Catholicarum quam plurimum scripturarum solertissimus indagator authoritatem sequatur inter quas fanè illae sunt quas Apostolica sedes habere ab eâ alij meruerunt accipere epistolas So that whereas Saint Augustine saith that in reckoning the Canonicall bookes of Scripture a man must follow the authority of the greater number of Catholique Churches and among them especially such as either had Apostolicall seates as Hierusalem and the like or receiued Epistles from some of the Apostles as did the Churches of Corinth and Galatia Gratian maketh him say that the Epistles which the Apostolicall See receiued or other receiued of it are to be reckoned among Canonicall Scriptures This ouersight of Gratian Picus Mirandula long since obserued and after him Alfonsus a Castro whereby wee may see how easie it was for men in former times to runne into most grosse errors before the reuiuing of learning in these latter times while the blinde did lead the blinde For Gratian was the man out of whom the greatest Diuines of former times tooke all their authorities of Fathers and Councles as appeareth by their marginall quotations And how ignorantly and negligently he mistooke them mis-alleaged thē this one example is proof sufficient But whatsoeuer we think of Gratian we shall find that not only our Diuines but the best learned among our aduersaries also put a greatdifference between the sacred scriptures of the holy Canon and the Decrees of Councels For first they say the Scripture is the word of God reuealed immediately and written in a sort from his owne mouth according to that of S. Peter the holy men of God spake as they were moued by the holie Ghost And that of S. Paul All Scripture is by diuine inspiration which is not so to be vnderstood as if alwaies the holy Writers had had new reuelations and had alwayes written that which before they were ignorant of for it is certaine that the Euangelists Mathew and Iohn wrote those things which they saw and Marke and Luke those things they heard from others as Luke himselfe confesseth in the beginning of his Gospel But the holy writers are therefore said to haue had immediate reuelation and to haue written the words of God himselfe because either some new things and not knowne before were reuealed to them by God or because God immediately inspired and moued the Writers to write those things which they had seene and heard and directed them that they should not any way erre in writing whereas Councels neither haue nor write immediate reuelations or words of God but only declare which is that word of God vttered formerly to the Prophets and Apostles how it is to bee vnderstood and what conclusions may bee deduced from it by discourse of reason Secondly the holy Writers performed that which they did without any further labour or trauell then that in writing and calling to minde what they had seene and heard but in Councels the Bishoppes and Fathers with great paine and trauell seeke out the trueth by discourse conference reading and deepe meditation and therefore the holy Writers are wont to attribute all to God onely and the Prophets were wont often to repeate The Lord sayth Thirdly in the Scriptures not onethe whole sentences but euery word pertaineth to Faith for no word is therein vaine or ill placed But in Councels there are many disputations going before resolution many reasons brought for confirmation of things resolued on many things added for explication and illustration many things vttered obiter and in passage that men are not bound to admitte as true and right nay many things are defined in Councels that men are not bound to stand vnto For it is the manner of Councels sometimes to define a thing as certainely and vndoubtedly true pronouncing them Heretiques that thinke otherwise and subiecting them to curse Anathema and sometimes as probable onely and not certaine as the Councell of Vienna decreed that it is more probable that both grace and vertues accompanying grace are infused into Infants when they are baptized then that they are not and yet is this no matter faith in the Church of Rome Fourthly in the scripture all things as well concerning particular persons as in generality are vndoubtedly true For it is as certaine that Peter and Paul had the spirit of God as that no man can be saued without the illumination and sanctification of the spirit but in the determinations and decrees of Bishoppes assembled in a generall councell it is not so for they may erre in iudging of the persons of men and therefore there is no absolute certainty in the canonization of Saints as both Thomas and Canus do confesse Fiftly in Scriptures there are no precepts touching manners either concerning the whole church or any part of it that are not right equall and just But councels may erre if not in prescribing things euill in stead of good yet in prescribing things not fitting nor expedient if not to the whole church yet to some particular part of it as not knowing the cōdition of things therein Yea some there are that think it not hereticall to beleeue that generall councels may prescribe some lawes to the whole church that are not right profitable and iust as to honour such a one for a Saint who indeed is no Saint to admit such orders of Religious men as are not profitable to receiue the communion onely in one kinde and the like And there are many that confidently pronounce that generall councells may decree such things as may breed inconuenience and may sauour of too great seuerity and austerity which the guides of the church in the execution of the same must bee forced to qualifie and temper So that the onely question