Credo ecclesiam sanctam Catholicam I beleeue the holy Catholike Church : the authoritie, vniuersalitie, and visibilitie of the church handled and discussed / by Edward Chaloner ...

Credo Ecclesiam Sanctam Catholicam. (Book 1)

I beleeue the holy Catholike Church. (Book 1)

SECT. I. The Preface and partition of the ensu∣ing subject.

THis parcell of the Creed, how compendious soeuer it seems in wordes, yet is it in signifi∣cation so ample, that if the Iesuites Comment exceedes not the Text, this, alone, is an abridgement of Diuinitie, this, a Catechisme sufficient to engrosse the Lay∣ties whole studie and beliefe. It is not a matter of small consequence to them which oppose names to things, and triumph in the naked sounds of Church and Catholike, whether you apparell the

sense in any other furniture of Language then this: they cannot reply as a 1.1 Demosthenes did to Aeschines, whē being vpbrayded with the impro∣per vse of a word, hee answered, that the fortunes of Greece consisted not therein; No, in hoc sit a sum fortunae Romae, in these Sillables the fortunes of Rome are entrench'd; not the seuen Hils whereon shee is seated, not her extended Wals whose aun∣cient Tracts are almost en••omb'd with Age, not her Castle of Saint Angelo are halfe so relied vp∣on by her, as this single Article; For why? Shee hopes, the Church will serue her for a Cittadle or Towre of defence, Holynesse will colour her title, and Catholicke will from all quarters furnish her with a voluminous Armie of ancient and experi∣enced souldiers. Howsoeuer therefore I am not able to vndertake this subiect, either with that power or skill, as those which haue preceded me in the same, yet because, as Rome was not built in a day, so neither can shee bee surueied in an houre, or as shee is b 1.2 the Beast with seuen heads and ten hornes, resembling Hydra, which as soone as Hercules had smitten off one head, maintained the fight with another; so there may remaine af∣ter those greater labours of others, something for vs of succeeding times and ages to meete withall; Be it as it will, I shall not thinke my paines mis∣pent, if whilest others haue pared off an head, my weaker strookes force her but so far as to shrinke in a horne.

But to leaue Prefaces, and come to the hand∣ling of the point. The words now read vnto you,

containing in them a matter of Faith and Beliefe, doe present two thinges to our consideration; Viz.

• 1. First the act of Faith, in these words, (tacitely implied) I beleeue.
• 2. Secondly the obiect of this Faith, the Church, pourtraited and descri∣bed by two properties. Viz.
  • 1. Sanctitie in that it is called, Holy.
  • 2. Vnjuersalitie, in that it is stiled Catholicke.

SECT. II. What act of Faith is implied in this Article of the Church, and the errours of Romish interpreters touching the same.

COncerning the acte of this faith (I be∣leeue) though it be not prefixed to the beginning of this Article, as neither to the rest which follow it; yet is it to be vnderstood; the former (I beleeue) which precedes the Article of the holy Ghost, communicating it selfe to this and the subsequent, and that chiefely for two reasons.

The one, to teach vs, that the principall obiect of our faith is God himselfe, considered in vnitie of Essence, and Trinitie of persons, and therefore to each of the persons, there is either a (Beleeue) prefixed, or the Particle (in) set before, to shew

that on them we are to build the certaintie and as∣surance of our hope; but as for these Articles of the Church, the forgiuenesse of sinnes, the Resurrecti∣on of the body, and the like, they being creatures, are but the secondarie obiects of our Faith, not to be trusted vpon immediately in themselues, but onely vnder God and through God, and there∣fore haue not a Credo a (Beleeue) a part to them∣selues, but prefixt to one of the persons (I beleeue in the holy Ghost.)

The other, to set out and diuide by this meanes vnto euery of the persons an appropriate and spe∣ciall worke. For as God the father hath Creation in the Articles attributed vnto him, and the Sonne Redemptionem merito, Redemption by the merit of his Death and Passion, vnto him; so the holy Ghost by the (Beleeue) which is prefixt to his Ar∣ticle, and is in part of sense to be conuei'd vnto the following; hath the application of our redempti∣on, Virtute & efficacia, by his vertue and efficacie appropriated vnto him also; to wit, The sanctify∣ing of the holy Catholicke Church, the vniting of the members in a communion with their head, the infu∣sion of iustifying faith, which apprehends the remissi∣on of sinnes, the quickning of the dead in the Resurre∣ction, and the conferring of life, both vitam gratiae, the life of Grace, and vitam gloriae, the life of glo∣rie in the world to come.

So then, the act of faith (I beleeue) which be∣longs to this Article of the Church, is to bee fetch'd and deriued from the preceding Article of the holy Ghost. And yet because it descends not

in the same forme and garbe of sense altogether, which it beares there, but something altered and transfigured, the question will be, what act it pro∣perly imports in this place towards his obiect, the holy Catholicke Church.

For the better resoluing whereof we must ne∣cessarily call to minde that ancient distinction of c 1.3 Saint Austens, and the Schoolemen touching Credere to beleeue: That there is

• 1. Credere in aliquem, to beleeue and put ones trust & confidence in one.
• 2. Credere alicui, to beleeue or giue credit to one.
• 3. Credere aliquem, to beleeue that one is in being, or to beleeue that one is after this or that manner in being.

The first of these, which is Credere in aliquem, to beleeue in one, doth virtually indeed include the other two, for one cannot beleeue in one, but he must presuppose that hee is, and that hee is to be credited, but yet the proper obiect of it, is bo∣num, a thing as it is good, and the formall act which it exerciseth, is chiefly an act of the will; whereas the rest haue rather for their obiect, ve∣rum a thing as it is true, and the act which they exercise, appertaines onely to the vnderstanding; but with this difference, that when I say, credo a∣licui, I giue credit to ones saying, the act of faith hath relation to his obiect, as to obiectum formale, a kind of principle for whose sake and cause I beleeue; but when I say, Credo aliquem, I

beleeue that one is in being, the act of faith hath relation here to his obiect, as onely to obiectum materiale, or quod, (as the Schoolemen speake) a conclusion, which it beleeues, and not as to the motiue or inducement for which it beleeues.

Now to bring this home to the marke; The Church of Rome and we doe agree, that the (be∣leeue) which is prefixt to the Article of the holy Ghost, doth not communicate it selfe with the re∣striction caused by the Particle (in) to this Article of the Church and the rest which follow it (for that were to beleeue in them, and then no diffe∣rence should be made betweene the Creator and the Creatures) but simply and without addition, and the question is, what act it now exerciseth; whether such an one as whereby our faith hath relation to the Catholicke Church, as onely to a materiall obiect or bare conclusion which it be∣leeues, by reason wherof we may say, Credo Eccle∣siam, I beleeue that there is a Catholicke Church, or moreouer, such, as whereby our faith may re∣flect vpon the Church as a formall obiect, cause and principle, for whose sake it yeelds credit and assent to all other things, so that thereby, though not expresly yet tacitly is implied, Credo Ecclesiae, I yeeld faith & beliefe To the Catholicke Church?

The d 1.4 Iesuites, howsoeuer they would palliate the matter, and make shew, that the Church is onely a condition, and not a formall cause of our beliefe, yet others of them speake more plainely what the rest ayme at; e 1.5 For Scotus and Biel, to whom Canus ioynes Durand, doe teach that our

faith is last resolued into the authoritie of the Church; and f 1.6 Stapleton yet more punctually af∣firmes, that this Article of the Church is inser∣ted into the Creede, Tanquam medium credendi alia omnia, as the onely meanes whereby we be∣leeue all other things, importing thus much, Credo illa omnia, quae Deus per Ecclesiam me docet, I beleeue all those things which God teacheth me by the Church. Whereby we may easily col∣lect, that the Papists by this Credo Ecclesiam, I beleeue that there is a Church, doe vnderstand also, Credo Ecclesiae, I yeeld faith and beliefe to the Church.

We for our parts doe reuerence the name and testimonie of the Church, we acknowledge it to bee of all humane the greatest, wee confesse more∣ouer that the Catholicke Church in the whole neuer hath erred, nor euer shall erre in fundamen∣tall points, the prouidence of God sustayning it. In regard whereof, it hath the promise of our Sa∣uiour g 1.7 that the gates of Hell shall not preuaile a∣gainst it, that the spirit shall lead it into all truth, and it is called by the Apostle, the pillar of truth, as who would say, that it retayneth a sauing profes∣sion of heauenly truth, and vpholdeth the same a∣gainst all the stratagems of Satan and his compli∣ces. But that it is not either in it selfe, or in this place to be taken, for the formall cause of our be∣liefe, that is, the foundation of our faith, vpon whose credit and authoritie wee are wholy to de∣pend, I shall by these following reasons drawen out of the Creed it selfe easily make apparant.

First by the Grammaticall construction of this Credo, I beleeue, which when it imports to yeeld credit or assent to a thing, is not ioyned with an Accusatiue case, as here in the Creede, but with a Datiue, whereas wee say not, Credo Ecclesiae, but Credo Ecclesiam, to shew that the Creede in this place implies veritatem in essendo, a beliefe of the Churches being; and not veritatem in significan∣do, a beliefe of the Churches saying: h 1.8 Stapleton notwithstanding would faine find an cuasion from this argument, saying, that to yeeld beliefe to the affirmations of the Church, is the Theologi∣call sense of the Creede, though it bee not the Grammaticall; much like as Bellarmine, who en∣deauouring to proue Purgatorie from these words of Christ, Matth. 12. It shall not be forgiuen him, neither in this world, nor in the world to come, i 1.9 Confesseth in the end, that it followes not indeed according to the rules of Logicke, but onely accor∣ding to the rule of Prudence, as if forsooth the Arts were contradictorie to Diuinitie and not subordinate vnto it, and that one might not iust∣ly suspect something to bee amisse in that house, where the Mistresse and her hand maides are at variance.

Secondly I argue from the word Catholicke in the Creede, which by the k 1.10 Tridentine Cate∣chismes owne confession, signifying the Flocke as well as the Pastors, and excluding no time, no persons, nor any condition of men, is not possi∣ble to be seene, nor capable to be heard, nor able to bee consulted with, and therefore according to

the sense which the Church beleeues in this place, it is absurd to conceiue that these words Credo Eccle∣siam, I beleeue that there is a Church, should bee e∣quiualent to these, Credo Ecclesiae, I yeeld faith and beliefe to the Church.

But for breuities sake, omitting other proofes as more behoofull for those which write large Tracts, than for my selfe, who desire to obserue as neere, as I can the lawes of Catechising, my third reason shall bee drawen from the word Church, which be∣ing by the Papists inuolued with so many contrari∣eties and contradictions, from it, I thus argue.

That which is to be the foundation of my faith, and to which I am to yeeld assent in all things, that must be a thing certainely knowne and determined, what it is; It is not sufficient to be acquainted with the word, but wee must also vnderstand the thing; for faith is not verball but reall, neither are we con∣ueied to heauen by bare sounds, as by Magicke spels, but by truths and verities which are couched vnder them. But according to the Papists owne as∣sertions, this Church, which they here would make to be the foundation of their faith: and to which (say they) we are to yeeld assent in all things, is not to them a thing, as yet certainely knowne and de∣termined what it is, which by these Gradations fol∣lowing I shall demonstrate.

SECT. III. The Romanists distractions touching the Church, set downe in eight Gradations.

THe Church is deuided by some of the Popish* 1.11 Doctors into the Church,

• 1. Essentially, which they make to be the Conuocation of all that be∣leeue in Christ.
• 2. Representatiue, which they say, are either the Bishops assembled in a generall Councell, as most doe af∣firme, or the Colledge of Cardi∣nals, as Siluester Prierias imagines.
• 3. Virtually, which they conceiue to be the Pope.

The first Gradation.

1. NOw graunt the Church to be such a Pillar of truth, that who so heares it cannot erre, yet, First, it is not determined by Popish writers which is that Church, to whose Oracles and definitiue sen∣tence we are to listen.

1. The m 1.12 Glosse vpon Gratians Decrees, which containe the Popes owne lawes and constitutions, asking the question, what Church it is to be meant off, when it is said, that the Church cannot erre, an∣sweres, that it is to be meant not of the Pope but of the Congregation of the faithful, that is the Church Essentially.

2. But this opinion of the Church is generally

by almost all the Papists reiected, for being the iudge of Controuersies, and consequently the foun∣dation of our faith; the reasons are, First, n 1.13 because such a multitude dispersed farre and wide through∣out the face of the earth, cannot be so marshalled as to haue their opinions calculated. Secondly, because the greater part of these are Lay-people, whose ap∣prehensions oftentimes reach not vnto the matters controuerted. Lastly, o 1.14 because there is no promise made either to the flocke or to the Pastors and do∣ctors of the Church, that a greater part of them shal not erre, but only that all of them shal not erre. Wherefore though the whole Church in this sense cannot erre, errore personali, with a personall error, yet Bellarmine in his fourth Booke De Rom. Pont. and fourth Chapter, tels vs, that we must seeke out for one that cannot erre, errore iudicali, with a iu∣diciall errour.

Some therefore of the Papists are of opinion that the Church in this sense, as it is taken for the iudge of controuersies and foundation of faith is the Church, representatiue in a generall Councell of Bishops, no matter whether with the Pope or without him, because the Pope p 1.15 (say they) though he be the head of all Christians and all Churches in seuerall, yet is he not of all the Church assembled in a Councell togeather. And of this opinion, besides those which q 1.16 Bellarmine reckons vp, as Cardinalis Cameracensis, Ioh. Gerson, Iacobus Almanus, Nic. Cusanus, Panormitanus, Cardinalis Florentinus, and Abulensis, we may ioyne, Ocham, Driedo, the Bi∣shops assembled in the generall Councels of Constance

and Basill, and in a word the Vniuersitie of Paris, as Coriolanus in his Preface to the Councels Praelud. 5. doth confesse.

3. But many of the later Papists and especially r 1.17 the Iesuites, perceiuing that the former opinion touching the Authoritie of a generall Councell a∣boue the Pope, (s 1.18 howsoeuer the contrarie bee not yet determined) doth indeed ouerthrow the verie faith of the Popes Primacie, and finding (as they say) no promise made to a generall Councell with∣out the Pope, for that the Church is to be built vp∣on the rocke; and not the rocke vpon the Church, they doe concurre, that the Church whose defini∣tiue sentence wee are bound to beleeue, is nothing else but the Church virtually, that is the Pope, whereby they delude, and impose vpon the world more than euer, for whilst they boast of the Church their Mother, they meane and intend nothing else thereby, but onely the Pope their father.

The second Gradation.

