of such a man is to be followed in interpretatioÌ„ of Scripture or otherwise as the rule of faith or as a sufficient infallible means to leade men and to direct them in the knowledge of matters which are to be beleeued by faith Now this being the sense of my conclusion let vs heare how my aduersaries will answer my proofes 5 First he grants that a priuate man assisted by the holy Ghost may interpret Scripture truly and infallibly against a company as big as the Romane Church supposing the said company were not so assisted but it is not to be thought that the holy Ghost forsakes the Catholick Church to assist any who interpret contrary to it Which I thinke too and therfore neuer denied his coÌ„clusion nor gaine-said the arguments whereby he confirmed it in this generall sense But when these priuate men were expounded to be the reformed Churches and their Pastors and this holy Catholicke vniuersall Christian Church vnderstood to be the Papacy and the Romish faction then I affirmed that priuate men might haue the Spirit of God and his truth and the Church want it But that I be not mistaken and that the Reader may vnderstand wherein I and my aduersaries differ Note that the name of the Church may be taken 3. waies First for the whole company of such as professe Christ and his Gospell collectiuely in all ages and places which is most properly and really the Catholicke vniuersall Church So expressely o Princip doctr pag. 99. 101. edit Ascens an 1532. Waldensis This is the Catholicke Apostolicke Church of Christ meant in the Creed the mother of beleeuers whose faith cannot faile not any speciall Church Not the African as Donatus said not the particular Romane Church but the vniuersall Church not assembled in a generall Councell which we know hath sometime erred but the Catholicke Church of Christ dispersed through the whole world since the Baptisme of Christ by the Apostles and their successors to these times is it which containes the true faith and holds the certain truth in the midst of all errors Secondly for any part of this Catholicke Church in this or that time or contrey as the particular Churches of Greece Rome Corinth or any assembly of Bishops congregated in a Councell either generall or particular Thirdly for the Papacy or Romish Church peculiarly containing that faction which imbraces the Romish religion and liues vnder the Popes subiection In which sense my aduersary and all Papists alway vse the name of the Church p Est coetus hominum eiusdem Christianae fidei professione corundem Sacramentorum communione colligatus sub reginunt legitimorum Pastorum ac precipuè vnius Christi in terris Vicarij Romani Pontificis excluduntur schismatici qui habent fidem in sacramenta sed non subsunt legitimo Pastori Bell. de eccl milit c. 2. Est visibilis hominum câ—etus sub Christo apite â—â—us in terris Vicario â—astore ac summo Pontifice agens Simanch Cath. instit tâ—t 24. n. 1. defining it by this Romish faith with subiection to the Pope and excluding from it all that refuse the Papacy The which distinction being thus laied I propound my answer and that we say touching the point in the fourth proposition First No man or company of men beleeuing and expounding the Scripture contrary to that which the vniuersall Church in the first sence hath alway beleeued and expounded can be assured they haue the assistance of Gods Spirit but the contrary they may assure themselues they are led by the spirit of error The reason is for no truth can be reuealed to any but that which is in this Church for if it be not in it so that the Church neuer knew or beleeued it then it cannot be the truth For q 1. Tim. 3.15 the Church is the pillar and ground of truth and so a priuate man holding it must needs hold an error Secondly A priuate man and priuate companies of men may be and many times are so assisted by the holy Ghost that they may beleeue and expound the Scripture truly against a particular Church or Councell of Bishops either generall or particular The reason is for God hath left his truth with his Church therein to remaine for euer but not infallibly euery parcell of his truth with euery part or assembly of the Church But his prouidence and promises to his Church are sufficiently vpholden if he so support the true faith that it alway remaine in some of the Church Therefore a particular Church or councell of Bishops may at some time and in some points erre and then it cannot be denied but others may see the truth against them this proposition our aduersaries dare not denie nor do not Thirdly a priuate man and priuate companies of men beleeuing and expounding the Scripture onely against the Papacie may be infallibly assured they are assisted by the holy Ghost The reason is because this Papacie is no part of Gods truth but the late inuentions of men added vnto it Fourthly Priuate men and priuate companies of men beleeuing and expounding contrarie to the Papacie resist not the true Church of Christ nor any part of it The reason is for the Papacie being nothing else but a disease or excrement breeding in the Church must not be expounded to be the Church it selfe as a wenne or leprosie growing on the bodie is not the bodie it selfe and he that cuts off the wen or purges away the leprosie cannot be said to resist or wrong the bodie 6 These foure propositions thus laid downe it is manifest my aduersarie doth but cauill in this place For if his conclusion intended no more but that priuate men must not be thought to know the truth and the true Catholick Church to be in error no man would speake against him But the sence of his conclusion is against the three last of my propositions That no man can be thought inspired of God or to haue the truth when he expounds Scripture as Luther and his did contrary to the church of Rome in which sence onely I dispute against him and in no other Not affirming that priuate men may see the truth and the Catholicke vniuersall Church not see it but onely that priuate men beleeuing contrary to that which my aduersarie meanes by the Catholicke vniuersall Church may haue the truth on their side and be infallibly sure therof without holding any thing contrary to the vnamine interpretation of the precedent or liuing Pastors of the sound part of the Catholicke Church CHAP. XXXIII 1. How a priuate man is assured he vnderstands and beleeues aright touching the last and highest resolution of faith 2. Luthers reiecting the Fathers 3. Occhams opinion that no man is tied to the Pope or his Councels 4. The Beraeans examined the doctrine that they were taught 5. The faith of the beleeuer rests vpon diuine infused light 6. M. Luther sought reformation with all humilitie 7. Scripture is the
My aduersarie therefore maintaining the doctrine of the Church to be the rule of faith * Suarez the Iesuit shames not to tell the king of England in his late writing against him that The authoritie of the Trent Councell which all the world knowes was mooued by the Pope in the same manner that Puppet motions are mooued by such as shew them is the authoritie of the vniuersall Catholicke Church Defens fid Cathol adu Angl. sect lib. 1. c. 9. nu 7. meanes nothing by the Church but THE POPE HIMSELFE and they that yeeld themselues to be led by the Romane Church must depend solely vpon his will and word 3 To the second this diuine doctrine of the Church which the Repliar saies is the rule of our faith is by himselfe expounded to include not onely the written Scripture but vnwritten traditions also and such decrees and interpretations both of Scripture and tradition as the Pope shall reueale and propound hence it followes that any Friars dreame may be thrust vpon vs as an article of faith necessary to saluation because these traditions and interpretations and this authoritie of the Pope containe many such dreames that is to say the Pope and his Church vnder pretence that they are diuine traditions and all power to propose matters of faith belongs to him may and doth require vs to beleeue lyes and errors and albeit the Iesuite affirme these traditions and interpretations of his Church to be reuealed by God to the Apostles and their successors the Doctors and Pastors of the Church as part of that diuine and Church doctrine which he would haue receaued o Pari pietatis affectu ac reuerentia suscipit veneratur Conc. Trid. sess 4. with the same obedience and affection wherewith we receaue the Scripture yet this is false For the whole obiect of our faith is contained in the Scripture alone as I shewed in the third Digression and because he denies that any such dreames can be contained in the doctrine of his Church thus I reason For whatsoeuer the Pope shall definitiuely propound to be beleeued that is the doctrine of the Church But he may definitiuely propound the very dreames of a Friar this I proue The bookes of i Baro. an 159. n 4. ind expurg Hispa p. 149. d. 15. Sanct. Romana Hermes and k Phot. Biblioth p. 156. edit Graec. Haschel Balâ—am respon p. 363 in Iure Graeco Rom. tom 1. Zâ—onar in Apost can vlt. Perer. Ioh. 13. disp 30. Clemens Constitutions are Apochryphall counterfet and vnsound writings but D. Stapleton l Hos similes libros in canoneÌ„ sacrae Scripturae si praesens Ecclesia referret nulla ratio obstat quin eos pro Canonicis admittere debeamus Relect. pag. 514. saies he may put these bookes into the Canon of the Bible and so binde men to beleeue them by diuine faith therefore he may define and make to be matter of faith that which is vnsound and no better then a dreame Againe Canus and Caietan m Refert Fra. Suar. tom 2. p. 30. a. affirme the opinion of the virgine Maries conception without sinne to be godly and probable in shew but false and vncertaine indeede Yet n Suar. ibi Vas qu. in 3. part Tho. to 2. p. 45. the Iesuits say the Pope may define it when he will Thirdly o Grego Val. analys fid pag. 325. they hold the authority of the Church in defining to be in the Pope who may determine the things of faith whether he vse care and diligence therin or not but he that defines without any care taking or diligeÌ„ce vsed may chance specially if he be a Friar p To the number of 52. Azor institut moral tom 2. l. 5. c 44. as many Popes are to thrust his Friars dreames vpon the Church Fourthly the Canon law q Gl Marg. c quanto de translatione sayes He may make something of nothing and make that a sentence which is none Lastly r Suar vbi sup the Iesuites hold that a supernaturall truth may be so implicitely contained in tradition or Scripture that * Canisius reports that in Paris in the Vniuersities of Spaine and elsewhere no man is admitted to any degree in diuinitie vnlesse he sweare that he will hold the Immaculate conception of the virgine Marial lib. 1. c. 7. Such trickes as this will make this consent swell and increase as fast as the mountaine the common consent of the Church increasing whereby oftentimes the Holy Ghost expounds traditions and Scriptures the Church may at last bring in her definition which shall haue the force of a reuelation The two doores of sleepe Å¿ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hom. Odiss Ï„. mentioned so much in the Poets let not in more dreames then this doctrine doth lyes heresies into the world for whensoeuer the Church of Rome will bring in a new doctrine the implicite traditions and the increase of the Churches consent may be pretended 4 * Ad. 3. To the third he notes no more But what he said in his treatise and I granted in such sense as I layed downe in my answer And this noting it againe is needles and impertinent to the matter in hand which is not touching the quality but the quiddity of the rule 5 * Ad. 4. To the fourth we know well enough that the Church and the doctrine go together but it is false that the Church as deliuering doctrine is the rule For the doctrine is the rule and the Church that which teaches both vs and it selfe according to it as the Iudge expounding and executing the law is not the rule together with the law but the law is the rule it selfe and the iudge is the kings officer to apply it but hauing no authority ouer or beside it And yet allowing the contrary and all that the Repliar sayes still in his conceite the Pope with his definitions shall be this Church and this doctrine which he thus conioynes to be the rule 6 To the fift to proue the doctrine of the Church to be the rule of saith in such sort as the Repliar hath said Ad. 5. it is not sufficieÌ„t to shew that at least once or in some one age there hath bene a company of men called the Church in one sense or other ordained by God and furnisht with conditions to teach men the faith for the Repliar hath said that the doctrine of the Church is the rule of faith in such sort as it includes not onely the written Scriptures but vnwritten traditions and the interpretation of them both by Church authority Where two things are affirmed first that vnwritten traditions are part of the doctrine that is the rule Secondly that our faith is built t Non quid dicatur sed quis dicat attendendum Staplet Princ. pag. 364. Relect. p. 429. on the authority of the Church Neither of these is proued by shewing that which is
should be iudged Pag 210. A. D. Thus therefore we see that those texts which I alledge do not onely pertaine to the Apostles and men liuing in that age as my Aduersaries ignorantly White pag. 72. 73 74. and absurdly make answer to some of the texts but that they pertaine also to men liuing in other ages and consequently as my reason drawne out of them proueth infallibility and other conditions requisite in the rule and meanes to be in the Apostles doctrine so it proueth also infallibility and the said other conditions in the doctrine of succeeding Pastours 5 The texts alledged were these Math. 28 20. Ioh. 14.16 and the 16.13 Math. 28.19 Luc. 10.16 The thing he would proue by them was that the doctrine of the Church is infallible which conclusion in a good sense u §. 13. n. 1. §. 14 n. 2. in the WAY by me set downe I granted But when he meant it otherwise * Ecclesia docere potest aliquid extra praeter verbum scriptum D. Staplet relect p. 431 Eius doctrina quoque est infallibilis pag. 463. according to the doctrine of Rome that the Church can erre in nothing it teaches albeit it teach that which is not in the Scripture I answered the texts he brought out of the Scripture and to these foure I said that they belonged either onely or properly to the Apostles I answered them sufficiently otherwise all which the Repliar here conceals if they were applied to the whole Church but that also was one part of my answer Therefore here he replies that ignorantly and absurdly I make answer because they belong to the Church Pastours in all ages as he hath shewed Yet x The same word may be applied in the Apostle◠and to the succeeding Pastors so far foorth as to proue the substance of the thing signified to agree to both although in circumstance of measure manner or degree there be great difference A. D. Reply p. 208. 217. his owne confession is that this is onely secondarily or by consequence but primarily and principally they pertaine to the Apostles which is as much as I said For I do not so restraine them to the Apostles but that I allow part of the sense therein contained to concerne the Church and therefore I answered them also otherwise whereto the Repliar replies neuer a word And if they had proued the infallibility of his Church so pregnantly let him giue ouer his confidence and tell vs how then comes it to passe that so many in his owne Church hold some that y Occh. dial part 1. l 5. c. 25. Turtecrem sum de eccl l. 3. c. 58. concl 2. Caiet apol part 2. c. 21. Councels some that z Mic. Cezen lit ad Imperat. c. vlt. Hadrian 4. p. 26. Alphons l. 1 c. 4 Onus eccl c. 15. n. 34. the Pope himselfe may erre and let him not talke of erring definitiuely and è Cathedra for that distinction is in none of the texts alledged The priuiledge of not erring is by no words thereof tied to the chaire but that which is promised is tied to the persons So that the persons of these Pastors not being made infallible by these texts it followes that no such infallibility at all as the Repliar dreames of is giuen them therein A. D. As by the promise of Christ we be assured that the Apostles Pag. 214. and consequently in some sense the Pastours of the Church are taught all truth by the Holy Ghost so by the commission warrant commandement and threat ioyntly considered as here I consider them we are assured that the same Holy Ghost doth so assist them as not to permit either the Apostles or the Pastours vniuersally to teach authoratiuely false doctrine or their owne deuices in regard otherwise men should be bound sometimes to beleeue false doctrine which inconuenience cannot be auoided by saying as M. White saith White pag. 75. that the band hath a limitation that we heare them so farre as they teach agreeable to Scripture and no further and by those Scriptures we may releeue our selues if they chance to teach falsely Because first that conditionall limitation is no where expressed nor in M. Whites sense to be necessarily gathered out of any place of Scripture Secondly I aske how those should releeue themselues who cannot reade much lesse vnderstand Scripture 6 The limitation whereof I spake that we heare the Pastors of the Church NO FVRTHER THEN THEY TEACH AGREEABLE TO THE SCRIPTVRE is expressed and necessarily gathered out of Scripture euen in M. Whites sence For the Scripture bids a 1. Th. 5.21 trie all things and hold that which is good And b 1 Ioh. 4.1 beleeue not euery spirit but trie the spirits whether they be of God And that we may know the Scripture alone is the rule whereby this triall must be made it sayes againe c 2. Pet. 1.19 We haue a more sure word of the Prophets whereto we do well to take heede as to a light that shines in the darke till the day dawne and the day star rise in our hearts d Ioh. 5.39 And search the Scriptures for in them we thinke to haue eternall life and they be they that testifie of Christ And the mē of Beraea e Act. 17.11 searched the Scriptures daily whether those things which the Apostles preached were so There were nothing more harsh then these speeches of the Holy Ghost if the Scripture were not allowed and appointed as a sufficient and the last outward meanes to preserue the faithfull from false teaching And as I haue often heretofore affirmed the Papists themselues cannot auoid this limitation For the Pope and Councels and particular Pastors may all erre and teach false Adrian that himselfe was a Pope and therefore best knew what belongs to Popes f Vbi sup sayes It is certaine the Pope may erre euen in such things as touch the faith auouching heresie by his determination or decree Touching Councels not confirmed by the Pope Azorius the Iesuite g Azo instit moral tom 2. l. 5. c. 12. sayes All Catholickes are agreed that they may erre touching particular Pastors and Bishops Waldensis h Doctrinal fid l. 2. c. 19. sayes we know that all these both Cleargy and Prelates of the Church haue often erred If all these may erre then it followes that their teaching must be examined accepted with this limitation if it consent with the Scripture Gerson i De exam doctr part 1. confid 5. tom 1. saies Euery man sufficiently learned in the Scriptures is an examiner of doctrines put case there be a simple man not authorised excellently seene in holy writ then in the point of doctrine his assertion is more to be beleeued then the Popes declaration For it is plaine the Gospell is more to be beleeued then the Pope if therefore such a learned man teach any verity to be contained in the
AND IN THE WRITINGS OF THESE MEN TOVCHING THE SCRIPTVRES SACRAMENTS CHVRCH POPE COVNCELS TRANSVBSTANTIATION IMAGES INVOCATION OF SAINTS IVSTIFICATION GOOD WORKS c. WAS THE DOCTRINE OF THE CHVRCH AND PROFESSED BY THE BISHOPS OF ROME FATHERS AND COVNCELS EXPRESSED IN THE FIRST 800 YEARES OF THIS CATALOGVE this is our obiection whereto the Replier answers that he can retort it more strongly against the Protestants c. But this is but wind and so let it passe and come we forward to the substance of his answer CHAP. XLIII 1. Whatsoeuer the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued is expressed in their bookes 2. The Replier is driuen to say they held much of his religion onely implicitely What implicite faith is according to the Papists The death of Zeuxis The Fathers write that which cannot stand with Papistrie Pag. â—67 A. D. Secondly I answer that to say there be diuers points held by vs whereof no mention is made in those ancient Fathers is no good argument to proue that which we hold was not holden by them For this is Argumentum ab authoritate negatiua which argument is of no force to proue this point vnles it be first proued that those Fathers held nothing explicitè or implicitè which is not expresly to be fouÌ„d in their writings But this my aduersaries will neuer be able to proue Now on the contrary side we can shew good reasons or at least probable presumptions sufficient to proue first that they held more then is expressed in their writings Secondly that they held explicitè or implicitè the same in all points of doctrine which we hold First I say we haue reason to thinke that they held more then is expressed in their writings because since ordinarily the writings of these Fathers were not by them set out of purpose to expresse in particular euery thing that they held implicitè or explicitè concerning all matters of faith but rather were written vpon some speciall occasion it is to be thought that their writings contain only some parts of the doctrine to wit so much of it as was that requisite to be written vpon that special occasion The which is confirmed euen by experience of these our times in which although learned men do ordinarily set downe more expresly in Catechismes bookes of controuersies c what the Catholik faith is in diuers points then formerly it hath bin set downe as they haue more occasion by reason of more heresies daily arising then learned men of former ages when those heresies were not haue had Yet no learned man now adaies writeth euery thing which explicitè or implicitè he beleeueth to be the Catholick faith For euery Catholicke man beleeueth explicitè or implicitè all that is contained in Scriptures and traditions in that he beleeueth whatsoeuer was reuealed by God to the Apostles deliuered by them in word or writing to the Catholicke Church and which the Church in Scriptures and vnwritten traditions propoundeth and deliuereth to vs diuers particulars whereof are not necessary to be expresly knowne to or written by any particular learned man of any age but are alwaies preserued at least in the implicite or infolded faith of the Church the which infolded faith of the Church may and shall be vnfolded the holy Ghost still assisting and suggesting all the aforesaid reuealed truth as necessitie shall require that the truth should be in any point expresly declared which necessitie chiefly is when some new heresie ariseth oppugning particularly the truth of that point 1 HEre he sayes the Fathers named in his Catalogue might hold what the church of Rome holds though there be no mentioÌ„ therof in their writings because they might hold that which is not expresly in their writings We had thought vntil now that this had bin a plain demonstration The ancient Fathers in all their writings make no mention of diuers points of the Popish religion Ergo they held them not Or thus What religion the Fathers held that they mention in their writings But the Popish religion they mention not in their writings Ergo they held not the Popish religion But he hauing good experience that the second proposition is true denies the first and will shew either by good reasons or probable presumptions that they held more then they mention and expresse in their bookes Wherein at once he hath destroyed his Catalogue and laid his religion open to the scorne of women and children For if the Fathers in all their writings handled nothing but the cause of religion teaching expounding and defending it against Iewes Gentiles hereticks schismatickes whereby they could not but mention what they held and yet neuer mentioned diuers points of Poperie it is plaine they neuer held them But the Iesuite sayes this is Argumentum ab authoritate negatiua which is not good they might hold either explicitè or implicitè that which they haue not expressed Wherein you must marke his tergiuersation For to shew a visible Church in all ages professing openly his Romane faith that all men may see it he tenders this catalogue But when we bid him proue that the Fathers of the first 600 or 800 yeares beleeued and professed that part of his Romane faith which the Church of England reiects that it may appeare so to vs and we may see it he sayes he can shew good reasons and presumptions that they beleeued more then is expressed in their writings whereas he should shew by their WRITINGS that they held and beleeued as the Romish Church now doth because it is impossible to shew what they held but by their writings and himselfe sayes in another place We cannot haue any certaintie of things past but by the writings of those times And if he will haue his Church to be so visible in the Fathers time and those Fathers to be so eminent members thereof good reason men see it yet see it they cannot by presumptions but by their writings 2 But he sayes We haue reason to thinke that they held more then expressed in their writings forsomuch as no man writes euery thing which explicitè or implicitè he beleeues I answer though it be granted that both they and we in all our writings may omit some things not belonging to faith or religion yet many articles of faith such as our aduersaries say theirs are the deniall whereof they call schisme and damnable herersie and persecute with fire sword and gun-powder cannot but be expressed for so much as such articles are simply needfull vnto saluation and are the grounds and conclusions of all theologicall writing and discourse Secondly it is impertinent to the obiection which denies the Fathers of the first 600 yeares to haue done that which the Catalogue sayes they did professed VISIBLY as the Romane Church now doth which obiection is not satisfied by saying they might explicitè or implicitè professe that they neuer writ because no man writes all he beleeues but by shewing in their writings this
d Syllog Whatsoeuer he taught by word of mouth the same by his Epistles he reuoked to their memory But he taught al things belōging to faith by word of mouth Therefore by his Epistles he reuoked the same to memory But his Epistles are written therfore by writing he reuoked to their memorie all things belōging to faith Therefore all things belonging to faith are written is from the demonstration of holy inspired Scriptures b Iren. l. 3 c. 1. For the disposing of our saluation we haue not knowne by any other but those by whom the Gospell came vnto vs the which then they preached but afterward by Gods appointment they deliuered vnto vs in the Scriptures to be the foundatiō and pillar of our faith And c Ibid. c. 2. Whē hereticks are conuinced out of the Scriptures they fal to accusing them as if they were not right nor from authoritie because they are variably spoken and from them the truth cannot be found of those that know not Tradition inasmuch as this truth was not deliuered by writing but by word of mouth Thus speakes the ancient Church in expresse termes pointing to our aduersaries whereby the Reader may iudge which of vs beare most good will to the Church and Scriptures and if the Iesuite will yeeld to that Nicephorus q writes in his Ecclesiasticall historie that whatsoeuer S. Paul being present taught by word of mouth among the Corinths Ephesians Galatians Colossians Philippians Thessalonians Iewes Romanes and many other townes whereunto the holy Ghost sent him and whom he begat in the faith of Christ the same being absent by his Epistles sent to them he compendiously reuoketh into their memorie Then forasmuch as the Apostles preached nothing to any but what they set downe in the Epistles the Protestants haue good reason to admit onely Scripture because it containes all the preaching of the Apostles whatsoeuer Let the Iesuite in the course of his studies and all Papists in the heate of their zeale marke these and such like our grounds and well consider them Pag. 32. A.D. As concerning his second mark wherein he says the very face of our Church is cleane contrary to the first antiquitie if he mean that there is some accidentall difference either in personall qualities of particular men or in some point of outward estate and manner of gouernment betwixt the first primitiue age or infancie of the Church and that other estate which after it had and now hath when it is at full growth this is not an argument sufficient to make men doubt of our religion more then to see some accidental alteration betwixt the infancy elder age of a man is any argument sufficient to make one doubt whether he be substantially the same man or no but if he meane that there is any substantiall difference in any doctrine of faith his assertion is very false as I declare in the Appendix annexed to this my Reply where particular answer is made to the chiefe matters against which here he taketh exception 8 I meane and expresse so much that betweene the present Roman Church and the ancient there is a substantiall difference in many doctrines of faith and not such an accidentall difference onely as the Iesuite mentions And because I desire no man to credit my bare word I named the Hierarchie of the Church of Rome consisting in the state and iurisdiction of the Roman cleargie which is simply the substantiallest point that they count of and foure other points and my speech was of that latitude that it chargeth them with innouation in all the rest the booke it selfe afterward shewing it in particular so fully and directly that all the Iesuites in England dare not lay railing and cauilling aside and answer what I said temperately and ingeniously for that which the Iesuite sayes in the Appendix he hath made particular answer is vntrue he hath answered particularly to nothing nor can he But knowing his sectaries were either so slothfull that they would not reade his booke so far or so forgetfull that when they came to the Appendix this matter would be out of their head he was bold in this place to promise what he neuer meant there to pay though whatsoeuer he say there is sufficiently answered I am sorie at my heart for my countrimen that haue these tricks put vpon them to seduce and peruert them I beseech them by the mercies of Iesus Christ that as I penned my booke out of my loue to them and desire of their saluation for the which I would sacrifice my life and all the hopes I haue in this world so they will faithfully examine how the contents thereof are answered by this Reply who if I be not deceiued is farre vnable to meddle with these things CHAP. X. 1. The practise of the Papists in purging bookes 2. The sacrifice of the Masse and Reall presence denied 4. Points of Papistrie absurd 6. The Pope Lords it ouer all Papists need pay no debts May be traitors to murther Princes 7. Iesuites plotters in the Powder-treason The Popes dispensing with sinne 8. A meditation for all Papists A. D. M. Whites third marke is set downe by him in these words Pag. 31. There is no point of our faith but many learned in their owne Church hold it with vs. And no point of Papistrie that we haue reiected but some of themselues haue misliked as well as we And this saith he may be demonstrated in all the questions that are betweene vs and they know it c. Thus farre are M. Whites words The which containe in them so many blacke lies as there are instances which may be giuen of particular points both of Catholicke doctrine reiected by Protestants and not misliked by any of our selues and of Protestant doctrine not patronized nor held by any learned men of our Church And to omit other instances I aske M. White how many learned men of our Church haue denied the Masse to containe a Sacrifice in such sort as Protestants do denie How many also will he finde to affirme that Christ his blessed bodie is onely figuratiuely in the Sacrament or in such sort that the reall substance of it is no nearer them that receiue the Sacrament then heauen is to earth as by the Caluinists is held against the Romane Church Let M. White for his credit produce if he can many or any learned men of our Church which hold in these points with Caluinists against the Romane faith As for the Index expurgatorius which M. White mentioneth and the practise and vse of it our Authors haue sufficiently answered namely N.D. in his Warnword and the author of the booke called the Grounds of the old and new religion in his answer to M. Crashaw annexed to the said booke 1 THat which I said I shewed in my book where in euery controuersie that fell out betweene vs I haue produced popish writers one against another either iustifying our doctrine or crossing
nothing 2 That which he sayes is two things First he repeates and expounds his conclusion Next he touches some small portion of that I said concerning it In repeating his conclusion first he sayes he meant it against such as thinke it sufficient to beleeue some few articles onely though they deny or doubt of others which yet the Church beleeues yea rashly and obstinately denies them who these men are he names not but he meanes the Protestants Because they deny such points as the Church of Rome which he meanes by his Catholicke Church vntruly propounds vnto them For they must be the persons intended that deny any thing which the Roman Church holds for an article of faith as the Popes primacy Purgatory Images and the rest which in b Commonly printed with the Trent Councell inserted in the WAY praef n. 15. the new Creed of the Trent Councell are made articles of faith But the Protestants answer readily that they confesse no point at all may be denied or doubted of either obstinately or rashly or at all that is a point of faith reuealed in the word of God but the things holden and propounded by the Church of Rome against them are the false doctrines and heresies of Antichrist ridiculously called the faith of the Catholicke Church Then expounding his conclusion he shewes in what manner faith must beleeue all things that it may be entire and he sayes either expresly or implicitely wherein he bewrayes that which I suspected and signified in my answer for his conclusion being that faith must be entire and sound stedfastly beleeuing all things reuealed I c The WAY pag. 5. answered that this might be granted in a true sense But peraduenture his mind ran vpon a further matter which his Church teaches about infolded faith meaning thereby that howsoeuer he affirmed that we are bound to beleeue all points of faith as well one as other yet that might be done sufficiently by beleeuing as the Church beleeues without knowledge of any thing that is beleeued the which my suspition he grants in this place to be true and so his conclusion which at the first carried so good a semblance of binding men to the knowledge of particular verities and made so honest a proffer against ignorance is now resolued into this sense that by an intire faith you are bound to beleeue all things the which is done by knowing nothing but onely beleeuing implicitely as the Church of Rome beleeues Let a man neuer trouble himselfe with inquiring into the mysteries of Christian religion or controuersies of faith but onely say d Rhem. annot Luc. 12.11 he will liue and die in that faith which the Catholicke Church teaches and this Church can giue a reason of the things beleeued This is the equiuocating tongue of the Church of Rome that can ambush it selfe in words and vnder faire speeches conceale no small wickednes 3 His arguments in maintenance of this implicite faith are fiue First the authority of M. Wootton who seemes to speake against me next because to get expresse knowledge of all points contained in Scripture which are points necessary to be beleeued is impossible at least for vnlearned men Thirdly faith and knowledge are two distinct things faith being of things not knowne captiuating the vnderstanding therefore this distinct knowledge is not presupposed before Fourthly reason and experience teach that beleefe and knowledge are distinct beleefe not presupposing knowledge but going before it Fiftly the Fathers Irenaeus Hilary Austin affirme faith to be sufficient without knowledge Afore I answer his arguments note fiue things First what our aduersaries meane hy implicite or infolded faith and it is nothing else but a blind assent of the mind to whatsoeuer the Church of Rome beleeues without any knowledge at all of the things themselues e Occh. dialog part 1. l. 3. c. 1. p. 18. Dur. 3. d. 25. q. 1. â—abr ibi Notab 2. Do. Bann 22. pag. 349. The Schoolemen deliuer it in finer termes that it is the assent of the minde to some generall or vniuersall thing wherein many particulars are included with will to beleeue nothing that is contrary thereunto but the meaning is that to the essence and nature of this entire faith the distinct knowledge or apprehension of any particular truth or article is not required but onely resolution and profession to be of the Churches beleefe whatsoeuer it be in the same manner that I reported the Colliars faith Thus any man by an implicite faith beleeues the articles of Religion and particular mysteries of our faith touching the Vnity and Trinity of the Godhead the Incarnation and Office of Christ the nature of Faith the practise of Repentance the Resurrection the Sacraments Redemption of mankinde state of sinne and the last Iudgement when he will beleeue and hold touching these things as the Church of Rome doth and yet in the meane time his vnderstanding in no measure penetrates into these articles nor can distinctly explicate or conceiue them Altisiodorensis f Sum. l. 3. tract 3. c. 1. qu. 5. saies To beleeue implicitely is to beleeue in this generall that whatsoeuer the Church beleeues is true Dionysius g 3. de 25. qu. vnic p. 215. This is infolded faith to beleeue in generall all that our Holy mother the Church beleeues Summa Rosella h V. Fides n. 1. quem refert Bann vbi sup To beleue all that which our mother the Church beleeues and holds as when a Christian man is asked whether Christ were borne of the virgine Marie or whether there be one God and three Persons and he answers that he cannot tell but beleeues touching these matters as the Church holdeth This is the definition of entire faith which the Iesuite saies extends it selfe vniuersally to all points at least implicitely Note Secondly what the things are and which be the points that our aduersaries teach to be sufficiently beleeued by this infolded faith The Reply seemes to affirme that it is allowed onely in some points which a man for want of sufficient meanes cannot know I grant saith he and neuer did deny but that there are some points necessary to be particularly knowne of all sorts Necessitate medij and some necessary to be knowne Necessitate praecepti In which points implicite beleefe doth not suffice but expresse particular knowledge is required by Catholicke Diuines to be ioyned to the assent of our faith in other points so farre as we neither know nor haue sufficient meanes to know them we may well commend the Colliars faith in beleeuing in generall as the Church beleeueth In which wordes my aduersarie seemes to allow implicite faith only in some few cases and charges me with two grosse vntruthes because I say the Papists vtterly refuse knowledge and Canonize the Colliars implicite faith for their Creed But he should haue obserued that which was vnder his eyes and affixed to my words alledged whereby I proued what I said I alledged Iacobus
is quenched the light and zeale and comfortable assurance thereof is taken away and all sorts of people are imboldened to security negligence in seeking that quantity of knowledge whereto God hath enabled them to attaine So that hereby the people of God in whom p Col. 3.16 his word ought to dwell plentifully with all manner of knowledge q Ro. 10.10 that should be able both to beleeue with the heart and confesse with their mouth to saluation r Heb. 5. vlt. that through long custome should haue their wits exercised to discerne both good and euill ſ 1 Pet. 3.15 that should be alway ready to giue an answer to euery one that asketh a reason of the hope that is in them are turned into sencelesse Idols that can neither heare nor see nor vnderstand the which kind of ignorance the ancient Church neuer allowed Thirdly we cōdemne the defining of faith yea entire Catholicke faith by this kind of beleeuing for albeit the faith knowledge of the best of Gods children be intangled as Caluin hath freely confessed with the relickes of much ignorance when many things beleeued necessary to saluation are not yet distinctly vnderstood yet there is a progres increase in knowledge wherby the dullest ignorantest of Gods children are inlightned more and more vntill they reach that quantity of apprehension that the commandement of faith requires In which sense we allow the faith of any man liuing specially the vnlearned to be implicite First when he knowes and apprehends in generall the substantiall articles belonging to faith which are contained in the Scriptures and rule of faith Secondly when the ignorance is only in the particulars whereby the said generall articles are demonstrated as a lay man beleeuing the Vnity and Trinity of Persons in God yet is not able to expresse or conceaue the difference betweene the essence and the Persons nor the different manner of persons proceeding 3. When withall he vses the meanes to increase in knowledge by searching the Scriptures and hearing the word preached and in the meane time obediently submits himselfe to the ministry and direction of the Church herein The implicite faith of such persons as haue this threefold disposition concurring in them we condemne not but this is not it which our aduersaries pleade for who defēd that it is enough to assent to the Church though all this be wanting that is to say to professe himselfe a Romane Catholicke beleeuing as the present Church holds without any knowledge of the things in themselues 8 Note lastly that the distinct knowledge of things beleeued which against this implicitie of faith we require is the knowledge of that which God hath reuealed not of the essence and reason of the things For the vnderstanding whereof we must consider that the Scriptures and Church by their proposition reueale the points of faith vnto vs and bid vs learne beleeue thē as that there is one God the maker of all things and one mediator Iesus Christ that was conceaued by the Holy Ghost borne of the virgine Marie and as followes in the Rule of Faith Which things thus mentioned vnto vs are profound mysteries and haue many abstruse and secret notions belonging to them as for example the deepe reasons of the Trinitie in the Godhead and the Vnion of the two natures in Christ Now when we require knowledge to be ioyned with the faith of these things we meane the knowledge of the Reuelation not of the reason and whole nature of the things reuealed for is any man so presumptuous as to imagine that a supernaturall obiect beleeued by faith reuealed by God can by discourse of reason be reduced to naturall vnderstanding the Apostle t 1. Cor. 2.14 saying The naturall man perceaues not the things of God neither can he know them Or do our aduersaries imagine the knowledge we require to be such as is in humane sciences where conclusions are demonstrated by their principles and things are comprehended in their causes and properties Haue they that power ouer their people to make them beleeue that we require for example men to be able to vnderstand and vtter the manner and reasons how God is one How 3. in Person How the dead shall be raised againe How our nature subsists in the word How the redemption of mankinde could be wrought by the sufferings and death of the Sonne of God How the Sacraments confer Grace How man could be predestinate before the world was made We do not require the world to know these things u 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Theodor. de prouid l. 10 sub fin which are reserued to the beatificall vision in the life to come but onely in such sort and measure as is reuealed which is by conceauing that God is one that the Persons are 3. that the dead shall be raised againe c. and such things concerning them as may without error be vnderstood * Deut. 29 29. For secret things belong to the Lord our God but things reuealed belong to vs and to our children for euer * The state of the question The true state of the question therefore touching implicite faith is whether the beleeuer besides his generall assenting to the Church and Scripture be also bound to haue in himselfe a distinct knowledge of things propounded him to beleeue so that he can according to any true notion of conceauing apprehend and conceaue that which is reuealed to him in which question the distinction of Necessary as the meanes and Necessary by the command is friuolous because whatsoeuer is omitted against Gods commandement is sinne and consequently damnable without repentance and therefore if knowledge be commanded it is also the meanes of Saluation so farre foorth as the obseruation of the commandements is the meanes But our aduersaries apply this distinction which in some question is of good vse in this place to lay their people a sleepe on their pillow when they shall heare knowledge to be commanded but yet not as a Necessary meanes Now there be twenty wayes to escape from a commandement 9 These things thus premised now I answer my aduersaries arguments made for implicite faith against distinct knowledge The first that I dispute so whotly against that which M. Wootton admits is false For M. Wootton admits no more then he insinuates in his conclusion that a generall beleefe of some points may suffice some persons without danger of damnation and this pleases me well enough for I haue shewed this not to be the question but let my aduersary deale sincerely and hold him to that which is taught in his Church and it will please himselfe neuer a whit When that doctrine allowes ignorance in all points and the other which is somewhat honester allowes it in more points and defines the ignorance otherwise then M. Wootton will do My aduersary therefor hath not M. Wootton on his side nor against me but directly with me
faith or needfull to be followed And so from that place to pag. 57 I disputed that the Scripture ALONE is the rule of faith that is to say That rule which my Aduersary in his fourth ground had said God had prouided whereby euery man learned and vnlearned may sufficiently be instructed WHAT is to be holden for the true faith Now he complaines that the State is peruerted the question not being whether Scripture be the rule of faith but whether Scripture alone be the rule and meane ordained of God to breed all faith And he notes two points wherein it is peruerted First in that I so affirme and defend the Scripture to be the rule as if he and his sectaries excluded it from being the rule in any sort which he sayes they do not For they hold the Scripture as propounded by the Church to be part of it I answer that I knew well enough they confessed the Scripture to be part of the rule and the Diuine doctrine which is the whole rule to be some of it written But I knew also that they denied it to be the whole rule ioyning therewith vnwritten traditions and the Popes Decretals which they call Church authority I knew also they allowed it to be no part of the rule but as and in such sence as the Church of Rome should please to propound it and I saw his conclusion in termes denying the Scripture alone to be the rule whereby men may sufficiently be instructed WHAT the faith is therefore I disputed directly opposite to all this that the Scripture alone without traditions is the whole rule to shew vs WHAT is to be holden for faith and nothing but the Scripture this is close to the question For albeit he yeelds it to be the rule in a sort because as his Church propounds it it containes part of the rule yet he denies it to be that whole and entire rule that his conclusion inquires of and so is to be disputed against as well as if he denied it to be any part of the rule at all Againe he holds two things First affirmatiuely that the Scripture is one part of the rule then negatiuely that the Scripture alone is not all the rule Both these are contradictory to my assertion The Scripture alone is the rule My assertion therefore affirming what he denies and denying what he affirmes containes the true state of the question and his inuoluing the matter with all this cauilling tends onely to the couering of his doctrine the loathsome visage whereof he is ashamed should be seene 3 The second point wherein he sayes the question is peruerted is in that I take the rule of faith otherwise then he doth For whereas he by that word rule meanes such a rule as not onely is sufficient to REVEALE all diuine truths that are to be beleeued but also to BREED or produce in vs the faith whereby we beleeue them I he sayes vnderstand such a rule onely as is sufficient to reueale the diuine verities though it be not sufficient to breed in vs faith and assent thereunto And it is true that I vnderstand such a rule indeed the Church wherein I liue onely beleeuing the sufficiency of the Scripture to containe all the obiect of faith but not to enable vs to beleeue it or vnderstand it ordinarily without the ministry of the Church and other meanes But this peruerts not the question * The state of the question touching Scripture ALONâ— for about the meanes there is no question but the question is whether Scripture alone excluding all Church traditions and authority comprehend the whole obiect or matter of faith that is to say All that we are bound to know beleeue and doe for our saluation though it be granted that to breed or produce faith and knowledge of that which is in the Scripture the Ministry of the Church and the helpe of Gods Spirit and our owne industry must concurre For our Aduersaries deny this and hold their runagate traditions and Church authority to be necessary not onely for the expounding and confirming to vs that which is in the Scripture if any one chance to deny it or not to see it but for the supplying of infinite articles of faith which are no waies at all comprised in the Scripture but vpon the said authority are to be receiued as well as that which is reuealed in the Scripture The Iesuite speakes as if he thought his Church authority to consist more in breeding faith and leading men to beleeue what is written then in adding any thing to the measure of the diuine verities contained in the Scripture and indeed sometime there be of his side that will plainely say so He that writ the defence of the Censure a Def. of the Cens pag. 141. NOTE THIS and inquire whether all Papists will stand to it sayes it is to be noted that the question betweene vs and the Protestants is of EXPRESSE SCRIPTVRE ONELY and not of any far fet place which by interpretation may be applied to a controuersie For this contention began betweene vs vpon this occasion that when we alledged diuers weighty places and reasons out of the Scripture for proofe of inuocation of Saints praier for the dead Purgatory and some other controuersies our aduersaries reiected them for that they did not plainely and expresly decide the matter Whereupon came this question whether all matters of beleefe are plainely and expresly in Scripture or not which they affirme and we deny And this he sayes is is the true state of the question Gretser b Defens Bellar tom 1. l. 4. c. 4. p. 1598. sayes These things may be proued by Scripture but not sufficiently not effectually by Scripture alone without tradition but onely probably The which if my aduersary and his Church did hold constantly and in good earnest I would confesse I had peruerted the state of the question But they do not but hold many things belonging to faith to be wanting and no way at all neither openly nor expresly nor consequently contained in the Scripture Dominicus Bannes c D. Dann 22. Tho. p. 302. All things which pertaine to Catholicke faith are not contained in the Canonicall books either manifestly or obscurely nor all those things which Christ and his Apostles taught and ordained for the instructing of his Church and confirming of the faith were committed to the holy Scriptures and the contrary is open heresie Melchior Canus d Can. loc p. 151 There are many things belonging to the doctrine and faith of Christians which are contained in the sacred Scriptures neither manifestly nor obscurely Cardinall Hosius e Hos confess Polon p. 383. The greater part of the Gospell by a great deale is come to vs by tradition very little of it being written in the Scripture Peresius f Peres de tradit p. 4. Tradition is taken so that it is distinguisht against the doctrine which is found in the Canonicall bookes of the
Scripture Bellarmine g Bell. de verb. Dei lib. 4. c. 1. The name of tradition is applied by Diuines to signifie onely vnwritten doctrine Alphonsus h Alphons à Castr adu haer lib 1. c. 5. This is to be laid for a most sound foundation that the traditions of the vniuersall Church and the determinations thereof in things concerning faith are of no lesse authority then the sacred Scripture it selfe though there be no Scripture to proue them Hessels of Louan i Hessel expli symb c. 69. p. 38. The Apostles neuer intended by their writing to commit to writing the whole doctrine of faith but as necessity vrged them what in their absence they could not teach that they committed to writing Costerus the Iesuite k Coster enchirid p. 43. It was neuer the mind of Christ either to commit his mysteries to parchment or that his Church should depend on paper writings Lindane l Lind. panopl. pag. 4. We Catholickes teach that Christians are to beleeue many things which are to be acknowledged for Gods word that are not contained in the Scripture and many things finally to be receiued with the same authoritie wherewith those doctrines of faith are receiued which are contained in holy writ Rodericus Delgado m Roderic dosm de autor Script l. vlt. p. 63 Albeit these things are not found written in the Bible yet they must no lesse be obserued by the godly that they may fulfill the precepts and firmely beleeue the mysteries of the heauenly faith Doctor Stapleton n Staplet princip doctr l. 12. cap. 5. There both were among the Iewes and are among vs very many things religiously performed in the worship of God and also necessary to saluation and necessarily to be beleeued which yet are not comprehended in the Scriptures but are approued or commended to vs ONELY by the authority of the Church Gregory of Valentia o Valent. tom 3. p. 258. D. All the controuersie is whether the Apostles by word of mouth WITHOVT WRITING deliuered any such doctrines as now affoord an infallible argument for the determining of the controuersies of faith in the Church These wordes of our aduersaries make it more then plaine that the Church of Rome holds the Scriptures vnsufficient not onely in respect of breeding faith or bringing men to know and beleeue it ordinarily which we grant but also in respect of containing it in themselues which we deny And that my aduersary holds the same thing I will prone directly For ha-laid downe 4. grounds First that true faith is necessary Secondly that this faith is onely one Thirdly that this faith must be certaine Fourthly and entire in all points he addes the fift that it must not be doubted but God hath prouided and left some certaine rule and meanes whereby euery man may in all points and questions be sufficiently and infallibly instructed WHAT is to be holden for true faith and then immediately he puts the question what in particular may be assigned to be this rule wherto he answers in his first conclusion The Scripture alone especially as translated into English cannot be this rule Which I denied Therefore his question was touching the sufficiency of the Scripture as the said sufficiency is opposed to vnwrittē traditiō not as it is distinguished against the requisite condition of the meanes to be vsed for the vnderstanding of the Scripture And this I confirme for my aduersary saies they hold the Scripture to be part of the rule because it is part of the doctrine of the Church immediatly reuealed by God but yet there are many substantiall points of faith not contained in them Yea p Pag. 67. Reply his expresse words are The question is betwixt vs and Protestants whether God did reueale any thing to the Prophets and Apostles necessary to be beleeued which is not now expressed or so contained in the Scripture that by euident and necessary consequence excluding all tradition and Church authority it may be gathered out of some sentence expresly set downe in the Scripture I did not therefore peruert the state of the question but my Aduersary hauing nothing else to say thought good by this shift to rid himselfe from that which he saw could not be answered 4 Neuerthelesse pleasing himselfe with his owne conceite he concludes that conuicted with the euidence of truth I haue yeelded to his conclusion in that sence wherein he meant it That Scripture alone is not the rule of faith And therefore all my discourse is idle and impertinent I answer two things first if his conclusion The Scripture alone is not this rule which almighty God hath prouided whereby euery man may sufficiently be instructed WHAT is to be holden for true faith meane no more but onely to adde the Ministry of the Church and mens owne industry to the Scripture as the meanes for the ordinary vnderstanding and beleeuing that which is written in it in this sence the Scripture alone is the rule whereby to iudge whatsoeuer matter belongs to faith but Scripture alone is not the ordinary rule and meanes by it selfe to kindle in vs the true knowledge and faith of that which it containes without the Ministrie of the Church and other things be ioyned with it for the learning of it then I grant it and require the Iesuite againe in lieu thereof either to renounce his traditions or else confesse they haue no other vse but onely to helpe to expoūd and teach that which is wholly contained in the Scripture without any power to supply any defect of doctrine that may be supposed to be therein And when he hath done the next treatise of faith he writes to distinguish a little better betweene the Rule and the Meanes of applying it and not say that is no sufficient rule whereby to be instructed WHAT is faith and WHAT not which onely is not a sufficient meanes to bring men to faith without the subordinate condition of such meanes as is required in the application of any rule Secondly I answer that his conclusion meanes more viz. That Scripture alone is vnperfect and defectiue 2. waies The first in that without other meanes it doth not ordinarily breed or draw foorth in vs assent to that it reueales nor so much as make vs see the reuelation to be And therefore there needes the Church by her Pastor to teach and perswade vs and there needes the Spirit of God and industrie in our selues This way no Protestant euer denied The second is in that it alone containes not all Gods word or all such truth as he hath reuealed necessarily to be beleeued but onely one small and obscure part thereof the best part or at least some part being by Tradition onely vnwritten This way we deny with open mouth and the Iesuite holds it and in the place now controuerted hugges it in his armes and therefore I discoursed against him as I did and in no other sense and so consequently it is
