Full text of "Works"

hlh w\«>"'1-V^

THE

WORKS

MOST REVEREND FATHER IN GOD,

WILLIAM LAUD, D. D.

SOMETIME LORD AKCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY.

VOL. II.
CONFERENCE WITH FISHER.

OXFORD :
JOHN HENRY PARKER.

MDCCCXLIX.

.-;^a\'^'

..^

LONDON :
It. CLAY, PRINTER, BREAD STREET HILL.

RELATION

THE CONFEEENCE

BETWEEN

WILLIAM LAUD,

LATE
LORD AKCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY,

AND

MK FISHER THE JESUIT,

BY THE COMMAND OF KING JAMES,

OF EVER BLESSED MEMORY.
WITH

AN ANSWER

TO SUCH EXCEPTIONS AS A. C. TAKES AGAINST IT.

THE SIXTH EDITION.

OXFORD :

JOHN HENRY PARKER.

MDCCCXLIX.

EDITOR'S PREFACE.

Personal and oral Conferences on the points disputed at
the Reformation were not of rare occurrence. In form they
were, perhaps, the legitimate successors of the disputations
of the Schools ; but gradually their technical and scientific
shape merged into the more popular, but perhaps more in-
teresting, written controversial discussion of modern times.
Archbishop Laud's Conference, while it is one of the later
instances of the ancient method, betrays by its subsequent
adaptation to the shape of a regular treatise, that the
influence and value of mere scholastic discussion was felt to
have passed away. The Conferences, however, of which so
many are on record during the first century of the Reforma-
tion, must be distinguished. Some were strictly scholastic
acts, as those connected with the deprivation of Archbishop
Cranmer, and Ridley's disputations at Oxford ; some were
formal discussions upon fixed propositions, such as those
debated in Westminster Abbey, between the leading divines
of the reformed doctrines and their opponents, in 1559 ; and
some were of a more private nature, either for eliciting the
truth on the part of the disputants, or for the sake of gaining
or retaining a more distinguished convert or adherent to
either side.

A 3

[vi] editor's preface.

Among these may be mentioned : the disputations conducted
by Feckenham, the last Abbot of Westminster, at the Savoy —
at Sir William Cecil's — at Sir John Cheke's ; the Conference
between Redmayne and Wilks at Westminster, in 1551 ; the
Conference between Campian the Jesuit, in 1581, assisted by
Sherwin, against Nowel, Fulke, and others, in the Tower ;
the well-known discussion between Rainolds and Hart, in
1583, in the Tower; [Robert] Parsons' "Review of Ten
public Disputations or Conferences, held within the com-
pass of Four Years, under King Edward and Queen Mary,
concerning some principal points in Religion ; " *' Fitz-
Simon's dispute with Ussher, then only nineteen years
of age, in Dublin Castle, in 1599. During the reign
of King James, partly perhaps occasioned by that monarch's
personal taste for theological argument, which was espe-
cially exhibited in one of the first transactions of his
reign, the well-known Hampton Court Conference, many
of these oral discussions were held. Walsingham disputed
with Covel and other doctors of the Church of England,
in 1604. Bagshaw and Stephens, on the Roman Catholic
side, disputed before Lord CliflFord, the English ambassador
at Paris, against Fairclough, better known under the name
of Featley, then Chaplain to the Embassy, in 1612. Smith,
subsequently Bishop of Chalcedon, held a personal Confer-
ence with Featley, M^ho was much engaged in these disputes.
Featley and Goad disputed against Musket {alias Fisher),
and Percy, commonly called " Fisher the Jesuit," in 1621.
Featley also disputed against Everard, in 1626 ; and previously,
at a Conference held at the house of Sir Humphrey Lynde,
in 1623, assisted by Dr. White, he had been engaged in a

" Title-page of a work of Parsons, under the name of N[icliolas] D[oleman.]
St. Omors, 3G04.

editor's preface. [vii]

similar personal discussion with Fisher and another Jesuit
named Sweet.

These public controversies were not confined to the cham-
pions of the two Churches. During the Usurpation^ the
different sectaries often discussed their mutual differences in
this way : Vavasor Powell and John Goodwin held a dispu-
tation in Coleman-street, London, in 1649; John Reading
disputed publicly in Folkestone Church with Samuel Fisher,
an Anabaptist, in 1650; Tombes the Anabaptist, and Baxter
" disputed face to face, and their followers were like two
armies,'' (Ant. Wood, in Life of Tombes ;) Tombes also held
a public dispute against Vaughan and Cragge, at Aber-
gavenny, in 1653. This mode of controversy was recurred
to by the Caroline divines, not only in the Civil War, but
during the Usurpation, both at home and abroad. Gunning
held two or three set disputations with a Roman Catholic
priest, for the satisfaction of his patron. Sir Robert Shirley,
according to Ant. Wood, who adds that " there was no con-
siderable sect, but he held with them, some time or other, a
set public disputation, in defence of the Church of England.'"^
A public conference was held at Brussels, in 1649, between
Morley, and D'Arcy, a Jesuit.

The occasion of one of the most celebrated of these Con-

^ Accounts are extant of two of these conferences : 1. " A Contention for
Truth ; in two several public disputations, before thousands of people, in the
Church of S. Clement Danes, without Temple Bar, on the 19 and 26 November,
1657, between Peter Gunning and Hen. Denn, on Infant Baptism, London,
1658." — 2. "Schism Unmasked : or a late Conference between Mr. Peter Gun-
ning and Mr. John Pierson [subsequently Bishop of Chester, and author of the
celebrated work on the Creed], Ministers, and two disputants of the Romish
persuasion. Paris, 1658." This publication came from the Roman Catholic
side, and was edited by Spenser, a priest, (Dodd's Ch. Hist. vol. ii. p. 313,) one
of those engaged in the Conference, with whom was associated Dr. Lenthall,
though other names have been given as those of the Roman Catholic disputants,
viz. John White, and Johnson, alias Terret. (Cf. Wood's Athenae Oxon. ed. Bliss,
vol. iv. col. 144.)

[\nii] editor's treface.

ferences, that between Laud and Fisher^ is connected with
political as well as theological considerations.

The rise and fortunes of George VillierSj Duke of Bucking-
ham, were so remarkable, that they invested not only with
interest, but importance, every thing connected with his
family. And during the reign of the Stuarts, the religious
professions of tliose about the Court were matters of earnest
solicitude, because of great political consequence, to the King.
Tlie mother of the Duke of Buckingham, Lady Villiers,
though she had contracted a second marriage with Sir
Thomas Compton, a private gentleman, had been created
Countess of Buckingham, soon after her son had first
received his title.'' This lady was converted to the Eoman
Catholic communion, bv Fisher the Jesuit. It does not
appear exactly at what time she joined the Church of Rome.
Laud, in his Diary, 1 622, April 23, speaks of " the Countess
of Buckingham, who about that time was wavering in point
of religion ; " and in the " History of the Troul)les and
Trial," &c. p. 226, lie says that he " brought the Lady
his [Buckingham's] mother to the Church again; l)ut she
was not so happy as to continue with us." At any rate,
whether at this time the Countess of Buckingham had
actually conformed to the Church of Rome, or whether she
was then only in a doubtful state, her change in religion is
to be attributed to the arguments of one " Fisher the Jesuit."
Her influence with her son was so great, that it was a saying
of the time, recounted by Count Gondomar, the Spanish
ambassador, with CAident reference to her cliangc in religion,
that more intercession was made to the mother than to
the son.'^

Besides being subject to this influence on the side of his

■^ Clarendon. Book I. '' Echard's History of England, vol. i. p. [»6.3.

editor's preface. [ix]

mother, the Duke of Buckingham had other inducements
to favour the Roman Catholics ; and it was at the time hoped,
by a combination of domestic circumstances, to bring him
over to that communion. His wife, Lady Katharine Manners,
only daughter and heiress of Francis, sixth Earl of Rutland,
was also " bred^^'' a Roman Catholic. Echard says that she was
for awhile persuaded by Dr. White to forsake this com-
munion : but was quickly reclaimed by her mother-in-law,
" a fiery Romanist." If this were the case, she had been
previously brought to some partial, if not entire, commu-
nion with the Church of England as early as the year 1619,
before her marriage with the Duke, then Marquis, of Buck-
ingham in 1620, by Lord Keeper Williams (Hacket's Life
of Williams) . It seems, however, plain that in the year 1 622,
the Countess of Buckingham, the mother, was either openly
or secretly a Roman Catholic; so was the Marchioness of
Buckingham the wife ; and of the Marquis himself. Archbishop
Laud stated on his trial, (" Troubles and Trial," &c. p. 226,)
" The Right Honourable the Lord Duke of Buckingham was
almost lost from the Church of England between the conti-
nual unceasing labours of Fisher the Jesuit and the persua-
sions of the Lady his mother.^'

At this juncture it was, that Dr. White, as he intimates,'
was invited by the Duke of Buckingham to undertake the
settling of his mother : from internal evidence, however,
it seems more probable that even in the first instance
King James, alarmed for the religious profession of his
favourite, suggested a conference as the means really of
confirming the Marquis himself, ostensibly for the purpose
of settling the Countess. Dr. Francis White, Rector of

« Hacket's Life of Williams, p. 42.

' Preface to his "Iteplie to Jesuit Fislicr/' &c.

[x] editor's preface.

St. Peter's, Cornhill, and one of the Royal Cliaplains,s was
selected on the side of the Churcli of England, and between
liim and Fisher the Jesuit a personal conference was held
in the presence of the Marquis of Buckingham, the Mar-
chioness of Buckingham, the Countess of Buckingham, and
Lord Keeper Williams, then Bishop of Lincoln, and subse-
quently Archbishop of York.'' According to Fisher's own
account, (vide infra, App. Nos. 11. III. pp. xxiii. — xxvi.) a
paper of his addressed to the Countess, came to some hands,
unquestionably those of the Marquis, Avho gave it to Dr.
White to answer and " oppugn it in a Conference."

Shortly afterwards a second Conference was held between
the same parties, at which the King himself was present ;
who " having observed that our adversaries are cunning and
subtle, in eluding our arguments brought against them, but
of no strength, especially in particular questions, when they
come to the Karaafcevrj and confirmation of their own tenet,
was himself pleased to have nine questions of controversy
propounded to the Jesuit, that he might in writing manifest
the grounds and arguments whereupon the Popish faith in
those points was builded." (White's Preface.)

Besides the King's dissatisfaction with the result of these
first two Conferences, it appears that the Countess of Buck-
ingham required from the English Divines, according to
Fisher, more distinct argument on the doctrine of " a con-
tinual, infallible, visible Church," (Vide infra, Conference,
&c. p. 2.) To meet this difficulty, the King himself imposed
upon Dr. William Laud, then Bishop of S. David's, the duty
of meeting Fisher in a Third Conference before the same

K Successively Dean of CarlLsIe in 1622 ; Bishop of Carlisle in 1626; of
Norwich in 1628 ; and of Ely in 1631.

'' Vide infra, p. xxvi. App. No. III. "A few but very honourable persons . . .
L. K., L. M. B., 1.. B., and M. B."

editor's preface. [xi]

parties. The allusions to this Conference, contained in
Laud's Diary, are these : —

" 1622. April 23. Being the Tuesday in Easter week, the King sent for me

and set me into a course about the Countess of Buckingham, who about

that time was wavering in point of religion.
" April 24. Dr. Francis White and I met about this.
" May 10. I went to the court to Greenwich, and came back in coach with

the lord marquess Buckingham. My promise then to give his lordship

the discourse he spake to me for.
" May 19. I delivered my lord marquess Buckingham the paper concerning

the diflference between the Church of England and Rome, in point of

salvation, &c.
" May 23. My first speech with the Countess of Buckingham.
" May 24. The conference between Mr. Fisher, a Jesuit, and myself, before

the lord marquess Buckingham, and the Countess, his mother. I had

much speech with her after.
" June 9. Being Whit-Sunday, my lord marquess Buckingham was pleased

to enter upon a near respect to me. The particulars are not for paper.
" June 15. I became C. to my lord of Buckingham."

Strict secrecy on the particulars of these several Confer-
ences had been enjoined on the parties concerned in them ;
but according to Dr.White, Fisher had " dispersed hundreds
of papers on the subject of the Third Conference to his
own praise and our disgrace, for had we been school-boys of
thirteen years old, he could not have made a reverend Bishop
and myself seem more childish and unskilful than he did."
(Preface.) White, however, though he "at first proposed
to have published in print a narration of his two disputa-
tions," (ibid.) yet thought it desirable to wait for Fisher's
written answer to the nine points proposed as the chief
errors of the Church of Rome, by King James. These sub-
jects were thus enumerated in " His Majesty's note delivered
unto Mr. Fisher." " Some of the principal points which with-
held my joining unto the Church of Rome, except she reform
herself, or be able to give me satisfaction, are these : 1 . The
Worship of Images. 2. The Prayings and offering Oblations
to the B. V. M. 3. Worshipping and Invocation of Saints

[xiij EmTOR's PREFACE.

and Angels. 4. The Liturgy and private Prayers in an
unknown tongue. 5. Repetitions of Pater Nosters, Aves,
and CreedSj especially affixing a kind of merit to the number
of them. G. The doctrine of Transubstantiation. 7. Com-
munion under one kind^ and the abetting it by concomitancy.
8, Works of Supererogation, especially with reference unto
the Treasure of the Chiu'ch. 9. The opinion of Deposing
Kings, giving away their kingdoms by papal power, whether
directly or indirectly." (The Answ^er unto the Nine Points,
&c. p. 2.) To eight of these questions Fisher retui'ued an
answer in manuscript, declining a reply to the last " with
a rhetorical declamation," (White, Preface,) stating that the
rules of his order forbad his interference with state affairs.
" But before the nine questions he placeth a large dis-
putation (provided no doubt aforehand, and expecting only a
prosperous wind of occasion, to send it abroad,) touching
the Rule of Faith, concerning Scripture and Tradition, the
Notes of the Church, &c. Then, to counterpoise the King's
Nine Articles, he chargeth our Church Avith nine remark-
able errors, as he accounteth them." (White, Preface.)

In the meantime. Bishop Laud, as early as jNIichaelmas
1622, had prepared his Relation of the Third Conference,
w ith especial reference to what he calls Fisher's " papers full
of partiality to his cause, and more full of calumny against
the Bishop." (Preface to R. B.'s Answer to Mr. Fisher's
Relation, &c.) It does not appear at what time Fisher
delivered his answer to the nine points to the King : ' but
it was not till April 10, 1621, that White was ready with his
" Replie to Jesuit Fisher's Answere to certain Questions
propounded by his most gracious Majestic King James :

' Hen. Jlore, (Hist. Proviuc. Anglic. Soc. Jesu. p. 382,) says that Fisher
"finished his answer in a month, but that it was some time hclbre it reached
the King."

editor's preface. [xiii]

Hereunto is annexed a Conference of the right R. B. of
St. David's with the same Jesuit." For the publication of
Dr. White's work Bishop Laud's own account of the Confer-
ence, already prepared, was delayed; which appeared at length
only as an accompaniment to the larger work of Dr. White,
and was pulDlished under the initials R[ichard] B[aily] the
Bishop's chaplain, and with the title, " An Answere to Mr.
Fisher's Relation of a Third Conference betweene a certaine
B. (as he stiles him) and himselfe. The Conference was
very private, till Mr. Fisher spread certaine papers of it,
which in many respects deserved an Answere. Which is
here given by R. B. Chapleine to the B. that was im-
ployed in the Conference. London, Printed by Adam Islip.
1624."

It was, however. Bishop Laud's own work, as he subse-
quently acknowledged, and constitutes, in this shape, the
first edition, or rather the original sketch, of the volume now
placed in the reader's hands. How the work came to be
afterwards enlarged and published in an independent form,
and in his own name, after the author's translation to
Canterbury, Archbishop Laud himself fully explains in his
Dedication of it to King Charles, pp. iii. — xviii. of the
present Edition.

On the side of the Church of England, then, Dr. White's
share of the joint Reply to Fisher may be considered as a
complement to the argument which, according to the King's
judgment, the oral conferences had only partially worked
out ; while Bishop Ijaud's Relation was designed rather to
meet the antecedent question urged by Lady Buckingham,
and embraced in Fisher's preliminary " Disputation touch-
ing the Rule of Faith, Scripture, and Tradition, the Notes
of the Church, &c."

[xiv] editor's preface.

It appears to l)e beyond doubt, that Fisher's " Short
Relation of the Conference/' and his " Answer to the Nine
Points/' were at present only in manuscript. Both Dr.
White and Bishop Laud, in their respective Answers, in the
joint pubHcation of 1624, recite the whole of Fisher's manu-
script papers, section by section, replying to each argument
and assertion. Fisher had now to reply, which he did under
the pseud-initials A. C. to Laud's account of the Conference ;
while at the same time appeared, either from him or an
associate, a " Rejoinder to White's Reply," under the initials
.1. F. But the chronological order of the works in which the
controversy proceeded, may be best understood by the fol-
lowing synopsis : —

I. Fisher's Answer to the Nine Points, &c. presented to the
King privately in MS. It was without notes.

II. Fisher's own Short Relation of the Conference, circu-
lated privately, but largely, in MS. This was also without
notes.

Ill . White's " Reply to Jesuit Fisher's Answer, &c.
together with Laud's Account of the Third Conference;
under the initials R. B. London, 1624." This joint pro-
duction incorporates Fisher's two MS. works, (I. II.) which
are printed in their respective pai'ts, in different type from
the body of the work.

I\. The "Answer unto the Nine Points, &c. and the
Rejoinder unto the Reply of Dr. Francis White, Minister.
1625." This incorporates No. I. and has many notes added
by way of answer to White's part of No. III. Prefixed to
this volume is found " The true picture of the said Minister,
or censure of his writings." And the whole collection then
has the title-page of 1626. This volume is rare : bvit copies
are to be found of it. H. More (ubi sup.) intimates that

editor's preface. [xv]

the notes are not Fisher^s, " Quo factum est ut denuo revisa
prodierint [viz. Fisher's 'Answer to the Nine Points'] in
lucera docto cum commentario Joannis Floydi,'' ^ and Dodd^
(Ch. History, vol. ii. p. 106, of. vol. iii. p. 394,) by merely
translating Alegambe (Biblioth. Scriptor. Soc. Jesu), with-
out transcribing the exact titles, seems to attribute the
whole work fboth to Fisher and Floyd in their respective
lives ; though Alegambe himself, writing in Latin, had, with
greater accui'acy, given the "Rejoinder to White's Reply "
to Floyd. The truth seems to be, that the whole of the first
part of the work, " The Picture of Dr. White," together
with the Prefaces and the " Rejoinder to White's Reply,"
are Floyd's; the original MS. of Fisher, presented to the
king, the "Answer unto the Nine Points," No. I. being for
the second time reprinted, as it ];iad already been in " White's
Reply," and being now fully annotated and enlarged by
Floyd. As, therefore. White and Laud were associated in
No. III., so Fisher and Floyd were associated in this volume.
In catalogues it is usually attributed to Fisher; and the
identity of the initials J. F[isher] and J. F[loyd], which are
attached to the Epistle Dedicatory, will at once account for
the mistake; but not only is H. More's statement positive as
to Floyd's larger share in the work, a statement corroborated
by Dodd's less direct testimony, but the Dedication to King
Charles constantly uses the term " we," with a plain refer-
ence to an associated authorship. It appears, then, that as
regards No. III., the joint work of White and Laud, Floyd
was entrusted to "rejoin" to White, while Fisher reserved
himself for an encounter with Laud, which he engaged in by
publishing —

^ Floyd was the writer of the book " Contra Novatores " " Deus et Kex.
St. Omer's, 1620." (Vide infra, p. 272, note d.)

[xvi] editor's preface.

V. Fisher's " True Relations of sundry Conferences, &c/''
1626, incorporating No. II. with notes added by way of special
answer to Laud's part of No. III. This is a very rare work,
which does not occur either in the Bodleian Library or in the
British jSIuseum ; and for the loan of the only copy which
the present Editor has heard of, he is indebted to the kind-
ness of the Rev. Dr. Routh, the venerable President of
S. Mary Magdalene College, Oxford. The whole of its intro-
duction may be read consecutively from p. xix. to p. xl. of
the present volume (Appendix, Nos. I. II. III. IV.) Thence-
forward the body of A. C.'s work is included in Laud's own
Relation, in which it is reprinted and answered paragraph
by paragraph. It is not mentioned in the list of Fisher's
Avorks in the Biblioth. Scriptor. Soc. Jesu, nor by Dodd,
who follows that collection. Besides this, viz. A. C.'s
account of the Conference between Dr. Francis White and
Mr. John Fisher, A. C.'s collected volume of 1626 contains
two other controversial pamphlets ; one, " An Answer to a
Pamphlet, intituled : The Fisher catched in his own Net, &c,
1623," pp. 86, (this refers to the discussion held between
Fisher and Sweet against Drs. White and Featley, at the
house of Sir Humphrey Lynde, in 1623;) and the other,
" A Reply to D. White and D. Featley. The First Part, &c.
The Second Part, &c. 1625," pp. 181. The title-page of the
whole volume is given below, p. xix. It does not appear to
have been widely circulated, being printed at St. Omer's (?),
and Laud (vide infra, p. vii.) observes that he did not meet
with it till "some years after" its publication.

VI. The present work. Laud's " Relation of the Conference,
&C. 1639." To this appeared some specific answers; viz.

VII. "A Rcplie to a Relation of the Conference between
William Laude and Mr. Fisher the Jesuite. By a Witnesse of

editor's preface. [xvii]

Jesus Christ. Imprintedj anno 1640." This is a puritan work
of singular duhiess and intense bitterness : it is very rare.

VIII. " Questions propounded for Resolution of unlearned
Pretenders in matters of Religion^ to the doctors of the pre-
latical pretended Reformed Church of England, &c. Paris,
[London?] 1657." In the additions to Wood's Athense
Oxon. (ed. Bliss,) vol. iv. p. 144, this work is styled, an
" answer to Dr. Laud's work." Its author was John Spenser,
a Jesuit. (Cf Dodd's Ch. History, vol. ii. p. 313, and v.
supra, p. [vii], note '\)

IX. " Labyrinthus Cantuariensis : or Dr. Laud's Laby-
rinth, &c. Paris [?] : Printed by John Billaine, 1658." It
purports to be by T. C. [arvell] a Jesuit, whose real name was
Thorold. He was of a good Lincolnshire family, and died in
London, 1664. Stilhngfleet says that the date is fictitious,
and that the book did not really appear till 1663. Thorold
had two immediate answers : viz.

X. " Of the Necessity of Reformation, &c. occasioned by
some late virulent books written by Papists : but especially
by that intituled Labyrinthus Cantuariensis. By Meric
Casaubon. London, 1664."

XL ^'A Rational Account of the grounds of Protestant
Rehgion, &c. being a Vindication of the Lord Archbishop of
Canterbury's Relation of a Conference from the pretended
answer of T. C. By Edward Stillingfleet. 1664." This forms
the fourth volume of Stillingfleet's works in the collected
edition of 1709-10.

John Serjeant, now very aged, who had been the anta-
gonist of Archbishop Bramhall, took part in the dispute at
this time, (cf. p. 84, note ') : and Stillingfleet replied to him.
Abraham Woodhead also engaged in it. It appears tlierefore
that the direct discussion of the famous " Conference

VOL. II. — LAUD. fi

[xviii] editor's preface.

between Laud and Fisher" ranged over a period of exactly
forty years.

" Fisher the Jesuit/' of the Conferences— A. C, of the
replies to White and Laud — was only a name assumed by a
person named Piersey, Piers^ Percy, or Persy, for his name is
spelled variously, of whom the following facts are recorded in
the Bibliotheca Scriptorum Societatis Jesu, (ed. Alegambe
ct Sotwell, Romse, 1676) — in Dodd's Ch. History — and in
H. More, (Hist. Soc. Jesu.) He was born in the county of
Durham, (Dodd and Wood say in Yorkshire) — and was con-
verted at about the age of fourteen, by the influence of a
Roman Catholic woman with whom he had been placed in
lodgings by his family, in order to avail himself of the
instruction of an elder brother, — educated at Rheims, and
subsequently in the English College at Eome. He entered
the Jesuit College at Tournay, and while meditating a journey
to England in 1596, was seized at Flushing by some English
soldiers, and sent prisoner to England, where he was almost
immediately thrown into Bridewell. He was frequently
imprisoned; but was at length released at the request of
Queen Henrietta Maria. He died in London of a cancer,
after two years' illness, being then above seventy years of age;
the date of his death is not exactly recorded ; but he was
alive in 1641. (Cf. Dodd's Church History, vol. iii. p. 394.)

But little more is recorded than these leading events of
his life. When summoned to the Three Conferences, he
was a " prisoner for the Catholique faith." One of his great
successes was the temporary conversion of Chillingworth,
which is ascribed to him by Dodd, — or rather Hugh Tootle,
writing under that name — (Church History, vol. iii. p. 101.
Cf. Des Maizeaux' Life of Chillingworth, p. 6 ; and Ant.
Wood, sub nom.). Not only did he conduct the controversy

editor's preface. [xix]

between himself and Drs. White and Laudj and the nearly
contemporaneous dispute at the house of Sir H. Lynde, but
in 1623 we find him in a controversy Avitli Henry Rogers,
who wrote " An Answer to Mr. Fisher the Jesuit his Five
Propositions concerning Luther/' &c. 1623. To this Fisher
repliedj and Rogers subsequently answered, in the " Protest-
ant Church existent," &c. 1638. In 1625 (cf. Prynne's
Hidden Workes of Darkness, &c. p. 71) "Piercy's" name
occurs first in the writ of pardon, dated 4 May, and issued
in favour of twenty Priests and Jesuits, a few days after
King Charles's marriage with Henrietta Maria. It was
made a subject of accusation against Archbishop Laud on
his trial, that he had connived at Fisher's release from
imprisonment ; and that on more than one occasion he had
discountenanced his arrest.

A tedious and circumstantial account of this matter is
inserted by Prynne, with his usual prolixity and malignity,
in Canterburie's Doome, pp. 451—453. It certainly does
appear, and much to the Archbishop's credit, that in March,
1634-5, he was instrumental in getting, at least, a commuta-
tion of Fisher's punishment. Under the existing laws against
seminary priests, it was felony for one of the Jesuits to be
found in England. Fisher had been arrested by Cook and
Gray, the messengers, and " after his examination before the
Council, the Archbishop of Canterbury and Secretary Cooke
went to the King, to know his pleasure what should be done
with him ; who returning to the Board, the Archbishop de-
livered the King's pleasure, to this effect : — ' Master Fisher,
kneel down upon your knees, every morning and every even-
ing, and pray for the King for granting you your life ; and,
to be short. Master Fisher, his Majesty's pleasure is, that you
shall be forthwith banished this kingdom, and all other his

[xx] editor's preface.

Majesty's dominions^ and you shall remain prisoner in the
Gate House^ until you put in good security before the King's
attorney^ Sir John Banks, never to return again/ Where-
unto Fisher replied : If he had a hundred lives, he would
come hither again, or elsewhere, if his superior so com-
manded him; and utterly refused to put in any security."^
(Canterburie's Doome, p, 452.) Prynne goes on to say that
in consequence he was committed to the Gate House, ])ut
was found at liberty in Holborn four months after. This
must have been in consequence of Secretary Windebanke's
general policy of releasing all the Roman Catholic prisoners :
a catalogue of the Priests discharged by him, to the number
of seventy-seven, is produced by Prynne in the " Hidden
Workes of Darkness," &c. p. 124, in which we find :
"20. — John Piers, alias Fisher, with two sureties in 500/. to
appear upon twenty days^ warning : bond dat. 12 August,
1635." Fisher is also alluded to in a letter from Phillips the
Queen's Confessor, addressed to M. Mountague in France:
" You may expect some company with you ere long. Crofts,

Suckling, Piercy, Jermaine are gone." (Hidden Workes, &c.
p. 215.) His works, as catalogued in the Bibliotheca Script.

Soc. Jesu, and in Dodd's Church History, are —

1. A Treatise of Faith. London, 1600. With Notes,

St. Omer's, 1614.

2. A Defence of his Treatise of Faith, against Wotton

and White. St. Omer's, 1612.

3. A Challenge to Protestants, &c. St. Omer's, 1612.

4. An Answer to Nine Points of Controversy, &c., with

the Censure of Mr. White's Reply. 4to. 1625.
It has already been shown how little of this last work is
Fisher's.

' H. More (v. supra) adds to this dialogue.

editor's PrvEFACE. [xxi]

It remains to give some more particular account of Arch-
bishop Laud's work, now reprinted. Of the first edition,
or rather original sketch, appended to Dr. White's work,
sufficient notice has been taken.

The second edition, or in point of fact the first edition of
the complete work itself, was published in 1639, in small
folio ; its title-page has been fac-similed for the present
volume; and follows the Editor's preface. It was the only-
edition published during the author's life.

The third edition is '^A Relation of the Conference
between William Laud, late Lord Arch-Bishop of Can-
terbury, and Mr. Fisher the Jesuite, By the Command of
King James, of ever-blessed Memory. With an Answer
to such Exceptions as A. C. takes against it. The Third
Edition Revised : with a Table annexed. London : Printed by
J. C. forTho. Bassett, T. Dring, and J. Leigh, at the George,
the White-Lion, and the Bell in Fleet-street. MDCLXXIII."

The title-page of the fourth edition, printed in red and
black, is " A Relation of the Conference between William
Laud, late Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, and Mr. Fisher
the Jesuit, by the Command of King James of ever Blessed
Memory. With an Answer to such Exceptions as A. C.
takes against it. The Fourth Edition revised : with a Table
annexed. Imprimatur. C. Alston, R. P. D. Hen. Episc.
Lond. a Sacris Domesticis. Jan. 25. 168|.. London, Printed
by Ralph Holt for Thomas Bassett, Thomas Dring in Fleet
Street, and John Leigh, mdclxxxvi."

A reprint, making the fifth edition, was published " Oxford,
at the University Press. 1839." The present edition, there-
fore, is the sixth.

The text of the posthumous editions of 1673 and 1686
(tlie latter being a reprint, with very trifling variations of tlie

[xxii] editor's preface.

former) differs in very many, and sometimes important, par-
ticulars from that of 1639. In most^ but not in all, cases the
text of the later editions is an improvement on the original :
but the present Editor did not feel himself at liberty to dis-
card the text as left by the author in 1639 : especially as the
third edition claims to be, and is, " Revised : with a Table
annexed;" and it is by no means clear how far all the addi-
tions to, or variations from, the edition of 1639 received the
author's sanction. That some of the corrections, — for ex-
ample, the passage at p. 284, — contain Archbishop Laud's
own second, and matm-ecl, thoughts is tolerably plain : and
the reason of such additions it is not difficult to trace, as
they, correct errors in fact, of that sort which an author
alone was likely to detect : but on the other hand, certain
variations — such as corrections in style — seem rather to
betray the editor than the author. While therefore it has
been thought preferable on the whole to retain the author's
own text as the basis of the present edition, all the changes
introduced in the subsequent editions will be found noted in
the margin. In some instances, however, the text of 1673,
&c. has been adopted, but in these cases the original reading
is also retained in the margin or in notes.

It may be probably conjectured that the edition of 1673
was prepared for the press by the same Dr. Richard Baily,
Archbishop Laud's Chaplain, in whose name the first edition
of the " Relation of the Conference" appeared. Dr. Baily had
married a niece of Laud's, Elizabeth, daughter of Dr. William
Robinson, the Archbishop's half-brother ; and it appears by
a clause in the Archbishop's will, to which he was appointed
executor, that he stood high in his confidence, and may be
regarded as the person to whom all corrections of his works
were committed. It is : —

editor's preface. [xxiii]

" Item. — I doe lay upon Dr. Baylye, above iiamedj tlie care
of all my papers and paper-bookes, if they can scape the
violence of the time. . . . All which papers and paper-bookes
I give unto him alsoe. But with this charge, that hee burne
all which hee thinkes not fitt to use himself, that my Aveak-
nes M^hatever it bee, bee not any man's scorne; and my
dilligence I am sure cannott bee. As for my Sermons, I
leave them likewise to Dr. Baylye's care ; all that are faire
written, and have this mark (7) before them, I have revised ;
and yet I will not have any of them jsrinted, unles they be
perused either by Dr. Juxon, Lord Bishop of London, or
Dr. Wrenn, Lord Bishop of Ely, or Dr. Steward, Dean of
St. Panics, my reverend friends, nor yet then unles the times
will beare them. . . . And I do heartily pray my Executor to
take care that my booke written against Mr. Fisher the
Jesuite, may be translated into Lattin and sent abroad, that
the Christian world may see and judge of my religion. And
I give unto him that translates it, for his paines, 100/." ^

When it is said that Dr. Baily was the probable editor of
the edition of 1673, it is meant that it was probably revised
for the press by him ; for he died, Dean of Salisbury and

•" A copy of Laud's will is given in Wharton's Eemains, vol. i. p. 454, but it
is neither complete nor accurate. The above extract, which is not given by
Wharton, has been transcribed from the original will in Doctors' Commons.
The clause respecting the Sermons will enable us to account for what, when
the previous volume (the Sermons) of this collected edition of Laud's works was
published, seemed difficult to understand, viz. : why only seven out of all those
which he was known to have preached, were printed in the collected edition
of 1651 ; and why the seventh Sermon, preached in 1631, was published in
1645, shortly after the Archbishop's death. Doubtless both publications are
due to Dr. Baily's estimate of the responsibility laid on him by the Archbishop's
will; though it is not easy to understand the especial suitableness of the
years 1645 (the date of publication of the Seventh Sermon) and 1651 (the date
of the collected volume) — "nor yet then unless the times will bear them" — to
such works as Laud's Sermons.

[xxiv] editor's rHEFACE.

President of S. John's College, in 1667. The only addition
•which this edition of 1673 professes to make to the Author's
own edition, is the " Table annexed." But it is certain that,
though uncommon, copies of the edition of 1639 occur with
"A Table of the principall Contents," word for word the
same as in the posthumous editions. One such copy is in
the present Editor's possession. The subject has a slight
interest; because a presentation copy" of the edition of 1639,
from Laud to Lord Derby, and now in the possession of the
Rev. W. Maskell, in the original binding, has no such
Index; and it has been said that this Index, or Table, be-
trays a bias somewhat inconsistent with the substance of
the work. But from a comparison of the two " Tables," it
is plain that they are composed from different founts of
type; and consequently that the Index to the edition of
1639, is not a mere adaptation to its own paging of that of
the edition of 1673; though it seems doubtful whether it is
contemporaneous with the authentic publication of the work
in Laud's life-time.

The present Editor must be considered responsible for the
headings of the pages, in which he has tried to give accu-
rately the sense of the author ; though, from the great
difficulty of compressing an argument or statement into a
few words, he fears that if he has not sometimes missed the
sense, he has occasionally been led into forced and even
ungrammatical expressions.

" Facsimile of Laud's autograph, on
the title-page of this copy.

r&^^

editor's preface, [xxv]

The other additions of the present Editor are marked
"with brackets ; andj as in the preceding volume, the citations
from the Fathers have been verified and given in full.

It will be found that the present edition incorporates the
whole of Fisher's own Relation of the First Conference,
as well as of the Third, to which Laud's Relation is a reply;
a work, as has already been observed, of exceeding rarity.
The present edition reprints, for the first time from this
source, the whole of the long notes which A. C. added to
his printed Relation, as a controversial reply to Laud's short
and original account of the Conference published under
Dr. Rally's name. These notes are not, like Fisher's original
manuscript Relation, incorporated in the Archbishop's account
of the Conference, and they are never cited by Laud except
in a fragmentary form, ahvays sparingly, and sometimes with
slight but unintentional inaccuracy. In the present edition,
as in A. C.'s printed Relation, they follow upon his text, and,
together with those other portions of that work which Laud
omitted, are enclosed in [ ] .

The initials used in this work are,

2B. Bishop Laud.

5F. Fisher the Jesuit.

D. W. Dr. Francis White.

L. K. Lord Keeper Williams, Bishop of Lincoln.

A. C. The initials adopted by Fisher in his " True
Relations of Sundry Conferences," &c. and especially in
his answer to Bishop Laud's first printed account of his
Conference.

Upon the value and importance of the present celebrated
work, it were superfluous in this place to enlarge. But in
no edition of it should it remain unnoticed, that so high was

[xx\d] editor's niEFACE.

the value wliicli King Charles set upon it, that he epitomized
it T^■ith his owu hand, (Life, prefixed to King Charles' Works,
Perrinchief, p. 115 ; Sir P. Warwick's Memoirs, &c. p. 82;)
and that he ad\ised his daughter Elizabeth to read, and at
the same time gave her with his own hands. Bishop An-
drewes' Sermons, Hooker's Ecclesiastieal Polity, and Laud
against Fisher. (Thom. Herbert's Life, apud Ant. Wood;
Dugdale's Short View of the Late Troubles, &c. p. 382 ;
Harris's Lives, vol. ii. p. 74, note.) Of the spirit in Avhich it
was composed, it is a sufficient defence to remember, that it
was actually made a charge against the Archbishop on his
trial, (Canterburie's Doome, p. 457,) that in his Epistle Dedi-
catory to the King, (vide infra, p. x.) he averred that "he had
not given him [Fisher] or his so much as coarse language."
And of its matter, it may be enough to cite the Author's own
account of his controversial principles. " Secondly, my book
against Fisher hath been charged against me; where the
argument must lie thus : I have endeavoured to advance
Popery, because I have written against it. And with what
strength I have written, I leave to posterity to judge, when
the envy which now overloads me shall be buried Avith me.
This I will say with S. Gregory Nazianzen, (whose success at
Constantinople was not much unlike mine here, save that his
life was not sought,) ' I never laboured for peace to the wrong
and detriment of Christian verity,' (Orat. 32,) nor I hope ever
shall. [And let the Church of England look to it ; for in
great humility I crave to write this (though there Avas no
time to speak it) : That the Church of England must leave
the way it is now going, and come back to that way of
defence which I have followed in my book, or she shall
never be able to justify her separation from the Church of
Rome.]" (Troubles and Trial, &c. p. 418.)

EDITOII'S PRErACE. [xxvii]

Finally^ What Laud's own dying judgment of liis endea-
vours in this Conference was, may be estimated by the
clause in his will, quoted above : but it seems scarcely
becoming to do other than to prefix, by way of motto to it,
the admission of one of the Archbishop's bitterest enemies.
Sir Edward Peering, who observed that " his own book
against the Jesuit will be his lasting epitaph/' (Heylyn's

Life of Laud, p. 504.)

WILLIAM SCOTT.

HOXTON,

October m, 1849.

The references have been made to the following editions.
When a reference occurs but once, the edition in such case
is specified with the quotation itself.

iEneas Sylvius, apud Fascic. Eerum,

&c., q. V.
Albertus Magnus, Ratisbon., Op., fol.

Basil. 1506.
Alliaco, Pet. de, Card. Cameraceus.

inter Opera Jo. Gerson., q v.
Almain, Jacob., in Sentent. fol. Lugd.

1527.
• Opuscula, fol. s. a. Par.

[15171]
Alphonsus a Castro, Op., fol. Paris.

1571.
Aquinas, B. Thom., Op., fol. Paris.

1615.
• Opuscula, ed. Mo-

relles. Ant v. 1612.
Aristoteles, Op., ed. Bekker. 8vo.

Oxon. 1837.
Assemanni, Cod. Liturgic. Eccl. Univ.

4to. Romaj, 1749-67.
Athanasius, S., Op., ed. Benedict, fol.

Paris. 1698.
Augustinus, S., Op., ed. Benedict, fol.

Paris. 1679—1700.
Azorius, Lorcitan. Institut. Moral.

fol. Paris. 1616. et Colon. 1613.
Bandinus, de Trinitate, &c. Lovan.

1557.
Baronius, Annales, fol. Romoe, 1607.
Basilius, S., Op., ed. Benedict, fol.

Paris. 1721-30.
Becanus, Mart., Op., fol. Paris. 1633.

Opuscula, fol. Jlogunt. 1610.

Bellarminus, Card., Op., fol. Col. Agrip.

1619.

Bernardus, S., Op., fol. Par. 1551.
Bibliotheca Patrum, Max. fol. Lugd.

1677.
Biel, Gabr., in Canon. Miss. fol. Cleyn,

Lugdun. 1514.
in Sentent. Clevn. Lugd.

1519.
Suppl. in IV. Sentent. fol.

Par. 1521.
Boetius, de Consol. Philos. Basil. 1570.
Bonaventura, Card., Op., fol. Mogunt.

1609.
Bossuet, ffiuvres de, 8vo. Versailles,

1817.
Bullarium Magn. &c. fol. Luxemburg.

1727, &c.
Cajetan., Card., Op., fol. Lugd. 1662.
Calvinus, Op., fol. Amst. 1667.
Calvisius, Chron. fol. Francof. 1685.
Camis Melchior, de Locis Theolog.

8vo. Lovan. 1569.
Cappellus de Appell. Eccl. African.

8vo. Paris. 1622.
Caranza, Barthol., Summa Concili-

orum, 12mo. Duaci, 1679.
Cassander, Op., fol. Paris. 1616.
Catharinus, Ambros. in Epist. D.

Pauli, fol. Paris. 1566.
Cave, Historia Literaria, fol. Oxon.

1740—43.
Chemnitz, Examen Cone. Trident.

fol. Genev. 1614.
Cicero, Op., Ernesti, Londin. 1819.
Codex Veteris Eccles., apud Justclli

Biblioth. Canon, ed. fol. Paris. 1661.

[xxviii]

editor's preface.

Conciliorum Collectio, Binnii, fol.

Taris. 1C36.
Labbe et Cos-

sart. fol. Paris. 1671-72.
Summa a Bartliol. Ca-

ranza, Duaci, 1679.
Corpus Juris Civilis, ed. Yan Lecu-

wcn. fol. Amstel. 1003.
Corpus Juris Canonici, ed. Pithoei,

fol. Paris. 16S7.
Critici Sacri, &c. fol. Londin. 1660.
Cyprianus, S., Op., ed. Benedict, fol.

Paris. 1726.

Op., fol. Paris. 1616.

Cyrillus Alexandr. S., Op., ed. Aubert,

fol. Paris. 1638.
Cyrillus Hierosolym., S.,Op., fol. Pans.

1640.
Damascenus, S. Joan., Op., Lequien,

fol. Paris. 1712.
De Dominis Ant. Archiep. Spalat.

A Manifestation of the Motives, &c.

London, 1616.
id. (Latin) Paris.

1623.
De Marca, de Concordia Sacerdotii et

Imperii, fol. Paris. 1669.
Decretalia (Greg. IX.) cum Gloss.,

fol. ed. Taurini, 1621.
Dionysius Carthusianus, (Dionys. a
Kic'kel de Leewis,) Enarratioues in
IV. Evansr. fol. ed. Paris. 1542.

Durandus, Ep. Mimatcns., in Senten-
tias, fol. Paris. 1508.

Ecclesiast. Hist. Scriptores, ed. Read-
ing., fol. Cantabrig. 1720.

Echard's Hist, of England, fol. Lon-
don, 1707.

Epiphanius, S., Op., ed. Petav. fol.
Paris. 1622.

Erasmus, Adag. Chiliad, fol. Colon.
1612.

Espencffius, Op., fol. Paris. 1619.

Eucher, (Emond,) Op., 4to. Col. 1701.

Euchologion Grcecor. Goar. fol. Paris.
1047.

Eusebius Ciesariensis, (Pamphili) Hist.
Ecclcs. apud Hist. Ecclcs. Scrip-
tores, q. V.

Fasciculus Renim, &c. per Gratium,
fol. Colon. 1535.

Ferns, Enarr. in Act. fol. Colon. 1567.

Field, Of the Church, fol. Oxford,
1635.

Gandavcnsis, Henr. (Gocthals) Sum-
ma, kc. fol. Ferraripc, 1646.

Gerbardus, Op., 4to. Tubingje, 1776.

Gerson., Job., Op., ed. Dupin. Par.
1706.

Goldivstus, Monarchia S.Romani Im-
perii, fol. Francof 1614.

Gorranus in Evangel. Comment, fol.
Antverp. 1617.

Gregorius Magnus, S., Op., cd. Bene-
dict, fol. Par. 1705.

Nazianzenus, S., Op., ed.

Benedict, fol. Paris. 1778— 1840.

ed. Billii, fol.

Paris. 1630.

• Thaumaturg., S.. ed. Paris.

1622.

de A^alentia, Comment.

Theolog. in Summ. S. Thom. Aquin.
in Op., fol. Paris. 1609.
Hieronymus, S., Op., ed. Benedict.

Paris, fol. 1693—1706.
Hilarius Pictav., S., Op., ed. Benedict.

fol. Paris. 1693.
Holkot in Sentent. fol. Lugd. 1497.
Hooker, Richard, Works, ed. Kcble,

8vo. Oxford, 1836.
Ignatius, S. apud Patres Apostol., q. v.
Irenteus, S., Op., ed. Benedict, fol.
Paris, 1710.

ed. Grabe. fol.

Oxon, 1702.
Isidor. Hispalens. S., Op., ed. Loren-

zanae, 4to. Romas, 1802.
laidor. Pelusiot., S., Op., fol. Paris.

1638.
Jansenius,Concord. Evang. fol. Lovan.

1571.
Junius, Op., fol. Genev. 1613.
Justin Martyr, S., Op., ed. Thirlby,

Londin. 1722.
Lactantius, Op., ed. Lebrun, Paris.

1748.
Leo ilagnus, S., Op., ed. Ballerini, fol.

Venet. 1753.
Llamas, Summ. Ecclesiast. Mogunt.

1605.
Lombard, P., Magist. Sentent., Op.,

8vo. Paris. 1575.
Lucanus de Bell. Phars. Variorum,

Londin. 1818.
Maldonatus, Comment, fol. Mussi-

ponti, 1596.
Martvr, Pet., Loc. Comm. Genev.

1624.
Maurus, Rabanus, Op., fol. Colon. 1620.
Minutius Felix, Octavius, 8vo. Lugd.

Bat. 1672.
^Mirandula, Joann. Pic, Op., fol. Basil.

1496.
Nauclerus, Chronicon, fol. Colon.

1564.
Novatianus de Trinitate, ad calcem

Op. TertuUiani, q. v.
Ockam, cf Goldastus.
Optatus J\Iilevitanus, S., de Schism.
Donatist. ed. Dupin. fol. Paris.
1700.
Origcnes, Op., ed. Ben. fol. Par.
1733-59.

• Op., Erasm. Interpret, ed.

Frobenii, Basil. 1545.

editor's preface.

[xxix]

Patres Apostolici, ed. Cotelerius, fol.

Arnst. 1724.
Paul Sarpi, Hist. Cone. Trident, (vers.

Lat.) fol. Aug. Trinobant. 1620.
Paulinus, Nolan, S., Op., fol. Paris.

1685.
Pighius, Albert., Hierarch. Eccles. fol.

Colon. 1538.
Platinade Vitis Pontificum, fol. Colon.

