae sunt c. part 1 p. 414. §. 3. But in a most ancient Manuscript in Corp. Ch. Colledge Library in Cambridge the words are Nisi me commoveret c. Lacobus Almain's Opinion That we are per prius magis first and more bound to believe the Church then the Gospell Which your own Learned men as you may see by c Canus L. 2. de Locis c. 8. fo 34. b. §. 16. Num. 6. Mel. Canus reject as Extreame foule and so indeed it is The first knowledge then after the Quid Nominis is knowne by Grammer that helpes to open a mans understanding and prepares him to bee able to Demonstrate a Truth and make it evident is his Logicke But when he hath made a Demonstration he resolves the knowledge of his Conclusion not into his Grammaticall or Logicall Principles but into the Immediate Principles out of which it is deduced So in this Particular a man is probably led by the Authority of the present Church as by the first informing induceing perswading Meanes to believe the Scripture to be the Word of God but when he hath studied considered and compared this Word with it selfe and with other Writings with the helpe of Ordinary Grace and a minde morally induced and reasonably perswaded by the Voyce of the Church the Scripture then gives greater and higher reasons of Credibility to it selfe then Tradition alone could give And then he that Believes resolves his last and full Assent That Scripture is of
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
esso non potest hos esse Libros Canonicos Wal. Doct. fid l. 2. a. 2. c. 20. cui subesse non potest falsum into which no falshood can come but by a Divine Testimony This Testimony is absolute in Scripture it selfe delivered by the Apostles for the Word of God and so sealed to our Soules by the operation of the Holy Ghost That which makes way for this as an b Canus Loc. l. 2 c. 8. facit Ecclesiam Causam sine quanon Introduction and outward motive is the Tradition of the present Church but that neither simply Divine nor sufficient alone into which we may resolve our Faith but only as is †§. 16. before expressed And now to come close to the Particular The time was before this miserable Rent in the Church of Christ which I thinke no true Christian can looke upon but with a bleeding heart that you and Wee were all of One Beliefe That beliefe was tainted in tract and corruption of times very deepely A Division was made yet so that both Parts held the Creed and other Common Principles of Beliefe Of these this was one of the greatest †Inter omnes penè constat aut certè id quod satis est inter me illos cum quibus nunc agitur convenit hoc c. Sic in aliâ Causá cont Manichaos S. Aug. L. de Mor. Eccl. Cath. c. 4. That the Scripture is the VVord of God For our beliefe of all things contained in it depends upon it Since this Division there hath beene nothing done by us to discredit this Principle Nay We have given it all honour and ascribed unto it more sufficiency even to the containing of all things necessary to salvation with * Vin. Lir. cont Hares c. 2. Satis super que enough and more then enough which your selves have not done do not And for begetting and setling a Beliefe of this Principle we goe the same way with you and a better besides The same way with you Because we allow the Tradition of the present Church to be the first induceing Motive to embrace this Principle onely we cannot goe so farre in this way as you to make the present Tradition alwayes an Infallible VVord of God unwritten For this is to goe so farre in till you be out of the way For Tradition is but a Lane in the Church it hath an end not only to receive us in but another after to let us out into more open and richer ground And We go a better way then you Because after we are moved and prepared and induced by Tradition we resolve our Faith into that Written Word and God delivering it in which we finde materially though not in Termes the very Tradition that led us thither And so we are sure by Divine Authority that we are in the way because at the end we find the way proved And doe what can be done you can never settle the Faith of man about this great Principle till you rise to greater assurance then the Present Church alone can give And therefore once againe to that known place of S. Augustine * Contr. Epist. Fund c. 5. The words of the Father are Nisi commoveret Vnlesse the Authority of the Church mooved me but not alone but with other Motives eâ—…se it were not commovere to move together And the other Motives are Resolvers though this be Leader Now since we goe the same way with you so farre as you goe right and a better way then you where you go wrong we need not admit any other Word of God then We doc And this ought to remaine as a Presupposed Principle among all Christians and not so much as come into this Question about the sufficiency of Scripture betweene you and us But you say that F. From this the Lady called us and desiring to heare VVhether the Bishop would grant the Romane Church to be the Right Church The B. granted That it was B One occasion which mooved Tertullian to § 20 write his Booke de Praescript adversùs Haereticos was That he * Pamel in Summar Lib Uiaens Disputationibus â—…ihil ant parum profici saw little or no Profit come by Disputations Sure the Ground was the same then and now It was not to deny that Disputation is an Opening of the Vnderstanding a sifting out of Truth it was not to affirme that any such Disquisition is in and of it selfe unprofitable If it had S. Stephen a Acts 6 9. would not have disputed with the Cyrenians nor S. Paul with the b Acts. 9. 29. Grecians first and then with the Iewes c Acts 19. 17. and all Commers No sure it was some Abuse in the Disputants that frustrated the good of the Disputation And one Abuse in the Disputants is a Resolution to hold their own though it â—…e by unworthy means and disparagement d Debilitaetur generosa indoles conjecta in argutias Sen. Aep 48. of truth And so I finde it here For as it is true that this Question was asked so it is altogether false that it was asked in this * Here A. C. hath nothing to say but that the Iesuite did not affirme That the Lady askâ—…d this Question in this or any other precise forme No why the words preceding are the Iesuites own Therefore if these were not the Ladies words he wrongs her not I him forme or so Answâ—…red There is a great deale of Difference especially as Romanists handle the Question of the Church between The Church and A Church and there is some betvveene a True Church and a Right Church vvhich is the vvord you use but no man else that I knovv I am sure not I. For The Church may import in our Language The