not prove it shewes the interruption of their succession and while they affirm it shewes that they believe their succession and calling insufficient unlesse they derive it from the Church of Rome thereby acknowledging the Church of Rome the true Church which they in their Doctrine and dependence have forsaken and there can be no reason to forsake the true Church upon what pretence soever For the errors of the Church of Rome are but supposed and their Reformation neither is but supposed they being infallibily sure of nothing since they hold their Church may erre and so for ought ought they certainly know it did in accu and forsaking the Church of Rome and in their own imaginary amendment and instead of Christ have chosen Barrabas And what can be more inconsiderate than to forsake the true Church by their own confession upon pretences of whose truth they are by their own confession also uncertain For he that confesseth he may erre in that wherin he may erre being an object of the understanding not of the sense cannot be sure that he doth not erre And so they are altogether at a losse and a ground not infallibly no nor prudently sure of the least tittle they affirm They cannot be infallibly sure because they may erre as themselves confesse they cannot be prudently sure seeing there is a hundred voyces and judgements of men for the Roman Church to one for any Protestant Church They had therefore done much more wisely to have followed the admonition of S. Paul to Timothy DEPOSITUM CUSTODI keep that which is committed to thy charge 1. Tim. 6.20 and what is that saith Vincentius Lirinensis He answereth Comomnit advers haer c. 27. It is that which thou art trusted with not that which is found out by thee that which thou hast received not which thou hast devised a thing not of wit that is of thine own fancy but of learning that is which thou hast learnt not of private usurpation but of publique Tradition a thing brought to thee not brought forth by thee wherein thou oughtest to be not the Author but the keeper not a Master but a Scholler not a leader but a follower § 2. As for their assertion who say that Roman Catholiques and Protestants are all one Church it is both false foolish False it is because the differing in any one point of faith proposed by the Church makes one party not to be of the true Church it is certain that the Church of Rome and England differ in many Doth not the Church of England account the four grand Heretiques who were condemned in the first four Generall Councells to be out of the Church and not one with her that condemned them and they held each of them but some one or very few points different from the Church of Rome So that either they must confesse themselves also not to be one with the Roman Church or else that all Hretiques are of it which is absurd and contrarie to the mind of d De fide Symbolo c. 10. S. Augustine who saith that neither Heretiques nor Schismatiques are of the Church If Protestants say that they that were condemned in those Councells did indeed hold Heresies and so were not the Church but their own are truths and amendments of the Doctrine of the Church I answer so did those Heretiques also say yea and prove it by Scriptures and Fathers in their own sense and did believe their Doctrines to be the pure Word of God as confidently as any Protestants in the world do theirs who cannot say more for themselves than they did and they were some of them as numerous and as learned as Protestants are nor was there more authority against them than against the Protestants which is The Catholique Roman Church guided by the Spirit of God and the Word of God written unwritten Moreover they were the parties accused so are the Protestants it is not fit therefore that they should be the Judges If they say that they also accuse the Church of Rome of errors and therefore it is not fit that she should be Judge I answer some body must if ever we will have an end of controversie and then whether the whole society of Christians or some one or few men for so all Heresies began and so did the Protestant Religion in one Luther let any indifferent man judge Moreover God hath made the Church the Judge saying tell the Church and that is the Church of Rome as those Protestants must grant who say they are one with it and that it was the Church when they revolted from her And to consider the matter according to reason seen in the practise of all societies and bodies whether Ecclesiasticalll or Civill if any one or few members break the law and rule of the whole who shall judge whether it be well or ill done Surely either the head or the head and whole representative body together And this was the proceeding against Luther and the Protestants in a Generall Councell by which they were condemned and cast out of the Church Which judgement if it be not sufficient but that the condemned party justifying himself by his own bare affirmation or interpretation of the Law according to his own particular fancy contrary to the whole body whereof he is or was a member may be admitted what Heretique or Rebell will ever be found guilty or will not in despite of all mankind be accounted a true Christian and loyall subject and the soundest member of the whole body Secondly it is both poore and absurd for Protestants to seeke for shelter and countenance under that Church which they have abandoned disgraced and cruelly wounded though to their owne destruction thereby also abusively perswading many people to keep still in the Protestant Church while they think they are of the Roman they being as their new Masters teach them both but one Church § 3. But Catholiques whose consent it is very fit should be taken in this matter acknowledge no such union of Churches betwixt themselves and Protestants for Catholiques doe not allow their Ordination and Consecration of Bishops and Priests for good which appeares in that if a Priest of the Roman Church revolt to the Protestant party he is allowed by them to be a lawfull Priest but not so if a Protestant Minister returne to the Roman Church Also some Protestants grant that Roman Catholiques may be saved in their Religion but Catholiques doe not grant the like to Protestants which they would doe surely if they thought they were all one Church Besides the denying to communicate with each other is a proof that in the opinion of both they are not all one Church And whereas Protestants magnifie their own charity in this kind conceit of theirs and accuse Catholiques of the want therof it is very idle for the controversie about the meanes of salvation and the Church wherein it is to be had is not to be determined by
though the Apostles their hearers be departed out of this life yet there still remaines a meanes in the world by which all men may assuredly know what the Apostles preached and the primitive Church received of them seeing the Church to the worlds end must be built on the Apostles and beleive nothing as matter of Faith besides that which was delivered of them as S. Paul saith Ephes 2.20 and are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Jesus Christ being the chiefe corner stone CHAP. II. Of the meanes to know which is the Word of God And that all the Protestants Arguments to prove that the Scripture and it onely is the Word of God are insufficient And that the generall Tradition of the Catholike Church is the only assured proof thereof § 1. THese things being supposed the chief difficulty to my seeming consisted in this how we might certainly know now adaies so many ages after the Apostles death what all necessary points that they taught and preached the Protestants said that this was to be found in the Scriptures which were written by them but this did not satisfie my doubt for supposing the Scriptures to be the word of God delivered by the Apostles and others inspired by him yet I wanted some sufficient witnesse or proofe to assure me so much for of my selfe I could not find it The bare word of the Protestants I saw I had no reason to take because they confesse that they may erre and I in this matter not being able to discover whether they did erre or no relying upon a fallible guide must alwaies remaine in uncertainty and fear I observed moreover that although in most of their assertions they might upon examination prove false yet in saying that the Church might erre and taking themselves for the Church they had said most true finding that they indeed had erred in this most important Particular of declareing what is the word of God and what not the Lutherans affirming much lesse for the word of God then the Calvinists and the Church of England doth § 2. Now of necessity one of these sorts of Protestants must erre and that most dangerously the one by beleiving that to be the word of God which is not but the invention of men and perhaps false and foolish Praefat. in Epist Iac. in Edi◠levens as Luther said of S. Iames his Epistle or the other by renouncing that which is indeed the Word of God and so not believing what God himself hath spoken Their Authority being by themselves in their evident disagreement thus broken I descended to consider the reasons by them alledged to induce men to believe that the Scriptures are the Word of God which in general I apprehended to be insufficient because they did not lead the Protestants themselves to an agreement in the quantity thereof But I further weighed them particularly the principall whereof are these § 3. First they say the Scriptures are knowne to be divine by their owne light shining in them Cal. lib. 1. Inst cap. 7. Sect. 2. infine Even as sweet and bitter are knowne by the tast white and blacke by the sight which assertion to me seemed very absurd I confesse indeed much of the Scripture is but the amplification of the Morall Law which is a knowledge engrafted in man by nature by the light whereof we may see that it is true but this proves it not to be the Word of God For though all truth be from God as he is the prime verity and so may be called in some sense his Word yet by the Word of God in this case is meant truth revealed by God immediately unto the pen-men thereof and though we find much thereof to be true as agreeing with the engrafted principles of reason yet this proveth not that it was revealed immediately and extraordinarily which is the circumstance that makes it the Word of God in the sense of those that dispute about it As for the historical parts both of the Old and New Testament the institution of Sacraments with the like they have no affinity with the in-born principles of reason and are therefore not knowne to be so much as true by any light they carry with them much lesse to be extraordinarily revealed by God and so to be his Word Besides if it could be discerned what were the Word of God and what not by the resplendent light thereof as easily as the light is knowne from darknesse as some of them say how could there be so much dissention about the parts thereof as it is knowne there is the Calvinists seeing more to be the Word of God then the Lutherans do and lesse then the Catholikes and yet if it shew it selfe by its owne light the Turks may see it as well as any of them And heere I observed that many had blinded themselves with looking on the light and could not see so far as to discern between corporall and spirituall light but because the Prophet David saith Thy word is a lanterne unto my feet and a light unto my paths Psal 118.105 they conceived the Scripture was as easily discerned by its own light as the Sun True it is that every corporall light that doth enlighten the eye of the body must be evident in it selfe and originally cleer but not so every truth that doth illustrate mens understanding The reason is because the eye of the body cannot by things seen inferre and conclude things that are hidden but can only apprehend what doth directly and immediately shew it selfe but mans understanding apprehends not only what shewes it selfe but by things knowne inferres and breeds in it selfe the knowledge of things hidden Hence though things shewing themselves directly and by their own light be prime principles of the understanding and the meanes to know other things yet also things hidden in themselves being formerly known by the light of authority may thereby become lights that is meanes to encrease our knowledge of hidden things So that speaking of spirituall and intellectuall lights it is false that all lights that enlighten mans understanding to know other things are evident in themselves yea some secondary principles and lights there are which must be shewed by a superiour light before they become lights themselves In which kind is the Scripture being a light only to the faithfull because known by the Churches Tradition to be from the Apostles by the Apostles authority confirmed by miracles to be of God by Gods supreme verity who cannot deceive nor be deceived to be the truth Moreover this conceipt of theirs doth utterly extinguish faith and beleife of the word of God for every thing is so far forth the object of faith that it is not seen as S. Paul saith Faith is the argument of things not seen Hebr. 11.1 In Evang. Ioan. Tract 40. and S. Augustine What is faith but to believe that which thou dost not see If therefore they do see it they cannot properly
be said to believe it but to know it and if so what excellency what vertue what merit what pious affection towards God to believe that which they see plainely before their eyes A bold presumption also it is in them to claime a cleerer degree of knowledge then the Apostles had for they did but see through a glasse darkely 1 Corinth 13.12 but these men are convicted of the divine truth of the things they believe Fran White Orthodoxe p. 107. by the lustre and resplendent verity of the matter of Scripture which is a priviledge which whosoever hath equalls the blessed Saints in heaven whose happinesse it is to see what we believe especially seeing one point of the Doctrine Protestants pretend to see is the mysterie of the Blessed Trinity the true light resplendent veritie wherof no man can see manifestly out of the state of Blisse § 4. Secondly they pretend to know the Scriptures to be the Word of God by the * Whites Reply p. 16.30.68 Feild Appendix pag. 34. Cal. Inst l. 1. c. 7. majestie of the matter and purity of the Doctrine but I conceived that though some mysteries of the Scripture carry a majesty in them in respect of naturall reason and an elevation above it as of the B. Trinity yet other matters of Scripture seem unto reason ridiculous as the Serpents talking with Eve and Balaams Asse reproving of his master with many others Nor could the purity of the doctrine convince me seeing we know that many learned and godly men have written very holily whose writings are not therefore accounted the word of God Besides there are many historicall parts of the Scripture which do not at all touch upon purity therefore cannot be discerned by it Againe they affirme that the Scripture may be knowne by the stile but I considered that God hath no proper stile or phrase of his owne but can at his pleasure al stiles that he did vse the pens of those whom it pleased him to inspire couching his heavenly conceipts under their usuall language and ability of expression whence issueth so great difference of stiles as is on all sides acknowledged amongst sacred Writers and that God did only guide them in the truth they wrote not in the stile for then all their stiles in likelihood should have been alike Indeed God hath an eternal increated manner of speaking which is the production of the eternall word by which the blessed do discern him from all other speakers by the evidence of blissefull learning but no created manner of speaking no not his speaking inwardly to the soule is so proper to God as that it can be knowne to be his speaking by the meer sound of the voice or by the stile without especiall revelation or some consequent miraculous effect § 5. Thirdly the * VVhites Reply p. 19. Harmony of the Scriptures is alledged by some as an argument to prove them to be the Word of God But though this Harmony appeare in divers things yet it is most certaine that there are very many seeming contradictions many of which are but probably answered by Commentaetors by assuming some things without proofe because otherwise they must admit contradictions some places are not fully answered but the Fathers were forced to fly from literall to allegoricall senses as appeares particularly in the foure first Chapters of Genesis the Genealogy of our Saviour and in the reconciling of the Chronologies of the Kings And seeing no man is infallibly sure that all the answers used to reconcile the seeming contradictions of Scriptures are true no man can be assured by the evidence of the thing that there is this perfect harmony in them nor consequently that they are thereby knowne to be the Word of God Moreover if we were infallibly assured that there were this perfect harmony in the Scriptures yet this to me seemed not a sufficient proofe that they are the Word of God because there is no reason forbids me to believe that it may not be also found in the writings of some men yea I make no question but it is to be found and that with lesse seeming contradiction then is in the Scripture yet no man accounts that this proves their writings to be the Word of God Neither as I saw could these pretences before mentioned be laid hold on by the unlearned multitude an innumerable company whereof cannot read at all and when they heare them read if they were asked would say that they see not this light this majestie stile and harmony which their learned men talk of nor do they know what it meanes nor that a tittle of it is the word of God but only because they are told so Indeed S. Peter saith in the behalf of the old Testament 2 Pet. 1.21 That holy men of God spake as they were moved by the holy Ghost But we are as uncertaine by any thing in the words themselves that S. Peter said this as of all the rest that is altogether § 6. So that I could not find that there was any more then probable arguments to be drawn from the Scriptures themselves to prove them to be the word of God For that which is the word of God and the rule of faith must be certaine not only in some parts but in every part and particle book chapter and line thereof which is impossible to be knowne by the light and evidence of the sense and doctrine seeing many places even by * Field of the Church lib. 4. cap. 15. VVhites Reply p. 35 Protestants confessions are darke obscure and full of difficulties and how can that be knowne to be the Word of God by the light thereof when the light thereof is not knowne As uselesse also to their purpose is the majestie purity stile harmomony or any the like for we believe it to be harmonious because it is the Word of God not to be the Word of God because it is harmonious which wee doe not infallibly see So that upon these considerations I saw no evident certainty out of the Scriptures that they were the Word of God but that they are believed to be such without being seen upon some other Word of God more cleerly appearing to be the Word of God and lesse liable to corruption then the Scriptures are assuring us so much and that is the Tradition of the Church according to the saying of S. Augustine * Aug. contra Epist fundament c. 5. I would not believe the Gospell unlesse the Authority of the Catholike Church did move me To which Hooker one of the learnedest men that ever the Protestant party could boast of agreeth saying * Eccl. Pol. lib. 1. sec 14 p. 36. Of things necessary the very chiefest is to know what books we are bound to esteem holy which point is confessed impossible for the Scripture it self to teach * Ibid. l. 2 sec 4.102 for if any one book of Scripture did give testimony to all yet
still that Scripture which giveth credit to the rest would require another Scripture to give credit to it * Ibid. p. 103. neither could we ever come to any pause whereon to rest unlesse besides Scripture there were something else acknowledged And this something is as he saith * Lib. 2. ca. 4. p. 300. The Ecclesiasticall tradition an argument whereby may be argued and convinced what books be Canonicall and what not § 8. Lastly some say they know the Scripture to be the Word of God by the Spirit of God prompting it to their soules And this of all the rest seemed to me most absurd For first I durst not arrogate this Spirit to my self nor could I know it was in any other His saying the Spirit told him the Scripture was the Word of God did not prove it nor had I reason to believe he had the Spirit more than I without some proof If a mans testimony in his owne case might thus be admitted I saw that no Heretique would want it to support his impiety by ascribing it to the Spirit as * Epiphanhaer 21. Simon Magus did only this H. Spirit he believed to be his Concubine Helena and Protestants ascribe the title of the Spirit to their private fancies If I should have said that I know by the suggestion of Gods Spirit that this or that part of Scripture or that none of it was the Word of God my proof was as good to him as his to me For although the testimony of the Spirit of God be a sure witnesse to him that hath it yet it is none to others unlesse he can prove he hath it by some miraculous effect And without this kind of proof every prudent man hath reason to believe that such a boaster is a lier and intends to deceive others as it is likely of the first Authors of Heresies or else that he deceives himselfe by a strong operation of his fancy which he calls the Spirit because he is told by the doctrine of some Protestants that he must feel that he hath the Spirit as in particular concerning the assurance of his salvation desirous then to be in the right way that which he would have he perswades himself he hath because else he finds himselfe at a losse which begets a horror in him Which to avoid he flies to this pitifull refuge being the best he is instructed to that he may have some stay for his belief and repose for his soul And this happens commonly and most strongly to those that have some zeal but little wit on whom therefore the reflection of their fancy is the stronger and works upon them as upon some I have read and heard of who by their eager desire to be so have strongly conceited themselves to be indeed Kings and Princes and other kind of great and rich men when truly and in all other mens judgements they were either mad-men or fools So that this I perceived was to open a gap to any mans fantasticall pretence whatsoever who had the impudence to ascribe it to the Spirit of God Nor is there any peaceable way to compose the differences amongst men of this nature for each one pretending the Spirit he hath no reason to yeeld to another the holy Spirit being an infallible director wheresoever it is yet when it is different in different men who pretend to it as it often falls out it is a certaine signe that one of them is deceived and both are deceived in the opinion of each other yet neither yeelding to other the contention ends in the action of Zedekiah against the Prophet Micheas who gave him a box on the eare and said 2 Chron. 18.23 Which way passed the Spirit of our Lord from me that it should speake to thee And so it hath fallen out amongst those that derive their knowledge this way that they end their differences by blowes and conquests not by Councels and miracles Plut. And as the sonnes of Pyrrhus asking him who should succeed him in his Kingdome he answered he that hath the sharpest sword so if it be demanded amongst them who hath the Spirit of God and consequently the true Religion It must be answered He that hath the most strength of armes to maintaine it But S. Peter did otherwise who provoked by Simon Magus proved that he had the Spirit of God by raising up a childe from death Egesippus which the other with all his Magick could not do who also challenging S. Peter to fly from the Capitol to Mount Aventine while he was doing so by the prayer of S. Peter he came tumbling down and brake his leg whereof he soone after died If men that boast of the Spirit cannot this way prove it the saying of S. Augustine is appliable unto them * Tract 45. in Ioan. There are innumerable who do not only boast that they are Videntes or Prophets but will seem to be illuminated or enlightned by Christ but indeed are Heretiques § 5. Yet most certain it is that no man can believe the Scriptures to be the Word of God but by the Spirit of God inclining him thereunto for as the Apostle saith Ephes 2.8 Faith is the gift of God But there are two kinds of inspiration of the Spirit of God one immediate without the concourse of any externall ground of assurance the other mediate moving the heart to adhere to an externall ground of assurance making it to apprehend divinely of the authority thereof they that challenge the first are Enthusiasts and run into all the fore-mentioned absurdities they that take the latter way must besides their inward perswasion have an externall ground of belief and then what is there so high and sufficient as the testimony of Vniversall Tradition Agreeable whereunto Hooker saith * Eccles Pol lib. 2. sect 7.8 The outward letter sealed with the inward witnesse of the Spirit is not a sufficient warrant for every particular man to judge and approve the Scripture to be Canonicall the Gospell it self to be the Gospell of Christ * lib. 3. sect 3. but the authority of Gods Church as he saith is necessarily required thereunto § 9. And though it were true that we might know the Scripture to be the word of God without the testimony of the Church yet it doth no where appear that the Scripture is the whole word of God and containes all that the Apostles left unto the Church for their direction so that my first Quere would still be unsatisfied to wit how we should know the whole word of God which the Apostles taught For even that word which is written doth tell us that all is not written and therefore doth S. Paul exhort us to keepe both the written and unwritten Stand fast saith he and keepe the traditions which you have learned whether by word or by our Epistle 2 Thes 2.15 It is manifest that the first Church of God from the creation untill Moses which was about the space
