tantum ut omnes Mandato suo obediant licitum est Catholicis facere Quià praestant solum Obedientia officium Sin jubeat ut eo Symbolo fimul Religionem Haereticam profiteantur parere non debent Quares iterum An liceat Catholico obedire modò publicè asseveret se id efficere solùm ut Principi suo obediat non ut sectam hareticam profiteatur I Respondeo Quidam id licere arbitrantur ne bona ejus publicentâ—…r vel Vita eripiatur Quod sanè probabiliter dici videtur Azorius Instit. Moral p. 1. L 8. c. 27 p. 1299. Edit Paris 1616. Azorius affirmes this in expresse termes And what doe you think can he prove it Nay not Azorius onely but other Priests and Iesuites here in England either teach some of their Proselytes or els some of them learn it without teaching That though they be perswaded as this Lady was that is though they be Romane Catholikes yet either to gaine honour or save their purse they may goe to the Protestant Church just as the Iesuite here sayes The Lady did out of frailty and feare to offend the King Therefore I pray A. C. if this be grosse dissimulation both with God and the world speake to your fellowes to leave perswading or practising of it and leave men in the profession of Religion to bee as they seeme or to seeme and appeare as they are Let 's have no Maske worne here A. C s. second Reason why one so perswaded as that Lady was might not goe to the Protestant Church is Because that were outwardly A. C. p. 73. to professe a Religion in Conscience knowne to bee false To this I answer first that if this Reason be true it concernes all men as well as those that be perswaded as the Lady was For no man may outwardly professe a Religion in conscience knowne to bee false For with the bea rt man believeth to righteousnesse and with the mouth hee confesseth to salvation Rom. 10. Rom. 10. 10. Now to his owne salvation no man can confesse a knowne false Religion Secondly if the Religion of the Protestants be in conscience a knowne false Religion then the Romanists Religion is so too for their Religion is the same Nor do the Church of Rome and the Protestants set up a different Religion for the Christian Religion is the same to both but they differ in the same Religion And the difference is in certaine grosse corruptions to the very endangering of salvation which each side sayes the other is guilty of Thirdly the Reason given is most untrue for it may appeare by all the former Discourse to any Indifferent Reader that Religion as it is professed in the Church of England is nearest of any Church now in being to the Primiâ—…ive Church And therefore not a Religion knowne to be false And this I both doe and can prove were not the deafenesse of the Aspe upon the eares of seduced 〈◊〉 58. 4. Christians in all humane and divided parties whatsoever After these Reasons thus given by him A. C. tels me That I neither doe nor can prove any superstition A. C. p. 73. or errour to be in the Romane * I would A. C. would call it the Romane Perswasion as some understanding Romanists do Religion What none at all Now truly I would to God from my heart this were true and that the Church of Rome were so happy and the whole Catholike Church thereby blessed with Truth and Peace For I am confident such Truth as that would soone either Command Peace or †For though I spare their Names yet can I not agree in Iudgement with him that sayes in Print God be praised for the disagreement in Religion Nor in Devotion with him that prayed in the Pulpit That God would teare the Rent of Religion wider But of S. Greg. Naz. Opinion I am 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Non studemus paci in detrimentum verae Doctrinae ut facilitatis Mansuetudinis famam colligamus Et rursum Pacem colimus legitimè pâ—…gnantes c. Orat. 32. confound Peace-Breakers But is there no Superstition in Adoration of Images None in Invocation of Saints None in Adoration of the Sacrament Is there no errour in breaking Christs own Institution of the Sacrament by giving it but in one kinde None about Purgatorie About Common Prayer in an unknowne tongue none These and many more are in the Romane Religion if you will needs call it so And 't is no hard worke to prove every of these to be Errour or Superstition or both But if A. C. think so meanely of me that though this be no hard worke in it selfe yet that I such is my weakenesse cannot prove it I shall leave him to enjoy that opinion of me or what ever else he shall be pleased to entertaine and am farre better content with this his opinion of my weaknesse then with that which followes of my pride for he adds That I cannot A. C. p. 73. prove any Errour or Superstition to be in the Romane Religion but by presuming with intolerable pride to make my selfe or some of my fellowes to be Iudge of Controversies and by taking Authority to censure all to be Superstition and Errour too which sutes not with my fancy although it be generally held or practised by the Vniversall Church Which saith he in S. Augustine's judgement is most 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What not prove any Superstition any Errâ—…ur at Rome but by Pride and that 〈◊〉 Truly I would to God A. C. saw my heart and all the Pride that lodges therein But wherein doth this Pride appeare that he censures me so deeply Why first in this That I cannot prove any Errour or Superstition to be in the Romane Religion unlesse I make my selfe or 〈◊〉 of my fellowes Iudge of Controversies Indeed if I tooke this upon me I were guilty of great Pride But A C. knowes well that before in this Conference which he undertakes to Answer I am so farre from making my selfe or any of my fellowes Iudge of Controversies that a §. 33. §. 26. Nu. 1. 11. I absolutely make a lawfull and free Generall Councell Iudge of Controversies by and according to the Scriptures And this I learned from b Praeponitur Scripturae c. S. Aug. L. 2. de Bapt. cont Donat c. 3. S. Augustine with this That ever the Scripture is to have the prerogative above the Councell Nay A. C. should remember here that c §. 32. Nu. 5. A. C. p. 63. he himselfe taxes me for giving too much power to a Generall Councell and binding men to a strict Obedience to it even in Case of Errour And therefore sure most innocent I am of the intolerable pride which he is pleased to charge upon me and he of all men most unfit to charge it Secondly A. C. will have my pride appeare in this A. C. p. 73. that I take Authority to censure all for
force me to dissent And in that Case I shall do it without Contempt too This onely I will say b Nemini in sua causa eredendum nisi conformitter ad Legem Divinam Naturalem Canouicam loquatur So Io. Gerson the Doctors of Paris cited in Lib. Anon. de Ecclesiastica Politica Potestate c. 16. Ed. Paris 1612. Now these Popes doe not speak here conformably to these Lawes That Sixe Popes concurring in opinion shall have lesse waight with me in their own Cause than any other Sixe of the more Ancient Fathers Indeed could I swallow b L. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 3. Bellarmines Opinion That the Popes Iudgement is Infallible I would then submit without any more adoe But that will never downe with me unlesse I live till I doate which I hope in God I shall not Other Proofes than these Bellarmine brings not to prove that the Particular Church of Rome cannot erre in or from the Faith And of what force these are to sway any Iudgement I submit to all indifferent Readers And having thus examined Bellarmines Proofes That the Particular Church of Rome cannot erre in Faith I now returne to A. C. and the A. C. p. 42. Iesuite and tell them that no Iesuite or any other is ever able to prove any Particular Church Infallible But for the Particular Church of Rome and the Pope with it erred it hath And therefore may erre Erred I say it hath in the Worship of Images and in altering Christs Institution in the blessed Sacrament by taking away the Cup from the People and diverse other particulars as shall appeare at †§. 33. Consid. 7. Num. 5. 12 after And as for the Ground which is presumed to secure this Church from Errour 't is very remarkable How the c Romanae Ecclesia Particularis non potest errare persistente Romae Apostolicá sede Propositio haec est verissima fortasse tam vera quam illa prima de Pontifice L. 4 de Rom. Pont. c. 4. §. 2. And that first proposition is this Summus Pontifex cum totam Ecclesiam docet in his quae ad fidem pertinent nullo casu errare potest Ibid. c. 3. §. 1. Learned Cardinall speakes in this Case For he tells us that this Proposition So long as S. Peter's Chaire is at Rome that Particular Church cannot erre in the Faith is verissima most true and yet in the very next words 't is Fortasse tam vera peradventure as true as the former that is That the Pope when he teaches the whole Church in those things which belong to the faith cannot erre in any case What is that Proposition most true And yet is it but at a peradventure 't is as true as this Is it possible any thing should be absolutely most true and yet under a Peradventure that it is but as true as another truth But here without all Peradventure neither Proposition is true And then indeed Bellarmine may say without a Fortasse That this proposition The Particular Church of Rome cannot erre so long as the Sea Apostolike is there is as true as this The Pope cannot erre while he teaches the whole Church in those things which belong to the Faith For neither of them is true But he cannot say that either of them is verissima most true when neither of them hath Truth 2. Secondly if the Particular Church of Rome be Infallible and can neither erre in the Faith nor fall from it then it is because the Sea Apostolike cannot be transferred from Rome but must ever to the consummation of the World remaine there and keepe that Particular Church from erring Now to this what sayes Bellarmine what why he tells us a Pia probabilissima Sententia est Cathedram Petri non posse separari à Româ proinde Romanam Ecclesiam absolutè non posse errare vel deficere L. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 4. §. Quod nihilominus That it is a pious and most probable Opinion to thinke so And he reckons foure Probabilities that it shall never be remov'd from Rome And I will not deny but some of them are faire Probabilities But yet they are but Probabilities and so unable to convince any man Why but then what if a man cannot thinke as Bellarmine doth but that enforced by the light of his understanding he must thinke the quite contrary to this which Bellarmine thinks pious and so probable What then Why then b Contraria sententia nee est Haeretica nee manifestè erronea L. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 4. §. At socundum Bellarmine himselfe tells you that the quite contrary Proposition to this namely That S. Peter's Chayre may be severed from Rome and that theâ—… that Particular Church may erre is neither Haereticall nor manifestly erroneous So then by Bellarmines owne Confession I am no Haereticke nor in any manifest error if I say as indeed I doe and thinke it too that 't is possible for S. Peter's Chaire to be carried from Rome and that then at least by his owne argument that Church may erre Now then upon the whole matter and to returne to A. C. If that Lady desired to rely upon a A. C. p. 42. particular infallible Church 't is not to be found on earth Rome hath not that gift nor her Bishop neither And Bellarmine who I thinke was as able as any Champion that Church hath dares not say t is either Haeresie or a manifest error to say That the Apostolike Sea may be removed thence and That Church not only erre in Faith but also fall quite away from it Now I for my part have not ignorance enough in me to believe That that Church which may Apostatize at some one time may not erre at another Especially since both her erring and failing may arise from other Causes besides that which is mention'd by the Cardinall And if it may erre 't is not Infallible F. The Question was Which was that Church A friend of the Ladies would needs defend That not only the Romane but also the Greek Church was right B. When that Honourable Personage answered § 4 I was not by to heare But I presume He was so farre from granting that only the Romane Church was right as that He did not grant it right And that He tooke on him no other Defence of the poore Greeke Church then was according to truth F. I told him That the Greeke Church had plainly changed and taught false in a Poynt of Doctrine concerning the Holy Ghost and That I had hear'd say that even His Majestie should say That the Greeke Church having erred against the Holy Ghost had lost the Holy Ghost B. You are very bold with His Majesty to § 5 relate Him upon Heare-say My Intelligence serves me not to tell you what His Majestie said But if he said it not you have beene too credulous to believe and too suddaine to report it Princes deserve and were
est aut quaelibet alia Ecclesiae communis Generalis Hispaniâ—… Galliciae Synodus celebretur c. Conc. Tolet. 4. Can. 3. They Decree That if there happen a Cause of Faith to be setled a Generall that is a Nationall Synod of all Spaine and Gallicia shall be held thereon And this in the yeare 643. Where you see it was then Catholike Doctrine in all Spaine that a Nationall Synod might be a Competent Iudge in a Cause of Faith And I would faine know what Article of the Faith doth more concerne all Christians in generall then that of Filioque And yet the Church of Rome her selfe made that Addition to the Creed without a Generall Councell as I have shewed e §. 24. Nu. 2. already And if this were practised so often and in so many places why may not a Nationall Councell of the Church of England doe the like as Shee did For Shee cast off the Pope's Vsurpation and as much as in her lay restored the King to his right That appeares by a a The Institution of a Christian man printed An. 1534. Booke subscribed by the Bishops in Henry the eight's time And by the b In Synodo Londinâ—…nsi Sess. 8. Die Veneris 29. Ianuarii An. 1562. Records in the Arch-bishop's Office orderly kept and to be seene In the Reformation which came after our c And so in the Reformation under Hezekiah 2. Chron. 29 under Iosia 4 Reg. 23. And in the time of Reccarcdus King of Spaine the Reformation there proceeded thus Quùm gloriosissimus Princeps omnes Regiminâ—… sui Pontifices in unum convenire mandâ—…sset c. Conâ—…il Tolet. 3. Can. 1. Cùm convemssemus Sacerdotes Domini apud urbem Toletanâ—… ut Râ—…giis imperiis atque jussis commoniti c. Concil Tolet. 4. in princ apud Caraâ—…zam And boâ—…h these Synods did treat of Matters of Faith Princes had their parts and the Clergy theirs And to these Two principally the power and direction for Reformation belongs That our Princes had their parts is manifest by their Calling together of the Bishops and others of the Clergie to consider of that which might seeme worthy Reformation And the Clergie did their part For being thus called together by Regall Power they met in the Nationall Synod of sixty two And the Articles there agreed on were afterwards confirmed by Acts of State and the Royall Assent In this Synod the Positive Truths which are delivered are more then the Polemicks So that a meere Calumnie it is That we professe only a Negative Religion True it is and we must thanke Rome for it our Confession must needs containe some Negatives For we cannot but deny that Images are to be adored Nor can we admit Maimed Sacraments Nor grant Prayers in an unknowne tongue And in a corrupt time or place 't is as necessary in Religion to deny falshood as to assert and vindicate Truth Indeed this latter can hardly be well and sufficiently done but by the former an Affirmative Verity being ever included in the Negative to a Falshood As for any Errour which might fall into this as any other Reformation if any such can be found then I say 't is most true Reformation especially in Cases of Religion is so difficult a worke and subject to so many Pretensions that 't is almost impossible but the Reformers should step too farre or fall too short in some smaller things or other which in regard of the farre greater benefit comming by the Reformation it selfe may well be passed over and borne withall But if there have beene any wilfull and grosse errours not so much in Opinion as in Fact †Quisquis occasione hujus Legis quam Regesterra Christo servientes ad emendandam vestram impietatem promulgaverunt res proprias vestras cupide appetit displicet nobis Quisquis denique ipsas res pauperum vel Baâ—…licas Congregationum c. non per Iustitiam sed per Avaritiamtenet displicet nobis S. Aug. Epist. 48. versus finem Sacriledge too often pretending to reforme Superstition that 's the Crime of the Reformers not of the Reformation and they are long since gone to God to answer it to whom I leave them But now before I go off from this Point I must put you in remembrance too That I spake at that time and so must all that will speak of that Exigent of the Generall Church as it was for the most part forced under the Government of the Romane Sea And this you understand well enough For in your very next words you call it the Romane Church Now I make no doubt but that as the Vniversall Catholike Church would have reform'd her selfe had she beene in all parts freed of the Romane Yoke so while she was for the most in these Westerne parts under that yoke the Church of Rome was if not the Onely yet the Chiefe Hindrance of Reformation And then in this sense it is more then cleare That if the Romane Church will neither Reform nor suffer Reformation it is lawfull for any other Particular Church to Reform it selfe so long as it doth it peaceably and orderly and keeps it selfe to the Foundation and free from * And this a Particular Church may doe but not a Schisme For a Schisme can never be peaceable nor orderly and seldome free from Sacriledge Out of which respects it may be as well as for the grâ—…evousnesse of the Crime S. Aug. cals it Sacrilegium Schismatis L. 1 de Bapt. cont Donat. c. 8. For usually they go together Sacriledge F. I asked Quo Iudice did this appeare to bee so VVhich Question I asked as not thinking it equity that Protestants in their own Cause should be Accusers VVitnesses and Iudges of the Romane Church B You doe well to tell the reason now why you § 25 asked this Question For you did not discover it at the Conference if you had you might then have received your Answer It is most true No man in common equity ought to be suffered to be Accuser Witnesse and Iudge in his owne Cause But is there not as little reason and equity too that any man that is to be accused should be the Accused and yet VVitnesse and Iudge in his owne Cause If the first may hold no man shall be Innocent and if the last none will be Nocent And what doe we here with in their owne Cause against the Romane Church Why Is it not your owne too against the Protestant Church And if it be a Cause common to both as certaine it is then neither Part alone may be Iudge If neither alone may judge then either they must be judged by a * §. 21. Nu. 9. Third which stands indifferent to both and that is the Scripture or if there be a jealousie or Doubt of the sense of the Scripture they must either both repaire to the Exposition of the Primitive Church and submit to that or both call and submit to a Generall
then A. C. tels us That Particular Churches must in A. C. p. 58. that Case as Irenaeus intimateth have recourse to the Church of Rome which hath more powerfull Principality and to †And after hee saith p. 58. that the Bishop of Rome is and ought to bee the Iudge of particular Churches in this Case her Bishop who is chiefe Pastour of the whole Church as being S. Peter's Successour to whom Christ promised the keyes S. Matth. 16. for whom he prayed that his Faith might not faile S. Luke 22. And whom he charged to seed and governe the whole Flocke S Iohn 21. And this A. C. tels us he shall never refuse to doe in such sort as that this neglect shall be a Iust Cause for any Particular Man or Church under Pretence of Reformation in Manners or Faith to make a Schisme or Separation from the Whole Generall Church Well first you see where A. C. would have us If any Particular Churches differ in Points of Divine Truth they must not Iudge or Condemne each other saith he No take heed of that in any case That 's the Office of the Universall Church And yet he will have it That Rome which is but a Particular Church must and ought Iudge all other Particulars Secondly he tels us this is so Because the Church of Rome hath more Powerfull Principality then other Particular Churches and that her Bishop is Pastour of the Whole Church To this I answer that it is most true indeed the Church of Rome hath had and hath yet more Powerfull Principality then any other Particular Church But she hath not this Power from Christ. The Romane Patriarch by Ecclesiasticall Constitutions might perhaps have a Primacy of Order But for Principality of Power the Patriarchs were as even as equall as the a Summa Potestas Ecclesiastica non est data solum Petro sedetiam aliis Apostolis Omnes enim poterant dicere illud S. Pauli Solicitu la omnium Ecclesiarum c. 2. Cor. 11. 28. Bellar. L. 1. de Rom. Pont. c. 9. §. Respondâ—… Pontificatum Where then is the difference betweene S. Peter and the rest In this saith Bellarmin Ibid. Quta hec Potestas data est Petro ut Ordinario Pastori cui perpetuo succederetur Aliis verò tanquà m Delegatis quibus non succederetur This is handsomely said to men easie of beliefe But that the Highest Power Ecclesiasticall confessed to be given to the other Apostle as well as to S. Peter was given to S. Peter onely as to an Ordinary Pastour whose Successours should have the same Power which the Successours of the rest should not have can never bee prooved out of Scripture Nay I will give them their own Latitude it can never be proved by any Tradition of the whole Catholike Church And till it be proved Bellarmines handsome Expression cannot be believed by me For S. Cyprian hath told me long since that Episcopatus Vnus est for as much as belongs to the Calling as well as Apostolatus L. de simp. Praelato Apostles were before them The Truth is this more Powerfull Principality the Romane Bishops b §. 25. Nu. 12. got under the Emperours after they became Christian and they used the matter so that they grew big enough to oppose nay to depose the Emperours by the same power which they had given them And after this other Particular Churches especially here in the West submitted themselves to them for succour and Protections sake And this was one maine Cause which swelled Rome into this more Powerfull Principality and not any Right given by Christ to make that c Lib. 1. de Rom. Pont. c. 9. §. Augustmu Epistola Prelate Pastour of the whole Church I know Bellarmine makes much adoe about it and will needs fetch it out of d S. Aug. Epist. 162. In Romaná Ecclesiâ—… emper Apostolicae Cathedrae viguit Principatas S. Augustine who sayes indeed That in the Church of Rome there did alwaies flourish the Principality of an Apostolicke Chaire Or if you will the Apostolicke Chaire in relation to the West and South parts of the Church all the other foure Apostolicke Chaires being in the East Now this no man denies that understands the state and story of the Church And e Quia Opinio invaluit fundâ—…tam esse hanc Ecclesiam à S. Petâ—… Jtaque in Occidente Sedes Apostolica Honoris 〈◊〉 Calv. L. 4. c. 6. §. 16. Calvin confesses it expresly Nor is the Word Principatus so great nor were the Bishops of those times so little as that Principes and Principatus are not commonly given them both by the a Princeps Ecclesiae S. H. lar 18. de Trin. Prin. And he speakes of a Biâ—…hop in generall Greg. Nazianz. Orat. 17. Ascribuntur Episcopo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Imperium Thronus Principatus ad regimâ—…n Aâ—…imarum Et 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hujusmodi Imperium And he also speaks of a Bishop Greg. Nazian Orat. 20. Nor were these any Titles of pride in Biâ—…hops then For S. Greg. Nazianz. who challenges these Titles to himselfe Orat. 17. was so devout so mild and so humble that rather then the Peace of the Church should be broken he freely resigned the Great Patriarchate of Constantinople and retired and this in the First Councell of Constantinople and the Second Generall Greeke and the Latine Fathers of this great and Learnedest Age of the Church made up of the fourth and fist hundred yeares alwaies understanding Principatus of their Spirituall Power and within the Limits of their severall Iurisdictions which perhaps now and then they did occasionally exceed And there is not one word in S. Augustine That this Principality of the Apostolike Chaire in the Church of Rome was then or ought to be now exercised over the whole Church of Christ as Bellarmine insinuates there and as A. C. would have it here And to prove that S Augustine did not intend by Principatus here to give the Romane Bishop any Power out of his owne Limits which God knowes were farre short of the whole Church I shall make it most manifest out of the very same Epistle For afterwards saith S. Augustine when the pertinacy of the Donatists could not be restrained by the African Bishops only b Pergant ad Fratres Collegas nostros transmarinarum Ecclesiarum Episcopos c. S. Aug. Ep 162. they gave them leave to be heard by forraigne Bishops And after that he hath these words c An fortè non debuit Romanae Ecclesiae Melciades Episcopus cum Collegis transmarinis Episcopis illud sibi usurpare judicium quod ab Afris septuaginta ubi Primas Tigisitanus praesedit fuerit terminaetum Quid quod nec ipse usurpâ—…vit Rogatus quippe Imperator Iudices misit Episcopos qui cum â—…o sederent de totâ illâ Causà quod justum videretur statuerent c. S. Aug. Ibid. And yet peradventure Melciades the Bishop of
the Church of Christ. And this is said to have amounted into a formall Separation from the Church of Rome and to have continued for the space of somewhat more then one hundred yeares Now that such a Separation there was of the African Church from Rome and a Reconciliation after stands upon the Credit and Authority of two publike Instruments extant both among the Ancient Councels The one is an a Epist. Bonifacii 2. apud Nicol. To. 2. Concil p. 544. Epistle from Boniface the second in whose time the Reconciliation to Rome is said to be made by Eulalius then Bishop of Carthage but the Separation Instigante Diabolo by the Temptation of the Divil The other is an b Exemp PrecuÌ„ apud Nicolin Ibid. p. 525. Exemplar PrecuÌ„ or Copie of the Petition of the same Eulalius in which he damnes and curses all those his Predecessors which went against the Church of Rome Amongst which Eulalius must needes Curse S. Augustine And Pope Boniface accepting this Submmission must acknowledge that S. Augustine and the rest of that Councell deserved this Curse and dyed under it as violating Rectae Fidei Regulam the Rule of the Right Faith so the Exemplar Precum beginnes by refusing the Popes Authority I will not deny but that there are divers Reasons given by the Learned Romanists and Reformed Writers for and against the Truth and Authority of both these Instruments But because this is too long to be examin'd here I wil say but this and then make my use of it to my present purpose giving the Church of Rome free leave to acknowledge these Instruments to be true or false as they please That which I shall say is this These Instruments are let stand in all Editions of the Councels and Epistles Decretall As for Example in the Old Edition by Isidor Anno. 1524. And in another Old Edition of them Printed Anno. 1530. And in that which was published by P Crabbe Anno. 1538. And in the Edition of Valentinus Ioverius Anno. 1555. And in that by Surius Anno. 1567. And in the Edition at Venice by Nicolinus Anno. 1585. And in all of these without any Note or Censure upon them And they are in the Edition of Binius too Anno. 1618. but there 's a Censure upon them to keepe a quarter it may be with * Baron Annal. An. ad 4 9. Nu. 93. 94. Baronius who was the first I think that ever quarrelled them and he doth it tartly And since †Ualde mihi illa Epistola suspecta sunt Bellar. L. 2. de Ro. Pont. c. 25. § Respondeo primum Sed si fortè illa Epistola verae sunt nihil enim affirmâ—… c. Ibid. § ult Bellarmine followes the same way but more doubtfully This is that which I had to say And the Vse which I shall make of these Instruments whether they be true or false is this They are either true or false that is of necessity If they be false then Boniface the Second and his Accomplices at Rome or some for them are notorious Forgers and that of Records of great Consequence concerning the Government and Peace of the whole Church of Christ and to the perpetual Infamie of that Sea and all this foolishly and to no purpose For if there were no such Separation as these Records mention of the Africane Churches from the Romane to what end should Boniface or any other counterfeit an Epistle of his owne and a Submission of Eulalius On the other side if these Instruments be true as the sixth Councell of Carthage against all other Arguments makes me incline to believe they are in Substance at least though perhaps not in all Circumstances then 't is manifest that the Church of Africk separated from the Church of Rome That this Separation continued above one hundred yeares That the Church of Africke made this Separation in a Nationall Councell of their owne which had in it two hundred and seventeene Bishops That this Separation was made for ought appeares only because they at Rome were too ready to entertaine Appeales from the Church of Africke as appeares in the Case of * And so the Councell of Carthage sent word to Pope Calestine plainly that in admitting such Appeales he brake the Decrees of the Councell of Nice Epist. Concil Africa ad Calestinum c. 105. Apud Nicolin Tom. 1. Concil p. 844. Apiarius who then appealed thither That S. Augustine Eugenius Fulgentius and all those Bishops and other Martyrs which suffered in the Uandalike Persecution dyed in the time of this Separation That if this Separation were not just but a Schisme then these Famous Fathers of the Church dyed for ought appeares in Actuall and unrepented Schisme †Planè ex Ecclesiae Catholicae albo Expâ—…ngenda fâ—…issent Sâ—…nctorum Africanorum Martyrum Agâ—…ina qui in persecutione Vandalica pro Fide Catholica c. Baron Ann. 419. Num. 93. Et Binius In Notis ad Epist. Bomfacii 2. ad Eulalium and out of the Church And if so then how comes S. Augustine to be and be accounted a Saint all over the Christian world and at Rome it selfe But if the Separation were just then is it farre more lawfull for the Church of England by a Nationall Councell to cast off the Popes Vsurpation as * §. 24. Nu. 5. She did then it was for the African Church to separate Because then the African Church excepted only against the Pride of Rome †Belâ—… 2. de Ro. Pont. c. 25. §. 2. in Case of Appeales and two other Canons lesse materiall But the Church of England excepts besides this Grievance against many Corruptions in Doctrine belonging to the Faith with which Rome at that time of the African Separation was not tainted And I am out of all doubt that S. August and those other Famous men in their generations durst not thus have separated from Rome had the Pope had that powerfull Principality over the whole Church of Christ And that by Christs owne Ordinance and Institution as A. C. pretends he had A. C. p. 58. I told you a little * §. 25. Nu. 10. before that the Popes grew under the Emperors till they had over-grown them And now lest A. C. should say I speake it without proofe I will give you a briefe touch of the Church-story in that behalfe And that from the beginning of the Emperors becomming Christians to the time of Charles the Great which containes about five hundred yeares For so soone as the Emperors became Christian the Church which before was kept under by persecutions began to be put in better order For the calling and Authority of Bishops over the Inferiour Clergie that was a thing of kâ—…owne use and benefit for Preservation of Unity and Peace in the Church And so much †Quòd autem postea Vxus electus est qui cateris praporerâ—…ur in Schismatis remedium fallum est ne unusquisque ad se trahens Christi
was necessary after Baptisme formally given by the Church So this Proposition In Point of Faith and Salvation it is safest for a man to take that way which the differing Parties agree in or which the Adversary Confesses is you see both true and false as men have cunning to apply it and as the matter is about which it is Conversant And is therefore no Proposition able or fit to settle a Conclusion in any sober mans minde till the Matter contained under it bee well scanned and examined And yet as much use as you would make of this Proposition to amaze the weake your selves dare not stand to it no not where the matter is undenyably true as shall appeare in divers Particulars beside this of the Eucharist But before I adde any other particular Instances I must tell you what A. C. sayes to the two A. C. p. 65. former For he tels us These two are nothing like the present case Nothing That is strange indeed Why in the first of those Cases concerning the Donatists your Proposition is false And so farre from being safest that it was no way safe for a man to take that way of Beliefe and so of Salvation which both parts agreed on And is this nothing Nay is not this full and home to the present case For the present case is this and no more That it is safest taking that way of Beliefe which the differing Parties agree on or which the Adversary Confesses And in the second of those Cases concerning the Eucharist your Proposition indeed is true not by the Truth which it hath in it selfe Metaphysically and in Abstract but only in regard of the matter to which it is applyed yet there you desert your owne Proposition where it is true And is this nothing Nay is not this also full and home to the present case since it appeares your Proposition is such as your selves dare not bide by either when it is true or when it is false For in the Case of Baptisme administred by the Donatist the Proposition is false and you dare not bide by it for Truths sake And in the case of the Eucharist the Proposition is true and yet you dare not bide by it for the Church of Romes sake So that Church with you cannot erre and yet will not suffer you to maintaine Truth which not to doe is some degree of Errour and that no small one Well A. C. goes on and gives his Reasons why these two Instances are nothing like the present Case A. C. p. 65. For in these Cases saith hee there are annexed other Reasons of certainly knowne perill of damnable Schisme and Heresie which wee should incurre by consenting to the Donatists denyall of true Baptisme among Catholikes and to the Protestants denyall or doubting of the true substantiall Presence of Christ in the Eucharist But in this Case of Resolving to live and dye in the Catholike Romane Church there is confessedly no such perill of any damnable Heresie or Schisme or any other sinne Here I have many Particulars to observe upon A. C. and you shall have them as briefly as I can set them downe And first I take A. C. at his word that in Punct 1. the case of the Donatist should it bee followed there would bee knowne perill of damnable Schisme and Heresie by denying true Baptisme to be in the Orthodoxe Church For by this you may see what a sound proposition this is That where two Parties are dissenting it is safest believing that in which both Parties agree or which the Adversary confesses for here you may see by the case of the Donatist is confessed it may leade a man that will universally leane to it into knowne and damnable Schisme and Heresie An excellent Guide I promise you this is it not Nor secondly are these though A. C. calles them Punct 2. A. C. p. 65. so annexed Reasons For hee calls them so but to blaunch the matter as if they fell upon the proposition ab extra accidentally and from without Whereas they are not annexed or pinned on but flow naturally out of the Proposition it selfe For the Proposition would seeme to be Metaphysicall and is applyable indifferently to any Common Beliefe of dissenting Parties be the point in difference what it will Therfore if there be any thing Hereticall Schismaticall or any way evill in the Point this proposition being neither Vniversally nor necessarily true must needes cast him that relyes upon it upon all these Rocks of Heresie Schisme or what ever else followes the matter of the Proposition Thirdly A. C. doth extremely ill to joyne these Cases of the Donatists for Baptisme and the Protestant for Punct 3. A. C. p. 66. the Eucharist together as he doth For this Proposition in the first concerning the Donatists leades a man as is confessed by himselfe into knowne and damnable Schisme and Heresie but by A. C s. good leave the later concerning the Protestants and the Eucharist nothing so For I hope A. C. dare not say That to believe the true * Caterùm his absurditatibus sublatis quicquid ad Exprimendam veram substantialemque Corporis ac sanguinis Domini Communicationem qua sub sacris Coenae symbolis fidelibus exhibetur facere potest libeuter recipio Calvin L 4. Inst. c. 17. §. 19. In Coenae mysterio per symbola Panis Vini Christus verè nobis exhibetur c. Et nos participes substantiae ejus facti sumus Ibid. §. 11. substantiall Presence of Christ is either knowne or damnable Schisme or Heresie Now as many and as Learned †§. 35. N 3. Protestants believe and maintaine this as doe believe possibility of Salvation as before is limited in the Romane Church Therefore they in that not guilty of either knowne or damnable Schisme or Heresie though the Donatists were of both Fourthly whereas he imposes upon the Protestants The denyall or doubting of the true and Reall Presence of Punct 4. A. C. p. 66. Christ in the Eucharist he is a great deale more bold then true in that also For understand them right and they certainly neither deny nor doubt it For as for the Lutheran as they are commonly called their very Opinion of Consubstantiation makes it knowne to the world that they neither deny nor doubt of his true and Reall Presence there And they are Protestants And for the Calvinists if they might bee rightly understood they also maintaine a most true and Reall Presence though they cannot permit their judgement to be Transubstantiated And they are Protestants too And this is so knowne a Truth that a Bellarm. L. 1 de Euchar. c 2. §. Quinto dicit Sacrameâ—… saepe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 de Corpus Christian Coenâ—… adesse sea 〈◊〉 adesse nunquam 〈◊〉 quod legerim nifi forte loquuntur de Coenâ quae fit in Calo c. And that he meanes to brand Protestants under the name of Sacramentarii is plaine For he sayes the Councell of
What then Why then A. C. addes That D. White confessed that this Visible Church had in all ages A. C. p. 67. taught that unchanged Faith of Christ in all Points Fundamentall D. White had reason to say that the Visible Church taught so but that this or that Particular Visible Church did so teach sure D. White affirmed not unlesse in case the whole Visible Church of Christ were reduced to one Particular only But suppose this What then Why then A. C. telles us that D. White being urged to assigne such a Church expresly A. C. p. 67. granted he could assigne none different from the Romane which held in all ages all Points Fundamentall Now here I would faine know what A. C. meanes by a Church different from the Romane For if he mean different in Place 'T is easie to affirme the Greeke Church which as hath * §. 9. before beene prooved hath ever held and taught the Foundation in the midst of all her Pressures And if he meane differentiâ—… Doctrinall Things and those about the Faith he cannot assigne the Church of Rome for olding them in all ages But if he meane different in the Foundation it selfe the Creed then his urging to assigne a Church is void be it Rome or any other For if any other Church shall thus differ from Rome or Rome from it selfe as to deny this Foundation it doth not it cannot remaine a Differing Church sed transit in Non Ecclesiam but passes away into No-Church upon the Denyall of the Creed Now what A. C. meanes he expresses not nor can I tell but I may peradventure guesse noare it by that which out of these Premises he would inferre For hence he tels us he gathered that D. Whito's Opinion A. C. p. 67. was That the Romane Church held and taught in all ages unchanged Faith in all Fundamentall Points and did not in any age erre in any Point Fundamentall This is very well For A. C s. confesses he did but gather that this was Doctor White 's Opinion And what if he gathered that which grew not there nor thence For suppose all the Premises true yet no Cartrope can draw this Conclusion out of them And then all A. C ' s. labour's lost For grant some one Church or other must still be Visible And grant that this Visible Church held all Fundamentals of the Faith in all ages And grant againe that D. White could not assigne any Church differing from the Romane that did this Yet this will not follow that therefore the Romane did it And that because there 's more in the Conclusion then in the Premises For A. C s. A. C. p. 67. Conclusion is That in D. White 's Opinion the Romane Church held and taught in all ages unchanged Faith in all Fundamentall Points And so farre perhaps the Conclusion may stand taking Fundamentall Points in their literall sense as they are expressed in Creedes and approved Councels But then he addes And did not in any age erre in any Point Fundamentall Now this can never follow out of the Premises before laid downe For say some one Church or other may still be Visible And that Visible Church hold all Fundamentall Points in all Ages And no man be able to name another Church different from the Church of Rome that hath done this yet it followes not therefore That the Church of Rome did not erre in any age in any Point Fundamentall For a Church may hold the Fundamentall Point Literally and as long as it stayes there be without controlle and yet erre grosly dangerously nay damnably in the Exposition of it And this is the Church of Romes case For most true it is it hath in all ages maintained the Faith unchanged in the Expression of the Articles themselves but it hath in the exposition both of Creeds and Councels quite changed and lost the sense and the meaning of some of them So the Faith is in many things changed both for life and beliefe and yet seems the same Now that which deceives the world is That because the Barke is the same men thinke this old decayed Tree is as sound as it was at first and not weather-beaten in any age But when they can make me believe that Painting is true Beauty I 'le believe too that Rome is not only sound but beautifull But A. C. goes on and tels us That hereupon the Iesuite asked whether Errors in Points not Fundamental were damnable And that D. White answered they were not unlesse they A. C. p. 67. were held against conscience T is true that Error in Points not Fundamentall is the more damnable the more it is held against conscience But it is true too that Error in Points not Fundamentall may be damnable to some men though they hold it not against their conscience As namely when they hold an Errour in some Dangerous Points which grate upon the Foundation and yet will neither seeke the meanes to know the Truth nor accept and believe Truth when 't is known especially being men able to Iudge which I feare is the case of too many at this day in the Romane Church Out of all which A. C. tels us The Iesuite collected that D. White 's Opinion was That the Romane Church held all A. C. p. 68. Points Fundamentall and only erred in Points not Fundamentall which he accounted not damnable so long as he did not hold them against his Conscience And that thereupon hee said D. White had secured him since he held no Faith different from the Romane nor contrary to his Conscience Here againe wee have but A C s and the Iesuites Collection But if the Iesuite or A. C. will collect amisse who can helpe it I have spoken before in this very Paragraph to all the Passages of A. C. as supposing them true and set downe what is to be answered to them in case they proove so But now 't is most apparent by D. White 's Answer set downe before †§. 37. N. 1. at large that he never said that the Church of Rome erred onely in Points not Fundamentall as A. C. would have it But that hee said the contrary Namely that some errours of that Church were Fundamentall reductivê by a Reducement if they which embraced them did pertinaciously adhere to them having sufficient meanes of information And againe expresly That hee did not say that none were damnable so long as they were not held against Conscience Now where is A. C ' s. Collection For if a Iesuite or any other may collect Propositions which are not granted him nay contrary to those which are granted him hee may inferre what hee please And he is much too blame that will not inferre a strong Conclusion for himselfe that may frame his owne Premises say his Adversary what hee will And just so doth A. C. bring in his Conclusion to secure himselfe of Ialvation because he holds no Faith but the Romane nor that
how farre every man must believe as it relates to the possibility or impossibility of his salvation in every particular And that which the Church cannot teach men cannot learne of her She can teach the Foundation and men were happy if they would learne it and the Church more happy would she teach nothing but that as necessary to Salvation for certainly nothing but that is Necessary Now then whereas after all this the Iesuite tels us that F. Upon this and the precedent Conferences the Lady rested in judgement fully satisfied as she told a confident Friend of the Truth of the Romane Churches faith Yet upon frailty and feare to offend the King she yeelded to goe to Church for which she was after very sorry as soâ—… of her friends can testifie B. This is all personall And how that Honourable § 39 Lady was then setled in Conscience how in Iudgement I know not This I think is made cleare enough That that which you said in this and the precedent Conferences could settle neither unlesse in some that were setled or setling before As little do I know what she told any confident friend of her approoving the Roman cause No more whether it were frailty or feare or other Motive that made her yeeld to go to Church nor how sorry shee was for it nor who can testifie that sorrow This I am sure of if shee repent and God forgive her other sinnes she will more easily be able to Answer for her comming to Church then for her leaving of the Church of England and following the superstitions and errours which the Romane Church hath added in Point of Faith and the Worship of God For the Lady was then living when I answered thus Now whereas I said the Lady would farre more easily be able to answer for her comming to Church A. C. p. 73. then for her leaving the Church of England To this A. C. excepts and sayes That I neither prove nor can prove that it is lawfull for one perswaded especially as the Lady was to goe to the Protestant Church There 's a great deale of cunning and as much malice in this passage but I shall easily pluck the sting out of the Tayle of this Waspe And first I have proved it already through this whole Discourse and therefore can prove it That the Church of England is an Orthodoxe Church And therefore with the same labour it is proved that men may lawfully goe unto it and communicate with it for so a man not onely may but ought to doe with an Orthodoxe Church And a Romanist may communicate with the Church of England without any Offence in the Nature of the thing thereby incurred But if his Conscience through mis-information checke at it he should do well in that Case rather to informe his Conscience then for sake any Orthodoxe Church whatsoever Secondly A. C. tels me plainly That I cannot prove that a man so perswaded as the Lady was may goe to the Protestant Church that is That a Romane Catholike may not goe to the Protestant Church Why I never went about to proove that a Romane Catholike beiug and continuing such might against his Conscience goe to the Protestant Church For these words A man perswaded as the Lady is are A. C s. words they are not mine Mine are not simply that the Lady might or that she might not but Comparative they are That she might more easily answer to God for comming to then for going from the Church of England And that is every way most true For in this doubtfull time of hers when upon my Reasons given shee went againe to Church when yet soone after as you say at least shee was sorrie for it I say at this time she was in heart and resolution a Romane Catholike or she was not If she were not as it seemes by her doubting shee was not then fully resolved then my speech is most true that she might more easily answer God for comming to Service in the Church of England then for leaving it For a Protestant shee had beene and for ought I knew at the end of this Conference so she was and then 't was no sin in it selfe to come to an Orthodoxe Church nor no sinne against her Conscience she continuing a Protestant for ought which then appeared to mee But if she then were a Romane Catholike as the Jesuite and A. C. seeme confident she was yet my speech is true too For then she might more easily answer God for comming to the Church of England which is Orthodoxe and leaving the Church of Rome which is superstitious then by leaving the Church of England communicate with all the superstitions of Rome Now the cunning and the malignity of A. C. lies in this he would faine have the world think that I am so Indifferent in Religion as that I did maintaine the Lady being conscientiously perswaded of the Truth of the Romish Doctrine might yet against both her conscience and against open and avowed profession come to the Protestant Church Neverthelesse in hope his cunning malice would not be discovered against this his owne sense that is and not mine he brings diverse Reasons As first 't is not lawfull for one affected as that Lady was that is for one that is resolved of the Truth of the Romane Church to goe to the Church of England there and in that manner to serve and worship God Because saith A. C. that were to halt on both sides to serve two Masters and to dissemble with God and the world Truly I say the A. C. p. 73. same thing with him And that therefore neither may a Protestant that is resolved in Conscience that the profession of the true Faith is in the Church of England goe to the Romish Church there and in that manner to serve and worship God Neither need I give other Answer because A. C. urges this against his owne fiction not my assertion Yet since he will so doe I shall give a particular Answer to each of them And to this first Reason of his I say thus That to Believe Religion after one sort and to practise it after another and that in the maine points of worship the Sacrament and Invocation is to halt on both sides to serve two Masters and to dissemble with God and the world And other then this I never taught nor ever said that which might inferre the Contrary But A. C. give me leave to tell you your fellow Iesuite * Quintò quaeritur An ubi Catholici unà cum Haereticis versantur licitum sit Catholico adiâ—… Templa ad quae Haeretici conveniunt eorum interesse Conventibus c. Respondeo Sirei Naturam spectemus non est per se malum sed suà naturâ indifferens c. Ec postea Si Princeps haeresi laboret jubeat subditos Catholicos sub poena Mortis vel Confiscationis bonorum frequentare templa Haereticoâ—… quid tum faciendum Respondeo si jubeat