BVt secondly, graunt for the Church at the Ie∣suites request, that it be the Pope, vpon which we are to relie, yet is it not agreed vpon by them for the manner, whether it bee the Pope alone, or whether the Pope in an assembly of the Church re∣presentatiue, and again whether this Church repre∣sentatiue be the Colledge of Cardinals, or whether a generall Councell.

1. For no meane Writers amongst them doe hold that the Pope may erre if hee define without a

generall Councell, as besides many of the Parisiens t 1.19 Alphonsus a Castro, and Pope Adrian the sixth doe auerre, that we may see not onely priuate men, but also Popes themselues to haue suspected the Papall authoritie in this point. And here though Bellarmine vaunts, that all Catholickes doe conspire in this, that when the Pope defines any thing in a generall Councell, hee is then out of danger of er∣ring, either in faith, or generall precepts touching manners, yet it is not decided say u 1.20 Canonists, of whom this generall Councell is to consist. For as it is generally defined it imports x 1.21 an assembly of Bi∣shops or holy Fathers, met together out of all quarters of the earth. But y 1.22 Bellarmine in his first Booke, De Concil. & 17. Cap. saith that such a gene∣rall Councell neuer was, nor possibly can bee, since in the first generall Councell there were present but two Priests out of Italy, one Bishop out of France, one out of Spaine, and one out of Africa. In the second and third there were none out of the West, and in the fourth, onely the Legate of Leo, which deliuered the consent of the other Bishops of Spaine, France and Italy, who had before sent the same in Writing vnto the Pope forth of their owne Prouin∣ces. And on the contrarie in Councels celebrated in the West, few Easterne Bishops haue bin found. What then thinkes the Cardinall best to bee done? z 1.23 Why, he tels vs, it is enough if it be published and made knowne to all the greater Christian Prouin∣ces,

neither matters it (say a 1.24 Canus, Turrecremata and Gregorie de Valentia) that all bee Cited, much lesse that all doe Come; sufficient it is (saith Bellar∣mine) if no Bishop be excluded, if out of the grea∣ter part of Christian Prouinces some doe appeare, and if the foure chiefe Patriarchs, which are besides the Bishop of Rome, bee present, either by them∣selues or by their substitutes, though hee thinkes that this Condition bee not very necessarie at this day; considering they are either Heretikes or Schis∣matikes. So that here they commit mayne Contra∣dictions. For first, they make a Councell to be ge∣nerall, and to represent the whole Church, and yet to b 1.25 consist oftentimes of fewer Bishops than a Na∣tionall, and those for substance but of one Angle of the World onely, the rest either not cited, or not expected. Secondly, they iudge it sufficient for the Patriarchs which are absent, to depute others in their roome, c 1.26 the which was also practised by their Bishops at Trent, and yet (as d 1.27 Valentia and others well dispute in the Case of the Popes Legates) the assistance of the holy Ghost is a thing personall, and cannot bee delegated vnto another. Wherefore to salue all sores with one playster, e 1.28 Valentia and Tur∣recremata, doe affirme, that considering those diffi∣culties, the Popes owne authoritie (it being vniuer∣sall) is capable to make a particular Councell to bee

Vniuersall, as it hath done in some of the Roman. But see then a third contradiction, no lesse misse∣shapen than the former, ascends the Stage; for whereas, f 1.29 Bellarmine in his first booke de Concil. and fifteenth Chapter, and others, and endeuour to proue jure diuino, by the Law of God, that Bi∣shops onely haue deciding voyces in a generall Councell, and that the promise of deliuering the truth is made to them onely, as being the sole Pa∣stors of the Church, g 1.30 they confesse notwithstan∣ding in their writings and declare by the practise of the Tridentine Councell, that Cardinalls, Abbots, and Generalls of Orders haue voyces there, though not ordinarie and by right, yet by priuiledge and custome, whence it followes, that either the Church hath that prerogatiue to assigne and appoint whom the holy Ghost shall assist; or else that a major part in a Councell may bee made vp by those to whom the holy Ghost hath past no promise that they shall not erre.

2. These absurdities therefore considered, some of the Church of Rome doe abase that high esteeme which for a long time was conceaued of generall Councells, making either their first originall to bee but humane, as h 1.31 Albertus Pighius, or their vse not absolutely necessarie, as i 1.32 Bellarmine and others. Hence it is that a second sort contracting the face of the Church into a lesser modell, doe teach that the Church here disputed of to bee the Iudge of Con∣trouersies, is the Pope in the Church, represented, not by Bishops in a Councell, but by the Colledge of Cardinalls in the Consistorie, which opinion is

recited by k 1.33 Greg. de Valentia, in his Disputations vpon Thomas.

3. But because the Colledge of Cardinalls seemes too compendious a walke wherein to impale the greatnesse of the Pope, and a generall Councell too vncertaine a path to tread, therefore the greater cry rings this peale, that the Church wee talke of is the Pope himselfe, whether with a Councell or without a Councell, whether with the Cardinalls or with∣out them, as in the next Gradation shall appeare.

The third Gradation.

BVt thirdly; grant for the manner, that it bee the Pope himselfe, which is this Church, whether with a Councell or without a Councell, whether with Cardinalls or without them, yet is it not determined for the time when, it is the Pope.

1. For some teach, that it is the Pope at all times, in that hee cannot possibly be an Hereticke or pub∣lish a falshood, and of this opinion is Albertus Pi∣ghius, in his fourth booke de Hierarch. eccles. cap. 8.

2. But others hold, that it is the Pope then one∣ly, when hee publisheth a doctrine vnder this con∣dition, to bee beleeued by the whole Church as an Article of Faith, and of this opinion is l 1.34 Bellarmine himselfe, and by his account, Thom. Aquinas, Wal∣densis, Ioannes de Turrecremata, Driedo, Caietan, Hosius, Eckius, Ioannes a Louaine, Petrus a Soto, Mel∣chior Canus, besides Valentia, Becanus, and the whole fraternitie of Iesuites.

The fourth Gradation.

BVt fourthly, grant for the time, because haec est communissima opinio, this is the most com∣mon opinion of all Catholicks (saith Bellarmine) that the Church is then the Pope, when hee pro∣pounds a doctrine to bee beleeued by all men as an article of Faith, yet is it not sufficiently resolued by them, for the matters, what matters they must bee, in resoluing whereof his proposition is infallible.

1. For you haue beene hitherto made beleeue, that whensoeuer hee buckles himselfe to define any thing to bee beleeued as an Article of Faith, that then hee is in his Chaire, and then hee cannot erre, and amongst other points in which they say that wee are to beleeue assuredly that the Pope cannot erre, Bellarmine, and Greg. de Valentia reckon vp m 1.35 the Canonization of Saints to be one, and that the n 1.36 Pope is the successor of Peter to bee another.

2. But on the other side, it is first confest by o 1.37 Bellarmine, and as hee saith by all Catholickes, that the Pope may erre euen with a generall Councell at his elbow, in matters of fact which depend vpon in∣formation, and the testimonies of men, and such is the question touching the legitimacie of the Pope, confest to bee by p 1.38 Bellarmine. And because the Canonization of Saints is of the same nature, q 1.39 Va∣lentia confesseth that the Popes infallibilitie therein is not so altogether deliuered by the Church, and Canus in his fifth booke de locis theolog: chap. 5. saith that it is not certaine, de fide, as a matter of faith,

neither will hee pronounce him to bee an Heriticke who after so great a pudder as hath beene kept a∣bout Saint Francis, shall yet deny him to bee in hea∣uen. Secondly r 1.40 Turrecremata in his second booke de Ecclesia, and Syluester in his summes do grant that the Pope may so farre as in him lyes, endeàuour to establish his owne heresie, and obtrude it vpon the Church; nor doe s 1.41 Valentia and Bellarmine dissalow their position vnder these two prouiso's, the one, that if he doe it effectually, then the contrary hath beene formerly determined by the Church; so that the Church can then receiue no danger thereby of er∣ring; the other, that if the contrary was neuer before determined, then the Pope may indeed attempt it, as did t 1.42 Ioh. 22. in a question touching the state of the soule after death, but God in his prouidence will take such course, as that he neuer shall accomplish it.

The fifth Gradation.

BVt fiftly, grant for the matters, that the Pope be this Church in determining any matter of Faith whatsoeuer, yet is it not resolued clearely by them for the person in generall, whether the Pope vp∣on which wee are so to relie, bee the present Pope, or whether the Popes deceased.

1. For the voice of the Iesuites speakes this, that it is the present Pope, nay u 1.43 Gregorie de Valentia is so confident therein, that neque Scriptura sacra (saith hee) neque etiam sola traditio (si ab ea separes praesen∣tem

in ecclesia authoritatem) est illa authoritas infalli∣bilis, magistra fidei &c. that is, neither the Scriptures, nor yet traditions, if you separat from the present au∣thoritie in the Church, is that infallible mistresse of Faith & Iudge of controuersies. So Bellarmine, x 1.44 om∣nium conciliorum veterum, & omnium dogmatum fir∣mitas pendet ab authoritate praesentis Ecclesiae, the strength of all ancient Councells and all assertions, doth depend vpon the authoritie of the present Church; and y 1.45 their reasons alleadgedare, for that without the authoritie of the present Church, wee neither can be assured of the certainty of Traditions and Councells, nor of the sense & meaning of them.

2. But contrariwise, the case being put (as you haue heard) by Turrecremata and Siluester; that the Pope may doe, what lyes in him to propose an he∣resie, both z 1.46 Valentia and Bellarmine grant the po∣sition not to be impossible, vpon condition that the heresie haue beene condemned formerly by the Church, for then according to their doctrine the Church is to examin the errors of the present Pope, by truthes resolued by precedent Popes. So that if in all points necessarie to saluation the truth haue beene already determined by former Popes (as in 1600. yeeres space they haue had leasure enough to doe it) the present Pope ceaseth to bee a competent Iudge in such matters, hee may erre touching them hee may doe his best indeuour to obtrude vpon the Church heresies concerning them, nay hee stands himselfe to bee arrained at the barre, and Tribunall of his Clergie, whether he be Orthodoxe or no and that by the prescripts of his predecessors.

The sixt Gradation.

SIxtly, graunt for the Person in generall, that it bee the present Pope which is the Church, in that no danger can accrue from the Popes pro∣pounding an heresie, if that heresie haue beene for∣merly condemned, because a 1.47 (as they say) the Church may then know him not to bee their Shep∣herd, but a Wolfe, yet is it not agreed or determi∣ned sufficiently amongst them for the meanes, how the Church may bee able to iudge or truly discerne him to be such an one.

1. For they which hold a Generall Councell to* 1.48 be aboue the Pope, and that it cannot erre, as Ger∣son, Cameracensis, and others aboue mentioned, doe hold likewise that the Pope so erring may bee iud∣ged both for his person and doctrine by the church in a Generall Councell.

2. But they which hold a Generall Councell not to be aboue the Pope, but that wanting his compa∣nie it may erre euen in matters of faith, as b 1.49 Bellar∣mine, Valentia, Cajetan, Turrecremata, and others, these disable any for being competent Iudges of the Popes doctrine. For howsoeuer they may pretend that the Councell proceeding according to former Popes declarations cannot erre, yet because they teach that the certaintie & sense of former Decrees depends vpon the iudgement of the present Pope, I cannot see what meanes may, according to their opinion, be affoorded for the triall of the Popes do∣ctrine, if he should chance to erre.

The seuenth Gradation.

SEauenthly, graunt for the meanes that the Church neuer neede to passe verdict vpon the Popes doctrine, yet is it not agreed vpon by them for the See, whether the Popedome bee necessarily vnited to the See of Rome, so that the word Roman for ought they know assuredly, is not conuertible with Catholike, but that he which brags he is a Ro∣man Catholike to day, may, if the Pope should chance to die, prooue a c 1.50 Geneua Catholike to¦morrow.

1. For d 1.51 Dominicus a Soto vpon the fourth of the Senten. saith, that the Apostolicall seate and power of vniuersall Bishop is annext to the Bishoprick of Rome onely jure Ecclesiastico, that is, not by the Law of God, but by the Churches constitution, so that by the authoritie of the Church, a Bishop of another See may be chosen Pope. And e 1.52 Bellarmine graunts, that it is no matter of faith, that the A∣postolicall seate may not bee separated from the Church of Rome, forasmuch as neither Scripture nor Tradition doe auouch it.

2. But f 1.53 Canus, Driedo, Turrecremata, and Gre∣gorie de Valentia, doe hold the contrarie, that the Bishop of Rome is Peters successor, not onely by the constitution of the Church, but also by the in∣stitution of Christ, though Valentia confesseth, va∣rias hac de re doctorum sententias, that the opinions of the Doctors be diuers in this point.

The eighth Gradation.

EIghtly (for I shall not yet leaue them) graunt for the See that the Bishop of Rome bee the or∣dayned Successour of Peter by the institution of Christ, not onely in the Popedome, but also in the particular See of Rome, yet is it not certayne for the particular person of this or any present Pope, whe∣ther hee bee the true and lawfull Bishop of Rome or no?

1. For although g 1.54 Gregorie de Valentia doth thinke that Gods prouidence will alwayes secure the Church of a lawfull Pope. 2. Yet hee confes∣seth that graue Doctors doe admit the case as pos∣sible, and this according to them, may fall out di∣uers wayes.

First, if the Pope be promoted by Simonie, and that this is not impossible, Aquinas affirmes it, 2^a. 2^a. q. 100. where hee saith, Papa potest incurrere vitium Simoniae sicut & quilibet alius, the Pope may incurre the sinne of Simonie as well as any other. The which opinion Cajetan and others vpon Tho∣mas doe follow, and it is moreouer a clause in the Bull of Pope Iulius the second, That if any Pope happen to be chosen simoniacally, the same election shall bee actually void, although inthronization, protraction of time and adoration of the Cardinalls haue established him in the See.

Secondly, if the person elected by the Cardinalls bee not of the h 1.55 masculine gender, as not a few of their owne writers doe affirme to haue beene some∣times experimented.

Thirdly, i 1.56 if the partie chosen Pope were neuer truly baptized, and of this by their Tenents one can neuer be assured. For the Papists doe make the Sa∣craments to depend vpon the intention of the Priests, and therefore Bellarmine in his third booke de Iustif. and eight chapter, disputing against Am∣brosius Catharinus concerning the certaintie of grace, Ne{que} potest quis esse certus certitudine fidei, se percipere verum sacramentum, cum sacramentum sine inten∣tione ministri non conficiatur, & intentionem alterius nemo videre potest; that is, no man can by the cer∣taintie of Faith be assured that he receiues the true Sacrament, seeing that the Sacrament without the intention of the Priest is not made, and the inten∣tion of another doth no man see. To these k 1.57 Ioh. de Turrecremata addes, that the Pope is deposed by God euen for mentall heresie, which we know, is a thing not liable to the sense.