is whether a generall councell may certainely define any thing to bee true in matter of faith that is false or command the doing of any act as good and an act of vertue that indeed and in trueth is an act of sinne Touching this point there are that say that all interpretations of holy Scriptures agreed on in generall councels and all resolutions of doubtes concerning things therein contained proceed from the same Spirit from which the holy Scriptures were inspired and that therefore generall councels cannot erre either in the interpretation of Scriptures or resoluing of things doubtfull concerning the faith But these men should know that though the interpretations and resolutions of Bishops in generall councels proceed from the same Sperit from which the Scriptures were inspired yet not in the same sort nor with like assurance of beeing free from mixture of errour For the Fathers assembled in generall councels doe not rely vppon immediate reuelation in all their particular resolutions and determinations as the Writers of the Bookes of holy Scripture did but on their owne meditation search and study the generall assistance of Diuine grace concurring with them That the Fathers
doe those things he prescribeth to them in like sorte God seeing that sinne was entred brought in punishments to represse it and seeing that it would be eternall if man did continue immortall he brought in death to make an end of it For saith Epiphanius sin is so deepely rooted in vs that it cannot bee quite killed nor pulled vp by the rootes while the body and soule remaine together Euen as sayth hee when some wilde figge tree groweth in the walles of a Goodly and stately building and defaceth and hideth the beauty and glory of it the boughes and braunches may be cut or broken off but the roote which is wrapped into the stones of the building cannot bee taken away vnlesse the walles bee throwen downe and the stones cast one from another So the sinne vvhich dvvelleth in vs hath the rootes of it so invvrapped into our nature the parts of it that hovvsoeuer the boughs and braunches may be cut and broken off the roote remaineth vvhile vve carry about vs this body of death vvill cause more branches to grovv foorth till by death the parts of our nature to vvit the soule and the body bee sundred and diuided And as the vvall may be raised againe and the stones thereof in due sort laid together when the rootes of the trees which formermerly grew into it be taken forth So when the roote of sin is remoued by death out of mans nature God will bring these parts of his nature together againe and giue him that immortality both of body and soule which he intended to him in his creation and would haue giuen him had not death beene necessary for the rooting out of that sinne hee voluntarily fell into That sinne is soe deepely rooted in the nature of man that it cannot bee plucked vp but by death Epiphanius saith it is euident by that of the Apostle who pronounceth of himselfe that to will was present with him but he found no ability to performe That the good hee would do hee did not and the euill that bee would not doe that hee did And that yet it was not hee that did it but sinne that dwelleth in him By this sayth hee it is proued that sinne is not pulled vp by the rootes that it is not dead but liuing that there is no man but hath euill thoughts and desires which growe from this bitter roote of sinne which neither Baptisme nor faith do wholly remoue or kill that sinne is only repressed resisted and stilled from raging and preuailing in such sort as it did before but not wholly taken away Thus then wee see that Epiphanius most excellently deliuereth that in the defence of the trueth against Origen and such like heretickes which Bellarmine imputeth vnto vs as heresie condemned by Epiphanius Wherein surely he was either grosly abused by others making him beleeu Epiphanius sayth that which most peremptorily hee denyeth or else hee was vvilling to deceiue and abuse others Howsoeuer this aduantage wee haue gotten thereby that our assertion that sinne remaineth after Baptisme and that the roote of it is not taken away nor killed till by death the soule and body be diuided is proued to be the auncient doctrine of the Primitiue Fathers But if Epiphanius faile him Bellarmine hath another author whereon to relye For hee saith Theodoret reporteth that the Messalians were condemned for heretickes because they thought that Baptisme as a Razar shaueth away sinnes past but doth not take away the roote of sinne and that therefore for that purpose wee must flye to the force of prayer This opinion of the Messalians touching the not taking away the roote of sinne in such sort as they vnderstoode it and Theodoret disliked it wee also condemne For wee thinke that Baptisme doth not only take away sinnes past but the very roote of all sinnes which is Originall sinne though not wholly for then wee should dissent from Epiphanius before alleaged yet in such sort as I will deliuer in that which followeth The errour of the Messalians Bellarmine attributeth vnto vs because wee teach that concupiscence in the Regenerate is sinne For the better clearing of this point wee must obserue that the Romanists doe erre most daungerously in the matter of originall sinne and naturall concupiscence For first they teach that the contrariety betwene the spirit and the flesh the pronenesse inordinately to desire things transitory sensible and outward and the difficulty to that which is best are the primitiue conditions of the nature of man And consequently that concupiscence neither after nor before Baptisme in the Regenerate