all the gates of hell not onely ouer the sayings of men though holy men or deceitful custom Gods word is ouer all The diuine Maiestie is of my side that I care not if a thousand Austins a thousand Cyprians a thousand King Harry-churches stood against me God can neither deceiue nor be deceiued Austin and Cyprian as all the elect may erre and haue erred In all these words there is nothing spoken simply against the Fathers but comparatiuely if a thousand Fathers were against the Scriptures he would rather stand to the Scripture wherein he speakes most godly and honestly that d Gal. 1. if an Apostle or an Angell from heauen farre greater then a thousand Austins and Cyprians should preach otherwise let him be accursed Neither Saint Paul nor Luther granted the Angels or Doctors of the Church to preach otherwise then they did but if any man would pretend and oppose their names and preaching against the Scripture let them be accursed the word of God is aboue all that I care not if a thousand Austins and a thousand Cyprians stood against me which is the truth and our aduersaries say as much themselues Baronius e An. 31. n. 213. Though the Fathers whom for their high learning we worthily call the Doctors of the Church were endued with the grace of the holy Ghost aboue others yet in expounding the Scripture the Catholicke Church doth not alway and in all things follow them D. Marta f De iurisdict part 1. pag. 273. The common opinion of the Doctors is not to be regarded when the contrary opinion fauours the power of the Popes keyes or a pious cause And I haue shewed g THE WAY digr 47. elsewhere that this is the common practise of our aduersaries They speake not alway so zealously and plainly as Luther doth but for substance they say the same that he doth h Yesterday Ecchius brought against me Gregory Ambrose Chrysostome to whom I then answered nothing I will therefore now say what I then forgot opposing the rule of diuine Augustine that the savings of all writers must be iudged by the sacred Scripture whose authoritie is greater then the authoritie of all men Not that I condemne the iudgement of the most illustrious Fathers but I imitate those that come nearest to the Scriptures and if the Scripture be plaine I embrace it before them all Tom. 1. disput Lips cum Ecch. pag 263. Wittemb I mention the opinion of Austin not to defame or detract froÌ„ that holy man but because it is good necessary that these holy Fathers be sometime found like our selues men that the glorie of God may stand firme c. Jâ— Genesc 21 pag. 255. tom 6. Wittemb who thought also as reuerently of the Fathers as any man is bound to do 3 But it was not Luthers going against the Fathers that discontented our aduersaries it was his resisting the Popes Canons and the faith of the Church of Rome which they shrowded vnder the name of the Fathers wherein by their owne diuinitie he might be guiltlesse Peraduenture i Dialog tract 2. part 2. c. vult pag. 180. col 3. edit Lugdun per Ioh. â—rech an 1494. saith Occham one might say that simple men ought to beleeue nothing but what the Pope and Cardinals deliuer to be beleeued explicately and should be content with things common not presuming vpon their owne vnderstanding to beleeue any thing explicitely but what the Pope and Cardinals deliuer vnto them but HE THAT SHOVLD AFFIRME THESE THINGS WERE AN INVENTOR OF NEW ERRORS For though simple men be not ordinarily tied to beleeue explicitely but onely those things which are by the Cleargie declared to be so beleeued yet SIMPLE MEN READING THE DIVINE SCRIPTVRE BY THE SHARPNES OF REASON MAY SEE SOME THING THAT THE POPE AND CARDINALS HAVE NOT DECLARED EVIDENTLY TO FOLLOW OF THE SCRIPTVRE in which case they can and must explicitely beleeue and ARE NOT BOVND TO CONSVLT WITH THE POPE AND CARDINALS FORASMVCH AS THEY ARE BOVND TO PREFERRE THE HOLY SCRIPTVRE BEFORE THEM ALL. If all the Papists in the world can shew Luther did any more then Occham here allowes euery simple man to do I am much deceiued And if he did no more then by their owne iudgements he might doe then away with these friuolous and emptie exclamations against Luther and let vs heare no more of them A. D. But saith M. White Scripture promiseth Pag 201. that euery doctrine is of God which consenteth to it and this consent a man may know infallibly or else in vaine had the Bereans searched c. I answer that I do not denie but a man may know doctrine to consent to Scripture but I aske how he may know this by onely Scripture interpreted by ones owne iudgment or priuate spirit I hope I haue shewed the contrary neither will M. White be euer able to proue that the 1 Act. 17.11 Beraeans had infallible certaintie onely by the Scripture interpreted by their owne priuate iudgement or that 2 Es 8.20 the Prophet sent any for infallible certaintie to the law and testimonie expounded onely by priuate iudgement or that 3 Luc 1 4. Saint Luke or f Col. 2.2 Saint Paul whom he alledgeth meant that men should haue infallible assurance by onely Scripture interpreted by priuate iudgement or spirit 4 I neuer intended that any man could haue infallible assurance of that he beleeues onely by Scripture interpreted by his owne priuate iudgement all that I affirme is that priuate men may examine any doctrine that is publickly taught by whosoeuer and by Scripture alone as by a certaine rule they may be assured of the truth This is plainly euinced by the texts alledged For the Beraeans hearing the Apostles preach yet searched the Scripture dayly whether those things were so and therefore beleeued In which example the matter examined is the things that the Apostles preached The rule whereby this was examined is the Scripture alone which in the text is distinguished from the Apostles preaching and ministery and authoritie and opposed against them for by it the Beraeans examined them The persons that did this were a priuate people subiect to the Pastors of the Church as much as any can be The end why they did thus examine the doctrine was to see if it consented with the Scripture The euent and issue of their examining was Therefore many of them beleeued Whereby it is cleare that a priuate man by the Scripture alone may be able to iudge of any thing that is publickly taught and by the Scripture alone be infallibly assured if he hold the truth Not the Scripture alone excluding the condition of the meanes whereby God makes the sense thereof knowne but the Scripture alone as the rule of faith excluding all authoritie of the Church and Pastors Nor the Scripture interpreted by a mans owne iudgement and priuate spirit but by it selfe truly according to the manifest rule
here mentioned For though there be a Church in any sense that a true Church can be meant ordained to teach vs yet it followes not that it hath any such authority or any authority at all to propound vnwritten traditions and there may be a Church and yet the iudgement thereof not be the authority whereon our faith is grounded and the same Church may be ordained to teach vs yet not allowed to teach these vnwritten verities For God hath propounded all doctrine of faith in the Scriptures and appointed his Church to reueale and expound it to his people the which doctrine thus expounded inlightens the mind begets faith and is the rule of all mens iudgement through the worke of the Holy Ghost that confirmes it in the mind Granting therefore that which the Repliar so much desires that all his meaning is that once or in one age there was a company of men who in one sense or other may be called the Church whom God hath appointed and furnished to teach all men the things of faith yet it helps not his conclusion nor makes it true in that sense wherein he meanes it CHAP. XXXV 1 The Papists pretending the Church meane onely the Pope 2. How and in what sense they vnderstand the doctrine of the Apostles to be the rule of faith 3 They hold that the Pope may make new articles of faith 4 And that the Scripture receiues authority and credit from him 6Vnlearned men may see the truth when the Pope and his crew sees it not 7. And they may iudge of that they teach 8 The Iesuites dare not answer directly Pag. 204. White pag. 67. A. D. This being proued my Aduersaries may see how much they mistake when they thinke me to meane in this Chapter by the name Church onely the Pope or onely the present Pastours of the Church when as rather I meant to include these onely secondarily meaning here by the name Church principally the Apostles themselues who for the time they liued on earth were principall Doctours and Pastours of thâ— Church being by me therfore tearmed the Church which I said is the rule of faith not taking the verbe is so strictly as onely limited to this present time but â—â—ther indefinitely abstracting from all time or per ampliationem as it may extend it selfe to the by-past as well as to the present time This to be my meaning my Aduersaries might haue perceiued by the texts of Scripture which I bring for the proofe of my conclusion For those texts are by me here applied as they were by our Sauiour spoken and meant to wit principally to the Apostles being the primitiue Pastours and principall members of the Church and are onely secondarily or by consequence applied to other Pastours succeeding in their places Now taking my conclusion in this chiefly intended sense it cannot be denied to be true neither can the reason by which I proue it with any reason be denied to be good 1 IT is easie to see that he knownes not in what sense he should take his conclusion that it might be defended For if by the Church he meant no more but the Apostles and primitiue Pastours and by the doctrine of the Church no more but that which is the doctrine indeed contained in the Scripture no man would deny the doctrine and teaching faith and beleefe of the Apostles contained in the written word to be the rule of faith but he meant and still meanes otherwise that this Church which all men ought to follow is the B. of Rome alone for the time being wherein a See Chap. 34. nu 1. I mistooke him not For he meanes that which in all ages for the time being is the supreame iudge and hath subiectiuely in it all the Church authority But such is the Pope alone according to the principles of Papists Therefore he meanes the Pope alone againe he meanes that Church whereof he expounds the texts of Scripture alledged in that Chapter to proue the doctrine of the Church to be the rule but all those texts he expounds of the Pope alone for the time being Ergo. Thirdly I suppose the Repliar to be a Papist and in this place a maintainer of the Popish doctrine touching the rule of faith but that doctrine meanes the Church as I expound For the order which God hath left in his Church for the iudging and deciding of matters of faith according to the Iesuites doctrine b Staplet Princ. doctrin fid l. 6. praef 1 Bell. de Rom. Pont. l. 4. c. 1. 2 Staplet Princ. doctr l. 5. c. 1. 3 c. 2. 4 c. 5. 5 l. 6. c. 1. is this 1. That not the Scripture but the Church is this supreme iudgâ— of all controuersies and things of faith 2 Yet this Church as it is taken for the whole body iudges not 3. Nor lay priuate men therein 4. But the power of iudging belongs to the Bishops and Priests alone 5. And among them the B. of Rome alone as the successor of S. Peter is so the head of the whole Church and the primary and highest subiect of this Church iudgement that he hath power alone aboue all others whether Pastors or sheepe to pronounce 6 Grets def Bellar. tom 1 p. 1218. c. and determine touching the matters of faith 6. So that besides the Doctors and Pastors there must be in the Church some other supreme iudge and he is the B. of Rome either alone or with a Councell Here it is plaine that howsoeuer the name of the Church be pretended yet the whole power is limited and restrained to the Pope alone For they hold the gouernment and power of the Church not to be Aristocraticall placed in Councels or Bishops but Monarchicall where all the gouernment power and infalliblenesse is in the Pope alone Councels Bishops Priests and all other parts of the Church are but cyphers the power is eminently and infallibly and authoratiuely in the Pope alone either with them or without them Bellar. c De Rom. Pont l. 1. c. 9. §. sed nec sayes plainely Neither the Scripture nor secular princes nor priuate men are iudges of controuersies but Ecclesiasticall Prelates and Councels may iudge of the controuersies of religion but that iudgement is not firme or ratified till the Pope haue confirmed it and therefore the last iudgement belongs to him for either there must be no iudge among men at all or else he must be the iudge that is aboue the rest I haue alledged the words of Gregory of Valence diuers times d Tom. 3. in 22. pag. 24. When we say the Proposition of the Church is a condition necessary to the assent of faith by the name of Church we meane the head thereof that is to say the B. of Rome either alone by himselfe or with a Councell Syluester Prierias e In Luth. tom 1. pag. 159. fundam 1. The vniuersall Church essentially is the conuocation of all that beleeue in Christ but
we say that the Church free from grosse and foule corruptions is not alway to be seene where or in whom it is Whereto if you adde that which l Epist de pacif Venet. ad Reg. Franc. 1607. April 5. Cardinall Perone lately writ to the French King that it is vncertaine whether God will suffer the Catholicke religion to be oppressed in Italie and driuen out of all Europe into another Hemisphere the case will be clearer For if the Pope and his drudgerie may be expulsed Italy and twentie Geneuahs planted there as the Cardinall speaks beleeue me that would bring the Romane faith to as low a size as euer the Protestants was and our aduersaries would be as inuisible as their fellowes The last is enough to shew that I peruert not the question For I denie and shewed in my answers to all his arguments that howsoeuer the Church consists of men that may be seene and these men know one another where they liue yet there is no such eminencie in any of them that the world can tell who or where they be that in the Church hold the true faith without corruption but they may be so hidden by persecutions heresies increasing in the church that no man shall discerne them and that they can haue no open or vncorrupted exercise of religion wherein I haue shewed our aduersaries themselues driuen by the necessitie of the truth to come home to vs. Digress 17. A. D. Now taking the question in this sence Pag. 236. my conclusion of this chapter was that the Church is neuer quite inuisible but alwaies visible This I proued by diuers reasons which stand still in force against my aduersaries supposing the state of the question be rightly vnderstood as first I meant it and as now I haue declared it The truth of which my conclusion I further confirme by the authoritie of Saint Augustine who * Ep. 48. hauing said as euen now I cited that the Church is sometimes obscured with multitude of scandals he addeth but euen then she is eminent in her most firme members Secondly I confirme the same by experience of ancient and present times because euen in times of greatest persecution vnder the heathen Emperors euen when the Church hath seemed to be ouerwhelmed with heresies euen when it was said that the world did maruell to see it selfe become Arian euen when it seemed to be rent in peeces with schismes euen when it hath bene most blemished with ill liues of the true professors themselues euen in the most obscure and ignorant ages wherein there was least number of teachers and writers there was alwayes a companie of true professing Christians so visible as that at least some in all ages whom God stirred vp to be eminent men opposing themselues by word or example or both as a wall for the house of God were actually apparent euen to the world or at least being knowne to Christians themselues as my aduersaries seeme to grant that the true Professors alwaies are they or some of them might and may be assigned by Christians to such as desire to know them as after I shall shew which sufficeth to proue the Church visible in such sence as I here make the question In what sence the Church militant is said to be sometime inuisible 5 The question is not of the visiblenesse of the church taking the word Church for the Militant church of God wherein the true faith is preserued and whose sound doctrine is the rule of all faith for we denie it not but onely as it signifies such therein as are free from the generall apostacie and corruptions which now and then preuaile in and all ouer the church For in the first sence we say the Church is visible because the companies of those which professe and hold the substance of faith howsoeuer many errors besides may be added thereto are alway manifest but in the second sence we say it may be inuisible inasmuch as at some times yea for a long time together no part thereof nor any companie therein can be discerned to be free from the corruption preuailing but a time may come when things are so reformed and the doctrine of the Church so reduced to the first Apostolicke veritie by putting away the apostacie and innouations that for some ages before there hath not bene knowne in all the Church any companie enioying or practising the said doctrine thus purged and reformed This being all that I hold touching the inuisiblenesse of the Church his reason concludes nothing against me as will appeare by viewing a In THE WAY §. 18. inde my answers To the place of Saint Austine I answer that it makes for me in the first words expresly The Church is sometimes obscured with multitudes of scandals and in the latter words the firme members wherein the Church is eminent are not such as are totally free from all abuses and corruptions belonging to apostacie but such as in the middest of corruption still retaine the principall points of Christian faith and among many errors yet eminently hold the substance of sauing doctrine and such we grant alway were in the middest of the Papacie which is OVR VISIBLE CHVRCH THAT WAS BEFORE LVTHERS TIME To his other reason of experience of ancient and present times I haue answered also in my booke and here answer againe that it is false meaning by those true professing Christians stirred vp of God and eminent men opposing themselues such as opposed themselues against all error For there neuer wanted in any persecution schisme or heresie those which professed the true faith euen visibly in that which substantially belonged to the faith and was sufficient to saluation but there haue not alway bene visibly to be seene those that eminently opposed or refused euery corruption or were preserued from such error as was afterward lawfully reformed and done away For the church of Rome being made the seate of Antichrist b 2. Thess 2 6. Apoc. 17. Valde verisimile est Irenae l. 5. c 30. as the holy Ghost foretold it was impossible there should be any visible companie so eminent or perfect that the generall contagion should not though not mortally in some measure touch them as c Act. 1.6 the Iudaisme of the times wherein Christ liued generally corrupted all the Apostles who yet for all that remained eminent members of the Church And if my aduersary thinke his Pope not to be Antichrist or the persecution of Antichrist whosoeuer he be not able thus far to preuaile against the Church let him descend when he will into that question and he will find himselfe as weake there as here the rather because I know no learned man of his side but confesses the same inuisiblenesse of the Church in Antichrists time that I maintaine Telesphorus the Hermite d Lib. de magn tribul pag. 32. edit Venet. per Soard an 1516. sayes The sacrifice and oblation shall faile the Ecclesiasticall
should fall on the Inquisitors as the diuell had promised him we felt no fire touch vs but himselfe was soone burnt and consumed to ashes TO THE READER HItherto my aduersarie hath prosecuted the defence of the twelue first Chapters of his Treatise where he giues ouer and proceeds no further Now followes the SECOND PART of his Booke Pag. 251. which he entitles AN APPENDIX TO THIS FIRST PART OF REPLY wherein an issue or triall is made whereby may be seene whether Catholicks or Protestants be the true VISIBLE CHVRCH wherein he first sets downe as he entitles it A CATALOGVE OF THE NAMES OF SOME CATHOLICK PROFESSORS to shew that the Romane Church hath bin as the true Church must be continually visible in all ages since Christ And then after the Catalogue A CHALLENGE TO PROTESTANTS Pag. 265. requiring them to make a like Catalogue of the Professors of their faith in all ages since Christ as he hath it downe a catalogue of his Church His Catalogue is nothing else but a chronologicall Table containing and representing the names of all the POPES and the most DOCTORS and ancient Fathers and some GENERAL COVNCELS and many PROFESSORS as he cals them of the Romane faith which in euery age haue bin in the Church to this day distinguishing the ages by centuries of yeares and vnder euery centurie placing the Popes Fathers Councels and Professors that liued were therein In the first centurie he names our blessed Sauiour Christ with his Apostles and Euangelists and the Churches of Rome Corinth Galatia with the rest of the Apostolick Churches In the second and so forward be sets downe the ancient Fathers of the Primitiue Church with the Martyrs Councels holy men and nations conuerted that were in euery age successiuely till he come to the yeare 1600. The folly and error of this his Table stands in fiue things first that he assumes these persons Councels and nations to himselfe as professing his Popish faith who were indeed eminent members of the Church in their times but neuer either professed or saw that part of his Romane faith which we haue cast off For how ridiculous is it to say that our Sauiour and his Apostles and the rest that follow for a thousand yeares beleeued and professed as the Iesuites now do or as the Trent Councell hath decreed in the Canons and new Creed thereof The second is that the persons named in the first ages till 800 or a 1000 yeares after Christ not onely professed not the Papacie but beleeued professed that which directly destroyes it They held that which the Church of Rome holds according to the Scriptures and wherein the Papists and we consent but the things in time and by peece-meale added to the truth wherein we differ from them they held not but the contrary Let the Iesuite therefore shew a catalogue of such as in those times professed and beleeued not onely what the Church of Rome beleeues aright but what it holds against vs in the seuerall articles of our difference The third is that diuers Councels especially latterward which resisted the Papacie comming on are omitted as those of Constantinople Frankford Pisa Constance Basil c. and many famous eminent Doctors omitted that professed directly against diuers articles of the now Church of Rome The fourth is that many false and fabulous Saints are named and things set downe out of Legends that can never be proued as the tale of the Iewes of Berytum conuerted by a bleeding Crucifixe and such like The last is that divers Popes for many yeares together namely in the ninth age succeeded not but entred violently and disorderly and very many especially in the latter ages are excepted against vpon diuers points purposely let downe in * Digr 53. my former writing His Catalogue therefore is to no purpose as shall fully appeare in that which follower for euen we our selues lay claime to so much of it as is true and if he will giue vs leaue to adde the names of some others that liued after the 800 yeares we will exhibite this very Catalogue our selues and no other saue that the Legend Saints and the Friars and apostaticall Popes and Iesuites with such traitors as Allen was we need not Next after the Catalogue ensues the CHALLENGE TO PROTESTANTS that they shew the like Catalogue But this is idle For we shew the same if he will permit vs to supply some wants in the latter ages professing the Church of Rome it selfe in all ages to haue bin the visible Church of God as I haue shewed in * From ch 36. forward that which goes before though the Papacie therein were not the Church After his challenge containing onely one leafe the whole matter whereof is the same that I haue answered in the sixe last chapters he propounds certaine obiections which he thought might be made against his Catalogue thereby to give colour to the succession of his Poperie The which obiections with his answers to them I will set downe and handle as I haue done the rest of his Reply and so proceed CHAP. XLII An obiection against the Repliers Catalogue Diuers Articles condemned by the Fathers mentioned in the Catalogue that the Church of Rome now vses What consent there is betweene Antiquitie and Papistrie A. D. My aduersaries will obiect Pag. 267. that all there which I set downe in my Catalogue especially those of the Primitiue age were not professors of our religion in regard as they will say there be diuers points held by vs now adayes whereof no mention is made in the writings of the Fathers of that age To this I answer first retorting more strongly the argument against Protestants who falsly and absurdly challenge as M. Iewell did the Fathers of the first sixe hundred yeares or as M. White doth the whole Christian Church of the first eight hundred yeares to be Protestants And I say that Protestants do hold diuers points now adayes whereof either no mention is made in the writings of the Fathers of those ages or if any mention be made it is expresly contrary to Protestants and for vs and this sometimes with vnanime consent whereas Protestants are neuer able to shew for themselues and against vs in any point such an vnanime consent of those Fathers BEfore he retort the obiection or be too busie with B. Iewels 600 yeares and M. Whites 800 I would haue him to be better aduised what they obiect For touching the Fathers of those times three things will be granted him First that diuers maine articles of the now Romish faith which we reiect are mentioned most amply and frequently in their writings For example the Popes PRIMACIE and being vniuersall Bishop aboue all other Bishops is mentioned by Gregorie himselfe a Pope in the first age and a Per elationem pompatici sermonis Christâ— sibi studet membra subiugare lib. 4. ep 36. Quis rogo in hoc tam peruerso vocabulo
implicitè all points of faith that we hold This will appeare by these ensuing considerations First it is certaine that the Apostles taught the whole corpse of Christian doctrine partly by word partly by writing which as a sacred depositum was commended by S. Paul to S. Timothy and other succeeding Bishops and Pastors of the Church to be maintained alwaies in the Church against all profane innouation of heresies in these words O Timothy keepe the depositum auoiding the profane nouelties of voices oppositions of falsly called knowledge which diuers promising haue erred about the faith The which words * Aduers haer c. 17. Vincentius Lyrinensis expoundeth thus Who saith he at this day hath the place of Timothy but either the whole Church or especially the whole bodie of Prelats who ought themselues to haue the whole knowledge of diuine religion and also to instruct others And a litle after What is meant by this Depositum it is saith he that which is committed to thee not that which is inuented by thee that which thou hast receiued not that which thou hast deuised a thing not of wit but of learning not of priuate vsurpation but of publicke tradition a thing brought to thee not a thing brought forth of thee wherein thou must not be an author but a keeper not an institutor but a secretor not a leader but a follower Keepe the Depositum preserue the talent of the Catholicke faith pure and sincere that which is committed to thee let that remain with thee and that deliuer vnto the people To the same purpose S. Irenaeus saith * l. 3. c. 14. We must not seeke the truth among others which is easie to receiue from the Church when the Apostles haue most fully laid vp all the truth in it as in a rich treasure house Also the same Irenaeus saith * l. 4. c. 43. We must heare and obey those Priests who haue succession from the Apostles who with succession of their Episcopall function haue receiued the Charisma of truth Now supposing that this sacred depositum of the whole corpse of the reuealed truth is preserued in one or other succession of Pastors of one or other companie of Christians called the Church either it must be granted that it was preserued in that succession of Pastors which my catalogue sheweth or else I must require my aduersaries to set forth another catalogue of Pastors vnto whom this sacred depositum was committed and from whom we may receiue it as need shall require For to say that the diuine truth committed to the custody of the Pastors whom God hath appointed to be alwaies in the Church of purpose to preserue men from wauering in faith Eph. 4 v. 13.14 and from being caried about with euery wind of false doctrine did at any time wholy or in part by contrary error faile in them vniuersally in such sort that there should not in all ages be sound one or other company of Pastors and Priests whom we could know still to keep the Depositum inuiolate and entire and whom consequently according to Irenaeus his saying we ought to obey as being men l. 4. ◠4. who with succession of their Episcopall function receiued also the Charisma of truth if I say this were so that Gods truth all or in part had explicitè and implicitè perished from the mouth of all knowne Priests and Pastors Gods ordinance it selfe who for the generall good of the Church appointed these Pastors had bin deficient or had failed of the intended effect Eph. 4. v. 13.14 For how should men be preserued from wauering in faith or from being caried about with euery wind of false doctrine by Pastors appointed to be for that purpose vnto the worlds end if in some ages no such Pastors were or were not to be knowne or being knowne to be the Pastors yet did vniuersally faile to preserue the entire formerly receiued truth by beleeuing and teaching and so making the people beleeue contrary errors If this were so the holy Ghost had failed to teach the Church all truth and consequently Christs promise had not bin performed which said that the Spirit of truth shall teach all truth Ioh. 16. v. 13. Some Pastors therefore alwaies are in the Church who without spot or wrinkle of any error in faith shall preserue the entire truth and by the assistance of Christ and his holy Spirit shall be able as need shall require to vnfold and deliuer to the people the same truth thereby to preserue them from falling into error and from wauering in faith 1 THat the Apostles taught the whole bodie of Christian doctrine and commended the same to the succeeding Pastors of the Church to be alway maintained without innouation and that as Vincentius and Irenaeus speake the faithfull people of the Church were to be taught the truth by these Pastors shall be granted for what the Apostles reuealed and deliuered from Iesus Christ the same they intended should be continued for euer in the Church But this proues not that the ancient Fathers of the Primitiue Church held all things that the Church of Rome now holds vnlesse my aduersarie can shew that euery thing holden in the Church of Rome is part of the Bodie of that Christian doctrine which the Apostles commended to their successors For ouer besides the truth reuealed by the Apostles the church of Rome successiuely by degrees in these last 800 years especially hath brought in diuers pernicious and damnable errors and corruptions touching Traditions Transubstantiation Images Iustification the Masse the Popes primacie the worship of Saints innumerable other points wherin we haue forsaken it the which corruptions not belonging to the bodie of Christian doctrine which the Apostles taught but being a disease that bred in the body of the Church must not be said to haue bin the faith of the Fathers who receiued nothing from the Apostles but that doctrine which is contained in the canon of the Bible besides which doctrine if either the Fathers or Pastors of the Church succeeding taught any thing it must be reiected as no part of the Depositū mentioned Thus my answer is plain that the Apostles deliuered to their successors to be preserued against all innouation the whole Christian doctrine but the seuerall articles of the now Romish faith which we haue cast off are no part of that Christiā doctrine Secondly my aduersarie replies that it was the mind of the Apostles and the ordinance of God not onely that the whole bodie of the truth should be preserued in some successiō or other but also that it should be preserued so inuiolate and entire that no contrary error should be taught with it which being supposed he sayes it must be granted that it hath bin so preserued in that succession of Pastors which his Catalogue sheweth because the Protestāts are able to shew no other Pastors His whole discourse affirmes two things the first that the bodie of Christian
dayes Thirdly that diuerse particular points of our doctrine are acknowledged by learned Protestants to haue bene taught by the ancient Fathers namely Vowes Reall presence c. For all which the said Protestant Apology citeth the names and bookes and oftentimes the very words of the learned Protestants as may be seene and I wish the Reader for his more satisfaction to see Lastly that our Church holdeth the very same and no other faith in substance then that which was held by the ancient Church may appeare by the very nature as I may say of our Church whose property and condition is not to inuent of new or to alter any doctrine in any matter of faith but to receiue humbly and obediently at the hands of our present Pastours what they in like manner learned of their predecessors and still to hate and resist all innouation in any matter of faith no lesse then a deadly poison as knowing that the least infection of any new inuented heresie or alteration in matter of faith doth corrupt and adulterate the whole faith and taketh away infallible authoritie and credite from the Church Wherefore our Pastors haue bene like men appointed to watch very vigilant in noting reprehending resisting and condemning all innouation in faith and sometimes casting incorrigible members out of the Church euen for a word or two profanely innouated contrary to the custome and faith of the Church The which course being duly obserued as chiefely by Gods prouidence and partly by humane diligence it hath bene and shall be still obserued it is not possible that there should be such alteration in religion or difference betwixt the faith and doctrine of the ancient and present Pastours of the Church as our aduersaries ignorantly or maliciously obiect For as Vincencius Lyrinensis saith Vincent Lyr. l. aduersus haereses Vincentius Lyr. contra haereses c. 32. the Church of Christ is a carefull keeper of religion committed to her charge she neuer changeth or altereth in any thing she diminisheth nothing nothing she addeth to wit as a doctrine of faith True it is that by reason of heresies arising the Pastors and doctors of the Church in latter ages haue had occasion to write more largely and expressely about diuerse points then was done in former times when no such heresies were and that for confutatiō of those heresies and more explication of the formerly receiued faith these Pastours and Doctors haue vsed some kinde of more significant words then formerly were vsed in which sort the terme of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was brought in against those who denied Christ our Sauiour to be true God and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against those who denied our blessed Lady to be the mother of God and transubstantiation against those who denied the conuersion of the substance of bread into the substance of the body of our Lord. The which tearmes although they may seeme to smell of noueltie yet indeed are not of that prophane sort of nouelty of voices or wordes which the Apostle wisheth to be auoided because the sence of these wordes is not different from the faith and phrase vsed formerly by the Church but do onely explicate more plainely or signifie more fully and clearely that which was formerly beleeued and taught by the Church which kinde of explication of the ancient faith to be lawfull and allowable Vincent Lyrin cont haer c. 2. we may learne out of Vincentius Lyrinensis who although a most true louer of antiquitie alloweth such new explicatiō of the faith as we may see in his goldē Treatise where hauing declared excellently by that saying of the Apostle Cap. 28.29 30. O Timothy keepe the Depositum c. that nothing is to be innouated in faith he sheweth how this notwithstanding Cap. 32. the ancient faith may in processe of time be more explained and that for more easie vnderstanding of it to an old article of faith we may giue a new name 1 HEre are foure reasons to proue that the ancient Fathers held the same doctrine of faith that is now professed in the Church of Rome and one obiection answered that he thinkes will be made against him His first reason is the testimony of Coccius a Cum ab ineunte aetate incidisset in praeceptores Lutheranos adhuc inuenis in eiusmodi haereticorum Academijs versatus c. Posseuin ap v. Iod. Cocc an apostata who in his Thesaurus settes downe the Fathers point by point with vnanime consent testifying against the Protestants Wherein he much forgets himselfe for if Coccius set downe the Fathers point by point what needed the Repliar haue graunted b Ch. 44. a little before that there be diuers points held by his side now adaies whereof there is no mention in the writings of the Fathers yet they held them because either explicitely or implicitely they held many points that they haue not expressely mentioned let these two be reconciled They held some things onely implicitely by an infolded faith not mentioning them expressely and yet Coccius sets them downe point by point testifying against the Protestants For those points which they held onely infoldedly Coccius cannot set downe in their owne wordes point by point I answer therefore that Coccius with his * Spatio 24. annorū Posseu twenty foure yeares studie hath not done this that my Repliar reports he hath collected together the wordes of the Fathers and such places as his side vses for the confirmation of their hereticall opinions but the vnanime and certaine consent in the now current Romane faith he hath not shewen and the Reader shall know it by this that in the controuersies betweene vs they many times deny the authority of the Fathers and c Ind. expurg Belg pag. 12. professe so to do yea to excuse and extenuate their errors by deuising shifts and to fainesome fit sense for their owne purpose vnto them when they are opposed against them by vs in our disputations And why haue they thus purged and corrupted their writings and why do they allow nothing to be the sense of their wordes but what the Pope and his Clergy allowes to be the sense Is it not palpable hypocrisie to do all this and yet to bragge of their vnanime consent against vs Coccius therefore out of the Fathers whom they haue CORRVPTED PVRGED COVNTERFETTED and COINED may bring places which being fraudulently expounded and shuffled may giue colour to Papistrie but by the true writings of the true Fathers truely expounded as themselues meant the present faith of Rome in the articles which they hold against vs and as they expound them cannot be confirmed no not in one point and let no man hope the contrarie as may appeare by these examples following Of the sufficiency of the Scripture without traditions Saint Basil d De Fid. p. 394. graec Basil sayes It is a manifest falling from the faith and an argument of arrogancy either to abrogate any of
vbi sup Fourthly the Feast of the Conception which imports she was without sinne is celebrated 5 Vasq vbi sup In which regard sayes Vasquez it would seeme verie strange to me if the Church should euer define she was conceiued in sinne when by her authoritie she hath alreadie commaunded the Feast of the Conception in token she was not conceiued in sinne and the common consent of Catholicks both vulgar and Diuines contending for the immaculate conception without sinne Suarez q Vbi sup prop. 4. sayes Sixtus Quartus did much fauour it whose decree the Councell of Trent approues and the whole Church doth vehemently leane to it that now the contrarie can haue either none at all or no firme or euident foundation But the truth is it is fully defined in the Councell of Basill Hitherto r Sess 36. sayes the Councell a difficult question hath bene made touching the Conception of the glorious Virgin We hauing diligently seene and examined the reasons define and declare that the doctrine which teaches her neuer to haue bene actually subiect to sinne but alwayes free from it and from all actuall sinne to be consonant to the religion OF THE CHVRCH AND CATHOLICKE DOCTRINE and that it shall be lawfull for no man hereafter to teach the contrarie moreouer we renew the ordinance made for the celebrating of this holy conception on the 6. of the Ides of December Whereby we see how false it is that it is not held as a point of faith For building themselues vpon this decree and vpon Å¿ Cum Praeexcelsa Graue nimis in extrau comm another of Sixtus Quartus whereto the t Sess 5. §. Declarat tamen Councell of Trent manifestly giues way by confirming the conceit u Almain Clictouae Titlem reported by Vasq Suar. vbi sup the forwarder sort of our aduersaries affirme it resolutely to be a point of faith defined by the Church But whether it be true or no that the faith of their Church is nothing but what this froward generation will confesse to be defined by the Pope by this it is plaine that touching this point the Pastors and Doctors and people of the Romane church differ from antiquitie Vasquez w Communis consensus Catholicorum non solùm imperiti vulgi sed etiam Doctorum Theolâ—gorum pro immaculata conceptione pugnat Vasq vbi sup sayes expresly Not onely that vnskilfull vulgar but the Doctors and Diuines and all Catholickes with one consent fight for the immaculate conception What immodestie is it now to denie that to be the Churches faith which is thus holden and to say it is not diligently digested that is thus concocted in the conceits not onely of the vulgar but of the Doctors and Diuines and all Catholickes with one consent in the Church of Rome CHAP. L. 1. Touching Seruice and Prayer in an vnknowne language 2. The Text of 1. Cor. 14. expounded and defended against Bellarmine 7. The ancient Church vsed prayer in a knowne language A. D. Secondly touching Latin Seruice although M. White say as it is easie to say that all antiquitie is against vs in this point Pag. 279. White p. 343. yet he will neuer be able to proue solidely that the ancient Church did condemne this our practise The words of the Apostle which he alledgeth proue nothing to the purpose as is shewed by Bellarmine and as for other authors which he citeth they do not disallow this this our practise Bellar. l. 2. de verb. Del. c 16. or account it vnlawfull whereas both by reason and authoritie our authors shew it to be both lawfull and laudable See Bellarmine lib. 2. de verbo Dei cap. 15. 1 THe vse of the Church of Rome to haue the publicke Seruice and Prayers and ministration of Sacraments in an vnknowne tongue is well enough knowne This I affirmed to be against antiquitie and a point wherein they haue altered the faith of the ancient Church And first I alledged the words of Saint Paul then the testimonie and confession of other Ecclesiasticall writers to all which he answers nothing but referres me to Bellarmine In which absurd course if I would imitate him I might also referre him to such as haue answered Bellarmine and the reader that expected to see the thing tried betweene vs should be deluded Neuerthelesse I will doe my best to bring this broode of darknesse to the light and euery thing that I haue said to the triall that the truth may appeare and the shame be theirs that turne their backes 2 First he sayes I will neuer be able soundly to proue that the auncient Church condemned this their practise I answer the Apostle condemnes it in the words a 1. Cor. 14.7 alledged If an instrument of musicke make no distinction in the sound how shall it be knowne what is piped or harped So likewise you vnlesse by the language you vtter words that haue signification how shall it be vnderstood what is spoken for you shall speake in the aire I will pray and sing with the spirit and I will pray and sing with the vnderstanding also Else when thou blessest with the Spirit how shall he that occupies the roome of the vnlearned say Amen at thy giuing of thankes seeing he knowes not what thou sayest I had rather in the Church to speake fiue words with my vnderstanding that I might also instruct others then a thousand words in a strange tongue No enemie that the Church of Rome hath can more fully condemne Seruice in an vnknowne language nor in more effectuall termes speake against it For be requires all that which is done in the Church be it Exhortation Prophecie Singing Expounding or Praying to be done in a language that the people present vnderstands and rebukes the contrary All that the Replier sayes hereto is that Bellarmine hath shewed these words proue nothing Which is his policie to auoide the scanning of them for he knowes all the learned of his side be so deuided in their answer to these words that whatsoeuer he should say would fall out to be contrary to that which others affirme For the auoiding of which inconuenience he referres vs to Bellarmine as if in him we should find a iust answer and full satisfaction But he abuses the Reader as shall plainly appeare by propounding the summe and substance of all that Bellarmine sayes to the place First he sayeth It is certaine the Apostle in a great part of this chapter speakes not of the reading of the Scripture nor concerning the Seruice of the Church but of certaine spirituall exhortations and conferences then vsed Touching this point how true or false soeuer it be I will not greatly stand with him but then it is as certaine that in a great part of this Chapter he speakes of Church-seruice and prayers and of reading the Scripture as well as of spirituall conferences and collations So his patron Gretser that hath lately vndertaken to defend all his
writings confesses c Grets defens Bellar. de verb. Dei l. 2. c. 16. pag. 850. c. pag 918. A. If you speake of the whole Chapter Bellarmine acknowledges the Apostle to speake not onely of spirituall songs and preaching and exhortations but of the reading the Scripture likewise and publicke Seruice Hence it followes that the Apostle condemnes the reading of the Scripture or prayer and Church-seruice in a language not vnderstood as well as he doth preaching collations and hymnes for vers 26. he requires all things that he speakes of be done to edifying and vers 6. he sayes If I come vnto you speaking with tongues that is in a language you vnderstand not what shall I profit you And vers 9. Except ye vtter words that can be vnderstood you shall speake in the aire And vers 11. If I know not the meaning of the voice he that speakes shall be a Barbarian vnto me And vers 14. For if I pray in an vnknowne tongue my vnderstanding is vnfruitfull And vers 16. How shall he that occupies the roome of the vnlearned say AMEN at thy giuing of thanks when he vnderstands not what thou sayst Thou giuest thankes well but the other is not edified Hence I thus reason The Apostle condemnes euery thing in the Church whatsoeuer it be that edifies not But prayer reading the Scripture and Seruice in the Church as well as preaching and spirituall songs in a language that the people present vnderstand not edifie not Ergo he condemnes prayer reading the Scripture and Seruice in the Church in a language that the people present vnderstand not as well as preaching and spirituall songs The first proposition is in vers 12.19.26 the second in vers 6.14.16.17 the conclusion therefore is the Apostles And indeed if our aduersaries could haue shewed that the prayers mentioned ver 15 had bin such spirituall songs or preaching onely as they expound and then that the Apostle in all his discourse had onely spoke of such songs and preaching and not of prayer reading the Scripture or Seruice in the Church also they had had some colour for themselues though not enough to auoid our argument but when he speaks of these things also by their owne confession and the whole intent of his doctrine is that ALL THE THINGS HE SPEAKES OF be done with edification it is desperate peruersnesse to say the text proues nothing against them 3 In the second place therefore when Bellarmine cannot auoide it but it is manifest the Apostle at least in some part of his discourse speakes of singing and prayers and reading of the Scripture which belong to Church-seruice he fals to answering and layes downe foure answers whereof he casts off three and betakes himselfe to the fourth The first is that by singing and praying mentioned verse 19. where the Apostle sayes I will pray and sing with the spirit and I will pray and sing with vnderstanding also else how shall he that occupies the roome of the vnlearned say AMEN when he vnderstands not what thou sayst is meant preaching and exhorting not praying a hard exposition when the common notion of the words is against it and the Apostle manifestly distinguishes the one from the other and men vse not to say Amen to preaching yet most vntruly and dishonestly he fathers it on Basil Theodoret and Sedulius a For Basil reg contract q 278. Theodor 1. Cor. 14. v. Quid ergo est expound the place of prayer as well as of exhortation Sedulius onely expounds it of exhortation alone being deceiued through ignorance of the Greeke word who neither all of them expound it so * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Basil qu. cont q. 178. nor allow prayer in an vnknowne tongue His second exposition is that the Apostle requires not all the people to vnderstand what is prayed and sung but onely that he vnderstand who supplies the roome of the people in answering meaning the Parish clark b Quidam ex Catholicis ita hunc locum intellexerunt Grets p 971. B. But Seâ—ulius sayes Jdiotae id est nuper baptizati qui nullam praeter propriam intelligit linguam p. 237. Theodoret says Qui in laicorum ordine constitutus est This answer is made by some Papists and went for good till necessitie draue the Iesuites to find a better For it was too grosse to bring the pedegree of a Parish clarke vp to the Church of Corinth in S. Pauls dayes His third is that by him that occupies the roome of the vnlearned is meant he that answers for the people belike some that vnderstands the tongue but not a Parish clarke by office and takes vpon him to answer for the rest that vnderstand it not These three answers he casts off and deuises a fourth whereto the Replier in this place referres me 4 Fourthly therefore c §. Vera igitur he sayes The Apostle in this place speakes neither of diuine Seruice nor of the publicke reading of the Scriptures in the Church but of certaine spirituall songs which the Christians composed for the praising of God and giuing him thankes and for their owne and others comfort and edification This answer allowes the Apostle to condemne the vse of such hymnes and canticles in an vnknowne tongue and the like vse of preaching and collations but it denies the vse of prayer and Seruice and the rest of the publicke Liturgie in an vnknowne tongue to be condemned because the Apostle in these words of the 15 and 16 verses speakes nothing concerning them d Antid Apostolic in 1. Cor. 24. v. 16.17 D. Stapleton and e On 1. Cor 14. §. It is as certain the Rhemists also affirme it to be certaine that he meanes not nor writes any word in this place of the Churches publicke Seruice Prayers or ministration of the holy Sacrament but onely of a certaine exercise of mutuall conference wherein one did open to another and to the assembly miraculous gifts and graces of the holy Ghost and such Canticles Psalmes secret mysteries sorts of languages and other reuelations as it pleased God to giue to certaine both men and women This answer containes two parts an affirmatiue and a negatiue The affirmatiue is that he meanes such spirituall songs and exercises of conference I will not sticke with the Iesuite for the vse of such exercises in the Church at that time it being agreed of all hands that there was such a custome and the Apostles owne words report it in the 26 v. When you come together euery one of you hath a Psalme hath a doctrine hath a tongue hath a reuelation hath an interpretation But that he so meanes such hymnes and such extraordinarie exercises alone that he meanes not praier also I vtterly denie For that which he brings out of Eusebius Dionysius and Tertullian will serue to proue that the custome of those times was to sing in the congregation but it proues not that S. Paul here speakes of
worship stands not in rehearsing Latin words but when the people by those words learne to know Gods wil and their own duty and offer him vp the requisite motions of their hearts which in an vnknowne tong they cannot do And if secondly the Priest be to expound the meaning of that which is done in the Liturgy then they are bound to vse it in a knowne language both because they cannot giue the meaning without interpreting the language and that interpreting when it comes to execution and practise will proue farre more difficult and obnoxious to danger and inconuenience then the simple reading in a knowne language 7 Hitherto I haue stood to cleare the Apostles text that I alledged from the answers that Bellarmine hath made thereto But beside that text I shewed by a place in Origen a Cont. Cels l. 8 bidding euery man make his praier to God in a knowne language that it was the custome of the ancient Church to do seruice and pray in a knowne language And I produced the testimonies of Lyra Thomas of Aquine Caietan Erasmus and Cassander all of them great persons in the Church of Rome to the same effect and confessing also that it were better for the Churches edification to haue it so still What could I do more or what can an aduersary require more then by so sufficient witnesses to proceede in my assertion If I had said it vpon my owne word only by way of assertion he would haue bidden me proue it now I proue it by pregnant and full testimony he replies my authors disalow not our practise but he hath authors that shew it to be both lawfull and lawdable and referrs me againe to Bellarmine He had as good haue renounced his cause for these Authors first shew the custome in the Primitiue Church to haue bene to haue seruice in the common vulgar language that was best knowen whence it followes secondly that they affirme the Church of Rome to be swerued from it in this point as I said which is all I alledged them for Neuerthelesse because the Repliar thinkes to saue himselfe by saying they account not our practise vnlawfull let him consider well with himselfe why they should mention this alteration from the Primitiue Church if they had not in their iudgement disallowed it How can they say as they do b Lyr. Tho. Caiet Cassand Erasm cited in TEH WAY In the Primitiue Church it was otherwise By Saint Paules doctrine it were better for the Churches edification if the publike seruice of the Church were in a knowne language and not disallow the present practise if they durst haue spoken all they thought or could haue told how to helpe it I will adde two more testimonies and so end the point leauing the censure of my proceeding to the reader Isidore c De Eccl. offic l. 1. c. 10 pag. 3. The hearers are not a little edified by reading Therefore it behooues that when the singing is all sing * Oratio ipsa sit pinguiâ—r dum mens RECENTI LECTIONE SAGINATA PER DIVINARVM RERVM QVAS NVPER AVDIVIT IMAGINES CVRRIT and when praier is all pray and when the lesson is read it be indifferently heard of all and thinke not that it is a small profite that comes by hearing the reading for thy praier is made fatter when thy minde lately fed with reading runnes through the images or formes of those diuine things which it hath lately heard Where are these images of the things that he hath heard read who vnderstandes not the language Secondly I haue lying by me diuers ancient Liturgies intituled to Saint Peter Saint Basil Saint Marke Saint Iames Saint Chrysostome Clemens Gregory and others in all which it is set downe that the people shall answer the Priest at many periods which imports they vnderstood the language or else they could not answer Balsamon the Patriarch of Antioch a Ius GraecoruÌ„ l. 5. Respons 1. p. 365. interrog 5. to this question Whether the orthodoxe Syrians and Armenians and other faithfull men of other countries may without danger celebrate in their owne language or must be constrained to do seruice in the Greeke tongue which they vnderstand not answers The Apostle saies Is God onely the God of the Iewes is he not also the God of the Gentiles He is verily Let them therefore which hold the true faith in all things * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if they be ignorant of the Greek tongue do their diuine seruice in their owne language By this it appeares it was the custome of the Greeke Church to haue seruice in the vulgar language as by Isidore it is manifest the same custome was in the Latine Church till tyranny and heresie remooued it Our b Bell. c. 16. l. 2. foule mouthed aduersaries may call them schismatickes and heretickes but when they haue done their testimonies will remaine for sufficient recordes what was done in Gods true Church for 800. yeares after Christ CHAP. LI. 1.2 The Church of Rome against all antiquitie forbiddes the lay people the vse of the Scripture in the vulgar language 3. The shifts vsed by the Papists against reading Spitefull speeches against it 4. Testimonies of antiquity for it 5. The Repliars reason against it answered Pag. 280. A. D. Thirdly touching forbidding the laity to reade Scriptures and to haue them in the mother tongue there is no such generall prohibition among vs. 1 1. Pet. 3. v. 16. All that we say is that the holy Scriptures should not promiscuously be permitted to all men at least in dangerous times when men may by rash misinterpreting fall easily into errour and heresie running thereby into their owne perdition but that care should be had that the parties disposition be such as is like to take benefit and not harme by them The which our practise is not condemned by our Sauiour Christ or by the ancient Church but is most conformable to our Sauiours saying 2 Mat. 7. v. 6. Giue not the holy things to DOGS nor cast not pearles before HOGS Now care being had that the parties disposition be such as may take benefit by reading or hearing and no harme by rash misinterpreting we do not prohibite but with due order permit and wish the Scriptures euen in the mother tongue to be read and heard both by laie men and women That sentence of our Sauiour 3 Ioh. 5. v. 39. Search the Scriptures which is so often vrged hy Protestants doth not proue a necessity for all men immediatly to read the Scriptures For first these words were not spoken to all in generall but to Pharisies and Princes of the people Besides they either containe no precept as S. Cyril expoundeth or no absolute but conditionall precept or rather licence that since they would not beleeue our Sauiour himselfe they should or might search the Scriptures which themselues did admit Lastly if it were an absolute precept