Whereby wee may behold into what laborinths the Papists doe cast themselues by proiecting their faith vpon the Pope. For if he haue intruded vpon the Papacie by Simonie, or be of the wrong Sexe, or that the Priest at his baptisme owing his parents a spight, or his wits being a wooll-gathering, in∣tended not to baptise him; nay, put the case that hee bee rightly baptised, yet if the Bishop which conferred priest-hood vpon him, or those which baptised or ordayned that Bishop missed their right intention, or farther, if any of his predecessor Popes which either made Lawes for the forme and manner of electing the Pope, or created so many Cardinalls as might make a major or exclusiue part,

in the election of succeeding Popes, fayled by rea∣son of the forenamed Cases, or lastly (according to Turrecremata) if being truly elected, hee chance to fall into mentall heresie, then is not such a man by their owne positions true Bishop of Rome, that supposed Bishop of Rome not lawfull Pope, that Pope hath not the spirit of infallibilitie annext vn∣to him, and yet this may happen l 1.58 (nay, by some it is proued to haue happened) and yet the Church neuer the wiser.

For howsoeuer m 1.59 Franciscus Longus in his late Summes of the Councells, finding that their faith must needes stagger which depend altogether vpon the infallibilitie of the Pope, if it may not bee cer∣tainly knowne who is true and lawfull Pope, makes this assertion, De fide est dicere, hunc numero Papam viz. Gregorium XV. esse verum successorem Petri & Christi Vicarium, that is, That it is an article of faith, to say, this very Pope in particular, to wit, Gregorie the fifteenth, is the true successor of Peter and Vicar of Christ; yet by his leaue, I should hardly graunt that priuiledge to a priuateman, which is not due to a Generall Councell, and the Pope himselfe; or thinke it equitie to impose any thing vpon men to be beleeued as an article of faith, concerning which the Doctors of the Church, and the Bishops of Rome themselues may erre and be deceiued.

Now, who knowes not, that Pope Stephen the sixt in a Councell of Bishops, did disanull the acts of Formosus his predecessor, and commanded those which had beene ordayned by him, to bee reorday∣ned againe, as not acknowledging him for a true

and lawfull Pope. Againe, how Iohn the ninth dis∣anulled the acts of Stephen the sixth, and approued the acts of Formosus; yet farther, how Sergius the third re-established the acts of Stephen, and made void the acts of Formosus, and by consequence those of Iohn, both which notwithstanding, all succee∣ding Popes haue receiued as right and vndoubted successors of Peter in the Papall Throne. Nor doth n 1.60 Bellarmine otherwise defend these errors of the Popes, then by saying that they erred, in quaestione facti non iuris, in a question of fact not of right, and concludes, that the chiefe question was, whether Formosus were lawfull Pope or no, in which kinde of questions (saith he) we denie not but the Popes may erre, and that Stephen & Sergius erred indeed. In like manner, did not Iohn the three and twentieth sit fiue yeeres as Bishop of Rome, and moreouer in that ranke which is esteemed by the Iesuites to bee the right Line; yet o 1.61 Bellarmine tells vs, that hee was not a certaine and vndoubted Pope, and there∣fore not needfull to bee defended, considering that there were three at the same time; neither could it be easily decided amongst so many learned Patrones which each of them had, whether of them was le∣gitimate. And if it bee true which the p 1.62 Cardinall tells vs in another place, disputing the deposing of this Iohn, that dubius Papa habetur pro non Papa; a doubtfull Pope is held for no Pope, surely of whose election wee may any way doubt, his decisi∣ons wee may iustly feare, and the validitie of his pardons prouidently suspect.

SECT. IIII. The palpable abuse offered the Laytie, by obtruding the Church vnto them as their soueraigne Iudge, displayed by the present practice of the Iesuites.

NOw by this which hath beene alreadie spo∣ken touching the Church and the Pope, may appeare what sophistrie is currant in the Romish pale, and what legerdemayne, is practi∣sed in popish markets, whilest one thing is shewed and another sold, the Title of the Church being vsed but as a clowd, wherein they carrie poore people, whilest the mysterie of iniquitie more couertly workes; which being reuealed, it will appeare that a lay-papist (whose faith is lapt vp in the implicite beliefe of the Church) being defined, will proue no better, than a creature that beleeues hee knowes not what, and credits it hee knowes not why, resembling somewhat the patient which receiued this precipe of his physician.

q 1.63 Si vis sanari de morbo nescio quali, Accipias herbam, qualem sed nescio vel quam, Ponas nescio vbi, sanabere nescio quande.

To make this the more palpable and euident to the sense, I will wade a little into the practicall part of this doctrine, and shew to what miserable shifts the learnedst of the Romish side are driuen, by vnder∣taking the defence of the Churches preeminency in matters of faith.

Imagine therefore, a poore papist thus tormen∣ted in his conscience. I am (saith hee) enioyned by

my Confessor, to ground my faith and beliefe vpon the authoritie of the Church. Now, woe is mee, what shall I doe? Our Masters which should bee lights to the blinde, and informe vs, which is that Church whereon we are to depend, they are distra∣cted in their opinions, one saith a Generall Coun∣cell, although without the Pope, another a Coun∣cell and the Pope together, a third that it is the Pope alone, and surely there is but one Truth, besides which can there possibly be (in so important a busi∣nesse as this is) hope of saluation? Yes (will r 1.64 Bel∣larmine resolue you) for though it be hereticall not to beleeue the Church in grosse, yet is it not hereti∣call to mistake the acception of the Church, which is in effect to beleeue a false Church; for examples sake, To take a Generall Councell without the Pope for the infallible Church, inasmuch as wee see (saith hee) these tolerated by the Church which defend that opinion, although it be erronious and next to heresie. But alas (replyes the poore man) now that I am come so farre by your instructions, as to know that the Pope is the Church, which is a great deale far∣ther than many of my ghostly Fathers are come, yet because I perceiue a dissention amongst you, and that you which hold this Tenent are not agreed, when and in what matters, it is that the Pope can∣not erre, I finde my conscience but a little eased by your resolution. No matter for the Popes erring or not erring, will Bellarmine answer, for all Catholikes s 1.65 (saith he) doe accord in this, that the Pope, whether he may erre or no, is yet to be heard with all obedience. But what comfort (will the man obiect) can this be

to me, that liue haply in England or Spaine, farre remote from Rome; It is the present Pope (you say) vpon whose iudgement I am to depend, whom I am neither able to heare, neither doth your t 1.66 Cardinalship thinke it necessarie that hee should be a preacher to be heard. Tush (saith u 1.67 Bellarmine) it is not materiall that you heare the Pope, when as there bee Preachers in your owne Parish who may in∣forme you. But (faith the man) there is no promise made, that whatsoeuer my Parochian teaches mee, is forth with the true and vndoubted doctrine of the Church, considering that he may erre and be decei∣ued. Nor haue you (will Bellarmine tell you) more assurance of the Popes word, if you and your whole Nation should trauaile to Rome to heare his resolu∣tion, x 1.68 For asmuch as when he teacheth not the whole Church, he is in as much possibilitie to erre, as Inno∣cent the eighth was, when hee permitted the Norwe∣gians to celebrate the Eucharist without wine. What then is to bee done? y 1.69 Greg. de Valentia in his third tome vpon Thom. 1. Disp. makes this answer, That if you finde but an Episcopall Synod, or the consent of diuers Diuines onely affirming such a doctrine to be the sentence of the Church, you are bound to beleeue it, though it bee a lye. But is it not a sinne (will the man reply) to beleeue a lye. z 1.70 Gabriel Biel, and

a 1.71 Tolet the Iesuite (to the end that we may see how both ancient and later Papists haue beene forced to the same streights) will answere, that if one heare his Bishop or Prelate preach contrarie to the Faith, thin∣king that it is so beleeued by the Church, such an one shall not onely not sinne, but also in beleeuing that falshood, shall commit an act meritorious.

It is no maruaile then if the Romanists boast so much of Visibilitie, considering that their faith is built fiue stories high; the Layties beliefe vpon his Pastor, the Pastors vpon the common opinion of neighbour Diuines, or an Episcopall Synod, that Episcopall Synod vpon the Church, the b 1.72 Church vpon the Pope; and the Pope vpon Christ. Wherin how skilfull Artizans soeuer the Iesuites are in other Trades, I know not, surely in architecture they shew but little skil, hauing not prouided any thing to sup∣ply the roome of the Pope in the vacancie, so that for a yeare, and more, sometimes, the vpper stories must like Esops Towers bee seene to hang in the aire For howsoeuer c 1.73 those which hold the supreame authoritie, to bee subiectiuely and formally in the Church, and instrumentally onely in the Pope, may supply the place of the dead Pope with a generall Councell, yet the Iesuites and others which with open cry, now adayes condemne this opinion as false and next to heresie, may be challenged of more folly, then d 1.74 hee which built his house vpon the sand.

SECT. V. The obiections out of the Scriptures touching the Chur∣ches infallibilitie, answered.

WHat now remaines, but that we answer those arguments, wheron our aduersaries seem to ground this supposed power of the Church, in challenging absolute beliefe to what she affirmes.

The first rank of arguments containes such places of Scripture as concerne the priuiledges of the Church in generall. As 1. Tim. 3. 15. That thou* 1.75 mayest know how thou oughtest to conuerse in the house of God, which is the Church of the liuing God, the piller and ground of truth. I answer that the Church here mention'd is not that Church, which the Papists make to be the Iudge of Controuersies, that is, ei∣ther the Church representatiue, which is a generall Councell, or the Church virtuall, which they ima∣gine to be the Pope; but the Church essentiall, in whole or part, which is the congregation of all faith full beleeuers and therefore not to the purpose. For the Papists themselues doe discharge it in this sense from the office of defining, because in part it is falli∣ble, and in whole it is avast bodie, composed of parts farre asunder, and wanting a speaker. And that the Church in this place is so taken, besides the confession of e 1.76 Bellarmine who acknowledgeth it; the very circumstances of the place doe carrie it; for Saint Paul tells Timothie here, that hee wrote this Epistle vnto him, that hee might know how to conuerse or behaue himselfe in the house of God, which hee expounding to bee the Church, it must

on necessitie bee construed of the Church essentiall as consisting of the faithfull, in grosse, vnlesse one should be so absurd, as to say that Saint Paul deliue∣red directions vnto Timothie in this Epistle, how he should conuerse in a generall Councell, whereof there were none in three hundred yeeres after, or else (which is more absurd) how he should behaue himselfe discreetly and with circumspection in the Popes belly.

So Matth. 18. 16. And if hee will not heare them,* 1.77 tell the Church; and if hee will not heare the Church, let him bee to thee, as the Heathen and the Publican. I answer, that here be three degrees of admonitions and reproofes set downe by our Sauiour, in case that one brother trespasse against another. Viz.

• First corripiendus amore, he is to bee reproued with loue, verse 15. goe and rebuke him be∣tweene thee and him alone.
• Secondly corripiendus pudore, hee is to bee re∣proued with shame, verse 16. if hee will not heare thee, ioyne with thee besides one or two.
• Thirdly corripiendus timore, he is to be repro∣ued with feare, verse 17. if hee will not heare them, tell the Church.

So that I willingly grant this honour to haue beene here giuen by our Sauiour, to his Church, that the last resort and appeale vpon earth should be made vnto it; but you must remember withall how farre this present case will besteed you. For he saith not absolutely, whatsoeuer thy brother shall say or beleeue, but if thy brother shall offend or trespasse a∣gainst thee, which (make the most wee can) f 1.78 is but

quaestio facti non iuris, that is, a matter of fact, not of faith; it is onely touching some personall and per∣ticular iniuries, in deciding whereof, the Papists themselues denie not, but the Church may erre. See aboue, Grad. 4.

So Matth. 23. 2. Vpon the chaire of Moses haue* 1.79 sitten the Scribes and the Pharisees, all things therfore whatsoeuer they shall say vnto you, obserue ye and doe ye. I answere, that these words whatsoeuer they shall say vnto you, are either to be taken conditionally, that is, with this prouise; that they speake the truth, otherwise not and then aduantageth it nothing the Papists cause; or else absolutely, and then our Sauiour should contradict himselfe, who reproued the errors of the Scribes and Pharises, Math. 5. and forewarned his Disciples to take heed of their leauen. Matth. 16. 6. Besides, all precepts concerne the time present or future, now g 1.80 Bellarmine himselfe confesseth that the high-Priests Councels of the Iewes were at this present, lyable to errour, nay farther, that it was prophesied that they should erre and denie Christ. Isa. 6. Dan. 9. and therefore this could bee no such absolute precept of obedience, as the Papists ima∣gine, especialy to those which now liued, when (by their owne acknowledgement) such as possest the Chaire of Moses might erre and be deceiued.

