Gods word which I hope is an Oracle altogether as infallible as the Church But the question is whether such a one may be divided from Gods infallible Truth or not if not he is absolutely infallible if he may then what security hath any one to rely upon him upon such a conditional Infallibility which he can have no assurance of But still he hopes to retort the Instances upon me I never saw such a way of retorting in my whole life My design was to prove by these Instances that an infallible Testimony of a Church was not necessary in order to Faith he saith I must solve my own difficulties I confess I see none at all in my way that need to be answered for I assert that men may have sufficient Grounds of Faith without an infallible Proponent Well but he supposes all these Barbarians converted to Christ to have had true Faith and consequently prudent Motives to believe before they firmly assented to the Divine Revelation And so do I too But what were these motives To this Question he saith I return the strangest answer he ever heard for I seem to make the motives inducing to faith nothing but the Rational evidence of the Truth of the Doctrine delivered and therefore I grievously complain that they destroy the obligation which ariseth from the Rational evidence of the Christian Religion upon which he discourses as though by rational evidence the self-evidencing light of the doctrine and consequently all the miracles wrought by Christ and his Apostles were to no purpose Have not I reason to applaud my good fortune that I have met with so ingenuous an Adversary But I see those who write Controversies must be true Nethinims not only hewers of difficulties and drawers of the waters of contention but bearers of burdens too even such as their Adversaries please to lay upon them Could any thing be further from my meaning than by the rational evidence of Christianity to understand the self-evidencing light of the Scriptures But it is not what I say but what E. W. finds in his Common-place-Books a little before when I had proposed an argument he had not met with in those terms he presently fancied I meant another arguâ—ent which he found under the title of Defectilility of the Church and then in comes that with the answers he found ready to it Now for the rational evidence oâ— Christian Religion he finds not that Head in his Note-Books and cannot therefore tell what to make of it But an argument he had ready against the self-evidenâ—ing lighâ— of the Scriptures and therefore the Seraphims seather must serve instead of St. Larence's Gridiron He might have been easily satisfied in that very Paragraph what I mean by the rational evidence of Christian Religion viz. the unquestionable assurance which we have of the matters of fact and the miracles wrought by Christ for confirmation of his Doctrine and this within four lines after the words by him produced And in the foregoing paragraph I insist very much on the evidence of sense as to the miracles wrought by Christ as a great part of the rational â—vidence of Christianity which is destroyed by the doctrine of the Roman Church while transubstantiation is believed in it For what assurance can there be of any object of sense such as the miracles of Christ were and his Body after his Resurrection if we are so framed not only that our senses may be but we are bound to believe that they are actually deceived in as proper an object of sense as any in the world And if such a thing may be false what evidence can we have when any thing is true For if a thing so plain and evident to our senses may be false viz. that what I and all other men see is bread what ground of certainty can we have but that which my senses and all other mens judge to be false may be true For by this means the criterium both of sense and reason is destroyed and consequently all things are equally true and false to us and then farewel sense and reason and Religion together These things I there largely insist upon which is all very silently passed over the Schools having found no answers to such arguments and therefore they must be content to be let alone But however though arguments cannot be answered I desire they may not be mis-represented and that when I fully declare what I meanby rational evidence such a sense may not be put upon my words as I never dreamt off There is nothing after which looks with the face of an answer to theâ—e Instances unless it be that he saith that none can have infallible assurance either of our Savâ—ours Miracles or of any other verity recorded in Scripture independent of some actual living actual infallible and most clear evidenced Oracle by signs above the force of nature which in this present state is the Church These are good sayings and they want only proving and by the Instances already produced I have shewed that Persons did believe upon such evidence as implied no infallible Testimony and if he goes about to prove the Church infallible by such Miracles wrought by her as were wrought by the Apostles I desire only not to believe the Church infallible till I be satisfied about these Miracles but of that afterwards But I demanded if we can have no assurance of the Miracles of Christ and his Apostles without an Infallible Church what obligation can lie upon men to believe them who see no reason to believe any such Infallibility And since the Articles of our Faith are built upon matters of fact such as â—he death and resurrection of Jesus Christ whether these matters of fact may not be conveyed down in as unquestionable a manner as any others are Cannot we have an unquestionable assurance that there were such persons as Caesar and Pompey and that they did such and such things without some Infallible Testimony If we may in such things why not in other matters of fact which infinitely more concern the world to know than whatever Caesar or Pompey did This his Margin calls an unlearned objection and in the body of his Book saith I might have proposed a wiser Question an â—asier I grant I might as appears by the answer he gives it For two things he saith may be considered 1. That the man called Christ dyed upon the Crâ—ss and this he saith both Jews and Gentiles yet assent to upon Moral Cerâ—ainty but therefore do not believe in Christ. 2. That the man called Christ dying for us was the only Messias truly God the Redeemer of mankind Here we have he saith the hidden verities of Christian Religion the certain objects of faith conveyed unto us by no moral assurance but only upon Gods Infallible Revelation A very wise answer I must needs say if intolerable shuffling be any part of wisdom Read over my words again and be ashamed If so then men
excuse for their Insidelity that his works did bear witness of him And his Evangelist declares that this was the end for which these miracles are recorded that men might believe that Jesus was the son of God Afterwards when he was risen from the dead and he sent abroad his Disciples to preach the Gospel he told them that God would bear them witness by divers signs and miracles and gifts of the Holy Ghost of which we have a full account in the Books of the new Testament As to all which miracles we have not the least ground of suspicion of any fraud or imposture being publickly done in the presence of enemies and written in a time when the Testimony of Writers might be easily contradicted and when all imaginable way 's were used to make the first Witnesses of these things to recant their Testimonies by the greatest severities and persecutions in stead of which they persisted with great resolution and laid down their lives rather than weaken the Testimony which they had given Thus we see such great and extraordinary effects of Divine Power which we ought to call miracles were wrought by Christ and his Apostles on purpose to confirm their own Authority that they were Persons sent from God and therefore could not deceive the World in the doctrine delivered by them 2. The Authority and Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles being thus confirmed by the miracles wrought by them there cannot be any such necessity in succeeding Ages to confirm the same doctrine by miracles For if it were once fully proved by those miracles then wrought there can want nothing further to establish the faith of succeeding Ages than a certain conveyance of those miracles to them Those miracles being wrought for the benefit of succeeding Ages as well as of that present Age And if those miracles would not serve for the Ages following as well as that present time it might with as much reason be said that then they did serve only for those who saw them For on the same ground that Persons then in regard of distance of Place were bound to believe although they did not see them wrought so likewise are others in regard of distance of time only supposing the certainty of conveyance to be equal But it is with much advantage to us by the concurrent Testimony of so many Ages and the effects of the doctrine confirmed by those miracles upon so many nations of the World not with standing all the Power and subtility which were used against it 3. The less the necessity and the greater the pretence to miracles so much more reason there is to suspect them Because God we are certain doth not imploy his Power in going beyond the common effects of nature to little or no purpose When we see that in all the writings of Scripture miracles were very sparingly wrought unless it were for the confirmation of a new Religion as that of Moses and Christ if asterwards we find such abundance of miracles pretended to that no Age or Country of one sort of men but give out that multitudes of these are done among them what must we think that God hath changed the Method of his Providence and not rather that God is true but such men are liars or through ignorance and credulity take those for miracles which are not so 4. Those cannot be true miracles which are pretended to be wrought to confirm a doctrine contrary to what is already confirmed by miracles For God will never imploy his power to contradict himself he may in the establishing of one Religion foretel the comming of another afterwards in its room by his own appointment as in the Gospel succeeding the Law but the latter miracles in this case do not contradict but rather confirm the doctrine of the former but when he hath declared that no other Religion shall come into the world after that which is confirmed by miracles as it is with the Christian Religion then to suppose miracles wrought to confirm any doctrine contrary to that is to suppose that God by miracles should contradict himself Therefore although in the beginning of a Religion the doctrine is to be proved by miracles yet that being once supposed miracles afterwards are to be tryed by the doctrine And then though an Angel from heaven should preach or offer to confirm any other doctrine by miracles than that which was first confirmed by Christ and his Apostles we are bound to reject that doctrine and to suspect those miracles not to be from God 5. Where false and lying miracles are foretold by a doctrine confirmed by true miracles there can be no reason to believe upon such miracles till they are evidently distinguished from such as are deceitful Now this is plainly the case in the Christian Religion Christ himself hath foretold that men shall arise doing such great wonders in imitation of him as should deceive if it were possible the very elect and his Apostles that his greatest enemies should appear with all power and signs and lying wonders Can any thing be now more reasonable than after such forewarnings for us to examine all pretences of miracles by trying whether they can be evidently distinguished from all deceitfull appearances of miracles which may be wrought by a power less than divine For in this case the evidence must be such as the persons concerned are to judge by to tell them any distinctions which they cannot proceed by in the judgement of miracles is to speak impertinently where rules of Judgement are required 6. If the continuance of the power of miracles be asserted to prove the Churches infallibility in every Age there must not only evident proof be given that such miracles are wrought but that they are wrought for this very end For if God may work miracles for another end either to shew his Providence in general or particular Regard to some men then the meer proving miracles cannot be sufficient but it must be shewed that these miracles could be wrought for no other end but to prove the Church infallible These things being premised I now come to shew 1. That in the Roman Church they cannot give any evident distinction between the miracles they pretend to and such which we are bid to beware of 2. That they can never prove that the miracles wrought in their Church could be wrought for no other end than to prove the infallibility of their Church 1. That in the Roman Church they cannot give any evident distinction between their miracles and such as we are bid to beware of For which we are to consider that scarce any Religion or superstition hath obtained in the world but it hath pretended to be confirmed by some kind of miracâ—es which in it self is no more a prejudice to true miracles than sophistical arguments are to true reasoning But those who pretend to miracles in a Church which is founded on a doctrine confirmed by undoubted miracles must give such
