cause of this Separation lyeth in the Church of Rome namely the cup of abomination in the whores hand which is their haereticall and schismaticall religion Vpon this foundation of these learned men I set this frame of disputation Euery erroneous faith is to be refused The faith of the Church of Rome is an erroneous faith Therefore the faith of the Church of Rome is to be refused Can there be any question made of the first part or proposition of this reason when the holy Apostle Saint Iude exhorts all men without exception of person time or matter to striue for the faith delivered to the Saints Iudev 3. But how striue we for that faith which is the reuealed truth of God if we can be content to beleeue errours which are against the truth Yea what doe we else by holding errours for truth but adde to the diuine reuelation giuen by the Lord God himselfe contrary to his charge Deut. 4. 2. You shall put nothing to the word that I command you The second part which we call the assumption or minor Deutr. 4. 2. is that wherein all the doubt lieth for what is the Church of Rome the worse for granting that an erroneous faith is to be refused vnles their faith can be proued erroneous And whereas I say in my question and disputation erroneous rather then hereticall I doe it od of purpose because I would shunne all needlesse wrangling about the word for it seemes to many somewhat doubtfull what is properly to be called heresy For my part I can not see that any false proposition deliuered for an Article of faith can be lesse then heresie I doubt not but a man may thinke somthing to be true which is false be no heriticke buâ— he thâ— shall obstinately hold such a point for an Article of faith necessarily to be beleeued by all men vpon paine of damnation cannot for ought I see be freed from heresie As for the errours of the Papists Dr. Reynolds Dr. Whitakers and Mr. Perkins as we haue seene make no doubt to call them heresies Now that we may the better vnderstand whether the faith of the Church of Rome be erroneous or no we must enquire how the truth and falsenesse of faith is to be discerned which we cannot doe either better or otherwise then by considering how the Article of faith or proposition enioyned to be beleeued agreeth with the diuine testimonie concerning that point or Article for the diuine testimonie is the thing or rule to which the Article must be applied and by which it must be squared so that if it agree wholy with it it is true if in any part it differ from that testimonie it is false and erroneous This Sess 14. caâ— Decret de necessitate satiffaction is Decâ—ct de sacram paenitentiae can 6. description of errour and falsehood in matters of faith is warranted by the Councell of Trent where they make falsehood consist in differing from the word of God and That which differs from the institution of Christ is called an humane tradition and therefore is erroneous According to this declaration of a false and erroneous faith I proceed now to shew that the faith of the Church of Rome is false and erroneous That faith which hath a false and ertoneous foundation is false and erroneous Wherein first I take it for granted that Faith must haue an extrinsecall foundation out of the shings themfelues which are to be beleeved This outward and extrinsecall foundation is the credit and authority of him that delivereth those things for true and requires assent or agrement to them Secondly I hold it for certaine and agrred vpon by all that faith is true or false according to the foundation whereon it stands as the diuine restimonie begets a diuine faith an humane testimonie breeds an humane which may thus appeare What makes the faith of the ancient heathen and the now heathenish Turks and all sorts of Infidels who beleeue that there is but one God to be humane false and erroneous and the faith of Christians concerning the same point to be diuine and true but the diuerse foundations of these faiths the former depending vpon the coniectures and testimonies of men the other arising out of the witnesse of God himselfe To come nearer home why doe the Papists denie that wee are of their faith although they confesse wee hold the very same Articles of the Creed that they professe and aagree with them in most points of religion but for that we haue not the same foundation of our faith which they haue of theirs It is then the goodnesse or badnesse of the foundation that make the faith good or bad so that where the foundation is false the faith whatsoeuer it be cannot be true The proposition thus prooued I will adde the assumptition to it The foundation of the faith of the Church of Rome is false and erroneous For the foundation of their faith is the authority of the Pastors of their Church as it Sect. 4. Decret de edit scriptur sect praeterea is manifest by the Councell of Trent It is the office of the Church saith the Councel to giue sentence of the true meaning and sense of the Scriptures Now by the Church they meane the Pastours of the Church as their continuall practise declareth no man being suffered to giue a voice in any Councell but their Bishops whom onely they hold to be the Pastours of the Church By true sense and meaning they vnderstand the doctrine of faith which is nothing else but the Word of God truly vnderstood By the