nor vnregenerate is sinne or punishment of sinne but a condition of pure and sole nature For if man had beene created in a state of pure nature that is hauing all that pertaineth to the integrity of nature and nothing else it would haue beene found in him Neither doe they make any doubt but that GOD might haue created man in the beginning with all those defects hee is now subiect vnto and yet without all sinne For the beeing subject to them argueth not sinne but whereas they were restrained bridled and suppressed by addition of supernaturall qualities the hauing of them at libertie by voluntarie losse of those qualities is not without sinne Thus then howsoeuer they talke of concupiscence in the Regenerate and would seeme to deny it to be sinne in them onely yet they doe as well deny it to be sin in men not Regenerate as in the Regenerate and make it onely a punishment of sinne if yet they yeeld so much vnto the truth For indeede according to their erroneous conceit concupiscence is a sequele of nature and not a punishment of sinne so that all that they doe or can say is nothing but this that concupiscence was naturall and such a thing as might bee found in the integrity of nature that it was restrained by supernaturall grace added aboue that nature requireth for the perfecting of her integritie that the hauing it now free and at libertie to prouoke moue and incline vs to sinne is the punishment of that sinne whereby we depriued our selues of supernaturall grace But wee say contrary to this absurd conceite of theirs First that all these defects and euils to wit contrariety betweene the better and meaner faculties of the soule pronenesse to doe euill and difficultie to doe good doe arise and grow out of the want of that originall righteousnesse the property whereof is to subject all vnto God and to leaue nothing voide of him Secondly that this righteousnesse was essentially required to the integrity of nature So that there is no state of sole and pure nature without addition of sinne or grace as the Papists fondly imagine for that the nature of man is such as must either be lifted aboue it selfe by grace or fall below it selfe and be in a state of sinne Thirdly that all declinings and swaruings from that perfect subjection vnto God and entire conjunction with God which grace worketh
are sinnes and decayes of natures integrity and consequently that concupiscence being a declining from that entire subiection to and conjunction with God is truely and properly sin whatsoeuer our adversaries teach to the contrary Fourthly that originall righteousnesse is said to bee a supernaturall quality because it groweth not out of nature and because it raiseth nature aboue it selfe But that it is naturall that is required to the integritie of nature Neither should it seeme strange to any man that a quality not growing out of nature should be required necessarily for the perfecting of natures integrity seeing the end and object of mans desires knowledge and action is an infinite thing and without the compasse bounds of nature And therefore the nature of man cannot as all other things doe by naturall force and things bred within her selfe attaine to her wished end but must either by supernaturall grace bee guided and directed to it or being left to her selfe faile of that perfection shee is capable of and fill her selfe with infinite euills defects and miseries This may suffice for refutation of the vaine and idle conceits of the Papists concerning three estates of man the one of grace the other of nature and the third of sinne Out of which we may obserue that howsoeuer they indeavour to make shew of the contrary yet indeede they thinke that concupiscence is not sinne neither in the regenerate nor vnregenerate Whereupon it is that Bellarmine speaking of the guilt of concupiscence which the Diuines say is taken away in Baptisme though the infirmity remaine saith it must be vnderstood of that guilt which causeth concupiscence not which is caused of it For saith he originall sinne maketh guilty and subjecteth men to concupiscence but concupiscence doth not make them guilty that haue it and therefore it is not sinne neither before nor after Baptisme But we say with Augustin Sicut caecitas cordis quam removet alluminator deus peccatū est quo in deum non creditur poena peccati qua cor superbū dignâ animadversione punitur causa peccati cùm mali aliquid caeci cordis errore cōmittitur ita concupiscentia carnis aduersus quam bonus concupiscit spiritus peccatum est quia inest ei inobedientia contra dominatum mentis poena peccati est quia reddita est meritis inobedientis causa peccati est defectione consentientis vel contagione nascentis As the blindnesse of heart which God remooueth when hee lightneth those that were formerly in darkenesse is a sinne in that by reason of it men beleeue not in GOD and a punishment of sinne wherewith the proude hearts of wicked men are iustly punished and a cause of sinne when erring by reason of this blindnesse of heart they doe those things that are euill so the concupiscence of the flesh against which the good spirit doth striue and couet is a sinne because there is in it disobedience against the dominion of the mind and a punishment of sinne in that it falleth out by the iust iudgment of God that they who are disobedient vnto God shall finde rebellious desires in themselues and it is a cause of sinne in that men either by wicked defection consent vnto it or by reason of the generall infection of humane nature are borne in it Wee thinke therefore there should be no question made of concupiscence and other like defects and euils