neither proueth our practise vnlawfull neither indeed can he proue that the contrary practise either of marying a wife or vsing the company of a wife was euer lawfull after holy orders but rather may finde it generally condemned for vnlawfull M. Whites examples to the contrary either are not authenticall or they speake of those that were maried before holy orders who neuer companied with their wiues after 1 THe fourth example was the forbidding mariage to the Cleargie Which by diuers pregnant authorities I shewed to be contrary to the practise of the Primitiue Church First I alledged the words of the Apostle allowing it Then the examples of the Priests in the old law diuers Bishops in the Primitiue Church vsing it then the confession of the most learned among our aduersaries testifying the present practise of the Church of Rome to be but A HVMANE CONSTITVTION AND NOT THE DIVINE LAW OF GOD. Whereunto he replies nothing but as you see in generall termes onely denies the authorities as if there were not a God that abhorred lying and imposture and these odious practises of shuffling and concealements and will one day seuerely punish them First to the text of S. Paul a 1. Tim. 3.2 Tit. 1.6 where he sayes a Bishop must be the husband of one wife hauing faithfull children his children in subiection with all grauitie which precept supposes it lawfull for him to haue a wife and children he replies M. White cites a mistaken sentence out of the Apostle But what mistaking can there be in words so plaine and when wife and children are mentioned what mistaking is it to conclude mariage b Chrysost ho. 2 in Tit. OecuÌ„ Theophyl in Tit. 1 Chrysostome Theophylact and the Greeke scholiast vpon this text write thus He will stop the mouths of heretickes calumniating mariage and shewes the thing not onely to be blamelesse but so honorable * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that therein a Bishop may ascend vp to his sacred throne These affirme that a man in the state of mariage without putting away his wife or vowing single life may be a Bishop And Soto maior a great Doctor at this day in the Church of Rome c Comm. in Tit. 1. §. vnius vxâ—ris handling this place confesses it proues BB. and Priests to haue bene maried at that time M. White alone therefore mistakes not the Apostle but others also with him 2 Secondly he saies I boldly affirme after my fashion that mariage of Priests was ordinary in the Primitiue Church But I affirmed nothing but what I gaue examples of my fashion and course holden throughout my writing being to iustifie what I affirme by authoritie He is the bolder of the two that dares charge his aduersarie with boldnes whose reasons and authorities he durst not looke in the face neuerthelesse let that he saies be considered First be sayes he proues not our practise vnlawfull This is folly For whatsoeuer restraines and forbids that which the Apostles and their Churches permitted and commended is vnlawfull But M. White cannot proue it was euer lawfull either to marrie a wife or vse the company of a wife after holy orders but he shall rather finde it condemned as vnlawfull All this I proued as will appeare by reading what I writ but yet you shall see what M. White can proue more though if he proue neuer so much all is one with my Repliar For his answer at the last will be the same that Aeneas who afterward was Pope Pius 2 made the Bohemians * Epist 130. post med We are not bound to al things which the Fathers did in the Primitiue Church they had wiues we haue none we therefore merit the more First d L. 6. c. 17. the Constitutions of Clemens expresly allowes Ministers Cantors Readers doore-keepers e Id asserunt omnes veteres Scholast DuraÌ„ do excepto Et ex recentioribus grauissimi quique idque videtur sensisse conc FloreÌ„t Trident. Bellarm. de ordin c. 8. who are within holy orders that is properly a sacrament in the Church of Rome * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 99. to marry after they are entred into orders and if it were lawfull for Bishops and Priests also after their entrance into orders to keepe and company with their wiues which they had maried before what reason can be giuen why they might not aswell marrie after their entrance into orders Now that it was lawfull to keepe and liue and company with their wiues after their entrance into orders I shewed by the testimonies of f Monâ—d Nazianzen g Epist ad Euopt Synesius h Epist ad Dracont 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 739. Commelin Athanasius i L. 4. c. 23. Eusebius k L. 5. c. 22. Socrates and l L. 12. c. 34. Nicephorus Which I will not here repeate And this was so far from being condemned as vnlawfull that it was iustified and practised against those that began to mislike it Nazianzen m Orat. in sanct Bapt. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 656. rebukes them that said none should baptise them but an vnmaried Priest Sidonius a B. in France about the yeare 480. being intreated to commend a MetropolitaÌ„ to the prouince of Aquitaine in France commends one Simplicius reporting him to be maried and to haue children and hauing in many other things praised him as fit for the place n L. 7. conc p. 445. he proceeds thus His wife also is descended of the stocke of the Palladij who to the commendations of their order haue holden the seates of learnings or of the altars and verily in as much as the person of the matrone requires a modest and succint mention of her I will constantly auouch * Respondere illam foeminam sacerdotij vtriusque familiae vel vbi educta creuit vel vbi electa migrauit that woman to answer the Priesthoods of both the families either whence she was brought forth or whither she came when she was chosen Both of them well and wisely instruct their children This example doth so plainely shew that Bishops and Priests companied with their wiues after orders that it cannot be well eluded For therein not onely a maried man is preferred to be a Metropolitan almost 500 yeares after Christ but thought to be the fitter because of the quality of his wife being first descended of Priests and then a modest woman and such a one as * Filios AMBO instituunt together with her husband instructed their children which neither needed nor could be said if he liued not with her Isidorus Pelusiota in o L. 2. ep 53. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 198. a certaine Epistle to a Priest reporting a narration touching a woman bids him tell it his wife That Priest was married therefore But the Repliar sure will allow no example to be authenticall vnlesse it shew they lay together the which I confesse is much when
whereby vnanswerably it followes that there was no visible head of the Church infallibly knowne all that time but according to our Aduersaries owne principles the Church wanted meanes to instruct and confirme her people in the faith yea the liuing rule of faith ceased and was ouerthrowne in these schismes The Iesuite replies that in all these schismes either the true Pope was knowne or if he were not yet there was meanes to cleare the doubt by electing a new The first of these is false that in all the schismes the true Pope was knowne For in some of them there were so many learned men and Princes of the earth following each part deuided one against another that it was impossible there should be any certainety And my Aduersarie could not haue instanced with me in a worse then in Vrbanus whose reputation was so small by reason of a Whereof reade Theodor à Niem de schism l. 1. c. 2. the manner of his entrance and gouernment that he was generally nicknamed Turbanus and so odious to his Cardinals that in reuenge b Ibi. cap. 51. Pandulf Collenut hist Neapolit l. 5. p. 233. some he tormented vpon the racke in base and miserable fashion and afterward tied vp in sackes and so drowned them and others he baked in an ouen and carried them when he had done vpon mules before him when he trauelled with their Cardinal hats vpon them Now it is a rule among our c Petr. Cresper sum Cathol fid verb. Disciplinae pag. 180. Aduersaries themselues that a doubtfull Pope is to be accounted for no Pope The succession therefore failed all the time of these schismes And albeit as the Reply speaketh there was meanes by a Councell to elect a new Pope yet what successe these meanes had he may perceiue by the stories of the Councels of Pisa Constance and Basil whereof this last d Aen. Sylu. comment de Gest Basil Concil lib. 2. deposed Eugenius and elected the Duke of Sauoy calling him Faelix the fift and yet our aduersaries still hold the succession in Eugenius yea the Replier hath put him in his Catalogue and left Faelix out which by this his rule he should not haue done And besides though a Councell may depose the schismatickes and elect a new Pope yet who shall he that is thus elected succeed or how can a Councell or any other meanes that shall be vsed peece together the interruption past that it may truly be said the succession was neuer broken Martin was elected by the Councell of Constance but let the Iesuite and Gregory of Valence his master of whom he hath borrowed all that he sayes answer whom he succeeded whether Vrban and his successors or Clement and his which side soeuer he takes he cannot rid himselfe For Clement and they that followed him in his time are thrust out of the catalogue and Vrbane with those that followed him put in yet the said Vrban in his time was thought no right Pope and Eugenius that immediatly followed this Martin was deposed by the Councell of Basil 13 The Iesuites hope therefore that he hath answered the obiections will faile him things may wittily and cunningly be pretended but let euery man that will stablish his conscience in the truth enquire whether the reason of true succession can hold where such things as these fall out and whether it be possible or can stand with Gods prouidence that a succession planted for such purposes as our aduersaries pretend this of Rome to be shall be furnished and peeced out with boyes women hereticks ignorant and vnlettered dotards simoniacall intruders and so many times diuers of them at once Two things therefore touching this matter of succession are the truth First that the outward and personall succession of Bishops in the Church of Rome is not so entire as is pretended but hath bene defiled and poisoned with so many disorders that it is as lame a succession as any is wheresoeuer in the world Their catalogues assigned and drawne to exhibite to the vulgar people looke smooth on the outside and nothing but well is discerned in them but examine the particulars and enquire into the histories of their succession and there was neuer any thing so patched and peeced together as they Secondly the succession of doctrine is the true succession and is not tied to that which is in place and persons and therefore let not the Iesuites blaze out their catalogues of names vntill they can prooue the corruptions which they haue added to religion wherein onely we forsake the Church of Rome were holden and beleeued by the persons named For what foolery is it to make a catalogue of Iesus Christ Saint Peter all the Apostles and Euangelists the virgin Marie and the whole Church of the first six hundred yeares as if these had professed what the Pope and his rabble now teach did these adore images vse the Communion in one kind beleeue Purgatorie did these teach it lawfull for the Pope to excommunicate depose murder the Kings of the earth Are not all these things against their expresse doctrine Let our aduersaries retire backe to modestie and truth and giue ouer their courses There are two parts of their religion One wherein they and we agree as that there is one God three persons one redeemer Iesus Christ that the Scripture Canonicall is Gods word that the dead shall rise and all the rest wherein we consent Another part of their religion is it which we and all the reformed Churches haue cast off as Images Transubstantiation Purgatorie Traditions and a hundred such like points The Catalogue assigned sufficiently shewes the former part both for them and vs against all Iewes and Gentiles that denie it The latter part they cannot shew to haue bene holden by the persons named vntill many ages after Christ as they came in by degrees in all which time the truth maintained by the Protestants against them was holden still and the Papacie was but a faction in the Church opposing the sounder part thereof And so the visible Church of Rome it selfe is it wherein the Protestants faith in all ages hath bene professed for the substance thereof Vincat veritas I. Wh.
which must be acknowledged when tyrants and such as feare not God by their euill gouernement and neglect of religion many times darken the aire and hinder the raine and make the fields barren and riuers empty Pliny enquiring the reason why the fields adioyning to Rome in old time were so fruitfull saies It was because they were tilled by the chiefe gouernours such as Fabritius and Cincinnatus were Ipsorum tunc manibus Imperatorum colebantur agri gaudente terra vomere laureato triumphali aratore Which your Maiesty doing so painefully with your owne hands in a more noble field the Church of God all godly minded shall bid God speed the plow and daily waite till the briars and thornes be rooted out and the dew of Gods grace fall on the barren part that the Plowman may neuer be wearie nor his hand weake nor his workmen vnfaithful to him but all that are about him and his Noble seruants by his example may giue ouer sleeping and put their hand without looking backe to the same worke that the enuious man that soweth tares may be driuen forth and their owne houses may be the greenest and cleanest part of the field till he come that shall giue end and rest to euery labour and recompence beyond all that can be thought the workmans trauell and binding the good corne in sheaues cast the tares into vnquenchable fire God euermore continue and increase his mercies to your Highnesse and lay your enemies at your feete that you may see an end of all dissentions and stablish peace and vnity in the Church Your Maiesties most humble subiect IOHN WHITE To the Reader IT is now fiue yeares since I published a booke called THE WAY TO THE TRVE CHVRCH wherein my purpose was nothing else but onely to shew the weakenesse and insufficiency of those Motiues which leade so many to Papistrie and to bring to triall such reasons as the Iesuites and Seminaries ground themselues vpon in perswading their people against vs making it more then plaine that the corruptions of the Church of Rome are maintained and the communion of our Church in the doctrine preaching and the Sacraments thereof is refused by such as follow the Papacy vpon weake and false grounds that cannot be defended This poore booke it seemes hath not a little incensed my Aduersary and discontented many that yet should follow reason and the truth of things and not be transported with rumor and common impression For man being a noble creature endued with reason and faculty to discourse and hauing a rule left him of God whereby to examine things should not tie his faith and conscience to the authority or person of any more then the truth and the reason and euidence of that be saies will beare him out It was neuer heard of in the world till now of late yeares that the Pope and his definitions were the rule of faith or that men were bound to follow whatsoeuer he should appoint but the Church of God euery where till tyranny oppressed it examined his doctrine accepting and allowing that which agreed with the sacred Scriptures and the first antiquity and reiecting the rest and albeit many errors had long prescription yet the godly still held them to that rule of our Sauiour BVT FROM THE BEGINNING IT WAS NOT SO. Mat. 19.8 Our Aduersaries therefore may in some points possible pretend antiquitie but PRIORITIE which is the first and best antiquitie they cannot in any one thing wherein they refuse vs and whether the zealous and resolued Recusants will beleeue it or no yet it is certainely true there is no one point of Papistry Catholicke that is to say such as hath bene from the beginning generally receiued as an article of faith by the vniuersall Church And though it be granted that many parts of his religion haue long continued in the world yet were they neuer the certaine or generall doctrines of the Church but the corruptions of some therein which in time and by degrees obtained that strength and credit which now they haue it being the easiest thing of a thousand for the Pope and his clergie sitting at the sterne when themselues had once imbraced them with their strength and learning to giue them authority in the world when Mahomet himselfe by policy and tyrannie was able in time to spread abroad and a vniuersally the doctrine of his Alchoran which now is 800 yeare old and is followed by many and great nations as close as Papistrie is either in England or Italy But whē the Scripture makes it plaine that FROM THE BEGINNING IT WAS NOT SO and the Histories and monuments of antiquity and the bookes of the elder Papists and such as were chiefe in the Church of Rome beare witnesse that these things were misliked and in all ages complained of and that which the Church of England now professes was the faith of most godly men and holy Bishops though the power of the gouernors in the Church of Rome increasing they were suppresed they do but deceiue themselues that thinke our faith a new faith or the points of Papistrie the old religion I haue as well as I haue bene able and as diligently as I could with an vnpartiall eie and many teares to God for his direction in the businesse and with a heart hating contention and possessed as much as any mans liuing with desire of peace and vnity whereof my 17 yeares residence in Lancashire can giue plentifull witnesse read the Scriptures and trauelled through the writings of the Fathers and obserued the course of former times and well aduised my selfe of that which the learned of the Church of Rome in later times haue written from the elder Schoolemen to the later Iesuites though with all humility I acknowledge my selfe to be the meanest of any that haue taken this course and much lament my owne weaknesse yet am I readie whensoeuer God the Iudge of all secrets and the terrible reuenger of falsehood and partiality shall call me foorth of this world to testifie that my faith and religion and the points thereof maintained in my writings and preaching is the truth agreeable to the first antiquity and the contrary defended by the Iesuites and followed by Romish Recusants error and vncatholicke And if any persons presumed to be learned on the other side haue either in their life or death shewed extraordinary zeale for their Roman faith I desire I may be allowed my owne knowledge both of some such persons and of their iudgement and outward cariage and not be importuned to follow that which vnskilfull and vnable and partiall friends haue apprehended rather then my owne cleare knowledge both of them and their cause And if the Church of Rome haue in it diuers learned betweene whom and vs my Aduersaries will indure no comparison that write against vs yet my certaine experience of their manner of writing one against another and against knowne antiquitie and their strange maintenance of the foulest and
make them pale for feare and therefore he would affixe it though I for my part will thinke he doe it not so much to terrifie vs as to gull his owne with the name of the Church If he had in any good fashion defended the exposition and application he made of it k THE WAY § 15. Reply pag. 223 in his Treatise he might haue vsed it the better and it would haue made vs the more afraid but hauing left it in the lash where I answered it he is not worthy so faire a text should come vnder his title Neuerthelesse there is good vse to be made of it against himselfe For if the Church be the pillar of truth and the Papacie which he striues for in his Reply be the pillar of lies then it will follow the Papacie is not the Church The first proposition is his text The second neither his Reply nor Treatise can put by The conclusion therefore is the truth And so the Text may keep his place to good purpose 5 On the backside of the same page hee hath placed in Latin and English this sentence of Saint Austin de vtil cred c. 8. If thou seeme to thy selfe to be sufficiently tossed to wit in doubts questions or controuersies of faith and wouldest make an end of these labours follow the way of the Catholicke discipline which did proceed from Christ himselfe by the Apostles euen vnto vs and from hence shall be deriued to posteritie I guesse his minde was to allude to the title of my booke which I called THE WAY and because therein I defend the way of the Scripture followed by the vniuersall Church which he likes not therefore he brings S. Austin reuoking vs to the way of Catholicke discipline This man sure hath a strange apprehension * Denique addimus Ecclesiam quae nunc Pontifici Romano obtemperat ture ac merito Catholicae nomen sibi vendicare eademque ratio ne fidem eius Catholicam esse censendam appellandam Suar. de fens si◠Cathol aduers Anglic. sect err l. 1. c. 12. nu 9. to thinke that wheresoeuer the Fathers vse the word Catholicke they vnderstand thereby this New-Roman-Catholicke and when they speake of Catholicke discipline they vnderstand his Church proposition determined by the Pope when they affirme nothing else but the doctrine contained and written in the Scriptures to be Catholicke and the discipline whereby men are directed both in faith and manners So S. Austin expounds himselfe l Cap. 6. in the same place Beleeue me whatsoeuer is in those SCRIPTVRES is loftie and diuine THERE is altogether IN THEM the truth and discipline most accommodate for the renewing and repairing of our mindes and so qualified that there is NO MAN BVT FROM THENCE HE MAY DRAW THAT WHICH IS SVFFICIENT for him if to the drawing he come deuoutly and godly as true religion requires So also Theophilus Alexandrinus m Epist 1. Pas chal pag. 377. cals the medicines taken out of the holy Scriptures for the curing of heresies the ecclesiasticall discipline The WAY to the Church therefore and S. Austins WAY of Catholicke discipline are both one because they both are the way of the Scripture and that sufficient and easie way which the simplest that is may finde though the Pope with his authoritie and traditions intermeddle not and he that will seeke the Catholicke discipline by Saint Austins consent must do it in the SCRIPTVRE which I doubt will not greatly please this Iesuite who hath spent all his time in groping for it about the Popes stoole he being the man when all is done that must determine this discipline and * Cum Pontisex definit Ecclesia per caput suum loquitur Suar. vbi sup c. 2◠nu 7. the mouth whereby their Catholicke Church must vtter and expound it 6 In the next page followes a Table of the contents of his booke and after that a short Preface to the Reader wherein first he commends his booke that I confuted and his Method vsed therein to bring men to resolution and then shewes how he was vrged by our writing against it to this Reply excusing himselfe for the plainesse of his stile and concluding with a grieuous complaint of our vnsincere dealing which he proceeds to shew in that which followes The Commendation that he giues his Method may not be denied for we allow Apes to hugge their yong ones and heretickes to conceit their owne deuices and I must confesse it is good round Method indeed for the purpose and profitable for them to be followed For if you will see it this it is Good Eue for your soules health I were readie to shed my best bloud and therefore haue ventured my life as you see vpon the entertainment you know of such as I find in the hiding roomes to bring you home to the Catholicke Church your Method is this Close vp your eies and examine nothing but obstinately renouncing the Protestants and stopping your eares against the Scriptures in all things beleeue vs who on my owne word are the Church of God and submitting your selfe to the direction of your ghostly father without more adoe be resolute and you shall easily be perswaded of our Roman faith This is a good sure Method to resolution and makes many resolute indeed and the Iesuite hauing found by experience how kindly it works with good natures had reason to commend it though in any indifferent iudgement it be a poore one as will appeare The rest of his Preface is trash come we to that which is materiall 7 After the Preface to shew my vnsincere dealing whereof he complaines he makes a title of examples of grosse vntruths gathered out of M Woottons and M. Whites bookes by which the discreete reader may see how little sinceritie or care of truth they haue had and consequently how little credit is to be giuen to their writings and hauing dispatched M. Wootton he comes to me with these words Now to come to M. White whose booke is said to do much more harme among the simple then M. Woottons doth I hope I shall lay open such foule want of sinceritie and care of truth in him as it will plainly appeare that those which shall hereafter take harme by giuing credence to his words or writings shall shew themseluis to be very simple indeed So that in all probabilie he should haue some great matter to shew that makes so large an offer and yet euery one of these examples will proue in the scanning so many testimonies of his owne weaknesse and immodesty when hauing had the book foure yeares in his hands and so many of his consorts to ioyne with him in replying all which time their rage against it and desire to discredit it and vowes to confute it appeared well enough yet now at the last can obiect no other examples of vntruth then these And that we may know he comes furnished he cals for a railing roome to brawle in
they to whom this was commanded The Apostles and their successors And who be these successors He that now holds the first sea of Rome he that holds the second of Constantinople he of Alexandria and Antioch and he of IerusaleÌ„ This is the fiuefold top that is the power of the fiue Patriarkes of the Church in their power is the iudgement of diuine doctrines This man and his name stands in l Menolog Grae Nouemb. 11. tom 4. Bibl. SS Patrum the Greeke Kalendar in his time to fit the controuersie depending betweene the student and me thought all the Patriarkes together to haue the right of iudgement and not he of Rome alone which shewes that it is true which the Cardinall of Cusa m Cusan conc l. 2. c. 12. writes that by custome of mens obeying him he hath gotten beyond the bounds of ancient obseruation And so the head being departed I hope the bodie stayed not behind A.D. And § 11. where he affirmeth Pag. 28. that Protestants haue the Scripture in manifest places free from all ambiguitie for their side 4 If this be not true say directly why do you teach most blasphemously that the Scripture is so obscure so defectiue so dangerous for the people to meddle with Why do you forbid the people the reading of it in the mother tongue What Protestant if he would studie to do it of purpose can speake plainer then they against n Exod. 20.4 Deut. 4.15 images o Apoc 19.10 22.8 the worshipping of Saints p Act. 10.25 the Popes pride q 1. Cor. 14. Latin prayers and Seruice r Luc. 17.10 Phil. 3.12 Merit and perfection of workes Å¿ Psal 37.37 Apoc. 14.13 Purgatorie t Luc. 22.25 the Popes primacie u 1 Cor. 10 16. Transubstantiation w 1. Sam. 26.8 Rom. 13.1 Deposing and murdering Kings x 1. Tim. 4.3 Distinction of meates for conscience what finally can be spoken plainer in defence of y 1. Tim. 3.2.11.12 Priests mariage or to shew the Pope and his crew to be z 2. Thesâ—â—3 Apoc. 17.18 that Antichrist c. The Scripture therefore is manifest enough for vs but a Hos de expr Dei verb. our aduersaries haue a rule that the Scripture as it is alledged by Protestants is the word of the diuell and therefore be it neuer so manifest yet it must not be manifest when we alledge it A.D. And againe Pag. 28. that Protestants haue the principles of religion contained in the Lords prayer the Creed the ten Commandements leading directly to euery point of Protestancie and that for this reason the Church of Rome forbiddeth the reading and exercise of these things to the people lest they should see so much 5 As for example to pray to God alone and to no other for the Lords prayer teacheth vs to pray to him that is our Father to whom it belongs to forgiue vs our trespasses and whose is the kingdome the power and the glorie all prayers being to be made after this forme we are directly lead from praying to Saints to whom these things agree not to call on God alone Secondly the second commandement leades directly against image-worship and that is the reason why the Papists haue not onely forbidden the reading of it but also a In their Catechismes Van. Canis Ledesm Office of our Lady and other put it cleane out in their ordinary Catechismes Thirdly the Creed saying that Christ being ascended into heauen sits at the right hand of God from whence he shall come to iudge the quicke and the dead teaches plainly to beleeue that he comes not downe euery day to be eaten in the Sacrament vnder the formes of bread and wine In like maner we affirme these three the Creed the Lords prayer and the ten Commandements to be such a rule as serues to conclude in true and perfect consequence whatsoeuer we hold against our aduersaries and whether the Church of Rome haue not forbidden the people to vse them I referre my selfe to the times of King Henrie the 8 what time the people with incredible ioy and admiration first heard them in the English tongue I referre me to the manner of their praying mentioned b Ch. 12. hereafter which had not bene if they had bene permitted the vse of these things And because the Iesuite denies this let him say truly what incouragement haue they giuen the common people to reade the Scriptures to vse the Lords prayer and the rest in their mother-tongue to exercise themselues diligently in these things Let them shew vs the time when the words wherewith the benefite that hath ensued thereby No they haue reuiled and reproched these things and bred a hatred of them in the people and all to keepe them in ignorance my selfe continued many yeares in a parish where there were not a few Recusants and in all the number I did not in the time though I made triall of many finde one that could say and pronounce these things in the English tongue vnlesse he were which few were book-learned Among many other I came to an aged womans house and desiring her to repeate vnto me the Creed she said it in fustian Latin of that sort which I haue expressed c Ch. 12. a litle below and assaying to teach it her in English she answered that seeing her Latin creed had serued her turne to this age she would now learne no new And when I asked her who Iesus Christ was that the Creed said was borne of the virgin Mary she answered she could not tell but by our deare Ladie it is sure some good thing or it should neuer haue bin put in the Creed but what it is I cannot tell you for I was neuer taught so much my selfe This woman afterward heard me willingly and reioyced to heare the vnderstanding of these things and reported strange things of the barbarous ignorance and irreligion of those times wherein she was brought vp The experience that we haue of these things shewes how and in what sort Papists exercise their people in the principles of Religion and my owne particular knowledge hereof obtained by conuersing diuers yeares among them is such that all the Seminary Priests and Iesuites in England if there were ten thousand of them shal neuer outstare it with their great lookes A.D. And againe Pag. 28. that the ancient Fathers are for Protestants in expresse termes in all things that they held constantly and certainly with one consent and that in the principall points touching Scripture Iustification Merit of workes Images and all the rest they write most clearely with Protestants 6 This I shewed throughout my writing in euery point I stood vpon and if it be not so shrinke not but answer why haue you corrupted the writing of the Fathers d De vnit eccl in the Rom. Antw. prints and in all that follow them Cyprian to auoide his euidence against the
the feast of the Annunciation was not holden nor long after See Concil Mogunt l. c. 36. apud Binn tom 3. pag. 466. an ordinarie thing to father bastard writings on the ancient Doctors Sixt. Senens biblioth pag. 320. and therefore our aduersaries should not ground themselues on such writings if they were desirous of nothing but the truth not the words of Saint Austin but as it is supposed one Fulbert a superstitious French-man that liued Å¿ Hee died Ann. 1028. aboue a thousand yeares after Christ whose sermon containing this prayer is clapped into Saint Augustines workes by those that with his name would giue authoritie to their owne conceits This man t Baron an â—028 was our Ladies Chaplen and as they say was much deuoted to her seruice and writ a booke in her commendations and if the Legend lie not found the fauour to sucke her breast and therefore had reason to speake her faire and doe her seruice but yet in the meane time the Iesuite playes falsehood in fellowship in offering his words vnder the name of Austine yea seuen times ouer to aduance them with his name when Saint Austin was farre from that idolatrie and Saint Austins time but spake in another fashion u Confess l. 10. c. 42. Whom might I finde O God to reconcile me to thee should I haue gone to the Angels with what prayers with what Sacrament Many endeuouring to returne vnto thee and as I heare not able to do it of themselues haue fallen into the desire of curious visions and made themselues worthy to be deluded w cap. 43. but the true Mediator whom thy secret mercie hath made knowne to the humble is Iesus Christ the Mediator of God and men These words are farre from that which is here alledged vnder his name and possibly the Reply noting in the margent some harshnesse to be in them that needs a pious meaning alledged them against his conscience and was contented to vse any base cosenage to set some antiquitie and authoritie vpon his idolatrie but let him set his heart at rest neither the holy Virgin nor any Saint or Angell in those dayes were inuocated as now the Church of Rome vses Some priuate men began to hammer such a thing and the Fathers now and then were ventring at it for x 2. Thess 2.7 the mysterie of iniquitie began to worke in the Apostles time with guesses surmises and Rhetoricke but nothing was done certenly or taught resolutely this way Nicephorus y Hist eccl l. 15 c. 28. sub fin writes that one Peter Fuller who was a schismaticall Bishop of Antioch almost fiue hundred yeates after Christ inuented the inuocation of our Ladie that she should be named in all prayer contrary to the doctrine of the Church reported by z pag. 447. graec Epiphanius The bodie of Marie was holy * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but it was not God and she was a glorious virgin but not giuen vs to worship but her selfe worshipped him that tooke flesh of her c. Which words of Epiphanius plainly shew that the Church of Rome commits the same idolatrie with the blessed virgin by worshipping and inuocating her that those heretickes did against whom he writes and therefore he that condemneth them for it condemnes not Saint Austin but a wicked heresie that hath forged and coined many things vnder many mens names to win credit to it selfe CHAP. XV. 1. The Iesuites insolencie censured 2. Note bookes 3. A relation shewing how the Iesuites traine vp their Nouices to dispute 4. The doctrine of the Iesuites touching formall lies and equiuocation 5. The Repliers motion to Protestant Ministers answered A. D. I might now as if need be hereafter I shall go forward in this my examination of M. Whites vntruths Pag. 45. but I hope it shall not be needfull at this time to digge any deeper into this vnsauorie dunghill sith by this which is alreadie set downe I suppose the Reader hath had a sufficient taste of the mans talent in this kinde of vnsincere writing which may worthily make him suspect euery thing that he shall say against vs or rather may make him Ioath and abhorre for his sake to reade any English Protestant writers of controuersies especially when as appeares by M. Walsinghams * The title of this booke is a Search made into matters of Religion by Fr ncis Walsingham DeacoÌ„ of the Protestant Church before his change to the Catholicke Jn which is shewed among other things worthy of note the falsities of M. Caluin M. Iewel M. Io Fox M. Calfehil M. Doue M Mer. Hanmer M. Wil. Chark M. Wil. Perkins M. Morton M. Math. Sutcliffe M. Willet M. Bel M. Rogers Sir Philip Mornay and others book so many other of their owne principall writers out of whose bookes this and other pettie Ministers doe as it seemeth take their Note-bookes with which they furnish their discourses are found guiltie of many grosse vntruths very ill beseeming such as take vpon them to be Professors and especially Ministers of the simple Truth Verily my selfe haue sometime maruelled how it could come to passe that Protestant writers should so often and so grossely be taken tripping in this kind and hereupon haue sometime discoursed with my selfe what might be the cause being willing in mine owne thoughts to see if I could finde out a iust excusing cause But hauing considered the case although I was willing on the one side to imagine the best to wit that many of their errors might be excused in some sort by ouersight of wit pen or print or that some of the persons might be lesse blamed hauing in simplicitie receiued their errors from other their brethrens Note bookes or printed bookes not hauing perhaps heard how false and vnsincere these their bookes and Note-bookes are commonly sound yet on the other side I could not excuse all because I saw such store of palpable and vnexcusable errors obiected by our authors against Protestant writers which were all so insufficiently defended by themselues against our authors that I could not deeme them to haue proceeded from simplicitie or ouersight in regard I thought it not likely that men of their wit learning and reading should not see or suspect at least that these things which they writ were false and consequently formall lies proceeding from either wilfull malice or grosse negligence which made me muse with what conscience men of their qualitie could publish in print such palpable and pernicious vntruths tending to the seducing of soules and matters of religion and faith 1 IVstin Martyr a Ad Zen. Seren. pag. 389. sayes It is time for a man to hold his peace * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when his aduersarie begins to shout and I confesse this bragging and impudencie amazes me that I know not whether I should more abhorre him for it or vpbraid his followers that content themselues with such Masters For what one point of
Ecclesiam Dei posse de assertione non vera facere veram aut de non non falsam Turrecâ—em sum de Eccl. l 4. part 2. c. 3. ad 6. our aduersaries denie the latter is not sufficient to make the Scripture onely probable in that howsoeuer for want of Church authoritie a man may not see such texts to proue the virginitie of Marie or the Baptisme of children yet the proofe is in them within their owne latitude and if there be any such matter in them at all then is it in them more then probably because no diuine testimonie is probable but necessarie but Gretser and the Church of Rome vse their traditions as Alchymists do the Philosophers stone with the touch of it they turne any mettall into gold or as Painters do Allum to giue tincture to their colours CHAP. XIX 1. 2. How the Churches authoritie proues the Scripture 3. The Iesuits plainely confesse that the Scriptures alone prooues it selfe to be Gods word 4. The Scriptures are Principles indemonstrable in any superior science 6. All other testimony resolued into the testimony of the Scripture 7. Touching Euidence and the Compossibility thereof with faith A. D. I will insist in that example which I propounded Pag. 68. in the treatise and thus I dispute All sorts both Catholickes and Protestants do beleeue and hold it a point necessary to be beleeued that S. Mathewes S. Marks Gospell c. are true diuine Scripture and that these particular bookes which the Church vseth are the same true Scripture at least in sense and substance which was set downe by those holy writers But these points are not expressed in Scripture nor secluding Church authority and tradition so contained as that they can be proued euidently and necessarily out of any sentence of Scripture Ergo all points necessary to be beleeued are not so contained in Scripture as Protestants say they are M. Wotton and M. White both struggle with this argument as other Protestants haue done before theÌ„ but when they haue done said all one may easily see how they sticke fast in the mire To omit their impertinent speeches there are onely two things which to the purpose they do or can directly say viz. either they must deny these to be points of faith necessary to be beleeued or else they must shew how one may prooue these points euidently out of some sentence of Scripture For if they admit that these be points of faith necessary to be beleeued and that these cannot be prooued out of Scripture it followeth ineuitably that all points of faith necessary to be beleeued cannot be prooued by Scripture and that their Principle is false which saith nothing is necessary to be beleeued as a point of saith which cannot be prooued euidently by Scripture M. White saith that like as in other sciences White pag. 47. there are some Principles indemonstrable so in matters of faith it is a Principle to be supposed that Scripture is Diuine and so no maruell if it cannot be prooued as other points of faith are To this I reply that Principles in sciences are either euident to vs and knowne by the onely light of nature and so neede no proofe but onely declaration of terms or words in which they be vttered or if they be not euident to vs they must be demonstrated either in the same science or in some superior science by some other Principle more euident to vs. But that these books which are in the Bible are diuine Scripture is * If it were euident how is it onely beleeued by faith For S. Paul calls faith argumentum non apparentium Heb. 11. v. 1. not euident therefore if M. Whites similitude be good it must be demonstrated by some other Principle more euidently vnto vs that these books which are in the Bible be diuine Scripture Secondly I aske whether this point of doctrine that S. Mathewes Gospell c. is diuine Scripture be such a Principle of faith as it selfe is also a point necessary to be beleeued and that by the same infallible faith by which we beleeue the blessed Trinity Or that it is so a Principle as it selfe is not to be beleeued at all by faith or by the same faith by which wee beleeue the blessed Trinity If the first be said then either the opinion of Protestants who say nothing is to be necessarily beleeued as a point of faith which cannot be prooued out of the Scripture is false or else this is not a Principle indemonstrable as M. White affirmeth If rhe second be said then it followeth that Protestants do not beleeue by faith S. Mathewes S. Marks Gospell c. nor any other booke in the Bible to be diuine Scripture and consequently not hauing assurance of diuine faith in this point they cannot haue any faith at all in any other points since other points being not otherwise in a Protestants iudgement points of faith then as they are conclusions prooued out of Scripture cannot be more assuredly knowne then Scripture it selfe which is the onely Premise or Principle whence Protestants deduce all other points of their faith 1 MY Aduersary in a In THE WAY §. 9. but in his printed booke cap. 7. his treatise that I answered to shew that the Scripture is not the Rule whereby to find and iudge of true faith obiected the insufficiencie and imperfection thereof because there be diuers questions and points of faith not contained and determined therein Which he endeuours to proue by this argument here set downe Whereto I answered directly and in forme as b THE WAY §. 9. n. 3. inde the booke will shew The which my answer in this place he replies to as you see after his ordinary manner with bragging and saying nothing and casting out a few insolent speeches The Protestants struggle with this argument One may easily see how they sticke in the mire Onely two things to the purpose It seems M. White saw the weakenes of his answer c wherto I answer 2 First he sayes we struggle with this argument and sticke in the mire which in some sense I may not deny for when I vndertooke this Iesuit I struggled with a dunghill and therefore * Hoc scio pro certo quod si cuÌ„ stercâ—re c. no maruell if for my penance I sticke in the mire both here and in many other places of this reply his bragging and railing and facing it out with nothing when yet all this with many shall be accepted for sound diuinity being such as will bemire and weary any man in the world that desires nothing but the truth Otherwise my answer was direct and plaine for the point he is to proue is that the Scripture alone containes not nor determines the whole obiect of our faith but diuers points needfull to be beleeued are wanting in it and must be supplied by the authority and tradition of the Church his reason to proue this is the
whereof all this question rises 5 Our Aduersaries holding many points of religion which we refuse we require them to shew vs the said points in the Scriptures if they will either haue vs to beleeue them or free themselues from heresie their Tradition their Purgatory their Masse their Latine seruice their Transubstantiation their Images their seuen Sacraments their Inuocation of Saints and all the rest wherein we differ * This is shewed c. 28. n. 3. Their answer is that many diuine truthes and articles of faith are not contained in the Scriptures but reuealed by Tradition and Church authoritie which are to be receiued and beleeued as well as that which is written * The original cause why the Papists set a foot the question touching the insufficiency of the Scripture This is the originall reason why they stand thus against the sufficiency of the written word for their Church authoritie and to proue this they vse the Argument here propounded by the Reply and descant with it as you see Which is an impertinent kinde of proceeding when this point whether the Bookes contained in holy writ be Gods word is no question betweene vs but agreed vpon of all hands but the question is touching other speciall articles Images adoration halfe communion and such like a number more whether not being contained in the Scripture men are bound to beleeue them For touching these things it is properly that we say Nothing is necessary to be beleeued as a point of faith which cannot be prooued euidently by Scripture And therefore this argument is impertinent For where we affirme all points of faith to be comprised within the body of the Scripture we distinguish first of the things which we say are comprised for albeit we firmely hold the diuine truth and authoritie of these Bookes to be euident in themselues yet the points that we meane in this question are touching other matters for neither they nor we deny the Scripture but both they and we deny many things to be contained in it Secondly then againe of the manner how things are comprised for all other things are comprised in Scripture as the duty obedience of subiects is in the kings lawes and as true speaking is contained in Grammar or the right forme of resoluing in Logicke but this one point is so contained as light is in the Sunne or sweete in hony and according to the same notion whereby the authoritie of the Law and truth of Principles is contained in themselues This is it which very briefly I answered in * THE WAIE § 9. 3. digr 11. n. 17. two seuerall places of my Booke Now let us see what the Iesuite replies to it To this saith he I reply that principles insciences are either euident to vs and knowne by the onely light of nature and so neede no proofe but onely declaration of termes or words in which they be vttered or if they be not euident to vs they must be demonstrated either in the same science or in some superiour science by some other principle more euident to vs. But that these Bookes which are in the Bible are diuine Scripture is not euident therefore if M. Whites similitude be good it must be demonstrated by some other principle more euident to vs that these Bookes which are in the Bible be diuine Scripture The substance of his Reply is that all principles are either euident of themselues or not euident such principles as are euident he grants need no prouing but the Scriptures are principles of religiō not euident of themselues but such as need to be demonstrated to be Gods word by some other principle in a higher science more euident to vs both denying them to be euident and also to be made so by onely declaring the words wherein they are vttered And to proue this he saies in the margent if it were euident that these Bookes in the Bible are diuine Scripture how is it onely beleeued by faith for Saint Paule cals faith Argumentū non apparentium Heb. 11.1 1. My answer is that the Scriptures are principles euident of themselues to those that haue the Spirit of God and such as need not to be proued by Church authoritie but onely to be reuealed and expounded according to that which is in themselues This my answer to helpe the reader out of the Iesuits perplexed discourse I will lay downe and explicate in 3. propositions First the Scripture in diuinitie hath the same office that principles haue in sciences that as the rules and principles of Grammar teach all true speaking and as the elements of Arithmeticke teach all right numbring so the doctrine contained in the Scriptures teaches all true faith Secondly as they are the principles of religion and rule of faith so they enioy the same priuiledge that principles do in forren Professions that is to be receiued and assented to for themselues without discourse For e Atist Poster c. 1. no humane science proues it owne principles or disputes against him that denies them and although the principles of an inferiour science may be demonstrated in a superiour yet this befalles not that which is the highest as the Metaphysicks which hauing no superiour science neither stands to demonstrate it selfe nor to receiue demonstration from another but our vnderstanding assents immediatly to the principles thereof and so goes forward by them to discerne of other things In the same manner the Scripture hauing no superiour science or rule aboue it is like these principles receiued for it selfe and is not occupied in prouing it selfe and the principles therin contained but shewing other things by them it selfe must be assented to without discourse by faith before we can argue out of it Thirdly all demonstration and proofe of principles is onely voluntary not necessarie against him that denies them as in Musicke the Musitian demonstrates his precepts not thereby to teach his arte but to conuince him that denies it Hence appeares the insufficiency of my aduersaries reply First in that he saies principles are not euident but need demonstration that so the Scriptures being yeelded to be the principles of religion yet they should not be receiued vnlesse they proue themselues vntill the authoritie of the Church come There is no man acquainted with f Principia per seipsa nata sunt cognosci reliqua verò per principia Arist prio l. 2 c. 18. idem Procl in Euclid l. 2. c. 2. humane art will say so His owne Thomas g Tho. 1. part q. 1. art 8. sayes that like as other sciences do not argue to proue their owne principles but out of the principles argue to shew other things so the sacred doctrine doth not argue to proue the owne principles but from them proceeds to shew something The same is said by h Capreol prol in 1. part q. 1. pag. 24. Greg. Valent. tom 1. pag. 50. a. others Next it is false that the Scripture is like those principles which need
d Luc. 1 70. God spake by the mouth of his holy Prophets therefore it is expresly written that all the bookes of Scripture are Gods word Any man may see this answer to be full his question being touching this Scripture that we vse and haue in our hand where therein it was written that it selfe is Gods word For I answer that it is written in these three places whereof he hath here rehearsed two Now he replies that he doth not onely enquire how we proue in generall that there is any diuine Scripture at all but how we proue these bookes which the Church now vses to be the same that those men writ whose titles they beare which he sayes cannot be proued by the Scriptures alledged because it may still be doubted whether these bookes that we vse as the Gospell of Matthew and Marke for example be part of that Scripture which the texts alledged affirme to be inspired of God and it must likewise be proued that these texts that affirme this are themselues the word of God Whereto I answer first that granting these places to proue some diuine Scripture to be and to be inspired of God it must be granted that the Scripture may be proued so to be by the Scripture it selfe For these sentences All Scripture is giuen by inspiration Holy men spake as they were moued by the holy Ghost and such like places could not proue so much as in generall that any bookes at all whether it were these that we vse or no are diuine Scripture if themselues were not diuine I say they could not proue it truly and effectually they might say it but they could not proue it because that which shall proue it must it selfe first be a diuine testimonie Secondly prouing some diuine Scripture to be and to be inspired they proue this that we vse to be such because they so mention the Scripture they speake of that it appeares to be this that we vse and it is agreed vpon of all hands that there is no scripture but this and therefore speaking of some scripture they speake of this This is my argument That Scripture whereof the sentences alledged speake is proued thereby to be diuine But the sentences alledged speake of the same Scripture that we vse For the Church hath alwayes vnderstood it so The sentences therefore alledged proue this Scripture that we vse to be diuine And so my aduersaries demaund is satisfied I enquire not onely how it is proued by Scripture that there is some diuine Scripture which is inspired by God but that these bookes in particular are that Scripture For if it giue any testimonie at all to any Scripture at all it is to these bookes in particular which are now vsed in that it describes these bookes neither are there or haue there bene any other nor dares the Church of Rome it selfe hitherto canonize any other howsoeuer some therein think it may 2 To this my aduersarie replies that before these sentences can sufficiently proue the Scripture to be diuine they must themselues be supposed to be diuine which cannot be proued by themselues if Tradition be excluded I answered this e Digr 12. in my Booke whereto he hath replied neuer a word but stands dumbe and offers the Reader that which I answered in stead of a Reply to my answer neuerthelesse I answer againe that all places in the Scripture which affirme the Scripture to be Gods word are proued to be Gods word by themselues and their owne light and not by Tradition or Church-authoritie which is but the ministerie whereby God reueales the proofe to vs and it selfe is iudged by the Scripture For if the Church-authoritie make them to be canonicall and diuine * For that is it properly that the Papists say Bellar. Stapl. Grego to vs then it is either by adding truth diuinitie authoritie to them which they had not before in themselues by diuine inspiration or onely by declaring and reuealing to vs that truth diuinitie and authoritie which they haue immediatly from God of themselues before the Church approued them that we might see and confesse it The former our aduersaries will not say or if they will it is Atheisme worse then blasphemie for so all our faith and the highest reason mouing vs to beleeue should not be diuine reuelation but humane authoritie and the Scripture which of it selfe had no truth or diuine inspiration should be canonized by men If the latter which our aduersaries dare not denie then who sees not that they proue themselues and in themselues haue diuine authoritie immediatly from God the Church-authoritie in approuing them being nothing else but bare ministerie in respect of the Scripture though in regard of vs it be authoritie in helping vs to see that which is in themselues When the King stampes coine and signes it with his image and superscription he puts that valew and currentnesse into it that was not there before Thus a small peece of copper of it selfe originally not worth a penie may be made worth sixe pence Thus the Church authorizes not the Scripture Stapleton f Staplet relect pag. 505. in explicat art sayes The Church approues not the Scripture the first way by making it sacred diuine for this approbation it hath onely from the holy Ghost the author thereof of whom alone it hath to be sacred and not humane nor the second way by making that through her iudgement it should be accepted for true and worthy credit because that which is in the Scripture is the diuine truth BY IT SELFE AND IS NOT MADE TRVE BY THE APPROBATION OF THE CHVRCH But the third way in that by the force of her approofe and iudgement they are accepted of the faithfull for sacred and diuine and infallible true And thus we beleeue these Scriptures to be Canonicall for the testimonie of the Church The King sends a commission vnder seale by a messenger this messenger giues no authoritie to the commission but is the Kings minister authorized to propound it to the subiects Thus the Church giues testimonie to the Scriptures that it is diuine and no otherwise and it selfe fetches this testimonie from the Scripture and all the authoritie thereof is lastly resolued into the testimonie of the Scripture 3 Next these Scriptures are proued to be diuine by their owne light shining and by their owne vertue shewing it selfe in them as sweetnesse is knowne by it owne taste and the Sunne seene by it owne light and as the Kings coine is knowne by his image vpon it and the fathers voice is knowne to his children by the sound and fashion thereof so are these Scriptures by the heauenly light image and sound inspired into them knowne to be the word of God The aduersaries against whom I deale haue here with Turks and Infidels debarred me from alledging Scripture to proue it selfe and therefore I will shew it otherwise Canus a Papist g Can. loc l. 2. c. 8. pag. 13.
