this Apostasie of the Iesuites is the most abhominable and contumelious against the blessed Trinitie pag. 300. THE TRIPLICITIE OF ROMISH BLASPHEMIE OR THE THREE DEGREES OF ANTICHRISTS EXALTATION Against all that is called GOD. THE THIRD BOOKE SECT I. Contayning the assertions of the Romish Church whence her threefold blasphemie springs HAuing in the former dispute clearly acquitted as well Gods word from breeding as our Church from nursing contentions schismes and heresies wee may in this by course of common equitie more freely accuse their iniurious calumniators And because our purpose is not to charge them with forgerie of any particular though grossest heresies or blasphemies though most hideous but for erecting an intire frame capacioâ—s of all villanies imaginable farre surpassing the hugest mathematicall forme humane fancie could haue conceiued of such matters but only from inspection of this reall and materiall patterne which by degrees insensible hath growne vp with the mysterie of iniquitie as the barke doth with the tree such inconsiderate passionate speeches as heat of contention in personall quarrells hath exstracted from some one or few of their priuate Writers shall not be produced to giue euidence against the Church their Mother whose triall shall be as farre as may be by her Peeres either by her owne publike determinations in this controuersie or ioynt consent of her authorized best approued Advocates in opening the title or vnfolding the contents of that prerogatiue which they challenge for her 2 Our accusations are grounded vpon their Positions before set downe when wee explicated the differences betwixt vs. The position in briefe is this That the infallible authoritie of the present Church is the most sure most safe vndoubted rule in all doubts or controuersies of faith or in all points concerning the Oracles of God by which we may certainely know both without which wee cannot possibly know either which are the Oracles of God which not or what is the true sense and meaning of such as are receiued for his Oracles whether written or vnwritten 3 The extent of diuine Oracles or number of Canonicall bookes hath beene as our Aduersaries pretend very questionable amongst the ancient though such of the Fathers as for their skill in antiquitie were in all vnpartiall iudgements most competent Iudges in this cause were altogether for vs against the Romanists and such as were for their opinion were but for it vpon an error as thinking the Iewes had acknowledged all those bookes of the old Testament for Canonicall Scripture which the Churches wherin they liued receiued for such or that the Christian Church did acknowledge all for Canonical which they allowed to be publikely read Safe it was our aduersaries cannot denie for the Ancient to dissent one from an other in this question or to suspend their assent till new probabilities might sway them one way or other No reasons haue beene produced since sufficient to moue any ingenious mind vnto more peremptorie resolutions yet doth the Councell of Trent binde all to an absolute acknowledgement of those Bookes for Canonicall which by their owne confession were reiected by S. Hierome and other Fathers If any shall not receiue the whole Bookes with all their parts vsually read in the Church and as they are extent in the old vulgar for sacred and Canonicall let him be accuâ—sed So are all by the same decree that will not acknowledge such vnwritten traditions as the Romish Church pretends to haue come from Christ and his Apostles for diuine and of authoritie equall with the written word 4 So generally is this opinion receiued so fully beleeued in that Church That many of her Sonnes euen whilest they write against vs forgetting with whom they haue to deale take it as granted That the Scriptures cannot be known to be Gods word but by the infallible authoritie of the present Church And from this supposition as from a truth sufficiently knowne though neuer proued they labour in the next place to inferre That without submission of our faith to the Churches publike spirit wee cannot infallibly distinguish the orthodoxall or diuine sense of Gods Oracles whether written or vnwritten from hereticall or humane 5 Should we admit vnwritten Traditions and the Church withall as absolute Iudge to determine which were Apostolicall which not little would it boote vs to question with them about their meaning For when the point should come to triall wee might be sure to haue the very words framed to whatsoeuer sense should bee most fauourable for iustifying Romish practises And euen of Gods written Oracles whose words or characters as hee in his wisedome hath prouided cannot now be altered by an Index Expurgatorius at their pleasure That such a sense as shall bee most seruiceable for their turne may as time shall minister occasion bee more commodiously gathered the Trent Fathers immediately after the former decree for establishing vnwritten Traditions and amplifying the extent of diuine written Oracles haue in great wisedome authorized the old and vulgar translation of the whole Canon Which though it were not purposely framed to maintayne Poperie as some of our writers say they haue as friuolously as maliciously obiected yet certainely aswell the escapes and errors of those vnskilfull or ill-furnished interpretors as the negligence of transcribers or other defects incident to that worke from the simplicitie of most ancient the iniuries or calamities of insuing times were amongst others as the first heads or pettie springs of that raging floud of impietie which had well nigh drowned the whole Christian world in perdition by continually receiuing into it channell once thus wrought the dregs and filth of euery other error vnder heauen with the corrupt remainder of former heresies for these thousand yeares and more And vnto many grosse errors in Romish religion which this imperfect translation did not first occasion it yet affords that countenance which the pure Fountaines of the Greeke and Hebrew doe not but rather would scoure and wipe away were they current in that