too And not that only but all the Doctrinall Points about the Faith which have beene Determined in all such Councels as the present Church of Rome allowes * Aud so also Bellarm. Sexta nota est Conspiratio in Doctrinâ cum Ecclesiâ Antiquâ L. 4 de Notis Eccle. c. 9. §. 1. as most certainly he doth so meane and 't is the Controversie betweene us then 't is most certaine and most apparent to any understanding man that reads Antiquity with an impartiall eye that a Visible Continuall Succession of Doctors and Pastors have not brought downe the Faith in this sense from Christ and his Apostles to these dayes of ours in the Romane Church And that I may not bee thought to say and not to prove I give Instance And with this that if A. C. or any Iesuite can prove That by a Visible Continued Succession from Christ and his Apostles to this day either Transubstantiation in the Eucharist Or the Eucharist in one kinde Or Purgatory Or worship of Images Or the Intention of the Priest of Necessity in Baptisme Or the Power of the Pope over a Generall Councell Or his Infallibility with or without it Or his power to Depose Princes Or the Publike Prayers of the Church in an unknowne tongue with divers other Points have beene so taught I for my part will give the Cause Beside for Succession in the generall I shall say this 'T is a great happinesse where it may be had Visible and Continued and a great Conquest over the Mutability of this present world But I do not finde any one of the Ancient Fathers that makes Locall Personall Visible and Continued Succession a Necessary Signe or Mark of the true Church in any one place And where Vincentius a Vin. Lir. cont Har. c. 4. Lirinensis cals for Antiquity Vniversality and Consent as great Notes of Truth hee hath not one word of Succession And for that great Place in * Hâc Ordinatione Successione ea quae est ab Apostolis in Ecclesiâ Traditio veritasis praeconiatio pervenit usque ad nos Et est plenissima haec Ostensio Vnam eandem Vivificatricem fidem esse quae in Ecclesiâ ab Apostolis usque nunc sit conservata tradita in veritate Iren. L. 3. Advers Haer. c. 3. Irenaeus where that Ancient Father reckons the Succession of the Bishops of Rome to Eleutherius who sate in his time and saith That this is a most full and ample Proofe or Ostension Vivificatricem Fidem that the Living and Life-giving Faith is from the Apostles to this day Conserved and delivered in Truth And of which Place †Per hanc Successionem confundi omnes Haereticos Bellarmin L. 4. aé Notis Eccles c. 8. §. 1. There 's no such word round in Irenaeus Bellarmine boasts so much Most manifest it is in the very same Place that * Testimonium his perhâ—…bent quae sunt in Asiâ Ecclesiae Omnes qui usque adhuc Successerunt Polycâ—…po Iren. I. 3 advers Haere c. 3. Constat omnem Doctrinam quae cum illis Ecclesiis Apostolicis Matricibus Originalibus Fidei conspiret Veritati doputandam Tettul de praescript advers Haeret. c. 21. Ecclesia posteriores non minùs Apostolicae deputantur pro consanguiinitate Doctrinae Ibid c 32. Ecclesia non in Parietibus consistit c. Ecclesia autem illic erat ubi fides verae erat S. Hieron in Psal. 133. Irenaeus stood as much upon the Succession of the Churches then in Asia and of Smyrna though that no prime Apostolicall Church where Polycarpus sate Bishop as of the Succession at Rome By which it is most manifest that it is not Personall Succession only and that tyed to one Place that the Fathers meant but they taught that the Faith was delivered over by Succession in some places or other still to their present time And so doubtlesse shall be till Time be no more I say The Faith But not every Opinion true or false that in tract of time shall cleave to the Faith And to the Faith it selfe and all its Fundamentals we can shew as good and full a Succession as you And we pretend no otherwise to it then you do save that We take in the Greeks which you do not Only we reject your grosse superstitions to which you can shew no Succession from the Apostles either at Rome or elsewhere much less any one uninterrupted And therfore he might have held his peace that says It is evident that the Roman Catholike Church only hath had a Constant and uninterrupted Succession of Pastors and Doctors and Tradition of Doctrine from Age to Age. For most evident it is That the Tradition of Doctrine hath received both Addition and Alteration since the first five hundred yeares in which †Antiqua Ecclesia primis quingentis Annis vera Ecclesia fuit proinde ApostolicaÌ„ DoctrinaÌ„ retinuit Bel. L. 4. de Notis Eccles c. 9 §. 1. Bellarmine confesses and B. Iewell maintains the Churches Doctrine was Apostolicall And once more before I leave this Point Most evident it is That the Succession which the Fathers meant is not tyed to Place or Person but 't is tyed to the Verity of Doctrine For so a Ad hanc formam provocabuntur ab illis Ecclestis quae lic èt nullum ex Apostolis vel Apostolicis Authorem suum proferunt ut multò posteriores quae denique quotidie instituuntur tamen in eadem fide conspirantes non minùs Apostolicae deputantur pro consanguinitate Doctrine â—…ertul de praescript c. 32. Tertullian expresly Beside the order of Bishops running downe in Succession from the beginning there is required Consanguinitas Doctrinae that the Doctrine be allyed in blood to that of Christ and his Apostles So that if the Doctrine bee no kinne to Christ all the Succession become strangers what nearnesse soever they pretend And * Illis Presbyteris obediendum est qui cum Episeopatus Successione Charisma acâ—…perunt Ueritatis Iren. Lib. 4. cap. 43. Irenaeus speaks plainer then he We are to obey those Presbyters which together with the Succession of their Bishopricks have received Charisma Veritatis the gift of truth Now Stapleton being prest hard with these two Authorities first a Successio nec Locorum tantum est nec personarum sed etiam vera sana Doâ—…rinae Stapl. â—…elect Controver 1. q. 4 A. 2. Notab 1. Confesses expresly That Succession as it is a Note of the true Church is neither a Succession in place only nor of Persons only but it must be of true and sound Doctrine also And had hee stayed here no man could have said better But then he saw well he must quit his great Note of the Church-Succession That he durst not doe Therefore he beginnes to cast about how hee may answer these Fathers and yet maintaine Succession Secondly therefore he tels us That that which these Fathers say do nothing weaken Succession
What Successe this Great Distemper caused by the Collision of two such Factions may have I know not I cannot Prophesie This I know That the use which Wise men should make of other mens falles is not to fall with them And the use which Pious and Religious men should make of these great Flawes in Christianity is not to Joyne with them that make them nor to helpe to dislocate those maine Bones in the Body which being once put out of Ioynt will not easily be set againe And though I cannot Prophesie yet I feare That Atheisme and Irreligion gather strength while the Truth is thus weakned by an Vnworthy way of Contending for it And while they thus Contend neither part Consider that they are in a way to induce upon themselves and others that Contrary Extreame which they seeme most both to feare and oppose Besides This I have ever Observed That many Rigid Professors have turn'd Roman Catholikes and in that Turne have beene more Iesuited then any other And such Romanists as have chang'd from them have for the most part quite leaped over the Meane and beene as Rigid the other way as Extremity it selfe And this if there be not both Grace and VVisdome to governe it is a very Naturall Motion For a Man is apt to thinke he can never runne farre enough from that which he once begins to hate And doth not Consider therewhile That where Religion Corrupted is the thing he hates a Fallacy may easily be put upon him For he ought to hate the Corruption which depraves Religion and to runne from it but from no part of Religion it selfe which he ought to Love and Reverence ought hee to depart And this I have Observed farther That no One thing hath made Conscientious men more wavering in their owne mindes or more apt and easie to be drawne aside from the sincerity of Religion professed in the Church of England then the Want of Uniforme and Decent Order in too many Churches of the Kingdome And the Romanists have beene apt to say The Houses of God could not be suffer'd to lye so Nastily as in some places they have done were the True worship of God observed in them Or did the People thinke that such it were 'T is true the Inward VVorship of the Heart is the Great Service of God and no Service acceptable without it But the Externall worship of God in his Church is the Great VVitnesse to the World that Our heart stands right in that Service of God Take this away or bring it into Contempt and what Light is there left to shine before men that they may see our Devotion and glorifie our Father which is in Heaven And to deale clearely with Your Majesty These Thoughts are they and no other which have made me labour so much as I have done for Decency and an Orderly settlement of the Externall Worship of God in the Church For of that which is Inward there can be no Witnesse among men nor no Example for men Now no Externall Action in the world can be Uniforme without some Ceremonies And these in Religion the Ancienter they bee the better so they may fit Time and Place Too many Over-burden the Service of God And too few leave it naked And scarce any Thing hath hurt Religion more in these broken Times then an Opinion in too many men That because Rome had thrust some Vnnecessary and many Superstitious Ceremonies upon the Church therefore the Reformation must have none at all Not considering therewhile That Ceremonies are the Hedge that fence the Substance of Religion from all the Indignities which Prophanenesse and Sacriledge too Commonly put upon it And a Great Weaknesse it is not to see the strength which Ceremonies Things weake enough in themselves God knowes adde even to Religion it selfe But a farre greater to see it and yet to Cry Them downe all and without Choyce by which their most hated Adversaries climb'd up and could not crie up themselves and their cause as they doe but by them And Divines of all the rest might learne and teach this VVisdome if they would since they see all other Professions which helpe to beare downe their Ceremonies keepe up their owne therewhile and that to the highest I have beene too bold to detaine Your Majesty so long But my Griefe to see Christendome bleeding in Dissention and which is worse triumphing in her owne Blood and most angry with them that would study her Peace hath thus transported me For truely it Cannot but grieve any man that hath Bowells to see All men seeking but as S. Paul foretold Phil. 2. Their owne things and not the things which are Phil. 2. 21. Jesus Christs Sua Their owne surely For the Gospell of Christ hath nothing to doe with them And to see Religion so much so Zealously pretended and called upon made but the Stalking-Horse to shoote at other Fowle upon which their Ayme is set In the meane time as if all were Truth and Holinesse it selfe no Salvation must be possible did it lye at their Mercy but in the Communion of the One and in the Conventicles of the Other As if either of these now were as the Donatists of old reputed themselves the only men in whom Christ at his comming to Judgment should finde Faith No saith * S. Aug. Epist. 48. S. Augustine and so say I with him Da veniam non Credimus Pardon us I pray we cannot beleeve it The Catholike Church of Christ is neither Rome nor a Conventicle Out of that there 's no Salvation I easily Confesse it But out of Rome there is and out of a Conventicle too Salvation is not shut up into such a narrow Conclave In this ensuing Discourse therefore I have endeavour'd to lay open those wider-Gates of the Catholike Church confined to no Age Time or Place Nor knowing any Bounds but That Faith which was once and but once for all deliver'd to the Saints S. Jude 3. And in my pursuite of this way I have searched after and deliver'd S. Iod. 3. with a single heart that Truth which I professe In the publishing whereof I have obeyed Your Majesty discharg'd my Duty to my power to the Church of England * 1 S. Pet. 3. 15. Given account of the Hope that is in me And so testified to the world that Faith in which I have lived and by God's blessing and favour purpose to dye But till Death shall most unfainedly remaine Your Majesties most faithfull SUBJECT and most Humble and Obliged SERVANT W. CANT A RELATION Of the Conference betweene WILLIAM LAWD Then L. Bishop of S. Davids now Lord Arch-Bishop of CANTERBURY AND M. Fisher the Jesuite by the command of KING JAMES Of ever Blessed Memorie With an Answer to such Ecceptions as A. C. takes against it F The Occasion of this Conference was B THe Occasion of this Third § 1 Conference you should know fufficiently You were an Actor in it as well as in two
other Whether you have related the two former truly appeares by D. White the late Reverend L. Bishop of Ely his Relation or Exposition of them I was present at none but this Third of which I here give the Church an Account But of this Third whether that were the Cause which you alledge I cannot tell You say F. It was observed That in the second Conference all the Speech was about particular matters little or none about a continuall infallible visible Church which was the chiefe and onely Point in which a certaine Lady required satisfaction as having formerly setled in her minde That it was not for her or any other unlearned Persons to take up on them to judge of Particulars without depending upon the Iudgement of the true Church B. The Opinion of that Honourable Person in § 2 this was never opened to mee And it is very fit the people should looke to the Iudgement of the Church before they bee too busie with Particulars But yet neither a 1 Cor. 10. 15. Scripture nor any good Authority denies them some moderate use of their owne understanding and Iudgement especially in things familiar and evident which even b Quis non sine ullo Magistro aut interprete ex se facilè cognoscat c. Novat de Trin. c. 23. Et loquitur de Mysterio Passion is Christi Dijudicare est Mensurare c. Unde Mens dicitur a Metiendo Tho. p. 1. q. 79. A. 9. ad 4. To what end then is a m nde and an understanding given a Man if he may not apply it to measure Truth Et 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. ab eo quod confiderat discernit Quiadecernit inter verum falsum Damasc. l. 2. Fid. Orth. c. 22. And A. C. himselfe p. 41. denyes not all Iudgement to private men but sayes they are not so to relie absolutely upon their private Iudgement as to adventure salvation upon it alone or chiefly which no man will deny ordinary Capacities may as easily understand as reade And therefore some Particulars a Christian may judge without depending F. This Lady therefore having heard it granted in the first Conference That there must bee a continuall visible Company ever since Christ teaching unchanged Doctrine in all Fundamentall Points that is Poynts necessary to salvation desired to heare this confirmed and proofe brought which was that continuall infallible visible Church in which one may and out of which one cannot attaine salvation And therefore having appointed a time of Meeting betweene a B. and me and thereupon having sent for the B. and me before the B. came the Lady and a friend of hers came first to the roome where I was and debated before me the aforesaid Question and not doubting of the first part to wit That there must be a continuall visible Church as they had heard granted by D. White and L. K. c. B. What D. White and L. K. granted I heard § 3 not But I thinke both granted a continuall and a visible Church neither of them an infallible at least in your sense And your selfe in this Relation speake distractedly For in these few lines from the beginning hither twice you adde infallible betweene continuall and visible and twice you leave it out But this concernes D. W. and he hath answered it Here A. C. steps in and sayes The Iesuite did not speake distractedly but most advisedly For saith he A. C. p. 40. where he relates what D. White or L. K. granted hee leaves out the word Infallible because they granted it not But where he speakes of the Lady there he addes it because the Iesuite knew it was an infallible Church which she sought to rely upon How farre the Catholike Militant Church of Christ is infallible is no Dispute for this Place though you shall finde it after But sure the Iesuite did not speake most advisedly nor A. C. neither nor the Lady her selfe if she said she desired to relie upon an Infallible Church For an Infallible Church denotes a Particular Church in that it is set in opposition to some other Particular Church that is not infallible Now I for my part doe not know what that Lady desired to relie upon This I know if she desired such a Particular Church neither this Iesuite nor any other is able to shew it her No not Bellarmine himselfe though of very great ability to make good any Truth which he undertakes for the Church of Rome †Feritas vincat necesse est sive Negantem sive confitentem c. S. Aug. Epist. 174. Ocâ—…ultari potest ad tempus veritas vinci non potest S. Aug. in Psal. 61. But no strength can uphold an Error against Truth where Truth hath an able Defendant Now where Bellarmine sets himselfe purposely to make Lib. 4. De Rom. Pont. Cap. 4. §. 1. Romana particularis Ecclesta non potest errare in Fide this good That the Particular Church of Rome cannot erre in matter of Faith Out of which it followes That there may be found a Particular infallible Church you shall see what he is able to performe 1. First then after he hath Distinguished to expresse his meaning in what sense the Particular Church of Rome cannot erre in things which are de Fide of the Faith he tells us this Firmitude is because the Sea Apostolike is fixed there And this he saith is most true * Ibid. §. 2. And for proofe of it he brings three Fathers to justifie it 1. The first S. Cyprian a Navigare audent ad Petri Cathodram Ecclesiam principalem c. Nec cogitare eos esse Romanos ad quos Perfidia habere non potest accessum Cypr. l. 1. Ep. 3. whose words are That the Romanes are such as to whom Perfidia cannot have accesse Now Perfidia can hardly stand for Error in Faith or for Misbeliefe But it properly signifies malicious Falsehood in matter of Trust and Action not error in faith but in fact against the Discipline and Government of the Church And why may it not here have this meaning in S. Cyprian For the Story there it is this b Bin. Concil To. 1. p. 152. Edit Paris 1636. Baron Annal. an 253. 254. 255. In the Yeare 255. there was a Councell in Carthage in the cause of two Schismatiks Felicissimus and Novatian about restoring of them to the Communion of the Church which had lapsed in time of danger from Christianity to Idolatry Felicissimus would admit all even without penance and Novatian would admit none no not after penance The Fathers forty two in number went as the Truth led them between both Extreames To this Councell came Privatus a knowne Heretick but was not admitted because he was formerly Excommunicated and often condemned Hereupon he gathers his Complicies together and chooses one Fortunatus who was formerly condemned as well as himselfe Bishop of Carthage and set him up against S. Cyprian This done
Felicissimus and his Fellowes haste to Rome with Letters Testimoniall from their owne party and pretend that Twenty five Bishops concurred with them and their desire was to be received into the Communion of the Romane Church and to have their new Bishop acknowledged Cornelius then Pope though their hast had now prevented S. Cyprian's Letters having formerly heard from him both of them and their Schisme in Africke would neither heare them nor receive their Letters They grew insolent and furious the ordinary way that Schismaticks take Vpon this Cornelius writes to S. Cyprian and S. Cyprian in this Epistle gives Cornelius thanks for refusing these African fugitives declares their Schisme and wickednesse at large and encourages him and all Bishops to maintaine the Ecclesiasticall Discipline and Censures against any the boldest threatnings of wicked Schismaticks This is the Story and in this is the Passage here urged by Bellarmine Now I would faine know why Perfidia all Circumstances considered may not stand here in its proper sense for cunning and perfidious dealing which these men having practised at Carthage thought now to obtrude upon the Bishop of Rome also but that he was warie enough not to be over-reach'd by Busie Schismaticks 2. Secondly let it be granted that Perfidia doth signifie here Error in faith and doctrine For I will not denie but that among the African Writers and especially S. Cyprian it is somtimes so us'd and therefore here perhaps But then this Priviledge of not erring dangerously in the Faith was not made over absolutely to the Romanes that are such by birth and dwelling onely but to the Romanes qua tales as they were such as those first were whose faith was famous through the world and as long as they continued such which at that time it seemes they did And so S. Cyprian's words seeme to import eos esse Romanos that the Romanes then under Pope Cornelius were such as the b Rom. 1. 8. Apostle spake of and therefore to whom at that time or any time they still remaining such perfidious Misbeliefe could not be welcome Or rather indeed perfidious Misbelievers or Schismaticks could not be welcome For this very phrase Perfidia non potest habere accessum directs us to understand the word in a Concrete sense Perfidiousnesse could not get accesse that is such perfidious persons Excommunicated out of other Churches were not likely to get accesse at Rome Or to finde Admittance into their Communion It is but a Metonymie of speech the Adjunct for the Subject A thing very usuall even in elegant a Ego tibi istam scelestam Scelus â—…inguam abscindam Plaut Amphit Ex hac enim parte pudor pugnat illinc petulantia c. Cic. Látuit plebeio tectus amictu Omnis Honos Nullos comit at a est purpura fasces Lucan l. 2. Authours and much more in later times as in S. Cyprian's when the Latine Language was growne rougher Now if it be thus understood I say in the Concrete then it is plaine that S. Cyprian did not intend by these words to exempt the Romanes from possibility of Errour but to brand his Adversaries with a Title due to their Merit calling them perfidious that is such as had betrayed or perverted the Faith Neither can wee loose by this Construction as will appeare at after 3. But thirdly when all is done what if it bee no more than a Rhetoricall Excesse of speech Perfidia non potest for non facilè potest It cannot that is it cannot easily Or what if S. Cyprian doe but Laudando praecipere by commending †Nec cogitare eos esse Romanos quorum fides Apostolo praedicante c. them to be such instruct them that such indeed they ought to bee to whom Perfidiousnesse should not get accesse Men are very bountifull of their Complements sometimes * Epist. 67. Synesius writing to Theophilus of Alexandria begins thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. I both will and a Divine Necessity lies upon mee to esteeme it a Law whatsoever that Throne meaning his of Alexandria shall Determine Nay the Word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that signifies to determine like an Oracle or as in Gods stead Now I hope you will say This is not to be taken Dogmatically it is but the Epistolers Courtesie onely And why not the like here For the haste which these Schismaticks made to Rome prevented Saint Cyprians Letters yet Cornelius very carefull of both the Truth and Peace of the Church would neither heare them nor receive their Letters till b Eor so S. Cyprian begins his Epistle to Cornelius Legi literas tuas frater c. And after Sed enim lectâ aliâ Epistolâ tuâ frater c. S. Cypr. L. 1. Epist. 3. hee had written to S. Cyprian Now this Epistle is S. Cyprian's answer to Cornelius in which he informes him of the whole truth and withall gives him thanks for refusing to heare these African Fugitives In which faire way of returning his thanks if hee make an honourable mention of the Romanes and their Faith with a little dash of Rhetorick even to a Non potest for a Non facilè potest 't is no great wonder But take which Answer you will of the three This is plaine that S. Cyprian had no meaning to assert the unerring Infallibility of either Pope or Church of Rome For this is more then manifest by the Contestation which after happened betweene S. Cyprian and Pope Stephen about the Rebaptization of those that were Baptized by Haereticks For hee †Stephanus Frater noster Haereticorum causam contra Christianos contra Ecclesiam Dei asserere conatur Cypr. ad Pompeium contra Epist Stephani Edit per Erasmum Basil. p. 327. saith expresly that Pope Stephen did then not onely maintaine an error but the very Cause of Haereticks and that against Christians and the very Church of God * Stephanus fratris nostri obstinatio dura Ibid p. 329. And it would be marked by the Iesuite and his A. C. that still it is Stephani fratris nostri and not Capitis or summi Pastoris nostri And after this he chargeth him with Obstinacy and Presumption I hope this is plaine enough to shew that S. Cyprian had no great Opinion of the Romane Infallibility Or if he had it when he writ to Cornelius certainely hee had chang'd it when he wrote against Stephen But I think it was no change and that when he wrote to Cornelius it was Rhetoricke and no more Now if any man shall say that in this Poynt of Rebaptization S. Cyprian himselfe was in the wrong Opinion and Pope Stephen in the right I easily grant that But yet that Error of his takes not off his judgement what he thought of the Papall or Romane Infallibility in those times For though afterwards a Caranza in Concil Carthag sub Cornel. fine S. Cyprian's Opinion was condemned in a Councell at Rome under Cornelius
wont to have more respect than so If His Majestie did say it there is Truth in the speech The error is yours only by mistaking what is meant by Loosing the Holy Ghost For a Particular Church may be said to loose the Holy Ghost two wayes or in two Degrees 1. The one when it looses such speciall assistance of that Blessed Spirit as preserves it from all dangerous Errors and sinnes and the temporall punishment which is due unto them And in this sense the Greeke Church did perhaps loose the Holy Ghost for they erred against Him they sinned against God And for this or other sinnes they were delivered into another Babylonish Captivity under the Turke in which they yet are and from which God in his mercy deliver them But this is rather to be called an Error circa Spiritum Sanctum about the Doctrine concerning the Holy Ghost then an error against the Holy Ghost 2. The other is when it looses not only this assistance but all assistance ad hoc to this that they may remaine any longer a true Church and so Corinth and Ephesus and divers other Churches have lost the Holy Ghost But in this sense the whole Greeke Church lost not the Holy Ghost For they continue a true Church in the maine substance to and at this day though erroneous in this Poynt which you mention and perhaps in some other too F. The Ladies friend not knowing what to answer called in the Bishop who sitting downe first excused himselfe as one unprovided and not much studied in Controversies and desiring that in Case he should faile yet the Protestant Cause might not be thought ill of B. This is most true For I did indeed excuse § 6 my selfe and I had great reason so to doe And my Reason being grounded upon Modestie for the most part there I leave it Yet this it may be fit others should know that I had no information where the other Conferences brake off no instruction at all what should be the ground of this third Conference nor the full time of foure and twenty hourâ—…s to bethinke my selfe And this I take upon my Credit is most true whereas you make the sifting of these and the like Questions to the very Branne your daily work and came throughly furnished to the businesse and might so leade on the Controversie to what your selfe pleased and I was to follow as I could * De util Credendi c. 2. S. Augustine said once Scio me invalidum esse I know I am weake and yet he made good his Cause And so perhaps may I against you And in that I prefer'd the Cause before my particular credit that which I did was with modesty and according to Reason For there is no Reason the waight of this whole Cause should rest upon any one particular man And great Reason that the personall Defects of any man should presse himselfe but not the Cause Neither did I enter upon this Service out of any forwardnesse of my owne but commanded to it by Supreame Authority F. It having an hundred better Schollers to maintaine it than he To which I said there were a thousand better Schollers than I to maintaine the Catholike Cause B. In this I had never so poore a Conceit of the Protestants Cause as to thinke that they had § 7 but an hundred better than my selfe to maintaine it That which hath an hundred may have as many more as it pleases God to give and more than you And I shall ever bee glad that the Church of England which at this time if my memory reflect not amisse I named may have farre more able Defendants than my selfe I shall never envie them but rejoyce for Her And I make no Question but that if I had named a thousand you would have multiplied yours into ten Thousand for the Catholike Cause as you call it And this Confidence of yours hath ever beene fuller of noyse than Proofe But you proceed F. Then the Question about the Greeke Church being proposed I said as before That it had erred B. Then I thinke the Question about the § 8 Greeke Church was proposed But after you had with confidence enough not spared to say That what I would not acknowledge in this Cause you would wring and extort from me then indeed you said as before that it had erred And this no man denied But every Errour denies not Christ the Foundation or makes Christ denie it or thrust it from the Foundation F. The Bishop said That the Errour was not in Point Fundamentall B. I was not so peremptory My speech § 9 was That diverse Learned men and some of your owne were of opinion That as the Greeks expressed themselves it was a Question not simply Fundamentall I know and acknowledge that Errour of denying the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Sonne to be a grievous errour in Divinity And sure it would have grated the Foundation if they had so denied the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Sonne as that they had made an inequality betweene the Persons But since their forme of speech is a Non ex Filio sed Spiritum Filii esse diâ—…imus Damascon L. 1. Fid. Orth. c. 11. Et Patris per filium Ibid. That the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father by the Sonne and is the Spirit of the Sonne without making any difference in the Consubstantiality of the Persons I dare not denie them to bee a true Church for this though I confesse them an Erroneous Church in this Particular Now that diverse learned men were of Opinion That à Filio per Filium in the sense of the Greeke Church was but a Question in modo loquendi in manner of b Pluralitas in Uoce salvat â unitate in re non repugnat uniâ—…ati Fidei Durand Lib. 3. d. 25. q. 2. speech and therefore not Fundamentall is evident c Magist. 1. Sent. d. 11. D. Sane sciendum est quòd licet in praesenti Articulo a nobis Graeci verbo discordent tamen sensu non differunt c. Bandinus L. 1. de Trin. d. 11 Bonavent in 1 Sent. d. 11. A. 1. q. 1. §. 12. Licet Graecis infensissimus quùm dixit Graeces objicere curiâ—…sitatem Romanis addendo I ilioque Quia sine hujus Articuli professione salus er at non Respondet negando salutem esse sed dicit tantùm opportunam fuisse Determinationem propter periculum Et postea §. 15. Sunt qui volunt sustinere opinionem Graecorum Latinorum distinguendo duplicem modum Procedendi Sed fortè si duo sapientes unus Graecus alter Latinus uterque verus amator Veritatis non propriae dictionis c. de hac visa contrarietate disquirerent pateret utique tandem ipsâ—…m Contrarietatem non esse veraciter realem sicut est Vocalis Scotus in 1. Sent. d. 11. q. 1. Antiquorum Graecorum à Latinis diserepantia in voce potiùs est modo
explicandi Emanationem Sp. S. quà m in ipsá re c. Iodocus Clictoveus in Damase L 1. Fid Orth. c. 11. Et quidam ex Graecis concedunt quòd sit á Filio vel ab eo prostuat Thom. p. 1. q. 36. A. 2. C. Et Thomas ipse dicit Sp. S. procedere mediatè à Filio ib. A. 3. ad 1. salâ—…em ratione Personarum Spirantium Respondeo cum Bessarione Gennadio Damascenum non negâsse Sp. S. procedere ex Filio quod ad rem attinet quùm dixerit Spiritum esse Imaginem Filii per Filium sed existimásse tutiùs dici per Filium quà m ex Filio quantum ad modum loquendi c. Bellarm. L. 2. de Christo c. 27. §. Respondeo igitur Et Tollet in S. Iohn 15. Ar. 25. Lutheran Resp. ad Resp. 2. Ieremiae Patriarchae The Master and his Schollers agree upon it The Greeks saith he confesse the Holy Ghost to bee the Spirit of the Son with the Apostle Galath 4. and the Spirit of truth S. Iohn 16. And since Non est aliud it is not another thing to say The Holy Ghost is the Spirit of the Father and the Sonne then that He is or proceeds from the Father and the Sonne in this They seeme to agree with us in candem Fidei sententiam upon the same Sentence of Faith though they differ in words Now in this cause where the words differ but the Sentence of Faith is the same d Eadem penitùs Sententia ubi suprà Clictov penitùs eadem even altogether the same Can the Point be fundamentall You may make them no Church as e Bellarm. 4. de Notis Eccl. cap. 8. §. Quod autem apud Graecos Bellarmine doth and so deny them salvation which cannot be had out of the true Church but I for my part dare not so do And Rome in this Particular should be more moderate if it be but because this Article Filióque was added to the Creed by her selfe And 't is hard to adde and Anathematize too It ought to be no easie thing to condemne a man of Heresie in foundation of faith much lesse a Church least of all so ample and large a Churchas the Greeke especially so as to make them no Church Heaven Gates were not so easily shut against multitudes when S. Peter wore the Keyes at his owne girdle And it is good counsell which a Lib. 3. cont Hares fol. 93. A. 〈◊〉 vidcant ht qui famile de haerest pronumiant quaÌ„ facile etiam ipsi errent Et intelligant non esse tam leviter de Haeresi censenduÌ„ c. In verbo Beatitudo Alphonsus à castro one of your owne gives Let them consider that pronounce easily of Heresie how easie it is for themselves to erre Or if you will pronounce consider what it is that separates from the Church simply and not in part only I must needs professe that I wish heartily as well as b Iunius Animad in Bellar. cont 2. L. 3. c. 23. others that those distressed men whose Crosse is heavie already had beene more plainly and moderately dealt withall though they thinke a diverse thing from us then they have beene by the Church of Rome But hereupon you say you were forc'd F. Whereupon I was forced to repeate what I had formerly brought against D. White concerning Points Fundamentall B. Hereupon it is true that you read a large § 10 Discourse out of a Booke printed which you said was yours The Particulars all of them at the least I do not now remember nor did I then approve But if they be such as were formerly brought against Doctor White they are by him formerly answered The first thing you did was the * P. First righting the Sentence of S. Austine Ferendus est Disputator errans c. Here A. C. p. 44. tells us very learnedly that my corrupt Copy hath righting instead of reading the Sentence of S. Austine Whereas I here use the word righting not as it is opposed to reading as any man may discerne A. C. palpably mistakes but for doing right to S. Austine And if I had meant it for writing I should not have spelled it so righting of S. Augustine which Sentence I doe not at all remember was so much as named in the Conference much lesse was it stood upon and then righted by you Another place of S. Augustine indeed was which you omit But it comes after about Tradition to which I remit it But now you tell us of a great Proofe made out of this †By which is proved That all poynts Defined by the Church are Fundamentall Place For these words of yours containe two Propositions One That all Poynts defined by the Church are Fundamentall The other That this is proved out of this Place of S. Augustine 1. For the first That all Poynts defined by the Church are fundamentall It was not the least meanes by which Rome grew to her Greatnesse to blast every Opposer she had with the name of Hereticke or Schismaticke for this served to shrivel the credit of the Persons And the Persons once brought into contempt and ignominie all the good they desired in the Church fell to dust for want of creditable Persons to backe and support it To make this Proceeding good in these later yeares this Course it seemes was taken The Schoole that must maintaine and so they doe That all Points Defined by the Church are thereby a Your owne word Fundamentall b Inconcussâ fide ab omnibus Thom. 2. 2ae q. 1. Art 10. C. necessary to be believed c Sco us 1. Sent. d. 11. q. 1. of the substance of the Faith and that though it be determined quite d Ecclesiae Voces etiam extra Scripturam Stap. Relect. Con. 4. q. 1. Ar. 3. Quae maturo judicio definivit c. Solidum est etiamsi nullo Scripturarum aut evidenti aut probabili testimonio confirmaretur bid Extra Scripturam And then e Et penes Cercopes Victoria sit Greg. Naz. de Differen vitae Cercopes 1. Astutos veteratoriae improbitat is Episcopos qui artibus suis ac dolis omnia Concilia perturbabant Schol. ib. leave the wise and active Heads to take order that there be strength enough ready to determine what is fittest for them But since these men distinguish not nor you betweene the Church in generall and a Generall Councell which is but her Representation for Determinations of the Faith though I be very slow in sifting or opposing what is concluded by Lawfull Generall and consenting Authority though I give as much as can justly be given to the Definitions of Councels truly Generall nay suppose I should grant which I doe not That Generall Councells cannot erre yet this cannot downe with me That all Poynts even so defined are Fundamentall For Deductions are not prime and native Principles nor are Superstructures Foundations That which is a
Foundation for all cannot be one and another to different Christians in regard of it selfe for then it could be no common Rule for any nor could the soules of men rest upon a shaking foundation No If it be a true Foundation it must be common to all and firme under all in which sense the Articles of Christian Faith are Fundamentall And f Quum exim una cadem sides sit neque is qui multum de ipsà dicere potest plusquam oportet dicit neque qui parùm ipsam imminuit Iren. L. 1. advers haeres c. 3. Ireneus layes this for a ground That the whole Church howsoever dispersed in place speakes this with one mouth He which among the Guides of the Church is best able to speake utters no more then this and lesse then this the most simple doth not utter Therefore the Creed of which he speaks is a common is a constant Foundation And an Explicite faith must be of this in them which have the use of Reason for both Guides and simple people All the Church utter this Now many things are defined by the Church w ch are but Deductions out of this which suppose them deduced right move far from the Foundation without which Deductions explicitly believed many millions of Christians go to Heaven and cannot therefore be Fundamentall in the faith True Deductions from the Article may require necessary beliefe in them which are able and do go along with them from the Principle to the Conclusion But I do not see either that the Learned do make them necessary to all or any reason why they should Therfore they cannot be FundameÌ„tall yet to some mens Salvation they are necessary Besides that which is Fundamentall in the Faith of Christ is a Rocke immoveable and can never be varied Never a Resolutio Occhami est quòd nâ—… tota Ecclesia nec Concilium Generale nec summus Pontifex potest facere Articulum quod non suit Articulus Sed in dubiis propositionibus potest Ecclesia determinare an sint Cathilicae c. Tamen sic determinando non facit quod sint Catholicae quum prius essent ante Ecclesiae Determinationem c. Almain in 3. D. 25. Q. 1. Therefore if it be Fundamentall after the Church hath defined it it was Fundamentall before the Definition els it is mooveable and then no Christian hath where to rest And if it be immooveable as b Regula Fidei una omnino est solailla immobilis irreformabilis Tertul. de Virg. vel cap. 1. In hac fide c. Nihil transmutare c. Athan. Epist. ad Iovin de side indeed it is no Decree of a Councell be it never so Generall can alter immooveable Verities no more than it can change immooveable Natures Therefore if the Church in a Councell define any thing the thing defined is not Fundamentall because the Church hath defined it nor can be made so by the Definition of the Church if it be not so in it selfe For if the Church had this power she might make a New Article of the Faith c Occham Almain in 3. Sent. D. 25. q. 1. which the Learned among your selves deny For the Articles of the Faith cannot increase in substance but onely in Explication d Thom. 2. 2. q. 1. Ar. 7. C. And for this I 'le be judg'd by Bellarmine f Fides Divina non ideo habet certitudinem quia toti Ecclesiae communis est sed quia nititur Authoritate Dei qui nec falli nec fallere potest quum sit ipsa Veritas L. 3. de Justif. c. 3. §. Quod verò Concilium Probatio Ecclesiae facit ut omnibus innotescat Objectum Fidei Divinae esse revelatum à Deo propter hoc certum indubitatum non autem tribuit firmitatem verbo Dei aliquid revelantis Ibid. §. At inqust who disputing against Amb. Catharinus about the certainty of Faith tels us That Divine Faith hath not its certainty because 't is Catholike .i. common to the whole Church but because it builds on the Authority of God who is Truth it self and can neither deceive nor be deceived And he addes That the Probation of the Church can make it known to all that the Object of Divine Faith is revealed from God and therefore certaine and not to be doubted but the Church can adde no certainty no firmenesse to the word of God revealing it Nor is this hard to be farther proved out of your owne Schoole For a Scotus in 1. Sent. D. 11. q. 1. Scotus professeth it in this very particular of the Greeke Church If there be saith he a true reall difference betweene the Greekes and the Latines about the Point of the Procession of the Holy Ghost then either they or we be verè Haeretici truly and indeed Hereticks And he speakes this of the old Greekes long before any Decision of the Church in this Controversie For his instance is in S. Basil and Greg. Nazianz. on the one side and S Ierome Augustine and Ambrose on the other And who dares call any of these Hereticks is his challenge I deny not but that Scotus adds there That howsoever this was before yet ex quo from the time that the Catholike Church declared it it is to be held as of the substance of Faith But this cannot stand with his former Principle if he intend by it That whatsoever the Church defines shall be ipso ficto and for that Determination's sake Fundamentall For if before the Determination supposing the Difference reall some of those Worthies were truly Hereticks as he confesses then somewhat made them so And that could not be the Decree of the Church which then was not Therefore it must be somwhat really false that made them so and fundamentally false if it made them Hereticks against the Foundation But Scotus was wiser than to intend this It may be he saw the streame too strong for him to swim against therfore he went on with the doctrine of the Time That the Churches Sentence is of the substance of Faith But meant not to betray the truth For he goes no further than Ecclesia declaravit since the Church hath declared it which is the word that is used by diverse b Bellarm. L. 2. de Conc. Auth. c. 12. Concilia cùm definiunt non faciunt aliquid esse infallibilis veritatis sed declarant Explicare Bonavent in 1. d. 11. A. 1. q. 1. ad sinem Explanare declarare Tho 1. q. 36. A. 2. ad 2. 2. 2. q. 1 A. 10. ad 1. Quid unquam aliud Ecclesia Câ—… ili rum Decretis enisa est nisi ut quod anica simplicitèr credebatur hoc idem postea diligentiùs crederetur Vin. Lyr. cont 〈◊〉 c. 32 Now the a Sent. 1. D. 11 Master teaches and the b Alb. Mag. in 1. Sent. D. 11 Art 7. Schollers too That every thing which belongs to the Exposition or Declaration of
another intùs est is not another contrary thing but is contained within the Bowels and nature of that which is interpreted from which if the Declaration depart it is faulty and erroneous because instead of Declaring it gives another and contrary c Hoc semper nec quicquam praeterea Vin. Lyr. c. 32. sense Therefore when the Church declares any thing in a Councell either that which she declares was intùs or extrà in the Nature and verity of the thing or out of it If it were extrà without the nature of the thing declared then the Declaration of the thing is false and so farre from being Fundamentall in the Faith d In novâ Haeresi Veritas prius erat de Fide et si non ita deâ—… rata Scotus in 1. D. 11. q. 〈◊〉 fine Haeretici multa quae erâ—… implicita sidei nostra compâ—… runt explicare Bonavent in 〈◊〉 D. 11. A. 1. Q. 1. ad finem Tho. 1. q. 36. A. 2. ad 2. Quamvis Apostolica Sedes aut Generale Concilium de Haeresi censere possit non tamen ideò Assertio aliqua erit Haeresis qui. Ecclesia definivit sed quia 〈◊〉 dei Catholica repugnat Ecclesia siquidèm suâ definitione 〈◊〉 facit talem Assertionem esse Haeresin quùm etiamsi ipsa non definivisset esset Haeresis sed id efficit ut paeteat c. Alphon à Castro L. 1. Advers Haeres c. 8. fol. 21. D. If it were intùs within the Compasse and nature of the thing though not open and apparent to every eye then the Declaration is true but not otherwise Fundamentall than the thing is which is declared for that which is intùs cannot be larger or deeper than that in which it is if it were it could not be intùs Therefore nothing is simply Fundamentall because the Church declares it but because it is so in the nature of the thing which the Church declares And it is a slight and poore Evasion that is commonly used that the Declaration of the Church makes it Fundamentall quoad nos in respect of us for it doth not that neither For no respect to us can varie the Foundation The Churches Declaration can binde us to peace and externall Obedience where there is not expresse Letter of Scripture and sense agreed on but it cannot make any thing Fundamentall to us that is not so in its owne nature For if the Church can so adde that it can by a Declaration make a thing to be Fundamentall in the faith that was not then it can take a thing away from the Foundation and make it by Declaring not to be Fundamentall which all men grant no power of the Church can doe e Ecclesia non amputat necessaria non apponit superâ—…ua Vin. Lir. c. 32. Deut. 4. 2. For the power of adding any thing contrary and of detracting any thing necessary are alike forbidden * Thom. Supp q. 6. A. 6. C. and alike denyed Now nothing is more apparent then this to the eye of all men That the Church of Rome hath determined or declared or defined call it what you will very many things that are not in their owne nature Fundamentall and therefore neither are nor can be made so by her adjudging them Now to all this Discourse That the Church hath not power to make any thing Fundamentall in the Faith that intrinsecally and in its owne nature is not such A. C. is content to say nothing 2. For the second That it is prooved by this place of S. Augustine That all Poynts defined by the Church are Fundamentall You might have given me that Place cited in the Margin and eased my paines to seeke it but it may be there was somewhat in concealing it For you doe so extraordinarily right this Place that you were loth I thinke any body should see how you wrong it The place of S. Augustine is this against the Pelagians about Remission of Originall sinne in Infants * August Serm. 14. de verb. Apost c. 12. Fundata res est In aliis Quastionibus non diligentèr digestis nondum plenâ Ecclesiae Authoritate sirmatis ferendus est Disputator errans ibi ferendus est error non tantum progredi debet ut etiam Fundamentum ipsum Ecclesiae quatere moliâ—… This is a thing founded An erring Disputer is to be borne with in other Questions not diligently digested not yet made firme by full Authority of the Church there error is to be borne with but it ought not to goe so farre that it should labour to shake the Foundation it selfe of the Church This is the Place but it can never follow out of this Place I thinke That every thing defined by the Church is Fundamentall For first he speakes of a Foundation of Doctrine in Scripture not a Church definition This appeares for few lines before he tels us b Ibid. cap. 20. There was a Question moved to S. Cyprian Whether Baptisme was concluded to the eight Day as well as Circumcision And no doubt was made then of the c Origine Peccati beginning of sin and that d Ex eâ re unde nulla erat Quaestio soluta est exorta Quaestio out of this thing about which no Question was mooved that Question that was made was Answered And e Hoc de Fundamento Ecclesiae sumpsit ad confirmandum Lapidem nut antem againe That S. Cypryan tooke that which he gave in answer from the Foundation of the Church to confirme a stone that was shaking Now S. Cyprian in all the Answer that he gives hath not one word of any Definition of the Church therefore ea res That thing by which he answered was a Foundation of prime and setled Scripture-Doctrine not any Definition of the Church Therefore that which he tooke out of the Foundation of the Church to fasten the stone that shooke was not a Definition of the Church but the Foundation of the Church it selfe the Scripture upon which it is builded as appeareth in the f Concil Milevit c. 2. Milevitane Councell where the Rule by which Pelagius was condemned is the Rule of g Rom. 5. 15. Scripture Therefore Saint Augustine goes on in the same sense That the Disputer is not to be borne any longer that shall h Vt Fundamentum ipsum Ecclesiae quatere moliatur endeavour to shake the Foundation it selfe upon which the whole Church is grounded Secondly if S. Augustine did meane by Founded and Foundation the definition of the Church because of these words This thing is Founded this is made firm by full Authority of the Church and the words following these to shake the foundation of the Church yet it can never follow out of any or all these Circumstances and these are all That all Poynts defined by the Church are Fundamentall in the faith For first no man denies but the Church is a c 1 Tim. 3. 15. Foundation That things defined
