The third booke of commentaries vpon the Apostles Creede contayning the blasphemous positions of Iesuites and other later Romanists, concerning the authoritie of their Church: manifestly prouing that whosoeuer yeelds such absolute beleefe vnto it as these men exact, doth beleeue it better then Gods word, his Sonne, his prophets, Euangelists, or Apostles, or rather truly beeleeues no part of their writings or any article in this Creede. Continued by Thomas Iackson B. of Diuinitie and fellow of Corpus Christi College in Oxford.

CHAP. II.

That the Churches proposall is the true, immediate, and prime cause of all absolute beliefe any Romanist can haue, concerning any determi∣nate diuine Reuelation.

1 WHereas Valentian and (as he sayes) Caietan, deny the Churches infallible proposal to be the cause why we belieue diuine Reuelations: This speech of his is equiuocall, and in the equiuocation of it (I thinke) Valentian sought to hide the truth. The ambiguity or fallacie, is the same which was* 1.1 disclosed in Bellarmines reply vnto vs obiecting, that Pontificians make the Churches authority greater then Scriptures. In this place, as in that, the word of God, or diuine reuelations, may bee taken, eyther indefinitely, for whatsoeuer God shall hee supposed to speake, or, for those particular Scriptures or Reuelations which wee suppose hee hath already reuealed and spoken. Or, Valentian may speake of the obiect of our beliefe, not of beliefe it selfe. If wee take his meaning in the former sense; what hee sayth is most true. For the Churches infallibility is no cause why wee belieue that to bee true which

wee suppose God hath reuealed: nor did wee euer charge them with this assertion. This is an Axiome of nature presupposed in all Religions; yet of which none euer knew to make so great se∣cular vse as the Romish Church doth. But if wee speake of that Canon of Scripture which wee haue, or any things contained in it; (all which wee and our aduersaries iointly suppose to haue come from God) the onely cause why wee doe or can rightly belieue them, is, by Iesuiticall doctrine, the Churches infallibili∣ty that commends them vnto vs.

2 If that Church which Valentian holdes so infallible should haue saide vnto him totidem verbis: you must beleeue the books of Maccabes are canonicall, euen for this reason, that your holy Catholike Mother tels you so: hee durst not but haue belieued as well the reason as the matter proposed; [To witte, That these Bookes were Canonicall, because the Church had enioyned him so to think:] albeit his priuate conscience, left to Gods grace & it selfe, would rather haue held the Negatiue. For if wee beleeue, as the Papists generally instruct vs, that wee our selues, all priuate spi∣rites, may erre in euery perswasion of faith, but the Church which onely is assisted by a publike spirite, cannot possibly teach amisse in any: Wee must vpon termes as peremptory, and in equall de∣gree, beleeue euery particular point of faith, because the Church so teacheth vs, not because wee certainely apprehend the truth of it in it selfe. For wee may erre, but this publike spirite cannot. And consequently wee must infallibly belieue these proposi∣tions * 1.2 [Christ is the Redeemer of the world, not Mahomet,* 1.3 There is a Trinity of persons in the diuine nature] for this reason only that the Church commends them vnto vs for diuine reuelations: see∣ing by their arguments brought to disproue the sufficiency of Scriptures, or certainety of priuate spirites, no other means pos∣sible is left vs. Nay, were they true, wee should be onely certain, that without the Churches proposall, wee still must be most vn∣certain in these and all other points; because the sonnes are per∣petually obnoxious to error, from which the mother is euerla∣stingly priuiledged. The same propositions and conclusions we might condicionally belieue to be absolutely authentike, vppon supposall they were Gods word: but that they are his word, or reuelations truly diuine, wee cannot firmely belieue, but onely

by firme adherence to the Churches infallible authority, as was in the second* 1.4 Section deduced out of the Aduersaries princi∣ples. Hence it followes that euery particular proposition of faith, hath such a proper causall dependance vpon the Churches proposall, as the conclusion hath vpon the premisses, or any particular vpon it vniuersall. Thus much* 1.5 Sacroboseus grants.