Church Finally though it yeld not nutriment to enlarge or feed yet it serues as a cloake to hide or couer most parts of the great mysterie of iniquitie 6 Yet besides the fauourable construction that may be made for that religion out of the plaine and literall sense of this erroneous translation the Church will bee absolute Iudge of all controuersies concerning the right interpretation thereof So as not what our consciences vpon diligent search and iust examination shall witnesse to vs but what the Church shall declare to them must be absolutely acknowledged for the true intent and meaning of Gods word as it is rendred by the vulgar interpretor To this purpose is the very next decree 7 Moreouer for brideling petulant dispositions it is decreed That no man in confidence of his owne wisdome or skill in matters of faith and manners making for the edification of Christian doctrine shall dare to interpret Scriptures wresting them to his
existence necessary Whatsoeuer is besides is but a shadow or picture borrowed from his infinite being Amongst created entities all essentially depending on Him Accidents haue a kind of existence peculiar to themselues yet cannot so properly bee saide to exist as their subiects on whom they haue such double dependance Nor can the Moone so truely say my beauty is mine owne as may the Sunne which lends light and splendor to this his sister as it were vpon condtion shee neuer vse it but in his sight For the same reason that for which wee belieue another thing is alwayes more truely more really and more properly belieued then that which is belieued for it if the one beliefe necessarily depend vpon the other tam in facto esse quam in fieri from the first beginning to the latter end For of beliefes thus mutually affected the one is reall and radicall the other nominall or at the most by participation onely reall This consequence is vnsound Intellectiue knowledge depends on sensitiue therefore sensitiue is of these two the surer The reason is because intellectiue knowledge depends on sensitiue onely in the acquisition not after it is acquired But this inference is most vndoubted Wee belieue the conclusion for the premisses therefore we belieue the premisses the better because beliefe of the Conclusion absolutely depends vpon the premisses during the whole continuance of it This is the great Philosophers rule and a branch of the former Axiome And some iustly question whether in Scholastique propriety of speech wee can truely say there is a beliefe of the conclusion distinct from the beleefe of the premisses or rather the beliefe of the premisses is by extrinsical denomination attributed vnto the conclusion This latter opinion at least in many Syllogismes is the truer most necessarily true in all wherein the conclusion is a particulall essentialâ—y subordinate to an vniuersall of truth vnquestionable As hee that infallibly belieues euery man is a reasonable creature infallibly belieues Socrates is such Nor can wee say there be two dictint beliefes one of the vniversall another of this particular for he that sayeth All excepteth none If Socrates then make one in the Catalogue of men hee that formerly knew all knew him to bee a reasonable Creature all he had to learne was what was meant by this name Socrates a man or a beast After he knowes him to be a man in knowing him to bee a reasonable creature hee knowes no more then he did before in that vniuersall Euery man is a reasonable Creature The like consequence holdes as firme in our present argument He that beleeues this vniuersall Whatsoeuer the Church proposeth concerning Scriptures is most true hath no more to learne but onely what particulars the church proposeth These being knowne we cannot imagine there should bee two distinct beleefes one of the churches generall infallibility another of the particular Truthes or points of faith contained in the Scripture proposed by it For as in the former case so in this He that from the churches proposall beleeues or knowes this particular The Booke of Reuelations was from God receiues no increase of former beleefe for before hee beleeued all the church did propose and therefore this particular because one of all 4 The truth of this conclusion may againe from a maine pinciple of Romish faith be thus demonstrated Whatsoeuer vnwritten traditions the Church shall propose though yet vnheard of or vnpossible otherwise to be knowne then onely by the Churches asseueration all Romanists are bound as certainly to beleeue as deuoutly to embrace as any truths contayned in the written word acknowledged by vs the Iewes and them for diuine Now if eyther from their owne experience the ioynt consent of sincere antiquitie or testimonie of Gods spirit speaking to them in priuate or what meanes soeuer else possible or imaginable they gaue any absolute credence vnto the written word or matters contained in it besides that they giue vnto the churches generall veracitie the Scriptures by addition of this credence were it great or little arising from these grounds peculiar to them must needs be more firmely beleeued and embraced then such vnwritten traditions as are in themselues suspitious vncapable of other credit then what they borrow from the Church For in respect of the Churches proposall Which is one and the same alike peremptory in both Scriptures and traditions of what kinde soeuer must be equally beleeued And if such traditions as can haue no assurance besides the Churches testimony must be as well beleeued as Scriptures or diuine truthes contained in them the former conclusion is euidently necessary that they neyther beleeue the Scriptures nor the Truthes contained in them but the Churches proposall of them onely For the least beleefe of any Diuine truth added to beleefe of the Churches proposall which equally concernes written and vnwritten verities would dissolue the former equalitie But that by the Trent Councell may not bee dissolued Therefore our aduersaries in deede and verity beleeue no Scriptures nor Diuine written Truth but the Churches proposall onely concerning them And Sacroboscus