1568.
Plautus, Op., Ernesti, Lipsise, 1760.
Prosper, S., Aquitan. Op., ed. Antelmn.

fol. Paris. 1711.
Eamus, Schol. Math. Basil. 1 569.
Rogers on the Articles, &c. London,

1585 and 1639.
Ruffinus, Expositio Symboli, apud

S. Cyprianum, q. v.
Sa Emmanuel, Lusitan. Aphorism.

Colon. 1615.
Salmeron, Comment. &c. fol. Colon.

1614.
Sanchez de Matrimonio, fol. Antwerp.

1626.
Scotus, Duns, Doctor Subtil., Op., fol.

Lugd. 1639.
Seneca, Op., fol. Paris. 1607.
Simancas, de Cathol. Instit. fol.

Roma3, 1575.
Sixtus Senensis, Biblioth. Sanct. fol.

Paris. 1610.
Socrates, Hist. Eccles. apud Hist.

Eccles. Scriptor., q. v.
Stapleton, Thorn., Op., fol. Paris.

1620.
Stella, Enarr. in S. Luc. foL Antverp.

1622.

Suarez, Op., fol. Colon. 1614. fol.

Venet. 1747.
Comment, ac Disput. in

Summ. S. Thorn. Aquin. fol.

Mogunt. 1619.
Synesius, Cyren. Op., ed. Petav. ad

calcem S. Cyril. Hierosol. fol. Paris.

1640.
Tena, Comment, fol. Londin. 1661.
TertuUianus, Op., cum Novatiano de

Trin. ed. Rigalt. fol. Paris. 1673.
Theodoretus, Op., Sirmondi, fol. Par.

1642.
Theodoretus, Eccl. Hist, apud Hist.

Eccles Scriptores, q. v.
Theophylactus, Comment, in Evang.

fol. Par. 1635.
Comment, in Epist.

ed. Lindsell. Londin. 1636.
Toilet, Cardinal, in S. Johann. fol.

Lugd. 1615.
Tostatus, Op., fol. Col. Agrip. 1613.
Tractatus Juris Utriusque, &c. fol.

Venet. 1584.
Turrecremata, Summ. de Eccles.

Lugd. 1496.
Vasquez, Comment, in Summ. S.

Thorn. Aquin. fol. Antv. 1621.
Vincentius Lirinensis, 12mo. Colon.

1585.
Waldensis, Thomas, Doctrinal. Fidei,

fol. Paris. 1532.
Whitaker, Op., Aurel. AUobrog. et

Genev. fol. 1610.
Wittembergenses Theologi, &c. fol.

WitebergEe, 1584.
Zanchius, Op., fol. ed. Crispin!, 1619.

ERRATA.

In Fisher's Rilaiion, &c. : —

Page 27, line 1, for distinction of faith, read distinction of points of faitli.

— 30, — 30, for cannot be to [so] firm, read cannot be firm.

— 132, — 19, fur so rudely, read formerly.

— — — 24, for tlie first thing known, read the first thing foreknown.

— 149, — 3", &c. for for contra id, read for if contra id.

_ _ _ 39, 40, /or insolent madness. What then ? Is it, &c., read insolent madness ;
■what then is it, &c.

— — — ,'jfi, for to Rome, to, read to come to.

— 240, — 6, for do justify, read do not like.

[The above faults occnr with some others in Fisher's own book : but they'are corrected in
a Table of Errata which escaped the present Editor until far advanced in his own volume.]

In Laud : —

Page 10, notes, col. 2, line 23, for Bonifacium, rfad ad Bonifacium.

— 12, in marg. line penult. 1

— — notes, col. 2, line penult. > /or 1663, rearf 1673.

— 16, do. do. I

— 91, notes, col. 2, line 12, for Hipponem — regium, read Hipponem-Regium.

— 152, notes col. 1, line 9, for 1629, read 1529.

— 240, at the end of the head-line, /or period, ;)Zac<> comma.

— 288, notes, col. 2, line 13, fur Stapletoni, read Hardingi.

— 300, notes, col. 2, line 8, for de Vit., read de Vio.

— 336, notes, col. 1, line 12, dele period after vi.

CONTENTS.

Page

Laud's Dedication of his Relation of the Conference to King

Charles I. ........ . iii

Appendix.

No, I. (Fisher) Preface of the Publisher, W. I. . . xxi

II. Occasion of the First Conference between

Dr. White and Fisher . . . xxiii

III. Relation of the First Conference between

Dr. White and Fisher . . . xxvi

IV. Preface to Relation of the Third Confer-
ence between Bp. Laud and Fisher . xxxix

Laud's Relation of the Conference between himself and
Fisher, incorporating A.C. [Fisher's] own Relation of the
same Conference ........ 1

Index 431

Index of Texts ........ 439

RELATION

The Conference

BETWEENE

WILLIAM LAWD,

Then, L"'- BiOiop of S^ D a v i d s ;

NOW,
Lord Arch - Bifhop of Canterbvry:

And Mr. Fiilier the 'Jefuite, by the Comtna?2d of
King JAMES of ever

BleJJed Memorie.

With an Anfwer to fuch Exceptions as

A. C, takes againji it.

By the fayd Moft Reverend Father in G o d,
WILLIAM,

Lord Arch-Bifhop of Canterbury.

LONDON,

Printed by Richard Badger, Printer to the Prince
HIS HIGHNES.

MDCXXXIX.

HIS MOST SACRED MAJESTY,

CHARLES,

BY THE GRACE OP GOD,

KING OF GREAT BRITAIN, FRANCE, AND IRELAND, DEFENDER

OF THE FAITH, &c.

Dread Sovereign,

This tract will need patronage, as great as may be had,
that is yours. Yet, when I first printed part of it, I pre-
sumed not to ask any, but thrust it out at the end of
another's labours, that it might seem, at least, to have the
same patron, your royal Father of blessed memory, as the
other work, on which this attended, liad.^ But now I humbly
beg for it your Majesty's patronage ; and leave withal,
that I may declare to your most excellent Majesty, the
cause why this tract was then written : why it stayed so
long before it looked upon the light : why it was not then
thought fit to go alone, but rather be led abroad by the
former work : why it comes now forth both with alteration
and addition : and why this addition made not more haste
to the press than it hath done.

" [Laud's first account of his "Con-
fevence with Fisher the Jesuit," pub-
lished under the name of liis Chaplain,
Dr. Baylie, appeared under the title,
" An Answere to Mr. Fisher's Relation
of a Third Conference betweene a cer-
tain 13. (as he stiles him) and himselfe.
The Conference was very private, till
Mr. Fisher spread certaine Papers of it,
which in many respects deserved an

answere. Which is here given by
R. B. Chapleine to the Hi. that was
imployed in the Conference. London,
printed by Adam Islip, 1624." It
is appended to Dr. Francis White's
"Replie to Jesuit Fisher's answere," &c.
(Vide infra, p. 1. note ''.) White's
book is dedicated to King James, to
whom he was Chaplain.]

iv [epistle dedicatory.]

The cause M'hy this discourse was written, was this :
I was, at tlie time of these Conferences with Master Fisher,
Bishop of S. David's ; and not only directed, but commanded,
by my blessed master. King James, to this Conference with
hira. He, when we met,'* began Avith a great protestation of
seeking the truth only, and that for itself And certainly,
truth, especially in religion, is so to be sought, or not to be
found. He that seeks it with a Roman bias, or any other,*^
will run counter when he comes near it, and not find it,
though he come within kenning of it. And therefore I did
most heartily wish, I could have found the Jesuit upon that
fair way he protested to go. After the Conference ended,
I went, whither my duty called me, to my diocese; not
suspecting any thing should be made public, that was both
commanded and acted in private. For W. I., the pubHsher
of the Relation of the First Conference with D. WTiite, the
late reverend and learned Bishop of Ely, confesses plainly :
" That Master Fisher was straitly charged upon his allegiance,
from his INIajesty that then was, not to set out, or pubUsh
what passed in some of these Conferences, till he gave
licence, and until M. Fisher and they might meet, and
agree, and confirm under their hands, what was said on
both sides." ^ He says farther, " That M. Fisher went to
D. White's house, to know what he would say about the
Relation, which he had set out." « So then, belike :\I. Fisher
had set out the Relation of that Conference before he went
to D. AVhite to speak about it. And this notwithstanding
the King's restraint upon him, upon his allegiance. Yet to
D. White it is said he went, but to what other end than
to put a scorn upon him, I cannot see. For he went to his
house to know " what he would say about that Relation of
the Conference, which he had set out before." In my
absence from London, M. Fisher used me as well. For with
the same care of his allegiance, and no more, " He spread

c ^^^ ^/i J^^^," . ^'0™' to become adverse to, the truth.

Uue of these biases, is an aversion " In his • Epistle to the reader. ["The

from all such tmth as fits not our ends. Preface of W. I., the publisher of these

And a luce yentat.s aversus, [et] ob Kelations," is added in the appendix

hoc luci veritatis adversus (ht), K-c._ to thi. Dedication, No. I. v. infra, pp.

b. Augustin. cont. Adversaruim Legis xxi— xxiii 1

et Prophet, lib. ii. [cap. 7. Op., torn. ' Ibi'd

viii col. 593. D.] And it i.s an easy i r.,,„ •„ -r. ,■,. i^-o

transition, for a man that is averse i^Jf^ 'I'^''^" • • • • ^^l^"' ^^'^' '^'^^

[epistle dedicatoey.]

abroad papers of this Conference^ full enough of partiality
to his cause, and more full of calumny against me." ^
Hereupon I was in a manner forced to give M. Fisher's
Relation of the Conference, an answer, and to publish it.
Though for some reasons, and those then approved by
authority, it was thought fit I should set it out in my
chaplain's name, R. B., and not in my own. To which I
readily submitted.

There was a cause also, why at the first, the Discourse
upon this Conference stayed so long, before it could endure
to be pressed. For the Conference was in May, 1622.^
And M. Fisher's paper was scattered and made common, so
common, that a copy was brought to me, being none of his
special friends, before Michaelmas. And yet this Discourse
was not printed till April, 1624. Now that you may know
how this happened, I shall say for myself. It was not my
idleness, nor my unwillingness to right both myself and the
cause, against the Jesuit, and the paper which he had spread,
that occasioned this delay. For I had then most honourable
witnesses, and have some yet living, that this Discourse,

' These words were in my former confession by A. C. of that which he

epistle, [i.e. in the short Epistle to struggles to deny. He says, " He did

the Keader, prefixed to Laud's first not spread papers." What then ?

account of the Conference, published What 1 why " he did but deliver

under the name of R. B.] and A. C. copies." Why, but doth not he that

checks at them, in defence of the delivers copies, for instance, of a

Jesuit, and says : " That the Jesuit did libel, spread it? Yea, "but he de-

not at all, so much as in speech, and livered but a very few copies." — [ibid,

much less in papers, publish this or p. 38.] Be it so; I do not say how

either of the other two Conferences many he spread. He confesses the

[which he had] with D. White, Jesuit delivered some, though very

until he was forced unto it by false few ; and he that delivers any, spreads

reports, given out [about them] to it abi'oad. For what can he tell,

his private disgrace and the pre- when the copies are once out of his

judice of the Catholic cause. Nor power, how many may copy them out,

then did he spread papers abroad, but and spread them farther ! Yea, " but

only delivered a very few copies to he delivered them to special friends."

special friends, and this not with — [ibid. p. 38.] Be it so too : the

intent to calumniate the Bishop, &c," more special friends they were to him,

— A. C. in his preface before his the less indifferent would they be to

" Relation of this Conference[between me, perhaps my more special euemies.

a certain li. and M. Fisher, defended Yea, but all this was "without an in-

against the said 15. 's Chaplain." tent to calumniate me." — [ibid. p. 38.]

A. C. p.37. This preface to the Rela- Well, be that so too. But if 1 be

tion, is added in the appendix to this calumniated thereby, his intention

Dedication, No lY. V. intra, p. xxxix.J will not help it. And whether the

Truly, I knew of no reports then given copies, which he delivered, have not

out to the prejudice of the Jesuit's in them calumny against me, I leave

either person or cause. I was in a cor- to the indifterent reader of this Dis-

ner of thekingdom, where [heard little, course to judge.
But howsoever, here is a most plain f [Vide supra, note ''.]

vi [epistle dedicatory.]

such as it was when A. C. nibbled at it, was finished long-
before I could persuade myself to let it come into public view.
And this was caused partly by my own backwardness to deal
with these men, whom I have ever observed to be great
pretenders for truth and unity, but yet such as will admit
neither, unless they and their faction may prevail in all; as
if no reformation had been necessary. And partly because
there were about the same time, three Conferences held
with Fisher. Of these this was the third ; and could not
therefore conveniently come abroad into the world, till the
two former were ready to lead the way, which till that time
they were not.

And this is in part the reason also, why this tract crept
into the end of a larger work. For since that work con-
tained in a manner the substance of all that passed in the
two former Conferences, and that this third, in divers
points, concurred with them and depended on them, I could
not think it substantive enough to stand alone. But besides
this affinity between the Conferences, I was willing to have
it pass as silently as it might, at the end of another work,
and so perhaps little to be looked after, because I could not
hold it Avorthy, nor can I yet, of that great duty and service
which I owe to my dear mother the Church of England.

There is a cause also, why it looks now abroad again with
alteration and addition. And it is fit I should give voui-
Majesty an account of that too. This tract was first printed
in the year 1624. And in the year 1626, another Jesuit, or
the same, under the name of A. C, printed a Relation of
this Conference,*' and therein took exceptions to some par-
ticulars, and endeavoured to confute some things delivered
therein by me. Now being in years, and unwilling to die
in the Jesuit's debt, I have in this Second Edition done as
much for him, and somewhat more. For he did but skip up
and down, and labour to pick a hole here and there, where
he thought he might fasten ; and where it was too hard for

'■ [A. C.'s " Relation of the Con- (i.e. himself, A. C.) and Laud, and

fercnce viz. the First Conference, be- which appeared in the same volume

tween himself and White, is added in with his " Relation of the First Con-

theappondixtothisDedication,No.lII. fercnce," is incorporated in the bod>-

His " Hclation ol ( lie Conference," viz. of the pres^ent edition.]
the Third Coufereuce, between Fisher

[epistle dedicatory.] vii

him, let it alone. But I have gone thorough with him ; and
I hope, given him a full confutation ; or at least such a bone
to gnaw, as may shake his teeth, if he look not to it. And
of my addition to this Discourse, this is the cause; but of
my alteration of some things in it, this. A. C. his curiosity
to winnow me, made me in a more curious manner fall to
sifting of myself, and that which had formerly passed my pen.
And though {I bless God for it,) I found no cause to alter
any thing that belonged either to the substance or course
of the Conference : yet somewhat I did find which needed
better and clearer expression, and that I have altered, well
knowing I must expect curious observers on all hands.

Now, Avhy this additional answer to the Relation of A. C.
came no sooner forth, hath a cause too, and I shall truly
represent it. A. C.'s Relation of the Conference was set
out, 1626. I knew not of it in some years after; for it was
printed among divers other things of like nature, either by
M. Fisher himself, or his friend A. C. When I saw it, I
read it over carefully, and found myself not a little wronged
in it; but the Church of England, and indeed the cause
of religion, much more. I was before this time, by your
Majesty's great grace and undeserved favour, made Dean of
your Majesty's Chapel Royal, and a Councillor of State ;
and hereby, as the occasions of those times were, made too
much a stranger to my books. Yet for all my busy employ-
ments, it was still in my thoughts to give A. C. an answer.
But then I fell into a most dangerous fever ; and though it
pleased God, beyond all hope, to restore me to health, yet
long I was before I recovered such strength, as might
enable me to undertake such a service.' And since that
time, how I have been detained, and in a manner forced
upon other many, various, and great occasions, your Majesty
knows best. And how of late I have been used by the
scandalous and scurrilous pens of some bitter men, (whom

' [Ijaud was sworn in Dean of the house, Mr. Francis Windebank. There

Chapel Royal, Octob. 16, 1626, and I lay in a most grievous burning

Privy Councillor, April 29, 1627. fever, till Monday, Sept. 7, on which

The illness to which Laud alludes, is day I had my last fit. I was brought

mentioned in his Diary, 1629. "Aug. so low, that I was not able to return

14. I fell sick upon the way towards towards my own house at London, till

the Court, at Woodstock ; I took up Tuesday, Octob. 29."]
my lodging at my ancient friend'.s

viii [eptstle dedicatory.]

I heartily beseech God to forgive,) the world knows ; little
leisure find less encouragement given me to answer a Jesuit,
or set upon other services, while I am under the prophet's
Ps.l. 19,20. affliction; between the "mouth that speaks wickedness,
and the tongue that sets forth deceit, and slander me as
thick, as if I were not theii* own mother's son.'"^ In the midst
of these libellous outcries against me, some divines of great
note and worth in the Church, came to me one by one, and
no one knoAving of the other's coming, (as to me they pro-
tested,) and persuaded with me to reprint this Conference
in my own name. This they thought would vindicate my
reputation, were it generally known to be mine. I confess,
I looked round about these men and their motion ; and at
last, my thoughts working much upon themselves, I began
to persuade myself that I had been too long diverted from
this necessary work ; and that perhaps there might be
in voce hominum, tuba Dei, " in the still voice of men, the
loud trumpet of God," which sounds many ways, sometimes
to the ears, and sometimes to the hearts of men, and by
means which they think not of. And as S. Augustine
speaks, " A word of God there is, quod nunquam tacet, sed
non semper audihir, ' which though it be never silent, yet is
not always heard.'" ^ That it is never silent, is His great
mercy ; and that it is not always heard, is not the least of
our misery. Upon this motion I took time to deliberate,
and had scarce time for that, much less for the work ; yet
at last, to every of these men I gave this answer : That
M. Fisher, or A. C. for him, had been busy with my former
Discourse, and that I would never reprint that, unless I
might gain time enough to answer that which A. C. had
charged afresh both upon me and the cause. While my
thoughts were thus at work, your IMajesty fell upon the
same thing, and was graciously pleased not to command, but

'' [This passage refers to the lil)cls disputing in the temple with the

of Bastwick, Burton, and Prynne, who elders of the Jews. And thcv heard

were censured in the Slar-Chambcr, Christ, the essential Word ' of the

June 14, 1637.] P'athcr, with admir.ition to astonish-

' [Sed quid mirum ? Verbum Dei meat, yet believed Him not. S. Luke

nunquani tacet ; sed non semper audi- ii. 47. ' And the Word then spake to

tur.]— S. Augustin. Serm. [li. do con- them, by a means they thought not

cord. Matth. et Luc. olim Serm.] Ixiii. of, namely, per Filium Dei in puero

de diversm, cap. 10. [Op., torn. v. " by the Son of God Himself, under

col. 291. C] He speaks of Christ, the veil of our human nature."

[epistle dedicatory.] ix

to wish^ me to reprint tins Conference, and in mine own
name; and this openly, at the Council-table, in Michaelmas
Term, 1637."' I did not hold it fit to deny, having in all the
course of my service obeyed your Majesty's honourable and
just motions as commands ; but craved leave to show, what
little leisure I had to do it, and what inconveniences might
attend upon it. When this did not serve to excuse me, I
humbly submitted to that, which I hope was God's motion
in your Majesty's. And having thus laid all that concerns
this Discourse, before your gracious and most sacred
Majesty, I most humbly present you with the book itself;
which as I heartily pray you to protect, so do I wholly sub-
m.it it to the Church of England, with my prayers for her
prosperity, and my wishes that I were able to do her better
service.

I have thus acquainted your Majesty with all occasions
which both formerly and now again have led this Tract into
the light ; in all which T am a faithful relater of all passages,
but am not very well satisfied who is now my adversary.
M. Fisher was at the Conference. Since that I find A. C.
at the print : and whether these be two or but one Jesuit,
I know not, since scarce one amongst them goes under one
name. But for my own part, and the error is not great, if
I mistake, I think they are one, and that one, M. Fisher,
That which induces me to think so is, first, the great
inwardness of A. C. with M. Fisher, which is so great as
may well be thought to neighbour upon identity. Secondly,
the style of A. C. is so like M. Fisher's that I doubt it was
but one and the same hand that moved the pen. Thirdly, A. C. A. C. p. 67.
says expressly, " That the Jesuit himself made the Relation
of the first Conference with D. White :" and in the title-

■" [It seems not improbable, that night, and highly displeased with me,
King Charles might have made this and so continues." This Lady New-
request on the occasion which is thus port (Heylyn's Life of Laud, p. 337.)
alluded to by Land in his Diary : was " a kinswoman of the Duke of
"1637. Octob. 22, Sunday. — A great Buckingham;" the Queen's chapel
noise about the perverting of the Lady was at Somerset (then called Durham)
Newport. Speech of it at the Council. House ; and Montague, a son of the
My free speech there to the King, E.irl of Manchester, and JIattliews,
concerning the increase of the Koman eldest son of the Archbishop of York,
party, the freedom at Durham House, were two of the most distinguished
the carriage of Mr. Walter Montague persons who had conformed to the
and Sir Toby Matthews. The Queen Church of Rome.]
acquainted with all I said, that very

[EriSTLE DEDICATORY.]

page of the work that Relation as well as this is said to be
made by A. C. and published by W. I. Therefore A. C. and
the Jesuit are one and the same person, or else one of these
places hath no truth in it.

Now, if it be M. Fisher himself, under the name of A. C,
then what needs these words : " The Jesuit could be content
to let pass the Chaplain's censure as one of his ordinary
persecutions for the Catholic faith, but A. C. thought it
necessary for the common cause to defend the sincerity and
truth of his relation, and the truth of some of the chief
heads contained in it ?" " In which speech, give me leave to
observe to your sacred Majesty how grievously you suffer
him and his fellows to be persecuted for the Catholic faith,
when yom' poor subject and servant cannot set out a true
copy of a Conference held with the Jesuit, jussu superiorum,
but by and by the man is " persecuted.'' God forbid I
should ever offer to persuade a persecution in any kind, or
practise it in the least : for, to my remembrance, I have
not given him or his so much as coarse language. But, on
the other side, God forbid, too, that your Majesty should let
both laws and discipline sleep for fear of the name of perse-
cution ; and, in the meantime, let M. Fisher and his fellows
angle in all parts of your dominions for your subjects. If
in your grace and goodness you will spare their persons, yet
I humbly beseech you see to it, that they be not suffered
to lay either their wheels, or bait their hooks, or cast their
nets in every stream, lest that tentation grow both too
general and too strong. I know they have many devices
to work their ends ; but if they will needs be fishing, let
them use none but lawful nets." Let us have no dissohdng

" Preface to the Relation of this Con- seopi, vel inferioris ordinis ecclesiarum

ference b^' A. C. [v. infra, p. xxxix.] pnvpositi, intelligendi sunt: quiadic-

" And S. Augustine is very full turn est, Venite, et faciam vos pisca-

aguinst tlic use of mala rctia, "un- tores hominum. Iletibus enim bonis

lawful nets ;" and saitli the fishermen capi possunt pisces et boni et mali ;

themselves have greatest cause to take retibus autem nialis capi non possunt

heed of them. [Ut si intra retia Do- pisces boni Quoniam in doctrina

mini bona piscis malus essct, non bona et bonus potest esse qui audit et

tamen pisces Domini sui malis retibus fecit, ct mains qui audit et non

irretiret ; hoc est, ut si haberet in facit : in doctrina vero mala, et qui

Ecclcsia vitam malam.non tamen illic cam veram putat, quanivis ci non

institueret doctrinam malam . . . llrec obtemperet, malus est ; et qui obtem-

sunt mala retia, quae caverc debent pcrat, pcjor est.] — S. Augustin. lib. de

prascipuc piscatores : si tamen ilia Fide et Operibus, cap. xvii. [Op.,

evangelica similitudine piscatores epi- torn. vi. col. 183. F.]

[epistle dedicatory.] xi

of oatlis of allegiance ; no deposing, no killing of kings ; no

blowing up of states to settle quod volumus, that wliicli fain

tliey would have in the Church ; with many other nets as

dangerous as these ; for if their profession of religion were

as good as they pretend it is, if they cannot compass it hy

good means I am sure they ought not to attempt it by bad ;

for, if they will " do evil that good may come thereof/^ the ^o^n- i'i- 8.

Apostle tells me " their damnation is just/^

Now, as I would humbly beseech your Majesty to keep
a serious watch upon these fishermen, which pretend S. Peter,
but fish not with his net ; so would I not have you neglect
another sort of anglers in a shallower water ; for they have
some ill nets too ; and if they may spread them when and
where they will, God knows what may become of it. These
have not so strong a back abroad as the Komanists have,
but that is no argument to sufl'er them to increase. They
may grow to equal strength with number; and factious
people at home, of what sect or fond opinion soever they be,
are not to be neglected, partly because they are so near —
and it is ever a dangerous fire that begins in the bed-straw —
and partly because all those domestic evils which threaten
a rent in Church or State, are with far more safety prevented
by wisdom than punished by justice. And would men con-
sider it right, they are far more beholding to that man that
keeps them from falling than to him that takes them up,
though it be to set the arm or the leg that is broken in the
fall.

In this Discourse I have no aim to displease any, nor any
hope to please all. If I can help on to truth in the Church,
and the peace of the Church together, I shall be glad, be it
in any measure. Nor shall I spare to speak necessary truth
out of too much love of peace ; nor thrust on unnecessary
truth to the breach of that peace which once broken is not
so easily soldered again. And if for necessary truth's sake
only, any man will be ofPended, nay take, nay snatch at that
off'ence which is not given, I know no fence for that. It is
truth, and I must tell it : it is the Gospel, and I must preach l Cor. ix.
it. And far safer it is in this case to bear anger from men
than a "woe" from God. And where the foundations of faith
are shaken, be it by superstition or profaneness, he that puts

xii [epistle dedicatory.]

not to his hand, as firmly as he can, to support them, is too
wary, and hatli more care of himself than of the cause of
Christ ; and it is a wariness that brings more danger in the
end than it shuns ; for the Angel of the Lord issued out a

Jii(lg.v.23. curse against "the inhabitants of Meroz, because they came

not to help the Lord, to help the Lord against the mighty."

j I know it is a great ease to let every thing be as it will, and

every man believe and do as he list ; but whether governors

in State or Church do their duty therewhile, is easily seen,

Jndg. xvii. siucc this is an eflFect of " no king in Israel."

The Church of Christ upon earth may be compared to a
hive of bees, and that can be nowhere so steadily placed in
this world but it will be in some danger ; and men that care
neither for the hive nor the bees have yet a great mind to
the honey ; and having once tasted the sweet of the
Churches maintenance, swallow that for honey Avhich one
day will be more bitter than gall in their bowels. Now, the
King and the Priest, more than any other, are bound to look
to the integrity of the Church in doctrine and manners, and
that in the first place ; for that is by far the best honey in
the hive. But, in the second place, they must be careful of
the Church's maintenance too, else the bees shall make
honey for others, and have none left for their own necessary
sustenance, and then all is lost ; for we see it in daily and
common use, that the honey is not taken from the bees, but
they are destroyed first. Now, in this great and busy work,
the King and the Priest must not fear to put their hands to
the hive, though they be sure to be stung ; and stung by
the bees Avliose hive and house they preserve. It was King

Ps. cxviii. DaAid's case, God grant it be never yours. '^'^ They came
about me," saitli the Psalm, " like bees." p This was hard
usage enough, yet some profit, some honey, might thus be
gotten in the end. And that is the King's case. But Avheu
it comes to the Priest, the case is altered ; they come about
him like wasps, or like hornets rather — all sting and no
honey there; — and all this many times for no offence, nay,
sometimes for service done them, would they see it. But

Wcv. XX ii. you know Who said, " Behold I come shortly, and My reward

PApum [vcro] similitudine vcsanum mira tamen [est] excandescentia. —
ardorem notat : [quia etsi] in illis Calvin, in Psalm, cxviii. [12. Op.,
[animalibus] non tantum est robori-s torn. iii. p. 434. col. 2.]

[epistle DEDICATOllY.] xiii

is with Me, to give to every man according as liis works shall

be.'^ And He Himself is so " exceeding great a reward," as Gen. xv. i.

that the manifold stings which are in the world, howsoever

they smart here, are nothing when they are pressed out with

that " exceeding weight of glory " which shall be revealed. Rom. viii.

Now, one thing more let me be bold to observe to your
Majesty in particular, concerning your great charge, the
Church of England. It is in a hard condition. She professes
the ancient Catholic faith, and yet the Romanist condemns
her of novelty in her doctrine ; she practices Church govern-
ment as it hath been in use in all ages and all places where
the Church of Christ hath taken any rooting, both in and
ever since the Apostles' times, and yet the Separatist con-
demns her for Antichristianism in her discipline. The plain
truth is, she is between these two factions, as between two
millstones, and unless your Majesty look to it, to whose
trust she is committed, she will be ground to powder, to an
irreparable both dishonour and loss to this kingdom. And
it is very remarkable that while both these press hard upon
the Church of England, both of them cry out upon " perse-
cution ;" like froward children, which scratch and kick and
bite, and yet cry out all the while, as if themselves were
killed. Now, to the Romanist I shall say this : — The errors
of the Church of Rome are grown now, many of them, very
old J and Avhen errors are grown by age and continuance to
strength, they which speak for the truth, though it be far
older, are ordinarily challenged for the bringers in of " new
opinions." And there is no greater absurdity stirring this
day in Christendom than that the reformation of an old
corrupted Church, will we nill we, must be taken for the
building of a new. And were not this so, we should never
be troubled with that idle and impertinent question of
theirs: "Where was your Church before Luther?" for it
was just there, where theirs is now. One and the same
Church still, no doubt of that; one in substance, but not
one in condition of state and purity : their part of the same
Church remaining in corruption, and our part of the same
Church under reformation. i The same Naaman, and he

1 " There is no other difference be- Church miserably corrupted, and hap-
tween us and Home than betwixt a pily purged,' &c. — Joseph Hall, Bishop

xiv [epistle dedicatory.]

M Syrian still ; but leprous with them, and cleansed with

us ;— the same man still. And for the Separatist, and him

that lays his grounds for separation or change of discipline,

though all he says, or can say, be in truth of divinity, and

among learned men, little better than ridiculous, yet since

these "fond opinions" have gained some ground among

your people, to such among them as are wilfully set to " follow

Malt. XV. their bhnd guides " through thick and thin, till " they fall

^^- into the ditch together," I shall say nothing. But for so

many of them as mean well, and are only misled by artifice

and cunning ; concerning them I shall say thus much only : —

They are bells of passing good metal, and tuneable enough

of themselves and in their own disposition ; and a world of

pity it is that they are rung so miserably out of tune as they

are, by them which have gotten power in and over their

consciences. And for this there is yet remedy enough ; but

how long there will be, I know^ not.

Much talking there is— bragging, your Majesty may call
it_on both sides ; and w hen they are in their ruff they both
exceed all moderation and truth too, — so far till both lips

of Exeter, in his " Apologetical Adver- is not the same now as it was when
tisement to the Reader," [appended Luther began. And, 3. That we have
to " The Old Religion," &c. the Third not departed from the Church where-
Edition,] p. 192. [194. ed. London, in our fathers lived and died, but
1630.] approved by Thomas Morton, only from the faction that was in it.
Bishop then of Coventry and Lich- Touching the first, M. Luther con-
field, now of Duresme, in the Letters fesseth (lib. contr. Anabapt. ubi infra,
printed by [Hall,] the Bishop of p. 314. note ',) that much good, nay,
Exeter, in his Treatise called, " The that all good, and the very marrow
Reconciler," [i. e. " An Epistle pacifi- and kernel of faith, piety, and Chris-
catory of the seeming diflerences of tian belief was, by the happy provi-
opinion concerning the trueness and dence of God, preserved even in the
visibility of the Roman Church:"] midst of all the confusions of the
p. 68. [ed. London, 1629. Bishop papacy. M. Calvin in like sort
Morton's words are: "And now re- showeth that the true Church re-
membering the accordance your Lord- maincd under the papacy : Cum
ship hath with others touching the Dominus fuedus suum, saith he, in
argument of your book, I must needs Gallia, Italia, Germania, Hispania et
reflect upon myself; who have long Anglia deposuerit ; ubi illae provincitB
since defended the same point, in Antichristi tyrannide oppressae sunt,
the defence of many others."] — And quo tamcn foedus suum inviolabile
Dr. Field, Of the Church, Appendix maneret, Baptismum primo illic con-
to the Third Part, chap. ii. [p. 880], servavit, foederis testimonium, qui ejus
where he cites Calvin to the same ore consecratus, invita humana impie-
purpose ; (Instit. lib. iv. cap. 2. § 11.) tate, vim suam retinet. Deinde sua
[ . . . "I will first show that all our providentia effecit, ut aliaquoque reli-
best and most renowned divines did quite cxstarent, ne Ecclesia prorsus
ever acknowledge as much as I have interiret; &c. — Calvin. Op., torn. viii.
written. 2. That the Roman Church p. 281. col. 1.]

[epistle dedicatory.] XV

and pens open for all the world like a purse without money ;
nothing comes out of this, and that which is worth nothing
out of them. And yet this nothing is made so great, as if
the salvation of souls — that great work of the Redeemer of
the world, the Son of God — could not be effected without it.
And while the one faction cries up the Church above the
Scripture, and the other the Scripture to the neglect and
contempt of the Church, which the Scripture itself teaches
men both to honour and obey ; they have so far endangered
the belief of the one, and the authority of the other, as that
neither hath its due from a great part of men ; whereas,
according to Christ's institution, the Scripture, where it is
plain, should guide the Church ; and the Church, where
there is doubt or difficulty, should expound the Scripture ;
yet so, as neither the Scripture should be forced, nor the
Church so bound up, as that upon just and farther evidence
she may not revise that which in any case hath slipped by
her. What success this great distemper, caused by the
collision of two such factions, may have, I know not, I
cannot prophesy. This I know, that the use which wise
men should make of other men's falls, is not to fall with
them ; and the use which pious and religious men should
make of these great flaws in Christianity, is not to join with
them that make them, nor to help to dislocate those main
bones in the body which being once put out of joint will not
easily be set again. And though I cannot prophesy, yet
I fear that atheism and irreligion gather strength while the
truth is thus weakened by an umvorthy way of contending
for it. And while they thus contend, neither part consider
that they are in a way to induce upon themselves and others
that contrary extreme which they seem most both to fear
and oppose.

Besides, this I have ever observed, that many rigid pro-
fessors have turned Roman Catholics, and in that turn have
been more Jesuited than any other : and such Romanists as
have changed from them have for the most part quite leaped
over the mean, and been as rigid the other way as extremity
itself. And this, if there be not both grace and wisdom to
govern it, is a very natural motion : for a man is apt to think
he can never run far enough from that which he once begins

xvi [EnSTLE DEDICATORY.]

to hate, and doth not consider there-while, that where religion
corrupted is the thing he hates, a fallacy may easily be put
upon him; for he ought to liate the corruption which
depraves religion, and to run from it ; but from no part of
religion itself, which he ought to love and reverence, ought
he to depart. And this I have observed farther, that no one
thing hath made conscientious men more wavering in their
own minds, or more apt and easy to be drawn aside from the
sincerity of religion professed in the Church of England, than
the want of uniform and decent order in too many churches
of the kingdom ; and the Romanists have been apt to say.
The houses of God could not be suffered to lie so nastily,
as in some places they have done, were the true worship of
God observed in them, or did the people think that such it
were. It is ti'ue, the inward worship of the heart is the
great service of God, and no ser\ice acceptable without it ;
but the external worship of God in His Church is the great
witness to the world, that our heart stands right in that
service of God. Take this away, or bring it into contempt,
[Matt. V. and Avhat light is there left " to shine before men, that they
■' may see our devotion, and glorify our Father which is in

heaven?'^ And to deal clearly with your Majesty, these
thoughts are they, and no other, which have made me labour
so much as I have done for decency and an orderly settle-
ment of the external worship of God in the Church ; for of
that which is inward there can be no witness among men,
nor no example for men. Now, no external action in the
world can be uniform Avithout some ceremonies ; and these
in religion, the ancienter ihej be the better, so they may fit
time and place. Too many overburden the service of God,
and too few leave it naked. And scarce anything hath hurt
religion more in these broken times than an opinion in too
many men, that because Rome had thrust some unnecessary
and many superstitious ceremonies upon the Church, there-
fore the Reformation must have none at all ; not considerinsr
thercwhile, that ceremonies are the hedge that fence the
substance of religion from all the indignities which profane-
ncss and sacrilege too commonly put upon it. And a great
weakness it is, not to see the strength which ceremonies, —
things weak enough in themselves, God knows, — add even

[epistle dedicatory.] xvii

to religion itself; but a far greater to see it and yet to cry
them down all and without choice^ by which their most
hated adversaries climbed up, and could not cry up them-
selves and their cause as they do but by them. And divines,
of all the restj might learn and teach this wisdom if they
would, since they see all other professions which help to bear
down their ceremonies, keep up their own therewhile, and
that to the highest.

I have been too bold to detain your Majesty so long; but
my grief to see Christendom bleeding in dissension, and,
Avliich is worse, triumphing in her own blood, and most
angry with them that would study her peace, hath thus
transported me ; for truly it cannot but grieve any man that
hath bowels to see " all men seeking," but as S. Paul foretold, Phil. ii. 21.
" their own things, and not the things which are Jesus
Christ's :" sua, "their own'' surely ; for the Gospel of Christ
hath nothing to do with them : and to see religion so much,
so zealously pretended and called upon, made but the stalk-
ing-horse to shoot at other fowl upon which their aim is set ;
in the meantime, as if all were truth and holiness itself, no
salvation must be possible, did it lie at their mercy, but in
the communion of the one, and in the conventicles of the
other ; as if either of these now were, as the Donatists of old
reputed themselves, the only men in whom Christ at His
coming to judgment should find faith. No, saith S. Augus-
tine, and so I say with him. Da veniam,, non credimus, "Par-
don us, I pray, we cannot believe it." *■ The Catholic Church
of Christ is neither Rome, nor a conventicle. Out of that
there is no salvation, I easily confess it. But out of Rome
there is, and out of a conventicle too ; salvation is not shut
up into such a narrow conclave. In this ensuing Discourse,
therefore, I have endeavoured to lay open those wdder gates
of the Catholic Church confined to no age, time, or place;
nor knowing any bounds but that " faith which was once " — Jude 3.

[Sed nempe hoc est totum, quod solos, in quibus inveniat fidem, cum

nobis persuadere conaris, solos reman- venerit, Filius hominis. Da veniam,

sisse Rogatistas, qui catholici recte non credimus.] — S. Augustin. [ad Vin-

appellandi sint, ex obsers'atione prse- centium liogatistam,] Epist. [xciii.

ceptorum omnium divinorum atque olim] xlviii. [cap. 7. Op., torn. ii. col.

omnium sacramentorum ; et vos esse 240. F.]

VOL. II. — LAUD. (^

xviii [epistle dedicatory.]

and but once for all — "delivered to the saints," And in
my pursuit of this way^ I have searched after, and delivered
■with a single heart, that truth whieh I profess. In the pub-
lishing -nhereof I have obeyed your Majesty, discharged my
1 Pet. iii. duty to my power to the Church of England, "given account
of the hope that is in me," and so testified to the world that
faith in which I have lived, and by God's blessing and favour
purpose to die; but, till death, shall most unfeignedly
remain

Youi' Majesty's

Most faithful Subject,
And
Most humble and obliged Servant,

W. CANT.

T R V E

RELATIONS

OF SVNDRY

Conferences had between certaine Proteftant DoBours,

and a Iesvite called M. Fijher (then Pri-

foner in London for the Catholique Fayth :)

togeather with Defences of the fame.

IN WHICH

Is /fiewed^ that there hath alwayes beene, fince Chrifi^ a Vifible
Church, and in it a Vifible Succeflion of DoSfours i^
Pajiours, teaching the vnchanged Doctrine of Fayth , left by
Chriji and his Apojlles, in all points necejfary to Saluation.

AND THAT

Not Proteftants, but only Roman Catholiques haue had, and

can fhew fuch a Vifible Church; and in it fuch ^Succejfwn

of Paftours and Dodours, of whome men may fe-

curely learne what points of Fayth are

neceffary to Saluation.

By A. C.

/ hefeech you. Brethren, marke them which caufe diuifions and offence's, toH'-
trary to the DoBri?ie you haue learned, iff auoyd them. Rom. i6. v. 17.

Permiffu Superiorum. M. DC. XXVI.

[APPENDIX. No. I.]

The Preface of the Publisher of these Relations.

Gentle Reader, — I bave thought good to present to thy view these
Relations, together witli the Defences of them; not doubting but if thou
peruse and ponder them well, they will turn to thy benefit more ways
than one. First, supposing thou never heardest anything of these Con-
ferences but in general, or perhaps hast heard particulars falsely related
by some who are partially affected, or misinformed ; thou mayest by
this my labour be certified of the truth, and hereby enabled to do a
work of charity, in freeing others from ignorance and error, and con-
tradicting such false I'umours as thou mayest chance to understand to
have been spread abroad, whether in speech or in print, about this
matter.

Secondly, If thou be not thyself already resolved aright in matter of
faith necessary to salvation, thou mayest gain no small help towards
a sound settling of thy mind ; first, in the true knowledge and belief of
that one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, w^hich is mentioned in the
Apostles', and the Nicene, Creed ; and by means of it, in every other
article and point of that true Catholic faith, which S. Athanasius in his
Creed signifieth to be so necessary to salvation, that " whosoever doth
not hold it entire," that is, in all points, "and inviolate," that is, in the
true, unchanged, and incorrupted sense, in which Christ and his Apostles
left it, as a sacred depositum to be kept always in the Church, " without
doubt he shall perish everlastingly."

Thirdly, If thou be already rightly resolved, thou mayest receive
confirmation in thy faith, and consolation, in considering how plainly
it is proved that there is no other Church, nor consequently faith,
Avhich can, with any probable colour, be pretended to be truly Christian
and Catholic, besides that which always was, and yet is, the Roman, or
united with the Roman Church and faith.

Lastly, Having once thy mind thus settled and confirmed in the right
Roman Christian Catholic faith, and thereby freed from wavering in
uncertainty and doubtfulness about any particular point of faith, thou
needest not spend time in endless disputes about controversies of faith,
nor be always reading and learning, as many curious people be now-
a-days, and never coming to settled and well-grounded knowledge or
belief of all points of faith ; but mayest bestow thy time, as S. Peter
counsellelh those who be faithful Christians, when he saith, " Employ- 2 Pet. i.

xxii [Appendiv. No. I.]

iiig all care, minister ye iii your faith, virtue," by which you may live
conformably to that faith ; " and in virtue, knowledge," by which you
may discern practically good from ill; " and in knowledge, abstinence "
from all that is ill; "and in abstinence, patience," in regard there will
not want some pain to be suffered, while you labour to abstain from
ill; "and in patience, piety," or devotion, out of which will spring spi-
ritual comfort, enabling you to endure patiently all kind of pain ; " and
in piety, love of the fraternity," or brotherhood and unity of the whole
Church ; (not suffering yourselves, with a preposterous piety of private
feeling devotion, to hate or separate from the common doctrine, sacri-
fice, sacraments, service, rites, or ceremonies of the Cathohc Church;)
" and in love of the fraternity, charity," or love of God ; which charity,
if it be well grounded and rooted in your heart, it will doubtless move

2 Pet. i. you "to labour," as the same S. Peter further adviseth, "by good
works," and not by only faith or apprehension that your sins be for-
given, or that you be just, or the children of God, or of the number of
the elect, "to make sure your vocation and election; which doing you

Ibid. shall not," as the same Apostle promiseth, "sin at any time; and

there shall be ministered unto you abundantly, an entrance into the
everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ."

Some may perhaps marvel why these Relations come out so late, it
being now long since the adversaries have given out false reports, both
in speeches and print. For answer hereof, it must be considered, that
besides the ordinary difficulties which Catholics in England have, either
to write for want of convenient place, time, commodity of books, and
conferring with others, or to print, there have been some special extra-
ordinary impediments which have hindered the same. As, namely, that
M. Fisher was straitly charged, upon his allegiance, from his Majesty
that then was living, not to set out or publish what passed in some of
these Conferences, until he gave licence ; which made both M. Fisher
and his friends to forbear, hoping (as was promised by him who delivered

L. K. his Majesty's message), that D. White and others were not to publish

anything, until they, meeting with M. Fisher, should treat and agree,
and under their hands confirm what Avas said on both sides ; which his
Majesty perusing, would grant licence to publish. The which meeting
M. Fisher expected a long while, and once went to D. White's house,
to know what he would say about the Relation which he had set out ;
but found him unwilling to make any such treaty and agreement, nor
would himself set out in print or writing what he thought to be the true
Relation, as knowing by likelihood that he could not set out the truth
w ithout disadvantage of his cause, or not Avithout impairing, or at least
not advancing, his own credit so much as he desired.

If any marvel why in these Relations so little is said of the second
day's Conference with D. White, the reason is, because in a manner
all the speech of that meeting was between his Majesty and M. Fisher,
who beareth that dutiful respect to his Sovereign, that he will not per-
mit anything said by him to be published now after his death, which he

[Fisher's Relation of the Conferences. — Occasion oftheFirst Confer.'] xxiii

had so specially forbidden to be published in the time of his life. For
if this cause had not been, it had been also now published as well as
the rest; there being nothing in it which M. Fisher should be ashamed
of, or by which any prejudice might come to the CathoUc cause : for if
there had been any such matter, D. White (who in general terms doth
in his preface seek to disgrace M. Fisher, saying, " he vanished away
with disgrace,") would not have omitted to set down in particular
some, at least one, blameworthy argument or answer. But of this, as
also of D. Featly's endeavouring to disgrace M. Fisher, by objecting
falsely-supposed untruths, contradictions, &c., more is to be said in
another place ; and therefore, not being willing to hold thee, gentle
reader, any longer from the consideration of the first occasion of all this
business, I commit thee to the protection of Almighty God.

Thy hearty well-wisher and servant in Christ,

W. I.

[APPENDIX. No. II.]

The Occasion of a certain Conference had between D. Francis "White

and M. John Fisher.

The occasion of this Conference was a certain written paper, given by
M. Fisher to an honourable lady, who desired something to be briefly
written, to prove the Catholic Roman Church and faith to be the only
right.

2'he copy of this Paper is as followeth : —

First, It is certain that there is one, and but one true, divine, infalli- Ephes. iv.
ble faith, without which none can please God or attain salvation. Heb. xi.

2. This one true, divine, infallible faith, is wholly grounded upon the '-^' *"-'
authority of God's word ; and in this it dilFereth not only from all
human sciences bred by a clear sight or evident demonstration, and
from human opinion proceeding from probable arguments or conjec-
tures, and from human faith built upon the authority of Pythagoras'
ipse dixit, or the word of any other man ; but also from all other divine
knowledge had, either by clear vision of the Divine Essence which saints
have in heaven, or by clear revelation of divine mysteries, which some
principal persons, to wit, patriarchs and prophets and apostles, had
on earth ; and also from that theological discursive knowledge, which
learned men attain unto by the use of their natural wit, in deducing
conclusions, partly out of the foundations of supernatural faith, partly [p. 3.]
out of principles of natural reason : from all these kinds of knowledge, I
say, that one true, divine and infalhble faith differeth, in that it is grounded
wholly upon the authority of the word of God, as human fallible faith is
grounded upon the authority of the word of man.

xxiv [Appendix. No. //.]