power thereof to be extinguished by permitting damnable errors in the whole Church and that soon after his departure as some Protestants say and not to recover light for twelve or fourteen hundred years together especially considering there was no possible meanes for any man to know the contrary there was no society of men that taught otherwise and if at any time there started up any they were condemned of error by all their fellow Christians and in processe of time melted from the face of the earth The Scripture if that were the means as Protestants pretend not being printed the invention of Printing not being in the world till about two hundred years ago and the Bibles that were written being but few by reason of the great labour of writing them and those that were not purchaseable but by few because of their price nor legible but by fewer because they were not printed but written and lastly not to be knowne to be the Word of God as I have shewed before but by the testimony of those men who they say were corrupted who having corrupted the doctrine might with much more ease have extinguished or corrupted the Text and made them speak what they pleased it being known to far fewer than the doctrine was it being difficult to obtaine uncertain whether it were right and very obscure in its meaning so that if they had been guilty of changing the Apostles doctrine they could easily have razed out all those places which Protestants urge against them and so have prevented the strange and notable discovery that the Protestants think they have made of their errors And if they say that God by his providence preserved the Scripture both from extinction and corruption may not we much more reasonably say having warrant for it out of the Scripture also whereas they have no warrant for the preservation of the Text that God by the same providence did and will alwaies preserve his Church from corruption which is a thing much more easily known than the Scripture consisting of a living multitude can expresse it self more plainly This infallibility in the mouth and Tradition of the Church the Prophet assureth Esa 59.21 My Spirit which is upon thee and the words which I have put into thy mouth shall not depart out of thy mouth nor out of the mouth of thy seed nor out of the mouth of thy seeds seed from hence forth for ever And therfore S. Augustine saith Aug. Ep. 118. that to dispute against the whole Church is insolent madnesse § 4. To know divine and supernaturall truth by the light and lustre of the doctrine belongs to the Church triumphant Inward assurance without an externall infallible ground is proper to Prophets and Apostles the first publishers of Religion and seeing that God doth not now instruct either of these waies as I have shewed but by an externall infallible ground and this being the Tradition of the Church it followes that he must preserve it from error and likewise render the Church it selfe alwaies conspicuous that it may be discerned by sensible markes of which we shall speake anon And he is also bound by his providence to assist men in the finding out of this Church when they apply their best diligence thereunto that so they be not deceived And whereas some of the more learned Protestants say that though they have no infallible ground besides the teaching of the Spirit yet they are not taught immediatly by propheticall manner because they are also taught by an externall probable though not infallible motive to wit the Churches tradition I conceive that except they assigne an externall infallible meanes besides Gods inward teaching they cannot avoid the challenging of immediate revelation For whosoever knowes things assuredly by the inward teaching of the Spirit without an externall infallible motive unto which he doth adhere is assured prophetically though he have some externall probable motives to direct his belief S. Peter had some come conjecturall signes of Symon Magus his preversenesse and incorrigible malice yet seeing he knew it assuredly we believe he knew it by the light of prophecy because beside inward assurance he had no externall infallible ground If one see a man give almes publiquely though he see probable signes and tokens that he doth it out of vaine glory yet cannot he be sure thereof but by the light of immediate revelation because the other tokens are not grounds sufficient to make him certain For if a man be sure and have no certain ground of this assurance out of his own heart it is cleer that he is assured immediately and only by Gods inward inspiration Wherefore Protestants if they will disclaime immediate revelation in deed not in words only they must either grant Tradition to be infallible or else assigne some externall infallible ground besides Tradition whereby they are taught what Scriptures the Apostles delivered Lastly I was perswaded of the Churches infallibility in her Traditions and Doctrines because she is endowed with the power of miracles which wheresoere they are which I shall hereafter examine do both prove that that society of Christians is the true Church and that that Church is infallible in all that she proposes as the Word of God And the reason is because God who is truth it self cannot set his hand and seal that is miracles and works proper to himself to warrant and authorize a falshood invented by men Against which * Feild lib. 3. cap 15. Whites Reply p 216. Protestants object and say that miracles are only probable and not sufficient testimonies of divine doctrine alleadging Bellarmine who saith we cannot know evidently that miracles are true for if we did we should know evidently that our faith is true and so it should not be faith To which may be answered that such evidence as doth exclude the necessity of pious affection and reverence to Gods Word evidence that considering the imperfection of humane understanding may enforce men to believe cannot stand with true faith If we know by Mathematicall or Metaphysicall evidence that the miracles done in the Church were true this evidence would compell men to believe and to overcome the naturall obscurity and seeming impossibility of the Catholique Doctrine therefore as Bellarmine saith we cannot be Mathematically and altogether infallibly sure by the light of nature that miracles are true Notwithstanding it cannot be denied in reason what our Saviour affirmes that miracles are a sufficient testimony binding men to believe the very works that I do do bear witnesse of me that the Father hath sent me Joh. 5.36 and consequently that we may know them to be true by Physicall evidence as we are sure of things we see with our eyes and handle with our hands as S. John saith 1 Epist 1.1 what we have seen with our eyes what we have beheld and our hands have handled of the word of life Or we may be as sure of Miracles as we are of such things as
being once evident to the world are by the worlds full report declared unto us which is a morall infallibility So that if we have not a Metaphysicall or Mathematicall infallibility of the truth of Miracles yet we have a Physicall and morall infallibilitie as much as we have of any thing we either hear or see Nor doth this Physicall evidence take away the merit of faith because this evidence not being altogether and in the highest degree infallible in it self for our senses may somtimes be deceived it is not sufficient to conquer the naturall obscurity darknesse and seeming falshood of things to be believed upon the testimony of those miracles For the mystery of the Trinity of the Incarnation Reall presence and the like seem as far above the reach of reason as any Miracle can seem evident to sense hence when faith is proposed by Miracles there ariseth a conflict betwixt the seeming evidence of the Miracles and the seeming falshood and darknesse of Catholique Doctrine against which obscurity a man cannot get the victory by the sole evidence of miracles except he be inwardly assisted by the light of Gods Spirit moving him by pious affection to cleave to the Doctrine which is by so cleer testimony proved to be his Word Even as a man shut up in a chamber with two lights whereof the one makes the wall seem white the other blew cannot be firmly assured what colour it is untill day-light enter and obscuring both those lights discover the truth so a man looking upon Christian Doctrines by the light of miracles done to prove them will be moved to judge them to be truth but looking upon them through the evidence of their seeming impossibilities unto reason they will seem false nor will he be able firmly to resolve for the side of faith untill the light of divine grace enter into his heart making him prefer through pious reverence to God the so-proposed authority of his Word before the seeming impossibility to mans reason CHAP. VII That Catholique Tradition is the onely firm foundation and motive to induce us to beleeve that the Apostles received their doctrine from Jesus Christ and Jesus Christ from God the Father And what are the meanes by which this doctrine is derived downe to us § 1. AS Catholique Tradition is infallible in it self so is it most necessary for us there being no other certaine testimony to any prudent man no firme ground or motive to believe that the Primitive Church received her doctrine from the Apostles the Apostles from Christ Christ from God nor no way to bring it downe from those times to these but only the Tradition of the Church For we may observe three properties of the doctrine of faith to be true to be revealed of God to be preached and delivered by the Apostles The highest ground by which a man is persuaded that his faith is true is the authority of God speaking and revealing it the highest proof by which a man is assured that his faith is revealed is the authority of Christ and his Apostles who delivered the same as descending from God but the highest ground that moveth a man to believe that his faith was preached by the Apostles is the perpetuall Tradition of the Church succeeding the Apostles unto this day assuring him so much according to the saying of * De praescr c. 21. 37. Tertullian who maketh this ladder of belief in this sort what I believe I received from the present Church the present from the Primitive the Primitive Church from the Apostles the Apostles from Christ Christ from God and God the prime verity from no other fountaine different from his own infallible knowledge So that he that cleaveth not to the present Church firmely believing the Tradition thereof as being come down by succession is not so much as on the lowest step of the ladder that leads unto God the revealer of saving truth successive Tradition unwritten being the last and finall ground whereon we believe that the points of our belief came from the Apostles which may be proved by these arguments § 2. First if the maine points of faith be to be believed to come from the Apostles because they are written in Scriptures and the Scriptures are believed to be the Word of God upon the report of universall Tradition then our belief that the things which we believe come from the Apostles and from God resteth upon the Tradition of the Church but it is most certaine that the Scriptures cannot be proved to have been delivered unto the Church by the Apostles but by the perpetuall Tradition unwritten conserved in the Church succeeding the Apostles all the other waies by which the Protestants endeavour to prove the Scripture to be the word of God being vaine and insufficient as I have proved before Secondly common and unlearned people which comprehend the greatest part of Christians may have true faith yet they cannot have it grounded on the Scripture for they can neither understand nor read it or if read it yet but in a vulgar language of the truth of whose translation they are not assured therefore must rely upon the testimony of the present Church that that which they believe is the Word of God Thirdly if all the maine and substantiall points of Christian faith must be believed before we can securely read and truly understand the holy Scripture than they are believed not upon Scripture but upon Tradition going before Scripture and that it is so is manifest because true faith is not built but upon Scripture truly understood according to the right sense thereof nor can we understand the Scripture aright unlesse we first know the main Articles of Faith which all are bound expresly to believe by which as by a rule we must regulate our selves in the interpretation of the Scripture otherwise without being setled in the rule of faith by Tradition men are apt to fall into grievous errors even against the main articles of the faith as of the Blessed Trinity and Incarnation of the Son of God as experience doth sufficiently testifie so that reading and interpreting Scripture doth not make men Christians but supposeth them to be made so by Tradition at least for the main points such as every one is bound expresly to know Fourthly they to whom the Apostles wrote and delivered the Scripture were already converted to Christianity and instructed in all necessary points of faith and in the common practises of Christianity and so by what they knew by Tradition could easily interpret what was written but otherwise might easily have failed in the mainest points as some forsaking Tradition did for example the Arrians who were confuted by the Catholiques not by bare Scripture for of that the Arrians had plenty but as it was interpreted by Tradition Therefore none can be supposed to understand the Scripture aright so to know the true word and will of God but by being such as they were to whom the Apostles
delivered the Scripture that is first instructed by Tradition Otherwise they may easily erre in some chiefe articles of Faith any of which to erre in is damnable And I would faine know whether any understanding Protestant doth believe that if a Bible were given to a heathen or to one borne amongst themselves supposing he had not been trained up by Catechisme and other traditionall instruction whether I say he could out of that extract as points cleerly expressed therein the thirty nine Articles of the Church of England or the book called the Harmony of Confessions which is the profession of the faith of most of the Protestants of the world Lastly we cannot with modesty say that we are more able to understand Scripture than were our fore-fathers the ancient Doctors of the Church but they thought themselves unable to interpret Scripture by conference of places or such like humane means without the light of Christian Doctrine before-hand knowne and firmly believed upon the Tradition of the Church witnesse * Ruf. Eccl. hist l. 2. c 9. S. Basil S. Gregory Nazianzene and * Orig. tract in Mat. 29. c. 23. Origen who thus writeth In our understanding of Scriptures we must not depart from the first Ecclesiasticall Tradition nor believe otherwise but as the Church of God hath by succession delivered to us therefore no man is able to interpret Scripture without the light and assistance of Christian faith afore-hand received by the voice of the Church delivering what shee received from her ancestors Dangerously and high boldnesse then it is for men of this age so to presume on their owne interpretations of Scripture gotten by humane meanes as to make them over-ballance a thousand * Luther de capt Babil Tom. 2. VVittenberg p. 344. Cyprians Augustines Churches and Traditions § 3. From all which I observed that the Protestants do not well understand that place of Scripture so frequently urged by them against Tradition where S. Paul saith to Timothy Thou hast known the holy Scriptures from thy childhood which are able to instruct thee or make thee wise unto salvation Inferring from hence that the Scriptures are able to make all men wise unto salvation whereas this was spoken with relation to Timothy only and to such as agree with him in the cause for which this saying is true in him that is such as were aforehand instructed by Tradition and did firmly believe all substantiall Doctrines of faith and know the necessary practises of Christian Discipline even as what God said to Abraham I am thy protector and thy exceeding great reward Gen. 15.1 is not appliable to all men absolutely but only to all men that were of the same qualification that is faithfull and devout as he was Moreover the Apostle in that place speaketh only of the Scriptures of the Old Testament for the New was not written in the infancy of Timothy nor some of it at this very time that these words were written and these Scriptures he affirmes also to instruct Timothy not by themselves alone but by faith which is in Christ Jesus that is joyned with the doctrine of the Christian faith which Timothy had heard and believed on the voice of Tradition And the following words of the Apostle are with equall confidence insisted on All Scripture inspired of God is profitable to teach c. is very unprofitable for their purpose seeing that profitable can by no means be stretcht to signifie sufficient as they would have it and that for every man but particularly for him that is HOMO DEI a man of God that is one already instructed by Tradition in all the main points of Christian faith and godly life such an one as Timothy was Thus indeed the Scriptures may be granted sufficient joyned with Tradition but not alone And whereas there are some places of the Fathers alledged by Protestants to prove the Scriptures to be clear in all substantiall points they are to be understood as the Apostles words are with reference to such men who have been before instructed by Tradition even as they that hear Aristotle explicate himself by word of mouth may easily understand his books of nature which are very hard to be understood of them that never heard his explication either from his own mouth or by Tradition from his Schollers § 4. Whereas some Protestants say that the difficult places of Scripture are unfolded a VVootton triall of the Romish c. p. 88. l. â—9 by Scripture and the rules of Logick b Field p. 281. lin 20. and by other things beside Scripture evident in the light of nature it seems to me very incongruous First because the rule of faith must be for the capacity of the unlearned as well as the learned and unlearned men cannot be sure of the infolded sense of the Scripture by Logicall deductions Secondly the Scripture it self sends us to supply her wants not to the rules of Logick but unto Tradition saying Hold the Traditions which ye have received by word or our Epistle 2 Thes 2.15 It sendeth us to the Church the pillar and ground of truth 1 Tim. 3.15 which whosoever doth not heare is as a Heathen and a Publican Matth. 18.17 It did the same to the Jewes who had the Scriptures also saying Remember the old dayes think upon every generation ask thy father and he will declare unto thee the elders and they will tell thee Deut. 32.7 The same do the Fathers as I shall shew hereafter § 5. And whereas it is further objected that the Fathers disputed negatively from the Scripture against Heretiques thus Doctrine is not cleerly delivered in Scripture therefore it is not to be received as a matter of Faith we must know that the Fathers proceeded upon this supposition that was known to all and granted by the Heretiques themselves namely that the Doctrines they disputed against were not the Traditions of the Church and in this case they required the testimony of Scripture Yea more the Fathers did not onely require places of Scripture from the Heretiques by way of deduction and Logicall inference for to such all ancient Heretiques and Protestants now pretend wherewith they delude ignorant people but they required of them to shew their Doctrine in Scripture saith Irenaeus expresly and in termes and to prove it not by texts * Aug. de unitat Eccles cap. 5. which require sharpnesse of wit in the Auditors to judge who doth more probably interpret them not by places which require an interpreter one to make Logicall inferences upon the text but by places plaine manifest cleere which leave no place to contrary exposition and that no Sophistry can wrest them to other sense to the end that controversies which concern the salvation of soules be defined by Gods formall Word and not by deductions from it by rules of Logicke And even by this way of the Fathers arguing negatively from the Scripture the Protestant Religion is quite overthrowne for seeing nothing is