by it are founded upon it And yet hence it cannot follow That the thing that is so founded is Fundamentall in the Faith For things may be d Mos fundatissimus S. Aug. Ep. 28. founded upon Humane Authority and be very certaine yet not Fundamentall in the Faith Nor yet can it follow This thing is founded therefore every thing determined by the Church is founded Again that which followes That those things are not to be opposed which are made firme by full Authority of the Church cannot conclude they are therefore Fundamentall in the Faith For full Church Authority alwayes the time that included the Holy Apostles being past by and not comprehended in it is but Church Authority and Church Authority when it is at full sea is not simply e Staple Rebect cont 4. q. 3. A. 1. Divine therefore the Sentence of it not fundamentall in the Faith And yet no erring Disputer may be endured to shake the foundation which the Church in Councell layes But plaine Scripture with evident sense or a full Demonstrative Argument must have Roome where a wrangling and erring Disputer may not be allowed it And ther 's f Quae quidem si tam manifesta monstratur ut in dubium venire non possit praeponenda est omnibus illis rebus quibus in Catholicâ teneor Ita si aliquid apertissimum in Evangelio S. Aug. contra Fund c. 4. neither of these but may Convince the Definition of the Councell if it be ill founded And the Articles of the faith may easily proove it is not Fundamentall if indeed and verily it be not so And I have read some body that sayes is it not you That things are fundamentall in the Faith two wayes One in their Matter such as are all things which be so in themselves The other in the Manner such as are all things that the Church hath Defined and determined to be of Faith And that so some things that are de modo of the manner of being arc of Faith But in plaine truth this is no more then if you should say some things are Fundamentall in the faith and some are not For wrangle while you will you shall never be able to proove that any thing which is but de modo a consideration of the manner of being only can possibly be Fundamentall in the faith And since you make such a Foundation of this Place I will a little view the Mortar with which it is laid by you It is a venture but I shall finde it a Ezek. 13. 11. untempered Your Assertion is All poynts defined by the Church are Fundamentall Your proofe this Place Because that is not to be shaken which is setled by b Plenâ Ecclesiae Authoritate full Authority of the Church Then it seemes your meaning is that this poynt there spoken of The remission of Originall sinne in Baptisme of Infants was defined when S. Augustine wrote this by a full Sentence of a Generall Councell First if you say it was c 1. 2. de Author Concil c. 5. §. A solis particularibus Bellarmine will tell you it is false and that the Pelagian Heresie was never condemned in an Oecumenicall Councell but only in Nationalls But Bellarmine is deceived For while the Pelagians stood out impudently against Nationall Councels some of them defended Nestorius which gave occasion to the first d Can. 1. 4. Ephesine Councell to Excommunicate and depose them And yet this will not serve your turne for this Place For S. Augustine was then dead and therefore could not meane the Sentence of that Councell in this place Secondly if you say it was not then Defined in an Oecumenicall Synode Plena authoritas Ecclesiae the full Authority of the Church there mentioned doth not stand properly for the Decree of an Oecumenicall Councell but for some Nationall as this was condemned in a * Concil Milevit Can. 2 Nationall Councell And then the full Authority of the Church here is no more then the full Authority of this Church of †Nay if your owne Capellus be true De Appell Eccl Afric c. 2. n. 5. It was â—…ut a Provinciall of Numidia not a Plenary of Africk Africk And I hope that Authority doth not make all Points defined by it to be Fundamentall You will say yes if that Councell be confirmed by the Pope And then I must ever wonder why S. Augustine should say The full Authority of the Church and not bestow one word upon the Pope by whose Authority only that Councell as all other have their fulnesse of Authority in your Iudgement An inexpiable Omission if this Doctrine concerning the Pope were true But here A. C. steps in againe to helpe the Iesuite and he tells us over and over againe That all A. C. p. 45. points made firme by full Authority of the Church are Fundamentall so firme he will have them and therefore fundamentall But I must tell him That first 't is one thing in Nature and Religion too to be firme and another thing to be fundamentall These two are not Convertible T is true that every thing that is fundamentall is firme But it doth not follow that every thing that is firme is fundamentall For many a Superstructure is exceeding firme being fast and close joyned to a sure foundation which yet no man will grant is fundamentall Besides what soever is fundamentall in the faith is fundamentall to the Church which is one by the vnity a Almain in 3. Sent. Dis. 25. q. 2. A Fide enim unà Ecclesia dicitur una of faith Therefore if every thing Defined by the Church be fundamentall in the faith then the Churches Definition is the Churches Foundation And so upon the matter the Church can lay her owne foundation and then the Church must be in absolute and perfect Being before so much as her Foundation is laide Now this is so absurd for any man of learning to say that by and by after A. C. is content to affirm not only that the prima Credibilia the Articles of Faith but all which so pertaines to Supernaturall Divine and Infallible Christian Faith as that thereby Christ doth dwell in our hearts c. is the Foundation of the Church under Christ the Prime Foundation And here he 's out againe For first all which pertaines to Supernaturall Divine and Infallible Christian Faith is not by and by b Aliquid pertinet ad Fidem dupliciter Uno modo directè sicut ea quae nobis sunt principalitèr divinitùs tradita ut Deum esse Trinum c. Et circa haec opinari falsum hoc ipso inducit Haeresin c. Alio modo indirectè Ex quibus consequitur aliquid contrarium Fidei c. Et in his aliquis potest falsum opinari absque periculo Haeresis donec Sequela illa ei innotescat c. Tho. p. 1. q. 32. A. 4. C. There are things Necessary to the Faith and
speake of the Written Word and so lie crosse to Stapleton as is mention'd But to returne If A. C. will he may but I cannot believe That a Definition of the Church which is made by the expresse Word of God and another which is made without so much as a probable Testimony of it or a cleare Deduction from it are made firme to us by one and the same Divine Revelation Nay I must say in this case that the one Determination is firme by Divine Revelation but the other hath no Divine Revelation at all but the Churches Authority onely 2. Secondly I cannot believe neither That all Determinations of the Church are sufficiently applied by one and the same full Authority of the Church For the Authority of the Church though it be of the same fulnesse in regard of it self and of the Power which it commits to Generall Councels lawfully called yet it is not alwayes of the same fulnesse of knowledge and sufficiency nor of the same fulnesse of Conscience and integrity to apply Dogmata Fidei that which is Dogmaticall in the Faith For instance I thinke you dare not deny but the Councell of Trent was lawfully called and yet I am of opinion that few even of your selves believe that the Councell of Trent hath the same fulnesse with the Councell of Nice in all the fore-named kinds or degrees of fulnesse Thirdly suppose That all Determinations of the Church are made firme to us by one and the same Divine Revelation and sufficiently applied by one and the same full Authority yet it will not follow that they are all alike Fundamentall in the Faith For I hope A. C. himselfe will not say that the Definitions of the Church are in better condition than the Propositions of Canonicall Scripture Now all Propositions of Canonicall Scripture are alike firme because they all alike proceed from Divine Revelation but they are not all alike Fundamentall in the Faith For this Proposition of Christ to S. Peter and S. Andrew Follow me and I will make you fishers of men a S. Matth. 4. 19 is as firm a Truth as that which he delivered to his Disciples That he must die and rise againse the third day b S. Matth. 16. 21 For both proceed from the same Divine Revelation out of the mouth of our Saviour and both are sufficiently applied by one and the same full Authority of the Church which receives the whole Gospell of S. Matthew to be Canonicall and infallible Scripture And yet both these Propositions of Christ are not alike Fundamentall in the Faith For I dare say No man shall be saved in the ordinary way of salvation that believes not the Death and the Resurrection of Christ. And I believe A. C. dares not say that No man shall be saved into whose Capacity it never came that Christ made S. Peter and Andrew fishers of men And yet should he say it nay should he shew it sub annulo Piscatoris no man will believe it that hath not made shipwrack of his Common Notions Now if it be thus betweene Proposition and Proposition issuing out of Christ's own Mouth I hope it may well be so also betweene even Iust and True Determinations of the Church that supposing them alike true and firme yet they shall not be alike Fundamentall to all mens beliefe F. Secondly I required to know what Points the Bishop would account Fundamentall He said all the Points of the Creed were such B. Against this I hope you except not For § 11 since the a Tertull. Apol. contra Gentes c. 47. de veland virg c. 1. S. August Serm. 15. de Temp. cap. 2. Ruffin in Symb. apud Cyprian p. 357. Fathers make the Creed the Rule of Faith b Alb. Mag. in 1. Sent. D. 11. A. 7. since the agreeing sense of Scripture with those Articles are the two Regular Precepts by which a Divine is governed about the Faith since your owne Councell of c Concil Trident Sess. 3. Trent decrees That it is that Principle of Faith in which all that professe Christ doe necessarily agree Fundamentum firmum unicum not the firme alone but the onely Foundation since it is Excommunication d Bonavent ibid. Dub. 2. 3. in literam ipso jure for any man to contradict the Articles contained in that Creed since the whole Body of the Faith is so contained in the Creed as that the e Thom. 2. 2ae q. 1. Art 7. c. substance of it was believ'd even before the comming of Christ though not so expresly as since in the number of the Articles since f Bellar. L. 4. de Verb. Dei non Script c. 11. §. Primum est Bellarmine confesses That all things simply necessary for all mens salvation are in the Creed and the Decalogue what reason can you have to except And yet for all this everything Fundamentall is not of a like nearenesse to the Foundation nor of equall Primenesse in the Faith And my granting the Creed to be Fundamentall doth not deny but that there are g Tho. 2. 2ae q. 1. A. 7. C. quaedam prima Credibilia certaine prime Principles of Faith in the bosome whereof all other Articles lay wrapped and folded up One of which since Christ is that of S. h 1. S. Iohn 4. 2. Iohn Every spirit that confesseth Iesus Christ come in the flesh is of God And one both before the comming of Christ and since is that of S. Paul i Heb. 11. 6. He that comes to God must believe that God is and that he is a rewarder of them that seeke him Here A. C. tels you That either I must meane that those Points are onely Fundamentall which are expressed A. C. p. 46. in the Creed or those also which are infolded If I say those onely which are expressed then saith he to believe the Scriptures is not Fundamentall because 't is not expressed If I say those which are infolded in the Articles then some unwritten Church Traditions may be accounted Fundamentall The truth is I said and say still that all the Points of the Apostles Creed as they are there expressed are Fundamentall And therein I say no more than some of your best Learned have said before me But I never either said or meant That they onely are Fundamentall That they are a Conc. Trident. Sess. 3. Fundamentum unicum the only Foundation is the Councell of Trent's 't is not mine Mine is That the Beliefe of Scripture to be the Word of God and infallible is an equall or rather a preceding Prime Principle of Faith with or to the whole Body of the Creed And this agrees as before I told the Iesuite with one of your owne great Masters Albertus Magnus b In 1. Sent. D. 11. A. 7. Regula Fidei est concors Scriptururum sensus cum Articulis Fidei Quia illis duobus regularibus Praeceptis regitur Theologus who is not farre from
that Proposition in terminis So here the very Foundation of A. C ' s. Dilemma fals off For I say not That onely the Points of the Creed are Fundamentall whether expressed or not expressed That all of them are that I say And yet though the Foundation of his Dilemma be fallen away I will take the boldnesse to tell A. C. That if I had said That those Articles onely which are expressed in the Creed are Fundamentall it would have beene hard to have excluded the Scripture upon which the Creed it selfe in every Point is grounded For nothing is supposed to shut out its owne Foundation And if I should now say that some Articles are Fundamentall which are infolded in the Creed it would not follow that therefore some unwritten Traditions were Fundamentall Some Traditions I deny not true and firme and of great both Authority and Vse in the Church as being Apostolicall but yet not Fundamentall in the Faith And it would be a mighty large fold which should lap up Traditions within the Creed As for that Tradition That the Bookes of holy Scriptures are Divine and Infallible in every part I will handle that when I come to the proper place * §. 16. N. 1. for it F. I asked how then it happened as M. Rogers saith that the English Church is not yet resolved what is the right sense of the Article of Christs Descending into Hell B. The English Church never made doubt that § 12 I know what was the sense of that Article The words are so plaine they beare their meaning before them Shee was content to put that a Art 3. Article among those to which she requires Subscription not as doubting of the sense but to prevent the Cavils of some who had beene too busie in Crucifying that Article and in making it all one with the Article of the Crosse or but an Exposition of it And surely for my part I thinke the Church of England is better resolved of the right sense of this Article then the Church of Rome especially if shee must be tryed by her Writers as you try the Church of England by M. Rogers For you cannot agree whether this Article be a meere Tradition or whether it hath any Place of Scripture to vvarrant it a Scotus in 1. D. 11. q. 1. Scotus and b Stapleton Relect. Con. 5. q. 5. Art 1. Stapleton allow it no footing in Scripture but c Bellarm 4. de Christo. c. 6. 12. Scripturae passim hoc docent Bellarmine is resolute that this Article is every where in Scripture and d Thom. 2 â—…ae q. 1. A 9 ad 1. Thomas grants as much for the whole Creed The Church of England never doubted it and S. e S. Aug. Ep. 99. Augustine prooves it And yet againe you are different for the sense For you agree not Whether the Soule of Christ in triduo mortis in the time of his Death did go downe into Hell really and was present there or vertually and by effects only For g Tho. p. 3. q. 52. A. 2. c. per suam essentiam Thomas holds the first and h Dur in 3. d. 22. q. 3. Durand the later Then you agree not Whether the Soule of Christ did descend really and in essence into the lowest pit of Hell and Place of the Damned as i Bellar. L. 4. do Christo. c. 16. Bellarmine once held probable and prooved it or really only into that place or Region of Hell which you call Limbum Patrum and then but vertually from thence into the Lower Hell to which k Bellar. Recog p. 11. Bellarmine reduces himselfe and gives his reason because it is the l Sequuntur enim Tho. p. 3. Q. 52. A. 2. common Opinion of the Schoole Now the Church of England takes the words as they are in the Creed and believes them without farther Dispute and in that sense which the ancient Primitive Fathers of the Church agreed in And yet if any in the Church of England should not be throughly resolved in the sense of this Article Is it not as lawfull for them to say I conceive thus or thus of it yet if any other way of his Descent be found truer then this I deny it not but as yet I know no other as it was for m Non est pertinaciter asserendum quin Anima Christi per alium modum nobis ignotum potuerit descendere ad Infernum Nec nos negamus alium modum esse for sit an veriorem sed fatemur nos illum ignor arc Durand in 3. sent Dist. 22. q. 3. Nu. 9. Durand to say it and yet not impeach the Foundation of the Faith F. The Bishop said That M. Rogers was but a private man But said I if M. Rogers writing as he did by publike Authority be accounted only a private man c. B. I said truth when I said M. Rogers was a private § 13 man And I take it you will not allow every speech of every man though allowed by Authority to have his Bookes Printed to be the Doctrine of the Church of Rome * And this was an Ancient fault too for S. Augustine checks at it in his time Noli colligere calumnias ex Episcoporum scriptis sive Hillarii sive Cypriani Agrippini Primò quia hoc genus literarum ab Authoritate Canonis distinguendum est Non enim sic leguntur tanquam it a ex iis testimonium proferatur ut contrà sentire non liceat sicubi fortè aliter sentirent quà m veritas postulat S. Aug. Ep. 48. c. And yet these were farre greater men in their generations then M. Rogers was This hath beene oft complained of on both sides The imposing particular mens assertions upon the Church yet I see you meane not to leave it And surely as Controversies are now handled by some of your party at this day I may not say it is the sense of the Article in hand but I have long thought it a kinde os descent into Hell to be conversant in them I would the Authors would take heed in time and not seeke to blinde the People or cast a mist before evident Truth least it cause a finall descent to that place of Torment But since you will hold this course Stapleton was of greater note with you then M. Rogers his exposition of Notes upon the Articles of the Church of England is with us And as he so his Relection And is it the Doctrine of the Church of Rome which Stapleton affirmes †Stapl. Cont. 5. q. 5. A. 1. The Scripture is silent that Christ descended into Hell and that there is a Catholike and an Apostolike Church If it be then what will become of the Popes Supremacie over the whole Church Shall he have his Power over the Catholike Church given him expresly in Scripture in the a S. Mat. 16. 19. Keyes to enter and in b S. Ioh. 21. 15. Pasce
to feede when he is in and when he had fed to c S. Luk. 22. 35. Confirme and in all these not to erre and faile in his Ministration And is the Catholike Church in and over which he is to do all these great things quite left out of the Scripture Belike the Holy Ghost was carefull to give him his power Yes in any case but left the assigning of his great Cure the Catholike Church to Tradition And it were well for him if he could so prescribe for what he now Claymes But what if after all this M. Rogers there sayes no such thing As in truth he doth not His words are d Rogers in Art Eccle. Angl. Art 3. All Christians acknowledge He descended but in the interpretation of the Article there is not that consent that were to be wished What is this to the Church of England more then others And againe e Ibid. Till we know the native and undoubted sense of this Article is M. Rogers We the Church of England or rather his and some others Iudgement in the Church of England Now here A. C. will have somewhat againe to say though God knowes 't is to little purpose 'T is A. C. p. 47. that the Iesuite urged M. Roger's Booke because it was set out by Publike Authority And because the Booke beares the Title of the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England A. C. may undoubtedly urge M. Rogers if he please But he ought not to say that his Opinion is the Doctrine of the Church of England for neither of the Reasons by him expressed First not because his Booke was publikely allowed For many Bookes among them as well as among us have beene Printed by publike Authority as containing nothing in them contrary to Faith and good manners and yet containing many things in them of Opinion only or private Iudgement which yet is farre from the avowed Positive Doctrine of the Church the Church having as yet determined neither way by open Declaration upon the words or things controverted And this is more frequent among their Schoolemen then among any of our Controversers as is well knowne Nor secondly because his Booke beares the Title of the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England For suppose the worst and say M. Rogers thought a little too well of his owne paines and gave his Booke too high a Title is his private Iudgement therefore to be accounted the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England Surely no No more then I should say every thing said by * Angelici D. S. Tho. Summa Thomas or †Celebratissimi Patris Dom. Bonaventurae Doctoris Seraphici in 3. L. Sent. Disputata Bonaventure is Angelicall or Seraphicall Doctrine because one of these is stiled in the Church of Rome Seraphicall and the other Angelicall Doctor And yet their workes are Printed by Publike Authority and that Title given them Yea but our private Authors saith A. C. are not allowed for ought I know in such a like sorte to expresse A. C. p. 47. our Catholike Doctrine in any matter subject to Question Here are two Limitations which will goe farre to bring A. C. off whatsoever I shall say against him For first let me instance in any private man that takes as much upon him as M. Rogers doth he will say he knew it not his Assertion here being no other then for ought he knowes Secondly If he be unwilling to acknowledge so much yet he will answer 't is not just in such a like sort as M. Rogers doth it that is perhaps it is not the very Title of his Booke But well then Is there never a Private man allowed in the Church of Rome to expresse your Catholike Doctrine in any matter subject to question What not in any matter Were not Vega and Soto two private men Is it not a mâ—…tter subject to Question to great Question in these Dayes Whether a man may be certaine of his Salvation câ—…rtitudine fidei by the certainty of Faith Doth nâ—…t * Bellar. Lib. 3. de Justificat c. 1. 14. Bellarmine make it a Controversie And is it not a part of your Catholike Faith if it be determined in the †Huic Concilio Catholici omnes ingenia sua judicia sponte subjiciunt Bellar. 3. de Justif. c. 3. §. Sed Concilii Tridâ—…i Councell of Trent And yet these two great Friers of their time Dominicus Soto and Andreas Vega a Hist. Concil Trident. Lib. 2. p. 245. Edit Lat. Leidae 1622. were of contrary Opinions and both of them challenged the Decree of the Councell and so consequently your Catholike Faith to be as each of them concluded and both of them wrote Bookes to maintaine their Opinions and both of their Bookes were published by Authority And therefore I think 't is allowed in the Church of Rome to private men to expresse your Catholike Doctrine and in a matter subject to Question And therefore also if another man in the Church of England should be of a contrary Opinion to M. Rogers and declare it under the Title of the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England this were no more then Soto and Vega did in the Church of Rome And I for my part cannot but wonder A. C. should not know it A. C. p. 47. For he sayes that for ought he knowes Private men are not allowed so to expresse their Catholike Doctrine And in the same Question both Catharinus and Bellarmine b Bellar. L. 3. de Iustif. c. 3. take on them to expresse your Catholike Faith the one differing from the other almost as much as Soto and Vega and perhaps in some respect more F. But if M. Rogers be only a private man in what Book may we finde the Protestants publike Doctrine The Bishop answered That to the Booke of Articles they were all sworne B. What Was I so ignorant to say The Articles § 14 of the Church of England were the Publike Doctrine of all the Protestants Or that all Protestants were sworne to the Articles of England as this speech seems to imply Sure I was not Was not the immediate speech before of the Church of England And how comes the Subject of the Speech to be varied in the next lines Nor yet speake I this as if other Protestants did not agree with the Church of England in the chiefest Doctrines and in the maine Exceptions which they joyntly take against the Romane Church as appeares by their severall Confessions But if A. C. will say as he doth that because there was speech before of the Church of A. C. p. 47. England the Iesuite understood mee in a limited sense and meant only the Protestants of the English Church Bee it so ther 's no great harme done †And therfore A. C. needs not make such a Noise about it as he doth p. 48 but this that the Iesuite offers to enclose me too much For I did not
say that the Booke of Articles only was the Continent of the Church of Englands publike Doctrine She is not so narrow nor hath she purpose to exclude any thing which she acknowledges hers nor doth she wittingly permit any Crossing of her publike Declarations yet she is not such a shrew to her Children as to deny her Blessing or Denounce an Anathema against them if some peaceably dissent in some Particulars remoter from the Foundation as your owne Schoole men differ And if the Church of Rome since she grew to her greatnesse had not beene so fierce in this Course and too particular in Determining too many things and making them matters of Necessary Beliefe which had gone for many hundreds of years before only for things of Pious Opinion Christendome I perswade my selfe had beene in happier peace at this Day then I doubt we shall ever live to see it Well but A. C. will proove the Church of England a Shrew and such a Shrew For in her Booke * Can. 5. of Canons A. C. p. 48. She Excommunicates every man who shall hold any thing contrary to any part of the said Articles So A. C. But surely these are not the very words of the Canon nor perhaps the sense Not the Words for they are Whosoever shall affirme that the Articles are in any part superstitious or erroneous c. And perhaps not the sense For it is one thing for a man to hold an Opinion privately within himselfe and another thing boldly and publikely to affirme it And againe 't is one thing to hold contrary to some part of an Article which perhaps may bee but in the manner of Expression and another thing positively to affirme that the Articles in any part of them are superstitious and erroneous But this is not the Maine of the Businesse For though the Church of England Denounce Excommunication as is a Can. 5. before expressed Yet She comes farre short of the Church of Rome's severity whose Anathema's are not only for 39. Articles but for very many more * Concil Trident. above one hundred in matter of Doctrine and that in many Poynts as farre remote from the Foundation though to the farre greater Rack of mens Consciences they must be all made Fundamentall if that Church have once Determined them whereas the Church A. C. p. 45. of England never declared That every one of her Articles are Fundamentall in the Faith For 't is one thing to say No one of them is superstitious or erroneous And quite another to say Every one of them is fundamental and that in every part of it to all mens Beliefe Besides the Church of England prescribes only to her owne Children and by those Articles provides but for her owne peaceable Consent in those Doctrines of Truth But the Church of Rome severely imposes her Doctrine upon the whole World under paine of Damnation F. And that the Scriptures only not any unwritten Tradition was the Foundation of their Faith B. The Church of England grounded her Positive § 15 Articles upon Scripture and her Negative doe refute there where the thing affirmed by you is not affirmed by Scripture nor directly to be concluded out of it And here not the Church of England only but all Protestants agree most truly and most strongly in this That the Scripture is sufficient to salvation and containes in it all things necessary to it The Fathers a S. Basil. de verâ piâ fide Manifesta defectio Fidei est importare quicquam eorum quae scripta non sunt S. Hilar. L. 2. ad Const. Aug. Fidem tantùm secundum ca quae scripta sunt desider autem hoc qui repudiat Antichristus est qui simulat Anathema est S. Aug. L. 2. de Doctr. Christian. c. 9. In iis quae apertè in Scriptura posita sunt inveniuntur illa omnia quae continent sidem mâ—…resque vivendi And to this place Bellarm L. 4. de verbo Dei non scripto c. 11. saith that S. Augustine speakes de illis Dogmatibus quae necestaria sunt omnibus simpliciter of those Points of faith which are necessary simply for all men So farre then he grants the question And that you may know it fell not from him on the suddaine he had said as much before in the beginning of the same Chapter and here he confirmes it againe are plaine the b Sâ—…tus Proleg in sent q. 2. Scriptura sufficienter continet Doctrinam necessariam Uiatori Thom. 2. 2ae q. 1. A. 10. ad 1. In Doctrina Christi Apostolorum veritas fidei est suffi ientèr explicata And he speakes there of the written Word Schoolemen not strangers in it And have not we reason then to account it as it is The Foundation of our Faith And c Scripturam Fundamentum esse columnam Fidei fatemur in suo genere i. can genere Testimoniorum in materia Credendorum Relect. Con. 4. q. 1. Ar. 3. in fine Stapleton himselfe though an angry Opposite confesses That the Scripture is in some sort the Foundation of Faith that is in the nature of Testimony and in the matter or thing to be believed And if the Scripture be the Foundation to which we are to goe for witnesse if there be Doubt about the Faith and in which we are to find the thing that is to be believed as necessary in the Faith we never did nor never will refuse any Tradition that is Universall and Apostolike for the better Exposition of the Scripture nor any Definition of the Church in which she goes to the Scripture for what she teaches and thrusts nothing as Fundamentall in the Faith upon the world but what the Scripture fundamentally makes materiam Credendorum the substance of that which is so to be believed whether immediatly and expresly in words or more remotely till a cleare and full Deduction draw it out Against the beginning of this Paragraph A. C. excepts And first he sayes 'T is true that the Church of England grounded her Positive Articles upon Scripture A. C. p. 48. That is 't is true if themselves may be competent Iudges in their owne Cause But this by the leave of A. C. is true without making our selves Iudges in our owne Cause For that all the Positive Articles of the present Church of England are grounded upon Scripture we are content to be judged by the joynt and constant Beliefe of the Fathers which lived within the first foure or five hundred yeares after Christ when the Church was at the best and by the Councels held within those times and to submit to them in all those Points of Doctrine Therefore we desire not to be Iudges in our owne Cause And if any whom A. C. cals a Novellist can truly say and maintaine this he will quickly proove himselfe no Novellist And for the Negative Articles they refute where the thing affirmed by you is either not affirmed in
assurance and for which we have no warrant at all in Scripture while wee in the meane time neglect the ordinary way and meanes commanded by Christ. Secondly 't is very neare an Expression in Scripture it selfe For when S. Peter had ended that great Sermon of his Act. 2. he Act. 2. 38 39. applies two comforts unto them Vers. 38. Amend your lives and be baptized and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost And then Verse 39. hee inferres For the promise is made to you and to your children The Promise what Promise What Why the Promise of Sanctification by the Holy Ghost By what meanes Why by Baptisme For 't is expresly Be baptized and ye shall receive And as expresly This promise is made to you and to your children And therefore A. C. may finde it if he will That the Baptisme of Infants may be directly concluded out of Scripture For some of his owne Party a Nullum excipit non Iudaeum non Gentilem non Adultum non Puerum c. Ferus in Act. 2. 39. Ferus and b Et ad Filios vestros quare debent consentire quum ad usum rationis perveniunt ad implenda promissa in Baptismo c. Salm. Tract 14. upon the place Salmeron could both find it there And so if it will doe him any pleasure he hath my Answer which he saith he would be glad to know 'T is true a Bellar. L. 4. de Verbo Dei c. 9. §. 5. Bellarmine presses a maine Place out of S. Augustine and he urges it hard S. b S. Aug. Gen. ad Lit. c. 23. Consuetudo Matris Ecclesia in Baptizandis parvulis nequaquam spernenda est nec omninò credenda nisi Apostolica esset Traditio Augustine's words are The Custome of our Mother the Church in Baptizing Infants is by no meanes to be contemned or thought superfluous nor yet at all to be believed unlesse it were an Apostolicall Tradition The Place is truly cited but seemes a great deale stronger than indeed it is For first 't is not denyed That this is an Apostolicall Tradition and therefore to be believed But secondly not therefore onely Nor doth S. Augustine say so nor doth Bellarmine presse it that way The truth is it would have beene somewhat difficult to finde the Collection out of Scripture onely for the Baptisme of Infants since they do not actually believe And therefore S. Augustine is at nec credenda nisi that this Custome of the Church had not been to be believed had it not been an Apostolicall Tradition But the Tradition being Apostolicall led on the Church easily to see the necessary Deduction out of Scripture And this is not the least use of Tradition to lead the Church into the true meaning of those things which are found in Scripture though not obvious to every eye there And that this is S. Augustine's meaning is manifest by himself who best knew it For when he had said c Cur Antiquam fidei Regulam frangere conaris S. Aug. Ser. 8. de ver Apos c. 8. Hoc Ecclesia semper tenuit Ib. Ser. 10. c. 2. as he doth That to baptize children is Antiqua fidei Regula the Ancient Rule of Faith and the constant Tenet of the Church yet he doubts not to collect and deduce it out of Scripture also For when Pelagius urged That Infants needed not to be baptized because they had no Originall Sin S. Augustine relies not upon the Tenet of the Church only but argues from the Text thus a Quid necessarium habuit Infans Christum si non aegrotat S. Matth. 9. 12. Quid est quod dicis nisi ut non accedant ad Iesum Sed tibi clamat Iesus Sine Parvulos venire ad me S. Aug. in the fore-cited places What need have Infants of Christ if they be not sicke For the sound need not the Physitian S. Mat. 9. And againe is not this said by Pelagius ut non accedant ad Iesum That Infants may not come to their Saviour Sed clamat Iesus but Iesus cries out Suffer Little ones to come unto me * S. Marc. 10. 14. S. Mar. 10. And all this is fully acknowledged by b Nullus est Scriptor tam vetustus qui non ejus Originem ad Apostolorum seculum pro certo referat Calv. 4. Inst. c. 16 §. 8. Calvine Namely That all men acknowledge the Baptisme of Infants to descend from Apostolicall Tradition †Miserrimum alylum foret si pro Defensione Paedubaptismi ad nudam Ecclesiae authoritatem fugere cogeremur Calv. 4. Inst. c. 8. §. 16. And yet that it doth not depend upon the bare and naked Authority of the Church Which he speakes not in regard of Tradition but in relation to such proofe as is to be made by necessary Consequence out of Scripture over and above Tradition As for Tradition * §. 15. Num. 1. A. C. p. 49. I have said enough for that and as much as A. C. where 't is truly Apostolicall And yet if any thing will please him I will add this concerning this particular The Baptizing of Infants That the Church received this by c Orig in Rom 6 6. tom 2 p. 543. Pro hoc Ecclesia ab Apâ—…stolis Traditionem suscepit etiaÌ„ parvulis BaptismuÌ„ dare Et S. Aug. Ser. 10. de verb. Apos c. 2. Hoc Ecclesia à MajoruÌ„ side percepit And it is to be observed that neither of these Fathers nor i believe any other say that the Church received it à Traditione solâ or à Majorum side sola as if Tradition 〈◊〉 exclude collection of it out of Scripture Tradition from the Apostles By Tradition And what then May it not directly be concluded out of Scripture because it was delivered to the Church by way of Tradition I hope A. C. will never say so For certainly in Doctrinall things nothing so likely to be a Tradition Apostolicall as that which hath a * Yea and Bellarmine himself avers Omnes Traditiones c. contineri in Scripturis in universali L. 4. de verb. Det non scripto c. 10. §. Sic etiam And S. Basil. Serm. de fide approves only those Agrapha quae non sunt aliena à piâ secunduÌ„ ScripturaÌ„ Sententid root and a Foundation in Scripture For Apostles cannot write or deliver contrary but subordinate and subservient things F. I asked how he knew Scripture to be Scripture and in particular Genesis Exodus c. These are believed to be Scripture yet not proved out of any Place of Scripture The Bishop said That the Books of Scripture are Principles to be supposed and needed not to be proved B. I did never love too curious a search into § 16 that which might put a man into a wheele and circle him so long betweene proving Scripture by Tradition and Tradition by Scripture till the Divell finde a meanes to dispute him into Infidelity and make him believe neither I
hope this is no part of your meaning Yet I doubt this b Qui conantur sidem destruere sub specie Questionis difficilis aut fortè indissolubilis c. Orig. Q. 35. in S. Matth. Question How doe you know Scripture to be Scripture hath done more harme than you will be ever able to helpe by Tradition But I must follow that way which you draw me And because it is so much insisted upon by you and is in it self a c To know that Scriptures are Divine and infallible in every part is a Foundation so necessary as if it bee doubtfully question'd all the Faith built upon Scripture fals to the ground A. C. p. 47. Necesse est nôsse extare Libros aliquos vere Divinos Bellarm. L. 4. de verb. Dei non scripto c. 4. §. Quarto necesse Et etiam libros qui sunt in manibus esse illos Ibid. §. Sexto oportet matter of such Consequence I will sift it a little farther Many men labouring to settle this great Principle in Divinity have used diverse meanes to prove it All have not gone the same way nor all the right way You cannot be right that resolve Faith of the Scriptures being the Word of God into onely Tradition For onely and no other proofe are equall To prove the Scripture therefore so called by way of Excellence to be the Word of God there are severall Offers at diverse proofes For first some flie to the Testimony and witnesse of the Church and 1. her Tradition which constantly believes and unanimously delivers it Secondly some to the Light 2. and the Testimony which the Scripture gives to it selfe with other internall proofes which are observed in it and to be found in no other Writing whatsoever Thirdly some to the Testimony of the Holy 3. Ghost which cleares up the light that is in Scripture and seales this Faith to the soules of men that it is Gods Word Fourthly all that have not imbrutished 4. themselves and sunke below their species and order of Nature give even Naturall Reason leave to come in and make some proofe and give some approbation upon the weighing and the consideration of other Arguments And this must be admitted if it be but for Pagans and Infidels who either consider not or value not any one of the other three yet must some way or other bee converted or left without excuse Rom. 1. and that is Rom. 1. 20. done by this very evidence 1. For the first The Tradition of the Church which is your way That taken and considered alone it is so farre from being the onely that it cannot be a sufficient Proofe to believe by Divine Faith that Scripture is the Word of God For that which is a full and sufficient proofe is able of it selfe to settle the soule of man concerning it Now the Tradition of the Church is not able to doe this For it may bee further asked why wee should believe the Churches Tradition And if it be answered we may believe Because the Church is infallibly governed by the Holy Ghost it may yet be demanded of you How that may appeare And if this be demanded either you must say you have it by speciall Revelation which is the private Spirit you object to other men or else you must attempt to prove it by Scripture a Esse aliquas veras Traditiones demonstratur ex Scripturis Bellar L. 4 de verbo Dei non Scripto c. 5. and A. C p. 50. proves Tradition out of 2 Thes. 2. as all of you doe And that very offer to prove it out of Scripture is a sufficient acknowledgement that the Scripture is a higher Proofe then the Churches Tradition w ch in your own Grounds is or may be Questionable till you come thither Besides this is an Inviolable ground of Reason * Arist. 1. Post. c. 2. T. 16. Per Pacium Quocirca si 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 propter prima scimus credimus illa quoque scimus credimus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 magis quia per illa scimus credimus etiam posteriora That the Principles of any Conclusion must be of more credite then the conclusion it self Therefore if the Articles of Faith The Trinity the Resurrection and the rest be the Conclusions and the Principles by which they are prooved be only Ecclesiasticall Tradition it must needs follow That the Tradition of the Church is more infallible then the Articles of the Faith if the Faith which we have of the Articles should be finally Resolved into the Veracity of the Churches Testimony But this †Eorum errorem dissimulare non possum qui asserunt fidern Nostram cò tanquà m in ultimam credendi causam reducendam esse Vt Credamus Ecclesiam esse Veracem c. M. Canus L. 2. de Locis c. 8. §. Cui tertium your Learned and wary men deny And therefore I hope your selfe dare not affirme Againe if the Voyce of the Church saying the Bookes of Scripture commonly received are the Word of God be the formall Object of Faith upon which alone absolutely I may resolve my selfe then every man not only may but ought to resolve his Faith into the Voyce or Tradition of the Church for every man is bound to rest upon the proper and formall Object of the Faith But nothing can bee more evident then this That a man ought not to resolve his Faith of this Principle into the sole Testimony of the Church Therefore neither is that Testimony or Tradition alone the formall Object of Faith * Uox Ecclesiae non est formale Obiectum Fidei Stapl. Relect. Cont 4. q. 3. A. 2. Licet in Articulo Fidei Credo Ecclesiam fortè contineatur hoc totum Credo ea quae docet Ecclesia tamen non intelligitur necessariò quod Credo docenti Ecclesiae tanquam Testi insallibili ibid. Vbi etiam rejicit Opinionem Durandi Gabr. Et Waldens L. 2 Doctr. Fidei Art 2. c. 21. Num. 4. Testimonium Ecclesiae Catholicae est Objectum Fidei Christianae Legislatio Scripturae Canonica subjicitur tamen ipsi sicut Testis Iudici Testimonium Veritati c. Canus Loc. Lib. 2. cap. 8. Nec si Ecclesia aditum nobis prabet ad hujusmodi Libros Sacros cognoscendos protinus ibi acquiescendum est sed ultrà â—…portet progredi Solidà Dei veritate niti c. The Learned of your owne part grant this †Although in that Article of the Creed I believe the Catholike Church peradventure all this be contained I believe those things which the Church teacheth yet this is not necessarily understood That I believe the Church teaching as an Infallible Witnesse And if they did not confesse this it were no hard thing to prove But here 's the cunning of this Devise All the Authority's of Fathers Councels nay of Scripture too b Omnis ergo Ecclesiastica Authoritas cùm sit ad
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—…
Tradition may be knowne to be such by the light which it hath in it selfe which is an excellent Proposition to make sport withall were this an Argument to be handled merrily 3. For the third Opinion and way of proving either some thinke that there is no sufficient warrant for this unlesse they fetch it from the Testimony of the Holy Ghost and so looke in vaine after speciall Revelations and make themselves by this very Conceit obnoxious and easie to be led by all the whisperings of a seducing private spirit or els you would faine have them think so For your side both upon this and other Occasions do often challenge That we resolve all our Faith into the Dictates of a * A Iesuite under the name of T S. set out a Booke An. 1630. which he called The Triall of the Protestant private Spirit private Spirit from which we shall ever prove our selves as free if not freer than you To the Question in hand then Suppose it agreed upon that there must be a d Ut Testimonia Scripturae certam inaubitatam fidem praestent necessarium videtur ostendere quod ipsae Divinae Scripturae sint Dei Spiritu inspiratae Orig. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Divine Faith cui subesse non potest falsum under which can rest no possible errour That the Bookes of Scripture are the written Word of God If they which goe to the testimony of the Holy Ghost for proofe of this doe meane by Faith Objectum Fidei the Object of Faith that is to bee believed then no question they are out of the ordinary way For God never sent us by any word or warrant of his to looke for any such speciall and private Testimony to prove which that Booke is that we must believe But if by Faith they meane the Habit or Act of Divine infused Faith by which vertue they doe believe the Credible Object and thing to bee believed then their speech is true and confessed by all Divines of all sorts For Faith is the gift * 1. Cor. 12. 3. 4. Datur nobu a Deo c. S. Aug. in Psal. 87. of God of God alone and an infused †Quia homo assentiendo eis quae sunt fidâ—…i clevatur supra Naturam suam oportel quòd hoc inâ—…t ei ex supernaturali pâ—…incipio intâ—…riùs movente quod est Dens Tho. 2 2 ae q. 6. A. 1. c. And your owne Divines agree in this That Fides acquisita is not sufficient for any Article but there must be Fides infusa before there can be Divine Certainty Fides acquisita innititur conjecturis humanis Ad quem modum Saraceni suis Praeceptoribus Iudaei suis Rabinis Gentâ—…s suis Philosophs omnes suis Maj ribus inharent non sic Christians sed per interius lumen infusum à Spiritu Sancto quo firmissimè certissimè moventur ad credenâ—…m c. Canus L. 2. Locor c. 8. §. I am si hac Habit in respect whereof the Soule is meerely recipient And therefore the sole Infuser the Holy Ghost must not beâ—… excluded from that worke which none can doe but Hee For the Holy Ghost as * Symb. Nicen. The Holy Ghost spake by the Prophets c. Et 1. S. Pet. 2. 21. Quis modus est quo doces animas ea quae futura sunt Docuistâ—… enim Prophetas tuos S. Aug. L. 11. Confess c. 19. Hee first dictated the Scripture to the Apostles b Nec enim Ecclesiae Testimonium aut Judicium praedicamus Dei Spiritum vel ab Ecclâ—…sia doceâ—…te vol à nobis audientibus excludimus sed utrobique disertè includimus c. Stapl. trip contr Whitak c. 3. So did he not leave the Church in generall nor the true members of it in particular without Grace to believe what himself had revealed and made Credible So that Faith as it is taken for the vertue of Faith whether it be of this or any other Article c Fides quae caepit ab Ecclesia Testimonio quatenus proponit inducit ad Fidem deâ—…nit in Deo intùs revelante intùs docente quod forts Ecclesia pradicavit Stapl. Relect. Cont. 4. q. 3. a. 2. When grave and learned men doe sometimes hold that of this Principle there is no proofe but by the Testimony of the Spirit c. I thinke it is not their meaning to exclude all outward Proofes c but rather this That all other meanes are uneffectuall of themselves to worke Faith without the speciall Grace of God Hook c. Lib. 3. §. 8. though it receive a kinde of preparation or Occasion of Beginning from the Testimony of the Church as it proposeth and induceth to the Faith yet it ends in God revealing within and teaching within that which the Church preached without For till the Spirit of God move the Heart of man he cannot believe be the Object never so Credible The speech is true then but quite d De habitu Fidei quoad fieri ejus generationem quùm à Deo immediatè solo Dono gratuito infusus est Nihil ad Quastionem nisi quoad hoc quod per Scriptura inspectionem c. Henr. à Gand. Sam. a. 10. q. 1. lit D. out of the State of this Question which inquires onely after a sufficient meanes to make this Object Credible and fit to be believed against all impeachment of folly and temerity in Beliefe whether men do actually believe it or not For which no man may expect inward private Revelation without the externall means of the Church unlesse perhaps the e Stapl. Relect. Cont. 4. Q. 3. A. 2. Doth not onely affirme it but proves it too à paritate rationis in case of necessity where there is no Contempt of the externall meanes case of Neceâ—…ity be excepted when a man lives in such a time place as excludes him from all ordinary means in which I dare not offer to shut up God from the foules of men nor to tie him to those ordinary waies and means to which yet in great wisdome and providence He hath tied and bound all mankind Private Revelation then hath nothing ordinarily to doe to make the Object Credible in this That Scripture is the Word of God or in any other Article For the Question is of such outward and evident meanes as other men may take notice of as well as our selves By which if there arise any Doubting or Infirmity in the Faith others may strengthen us or we affoord meanes to support them Whereas the a Quid cum singulis agitur Deus scit qui agit ipsi cum quibus agitur sciunt Quid autem agatur cum genere Humano per Historiam commendari volâ—…it per Prophetiam S. Aug. de vera Relig. c. 25. Testimony of the Spirit and all private Revelation is within nor felt nor seen of any but him that hath it So that hence can be drawn no proofe to