found in the nature of man but that they are in their owne nature sinfull defects And hereof I am well assured none of the Fathers euer doubted but how farre they are washed away and remitted in Baptisme which is the matter about which Bellarmine wrangleth and taketh exception against vs let vs now consider Alexander of Hales the first and greatest of all the Schoolemen noteth diuers things most fitly to this purpose out of which wee may easily resolue what is to bee thought of this matter First therefore hee obserueth that there are two sortes of sinnes some naturall which are in the person from the generall condition of nature some personall that are acted by the person and so defile the nature as all actuall sinnes Secondly that concupiscence is of the first kind being an euill contracted and cleauing to nature not personally acted or wrought by vs. Thirdly that concupiscence may bee considered either as it hath full dominion and is a prevailing thing in them that haue it or as it is weakened and hath lost that strength dominion and command which formerly it had Fourthly that concupiscence while it hath dominion is a sinne defiling and making guilty both the nature person in which it commaundeth all But if it lose this dominion it cleaueth to the nature only and is not imputed to the person for sinne vnlesse hee some way yeelde vnto it bee drawen by it or suffer himselfe to be weakened in well doing by the force of it Fiftly that the benefits of grace are not generall but speciall of priuiledge not freeing the whole nature of man from sin and punishment as sin corrupted and defiled all but that they extend onely personally to some certaine Sixtly that when men are borne anew in baptisme they are freed from all that sin which maketh their persons guilty before God and consequently from all punishments due to them for any thing their persons were chargeable with But because they still remaine in that nature which is of the masse of malediction therefore sin cleaueth to their nature still and they are subject to the common punishment of hunger thirst death and the like Seauenthly that the dominion of that sin which is of nature is taken away by the benefit of regeneration in Baptisme Whence it commeth that the persons of men baptized are not chargeable with it though they remaine still in that nature wherein it is And consequently that the punishments which they are subject vnto because they remaine in the communion of that nature which is not generally free from sin cease to be vnto them in the nature of destroying euils serue to diverse good purposes and turne to their great benefit So then wee say with the Fathers and best learned of the Schoolemen that concupiscence in men not regenerate is a sinne corrupting and making guilty both the nature and the person wherein it is and that in the Regenerate it cleaueth to nature as a sinne still but hauing lost the dominion it had so that it cannot make the person guilty not prevailing with it nor commaunding ouer it Regnum amittit in terra perit in caelo It is driuen from the kingdome it formerly had in the Saints of God while they yet remaine on earth but it is not vtterly destroyed till they goe from hence to heauen Thus then I hope it appeareth that wee are far from the errour of the Messalians and doe fully accord with the Catholike Church of God and that the Romanists are not far from the heresie
head and spouse and thirdly because it is led by the spirit of trueth These reasons will be found exceeding weake if we examine them Let vs therefore take a particular view of them First the Apostle say they calleth the Church the Pillar and ground of trueth therefore it cannot erre These wordes cannot proue that for confirmation whereof our aduersaries alleage them seeing hee speaketh in this place of a particular Church to wit the Church of the Ephesians in which hee left Timotheus when he departed from it Now that particular Churches may erre in matter of fayth and become hereticall our adversaries make no question That the Apostle speaketh of the Church of Ephesus and calleth it The pillar and ground of trueth it appeareth by all circumstances of the place These things haue I written sayth hee hoping to come shortly vnto thee but if I tarrie longer that thou mayest know how to behaue thy selfe in the house of God That house of God in which Paul left Timothie in which he directeth him how to behaue himselfe till hee come he calleth The Church of God and Pillar of truth that Timothie might bethinke him the better how to demeane himselfe in the government of it The Church of God is named the Pillar of trueth not as if the truth did depend on the Church or as if God could not otherwise man fest it than by her Ministery or that our fayth should be built on the authority of it or that we should thinke it absolutely free from all ignorance and errour but because it doth strongly hold and maintaine the sauing profession of the truth notwithstanding all the violence of wicked and cruell enemies as both the Ordinary glosse and that of Lyra doe interpret it and for that by instructions admonitions and comforts it strengtheneth stayeth and supporteth such as otherwise would fall as the Interlineall glosse seemeth to expresse it So then the Church is The pillar of trueth not because it is absolutely free from all errour or that our faith should be builded vpon the infallibility of it but because it alway retayneth a saving profession of heauenly trueth and by strength of reasons force of perswasions timelinesse of admonitions comforts of Sacraments and other meanes of sauing grace The powerfull force