to be reputed a matter of faith which is not formally and expresly to be proved by the Word of God either written or unwritten and delivered by full Ecclesiasticall Tradition and seeing the Protestants doe not nor can pretend to this Tradition nor yet can prove their tenets by Scripture in expresse and evident termes but such as themselves confesse to receive probable solutions it must hence necessarily follow that their doctrines are false without foundation and to be rejected by every Christian § 6. Lastly whereas Protestants object that the Pharisees are reproved by Christ for the observation of Traditions it is altogether impertinent for the Scripture doth not say that their Traditions were derived by succession from Moses the first deliverer of their law nor did the Pharisees pretend to it but they were Traditions of their owne whereof some were frivolous and superstitious some impious some pious The frivolous and superstitious were their washing of hands pots dishes the like supposing that otherwise they might have some spirituall impurity in them which our Saviour confutes saying There is nothing without a man entring into him which can defile him Mark 7.15 The impious were such as whereby they violated the commandements of God under the pretence of observing their Traditions as when they allowed a man under pretence of giving something to the Church to neglect his duty to his parents Mar. 7.11 Neither of these kinds is the Catholike Church guilty of Of their pious we have an example in their paying Tithes of mint a very small herb which was a Tradition of their owne not commanded in their law yet this our Saviour approves and binds them to it saying this you ought to have done Luc. 11.42 And it is worth the observation that the thing most of all objected against our Saviour was the written word and Tradition of God by Moses about keeping the Sabbath day as appeares in all the Evangelists from which precept not by Tradition unwritten but by logicall inferences of their owne they concluded that our Saviour brake the Sabbath by healing or doing some small labour thereon So that the Pharisaicall Traditions were not pretended to be doctrines unwritten derived from the first deliverer of their religion but doctrines concluded from the Scripture by the rules of Logick and reason as they conceived according to the present manner of the Protestants CHAP. VIII That the Church is infallible in whatsoever she proposeth as the Word of God written or unwritten whether of great or small consequence That to doubt of any one point is to destroy the foundation of faith And that Protestants distinction between points fundamentall and non-fundamentall is ridiculous and deceiptfull § 1. HAving thus found out that the Church was shee from whom I was to receive assurance what is the word of God and that otherwise it was impossible for me to know it and that shee could not mistake nor erre in her directions I conceived then that I was bound to believe all that shee propounded to me as the word of God whether it were written or not written writing being no testimony of the truth of any thing seeing it may be false as well as speaking and that to doubt of any thing was to call all into question and to dissolve the whole nature of divine faith For to believe hath a threefold signification in speech first it is taken for knowledge as where our Saviour saith Thomas because thou hast seen me thou believest John 20.29 to wit that I am risen now he that sees one knowes so much Secondly for opinion which is an assent begot by probable reason so men delivering their opinions use to say I believe thus or thus Thirdly and most properly for an assent unto such things as doe not appear but are assented unto by a firm reliance on the truth of him that reports them as S. Paul saith Faith is the argument of things not seen Heb 11.1 And this reliance on an Author such as cannot deceive or be deceived at least in those things which he propounds unto us to be believed must beget in us an equall belief of things that have humane possibility or probability on their side and of things that are clean against it the matter propounded makes no matter nor yet the manner of propounding it is the Author and our apprehension of him that controles all opposition By this do we believe the inexplicable mystery of the Trinity the Incarnation of God the Mother-hood and yet Virginity of the B. Virgin Mother with many others with as much ease as we believe that Noah had three sons or that S. Peter had neither silver nor gold and by this do we believe the latter with as much strength and firmnesse as the former For he that believes a thing because such an one sayes it who he believes cannot lie must believe all that he sayes and that with the same firmnesse because the reason of his belief still remaines namely the inerrability of the speaker But if he apply his belief according to the probability of the thing spoken and no further then he doth not believe because of the truth of the speaker but of the thing spoken which he must gather from probabilities of reason wherein he doth not believe the thing for the truth sake of the speakers testimony but for the likelihood thereof which he finds by the measure of his own understanding which is not to believe the other but himselfe and the other no more than he would do the arrantest lyer in the world yea the Devill himself that is so far as he by his reason conceives that he speakes the truth Which reason of his if it be infallible he doth not believe the thing properly but he knowes it if it be but probable he believes it not properly but hath an opinion of it and no more assurance than of other humane reports whose authors have no security from error which as they may be true so they may also be false And thus to believe is not to believe by divine and infallible faith but by humane and fallible and so it cancells divine supernaturall faith the first in order of the three theologicall vertues without which no man can be saved § 3. So that all the place that reason hath in the government of our faith is this to lead us to believe that testimony which cannot deceive us and for the particular objects of beliefe to take them upon trust of that testimony without checking at them whatsoever they be and though they be bones to Philosophy yet make them milke to faith and not as Heretiques doe make us demand a reason of every particular point of faith which if it square not to their apprehensions they cashiere This is not faith but fancy For to rely upon a humane basis such as reason is will not support such a mighty statue as divine faith And to use Chillingworths own similitude Water will not rise
higher then the fountain from whence it springs if therefore particular reason be the governour of our faith which reason is a humane and fallible thing it cannot rise to nor support a divine faith But divine faith is that which God requires of us in the businesse of Religion and that which is not such is none And it is convenient that as God ordained man to a supernaturall end namely the blissefull vision of himselfe which is a thing far above all excellencies of nature so he should bring him to this blisse by believing things above the reach of reason which in man is his nature and to beget this faith by Miracles his owne acts which are above the power of nature and by the testimony of those that do those supernaturall acts to whom if he have given his deeds it cannot be doubted but he hath given his word of any part whereof to make any doubt is to call the credit of all into question the house of Faith being like some artificiall buildings whereof if you pull out one pin you loosen the whole frame So if a man disbelieve any one point delivered him by the Catholique Church he unjoynts the whole frame of faith and virtually denies it all and that because they have all the same height of proof to wit the testimony of the Church which if she can lie in one thing she may for ought wee know in another and so in all and thus bring a man to doubt of all and then to denie all And that those men that doe denie some one point of Catholique Tradition though unwritten doe not denie all is not for that they have any faith but out of secular ends and deceiptfull reason § 4. Indeed some Protestants grant that if Tradition be universall and perfectly Catholique it doth oblige to the belief thereof but not otherwise by which universall Tradition they meane such as never any one gainsaid But if such onely are to be called Catholique Traditions there is scarce any thing left for Christians to believe and indeed to that passe have many brought it for some have denied the distinction of Persons in the Trinity others the Divinity of our Saviour others his humanity others the Deity of the Holy Ghost and a hundred more now if no Tradition be to be called Catholique but such as was never denied by any one or some number of Christians then a man may deny the fore-mentioned and many other points and Articles of faith because their Tradition hath not been so universall but that some have denied it yea some books of the Scripture it self were not universally received till about four hundred years after Christ By Catholique or universall Tradition then must be understood that which the Catholique Church hath alwaies taught not which all Christians for then we must look for Tradition in the mouths of Heretiques whose property it is to deny some Tradition or other under pretence that it is opposite to Scripture And if any have taught contrary the Catholique Church hath condemned them for Heretiques which is a sufficient proof that untill such Hereticall Spirits opposed some one or more Traditions of the Church they were universally believed As for example the Doctrine of Christs consubstantiality or being of the same substance with the Father no reasonable man will deny but that it was generally believed in the Church before the daies of the Arch-heretique Arrius and that the Councel of Nice condemning of him was a sufficient proof that the doctrine he opposed was the universall Tradition of the Church by force whereof he was overthrowne and not by Scripture only there being no place of Scripture so plaine but he would give some answer to it and likewise alledge plenty of Scripture in the proof of his own Heresie while he took upon him to interpret it himself forfaking the traditionall sense thereof and would receive no answer to it And if Arrius his denyall of that point of Faith will make it universall for place or the doctrine it self new and so universall for time as some in other instances do alledge because it was then first declared by reason of that opposition then it may be lawfull under the same pretence for men to deny all the Traditions of the Church all the decrees of Generall Councells of the Church and to revive all the Heresies that were in the Church § 5. Moreover to attribute conditionall infallibility to the Church and not absolute in all that she delivers * Chillingworth pag. 118. Pet. Martyr loc Com. clas 4. c 4. sect 21. Confess Helvet c. 17. as some Protestants doe making her infallible onely while she followes the Scripture and Vniversall Tradition is to give her no more priviledge than to a child or fool who are also infallible while they affirm nothing but what is agreeable to Scripture and universall Tradition But if we know not Scripture nor Tradition but by the Churches direction how shall we know in her exposition of Scripture and deciding of controversies that she doth erre unlesse we know it from her also seeing her authority in the one is as good as in the other and by those reasons that we may deny the truth of the one we may deny the other And if she say she have expounded Scripture truly and decided controversies aright by the rule of Scripture and Tradition who shall gainesay her Can any man be so foolish as to think his word is of more credit than the whole Churches Or that his reason is better then hers Or that if she may erre from her rule he may not do so also And if their infallibilities be both of the same strength who in his right mind would not believe millions affirming the same thing rather than one or some few affirming the contrary If there were a rule so plaine and clear that all men understood it and none could pervert it then there were no need of a judge or directer but if the rule be obscure or liable to misinterpretation as all words are let them be expressed never so plainly then it is meet that there should not onely be a Judge but that this Judge should be infallible seeing the businesse concerns the salvation of mankind and not be subject to the petty after-examinations of proud and discontented people as if one or more of them did know the meaning of the rule better than the Judge when that Judge is the universall Church And that which these men affirm in this matter amounts to this wise Maxime That the Church is infallible while she is infallible and so is the Devill § 6. Frivolous then and without foundation is that late started distinction of points fundamentall and not fundamentall and the assertion built thereon That the Church may erre in the one and not in the other and so by consequence we are not bound to believe her in all things Indeed in regard of the materiall object or thing to be believed some points
faith were delivered to them by the Apostles to the Apostles by Christ to Christ by God the fountain of all truth CHAP. IX That there is and ever shall be a visible Church upon earth And that this Church is one holy Catholique and Apostolique § 1. NOw considering all that hath been said before the summe whereof is this That we have no meanes to know certainly the doctrines of the Apostles but only the Tradition of the Church and that that Tradition is and ought to be infallible hence I conceived that this consequence was necessary that there should be and is alwaies a visible Church in the world to whose Traditions men might cleave and that this Church is one universall Apostolicall Holy First there is alwaies a true Church of Christ in the world for if there be no meanes for men to know that Scriptures and all other Articles came from Christ and his Apostles and so consequently from God but the Tradition of the Church then there must needs be in all ages a Church receiving and delivering these Traditions else men in some age since Christ should have been destitute of the ordinary meanes of salvation because they had no meanes to know assuredly the doctrines of Christianity without assured faith whereof no man can be saved And although a false Church may deliver the true Word of God as it is contained in the Scripture and the Creed yea even a Jew or Heathen may do so for this is but casuall yet none but a true Church can deliver the Word of God with assurance to the receiver that the text is incorrupt thereby binding him to the belief thereof Now it is necessary that men have the true Scripture not only casually but they must be sure the Text thereof be uncorrupt therefore there must be a true unerring Church whose authority is so aut hentique that it is a sufficient warrant for men to believe the doctrine shee delivers to come from the Apostles Secondly this Church must be alwaies visible and conspicuous For the Traditions of the Church must ever be famous and most notoriously known in the world that a Christian may truly say with S. Augustine De utilit Cred. c. 14. I believe nothing but the consent of Nations and Countries and most celebrious fame Now if the Church were at any time invisible or very secret and hidden then could not her Traditions be famously known nor could men that were willing to submit themselves to her directions know where to find her out of whose communion they cannot attain salvation Thirdly this Church is Apostolicall that is derived from the Apostolicall Sea by the succession of Bishops and Pastors for else how can we be assured that we have the Apostles doctrine It must be one generation that must certifie another and if there should be any interruption in that time all might be lost and changed And how could the Tradition of Christian Doctrine be notoriously Apostolicall if the Church delivering the same hath not a manifest and conspicuous pedigree and derivation from the Apostles Which is a convincing argument used by S. Augustine Epist 48. circa med How doe we trust out of the divine writings that we have manifestly received Christ if we have not also from thence manifestly received his Church The Church that hath a lineall succession of Bishops from the Apostles famous and illustrious whereof not one hath been opposite in Religion to his immediate predecessor proves evidently that this Church hath the Doctrine of the Apostles For as in the rank of three hundred stones ranged in order if no two stones be found in that line of different colour then if the first be white the second is white and so the rest unto the last even so if there be a succession of three hundred Bishops all of the same Religion if the first have the Religion of the Apostles and S. Peter the second hath and so the rest even unto the last Fourthly this Church is one that is all the Pastors and Preachers deliver and consequently all her Disciples and children believe one and the same Faith For if the Preachers and Pastors of the Church disagree about matters which they preach as necessary points of Faith they lose all their credit and authority for who will believe witnesses on their own words if they disagree in their testimony Fifthly I infer that this Church is universall spread over all Nations that she may be said to be every where morally speaking that is according to common humane account by which a thing diffused over a great part of the world and famously knowne is said to be every where In this manner the Apostle said that the faith of the Romans was renowned in the whole world Rom. 1.12 that so the whole world may take notice of her as of a worthy and credible witnesse of Christian Tradition howsoever her outward glory and splendour peace and tranquillity in some places and at some times be more or lesse eclipsed and shee be not alwaies in all places at once And the reason of this perpetuall visible universality is because the Tradition of the Church is the sole ordinary meanes of faith toward the Word of God This Tradition therefore must be so delivered as that it may be known to all men seeing God will have all men without exception of any nation to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth 1. Tim. 2.4 which they cannot do unlesse the Church be so diffused in the world that all known nations may take notice of her And Gods will that all men should be saved though it be but an antecedent will as Schoolemen call it yet it inferreth two things which some Protestants deny first the salvation of all men secondly the meanes of their salvation In respect of the meanes the will of God is absolute that all men in some sort or other have sufficient meanes of salvation In respect of the end to wit the salvation of all men the will of God is not absolute but as Schoolemen say virtually conditionall that is God hath a will that all men be saved as much as lies in him if the course of his providence be not intercepted and men will cooperate with his grace And the reason why some Nations hear not the Gospell and Word of God is not the defect of his Church but the want of working in the naturall causes to discover such Countries which defect God will not ever miraculously supply But if the Church were invisible to the world and hoarded up her Religion to her selfe either not daring or not willing to professe and preach the same unto others Nations may be knowne and yet the Word of God not known to them If therefore this Church should be hidden for a long time mens souls should perish not through defect in the naturall causes but only through the hiddennesse obscurity and wretchednesse of the supernaturall meanes to wit of the Church not
and Apostolique Church THese premises considered I look'd round about to see amongst al the societies of the world professing the name of Christ to which of them the title and dignity of the Church might most justly be applyed and I found that the Roman Church that is the multitude of Christians spred over the face of the known world adhering to the doctrine of the Church of Rome is the One Holy Catholique and Apostolique Church The vulgar objection against the title of Catholique Roman that is say they universall and yet but particular seemed very childish the one title being applyed in regard of the doctrine and the extent thereof which is universall the other of the discipline and the fountaine and head thereof which is particular from the Bishop of Rome For the word Catholique is taken three waies to wit formally causally and participatively Formally the universall Church only that is to say the society of all the true particular Churches united in one selfesame Communion is called Catholique Causally the Roman Church is called Catholique for as much as shee infuseth universality into all the whole body of the Catholique Church For to constitute universality there must be two things one that may be instead of matter thereto to wit the multitude and the other instead of form thereto to wit unity for a multitude without unity doe not properly make universality Take away vnity from the multitude saith S. Augustine and it is a tumult De verb. Dom. sceundum Luc. Serm. 26. but bring in unity and it is a people Therefore the Roman Church which as the center and beginning of the Ecclesiasticall Communion infuseth unity which is the forme of universality into the Catholique Church may be called Catholique causally though in her own being shee be particular Even as the chief Captaine of an army on whom all the inferiour Captaines Officers and common Souldiers have their dependency and with whom they hold correspondency is called The Generall though he be but one particular man because it is he that by the relation that all others have to him gives unity to the whole body of the Army And thirdly particular Churches are called Catholique participatively because they agree and participate in doctrine and Communion with the Catholique Church § 2. Now I was induced to believe that the Roman Church is the only true Catholike Church by these ensuing reasons First God being the Prime Verity revealing truth cannot suffer the knowledg of saving doctrine to be impossible but it is impossible if it be hidden or if a false meanes of knowledge thereof be so drest with the marks of the true as that the true become undiscernable from it And if the Roman be not the true Catholique Church and Tradition then the true Catholique Church and Tradition is hidden and a false Church hath the marks of the true so cleerly that no other can with any colour pretend to be Catholique rather than it that is to have doctrine delivered from the Apostles by whole worlds of Christian Fathers to whole worlds of Christian children Hence either there is no meanes left assuredly to know the saving truth or else it must be inward teaching by immediate revelation without any externall infallible meanes or the Scripture known to be the Word of God and truly interpreted by the light and evidence of the things or by the force of naturall reason the vanity and falshood whereof I have already shewed for knowledge of supernaturall truth by the light and lustre of the doctrine is proper to the Church triumphant inward assurance without an externall infallible ground is proper unto Prophets and the first publishers of Religion Hence it may be concluded that if God be the Prime Verity teaching Christian Religion darkely without making men see the light of things believed and mediatly by some externall infallible meanes upon which inward assurance must rely then he must ever conserve the Catholique Church and Tradition visible and conspicuous that the same may be by sensible marks discerned And if any object that the senses of men in this search may be deceived through naturall invincible fallibility of their organs and so be no ground of faith that is altogether infallible I answer that evidence had by sense being but the private sense of one man is not ordinarily fallible but when the same is also publique generall that is when a whole world of men concur with him then his evidence is altogether infallible Besides seeing God will not teach men immediatly but will have them cleave to an externall infallible means and to find out this means by the sensible evidence of the thing he is in a manner bound by the perfection of his veracity to assist mens senses with his providence that therein they be not deceived when they use such diligence as men ordinarily use that they be not deceived by their senses Now what greater evidence can one have that he is not deceived in this matter of sense that the Roman doctrine is the Catholique that is doctrine delivered from the Apostles by worlds of Christian Ancestors unanimous amongst themselves in all matters of faith what greater assurance I say can one have that herein he sees aright than a whole world of men professing to see the same that he doth And surely this was the meaning of God by the Prophet Esay when speaking of the Church of Christ he calls it a direct way so that fools cannot erre therein Esa 35.8 which cannot be but by following a world of Ancestors going before them in the same Tract Otherwise it is not only possible for fools but even for them that seem to be wisest to erre yea in this case it is impossible to be otherwise And if it be further objected that I believe the Catholique Church is an Article of Faith and Faith is the argument of things not seen I answer an Article of Faith may be visible according to the substance of the thing and yet invisible according to the manner it is believed in the Creed The third Article He suffered under Pontius Pilate was crucified dead and buried according to the substance of the thing was evident to sense and seen of the Jewes and is now believed of their posterity but according to the manner that it is believed in the Creed to wit that herein the Word of God by his Prophets was fulfilled and that it was done for the salvation of man in this manner this visible Article is invisible and so it is believed in the Creed In like manner that there is in the world a Catholike Church and that the Romane is this Catholique Church Pagans Jewes and Heretiques if they shut not their eyes against the light do clearly behold but that herein the Word of God concerning the perpetuall amplitude of his Church is accomplished that this is an effect of Gods varacity to the end that the meanes to learn saving truth may not be hidden this is a