of all this vehemencie against the authoritie of the Scripture it selfe is but vnder the name of Church-authoritie to make roome for their Antichristian tyrannie and by outfacing vs from that which we sensibly feele wrought in our conscience by the holy Ghost to abandon our selues ouer to the most hereticall and damnable authoritie of whatsoeuer the Pope and his creatures shall thrust vpon vs. 7 But that which my aduersarie infers vpon my speech that hence because we say the children of God and particular men are assured of the Scriptures and sense thereof by the Spirit of God for I said no more nor any way denie the iust authoritie of the true Church proceeds our audacious and impudent neglect of the authoritie of ancient Fathers generall Councels and whatsoeuer stands against vs I can scarce paste ouer with any reasonable patience for the Fathers and Councels in things that they held certainly and determinately with consent a THE WAY §. 44 p. 3. ibi D gr 47. I purposely shewed we allow and follow and in euery question will stand to but when our aduersaries themselues cannot denie that there is not onely the diuine truth but a heauenly light also whereby to see iâ— in the Scriptures themselues that is not put into them by any testimonie of the Church whereby a simple man may be able to discerne an error in any Father or Councell what fault is it in vs by this light to iudge of Fathers and Councels Occham b Dial. pag. 18â— sayes Catholicke men may learne many truths not knowne before by the sacred Scriptures although the Pope and Cardinals haue not formerly attempted to declare them And whereas possible some may say that the simple people are to beleeue nothing but what the Pope and Cardinals deliuer to be beleeued expresly nor ought to search the mysteries of the Scriptures but be content with common things not presuming of their owne vnderstanding to beleeue any thing expresly but what the Pope and Cardinals deliuer BVT HE THAT SHOVLD SAY THVS WERE AN INVENTER OF NEW ERRORS for though the simple people be not ordinarily bound to beleeue expresly any thing but that which by the Cleargie is already declared to be beleeued expresly yet these simple people BY READING THE SCRIPTVRES and THE SHARPNESSE OF THEIR REASON which simple people do not altogether want may finde something EVIDENTLY to follow of the diuine Scriptures which the Pope and Cardinals haue not declared in which case they may and must expresly beleeue it and are not bound to enquire of the Pope and Cardinals because they are bound to preferre the Scripture before them And the reason of this is for THE POPE AND CARDINALS ARE NOT THE RVLE OF OVR FAITH The Diuines of Venice in their late writing against the present Pope lay downe these conclusions c Tract de in terdict prop. 8. The law of God is the rule of the Popes power d Prop. 12. Christian men may not obey the Popes command vnlesse they first examine it and he that inconsiderately obeyes before such examination sinnes e Prop. 13. It excuses not a Christian man though the Pope constantly affirme his commandement to be iust but it behoues him to examine it and to direct himselfe according to the rule giuen aboue Gerson f Part. 2. recom licent pag. 832. sayes The spirit of a iust man now and then giues warning of the truth better then seuen watch-men set in a high place to watch Do not g Quis enim sant capitis diceret sententiam amplectendam solius Papae quae potest errori subesse postponendam sententiam Ecclesiae Anton. de Rosell monarch pag 67. Dico quod postqâ—am Concilium est congregatum Papae authoritas in teruenit authoritas Papae postea confundi tur cum Concilio remanet forma Concilij authoritas Papae congregantis finitur facta congregatione Iacobat de Conc. l. 10. art 6. pag. 614. D. Cum agitur de fide Synodus est maior quà m Papa Zabarell de schism pag. 701. A. The same is directly holden by Almain de author eccles cap. 7. pag. 725. F. Occham compend erro cap. vlt. sub fin And the Diuines of France at this day Lib. de eccl polit Pet. de Alliaco de eccles author part 3 cap. 2. pag. 924. Mariana sayes Multi viri prudentes graues eruditione maxima Pontifices Romanos Ecclesiae vniuersae subiecerunt de Reg. l. 1. cap. 8. pag. 74. Note the speech of Almain Determinatis per summum Pontificem non est necessario credendum quamuis non sit oppositum publicè dogmatisandum nisi manifestum sit ea sacris literis c. Quest in Vesperg pag. 133. the strongest champions the Church of Rome hath limit the Popes authoritie making it subiect to the Church and allowing men to examine it afore they obey it which shewes vnanswerably that in the Scripture it selfe for that also is granted at the last to be the the rule whereby to trie him is a light which may be seene by a priuate person against the Popes commandement and vnlesse they assume an vnlimited authoritie and such as is subiect to no triall to their Church and Pope which the violentest aduersary we haue dare not do they shall though they be wrangled till dooms day be enforced to grant the same authoritie and light in the Scripture that we affirme 8 Againe before my aduersary had charged vs with audacious and impudent neglect of Fathers and Councels he should haue answered the 47 Digression of my booke where I haue related those practises of Papists in contemning reiecting eluding purging abusing both Fathers and Councels that if they had any sparke of grace in them they would be ashamed to charge others with that impudency and audaciousnesse which none are guilty of so much as themselues I will rehearse nothing of that which there I writ but adde something to it whereby the Reader shall iudge who they be that most impudently and audaciously neglect antiquity D. Marta in a booke dedicated to the present Pope h D. Marta de iurisdict part 4. pag. 273. sayes the common opinion of the Doctors is not to be regarded when the other opinion contrary to them fauours the power of the Keyes or the Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction or a pious cause This man speakes plaine that one may vnderstand him the Fathers all of them must crouch to the Keyes and pious cause of the Pope which Keyes and cause when they come to scanning will prooue as partiall as any priuate spirit in the world And touching the interpretation of the Scripture Baron i An. 34. n. 213 sayes the Bishops all of them who succeeded in the roome of the Apostles attained not the sence and vnderstanding of the Scriptures for the Catholicke Church now turned Protestant and priuate doth not alway and in all things follow them How then I am no lesse delighted k
Pined in Iob 19 v. 26. nu 3. sayes a Iesuite when I see and heare some wise man of our age as Fran. Suarez a Iesuite for example and vpon occasion bring him into my Commentaries then when I cast mine eyes vpon many of the ancient Fathers Here antiquity must giue place to a Iesuite and yet if the Protestants do but one halfe of this they are audacious and impudent vpon their bold presumption This is that Erasmus l Annot in Hieron Praef. in Dan. tom 3. p. 28. noted of them long agoe When it is for our purpose the authority of Hierome is woorth any thing when otherwise it is not for our purpose it is worth nothing and afterward they condemne vs because we beleeue them not The examples how they cast off Fathers and Councels and all antiquity are innumerable they do it in euery question that fals out betweene vs whensoeuer they ioyne in the triall with vs and they confesse that they may be refused because they may erre Guido the Carmelite m Guido de Perpin de haeres c. 7. pag. 8. edit à Bad. Ascens an 1528. sayes Albeit the writings of the holy Doctors be to be handled and read and receiued with due reuerence yet is their authority neither so firme nor inuiolable but it may be lawfull to contradict them or doubt of them where they are not prooued and confirmed euidently and expresly by the holy Scripture and where the Church hath not determined their firme and vndoubted soothfastnes Whence it followes that an opinion cannot precisely be conuinced of heresie by the saying of the Doctors for where where is not infallible truth there is no certaine faith since certaine faith leanes vpon infallible truth yea there can be no infallible assent that a man should firmely cleaue to such things for when there is no infallible truth there can be no certaine and vndoubted faith But in the saying of the Doctors there is no infallible certaine or vndoubted truth partly because they sometime doubt themselues in their owne sayings whether they haue erred therein or no partly because their disagreement is a testimony of falsity and what disagreement there is among the Doctors no man doubts that hath read their writings It is not necessary therefore vndoubtingly to beleeue them but it is lawfull to THINKE AGAINST THEM DISALOW THEM AND REIECT THEM without any danger of heresie So he And yet you see how busily my aduersary taxes Protestants for neglecting the Fathers like the crabfish that chid her yong one for creeping backward and yet went backward her selfe it were an honester course and more relishing of piety for our aduersaries to spare our dissenting sometime from the Fathers as they do their owne onely inquire whether we dissent with reason as themselues sometimes do but this were labour and expence a Iesuites pen can afford railing and facing a great deale better cheape CHAP. XXI 2. Which is the Militant Church 3. And the Catholicke 4. The Church of the Elect inuisible 5. A rancid conceite of the Iesuite Pag. 113. A. D. This Church which consisteth of Professors M. White * White pag. â—9 100. calleth the Church Militant that which consisteth onely of the Elect he calleth the Catholicke Church but to keepe the Antithesis he should rather call it the Church Triumphant not Triumphant as we Catholickes take the name for the happiest part of the Church which is now glorious in heauen but as it being a Church inuisible in earth may triumph indeed as hauing no need to feare any persecutions in that none in time of persecutions can finde theÌ„ out nor can know them nor consequently can persecute or hurt theÌ„ for being members of Christs true Church But as in this respect it may be called the Church Triumphant so on the other side it may be called the Church Lamentant as hauing so iust cause to lament in that the members of it being vnknowne not onely to the world but to one another can haue no societie one with another requisite to the nature of a true Church nor can performe those offices which should be done in and onely in the true Church nor can tell whom to repaire to for instruction in faith or for counsaile in direction of manners or for the comfort of the holy Sacraments nor can haue any knowne Pastours to gouerne the Church nor any knowne sheepe to obey these Pastours nor can haue any Historiographer to write their actes thereby to edifie men with the vertues exercised by them or so much as to make it appeare to posterity that such a company hath bene according to Christs promise alwaies extant in the world In this respect it may be called a Church Lamentant or a Lamentable Church 1 MY Aduersary being in a deepe discourse about the persons and societies of men to whom alone God vouchsafes the assistance of his Spirit for the vnderstanding and beleeuing the things of faith thinks himselfe interrupted by a speech of mine in the place quoted touching the Church Militant and Triumphant the which if he had misliked he should haue confuted in it owne place where I vsed it to shew the true state of the question concerning the visiblenes of the Church saying the question is of the Militant Church though we say also that the Church mentioned in the Creed euery member whereof is saued be in some sort inuisible too in that the Church Triumphant in heauen which is one part of the Church mentioned in the Creed is to vs that liue here inuisible and onely beleeued This speech my Aduersary according to his disordered and cowardly Method vsed in all his booke durst not confute in it owne place where it lay but drawes in backwards by the taile into the den of his discourse as * Apollodo de orig deorum they say Cacus did the oxen he stole from Hercules that he might the better descant vppon it when his Reader by this his glancing at it cannot know the purpose whereto I intended it nor the ground whereupon I affirmed it 2 That which he sayes is foure things First that I call that which consists of Professours the Church Militant the which you see he mentions so that one would thinke he meant to condemne it yet he dares not but onely craftily repeats it to expose it to censure with the rest that followes for a Catech. Roman pag. 112. edit Colo. an 1507. Bellar. Eccl. mil. c. 1. his owne side speakes in the same manner D. Bannes b 22. pag 94. edit Venet. apud Dâ—mian Zâ—nar 1602. sayes The Church which VPON THE EARTH LIVES IN WARFARE is called Militant One way as it is a congregation of such as professe the faith of God another way as it is congregated not onely by faith but also by Baptisme In this therefore there is no fault but all is well for this part of the Church on earth that liues in the Camp warfaring with the
seemeth to yeeld me for he saith that the rule must be easie White pag. 10. and plaine to all sorts of men learned and vnlearned to wit which vse the meanes and are diligent in attending to it and be enlightened with the Spirit of God to all such saith he it is plaine be they neuer so vnlearned to the rest it is not Neither is it saith he a necessary condition of the rule so to be not because it is obscure at any time but for that sometimes men haue not eyes to see into it c. This which he hath said of being enlightened with the spirit had need to be declared If he meane that one must be first endued with faith and in that sence lightned with the Spirit before he can vnderstand the determinate sence and meaning of that which is appointed by God to be the ordinary rule and meanes to instruct men in faith then it is false that to be enlightened with the Spirit is required as a necessary condition for so one must be supposed to haue faith before he can by the ordinary meanes be first instructed in faith so the ordinary meanes were needlesse for the end to which it was appointed For what need were there of an outward ordinary meanes to instruct men first in faith when they are already supposed to be by the spirit sufficiently enlightned with faith If he meane onely that the Spirit of God must assist and concur with mans vnderstanding in a speciall manner to enable the vnderstanding to apprehend the instruction propounded by the meanes and to make it yeeld assent of faith so I shall not striue with him as hauing in * Introd q. 6. the Introduction affirmed as much Onely I would haue him note FIRST that it is not the Protestants spirit whose illumination is required to true faith as o Ibid. there I haue shewed SECONDLY that the true Spirit of God whose assistance is necessary is ready through the merits of our Sauiour Christ to assist all men sufficiently to the attaining of the truth and that no man who hath receiued exciting grace to moue him to seeke find and attend vnto the ordinary rule and meanes appointed by God for mens instruction in matters of faith need feare want of necessary assistance of Gods Spirit to concurre with him but rather had need to feare least himselfe be wanting to the gracious assistance of Gods Spirit in being negligent to concurre with it so much as he may and ought and least in steed of following Gods Spirit he suffers himselfe to be misled with the spirit of Sathan transfiguring himselfe into an Angell of light whose propertie is to withdraw men from the secure ordinary meanes of the doctrine of the Church to follow priuate instincts so coloured with seeming sentences of Scripture as though they were the very instincts of the holy Ghost The third propertie to wit vniuersality is meant that the rule and meanes doth extend it selfe to all points of faith so far as it is or may be necessary to saluation In which sence I do not perceiue my Aduersaries to gainesay Onely the question is WHETHER and HOW all points of faith be necessary to saluation The which question I haue resolued in the Introduction and in the fourth Chapter where I do determine all points of faith to be necessary to be beleeued explicitè or implicitè of all sorts and that none is indifferent or such as may be lawfully misbeleeued especially obstinately at any time by any persons and that although all be not necessary to be knowne at all times expresly by all persons yet they are or may be necessary so to be knowne at least at sometimes and by some persons in the Church and consequently there must be an vniuersall ordinary rule and meanes sufficient to instruct and to resolue all sorts of men in all points of faith at such times and in such sort as need shall require thereby to hinder men from misbeleeuing any and which may tell them determinately when controuersies arise whether this or that point be necessary to be knowne and beleeued expresly by all or onely some of the Church and by whom Besides these three properties of the rule and meanes White pag. 10. M. White would haue other two But either they are not necessary or else they be sufficiently included in these which I haue set downe For if the rule bee knowne to be infallible it little skilleth to our present purpose whether there be any higher rule whereupon it doth depend or no or whether the case which is to be ruled by it concerne the thing it selfe which is assigned for the rule or some other thing for where infallibility is partiality need not be feared neither need one seeke a higher rule when he knoweth the rule which he hath to be infallible 1 MY Aduersaries last conclusion was that the rule of faith must haue three properties 1 To be infallible that shall not deceiue vs. 2 Easie to be vnderstood of all sorts of men learned and vnlearned 3 Vniuersall to shew what is the truth in all points Touching my answer hereto he sayes foure thing FIRST that I grant these three properties to be required in the Rule in some sence The first that it must be infallible and the last that it must be vniuersall I grant simply without any limitation and this is true SECONDLY touching the second condition of being easie he expounds himselfe that he meanes so easie that without miraculous illumination or extraordinary and excessiue difficulty any sort of men may vnderstand the meaning of it and sayes M. White seemes also to yeeld him this The which I did in these words The rule is easie and plaine to all sorts of men learned and vnlearned that vse the meanes and are diligent in attending it and be inlightned by the Spirit of God to such it is plaine be they neuer so vnlearned to the rest it is not nether is it a necessary condition of the rule so to be not because it selfe is obscure at any time but for that sometimes men haue not eyes for want of diligence or Gods illumination to see into it for all meanes and rules are vaine vnles God giue eyes to see This exposition wherby I declared in what sence the rule must be vnderstood to be easie he distinguishes and sayes If I meane no more but that the Spirit of God must helpe our vnderstanding in a speciall manner to enable it to apprehend and yeeld to that which the rule propounds he will not contend with me But if my meaning be that a man must first haue faith and in that sence be inlightned before he can vnderstand the meaning of the rule then he sayes my saying is false and sets downe a proposition against it that to be endued with faith is not required as a necessary condition to the easines of the rule which is a needlesse limitation For first I mentioned not
faith but the illumination of Gods Spirit whereof faith is an effect 2. Himselfe in those words the Spirit of God must assist and concur with mans vnderstanding not onely in generall to preserue the faculty thereof but in a speciall manner to enable it to apprehend and yeeld confesses as much as I said or could meane taking my words in all their latitude 3. If faith be taken in one particular sence as sometimes it is for the receiuing of diuine illumination into the heart as a darke roome when the window is opened or a candle is brought in receiues light then it is true * â—rgo ante fidem absque fide intelligi Scripturas posse affirmas Hoc si tibi absurdum non videtur plus quam Pelagia nus es D. Stapl. de author script c. 8. §. 16. that the heart must be endued with faith before any man can vnderstand the rule and yeeld his assent to it vnlesse he will hold Pelagianisme neither doth my Aduersaries argument conclude any thing against this for the vsing of the rule and this faith go together as the opening of the eye and light concur to seeing Therefore as he that seekes a thing in a blind roome first opens the window and lets in light and then applies his eye with the helpe of that meanes to the obiect so though it be supposed that faith cannot be had before the rule instruct vs yet this light of Gods Spirit which is the beginning of faith as the medium whereby the rule is vnderstood goes in order before it As in all our sences * Nihil agit in distans nisi primo agat in medium Allias â—â—â—ct de anim c. 8. part 3. the way from the sence to the obiect is disposed by the medium But if faith be taken in the whole extent for the knowledge and assent of all that which is reuealed then I grant the rule must go before 2 Thirdly touching illumination of the Spirit which we both agree is necessary for the vsing and vnderstanding of the Rule he will haue 2. things noted First that this is not the Protestants spirit Whereunto I answer it is neither the Protestant nor Romish nor any priuate spirit much lesse the Popes spirit a Shewed Ch. 35. whereby alone they breathe that thus charge others with priuate spirits but the Spirit of God that is b 1 Cor. 12.6 giuen to euery man to profit withal Secondly that this Spirit of God is ready to assist all men at least sufficiently to the attaining of the truth and that no maÌ„ whoÌ„ grace hath excited to vse the rule need feare any want thereof but all men rather had need feare least themselues be wanting to concurre with this Spirit and least in stead of following the Spirit of God they suffer themselues as all they do that follow the Church of Rome to be misled by the spirit of Satan transfiguring himselfe into an Angell of light c. The which I am also well pleased to note and commend backe againe to himselfe and all of his sect who refusing the light of the Scripture that so euidently detects their errors haue suffered themselues to be seduced by the spirit of Antichrist * Apoc. 13.13 who hath transfigured himselfe into an Angell of light and broaching his owne priuate conceits yet colours all with the stile of S. Peters successour and seeming authority and spirit of the Church when the Primum mobile of all Papistry is now become the Iesuited Popes sole instinct 3 Fourthly he mislikes that besides these 3. properties of the Rule I would haue other two Vnpartiality that it be addicted to no side and Authority to conuince that there might be no appeale from it But these conditions I added for the better explication of the rest and to exclude the Church of Rome which is so partiall that it begges to be it owne iudge and so vnable to support the cause since that the clearest definitions thereof are still called in question by themselues as c Digr 36. I made demonstration The which being the true reasons of his mislike he dissembles and onely replies that these conditions are either not necessary or else included in the other 3. the former of which is not true the latter that they be included in the condition of infalliblenesse I will not contend about onely I noted them for the more distinct and particular explication of that which must belong to the Rule And so in this point there shall be no variance CHAP. XXVII 1. The Repliers terginersation 2. 3. The state of the question touching the sufficiency of the Scripture alone and the necessity of the Church Ministrie 3. The speeches of diuers Papists against the perfection of the Scripture 4. In what sence Scripture alone is not sufficient Pag. 177. A. D. Concerning the seuenth Chapter if my aduersaries did not ignorantly or wilfully peruert the state of the question they could not haue had colour to make so long discourse about this Chapter as they do both make My question was not whether Scripture be the rule of faith but whether it alone be the rule and meanes ordained by God to breed in men that one infallible entire Faith which is necessary to saluation This my question my aduersaries peruert FIRST in that they would gladly as it seemeth make men beleeue that we exclude Scripture from being in any sort the rule of faith and thereupon * Pag. 10 11. M. Wootton maketh speciall opposition betwixt the Scripture which they assigne and the doctrine of the Church which we assigne for the rule of faith whereas we make no such opposition at all but hold the Scripture as propounded to vs by the Church to be part of that which in the tenth Chapter I call the rule of faith For by the doctrine of the Church which there I cal the rule of faith I do not meane any humane doctrine as humane is distinguished from Diuine but do account the same doctrine whether written or vnwritten which is called diuine because it was first immediatly reuealed by God to the Prophets and Apostles to be also Church doctrine because it is propounded interpreted and applyed in particular to vs by the Pastours of the Church This my aduersary might haue vnderstood euen by the very title of this Chapter in regard I said not the Scripture is not the rule of faith but Scripture ALONE is not the rule of faith SECONDLY they peruert the state of the question in that they take the rule of faith otherwise then I do and otherwise then according to the drift of the precedent Chapters wherupon this present Chapter doth depend they ought to do For whereas there may be distinguished in this matter First that which is a rule of faith but not the ordinary sufficient meanes ordained by God to breed faith in men viz the diuine reuealed verities as they are in themselues Secondly that which is so an
words seeming plaine are to be vnderstood properly as they sound and when they are to be taken in a figuratiue or improper sence This say I is not to be learned sufficiently in the bare letter of Scripture alone but is to be learned of the Church according to that worthy saying of Vincentius Lyrinensis Vincent Lyr. cont haeres c. 2. Because all men do not take the holy Scripture for the height of it in one and the same sence but diuers men interpret the sayings of it diuersly in so much that almost so many different sences may seeme possible to be drawne from it as there are diuers men c. Therefore it is very necessarie that the line of Propheticall and Apostolicall interpretation be directed according to the rule of Ecclesiasticall and Catholicke sence True it is that by other probable meanes viz. rules of art knowledge of tongues obseruation of circumstances conference of places c. one but not euery lay-man woman and childe euen of M Wotton and M. Whites owne parish may probably finde out when the words are and when they are not to be vnderstood properly but infallibly in such sort as to build thereupon infallible assent of faith one cannot without infallible interpretation had either immediatly by reuelation of the Spirit which is not ordinarily to be expected or by infallible authoritie of the Church True it is also that ordinarily Diuines hold it for a certaine rule that words of Scripture are to be vnderstood properly as they sound vnlesse to auoide some absurditie we be compelled to interprete by a figure But when such an absurditie occurreth that ought to compell vs to interprete plaine words of Scripture by a figure and when not although reason it selfe may probably know which probable knowledge may suffice for direction of manners yet infallibly in such sort as is required to the assent of faith reason alone not assisted by Church authoritie cannot at the least alwayes tell sith many things may seeme absurd to our priuate sence and reason which in truth are not absurd as in the mystery of the blessed Trinitie may plainly appeare and contrariwise many things may seeme in reason not absurd which in true Diuinitie are absurd and most false 1 HIs second reason against the Scriptures being the rule of faith was their obscuritie because they faile in the second condition of the rule being of themselues alone so obscure and vnknowne both to the vnlearned and learned that no man can thereby alone be sufficiently directed This reason was handled § 7 and 8. where I answered the argument whereby he prosecuted it and euery word also that he replies here which makes me to wonder with what conscience he followes his cause when that he sayes here being answered he shrinks from replying and onely repeates his old argument againe and yet intitles his booke a Reply when he replies nothing but conceales all from his Reader that I answered neuerthelesse that he sayes I will answer againe 2 First he tels in what sence he holds the Scripture to be obscure and how farre forth Not that it cannot by any meanes be vnderstood or that it is any imperfection in the Scripture to be obscure but the perfection rather the onely thing he goes about to proue being that de facto it is obscure or at the least not so easie as the ordinary rule of faith ought to be which is denied and confuted not denying some parts to be obscure as many prophecies and mysteries therein nor affirming any of it to be so effectuall to our vnderstanding that without the motion of Gods Spirit and vse of the meanes euery man can effectually vse it to his saluation for I neuer denied the requisite condition of Gods grace and the Churches teaching and our owne endeuour to open our vnderstanding euen in the plainest Scripture that is but I onely affirme all things concerning faith and good life needfull to be knowne to be so plainly set downe therein that the vnlearnedst man aliue vsing the meanes which is not the Church-authoritie intended by my aduersary and being enlightned with Gods Spirit may sufficiently vnderstand them to his saluation which is enough to make it a rule perfect entire and as easie as is possible for a rule to be for the finding out and deciding whatsoeuer matter belongs to faith For howsoeuer some things in the Scripture the knowledge whereof is not simply necessary to saluation be very obscure and doubtfull yet the whole rule of our faith needfull to all men is set downe so plainly that it may be vnderstood of all men allowing them some eleuation and onely supposing them to haue the light of grace and to take that paines in searching that is ordinarily required in the vse of any rule and in the execution of any meanes whatsoeuer It seemes my aduersarie would conclude from hence that therefore I grant Scripture alone not to be so easie as the rule of faith ought to be because I require so many euen outward meanes and helpes for the vnderstanding thereof beside the helpe of Gods Spirit within vs. But he is deceiued and deceiues his Reader for I expounded my selfe that it is not necessarie the rule be so easie and effectuall that no helpe shall be needfull for the applying it to our conscience but the perfection and easinesse of it stands in this that a man vsing diligence and eleuated by grace from his naturall ignorance shall finde therein absolutely and plainly all things whatsoeuer he is bound to know and beleeue and needs not that the Church by her authoritie and traditions should adde any thing to it that is not contained in it And that this condition of vsing meanes and outward helpes takes not away the reason of a rule he must confesse by his owne principles for let his Church-teaching and authoritie his owne Helena be the rule yet afore any man can determinately know it or vnderstand and yeeld to it he must I hope haue the grace of the Spirit and seeke it out and diligently attend what it teaches him which is as much as we require for the vnderstanding of the Scriptures This therefore is a vaste partialitie in my Iesuite that he will conclude a thing cannot be a sufficient rule or meanes that requires the helpe of grace and a mans owne industrie in the applying it when themselues holding their Church to be the rule yet confesse that no man can heare the voice thereof not vnderstand nor yeeld assent to it without the very same meanes that we require for the vnderstanding of the Scriptures What voice what complaint what querimonie shall we vtter against this peruersnesse against this spirit of contradiction But my aduersarie sayes that among these outward meanes and helpes which M. White requires to the vnderstanding of the Scripture besides the Spirit of God there must be one an outward meanes which is * There is no such outward infalible means in this life
Scripture D. Stapleton a Relect. p. 462. sayes The Church is the ground and pillar of truth in a higher kind then the Scripture namely in the kind of the efficient cause And b Pag. 494. in explicat qu. the authority of the Church may be vnderstood to be greater then the authority of the Scripture because it is not simply subiect or bound to it but may by it authority teach decerne something which the Scripture hath neither determined nor taught The things which the Church teaches do as much binde the faithfull as those things which the Scripture teacheth we Catholickes affirme that the Church is to be heard more certainely then the Scriptures because the doctrine thereof is more manifest and euident then the doctrine of the Scriptures or at the least equally with the Scriptures because the authority thereof is no lesse irrefragable and infallible The Scripture is the booke of the Church the testimonie of truth which the Church testifies the law of God which the Church hath publisht the rule of faith which the Church hath deliuered We had wont to maruell at the blasphemies c Illyric clau script p. 541. Hos de express verb. Dei of Cusanus Verratus Hosius That the Church hath authoritie aboue the Scripture The Scripture as it is produced by heretikes is the word of the Diuell A Councell is the highest tribunall and hath the same power to determine any thing that the Councell of the Apostles and Disciples had The things written in the Gospell haue no soundnesse but through the determination of the Church c. But now you see the same renewed in that Church to this day and the Iesuits in the midst of their learned subtilties to be as grosse as the grossest Friars preferring their Church authority farre aboue the Scriptures or any vse that a Candlesticke can haue in shewing the candle Note FOVRTHLY what it is that the Protestants say touching the authority of the Scripture and the Church so much as belongs to the present occasion First that the Scriptures haue in them a light and an authoritie of their owne sufficient to prooue themselues to be the word of God and to giue infallible assurance to all men of the true sense and this light and authority is not added increased or multiplied by the Ministry of the Church or any thing that it doth about the Scripture Secondly this light and authoritie of the Scripture shines in vs and takes effect in vs then onely when the Spirit of God opens our hearts to see it The defect of which heauenly illumination is the reason why some neuer and the elect themselues at all times do not see it but it argues no defect of light in the Scriptures Thirdly the means whereby God opens our eies and hearts to see this light and authoritie in the Scripture is the Ministry of the Church I expound my selfe it is the ordinary and publike meanes wherto he referres men And this Ministry is by preaching and expounding the Scripture out of it selfe and perswading and conuincing the consciences of men yet priuately and extraordinarily when and wheresoeuer this Ministry failes or ceasses the light and sense of the Scripture is obtained by the Scripture alone without this Church Ministry and the Scripture alone in this sort immediately at sundry times by it selfe giues full assurance and workes all other effects in our consciences that it doth when the Church propounds it Fourthly the Scripture is so sufficient of it selfe both to reueale whatsoeuer is needfull to be knowne and to establish and assure our heart in the infallible faith of that it reueales that the Church hath nether authority to adde so much as one article more then is contained therein nor power to giue this assurance from any thing but from the Scripture it selfe So farre forth that THE WHOLE TEACHING AND DOCTRINE AND AVTHORITIE OF THE CHVRCH IS TO BE ADMITTED AND YEELDED TO OR REFVSED ACCORDING AS IT CONSENTS OR DISAGREES WITH THE SCRIPTVRE the fountaine of truth the rule of faith Note FIFTLY what our aduersaries meane by the Church and the meanes whereby the Church executes her authority what the things are which by her authority she may do and what the proper effect is that this authority workes in vs. First by this Church d This is shewed c. 35. nu 1. c. 36. nu 1. they vnderstand the Church of Rome for the present time being and therein the Pope in whom they say the whole power and vertue of the Church abideth Secondly the meanes whereby it executeth her authority is vnwritten Tradition out of the which it supplies all things pretended to be needfull for the exposition of the Scripture or the defining of matters that must be beleeued Thirdly the things that she may do by her authoritie are all things that appertaine to the questions of religion 1 Cus epi. 2. 3. 7. to expound the Scripture after her owne iudgement 2 Conc. Trid. sess 24. can 3. to dispense against the Scripture 3 Stapl. princip l. 9. c. 14. relect pag. 514. to canonize new Scripture that before was none 4 Stapl. ibi relect p. 494. inde to giue authority to the Scripture 5 August de Ancon qu. 59. art 1. 2. to make new articles of faith 6 Gl. de transl episc Quanto §. veri to make that to be the sence of the Scripture that is not Lastly the effect of this power is the same that the Scripture breeds and more 7 Grets defens Bel. tom 1. pag. 1218. c. obedience in all that will be saued so that the world is bound as much to the Popes definitiue sentence as to the Scripture or the voice of God himselfe 8 The speech of all the canonists for Christ and the Pope make but one tribunal 9 Capistran de author Pap. pag 130. He is aboue al like him that came downe from heaueÌ„ 10 Capist ibi For with God and the Pope his will is sufficient reason and that which pleases him hath the vigor of a law 11 Palaeot de consist part 5. q 9. after his sentence pronounced no man must doubt or delay to yeeld 12 Petrisedes in Romano solâ—o collocata libertate plena in suis agendis per omnia poteri debet nec vlli subesse homini Gl. ibid. vbi sup yea all the CouÌ„cels and Doctors and Churches in the world must stoop to his determination 5 These fiue things thus obserued it is easie to se that our aduersaries attribute more to the Church then to be onely a meanes for the communicating of that which is in the Scripture to vs expounding the authority thereof that it exceedes the latitude of a Candlesticke and is turned into the Candle it selfe And so to returne to my aduersaries answer and to conclude I thus reason The Ministery and authority of the Church is required either
onely as a condition to instruct vs and leade vs to the knowledge and assurance of that which is contained in the Scripture it selfe or else as a meanes to reueale vnto vs some thing that is not conceiued in the Scripture But not of the latter for all articles of faith are in the Scripture Therefore the former Therefore the Scripture alone is the rule of faith 6 My aduersarie saies it troubles vs that he sayes there be diues questions of faith which are not expressely set downe nor determined in the Scripture Whereto I answered that this was not the question for if by expressely he meant written word for word in so many syllables then the rule is not bound to containe all things thus expressely it being sufficient if all things needefull were contained therein in respect of the sense so that it might be gathered from thence by consequence the question not being in what manner but whether any way at all the whole and entire obiect of our faith be reuealed in the Scripture though some part thereof be gathered but by Consequence from that which is written expressely in so many syllables To this my aduersary replyes that it troubles vs sore to be thus conuinced with the euidence of the matter that we cannot deny it but are driuen to confesse diuers sustantiall points not to be expressely set downe But he is deceaued it troubles vs not a whit would this hatefull guise of bragging and talking of Conuincing when nothing is graunted but that which belongs not to the question troubled vs no more For no Protestant affirms all things to be written expressely but onely that All things belonging to faith are written in such sort that we haue in the Canonicall bookes either expresse wordes as plaine as any man can speake or infallible sense which any man by vsing the meanes may vnderstand for euery article of faith whatsoeuer Neither did D. M. Luther or any of the learned Diuines of our Church whom my aduersary in his canting language calles his new Masters euer hold otherwise He sayes by our leaues this was the question first when our Grandfather Luther was so hoate to haue expresse Scripture that he would haue all expressed euen in words c. And biddes me see Gretser in his defence of Bellarmine But by his leaue Gretser and he both speake vntruly and he absurdly For he so quotes Gretser that a man would thinke Gretser had shewed out of Luthers writings some places wherein Luther required expresse Scripture euen in wordes which he doth not nor Bellarmine whō he defends could do but be reports in English what Gretser lied in Latine and then biddes see Gretser when there is as little in Gretser to this purpose as in himselfe If M. Luther and the Diuines of our Church confesse many things not to be written verbatim in expresse syllables as it is not thus written that infants must be baptized or that Christ is consubstantiall with his Father do they therefore confesse they are not written at all or will himselfe conclude the Scripture wants that which is not written in so many words Is the true sense and meaning of the words nothing are they not as well conclusions of Scripture which are deduced by true discourse as which are expressed verbatim doth not Picus e Theorem 5. sub sin say such are most properly conclusions of faith which are drawne out of the old and new Testament or by good connexion depend on those that are drawne doth not the Cardinall of Cambrey f 1. q. 1. art 3. p. 50 h. say They are conclusions of diuinity not onely which formally are contained in Scripture but also which necessarily follow of that which is so contained And before him g Prolog sent qu. 1. art 2 pag. 10. f. Rom. edit Aureolus another Cardinall In the second manner of proceeding when we goe forward from one proposition beleeued and another necessary or from both beleeued to inquire of any one that is doubtfull no other habite is obtained but the habite of faith the contrary whereof are heresies in which wordes we see he affirmes a going forward from that which is certainely beleeued because it is expresly written to that which is gathered by discourse and makes this latter also to belong to faith I know few of the schoolemen deny this whereupon it followeth manifestly that it is reputed to be within the contents of the Scripture not onely which is expressed in words but also which is so in sense and good consequence In which manner I haue prooued vnanswerably that all the whole obiect of faith is expressed CHAP. XXXI Wherein the place of 2. Tim. 3.15 alledged to proue the fulnes and sufficiencie of the Scripture alone is expounded and vrged against the Iesuites cauills A. D. To my answer of the Protestant obiection whereas I say Pag. 190. the Apostle affirming the Scripture to be profitable doth not auouch the alone sufficiency of it Whereas also secondly I say it is rather profitable in that it commendeth the authority of the Church which is sufficient M. White replieth against the first part of this my answer White pag. 55. that when the Apostle saith the Scripture is profitable c. he meaneth that it is so profitable that a man by vsing it may be made perfect to euery worke and thereupon thus he reasoneth We do not say Scripture is profitable Ergo sufficient but it is profitable to euery thing Ergo sufficient I answer that this consequence is not good Piety is by S. Paul said to be profitatable to euery thing doth it therefore follow that it is sufficient in such sort that there need no other helpe or meanes to be ioyned with it to attaine whatsoeuer thing M. Wootton and M. White seeme to reason more strongly yet weakely enough to this effect That is sufficient which is able to make a man wise to saluation and which is profitable taking the word profitable as expounded by the word able to make one absolute and perfect c. But the Apostle affirmeth Scripture to be able and profitable to the foresaid purposes Ergo. To this I answer that if they had put into the argument the word alone of which all the question is it would more plainly appeare how it proueth nothing Secondly I might say that the Apostle speaketh of the old Testament Wootton p. 97 as M. Wootton granteth yea of euery parcell thereof as the word Omnis signifieth yet I hope that neither M. Wootton nor M. White will say that now the old Testament without the new and much lesse euery parcell of the old is of it selfe alone sufficient for all the foresaid purposes For if so what need were there of the new Testament or of the other parts besides any one parcell of the old Thirdly I say that the word profitable is not to be expounded by the word able and if it were the word able doth not signifie that the Scripture
Scriptures make the Church perfect by cōmending it to it self for thē the Apostles should speak thus by my aduersaries exposition the Scriptures are profitable to make the Church perfect by commending to it the authority of the Church and yet he defendes it First because it sendes them Pastors Pope Councell and all to the interpretations of Councels and Fathers of the ancient Church But then I demand how did they make perfect the ancient Church it selfe the first Councels and Fathers of whom the Apostle speakes as well as of the latter for they had none to retire to but the Scripture onely Secondly because the Pastors of the Church sustaine two persons one as publike Pastors authorized to teach another as priuate men needing instruction themselues and so the Apostle saies the Scripture sends them as priuate men to themselues considered as publike men inabled as need shall require to define the truth in any point the which is an irkesome answer to any that shall consider it for although a Pastor be considered these 2. waies yet it is false that is assumed that he which as a priuate man erres and is ignorant yet as a publike person is able to direct himselfe and others and define the truth this I say is a trick to mocke an ape with though it be all the shift they haue to defend the Pope from being a formall hereticke and yet admitting it to be true that the Pastors of the Church considered as priuate men are sent to themselues considered as publike men yet it cannot be true that the Scripture makes thē perfect this way by sending and commending them to themselues because the perfection auouched is the effect of that teaching that reprouing that correcting that instructing which is contained in the Scripture it selfe and not in the authoritie of man whither the Scripture is imagined to send vs. For all that the Apostle in this text affirmes is of the Scripture alone as appeares 7 Besides my argument I alleadged some testimonies of Chrysostome and certaine Papists to iustifie my exposition wherein they affirme as much out of the text as I doe whereto he replies that the said testimonies must either be explicated to mean that the Scriptures are able to instruct vs with the meanes of Church authority or else be taken without limitation if they be thus explicated they proue nothing against him if they be taken without limitation they proue as much against vs as against him I answer to the first the testimonies are to be seene and the words thereof are so full that they cannot be thus explicated as for example Chrysostome in his words expounds S. Paul to distinguish the Scripture against his owne ministry Thou hast the Scripture to teach thee in steed of me if thou desire to know anything there thou maiest learne it that which can teach vs in steed of the Church Pastours can teach vs without their authority if God as Antonin says hath spokē but once that in the Scriptures that so fully that he speakes no more how can the meaning be that other authority should be ioyned with them for so God should speake twice once in the Scriptures another time in the Church and in the Scripture so far from fully that he needs speake againe in the Church The like may be said to the other testimonies but I refer the iudgement to the conscience of the Reader To the second if these words be taken without limitation that alone without any means ioyned to thē they are able to instruct vs they proue as much against me as against him that its maruell I should haue so little iudgement I demand and why so I pray because then they will make as much against our Church ministery as against his Church authority which had bene spoken to the point if we by Church ministry had meant either the same or as much as he doth by Church authority but when his Church authority intends a supply of that which is wanting in the Scripture by traditions our Church ministry no more but a simple cōdition of vsing the meanes to make vs see that which is contained in thē which ministry also we do not hold to be alway vnto all persons necessary he may let our iudgements alone and take a new reckoning of his owne that is so simple as to make alike things that are so far vnlike his Church authority and our Church ministry CHAP. XXXII Touching priuate spirits that expound against the Church 1. Such priuate expositions refused by the Protestants 2. And yet the Papists haue no other All teaching is to be examined euen by priuate men 5. Certaine propositions shewing how the Church teaching may be or may not be examined and refused Pag. 196. Wootton p. 110 White pag. 62. A.D. Concerning the ninth Chapter M. Wootton and M. White both seeme to disclaime from immediate teaching of priuate spirits and consequently seeme to grant the substance of the conclusion of this Chapter in such sense as it was principally intended by me yet wheresoeuer they be vrged to tell how they infallibly know that there is any Scripture at all and that these and no other bookes be Canonicall Scripture and that this or that is the true interpretation and sense of this or that text of holy Scripture vpon which questions well resolued the whole frame of their faith doth depend after alledging other reasons drawne from rules of art and knowledge of tongues c. which they know to be infallible they must be forced finally to flie for infallible assurance either to the immediate teaching of their priuate spirit or else to run the round betwixt Scripture and priuate spirit in such sort as I haue shewed in the Introduction Introd q. 6. and hence it seemeth to proceed that they both thought fit to make answer to my reasons which they needed not to haue done if the conclusion of this Chapter had no waies bene contrary to their doctrine White pag. 59. 60. M. White before he begin to answer my reasons distinguisheth a double meaning of the word priuate which I put in my conclusion and saith that if I meant it as it is opposed ô strange opposition to diuine and spirituall I said well but vsing it as we Catholickes do as it is opposed to common he saith that a priuate man may so be assisted with the Holy Ghost that he may interprete Scripture truely and infallibly against a company as big as the Roman Church 1 HIs third conclusion touching the rule of faith was that no priuate man who perswadeth himselfe to be specially instructed by the spirit can be this rule of faith specially so far foorth as he teaches or beleeues contrary to the receiued doctrine of the Catholicke Church the which I granted to be true but admonished the Reader withall that he had a further reach therein then yet he made shew of For his intent was to condemne all particular men and