whereof the sonnes of God doe feele it strengtheneth and stayeth the weakenesse of all them that depend vpon it This is it that Calvine meaneth when hee sayth the Church is called The pillar of trueth because it firmely holdeth the profession of it and strengtheneth others by the knowledge of it Bellarmines cavill that if this were all the Church might more fitly be compared to a chest than a Pillar is not worth the answering for it doth not onely preserue the trueth as a hidden treasure but by publique profession notwithstanding all forces endeavouring to shake it publisheth it vnto the world stayeth the weakenesse of others by the knowledge of it in which respect it is fitly compared to a Pillar and not vnto an Arke or chest The second reason is much more weake than the former For thus they argue The Church is governed by Christ as by her head and spouse and by the spirit as by the soule and fountaine of her life therefore if shee erre her errour must be imputed vnto Christ and to the spirit of trueth This their consequence is blasphemous and impious For who knoweth not that particular men companies of men and Churches are governed by Christ as by their head and spouse by the spirit of trueth as being the fountaine of their spirituall life as the Churches of Corinth Galatia and the Churches mentioned in the Revelation of S. Iohn called golden Candle stickes in the midst whereof the Sonne of God did walke yet had they their dangerous and grievous errours and defaults for which they were blamed so that by the argument of our adversaries men may blame the spirit of trueth for their errours That which the Iesuite addeth that Christ the husband of the Church is bound to free it from all errour in matter of faith whence any great euill may ensue is as childish an argument as may be devised For if great and grievous euils may be found in the Church then notwithstanding this argument errours also Now that the Church is subject to great grieuous euils he that maketh any questiō seemeth to know nothing at all As therfore God giueth that grace whereby the children of the Church may avoyde great and grievous euils and neuer with-draweth the same but for punishment of former sinne and contempt of grace so he giueth the gracious meanes of illumination and neuer withdraweth the meanes of knowledge but when the contempt of the light of knowledge and the abusing of it procure the same So that the sinnes and errours of the children of the Church proceede from themselues and not from any defect or want of Christ the husband of the Church The third reason is he that heareth not the Church must bee holden for an Ethnike therefore it cannot erre But they should know that Christ speaketh in that place of the Sanedrim of the Iewes which whosoeuer refused to obey they held him as an Ethnicke Yet was not that great Councell of State among the Iewes free from danger of erring If these wordes of our Saviour be applyed to the Church as they are ordinarily by the Fathers they must be vnderstood by the censures of the Church which are not alwayes just and righteous as Augustine sheweth and not of her doctrinall determination But saith Bellarmine the Councels were wont to denounce Anathema to all that obey not their decrees therefore they thought they could not erre To this we answere that they denounce Anathema not because they thinke euery one that disobeyeth the decree of the Councell to bee accursed but because they are perswaded in particular that this is the eternall truth of God which they propose therefore they accurse them that obstinately shall resist as Paul willeth euery Christian man to Anathematize an Angell comming from Heauen if he shall teach him any other doctrine then he hath already learned yet is not euery particular Christian free from possibility of erring The other argument that because the Church is holy and her profession holy therefore shee cannot erre will proue as well that particular Churches cannot erre as the vniversall If they say the vniversall Church is holy and the profession of it holy in such adegree as freeth it from error it is petitio principii Their next argument is that if the Church be not free generally from erring but only from erring in things necessary to saluation many Catholike verities may be called in question doubted of for that there are many things that pertaine to faith which are not necessary to saluation This argument holdeth not for though the Church which comprehendeth onely the number of beleeuers that are at one time in the world may
assembled in Generall councels rely not vpon any speciall and immediate revelations may easily be proued by sundry good and effectuall reasons For first whensoeuer we hope to come to know any thing by speciall and immediate revelation from God wee vse not to betake our selues to study and meditation but to prayer onely and other good workes or at least principally to these Whence it is that Daniel when he hoped to obtaine of GOD the interpretation of Nebuchadnezars dreame by speciall and immediate revelation did not exhort his companions and consorts by study to search out the secret he desired to know but by prayer and supplication to seeke it of GOD. And after hee had found out the secret hee sought for hee saide O God of my Fathers I confesse vnto thee and praise thee because thou hast giuen mee wisedome and strength and hast shewed vnto me those things which we desired of thee and hast opened vnto vs the word of the King Whence also it is that Christ promising-his Apostles that hee would reveale vnto them what they should speake when they should bee brought before Kings