thing invisible and according to this notion the Catholique Church is proposed in the Creed Secondly propositions of Faith must be invisible according to the Predicate or thing believed but not alwaies according to the Subject or thing whereof we believe some other thing The things the Apostles believed of Christ to wit that he was the Son of God the Saviour of the world were things invisible but the subject and person of whom they did believe these things was visible to them yea God did of purpose by his Prophets foretell certain tokens whereby that subject might by sense be seen and discerned from all other that might pretend the name of Christ or else his comming into the world to teach the truth had been to little purpose In this sort the Predicate or thing believed in this Article the Holy Catholique Church to wit Holy is invisible but the Subject to wit the Catholique Church which we affirme and believe to be holy in her doctrine is visible and conspicuous to all Yea God hath of purpose foretold signes tokens whereby shee may by sense be cleerly discerned from all other that may pretend to the title of Catholique For were not this subject the Holy Catholique Church which we believe to be holy and infallible in her teaching visible and discernable from all other that pretend to that title of what use were it to believe that there is such an infallible teaching Church in the world hidden we know not where like a Candle under a Bushell or a needle in a bottle of hey § 3. Secondly if there must be alwaies in the world as was proved before one holy Catholique and Apostolique Church that is a Church delivering doctrines uniformly thereby making them credible universally thereby making them famously known to mankind holily so making them certain and such as that on them we may securely rely Apostolically so making them flow in the channel of a never-interrupted succession of Bisbops from the Apostles then this Church must be either the Roman or the Protestant or some other opposite to both Protestants cannot say a Church opposite to both for then they should be condemned in their own judgement and be bound to conforme themselves to that Church which can be no other but the Grecian a Church holding as many doctrines which the Protestants dislike as the Church of Rome as might easily be proved if need were It is further manifest that the Protestants are not this One Holy Catholique and Apostolique Church since their revolt and separation from the Church of Rome because in that very act of separation they did extinguish all these titles for they changed the doctrines they once held they forsook the body whereof they were Members brake off from the stock of that tree whereof they were branches neither in their departure did they joyne themselves with any other Church different from the Roman professing the particular Protestant doctrines so that they made a new Church of their own not agreeing in all points of faith with any that went before neither have they which have come after them as there are very many Sects risen out of the first Protestant agreed with them And therefore there is none or the Roman is the One Holy Catholique and Apostolique Church § 4. Thirdly the Protestants had the Holy Scripture from the Holy Catholique and Apostolique Church otherwise they cannot be sure that they are the true Scriptures of the Apostles because the testimony and Tradition of any other Church is fallible and may deceive them And if it may for ought they know it hath seeing they lived not in the Apostles daies thereby to make themselves certain thereof and so they will be altogether uncertain of that which they make the only object of their faith Luther cont Anab To. 7. German Ien fol. 169. whitaker de Eccles l. 3. p. 369. Now it is most certain that they had the Scriptures from the Roman Church acknowledged by Luther himselfe and also by Doctor Whitaker only they took the wicked boldnesse to cancell some parts thereof therefore they must either acknowledge that they are not sure that the Scripture is the Word of God or that the Church of Rome from whom they received it is the true Church And if the true Church hath delivered the true Text of Scripture then hath she also together with the true Text delivered the true Apostolicall sense because the Apostles themselves did not deliver to her the bare Text but with it the true sense to be delivered perpetually to posterity not by making a large and entire comment of all difficult places but by delivering with the Text the sense also about the maine and principall points So that they who by Tradition receive from the Apostles the true Text must together with it receive the true sense Now principal * Chemnit exam Cont. Trid. p. 1. fol. 74. Doctor Bancroft in the Survey p. 379. Protestants affirme the former saying No man doubteth but the Primitive Church received from the Apostles and Apostolicall men not only the Text of Scripture but also the right and native sense Which is agreeable to the Doctrine of the * Vincentius Lyrinens cap. 2. Fathers that from the Apostles together with the Text descends the line of Apostolicall interpretation squared according to the Ecclesiasticall and Catholique sense Whereupon * Aug. de util cred c. 14. S. Augustine affirms the later that they that deliver the Text of Christs Gospell must also deliver the Exposition saying that he would sooner refuse to believe Christ than learn any thing concerning him but of those by whom he was brought to believe Christ For they that can deliver by uniform Tradition a false sense may also deliver a false Text as received from the Apostles their freedome from or liablenesse to error in both being equall If therefore the Church of Rome have delivered the true Text then she hath also delivered and preserved the true sense or else we are sure of neither and so she only is the true holy Catholique and Apostolique Church or else there is none § 5. Fourthly it is granted by Protestants that the Romane Church was once the true Church and it cannot be proved that she hath changed her doctrine since the Apostles time therefore she is still the same true Church And that she hath not changed her Doctrine is thus proved the Doctrines that have continued for divers ages in the Christian Church and no time of their beginning can be assigned must needs be Doctrines descending from the Apostles and unchanged and such are the Doctrines of the Church of Rome Than the Doctrines of the Romane Church which Protestants reject have been universally received for many hundreds of years is by many learned Protestants confessed Perkins saith * Expos of the Creed p. 307. 400. during the space of nine hundred years the Popish Heresie hath spread it selfe over the whole world and
nor feet And even such imperfect things are all hereticall and deformed Churches which want faith for their head charity for their heart firmnesse and perseverance for their feet Holding such monstrous and absurd opinions that they make up a bundle of Heathenisme Turcisme Heresie and contradictions to common-sense Can then any indifferent and prudent man who knowes that God made the world with wisdome in number weight and measure can he think that they are the Church of God the deare Spouse of Christ for whose sake he descended from his heavenly Throne and took and lost humane life Or will he not rather say that they are mad 1 Cor. 14.26 Who are framed neither in number weight nor measure their societies and Churches being or being possible to be according to their principles as many as their persons their opinions vaine and foolish and their government confused and mis-shapen seeming rather a chaos than a creation In summe there is nothing that can be said for a true Catholique Church but may be truly said for the Roman there is â—othing that the Protestant Churches have said or can say for themselves but have been or may be said by Heretiques and are said by those who subdivide and separate from them which pretences if they be good in them against the Church of Rome they are good in others against them which yet they will not admit So that the Church of Rome is the true Church or there never was any true Church and all Protestants are Heretiques or there never were any that deserved that name § 9. What remaines then for all Protestants of what sort or title soever but to listen to the voice which sayeth Goe out of her my people that yee be not partakers of her sinnes and that ye receive not of her plagues Revel 18.4 To redeem their soules from forfeiture that have been thus long morgag'd to eternall death and with the Prodigall son to returne home to the Catholique Church their mother and thereby to God their Father in whose house there is plenty of celestiall Manna while they perish for want of food or become fellow commoners with the hogs and feed upon huskes and draught and thereby to give joy both to earth and heaven in their conversion seeing that as the elements never rest contentedly but in their proper placeâ— so they will find no rest but in the bosome of the true Church which is the proper place of every Christian To listen to the voice which crieth Return return ô Sunamite return return Cant 6.13 And the Spirit and the Bride say come And let him that heareth say come and let him that is athirst come And whosoever will let him take of the water of life freely Revel 22.17 by coming to Mount Sion and to the city of the living God the heavenly Jerusalem and to an innumerable company of Angells to the generall assembly and Church of the first borne which are written in heaven and to God the Judge of all and to the Spirits of just men made perfect and to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant Heb. 12.22.23.24 before he come to them as a terrible Judge revealed from heaven with his mighty Angells in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God and that obey not the Gospell of our Lord Jesus Christ 2. Thess 1.7.8 And that they may all doe so especially the Kingdome of England and most especially the most excellent King thereof Strike ô strike their and his soule O Lord with thy omnipotent grace whose magnetique vertue may draw his Royall heart to thee and make him a glorious and happy instrument of drawing others till they all meet in the unity of the faith so to continue untill their mortality shall put on immortality and his temporall crown of thornes be exchanged for an eternall crown of glory Amen FINIS S. Ambr. Ep. 31. ad Valent. Imp. Non erubesco cum toto orbe longaevo converti verum certè est quia nulla aetas ad perdiscendum sera est Erubescat senectus quae emendare se non potest Non annorum canities est laudanda sed morum Nullus pudor est ad meliora transire A Table of the Contents of the severall Chapters contained in this Book Chap. 1. THe Introduction And that the knowledge of the meanes to arrive unto eternall life is not otherwise attaineable then by faith grounded on the Word of God pag. 1. Chap. 2. Of the means to know which is the Word of God And that all the arguments imployed by Protestants to prove that the Scripture and it only is the Word of God are insufficient And that the Generall Tradition of the Catholique Church is the only assured proof thereof p. 6. Chap. 3. Of the insufficiency of means used by Protestants to find out the true sense of Scripture The absurdity of that assertion of theirs That all points necessary to salvation are clear and manifest p. 26. Chap. 4. Of the vanity and impiety of those who affirm that each mans particular reason is the last Judge and interpreter of Scripture and his guide in all things which he is obliged to believe and know And that the Catholique Church is the only Judge p. 36. Chap. 5. Of the meaning of those words Church and Catholique and that neither of them belong to Protestants p. 49. Chap. 6. Of the Infallibility of the Church p. 54. Chap. 7. That Catholique Tradition is the only firme foundation and motive to induce us to believe that the Apostles received their Doctrine from Jesus Christ and Jesus Christ from God the Father And what are the means by which this Doctrine is derived down to us p. 66. Chap. 8. That the Church is infallible in whatsoever she proposeth as the Word of God written or unwritten whether of great or small consequence That to doubt of any one point is to destroy the foundation of Faith And that Protestants distinction between points fundamentall and non-fundamentall is ridiculous and deceitfull p. 78. Chap ' 9. That there is and ever shall be a visible Church upon earth And that this Church is one holy Catholique and Apostolique p. 94. Chap. 10. That the Roman is that one holy Catholique and Apostolique Church p. 105. Chap. 11. That the true Church may be knowne by evident marks and that such marks agree only to the Roman Church And first of Universality the first mark of the Church p. 137. Chap. 12. Of the second mark of the Church viz. Antiquity both of persons and Doctrine p. 151. Chap. 13. Of Visibility the third mark of the Church And of the vanity of Protestants supposition that the true Church is sometimes invisible That Protestant Churches have not alwaies been visible p. 188. Chap. 14. Of the fourth mark of the true Church viz. a lawfull succession and ordinary vocation and mission of Pastors And that it is ridiculous to affirme that Catholiques and Protestants are the same Church p. 208. Chap. 15. Of the fifth Mark of the true Church viz. Unity in Doctrine and of the horrible dissentions among Pretestants p. 216. Chap. 16. Of the sixth Mark of the true Church viz. Miracles And that there are no true Miracles among Protestants p. 240. Chap. 17. Of the seventh Mark of the true Church viz. Conversion of Kingdomes and Monarchs p. 254 Chap. 18. Of the eighth and ninth Marks of the true Church viz. Sanctity of Doctrine and life p. 260. Chap. 19. Of the tenth and last here mentioned Mark of the Church viz. That the true Church hath never been separated from any society of Christians more antient then her felf p. 276. Chap. 20. That the Pope is the head of the Church p. 281. Chap. 21. That English Protestants do much mistake Catholike Doctrine being abused by the malice or ignorance of many of their Ministers And that upon their owne grounds they are obliged to inform themselves more exactly of the truth p. 297. Chap. 22. Of Communion in one kind p. 331. Chap. 23. Of the Liturgie and private prayers for the ignorant in an unknowne tongue p. 351. Chap. 22. Of the foolish deceitfull and absurd proceedings and behaviour of Protestants in matter of Religion And of the vanity and injustice of their pretext of conscience for their separation from the Roman Church p. 336 Chap. 23. The Conclusion wherein is represented on the one side the splendor and orderly composure of the Roman Catholique Church And on the other side the deformity and confusion of Protestant Congregations p. 362. The faults made by the Printer I desire the Reader thus to correct Page 21. line 1. dele § 5. p. 37. l. 2. r. tittle p. 47. l. 25 r. faith p. 61. l. 18. dele come p. 71. l 19. r. dangerous p. 85. l. 14. 15. r. ununiversall p. 140. l. 24. r. Psal 2.8 p. 147 l. 3. r. became l. 17. r. man p. 165. l. 9. r. intermingled p. 168. l. 11. r. unexpressible p. 188. l. 23. r. to a City p. 199. l. 9. r. tittle p. 201. l. 21. r. one p. 208. l. 22. r. all meet p. 210. l. 4. dele ought r. accusing p. 221. l. 13. r. call p. 261. l. 17. r. of hell l. 25. r. in our p. 276. l. 23. r. different p. 290. l. 2. r. say of l. 12. r. pillar of p. 293. l. 8. r. denying them p. 292. l. 18. r. Bishop p. 307. l. 12. r. as his p. 341. l. 15. r. consequentiae p. 358. l. 12. r. done in p. 358. l. 14. r. to this p. 367. l. 15. dele in p. 368. l. 5. r. Vnion Postscript The French Printer to the English Reader WHilst this piece so generally and deservedly lik'd and applauded both in the English Originall and in the French Version was reprinting here at Paris the learned Author returning hither from Rome in the very nick of time hath thought fit to add a Preface and two new Chapters to it the first Of Communion in one kind the other Of praying in an unknowne tongue both no lesse requisite then abundantly satisfactory So that I make no question but the contentment and benefit you will receive thereby will easily reconcile you aswell to the misnumbring of some Chapters pages occasioned by the Addition as to some other Errata's for which my ignorance in your language craves the benefit of a pardon Adieu
of two thousand years had no word of God but that which was unwritten which we call Tradition the Church of the Jewes had Scripture but with it Tradition as the prayer of Elias concerning raine Jam. 5.15 The contention of the Archangel S. Michael and the Devill about the body of Moses Jude v. 9. with others and of the Scripture both Old and New many books are lost as many Parables and Verses of Salomon 3 King 3.32 with many other books and S. Paul wrote an Epistle to the Laodiceans Col. 4.16 and another to the Corinthians which are not extant 1 Cor. 5.9 And seeing we have not the whole Canon of the Scripture how can we be sure that that part which we have conteineth all that we are bound to believe and do we do not read that the Apostles were sent to write but to preach and S. John denies that he had expressed in writing all that he had to say Having more things to write unto you saith he I would not by paper and inke for I hope that I shall be with you and speake mouth to mouth that your joy may be full Now that these things that the Apostles did not write but teach by word of mouth were matters also of weight and belonging to Faith S. Paul assures us in these words Night and day more abundantly praying that we may see your face and may accomplish those things that want of your faith 1 Thes 3.10 By which it is evident that the Apostles besides their writings did preach other things which were wanting to their faith § 10. Nor did the Apostles surely intend to write all points of faith for if they had it is probable that they all together or some one of them would have done it purposely punctually and methodically and declared so much unto the world But we know the contrary to wit that they did not write all by their own confession and that which they did write was but accidentall and upon particular occasions as Hooker affirmes Eccles Pol. l. 1. sect 15. p. 37. The severall Books of Scripture are written upon severall occasions and particular purpose which occasions if they had not happened it is most likely that they had not written that which they did For instance the Epistles of S. Peter James John and Jude were written against certain Heretikes who mis-understanding S. Paul did thereupon teach That faith onely without works sufficed to salvation of which very point S. Augustine saith Because this opinion was then begun De fide operibus c. 14. other Apostolicall Epistles of Peter John James Jude do chiefly direct their intentions against it that they might strongly confirm Faith without works to profit nothing S. John also did preach the Gospell till his last age which was very long without writing any Scripture and took occasion to write as S. Ierome affirmes by reason of the heresie of the Ebionites De Scriptoribus Eccles which then brake out The like might be shewed of all the rest And lastly which is worth the observation all the Epistles are written to such persons onely as were already converted to the Christian Faith therefore they were written not so much to instruct Tom. 2. l. de Eccles fol. 43. as to confirme as Zuinglius also confesseth § 11. By all which it is evident so far as we can see that the Apostles and Evangelists did write their books not by any command from Christ but upon some accidentall occasion moving them thereunto Wherein one and the same matter is often repeated as in S. Pauls Epistle to the Romans and to the Galatians and also in all the Evangelists and many other things are omitted as a world of works which our Saviour did as S. John testifieth 2. John 21.25 and which the Apostles did also the small book of their Acts being too little to expresse all their actions and also the things which S. Paul ordained in the Church of the Corinthians 1 Cor. 11.34 by which it is manifest that they neither intended any compleat Ecclesiasticall history nor body of divinity containing all matters of faith and practice So that it did neither appear to me that the Scripture contained all the doctrine of salvation that the Apostles taught nor yet any of it because I could not see by the directions that Protestants gave me whether the Scripture were the Word of God or no. CHAP. III. Of the insufficiency of the Protestants meanes to find out the true sense of the Scriptures And of the absurdity of their assertion that all points necessary to salvation are clear and manifest § 1. AS to know the letter of the Scripture so to know the meaning thereof I found a matter of great difficulty agreeable to S. Peter who saith speaking of S. Pauls Epistles 2 Pet. 3.16 In which are certain things hard to be understood which the unlearned and unstable deprave as also the rest of the Scriptures to their own damnation But * Falke Con. Rhē Test in 2 Pet. cap. 3. Morton Apol. part 1. lib. 1. cap. 19. VVhitaker contro◠2. q. 5. c. 7. p. 513. Protestants to avoid their dependence on the Church for the interpretation thereof say that all things necessity to salvation are easie to be understood even by the most unlearned Reader But they never yet expressed what points were necessary to salvation and what not nor have given any rule by by which it might be found out but have left themselves the liberty of adding to or substracting from that title what and whensoever they pleased And who seeth not that with this device they may exclude if they please almost all the points of Christian belief and practise § 2. Wonderfull confusion I found herein for here the understanding of the most unlearned Reader is made the size of things necessary to salvation and if it be a measure unto all men then the most learned Clerk is bound to believe no more than the most unlearned peasant that can but read and the most unlearned need not the help of the learned for the understanding of things necessary but can find them out by his own reading So that you must take the arrantest dunce in their Church that can read and after he hath diligently perused the Bible and prayed for understanding therein that which he understands must be accounted necessary to salvation and no more Surely me thinks they are to blame that have not for the greater credit and cleernesse of their cause made this tryall upon some silly fellow and from his mouth have set downe their points necessary to salvation But by this it appears that they are willing to draw the matters necessary to salvation for their great ease into a very narrow compasse and make the same measure serve the silliest clown and the greatest Clerk which is uncomly And coming closer to the matter I have known some affirm which I believe is the opinion of very many that to believe