man born blind the raising the dead c. others are such as exceed the common power of nature although there may be some secret and hidden causes of them that may lie within the compass of nature The first sort he saith are the only undoubted testimonies of truth but the other may be wrought by the Devils power either by local motion or the application of the power of natural Agents Of this sort saith he are the miracles done by false Christs and false Prophets and by Antichrist and among these he reckons all manner of cures when the diseases are not wholly incurable 2. He saith that miracles of this later sort are equivocal signs and may be referred to different causes and therefore nothing can be determined by them considered in themselves because they may be done by a different power and for a different end When they are done for ostentation or delight or curiosity they cannot have God for their Author much less when they are wrought to confirm a false doctrine or for an evil end therefore when such miracles are wrought for confirmation of an error they have not God but the Devil for their cause For although they be aequivocal of themselves yet the determining of them to an evil end such as the confirmation of an error is takes away all aequivocalness in them 3. He asserts that true and proper miracles in the first sense although most commonly wrought by good men as Gods instruments yet may sometimes be done by wicked men and Hereticks and Infidels For which he instances in Balaam and those our Saviour mentions who should boast of the miracles they had wrought in his name which Christ doth not deny but only rejects them for being workers of iniquity and in Judas who wrought miracles with the other Apostles although we do not read that the Blessed Virgin or Joseph or John the Baptist ever wrought any He observes from St. Austin that God gives this power of miracles to evil men when he denies it to good 1. Lest the power should be attributed to the instrument or seem to take its vertue from thence 2. Because miracles are not wrought for the good of the efficient but for the good of others 3. Lest men should set a higher value upon miracles than upon true goodness and vertue For Saith he this is a false consequence such a man does miracles therefore he is approved or his doctrine such a place miracles are wrought in therefore such a place is approved for by this consequence wicked men Hereticks and Infidels would be approved of whom it is certain that they have wrought miracles 4. Such kind of miracles though they may be done by Hereticks can never be wrought sor the confirmation of error for that were to charge God himself with falshood but miracles of the other sort he grants may be wrought for the confirmation os errors because they are such as do not exceed the Devils power and in this case to know whether they come from God or the Devil must be taken from the end for which they are wrought as he shews from S. Austin From which discourse of Lingendes it follows â—hat since the confirmation of Christian Reâ—igion by miracles the only certain way of â—istinguishing true and deceitful miracles is from the end for which they were wrought For he grants that to all outward appearance Hereticks and false Christians may do as great â—s any nay God himself may use them as his Instruments to confirm Truth by but we are sure God cannot imploy his Power to confirm a falshood Since therefore we are forewarned that men shall appear with such signs and lying wonders as would if it were possible deceive the very Elect since no distinction can be made from the things themselves between the effects of a created invisible power and of a divine in most things which pass for miracles since Hereticks may be Gods instruments in the most divine miracles for a good end it necessarily follows that the pretence of miracles is far from proving the truth and infallibility of the Church wherein they are wrought till it be made appear that they are truly divine miracles that they are wrought for this end to prove this Churches infallibility and that the Churches infallibility doth not contradict any part of that doctrine which hath been already confirmed by the miracles of Christ and his Apostles 2. They can never prove that the miracles wrought in the Roman Church were wrought for no other end but to prove the Infallibility of their Church When Christ and his Apostles wrought miracles to prove their Infallibility they wrought the miracles themselves and declared that this was the end for which they were wrought that men might believe that they were Teachers sent from God but there is nothing like this in the miracles of the Roman Church They are generally pretended to be done at some Shrine or Monument or by a vision of some Saint and among the most credulous people but by no means for the satisfaction of Infidels or Hereticks whose very presence is enough to spoil a well contrived miracle but supposing the things true which are reported what doth a restored Leg to a poor Boy at Zaragosa in Spain signifie to the proof of the Roman Churches Infallibility or Father Marcellus his cure at Naples by a vision of Xaverius to the proof of Pius the fourths Creed If they will prove any thing by this way of miracles let their Missionaries here among us whom they account Infidels and Hereticks do the same things that Christ and his Apostles did for the conversion of Jews and Gentiles Let them heal all manner of diseases as pubâ—â—ckly as commonly as perfectly as suddenâ—y as they did and with no more art or cereâ—ony let us see them raise the dead and not â—hink we will be put off with painted Straws 〈◊〉 counterfeit Trances which we hope they â—re ashamed of themselves such things I asâ—â—ure them tend not to the credit of their â—ower of miracles among us and do not much â—elp our faith in the belief of things done at â— great distance and in such places where credulity and superstition reign If you do miracles in earnest do them before enemies as Christ and his Apostles did give us leave to stand by that we may be satisfied from the circumstances of them that they are true miracles and wrought to testifie that your Teachers are sent from God But you do not pretend to work miracles to confirm the Authority of your Teachers for then of all persons your Popes should work the greatest miracles and the Bishops who sit in General Councils among whom this Infallibility is lodged therefore there is no parallel between the miracles done in the Church of Rome and those which were wrought by Christ or his Apostles If all that had been pleaded in the Apostles times for their divine commission had been only that a poor Boy had his
and is the ground of believing and not where it is a meer condition of understanding If a Prince sends an Ambassadour about a match to a foraign Princess declaring that he will wholly rely upon his Testimony of her in this case there needs the greatest judgement and veracity in the Person trusted because the Prince resolves his judgement into his Ambassadours Testimony but if he only imploys a Person to bring her into the Room where he may see her and judge of her himself in this case there is no necessity of any other quality thâ—â— only obedience and fidelity So we say as the Church if the Churches Testimony to be relied upon as the Foundation of oâ— belief of the Scriptures then it is necessaâ— the Church should be infallible if there câ—â— be no faith without such a Testimony bâ— if all the office of the Church be only to prâ— pose the object of faith to be viewed and coâ— sidered by us then a common veracity mâ— be sufficient for it And in this case I granâ— faith is not to be resolved into the conditioâ— of applying the object of faith any moâ— than love is into the light whereby a mâ— sees Beauty or the burning of Fire into thâ— laying near of the fuel but if it be assertâ— that there can be no divine faith without â— infallible Testimony that this Testimony iâ— that of the Church and therefore upon thiâ— infallible Testimony we must build our saith he is blind that doth not see in this case thaâ— it must be resolved into this infallible testimony And therefore E. W. very impertinently charges me with this constant errour viz. making the motives of faith the Foundation of it and that hereby I confound thâ— judgement of credibility with the assent of faith by making the infallible testimony of the Church to those who believe it the formal object of faith For although the common motives of faith should do no more than â—ake the object of faith appear evidently â—edible and so the faith of such persons be â—eâ—olved into a further reason than those moâ—ves yet they who do believe upon the acâ—ount of the infallibility of the Churches â—estimony must resolve their faith into that which to them is the only infallible and adaequate Ground of Faith § 6. 2. To lay open the Foundation of all these mistakes about the nature of Faith I shall inquire into the influence which the motives of credibility have upon believing And therein give an account of these three things 1. What the motives of credibility are 2. How far they are necessary to faith 3. What influence they have upon the assent of Faith 1. What these motives of credibility are Suarez brings them under four heads 1. From the qualities of the Christian doctrine and those are 1. It s truth without any mixture of falshood but faith he if there be many things true and some false it is a sufficient sign that doctrine is not from God as it was among the Philosophers of old The way to judge of this quality he thus laies down those things which the Christian Religion speaks of which may be knowâ— by natural light are very agreeable to thâ— common reason of mankind those otheâ— things which are above it are not repugnanâ— to any principle of it but are agreeable tâ— the infinite and incomprehensible Majesty oâ— God 2. The sanctity and purity of this doctrine as appears by the excellency of the precepts of it the moral precepts not only agreeable to the Law of nature but tend much to the improvement of it the spiritual precepts have nothing contrary to the rules of morality and are suitable to the perfections of the Divine Nature 3. The efficacy of it which is seen by the strange and miraculous ways of its propagation by such instruments as were never like to effect their design without a Divine Power 2. The second Motive is from the number of witnesses of the whole Trinity at the Baptism of Christ of Christ himself in his holy and innocent life of Moses and the Prophets before him of the Apostles after him of the Devils themselves of the multitude of Martyrs of all kinds suffering with so much patience and courage and Christian Religion increasing by it 3. From the Testimony God gave to the truth of it by the Miracles which were wrought in confirmation of the Doctrine preached in which ought to be considered the nature the effects the frequency the manner of working them and the end for which they were wrought which must be not meerly for the benefit of the person on whom they are wrought but for a testimony to the truth of the Doctrine delivered otherwise he grants a Deceiver may work Miracles 4. From the continuance of this Doctrine in the world being so hard to believe the Doctrine and practice the precepts of it meeting with such multitudes of enemies of all kinds out of all which the credibility of the Christian Religion may be demonstrated a Divine Providence being supposed to take care of the affairs of mankind Greg. de Valentiâ reckons up these motives to 19. Michael Medina follows â—cotus and makes 10. or 11. of them on which he largely insists viz. the fulfilling of Prophesies the consent of Scriptures their Authority and truth the care and diligence of the first Christians in examining the Doctrine of Christianity the excellency of it in all its parts the propagation of it in the world the Miracles wrought for the confirmation of it the testimony of enemies the justice of providence and the destruction of its Adversaries To the same purpose Cardinal Lugo and others of the Schoolmen make an enumeration of theâ— motives of credibility but a late Jesuit haâ— reduced them all to the four chief Attribute of God His Wisdom Goodness Poweâ— and Providence but inlarges upon theâ— much in the same way that Suarez had donâ— Thus much may suffice for understandinâ— what these motives of credibility are whâ—â— are acknowledged to make up a demonstrâ—tion for the credibility of the Christian Religion 2. How far these are necessary to faith for that we are to consider that faith beinâ— an assent of the rational faculty in man muâ— proceed upon such grounds as may justifie thâ— assent to be a rational act which cannot bâ— unless sufficient reason appear to induce thâ— mind to assent which reason appearing â— all one with the creâ—â—bility of the object which doth not imply here what may be believed either with or without reason but whaâ— all circumstances considered ought to be believed by every prudent person And in thiâ— sense Suarez asserts the necessity of the evidence of credibility to the act of faith for saith he it is not enough that the object oâ— faith be proposed as revealed by God but iâ— is necessary that it be proposed with such circumstances as make it appear prudently crâ—dible in that way it is proposed For levilâ—
Christ which House stood in the country of Judea in a City of Galilee whose name was Nazareth in which Chamber the B. Virgin Mary was born and bred up and afterwards there received the salutation of the Angel Gabriel and in the same Chamber she educated her Son Jesus Christ to the Age of twelve years After the Ascention of Christ to Heaven the Virgin Mary remained upon earth with the Apostles and other Disciples of Christ who seeing many divine Mysteries performed in the said Chamber did by the common consent of them all decree to make a Church of that Chamber to the honour and memory of the B. Virgin Mary which they did and the Apostles and Disciples consecrated that Chamber to be a Church and there celebrated divine offices and St. Luke the Evangelist with his own hands made an Image to the likeness of the B. Virgin which is there to this day Afterwards that Church was inhabited and honoured with much devotion by the Christian people in those parts in which it stood as long as the people remained Christian. But after they renounced the Christian faith and embraced Mahometism the Angels of God took away the said Church and carried it into the parts of Sclavonia and there placed it by a certain Castle called Fiume where it met not with that honour which the B. Virgin desired Therefore the Angels came and took it from thence and carried it clear over the Sea into the parts of the territory of Recanati and there placed it in a Wood which belonged to a Noble Lady who had the command of the City of Recanati and was Owner of the Wood whose name was Loreta and from her the Church took its name of St. Maria de Loreto In that time by reason of the great concourse of all people to that Wood in which the Church remained abundance of robberies and mischiefs were committed there and therefore the Angels again took up the Chappel and carried it to a Hill belonging to two Brothers where the Angels set it down these Brothers getting a vast revenew by the resort of Pilgrims thither and the oblations by them made fell to a great discord Upon which the Angels came again and took away the Chappel from that place and carried it into the High-way and there placed it where it is now with many signs and innumerable gifts and miracles Then all the people of Recanati went to see the Church which stood upon the Earth without any Foundation and being astonished at such a Miracle and fearing left it should come to ruine they compassed it about with a good thick Wall and a strong Foundation as it iâ— seen at this day and yet no one knew from whence that Church came into those parts until in A. D. 1290. the blessed Virgin appeared in a Dream to a certain maâ— much devoted to her to whom she revealed the foregoing things and he presently divulged them to certain honest men of that Country who immediately resolved to know the truth of these matters and therefore determined to send sixteen notable good men to Nazareth to find out the truth of them Who carried with them the measure of the said Church and there they found exactly the Foundations of it and the just measure and to make all sure they found it written upon a Wall that such a Church had been