bewrayes his readinesse to beleeue the Church as absolutely as any Christian can doe God or Christ though no title of the New-testament were extant For that the Church cannot erre was an Oracle reuealed by God proposed by the Church and beleiued by the faithfull before any part of the New testament was written Now hee that without the Gospel of Iesus Christ would beleeue the Doctrines of faith as firmely as with it beleeues not the Gospel which now he hath but their authorities onely vpon which though wee had it not he would as absolute rely for all matters of doctrine supposed to be contained in it 5 Or further to illustrate the truth of our conclusion with this Iesuits former comparison which hath best illustrated the Romish churches tenent That Church in respect of the Canon of Scriptures or any part thereof is as the light is to colours As no colour can be seene of vs but by the light so by his doctrine neyther the Canon of Scriptures or any part thereof can be known without the Churches testimonie Againe as remoueall of light presently makes vs loose the sight of colours so doubt oâ— deniall of the Churches authoritie depriues vs of all true and stedfast beleefe concerning Gods Word or any matter contained in it God as they plead hath reuealed his will obscurely and vnto a distinct or cleare apprehension of what is obscurely reuealed the visible churches declaration is no lesse necessary then light to discernment of colours The reason is one in both and is this As the actuall visibilitie of colours wholly depends vpon the light as well for existence as duration so by Iesuiticall Doctrine true beleefe of Scriptures wholly depends on the visible Churches declaration as well during the whole continuance as the first producing of it By the same reason as we gather that light in it selfe is more
recordes and declarations written or vnwritten to be most authentique they cannot be certaine whether euer there had beene such an Emperour as they plead succession from or at least how farre his Dominions extended or where they lay This manner of plea in secular controuersies would be a meane to defeate him that made it For albeit the Christian World did acknowledge there had beene such an Emperour and that many parts of Europe of right belonged vnto his lawfull heire Yet if it were otherwise vnknowne what parts these were or who this heire should bee no Iudge would be so mad as finally to determine of eyther vpon such motiues Or if the Plaintiffe could by such courses as the World knowes oft preuaile in iudgement or other gracious respects effect his purpose hee were worse then madde that could thinke the finall resolution of his right were into the Emperours last will and testament which by his owne confession no man knowes besides himselfe and not rather into his owne presumed fidelitie or the Iudges apparant partialitie So in this controuersie whatsoeuer the Pope may pretend from Christ all in the end comes to his owne authority which wee may safely beleeue herein to bee most infallible that it will neuer prooue partiall against it selfe or define ought to his Holinesse disaduantage 10 Here againe it shall not be amisse to admonish yonger Students of another gull which the Iesuite would put vpon vs to make their Churches doctrine seeme lesse abominable in this point lest you should thinke they did aequalize the authority of the Church with diuine reuelations Valentian would perswade you it were no part of the formall obiect of faith It is true indeed that the Churches authority by their doctrine is not comprehended in the obiect of belieefe whilest it onely proposeth other Articles to bee beleeued No more is the Sunne comprehended vnder the obiects of our actuall sight whilest we behold colours or other visibles by the vertue of it But yet as it could not make colours or other things become more visible vnto vs vnlesse it selfe were the first and principall visible that is vnlesse it might bee seene more clearely then those things which wee see by it so wee would direct our sight vnto it so would it bee impossible the Churches infallible proposal could make a Romane Catholikes beliefe of Scriptures or their orthodoxal sense the stronger vnlesse it were the first and principall credible or primary obiect of his beliefe or that which must bee most clearely most certainely and most sted fastly belieued so as all other Articles besides must be belieued by the beliefe or credibility of it This is most euident out of Sacroboscus and Bellarmines resolution or explication of that point how the Churches proposall confirmes a Roman Catholiques beliefe To giue this doctrine of their Churches infallibility the right title according to the truth it is not an Article of Catholike beleefe but a Catholike Axiome of Antichristian vnbeliefe which from the necessary consequences of their assertions more strictly to be examined will easily appeare CHAP. IIII. What maner of causall dependance Romish beleefe hath on the Church that the Romanist truly and properly beleeues the Church onely not God or his word 1 THe 2. main assertions of our aduersaries whence our intended conclusion must be proued are these often mentioned heretofore First that wee cannot be infallibly perswaded of the truth of Scriptures but by the Churches proposall Secondly that without the same wee cannot bee infallibly perswaded of the true sense or meaning of these scriptures which that Church and we both belieue to be Gods word How wee should know the Scriptures to be Gods word is a probleme in Diuinity which in their iudgement cannot be assoiled without admission of Traditions or diuine vnwritten verities of whose extent and meaning the Church must be infallible Iudge It is necessary to saluation saith Bellarmine that wee know there bee some bookes diuine which questionlesse cannot by any meanes be knowne by Scriptures For albeit the Scriptures say that the Books of the Prophets or Apostles are diuine yet this I shall not certainely belieue vnlesse I first belieue that Scripture which saith thus is diuine For so wee may read euery where in Mahomets