in Jesus Christ without any distinct belief of his divine and humane nature and that he died for the sinnes of the world and that a man must repent before he die is all that is necessarily required either for belief or practice of any man As for those that cannot read which are I believe the greatest number or very little inferior they deal most unkindly with them not providing a certaine means whereby they may be brought up to read which they that can read think all are bound to with references to the Scriptures by the commandement of Christ and wherby they are to find out the things necessary to salvation but leave them if at all to be saved by the cruell blind Popery as they please to call it of an implicite faith § 3. I then considered that there was much ambiguity in these words necessary to salvation there being divers kinds of necessity that have place in matters of Religion First there is an absolute necessity and a conditionall necessity Absolute necessity is that which admits no excuse of impossibility nor any exception of place time or person as in regard of those that are of age capable of knowledge The belief of Christ mediator betwixt God and man and to this kind of necessity there are some that would restrain all things to be believed leaving themselves the liberty of all matters else to believe what they please but with as much reason they may restraine this necessity to the believing only that there is a God and so renounce their Christianity Conditionall necessity is that which obligeth not but in case of possibility and receives exception of time place and person Thus there are many points necessary to be believed if a man be in place where he may be instructed in them and hath time to receive instruction which are not necessary for a man liveing in the wildernesse or so ready to be attached by death as he hath no leisure to be instructed or apprehension to receive it as that Christ was borne of a Virgin and crucified under Pontius Pilate And many things are necessary for Pastors to believe which are not for common people as that the persons of the Trinity are the same in essence but distinct in subsistence that in Christ there are two natures and but one person with many the like And in matter of practise there are many things necessary in case of possibility and opportunity of time and place which are not necessary if the conveniency to accomplish them be wanting as the assistance at Church service and participation of the Eucharist Secondly there is a necessity of means and a necessity of precept Necessity of means is in those things to which God hath obliged us if we will attaine the end as of the Sacraments to which God hath given power to confer grace and of the Commandements whose necessity is imposed upon us if we will enter into life and of repentance of sinnes which is a means necessary to obtain their remission Necessity of Precept is that which only obliges in regard that it is commanded contributing otherwise no real advancement to our salvation as the celebrating the Lords day and other such like observations the omission wherof could be no hindrance to salvation but in respect of disobedience and breach of the Commandement Thirdly there is a necessity of speciall belief and a necessity of generall belief Necessity of speciall belief is of those points which all faithfull if they be not prevented by death are obliged to believe with faith expresse distinct determinate which the Schoolemen call explicite faith as the twelve Articles of the Creed Necessity of generall belief is of those things which every particular man is not bound to believe with a distinct and explicite faith as that Baptism given by Heretiques is true Baptism and that Heretiques which have received Baptism must not be baptized again when they return to the Church with many such like in which it will suffice the unlearned multitude to believe them implicitly that is to adhere to the Church that doth believe them and by a generall belief imbrace them by believing as the Church doth and referring themselves to her prepared alwaies to believe them explicitly when they shall be declared to them and themselves are capable to apprehend them Lastly there is a Necessity of act and a Necessity of approbation Necessity of act is of those things which every particular person is obliged actually to perform as to professe the name of Christ to forgive offences commited against him with the like Necessity of approbation is of those things which every man is not bound actually to performe but only not to contradict them nor to condemne those that do them nor the Church that allowes them nor to seperate themselves from her upon this occasion as the choice to live in virginity and single life with the like § 4. Now according to these severall kinds of Necessity I accounted it meet to hold for necessary to salvation all those things that the Fathers have holden necessary in that degree and according to those kinds of necessity as they have holden them And this I did not perceive to be a matter of such ease to find out as Protestants did under their title of necessary to salvation affirm I found innumerable places of Scripture were obscure and hard to be understood and that their distinction of things necessary to salvation was more obscure and uncertain than any thing having no limits or determination but like the Gladius Delphicus was fitted for all turns but indeed served none but to cozen themselves who presented with a point of belief or practice which they did not like would wave it with saying it was not necessary to salvation Therefore as S. Philip asked the Eunuch whether he understood what he read who said how can I without some body to interpret it So I answered my selfe and had reason to believe that others could not truly answer better for themselves An interpreter then was necessary who might judge of the true meaning of the Scripture against the corruption of heretiques who all take their protection from thence and which should determine all emergent controversies which were needfull for the preservation of peace and unity And in bestowing of this Office I observed that the Protestants voices were divided * Har. Confes p. 5. some gave it to the Scripture it selfe saying that it must interpret it selfe and be the Judg of all controversies * VVhites way to the Church p. 6.27 Others that the Spirit of God doth interpret to every private man both which I apprehended absurd and unreasonable The former because nothing if it speak obscurely can interpret it selfe but that which hath a living voice which the Scripture not having cannot possibly interpret it selfe As for the assertion of some that the obscure places are interpreted by plain places speaking to the same purpose it is false there
being no such plaine places in many cases to be found which they themselves prove by their disagreement about the sense of many places Therefore to allay the unreasonablenesse of this assertion they add that it is Scripture diligently read by us and one place conferred with another all circumstances weighed and much prayer used which is in effect that not the Scripture it selfe but they interpret the Scripture by the aforesaid meanes § 6. But all these waies of study and conference skill in the tongues or the like are but humane endeavours and subject to error yea though much fervour of prayer be mixed therewith and such as the meanes are such of necessity must be the interpretation and determination but the meanes are uncertaine doubtfull and fallible therefore such must be the interpretation and if it be uncertaine it may be false and whether it be so or no Protestants have no way to discover but by the Spirit as he instructs every particular man whose insufficiency I found in my former consideration of the meanes to know the Scripture to be the Word of God And if it cannot assure me of the letter of Gods Word no more can it of the meaning considering that I can neither know whether another have the Spirit nor yet whether I have it my selfe or no without some miraculous revelation for all other proofs of having the direction of the Spirit are but humane and so subject to deceipt but miracles we are sure are from God because they exceed all humane and created power § 7. And seeing Protestants ground their salvation upon faith onely which as they say doth onely justifie and faith upon Scripture only which according to them containes all things necessary to be believed and the Scripture and sense thereof upon the private Spirit only by which they expound the Scripture it followes that the private Spirit is the sole or principall ground to them of the sense of Scripture the Scriptures sense the like ground of their faith and this their faith the like ground of their salvation therefore no Protestant can have greater certainty of his faith or salvation then he hath of this private Spirit whereof seeing he hath none either from Scripture Church Councells Fathers common sense or experience it must needs follow that he hath certainty of nothing and that this relying upon the private Spirit must needs plunge him into infinite and abominable errors CHAP. IV. Of the vanity and impiety of those who affirm that each mans particular reason is the last Judge and Interpreter of Scripture and his guide in all things which he is bound to believe and know And that the Catholike Church is the sole Judge § 1. FInally Chillingworth the last reformer and calciner of the Protestant Religion seeing the weaknesse of all the former pretences hath boldly and roundly reduced all to one only principle and that is of naturall reason affirming that our belief of the Scripture to be the Word of God and also our belief of the Scripture in every particular part thereof depends upon each mans reason and discourse beyond which or different from which he is not bound to believe a title Yet he doth not say that this way is infallible but because all wayes else are fallible as he supposes and this the onely way God hath given us to be guided by we must be herewith contented and God also must be contented herewith in us and give salvation to those that believe and do according to their best understanding And this opinion I observed had got a large possession in the minds of Protestants especially of the Clergy and Gentry whose ingenuous education gave them the highest claime to the exercise of reason who were therefore very glad to embrace such a principle of Religion as of which they accounted themselves the chiefest Masters § 2. This conceipt seemed to me no lesse absurd and much more insolent than any of the other for the other did seem at least to ascribe our knowledge of the Scripture and sense thereof to God either speaking in the Scripture or by his Spirit speaking to their soules or concurring with their humane endeavours though in conclusion they drew it to the determination of their owne fancies But this man more impiously hardy than all that went before him doth directly and in plaine termes attribute all the assurance we have of the Word of God the director to salvation unto our selves and that too as we are meer men And this resolving of faith not into Authority but into reason and that not as preparing or inducing us to believe which Catholiques allow but as the maine ground and strongest pillar of our faith and the dependence of faith upon reason as the Conclusion on the premises is a doctrine incredibly pernicious and the source of monstrous impieties And for this purpose he builds much upon this * Pag. 36. n. 8. Axiome we cannot possibly by naturall meanes be more certaine of the conclusion than of the weaker of the premises as a river will not rise higher than the fountaine from whence it flowes Hence in the same place he inferres that the certainty of Christian faith can be but morall and humane and not absolutely infallible Therefore as an instance to the same purpose he saith * Pag. 116. We have as great reason to believe there was such a man as Henry the eight King of England as that Jesus Christ suffered under Pontius Pilate And in larger explication of this his doctrine he saith If upon reasons seeming to my understanding very good I have made choice of a guide or rule for my directions in matters of faith when afterwards I discover that this guide or rule leads me to believe one or more points which in the best judgement that I can frame I have stronger reason to reject than I had to accept my former rule I may and ought to forsake that rule as false and erroneous otherwise I should be convinced not to follow reason but some setled resolution to hold fast whatsoever I had once apprehended From which wild and vast principle doth follow that if the Scripture for example propound things seeming more contrary to any mans reason and opinion than the inducements which first moved him to believe Scripture were in his opinion strong and convincing he must reject the Scripture as an erroneus rule and adhere to his owne reason and discourse as his last and safest guide Especially considering that according to him the motives for which we believe the Scripture are but probable and by consequence subject to falshood which in all reason must give place to reasons seeming demonstrative and convincing as there will not want many such against the highest mysteries of Christian faith if once we professe our assent to them must be resolved into natural discourse For for what reason do the Socinians and such like deny the misteries of the blessed Trinity the Diety of our blessed Saviour
government can best determine § 7. Lastly if any of these fore-mentioned waies of Protestants for the knowledge of the Word of God the guide to eternall life were sufficient what need were there of preaching and instructing of the people at least of them that can read but let them take the Bible and let nature work which in the co-operation of their owne wise fancies will hatch a goodly Religion no doubt borne like Minerva of the brain of Jupiter and be as comely as a Chymera of many seuerall shapes tackt together and to them instead of the ancient heathens houshold-Gods which every one must adore as his private God within himselfe O sacras gentes quibus haec nascuntur in ipsis Numina Who prove the truth of this saying in themselves that He that is Schoole-master to himself is Scholler to a fool § 8. Observing thus the weaknesse and absurdity of all the Protestants alledged in proof that the Scripture is the Word of God easie to be understood at least in all things necessary to salvation and that it is to be interpreted by it self or by the Spirit to everie particular man so making way for as much variety in Religion as there may be diversity of opinion I saw that although some probable arguments may be drawn from the Scriptures to prove them to be of God yet there was no other infallible way to know what is the true Word of God first taught by the Apostles and their hearers but by the testimony of some sure certain and agreeing witnesses and what is the meaning of this Word of God in case there should be any important difference about it thereby to give a period to all controversies but by some society of men renowned for their wisdome And this I conceived in common prudence a far better way than for a man to rely upon himselfe But though this were a better way than those of the Protestants yet if this society of men were not in these matters free from error although it is more likely they should tell truth than the Protestants yet I could not have an immovable foundation for my saith but it would be subject to wavering and inconstancy and so there could be no prudent setlednesse in Religion nor any well-built hope of the end thereof eternall life I saw then that it was needfull that there should be a faithfull witnesse a wise judge and so wise and faithfull that he should not be subject to falshood or error otherwise it seemed to me that God had not contrived a competent way to his own glory or mans salvation which to be wanting in is neither sutable to his wisdome nor his goodnesse I therefore concluded that there was some society of men who must instruct us in the premises and that this society in reason ought to be infallible and that none could with any colour pretend to be this society but that which we call the Catholique Church which all Christians professe to believe according to the Creed of the Apostles But before I could proceed any further I was cast upon the examination of the sense of the words Church and Catholique finding therein much difference amongst the pretenders to these titles CHAP. V. Of the meaning of these words Church and Catholique and that neither of them belong to Protestants § 1. THere were seven Cities that strove for the body of Homer And very many societies of Christians there are that lay claime to the body of Christ which is his Church And as when Telesius a young Grecian having won the prize in the Pythian games was to be led in triumph there arose such a dispute between the severall Nations there present every one being covetous to have him for their owne that one drawing one way another another instead of receiving the honour that was prepared for him he was torne in pieces even by those who seemed most ambitious to honour him So happens it to the Church all those that beare the name of Christians avow that to her only appertaines the victory over hell and that whosoever will have part in the prize and glory of this triumph must serve under her Ensigne but when they come to debate about the body of this society then every Sect desirous to draw her to themselves they rend and teare her in pieces and instead of embracing the Church which consists in unity they embrace Schism and Division which is the death and ruin of the Church § 2. The Protestants do somtimes give a strict definition of a Church somtimes a large somtimes they restraine her to the number of the predestinate only somtimes they enlarge her so far that they imbrace within her compasse because they will be sure not to leave out themselves all the variety of Christians whatsoever But by all the former they exclude the visibility of the Church which is an inseperable companion thereof as I shall shew hereafter for the predistinate are not knowne to any body nor ordinary unto themselves But those that are so presumptuous as very many are to assume unto themselves the assurance of their predestination do easily lay hold on this tenure which they do the more boldly by how much it is more difficult for another to disprove but as it is not easie for another to disprove so it is as hard for them to prove and concludes nothing therefore in the behalf of the Churches description in generall or of their share in particular Beside the word Ecclesia Church is derived from a verb which signifies to call not to predestinate And the Church is a society but the predestinate are a multitude and there is this difference between a societie and a multitude that a society hath a certain form and vertue whereby they communicate together which the other without this association have not Now predestinaton as it is meere predestination establisheth nothing in the predestinate nor is it made in them but in God only and by consequence doth not make them actuall parts of the society called the Church It is not the union of predestination but of vocation that builds men into a Church By the later definition of a Church they deny the very being of Heresie and Schisme for if the whole Masse of Christians be the Church notwithstanding the errors in faith which some of them hold or separation in communion which they make then there are none that can be called Heretiques or Schismatiques or else which is equally absurd all Heretiques and Schismatiques are of the Church and this destroyes the holinesse of the Church in doctrine which is another inseparable ornament thereof Others which are some of the subdivisions of sects amongst the Protestants as Brownists Anabaptists and the like say each sect for it selfe that that is the Church excluding all others from that title even their fellow Protestants but this excludes the universality of the Church another inseparable companion thereof at least after the Apostles had