Divine Authority into internall Arguments found in the Letter it selfe though found by the Helpe and Direction of Tradition without and Grace within And the resolution that is rightly grounded may not endure to pitch and restit selfe upon the Helpes but upon that Divine Light which the Scripture no Question hath in it selfe but is not kindled till these Helps come Thy word is a Light d Psal. 119. 105. Sanctarum Scripturarum Lumen S. Aug. L. de verâ Relig. c. 7. Quid Lucem Scripturarum vanis umbris c. S. Aug. L. de Mor. Eccl. Cathol c. 35. so David A Light Therefore it is as much manifestativum sui as alterius a manifestation to it selfe as to other things which it shewes but still not till the Candle be Lighted not till there hath beene a Preparing Instruction What Light it is Children call the Sunne and Moone Candles Gods Candles They see the light as well as men but cannot distinguish betweene them till some Tradition and Education hath informed their Reason And * 1 Cor. 2. 14. animalis homo the naturall man sees some Light of Morall counsell and instruction in Scripture as well as Believers But he takes all that glorious Lustre for Candle-light and cannot distinguish betweene the Sunne and twelve to the Pound till Tradition of the Church and Gods Grace put to it have cleared his understanding So Tradition of the present Church is the first Morall Motive to Beliefe But the Beliefe it selfe That the Scripture is the Word of God rests †Orig. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 1. went this way yet was he a great deale nearer the prime Tradition then we are For being to proove that the Scriptures were inspired from God he saith De hoc assignabimus ex ipsis Divinis Scripturis quae nos competenter movcrint c. upon the Scripture when a man findes it to answer and exceed all that which the Church gave in Testimony as will after appeare And as in the Voyce of the Primitive and Apostolicall Church there was a Principaliter tamen etiam hîc credimus propter Deum non Apoâ—…olos c. Henr. à Gand. Sum. A. 9. q. 3. Now if where the Apostles themselves spake ultimata resolutio Fidei was in Deum not in ipsos per se much more shall it be in Deum then in praesentem Ecclesiam and into the writings of the Apostles then into the words of their Successors made up into a Tradition simply Divine Authority delivering the Scripture as Gods Word so after Tradition of the present Church hath taught and informed the Soule the Voyce of God is plainly heard in Scripture it selfe And then here 's double Authority and both Divine that confirmes Scripture to be the Word of God Tradition of the Apostles delivering it And the internall worth and argument in the Scripture obvious to a soule prepared by the present Churches Tradition and Gods Grace The Difficulties which are pretended against this are not many and they will easily vanish For first you pretend we go to Private Revelations for Light to know Scripture No we do not you see it is excluded out of the very state of the Question and we go to the Tradition of the present Church and by it as well as you Here we differ we use the Tradition of the present Church as the first Motive not as the Last Resolution of our Faith We Resolve onely into d Calv. Instit. 1. c. 5. §. 2. Christiana Ecclesia Prophetarum scriptis Apostolorum praedicatione initio fundata fuit ubicunque reperietur ea Doctrina c. Prime Tradition Apostolicall and Scripture it selfe Secondly you pretend we do not nor cannot know the prime Apostolicall Tradition but by the Tradition of the present Church and that therefore if the Tradition of the present Church be not Gods unwritten Word and Divine we cannot yet know Scripture to be Scripture by a Divine Authority Well Suppose I could not know the prime Tradition to be Divine but by the present Church yet it doth not follow that therefore I cannot know Scripture to be the Word of God by a Divine Authority because Divine Tradition is not the sole and onely meanes to prove it For suppose I had not nor could have full assurance of Apostolicall Tradition Divine yet the morall perswasion reason and force of the present Church is ground enough to move any reasonable man that it is fit he should read the Scripture and esteeme very reverently and highly of it And this once done the Scripture hath then In and Home-Arguments enough to put a Soule that hath but ordinary Grace out of Doubt That Scripture is the Word of God Infallible and Divine Thirdly you pretend that we make the Scripture absolutely and fully to be knowne Lumine suo by the Light and Testimony which it hath in and gives to it selfe Against this you give reason for your selves and proofe from us Your Reason is If there be sufficient Light in Scripture to shew it selfe then every man that can and doth but read it may know it presently to be the Divine Word of God which we see by daily experience men neither do nor can First it is not absolutely nor universally true There is a And where Hooker uses this very Argument as he doth L. 3. §. 8. his words are not If there bee sufficient Light But if that Light bee Evident sufficient Light therefore every man may see it Blinde men are men and cannot see it and b 1 Cor. 2. 14. sensuall men in the Apostles judgement are such Nor may we deny and put out this Light as insufficient because blinde eyes cannot and perverse eyes will not see it no more then we may deny meat to be sufficient for nourishment though men that are heart-sicke cannot eat it Next we do not say That there is such a full light in Scripture as that every man upon the first sight must yeeld to it such Light as is found in Prime Principles Every whole is greater than a Part of the same and this The same thing cannot be and not be at the same time and in the same respect These carrie a naturall Light with them and evident for the Termes are no sooner understood then the Principles themselves are fully knowne to the convincing of mans understanding and so they are the beginning of knowledge which where it is perfect dwels in full Light but such a full Light we do neither say is nor require to be in Scripture and if any particular man doe let him answer for himselfe The Question is onely of such a Light in Scripture as is of force to breed faith that it is the Word of God not to make a perfect knowledge Now Faith of whatsoever it is this or other Principle is an Evidence a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well as Knowledge and Heb. 11. 1. the Beliefe is firmer then any Knowledge can
be because it rests upon Divine Authority which cannot deceive whereas Knowledge or at least he that thinks he knowes is not ever certaine in Deductions from Principles †§. 16. 〈◊〉 13. But the Evidence is not so deere For it is c Heb. 11. 1. of things not seene in regard of the Object and in regard of the Subject thatsees it is in d 1 Cor. 13. 12. And A. C. confesses p. 52. That this very thing in Question may be known infallibly when 't is knowne but obscurely Et Scotus in 3. Dist. 23 q. 1. fol. 41. B. Hoc modo sacile est videre quomodo â—…ides est cum aenigmate obscuritate Quia Habitus Fidei non credit Articulum esse verum ex Evidentia Objâ—…cti sed propter hoc quod assentit veracitati infâ—…ndentis Habitum in hoc revelantis Credibilia aenigmate in a Glasse or darke speaking Now God doth not require a full Demonstrative Knowledge in us that the Scripture is his Word and therefore in his Providence hath kindled in it no Light for that but he requires our Faith of it and such a certaine Demonstration as may fit that And for that he hath left sufficient Light in Scripture to Reason and Grace meeting where the soule is morally prepared by the Tradition of the Church unlesse you be of Bellarmine's e Bellar. l. 3. de Eccles. c. 14. Credere 〈◊〉 esse divinaâ—… Scripturas non est omninò necessarium ad salutem I will not breake my Discourse to risâ—…e this speech of Bellarmine it is bad enough in the best sense that favour it selfe can give it For if he meane by omninò that it is not altogether or simply necessary to believe there is Divine Scripture and a written Word of God that 's false that being granted which is among all Christians That there is a Scripture And God would never have given a Supernaturall unnecessary thing And if he meanes by omninò that it is not in any wise necessary then it is sensibly false For the greatest upholders of Tradition that ever were made the Scripture very necessary in all the Ages of the Church So it was necessary because it was given and given because God thought it necessary Besides upon Romane Grounds this I thinke will follow That which the Tradition of the present Church delivers as necessary to believe is omninò necessary to salvation But that there are Divine Scriptures the Tradition of the present Church delivers as necessary to believe Therefore to believe there are Divine Scriptures is omninò be the sense of the word what it can necessary to Salvation So Bellarmine is herein foule and unable to stand upon his owne ground And he is the more partly because he avouches this Proposition for truth after the New Testament written And partly because he might have seene the state of this Proposition carefully examined by Gandavo and distinguished by Times Sum. p. 1. A. 8. q. 4. fine Opinion That to believe there are any Divine Scriptures is not omninò necessary to Salvation The Authority which you pretend against this is out of a Lib. 1. §. 14. Hooker Of things necessary the very chiefest is to know what Bookes we are bound to esteeme Holy which Point is confessed impossible for the Scripture it selfe to teach Of this b Protest Apol. Tract 1. §. 10. N. 3. Brierly the Store-house for all Priests that will be idle and yet seeme well read tels us That c L. 2. §. 4. Hooker gives a very sensible Demonstration It is not the Word of God which doth or possibly can assure us that wee doe well to thinke it is His Word for if any one Booke of Scripture did give Testimony to all yet still that Scripture which giveth credit to the rest would require another to give credit unto it Nor could we ever come to any pause to rest our assurance this way so that unlesse beside Scripture there were something that might assure c. And d L. 2. §. 7. L. 3. §. 8. this he acknowledgeth saith Brierly is the Authority of Gods Church Certainely Hooker gives a true and a sensible Demonstration but Brierly wants fidelity and integrity in citing him For in the first place Hooker's speech is Scripture it selfe cannot teach this nor can the Truth say that Scripture it selfe can It must needs ordinarily have Tradition to prepare the minde of a man to receive it And in the next place where he speaks so sensibly That Scripture cannot beare witnesse to it selfe nor one part of it to another that is grounded upon Nature which admits no created thing to bee witnesse to it selfe and is acknowledged by our Saviour e S. Ioh. 5. 31. He speakes of himselfe as man If I beare witnesse to my selfe my witnesse is not true that is is not of force to bee reasonably accepted for Truth But then it is more then manifest S. Ioh. 8. 13. that Hooker delivers his Demonstration of Scripture alone For if Scripture hath another proofe nay many other proofes to usher it and lead it in then no question it can both prove and approve it selfe His words are So that unlesse besides Scripture there be c. Besides Scripture therefore he excludes not Scripture though he call for another Proofe to lead it in and help in assurance namely Tradition which no man that hath his braines about him denies In the two other Places Brierly falsifies shamefully for folding up all that Hooker sayes in these words This other meanes to assure us besides Scripture is the Authority of Gods Church he wrinkles that Worthy Authour desperately and shrinkes up his meaning For in the former place abused by Brierly no man can set a better state of the Question betweene Scripture and Tradition then Hooker doth a L. 2. §. 7. His words are these The Scripture is the ground of our Beliefe The Authority of man that is the Name he gives to Tradition is the Key which opens the doore of entrance into the knowledge of the Scripture I aske now when a man is entred and hath viewed a house and upon viewing likes it and upon liking resolves unchangeably to dwell there doth he set up his Resolution upon the Key that let him in No sure but upon the goodnesse and Commodiousnesse which he sees in the House And this is all the difference that I know betweene us in this Point In which do you grant as you ought to do that we resolve our Faith into Scripture as the Ground and we will never deny that Tradition is the Key that lets us in In the latter place Hooker is as plaine as constant to himselfe and Truth b L. 3. §. 8. His words are The first outward Motive leading men so to esteeme of the Scripture is the Authority of Gods Church c. But afterwards the more wee bestow our Labour in reading or learning the Mysteries thereof the
his abodc on Earth And this Promise of his spirituall presence was to their Successors else why to the end of the world The Apostles did not could not live so long But then to the * Rabanus Manr goes no furrher then that to the End some will alwayes bee in the world fit for Christ by his Spirit and Grace to inhabit Divina mansione inhabitatione digni Rab. in S. Mat. 28. 19 20. Pergatis habentes Dominum Protectorem Ducem saith S. Cypr. L. 4. Epist. 1. But he doth not say How farre sorth And loquitur Fidelibus sicut uni Corpcri S. Chrysost. Homil in S. Matth. And if S Chrysost. inlarge it so farre I hope A. C. will not extend the Assistance given or promised here to the whole Body of the Faithfull to an Infallible and Divine Assistance in every of them as well as in the Pastors and Doctors Successors the Promise goes no further then I am with you alwayes which reaches to continuall assistance but not to Divine and Infallible Or if he think me mistaken let him shew mee any One Father of the Church that extends the sense of this Place to Divine and Infallible Assistance granted hereby to all the Apostles Successors Sure I am Saint †In illis donâ—… quibus salus aliorum quaeritur qualia sunt Prâ—…phetiae interpretationes Sermanum c. Spiritus Sanctus nequaquam semper in Pradicatorib us permanet S. Greg. L. 2. Moral c 29. prin Edit Basil. 1551. Gregory thought otherwise For hee saies plainly That in those Gifts of God which concern other mens salvation of which Preaching of the Gospell is One the Spirit of Christ the Holy Ghost doth not alwayes abide in the Preachers bee they never so lawfully sent Pastors or Doctors of the Church And if the Holy Ghost doth not alwayes abide in the Preachers then most certainly he doth not abide in them to a Divine Infallibility alwayes The Third Place is in S. Iohn 14. where Christ sayes S. Iohn 14. 16. The Comforter the Holy Ghost shall abide with you for ever Most true againe For the Holy Ghost did abide with the Apostles according to Christs Promise there made and shall abide with their Successors for ever to * Iste Consolator non auferetur à Vobis sicut subtrahitur Humaint as mea per mortem sed aternalitèr erit Vobiscum hic per Grasiam in futuro per Gloriam Lyra. in S. John 14. 16 You see there the Holy Ghost shal be present by Consolation and Grace not by Infallible Assistance comfort and preserve them But here 's no Promise of Divine Infallibility made unto them And for that Promise which is made and expresly of Infallibility Saint Iohn 16. though not S. Ioh. 16. 13. cited by A. C. That 's confined to the Apostles onely for the setling of thâ—…m in all Truth And yet not simply all For there are some Truths saith a Omnem veritatem Non arbitror in hac vita in cujusquam mente compleri c. S. Augustin in S. Ioh Tract 96. versus fin Saint Augustine which no mans Soule can comprehend in this life Not simply all But b Spiritus Sanctus c. qui eos doceret Omnem Veritatem quam tunc cum iis loquebatur portare non poterant S. Ioh. 16. 12 13. S. Augustin Tract 97. in S. Ioh. prin all those Truths quae non poterant portare which they were not able to beare when Hee Conversed with them Not simply all but all that was necessary for the Founding propagating establishing and Confirming the Christian Church But if any man take the boldnesse to inlarge this Promise in the fulnesse of it beyond the persons of the Apostles themselves that will fall out which Saint c Omnes vel insipientissimi Haeretici qui se Christianos vocars volunt audacias figmentorum suorum quas maximè exhorret sensus humanus hac Occasione Evangelicae sententiae colorare comentur c. S. Augustin T. 97. in S. Ioh. circamed Augustine hath in a manner prophecyed Every Heretick will shelter himselfe and his Vanities under this Colour of Infallible Veritie I told you a * Num. 26. A. C. p. 52. little before that A. C. his Penne was troubled and failed him Therefore I will helpe to make out his Inference for him that his Cause may have all the strength it can And as I conceive this is that hee would have The Tradition of the present Church is as able to worke in us Divine and Infallible Faith That the Scripture is the VVord of God As that the Bible or Bookes of Scripture now printed and in use is a true Copie of that which was first written by the Penne-men of the Holy Ghost and delivered to the Church 'T is most true the Tradition of the present Church is a like operative and powerfull in and over both these workes but neither Divine nor Infallible in either But as it is the first morall Inducement to perswade that Scripture is the Word of God so is it also the first but morall still that the Bible wee now have is a true Copie of that which was first written But then as in the former so in this latter for the true Copie The last Resolution of our Faith cannot possibly rest upon the naked Tradition of the present Church but must by and with it goe higher to other Helpes and Assurances Where I hope A. C. will confesse wee have greater helpes to discover the truth or falshood of a Copie then wee have meanes to looke into a Tradition Or especially to sift out this Truth that it was a Divine and Infalliâ—…le Revelation by which the Originals of Scripture were first written That being fatre more the Subject of this Inquiry then the Copie which according to Art and Science may be examined by former preceding Copies close up to the very Apostles times But A. C. hath not done yet For in the last place hee tells us That Tradition and Scripture A. C. p. 53. without any vicious Circle doe mutually confirme the Authority either of other And truly for my part I shall easily grant him this so hee will grant mee this other Namely That though they doe mutually yet they doe not equally confirme the Authority either of other For Scripture doth infallibly confirme the Authority of Church Traditions truly so called But Tradition doth but morally and probably confirme the Authority of the Scripture And this is manifest by A. C ' s. owne Similitude For saith he 't is as a Kings Embassadors word of mouth and His Kings Letters beare mutuall witnesse to each other Iust so indeed For His Kings Letters of Credence under hand and seale confirme the Embassadors Authority Infallibly to all that know Seale and hand But the Embassadors word of mouth confirmes His Kings Letters but onely probably For else Why are they called Letters of Credence if they give not him
esso non potest hos esse Libros Canonicos Wal. Doct. fid l. 2. a. 2. c. 20. cui subesse non potest falsum into which no falshood can come but by a Divine Testimony This Testimony is absolute in Scripture it selfe delivered by the Apostles for the Word of God and so sealed to our Soules by the operation of the Holy Ghost That which makes way for this as an b Canus Loc. l. 2 c. 8. facit Ecclesiam Causam sine quanon Introduction and outward motive is the Tradition of the present Church but that neither simply Divine nor sufficient alone into which we may resolve our Faith but only as is †§. 16. before expressed And now to come close to the Particular The time was before this miserable Rent in the Church of Christ which I thinke no true Christian can looke upon but with a bleeding heart that you and Wee were all of One Beliefe That beliefe was tainted in tract and corruption of times very deepely A Division was made yet so that both Parts held the Creed and other Common Principles of Beliefe Of these this was one of the greatest †Inter omnes penè constat aut certè id quod satis est inter me illos cum quibus nunc agitur convenit hoc c. Sic in aliâ Causá cont Manichaos S. Aug. L. de Mor. Eccl. Cath. c. 4. That the Scripture is the VVord of God For our beliefe of all things contained in it depends upon it Since this Division there hath beene nothing done by us to discredit this Principle Nay We have given it all honour and ascribed unto it more sufficiency even to the containing of all things necessary to salvation with * Vin. Lir. cont Hares c. 2. Satis super que enough and more then enough which your selves have not done do not And for begetting and setling a Beliefe of this Principle we goe the same way with you and a better besides The same way with you Because we allow the Tradition of the present Church to be the first induceing Motive to embrace this Principle onely we cannot goe so farre in this way as you to make the present Tradition alwayes an Infallible VVord of God unwritten For this is to goe so farre in till you be out of the way For Tradition is but a Lane in the Church it hath an end not only to receive us in but another after to let us out into more open and richer ground And We go a better way then you Because after we are moved and prepared and induced by Tradition we resolve our Faith into that Written Word and God delivering it in which we finde materially though not in Termes the very Tradition that led us thither And so we are sure by Divine Authority that we are in the way because at the end we find the way proved And doe what can be done you can never settle the Faith of man about this great Principle till you rise to greater assurance then the Present Church alone can give And therefore once againe to that known place of S. Augustine * Contr. Epist. Fund c. 5. The words of the Father are Nisi commoveret Vnlesse the Authority of the Church mooved me but not alone but with other Motives eâ—…se it were not commovere to move together And the other Motives are Resolvers though this be Leader Now since we goe the same way with you so farre as you goe right and a better way then you where you go wrong we need not admit any other Word of God then We doc And this ought to remaine as a Presupposed Principle among all Christians and not so much as come into this Question about the sufficiency of Scripture betweene you and us But you say that F. From this the Lady called us and desiring to heare VVhether the Bishop would grant the Romane Church to be the Right Church The B. granted That it was B One occasion which mooved Tertullian to § 20 write his Booke de Praescript adversùs Haereticos was That he * Pamel in Summar Lib Uiaens Disputationibus â—…ihil ant parum profici saw little or no Profit come by Disputations Sure the Ground was the same then and now It was not to deny that Disputation is an Opening of the Vnderstanding a sifting out of Truth it was not to affirme that any such Disquisition is in and of it selfe unprofitable If it had S. Stephen a Acts 6 9. would not have disputed with the Cyrenians nor S. Paul with the b Acts. 9. 29. Grecians first and then with the Iewes c Acts 19. 17. and all Commers No sure it was some Abuse in the Disputants that frustrated the good of the Disputation And one Abuse in the Disputants is a Resolution to hold their own though it â—…e by unworthy means and disparagement d Debilitaetur generosa indoles conjecta in argutias Sen. Aep 48. of truth And so I finde it here For as it is true that this Question was asked so it is altogether false that it was asked in this * Here A. C. hath nothing to say but that the Iesuite did not affirme That the Lady askâ—…d this Question in this or any other precise forme No why the words preceding are the Iesuites own Therefore if these were not the Ladies words he wrongs her not I him forme or so Answâ—…red There is a great deale of Difference especially as Romanists handle the Question of the Church between The Church and A Church and there is some betvveene a True Church and a Right Church vvhich is the vvord you use but no man else that I knovv I am sure not I. For The Church may import in our Language The only true Church and perhaps as some of you seeme to make it the Root and the Ground of the Catholike And this I never did grant of the Romane Church nor ever meane to doe But A Church can imply no more then that it is a member of the Whole And this I never did nor ever will deny if it fall not absolutely away from Christ. That it is a True Church I granted also but not a Right as you impose upon me For Ens and Verum Being and True are convertible one with another and every thing that hath a Being is truly that Being which it is in truth of Substance But this word Right is not so used but is referd more properly to perfection in Conditions And in this sense every thing that hath a true and reall Being is not by and by Right in the Conâ—…itions of it A man that is most dishonest and unworthy the name a very Thiefe if you will is a True man in the verity of his Essence as he is a Creature endued with Reason for this none can steale from him nor he from himselfe but Death But he is not therefore a Right or an upright man And a Church that is
exceeding corrupt both in Manners and Doctrine and so a dishonour to the Name is yet a True Church in the verity of Essence as a Church is a Company of men which professe the Faith of Christ and are Baptized into His Name But yet it is not therefore a Right Church either in Doctrine or Manners It may be you meant cunningly to slip in this word Right that I might at unwares grant it Orthodox But I was not so to be caught For I know well that Orthodox Christians are keepers of integrity and followers of right things so a Integritatis custodes recta sectantes De vera Relig. c. 5. S Augustine of which the Church of Rome at this day is neither In this sense then no Right that is no Orthodox Church at Rome And yet no Newes it is that I granted the Romane Church to be a True Church For so much very learned Protestants b Hooker l. 3. §. 1. Iunius l. de Ec. c. 17. Falluntur qui Ecclesiam negant quiâ—… Papatus in ea est Reynold Thes. 5. Negat tantum esse Catholicam vel sanuÌ„â—…jus membrum Nay the very Separatists grant it Fr. Johnson in his Treatise called A Christian Plea Printed 1617. p. 123. c. have acknowledged before me and the Truth cannot deny it For that Church which receives the Scripture as a Rule of Faith though but as a partiall and imperfect Rule and both the Sacraments as Instrumentall Causes and Seales of Grace though they adde more and misuse these yet cannot but be a True Church in essence How it is in Manners and Doctrine I would you would looke to it with a single eye c Si tamen bono ingenio Pictas Pax quaeda mentis accedat sine quá de sanctis rebus nihil prorsus intelligi potest S. Aug. de Vâ—… Cred. c. 18. For if Piety and a Peaceable mind be not joyned to a good understanding nothing can be knowne in these great things Here AC tells us That the Iesuite doth not say that the Lady asked this Question in this or any other precise forme A. C. p. 53. of words But saith the Iesuite is sure her desire was to know of me whether I would grant the Romane Church to be the right Church And how was the Iesuite sure the Lady desired to heare this from me Why A. C. tells us that too For he addes That the Iesuite had particularly spoken with her before A. C. p. 54. and wished her to insist upon that Poynt Where you may see and 't is fit the Clergie of England should consider with what cunning Adversaries they have to deale who can finde a way to d And after A. C. saith againe p. 54. that the Lady did not aske the Question as if she meant to be satisfied with hearing what I said So belike they take Caâ—…tion before hand for that too That what ever we say unlesse we grant what they would have their Proâ—…elytes shall not be satisfied wiâ—…hit prepare their Disciples and instruct them before hand upon what Poynts to insist that so they may with more ease slide that into their hearts and consciences which should never come there And this once known I hope they will the better provide against it But A. C. goes on and tells us That certainly A. C. p. 54. by my Answer the Ladies desire must needs be to beare from me not whether the Church of Rome were a right Church c. but whether I would grant that there is but one holy Catholike Church and whether the Romane Church that is not only that which is in the City or Diocesse of Rome but all that agreed with it be not it About A Church and The Church I have said enough †§. 20. N. 1. before and shall not repeat Nor is there any need I should For A. C. would have it The Church The One Holy Catholike Church But this cannot be granted take the Roman Church in what sense they please in City or Diocesse or all that agree with it Yet howsoever before I leave this I must acquaint the Reader with a perfect Iesuitisme In all the Primitive Times of the Church a Man or a Family or a Nationall Church were accounted Right and Orthodox as they agreed w th the Catholike Church But the Catholike was never then measured or judged by Man Family or Nation But now in the Iesuites new schole The One Holy * And though Stapleton to magnifie the Church of Rome is pâ—…eased to say Apud veteres pro codem habit a fuit Ecclesia Romana Ecclesia Catholica yet he is â—…o modest as to give this Reason of it Quia ejus Communio erat evident èr certissimè cum tota Catholicá Relect. Con. 1. q. 5. A. 3. Lo The Comâ—…union of the Romane was then with the Catholike Church not of the Catholike with iâ—… Anâ—… S. Cyprian imployed his Legates Caldonius and Fortunatus not to bring the Catholike Church o the Communion of Rome buâ—… Rome to the Catholike Church Elaborarâ—…nt ut ad Cath licae Ecclesiae unitatâ—…m 〈◊〉 Corporis membra 〈◊〉 c Now the Memâ—…ers of this Râ—… and tâ—…rne Body were they of Rome then in an open Schisme betweene Cornâ—…ius and Novatian S. Cypr. L. 2. Epist. 10. Catholike Church must bee measured by that which is in the City or Diocesse of Rome or of them which agreed with it and not Rome by the Catholike For so A. C. sayes expresly The Laâ—…y would know of me not whether that were the Catholike Church to which Rome agreed but whether that were not the Holy Catholike Church which agreed with Rome So upon the matter belike the Christian Faith was committed to the Custody of the Romane not of the Catholike Church And a man cannot agree with the Catholike Church of Christ in this new Doctrine of A. C. unlessâ—… he agree with the Church of Rome but if he agree with that all 's safe and he is as Orthodox as he need be But A. C. is yet troubled about the forme of the Ladies Question And he will not have it That She desired to know whether I would grant the Romane Church to be the Right Church Though these be her words according to the Iesuites owne setting downe but he thinkes the Question was Whether the Church of Rome was not the Right Church not Be not but was not Was not That is was not once or in time past the Right A. C. p. 54. Church before Luther and others made a breach from it Why truly A. C. needed not have troubled himselfe halfe so much about this For let him take his Choise It shall be all one to me whether the Question were asked by Be or by Was For the Church of Rome neither is nor was the Right Church as the Lady desired to heare A Particular Church it is and was and in some times right and in some times wrong
and then in some things right and in some things wrong But The Right Church or The Holy Catholike Church it never was nor ever can be And therefore was not such before Luther and Others either left it or were thrust from it A Particular Church it was But then A. C. is not distinct enough here neither For the Church of Rome both was and was not a Right or Orthodox Church before Luther made a Breach from it For the word Ante Before may looke upon Rome and that Church a great way off or long before and then in the Prime times of it it was a most Right and Orthodox Church But it may looke also nearer home and upon the immediate times before Luther or some Ages before that And then in those times * Câ—… infiniti Abusus Schismata quoque Haereses per totum nunc Christianum Orbem invalescant Ecclesiam Dei legitimâ indigere Reformatione nemini non apertum erit Pet. de Aliaco Card. Cameracensis L. de Refor Ecclesiae And if Schismeâ—… and Heresies did then invade the whole Christian world let A. C. consider how Rome scaped free And I thinke Cameracensis was in this Propheticall For sixty yeares and more before Luther was borne and so before the great troubles which have since fallen upon all Christendome he used these words in the Booke which himselfe delivered up in the Councell of Constance Nisi celeriter fiat Reformatio aâ—…deo dicere quod licet magna sint quae videmus tamen in brevi incomparabiliter majora videbimus Et post ista tonitrua tam horrenda majora alia audienâ—…s c. Cam. l. de Refor Eccle. And it will hardly sinke into any mans judgement that so great a man as Pet. de Aliaco was in that Church should speake thus if he did not see some errors in the Doctrine of that Church as well as in Manners Nay Cassander though he lived and dyed in the Communion of the Church of Rome yet found fault with some of her Doctrines Consulta Artic. 21. 22. And Pope Iulius the third Professed at Bononia in Sacramentorum Ecclesiae ministerium innumerabiles Abusus irrepsissâ—… Espenâ—…us in Tit. 1. and yet he was one of the Bishops nay the chiefe Legat in the Councell of Trent Rome was a Corrupt and a tainted Church farre from being Right And yet both these times Before Luther made his Breach So here A. C. should have beene more distinct For the word Before includes the whole time before Luther in part of which time that Church of Rome was Right and in other part whereof it was wrong But A. C. addes yet That I suspected the Lady would inferre if once that Church were Right what hindred it now to be Since that did not depart A. C. p. 54. from the Protestant Church but the Protestant Church from it Truly I neither suspected the Inference would be made nor feare it when it is made For 't is no Newes that any Particular Church Romane as well as another may once have beene Right and afterwards wrong and in farre worse case And so it vvas in Rome after the enemy had sowed tares among the wheat †S. Mat. 13. 25. S Mat. 13 But whether these Tares were sovven vvhile their Bishops slept or vvhether * For A. C. knowes well what strange Doctrines are charged upon some Popes And all Bellarmines labour though great and full of art is not able to wash them cleane Bellarm. L. 4. dâ—… Rom. Pont. c. 8. c. Et Papas quosdam graves errores seminâsse in Ecclesia Christi luâ—…arius est Et probâ—…ur à laco Almain Opusc. de Autho. Ecclesiae c. 10. And Cassander speakes it out more plaâ—…ly Vâ—…inam Illi He speaks of the Biâ—…hops and Rectors in the Romane Church à quâ—…bus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—…sset non Ipsi Superstâ—…num Auctores â—…sent â—…el 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Animis homâ—…um simpliâ—…um aliquando 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Coâ—…sulta Art 21. 〈◊〉 finem They themselves did not helpe to sovv them is too large a Disquisition for this Place So though it were once Right yet the Tares which grow thick in it are the Cause why 't is not so now And then though that Church did not depart from the Protestants Church yet if it gave great and just Cause for the Protestant Church to depart from the Errours of it while it in some Particulars departed from the Truth of Christ it comes all to one for this Particular That the Romane Church which was once right is now become wrong by embracing Superstition and Errour F. Farther he confessed That Protestants had made a Rent and Division from it B. I confesse I could here be heartily a Grave omninò crimen sed defensionem longinquam non requirit satis est enim negare sicâ—…t pro Ecclesiâ olim S. Aug. de Util. Cred. c. 5. angry but § 21 that I have resolved in handling matters of Religion to leave all gall out of my Ink For I never granted that the Romane Church either is or was the right Church 'T is too true indeed that there is a miserable Rent in the Church and I make no Question but the best men doe most bemoane it b Hanc quae respectu hominum Ecclesia dicitur observare 〈◊〉 Communionem colere debemus Calv. Inst. 4. c. 1 nor is he a Christian that would not have Vnity might he have it with Truth But I never said nor thought §. 7. that the Protestants made this Rent The Cause of the Schisme is yours for you thrust us from you because we called for Truth and Redresse of Abuses For a c Rectè scias nos secisse recedendo à vobis c. Lucif L. de Non conveniendo cum Haereticis He speakes of the Arrians and I shall not compare you with them nor give any Offence that way I shall onely draw the generall argument from it thus If the Orthodoxe did well in departing from the Arrians then the Schisme was to be imputed to the Arrians although the Orthodoxe did depart from them Otherwise if the Orthodoxe had beene guilty of the Schisme he could not have said Rectè scias nos fecisse recedendo For it cannot be that a man should do well in making a Schisme There may be therefore a necessary separation which yet incurres not the blame of Schisme And that is when Doctrines are taught contrary to the Catholike Faith Schisme must needs be theirs whose the Cause of it is The Woe runs full out of the mouth of * S. Mat. 18. 7. Christ ever against him that gives the Offence not against him that takes it ever But you have by this carriage given me just cause never to treat with you or your like but before a Iudge or a Iurie But here A. C. tels me I had no cause to be angry either with the Jesuite or my selfe Not with the Iesuite A. C. p. 55 56. for he
suum praeferat tanquam ipse solus Spiritum Dei habeat S. Bern. Serm. 3. ae Resurr But Saint Bernard not so For these last words of all the Christian Churches in the world are not in Saint Bernard And whether Toti Congregationi implie more in that Place then a Particular Church is not very manifest Nay I thinke 't is plaine that hee speakes both of and to that particular Congregation to which he was then preaching And I believe A. C. will not easily finde where tota Congregatio the whole Congregation is used in S. Bernard or any other of the Fathers for the whole Catholike Church of Christ. And howsoever the meaning of S. Bernard be 't is one thing for a private man Iudicium suum praeferre to preferre and so follow his private Iudgement before the Whole Congregation which is indeed Lepra proprii Consilii as S. Bernard there cals it the proud Leprosie of the Private Spirit And quite another thing for an Intelligent man and in some things unsatisfied modestly to propose his doubts even to the Catholike Church And much more may a whole Nationall Church nay the whole Body of the Protestants doe it And for S Augustine the Place alledged out of him is a knowne Place And he speakes indeed of the Whole Catholike Church And he * Similiter etiam siquid horum tota per Orbem frequentat Ecclesia Nam hinc quin it a faciendum fit disput are Insolentissimae Insaniae est S. Aug. Epist. 118. c. 5. sayes and hee sayes it truly 'T is a part of most insolent madnesse for any Man to dispute whether that bee to bee done which is usually done in and thorough the whole Catholike Church of Christ. Where first here 's not a word of the Romane Church but of that which is tota per Orbem all over the World Catholike which Rome never yet was Secondly A. C. applies this to A. C. p. 56. the Romane Faith whereas S. Augustine speakes there expresly of the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church and a Quaeris quid per quintam Feriam ultime hebdom adis Quadragesimae fiers debet An offerendum sit manè c. S. Aug. Ibid. particularly about the Manner of Offering upon Maundy-Thursday whether it be in the Morning or after Supper or both Thirdly 't is manifest by the words themselves that S. Augustine speakes of no Matter of Faith there Romane nor Catholike For Frequentat and b And so Bellarmine most expresly But then he adds Universam Ecclesiam non posse errare non solùm in Credendo sed nec in Operando praesertim in Ritu Cultu Divino L 4. de Verb. Dei c. 9. §. 4 And if this be true what is it to Rome Faciendum are for Things done and to be done not for Things believed or to be believed So here 's not One Word for the Romane Faith in either of these Places And after this I hope you will the lesse wonder at A. C s. Boldnesse Lastly a right sober man may without the least Touch of Insolency or Madnesse dispute a Businesse of Religion with the Romane either Church or Prelate As all men know c Euseb. L. 5. Hist. Eccl. c. 26 Et Socrat. L. 5. Hist. c. 22. Irenaeus did with Victor so it bee with Modesty and for the finding out or Confirming of Truth free from Vanity and purposed Opposition against even a Particular Church But in any other way to dispute the Whole Catholike Church is just that which S Augustine cals it Insolent Madnesse But now were it so that the Church of Rome were Orthedoxe in all things yet the Faith by the Jesuite's leave is not simply to be called the Romane but the Christian and the Catholike Faith And yet A. C. will not understand A. C. p. 56. this but Roman and Catholike whether Church or Faith must be one and the same with him and therefore inferres That there can be no just Cause to make a Schisme or Division from the whole Church For the whole Church cannot universally erre in Doctrine of Faith That the whole Church cannot universally erre in the Doctrine of Faith is most true and 't is granted by diverse †Quaestio est An Ecclesia totalis toteliter 〈◊〉 1. pro omnibus simul Electis dum sunt Membra Mâ—…tis Ecclesiae possint errare vel in totâ fiâ—…e vel in gravi aliquo fidei puncto Et respondemus simplicitèr 〈◊〉 esse impossibile Keckerm Syst. Theol. p. 387 Edit Hannoviae An. 1602. Calvinus caeteri Haeretici concedunt Ecclesiam absolutè non posse deficcre Sed dicunt intelligi debere de Ecclesia Inviâ—… Bellarm. L. 3. de Eccles Milit. c. 13. §. 1. But this Exception of Bellarmine's that the Protestants whom out of his Liberality he cals Hereticks speake of the Inâ—…isible Church is meerely frivolous For the Church of the Elect is in the Church of them that are Called and the Invisible Church in the Visible Therefore if the whole Church of the Elect cannot erre in Fundamentals the whole Visible Church in which the same Elect are cannot erre Now that the Invisible Church of the Elect is in the Visible is manifest out of S. Aug. Ipsa est Ecclesia quae intra sagenam Dominicam cum malis piscibus natat S. Aug. Epist. 48. Grana sunt inter illam palcam quando Area cum videretur tota palea putabatur S. Aug. in Psal. 121. And this is proved at large by Hooker L. 3. Eccles. Pol. §. 1. For els the Elect or Invisible Church is tyed to no duty of Christianity For all such Duties are required of the Church as 't is Visible and performed in the Church as 't is Visible And D r. Field speakes as plainly we hold it impossible that the Church should ever by Apostasie and Misbeliefe wholly depart from God c. So we hold that it never fals into Heresie So that Bellarmine is as much to be blamed for idle and needlesse busying himselfe to prove That the Visible Church never fals into Heresie which we most willingly grant Field L. 4. de Eccles. c. 2. Taking the Church for all the Beleevers now living and in things necessary to be knowne expresly Ibid. And Bellarmine himself adds Calvinus dicit hanc Propositionem Ecclesia non potest errare veram esse si intelligatur cum duplici restrictione Prima est si non proponat Dogmata extra Scripturam c. And indeed Calvin doth say so L. 4 Instit. c. 8. §. 13. Secunda est si intelligatur de solâ Ecclesiâ Universali non autem de Representativâ Bellar. L. 3. de Eccl. Milit c. 14. §. 2. And I hope it is as good and a better Restriction in Calvin To say the Catholike Church cannot erre if it keepe to the Scripture then for Bellarmine to say The particular Church of Rome cannot erre because of the Pope's residing there or the Pope cannot
erre if he keepe his chaire which yet he affirmes L. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 4. §. 2. Protestants so you will but understand it s not erring in Absolute Fundamentall Doctrines And therefore 't is true also that there can bee no just Cause to make a Schisme from the whole Church But here 's the Iesuite's Cunning. The whole Church with him is the Romane and those parts of Christendome which subject themselves to the Romane Bishop All other parts of Christendome are in Heresie and Schisme and what A. C. pleases Nay soft For another Church may separate from Rome if Rome will separate from Christ. And so farre as it separates from Him and the Faith so farre may another Church sever from it And thâ—…s is all that the Learned Protestants doe or can say And I am sure all that ever the Church of England hath either said or done And that the whole Church cannot erre in Doctrines absolutely Fundamentall and Necessary to all mens Saâ—…vation besides the Authority of these Protestants most of them being of prime ranke seemes to me to be cleare by the Promise of Christ S. Matth. 16 â—…hat the gates of Hell shall not prevaile S. Matth. 16. 18. against it Whereas most certaine it is that the Gates of Hell prevaile very farre against it if the Whole Militant Church universally taken can Erre from or in the Foundation But then this Power of not Erring is not to be conceived as if it were in the Church primò per se Originally or by any power it hath of it selfe For the Church is constituted of Men and Humanum est errare all men can erre But this Power is in it partly by the vertue of this Promise of Christ and partly by the Matter which it teacheth which is the unerring Word of God so plainely and manifestly delivered to her as that it is not possible she should universally fall from it or teach against it in things absolutely necessary to Salvation Besides it would be well waighed whether to believe or teach otherwise will not impeach the Article of the Creed concerning the Holy Catholike Church which we professe we believe For the Holy Catholike Church there spoken of containes not onely the whole Militant Church on earth but the whole Triumphant also in Heaven For so †Ecclesia hic tota accipiâ—…da est non solum ex parâ—…e quà pâ—…rinatur â—…terris c. vâ—…tiam ex illa parte quae in coelâ—… c. S. Aug. Eâ—…hir c 56. S. Augustine hath long since taught me Now if the whole Catholike Church in this large extent be Holy then certainly the whole Militant Church is Holy as well as the Triumphant though in a far lower degree in as much as all * Nemo ex toto Sanctus Optat. L 7 contra Parmen Sanctification all Holinesse is imperfect in this life as well in Churches as in Men. Holy then the whole Militant Church is For that which the Apostle speakes of Abraham is true of the Church which is a Body Collective made up of the spirituall seed of Abraham Rom. 11. If the root be holy so are the branches Well then the whole Militant Church is Holy Rom. 11. 16. and so we believe Why but will it not follow then Thaâ—… the whole Militant Church cannot possibly erre in the Foundations of the Faith That she may erre in Superstructures and Deductions and other by and unnecessary Truths if her Curiosity or other weaknesse carry her beyond or cause her to fall short of her Rule no doubt need be made But if She can erre either from the Foundation or in it She can be no longer Holy and that Article of the Creed is gone For if She can erre quite from the Foundation then She is nor Holy nor Church but becomes an Infidell Now this cannot be For †Dum Christus or at in Excelso Návicula id est Eâ—…clesia â—…tur fluctibus in profundo c sed quia Christus orat non potest mergi S. Aug. Serm 14 de Verb. Domi. c 2. Et Bâ—…llar L. 3 ac Eccle Milit c. 13. Praesidiâ—… Christi fulâ—…itur Ecclâ—…siae perpetuitas ut inter turbulentas aâ—…itationes formiâ—…abiles mâ—…tus c. salva tamâ—…n maneat Câ—… L. 2. Instit c. 15. §. 3. Ipsa Symboli 〈◊〉 admonemur perpetuam residâ—…re in Ecclesia Christi remission m Peccatorum Calv. L. 4. Inst. c. 1. §. 17. Now remission of sins cannot be perpetuall in the Church if the Church it selfe be 〈◊〉 perpetuall But the Church it selfe cannot be perpetuall if it fall away all Divine Ancient and Moderne Romanists and Reformers agree in this That the whole Militant Church of Christ cannot fall away into generall Apostacy And if She Erre in the Foundation that is in some one or more Fundamentall Poynts of Faith then Shee may bee a Church of Christ still but not Holy but becomes Hereticall And most certain it is that no * Spiritus Sanctificationis non pâ—…ost inveniri in Haereticorum mentibus S. Hierom in Ierom. 10. Assemâ—…ly be it never so generall of such Hereticks is or can be Holy Other Errors that are of a meaner alay take not Holinesse from the Church but these that are dyed in graine cannot consist with Holinesse of which Faith in Christ is the very Foundation And therefore if we will keepe up our Creed the whole Militant Church must be still Holy For if it be not so still then there may be a time that Falsum may subesse Fidei Catholicae that falshood and that in a high degree in the very Article may be the Subject of the Catholike Faith which were no lesse then Blasphemy to affirme For we must still believe the Holy Catholike Church And if She be not still Holy then at that time when She is not so we believe a Falshood under the Article of the Catholike Faith Therefore a very dangerous thing it is to cry out in generall termes That the whole Catholike Militant Church can Erre and not limit nor distinguish in time that it can erre indeed for Ignorance it hath and Ignorance can Erre But Erre it cannot either by falling totally from the Foundation or by Hereticall Error in it For the Holinesse of the Church consists as much if not more in the Verity of the Faith as in the Integrity of Manners taught and Commanded in the Doctrine of Faith Now in this Discourse A. C. thinkes he hath met with me For he tells me that I may not only safely grant A. C. p. 56. that Protestants made the Division that is nâ—…w in the Church but further also and that with a safe Confidence as one did was it not you saith he That it was ill done of those who did first made the Separation Truly I doe not now remember whether I said it or no. But because A. C. shall have full satisfaction from me and without any Tergiversation if I did not