Alcoran that the Alcoran it selfe was sent from heauen but wee belieue it not Therefore this necessary point that some Scripture is diuine cannot sufficiently be gathered out of Scriptures alone Consequently seeing faith must rely vpon Gods word vnlesse wee haue God word vnwritten we can haue no faith His meaning is wee cannot know the Scriptures to be diuine but by Traditions and what Traditions are diuine what not wee cannot know but by the present visible Church as was expresly taught by the same Author before And the finall resolution of our belieuing what God hath said or not said must bee the Churches authority To this collection Sacroboseus thus farre accords Some Catholiques reiected diuers Canonicall Books without any danger and if they had wanted the Churches proposall for others as well as them they might without sinne haue doubted of the whole Canon This he thinks consonant to that of Saint Austin I would not belieue the Gospell vnlesse the Churches authority did thereto moue me He addes that we of reformed Churches making the visible Churches authority in defining points of faith vnsufficient might disclaime all without any greater sinne or danger to our soules then wee incurre by disobeying some parts of Scripture to wit the Apocryphall books canonized by the Romish church The Reader I hope obserues by these passages How Bellarmine ascribes that to Tradition which is peculiar to Gods prouidence Sacroboscus that to blind beliefe which belongs vnto the holy Spirit working faith vnto the former points by the ordinary obseruation of Gods prouidence and experiments answerable to the rules of Scriptures 2 Consequently to the Trent Councels decree concerning the second assertion Bellarmine thus collects It is necessary not onely to bee able to read Scriptures but to vnderstand them but the Scripture is often so ambiguous and intricate that it cannot bee vnderstood without the exposition of some that cannot erre therefore it alone is not sufficient Examples there be many For the equality of the diuine persons the Holy Ghost proceeding from the Father and the Sonne as from one ioint originall Originall sinne Christes descension into Hell nd many like may indeed be deduced out of scriptures but not so plainely as to end controuersies with contentious spirits if we should produce onely testimonies of Scriptures And wee are to note there bee two things in Scripture the Characters or the written words and the sense included in them The Character is as the sheath but the sense is the very sword of the spirite Of the first of these two all are partakers for whosoeuer knowes the Character may reade the Scripture but of the sense all men are not capable nor can wee in
some part of Gods Word reuealed for our aduersaries acknowledge all points of faith should bee resolued into the first truth Hence if wee descend to any particular or determinate conclusion of faith it must be gathered in his Syllogisme Whatsoeuer the Church teacheth concerning the determinate and true sence of Scriptures whereon points of Faith are grounded is most true But the Church teacheth thus and thus for example her owne authoritie is infallibly taught by the Holy Ghost in these wordes Peter feede my sheepe Peter I haue prayed for thee that thy faith should not faile goe this sence and meaning of these wordes is most true And as true as it is must the sence likewise of euery proposition or part of Scripture by this Church expounded or declared be accounted 2 The Maior proposition of this Syllogisme is as vndoubted amongst the Roman Catholiques as the maior of the former was vnto all Christians but as yet the minor The Church doth giue this or that sence of this or that determinate place may be as vncertaine indeed as they would make our beleefe vnto the minor proposition in the generall Syllogisme before it bee confirmed by the Churches authoritie For how can we be certain that the Church doth teach all those particulars which the Iesuites propose vnto vs wee haue Bookes indeede which goe vnder the name of the Trent Counsell but how shall wee know that this Counsell was lawfully assembled that some Canons haue not beene foisted in by priuate Spirits that the Councell left not some vnwritten tradition for explicating their decrees after another fashion then the Iesuites doe who shall assure vs in these or like doubtes The present Church All of vs cannot repaire to Rome such as can when they come thither cannot bee sure to heare the true Church speake ex Cathedra If the Pope send his Writs to assure vs what Critcicke so cunning as to assure vs whether they be authentike or counterfeite Finally for all that can bee imagined in this case onely the Maior of the Catholicke syllogisme indefinitely taken is certaine and consequently no particular or definite conclusion of faith can be certaine to a Romanist because there are no possible meanes of ascertaining the Minor What the true Church doth infallibly define vnto his Conscience 3 Or if they wil hold such conclusions as are ordinarily gathered from the Trent Councell or the Popes decisions as infallible points of faith they make their authoritie to be farre greater then the infallibilitie of Gods written word yea more infallible then the Deitie This Collection they would denie vnlesse it followed from their owne premisses These for example That a conclusion of faith cannot be gathered vnlesse the minor God did say this or that determinately be first made certaine But from the Pope or Churches infallibilitie conclusions of faith may be gathered albeit the minor be not certaine de fide For who can make a Iesuites report of the Popes Decrees or an Historicall relation of the Trent Councell certaine de fide as certaine as an Article of faith And yet the Doctrine of the Trent Councell and Popes Decrees must bee held de fide vpon paine of damnation albeit men take them onely from a Priests mouth or vpon a Iesuites faith and credit 4 This is the madnesse of that Antichristian Synagogue that acknowledgeth Gods Word for most infallible and the Scriptures which wee haue for his word if