Other places are alleadged by our Aduersaries, which, because they run rather in the plurall num∣ber with vos, you, arguing a democracie or aristo∣cracie in the Church, then with te, thee, implying a Monarchie, (which to maintaine the Iesuites bend all their forces) and for that they are to bee vnder∣stood

primarily, totally, and absolutely of the Apo∣stles, secondarily, partially, and conditionally only of other pastors, as Iohn 16. The spirit of truth shall leade you into all truth, and Luke 10. Hee which hea∣reth you, heareth mee, therefore the weight and load is laid vpon such particular promises, as our Sauiour is thought to haue made vnto Peter in the Gospells. Where, to omit that of our Sauiour to Peter, Luke 22. 32. I haue prayed for thee, that thy faith faile not for which, the Cardinall cannot produce one anci∣ent father (Popes excepted) to proue that our Saui∣our intended therein any speciall benefit to Peters Successors, saue onely to his personall faith; as also that which he spake vnto him, Iohn. 21. 15▪. Feede my Sheepe, which of a precept, they would willing∣ly change into a promise, contrarie to the rules of Grammer or Logicke, as if Saint Peter had made Popes of the inferior pastors of the Church and their Successors, when he bad them in like manner, Feede the flocke of Christ, forasmuch as Christs word is the same in his owne mouth, and in the mouthes of his Apostles. The maine foundation whereon at length they pitch, is that of our Sauiours to Saint Peter, Matth. 16. 18. And I say vnto thee, that thou art Peter; and vpon this rocke will I build my Church and the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it. In which words, they let not a tittle fall to the ground without admiration. Our Sauiour (say they) speaks not as at other times, Simon thou sonne of Ionas, this was his vulgar stile, he brought with him frō home, and it was of his fathers bequeathing; nor as other∣while hee did by the sirname imposed by himselfe

pronouncing it barely without an Emphasis, onely Peter and no more; but making as it were a preface to some new dignitie which he purposed to bestow vpon him, I say vnto thee, thou art Peter, as who would say, thou art a rocke, and vpon thee, that rock I will build my Church. To giue more colour to this interpretation, they will vs to take notice how our Sauiour spake not in the Greeke, but in the Syriack language, in which Cephas, the name of Peter, is the same in termination, sound and sense, that Peter is, implying both of them a rocke. This is a faire glosse if they were Masters of Languages, and had com∣mission to set forth new Calepines. But first, how chance that the Apostles which were better seene in the Syriacke Tongue (it being their naturall dialect) than you can be, vnderstood not this elegancie, but did afterwards quarrel about precedency, not know¦ing that their Master had before past his promise thereof vnto Saint Peter. How comes it that the Fathers pickt not out your sense, who liued neerer the times of the Apostles, as S. Austen, Chrisostom, Hi∣larie, Basill, Ambrose and others, by this rocke, vn∣derstood not Peter, but either his confession, or Christ whom hee confessed, seeing this knowledge of the Church, how by Scripture it is built vpon Peter, was as behoofull for them as for vs. But se∣condly, what if our Sauiour foreseeing that this Rocke would be lapis offendiculi a stone of offence (and that some supposing Peter to bee it, would at the sight thereof, no lesse then at Gorgons head; be stupified and turned into stones) hath in the Greeke edition of Saint Matthewes Gospell (which them∣selues

deny not to be authenticall) distinguished be∣tween the one & the other by a threefold Gramatical difference? then we cannot without contempt offer∣ed to Grammarians admit it, or at least the sirrop of blind obedience, swallow it downe. Now our Sa∣uiour saith not, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 thou art Peter and vpon thee Peter, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 thou art a rock and vpon thee, that rock I will build my Church, but with a triple mutation and alteration in the con∣struction, first of the Person, thou Peter in the second, and that rocke, in the third; secondly of the gender 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the masculine and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the feminine; thirdly of the sense 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which by the iudgement of the most iudicious Grecians signifies vsually but a single stone and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which implies a Rocke; so that as our Sa∣uiour in another place tels vs, that God can of stones raise vp children vnto Abraham, in like manner hee doth now by a nominall Metamorphosis conuert a Sonne of Abraham into a stone, and a stone of his building too, yet he doth not by this Charter so in∣large his shoulders, as to serue for a rocke, whereon to support his whole building. Say farther hee did make him a 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a deriuatiue or denominatiue from that rocke, and so (as the Fathers sometimes v∣sed the word) by a Metonymie terme him a ministeri∣all rocke, by which he built his Church, yet did hee not by this make him the principall rock, on which he built it. Grant againe, that hee was taught, that a∣mongst the ministeriall rocks, he should be Petra pri∣maria, a prime rocke, yet was he not made Petra soli∣taria, the only rock. In a word he might be admoni∣shed by this name, to be Petra deuotione, a rocke for

deuotion and zeale in adhering, and yet not promi∣sed to bee petra virtute, a rocke for vertue in sustay∣ning. So that to conclude, there may be (as you see) in many things a likenesse betweene petrus & petra, this rocke and that stone, yet not so much, as that a reasonable lapidarie may not distinguish them.

SECT. VI. The obiection drawne from the question, how wee may know the authoritie, sense, puritie and perfection of the Scriptures, handled and resolued.

THe last forme of argumentation which they vse, is drawne from the dependancy, which (they say) the Scriptures haue vpon the Church, though not absolutely in themselues, yet in respect of vs & our discerning of them. Whence they thus argue; if the testimonie of the Church be not infallible, how shall we be resolued in these three interrogatiues.

The first is touching the Scriptures authoritie, whether they be the vndoubted Word of God, or no?

The second touching their interpretation, what their sense and meaning is?

The third concerning their puritie and perfection, whether they be perfect and entire, or maymed and corrupted?

To prepare the way for the resoluing of these questions; we are to note, that as to the right ap∣prehension of an obiect by the sense, so to the due comprehension of the Scriptures by the soule, three things are ordinarily required.

Viz.

• 1. First, that the Scriptures bee an obiect ca∣pable to be apprehended and discerned.
• 2. Secondly, that there bee organs and facul∣ties, as those of the bodie, so these of the soule, fitly disposed and qualified to receiue and discerne that obiect.
• 3. Thirdly, that there bee a medium, that is, a middle instrument, or meanes, to conuey, present, and vnite the obiect to the organ.

1. For the first, wee agree, that to the end, the* 1.81 Scriptures should bee an obiect capable to bee seene and discerned, it is requisite, that they should be en∣dowed with such remarkable properties and notes, as may distinguish them from other writings. For we take not to taske to teach vnreasonable creatures as did Saint Francis, neither doe we dreame of fana∣ticall inspirations, imagining that God reueales things vnto vs ouer and besides the Word, but wee inuite you to looke vpon the markes and characters of the Word, and we say as Philip did to Nathaniel, Ioh. 1. Come and see. Now these properties, notes, and Characters, by which the Word of God be∣comes an obiect, distinct and capable to be knowne by vs, are Either

• 1. Outwardly accompanying it, as anti∣quitie, miracles, fulfilling of prophesies, testimonies of Martyrs, and the like, which doe onely procure attention, and prepare men to beleeue probably, and with lesse difficultie.
• 2. Inwardly imprinted in it, as first, the di∣uine and spirituall matters therein con∣tayned,

• surpassing all humane wisedom, being things which neither eye hath seene, nor eare hath heard, neither haue entred into the heart of man. Secondly, The forme of the stile, void of affectation, yet transcending in quicknesse, maiestie, and fulnesse, the Master-peeces of the most polite and elaborat Orators. Thirdly, The sweet harmonie and consent of parts with parts. Lastly, The efficacy and ver∣tue which it hath to produce the loue of God and our Enemies, to procure the peace of our Consciences, to alienate a man from the delights of the Flesh and the World, to make him reioyce in affli∣ctions, to triumph ouer Death, all which doe necessarily conclude the diuine au∣thoritie of the Scriptures, seeing nature it selfe is thereby vanquisht, and a strong man cannot be bound, but by a stronger than himselfe.

2. For the second, wee agree, that seeing wee are* 1.82 not able to discerne the Scriptures, by any naturall habit or inbred qualitie of our owne, For the natu∣rall man (as the Apostle speakes) receiueth not the things of the Spirit of God, because they are foolishnesse vnto him, neither can he know them, for that they are spiritually discerned, 1. Cor. 2. that therefore wee are enabled thereunto by faith, and by the inward en∣lightning and perswasion of Gods Spirit. But I neede not insist vpon a point, which Bellarmine himselfe labours so to proue in his 6. lib. de Grat. &

lib. Arbit. cap. 1. 2. and is confirmed by the Triden∣tine Councell in the 6. Sess. & 3. Can.

3. For the third, which is the medium; wee are* 1.83 not of Democritus opinion, who thought, that if the aire (which conueyes the beames of the Starres vn∣to vs) were away, one should bee able to spie a pis∣mire in heauen, but rather with Aristotle, we thinke wee should then see nothing, according to that axiome in philosophie, In vacuo & per vacuum nulla fit visio; wee conseut therefore, that God hath ap∣pointed an ordinarie meanes to conuey and present such celestiall obiects as the Word of God, to our view, and this ordinarie meanes wee say is the Church; to which wee willingly attribute these two ordinarie vses in that imployment. Viz.

• 1. First, of a witnesse, testifying the authori∣tie and sense of the Scriptures vnto vs, wherein for the effect, the papist and wee differ but this, that wee say it produceth a faith no more than humane; they, lesse than diuine.
• 2. Secondly, of Gods instrument, by whose ministerie in preaching & expounding the Scriptures, the holy Ghost begets a diuine Faith and other spirituall graces within vs.

So that the question betweene vs, is not whether* 1.84 we are to exclude the ordinarie ministerie of the Church testifying and propounding the Scriptures vnto vs, for this, wee doe not: Nor on the other side, Whether the authoritie of the Church, be a sufficient argument of it selfe, to produce a diuine assent vnto the same, for this the learneder sort of them (as anon you shal

heare) will not affirme; But this, Whether to the end that we may by the assistance of Gods Spirit, and those inward notes and properties found in the Scriptures, discerne the Word propounded by the Church vnto vs, to be the Word of God, infallibilitie be a requisite con∣dition in the Propounder? As if in playner termes one should say, whether to the end, that I may by the visage, gesture, and garments discerne my friend approaching towards me, to bee such an one, it bee needfull that the aire which conueyes those formes to my eye, bee neuer and at no time capable by rea∣son of mists or other accidents, to represent false and deceitfull formes? Or this, whether to the end, that a Gold-smith may by his touch-stone discerne a piece of gold deliuered him, to bee good and cur∣rant, it bee required, that the parties credit which sells it him should bee vnquestionable? This is that which in effect they affirme, and this we denie.

To resolue therefore the difficultie; We graunt,* 1.85 that where the Propounder is the principall, finall, and onely cause, for whose sake we beleeue a thing, there, if the Propounder bee liable to error and de∣ceit, a firme and vndoubted beliefe of such a thing cannot be had. As for example, if one onely Tra∣uailer haue beene in the Indies, and brings relation by word of mouth, touching the commodities of the Countrie, and of the priuiledge of trafficke which the King thereof tenders to our countrimen, in this case, if the Relators credit bee suspitious, it were dangerous to build vpon his report, because here he is the principall and only cause, vpon whose sole affirmation we can finally rest. In like manner,

if two persons onely bee present at the death of a friend, and depose, that in this or that manner he be∣stowed legacies: in this case, if they be of doubtfull repute, it will be hard to determine positiuely, what is the truth, because that here they are the principall and onely witnesses, and there are no other authen∣tike proofes whereby their depositions may be exa∣mined. But where the Propounder is onely the in∣strument, by whose meanes, wee are brought to see proofes of an higher nature, and by whose ministe∣rie, arguments of greater importance doe display themselues; (as if the Trauailer shall bring letters of Credence, vnder the Hand & Seale of the Prince confirming his Relation, or if the persons present at the death of their friend, shall, besides their owne testimonie, produce a formall will, subscribed by the hands of lawfull witnesses, and strengthened by an authentike seale) here the possibilitie of erring in the Propounder, takes not away the certaintie of the things propounded by him, because, in this case, the same may be supplyed by other more suffi∣cient demonstrations, vpon which, as the principall causes of our beliefe, wee may finally rest. Now to apply this to the Church. I say, that if the Church were the principall or onely Cause, for whose au∣thoritie, our faith doth finally assent to the mysteries propounded by her, then and vpon this suppositi∣on, it were to be acknowledged, that if the Church might erre, and that her testimonie were not infal∣lible, the assured truth of things, so assented vnto could not bee attayned by vs. But wee say, that in working an vndoubted assent vnto the mysteries

propounded and deliuered vnto vs, the Church, though it bee one cause, to wit, an inductiue or pre∣paratiue, h 1.86 yet is it not the onely, no nor the princi∣pall or finall vpon which wee lastly depend. The principall and finall causes, for whose sake we firme∣ly beleeue those truths which the Church pro∣pounds vnto vs touching the Scriptures, are two. The one the Word of God it selfe with the proper∣ties, notes, and characters (aboue mentioned) im∣printed in the letter thereof, which serue as the hand-writing and Deed of the great Maker, produ∣ced by the Church in confirmation of what shee vt∣ters. The other, the inward testimonie of Gods Spirit, enlightning the eyes of our vnderstanding to discerne the Scriptures, by those notes, and perswa∣ding vs what we discerne, stedfastly to beleeue, ser∣uing as a seale which confirmes to the consciences of the Elect, the Deed to bee lawfull and authen∣tike.

The former (which is the Word it selfe and the notes thereof) cannot bee denyed by an ingenious Papist to bee there found; for howsoeuer some of them, by a iust iudgement of God for being iniu∣rious to the Scriptures, in branding them with ob∣scuritie, imperfection, &c. haue beene so blinded by the Prince of darknesse, that (setting aside the iudgement of the Church) no reason to them hath appeared, wherefore Aesops Fables should not as well as the Scriptures themselues bee thought Ca∣nonicall, yet others, as i 1.87 Bellarmine, Greg. de Valen∣tia, Gretser, &c. doe acknowledge these distinguish∣ing notes to be in their kinde argumentatiue, and to

shine in them, as the excellency of the Doctrine, concord, efficacie, and the like, whereby may be ve∣rified of the whole Booke of God, what the Offi∣cers sent by the Pharisies and Priests, said of our Sa∣uiour, Ioh. 7. Neuer man spake like this man.

Nor is the later (which is the inward testimonie of the Spirit) denyed by the learneder sort of Pa∣pists to possesse another chief place in the discouerie of the Scriptures. For although in popular aire they seeme to vent the contrarie, yet when they are cal∣led to giue a more sober account in writing, they vtter the same in effect which we doe. k 1.88 The Church (saith Stapleton) by reason of her ministerie and ma∣stership receiued of God, doth make vs to beleeue, but yet the formall reason wherefore we beleeue, is not the Church, but God speaking within vs. Againe, The minde of a faithfull beleeuer (saith hee) doth rest in the iudgement, but not by the iudgement of the Church, but by the inward grace of the holy Spirit. So Gre∣gorie de Valentia; The infallible proposition of the Church (saith he) is as obscure to vs, as any other ar∣ticle of faith whatsoeuer, alleadging out of Canus, That if a man should aske wherefore he beleeues the Trinitie, he should answer incommodiously, in saying, because the Church doth infallibly propose it. And Ca∣nus l 1.89 giues the reason, Because the last resolution of faith (saith he) is not into the testimonie of the Church, but into a more inward efficient cause, that is, into God inwardly mouing vs to beleeue. m 1.90 If therefore (addes Becanus) you be asked, wherefore you beleeue, that God

reuealed such a thing, and you answere, that you be∣leeue it for the authoritie of the Church; it is not the assent of a theologicall faith, but of some other faith of an inferiour ranke. Many more testimonies might bee added, it being a firme position amongst the Schoolemen, that principles of faith, such as the Scriptures are, cannot bee beleeued (as they ought to bee) but by infused faith. But I will conclude where: I began, with our Countriman Stapleton, be∣cause he layes downe the very fundamentall reason vpon which this Doctrine is grounded. n 1.91 There is the same faith (saith hee) in the rest of the whole Church, which is in the Prophets, Apostles, and all those who are immediately taught of God. They haue one and the same formall reason of their act of belee∣uing. But the faith of the Apostles and Prophets which was by immediate reuelation, was lastly resolued into God alone the Reuealer, and did end and rest vpon him onely, as the supreme and last cause of beleeuing, therefore the faith of the rest of the whole Church, hath the same formall obiect.