that give just Cause to continue a Separation But for free-hearings or safe Conducts I have said enough till that Church doe not only say bnt doe otherwise And as for Truth and Peace they are in every mans mouth with you and with us But lay they but halfe so close to the hearts of men as they are common on their tongues it would soone be better with Christendome then at this day it is or is like to be And for the Protestants in generall I hope they seeke both Truth and Peace sincerely The Church of England I am sure doth and hath taught me to †Beseeching God to inspire continually the Vniversall Church with the Spirit of truth unity and concord c. In the Prayer for the Militant Church And in the third Collect on Good-friday pray for both as I most heartily doe But what Rome doth in this if the world will not see I will not Censure And for that which A. C. addes That such a free hearing is more then ever the English Catholikes could obtaine A. C. p. 57. though they have often offered and desired it and that but under the Princes word And that no Answer hath nor no good Answer can be given And he cites Campian for it How farre or how often this hath beene asked by the English Rommists I cannot tell nor what Answer hath beene given them But surely Campian was too bold and so is A. C. too to say * Campian praefat Rationsbut praefixà Honestum responsum nullum no good Answer can be given For this I thinke is a very good Answer That the Kings and the Church of England had no Reason to admit of a Publike Dispute with the English Romish Clergie till they shall be able to shew it under the Seale or Powers of Rome That that Church will submit to a Third who may be an Indifferent Iudge betweene us and them or to such a Generall Councell as is after * §. 26. Nu. 1. mentioned And this is an Honest and I thinke a full Answer And without this all Disputation must end in Clamour And therefore the more publike the worse Because as the Clamour is the greater so perhaps will be the Schisme too F. Moreover he said he would ingenuously acknowledge That the Corruption of Manners in the Romish Church was not a sufficient Cause to justifie their Departing from it B. I would I could say you did as ingenuously repeat § 22 as I did Confesse For I never said That Corruption of Manners was or was not a sufficient Cause to justifie their Departure How could I say this since I did not grant that they did Depart otherwise then is * §. 21. N. 6. before expressed There is difference between Departure and causelâ—…sse Thrusting from you For out of the Church is not in your Power God bee thanked to thrust us Think on that And so much I said expresly then That which I did ingenuously confesse was this That Corruption in Manners only is no sufficient Cause to make a Separation in the Church a Modò ea qùae ad CathedraÌ„ pertinent recta praecipiant S. Hier. Ep. 236. Nor is it It is a Truth agreed on by the Fathers and received by Divines of all sorts save by the Cathari to whom the Donatist and the Anabaptist after accorded And against whom b L. 4. Instit. c. 1. §. 13. c. Ep. 48. A malis piscibus corde semper moribus seâ—…arantur c. Corporalem separationem in â—…tore maris hoc est in fine saculi expectant Calvin disputes it strongly And S. Augustine is plaine There are bad fish in the Net of the Lord from which there must be ever a Separation in heart and in manners but a corporali 〈◊〉 must be expected at the Sea shore that is the end of the world And the best fish that are must not teare and breake the Net because the bad are with them And this is as ingenuously Confessed for you as by me For if Corruption in Manners were a just Cause of Actuall Separation of one Church from another in that Catholike Body of Christ the Church of Rome hath given as great cause as any since as * Uix ullum peccatum solâ—… Haeresi exceptá câ—…gitari potest quo illa Sedes â—…urpiter maculata non fucrit maxime ab An 8â—…0 Relect Cont. 1. q. 5. Art 3. Stapleton grants there is scarce any sinne that can be thought by man Heresie only excepted with which that Sea hath not been fouly stained especially from eight hundred yeares after Christ. And he need not except Haeresie into which a Biel in Can. Miss Lect. 23. Biel grants it possible the Bishops of that Sea may fall And †Stel. in S. Luc. c 22 Almain in 3. Sent. d. 24. q. 1 fine Multae sunt Decretales haereticae c. And so they erred as Popes Stella and Almaine gâ—…ant it freely that some of them did fall and so ceased to be Heads of the Church and left Christ God be thanked at that time of his Vicars defection to looke to his Cure himselfe F. But saith he beside Corruption of Manners there were also Errors in Doctrine B. This I spake indeed And can you prove that § 23 I spake not true in this But I added though here againe you are pleased to omit it That some of the errors of the Roman Church were dangerous to salvation For it is not every light Eâ—…ror in Disputable Doctrine and Points of curious Speculation that can bee a just Cause of Separation in that Admirable Body of Christ which is his * Eph. 1. 23. Church or of one Member of it from another For hee gave his Naturall Body to bee rent and torne upon the Crosse that his Mysticall Body might be One. And S. †S. Aug. Ep. 50. Et iterum Colum ba non sunt qui EcclesiaÌ„ dissipant Accipitres sunt Milvi sunt Non laniat Columba c. S. Aug. tract 5. in S. Iohn Augustine inferres upon it That â—…e is no way partaker of Divine Charity that is an enemie to this Vnity Now what Errors in Doctrine may give just Cause of Separation in this Body or the Parts of it one from another were it never so easie to determine as I thinke it is most difficult I would not venture to set it downe in particular least in these times of Discord I might bee thought to open a Doore for Schisme which surely I will never doe unlesse it be to let it out But that there are Errors in Doctrine and some of them such as most manifestly endanger salvation in the Church of Rome is evident to them that will not shut their Eyes The proofe whereof runnes through the Particular Points that are betweene us and so is too long for this Discourse Now here A. C. would faine have a Reason given him Why I did endeavour A. C. p. 55. to shew what Cause
the Protestants had to make that Rent or Division if I did not grant that they made it Why truly in this reasonable demand I will satisfie him I did it partly because I had granted in the generall that Corruption in Manners was no sufficient cause of Separation of one Particular Church from another and therefore it lay upon me at least to Name in generall what was And partly because he and his Partie will needes have it so that we did make the Separation And therefore though I did not grant it yet amisse I thought it could not be to Declare by way of Supposition that if the Protestants did at first Separate from the Church of Rome they had reason so to doe For A. C. himselfe confesses A. C. p. 56. That Error in Doctrine of the Faith is a just Cause of Separation so just as that no Cause is just but that Now had I leasure to descend into Particulars or will to make the Rent in the Church wider 't is no hard matter to proove that the Church of Rome hath erred in the Doctrine of Faith and dangerously too And I doubt I shall afterwards descend to Particulars A. C. his Importunity forcing me to it F. Which when the Generall Church would not Reforme it was lawfull for Particular Churches to Reforme themselves B. Is it then such a strange thing that a Particular § 24 Church may reforme it selfe if the Generall will not I had thought and do so still That in Point of Reformation of either Manners or Doctrine it is lawfull for the Church sinoe Christ to doe as the Church before Christ did and might do The Church before Christ consisted of Iewes and Proselytes This Church came to have a Separation upon a most ungodly Policie of a 3. Reg. 12. 27. Ieroboam's so that it never peeced together againe To a Common Councell to reforme all they would not come Was it not lawfull for Iudah to reforme her selfe when Israel would not joyne Sure it was or els the Prophet deceives me that sayes expresly b Hos. 4. 15. Though Israel transgresse yet let not Iudah sinne And S. Hierome c Super Haereticis prona intelligentia est S. Hier Ibid. expounds it of this very particular sinne of Heresie and Errour in Religion Nor can you say that d Non tamen cessavit Deus populum hunc arguere per Prophetas Nam ibi extiter unt Magni illi insignes Prophetae Elias Elizaeus c. S. Aug. L. 17. de Civit. Dei c. 22. Multi religiosè intra se Dei cultum habebant c. De quo numero eorumvè Posteris septem illa miâ—…ia fuisse statuo qui in Persecutione sub Achabo Deum sibi ab Idololatriâ immunes reservârunt nec genua ante Baal flexerunt Fran. Monceius L. 1. de Vit. Aureo c. 12. Israel from the time of the Separation was not a Church for there were true Prophets in it e 3. Reg. 17. sub Achabo Elias and f 4. Reg. 3. sub Iehoram filio Achabi Elizaeus and others and g 3. Reg. 19. 18. thousands that had not bowed knees to Baal And there was salvation for these which cannot be in the Ordinary way where there is no Church And God threatens h Hos. 9. 17. to cast them away to wander among the Nations and be no Congregation no Church therefore he had not yet cast them away in Non Ecclesiam into no-No-Church And they are expresly called the People of the Lord in i 4. Reg. 9. 6. Iehu's time and so continued long after Nor can you plead that Iudah is your part and the Ten Tribes ours as some of you doe for if that bee true you must grant that the Multitude and greater number is ours And where then is Multitude your numerous Note of the Church For the Ten Tribes were more then the two But you cannot plead it For certainly if any Calves be set up they are in Dan and in Bethel They are not ours Besides to reforme what is amisse in Doctrine or Manners is as lawfull for a Particular Church as it is to publish and promulgate any thing that is Catholike in either And your Question Quo Judice lies alike against both And yet I thinke it may be proved that the Church of Rome and that as a Particular Church did promulgate an Orthodoxe Truth which was not then Catholikely admitted in the Church namely The Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Sonne If she erred in this Fact confesse her Errour if she erred not why may not another Particular Church doe as shee did A learned Schoole-man of yours saith she may †Non oportuit ad hac cos vocare quum Authoritas fuerit publicandi apud siaâ—… Romanam pracipuè cùm unicuique ctiam particulari Ecclesiaeliceat id quod Catholicum est promulgare Alb. Mag. in 1. Dist. 11. A. 9. The Church of Rome needed not to call the Grecians to agree upon this Truth fince the Authority of publishing it was in the Church of Rome especially since it is lawfull for every particular Church to promulgate that which is Catholike Nor can you say he m anes Catholike as fore determined by the Church in generall for so this Point when Rome added Filioque to the Creed of a Generall Councell was not And how the Grecians were used in the after-Councell such as it was of Florence is not to trouble this Dispute But Catholike stands there for that which is so in the nature of it and Fundamentally Nor can you justly say That the Church of Rome did or might do this by the Pope's Authority over the Church For suppose he have that and that his Sentence be Infallible I say suppose both but I give neither yet neither his Authority nor his Infallibility can belong unto him as the particular Bishop of that Sea but as the * Non errare convenit Papa â—…t est Caput Bell. L. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 3. Ministeriall Head of the whole Church And you are all so Iodged in this that †L. 2. de Christo. c. 21. §. Quando autem So you cannot finde Record of your own Truths which are farre more likely to be kept but when Errours are crept in we must bee bound to tell the place and the time and I know not what of their Beginnings or els they are not Errours As if some Errours might not want a Record as well as some Truth Bellarmine professes he can neither tell the yeare when nor the Pope under whom this Addition was made A Particular Church then if you judge it by the Schoole of Rome or the Practice of Rome may publish any thing that is Catholike where the whole Church is silent and may therefore Reforme any thing that is not Catholike where the whole Church is negligent or will not But you are as jealous of the honour of Rome as a
Omninò rectè nisi excepisset c. Nec consideravit quanti refer at concedere Ecclesiis particularibus jus condendâ—…rum Canonum de Fide inconsult â Romanà Sede quod nunquam licuit nunquam factum est c. Capell de Appellat Ecol Africanae c. 2. Nu. 12. Capellus is who is angry with Baronius about certaine Canons in the second Milevitâ—…ne Councell and saith That he considered not of what consequence it was to grant to Particular Churches the Power of making Caâ—…ons of Faith without consulting the Romane Sea which as he saith and you with him was never lawfull nor ever done But suppose this were so my Speech was not Not consulting but in Case of Neglecting or Refusing Or when the difficulty of Time and Place or other Circumstances are such that a b Rex confitetur se vocâsse Concilium tertium Toletanum Quia decurâ—…s retrò temporibus Haeresis imminens in tota Ecclesia Catholica agere Synodica Negotia denegabat c. Concil Toletan tertium Can. 1. Generall Councell cannot be called or not convene For that the Romane Sea must be consulted with before any Reformation bee made First most certaine it is Capellus can never proove And secondly as certaine that were it proved and practised we should have no Reformation For it would be long enough before the Church should be cured if that Sea alone should be her Physitian which in truth is her Disease Now if for all this you will say still That a Provinciall Councell will not suffice but we should have borne with Things till the time of a Generall Councell First 't is true a Generall Councell free and entire would have beene the best Remedy and most able for a Gangrene that had spread so farre and eaten so deepe into Christianity But what Should we have suffered this Gangren to endanger life and all rather then bee cured in time by a Physitian of a weaker knowledge and a lesse able Hand Secondly We live to see since if we had stayed and expected a Generall Councell what manner of one we should have had if any For that at Trent was neither generall nor free And for the Errours which Rome had contracted it confirmed them it cured them not And yet I much doubt whether ever that Councell such as it was would have beene called if some Provinciall and Nationall Synods under Supreme and Regall Power had not first set upon this great worke of Reformation Which I heartily wish had in all places beene as Orderly and Happily pursued as the Worke was right Christian and good in it selfe But humane frailty and the Heats and Distempers of men as well as the Cunning of the Divell would not suffer that For even in this sense also The wrath of man doth not accomplish the will of God S. Iames 1. But I have learned S. Iames 1. 20. not to reject the Good which God hath wrought for any Evill which men may fasten to it And yet if for all this you thinke 't is better for us to be blinde then to open our owne eyes let me tell you very Grave and Learned Men and of your owne Party have taught me That when the Vniversall Church will not or for the Iniquities of the Times cannot obtaine and settle a free generall Councell 't is lawfull nay sometimes necessary to Reforme grosse Abuses by a Nationall or a Provinciall For besides Alb. Magnus whom I quoted a §. 24. Nu. 2. before Gerson the Learned and Devout Chancellour of Paris tels us plainly b Nolo tamen dicere quin in multis partibus possit Ecclesia per suas partes reformari Imò hoc necesse esset sed ad hoc agendum sufficerent Concilia Provincialia c Gerson tract de Gen. Concil unius obedientia parte 1. p. 222. F. That he will not deny but that the Church may be reformed by parts And that this is necessary and that to effect it Provinciall Councels may suffice And in somethings Diocesan And againe c Omnes Ecclesiae status aut in Gonerali Concilio reformetis aut 〈◊〉 Conciliis Provincialibus reformari mandetis Gerson Declarat Defectuum Virorum Ecclesiasticorum par 1. pag. 209. B. Either you should reforme all Estates of the Church in a Generall Councell or command them to be reformed in Provinciall Councels Now Gerson lived about two hundred yeares since But this Right of Provinciall Synods that they might decree in Causes of Faith and in Cases of Reformation where Corruptions had crept into the Sacraments of Christ was practised much above a thousand yeares ago by many both Nationall and Provinciall Synods For the d Concil Rom. 2. sub Sylvestro Councell at Rome under Pope Sylvester An 324. condemned Photinus and Sabellius And their Heresies were of high Nature against the Faith The e Concil Gang. Can. 1. Councell at Gangra about the same time condemned Eustathius for his condemning of Marriage as unlawfull The f Con. Carth. 1. Can. 1. first Councell at Carthage being a Provinciall condemned Rebaptization much about the yeare â—…48 The g Con. Aquiliens Provinciall Councell at Aquileia in the yeare 381. in which S. Ambrose was present condâ—…mned Pallâ—…dius and Secundinus for embracing the Arrian Heresie The h Con. Carth. 2. Can. 1. second Councell of Carthage handled and Decreed the Beliefe and Preaching of the Trinity And this a little after the yeare 424. The i Quaedam de causis fidei unde nunc quaestio Pelagianorum imminet in hoc 〈◊〉 sanctissimo primitus tractentur c. Aurel Carthaginensis in Praefat. Conc. Milevit apud 〈◊〉 Councell of Milevis in Africa in which S. Augustine was present condemned the whole Course of the Horesie of Pelagius that greatand bewitching Heresie in the yeare 416. The a Con. Aurausican 2. Can. 1 2 6. second Councell at Orang a Provinciall too handled the great Controversies about Grace and Free-will and set the Church right in them in the yeare 444 The b Con. Tolet. 3. third Councell at Toledo a Nationall one in the yeare 589. determined many things against the Arrian Heresie about the very Prime Articles of Faith under fourteene severall Anathema's The fourth Councell at Toledo did not onely handle Matters of Faith for the Reformation of that People c Que omnia in aliis Symbolis explicitè tradita non sunt Conc. Tolet. 4. Can. 1. but even added also some things to the Creed which were not expresly delivered in former Creeds Nay the Bishops did not onely practise this to Condemne Heresies in Nationall and Provinciall Synods and so Reforme those severall Places and the Church it selfe by parts But They did openly challenge this as their Right and Due and that without any leave asked of the Sea of Rome For in this Fourth Councell of Toledo d Statuimus ut saltem semel in Anno à Nobis Concilium celebretur it à tamen ut si Fideâ—… Câ—…usa
but his owne fiction For the most †Si demus errare non posse Ecclesiam in rebus ad salutem necessariis hic sensus noster est Idco hoc esse quia abdicatâ omni suâ sapientiâ à Spiritu Sancto doceri se per Uerbum Dei patitur Calv. L. 4. Inst c. 8. §. 13. And this also is our sense Uide sup §. 21. Nu. 5. Learned Protestants grant it But if he meane that the whole Church cannot Erre in any one Point of Divine Truth in generall which though by sundry Consequences deduced from the Principles is yet a Point of Faith and may proove dangerous to the Salvation of some which believe it and practise after it as his words seeme to import especially if in these the Church shall presume to determine without her proper Guide the Scripture as * Nostra sententia est Ecclesiam absolutè non posse errare nec in rebus absolutè necessariis nec in aliis quae credenda vel facienda nobis proponit sive habeantur expressè in Scripturis sive non Bellar. L. 3. dc Eccl. Mil. c. 14. §. 5. Bellarm. sayes She may and yet not Erre Then perhaps it may be said and without any wrong to the Catholike Church that the Whole Militant Church hath erred in such a Point of Divine Truth and of Faith Nay A. C. confesses expresly in his very next A. C. p. 58. words That the VVhole Church may at some time not know all Divine Truths which afterwards it may learne by study of Scripture and otherwise So then in A. C s. judgement the Whole Militant Church may at some time not know all Divine Truths Now that which knows not all must be ignorant of some and that which is ignorant of some may possibly erre in one Point or other The rather because he confesses the knowledge of it must be got by Learning and Learners may mistake and erre especially where the Lesson is Divine Truth out of Scripture out of Difficult Scripture For were it of plain and easie Scripture that he speakes the Whole Church could not at any time be without the knowledge of it And for ought I yet see the VVhole Church Militant hath no greater warrant against Not erring in then against Not knowing of the Points of Divine Truth For in S. Ioh. 16. S. Iohn 16. 13. There is as large a Promise to the Church of knowing all Points of Divine Truth as A. C. or any Iesuite can produce for Her Not erring in any And if She may be ignorant or mistaken in learning of any Point of Divine â—…ruth Doubtiesle in that state of Ignorance she may both Eâ—…re and teach her Error yea and teach that to be Divine Truth which is not Nay perhaps teach that as a Matter of Divine Truth which is contrary to Divine Truth Alwayes provided it be not in any Point simply Fundamentall of which the Whole Catholike Church cannot be Ignorant and in which it cannot Eire as hath * §. 21. Nu. 5. â—…efore beene prooved As for the Places of Scripture which A C. cites to proove that the Whâ—…l Church cannot Erre Generally in A. C p. 57. any one Point of Divine Truth be it Fundamentall or not they are known Places all of them and are alledged by A. C. three severall times in this short Tract and to three severall purposes Here to proove That A. C. p. 57. the Vniversall Church cannot erre Before this to prove A. C. p. 53. that the Tradition of the present Church cannot Erre After this to prove that the Pope cannot Erre He should A. C. p. 5. 73 have done well to have added these Places a fourth time to proove that Generall Councels cannot Erre For so doth both * Staple Relect. praef aâ—… Lâ—…ctoreÌ„ Stapleton and †Bellar. L. 2. de Concil c. 2. Bellarmine Sure A. C. and his fellowes are hard driven when they must fly to the same Places for such different purposes For A Pope may Erre where a Councell doth not And a Generall Councell may Erâ—…e where the Catholike Church cannot And therefore it is not likely that these Places should serve alike for all The first Place is Saint Matthew 16. There Christ told Saint Peter S. Mat. 16. 18. and we believe it most assuredly That Hell Gates shall never be able to prevaile against his Church But that is That they shall not prevaile to make the Church Catholike Apostatize and fall quite away from Christ or Erre in absolute 〈◊〉 which amounts to as much But the Promise reaches not to this that the Church shall never Erre no not in the lightest matters of Faith For it will not follow Hell Gates shall not prevaile against the Church Therefore Hellish Divells shall not tempt or assault and batter it And thus Saint a Pugnare potest Expugnari non potest S. Aug. L. de Symb. ad Catecum c. 6. Augustine understood the place It may fight yea and bee wounded too but it cannot be wholly overcome And Bellarmine himselfe applies it to proove * Bellar L. 3. de Eccl Milit. c. 13. §. 1. 2. That the Visible Church of Christ cannot deficere Erre so as quite to fall away Therefore in his judgement this is a true and a safe sense of this Text of Scripture But as for not Erring at all in any Point of Divine Truth and so making the Church absolutely Infallible that 's neither a true nor a safe sense of this Scripture And t is very remarkable that whereas this Text hath beene so much beaten upon by Writers of all sorts there is no one Father of the Church for twelve hundred yeares after Christ the Counterseit or Partiall Decretalls of some Popes excepted that ever concluded the Infallibility of the Church out of this Place but her Non deficiency that hath beene and is justly deduced hence And here I challenge A. C. and all that partie to shew the contrary if they can The next Place of Scripture is Saint Matthew 28. S. Mat. 28. 〈◊〉 The Promise of Christ that hee will bee with them to the end of the VVorld But this in the generall voyce of the * S Hil. in Psal. 124. Prosp. L. 2. de Vocat Gent. c. 2. Leo. Ser. 2. de Resur Dom. c. 3. Ep. 31. Isidor in Iosu. 12. Fathers of the Church is a promise of Assistance and Protection not of an Infallibility of the Church And †In omnibus quae Ministris suis commisit exequenda S. Leo. Epist. 91. c. 2. Pope Leo himself enlarges this presence and providence of Christ to all those things w ch he committed to the execution of his Ministers But no word of Infallibility is to be found there And indeed since Christ according to his Promise is present with his Ministers in all these things and that one and a Chiefe of these All is the preaching of his Word to the People
power then other Churches but not over all other Churches And as they understand Irenae a Necessity lay upon all other Churches to agree with this but this Necessity was laid upon them by the Then Integrity of the Christian Faith there professed not by the Universality of the Romane Jurisdiction now challenged And let Rome reduce it selfe to the Observation of Tradition Apostolike to which it then held and I will say as Irenaeus did That it will be then necessary for every Church and for the Faithfull every where to agree with it Lastly let me Observe too That Irenaeus made no doubt but that Rome might fall away from Apostolicall Tradition as well as other Particular Churches of great Name have done For he does not say in quâ servanda semper erit sed in quâ servata est Not in which Church the Doctrine delivered from the Apostles shal ever be entirely kept That had beene home indeed But in which by God's grace and mercy it was to that time of Irenaeus so kept and preserved So wee have here in Irenaeus his Iudgement the Church of Rome then Intire but not Infallible And endowed with a more powerfull Principality then other Churches but not with an Universall Dominion over all other Churches which is the Thing in Question But to this place of Irenaeus A. C. joynes a reason of his owne For he tels us the Bishop of Rome is A. C. p. 58. S. Peter's Successour and therefore to Him we must have recourse The Fathers I deny not ascribe very much to S. Peter But 't is to S. Peter in his owne person And among them Epiphanius is as free and as frequent in extolling S. Peter as any of them And yet did he never intend to give an Absolute Principality to Rome in S. Peter's right There is a Noted Place in that Father where his words are these †Ipse autem Dominus constituit â—…um Primum Apostolorum Petram firmam super quam Ecclesia Dei adificat a est portae inferorum non valebunt adversus illam c. Juxta omnem enim modum in Ipso firmata est fides qui accepit Clavem Coelorum c. In hoc enim omnes Questiones ac Subtilitates fidei inveniuntur Epiphan in Ancorato Edit Paris Lat. 1564. fol. 497. A. Edit verò Grace Latin To. 2. p. 14. For the Lord himselfe made S. Peter the first of the Apostles a firme Rocke upon which the Church of God is built and the Gates of Hell shall not prevaile against it c. For in him the Faith is made firme every way who received the Key of Heaven c. For in him all the Questions and Subtilties of the Faith are found This is a great Place at first sight too and deserves a Marginall Note to call young Readers eyes to view it And it hath this Note in the Old Latine Edition at Paris 1564. Petri Principatus Praestantia Peter's Principality and Excellency This Place as much shew as it make for the Romane Principality I shall easily cleare and yet doe no wrong either to S. Peter or the Romane Church For most manifest it is That the authority of S. Peter is a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For there bâ—…gins the Arâ—…ument of Epiphanius urged here to proove the Godhead of the Holy Ghost And then follow the Elogyes given to S. Peter the better to set off and make good that Authority As that hee was b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Princeps Apostolorum the Prince of the Apostles and pronounced blâ—…ssed by Christ because as God the Father revealed to him the Godhead of the Sonne so did the Sonne the Godhead of the Holy Ghost After this Epiphanius calls Him c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 solidam Petram a solid Rocke upon which the Church of God was founded and against which the Gates of Hell should not prevaile And addes That the Faith was rooted and made firme in him d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. every way in him who received the Key of Heaven And after this he gives the Reason of all e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. S. Mâ—… 16. 17. Because in Him mark I pray 't is still in Him as he was blessed by that Revelation from God the Father S. Matthew 16. were found all the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the very Niceties and exactnesse of the Christian Faith For he prosessâ—…d the Godhead of the Sonne and of the Holy Ghost And so Omni modo every Point of Faith was 〈◊〉 in Him And this is the full meaning of that Learned Father in tâ—…is passage Now therefore Building the Church upon Saint Peter in Epiphanius his sense is not as if He and his Successors were to be Monarchs ovâ—…r it for ever But it is the edifying and establishing the Church in the true Faith of Christ by the Confession which S. Pâ—…ter made And so f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Qui factus est nobis rever à solida Petra firmans fidem Domini In quâ Petrá aedificata est Ecclesia juxta omnem modum Primò quòd confessus est Christum esse Filium Dei vi vi statim audivit super hanc Petram soliâ—… 〈◊〉 adisicabo Ecclesiam 〈◊〉 Etiam de Sp. Sancto idem c. Epipha L. 2. Hares 59. contra Catharos To. 1. p. 500. Edit Graeco-Lat Hee expresses himselfe elsewhere most plainly Saint Peter saith he who was made to us indeed a solid Rock firming the Faith of our Loâ—…d On which Rocke the Church is built juxta omneÌ„ modum every way First that he Confessed Christ to be the Sonne of the Living God and by and by he heard Upon this Rocke of solid Faith I will build my Church And the same Confession he made of the Holy Ghost Thus was S. Peter a solid Rocke upon which the Church was founded omni modo every way That is the Faith of the Church was a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. confirmed by him in every Point But that S. Peter was any Rocke or Foundation of the Church so as that he and his Successours must be relied on in all matters of Faith and governe the Church like Princes or Monarchs that Epiphanius never thought of And that he did never thinke so I prove it thus For beside this apparent meaning of his Context as is here expressed how could hee possibly thinke of a Supremacy due to S. Peter's Successour that in most expresse termes and that b Ille primus speaking of S. Iames the Lords Brother Episcopalem Cathedram capit quum ei ante â—…teros omnes suum in terris Thronum Dominus tradidisset Epiphan L. 3. Hares 78. To. 2. p. 1039. Et ferè similiter To. 1. L. 1. Hares 29. twice repeated makes S. Iames the brother of our Lord and not S. Peter succeed our Lord in the Principality of the Church And Epiphanius was too full both of Learning and Industrie to
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
Patriarch to another who were fit or unfit to be admitted to their Communion if they upon any Occasion repaired to their Seas were sent mutually And as freely and in the same manner from Rome to the other Patriarchs as from them to it Out of which I thinke this will follow most directy That the Church-Government then was Aristocraticall For had the Bishop of Rome been then accounted Sole Monarch of the Church and beene put into the Definition of the Church as he is now by a Bellar. L. 3. de Eccles. c. 2. §. Nostra autem Bellarmine all these Communicatorie Letters should have beene directed from him to the rest as whose admittance ought to be a Rule for all to Communicate but not from others to him or at least not in that even equall and Brotherly way as now they appeare to be written For it is no way probable that the Bishops of Rome which even then sought their owne Greatnesse too much would have submitted to the other Patriarchs voluntarily had not the very Course of the Church put it upon them Besides this is a great and undoubted Rule given by b Non â—…im Râ—…publica est in Ecclesiâ sed Ecclesia in Republicâ i. e. in Imperio Romano Optat. L. 3. Optatus That wheresoever there is a Church there the Church is in the Common-wealth not the Common-wealth in the Church And so also the Church was in the Romane Empire Now from this Ground I argue thus If the Church be within the Empire or other Kingdome 't is impossible the Government of the Church should be Monarchicall For no Emperour or King will indure another King within his Dominion that shall bee greater then himselfe since the very induring it makes him that indures it upon the matter no Monarch Nor will it disturbe this Argument That two Great Kings in France and Spaine permit this For he that is not blinde may see if hee will of what little value the Pope's power is in those Kingdomes farther then to serve their owne turnes of Him which They do to their great advantage Nay farther the Ancient Canons and Fathers of the Church seem to me plaine for this For the a Conc. Antioch c. 9. p. 507. Councell of Antioch submits Ecclesiasticall Causes to the Bishops And what was done amisse by a Bishop was corrigible by a b Conc. Nic. 1. c. 5. Antioch c. 12. Synod of Bishops but this with the c Conc. Nie. 1. c. 4. Antioch can 9. Metropolitane And in Case these did not agree the d Conc. Antioch c. 14. Metropolitane might call in other Bishops out of the neighbouring Provinces And if Things setled not this way a Generall Councell e Sed praeponitur Scriptura S. August L. 2. de Bapt. cont Donat c. 3. under the Scripture and directed by it was the Highest Remedy And f Nam cùm Statutum sit omnibus nobis c. singulis Pastoribus portio gregis c. S. Cypr. L. 1. Ep 3. S. Cyprian even to Pope Cornelius himselfe sayes plainely That to every Bishop is ascribed a portion of the flocke for bim to governe And so not all committed to One. In all this the Government of the Church seemes plaâ—…nely Aristocraticall And if all other Arguments faile wee have one left from Bellarmine who opposes it as much as any g Bellar. L. 1 de Ro. Pont. c. 8. L. 2. de Concil c. 16. twice for failing And yet where hee goes to Exclude Secular Princes from Church-Governement h Bellar. L. 1. de Ro. Pâ—…nt c. 7. all his Quotations and all his Proofes run upon this Head to shew That the Governement of the Church was ever in the Bishops What sayes A. C. now to the Confession of this great Adversarie A. C. p. 64 65. and in this great Point extorted from him by force of Truth Now if this bee true then the whole foundation of this Argument is gone The Church Militant is no Kingdome and therefore not to be Compared or Iudged by One. The Resemblance will not hold Next suppose it a Kingdome yet the Church Militant remaining one is spread in many Earthly Kingdomes and cannot well bee ordered like any one particular a Liâ—…et sit 〈◊〉 quòd uni Populâ—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sit unus Episcopus non expedit taâ—…n 〈◊〉 toti pâ—…pulo fideli praesit unus sâ—…lus Tum quia omnia Negotia 〈◊〉 popâ—…li partialis potest sustinere unus sâ—…us Nullus autem unus potest sustinere omnia Negotia etiam majora omnium Christianorum Tum quia minus 〈◊〉 est ut populus partialis parvus inâ—…iatur ab 〈◊〉 Episâ—…opo quam ut totus vel ferè totus populus Christâ—… insiciatur ab uno Capite quod omnibus praesit 〈◊〉 L. 2. Dial. tract 1. p. 3. c. 30. ad 8. And besides this of Ockam To that Common Argument That Monar â—…call Governement is the best and therefore undâ—…dly that which Christ instituted for his Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Answer That a Monarchy is the best forme of Government in one City or Countrey Arist. L. 8. Moâ—…l c. 10. But it followes not That it is the best in respect of the whole world where the Parts are so remote and the Dispositions of men so various And therefore Bellarm. himselfe confesses Monarchiam Aristocratiae Democratiae admixtam utiliorem esse in hác vità quà m simplex Monarchia est L. 1. de Ro. Pont. c. 3. §. 1. Kingdome And therefore though in one particular Kingdom there be many Visible Iudges and one Supreme yet it followes not That in the Vniversall Militant Church there must be one Supreme For how will he enter to Execute his Office if the Kings of those Kingdomes will not give leave Now here though A. C. expresses himselfe no farther yet I well know what he and his Fellowes would be at They would not be troubled to aske leave of any severall Kings in their severall Dominions No they would have one Emperour over all the Kings as well as One Pope over all the Bishops And then you know b In the first Glosse ascribed to Isidore in Gen. 1. 16. ' Tiâ—… Per Solem intelligitur Regnum per Lunam Saceidotium But Innocent the third almost six hundred yeares after Isidore's death perverts both Text and Glosse Thus. Ad firmamentum Coeli i. e. Vniversalis Ecclesiae fecit Deus duo magna Luminaria hoc est dâ—…us inâ—…ituit Potestates Pontificalem Regalem c. 〈◊〉 quantainter Solem Lanam tanta 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Reges differentia cognoscatur Epist. ad Imperaâ—…â—…nopolitanum Decret L. 1. de Majoritate Obâ—…ntia Tit. 33. cap. Solitae who told us of two great Lights to governe the world the Sun and the Moone that is the Pope and the Emperour At the first it began with more modesty The Emperour and the Pâ—…pe And that was somewhat Tolerable For c 〈◊〉 Miliâ—… 〈◊〉 Sâ—…ripturis 〈◊〉
appeares though somewhat may be done by the Bishops and Governours of the Church to preserve the unity and certainty of Faith and to keepe the Church from renting or for uniting it when it is rent yet that in the ordinary way which the Church hath hitherto kept some things there are and upon great emergent Occasions may be which can have no other helpe then a lawfull fre and well composed Generall Councell And when that cannot be had the Church must pray that it may and expect till it may or else reforme its selfe per partes by Nationall or Provinciall Synods as hath beene said a §. 24. N. 1. before And in the meane time it little beseemes A. C. or any Christian to check at the wisdome of †And shall we think that Christ the wisest king hath not provided c. A. C. p. 60. Where I cannot commend either A. C. his Modesty that he doth not or his cunning that he will not go so 〈◊〉 as some have done before him though in these words shall we think c hee goes too farre Non videretur Dominus discretus fuisse ut cum reverentiá ejus loquar nisi unicum post se talem Vicarium reliquisset qui haec omnia potest Fuit autem ejus Vicarius Petrus Et idem dicendum est de Successoribus Petri cum cadem absurditas sequeretur si post mortem Petâ—…i Humanam Naturam à se creatam sine regimine Vnius Personae reliquisset Extravagant Com Tit de Majoritate Obedientiâ c. Vuam Sanctam In addition D. P. Bertrands Edit Paris 1585. Christ if he have not taken the way they thinke fittest to settle Church Differences Or if for the Churches sin or Tryall the way of Composing them be left more uncertaine then they would have it that they which are approved may be knowne 〈◊〉 Cor. 11. 19. But the Iesuite had told me before that a Generall Councell had adjudged these things already For so hee saies F. I told him that a Generall Councell to wit of Trent had already Iudged not the Romane Church but the Protestants to hold Errours That saith the B. was not a Lawfull Councell B. It is true that you replied for the Councell of § 27 Trent And my Answer was not onely That the Councell was not Legall in the necessary Conditions to be observed in a Generall Councell but also That it was no Generall Councell which againe you are content to omit Consider it well First is that Councell Legall the Abettors whereof maintaine publikely That it is lawfull for them to conclude any controversie and make it bee de fide and so in your Iudgement Fundamentall though it have not I doe not say now the Written Word of God for warrant either in expresse Letter or necessary sense and deduction as all unerring Councels have had and as all must have that will not erre but not so much as †Etiamsi non confirmetur ne probabili Testimonio Scripturarum Stapl. Relect. Cont. 4. Q. 1. Ar. 3. Probable Testimony from it nay quite extrà without the Scripture Nay secondly Is that Councell * Here A. C. tells us that doubtlesse the Arrians also did mislike that at Nice the Pope had Legates to carry his messages and that one of them in his place sate as President Why but first 't is manifest that Hosius was president at the Councell of Nice and not the Bishop of Rome either by himselfe or his Legates And so much Athanasius himselfe who was present and surely understood the Councell of Nice and who presided there as well as A. C. tells us Hosius hic est Princeps Synodorum So belike He presided in other Councells as well as at Nice Hic formulam Fidei in Nicaenâ Synodo concepit And this the Arrians themselves confesse to Constantius the Emperour then seduced to be theirs Apud S. Atbanas Epist. ad solitar vitam agentes But then secondly I doe not except against the Popes sitting as President either at Nice or Trent For that he might do when called or chosen to it as well as any other Patriarch if you consider no more but his sitting as President But at Nice the Cause was not his own but Christs against the Arrian whereas at Trent it was meerely his owne his own Supremacy and his Churches Corruptions against the Protestants And therefore surely not to sit President at the Triall of his owne Cause though in other Causes hee might sit as well other Patriarchs And for that of Bellarmine L. 1. de Concil c. 21. §. Tertia conditio Namely That 't is unjust to deny the Roman Prelat his Right Ius suum in Calling Generall Councells and Presiding in them in possession of which Right he hath bin for 1500. yeares That 's but a bold Assertion of the Cardinalls by his leave For he gives us no proofe of it but his bare word Whereas the very Authenticke Copies of the Councells published and printed by the Romanists themselves affirme cleerely they were called by Emperors not by the Pope And that the Pope did not preside in all of them And I hope Bellarmine will not expect we should take his bare word against the Councells And most certaine it is that even as Hosius Presided the Councell at Nice and no way that as the Popes Legate so also in the second Generall Councell which was the first of Constantinople Nectarius Bishop of Constantinople Presided Concil Chalced. Act. 6. p. 136. apud Binium In the third which was the first at Ephasus S. Cyril of Alexandria Presided And though Pope Coelestine was joyned with him yet be sent none out of the West to that Councel til many things were therein finished as appeares apud Act. Concil To. 2. c. 16. 17. In the fourth at Chalcedon the Legats of the Bishop of Rome had the Prime place In the fift Eutychius Bishop of Constantinople was President In the sixe and seventh the Legats of the Pope were President yet so as that almost all the duty of a Moderator or President was performed in the seventh by Tharasius Bishop of Constantinople as appeares manifestly in the Acts of that Councell And since these seven are all the Generall Councells which the Greekes and Latines joyntly acknowledge And that in these other Patriarchs Bishops Presided as oft at least as the Bishops of Rome what 's become of Bellarmines Brag That the Pope hath beene possest of this Right of Presiding in Generall Councells for the space of 1500. yeares Legall where the Pope the Chiefe Person to be Reformed shall sit President in it and be chiefe Iudge in his own Cause against all Law Divine Naturall and Humane In a place not free but in or too neare his owne Dominion To which all were not called that had Deliberative or Consultative Voice In which none had Suffrage but such as were sworne to the Pope and the Church of Rome and professed Enemies to all that called for
Patriarch or Christian Bishop which did confirm the Canons of the Councell of Irent and Anathematize them which admitted them not and I will confesse they speake home to the Comparison between the Councels els a blinde man may see the difference and 't is a vast one But here A. C. makes account he hath found a better reply to this and now tels us that neither French nor Spanish nor Schismaticall Greekes did agree with Protestants A. C p. 62. in those Points which were defined in that Councell especially after it was Confirmed by the Pope as appeares by the Censure of Ieremias the Greeke Patriarch Who agreed with the Protestants in the Points defined by that Councell as he speakes or rather â—…o speake properly against the Points there defined I know not And for ought A. C. knowes many might agree with them in heart that in such a Councell durst not open themselves And what knowes A. C. how many might have beene of their Opinion in the maine before the Councell ended had they beene admitted to a faire and a free Dispute And it may be too some Decrees would have beene more favourable to them had not the care of the Popes interest made them sowrer For else what mean these words Especially after it was confirmed by the Pope As for Ieremtas 't is true his Censure is in many things against the Protestants But I finde not that that Censure of his is warranted by any Authority of the Greeke Church Or that he gave the Protestants any hearing before he passed his Censure And at the most it is but the Censure of a Schismatick in A. C. owne Iudgement And for his flourish which followes that East and West would Condemne Protestants for Hereticks I would he would forbeare prophecying till both parts might meet in a free Generall Councell that sought Christ more then themselves But I finde the Iesuite hath not done with me yet but addes F. In fine the B. wished That a Lawfull Generall Councell were called to end Controversies The Persons present said That the King was inclined thereunto and that therefore we Catholikes might doe well to concurre B. And what say you to my Wish you pretend § 30 great love to the Truth would you not have it found Can you or any Christian be offended that there should be a good end of Controversies Can you think of a better end then by a Generall Councell And if you have a most Gracious King inclined unto it as you say it was offered how can you acquit your selves if you doe not consent Now here A. C. marvels what A. C. p. 62. kind of General Councel I would have and what Rules I would have observed in it which are morally like to be observed and make an end of Controversies better then their Catholike Generall Councels Truly I am not willing to leave A. C. unsatisfied in any thing Nor have I any meaning to trouble the Church with any New Devisings of mine Any Generall Councell shall satisfie me and I presume all good Christians that is lawfully called continued and ended according to the same course and under the same * Ex iis Conciliis quae omnium consensu Generalia fuerunt qualia sunt quatuor prima Et ex consuetudine Ecclesiae colligimus quatuor Conditiones requiri sufficere Bellar. 1. de Con. c. 17. §. 2. Conditions which Generall Councels observed in the Primitive Church which I am sure were Councels Generall and Catholike what ever yours bee But I doubt that after all noyse made about these Requisite Conditions A. C. and his Fellowes will be found as much if not more defective in performance of the Conditions then in the conditions themselves Well the Iesuite goes on for all this F. I asked the B. whether hee thought a Generall Ccuncell might erre He said it might B. I presume you doe not expect I should enter into the Proofe of this Controversie Whether a Generall § 31 Councell may erre in Determination or not Your selfe brought no proofe that it cannot and till that bee brought my speech is good that it can and yet I hope to bee found no Infringer of any Power given by Christ to his Church But it seemes by that which followes you did by this Question Can a generall Councell Erre but seeke to winne ground for your other which followes F. If a Generall Councell may erre what nearer are wee then said I to unity after a Councell hath determined Yes said he although it may erre yet we should be bound to hold with it till another come to reverse it B Whether a Generall Councell may erre or not § 32 is a Question of great Consequence in the Church of Christ. To say it cannot erre leaves the Church not only without Remedy against an errour once Determined but also without sense that it may need a Remedy and so without care to seeke it which is the misery of the Church of Rome at this day To say it can erre seemes to expose the members of the Church to an uncertainty and wavering in the Faith to make unquiet Spirits not only to disrespect former Councels of the Church but also to slight and contemne whatsoever it may now Determine into which Errour some Opposers of the Church of Rome have fallen And upon this is grounded your Question Wherein are we nearer to unity if a Councell may erre But in relating my answer to this you are not so candid For my words did not sound as yours seeme to doe That wee should â—…old with the Councell erre or not erre till another came to reverse it As if Grounds of Faith might vary at the Racket and be cast of each side as a cunning hand might lay them You forget againe omit at least and with what minde you best know the Caution which I added For I said The Determination of a Generall Councell erring was to stand in force and to have externall Obedience at the least yeelded to it till * §. 33. Confid 5. Nu. 1. 2. And the Râ—…son of this is Because to have a General Councel deceived is not impossible But altogether impossible it is that Demonstratiâ—…e Râ—…ason or Testimony Diâ—…ine should deceâ—…ve Hooker L. 2. Ec. Pol. § 7. Evidence of Scripture or a Demonstration to the Contrary made the Errour appeare and untill thereupon †In which case Maldoâ—… puts in the shâ—…ewdest Arg ment Namely that this way we should never have a certaine end of Controversies For to try whether any thing were Decreed according to the Word of God by one General Councel we â—…ould need another Couâ—…ll And thâ—…n anoâ—…her to try that And so in 〈◊〉 So our faith should never have where to settle and rest it selfe Malâ—…n S. Mat. 1â—… 20. But to this I answer That the Aâ—…nt Church tooke this way as will afterward appeare in S. Augustine Next here is no uncâ—…rtainty at all For no 〈◊〉 Coâ—…cell lawfully called and so