Scriptures they meane euery particular place of Scripture for if they should meane some places onely there could be no certainty in this their decree vnlesse they had determined what particular places they are whereof the Church may giue sentence These things thus declared I dispute thus They that haue the office to determine which is the true faith their authority is the foundation of Faith But the Church hath the office to determine which is the true faith as it appeares by the words of the Councell ere-while recited Therfore the authority of the Church is the foundation of their faith That the Church of Rome claimes this authority it may further appeare by those titles whcih it vsurpeth in the said Councell that The Bishop of Rome is Gods Vicar on Sess 6. de reformat cap. 1. Sess 14. de poenitentia cap. 7. Sess 7. de Baptism Can. 3. Sess 22. de sacrificio missae cap. 8 De verbo dei lib. 3. cap. 3. Sâ—ct Tota igitur Cap. 5. Sect. Ex his earth The Church of Rome is the mother and mistris of all Churches Yea euerie man may plainly see that Bellarmine teacheth the same things of the church of Rome The Church is the iudge of the true sense of the Scripture and all controuersies By Church hee vnderstands the Pope with a Councell and this he saith is expresly
as easie and reasonable for vs to refuse his argument grounded vpon that which we deny as for him to affirme that he cannot proue Yet that we may deale more kindly with him then he doth with vs wee will giue him a reason of our answer which is that None of the Apostles did euer vse any other kind of teaching then reuealing If they deny this let them shew that any Apostle did euer informe the Church that This or that booke was scripture that this or that tradition was by diuine authority that this or that place had this or that sense And that this information of theirs was not by way of reuelation that is of immediate inspiration and motion from God wherby they were freed from all errour If they cannot doe this as I am out of doubt they cannot it must needs be granted that they taught onely by reuelation not otherwise They will perhaps obiect Act. 15. 7. but in vaine For the Apostles doe not there expound any place of Scripture formerly written or propound matters already reuealed by God but by the immediate inspiration of the holy Ghost resolue and enioyne what was to be done in that case So that their determination was a law then first giuen by way of reuelation from God not by way of interpreting and propounding what the Lord had formerly deliuered For it is manifest that the Lord hath no where taught in the old Testament the new was not then written that the Gentiles conuerted to the faith were to abstain from strangled things and from blood to the forbidding wherof the holy Ghost directed them immediately vpon that occasion for that time From which after a time he freed them by the like direction and reuelation giuen to the Apostle S. Paul and by him to the Church Rom. 14. And that this decree of the Apostles was made by reuelation and inspiration of the holy Ghost * De Rom. Pons lib. 4. cap. 25. Sect. Respondeâ— ad primum Bellarmine himselfe grants Yea the Apostles in that same place seeme to take a contrary course to that which if they had expounded the former Scriptures or propounded things formerly deliuered they must haue followed For as it appeareth by debating of the point by Iames and Peter the old testament absolutely Act. 15. freed the Gentiles conuerted from the ceremoniall law Why tempt ye God saith Peter Vers 10. to lay a yoake on the Disciples neckes which neither our fathers nor wee were able to beare Yet the Apostles by this decree of theirs bind them to part of that law by enioyning them Vers 20. 29. To obstaine from blood and that that is strangled Which they might not haue done if they had propounded matters already resolued of and not followed the immediate reuelation and direction of the holy Ghost To this I may adde the manner of this charge giuen by the Apostles which is by inspiration from the holy Ghost whose authority in this case they alledge It seemed good to the holy Ghost not thus saith Moses Dauid or the Lord by this or that Prophet Therfore in that Councel the Apostles did reueale what was to be done not propound what formerly had beene reuealed And yet this is the onely place in all the new Testament wherein there is any shew of Feeding by expounding and propounding otherwise then by reuelation CHAP. VII Of the two latter points in Bellarmines Propositions HAuing found the two former points to be light and false I come now to weigh the third which is set downe as plainly as either of the former that Feeding Christs sheepe Ioh. 21. 