3 Suppose God should speake vnto vs face to face, what rea∣son had wee absolutely and infallibly to belieue him, but because wee know his words to bee infallible? his infallibility then should be the proper cause of our beliefe. For the same reason, seeing he doth not speake vnto vs face to face, as hee did to Moses; but as our aduersaries say, reueales his will obscurely, so as the Reuealer is not manifested vnto vs: but his meaning is by the visible Church, (* 1.6 which is to vs in stead of Prophetes, Apostles, and Christ him∣selfe, and all the seuerall manners God vsed to speake vnto the world, before he spake to it by his onely sonne) this Pantheas in∣fallibility must bee the true and proper cause of our beliefe: And * 1.7 Valentian himselfe thinks that Sara and others of the old world, to whom God spake in priuate, eyther by the mouth of Angels, his sonne, or holy spirit, or by what meanes soeuer; did not sinne against the doctrine of faith, or through vnbeliefe, when they did not belieue Gods promises. They did herein vnaduisedly, not vn∣belieuingly. Why not vnbelieuingly? because the visible Church did not propose these promises vnto them.

4 If not to belieue the visible Churches proposals, be that which makes distrust or diffidence to Gods promises, infidelity: then to belieue them, is the true cause of belieuing Gods promises: or if Sara and others did (as Valentian sayth) vnaduisedly or impru∣dently, in not assenting to diuine truthes proposed by Angels: surely they had done only prudently and aduisedly in assenting to them; their assent had not beene truely and properly beleefe: So that by this assertion, the Churches proposall hath the very remonstratiue roote & character of the immediat and prime cause, whereby wee beleeue and know matters of faith. For whatsoeuer

else can concurre without this, our assent to diuine truthes pro∣posed is not true Catholike beliefe; but firmely beleeuing this in∣fallibility, we cannot erre in any other point of faith.

5 This truth* 1.8 Valentian elsewhere could not dissemble, how∣soeuer in his professed resolution of faith hee sought to co∣uer it by change of apparrell; Inuesting the Churches proposall onely with the title of a condition requisite, & yet withall (so disso∣nant is falsity to it selfe) making it the reason of beleeuing diuine Reuelations. If a reason it be why wee should belieue them, needs must it sway any reasonable mind to embrace their truth. And whatsoeuer inclines our minds to the embracement of any truth, is the proper efficient cause of beliefe or assent vnto the same: Yea efficiency or causality it selfe doth formally consist in this in∣clination of the mind. Nor is it possible this proposall of the Church should moue our minds to embrace diuine Reuelations by any other meanes then by belieeuing it: And beliefe it selfe being an inclination or motion of the mind, our minds must first be moued by the Churches proposall, ere it can moue them at all to assent vnto other diuine truthes. Againe,* 1.9 Valentian grants that the orthodoxall or catechisticall answere to this interroga∣tion; [Why doe you belieue the doctrine of the Trinity to be a diuine re∣uelation?] is [because the Church proposeth it to me for such.] Hee that admits this answere for sound and Catholike, and yet de∣nies the Churches proposall to bee the true and proper cause of his beliefe in the former point, hath smothered, doubtlesse, the light of nature, by admitting too much artificiall subtlety into his braines. For if a man should aske, why do you belieue there is a fire in yonder house? and answere were made, Because I see the smoake go out of the Chimney: should the party thus answering in good earnest, peremptorily deny, the sight of the smoake to bee the cause of his beleefe there was a fire; hee de∣serued very well to haue eyther his tongue scorched with the one, or his eyes put out with the other. Albeit if wee speake of the things themselues, not of his beliefe concerning them, the fire was the true cause of the smoake, not the smoake of the fire. But whatsoeuer it be, [Cause, Condition, Circumstance, or Effect,] that truly satisficeth this demand, [Why doe you belieue this or that]

