demonstratiue assent of him self being the Author and Reuealer of the Christian doctrin it is so far from being fit the Doctors of his Church should conuict Pagans or heretiks by cleerly euidencing to them God reuealed the sauing truthes that it is not possible For though som Diuines haue sayd Faith is consistent with cleer euidence of God hauing reuealed the truth of its obiect because forsooth though the belieuer doth see the truth and by consequence can not doubt of it or be an heretik yet he doth not see it in its proper causes but only in Gods reuelation notwithstanding I say this vnwary opinion of som schoolmen themselues can not well reconcile with it the merit obscurity liberty and obsequiousness of Christian Faith nor shew how 't is possible for any learned Catholik or other man to be an heretik in his iudgment because the malice of Heresy this being an error in the understanding as well as obstinacy in the will consists in doubting or denying inwardly that God did reueal such an article of Faith but if euery learned Catholik doth see by virtue of tradition that he did realy reueal it he can not see nor say the contrary in his mind and by consequence can not be an heretik And yet it s granted on all sides that any learned man without forgetting any part of his learning or knowledge may be an heretik Besides the assent and certainty of Christian Faith doth not enter further vpon its obiect than to say it exists or that the act of Faith is true it medles not with why it exists or with any of its proper or particular causes that is with any reasons why the obiect exists or why the act of Faith is true it is grounded only vpon Gods reuelation and this sayes no more than it is so all other reasons and causes are impertinent as to the nature and vse of Faith Faith being an imperfect knowledge and a total relying vpon the Diuine authority and not vpon the knowledge of proper or any other causes Now it is impossible that the obscurity and nature of Faith can be more or so much destroyd by subsequent euidence impertinent to its end and nature than by an euidence that immediatly and directly opposeth and is inconsistent with its motiue its merit and nature If the act of Faith be not consistent with the cleer sight or euidence of its truth in the proper and particular causes notwithstanding those causes are not its motiue nor considered or toucht by the act or assent of Faith how can its merit obscurity or nature consist and continue with a cleer sight of its truth or of its motiue or which is the same with euidence of the Diuine reuelation This sight or euidence being as destructiue of the obscurity and difficulty wee meet with in assenting to the mysteries and of the trust we repose in God by belieuing which is no less essential to Faith than its truth as it is directly oppofit to the state of obscurity wherin we must be if we trust his word deliuered to vs by the Church as also to the darkness and desguise he must speake to vs in if he will haue vs trust him and merit by Faith or indeed belieue him at all for men do not belieue when they assent to a truth they see or can not deny And it is impossible for them to see that God who is truth itself speakes or reuealeth any mystery without seing also t is truth he speakes or reueals Our aduersaries seem to make the Montebanks saying seing is belieuing the rule of Diuine Faith Q. Vvhy should not the merit of Faith be consistent with the cleer euidence of the truth therof in its proper causes or with cleer euidence of Gods reuealing the mystery belieued Is it not sufficient for a meritorious assent that the VVill applyed the vnderstanding to cleer the difficulties which might retard or suspend the act of Faith before its actual assent Must this assent also meet with obscurity and ouercom a difficulty in saying and not seing that God reuealed what it assents vnto after all our former pains taken in finding out the rule of Faith and examining the nature of Catholik Tradition A. The chief merit of Christian Faith consists in ouercomming the difficulty we find in assenting to more than we see or with more assurāce than wee see there is euidence of truth If we did see or certainly know that God reuealed what we assent vnto by the act of Faith we could not haue that difficulty in assenting to the mysteries therof which we find by experiēce for what difficulty can there be in saying inwardly God reuealed the Trinity or the Trinity is true if we see that God reuealed that mystery and by an immediat consequence that it is true Therfore the proper and immediat merit of an act of Faith as such doth consist in ouercoming the difficulty of actualy assenting that God reuealed the mystery or matter we belieue he did reueale though we see not his reuelation nor any necessary connexion between it and the doctrin tradition or testimony of the Church As for those other difficulties antecedent to this and to the act of Faith which we ouercom and are rather dispositions to make our selues fit to belieue by remouing the obstacles of education and custom or by examining the nature of Tradition and the motiues of credibility than immediat acts of Faith the merit that results from ouercoming those difficulties is not the proper and immediat merit of Faith itself because it is antecedent to it for after all our aforesaid inquiry and examination of the rule and motiues of Faith we find still a great difficulty in assenting actualy or belieuing that God reuealed what Tradition affirms he did this our own experience doth demonstrat and it may be proued by diuers places of holy Scripture as that of Luc. 19. when one hauing bin credibly informed and perhaps seen how Christ wrought many miracles he desired Christ to dispossess his son of a dumb Deuil Christ told him if he could belieue he would deliuer his son from that spirit Vvithout doubt the Father found great difficulty in the very act of Faith whereby he belieued Christs power for though he sayd I do belieue yet he cried out adding Lord help my incredulity And yet this man was very well disposed and informed of Christs power and miracles before he brought his son to him otherwise he would not have taken so much pains to follow him and present his son before him And indeed incredulity as obstinacy also doth suppose as much information and euidence of the motiues of credibility and of the rule of Faith or Tradition as is requisit for the actual assent of Faith otherwise none could be called incredulous or obstinat for not belieuing The faithfull therfore merit and ouercom a great difficulty by the very act of Faith after that all other difficulties precedent to it are cleered or ouercom And