only true Church and perhaps as some of you seeme to make it the Root and the Ground of the Catholike And this I never did grant of the Romane Church nor ever meane to doe But A Church can imply no more then that it is a member of the Whole And this I never did nor ever will deny if it fall not absolutely away from Christ. That it is a True Church I granted also but not a Right as you impose upon me For Ens and Verum Being and True are convertible one with another and every thing that hath a Being is truly that Being which it is in truth of Substance But this word Right is not so used but is referd more properly to perfection in Conditions And in this sense every thing that hath a true and reall Being is not by and by Right in the Conâ—…itions of it A man that is most dishonest and unworthy the name a very Thiefe if you will is a True man in the verity of his Essence as he is a Creature endued with Reason for this none can steale from him nor he from himselfe but Death But he is not therefore a Right or an upright man And a Church that is
Councell which shall be lawfully called and fairely and freely held with indifferency to all parties And that must judge the Difference according to Scripture which must be their Rule as well as Private Mens And here after some lowd Cry against the Pride and Insolent madnesse of the Protâ—…stants A. C. addes That A. C. p. 58. the Church of Rome is the Principall and Mother Church And that therefore though it be against common equity that Subjects and Children should be Accusers Witnesses Iudges and Executioners against their Prince and Mother in any case yet it is not absurd that in some Cases the Prince or Mother may Accuse Witnesse Iudge and if need be execute Iustice against unjust and rebellious Subjects or evill Children How farre forth Rome is a Prince over the whole Church or a Mother of it will come to be shewed at after In the meane time though I cannot grant her to be either yet let 's suppose her to be both that A. C s. Argument may have all the strength it can have Nor shall it force me as plausible as it seemes to weaken the just power of Princes over their Subjects or of Mothers over their Children to avoid the shocke of this Argument For though A. C. may tell us 't is not absurd in some Cases yet I would faine have him name any one Moderate Prince that ever thought it just or tooke it upon him to be Accuser and VVitnesse and Iudge in any Cause of moment against his Subjects but that the Law had Libertie to Iudge betweene them For the great Philosopher tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Arist. Eto c. 6. That the Chiefe Magistrate is Custos juris the Guardian and keeper of the Law and if of the Law then both of that equity and equality which is due unto them that are under him And even Tiberius himselfe in the Cause of Silanus when Dolabella would have flatter'd him into more power then in wisdome he thought fit then to take to himselfe he put him off thus No †Minui Jura quoties gliscat Potestas nec utendum Imperio ubi Legibus agi possit Tacit. L. 3 Annal. the Lawes grow lesse where such Power enlarges Nor is absolute Power to be used where there may be an orderly proceeding by Law And for * Heb. 12. 9. Parents 't is true when Children are young they may chastise them without other Accuser or VVitnesse then themselves and yet the children are to give them reverence And 't is presumed that naturall affection will prevaile so far with them that they will not punish them too much For all experience tells us almost to the losse of Education that they * God used Samuel as a Messenger against Eli for his overmuch indulgence to his sonnes 1 Sam. 3. 13. And yet Samuel himselfe committed the very same fault concerning his own sonnes 1 Sam. 8. 3. 5. And this Indulgence occasioned the Change of the Civill government as the former was the losse of the Priesthood punish them too little even when there is cause Yet when Children are growne up and come to some full use of their owne Reason the Apostles Rule is †Coloss. 3. 21. Colos. 3. Parents provoke not your Children And if the Apostle prevaile not with froward Parents there 's a Magistrate and a Law to relieve even a sonne against a Crimini ci Tribunus inter eatera dabat quod filium juvenem nullius probri compertum extorrem urbe domo penatibus foro luce congressu aequalium prohibituÌ„ in opus servile propè in carcerem atque in ergastulum dederit Liv. dec 1. l. 7. unnaturall Parents as it was in the Case of T. Manlius against his over Imperious Father And an expresse Law there was among the Iewes Deut. 21. when Children Deut. 21. 19. were growne up and fell into great extremities that the Parents should then bring them to the Magistrate and not be too busie in such cases with their own Power So suppose Rome be a Prince yet her Subjects must be tryed by Gods Law the Scripture And suppose her a Mother yet there is or ought to be Remedy against her for her Children that are growne up if she forget all good Nature and turne Stepdame to them Well the Reason why the Iesuite asked the Question Quo Iudice Who should be Iudge He sayes was this Because there 's no equity in it that the Protestants should be Iudges in their owne Cause But now upon more Deliberation A. C. tells us as if he A. C. p. 57. knew the Iesuites minde as well as himselfe as sure I thinke he doth That the Iesuite directed this Question chiefly against that speech of mine That there were Errors in Doctrine of Faith and that in the Generall Church as the Iesuite understood my meaning The Iesuite here tooke my meaning right For I confesse I said there were Errours in Doctrine and dangerous ones too in the Church of Rome I said likewise that when the Generall Church could not or would not Reforme such it was Lawfull for Particular Churches to Refâ—…rme themselves But then I added That the Generall Church not universally taken but in these Westerne parts fell into those Errours being swayed in these latter Ages by the predominant Power of the Church of Rome under whose Government it was for the most part forced And all men of understanding know how oft and how easily an Over-potent Member carries the whole with it in any Body Naturall Politick or Ecclesiasticall Yea but A. C. telles us That never any Competent Iudge did so censure the Church And indeed that no Power A. G. p. 57. on Earth or in Hell it selfe can so farre prevaile against the Generall Church as to make it Erre generally in any one Point of Divine Truth and much lesse to teach any thing by its full Authority to be a Matter of Faith which is contrary to Divine Truth expressed or involved in Scriptures rightly understood And that therefore no Reformation of Faith can be needfull in the Generall Church but only in Particular Churches And for proofe of this he cites S. Mat. 16. and 28. S. Luk. 22. S. Iohn 14. and 16. In this trouâ—…lesome and quarrelling Age I am most unwilling to meddle with the Erring of the Church in generall The Church of England is content to passe that over And though * Art 19. She tels us That the Church of Rome hath Erred even in matters of Faith yet of the Erring of the Church in generall She is modestly silent But since A. C. will needs have it That the whole Church did never generally Erre in any one Point of Faith he should doe well to Distinguish before he be so peremptory For if he mean no more then that the whole Vniversal Church of Christ cannot universally Erre in any one Point of Faith simply necessary to altmens salvation he fights against no Adversary that I know