there and was gone from thence and these persons upon their return certified the truth of all these things and from that time it was known that that Chappel was the Chamber of the blessed Virgin Mary and the Christian people shewed great devotion towards it for the blessed Virgin there every day doth infinite Miracles as experience shews There was a certain Eremite that was called Brother Paul of the Wood who dwelt in a small Cottage in that Wood and every morning went to divine offices in that Chappel and wâ—s a man of a great abstinence and a holy Lifâ— who said that ten years before or thereabouts on the day of the Nativity of the blessed Virgin bâ—ing the 8th of September two hours before day in a clear Air going out of his Cottage towards the Church he saw a light descend from Heaven upon the Church twelve â—oot long and six broad and when it was upon the Church it vanished upon which he said it was the blessed Virgin which there appeared on the day of her Nativity and came to see her Feast observed but no man saw her besides this Holy man To confirm the Truth and certainty of all these things two honest men of this Village reported them several times to me Teremanus the Over-seer and Governour of the said Church one of them was called Paulus Renaldatii the other Francis Prior. The said Paul told me that his Grandfathers Grandfather saw when the Angels carried the said Chappel over the Sea and placed it in the Wood and that he and other persons oftimes went to the said Chappel And the said Francis oftimes said to me that his Grandfather being one hundred and twenty years old said that he went often to the said Church in the Wood. Moreover the said Francis averred that his Grandfathers Grandfather had a House and dwelt there and that in his time the Chappel was removed by Angels from the hill of the two Brothers to the High-way Deo gratias Imprinted at Venice by Benedictus de Bindonis A. D. 1499. In the Italian Copy it is only added that this Narration was taken out oâ— an Original Authentick M. S. belonging to the said Chappel March 20. A. D. 1492. And is not this a very pleasant story to be matched in point of credibility with the Miracles of Christ and his Apostles What do these men think in their hearts of Christian Religion that dare avouch such ridiculous fictions as these are and impose them on the credulity of mankind But we are not to imagine this to be only a Legend hung up at Loreto for the comfort of devout Pilgrims but it is delivered in the same manner by men who should have had more wit or more honesty Cardinal Baronius in his Annals cannot let it escape but relates the miraculous translation of this Chappel from Nazareth to Dalmatia from thence to Loreto much after the same way All the Argument â—e brings for the truth of it is taken from Gods omnipotency as though as Is. Casauâ—on truly answers him all the Rabbinical and Mahumetan Fables might not be believed on the same ground And he observes from some of the Fathers that Gods omnipotency is the Sanctuary of Hereticks whither they betake themselves when they are basfled with reason But Baronius refers us to Canisius for a fuller account of this admirable story who very wisely brings the stories of the Prophet Elias Habakkuk and Philip in the Acts to confirm the truth of this as though the dispute were whether God could do it and not whether the thing were really done But if we offer to Question
able to walk or stand and fifteen years did â—eremain under this infirmity of Boots By this miracle faith Mr. Cressy the Sanctity of the Holy Bishop was approved A wonderful discovery of Sanctity to revenge himself so severely upon the Abbot for his reasonable suspicion of an imposture methinks however a pair of strait shoos might have been fair punishment at first for calling him Cobler and if those had not convinced him he might then have proceeded to the Scotch severity of the Boot But we are to consider that a great deal depended upon the honour of the Body that was to be translated for the resort would be made accordingly and therefore a long gout upon an old Abbot might by an easie metaphor pass for St. Ivo's boots I wonder Mr. Cressy omitted another miracle wrought no doubt in approbation of the Sanctity of the Holy Bishop too for in my opinion the story of St. Ivo's girdle is as good as of his boots for which we must understand that these Saints were very severe towards all persons who neglected their Festival days now it so happened that a Monk commanded his servants to work upon his day and spake not very kindly of the Saint It may be questioning whether ever there was any such Saint or no or calling him Girdler as we may think by his punishment to him St. Ivo appeared and asked him if he knew him he trembling answered no. The Saint replied I am Ivo whom thou lately saidst thou didst not know and hinderedst men from keeping my Feast Here take this girdle and by this token remember me and girding it about him he left him The Monk waking found himself as it were girt with an Iron girdle and was under horrible pains and diseases till by visiting St. Ivo's monument he recovered his health Thus these miracles end in some honour to a shrine or monument which may reward the Monks well for the use of their inventions to delude the people But did ever Christ or his Apostles testifie their sanctity by giving men such Boots and Girdles as St. Ivo did Did they ever vindicate the honour of their Festivals in such a manner It 's true when persons openly lied and cheated they were once struck dead upon the place and when others profaned the holy institution of the Lords supper they were severely punished but what is this to the questioning the body of such an unknown Saint as St. Ivo What is this to the hindring men from keeping his Festival Were the other such fit ends for God to imploy his power in working miracles as these Could any think the asserting the Apostolical power or the holiness of Christs own institutions were fit to be compared with the owning of the body of St. Ivo or making servants work upon his holy-day If they do they must have different apprehensions of the Christian Religion from what some would seem to have in the Church of Rome But to proceed Was ever any thing done by Christ or his Apostles like the turning a pound of butter into a bell yet this is related from the same storehouse from which they had St. Ivo's Boots and Girdle viz. Capgrave who saith that St. Oudoceus Bishop of Landaff travelling desired of some women that were washing butter a dish of water they told him they had no dish but their butter the Bishop took their butter and made it in the fashion of a bell and drank out of it and it remained in that fashion as a Golden Bell and was perserved as a sacred Relique in the Church of Landaff for a Testimony of the miracle Did ever any of Christs Apostles meerly with breathing and the sign of the Cross change a person from looking young and fresh to be grayhaired and wrinkled yet this Mr. Cressy delivers as he saith from our more ancient and credible Historians concerning St. Modwenna who intending to retire appointed Abbess over her Monastery a certain virgin named Orbila who by reason of her youth and beauty being in great apprehension to undertake that charge she binding her with her own girdle and making the sign of the Cross upon her presently all her hair became white and her Countenance wrinkled as if she had been very aged yet without any diminution of her health or strength Mr. Cressâ— omits a necessary circumstance of this miracle viz. that she breathed upon her for who can tell but there might be as great vertue in that as in the sign of the Cross or her girdle When was there ever such a miracle seen in the Apostolical times as in the letting down the bolt of a door to St. Neotus For as Mr. Cressy observes he was of a stature so very low and dwarfish that in celebrating Mass he was obliged to make use of an iron footstool Now saith Capgrave some great man knocking hastily at the door St. Neâ—t endeavoured to open it and the bolt was much too high for him and behold a miracle the bolt was let down to his girdle that he might with ease open it Had it not been as well for the door to have opened it self by a miracle but then St. Neot would have had no hand in it Did ever any of them revenge perjury as St. Quintin did who pulled a man by the nose in the night for it and as Capgrave saith the next morning touching his nose it dropt off into the bason where â—e was washing or as St. Egwin when an old man sware by his beard that the land was â—is own which belonged to St. Egwin immediately his beard fell to the ground and so he lost his land and his beard too Did ever any of them curse a whole Trade in a Town â—s St. Egwin did for St. Egwin we must know went often from his Monastery of Evesham to Aln-cester to preach to the people which place was very full of Smiths who beat their Anvils so loud while he was preaching that he could not be heard upon that he solemnly cursed the Trade of Smiths in that place so that saith Capgrave never did any one thrive by it since Did ever any of them bind themselves in Iron Chains for their sins and go in Pilgrimage in them as the same St. Egwin did from England to Rome as Mr. Cressy relates the story from Ancient Authors And were any of them assured of the pardon of their sins by such a miracle as he was viz. As soon as he had fastned his chains he cast the key which locked them together into the river Avon publickly protesting that he would never esteem himself secure of the pardon of his sins till either the key were restored to him or the chains unloosed by a power supernatural And now behold the miracle While he was at his devotionâ— in the Church of St. Peter in Rome his servants going to the rivers siâ—e to buy proviâ—â—on for their master they found in a sifhâ—â— belly the key which locked
Power in the cure of diseases at the memories of the Mariyrs or upon the prayers of the faithful of which he there gives several examples but elsewhere he shews that the miâ—acles wrought by Christ and his Apostles were â—rought for the benefit and satisfaction of future Ages as well as their own that so none might complain for want of a power of miracles And when the Donatists aftewards appealed to the miracles wrought by Donatus and Pontius and to visions and revelations St. Augustin very smartly bids them lay aside those feigned miracles or Diabolical impostures for either they were not true or if they were we have so much the more reason to beware of them because our Saviour hath foretold that false Prophets should arise working signs and wonders that if it were possible they should deceive the very Elect. But it may be said that in all this St. Augustin doth only upbraid the Schismatical Donatists witâ— lying miracles and not take away the evidence of miracles from the true Church 〈◊〉 that St. Augustin himself answers that the Catholicks do not bring the evidence of miracles to prove the true Church by nor yet oâ— Visions and Revelations for saith he 〈◊〉 such things are to be approved because they are done in the Catholick Church and nâ—â— that the Church is proved to be Catholicâ— because such things are done in it and therefore saith that controversie of the Church must be ended by the Scriptures From whence it necessarily follows that St. Augustin could never think the miracles done in his time were to be compared with those wrought by Christ or his Apostles or could give equal evidence of credibility either concerning the Doctrine or the Church which delivered it Never did two men more plainly contradict each other in this point than St. Augustin and E. W. who appeals to miracles for proof of the Catholick and infallible Church and such as are equal to those of Christ and his Apostles but whether St. Augustin or E. W. deserve the greater credit that is another controversie which I am not now at leisure to engage in To the same purpose St. Augustin speaks in another place viz that miracles are no proof of the true Church for though Pontius and Doâ—atus might do wonders and see visions yet Christ hath now forewarned us quia miraculis decipi non debemus we ought not now to be deceived by miracles The force of which argument from our Saviours caution depends upon this viz. that the Christian Religion being once established by plain and evident miracles there would be no necessity in after ages to have recourse to miracles again For if no new Doctrine be delivered what need can there be of new miracles Let no man therefore now complain saith the same St. Augustin because Christ doth not work the same miracles now that he did in former times for he hath said Blessed are they which have not seen and yet have believed whom doth he mean saith he but us and those who are to come after us But those miracles were wrought by Christ to draw men to faith and this faith is now spread over the world And now although he does not work the same cures he does greater now the blind eyes do not receive sight by a miracle of Christ but the blind hearts do see by the doctrine of Christ now dead bodies are not raised but souls that are dead in living bodies do rise again Now deaf ears are not opened but deaf minds are by the power of Gods word so that they believe and live well who were unbelievers and wicked and disobedient Could any man of common sense have used these expressions if he had thought there was either any necessity of miracles being wrought in his time or that there were such miracles then wrought which might be compared with those of Christ and his Apostles and as he elsewhere fully speaks to this purpose Signâ— and Miracles were wrought by the Apostles to bring men from infidelity to faith that men seeing those things done which are impossible with men may acknowledge that the preaching is from God by which power they were to prove that there was reason to believe Among believers then signs and miracles are not not necessary but only a firm hope From these Testimonies of St. Augustin thus laid together we observe these things 1. That the main intention of miracles was to convince unbelievers 2. That the Christian faith being established there was no longer any necessity of the power of miracles 3. That though there were not any such necessity yet God out of his abundant kindness was pleased to do some extraordinary things among them in their time 4. That in disputes about the true Church they never appealed to the Power of miracles but to the Scriptures whose Doctrine was already confirmed by Miracles 5. That those out of the true Church might make as great a pretence to miracles visions and revelations as those who were in it as appears by the Donatists 6. That some kind of miracles were wholly ceased then in the Church as the gift of tongues and the common miraculous cures of diseases by those that preached 7. That those which did then remain were not in any respect for number or quality to be compared with those of Christ and his Apostles as the cure of one blind man at Miâ—â—n or those other cures of a Cancer a Fistula or the two shaking persons in Africa for when himself speaks most favourably of the miracles then wrought he saith they were not so great nor so many as those done by Christ or his Apostles § 10. But what shall we now say to the succeeding Ages of the Church For after the first 600 years were passed and there were no more St. Chrysostoms or St. Augustins and one of the greatest Prodigies as Tully said of old was a wise man the pretence of the common working of miracles was again started by those who undertook to give an account of the lives of the Saints for they thought they said nothing in effect of them if they did not attribute the power of miracles upon any occasion to them Then St. Gregory and St. Bede shewed the way to the rest and by their own credulity and want of judgement gave a pattern and encouragement to all the Monkish Tales and impostures afterwards But we must acknowledge our obligation to some more ingenuous and judicious men in the Roman Church who in several Ages have blasted the credit and discovered the Impostures of these Legendary Writers which is the next thing I am to prove viz. 2. That the credibility of their miracles in the Church of Rome is destroyed by the Testimony of their own more judicious Writers Ludovicus Vives after he hath discoursed of all other Histories comes to that of the Church and particularly the Lives of the Saints of which he saith that they are generally corrupted with