Churches that should either refuse or examine the publike faith of the Church of Rome which he meanes by the Catholicke Church as Wickliffe Hus Luther and the Churches of England Scotland and Germany haue done the which his intent the rather because the Diuines of his Church are so a Proh nefaÌ„dum hominem Caluinus poeta Cynadus stigmaticus errare non potest Ecclesia tamen Christi sponsa errori est obnoxia Vna Geneua euibrato è sole radio coruscat Ecclesia autem in tenebris squalet conticescit West de tripl offic l. 3. pag. 337. violent therein I confuted by answering all his arguments which marching against priuate spirits I easily perceiued to be meant against the Protestant Churches casting off the papacy Now let vs see what heresies first he sayes that I seeme to disclaime from immediate teaching of priuate spirits and to grant the substance of his conclusion in that sense wherin it was principally intended He affirmes two things of me First that I seeme to disclaime the immediate teaching of priuate spirits This I grant and wish that himselfe and his sectaries by our example would likewise disclaime the priuate spirit of the Pope b Sicut coelum generat corrumpit ista inferiora alterat variat ipsa nihil tamen istorum inferiorum insurgit contra coeluÌ„ vel appellat contra ipsum sed patienter tolerat quicquid coelum operatur in eâ—s siue per generationem siue corruptionem siue alterationem sic potest as Papalis tanquam celestis ita potest omnes inferiores potestates tam Clericorum quam Laicorum generare cerrumpere alterare quia nulli licet insurgere vel appellare contra ipsum August Triumph sum de eccl pot q 6. â—â—t 5. Sententia Papae est praeferenda sententiae omnium aliorum Ioh de Turrecrem sum de eccleâ— l. 3. c. 64. concl 1. Sententiae Papae standuÌ„ est quando contradicit sententiae totius Concilii Ioh. Andrae quem refert Syluest sum v. Concil n. 3. Papa absque Concilio reuocat gesta in Concilio Si Papa Concilium diuersas constitutiones edant praefertur constitutio Papae tanquam maioris authoritatis Ioh. Capistran de author Pap. pag. 105. Jn pontifice totam esse Monarchiam spiritualem ipsius potestatem ab omni regula quae coarctet absolutam esse Hieâ—on Alban de potest Pap. pag. 125. n. 122. Summus pontifex tanquam agens vniuersale ecclesiasticas omnes potestates veluti agentia particularia sua authoritate continet Palaeot de consist pag. 61. Probatione non indiget Cardinalium aut aliorum consensum in rebus consistorialibus definiendis nullatenus necessarium esse pag. 25. Ad ostendendum Papae primatum super omnia potestatem dicitur corporalis in orbe Deus Dominic Iacobat de concil p. 653. edit Rom. per Anto. Blad 1538. who determines aboue beside and against the publike spirit of the whole Church Next that consequently I seeme to grant the substance of his conclusion as it was principally intended by him this is false for though I allow the conclusion yet not his principall intent which c In the WAY § 58. inde afterward he discouers to be against our Diuines Church that resisted the Papacy d §. 60 , 57. alledging this reason against them that they were but priuate men and a few of them lately sprong vp against the vniuersall Church Which was the cause why I distinguisht 2 senses of the conclusion the one seeming in the words the other lurking in the intent and this latter I confuted 2 Secondly he sayes notwithstanding we seeme to disclaime priuate spirits yet we are finally forced to flie to them againe No maruell when he sayes it but say on how are we inforced and by what necessity Because whensoeuer they be vrged How they know there be any Scripture How they know these bookes to be Scripture How they know this or that to be the sense of the Scripture they are forced finally to flie for infallibly assurance to the immediate teaching of their priuate spirit or else to run the round betwixt Scripture priuate spirit This is vntrue For we ground not our faith of these things or any thing vpon our owne spirit but vpon the Spirit of God bearing witnesse with our spirit and speaking vnto vs out of the Scripture it selfe in the middest of the Catholicke Church in this manner that euery one which is inlightned of God no other can haue assurance any way but remaines in vnbeleefe as Gentiles Atheists and Heretikes doe feels the holy Ghost testifying these things to his heart and infallibly assuring him by the Scripture it selfe which light of the Spirit of God shining to our spirit is the formall reason of beleeuing the which spirit if my Aduersary will deny or call a mans owne priuate spirit or measure whether it be Gods Spirit or noe by the agreement thereof with the Church of Rome and the Popes will when themselues are part of that that must be tried by the Spirit of God let him go for an Atheist and one that renounces the habit of infused faith which is not resolued into any thing e Actus sidei infusae est credere Diuinae veritati propter se Aquar in Capreol p. 43. e. but the authority of this spirit or if he distast that let him looke vpon two principles holden by his owne Diuines f Staplet princi doctr fid pag. 274. Triplicat pag. 183. The first that the internall perswasion of the Holy Ghost or the alone habite of faith infused is so effectuall that thereby ALONE WITHOVT THE TESTIMONY AND TEACHING OF THE CHVRCH a man may beleeue that is to say be infallibly assured of any thing that must be beleeued The second that g Greg. de Valent tom 3. p. 32. AlexaÌ„d Pesant in Thom. p. 479. the propositioÌ„ of the Church is beleeued to be infallible for the reuelation of Scripture giuing testimony to the Church which reuelation of the Scripture is beleeued FOR IT SELFE These principles affirming that without any authority of the Church by the Spirit of God alone a priuate man may be infallibly assured and that the Scripture prouing to vs the infallible authority of the Church is lastly beleeued for it selfe let him shew if he can so that we may vnderstand him that it must needs be a priuate spirit of a mans owne whensoeuer by the Scripture alone without and beyond the authority of the Church we rest contented and assured of that we beleeue For before the Church authority and after it and without it men may be infallibly assured by Gods Spirit in their hearts by meanes of the Scriptures beleeued therefore knowne and vnderstood in themselues Againe they hold the Pope to be the supreme Pastour yet thinke h Occh. op 90. dierum cap. 1. that in case of heresie one may appeale from him to a superior
iudge and i Gi. d. 19 Auast §. in concilio in a difficult cause whether of faith or right he must call a Councel where if the Councel he cannot agree in deciding but are contrary k AntoÌ„ de â—â—o â—eâ—â— Mon â—â—h â—â—ct de concil p 47. â—urtâ—â—eÌ„ d. 19. Sâ—cundum E câ— n. 6. then they of the two must be followed which haue the best reasoÌ„ l â—urâ—ecrem d. 40. Si â—â—pa n. 4. Simaâ—ch Cathol instit tit 12 n. 13. when the faith lies in danger the Cardinals or a CouÌ„cell may resist the Pope in all which cases how shall a priuate man or a whole nation be infallibly assured of truth the Pope may erre he may erre definitiuely against a CouÌ„cell he may be an hereticke he may be resisted the Councell also may erre the faith may be indangered therefore men must try their reasons all this is confessed Where now is this iudge that my aduersary talkes of neither the Pope nor a Councell is it for men must follow them of the two that had the best reasons who shall iudge of their reasons the Christian people whom the cause concernes And by what can they iudge but by some thing distinct from both Councell and Pope and aboue them both which is the m So Occham GersoÌ„ Panorm The Diuines now of Venice and Paris in their tractats of this matter Scripture or nothing And for so much as no man can vnderstand the Scripture without Gods Spirit therefore in the case propounded our aduersaries must allow both Pope and Councell to be tried by priuate spirits as much as we do the teaching of the Church Let the most zealous and learned Papist that liues consider this and he shall perceiue that what we meane when we say The Scripture is the supreme rule and the true sense thereof is assured vnto vs lastly and authoratiuely by the Spirit of God themselues are driuen to hold as well as we Therefore whatsoeuer my aduersary hath rabbled together in his Introduct it is no more a circle in vs to proue our spirit by the Scripture and againe to be assured of the Scripture by the Spirit then it is in discourse to go too and fro betweene causes and effects But * See D. R. Field 2. part Append. p. 12. § 5. 6. where this point is shewed effectually it is himselfe and his owne Diuines that runne the round 3 Thirdly he saies that I needed not haue answered the reasons of his conclusion if the conclusion had not bene against our doctrine but this is idle for I answered the reasons because of that which the conclusion intended Good wordes especially with equiuocators may haue a bad purpose in which case the sense must be distinguisht and that which is false confuted 4 Fourthly he saies 2. things about my distinguishing of the word priuate For the vnderstanding whereof note that his conclusion being No priuate man perswading himselfe to be instructed by the Spirit can be the Rule of faith I answered that if he meant priuate when he sayes so often in the proces of his argument priuate spirits as it is opposed to diuine and spirituall he said well but vsing it in another sense as it is opposed to common and vsuall his conclusion was vntrue To this he replies first ô strange opposition but this he doth onely by the way because he would not loose a Parenthesis His head being so full of mentall reseruations that it makes his booke breake out all ouer into Parentheses as if it were full of the Measels for when particular men and priuate spirits do not erre by reason of their small number but by holding against that which is diuine and spirituall what such strange opposition is it to oppose the priuate spirit against the diuine Spirit of God and a priuate man against him that is spirituall In this sense No priuate mans spirit can be the rule if by priuate he meane not that which is not so common but that which is not diuine and spirituall But this is not worth the standing on his second exception is against the matter of the distinction For I said a priuate man may be so assisted by the holy Ghost that he may interpret Scripture truely and infallibly against a company as bigge as the Romane Church To this he replies denying my supposition that it is not to be thought the holy Ghost assists any that expoundes the Scripture contrary to the vniuersall Catholicke Church the which I thinke too and therefore this is not the point in question when we both agree but the point is whether these priuate men and spirits being expounded to be Luther such as he was with the Churches that cast off the Papacy this Catholicke and vniuersall Christian Church being expounded as it is by our aduersary to be the Papacy or Roman Church theÌ„ whether the priuate coÌ„pany may not haue Gods Spirit and the great company want it and so consequently the said priuate company be able to haue the truth against that which A. D. calles the Catholicke vniuersall Church for we affirme it Not by saying that Luther or any of our side had Gods Spirit or saw any truth which the true Church did not see but that they had and saw the the truth in the middest of the Church against the Papacy which now ridiculously is stiled the Catholicke vniuersall Church And therefore my aduersay and all of his side do but trifle away time in opposing the vniuersall Church against M. Luther vntill they haue proued the Papacy to be it and Luther with such as followed him no part of it For he resisted not the Catholicke Church but the Papacy in the Catholicke Church A. D. I do not deny but that a priuate man Pag. 196. supposing he were indeede assisted by the holy Ghost might interpret Scripture truely and infallibly against a company as bigge as the Romane Church supposing this company were not so assisted But herein consisteth the chiefe point of the question whether it be to be thought that the holy Ghost doth indeed or not assist one or some few priuate men who presuming that they are so assisted do interpret the holy Scripture in such sense as is contrary to the sense of the holy Catholike or vniuersall Christian Church whether it be Romane or not I do not now dispute this we shall see hereafter which as I shall proue is vndoubtedly knowne by the promises of Christ to haue the assistance of the holy Ghost This being the point in question my conclusion in this Chapter is that no priuate man pretending neuer so much to be spiritual or specially inspired is to be thought indeede inspired by the holy Ghost when he interpreteth Scripture as Luther and his like did in a sense contrary to the vnanime interpretation of the precedent and then liuing Pastours of the Catholicke Church and consequently it is not to be thought that the priuate spirit
the Papists must shew by some certaine and pregnant proofe that Luther and we that refuse the Papacie haue not this light and testimonie which is not done by saying it is a priuate spirit not common to the Church For all this is denied The Spirit that giues vs this assurance is the Spirit of God the same which is common to the true Church The Spirit which inclines to humilitie order and vnitie And the persons that lay claime to this Spirit did neither presume nor rush into the text The reformation that Luther began was sought with peace and order and euen with teares nor expound it as they listed but what they held they learned of the Church not of the Romish faction and contagion that ouerspread the Church but of the true Church of God that remained in the midst of the Papacie and in former ages followed the Scripture And of this I forewarne all Papists that when they please to leaue these emptie clamours and go roundly to the point enquiring what order and humilitie Luther vsed when he first dealt against the Papacie and what Church he followed it will be iustified against him that the pride and peruersnesse and disorder that was was on their owne side and themselues were departed from the true Church These priuate men whom the Replier meanes with all humilitie and good order by supplication disputation mediation both to the Pope and Christian Princes sought the redresse of abuses their complaints were laid open before all the Courts in Germanie France Spaine England Italy Denmarke and the Christian world all countries laid downe their grieuances against the Church of Rome and openly complained of the Papacie o The Pope in his businesse with the States of the Empire about the reformation of the Church could not denie this We know saith Pope Adrian that in this holy Sea of Rome there haue bene of late yeares many abhominable things many abuses in spirituall things and excesses and all things peruersly turned vpside downe And no maruell if the disease be gone downe from the head to the members and from the Popes to inferior Prelates All we the Prelates of the church haue turned aside euery one to his owne wayes of a long time therehath not bin one that did good no not one We took vpon vs the yoke of this great dignitie to be Pope onely that we might reforme the deformed Catholik Church Adrian 6. instr pro Fra. Cheregat pag 173. Fascic rer exp fug edit Colon. 1535. The abuses errors tyrannie and oppression preuailing in this Church of Rome noted complained of by many in all ages as they grew Bernard Agobard Occham Marsil de Rosate Clemangis Aluarus Gerson Alliaco Auentine c. See this point handled by D. Field l. 3. c. 7. and in his Append. added to that chapter as departed from the doctrine and canons of the ancient Church But particularly what order humilitie and respect of vnitie was in Luther when he opposed himselfe shall best appeare by p Tom. 7. Wittemb 22. pag â— his owne words All this time wherein the cause of Religion hath bene heard before the Emperour and in many great assemblies touching that which belongs to the Pope and his Bishops vpon desire of publicke peace and safetie as much as could stand with Gods truth we haue caried our selues lowly enough that they might if they would haue vnderstood long ago that we did not aime at the weakening of their power to change the present state of things or the Ecclesiasticall pollicie of the Church WE PLAINLY AND EXPRESLY PROFESSED AS OVR BOOKES BEARE WITNES THAT IF THEY WOVLD NOT CONSTRAINE VS TO ARTICLES OPENLY IMPIOVS AND BLASPHEMOVS WE WOVLD DEFEND THEM IN OTHER THINGS But when reuerently and suppliantly PROSTRATE at their feete we onely demanded MOST IVST THINGS IN THE GREATEST MATTERS and for the publicke good we were not counted worthy to obtaine any thing but wisedome is driuen away from among them and THINGS ARE CARIED WITH STRONG HAND They will constraine vs from the manifest truth against our wils to receiue their abominations WITH WHAT RIGHR OR WRONG THEY DEALE WITH VS THEY CARE NOT BVT THE VPSHOT IS THIS THEY WOVLD HAVE THE TRVTH AND VS BY ANY MEANES SVPPRESSED THIS THOV LORD IESVS CHRIST THE SONNE OF THE LIVING GOD WILT IVDGE For when as like Pharaoh they be hardened against THE TEARES of suppliants peraduenture their end presses vpon them c. Thus the Pope with his Cleargie proudly contemning all things and deluding the world with promises of reformation and persecuting with fire and sword such as complained the first reformers by this tyrannie and dissembling were driuen to leaue the Papacie as the seate of Antichrist and the neast of all heresie and abhominations The which is so true that our aduersaries haue purged and forbidden the bookes containing these complaints and raile vpon vs when wee produce or mention them as this Replier doth vpon mee throughout his booke and most impudently denie them and vse other the most dishonest shifts that euer were which makes it plaine that they dare not enter this triall but with noise and scurrilitie outface all things that leade that way I haue said it often in my writings and here I say it again * Nec moueor clamoribus Epicureorum aut hypocritarum qui aut rident aut damnanâ— manifestam veritatem sed verè statuo consensum perpetuum esse Catholicae Ecclesiae Dei hane ipsam doctrina vocem qua sâ—naâ— in Ecclesiis nostris Philip. Melancth praef in 2 tom Luth. THE ABVSES AND CORRVPTIONS OF THE COVRT AND CHVRCH OF ROME WERE SEEN MISLIKED AND COMPLAINED OF BY THE BEST MEN AND WISEST STATES THAT WERE BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER LVTHER OPPOSED HIMSELFE AND THE ARTICLES OF RELIGION WHEREIN THE REFORMED CHVRCHES STAND AGAINST THE IESVITES ARE THE MANIFEST DOCTRINE OF THE SCRIPTVRES AND ANCIENT FATHERS AND WERE HELD BY DIVERS OF THE BEST LEARNED IN THE CHVRCH OF ROME EVEN IN THESE LAST 700 YEARES THE DOCTRINE LATELY DETERMINED BY THE TRENT COVNCELL AND NOW SO VIOLENTLY DEFENDED BY THE IESVITES BEING NEVER GENERALLY OR VNIFORMLY RECEIVED IN THE CHVRCH OF ROME BVT BROACHED AND PVT FORWARD BY THE FACTION OF SOME THEREIN AGAINST THE REST. 7 And whereas the Replier sayes we haue no ground to assure vs which may not in like maner and with as good colour be alledged by others whom our selues confesse to be deceiued I answer that we do not onely alledge the Scripture the Spirit of God the Church the Pastors therein which any hereticke may do but we alledge them truly q Varim quideÌ„ diuersus ex vno tamen fonto haereticâ— prauttatis error emersit cardo pessimus origo maloruÌ„ quae ex se cunctarum impâ—etatum occasioneÌ„ peperit haec estâ— dum celestium dictorum virtus vitio male intelligentium temerata non secundùm sui qualitateÌ„ sensus perpenditur sed in alias res pro
arbitrio legentis sic us quam veri ratio postulat deriuatur Vigil l. 2. pag. 553. contr â—utych 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Clem. Alexan. Strom. l. 7. pag. 322. edit Commelin ann 1592. which no hereticke may do The Papists alledge the Church So do the Greekes theirs the Armenians and Ethiopians theirs The Papists alledge the successions of their Popes so do the Greeks the succession of their Patriarks Chrysostome sayes r Op. imperâ— hom 49. pag 1101. All those things that belong to Christ in truth heresies may haue in schisme and in shew Churches Scriptures Bishops the orders of Cleargie men Baptisme the Eucharist and all things else The diuell also alledged Scripture but did he therefore giue ouer the Scripture No. But as Ierome Å¿ Comment in Math. 4. sayes The false darts of the diuell which he tooke out of the Scripture our Sauiour breakes with the true shield of the Scripture A Scripture ill cited t Concord c. 14 saith Iansenius he beateth backe with another Scripture truly alledged as it were one naile with another The Replier must therefore proue that they which alledge the Scripture or the Church or the Spirit of God against vs do it in like manner with as probable colour as wee alledge it for our selues But this cauill I answered in the WAY on the same page that my aduersarie quotes whereto he replies onely by repeating that I answered and so comes to railing 8 For hauing obiected that it is not Gods manner to teach men immediatly by himselfe but by the meanes of his Church and the Pastors therein I answered that these whom he cals priuate men had their knowledge by meanes of the Scripture truly taught in the Church but the Papacie was not this Church nor the Priests thereof those Pastors whom God had put into his Church To this he replies as you see that I am impudent and it is maruell his owne blacke face blushes not to vtter such a shamelesse vntruth Let him name if he can what Pastors those were that taught Luther and Caluin vnlesse he will allow the Diuell to be a Pastor whom Luther confesses to haue taught him his doctrine against the Masse I answer that the Pastors which taught Luther and Caluin their doctrine were of foure sorts First the blessed Apostles whose ministerie extends it selfe to all ages Next the Doctors and Pastors of the Primitiue Church and long after whose doctrine also in all substantiall points and namely in that wherein they forsooke the Papacie they stedfastly embraced when the Papacie had cast it off Thirdly the learned men whom God in many ages afterward raised vp to preach against the Papacie as it grew Such as were Bernard Wickliffe Husse the Waldenses and diuers others Fourthly many ordinary Pastours of the Church of Rome it selfe who being defiled with much of the Romish corruption yet in many things were sound and taught soundly the truth which truth such as Luther was might learne euen among Heretickes as S. Austin did a good exposition of Tyconius the Hereticke by the Scripture might be able to iudge betweene that they taught truly and that they taught otherwise u Refert Gabr. lect in can 57. h There were in the Church of Rome that taught pardons to be of no force to helpe soules in Purgatory * Durand 4. d. 20. qu 3. Caiet tract de indulg c. 1. p 211. b. that their vse is by no authority of the Scripture or Fathers diuers taught x Occh. Lyr. Hug. Dionys Turrecrem Picus Caietan whom see before the Apocrypha not to be Canonicall Gerson y Declarat compend defect eccl n. 67. complained of the abuse of images The same z Serm. de Natiu Mar. consid 2. Gerson a 3. part q. 68. art 1. 2. 11. Caietan taught that Infants vnbaptised might be saued b Sacramental pag. 30. Waldensis against the merit of workes c 2. d. 26. per tot Ariminensis against the power of nature and freewill d Lect. 4. in rom 3. lect 4. in Gal. 3. Aquinas for iustification by faith onely e De vit spiritual anim concl vnic Coroll 1. in 3. part operum Gers Paris 1606. Gerson that all sinne is against the law of God and none is veniall of it nature f Almain Occh. Gers Maior others to this day famously knowne The Sorbonistes of Paris taught against the Popes Monarchy the Greeke Church also held many things against the Papacy touching Priests mariage Purgatory c. There is no article of Luthers or Caluins doctrine but it was taught in the Church of Rome before them g Praef. in tom 2. operum Luther Melancthon sayes that he often heard Luther make report how an old man among the Austine Friars at Erford confirmed him in that opinion which is so much obiected to him touching speciall faith and he adds that before he stirred there were many in the Church of Rome which did inuocate God aright and held the doctrine of the Gospell some more some lesse such as was that old man who shewed Luther the doctrine of faith 9 That Luther confesses the Diuell to haue taught him the doctrine against the Masse is vntrue He onely reports how the Diuell in a spirituall h That it was no more will appeare to him that reads the whole discourse especially toward the latter end temptation to bring him to despaire accused him for saying Masse and the more to terrifie him layed many true reasons against the Masse before him whereby to let him see the foulenes thereof that so he might driue him to desperation as to bring any man to despaire of Gods mercy he vses ordinarily by true and effectuall reasons to accuse the sinne whereof he is guilty Not to perswade him to hate or leaue the sinne but to bring him to say with Cain My sinne is greater then can be forgiuen i An easie thing it were to obiect as much to the Iesuites touching their fellowes and Ignatius himselfe their founder but let God be iudge of these things Hasenmuller who spent much time among the Iesuites and was of their religion makes this report Turrian the Jesuite hath often told me that Ignatius Loiola both at meat and Masse and in his recreations vsed to be vexed with the Diuel that he should sweate as cold as one that were ready to die Bobadilla told him that he would oftentimes complaine that he could neuer be quiet for the Diuel molesting him Turrian said the Diuel was his daily companion euen to the altar where he vsed to say Masse c. Hasenmull hist Iesuit c. 11 pag. 427. We can giue them a bead-role of Popes that haue had familiarity with the Diuel more then this commed to I know how scurrilously our aduersaries obiect this of Luther but their malice armed with all the wit and skill they haue can neuer euince it to be otherwise then I
haue said A. D. Whereas I obiect that sectaries and the Diuell himselfe doth alledge words of Scripture Pag. 202. White pag. 64. M. White granteth it but saith he either they alledge not true Scripture or not truly applied as also they alledge the authority of the Church but either not the true Church or the true Church not truly Testimonium hoc verū est This which M. White granteth is the very truth and wanteth nothing but that he apply it to his priuate men Luther and Caluin and to his owne selfe Partiality will not suffer him to apply it thus but there is no reason that he should be iudge it is more fit that the iudgement of this matter be left to the Catholicke Church which he confesseth to be taught of God White pag. 63. 10 If my answer be true that when sectaries or the Diuell alledge Scripture or the Church they do it not truly let the Repliar giue ouer bragging and shew really that the Protestants haue not alledged these things truly And if it be no reason we be iudges our selues no more is it that the Pope and Papacy which k Nomine Ecclesiae intelligimus eius caput id est Romanum Pontificem Grego de Valent pag. 24. tom 3. Quod autem haec regula animata rationalis sit summus Pontifex non est hic locus proprius probandi Fra. Albertin Coroll p. 251. c. No maruell now though the Catholicke Church were so fast talked of he meanes by the Catholick Church be iudge but were it at that that we might haue a free Councell assembled and holden as Councels were of ancient time where the Pope and his faith might be tried as well as we it would soone appeare the Protestants haue not bene partiall in their cause when the late Trent Councell it selfe had come nearer vs then it did if it had not bene managed by Machiauellisme more then religion and the greatest tyranny and cosenage and villany vsed in it that euer stirred in any publicke busines CHAP. XXXIIII 1 The Papists pretending the Church haue a further meaning then the vulgar know 2 The Popes will is made the Churches act 3 Base traditions expounded to be diuine truth A. D. Concerning the tenth Chapter both my Aduersaries make maine opposition against the conclusion of this Chapter Pag. 202. one reason whereof is that they do not or will not rightly vnderstand what I meant when here I say the doctrine of the Church is the rule of faith note therefore first whereas the name Church may be taken seuerall waies Intro q. 3. according to that which I noted in the Introduction whereas also in euery one of these senses it may be taken either as it is generally in all ages or as it is particularly in this or that determinate age my Aduersaries omitting all other senses principally vnderstand me to meane by the name Church the Pope or Pastours of this present age whereas in this Chapter I do not at least ex professo or primarily intend to speake of the Church in this sense but rather do speake of the Church in a more generall indefinite and indeterminate sense as it signifieth one or other companie of men liuing either in all ages or in one or other age who in one or other sense may be called the Church the doctrine whereof say I is the rule and meanes ordained by God to instruct all sorts of men in all matters of faith Note secondly that by the doctrine of the Church I do not vnderstand any Friars dreames White pag. 3 as M. White dreameth nor humane traditions especially opposite to Scripture but diuine doctrine including therein both the written diuine Scripture and the vnwritten diuine traditions and the true diuine interpretation of them both as by word writing signes or otherwise it is or may be propounded and deliuered to vs by the authority of the Church all which although it may worthily be called diuine doctrine as being first reuealed by God here I call Church-doctrine because as it was first reuealed and committed to the keeping of Prophets and Apostles who in their time were chiefe and principall members of the militant Church so by Gods ordinance it was to be propounded and deliuered to other men by the same Prophets Apostles and others their successors as they are Doctors and Pastors of the same Church Note thirdly that by the rule of faith I meane such a rule as is also a sufficient outward meanes ordained and set apart by God to instruct all sorts of men in all points of faith which consequently must haue those three conditions or properties of the rule set downe and declared in the sixt Chapter viz that it must be infallible easie to be vnderstood of all sorts and vniuersall or such as may sufficiently resolue one in all points of faith Note fourthly that when I say the doctrine of the Church is the rule of faith I do not vnderstand that the doctrine as seuered from the Church or the Church as diuided from the doctrine is the rule of saith but that the doctrine as deliuered by the Church or the Church as deliuering doctrine is that rule and meanes which God hath ordained to instruct men in faith Note fifthly that to proue the doctrine of the Church to be the rule of faith in such sort as now I haue said it might suffice for this Chapter that it be shewed that at least once or in one age there were one or other company of liuing men in one or other sense called the Church who were ordained by God and set apart to instruct all sorts of men in all points of faith being for that purpose in their doctrine and teaching furnished with these three conditions which are requisite in the rule of faith for this being shewed in this Chapter I shall easily shew in the next that the same is to be said of some or other company continuing in all ages In this Chapter therefore I chiefly vndertake to proue that once or in one age there was a company of liuing men who in one sense may be called the Church whom God specially appointed as a meanes sufficient quantū ex se to instruct all men in all matters of faith being for that purpose furnished with the three conditions or properties of the rule of faith 1 THe conclusion of this Chapter was that the infallible rule which we ought obediently to follow in all points of faith is the doctrine and teaching faith and beleefe of the true Church his meaning wherein he saies I would not or did not rightly vnderstand Let vs therefore see how I vnderstood it My answer was that we would freely grant this conclusion if the meaning were no more but that the doctrine and faith of the vniuersall Church is the rule of faith but there is a higher matter meant First that the Churches word and authority without grounding the same on the Scripture is the rule
virtually it is the Church of Rome and the Pope the Church of Rome representatiuely is the Colledge of Cardinals but virtually the Pope who is the head of the Church Pelaeottus f De consist part 1. qu. 3. pag. 19. The Pope alone may do not onely that which is granted to all and singular Prelates in the Church but also more then they all g Respons moral p. 44. n 4. Comitol The power of Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction is not in the vniuersality of the Church as in the true subiect but in the Prelates thereof and in the Bishops of Rome as in the fountaine whence it flowes vnto all other Ministers of the new Testament Albertine h Coroll pag. 251. saies The Bishop of Rome is the rule of faith into which Rule all the articles of our faith are lastly resolued as into the formall reason whereby they are propounded to vs. Gretser i Defens Bell. to 1. p. 1450. B. saies when we affirme the Church to be the iudge of all controuersies of faith by the Church we vnderstand the Bishop of Rome who for the time being gouernes the ship of the militant Church and by liuely voice doth clearely and expressely expound his iudgement to them that seeke to him Zumel k Disput var. tom 3. p. 49 D. saies I beleeue that the chiefe Priest and Bishop of the Church the Pope who is the master of our faith cannot but attaine the truth of faith nor can be deceaued or erre if as chiefe Bishop and master of the faith he set downe his determination so that vnlesse a man be afraid of the truth there is no cause why he should feare the Popes determination It is idle therefore and sordid that the Repliar saies by the Church he meant the Pope but secondarily as it is ridiculous to say the Church is the rule indefinitely and abstracting from all time or per ampliationem which are termes deuised onely to besot the ignorant that they should not smell his heresie for if his Church be the rule he must needes meane such a Church as he thinkes in all ages and times successiuely to haue bene inuested with that authority and that Church is the Pope alone that miserable iudge of whom their owne men say h Do. Bann to 3. p. 106. b. It is no Catholicke faith but an opinion very probable that he is S. Peters successor and the most iudicious confesse i Alph. l. 1. c. 4. Hadrian pag. 26. ad 2. he may erre * August Anconit sum qu. 5. art 1 Iacobat de conc l. 4. art 1. Occh Dialog 1. part l. 6. 2. part c. 69. inde Cusan de concord cath l. 2. c. 17. Panorm de elect C. signif not 7. Zabarell tract de schismat Gerson de auferibil Pap. consid 10. inde and be deposed for heresie A.D. § 1. Pag. 205. That the doctrine of the Apostles was for their life time the rule and meanes First I say that my conclusion being vnderstood as in this Chapter I principally meant cannot be denied to be true for it cannot be denied but that the doctrine as deliuered by the Apostles themselues being for the time they liued the Church in such sense as here I take the name Church was such a rule and meanes as here we seeke for For first it is knowne to be infallible Secondly it was easie to be vnderstood c. Thirdly it was vniuersall c. Since therefore these 3. conditions requisite in the rule of faith are found in the doctrine and teaching of the Apostles it cannot be denied but that the diuine doctrine as deliuered by them in their life time either by word or writing was the rule and meanes which God ordained to instruct men in faith Taking therfore my conclusion in the chiefely intended sense I suppose that my aduersaries will neither deny it to be true nor the reason by which I proue it to be good 2 This discourse needed not for no Protestant denies the doctrine of the Apostles to be the rule either for their time or the time succeeding to the world ende I graunt therefore the Repliar his assertion and inferre thereupon that his Popes determinations and the doctrine of his Romish Church is not the rule of faith because they agree not with that which he here confesses was the rule in the Apostles time vnlesse he will maintaine when he replies againe that the rule is not one and the same at all times as k Cusan ep 2.7 his Cardinall writes that the Scripture is fitted to the time and variably vnderstood so that at one time it is expounded according to the fashion of the Church and when that fashion is changed the sense of the Scripture is also changed Againe Magalian a Iesuite I thinke yet liuing l Magal op Hierarch in tit p. 61. n. 6. saies Though it were granted that the wordes of Paule Tit. 1.6 containe a precept to marrie yet seeing Paule gaue it by his owne authority it were no diuine but an Ecclesiasticall precept which the Church may change yea abrogate and much more dispense with Marke what trickes heretickes haue to change the Apostles doctrine when it fits not their Church then the Apostles gaue it by their owne authority which I note that the Reader may perceaue there is no sincerity in the Repliars words For albeit he grants here the Apostles doctrine be the rule yet he meanes it to be the rule but for their owne time because the Pope may vnder colourable pretences expound it that is in plaine English change it when he will as his Cardinall and Iesuite here affirme A D. § 2. That the doctrine of the succeeding Pastours of the Church Pag. 207. is the rule and meanes The chiefe controuersie is about my conclusion as in a secondary sense it may be meant of the succeeding Pastors of the Church In which sense I affirme that like as the diuine doctrine not as contained in onely Scripture or as gathered thence by natural wit or priuate spirit but as deliuered by the Apostles or the Apostles as deliuering this doctrine was the rule and meanes ordained by God to instruct all men liuing in their daies in all matters of faith So the same doctrine not as contained in onely Scripture nor as gathered thence by naturall wit or priuate spirit but as deliuered by Pastors of the succeeding Church or those Pastors as deliuering this doctrine is the rule and meanes ordained by God to instruct all men liuing in succeding ages in all points of faith 3 This assertion I will grant as I did the former namely that the doctrine of the Pastors of the true Church such as succeed the Apostles is the rule and meanes of faith but the reader shall note two trickes that the Iesuite puts vpon him in the Proposition hereof First that affirming the doctrine of the succeeding Pastors of the Church to be the rule he saies not
whether this doctrine of these succeeding Pastors shal need to be the same that the doctrine of the Apostles was but onely affirmes that as the Apostles doctrine for the time they liued was the rule so the doctrine of the succeeding Pastors is the rule leauing roome enough for this doctrine of these succeeding Pastors to vary from the doctrine of the Apostles that when we shew the present abuses in the Church of Rome and decrees of their latter Popes for these last 800. yeares to haue swarued from the Apostles doctrine and practise they may pleade the authoritie of their succeding Pastors And indeede it is true that the Church of Rome holds that it is not necessary the doctrine and teaching of the present and succeeding Pastors be the same in all things that it was in the Apostolicke and Primitiue Church but the Pope hath power to make a NEW CREED and NEW ARTICLES of faith For Iacobatius m De Concil p. 310. A. saies The Pope alone may make new articles of faith according to one acceptation of the word Article that is for such as must be beleeued which before needed not be beleeued and Zenzelin a Popish doctor n Gl. extr Ioh. 22. cum inter § doclaramus saies The Vicar of Christ may make an Article of faith taking an article not properly but in a large sense for that which must be beleeued when before by the precept of the Church it was not necessary to be beleeued Augustinus Triumphus writes o August Anconit sum de eccle potest q. â—9 art 1. that it belongs to the Pope alone to make a new Creed For in a Creed those things are put that vniuersally belong to Christian faith he therefore hath authority to make such a Creed who is the head of Christian faith and in whom as in the head all the members of the Church are vnited and by whose authoritie all things pertaining to faith are confirmed and strengthened And p Art 2. againe That the Pope may dispense in adding articles may be vnderstood 3. waies First in respect of the multiplication of the articles themselues Secondly in respect of expounding the things contained in the articles Thirdly in respect of the augmentation of such things as may be reduced to the articles ALL THESE WAIES the Pope may dispense in adding articles because as he may make a new Creed so he may MVLTIPY NEW ARTICLES OVER AND ABOVE THE OTHER Secondly he may by more articles explicate the articles already placed in the Creed Thirdly because peraduenture all things beleeued in the Creed may be reduced after the aforesaid articles and by such reduction may be increased so that vnder each article MORE THINGS NECESSARY TO BE BELEEVED MAY BE PVT THEN ARE YET PVT The which being done marke what they say touching their authority q Roder. Dosm de auth script l. 3. c. 12. The Popes assertions ascend to the height of diuine testimony as the assertions of the Apostles did and of such as made the holy Scripture and there be who contend that they belong to the sacred Scripture it selfe which is contained in the bookes of the Bible This doctrine whereof all our aduersaries bookes are full shewes plainely that they intend not that this their Church teaching so much magnified to be the rule should alway be one and the same but such as shall follow the Popes lust and be altered with the time that so this Antichrist of Rome might abolish the whole Testament of Christ this is the first thing to be noted that the reader may see what he meanes by his Church doctrine that is the rule 4 The next thing is his distinction about this doctrine of the Church that it was the rule in the Apostles dayes and is the rule in succeeding ages but not as contained in onely Scripture but as deliuered by these Pastors Which speech containes 2. things a Negatiue and an affirmatiue the negatiue is that the doctrine of the Church is not the rule as it is contained in onely Scripture Meaning as * Ch. 27. n. 3. I haue shewed that all diuine doctrine belonging to the rule is not contained in the Scripture but much or the most of it in tradition vnwritten and that which is contained is not the rule by vertue of writing but by vertue of the Church that makes it authenticall Panormitan r Panorm tom 2. de praesumptione c. Sicut noxius sayes The words of the text of Scripture are not the Popes words but the words of Salomon in the Prouerbs but because this text is made Canonicall it is to be beleeued and induceth necessity so to do as if the Pope had set it foorth himselfe Because we make all those things to bee ours whereto we might impart our authority But whether without Canonization the sayings of Salomon be approued in the Church seeing they are in the body of the Bible say as the glosse saith and Ierom holdeth who seemes to conclude that they are Apocrypha which is to be noted and that because of this as also because Salomon had no power to make Canons This also must be obserued that the Reader may know the meaning of his conclusion and what it is that we deny therein For NO DOCTRINE EITHER OF THE APOSTELS IN THEIR TIME OR OF THE SVCCEEDING PASTORS OF THE CHVRCH IN ANY TIME IS THE RVLE OF FAITH BVT ONELY THAT WHICH IS CONTAINED IN THE SCRIPTVRE As I haue Å¿ In the WAY digr 3. shewed His affirmatiue is that the doctrine of the Church is the rule as it is deliuered by the Pastors or the Pastours deliuering this doctrine are the rule which is the same that he said a little before the doctrine as deliuered by the Church or the Church as deliuering doctrine is the rule t Pars obiecti formalis fidei est vox Ecclesiae D. Stapler relect p. 484. Saltem aequalis est Ecclesiae Scripturae authoritas ibi pag. 494. His meaning is that the Churches testimony and authority mingles it selfe with the authority of the doctrine and is ioyntly with it or aboue it the rule of faith as when diuers simples haue their ingredience into one compound and two men equally carry betweene them one burthen Their doctrine this way is knowne wel enough how the Scriptures in regard of vs haue all their authority from the Church the sense of the Scripture is to be fetched from the Church whatsoeuer the Church of Rome shall teach is the word of God c. The which things being couched in the Iesuites conclusion as he vnderstands it we detest and spit vpon when he shall thus debarre the Scripture from being the rule to set vpon the bench his Papall Antichristian authority If the shame either of God or men or any respect of truth were with them they durst not thus presumptuously and basely steale the authority to themselues whereby both themselues and we and all the world
answered Digression 48. yet here I answer againe that the Protestant faith so far as it differeth from that which the Church of Rome holds against vs continued alwaies not in the aire but in men and those men were such as liued in the Church of Rome it selfe constantly holding the foundation of Christian Religion though the same men were corrupted also some more some lesse with those errors that we refuse The rest of this Chapter meddles with nothing I writ but is spent in prouing that the Church whose doctrine is the rule continues in all ages vnto the worlds end not onely the true Church abides for euer vnto the end but that Church doth so whose doctrine is the rule to teach vs as if there were a true Church of Christ whose doctrine were not the rule in such sense as I haue expounded the doctrine of the Church to be the rule This is partly to be saying somewhat when he could not reply to that I said and partly to perswade his people that we hold the contrary I detest his rudenesse and lament their bondage and slauery A. D. M. White granteth Pag. 233. White p. 63. that those Scriptures which I alledge in the treatise proue well Christs abiding alway with the Church whereupon is inferred the continuance of the Church in all ages therefore he will not or ought not deny but that they proue also that there is teaching of true doctrine of faith in the Church not onely for the Apostles time or for sixe or eight hundred yeares after but absolutely for all ages I grant all this and if he beg hard I will giue him more that the doctrine of the Church thus taught in all ages is the rule of faith that all men ought to follow But he is so far bankrupt and behind hand that no reasonable thing will helpe him For still this Church supposes not his Pope nor his Papacy and this doctrine meanes not his traditions nor any thing taught in the Church besides the Scripture nor doth this being the rule intend any such authority or soueraignty of the Church aboue the Scripture as he pleads for but only the Ministry of the Church vnder Christ and his Scriptures in propounding the faith to particular beleeuers and confirming the same to their hearts and consciences by the sole authority of the Scriptures themselues as I haue often touched CHAP. XXXVII Not the Church but the Scripture is the rule 2. The question touching the visiblenesse of the Church proceeds of the Militant Church 3. 4. 5. In what sense we say the Militant Church is sometime inuisible 5. The Papists thinke the Church shall be inuisible in the time of Antichrist Their contradictions touching Antichrist breefly noted A. D. Concerning the twelfth Chapter By that which hath bene said in the two precedent Chapters it is apparant enough Pag. 234. that there is in all ages a certaine company called the Church whose doctrine is the ordinary rule and meanes ordained by God to instruct all men in all matters of faith and that by the said doctrine and teaching of the true Church euery one is to learne what is and what is not to be holden for the true faith not doubting but that the doctrine of faith which is commended and caught vs by the said true Catholicke Church is the right faith The which being so euery one may see how necessary it is to seeke find and follow the iudgement of the true Church as being a most necessary meanes without which none can expect to attaine that one infallible entire faith which is necessary to saluation This seemeth in a sort to be granted by M. White For although he pleade hard to haue Scripture alone to be the (a) White p. 13. 14. 15. rule holding the letter it selfe to be the (b) Pag. 12. vessell which presenteth thu rule which he (c) Pag. 31. cōpareth to the Carpenters square to the precepts of art to the law of the Land yet as he cannot deny that a child cannot do any thing with the Carpenters square nor an vnlearned man with a booke wherein is contained precepts of art or with a lawbooke but the square must be applied by a cunning Carpenter the precepts of art must be expounded by a learned maister the law must be declared by a skilfull Lawier or propounded by an authorized Iudge Euen so he must grant that the Scripture it selfe although it be a good rule yet if it were as he would haue it the onely rule must be applied expounded declared and propounded not by euery man woman and child but by the authority as we say or by the Ministry as my Aduersaries say of the Church White p. 110. Pag. 93. and that so necessarily that euen as M. White affirmeth except in some extraordinary cases no man can of himselfe attaine to the knowledge of faith but as the Church teacheth him in regard as otherwhere he confesseth the Church is a subordinate meanes for the bringing of men to saluation in that God teacheth his elect by the ministry thereof Neither saith he can any man be the child of God except first he be conceiued in the wombe of the Church So we see euen in M. Whites opinion how necessary it is for euery one to seeke finde and follow the teaching of the true Church 1 THat which he sayes I granted in a sort I grant againe and yet will still pleade and proue the Scripture alone to be the rule and nothing else For though a child can do nothing with a square nor an vnlettered man with a booke yet still the square and contents of the booke are the rule and not the Carpenter and the Iudge they are onely Ministers to apply the rule and subordinate conditions requisite for the due vse of the rule and to be ruled by it themselues if at any time as sometime they may they erre in working So is it in few words with the Church and Scriptures And albeit I affirmed as he saith and it be my opinion that it is necessary to find and follow the teaching of the Church yet is it not my opinion that the vniuersall Church teaches any doctrine that is not written in Scripture or God by the Church teaches those vnwritten traditions or that the Church exceeds the condition of a bare Minister vnder the Scriptures Which Ministry being acknowledged M. White will allow it any authority and power to teach informe perswade correct represse particular men that my Aduersaries will demand but they require Church authority aboue the Scripture and make vnwritten traditions and the Popes Decretals equall with the Scripture and place all the power and faculty of the Church in the Pope and when they haue done allow no particular man or Church to call any of these things in question This is it the Repliars teeth water at and which by M. Whites concessions he would recouer but he shall neuer get it nor all the