blindness in faith is to pretend a cleer sight of its rules infallibility The Catholik Church acording to St Paul and the Scriptures is a Congregation of men who do not see what they belieue and are led and directed by the holy Ghost in matters of doctrin This Church is euery particular mans immediat Guide because we follow it and hold fast to its testimony and tradition but this Church also hath a Guide the holy Spirit which leads it as Christ sayes into all truth by continualy directing it and assisting in its definitions and decrees Vvhen the four first general Councells defin'd the Diuinity of Christ and of the holy Ghost they did not cleerly see nor demonstrat against heretiks the truth of that doctrin or that God reuealed it For if they had the heretiks could not haue continued heretiks in their iudgments It s therfore fufficient that in the Catholik Church there be Doctors and arguments to demonstrat that all Dissenters or heretiks by not submitting to its doctrin and authority go against reason and the obligation all men haue to embrace that religion which is most likely to be Diuine in regard of greater appearance therin of supernatural signs which Christ sayd his Church should haue than in any other To ground therfore the certainty of Christian Faith or of its rule vpon any euidence which faith itself declares to be fallacious and fallible as it doth declare the euidence of our senses and sensations is in the article of Transubstantiation is to destroy Christianity and therfore Tradition as receiuing its certainty from our sensations can not be a sufficient ground for the certainty of Christian faith Q. I pray resolue your Catholik faith vnto its motiue A. That is don by answering questions Thus. Vvhy do you belieue the mystery of the Trinity or Transubstantiation Because God who can not deceiue nor be deceiued reuealed it How do you know God reuealed it If you speake of cleer knowledge I do not know that God reuealed it But if you will speake properly as a Christian or as a man that vnderstands what we mean by Faith you must not ask how I know but how or why do I belieue that God reuealed it Then I will answer that the testimony or tradition of the Church confirmed with seemingly supernatural signs testifying that God reuealed those mysteries makes it euidently credible he did reueal them But because I know my vnderstanding is so imperfect that I can not pretend to infallibility and my senses are so fallacious that by our sensations we are often mistaken and that faith itself tells us so in the article of Transubstantiation I cant no assent to this article or to the mystery of the Trinity or to any other pretended to be euidently reuealed by virtue of self euident Tradition and infallible sensations with that certainty which Christianity requires vntill I reflect and rely altogether vpon Gods veracity and apply it to the aforesaid testimony and Tradition of the Roman Catholik Church which declares that itself is authorised by God and shews for that authority seemingly supernatural signs to propose as reuealed by him those mysteries and all the other particulars of our Faith Vvhen I compare and apply the Diuine veracity to this testimony of the Church authorised by those signs I assent to all shee proposeth as reuealed by God by this act Notvvithstanding I do not see any cleer euidence or infallible connexion betvven the testimony or signs of the Church and Gods reuealing its doctrin yet because Gods veracity and his auersion from falsood is infinit I do belieue as certainly as I do that God is infinitly inclined to truth that he neuer did nor neuer vvill permit the least falsood to be so authenticaly proposed as his reuelation or vvord as I see euery point of the Roman Catholick doctrin is proposed by the tradition and signs of that Church This general assent is applyed to euery particular article Heer you see that the motiue of our Chatholik Faith is not the Tradition or testimony of the Church but only Gods veracity You see also that the tradition of the Church is the rule of our Faith because it helps and directs vs to reflect and rely more vpon the motiue which is Gods veracity than upon Tradition itself Lastly you see there is no impossibility in assenting by an act of faith with more assurance than there is appearance or euidence of the truth assented vnto because the assurance is not taken from nor grounded vpon the appearance but vpon Gods veracity and his infinit inclination to truth Hence followeth 1. That whosoeuer denyes any one article of Faith whether fundamental or not fundamental belieueth none at all with Diuine or Christian Faith because he slights the motiue therof which is Gods infinit inclination to truth and auersion from falsood to that degree as to be persuaded the Diuinity can permit falsood to be so credibly fatherd vpon itself as the Roman Catholik Church doth its doctrin with so seeming supernatural signs and so constant a Tradition The motiue of Faith being thus once slighted none that so slights it can belieue any thing for its sake or upon its score 2. It followeth That the Tradition and Miracles of the Catholik Church do not make it cleerly euident to us that God reuealed any one article of Christian Faith nay not that fundamental one of the Diuinity of Christ For though Tradition makes it cleerly euident to us there was such a man as Christ and such prodigies as his Miracles and that him self say'd he was God yet that Tradition and those prodigies do not make it cleerly euident to us as it did not to the Iewes that Christ was realy God For if this had bin cleerly euidenc'd to them or us neither Iewes nor Socinians or any other ancient heretiks could haue bin obstinat or heretiks in their iudgments against Christs Diuinity Q. If I do not see an infallible