it is only 〈◊〉 for old women could any man have doâ— this that had believed them to be any othâ—â— than cheats and impostures Especially in 〈◊〉 solemn a matter as the immaculate conceptioâ— and in a discourse addressed to Leo 10. anâ— prepared for the Lateran Council By whicâ— we see that the learned and wise men amonâ— themselves when they are put to declare theâ—â— minds speak as freely of these matters as wâ— can do but still they think it fit the commoâ— people should be cheated and deceived by them so a learned and ingenuous writer oâ— the French Church and Doctor of the Sorboâ— tells us that he was so far from receiving â—anks from many for laying open the fables â—â—d impostures of the Monks that they reâ—â—rred him to Polybius his judgement about â—â—ese matters who determines that allowance â—â—ght to be given to those Writers who invent â—iracles and stories to keep up the devotion of â—he People The occasion of Polybius delivering â—is judgement of his was this It seems the â—eathen Priests made almost as many and as â—oolish stories of miracles about their Images â—s they are wont to do in the Church of Rome â—mong the rest it was verily believed among â—he Bargelietae that the Image of Diana being â—xposed to the air could receive no injury eiâ—her by snow or rain and the same was beâ—ieved of the Image of Vesta among the Jassiâ—ns and these miracles were written by their Historians But Polybius declares his great oppoâ—ition to these follies such saith he as the miâ—acle Theopompus relates of Jupiter's Temple in Arcadia that the bodies of those who are in â—t never cast any shadows Yet he yeilds that something of this nature must be done to keep up the devotion of the people but he would have it within bounds although he saith it be very hard to determine those bounds Now saith Launoy this saying of Polybius I have been often told of by all sorts of men who pretended hereby to secure Christian piety but I found them worse than Polybius for he would have bounds set but these will allow none For they judge of all things by the absoluteness of Gods power and regard not whether the things were done or no as long as they might be done But as he excellently adds a false Religion indeed according to Polybius stands in need of such cheats and trickâ— to support it but true Religion wants no such helps the more simple pure and innocent it is it is so much the greater and more glorious it is corrupted when it hath any thing unlike it self mixed with it They who think otherwise of Christian Religion do not know it but design to make a Religion out of truth and falshood Thus far that ingenuous man By whom we see what the opinion is which the more sagacious Persons in the Roman Church have of these Monkish tales and impstoures yet they generally are for keeping them up in as much credit with the people as they can and discountenance those who go about to undeceive them But is not the Testimony of these things by their own confession very credible the mean while and fit to be compared with the Testimony upon which the miracles of Christ and his Apostles is received in the Christian Church It is hard to think that such men do believe Christianity in their hearts that dare publish such impudent comparisons When the impostures of this nature in the Church of Rome have been like Astrology in old Rome alwaies complained of and always practised as will easily appear to any one that will peruse the Testimonies brought by Launoy in that discourse concerning counterfeit Saints Relicks and miracles which I shall not transcribe The whole Christian World is obliged to the Ingenuity of such men who have taken pains in the discovery and confutation of such Impostures as the Monks have abused the people with But we are not only beholding to such learned men who have purposely done this but to those who have lately published such writings of the middle Ages whereby we understand their History far better than we could do before As for instance to our present purpose among other very useful things published by Lucas D'achrey we have the works of Guibert Abbot of Nogent in France who lived in the beginning of the 12. Century a time brim full of miracles and superstition in his works we have a discourse of the Relicks of the Saints which was occasioned by a pretence the Monks of St. Medard made to a tooth of our Saviour wherein he begins with a complaint of the dishonour which is put upon the Saints by the false stories which are made of them and then proceeds to the false Saints which were worshipped by them as Saint Piron whom upon enquiry he found to have fallen drunk into a Well and so dyed yet this man was worshipped he saith both in Britain and in France and after telling some ridiculous miracles which he was willing however to believe to be true he falls upon the false and counterfeit ones of which he saith that they who ascribe to God that which he never thought to do as much as lies in them make God a Lyer and he produces this instance of his own knowledge a certain boy that belonged to a Souldier happened to dye upon good Friday the people were ready to attribute great Sanctity to him for dying upon that day and of a sudden great resort was made to his tomb and many oblations were made and wax Candles offered and his tomb compassed about with great devotion the people coming out of Britain to it The Abbot and Monks seeing the people make such resort thither were willing to have it believed that miracles were wrought there And presently some of the people feigned themselves deaf others mad and others lame to bring greater credit by their cures to the young Saint that was but newly set up and the good Abbot gave encouragement to them But Guibert detests his Nebulonity for it as he calls it a word though hardly to be met with elsewhere yet very fitly expresses such horrible cheating and deluding the people Another instance he gives immediately after done in his presence viz. a Preacher in a famous Church had a mind to draw custom to it and finding it necessary to tell them what excellent Relicks they had he produces a box and shews it to the people and tells them they were to understand that within that box was kept a piece of the bread which Christ himself did eat and if you do not believe this behold a very learned Person among you pointing to Guibert will bear witness if it were needful to the Truth of what I say Guibert saith he blushed at the mans impudence and had a good mind to have contradicted him but he stood too much in awe of the Persons about him who were his abettors in so advantagious a lie to them But he saith
Miracles to convert them bâ—â— withal saith that the conversion of Infidels 〈◊〉 not so necessary now as in the Apostles times and therefore God doth not in this ordinarily bestow this gift on men although he mâ—â— do it in some extraordinary cases Whâ—â— shall we say now to the Testimony of thiâ— learned Bishop had he never heard 〈◊〉 St. James of Compostella and the Miraclâ—â— pretended to be wrought there and could 〈◊〉 believe them and write these things Haâ— he never heard of St. Vincentius Ferreriâ—â— who lived in some part of the same time witâ— him and if he had believed the Miracles reported of him he would neither have pâ—â— the Question nor answered it so as he diâ— After him I shall produce the Testimony 〈◊〉 Fisher Bishop of Rochester in his Answer tâ— Luther who to prove the necessity of interpreting Scripture by the continued sense 〈◊〉 the Church and not by the bare Letter offeâ— to produce such words of Christ in which bâ—sides the matter of fact and the commanâ— there is a promise annexed and yet saith he in our dayes no effect of this promise iâ— seen and then brings the words of Scriptuâ—â— wherein it is said that Christ cured tâ—â— blind and the lame and cast out Devils and he commanded his Disciples to do 〈◊〉 same and makes a promise to them that â—hould believe in Christ. Mark 16. that many â—â—gns should follow them and yet this promise saith he hath no effect now for no man â—ow casts out Devils nor heals diseases and yet no one questions but there are many that believe But what then was the promise of Christ of no effect no saith he Christ intended it only for the first Ages of the Church but when the Christian faith was dispersed over the world there was no longer need of miracles Can any Testimony be more plain or weighty in our case than this it being from one who undoubtedly knew all the pretences to miracles that were then made Erasmus expresly saith that the gift of miracles which was necessary to the first Ages of the Church for the conversion of Infidels as speaking with strange Tongues miraculous Cures Prophesying and such like miracles is is now ceased Stella not only saith that the power of miracles is ceased but he saith that the receiving it would do more hurt than good for men would say that the Christian faith was not sufficiently confirmed before Of all cases we might most reasonably suppose that God should if ever renew this gift in the conversion of Infidels and yet Franciscus à Victoria saith that he heard of no miracles or signs that were wrought for the conversion of the Indians Josephus Acostâ— at large debates this case why God doth nâ—â— now give the power of miracles among those who preach to Infidels as he did of old anâ— he offers at several reasons for it of which this is the chief That miracles were necessary in the beginning of Christian Religion but not now And if the Church be defective in the power of miracles where it is the most necessary what reasonable ground can there be to think that God should imploy his power not for the satisfaction of Infidels but of the credulous and superstitious As God never works miracles to convince obstinate Atheists so neither doth he to gratifie the curiosity of old Women and Pilgrims but if ever he doâ—â— it it is to lay a sufficient foundation for those to believe who are otherwise destitute of the means of faith But if such persons who are imployed upon the work of converting Infidels do want the Testimony of miracles I know no reason to believe that he imployâ—â— it for other ends And if these persons had believed that the power of miracles had been any where else in the Church they would have made that considerable objection to themselves why God should give it where there was less need and deny it where there was greatest But what then shall we say to the miracles pretended to be wrought by Xaverius and others in the East-Indies I say that if they were sufficiently attested we might be much more inclined to believe the Truth of those miracles than of the Lady of Loretto or St. James of Compostella or any of the rest which E. W. refers us to For if it were at any time reasonable to expect a power of miracles it would be for the conversion of Infidels and Xaverius and his companions going upon so generous a design might be favoured in it by some extraordinary effects of Divine Power But then in all reason the miracles would be such as were most accommodated to that design as the speaking with the Tongues in which they were to preach the Christian Religion but by the letters of Xaverius himself we find that he was extreamly put to it for want of this gift of Tongues both on the Coast of Commorin and especially in Japan for in one of his Letters he laments his condition very much because the people being willing to learn and he as willing to instruct them for want of the language they conversed with each other like Statues and when they asked him questions he could give them no answer but by degrees he said he learnt to prattle like a Child among them Can any one now imagine that God had bestowed the gift of miracles upon Xaverius for propagating Christianity and yet should deny him that without which all other miracles would be to no purpose if he could not deliver the doctrine those miracles were to confirm so as to be understood by the people But in truth I do not find that Xaverius himself in any of his Epistles did make any pretence to the power of miracles after his death indeed the Jesuits in those parts to increase the glory of their Society and their Brethren in these parts as readily concurring to such a design published some miracles which they said were wrought by him So Melchior Nunezius in his Epistle to Ignatius Loyola where he gives an account of the death of Francis Xaverius saith that many things were discovered since his death that were not known while he was alive and is not this a very probable circumstance that he had a power of miracles Would the Miracles of Christ and his Apostles have converted Infidels if they had not been known while they were living And yet these miracles he reports are very few and delivered on the single testimonies of no very considerable men the rest he faith for brevity's sake he omits which is not very probable considering how long he insists upon the story of the miraculous incorruption of his Body after his decease Which Bellarmin likewise magnifies viz. That his Body being cast into Lime was preserved fifteen months entire and free from corruption What will not these men make miracles of when they have a mind to it When Maffeius saith that the Relicks of St. Thomas at