15. is teaching the whole Church There hath beene enough said already to discredit and disable the proposition yet I will goe forward that it may appeare what truth there is in it Bellarmine laboureth De Rom. Pont. lib. 1. cap. 16. much to proue that by Christs Sheepe in this place all Christians whatsoeuer are signified But what needeth all this adoe Wee neuer meant to deny it neither doth our granting or his prouing of it any thing at all helpe them or hinder vs. For there is nothing meant in this place by teaching but reuealing as I shewed in the former chap. numb 10 11 12. But this the church of Rome claimes not but striueth tooth and naile for such a teaching as consisteth in expounding and propounding things reuealed yea I will grant him both proposition and assumption in the tearmes wherein they are deliuered Because the whole Church was to bee instructed by the feeding here spoken of and no man had or hath liberty either to refuse as vntrue or not to obey as needlesse any thing that should be deliuered according to this commandement Feed my sheepe The more doth Bellarmin wrong vs in saying that we denie that the whole Church is meant by the name of sheepe in this place For whereas our Diuines say that Peter was made a particular not an vniuersall Bishop they meane not thereby to deny his authority to teach all Nations whatsoeuer and all congregations in all nations as occasion was offered but onely to signifie that hee had no commission giuen by those or any other words to be soueraigne Bishop of the whole Church as they speake in the words going a little Sect. Primum before As for that of Iohn 21. 15. they shew that those words can argue no such authority because then Paul might not haue had the same office among the Gentiles which Peter had among the Iewes so that the vniuersality denied in that and other places by our Diuines is an authority of feeding those who were ioyned with him in the same commission of feeding and had equall authority with him to reueale the truth of God to all the sheepe of Christ without exception which Caluin expresseth thus If the Caluin Institut lib. 4. c. 6. n. 4. same authority be granted to all which was promised to one wherin shall he be aboue his fellowes in office As for n. 7. which Bellarmine quoteth Caluin doth neither mention nor signifie that place Iohn 21. 15. therein There remaineth the fourth poynt to be considered that seeding Christs sheepe Iohn 21. 15. is teaching by way of iudging or determining what is to be beleeued of all men This also is expressed in plaine termes and is of as much importance as any of the other three His proofe is that wee cannot better vnderstand it then in that sense I see not why I may not grant him this without any inconuenience For indeed the Apostles feeding either by word of mouâ—h or writing was by way of sentence so that no man might deny or doubt of any thing which they deliuered Neither was there any higher court to which there might be any appeale from their sentence but all men were absolutely bound to beleeue and obey whatsoeuer they taught and commanded This wee grant and herein we would agree with Bellarmine if this were all he meaneth But he
That which the Apostle commanded the Thessalouians to keepe was a sauing faith Therefore some sauing truth is contained in tradition There is no end of Bellarmines begging We must deny as before that whatsoeuer the Apostles taught is recorded and come to posteritie To the proposition I answer in particular that being vnderstood of that time when the Apostle writ that Epistle it is true he had then deliuered some things by word of mouth and not written them and those hee commandeth them to keepe But what proofe can Bellarmine make that those things were not written afterwards The assumption is not easily to be proued that those things were sauing truth Why doth not Bellarmine tell vs what they were Me thinks he dareth not so much as guesse at them otherwise he would let vs know at the least what his Catholickes worthily take them to be Would any man dally thus in a matter of faith to bee beleeued vpon paine of damnation Bellarmine will make amends for the want of weight in his reasons by the number of them and he propoundeth his fift thus to bee deliuered Bellar. ubi supra sect quaitam That which was committed to Timothy 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2. is contained in tradition That which was there committed to Timothy is a sauing 1. Tim. 6. 20. 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2. truth Therefore some sauing truth is contained in tradition Here he beggeth againe as before but wee cannot grant that whatsoeuer the Apostles preached is remaining vpon record to posteritie If that were granted yet should I thinke the proposition no sufficient warrant for an Article of faith Therefore Bellarmine offereth proofe of it on this maner That which Timothy had heard of Saint Paul 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2 and was to deliuer to faithfull men able to teach other also that is contained in tradition But that which was committed to Timothy 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2 he had heard of Saint Paul and was to deliuer to faithfull men able to teach other also Therefore that which was committed to Timothy 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2 is contained in tradition Least wee should deny the first part or Proposition of this Syllogisme because the things so delivered and given in charge by the Apostle might be matter for the present vse of the Church and such as needed not to be alwayes knowne Bellarmine telleth us that by those things so heard and so to be committed the vnderstanding of the sense of the scriptures and other doctrine is signified so that the whole force of his Argument lyeth in this interpretation which he never offereth to proue Therefore vnlesse we will take his