prâ—…ng can be questioned in another unlesse it to tall out that 〈◊〉 Scriptuâ—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 appeare against it Buâ—… eâ—…t 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thâ—…se aâ—…e â—…o 〈◊〉 and manâ—…t and â—…ving the it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whâ—… or 〈◊〉 wiâ—…h 〈◊〉 without a Councell §. 33. 〈◊〉 5. Nâ—… 1. 2. another Councell of equall authority did reverse it And indeed I might have returned upon you againe If a Generall Councell not Confirmed by the Pope may erre which you affirme to what end then a Generall Councell And you may Answer yes For although a Generall Councell may erre yet the Pope as Head of the Church cannot An excellent meanes of unity to have all in the Church as the Pope will have it what ever Scripture say or the Church thinke And then I pray to what end a Generall Councell Will his Holinesse be so holy as to confirme a Generall Councell if it Determine against him And as for * 〈◊〉 L 4. dâ—… 〈◊〉 Pâ—…t â—…7 §. 3. c. Bellarmines reasons why a Generall Councell should be usefull if not necessary though the Pope bee Iâ—…fallible they are so weake in Part and in part so unworthy that I am sory any necessity of a bad cause should force so learned a man to make use of them Here A. C. tels mee The Caution mentioned as omitted makes my Answer werse then the Iesuite related A. C. p. 63. â—…4 it And that in two things First in that the Iesuite relates it thus Although it may erre but the Caution makes it as if it did actually erre Secondly in that the Iesuite relates That wee are bound to hold it till another come to reverse it that is wâ—…e not knowing whether it doe erre or not but onely that it may erre But the Caution puts the Case so as if the Determination of a Generall Councell actually erring were not ipso jure invalid but must stand in force and have externall Obedience yeelded to it till not onely morall Certainty but Evidence of Scripture or a Demonstration to the Contrary make the errour appeare And when it appeares wee must yeeld our Obedience till a Councell of equall Authority reverse it which perhaps will not bee found in an whole Age. So either the Iesuite relates this speech truly or lesse disgracefully And A. C. thinkes that upon better Iudgement I Will not allow this Caution Truly I shall not thanke the Iesuite for any his kindnesse here And for the Caution I must and doe acknowledge it mine even upon advisement and that whether it make my Answer worse or better And I thinke farther that the Iesuite hath no great Cause to thanke A. C. for this Defence of his Relation First then the Iesuite so sayes A. C. doth in his Relation make it but a supposition That a Generall Councell A. C. p. 63 may erre But the Caution expresses it as actually erring True But yet I hope this Expression makes no Generall Councell actually erre And then it comes all to one whether I suppose that such a Councell may erre or that it doe erre And 't is fitter for clearing the Difficulties into which the Church fals in such a Case to suppose and more then a supposition it is not a Generall Councell * Synodum Generalem aliquoties errâsse percepimus Wald. L. 2. de Doctrin Fidri Art 2. c. 19. §. 1. actually erring then as only under a Possibility of Erring For the Church hath much more to doe to vindicate it selfe from such an Errour actually being then from any the like Errour that might be Secondly A. C. thinkes he hath got great advantage A. C. p. 63. by the words of the Caution in that I say A Generall Councell erring is to stand in force and have externall Obedience at least so farre as it consists in silence Patience and forbearance yeelded to it till Evidence of Scripture or a Demonstration to the Contrary make the Error appeare and untill therupon another Councell of equal Authority did reverse it Well! I say it again But is there any one word of mine in the Caution that speakes of our knowing of this Errour Surely not one that 's A. C s. Addition Now suppose a Generall Councell actually Erring in some Point of Divine Truth I hope it will not follow that this Errour must bee so grosse as that forthwith it must needes be knowne to private men And doubtlesse till they know it Obedience must be yeelded Nay when they know it if the Errour be not manifestly against Fundamentall verity in which case a Generall Councell can not easily erre I would have A C. and all wise men Consider Whether Externall Obedience be not even then to be yeelded For if Controversies arise in the Church some end they must have or they 'll teare all in sunder And I am sure no wisdome can thinke that fit Why then say a Generall Councell Erre and an Erring Decree be ipso jure by the very Law it selfe invalid I would have it wisely considered again whether it be not fit to allow a Generall Councell that Honour and Priviledge which all other Great Courts have Namely That there be a Declaration of the Invalidity of its Decrees as well as of the Laws of other Courts before private men can take liberty to refuse Obedience For till such a declaration if the Councel stand not in force A. C sets up Private Spirits to controll Generall Councels w ch is the thing he so often and so much cryes out against in the Protestants Therefore it may seeme very fit and necessary for the Peace of Christendome that a Generall Councell thus erring should stand in force till Evidence of Scripture or a Demonstration make the Errourto appeare * It is not long since A C. compared Councels to Parliaments it was but p. 60. And I hope a Parliament and the Acts of it must stand in force thoughsomthing bemistaken in them or found hurtfull till another Parliament of equal Authority reverse it and them For I presume you will not have any inferiour Authority to abrogate Acts of Parliament as that another Councell of equall Authority reverse it For as for Morall Certainty that 's not strong enough in Points of Faith which alone are spoken of here And if another Councell of equall Authority cannot be gotten together in an Age that is such an Inconvenience as the Church must beare when it happens And far better is that inconvenience then this other †§. 33. Consid. 4. N. 1. that any Authority lesse then a Generall Councell should rescinde the Decrâ—…es of it unlesse it erre manifestly and intolera'ly Or that the whole Church upon peaceable and just complaint of this Errour neglect or refuse to call a Councell and examine it And there come in Nationall or Provinciall Councels to a § 24. Nu. 1. reforme for themselves But no way must lye open to private men to b §. 38. Nu. 15. Refuse obedience till the Councell be heard
confessionis Iustin. Mart. Dial. cum Tryph. S. Chrysost. Hom. 2. in Psal. 50. S. Amb. L. 10. in S. Luc. c. 24. And S. Greg. gives it for a Rule when Petra is read in the singular number and so it is here Christus est Christ is signified Fathers come in with very full consent And this That the Gates of Hell shall not prevaile against it is not spoken of the Not erring of the Church principally but of the Not a Non deficit S. Bern. Ser. 79. in Cant. And Bellarmine himselfe going to prove Ecclesiam non posse deficere begins with this very place of Scripture L. 3. de Eccl. c. 13. falling away of it from the Foundation Now a Church may erre and dangerously too and yet not fall from the Foundation especially if that of b L. 3. de Eccl. c. 14. §. Quinto si esset Multa sunt de Fide quae non sunt absolutè necessaria ad salutem Bellarmine be true That there are many things even de fide of the Faith which yet are not necessary to Salvation Besides even here againe the Promise of this stable edification is to the whole Church not to a Councell at least no farther then a Councell builds as a Church is built that is upon Christ. The next Place is Christ's Prayer for S. Peter's Faith The native sense of which Place is That Christ prayed and obtained for S. Peter perseverance in the grace of God against the strong temptation which was to winnow him above the rest But to conclude an Infallibility hence in the Pope or in his Chaire or in the Romane Sea or in a Generall Councell though the Pope bee President I finde no one Ancient Father that dare adventure it And a Lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. cap. 3. Bellarmine himselfe besides some Popes in their owne Cause and that in Epistles counterfeit or falsely alledged hath not a Father to name for this sense of the Place till he come downe to Chrysologus Theophylact and S. Bernard of which Chrysologus his speech is but a flash of Rhetoricke and the other two are men of yesterday compared with Antiquity and lived when it was God's great grace and learned mens wonder the corruption of the time had not made them corrupter then they are And b 2. 2 ae q. 2. A. 3. Probat enim ex his verbis Fidem Ecclesiae Vniversalis non posse deficere Thomas is resolute That what is meant here beyond S. Peter's Person is referred to the whole Church And the Glosse upon the Canon Law is more peremptorie then he even to the Deniall that it is c Causa 24. q. 1. C. A Recta Non de Papa quia Papa potest errare meant of the Pope And if this Place warrant not the Popes Faith where is the Infallibility of the Councell that in your Doctrine depends upon it The next Place is Bellarmines choice one his first and he sayes 't is a d Testimonia propria sunt tria Primum est Matth. 18. c. Bellar. L 2. de Concil c. 2. §. 4. Sed contrà Firmitas Conciliorum propriè non innititur his verbis Stapl. Relect. Controvers 6. q 4. A. 4 ad 4 um Locus hio non debet huc propriè accommodari Valentia in Tho. To. 3. Disput 1. R. 1. Puncto 7. §. 45. proper place for Proofe of the Infallibility of Generall Councels This Place is Christ's Promise Where two or three are gathered together in my name there am I in the midst of them e S. Mat. 18. 19. 20. S. Mat. 18. And he tels us The strength of the Argument is not taken from these words alone but as they are continued with the former and f Additâ Argumentatione à Minori ad Majus c. Bellar. L. 2. de Concil c 2. §. 4. Et Stapl. Relect. Cont. 6. q. 3. A. 4. that the Argument is drawne à Mâ—…nori ad Majus from the lesse to the Greater Thus g Siduo vel tres congregati in nomine meo obtinent semper quod petunt à Deo c. Bellat ibid. §. 5. If two or three gathered together in my Name do alwaies obtaine that which they aske at God's hands to wit wisdome and knowledge of those things which are necessary for them How much more shall all the â—…ops gathered together in a Councell alwaies obtaine wisdome and knowledge to Iudge those things which belong to the Direction of the whole Church I answer First 't is most true that here is little strength in these words alone For though the Fathers make different interpretations of this Place of Scripture yet * S. Chrys. Hom. 61. in S. Mat. 18. ubi duo vel tres pari spiritu voluntate collecti sunt c. Theoph. in S. Mat. 18. S. Cyprian L. 4. Epist. 4. S. Hilâ—… in S. Mat. 18. most of them agree in this That this Place is to be understood of Consent in Prayer And this is manifest enough in the Text it selfe Secondly I think there is as little strength in them by the Argument drawne A Minori ad Majus And that I prove two wayes First because though that Argument hold in Naturall and Necessary Things yet I doubt it holds not either in Voluntary or Promised things or things which depend upon their Institution For he that Promises the lesse doth not hereby promise the greater and he which will doe the Lesse will not alwaies doe the greater Secondly because this Argument from the Lesse to the greater can never follow but where and so farre as the thing upon which the Argument is founded agrees to the lesse For if it do not alwayes agree to the lesse it cannot Necessarily passe from thence to the greater Now that upon which this Argument is grounded here is Infallible hearing and granting the Prayers of two or three met together in the Name of Christ. But this Infallibility is not alwaies found in this Lesse Congregation where two or three are gathered together For they often meet and pray yet obtaine not because there are diverse other Conditions necessarily required as S. Chrysostome †Quemodo igitur à Patre cuncta non consequentur Quia multae sunt Causae non impetrandi c. S. Chrysost. Hom. in S Matth. 18. Et Bellar. ipse Si congregari in nomine Christi sit Nota Ecclesiae non erit quomodocunque congregari Sic enim onines Haereses Schismata congregantur in nomine Christi Sed c. L. 4. de Notis Ecclesiae c. 2. §. Tertius non observes to make the Prayers of a Congregation heard beside their gathering together in the Name of Christ. And therefore it is not extended to a greater Congregation or Councell unlesse the same Conditions be still observed Neither doth Christs Promise Ero in Medio I will be in the midst of them inferre That they the greater or the Lesse three or three hundred have all even
aliorum salutem expetunt c. Quidigitur mirum si in hoc Concilio fuerit Spiritus Sanctus c. Nos aliter Convenimus 〈◊〉 cum magnâ pompâ—… nâ—…sque ipsos quâ—…rimus atque nobispollicemur nihil nobis non licere de Plenitudine Potestatis Et quomodo Sp. Sanctus ejusmodi Concilia probare possit Fetus in Act. 15. 7 One of their owne who tels us plainly That the Apostles in their Councell delt very prudently did not precipitate their Iudgement but waighed all things For in Matters of Faith and which touch the Conscience it is not enough to say Volumus Mandamus We Will and Command And thus the Apostles met together in simplicity and singlenesse seeking nothâ—…ng but God and the Salvation of men Anâ—… what wonder if the Holy Ghost were present in such a Councell Nos alitèr But we meet otherwise in great pompe and seeke our selves and promise our selves that we may doe any thing out of the Plenitude of our power And how can the Holy Ghost allow of such meetings And if not allow or approove the Meetings then certainly not concurre to make every thing Infallible that shall be concluded in them And for all the Places together waigh them with indifferency and either they speake of the Church including the Apostles as all of them doe And then All grant the Uoyce of the Church is Gods Voyce Divine and Infallible Or else they are Generall unlimited and applyable to private Assemblies as well as Generall Councels which none grant to be Infalliâ—…le but some mad Enthusiasts Orels they are limited not simply into All truth but All necessary to salvation in which I shall easily grant a Generall Councell cannot erre suffering it selfe to be led by this Spirit of Truth in the Scripture and not taking upon it to lead both the Scripture and the Spirit For Suppose these Places or any other did promise Assistance even to Infallibility yet they granted it not to every Generall Councell but to the Catholike Body of the Church it selfe and if it be in the whole Church principally then is it in a Generall Councell but by Consequent as the Councell represents the Whole And that which belongs to a thing by consequent doth not otherwise nor longer belong unto it then it consents and cleaves to that upon which it is a consequent And therefore a Generall Councell hath not this Assistance but as it keepes to the whole Church and Spouse of Christ whose it is to heare His word and determine by it And therefore if a Generall Councell wil go out of the Churches way it may easily goe without the Churches Truth Fourthly I Consider That All agree That the Consid. 4. Church in Generall can never erre from the Faith necessary to Salvation No Persecution no Temptation no †S. Mat. 16 18. Gates of Hell whatsoever is meant by them can ever so prevaile against it For all the Members of the Militant Church cannot erre either in the whole Faith or in any Article of it it is impossible For if all might so erre there could be no union betweene them as Members and Christ the Head And no Vnion betweene Head and Members no Body and so no Church which cannot be But there is not the like consent That * Ecclesia Vniversalis fideÌ„ habet indefectibilem c. Non quidem in Generali Synodo congregata quam aliquoties errâsse percepimus c. Wald. L. 2. Doct. Fid. Ar. 2. c. 19. §. 1. §. 38. N. 4. Generall Councels cannot erre And it seemes strange to me the Fathers having to doe with so many Hereticks and so many of them opposing Church Authority that in the condemnation of those Hereticks this Proposition even in termes A Generall Councell cannot erre should not be found in any one of them that I can yet see Now suppose it were true That no Generall Councell had erred in any matter of moment to this day which will not be found true yet this would not have followed that it is therefore infallible and cannot erre I have no time to descend into Particulars therefore to the Generall still S. Augustine a Aug. L. 2. de Bapt. contra Donat cap. 3. puts a Difference betweene the Rules of Scripture and the Definitions of men This Difference is Praeponitur Scriptura That the Scripture hath the Prerogative That Prerogative is That whatsoever is found written in Scripture may neither be doubted nor disputed whether it be true or right But the Letters of Bishops may not only be disputed but corrected by Bishops that are more learned and wise then they or by Nationall Councels and Nationall Councels by Plenary or Generall And even b Ipsaque Plenaria saepâ—… priora à posterioribus emendari Plenary Councels themselves may be amended the former by the later It seemes it was no newes with S. Augustine that a Generall Councell might erre and therefore inferiour to the Scripture which may neither be doubted nor disputed where it affirmes And if it be so with the Definition of a Councell too as Vox Ecclesia â—…Word est ut non de 〈◊〉 judicenius rectene an secùs docuerit So. Stap. Relect c. 4 q. 1. Aâ—… Stapleton would have it That that may neither be doubted nor disputed Where is then the Scriptures Prerogative I know there is much shifting about this Place but it cannot be wrastled off b De Regulis Morum Disciplinâ Relect. Con. 6. q. 3. A. 4. Stapleton sayes first That S. Augustine speaks of the Rules of Manners and Discipline And this is Bellarmines last shift Both are out and Bellarmine in a Contradiction Bellarmine in a Contradiction For first he tels us Generall Councels cannot erre in c L. 2. de Concil c. 2. Princip Precepts of Manners and then to turne off Saint Augustine in this Place hee tels us That if Saint Augustine doth not speake of matter of Fact but of Right and of universall Questions of Right then he is to be understood d Ib. cap. 7. §. Potest etiam of Precepts of Manners not of Points of Faith Where he hath first runne himselfe upon a Contradiction and then we have gained this ground upon him That either his Answer is nothing or els against his owne state of the Question A Generall Councell can erre in Precepts of Manners So belike when Bellarmine is at a shift A Generall Councell can and cannot erre in Precept of Manners And Both are out For the whole Dispute of Saint Augustine is against the Errour of Saint Cyprian followed by the Donatists which was an Errour in Faith Namely That true Baptisme could not be given by Hereticks and such as were out of the Church And the Proofe which Stapleton and Bellarmine draw out of the subsequent words e Quando aliquo rerum experimeÌ„to quod clausum erat aperitur VVhen by any experiment of things that which was shut is opened is too weake For
I think it is undoubted Truth That one and the same Conclusion may be Faith to the Believer that cannot prove and Knowledge to the Learned that can And b Cont. Fund c. 4. S. Augustine I am sure in regard of one and the same thing even this the very Wisdome of the Church in her Doctrine ascribes Vnderstanding to one sort of men and Beliefe to another weaker sort And c Tho. p. 1. q. 2. A. 2. ad 1. Nihil prohibet illud quod secundùm se demonstrabile est scibile ab aliquo acciti ut Credibile qui Demonstrationem non capit Thomas goes with him Now for further satisfaction if not of you yet of others this may well be thought on Man lost by sin the Integrity of his Nature and cannot have Light enough to see the way to Heaven but by Grace This Grace was first merited after given by Christ this Grace is first kindled in Faith by which if we agree not to some Supernaturall Principles which no Reason can demonstrate simply we can never see our way But this Light when it hath made Reason submit it self cleares the Eye of Reason it never puts it out In which sense it may be is that of a L. 3. Rationabilu ubique diffusa Optatut That the very Catholike Church it selfe is reasonable as well as diffused every where By which b Ut ipsâ fide valentiores facti quod credimus intelligere mereannur non jam hominibus sed Deo intrinsecùs mentem nostram firmante illuminante S. Aug. cont Epist Fundamenti c. 14. Reason inlightened which is stronger then Reason the Church in all Ages hath beene able either to convert or convince or at least c Omnia genera Ingeniorum subdita Scripturae S. Aug. L. 22. cont Faust. cap. 96. stop the mouthes of Philosophers and the great men of Reason in the very Point of Faith where it is at highest To the present occasion then The first immediate Fundamentall Points of Faith without which there is no salvation as they cannot be proved by Reason so neither need they be determined by any Councell nor ever were they attempted they are so plaine set downe in the Scripture If about the sense and true meaning of these or necessary deduction out of these Prime Articles of Faith Generall Councels determine any thing as they have done in Nice and the rest there is no inconvenience that one and the same Canon of the Councell should be believed as it reflects upon the Articles and Grounds indemonstrable and d Almain 3. D. 24. q. 1. Tho. 2. 2a q. 1. A. 5. C. Id quod est scitum ab uno homine etiam in statu via est ab alio Creditum qui hoc Demonstrare non novit yet knowne to the Learned by the Meanes and Proofe by which that Deduction is vouched and made good And againe the Conclusion of a Councell suppose that in Nice about the Consubstantiality of Christ with the Father in it selfe considered is indemonstrable by Reason There I believe and assent in Faith But the same Conclusion e Concilium Nicanum deduxit Conclusionem ex Scripturis Bellar 2. de Concil c. 12. §. Sic etià m if you give me the Ground of Scripture and the Creed and somewhat must be supposed in all whether Faith or Knowledge is demonstrable by naturall Reason against any Arrian in the world And if it be demonstrable I may know it and have an Habit of it And what inconvenience in this For the weaker sort of Christians which cannot deduce when they have the Principle granted they are to rest upon the Definition only and their Assent is meere Faith yea and the Learned too where there is not a Demonstration evident to them assent by Faith onely and not by knowledge And what inconvenience in this Nay the necessity of Nature is such that these Principles once given the understanding of man cannot rest but it must be thus And the †S. Pet. 3. 15. Apostle would never have required a man to be alle to give a Reason and an account of the hope that is in him if he might not be able to know his account or have lawfull interest to give it when he knew it without prejudicing his Faith by his knowledge And suppose exact knowledge and meere Beliefe cannot stand together in the same Person in regard of the same thing by the same meanes yet that doth not make void this Truth For where is that exact knowledge or in whom that must not meerely in points of Faith believe the Article or Ground upon which they rest But when that is once believed it can demonstrate many things from it And Definitions of Councels are not Principia Fidei Principles of Faith but Deductions from them And now because you aske Wherein are we nearer Consid. 7. to unity by a Councell if a Councell may erre Besides the Answer given I promised to consider which Opinion was most agreeable with the Church which most able to preserve or reduce Christian Peace The Romane That a Councell cannot erre Or the Protestants That it can And this I propose not as a Rule but leave the Christian world to consider of it as I doe First then I Consider Whether in those Places of Scripture before mentioned or any other there bâ—…e promised to the present Church an absolute Infallibility Or whether such an Infallibility will not serve the turne as * Relect. Cont. 4. q. 2. Notab 3 Exacta Omnimodâ Infallibilitate non indiget sed satis est semel acceptis c. Stapleton after much wrigling is forced to acknowledge One not every way exact because it is enough if the Church doe diligently insist upon that which was once received and there is not need of so great certainty to open and explicate that which lyes hid in the seed of Faith sowne and deduce from it as to seeke out and teach that which was altogether unknowne And if this be so then sure the Church of the Apostles required guidance by a greater degree of Infallibility then the present Church which yet if it follow the Scripture is Infallible enough though it hath not the same degree of Certainty which the Apostles had and the Scripture hath Nor can I tell what to make of Bellarmine that in a whole Chapter disputes five Prerogatives in Certainty of Truth a L. 2 de Con. c. 12. §. ult Cùm utraque sint infallibilis veritatis aquè certa dici possunt that the Scripture hath above a Councell and at last Concludes That They may be said to be equally certain in Infallible Truth The next thing I Consider is Suppose this not Exact but congruous Infallibility in the Church Is it not residing according to Power and Right of Authority in the whole Church and in a Generall Councell only by Power deputed b Nam si Ecclesiae Vniversitati non
Catholikes utterly condemne it And well they may For no man can affirme it but he shall make himselfe a scorne to all the Learned Men of Christendome whose Iudgements are not Captivated by Romane Power And for my owne part I am cleare of a Et mirum est quod Adversarii non asserant cum Impiccabilem Et credo assercrent nisi quotidiana Summorum PontificuÌ„ Opera ad credendnÌ„ Oppositum compellerent Almain de Author Eccles cap. 10. sine Jacobus Almain's Opinion And a great wonder it is to me That they which affirme the Pope cannot erre do not affirme likewise that he cannot sinne And I verily believe they would be bold enough to affirme it did not the daily Workes of the Popes compell them to believe the Contrary For very many of them have led lives quite Contrary to the Gospell of Christ. Nay such lives as no Epicurean Monster storied out to the world hath out-gone them in sensuality or other grosse Impiety if their owne Historians be true Take your choice of b Platina Onuphrius in Vitis eorum John the thirteenth about the yeare 966. Or of Sylvester the second about the yeare 999. Or John the eighteenth about the yeare 1003. Or Benedict the ninth about the yeare 1033. Or Boniface the eighth about the yeare 1294 Or Alexander the sixt about the yeare 1492. And yet these and their like must be infallible in their Dictates and Conclusions of Faith Do your owne believe it Surely no. For c Non enim credo aliquem esse adeo impudentem Papae Assentatorem ut ci tribuere hoc velit ut nec errare nec in Interpretatione SS Literarum ballucinari possit Alphons à Castro I. 1. Advers Hares c. 4. And the Glosse confesses it plainely in C. 24. q. 〈◊〉 C. A recta ergo Alphonsus à Castro tels us plainly That he doth not believe that any man can be so grosse and impudent a flatterer of the Pope as to attribute this unto him that he can neither erre nor mistake in expounding the Holy Scripture This comes home And therefore it may well be thought it hath taken a shrewd Purge For these words are Expresse in the Edition at Paris 1534. But they are not to be found in that at Colen 1539. Nor in that at Antwerp 1556. Nor in that at Paris 1571. a Parding his Detection of Errours against Iewell p. 64. Harding sayes indeed Alphonsus left it out of himselfe in the following Editions Well First Harding sayes this but proves it not so I may chuse whether I will believe him or no. Secondly bee it so that hee did that cannot helpe their Cause a whit For say hee did dislike the sharpnesse of the Phrase or ought els in this speech yet he alter'd not his judgment of the thing For in all these later Editions he speakes as home if not more then in the first and sayes Expresly * Coelestinus crravit non solùm ut privata persona sed ut Papa c. Alph. à Castro L. 1. adv Haeres c. 4. Ibid. That the Pope may erre not onely as a private person but as Pope And in difficult Cases he adds That the Pope ought to Consult Viros doctos men of Learning And this also was the Opinion of the Ancient Church of Christ concerning the Pope and his Infallibility For thus Liberius and he a Pope himselfe writes to Athanasius Brother Athanasius if you thinke in the presence of God and Christ as I doe I pray subscribe this Confession which is thought to be the true Faith of the Holy Catholike and Apostolike Church that we may be the more certaine that you thinke concerning the Faith as We doe †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Liberius in Epist. ad Athanas. apud Athanas To. 1. p. 42. Edit Parisuns 1608. Et Edit Paris Latino-Grac 1627. Vt ego etiam persuasus sim inhaesitantèr That I also may be perswaded without all doubting of those things which you shall be pleased to Command me Now I would faine know if the Pope at that time were or did thinke himselfe Infallible how he should possibly be more certainly perswaded of any Truth belonging to the Faith by Athanasius his Concurring in judgment with him For nothing can make Infallibility more certaine then it is At least not the Concurring Iudgement that is Fallible as S. Athanasius was Beside the Pope Complemented exceeding low that would submit his unerring Iudgement to bee Commanded by Athanasius who hee well knew could Erre Againe in the Case of Easter which made too great a noyse in the Church of old a Post Aegyptiorum supputationes Alexandrinae Ecclesiae definitionem Episcopi quoque Romanae Ecclesiae per Literas plerique meam adhuc expectant sententiam quid existimem de die Paschae S. Ambros. L. 10. Epist. 83. Very many men called for S. Ambrose his Iudgement in that Point even after the Definition of the Church of Alexandria and the Bishop of Rome And this I presume they would not have done had they then conceived either the Pope or his Church Infallible And thus it continued downe till Lyra's time For he sayes expresly b Ex hoc patot quòd Ecclesia non consistit in hominibus ratione Potestatis vel Dignitatis Ecclesiasticae vel sacularis quid multi Principes summi Pontifices alii inferiores inventi sunt Apostat âsse à Fide c. Lyra in S. Matth. 16. 18. That many Popes as well as other Inferiours have not onely erred but even quite Apostatized from the Faith And yet now nothing but Infallibility will serve their turnes And sometimes they have not onely taken upon them to bee Infallible in Cathedrâ in their Chaire of Decision but also to Prophecie Infallibly out of the Scripture But Propheticall Scripture such as the Revelation is was too dangerous for men to meddle with which would bee carefull of their Credit in not Erring For it fell out in the time of Innocent the third and Honorius the third as c Ram. Pontifices ex S. Historiâ 〈◊〉 Qua mendaciâ—…sima esse exitus prob avâ—… Aventm Annaâ—… Boicrum L. 7. p. 529. Edit Basil. 1580. Aventine tels us That the then Popes assured the world that Destruction was at hand to Saracens Turks and Mahumetans which the Event shewed were notorious untruths And 't is remarkeable which happened Anno 1179. For then in a Councell held at Rome Pope Baron An. 1179. N. 13. Alexander the third Condemned Peter Lombard of Heresie And he lay under that Damnation for thirty and sixe yeares till Innocent the third restored him and condemned his Accusers Now Peter Lombard was then Condemned for some thing which hee had written about the humane Nature of our Saviour Christ. So here was a great Mystery of the Faith in hand something about the Incarnation And the Pope was in Cathedrâ and that in a Councell of three hundred Archbishops
and Bishops And in this Councell he condemned Peter Lombard and in him his Opinion about the Incarnation And therefore of necessity either Pope Alexander erred and that in Cathedrâ as Pope in Condemning him Or Pope Innocentius in restoring him The truth is Pope Alexander had more of Alexander the Great then of S. Peter in him And being accustomed to warlike Imployments he understood not that which Peter Lombard had written about this Mystery And so He and his Learned Assistants Condemned him unjustly And whereas you professe * Apud A. C. p. 68. after That you hold nothing against your Conscience I must ever wonder much how that can be true since you hold this of the Pope's Infallibility especially as being Propheticall in the Conclusion If this be true why doe you not lay all your strength together all of your whole Society and make this one Proposition evident For all Controversies about matters of Faith are ended and without any great trouble to the Christian World if you can but make this one Proposition good That the Pope is an Infallible Iudge Till then this shame will follow you infallibly and eternally That you should make the Pope a meere man Principium Fidei a Principle or Authour of Faith and make the mouth of him whom you call Christ's Vicar sole Iudge both of Christ's Word be it never so manifest and of his Church be she never so Learned and carefull of his Truth And for Conclusion of this Point I would faine know since this had beene so plaine so easie a way either to prevent all Divisions about the Faith or to end all Controversies did they arise why this briefe but most necessary Proposition The Bishop of Rome cannot erre in his Iudiciall Determinations concerning the Faith is not to be found either in Letter or sense in any Scripture in any Councell or in any Father of the Church for the full space of a thousand yeares and more after Christ For had this Proposition been true and then received in the Church how weake were all the Primitive Fathers to prescribe so many Rules and Cautions for avoydance of Heresie as Tertullian and Vincentius Lirinensis and others do and to indure such hard Conflicts as they did and with so many various Haereticks To see Christendome so rent and torne by some distempered Councels as that of Ariminum the second of Ephesus and others Nay to see the whole world almost become Arrian to the amazement of it selfe And yet all this time not so much as call in this Necessary Assistance of the Pope and let the world know That the Bishop of Rome was infallible that so in his Decision all differences might cease For either the Fathers of the Church Greeke as well as Latine knew this Proposition to be true That the Pope cannot Erre Iudicially in matters belonging to the Faith or they knew it not If you say they knew it not you charge them with a base and unworthy Ignorance no wayes like to over-cloud such and so many Learned men in a Matter so Necessary and of such infinite use to Christendome If you say they knew it and durst not deliver this Truth how can you charge them which durst die for Christ with such Cowardise towards his Church And if you say they knew it and with-held it from the Church you lay a most unjust Load upon those Charitable Soules which loved Christ too well to imprison any Truth but likely to make or keepe peace in his Church Catholike over the world But certainly as no Divine of worth did then dreame of any such Infallibility in Him so is it a meere dreame or worse of those Moderne Divines who affirme it now a The wilde Extent of the Popes Infallibility and Jurisdiction is a Mistake These are the Words of a Great Romane Catholike uttered to my selfe But I will spare his Name because he is living and I will not draw your Envy upon him And as b Puto quòd ipsi etiam rideant quum hoc audiunt tamen nifi hoc dicant quod erabescant si dicant non habent omninò quod dicant Sed quid ad nos Nâ—…ini invidemus Legant nobis hoc de Scripturis Sanctis credimus S. August de Vnit. Eccl. c. 17. S. Augustine somtimes spake of the Donatists and their absurd limiting the whole Christian Church to Africa onely so may I truly say of the Romanists confining all Christianity to the Romane Doctrine governed by the Pope's Infallibility I verily perswade my selfe That even the Jesuites themselves laugh at this And yet unlesse they say this which they cannot but blush while they say they have nothing at all to say But what 's this to us we envy no man If the Pope's Decision bee infallible Legant Let them read it to us out of the Holy Scripture and wee 'l believe it In the meane time take this with you that most certaine it is That the Pope hath no Infallibility to attend his Cathedrall Iudgement in Things belonging to the Faith For first besides the silence of Impartiall Antiquity Diverse c Papa non solùm Errore Personali sed Errore Iudiciali potest errare in Materia Fidei Almain L. de Author Eccles. c. 10. of your Owne confesse it yea and proove it too by sundry Instances Secondly there is a great Question among the Learned both Schoole-men and Controversers Whether the Pope comming to bee an Hereticke may bee Deposed And 't is learnedly disputed by d L. 2. de Rom. Font c. 30. Bellarmine The Opinions are different For the e Si sit à Fide de vius Dist. 40. Can. Si Papa Canon-Law saies expresly He may be judged and deposed by the Church in Case of Heresie †Iure Divino Papatu privatus est c. Io. de Turrecrem L. 4. Par. 2. c. 20. Et Bellar. L. 2. de Re. Pent. c. 30. Io. de Turrecremata is of Opinion That the Pope is to be deposed by the Church so soone as he becomes an Hereticke though as yet not a manifest one Because he is already deprived by Divine Right And recites another opinion That the Pope cannot be deposed though be fall into secret or manifest Heresie * Papa factus Hareticus non est ipso facte vel jure Divino vel humano depositus sed deponendus Cajet Tract de Author Papa Concilii c. 20. Cajetan thinkes that the Pope cannot be deposed but for a manifest Heresie and that then he is not deposed ipso facto but must be deposed by the Church †Papa Hareticus manifestus per se desinit esse Papa Caput c. Et tum potest ab Ecclesiâ Iudicari puniri Bellar. L. 2. de Rom. Pont. c. 30. §. Est ergo quinta Bellarmines owne Opinion is That if the Pope become a manifest Hereticke he presently ceases to be Pope and Head of the Church and may then be Iudged and
Protestants have ever beene ready for Truth and in Charity to grant as much as might be And therefore from the beginning many †Nos fatemur sub Papaetu plurimum esse boni imò omne bonum Christianum at que etiam illinc ad nos devenisse c. Luther contra Anabaptist citante Bellarmine L. 4. de Notis Eccles. c. 16. §. penult Et Field appendice par 3. c. 2. Et Ios. Hall Bishop of Exeter L. Of the Old Religion c. t. Many holding Christ the Foundation aright and groaning under the burden of Popish trash c. by a generall repentance and assured Faith in their Saviour did finde favour with the Lord. D. Geo. Abbot late Archbishop of Cant. Answer to Hill ad Ration 1. §. 30. For my part I dare not deny the possibility of their Salvation who have beene the chiefest Instruments of ours c. Hooker in his Discourse of Iustificat §. 17. In former times a man might hold the generall Doctrine of those Churches wherein our Fathers lived and be saved And yet since the Councell of Trent some are found in it in such degree of Orthodoxy as we may well hope of their Salvation Field L. 3. Eccl. c. 47. The Latine or Westerne Church subject to the Romish Tyranny was a true Church in which a saving profession of the Truth of Christ was found Ios. Hall B. of Exeter L. Of the old Religion fine in his Advertisement to the Reader p. 202. Non panci retinuerunt Christum Fundamentum c. Mornaeus Tract de Ecclesia c. 9. fine Inter sordes istas ista quae summe cum periculo expectetur salus non ipsorum Additamentis sed iis quae nobiscum habent communia Fundamentis est attribuenda Io. Prideaux Lectione 9. fine Papa aliquam adhuc Religionis formam relinquit spem vitae aternae non tollit c. Calv. Instruct. advers Libertinos c. 4. Leà rned men granted this So that you needed not have put such a serious Mark that upon my speech as if none before had or none but I would speake it And if your Marke that were not for some New matter was it for some Great Yes sure it was For what greater then Salvation But then I pray marke this too That might be saved grants but a a Here A. C. gets another snatch and tels us That to grant a Possibility of Salvation in the Romane Church is the free Confession of an Adversary and therfore is of force against us and extorted by Truth But to say that salvation is more securely and easily to be had in the Protestant Faith that 's but their partiall Opinion in their own behalfe and of no force especially with Romane Catholikes I easily believe this latter part That this as A. C. and the rest use the matter with their Proselytes shall be of little or no force with Romane Catholikes But it will behoove them that it bee of force For let any indifferent man weigh the Necessary Requisites to Salvation and he shall finde this no partiall Opinion but very plaine and reall Verity That the Protestant living according to his belief is upon the safer way to Heaven And as for my Confession let them enforce it as farre as they can against me so they observe my Limitations which if they do A. C. and his fellowes will of all the rest have but little comfort in such a limited Possibility Possibility no sure or safe way to Salvation The Possibility I think cannot be denied the Ignorants especially because they hold the Foundation and cannot survey the Building And the Foundation can deceive no man that rests upon it But a secure way they cannot goe that hold with such corruptions when they know them Now whether it be wisdome in such a Point as Salvation is to forsake a Church in the which the Ground of Salvation is firme to follow a Church in which it is but possible one may be saved but very probable he may do worse if he look not well to the Foundation judge ye I am sure b L. 1. De Bapt. cont Don. c. 3. Gravitèr peccarent in rebus ad salutem animae pertinentibus c. â—…o solo quod certis incerta praeponerent S. Augustine thought it was not and judged it a great sinne in Point of Salvation for a man to preferre incerta certis uncertainties and naked possibilities before an evident and certaine Course And c Propter incertitudinem propriae Iustitiae periculuminanis gloriâ—… tutissimuÌ„ est fiduciam totam in solá Dei misericordiâ benignitate reponere Bellar. L. 5. ae Iustif. c. 7. §. Sit tertia Propositio Bellarmine is of Opinion and that in the Point of Iustification That in regard of the uncertainty of our own Righteousnesse and of the danger of vaine glory tutissimum est 't is safest to repose our whole trust in the Mercy and Goodnesse of God And surely if there be One safer way then another as he Confesses there is he is no wise man that in a matter of so great moment will not betake himselfe to the safest way And therefore even you your selves in the Point of Condignity of Merit though you write it and preach it boysterously to the People yet you are content to dye renouncing the condignity of all your owne Merits and trust to Christs Now surely if you will not venture to dye as you live live and beleeve in time as you meane to die And one thing more because you bid Marke this let me remember to tell you for the benefit of others Vpon this very Point That we acknowledge an honest ignorant Papist may be saved you and your like worke upon the advantage of our Charity and your owne want of it to abuse the weake For thus I am told you worke upon them You see the Protestants at least many of them confesse there may be salvation in our Church We absolutely deny there is salvation in theirs Therefore it is safer to come to Ours then to stay in theirs to be where almost all grant Salvation then where the greater part of the world deny it This Argument is very prevailing with men that cannot weigh it and with women especially that are put in feare by * And this peece of Cunning to affright the weake was in use in Iustin Martyrs time Quosdam scimus c. ad Iracundiam suam Evangelium pâ—…ntes c. quibus si potestas ea obtigisset ut â—…los Gehenna traderent Orbem quoque Vniversum consumpsissent Iust. Martyr Epist. ad Zenam Serinam And here 't is ad Iracundiam suam Ecclesiam pertrahentes c. violent though causelesse denying Heaven unto them And some of your party since this have set out a Booke called Charity mistaken But beside the Answer fully given to it this alone is sufficient to Confute it First that in this our Charity what ever yours be is not mistaken unlesse the
Charity of the Church her selfe were mistaken in the Case of the Donatists as shall †§. 35. Nu. 3. after appeare Secondly even Mistaken Charity if such it were is farre better then none at all And if the Mistaken be ours the None is yours Yea but A. C. tells us That this denyall of Salvation A. C. p. 65. is grounded upon Charitie as were the like threats of Christ and the Holy Fathers For there is but one true Faith and one true Church and out of that there is no Salvation And he that will not heare the Church S. Matth. 18. let him bee as a Heathen and a Publicane Therefore he sayes 't is more Charity to fore-warne us of the danger by S. Matth. 18. 17. these threats then to let us run into it thorough a false security 'T is true that there is but one true Faith and but one true Church But that one both Faith and Church is the a And this is prooved by the Creed â—…n which we professe our Beliefe of the Catholike not of the Roman Church Catholike Christian not the Particular Romane And this Catholike Christian Church he that will not both heare and obey yea and the Particular Church in which hee lives too so farre as it in necessaries agrees with the Vniversall is in as bad condition as a Heathen and a Publicane and perhaps in some respects worse And were we in this Case we should thanke A. C. for giving us warning of our danger But 't is not so For he thunders out all these threats and denyall of salvation because we joyne not with the Romane Church in all things as if her Corruptions were part of the Catholike Faith of Christ. So the whole passage is a meere begging of the Question and then threatning upon it without all ground of Reason or Charity In the meane time let A. C. looke to himselfe that in his false security hee run not into the danger and losse of his owne salvation while hee would seeme to take such care of ours But though this Argument prevailes with the weake yet it is much stronger in the cunning then the true force of it For all Arguments are very mooving that lay their ground upon b This is a free Confession of the Adversaries Argument against themselves and therefore is of force A. C. p. 64. But every Confession of Adversaries or others is to be taken with its Qualities and Conditions If you leave out or change these you wrong the Confession and then 't is of no force And â—…so doth A. C. here And though Bell. rm makes the Confession of the Adversaâ—…y a note of the true Church L. 4. de Notâ—…s Ecâ—…l c. 16. yet in the very beginning whâ—… layes his Ground 〈◊〉 1. he layes it 〈◊〉 plaine fallacie à secunaùm quid ad simpliciter the Adversaries Confession especially if it be confessed and avouched to be true But if you would speak truly and say Many Protestants indeed confesse there is salvation possible to be attained in the Romane Church but that yet they say withall that the Errors of that Church are so many * For they are no meane Differences that are betweene us by Bellarmines owne Confession Agendum est non de rebus levibus sed de gravissimis Quastionibut quae ad ipsa Fidei fundament a pertinent c. Bellarm. in praefat Operibus praefixá §. 3. And therefore the Errours in them and the Corruptions of them cannot bee of small Consequence by your owne Confession Yeâ—… by your owne indeed For you A. C. say full as much if not more then Bellarmine Thus We Catholikes hold all points in which Protestants differ from us in Doctrine of Faith to be Fundamentall and necessary to bee Believed or at least not denyed A. C. Relation of the first Conference p. 28. and some so great by the Confession of your owne as weaken the Foundation that it is very hard to goe that way to Heaven especially to them that have had the Truth manifested the heart of this Argument were utterly broken Besides the force of this Argument lyes upon two things one directly Expressed the other but as upon the By. That which is expressed is We and our Adversaries consent that there is salvation to some in the Romane Church What would you have us as malicious at least as rash as your selves are to us and deny you so much as possibility of Salvation If we should we might make you in some things straine for a Proofe But we have not so learned Christ as either to return evill for evill in this headie course or to deny salvation to some ignorant silly soules whose humble peaceable obedience makes them safe among any part of men that professe the Foundation Christ And therefore seeke not â—…o help our Cause by denying this comfort to silly Christians as you most fiercely do where you can come to worke upon them And this was an old trick of the Donatists For in the Point of Baptisme Whether that Sacrament was true in the Catholike Church or in the Part of Donatus they exhorted all to be baptised among them VVhy Because both Parts granted that Baptisme was true among the Dâ—…atists which that peevish Sect most unjustly denyed the sound part as S. †Esse verò apud Dâ—…natistas Baptismum illi asserunt nos concedimus c. L. 1. de Bap. cont Donat. c. 3. Augustine delivers it I would aske now Had not the Orthodox true Baptisme among them because the Donatists denyed it injuriously Or should the Orthodox against Truth have denyed Baptisme among the Donatists either to cry quittance with them or that their Argument might not be the stronger because both parts granted But Marke this how farre you runne from all common Principles of Christian Peace as well as Christian Truth while you deny salvation most unjustly to us from which you are farther off your selves Besides if this were or could be made a concluding Argument I pray why doe not you believe with us in the Point of the Eucharist For all sides agree in the Faith of the Church of England That in the most Blessed Sacrament the Worthy receiver is by his * Corpus Christi manducatur in Coena c. tantùm caelesti spirituall ratione Medium autem quo Corpus Christi accipitur manducatur in Coenâ Fides est Eccl. Angl. Art 28. After a spirituall manner by Faith on our behalfe and by the working of the Holy Ghost on the behalfe of Christ. Fulk in 1 Cor. 11. p. 528. Christus se cum omnibus bonis suit in Coenâ offert nos eum recipimus fide c. Calv. 4. Inst. c. 17. §. 5. Et Hooker L. 5. §. 67. p. 176. And say not you the same with us Spiritualis manducatio quae per Animam fit ad Christi Carnem in Sacramento pertingit Cajet Tom. 2. Opusc. de Euchar. Tract 2. Cap. 5. Sed