it is a true and proper cause of our beleefe, though not of the thing beleeued. If then we admit the Churches proposall to bee but a condition annexed to diuine reuelations: yet if it bee an in∣fallible [medium] or meane; or as our aduersaries all agree the only mean infallible, whereby we can rightly beleeue this or that to be a diuine reuelation; it is the true and only infallible cause of our be∣leefe. That speech of Valentian, which to any ordinary mans capa∣city includes as much as we now say, was* 1.10 before alleadged. [That Scripture which is commended and expounded vnto vs by the Church, is, eo ipso, euen for this reason, most authentike and cleare] He could not, more emphatically, haue expressed the Churches pro∣posall to be the true and prime cause, why particular or determi∣nate diuine reuelations become so credible vnto vs. His second, Sacroboscus, hath many speeches (to be inserted hereafter) to the same effect.* 1.11 Amongst others, where Doctor Whittaker obiects, that the principall cause of faith, is by Papists ascribed vnto the Church; he denyes it onely thus far [What we beleeue for the Chur∣ches proposall, we iointly beleeue for God speaking eyther in his written word, or by tradition:] Yet, if a man should haue asked him why he did, or how possibly hee could, infallibly beleeue that God did speake all the words eyther contayned in the Bible, or in their tra¦ditions: he must haue giuen eyther a womans answere, [because God sp••ke them] or this, [because our holy mother the Church doth say so.] For elsewhere he plainlya 1.12 auowes, the Bookes of Canoni∣call Scripture need not be beleeued without the Churches pro∣posall, whose infallible authority was sufficiently knowne before one title of the New Testament was written, and were to be ac∣knowledged, though it had neuer beene; hee plainly confesseth withall, that hee could not beleeue the Scriptures taught some

principall Articles of faith most firmely beleeued by him vnlesse the churches authoritie did thereto moue him, against the light of naturall reason. Now if for the churches proposall, hee be∣leeue that, which otherwise to beleeue he had no reason at al, but rather strong inducements to the contrarie, as stedfastly as any other truth: the Churches infallibilitie must be the true and only cause, both why he beleeues the mystery proposed, and distrusts the naturall dictates of his conscience to the contrary. In fine, hee doth not beleeue there is a Trinitie, (for in that Article is his in∣stance) because God hath said it, but hee beleeues that God hath said it, because his infallible Mother the Church doth teach it. This is the misery of miseries, that these Apostates should so be∣witch the World, as to make it thinke they beleeue the Church, because God speakes by it, when it is euident they doe not be∣leeue God, but for the Churches testimonie: well content to pretend his authority, that her own may seeme more soueraigne. Thus make they their superstitious, groundlesse magical faith, but as a wrench, to wrest that principle of nature, [Whatsoeuer God saith is true,] to countenance any villany they can imagine, as will better appeare hereafter. But first the Reader must be content to be informed, that by some of their* 1.13 tenents the same Diuine reuelations may be assented vnto by the Habite either of Theologie

or of faith; both which are most certaine, but herein different; That the former is discursiue and resembles science properly so called; the latter not so, but rather like vnto that habite or faculty by which we perceiue the truth of generall Maximes, or vnto our bodily sight, which sees diuers visibles all immediately, not one after, or by another. Whilst some of them dispute against the cer∣tainty of priuate spirits, their aguments suppose Diuine reuelati∣ons must be beleeued by the Habite of Theology, which is as a sword to offend vs. Whiles we assault them, and vrge the vnstabilitie of their resolutions, they fly vnto the non discursiue Habite of faith in∣fused, as their best buckler to ward such blowes as the Habite of Theologie cannot beare off.