connexion between the assent or rule of Faith and Gods reuelation I must needs see there is no infallible connexion and may say the assent of Faith may be false seing Tradition which is the rule of that assent is fallible On the other side I must sa yt he assent of Faith can not be false So that if Tradition be not so self euident as from it to conclude cleerly the impossibility of Faiths falsood it must be granted that I see Faith is and is not infallible and that Tradition is and is not an infallible Rule A. Though I do not see any infallible connexion between Gods reuelation and the Tradition of the Church or any other rule directing to belieue what he realy â—eueald or which is the same between the assent of Faith and the rule of Faith yet it doth not follow that I must see or say there is no necessary connexion between them For at the same time I do not see that necessary connexion or infallibility I do belieue there is that
make great impression vpon all sorts of people as also relations of miracles credibly reported These impressions and the inspirations which follow them raise doubts and these if not endeuored to be cleered are a sufficient cause of damnation The doubts which are raised in ourselues by the example or the discourse of others who haue no design vpon us but the saluation of our souls are also damnable to us if we neglect the cleering of them by all the wayes that a buisness of so great importance doth require And the more diligent we must be in the search by how much more the persons interested in maintaining our persuasion I mean such as liue by the ministery therof deterr us from so rational a scrutiny which they would neuer dissuade us from if they did not feare a discouery of their own wickedness and of their causes weakness Q. I pray sir apply this discourse to the Protestants and Roman Catholiks of England A. I beg your pardon sir I am loath to offend the Parliament But I will apply it to the Arians and Roman Catholiks of Spain The Heir of that Croun Prince Hermenegild hauing bin bred an Arian doubted of the truth of that pretended reformation this doubt was ocasioned by the discourse he had with St Leander Archbishop of Seuil At length he was conuinc't of the falsood of that Arian heresy and reconciled to the Roman Catholik Church The King his Father would needs haue him receiue the Arian communion which the Prince refusing to do the wicked Father for fear of his people sacrified the Heir apparent of the Croun to their fury and caused him to be murthered This change to and constancy in the Roman Catholik Religion together with a report of som miracles wrought so much upon all the people of Spain that a litle after they all turned Catholiks and a law was made that none but Catholiks should haue employment in that Kingdom Hence you may inferr what strong influence the example of a religious and resolute Prince hath euen vpon the most uulgar iudgments and how damnable it is in all people not to examin the motiues of so edifying a conuersion as that wherby one hazards and waues the greatest temporal interest and how certain it is that God will punish as well in this world as in the next all such as resist or neglect the impressions and inspirations which men feel in themselues to follow a religion so generously professed and preferrd before all the greatness and glory of an Imperial Croun Q. If Princely suffering vpon the score of conscience be so great a miracle why shall not the Lady Iane Grayes suffering and Queen Elizabeths also for the Protestant religion be miracles and confirm that profession as the true Catholik Add to these the patience and constancy of those glorious Protestant Martyrs recounted by Iohn Fox in his Acts and Monuments SECT II. OF THE DIFFERENCE BETVVEEN Catholik constancy and heretical obstinacy and vvherin doth each consist A Your obiection is material and I shal endeuor to answer it as cleerly and in as few words as I can but depending of a proper notion of heresy it inuolues som difficulty Experience and history hath proued almost in euery age that som heretiks suffer with as great resolution all Kind of torments and death itself for their false religion as Catholiks do for the true one And yet we all agree in terming the heretiks resolution obstinacy and the Catholiks constancy The reason is because the heretik suffers for adhering to a particular opinion and to his own priuat iudgment The Catholik for conforming himself to the belief of the uniuersal Church and for submitting his iudgement to the same Therfore St Paul sayes that an heretik is condemned by his own proper iudgment 2. Petr. 1. 2. No profecy of Scripture is made by priuat interpretation and St Peter tells us that the true interpretation of Scripture is not that of a priuat man but of the Church And the very word Heresy signifies a particular choyce or a wilfull diuision and declining from the first doctrin This supposed there can be no difficulty in declaring why an heretik may without any miracle suffer with great resolution the greatest torments for maintaining his heresy Because men are naturaly inclined to follow their own opinions and to maintain their own choice and therfore we see what endeuors are used in vain to persuade an humorsom and wilfull man or woman to recall any foolish Act they did of their own heads and how hard it is to conuince them that it was ill don Now euery heretik makes his religion his own act not by an humble submission of his iudgment to the Church as Catholiks do but by a proud preference of his own vnderstanding before that of all others This needs no other proof than that pitty which euery pittifull Protestant euen the women hath of the most learned Roman Catholiks ignorance and Idolatry In this pride and preference of their proper iudgment and in the wilfulness of continuing in their own choice doth consist the obstinacy of heretiks as the constancy of Catholiks takes its denomination from that religious perseuerance which is grounded vpon so rational a resolution as it is to submit and stick to the doctrin of a Church signalised with so many supernatural and uisible marks of being trusted by God to teach and preach the true Catholik Faith as hath bin demonstrated in the 