the care of Physitians who returned this answer that they could find nothing praeternatural in her then great clamours were made by the people and â—editious Preachers that the priviledges of the Church were infringed and that all this was done in favour of the Hugonots to take away from the Catholick Church the glory of her Miracles after severe animadversion on these factious Preachers and Friers Martha was sent home with her Father and Sisters and confined thither But the Bishop of Clermont and his Brother carried her away to Avignon and refused to obey the summons sent them by the Parliament and the King sent to Cardinal Ossat his Ambassador at Rome to acquaint the Pope with the whole matter before they came thither It happened that sirmondus was then with Cardinal Ossat him he imploys to the General of the Order of Jesuits who were suspected to be friends to the Brothers who had been bred up in their Society that if they medled in this matter it would be their greatest hindrance to their restitution in France which they had then good hopes of Upon this the Jesuits for sook them and they were forced to submit to the King and so poor Martha was quite dispossessed Thus we see what intrigues and designes are carried on by such impostures in the Roman Church that when such things escape examination they pass for Miracles but when they are throughly searched into they appear to be meer cheats and impostures I shall conclude this discourse of impostures with these passages out of the Lord Herberâ— History of Henry 8. The King having issue Male proceedeâ— more confidently in his designs and because he knew that the pretended and false miracles of Priests had seduced many ignorant people to a superstitious obedience to the Romish See and reverence of Monasteries he resolved to detect them at least as many as he could for divers were so cunningly represented as they had kept their crediâ— for some ages the manner of these times being if a man were restored to his health upon a Pilgrimage or obtained any thing he desired upon a vow to some Saint never to study other cause And here out of ouâ— Records I shall mention some of the Imageâ— and Relicks to which the Pilgrimages oâ— those times brought devotion and offerings as our Ladies girdle shewed in eleven several places and her Milk in eight the Belâ— of St. Guthlac and the Felt of St. Thomaâ— of Laneaster both remedies for the Headâ— ach the Pen-knife and Boots of St. Thomas of Canterbury and a piece of his Shirt much reverenced by great-bellied women the Coals that roasted St. Laurence two or three heads of St. Ursula Malcus his Ear and the pairing of St. Edmonds Nails the Image of an Angel with one Wing which brought hither the Spears head that pierced Christs side an Image of our Lady with a Taper in her hand which burned nine years together without wasting till one forswearing himself thereon it went out and was now found to be but a piece of wood our Lady of Worcester from which certain veils and dressings being taken there appeared the statue of a Bishop ten foot high these and others were now brought forth and with great ostentation shewed to the people Among which were two notable Trumperies I cannot omit One was the Rood of Grace at Boxley in Kent which being made with divers vices to turn the eyes and move the lips was shewed publickly at St. Pauls Cross by John Bishop of Rochester and there broken and pulled in pieces The other was at Hales in Gloucestershire where the Blood of Christ brought from Jerusalem being kept as was affirmed for divers Ages had drawn many great offerings to it from remote places and it was said to have this property that if a man were in mortal sin and not absolved he could not see it otherwise very well Therefore every man that came to behold this Miracle confest himself first to a Priest there and then offering something to the Altar was directed to a Chappel where the Relick was shewed the Priest who confest him in the mean while retiring himself to the back part of the said Chappel and putting forth a Cabinet or Tabernacle of Chrystal which being thick on the one side that nothing could be seen through it but on the other side thin and transparent they used diversely For if a rich and devout man â—entred they would shew the thick side till he had paid for as many Masses and given as large Alms as they thought fit after which to his great joy they permitted him to see the thin side and the blood Which yet as my Author a Clerk of the Council to Edward the sixth and living in those times affirms was proved to be the blood of a Duck every week renewed by the Priests who kept the secret betwixt them Besides which the Images of our Lady of Walsingham of Ipswich of Fenrise of Islington and St. John of Osulston called otherwise Mr. John Shorn who was said to shut up the Devil in a Boot and divers others were publickly burnt And by this means the Monasteries grew infamous where most of these Images were kept and divers were undeceived who before held a Reverend opinion of these pretended Relicks and Miracles After which he relates how the King discovered the Forgery of the Miracles pretended to be wrought at Thomas Beckets shrine and that the Scull which the People did so much venerate was not his own that being found together with his body in the Tomb. I leave it now to the judgement of the Reader what credit such Miracles deserve which are reported by Persons who think it lawful to lie in these matters and which where strict examination hath been made have been discovered so often to be notorious impostures And this may abundantly suffice for the first particular which was the comparing the Miracles of the Roman Church with those of Christ and his Apostles in point of credibility § 12. 2. I come to compare them as to the Testimony given by them to Infallibility i. e. whether the Miracles supposed to be wrought in the Roman Church do equally prove that Church Infallible as those wrought by Christ and his Apostles did prove them Infallible For clearing of this I shall premise these particulars 1. That it is agreed on both sides that the miracles wrought by Christ and his Apostles did sufficiently prove that they were Teachers sent from God For we are assured by the universal Testimony of all Christians not contradicted by their greatest Adversaries that the first Preachers of the Christian Religion did work so many so publick so great miracles that all impartial Persons could not but look upon them as persons immediately sent by God And Christ himself declared that this was the end for which he did those miraculous works that men might believe by them that God had sent him that without these men might have had an
Leg cut off and strangely restored or that some persons were suddenly cured of a dangerous disease by the vision of an Apostle would this have ever satisfied the world that the Apostles were Persons sent from God and assisted by an infallible Spirit Supposing the matters of Fact were true it might be reasonably demanded why God might not do such extraordinary cures in some rare cases without making that Company of men infallible among whom they are done For we see their own Writers acknowledge that God may do real miracles even among Pagans and Infidels to give testimony to his universal Providence And Suarez particularly distinguisheth in this case of miracles saying that a miracle may be wrought two ways 1. Without respect to any truth at all to be confirmed by it but only for the benefit of him that receives it as in case of a miraculous cure or such like 2. When it is wrought purposely to confirm the truth of a doctrine Now I say supposing I should grant all that E. W. contends for as to the truth of the two miracles he insists so much upon viz. the cure of F. Marcellus and the restored Leg at Zaragosa what can this prove as to their Churches infallibility if according to Suarez such miracles may be wrought only for the benefit of those who receive them Del-Rio saith this is no good consequence such a one wrought miracles therefore his faith is true because God may work miracles by Insidels but this consequence he saith is good such a one wrought miracles to confirm the faith which he professed therefore his saith is true because God cannot work miracles purposely to confirm a falshood But withall he saith elsewhere that the faith being now established there is little or no necessity of miracles to confirm it Supposing then some true miracles to be wrought in the Roman Church what consequence can be thence drawn for that Churches infallibility in doctrine if those miracles are not wrought for that end as E. W. never undertook to prove that they were And if the consequence will not hold as to a particular person for the truth of his faith from the bare working of miracles neither can it for the truth or infallibility of a Church for the same reason for if God may work miracles by Infidels he may likewise in a false or corrupt Church Maldonat another Jesuit confesseth that since the Christian Religion hath been confirmed by miracles in the Churches beginning there is no necessity of miracles for that end and quotes Gregory and Bede for it who compare the power of miracles to the watering of a plant which is only needâ—ul at first and is given over when it hath taken root So that whatever miracles they suppose to remain in the Church they do not look on them as wrought for the confirmation of any necessary part of Christian faith such as the Churches Infallibility is asserted to be by E. W. Andradius saith that miracles are oftimes false but always weak proofs of a true Church Ferus that the doctrine of a Church is not to be proved by miracles but miracles by the doctrine viz. because Christ hath forewarned us of false Prophets doing so many signs and wonders So that Acosta saith that in the time of Antichrist it will be a hard matter to discern true and false signs when these later shall be many and great and very like the true and he quotes it from Hippolytus whom he calls an antient Writer that Antichrist shall do far greater miracles than the cure of Marcellus or the restored Leg at Zaragosa viz. that be shall raise the dead as well as cure the diseased and have command over all the elements And I would understand from E. W. whether Antichrists Church will not then be proved as insallible in this way as the Church of Rome Cajetan determines that the Church hath no ground to determine any matter of doctrine now on the account of miracles because the Dâ—vil may do such things which we cannot distinguish from true miracles as in great cures c. and because signs were given for unbelievers but the Church â—ow hath the Revelation of Prophets and Apostles to proceed by and because miracles prove only a personal faith i. e. of one that saith he is sent from God and because the doctrine of the Scripture is delivered to us with so much certainty that if an Angel from Heaven should deliver any thing contrary to it we are not to believe him and lastly because the most authentick testimonies of miracles among them viz. in the Canonization of Saints are not altogether certain because it is written every man is a lyer and he supposes that faith must stand on a more infallible certainty than that of their miracles And many of their most learned Writers do assert that there can be no certainty of the truth of any miracles among them but from the Churches approbation which is in effect to say they do not believe the Church infallible because of their miracles but they believe their miracles to be true because they believe their Church to be infallible For which Paulus Zacchias gives this reason because wicked men and Devils may not only do miracles in appearance but such as are really so as the instruments of divine Power and because credulous people are very apt to be deceived with false miracles instead of true And after he hath laid down the conditions of a true miracle he hath a chapter on purpose to enquire why since miracles very rarely happen yet so many are still pretended to in the Roman Church One cause he assigns of it is the monstrous credulity of their people in this matter of miracles who make so many that he saith if they were to be believed miracles would be almost as common as the ordinary effects of nature for no odd or unusual accident happens but among them passes for a miracle no man escapes out of a dangerous disease especially if by the disturbance of his Fancy he imagines he had a vision of some Saint as Xaverius or the like but he gives out he obtained his recovery by a miracle no man avoids any great danger or trouble if he chanced to think of the Blessed Virgin in it or made any addresses to some Saint for I do not find that praying to God or Christ is so effectual for miracles as praying to the Saints is but this is cryed up for a miracle Riolanus gives the relation of a man that was hanged and his body delivered to the Physitians to be dissected who found there was some lise in him and by letting blood and other means they recovered him who afterwards returning to his own Country Oetingen where there was a celebrated image of the Blessed Virgin this very recovery was there painted for a substantial miracle But to return to Zacchias miracles saith he are made so common among