6 Not heere to dispute eyther how truly or pertinently they denie faith infused to be a discursiue habite; the Logicall Reader need not (I hope) my admonition to obserue, that faith or beleefe whether habituall or actuall, vnlesse discursiue, cannot possibly bee resolued into any praeexistent Maxime or principle. From which grant, this emolument will arise vnto our cause; that the Churches authoritie cannot be proued by any diuine reuelation, or portion of Scripture; seeing it is an Article of faith, and must be beleeued eodem intuitu with that Scripture or part of Gods word, whether written or vnwritten, that teacheth it; as light and colours are perceiued by one and the same intuition in the same instant. And by this assertion we could not so properly say, wee beleeue the diuine reuelation because we beleeue the church (nor doe we see colours because we see the light;) but wee may truly say, that the obiects of our faith, (diuine reuelations) are therefore actually credible, or worthy of beleefe, because the infallible Church doth illustrate or propose them; as the light doth make colours though invisible by night, visible by day. This similitude of the light and colours is not mine, but Sacroboscus; whom in the point in hand I most mention, because Doctor Whittakers Obiecti∣ons against their Churches Doctrine, as it hath beene deliuered by Bellarmine and other late controuersers, hath enforced him clearely to vnfold, what Bellarmine, Stapelton, and Valentian left vnexpressed, but is implicitely included in all their writings. But ere we come to examine the ful incōueniences of their opinions, I must request the Reader to obserue, that as oft as they mention

resolution of faith, they meane the discursiue habite of Theolo∣gie. For al resolution of beleefe or knowledge, essentially includes discourse. Andc 1.14 Bellarmine directly makes,* 1.15 Sacroboscus expresse∣ly auoucheth, the Churches authority the medius terminus, or true cause, whence determinate conclusions of faith are gathered. From which and other equiualent assertions, acknowledged by all the Romanists this day liuing, it will appeare that Valentian was eyther very ignorant himselfe, or presumed hee had to deale with very ignorant aduersaries, when he denyed, that the last re∣solution of Catholique faith was into the Churches authoritie, which comes next in place to be examined.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Sect. 2. cap. 1.
• * 1.2

  Vide Chap. 4. Paragr. 2.
• * 1.3

  Vide Chap. 4. Paragr. 2.
• * 1.4

  Cap. 8. Parag. 4 &c. 2. Parag. 10
• * 1.5

  The place is quoted in the second An∣notation, Parag. 5.
• * 1.6

  Vide Annot. cap. 4. Parag. 5.
• * 1.7

  Ex quo intelli∣gitur eos qui in Scriptura repre∣henduntur, quod priuatis reuelati∣onibus non cre∣diderint, vt Sara Genes 18. Zachae∣rias Lucae 1. non propter infideli∣tatem propriè, vt est vitium contra fidem Catholicam, re∣prehendi, sed propter impru∣dentiam & du∣ritiem ••ordis. Pertinet enim ad prudentiam infusam, & ad donum Consilij, eiusmodi reuela∣tionibus priuatis assensum praebe∣re vel negare, consideratis circumstantijs, quae docent eas esse à Deo vel non: Et illae personae commemoratae, ex prudentia & dono consilij credere illis debuissent. Valent. Disp. 1. Quaest. 1. De obiecto fidei. Punct. 1. The ground of this Position is, because, Sola Diuina Reuelatio ab Ecclesia proposita est obiectum fide▪
• * 1.8

  Vide lib; 2. Sec. 4. cap. 5. Parag. 19. Ratio credendi est causa credendi
• * 1.9

  Valent. Tom. 3, in Aquin. Disp. 1 Quaest. 1. De ob∣test. fidei, Punct. 1. His words are quoted. lib. 2. sect. 4. cap. 5, Parag. 16.
• * 1.10

  Lib. 2, Sect. 2. Cap. 5. §. 8.
• * 1.11

  Voluit igitur de fide supernatu∣rali indistin••le l••qui prout dif∣fert à fide natu∣rali & acquisi∣ta: & vim gene∣randi fidem ha∣bere, quicquid ad actum siue ex parte poten∣tiae, siue ex parte obiecti est neces∣sarium. Verum tunc, vt Scrip∣turae vis haec con∣cedi potest; sic nequaquam de∣bet excludi Ec∣clesia, quae respe∣ctu nostri est causa proponens, vt est supra explicatum. And a little after; authoritas Ecclesiae proponentis, & loquentis Dei in Scriptura re∣spectu actus fidei, se habent vt lumen, & color, respectu visionis albi; vel quemadmodum potentia, & disposi∣tiones in materia se habent, respectu actus informationis formae substantialis: & quod consequens est, quae habetur fides à Scriptura Dei mentem continente, eadem habetur ab Ecclesia & qui libri sint verbum Dei, & quis sit verus scripturae sensus indicante. Sacroboscus Det. Decr. Trid. & Sentent. Bellarm. Cap. 6 Parag. 1. Pag. 105.
• a 1.12

