Of the incurable scepticism of the Church of Rome

CHAP. XXIII. That it is not certain those things are true, which are una∣nimously taught by all Pastors.

THat it is uncertain, what the Governours of the Church unanimously teach, we have proved; yet grant it certain: Can we securely believe this their unanimous consent? What if they may all err? This our Adversaries will say they cannot. But is that certain and undoubted? If not, in vain is it alledged. They will perhaps say it is; nay, and of Faith, so as it can∣not be denied without open Heresy. So Duvall1, and many others. And indeed, if it be not of Faith that all the Pastors consenting cannot err, Faith cannot rely upon their Authority. Yet is this most false; for we before proved these two Propo∣sitions. I. That nothing is of Faith, whose contrary is held and taught by Catholick Divines, the Church knowing and not censuring their Opposition. II. That the greatest Divines of the Roman Church, Doctors, Bishops, and Cardinals taught; 1. That the whole Clergy might be infected with Heresy. 2. That the Church, to which Infallibility was promised, might con∣sist in one Laick, or one Woman, the rest apostatizing from the Faith. This was the Opinion of Alensis, the Author of the Gloss upon the Decretals, Lyra, Occam, Alliaco, Panormitan, Tur∣recremata, Peter de Monte, S. Antoninus, Cusanus, Clemangis, Ja∣cobatius, J. Fr. Picus. But who can imagin so many, and so great Men, either not to have known what is of Faith, or wil∣fully to have taught the contrary?

This moved Suarez to esteem the Infallibility of the Pastors thus consenting uncertain. It is asked, saith he2, whether all the Bishops of the Church can agree in any error? For among Catholicks, some af∣firm

it, because there is no promise found (of the contrary:) Others deny it, because the whole Church would be otherwise in great danger of error. To me neither seemeth sufficiently certain. Yet it is pro∣bable, that it becomes the Providence of Christ not to permit it. In these words two things may be observed. First, That Suarez speaks of the Infallibility of Bishops not in believing, but in teaching. For he saith this in answer to an Objection, That if all the Bishops could err, then the other part of the Church, the Laity, might also err, because they ordinarily follow the Doctrine of their Pastors, and are bound to do it. Now the People are bound to follow their Pastors, not in what they think, but in what they teach. This also appears from the reason why some denied the consent of all Bishops in any error to be possible, because, if that should happen the whole Church would be brought into great danger of error. But if Bishops should teach rightly, although they thought erroneously, there would be thence no danger of Error to the rest of the Faith∣ful. Secondly, Of this Infallibility of Bishops in what they teach unanimously, he saith three things. 1. That some Catho∣licks deny it. 2. That neither part seems certain to him. 3. That it is probable. All which singly prove, That he thought it not to be of Faith. But who can imagine so great a Doctor could be ignorant of what was of Faith?

Theoph. Raynaudus differed not much from the Opinion of Suarez: That the visible Head, saith he3, be∣ing laid aside, all the Members should be infected with any material error, could scarce happen; and it is most probable God will take care it should not. Yet if it should happen, the Head being unin∣fected, the perpetuity of true Faith in the Church would suffer no loss: Where he determines not absolutely this cannot happen; but looks upon the contrary only as most probable; and de∣nieth the Infallibility of the whole Church to depend thereon, which is so much urged by the maintainers of the contrary Opi∣nion. Rhodius speaks more plainly, who affirms4, That the Pope being dead, the Church hath no Infallible Authority to make De∣crees of Faith, as having no actual and immediate Infallibility at that time.

Hence is manifest, that we want little of a Confession from our Adversaries, that the Infallibility of the Governours of the Church is not of Faith. And indeed it cannot be. For no Foundation of such a Faith is to be found: Not Scripture or Tradition. For not to say, that these, to make any Article be∣come of Faith, ought, according to our Adversaries, most evi∣dently to contain it; which evidence even they will not deny to be here wanting: It would be most absurd, that Papists should believe this Infallibility of the Pastors of the Church for the Authority of Scripture and Tradition; when they believe nei∣ther of these, but for the Authority of the Pastors. Take away their Testimony, and they will deny it to be known whe∣ther Scripture or Tradition be the word of God, or what is the sence of either. The same may be said of the Decrees of the Church Representative. For besides that no such express Decree of it can be produced, the Infallibility of the Repre∣sentative Church it self is believed by every single Papist, only because they hear it taught by their Pastors. As for the belief of the Universal Church, that ought not be produced. For that is the thing now inquired, why the Universal Church believeth so?