endewed with so much zeal and courage as to professe her Religion and to propagate it in the world which cannot be Therefore it is impossible that the true Church should not be ever universall and famously known Sixthly this Church is holy both in life and Doctrine Holy for life shining in all admirable sanctity the rayes whereof do overcome the hearts of the beholders such as the Holy Apostles gave example of as of poverty chastitie obedience charity in undergoing all forms of labour and danger for the safety of soules patience invincible in the rough handling of themselves by wonderfull fastings and all kind of austerities fortitude heroicall in suffering martyrdome not onely with patience but with joy though given them in all the most hideous shapes that mans imagination steeled with malice could invent And although this kind of sanctity does not shine in all the members of the Church but in the more eminent professors and principally in the Pastors yet if this kind of sanctity together with Miracles were wanting she could not be so sufficient a witnesse to Infidells who ordinarily are not won to the affection and admiration of Christianity but by beholding such wonders of power and sanctity in the Professors thereof Holy shee is also for doctrine in regard her traditions are divine and holy without commixture of error for if the Church could deliver any one or few errors intermingled with many truths her Traditions even of the truth were questionable and could not be believed upon her word Even as if we admit in Scripture any error in smaller matters we cannot be sure of its infallibility in matters of greatest moment as he that shall say Gods written word is false or uncertaine when it tells him that S. Paul left his cloake at Troas may also say with as much reason that it is false or uncertain when it tells him that Christ was borne of the Virgin Mary Even so he that grants that some part of Traditions or the Word of God unwritten may be false inferrs by consequence that every part thereof may be so and that because we have no antecedent ground or touch-stone to try Traditions by but they must be believed for their own sakes being therein more fundamentall than the Scripures which are not known to be Apostolicall but by Tradition whereas perpetuall Tradition is knowne to come from the Apostles by its own light for what can be more evident then that that is from the Apostles which is delivered as Apostolicall by perpetuall succession of Priests and people affirming and believing the same § 2. But against this truth that if the Church may erre in one thing neither wee nor shee can be sure that shee speakes truth in any thing Chillingworth makes these in my judgement impertinent interrogations A Judge may possibly erre in Judgement can he therefore never have assurance that he hath judged right A travayler may possibly mistake his way must I therefore be doubtfull whether I am in the right way from my hall to my chamber pag. 117. sect 106. In which he weakly falls into comparison betwixt matters which are the object of the sense or of the understanding and of faith which in this case have no proportion betwixt them For the doctrines of faith as they are of faith being altogether and all equally without the reach of our knowledge we have no way to attaine to but by the help of others whom we must absolutely believe and if we know that they may deliver that which is false to us wee can never be sure that any thing they deliver to us is not false unlesse we had some superiour rule to try and examine their Traditions by which certainly we have not Nor can the Church it selfe if shee may erre in the delivery of one thing be sure that shee doth not erre in every thing because shee hath no infallible rule to examine her doctrines by out of her selfe who if shee be assisted by the Holy Ghost cannot erre in any thing if not for ought shee knowes shee doth in all things Now that the Church is assisted by God and that mans reason cannot be the highest judge to whom the last appeal is made in matters of faith which descend from God I have shewed before As for a humane Judge as he may erre through ignorance wilfulnesse or negligence which to conceive of the Church is absurd yea blasphemous shee having Christ for her Head and the Holy Ghost for her Spirit so he cannot bee more certaine of the truth of his judgement than his reason can make him which will not reach to an absolute infallibility And as a travayler may mistake his way in one journey so he may in another if he have no more certainty nor better guide of the one way than of the other which is the Churches case in propounding and believing matters of faith revealed to her by God which like the Circumference from the Center are all equally distant from our knowledge and the Church hath an equall Prerogative of infallibility by the guidance of the Holy Ghost in all who therefore can erre in nothing or in all things which she saith she so receives and delivers Yet Chillingworth saith that his consequences are as like the other as an egge to an egge or milk to milk but more truly they are as like as an egge to an oyster or milk to ink § 3. And lest any Protestant who honours the Scriptures much with his lips though he be far removed with his heart should think that I am injurious to the Scripture in saying that Tradition is more fundamentall than Scripture it selfe I desire him to take notice that Tradition and Scripture according to different comparisons are equall and superior the one to the other Compare them in respect of certainty of truth they are equall both being the Word of God the one written the other unwritten and so both infinitely certain Compare them in respect of depth of sublimity and variety of doctrine the Scripture is far superiour to Tradition Tradition being plaine and easie doctrine concerning the common capitall and practicall Articles of Christianity whereas the Scripture is full of high hidden senses and furnished with great variety of examples discourses and all manner of learning Compare them in respect of antiquity and evidence of being the Apostles the Scripture is inferiour to Tradition in time and knowledge and cannot be proved directly to be the Apostles and therefore Gods but by Tradition As Philosophy is more perfect than Logicke and Rhetoricke than Grammar in respect of high and excellent knowledge yet Logicke is more prime originall and fundamentall than Philosophy Grammar than Rhetorique without the rules and principles whereof they cannot be learned Even so Tradition is more prime and originall than Scripture though Scripture in respect of depth and sublimity of discourse be more excellent then Tradition CHAP. X. That the Roman is that one holy Catholique
for many hundred years an universall Apostacy over-spread the whole face of the earth so that our Protestant Church was not then visible to the world Fulk saith * Treatise ag Stapleton Martiall p. 25. the Pope hath blinded the world these many hundred years some say 900. some 1000. some 1200. And * On the Revelat. p 64. Napier saith The Antichristian and Papisticall reign began about the year three hundred and sixteen after Christ which is now above 1300. years ago raigning universally without debateable contradiction Gods true Church abiding certainly hidden and latent Secondly Protestants cannot tell the time when the Church of Rome began to change and swerve from the Apostolicall doctrine therefore doubtlesse she hath never changed her faith Now that doctrines universally received although they be not written are Doctrines derived from the Apostles is affirmed by * De Baptis lib. 5. c. 23. S. Augustine and allowed by * D. sence p. 351. 352. D. Whitguift Archbishop of Canterbury who in his book against Puritanes citing divers Protestants as concurring in opinion with him saith whatsoever opinions are not knowne to have begun since the Apostles time the same are not new or secundary but received their originall from the Apostles But because this principle of Christian divinity brings in as Cartwright the Puritan there alledged speaks all Popery in the judgement of all men I will further demonstrate it though of it selfe it be cleer enough Christ by his Spirit being still present with his Church cannot permit errors in Faith so to creep into the Church as that by the very principles of Christianity they become unreformable but if errors so creep into the Church as that their beginning cannot be knowne and their progresse become universall then do they so enter and prevaile that by the principles of Christianity they are past reformation and that because whosoever undertakes to reform them is to be condemned as an Heretique for he that will undertake to reform Doctrines universally received by the Church opposeth himself against the whole Church and is therefore by a knowne and received Principle of Christianity and Christs owne precept to be accounted as a Heathen and a Publican Mat. 18.17 Epist 118. And as S. Augustine saith To dispute against the whole Church is insolent madnesse For the Church by Christ is appointed the Judge and corrector of all others as our Saviour saith Tell the Church and therefore is not to be judged nor corrected by any he that hath the high presumption to doe so presently pulls on himself the censure of a Heathen And justly too for like the Giants amongst the Poets who waged war against the Gods he doth not only oppose the present Church but the Church of all ages even the Apostles themselves and who is sufficient for these things And he begins a new course of Christianity seeking to overthrow that Doctrine which is universally received and cannot be proved by any Tradition of Ancestors to be otherwise planted in the world than by the Apostles themselves through the power of innumerable miracles Wherefore these Doctrines if they be errors are errors whose reformation no man by the principles of Christianity ought to attempt And seeing it is impossible there should be any such errors the Principle of S. Augustine stands firm That Doctrines received universally in the Church without any known beginning are truly Apostolicall and of this kind are the Roman Doctrines from which Protestants have revolted But some Protestants object that the errors of the Pharisees were universally received in the Jewish Church yet reformed by our Saviour To which may be answered that Protestants out of their desire to make Catholiques seem like the Pharisees make themselves seem as if they did not any whit understand the Gospell For the Traditions of the Pharisees were not universall Traditions but certaine practises of piety invented by themselves and deducted by their skill from Scripture whereby they would seem singularly religions and not as other men Secondly Christ Jesus proving himselfe to be true God might reforme errors universally received and the Church of the Jewes falling erect a new Church of Christians as he did which is not lawfull for any one else to doe For Christian Religion must continue to the worlds end by vertue of the first Tradition thereof and must never be interrupted without extraordinary and propheticall beginning by immediate revelation and Miracles If therefore errors be delivered by the full consent of Christian Tradition they are irreformable Again some Protestants say that one may oppose the whole Church and confute her errors by Scripture not be as an Heathen or Heretique for not every one that opposeth the Church is to be accounted an Heathen Whites Reply p. 136. but only such as inordinately and without just cause oppose it And who I pray shall judge of the justnesse of the cause By this doctrine every man is made an examiner and judge of the whole Church hellish confusion brought in thereby For if against the sentence of perpetual universal Tradition a private man may without the guilt of heresie pretend Scripture and stand obstinately therein though the Church do give seeming and appearing answers as some of them confesse to his Scripture yet condemne her answers saying they are sophisticall as some of them do what can be more disorderly or what is Hereticall obstinacy if this be not Wherefore S. Augustine saith absolutely Epist 48. it is impossible men should have just cause to depart from impugn the whole Christian Church And why but because it is a ruled case in Christianity he that heareth not the Church is an Heretike Yet notwithstanding this the Protestants doe charge the Church of Rome DE FACTO to have falne into errors and to have changed her faith and that because points of doctrine undefined about which Doctors have disputed and held different opinions have been afterwards defined by the Church so that it was not lawfull for any after that to make doubt thereof the Church by this meanes hath held in later ages that to be DE FIDE a matter of faith which the former ages did not and so say they hath changed the faith and believes and delivers more than shee received from the Apostles But this I found to be no change of faith but only a declaration of some point explicitly which was implicitly and involvedly believed before For all the Articles of faith were immediately re-revealed by Christ to his Apostles and by them againe delivered to their posterity so that since there have been no new and particular revelations but the first being laid up in the treasury of the Church for which cause S. Paul calls it a depositum a stock or pawn other truths have been deduced from thence as occasion hath required For when any one endeavours to corrupt the doctrine delivered by the Apostles the Church calls her Pastors and Doctors to
examine the matter and being infallibly assisted by the Spirit of truth which our Saviour promised should be with his Apostles to the end of the world that is with the Church their Successor which was to continue to the worlds end shee declares what is true and what is false as agreeing with or disagreeing from that doctrine which shee hath received from her Fore-fathers the Prophets and Apostles upon whom shee is built as S. Paul saith built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Ephes 2.20 For as in a building there is not the least stone which rests not upon the foundation so in the doctrine of the Catholique Church there is not the least point which is not grounded on or contained in that which was delivered by the Apostles For example in the principles of every Science are contained divers truths which may be drawn out of them by many severall conclusions one following another These conclusions were truths in themselves before though they did not so appear to us till wee saw the connexion they had with the premises and how they were contained in them And by the many severall conclusions so drawn the truth of those principles doth more shew it selfe but doth not receive any change in it selfe thereby even so in the prime principles of our faith revealed immediately by God and delivered to the Church are contained al truths that any way belong to our faith but it was not necessary that the Church should manifest all these at their first meeting in Councell but only so much in every severall Councell as should concerne the present occasion of their meeting which is some particular heresie or heresies then sprung up and so more according to the successive growth of heresies which when shee hath done shee cannot be charged with creating of a new faith or altering of the old but shee doth only out of old grounds and premises draw such conclusions as may serve to destroy new heresies and shew them to be contrary to the ancient faith In this manner the Church hath grown and increased in knowledge by degrees and shall still do so to the end of the world And as the sun spreads the raies of his light more and more betwixt morning and noon and his beames display themselves in a valley or some roome of a house where they did not before without any change of light in the sun himselfe So may the Church spread the light of her faith shewing such or such a point to be a divine truth which before was not known to be so or which though it were a divine truth in it selfe yet it was not so to us for want of sufficient proposall that is of the Churches wherein the Church resembles our Blessed Saviour her Lord and Spouse who though he never received the least increase of grace and knowledge from the first moment of his being conceived yet the Scripture saith He grew in wisdome and age and in favour with God and men Luc. 2.52 to wit because he shewed it more and more in his words and actions This also further appeares by the method which Catholique Fathers and Doctors observe in and out of Councells in proving and defining points of faith namely by having recourse to the authority of Gods Word conteined both in Scripture and Tradition and to the belief and practise of the Church in searching whereof the Holy Church joynes humane industry with Gods grace and assistance For when any question or doubt of faith ariseth particular Doctors severally dispute and write thereof then if further cause require the Holy Church assembles her Pastors and Doctors together in a generall Councell to examine and discusse the matter more fully as in that first Councell of the Apostles whereof the Scripture saith The Apostles and Elders assembled together to consider of this word Acts 15.6 The Pastors being thus come together and having the presence of our Saviour and his Holy Spirit according to his promise amongst them out of Scripture and Traditions joyning therewith the consent of holy Fathers and Doctors of foregoing times she doth infallibly resolve and determine the matter not as new but as ancient orthodox and derived from her forefathers making that which was ever in it selfe a divine truth so to appeare to us that now wee may no more make question thereof So that from hence it appeares that the Church makes no new Articles of faith such as then may be said to have their beginning but only explications and collections out of the old which were delivered to the Apostles and by them to us And though the Church doe thus grow in the knowledge of points of faith yet this is no newnesse of faith but a maintenance of the old with a kind of increase by way of explicating that which was involved cleering that which was obscure defining that which was undefined obliging men to believe more firmly and explicitly that which before they were not bound so to believe That is only to be called a new faith which is contrary to that which was held before or hath no connexion with it and when we cease to believe that which we believed before this indeed is change of faith the other is but encrease And if this encrease of faith by the declaration of Councells may be called a change and innovation of faith there is no Heretique but may challenge antiquity to himselfe and put novelty on the score of the Church For he may say such a thing for example that the Sonne is of the same substance with the Father was not held de fide a matter of faith before the Councell of Nice therefore it is new That Baptisme administred by Heretiques is good baptisme was not held as a matter of faith before the daies of S. Cyprian therefore it is new And the Heretique may say that he believes only that which was believed before such or such a Councell which he please for the case is alike in all and therefore he believes the antient Faith By which way of arguing he may renounce the decrees of all Councells as Novelties and maintaine many Heresies as the antient Faith Yea by this absurdity a man may deny divers Books of the Scripture as the Epistle to the Hebrewes the second Epistle of S. Peter the Epistle of S. Iames of S. Iude and the Apocalyps with some others because they were not admitted for Canonicall untill 300. or 400. yeares after they were written Yet when they were declared to be Canonicall there was no change of faith in the Church thereby for the believing of these Books was involved in this revealed Article I believe in God and the believing of them to be Canonicall was involved in this revealed Article I believe the holy Catholike Church onely hereby was an increase of the materiall object of our faith to us not in it selfe we being bound upon the declaration of the Church to believe that thing firmely and without dispute
but that it is necessary and fundamentall to believe God in all that he saith whether the matter be great or small now Protestants professing to believe nothing necessarily but what may be proved by the Scripture and their differences being in the things which they believe it followes that their differences are in things which are proved by Scripture that are the pure Word of God and the meaning of the Holy Ghost as they use to speak and therefore must needs be in the severall opinions of them that hold them fundamentall and necessary to salvation To instance in some particulars of their disagreement for to speak of all were to enter into a Labyrinth First concerning Scripture it selfe I think they will grant it is a fundamentall point I am sure their learned Hooker doth so Eccles Pol. lib. 1. sect 14. who saith Of things necessary the very chief is to know what books we are bound to esteem holy and as sure I am that in this there is great disagreement for the Lutherans do deny besides those books of the Old Testament which the Calvinists also deny * Châ—mnit exam conc Trid. part 1. pag. 55. also Enchyrid p. 63. the second Epistle of S. Peter the second and third Epistle of S. John the Epistle to the Hebrewes of S. James of S. Jude and the Revelation all which the Calvinists and the Church of England do undoubtedly believe to be the Word of God And if they disagree about their prime Principle how can agreement be expected in the things that they derive from thence Secondly concerning their translation of Scriptures in the truth whereof consists the truth of Gods Word to those that understand it not but as it is translated very great are the disagreements and bitter the reprehensions between Luther and Zuinglius between Calvin and Molineus between Beza and Castalio between legall Protestants and Puritans of England each party condemning the others translation I will instance chiefly in the English The Ministers of Lincoln Diocesse in a book delivered to King James being an abridgement of their grievances say pag. 11.13.14 that the English translation of the Bible is a translation that takes away from the text that addes to the text and that sometimes to the changing or obscuring the meaning of the holy Ghost And Broughton the great Linguist in his Advertisement of Corruptions tels the Bishops that their publique translations of Scripture into English is such as that it perverts the text of the old Testament in 848 places and that it causeth millions of millions to reject the new Testament and to run into eternall flames And yet the translators of the Bible and the Bishops were of another mind or else surely they would not have commended it to the use of the people And what a wofull condition were the people in who must be guided by such a Bible in which either there was certaine falshood or they were not certaine that it was the truth Secondly the Reall presence of Christs body in the Eucharist by consubstantiation and to the bodily mouth of the receiver is affirmed by the Lutherans but denyed by the Calvinists Thirdly that Christ descended into Hell which is an article of the Creed is affirmed by Hill in a Treatise of that subject by Nowell and by many Protestants but is denyed by Carleil in a book written to that purpose and commonly by all Puritans Fourthly Evangelicall Councells are affirmed by Hooker Eccles Pol. l. 3. sect 8. p. 140. but are denyed by Perkins Reformed Cath. p. 241. and most of the Church of England Fiftly concerning the head of the Church or the supreame governour in causes Ecclesiasticall which one would think a fundamentall matter the Church of England holds that the King or Queen when the Kingdome is governed by a Woman is the head thereof but the Church of Helvetia saith f Harmony of Consess p. 308. forward we acknowledge no other head of the Church but Christ and that he hath no deputy on earth and many there are in England of the same opinion who are not afraid to say so now though it be by law a capitall offence Sixtly the government of the Church by Bishops one would think were a fundamentall point for it is affirmed to be jure divino by divine law by many Protestants in England and particularly Bishop Hall wrote a book a few yeares since to that purpose and yet this is denyed by a great party in England as the Bishops by woefull experience do know A hundred other differences might be named in the maintenance whereof books have been written one against another one side holding with the Catholiques so that there is scarce any point of Catholique doctrine but is maintained by some or other Protestants amongst them all almost the whole Catholique doctrine If therefore they differ from the Church of Rome they differ from one another And that their differences are not light but about most important matters in their own opinions being about matters as they conceive revealed in the word of God to which all men are bound to adhere even their persuit of those differences doth plainly demonstrate which stretcheth to the g Luth. con art Louan Thes 27. condemning of one another for Heretiques h Osiander â—pit Eccl. hist cont 16 par altera p. 805. and banishing each other from their severall territories i Hospi hist Sacrament par alt fol. 393. 395. 397. 398. forbidding the reading of each others books imprisoning of their persons and finally breaking into open Arms one against another are not al these tragical particulars to our infinite grief now acted on the stage of England the chief pretence is Religion And surely they are guilty of extreme folly that will fight to the fundamentall overthrow of themselves families for ought they know of the whole Kingdome for matters which they hold not-fundamentall § 4. But the Protestants think to wipe off this staine of disagreement by retorting it upon the Catholiques accusing them of as great disagreement as is amongst themselves which when I considered I found altogether impertinent For amongst Catholiques there are two sorts of points some defined by the Church in a Generall Councell and so infallibly certain others not defined In the former they all exactly agree in the later each man follows the direction of his particular reason Like to this there are amongst Protestants certaine Articles as they call them which are agreed upon in each severall dominion of Protestants which are set down in their Harmony of confessions concerning which first it is to be noted that there is great disagreement in generall betwixt their Churches they never meeting all together in any one Councell to determine any one thing so that they are not united in any one point by consent Then in particular dominions the decrees that they publish are not firmely believed by all under those dominions but are accounted as