it is impudencie to denie his conclusion so apparently proued on the other side we dare not grant it for feare of the people Here is neuer a true word First his conclusion is not proued For the arguments which he propounded to demonstrate it he hath not followed nor vpholden but leauing them in the field behind him he runs away without so much as looking behind him and in all his Reply rescues not one of them Secondly his conclusion is iustly denied and without impudencie for it is no impudencie to denie that which cannot be proued but it is impudencie to require men to beleeue that which hath no proofe He speakes of his proofes as he doth of his Church all is eminent illustrous apparent plaine visible to all when yet no man sees them Thirdly the reason why we grant not the Church to be in his sence visible is not for feare of the people nor because we cannot giue the Professors of our faith in euery age but because it is the truth which with all his boasting he cannot remoue for albeit the Church neuer failes but abides perpetually visible in some degree to the end yet is there not alway therein a visible companie by profession and gouernment distinct from the rest that is free from the generall corruption that preuailes in the Church of which company onely the question is He maintaining that the Church cannot erre nor be subiect to any such corruption but hath alway in it eminent professors and speciall congregations that are neuer infected with any part of the corruption nor need reformation which persons and congregations appeare as visibly and distinctly to all men as worldly kingdomes are distinctly seene and knowne and we holding the Church to be perpetuall onely because there are alway in the world which hold the true worship of God and to be visible in regard it may at all times be seene though heresie may so preuaile and persecution so arise that a visible companie shall not appeare which is not in some measure touched with the common errors or needs not repentance and reformation All which is so true that I challenge the Replier and prouoke the zealousest of my aduersaries to say ingenuously if the learned Papists alledged Digress 17. say not in effect as much themselues 2 Our answer therefore is direct and plaine both to the conclusion and the reasons and so direct that the Iesuite hath no stomack to reply but exceeding grosly falsly expounds affixes a meaning to vs that we neuer meant First he says we distinguish two seuerall Churches whereof we call the one the Catholicke Church mentioned in the Creed containing onely the elect the other the Militant Church containing as part of the Catholick the professors of the true faith whether good or bad beleeuers or hypocrites elect or reprobate Next he sayes the reason why we thus distinguish two seuerall Churches is that when we are hunted out of the one we may runne into the other This he expounds something more plainly That which as I guesse for he hath no certaintie of what he sayes driues them to admit such a Church militant distinguisht from the Catholicke is least if none should be said to pertaine to the Church but onely the elect it would follow that men might despaire of attaining true faith which is not had but by the teaching of the Church for as much as they could neuer know who are elected Thirdly he says this Militant Church which other Protestants commonly call the visible Church M. White will needs defend to be sometimes inuisible That these things may the better be vnderstood and answered note FIRST that by the word Church taken in his full latitude The Church we meane the whole companie of all those whom God calls to the knowledge and profession of his truth and so to saluation Of which calling and separation from the rest of the world liuing in Atheisme and idolatry without the knowledge or acceptation of those supernatural verities that leade to God it hath the denomination and is called the Church as if you should say a companie called or gathered forth of the rest of the world But one church Note SECONDLY that the Church absolutely and simply considered in this latitude is but One as the state and company of the kingdome of Great Brittain is but one in as much as all and euery one called to this grace of how different state qualities or condition soeuer belong one way or other to this companie for the faith being but one and the maner of calling by reuealing the same but one the companies that receiue and professe it how many soeuer respectiuely yet absolutely and abstracting from particular conditions of times and persons can be but one Note THIRDLY that in the Church being absolutely but one there are sundry differences and respects that is to say the persons called to the faith of Christ are of diuers sorts as the kingdome of Great Brittain being but one yet is diuers waies considered For some part of the Church being reduced from the state of this mortall life reignes with God in heauen and is glorified with that glorie whereto it was called when it was here on earth The triumphant Church This we call the Triumphant Church because as triumphers they enioy the reward due to conquerers The other part of the Church is that which successiuely in all ages liues here in this world professing that it desires to follow the Triumphant The militant Church and enioy eternall life this we call the Church Militant because it lies as it were in the campe fighting against the world the diuell and the flesh vnder the banner of Christ waiting for the victorie But among these againe there are two sorts of people the first all such as are called effectually The Church of the elect these are the elect onely whom God not onely calls but inspires also effectually to obey his calling and to liue holy and vnblameable in such sort that they shal infallibly be saued in the life to come The inuisible Church This company we call the inuisible Church because God onely sees who are his we can see the men and by their fruits hope they are Gods elect but to speake precisely no mortall eie can discerne them to be Gods elect but God alone by reason hypocrites and the reprobate do many times resemble them in shew and profession The second sort of the Militant Church are hypocrites and vnsound members that are not called effectually but disobey the truth whereof they make profession such are heretickes schismatickes and all the wicked that will not obey the truth whom we call the false and malignant church The malignant Church Note FOVRTHLY that howsoeuer the elect liuing here vpon earth and effectually called be inuisible in the sence deliuered yet when we say the Church militant is sometimes inuisible we meane it of the Church Militant that liues in
And albeit we thus distinguish the Militant from the Catholick inuisible Church of the elect part whereof is alway in the Militant church and one cause among many be the same that the Replier hath assigned lest if none should pertaine to the Church but the elect men should despaire of attaining the truth forasmuch as it is not found but in the Church because they should not be able to tell who are elect yet that we say is a direct answer to them that bid vs assigne a continuall visible Church professing the Protestant religion for we assigne and name not the inuisible Church of the elect as the Replier absurdly reports but the Militant Church of Rome that all men haue seene many ages together But when they reply that the Church of Rome differs from the Protestants in many points then comes in that we say of the inuisible state of the Church that the true Church of God wherein saluation is to be found may yet for some space and distance of time be so ouerwhelmed with heresie and persecution that no companie can be seene to beleeue and professe in all things aright according to the Apostles teaching by reason of errors either greater or lesser added to their Apostolicke faith the which errors when God giues libertie to remoue that the rule of faith may be holden without them then it may truly and directly be said the reformed Church that hath remoued these corruptions for some space in former times was inuisible What vntruth now or what flying out of one Church into another is here or what strait is this Let the Iesuite say resolutely and directly without cauilling Ad 3. 4 To the third that this Church which other Protestants commonly call the visible Church M. White will needs defend to be sometime inuisible I answer other Protestants and M. White with them call the Militant Church visible and hold it to be alway so because it is such as may be seene and at all times is to be seene and yet againe M. White and all other Protestants with him will denie it to be alway visible in that sence which the Iesuites vse to deliuer this is no contradiction when the Church is called visible in one state and yet inuisible in another As the Sunne is affirmed to be visible when it is in our Horizon and then affirmed againe to be inuisible when it is gone downe or obscured by eclipse A. D. To ouerthrow this absurd answer of my aduersaries Pag. 238. I will in this place shew first that this distinction of two Churches is false Secondly that if it were true at least in this place it is friuolous Thirdly that the Church Militant containing all professors of the faith cannot be as M. White would haue it inuisible 5 The first of these is needlesse For no man holds two Churches but onely two or more respects of one Church as I noted the which respects h Catech. Rom pag. 112. our aduersaries all of them distinguish as well as we The next is with his owne word friuolous For to what end should he stand prouing that friuolous which his aduersarie sayes not How absurd therefore soeuer he thinke my answer yet this is no good way to infringe it by reporting that to be my answer which is not and disputing against that I say not neuer meaning to deale with that which is my true answer indeed The third tends well enough to the prouing his conclusion being vnderstood of such an inuisiblenesse as I haue declared yet when all he will say was propounded in his first booke and directly answered and much more then his Reply containes why did he not reply vpon that but multiply new reasons before he hath defended the old Neuerthelesse omitting his two first points wherein he touches not my booke I will answer that which he sayes concerning me in the third A. D. § 3. Concerning the third point Pag. 241. Wotton p. 107. White p. 87. 100. that the companie of Professors cannot be inuisible M. White and M. Wotton both seeme to defend that not onely the true Church consisting in their opinion onely of the elect is altogether inuisible but the other Church which they grant to consist of all Professors of the faith may sometimes be inuisible this assertion they maintaine as it seemeth of purpose that when after I shall vrge them to assigne a continuall professing Protestant companie as we can shew a continuall companie of professors of the Romane faith they may by this starting hole of the inuisibilitie or secretnesse of the Church escape away without answering my demand which can neuer be directly and sufficiently answered To defend this paradoxe of inuisible professors of the faith first they peruert the state of the question as in the beginning I noted Secondly M. White noteth two things White pag. 87. the first is that the Church militant may consist of a small number as it did in the beginning to wit at the time of the passion of Christ and as it shall do in the end of the raigne of Antichrist the second is that although it alwayes professe the faith yet this may be secretly that the world shall not perceiue By which two blind shifts he would gladly bleare the eyes and bewitch the vnderstanding of his Reader so farre as to perswade that in all ages there was at least some few professing Protestants although for many hundred yeares before Luther they were so secret and inuisible that the world nor God I weene could not but the faithfull Protestants themselues forsooth could see and know them 6 First it is true that M. White affirmes the true Church of God to consist onely of the elect the rest being neither perfectly nor truly nor properly members of the Church but onely improperly and aequiuocally or as Canus i Membra videlicet aliquando non ex vita quam sua sponte natura vendicant sed ex situ quem sortita in corpore sunt per Metaphoram transferri solent Propriè ac verè membrum corporis Ecclesiae non sunt Can. loc pag 321. Ad vnionem corporis mystici siue Ecclisiae nunquam pertinent existentes in peccato mortali Alexand. quem refert Ioh. Turrecrem sum de eccl l 1. c. 57. speakes metaphorically by reason of the place they occupie in the church and I alone say not this but as learned Papists as any are say it with me howsoeuer k Solent haretici dicere esse Sanctos Electos esse propriè membra Ecclesiae alios impropriè sed falluntur Staplet relect pag. 8. Yet the learnedst of his owne side say it as well as we as appeares he whom my aduersarie followes relate this opinion as if none but Protestants held it Next I affirme againe and the Replier yeelds it that l No man can tell who be Gods elect A. D. Repl. pag. 238. None can know who are elect or where in particular the
elect be pag. 240. the Church thus considered is altogether inuisible but the question is not touching this Church and therfore against his conclusion I haue also affirmed thirdly that the Church consisting of professors sometime is inuisible that is to say the whole number of true beleeuers and professors liuing in the world which we call the Church Militant sometime loose the outward conspicuousnes of Apostolicke doctrine and gouernment free from abuses which the Papists say they alway hold Touching this assertion he notes two things 7 First the reason why we maintaine it That when he forsooth shall afterwards vrge vs to assigne a continuall professing Protestant company as he can shew a continuall company of Professors of the Roman faith we may by this starting hole escape without answer This is but winde and ostentation he can shew no continuall company successiuely or visibly professing the Roman faith with all the articles thereof as now it is holden he may set downe a catalogue of Bishops Doctors Councels and Professors that in all ages haue bene in the world but that they beleeued as himselfe and the Iesuites and his Romish Church now do otherwise then in the substantiall articles of faith wherein we agree with them or that there were none among them that misliking the corruptions of the Papacy as they grew held in the substance of the Protestants religion he can neuer shew as will appeare The true cause why we maintaine the Church to be sometime inuisible is this that I shall lay downe * The manner how the question touching the visibility of the Church first began and in what sense For when Luther and the first Reformers some hundred yeares agoe withdrew themselues from the subiection of the Pope and put away these innumerable errors out of their Churches which our Aduersaries now maintaine against vs as the doctrine of image worship Inuocation of Saints Purgatory the Masse Transubstantiation and the rest wherein our Aduersaries and we dissent altering nothing of that which belongs to the substance of true faith or which the Church of Rome had receiued from the Apostles and Primitiue Church but onely contrary to the customes of some ages before professing the same without the mixture of the aforesaid errors the Pope with his crew cried out they were Heretickes persecuting them with fire and sword and charging them to haue forsaken the Church of Christ wherein they should be saued and among other arguments his Champions required them to shew the succession of their doctrine and Pastors boasting that vnlesse they could do it and shew their Church to haue visibly bene in all ages they would conclude they had forsaken the Church and were the first authors of the Protestant Religion The Reformers to this answered that THE CHVRCH OF ROME IT SELFE was their visible Church wherein they were bred and whence they proceeded but therein was two kinds of Articles of Religion The one which was Apostolicke and had bene from the beginning the other that which at seuerall times by the faction and conueiance of Hereticks had bene brought in and mingled with the truth this latter they had renounced but not the former making it more then manifest that in the substance of the truth and rule of faith taught by the Apostles and certainely holden by the ancient Church they had altered nothing but onely separated themselues from intollerable corruptions and from the Popes tyranny that maintained and vrged them who by his tyranny and peruerting all things had declared himselfe to be Antichrist sitting in the Church of God And when the Papists still cried SHEW VS A VISIBLE CHVRCH IN ALL THE WORLD PROFSSING IN ALL THINGS AS YOV DO they replied it was not necessary so to do THE CHVRCH OF ROME IT SELFE was the visible Church professing as they did in all things substantiall But if they required such a Church as had put away those errors and held the substance without corruptions and heresies mingled among the Professors then such a Church was sometime inuisible that is to say it may sometime fall out that in all the world no part of the Church shall be outwardly seene to hold the succession of all the true faith without corruption and the purest Professors may be oppressed that their memory shall be taken away and that which is the worst part of the Church shall be strongest and generally reputed most Catholicke This is the true and originall reason of this question whereby it is easie to see that we neuer imagined the Church to be simply inuisible at any time but this inuisibility hath bene affirmed onely of the outward state thereof at some times when reformation hath not bene so pure as now it is No otherwise then I would say the body was inuisible when a Leprosie had ouergrowne it or the kingdome of France were inuisible when tyranny and new customes should mingle themselues therewith and the ancient lawes be expounded by a faction of Rebels 8 By this his second exception that to defend a paradoxe I haue peruerted the state of the question is answered For it is cleare hereby that the question is of the militant Church and so D. Stapleton m Relect. p. 2. sayes expresly In this controuersie the appellation of the Church principally belongs to the militant company And the two things mentioned touching it that it may consist of a small number and that it professes sometime in secret being taken in the sense deliuered are so farre from being blind shifts that they cannot be disproued by bragging and if there be any mettall or truth in my Aduersary here I spur him and let him answer freely That which I noted is the cleare confession of many n In THE WAY Digr 17. n. 3. learned Papists themselues Alexand. Durand Turrecremata Parnormitan Pererius Ouandus Acosta the Rhemists Dom Scoto Gregory Valence But these being principall men in the Church of Rome must not be said to teach blind shifts but the truth that therefore which I noted is the truth If it be the truth that the Church militant in respect of the best part thereof may sometime consist of a small number and may secretly that the world cannot see it professe the faith how can the truth bleare the Readers eye or bewitch his vnderstanding when that which befals the Church at one time may befall it againe though not at any yet at some time and whether the yeares were more or lesse wherein we say it was obscured yet they were the yeares of the persecution of Antichrist and in Antichrists time o Ioh. Parisiens tract de Antich p. 45. edit Venet apud Laz. Soarol an 1516. When the Church is turned into Armageddon the mount of theeues no Papist will deny but it may be inuisible in the sense that we hold as I shewed in the 17. Digression and himselfe confesses in that which immediatly followes CHAP. XXXIX 1 The Papists are inforced to yeeld the same that we
affirme that the hatred of the Romish faith brought Castalion or Nenser or Aleman to that which they did The like is reported by x Hasenmull hist Iesuit c. 11. Hasenmuller one that liued among the Iesuites and * Historiā hanc quam bona fide recitani sicuti eam audiui vidi dum rebus Iesuitarum interfui saw the things that he reports of diuers Iesuites falling into the like terrible desperation among whom one despairing like Spira because he had renounced the truth to become a Papist complained that he was damned for the same calling vpon them them that stood by to kill him because he felt nothing in himselfe but hel the torture of diuels tormenting him for putting confidence in Masses images crosses beades suffrages the merits of Saints and such like The dotage of Postellus who sometime was so famous among our aduersaries and his impiety about the Messias is inferior to none of these But because Acosta the Iesuite hath written a memorable example of one liuing in Peru I will translate the History and so let the Repliar himselfe say if his owne religion breed not Iudaisme Turcisme doubtings and desperation as grosse as euer Ochin or any other fell into CHAP XLI A Narration of a Popish Doctor and professor of diuinity in the Church of Rome trāslated out of Acosta de Temp. nouiss l. 2. c. 11. Maiol dies canicul tom 2. pag. 89. and inserted for answer to that wherewith the Iesuite reproches our Church in the last words of his precedent Reply THere was in the kingdome of Peru a man at that time greatly esteemed a learned Diuine and a professor of diuinitie who a long time together was accounted Catholick and godly and almost the oracle of all this part of the world This man was so linked in familiarity with a certaine woman who boasted of herselfe that she was taught great mysteries by an Angell and like another Philumena or Maximilla whom Montanus followed was rapt out of her selfe or at least seemed so to be that he often vsed to consult with her about the greatest questions in diuinity In all things he esteemed her as an Oracle reporting her to be full of great reuelations and to be dearely beloued of God who otherwise was but a base creature and of small sense vnlesse it were to deuise lyes Whether therefore she were possessed by the Diuell which is most likely or whether she counterfetted the matter when she fell into her extasie as many wise men thought this Diuine hearing great and strange things that in her exstasies she would speake of him and conceauing that farre greater would afterward be spoken addicted himselfe thereupon to be her disciple whose ghostly father indeed himselfe was The man at length was so transported that he would assay to worke miracles and perswaded himselfe that he did worke them when no signe of any miracle appeared for which cause as also for receauing from this woman certaine propositions contrary to the sense of the Catholike Church he was apprehended by the iudges of the most holy Inquisition where by the space of fiue yeares he was heard and examined and at last detected to be the proudest and maddest man that liued He would auouch that he had an Angell sent from God of whom he learned whatsoeuer he pleased and that he had immediate conference and familiarity with God and fell into those toyes that no man in his right wits would vtter yet all this while his vnderstanding as concerning his brains was so sound that my owne is no sounder He would therefore say he should be a King and in very good earnest tell how he should be Pope and that the Apostolicke Sea should be translated into these kingdomes that God had giuen him holinesse aboue the Angels and beyond all the Apostles yea offered him the Hypostaticall vnion but he would not receiue it That he was giuen to be the redeemer of the world in regard of the efficacie whereas Christ was the redeemer but in regard of sufficiencie That all Ecclesiasticall states should be abrogated and he would giue new lawes that should be plaine and easie whereby the single life of the Cleargie should be taken away and many wiues allowed and the necessitie of shrift be abrogated These and many such like things he affirmed with such confidence and earnestnes that we were amazed to see a man imagining these things yet not to be out of his wits At the last when we had a long time considered his doings and condemned aboue 120 propositions of his that were hereticall and dissonant from the doctrine of the Church we were commanded to dispute with him to see if we could bring him backe to a right mind and the true faith To which purpose the Iudges and the Bishop of Quita with others of vs met together where the man being brought in before vs he maintained his cause with that libertie and eloquence of tongue that I my selfe to this day am astonished to think that euer a mans mind should be filled with that pride He professed his doctrine to be such that it could not be demonstrated but by the Scriptures and miracles being farre beyond all humane reasō that by the testimonies of the Scripture he had proued his matter far more manifestly effectually then S. Paul had proued Christ to be the true Messias and that he had wrought such and so many miracles that the resurrection of Christ was no greater miracle for he said that he had bin dead and was risen again and by euident testimonie had shewed the same And whereas he had no book but had his very Breuiarie taken from him yet he would rehearse the Scriptures without book such and so long places out of the Prophets the Reuelation the Psalmes and other parts that his memorie was admirable but then he so applied or allegorized them to his conceit that it would haue made any either to haue laughed or wept Finally if we would handle the matter by miracles he would presently he said shew them These things he spake so as if he had taken vs for mad men or had bin mad himselfe He told vs that it was reuealed vnto him how Don Iohn of Austrich was ouercome in a fight at sea by the Turk and that K. Philip had almost lost his kingdome of Spaine and that they were in hand at Rome with a Councell for the deposing of the present Pope and the creating of a new Which things he said he would tell vs that we knowing them by certaine intelligence might perceiue they came to him by diuine reuelation The which things being most false yet he auouched them as matters that we had certainly knowne At the last when in two daies conference with him we could do no good according to the maner of Spaine we brought him with others to the publick spectacle of the people where looking vp to heauen and expecting fire that from thence
nisi ille ad imitandum proponitur qui despectis Angelorum legionibus secum socialiter constitutis vt solus omnibus praeesse videretur Ep. 38. Ego fidenter dico quia quisquis so vniuersalem Sacerdotem vocat vel vocare desiderat in elaâ—ione sua Antichristum praecurrit l. 6. ep 30. called a proud pompaticall prophane sacrilegious Antichristian and diuellish title and the man that should assume it a follower of the diuel and the forerunner of Antichrist b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb l. 5. c. 17. spoken of Montanus FASTING by distinction of meates and daies c Sectae Simonis â—uisse videtur soâ—ta quaedam Mâ—rcellina quae colebat imagines Iesu Pauli Homeri adorado incensumque ponendo August de haer Irenae l. 1. c 24. Epiph. haer 27. Theodor haer fab l. 1. Jnueni ibi velâ—m habeâ—s imaginem quasi Christs vel Sancti cuiusdam contra authoritatem Scriptiâ—rarum Epiph. ep â—d Ioh. Hicrosol Images d Cathari propter munditiem gl riantes de suis meritis Isido Orig. l. 8. c. 5. Perfection of our workes without sinne and abilitie to keepe the law e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clem. Rom. constit pag 57. Womens baptizing f Conc. Laod. can 35 Oecum pag 697. Veron graec the worship of Angels g Cruces nec colimus nec optamus Arâ—ob the worshipping of the Crosse h Vâ—rgo erat sed non ad adorationem nobis data Epiph. pag. 344. the worshipping of the virgin Marie i Nec exhorrescunt beatae Trinitatis imaginem facere Euthym. Panopl pag. 690. the Images of the Trinitie k Haereticâ— cum ex Scripturis arguuntur in accusationem ipsarum conuertuntur quasi non rectè habeant nec sint ex authoritate quia vartè sunt dicta quâ—a non possit ex his inueniri veritas abhis qui nesciunt Traditionem Irenae l. 3. c 2. the obscuritie and insufficiencie of the Scripture l Auditores apud eos Manichaeos si vâ—luerint vxores habent quorum nihil faciunt qui vocantur electi August ep 74. the necessitie of single life in the Cleargie and many other points defended by our aduersaries are mentioned and named in the Fathers but it is to shew that they were holden by hereticks and to confute them This first grant I returne my aduersary for a fauour because he hath replied without railing in this Chapter and I do it in the name of all Protestants that hereafter he may not say but they are tractable and wil yeeld much of his Romish religion to be if not defended yet mentioned in the writings of the Fathers Secondly that some ceremonies and doctrines also holden at this day by the Church of Rome which we refuse were held by some particular ancient Fathers and practised in the Church of those times though * It is the rule of Vincentius Lirinensis â—hat what the Fathers thus hold is not the Catholicke faith but what they hold resolutely and with generall consent Monitor c. 39. doubtfully vncertainly and without vniuersalitie and vniformitie and which is chiefly to be obserued by him that wil see the truth otherwise and to other intents then the Church of Rome now holds theÌ„ the reason whereof is manifest For the Apostle m 2. Thess 2.7 sayes the mysterie of iniquitie began to work in his time And n Niceph. l. 4. c 7. Euseb hist l 3 c. 32. Hegesippus that liued immediatly after the Apostles The Church continued a virgin vndefiled as long as the Apostles liued but when that generation was passed the conspiracy of wicked heresie through the seducement of those which taught otherwise tooke beginning And o 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Isid Pelus l. 3 ep 408. pag 668. Isidorus Pelusiota that liued in the fourth age The Church is like a woman fallen from her ancient state and hauing nothing but the signes of it bereaued of her goods through their naughtinesse that held the administration Thus some particular ceremonies and doctrines began to be vsed and got increase with vsing as Prayer for the dead Purgatorie Necessitie of Baptisme for the saluation of infants and not many more doctrines agreeing with the Church of Rome which yet were vsed and holden as I said vncertainly and to other purposes then now they are for it cannot be shewed that they were the resolued doctrine of the Church vniuersally embraced The most that our aduersaries can shew in the writings of antiquitie being some part of their ceremonies as Tapers Crosses Vigils Oile Spittle Commemorations of the dead and such like wherein also they haue altered or forsaken many things as well as we as they haue with vs abandoned some points of their doctrine also which yet p It is coÌ„fessed that all the Fathers held the B. Virgin to haue bin conceiued in originall sinne by Turrecrem de consecr d. 4. Firmissime nu 11. Dom. Ban. part 1 q 1 art 8. dub 5. And most of the Fathers that the soules of the iust see not God till the day of iudgement Sixt Senens bibl l. 6 an 345. Barthol Medin in 12. pag 56. and others whom see below c. 57. n. 3. In which two points the now Church of Rome hath forsaken them by their owne confession they held as well as they did that which the Church of Rome still retaines which proues vnanswerably that it is no disaduantage to our side if some few particular doctrines thus vnsufficiently held be found in the Fathers which we refuse Thirdly we grant that we hold many negatiues against our aduersaries in the Church of Rome which are not expresly controlled or condemned by the Fathers in that maner that we condemne them that is to say directly purposely and namely but onely by discourse and consequence from those truths which they maintaine and those errors which they condemne in the heretiks of their times The reason is because in the Fathers daies such errors now denied and refused by vs were not broached but came vp since and the Fathers could not denie or speake against that which was not then in rerum natura This is the true reason why we denie sundrie things that the Fathers in their time denied not 2 These three things being granted that which we obiect against the Repliers Catalogue is that the ancient Fathers in their writings neither defend nor acknowledge the substantiall articles of Papistry wherein we really differ There is q You mâ—y see it in the Pref. before B. Iewels workes of the last impression And in the Pref. of THE WAY n. 15. And in the Councel of Trent at the end a new Creed made by the Councell of Trent and imposed vpon all men to beleeue the articles whereof are particularly expounded in the decrees and catechisme of the said Councel and in the writings of the moderne Schoole-men and Iesuites LET THEM SHEW IF THEY CAN THAT THE DOCTRINE CONTAINED IN THAT CREED
doctrine coÌ„mitted to the Pastors of the church doth not at any time faile either in whole or part but is preserued inuiolate and entire from all errors growing thereto The second that the Protestants can shew no other succession of Pastors whereto this doctrine was committed then is contained in his catalogue Hence he concludes that his now church of Rome holds nothing but what the ancient Fathers held I answer to the second touching the Catalogue that for the first 600 yeares we approue it confessing the Pastors and Christians mentioned therein to haue bin the true Church And for the rest of the ages to this day we will allow the Catalogue with three limitations first that the Pastors and people therein named be confessed to haue kept the faith lesse purely then they of the former ages so that the lower they succeeded the more they were corrupted Secondly that from the 800. yeare specially such Pastours and people be added euery one in their place as misliked and resisted the corruptions of the Church of Rome growing on and vpheld the purer doctrine in such manner as I briefly touched in THE WAY Digress 52 Thirdly that the legend Saints Antichristian Popeâ— lying stories and the Popes creatures whose succession we need not be wiped out and the ordinary Pastors liuing in communion with the Church of Rome Greece Armenia and such like though we allow not euery singular and speciall man be supplied Let the Catalogue be reformed and vndertaken in this manner and the Pastors and the people contained therein shall be yeelded to be the same that Christ and his Apostles committed the truth to and in the meane time the Repliar doth but trouble himselfe and seduce his Reader wheÌ„ he beares him in hand that we desire to shew other Pastors or people besides these all Protestants freely affirming their faith to haue succeeded euen in the Church of Rome it selfe though the errors thereof were no part of their faith but the inuentions of men added thereunto 2 But the first thing affirmed that the Christian doctrine committed to the Pastours of the Church cannot faile in any degree or part thereof but is alway preserued inuiolate and entire from all error is false For albeit it be the commandemeÌ„t of God and were the desire of the blessed Apostles that it should be so How the Church cannot erre yet as I haue shewed the euent teaches that sometime it falls out otherwise in the same manner that it is Gods ordinance that no man should sinne and yet all men do sinne So that all that can be said of the Church and the Pastors thereof by vertue of the promise is that neither it nor they shall vniuersally all of them at any time faile in the beleefe profession of those truths which are absolutely and simply necessary to saluation though many Pastors and people reputed for the best part of the Church may erre and sometime also persist in ioyning mortall errors with the truth many ages together what time no Pastors or people at all shall appeare to hold the faith so entire but some corruptions not hindering saluation shall be holden therewith the which assertion as it ouerthrowes all the Iesuites discourse in this place so is it true that our Aduersaries grant neither the whole nor any part of the Church to be free from error but so far forth as it followes the Pope who himselfe by their like confession may erre and be deposed for herâ—sie Beside if Gods ordinance or the Apostles intendiment did warrant the Pastors of the Church that they should not erre at least vniuersally how comes it to passe that euen euery Doctor in his Catalogue from Dyonisius and Ignatius to Stapleton and Bellarmine haue had their errors all his Councels haue had theirs and the most of his Popes haue decreed one against another and there is not one Diuine in all his Catalogue not his dearest Thomas of Aquin but he will confesse him to haue erred yet erre he should not if the prouidence of God were to preserue the Doctors of his Church from all error in the degree that the Replie sayes The truth therefore succeeds continually in the Church without ceasing but first Not alway in all nor in the highest Pastors Secondly Nor alway without corruption Thirdly Nor at all times entire and inuiolate from all error but sometime a vniuersall apostasy may so ouerflow the Church that nothing shall remaine free from error but onely the necessary and fundamentall points of faith the which points do not therefore lose their succession because many corruptions are receiued taught with theÌ„ much lesse do those corruptions succeed with the truth from the Apostles but the Pastors people thus corrupted shew themselues not to haue kept his couenant who will saue them that haue perseuered in the foundation and be merciful to them that haue erred of inuincible ignorance and forgiue them that haue repented of their errors and damme them whether Pastors or people that with tyranny and contumacy haue maintained the corruptions 3 The Iesuites reasons to proue that the Pastours of the Church cannot erre and that the true faith cannot be corrupted are answered already in THE WAY § 14. A.D. Wherefore if my Aduersaries will deny the catalogue of Pastors Pag. 270. which I haue set downe to be of such as haue alway preserued the foresaid sacred Depositum of the truth entire and inuiolate I require first that they will assigne another Catalogue of such as did continually preserue it whole and without change Also I require that they assigne the first Pastour of my Catalogue which failed in preseruing the truth setting downe â—hall the point of doctrine wherein he erred and naming other Pastâ—â—â—s who resisted and continued to resist Lastly I require that they assigne not as their manner is White digr 51. 52. and as M. White doth such particulars as they may see ordinarily answered and refuted by Catholicke Authors but some plaine instances which neuer were yet nor cannot be answered or refuted Which my demands if they cannot satisfie as I am sure they cannot euery discreet man carefull of his soule will see that it is not safe to forsake this reuerend ranke and orderly succession of knowne Pastours to follow such a phantasticall Platonicall Idaea of an inuisible company of professing Protestants White p. 338. which M. White imagineth to haue alwaies bene as euery other Hereticke might imagine the professors of his sect to haue bene or to run after such a rabble of ragged hereticks as the same M. White assigneth for emineÌ„t meÌ„bers of the ProtestaÌ„t Church White ib. pag. 394. the which neither haue interrupted succession or continuance in time or place nor vniformity in doctrine with the ancient Church or one with another or with the Protestants of his age This foresaid consideration may suffice to let any indifferent man see that the same doctrine of faith which the ancient
those things that are written in the Scriptures or to bring in any thing that is not written Of images Epiphanius e Ep. ad Ioh. Ierosol sayes It is against the authority of the Scripture that the image of a man should hang in the Church And * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the making of statues resembling the images of the dead he calls an idolatrous and a diuellish practise And speaking of worshipping the image of the blessed Virgin which now is so commonly seene painted and attired f Pingitur cincinnis exculta vestibus ornatissimis pompa adeo inani structa vt illi etiam vniones ab auribus pendeant quod nemo possit sine stomacho aspicere Paleot de imag pag. 253. in the fashion like a Lady yea g Vestientes dominam nostram Magdalenam alias sanctas ornamentis profanis vanis ac meretricijs quibus etiam pudicae matronae sese vestire vererentur Nauar manual c. 11. n. 23. like a Curtisan and keeps such a court at Lauretto in the same place where h Leand. Albert descript Ital. in Picen pag. 428. sometime Iuno kept hers he addes that thereby men are drawne a whoring from God the body of Mary being holy but not God and shee an honorable Virgin but not giuen to be adored but her selfe adoring him that shee bare in her wombe Of the Supremacy which now the Pope vses ouer all other Bishops Gregorie who in his third argument the Repliar sayeth professed his religion i Lib 6. ep 30. sayes he will confidently auouch him to be the forerunner of Antichrist whosoeuer he be that desires to be called vniuersall Bishop proudly preferring himselfe before others Of images of the Trinity Gregory the second k 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epist ad Leo. Isaur Imp. sayes they may not be made Of Purgatory it is cleare that the Greeke Church neuer beleeued it So saith Nilus l 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nil de purgat p. 118. l. 1. Our Fathers neuer taught vs Purgatory neither did the Easterne Church euer beleeue it Roffensis m Artic. 18. No man now doubts of Purgatory and yet among the ancient there is little or no mention made of it yea the Greekes to this day beleeue it not and the Latins haue not with one consent conceiued the truth of this thing For the beleefe of Purgatory was not so needfull for the Primitiue Church as now it is Of the number of Sacraments which n Trid. conc sess 7. can 1. our Aduersaries will needs haue to be seauen Cassander o Consult art 13. §. de numero sacram sayes we do not reade the other Sacraments confirmation matrimony orders penance vnction by those ancient writers to be cōprehended in any certaine number nor shall you hastily find any before Peter Lumbard that determined any certaine or definite number of them Of the peoples receiuing the cup in the Sacrament p 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Clē const p 145. Venet. the constitutions of Clemens say Let the whole Laity in order with feare and reuerence receiue the cup. By which few examples the Reader may discerne how vntrue it is that Coccius hath particularly set downe point by point the ancient Fathers with vnanime consent against the Protestants who hath brought nothing out of them to that purpose which is not clearely and sufficiently answered by * Jn the most waighty controuersies he is answered by M. Perkins in his Problema our Diuines in euery controuersie 2 His second argument is the testimony of those that writ the Centuries Who being themselues famous Protestants testifie this to be so in many points This argument was obiected in q THE WAY §. 44 Digr 47. his Treatise and fully answered and therfore should not haue bene repeated againe before my answer had bene auoided Yet a little I will satisfie him First if the Magdeburgenses acknowledge the Fathers in many points to be for the Papists which they no where do yet that is not all the Fathers with vnanime consent point by point in all points Some particular Fathers the Repliar knowes well enough speake that which hath no vnanime consent of the rest and their priuate opinions may giue colour to many things and yet will not reach from point to point Next it is false that is here reported of the Centuries They testifie no more but what they thought that Fathers held corruptly and themselues iudged to be errors and blemishes in their writings There is no Romish writer at this day but he doth the same Baronius in his Annals purposely intended against the Centuries hath not left one Father or one ancient history vncensured but still charges it with some error and blemish or other But my Aduersary sayes the things which the Centuries say were blemishes in the Fathers are such points as the Church of Rome now holds whereby it should seeme that in many things they testifie with the Church of Rome against the Protestants I answer first that in some points as the diligentest that are may sometime ouersee and now and then they mistake and call that the opinion or the error of a Father that is not This kind of ouersight we perceiue and pardon in our Aduersaries themselues Secondly diuers things noted by them for errors in the Fathers are not holden by the Church of Rome but are censured also by our Aduersaries themselues as well as by the Centuries Thirdly diuers points in particular Fathers are taxed which belong to that which is now holden in the Church of Rome but this iustifies not the Papists first because in such points there is no vnanime consent of all the Fathers or all the Church but onely the vnsetled and ambulatory opinions of some priuate Doctors Next what these Doctors deliuered touching such points is holden otherwise and to other intents and purposes now in the Church of Rome as their praying for the dead which the Centuries iustly note for a blemish was not with opinion of Purgatory as now it is in Rome Thirdly the mystery of iniquity began to worke in the primitiue Church whereby the fathers themselues though Bishops of the Church and most holy men yet but men sometime were deceiued and brought into error in some things thus it is written of Papias r Baron an 118 n. 2. 6. a Bishop of great authority in the Church and famous for the holines of his life that by misunderstanding ſ Apoc. 20.4 a Text in the reuelation t Prateol elench haeret l. 3. n. 17. Hiero. de scripto c. 18. he gaue occasion of the millenary heresie afterward condemned in the Church yet his credite and estimation was such that many great men followed him Nepos Irenaeus Victorinus Tertullian Lactantius Apollinarius Coracion and diuers others For being a man as u 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb hist eccle l. 3. c. vlt. Eusebius sayes
of him of no deepe iudgement but giuen to beleeue reports for he was not so carefull to attend what was written by the Apostles as to gather together the reports and traditions of such as had bene conuersant with the Apostles and Apostolicall men he was deceiued thereby himselfe and deceiued many that followed him That it is no maruell if some among the Fathers taking that course vented in their bookes that which is not so sound and vnawares writ some things which the Church of Rome declining into heresie and following Antichrist afterward would lay hold on to maintaine their errors Thus Origen Tertullian Lucifer Lactantius Hilary Cyprian and all the Fathers till it come to good S. Austin the most orthodoxall of all the Fathers Greeke or Latine partly seduced by reports and tradition as was Papias partly transported by the subtilty and learning of Philosophers and heretickes that liued euery where among them and partly * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Basil pag. 314. ouercharged with zeale or passion in contending against them deliuered diuers things that were not the vniforme doctrine of the Church whereof some perhaps may belong to the now errors of the Church of Rome but that is not much and what can be shewed concernes but the smaller points of Popery wherein there is no great moment and euen in such aduantages they are vnhappy that haue nothing in the Fathers to pleasure them but the parings of their nails and excrements of their writings And if our aduersaries be impatient hereat the field is open let the resolutest among them chuse any point determined against vs in the new creed of the Trent Councell and shew out of his Coccius or whence he will this vnanime consent of the Fathers for it and he shall be answered in such sort that it shall euidently appeare there in no such matter 3 His third argument is the testimony of his ProtestaÌ„t apology such another author as Coccius was a Seminary Priest yet liuing and of the same stamp the Repliar himselfe is Which brings to my mind a iest that I read in Cyrill of the Emperor Iulian a Mâ— certe sanauit saepe Aesculapius aegrotantem subministrans remedia horum testis est Iupiter cont Iulia. l. 7. p. 1â—2 Aesculapius verily hath often cured me when I haue bene sicke and I call Iupiter to witnesse He brings his testimony to proue the deity of Aesculapius who himselfe was no lesse an idoll then Aesculapius as my Repliar alledges Coccius and Briarly whose writings are mistrusted no lesse then his owne Reply That which he hath said is answered by b Protest App. p. 1. inde the D. of Winch. to whose booke I refer the Repliar as he refers me to Briarly That the first conuersion of English men was not By Austin I c §. 49. shewed in THE WAY and whether Gregory professed the faith now holden in Rome the Reader may see in the D. of Winch. booke His holding of some things superstitiously which the Church of Rome hath entertained proues not that he professed the same faith the Church of Rome now doth because the faith of the said Church comprehends much more then he held and what he held is now otherwise expounded and applied then by him it was For example in the matter of images he was superstitious d Lib 7 ep 54. Secundino sub sin and would haue them vsed to put vs in minde and to be lay mens bookes but e L. 9. ep 9. in no wise to be worshipped It is reported to me that being inflamed with inconsiderate zeale you haue broken in peeces the images of Saints with this excuse that they ought not to be worshipped And verily we do altogether commend you in that you forbad them TO BE WORSHIPT but we reproue you for breaking them for it is one thing to ADORE a picture and another thing by the historie of a picture TO LEARNE what is to be adored For what writing performes to them that can reade the same doth a picture to idiots beholding it now that which was placed in Churches NOT TO BE ADORED but ONELY to instruct the ignorant should not haue bene broken Now f Tho. 3. part q. 25. art 3 Capre ol 3. d. 9. q. vnic ad 1. concl 2. imagines porto Christi Deiparae virginis aliorum sanctorum in templis retinendas eisque debitum honorem venerationem impertiendam per imagines quas oscul â—mur coram quibus caput a perimus procumbimus Christum adoramus sanctos quorum illae similitudinem gerunt veneramur conc Trid. sess vlt. vbi verbum Adoramus Latriam verbum autem Veneramur duliâ—m significare videtur Suar. tom 1. d. 54. â— 4. imagines Christi sanctoruÌ„ venerandae sunt non solum per accidents vel impropriè ita vt ipsae termineÌ„t vâ—nerationem vt in se considerantuâ— non sulum vt vicem gerunt exemplaris Bell. de imag c. 21. the faith professed by our aduersaries is that they are to be worshipt and adored with diuine honour and properly which Gregory condemned So likewise g Moral l. 4. c. 42. l. 18. c. 24. l. 25. c. 1. his wordes are alleadged for the merite of workes yet the condignity thereof now maintained and wherein merite properly consisteth he neuer dreamt of but saies plainely h Explan in Psal poemt p. 7. v. Auditam fac mihi the contrary If that happinesse of the Saints in heauen be Gods mercie and not obtained by merits where shall that be which is written And thou shalt reward euery man according to his workes If it be giuen according to workes how shall mercie be esteemed This is the obiection now marke his answer But it is one thing for God to render according to works and another thing to render for the works themselues For in that which is said According to works the quality it selfe of the works is vnderstood that the glorious reward shall be his whose good works shall appeare because vnto that blessed life wherein with God and of God we liue no labour can be equalized no works compared specially when the Apostle saies The sufferings of this life time are not condignely worthy of future glory which shall be reuealed in vs. it is certaine therefore that to whom he mercifully giues to worke well in this life to them he more mercifully giues that to them in eternall blessednesse an hundredfold fruite shall be rewarded This profession of Gregory is farre from that which a Before §. where M. Baius his doctrine is laied downe I haue shewed the Church of Rome now professes touching the merite of our works Secondly whereas our of Briarly he saies the Faith professed by Gregory and taught the English men by Austine at our first conuersion agreed for substance with the first faith whereto the Brittans were conuerted in the Apostles daies and was the same which vniuersally was professed We
the backe side d In THE WAY §. 38. He said the Protestants were euidently more wicked then in old time e §. 40. And their doctrine such as could not but leade to all loosenesse and liberty all true holinesse was in Rome which was a signe it was the true Church Against this insolency I opposed the digression that seems so much to offend his stomacke against which whatsoeuer he oppose it will be small aduantage to him so long as whatsoeuer he shall say either against our Euangelicall brethren or our primitiue parents will proue but the reports of a Gifford or a Bolseâ—ke or a Cochlaeus that is to say a Knight of the Post one of their one side and our vowed enemie whereas whatsoeuer we produce shall be out of his owne writers and as famous and credible men as any they haue in their Church And the things reported shall touch their crowne and the Top-gallant of their Church 6 M. White therefore grants that he regards not what can be obiected against his brethren vpon this ground because he knowes no more can be obiected then is obiected already and hath so much insight into matters that withouâ— either blind zeale or malice or deuising he can vie turnes and obiect againe to better purpose his knowledge in the historie of Popish times and experience of Romish sanctitie being such that he will not exchange it hastily for twise as much as is writteÌ„ in the Repliars Caluino-Turcismus Briarly against the Protestants And so to come in againe with the Repliar the conclusion shall be the same that is said a THE WAY pag. 347. in my booke quoted in his margent It had not bene possible the Popish D D. should haue spoken so waueringly and vncertainely if that they say in the points of their faith had bene alway vniuersall in the Church when in things alwaies beleeued as the Trinitie and Incarnation they speake resolutely enough And my aduersaries discourse to the contrary is nothing to the purpose For first what varietie of opinions soeuer be among vs and whatsoeuer he can vrge and how little meanes soeuer we haue to take away this varietie that answers not my argument as b THE WAY §. 33. 34. I answered this recrimination to the full in my first writing whither I refer him The second that this varietie of opinions among his D D. is not in matters of faith is denied and answered a little before c N. 1. 4 twise ouer and this is but a tricke put vpon the ignorant that they should not stumble at these innouations and to hide the same from being espied The third that the things wherein their D D. dissent and are not so certaine as they are in the articles of the Trinitie and the Incarnation are not so necessarie to be expresly knowne nor so expresly determined by the Church whereupon men haue not bene so carefull to get this knowledge of them which is the cause why they vary rather in them then in the matter of the Trinitie or Incarnation confesses three things first that the articles of Papistry as Transubstantiation for example is not so necessarie to be knowne as the mysterie of the Trinitie or of the Incarnation Secondly that the Church hath not so expresly determined them Thirdly men are not bound to be so carefull in getting the expresse knowledge of them This is the same that I said They were not therefore so vniuersally receiued in the Church And confirmes my assertion in this place that they are not to be visibly seene and read in the writings of the Doctors of the primitiue Church For being neither necessary to be knowne nor expresly determined nor such as men thought themselues bound to learne how should they write them And if they writ them not it will be but labor lost for the Repliar to go about to proue they beleeued them his implicite beleeuing is too short and then if they beleeued them not downe comes the catalogue and the Church of Rome which I beleeue expresly will proue the seate of Antichrist and mother of heresies thus to maintaine that which the ancient Church neither writ nor read nor yet beleeued CHAP. XLVII 1 Councells haue erred and may erre 2 What manner of Councells they be that the Papists say cannot erre 3 It is confessed that both Councels and Pope may erre A.D. The third obiection Thirdly my Aduersaries may obiect errors to haue bene not onely in priuate Doctors Pag. 277. but also in the decrees of Councells This stale obiection is answered I know not how often by Catholicke authors The summe of the answer is that either the Councels which may be obiected by my Aduersaries were not generall Councels lawfully called continued and confirmed or that which is by my Aduersaries accounted an error either was no error or was not definitiuely concluded the error rather being in my Aduersaries or other whom they haue followed who may either ignorantly account that an error which is none or corruptly cite the words or misinterprete the minde of the Councels alledging that to haue bene defined by this or that Councell which is not So that it pertaineth to my aduersaries if they wil obtaine any thing by this obiectioÌ„ not onely to say this Councell and the other Councell haue erred but they must proue the Councell whose error they shall obiect to haue bene a generall Councell lawfully called continued and confirmed And that the error is an error in faith and that this error was concluded by the definitiue sentence of the Councell truly cited without corruption and truly interpreted according to the minde of the Councell 1 THat Councels of Bishops may erre is a truth as I noted in a §. 15. n. 6. 44 n. 6. the WAY the Replie denies not for Panormitan b Panorm de elect c. Signif saies In things concerning faith a Councell is aboue the Pope and yet a Councell may erre and sometime hath erred Waldensis c Doctr. sid tom 1. l. 2. c. 19. sayes A particular Church though it were the particular Romane Church is not that Church that cannot erre in faith but the vniuersall Church not as it is assembled in a generall Councell which we haue perceiued sometimes to erre but the Catholicke Church of Christ dispersed ouer all the world from the baptisme of Christ by the Apostles and their successors to these daies is it Dominicus Iacobatius d Iacobat de concil l. 10 art 7. ad â— p. 731. sayes A particular Church yea a Councell representing the vniuersall Church may erre But that which we obiect in this place is properly and most especially against the latter Councels holden since the time that the Papacie preuailed in the Church of Rome these last 800 yeares though the same also be true of many holden before For such Councels haue erred and iudged erroniously whose doctrine our Aduersaries ought to giue vs leaue to examine