prâ—…ng can be questioned in another unlesse it to tall out that 〈◊〉 Scriptuâ—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 appeare against it Buâ—… eâ—…t 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thâ—…se aâ—…e â—…o 〈◊〉 and manâ—…t and â—…ving the it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whâ—… or 〈◊〉 wiâ—…h 〈◊〉 without a Councell §. 33. 〈◊〉 5. Nâ—… 1. 2. another Councell of equall authority did reverse it And indeed I might have returned upon you againe If a Generall Councell not Confirmed by the Pope may erre which you affirme to what end then a Generall Councell And you may Answer yes For although a Generall Councell may erre yet the Pope as Head of the Church cannot An excellent meanes of unity to have all in the Church as the Pope will have it what ever Scripture say or the Church thinke And then I pray to what end a Generall Councell Will his Holinesse be so holy as to confirme a Generall Councell if it Determine against him And as for * 〈◊〉 L 4. dâ—… 〈◊〉 Pâ—…t â—…7 §. 3. c. Bellarmines reasons why a Generall Councell should be usefull if not necessary though the Pope bee Iâ—…fallible they are so weake in Part and in part so unworthy that I am sory any necessity of a bad cause should force so learned a man to make use of them Here A. C. tels mee The Caution mentioned as omitted makes my Answer werse then the Iesuite related A. C. p. 63. â—…4 it And that in two things First in that the Iesuite relates it thus Although it may erre but the Caution makes it as if it did actually erre Secondly in that the Iesuite relates That wee are bound to hold it till another come to reverse it that is wâ—…e not knowing whether it doe erre or not but onely that it may erre But the Caution puts the Case so as if the Determination of a Generall Councell actually erring were not ipso jure invalid but must stand in force and have externall Obedience yeelded to it till not onely morall Certainty but Evidence of Scripture or a Demonstration to the Contrary make the errour appeare And when it appeares wee must yeeld our Obedience till a Councell of equall Authority reverse it which perhaps will not bee found in an whole Age. So either the Iesuite relates this speech truly or lesse disgracefully And A. C. thinkes that upon better Iudgement I Will not allow this Caution Truly I shall not thanke the Iesuite for any his kindnesse here And for the Caution I must and doe acknowledge it mine even upon advisement and that whether it make my Answer worse or better And I thinke farther that the Iesuite hath no great Cause to thanke A. C. for this Defence of his Relation First then the Iesuite so sayes A. C. doth in his Relation make it but a supposition That a Generall Councell A. C. p. 63 may erre But the Caution expresses it as actually erring True But yet I hope this Expression makes no Generall Councell actually erre And then it comes all to one whether I suppose that such a Councell may erre or that it doe erre And 't is fitter for clearing the Difficulties into which the Church fals in such a Case to suppose and more then a supposition it is not a Generall Councell * Synodum Generalem aliquoties errâsse percepimus Wald. L. 2. de Doctrin Fidri Art 2. c. 19. §. 1. actually erring then as only under a Possibility of Erring For the Church hath much more to doe to vindicate it selfe from such an Errour actually being then from any the like Errour that might be Secondly A. C. thinkes he hath got great advantage A. C. p. 63. by the words of the Caution in that I say A Generall Councell erring is to stand in force and have externall Obedience at least so farre as it consists in silence Patience and forbearance yeelded to it till Evidence of Scripture or a Demonstration to the Contrary make the Error appeare and untill therupon another Councell of equal Authority did reverse it Well! I say it again But is there any one word of mine in the Caution that speakes of our knowing of this Errour Surely not one that 's A. C s. Addition Now suppose a Generall Councell actually Erring in some Point of Divine Truth I hope it will not follow that this Errour must bee so grosse as that forthwith it must needes be knowne to private men And doubtlesse till they know it Obedience must be yeelded Nay when they know it if the Errour be not manifestly against Fundamentall verity in which case a Generall Councell can not easily erre I would have A C. and all wise men Consider Whether Externall Obedience be not even then to be yeelded For if Controversies arise in the Church some end they must have or they 'll teare all in sunder And I am sure no wisdome can thinke that fit Why then say a Generall Councell Erre and an Erring Decree be ipso jure by the very Law it selfe invalid I would have it wisely considered again whether it be not fit to allow a Generall Councell that Honour and Priviledge which all other Great Courts have Namely That there be a Declaration of the Invalidity of its Decrees as well as of the Laws of other Courts before private men can take liberty to refuse Obedience For till such a declaration if the Councel stand not in force A. C sets up Private Spirits to controll Generall Councels w ch is the thing he so often and so much cryes out against in the Protestants Therefore it may seeme very fit and necessary for the Peace of Christendome that a Generall Councell thus erring should stand in force till Evidence of Scripture or a Demonstration make the Errourto appeare * It is not long since A C. compared Councels to Parliaments it was but p. 60. And I hope a Parliament and the Acts of it must stand in force thoughsomthing bemistaken in them or found hurtfull till another Parliament of equal Authority reverse it and them For I presume you will not have any inferiour Authority to abrogate Acts of Parliament as that another Councell of equall Authority reverse it For as for Morall Certainty that 's not strong enough in Points of Faith which alone are spoken of here And if another Councell of equall Authority cannot be gotten together in an Age that is such an Inconvenience as the Church must beare when it happens And far better is that inconvenience then this other †§. 33. Consid. 4. N. 1. that any Authority lesse then a Generall Councell should rescinde the Decrâ—…es of it unlesse it erre manifestly and intolera'ly Or that the whole Church upon peaceable and just complaint of this Errour neglect or refuse to call a Councell and examine it And there come in Nationall or Provinciall Councels to a § 24. Nu. 1. reforme for themselves But no way must lye open to private men to b §. 38. Nu. 15. Refuse obedience till the Councell be heard