;5. This word of God, upon which divine infallible faith is grounded,
is not only the word of (iod incrcate, or the prime verity, but also the
word created, or revelation proceeding from that prime verity, by which
the truth of Christian mysteries, by Christ, who is true God, was first
made manifest to the Apostles and other His disciples; partly by the
exterior preaching of his own mouth, but chiefly by the inward revela-
tion of His eternal heavenly Father, and by the inspiration of the Holy
[p. 4.] Ghost. Secondly, it was made known to others living in those days,
partly by outward preaching, partly by the writings of the aforesaid
Apostles and disciples, to whom Christ gave lawful mission and corn-
Matt, mission to teach, saying, " Teach all nations ;" promising that Himself

t'V'"' • would be with them all days, unto the end of the world; and that His Holy

Jolin XVI. •' '

Luke X. Spirit should assist them and teach them, and consequently make them

able to teach others, all truth, in such sort as Avhosoever should hear them
should hear Christ Himself, and so should be made docibiles Dei, and as
the prophet foretold, doeti a Domino, and as S. Paul speaketh of some,
epistola Chrisii, " ' the epistle of Christ,' written not with ink, but with
the Spirit of God." Whence appeareth, that not only the word increate,
but also the word created, may be truly said to be the foundation of our
faith ; and not only that word which was immediately inspired by the
[p. 5.] heavenly Father, or by the Holy Ghost, in the hearts of the Apostles
and other disciples who lived in our Saviour's days ; but also the word
as well preached as written by the Apostles, and also that word which,
by the preaching and writing of the Apostles, was by the Holy Ghost
imprinted in the hearts of the immediate hearers, who were thereupon
said to be the epistles of Christ, as I have already noted.

4. This word of God, which I call created, to distinguish it from the
word increate, being partly preached, partly written, partly inspired or
imprinted in manner aforesaid, was not to cease at the death of the
Apostles and disciples and their immediate hearers, but by the appoint-
1 Tim. ii. ment of God, " who would have all men to be saved, and come to the
knowledge of the truth," was to be derived to posterity; not by new
[p. 6.] immediate revelations or enthusiasms, nor by sending angels to all par-

ticular men, but by a continuated succession of visible doctors, and pastors,
and lawfully sent preachers in all ages, who, partly by transcripts of
what was written first by the Apostles, but chiefly by vocal preaching
of the same doctrine, without change, which the pastors of every age
successively one from another received of their predecessors, as they
who lived in the age next to the Apostles' days received it from the
Apostles, as a sacred depositum, to be kept and preserved in the Church,
maugre all the assaults of liell-gates, which, according to Christ's
promise, shall never prevail against the Church. Whence followeth,
that not only for 400 or 500 or 600 years, but in all ages since Christ,
there was, is, and shall be, the true word of God preached by visible
doctors, pastors, and lawfully sent preachers, so guided by Christ and
[p. 7.] his Holy Spirit, that by them people of every age were, are, and shall
be sufficiently instructed in true, divine, infallible faith, in all thin"-3

\_Fisher's Relation of the Conferences. — Occasion of the First Confer.'] xxv

necessary to salvation ; to the intent that tliey may not be little ones,
wavering, nor carried about " with every wind of new doctrine," which Ephes. iv.
being contrary to the old and first received, must needs be false.

5. Whereas by this which is already said, (which if need be may be
more fully proved,) it appeareth, first, that there is one true, divine,
infallible faith, necessary to salvation. Secondly, that this faith is wholly
grounded upon the word of God. Thirdly, that this word of God is not
only the word increate, but also the word created, either inwardly in-
spired or outwardly preached, or written and continued, without change,
in one or other continued succession of visible pastors, doctors, and
lawfully sent preachers, rightly teaching, by the direction of Christ and [p- 8.]
His Holy Spirit, the said word of God : whereas, I say, all this doth most
evidently appear by this which is already said.

That I may prove the Roman Church only, and those who consent
and agree in doctrine of faith w ith it, to have that one true, divine, infol-
lible faith which is necessary to salvation.

Thus I dhpute :

If it be needful that there should be one or other continual suc-
cession of visible pastors, in which and by which the unchanged word
of God, upon which true, divine, infallible faith is grounded, is preserved
and preached; and no other succession besides that of the Roman
Church, and others which agree in faith with it, can be showed (as if
any such were, may be showed) out of approved histories, or other
ancient monuments ; then, without doubt, the Roman Church only,
and such as agree with it in faith, have that true, divine, infallible faith [p. 9 ]
which is necessary to salvation.

But there must be one or other such succession of visible pastors ; and
no other can be showed out of approved histories or ancient monuments,
besides that of the Roman Church only, and such others as agree with
it in faith. Ergo,

The Roman Church only, and such others as agree with it in faith,
hath true, divine, infallible faith, necessary to salvation.

The consequence of the major cannot with reason be denied, and if it
be, it shall be proved.

The minor hath two parts. The first whereof is plain, by that which
is already said, and if need be, it shall be more fully proved out of holy
Scriptures.

The second part may be made manifest, first out of histories, secondly
out of the confession of Protestants. r-p jq 1

The second Argument.

If the Roman Church had the right faith, and never changed any
substantial part of fixith ; then it followeth, that it hath now that one
true, divine, infallible fiiith which is necessary to salvation.

But the Roman Church once had the right faith, and never changed
any substantial part of faith. Ergo,

The Roman Church now hath the right faith, and consequently Pro-
testants, so far as they disagree with it, have not the right soul-saving fixith.

xxvi [^Appendix. No. III.'\

The major is evident.

The minor hath two parts. The first is dear out of S. Paul, Rom. i.,
and is confessed by Protestants.

The second part I prove thus: If the Roman Church changed any
substantial part of faith, then there may be showed the point changed,
[p. 11.] the person which was the author of that change, the time when and
place where the change was made ; and others may be named who, per-
sisting in the ancient faith, continued opposition ag.ainst the innovation
and change, as may be sliowed in other like and less changes, and
namely in Luther's and Calvin's change.

But these circumstances cannot be shoAved. Ergo, No change.

If my adversaries name any point which they affirm to have been
changed, 1. This will not suffice, unless they name the other circum-
stances of the author, time place, and who, persisting in the former
unchanged faith, opposed and continued opposition against it, as against
a novelty and heresy, as we can do in other changes, and namely in
that which was by Luther and Calvin,
[p. 12.] 2. These points, which they say were changed after the first six

hundred years, may be showed them to have been held by more ancient
approved authors in the same sense in which they are held by the
Roman Church; which doth argue, that there was no such change made.

[APPENDIX. No. III.]

[p. 13.] A brief Relation of ivhat passed between D. White a7id M. Fisher,

about the foresaid written Paper .

This foresaid paper passing from one to another, came to some hands
who gave it to D. Francis Wliite to answer, and to prepare himself to
oppugn it in a Conference with M. Fisher, who, when he w rote it and gave
it to the Lady, did not think or suspect that any such great matter
should have been made of it as after proved. M. D. White having
(as he confessed after to M. Fisher) had this paper about ten days in
his hands, studying what to say to it, came as he was appointed to the
place of meeting; and M. Fisher, being then a prisoner, was also sent
for. At tlie liour and place prefixed, both the one and the other, as
they were bidden, sat dow n below a few, but very honourable persons,
whose names I will only, as M. Fisher first did, express in these
ensuing letters, L. K., L. M. B., L. B., and M. B. Then D. White drew
out a copy of the aforesaid written paper, and asked M. Fisher whether
he wrote it. Unto which M. Fisher answered, " I wrote such a thing,
and if it be a true copy I will defend it,"
[p. 14.] Then D. White read the first point of the said paper, in which was

said, " There is one, and but one true divine faith," &c. "This," saith
D. White, " is true, if faith be understood explicit or implicit." Which
to be the true sense, M. Fisher assented.

[Fisher's Relation of the Conferences. — The First Conference.'] xxvii

Then D. White read the second point, in whicli was said, "That this
true divine faith was wholly grounded upon the word of God," &c.
This also D. White yielded to be true.

Then D. White read the third point, in whicli was said, " That this
word of God, upon which faith was grounded, is not only the word
increate, but also the word created, to wit, the divine revelation made
manifest, partly by Christ's outward preaching, partly by the Holy
Ghost's inward inspiration in the hearts of the Apostles," &c.

This point also D. White allowed, but knowing what followed in the
fourth point, he asked M. Fisher whether he thought that the Holy
Ghost was equally in others as in the Apostles ? M. Fisher said, that
the inspiration of the Holy Ghost was promised and given both to the
Apostles and others, yet not in the same degree, nor in the same full
measure ; but the Apostles, as being after Christ the prime foundations
of the Church, had the Holy Ghost in such high degree and full mea-
sure, that they could and did write canonical Scriptvires. Others that
were pastors and doctors had it in an inferior degree, yet so as by it
they were enabled to teach infallibly, and without change, the substance
of all points needful to salvation ; especially when in a general council,
after discussion of the matter, they did conclude as the Apostles and
seniors did, Jlsum est Spiritui Sancto et nobis, " It seemelh good to the
Holy Ghost and us." The people also had a measure of the same
Spirit, sufficient to enable them to conceive rightly and to believe [p. 15.]
stedfastly the teaching of their pastors.

D. White did not disallow the svibstance of this answer, but only made
a verbal objection, saying, " The Apostles had inspiration, pastors and
people only illumination."

M. Fisher answered, that both Apostles and pastors had inspiration
and illumination, in regard the motion of the Holy Ghost, as received
in the understanding, is called "illumination," and as received in the
will, it is called " inspiration."

L.. K. bade them leave that verbal controversy, and proceed in the
matter. D. White excepted against that part of the paper wherein was
said. That the word of God was partly written, partly unwritten ; and
would have nothing to be the word of God but what is written in
Scripture.

M. Fisher, to justify that part of the paper, first alleged that text of
S. Paul, " Hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by our
word or epistle." Secondly, he made these two ensuing arguments, to
prove that more is to be believed by divine faith than is written in
Scripture.

It is necessary to believe, by divine faith, that Genesis, Exodus, and
other particular books, are canonical and divine Scripture.

But this to be so, is not assuredly known by the only word written.
Ergo, &c.

Moreover, Protestants hold and believe this proposition : Nothing is
to be believed by Christian faith, but what is contained in Scripture.

xxviii [Ajipendlv. No. III.]

But this proposition is not contained in the \vorcl written. Ergo,
Something is beheved even by Protestants, which is not contained in
the written word ; and therefore they must admit for a ground of faith
[p. IC] some word of God not written.

D. White answered, Although at that time when S. Paul wrote the
text alleged, some part of God's word was not written, yet after-
wards all needful to be believed was written. This D. White said, but
did not, nor cannot prove, especially out of any part of the written
word.

D. White alleged this text, Omnis scriptura divinitus inspirata, utilis est,
&c. But, as M. Fisher then told him, this text doth not prove the
point which is to be proved. For this text doth not say, that all which
is divinely inspired was written ; or that Genesis, Exodus, and other
particular books, are divinely inspired ; or that nothing is to be believed
which is not contained in Scripture ; but only saith, " That all, or every
Scripture divinely inspired, is profitable."

D. White said : " Scripture is not only said simply to be profitable, but
to be profitable to argue, to teach, to correct, to instruct, that the man
of God may be perfect; and therefore being profitable to all these
offices, it may be said to be sufficient."

M. Fisher replied : " Although wood be profitable to make the sub-
stance of the house, to make wainscoat, to make tables and stools, and
other furniture ; yet hence doth not follow, that wood alone is sufficient
to build and furnish a house." I will not say that here D. White was at
a 7ionpliis, because I understand that word nonplus doth not please him ;
but the truth is, that to this D. White did make no answer. And
for my part, I profess I do not see what answer he could have made
to the purpose, and worthy of that honourable and understanding
audience.

D. White, therefore, without saying anything to this instance, seemed
[p- 17.] to be weary, and giving the paper to M. Fisher, bade him read on.

M. Fisher, taking the paper, read the fourth point, in which was said,
"That the word of God manifested to the Apostles, and by them to
their immediate hearers, was not to cease at their death, but was to be
continued and propagated without change, in and by one or other com-
pany of visible pastors, doctors, and lawfully sent preachers, succes-
sively in all ages," &c. All which to be true being at last granted, or
not denied by D. White, M. Fisher proposed the first of the two argu-
ments set down in the aforesaid paper, viz. —

If there must be in all ages one or other continual succession of visi-
ble pastors, doctors, and lawfully sent preachers, by whom the unchanged
word of God, upon which faith is grounded, was preserved and preached
in all ages since Christ ; and no other is visible, or can be showed,
besides those of the Roman Church, and such as agree in faith with
them : then, none but the pastors of the Roman Church, and such as
agree in faith with them, have that one infallible, divine, unchanged
faith, which is necessary to salvation.

[Fisher's Relation of the Conferences. — The First Conference.'] xxix

But there must be sucli a visible succession, and none such can be
showed different in faith from the pastors of the Roman Church. Ergo,

0\\\\ the pastors of the Roman Church, and such as agree in faith
with them, preserve and teach that one infallible, divine, unchanged faith,
which is necessary to salvation.

D. White answered. That it was sufficient to show a succession of
visible pastors teaching unchanged doctrine in all points fundamental,
although not in points not fundamental.

M. Fisher replied, saying, first, that if time permitted, he could
prove all points of divine faith to be fundamental, (supposing they were [p- 18.]
points generally held, or defined by full authority of the Church) ; to
which purpose he did recite the beginning of this sentence of S.
Augustine : Ferendus est dlsputator erransin aliis quo'stionibus non diUgenter
digestis, nondum plena Ecclesice authoritate firmatis ; ibi ferendus est error :
non tantum progredi debet, ut [etiam'] ipsum fundamentum quatere moUatur."
In which S. Augustine insinuateth, that to err in any questions defined
by full authority of the Church, is to shake the foundation of faith, or
to err in points fundamental. But M. Fisher not having the book at
hand, and fearing to be tedious in arguing upon a text which he had
not ready to show, passed on ; and, secondly, required D. White to give
him a catalogue of all points fundamental, or a definition or description,
(well proved out of Scripture, and in which all Protestants will agree,)
by which one may discern which be and which be not points
fundamental.

D. White rejected this demand, as thinking it unreasonable to require
of him a catalogue, or definition, or description of points fundamental,
out of Scripture, in which all Protestants will agree. But, considering
in what sense D. White did understand this distinction of points funda-
mental and not fundamental, (to wit, that none could be saved who did
not believe all points fundamental rightly, and that none should be
damned for not believing other points, unless he did wilfully against his
conscience deny or not believe them,) M. Fisher's demand was both
reasonable and most necessary; for since all Protestants agree in hold-
ing it necessary to be certain of their salvation, and that none can be
saved who do not believe all points fundamental; and that in these
points, one must not content himself with implicit faith, but must [p. 19.]
expressly know them ; it is most necessary that all Protestants should
out of Scripture (which they pretend to be their only rule of faith) find,
and conclude with unanimous consent certainly, what is, and what is
not, a fundamental point of faith necessary to salvation. For while
some hold more, some less to be fundamental, and none of them giveth
(out of Scripture) a sufficient rule by which it may be discerned which
is, and which is not fundamental, how can each particular Protestant
rest assured, that he believeth expressly all points fundamental, or so
much as is necessary and sufficient to make him assured of salvation ?

» [S. Augustin. Serm. ccxeiv. olim Serm. xiv. de verbis Apostoli, cap. 21. in
fin. Op., torn. V. col. 1194. A.]

XXX \_Appendix. No. III.^

But to return to the Relation. D. White, having rejected M. Fisher's
demand, requ'ring a catalogue, definition, or description out of Scripture,
in ^vhich all Protestants will agree, said. That all those points uere
fundamental which were contained in the Creed of the Apostles.

M. Fisher might have asked him divers questions iipon this answer.
1. What text of Scripture taught him, that all the points contained in
the Apostles' Creed were fundamental in the sense aforesaid? Or, that
this Creed was composed by the Apostles as a summary of faith, con-
taining points needful (at least necessitate pracepti) to be expressly
believed by all men ? The Church indeed so teacheth, but the Scripture
hath not any text which doth expressly say so, or whence by necessary
consequence so much may be gathered ; and therefore, according to
Protestant principles, (permitting nothing to be believed but only Scrip-
ture,) the Apostles' Creed ought not to be believed as a rule of any
point of faith, and much less a rule containing all principal and funda-
mental points of faith.

[p. 20.] 2. M. Fisher might have asked. Whether only the words of the Creed

are needful to be held as a sufficient foundation of faith, or the Catholic
sense ? If only the words, then the Arians and other condemned heretics
may be said to have held all the fundamental points sufficient to salva-
tion ; which is contrary to the judgment of antiquity, and is most absurd.
If the Catholic sense, then the question must be, Who must be judge to
determine which is the Catholic sense ; and Avhether it be not most
reasonable and necessary, that the Catholic Church itself, rather than
any particular man, or sect of men, should teach the true sense ? w hen,

John xiv. especially, the Holy Ghost was promised to the Catholic Church, (and

and XVI. ^^^. ^^ ^^^^ particular man, or sect of men, differing in doctrine from it,)
to teach it all truth.

3. M. Fisher might have asked. Whether all points fundamental were
expressed in the Creed or not? If they be not, by what other rule shall
one know what is a point fundamental ? If all which is fundamental be
expressed in the Creed, then to believe only Scripture, or to believe that
there is any Scripture at all, is not fundamental or necessary to salva-
tion ; but to believe the Catholic Church, and consequently the truth
of all such doctrines of faith which she generally teacheth or defineth
in her general councils, is fundamental. So, as we may say with S.
Atlianasius, " Whosoever will be saved, must believe the Catholic faith,"
(that is, the faith taught by the Catholic Church,) and this not only in
part or in a corrupt sense, but in all points and in Catholic sense. For
as the same S. Athanasius saith, " Unless one believe the said Catholic
faith" {'inlcgram iuviolatamque) " entire and inviolate, without doubt he

[p. 21.] shall perish everlastingly." All these questions M. Fisher might have
asked, but he at that present only asked. Whether all articles of the
Creed were held by D. White to be fundamental ?

To which question D. White answ ered, That all was fundamental.
M. Fisher asked, Whether the article of Christ's descending into hell
were fundamental?

[Fisher's Relation of the Conferences. — The First Conference.'] xxxi

D. White said, Yes.

Why then, said M. Fisher, did M. Rogers affirm, " That the Church
of England is not yet resolved what is the right sense of that article?"''

It Avas answered, that JVI. Rogers was a private man. M. Fisher
replied, That his book in the title professeth to be set out by public
authority. To which M. Fisher might have added. That the book so
set out by public authority, beareth title of the Catholic or universal
Doctrine of the Church of England ; by which addition is showed a
difference betwixt this book of M. Rogers, and some others which were
objected to be set out by licence of the Catholic side : for these our books
are only licensed to come out in the name of such or such a private
author, and as books declaring his private opinions; but this of M.
Rogers was authorized, and graced with the title of the Catholic Doc-
trine of the Church of England, and therefore ought by Protestants to
be more respected than other private men's books.

M. Fisher, not thinking it necessary to press this difference, returned
again to D. White's first answer to the main argument, in which he
having said, That it w^as sufficient to show a visible succession of such
as held points fundamental, did implicitly grant it necessary, that a suc-
cession should be showed of such visible pastors as did hold all points,
which at least himself held to be fundamental, or necessary to salvation, [p. 22.]
Whereupon M. Fisher bade D. White name a continual company, or
succession of visible Protestants, (different from the Roman Church
which they call Papists,) holding all points which he accounted funda-
mental.

D. White expressly granted, That he could not show such a visible
succession of pastors and doctors, (differing in doctrine from the Roman
Church,) who held all points which he accounted fundamental. Which
his ingenuous confession I desire the reader to note, applying it to the
argument which M. Fisher proposed, showing that only the Roman
Church hath had such a succession. For if, as the argument urgeth,
one such succession hath been, and none differing in doctrine from the
Roman can be showed by D. White, (being accounted a prime Protestant
controversialist, who may teach such as D. Featly, as was lately pro-
fessed by D. Featly himself,) we may absolutely conclude, that no such
visible succession was of Protestants, so far as they differ in doctrine
from the Roman Church ; and consequently till they assign some other,
(which they can never do,) they must acknowledge the Roman to be
the only Church, or at least a Church which hath had a visible succes-
sion, teaching the unchanged faith of Christ in all ages, in all points, at
least fundamental : which being acknowledged, worthily might M.
Fisher ask (as he did ask) D. White, Why Protestants made a schism
from the Roman Church 1 and. Why Protestants did persecute Roman
Catholics, contrary to the custom of the ancient Fathers, who still kept
unity with other Churches, although in their opinion holding errors,

•• Rogers in his Doctrine of the Church of England, Art. 3. [vide infra, Sect,
xii. No. 1. p. 51, &c.]

xxxii [Appendix. No. III.~\

[p. 23.] until the Catholic Church by full authority defined them to be errors in
faith, and that after such definition of the Church (which was yet never
made against the Roman Church), they would still obstinately persist
in error ? as appeareth in S. Cyprians case. To these demands made by
M. Fisher, D. White answered : We do not persecute you for reli-
gion. About which answer I desire the gentle reader to observe, that
M. Fisher asked two questions: 1. Why Protestants made a schism
from the Roman Church? 2. Why Protestants did persecute Roman
Catholics ?

To the first of these questions, being about schism, D. White answered
not a word, and yet this was the most important question, sufficient to
show Protestants to be in a damnable state, iinless they repent and
return to imity with the Roman Church. For on the one side, it cannot
be denied but that schism, or separation of oneself from Church unity,
is a most damnable sin, which cannot be made lawful for any cause, nor
cannot without repentance and returning to unity be washed away, even
with martyrdom itself, as the ancient Fathers confess. And on the
other side it is evident (and even confessed by some Protestants), that
Protestants did separate themselves from the Roman Church, which
is confessed to be the mother Church, and \\hich cannot be showed to
have separated itself from a former Church yet extant, as the true
Church of Christ must always be visibly extant. Neither can there be
showed any other reason why Protestants did make and continue this
their separation, than were or might have been alleged by heretics and
schismatics of ancient times, separating themselves from the Catholic

[p. 2i.] Roman Church : for setting aside all temporal respects, which doubtless
were (but were very insufficient and unworthy) causes why some did
first, and do yet continue this separation ; there cannot be imagined any
pretended cause which may not be reduced to these two heads : to wit,
corruption of manners, or corruption of doctrine. Corruption of man-
ners is not a just cause to make one leave the faith, sacraments, and
rites of the Church, our Saviour having sufficiently forewarned what is

Matt. to be done in this case, when he said, " Upon the chair of Afoses the

xxiu. Scribes and Pharisees have sitten; all, therefore, that they say unto you

observe and do, but according to their works do not." For by this is
showed, that the separation which in other places of Scripture is com-
manded, is not meant so, as if it were to be made by neglecting or con-
tradicting the doctrine of lawfully authorized pastors, or by corporally
absenting oneself from communicating with them in necessary sacra-
ments and Church rites, but only spiritually, to depart from the imitation
of their ill manners. The second, to wit, corruption of doctrine, per-
taining to the common faith of the Catholic Church, neither did nor can
happen to the whole visible Church: Christ having promised, that the
Holy Ghost shall be always with it to teach it all truth ; and that hell-
gates shall never so prevail against it as to overthrow in it the founda-
tion of all goodness, to wit, true faith. And for other errors, in such
questions as are not determined by full authority of the said Catholic

[Fisher's Relation of the Conferences. — The First Conference.'] xxxiii

Church, S. Augustine's rule is to be observed, when he saith,*^
Ferendus est dhputator ei-rans : neither must one for the error of a few
leave the society and communion of all ; neither must one or a few, pre-
suming upon their own private reading and interpreting of Scripture, or [p. 25.]
their private spirit (which is or may be the common pretext of all here-
tics), censure and condemn the doctrine or practice of the universal
Catholic Church to be erroneous: which to do is, by S. Bernard's
sentence, "intolerable pride," and in S. Augustine's judgment, "inso-
lent madness."

The beginning, therefore, and continuance of the schism and separa-
tion of the Protestants from the Catholic Roman Church, (in which
even, as Calvin confesseth,'' there was made a discession and departure
from the whole world,) is very damnable, and altogether inexcusable.
Which, perhaps, was the cause why D. White passed over that part of
the question (touching this schism) with silence, and only answered, as
is above said, to the other part, saying, " We do not persecute you for
religion."

To which answer M. Fisher replied, saying, You do us wrong, for
myself being a prisoner was never taxed with any state matter, but do
suffer for religion. L. M. B. made another answer, saying. You of your
side did first persecute Protestants.

M. Fisher answered, That we Catholics hold all points in which Pro-
testants differ from lis in doctrine of faith, to be fundamental, and
necessary to be believed, or at least not denied, and so may have cause
to punish them who deny or contradict. But Protestants, who believe
Catholics to hold right in all points which themselves esteem funda-
mental, have no reason to persecute us for supposed errors in points
•not fundamental, which Protestants do not account damnable. For
better clearing whereof, M. Fisher asked D. White, Whether he thought
error in a point not fundamental, to be damnable ? [p. 26.]

D. White said, No, unless one hold it against his conscience.

M. Fisher asked, How one could hold an error against his conscience?
meaning that one could not inwardly in his conscience believe that to
be true, which he knew in his conscience to be an error.

D. White answered. That by perversity of will he might hold an error
against the known truth. Which answer is true, if he mean that one
who knoweth the truth at this instant, may after, by perversity of will,
incline the understanding to hold the contrary error. But that at the
same instant he should know the truth actually, and yet actually hold
in the same instant the contrary error in his conscience, or inward
knowledge, is more than I think any philosopher can explicate. For
this were to know and not know, and to believe two contraries — truth
and error — about the same object, in the same subject, the inward con-
science, at one and the same instant ; which is impossible.

M. B. marvelling at D. White's answer, asked him again the same

Aug. de verb. Apost. Ser. 14. [vide infra, Sect. x. Xo. 1. p. 31, &c.]
Calvin. 1. Ep. epist. 141. r vide infra, p. 358. note i.]

d
VOL. II. — LAUD

xxxiv [Appendix. No. III.]

question, saying, May one be saved tliat lioldeth error in points of faitb
not fundamental, supjjosing he hold not against his conscience ?

D, White said. Yes.

Those, saith M. B., who, suffering for conscience, hold error in faith
against their conscience, are worthy to be damned.

M. Fisher having observed, that D. White had insinuated that one
might be damned for holding error in points of faith not fundamental,
in case he hold them against his conscience, said. If it be damnable to
f p. 27.] hold errors in points not fundamental, in case one hold them wilfully
against his conscience, a fortiori, it is damnable to hold the like errors
\\ ilfully and obstinately against the known judgment and conscience of
the Church. For, as S. Bernard saith,« Quce major superbia, quam ut unus
homo judicium suum prceferat toti congregatioui? "What greater pride,
than that one man should prefer his judgment (or conscience) before
the judgment (and conscience) of the whole Church?"

D. White said, He remembered that sentence of S. Bernard ; but it is
not remembered that he gave any good answer, either to that sentence
or to the argument confirmed by it. Neither indeed can he give any
good answer, in regard it is certain, that the judgment and conscience
of the whole Church, (or congregation of so many faithful, wise, learned,
and \irtuous men, assisted by the promised Spirit of truth,) is incom-
parably more to be I'espected, and preferred before the judgment and
conscience of any private man ; as appeareth by that of Christ our
Saviour, who, without excepting any who pretendeth to follow his con-
science, and without distinguishing the matter in which he pretendeth
to follow it into points fundamental and not fundamental, absolutely
Matt.xviii. affirmeth, "He that will not hear" (that is, believe and obej) "the
Church, let him be to thee as an heathen and publican."

Hence Protestants, who prefer their private judgment and conscience
before the judgment and conscience of the Catholic Church, in inter-
preting Scriptures or otherwise, may learn in what state they remain,
so long as they do thus, being by the censure of S. Bernard extremely
"proud," and in the judgment of S.Augustine, insolently " mad,"
[p. 28.] and by the sentence of Christ himself, to be accounted no better than
" heathens and publicans."

It seemeth that D. White did not deeply ponder this point, or else
was w illing to pass over it, as a cat over hot coals ; and so he betook
himself to oppugn another part of M. Fisher's paper, in which is said that
" No company of visible pastors delivering unchanged doctrine, could
be showed in all ages, besides those of the Roman Church."

D. White denied this to be true, and, notwithstanding he had before
said that he could not show any company differing in doctrine from the
Roman Church, holding in all ages all fundamental points, said, that
both the Greek Church and the Protestant Church had such a succession
of visible pastors : which tw o sayings, how D. White would reconcile,
])ertaineth to him to declare.

' Bern. Serm. de Resurrect, [vide supra, Sect. xxi. No. 4. p. 153.]

[Flshef's Relation of the Conferences. — The First Conference^] xxxv

M. Fisher replied, and told him that the Greek Church changed and
erred in a point of faith, to wit, about the Holy Ghost. A like or
greater change he might, and in likelihood would have told him to have
been in many points held by the Protestant Church, if he had not been
interrupted by L. K., who asked, " Whether, notwithstanding that error
of the Greek Church, ignorant men might not be saved?"

M. Fisher answered to L. K.'s question, saying, Some ignorant men
may be excused from actual sin in holding that error, as, through in-
vincible ignorance, one holding some error against the Holy Trinity
itself may be excused ; yet for other actiial sins they might be
damned, for want of means necessary for remission of them. This
answer was meant by M. Fisher of such ignorant men who, although
by invincible ignorance excused from the actual sin of positive infidelity,
heresy, and schism, wanted true supernatural faith, hope, and charity, [p. 29.]
out of which an act of true contrition springeth ; or wanted the true
and lawful use of the sacrament of penance and priestly absolution ;
which being needful to obtain pardon of sin, may easily be wanting to
such people as commit other sins against the light of nature, or against
those good motions of grace, which now and then Almighty God giveth
to all sorts, who consequently (through this their own fault) are not
illuminated with true supernatural faith, but are permitted still to remain
in infidelity, or heresy, or schism, or in a negative disposition of want
of all faith, devotion, and desire of union with God and such good men
who truly serve God in his true Chui'ch : of which sort of ignorant
people, it is to be doubted there be but too many in all, especially infi-
del, heretical, or schismatical countries. But hence doth not follow,
neither did M. Fisher ever mean to affirm, that all ignorant Grecians,
Protestants, or of any other sort of schismatics, heretics, or infidels, are
damned : for if, on the one side, this their ignorance be invincible, so as
to excuse them from the actual sin of their schism, heresy, and infidelity;
and on the other side, they by Almighty God's special grace be pre-
served from other actual mortal sin, and by the same grace be excited
extraordinarily to faith, hope, charity, and to true contrition for all
sin, they may be saved. But this being extraordinary, no man ought
ordinarily presume or rely on it, especially so as to neglect the ordinary
means, known to be in the unity of the Catholic Roman Church.

After this D. White excepted against another point of M. Fisher's
paper, in which was said, '• That the Roman Church had still held un- [p- 30.]
changed doctrine of faith in all points," &c. And for instances of change
made, he objected " transubstantiation, images, communion under one
kind, sacrament of penance," &c. These points he shghtly began to
touch, but did not, as the paper required, name when, and by whom
the change was made in these points, but said. It was not needful to
show these circumstances. As for example, saith he, the Pharisees held
error in saying, that the gold of the altar was more holy than the altar,
which was a change in doctrine, and yet you cannot show when, and by
whom this change was made.

xxxvi [Appendix. No. III.~\

To this M. Fisher answered, That altliough he could not on the sud-
den tell when, and by whom this change Avas made, yet he did not
doubt but that with study he might find it out. And so indeed he might
have named the author of the sect of Pharisees, who first brought in
that error, and the time when that sect began, Avhich is enough. For
we do not press Protestants to tell the very day or hour in which every
one of our supposed errors were brought in ; but to name the first
author of any erroneous doctrine, or of any sect of men who were
specially noted for teaching such a peculiar doctrine, and about what
year or age that sect of men first began; and who they were, who then
noted them to teach such doctrine, contrary to the formerly received
faith of the universal Church ; as must be, and is usually noted, when
especially any such notorious matters as those which D. White objected,
were by any man, or any sect of men, taught contrary to the formerly
received faith of the universal Church.

Sith, therefore, the aforesaid circumstances are usually noted in other
[r. 31.1 ^"^^1 kind of changes, and that it is morally impossible that such
great changes, and so universally spread over the world, should be
made either in an instant or in succession of time, and that not one or
other writer Avould have made mention of the change, and when, where,
and by whom it was made, as they do of all other such matters, D.
White (who objected such great changes of doctrine to have been made
in the Roman Church, accusing hereby grievously her, which confessedly
■was once the true mother Church), is obliged and bound not only to
prove this his accusation, by showing the foresaid circumstances in
good authors, if he will not be accounted an unnatural and false calum-
niator of his true mother Church ; but he must also show another
continually visible Church, which never did admit any such changes in
doctrine of faith, if he will not impiously deny the truth of the prophecies
and promises of Scripture, whereby we learn that hell-gates shall not
prevail against the Church, and that Christ Himself, and His Holy Spirit,
will always be with the Church, teaching it, and consequently enabling
it to teach us all truth, and making it the pillar and ground of truth,
and consequently free from all error in matters of faith.

But D. White can never prove his accusation by showing out of good
authors the aforesaid circumstances of the change of the Roman Church
in doctrine of faith, nor can show any other continually visible Church,
which did not admit change in doctrine of faith. Let him therefore
consider, whether it be not better to recall his false unnatural accusation
of his mother the Roman Church, being sorry for it, with purpose here-
after humbly to hear, believe, obey, and follow her doctrine and direc-
[p. 32.] tion, rather than to incur not only the foresaid censure of men, but also
of Christ Himself, wlio saith, " He that will not hear tlie Church, let him
be to thee as an heathen and publican," that is, cast out of the favour
of God and all good men, both in this present life, and also, if he do not
in time repent, in the future eternal lite.

These be the chief points which 1 have gathered out [of] M. Fisher's

[Fishe7''s Relation of the Conferences. — The First Conference J] xxxvii

first Relation, Avhich he showed to D. White with an intent that he
should put him in mind if anything were not remembered or misremem-
bered : but the Doctor at that time did not, nor could truly say, that
anything was falsely related; only he said, — 1. That himself did not
remember a point or two, which both M. Fisher and M. B. did perfectly
remember to have been so as is here related. 2. He said that some-
thing more was said than is related ; which M. Fisher did not deny, but
was willing to add anything that D. White could put him in mind of, or
that himself should after remember : and so being put in remembrance
made by D. White, to wit. Whereas M. Fisher, upon some occasion or
other, had said. That although a general council might err in the pre-
mises, yet not in the conclusion ; D. White objected, saying. That in all
sciences the conclusion is no more certain than the premises, and there-
fore if the premises in a general council be fallible, the conclusion cannot
be infallible. To Avhich M. Fisher answered, saying, Although in sciences
which depend only upon the light of nature, the conclusion cannot be
more certain than the premises ; yet in a general council, assisted by
the Holy Ghost, in the final conclusion or definitive sentence, the
conclusion is always infallible, although sometimes the premises be
fallible.

And M. Fisher had great reason to answer in this manner. Indeed, [p. 33.]
if to define a matter of faith were to conclude the same by way of dis-
course out of principles, as the argument doth suppose, then if councils
might err in the premises, they might likewise err in their conclusion and
definitive sentence. But this supposition is false, infallibility in defining
coming from a divine assistance, not to infer one thing out of another
by way of connexion and consequence, but to decree and declare what
is conform to the word of God, by way of authority, binding the Church
so to believe. And so this definition is ever infallible, though all the argu-
ments the council brings by way of discourse in proof of the definition,
either before or after the same is made, be not still demonstrative.

Another objection M. Fisher hath since that time remembered, to wit,
that D. White alleged something out of Abulensis, in Matt. vii. 19,
which M. Fisher deferred to make answer unto, until he might see the
author himself, having had experience enovigh how falsely many
ministers cite authors, and how false their note-books be. Now M.
Fisher hath seen the book, and findeth the words cited by D. White to
contain two parts ; one as contrary to D. White as the other seemeth
contrary to M. Fisher; and that the whole discourse of Abulensis in
that place showeth, that even that part which seemeth contrary to M.
Fisher, doth nothing prejudice M. Fisher's cause, as will appear to any
that will duly ponder all that is there said of the authority of the Church,
in defining what books be and what be not canonical. For Abulensis
expressly declareth, " that all, and only those books are to be accounted
canonical, which the Church doth define to be canonical : " and the
reason why he did (in his private opinion) think one or two books not [p- 34.]
to be canonical, which we do now hold for canonical, is, for that the

xxx\iii {^Appendix. No. III.^

Church had not then so clearly defined them to be canonical, as it hath
done since Abulensis wrote that passage : as there are divers other
books held for canonical, even by Protestants, which have not been so
esteemed by some of the ancient Fathers, in regard the Church had not
then so clearly defined them to be canonical, as it hath done in after times.

A third objection was made by D. White about " the worship of
images," which D. White would needs affirm to be an "innovation, and
gross error of Papists :" which M. Fisher denied, and said that the
worship (meaning the same worship which is due to the prototypon)
is not given by us to the image itself. This objection D. White urged
no further the first day, but the next day of meeting he urged those
words of Bellarmine, Datur veneratio ipsi imagini. M. Fisher answered,
That Bellarmine did not mean that the same worship which was due to
the prototypon, was given to the image itself, but an inferior degree of
worship, and that also for the prototypon 's sake.

Then D. White betook himself to Suares, saying that Suares did hold
that the same worship which was given to the prototypon, was given
to the image. M. Fisher answering said. You do not understand our
authors : for, said M. Fisher, they that seem to give most, give the least
to images ; for those that say that one and the same worship is given
to the image and that which is represented by it, hold the image to be
incapable of any part of worship, and so the whole to pertain to the
thing. Whereas others who distinguish one honour to be due to the
thing, and another far inferior to be given to the image, give something,
[p. 35.] as M. Fisher explicated in the example of the respect one beareth to
the picture of his friend, which although it be not capable of that
friendly respect and affection which by looking upon it he exciteth in
himself towards his friend represented by it, yet it is capable of an
inferior degree of respect, as to be set in a more worthy and eminent
place, &c., than it should be if it were the picture of some other who
were not one's friend.

These be the chief passages of this Conference between D. W^hite
and M. Fisher, so far as hath come to my notice, who have used so
much diligence in incpiiring the truth of this matter, as I have no doubt
but for substance I have not omitted anything that may much import,
considering what the occasion and subject of the Conference was ; to
wit, that paper written by M. Fisher, in which he proved the Roman
Church, and those who agree in faith with it, to be that company of
whom every one must learn what is the truth, in all points and ques-
tions of faith necessary to salvation : which paper not being substan-
tially confuted, as it was not by anything said by D. White or any
other at that time or after, D. White is yet obliged to make a better
answer, if he mean to give satisfaction either to Catholics or Protestants
in this most important point of a perpetually visible Church, of which
all sorts must learn true, divine, infallible faith, necessary to salvation.

[Fisher's Relation of the Conferences. — The Third Conference^] xxxix

[APPENDIX. No. IV.]

A Relation of the Conference between a certain B. and M. Fisuer, [p. 37.]
defended against the said B. his Chaplain.

THE PREFACE.

Gentle Reader, — I think it needful to let thee understand, that
whereas the Chaplain of a certain B. saith, (in the preface of his Answer
to a Relation of what passed between the said B. and M. Fisher,) *' That
the Jesuit spread abroad papers of this Conference, which were full of
partiality to his cause, more full of calumny against the B. ; " the truth
is, that the Jesuit did not at all, so much as in speech, and much less [p. 38.]
in papers, publish this or either of the other two Conferences which he
had with D. White, until he was forced unto it by false reports given
out about them, to his private disgrace, and to the prejudice of the
Catholic cause. Neither then did he spread papers abroad, but only
delivered a very few copies to special friends ; and this not with intent
to calumniate either the B. or the Doctor, or to make the papers common,
but to enable his friends to answer and countermand such false reports
as they had heard or might hear. Which being so, I do not see how
the Chaplain can free himself from the faults of partiality and calumny,
whereof he doth accuse the Jesuit, unless he do (by some other proois
better than his own or his master's bare affirmation) prove that the
Jesuit spread such papers ; showing also particularly wherein he did
relate partially to his cause, and calumniously against the B. I say [p. 39.]
"relate," in regard I do not at this present promise to examine exactly
all doctrmes insinuated in the Jesuit's Relation, and impugned by the
Chaplain (as neither having sufficient leisure, nor commodity of books
requisite for such a work) ; but the Relation to have been sincere and
true, free from partiality, more free from calumny, I undertake to defend.
For which purpose I think best to set down the Jesuit's Relation (for
the most part as I find it in the Chaplain's printed copy) in o-reater
letters, and in a lesser letter the Chaplain's chiefest exceptions, and my
answer unto them.

I think the Jesuit himself, for his own particular respect, could be
content to let pass this partial and calumnious censure of his Relation,
suffering it patiently as one of the ordinary persecutions which he and
others at this day endure for the Catholic faith, and for that peculiar [P- 40.]
order of life which he professeth, under the name of the Society of Jesus ;
comforting himself with the example of Christ's Apostles, " who Acts v. 41.
rejoiced that they were thought worthy to suffer contumely for the
name of Jesus," In this respect, I say, I suppose the Jesuit himself
could be content, that nothing were said to the Chaplain's censure. But
considering the hurt which may come to the common cause by his un-
just disgrace, I have thought it necessary to defend the sincerity and

xl [App€?idi,v. No. IV.I

truth of his Relatiou, and sume of the chief heads of doctrine contained
in it, to the intent that hereby men may be moved better to trust what
he hath written heretofore, or may write hereafter, in defence of the
Catholic fiiiih and Church ; and less trust his adversaries, A^ho without
just cause do so much endeavour to calumniate his person or writings.

[p. 41.] M. Fisher's Relation of the Conference between a certain B. and

himself.

The occasion of this Conference was, &c.

RELATION OF THE CONFERENCE

BETWEEN

WILLIAM LAUD,

THEN LORD BISHOP OF ST. DAVID's, NOW LORD ARCHBISHOP OP

CANTERBURY,

AND

MR. FISHEH THE JESUIT,

BY THE COMMAND OP KING JAMES OP EVER BLESSED MEMORY,

WITH AN ANSWER TO SUCH EXCEPTIONS AS
A. C. TAKES AGAINST IT.

■^^— — ^^— — Section

JF. Tlie occasion of this conference was, ... [A. C.

2B. Tlie occasion of tliis third conference you should know
sufficiently. You were an actor in it, as well as in two
other. Whether you have related the two former truly,
appears by Doctor White, the late Reverend Lord Bishop of
Ely, his relation,'^ or exposition of them. I was present at
none, but this third; of which I here give the church an

" [The title of this work of Fisher what points of Fayth are necessary to
(so called) is : True Relations of Salvation. By A. C. / beseech you,
Sundry Conferences had between cer- Brethren, marke them tvhich cause
tain Protestant Doctours, and a divisions and offences contrary to the
Jesuite called M. Fisher, (then Doctrine you have learned, and avoyd
Prisoner in London, for the Catho- them. Rom. xvi. 17. Permissu Su-
lique Fayth :) togeather with De- periorum. mdcxxvi]
fences of the same. In which is ^ [The title of this work is : A
shewed, that there hath alwayes heene, Replie to Jesuit Fisher's answeie
since Christ, a Visible Church, and to certain questions propounded by
in it a Visible Succession of Doc- his most gratious Ma"'*' King James.
tours and Pastours, teaching the un- By Francis White, D. of Div. Deane
changed Doctrine of Fayth, left hy of Carlile, Chaplaine to his Ma''*".
Christ and his Apostles, in cdl points Hereunto is annexed a Conference of
necessary to Salvation. And that, the right R. B. of St. David's with the
Not Protestants, but only Roman Ca- same Jesuit. Gip7'ianus de Lapsis.
tholiques have had, and can show Nee Ecclesia? jungitur qui ab Evan-
such a Visible Church ; and in it such gelio separatur. London : Printed by
a (SWcesiJow of Pastours and Doctours, Adam Islip. 1624.]
of whome men may securely learne

2 Legitimate Use of individual Judgment.

CoNFEKF.NOE accouiit. But of tlils third, Avlictlier that were the cause
iVuER ■"liich you allege, I caunot tell. You say,

[A.C.p.41.] ^. [for that] it Avas observed, that iu the' second

>[a...A.C.] conference [Avith D.White,] all the speech was about

2 [nothing particular matters; [and] little or none^ about a

\ C 1

continual, infallible, A-isible Church, which was the

chief and only point in which a certain lady required

satisfaction ; as having formerly settled in her mind,

3 [any, that it Avas not for her, or any^ other unlearned
cn-d A.C.] persons, to take upon them to judge* of particulars,

without depending upon the judgment of the true
Church.

* [To wit, absolutely, and to rely upon their private judgment, so as to
adventure salvation upon it alone, or chiefly. — A. C. marg. note to p. 41.]

§ 2. 25. The opinion of that honourable person in this, was

ne\'er opened to me. And it is very fit the people should
look to the judgment of the Church, before they be too busy
1 Cor. X. 15. with particulars. But yet neither scripture, nor any good
authority, denies them some moderate use of their oavu
understanding and judgment, especially in things familiar
and CAddcnt ; aaIucIi even ordinary ' capacities may as easily

•^ [Quia enim non intelligat, quod Tho. [Aquin. Summ.] pars 1. Q[uEest].

impassibilis sit divinitas, passibilis 79. A[rt]. 9. ad 4. [p. 145.] — To what

vero sit humana fragilitas \ Cum ergo end, then, is a mind and an understand-

tam ex eo quod Deus est, quam etiam ing given a man, if he may not apply

ex illo quod homo est Christus, intcl- it to measure truth ? Et Siawio [dici-

ligatur esse permixtuaet esse sociatus. tur] airb tuv SiavoeTv, i.e. ab eo quod

Verbum enim caro factum est, et habi- consideret, ac discernat. — Damasc. 1. ii.

tavit in nolns,] quis non sine ullo ma- Fid. Orth. c. 22. Quia [ait Damasc] dis-

gistro, aut iuterpretc ex se [sese] facile ccrnit inter verum et falsum. [tK Se

cognoscat, [non illud in Christo mor- (pavracrias yli'STai 5o|o" elra rj Sidvota

tuum esse quod Deus est, .sed illud in dvaKpivaaa ttjc SiJ^ar, eire d\ri6-^s idTiv,

illo mortuum esse quod homo est?] — elre ipfvSrji, Kpivei rd d\rid4s- odev koi

Novat. de Trin. c. 23. — [c. xx. p. 719. Stdvota Xeyerai dndroO Siavouu, itotSta-

C. ad calcem Op. Tertull.] (et loquitur xpiVeii/. — S. Joann. Damascen. de Fid.

[sc. Novatianu.s] de mysterio Passionis Orthodox, lib. ii. cap. 22. Op., torn. i.