5. Chap. Q. I grant that the difference between Catholik constancy and heretical obstinacy is that this is a more wilfull than rational adherency to a mans proper opinion or to a priuat interpretation of Scripture against the testimony and tradition of the Church and Catholik constancy is a religious perseuerance in a resolution of submitting our iudgments to the same Church but how will you make it appeare that our Protestant interpretation of Scripture is a priuat one or that we are guilty of pride seing we follow the interpretation of the Church of England and submit our iudgments therunto A. I will make that heretical obstinacy appeare in those very Protestant Saints and Martyrs which Iohn Fox doth celebrat for their constancy And to begin as you do with the most innocent of them all the Lady Iane Grey shee did wilfully choose and preferr before the Catholik a new religion or an interpretation of Scripture that was not as old as herself though she was very yong It had bin hatcht by Cranmer and confirmed by the Parliament of Ed. 6. but some fiue years before she suffered and was then Known and declared by an other Parliament 1. Mar. to be heresy and contrary to the publik sense and continual tradition of the Catholik Church and therfore was called by the Protestants themselues a Reformation of the old doctrin So that though the Church and Parliament of England in the reign of K. Ed. 6. called it à Common prayer or a publik worship yet was it
declared by the Parliament of Q. Mary a bundel of Cranmers errers and priuat opinions which himself and som few others inuented or borrowed from Luther and Caluin and other Innouators who had resolued to make themselues popular and powerfull by setting vp their own priuat interpretations of Scripture and opinions for points of Religion So that though all England or a greater part of the world than England is should embrace that Reformation and submit their iudgments to that Church their protestant Tenets are still priuat opinions and the submission of their iudgments to the same doth still inuolue that pride and preference of their own choice of a nouelty or new interpretation of Scripture before the ancient doetrin and against the publik testimony of all precedent English Parliaments as also against the tradition of the Catholik Church As for Queen Elizabeth shee accommodated her religion to the times untill shee got the Croun and then shee made use of the new Faith to serue her turn and secure her interest Indeed Iohn Fox his Martyrs were great but foolish sufferers their ignorance was proportion'd to their obstinacy they cast themselues into the fire without Knowing wherfore And yet Iohn Fox sayes those Tinkers Tanners and silly women confuted the Bishops that endeuored to saue their liues which themselues had forfeited acording to the ancient lawes of the land And though they dyed not Martyrs yet they dyed like Englishmen that is with as litle concern and as great courage as if their cause had bin better But this is no miracle in England though the foolish partiality of Iohn Fox his pen doth endeuor to make his Protestant Readers mistake those proud mad fellows for pious Martyrs Q. Though I do approue of your difference between heretical obstinacy and Catholik constancy yet I must still condemn your application therof to protestancy and popery for an other reason which is that Protestancy is so far from inuoluing pride that the Church of England doth not as much as pretend to be infallible in its doctrin neither doth it exact from its children a submission of their iudgments to itself but only to Scripture And I hope there is as much humility I am sure there is more safety in submitting our iudgments to Gods written word as to the tradition of the Roma Catholik Church A. As I commend the Church of Englands modesty and ingenuity in acknowledging its fallibility and in dispensing with the submission of your iudgments to the same no fallible Church can exact or expect a submission of iudgment in any points of doctrin so must I continue in my opinion of the pride and obstinacy of protestancy 1. Because you will not belieue any thing inculcated to you by God vnless it be deliuered to you in writing as if the Diuine maiesty had not as much right to command by orders intimated to us by word of mouth as by his writing All the true belieuers of the world vntill Moyses his law were gouernd by the testimony and tradition of the Church without any writing or Scriptures neither is any thing written in the old or new Testament wherupon Protestants may with any color of probability ground their pretended priuilege of not belieuing any thing but Scripture and this doth in many places tell them they are as much obliged to belieue Tradition or Gods unwritten word as the written Now why Englishmen and som Northen people alone should refuse to obey the Catholik Church vnless it shewes for euery particular Gods order in writing is not intelligible themselues and all other Nations owning the contrary to be prudently practised in all human gouernments This must be pride and obstinacy 2. The pride and obstinacy of this their pretended priuilege which is the life and fundation of all Protestant Reformations is further discouered by the practise of aprinciple wherin all Protestants agree which is that not one of them thinks he is bound in conscience to submit his iudgment to any of their own or any other Congregations sense of Scripture in controuerted texts if that sense agreeth not with his own priuat interpretation If that of his Church agree not with his own sense he may stick to his own and reiect the other And this is the reason why Protestants are diuided into so many sects How this principle and practise may be excused from heretical pride and obstinacy I know not For they stand at a defiance with all Churches and will as litle submit their iudgments to their own as to that of Rome Euery Protestant is by the fundamental Tenet of the Reformation his own Master and a supreme Iudge of Gods written law Doth not this demonstrat how those Reformations are founded vpon pride and obstinacy Can there be greater than that simple men and silly women should presume to be Masters and Iudges of those Diuine and incomprehensible