we refuse the church of Rome are nothing else but the corruptions and abuses that came in by the faction of some and were opposed by the sounder part of the Church as they grew and came in CHAP. XLIX 1.2 The ancient Church held the blessed Virgin to haue bene conceiued in sinne 3. The now Church of Rome holds the contrary Pag. 279. A. D. The fourth obiection Fourthly my aduersary M. White obiecteth eight points wherein as he saith the Church holdeth contrary to that which it hath formerly held to wit the conception of the virgin Marie Latin Seruice reading Scriptures Priests marriages Images Supremacie Communion in one kinde Transubstantiation To this I answer here onely briefly and in generall referring the Reader for more particulars to other Catholicke authors who ex professo write of these points First concerning the conception of the blessed virgin Marie it neuer was vniuersally held by the ancient Church as a point of faith that she was conceiued in sinne For if it had bene so held Saint Augustine would neuer haue pronounced so absolutely as he doth that when question is concerning sinne he would haue no mention of the blessed Virgin Neither is it now held by vs as a point of faith that she was not conceiued in sinne this being one of those points in which according to Saint Augustine an erring disputer is to be borne withall in regard the question is not diligently digested nor confirmed by full authoritie of the Church 1 THe Replier in his Treatise that I answered to proue his Romane church Catholicke a In THE WAY §. 46. 47. vsed this reason because it had still professed without change the same faith which hath bene continually since the Apostles without denying any point of doctrine which in former times was vniuersally receiued and bad vs prooue the contrary if we could To this I answered first generally and then in the 49 Digression particularly I obiected the eight points here mentioned shewing that the church of Rome holds therein contrary to that which formerly was holden Now he replies that his answer shall be but briefe and in generall referring the Reader to other Catholicke authors that purposely haue writ of these points But when he made his challenge I supposed he would haue tried them with me himselfe not by referring me to his Catholicke authors whose writings the reader hath no meanes to suruey but by bringing what he thought good out of them and letting the reader see what the issue would be betweene vs. But seeing he durst not put his cause to that kind of triall my answer shall be like his argument That I also referre the Reader to other learned men who ex professo haue answered whatsoeuer his authors haue written of these points And what himselfe hath said I will answer that the reader shall wel perceiue my instances were sufficient to shew that the church of Rome now holds contrary to that which formerly was holden and beleeued 2 First touching the conception of the blessed Virgin he sayes it was neuer vniuersally held by the ancient Church as a point of faith that she was conceiued in sinne nor is it now held in the Church of Rome as a point of faith that she was not conceiued in sinne Let vs make short worke Both these are false First it was held as a point of faith that is to say as a part of the religion and profession of those times that she was conceiued and borne in sinne as all others are This I proue by his owne authors Paulus Cortesius in his writing vpon the Sentences directed to Pope Iulius b 3. d. 4. pag. 65 sayes that one Vincentius produces 260 witnesses affirming her to be conceiued in sinne Cardinall Turrecremata c De consecr d. 4 Firmissimè â— 11. affirmes that all the Doctors in a manner hold it and that himselfe had gathered together the testimonies of three hundred to that effect noting the places and words wherein they affirme it Dominicus Bannes d 1 part qu. 1. dub 5. §. Arguitur secundo pag. 89. Venet. sayes It is the generall consent of the holy Doctors that she was conceiued in sinne and yet the contrarie opinion is holden in the Church to be not onely probable but verie godly This is plaine dealing He sayes that which is contrary to the vnanime consent of all the Fathers is now holden by the Church as the more profitable and godly opinion The like is confessed by e Bonan 3. d. 3. art 1. qu. 2. Arimin 2. d. 30. qu. 2. art 1. Capreol 3. d. 3. art 1. Caietan opusc de concept Cano loc l. 7. c. 1. others as fully To f De nat grat c 36. the place alledged out of Austin Gregorius Ariminensis g Art 3. ad 1. answers that he meanes it onely of actuall sinne In which doctrine Saint Austin is not constant neither for he sayes h De perfect iustit cont Celest sub sin elsewhere Whosoeuer he be that thinkes there haue bene or are any man or any men excepting onely the Mediator of God and men to whom the remission of their sinne was not necessarie he goes against the Scripture and the Apostles Romanes 5. And the Fathers mentioning the text of Iohn 2.4 Woman what haue I to do with thee affirme in effect that she was a sinner Saint Austin i Tulit admonitionem Filij expauescat Filij inuentutem de Symb. l. 2. c. 5. sayes Christ admonished her and bids her feare her Sonne Athanasius k 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 orat 4. aduer Arian pag. 281. sayes he checkt her Euthymius l Corripuit eam in Ioh 2. pag. 320. he rebuked her Chrysostome m Asperiora hac verba indignatio hom 20. in Ioh. that he was angrie at her Irenaeus n Repelleni eius intempestinam festinationem l. 3. c. 18. that he repelled her vnseasonable hastinesse Theophylact o 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Ioh. 2. that he child her not without cause Few of the ancient Fathers this is the confession p Comm. in Ioh. 2. nu 11. of Maldonat a Iesuite but either openly say or obscurely signifie that there was some fault or error in her They thought therefore she was a sinner actually which could not haue bin if originall sinne which is the fountaine of actuall had not bin in her 3 Next the Church of Rome now holds the contrarie whether as a point of faith or no the reader shall iudge presently 1 Below in the letters First it is holden expresly contrary to that which the Fathers held that she had no originall sinne 2 Can. Bâ—n vbi sup Next I presume no Papist will denie it to be defended in the Church as a godly opinion 3 Suar. tom 2. d. 3 s 6. pro. 1. Vasq 3 d. 1â—7 n. 148. Thirdly the Church may define it when she will 4 Vasq
those songs nor determines what kinde of songs they were whether such as they vttered by miracle or ordinarie Psalms ordinarily vsed in all assemblies without miracle much lesse doth it proue that the custome was so to sing that there was no praier vsed besides whereas the Text is plaine I will sing and I will pray distinguishing two seuerall actions singing and praying And because Gretser answers that singing is praying therefore the saying Amen is mentioned which was not so properly vsed when they sang but when they prayed without singing For who vsed to say AMEN at a Psalme Besides he wills them to vnderstand what they do that vnderstanding they may be able to say AMEN now that which he would haue vnderstood is not the songs onely but the praiers also First because the reason why songs should be vnderstood holds in praiers also Secondly because Bellarmine confesses that in some part of this Chapter the Apostle speakes of praier and Church Seruice But whatsoeuer he speakes of he requires to be vnderstood for the reason why he speakes of all that he mentions is because the Corinthians vsed them when the people vnderstood not which abuse he reproues admonishing them to ioine vnderstanding with their gifts Their songs therefore their reading Scripture their collations their praiers and all must be vnderstood Therefore in this place of the v. 15.16 not spirituall songs alone are meant but the Church praiers and Seruice also because in other places it is meant If Bellarmine replie that S. Paul speakes in other parts of the Chapter of praier and Church Seruice but no where in the Chapter that they should be vnderstood who sees not the falsehood when the reason that drew him on to speake of them was the abuse that they were not vnderstood which abuse he corrects by willing them to vse them that they may be vnderstood a Antidot apost in 1. Co p. 723. 727. inde D. Stapleton therefore answers that the Apostle in this place speakes of prayer but not such praier as we ordinarily vse in our Church but such as they vsed by miracle and the gift of tongues and admits that he rebukes this but not that This is follie for giue a reason why he rebukes this It was because the people vnderstood them not The same reason holds in that For the people vnderstand not If the Apostle would take this reason to condemne the vse of a miraculous gift when vnderstanding went not with it of necessitie he must also condemne ordinarie praiers when they offend against the same reason b P. 724. D. Stapleton answers that praying by gift was ordained for the profit of others therefore it was meet it should be vnderstood but the Church Seruice he saith is not to teach the people but to inuocate God for the people which may sufficiently be done when they vnderstand it not I replie that the praiers in the Church Seruice are not onely to inuocate God for the people but for the people to inuocate God for themselues as appeares first because God hath appointed not onely the Priest to pray for them but with them and themselues to ioine with him in the praiers and with one mind and heart to vtter with him that which he pronounces which cannot be when they vnderstand not what he saies Againe the Church praiers are conceiued and pronounced not onely in the name of the Priest for the people but also in the name of the people for themselues Heare thy people that calls vpon thee ô Lord open our lips and our mouth shall set foorth thy praise and such like therefore there is the same reason why the people should vnderstand them that there is why the Priest should do it Thirdly its false that the Church praiers are not to teach the people For their end is not onely to intreate God a Ro. 8.26 but to teach how to do it with what affection with what contrition with what faith with what vnderstanding and to forme in the minde the signes of the things framed that their being may shine in the vnderstanding Which is not done when the praier is conceiued in a language they know not They may say AMEN with a kind of brutish deuotion * Carent tamen eo fructu quem perciperent si orationes eas quas ore proferunt etiam intelligerent nam speciatim intenderent animum mentem in Deum ab eo impetrarent speciatim ea quae ore petunt magis aedificarentur ex sensu suo earum orationum quas ore proferunt Carent ergo hoc fructu Contaren Christ Instruct interr vlt. but these sighs and gronings which ought to accompanie all praier they feele not the mind meditates not the sense of the words that are vttered nor contemplates nor penetrates the things that are necessarie in all praier by reason of which defect Card. Caietan b In 1. Cor. 14. §. Sed alter non aedificatur p. 158. sayes that by the doctrine of Paule It is much better for the edification of the Church that the publicke praiers in the hearing of the people be said in a common language then in Latine 5 Gretser the Iesuite to this point c Def. Bell. de verb. Dei l. 2. c. 16. saies that the Church praiers in Latine profite two waies First in that the Priest praies for the people Secondly in that they stir vp deuotion and affection in the people though they vnderstand them not and he seemes to affirme that other profit then this is not needfull to be sought in praier But this is false for neither do they stir vp the deuotion mentioned which being an act of the will cannot be formally exercised without knowledge in the vnderstanding going before nor is such deuotion as the profite that God hath ordained praier for taking this profite in the true latitude thereof For the end and vse of praier is not onely to kindle some kinde of deuotion but to bewaile and vtter our wants to him we praie to vnfold our sinnes with particular feeling to breed in our hearts remorse compunction repentance by opening our miserable state To informe our vnderstanding by frequent meditations To increase our faith c. in which regard we are required to be attentiue and diligent in the time of praier The Emperor Iustinians law was d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the same that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Varin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nouell Justin pag. 181. that all B B. and Priests should celebrate the Seruice and praiers vsed in Baptisme not with a low but a loud voice which the people might heare whereby their minds might the better be stirred vp to vtter the praises of God Therefore diligent attention and eleuation of the minde being to bee brought by all that come to Church it is manifestly intended that they shall vnderstand what is said The Repliar I presume e Cum enim aliquis venit
audire sacrum poste◠raptus alijs cogitationibus parum aut nihil aduertit dicitur quidem praeceptum missam audiendi implere nec tenetur audire aliam dummodo non sit affectata diuagatio Tol. sum l. c. 6. c. 6. vide Nauarr man c. 21. n. 8. de orat p. 431. concl 16. n. 2. if he hold him to the doctrine of his owne side will require no such attention but that must not greatly mooue vs when f Quae autem segnitia est alienari capi ineptis cogitationibus profanis cum dominū deprecaris quasi aliud sit quod magis debeas cogitare quam quod cum Deo loqueris◠Cypr. de orat Dom. sub fi◠it were the most barbarous thing in the world for the people in time of Gods Seruice not to ioine heart and tongue and countenance and all with the Minister Secondly that the Priests praying for the people is that profite which is sufficient for the people in publike praiers or any profit at all when it is in an vnknowne language is likewise false as I haue said And there can no reason be assigned why then S. Paule should condemne the praiers vsed in the Church of Corinth in a strange tongue when they also were conceiued for the people as well as ours 6 The negatiue part of Bellarmines answer is that the Apostle speakes not of Diuine Seruice nor the publicke reading of the Scripture I grant he speakes not of such Diuine Seruice as is now vsed because I suppose there was either no set forme of Seruice at all the Church being yet vngrowne and in persecution or no such forme as now is vsed But of that forme that was then vsed he speakes that is to say whatsoeuer forme of Seruice and manner of praiers was vsed in the congregation he commands euen in those words be done in a knowne language The which if the Repliar denie I must put him in mind of that I haue said before out of Gretser that in this Chapter he speakes of reading the Scripture and the publicke Seruice But it is certaine that whersoeuer he speakes of it he requires they be done to edification and expounds the edification by vnderstanding the language wherein they are done in the same manner that here he speakes of singing and praying For therefore he mentions them wheresoeuer it be because they were abused and that abuse was the vsing them in an vnknowne tongue and this abuse he condemnes wishing them to speake with edification which is al one whether he speake of them in this place or in another But let vs heare how Bellarmine proues the Apostle not to speake of diuine seruice or publike reading the Scripture in this place it is proued saith he by this that the Scriptures were read and the seruice done in Greeke because it was a Greeke Church But the Apostle speakes of something that was done not in the Greeke but in some other vnknowne tongue This auoids not our argument for he cannot proue they had any set forme of liturgy at all g Mos Apostolorum fuit vt ad ipsam solummodo orationem dominicam oblationis hostiam consecratent Greg. l. 7. ep 64. see Amulat Fortun. l. 3. Pref. Cusan ep 7. All writers consenting that in those daies they vsed to consecrate the Sacrament by saying the Lords prayer it is as likely they would haue had a set forme for the Sacrament as for any other part of the seruice But whether they had a set forme or no we grant they had a forme of seruice at least praier and reading and Sacraments formed at the choise and liberty of the Pastors But how doth the Iesuite proue that de facto it was done in the Greeke that all vnderstood we graunt de iure it ought but this is that we say that when these men indued with the gifts of tongues came into the congregation they would do it in strange tongues and not in Greeke which is part of the abuse that the Apostle speakes against requiring that if such would omit the ordinary common language and do the Church seruice such as it was in a strange language as the spirituall songs mentioned were done then let him speake and another interpret Besides the singing mentioned cannot be shewed to haue bene other then a part of the Church seruice For whatsoeuer shew Bellarmine make with the names of Eusebius Dionysius and Tertullian yet as I haue said h Yea Tertull. in the place cited apol c. 39 mentions nothing else but the Hymnes which Christians sang altogether in their assēblies instituted by the Apostles whereof we reade so much in antiquitie that the Christians in their meetings vsed to sing Psalmes together Ephes 5.19 Col. 316 Epiph. l 3 sub fin Plin l. 10. ep 2. Nicep l 3 c. 17. Euseb hist l. 3 c. 33. Tert apol c. 2. Aug. conf l. 9. c. 6. 7. Jgnat Ep ad Rom. sub init Basil ep 63. Dionys de diuin nom c. 3. 4. pag. 281. mentions nothing but singing of all together and in another place eccl Hier. c. 3. reports the custome of singing Psalmes by all the cleargy mē together at the Altar 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 132. the which to haue bene such spirituall songs as the Iesuite here conceites that were no part of the Church seruice he can neuer proue but the place looked into will shew the contrary that they were part of such Church seruice as they vsed they do not distinguish the singing they speake of frō that which belongs to the liturgie or was of the same order and albeit it were granted that such as the Apostle mētions sang by miracle as they praied and prophecied by miracle yet why might not this singing praying and reading be part of the Church seruice that at such times was vsed Thirdly let it be granted that he speakes not of the seruice but onely of that which was done extraordinarily by miracle then haue our aduersaries to shew how the Apostles argument against preaching and singing in a strange tongue holds not likewise against Church seruice in a strange tongue Bellarmine and Gretser say the principall end of those spirituall and miraculous songs was the instruction and consolation of the people and therefore it was meete they should vnderstand them but the principall end of Church seruice being to worship God and the Priest hauing in charge to teach the people what they vnderstand not it is not needfull the said seruice should be in a knowne tongue But this latter that the Priest had in charge to teach the people what they vnderstood not is vntrue for the Apostle will haue both Priest and people ioyned together Thou verily giuest thankes well but thy brother is not edified Neither would I require any better argument for my assertion then this For if the end of Church seruice be Gods worship therefore the people must vnderstand it that they may worshippe God For this
in their conscience they know the primitiue Church neuer made and raking into all the abuses of the Scripture that they can finde mens deprauing misexpounding misapplying them vsing them ouer boldly malepartly not with the respect they should hence most dishonestly they conclude the vtter suppressing of them not that they care how they are vsed for neuer any vsed them so vilely as themselues either * PRVRITANVS in applying reuiling or corrupting them but because they are mad at that which discouers their heresie 3 The Reply to salue the matter sayes that if the parties disposition be such that he may take benefit and no harme by reading then they permit the Scripture in the mother tongue both to laie men and women This is not true for how do they permit it to such where as in Spaine there is permitted no translation at all how it is permitted when the Pope sayes none may reade but such as are licenced by the Bishops and this power of licencing is taken from him by the Inquisition Againe euen by making this restraint they are gone from the primitiue Church which gaue rules had discipline to restraine such as abused the Scripture but the liberty of the booke it selfe they neuer restrained nor euer bound the rudest that was to go to the Bishop for a licence but by how much the more he was ignorant or transported with pride or indangered with heresie by so much the more they required him to reade the Scripture to reforme himselfe and if he did not they onely preached against his abuse and punisht the man but the translation they suppressed not And all the Papists in Europe in all the writings of the first 600 yeares cannot shew one period beyond this There are in the Fathers specially Nazianzen and Ierome sharpe speeches against abusers of the Scripture such as tosse turne thē to their owne lusts as Papists do but not a word against the translating and permitting them to all indifferently in the vulgar tongue to be read They neuer reproacht Gods people that desired his law with the name of dogges and swine as these * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eustat Centaurs do nor euer imagined the permission of the sacred Scripture to be casting of pearles before them It is easie enough to see that if the laity were dogges and hogs neuer so much it were impossible they should trāple Gods blessed word worse then this Grillus drencht with Cyrces cup at Rome hath by this his application trampled it And whereas it may be some will beleeue him that the restraint made is onely in dangerous times and where there is perill of falling into error as he seemes to speake let it be remembred that at all times and in all places this restraint is made euen when and where there is no danger of error or heresie but onely of that which they will stile heresie when men by the Scripture see the horrible errors of the Church of Rome It being the doctrine of that side that the Scriptures should not be translated at all Let the wordes of Rainolds and Gifford in their a L. 4. c. 7. pag. 824. inde Caluino Turcismus be a litle pondered I conclude therefore that it is much more honour to the Scripture and saffe for religion and wholesome for the people that this power of the people to reade the Scripture in the mother tongue were altogether taken away without which they might both beleeue piously and liue holily and by so doing much more saffely and easily attaine eternall life 2 P. 825. It seemes to me this profane reuealing of the diuine mysteries by translating the Scripture is odiously contrary to the will of God and to the nature of the mysteries themselues 3 P. 830. The Pastors of the Church are not tied true for they haue broke the bonds to translate the Scripture into vulgar tongues there being no Apostolike precept or councell or so much as any light signification of their will to haue it so 4 P. 831. The manifold and great mischiefes which by the translations of the Scripture haue risen against the maiestie of God against the holinesse of the Scripture its selfe against the tranquillity of states against the faith and good conuersation of men * Satis magnā vim habere de buit ad istas translationes penitus supprimendas etiamsi diuina vel Apostolica authoritate niterentur Thus Gods ordinance Christs Testament and the Apostles doctrine must giue place to the Popes lust should haue force enough vtterly to suppresse these translations yea ALBEIT THEY WERE SVPPORTED BY DIVINE OR APOSTOLICALL AVTHORITY Let the reader iudge by this if the Church of Rome do onely as the Reply blaunches it not promiscuously permit vulgar translations when they may be occasions of error by misinterpreting and not vtterly hate and condemne them as the causes of their discontent and desire the suppressing of them from all It s easie to discerne how pretiously they affect that which by reason onely of some abuse which also they multiply by their art many times a mote being in their eye when there is none in the skie they would haue vtterly taken away though by DIVINE AND APOSTOLIKE AVTHORITIE IT WERE SVPPORTED 4 To the testimonies alledged out of 1 Deut. 6.7 Moses 2 2. Tim. 3.15 S. Paule 3 Hom. 3. in Laz ho. 2. in Matthae S. Chrysostome 4 Epitaph Paul S. Ierom and 5 Cornel. Agrip. de vanit c. 100. the Councell of Neece whereby I shewed the doctrine of the Primitiue Church to be that lay people should reade the Scripture he answers nothing but contents himselfe hauing better helps for it with replying to the 5. of Iohn Search the Scriptures wherein I commend his discretion that falling so foule on this would let the rest alone First he saies the wordes were not spoken to all in generall but to the Pharisees and princes of the people because if they were spoken to the people he did wisely foresee that our Sauiour therein no longer counts them dogges and hogges but admonisheth them as Gods people bought with a price to the reading of the Scripture But how shall I be sure he speakes to none but the Pharisees and Priests when a V. 15. 18. the text saies he spake to the Iewes that sought to kill him whom the man healed at the poole of Bethesda had told of his healing which Iewes cannot be shewed to be the Priests and Doctors alone but some of the laity withall who were as eager in persecuting our Sauiour as the Priests and frequented the Temple and prouoked him in all places where he was as well as the Pharisees Or if it were granted he spake onely to the Priests yet how doth that auoide the argument when the Iewes had the Scriptures in their owne language neither Priests nor people vsing them in any other For it were too grosse to
say the people might not reade that which they had in their owne language b Act 15 21. which they daily heard read in their Synagogues and c Deut. 6.7 which they must rehearse continually to their families d 2. Tim. 3.15 and wherein they brought vp their children from their infancy Secondly he saies either they containe no precept or but a conditional precept or licence that when they would not beleeue Christ himselfe they might search the Scripture Faine he would say absolutely it is no precept because it would serue his turne better But belike he read in his Cyrill e In Ioh. l. 3 c. 4 that the common and receaued expopositionis that with a certen COMMAND our Sauiour stirres them vp to search the Scripture Athanasius f Tom 2 p. 248. Commelin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saies He COMMANDED them to search the Scripture g Aschet p. 599. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Basil wheÌ„ a COMMANDEMENT is giuen vs let vs obey our Lord saying Search the Scripture h Ho 40. 39. in Ioh. Chrysostome he COMMANDS to digge deepe into the Scripture he sends them away to the Scripture i Pag. 343. in Ioh. Euthymius He COMMANDS them to search k Iansen concord c. 36. Peter seleâ—â— disp to 4. in Ioh. 5. d. 20. Our aduersaries confesse this to be the commonest exposition and some of them the best l In Ioh. 5. Maldonat the Iesuite Cyrill thinkes the word SEARCH not to be the imperatiue but the indicatiue mood but Chrysostom Theophylact. Austine I thinke ALL GRAVE AVTHORS except Cyrill do BETTER thinke it to be the imperatiue And this is confirmed by manifest reason For in case of error the Iewes and all men are bound by precept to haue recourse to such meanes as can reforme them But the Repliar is content it be a precept so he may haue the hammering of it First therefore he saies It s but a conditionall precept or rather a licence that seeing they would not beleeue our Sauiour himselfe they might search the Scripture which they did beleeue This is transparently against the Fathers yet it will serue my turne and vtterly destroy his cause For such a licence the Pope and the Inquisitors will neuer grant as Clement 8. hath professed And if our Sauiour when the Iewes beleeued not him permitteâ— them to search the Scripture then by this text when the People beleeue not the Pope but misdoubt his doctrine he must giue licence to them to reade the Scripture which he will neuer do Gretser to helpe the Repliar a little m Tom. 1. pag. 893. c. answers There is not the same reason of Christians that there was of the Iewes and why so the Iewes beleeued not in Christ but opposed both his doctrine and person whereas he that is a true Christian beleeues Christ and honours him This is true that is said both of the Iewes and Christians but this difference is no reason why a beleeuing Christian may not search the Scripture as well as an vnbeleeuing Iew. For the Christian though he beleeue in Christ yet is ignorant of much of his wil or weake in faith or assailed with heresies increasing in the world or desirous to confirme himselfe and others in the truth in which cases let the Iesuite shew why Christ for the curing of the Iew should allow him to reade the Scripture and yet debar the Christian whose state needes the support of the Scripture one way as much as the state of the Iew doth another Nay this is a good argument against himselfe and my Repliar For if the reason why the laity may not reade the Scripture be because our Sauiour hath commanded vs not to giue holy things to dogges nor to cast pearles before hogges and the Iewes not beleeuing Christ but opposing his doctrine and person be more dogges and hogges then Christians hence it will follow roundly that the Scripture is to be permitted to Christians much more then to the Iewes because the Iewes were permitted to reade the Scriptures though they were dogges and hogges 5 Secondly he sayes that allowing it to containe an absolute precept which he doth as a child kisses the rod for he must do it if he wil follow the coÌ„sent of the Doctors yet being an affirmatiue precept it obliges not all meÌ„ nor at all times but may be limited to particular times as to the time of the Primitiue Church to particular persons as now only the Clergy and other circumstances which the Church of Rome shal think meet I answer affirmatiue precepts first binde all persons to whom they are giuen Secondly they binde at all such times as the matter therein contained agrees vnto Thirdly they receiue limitation or restraint from none but from the lawgiuer himselfe in all which properties they agree with negatiue commandemeÌ„ts therefore omitting all intricate discourse touching this matter the precept of searching the Scripture binding in this manner it is sufficient for the allowance thereof to the people For first they that cannot reade may fulfill it by hearing it read Searching being restrained no more to the one then to the other Secondly there is none but by searching that is to say by diligent labour may vnderstand them in their mother tongue better then in Hebrew Because I haue shewed many times ouer that the articles of faith and rules of good life are set downe so plainely that the simplest may vnderstand them vnlesse he will make lay people so sencelesse that they haue not the common light of nature Thirdly we binde not euery man to reade all the Scriptures and at all houres doing nothing else because there is no such thing in the precept Then I haue satisfied his questions and admit a limitation in things wherein the precept limits it selfe but how followes this Affirmatiue precepts haue their limitations therefore the Pope may limit them Or this Circumstances limit precepts therefore the Church of Rome vpon her Antichristian circumstances may restraine the precept of Christ Or this Some lawfull and legitimate circumstances may stay the execution of an affirmatiue precept therefore the malicious and desperate imputations layed vpon the people or some misdemeanors committed by them indeed may lawfully debarre the people from hauing the Scripture any more Away with these circumstances and giue vs substance CHAP. LII 1 The mariage of Priests and Bishops lawfull and allowed by Antiquitie 2 Some examples hereof in the ancient Church The restraint hereof is a late corruption Priests were married euen in these Westerne parts a thousand yeares after Christ Pag. 281. A. D. Fourthly touching the mariage of Priests M. White citeth * See Bellar. de cleric c. 19. Prot Apol. tract 1. sect 3. n. 1. sect 7. tract 2. c. 1. sect 3. a mistaken sentence out of the Apostle and boldly affirmeth after his fashion that mariage of Priests was ordinarily in the Primitiue Church But he
* Ch. 48. n. 4. elsewhere shewed in the narration of the Councels of Frankford and Paris Walafridus Strabo h In his colendi superstitionem hebetudinem pag. 3 37. b. Nouimus non adorandas nec colendas iconas ib. d. called it superstition and blockishnesse to worship them Ionas the B. of Orleance liuing the same time i Pag. 609. Bibl SS Patrum edit 1. tom 5. pag. 609. c. That which you said the worshippers of images answered in defence of their error We do not thinke any diuinitie to be in the image but we worship it onely in honour of him whose image it is we reproue and detest as well as you because WHEN THEY KNOW THERE IS NO DIVINITIE IN IMAGES THEY ARE THE MORE TO BE INVEYED AGAINST FOR GIVING TO AN INFIRME AND BEGGARLY IMAGE THE HONOR THAT IS DVE TO THE DIVINITIE How much the maintainers and followers of this error go astray from religion I need not particularly declare God grant they in the East he meanes such as held and followed the second Nicene Councel who haue inthralled themselues to this most wicked error may be deliuered from it The like is testified by Agobardus the B. of Lions at the same time who wrote a booke to proue images should not be worshipped k De pict imag pag. 237. wherein he sayes They which answer they thinke no diuinitie to be in the image they worship but onely they worship it in honour of him whose image it is are easily answered againe because if the image he worships be not God NEITHER IS IT TO BE WORSHIPPED IN HONOR OF THE SAINTS who vse not to arrogate to themselues diuine honour And he addes that the images of the Apostles and our Lord himselfe were expressed by the ancient after the custome of the Gentiles RATHER FOR LOVE AND MEMORIE THEN FOR ANY RELIGIOVS HONOR OR WORSHIP And concluding his booke l Agobard pag. 251. he sayes THIS IS THE SINCERE RELIGION THIS IS THE CATHOLICKE CVSTOME THIS THE ANCIENT TRADITION OF THE FATHERS LET THIS HIGH-WAY THEREFORE BE HOLDEN THIS IS THE DOCTRINE TAVGHT BY THE APOSTLES THE MASTERS OF THE CHVRCH THE RAMMS OF THE FLOCKE And that this image-worshippe thus set afoote by the Nicene Coâ—ncell yet was not vniformly entertained of a long time after appeares by the manifest opposition that euen within these 400 yeares m See Polyd. inuent l. 6. c. 13. Gers declat compend defect eccl n. 67. Henric. quodl 10. q. 6. Dur. 3. d. 9. q. 2. ad 4. Dur. rational l. 1. c. 3 n. 4. Pic. Mirand apol q 3. Holt. in Sap. lect 157. B. Catharin l. de cult imag Biel lect 49. Cassand consult tit de imag as learned men as any liued in the Church of Rome made against it misliking and condemning it CHAP. LIIII 1. The Popes supremacie was not in the ancient Church neither is it acknowledged at this day by many Papists Nunne Brigets speech touching the Pope And Cyrils riddle A. D. Sixtly concerning the Supremacie Pag. 285. 1 Bell. l. 2. de Rom. Pont. c. 2.13.14.15.16 c. 21. deinceps lib. 5. c. 7.8 Iodoc. Cocc others there are so sufficient testimonies both of Scriptures and Fathers alledged by our Authors for it that it is maruell that M. White durst aduenture to reckon it for a point wherein we disagree from antiquitie especially vpon so sleight grounds and insufficient authorities which are so ordinarily answered by our Authors as I thinke it not worth spending inke and paper about them True it is that the practise of this authoritie might as occasion vrged be more at one time then at another but the fulnesse of all Pastorall power ouer all Christs sheepe was equally in all Popes from the very beginning when it was giuen by our Sauiour peculiarly to S. Peter and in him to his Successors BVt a THE WAY §. 36. n. 11. inde Digr 30. I shewed this fulnesse of power was giuen neither to Peter nor his Successors and made it so plaine to the Reader that the Repliar and his consorts haue nothing to say in defence of it Their guise is to giue the onset with much breath but when they are a little taken downe they thinke it not worth inke and paper to proceed any further they maruell we dare aduenture vpon so sleight grounds their graue onsets that promised all sinceritie and vndeniable proofes are resolued into Thrasonicall brags For the testimonies alledged in the Digression did not onely shew the practise of the Popes authoritie to haue bene lesse in the Primitiue Church then now it is but they make it euident that what he now practises and then began to claime or vsurpe more then the other three Patriarks had was vnlawfull I shewed his title of vniuersall Bishop his intermedling with Appeales his going beyond the Church canons and out-stripping the other Patriarkes his malepertnesse with Kings and their states was all condemned in those dayes by the doctrine and practise of the Church This was directly to the point when he bad me shew what point of doctrine the Romish Church now holds or denies contrary to the vniuersall Churh He sayes the authorities alledged are ordinarily answered by his Authors Coccius and Bellarmine This is his ordinary answer But had he told the Reader what his Authors say it would not haue endured day-light And as it pleases God all the world now sees the vttermost that can be said for the Supremacie is vented and Bellarmine himselfe is not onely confuted by others of his owne side but is at that fault with his directè and indirectè that we iustly begin to thinke he dotes * The B. of Ely As good a man and as learned as himselfe euery day in the yeare hath so vncased him that the titles of his learning and reputation of his greatnes shall deceiue vs no more And this I admonish the Replier that if the Pope spend the reuenues of his triple crowne vpon inke and paper he cannot iustifie his present vsurpations which not we alone abhorre but his owne Church b See controu memorab inter Paul 5. Ven. at Venice and at c De eccl polit potest Paris 1612. Paris this day hath cast off and d Occh. Rosell Rosat Marsil Maior Alliac Zabarel Cusan Dante 's WalraÌ„ Lupold and diuers others whose bookes are wel known and extant many of his owne Doctors within the compasse of the last 400 yeares haue condemned and the late Councels of Constance and Basil laboured to restraine And the Replier is too immodest to say he maruels I durst aduenture to reckon this of all points when the disagreement from antiquitie is more sensible in no point That now we may say of the Pope as e Brig reuel l 6 c. 96. Nunne Brigit sometime writ He that should crie Come and you shall finde rest to your soules now cries Come and see me in pomp and ambition
may define contrary to that they all writ as the B. Virgin not to be conceiued in sin and so they shall beleeue iust that they beleeued not and the direct contrary CHAP. LVII 1 Touching the first coming in of errors into the Church with the persons Time and Place 2 Purgatory and pardons not knowne in the ancient Church nor in the Greeke Church to this day 3 The true reason why the ancient praied for the dead Pag. 287. A. D. To conclude it is not enough for M. White to name these eight or any other points of our doctrine and to say that we hold or practise contrary to the doctrine of the ancient Church but I must require him to set downe the time place persons and other circumstances of this supposed innouation which circumstances are commonly noted in Histories when any such innouation against the vniuersall doctrine of the Church did arise This my demand 1 White Digr 5. pag. 374. M. White who will it seemeth sticke at nothing taketh vpon him to satisfie by naming seauen points of our religion offering to shew the time when and manner how they got into the Church And thereupon first he nameth pardons and purgatory the vse whereof he sayeth came lately into the Church To this I answer first that he nameth not the particular Time Place not Persons that first brought in the vse of pardons and purgatory and so he saieth nothing to the purpose Secondly I answer that our questions is not so much about the vse of pardons and purgatory as whether the doctrine which holdeth purgatory to be and pardons duely vsed to be lawfull came in of late contrary to the former doctrine of the Church Now M. White will neuer be able to shew that that Church did at any time vniuersally beleeue that 2 Concerning praier for the dead which supposeth the beleefe of Purgatory learned Protestants grant it to haue bene general in the Church long before S. Austins time as may be seene in the Protest Apol. tract 1. sect 2. nu 4. purgatory was not or that pardons duely vsed were vnlawfull or that the doctrine concerning the substance of these points was first brought in of late naming the first time place or persons which brought it in contrary to the former faith and shewing who resisted it as an heresie and who continued to resist it 1 HAuing no power to answer the examples I gaue of the Church of Romes now holding contrary to the ancient Church he concludes that it is not enough to name the points or to say they hold contrary to the doctrine of the ancient Church vnlesse I set downe the Time Places Persons and other circumstances of the innouations as Histories vse to note them when any such innouations arises and therefore he must require me to set them downe I answer it is sufficient that I haue shewed the points not to haue bene holden by the ancient Church For if the ancient Church held them not what skills it when or by whom they were brought in when they were brought in since the times of the ancient Church for that which was not at the first is not Catholike but by some at some time was brought in contrary to that which is Catholicke And a THE WAY §. 50. n. 5 6. I haue shewed that there be many confessed changes wherein these circumstances cannot bee shewed Neuerthelesse for example b THE WAY Digr 51. I named him seauen points and the circumstances of Time Place and Persons of their getting in whereof the vse of PARDONS was the first He replies that I haue not named the particular time place nor persons that brought them in and therefore say nothing to the purpose Here let the Reader iudge whether hauing shewed out of the confession of his owne writers that they are not from the Apostles times not expressed in the Scripture or Fathers nor brought to our knowledge by their authority but lately come into the Church this be not enough for what is not from the Apostles times came in since there is the Time when What came in lately was not vsed in the Primitiue Church There is the Time againe what is not mentioned by the Scripture Fathers and ancient Church was deuised by innouators there is the Persons What the Scriptures and Pastors of the Church reueals not that growes vp as cockle and weed in the Church there is the place Let me adde to the rest whom I alledged in the Digression the words of B. Fisher c Art 28 p. 86. b. Pardons therefore began AFTER men had a while trembled at the torments of Purgatory I haue therefore brought euidence sufficient to proue pardons to be an innouation because it proues they were not vsed in the ancient Church nor reuealed by the Apostles 2 He replies that the question is not so much about the VSE of pardons and purgatory as whether the DOCTRINE that holds them came in of late CONTRARY to the doctrine of the Church And I answer againe affirmatiuely that it did For the vse is founded on the doctrine and the doctrine cannot be without vse There was no vse ergo there was no doctrine But M. White will neuer be able to shew that the Church beleeued there was no Purgatory or that pardons were not lawfull This is follie for how should M. White shew the Church condemned that which was not yet in rerum natura no man being able to speake of that which is not in being If pardons therefore were not M. White must be pardoned if he cannot shew how the Church condemned them And touching Purgatory though it be much ancienter yet neither did the Catholicke Church beleeue it There were some in the Church that conceited such a thing and the Fathers began in Saint Austines time but a Non redarguo quia forsitan verum est c. Aug ciuit l. 21. c. 26. see Enchirid. c. 69. and the Apol of the Gre. p. 132. waueringly and without any resolute certainety to mention it but it was not beleeued in their daies as a matter of faith that he which denied it should be an hereticke as it is now beleeued in the Church of Rome Besides the East Church beleeued it not to this day therefore the vniuersall Church beleeued it not Heare their owne words in an Apology written touching this matter b Apol. Graec. p. 119. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We haue not receaued from our Doctors that there is any such Purgatory or temporary punishment by fire and we know the East Church neuer thought so Heare also what the B. of Rochester c Art 18. p. 86. b. saies No true beleeuer NOW doubts of Purgatory whereof notwithstanding among the ancient there is very litle or no mention at all The Greekes also to this day do not beleeue there is a Purgatory Let whose will reade the commentaries of the ancient Greekes and so farre as I see he shall finde very rare
speech of Purgatory or none at all and the Latines in the West Church did not all of them together receaue the truth of this matmatter but by little and little neither indeed was the faith either of Purgatory or pardons so needful in the Primitiue Church as now it is We neede no more then this confession of our aduersaries and testimony of the Greeke Church to shew the nouelty of this doctrine 3 And that which the Reply hath added in his margent Prayer for the dead which supposes the beleefe of Purgatory learned Protestants graunt to haue bene generall in the Church long before Saint Austines time is most weake for whatsoeuer learned Protestants say touching the antiquity of prayer for the dead which is impertinent now to be debated it is not true that the vse thereof supposes Purgatory which I will shew most euidently that the Reply may bewaile his cause when he sees no medicine applied to it can recouer or do it good For the Greekes praied for the dead and yet as you haue heard they beleeued not Purgatory And d See the Liturgies of Iames. Basil Chrysost and the rest in the praiers mentioned they praied for * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lit. Iacob the martyrs the B Virgine Iohn Baptist and for all the righteous from Abel to that day yet neither they nor the Church of Rome euer thought them to be in Purgatory Not the Martyres for e Bell. Purg. l. 2. c. 1. they are exempted by priuiledge Not f Rhem. on act 1. the B. Virgine for she had no sinne to purge but was carried immediately to heauen Not the iust from Abel to Christ for g Tho. Argenti 3. d. 22. art 4 p. 35. Gabr. ib. dub 3. Christ at his descent emptied Purgatorie It remaines therefore that their praying for the dead was not because they thought any to be in Purgatorie but by way of commemoration onely So sayes Cabasilas h Nicol. Cabasil exposic Liturg c 33. p. 503. in Bibl. S Pat. edit 1. in his exposition The Priest giues God thankes and offers supplication laying downe the causes of the thankesgiuing and the matter of the supplication The causes of thankesgiuing are the Saints The matter of the supplication are they who are not yet consummate but haue need of prayer For which Saints he offers this reasonable seruice as A THANKES GIVING to God and aboue all the rest for the B. Mother of God who exceedes all sanctity * Nihil pro eis orat Therefore the Priest PRAIES FOR NOTHING for them but rather praies to them that he may be holpen by their praiers * Haec quidem verba habent supplicationeÌ„ ostendunt autem etiam gratiarum actionem Deum praedicant These wordes containe supplication but shew thankesgiuing and praise God the benefactor of mankinde by remembring the persons whom he hath sanctified and almost consummated saying Giue vs the grace which already thou hast giuen the Saints to sanctifie vs as thou hast sanctified them before who are of the same kinde with vs. It was not therefore with an opinion of purgatory that the ancient praied for the dead but in expectation of the resurrection and in remembrance of Gods goodnesse toward them who had begun to glorifie them the consummation whereof they desired For it was a general opinioÌ„ of the Church of those times that the soules of the Saints departed saw not God nor should see him by beatificall vision till the day of iudgement in which regard they praied for the dead that their glorie might be consummate as all faithfull people pray for that good which they beleeue is to come the certaine fruition whereof they apprehend Bartlemew Medina writing vpon Thomas i Bart. Medin 12. qu. 4. art 5. p. 56. edit Bergom an 1586. saies that Almost all the ancient Fathers Iames in his Liturgie Ireneus Iustine Tertullian Clemens Origen Lactantius Victorine Prudentius Ambrose Chrysostome Augustine Theodorit Arethas Oecumenius Theophylactus Euthymius Bernard at the first sight but in the scanning of their wordes both he and the rest of his fellowes bewray it to be at the second sight too deny that the soules of the Saints see God vntill the day of iudgement The like is testified by k Sixt. Senens Bibl. lib. 6. ann 345. Perer. in Gen. l. 3 n. 45. Bellarm. â—e eccl triumph cap. 1. Vieg in Apoc. pag. 334. Riber ibi pag. 198. lun tom 2. pag. 1587. others the triall whereof the curious reader may see in Sixtus Senensis who hath collected together both the names and wordes of the Fathers to that effect that it is the vainest conceit that can be to imagine the ancient Church by praying for the dead intended a Purgatory when they assumed it for certaine that the dead came not into the presence of God till the last day l Luce clarius constat quia perfectorum animae mox vt huius carnis exeunt in celestibus sedibus recipiuntur Flor. Magistr exposit Missae pag. 65â— Which being an error no maruell if they erred in what they built vpon it nothing being sound that is built on a false foundation CHAP. LVIII 1. The Popes Supremacy 2. Single life of votaries 3. The worship of images 4. The Merite of workes 5. The sacrifice of the Masse 6. And the Popish doctrine touching originall sinne all of them innouations 5. The disagreement of Papists in their religion 7. And namely in their doctrine of originall sinne A. D. Secondly he names the Popes Supremacy which he 1 White pag. 376. saieth Pag. 288. began in Boniface the third But how false his assertion is appeareth by that which is shewed by not onely Catholicke but also Protestant Authors Thirdly he nameth Priests marriages to haue bene first restrained by Siricius This also to be false he may learne by 2 Concil Carth 2. can 2 see Prot. apol tr 1 sec 7 nu 3. the Councel of Carthage which signifieth that Priests were restrained from company of wiues long before Siricius his daies euen by the Apostles themselues Siricius might vpon occasion renew the prohibition as also Gregory the seuenth might but the first Authors of that doctrine or practise they were not Fourthly he nameth worship of images to haue bene first brought in by the Nicen Councell But this Councell was so farre from being 3 See Prot. apol tr 1. sec 3. n. 12. the first author of this doctrine as it expressely saith it followed in this point the doctrine of the holy Fathers and Tradition of the Catholicke Church in which the holy Ghost doth inhabite Concerning that which M. White saith 4 White pag. 378. Conc. Nicen 2. touching images see Bellarmine de imag C 8. Fiftly he nameth the doctrine 5 White p. 379. See Bellar. l. 5. de iustif c 2. 3 4 Greg. de Val. tom 2. disp 8. q. 6. p. 2. 4. of Merite of workes to haue begun lately by