Christi.) — Dijudicare est mcnsurare, p. 187. B. ed. Lequien. Pari.s. 1712.]

etc. Unde et mens dicitur a metiendo. And A. C. himself, p. 41, [v. supra,]

[^4. Prffiterca, Damascen. dicit quod denies notalljudgmenttoprivatemen;

ex imaginatione fit opinio, deinde but says, " they are not so to rely

mens dijudicans opinionem sive vera absolutely upon their private judg-

sit, sive falsa, dijudicat veritatcm. ment, as to adventure salvation upon

Unde et mens dicitur a metiendo. De it alone, or chiefly ;" which no man

quibus igitur judicatum est jam et de- will deny.

lerminatum, vere dicitur intellectus.]

Point at issue respecting the InfalUbiUty of the Church. 3

understand, as read. And therefore some particulars a Sections
Christian may judge without depending. '

5f. This lady, therefore, having heard it granted in [A.C.p.42.]
the first conference, That there must be a con-
tinual, visible company ever since Christ, teaching

unchanged doctrine in all fundamental points,' that ' [points

fundament-
is, [in all] points necessary to salvation, desired toal...A.C.]

hear this confirmed, and proof brought [to show]

which was that continual, infallible,* Adsible Church,

in which one may, and out of which one cannot,

attain salvation. And, therefore, ha\ing appointed

a time of meeting between^ a [certain] 2B. and me,^ « [betwixt

A.C.I
and thereupon having sent for the 2B. and me, before ^ [myself. . .

A.C.I
the %. came, the lady, and a friend of hers, came

first to the room where I was, and debated before me

the aforesaid question, and not doubting of the first

part, to wit. That there must be a continual \dsible

Church, as they had heard granted by D. White,

and* L. K . [&c.] .... 4 ^^^^^

caret A.C.]

* [The Chaplain noting the word infcdlihle to be sometimes put in, some-
times left out, taxeth M. Fisher of speaking distractedly. But I note herein,
that M. Fisher spake most advisedly, and with precise care of punctual truth :
for when he speaketh of what was observed, or desired by the lady, he puttcth
in the word infallible, because he knew it was an infallible Church which she
sought to rely upon. But when he speaketji of what D. White or L. K. granted,
he leaveth it out, because they did not mention the word infallible, but only
granted a visible Church in all ages, teaching unchanged doctrine, in all matters
necessary to salvation. — A. C. marg. note to p. 42.]

I.— 2B. What D. White and L. K. granted, I heard not : § 3.
but I think, both granted a continual and a visible Church ;
neither of them an infallible, at least in your sense. And
yourself, in this relation, speak distractedly; for, in these
few lines, from the beginning hither, twice you add "infal-
lible" between "continual" and " visible," and twice you leave
it out. But this concerns D. W., and he hath answered it.

II. — Here A. C. steps in, and says, " The Jesuit did not
speak distractedly, but most advisedly. For," saith he, AC. p. 42.
" where he relates what D. White or L. K. granted, he [marg-.not.]

■1' Can the Church of Rome err in the Faith ?

I'oNPERKNCE leaves out the word ' infallible/ because tliey granted it not ;
Fisher, ^ut where he speaks of the lady, there he adds it, because
the Jesuit knew it was an infallible Church which she sought
to rely upon." How far the Catholic Militant Chui'ch of
Christ is infallilde, is no dispute for this place, though you
shall find it after. But sure the Jesuit did not speak most
advisedly, nor A. C. neither, nor the lady herself, if she said
she desired to rely upon an infallible Chm-ch. For an infal-
lible ChiuTh denotes a particular Chm^ch, in that it is set
in opposition to some other particular Church, that is not
infallible. Now I, for my part, do not know what that lady
desired to rely upon. This I know : if she desired such a
particular Church, neither this Jesuit, nor any other, is
able to show it her ; no, not Bellarmine himself, though of
very great ability to make good any truth, which he under-
takes for the Chui'ch of Kome. But no strength can uphold
an error against truth,'i where truth hath an able defendant.
Now, where Bellarmine sets himself pm-posely to make this
good, that " The particular Church of Rome cannot err in
matter of faith," ^ out of which it follows, that there may be
found a particular infalhble Chui'ch, you shall see what he
is able to perform.

Ill- — 1- First, then, after he hath distinguished, to
express his meaning, in what sense the particular Church
of Home cannot err in things which are tie fide, of the faith;
he tells us, this firmitude is, because the See Apostohc is
fixed there. "And this," he saith, "is most true."^ And for
proof of it, he brings three Fathers to justify it.

•■ [Non enim bonum hominis est vandum hoc loco, in alio sensu accipi

hominem vincero; seel bonum est debcrefirmitatemEcclesiEe Romanfein

honiiui ut cum Veritas vincat volcn- fide, et in alio firmitatem pontificis:

tern; quia malum est homini ut cum nam pontifex uon potest errare errore

Veritas vincat invitum. Nam ipsa] judiciali : idcst, dum judicatet definit

vincat necesse est, sive negantem, sive qurestionemfidei. At Ecclesia Romaua

confitentem.— S. Augustin. Ei)ist. 174. id est, populus el clorus Romanus, noii

[238. ad Pasccntium, sect. 29. Op., potest errare errore personali. ita ut

torn. 11. col. 863. A. ed. Benedict.]— omnes omnino errent, et nulli sint in

Occultan potest ad tcmpus verita.s, Romana Ecclesia fidelcs, pontifiei ad-

yinci non potest.— S. Aug. [Enarr ] hserentes. Tametsi enim unusquisque

in Psal. 1x1. [sect. 16. Op., torn. iv. scorsim errare potest, tamen id fieri

par. 1. col. 599. G. ed. Benedict.] non potest, ut omnes errent simul et

= Lib. IV. De Rom. Pont. c. 4. tota Romana Ecclesia apostatica effi-

sect. 1. [Secun.la Propo.sitio: Nun ciatur. — Bellariiiiu. Op., torn i. col

solum Pontifex Romanu.s] non potest 811, 812. ed. Colon. 1620.]
errare in fide, sed neque Romana par- f Ibid. sect. 2. iob.rerVandum est

ticularis Ecclesia. [Est autcm obser- prseterea, Ecclesiam Romanam non

S. Cyprian's Testimony examined. 5

(1.) The first; S, Cyprian^ t^' whose words are^ -'That the Section

Romans are such^ as to whom perjidia cannot have access."
NoW; perjidia can hardly stand for error in faith^ or for mis-
beUef j but it properly signifies malicious falsehood in matter
of trust and action ; not error in faith, but in fact, against
the discipHne and government of the Chui'ch. And why
may it not here have this meaning in S. Cyprian ?

IV. — For the story there '' it is this. In the year 255,
there was a council in Carthage, in the cause of two schis-
matics, Felicissimus and Novatian, about restoring of them
to the communion of the Church which had lapsed, in time
of danger, from Christianity to idolatry. Felicissimus would
admit all, even without penance ; and Novatian would admit
none, no, not after penance. The Fathers, forty-two in
number, went, as the truth led them, between both extremes.
To this council came Privatus, a known heretic, but was not
admitted, because he was formerly excommunicated, and
often condemned. Hereupon he gathers his accomplices
together, and chooses one Fortunatus, (who was formerly
condemned, as Avell as himself,) Bishop of Carthage, and set
him up against S. Cyprian. This done, Felicissimus and his
fellows haste to Rome with letters testimonial from their
own party, and pretend that twenty-five bishops concurred
with them ; and their desire was to be received into the
communion of the Roman Church, and to have their new
bishop acknowledged. Cornelius, then pope, though their
haste had now prevented S. Cyprian^s letters, having for-
merly heard from him both of them and their schism in
Africa, would neither hear them nor receive their letters.
They grew insolent and furious, (the ordinary way that

posse errare mode explicato, adhuc schismaticis et profanis literas ferre ;]

dupliciter posse intelligi. Uno modo, nee cogitare eos esse Romanos [quorum

ut non possit errare, persistente Eomje fides apostolo prsedicante (Horn, i.) lau-

apostolica sede : secus autem, si sedes data est,] ad quos perfidia habere uoa

aufei-retur. Altero modo, ut simpli- possit accessum. — S. Cypr. 1. i. Ep. 3.

citer non possit errare, vel deficere, [Ep. Iv. ad Cornelium de Fortunato et

quia nee sedes Apostolica possit un- Felicissimo, Op., p. 86. ed. Benedict.]

quam Koma alio transferri. Et qui- i* Bin. Concil. tom. i. p. 152. edit.

dem secundum priorem sensum pro- Paris. 1636. [Concil. Roman, ii. —

positio nostra est verissima.] Concil. ed. Labb. et Cossart., tom. i.

^ [Post ista adhuc insuper pseudo- col. 715, A. B. C] Baron. Annal. an.

episcopo sibi ab lisereticis constitute,] 253, [num. 109,] 254, [num. 32 — 107,]

navigare audent, [et] ad Petri Cathe- 255, [num. 1 — 30, tom. ii. ed. Romae,

dram atque ad Ecclesiam principalem, 1594.]
funde unitas sacerdotal is exorta est. a

III.

G S. Cyprian, as alleged for the Infallibility of Rome,

CoNFEKENCE schismatics take). Upon this, Cornelius writes to S.
F)[SHER Cyprian; and S. Cyprian, in this epistle, gives Cornelius

thanks for refusing these African fugitives, declares their

schism and wickedness at large, and encourages him, and all
bishops, to maintain the ecclesiastical discipline and cen-
sures against any, the boldest, threatenings of wicked schis-
matics. This is the story; and in this is the passage here
urged by Bellarmine. Now I would fain know why perfidia,
all circumstances considered, may not stand here in its
proper sense, for cunning and perfidious dealing, which these
men, having practised at Carthage, thought now to obtrude
upon the Bishop of Rome also, but that he was wary enough
not to be overreached by busy schismatics ?

V. — (2.) Secondly, let it be granted that perfidia doth
signify here, error in faith and doctrine. For I will not
deny but that among the African writers, and especially
S. Cyprian, it is sometimes so used; and therefore here,
perhaps. But then this privilege, of not erring danger-
ously in the faith, was not made over absolutely to the
liomans, that are such by birth and dwelling only ; but to
the Romans, qua tales, as they were such as those first
Avere, " whose faith was famous through the world," and as
long as they continued such ; which, at that time, it seems
they did. And so S. Cyprian's words seem to import, eos
esse Romanos, that the Romans then, under Pope Cornelius,
Rom. i. 8. were such as the apostle spake of, and therefore to whom,
at that time, (or any time, they still remaining such,) per-
fidious misbelief could not be welcome ; or rather, indeed,
perfidious misbelievers or schismatics could not be welcome.
For this very phrase, perfidia non potest habere accessum,
directs us to understand the word in a concrete sense :
"perfidiousness could not get access ;" that is, such perfidious
persons, excommunicated out of other Churches, were not
likely to get access at Rome, or to find admittance into their
communion. It is but a metonymy of speech, the adjunct
for the subject; a thing very usual even in elegant 'authors,

• Ego tibi islam Catilin. Orat. ii. sect. 25. (al. 11.)]—

Scelestam,sce/?«.s,linguamabsciudam latuit plebeio tcctus amictu

— Plant. Am))hit. [act. ii. sc. 1. v. 6.] — Omnis hono.t : nullos comitata est

Ex hac cnim parte pudor pugnat, purpura /«,?ce.9.

illinc litlvdantia, &c.~Cic. [in L. —Lucan. [de Bell. Civil.] lib. ii. [18.]

examined, and explained. /

and much more in later times, as in S. Cyprian^ s, wlien tlie Section
Latin language was grown rougher. Now, if it be thus
understood, I say, in the concrete, then it is plain, that
S. Cyprian did not intend by these words to exempt the
Romans from possibility of error, but to brand his adversa-
ries with a title due to their merit, calling them perfidious,
that is, such as had betrayed or perverted the faith. Neither
can we lose by this construction, as will appear at after.

VI. — (3.) But thirdly, when all is done, what if it be no
more than a rhetorical excess of speech ; perjidia non potest,
for non facile potest ; it "cannot," that is, "it cannot easily ?"
Or what if S. Cyprian do but laudando pracipere, by com-
mending '^ them to be such, instruct them that such indeed
they ought to be, to whom perfidiousness should not get
access ? Men are very bountiful of their compliments some-
times. Synesius,^ writing to Theophilus of Alexandria,
begins thus : 'Eyco koX ^ovKojiai, koX dvdjKi] /xot Oela,
[vo/jiov Tjjelcrdai tovto o to dv eKeiva 6 6p6vo<i ^ecTTr/cr?;']
" I both will, and a di\ane necessity lies upon me, to esteem it
a law, whatsoever that throne," (meaning his of Alexandria,)
" shall determine." Nay, the word is Oea-TTi^etv, and that sig-
nifies to determine like an oracle, or as in God's stead. Now,
I hope you will say, this is not to be taken dogmatically ; it
is but the epistler's courtesy only. And why not the like
here ? For the haste which these schismatics made to
Rome prevented S. Cyprian's letters; yet Cornelius, very
careful of both the truth and peace of the Church, would
neither hear them, nor receive their letters, till "' he had
written to S. Cyprian. Now this epistle is S. Cyprian's
answer to Cornelius, in which he informs him of the whole
truth; and withal gives him thanks for refusing to hear these
African fugitives. In which fair way of returning his thanks,
if he make an honourable mention of the Romans and their

'' Nee cogitare eos esse Romanos, frater [carissime, quas per Saturum

quorum fides apostolo praedicante, &c. fratrem nostrum acolythum misisti, et

[v. supra, p. 5, note &.] dilectionis fraternae et ecclesiasticEe

' Epist. 67. [ad Theophilum Alex- disciplinge et sacerdotalis censuras satis

andr. Synesii Episcop. Cyrenens. Op., plenas. — S. Cyprian. Epist. Iv. ad Cor-

p. 208. A. (ad calcem Op., S. Cyril, nelium, Op., p. 79. ed. Benedict.] And

Hierosol.) ed. Dionys. Petav. Paris, after : Sed enim lecta alia tua epistola,

1640.] frater, &c.— S. Cypr. lib. i. Epist. 3.

" For so S. Cyprian begins his epis- [Epist. Iv. ad Cornelium, Op., p. 80.]
tie to Cornelius. Legi litcras tuas,

8 S. Cyprian alleged against the Infallibility of Rome.

Conference faith_, with a little dash of rhetoric, even to a non potest for a
FisuER. ^^^^^ facile j)otest, it is no great wonder.

VII. — But, take which answer you will of the three, this

is plain, that S. Cyprian had no meaning to assert the
nnerriug infallibility of either Pope or Church of Rome.
For this is more than manifest by the contestation which
after happened between S. Cyprian and Pope Stephen, about
the rebaptization of those that were baptized by heretics;
for he saith*^ expressly, that ^'Pope Stephen did then not only
maintain an error, but the very cause of heretics, and that
against Christians and the very Church of God." And after
this he chargeth him with obstinacy and presumption." I
hope this is plain enough to show, that S. Cyprian had no
great opinion of the Roman infallibihty : or if he had it
when he writ to Cornehus, certainly he had changed it when
he wrote against Stephen. But I think it was no change ; and
that, Avhen he wrote to Cornelius, it was rhetoric, and no more.
VIII. — Now, if any man shall say, that, in this point of
rebaptization, S. Cyprian himself was in the wrong opinion,
and Pope Stephen in the right, I easily grant that; but yet
that error of his takes not off his judgment, what he thought
of the Papal or Roman infallibility in those times. For
though afterwards p S. Cyprian's opinion was condemned in
a council at Rome under Cornehus, and after that by Pope

" [Cyprianus Pompeio fratri salu- tendat Alios Deo nasci ? — Ibid. p. 140.]

tem. Quanquam plene ea qute de liEere- And it would be marked by the

ticis baptizandis dicenda sunt com- Jesuit and his A. C, that still it ia

plexi Bumus in Epistolis, qiiarum ad Stephani fratris nostri, and not cain-

te oxeuipla Irausmisimus, fraier caris- tits, or siunmi pa»torix no.itri.
sime, tamcn quia desiderasti in noti- p Caranza in Concil. Carthag. sub

tiam tuam perfcrri quid mihi ad li- Cornel, fine. [Cyprianus Carthaginen-

teras nostras] Stephanus frater noster sis dixit : Ceuseo secundum Evangeli-

[rescripserit, misi tibi rescripti ejus cam et Apostolicam contestationem,

txemplum : quo lecto, magis ac magis adversaries Christi et Antichrislos ap-

ejus enorem denotabis, qui] hrereti- pellatos, quandoadEcclesiam vcnerint,

coi-um causam contra Christianos et unico Ecclesire baptismo baptizandos

contra ccclesiam Dei asserere conatur. esse, ut possint fieri de adversariis

— S. Cypr. ad Pompeium contra Epist. amici, et de Antichristis Christiani.

Steph. edit, per Erasmum, Basil. p. 327. Pievocala sunt ha;c per Cornelium in

[Epist. Ixxiv. p. 138. Op., ed. lienedict.] sacerdotali concilio IJomte, et per Ste-

° [Cum vero nulla omnino hajresis, phanum Papam. — Caranzse Summ.

sed ueque aliquud schisma habere Concil. p. 38. ed. Duaci, 1679. This

Balutaris baptisuii sanctificationem Council, (the third of those held at

foris po.s.-;it, cur in tantuni] Stephani Carthage and not received by the

fratris nostri obstinatio dura [prorupit. Church,) is of the date a. u. 258. (al.

ut etiam dc Marcionis baptismo, item 2.">6,) during the pont ficate of Pope

Valentini et Apclletis, et caeterorum S. Stephen"]., not S. Cornelius. — Cf.

bla.sphemautium in Deum patrem, con- Concil., tom i. col 706. C]

S. Jerome's Testimony examined. 9

Stcplien^ and after both in the first Council of Carthage,i Section

yet no one word is there in that council which mentions this ,
as an error, that he thought Pope Stephen might err in the
faithj while he proclaimed he did so. In wliich_, though the
particular censure which he passed on Pope Stephen was
erroneous, for Stephen erred not in that, yet the general
which results from it, namely, tliat for all his being in the
popedom, he might err, is most true.

IX. — 2. The second Father which Bellarmine cites, is
S. Jerome -J his words are : "The Roman faith commended
by the apostle, admits not such prcBstigias, ' deceits and
delusions,^ into it, though an angel shouhl preach it otherwise
than it was preached at first, (and) being armed and fenced
by S. Paul's authority, cannot be changed.'' Where, first, I
will not doubt but that S. Jerome speaks here of the faith ;
for the prcestigia here mentioned are afterwards more plainly
expressed : for he tells us after,^ " That the Bishop of Rome
had sent letters into the East, and charged heresy upon
Ruffinus." And farther, "that Origen's books irepl ap-^wv
were translated by him, and delivered to the simple people
of the Church of Rome, that by his means they might lose
the verity of the faith, which they had learned from the
apostle." Therefore the pr<£stiyi(E before mentioned, were the

1 Can. 1. [This council, held during alienum a sincera fide et catholica

thepontificateof Pope S.Julius I. — not disciplina. — Concil., torn. ii. col. 714.

S. Sylvester I., as Caranza incorrectly A. B.]

states — by Gratus, Archbishop of Car- "■ Attamen scito Romanam fidem,

thage, A.D. 348, was not strictly the Apostolica voce laudatam, istiusmodi

first Council of Carthage, for several prajstigias non recipere, etiam si

had been held thereunder S Cyprian; Ange'.us aliter annunciet, quani semel

but it is styled the first Council of prsedicatum est, Pauli auctoritate

Carthage, " quia inter orthodoxa et ap- munitam non posse mutari. — S.

probata Concilia Carthagine habita, Hieron. lib. iii. Apol. contra Euffi-

ea quae etiamnum extant, primum sit num, torn. ii. fol. 84. K. ed. Paris 1534.

et antiquissinium." (Bin. not. Concil., [adv. Rufin. lib. iii. Oj)., torn. iv. par.

torn. ii. col. 719.) Can. 1. — Ergo, si ii. col. 449. ed. Benedict.] Peradven-

vol)is placet, consideremus primum ture it is here to be read et jam si,

titulum rebaptizationis. Unde sancti- for so the place is more i^lain, and

tatem vestram postulo, ut mentis more strong; but the answer is the

vestrte placita producatis ad descen- same.

dentem in aquam, et interrogatnm in ^ Deinde, ut epistolas contra te ad

Trinitate secundum evangelii fidem et Orientem mitteret, et cauterium tibi

apostolorum doctrinam, et confessum hrereseos, [dum nescis,] inureret ; di-

bonam conscientiam inDeum,de resur- ceretque libros Origenis Tre/jl apxcHv, a

rectione Jesu Christi, si liceat itcrum te translates, et simplici llomanas

interrogari in eadem fide, et in aqua EcclesiaB plcbi traditos, ut fidei veri-

iterum intingi. Universi Episcopi tatem quam ab Apostolo didicerant,

dixerunt: Absit, absit. lUicitas esse per te perderent. — S. Hieron. ibid. fol.

saucimus i-ebaptizationcs, et satis es.se 85. K. [Ibid. col. 457.]

III.

10 *Sf. Jerome as alleged for the InfalUbility of Rome.

Conference cunning illusions of Ruffinus, putting Origen's book under
fTsher *^^^ martyr Parapliilus' name, that so he might bring in

heresy the more cunningly under a name of credit, and the

more easily pervert the people^s faith. So, of the faith
he speaks. And secondly, I shall as easily confess that
S. Jerome's speech is most true, but I cannot admit the
Cardinars sense of it : for he imposes upon the word fides.
For by Romana fides, the Roman faith, he will understand
the particular Church of Rome ; which is as much as to
say, Romanos fideles, the faithful of that Church ; and that
no wily delusions, or cozenage in matter of faith, can be
imposed upon them. Now, hereupon I return to that of
S. Cyprian : if fides Romana must signify fideles Romanos,
why may not perfidia before signify perfidos ? especially since
these two words are commonly used by these writers, as
terms opposite;* and therefore, by the law of opposition,
may interpret each other proportionably. So with these
great masters — with whom it is almost grown to be, quod
volumus, rectum est, what we please, shall be the author's
meaning — perfidia must signify absolutely error in faith, or
misbelief; but fides must relate to the persons, and signify

' [Graviter ct dolenter motus sum, profani, divina terreni, sancta sacri-

fratres carissimi, quod cognoverim legi.] — Ilnd. [p. 111.] — [Quanquam

Fortunatianum quondam apud vos etsi aliquis ex talibus fuerit appre-

episcopum post gravem lapsum ruinae hensus, non est quod sibi quasi in

sua3 pro iutegro nunc agere velle et confessione nominis blandiatur, cum

episcopatum sibi vindicare coepisse. constat, si occisi ejusmodi extra cccle-

Quae res contristavit me, primo siam fuerint, fidei coronam non esse,

propter ipsum, qui miser, vel diaboli sed pcenam potius esse perfidise. — S.

tenebris in totum exccecatus, vol quo- Cyprian. Epist. Ivii. ad Cornelium, Op.,

runilam sacrilcga persuasione decep- p. 95. — Nulla societas fidei et perfidiae

tus, cum debeat satisfacere et ad potest esse. — S. Cyprian. Epist. Iv. ad

Dominum exorandum diebus ac nocti- Cornelium, Op., p. 89.] — Ex ovibus

bus lacrymiset orationibus et precibus subito facti sunt ^iilpes, ex fidelibus

incumberc, audet sibi adhuc saccrdo- perfidi.— S. Optatus, lib.vii. [lib.vi. c. 8.

tium, quod prodidit, vindicare, quasi Do Schism. Donatist. Op., p. 100. ed.

post aras diaboli accedere ad altare Dupin. 1700.]— [Quieris a me, Utrum

Dei fas sit, aut non majorem in se parentes baptizatis parvulis suis no-

iram ct indignationem Domini in ceant, cum eos deemoniorum sacrificiis

die judicii provocet,] qui cum fidei sanare conantur. Et si non noccnt],

[et virtutis] dux [fratribus] esse non quomodo eis prosit cum baptizantur

potuerit, pcrfidite [et audacite et parentum fides, ([uorum eis non po-

teraeritatis magister] existat. — S. test obesse perfidia ? — S. Aug. Epist.

Cyprian, lib. i. Epist. 7. [Epist. Ixiv. xxiii. [xcviii. Bonifacium, Op., torn,

ad Epictetum, pp. 110,111.]— [Undeet ii. col. 263. F. ed. Benedict.] —

ipsam venisse perspicimus et crcdi- Quanto [ergo] potius fides aliena po-

mus de Dei exploratione ccnsuram, test consulcre parvulo,cui sua perfidia

ne apud altare consistere et contrec- [non potest iniputari?] — S. Aug. lib.

tare ulterius pcrscvcrarent pudorem iii. do Jjib. Arb. c. 23. [c. 67. Op.,

incesti,] fidcm perfidi, [religionem torn. i. col. 637. F. cd. Benedict.]

S. Jerome really supports the opposite vieiv. 11

the faithful of the Roman Church. And now I conceive my Skction

III
answer will proceed with a great deal of reason. For Romana '___

fides, "the Roman faith/^ as it was commended by the apostle,

of which S. Jerome speaks, is one thing, and the particular

Roman Church, of which the Cardinal speaks, is another.

The faith indeed admits not prcestigias, wily delusions, into

it; if it did, it could not be "the whole and undefiled faith ^'

of Christ, which they learned from the apostle ; and which is

so fenced by apostolical authority as that it cannot be

changed, though an angel should preach the contrary. But

the particular Church of Rome hath admitted prcestigias,

divers crafty conveyances, into the faith, and is not fenced

as the faith itself is : and therefore, though an angel cannot

contrary that, yet the bad angel hath soAved tares in this.

By which means Romana fides, though it be now the same

it was for the words of the Creed, yet it is not the same for

the sense of it, nor for the super and praeter structures

built upon it, or joined unto it. So the Roman faith, that

is, the faith which S. Paul taught the Romans, and after

commended in them, was all one with the Catholic faith of

Christ. For S. Paul taught no other than that one ; and this

one can never be changed in or from itself by angel or

devil. But in men's hearts it may receive a change ; and in

particular churches it may receive a change ; and in the

particular Church of Rome it hath received a change. And

ye see, S. Jerome himself confesses, that the Pope himself

was afi'aid ne perderent^ lest by this art of Ruffinus, " the

people might lose the verity of the faith." Now that which

can be lost, can be changed; for usually habits begin to

alter, before they be quite lost. And that which may be lost

among the people, may be lost among the bishops, and the

rest of the clergy too, if they look not to it ; as it seems they

after did not at Rome, though then they did. Nay, at this

time the whole Roman Church was in danger enough to

swallow Origen's book, and all the errors in it, coming under

the name of Pamphilus ; and so S. Jerome himself expressly,

and close upon the place cited by Bellarmine. For he

desires Rufl&nus to "change the title of the book,""^ that error

" Ne fidei veritatem quam ab Apos- ^ [Ergo frater, sive a te falsatus est
tolo didiccrant, per te pcrderent. — [S. liber, ut multi putant ; sive ab altero,
Kicron.] ut sup. [p. 9. note']. ut forsitau persuadere couaberis, et

12 S. Greg. Nazianzen alleged against the InfalUbility of Rome.

Conference may not be spread under the specious name of Pampliilus,
Fisher " ^^^ ^^ ^^ ^^'^^ from danger tlie Roman simplicity.'' Where,
by the way, Roman unerring power now challenged, and
Roman simplicity then feared, agree not very well together.

X. — 3. The third Father alleged by Bellarmine, is S.
Gregory Nazianzen.y And his Avords are, " That ancient
Rome from of old hath the right faith, and always holds it,
as becomes the city which is governess over the whole world,
to have an entu-e faith in and concerning God.'^ Now
certainly it became that city very well, to keep the faith
sound and entire. And having the government of a great
part of the world then in her power, it became her so much
the more, as her example thereby was the greater. And in
S. Gregory Nazianzen's time, Rome did certainly hold both
rectam et integram fidem, the right and the whole entire
faith of Christ. But there is nor promise nor prophecy in
S. Gregory, that Rome shall ever so do. For his words are

Idecei sem- plain ; semper decet, " it always becomes " that great city to

per, it be- j^ave, and to hold too, inteqram Mem, "the entu*e faith." But

comes that ' . .

great city at the other semper, it is retinet^ tliat city from of old "holds"

have^^ ^ ^^'^ right faith yet ; but he saith not retineh'it semper, that the

Editt. 1663 city of Rome " shall retain it ever," no more than it shall

and 1686.] '' ^ ^x. r xi i i ^t •. . i

ever retain tne empire oi the world. JNow it must be

assured that it shall ever hold the entire faith of Christ,

before we can be assured that that particular Church can

never err, or be infallible.

XI. — Besides these, the Cardinal names ^ Cyrillus and

temcre credidisti, h<eretici hominia Kaeius SiKaiof ttji/ TrpoeSfiov tuv o\wv,

o-u;'T07;ua esse martyris,] inula titulmn, "OKqv (Tipovauif T-qv 0toD a-viJ.cj)wviav

et llomanam siniplicitateiu tun to peri- 'H 5' ^i/TonpicrOei' opdonous, vvv 8' ovKiTt.

culo libera — [S. Hieron.] Ibid. fol. 84. k. t.\. 562 — 573, Op., lom. ii. p. 704.

K. [col. 449.] cd. Paris. 1840.]

y Yetus lloma ab antiquis tempo- '■ The words iu the Greek are, rj

ribus habet rectam fidcm, et semper fxiv ■rjf 4k nKeiofos, nal vvu er' eanv

cam retinet, sieut dccet urbcm, qure evSpoixos. Iltec quidem fuit diu, et

toti orbi prajsidet, semper de Deo nunc adhuc est rcetigrada : ea-Ttv, est ,-

iiitcgram fidcm habere. — Greg. Xaz. iu so S. Gregory says, but of an tarai, or a

Carmine de Vita Sua, ante medium, rdimhit, he says nothing.^
p. !». ed. Paris. 1609. " [Nam auetores citati, ut Lucius et

[Ai>u) jxlv ov hiZcoKiv ijAiovs <pv<rts, Felix papas et martyres ; Agatlio et Ni-

Ai(raa^ S( 'Poi/j.as, ttjs oAtjs o(Kovfxei/ris colans papa> ctcont'essores ; itcmCyril-

haixirrrjpas, apx°-^v re koI viov Kparos, lus et liufliuus, noil solum pontificem,

TicTov hiatpipovTas d\KriKiiiv, oaov sedetiain Eeclesiam Romaiiam, asserue-

TTj^/xef TTpoAc^.uTreix'jjAioi', Ti)i/5' e'cTTr/pos" runt noil posse errare. — Bellarmin. de

KaAAfi 5^ (caAAos avTaviaxi^" (Tv^vyus.

TuLToii' 5* nlarts, t) /uev ^i/ e'/c TrXeiovos, ' [ . . . . uor is semjyer in the text

Kal vvu tr iarif eijSpofios, rrji) iariripav of Naisianzcn. — Editt. 1663 and

Tlaaav Seov(Ta tw aairrip'Kp Koyp, 1686.]

S. Cyril of Alex, alleged against the Infallihility of Rome. 13

Ruffinus^ but he neither tells us where^ nor cites their words. Section
Yet I think I have found the most pregnant place in S. "

Cyril,'' and that makes clearly against him. For I find
expressly these three things : First, that the Church is
inexpugnable, and that " the gates of hell shall never prevail
against it," but that it shall in perpetuum manere, " remain for
ever." And this all Protestants grant. But this, that it
shall not fall awav, doth not secure it from all kinds of error.
Secondly, Bellarmine quotes S. Cyril for the particular
Roman Church; and S. Cyril speaks not of the Roman at
all, but of the Church of Christ, that is, the Catholic Church.
Thirdly, that the foundation and firmness, which the Church
of Christ hath, is placed not in, or upon, the person, "^ much
less the successor, of S. Peter; but upon the faith,*^ which by
God's Spirit in him, he so firmly possessed : which is the
common received opinion both of the ancient Fathers and
the Protestants. "Upon this rock," that is, upon this faith, S. Matt.
" will I build ray Church." So here is all the good he ^^^" '
hath gotten by S. Cyril, unless he can cite some other place
of S. Cyril, which T believe he cannot.

XII. — And for Ruflfinus, the place which Bellarmine aims
at, is in his Exposition upon the Creed ; and is quoted in

Eom. Pontif. lib. iv. c. 4. Op., torn. i. novum nomen propter novam con-
col. 812. B.] fessionem. Et diciuir Petrus, qui

^ Petram opinor per agnomina- Symon vocabatur.] Et super hanc

tionem nihil aliud, quam inconcusyam petram) hoc est, fidei hujusfirmitatem

etfirmissimam discipuli fidem vocavit. et fundamentum. Vel, super hanc

In qua, Ecclesia Ghristi ita fundata et petram quam confessus es, hoc est,

firmata esset, ut non laberetur, ct esset super Meipsum ipsum lapidem angula-

inexpugnabilis inferorum portis, in rem, [montem altissimum de quo ait

perpetuum manens. — S. Cyril. Alex. apostolus, Fundamentum aliud nemo

Dial, de Trin. lib. iv p. 278. Paris. potest ponere, prfeter id quod positum

an. 1604. [Tlerpav olfiui ira.pm'vixo>s, est, quod est Christus Jesus In

erepop ovotv ^ tt)*/ dKaTdaeiaruv Kul hac igitur fide, quod Jesu3 est

eSpaioTcirov tov fxadriTov ■k'kttiv diro- Christus, filius Dei vivi, fundatur

KaKoiu, 4(p' ^ ical dSiavToirws ep-^petarai atque salvatur ecclesia.] — Dion[ysii]

T6 Kol Sianenriysu rt ^KKh-qaia XpicTTov, Carthus[iaui in quatuor Evangelia

Koi avTais dvd\<A)Tos ra7s q.^ou TryAais Enarraiiones, art. xxix.] in S. Matth.

ejVafl Sta/xevovaa. — De Sancta Trini- xvi. 18. [fol. Iv. C. ed. Paris. 1542.

tate. Dialog, iv. Op., torn. v. pp. 507. — Dionysius a Rickel, cognomento de

E 508. A. ed. Paris. 1638.] Leewis, natione Belga doctor

•^ mt ego dico tibi) hoc est, tuse con- ecstaticus dictus .... anno fetalis sure

fessioni, qua mihi dixisti, Tu es 21, Carthusiauis nomen dcdit .... cla-

Christus, [vicissitudinem et prfemium ruit anno 1450, Cardiualis Cusani ami-

reddo, et dico, dicendoque facio, quo- cus vir in diviuis scripturis, ait

niam mcum dixisse fccisse est. Quia Trithemius, studiosissimus .... ingc-

tu es Petrus, id est, principalis ; et nio sul)tilis, sermoue scholasticus. —

in fide firmus. Vel Petrus, id est, Henr. Wharton, sub voc. in append,

verae petr^, qui es Christi dignus ad Cavei Ilistor. Literar. Siec. Synod,

confessor. Sic ergo imponitur ei torn. ii. (app.) p 166.]

14 Riiffinus alleged against the InfallihiUty of Rome.

Conference part tlie chapter before.*^ But when all his words shall be
Pj^^jjj,^ laid together, they will make no more for Bcllarmiue and
his cause, than the former places have done. Ruffinus'
words then run thus -.^ "Before I come to the words of the
Creed, this I think fit to warn you of: — That in divers
Churches some tilings are found added to the words (of the
Creed). But in the Church of the city of Rome, this is not
found done : and as I think, it is for that no heresy did
take its rise or beginning there ; and for that the old custom
is there observed, namely, that they which are to receive the
grace of baptism do publicly repeat the Creed in the hearing
of the people, who would not admit such additions. But in
other places, as far as I can understand, by reason of some
heretics, some things were added, but such as were to ex-
clude the sense of their novel doctrine." Now these words
make little for Bellarmine, who cites them, and much against
Rufi&nus that uttered them. They make little for Bellarmine.
First, because, suppose Ruffinus' speech to be true, yet
this will never follow. In Ruffinus^ time, no heresy had
taken its beginning at Rome ; therefore no heresy hath had
rooting there so many hundred years since. Secondly,
Bellarmine takes upon him there to prove, that the particular
Church of Rome cannot err. Now neither can this be con-
cluded out of Ruffinus^ words : First, because, as I said
before, to argue from non sumpsit to ergo sumere non potest,
— no heresy hath yet begun there, therefore none can begin
there, or spring thence, — is an argument drawn ab actu ad

■^ Bellar. lil). iv. de Rom. Pont. cap. [quod ego] pro eo [esse] arbitror,
iii. sect, penult. [In primis constat, quod neque hasresis uUa illic sumpsit
omnes patriarcliales sedes defecisse a exordium, et mos ibi servatur anti-
fide : ita ut htcretici, et hasresim pro- quus, eos qui gratiam bapti.^^mi sus-
fitentes ac docentes, in illis sederint, cepturi sunt, publico, id est, fidelium
excepta Romana sede .... Nihil tale populo audiente, symbolum reddere,
de Romana Ecclesia potest ostendi : et utique adjectionem unius saltern
ex quo apparet, revera pro ipsa sermonis, eorum qui prreeesserunt in
Dominum orasse, ne deficeret fides fide non adraittit auditus. In cteteris
ejus. Undo Ruffinus in expositione autcm locis, quantum intelligi datur,
Symboli : In Ecclesia, inquit, urbis propter nonnuUos hajrcticos addita
Eomse, neque boBresis ulla sumpsit quaedam videntur, per qufc novellje
exordium, et mos ibi servatur anti- doctrinaa sensus crcderetur cxcludi,
quus.— Op., torn. i. col. 811. C] &c.— Ruffin. in Exposit. Symbol, (ut

•^ Illud non importune commonen- habetur inter Opera S. Cypriani,)

dum puto, quod in diversis ecclesiis Praafat. Expos. [Opusc. vulgo S. Cypr.

aliqua in his verbis inveniuntur adscript, col. cxcix. ad calcem'ed.

adjecta. In ecclesia tamcn urbis Benedict.]
Romae hoc non deprehenditur factum :

Some Heresies had their origin at Rome. 15

potentiam negative, from the act to the power of being, which Section
every novice in learning can tell proceeds not negatively. And ^^^-
common reason tells every man^ it is no consequence to say,
Such a thing is not, or hath not been, therefore it cannot be.
Secondly, because though it were true, that no heresy at all
did ever take its beginning at Rome, yet that can never prove
that the particular Church of Rome can never err, (which is
the thing in question.) For suppose that no heresy did ever
begin there, yet if any, that began elsewhere, were admitted
into that Church, it is as full a proof that that Church
can err, as if the heresy had been hatched in that nest. For
that Church errs which admits a heresy into it, as well as
that which broaches it. Now, Ruffinus says no more of the
Roman Church than non sumpsit exordium, " no heresy took
its beginning there;" but that denies not, but that some
heretical taint might get in there. And it is more than
manifest, that the most famous heresies in their several
times made their abode even at Rome. And it is observ-
able too, that Bellarmine cites no more of Ruffinus' words
than these : In ecclesia urbis Romts neque hceresis ulla
sumpsit exordium, et mos ibi servatur antiquus, as if this
were an entire speech ; whereas it comes in but as a reason
given of the speech precedent ; and as if Ruffinus made the
Church of Rome the great observer of the customs of the
Church ; whereas he speaks but of one particular custom of
reciting the Creed before baptism. But after all this, I pray.
Did no heresy ever begin at Rome ? Where did Novatianism
begin ? At Rome, sure. For Baronius,'' Pamelius,'^ and
Petavius,'' do all dispute the point, whether that sect was
denominated from Novatianus the Roman priest, or Novatus

' Baron, torn. ii. an. 254. num. manse presbyter Hie autem pri-

62. [Sed de iis illud in primis com- mum in ecclesia scliisma concitavit.

monendum, similitudine nominum .... Eusebius et Nicephorus

factum, ut nonnuUi antiqui scrip- uterque, et sic etiam Socrates, vicini-

tores alterum pro altero interdum tate nominum (sc. Novatiani et No-

usurparint, et alii unum eundemque vati) falsi, J^ovatum ilium vocant non

Novatum cum Novatiano conflave- recte. — In Epist. xli. ad Cornelium,

rint : porro Novatianos a No- p. 80. ed. Paris. 1616, et p. 55. ed.

vatiano ut principaliori denominates, Benedict.] et Ixxiii. [Hinc etiam patet

constat ex his quai Cyprianus (epist. a Novatiano dictos illos hjereticos, non

Ixxiii.) scribit ad Fabiamim,ubieosdem a Novato. — Id. in Epist. Ixxiii. ad

quos dicimus Novatianos, a Novatiano Jubaianum, Op., p. 188, et p. 129.

derivans, Novatianenses appellat.] ed. Benedict.]

B Pamel. in Cyprian. Epist. xli. '' Petavius in Epiphan. Hteres. lix.

[Erat hie Novatianus Ecclesise Eo- [sc. Novatianorum. In quo plerosque

Heresies of Novation and Florinus originated at Rome.

WITH

Fkher.

Conference the African bisliop ; and they conclude for Novatian. He
then tliat gave that name is in all right the founder, and
Rome the nest, of that heresy : and there it continued
WTith a succession*^ of bishops from Cornelius to Cselestine^
which is near upon two hundred years. Nay, could Ruffinus
himself be ignorant that some heresy began at Rome ? No,
sure. For in this I must challenge him either for his weak
memory or his wilful error ; for Ruffinus had not only read
Eusebius' history, but had been at the pains to translate him.
NoAv, Eusebius s says plainly, that " some heretics spread
their venom in Asia, some in Plirygia, and others grew at
Rome, and Florinus was the ringleader of them.^^ And more
clearly after, " Irenseus " saith he, " dii'ected divers epistles
against this Florinus, and his fellow Blastus, and condemns
them of such heresies as threw them and their followers
into great impiety, &c. ; those at Rome corrupting the sound

veterum patrum, ac potissimum Grae-
corum, aberrasse constat : qui duos
sectaB hujus architectos in unum mis-
cent similitudine nominuni decepti,

Novatum et Novatianum Sic

igitur Novatianorum secta a

posteriore prassertim, hoc est Nova-
tiauo, magnum incrementum aecepit.
— Petav. Animad. in Epipli. Hseres.
torn. ii. p. 226. ed. Paris. 1622.]

' Onuph. in Notis ad Plat, in vita
Cornelii. [Post S. Fabiani obitum et
Cornelii electioncm, piimum in Eccle-
sia Romana schisma fuisse constat. No-
vatianus enim quidam presbyter S.R.E.
ambitionis spiritu inllatus. . . . ponti-
ficatum contra Cornelium liomas
assumpsit .... a quo literesis Novatia-
norum manavit. . . . Hujus Novatiani
in episcopatu succcssoros llomse us-
que ad Cixilestini Papae poutificatum
permanscrunt. — Onuplir. in Platin.
Vit. Pontific. p. 33. ed. Colon. 15tj8.] ,

'' Ha3rctici alii in morem venena-
torum serpentum in Asiam et Pliry-
giam irrepserunt, oi 5' eVl 'Pcu^rjs t^k-
fia^ov, quorum Dux Florinus. — Euseb.
lib. V. cap. 14. [et 15. ap. Hist Eccl.
Script, cd. Ivcading, tom. i. p. 227.
Miffo/caAJs 76 ntv is rd fxahiara kclI
(piKoir6vripos Siv 6 Trjs tKKKriaias tuv
&eoS iroXifjiios, fjLijScfa t€ ixTjSa.tJ.us ttjs
Kara, rcuv dv^f/oinwi/ iniBovKrjs a.TroKLiru>v
TpiiTov, alpiaeis ^evas ni/dis iincpufaQai
Kurd TTJS iKKKrjoias Iviipya' wv oi /xi;/
loj36\ciiv 5iKTj:> kpiriTwv f ttI t^x 'Aalas koI
^pv)ias (ipTof rhv /xif irapdKK'OTov

MovTaudv, Tas 5e 6| avTov ywdiKas,
UpiaKiWav hoI Ma^ifxiWuv, cos civ
Tov MovTavov Trpo(pr,Ti^as yeyovvias
avxoCi/Tfs. Ol 5' iirl 'Pcv/xris rjKtxa^ov,
wv Tj-yuTo ^\ciip7vos, irpeirlivTepiov ttjs
e/c/fAijffias dirmreawV BKdaros T6 avv
TOVTCj} Trapan\7]alw imjofxcni Kareaxvi''-^'
vos' ot Koi TrAeiofs ttjs iKK\r,iTia':
Trepi€\K0VTes, eirl rh a<p£v uTT'^yoi/
fiovA.7]ua' Bdrepos iSiccs wfpl rijv
o.\r\Q(:Lav vewTepl^eiv ireipcifievos.^ And
in Piuffinus' translation, c. 15. [Sed
in nrbe Romje Florinus quidam gra-
du prcsbyteri de ecclesia lapsus una
cum Blasto socio criminis et furoris,
plurimos de ecclesia in suum barath-
rum deduccbant nova advcrsum veri-
tatem figmcnta machinantes. — p.
115. B. Euseb. Ruffino interpret,
apud Autor. Hist. Ecclesiast. ed.
Frobenli, Basil. 1539.] And then after-
wards, c. 19 and 20. £| ivavrias 5e t<Zv
6/Tt 'P</i/j.r]STdv vyL-fJTrjs eKxA/jcrias deapidv
irapaxo-pimovTuv, [E.lp7)vaios Stacpopuvs
eiTiffToAas crui'TaTTef r-^v /xiv (Trtypd^pas,
irphs BAoo-Toi'irepicrxlcrM''''''"^" t^v Si rrpus
^KwpTvov rrepl fxovapx'^O'S, V Trepl tuv /ut}

iluai TOV Oibv TTOiTJTTJj' KaKUV TCLTTJS

yap TOi T^s yvwfx7]s outos iSdnet
irpouani^eiv Si' ov aiiOis VTroavpojxiVov
Tt) KaTa Ova\evT7vov irAai'Tj, k. t. A. —
Euseb. Ibid. p. 237. ed. Reading.] Now
this Blastus taught' that God was the
author of sin.

' [Now these taught,
and 1686.]