mysteries That they should preferr their priuat iudgments before that of their own Church and of ours vnto which the greatest Doctors in all ages haue submitted Vvhat a proud foolish insolent and obstinat people would the English conclude any other to be wherof not one would acquiesce in the iudgment or sentence of the Courts of Iudicature but euery one assume to himself the power of deciding his own law suites and of appealing from the Chancery or euen from the Parliament to his own priuat opinion and iudgment Let euery Protestant know this is his own case in matters of religion He appeals in what concerns Faith and the sense of Scripture from his own Church and the Catholik and general Councells to his own proper iudgment Doth he think that Christ would institute so absurd a spiritual gouernment Can any man of sense imagin it agrees with Scripture To what purpose then should the Scriptures and St Paul bid us be of one belief peaceable and humble Is any of these virtues or that of Catholik Faith consistent with such pride obstinacy and dissentions as this principle must inspire and we see in all the reformed Churches and in that of our own Countrey You see therfore that your reformed Churches and interpretations of Scripture haue so litle in them of the vnity obsequiousness and humility of Christian Faith so much recommended to us by St Paul that they seeme to the most learned Roman Catholiks not only to sauor of heresy but to be the very source of heretical pride and damnable obstinacy so far are they from hauing the least smack of the fundation or fruit of Christianity SECT III. SOM INFERENCES FIT TO BE considered by all Protestants and vvhether any may be saued if they dye in that persuasion IF Protestancy doth inuolue that pride and obstinacy which I haue endeuored to proue and deduce from its principles without doubt he who dyes a Protestant is damn'd But Because som are called Protestants and yet know not what protestancy is I will deliuer my opinion how far their ignorance may excuse them from being
he concluded there had bin no such thing as Christs Diuinity and proceeded to teach Circumcision and Poligamy and at length came to be an impure Apostata as the famous Beza doth term him in his Treatise de Poligam pag. 4. Impurus ille Apostata Bernardinus Ochinus Read likewise Sebastian Castalios ' own words in his Preface of the great Latin Bible dedicated to King Eduard 6. which are The more I do peruse the Scriptures the less do I find the same he meanes the profecies of the conuersion of Kings and Nations performed hovvsoeuer you understand the same profecies Dauid George say the Protestant Diuines of Basil in their History of him edit 1568. discoursed thus If the doctrin of Christ and his Apostles had bin true and perfect the Church vvhich they planted c. should haue continued c. But novv it is manifest that Antichrist hath subuerted the doctrin of the Apostles and the Church by them begun as is euident in the Papacy therfore the doctrin of the Apostles vvas false and imperfect And so this protestant Apostle of Basil by reflecting vpon the fundamental principle of the Reformation which is a supposition that the true Church and doctrin had bin inuisible or destroyd for many ages by Popery became a blasphemous Apostat affirming that our Sauior was a seducer In like manner Adam Neuserus the chief Pastor of Heidelberg turnd Turk and was circumcised at Constantinople See Osiander in his Epitom Centur. 16. pag. 818. The like fate had Alemannus Beza his bosom friend as Conradus Schlusserburg sayes in Theol. Caluin fol. 9. and Beza confesseth ep 65. pag. 108. Alemannum affirmant ad Iudaismum defecisse And all their conuersions to so damn'd sects were grounded vpon their not finding any pagan Kings or Nations to haue bin euer conuerted to protestancy but all wayes to popery Q. I must confess Sir that if all the Heathen Kings and Nations haue bin conuerted to that Christianity which we call popery and this was performed by Papists which could not be don without miracles and no pagan Kings and Nations haue bin euer conuerted to Protestancy nor by Protestants yee haue much more to say for yourselues than euer I heard before and we much less But I doubt you will hardly proue that untill the end of the first 600. years there were any Kings or Nations conuerted to Popery though afterwards I must own that profession was spread ouer the world and reignd untill our Protestant Reformation began in the year 1517. And to auoyd prolixity I desire you to rosolue me this one question whether Constantin the great the first Christian Emperor was a Papist Vve belieue that he and the Church of his time was Protestant because the purest Christianity Protestancy was then in vogue though afterwards it degenerated insensibly into Popery A. Euseb de Vita Constantini l. 3. c. 47. lib. 4. cap. 38. S. Hieron contra Vigilant ante med Costantinus Imperator saÌ„ctas reliquias Andreae Lucae Timothei transtulit Constantinopolim apud quas Daemones rugiunt And ibid. Si reliquius Sanctorum traÌ„sferre in aureos loculos re condere non licet sacrilegus fuit cum Constantino Arcadius omnes Episcopi non solum sacrilegi sed fatui iudicandi qui rem vilissimaÌ„ cineres dissolutâ—s â—n sericâ— vase aureo portauerunt c. S. August tom 39. dâ— Sanctis saith Crucis caracterâ— Basilicae dedicantur altaria consecrantur S. Greg. apud Bedam hist lib. 1. c. 30. Euseb de vitâ Constantini l 3. c. 2. atque interdum vultum salutari illa passionis signavit nota Zozomen hist l. 1. c. 8. Sanctae Crucis plurimum tribuit honoris Prudentius in Apotheosi vexillumque Crucis summus Dominator adorat S. Chrysostom in ep 2. Cor. hom 26. versus fin Nam ipse qui purpuram indutus est accedit illa amplexus sepulchra fastu deposito staâ— Sanctis supplicaturus ut pro se ad Dominum intercedant See the same also in S. Chrysost ad pop hom 60. versus finem That Constantin the great was a Papist and the Religion then in vogue and the only then called Catholik was Popery is euident by Eusebius his Ecclesiastical History written a litle after Constantins death as also by what the Centurists of Magdeburg and all other learned Protestants confess For it is euident by their writings that Constantin erected