it selfe bee infallible For it tels vs they are such yet will not haue collections or conclusions with equall probabillitie deduced thence so firmely beleeued by priuate men as the collections or conclusions which are gathered from the Churches infallibilitie An implicit faith of particulars grounded vpon the Churches generall infallibilitie so men stedfastly beleeue it may suffice But implicit faith of particulars grounded onely vpon our generall beleefe of Gods infallibilitie prouidence or written word sufficeth not This prooues the authoritie of the Church to be aboue the authoritie of Scriptures or the Deitie absolutely considered not only in respect of vs that is all besides the Pope and his Cardinals For that is of more authoritie absolutely not onely in respect of vs which vpon equall notice or knowledge is to be better beleeued more esteemed or obeyed but such is the authoritie of the Church in respect of the diuine authoritie such is the authoritie of the Popes Decrees in respect of Gods Word For the Minor proposition in both the former Syllogismes being alike vncertaine the conclusion must bee more certaine in that Syllogisme whose maior relies vpon the Popes infallibilitie then in the other whose Maior was grounded vpon the infallibilitie of the Deitie 5 Briefly to collect the summe of all The authoritie of the Church is greater then the authoritie of Scriptures both in respect of faith and Christian obedience In respect of faith because we are bound to beleeue the Churches decisions read or explicated vnto vs by the Popes messenger though à Sir Iohn Lack-lattin without any appeale but no part of Scripture acknowledged by vs and them we may beleeue without appeale or submission of our interpretation to the Church albeit the true sence and meaning of it seeme neuer so plain vnto priuate consciences in whom Gods Spirit worketh faith The same argument is most firme and euident in respect of obedience 6 That authoritie ouer vs is alwayes greatest vnto which wee are to yeeld most immediate most strict and absolute obedience but by the Romish Churches Doctrine wee are to yeelde supreme and most absolute obedience to the Church more supreme and absolute then vnto Gods word therefore the authoritie of the Church is greater ouer vs. The Maior is out of controuersie seeing greatnesse of authoritie is alwayes measured by the manner of obedience due vnto it The Minor is as euident from the former reason Our obedience is more absolute and strict vnto that authoritie from which in no case we may appeale then vnto that from which wee may in many safely appeale but by the Romish Churches doctrine there lies alwayes an appeale from that sence and meaning of Scriptures which Gods spirit and our owne conscience giues vs vnto the Churches authoritie none from the Churches authoritie or meaning vnto the Scriptures or our owne consciences 7 Our Sauiour Christ bids vs search the Scriptures Saint Paul trie all retaine that which is good Saint Iohn trie the Spirits whether they bee of God or no Suppose a Minister of our Church should charge a Romanist vpon his allegiance to our Sauiour Christ and that obedience which he owes vnto Gods Word to search Scriptures trie spirits and examine Doctrines for the ratifying of his faith he will not acknowledge this to be a Commandemēt of Scripture or at least not to be vnderstood in such asense as may bind him to this practise What followes if our Clergie charge him to admit it he appeales vnto the Church And as in Schooles simus
doe First their prerogatiues they giue to Peter are blasphemous Secondly their allegations to proue that their Popes succeede as full heires to all Peters prerogatiues are ridiculous Whence it must needes follow that their faith is but a compost of folly blasphemy This pretended perpetuity of tradition or suspitious tale of succession from Peter is the best warrant they haue the Church doth not erre in expounding the places alleadged for her infallability and their beliefe of their infallibility in such expositions the onely security their soules can haue that obeying the former decree of worshipping the consecrate host of cōmunicating vnder one kind they doe not contemptuously disobey Gods principall lawes mangle Christs last Will and Testament vilifie his pretious body and bloud Seeing then they themselues confesse the places brought by vs against their decrees to be diuine and we haue demonstrated that mens beliefe of that infallible authority in making such decrees to bee merely humane the former conclusion is most firme that whilest men obey these decrees against that naturall sense and meaning which the former passages of scripture suggest so plainly to euery mans conscience that the Churches pretended authority set aside none would euer question whether they could admit any restraint they obey men more then God humane lawes more then diuine and much better belieue the traditions of humane fancy of whose forgery for others worldly gaine there bee strong presumptions then the expresse written testimony of the holy spirit in the especiall points of their owne saluation 12 Or if vnto the testimony of Gods spirit recorded in Scriptures wee adde history tradition Councels or former Popes decrees or whatsoeuer possibly may be pretended to proue the present Popes authority it must still bee supposed greater better knowne then all that can be brought for it or against it as will appeare if we apply our argument vsed before That authority is alwayes greater which may trie all others and must bee tried by none but such is the Popes declaration or determination of all points in controuersie whether about the canon or sence of Scriptures ouer those which are brought for it whether about the truth true meaning or authority or vnwrittē traditions whether about the lawfulnes of councels or their authentique interpretations in one word his determinations are monarchical may not be examined as S. Austen or others of the ancient fathers writings may by any law written or vnwritten So Bellarmine suteable to the Trent Councell expresly auoucheth The Fathers