Editt. 1663

Ruffinus on the Canon of Scripture against Rome. 17

doctrine of the Church. Therefore most manifest it is, that Section
some heresy had its rise and beginning at Rome. But to ^^^'
leave this slip of Rnffinus, most evident it is_, that Ruffinus
neither did nor could account the particular Chui'ch of Rome
infallible ; for if he had esteemed so of it, he would not have
dissented from it in so main a point as is the canon of the
Scripture, as he plainly doth; for, reckoning ^ up the canonical
books, he most manifestly dissents from the Roman Chui'ch.
Therefore, either Ruffinus did not think the Church of Rome
was infallible, or else the Church of Rome at this day
reckons up more books within the canon than heretofore she
did. If she do, then she is changed in a main point of faith,
the canon of Scripture, and is absolutely convinced not to be
infallible ; for if she were right in her reckoning then, she is
wrong now ; and if she be right now, she was wrong then ;
and if she do not reckon more now than she did when
Ruffinus lived, then he reckons fewer than she, and so
dissents from her ; which doubtless he durst not have done,
had he thought her judgment infallible. Yea, and he sets
this mark upon his dissent besides,'" that he reckons up the

' Ruff, in Exposit. Symbol, p. dum tamen est, quod et alii libri sunt

188. [sect. 37, 38. col. ccxxiv. ad cal- qui non Canonici, sed Ecclesiastici, a

cam S. Cyprian, ed. Benedict. Itaque majoribus appellati sunt : ut est

veteris instrumenti prime omnium Sapientia Salomonis, et alia Sapientia,

Moysi quinque libri sunt traditi, quce dicitur filiiSyracli, qui liber apud

Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numeri, Latinos hoc ipso generali vocabulo

Deuteronomium. Post hos Jesu Nave, Ecclesiasticus appellatur ; quo voca-

et Judicum simul cum Ruth : quatuor bulo non auctor libelli, sed scripturse

post hgec Eegnorum libri, quos Hebrjei qualitas cognominata est. Eju.sdem

duos numerant ; Paralipomenon, qui ordinis est libellus Tobiee, et Judith,

dierum dicitur liber ; et Esdraj libri et Machabajorum libri. In Novo

duo, qui apud illos singuli compu- vero Testamento libellus qui dicitur

tantur et Esther : Prophetarum vero Pastoris,'siveHermetis, qui appellatur

Esaias, Hieremias, Ezechiel et Daniel : dute viaj, vel judicium Petri ; quae

prseterea duodecim Prophetarum liber omnia legi quidem in ecclesiis volue-

unus : Job quoque et Psalmi David runt, non tamen proferri ad auctori-

singuli sunt libri : Salomonis vero tatem ex his fidei confirmandam.

tres Ecclesiis traditi, Proverbia, Eccle- Cseteras vero Scripturas apocryphas

siastes, Cantica Canticorum. In his nominarunt, quas in ecclesiis legi

concluserunt librorum numerum noluerunt.] — In which reckoning he

veteris Testamenti. Novi vero, quatuor plainly agrees with the Church of

Evangelia, Matthaei, Marci, Lucaj, England, Art. vi.

Joannis : Actus Apostolorum, quos "' [Et ideo quae sunt] novi ac veteris

descripsit Lucas, Pauli Apostoli Testamenti [instrumenti] volumina,

Epistolas quatuordecim, Petri Apos- [quae secundum majorum traditionem

toll Epistolas duas, Jacobi fratris per ipsum Spiritum Sanctum inspirata

Domini et Apostoli unam, Judse unam, creduutur, et Ecclesiis Christi tradita,

Joannis tres, Apocalyp.sim Joannis. competens videtur in hoc loco evi-

Hasc sunt quae Patres intra Canonem denti numero,] sicut ex Patrum mO-

concluserunt ; ex quibus fidei nostrje numentis accepimus, [designare.] —

assertiones constare voluerunt. Scien- Ruffin. in Symb. p. 188. [sect. 3G.

A'OL. II. — LAUD. Q

18 Dilemma tohich BeUarmine^s Reference to Ruffinus involves.

CoNFERKNCE books of tliG canoii iiist so and no otherwise than as " he

WITH .

Fisher, received them out of the monuments of the forefathers, and
out of which the assertions of oiu* faith are to be taken/'
Last of all, had tliis place of Kuffinus any strength for the
infaUibihty of the Church of Rome, yet there is veiy Uttle
reason that the pope and his clergy should take any benefit
by it. For S. Jerome •» tells us. That when Ruffinus was
angry with him for an epistle which he writ not, he plainly
sent him to the Bishop of Rome, and bade him expostulate
with him for the contumely put upon him, in that he re-
ceived not his exposition of the faith, which, said he, all
Italy ai^proved ; and in that he branded him also, dum
nesciret, " behind his back," with heresy. Now, if the pope
which then was, rejected this exposition of the creed made
by Ruffinus, and branded him besides with heresy, his
sentence against Ruffinus was just, or unjust. If unjust,
then the pope erred about a matter of faith ; and so neither
he nor the Church of Rome infallible. If just, then the
Church of Rome labours to defend herself by his pen, which
is judged heretical by herself. So, whether it were just or
unjust, the Chui'ch of Rome is driven to a hard strait,
when she must beg help of him whom she branded with
heresy, and out of that tract which she herself rejected ;
and so uphold her infallibility by the judgment of a man,
who in her judgment had erred so foidly. Nor may she by
any law" take benefit of a testimony which herself hath
defamed and protested against.

col. ccxxiv.]— Et hffic Bunt quae Patres tibi hfereseos, dum ncscis, inureret —

intra Canonem concluserunt ; et ex S. Hicron. Apol. iii. advers. Ruffin fol

quibus fidei nostrae assertiones con- 85. K. [Op., torn. iv. par. ii col 457

stare voluerunt.— lb. p. 189. [ubi sup.] ubi sup. p. 9. note ■-.]

" Si [autem] Roman! Episcopi est, " Quum quis se velle personas

stulte facia ab eo exemplar Epistolaj testium post publicationem repellere

petere, cui missa non est: [et non ab fuerit protestatus. Si quid pro ipso

illo qui miserit de onente exspcctare dixeriut, iia non creditur. — Extra

testimonium, cujus auctorem et tes- Tex. et ibi Gloss, c. P«f5c«<mm, xxxi'

tern habeas in vicino.] Yade potius de Tcstibus. [This is not from the

Komam, et praesens apud eum expos- Extra vagantes, but from the Decretals

tula, cur tibi et absenti et innoccnti of Gregory IX. — Lib ii sect xx •

feccrit injunam [contumeliam.] Tri- de Testibus, cap. (xxxi.) Prcese'ntium

mum, ut non reciperet expositionem (Publicatis attestationibus non op-

hdci tuc^, quam omnis, ut seribis, ponitur in personas testium: tres

Itahacomprobavit; [et baculo tuarum casus excipit ; et ad secundum de-

uti noluerit literarum contra canes terminationem subdit.)— Cap. xxxi

tuos ] Dcinde, ut Epistolas contra te Prsesentium auctoritate statuimus!

ad Orientem mitteret, et cauterium ut si quis post depositiones testium

Testimonies of certain Popes alleged for Roman Infallibility.

XIII. — With these BeUarmine is pleased to name six'
popes^ which, he saith, are all of this opinion. But" he
addSjP "that these testimonies will be contemned by the

publicatas, objicere voluerit in perso-
nas eorum, ei tunc tandem id liceat,
cum juramento firmaverit, quod ad
hoc ex malitia non procedat : nisi
forsan ante publicationem id fuerit
protestatus ; vel ostendere poterit,
quod post publicationem didicerit,
quod objicit in personas. Ca3terum,
cum quis personas testium se velle
post publicationem depositionum re-
pellere, fuerit protestatus, si quid pro
ipso dixerint, do facili non credatur. —
Gloss. Per banc protestationem vi-
detur quod noluit fidem adhibere
dictis illorum testium contra se ; non

ergo debet habere pro se est

absurdum redire ad hoc, cui renuncia-
tum est. — Decret. Greg. IX. cum
Gloss, p. 726. ed. Taurini, 1621 ; et
Corpus Jur. Canon, tom. ii. p. 97.
ed. Pithoei, Paris. 1687.]

p Bell. lib. iv. de Kom. Pontif. c. 4.
sect. 5. [Nam auctores citati, ut
Lucius et Felix, papce et martyres;
Agatho et Nicolaus, papoe et confes-

sores non solum pontificem,

sed etiam Ecclesiam Romanam, asse-
ruerunt non jjosse crrare] .... Addo
etiam [duorum pontifieum testimonia,]
qute etsi ab haereticis contemnantur,
[tamen a Catholicis cum honore re-
cipienda sunt. Unum est Martini
Papae V. qui in Bulla (§ 3.) quam
edidit (an. 1418. cf. Bullarium, tom. i.
pp. 288, 289, ed. Luxemburg. 1727.)
concilio Constantiensi approbante,
haereticos haberi consult eos, qui de
Sacrament] s, aut fidei articulis aliter
sentiunt, quam Eomana Ecclesia sen-
tiat. Alteram est Sixti Papai IV. (an.
1478.) qui primum per Synodum
Complutensem, deinde etiam per se,
damnavit articulos Petri cujusdam
Oxoniensis, (Osmensis) quorum articu-
lorumunuseratjEcclesiamurbisEomaa
errare posse. Et quanquam hcec intel-
ligi dcbere videntur, prsecipue ratione
pontificis, tamen quia Ecclesia Eomana
non est solus Pontifex, sed Pontifex
et populus, ideo cum dicunt Patres,
aut Pontifices, Eomanam Ecclesiam
non posse errare, dicere volunt; in
Eomana Ecclesia semper futui-umEpis-
copum Catliolice docentem et populum
Catholice sentientem. — Bellarmin.
Op. tom. i. cob 812. (ubi sup. p. 12.
note ''.) — The constitution of Sixtus
IV. condemned certain propositions of

Peter de Osma, which he had taught
in the University of Salamanca.
See Aguirre's Concilia Hispania^,
tom. V. p. 351, Conventus Theologo-

rum apud Complutum (Alcala)

habitus, a.d. 1479. (1478.) So Labbe,
Concil. tom. xiii. cob 1465, l^eque
alienum fuerit observare eodem anno
1479, (1478,) errores quibus Petrus de
Osma Salmanticensem Academiam
infecerat, tum ab ipso pope Sixto IV.
condemnatos fuisse. The bull of
Sixtus IV. anno 1478, is in the Bul-
larium (tom. i. pp. 416, 417); but in
reciting the erroneous propositions
which it condemns, there is none
stronger than one which asserted,
" Eomanum pontificem purgatorii
poenam rcmittere, et super his quag
universalis Ecclesia statuit, dispensare
non posse." Peter de Osma after-
wards submitted. (Aguirre, ibid. p.
858.) The testimonies of the otherseven
popes are thus cited by BeUarmine
in the previous chapter : — 1. Lucius
I. (an. 256. cf. Concil. tom. i. col.
725.) papa et martyr, in Epistola
prima ad Episcopos Hispanire et
Gallise. Ecclesia, inquit, (§ 6.)
Eomana Apostolica est, et mater
omnium Ecclesiarum, quae a tramite
ApostolicEe traditionis nunquam er-
rasse probatur, nee hasreticis novita-
tibus depravata succubuit, secundum
ipsius Domini pollicitationem dicentis.
Ego rogavi x>ro te, &c. — 2. Felix I.
(an. 273. cf. Concil. tom. i. col. 911.)
in Epistola ad Benignum, de Eomana
Ecclesia loquens : Ut, inquit, (§ 2.) in
exordio normam fidei Christianae per-
cepit ab auctoribus suis, Apostolorum
Christi principibus, illibata manet,
juxta illud, Ego I'ogavi %)ro te, &c. — 3.
Leo (an. 447.) Sermone iii. (al. iv.) de
Assumptione sua ad Pontificatum, [c.
4. Op., tom. i. col. 14. ed. Ballerini,]
Specialis, inquit, cura Petri a Domino
suscipitur, et pro fide Petri proprie sup-
plicatur, tanquam aliorum status cer-
tior sit futurus, si mens principis victa
non fuerit. In Petro ergo omnium forti-
tude munitur : et divinae gratite ita
ordinatur auxilium, ut firmitas, quae
per Christum Petro tribuitur, per
Petrum cceteris (al. apostolis) confera-
tur. Ubi Leo utrumque privilegium
agnoscit, illud primum, cum ait ; Si
mens Principis victa non fuerit : illud

Section
III.

1 [or seven

Editt.

1673 and
1686.]

2 [of popes'
opinions he
saith ....
Editt. 1673
and 1686.]

Relnfwe and Individual Value

CoNFERF-NCE licretics.'^ Good words^ I pray I I know wliom tlic Cardinal

Fisher means by heretics very well ; hut the best is, his call can-

r~. not make them so. Nor shall I easily contemn six* ancient

' [seven .... .....

Editt. 1673 bishops of Romc concurring in opinion, if apparent verity in
^ ■-' the thing itself do not force me to dissent ; and in that case

This only I will say,^

I shall do it without contempt too.

secundum, cum subjungit ; Firmitas,
qu£e per Christum Petro tribuitur, per
Petrum cteteris conferatur. Non enim
confertur aliis firmitas, nisi veram
fidem exponendo. — 4. Agatho (an.67i^).
cf.Concil.tom. vi.coi. 636.)papainepis-
tola ad Constantinum imperatorem,
quffi lecta est in Sexto Synodo, aetione

4. et postea aetione 8. ab omnibus
probata : Hjec est, inquit, verse fidei
regula, quam et in prosperis et in
adversis vivaciter tenuit Apostolica
Christi ecclesia, qu£e per Dei gratiam
a tramite ApostolicEe traditionis nun-
quam errasse probatur, nee ha^reticis
novitatibus imquam depravata succu-
buit, quia dictum est Petro, Simon,
Simon, ecce Satanas, &c. £^170 autem
rof/avi 2^ro fe, &c. Hie Dominus fidem
Petri non defecturam promisit, et
confirmare eum fratres buos admon-
uit, quod Apostolicos pontifices mese
exiguitatis prtedecessores confidcnter
fecisse semper cunctis est agnitum. —

5. Nicolaus I. (an. 858. cf. Concil. tom.
viii. col. 314.) in Epistola (viii.) ad
Michaelem : Privilegia, inquit, istius
sedis (vel Ecclesise) perpetua sunt ;
divinitus radicata, atque plantata
sunt ; impingi possunt, transferri non
possunt ; trahi possunt, evelli non
possunt. Quae ante imperium ves-
trum fuerunt, (et) permanent, Deo
gratias, liactenus illibata, manebunt-
que post vos, et quousque Christia-
num nomen praedicatum fuerit, ilia
subsistere non cessabunt (immutilata).
—6, Leo IX. (an. 1049. cf. Concil. tom.
ix. col. 975. in Epistola ad Petrum
Antioclienum: Ximirum, inquit, solus
est, pro quo, ne deficeret tides ejus,
Dominus et Salvator a.sseruit se ro-
gasse, dicens, Rogavi 2)7-0 te, &c. Quae
venerabilis et efficax oratio obtinuit,
quod hactenus fides Petri non defecit,
nee defcctura creditur in tlirono illius.
— 7. Innocentius III. (IV.) (an. 1-250.
cf. Decret. Greg. IX. Lib. iii.Tit xlii.)
in Epistola ad Episcopum Arelaten-
sem, et habcturcap. Majoref, Extrav.
de Baptismo et ejus etfectu : Majores,
inquit Ecclesiai causas, prsesertim
articulos fidei eontingentes ad Petri

sedem referendas intelligit qui novit
pro eo Dominum exorasse, ne deficiat
fides ejus.- — Bellarmin. de Rom. Pont,
lib. iv. c. 3. Op., tom. i. col. 807. —
Of these testimonies, it may be ob-
served that the two earliest, those of
Popes Lucius and Felix, are admitted
to be spurious — cf. Concil. tom. i. col.
721. "Suspecta eodem jure cum aliis
Isidori mercibus," and Concil. tom. i.
col. 903. " Suppositia; hje epistolae
doctis habentur."]

1 [De reliquis auctoritatibus quaa ex
Scriptis Komanorum pontificum profe-
runtur, et ix. Question. 3 (sc. Gratian.
in Decret.) leguntur non est magnopere
laborandum, quia Johannes Gerson,
atque alii doctores Parisienses uno
verbo respondent,] nemini in sua causa
credendum, nisi conformiter ad legem
divinam, naturalem, et canonicam lo-
quatur : [juri autem divino et natu-
rali repugnat, caput ministeriale im-
perium habere absolutum in Ecclc-
siam.] — So Jo. Gerson, and the doctors
of Paris cited in Lib. Anon, de Eccle-
siastica et Politica Potestate, c. xvi.
ed. Paris. 1612. Now these popes do
not speak here conformably to these
laws. — [The author of this work, first
published anonymouslj-, Paris 1612,
was Edmund Richer, Syndic of the
faculty of divinity in the Sorbonne.
Of the circumstances attending its
publication, a full account is in
Bossuct, Def. Cler. Gall. lib. vi.
cap. 25. Qiuvres de Bossuet, tom.
xxxii. p. 389. ed. Versailles, 1817.
An English translation of it aj)-
peared in the same year, under
the title " A Treatise of Ecclesiasti-
cal! and Politike Power, Sec. Faith-
fully translated out of the Latin
originall, of late publicly printed and
allowed in Paris. Kow set foorth for
a further warrant and encouragement
to the Romish Catholikes of England,
for theyr taking of the Oath of
Allegiance ; seeing so many others
of their owne profession in other
countries doe deny the Popes in-
falibility in judgement and temporall
power over Princes, directly against

of such Testimony.

that six' popes concurring in opinion shall have less weight Section
with rue in their own cause than any other six^ of the more

III.

ancient Fathers. Indeed, could I swallow Bellarmine's i" ^^^even^.^.^
opinion, that the pope's judgment is infallible, I would then and 1686.]
submit without any more ado. But that will never down ^ [seven...
with me, unless I Hve till I dote, which I hope in God I
shall not.

XIV. — Other proofs than these Bellarmine brings not to
prove that the particular Church of Rome cannot err in or
from the faith; and of what force these are to sway any
judgment, I submit to all indifferent readers. And ha\ing
thus examined Bellarmine's proofs that the particular
Chui'ch of Rome cannot err in faith, I now return to
A. C. and the Jesuit, and tell them, that no Jesuit, or A. C. p. 42.
any other, is ever able to prove any particular Church
infallible.

XV. — But for the particular Church of Rome, and the
pope with it, erred it hath, and therefore may err. Erred

the doctrine of Jesuits." London.
1612. The last and most complete
edition of the work, with tlie De-
fences, documents, references, &c.,
together with some curious opuscula
connected with it, is that of Cologne,
1701, in two volumes quarto. In Lib.
i. cap. i. sect. 12. of the Defensio
Libelli de Eccl. et Politic. Potest, torn,
i. p. 12. ed. Colon., Kicher recites
the ancient doctrine held on the
Galilean liberties by the Paris Schools.
These principles are fully indicated
in the Decree which they passed in
1429, against John Sarrazin, (printed
in the Libell. de Eccl. et Politic.
Potest. Demonst. cap. xviii.) and re-
peated in the decree of 1611, (printed
in the preface to the Def. Libelli, &c.
p. i. — iii.) Sarrazin in his recantation
subscribed the following articles,
which may be considered as a sum-
mary of the views of Gerson, Almain,
&c., formally embodied by their suc-
cessors in the Paiusian Schools : —
1. Omnes potestates jurisdictionis
Ecclesiasticae, alise a papali potestate,
sunt ab ipso Christo quantum ad
institutionem et collationem prima-
riam : a Papa autem et ab Ecclesia
quantum ad limitationem et dispen-
sationem ministerialem. — 2. Hujus-
modi potestates sunt de jure divine,
et immediate institutae a Deo. — 3.

Invenitur in sacra Scriptura Christum
Ecclesiam fundasse, et potestates alias
a papali expresse ordinasse. — 4. Quan-
docunque in aliquo concilio aliqua
instituuutur, tota auctoritas dans
vigorem statutis residet non in solo
summo Pontifice, sed principaliter in
Spiritu Sancto et Ecclesia Catholica.
— 5. Ex textu Evangelii et doctrina
apostolorum habetur expresse, apos-
tolis et discipulis a Christo missis
auctoritatem jurisdictionis fuisse col-
latam. — 6. Dicere inferiorum prtelato-
rum potestatem jurisdictionis, sive
sint episcopi, sive sint curati, esse
immediate a Deo, evangelicjs et
apostoliciB consonat veritati. — 7.
Aliqua potcstas, scilicet potestas
EcclesiEe, de jure potest aliquid in
certis casibus contra summum ponti-
ficem. — 8. Quicunque purus viator
habens usum rationis cujuscumque
dignitatis, auctoritatis aut praeemi-
ncntite, etiamsi Papalis existat,
simouiam potest committere.]

"• Lib. iv. de Kom. Pont. c. iii.' [Sit
igitur prima propositio : Summus
Pontifex, cum totam ecclesiam docct,
in his qufe ad fidem pertinent, nuUo
casu errare potest. — Op., tom. i. col.
805.]

^ [in initio

1686.]

Editt. 1673 and

32 Cardinal BeUarmine on InfaUibiJity of Rome, so long as

Conference I say it hath, in the worship of images, and in altering
pTsnER Christ's institution in the blessed sacrament, by taking

away the cup from the people, and divers other particulars,

as shall appear at after.^ And as for the ground which is
presumed to secui'c this Church from error, it is very remark-
able how the learned Cardinal ^ speaks in this case ; for he
tells us, that this proposition. So long as S. Peter's chair is
at Home, that particular Church cannot err in the faith, is
verissima, " most true ;" and yet, in the very next words, it is
fortasse tarn vera, " peradventure as true^' as the former : that
is. That the pope, when he teaches the whole Chui'ch in
those things which belong to the faith, cannot err in any
case. What ! is that proposition " most true," and yet is it
but at a " peradventm'e it is as true as this ?" Is it possible
any thing should be absolutely most true, and yet under a
peradventure that it is but as true as another truth ? But
here, without all peradventure, neither proposition is true.
And then, indeed, BeUarmine may say, without a fortasse,
that this proposition. The particular Church of Rome
cannot err, so long as the see apostolic is there, is as true
as this : The pope cannot err, while he teaches the whole
Church in those things which belong to the faith. For
neither of them is true. But he cannot say that either of
them is verissima, " most true," when neither of them hath
truth.

XVI. — 2. Secondly, if the particular Church of Home be
infallible, and can neither err in the faith nor fall from it,
then it is because the see apostolic cannot be transferred
from Rome, but must ever, to the consummation of the
world, remain there, and keep that particular Church from
erring. Now, to this what says BeUarmine ? What ? Why,
he tells us,^ that it is a pious and most probable opinion to

' fV. infra,! Sect, xxxiii. (vii.)5, 12. pertinent, nullo casu crrarc potest.—

' llomana Ecclesia particularis non Ibid. c. 3. § 1. [ubi sup. p. 21. note".]

potest en-are, pcrsistentc Eomfc apos- >■ [Atsccimdumpostcriorcmscnsum

tolica scdc. Propositio bajc est vcris- Ecclesiain Komanam non posse defi-

sima, et fortasse tam vera quam ilia cere, est quidem pia et probabilissima

prima de Pontifice.— Lib. iv. dc liom. sententia, non tamen adeo certa ut

Pont. c. 4. § 2. [ubi sup. p. 4. note '.] coutraria dici possit hceretica, ' vel

—And that first proposition is this : manifeste erronca, ut recte doect Jo-

Summus Pontifex, cum tolam ccclc- auues Dricdo, lib. iv. c 3 par 3

siam docct, in his qua? ad fidem de Ecclcsiast. Dogmat. ct Scriptiiris'

Rome retains the Cathedra Petri. — Recapitulation. 23

think so. And he reckons four probabilities that it shall Section
never be removed from Rome. And I will not deny but \

some of them are fair probabihties ; but yet they are but
probabilities, and so unable to convince any man. Why
but then, what if a man cannot think as Bellarmine doth,
but that, enforced by the light of his understanding, he
must think the quite contrary to this, which Bellarmine
thinks pious, and so probable ? What then ? Why, then
Bellarmine himself tells you, that "the quite contrary propo-
sition to this," namely, that S. Peter's chair may be severed
from Rome, and that then that particular Church may err,
" is neither heretical nor manifestly erroneous.'' "" So then, by
Bellarmine' s own confession, I am no heretic, nor in any
manifest error, if I say, as indeed I do, and think it too,
that it is possible for S. Peter's chair to be carried from
Rome, and that then at least, by his own argument, that
Church may err.

XVII. — Now, then, upon the whole matter, and to return
to A. C. If that lady desired to rely upon a particular A. C. p. 42.
infallible Church, it is not to be found on earth. Rome
hath not that gift, nor her bishop neither. And Bellarmine,
Avho, I think, was as able as any champion that Church
hath, dares not say it is either heresy or a manifest error to
say, that the apostolic see may be removed thence, and that
Church not only err in faith, but also fall quite away from
it. Now I, for my part, have not ignorance enough in me
to bcheve that that Church which may apostatize at some
one time, may not err at another ; especially since both her
erring and failing may arise from other causes besides that
which is mentioned by the Cardinal. And if it may err, it is
not infallible.

Quod non sit omnino de fide, a Ro- non posse separari Petri Catliedram a

mana Ecclesia non posse separari Roma, ct proinde Romanam Ecclesiam

Apostolicam scdeni, patet : quiancquc absolute non posse errarc, nee deficcrc,

scriptura, ncque traditio, habet, sedem [probatur primo ex eo quod tamdiu

Apostolicam ita fixam esse Romte, ut mansit Romte sedes Apostolica non ob-

inde auferri non possit, Et omnia stantibus infinitis persecutionibus, &c.

testimonia Pontificum et Patrum, qui — Bellarm. de Rom. Pont.] lib. iv. c.

dicunt Romanam ecclesiam non posse 4. sect. 5. [ubi sup. p. 4. note "^.J
errare, possent exponi de Romana ec- ^ Contraria sententia ncc est hse-

clesia, donee in ca Apostolica sedes retica, ncc manifesto erronea. — [Bel-

permanct: non autem absolute, et larm.] lib. iv. de Rom. Pont. c. 4.

simpliciter. Quodnihilominus tamen] sect. 5. [ubi sup.]
pia et probabilissima sit sententia,

Error of the Greek Church concerning,

Conference

WITH

Fisher.

[A.C.p.43.]

» [The la-
dy's friend
... A. C]

§4.

[A.C.p.43.]

* [That . . .
caret A. C]

§5.

^. The question was, Which was that Church ? A
friend of the lady's' would needs defend, that not
only the Roman, but also the Greek Church, was
right.

2B. When that honourable personage answered, I was not
by to hear. But I presume he was so far from granting
that only the lloman Church was right, as that he did not
grant it right ; and that he took on him no other defence of
the poor Greek Chui'ch than was according to truth.

Jf. I told him, That the Greek Church had plainly
changed, and taught false in a point of doctrine con-
cerning the Holy Ghost ; and that I had heard say,
that even His Majesty should say, That^ the Greek
Church having erred against the Holy Ghost, had
lost the Holy Ghost.

25» You are very bold with His Majesty, to relate him
upon hearsay. My intelligence serves me not to tell you
what His jNIajesty said; but if he said it not, you have
been too credulous to believe, and too sudden to report it.
Princes deserve, and were wont to have, more respect than
so. If His Majesty did say it, there is truth in the speech ;
the error is yoiu's only, by mistaking what is meant by
losing the Holy Ghost. For a particular Chui'ch may be
said to lose the Holy Ghost two ways, or in two degrees.
1. The one, when it loses such special assistance of that
blessed Spirit as preserves it from all dangeroiis errors and
sins, and the temporal punishment which is due unto them.
And in this sense the Greek Church did perhaps lose the
Holy Ghost ; for they erred against Him, they sinned against
God ; and for this, or other sins, they were delivered into
another Babylonish captivity under the Tui'k, in which they
yet are, and from which God in His mercy deliver them !
But this is rather to be called an error circa Spiritum Sanc-
tum, about the doctrine '' concerning the Holy Ghost," than
an error against the Holy Ghost. 2. The other is, when it
loses not only this assistance, but all assistance ad hoc, to
this, that they may remain any longer a true Church ; and

not against, the Holy Ghost. 25

so Corinth and Ephesiis^ and divers other Churches, have Section
lost the Holy Ghost. But in this sense the whole Greek
Church lost not the Holy Ghost ; for they continue a true
Church, in the main substance, to and at this day, though
erroneous in this point which you mention, and perhaps in
some other too.

5p. The lady^s friend, not knowing what to answer, [A.C.p.43.J
called in the Bishop, who, sitting down first, excused"^
himself as one unprovided, and not much studied in
controversies ; and desiring that, in case he should
fail, yet the Protestant cause might not he thought
ill of

* [The Cbaplain taxeth the Jesuit, as if in this parcel he did insult, and
saitli it was the U.'s modesty to use this excuse, and to say "there were a
hundred scholars better than he." But I do not see any insultation, l)ut a
simple and true narration of what was said. Neither do I see less modesty in
the Jesuit's preferring a thousand before himself, than in the 13. 's pi'eferring a
hundred before himself. — A. C. marg. note to p. 43.]

%. This is most true ; for I did indeed excuse myself, and § 6.
I had great reason so to do. And my reason being grounded
upon modesty for the most part, there I leave it. Yet this
it may be fit others should know, that I had no information
where the other conferences brake oif, no instruction at all
what should be the ground of this third conference, nor the
full time of four-and-twenty hours to bethink myself. And
this I take upon my credit is most true ; whereas you make
the sifting of these and the like questions to the very bran
your daily work, and came thoroughly furnished to the
business, and might so lead on the controversy to what
yourself pleased, and I was to follow as I could. S. Augus-
tine said once, Scio me invalidwn esse, " I know I am weak;^' ^
and yet he made good his cause. And so perhaps may I
against you. And in that I prefered the cause before my
particular credit, that which I did was with modesty, and
according to reason. For there is no reason the weight of
this whole cause should rest upon any one particular man ;

y De Util. Credendi, [contra Mani- suetudinem plagis veternosarum opi-

chaeos,] c. ii. [vS. Augustin. Op., tom. nionum sauciatum oculum animte

viii. col. 48. B.ed. Benedict. Quoniam gerens, invalidum me esse cognosce,

propter peccata mea propterque con • ssepe rogo cum lacrymis.]

26 Not all Errors are against Fundamentals.

Conference and great reason, that the personal defects of any man
Fisher, should press himsclf, but not the cause. Neither did I enter
upon tliis service out of any forwardness of my own, but
commanded to it by supreme authority.

[A. C. pp. 1?. ... it haWusr an hundred better scholars to maintain

43, 44.]

it than he. To which I said, There were a thousand

better scholars than I to maintain the Cathohc cause.

§ 7. 25. In this I had never so poor a conceit of the Protes-

tants' cause, as to think that they had but an himdrcd better
than myself to maintain it. That wliich hath an hundred,
may have as many more as it pleases God to give, and more
than you. And I shall ever be glad that the Church of
England, which, at this time, if my memory reflect not
amiss, I named, may have far more able defendants than
myself. I shall never envy them, but rejoice for her. And
I make no question, but that if I had named a thousand,
you would have multiplied yours into ten thousand for the
Catholic cause, as you call it. And this confidence of yours
hath ever been fuller of noise than proof. But you proceed,

[A.C.p.44.] Jp. Then the question about the Greek Chnrch being

proposed,'^ I said as before, That it had erred.

* [The Chaplain telleth, that the Jesuit said, that what the 13. wonld not
acknowledge in this, he would " wring and extort from him." But these
words of " wringing and extorting " the Jesuit never useth, even to his
meanest adversaries, and therefore not likely to have used then to the J3. ;
but at most, that ho would evince by argument or such like. — A. C. marg.
note to p. 44.]

§ 8. 55. Then I think the question about the Greek Church

was proposed. But after you had, with confidence enough,
not spared to say, that what I would not acknowledge in this
cause, you woidd wring and extort from me ; then indeed
you said as before, that it had erred ; and this no man
denied. But eveiy error denies not Christ, the foundation ;
or makes Christ deny it, or thnist it from the foundation.

[A.C.p.44.] 5p. The 25. said, that the error was not in [a] point

fundamental.'^

* [The Chaplain saith : " The 13. was not so peremptory : his speech was,
that divers learned men, and some of your own, are of opinion, as the Greeks
expressed themselves, it was a question not simplj- fundamental." But
the Jesuit cannot remember the 13. to have said these words : yet if he did,
the Jesuit did not much miss of the chief point of the IS.'s meaning, which

Denial of Double Procession erroneous, not heretical. 27

was, by the distinction of faith fundamental and not fundamental, to defend Section
the errors of the Grecians not to be such, (although held against the known IX.

definitive sentence of the Church,) as doth hinder salvation, or exclude them

from being members of the true Church. About which see more hereafter. —
A. C. marg. note to p. 44.]

25. I. — I was not so peremptory. My speech was, that § 9.
divers learned men, and some of your own, were of opuiion,
that, as the Greeks expressed themselves, it was a question
not simply fundamental. I know and acknowledge that error,
of denying the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son,
to be a grievous error in di^dnity. And sure, it would have
grated the foundation, if they had so denied the procession of
the Holy Ghost from the Son, as that they had made an
inequality between the persons. But since their form of
speech is,'^ That the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father by
the Son, and is the Spirit of the Son, without making any
difference in the consubstantiahty of the persons ; I dare not
deny them to be a true Church for this, though I confess
them an erroneous Church in this particular.

II. — Now that divers learned men were of opinion, that a
Filio et per Filium, in the sense of the Greek Church, was but
a question in niodo loquendi, '' in manner of speech,'^ ^ and
therefore not fundamental, is evident.'^ The master and his

^ [At vero Eum] non ex Filio esse Episcopi, in quatuor Sententiarum

dicimus : sed Filii Spiritum [nomina- libros quEestionum resolutiones]. Lib.

mus.] — Damascen. lib. i. Fid. Orth. III. D[istinct.] xxv. Q[u£est.] 2. [fol.

c. 11. [p. 272. A. B. ed. Billii.— ccxciii. ed. Paris. 1508.]

Denique Spiritum sanctum et ex Patre ^ [Petri Lombard.] Magist[ri Sen-

esse statuimus,] et Patris [Spiritum tentiarum,] I. Sentent. D[istinct.]

appellamus atque Ipsum nobis] xi. D. [ Sciendum est tamen quod

per Filium [et patefactum esse, et im- Grreci confitentur Spiritum Sanctum

pertiri confitcmur.] — Ibid. [To Se esse Filii, sicut et Patris ; quia et

irvivixa TO ayiov, koX fK roO irarpds Apostolus dicit, Spiritum Filii (Galat.

Aeyofiev, KalTrve£fj.a iraTpos oi/o/jLa^onev iv. 6.) Et Veritas in Evangelio, Spiri-

iK Tov vlov Se rd TTvev/xa ov Ae7o^ef tum Veritatis (Joan. xvi. 13.) Sed cum

irvfvfxa 5e vlov ovofj.d^o/xd'' ef tls ycLp to non sit aliud Spiritum Sanctum esse

■KVivfia XptcTTov ovK exfi, (p7]a\v 6 de7os Patris vel Filii, quam esse a Patre et

d^^6aTo^os, ovtos ovk %(tti.v uvtov' koI Si' Filio ; etiam in hoc in eandem no-

viovTr€(pavepoi}aeai,KaliJ.eTu5iSo(TOair]ixi:i', biscum fidei sententiam convenire

6iu.o\oyoviJ.ev — S. Joann. Damascen. De videntur, licet in verbis disseutiant.]

Fid. Orthodox, lib. i. cap. 8. Op., torn. — Sane sciendum, quod licet in prae-

i. p. 141, B. ed. Lcquien.] senti articulo a nobis Grajci verbo

" [Ad secundum dicendum quod in discordent, tamen sensu non difFeruut.

tribus symbolis una Veritas continetur, [Confitentur cnim Spiritum esse Filii,

magis tamen explicita in uno quam in etsi non a Filio, quia scriptum est,

alio, propter novas htereses variis tem- Spiritum Filii.] — Bandinus, lib. i. de

poribus insurgentes ; talis autem] plu- Trin. d. xi. [^. e. Bandini, Theologi

ralitas in voce, salvata unjtate in re, doctissimi ac pervetusti, Sententia-

non repugnat imitati fidei. — Durand[i rum libri quatuor, &c. — lib. i. de

de Sancto Portiano Apostolici quon- Trinitate, Dist. xi. p. 54. cd. Lovan.

dam penitentiarii, Meldensis ecclesiae 1557] — Et Bonaventura, in I. Sent.

The Greek Expi'essinns about the Procession, differ

Conference scliolars agrcc upoii it. " The Greeks/' saitli lie, "confess the
Holy Ghost to be the ' Spirit of the Son/ (with the ApostleJ
and the 'Spirit of truth.' And since 7ion est aliud, 'it is not

WITH

Fisher.

Gal. iv. [6.]
John xvi.
[13.]

D[istinct.] xi. A[rt.] i. Q[u8est.] i.
Sect. xii. [Op., torn. iv. p. 95. A. cd.
Moguut. 1G09.], licet Grsccis infen-
sisiiimus, quuiu dixit Grsecos objicere
curiositatem Komanis, addendo Filio-
que [ul)i ait, Kedarguunt tanquam

curiosos Graicos,] quia sine

hujus Articuli professione salus erat,
non respondet negando salutem esse,
sed dicit tantum, Opportunam fuisse
determinationem propter periculum.
— Kt postea, [Bonavent.] Sect. xv.
[Ad illud quod objicitur de nexu,
diccndum quod nexus non liabet
rationem medii, sed rationem tertii,
quanquam aliqui voluerunt dicere quod
locum tenet et medii et tertii :] et vo-
luerunt isti sustinere opinionem Grse-
corum, et Latinorum, et distinguunt
duplicem modum procedendi, [scilicet
in alium, et sic procedit a Patre, vel ab
alio, et sic procedit a Patre et Filio. —
lb. p. 95. B.]— Sed forte si duo sapi-
entes, unus Grajcus, [et] alter Latinus,
utcrque verus amator veritatis, et non
proprise dictionis, [unde propria est]
de hacvisa coutrarietate disquirerent,
pateret utique tandem ipsam con-
trarietatem non esse veraciter realem,
sicut est vocalis : [alioquin, vel ipsi
Grffici, vel nos Latini sumus verehfere-
tici. Sed quis audet hunc auctorem
Joannem sc. Damascenum, et Beatos,
sc. Basilium, Gregorium Theologum,
Gregorium Nazianzenum, Cyrillum,
et similes Patres Grsecos arguere
haereseos ]] — Scotus in I. Sent. D[is-
tinct.] xi.Q[usest. ] 1 . [ Op., torn. v. par. i.
p. 858. ed. Lugd. 1639.] — Antiquorum
apud Gra^cos auctorum, [ut Cyrilli,
Damasceni, et similium,] a Latinis in
voce potius, et modo explicandi
emanationem Spirilus Sancti est dis-
crepantia, quam in ipsa re. [Eandem
enim penitus sententiam prajtendunt,
dicentes Spiiitum Sauctum per Fili-
um procedere, quam Latini et dicen-
tes Spiritum Sanctum procedere ex
Filio ; licet aliis ad ilium exprimcn-
dum utantur verbis.] — Jodocus Clich-
tovreus [Neoportiensis, Comment.] in
Damasc. Fid. Orthod. lib. i. c. 11. [Op.,
S.Joan. Damasc. p. 274. B. cd. Billii.] —
[Unde etiam ipsi Grjeci processionem
Spiritus Sancti aliquem ordinem
habere ad Filium intelligunt. Con-
coduut enim Spiritum Sanctum esse
Spiritum Filii, et esse a Patre per

Filium] Et quidam eorum dicuntur
concedere, quod sit a Filio, vel profluat
ab Eo, [non tamen quod procedat.
Quod videtur vel ex ignorantia vel
ex protervia esse.] — Thorn. [Aquin.
Summ.] P[ars] i. Q[usest.] xxxvi.
A[rt.] 2. [in conclus.] — Et Thomas
ipse dicit, Spiritum Sanctum proce-
dere mediate a Filio, saltem ratione
Personarum Spirantium : [sc. Ad pri-
mum ergo dicendum, quod in qualibet
actione est duo considerare, scilicet
suppositum agens, et virtutem qua
agit, sicut ignis calefacit calore. Si
igitur in Patre et Filio consideratur
A-irtus, qua spirant Spiritum Sanctum,
non cadit ibi aliquod medium : quia
hfec virtus est una et eadem. Si
autem considerentur ipsaj personaa spi-
rantes, sic cum Spiritus Sanctus com-
muniter procedat a Patre et Filio, in-
venitur Spiritus Sanctus immediate
a Patre procedere, in quantum est
ab Eo, et mediate in quantum est a
Filio.]— Ibid. A [rt.] 3. [Eesp.] ad 1.
— Eespondeo [igitur] cum Bessarione
et Gcnnadio, Damascenum non negasse
Spiritum Sanctum procedere ex Filio,
quod ad rem attinet, cum dixerit,
Spiritum esse imaginem Filii, et per
Filium [esse] ; sed existimasse, tutius
dici per Filium, quam ex Filio, quan-
tum ad modum loquendi, [propter
hisresim Macedonii, et Eunomii, qui
ex Filio, tanquam primaria, immo
etiam sola, causa processisse dicebaut
Spiritum Sanctum.] — Bellarm. Lib.
ii. de Christo c. 27. § Respondeo
igitur, [Op., tom. i. col. 372. B.]— Et
Toilet, in S. loann. xv. Annot. 25.
[Grajcus intelligens fatetur Spiritum
esse Filii et Patris, et a Patre proce-
dere, sed per Filium, quod non aliud
significat quam quod nos dicimus,
Filius producit Spiritum Sanctum a
Patre ; id est, habet a Patre produeere
Spiritum ; hoc est, Patrcm per Filium
produeere Spiritum Sanctum, sicut
Deus per Verbum omnia creavit. —
Toleti Cardinal, in loann. Evangel.
Comment, tom. ii. col. 131. ed. Lugd.
1615.] — Et liutheran. Eespons. ad
Respons. ii. Jeremiae Patriarchaj.
[Producimtur etiam Patres, clarissima
ilia Ecclesise lumina, quinetiam
Pontitices aliquot Romani, tanquam
testes, qui de processione Spiritus
Sancti a Patre loquantur : Athanasius

verbally, hut not essentially, from those of the West. 29

another thing ' to say, the Holy Ghost is the Spirit of the Section

Father and the Son, than that He is or proceeds from the .
Father and the Son, in this they seem to agree with us in
eandem fidei sententiam, ' upon the same sentence of faith,^
though they differ in words/' Now in this cause, where the
words differ, but "the sentence of faith" is "the same,'' "^ peni^
tus eadem, " even altogether the same," can the pomt be fun-
damental ? You may make them no Church, (as Bellarmine'^'
doth,) and so deny them salvation, which cannot be had out
of the true Church ; but I for my part dare not so do. And
Rome in this particular should be more moderate, if it be
but because this article, Filioque, was added to the Creed by
herself. And it is hard to add and anathematize too.

III. — It ought to be no easy thing to condemn a man of
heresy in foundation of faith ; much less a Church ; least of
all, so ample and large a Church as the Greek, especially so
as to make them no Chiu'ch, Heaven gates were not so
easily shut against multitudes, when S. Peter wore the keys
at his own girdle. And it is good counsel which Alphonsus a
Castro, one of youi' own, gives : " Let them consider, that pro-r
nounce easily of heresy, how easy it is for themselves to err."*

videlicet, Gregorius Theologus, &c. dem Theologis edita. piJ. 291^ — 293.

Agnoscimus sane inter ho3 ed. Witebergse, 1584.]

plerosque fuisse magnsB in Ecclesia <^ Eandem penitus sententiam, &c.

Dei authoritatis, et eorum saluberri- — Clichtov. ubi sup. [p. 28. note *=.]

mos labores cxosculamur, atque Deo '' Bellarmin. De Notis Ecclesia?,

pro eximiis donis, quae in ipsos con- lib. iv. c. 8. [Op., torn. ii. col. 183. D.

tulit, gratias agimus. Sed non vide- Dico secimdo, argnmentum a succes-

mus, quomodo ipsorum dicta a vobis sione legitima adferri a nobis prajcipue

allata cum nostra sententia pugnent. ad probandum non esse Ecclesiam, ubi

Idem enim dicunt, quod Christus; non est htec successio, quod quidem

quod videlicet Spiritus Sanctus a evidens est: ex quo tamen non colli-

Patre procedat. At nos hoc nunquam gilur necessario ibi esse Ecclesiam,

negavimus; neque unquam. Domino ubi est successio. Itaque hoc argu-

bene nos juvante, negabimus. Aliud mento probamus evidenter, non esse

autem est affirmare, quod Spiritus Ecclesiam apud Lutheranos.] Quod

Sanctus a Patre procedat : et aliud autem apud Grtecos [non sit Ecclesia,

dicere, quod non a Filio etiam i^roce- probamus alio modo, quia nimirum

dat. Primum dicunt illi Patres et convicti sunt legitime in tribus ple-

pontifices commemorati : alterum vero nariis conciliis, Lateranensi, Lugdu-

uequaquam dicunt. Quare cum nostra nensi et Plorentino, de schismate et

sententia non pugnant Quin- hteresi, ac prsecipue de haeresi circa

etiam vestri Patres nobiscum faciunt : processionem Spiritus Sancti a Filio,

licet verbis aliquatenus discrepent. quam esse manifestam hEeresim, Lu-

Athanasius certe, &c. — Acta et Scripta thei'ani et Calvinistae etiam confi-

Theologorum Wirtembergensium et tentur.J

Patriarchae Constantinopolitani D. <= Lib. iii. adv. Hasreses, in verbo

Hieremiae : quae utrique ab anno Beatitudo. [Secund. Hjeres.] fob 93. A.

MDLXxvi. usque ad annum mdlxxxi. [Alphonsi a Castro, Op., p. 211. F. ed.

de Augustana Confessione inter se Paris. 1571. Aut ergo Papias non est

miserunt : Grsece et Latine ab iis- haereticus censendus, aut alii qui eum

IX.

30 Are all Points defined by the Church, Fundamentals ?

Conference Or if you will pronoimce^ consider what it is that separates

WITH

Fisher, from the Churcli simply^ and not in part only. I must needs
profess, that I wish heartily, as well as others/ that those
distressed men, whose cross is heavy already, had been more
plainly and moderately dealt withal, though they think a
diverse thmg from us, than they have been by the Church of
Rome. But hereupon you say you were " forced,"

[A.C.p.44.] ^. Whereupon I was forced to repeat Avhat I had for-

merly brought against D. White concerning points
fundamental, [first reading* the sentence of S.
Augustme, Ferendus est disputator errans, &c., out of
which is proved, t that all points defined by the
Chui'ch are fundamental. J]

* [The Chaplain's corrupt copy hath "righting," instead of " reading," the
sentence of S. Austin. The whole sentence is set down by the Chaplain thus :
" This is a thing founded. An erring disputer is to be borne withal in other
questions not diligently digested, not yet made firm by full authority' of the
Church, — there error is to be borne with. But it ought not to go so far that it
should labour to shake the foundation itself of the Church." — S. August. Serm.
14. de Verbis Apost. cap. 12. — A. C. marg. note to p. 44.]

+ [Out of this place we may gather that all points defined are fundamental.
" All points defined are," as S. Austin speaketh, " made firm by full authority
of the Church." But all points made firm by full authority of the Church are
fundamental, in such sense as the Jesuit taketh the word " fundamental," that
is, in S. Austin's language, such as cannot be denied, or doubtfully disputed
against, without shaking the foundation of the Church. For denying or doubt-
fully disputing against any one, why not against another, and another, and so
against all ? — since all are made firm to us by one and the same divine
revelation, sufficiently applied by one and the same full authority of the
Church ; which being weakened in any one, cannot be to [so] firm in any
other. — A. C. marg. note to p. 45.]