their own and are with all submission to be observed by every Christian where Scripture or evident Demonstration come not against them Nor doth it make way for the Whirlewind of a private Spirit For Private Spirits are too giddy to rest upon Scripture and too heady and shallow to be acquainted with Demonstrative Arguments And it were happy for the Church if she might never be troubled with Private Spirits till they brought such Arguments I know this is hotly objected against c Praefat. p. 29. Hooker the d Dialogus â—…ctus Deus Rex Authour cals him a e Cordatus Protestans Wise Protestant yet turnes thus upon him If a Councell must yeeld to a Demonstrative Proofe Who shall Iudge whether the Argument that is brought be a Demonstration or not For every man that will kicke against the Church will say the Scripture he urges is evident and his Reason a Demonstration And what is this but to leave all to the wildenesse of a Private Spirit Can any ingenuous man read this Passage in Hooker and dreame of a Private Spirit For to the Question Who shall judge Hooker answers as if it had beene then made f Praef. p. 29. And therefore A. C. is much to blame after all this to talk of a pretext of seeming evident Scripture or Demonstration As he doth p 59. An Argument necessary and Demonstrative is such saith he as being proposed to any man and understood the minde cannot chuse but inwardly assent unto it So it is not enough to thinke or say it is Demonstrative The Light then of a Demonstrative Argument is the Evidence which it selfe hath in it selfe to all that understand it Well but because all understand it not If a Quarrell be made Who shall decide it No Question a § 32. Nu. 2. but a Generall Councell not a Private Spirit first in the intent of the Authour for Hooker in all that Discourse makes the Sentence of the Councell b Praesat p. 28. binding and therefore that is made Judge not a Private Spirit And then for the Judge of the Argument it is as plaine For if it be evident to any man then to so many Learned men as are in a Councell doubtlesse And if they cannot but assent it is hard to thinke them so impious that they will define against it And if that which is thought evident to any man be not evident to such a grave Assembly it is probable 't is no Demonstration and the producers of it ought to rest and not to trouble the Church Nor is this Hooker's alone nor is it newly thought on by us It is a Ground in Nature which Grace doth ever set right never undermine And c 2 de Bapt cont Don. cap. 4. S. Augustine hath it twice in one Chapter That S. Cyprian and that Councell at Carthage would have presently yeelded to any one that would d Uni verum dicenti demonstr anti demonstrate Truth Nay it is a Rule with e Cont. Fund cap. 4. him Consent of Nations Authority confirmed by Miracles and Antiquity S. Peters Chaire and Succession from it Motives to keepe him in the Catholike Church must not hold him against Demonstration of Truth f Quae quidem si tam manifesta monâ—…ratur ut in dubtum â—…enire non possit praeponenâ—…a est omâ—…ibus ills rebus quiius in Catholica 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aciquid apertissimâ—… in Euangelâ—… 〈◊〉 c. 4. which if it bee so clearely demonstrated that it cannot come into doubt it is to be preferred before all those things by which a man is held in the Catholike Church Therefore an evident Scripture or Demonstration of Truth must take place every where but where these cannot be had there must be Submission to Authority And doth not Bellarmine himselfe grant this For speaking of Councels he delivers this Proposition That Inferiours may not judge whether their Superiours and that in a Councell do proceed lawfully or not But then having bethought himselfe that Inferiours at all times and in all Causes are not to be cast off he adds this Exception a L. 2 de Concil c. 8. §. Alii dicunt Cencilium Nisi manifestissimè constet intolerabilem Errorem committi Unlesse it manifestly appeare that an intolerable Errour be committed So then if such an Errour be and be manifest Inferiours may do their duty and a Councell must yeeld unlesse you will accuse Bellarmine too of leaning to a Private Spirit for neither doth he expresse who shall judge whether the Errour be intolerable This will not downe with you but the Definition of a Generall Councell is and must be infallible Your Fellowes tell us and you can affirme no more That the Voice of the Church determining in Councell is not b Stapl. Relect. Cont. 4. Q. 3. Ar. 1. Humane but Divine That is well Divine then sure Infallible yea but the Proposition stickes in the throat of them that would utter it It is not Divine simply but in a c Divina suo modo Ibid. And so A. C. too who hath opened his mouth very wide to proove the Succession of Pastors in the Church to be of Divine and infallible Authority yet in the close is forced to add At least in some sort p. 51. manner Divine Why but then sure not infallible because it may speak lowdest in that manner in which it is not Divine Nay more The Church forsooth is an infallible Foundation of Faith d In altiori genere viz. in geners causae efficientis atque adeò aliquâ exparte formalis Ibid. Q. 4. Ar. 3. in an higher kinde then the Scripture For the Scripture is but a Foundation in Testimony and Matter to be believed but the Church as the efficient cause of Faith and in some sort the very formall Is not this Blasphemie Doth not this knock against all evidence of Truth and his owne Grounds that sayes it Against all evidence of Truth For in all Ages all men that once admitted the Scripture to be the Word of God as all Christians doe doe with the same breath grant it most undoubted and infallible But all men have not so judged of the Churches Definitions though they have in greatest Obedience submitted to them And against his owne Grounds that sayes it For the Scripture is absolutely and every way Divine the Churches Definition is but suo modo in a sort or manner Divine But that which is but in a sort can never be a Foundation in an Higher Degree then that which is absolute and every way such Therefore neither can the Definition of the Church be so infallible as the Scripture much lesse in altiori genere in a higher kinde then the Scripture But because when all other things faile you flie to this That the Churches Definition in a Generall Councell is by Inspiration and so Divine and infallible My haste shall not carrie mee from a little Consideration of that too Sixtly then If the