spiritualiter idest invisibiliter per virtutem Spiritus Sancti Thom. p. 3. q. 75. A. 1. ad 1 um Spiritualiter manducandus est per Fidem Charitatem Tena in Heb. 13. Difficultate 8. Faith made spiritually partaker of the true and reall Body and Blood of Christ †I would have no man troubled at the words Truly and Really For that Blessed Sacrament received as it ought to be doth Truly and Really exhibit and apply the Body and the Blood of Christ to the Receiver So Bishop White in his Defence against T. W. P. Edit London 1617. p. 138. And Calvin in 1 Cor. 10. 3. Verè datur c. And againe in 1 Cor. 11. 24. Neque enim Mortis tantùm Resurrectionis suae beneficium nobis offert Christus sed Corpus ipsum in quo passus est resurrexit Concludo Realiter ut vulgò loquuntur hoc est Verè nobis in Coenâ datur Christi Corpus ut sit Animis nostris in cibum Salutarem c. truly and really and of all the Benefits of his Passion Your Romane Catholikes adde a manner of this his Presence Transubstantiation which many deny and the Lutherans a manner of this Presence Consubstantiation which more deny If this argument be good then even for this Consent it is safer Communicating with the Church of England then with the Roman or Lutheran Because all agree in this Truth not in any other Opinion Nay †Hoe totum pendet ex Principiis Metaphysicis philosophicis ad Fidei Doctrinam non est necessarium Suarez iâ—… 3. Thom. Disput. 50. §. 2. Suarez himselfe and he a very Learned Adversary what say you to this A. C doth Truth force this from him Confesses plainely †That to Beleeve Transubstantiation is not simply necessary A. C. p. 64. 65. to Salvation And yet he knew well the Church had Determined it And * Bellar. L. 3. de Eucha c. 18. §. Ex his colligimus Bellarmine after an intricate tedious and almost inexplicable Discourse about an Adductive Conversion A thing which neither Divinity nor Philosophy ever heard of till then is at last forced to come to this a Sed quidquid fit de Modis loquendi illud tenendum est Conversionem Panis Uini in Corpus Sanguinem Christi esse substantialem sed arcanam ineffabilem nullis naturalibus Conversionibus per omnia similem c. Bellar. in Recognit hujus loci Et Vid. §. 38. Nu. 3 Whatsoever is concerning the manner and formes of speech illud tenendum est this is to be held that the Conversion of the Bread and Wine into the Body and the Blood of Christ is substantiall but after a secret and ineffable manner and not like in all things to any naturall Conversion whatsoever Now if he had left out Conversion and affirmed only Christs reall Presence there after a mysterious and indeed an ineffable manner no man could have spoke better And therefore if you will force the Argument alwayes to make that the safest way of Salvation which differing Parties agree on why doe you not yeeld to the force of the same Argument in the Beliefe of the Sacrament one of the most immediate meanes of Salvation where not onely the most but all agree And your owne greatest Clarkes cannot tell what to say to the Contrary I speake here for the force of the Argument which certainly in it selfe is nothing though by A. C. made of great account For he sayes 'T is a A. C. p. 64. Confession of Adversaries extorted by Truth Iust as * Sed quia it a magnum firmamentum vanitatis vestrae in hâc sententia esse abitramini ut ad hoc tiâ—… terminandam putares Epistolam quo quasi recentiùs in Animus LegeÌ„tium remaneret brevitèr respondeo c. S. Aug. L. 2. cont Lit. Petil. c. 108. Andhere A. C. ad hoc sibi putavit terminandaÌ„ Collationem sed frustra ut apâ—…bit Num. 6. Petilian the Donatist brag'd in the case of Baptisme But in truth 't is nothing For the Syllogisme which it frames is this The Papists and the Protestants which are the Parties differing agree in this That there is Salvation possible to be found in the Romane Church But in Point of Faith and Salvation 't is safest for a man to take that way which the differing Parties agree on Therfore 't is safest for a man to be and continue in the Romane Church To the Major Proposition then I observe first that though many Learned Protestants grant this all doe not And then that Proposition is not Universall nor able to sustaine the Conclusion For they doe not in this all agree nay I doubt not but there are some Protestants which can and do as stifly and as churlishly deny them Salvation as they doe us And A. C. should doe well to consider whether they doe it not upon as good reason at least Next for the Minor Proposition Namely That in point of Faith and Salvation 't is safest for a man to take that way which the Adversary confesses or the Differing Parties agree on I fay that is no Metaphysicall Principle but a bare Contingent Proposition and may be true or false as the matter is to which it is applyed and so of no necessary truth in it selfe nor able to leade in the Conclusion Now that this Proposition In point of Faith and Salvation 't is safest for a man to take that way which the differing Parties agree on or which the Adversary Confesses hath no strength in it selfe but is sometimes true and sometimes false as the Matter is about which it is conversant is most evident First by Reason Because Consent of disagreeing Parties is neither Rule nor Proofe of Truth For Herod and Pilate disagreeing Parties enough yet agreed against Truth it selfe But Truth rather is or should be the Rule to frame if not to force Agreement And secondly by the two Instances †§. 35. N. 3 before given For in the Instance betweene the Orthodox Church then and the Donatists this Proposition is most false For it was a Point of Faith and so of Salvation that they were upon Namely the right use and administration of the Sacrament of Baptisme And yet had it beene safest to take up that way which the differing Parts agreed on or which the adverse Part Confessed men must needs have gone with the Donatists against the Church And this must fall out as oft as any Heretick will cunningly take that way against the Church which the Donatists did if this Principle shall goe for currant But in the second Instance concerning the Eucharist a matter of Faith and so of Salvation too the same Proposition is most true And the Reason is because here the matter is true Namely The true and reall participation of the Body and Blood of Christ in that Blessed Sacrament But in the former the matter was false Namely That Rebaptization
Trent opposed this word realiter Figmento Calvinistico to the Calvinisticâ—…ll figment Ibid. Bellarmine confesses it For hee saith Protestants do often grant that the true and reall Body of Christ is in the Eucharist But he adds That they never say so farre as he hath read That it is there â—…ruly and Really unlesse they speake of the Supper which shall be in Heaven Well first if they grant that the true and Reall Body of Christ is in that Blessed Sacrament as Bellarmine confesses they doe and 't is most true then A. C. is false who charges all the Protestants with deniall or doubtfulnesse in this Point And A. C. p 65. secondly Bellarmine himselfe also shewes here his Ignorance or his Malice Ignorance if he knew it not Malice if he would not know it For the Calvinists at least they which follow Calvine himself do not onely believe that the true and reall Body of Christ is received in the Eucharist but that it is there and that we partake of it verè realiter which are b Calv. in 1. Cor. 10. 3. verè c. in 1. Cor. 11. 24. realiter Vids suprà Num. 3. Calvine's owne words and yet Bellarmine boldly affirmes that to his reading no one Protestant did ever affirme it And I for my part cannot believe but Bellarmine had read Calvine and very carefully he doth so frequently and so mainly Oppose him Nor can that Place by any Art be shifted or by any Violence wrested from Calvine's true meaning of the Presence of Christ in and at the blessed Sacrament of the Fucharist to any Supper in Heaven whatsoever But most manifest it is that Quod legerim for ought I have read will not serve Bellarmine to Excuse him For he himselfe but in the very c Bellar. L. 1. de Eucharistia c. 1. §. Secundo docet Chapter going before quotes foure Places out of Calvine in which he sayes expresly That we receive in the Sacrament the Body and the Blood of Christ Verè truly So Calvine sayes it foure times and Bellarmine quotes the places and yet he sayes in the very next Chapter That never any Protestant said so to his Reading And for the Church of England nothing is more plaine then that it believes and teaches the true and reall Presence of Christ in the * The Body of Christ is given taken and eaten in the Supper of the Lord onely after an Heavenly and Spirituall manner And the meanes whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten is Faith Eccl. Ang. Art 28. So here 's the Manner of Transubstantiation denied but the Body of Christ twice affirmed And in the prayer before Consecration thus Grant us Gracious Lord so to eat the Flesh of thy deare Sonne Jesus Christ and to drinke his Blood c. And againe in the second Prayer or Thanksgiving after Consecration thus We give thee Thanks for that thou dost vouchsafe to feed us which have duly received these holy Mysteries with the spirituall food of the most precious Body and Blood of thy Sonne our Saviour Jesus Christ c. Eucharist unlesse A. C. can make a Body no Body and Blood no Blood as perhaps he can by Transubstantiation as well as Bread no Bread Wine no Wine And the Church of England is Protestant too So Protestants of all sorts maintain a true and reall Presence of Christ in the Eucharist and then where 's any known or damnable Heresie here As for the Learned of those zealous men that died in this Cause in Q. Maries dayes they denied not the Reall Presence simply taken but as their Opposites forced Transubstantiation upon them as if that and the Reall Presence had beene all one Whereas all the Ancient Christians ever believed the one and none but moderne and superstitious Christians believe the other If they do believe it for I for my part doubt they do not And as for the Vnlearned in those times and all times their zeale they holding the Foundation may eat out their Ignorances and leave them safe Now that the Learned Protestants in Q. Maries dayes did not denie nay did maintaine the Reall Presence will manifestly appeare For when the Commissioners obtruded to Io. Frith the Presence of Christ's naturall Body in the Sacrament and that without all figure or similitude Io. Frith acknowledges †Io. Fox Marâ—…rolog To. 2. London 1597. pag. 943. That the inward man doth as verily receive Christ's Body as the outward man receives the Sacrament with his Mouth And he addes a Fox ibid. That neither side ought to make it a necessary Article of Faith but leave it indifferent Nay Archbishop Cranmer comes more plainely and more home to it then Frith For if you understand saith b Cranmer apud Fox ibid. p. 1301. he by this word Really Reipsâ that is in very deed and effectually so Christ by the Grace and efficacy of his Passion is indeed and truly present c. But if by this word Really you understand c I say Corporalitèr Corporally for so Bellarmine hath it expresly Quod autem Corporalitèr propriè sumatur Sanguis Caro c. probari potest omnibus Argumentis c. Bellar. L. 1. de Eucharist c. 12. §. Sed tota And I must bee bold to tell you more then That this is the Doctrine of the Church of Rome For I must tell you too that Bellarmine here contradicts himselfe For he that tels us here that it can be proved by many Arguments that we receive the Flesh and the Blood of Christ in the Eucharist Corporaliter said as expresly before had he remembred it that though Christ be in this Blessed Sacrament verè realiter yet saith he non dicemus Corporaliter i. e. co modo quo suâ naturâ existunt Corpora c. Bellar. L. 1. de Euchar. c. 2. §. Tertia Regula So Bellarm. here is in a notorious Contradiction Or els it will follow plainly out of him That Christ in the Sacrament is existent one way and received another which is a grosse absurdity And that Corporaliter was the Doctrine of the Church of Rome and meant by Transubstantiation is farther plaine in the Booke called The Institution of a Christian man set forth by the Bishops in Convocation in Hen. 8. time An 1534 Cap. Of the Sacrament of the Altar The words 〈◊〉 Unaâ—…r the forme and figure of Bread and Wine the very Body and Blood of Christ is Corporally really c. exhibited and received c. And Aquinas expresses it thus Quia tamen substantia Corporis Christi realiter non dâ—…iditur à sua quantitate dimensivâ ab aliis 〈◊〉 â—…bus indè est quod ex virealis Concomitantiae est in hoc Sacramento tota quantitas dimensiva Corporis Christi omnia Accidentia ejus Tho. p. 3. q. 76. Ar. 4. c. Corporaliter Corporally in his naturall and Organicall Body under the Formes of Bread and Wine 't
but so not as it is the Baptisme of Hereticks but as it is the Baptisme of Christ. Iust as we approve the Baptisme of Adulterers Idolaters Witches and yet not as'tis theirs but as 't is Christs Baptisme For none of these for all their Baptisme shall inherit the Kingdome of God And the Apostle reckons Hereticks among them a Gal. 5. 19. 20. 21. Galat. 5. And againe afterwards It is not therefore yours saith †Non ergo vestrum est quod dâ—…struere metuimus sed Christi quod in 〈◊〉 per se 〈◊〉 est S. Aug. Ibid. Saint Augustine which wee feare to destroy but Christs which even among the Sacrilegious is of and in it selfe holy Now you shall see how full this comes home to our Petilianist A. C. for hee is one of the Contracters of the Church of Christ to Rome as the Donatists confined it to Africke And he cries out That a Possibility of Salvation A. C. p. 6â—… is a free Confession of the Adversaries and is of force against them and to bee thought extorted from them by force of Truth it selfe I Answer I doe indeed for my part leaving other men free to their owne judgement acknowledge a Possibility of Salvation in the Romane Church But so as that which I grant to Romanists is not as they are Romanists but as they are Christians that is as they believe the Creed and hold the Foundation Christ himselfe not as they associate themselves wittingly and knowingly to the grosse Superstitions of the Romish Church Nor doe I feare to destroy quod ipsorum est that which is theirs but yet I dare not proceed so roughly as with theirs or for theirs to deny or weaken the Foundation which is Christs even among them and which is and remaines holy even in the midst of their Superstitions And I am willing to hope there are many among them which keep within that Church and yet wish the Superstitions abolished which they know and which pray to God to forgive their errours in what they know not and which hold the Foundation firme and live accordingly and which would have all things amended that are amisse were it in their power And to such I dare not deny a Possibility of Salvation for that which is Christs in them though they hazzard themselves extremely by keeping so close to that which is Superstition and in the Case of Images comes too neare Idolatry Nor can A. C. shift this A. C. p. 66. off by adding living and dying in the Romane Church For this living and dying in the Romane Church as is before expressed cannot take away the Possibility of Salvation from them which believe and repent of whatsoever is errour or sinne in them be it sinne knowne to them or be it not But then perhaps A. C. will reply that if this be so I must then maintaine that a Donatist also living and dying in Schisme might be saved To which I answer two wayes First that a plaine honest Donatist having as is confessed true Baptisme and holding the Foundation as for ought I know the †For though Prateolus will make Donatus and from him the Donatists to be guilty of an impious Heresie I doubt he meanes Arrianisme though he name it not in making the Sonne of God lesse then the Father and the Holy Ghost lesse then the Sonne L. 4. de Haeres Har. 14. yet these things are most manifest out of S. Aug. concerning them who lived with them both in time and place and understood them and their Tenets farre better then Prateolus could And first S. Aug. tels us concerning them Arriani Patris Filii Spiritus Sancti diversas substantias esse dicunt Donatista autem unam Trinitatis substantiam confitentur So they are no Arrians Secondly Si aliqui corum minorem Filium esse dixerunt quà m Pater est ejusdem tamen substantiae non negârunt But this is but si aliqui if any so 't was doubtfull this too though Prateolus delivers it positively Thirdly Plurimi verò in iis hoc se dicunt omnino credere de Patre Filio Spiritu Sancto quod Cathilica credit Ecclesia Necipsa cum illis vertitur Questio sed de sola Communione infoeliciter litigant c. De sola Onely about the Vnion with the Church Therefore they erred not in Fundamentall Points of Faith And Lastly All that can farther be said against them is That some of them to win the Goths to them when they were powerfull said Hoc se Credere quod illi Credunt Now the Goths for the most were Arrians But then saith S. Aug. they were but nonnulli some of them And of this some it was no more Certaine then sicut audivimus as we have heard S. Aug. knew it not And then if it were true of some yet Majorum suorum Authoritate convincuntur Quia nec Donatus ipse sic credidisse asseritur de cujus parte se esse gloriantur S Aug. Epist. 50. Where Prateolus is againe deceived for he sayes expresly that Donatus affirmed the Sonne to be lesse then the Father Impius ille asserebat c. But then indeed and which perchance deceived Prateolus beside Donatus the founder of this Heresie there was another Donatus who succeeded Majorinus at Carthage and he was guilty of the Heresie which Prateolus mentions Et extant scripta ejus ubi apparet as S. Aug. confesses L. 1. de Haereâ—… Har. 69. But then S. Aug. adds there also nec facilè in iis quisquam that scarce any of the Donatists did so much as know that this Donatus held that Opinion much lesse did they believe it themselves S. Aug. Ibid. Donatists did and repenting of what ever was sinne in him and would have repented of the Schisme had it beene known to him might be saved Secondly that in this Particular the Romanist and the Donatist differ much And that therefore it is not of necessary coÌ„sequence that if a Romanist now upon the Conditions before expressed may be saved Therefore a Donatist heretofore might For in regard of the Schisme the Donatist was in one respect worse and in greater danger of damnation then the Romanist now is And in an other respect better and in lesse danger The Donatist was in greater danger of damnation if you consider the Schisme it selfe then for they brake from the Orthodox Church without any cause given them And here it doth not follow if the Romanist have a Possibility of Salvation therefore a Donatist hath But if you consider the Cause of the Schisme now then the Donatist was in lesse danger of Damnation then the Romanist is Because the Church of Rome gave the first and the greatest cause of the Schisme as is prooved †§. 21. N. c. before And therefore here it doth not follow That if a Donatist have possibility of Salvation Therefore a Romanist hath For a lesser Offender may have that possibility of safety
ad hoc teneri Divino jure Bel. L. 1. de Sacrament in genere c. 2. §. 2. Bohemians must have a Dispensation that it may be lawfull for them to receive the Sacrament as Christ commanded them And this must not be granted to them neither unlesse they will acknowledge most opposite to Truth that they are not bound by Divine Law to receive it in both kindes And here their Building with untempered Mortar appeares most manifestly For they have no shew to maintaine this but the fiction of Thomas of Aquin That he which receives the Body of Christ receives also his Blood per †concomitantiam by concomitancy because the Blood goes alwayes with the Body of which Terme †Tho. p. 3. q. 76. A. 2. c. alibi passim Thomas was the first Author I can yet finde First then if this be true I hope Christ knew it And then why did he so unusefully institute it in both kindes Next if this be true Concomitancy accompanies the Priest as well as the People and then why may not he receive it in one kinde also Thirdly this is apparently not true For the Eucharist is a Sacrament Sanguinis effusi of Blood shed and poured out And Blood poured out and so severed from the Body goes not along with the Body per concomitantiam And yet Christ must rather erre or proceed I know not how in the Institution of the Sacrament in both kindes rather then the Holy unerring Church of Rome may doe amisse in the Determination for it and the Administration of it in one kinde Nor will the Distinction That Christ instituted this as a Sacrifice to which both kindes were necessary serve the turne For suppose that true yet hee instituted it as a Sacrament also or els that Sacrament had no Institution from Christ which I presume A. C. dares not affirme And that Institution which this Sacrament had from Christ was in both kindes And since here 's mention happen'd of Sacrifice my Punct 3. Third Instance shall be in the Sacrifice which is offer'd up to God in that Great and High Mystery of our Redemption by the death of Christ For as Christ offer'd up a Christ by his owne Blood entred once into the Holy Place and obtained eternall Redemption for us Heb. 9. 12. And this was done by way of Sacrifice By the offering of the Body of Iesus Christ once made Heb. 10. 10. Christ gave himselfe for us to be an Offering and a Sacrifice of a sweet smelling savour unto God Eph. 5. 2. Out of which place the Schoole infers Passioâ—… Christi verum Sacrificium suisse Tho. p. 3. q. 48. Art 3. c Christ did suffer Death upon the Crosse for our Redemption and made there by his one Oblation of himselfe once offered a full perfect and sufficient Sacrifice Oâ—…lation and Satisfaction for the sinnes of the whole World Eccles. Ang. in Canone Consecrationis Euchar. himselfe once for all a full and all-sufficient Sacrifice for the sinne of the whole world So did He Institute and Command a b And Christ did Institute and in his Holy Gospell Command us to continue a Perpetuall Memory of that his pretious Death untill his Comming againe Eccles. Ang. ibid. Memory of this Sacrifice in a Sacrament even till his comming againe For at and in the Eucharist wee offer up to God three Sacrifices One by the Priest onely that 's the c Sacramentum hoc est Commemorativum Dominicae Passionis quae fuit verum Sacrificium sic Nominatur Sacrifiâ—… Tho. p. 3. q. 73. A. 4. C. Christ being Offer'd up once for all in his owne proper Person is yet said to be Offer'd up c. in the Celebration of the Sacrament Because his Oâ—…lation one for ever made is thereby Represented Lambert in Fox 〈◊〉 Martyrolog Uol 2. Edit Lond. 1597. p. 1033 Et postea 'T is a Memoriall or Representation thereof Ibid. The 〈◊〉 of the Sentences judged truly in this Point saying That whâ—… is offer'd and Consecrated of the Priest is called a Sacrifice aâ—… Oblation because it is a Memory and Representation of tâ—… true Sacrifice and Holy Oblation made on the Altar of tâ—… Crosse. Arch-Bishop Cranmer in his Answer to Bishop 〈◊〉 concerning the most Holy Sacrament L. 5. p. 377. Aâ—… againe this shortly is the minde of Lombardus That the thâ—… which is done at Gods Board is a Sacrifice and so is that 〈◊〉 which was made upon the Crosse but not after one mannâ—… 〈◊〉 understanding I or this was the Thing indeed and that is 〈◊〉 Commemoration of the Thing Ibid. So likewise Bishop 〈◊〉 acknowledgeth incruentum rationabile Sacrificium 〈◊〉 of by Euseb. De Demonstrat Evang. L. 〈◊〉 Ieâ—…ls 〈◊〉 against Harding Art 7. Divis. 9. Againe The 〈◊〉 of the Holy Communion is sometimes of the Ancâ—…ent 〈◊〉 called an Vnbloody Sacrifice not in respect of any Corpoâ—… fleshly presence that is imagined to be there without 〈◊〉 shedding but for that it representeth and reporteth to 〈◊〉 minds that one and everlasting Sacrifice that Christ made 〈◊〉 Body upon the Crosse. This Bishop Jewel disliketh not in his Answer to Harding Art 17. Divis. 14. Patres Coenam Dominicam duplici de causa vocarunt Sacrificium incruentum Tum quod sit Imago solennis repraesentatio illius Sacrificii 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quod Christus cum sanguinis effusione obtulit in Cruce Tum quod sit etiam Eucharisticum Sacrificium id est Sacrificium Laudis gratiarum actionis cùm pro beneficiis omnibus tum pro redemptione imprimis per Christi mortem peractâ Zanch. in 2. Praecep Decal T. 4. p. 459 And D. Fulke also acknowledges a Sacrifice in the Eucharist In S. Mat. 26. 26. Non dissimulaverint Christiani in Coena Domini five ut ipsi loquebantur in Sacrificio Altaris peculiari quodam modo praesentem se venerari Deum Christianorum sed quae esset forma ejus sacrificii quod per Symbola Panis vini peragitur hoc Veteres praese non ferebant Isa. Casaub. Exercit. 16. ad Annal. Baron §. 43. p. 560. Commemorative Sacrifice of Christs Death represented in Bread broken and Wine poured out Another by the * In the Liturgie of the Church of England we pray to God immediately after the reception of the Sacrament That He would bee pleased to accept this our Sacrifice of Praise and Thanksgiving c. And Heb. 13. 15. The Sacrifice Propitiatory was made by Christ himselfe only but the Sacrifice Commemorative and Gratulatory is made by the Priest and the People Archbishop Cranmer in his Answer to Bishop Gardner L. 5 p. 377. Priest the People joyntly and that is the Sacrifice of Praise and Thanksgiving for all the Benefits and graces we receive by the precious Death of Christ. The Third †I beseech you Brethren by the mercies of God that you give up your Bodies a living Sacrifice holy and acceptable unto God Rom. 12.
well meaning man that is misted and believes an Hereticke Yet here let mee adde this for fuller Expression This must bee understood of such Leaders and Hereticks as c S. Mat. 18. 17. Qui oppugnant Regulam Veritatis S. Aug. L. de Haeresibus versùs finem refuse to heare the Churches Instruction or to use all the meanes they can to come to the knowledge of the Truth For else if they doe this Erre they may but Heretickes they are not as is most manifest in d Cyprianus Beatus Martyr S. Aug. L. 1. de Bapt. cont Donatist c. 18. S. Cyprian's Case of Rebaptization For here though he were a maine Leader in that Errour yet all the whole Church grant him safe and his e Donatista verò qui de Cypriani Authoritate fibi carnaliter blandiuntur S. Aug. L. 1. de Bapt. cont Donat. c. 18. nimiâ—…â—…iseri nisi se corrigant à semetipsis omninò daâ—…ati qui hoc in tanto viro eligunt imitari Ibid. c. 19. Followers in danger of damnation But if any man be a Leader and a Teaching Heretick and will add f Rei falsitatis circa accusatum Coecilianum deprehensi Donatistae pertinaâ—… dissentione firmatâ schisma in Haeresâ—… verterunt S. Aug. L. de Haeres Haer. 69. Et Tales sub Vocabulo Christiano doctrinae resistunt Christianae S. Aug. L. 18. 〈◊〉 Civ Dei c. 51. prin Schisme to Heresie and bee obstinate in both he without repentance must needs bee lost while many that succeed him in the Errour onely without the Obstinacie may bee saved For they which are missed and swayed with the Current of the time hold the same Errours with their misleaders yet not supinely but with all sober diligence to finde out the Truth Not pertinaciously but with all readinesse to submit to Truth so soone as it shall bee found Not uncharitably but retaining an internall Communion with the Whole Visible Church of Christ in the Fundamentall Points of Faith and performance of Acts of Charity not factiously but with an earnest desire and a sincere endeavour as their Place and Calling gives them meanes for a perfect Vnion and Communion of all Christians in Truth as well as Peace I say these however misled are neither Hereticks nor Schismaticks in the sight of God and are therefore in a state of Salvation And were not this true Divinity it would go very hard with many poore Christian soules that have been and are misled on all sides in these and other Distracted times of the Church of Christ Whereas thus habituated in themselves they are by God's mercy safe in the midst of those waves in which their Misleaders perish I pray you Marke this and so by God's Grace will I. For our * Qui et fi ipsi postmodum ad Ecclesiam râ—…eunt restituere tamen eos seoum reâ—…are non possunt qui ab iis seducti sunt foris morte praeventi extra Ecclesiam sine Communicatione pace perierunt quorum Animae in die Iudicii de ipsorum manibus expetentur qui perditionis Authores duces extiterunt S. Cypr. L. 2. Epist. 1. reckoning will bee heavier if wee thus mislead on either side then theirs that follow us But I see I must look to my selfe for you are secure For F. D. White said I hath secured mee that none of our Errours be damnable so long as we hold them not against our Conscience And I hold none against my Conscience B. It seemes then you have two Securities § 37 D. White 's Assertion and your Conscience What Assurance D. White gave you I cannot tell of my selfe nor as things stand may I rest upon your Relation It may be you use him no better then you do mee And sure it is so For I have since spoken with D. White the late Reverend B. of Ely and he avovvs this and no other Answer He was asked in the Conserence betweene you Whether Popish Errours were Fundamentall To this he gave an Answer by Distinction of the Persons which held and professed the Errours Namely that the Errours were Fundamentall reductivè by a Reducement if they which embraced them did pertinaciously adhere to them having sufficient meanes to be better informed Nay farther that they were materially and in the very kinde and Nature of them Leaven Drosse a 1 Cor. 3. 12. Hay and Stubble Yet he thought withall that such as were misled by education or long custome or over valuing the Soveraignty of the Roman Church and did in simplicity of heart embrace them might by their generall Repentance and Faith in the Merit of Christ attended with Charity and other Uertues finde mercy at Gods hands But that he should say signanter and expresly That none either of yours or your Fellowes Errours were damnable so long as you hold them not against Conscience that he utterly disavowes You delivered nothing to extort such a Confession from him And for your selfe he could observe but small love of Truth few signes of Grace in you as be told me Yet he will not presume to judge you or your salvation It is the b S Iohn 12. 48. Word of Christ that must judge you at the later day For your Conscience you are the happier in your Errour that you hold nothing against it especially if you speak not against it while you say so But this no man can know but your selfe c 1 Cor. 2. 11. For no man knowes the thoughts of a man but the Spirit of a man that is within him to which I leave you To this A. C. replyes And first he grants that D. White did not signanter and expresly say these precise A. C. p 67. words So then here 's his plaine Confession Not these precise words Secondly he saith that neither did D. White signanter and expresly make the Answer above mentioned But to this I can make no Answer since I was not present at the first or second Conference Thirdly he saith that the Reason which moved the Iesuite to say D. White had secured him was because the said Doctor had granted in his first Conference with the Iesuite these things following First That there must be one or other Church continually visible Though D. White late Bishop of Ely was more able to Answer for himselfe yet since he is now dead and is thus drawne into this Discourse I shall as well as I can doe him the right which his Learning and Paines for the Church deserved And to this first I grant as well as he That there must be some one Church or other continually visible Or that the Militant Church of Christ must alwayes be visible in some Particulars or Particular at least expresse it as you please For if this be not so then there may be a time in which there shall not any where be a visible Profession of the Name of Christ which is contrary to the whole scope and promise of the Gospell Well
to depart from the Foundation You have many dangerous Errours about the very Foundation in that which you call the Romane Faith But there I leave you to looke to your owne soule and theirs whom you seduce Yet this is true too That there is but one saving Faith But then every thing which you call De Fide of the Faith because some Councell or other hath defined it is not such a Breach from that One saving Faith as that he which expresly believes it not nay as that he which believes the Contrary is excluded from Salvation so his a S. 22. Nu. 5. Disobedience there while offer no violence to the Peace of the Church nor the Charity which ought to be among Christians And b Multa sunt de side quae non sunt absolutè necessaria as Salutem Bellar. L. 3. de Eccles. Milit. c. 14. §. Quinto si esset Bellarmine is forced to grant this There are many Things de Fide which are not absolutely necessary to salvation c Wald. Doct. Fid. l. 2. Ar. 2. § 23. Therefore there is a Latitude in the Faith especially in reference to different mens salvation To set d §. 38. Nu. 8. Bounds to this and strictly to define it for particular men Just thus farre you must believe in every Particular or incurre Damnation is no worke for my Pen. These two things I am sure of One That your peremptory establishing of so many things that are remote Deductions from the Foundation to bee believed as Matters of Faith necessary to Salvation hath with other Errours lost the Peace and Unity of the Church for which you will one day Answer And the other That you of Rome are gone farther from the Foundation of this One saving Faith then can ever be proved we of the Church of England have done But here A. C. bestirres himselfe finding that he is come upon the Point which is indeed most considerable A. C. p. 68. And first hee answers That it is * Pope Pelagius the second thought it was sufficient For when the Bishops of Istria deserted his Communion in Causa trium Capitulorum He first gives them an Account of his Faith that he embraced that Faith which the Apostles had delivered and the foure Synods explicated And then he adds Ubi ergo de Fidei firmitate nulla vobis poterit quastio vel suspicis generari c. Concil To. 4. p. 473. Edit Paris So then that Pope thought there could be no question made or suspition had of any mans faith that professed that Faith which the Apostles delivered as 't is explicated by those Great Councels And yet now with A. C. 't is not sufficient Or els he holds the Faith of our Lord Iesus Christ in such râ—…spect of persons contrary to the Apostles Rule S. James 2. 12. as that profession of it which was sufficient for Pope Pelagius shall not be sufficient for the poore Protestants not sufficient to beget a Confidence in this Case to say wee believe the Scriptures and the Creeds in the same sense which the Ancient Primitive Church believed them c. Most true if we onely say and do not believe And let them which believe not while they say they doe looke to it on all sides for on all sides I doubt not but such there are But if we doe say it you are bound in Charity to believe us unlesse you can prove the Contrary For I know no other proofe to men of any Point of Faith but Confession of it and Subscription to it And for these particulars we have made the one and done the other So 't is no bare saying but you have all the proofe that can be had or that ever any Church required For how farre that Beliefe or any other sinkes into a man's heart is for none to judge but God Next A. C Answers That if to say this be a sufficient Cause of Confidence he marvels why I make such A. C. p. 68. difficulty to bee Confident of the Salvation of Romane Catholikes who believe all this in a faire better manner then Protestants doe Truly to say this is not a sufficient cause but to say and believe it is And to take off A. C s. wonder why I make difficulty great difficulty of the salvation of Romane Catholikes who he sayes believe all this and in a farre better manner then Protestants doe I must be bold to tell him That Romanists are so farre from believing this in a better manner then we do that under favour they believe not part of this at all And this is most manifest For the Romanists dare not believe but as the Romane Church believes And the Romane Church at this day doth not believe the Scripture and the Creeds in the sense in the which the Ancient Primitive Church received them For the Primitive Church never interpreted Christ's descent into Hell to be no lower then Limbus Patrum Nor did it acknowledge a Purgatory in a side-part of Hell Nor did it ever interpret away halfe the Sacrament from Christ's owne Institutior which to breake * Stapl. Returne of Vntruths upon B. Iewell Art 2. Vntruth 49 fol. 44. Stapleton confesses expresly is a damnable Errour Nor make the Intention of the Priest of the Essence of Baptisme Nor believe worship due to Images Nor dreame of a Transubstantiation which the Learned of the Romane Partie dare not understand properly for a change of one substance into another for then they must grant that Christ's reall and true Body is made of the Bread and the Bread changed into it which is properly Transubstantiation Nor yet can they expresse it in a credible way as appeares by †Est totalis Conversio substantiae Panis Vini in Corpus Sanguinâ—…m Domini Bellar. L. 3. de Euchar. c. 18. §. 1. Substantiaâ—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Transubstantiatio sicut Ecclesia appellat Greg. de Valen. To. 4 〈◊〉 q. 3. punct 3. Now you shall see what stuffe Bellarmine makes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Conversio Panis in Corpus Domini nec est Productiva nâ—… Conservatâ—… sed Adductiva Nam Corpus Domini praeexistit ante Conversionem 〈◊〉 non sub speâ—…iebus Panis Conversio igitur non facit ut Corpus Christ simplicitèr esse incipiat sed ut incipiat esse sub speciebus Panis 〈◊〉 Bellar. L. 3. de Euchar. c. 18. §. Ex his colligimus So upon the whole matter there shall be a totall Conversion of the Bread into the Body of Christ And yet there shall be no Conversion at all but a Bringing of the Body of Christ before praeexistent to be now under the Species of Bread where before it was not Now this is meerly Translocation 't is not Transubstantiation And I would have Bellarm. or any Iesuite for him shew where Conversio Adductiva is read in any good Author But when Bellar. comes to the Recognition of his workes upon this place he tels us That some excepted against him
as if this were Translocation rather then Transubstantiation So in this charge upon him I am not alone And faine would be shift off this but it will not be But while he is at it he runs into two pretty Errours beside the maine one The first is That the body of Christ in the Sacrament begins to be non ut in loco sed ut substantia sub Accidentibut Now let Bellarm. or A. C. for him give me any one Instance That a Bodily Substance under Accidents is or can be any where and not ut in loco as in some place and he sayes somwhat The second is That some Fathers and others seeme he sayes but I see it not to approve of his manner of speech of Conversion by Adduction And he tels us for this that Bonaventure sayes expresly In Transubstantiatione fit ut quod erat alicubi sine sui mutations sit alibi Now first here 's nothing that can be drawne with Cart-ropes to prove conversion by Adduction For if there be Conversion there must be Change And this is fine mutatione sui And secondly I would faine know how a Body that is alicubi shall be alibi without change of it selfe and yet that this shall be rather Transubstantiation then Translocation Besides 't is a Phrase of very sowre Consequence should a man squâ—…eze it which Bellar. uses there even in his Recognition Panis transit in Corpus Christi Bellarmines struggle about it w ch yet in the end cannot bee or bee called Transubstantiation and is that which at this day is a †A Scandall and a grievous one For this grosse Opinion was but confirmed in the Councell of Lateran It had got some footing in the Church the two blinde ages before For Berengarius was made recant in such Termes as the Romanists are put to their shifts to excuse Bellar. L. 3. de Euchar. c. 24. §. Quartum Argumentum For he sayes expresly Corpus Christi posse in Sacramento sensualitèr manibus Sacerdotum tractari frangi fidelium dentibus atteri Decr. par 3. de Consecratione Dist. 2. C. Ego Berengarius Now this Recantation was made about the yeare 1050. And the Councell of Lateran was in the yeare 1215. Betâ—…ene this grosse Recantation of Berengarius and that Councell the great Learned Physitian and Philosopher Averroes lived and tooke scandall at the whole Body of Christian Religion for this And thus he saith Mundum peragravi c. non vidi Sectam deteriorem aut magis fatuam Christianâ quia Deum quem colunt dentibus devorans Espeneaeus L. 4. de Euchar adoratione c. 3. scandall to both Iew Gentile and the Church of God * NUM 4. A. C. p. 69. For all this A. C. goes on and tels us That they of Rome cannot be proved to depart froÌ„ the Foundation somuch as ProtestaÌ„ts do So then We have at last a Confession here that they may be prooved to depart from the Foundation though not so much or so farre as the Protestants doe I do not meane to answer this and prove that the Romanists do depart as farre or farther from the Foundation then the Protestants for then A. C. would take me at the same lift and say I granted a departure too Briefly therefore I have named here more Instances then one In some of which they have erred in the Foundation or very neare it But for the Church of England let A. C. instance if he can in any one point in which She hath departed from the Foundation Well that A. C. will do For he sayes The Protestants erre against the Foundation by denying Infallible A. C. p. 69. Authority to a Generall Councell for that is in effect to deny Infallibility to the whole Catholike Church a §. 33. Consid. 4. Nu 1. No there 's a great deale of difference betweene a Generall Councell and the whole Body of the Church And when a Generall Councell erres as the second of Ephesus did out of that great Catholike Body another may be gathered as was then that of Chalcedon to doe the Truth of Christ that right which belongs unto it Now if it were all one in effect to say a Generall Councell can erre and that the Whole Church can erre there were no Remedy left against a Generall Councell erring b §. 33. Consid. 7. Nu. 4. which is your Case now at Rome and which hath thrust the Church of Christ into more straits then any one thing besides But I know where you would be A Generall Councell is Infallible if it be confirmed by the Pope and the Pope he is Infallible els he could not make the Councell so And they which deny the Councels Infallibility deny the Pope's which confirmes it And then indeed the Protestants depart a mighty way from this great Foundation of Faith the Popes Infallibility But God be thanked this is only from the Foundation of the present Romane Faith as A. C. and the Iesuite call it not from any Foundation of the Christian A. C. p. 68. Faith to which this Infallibility was ever a stranger From Answering A. C. fals to asking Questions I thinke he meanes to try whether he can win any thing upon me by the cunning way A multis Interrogationibus simul by asking many things at once to see if any one may make me slip into a Confession inconvenient And first he asks How Protestants admitting no Infallible Rule of Faith but A. C. p. 69 Scripture onely can be infallibly sure that they believe the same entire Scripture and Creed and the Foure first Generall Councels and in the same incorrupted sense in which the Primitive Church believed 'T is just as I said Here are many Questions in one and I might easily be caught would I answer in grosse to them all together but I shall go more distinctly to worke Well then I admit no ordinary Rule left now in the Church of Divine and Infallible Verity and so of Faith but the Scripture And I believe the entire Scripture first by the Tradition of the Church Then by all other credible Motives as is before expressed And last of all by the light which shines in the Scripture it selfe kindled in Believers by the Spirit of God Then I believe the entire Scripture Infallibly and by a Divine Infallibility am sure of my Object Then am I as sure of my Believing which is the Act of my Faith conversant about this Object For no man believes but he must needs know in himselfe whether he believes or no and wherein and how farre he doubts Then I am infallibly assured of my Creed the Tradition of the Church inducing and the Scripture confirming it And I believe both Scripture and Creed in the same uncorrupted sense which the Primitive Church believed them and am sure that I do so Believe them because I crosse not in my Beliefe any thing delivered by the Primitive Church And this againe I am sure of