% [By the word " fundamental," is understood not only those lyrinia credi-
hilia, or prime principles, which do not depend upon any former grounds ; for
then all the articles of the creed were not, as both the 13. and D. White say
theyai'e, fundamental points; but all which do so pertain to supernatural,
divine, infallible, Christian faith, by M'liich faith Christ the only prime
foundation of the Church doth dwell in our hearts (1 Cor. iii. 11.), and which
faith is to the Church the substance, basis, and foundation of all good things
which are to be hoped for (Heb. xi. [1.]), as that, thej' being once confirmed or
made firm by full authority of the Church, if they are wittingly, willingly, and
especially oltstinatclj', denied or questioned, all the whole frame, and in a sort
the foundation itself, of all supernatural Divine Christian faith, is shaken. —
A. C. marg. note to p. 45.]

in hac parte sunt .secuti, eadem ratione ' Junius, Animad[versione8] in Bel-

dicentur liasrctici. Hajc omnia in lar[min.] Controv. ii. lib. ii. [de

medium placuit adferre,] ut videant Christo,] cap. 23. [1. Art. 10. Op., torn.

hi, qui facile do hoeresi prouuntiant, ii, col. 564. ed. Geuev. 1613. Yiderint

quam facile etiam ipsi crrent : et ergo homines nostri, quo jure Grsecis

intelligant, non esse tarn Icviter de et Orientalibus Ecclesiis assensum

h£eresi censendum, [proecipue cum non prsebitum, et ex assensu mendacium

sit pejus crimen quod viro Chris- perfidiamque secutam objiciant. Mihi

tiano possit impingi, quam si hterc- profecto non liquet, ut dicam ex

ticus appelletur.] solemni formula. Simplicius mode-

The Scholastic Theory of Fundamentals, 31

%, I. — Hereupon it is true, that you read a large discourse Section
out of a book printed, which you said was yours ; the particu-

lars, all of them at the least, I do not now remember, nor did I § 10.
then approve. But if they be such as were formerly brought
against Doctor White, they are by him formerly answered.
The first thing you did was the righting^ of S. Augustine :
which sentence I do not at all remember was so much as
named in the conference, much less was it stood upon, and
then righted by you. Another place of S. Augustine indeed
was (which you omit) ; but it comes after, about tradition, to
which I remit it. But now you tell us of a great j)roof made
out of this place ;^ for these words of yours contain two pro-
positions. One, '^that all points defined by the Church are
fundamental ; " the other, " that this is proved out of this
place of S. Augustine.-"

II. — 1. For the first, " that all points defined by the Church
are fundamental." It was not the least means by which Rome
grew to her greatness, to blast every opposer she had with
the name of heretic, or schismatic ; for this served to shrivel
the credit of the persons ; and the persons once brought into
contempt and ignominy, all the good they desired in the
Church fell to dust, for want of creditable persons to back
and support it. To make this proceeding good in these later
years, this course, it seems, was taken. The school, that
must maintain, (and so they do,) "that all points defined
by the Church are thereby fundamental,^ necessary to
be believed,'^ of the substance of the faith,^ and that,

ratiusquc agi cum iis qui diversum Q[uffist.] i. Art[ic.] 10. C[onclusio . . .

a nobis sentiunt optaverim.] Eespondeodicendum, quod .... nova

e " First rigliting tlie sentence of S. editio symboli necessaria est ad vitan-

Augustine, Ferendus est dlsputator dum insurgentes hffireses. Ad illius

errans, &c." Here A. C. p. 44, tells us ergo auctoritatem pertinet editio sym-

very learnedly,_tliat my corrupt copy boli, ad cujus auctoritatem pertinet

hatli ricjhting instead of reading tlie finaliter dcterminare ea quse sunt

sentence of S. Augustine. Whereas I fidei, ut ab omnibus inconcussa fide

here use the word righting, not as it teneantur. Hoc autem pertinet ad

is opposed to reading, (as any man auctoritatem summi pontificis, ad

may discern A. C. palpably mistakes,) quem majores et difficiliores Ecclesice

but for doi7ig right to S. Augustine ; qusestiones, ut dicitur in v. Decret.

and if I had meant it for ivi'iting, I Distinct. 43.]

should not have spelled it so. ' Scotus [in] I. Sentent. D[istinct.].

•> "By which is proved, that all xi. Q[u0est.] 1. [Op., tom. v. par. 1.

points defined by the Church are p. 858. Quicquid sit de eis, ex quo

fundamental."— [A. C. p. 44.] Ecclesia Catholica declaravit hoc esse

' Your own word. tenendum, sicut de substantia fidei,

'' Inconcussa fide ab omnibus. — sicut patet Extrav. de Summ. Trin.

Thom. [Aquin.] Secund. Secund. et Fid. Cathol. Cap. Firmiter,

32 Distinction betiveen the Church in general and a General Council.

WITH

Fisher.

Conference thoiigli it be determined quite ewtra Scripturam."^^^ And then
leave the wise and active heads to take order,'' that there be
strength enough ready to determine what is fittest for them.
III. — But since these men distinguish not, nor you^betAveen
the Church in general and a General Council, which is but her
representation for determinations of the faith ; though I be
very slow in sifting or opposing what is concluded by lawful,
general, and consenting authority ; though I give as much as
can justly be given to the definitions of Councils truly
general ; nay, suppose I should grant, which I do not, that
General Councils cannot err ; yet this cannot down with me,
that all points even so defined are fimdamental. For
deductions are not prime and native principles; nor are
superstructures foundations. That which is a foundation for
all, cannot be one and another to different Christians in
regard of itself ; for then it coidd be no common rule for any,
nor could the souls of men rest vipon a shaking foundation.
No : if it be a true foundation, it must be common to all.

tenendum est, quod Spiritus Sanctus
procedat ab Utroque.j

™ [Tales autem sunt hajreticorum
profanse voces, non solum extra
Scripturam, sed etiam extra omnem
ecclesiasticam tr.aditionem et auctori-
tatem privato judicio prolataj. Nam]
eeclesiastica.s voces, etiam extra
Scripturas, [iidem illi Sancti Patres
studiosissime receperunt.] — Stapleton,
[Eelectio Scholastica principiorum
fidci doctrinalium per controversias,
quaestiones ct articulos tradita ;] Con-
trov. [Capitalis,] iv. [De Potest. Eccl.]
Quccst. i. Art. 3. [solut. argumentorum.
Op., torn. i. p. 743. D. ed. Paris. 1G20.]
— [Sed] qute [Ecclesia ab Apostolo-
rum usque temporibus firma ct certa
traditione accepit, vel contra htereses
in causa fidei] maturo judicio de-
finivit, [vel pro loco et tempore in
morihus definiendum censuit,] etiam
si nullo Scripturarum, aut evident!,
aut probabili, tcstimoiiio confirmetur,
solidum tamcn [et indubitatum
cuivis fideli et vero Ecclesia; filio esse
debet.]— Ibid. [p. 744. A.]

" Et penes Cercopcs victoria sit.
— Greg. Nazian. de Differen. Vitae.
[Carm xvii. (al. x.) 1. 101. de diversis
vitai gcneribu.s, et ad versus falsos
episcopos. Op., tom. ii. p. 854. cd.
Benedict. 1840. et tom. ii. p. 81. B.
ed. Paris. 1630.

Tavra /■lei', oicri cl)i\ui/, km. KepKiiirwv

KpaTOS ill)'

Avrctptycii Xpicnov irX-^aoixai aTpe/Uewj/.]
— Cercopes vocat astutos et veteratoriae
[cujusdam] improbitatis Episcopos,
qui artibus suis ac dolis concilia
omnia pcrturbabant. — Schol. ibid.
[?". e. Jacob. Billii, in Carm. Greg.
Nazianz. tom. ii. col. 1361 D. ed.
Paris. 1630. — 'AyopcJ KepKunrcav' id
est, Coetus Cercopum, de concilia-
bulo conventuque versutorum et
improborum hominum dicebatur.
Narrant euim, Cercopes quosdam in
Epheso fuisse, notae fraudulcntia^
viros, qui suis dolis conati siut ipsi
Jovi imponere. Hos admonuerat
mater ue in Mclampygum inciderent,
id quod evcnit. Nam post ab Hercule
vincti sunt, jussu Omphales. Qui-
dam aiunt, quosdam ob imposturas et
malas artes KepKwrras, quasi caudatos,
appellatos fuisse apud Ephesios alque
Athenienses : ut idem sit sensus
hujus adagioni.?, et illius cujus alibi
meminimus, \iikov d^Kcis. (col. 584.)
Torquet hoc convitium ^Eschines in
Dcmostlienem (de Falsa Leg. c. xvii. et
ibi Schol.) OTi fdv oiiv ?iv ttoO' 6 KepKWij/,
r] TO KaAov/j.ei'ov TraiTraATjyua, rj rd
Tra\i/j.^o\ov, rj rd Toiavra prj/uara, oiiK
(jSeiv TTpoTepov' — Erasm. Adag. Chi),
li.ccnt. vii. 35. col. 592, 593. ed. Colon.
1612.]

Articles of the Creed the only necessary Fundamentals. 33

and firm under all ; in which sense the Articles of Christian Section
Faith are fundamental. And Irenseus^ lays this for a ^'
ground^ that the whole Church, howsoever dispersed in place,
speaks this with one moutli : " He, which among the guides
of the Clnu'ch is best able to speak, utters no more than this;
and less than this, the most simple doth not utter." There-
fore the creed, of which he speaks, is a common, is a con-
stant foundation. And an explicit faith must be of this, in
them which have the use of reason; for both guides and
simple people, all the Chm'cli, utter this.

IV. — Now, many things are defined by the Church, which
are but deductions out of this : which, suppose them deduced
right, move far from the foundation — without which de-
ductions explicitly believed, many millions of Christians go
to heaven — and cannot therefore be fundamental in the
faith. True deductions from the article may require ne-
cessary beHef, in them which are able, and do go along with
them from the principle to the conclusion. But I do not
see, either that the learned do make them necessary to all,
or any reason why they should. Therefore they cannot be
fundamental ; and yet to some men's salvation they are
necessary.

V. — Besides, that which is fundamental in the faith of
Christ, is a rock immovable, and can never be varied ; never.?

_ ° Quum enim una et eadem fides nationem, &c. — [Magistri Jacobi] Al-

sit, neque is qui mnltum de ipsa dicere main, in III. [Sentent.] D[istinct.J

potest, plusquam oportet, dicit ; neque xxv. Q[uasst.] 1. [Conclus. 7. fol. Ixxx.

qui parum, ipsam immiuuit. — Iren. ed. Lugd. 1527. — Almaiu's words are :

lib. i. Advers. Hajres. c. 3. [Kai o&Ve Sed ecclesia bene determinat de pro-

o -Kavv dvvarhs Iv Xuyco rwv if rats positionibus catbolicis, de quibus erat

iKK\7jaiais irpoicnuiTuiv, erepa ToiTav dubium prius, an essent catholicse

epel- {ovo^h ycLp virhp tov StSdaKaXoi',) vel non, quod sint catholicse : nam

ovre (' afr0ej/^js ev tSi AJ79; iKamilxjn sunt aliqure catholicEe, et tamen est

T7JI/ irapdSoaiv ixicis yap Kol ttjs avTrjs dubium, quia non continentur ex-

TTi'iTTecos ovffrjs, oure 6 ito\v wepl avTTjs pressse in sacris literis. sed deducun-

Swdi-ievos eiTreir, eirXeovaaei', oi/re tur ex aliquibus contentis in sacris

TO oxlyov, r]\aTTuvnae. — Iran, contra literis. Ecclesia potest determinare

Haereses, lib. i. cap. 3. (al. x. 2.) in fin. quod sint catholicae : tamen sic deter-

pp. 47, 47. ed. Grabe. Oxon. 1702.] minando non facit quod sint catho-

P Kesolutio Occhami est, quod nee licte, quum prius essent ante ecclesise

tota ecclesia, nee concilium generale, determiuationem, et sic facit ecclesia

nee summus pontifex potest facere quod non remanet amplius dubium

articulum, quod non fuit articulus. an illaj sint catholicse. Exemplum :

Sed in dubiis propositionibus potest determlnavit Ecclesia quod Spiritus

ecclesia determinare, an sint catho- Sanctus procedebat a Patre et Filio ;

licae, &c. Tamen sic determinando non facit'quod non prius fuerit Catho-

non facit quod sint catbolicse, quum lica; sed quod non amplius est dubium

prius essent ante ecclesiae determi- de ilia, de qua licebat prius dubitare.

VOL. II. — LAUD.

34 The Church cannot add to the Faith.

Conference Therefore, if it be fundamental after the Church hath
YisuiTK. (defined it, it was fundamental before the definition ; else it is

movable ; and then no Christian hath where to rest. And

if it be immovable,^ as indeed it is, no decree of a council,
be it never so general, can alter immoveable verities, no more
than it can change immovable natures. Therefore if the
Church in a coimcil define any thing, the thing defined is
not fundamental because the Clmrch hath defined it; nor
can be made so by the definition of the Chm-ch, if it be not
so in itself. For if the Church had this power, she might
make a new article of the faith, which the learned among
yourselves deny : ^ for the articles of the faith cannot increase
in substance, but only in explication.^ And for this, I will be
judged by Bellarmine, hvho, disputing against Amb[rosius]
Catliarinus, about the certainty of faith, tells us, "that divine
faith hath not its certaintv because it is Catholic, i.e. com-
raon to the whole Chiu'ch, but because it builds on the
authority of God, AVTio is truth itself, and can neither deceive
nor be deceived." And he adds, "that the probation of the
Church can make it known to all, that the object of divine
faith is revealed from God, and therefore certain, and not to
be doubted; but the Church can add no certainty, no firm-
ness to the word of God revealing it."

YI. — Nor is this hard to be farther proved out of your own
school ; for Scotus professeth it in this very particular of

— Cf. Gulielmi de Ockam Dialogus, ecclesia nee papa potest facere novum

liber secundus primiB partis, c. 12. 14. artieulum. — Ibid, paiilo supra.]

It is contained in Melchior. Goldasti ' Thom. [Aquin.] Secund. Secund.

Jlonarchia S Romani Imperii, torn. Qujest. i. Art. 7. C[onclus. Dicendum

ii. p. 419 et sqq. ed. Francof. 1614.] est, quod quantum ad substantiam

1 Regula [quidem] Fidei una om- articulorum fidei, non est factum

nino est, sola immobilis, et irreforma- corum augmentum per temponim

bilis. — Tcrtul. de Virg. vel. cap. i. .successionem, quia qufecunque pos-

[p. 173. A.] In hac fide, &c. Nihil teriores crediderunt, continebantur in

transmutare, &c. — Athan. Epist. ad fide prsecedentium patrum, licet im-

Jovian. de fide. [TauxTj tt? tt'ktth, plicite. Sed quantum ad explicatio-

Avyovcrre, iravras iiri/xei/eiv dvayKouov, nem crevit numerus articulorum ;

(is 6fla Koi airoa-To\tKrj , koI fxr^Seva quia quaedam explicite cognita sunt

fierdKivfiu avrrjv iridavoXoyiais Koi a posterioribus, qufe a prioribus non

\oy ojjiaxlais, owep ireiruii^Kaatv oi COgnoscebantur explicite.]

'ApetofiavlTai- k. t. A. — Sect. iv. Op., ' [Quod vero Concilium, (.sc. Tri-

tom. i. parsii. p. 782 A. ed. Benedict ] dentinum), non rejiciat certitudinem

' Occham. [as quoted by] Almain. solius fidei Catholicas, sed omnis

in III. Sent. D[istinct.] xxv. Q[uaest.] divine fidei, intelligi potest primum

1. [Sed utrum ecclesia possit facere ex eo, quod Concilium, data opera,

artieulum novum quod tangit Ocham non fecit mentionem fidei Catholicae,

in secundo libro dialogi in prima ut similibus glossis aditum prEeclu-

parte, dicit re-solutorie, quod ncc deret, et omnem fidem veram atque

Office of the Church to declare the Faith. 35

the Greek Churcli : " " If there he," saith he, " a true real Section

difference between the Greeks and the Latins, about the _
point of the procession of the Holy Ghost, then either they
or we be vere haretici, truly and indeed heretics." And he
speaks this of the old Greeks, long before any decision of the
Church in this controversy: for his instance is in S. Basil,
and Greg[ory] Nazianz[en] on the one side, and S. Jerome,
Augustine, and Ambrose, on the other. "And who dares call
any of these heretics ? " is his challenge. I deny not, but
that Scotus adds there, that howsoever this was before, yet
ex quo, from the time that the Catholic Church declared it,
it is to be held as of the substance of the faith. But this
cannot stand with his former principle, if he intend by it,
that whatsoever the Cluirch defines, shall be ipso facto, and
for that determination's sake, fundamental. For if before
the determination, supposing the difference real, some of
those worthies were truly heretics, as he confesses, then
somewhat made them so. And that could not be the decree
of the Church, which then was not. Therefore it must be
somewhat really false, that made them so; and funda-
mentally false, if it made them heretics against the fomida-
tion. But Scotus was wiser than to intend this. It may
be, he saw the stream too strong for him to swim against,
therefore he went on with the doctrine of the time, That the
Church's sentence is of the substance of faith ; but meant
not to betray the truth. For he goes no fm^ther than
ecclesia declaravit, " since the Church hath declared it,"
which is the word that is used by divers.'^

divinam includeret. Deinde ex eo, subesse nequeat, quoniam est de

quod disertis verbis docet, neminem objecto probate ab Ecclesia, fidei

esse, qui non possit de sua gratia autem divinte particular! falsum sub-

formidare. At qui habet certitudinem esse potest, quoniam est de objecto

fidei non possit fonnidare : alioqui non probato ab Ecclesia. Respondeo,

facit injuriam divina; fidei. Tertio, novam atque inauditam banc esse

quoniam omnis] fides divina [habet doctrinam, ut fidei divinas possit

certitudinem fidei Catholicae, fides subesse fiilsum, antequam ejus objec-

enim non est certa, quia Catholica, tum probatum fuerit ab Ecclesia.]

sed quia divina.] Non [enim] ideo Probatio [enim] Ecclesia3 facit, ut

certitudinem habet [fides,] quia toti omnibus innotescat, objectum illud (sc.

Ecclesiee communis est, sed quia fidei divinse) esse revelatum a Deo, et

nititur auctoritate Dei, qui nee falli, propter hoc certum et indubitatum ;

nee fallere, potest, cum sit ipsa non autem tribuit firmitatem verbo

Veritas.— [Bellarmin.] de Justif. lib. Dei aliquid revelantis. — Ibid,

iii. c. 3. [Op., torn. iv. col. 951. A. B.] " Scotus in I. Sent. D[istinct.] xi.

— [At, inquit Catharinus, soli fidei Q[u8est.] 1. [ubi supra, p. 28. note -■.]

CatholicEe convenit, ut et falsum ^ Bellarm. de Concil. auctoritat.

Fundamentals are such, not because the Church declares

Conference

WITU

Fisher.

VII. — Now the mastery toadies, and the scholars Hoo, tliat
every thing which belongs to the exposition or declaration
of another, intus est, is not another contrary thing, but is
contained within the bowels and nature of that which is
interpreted; from which if the declaration depart, it is
faulty and erroneous, because, instead of declaring, it gives
another and contrary sense. ^ Therefore, when the Church

lil). ii. cap. 12. [Op., torn. ii. col. 86.
C. At concilia non habent, ncque scri-
bunt iminediatas revelationes, aut
verba Dei, sed tantum declarant,
quodnam sit verbum Dei scriptiim,
vel traditum, et quomodo intelligi
debeat, ct prajtcrea ex eo per ratio-
cinationem deducunt conclusiones.
Itaque] concilia cum definiunt, [qui
.sint libri canonici et divini,] non
faciunt eos esse infallibilis veritatis,
sed declarant [solum esse tales.] —
[Haeretici multa quce erant implicita
fidei nostrse, sua importunitate com-
pulerunt] explicare. — Bonavent. in I.
[Sentent.] Distinct, xi. Art. 1. Qusest.
1. [in conclus. ad vi. Op., tom. iv. p. 95.
E. Ed. Mogunt. IC',%Q.]— [Ad secundum.
dicendum . . . Sequens concilium non
faciebat aliud symbolum, quam pri-
mum ; sed id quod implicite contine-
batur in primo symbolo, per aliqua
addita] explanahatur [contra hasreses
insurgentes. Unde in determinatione
Chalcedonensis synodi dicitur, quod
illi qui fuerunt congregati in concilio
Constantinopolitano, doctrinam de
Spiritu Sancto tradiderunt : non quod
minus esset in prtecedentibus, qui
apud Nicaeam congregati sunt, in-
ferentes ; sed intellectum eorum
adversus hsereticos] declarantes. —
Thom. [Aquin.] 1. [Summ.] Quajst.
XXX vi. Art. 2. in Conclus. Rcspons. ad
2 — YA, [Ad primum dicendum ....
necessaria fuit temporibus prajceden-
tibus] expUcatio [fidei contra insur-
gentes errores.] — Thom, [Aquin.] Se-
cund. Secund. QuEest. i. Art. 10.
in Conclus. Rcspons. ad 1. — Quid
unquara aliud (Ecclesia) Conciliorum
decrctis eni.sa est, nisi ut quod antca
simplicitcr crcdebatur, hoc idem
po.^tea diligentius credereturl — Vin.
Lir. cont. Hajr. c. xxxii. [p. 71. ed.
Colon. 1585.]

_ '' [Petr. Lomb.] Sent. I. D[is-
tinct.j xi. [Quicunque, inquiunt
Orjeci, a Filio Eum procedere addunt,
anathema ineurrunt : unde ct nos
arguunt anathematis reos In

symbolo enim Constantinopolitano,
in processions Spiritus solus com-
memoratur Pater. . . . lUud est sym-
bolum, quod in missa cantatur,
editum in Niceno concilio ; in fine
cujus subjunctum est. Qui aliud
docuerit, vel alitor prasdicaverlt, ana-
thema sit : ideoque Gra^ci nos anathe-
matizatos dicunt, (juia dicimus Spiri-
tum Sanctum a Filio procedere, quod
ibi non continetur .... a Latinis est
additum^/io</Me. Nos autem verba ita
determinamus. Qui aliud docuerit,
vel aliter prtedicaverit, id est, con-
trarium docuerit, vel contrario modo
prajdicaverit, anathema sit. Aliud
ergo posuit pro op)posito, qualiter et
Apost. in Epist. ad Galat. (i. 9.)
Si quis aliud evangelizaverit, id est,
contrarium, anathema sit. Non
dicit, Si quis addiderit. Nam si illud
diceret, sibi ipsi, ut ait Augustinus,
prEejudicaret, qui cupiebat venire ad
quosdam quibus scribebat, sicut I. ad
Thessalonien. (iii. 10.) ut suppleret
qu£e illorum fidei deerant. Sed qui
supplet quod minus erat, addit : non
quod inerat, tollit. — fol. 30. C. ed.
Paris. 1575.]

'■ Alb. Magn. 'in I. Sentent. D[is-
tinct.] xi. Art. 7. [Contrariuvi sacrce
Scrip)turcB quid sit. Deinde quajritur
de his quod dicit, (Qui aliud docuerit,
vel aliter praedicaverit, &c.) Ilia enim
expositio non videtur conveniens :
quia non quodlibet aliud est con-
trarium. Ad hoc dicendum, quod in
expositionibus tenet talis ratio : Quod
nihil aliud est nisi contrarium :
omne enim quod pertinet ad declara-
tioncm intus est ; et id quod non est
intus contrarium est. Unde Ansel-
mus, Omnis Veritas Sacr£e Scripturje
Veritas est qua; Sacraa Scriptura; non
contradicit. — Scriptum primum Alb.
Magn, Ratisbon. Episcop. in Sentent.
libros, tom. i. ed. Basil. 1506.]

" Hoc [inquam,] semper, nee quic-
quam prseterea. — Vin. Lir. c. xxxii.
[p. 71.]

them, but because of the nature of the Truth declared.

declares any tliiug in a Council, either that which she de-
clares was intus, or extra — in the nature and verity of the
thing*, or out of it. If it were extra, without the nature of
the thing declared, then the declaration of the thing is false,
and so, far from being fundamental in the faith. ^ If it
were intus, within the compass and nature of the thing,
though not open and apparent to every eye, then the
declaration is true, but not otherwise fundamental than the
thing is which is declared : for that which is intus, cannot
be larger or deeper than that in which it is ; if it were, it
could not be intus. Therefore nothing is simply funda-
mental because the Church declares it, but because it is so
in the nature of the thing which the Church declares.

VIII. — And it is a slight and poor evasion that is commonly
used, that the declaration of the Church makes it funda-

Section
X.

^ In nova hseresi Veritas prius
erat de fide, etsi non ita declarata. —
[Joannes Duns] Scotus, [Doctor
Subtil.] in I. [Sentent] D[istinct.] xi.
Q[ua3st.] i. in fine. [His words are:
Multa igitur docuit eos, (sc. discipulos)
Spiritus Sanctus, quffi non sunt
scripta in Evangelio, et ilia multa
quEedam per Scripturam, quajdam
perconsuetudineni tradiderunt. Simi-
liter di versa symbola diversis tempo-
ribus sunt edita contra diversas
ba3reses de novo orientcs, quia quando
insurgebat nova hEeresis, necessarium
erat declarare veritatem, contra quam
erat ilia baeresis : qua3 Veritas, etsi
prius erat de fide, non tamen erat
prius tantum declarata, sicut tunc
contra errorem illorum, qui eam
negabant. — Scoti Op., torn. v. p. 859.
ed. Lugd. 1639.— Ad illud quod
objicitur de conciliis, dicendum quod
nee in conciliis illis sunt omnia
instituta, quaj spectant ad mores, nee
etiam omnia dicta quss ad fidem
pertinent, sicut in Symbolo quod
cantatur in missa nibil dicitur de
descensu ad inferos. Sed nunquam
latuit sanctos patres processio Spiri-
tus Sancti a Filio : et si non latuit,
quare non dixerunt I Credo quod non
latuit, sicut per antiques Grsecorum,
quorum Magister adducit auctorita-
tem in litera : sed tamen non fait
expressum, quia nou erat opus.
NuUus enim negabat, nee negare
volebat. Sed] hajretici multa quaj
erant implicita fidei nostra}, [sua
importunitate] compulcrunt explicure.

— Bonavent. in 1. [Sentent.] D[istinct.]
xi. A[rt.] 1. Q[u£est ] 1. [in conclus. ad
vi.] ad finem. [Op., tom. iv. p. 95.
— Ad secundum dicendum, quod in
quolibet concilio, institutum fuit
symbolum aliquod propter errorem
aliquem qui in concilio damnabatur.
Undo sequens concilium non faciebat
aliud symbolum quam primum, sed id
quod implicite continebatur in primo
symbolo, per aliqua addita explana-
batur contra bsereses insurgentes ....
in tempore antiquorum conciliorum,
nondum exortusfuerat error dicentium
Spiritum Sanctum non procedere a
Filio ; non fuit necssarium quod hoc
explicite poneretur. . . . Continebatur
tamen implicite in hoc ipso, quod
dicebatur Spiritus Sanctus a Patre
procedere.] — Thom. [Aquin. Summ
i. Q[uEest.] xxxvi. A[rt.] 2. [Resp,
ad 2. [Admonere tamen hie oportet,
quod] quam vis Apostolica sedes,
aut generale concilium de ha3resi
censere possit, non tamen ideo
assertio aliqua erit liajresis, quia
Ecclesia definivit, sed quia fidei
Catholicaa repugnat. Ecclesia siqui-
dem sua definitione non facit talem
assertionem esse heeresim, quum,
etiamsi ipsa non definivisset, esset
hferesis ; sed id etficit [ecclesia] ut {no-
bis per suam censuram] pateat, [illud
esse lia3resim, quod contra nos latebat
an merito hasresis dici posset.] —
Alphon. a Castro. L[ib.] i. Advers.
Haires. c. viii. fol. 21. D. [Op., col.
49. E.]

38 Therefore the Church cannot make Truths fundamental.

Conference mental quoad nos, "in respect of us;" for it doth not that
FisnER neither : for no respect to us can vary the foundation. The

Church's declaration can hind us to peace and external

obedience, where there is not express letter of Scripture and
sense agreed on ; hut it cannot make anything fundamental
to us, that is not so in its own nature. For if the Church
can so add, that it can by a declaration make a thing to be
fundamental in the faith, that was not ; then it can take a
thing away from the foundation, and make it, by declaring,
not to be fundamental ; which all men grant, no power of
the Church can do. "^"For the power of adding anything
contrary, and of detracting anything necessary, are ahke

Deut. iv. 2. forbidden,"'^ and alike denied. Now, nothing is more
apparent than this to the eye of all men : That the Church
of Rome hath determined, or declared, or defined (call it
what you will), very many things, that are not in their own
nature fundamental ; and therefore neither are, nor can be,
made so by her adjudging them. Now to all this discom'se.
That the Church hath not power to make anything funda-
mental in the faith, that intrinsically and in its own natui'C
is not such, A. C. is content to say nothing.

IX. — 2. For the second. That it is proved by this place of
S. Augustine, " That all points defined by the Church are
fundamental.^' You might have given me that place cited in
the margin, and eased my pains to seek it ; but it may be
there was somewhat in conceahng it. For you do so extraor-
dinarily " right this place," that you were loth (I think) any-
body should see how you wrong it. The place of S. Augustine
is this, against the Pelagians, about remission of original sin
in infants : ^ " This is a thing founded : an erring disputer
is to be borne with in other questions not diligently digested,

" Ecclesia non amputat iiccessaria, damentum.] — Thorn. [Aquin.] Supp.

non appouit superflua. — Vin. Lir. [Tert, part. Summ.] Q[uffist.] vi. A[rt.]

c xxxii. [p. 71.] 6. C. [Op., torn, ix.]

'' [Mini-stri Eccleaiaj instituuntur ' Augustin. Serm. xiv. de Verb.

in Ecclesia divinitus fimdata et ideo Apost.c. 21. [Serm. ccxciv. de Baptism,

institutio Ecclesise prsesupponitur ad Parvul. cap. 21. (20.) in fin. Op., torn. v.

operatiouem ministrorum . . . . ideo col. 1193. F.ed. Benedict. Impetremus

ad ministros Ecclesia novos articulos ergo, .si possumus,afratribusnostris,ne

fidei edere, aut cditos removere, aut nos insuper appellent hfereticos, quod

nova sacramenta instituere, aut in- cos talia disputantes nos appellare

ptituta removere non pertinet, scd hoc po.ssimus forsitan, si velimus, ncc ta-

cst potcstatis excellenlis quae soli de- men appellamus. Sustinent eos mater

betur Christo, qui est Ecclesite fun- piis visceribus sanandos, portet docen-

S. Augustine on the Church's Authority in defining.

not yet made firm by full authority of the Churcli ; there
error is to be borue with ; but it ought uot to go so far that
it should labour to shake the foundation itself of the
Church/^ This is the place ; but it can never follow out of
this place, I think, that every thing defined by the Church
is fundamental.

X. — For, first, he speaks of a " foundation of doctrine in
Scripture/^ not " a Church definition/^ This appears : for,
few lines before, he tells us,^ " There was a question moved
to S. Cyprian, whether baptism was concluded to the eighth
day, as well as circumcision ? And no doubt was made then
of the beginning of sin [origine peccati) , and that out of this
thing, about which no question was moved [ex ea re, unde
nulla erat qucestio, soluta est exorta quastio), that question
that was made, was answered." And again, "That S.Cy-
prian took that which he gave in answer from the foundation
of the Church, to confirm a stone that was shaking {Hoc de
fundamento Ecclesite sumpsit ad confirmandum lapidem nu-
tanteni)" Now S. Cyprian, in all the answer that he gives,^

Section
X.

dos, ne plangat mortuos. Nimium
est quo progrediuntur : multum est,
vix ferendum est, magiiEe patientise
adhue ferri. Noii abutantur hac
patieutia Ecclesice ; corrigantur, bo-
num est. Ut amici exhortamur, non
lit inimici litigamus. Detrahunt
nobis, ferimus : canoni non detra-
hant, veritati non detrahant, Ecclesije
Sanctse pro remissione peccati ori-
ginalis parvulorum quotidie laboranti
non contradicaut.] Fundata [ista] res
est. Ferendus est disputator errans
in aliis qiiiestionibus non diligenter
digestis, nondum plena Ecclesite
authoritate firmatis ; ibi ferendus est
error : non tantum progredi debet, ut
etiani fundamentum ipsum Ecclesise
quatere moliatur.

' Ibid. cap. 20. [Ad hoc ergo lego
sanctum Cyprianum, ut videatis quo-
modo sit intellectus canonicus et ca-
tholicus sensus in his verbis, qute
paulo ante tractavi. Interrogatus est,
utrum infans baptizari debeat ante
octavum diem : quia vetere lege non
licebat circumcidi infautem, nisi octavo
die. Qusestio inde erat nata, de die
baptizandi : nam dc origiue peccati
nulla erat (jufestio ; et ideo ex ea re,
unde nulla erat quaestio, soluta est
exorta quaestio. Sanctiis Cyprianus

dixit (in Epist. 59, ad Fidum,) inter
csetera, quas superius dixit : " Propter
quod neminem putamus, &;c." . . Videte
quemadmodum de hac re nihil dubi-
tans, solvit illam unde dubitabatur.
Hoc de fundamento Ecclesise sumsit,
ad confirmandum lapidem nutantem.
—Ibid. col. 1193. B.]

e [Propter quod neminem putamus
a gratia consequenda impediendum
esse ea lege quge jam statuta est, nee
spiritalem circumcisionem impediri
carnali circumcisione debere, sed om-
nem omnino hominem admittendum
esse ad gratiam Christi, quando et
Petrus in Actis Apostolorum (x. 28.)
loquaturetdicat : Dominus mild dixit
neminem hominem communem dicen-
dum et immundum. Ca;teriim si
homines impedire aliquid ad consecu-
tionem gratise possit, magis adultos
et provectos et majores natu possent
impedire peccata graviora. Porro au-
tem si etiam gravissimis delictoribus
et in Deum multum ante peccantibus,
cum postea crediderint, remissa pecca-
tonim datur, et a baptismo atque a
gratia nemo prohibetur, quanto magis
prohiberi non debet infans, qui recens
natus nihil peccavit, nisi quod secun-
dum Adam carnaliter natus contagium
mortis antiquie prima nativitate con-

40 That the Church's Decisions are not to be ojtposed,

Conference hath not 0110 worcl of aiw definition of the Chm-ch : therefore

AVI Til

Fisher. ^^ '^'^^> " *l^^t thing " hy which he answered, was a foundation
of prime and settled Scriptm'e doctrine, not any definition
of the Church: therefore, that which he took out of the
foundation of the Church, to fasten the stone that shook,
was not a definition of the Church, but the foundation of the
Church itself, the Scripture upon which it is builded : as
appeareth in the Milevitane Council;^ where the rule, by

Kom.v. 15. which Pelagius was condemned, is the rule of Scripture;
therefore S. Augustine goes on in the same sense, that "the
disputer is not to be borne any longer, that shall endeavour
to shake the foundation itself, upon which the whole Church
is grounded" [ut fundamentum ipsumEcclesia quatere moliatur) .
XI. — Secondly, if S. Augustine did mean by "founded,"
and " foundation," the definition of the Chui'ch, because of
these words, " This thing is founded ; this is made firm by full
authority of the Church ;" and the words following these,
" to shake the foundation of the Chui'ch ;" yet it can never
follow, out of any or all these circumstances (and these are
all), that all points defined by the Church are fundamental
in the faith. For, first, no man denies but the Church is a

] Tim. iii. foundation ; that things defined by it, are founded upon it :
and yet hence it cannot follow, that the thing that is so
founded is fundamental in the faith: for things may be
founded upon human authority," and be very certain, yet not

traxit, qui ad remissam peccatorum caverunt, nisi quemadmodum ecclesia

accipiendam hoc ipso faciliui5 accedit catholica ubique diflFusa semper iutel-

quod illiremittuntur non propria, sed lexit. Propter banc enim regulam

ahena peccata.— S. Cyprian. Ep. lix. fidei, etiam parvuli, qui nihil pecca-

QQ "^™R Infant. Baptizand. Op., torum in semetip.sisadhuccommittere

p. 99- ed. Benedict.] potuerunt, ideo in peccatorum remis-

nr ^o"C'I. Milevitan. [a.d. 416.] sionem veraciter baptizantur, ut in eis

L[anon.J n. [Item placuit, ut quicun- regeneratione mundctur, quod "-cnera-

queparvulosrecentesab uteris matrum tione traxcrunt.— Concil. tom ii col

baptizandos negat, aut dicit, in remis- 1538. C]

sionem quidem peccatorum nos bapti- ' Mos fundatissimu.o — S Avi<- Ep

zan, sed nihil ex Adam trahere origi- 28. [His words arc: Sod contra Cynriani

nalis pcccati, quod regeneration is aliquam opinionem, ubi quod viden-

lavacro expietur : unde fit consequen.s dum fuit, fortasse non vidit, sentiat

ut in CIS forma baptismatis in remis- quisque quod libet ; tantum contra

sionem peccatorum, non vere, sed false, apostolicam manifesti.sMmam fidem

mtelligatur. anathenia sit. Quoniam nemo sentiat, quaj ex unius delicto om-

non ahter intelligendum est, quod ait nes in condemnationem duci pra^dicat

apostolus (Rom. V 18.) Pp-«,am/,omi. (Rom. v. 18) ; ex qua condemnatione

nem peccaliim intramt ui mundum, et non liberat, nisi gratia Dei per Jesum

per ppcrntum mors, ct ita in omnes Christum Dominum nostrum, in quo

homines pertramut.in quo omne^iw- uno omnes vivificantur, quicunque

does not imply that they are Fundamentals. 41

fundamental in tlie faith. Nor yet can it follow, This thing Section
is founded : therefore every thing determined by the Church '.

is founded. 'Again : that which follows, That those things are
not to be opposed which are made firm by full authority of
the Church, cannot conclude they are therefore fundamental
in the faith. For full Church authority (always the time
that included the holy Apostles being passed by, and not
comprehended in it) is but Church authority ; and Chm-cli
authority, when it is at full sea, is not simply divine,^ there-
fore the sentence of it not fundamental in the faith. And
yet no erring disputer may be endured to shake the founda-
tion which the Church in council lays. But plain Scripture
with evident sense, or a full demonstrative argument, must
have room, where a wranghng and erring disputer may not
be allowed it. And there is neither of these, but may
convince the definition of the Council,^ if it be ill founded.
And the articles of the faith may easily prove it is not
fundamental, if indeed and verily it be not so.

XII. — And I have read somebody that says (is it not you ?)
" that things are fundamental in the faith two ways :'^ one,
in their matter — such as are all things which be so in them-
selves ; the other, in the manner — such as are all things that
the Church hath defined and determined to be of faith:
and that so, some things that are de mode, " of the manner of
being, are of faith." But in plain truth, this is no more than
if you should say, some things are fundamental in the faith,
and some are not. For, wrangle while you will, you shall
never be able to prove that any thing which is but de modo,

vivificantur. Contra Ecclesite funda- monstratur, ut in dubium venire non

tissimum morem nemo sentiat, ubi ad possit, prasponenda est omnibus illia

baptismum, si propter sola parvulorum rebus, quibus in Catholica teneor. —

corpora curreretur, baptizandi ofie- S. Aug. contra [Epistolam Maniclisei,

rentur et mortui. — S. Augustin. liber quam vocant] Fund[amenti,] cap. iv.

ad Hieronym. sen Epist. clxvi. (al. [Op., tom. viii. col. 153. D. ed. Bene-

xxviii.) cap. 8. Op., tom. ii. col. 593. diet.— Quod] si [forte] in Evangelio

B. ed. Benedict.] aliquid apertissimum [de Manichsei

^ Stapleton. Kelect. Controv. iv. apostolatuinvenirei5otueris,infirmabis

[de potestate ecclesiae in se], Q[u£est.] mihi Catholicorum auctoritatem, qui

iii. [An vox determinantis Ecclesise jubent ut tibi non credam; qua intir-

sit divina 1] A[rtic.] 1. [Vox et deter- mata, jam nee evangelio credere potcro,

minatio ecclesise est suo modo divina. quia per eos illi credideram ; ita nibil

— Op., tom. i. p. 750.] apud me valebit, quidquid inde protu-

' [Apud vos autem, (sc. Manichteos) leris. Quapropter si nihil manifestum

ubi nihil horum est quod me invitet de Manicliffii apostolatu in Evangelio

ac teneat, .sola per.sonat veritatis polli- reperitur, Catholicis potius credam

citatio :] qnasquidem, sitam manifesta quam tibi. — Ibid. cap. v. col. 154. CJ

Instanced in the Pelagian Controversy .

Conference a consideration " of the manner of being" only, can possibly
FisHEK ^^ fundamental in the faith.

XIII. — And since you make such a foundation of this place,

I will a httle Adew the mortar with which it is laid by you.
Ezek. xiii. It is a venture but I shall' find it " untempered." Your asser-

, ; .„ tion is : " All points defined by the Church are fundamental."
' [will. ... ^ " .

Edit. Your proof, this place : " Because that is not to be shaken,

i^^^J which is settled by full authority of the Chui'ch [plena eccle-
si<B author it ate.)" Then it seems yoiu' meaning is, that this
point there spoken of, "The remission of original sin in
baptism of infants," was defined, when S. Augustine wrote
this, by a fuU sentence of a General Council. First, if you
say it was, Bellarmine^ will tell you it is false; and that the
Pelagian heresy was never condemned in an oecumenical
council, but only in nationals. But Bellarmine is deceived :
for wliile the Pelagians stood out impudently against national
councils, some of them defended Nestorius, which gave
occasion to the fii'st Ephesine Council to excommunicate
and depose them.™ And yet this will not serve your turn for
this place. For S.Augustine was then dead; and therefore
could not mean the sentence of that Council in this place.
Secondly, if you say it was not then defined in an oecume-
nical synod ; plena aiithoritas ecclesice, " the full authority of
the Chiu'ch," there mentioned, doth not stand properly for
the decree of an oecumenical council, but for some national ;
as this was condemned in a national council:" and then the
full authority of the Church here, is no more than the full
and 1686.] authority of this ' Church of Africa." And I hope that

> [the
Church
Editt. 1673

"' Lib. ii. de Concil. Auctorit. cap. v.
[Secundo, idem (so. concilia particiila-
ria a summo pontifice confirmata, in
fide et moribus en-are non posse)
probatur ex eo, quod si ejusmodi con-
cilia crrarc posscnt, plurinije hserescs,
• 11103 damnatte sunt] a solis [conciliis]
particularibus, [iterum rcvocari pos-
sent in dubium, ut Pelagianorum, I'ri-
scillianistarum, Joviniani et alionim.
— Bellarmin. Op., torn. ii. col. 59. B.]

" Can. i. & iv. [elfris 6 firyrponoAiTris
rfjs fwapxio-S, airoaTaTiicras Tris ayias
Ka\ olKoviJ.eviK7js avv/ioov, irpoaeOiro Tcp
TijS anoaraffias rrvv€dpi(fi, fj jUfrd touto
TTpoffTfOelri, ^ TcL KeXfCTTuw 4(pp6vT](r€v.
fl (ppouTicri], ouTos Kara twv ttiS inapx'tas
eViffKOTroji' SiaTtpaTTfaBui ti ov5ajj.us Sv-

varai, iraffTjs enKXTjffiaffriKrfis Koivwvias
ivTiiidiv ■^Stj vtto toO (tvvoSov eK^e^Xr)-
/xevos, Kol avevfpyriTos viza.px<»v' o-Khd.
Kol avrdis TOis Trjs enapxias iiriaKdirois,
Kal Toiy 7re'pi| fxrjTpOTruXiTais, toIs rd.
TTjr op0o5o|iay (ppovovaiv tiroKiiasTai,
(Is TO ndvTr) Kol tov 0adfiov ttjs iiricrKO-
ir^r e K^XriOijuai. — Can. i. — (1 Se rii/fs
dTTO(Trar-l](Taiiv twv KK7)piKwv, kol toA-
lii7](TatfV ^ Kar ISiav f) Srifioaia rd Necr-
roplov ^ TO, KeAecTTioi; tppov^crai, «oi
Tovrovs ilfai Ku6TipT]fjL&ovs inrb Ttjs
iiyias avvoSov SeStKuiwrai. — Can. iv. —
Concil. (an. 431.) torn. iii. col. 803,
80G.]

" Concil. Milcvit. Can. ii. [ubi sup.
p. 10. note K]

p Nay, if your own C'appellus be tmc,

The Church founded upon the Faith. 43

authority dotli not make all points defined by it to be fnnda- Section
mental. You will say, yes, if tliat council be confirmed by

the Pope. And then I must ever wonder why S. Augustine
should say, " the full authority of the Church -j" and not
bestow one word upon the Pope, by whose authority only
that Council, as all other, have their fulness of authority, in
your judgment. An inexpiable omission, if this doctrine
concerning the Pope were true.

XIV. — But here A. C. steps in again to help the Jesuit, and A. c. p. 45.
he tells us, over and over again, " that all points made firm by
full authority of the Church, are fundamental ;" so, " firm "
he will have them, and therefore " fundamental.^^ But I
must tell him, that first, it is one thing in nature, and religion
too, to be firm, and another thing to be fundamental. These
tAvo are not convertible : it is true that every thing that is
fundamental is firm ; but it doth not follow that every thing
that is firm is fundamental. For many a superstructure is
exceeding firm, being fast and close joined to a sure founda-
tion, which yet no man will grant is fundamental. Besides,
whatsoever is fundamental in the faith is fundamental to the
Church, which is ''one by the unity of faith.^'i Therefore, if
every thing defined by the Chui'ch be fundamental in the
faith, then the Church's definition is the Church's foundation.
And so, upon the matter, the Church can lay her own foun-
dation ; and then the Chm'ch must be in absolute and perfect
being before so much as her foundation is laid. Now this
is so absurd for any man of learning to say, that by and by
after A. C. is content to affirm not only that the prima cre-
dibilia, the articles of faith, but " all which so pertains to
supernatural, divine, and infallible Christian faith, as that
thereby Christ doth dwell in our hearts, &c. is the foundation
of the Church under Christ the prime foundation." And
here he is out again. For, first, all which pertains to superna-
tural, divine, and infallible Christian faith, is not by and by

— De Appell. Eccl. Afric. c. ii. n. 5, — caput Epistolse suas : Hsec ad sancti-

it was but a provincial of Numidia, not tatem tuam, &c. — pp. 20, 21. ed.

a plenary of Africa. [Concilium Mile- Komse, 1722.]

vitanum, eo quod ad Eomanum ponti- 'i Almain. in III. Sent. Distinct,

ficem Innocentium de hseresi Pelagiana xxv. Qusest. 1. [Concl. 3. fol. Ixxix.

tunc orienti fratres scripsere, fuisse cd. Lugd. 1527.] A fide eniui una

provinciale Numidiaj, et non plena- Ecclesia dicitur una.
rium Africse, scribunt patres ipsi ad

44 Faith objective as distinct from subjective.

Conference fundamental in the faith to all men.' And secondly, the
FiIuER. "^^liole discourse here is concerning faith, as it is taken
objective, for the object of faith and thing to be believed ; but
that faith by which Christ is said to dwell in our hearts is
taken subjective, for the habit and act of faith. Now to
confound both these in one period of speech, can have no
other aim than to confound the reader. But to come closer
both to the Jesuit and his defender A. C. : if all points made
firm by full authority of the Church be fundamental, then
they must grant that every thing determined by the Council
of Trent is fundamental in the faith. For with them it is
firm and catholic which that Council decrees. Noav that
Council decrees, "That orders collated by the bishop are
not void, though they be given without the consent or calling
of the people, or of any secular power." ^ And yet they can
produce no author that ever acknowledged this definition of
the Council fundamental in the faith. It is true, I do not
grant that the decrees of this Council are made by full
authority of the Chui'ch : but they do both grant and main-
tain it ; and therefore it is argumentum ad hominem, a good
argument against them, that a thing so defined may be firm,
for so this is ; and yet not fundamental, for so this is not.