These foundations being laid, it shall not be hard to shape distinct answeres to the seuerall questions aboue propounded. To the first, if the testimonie of the Church bee not infallible, how shall wee vn∣doubtedly knowe the Scriptures to bee the Word of God?

I answere, that wee may know them to bee so, partly, by the light of the Word, that is, the diuine notes and characters therein imprinted, and partly by the enlightning and perswading grace of Gods Spirit, enabling vs to see, and mouing vs to beleeue what wee see.

Now on the contrarie, I demand of them; (If one cannot bee assured of the certaintie of the Scriptures propounded by the Church, vnlesse the proposition of the Church bee infallible) how the lay Papists in this Land doe know any article of faith to be infallibly true, considering that few or none of them euer heard the voyce of that Church, which they suppose to bee infal∣lible; (that Church being according to their supposi∣tion, either the Pope in his chaire, or a Generall Coun∣cell) but are engaged altogether to the reports of par∣ticular Priests and Iesuites, whom none will exempt from being subiect to error and deceit.

2. To the second question, if the exposition of the Church be not infallible, how doe we know the sense and meaning of the Scriptures?

I answere, that although all places of the Scrip∣ture are not alike perspicuous, as all are not alike ne∣cessarie to saluation, yet for the opening of the sense thereof, so farre as is behoofefull for his Church, God is the best Interpreter of his owne meaning, expounding outwardly one place of the Word by another, & inwardly both opening ones eyes to dis∣cerne, and enclining ones heart to assent vnto the truth. As for those which cannot see but with the Popes spectacles, and pretend the Scriptures to bee euery where throughout so ouershadowed with a mist, that nothing presents it selfe cleerly to their view, I wonder the lesse at them, because their blind∣nesse is such, that they cannot see to serue God, without burning Tapers and lighted Candles at noone day.

Now, on the other side I demand of them, if one

cannot know the certaine meaning and sense of the Scriptures, vnlesse the exposition of the Church be infallible.

1. Wherefore hath not the Church of Rome all this while publisht a set interpretation vpon any one book of the Bible, considering, that they say, it is so necessarie, and that the Popes Commentaries vpon it, haue for so many Marts beene expected?

2. How a man which cannot discerne the sense of the Scriptures in plaine places, shall be able to shun the processe in infinitum, and not runne his wits out of breath, considering that according to the Papists them∣selues, the voyce of the Church vttered in former Decrees, requires the exposition of the present Church, meaning the Pope, and that the Churches Canons are inuol'd with no lesse, if not more perplexe∣ties than the Scriptures? I could instance in ancient Councells, as the Nicen, and aske whether the sixth Canon, wherein these wordes be, Quoniam talis est Episcopo Romano consuetudo, are to bee vnderstood, according to the opinion of Ruffinus, or Balsa∣mon, or Caranza, or Bellarmine, which foure are recounted by Bellarmine lib, 2. de Rom. Pont. c. 13. But because I desire to confine my selfe to that which is pure Roman, let's cast the water of the Tridentine Synagogue, and see whether that runnes so cleere as they pretend. I aske therefore, first, touching the Canonicall bookes, the number and names whereof the Fathers therein assembled, were so carefull to set downe, Sess. 4. whether that which we call the Apocrypha. Esther, be there ca∣nonized, as Bellarmine affirmeth, lib. 1. de verbo Dei

c. 7. or whether that booke and those which are cal∣led additaments, bee there excluded from the Ca∣non, as Sixtus Senensis in lib. 1. & 8. biblioth. sanct. doth auouch? Secondly, for the intention required by the Councell in him which administers the Sa∣crament, Sess. 7. I aske, whether the wordes of the Councell, be to be vnderstood according to Catha∣rinus opinion, in opusc. or Bellarmines lib. 1. de Sa∣cram. in Gen. c. 27. Thirdly, I aske how it comes to passe, that Priscian and our old Grammarians will not serue to construe the text of the Councel (if the Roman Church can endite with so perspicuous a stile) but that Sess. 7. Can. 8. Opus operatum, must, contrarie to the Grammar rules (as Bellarmine con∣fesseth, lib. 2. de Sacram. c. 1.) be vnderstood passiue∣ly. And that in the sixth Sess. cap. 5. de iustif. it is said, Neque homo ipse nihil omninò agat, wherein* 1.92 contrarie to Grammar, are two negatiues expres∣sed, which cannot bee resolued into an affirmatiue. Fourthly, if the interpretations of the Church are so facile and easie, whether was the Councell of Trents meaning concerning Originall sinne and Iu∣stification, the same that o 1.93 Dominicus a Soto affirms it to be, or that which Ambrosius Catharinus attri∣butes vnto it, seeing both were present at the draw∣ing of the Canons, both presented books for proofe of their opinions to the Councell (which are now extant) and the p 1.94 Councell it selfe being appealed vnto, could not decide the Controuersie, nor agree what was her owne meaning therein.

To the third question, if the tradition of the Church be not infallible, how shall we know, whe∣ther the Scriptures be perfect and entire, or maimed and corrupted? I answer, that there is a double per∣fection of the Scriptures, the one of integrall parts, which appertaines to the perfection of each booke, Chapter, and verse in particular, the other of essen∣tiall parts, which pertaine to the perfection of sauing knowledge. If the question be of the integrall puri∣tie and perfection, how I know, that there be copies of the Scriptures in the world, by iudicious compa∣ring whereof, light may bee giuen to correct all ma∣nifest errors and defects crept into the Text, whe∣ther by negligence or ignorance of the transcribers or otherwise, I answer, that I am assured thereof, by the promises of God in generall to establish a per∣petuitie of sauing knowledge and true beliefe in his Church, and consequently, by that firme foundati∣on of his prouidence, which appointing the end, to witte eternall life, will neuer suffer the meanes conducting thereunto, either to perish, or being dis∣paraged by corruptions, to become fruitlesse. Nei∣ther doth q 1.95 Greg de Valentia run for farther proofes to secure the Popes legitimacie, and salue the dan∣ger to which the Latine vulgar edition of the Bible is lyable by often impressions, then this prouidence of God. But if the question be of the essentiall pu∣ritie and perfection of the Scriptures, how one may be assured, that so much as contaynes points nece∣sarie to saluation, is preserued perfect and entire in them; I answer, that to resolue ones selfe herein, he hath (besides the generall promises of God, and his

neuer fayling prouidence) an experimentall know∣ledge, also springing from that amplitude of com∣fort and consolation, which Gods Spirit effects by the Scriptures in the hearts and consciences of true beleeuers. For such is the vnion and coherence of points necessarie to saluation on with the other, that one workes not his proper effect, where the other is not, at least in some reasonable and conuenient mea∣sure knowne and beleeued.

Now on the contrarie, I demaund of them, (if we cannot bee assured of the puritie and perfection of the Scriptures, vnlesse the Tradition of the Church concerning it, bee infallible) how a man can euer bee resolued thereof from the Church of Rome?

Which, first could neither heretofore preserue her La∣tine vulgar editions of the Bible, (which shee preferres before the originall) from manifest Corruptions, as may appeare by the corrections of Origen and Hierom, r 1.96 nor at this day hath been able to Canonize any edition, with∣out permitting faults, solecismes, Barbarismes, Misin∣terpretations, Ambiguities, Additions, Substracti∣ons, Transpositions, Immutations, Deprauations and the like, which are confest by Pagnine, Caietan, Fo∣rerius, Oleaster, Sixtus Senensis, s 1.97 Bellarmine and o∣thers, to bee found in their newest and most appro∣ued Bibles.

Secondly, which disparageth the Churches fidelitie and care, teaching that it hath lost many bookes of the

Old Testament, of which t 1.98 Becanus reckons vp par∣ticularly no fewer then 18. theol. scholast. part. 2.

Thirdly, which actually hath lost many articles of faith, heretofore defined & declared by it, as u 1.99 Valentia grants, Tom. 3. in Thom. disp. 1.

All arguing her to bee an incompetent Mistris of other mens purses, which hath beene so negligent a guardian of her owne.

So then let vs cast vp the reckoning, and see what small aduantage the Papists haue of vs in these que∣stions of the Scripture: Wee runne on thus farre together, that to a distinct resolution of them, there is required the testimonie of the word speaking out∣wardly to our eares, the testimonie of the spirit spea∣king inwardly to our hearts, and the testimonie of the Church preparing the way by her message for the other two. The combate stands chiefely in this, that they beleeue the message, because they thinke the Messenger cannot lye, wee beleeue the message not because wee thinke the Messenger cannot lye, but because he which sent him speakes the same by his deede and seale; nay farther, comes in person a∣long with him, and by a double affirmation, the one of his word, the other of his spirit, confirmes the Messengers saying in this particular to bee true; so that in fine, their lustie brags obtayne but this issue, that we beleeue the man for the masters sake, they beleeue the master for the mans sake.

SECT. VII. The new sleights and deuices, which the Iesuites vse in enforcing these arguments touching the Church and the Scriptures.

BVt see, what the Lyons pawes can effect, they think to compasse by the Foxes wiles, and therefore they haue instilled a method of disputing into the common people, which how∣soeuer it will not hold water in the schooles, yet be∣cause it haply passeth the throng in the streets, it shall not be amisse to discouer some trickes and de∣uices of theirs in this kinde, that you may see how they detaine the truth in vniustice (as the Apostle speakes) and that the penurie to which they are dri∣uen, is such, that now their chiefest warre is but de∣fensiue.

The first tricke of theirs is, to teach the people to require vs to proue and shew by euident demonstra∣tion, the Scriptures to be the Word of God, and that to those which beleeue them not. As if one should say; Imagine that I gaue no credit to the Scriptures, how will you (which depend not finally vpon the authoritie of the Church) make it appeare by euident conuincing proofes and reasons vnto me, that they are the Word of God? I could retort, and how will you conuince me by the authority of the Church that they are the Word of God, if first I beleeue them not to bee so; considering that your owne Diuines, * 1.100 Bellarmine by name lib. 4. de Eccles. cap. 3. confesse, that one cannot euidently demonstrate the true

Church by any notes, to bee the true one, but to such an one as first beleeues and receiues the Scrip∣tures, because the notes of the Church are from thence to bee taken and deduced. But by this que∣stion you may perceaue, that Poperie is a disease working vpon corrupt humours, and cannot domi∣neere, but there, where the flesh and humane reason weare the breeches. First they require one to proue that by such euidence as it is not capable of. For principles of faith (such as the Scriptures are) are apprehended by faith, and this faith, howsoeuer it bringeth with it certaintie, yet it doth not clearnesse, Whether you reflect vpon the matter, which are things not seene, Heb. 11. or the manner, it being through a glasse, darkely. 1. Cor. 13. Againe, that certaintie being inward, it serues but for the satisfy∣ing of ones selfe, not for the conuiction of others. Secondly they bid vs proue it to one, who by Ari∣stotles* 1.101 rule, in a like case, should bee excluded from being partaker of so high mysteries, in that hee is not idoneus auditor, that is, one that by reason of vn∣beliefe is not capable of the right & proper proofes, which is as much, as if one should dispute of colors with a blind man. Against which fopperies, Thomas Aquinas layes downe two remarkeable propositi∣ons. 1. part. q. ••. art. 8. The one, that Diuinitie is not argumentatiue, to proue her principles, but onely to proue her conclusions. The other, that against one which absolutely denies her principles, and namely the Scriptures, one cannot proceed proban∣do, but soluendo, that is, not by prouing the truth thereof, but by dissoluing the reasons brought to the contrarie.

Their second deuice is, to question vs not onely how wee proue the Scriptures in generall to bee the Word of God, but also in speciall, how wee know the Gospell of Saint Matthew to bee the Gospell of Saint Matthew? how we are assured of the sense and interpretation of such a particular verse? how wee rest satisfied that this or that syllable is correctly imprinted, or that haply not vnderstanding He∣brew and Greeke, one may bee confident that our translation accords throughout with the originall? This forme of questioning might indeed carry some credit with it, if wee either dreamed of a perfection of knowledge in this life, or conceiued a paritie of gifts in all men for the discerning of this Word, or an equalitie of necessitie in the things therein con∣tayned. But forasmuch as we acknowledge neither perfection nor paritie of gifts to be found here, nor lastly an equalitie of necessitie in the things; to re∣quire a distinct answer to all such questions from all men, is most vniust, and altogether besides the pur∣pose. For as touching perfection, we confesse with the Apostle, that we know but in part, and prophesie but in part, 1. Cor. 13. 9. And as for equalitie, as we ascribe not that degree of iudgement to any one member which we doe to the whole Church, so we make the skill of discerning to differ in the mem∣bers, and that in a three-fold respect.

1. First, in respect of the grace of God enlight∣ning vs, which is giuen vnto euery one, not equally, but according to the measure of the gift of Christ. Ephes. 4. 7.

2. Secondly, in respect of the meanes wherewith

the holy Ghost cooperates, which are hearing of the Word of God preached, meditation, studie, skill of tongues and the like, which are diuers in all. For we relye not (as I said before) vpon speciall and immediate reuelations, as the Prophets and Apo∣stles did, but on the grace of God concurring with our meditations, and the vse of the publike meanes.

3. Thirdly, in respect of the matters contayned in the Scriptures, whereof all display not themselues alike, being not all equally and alike necessarie to saluation, some imposing an absolute necessitie of beliefe, others onely a conditionall, that is, a prepa∣ration of minde to giue fuller credence, when it shall please God farther to enlighten one; as in the que∣stion of the authoritie of the Scriptures, the know∣ing of the Instrument or Pen-man, whether it bee Saint Matthew or Saint Paul, is not simply so requi∣site, as to know the principall Authour which is God, nor to determine punctually of the wordes so oblieging, as to beleeue the sense; nor againe of the sense of some places and texts as of other; all are to striue vnto perfection, but as the difference is in the gifts of arte, grace, and nature, so shall the difference be in the measure of the knowledge of all or some.