Temples in memory of Martyrs and the Apostles prouided his Sepulchre there to the end that after his death he might be made partaker of the prayers there offered He translated to Constantinople the reliques of St Andrew Luke and Timothy at which the Deuil did roare which particular circumstance St Hierom presseth against Vigilantius whom he concludeth an heretik for being against the praying to Saints and worshiping their reliques St Augustin and St Gregory two other Doctors of the Church defend the practise of consecrating Churches when Constantin built them with the sign of the Cross and sprinkling of holy water which I belieue the protestant Clergy of Dublin were ignorant of when as I haue bin credibly informed they framed very lately a new form of their own heads to consecrat Mr Lingars oual Temple with such hatred to the Cross that they would not make use of the sign therof in the Consecration nor bless themselues in the beginning or throughout the whole work nor place any Cross in the top of the Church for fear of profaning it or troubling the Spirit of that peaceble Minister not long before departed Nay Crosses were pull'd down in that Diocess and Catholiks punished for opposing them who committed such sacrileges Vvithout doubt Constantin the great was one of the most rank Papists and though he was the man who pulled down Idols and established Christianity in the world with its splendor and publik exercise yet I feare our Zealous Dublinian Clergy will protest against his Religion as superstitious and censure him guilty of Idolatry when they heare how often he blest himself making the sign of the Cross in his forhead nay which is worse not only adorning but adoring with an inferior religious worship the Cross and which is worst of all praying to St Peter and Paul that they vvould be Intercessors for him to God At least the Church of England will not challenge him as a member of theirs he being so auerse to the spiritual supremacy and Ecclesiastical iurisdiction of temporal soueraigns that he would not sit down at the Councell of Nice untill the Bishops had therto giuen their assent nor would he take vpon him to iudge of Ecclesiastical causes saying God hath ordained you Bishops and hath giuen you povver to iudge of yourselues by meanes vvherof vve yeeld ourselues to your iudgment So Crispinus in his book of the estate of the Church pag. 99. and Zozomen hist l. c. 10. post med sets down these popish vvords of Constantin Mihi vero non est fas cum homo sim ciusmodi
reuelation But how is it possible that scrupulous and acute Wits or Doubters can assent to Gods reuealing the articles of Christianity or to any truth with greater assurance then there is appearance and euidence of the same Is not euidence and assurance or certainty the same thing in our intellectual assents At least are they not so connected with one an other that they can not be separated or one be greater then the other A. Any thing which is uery reasonable must be possible because reason can not lead to or approue of an impossibility How possible and feasible it is to assent with infallible assurance and the greatest certainty for so we must assent in matters of Faith with only moral euidence is cleer in the scriptures especialy Iohn 20. where Christ our Sauior reprehended St Thomas for not belieuing with the assurance and certainty of Diuine Faith the mystery of the Resurrection though he had but moral euidence for it the testimony of the Apostles not as yet confirmed in grace Christ also Marc. ult reproacht with obstinacy and incredulity against Faith the Apostles themselues for not being content with that sole moral euidence of the Resurrection which they had from the testimony of the three Maries and the two Disciples of Emaus And certainly Christ would not find fault with St Thomas or the Apostles for not doing an impossibility It s possible therfore to belieue by an assent of Faith with more assurance and certainty then there is appearance of the truth or euidence of the Reuelation I confess it is uery difficult to shew how this is don But if wee distinguish the assurance or certainty we haue of truth by seing the truth in itself from the assurance or certainty we haue therof by putting our trust in an other or relying upon his knowledge and integrity we shall find this point much more easy then hitherto hath appeard to most both Diuines and Philosophers The assurance and certainty of our intellectual assents which is produced by the sight either intellectual or sensual of the Truth itself inuolues cleer euidence therof But the assurance and certainty of the Truth which is an effect of the Trust and esteem we haue of an others Veracity integrity power and wisdom is so farr from including a cleer sight or euidence of the truth that it excludes it For Trust is no more consistent with our exacting the possession sight or cleer euidence of that vvherwith vve trust an other than it is vvith doubts cautions and suspitions of his integrity or power Vpon this notion and the true nature of Trust excluding sight or cleer euidence of the thing trusted is grounded that saying I le trust such a man no further than I see him that is I vvill not trust him at all This supposed We may easily comprehend how its possible to belieue or to assent by an act of our Christian Faith with more assurance then appearance or euidence either of the truth or of the Diuine Reuelation Because to belieue or to assent by an act of our Christian Faith is to trust God for his reuelation as well as for the truth reuealed for we belieue God did reueal the mystery and so we must trust him for the reuelation also But if we see the reuelation euidently applied to the mystery reuealed we can not trust him for either seing the truth of the mystery is inseparable and necessarily connected with Gods reuelation therof and we can not trust God for the truth of one of two things that vve know are necessarily connected unless vve trust him for both Therfore if the reuelation be cleerly euident to us by Tradition vve can not trust God for it nor for the truth of the mystery we know is necessarily connected therwith Hence doth follow 1. that seing vve can not trust God for the truth of the mystery reuealed