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
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is reproach or infamie So that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies the holding of the entire Faith in such holinesse of life and conversation as is without all infamy and reproach That is as our English renders that Creed exceeding well Which Faith unlesse a man do keep whole and * Sic Ecclesia dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eph. 5. 27. in veteri Glossario Immaculatus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 undefiled even with such a life as Momus himselfe shall not be able to carpe at So Athanasius who certainly was passing able to expresse himselfe in his owne language in the beginning of that his Creed requires That we keepe it entire without diminution and undefiled without blame And at the end that we believe it faithfully without wavering But Inviolate is the mistaken word of the old Interpreter and with no great knowledge made use of by A. C. And then fourthly though this be true Divinity that he which hopes for salvation must believe the whole Creed and in the right sense too if he be able to comprehend it yet I take the true and first meaning of Inviolate could Athanasius his word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 have signified so not to be the holding of the true sense but not to offer violence or a forced sense or meaning upon the Creed which every man doth not that yet believes it not in a true sense For not to believe the true sense of the Creed is one thing But 't is quite another to force a wrong sense upon it Fiftly a reason would be given also why A. C. is so earnest for the whole faith and bawkes the word which goes with it which is holy or undefiled For Athanasius doth alike exclude from salvation those which keepe not the Catholike Faith holy as well as these which keepe it not whole I doubt this was to spare many of his †§. 33. Nu. 6. holy Fathers the Popes who were as farre as any the very lewdest among men without exception from keeping the Catholike Faith holy Sixtly I agree to the next part of his Exposition That a man that will be saved must believe the whole Creed for the true formall reason of divine Revelation For upon the Truth of God thus revealed by himselfe lies the Infallible certainty of the Christian Faith But I do not grant that this is within the Compasse of S. Athanasius his word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor of the word Inviolate But in that respect 't is a meere straine of A. C. And then lastâ—…y though the whole Catholike Church be sufficient in applying this to us and our Beliefe not our Understanding which A. C. is at A. C. p. 70. againe yet Infallible She is not in the proposall of this Revelation to us by every of her Pastours Some whereof amongst you as well as others neglect or forget at least to feed Christ's sheepe as Christ and his Church hath fed them But now that A. C. hath taught us as you see the meaning of S. Athanasius in the next place he tels us A. C. p. 70. That if we did believe any one Article we finding the same formall Reason in all and applied sufficiently by the same meanes to all wou'd easily believe all Why surely we do not believe any one Article onely but all the Articles of the Christian Faith And we believe them for the same formall Reason in all namely Because they are revealed from and by God and sufficiently applied in his Word and by his Churches Ministration But so long as they do not believe all in this sort saith A. C. Looke you He A. C. p. 70. tels us we do not believe all when we professe we do Is this man become as God that he can better tell what we believe them we our selves Surely we do believe all and in that sort too Though I believe were S. Athanasius himselfe alive againe and a plaine man should come to him and tell him he believed his Creed in all and every particular he would admit him for a good Catholike Christian though he were not able to expresse to him the formall reason of that his beliefe Yea but saith A. C. while they will as all Heretickes doe make choice of what they will and what they A. C. p. 70. will not believe without relying upon the Infallible Authority of the Catholike Church they cannot have that one saving Faith in any one Article Why but whatsoever Hereticks doe we are not such nor do we so For they which believe all the Articles as once againe I tell you we do make no choice And we do relie upon the Infallible Authority of the Word of God and the whole Catholike Church And therefore we both can have and have that one saving Faith which believes all the Articles entirely though we cannot believe that any particular Church is infallible And yet againe A. C. will not thus be satisfied but on he goes and adds That although we believe the same A. C. p. 71. truth which other good Catholikes doe in some Articles yet not believing them for the same formall reason of Divine Revelation sufficiently applied by Infallible Church Authority c. we cannot be said to have one and the same Infallible and Divine Faith which other good Catholike Christians have who believe the Articles for this formall Reason sufficiently made knowne to them not by their owne fancy nor the fallible Authority of humane deductions but by the Infallible Authority of the Church of God If A. C. will still say the samething I must still give the same answer First he confesses we believe the same Truth in some Articles I pray marke his phrase the same Truth in some Articles with other good Catholike Christians so farre his pen hath told Truth against his will for he doth not I wot well intend to call us Catholikes and yet his pen being truer then himselfe hath let it fall For the word other cannot be so used as here it is but that we as well as they must be good Catholikes For he that shall say the old Romans were valiant as well as other men supposes the Romans to be valiant men And he that shall say The Protestants believe some Articles as well as other good Catholikes must in propriety of speech suppose them to be good Catholikes Secondly as we do believe those some Articles so do we believe them and all other Articles of Faith for the same formall reason and so applied as but just * §. 38. Nu. 13. before I have expressed Nor do we believe any one Article of Faith by our own fancy or by fallible Authority of humane deductions but next to the Infallible Authority of God's Word we are guided by his Church But then A. C. steps into a Conclusion whither we cannot A. C. p. 71. follow him For he sayes that the Articles to be believed must be sufficiently made