were onely Doctors or expositors the Pope is a iudge What then is the difference betweene a Iudge and an expositor To explane as a Iudge there is required authority to explane as a Doctor or expositor onely learning is requisite For a Doctor doth not propose his sentence as necessary to bee followed but onely so farre as reason shal councell vs but a Iudge proposeth his sentence to bee followed of necessity Whereof then will the Pope bee Iudge Of expounding Scriptures these places of Scripture which make for his pretended authority Must his sentence herein of necessity be followed By Bellarmine it must albeit wee see no reason for it either out of Scripture or nature It is for Doctors to bring reasons for their expositions but the Pope needs not except hee will nor may wee exact it of a Iudge So hee addes more expresly We admit not of Bartolus or Baldus glosses as wee doe of Empecours declarations Austine and other Fathers in their Commentaries supply the places of Teachers but the Councell and Popes exercise the function of Iudges whereunto God hath designed them But how shall we know that God hath committed all iudgement vnto them seeing wee haue beene taught by his word that hee hath committed all iudgement vnto his sonne Because all men should honour the sonne as they honour the father We reade not of any other to whom the like authority is giuen by God or his sonne yet of one whose very name shall import the vsurpation of like authority that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christs Vicar generall vnto whom the Sonne as must bee supposed doth deligate the same iudiciary power the Father deligated vnto him 13. But may a Princes declaration in no case be examined by his subiects Yes though in ciuill matters it may so farre as it concernes their consciences as whether it be consonant to Gods word or no whether it make more for the health of their soules to suffer what it inflicts vpon the refusers or to act what it commands To controle contermaund or hinder the execution of it by opposition of violence or contrary ciuill power subiects may not But for any but man to vsurpe such dominion ouer his fellow creatures soules as earthly Princes haue ouer their subiects goods lands or bodies is more then Monarchicall more then tyrannical the very Idea of Antichristianisme And what I would commend vnto the Reader as a point of especiall consideration this assertion of Bellarmine concerning the Popes absolute authoritie directly proues him as was auouched before to be a supreame head or foundation of the selfe same ranke and order with Christ no way inferiour to him in the intensiue perfection but onely in the extent of absolute soueraigntie For greater soueraignty cannot be conceiued then this That no man may examine the truth or equity of commands or consequences immediately deriued from it though immediatly concerning their eternall ioy or miserie No Prince did euer deligate such soueraigne power to his Vice gerent or deputy nor could he vnlesse for the time being at least he did vtterly relinquish his owne supreame authority or admit a full compere in his kingdome Bellarmines distinctions of a primary and secondary foundation of a ministeriall and principall head of the Church may hence he described to be but meere stales set to catch guls Their conceit of the Popes copartnership with Christ is much better resembled and more truly expressed by the Poets imaginations of Iupiter and Augustus Caesars fraternity Diuisum imperium cum Iove Caesar habet Ioue and Caesar are Kings and Gods But Ioue of heauen that 's the onely ods That Christ should retaine the title of the supreame head ouer the Church militant and the realitie of supremacie ouer the Church triumphant ouer aduersaries are not offended Because there is small hope of raising any new tribute from the Angels and Saints in heauen to the Romish churches vse and as little feare that Christ should take any secular commodity from it which aunciently it hath enioyed 14. But though it were true that we were absolutely bound to obey an absolute Monarchie of whose right none doubts yet may we examine whether euery Potentate that challengeth Monarchicall iurisdiction ouer others or giues forth such insolent edicts in ciuill matters as the Pope doth in spirituall do not goe beyond his authority in these particulars albeit his lawfull prerogatiues in respect of others be
for the Churches proposall we iointly beleeue for God speaking eyther in his written word or by tradition Yet if a man should haue asked him why he did or how possibly hee could infallibly beleeue that God did speake all the words eyther contayned in the Bible or in their traditions he must haue giuen eyther a womans answere because God spâ—ke them or this because our holy mother the Church doth say so For elsewhere he plainly auowes the Bookes of Canonicall Scripture need not be beleeued without the Churches proposall whose infallible authority was sufficiently knowne before one title of the New Testament was written and were to be acknowledged though it had neuer beene hee plainly confesseth withall that hee could not beleeue the Scriptures taught some principall Articles of faith most firmely beleeued by him vnlesse the churches authoritie did thereto moue him against the light of naturall reason Now if for the churches proposall hee beleeue that which otherwise to beleeue he had no reason at al but rather strong inducements to the contrarie as stedfastly as any other truth the Churches infallibilitie must be the true and only cause both why he beleeues the mystery proposed and distrusts the naturall dictates of his conscience to the contrary In fine hee doth not beleeue there is a Trinitie for in that Article is his instance because God hath said it but hee beleeues that God hath said it because his infallible Mother the Church doth teach it This is the misery of miseries that these Apostates should so bewitch the World as to make it thinke they beleeue the Church because God speakes by it when it is euident they doe not beleeue God but for the Churches testimonie