both his Books lies in this one word Infallibility But it is time to fall to my business for fear of more Advertisements and Infallibility being the main design of his Books that shall be the subject of my present debate with him And because this E. W. is a great pretender to Principles the method I shall proceed in shall be first to consider his Principles and then to defend my own For which I shall chiefly make use of his last Book it being in effect but another edition of his former the other as I suppose being disposed of to better purposes than to be read for I never heard of one person in England that read it over However what there is material in it different from the last as to the present controversie I shall upon occasion take notice of The two main Principles he builds upon are these 1. That without an Infallible Church there can be no certainty of Faith 2. That the Roman-Catholick Church is this Infallible Church If he can prove these two he shall not need any more to establish their Religion or to overthrow ours And I will say that for his praise that he hath brought the controversie into a narrow compass for he confesses it is endless to dispute out of Scripture and Fathers since witty men by their fallâ—ble Glosses can turn and winde them which way they please but there is nothing so stiff and inflexible as a standing infallible Oracle in the Church which being once believed all Controversie is at an end But we may as soon hope to see all other controversies ended by dry blows as this Principle proved to the satisfaction of any reasonable man The main proofs for the necessity of the Churches Infallibility which he insists upon are these 1. That there can be no Divine Faith without it 2. There can be no certainty as to the Canon or edition or sense of Scripture 3. There can be as little certainty as to the sense of the Fathers or the Primitive Church 1. That there can be no divine Faith without it This he frequently insists upon in both his Books and with so much vehemency as to make the deniers of Infallibility to overthrow all Faith and Religion Which being a charge of the highest nature ought to be made good by the clearest evidence Whether that which E. W. produces be so I shall leave any one to judge when I have given an Account of his Principles as to this matter In his first Book called Protestancy without Principles he begins with this subject and lays down these assertions upon which all his Discourse is built 1. That Gods infallible Revelation requires an infallible Assent of Faith or an infallible verity revealed to us forcibly requires an answerable and correspondent infallible assent of Faith in us the contrary he calls wild Doctrine this subjective infallibility as he calls it he offers very wisely to prove from those places of Scripture which speak of the assurance which Christians had of the truth of their Religion 2. This infallible assent of Faith doth require infallible Teachers for infallible believers and infallible Teachers are correlatives And in the second Chapter he goes about to prove it because if Christs infallible Doctrine be only fallibly taught no man hath certainty what it is and seeing what is fallible may be false Christs Doctrine may not be taught at all which is infallible and cannot be false and he that should abjure this fallible Doctrine doth not deny therein Christs Doctrine and cannot be upon that account an Heretick But to make Faith Infallible he asserts That every Preacher sent by the infallible Church as a member conjoyned with it is infallible in his Teaching and on the contrary whosoever renounces an Infallible society cannot teach with certainty Christs infallible Doctrine From whence he saith follows an utter ruine of Christian Religion In his third Chapter he further proves That if the Church were fallible in her Teaching God would oblige us to believe a falsity because God commands men to hear the Church and if the Church may erre then men are obliged to believe a false Doctrine taught by her And all other means short of this Infallibility would be insufficient for preserving Christian Religion in the world In the fourth Chapter he comes to a particular consideration of divine Faith and from thence proves the necessity of infallibility Faith saith he requires two things essentially an object which is Gods Revelation and a Proposition of this object by Vertue of which the elicit act of Faith follows in a believer and intellectually lays as it were hold both oâ— Gods Revelation and the thing revealed Now to prove the necessity of such an infallible Proposition in order to divine Faith hoâ— lays down some abstruse Propositions 1. That Gods infallible Revelation availâ— nothing in order to Faith unless Christianâ— by their Faith lay hold on the certainly thereof or owne it as infallible and the assured ground of their Assent 2. That the measure and degrees of certitude in the assent are according to those which the Proponent gives to the Revelation If he teaches doubtfully the assent is doubtful if probably the assent is probable is infallibly the assent is infallible the reason which he gives of this is because an object revealed receives its light from the proposal as an object of sight doth from the light of the air As long therefore saith he as the infallibility of a Revelation stands remote from me for want of an undoubted application made by an infallible proponent it can no more transfuse certainty into Faith than Fire at a great distance warm that is no more than if it were not certain in it self or not at all in Being 3. From hence he saith it follows that Protestants can only doubtfully guess at what they are to believe and consequently never yet had nor can have Divine certain and infallible Faith Because they cannot â—ropose Faith infallibly Hence he proceeds Chapter fifth and sixth to disprove Moral Cerâ—ainty as insufficient in order to Faith and destroying as he saith The very being and â—ssence of Divine and supernatural Faith because the sole and adequate object of divine and supernatural Faith is Gods infinite veracity actually speaking to us but this infinite veracity when it is duly proposed transsuseth more certainty into the elicit act of Faith than any Moral Certainty derived â—rom inferiour motives can have For all Moral Certainty is at least capable of falsity and may deceive us Gods infallible veracity cannot be false nor deceive if Faith rest upon that Motive and if it rest not there it is no Faith at all Nay he asserts that supernatural Faith is more certain and infallible than all the Metaphysical Sciences which nature can give us For which he gives this plain reason Because the infinite veracity of God which only supporteth Faith with greater force energy and necessity transfuseth into it a supereminent
insallibility supereminent he saith and above all the Certainty which the principles of naturâ— can afford This is the substance of E. Wâ— principles of Faith in his first Book which is somewhat more enlarged in the second In one Chapter he designs to prove if the Roman Church be not infallible there is no truâ— Faith in the world the reason of which in his own easie terms is this For the meer possibility of deceiving Christians in one Article impossibilitates the Belief of all she proposeth In another Chapter That she is not only infallible but that the Adversaries of her infallibility destroy the very essence of Christian Religion And in the next That divine Faith in this present state of things necessarily requires a Church infallible because the infallibility of faith necessarily requires not only an Infallible Revelation but aâ— infallible Proponent Ruine one or the other Infallibility faith can be no more but an uncertain Assent and consequently can be no faith at all This reason he diversifies into many shapes and represents it in different words but it comes in at every turn So in the next Chapter he proves the Catholick Church Gods infallible Oracle because infallibility once taken away no man can have assurance so much as of one Christian verity the reason is no man can be assured of what is fallibly taught because what is so taught may by vertue of the Proposition be â—alse but a doctrine so far removed from inâ—allible certainly for want of a due application of its infallibility comes not near to the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles which was applied taught and proposed infallibly And in the same Chapter he saith It is utterly impossible that an infallible verity as revealed though fallibly proposed should have influence upon faith or work in believers a most firm assent Not long after he asserts That infallibility being taken away no man can tell but that Christian Religion is a fiction for these are his words A feigned and fallible Religion are near Coâ—sin Germans The one is a Fiction the other at least may be so and for ought any man can know is no better And in the same Chapter he saith That without infallibility Religion is meer Scepticism because all other means infallibility being set aside may be equally pleaded by Hereticks as Arians and such like as by any other To the same purpose in the following Chapter where he proposes that which he calls the last proof of the Churches Infallibility which is still the very same over and over for he out-does the Cook of Brundusium in serving up the the same meat in several dresses viz. That the denyal of it overthrows Christian Religion be pleased to observe his concise way oâ— reasoning If the infallibility of revealeâ— doctrine be lost as it were in the way between God and us If the Revelation appear not as it is in it self infallible wheâ— we assent to it by faith that is if it be noâ— infallibly conveyed and applied to all by aâ—â—nerring proponent as it subsists in its first cause infinitely infallible faith perishes wâ— are cast upon pure uncertainties and maâ— justly doubt whether such a doctrine separated from that other Perfection of Infallibility be really true or no In his third Diâ—course we meet with a convincing Argumenâ— as he calls it for Infallibility If all Authority imaginable whereupon faith can depend conveyed or delivered these verities both as infallible Truths and infallibly and I assent to the doctrine with a belief not infallible but only morally certain I leave by my fallible moral assent the true infallible teaching and conveying Oracles of Christian doctrine and believe upon a meer phansied Authority which was never impowered to convey Gods verities to any Before I come to examine these things it will be necessary to lay down his notion of faith in his own terms viz. That it essentially trends obsecurely to its own object no matter for understanding it but the words found well together and by this saith we lâ—y hold upon the most supream and all comprehending infallibility proper to God alone But withal we are to take notice of a twofold certitude in faith the one a certitude of Infallibility arising from the supernatural principles which concur to the very act of belief and these being not liable to error can never operate but when the divine Revelation really is and implies not only the meer truth of the act but moreover an infallible determination to Truth the other a certitude of adhesion not grounded on evidence but upon most prudent motives proposed to Reason which clearly discover'd the Will by her â—pious affection commands and determines the intellectual faculties to assent indubitably After all which he concludes that the plain and easie Resolution of Faith is into Gods veracity as speaking to men by an infallible Church Thus I have laid together so many parcels of E. W's rambling discourse as were necessary in order to the examination of it And indeed I cannot compare his reasoning to any thing better than his own pretty notion of faith for just as he saith Faith essentially tends obscurely to its object so his principles do to his conclusion But that I may proceed with the greater clearness I must premise these two things 1. § 2. That the Question is not concerning the necessity of any internal Assistance oâ— divine Grace but of an external insalliblâ— Proponent in order to divine Faith So thaâ— whatever certainty of saith is derived from the Spirit of God is no ways pertinent to ouâ— present debate I do not deny that a trulâ— divine faith doth suppose a divine and super natural assistance I do not deny that thâ— Holy Ghost may confirm mens minds to sucâ— a degree of certainty which may exceed thâ— rational grounds they are able to give tâ— others of their faith But I say all this iâ— very far from the purpose For I had expresly laid down this caution before that oâ— Question in the Resolution of Faith did noâ— relate to the workings of the divine Spirit oâ— our minds of which no satisfactory accounâ— can be given to others but to the externaâ— motives and grounds of faith whether theâ— must be infallible or not To what purposâ— is it then for E. W. to talk of a certitudâ— of Infallibility as he calls it arising from the supernatural principles which concur tâ— the very act of belief and these not liable tâ— error can never operate but when the divine Revelation really is Granting all thiâ— to be true yet what doth this prove concerning the necessity of an external infallible Proponent such as the Church is All that caâ— hence follow is that those whom the Spirit of God enables to believe cannot believe a falshood but what then Hath he proved that the supernatural principles of faith do never operate but where the Church first infalâ—ibly proposes No this
gives an admirable reason for it which is that this intrinsecally follows from the nature of a divine testimony as it is altogether infallible and can oblige to believe those things which God speaks as infallible for in speaking any thing he thereby declares his own veracity in what he affirms for by this means hâ— induces men to believe the truth of what he saith and consequently his own veracity a man being obliged to believe the testimony infallible and thereforâ— from the intrinsecal nature of such an act oâ— faith and such an object it follows that thâ— same testimony which suffices for the beliâ—â— of the thing revealed will likewise suffice tâ— believe Gods infallible veracity in revealing This reason I grant is very well accommodated to the mysteriousness of Faith but I do not know how it would satisfie any man that should doubt of Gods veracity in all his Revelations which ought to be the more considered since in the foregoing section he names some of their own Writers who assert that there is no intrinsecal evil in a falsity and therefore God may is he pleases reveal one so as to oblige manking to believe it I would willingly know then how the obligation on our parts to believe what God saith can satisfie any man of the infallible veracity of the revealer For all that there is in this reason is that God cannot oblige men to believe a falsity which it seems some of their own Schoolmen would not yield to But it is not enough that God hath declared he never will do it no Suarez himself plainly refutes that by saying that no man can be certain that God doth not make use of his absolute power in those declarations and if he can tell a lie he may not perform his own promise and therefore Gods ordinary power cannot serve the turn since by his absolute power he can act against it Cardinal Lugo although he saw all the reason in the world to reject the former opinion of Suarez yet he asserts That the assent to Gods veracity must be supernatural and elicited from the habit of infused faith which is not easie to understand since they all make this supernatural infused Faith to be an obscure inevident assent and himself grants this to be an evident assent from natural reason but how the same assent should be evident and inevident is a Question fit to be debated among the Schoolmen § 3. But all this perplexity and confusion among men of wit and subtilty arises from their false notion of divine and supernatural faith which as E. W. most Scholastically speaks essentially tending obscurely to its object like a blind man running at Tilt it makes them so much afraid of the least crevise of light or evidence lest the meritoriousness of it be utterly destroyed For it infinitely obliges God in their opinion to believe without evidence Therefore though a humane and acquisite faith such as Hereticks may have may be grounded on substantial reason yet this supernatural and meritorious faith much like a Mole works without light and expects the more wages for working in the dark I confess this essentiaâ— obscurity of faith suits very well with theiâ— Discourses about it which as E. W. speaks seems to have transfused its obscurity intâ— their writings concerning it But for us tâ— whom they will only allow a