and Rulers willeth them To take no care how or what to speake for that it should bee revealed vnto them in that houre what they should speake It is not you that speake saith our Sauiour but the spirit of my Father that speaketh in you When as therefore wee hope to learne any thing of GOD by immediate revelation wee must not apply our selues to study and meditation but to prayer But when men meete in Generall councels to determine any doubt or question they principally giue themselues to meditation study and search therefore they hope not to bee taught of GOD by immediate revelation Secondly when wee desire to haue things made knowne vnto vs by immediate revelation from GOD wee goe not to them that are most learned but to them that are most devout and religious whether they bee learned or vnlearned whether of the cleargy or the Laity whether men or women because for the most part GOD revealeth his secrets not to them that are wiser more learned but to them that are better more religious and devout according to that of our Sauiour r I giue thee thankes O Father LORD of Heauen and Earth because thou hast hidde these things from the wise and men of vnderstanding and hast opened them vnto Babes And therefore the good King Iosias when hee desired by revelation to know the will of GOD touching the wordes of the volume that was found in the Temple hee sent Helkiah the High Priest to Huldah the Prophetesse and sought not concerning the wordes of the Law among the Priests whose lippes are to preserue knowledge and at whose mouth men ought to seeke the Law because though the Law bee to bee sought at the mouth of the Priest in all those things which may bee learned by study meditation search yet in those things that are to bee learned by revelation recourse must bee had to them that haue the spirit of prophecie if any such bee or else to them that are most holy and whose prayers are most acceptable vnto God Neither are men for satisfaction in these things rather to goe to the Priestes then to any Lay-man that is vtterly vnlearned But in councels men goe to them that are more learned and of better place in the church though they bee not the best and holyest men Therefore questions touching matters of faith are not determined in councels by immediate revelation If it be said that the Apostles and Elders in that first councell which is mentioned in the Actes relyed on the knowledge they had of the Scriptures and Trueth of GOD and did not wayte for a new immediate revelation and that therefore this kinde of reasoning will bring them within compasse of the same danger of erring that wee subiect their Successors vnto because they relye not vpon immediate revelation but search and study It will bee easily aunswered that though the Apostles and others assembled in that councell depended not vpon immediate revelation but the knowledge they had of the Scriptures and Trueth of GOD and thence inferred what was to be thought of the matter then in question yet were they not in danger of erring as their successours are because they relyed not on such imperfect knowledge as study meditatiō begets but such as divine revelatiō causeth to wit perfect absolute whēce they knew how to deriue the resolution of any doubt or question beeing specially assisted by the Spirit of Trueth Neither lette any man thinke that the Apostles assembled in this Councell were any way doubtfull what to resolue when they heard the matter proposed because there is mention made of great disputation in that meeting For as it may bee thought that questioning and disputing was among the Elders and Brethren and not among the Apostles the meanest of them being able to resolue a farre greater matter without any the least doubt or stay So that it is absurd that Melchior Canus from hence inferreth that the Decrees of this Councell wherein there was so great a dispute are not Canonicall Scripture any other wayes then the wordes of Pilate are because they are recorded by the Euangelists in the holy Scripture But to returne to the matter whence this obiection made vs digresse it is no way necessary to thinke that the Fathers are any otherwise directed by the Spirit of Trueth in Generall Councels then in Patriarchicall Nationall or Prouinciall Seeing Generall Councells consist of such as come with instructions from Prouinciall Nationall and Patriarchicall Synodes must follow the same in making Decrees as hath beene shewed before and consequently that they are not led to the finding out of the trueth in any speciall sort or manner beyond that generall influence that is required to the performance of euery good worke So that as God assisting Christian men in the Church onely in a generall sort to the performance of the workes of vertue there are euer some wel-doers and yet no particular man doth alwayes well and there is no degree or kinde of Morall vertue commanded in the Law but is attained by some one or other at one time or other one excelling in one thing and another in another yet no particular man or company of men hath all degrees and perfections of vertue as Hierome fitly noteth against the Pelagians so in like sort God assisting Christian men in the Church in seeking out the truth only in generall sort as in the performance of the actions of vertue not by immediate reuelation and inspiration as in the Apostles times there are euer some that hold and professe all necessary truth though no one man or company of men doe find the truth euer and in all thinges nor any assurance can be had of any particular men that they should alwayes hold all necessary truthes And therefore we may safely conclude that