traditum est S. Cypri ad Pompeium cont Epist. Stephan princ tradere non traditum make a Tradition of that which was not delivered to her and by some of Them then She is unfaithful to God and doth not servare depositum faithfully keepe that which is committed to her Trust. * 1 Tim. 6. 20. and 2 Tim. 1. 14. 1 Tim. 6. And her Sonnes which come to know it are not bound to obey her Tradition against the c Si ipsa Ecclesia contraria Scripturae diceret Fidelis ipsi non crederet c. Hen. a Gand. Sum. p. 1. A. 10. q. 1. And Bellarmiâ—…e himselfe that he might the more safely defend himselfe in the Cause of Traditions sayes but how truly let other men Iudge Nullam Traditionem admittimus contra Scripturam L. 4. 〈◊〉 Verbo Dei c. 3. §. Deindè commune Word of their Father For wheresoever Christ holds his peace or that his words aâ—…e not Registred I am of S. d S. Aug. Tom. 96. in 〈◊〉 Ioh. in illâ—… Ferba Multa habeo dicere sed non potestis portare modò Augustines Opinion No man may dare without rashnesse say they were these or these So there were many unwritten Words of God which were never delivered over to the Church and thereâ—…ore never made Tradition And there are many Traditions which cannot be said to be the unwritten word of God For I believe a Learned Romanist that will weigh before he speakes will not easily say That to Annoint or use Spittle in Baptisme or to use three Dippings in the use of that Sacrament or diverse other like Traditions had their Rise from any Word of God unwritten Or if he be so hardy as to say so 't is gratis dictum and he will have enough to doe to prove it So there may be an unwritten Word of God which is no Tradition And there are many Traditions which are no unwritten Word of God Therfore Tradition must be taken two wayes Either as it is the Churches Act delivering or the Thing thereby delivered and then 't is Humane Authority or from it and unable infallibly to warrant Divine Faith or to be the Object of it Or els as it is the unwritten Word of God and then where ever it can be made to appeare so 't is of divine and infallible Authority no question But then I would have A. C. consider where he is in A. C. p. 49. this Particular He tels us We must know infallibly that the Bookes of Holy Scripture are Divine and that this must be done by unwritten Tradition but so as that this Tradition is the Word of God unwritten Now let him but prove that this or any Tradition which the Church of Rome stands upon is the Word of God though unwritten and the businesse is ended But A. C. must not thinke that because the Tradition of the Church tels me these Bookes are Verbum Dei Gods A. C. p. 50. Word and that I do both honour and believe this Tradition That therefore this Tradition it selfe is Gods Word too and so absolutely sufficient and infallible to worke this Beliefe in me Therefore for ought A. C. hath yet added we must on with our Inquiry after this great Businesse and most necessary Truth 2. For the second way of proving That Scripture should be fully and sufficiently knowne as by Divine and Infallible Testimony Lumine proprio by the resplendency of that Light which it hath in it selfe onely and by the witnesse that it can so give to it selfe I could never yet see cause to allow a Hook l. 2. §. 4 For as there is no place in Scripture that tels us Such Books containing such and such Particulars are the Canon and infallible Will and Word of God So if there were any such place that were no sufficient proofe For a man may justly aske another Booke to beare witnesse of that and againe of that another and where ever it were written in Scripture that must be a part of the Whole And no created thing can alone give witnesse to it selfe and make it evident nor one part testifie for another and satisfie where Reason will but offer to contest Except those Principles onely of Naturall knowledge which appeare manifest by intuitive light of understanding without any Discourse And yet they also to the weaker sort require Induction preceding Now this Inbred light of Scripture is a thing coincident with Scripture it selfe and so the Principles and the Conclusion in this kind of proofe should be entirely the same which cannot be Besides if this inward Light were so cleare how could there have beene any variety among the Ancient Believers touching the Authority of S. a Euseb. L. 2. c. 27. fine Edit Basil. 1549. Iames and S. Jude's Epistles and the b Euseb. L. 3. c. 25. Apocalyps with other Bookes which were not received for diverse yeares after the rest of the New Testament For certainly the Light which is in the Scripture was the same then which now it is And how could the Gospell of S. Bartholomew of S. Thomas and other counterfeit peeces obtaine so much credit with some as to be received into the Canon if the evidence of this Light were either Universall or Infallible of and by it selfe And this though I cannot approve yet me thinks you may and upon probable grounds at least For I hope no †Except A. C. whose boldness herein I cannot but pitie For he denies this light to the Scripture and gives it to Tradition His words are p. 52. Tradition of the Church is of a company which by its owne light shewes it selfe to bee infallibly assisted c. Romanist will deny but that there is as much light in Scripture to manifest and make ostension of it selfe to be infallibly the written Word of God as there is in any Tradition of the Church that it is Divine and infallibly the unwritten Word of God And the Scriptures saying from the mouthes of the Prophets b Isa 44. passina Thus saith the Lord and from the mouthes of the a Act. 28. 25. Apostles that the Holy Ghost spake by them are at least as able and as fit to beare witnesse to their owne Verity as the Church is to beare witnesse to her owne Traditions by bare saying they come from the Apostles And your selves would never go to the Scripture to prove that there are Traditions b 2. Thess. 2. 15. Iude vers 3. as you do if you did not thinke the Scripture as easie to be discovered by inbred light in itselfe as Traditions by their light And if this be so then it is as probable at the least which some of ours affirme That Scripture may bee knowne to bee the Word of God by the Light and Lustre which it hath in it selfe as it is which you c In your Articles delivered to D. W. to be answered And A. C. p. 52. affirme That a