humane faith I wish they would afford a little more evidence for what they say and not overthrow the fundamental ground of all certainty oâ— Faith by deriving the perswasion of it from divine Revelation and not from the naturaâ— conceptions we have of God But I cannoâ— but commend the Ingenuity of one of theiâ— late School-men who yields That the verâ—city of God as it is the foundation of faitâ— must be known by natural light and to the objection that divine Faith must then be resolved into a natural assent he answers 1. That natural notices may be an inadaequate formal object of faith 2. That faitâ— properly goes not beyond a Testimony thâ— other being rather an act of knowledge thaâ— faith It is all one to me so the thing be granted by what name men call it That which I aim at is that the veracity of God which is the foundation of our assent to what God reveals must be received antecedently to divine Revelation And so the principles of natural Religion must be supposed true before it is possible for us to judge of revealed Religion and among those principles we â—ust allow of the veracity of God without which we cannot imagine any firm assent to â—e given to divine Revelation which is â—hat I understand by the name of Faith Wherein a divine Testimony being implyed â—hat assent which I give to any thing as true â—pon the account thereof may be called Diâ—ine Faith as that which I give to the Truth of a thing not upon knowledge or experience but the credit of another Person is â—ustly called humane faith i. e. when it goes â—o farther than meer humane Testimony but â—f that humane Testimony at last leads me to â—hat which is divine then the Faith must receive its denomination from that which it â—ests upon As suppose some persons in Persia at the time of our Saviours being in Judaea had been made acquainted with the Doctrine which he Preached and the holiness of his Life while these persons received all only upon the credit of their Friends we may call this a humane faith but if they were fully satisfied afterwards of the mighty works which were done by him to attest his divine Commission on which account they believe him to be the true Messias their faith might now more properly be called a divine faith because it fixeth it self upon an immediate Testimony of God But then we are to consider 1. That there is no sixed and determinatâ— sense of a divine faith it being no termâ— used in Scripture but taken up by men to express thereby the difference between the assent we give to the Word of God and to the Testimony of men But then this Faith may be called divine either as it relates to the material object or the formal object or the divine effects of Faith that Faith may be said to be divine in one sense which may not bâ— in another For a man may believe thaâ— which God reveals and upon the account uâ— his Testimony and yet that Faith may neveâ— operate effectually and so be no effect oâ— divine Grace upon the mind of man Therefore one of the great mistakes of the Schoolmen in this matter hath been the making the belief upon a divine Testimony to be thâ— act of divine and supernatural Faith which the Devils and Judas might have and exâ—luding Faith built upon fallible grounds from being divine which yet might effectually lead men to the obedience of Faith and consequently was truly more divine than the other 2. The same Faith in several respects may be called both humane
others should But the Foundation of all this Nonsense is a strange apprehension of the nature of faith which the School-doctrine hath so rivited into him that it seems to be of the nature of a first principle with him which must be supposed as the Basis of all his discourse which is that faith is an obscure and inevident assent or that it essentially tends obscurely to its object and therefore no motives or arguments how clear or strong soever can have any influence upon faith For he imagines as great an opposition between arguments and faith as between light and darkness he first conceives faith to be a kind of deep Dungeon of the soul full of darkness and obscurity and then bids men have a care of bringing any light into it for if they do it ceaseth to be what he described it A light may serve a man very well to shew him the way to this Dungeon nay it may direct him to the very door but then farewel to all light noâ— the least crevise must be left to let in any to the mind that is once entred it but the excellency of it is that the soul fixes more certainly on its object in this state of darkness than it could do being environed with the clearest light Just as if a man should say there is a particular way of seeing with ones eys shut which is far more admirable and excellent than all the common ways of beholding things being far more certain and piercing than seeing by the help of eyes and light is for the light and sight may both fail in the representation of an object but this seeing without eyes is an infallible way to prevent all the fallacies of sense Much in this way doth E. W. talk for all arguments are fallible and therefore by no means must faith proceed upon them O but this believing without or above or it may be against arguments is the most infallible thing in the world for that man need never fear being deceived with reason that disowns the use of it Upon these grounds a skilful Painter may make a shift to bungle and to draw some rude uneven strokes by the help of his Pencil and a good light but if he would be sure not to miss making an excellent Piece he ought to shut his eyes or darken his Room for then to be sure that fallible thing called light can never deceive him An indifferent person that only consulted the nature and reason of things could never have fallen into these dotages but it hath been the interest of some men to cry down light that have had false wares to put off But of all things I wonder if this be the whole nature of Christian faith to believe no man knows why nor wherefore for if he doth his faith ceases to be faith being built upon reason why all this ado is kept about an infallible Church and motives of credibility cannot a man believe without reason at first as well at last cannot faith fix upon Gods Revelation for it self without troubling those motives of credibility to no purpose If a man hath a mind to leap blindfold from a Precipice why cannot he do it without so much ceremony must he have all his attendance about him and his Gentleman-usher to conduct him to the very brink of the Rock and there bid him Goodnight If all these motives of credibility contribute nothing to the act of believing what use are they of in such a Religion where Faith is look'd on as the great Principle of practice and the means of salvation If the judgement of credibility would save men they might still be useful but this will be by no means allowed for nothing in their opinion but this blind Guide which they call faith can conduct men to Heaven § 8. But what is it that hath made meâ— so in love with nonsense and contradictions Hath the Scripture given any countenance to this notion of faith Yes doubtless they are such lovers of Scripture that they daâ—e not take up any opinion in these matters without plain Scripture Then I hope Scripture may be plain in clear things if it be so in the description of so obscure a thing as they make faith to be But doth not the Scripture say that Faith is the Substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen and is not this all one as if it had been said that faith essentially tends obscurely to its object and that it is an inevident assent and therefore cannot make use of arguments This I know is all the pretence they have for this notion of faith but is it not very pretty because faith is called an evidence therefore iâ— must be inevident or to follow the vulgaâ— Latine because it is called an argument therefore it can use none No man is so senseless to deny that we believe things we do not see and things which cannot be seen we believe some things which might have been seen and were seen by some whose credit we rely upon as the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ we believe other things which are uncapable of being seen by our senses as the Joys of Heaven and the Torments of Hell and as to such things faith supplies the want of the Evidence of sense to us and by it our minds are assured of the truth of them though we do not or cannot see them Which is all that is intended by this description of faith but how doth it hence follow that our faith must be an immediate inevident obscure assent on which all the arguments that perswade men to believe can have no influence May not I believe that Christ died and rose again and will come to judge the quick and the dead because I see all the reason in the world to perswade me to believe it from the testimony of those who saw him and have delivered his doctrine to us and have given the greatest evidence of their fidelity Doth the strength of the argument hinder me at all from believing what I did not see I had rather thought the more obscure the object had been for it is little better than nonsense to call an act of faith obscure the greater necessity there had been of strong evidence to perswade a man to believe not such evidence as doth arise from the nature of the thing for that is contrary to the obscurity of the object but such as gives the greatest reason to believe from the Authority of those on whose Testimony I rely So that the greatest clearness and evidence as to the Testimony is not repugnant to the nature of Faith this only shews that in Christian Religion we do noâ— proceed by meer evidence of sense or rigorous demonstrations in the things we assent to but that the great things we believe are remote from sense and received upon the Authority of the Revealer yet so as that we assert we have as great evidence that these things were
known Miracles of those two admirable Saints Blessed St. Dominick and the Seraphical St. Francis and St. Vincentius Ferrerius reported by the pious and learned St. Antoninus Arch-Bishop of Florence From whence he infers that the Miracles wrought in the Roman-Catholick Church are not inferiour to those done by the Apostles and a little after Iâ— the Miracles of Christ and the Apostles rationally proved against Jews and Gentiles the credibility of Apostolical Doctrine the very like signs and supernatural effects most evident in the Roman-Catholick Church as rationally prove against Sectaries the credibility of our now professed Catholick-Doctrine for which he gives this reason The same signs and marks of Truth when equal in Majesty worth quality and number ever discover to reason the same Truth wherefore if the Roman-Catholick Church most clearly gives in evidence of her Miracles equal in worth quality and number with those wrought by Christ and his Apostles it follows that as those first Apostolical wonders were sufficient to convice Jews and Gentiles of the Truth of Christianity so these later also wrought in the Church are of like force and no less efficacious to convince Sectaries of whatever Doctrine she teaches Now ponder well what the Apostoles did they cured the sick dispossed Devils raised the dead converted nations c. but these very Miracles have been done in the Roman-Catholick Church yea and greater too Ergo we have the like evidence of Truth in both the Primitive Age and this consequently with it the same Truth The sequel is undeniable After this for particular instances he appeals to the undeniably authentick monuments and testimonies of that one sacred house of Loreto to the continual Miracles done at the Reliques of St. James at Compostella in Spain to the Sacred Vial of St. Mary Magdalen in France wherein saith he very gravely the precious blood gathered by that penitent Saint at our Saviours passion is yet preserved and visibly boyls up on the very day he suffered after the reading of the Passion to the undoubted Miracles wrought by the intercession of our Blessed Lady at Montaigu for which he calls in the testimonies of Lipsius and Putean and at large relates a Miracle wrought by St. Xaverius upon F. Marcellus a Jesuit at Naples and then answers some few Objections and concludes with the vindication of the Miracle at Zaragosa in Spain This is the substance of E. W's discourse upon this subject which in the proper consequence of it doth more really enervate the proofs of Christianity than establish the infallibility of the Roman Church For I do not think an Atheist would desire more advantage against the Christian Religion than to have it granted that the Miracles of Christ and his Apostles were no other than such as are wrought in the Roman Church and that the proofs of them are no more authentick and undeniable than those of the Miracles done at Loreto Compostella or Montaigu and that Christ and his Apostles gave no more illustrious evidences of their being sent from God than St. Dominick or St. Francis and that there was no greater evidence of Christs Resurrection from the dead than there is of the boyling up of the blood of Christ in the Vial of St. Mary Magdalen in the Church of St. Maximin in France Therefore not only to invalidate the Testimony drawn from hence for the Roman Churches Infallibility but to preserve the honour of Christianity I am obliged to enquire into these two things 1. Whether the Testimony upon which the Miracles of Christ and his Apostles and those of the Roman Church are delivered be equally credible 2. Whether the Miracles of the Roman Church be so equal to abate him what he saith of greater in worth quality and number with those of Christ and his Apostles that the Roman Churches Infallibility is as much attested by them as Christ and his Apostles was by theirs 1. I shall enquire into the credibility of the Testimony on both sides Two things are agreed to make up sufficient credibility in a Testimony viz. the knowledge and fidelity of the persons who deliver it If they speak nothing but what they were certain witnesses of and never gave suspicion of fraud and deceit and offered the highest ways of proof concerning their own fidelity then it is an unreasonable thing to disbelieve them This is the case of those who recorded our Saviours and his Apostles Miracles they were persons who either saw them wrought themselves or had them delivered to them immediately by them who saw them they published them to the world in that Age wherein they werecapable of being disproved by persons then living in the same places where they were wrought and were notorious enemies to the persons who did them who were concerned to discover for their own justification the least fraud or imposture in those matters But besides this to take away all suspicion of design the â—nesses of these things freely quitted all exâ—ectations of worldly advantages they ran themselves upon the greatest hazards to attest the truth of what they said and at last sacrificed their lives to confirm the truth of their own Testimony But on the other side if I can prove 1. That the greatest number of the Miracles in the Roman Church have been believed upon the credit of Fables and uncertain reports 2. That the Testimony of those who deliver them hath been contradicted by men of greater Authority than themselves 3. If upon strict and careful examination notorious forgeries and impostures have been discovered and never any persons laid down their lives to attest the truth of any of their Miracles then it can be nothing but the greatest impudence in any to parallel the Testimony of the Primitive Church concerning the Miracles of Christ and his Apostles with that of the Miracles wrought in the Church of Rome 1. That the greatest number of Miracles in the Roman Church have been believed upon the credit of Fables and uncertain reports For the proof of this I shall make choice of his own instances of Loreto in Italy Compostella in Spain St. Maximins Church in France and the lives of his two admirable Saints to which I shall add some nearer home that we may have a proof of the credibility of these miracles in the most considerable places of Europe § 2. Let us first go on pilgrimage to our Lady of Loreto to view the undeniably Authentick publick monuments and Testimonies of Miracles there wrought The first to be seen there in a Table hanging up for that purpose is the wonderful Miracle in the translation of that Chappel first from Nazareth to Dalmatia and from Dalmatia into those parts of Italy where it now stands The story cannot be better told than it is in the Authentick Table it self which may be thus Translated The Church of our B. Lady of Loreto was a Chamber of the House of the B. Virgin Mary Mother of our Lord Jesus