A. C. p. 45. XV.— But A. C. tells us further, " That if one may deny,
or doubtfully dispute against, any one determination of the
Church, then he may against another, and another, and so
against all; since all are made firm to us by one and the

' [Respond. Dicendum quod] ad ecclesiam determinatum, quod ex hoc

fidem pertinet aliquLd dupliciter. Uno sequitur aliquid contrarium fidei, in

modo (Urede, sicut ea qute nobis sunt hoc enare non esset absque hteresi.]

principalitcr divinitus tradita, ut —Thorn. [Aquin. Summ.] pFars.l 1

Dcum esse trinum [et unum, Filium Q[ua;st.] xxxii. A[rt.] 4. [in conclus.]

Dei esse incarnatum, et hujusmodi.] — There are things necessary to the

Et circa hjec opinari falsuni hoc ipso faith ; and things which are but

inducit hrcrcsim ; [maxime si pertina- accessor}^ &c. Hooker, Eccl. Pol

cia adjungatur.] Indirecte [vero ad Book iii. ch. iii. [4. Works, vol i

fidem pertinent ea] ex quibus conse- p. 450. cd. Keble.— His words are '•

quitur aliquid contrarium fidei; [sicut It is not that we make some things

61 quis diceret, Samuelcra non fuisse necessary, some things accessory and

fihum Helcana2; ex hoc enira sequi- appendent only: for our Lord and

tur, Scripturam divinam esse falsam. Saviour Himself doth make that dif-

Circa hujusmodi ergo,] absque periculo ference, &c.]

haeresis, aliquis falsum potest opinari ' Si quis dixerit . . . ordines ab epi-

[aute(iuamconsidereturveldetermiua- scopis collates, sine populi vol potes-

tum sit, quod ex hoc sequitur aliquid tatis sajcularis consensu autvocatione

contrarium lidei, et maxime si non irritos esse, . . . Anathema sit — [De-

pertiiiaciteradhajreat. Sed postquain cret.] Con. Trid. Scss. xxiii [die xv

manifestum est, et praecipue si sit per Julii, an. mdlxiii.] Can. 7.

TTie Vincentian Rule of Fundamentals. 45

same Di^dne revelation, sufficiently applied by one and the Section
same full authority of tlie Cliurcli, which being weakened in '

any one, cannot be firm in any other/' First, A. C. might
have acknowledged that he borrowed the former part of this
out of Vin. Lir.* And as that learned father uses it, I
subscribe to it, but not as A. C. applies it. For Vincentius
speaks there de catholico dogmate, "of catholic maxims;" and
A. C. will force it to every determination of the Church.
Now catholic maxims, which are properly fundamental,^ are
certain prime truths deposited with the Church, and not so
much determined by the Church as published and mani-
fested, and so made firm by her to us. For so Vincentius
expressly.^ Where, all that the Church doth, is but ut hoc
idem quod antea, " that the same thing may be beheved which
was before believed," but with more light and clearness, and,
in that sense, with more firmness than before. Now, in
this sense, give way to a disputator errans, " every cavilling
disputer," to deny or quarrel at the maxims of Christian reh-
gion, any one, or any part of any one of them; and why
may he not then take liberty to do the like of any other, till
he have shaken all ? But this hinders not the Church
herself, nor any appointed by the Church, to examine her
own decrees, and to see that she keep dogmata deposita, the
principles of faith unblemished and uncorrupted. For if she
do not so, but that novitia veteribus,^ "new doctrines" be

' [Vincent. Lirinens.] Cont. Haer. finita, custodiat.] Denique quid un-

c. xxxi. Abdicata etenim qualibet quam [aliud] Conciliorum decretis

parte Catliolici dogmatis, alia quoque, enisa est, nisi, ut quod antea simpli-

atque item alia, [ac deinceps alia, et ter credebatur, hoe idem postea dili-

alia jam quasi ex more et licito abdi- gentius crederetur 1 [quod antea len-

cabuntur. Porro autem singulatim tius prjedicabatur hoc idem postea

partibus repudiatis,] quid aliud ad instantius prajdicaretur ? quod antea

extremum sequetur, nisi ut totum securius colebatur, hoc idem postea

pariter repudietur ? — [p. 70.] sollicitius excoleretur ?] — Vin. Lir.

'' [V. infra,] Sect, xxxviii. 21. cont. Hseres. c. xxxii. [p. 71.]
^ [Christi vero] Ecclesia, [sedula et y Vin. Lir. cont. Hteres. cap. xxxi.

cauta] depositorum apud se dogmatum [Sed et e contra, si novitia veteribus,

custos, [nihil in iis unquam permutat, extranea domesticis, et profana sacratis

nihil minuit, nihil addit ; non amputat admisceri cceperint, proserpat hie mos

necessaria, non apponit superilua, non in universum necesse est, ut nihil

amittit sua, non usurpat aliena: sed posthac apud ecclesiam relinquatur

omni industria hoc unum studet, ut intactum, nihil illibatum, nihil inte-

veterafidelitersapienterquetractando, grum, nihil immaculatum, sed sit

si quae sunt ilia antiquitus informata ibidem deinceps] impiorum ac turpium

et inchoata, accuret et poliat : si qua errorum lupanar, ubi erat ante castas

jam expressa et enucleata, consolidet, et incorruptte sacrarium veritatis. —

firmet : si qua jam confirmata et de- [Ibid. p. 70.]

46 Grounds of Belief in Church Decision.^, various.

Conference added to the old/^ tlie Cliurcli, which is sacrarium veritatis,
FiIher " ^^^ repository of verity/' maybe changed in lupanar errorvni;
I am loth to Enghsh it. By the Church, then, this may — nay
it ought to be done ; however, every wrangling disputer may
neither deny, nor doubtfully dispute, much less obstinately
oppose, the determinations of the Church; no, not where they
are not dogmata deposit a, these " deposited principles." But
if he will be so bold to deny or dispute the determinations
of the Church, yet that may be done without shaking the
foundation, where the determinations themselves belong but
to the fabric, and not to the foundation. For a whole frame
A. C. p. 46. of building may be shaken, and yet the foundation, where
it is well laid, remain firm. And therefore, after all, A. C.
dares not say the foundation is shaken, but only in a sort.
And then it is as true, that in a sort it is not shaken.

XVT. — 2. For the second part of his argument, A. C. must
pardon me if I dissent from him. For, first, all determinations
of the Church are not made firm to us by one and the same
Divine revelation. For some determinations of the Church are
made firm to us per chirographum Scriptura,^ " by the hand-
writing of the Scripture,'' and that is authentical indeed.
Some other decisions, yea, and of the Church too, arc made,
or maybe (if Stapleton'"^ inform us right,) without an e\-ident,
nay without so much as a probable, testimony of Holy Writ.
But Bellarmine'^ falls quite off in this, and confesses in
express terms, " That nothing can be certain by certainty of
faith, unless it be contained immediately in the word of
God, or be deduced out of the word of God by evident
' [be cer- consequence." And if nothing can be so certain,' then
.... Editt! certainly no determination of the Church itself, if that
1 rl^ ''^^'^ determination be not grounded upon one of these — either
express word of God, or evident consequence out of it. So

'• Vin. Lir. cont. Hares, cap. '* Non potest aliquid certum esse

xxxii. [Coneiliorura suorum dccretis certitudine fidei, ni.si, aut immediate

Catholica pcrfccit Ecclesia, nisi ut contineatur in verbo Dei, aut ex

quod pi-ius a majoribus sola (al. sua) verbo Dei per evidentem consequen-

traditione susceperat, hoc deinde tiam deducatur : [fides enim non est,

postcris etiam per Scripturaj chiro- nisi verbi divini auctoritate nitatur.

graphum consignaret.— pp. 71, 72.] Neque de hoc principio vel Catholici

" Kelect. Cont. iv. Q[uiest.] i. Art. vel haeretici dubitant.]— Bellarmin.

3. Etiamsi nullo Scripturarum, aut de Justificat. Lil). iii. cap. 8. § 2.

evidenti, aut probabili testimonio, [Op,, torn. iv. col. 963.]
&c.— [ubi sup. p. 32. note "'.]

The Authority of the Church's Decisions admits of Degrees. 47

here is little agreement in tliis great point between Stapleton Section
and Bellarmine. Nor can this be shifted off, as if Staple-
ton spake of the Avord of God written, and Bellarmine of
the word of God unwritten, as he calls tradition. For
Bellarmine treats there of the knowledge which a man hath
of the certainty of his own salvation. And I hope A. C.
will not tell us, there is any tradition extant unwritten,
by which particular men may have assurance of their several
salvations. Therefore Bellarmine's whole disputation there
is quite beside the matter ; or else he must speak of the
written word, and so lie cross to Stapleton, as is mentioned.
But to return : If A. C. will, he may, but I cannot, believe
that a definition of the Church which is made by the
express word of God, and another which is made without
so much as a probable testimony of it, or a clear deduction
from it, are made firm to us by one and the same Divine
revelation. Nay, I must say in this case, that the one
determination is firm by Divine revelation, but the other hath
no Divine revelation at all, but the Churches authority only.
2. Secondly, I cannot believe either, " That all deter-
minations of the Church are sufficiently applied by one and
the same full authority of the Church." For the authority
of the Church, though it be of the same fulness in regard of
itself, and of the power which it commits to General Councils
lawfully called; yet it is not always of the same fulness of
knowledge and sufficiency, nor of the same fulness of con-
science and integrity, to apply dogmata fidei, that Avhich is
dogmatical in the faith. For instance, I think you dare not
deny but the Council of Trent was lawfully called ; and yet I
am of opinion that few, even of yourselves, beheve that the
Council of Trent hath the same fulness with the Council of
Nice, in all the forenamed kinds or degrees of fulness.
Thirdly, suppose that all determinations of the Church
are made firm to us by one and the same Divine Revelation,
and sufficiently^ applied by one and the same full authority ;
vet it will not follow, that thev are all alike fundamental in
the faith. For I hope A. C. himself will not say, that the
definitions of the Church are in better condition than the
propositions of Canonical Scripture. Now, all propositions
of Canonical Scripture are alike firm, because they all alike

48 Even e.rpreas Declarations of Scripture are not all Fundamentals.

Conference proceed from Divine Revelation ; but they are not all alike

Fisher, fundamental in the faith. For this proposition of Christ to

,7 : S. Peter and S. Andrew, " Follow Me, and I will make you

Matt. IV. . ' . .

ly. ^ fishers of men/' is as firm a truth as that which He delivered

Matt. xvi. to His disciples, " that He must die, and rise again the third
day." For both proceed from the same Divine Revelation,
out of the mouth of our Sa\dour, and both are sufficiently
applied by one and the same full authority of the Church
which receives the whole Gospel of S. Matthew to be
canonical and infallible Scripture. And yet both these
propositions of Christ are not alike fundamental in the faith.
For I dare say, no man shall be saved, in the ordinary way
of salvation, that believes not the death and the resurrection
of Christ. And I believe A. C. dares not sav, that no man
shall be saved into whose capacity it never came, that
Christ made S. Peter and S. Andrew fishers of men. And yet
should he say it, nay, should he show it sub annulo piscatoris,
no man will believe it that hath not made shipwreck of his
common notions. Now if it be thus between proposition and
proposition issuing out of Christ's own mouth, I hope it
may well be so also between even just and true determina-
tions of the Church, that, supposing them alike true and
firm, yet they shall not be alike fundamental to all men's
belief.

[A. C. pp. 5p. Secondly, I required to know, what points the Bishop

would accounf^ fundamental. He said, all the points
of [in] thef Creed were such ....

* [The Chaplain granteth, that there are qucedam prima credihilia, or some
prime principles, in the bosom whereof all other articles lay wrapped and
folded up, sous every point of the Creed is not a prime foundation; and there-
fore the C himself did not understand the word " fundamental " so strictly,
as if that which in one respect is "a foundation," may not in another respect,
to wit, as included in, and depending upon, a more prime principle, be
accounted "a superstructure." — A. C. marg. note to p. 45.]

+ [If the 13. mean, that only those points are fundamental, which are ex-
pressed in the Creed of the Apostles, I man-el how he can afterwards account
Scriptures, whereof no express mention is made in the Creed, to be the founda-
tion of their faith. But if he mean, that not only those are fundamental which
are expressed, but also all that is enfolded in the articles of the Creed, then,
not Scriptures only, but some at least of Church-traditions unwritten may be
accounted fundamental^to wit, all those that are inwrapped in these two
articles, "I believe in the Holy Ghost," "The Holy Catholic Church;" as
all those are, which being first revealed by the Holy Ghost unto the apostles,
have been by successive tradition of the Church, assisted by the same Holy
Ghost, delivered unto us. One of which i.s. That the books of Scriptures
themselves be Divine, and infallible in every part : which is a foundation so

The Creed Fundamental.

necessary, as, if it be doubtfully questioned, all the faith built upon Scripture
falleth to the ground. And therefore I marvel how the 13. can say, as he doth
afterwards in the Relation, " That Scriptures only, and not any unwritten
Tradition, was the foundation of their faith." — A. C. marg. note, to p. 46.]

25. I. — Against this I hope you except not. For since
the fathers *= make the Creed the rule of faith ; since " the
agreeing sense of Scripture with those articles are the two
regular precepts by which a divine is governed about the
faith ;^^'i since your own Council of Trent ^ decrees, "That it
is that principle of faith, in which all that profess Christ do
necessarily agree, et fundamentum firmmn et unicum, not the
firm alone, but the only, foundation ; " since it is excom-
mimication ^ ipso jure, for any man to contradict the articles
contained in that Creed ; since the Avhole body of the faith is
so contained in the Creed, as that the substance ^ of it was
believed even before the coming of Christ, though not so

Section
XI.

^^ 11.

*■' TertuU. Apol. contra Gentes, cap.
xlvii. [Expedite autem prsfiscribimus
adulteris nostris, illam esse regulam
veritatis, quae veniat a Christo, trans-
missa per comites ipsius, quibus all-
quanto posteriores diversi isti com-
mentatores probabuntur. — Op., i^. 37.
B. ed. Rigalt.] And [Regula quidem
fidei una omnino est, sola immobilis,
et irreformabilis. — Id.] de virg. vel.
cap. i. [Op., p. 173. A.] — S. Augustin.
Serm. sv. [xix.] de Temp. cap. 2.
[Nam quomodo in regula fidei con-
fiteremur, credere nos in Filium Dei
qui natus est ex virgine Maria, si non
FiliusDei, sedfilius hominis natus est
ex virgine Maria I &c. — Serm. clxxxvi.
cap. 2. Op., torn. v. col. 885. D.] —
Ruffin. [Exposit.] in Symbol, apud
[Opusc. vulgo] S. Cyprian, [adscript.
p. cxcviii. ad calcem ed. Benedict.]
Discessuri (sc. Apostoli) ab invicem
normam prius futuraj prcedicationis in

commune constituunt Omnes

ergo in uno positi, et Spiritu Sancto
repleti, breve istud futurse sibi prsedi-
catlonis indicium, conferendo in unum
quod sentiebat unusquisque, compo-
nunt : atque banc credeutibus dandam
esse regulam statuunt. Symbolum
autem hoc multis et justissimis ex
cansis appellari voluerunt.]

^ Alb. Magnus, in I. Sentent.
D[istinct.] xi. A[rt.] 7. [Quijeritur
etiam quai sit fidei regula quam tangit
(sc. Mag. Sentent.) ibi, (Qui autem
prsetergreditur fidei regulam non ince-
dit in via, &c.) Et dicendum q\iod
regula fidei est concors Scripturarum

VOL. II. — LAUD.

sensus cum articulis fidei : quia illis
duobus regularibus praeceptis regitur
theologus.]

<= Concil. Trident. Sess. 3. [Vide
infra, p. 50. note ''.]

f Bonavent. ibid. [i.e. in I. Sen-
tent. Distinct xi. Art. 1.] Dub. 2. et 3.
in literam. [Op., torn. iv. p. 93. D.
Exponit ista verba {Qui aliud do-
cuerit, vel cditer jn'cedicaverit) id est,
contrarium docuerit, vel contrario
modo, &c. Non videtur ista expositio
probabilis, eo quod ille qui contradicit
articulis excommunicatus est ipso
jure : ergo non oportebat pro contrario
dare sententiam : ergo videtur quod
pro diverso tulerunt sententiam ....
Reapondeo .... secundum veritatem
autem excommunicationis sententia
non se extendit nisi ad contradi-
centes . . .]

s Thom. [Aquin.]Secund. Secundae,
Q[u8est.] i. Art. 7. C. [Respondeo,
dicendum, quod ita se habent in
doctrina articuli fidei, sicut prin-
cipia per se nota in doctrina, qute per
rationem naturalem habetur, in
quibus principiis ordo quidam inve-
nitur, ut quajdam in aliis implicile

contineantur Similiter omnes

articuli implicite continentur in
aliquibus primis credibilibus, scilicet
ut credatur Deus esse .... In esse
enim divino includuntur omnia quae
credimus in Deo aeternaliter existere

Sic ergo dicendum est, quod

quantum ad substantiam articulorum
fidei, non est factum eorum argumen-
tum per temporum successionem.

50 Both the Creed, and the Belief that

Conference expressly as since in tlic number of tlie articles ; since
FishTr Bellarmine '' confesses^ that " all things simply necessary

for all men's salvation are in the Creed and the Decalogue ;"

what reason can you have to except ? And yet for all this^
everything fundamental is not of a hke nearness to the
foimdation, nor of equal primeness in the faith. And my
granting the Creed to be fundamental, doth not deny but
that there are quadam j^^'inia credibUia,^ " certain prime
principles of faith," in the bosom whereof all other articles
lay wrapped and folded up. One of which since Clu'ist, is that

1 Jolm iv. of S. John : "Every spirit that confesseth Jesus Christ come
in the flesh is of God." And one, both before the coming

Heb. xi. 6. of Christ and since, is that of S. Paul : " He that comes to
God, must believe that God is, and that He is a rewarder of
them that seek Him."

A. C. p. 46. II. — Here A. C. tells you, "That either I must mean that
those points are only fundamental which are expressed in
the Creed ; or those also which are enfolded. If I say those
only which are expressed, then," saith he, " to beheve the
Scriptures is not fundamental, because it is not expressed.
If I say those which are enfolded in the articles, then some
unwritten Church traditions mav be accounted funda-
mental." The truth is, I said, and say still, that all the
points of the Apostles' Creed, as they are there expressed,
are fundamental. And therein I say no more than some of
your best learned have said before me. But I never either
said or meant, that they only are fundamental : that they are
fundamentum unicum^ "the only foundation," is the Council

quia qnaecunque posteriores credide- et professione homo salvari non

runt, continebantur in fide prsBceden- possit, modo promptam habeat volun-

tium patrum. Sed quantum ad tatem ea puscipiendi, et credcndi,

explicationcm crevit numerus articu- quando sibi fuerint legitime per

lorum, quia quredam explicite cognita Ecclesiam proposita. — Op., tom. i.

sunt a poster! oribus, quise a prioribus col. 201. B.]
non cognoscebantur explicite.] ' Tho. Secund. Secundae, Quaest. i.

*> Bellarmin. lib. iv. de verb. Dei Art. 7. C. [ubi sup. p. 49. note^.]
non script, cap. xi. Primum est, '' Cone. Trident. Sess. 3. [Quare
[quffidam in doctrina Christiana tam symbolum fidei, quo Sancta Eomana
fidei, quam morum, esse simpliciter Ecclesia utitur, tanquam principium
omnibus necessaria ad salutem, qualis illud, in quo omnes, qui fidem Christi
est notitia articulorum Symboli Apo- profitentur, necessario conveniunt, ac
stolici, item cognitio decern prceccpto- fundamentum firmum et unicum. con-
rum, et nonnullorum Sacramentorum. tra quod portffi inferi, &c. totidem
Csetera non ita necessaria sunt, ut verbis, quibus in omnibus ecclesiis
sine eorum explicita notitia, et fide, legitur, exprimendum esse censuit.]

Scripture is the Word of God, Fundamental. 51

of Trent's ; it is not mine. Mine is^ That tlie belief of Section

XII.

Scripture to be the word of God and infalHble^ is an equal^
or rather a preceding, prime principle of faith, with or to the
whole body of the Creed. And this agrees (as before I told
the Jesuit), with one of your own great masters, Albertus
Magnus,^ who is not far from that proposition in terminis.
So here the very foundation of A. C.'s dilemma falls off.
Eor I say not, That only the points of the Creed are funda-
mental, whether expressed or not expressed. That all of
them are, that I say. And yet, though the foundation of
his dilemma be fallen away, I will take the boldness to tell
A. C. that if I had said^ That those articles only Avhich are
expressed in the Creed are fundamental, it would have been
hard to have excluded the Scripture, upon which the Creed
itself in every point is grounded. For nothing is supposed
to shut out its own foundation. And if I should now say.
That some articles are fundamental which are enfolded in the
Creed, it would not follow that therefore some unwritten
traditions were fundamental. Some traditions I deny not
true and firm, and of great, both authority and use in the
Church, as being apostolical, but yet not fundamental in the
faith. And it would be a mighty large fold, w^hich should
lap up traditions within the Creed. As for that tradition.
That the books of Holy Scriptures are diA'ine and infallible
in every part, I will handle that when I come to the proper
place™ for it.

^. I asked how then it happened, as^ M. Rogers saith, [A.C.p.46,]
That the English Church is not yet resolved what is a. C]
the right sense of the article of Christ's descending
into hell.

2B. I. — The English Church never made doubt, that I § 12.
know, w^hat was the sense of that article. The words are so
plain, they bear their meaning before them. She was content
to put that article among those to which she requires sub- ^^t. iii.
scription, not as doubting of the sense, but to prevent the

'Inl.Sentent. D[istinct.]xi. A[rt.] 7. cluobns regularibus prseceptis regitur
Eegula fidei est concors Scripturaruni Iheologus.— [ubi sup. p. 49. note ''.]
sensus cum articuUs fidei: quia illis "" [Vide infra,] sect. xvi. 1.

E 3

O-i/

The Article of the Descetit into Hell

Conference cavils of some, "vvlio liad been too busy in crucifying that
Fisher ai'ticle, and in making it all one with the article of the Cross,
or but an exposition of it.

II. — And surely, for my part, I think the Church of England
is better resolved of the right sense of this article than the
Church of Rome, especially if she must be tried by her
writers, as you try the Church of England by M. Rogers.
For you cannot agree whether this article be a mere tradi-
tion, or whether it hath any place of Scripture to warrant it.
Scotus " and Stapleton° allow it no footing in Scripture; but
Bellarmine p is resolute that this article is everywhere in
Scripture, and Thomas i grants as much for the Avhole Creed.
The Chmxh of England never doubted it, and S.Augustine'
~ proves it.

III. — And yet, again, you are different for the sense. For
you agree not whether the soul of Christ, in triduo mortis, " in

" Scotus in L' [Sentent.] D[istinct.]
xi. Q[urest.] 1. [Op., torn. V. p. 589. Ad
rationem illam de Evangelio, dico
quod Christum descendisse ad inferna,
non docetur in Evangelio : et tamen
tenendum est sicut articulus fidci, quia
ponitur in Symbolo Apostolorum.]

" Stapleton, Relect. Controv. [Con-
trov.] V. [depotestateecclesiae ex parte
objceti,] Q[uEest.] 5. A[rt.] 1. [Op.,
torn. i. p. 790. Sententia orthodoxa,
in respons. ad arg. 5. (sc. apostoli
omnem fidei doctrinam prasdicarunt,
ergo et scripserunt. Alioqui poste-
ritati fidelium eonsidere aut invidi
potuerunt, aut negligentes omiserunt.
Utrumquc absurdum. Ergo &c.) . . .
Sj'mbolum fidei de fide tencmus :
aliqua tamen in illo sunt quro Scrip-
tura tacet, ut Christum descendisse ad
inferos, esse Ecclesiam Catholicam ct
Apostolicam, esse communionem sanc-
torum.]

p Bellann. [lib.]iv. de Christo, [i. e.
de Christi anima,] cap. 6, 12. [Op.,
torn. i. col. 438. (Cap. vi.) Quteritur sc-
cundo, an et quomodo Christus ad
inferos descenderit. Ac ])rimum om-
nes conveniunt, quod Christus aliquo
modo ad inferos descenderit. Nam et
Scripturaj passim hoc decent, ut Act.
ii. : Kon derdinques animam meam
in inferno. Et Ephes. iv. : De.sce7id{t od
inferos terra'. Etpracterea in Symbolo
Apostolico legimus: Descendit ad in-
feros.— {C&ip. xii.) Quantum ad tertium

probo ex Scripturis Christum vere
descendisse ad inferos, sc. Ps. cvii. 16.
Ecclus. xxiv. 45. (Vulg.) Mat. xii. 40.
Act. ii. 31. Rom. x. 7. Ephes. iv. 9.]

1 Thom. [Aquin.] Secund. Secund.
Q,[ua3st.] i. A[rt.] 9. Ad primum [ergo
dicendum, quod Veritas fidei in sacra
Scriptura diffuse continetur, et variis
modis, et in quibusdam obscure, ita
quod ad eliciendam fidei veritatem
ex sacra Scriptura requiritur longum
studium et exercitium, ad quod non
possunt pervenire omnes illi quibus
necessarium est cognoscere fidci veri-
tatem.]

' S. Aug. Ep. xcix. [ad Evodium,
Ep. clxiv. cap. 4. Op., tom. ii. col. 573.
Qutestio quam mihi proposuisti ex
epistola apostoli Petri, solet nos, ut te
latere non arbitror, vehementissime
commovere, quomodo ilia verba accipi-
enda sunt tanquam de inferis dicta. . . .
(Cap 5.) Quamobrem teneamus firm-
issime, quod fides habet fundatissima
auctoritatefirmata, ^li/rt Christus mor-
tuus est secundunt Scri})tu7-a,s, et quia
sepultus est, et quia resurrexit tertia
die secundum Scripturas, ct csetera
quae de Illo testatissima veritate eon-
scripta sunt. In quibus etiam hoc est,
quod apud inferos fuit, solutisque
corum doloribus, quibus Eum erat
impossibile teneri, a quibus etiam
recte intelligitur solvisse et liberasse
quos voluit, corpus quod in cruce reli-
querat in sepulchro positum recepisse.]

differently understood.

the time of His deatli/^ did go down into liell really, and was
present there, or virtually and by effects only. For Thomas ^
holds the first, and Durand ^ the latter. Then you agree not
whether the soul of Christ did descend really and in essence
into the lowest pit of hell, and place of the damned, as Bel-
larmine ^ once held probable and proved it ; or really only
into that place or region of hell which you call Umbum
jpatrum, and then but virtually from thence into the lower
hellj to which Bellarmine'' reduces himself, and gives his
reason, because it is the common opinion^ of the school.
Now the Church of England takes the words as they are in
the Creed, and believes them mthout farther dispute, and
in that sense which the ancient primitive fathers of the

Sfction
ATI.

^ Thom. [Aquin.] pars Tert. Q[u£est.]
lii. A[rt.] 2. [Kespon. dicendum, quod
dupliciter dicitur esse aliquid alicubi.
Uno modo per simm effectum, ct hoc
mode Christus in quemlibet inferno-
rum descendit, alitor tamen et aliter.
Nam in infernuni damnatorum habuit
hunc eflFectum, quia descendens ad
inferos eos de sua incredulitate et
malitia confutavit, illis vero qui deti-
nebantur in purgatorio, spem gloriae
consequendee dedit. Sanctis autem
patribus qui pro solo peccato originali
detinebantur in inferno, lumen eeternse
glorise infudit. Alio modo dicitur
aliquid esse] per suam essentiam, [et
hoc modo anima Christi descendit
solum ad locum inferni in quo justi
detinebantur, ut quos Ipse per gratiam
interius visitabat secundum divini-
tatem eos etiam secundum animam
visitaret et loco.]

' Durand. in III. [Sentent.] D[is-
tinct.] xxii. Q[u8est.] 3. [Alio modo
potest dici anima separata descendere
ad infernum, secundum effectum. Et
hoc modo potest dici anima Christi
descendisse ad infernum propter dupli-
cem effectum quem habuit in illis qui
erant in inferno : unus effectus fuit
exhibitio visionis divinse qua carebant
ad quem se habuit passio Christi per
modum meriti . . . Alius effectus fuit
secundum quosdam ad quem se habuit
anima Christi directe per modum
agentis, sc. illuminare animas patrum
quae erant in limbo de ministeriis quae
cadunt sub revelatione. — fol. cclxxxi.]

" Bellarm. lib. iv. de Christo [i. e.
de Christi anima,] cap. 16. [Op., tom. i.
col. 466. Primum dubium; ad quae loca

inferni descenderit. B. Thomas (Tert.
par. 1. Quaest. lii. art. 2.) docet Christ-
um per realem praesentiam solum de-
scendisse ad limbum patrum, per
effectum autem ad omnia loca inferni
... At probabile est profecto, Christi
animam ad omnia loca inferni descen-
disse. Primo probatur per locum
ilium Ecclus. (sc. xxiv. 45. in Vulg.)
Penetraho omnes, &c. Nam quod B.
Thomas respondet, hoc intelligi do
peneti'atione per effectum, non videtur
satisfacere. Nam hoc modo possimus
cum Durando dicere, ad nullum locum
Christum descendisse aliter quam per
effectum, cum Scriptura non distin-
guat loca. Secuudo quia Augustin. in
Epist. xcix. dicit, Eum descendisse
ad loca inferni, ubi erant dolores et
tormenta, &c.]

^ Bellarmin. Recog. p. 11. [Praef.
ad Op., tom. i. col. 4. — De Christo, lib.
iv. cap. 16, § At 'probahile, &c. Re
melius considerata, sequendam esse
existimo sententiam S. Thomje, quaj
est et aliorum Scholasticorum (in III.
Sentent. Distinct, xxii.), prsesertim
cum testimonium Ecclesiastici, et
sanctorum patrum, qui videntur
affirmare Christum descendisse ad
loca omnia inferni, verificari possiut,
etiamsi dicamus Christi animam non
descendisse ultra limbum sanctorum
patrum, nam ex eo loco potuit ap-
parere omnibus spiritibus qui in variis
inferni locis degebant, et alios terrere,
alios consolari, prout expedire Ipsi
videbatur.]

5' Sequuntur enim [sc. Scholastici]
Tho. [Aquin. in] part. Tert. 1. 8.
Q[uaest.] lii. A[rt.] 2. [ubi sup, note^]

51< Rogers' Explanation of this Article.

Conference Cliui'cli agreed in. And yet if any in the Cliurch of England
WITH should not be thoroughly resolved in the sense of this article^,

is it not as lawful for them to say, " I conceive thus or thus

of it ; yet if any other way of His descent be found truer than
this, I deny it not, but as yet I know no other,'' as it was for
Durand ^ to say it, and yet not impeach the foundation of
the faith ?

[A.C.p.47.] jF- The 33- said, that M. Rogers was but a private man.

'' But," said I, " if M. Rogers,* writing as he did
by public authority, be accounted only a private

man, . . ."

* [The reason why the Jesuit did specially urge M. Rogers' hook, was for
that it was hoth set out by public authority, and beareth the title, " Of the
Catholic Doctrine of the Church of England." Our private authors are not
allowed, for aught I know, in such a like Bort, to take upon them to express our
Catholic doctrine in any matter subject to question. — A. C. marg. note to p. 47.]

§ 13. 23. I. — I said truth, when I said M. Rogers was a private
man. And, I take it, you wall not allow every speech of
every man, though allowed by authority to have his books
printed, to be the doctrine of the Church of Rome. This **
hath been oft complained of on both sides : the imposing
particular men's assertions upon the Church ; yet I see you
mean not to leave it. And surely, as controversies are now
handled by some of your party at this day, I may not say
it is the sense of the article in hand, but I have long
thought it a kind of descent into hell, to be conversant in
them. I would the authors w^ould take heed in time, and
not seek to blind the people, or cast a mist before evident
truth, lest it cause a final descent to that place of torment.

^ [Quamvis autemistud probabiliter dubitata testimonia,] colligere [velle]

sit dictum, et satis videatur salvare calumnias e.v episcoporum scriptis,

articulum ct dictum scriptura?, tamcn sive [uostrorum, sicutj Hilarii; sive

quiavirtusdivinanon comprehenditur [antcquam pars Donati separaretur,

a ratione humana, ideo] non est per- ipsius unitatis, sicut] Cypriani et

tinaciter asserendum, quin auima Agrippini : prime, quia hoc genus lite-

Christi per alium modum nobis iuno- rarum ab auctoritate cannnis distin-

tum potuerit descendere ad infernum : guendum est. Kon enim sic leguntur

nee nos necramus alium modum esse tanquam ita e.x iis testimonium pro-

forsitan veriorem ; sed fateniur nos feratur, ut contra sentire non liceat,

ilium ignorare. — Durand. in III. Sent. sicubi forte aliter sentirent, quam

Distinct, xxii. Qusest. 3. No. 9. [fol. Veritas postulat. — S. Augustin. Ep.

cclxxxii.] xlviii. [ad Vincentium, Ep. xciii. cap.

" And this was an ancient fault x. Op., torn. ii. col. 245. E. ed. Bene-

too, for S.Augustine checks at it in diet.] And yet these were far greater

his time. Noli [ergo, frater, contra men in their generations than M.

divina tarn multa, tam clara, tarn in- Rogers was.

Value of Rogers' Authority. 55

But since you will hold this course, Stapleton was of greater Section

note with you than M. Rogers^s " Exposition of Notes upon L_

the Articles of the Church of England^' is with us. And as

he, so his Relection. And is it the doctrine of the Church

of Rome which Stapleton affirms,'' "The Scripture is silent

that Christ descended into hell, and that there is a Catholic

and an Apostolic Church ? " If it be, then what Avill become

of the Pope^s supremacy over the whole Chui'ch ? Shall he

have his power over the Catholic Church given him expressly

in Scripture — in the keys, to enter — and in pasce, to feed Matt. xvi.

when he is in — and when he had fed, to confirm ; and in all j^j^^^

these not to err and fail in his ministration : and is the ^xi. 15, 16.

Catholic Church, in and over Avhich he is to do all these xxii. 32.

great things, quite left out of the Scripture ? Belike the

Holy Ghost was careful to give him his power ; yes, in any

case ; but left the assigning of his great cure, the Catholic

Church, to tradition. And it were well for him, if he could

so prescribe for what he now claims.

II. — But what if, after all this, M. Rogers there says no
such thing ? As in truth he doth not. His words are : " All
Christians acknowledge. He descended; but in the interpret-
ation of the article, there is not that consent that were to
be wished." *= What is this to the Church of England, more
than others ? And again, " Till we know the native and
undoubted sense of this article," "^ is M. Rogers' "we" the
Church of England — or rather his and some others' judg-
ment in the Church of England ?

III. — Now here A. C. will have somewhat again to say, A. c. p. 47.
though, God knows, it is to httle pui'pose. It is, " that the
Jesuit urged M. Rogers' book, because it was set out by public
authority, and because the book bears the title of ^The Catholic

** Stapl. Cont. V. Q[n£est.] 5. A[rt.] 2. as man only ... 3. as God and man in

1. [ubi sup. p. 52. note °.] one person . . —A Treatise upon sundry

'^ KogersinArt Eccles. Angl. art. 3. Matters contained in the XXXIX. Ai--

[Also that Christ went down into hell, tides of Religion which are professed

all sound Christians both in former in the Church of England. Long since

days {He descended into hell, Apost. written and published by Thomas

Sym.) and now living (Helvet. Confess. Eogers, pp. 15, 16. ed. London, 1639.]

ii. c. 11, &c., Basil, art. 4. Augsburg. '' Ibid. [But till we know the

art. 3, &c.,) do acknowledge ; howbeit native and undoubted sense of this

in the interpretation of the Article, article and mystery of religion, persist

there is not that consent as were to we adversaries unto them which say,

be wished : some holding that Christ that Christ descended not into hell at

descended into hell, 1. as God only . . . all, &c. — p. 17.]

56 ThoiKjh allowed, not adopted, by the Church of England.

CoNVEKKNCK Doctrmc of tlic Church of England.' ^'"^ A.C. may undoubtedly

FisHKR. urge M. Rogers^ if he please ; but he ought not to say that his

opinion is the doctrine of the Church of England^ for neither

of the reasons by him expressed. First, not because " his

book was publicly allowed." For many books among them,

as well as among us, have been printed by public authority,

as containing nothing in them contrary to faith and good

manners, and yet containing many things in them of opinion

only, or private judgment, which yet is far from the avowed

positive doctrine of the Church, the Church having as yet

determined neither way by open declaration upon the words

or things controverted. And this is more frequent among

their schoolmen than among any of our controversers, as is

Avell known. Nor, secondly, " because his book bears the title

of ' The Catholic Doctrine of the Church of England.'" For

suppose the worst, and say M. Rogers thought a little too

well of his own pains, and gave his book too high a title : is

his private judgment therefore to be accounted the Catholic

doctrine of the Church of England ? Sui'ely no : no more

than I should say, every thing said by Thomas,'' or Bona-

ventures is angelical or seraphical doctrine, because one of

these is styled in the Church of Rome " seraphical," and the

other, " angelical doctor." And yet their works are printed

" by public authority," and that title given them.

^ [The first form of Rogers' Tvork causes of the same being either secret,
•was a tabular analysis, without any I cannot, or not convenient to be pub-
exposition of the Articles, published lished, I may not set down." The
in two parts, mider the title : The other and enlarged editions of the
English Creede, consenting with the work abandon the tabular form, add
true auncient Catholique and Aposto- a commentary and exposition, adopt
lique Church in al the points and the title given in the preceding note,
articles of Religion which euerie Chris- and for a running head use the words,
tian is to knowe and belceue that " The Catholick Doctrine believed and
■would be saued. The first parte, in professed in the Church of England."
most loyal manor, to the glorie of God, But it must be remarked, that the
credit of our Church, displalcng of al imprint, " allowed by aucthoritie," on
haeresies and errors both olde and newe which A.C. remarks, occurs only in the
contrarie to the faith, subscribed vnto first edition, and not in those edition s
by Thomas Rogers. ^//ouvfZ%f7Mc?Ao- which, consisting of what Laud calls
ritie. Imprinted by lohn Windct, &c. " Exposition of Notes," contain the
London, 1585. The second part, ibid, passage commenting on the sense of
1587. The prefiice is dated 6 February our Lord's descent into hell.]
1585; and the occasion of the work is ' Angelici D[octorisJ S[ancti]
stated to be "the great subscription Tho. Summa, [in Tit.]
urged from the pastors and ministers « Celebratissimi Patris Dom. Bona-
of the word and sacraments, in a great venturse Doctoris Seraphici in IIL
part of this and the last year. The Sent. Disputata, [in Tit.]

Parallel Case of Soto and Vega on Justification. 57

IV. — '^ Yea^ hut our private autliors," saitli A. C. '''are not Section

Y TFT

allowed, for auglit I know, in such a like sort to express

our Catholic doctrine in any matter subject to question." A. C. p. 47.
Here are two limitations, which will go far to bring A. C.
oflF, whatsoever I shall say against him. For first, let me
instance in any private man, that takes as much upon him as
M. Rogers doth ; he will say. He knew it not ; his assertion
here being no other, than " for aught he knows." Secondly,
If he be unwilling to acknowledge so much, yet he will
answer. It is not just in such a like sort as M. Rogers doth
it; that is, perhaps, it is not the very title of his book. But
well then : Is there never a private man allowed in the
Church of Rome to express your Catholic doctrine in any
matter subject to question? What! not in any matter?
Were not Vega and Soto two private men ? Is it not a
matter subject to question — to great question in these days,
whether a man may be certain of his salvation, certitudine
fidei, " by the certainty of faith ? " Doth not Bellarmine'^
make it a controversy ? And is it not a part of your Catholic
faith, if it be determined in the Council of Trent ?^ And
yet these two great friars of their time, Dominicus Soto
and Andreas Vega,'^ were of contrary opinions ; and both of
them challenged the decree of the Council — and so conse-

•> Bellarm. Lib. iii. de Justificat. dicebat . . . duas esse solummodo fidei

cap. 1, 14. [Op., torn. ir. col. 945, et acceptiones ; alteram, veritatem et

sqq. — Errores preecipui ex ea forma realitatem asseverantis, sive promit-

justificationis, quam Lutherani con- tentis ; alteram, assensum auscultan-

Btituunt, quatuor esse videntur . . . . tis. Priorem esse in Deo; alteram

CoUigunt secundo. Debere homines solam esse nostram; de que hac in-

certo credere, non tantum se esse telligenda Scripturae loca, qu£e de

jnstos, sed etiam electos, ac praedesti- fide nostra loquuntur. Fidem vero

natos. Quem errorem audacter decent pro fiducia et confidentia accipere,

Calvinistce, timidius autem Lutherani non modo improprium esse sed abusi-

Status qurestionis hie erit : vum, neque D. Paulo usitatum.

Utrum debeat aut possit aliquis, Fiduciam a spe nihil aut parum

sine speciali revelatioue certus esse differre : eoque baud dubium esse

certitudine fidei divime, cui nullo Lutheri errorem, imo hasresin, asseren-

modo potest subesse falsum, sibi tis, Fidem justificantem esse fiduciam

remissa esse peccata.] et certitudinem in mente fidelis de

_ ' Sed concilii Tridentini, cui Catho- remissis sibi propter Christum pecca-

lici omnes ingenia sua atque judicia tis . . . Tcrtiam opinionem in medium

sponte subjiciunt, [decretum audia- attulit Andreas Vega, non esse

mus, Sicut nemo pius, &c.] — Bellar- temeritatem, multoque minus fidem

min. Lib. iii. de Justific. cap. 3. [Op., certam, sed sine peccato haberi posee

tom. iv. col. 950.] persuasionem conjecturalem. — (Paul.

^ Hist. Concil. Trident. Lib. ii. Sarpi.) Histor. Concil. Trident, lib. ii.

p. 245. edit. Lat. Leidas, 1622. [At p. 153. cd. Aug. Trinobant. 1620.]
F. Dominicus Soto, omnibus adversus,

58 The Church of EngJand does not

Conference qucntly your Catliolic faith to be as each of them concluded ;

WITH

Fisher.

and both of them wrote books to maintain their opinions,
and both of their books Avere pubhshed " by authority/' And
therefore I think it is allowed in the Church of Rome, to
private men, to express your Catholic doctrine, and in a
matter subject to question. And therefore also, if another
man in the Church of England should be of a contrary
opinion to M. Rogers, and declare it under the title of " The
Catholic Doctrine of the Chm'ch of England," this were no
more than Soto and Vega did in the Church of Rome. And
A.C. p. 47. I, for my part, cannot but wonder A. C. should not know it.
For he says, that " for aught he knows," private men are not
allowed so to express their Catholic doctrine. And in the same
question, both Catharinus and Bellarmine ^ take on them to
express your Catholic faith : the one differing from the
other almost as much as Soto and Vega, and perhaps in
some respects more.

[A.C.p 47.] ^. But if M. Rogers . . . be . . . only a private man, in

what book may we find the Protestants' public doc-
trine ?^ The 2B. answered, that to the book of Articles f
they were all sworn ; . . .

* [By " Protestants' public doctrine " in this place, the Jesuit meant, as he
understood the 13. to mean, only of English Protestants ; for the words going
before making mention only of the English Church, do limit the general word
" Protestants " to this limited sense. — A. C. marg. note to p. 47.]

•|- [This answer hath reference to that sense which the question had of " only
English Protestants," and not of all English Protestants, but»of such as the li.
and others arc, who by office are teachers of Protestant doctrine, who do either
swear to the Book of Articles, or by subscribing oblige themselves to teach that,
and no contrary doctrine. But if the Chaplain, to discredit the Relation, will
needs enforce a larger extent of the sense, contrary to the meaning of him that
made the answer, and him that asked the question, who understood one
another in that sense which I have declared ; he must know, that although
none do swear or subscribe besides the English clergy to the Book of Articles,
yet all who will be accounted members of, or to have communion with, one and
the same English Protestant Church, are bound cither to hold all those articles,
or at least not to hold contrary to any one of them, in regard the English
Protestant Church doth exclude every one from their Church by excommuni-
cation ip^'O facto, as appeareth in their Book of Canons. " Can 5. . . . AVho
shall hold anything contrary to any part of the said articles." So as, in this

' [Tcrtia sententia est Ambrosii ejus et Apologiam contra Dominicum

Catharini qui solum in primo dicto, a Soto. His erroribus contraria est

(sc. posse (ideles cam notitiam habere sententia communis fere omnibus

de sua gratia, ut certa fide statuant theologis, &c.] — Bellarmin. Lib. iii.

sibi remissa esse pecciita,) cum hare- de Justif. cap. 3. [Op., torn. iv. col,

ticis communicat . . . A'ideassertiones 949.]

confine her Doctrine to the Thirty-nine Articles. 59

respect, I do not see why any one who pretendeth to be of one and the same Section
Protestant communion with the Church of England, can be said not to be XIV.

obliged to hold one and the same doctrine which is in the book of Articles, not

only as the Chaplain saith, " in chiefest doctrines," which like a cheverell point
may be enlarged to more by those who agree in more, and straitened to fewer
by those who agree in fewer points, but absolutely in all points, and not to
hold contrary to any one, or any the least part of any one of them. Such a
shrew, as it seems, is the Church of England become, no less than the
Chaplain saith the Church of Rome to have been, in denying her blessing,
and denouncing anathema against all that dissent, although most peaceably,
in some particulai-s, remote enough from the foundation, in the judgment of
the poorer sort, both of foreian and home-bred Protestants. — A. C- marg. note
to p. 47.]

[In the above note, the word "cheverell," now disused, signifies a soft pliable
leather, kid-skin, which admits of considerable stretching ; from the French
chevreau.^

%. I. — What ! was I so ignorant to say, " The Articles of § 14.
the Church of England were the public doctrine of all the
Protestants ', " or, " That aU Protestants were sworn to the
Articles of England/' as this speech seems to imply ? Sure
I was not. Was not the immediate speech before, of the
Church of England? And how comes the subject of the
speech to be varied in the next lines ? Nor yet speak I this,
as if other Protestants did not agree with the Church of
England in the chiefest doctrines, and in the main excep-
tions w^hich they jointly take against the Roman Chvirch,
as appears by their several Confessions. But if A. C. will A. C. p. 47.
say, as he doth, " That because there was speech before of
the Church of England, the Jesuit understood me in a
limited sense, and meant only the Protestants of the English
Church,'' — be it so; there is no great harm done^ but this,
that the Jesuit offers to enclose me too much. For I did
not say, that the Book of Articles only was the continent of
the Church of England's public doctrine. She is not so
narrow, nor hath she purpose to exclude anything which
she acknowledges hers, nor doth she wittingly permit any
crossing of her public declarations ; yet she is not such a
shrew to her children as to deny her blessing, or denounce
an anathema against them, if some peaceably dissent in
some particulars remoter from the foundation, as your own
Schoolmen differ. And if the Chm^ch of Rome, since she
grew to her greatness, had not been so fierce in this course,
and too particular in determining too many things, and

■" And therefore A. C. needs not make such a noise about it, as he doth,
p. 48.

no 77/e Thirty-nine ArticIe.9,noi Fundamentals, thoiirjh not to he opposed.