because I take the Beliefe of the Primitive Church as it is expressed and delivered by the Councels and Ancient Fathers of those times As for the Foure Councels if A. C. aske how I have them that is their true and entire Copies I answer I have them from the Church-Tradition onely And that 's Assurance enough for this And so I am fully as sure as A. C. is or can make mee But if hee aske how I know infallibly I believe them in their true and uncorrupted sense Then I answer There 's no man of knowledge but hee can understand the plaine and simple Decision expressed in the Canon of the Councell where 't is necessary to Salvation And for all other debates in the Councels or Decisions of it in things of lesse moment 't is not necessary that I or any man else have Infallible Assurance of them though I thinke 't is possible to attaine even in these things as much Infallible Assurance of the uncorrupted sense of them as A. C. or any other Iesuites have A C. askes againe What Text of Scripture tels That Protestants now living do believe all this or that all A. C. p. 69. this is expressed in those particular Bibles or in the Writings of the Fathers and Councels which now are in the Protestants hands Good God! Whither will not a strong Bias carrie even a learned Iudgement Why what Consequence is there in this The Scripture now is the onely Ordinary Infallible Rule of Divine Faith Therefore the Protestants cannot believe all this before mentioned unlesse a particular Text of Scripture can be shewed for it Is it not made plaine before how we believe Scripture to be Scripture and by Divine and Infallible Faith too and yet wee can shew no particular Text for it Beside were a Text of Scripture necessary yet that is for the Object and the thing which we are to believe not for the Act of our believing which is meerely from God and in our selves and for which wee cannot have any Warrant from or by Scripture more then that we ought to believe but not that we in our particular do believe The rest of the Question is farre more inconsequent Whether all this bee expressed in the Bibles which are in Protestants hands For first we have the same Bibles in our hands which the Romanists have in theirs Therefore either we are Infallibly sure of ours or they are not Infallibly sure of theirs For we have the same Booke and delivered unto us by the same hands and all is expressed in ours that is in theirs Nor is it of moment in this Argument that we account more Apocryphall then they do For I will acknowledge every Fundamentall point of Faith as proveable out of the Canon as we account it as if the Apocryphall were added unto it Secondly A. C. is here extremely out of himselfe and his way For his Question is Whether all this be expressed in the Bibles which we have All this All what why before there is mention of the foure Generall Councels and in this Question here 's mention of the Writings of the Fathers and the Councels And what will A. C. look that we must shew a Text of Scripture for all this and an expresse one too I thought and doe so still 't is enough to ground Beliefe upon * Nâ—…n potest aliquid certum esse certitudire Fidei nisi aut immediate contineatur in verbo Dei aut ex verbo Dei per evidentem Consequentiam deducatur Bellar. L. 3. de Iustif. c. 8 §. 2. Necessary Consequence out of Scripture as well as upon expresse Text. And this I am sure of that neither I nor any man else is bound to believe any thing as Necessary to Salvation be it found in Councels or Fathers or where you will †Nec ego Nicaenum nec tu debes Ariminense tanquà m praejudicaturus proferre Concilium Nec ego hujus Authoritate nec tu illius detineris Scripturarum Au thoritatibus c. Res cum re Causa cum causâ Ratio cum ratione concertet S. Aug. L. 3. cont Maximinum c. 14. Testimonia Divina in fundamento ponenda sunt S. Aug. L. 20. de Civ Dei c. 1. Quia principia hujus Doctrinae per Revelationens habentur c. Tho. p. 1. q. 1. A. 8. ad 2. Solis Scriptur arum Libris Canonicis didâ—… hunc honorem deferre ut nullum Authorem corum in scribendo errâsse aliquid firmissimè credam Alios autem ita lego ut quant alibet sanctitate doctrináque praepolleant non ideò verum putem quod ipsi it à senserunt vel scripserunt S. Aug. Epist. 19. if it be Contrary to expresse Scripture or necessary Consequence from it And for the Copies of the Councels and Fathers which are in our hands they are the same that are in the hands of the Romanists and delivered to Posterity by Tradition of the Church which is abundantly sufficient to warrant that So we are as Infallibly sure of this as 't is possible for any of you to bee Nay are wee not more sure For wee have used no Index Expurgatorius upon the Writings of the Fathers * Sixtus Senens in Epist. ad Pium quintum as you have done So that Posterity hereafter must thanke us for true Copies both of Councels and Fathers and not you But A. C goes on and askes still Whether Protestants bee Infallibly sure that they rightly understand the A. C. p. 69. sense of all which is expressed in their Books according to that which was understood by the Primitive Church and the Fathers which were present at the foure first Generall Councels A. C. may aske everlastingly if hee will aske the same over and over againe For I pray wherein doth this differ from his †§. 38. N. 5. first Question save only that here Scripture is not named For there the Question was of our Assurance of the Incorrupted sense And therefore thither I refer you for Answer with this That it is not required either of us or of them that there should be had an Infallible assurance that wee rightly understand the sense of all that is expressed in our Bookes And I thinke I may believe without sinne that there are many things expressed in these Bookes for they are theirs as well as ours which A. C. and his Fellowes have not Infallible assurance that they rightly understand in the sense of the Primitive Church or the Fathers present in those Councels And if they say yes they can because when a difficulty crosses them they believe them in the Churches sense Yet that dry shift will not serve For beliefe of them in the Churches sense is an Implicit Faith but it works nothing distinctly upon the understanding For by an Implicite Faith no man can be infallibly assured that hee doth rightly understand the sense which is A. C s. Question whatever perhaps he may rightly believe And an Implicite
Faith and an Infallible understanding of the same thing under the same Considerations cannot possibly stand together in the same man at the same time A. C. hath not done asking yet But he would farther know Whether Protestants can be Infallibly sure that all and onely those points which Protestants account A. C. p. 69. Fundamentall and necessary to be expressely knowne by all were so accounted by the Primitive Church Truly Vnity in the Faith is very Considerable in the Church And in this the Protestants agree and as Vnisormely as you and have as Infallible Assurance as you can have of all points which they account Fundamentall yea and of all which were so accounted by the Primitive Church And these are but the Creed and some few and those Immediate deductions from it And †Tert. praescript adversus Haeres c. 13. c Tertullian and * Ruffin in Symb. Ruffinus upon the very Clause of the Catholike Church to decypher it make a recitall only of the Fundamentall Points of Faith And for the first of these the Creed you see what the sense of the Primitive Church was by that famous and knowne place of a Et neque qui valde potens est in dicendo ex Ecclesiae Praefectis alia ab his dicet c. Neque debilis in dicendo hanc Traditionem imminuet Quùm euim una cadem fides sit ueque is qui multum de eâ dicere potest plusquam oportet dicit neque qui parum ipsam imminuit Irenae L. 1. Adv. Haer. c. 2. 3. Et S. Basil. Serm. de Fide To. 2. p. 195. Edit Bafil 1505. Vna Immobilis Regula c. Tert. de veland Virg. c. 1. Irenaeus where after hee had recited the Creed as the Epitome or Briefe of the Faith he addes That none of the Governors of the Church be they never so potent to Expresse themselves can say alia ab his other things from these Nor none so weake in Expression as to diminish this Tradition For since the Faith is One and the same He that can say much of it sayes no more then he ought Nor doth he diminish it that can say but little And in this the Protestants all agree And for the second the immediate Deductions they are not formally Fundamentall for all men but for such b Quantum ad prima Credibilia quae sunt Articuli Fidei tenetur homo Explicitè credere sicut tenetur habere fidem Quantum autem ad alia Credibilia c. non tenetur Explicitè credere nisi quando hoc ci constiterit in Doctrinâ Fidei contineri Tho. 2. 2 q. 2. A. 5. c. Potest quis Errare Credendo oppositum Alicui Articulo subtill ad cujas sidem explicitam non â—…mnis teuentur Holkot in 1. sent q. 1. ad quartum as are able to make or understand them And for others t is enough if they doe not obstinatâ—…ly or Schismatically refuse them after they are once revealed Indeed you account many things Fundamentall which were never so accounted in any sense by the Primitive Church such as are all the Decrees of Generall Councels which may be all true but can never be all Fundamentall in the Faith For it is not in the power of * Resolutio Ocbam est Quod nec tota Ecclesiae nec Concilium Generale nâ—… suminus Pontifex potest facere Artiâ—…ulum quod non suit Articulus Articulus cuim est ex co solo qui à Deo Revelatuâ—… est Almain in 3. sent D. 15. q. unica Coâ—…clus 4. Dub 3. the whole Church much lesse of a Generall Councell to make any thing Fundamentall in the Faith that is not contained in the Letter or sense of that common Faith which was once given and but once for all to the Saints S. Lude 3. But if it be A. C's meaning to call S. Iude vers 3. for an Infallible Assurance of all such Points of Faith as are Decreed by Generall Councels Then I must bee bold to tell him All those Decrees are not necessary to all mens salvation Neither doe the Romanists themselves agree in all such determined Points of Faith Be they determined by Councels or by Popes For Instance After those Bookes which wee account Apochryphall were †Concil Trid Sess 4. defined to bee Canonicall and an Anathema pronounced in the Case a Six Senens Biblioth Sanct. L. 1. Sixtus Senensis makes scruple of some of them And after b Non est necessariò credendum Detâ—…minatis per Sum Pontificem c. Aimain in 3. sent D. 24. q. unica Conclus 6. Dubio 6. fine Pope Leo the tenth had defined the Pope to be aboue a Generall Councell yet many Romane Catholikes defend the Contrary And so doe all the Sorbonists at this very day Therefore if these be Fundamentall in the Faith the Romanists differ one from another in the Faith nay in the Fundamentals of the Faith And therefore cannot have Infallible Assurance of them Nor is there that Unity in the Faith amongst them which they so much and so often boast of For what Scripture is Canonicall is a great point of Faith And I believe they will not now Confesse That the Popes power over a Generall Councell is a small one And so let A. C. looke to his owne Infallible Assurance of Fundamentals in the Faith for ours God be thanked is well And since he is pleased to call for a particular Text of Scripture to proove all and every thing of this nature which is ridiculous in it selfe and unreasonable to demand as hath beene * §. 38. N. 6. shewed yet when he shall bee pleased to bring forth but a particular knowne Tradition to proove all and every thing of this on their side it will then be perhaps time for him to call for and for us to give farther Answer about particular Texts of Scripture After all this Questioning A. C. inferres That I had need seeke out some other Infallible Rule and meanes by A. C. p. 69. which I may know these things infalliâ—…ly or else that I have no reason to be so confident as to adventure my soule that one may be saved living and dying in the Protestant faith How weake this Inference is will easily appeare by that which I have already said to the premises And yet I have somewhat left to say to this Inference also And first I have lived and shall God willing dye in the Faith of Christ as it was professed in the Ancient Primitive Church and as it is professed in the present Church of England And for the Rule which governes me herein if I cannot bee confident for my soule upon the Scripture and the Primitive Church expounding and declaring it I will be confident upon no other And secondly I have all the reason in the world to be confident upon this Rule for this can never deceive me Another that very other which A. C. proposes
A. C. p. 72. namely the Faith of the Romane Church may Therefore with A. C ' s. leave I will venture my salvation upon the Rule aforesaid and not trouble my selfe to seeke another of mans making to the forsaking or weakening of this which God hath given me For I know they Committed two Evills which forsooke the Fountaine of Living Waters to hew out to themselves Cisternes broken Cisternes that can hold no VVater Ier. 2. For Ier. 2. 13. here 's the Evill of Desertion of that which was right and the Evill of a bad Choise of that which is hew'd out with much paines and care and is after Vselesse and Vnprofitable But then Thirdly I finde that a Romanist may make use of an Implicite Faith at his pleasure but a Protestant must know all these things Infallibly that 's A. C s. word Know these things Why but is it not enough to believe them Now God forbid What shall become of Millions of poore Christians in the world which cannot know all these things much lesse know them Infallibly Well I would not have A. C. weaken the Beliefe of poore Christians in this fashion But for things that may be knowne as well as believed nor I nor any other shall need forsake the Scripture to seeke another Rule to direct either our Conscience or our Confidence In the next place A. C. observes That the Iesuite was as confident for his part with this difference that he had sufficient A. C. p. 69. reason of his Confidence but I had not for mine This is said with the Confidence of a Iesuite but as yet but said Therefore he goes on and tels us That the Iesuite A. C. p. 70. had reason of hâ—…s Confidence out of expresse Scriptures and Fathers and the Infallible Authority of the Church Now truly Expresse Scriptures with A. C s. patience he hath not named one that is expresse nor can he And the few Scriptures which he hath alledged I have * §. 25. N. 5. §. 33. Confid 3. N. 1. Answered and so have others As for Fathers hee hath named very few and with what successe I leave to the Readers judgement And for the Authority of the Catholike Church I hold it a §. 21. N. 5. as Infallible as he and upon better Grounds but not so of a Generall Councell which he here meanes as appeares b A. C. p. 71. after And for my part I must yet thinke and I doubt A. C. will not be able to disprove it that expresse Scripture and Fathers and the Authority of the Church will rather be found proofes to warrant my Confidence then his Yea but A. C. saith That I did not then taxe the Iesuite with any A. C. p. 70. rashnesse It may be so Nor did he me So there we parted even Yea but he saith again that Iacknowledge there is but one saving Faith and that the Lady might be saved in the Romane faith which was all the Iesuite tooke upon his soule Why but if this be all I will confesse it again The first That there is but one faith I confesse with S. Paul Esphes 4. And the other that the Lady might be Ephes. 4. 5. saved in the Romane Faith or Church * §. 35. N. 1. I confesse with that charity which S. Paul teacheth me Namely to leave all men especially the weaker both sex and sort which hold the Foundation to stand or fall to their owne Master Rom. 4. And this is no mistaken charity As for Rom. 14. 4. the Inference which you would draw out of it that 's answered at large †§. 35. N. 2. A. C. p. 70. already But then A. C. addes that I say but without any proofe that the Romanists have many dangerous errours but that I neither tell them which they be nor why I think them dangerous but that I leave them to looke to their owne soules which he sayes they doe and have no cause to doubt How much the Iesuite and A. C. have said in this Conference without any solid proofe I againe submit to judgement as also what proofes I have made If in this very place I have added none 't is because I had made proofe enough of the selfe samething a §. 33. N. 12 §. 35. N. 7. before Where lest hee should want and call for proofe againe I have plainly laid together some of the many Dangerous errours which are charged upon them So I tell you which at least some of which they be and their very naming will shew their danger And if I did remit you to looke to your own soules I hope there was no offence in that if you doe it and do it so that you have no cause to doubt And the reason why you doubt not A. C. tels us is Because A. C. p. 70. you hâ—…d no new devise of your owne or any other mens nor any thing contrary to Scripture but all most conformable to Scriptures interpreted by Vnion Consent of Fathers and Definitions of Councels Indeed if this were true you had little cause to doubt in point of your Beliefe But the Truth is you doe hold new devises of your owne which the Primitive Church was never acquainted with And some of those so farre from being conformable as that they are little lesse then contradictory to Scripture In which particulars and divers others the Scriptures are not interpreted by Vnion or Consent of Fathers or Definitions of Councels unlesse perhaps by some late Councels packed of purpose to doe that ill service I have given instances enough * §. 33. N 12. § 35 N. 7. before yet some you shall have here lest you should say againe that I affirme without proofe or Instance a Conc. Lateran can 1. I pray then whose devise was b Conc. Constan. Sess. 13. transubstantiation And whose Communion under one kinde †Propter Haeresin Rex non solum Regno privatur sed filii ejus à Regni successione pelluntur Simanca Cathol Instit. tit 9. §. 259. Absoluti sunt Subditi a Debito fidâ—…litatis Et custodes arcium c. Ibid. tit 46. §. 73. It was stifly avowed not long since by That no man could thew any one Romane Catholike of note and learning that affirmed it lawfull to kill Kings upon any pretext whatsoever Now surely he that sayes as Romanists doe that 't is lawfull to Depose a King sayes upon the matter 't is lawfull to kill him For Kings doe not use to be long-lived after their Deposition And they selâ—…ome stay till griefe breake their hearts They have Assassinates ready to make thorter worke But since he is so confident I le give him an Author of note and very Learned that speakes it out Rex debet occidi si solicitet populum colere Idola vel deserere Legem Dei. Tostat in 2 Sam. c. 11. q. 17. And he makes bold with Scripture to prove it Deut. 13. And
known unto us by the Infallible Authority of the Church of God that is of men Infallibly assisted by the Spirit of God as all lawfully called continued and confirmed Generall Councels are assisted That the whole Church §. 21. Nu. 5. of God is infallibly assisted by the Spirit of God so that it cannot by any error fall away totally from Christ the Foundation I make no doubt For if it could the gates of hell had prevailed against it which our Saviour assures me S. Matth. 16. they shall never be able to doe Matth. 16. 18. But that all Generall Councels be they never so lawfully called continued and confirmed have Infallible Assistance I utterly deny 'T is true that a Generall Councell de post facto after 't is ended and admitted by the whole Church is then Infallible for it cannot erre in that which it hath already clearely and truly determined without Errour But that a Generall Councell à parte ante when it first sits down and continues to deliberate may truly be said to be Infallible in all its after-determinations whatsoever they shall be I utterly deny And it may be it was not without cunning that A. C. shuffled these words together Called Continued and Confirmed for be it never so lawfully called and continued it may erre But after 't is confirmed that is admitted by the whole Church then being found true it is also Infallible that is it deceives no man For so all Truth is and is to us when 't is once knowne to be Truth But then many times that Truth which being known is necessary and Infallible was before both contingent and fallible in the way of proving it and to us And so here a Generall Councell is a most probable but yet a fallible way of inducing Truth though the Truth once induced may be after 't is found necessary and Infallible And so likewise the very Councell it selfe for that particular in which it hath concluded Truth But A. C. must both speake and meane of a Councell set downe to deliberate or els he sayes nothing Now hence A. C. gathers That though everything defined to be a Divine Truth in Generall Councels is not absolutely A. C. p. 71. necessary to be expresly knowne and actually believed as some other Truths are by all sorts yet no man may after knowledge that they are thus defined doubt deliberately much lesse obstinately deny the Truth of any thing so defined Well in this Collection of A. C. First we have this granted That every thing defined in Generall Councels is not absolutely necessary to be expresly knowne and actually believed by all sorts of men And this no Protestant that I know denies Secondly it is affirmed that after knowledge that these Truths are thus defined no man may doubt deliberately much lesse obstinately deny any of them Truly Obstinately as the word is now in common use carries a fault along with it And it ought to be farre from the temper of a Christian to be obstinate against the Definitions of a Generall Councell But that he may not upon very probable grounds in an humble and peaceable manner deliberately doubt yea and upon Demonstrative grounds constantly deny even such Definitions yet submitting himselfe and his grounds to the Church in that or another Councell is that which was never till now imposed upon Believers For 't is one thing for a man deliberately to doubt and modestly to propose his Doubt for satisfaction which was ever lawfull and is many times necessary And quite an other thing for a man upon the pride of his owne Iudgement * S. 32. N. 5. to refuse externall Obedience to the Councell which to doe was never Lawfull nor can ever stand with any Government For there is all the reason in the world the Councell should be heard for it selfe as well as any such Recusant whatsoever and that before a Iudge as good as it selfe at least And to what end did †S. Aug. L. 2. de Bapt. cont Donat c. 3. Ipsaque plenaria sape priora à posterioribus emendari S. Augustine say That one Generall Councell might be amended by another the former by the Later if men might neither denie nor so much as deliberately doubt of any of these Truths defined in a Generall Councell And A. C. should have done well to have named but one ancient Father of the Primitive Church that ever affirmed this * S. 21. N. 5. For the Assistance which God gives to the whole Church in generall is but in things simply necessary to eternall Salvation therefore more then this cannot be given to a Generall Councell no nor so much But then if a Generall Councell shall forget it selfe and take upon it to define things not absolutely necessary to bee expresly knowne or actually believed which are the things which A. C. here speakes of In these as neither Generall Councell nor the whole Church have infallible Assistance so have Christians liberty modestly and peaceably and upon just grounds both deliberarely to doubt and constantly to deny such the Councels Definitions For instance the Councell of Florence first defined Purgatory to be believed as a Divine Truth and matter of Faith a I know the Greekes subscribed that Councell Sed in illo Concilio Graeca Ecclesiae diu restitit Pet. Mart. Loc. com classe tertiâ c. 9. nu 13. Et in ultimâ Sessione istius Concilii Graeci dixerunt se sine Authoritate totius Ecclesiae Orientalis Quaestionem aliam tractare non posse praeter illam de processione Sp. Sancti Postea verò consentiente Imperatore tractârunt de aliis c. Florent Concil Sess. ult apud Nicolinum To. 4. p. 894. c. This savours of some art to bring in the Greeks Howsoever this showes enough against Bellarmine That all the Greekes did not constantly teach Purgatory as he assirms L. 1. de Purgat c. 11. §. De tertio modo if that Councell had Consent enough so to define it This was afterwards deliberately doubted of by the Protestants after this as constantly denied then confirmed by the b Con. Trid. Sess. 25. in Bullâ Pii 4. super formà Iuramenti professionis Fidei Councell of Trent and an Anathema set upon the head of every man that denies it And yet scarce any Father within the first three hundred yeares ever thought of it I know a Omnes veteres Graeci Latini ab ipso tempore ApostoleruÌ„ constanter docuerunt Purgatorium esse Bel. L. 1. de Purg. c 11 §. De tertio modo Bâ—…llarmine affirmes it boldly That all the Fathers both Greeke and Latine did constantly teach Purgatory from the very Apostles times And where he brings his Proofs out of the Fathers for this Point he divides them into two Rancks b Bel. Lib 1 de Purg c 6 §. 1. In the first he reckons them which affirme Prayer for the dead as if that must necessarily inferre Purgatory Whereas
in another and another and so in all of like nature I say in all of like nature And A. C. may remember he expressed himselfe a little before to A. C. p. 71. speake of the Defining of such Divine Truths as are not absolutely necessary to be expresly knowne and actually believed of all sorts of men Now there is there can be no necessity of an Infallible certainty in the whole Catholike Church and much lesse in a Generall Councell of things not * §. 21. N. 5. absolutely necessary in themselves For Christ did not intend to leave an Infallible certainty in his Church to satisfie either Contentious or Curious or Presumptuous Spirits And therefore in things not Fundamentall not Necessary 't is no matter if Councels erre in one and another and a third the whole Church having power and meanes enough to see that no Councell erre in Necessary things and this is certainty enough for the Church to have or for Christians to expect especially since the Foundation is so strongly and so plainely laid downe in Scripture and the Creed that a modest man might justly wonder why any man should run to any later Councell at least for any Infallible certainty Yet A. C. hath more Questions to aske and his next is How we can according to the ordinary Course be A. C. p. 72. Infallibly assured that it erres in one and not in another when it equally by one and the same Authority defines both to be Divine Truth A. C. taking here upon him to defend M. Fisher the Jesuite could not but see what I had formerly written concerning this difficult Question about Generall Councels And to all that being large he replied little or nothing Now when he thinks that may be forgotten or as if it did not at all lie in his way he here turnes Questionist to disturbe that businesse and indeed the Church as much as he can But to this Question also I answer againe If any Generall-Councell doe now erre either it erres in things absolutely necessary to Salvation or in things not necessary If it erre in things Necessary we can be infallibly assured by the Scripture the Creeds the foure first Councels and the whole Church where it erres in one and not in another If it be in non necessariis in things not necessary 't is not requisite that we should have for them an infallible assurance As for that which followes it is notoriously both cunning and false 'T is false to suppose that a Generall Councell defining two things for Divine Truths and erring in one but not erring in another doth define both equally by one and the same Authority And 't is cunning because these words by the same Authority are equivocall and must be distinguished that the Truth which A. C. would hide may appeare Thus then suppose a Generall Councell erring in one point and not in another it doth define both and equally by the same delegated Authority which that Councell hath received from the Catholike Church But it doth not define both and much lesse equally by the same Authority of the Scripture which must be the Councels Rule as well as private mens no nor by the same Authority of the whole Catholike Church who did not intentionally give them equall power to define Truth and errour for Truth And I hope A C. dares not say the Scripture according to which all Councels that will uphold Divine Truth must Determine doth equally give either ground or power to define Errour and Truth To his former Questions A. C. adds That if we leave this to be examined by any private man this examination not being Infallible had need to be examined by another A. C p. 72. and this by another without end or ever comming to Infallible certainty necessarily required in that one faith which is necessary to salvation and to that peace and unity which ought to be in the Church Will this inculcating the same thing never be left I told the lesuite a §. 32. N. 5. §. 33. Consid. 7. Nu. 4. before that I give no way to any private man to be Iudge of a Generall Councell And there also I shewed the way how an erring Councell might be rectified and the peace of the Church either preserved or restored without lifting any private spirit above a Councell and without this processe in Infinitum which A. C. so much urges and which is so much declined in all b Arist. 1. Post Tex 6 4. Metaph T. 14. Sciences For as the understanding of a man must alwaies have somewhat to rest upon so must his Faith But a c §. 38 Nu. 〈◊〉 private man first for his owne satisfaction and after for the Churches if he have just cause may consider of and examine by the a Hic non loquimur de Decisione seu Determinatione Doctrinali quae ad unumquemque virum peritum spectare dignoscitur sed de Authoritativâ Iudiciali c la. Almain L. de Author Eccl. c. 10. princ Iudgement of discretion though not of power even the Definitions of a Generall Councell But A. C. concludes well That an Infallible certainty is necessary for that one Faith which is necessary to salvation And of that as I expressed b §. 38. Num. 1. before a most infallible certainty we have already in the Scripture the Creeds and the foure first Generall Councels to which for things Necessary and Fundamentall in the Faith we need no assistance from other Generall Councels And some of your c Sunt qui nescio quà ducti ratione sentiunt non esse opus Generali Concilio De Constantiensi loquitur dicentes omnia bene à Patribus nostris Ordinata ac Constituta modò ab omnibus legitimè fideliter servarentur Fatemur equidem id ipsum esse verissimum Tamen cùm nihil fere servetur c. Pet. de Aliaco L. de reformat Eccles. fine So that after-Councels are rather to Decree for Observance then to make any new Determinations of the Faith owne very honest and very Learned were of the same Opinion with me And for the peace and unity of the Church in things absolutely necessary we have the same infallible direction that wee have for Faith But in Things not necessary though they be Divine Truths also if about them Christian men doe differ 't is no more then they have done more or lesse in all Ages of the Church and they may differ and yet preserve the d Non omnis Error in his qua fidei sunt est aut Infidelitas aut Haeresis Holkot in 1. Sent. q. 1. ad 4. K. One necessary Faith and e Scimus quosdam quod semel imbiberint nolle deponere nec proposstum suum facilè mutare sed salvo inter Collegas pacis concordiae vinculo quaedam propria quae apud se semel sint usurpata retinere Quâ in re nec nos vim cuiquam facimus aut legem
damus c. S Cypr. L. 2. Epist. 1. Concordia quae est Charitatis effectus est â—…nio Voluntatum non Opinionum Tho. 2. 2 9. 37. Ar. 1. c. Dissensio de Minimis de Opinionibus repugnat quidem paci perfectae in quá plenè veritaes cognoscetur omnis appetitus complebitur Non tamen repugnat paci imperfectae qualis habetur in via Tho. 2. 2a q. 29. A. 3. ad 2. Charity too entire if they be so well minded I confesse it were heartily to be wished that in these things also men might be all of one mind and one judgement to which the Apostle exhorts †1 Cor. 1. 10 Phil 2 2. 1. Cor. 1. But this cannot be hoped for till the Church be Triumphant over all humane frailties which here hang thick and close about her The want both of Vnity and Peace proceeding too often even where Religion is pretended from Men and their Humours rather then from Things and Errours to be found in them And so A. C. tels me That it is not therfore as I would perswade the fault of Councels Definitions but the pride of A. C. p. 72. such as will preferre and not submit their private Iudgements that lost and continues the losse of peace and unity of the Church and the want of certainty in that one afore-said soule-saving Faith Once againe I am bold to tell A. C. that there is no want of certainty most infallible certainty of That one soule-saving Faith And if for other opinions which flutter about it there be a difference a dangerous difference as at this day there is yet necessary it is not that therfore or for prevention thereof there should be such a Certainty an Infallible Certainty in these things For he understood himselfe well that said Oportet esse Haereses 1. Cor. 11. There must there will be Heresies And wheresoever that Necessity lies 't is out of doubt 1. Cor. 11. 19. enough to prove That Christ never left such an Infallible Assurance as is able to prevent them Or such a Mastering Power in his Church as is able to over-awe them but they come with their Oportet about them and they rise and spring in all Ages very strangely But in particular for that which first caused and now continues the losse of Vnity in the Church of Christ as I make no doubt but that the Pride of men is one Cause so yet can I not think that Pride is the adaequate and sole Cause thereof But in part Pride caused it and Pride on all sides Pride in some that would not at first nor will not since submit their private judgements where with good Conscience they may and ought And Pride in others that would not first nor will not yet mend manifest great and dangerous errours which with all good Conscience they ought to do But 't is not Pride not to submit to known and grosse Errours And the Definitions of some Councels perhaps the Lateran Constance and Trent have beene greater and more urgent Causes of breach of Unity then the Pride of men hath been which yet I shall never excuse where'ere it is How farre this one soule-saving Faith extends A. C. tels me I have confessed it not a worke for my pen But A. C. p. 72. he sayes it is to be learned from that One Holy Catholike Apostolike alwayes Visible and Infallible Roman Church of which the Lady once doubting is now fully satisfied c. Indeed though A. C. sets this down with some scorn which I can easily passe over 't is true that thus I a §. 38. Nu. 1. said There is a Latitude in Faith especially in reference to different mens salvation But to set a Bound to this and strictly to define it Iust thus farre you must Believe in every particular or incurre damnation is no work for my pen. Thus I said and thus I say still For though the Foundation be one and the same in all yet a b §. 38. Nu. 8. Latitude there is and a large one too when you come to Consider not the Foundation common to all but things necessary to many particular mens Salvation For to whom soever God hath given more of him shall more be required c S. Luc. 12. 48. 〈◊〉 secundùm proportionem suam secundùm differentiam Scientiae vel Ignorantiae c. Et postea Extenditur doctrina hac non solum ad Donum Scientia c. Cajetan in S. Luc. 12. Ecce quomodo Scientia aggravat Culpam Unde Gregorius c. Gorran in S. Luc. 12. Therefore many things may be necessary for a Knowing mans Salvation which are not so for a poore Ignorant soule Si quis de Antecossoribus nostris vel ignorantèr vel simplicitèr non hoc observavit tenuit quod nos Dominus facere exemplo magisterio suo docuit potest simplicitati ejus de Indulgentiá Domini Venia concedi Nobis verò non poterit ignosci qui nunc à Domino admoniti instructi sumus S. Cyprian L. 2. Epist. 3. S. Luc. 12. as well in Beliefe as in Obedience and Performance And the gifts of God both ordinary and extraordinary to particular men are so various as that for my part I hold it impossible for the ablest pen that is to expresse it And in this respect I d § 38. Nu. 1. said it with humility and Reason That to set these bounds was no worke for my pen. Nor will I ever take upon me to expresse that Tenet or Opinion the deniall of the Foundation onely excepted which may shut any Christian the meanest out of heaven And A. C. I believe you know very well to what a narrow scantling some a Articuli Fidei sunt sicut Principia per se nota Et sicut quadam corum in aliis implicitè continentur ita omnes Articuli implicitè continentur in aliquibus primis Credibilibus c. secundùm illud ad Heb. 11. Tho. 2 2a q. 1. A. 10. c. In absoluto nobis facili est aternitas Iesum suscitatum à mortuis per Deum credere ipsum esse Dominum consiteri c. S. Hilar. L. 10. de Trin. ad finem Learned of your owne side bring the very Foundation it selfe rather then they will loose any that lay hold on Christ the Sonne of God and Redeemer of the world And as Christ Epitomizes the whole Law of Obedience into these two great Commandements The Love of God and our Neighbour S. Mat. 22. So the Apostle epitomizes the whole S. Matth. 22. 37. Law of Beliefe into these two great Assents That God is And that He is a Rewarder of them that seeke hun Heb. 11. That seeke him in Christ. And S. Peter Heb. 11. 6. was full of the Holy Ghost when he exprest it That there is no salvation to them that seeke it in or by another Name Act. 4. Act. 4. 12. But since this is no
but that it shall still be a maiâ—… Note of the true Church and in that sense which he would have it And his Reason is b Quia Doctrina Sana est ab ipsa verà legiâ—…ima Successione indivâ—…lsa Stapl. Ibid. Bâ—…se sound Doctrine is indivisible from true and Lawfull Succession Where you shall see this great Clarke for so hee was not able to stand to himselfe when he hath forsaken Truth For 't is not long after that he tels us That the People are led along and judge the Doctrine by the Pastors But when the Church comes to examine she judges the Pastors by their Doctrine And this c Nam è Pastore Lâ—…s fieri potâ—…st Stap. ibid. Nâ—…tab 4. he sayes is necessary Because a Man may become of a Pastor a Wolfe Now then let Stapleton take his choise For either a Pastor in this Succession cannot become a Wolfe and then this Proposition's false Or els if he can then sound Doctrine is not inseparable from true and Legitimate succession And then the former Proposition's false as indeed it is For that a good Pastour may become a Wolfe is no newes in the Ancient Story of the Church in which are registred the Change of many a Vincent Lit. cont Har. c. 23. 24. Great men into Hereticks I spare their Names And since Iudas chang'd from an Apostle to a Divell S. Ioh. 6. 't is no wonder to see S. Ioh. 6. 70. others change from Shepheards into Wolves I doubt the Church is not empty of such Changelings at this day Yea but Stapleton will helpe all this For he adds That suppose the Pastors do forsake true Doctrine yet Succession shall still be a true Note of the Church Yet not every Succession but that which is Legitimate and true Well And what is that Why b Legitima autem est illorum Pastorum qui Vnitatem tenent Fidem Stap. ibid. Notab 5. That Succession is lawfull which is of those Pastors which hold entire the Unity and the Faith Where you may see this Samson's haire cut off againe For at his word I 'le take him And if that onely be a Legitimate Succession which holds the Vnity and the Faith entire then the Succession of Pastors in the Romane Church is illegitimate For they have had c In their owne Chronologer Onuphrius there are Thirty acknowledged more Schismes among them then any other Church Therefore they have not kept the unity of the Church And they have brought in grosse Superstition Therefore they have not kept the Faith â—…ntire Now if A. C. have any minde to it he may do well to helpe Stapleton out of these bryars upon which he hath torne his Credit and I doubt his Conscience too to uphold the Corruptions of the Sea of Rome As for that in which he is quite mistaken it is his Inference which is this That I should therefore consider carefully Whether it be not more Christian and lesse braine-sicke to think that the Pope being S Peter's Successour with a Generall Councell should be Iudge of Controversies c. And that the Pastorall Iudgement of him should be accounted Infallible rather then to make every man that can read the Scripture Interpreter of Scripture Decider of Controversies Controller of Generall Councels and Judge of his Judges Or to have no Judge at all of Controversies of Faith but permit every man to believe as he list As if there were no Infallible certainty of Faith to be expected on earth which were instead of one saving Faith to induce a Babilonicall Confusion of so many faiths as fancies Or no true Christian Faith at all From which Evils Sweet Jesus deliver us I have Considered of this very carefully But this Inference supposes that which I never granted nor any Protestant that I yet know Namely That if I deny the Pope to be Iudge of Controversies I must by and by either leave this supreme Judicature in the hands and power of every private man that can but read the Scripture or els allow no Iudge 〈◊〉 and so let in all manner of Confusion No God forbid I should grant either For I have expâ—…esly * §. 26. Nu. 1. declared That the Scripture interpreted by the Primitive Church and a Lawfull and free Generall Councell determining according to these is Iudge of Controversies And that no private man whatsoever is or can be Iudge of these Therefore A. C. is quite mistaken and I pray God it be not wilfully to beguile poore Ladiâ—… and other their weake adherents with seeming to say somewhat I say quite mistaken to inferre that I am either for a private Iudge or for no Iudge for I utterly disclaime both and that as much if not more then he or any Romanist who ever he be But these things in this passage I cannot swallow First That the Pope with a Generall Councell should be Iudge for the Pope in ancient Councels never had more power then any the other Patriarchs Precedency perhaps for Orders sake and other respects he had Nor had the Pope any Negative voice against the rest in point of difference †Patrum Avorum nostrorum tempore pauci audebant dicere Papam esse supra Concilium Aeneas Sylvius sen Pius 2. L. 1. de Gestis Concil Basil. Et illâ—… imprimis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—…nes qui aliquo numero sâ—… Concilio subjiciâ—…nt Ibid. in fascic rerum Expetend fol. 5. 〈◊〉 autem Papam esse non solùm supra Concilium Generale sed Vniversam Ecclesiam est propositio ferè de Fide Bellar. L. 2. de Concil c. 17. 〈◊〉 1. No nor was he held superiour to the Councell Therefore the ancient Church never accounted or admitted him a Iudge no net with a Councell much lesse without it Secondly it will not downe with me that his Pastorall Iudgement should be Infallible especially since some of them have been as * Quum hoc tempore nullus sit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fâ—…nd est qui sacras Litâ—…ras dâ—…dicerit quâ—… fronte aliquis eorum docere audebit quod non didicerit Arnulph in Concil Rheâ—…nsi Nam câ—… constet plures eorum adeò illiteratos esse ut Grammaticam penitùs ignorarent qui sit ut Sacras Literas interpretari possint Alphons à Castro L. 1. advers Hâ—… c. 4. versùs medium Edit Paris 1534. For both that at Antwerpe An. 1556. and that at Paris An. 15â—… 〈◊〉 beene in Purgatorie And such an Ignorant as these was Pope Iohn the foure and twentieth Platiâ—… 〈◊〉 Vitae ejus Et § 33. Nu. 6. Ignorant as many that can but read the Scripture Thirdly I cannot admit this neither though hee doe most cunningly thereby abuse his Readers That any thing hath been said by me out of which it can justly be inferred That there 's no Infallible certainty of Faith to bee expected on earth For there is most Infallible certainty of it that is of the Foundations of it in Scripture and the Creeds And 't is so clearely delivered there as that it needs no Iudge at all to sit upon it for the Articles themselves And so entire a Body is this one Faith in it selfe as that the †Resolutio Occham est Quod nec tota Ecclesia net Concilium Generale nec Summus Pontifex potest facere Articulum quod non fuit Articulus Sed Ecclesia bene determinat de Propositionibus Catholicis de quibus erat dubium c. Ia. Almain in 3 Sent. D. 25. q. unicâ Dub. 3. Sicut ad ea quae spectant ad Fidem nostram nequaquam â—…x voluntate humana dependent non potest Summus Pontifex nec Ecclesia ae Assertione non verâ veram nec de non falsâ falsam facere it à non potest de non Catholicâ Catholicam facere nec de non Haretica Hareticam Et ideo non potest â—…ovum Articulum facere nec Articulum Fidei tollere Quoniam sicut Veritates Catholicae absque omni approbatione Ecclesiae ex naturâ rei sunt immutabiles immutabilitèr verae it à sunt immutabilitèr Catholica reputandae Similitèr sicut Hareses absque omni reprobatione damnatione sunt falsae it à absque omni reprobatione sunt Haereses reputanda c. Et posteà Patet ergo quod nulla Veritas est Catholica ex approbatione Ecclesiae vel Papae Gab. Biel. in 3. Sâ—…nt Dist. 25. q. unica Art 3. Dub. 3. versùs sinem Whole Church much lesse the Pope hath not power to adde one Article to it nor leave to detract any one the least from it But when Controversies arise about the meaning of the Articles or Superstructures upon them which are Doctrines about the Faith not the Faith it selfe unlesse where they be immediate Consequences then both in and of these a a §. 26. Nu. 1. Lawfull and free Generall Councell determining according to Scripture is the best Iudge on earth But then suppose uncertainty in some of these superstructures it can never be thence concluded That there is no Infallible certainty of the Faith it selfe But 't is time to end especially for me that have so Many Things of Weight lying upon me and disabling me from these Polemicke Discourses beside the Burden of sixty five yeares complete which drawes on apace to the period set by the Prophet David Psal. 90. and to the Psal. 90. 10. Time that I must goe and give God and Christ an Account of the Talent committed to my Charge In which God for Christ Iesus sake be mercifull to me who knowes that however in many Weaknesses yet I have with a faithfull and single heart bound to his free Grace for it laboured the Meeting the Blessed Meeting of Truth and Peace in his Church and Psal. 85. 10. which God in his own good time will I hope effect To Him be all Honour and Praise for ever Amen FINIS
Contrary to his Conscience Presupposing it granted that the Church of Rome erres only in not Fundamentals and such Errours not Damnable which is absolutely and clearly denyed by D. White To this A. C. sayes nothing but that D. VVhite did not give this Answer A. C. p. 67. at the Conference I was not present at the Conference betweene them so to that I can say nothing as a witnesse But I thinke all that knew D. White will believe his affirmation as soone as the Iesuites To say no more And whereas A. C. referres to the Relation of the Conference betweene D. White and M. Fisher A. C. p. 67. most true it is there * A. C. in his relation of that Conference p. 26. D. VVhite is charged to have made that Answer twise But all this rests upon the credit of A. C. only For †For so 't is said in the Title-page by A. C. he is said to have made that Relation too as well as this And against his Credit I must engage D. Whites who hath avowed another Answer as a §. 37. Nu. 1. NUM 8. before is set downe And since A. C. relates to that Conference which it seemes hee makes some good account of I shall here once for all take occasion to assure the Reader That most of the Points of Moment in that Conference with D. VVhite are repeated againe and againe and urged in this Conference or the Relation of A. C. and are here answered by me For instance In the Relation of the first Conference the Iesuite takes on him to prove 1 the Vnwritten VVord of God out of 2. Thes. 2. pag. 15. And so he doth in the Relation of this Conference with me pag. 50. In the first he stands upon it That the Protestants 2 upon their Principles cannot hold that all Fundamentall points of Faith are contained in the Creed pag. 19. And so he doth in this pag. 46. In the first he would faine through 3 M. Roger's sides wound the Church of England as if shee were unsetled in the Article of Christ's Descent into Hell pag 21 And he endeavours the same in this pag. 46. In the first he is very earnest to prove That the Schisme was made by the Protestants pag. 23. And he is as earnest for 4 it in this pag. 55. In the first he layes it for a Ground That Corruption of Manners is no just Cause of separation 5 from Faith or Church pag. 24. And the same Ground he layes in this pag. 55. In the first he will have it That the 6 Holy Ghost gives continuall and Infallible Assistance to the Church pag. 24. And just so will he have it in this p 53. In the first he makes much adoe about the Errig of the 7 Greeke Church page 28. And as much makes he in this page 44. In the first he makes a great noyse about the 8 place in S. Augustine Ferendus est disputator errans c. page 18. and 24. And so doth hee here also page 45. In the first he would make his Proselytes believe That 9 he and his Cause have mighty advantage by that Sentence of S. Bernard 'T is intolerable Pride And that of S. Augustine 'T is insolent madnesse to oppose the Doctrine or Practice of the Catholike Church page 25. And twise he is at the same Art in this page 56. and. 73. In the first he 10 tels us That * Postquam discessionem a toto mundo facere coacti sumus Calv. Epist. 141. Calvin confesses That in the Reformation there was a Departure from the whole world page 25. And though I conceive Calvine spake this but of the Roman world and of no Uoluntary but a forced Departure and wrote this to Melancthon to worke Vnity among the Reformers not any way to blast the Reformation Yet we must heare of it againe in this page 56. But over and above the rest one Place with his owne glosse upon 11 it pleases him extremely 'T is out of S. Athanasius his Creed That whosoever doth not hold it entire that is saith he in all Points and Inviolate that is saith hee in the true unchanged and uncorrupted sense proposed unto us by the Pastors of his Catholike Church without doubt he shall perish everlastingly This he hath almost verbatim in the first page 20. And in the Epistle of the Publisher of that Relation to the Reader under the Name of VV. I. and then againe the very same in this if not with some more disadvantage to himselfe page 70. And perhaps had I leasure to search after them more Points then these Now the Reasons which mooved mee to set downe these Particulars thus distinctly are two The One that whereas the * In the begining of the Conference set out by A. C. Iesuite affirmes that in a second Conference all the speech was about Particular matters and little or nothing about the maine and great generall Point of a Continuall Infallible Uisible Church in which that Lady required satisfaction and that therefore this third Conference was held It may hereby appeare that the most materiall both Points and Proofes are upon the matter the very same in all the three Conferences though little bee related of the second Conference by A. C. as appeares in the Preface of the Publisher VV. I. to the Reader So this tends to nothing but Ostentation and shew The Other is that Whereas these men boast so much of their Cause and their Ability to defend it It cannot but appeare by this and their handling of other Points in Divinity that they labour indeed but no otherwise then like an Horse in a Mill round about in the same Circle no farther at night then at noone The same thing over and over againe from Tu es Petrus to Pasce oves from thou art Peter to Do thou feed my Sheepe And backe againe the same way F. The Lady asked Whether she might be saved in the Protestant Faith Vpon my soule said the Bishop you may Vpon my soule said I there is but one saving Faith and that is the Romane B. So it seems I was confident for the Faith professed § 38 in the Church of England els I would not have taken the salvation of another upon my soule And sure I had reason of this my Confidence For to believe the Scripture and the Creeds to believe these in the sense of the Ancient Primitive Church To receive the foure great Generall Councels so much magnified by Antiquity To believe all Points of Doctrine generally received as Fundamentall in the Church of Christ is a Faith in which to live and die cannot but give salvation And therefore I went upon a sure ground in the adventure of my soule upon that Faith Besides in all the Points of Doctrine that are contioverted betweene us I would faine see any one Point maintained by the Church of England that can be proved