abundance of lies while the Writer indulges his own passion and sets down not what the Saints did but what he would have had him done so that in their lives we see the mind of the Writer and not the truth For there have been those who thought it a piecâ— of pieâ—y to tell lies for Religion which is a very dangerous thing lest by that means the true be rejected for the sake of the false This saying of Vives Melchior Canus a man highly esteemed in the Church of Rome recites and approves with a great deal more to the same purpose wherein he saith that the lives of the Philosophers are more severely written by Laertius than the Lives of the Saints by Christians and that Suetonius hath with more honesty and integrity delivered the acts of the Caesars than the Catholicks have done the Acts of Martyrs Virgins and Confessors And afterwards he charges them with wilful falsefying either only to deceive or to gain by it of which the one is sordid and the other pernicious and he produces some instances of such miracles which he saith are without number Neither doth he only understand this of such men as the Author of the Golden Legend or of the speculum exemplorum but he plainly confesses that their most grave Writers in reporting the miracles of Saints have followed uncertain reports and conveyed them to Posterity In which they either gave great liberty to themselves or yeilded too much to the desires of the People whom they found not only ready to believe these miracles but to be fond and greedy of them Therefore saith he they have reported some signs and miracles not that they did willingly believe them themselves but because they would not be wanting to the pious desire of the people which was it seems that they should tell lies to please them And if they had not their desires fully answered in this they were very insatiable After this he particularly instances in Bede and Gregory the one of which in his History the other in his Dialogues he charges with relating miracles upon common reports which the Criticks of thâ—â— Age will judge to be uncertain And we may be sure Canus who tells us what an excellent wit his Master Victoria said he had was one of them But is now the credibility of the miracles in the Roman Church to be compared with that of Christ and his Apostles Did they who writ the miracles recorded of them indulge their own affections and make Tales to please the people as we see Canus saith their gravest Writers of Miracles did Or did they take up things upon common rumors and from thence divulge them to posterity as we see Canus charges even St. Gregory and St. Bede with doing What would become of our Christianity if we had no better grounds to believe the miracles of Christ and his Apostles If any should say so of the reporters of their miracles they would be justly charged with betraying the Doctrine of Christianity and making it suspectd to be a fourb an Imposture a fabulous story as E. W. speaks in the case of the miracles related by St. Antonin And yet Mâ—lchior Canus expresly saith of him that he did not make it his business to wriâ—â— what wâ—â— true and certain but to let nothing pass that he could meet with And that he and Vincentius Belovacensis were so far from weighing what they writ in an exact ballance that they did not so much as make use of a common judgement Whereas our Critical E. W. saith And who dares say that so great a Doctor and most modest Prelate as St. Antonin was so frontless as to write that we read without assurance and certainty We see Melchior Canus dares say it and that not only of St. Antonin whom he looks on as far inferior to the other but of his venerable Bede too whom E. W. calls a great Scholar and a man highly esteemed the whole Christian world over I shall not go about to diminish his reputation in other things but he had need of a good easie faith that can swallow the miracles related by him whether those of St. Cuthbert which E. W. mentions or others What must we think of the Angels appearing to S. Cuthbert a horseback when he was a boy and prescribing him a Poultess to cure his sore knee and of his seeing the Gates of Heaven opened and the soul of St. Aidan conveyed through them by a troop of Angels Of his receiving three hot loaves from an Angel that were whiter than lillies smelt beyond roses and tasted sweeter than hony Of his frighting the crows from stealing the thatch off from the Covent and the penance they submitted to for the injury they had done and the satisfaction they made by bringing him a good piece of Lard with which he used afterwards to grease his Boots Of the vertue of his shoo 's in curing a man of a Palsie after St. Cuâ—â—bert's death being put on upon his feet Of these I shall only ask E. W's Question An any such sâ—en now a days wrought among Protestant Bishops No God knows their faith is a stranger to such kind of miracles But what shall we say to Canus who takes away the Authority of St. Gregory too as well as Bede in this matter of miracles I know Baronius falls very soul upon Canus for speaking so freely of St. Gregory in this particular especially because he doth not mention those miracles which he looks on as undeserving credit but I think he ought to have thanked him for his modesty and silence herein in not exposing Gregories credulity to contempt by insisting upon them But in truth St. Gregory in those Books of Dialogues for I see no reason to deny them to be his own was the Father of Legends and most of the others afterwards were made in imitation of his as might be particularly made appear by many Instances And Bede followed the Copy which Gregory had set him and from hence such a swarm of Legends arose that in the succeeding Ages it is hard to say whether there were more Ignorance or Wonders To give only a tast of some of the miracles reported by Gregory the first is of Honoratus the Abbot that stopt a great stone in the middle of its falling from a great mountain by making the sign of the cross towards it and there it is seen hanging as it were in the air But in my opinion St. Dunstan out-did him who not only saith Capgrave stopt a piece of Timber so falling but with the sign of the cross made it return back to the place from whence it sell. This was the greater miracle although the other had more to shew for it if the stone had hung quite in the air which I confess I do a little question Libertinus raised one from the dead by Honoratus his shoe being laid upon his breast saith Gregory as St. Cuthberts shoo 's in Bede
us as though God had nothing else to do with his Power but to pervert the course of nature by it at the beck of any idle fellow as it God did not manage his power as he does all things else with infinite wisdom as if God imployed his extraordinary power without great and most urgent causes For when it was necessary to shew his power for the confirmation of the Christian Religion and the Satisfaction of unbelievers then all persons might see the wonderful works of God but now saith he when the Truth of Christianity is known it would be to no purpose for God to shew so many miracles But whence then comes it that so many miracles are still talked of This arises saith he from the devotion of some who attribute ordinary effects of nature to a miraculous Power and from the Superstitious folly and fraud of others who will not endure any thing cryed up for a miracle should be ever questioned by any but say it is profane Atheistical and which is somewhat worse heretical to do it Whereas poor wretches they do not think what injury they do the Catholick cause while they go about to strengthen it with lies and forgeries when the Christian doctrine is already fully confirmed by the most true and undoubted miracles of Christ and his Apostles What need they then to feign any new miracles Doth God need your lies will ye talk deceitfully for him as I may justly use the words of Job saith he of these men Another cause of so much talk of miracles in the Roman Church he saith is Ignorance whereby any extraordinary accident though such as might happen where Christianity was never known is extolled for a miracle Quorum operum causas nulla ratione videre Possunt haec fieri divino numine rentur From hence he proceeds to particulars and shews that most of those who are accounted possessed among them are Melancholy and Hypochondriacal men and Hysterical women and then examins the pretence to Inspiration and Prophecy to raptures and extasies to miraculous cures to prodigious fastings to incorruption of bodies to raising from the dead and shews under every one of these heads how very often the meer effects of nature pass for miracles in the Roman Church to whose learned discourses I refer the Reader and we may easily understand the meaning of such a person when he tells us after all this that the Church will not suffer men to be deceived about miracles but such as the Church approves are to be approved Now let any one judge whether such persons who receive no other miracles but such which the Church commands them to believe could ever imagine that the Infallibility of their Church was proved by such miracles which they would not believe to be true unless they first believed the Church which approved them to be infallible Fortunatus Scacchus a man of great Authority in Româ— grants that it is a very easie matter to take false miracles for true and that no certain argument can be taken from Tables which are hung up at Images or shrines that wicked men may do real miracles which he proves from Scripture and History and the continued practice in their Church from whence he concludes that no argument can be drawn for the sanctity of any Person but only from such miracles as are approved by the Roman Church For saith he it belongs only to the Authority of the Roman See and the Bishop of Rome to determine which are true miracles because the promise of infallibility is only made to the Roman Church and the Head of it From whence he concludes that no other Bishop hath any Power to approve miracles especially if they be supposed to be wrought by an uncanonized Saint For we are to understand that the great use of miracles in the Roman Church hath not been pretended to be for proving the faith or Infallibility of the Church but for an argument of Saintship of those who are to be Beatified or Canonized So Aquinas determines that miracles are either wrought to confirm the truth of a doctrine preached or for the demonstration of the Sanctity of a Person and therefore in the Process of Canonization one main enquiry is about the miracles wrought by the Person who stands for the preferment of Canonization In the Process about the Canonization of Andreas Corsinus presented to Paul 5. the Auditours of the Rota say that to the Being Canonized it is concluded by all to be necessary that the person have wrought miracles and there they agree that it is not necessary to a miracle to be wrought for the confirmation of faith seeing miracles may be done for another end viz. for the proof of the Sanctity of the Person And such miracles say they are those which are done among Catholicks for whose sake miracles would be necessary on no other account because miracles are a sign not to believers but to unbelievers whence as they well observe from Isidore St. Paul cured the Father of Publius by a miracle but presâ—ribed to Timothy a natural remedy And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 many other processes of Canonization to the same purpose viz. to prove that it is not necessary to a miracle that it be done for the confirmation of any part of Christian faith Since therefore the far greatest number of the miracles in the Roman Church are such as are wrought for another end how can they from them prove the infallibility of their Church unless they can make it appear that where ever there are true Saints the Church is Infallible From which it appears that the miracles of the Roman Church ought no more to be compared with those of Christ and his Apostles as to the Testimony by them given to Infallibility than in point of credibility and that in both respects they are so infinitely short of them that nothing but the height of impudence could make any man pretending to be Christian to assert that as great nay greater miracles have been done by the Roman Church as ever were done by Christ or his Apostles in which subject I have taken the more pains not meerly to detect the frauds and impostures of the Roman Church but to preserve and vindicate the Honour of Christianity lest that should suffer by the intolerable rudeness of these comparisons The END Books sold by Henry Mortlock at his Shop at the Phoenix in St. Paul's Church-yard and at the White-Hart in Westminster Hall A Rational account of the grounds of Protestant Réligion being a Vindication of the Lord Arch-Bishop of Canterburies Relation of a conference from the pretended answer of T. C. by Edward Stillingfleet D. D. in Folio Cotgraves Dictionary French and English in Folio Sermons Preached by Anthony Farindon Folio House of Mourning in Folio Sheppards Practical Counsellor in Folio Animadversions on the 4. part of Cooks Institutes by William Prynne Esq Folio Observations upon Millitary and Political afairs by the Right