bare word for proofe wee are as farre to seeke as we were before Now that we haue no reason to doe so I thinke it may appeare by those things which I will now propound to the consideration of all reasonable men First then I would know oâ— Bellarmine whether by Vnderstanding of the sense he meane generall rules for the vnderstanding of it or the sense of particular places Secondly I demaund whether he deliuered to him the sense oâ— euery place of Scripture or of some onely Whether he answer this or that I aske thirdly what is become of those rules and expositions How will he proue to vs that they haue beene continued from time to time till now If they haue not beene continued what haue wee to do with them who dispute onely of such traditions as are in the possession and vse of the present Church Fourthly is it likely euen in Bellarmines iudgement that Saint Paul would take vpon him to instruct Timothy in the sense of any place of Scripture when as the office of interpreting the Scripture is committed by the Councell of Trent to the Church that is as Bellarmine expoundeth it to Peter and his successours Did he meane ambitiously to vsurpe Peters office or to send him to Peter or his successours to learne of them whether the interpretation he had giuen were true or no. Touching the second part of the first Syllogisme that Those thinges which were committed to Timothy were sauing truths Bellarmine saith nothing which argueth that he knew not what to say What reason haue we then to imagine that they were sauing truths or that this argument concludeth any thing for the doctrine of the Councell of Trent concering traditions There is yet one argument more in the same fift chapter thus to be concluded Those things which Iohn had to write 2. Ioh. 11 and Bellar. ubi supra Sect. ultimum testimonium 3. Ioh. 14. are contained in tradition for he saith he would not write them But those things which he had then to write were sauing truths taught by the Apostles Therefore some sauing truths taught by the Apostles are contained in tradition I am inforced here also to repeate my former answer that Bellaâ—mine still takes it for granted that whatsoeuer the Apostles taught is continued to posteritie which we denie and no papist can proue His assumption or minor is to weake to beare vp the weight of an Article of faith vnlesse he be able to â—â—ll 〈◊〉 certainly what the things were which the Apostle would not write and to whom hee did or at the least that hee did afterward deliuer them to some body from whom the Church hath receiued them Till we know what they were how shall we be sure they were part of the sauing truth CHAP. XV. Of two other arguments of Bellarmine VVEE haue done with the fift Chapter and are now to examine two arguments set downe chap. 4 the former I frame thus That there are Scriptures that these we haue he they is â— Bellar de verbo Dei non scripto cap. 4 Sect. quarto quinto Soxio contained in tradition For we cannot find them in the Scriptures But that there are Scriptures that these wee haue are they is part of sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles Therefore some sauing truthes taught by Christ and his Apostles are contained in tradition It hath appeared by my answer to Bellarmines arguments that he can find no place of Scripture that sendeth vs to tradition for any part of sauing truth taught by our Lord or his Apostles Wee might therefore conclude that there are no such traditions without troubling our selues any further But that we may dit vp the mouths of the Papists wee will bestow a little time and paines in these arguments If there had beene no more intended by the Councell of Trent in the decree touching tradition but to signifie that these three points are contained in tradition the danger had not beene great for then both the number and the particulars had been determined but the Papists by vertue of that Article take authoritie to thrust what they list vpon the Church and warrant it by tradition Thus much to the argument in generall Particularly I answer
contenteth not himself with this kind of teaching but will haue the teaching here spoken of to be a difiâ—itiue sentence declaring and determining what is reuealed and what the sense and meaning of it is as I shewed chapter 4. numb 7. To this must his proofes be applyed which lie thus If feeding Iohn 21. 15. be not teaching by way of determing what is reueâ—led and what the meaning of it is Then we must vnderstand it of preaching or writing commentaries How shall the consequence of this proposition bee made good since this feeding may at the least as reasonably be vnderstood of reuealing the sacred mysteries yea this interpretatioÌ„ is more reasonable because the words were spoken to him whose office it was to reueale those mysteries by vertue of his Apostolicall commission as I shewed numb 4. yea they are the very same in sense and meaning with those that are vsed in the commission Goe teach all Nations Mark 16. 16. and Iohn 20. 