The third trick and sleight of theirs, which they put vpon the people in this kinde, is, that bidding them to vrge vs to proue the Scriptures to bee the Word of God, or that they are cleare and easie in points necessarie to saluation, and knowing that the chiefe proofes vpon which we rest, are embowelled in the very body of the Text itselfe; first, they for∣bid the lay people to reade the Scriptures, vnlesse

they obtayne speciall licence from the Bishop or In∣quisitor to doe it; as appeares by the fourth rule of prohibited bookes, which is at the end of the Tri∣dentine Councell. And the granting of these licen∣ces, is now againe taken away by Clement the eighth as may bee seene in his Index of prohibited bookes, printed at Paris by Laurentius Sonius, and cited also by Iustinianus a Priest of the Congregation of the Oratorie, lib. 1. de Scriptura, cap. 9. Secondly, be∣cause they know that some people will bee itching (notwithstanding this prohibition) to looke into the Scriptures, and to see whether matters bee so as wee affirme them to bee, therefore they crie downe our Bibles, and present a Bible of their owne tran∣slation, which (to argue the obscuritie of the Scrip∣tures) they patch vp with such gallimaufrie and inke-horne termes, that an ordinarie man may bee confounded with the strangenesse of the wordes. As in the old Testament publisht by the Colledge of Doway; in stead of Fore-skin, they put Prepuce; Gen. 17. for Passeouer, Phase; for vnleauened bread, Azims, Exod. 12. for high places, Excelses, 2. King. 15. for the holy of holyest, Sancta Sanctorum, 1. Chr. 6. Nor are they lesse ridiculous in the new Testa∣ment, set forth by the Colledge of Rhemes, where you haue these English wordes piping hot out of the Popes mint, Depositum, Exinanited, Parasceue, Didragmes, Neophyte, Gratis, with the spirituals of wickednesse in the Celestials, and many more, labou∣ring by what meanes they can (as our learned Fulke shewes in his Preface to that Testament) to sup∣presse the light of Truth vnder one pretence or an∣other.

Their fourth stratagem is, that after their lay disciples haue giuen so loud a defiance to our Cause, as may make simple standers by conceiue, so great a crie must needes carrie some wooll with it; (then if by chance any of the companie vndertake to an∣swere them) to fetch them off againe with aduan∣tage, by making it knowne afore-hand vnto their Pupils, that howsoeuer they may bragge, it is for∣bidden yet vnto a lay man vnder paine of excom∣munication, to dispute of matters of faith, which constitution is in the Popes owne Decretals, and* 1.102 Emanuel Sa hath it in his Aphorismes, voce, fides. By which meanes, they both barre vs, after iust pro∣uocation, to informe and satisfie their adherents, and with all cherish presumption in their followers, as not being silenced by the weaknesse of their cause, but by the command of their Superiors.

Their fifth deuice is, that if notwithstanding the prohibition to dispute, aboue mentioned, some of their lay Auditors should be so hardie as to venture a skirmish, then to diuert them from reasoning out of the Scriptures, least the light thereof should some manner of way or other display it selfe, they busie their heads with questions aboue their capacitie, as where was our Church before Luther, what the ex∣position of the Doctors in all Ages, what the Do∣ctrine of the Fathers, Councells, and Schoolemen? which is the common Theame of this Age; hoping that either a few old wiues fables or fragments of antiquitie, shall serue to puffe vp their men with conceit of victorie; where they finde not equall op∣ponents; or where they doe, yet they shall not abate

thereby any whit of their courage, as being for want of artes and languages, vnable to see the point of the weapon which is darted at them, I meane the truth of those things which are alleaged.

Their sixt deuice is, that if any of their laytie, notwithstanding those prohibitions and this diuer∣sion, will presume so farre vpon the indulgencie of their ghostly Fathers, as to hazard a dispute out of the Bible, yet to doe it with aduantage enough on their side, they counsell him to make no thrusts, but to lie onely vpon the ward, and therein to enioyne vs, to shew the articles of Faith established in our Church, in iust so many wordes and syllables in the Scriptures and (as if grace destroyed nature) to for∣bid vs the benefit of Reason or Consequences.

1. If we infer any thing by way of consequence, they tell vs, that wee violate that which wee haue promised to the World, which is, to proue all our Assertions out of the pure Word of God. Where∣as, according to the grand principle of x 1.103 Logicke, De omni & de nullo, a truth deduced out of another truth, is acknowledged to bee contayned therein; for otherwise it could not bee drawne from thence. So that to bee in the Word of God, is to bee the Word of God. As y 1.104 Gregorie de Valentia saith, of the more distinct conceptions of any obiect, that they are contayned implicitly in the more generall, as particulars are in vniuersalls. And therefore z 1.105 Bellarmine speaking of matters of faith, makes those things as well to bee knowne by certaintie of faith, which are deduced by necessarie consequen∣ces from the Scriptures, as those which are imme∣diatly contayned therein.

2. If we deduce an article from premises, where∣of any one proposition is not in the Bible, (though otherwise it be a principle of nature) as for example, that a body cannot be in two places at the same time, they aske how such a Conclusion can bee of faith, or how wee can auerre that our articles of faith are proued out of the pure Word of God, * 1.106 conside∣ring that a Conclusion takes his efficacie not from one, but from both the premises? Which argument concludes our Aduersaries as much (if not more) then it doth vs. For the maynest principle of their to wit, That those which professe the faith vnder the Bishop of Rome, are the Church of Christ, cannot be deduced by Bellarmines logick, but search made in the Court Rolls of Nature, and by bor∣rowing an Euidence from thence to supply the place of one of the premisses. But to speake more punctu∣ally, we say, that those principles of Nature which we imploy in this kinde, are also vertually included in the Scriptures, though not expresly. As hee that faith, Socrates is a man, faith also by consequence that Socrates is a substance, that he is a liuing creature and that hee is reasonable, because Man contaynes all these things in his nature. So the Scripture say∣ing that Christ hath a body, saith by consequence, that according to his humane condition, he is finite, and being finite hath a limited and bounded exi∣stencie, and therefore cannot bee in many places at the same instant. For arte in this, is grounded vpon nature, and in nature the immediate cause implyes the effect, the species the genus, the subject the pro∣perties, the whole the parts, & one contrarie remooues

the other, so that these Maximes of Philosophie are but dilated verities, being before contractedly con∣tayned in the Letter, and adde not any thing to the Scriptures fulnesse, but onely are displayed by the vnderstanding facultie, as the species and formes of an obiect are by a perspectiue glasse multiplyed and made more visible.

3. If we presse them with the force and necessitie of our consequence, they bid them, demand of vs, whether we cannot erre in the deducing of a Con∣sequence? if we say we cannot, then to tell vs that we oppugne a doctrine of our owne, which deter∣mineth that the Church may erre; and if wee say wee may, then they will them to aske vs, how wee can build an article of faith vpon a Consequence which by our owne confession is fallible. To which wee say, first, that a posse ad esse non valet argu∣mentum, from a possibilitie of erring, to an actuall erring, an argument will not follow. Againe, the ne∣cessitie of a Consequence depends not vpon the per∣son of him which deduceth it, but vpon the intrin∣secall vnion and reall affinitie betweene the termes of the Antecedent and Consequent. But lastly, be∣cause they presse vs, to shew, how we can assure our selues that in this or that particular Consequence we doe not erre, considering that there is no subiect wherein we do not acknowledge, that we may erre. Let me aske them againe, how any of them can as∣sure themselues that they know the meaning of the Church in any one article of faith, considering that there is none of them in particular (the Pope in his chaire excepted) which may not (by their owne

Tenets) mistake a word, or misse-conceiue the Churches meaning. Sure if this reason were of force, wee should for the same Cause take away all certaintie of knowledge which comes by the sense, which was the error of the Academikes and Pirrho∣nians. For what sense is there which at sometimes by reason of the Medium, Organ, or Object, is not lyable to erre and be deceiued? But as Nature, which (Philosophers say) is not defectiue in things neces∣sarie, hath for the remedying of these inconuenien∣ces endowed man with reason, common notions and principles, whereby hee is able to iudge of the due site, habitude, and disposition of things, so the God of Nature, which is also the God of Grace, and knowes the necessitie of his children, giues vn∣to them (besides that portion of reason, common notions and principles aboue-mentioned) the spirit also of discretion, for the spirituall man iudgeth all things, 1. Cor. 2. So Saint Iohn, These things haue I written vnto you, concerning them that seduce you, but the anointing which you haue receiued of him, teacheth you all things, 1. Ioh. 2. 26.

4. If the Consequence bee so euident, that they cannot for shame denie it, then they counsell them to aske vs, where the Scripture saith in expresse termes, that whatsoeuer followeth by euident and necessarie consequence from her Pages, is an article of faith. Where they hope to choake vs with an e∣quiuocall acception of the word article. For an ar∣ticle of faith is sometimes taken strictly, for one of those verities which so neerly touch the foundation of faith, that a man cannot be saued vnlesse he ex∣presly

know and beleeue it, sometimes largely for any Catholike truth whatsoeuer. If they take it in the former sense, they fight with their owne sha∣dowes, for which of our men euer said, that what∣soeuer followeth from the Scriptures by euident and necessarie consequence, is in such manner and sense an article of faith. But if they take it in the latter sense, wee need not runne farre for Texts to proue that such consequences are articles of faith, and require (according to the nature of the subiect and euidence of the deduction) a beliefe, either ex∣plicit, or implicit of them, because that conclusi∣ons, as I shewed before, lye hid in their principles, as a kernell in the shell, and that consequences are materially in their premises, and being in them, are to be esteemed part of them, and therefore he which is bound to an absolute beliefe of the one, is bound also, at least conditionally, that is, vpon the appea∣rance of the euidence of the consequence, to beleeue the other.

5. If wee dispute syllogistically, they bid them tell vs, that not the Scriptures, but Aristotle pre∣scribes rules for syllogismes, and that Aristotles rules cannot binde the faith. As though syllogisticke formes were principall causes of the truth of things, and not onely instruments, whereby the Truth which was before, and might otherwise by naturall Logick and the strength of the common apprehen∣sion be perceiued, is made somewhat the more easie and apparant. For many Conclusions follow neces∣sarily in regard of the matter, which are vicious in regard of the forme. Galen inuented a fourth figure

which others reiect. And therefore wee build no more vpon Aristotle in matters of faith, then an house is built vpon the Carpenters Hammer, Square or Rule, which are neither whole nor part of the building, though otherwise they conduce thereun∣to as instruments.

6. If wee stop their mouthes, either with mani∣fest Texts of Scripture or pregnant consequences, then they bid them demand of vs Who shalbe iudge? Which is a peece of Sophistrie beyond the Deuils,* 1.107 who being taken tardie by our Sauiour in misse∣quoting places of Scripture, forgot to aske the que∣stion: Who shalbe iudge? This cauill is squint-eyed, and lookes three wayes at once. If we say the Holy Ghost, then they vpbraid vs with flying to priuate spirits, and making our selues Iudges in our owne cause. If we say the Scriptures, they reply, that the Scriptures are not sufficient to execute the place, be∣ing mute and wanting a voyce to declare, which (a∣mongst many senses) is their owne; and if we say the Church, then they conceiue the victorie to runne on their side, and think we haue granted them their Conclusion. But what if we make neither the one nor the other sitting alone, to be this Iudge, but ac∣knowledge a Concurrency (though not equall) in all of them, and that Concurrency (though not to the enacting of the sentence) as it is considered in se, in it selfe, yet to the publication of it, quoad nos, as it hath reference to vs? What then shall become of these sequells? And so it is indeed. For howso∣euer we make one supreme Iudge in this high Court of Veritie, yet wee doe not imagine him to speake

but by writing, nor that writing to bee ordinarily read and declared without an Herald. The principall Iudge, wee say, is God himselfe, from whom pro∣ceedes the knowledge of all supernaturall truths whatsoeuer. The instruments, whereby hee com∣municates them vnto vs, are threefold; first, his Spirit, whereby he speakes inwardly vnto vs, both enlightning vs to behold, and perswading vs to be∣leeue the sense and meaning of his mysteries. Yet is not this a priuate spirit, because it reueales not ought vnto vs besides the publicke writing, nor or∣dinarily without the ministerie of the Church. For to speake more clearely, a spirit may be termed priuate. Either

• 1. Ratione Principij, in regard of the au∣thor and efficient from whence it comes.
• 2. Ratione Subiecti, in regard of the subiect or person in which it dwells.
• 3. Ratione Medij, in regard of the meanes which it vseth.

Now the spirit wherby we iudge of diuine truths, howsoeuer it may bee termed priuate, in regard of the Subiect or Person wherin it inhabites, hee being haply (as most men are) of a priuat condition; yet we allow it not to bee priuate, either in regard of the meanes which it vseth, which are the reading of the Scriptures, publike ministerie of the Church, Coun∣cells, Fathers, &c. or in respect of the Author & efficient thereof, which is the Holy Ghost, the com∣mon father of light and grace, at which kind of spi∣rit Saint Peter specially aymes, when hee saith, no Scripture is of priuate interpretation. 2. Pet. 1.

The second instrument whereby God declares his sentence, is the Scripture; which is the only out∣ward infallible rule whereby Controuersies may be resolued and decided, and is not to be accounted im∣perfect or vnsufficient, for this purpose, because all men are not able to pry forth with into the meaning thereof throughout; or for that it wants vocall or∣gans to expresse, which (amidst varietie of senses at∣tributed vnto it) is his owne. For it promiseth not to doe this, but to those who are enlightned with the spirit, and which make right vse of the publike meanes, as the ministerie of the Church, reading of Authors, comparing of places, and the like; Logi∣cians telling vs, that an instrument is then sayd to be sufficient, not when it serues for all vses and in all manners whatsoeuer, but when it serues to such an end, and in such sort applyed, as the principall effi∣cient hath ordainedit; as a writing is then sufficient∣ly legeable, if those which haue eyes and a will ther∣unto, can read it, though to the blind and negligent it seeme otherwise.