one another to this end That the office of a Pastor is alwaies needfull our Saviour implies in calling his people his sheep and sheep without a shepherd are like to be but il provided for and as they are alwaies sheep so they ought alwaies to have a shepherd which office in ordinary being given to S. Peter first ought to continue out of the necessity of the cause thereof so long as the sheep continue which will be to the end of the world Which S. Peter not being now able to doe in person reason requires that it should be done by his Successors The Apostle 1 Cor. 12.21 compares the Church to a body and saith The head cannot say to the feet I have no need of you which cannot be understood of Christ our head for he may truly say to us all that he hath no need of us it must therefore be meant of some Head here on earth which must continue as long as the Church continues a body and that is to the worlds end And that the successors of S. Peter are this Head S. Chrysostome doubts not to affirm who demanding why Christ shed his blood De Saterdot l. 2. initio Leo Serm. 2. de Annivers assump sua ad Pontific answers It was to gaine that flock the care whereof he committed to Peter to Peters successors And S. Leo Peter continues and lives in his Successors And that his successors are the Bishops of Rome is out of doubt none but they ever assuming it to themselves or having it granted by others For the Bishop of Antioch succeeded not S. Peter in the government of the whole Church but of that diocesse for succession to any in his whole right is not but to him that leaves his place either by naturall death deposition or voluntary resignation now S. Peter living and ruling left the Church of Antioch and placed his Sea at Rome where he also died so that he that succeeds him in that Sea must succeed him both as he was Bishop thereof and likewise as he was Head of the whole Church as for the Bishop of Antioch he did never either possesse or pretend to higher than the third place amongst the Patriarchs Cone Nic. Can. 6. Gelasius In decret cum 70. Episcopis affirmes that the Roman Church is preferred before other Churches not by any constitutions of Councells but she obtained Primacy by the Evangelicall voice of our Lord saying thou art 〈◊〉 upon this rock I will build mâ—… 〈◊〉 And S. Hierome in his 59. Epistle 〈…〉 to Pope Damâ—sus saith To 〈◊〉 she 〈◊〉 require from the Priest the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â—â—tion and from the Pastor 〈…〉 I speak with the successor of th◠〈◊〉 shoâ—â— c. I following none but Christ in 〈◊〉 joyned in Communion to your holyn sse that is to the chaire of Peter upon that rock I know the Church to be builded 3. whosoever out of this house eates the lamb is prophane whosoever shall not be in the Ark of Noe shall perish in the deluge And S. Aug. writing to Pope Innocentius Epist 92. saith wee think that by the Authority of your Holynesse derived from the authority of Holy Scriptures they will more easily yeeld who believe such perverse and pernicious things Wherein he derives the Popes authority from the Scriptures And S Bernard writing to Pope Eugenius saith thus Thou alone art not only the Pastor of sheep De consider l. 3 cap. 8. Epist 190. ad Innoc. PP but also of Pastors Thou demandest how I prove this Out of the word of our Lord. For to whom I do not say Bishops but also of the Apostles were all the sheep so absolutely and indeterminately committed Peter if thou lovest me feed my sheep which the people of this or that city country or Kingdome Hee saith my sheep To whom is it not plain that hee did not assigne some but all Nothing is excepted where nothing is distinguished c. To conclude James who seemed a pillar for the Church was content with Jerusalem onely yeelding the universality to Peter And with the Fathers apart doe concur the Fathers united in Councell by whom in many Councells this truth hath been declared as in the Councell of a Sess 14. c. 7. Trent the Councell of Florence b Sess ult the Councell of c Respons Synod de authoritat Conc. general Basil the Councell of d Part. 2. Act. 3. Ephesus the Councell of e Sub. Innoc. 3. e. 5. Lateran the second Councell of f Act. 2. Nice the Councell of g Conc. Chal. Act. 1. Act. 3. tom 2. p. 252 edit Venet. Chalcedon as is easy to shew at large if need required § 3. As for the attempt of the Bishop of Constantinople against the Pope it was not for the Primacy and headship of the Church Catholique but only of the Churches of the East And the title of universall Bishop which he claimed was not with intent of superiority over the Pope but over the other Patriarchs who were all of the Easterne Empire and in association with the Pope for those parts yet with subjection to the Pope acknowledging him the root and stock of the universality even as Menas Patriarch of Constantinople in the time of this contention acknowledges saying Concil Constant sub Men. Act. 4. we will in all things follow and obey the sea Apostolique And as the Emperour and Patriarch both acknowledge as S. Gregory lib. 7. indict 2. ep 93. reports in these words Who is it that doubts but that the Church of Constantinople is subject to the Sea Apostolique which the most religious Lord the Emperour and our brother Bishop of the same city continually protest And if it were true as Protestants imagine that the Bishop of Constantinople contended with the Pope for the absolute Primacy over the Christian world this doth no more prove his right than Perkin Warbecks pretention in the daies of King Henry the seventh did prove his right to the crown of England And certain it is that neither the one nor the other did obtain that which he aspired to but were rejected by the voice of mankind which is an argument that their claim was unjust § 4. Another great objection of Protestants against the Popes Primacy is fetched from S. Gregory who was Pope himselfe and is this That he that intitled himselfe universall Bishop exalted himselfe like Lucifer above his brethren and was a forerunner of Antichrist To the understanding of which words I found that the word universall hath two meanings the one proper literall and grammaticall whereby it signifies Only Bishops excluding all others the other transferred and Metaphoricall whereby it signifies the supreme over all Bishops and S. Gregory censured this title in the first sense because that from hence it would have ensued that there had been but one Bishop only and that all the rest had been but his Deputies and not true Bishops and true Officers of Christ as
he saith l. 7. ind 2. Ep. 96. If there be one that is universall Bishop all the rest are no more Bishops Now S. Gregory maintained that all Bishops were true Bishops Ministers and officers of Christ although concerning jurisdiction they were subordinate the one to the other He therefore that usurps that title wholely to himselfe exalts himselfe with relation to the Episcopall order above his brethren denying him the essence and propriety of Bishops and officers of Christ and makes them only Commissioners to him as if they had the originall of that office from him and not from God And in this sense S. Gregory withstood the title of universall Bishop and not to deny in case of jurisdiction the superiority of one Bishop over another and the Bishop of Rome over all For that he maintaines Lib. 7. ind 2. Ep. 62. saying If there be any crime found in Bishops I know no Bishop but is subject to the Sea Apostolique He also addes for explication of the matter in hand Lib. 4. ind 13. Ep. 32. that The care of the Church hath been committed to the holy Apostle and Prince of all the Apostles S. Peter the care and Principality hath been committed to him and yet he is not called universall Apostle In which words hee ascribes the Primacy and headship of the Church to S. Peter yet denies the universality it must therfore needs be that the word universal in S. Gregories sense in this case is not the deniall of the Primacy of Jurisdiction over the whole Church but of his being the only Apostle as if there were none but he such as should derive their authority originally from him not from God And with application to the Pope it is the denyall of his being the only Bishop as if there were no Bishop in the world but he or such as he should constitute his deputies as from himself and not by command from God and as the Officers of God Moreover the Histories of all ages beat record that the Bishop of Rome hath exercised authority over all other Bishops in the world even in all Forraign Nations both before S. Gregory and after and even in his person and therefore he cannot mean the universall Government when he reproves the title of universall Bishop as by creating them himself by confirming them created by others by deposing them by restoring them being deposed by others by appointing them his Vicars by finall deciding their controversies by accepting their Appeales by making Lawes over all the Church by dispensing with them by inflicting his censures by being President in Generall Councells by calling of Councells so far as concerned the Ecclesiasticall authority which is the chiefest though the Emperours concurred therein in regard of temporall authority and of that only to make them obligatory to the secular tribunall and executory by the Ministry of the Officers of the Emperour as witnesseth the sixt Generall Councell Act 18. speaking of the first Generall Councell of Nice which saith The most sacred Constantine and the Praise-worthy Sylvester called the famous Councell of Nice which may also be proved of all the rest And by the saying of Athanasius ad solit That an Emperour presiding in Ecclesiasticall judgements is the Abomination of Desolation fore-told by Daniel And of Osius the Bishop of Cordua in an Epistle of his to Constantius the Emperour Go not about to meddle in Ecclesiasticall affairs and command not us in such matters but rather learne of us God hath committed the Empire to thee and the government of the Church to us And by the Protestation of the Emperour Constantine Pogonat sent to Rome for the holding of the sixth Generall Councell I will not sit as Emperour amongst them I will not speak imperiously In Epist Greg. 2. ad Leon. Imp. Ep. 1. but as one of them and what the Prelates shal ordain I will execute All which do undoubtedly prove the Pope of Rome both by divine and humane Law and by the right of prescription in all ages to be the supreme Pastor and Head of the Church And all the objections urged by Calvin all other invaders of this Sea are but like water furiously beating against a Rock broken into drops and forced creepingly to recoile and to foame and cry through shame and indignation at their vaine and impossible attempts impossible indeed unlesse they have more force then the gates of hell for they shall never prevaile against this Rock CHAP. XXI That English Protestants do much mistake Catholique Doctrine being abused by the malice or ignorance of many of their Ministers And that upon their owne grounds they are obliged to inform themselves more exactly of the truth § 1. AFter all these fore-going considerations for my more explicite satisfaction I descended to the examination of all the particular Doctrines in controversie betwixt the Church of Rome and the Protestants whom I found in all things to be exceedingly over-weighed both by Scripture Councells Fathers and reason Of which I will say no more than I have done but onely to shew in some few particulars how our poore English people are abused by their ordinary Preachers and made to believe monstrous things of the Doctrine and practice of the Church of Rome who for the most part stating the question false and laying to the Catholiques charge the things that they do not teach raise an error out of their own fancy and then fight against it most couragiously under the title of Popery And every young Minister is so valiant herein that he thinks he baffles the most learned Cardinall Bellarmine as Goliah thought he could have done David and in this case for the most part the most ignorant and imprudent are the forwardest And this I add to rectifie the opinions of the lesse learned and to reconcile them so far to the Catholique doctrines as to believe they are not so monstrous as they are vulgarly imagined First then they tell the people that the Papists as they call them are Idolaters in that they worship Images stockes and stones little painted babies and puppets with many such like titles wherewith they make themselves merry and then alledge all the places of the Scripture or Fathers wherein the Idolatry of the Heathen is reproved Now it is most certain that this is an unjust charge against Catholiques first because the worship of Images and Idolls is not all one seeing the words are of different signification as is manifest by those places where it is said Let us make man after our Image Gen. 1.26 And a man ought not to cover his head because he is the image and glory of God 1 Cor. 11.7 with many the like wherein if they say that Image Idoll were all one they must say also that when God made Adam hee made to himselfe an Idoll Secondly Catholiques doe not worship Images as God which the Heathen and Jewes when they had committed Idolatry did as appears by Elias who saith
do yea and more commanding things impossible and then punishes us for not doing them which is most tyrannicall Now if God do not require all but only thus much to do well then the doing better than well is a stock which God of his great bounty gives us to improve for our selves in a higher measure and to offer him liberalities beyond the bond of duty And what pride is it for man to acknowledge this sweet providence of his creator to praise his merciful indulgence in not exacting so much as he might but giving him a way means to shew his voluntary unexacted love to him Especially believing that this divine favour not to exact the uttermost of mans performance and consequently mans ability to present to God more perfect and excellent service than he requires is given through the merits of Christ § 8. But above all the Reall presence is the prodigie of opinions in the conceipt of Protestants whose playnnesse in Scripture notwithstanding leaves not where to adde to it with cleerer proofe as appeares by Christs words of institution This is my body so often repeated Mat. 26.26 Mar. 14.22 Luc. 22.19 They fight against it therfore with arguments drawn from the power of nature think because it exceeds the power of nature therfore it cannot be To whom it may be said as our Saviour said to the Jews who thought that mens bodies in heaven were like their bodies here on earth ye erre not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God Mat. 22.29 And why then do Protestants believe that God was in the form of a man a thing as impossible in nature as for God man together to be under the form of bread or wine And because they would make sure work if they could the former objection being in the opinion of many of them insufficient they say that it doth not only exceed the power of nature but of God also in that it implies a contradiction but this the most learned of them have never been able to prove nor never will I hope they will all take Luthers judgement herein whom they will not deny to be learned enough to discerne a contradiction Tom. Wittemb 1557. defens verb. Coenae fol. 388 and he saith what Scripture have they to prove that these two Propositions be directly contrary Christ sitteth in heaven Christ is in the Supper The contradiction is in their carnall imagination not in faith or the word of God They also fright the people from this belief by presenting to them the uncomlinesse and inconveniences that may ensue which objections are but raked out of the ashes of the old Heathen and Heretiques who made the like against Gods taking our flesh upon him as that it was undecent that God should lie in a womans womb nine moneths that he should be circumcised whipt and spit upon and finally suffer a most shamefull and painfull death But seeing Protestants doe believe that Christ when he was on earth was subject to all humane infirmities except sin why should his liablenesse to such infirmities make them forbear to believe that he is in the Sacrament But to acquit them of that trouble they may take notice that Christs body in the Sacrament is not subject to those inconveniences that it was before his death because it is now a glorified body and not subject to suffer any thing For as the Sun shining on a dunghill is not defiled therewith and as the Deity it selfe is every where and yet suffers no infection from the foulnesse of any place So the body of Christ being immortall and impassible cannot be defiled or hurt with the touch or impression of any unclean or hurtfull thing more than a man can hurt or defile a Spirit for of that nature are all glorified bodies as the Apostle saith It is sowen a naturall body it shall rise a spirituall body 1. Cor. 15.44 So that in this respect Protestants have more reason to believe the reall presence of Christs body in the Sacrament than that he once had a reall body conversant here on earth But some of them againe do acknowledge as they say themselves the Reall presence of Christs body in the Sacrament and therein seem to be Catholiques and please themselves in seeming to be so and think we can desire no more but they do but cozen both themselves and us for when their Presence is sifted we find no reality in it They say that Christ is really present in the Sacrament but not corporally or bodily by which bodily they mean either that his body it selfe is not there or that it is not there with the circumstances and accidents of a body as quantity and the like If they mean the former to wit that he is really there and yet his body is not there I would faine know how this may be For a body to be really in any thing must fignifie to be bodily or in body there or nothing Therefore to say that Christ is really there who is a body and yet not there bodily is the contradiction they speak of and is in their reall presence not in the Catholiques For it is as much as if they should say his body is there and it is not there If by not bodily they mean not with the accidents of his body as quantity figure and the like and that so Christ is not bodily in the Sacrament but spiritually that is after the nature of a Spirit then they agree with Catholiques who say the same and in this sense he may be and is both corporally and spiritually present in the Sacrament Now if by really they mean in regard of his Deity which is every where this is true but is not the true meaning of really for he is no more there in this sense than he is every where else so their confession of a reall presence imports nothing distinctly and is but a delusion For Christ being a man as wel as God the body of a man as wel as the Godhead concurring to the making of his person he that is whole Christ and unseparated cannot be said to be any where really unlesse he be there also bodily and if his body be there his body is by us received and that not only spiritually that is under the conditions of a Spirit or spiritually by receiving the grace of his holy Spirit into our Spirits and souls but also corporally in regard of himselfe who is a body and in regard of us who receive his body into our bodies and this not by faith but with faith that is not by an imaginary conceipt that he is there or that the benefits of his passion are conveyed to the receiver that thinks so which is the Protestant saith in this case but with faith that is faith and charity also abiding in our souls without which though we doe receive him truly really yet we do not receive him worthily profitably But according to the Protestant