unless vve trust him also for the reuelation vve can not belieue either or any thing the Catholik Church proposeth as matter of Faith if vve exact for that belief conclusiue and cleer euidence that God reuealed the same It followeth 2. That by exacting cleer or conclusiue euidence of the Reuelation to belieue the mystery or matter proposed by the Church we do not only mistrust Gods veracity and goodness but preferr the vvord and veracity of euery honest man before his as it is proposed to us by the Church For vvhen vve heare any honest man speak though vvee do not see the truth of his vvords nor any thing else necessarily connected vvith that truth yet vve belieue him and take his bare vvord for our assent and assurance of the truth But vve will not take Gods word deliuered to us by the Church unless vve see his reuelation which is necessarily connected with the truth of the mystery proposed And in this consists most of the obstinacy and malice of Heresy It followeth 3. That the obstinacy of Heresy is not alwayes grounded upon the passion or inclination of men to sensual pleasures and those nices which Christian Faith shocks and condemns but takes its rise also from the difficulty we find in assenting to any thing without euidence or in trusting euen God for the truth of things vvhich seem to be unlikely Christs Resurrection vvas a thing much desired by Saint Thomas and the Apostles and by consequence they vvere willing enough to belieue it And yet because they thought it an unlikely matter St Thomas vvould not belieue the other Apostles nor these the Disciples of Emaus and the three Maries vvhen they assured them Christ vvas resuscitated And this is the reason why there haue bin so many speculatiue heresies as that of the Arrians against Christs consubstantiality and that of the Greekes against the procession of the holy Ghost c. True it is that the Lutheran and other modern Heresies haue their principal source from sensual pleasures and lendness of life yet no liberty is more bewitching then that of opining euen in speculation and therfore the Church hath bin troubled with confuting many speculatiue heresies in former ages I conclude this Appendix with this aduertisment that many mistakes among Controuersors are occasioned by their not being vvell grounded in School Diuinity especialy in that part of it which treates of the Nature of Faith and Heresy Som confound the Motiues of Faith vvith the Motiues of Credibility as they do the euidence of these vvith that of the Diuine Reuelation and the euidence of this with that of our obligation to belieue it and fancy that the Authors who pretend to demonstrat Christianity or the truth of the Roman Catholik Religion intend to demonstrat God reuealed those mysteries and doctrin vvheras they go no further than to endeauor to demonstrat the reasonableness and obligation of belieuing the same by the euidence of the Motiues of credibility Some of late as Fisher Rushworth and others in England haue attempted to demonstrat or cleerly conclude the euidence of the Diuine reuelation by the certainty of the human Tradition of the Church and therupon ground the certainty of Diuine Faith As their zeal is to be commended so they are to be aduertised that the certainty of Faith must be supernatural and by consequence must haue a higher and more infallible Motiue than the euidence of human Tradition grounded upon that of our senses as all Diuines confess and euen these modern Authors seem to grant I heare a bold Spaniard went further and pretends that Christian Faith is science because the reuelation is euidently concluded from the Motiues of credibility Miracles c. and because St Paul sayes Scio cui credidi certus sum This is but a Spanish conceit Perhaps Saint Paul in his rapt to the third Heauen might haue euidence of the Diuine Reuelation But vve heare of no others that went so far to find out that knowledge I see there are Escobars and Dianas in speculatiue Theology as vvell as in Moral and I think speculatiue errors are more dangerous than large cases of conscience because these carry a certain horror and discredit a long vvith them but erroneous speculations if new seem to vulgar comprehensions especialy of the weaker sex to sauor of wit and many would fain seem witty upon any score euen in matters of Faith wherin the greatest wits must submit to authority and be commanded by the vvill piously affected and supernaturaly assisted to belieue more than we see or comprehend Yet the Spaniard is consequent enough in his error by saying Faith is science For if it be euident that whatsoeuer God reuealed is true and it be euident that God reuealed the Trinity or Transubstantiation it must needs be euident and by consequence Science that these mysteries are true and therfore no man who penetrats these termes can deny their Truth For my part I wish this opinion were true it would be a great ease to all Catholiks vvho find much difficulty in belieuing the articles of Faith So that the Authors and Abettors of Traditionary euidence haue this aduantage of their Aduersaries that we desire they may haue the better of us in this Dispute and if they haue not it must be want of Reason on their side not any preiudice or obstinacy on ours But vve haue this aduantage of them that we may with more ease conuince heretiks euen the wittiest of heresy and obstinacy than they can because its easier to demonstrat or euidently conclude that a man is bound to bilieue God reuealed a mystery of Faith than it is to demonstrat or euidently conclude he did actualy reueale it as it is easier to proue you are bound to belieue this man is your Father than that realy he is so And if we conclude euidently the first we convince the wittiest Diffenters or Disputers in the world of heresy and obstinacy if they do not submit their iudgments and belief to that of the Church