others And Miracles are not sufficient alone to prove it unlesse both They and the Revelation too agree with the Rule of Scripture which is now an unalterable Rule by b Gal. 1. 8. man or Angell To all this A. C. sayes nothing save that I seeme not to admit of an infallible Impulsion of a private Spirit ex parte subjecti A. C. p. 52. without any infallible Reason and that sufficiently applied ex parte objecti which if I did admit would open a gap to all Enthusiasmes and dreames of fanaticall men Now for this yet I thank him For I do not onely seeme not to admit but I doe most clearely reject this phrensie in the words going before 4. The last way which gives c Utitur tamâ—… sacra Doctrina Ratione Humanâ non quidem ad probandum Fidem ipsam sed ad manifest andum aliqua alia quae traduntur in hac Doctrina Tho. p. 1. q. 1. A. 8. ad 2. Passibus rationis novus homo tendit in Deum S. Aug. de vera Relig. c. 26. Passibus veruÌ„ est sed nec aequis nec solis Nam Invisibilia Dei altiori modo quantum ad plura pâ—…rcipitg Fides quà m Ratio naturalis ex Creaturis in Deum procedens Tho. 2. 2. q. 2. A. 3. ad 3. Reason leave to come in and prove what it can may not justly be denied by any reasonable man For though Reason without Grace cannot see the way to Heaven nor believe this Booke in which God hath written the way yet Grace is never placed but in a reasonable creature and proves by the very seat which it hath taken up that the end it hath is to be spirituall eye-water to make Reason see what by †Animalis homo non percipit 1. Cor. 2. 14. Nature onely it cannot but never to blemish Reason in that which it can comprehend Now the use of Reason is very generall and man do what he can is still apt to search and seeke for a Reason why he will believe though after he once believes his Faith growes d Quia scientiae certitudinem habent ox naturali lumine Rationis humanae quae potest errare Theologia autem quae docet Objectum Notitiam Fidei sicut Fidem ipsam certitudinem habet ex lumine Divinae scientiae quae decipi non potest Tho. p. 1. q. 1. A. 5. c. Vt ipsà fide valentiores facti quod credimus intelligere mereamur S. Aug. cont Ep. Manichaei dictam Fundamentum c. 14. Hoc autem it a intelligendum est ut scientia certior sit Certitudine Evidentiae Fides verò certior Firmitate Adhaesionis Majus lumen in Scientia majus Robur in Fide Et hoc quia in Fide ad Fidem Actus imperatus Voluntatis concurrit Credere enim est Actus Intellectus Vero assentiontis productus ex Voluntatis Imperio Biel. in 3. Sent. d. 23. q. 2. A. 1. Unde Tho. Intellectus Credentis determinatur ad Unum non per Rationem sed per Voluntatem ideo Assensus hic accipitur pro Actu Intellectus secundum quod à Voluntate determinatur ad Vnum 2. 2. q. 2. A. 1. ad 3. stronger than either his Reason or his Knowledge and great reason for this because it goes higher and so upon a safer Principle than either of the other can in this life In this Particular the Bookes called the Scripture are commonly and constantly reputed to bee the Word of God and so infallible Verity to the least point of them Doth any man doubt this The world cannot keepe him from going to weigh it at the Ballance of Reason whether it bee the Word of God or not To the same Weights hee brings the Tradition of the Church the inward motives in Scripture it selfe all Testimonies within which seeme to beare witnesse to it and in all this there is no harme the danger is when a man will use no other Scale but Reason or preferre Reason before any other Scale For the Word of God and the Booke containing it refuse not to bee weighed by a Si vobis rationi veritati consentanca videntur in pretio habete c. de mysteriis Religionis Iustin. Mart. Apol. 2. Igitur si fuit dispositio Rationis c. Tertull. L de Carne Christi c. 18. Rationabile est credere Deum esse Autorem Scripturae Henr. a Gand. Sum To. 1. Ar. 9. q. 3. Reason But the Scale is not large enough to containe nor the Weights to measure out the true vertue and full force of either Reason then can give no supernaturall ground into which a man may resolve his Faith That Scripture is the Word of God infallibly yet Reason can go so high as it can prove that Christian Religion which rests upon the Authority of this Booke stands upon surer grounds of Nature Reason common Equity and Iustice than any thing in the World which any Infidell or meere Naturalist hath done doth or can adhere unto against it in that which he makes accounts or assumes as Religion to himselfe The Ancient Fathers relied upon the Scriptures no Christians more and having to doe with Philosophers men very well seene in all the subtilties which Naturall Reason could teach or learne They were often put to it and did as often make it good That they had sufficient warrant to relie so much as They did upon Scripture In all which Disputes because they were to deale with Infidels they did labour to make good the Authority of the Booke of God by such Arguments as unbelievers themselves could not but thinke reasonable if they weighed them with indifferency For though I set the Mysteries of Faith above Reason which is their proper place yet I would have no man thinke They contradict Reason or the Principles thereof No sure For Reason by her own light can discover how firmely the Principles of Religion are true but all the Light shee hath will never bee able to finde them false Nor may any man thinke that the Principles of Religion even this That Scriptures are the Word of God are so indifferent to a Naturall eye that it may with as just cause leane to one part of the Contradiction as to the other For though this Truth That Scripture is the Word of God is not so Demonstratively evident a priori as to enforce Assent yet it is strengthen'd so abundantly with probable Arguments both from the Light of Nature it selfe and Humane Testimony that he must be very wilfull and selfe-conceited that shall dare to suspect it Nay yet farther a Hook L. 3. §. 8. Si Plato ipse viveret me interrogantem non aspernaretur c. S. Aug. de verá Relig. c. 3. Vide amus quatenus Ratio potest progredi á visibilibus ad invisibilia c. Ibid. c. 29. It is not altogether impossible to proove it even by Reason a Truth infallible or else to make them deny some