Will our Adversaries therefore say, they believe their Pa∣stors cannot err in teaching unanimously what is of Faith; be∣cause they so teach themselves? This they must recurr to; for they have no other reason left of believing so: Yet nothing can be more absurd. For first, it is the constant Opinion of all Mankind, and a received Law among all Nations, that none should be Witness or Judge in his own Cause. Secondly, As we believe not any Man to be true and honest, till we be assured of his veracity and honesty from some other Testimony than his own: So it would be the highest imprudence to esteem those Infallible, who challenge that privilege to themselves; until their Infallibility be known to us from some other Argu∣ment than their own Testimony. Certainly our Adversaries will not permit even the Scripture, which is the word of God, and hath so many illustrious Characters of a Divine Original, to be believed for its own Testimony; and Christ openly pro∣fessed, that if he bore Witness of himself, his Witness was not credible. Why then shall that be attributed to the Gover∣nours of the Church; which Christ denied to himself, and our

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

Adversaries deny to the Word of God? Thirdly, The Que∣stion will return, whence the Pastors of the Church know that they cannot err? For they will not say, they know it because the Faithful believe it; since as Hallier5 well saith, The Pastors do not therefore teach truly, because the Auditors believe truly; but the Auditors believe truly, because they assent to the Pastors teaching truly. They cannot say, that they know it from Scripture or Tradition. For the truth of these, without the Authority of the Church is no more known to learned than to unlearned persons. Think not, saith Bagotius6, that any one, even the most learned Di∣vine, can believe any thing without the Authority of the Church, and independently from it. And Hosius7 goeth so far, that he main∣tains it to be the best way, that even the most learned Men should recurr to implicit Faith, and believe only in general as the Church believeth. Shall the Pastors therefore believe, that they cannot err for their own Testimony? This is the natural conse∣quence of our Adversaries Doctrine, and that most absurd. For first, there is none of the Pastors which believeth so, because he teacheth so; but all teach so, because all believe so. Again, The Question will recurr upon what Foundation do they teach so? Here either nothing, or only this must be answered, That they teach so because they believe so. Then if you ask why they be∣lieve so? no other answer can be given, than because they believe so; which is so foolish, as that I need not urge it any farther.

Notes

• 1

  In 2. 2. p. 106.
• 2

  Petitur an omnes Episcopi Ecclesiae possint convenire in aliquo errore. Nam inter Catholicos quidam affirmant, quia non invenitur promissio. Alii negant, quia, &c. Mihi verò neutrum videtur satis exploratum probabile autem est ad pro∣videntiam Christi pertinere, ut id non permittat. Suar. de fide disp. 5. Sect. 6.
• 3

  Ʋt. seposito capite visibili, mem∣bra omnia possint infici aliquo errore materiali, vix potest contingere; & verisimillimum est Deo semper cordi fu∣turum ne id accidat. Si tamen ac∣cideret, incont aminato capite, nibil decederet de perpetuitate verae fidei in Ecclesiâ. Rayn. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 punct. 5.
• 4

  Mortuo ponti∣fice, non est in Ecclesiâ ulla infallibilis au∣thoritas ad con∣denda fidei Decreta.— Nullam e•• tempore infallibilitatem actualem & proximam habet Ecclesia. Rhod. de fide qu. 2. Sect. 5. §. 5.
• 5

  Non ideo vera docent Pastores, quia vera cre∣dunt Auditores; sed ideo vera credunt Audito∣res, quia vera docentibus as∣sentiuntur. F. Hallier de Hie∣rarch. l. 4. c. 2.
• 6

  Cave existi∣mes unumquen∣quam, etiam Theologum Do∣ctissimum, posse quicquam ere∣dere sine autho∣ritate Ecclesiae & independen∣ter ab eâ. Ba∣got. Instit. Theol. l. 4. c. 1. §. 1.
• 7

  Hos. cont. Brent.