assent of Christian faith is grounded vpon and directed by this truth Gods goodness and veracity will neuer countenance falsood with miracles nor permit errors in a Church whose authority and testimony is confirmed with such marks of his Diuine ministery and fauor as the Congregation of the Roman Catholiks is This shall be in the ensuing section more particularly proued SECT VNICA OF THE RESOLVTION AND RVLE of Catholik faith and vvhether this or Heresy be consistent vvith a cleer euidence of Gods revelation Q. Notwithstanding you haue told me that the assent of faith is rather a submission or yeelding of our vnderstanding to the Diuine authority than a sight or euidence of the same authority or reuelation yet other Roman Catholik Authors hold the contrary because they say that the tradition or testimony of the Church is the rule or motiue of Catholik Faith Now this tradition affirming that the faithfull deliuered to one an other from age to age from yeare to yeare the same doctrin in euery particular which the Roman Catholiks now hold and that they deliuered that doctrin not as the doctrin or opinions of men but as the word and reuelation of God it is as impossible we should not see this doctrin to haue bin reuealed by God as it is that a tradition so vniuersal wherin euery man was so particularly concerned and which hath bin conueyed by such euident sensations as that of hearing preaching seing practising and professing our faith by the most significant words and actions can be fallacious or false or that such multitudes could forget or would alter the doctrin of this year which they had receiued as Diuine the yeare before A. I know that the Author of sure footing hath writ with great zeal som Treatises vpon this subiect and hath so confounded those who assert only a moral certainty in Faith that they can not vindicat themselues from the Atheism wherunto their principles and bare probability of Christianity leads and wherwith the aforesaid Author doth vnanswerably charge them But because he took or reuiued this way thinking that by no other the certainty of Christian faith can be made out nor the Socinians argument against the possibility of assenting by an act of faith with more assurance than appearance of the truth answered and that I belieue both these difficulties may and ought to be solued otherwise I make vse of other principles for the resolution and rule of faith Q. Vvhat is the resolution of faith A. It is an orderly retrogradation from the assent or act of faith to its first motiue or to that which moued or made vs assent Q. Vvhat is the Rule of faith A. It is that which directs vs to that motiue and to assent or belieue as Christians Q. Is not the rule and the motiue of faith the same thing A. Many confound the one with the other But they are diferent things The motiue of faith is Gods veracity The rule of faith is the Testimony or Tradition of the Church Faith doth not fallow the nature of its rule if it did we could not call it a Diuine virtue because the testimony or Tradition of the Church which is its rule is human It s called Diuine faith because it is specified by and relyes wholy vpon Gods veracity and therfore is a Diuine virtue Q. Ought not the rule of faith be an infallible direction to the motiue of faith Ought it not also be of such a nature as to manifest cleerly its own infallibility to euery one that will examin the nature of Tradition which is the rule of faith A. It ought to be an infallible direction in itself otherwise it might lead vs out of the way but that infallibility ought not be more manifest to vs than the infallibility of faith itself The reason is because a Rule as such is but a direction and one may be infallibly directed though himself doth not Know it as a seaman who obeyes the Pilot commanding him to steer his ship by such and such land marks It is no necessary part or property of a Rule to euidence it s own infallibility unless the thing wherunto we are directed be self euident and uisible as we see in the rules and instruments of Mecanik arts But if the truth of that obiect or act wherunto a Rule directs us be of its own nature obscure and not obuious to our senses but rather aboue the reach and sight of our understanding then the truth or infallibility of the Rule ought not to appeare cleerly to us for if it did the Rule hauing a necessary connexion a parte rei with the act or obiect wherunto it directs it would cleerly discouer to us the truth of that obiect or act which is supposed to be obscure This is explained by examples A man that is purblind or trauells by night may be safely and infallibly directed or led between precipices or through an vncouth and vnknown path though he doth not see his own safety nor the skil of his Guide or the certainty of his way T is sufficient for his satisfaction and encouragement to beare patiently the incommodiousness of his iourney that being credibly informed he belieues his Guide is skilfull and honest T is so in our iourney to Heauen Vve do belieue that the rule of our faith which is Catholik Tradition is infallible by virtue of Gods particular assistance and protection though we do not cleerly see or know it is so Vve belieue also that euery assent of Christian Faith is infallibly true though we can no more see its infallibility than we can the truth of its obiect v. g. of the Trinity Diuinity of Christ Transubstantiation c. So that there ought not be greater or cleerer euidence required for the infallibility of the rule of faith than for the infallibility of the truth of faith this being the end and the other but subseruient to it Tradition therfore euen as it is sealed with all the signs of the Church doth not make cleerly euident to us that God reuealed any article of faith or any point of Christianity nay not that fundamental one of Christs Diuinity for though Catholik Tradition and the signes and miracles of the Church may make it cleerly euident to us that Christ reuealed our faith and doctrin yet they do not make it cleerly euident to us that Christ was God or that God reuealed Christianity witness all the heresies of witty and learned men in all ages against Christs Diuinity and euery one Knowes that against cleer euidence their can be no heresy Q. The Church being our Guide of faith if som Doctors therof do not see cleerly the way how can we be led to heauen How can they induce heretiks to follow them or assure them that the saying of our sauior will not be verified in us si caecus caecum ducat or that our Doctors are not like the Scribes and Pharisies caeci estis duces coecorum A. The greatest