in all things that so what the Apostles taught and antiquitie held we also may keepe Thirdly this canon was moued b Sed canones illos spectantes ad continentiam clericorum quoniam ea esse statuta apparent ex admonitione Siritij Romani Pontificis ea de re scribentis ante decennium ad episcopos Affricanos dignum est existimare fuisse alicuius alterius Coneilij Carthaginensis eo tempore post acceptas eiusdem Siritij Papae litteras celebrati Baro. an 397. n. 46. by the suggestion of Siritius and therefore most strongly iustifies my assertion For if the Councell of Carthage restrained Priests mariage and Siritius by his letters and suggestion drew the Councell thereunto then it is plaine Siritius made the restraint The Reply possible will say But the Councell saies the Apostles taught it and antiquity kept it and so the restraint was long before Siritius euen from the Apostles But I answer that he which suggested the motion suggested also the reason and so consequently Siritius mouing the restraint is the author of those words wherein he innouated as well as he did in the canon it selfe All this is plaine against the Replie and most sensibly demonstrates Siritius to be the author Fourthly I answer yet closer to the point that so much as the Bishops consented to was that Clergie men should liue honestly and chastly whether in the state of mariage or single life and not come at their wiues at certaine seasons This I proue First by the answer of the B B. It was said to Aurelius his motion by all the BB. it seemes good to vs all that Bishops Priests and Deacons or such as handle the Sacraments the maintainers of chastity abstaine also from their wiues It is said of all it seemes good that chastitie be maintained in all and of all that serue at the altar Here is no canon that they shall haue no wiues but that contrary their wiues are mentioned and they commanded chastitie which I hope the Replie c Heb. 13.4 dares not deny to be in cohabitation with a mans owne lawfull wife Secondly either the same or another Councell of Carthage at the same time d See Baro. vbi sup Balsam Who puts this canon into the 6 Councell of Carth. p. 310. for many things are printed in one Councell of Carthage that belong to another e Placuit vt presbyteri Episcopi Diaconi proprijs terminis etiam à suis abstineant vxoribus can 74. Synodi Carth. apud Balsam ordained that Priests Bishops and Deacons should abstaine from their wiues AT SET TIMES but other Clergie men should not be vrged thereto but keepe the custome of their Churches It was therefore no part of the Councels minde that they should be restrained mariage or the vse thereof out of those SET TIMES Thirdly Balsamon expounding these canons hath these words f In can 4. Out of this canon which I last cited it is shewed that Priests Deacons and Bishops liued with their wiues neither did the Synod forbid their companie with them but in THEIR SET TIMES that is in THE SET DAIES OF EVERY MANS COVRSE when he was to attend on the altar g In can 74. and note that in the time of this Councell Bishops had their wiues without preiudice with whom yet they did not conuerse in the time of their course for the ministery of Priests was deuided into weekes If therefore the Replie had deuised with long deliberation he could not haue giuen me a better weapon against himselfe then this canon of the Councell of Carthage made by the suggestion of Siritius himselfe and yet obtaining nothing of the Councell but onely abstinence of Priests from their wiues at certaine times 3 Fourthly touching images I shewed two things Both that images of the Trinity were not vsed and that the beginning of image worship was in the second Nicen Councell Touching the images of the Trinitie he bids me see Bellarmine but there is nothing to be seene to the purpose for he alledges neither example nor testimonie that there were any in the Primitiue Church but onely stands to proue them lawfull Now this is not the question but whether the Primitiue Church vsed or permitted them I shewed no by the testimonie of a Pope and a Councell and must be answered againe by disproouing the authority which if he cannot do I will not giue much for Bellarmines prouing of the lawfulnesse when it appeares the Pope and a Councell 800 yeares agoe misliked it and himselfe confesses That it is not so certaine whether the images of God or the Trinitie may bee made as it is that the images of Christ and his Saints may be made and that a Abul in Sent. 4. q. 5. Durand 3. d. 9. q. 2 Peres tradit 3. tract most learned Doctors in the Church of Rome vtterly condemne it For if this be true himselfe had a good steele conscience when he would take vpon him to iustifie that which was not certaine but onely an vnsetled opinion gainesaied by as learned as himselfe in his owne Church Touching the Nicen Councell he saies it was so far from being the first author of image worship that it saies expresly it followed in this point the doctrine of the holy Fathers and tradition of the Church Now sure this is a poore answer and like the former of Siritius For is it therefore the doctrine of the Fathers and tradition of the Church because they say it could not they that decreed idolatrie learne of their images to tell a lie Is there any more truth in their pretence of antiquitie then in the image worship it selfe This is like the former example of the Councell of Cathage where the restraint of mariage must be by the Apostles because Siritius that made the restraint suggests so much to the Councell But let the Repliar heare me a word with patience of this paltrie Nicen Councell b Ch. 48. I haue said enough already and to giue him some taste of that which it decreed a great Bishop of his owne Church c Claud Espencae 2. Tim. pag. 151. a. hath lately confessed That they who in that Councell defended the worship of images did abuse thereto the apparitions of Diuels and old wiues dreames as may be seene in the 4. and 5. actions of the Councell I suppose the doctrine of the Fathers and traditions of the Catholicke Church vses not to be supported with such stuffe And what impudencie was it for them to say it and yet be able no better to shew it 4 The fift point was the Merit of workes Which his owne Waldensis calles Pelagianisme and charges to be a late inuention To this he replies his accustomed argument It is false as our Diuines abundantly testifie But was not Waldensis his owne Diuine and is not his testimony enough to discharge me who professe no more but what I say to make good by the confession of my owne
aduersaries If he thinke his Diuines haue spoken so abundantly for it let him say ingeniously how chances his Bellarmine d De iustif l. 5. c. 7. confesses that by reason of the vncertenty of a mans owne righteousnesse and for feare of vaine glorie the safest way is to repose our whoâ—â— confidence in the sole mercy and goodnesse of God how chance his Waldensis saies e Pag. 30. Sacram The same merit of condignity condeÌ„ned also by Grego Ariminensis Burgensis Echius saies Vega qu. 5. de merit p. 788. He is to be reputed the sounder Diuine and the better Catholicke and more consonant with the Scripture that simply denies such merit confessing that simply no man merits the kingdome of heauen but obtaines it by the grace and free will of God that giues it These are strange courses therefore to affirme that an ancient doctrine which is neither so Catholicke nor so safe as the contrary nor so agreeable with the Scripture But of this point I haue intreated at large a the WAY Digr 35. elsewhere and laied downe enough to shew the foulenesse of it here I am onely to vphold that I said It was begun lately by the Schoolemen which is the confession of Friar Waldensis a man as learned as any of them all that say the contrary and b Quod opus Doctrinale antiquitatum sidei Thomae Waldensis non immerito And. Vega fontem esse asseruit ex qua postea plerique omnes qui contra nouos haeresiarchas scripserint hauserunt Posseu Bibl. sel p. 286. ThomaÌ„dico Waldensem vberrimum fontem ex quo hauserunt bonam partem fete omnes qui Luteranam sectam impugnarunt Vega qu. 4. de merit pag. 782. to whom the best of our aduersaries are beholding 5 The Sixt point was the Masse wherein the Digress by cleare testimonies shewed the vse of an vnknowne tongue the Transubstantiation the Sacrifice and the outward forme to be all brought in and added to the Sacrament since the Apostles time and the time of the Primitiue Church Whereto the Reply saies no more but that I cannot name the time when nor place where nor the persons in whom the substance of the Masse consisting onely in the consecration oblation and consumption of the hoast began I answer first these 4. the Latine language the Transubstantiation the Sacrifice and the forme of Praiers and other actions vsed as their garments ceremonies eleuation adoration circumgestation c. * Essentia sacrificij Eucharistiae in duobus consistit nempe in ritu externo in significatione Suar tom 3. p. 958. c. belong to the substance of the Masse and the Digress shewed they were not vsed by Christ nor his Apostles nor yet in the time of the Primitiue Church Now that which was not thus vsed is an innouation forsomuch as Christ left both the substance and manner of ministring the sacrament certaine and determinate and indispensable and it is not necessary in euery innouation to shew one determinate time person or place where it began because if it began after Christ and his Apostles it is an innouation when or where or by whom soeuer it was brought in Secondly touching the Sacrifice which is thâ— maine substance and very heart of the Masse I shewed the full confession of some Papists denying that Christ offered any sacrifice of himselfe vnder the formes of bread and wine at his last supper This is close to the matter for c Catholici scriptores omnes in eo potissimum laborant vt osteÌ„dant in Missa offerri Deo vere ae propriè corpus ac sanguinem Domini Bell. de Miss l. 1 c. 5. §. è contrario if the sacrifice be the sustance and Christ offered no sacrifice when he instituted it d Nam tota haec essentia ex institutione pendet Suar. p. 961. e. its plaine the substance of the Masse is not from Christ Therefore an innouation an addition an alteration therefore not Catholicke Thirdly afore the Repliar be so resolute about his sacrifice and substance it were expedient for the question in hand to be at some certenty touching the thing wherein his sacrifice consists for there is much reasoning about a sacrifice and yet no agreement what or which it is e Bell. de Miss l. 1. c. 27. Some say there is but onely one sacrifice f Tapper art 16. Cassal de sacrif p. 63. c. 20. Roffensis Alphons Gab. Hos Caâ—et Alexand Eck. Mag. TurrecreÌ„ quos refert Cassal ibid. p. 64 Some two They that say two hold the bread and wine to be one and the body and blood of Christ another They that hold onely one are not agreed what it is g Refert Suar. p. 959. B. whether the body and blood of Christ onely or h Bell. vbi sup the formes of bread and wine withall Againe whether i Suar. d. 75. s 2. the actions exercised in the Masse are sixe First the oblation of bread and wine by eleuation praier and other ceremonies before consecration Secondly the consecration Thirdly the distribution Fourthly another oblation after consecration Fifthly the breaking of the host and putting part of it to the wine Sixthly and the eating of it which the Reply calles consumption it is not agreed in which of these the essence of the sacrifice consists but k See them in Suar. s 2. 3. 4. 5. 6 there are as many opinions as there be men and their assertions and reasons are so ridiculous that nothing can be more When therefore the Reply hath no certainty touching the substance of his sacrifice but all things are still in question it is but folly for him to brag that the first author of this substance cannot be named But let him name the substance and shew me an agreement among his fellowes and masters that what he names is the substance and he shall haue an author Else when I haue named the author of this he may say neither this nor that belongs to the substance but the other For there are not so few as 6. opinions euery one whereof is guarded with speciall authors that we may entertaine them in their opinions as Hermias did the Philosophers l Herm. gentil philosoph Irrisio Let them shew me what is true and I will obey them But they plucke my minde in peeces and I confesse I cannot endure this frequent conuersion of euery thing Now they tell me I am immortall and I reioyce presently they say I am mortall and then I weepe by and by they turne me into water ayre fire a little after I am none of these but a beast or a fish now I swim among the Dolphines anon I am a dog or a bird When I looke vpon my selfe I know not how to call me whether a man or a wolfe or a serpent or a Chymaera These wise men turne me into all manner of things I swim I flie I creepe I runne I sit Empedocles turnes me into a tree
When I heare Anaxagoras I beleue him then comes Melissus and Parmenides and I know not how I change my minde * Quonsque tandem talia edoceor verum tamen nihil addisco How long shall I thus be taught and yet neuer taught to learne the truth 〈…〉 Thus he flouted the Philosophers that would say as much to our aduersaries and iustly might for any certainty they haue to rest vpon in any thing they hold against vs. Let them take the Councell that Vigilius gaue such as they are m Contr. Eutych l. 2. p. 555. Seeing both of you are coÌ„trary to your selues it s not amisse if both of you yeeld to confesse the truth with vs. You are deuided farre asunder the way you haue left is in the middest Come hither vnto vs one of you this way the other that way and meete together Let the one go into the others opinion so that he leaue not his owne let that which you hold priuately be common among you The contempt of which aduise is it that in all ages hath made hereticks so notorious for their disagreements with themselues that this hath bene obserued for the marke of their heresie They are deuided n Paschas comment in Lament l. 4. c. 4. pag. 74. saith Paschasius one from another through the singularity of their wicked inuentions and are able to agree neither with themselues nor with the Catholicke beleeuers of the Church 6 In the last place I named their doctrine of originall sin affirming that it was not vniuersall in former ages nor is not to this day agreed vpon This proues directly that it is not the same which the Apostles and Primitiue Church taught Because what they taught must be certainely knowne and agreed vpon which this their doctrine is not there being yet no certainety what the point is that the Church of Rome holds touching this matter The Reply answers that I cannot name the first author of any thing which the Church of Rome vniuersally holds touching this matter as a point of faith Meaning belike that the opinion of this or that Doctor may be a late deuise but not that which the Church holds I answer the Church of Rome cannot deny but our first Parents left the effect of their sinne in all mankinde their posterity a Eph. 2.3 whereby they are borne the children of wrath which effect is called originall sinne but what it holds vniuersally as a point of faith touching the nature and forme of this sin the Repliar cannot assigne that when he had assigned it I might try whether I could name the first author thereof or no. But let him giue me any definition of originall sinne holden in his Church whether vniuersally or priuately against that which the Church of England teaches and though possible it may fall out that I cannot name the first author thereof yet I will shew it not to haue bene the Catholicke doctrine of the Primitiue Church whereupon it will follow consequently that it is an alteration wherein the now church of Rome beleeues not as did the Primitiue Church In this varietie of opinions therefore I made choise of Bellarmine as most likely to be that which should be the point of faith and vniuersall and shewed it not to be so but to be a late deuice without antiquitie or vniuersalitie But my aduersary craftily forbearing to name what he holds to be the vniuersall doctrine of his Church and making shew as if Bellarmines opinion were not it bids me name the point of faith holden by his Church vniuersally and then shew the first author Because the question is not about priuate Doctors opinions but about the doctrine of faith vniuersally and authoritatiuely taught by the Church Wherein he deales neither plainly nor directly for if neither the opinion of Bellarmine nor of Catharinus which were all I named holden against vs be that which vniuersally authoritatiuely is taught by his Church he should haue named what it is that I might haue shewed it not to be catholicke 7 The truth is * Tantae est doctorum hominuÌ„ varietas inconstantia vt vix vlla alia in re maior Peltan de orig pecc p. 80. there is such varietie and inconstancie and shuffling of opinions touching this point of originall sinne that for his life he cannot tell what his Church holds and which is safest to follow which is an vnanswerable argument that the true faith they haue forsaken and minced into lend and absurd opinions The Councell of Trent b Sess 5. speakes warily and reseruedly defining nothing but leauing all sorts to their owne opinion Andradius c Orthod expl l. 3. p. 216. sayes The Councell of Trent when it had defined originall sinne to be sinne truly proper to euery one yet of set purpose forbore to speake of the proper reason thereof the which thing was also done by other Councels long before which delivering no certaine and expresse reason of originall sinne left it free for euery one to follow his opinion Hereupon it is that there are so many opinions 1 Dur. 2. d â—0 q. 1. Tap. art 2. p. 69. Cathar tract de orig pec disp 6. p. 150. some hold that it is not sinne properly nor can be imputed by reason it came by the will of another 2 Pigh contro 1. p. 29. Apol. p. 34. inde that it is sinne but not our sinne but that which Adam did whereby he made himselfe and his posteritie sinners 3 Roffâ—ns art 2 p. 29. Altisiod sum p. 97 col 4. Some that it is onely the guilt which lies vpon mankind for Adams sin being thereby excluded from eternall life without the mercie of God 4 Biel. 2. d. 30. q. 2. conc 6. Gre Arim. 2. p. 114. Aureol 2. d. 30. art 2. p. 284. Some that it is a corrupt or diseased qualitie in the soule deriued thereinto by the corruption of the flesh 5 Mag. 2. d. 30. Alexand. quem resert Dionys 2. p. 4â—8 col 2. Some that it is the concupiscence that is in vs to euill not euery inclination but that which is in the mind or will 6 Occh. 2. q. vlt. lit v. Scot. 2. d. 3. §. Circa istam Some that it is onely the priuation or destitution of the originall iustice that was in Adam and should be in all men 7 Tho. 12 q. 82. art 3. Bonau quem refert Dionys 2. p. 489 Capreol 2. pag. 495. ad 4. That it is formally the priuation of originall iustice but materially it is concupiscence 8 Sot de nat grat c 9. Azor. sum part 1. p. 287. That it stands wholly in the want or depriuation not of the habit of originall iustice as the sixt opinion affirmes but of that subiection vnto God and vnion of mind with him which all men should haue had if Adam had not transgressed Which of all these is that which the Replier
calls the vniuersall doctrine of the Church authoritatiuely taught I cannot define nor himselfe determine when all these haue bene and yet are holden in his Church and haue their patrons who will all of them maintaine that his owne opinion is the doctrine of the Church This therefore is it I said that had their doctrine touching originall sin bin the truth anciently taught in the Apostles Church it could not haue bene thus often changed and remoued from opinion to opinion till the opinions be multiplied to as many as there be Doctors 8 And this example shewes how friuolous the common answer is that their differences are not in points of faith but in by-matters not determined wherein it is lawfull to hold any part For this difference is in a point defined though not by any Popish councell yet by the word of God or whether it be defined or no it is in a matter wherein they hold against vs bearing men in hand that they can shew catalogues and whole companies in all ages that held therein with them FOR WE DO NOT SO MVCH CARE TO SHEW THEIR DIVISIONS TO BE IN THE SVBSTANCE OF THEIR FAITH albeit they haue infinite such AS TO MAKE CLEARE DEMONSTRATION THAT THEY AGREE IN NOTHING WHICH THEY HOLD AGAINST THE PROTESTANTS The which kind of disagreement is sufficient to shew the things we haue refused in their Church to be matters broacht and brought in which neuer had the generall approbation of the Church That wherewith he concludes we can shew diuers points of the Protestants faith directly contrary to the ancient Church is a stale vntruth already sufficiently confuted in euery passage He can referre vs to his Coccius and Bellarmine but himselfe I thinke can shew little of his owne knowledge being one of them whom not knowledge but rumour and popularitie haue carried to the Popes side CHAP. LIX Obiections against the outward succession of the Pope 1. Touching Peters being at Rome 2. His pastorall office what it was 3. Whether there be any diuine authoritie for the Popes succession 4. Not certaine what Popes haue succeeded one another 5. Vacancies diuers in the Sea of Rome 6. The storie of the woman Pope of what credit 7. 8. The Pope hath bene an hereticke and erred è Cathedra 10. The Pope succeeds by Simonie and violence Such succession is a nullitie by his owne law 11. The Pharisees in Moses chaire how A. D. defends the succession of an ASSE 12. Many Popes at once 13. Vrbanus his crueltie toward the Cardinals 13. What the Protestants say touching the succession of the Church of Rome A.D. The fifth obiection Lastly Pag. 289. my aduersaries may obiect against the Romane succession which in this Catalogue I mention FIRST that it is not certaine that euer S. Peter was at Rome SECONDLY that we haue no diuine but onely humane proofe that the Bishop of Rome White pag. 416 Pag. 418. pag 419. pag. 421. rather then he of Antioch is S. Peters successor THIRDLY admitting that S. Peter had one to succeed him in Rome it is not certaine who this was which succeeded him and who afterward succeeded one another FOVRTHLY the Sea hath bene voide a good while together FIFTLY a woman was once Pope SIXTLY diuers Popes haue bene hereticks SEVENTHLY some haue entred into the Popedome by simonie and violence c. EIGHTLY there haue bene 30 schismes and therefore it is vncertaine who was the right Pope To the FIRST I answer that so many ancient * See the Fathers cited for this point in the Rhem. Test annot Rom. 16 Fathers do witnes and so many monuments yet remaining do testifie that S. Peter was at Rome and died there that it is great ignorance and impudencie to denie it 1 THe obiections here mentioned the first excepted I proposed Digress 53. and they clearely shew that the outward succession of Bishops in the Romane Church is neither so entire nor perfect as is pretended Our aduersaries neuer haue done with vrging the lineall succession of their Popes frō S. Peter to this day making it a signe of the Church and concluding from it that they alone are the Bishops and Pastors of the world which haue preserued the truth from all corruption and innouation Which outward succession in some degree the Protestants denie not onely they affirme two things against it that the same is to be found in other Churches as well as in the Church of Rome and that it hath bene so tainted and interrupted with defects of all sorts that it can proue nothing against vs but rather shewes manifestly that the ancient faith and gouernment commended by Christ to his Church hath bene changed as will appeare by viewing the seuerall things that are obiected 2 To the first he answers that so many ancient Fathers and monuments yet remaining testifie S. Peter to haue bene at Rome and died there that it is ignorance and impudencie to denie it He affirmes three things First that we denie Peter to haue bene at Rome This is vntrue Let the writings of our a D. Fulk answ to the Rhem. Rom. 16. nu 4. D. Rainol conser c. 6. diuis 3. D. Whitak controu 4. ◠3. c. ◠Iun. contr 3. l. 2. c. 5. Diuines be viewed and they denie it not but the vttermost they say is that the reasons and testimonies brought out of antiquity whereupon his being there is grounded are vncertaine and may sensibly be dissolued If b Whose demonstrations that Peter was neuer at Rome are printed by Illyricus with his boke called Refut inuectiu Bruni printed at Basil an 1566. by Oporin Velenus or some speciall men with him haue brought the matter in question it was free for them so to do and almost necessarie for the bolting out of the truth all things in antiquitie touching the same being perplexed with such difficulties that it were able to make any man misdoubt it Yet the Protestants are not curious and the Church of Rome gaines not a straw by it Secondly that the ancient Fathers testifie he was at Rome This I grant but yet all the Papists liuing cannot reconcile their testimonies nor maintaine either that he came thither in such a time or stayed there so long as is reported The which consideration hath mooued as learned Papists themselues as euer were any to doubt of his being there at all if my aduersarie thinke them so impudent that do it Marsilius Patauinus * Marsil defens Pacis part 2. c. 16. printed at Basil in fol. saies that by the Scripture it cannot be conuinced either that he was Bishop of Rome or euer was at Rome at all And then considering the Ecclesiasticall histories that affirme it he so doth it that it plainely appeares he beleeued them not Whence it followes that his being there was a common opinion but not certaine forsomuch as it was grounded on no surer testimonie then these circumstances of Time were The first that saies he sate
25 yeares there wherein sundrie of the ancient and all our Aduersaries to this day follow him is c Printed at Basil by Henrico Petri and elsewhere in Latin Olympiad 205. Eusebius chronicle translated by S. Ierom and yet in the Greeke d Printed an 1606. Lugduni Batauorum set forth by Scaliger * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This is all he saies there is no mention of any time of his abode but onely that he went to Rome whereby it may be gathered that this matter of Peters being Bishop of Rome was much lesse at the first then afterward it came to be And whether the Fathers had any certainety of that they said or onely followed a common rumor begun by such a one as Papias was without examining it God knowes but our Aduersaries themselues feele the difficulty and cannot remoue it Thirdly that so many monuments yet remaining do testifie he was at Rome But those monuments are not so many There is e Baro. an 45. n. 11. an old chaire belike that on certaine daies is shewed the people and a sepulcher and certaine parts pretended to be relickes of his body but how shall these things be prooued to be such indeed when the iugling and imposture with relickes is so well knowne that the world hath long since abrogated all credit giuen to such monuments It hath not bene the least part of the Church of Romes policie for many ages together with fained miracles and counterfet relickes to breed and nourish in the vulgar people an opinion of the Roman holinesse But let them that will be led by such monuments first make sure they be not counterfets I would take some paines to discouer these monuments but that the thing he intends to proue by them is not so great that I will contend about it Pag. 290. A. D. To the SECOND I answer that we haue diuine authoritie to assure vs that there must be alwaies one in the Church who is S. Peters successour hauing the same absolute Pastorall authority that S. Peter had For first the name Pastour being peculiarly appropriate to S. Peter Ioh. 20.21 by these words Pasce oues meas signifieth an ordinarie office which dieth not with the person but is to be continued in a successour Secondly the end of this office being common to all ages argueth that our Sauiour meant so to institute it as it might serue for all ages and consequently that it should be continued in a succession of such Pastours Thirdly the loue and care which moued our Sauiour to institute this office for the good of the Church was common to the Church of all ages and the necessitie which the Church had of such a Pastour was not onely for that first age but for all succeeding ages and therefore it is not to be thought that Christ our Sauiour meant to institute that office onely for to continue in S. Peters person and to die with him but that he ordained it to continue in others who from time to time should succeed in his place Now that the Bishop of Rome rather then of Antioch should succeed in S. Peters office is not indeed expresly written in the Gospell but is partly gathered from that which is there written and is knowne vnto vs by tradition of the Church to be Christs institution as is learnedly declared proued See Bellarm. l. 1. de Rom. Pontif c. 12. Stapleron relect controu 3 q. 2. art 2 and defended by Gregorie de Valent. tom 3. disp 1. q. 1. de obiect fid p. 7. § 36. 37. and 38. The which to be so is confirmed in that by Christs appointment one or other is alwaies to succeed S. Peter in the office of chiefe Pastour but my Aduersarie cannot assigne any other besides the Bishop of Rome that did or could vpon so sufficient ground pretend to be S. Peters successor 2 This answer affirmes three things First that S. Peter had absolute Pastorall authoritie appropriate to him by those words Pasce oues meas Secondly that this authority was not to die with him but to continue for euer in the Church in some or other that should succeed him Thirdly that the Bishop of Rome rather then hee of Antioch was to succeed him in authoritie Touching the first and second let it be distinguished The Pastoral authority of Peter contained two things being taken in the whole latitude First his dutie to preach the Gospell and teach the people by ministring the word and sacraments to them Secondly his extraordinary and eminent power thereunto wherein he exceeded all ordinarie Pastors being called to be an Apostle and inabled to plant Churches conuert nations reueale Christ worke miracles c. Our Aduersaries adde a third his supreme iurisdiction ouer all the Apostles also and all the powers on earth spirituall and temporall whereby he was the ordinary Pastor and iudge ouer all the world directly as some say or indirectly as othersome will haue it The first of these is called his Pastorall office the second his Apostleship the third his Primacy or supremacie The which distinction being laied we grant that S. Peter had absolute Pastoral authority in the first and second sences to preach the Gospell as all other Pastors do and beyond them all to be an Apostle We grant secondly that authoritie to be an Apostle and Pastor of the Church that he might feed the flocke of Christ was either giuen or ratified to him by those words feed my sheepe We grant thirdly that the Pastorall authority taken onely in the first degree thereof was not to die with him but to remaine for euer in his successors the ordinary Bishops and Pastors of the Church But all this will do the Pope no good for it neither preferrs him of Antioch nor him of Rome but makes them both equall Fourthly we deny any to haue succeeded him in his Apostleship or God to haue ordained any succession in that second and eminent degree of his Pastoral charge neither dare our Aduersaries themselues simply and absolutely affirme it The Iesuite therefore in this his answer meanes the authoritie of Peter in the last sense as it imports the PRIMACY and iurisdiction ouer the other Apostles and the Kings and nations of the earth to rule and ouergouerne them This is denied and the Text alledged Feed my sheepe proues it not as I haue fully shewed in * Digress 26. nu 15. 22. The learned Reader may see Is Casaub exercitat 16. nu 132. p. 705. THE WAY where it was first offered me Whence it followes that hee could haue none to succeed him in any supremacy because he had none such himselfe For no man succeeds another in more then he hath himsâ—lfe And the Repliars three arguments proceeding onely for the first degree of his Pastorall authority proue nothing for the second or third By reason the Apostleship was not needfull for all ages and the supremacy intended was neuer giuen him at all nor meant
epist de solit vit agent p. 647. graec Hieron catalog script in Fortunat. say that for feare of death he subscribed to the Arians Damasus i Damas vit Liberij saies that Vrsacius and Valence two Arian Bishops being sent to him by the Emperor he consented to him Diuers other examples are well knowne and commonly obiected Dominicus Bannes k Bann vbi sup pag. 115. saies the Pope as he is a Doctor and a priuate person may erre in matters of faith euen with pertinacy that he becomes an Hereticke And this conclusion he affirmes to be generally holden by all the ancient Bishops of Rome themselues and by all the schoole Doctors before Albertus Pighius and by the grauer sort of Doctors also since him And to what purpose should vniuersally all the Diuines of the Church of Rome till of late yeares so curiously debate the questions touching the Churches power ouer the Pope l Turre â—rem summ de eccl l. 2 c. 112. l. 4. part 2. c. 20. Caietan de author Pap. concil cap. 18. Anton. de Rosell Monarch tract de concil p. 67. Occham dialog l. 6. partis 1 c. 12. inde in case he should chance to be an Hereticke if they had thought with the Repliar that he could not be an Hereticke at all Alphonsus a Castro m Adu haeres l. 1. c. 4. saies euery man may erre in the faith although it be the Pope himselfe For touching Pope Liberius it is manifest he was an Arian and he that hath read histories doubts not but Anastasius fauoured the Nestorians I CANNOT BELEEVE THERE IS ANY MAN SO IMPVDENT A FLATTERER OF THE POPE AS TO SAY HE CANNOT ERRE or be deceiued in expounding the Scripture For when IT IS WELL KNOWNE THAT DIVERS OF THEM ARE SO VNLERANED THAT THEY ARE ALTOGETHER IGNORANT OF GRAMMAR how can they expound the sacred Scripture My Aduersarie therefore and his learned Cardinall are egregious flatterers and parasites to the Pope by Alphonsus verdict such as he presumed the world should neuer haue seene but he was deceiued we now see them and heare them and my Aduersary it seemes beleeues them n Aen. Sylu. comment in Panorm de dict fact Alph. l. 1. n. 3. Pope Iohn the 23 was woont to say when flatterers praised him though he knew they lied yet he felt himselfe something tickled with that they said Which humor of the Pope being now better knowne you must giue his seruants leaue to gratifie it 8 Secondly he saies All the best learned Catholicke Diuines agree that neuer any Pope did shall or can ex Cathedra define any error or heresie to be true faith or authoratatiuely teach the Church any thing contrary to the true faith Indeed this is the opinion of the most Papists now adaies deuised of late to put off the inconueniences that pressed them that whatsoeuer heresies and abhominations of the Pope were obiected they might be salued by this distinction that he taught them not out of the chaire but from his owne stoole But it is false that all the best learned Catholickes agree in it For very many of the ancienter sort held it not but the contrary whose learning will abide any comparison that can be made with the Iesuites that now so presumptuously assume from their predecessors all the learning to themselues Hadrian who himselfe was Pope o In 4. de sacra confirm sub finem affirmes it to be certaine that the Pope may erre euen in things touching the faith and auouch that which is heresie by his determination or decretall Turrecremata a Cardinall of that reputation for his learning p Catharin tract de certa sanct glor l. 1. that the Pope honoured him with the title of Protector of the faith assigning certaine cases wherein pertinacy or wilfulnesse in heresie lies q Turre crem sum de eccl l 4. part 2. c. 16. giues this for one The seuenteenth manner whereby the Pope specially may be conuinced of pertinacy in heresie is if he SOLEMNLY DEFINE THE ERROR and affirme it to be holden by Christians as Catholicke It was therefore r Azor. tom 2. moral l. 5. c. 4. his iudgement that the Pope might erre euen iudiciously è Cathedra Waldensis Å¿ Waldens doctrinal fid l. 2. c. 19 tom 1. affirmes that no Church or Councell no not the particular Church of Rome is free from error but onely the Catholicke Church dispersed all ouer the world from the times of Christ and his Apostles to this day If onely the Catholicke Church thus considered be free from error then he thought the Pope euery way howsoeuer might erre and his particular Church and colledge being allowed to helpe him yet they not being the Church mentioned in the creed in Waldens the innocent promoting the faithlesse defaming Catholicks exalting schismatickes hating good men oppressing the truth with all their power and by all meanes possible without feare aduancing forward hereticall prauitie The time alas is come whereof the blessed Apostle prophecied 2. Tim. 4. The time shall be when men will not abide wholesome doctrine but with itching eares shal heape to themselues teachers after their owne lusts and turning their eares from the truth shall giue heed to fables Which prophecie indeed is fulfilled in our dayes which I speake with griefe And that I may conclude in few words with a whores forehead and execrable boldnesse they hasten to subuert both King and law diuine and humane c. 9 The third thing the Reply sayes is that the Popes priuate errors cannot preiudice the Church But this is folly For who sees not that if his decrees be admitted to be infallible truths the Church shall be constrained by the consequence of this principle to receiue for such many of his errors the reason is because he cannot possibly decree otherwise then he priuatly thinkes and in decreeing he is not bound either to follow or vse the counsell of other Bishops in which case what hath he to leade him but his owne erronious priuate spirit They will say possible Gods promise and prouidence is to preserue him when he teaches the Church è Cathedra else the Church should be tied to an inconuenience and be bound to follow his errors I answer in a word that priuiledge shall be granted him when our aduersaries can shew vs where God hath made any such promise Those promises that are belong not to the Pope but to the vniuersall Church and the lawfull Councels thereof as the most ancient and learned Papists do for the most part expound Thus the Fathers of the Councels of Pisa Basil Constance Thus all the Diuines that hold a Councell to be aboue the Pope And this was the cause why in the ancient Church not the Bishop of Rome but a Councell was the highest iudge of all controuersies that fell out for which cause the Church in all ages hath vsed to call such Councels which needed
saluation Therefore it is sufficient How doth it now appeare so plainely that it proues nothing the first proposition is manifest of it selfe the second is as manifest for all that the Apostle affirmes is of the Scripture alone and of nothing else for of Scripture alone he saies it is able to make wise to saluation it is profitable to teach to reproue to instruct to correct that the man of God may be perfect the conclusion therfore must needs be true Secondly he saies the Apostle speakes of the old Testament yea of euery parcell of Scripture yet M. White will not say that now specially the old Testament without the New or euery parcell of the old it selfe is alone sufficient for all the said purposes whereto M. White answers that he neither speakes of the old Testament alone nor of any one parcell either of old or new separated from the rest but of the whole in this sense all the whole Scripture taken together is able c. And if the Iesuits and D. Stapleton whom this man traces had not renounced all truth they would not say it when that which the Apostle auouches of the Scripture cannot agree to euery parcel alone but to all together for what one parcell performes all these effects to make wise to saluation to teach to reproue to instruct to correct to make perfect the Scripture is so vnderstood as that all these things may truly be affirmed of it but these things cannot truely be affirmed of the parcels alone Ergo. 4 Thirdly he saies the word PROFITABLE must not expound the word ABLE or if it be the word ABLE doth not signifie that the Scripture is so able as to worke that effect without any other meanes or helpes concurring with it but at the most it imports a great degree of profitablenesse This is no answer to this argument But to another that he hath not expressed I said therefore thirdly though very briefly By the word able the other word profitable must be expounded Which I thus put into forme that which is PROFITABLE by being ABLE is sufficient the Scripture is so PROFITABLE that it is ABLE to make vs wise to saluation Ergo it is sufficient He first denies the Minor and saies the word profitable is not to be expounded by the word Able but he seemes to be dazeled For that which is able to make wise to saluation must needes be able to make absolute and perfect because perfection consists in being wife to saluation but the Scripture alone is able to make wise to saluation Ergo. Next he saies that supposing the word PROFITABLE be expounded by the word ABLE thus Scripture is able to make one absolute and perfect yet the meaning is not that it is able without other helpes and meanes concurring with it but at the most that it is very profitable and if it be sufficient yet this sufficiency is not that whereof our question is but in a certaine limited kinde to wit of written Scripture That is to say if by able to make vs wise to saluation be meant that the Scriptures are sufficient yet it is not meant that alone they are sufficient as the Protestants hold but with a limitation so far as Scripture can be sufficient In which his answer he plainely discouers himselfe to be foundred and spent For our question is not whether the Scripture alone without vsing the Ministery of the Church or our owne industry or such meanes as God hath appointed for the finding our and vnderstanding of that which is contained in it be sufficient for Bread and Drinke and all manner of food is not sufficient to sustaine mans life if he take no paines to get it or if he be not able to swallow and digest it and my aduersaries owne Church and traditions with all their royalties are not sufficient vnlesse men take paines to finde them and be so mad as to beleeue them and so blinde as to let them downe but the question is of their latitude and extent viz. whether the written Scripture containe in expresse words or sense the whole and entire doctrine of faith and good life so that the Church by her authoritie and traditions may adde no point of faith that is wanting in the Scripture This appeares to be the question by my aduersaries own words and the words of the Diuines in his Church Now the Apostle saying the Scripture is able to make one wise to saluation affirmes the sufficiency of it alone without any other helpe or meanes to supply any doctrine or matter of faith not contained therein because there is no more needfull but to be wise to saluation and that wisdome the Scripture is able to instruct vs in Which ability is not limited to certaine points but extended to all the whole obiect of faith by the word For thus I reason He speakes of the Scripture alone and nothing else therefore the Scripture alone is able to make wise to saluation therefore it is so profitable and in such sort to make absolute and perfect to euery good worke that it can do it For it is able Therefore it alone is sufficient Therefore this sufficiency is so limited to written Scripture that it is perfectly and wholy contained in it 5 The second part of my aduersaries answer in his discourse to the text alleadged was that the Scripture is said to be profitable because it commendes to vs the authority of the Church This his answer I opposed with 7. arguments But when I repeated it I put in the word sufficient thus He saies they be profitable and SVFFICIENT because they commend vnto vs the Churches authority the addition of which word you see he distasts and makes a vantage of thereby to put off the answer to sixe of my arguments That the Prouerbe might be true it s an ill winde but blowes some men profite for vnder that pretence he takes occasion to cauill and put off that he could not answer For first the word might well be put in without any preiudice to his sense For if their profitablenesse lie in commending to vs the Church authoritie then their sufficiency lyes there too and so I might well make him say they be profitable and sufficient because they cōmend vnto vs the Churches authority Secondly it is idle that he saies my obiections are ouerthrown Only by reading his words aright leauing out the word sufficient For let him looke vpon them againe and he shall finde they ourthrow his exposition of profitable as well as if he had expounded sufficient in the same manner But my aduersary will take a small occasion to shun an argument 6 Onely to the sixth he replies for whereas I said the meaning cannot be that they are profitable because they commend vnto vs the Churches authority because the Apostle saies they are able to make the man of God perfect that is the Pastor himselfe the Pope the Councell and all and it were absurd to say that the
must distinguish for Gregory and Austine no doubt taught many points that were true and wherein we consent with them yea the substance of sauing faith but some things they innouated wherein the Church of Rome now followes them adding to the wordes of wholesome doctrine their owne corrupt opinions the first we graunt was professed before and was the faith of the Brittans at their first conuersion but not the latter And herein appeares the cunning and fraude of our aduersaries that by the testimonies of such as affirme Gregoryes faith in things of the first kind to be Apostolik go about to proue it to be such also in things of the latter kinde The Repliar therefore hath to proue that not the truthes which they taught but the additions which they brought in wherein the Protestants refuse them were the substance of their faith and that whereto our nation was conuerted in the Apostles time Which they can neuer do Thirdly that diuers particular points of the Papists doctrine are acknowledged by learned Protestants to haue bene taught by the ancient Fathers as Vowes Reall presence c. is answered before in the second obiection touching the Centuries And by the D. of Winchester in his booke against Briarly b Prot. App. l. 2. c. 1. inde where the particular instances are examined And if the Repliar and his Author will make good their assertion they must proue that the Fathers with one consent taught these things and withall so meant and expounded them as they are now meant and expounded in the Papacy Let this be done in those points that we refuse and good reason the game be theirs But if these learned Protestants do no more but note the particular corruptions that crept into particular writings and Churches whereby our aduersaries haue taken occasion to increase them they must not be said to acknowledge either that these things were the Catholicke doctrine of the whole Church or that they were intended and beleeued as the Romane Church now beleeues them 4 His fourth and last argument is because forsooth it is not the condition of the Romane Church to inuent or alter any doctrine but humbly and obediently to maintaine what they haue receaued from their predecessors to hate innouation to note reprehend resist all innouation in faith that it cannot be possible there should be any difference betweene the faith of the Fathers and the doctrine of the Church of Rome as the Protestants ignorantly and maliciously obiect And indeed if that part of the Church of Rome which we haue refused I meane the Papacy were the true vniuersall Church he said well for it is against the property of that Church to dissent from any part of the ancient faith as he hath well obserued out of his Gregory and Vincentius but how will he proue that side and faction in the Church of Rome which is charged with innouating and dissenting to be the true Church how shall the reader be assured that these heards of Popes Cardinals Prelats Monkes Friars Iesuites are those faithfull Pastors whose nature is not to innouate when all the world hath discouered them and their doctrine to be nothing else but weedes and excrements arising in the Church Is there not an assertion a Greg. Val. p. 96. tom 3. in the Spaniard quoted that saies By the vnfolded act of faith the same things haue not alway bene beleeued but diuers points in the progresse of time haue bene manifest and beleeued Doth not Austine of Ancona b Sum. de eccl pot q. 59. art 3. say the Pope may make a new Creed multiply the articles of faith and put more points vnder each article then were before This is enough to shew the vntruth of that the Replyar saies for vnder the pretence of the Pope and his Church power to vnfold that which the Fathers and auncient Church beleeued infoldedly and to make new articles they haue altered and innouated all things and their pestilent and palpable heresies are made a part of the old Churches infolded faith and these men being the formallest innouators that euer were yet must be said to dissent from the Fathers in nothing because whatsoeuer they daily inuent and innouate the Fathers held at least implicitely Vnhappie Rome c See Ph. Camerar tom 2. c. 10. whose certen name was neuer publikely knowne and whose certen doctrine to the worlds end can neuer be determined but still it may multiplie and diminish d Solin Poly. hist c. 1. The Gentile Romanes were persuaded the eternitie of Rome should consist in the concealing of the true name thereof and therefore Valerius Soranus was executed because he told the name and our Catholicke Romanes haue placed all their hope of enduring in concealing their faith vnder the veile of infolded faith Hold ye fast to this conceite ye braue Romanists and you may boldly reproch them all with ignorance that deny the consent of your doctrine with the Fathers 5 This obiection the Repliar saw coming for his conscience told him the present Church of Rome had increased that which the Fathers taught and therefore he answers that true it is the Doctors of his Church haue written more largely about diuers points then was done in former times But this was for the confutation of heresies rising and for the more explication of the formerly receaued faith and they haue vsed more significant words then formerly were vsed but yet the sense of such words differs not from the faith and phrases formerly vsed but onely explicate more plainely that which was formerly beleeued by the Church which kinde of explication Vincentius allowes in his golden Treatise But all this is vntrue and is briefely answered the Church of Rome and the D D. therein since the Fathers time haue done more then either the explicating of the ancient faith or giuing new names to old articles They haue innouated diminished corrupted the substance of the articles themselues as I shewed particularly a Dig. 19. 51 in the WAY euen in this very point of transubstantiation And this pretence of vsing more significant words by reason of heresies rising is but a cloke for the treachery the greatest heretickes that arose being themselues and the words deuised being the engines to aduance their heresies the sense whereof hath no agreement with the faith of the Fathers which being too scant for him that would sit as God in the Church of God must be inlarged by dispensations explications determinations new articles fulnesse of power and what not The contents of the Scripture were not enough to hold themselues to that which is expressed therein b Alphons haer v. eccl 3. n◠were to play the foole and to destroy all Christian religion The Pope is like Typhaeus the giant in Nannus c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dionys l. 2. pag. 36. that must haue a higher rooffed firmament to walke vnder and bigger starres to giue him light or else he would put