The third instrument whereby God publisheth his decrees, is the Church, and in it the Bishops and Pastors thereof, whether assembled in Councels, or otherwise considered in their ordinarie ministerie. This holds the place of an Herald, and howsoeuer it stands not in equipage with the two former, yet God hath commanded vs to heare it, and promised that it shall neuer erre in fundamentall points either totally or finally;

So that in summe the totall and plenary indicature of matters of Faith, belongs to the Holy Ghost,

whereby the Iudge of these things properly taken, is he alone; the gift of his spirit, the Scriptures and the Church, are but partiall instruments of promul∣gation, seruing onely as seuerall trunkes and pipes, whereby his decree arriues at the eares of our vn∣derstanding; yet if any shall compare the outward instruments together, the Church and the Scriptures and demand, by which of the two it is that the Ho∣ly Ghost speakes properly; as hee is iudge of Con∣trouersies, and on which wee are finally to rest for his infallible sentence; I answer, not the Church, but the Scriptures. First in respect of their dignity, because the Scriptures are the immediate worke of God, dictated by his Spirit; Whereas the expositi∣ons of the Church proceed not immediately from God, but mediating the voice of the Scriptures. Secondly in respect of their certainty, for the church is subiect to error, the Scriptures are not. Againe the truth in regard of the Scriptures is fixt, and there∣fore easie to be there found, shee being alwayes lod∣ged in the same bookes, but in regard of the Church it is Ambulatorie, and therefore needes more search to discouer it there, as not being entayled either to chaire, place or person. Thirdly in respect of the order and manner of knowing them, for howsoeuer by a confused knowledge, the Church may bee notior Scripturis, knowen better then the Scriptures, and∣before them, yet according to a distinct knowledge, are the Scriptures notiores Ecclesia, knowne better and sooner then the Church; for the true Scriptures, are knowne by their owne light, but the true Church, is not knowne but by the light of the Scriptures.

The conceit, that the Church must be accompa∣nied with infallibilitie, if to no other end, yet to make a finall end of Controuersies vpon earth, is ridicu∣lous; for if they suppose a finall end of Controuer∣sies amongst all men, whatsoeuer, first, they suppose that which shall neuer be whilest the Church is mi∣litant vpon earth, for the Apostle tells vs, that there must be heresies. 1. Cor. 11. Secondly, they present a meanes vncompetent to compasse that which they designe, by naming the Church of Rome, to that office; both in that she is a partie, and hath not as yet cleared her title to that dignitie, and in that infalli∣bilitie in the Iudge is not sufficient to compose diffe∣rences in supernaturall matters, without grace in the hearer, which is no coyne, that comes out of the Popes treasurie, nor hear be that growes in his Gar∣den, but raines from heauen where and what mea∣sure God pleaseth. On the other side, if more par∣ticularlie, they require an end of Controuersies a∣mongst those whom God hath elected, and that so farre as is necessarie for the saluation of their soules, it is needlesse to attribute infallibilitie to the Church, for the seruing of this Cure; because to them, God sup∣plyes the infallible assurance of his truth by meanes more excellent and agreeable to the nature of his spirituall Kingdome, to wit, by his Wisedome, in fur∣nishing them with a rule, both able to bee knowne by its notes and characters, and also sufficient to de∣cide all necessarie questions that may at any time be incident; by his Grace enabling them to see the truth and demonstrating the certaintie thereof to their consciences, and by his Prouidence raising vp faith∣full

Pastors in one place or other, to prepare, open and display those verities and decisions to the flocke.

Many like cratchets to these, and answered by the same grounds, doe issue daily out of the Iesuits ware∣house, as for example, if wee produce one place of Scripture to proue the meaning of another, they bid them call vpon vs to alleadge a third place, which shall say that this place ought to bee expounded by that, as if wee needed a Text to proue God no lyar, or that he doth not contradict himselfe. If in dispu∣ting vpon any subiect, we goe about to destroy their Assertion, they will them to presse vs to shew not onely our affirmatiues, as before, but also our nega∣tiues iust in so many vowells and consonants in the Bible, as we expresse them; whereas not onely con∣sequences drawn from thence are sufficient for that purpose, but also this one thing, not to bee contay∣ned in the Scriptures either directly or by conse∣quence, is in effect all one, as to bee no article of faith. In a word, if to these and the like mounte∣banke affronts, wee answer them not according to their minde, they furnish their Schollers with pre∣meditated speeches and scoffes, to say, that they brought vs to that plunge, as to vse these wordes,* 1.108 that is to say, and it is so by consequence, and to say that a Coach is also a consequence, because it fol∣loweth the Horses.

This method of disputing was inuented first by* 1.109 Gontier a French Iesuite; polisht by Veronus, some∣times one of the same Order; practised by Arnoldus the Confessor in most of his late bickerings; ap∣proued

by the Prelates of France assembled at Bur∣deaux,* 1.110 An. 1621. as also at Rome and by sundrie V∣niuersities; commended by the Pope, and the So∣cietie newly erected at Rome by the Bull of Gregorie the fifteenth, for the Conuersion of Heretikes, inti∣tuled, The holy congregation of the propagation of the faith; and so farre admired, that this Veronus, hath in imitation of that Roman societie procured letters Patents for the establishing of a French Congrega∣tion of Missionaries, as hee termes them, cull'd out of all Orders and Vniuersities, who dispersing themselues throughout the Kingdome, shall after the Sermon ended, by this method alone so blanke the Ministers of the Reformed side, that within foure or fiue yeeres he doubts not but to conuert all within that Kingdome to the Roman faith. To bee short, this method hath trauailed most parts of Christendome, being translated into seuerall lan∣guages, and (as out-landish toyes cannot long want a Merchant to transport them hither) so this hath beene lately taught to speake English, and applyed to the articles of our Church, as before it was to the Articles of the French reformed; wherein such confidence is put, that Veronus vnder-takes to make a Cobler able thereby to put the learnedst Minister of France to a non plus, though he deale so fauour∣ably with him as to allow him the Geneua Bible or what translation else, hee best likes, to boote. It seemes, a Coblers disputations are thought good enough to beget a Colliars faith, which to effect in the cōmon people, is the Iesuites greatest ambition.

It needes not bee doubted, but that this method

may as easily, if not with more aduantage to vs, be retorted vpon our aduersaries; and that it is no diffi∣cult taske to beate them with their owne weapons. But it shall not be amisse to obserue, from these new inuented shifts of the Iesuites, into what a straight they are brought, that they dare not enter the lists, but vpon most vniust and vnreasonable conditions. They bid vs to demonstrate that by sensible eui∣dence and reason, which themselues confesse cannot bee rightly apprehended without faith, which is as much as if one should bid his fellow to see with his Nose, or smell with his Eyes. They require the meanest of our side, to proue that which is not ab∣solutely requisite for euery man to know. They challenge vs to shew, and threaten their pupils with thunder-bolts if they see. In a word, they are con∣tented to venture a disputation, prouided wee for∣beare therein the vse of Consequences or Reason, as if Poperie could no longer subsist, vnlesse the rea∣sonable soule should resigne her office, and men could bee perswaded to turne either beasts, mad∣men or fooles.

And hitherto haue I treated of the act of faith implyed in this article, which at the first appearing no bigger then a mans hand, grew at length, like Elias clowd, so great that it well-nigh ouer-sha∣dowed* 1.111 my whole text, and I was drench'd therein, ere I could arriue at Iesrael. But now I hope, the threatning storme is ouer-past, and the obiect of this faith, the holy Catholike Church, like the Citie of God, discouers it selfe to your view, vpon whose description I purpose (God willing) to aduenture, in that which followeth.

Notes

• a 1.1

  Augustin. Cont. Crescon. gram. lib. 2. c. 1.
• b 1.2

  Reu. 13. 1.
• c 1.3

  Aug. 181. serm. de temp. P. Lom. 3. sent. dist. 23. Thom. 2. 2. q. 2. art. 2.
• d 1.4

  Greg. de Va∣lent. in Thom. Tom. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. p. 1. §. 6.
• e 1.5

  Scot. 3, sent. dist. 23. q. vn. Gab. q. 2. Can. lib. 2. c. 7. Du∣rand. 3. d. 24. q. 1 Et d. 25. q. 3.
• f 1.6

  Staplet. cont. Whitak. de au∣thorit. scriptur. l. 1. c. 14. §. 6. & lib. 8. princip. doct. cap. 21.
• g 1.7

  Matth. 16. Joh. 16. 13. 1. Tim. 3. 15.
• h 1.8

  Staplet. lib. 8 princip. doct. cap. 21.
• i 1.9

  Respondeo non sequi se∣cundum regu∣las dialectico∣rum, id quod inferimus ex verbis Domini sed tamen se∣qui secundum regulam pru∣dentiae. Bell. lib. 1. de purgat. cap. 4.
• k 1.10

  Precipuè vero in hoc articulo non praesides solum sed etiam qui parere debent significat. Catech. Roman. part. 1. cap. 10. §. 9. & 13.
• * 1.11

  I Siluest. Prie∣rias in Luth. tom. 1. pag. 159. fundam. 1.
• m 1.12

  Cap. 24. q. 1. c. a recta. Quae∣ro de qua Ec∣clesia intelligas quod hic dici∣tur, quod non possit errare? Resp. Ipsa con∣gregatio fideli∣um hic dicitur Ecclesia.
• n 1.13

  Ne{que} tamen debere Ponti∣ficem fidelium omnium Sen∣tentiam inqui∣rere; Hoc enim ne{que} fieri po∣test, ne{que} si pos∣sit expediret. Fere enim e∣iusmodi sunt quae in contro∣uersiam fidei adducuntur, vt captum vulga∣rium fidelium longe superent Valent. in Thom Tom. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. p. 7. § 47.
• o 1.14

  At posset tamen nihilo∣minus errare maior illorum pars. Ʋalent. 16. §. 45.
• p 1.15

  Bell. lib. 2. de concil. cap. 14. §. At alij aucto∣res.
• q 1.16

  Bellarm. 16. § Porro de propo∣sita. Ocham in dialog. Dried. de deg. Eccles. lib. 4. c 4. Concil. Constant. session. 4. Basil. act. 2. & 18.
• r 1.17

  Valent. in Thom. tom. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. p. 7. §. 45.
• s 1.18

  Ideo vs{que} ad hanc diem, quaestio super∣est, etiam inter Catholicos, Bell. lib. 2. de concil. c. 13.
• t 1.19

  Alphons. a Cast. lib. 1. cont. haeres. c. 2. Adri∣an. 6. quest. de confirm. Vid. Bellarm. lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. cap. 2
• u 1.20

  Resp. secun∣dum Abb. in cap. nimis de praeb. in fi. quod non re∣peritur Specifi∣cè decisum, qui debeant Con∣cilio vniuersali inter esse, nec in text. nec in glossa. Gloss. i•• institu. Iur. Can. lib. 1. tit. 3. in princip.
• x 1.21

  Instit. Canon. ibid. Bell. lib. 1. de concil. c. 4.
• y 1.22

  Si omnes, nullum suit er∣go hactenus concilium ge∣nerale, ne{que} videtur dein∣ceps futurum, Paulo post. Sic in concilio Ni∣caeno primo ex occidente So∣lum fuerunt duo Presbyteri missi ex Italia, vnus Episco∣pus ex Gallia, vnus ex Hispania, vnus ex Africa. In Concilio secundo & tertio, nulli fuerunt ex Occidente, Bellarm. li. 1. de concil, c. 17.
• z 1.23

  Quatuor conditiones sufficere, Prima vt euocatio sit generalis, ita vt innotescat omnibus maioribus Christianis pro∣uinc ijs. Bell. ibid.
• a 1.24

  Canus lib. 5. de loc. Theolog. c. 2. Turrecrem. lib. 3. de Eccles. c. 16. Ʋalent. in Thom. tom. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. p. 7. §. 45. Vid. Bell, vt sup.
• b 1.25

  Ex quo se∣quitur posse interdum con∣cilia nationa∣lia esse multo maiora genera∣libus, quoad numerum Epi∣scoporum. Bellar. ibid.
• c 1.26

  Ʋid. Catalog. ad fin. Concil. Trident.
• d 1.27

  Quia vt Tur∣recremata lib. 3. de Eccles. c. 6. 8. & 38. & Canus lib. 5. de locis Theol. c. 5 recte docent, potestas ipsa Pontificis ad infallibiliter definiendum deligari alijs nequit. Valent. in Thom. vt sup.
• e 1.28

  Quin etiam licet non conuenerint in eiusmodi aliquibus Romanis Concilijs Epi∣scopi variarum Prouinciarum, tamen ratione Pontificiae authoritatis, quae vniuersa∣lis est, Vniuersalia quodammodo dici possunt, vt notauit Turrecremata, lib. 3. de Ec∣cles. cap. 3. Ʋalent. in Thom. ibid. Vid. Bellarm. lib. 1. de Concil. cap. 5.
• f 1.29

  Bellar. lib. 1. de Concil. cap. 15. §. prior au∣tem sententia refellenda nunc est, ac primo ratione desumpta ex Scriptura. Item, Fran. Longus a Coriol. praelud. 4. ad Sum. Concil.
• g 1.30

  Ex priuile∣gio autem & consuetudine, etiam Cardi∣nales, Abbates, & Generales Ordinum licet Episcopi non sint. Bellar. lib. 1. de Concil. c. 15 Vid. subscript. ad fin. Concil. Trident.
• h 1.31

  Albert. Pigh. lib. 6. coelest. Hierarch. cap. 1.
• i 1.32

  Bellar. lib. 1. de Concil. c. 10.
• k 1.33

  Valent. to. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. p. 7. §. 42.
• l 1.34

  Bell. lib. 4. de Rom. pont. c 2. Aquin. 22. q. 1. art. 10. Walden lib. 2. doct. fid. c. 47. &. 48. Tur∣recrem. lib. 2. Summae. c. 109. Dried. lib 4. de eccles. dog. c. 3. part. 3. Caiet. in opusc. de potest. Papae & concil. c. 9. Hos. lib. 2. cont. Brent. de legit. iudic. Eck. lib. 1 de prim. Petri. Ioh. a Lou. de perpet. cathed Petri protect. cap 11. Pet. a Soto in Apo∣log. part. 1. c. 83. Can. lib. 6. c. 7. de locis. Valent. tom. 3. disp. 1. p. 7. q. 1. §. 40. Becan theol. Scholast.
• m 1.35

  Bell de sanct. beat. lib. 1 cap. 12. Valent. in Thom. tom. 3. disp. 1. q 1. p. 7. § 41.
• n 1.36

  Bell. lib. 2. de Rom. Pont. cap 12. Valent. vt. sup. §. 37.
• o 1.37

  Bell. lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. cap. 2. Conue∣niunt omnes Catholici posse Pontificem etiam vt Ponti∣ficem & cum suo caetu confi∣liariorum, vel cum generali Concilio, erra∣re in contro∣uersijs facti
• p 1.38

  Bell. lib. 4. de Ro. Pont. c. 12.
• q 1.39

  Valent. in Thom. tom. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. punct. 7 §. 41. Non est autem ita prorsus ab Ecclesia tradi∣ta haec doctri∣na, qua poni∣mus Pontifi∣cem non posse etiam errare in Canoniza∣tiorne Sancto¦rum.
• r 1.40

  Turrecrem. lib. 2. de eccles. cap. 112. ad arg 7. & lib. 4. part. 2. cap. 16. Syl∣uest. in Sum. Verbo. Opinio.
• s 1.41