23. as was declared c. 4. n. 4. But admit a man should say it is meant of preaching or writing how doth Bellarmine refute him By telling vs that if we so take it wee must condemne many Popes that haue written nothing at all As if that were any inconuenience to vs although to say the truth most of the Popes that haue written might haue had as much thanke to spare their labors as to write as they haue done Well say we vnderstand it of preaching That may not be neither saith Bellarmine Why so because the Pope cannot preach to all no not diuers Popes to any at all For as their owne Histories confesse some of them did not so much as vnderstand their Grammar But what if the Pope cannot no more could any of the Apostles nor Peter preach to all yet had they authority to preach to all as occasion might happen and were not restrained to this or that congregation diocesse prouince nation or Country and in that respect were vniuersall Pastors of the whole Church yea euery one of them CHAP. VIII Of the Assumption of Bellarmines syllâ—gisme c. 3. n. 5. HItherto I haue shewed what little shew of reason there is for that interpretation of Iohn 21. 15. whereon the strength of Bellarmines conclusion principally dependeth I will now set my selfe to the sifting of the assumption or second part of his syllogisme which is To Peter and his successors that feeding Iohn 21. 15. is committed As the proposition so the assumption also containeth foure seuerall points distinctly to be considered that 1 Those words Iohn 21. are spoken to Peter 2 The office of seeding is committed to Peter 3 Peter hath his successours 4 The office of seeding is committed to Peters successors The first of these foure â—entences or points is rather supposed then expressed in the assumption but it is plainly deliuered by Bellarmin It is said to Peter only Feed my sheepe Bel de Rom. Poâ— l c. 14. Sect. Hactenâ— Who denyeth this if it be â—ightly vnder The speech was directed immediately to Peter with whom our Lord then talked but not so to Peter as if the duty to which he is exhorted belonged to none but to Institut lib. 4. cap. 6. n. 4. him Therefore Calvin truely saith that as Peter receiued mandemâ—m of 〈◊〉 Iohn 21. 15. so all other ministers are exhorted to feed the sheepe 1. Pet. 5. 2. and by so saying hee granteth that those words were spoken to Peter but hee telleth the Papists withall that if they will proue that they auouch they must shew that whosoeuer are commanded â—o feed Christs sâ—eepe to them the power ouer the whole Church is committed In which words he denieth the consequence of the proposition which he doth not expresse but acknowledgeth the assumption contained in those words To Peter Bellar. de Rom. ponl lib. 1. c. 14. Sect. Sed coâ—tra onely Christ said feed my sheepe By which it is manifest that Bellarmine doth Caluin great wrong in charging him with the denying that those words Iohn 21. are spoken to Peter onely and spendeth his time and strength in vaine to proue by seuen arguments against Caluin that which Caluin neuer denyed But Bellarmines meaning is that the words are so spoken to Peter that the thing signified by them belongeth not to the rest of the Apostles And in this sense we say it is false that those words were spoken to Peter onely If Bellarmine can not proue them true in this sense as I am sure he cannot his argument is nothing worth For how shall that proue for Peter and his successors against the rest of the Apostles which was spoken to them as well as to him yet it is not to be wondred at that Bellarmin goeth not about to proue it in that sense For indeed there is no shew or colour of proofe for it because the Word of God no where maketh any distinction betwixt this feeding Iohn 21. 15. and that teaching Mat. 16. 16. Iohn 20. 21. which was enioyned Peter and the rest of the Apostles equally and alike as Bellarmine De Rom. Pont. lib. 1. c. 12. Sect. â—ices confesseth The keyes were giuen Iohn 20. and 21. For when our Lord said Iohn 20. 19. Peace be vnto you as my Father sent me so send I you then hee gaue them the power or key of iurisdiction For by those words hee made them as it were Legates and Gouernors of the Church in his name But in the words following Receiue ye the holy Ghost whose sinnes yee remit c. he gaue them the power of order And thus much of the first proposition of the foure The second followeth namely The office of feeding Ioh. 21. is committed to Peter This is affirmed in plaine words and must bee vnderstood of Peter alone not of him and the other Apostles For that will not serue Bellarmines turne because it proues nothing for the Popes power or against that wee defend Besides Bellarmine striues here for an office proper to Peter because he cals it a singular office But how can that be proper to Peter which is cominon to the rest of the Apostles with him This also we deny as Caluin did long since In this word Institut lib. 4. cap. 6. n. 4. feed saith he nothing is giuen to Peter more then to the other Bellarmine should haue proued that this conueyeth a proper office to the Pope and not haue taken that for granted which he knoweth we alwayes deny But hee doth not so much as offer to make any proofe of it either de verbo Lib. 3. cap. 5. Lib. 1. cap. 14. Dei or de Roman Pontif. in both which places he professedly disputeth the point Indeed in the latter place hee proueth that the words Feed my sheepe were spoken to Peter only But what is that to proue that feeding Iohn 21. is committed to Peter onely Some man perhaps will imagine that the latter dependeth vpon the former but he wil quickly change his