of Divinity in this sort is a Science because it proceeds out of Principles that are knowne by the light of a Superiour Knowledge which is the Knowledge of God and the Blessed in Heaven In this Superiour Science this Principle The Scriptures are the Oracles of God is more then evident in full light This Superiour Science delivered this Principle in full revealed Light to the Prophets and Apostles †Non creditur Deus esse Author bujus Scientiae quia Homines hoc testati sunt in quantum Homines nudo Testimonio Humano sed in quantum circa eos effulsit virtus Divina â—…sa Deus iis sibi ipsi in eis Testimonium pâ—…buit Hen. à Gand. Sum. P. 1. A. 9. q. 3. This Infallible Light of this Principle made their Authority derivatively Divine By the same Divine Authoriâ—…y they wrote and delivered the Scripture to the Church Therefore from them immediately the Church received the Scripture and that uncorrupt though not in the same clearenesse of Ligâ—…t which they had And yet since no sufficient Reason hath or can be given that in any Substantiall thing it hath beene * Corruâ—…pi non possunt quia in manibus sunt omnium Christianorum Et quisquis hoc primitùs ausus esset multorum Codicum vetustiorum collatione confutaretur Maximè quia non unâ—… linguá sea multis continetur Scriptura Nonnullae autem Codicum mendositates vel de Antiquioribus vel de Linguá praecedente emendantur S. Aug. L. 32. cont Faustum c. 16. Corrupted it remaines firme at this day and that proved in the most Supreme Science and therefore now to bee supposed at least by all Christians That the Scripture is the Word of God So my Answer is good even in strictnesse That this Principle is to be supposed in this Dispute Besides the Iewes never had nor can have any other Proofe That the Old Testament is the Word of God then we have of the New For theirs was delivered by Moses and the Prophets and ours was delivered by the Apostles which were Prophets too The Iewes did believe their Scripture by a Divine Authority For so the Iewes argue themselves a S. Iohn 9. 29. S. Ioh. 9. We know that God spake with Moses b Maldonat in S. Ioh. 9. It aque non magis errare posse eum sequentes quà m si Deum ipsum sequerentur And that therefore they could no more erre in following Moses then they could in following God himselfe And our Saviour seemes to inferre as much c S. Ioh. 5. 47. S. Ioh. 5. where he expostulates with the Iewes thus If you believe not Moses his Writings how should you believe Me Now how did the Iewes know that God spake to Moses How why apparently the same way that is before set downe First by Tradition So S. d Hom. 57. iâ—… S. Ioh. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysostome We know why By whose witnesse do you know By the Testimony of our Ancestors But he speakes not of their immediate Ancestors but their Prime which were Prophets and whose Testimony was Divine into which namely their Writings the Iewes did Resolve their Faith And even that Scripture of the Old Testament was a e 2. S. Pet. 1. 19. Light and a shining Light too And therefore could not but be sufficient when Tradition had gone before And yet though the Iewes entred this way to their Beliefe of the Scripture they do not say f S. Chrys. ubi suprà 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Audivimus We have heard that God spâ—…ke to Moses but We know it So they Resolved their Faith higher and into a more inward Principle then an Eare to their immediate Ancestors and their Tradition And I would willingly learne of you if you can shew it me where ever any one Iew disputing with another about their Law did put the other to prove that the Old Testament was the Word of God But they still supposed it And when others put them to their Proofe this way they went And yet you say F. That no other Answer could be made but by admitting some Word of God unwritten to assure us of this Point B. I thinke I have shewed that my Answer is § 19 good and that no other Answer need be made If there were need I make no Question but another Answer might be made to assure us of this Point though we did not admit of any Word of God unwritten I say to assure us and you expresse no more If you had said to assure us by Divine Faith your Argument had beene the stronger But if you speake of Assurance onely in the generall I must then tell you and it is the great advantage which the Church of Christ hath against Infidels a man may be assured nay infallibly assured by Ecclesiasticall and Humane Proofe Men that never saw Rome may be sure and infallibly believe That such a Citie there is by Historicall and acquired Faith And if Consent of Humane Storie can assure me this why should not Consent of Church-storie assure me the other That Christ and his Apostles delivered this Body of Scripture as the Oracles of God For Iewes Enemies to Christ they beare witnesse to the Old Testament and Christians through almost all Nations †Tant a hominum temporum consensione firmatum S. Aug. L. de Mor. Eccles Cath. c. 29. Is Libri quoquo modo se habent sancti tamen Divinarum Rerum pleni prope totius generis humani Confessione diffamantur c. S. Aug. de util cred c. 7. L. 13. cont Faust. c. 15. give in evidence to both Old and New And no Pagan or other Enemies of Christianity can give such a Worthy and Consenting Testimonie for any Authoritie upon which they rely or almost for any Principle which they have as the Scripture hath gained to it self And as is the Testimony which it receives above all * Super omnes omnium Gentiâ—… Literas S. Aug. 11. de Civit. Dei c. 1. Writings of all Nations so here is assurance in a great measure without any Divine Authority in a Word written or Vnwritten A great assurance and it is Infallible too Only then we must distinguish Infallibility For first a thing may be presented as an infallible Object of Beliefe when it is true and remaines so For Truth quà talis as it is Truth can not deceive Secondly a thing is said to be Infallible when it is not only true and remains so actually but when it is of such invariable constancy and upon such ground as that no Degree of falshood at any time in any respect can fall upon it Certain it is that by Humane Authority Consent and Proofe a man may be assured infallibly that the Scripture is the Word of God by an acquired Habit of Faith cui non su'est falsum under which nor Error nor falshood is But he cannot be assured infallibly by Divine Faith a Incertum