  Valent. ibid. Namsi tantum∣modo volue∣runt Pontifi∣cem vt priua∣tam Personam errare posse, aut etiam pri∣uatum aliquem suum errorem in fide mani∣festum, peruer∣se velle Ecclesiae ipsi, aduersus exploratam aliorum in eadem Ecclesia fidem obtrude∣re, rem illi opinantur non penitus improbabilem. Sic Bellarm. lib. 4 de Ro. Pont. c. 7.
• t 1.42

  Valent. vt sup. §. ad confirmationem. & Bell. l. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 14. Voluit autem lo∣bannes questionem definire, &c.
• u 1.43

  Valent. tom. 3. in Thom. disp. 1. q. 1. p. 7. §. 3.
• x 1.44

  Bell. lib. 2. de Sacram. cap. 25
• y 1.45

  Valent. ibid. §. 12. Sicut de authoritate scripturae, ne∣cesse est per a∣liquam aliam certam autho∣ritatem con∣stare, ita etiam de authoritate traditionis. Et Paulo post. Cum traditio fere scriptis doctorum con∣seruetur, que∣stiones moue∣ri possunt de sensu illius, &c Bell. ibid. Non enim habemus testimonium infallibile, quod Concilia illa fuerint & legitima fue∣rint, & hoc aut illud definie∣rint, nisi quia Ecclesia quae nunc est, ita sentit & docet.
• z 1.46

  Valent. ibid. § 41. Bell. lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. cap. 7.
• a 1.47

  Bellar. lib. 2. de Rom. Pont. c. 30. §. Est er∣go quinta opi∣nio vera.
• * 1.48

  Vid. Grad. 1.
• b 1.49

  Bellar. lib. 2. de Concil. cap. 11. Valent. vt sup. §. 45. Cajet. in Apo∣log. part. 2. c. 21. Turrecrem. lib. 3. c. 23.
• c 1.50

  Vid. Bellar. lib. 1. de Sa∣cram. in Gen. c. 27.
• d 1.51

  Dom. a Soto in 4. sent. dist. 24.
• e 1.52

  Bellar. lib. 2. de Rom. Pont. c. 12. & lib. 4. c. 4. Quod non sit omnino de fide, a Roma∣na Ecclesia nō posse separari Apostolicam sedem, patet, quia neque Scriptura, ne∣que Traditio habet sedem Apostolicam ita fixam esse Romae, vt inde auferri non possit.
• f 1.53

  Canus lib. 6. loc. Theol. c. 4, 5. & 6. Dried. lib. 4. de varijs dogmat. c. 4. part. 3. Turre∣crem. lib. 2. de Eccles. c. 40. Valent. in Thom. tom. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. p. 7. §. 38.
• g 1.54

  Valent. ib. §. 39. At{que} ipse mihi persua∣deo nunquam futurum, vt in∣capax eligatur, Deo id prohi∣bente. Sed quia graues e∣tiam doctores eiusmodi ca∣sum tanquam possibilem ad∣mittunt, &c.
• h 1.55

  Valent. ib. Mulier autem & infidelis Pontificatus minime sunt capaces.
• i 1.56

  Valent. ib. Praeterea idem patet, si errore eligeretur infi∣delis quispiam non baptiza∣tus. & Bellar. lib. 1. de Sa∣cram. cap. 28.
• k 1.57

  Turrecrem. lib. 4. p. 2. c. 20.
• l 1.58

  Vid. suppli∣cat. ad Impe∣rat. Reg. Prin∣cip. &c.
• m 1.59

  Francisc. Long. summ. Concil. prae∣lud. 10. assert. 2.
• n 1.60

  Bellar. lib. 4 de Rom. Pont c. 12. Respon∣deo errasse Stephanum 6. & Sergium 3. sed in quaestio∣ne facti non iu∣ris. Et paulo post, Praecipua ergo quaestio fuit, an For∣mosus fuisset Papa legiti∣mus, necne? in qualibus quaestionibus non negamus posse errare Pontifices, & de facto errasse Stephanum & Sergium.
• o 1.61

  Bellar. lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 14.
• p 1.62

  Bellar. lib. 2. de Concil. c. 19.
• q 1.63

  If thou woul∣dest bee cured of I know not what disease, thou must take an herbe I know not what, put it I know not where, and thou shalt bee cured I know not when.
• r 1.64

  Bellar. lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 2. Non est haeretica, nam adhuc vide∣mus ab Eccle∣sia tollerari, qui illam sen∣tentiam se∣quuntur &c.
• s 1.65

  Bellar. ibid. Deinde omnes Catholici con∣ueniunt, Pon∣tificem solum, siue errare possit, siue nō, esse ab omni∣bus fidelibus obedienter audiendum.
• t 1.66

  Bellar. lib. 3. de verbo Dei, c. 5. § Si etiam intelligamus, &c.
• u 1.67

  Bellar. ibid. Nee enim po∣test Pontifex omnibus ho. minibus con∣cionari, nec est opus, cum sint in singulis Ec∣clesijs qui con∣cionentur.
• x 1.68

  Bellar. lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 14. §. Qua∣dragessimus est Innocen∣tius octauus.
• y 1.69

  Valent. in Thom. tom. 3. disp. 1. quaest. 2. punct. 5. Nam vt infra quaest. 11. docebimus, quando{que} po∣test cōtingere, vt quis tenea∣tur conari ad eliciendum as∣sensum fidei supernaturalé, circaid cuius contrarium reipsa est verum. Vt si, Verbi gratia, Synodus Episcopalis, aut etiam communis consensus plurium Theologorum statueret aliquam propositio∣nem esse propositam ab Ecclesia vt de fide, atque adeo iuberetur quis praebere illi pro∣positioni assensum fidei; tunc talis teneretur conari ad eliciendum talem assensum ex praecepto fidei, & tamen cum Synodus Episcopalis & plures etiam Theologi errare possint, posset contingere &c.
• z 1.70

  Gab. lib. 3. dist. 25. q. vn. art. 1. Si quis ipse simplex & in eruditus audire praelatum suum praedicare aliquid contrarium fidei,—putans hoc a Praelato suo sic praedicatum esse creditum ab Ecclesia, talis non solum non pec∣caret, sed etiam sic credendo falsum, meretur.
• a 1.71

  Tollet. de instruct. Sacer∣dot. lib. 4. cap. 3 §. 7. Rursus si rusticus circa articulos cre∣dat suo Episco∣po proponen. ti aliquod dog∣ma haereticum, meretur in cre dendo, licet sit error; quia tenetur crede∣re, donec ei constet esse contra Eccle∣siam.
• b 1.72

  Bell. lib. 3. de Verbo Dei. c. 10. §. Respon∣deo ad hoc ar∣gumentum.
• c 1.73

  Vid. Bell. lib. 2. de concil. cap. 14.
• d 1.74

  Matth. 7. 26.
• * 1.75

  Rhem. Transl.
• e 1.76

  Bell. lib. 3. de Eccles. cap. 14. Probatur haec veritas, primo de Ecclesia vniuersa, vt continet om∣nes fideles, ac primum ex illo 1. Tim. 3. Eccle sia Dei est col∣lumna & firma∣mentum veri∣tatis.
• * 1.77

  Rhem. Transl.
• f 1.78

  Bell. lib. 3. de Verbo Dei. cap 5. Obseruan∣dum hic qui∣dem dominum loqui de iniu∣rijs quas vnus ab aliquo pa∣itur.
• * 1.79

  Rhem. Transl.
• g 1.80

  Bell. lib. 2. de concil. c. 8. Respondemus Pontifices & Concilia Iu∣daeorum, non potuisse erra∣re antequam Christus veniret, sed eo praesente potuisse. Sic. lib. 3. de Eccle∣cap. 17. §. ad tertium.
• * 1.81

  1. Obiect.
• * 1.82

  2. Organ and Faculties.
• * 1.83

  3. Medium.
• * 1.84

  Stat. quaest.
• * 1.85

  Resolut.
• h 1.86

  Sed non propterea vlti∣ma fidei no∣strae ratio & suprema causa haee vox & de∣terminatio Ecclesiae est. Quia tota haec vox, tota haec determinatio, vna tantum causa fidei no∣strae est, eaque minus princi∣palis. Staple∣ton. triplic. aduersus Whi∣tak. cap. 16.
• i 1.87

  Bellar. lib. 1. de verbo Dei, c. 2. Valent. in Thom. tom. 3. disp. 1. Gret∣serus tract. de agnoscendis Scripturis Ca∣nonicis, cap. 4.
• k 1.88

  Staplet. lib. 5 de authoritate Script. c. 12. §. 11. Vt denique intelligas Ec∣clesiā quidem ratione sui mi∣nisterij & ma∣gisterij a Deo accepti, facere vt credamus, formalem ta∣men rationem, non esse cur credamus, sed Deum intus loquentem, suoque diuino spiritu omnem nobis veritatē intus testifi∣cantem. Staplet, ibid. §. 12. In hoc quidem judi∣cio acquiescit fidelis animus, sed nō per hoc iudicium, sed per internam diuini Spiritus gratiam. Va∣lent. in Thom. tom. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. punct. 1. §. 7.
• l 1.89

  Can. loc. lib. 2. c. 7. &c. 8. Vltima fidei resolutio, non fit in Ecclesiae testimonium, sed in causam interiorem efficientem, hoc est, in Deum intus monentem ad creden∣dum.
• m 1.90

  Becan, Theol. Scholast. part. 2. tom. poster. tract. 1. c. 8. q. 8.
• n 1.91

  Staplet. lib. 8 princip. c. 20. Fides eadem est in reliqua tota Ecclesia, quae est in Pro∣phetis, Apo∣stolis, &c.
• * 1.92

  Vid. hist. Con∣cil. Trident. lib. 2.
• o 1.93

  Vide, Domi∣nici a Soto, de Natura & Gra∣tia libros tres, ad sanctū Con∣cilium Triden∣tinum. Item, Apologiam Dom. a Soto, qua Ambrosio Catharino de Certitudine gratiae respon∣det. Item, Ex∣purgationem Ambros. Ca∣tharini, aduersus Apologiam Domin. a Soto. Denique, confirmationem defensionis Catholicorum pro possibili certitudine gratiae, Amb. Catharini ad Dominicum Soto.
• p 1.94

  Hist. Concil. Trident. lib. 2.
• q 1.95

  Greg. de Valent. in Tho. tom. 3. disp. 1. qu. 1. p. 7. §. 41. §. Respondeo ad hoc argu∣mentum. & §. 43. §. Ad pri∣mumigitur.
• r 1.96

  Sixtus Se∣nensis. Bibliot. lib. 8. pag. pe∣nult. De erro∣ribus vero quos Hieroni∣mus in veteri translatione annotauit, & recentiores in hac noua edi∣tione pariter annotarunt, ingenue fate∣mur & nos multos errores ab Hieronimo emendatos, in veteri traductione, & similiter in hac nostra noua editione nonnullas inueniri mendas, solaecismos, barbarismos, hyperbata, & multa parum accomodate versa, & minus Latine expressa, obscure & ambigue interpretata, itemque nonnulla superaddita, aliqua omissa, quaedam transposita, immutata, ac vitio Scriptorum de∣prauata, quae Sanctis Pagninus, Th. Caietanus, Franciscus Forerius, & Hieronimus Oleastrius, viri ex Dominicano ordine eruditissimi interpretationibus & explanatio∣nibus suis indi carunt.
• s 1.97

  Bellarm. lib. 2. de Verbo Dei. cap. 2. §. Dices si ita est.
• t 1.98

  Becan theol. scholast. tom. post. part. 2. tract. 1. q. 7.
• u 1.99

  Valent. in Thom. tom 3. disp. 1. q. 1. p. 7. §. 12. Postremo multae in Eccle¦sia varijs tem∣poribus defini∣tae ac declara∣tae sunt senten. tiae, fidei, de quibus non ex. tet vs{que} adeo expressa tra∣ditio.
• * 1.100

  Bel. lib. 4. de Eccles. cap. 3. Dicimus ergo notas Ecclesiae quas adfere∣mus, non face∣re euidentiam veritatis sim∣phciter—a∣pud eos autem qui admittunt Scripturas di∣uinas &c: faci∣unt etiam eui∣dentiam veri∣tatis. Tametsi enim articula∣rum fidei veri∣tas non potest nobis esse eui∣dens absolute tamen potest esse euidens ex hypothesi, id est, supposita veritate Scrip turarum.
• * 1.101

  Aristot. 1. Eth. cap. 3.
• * 1.102

  De haereticis, cap. Quicun{que}, in 6. Inhibe∣mus quo{que} ne cuiquam laicae personae liceat publice vel priuatim de fi∣de Catholica disputare, Qui vero contra fecerit, excō∣municationis laqueo inno∣detur. Eman. Sa, A∣phorism. voce, fides, §. 3. Pro∣hibitum laico sub excommu∣nicationis fe∣renda paena, disputare de fide, cap. 1. lib. 6. de haeret. quam prohibitionem si sciens con∣tra faciat, pec∣cabit morta∣liter.
• x 1.103

  Arist. lib. 1. Prior. Analyt. cap. 1.
• y 1.104

  Valent. in Thom. tom. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. p. 6.
• z 1.105

  Bellar. lib. 3. de Iustif. cap. 8. Non potest a∣liquid certum esse certitudi∣ne fidei, nisi aut immediate contineatur in verbo Dei, aut ex verbo Dei per euidentem consequenti∣am deducatur.
• * 1.106

  Bellar. lib. 3. de Eccles. c. 15. Quod vt me∣lius intelliga∣tur, notandum est, omnem sententiam de fide nasci vel ex duabus propositioni∣bus de fide, & tunc totam cō∣clusionem in∣euidentem esse, vel ex vna de fide, altera euidenti, &c. Talis est ista conclusio, Isti homines qui nunc profiten∣tur fidem sub Rom. Pont. sunt Ecclesia Christi.
• * 1.107

  Matth. 4. 6.
• * 1.108

  Vid. M. du Moulin. Iesuite euasions.
• * 1.109

  Methodo Ve∣ronica, cap. 7.
• * 1.110

  See the booke intituled, L'e∣stablissement de la Congregation de la Propagati∣on de la Foy, & de Missionnaires generaux de Prelats de France, pour conferer auec les Ministers, & Prescher aux portes de leur Temples, &c. approuee par N. S. P. le Pa∣pa & le Prelats de France. Par M. Francois Veron Predica∣teur de sa M. pourles Contre∣uerses. A Lion chez Claude Armand. 1624.
• * 1.111

  2. King. 18. 44.