well content to pretend his authority that her own may seeme more soueraigne Thus make they their superstitious groundlesse magical faith but as a wrench to wrest that principle of nature Whatsoeuer God saith is true to countenance any villany they can imagine as will better appeare hereafter But first the Reader must be content to be informed that by some of their tenents the same Diuine reuelations may be assented vnto by the Habite either of Theologie or of faith both which are most certaine but herein different That the former is discursiue and resembles science properly so called the latter not so but rather like vnto that habite or faculty by which we perceiue the truth of generall Maximes or vnto our bodily sight which sees diuers visibles all immediately not one after or by another Whilst some of them dispute against the certainty of priuate spirits their aguments suppose Diuine reuelations must be beleeued by the Habite of Theology which is as a sword to offend vs. Whiles we assault them and vrge the vnstabilitie of their resolutions they fly vnto the non discursiue Habite of faith infused as their best buckler to ward such blowes as the Habite of Theologie cannot beare off 6 Not heere to dispute eyther how truly or pertinently they denie faith infused to be a discursiue habite the Logicall Reader need not I hope my admonition to obserue that faith or beleefe whether habituall or actuall vnlesse discursiue cannot possibly bee resolued into any praeexistent Maxime or principle From which grant this emolument will arise vnto our cause that the Churches authoritie cannot be proued by any diuine reuelation or portion of Scripture seeing it is an Article of faith and must be beleeued eodem intuitu with that Scripture or part of Gods word whether written or vnwritten that teacheth it as light and colours are perceiued by one and the same intuition in the same instant And by this assertion we could not so properly say wee beleeue the diuine reuelation because we beleeue the church nor doe we see colours because we see the light but wee may truly say that the obiects of our faith diuine reuelations are therefore actually credible or worthy of beleefe because the infallible Church doth illustrate or propose them as the light doth make colours though invisible by night visible by day This similitude of the light and colours is not mine but Sacroboscus whom in the point in hand I most mention because Doctor Whittakers Obiections against their Churches Doctrine as it hath beene deliuered by Bellarmine and other late controuersers hath enforced him clearely to vnfold what Bellarmine Stapelton and Valentian left vnexpressed but is implicitely included in all their writings But ere we come to examine the ful incoÌ„ueniences of their opinions I must request the Reader to obserue that as oft as they mention resolution of faith they meane the discursiue habite of Theologie For al resolution of beleefe or knowledge essentially includes discourse And Bellarmine directly makes Sacroboscus expressely auoucheth the Churches authority the medius terminus or true cause whence determinate conclusions of faith are gathered From which and other equiualent assertions acknowledged by all the Romanists this day liuing it will appeare that Valentian was eyther very ignorant himselfe or presumed hee had to deale with very ignorant aduersaries when he denyed that the last resolution of Catholique faith was into the Churches authoritie which comes next in place to be examined CHAP. III. Discouering eyther the grosse ignorance or notorious craft of the Iesuite in denying his faith is finally resolued into the Churches veracity or infallibility that possibly it cannot bee resolued into any branch of the first truth 1 IT were a foolish question as Caietan sayeth Valentian hath well obserued if one should aske another why he beleeues the first truth reuealing For the assent of faith is finally resolued into the first truth It may bee Caietan was better minded towardes Truth it selfe first or secondary then this Iesuite was which vsed his authority to colour his former rotten position That the Churches proposall by their doctrine is not the cause of faith but our former distinction betweene belief it selfe it obiect often confounded or between Gods word indefinitely and determinately taken if well obserued will euince this last reason to be as foolish as the former assertion was false No man sayeth he can giue any reason besides the infallibility of the Reuealer why hee beleeues a diuine Reuelation It is true no man can giue nor would any aske why wee beleeue that which wee are fully perswaded as a diuine Reuelation But yet a reason by their positions must bee giuen why we beleeue eyther this or that truth any particular or determinat portion of Scripture to be a diuine reuelation Wherefore seeing Christian faith is alwayes of definite and particular propositions or conclusions and as Bellarmine sayeth and all the Papists must say these cannot be known but by the Church As her infallible proposall is the true and proper cause why wee belieue them to bee infallibly true because the onely cause whereby wee can belieue them to bee diuine reuelations so must it bee the essentiall principle into which our assent or