  Vide Annot. Cap. 5. Parag. 4. Viget (Whittakerus) qui sensum aliquem amplectitur propter nullam aliam causam, risi quia sit Ecclesia statuit, non propter Propheticam & Apostolicam Scriptur••m in, tribuit ••ugustiorem authoritatem Ecclesiae quam Scripturae: sed cum in fide haec du•• sint, quid & propter quid, Pap••stis, propter quid, est sola authoritas Ecclesiae. Verūs espōdetur, id esse falsum: quae enim credimus propter Ecclesiam proponentem, simul etiam credimus propter Deum loquentem, verbo suo scripto vel tradito▪ vt est aliàs explicatum. Sacrobos. pag. 125.
• * 1.13

  At inquies, quā∣do Papistae di∣cūt se certo statu∣ere, id quod Ec∣clesia definit esse verum: proposi∣tiones ipsas sta∣tuunt esse vera••, vel quia Ecclesia id illis dicit, vel non quia Ecclesia dicit, sed quia Scriptura dicit. Si primum, nullum discrimen inter Deum & Ecclesiam statuetur, nam hoc proprium solius Dei est, vt id verum esse credamus quod ille dicit, nullam aliam quaerendo rationem. Sin secundum: summa authoritas desiniendi, non Ecclesiae, sed scripturae de∣fertur. Verum ne in aere disputemus, vt saepe solet adversarius, Catholici omnes firma fide credunt Ecclesiam in nulla fidei quaestione determinanda errare posse: vbi igitur Ecclesia desinit aliquid esse de fide, id illi hoc Theo∣logico discursu concludunt esse certum. Ecclesia non potest aliquid non verum profidei dogmate credendum propo∣nere. At hoc Ecclesia pro d••gmate fidei proponit credendum: est hoc ergo certum. In qua ratiocinatione medius terminus est determinatio Ecclesiae, atque ita, quo sensu medius terminus dicitur causa cognoscendi conclusio∣nem, dici potest definitio Ecclesiae causa, propter quam haec conclusio, vt est terminus praedicti discursus, cert•• persuadeatur. Ab sit vero vt quicquid per modum medij est causa certae cognitionis, eo ipso aequetur Deo. Secus enim angulus externus foret Deo aequalis, nam per hunc cognosco omne triangulum habere tres angulos aequales duobus rectis. Atque haec solutio perspicua est, solum aduertat, qui minus exercitatos habet sensus, dictam con∣clusionem, vt pendet ex discursu facto. pertinere ad habitum Theologiae (qui quidem certus est; quemadmodum est habitus fidei & scientiae: est tamen ab vtroque distinctus; vt verior tenet Theologorum sententia) nam aliae ratione pertinere potest ad habitum fidei, quatenus assensu simplici sine discursu creditur, & tunc Ecclesiae definitio non se habet per modum medij termini, sed per modum sufficientis propositionis; & authoritas Dei lo∣quentis verbo suo scripto vel tradito in loco ex quo petitur desinitio, est formalis ratio credendi: ita vt istae duae ra∣tiones subordinatae, sunt causae coniunctae actus fidei, qui exercetur circa propositionem definitam, sicque, quemad∣modum ait Aristoteles, non Policletus nec statuarius, sed Policletus statuarius est causa statuae, dicere possumus: non definitio Ecclesiae per se & solitariè, nec solus locus ex quo petita est definitio Ecclesiae, est causa assensus fidei. Sed definitio & locus, illa vt causa si••e qua non, authoritas Dei loquentis in hoc, vt formalis ratio obiecti. Sacro∣bos. def. Decr. Trid. & Sent. Bellarum, c. 6. §. 1. p. 115.
• c 1.14

  See the an∣notations. Sect. 2. c. 2. Par. 1.
• * 1.15

  His words are quoted in the Annotat. §. 6. of this chapter.