in you Joh. 6.54 And taking the Chalice he gave thanks and gave to them saying drinke ye all of this Mat. 26.27 Also In like manner the Chalice after he had supped saying this Chalice is the New Testament in my blood this do ye as often as yee shall drinke in remembrance of me 1 Cor. 11.25 But none of these places rightly understood nor any other do prove what the Protestants pretend to Particularly to the first of these places I answer that seeing the Protestants do generally interpret this Chapter of S. John not of receiving the Sacrament of the Eucharist but onely of believing in Christ it is no objection for them but because most Catholique Divines do interpret it of the Blessed Sacrament it is an objection against us to which therefore I further answer First that all words of Scripture that in their forme seem to import a Precept do not so indeed as where our Saviour saith to his Apostles that they ought to wash one anothers feet Joh. 13.14 yet no man ever held it for a matter of necessity But supposing for the present that it include a Precept I further answer that as we distinguish in the Sacrament the substance and the manner the substance being to receive Christ the manner to receive him in both kinds by formall eating and drinking So the same distinction is to be made in our Saviours Precept about this Sacrament For howsoever his words may sound of the manner of receiving in both kinds yet his intention is to command no more than the substance to wit that we really receive his body and blood which may be done under one kind The truth whereof will appeare if we consider first the occasion of the words objected which was the incredulity of the Capernaites whose doubt was not whether the Sacrament was to be given in one or both kinds but as Protestants still doubt whether he could give us his flesh to eat Secondly the manner of his speech which was not by making mention of any kind at all in the said words but only of the things themselves for he doth not say unlesse you eat the bread and drink the wine you have no life but unlesse you eat the flesh and drink the blood both which are equally contained under either bread or wine So that if a man receive the forme of bread only or of wine only he doth therein both eat and drinke the flesh and blood of Christ. And in other places of this Chapter where he makes mention of one kind it is of bread only and not at all of wine so that this place is of no force for the forme of wine unlesse the body and blood of Christ be separated and that receiving the form of bread we receive the body onely and of wine the blood only which must suppose Christ still dead which is most impious and impossible § 5. And if any think that because it is said unlesse you drinke therefore Christ must be received under a forme that may be drunke as well as eaten or else it is not drinking his blood but eating his blood as well as his body I answer it is called eating and drinking not so much in regard of the action as the subject so that flesh being the usuall subject of eating when the Sacrament is called flesh the action is called eating and blood being the usuall subject of drinking when there is mention of receiving the blood the action is called drinking and we are not bound to receive him in a drinkable forme because we are bid to drink his blood but we may be said to drink because we receive that which is in its nature drinkable to wit blood which we doe when we receive the body And if this will not serve the turn they may further argue against us that if we swallow the Host whole we do not eat it eating implying chewing more or lesse and so do not fulfill the precept of eating the flesh And we may argue in like manner against them that if they do not take wine enough to make a draught they do not drinke but onely tast or sip thereof and therein also do not fulfill that which they think they are here commanded But as a Protestant I suppose if the bread and wine should be so mixed together in a cup that both might be drunk together or else eaten with a spoon or in the manner of a moist piece of past or swallowed like a pill will believe that he receives in both kinds and fulfills this in his opinion Precept of drinking the blood So the body and blood being joyned together in either kind to us that believe Transubstantiation we receive both when we receive either kind which act of receiving with relation to the flesh may be called eating to the blood drinking yea though it should be taken in such a manner as strictly speaking should bee neither eating nor drinking I adde moreover with relation to them that do not believe Transubstantiation that the conjunctive particle And doth frequently signifie disjunctively that is Or For example the Apostle saith Acts 3.6 Silver and gold have I none where it is manifest that the sense is silver or gold I have none for if he had had either he had had no excuse of want for his not giving of almes So also S. Paul speaketh of this very Sacrament 1 Cor. 11.29 27. He that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh judgment to himselfe which he interpreteth in the same Chapter saying Whosoever shall eat this bread or drink the cup of our Lord unworthily In like manner those words Except ye eat the flesh and drink the blood if they be taken for eating and drinking under the severall formes of bread and wine are to be understood disjunctively thus Except ye eat the flesh or drink the blood of the sonne of man you shall not have life in you Which disjunctive sense is proved to be the sense intended in this place because else Christ should contradict himself for he promiseth in this same Chapter life eternall to eating only He that eateth me the same shall live by me and he that eateth this bread shall live for ever now if he require unto life eternall eating and drinking both under distinct forms and kinds it is manifest he should contradict himselfe and because this is impossible we must necessarily interpret this place with relation to the severall formes of bread and wine disjunctively thus unlesse you eat or drink The second text urged for Communion in both kinds is Drinks ye all of this Mat. 26.27 which being rightly understood will appeare to be spoken neither to all mankind as to Jewes Turks Infidells as Protestants also acknowledge nor yet to all the faithfull but to all the Apostles and to them all only Which is manifest out of the Text it self for what one Evangelist saith was commanded to all another relates to have been answerably performed by all They drank all
of which prophanation there hath been over frequent experience CHAP. XXIII Of the Liturgie and private prayers for the ignorant in an unknowne tongue § 1. PRayer in an unknowne tongue hath two branches one concerning publique prayer in a tongue which the people that are present doe not understand the other private prayer in a tongue which the party praying doth not understand both which Protestants think absurd in reason and contrary to Scripture but Catholiques beleeve truly that they are neither For maintenance whereof let us consider the meaning of S. Paul 1 Cor. ch 14. the place by them violently but impertinently objected against us We must then know that as the gift of tongues was given to the Apostles by the Holy Spirit when he in the shape of tongues desended upon them so the same gift with divers others was continued amongst the Christians for some time after This gift amongst the other they did exercise in their publique Church-meetings where they assembled for the benefit edification of the hearers speaking some extemporary prayer or other holy discourse both for matter and language as the Spirit gave them utterance with great affection elevation of the mind towards God Yea the language many times was such as no man present understood as is intimated verse 2. for he that speaketh in an unknowne tongue c. no man understands him no nor many times did the speaker understand himselfe for the gift of tongues and the gift of interpretation of tongues were two distinct gifts as we see in the 12. ch and did not alwaies meet together as we may gather from the 13. verse of this chapter where the Apostle exhorteth him that speaketh in an unknowne tongue to pray that he may interpret which was a signe that ordinarily they could not by verse 14. where he saith If I pray in a tongue my spirit prayeth but my understanding is unfruitfull now this must be meant of a tongue which he himself did not understand otherwise his own understanding could not be unfruitful And thus also doth S. Augustine de Genes ad lit lib. 12. cap. 8.9 and other Fathers interpret S. Paul By this it is manifest that the Apostle doth not here reprove the practise of the Church of Rome in her Latine Liturgie directly seeing this here reproved and that are extreamly different Therefore ours can be only so far reprovable as it agrees with the other in the reasons for which it was reproved which are want of interpretation therby want of edification to the auditors of sufficient warrant to the unlearned through want of understanding of what was said to say thereto Amen Now seeing ours doth not agree with that in any of these it is therefore irreproveable Yet if it should agree with that in any of these it should not notwithstanding be unlawfull because they differ in the maine and principall part the end for these Church-meetings were intended for the instruction edification of the auditors therefore it was fit the exercises thereof should be in a tongue which they that were to be instructed understood but the publike Liturgie of the Church was instituted for the service praise of God therfore may be without unlawfulnesse in any tongue that he understands to whom it is dedicated The truth of all this will appear if we consider the differences between that case and ours The languages then spoken were utterly unknowne many times to any man there present even to the speaker himself but the Liturgie of the Church is in a language or languages known to very many as the Latin in the Latin Church to all Scholars to most Gentlemen youths bred in Grammer Schools in some countries to most Mechanicks it cannot therfore absolutely be said to be an unknown tongue And though it cannot be proved unlawful to have the Liturgie in a tongue absolutely unknowne yet where the Latin tongue hath been unknowne to all or most of the better sort the Church hath dispensed with the use thereof as appears by the dispensation of Pope Paul 5. to turn the Liturgie of the Masse into the vulgar language of China to use the same until the Latin tongue grew more known familiar in that country Moreover the prayers other spiritual excercises which S. Paul speaks against were extemporall made in publike meetings according to the present inspired devotion of the speaker So that the unlearned hearer or he that supplied his place the Clark except he understood the language consequently the matter could not prudently say Amen to it seeing he knew not whether the thing that was spoken were good and lawfull or no. But the Liturgie Service of the Church hath set offices for every day approved by the Church therefore from hence a man may be confidently assured that it is good lawfull and therefore he may boldly say Amen Besides there are means applied to the ignorant multitude by which they are or may be if they use diligence therein made to understand the publike Prayers of the Church namely Sermons Exhortations Catechismes private instructions Manualls Primers in vulgar languages where the Prayers used in the Church are found So that the ordinary common passages of the publike Service may be and are easily understood even by women children they may understandingly say Amen Therefore as the Apostle did allow of an unknowne tongue in the exercises of the Corinthians provided there were some to interpret it so the Service in Latin is very allowable even under this notion while there are the aforesaid meanes used for the interpretation thereof And the Congregation is edified as the Apostle appoints it should be by the things that are done said in the Church while the people have but a generall understanding of the severall passages thereof And if they were in a vulgar language the difference for matter of understanding would be but in a little more or lesse for that every woman boy girl in a Church should be able to understand word by word the Liturgie therof be it in what language it will is morally impossible seeing there are great store of words in every tongue in common use amongst the better sort which common people do not understand And suppose this might be avoided in those parts of the Liturgie which are composed by the Church by making choice of the most vulgar words that might be found yet it is impossible to be so in that which makes the greatest part of the Liturgie to wit the Scripture And if yet all the words of the Scripture could be bowed to their understanding for the Grammatical signification thereof yet without all paradventure the sense which is the chiefe thing to be understood and for which only the language doth serve by reason of the innumerable figurative speeches therein is altogether impossible For example let any unlearned Englishman say whether these following places in English for so
God upon their soules but to remain in the Protestant Communion by the private instigations of flesh and blood Who wanting the seasoning of Charity doe warp and shrink from that to which their judgement hath joyned them Whose faith like bullion though it be good metall in it selfe yet wanting the stamp of of Catholique Communion and obedience is not currant in the Kingdome of heaven nor will serve in their journey to defray them thither But they according to the condition of all weak minds accounting the Present evill as losse of goods friends and the like the most intolerable desire to avoid that and put to adventure the ensuing And so while they saile through the troublesome Sea of this life unskilfull of steerage in a storme do strike and split their soules upon the flats of fear and rocks of presumption forgetfull of that dreadfull threatning of our Saviour He that shall deny mee before men shall be denyed before the Angells of God Luc. 12.9 Now to the diligence of examination before mentioned for those that are not yet convinced in their judgements a Protestant is bound by Chillingworths owne rule who though he say that for as much as there is no infallible guide and that therefore a man must follow the choice of his own reason in what he doth believe and that God will be contented with that be it more or lesse true or false being as much as he can attain to yet addes withall that a man must imploy his uttermost endeavours to the finding out of the truth And who is it amongst the Protestants that hath done that Who hath spent all his spare time much lesse who hath spared all the time he could to this enquiry I think no Protestants conscience can acquit him in this case and if not he must not think to quiet himselfe by saying that to the best of his understanding the Protestant Religion seemes true if he have not imployed all his endeavours to find whether it be so or no which cannot be unlesse with King Philip of Macedon he keep one ear for the party accused hee equally heare both sides Wherefore devesting themselves of all prejudice and prepossessed opinions like white paper wherein there is nothing written let them addresse themselves with all their spare time yea they ought to make spare time rather than to want it to a sad and serious consideration of the great businesse of Religion the truth whereof who so gaines though with the losse of all temporall felicity doth highly improve his estate considering that as our Saviour saith what will it profit a man to gain the whole world and to lose his owne soule Math. 16.16 And let no man defer this most important affaire and put it off to the later end of his life which how soon it will happen the youngest know not as if the Kingdome of heaven were like a market cheapest at the later end of the day or that because nature hath placed the seat of his memory in the hindermost part of his head therefore he may defer the remembrance of God and of comming to him by the path of true Religion to the hindermost part of his life But as God himselfe saith while it is called to day harden not your hearts Psal 94.8 lest his delay pull upon himselfe the forsaking of God and steel his forehead to the perpetuall refusall of his mercifull invitation and so he and especially the Citty of London which hath been purpled with the blood of so many martyrs hear the complaint and curse of our Saviour sounding in his eare O Jerusalem Jerusalem which killest the Prophets and stonest them that are sent to thee how often would I have gathered thy children as the hen gathereth her chickens under her wings and you would not behold your habitation shall be left unto you desolate Math. 23.37 CHAP. XXII Of the foolish deceitfull and absurd proceedings and behaviour of Protestants in matter of Religion And of the vanity and injustice of their pretext of conscience for their separation from the Roman Church § 1. HE that will apply himself to this inquest as I have done shall find that the objections of Protestants against Catholique Doctrines are very weak and sleight they are but paper-pellets and make more noise than hurt the workes also that they raise for their owne defence are as weak and easily dismantled I found that their objections were answered again and again which a later writer would take no notice of but retrive the first arguments and urge them as fresh as if they had never been urged before or at least had never been answered forgetting to make reply to the Catholique Answers which was indeed because they could not do it And in their writings I found much abuse of all Authors even from the Bible it self to the Authors of latest times either misalledging the words â—or misconstruing the meaning or urging that for their purpose which was indeed to no purpose § 2. Particularly for their mistranslating of Scripture wherein they grievously accuse one another as I shewed before I will alledge two or three places of a great many for a tast wherein their unfaithfulnesse is apparent as first that notable depravation of their Master Luther which I have mentioned before in adding the word only where the Apostle saith that a man is justified by faith without the works of the Law Rom. 3.28 Also where the Apostle saith give diligence by good works to make your calling and election sure 2 Pet. 1.10 the English Bibles leave out these words by good works and yet Beza in his notes upon the place acknowledges these words to be in almost all the antient Greek Copies Also in the same Chapter fifteenth Verse these words are read according to the originall I will do my diligence also you to have often after my decease that you may have a remembrance of these things shewing thereby that he would pray for them after he was dead as S. Chrysostome expounds it saying Rejoyce ever you blessed Apostles in our Lord without intermission pray for us fulfill your promises for ô Blessed Peter thou cryest out speaking thus I will do my diligence after my coming to make mention of you 2 Pet. 1.10 Now the English Bibles read this place thus Moreover I will indeavour that you may be able after my decease to have these things alwaies in remembrance corrupting the sense and making it signifie only that he would indeavour that they should remember those things when he was dead whereas he saith that he would indeavour after he was dead that they should remember those things and thereby it proves that he prayed for them after be was dead a Doctrine which many Protestants will not allow Also in the first Epistle to the Corinthians Chap. 11. v. 27. where the Apostle saith whosoever shall eat this bread or drink the cup of the Lord unworthily shall be guilty of the body and bloud of the Lord the
English translates it thus whosoever shall eat this bread and drink the cup of the Lord unworthily putting and for or thereby making the Apostle speak of the receiving of the bread and wine unworthily in an united sense whereas he speakes of them in a divided sense Thus in very many places do they deal with the Scripture like the Elephant when he goes to drink who troubles the cleer water with his feet because he will not see the deformity of his face So they trouble and defile the sense of Scripture either in words or exposition because they would not see the deformity of their Errors Many falsifications also and corruptions of Catholique Authors by the Protestant writers I have met with as where they speaking something by way of supposition they alledge them as if they speak it positively and absolutely where they bring the objections of Heretiques they alledge them as speaking the words in their owne names where they relate with reprehension the sayings of wicked men they alledge them as saying those words themselves which is as if they should charge S. Mathew himselfe with the words of the Pharisees against our Saviour Behold a glutton and a drinker of wine Math. 11.19 But I will not be particular in this matter because many that have been guilty in this case have been called to a strict account by their Catholique answerers And when they are pressed by Catholiques with plaine and direct proofes O what serpentine wriglings and windings to escape the assaulters doe they make O what perverse ridiculous contradictory answers and evasions do some of them make in which they doe at once shew both much wit and much folly for fooles could not speak as they doe and wise men would not In so much that a Answer to a Jesuites challenge chapt of limb Patrum Bishop Vsher Primat of Armagh a very learned man to avoid the confession of Christs descent into hell according to the Article of the Creed in the plaine sense thereof doth so turn it and winde it that he makes the sense of the words He descended into hell to be He ascended into heaven to such pittifull refuges doth the weaknesse of a bad cause drive them And thus they that have the most learning amongst them being by unhappy accident bred up in an erroneous Religion and thereby presuming it to be true do bend all the endeavours of their learning to the maintenance of their errors and the obscuring of the truth which learning if it were directed to the right end might by just title claime a place in the first file of desert even like a torch which turned downward is extinguished with that wax which held upward would make it bright and glorious But though their learning were a hundred times doubled yet as Aarons serpent devoured the Magicians serpents Exod. 7.12 so the wisedome of God which is in his Church will confound the sensuall wisdome of all her opposers seeing there is no wisdome nor prudence nor councell against God Prov. 21.30 § 3. I further observed that the arguments of Protestants for themselves were very fallacious most frequently in that which the Logicians call FALLACIA CONSEqUENCIA which is when the consequence is not justly inferred for example they argue thus the Sacrament is called a figure of Christs body therefore it is not his true and reall body which is a false Consequence for it may be both even as Christ is called a figure of the substance of his father Heb. 1.3 and yet is also the same substance Christ saith come unto me therefore we may go to no body else which is false for we may go to him and others also The Apostle saith that we are Justified by faith therefore say they not by works whereas we are justified by both We must confesse our sinnes to God therefore not to a Priest whereas wee must do both Christ is the head of the Church therefore the Pope is not whereas both are in severall capacities The like might be said in many others by which kind of arguing unlearned people are exceedingly deluded think that while one thing must be done that must be done only the veine of that word only invented by Luther in the matter of justification by faith running through the whole body of their Religion § 4. Moreover I found this contradiction amongst the Patrons of Protestancy that some of them reject the Fathers and accuse them of being infected with the errors which prevailed in their times and what were their errors even all that they taught contrary to their Protestant doctrines so making themselves the rule to judge the Fathers by and not the Fathers which any wise man would think more fit a rule to themselves who no doubt knew the Scriptures also and what was agreable or contrary to them better than they Protestants being herein like carpenters who wear their rule at their backs casting behind them neglecting those that should guide their belief But other Protestants ashamed of this insolency pretend for the credit of their cause that the Fathers are altogether on their side and then with much labour hunt out some obscure passages most liable to be wrested and triumph therein as if they had found a demonstration which when they are sifted either they make nothing for them or else quite against them who in this case are like to a man ready to be drowned who to save himselfe will catch hold on a naked sword with which he cuts his fingers So Protestants sunk into the despaire of their cause think to save themselves by that which serves but to encrease their overthrow They pretend also to answer many plaes of the Fathers alledged by Catholiques and to give their words a Protestant meaning and thereby run the Fathers into manifest contradiction of themselves in regard that the Fathers have but some oblique passages which seem and but seem to make for them as whoever spake so exactly nay who can possibly speak so exactly as that his words may not be made to seem different from his meaning but they have whole Bookes Sermons Tractates and a world of dispersed places of purpose in the maintenance of Catholique truths And though they say that the Fathers taught Protestant doctrine and they give a Protestant sense though very incongruous to many of the places of the Fathers alledged by Catholiques yet they dare not use those words and Phrases of the Fathers as of the Masse the Altar the Sacrifice concerning reall presence prayers to Saints and for the dead merits satisfaction and Purgatory with the like in their prayers Sermons and books which if they speak Protestant Doctrine in the true sense of the Fathers as they say they do why do they not with the sense make use of the words and speeches also I can conceive no other reason but for fear the peoples understandings not so fraught with prejudice nor acquainted with their uncouth evasions should carry them