many places bee certaine of it vnlesse Tradition be assistant It is an offer worth the taking that here he makes That the sense of Scriptures is the sword of the spirit This is as much as wee contend that the sense of the Scripture is the Scripture Whence the inference is immediately necessary That if the Romish Church binde vs to belieue or absolutely practise ought contrary to the true sense and meaning of Scriptures with the like deuotion we doe Gods expresse vndoubted commandements she preferres her owne authority aboue Gods word and makes vs acknowledge that allegiance vnto her which we owe vnto the spirit For suppose wee had as yet no full assurance of the spirit for the contradictory sense to that giuen by the Church we were in christian duty to expect Gods prouidence and inuoke the spirits assistance for manifestation of the truth from all possibility wherof wee desperately exclude our selues if wee belieue one mans testimony of the spirit as absolutely irreuoucably as we would do the manifest immediate testimony of the spirit yet Sacroboscus acknowledgeth hee beliues the mystery of the Trinity as it is taught by their Church onely for the Churches authority and yet this hee beleeues as absolutely as hee doth yea as hee could belieue any other diuine Reuelation though extraordinarily made vnto himselfe 3 In both parts of beliefe aboue mentioned the causall dependance of our faith vpon the Churches proposals may be imagined three wayes eyther whilest it is in planting or after it is planted or from the first beginning of it to it full growth or from it first entrance into our hearts vntill our departure out of this world How farre and in what sort the Ministery of men in the Church is auaileable for planting faith hath been declared heretofore Eyther for the planting or supporting it the skill or authority of the teachers reaches no further then to quicken or strengthen our internal taste or apprehension of the diuine truth reuealed in Scriptures or to raise or tune our spirites as Musicke did Elishahs the better to perceiue the efficacy of Gods spirit imprinting the stampe of those diuine Reuelations in our hearts whose Characters are in our braines The present Churches proposals in respect of our beliefe is but as the Samaritan womans report was vnto the men of Sichars Many sayth the Euangelist belieued in him for the saying of the woman which testified he hath told mee all things that euer I did But this beliefe was as none in respect of that which they conceiue immediately from his owne words For they saide vnto the woman Now wee belieue not because of thy saying for we haue heard him our selues and know that this is indeede the Christ. The eare sayeth Iob tryeth the words as the mouth tasteth meates Consonant hereto is our Churches doctrine that as our bodily mouthes taste and trie meates immediately without interposition of any other mans sense or iudgement of them so must the eares of our soules trie and discerne diuine truthes without relying on other mens proposals or reports of their rellish No externall meanes whatsoeuer can in eyther case haue any vse but onely eyther for working a right disposition in the Organ whereby triall is made or by occasioning the exercise of the faculty rightly disposed How essentially faith by our aduersaries doctrine dependes vpon the churches authority is euident out of the former discourses that this dependance is perpetuall is as manifest in that they make it the iudge and rule of faith such an indefectible rule and so authentique a Iudge as in all points must be followed and may not be so far examined eyther by Gods written law or rules of nature whether it contradict not it selfe or them 4 It remaines we examine the particular maner of this dependance or what the Churches infallibility doth or can performe eyther to him that belieues or to the obiect of his beleefe whēce a Romane Catholikes faith should become more firme or certaine then another mans It must enlighten eyther his soule that it may see or diuine reuelations that they may be seene more clearely otherwise he can exceed others onely in blinde beleefe The cunningest Sophister in that schoole strictly examined vpon these points will bewray that monstrous blasphemy which some shallow braines haue hitherto hoped to couer Wee haue the same Scriptures they haue and peruse them in all the languages they doe What is it then can hinder eyther them from manifesting or vs from discerning their Truth or true meaning manifested Doe we want the Churches proposall we demand how their present Church it selfe can better discerne them then ours may what testimonie of antiquity haue they which we haue not But it may be we want spectacles to read them our Church hath but the eyes of priuate men which cannot see without a publike light Their Churches eyes are Cat-like able so to illustrate the obiects of Christian faith as to make them cleare and perspicuous to it selfe though darke and inuisible vnto vs. Suppose they could Yet Cats-eyes benefit not by-standers a whit for seeing colours in darknes albeit able themselues to see them without any other light then their owne The visible Church saith the Iesuite is able to discerne all diuine truth by her infallible publique spirit How knowes he this certainly without an infallible publique spirit perhaps as men see Cats-eyes shine in the darke when their owne doe not Let him beleeue so But what doth this beleefe aduantage him or other priuate spirits for the cleare distinct or perfect sight of what the Church proposeth Doth the proposall make diuine Truthes more perspicuous in themselues Why then are they not alike perspicuous to all that heare reade or know the Churches testimonie of them Sacroboscus hath said al that possibly can be said on their behalfe in this difficultie The Sectaries albeit they should vse the authoritie of the true Church yet cannot haue any true beleefe of the truth reuealed If the vse of it be as free to them as to Catholikes what debarres them from this benefit They doe not acknowledge the sufficiencie of the Churches proposall And as a necessary proofe or medium is not sufficient to the attayning of science vnlesse a man vse and acknowledge it formally as necessary so for establishing true faith it sufficeth not that the Church sufficiently proposeth the points to be beleeued or auoweth them by that infallible authoritie wherewith Christ hath enabled her to declare both what bookes containe Doctrines Diuine and what is the true sense of places controuersed in them but it is further necessary that wee formally vse this proposall as sufficient and embrace it as infallible 5 The reason then why a Romane Catholique rightly beleeues the Truth or true meaning of Scriptures when a Protestant that knowes the Churches testimonie as well as he in both points vncertaine is because the Catholique infallibly beleeues the Churches authority to bee