Conference making tlicm matters of necessary belief, Avliich had gone
Fisher ^'°^' many liuudreds of years before, only for things of

pious opinion, Christendom, I persuade myself, had been in

liappier peaee at this day, than, I doubt, we shall ever live to
see it.

A. C. p. 48. II- — Well, but A. C. Avill prove '' the Church of England a
shrew, and such a shrew. For in her Book"^ of Canons, she
excommunicates every man, who shall hold anything contrary
to any part of the said Articles.^' So A. C. But surely these
are not the very words of the Canon, nor perhaps the sense.
Not the words ; for they are : " Whosoever shall affirm that
the Articles are in any part superstitious, or erroneous," &c.
And perhaps not the sense. For it is one thing for a man
to hold an opinion privately within himself; and another
thing boldly and publicly to affirm it. And again, it is one
thing to hold contrary to some part of an article, which
perhaps may be but in the manner of expression ; and
another thing positively to affirm, that the articles in any
part of them are superstitious and erroneous. But this is
not the main of the business ; for though the Church of
England denounce excommunication, as is before ° expressed,
yet she comes far short of the Church of Homers severity,
whose anathemas are not onlv for thirtv-nine articles, but for

' [matters very many more,P above one hundred in matter' of doctrine,

i6'"3 nd ^^^^ ^^^^^ ^^ many points as far remote from the foundation ;

1686] though, to the far greater rack of men's consciences, they
must be all made fundamental, if that Church have once

A. C. p. 45. determined them : whereas the Church of England never
declared, that every one of her articles are fundamental in
the faith. For it is one thing to say. No one of them is
superstitious or erroneous ; and quite another to say. Every
one of them is fundamental, and that in every part of it,
to all men's belief. Besides, the Church of England pre-
scribes only to her own children, and by those articles
provides but for her own peaceable consent in those doc-
trines of truth. But the Church of Rome severely imposes
her doctrine iipon the whole world, under pain of dam-
nation.

" [Canon, v.] " Canon, v. p Concil. Trident.

Scripture the Foundation of Faith. 61

5P. . . . and tliat^ tlie Scriptures only,"^ not any unwritten Skction

XV.
tradition, was the foundation of tlieir faith.

[A.C.p^.J

* [The Chaplain saith, " The Church of England grounded her positive \ [that . . .
articles upon Scripture," &c. True : if themselves in their own cause may be caret A. C]
admitted for competent judges ; in which sort some other novelist will say,
that he grounded his positive articles upon Scriptures ; and his negative refute
not only our Catholic, but also Protestant doctrines. As for example : Baptizing
of Infants, upon this negative ground, is not expressly, at least (not) evidently,
affirmed in Scriptures, nor directly, at least not demonstratively, concluded
out of it. In which case I would gladly know, what the Chaplain would
answer to defend this doctrine to be a point of faith, necessary for the salvation
of poor infants, necessitate medii, as all Catholic divines hold? I answer with
S. Austin: — (S. Aug. 1. i. contra Cresc. c. 31.) Scripturarum a nobis tenetur
Veritas, ctim id facimus quod universce. pitacet ecclesiee, quani earundem
scripturarum comynendat auctoritas : "We hold the verity of Scriptures,
when we do that which pleaseth the whole Church, which the authority of the
same Scriptures doth commend." But what answer the Chaplain can make, I
cannot easily guess, unless with us he acknowledge authority of Church-tradition
to be necessary in this case. — A. C. marg. note to p. 48.]

2B. I. — Tlie Church of England grounded her positive § 15.
articles upon Scripture; and her negative do refute there,
where the thing affirmed by you is not affirmed by Scriptui'e,
nor directly to be concluded out of it. And here, not the
Church of England only, but all Protestants, agree most
truly and most strongly in this, "That the Scriptiu'e is
sufficient to salvation, and contains in it all things necessary
to it." The Fathers'! are plain, the Schoolmen'^ not

1 S. Basil, de vera et pia Fide, de quibus tractavimus.] — And to this
Manifesta defectio Fidei est, impor- place Bellarmine, lib. iv. de Verbo
tare quicquam eorum qute sci-iptanon Dei non scripto, c. 11. [Op., tom. i.
sunt, [(pavfpa (Knratais Trianois Kol col. 206.] saith, that S. Augustine
i>TTfp7}(pavias KUTriyopia, 'q aQerelv ti speaks, de illis dogmatibus quae
Twv yeypaixjxeuwv, tj i-Keiadyftv rdiv fx^ neccssaria sunt omnibus simpliciter,
•yeypantxevup. — S. Basil, de Fide, cap. i. [qualia sunt quae habentur in Sym-
Op., tom. ii. p. 224. D. ed. Benedict.]^ laolo Apostolico, et in decalogo,] " of
S.Hilar. Lib. ii.[cap. 8.]ad Const. Aug. those points of faith, which are ne-
[In quantum ego tunc beatee reli- cessary simply for all men." So far
giosfeque voluntatis vere te, domine then he grants the question. And
Constanti Imperator, admirer] fidem that you may know, it fell not from
tantum secundum ea quae scripta sunt him on the sudden, he had said as
desiderantem, et [merito plane ad ilia much before, in the beginning of the
ipsa unigeniti Dei eloquiafestinans,ut same chapter, [Primum est qua^-
imperatoriaesoUicitudiniscapax pectus dam in doctrina Christiana tam fidei
etiam divinorura dictorum conscientia quam morum, esse simpliciter omni-
plenum sit.] Hoc qui repudiat Anti- bus necessaria ad salutem, qualis
christus est : et qui simulat, ana- est notitia articulorum Symboli
thema est. — [Op., col. 1229. F. ed. Apostolici, item cognitio deccm prae-
Benedict.] — S. Aug. de Doctrina ceptorum, et nonnuUoruui sacra-
Christiana, lib. ii. cap. 9. [Op., tom. mentorum. — Ibid. col. 201.] and here
iii. col. 24. D. ed. Benedict.] In iis he confirms it again,
[enim] quae aperte in Scripturis Scotus Prolog, in Sentent. Q[uajst.]
posita sunt, inveniuntur ilia omnia ii. [c. 14. Op., tom. v. p. 63. Habito
quas continent fidem, moresque vi- igitur contra haereticos, quod doctrina
vendi, [spem scilicet atque caritatem, canonis est vera, videndum est

62 The positive Articles among the Thirty -nine grounded on Scripture.

Conference strangers in it. And liavc not we reason tlieii to account

fTsher ^^' ^^ ^^ ^^j ^^^ foundation of our faith? And Stapleton^

" — - himself, though an angry opposite, confesses, "that the

Scripture is in some sort the foundation of faith, that is, in

the nature of testimony, and in the matter or thing to he

heheved." And if the Scripture he the foundation to

which we are to go for witness, if tliere be doubt about the

faith, and in which we are to find the thing that is to be

believed as necessary in the faith, we never did, nor never

will refute any tradition that is universal and apostolic, for

the better exposition of the Scripture ; nor any definition of

the Church, in which she goes to the Scripture for what

she teaches, and thrusts nothing as fundamental in the faith

'[remotely, upon the world, but what the Scripture fundamentally

clear and makes materiam credendorum, " the substance of that which

ti' n dr^ws ^^ ^° *^ ^^^ bclievcd," whether immediately and expressly in

it out. . . . words, or more remotely, till a clear and full deduction

Editt. 1673 1 •, , ,

and 1686.] <il'aw it out.'

A. C. p. 48. II. — Against the beginning of this paragraph, A. C. excepts.

And first he says : " It is true, that the Church of England

grounded her positive articles upon Scripture ; that is, it is

true, if themselves may be competent judges in their own

cause." But this, by the leave of A. C. is true, AAithout

making ourselves judges in our own cause. For " that all

the positive articles of the present Church of England are

grounded upon Scripture," we are content to be judged by

the joint and constant belief of the Fathers, which lived

Avithin the first four or five hundred years after Christ,

secundo, an sit necessaria, ct siiffici- tibus explicatio fidei contra insur-

ens viatori ad consequendum finem geutes errores.] And he speaks tliere

suum .... Ista ergo conferendo ad of the written word,
tres rationes quibus innititur solutio " Scripturam [autem] fundamen-

quoestionis prsecedentis patet quod turn et columnam fidei fatemur in

sacra] Scriptura sufficienter continct suo genere esse, sc. in genera testi-

doctrinani neeessariam viatori. — moniorum, et in materia credendo-

Thom. [Aquin.] Secund. Secund. rum ; [quo sensu unus primarius

Q[u8est.] i. A[rt.] 10. ad primum articulus est fundamentum mulio-

[ergo diccnduni, quod] in doctrina rum, ut de Petri confessione et fide

Christi ct Apostolorum, Veritas fidei incarnati Filii Dei scripsit Hilarius

est sufficienter e.xplicata, [sed quia de Trinit. lib. vi. Scd non est solum

perversi homines apostolicam doctri- fundamentum, Ecclesia enim firraa-

nam, et cajterasdoctrinaset Scripturas mentura et columna .alia est. 1 Tim.

pervertunt ad sui ipsorum penlitio- iii.] llclect. Con. iv. Qusest. i. Art. 3.

nem sicut dictum 2 Pet. (iii. IG.) ideo in fine. [Op., torn. i. p. 774. ubi sup.

necessaria fuit temporibus praeceden- p. 32. note ■".]

Mode of Proof by Consequences from Scripture. 63

wlien the Cliurcli was at the best ; and by the Councils held Section
Avithin those times; and to submit to them in all those ^^'
points of doctrine. Therefore, we desire not to be judges in
our own cause. And if any whom A. C. calls "a novelist^'
can truly say and maintain this, he will quickly prove him-
self no novelist. And for the negative articles, they refute,
where the thing affirmed by you is either not affirmed in
Scriptiu-e, or not directly to be concluded out of it. Upon
this negative ground, A. C. infers again, " That the baptism
of infants is not expressly, at least not evidently, affirmed
in Scripture, nor directly, at least not demonstratively, con- A. C. p. 49.
eluded out of it.^' In which case, he " professes, he would
gladly know, what can be answered to defend this doctrine
to be a point of faith necessary for the salvation of infants.^^
And, in conclusion, " professes he cannot easily guess what
answer can be made, unless we will acknowledge authority
of Church tradition necessary in this case.^^

Ill, — And truly, since A. C. is so desirous of an answer,
I Avill give it freely. And first in the general. I am no way
satisfied with A. C.^s addition — "not expressly, at least not
evidently.'-* What means he ? If he speak of the letter of
the Scripture, then, whatsoever is expressly, is evidently, in
the Scripture ; and so his addition is vain. If he speak of
the meaning of the Scripture, then his addition is cunning;
for many things are expressly in Scripture, which yet in
their meaning are not evidently there. And whatever he
mean, my words are, " That our negative articles refute that
which is not affirmed in Scripture," without any addition of
■^^ expressly '^ or "evidently •/' and he should have taken my
Avords as I used them. I like nor change nor addition ; nor
am I bound to either of A. C.'s making.-— And I am as little
satisfied with his next addition — " nor directly, at least not
demonstratively, concluded out of it." For are there not
many things in good logic concluded directly, which yet are
not concluded demonstratively ? Surely there are. For to
be directly or indirectly concluded, flows from the mood or
form of the syllogism; to be demonstratively concluded,
flows from the matter or nature of the propositions. If the
propositions be prime and necessary truths, the syllogism is
demonstrative and scientifical, because the propositions are

64 Instanced in the Case of Infant Bajitism.

CoNFEREKCE sucli. If tlic propositlous be probable only, tliougli the
f1sh"r. syllogism be made in the clearest mood, yet is the con-
elusion no more. The inference or consequence, indeed, is
clear and necessary ; but the consequent is but probable, or
topical, as the propositions were. Now, my words were only
for a direct conclusion, and no more : though in this case
I might give A. C. his caution. For Scripture here is the
thing spoken of. And Scripture being a principle, and every
text of Scripture confessedly a principle among all Christians,
whereof no man desires* any farther proof, I would fain
know, why that which is plainly and apparently, that is, by
direct consequence, proved out of Scripture, is not demon-
stratively or scientifically proved — if at least he think there
can be any demonstration in divinity ; and if there can be
none, why did he add " demonstratively?^'

A.C. p. 49. IV. — Next, in particular : I answer to the instance which
A. C. makes concerning the baptism of infants. That it may be
concluded directly (and let A. C. judge, whether not demon-
stratively) out of Scripture, both that infants ought to be
baptized, and that baptism is necessary to their salvation.
And first, That baptism is necessary to the salvation of
infants, (in the ordinary way of the Church, without binding
God to the use and means of that sacrament, to which He hath
bound us,)" is express in S. John iii. : " Except a man be born

' [Illud tandem intelligamus opor- sententia nisi moverentur, omnino

tel] habitum fidei in ordine ad parvulos nee baptizandos esse cense-

'Wieologiae disciplinam se habere, ut rentur. Sed quia non ait, inquiunt

Inbitus intellectus se habet ad isti, Nisi quis renatus, &c., non

humanas scientias [et facultates. liabebit salutcm, vel vitam fetcrnam,

Quemadinodum itaque intellectus tantunimodo autem dixit, non intra-

noster in discursu disciplinarum na- bit in regnum Dei ; ad hoc parvuli

turalium, primo cum principiis con- baptizandi sunt, ut sint ctiam cum

greditur, deinde ad reliqua cognos- Christo in regno Dei, ubi non erunt

cenda proficiscitur, qute videlicet a si baptizati non fuerint : quamvis

principiis positis derivantur, sic in et sine baptismo si parvuli moriantur,

cognitione supernaturalium rcrum salutem vitamque teternam habituri

qucedam sunt principia supernatu- sint, quoniam nullo peccati vinculo

ralia, ex quorum fide fidelis animus obstricti sunt. Hsec diccntes, primo

ad cajtcra investiganda procedit.] — nnnquam explicant isti, qua justitia

M[elchior] Canus, do loc[is Theolo- nullum peccatum habens imago Dei

gicis,] lib. ii. cap. 8. [cap. 56. ed. separetur a regno Dei. Deinde videa-

Lovan. 15C!).] nius utrum Dominus Jesus, unus et

" S. Augustine expressly of the solus magister bonus, in hac ipsa

Baptism of infants. [Jam nunc evangelica lectione non significaverit

scrutemur diligcntius, quantum ad- et ostcnderit non nisi per remissionem

juvat Dominus, ctiam ipsum Evan- peccatorum fieri, ut ad regnum Dei

gelii capitulum, ubi ait. Nisi quis perveniant baptizati : quamvis recte

renatus, &c. Qua isti (sc. Pelagiani) intelligentibus sufficeredebuerit, quod

Scripture teaches the Necessity of Baptism for all :

again of water, and tlie Spirit, lie cannot enter into the
kingdom of God/' So, no baptism, no entrance. Nor can
infants creeps in any other ordinary way. And this is the

Section

dictum est, Nisi quis natus fuerit de-
nuo, &c. et, Nisi quis renatus fuerit ex
aqua et Spiritu, &c.] — De peccatorum
mentis et remissione, lib. i. cap. 30.
[Op., tom. X. col. 32. D.] — and, [Quis-
quis vcro adhuc movetur, quare bapti-
zenturquijamdebaptizatisnascuutur,
hoc breviter accipiat. Sicut generatio
carnis peecati per unum Adam ad
condemnatiouem trahit omncs qui eo
mode generantur, sic generatio spiritus
gratia3 per unum Jesum Christum ad
justificationem vitse reternre ducit
omnes qui eo modo prsedestinati
regenerantur. Sacramentum autem
baptismi* profecto sacramentum re-
generationis est, Quocirca sicut
homo, qui non vixerit, mori non
potest, et qui mortuus non fuerit,
resurgere non potest, ita qui natus
non fuerit, renasci non potest. Ex
quo conficitur, neminem in suo
parente renasci potuisse non natum.
Oportet autem, ut si natus fuerit,
renascatur : quia, Nisi quis natus fuerit
denuo, &c. Oportet igitur ut Sacra-
mento regenerationis, ne sine illo
male de hac vita exeat, etiam parvu-
lus imbuatur : quod non fit nisi in
remissionem peccatorum. — ibid. J lib.
ii. cap. 27. [ubi sup. col. 63. C.]— and,
[Sed ut omittamus et contemnamus
ea, quae brevi tempore patiuntur, nee
transacta revocantur, numquid simili-
ter contemnere possumus, quod Per
unum homiuem mor.s, ho.. % Per
hanc enim apostolicam, divinam,
claramque sententiam, satis evidenter
elucet, neminem ire in mortem nisi
per Adam ; neminem ire in vitam
seternam nisi per Christum . . . Item
quisquis dixerit, quod in Christo
vivificabuntur etiam parvuli, qui
sine sacramenti baptismi parti eipa-
tionc de vita exeunt, hie profecto et
contra apostolicam pr^edicationem
venit, et totam condemnat Eccle-
siam, ubi propterea cum baptizandis
parvulis festinatur et curritur, quia
sine dubio creditur alitor eos in
Christo vivificari omnino non posse.]
— Lib. i. [ad Hieronym. seu Ep. clxvi.
(al. xxviii.)] de origine animce homi-
nis, [cap. vii. 21. Op., tom. ii. par. 2.
col. 591. G.] — Nay, they of the lioman
party, which urge the baptism of
infants as a matter of faith, and yet
not to be concluded out of Scripture,

VOL. II. — LACD.

when they are not in eager pursuit of
this controversy, but look upon truth
with a more indifterent eye, confess as
much (even the learnedest of them)
as we ask : Advertendum autem
Salvatorem, dum dicit. Nisi quis
renatus, &c. necessitatem impouere
omnibus, ac proinde [etiam] par\'uIo3
debere renasci ex aqua et Spiritu. —
[Corn.] Iansen[ii Comment.] in [Con-
cord.] Evang. cap. xx. [p. 157. ed.
Lovan. 1571.] So here is baptism
necessary for infants, and that ne-
cessity imposed by our Saviour, and
not by the Church only. — Hseretici
[qui cum duo tantum faciant sacra-
menta, Baptismum et Eucharistiam,
doceantque etiam baptizandos infan-
tes, ncc ullo] alio quam hoc Scripturte
testimonio probare possint, infantes
esse baptizandos, [ne concedere co-
gentur.cScc.] — Maid[onat.] in S. Joann.
iii. 5. So Maldonatus confesses that the
Heretics (we know whom he means)
can prove the baptism of infants by
no testimony of Scripture but this :
which speech implies, That by this
testimony of Scripture it is and can
be proved, and therefore not by
Church tradition only.— And I would
fain know^, why ]5ellarmine, de Bap-
tismo, lib. i. cap. 8. sect. 5. [Op.,
tom. iii. col. 269. D. Porro Catholica
Ecclesia semper docuit infantes bapti-
zandos .... Probaturhccc Veritas tribus
argumentorum generibus. Primum,
Sumitur a scripturis : habemus autem
in scripturis tria argumenta. Primum
sumitur a figura Testamenti Veteris

Secundum argumentumcolligitur

exduobuslocisEvangeliisimuljunctis,
Joann. iii. 5. Nisi quis renatus, &c.
At quod parvuli non pereant Do-
minus docet. Mat. xix. 14. Mar. x. 14.
et Luc. xviii. 16. Sinite parvulos, &c.

Tertium argumentum coUigitur

ex locis illis, ubi dicuntur baptizatee
integrte familiee, ut Actor, xvi. 15 di-
citur Lydia baptizata, et domus ejus :]
should bring three arguments out of
Scripture to prove the baptism of
infants, (Habemus in scripturis tria
argumenta, kc.) if baptism cannot be
proved at all out of Sciipture, but
only by the tradition of the Church. —
And yet, this is not Bellarmine's way
alone, but Suarez's in Thorn. [Aquin.
Summ.] Part. Tcrt. Q[u£est.] Ixviii.

GG Hence Infant Baptism may be directly inferred from Scripture ;

Conference received opinion of all tlic ancient Cliiircli of Christ." And
fTshkk. secondly; That infants ought to be ba^jtized, is, first, plain by

evident and direct consequence out of Scriptm*e. For if

there be no sahation for infants in the ordinary way of the

[Art. 10.] Disput. xxv. Sect. i. § 2.
[Comment, ac Disput. in Tert. Part.
Div. Tliom. tom. iii. p. 255. col. ii. ed.
Mogunt. 1G19. Dice primo, homines
post nativitatem ex utero materno
statim sunt capaces baptismi, etiamsi
rationis usum nou habcant. Conclu-
sio est de fide, qiias licet non sit in
Sacra Scriptura exprcssa,] possunt
[tamen] ex ilia varia argumcnta
sumi ad earn confirmandam, [Actor.

enim xvi. legimus, &c ] Nee

dissimile [argumentum sumitur ex
ipsa institutioue baptismi, et ex illis
verbis Joann. iii. &c.] — And Grego-
rius de Valentia, de Suscipientibus
Baptismum, [Comment. Tlieolog. in
Tert. Part. Div. Thoni. Qucest. Ixviii.
Art. 10. Disput. iv. Qusest. iii.
Punct. 1. Op., tom. iv. col. 727. C. ed.
Paris. 1609. Infantes secundum fidem

Catholicam baptizari posse pro-

batur primo ex Scriptura, &c.] — And
the Pope himself, Innocent III. [Arela-
tensi Archiepiscopo] Decretal, lib. iii.
Tit. 42. cap. Majores. [Asserunt
hreretici parvulis inutiliter baptisma
conferri .... Ad id autem taliter rc-
spondemus quod baptisma circumci-
sioni successit .... ita nunc indistincte
vox intonat evangelica. Nisi quis
renatus, &c.] — And thej'all jump with
S. Ambros. lib. x. Epist. 84. ad Demc-
triad. Yirg. who expressly affirms
It, P;Bdobaptismum esse constitutio-
nem Salvatoris. And proves it out
of S. John iii. 5. [Hinc Adte pecca-
tum exemplo posteris asserebatur no-
cuisse non transitum . . . hinc evacuatio
baptismatis parvulorum, qui sola adop-
tione donati, nullo autem rcatu diceren-
tur absolvi .... Nee frustra scriptum
est : Nemo mundus a sorde, ncc in-
fans, cujus unius diei vita est super
terram. Et quis poteritfocere mundum
de immundo conceptum semine, nonne
Tu qui solus es? Propter quod sicut
nunc in ecclesia manet constitutio Sal-
vatoris, dicentis : Nisi quis renatus, &c.
— (Pseudo-) S. Ambrosii, lib. x. Epist.
84. ut sup. Op., tom. iii. p. 265. B. ed.
(Erasm.) Basil. 1538. This epistle, ad
Demetriadem, is rejected by the Bene-
dictine editors. See Appendix to Op.,
torn. ii. col. 477, 478. ed. Benedict. It
has been variously attributed to S. Leo

Magn. by his editor Qucsnel ; and to
S. Prosper of Aquitaine by his editor
Antelmn. Sec S. Prosp. Aquit. Op.,
p. 930. ed. Paris. 1711.]

=^ Infantes reos esse originalis pec-
cati, et ideo baptizandos esse, anti-
quam fldei regulam vocat S. Aug.
ser. viii. cap. 8 de verb. Apost. [sc.
Universam massam generis humani
in homine primo vcnenator ille per-
cussit ; nemo ad secundum transit
a primo, nisi per baptismatis sacra-
mentum. In parvulis natis et non-
dum baptizatis agnoscatur Adam ....
ex eo quod in te corrumpitur generas

parvulum quare novis di.sputa-

tionibus antiquam fidei regulam
frangere conaris?— Serm. clxxiv. de
verbis Apost. 1 Tim. i. Humanus
sermo et omni acceptione, &c. Op.,
tom. V. col. 834. F.] — Et, Nemo vobis
susurret doctrinas alienas. Hoc Ec-
clesia semper habuit, semper tenuit,
hoc a majorum fide percepit : [hoc
usque in finem perseveranter cus-
todit .... Si quando portantur in-
fantes, dicuntur omnino nullum pro-
paginis habere peccatum, et veniunt
ad Christum; quare non eis dicitur
in Ecclesia qui eos apportant : Au-
ferte hinc innocentes istos ?] — S.
Aug. Serm. x. [clxxvi. ed. Benedict.]
cap. 2. de verbis Apost. [1 Tim. i. Fide-
lis sermo et omni acceptione, &c. Op.,
tom. V. col. 840. A.] — And [Pseudo-]
S. Ambros. lib. x. epist. 84. [ubi sup.
Qute omnia et multo plura documenta
non tanta cura sacris paginis Spiritus
Sanctus inseruisset, si talis esset na-
tura in filiis Adam, qualis in ipso est
principaliterinstituta.] — And S. Chry-
sostom. Homil. de Adam, et Eva. [The
following passage may perhaps be that
referred to in this vague citation :
'Opas TTus ix(i^u)v 7J eviropla rrjs fij/xiay ;
■ncos trXdw!/ d TlKovros ; olov ri Aiyca,
e~\uafv 6 Qe6s rbv avOpooirov aico "yrjs
Kai vSaros Kal eflero avTuv iv rep Trapa-
Sfiacp' ovK tytvero xP'^'^'-P-os 6 irXacrOels,
dwA Zii<JTpd,<pT}' ovKfTi AoiTtov dno yrjs
Kal i/Saroy avrdf dyunXaTiei, dW' €|
vSuTos Kal Tn'evfj.aTos' Kal oik en irapd-
Seurov iirayy ' Werai Trpus avrou, dWa,
fiaaiKiiav ovpavuv. Kal oirias &Kove.
NiKoSijjxov ydp Tov apxovTos rcHv 'luv-
Saiuv K. T. \. — S. Chrysostom. in

as it is almost expressly commanded therein, 67

Churchy but by baptism^ and tliis appear in Scripture^ as it Section

XV.

dotli, then out of all doubt^ tlie consequence is most evident
out of that Scriptiu'Cj That infants are to be baptized, that
their salvation may be certain. For they which cannot help
themselves/ must not be left only to extraordinary helps ; of
which we have no assurance, and for which we have no
warrant at all in Scriptui^e; while we, in the mean time, neg-
lect the ordinary way and means commanded by Christ.
Secondly, it is very near an expression in Scripture itself.
For when S. Peter had ended that great sermon of his, he
applies two comforts unto them, " Amend your lives, and be Acts ii.
baptized, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.^^ '
And then, he infers, *^ For the promise is made to you, and
to your children." The promise ! what promise ? What ?
Why, the promise of sanctification by the Holy Ghost. By
what means ? Why, by baptism : for it is expressly, " Be
baptized, and ye shall receive ; ^' and as expressly, " This
promise is made to you, and to your children." And there-
fore A. C. may find it, if he will. That the baptism of infants
may be directly concluded out of Scripture. For some of
his own pcirty, Ferus^ and Salmeron,^ could both find it
there. And so, if it will do him any pleasure, he hath my

answer, which, he saith, " he would be elad to know." [A.C.marg.

' ^ ' » note to p.

V. — It is true, Bellarmine ^' presses a main place out of 48.]

Genesim, Sermo vii. cap. 5. Op., torn. nocet infidelitas :] quare debent con-

iv. p. 681. C] — Hoc prajdicat Ecclcsia sentire, cum ad usum rationis perve-

Catholicaubique diffusa. — [Concil. Mi- niunt, ad implenda promissa in

levit. canon, ii. ubi sup. p. 40. note ''.] Baptismo : [et non tantum ad eoi5,

y [Commendaverimcaritativestras] sed ad omnes qui longe sunt a Dei

causam eorum, qui pro se loqui non notitia, quos videlicet Dominus ex

possunt. — S.Augustiu.serm.viii. cap.8. sua gratia advocavit, spectat hoe

de verb. Apost. [ubi sup. col, 834. E.] tantum beneficium. ] — Salmeron.

^ [Tertio signanter addit, Unus- Tractat. xiv. in loc. [sc. Act. ii. 39.

quisquevestriim&c.] nullum [quippe] Comment, torn. xii. pp. 87, 88. ed.

excipiens, [non marcm, non foeminam. Colon. 1614.]

non servum, non liberum,] non Ju- •' [Secunda regula est, quando uni-

dreum, non Gentilcm, nfic adultura, versa Ecclcsia aliquid servat, quod

nee puerum, [et omnibus indicat esse nemo constituere potuit, nisi Deus,

necessariumbaptisma. — Eeverendi pa- quod tamen nusquam invenitur scrip-

tris D. Joannis] Feri &c. [Enarra- turn, necesse est dicere,ab ipso Christo,

tiones in Acta Apostolor.] in Act. ii. et Apostolis ejus traditum. Eatio est

39. [p. SS.Coloniae, 1567.] _ similis superior!. Nam Ecclesia uni-

" [Vobisenim est 7-epromissio, et versa non solum non potest errare in

Jiliis vestris, et onuiihus qui longe credendo, sed nee in operando, ac pras-

sunt. Hoc est, ad vos Juda30s, vel sertiminritu etcultudivino; recteque

praesentes, repromissio Joelis de Spi- Augustin. Epist. 118. docet insolen-

ritu Sancto,] et ad filios vestros, [quos tissimae insanioe esse existimare, non

multum juvat parentum fides, sicut recte fieri, quod ab uni versa Ecclesia

C° Though it may not he recognised without Tradition,

Conference S. Augustinc, and hc lu'gcs it hard. S. Augustine's words arc,
fTsher. " The custom of our mother the Church in baptizing infants
is by no means to be contemned, or thought superfluous ;
nor yet at all to be believed, unless it were an apostolical
tradition." '^ The place is truly cited, but seems a great
deal stronger than indeed it is. For, first, it is not denied,
that this is an apostolical tradition, and therefore to be
believed. But, secondly, not therefore only. Nor doth
S. Augustine say so, nor doth Bellarmine press it that way.
The truth is, it would have been somewhat difficult to find
the collection out of Scripture only for the baptism of infants,
since they do not actually believe. And therefore S. Augus-
tine is at nee credenda nisi, that this custom of the Church
had not been to be believed, had it not been an apostolical
tradition. But the tradition being apostolical, led on the
Church easily to see the necessary deduction out of Scripture.
And this is not the least use of tradition, to lead the Church
into the true meaning of those things which are found in
Scripture, though not ob\ious to every eye there. And that
this is S. Augustine's meaning is manifest by himself, who
best knew it. For when he had said, as he doth,"^ That to
baptize children is antiqua fidei regula, " the ancient rule of
faith," and " the constant tenet of the Church," yet he doubts
not to collect and deduce it out of Scripture also. For when
Pelagius urged, that infants needed not to be baptized,
because they had no original sin, S. Augustine relies not
upon the tenet of the Church only, but argues from the text
thus : " "Wliat need have infants of Christ if they be not

Matt. ix. sick ? ' For the sound need not the physician.' " ^ And again,

[12.]

fit. Ergo ilia qiiEe Ecclesia non potest flua deputanda,] necomnino credenda,

recte servare, nisi aDeosint instituta, nisi Apostolica esset traditio.
et tamen scrvat, necesse est diccre, ** (^uare [novisdisputationibus] an-

a Deo instituta, etiamsi nusquam id tiquani fidei regulam frangere conarisi

legatur. Tale est baptisma parvulonim. — S. Aug. Ser. viii. [clxxiv.] de verb.

Erraret enim gravissime Ecclesia, si Apost. cap. 8. [ubi sup p. 66. note ^] —

sine Dei mandato pan'ulos, qui actu Hoc Ecclesia semper [habuit, semper]

non credunt, baptizaret. Quocirca An- tenuit.- — Id. Ser. x. [clxxvi.] cap. 2. [ubi

gustinus, lib. x. de Gen. cap. 23, &c.] — sup. p. C6. note ".]
Eellarniin. de Verbo Dei [non scripto,] "= [Quoniam (Matth. ix. 12.) non est

lib. iv. cap. 9. § 3. [Op., tom. i. col. 103. opus sanis medicus, sed a^grotanti-

B.] bus,] quid necessarium [ergo] habuit

« S. Aug. [de] Gen[esi,] ad Lit. [lib. infans Christum, si non tegrotat ? [8i

X.] cap. 2:J. ( Op., torn. iii. par. 1. col. 272. sanus est, quare per eos qui eum dili-

D.] Consuetudo [tamen] MatrisEcele- gunt,medicumqua;rit? — S.Aug.Serm.

sirein baptizandisparvulisnequaquam clxxvi. ubi sup.] — Quid est quod

eperneuda est, [neque ullo uiodo super- dicis, nisi ut non accedant ad Jesum ]

ivhich unfolds the implicit Sense of Scripture. 69

Is not this said by Pelagius, ut non accedant ad Jesum ? ' that Section

infants may not come to their Saviour?' Sed clamat Jesus,

'but Jesus cries out/ 'Suffer little ones to come unto Mark x.
Me/ '' And all this is fully acknowledged by Calvin/ "
namely, "^ That all men acknowledge the baptism of infants
to descend from apostolical tradition/' And yet that "it
doth not depend upon the bare and naked authority of the
Church.'^ s Which he speaks not in regard of tradition, but
in relation to such proof as is to be made by necessary con-
sequence out of Scripture over and above tradition.

VI. — As for tradition, I have said enough for that,'^ and as
much as A. C. where it is truly apostolical. And yet if any A. C. p.49.
thing Avill please him, I will add this concerning this particular,
the baptizing of infants, that the Church received this by
tradition from the Apostles.' By tradition. And what then ?
May it not directly be concluded out of Scripture, because
it was delivered to the Church by way of tradition ? I hope
A. C. will never say so. For certainly in doctrinal things
nothing so likely to be a tradition apostolical as that which
hath a root and a foundation in Scriptu.re.'^ For Apostles

Sed tibi clamat Jesus, Sine parvuloa 9. Op., torn. iv. p. 565. A. col. 2. ed.

venire ad Me. — S. Augustin. [Serm. Benedict.] — Et S. Aug. Ser.x. [clxxvi.]

clxxiv. ubi sup. p. 66. note ^] de verb. Apost. cap. 2. [ubi sup. p. QQ.

' [Quod autem apud simplicem vul- note ".] Hoc ecclesia a majorum lide

gum disseminaiit, longam annorum percepit. — And it is to be observed, that

seriem post Christi resurrectionem neither of these Fathers (nor I believe

prseteriisse, quibus incognitus erat any other) says that theChurch received

pisdobaptismus, in eo fcedissime men- it "a traditione sola," or "a majorum

tiuntur : siquidem] nullus est scriptor tide sola," as if tradition did exclude

tam vetustus, qui non ejus originemad collection of it out of Scripture,
apostoloriim seculum pro certo referat. ^ Yea, and Bellarmine himself avers,

— Calvin. Instit. lib. iv. cap. 16. § 8. De verbo Dei non scripto, lib. iv. cap.

[Op., tom. viii. p. 357. col. 1.] x. § 7 : Sic etiam [quia scriptum est

s [Aiunt pasdobaptismum non tam 2 Tliess. ii. 15. Tenete traditioues, &c. ;

ex aperto scriptural mandate, quam et Luc. x. 16. Qui vos audit. Me au-

ex ecclesiae decreto emanasse. At] dit ; et Matt, xviii. 17. Si ecclesiam

miserrimum asylum foret, si pro defen- non audierit, &c., idcirco nos affirma-

sione paedobaptismi ad nudam eccle- mus, traditioues esse quodammodo ex-

siae auctoritatem sufiugere cogeremur. plicationes verbi scripii, non quod

— Calvin. Instit. lib. iv. cap. 8. § 16. nudam contineant ejus expositionem,

[Op., tom. viii. p. 311. col. 2.] sed quia] omnes traditioues [et eccle-

•> [Vide sup.] sect. xv. 1. [p. 62.] siaj decreta] continentur inscriptis in

' Origen. in Horn. vi. 6. tom. ii. uuiversaLi ; [sed in particulari non

p. 543. Pro hoc [et] ecclesia ab apo- continentur, nee debent contineri. —

stoUs traditionem suscepit, ctiam par- Op., tom. i. col. 196. C] AndS. Basil,

vulis bapti.smum dare. [Sciebant enim Serm. de fide, approves only those

illi quibus mysteriorum secreta com- Agrapha, quaj non sunt aliena a pia

missa sunt divinorum, quod essent secundum Scripturam sententia. [ews

in omnibus genuinaj sordes peccati, ixlv ovv ayuvi'^eo-Bai -nphs ras iwavKTra-

qu£e per aquam et Spiritum ablui de- ^eVas kutu Kaiphv aipiaeis ^xP^t"' ^'^"'

berent. — Comment, in Eom. lib. v. cap. ixevos toIs irpoaih-q'potnv, olkoAovOou

70 How is Scripture knoivn to be Scripture?

Conference cannot -write or deliver contrary, but subordinate and sub-
FisHER. servient, things.

[A.C.p.49.] JF- I asked liow * he knew Scripture to be Scripture,

and in particular Genesis, Exodus, &c. These are

believed to be Scriptm^e, yet not proved out of any

place of Scripture. The ^. said, that the books of

Scripture are principles to be supposed, and needed

not to be proved.

* [The Jesuit did not ask this question as doubting of the divine authority
of Scripture, but to make it seen, that beside Scripture, which the U. said was
the " only" fouudation of faith, there must be admitted some other foundation,
to wit, '' unwritten " tradition, and this of infallible authority, to assure us
iufallibly that these books are divine ; which to be divine is one point infallibly
believed by divine faith, and yet cannot be infallibly proved by "only" Scrip-
ture : therefore " only " Scripture cannot be said, as the 33. said, to be the
" only " foundation of faith, or of every point believed by faith. I hope the
Chaplain, who is so careful to avoid all suspicion of being familiar with impiety,
as he would have no question moved about this point upon any terms or pre-
tence, will not be so impious as to say, That to believe these books to be divine
Scripture, is not a point of divine faith ; or that this point, being so important,
as it is, to be most firmly believed, is believed by divine faith, without any
ground or foundation; or without a sufficient infallible and divine foundation
of God's word, written or unwritten. Since therefore this is a point of faith,
and hath a foundation, yea an infallible foundation, it is not against either art,
or equity, or piety, for confutation of error, and confirmation of truth, to
inquire what particular foundation of God's Avord, written or unwritten, doth
assure us infallibly that these particular books contain the sole and Avhole truth
of God, believed by Christian faith. Neither need any be troubled, or endan-
gered, by this question, but such as, not finding any sufficient foundation in
God's word written, do pertinaciously resolve not to believe any thing to be
God's word which is not written. Those that believe that there is a word of
God, partly written and partly unwritten, according to that of S. Paul (2 Thess.
ii.), "Hold the traditions, whether by our word, or epistle," do easily, and without
too much turning in a wheel or circle, answer the question. See the reply to
Mr. Wootton and M. White in the Introduction, of which mention is made in
the Relation, where this and divers other important matters pertaining to the
drift of this Conference are handled at large. — A. C. marg. note to p. 49.]

§ 16. 55. I. — I did never love too curious a search into that which
might put a man into a wheel, and circle him so long between
proving Scripture by tradition, and tradition by Scripture,
till the devil find a means to dispute him into infidelity, and
make him believe neither. I hope this is no part of your
meaning. Yet I doubt this question, " How do you know
Scripture to be Scriptm^e ?" ^ hath done more harm, than

ijyovfxrjv TTJ Sia(popa rrjs i-KiaTreipofiivris S.Basil. Serm. de fide, cap. 1. Op.,

vno Tov StaBoKou aae^eias, raTs uvned- tom. ii. p. 224. B. ed. Benedict.]
TOis tpccfals KOiiXvfiv, ^ KOI avarpliTiiv ras ' [Et non est quidcm durum, quod

fTTayojXivas B\aa(p7\ixias, Kol aWore a\- uuusquisque fidclium qui credit qui-

Aais, is au ?) 'xpela tUv voaovvroiv Karr)- dcm, non tamen cum ratione, et cum

vlyKafff, KoiTathais iroWdicis aypdcpois judicio credit, ut ita sit constans in

/xkv. ofxcas B' ouv ovk airtlfvoifxivais rf/j fide, ut etsi mille crimina objiciant

KarcL T»V' ypacpTjv evafffovs Stavoias' — contra evangelieam fidem] volentes

Fow principal Methods of Proof. 71

you will be ever able to lielp by tradition. But I must Sf.ction

follow tliat way wliicli you draw me. And because it is so
mucli insisted upon by you,*^ and is in itself a matter of such
consequence^ I will sift it a little further.

II.— INIany men labouring to settle this great principle in
divinity, have used divers means to prove it. All have not
gone the same way, nor all the right way. You cannot be
right, that resolve "faith of the Scriptures," being the " word
of God," into " only tradition." For " only," and " no other '*
proof are equal. To prove the Scripture, therefore (so called
by way of excellence), to be the word of God, there are
several offers at divers proofs. For first, some fly to the
testimony and witness of the Church, and her tradition,
which constantly believes, and imanimously delivers it.
Secondly, some to the light and the testimony which the
Scripture gives to itself; Avitli other internal proofs which
are observed in it, and to be found in no other writing
whatsoever. Thirdly, some to the testimony of the Holy
Ghost, which clears up the light that is in Scripture, and
seals this faith to the souls of men, that it is God's Avord.
Fourthly, all that have not imbrutished themselves, and
sunk below their species and order of nature, give even
natural reason leave to come in, and make some proof, and
give some approbation upon the weighing and the consider-
ation of other arguments. And this must be admitted, if it
be but for pagans and infidels, who either consider not or
value not any one of the other three : yet must some way or

destruere fidem nostram, [ut in nulla certe nnllo modo ex Scripturls liaberi

parte eorumcommoveatursermonibuf?,] potest. Nam etiamsi Scriptura dieat,

qui [fingentes se credere scripturis librosprophetarumetapostolorumesse

evangelicis,] per occasionem unius aut divinos, tamen non certo id credam,

alterius qua^stionis aut difficilis, aut nisi prius credidero, Scripturam, qu£e

forte et indissolubilis, [adversantes hoc dicit, esse divinam.] — Bellarm. de

scripturis] festinant fidem [Christi et verboDeinonscripto,lib.iv.cap. 4.§15.

Eva'ngeliorum ejus] toUere [de anima [Op.,tom.i,col.l75.B.] — Sexto,oportet

nostra. — Origen.Q. [i.e.Tractat.] xxxv. etiam [non solum scire qui sint libri

in Matth. [Erasmo interpret, torn. ii. sacri, sed etiam in parti culari] istos,qui

p. 231.ed. Frobenii, Basil. 1545. et in sunt in manibus, esse illos. [Non cnim

Matth. Comment. Ser. 134. Op., tom. satis est credere Evangelinm Marci

iii. p. 923 D. ed. Benedict.] esse verum, Evangelium Thomas non

m " 'Pq know that Scriptures arc esse verum, sed oportet etiam credere,

divine and infallible in every part, is hoc evangelium, quod nunc legitur

a foundation so necessary, as if it be sub nomine Marci, esse illud verum et

doubtfullyquestioned,allthefaithbuilt incorruptum quod scripsit Marcus,

upon Scripture falls to the ground." quod ccrte ex Scripturis haberi non

A. C. p. 47. — Quarto, necesse estnosse, potest. — Ibid. col. 175. D.]
extarelibros aliquosvere divinos, [quod

XVI.

73 (1.) Tradition alone not a sufficient Proof of this. \

Conference otlicr bc converted, 01' " left witliout excuse ;" and tliat is
fLher. done by tbis very evidence.

~ —- III. — Por tbe first : the " tradition of tbeCburcb/' which is

Eom. 1. 20.

yoivr way. That taken and considered alone^ it is so far from
being the only, that it cannot be a sufficient, proof to believe
by di\'ine faith, that Scriptmx is the word of God. For that i

which is a full and sufficient proof, is able of itself to settle J

the soul of man concerning it. Now, the tradition of the
Church is not able to do this. For it may be fui'ther asked,
"Why we should believe the Church's tradition ? And if it bc
answered. We may believe, because the Church is infallibly
governed by the Holy Ghost ; it may yet be demanded of
you, How that may appear ? And if this be demanded, cither
you must say, you have it by special revelation, which is the
"private spirit" you object to other men, or else you must
attempt to prove it by Scripture,'^ as all of you do. And
that very offer, to prove it out of Scriptiu'c, is a sufficient
acknowledgment that the Scripture is a higher proof than
the Church's tradition, which, in your own grounds, is or may
be questionable till you come thither. Besides, this is an
inviolable ground of reason : " That the principles of any
conclusion must be of more credit than the conclusion itself." °
Therefore if the Articles of Faith, the Trinity, the ResiuTcc-
tion, and the rest, be the conclusions, and the principles by
which they are proved be only ecclesiastical tradition, it must
needs follow, that the tradition of the Church is more infal-
lible than the articles of the faith, if the faith which we have
of the articles should be finally resolved into the veracity of
the Church's testimony. But this your learned and wary
men deny,? and therefore I hope yourself dare not affirm.

" Esse aliquas veras fraditioncs Trpwra, propter prima scimns ct ere-
dcmonstratur ex Scriptiiris. — Bellar. dimus, ilia quoque scimus et cre-
do vcrbo Dei nouseripto, lib. iv. cap. 5. dimus, /xaWov, magis, quia per ilia
[in tit. Si Scriptura non continet om- scimus et credimus ctiam posteriora.
Ilia, et necessarium est vcrbum tradi- ['AvdyKt], fi^ ix6vov irpoyivuxTKnv rti
turn, scquitur esse aliquod verbum npwTa, 17 iravra ?) tvia, aWd Ka\ fiuWoV
traditum, alioqui Dcus non bene pro- dd ydp, 81 S vwapxa (Kaarou, iKe'ii/o
vidissct ecclesias. Secundo probatur /xaWov vnapx^i-' olou. Si' o (piXovjxiv,
tcstimoniis Scripturarum. Primum est 4Ke7vo <pi\uv jxciWnv. "CIctt, (imp "ia/xeu
Joliannis xvi. 12. Multahabco, &c. Et Std rd npuTa koI -niGTevojxiv, KaKsTua
Johan. xxi. 2.5. Sunt autcm et alia tafjuv re Ka\ incmvotxeu jxciWov, on 5i'
multa, &c. — Op., torn. i. col. 177. D.] iK^lva koL to vanpov. — Op., tom. i.
And A.C. p. 50. [nbi snp. p. 70.] proves p. 1S5. cd. Bckker. Oxon. 1837.]
'• tradition" out of 2 Thcss. ii. [15.] p [Cui et tertium subjiciendum est,

° Aristot Post. [Analyt. lib.] i.cap.2. rationem formalem nostrae fidei non

T. 16. per Pacium. Quocirca si 8id rd esse ecclesiae auctoritatem, hoc est,

The Testimony of the present Church not the only Object of Faith.

IV. — Agaiiij if tlie voice of tlie Cliurcli^ sa.ying the books
of Scripture commonly received are the Word of God,
be the formal object of faith, upon which alone absolutely I
may resolve myself; then every man not only may, but
ought to, resolve his faith into the voice or tradition of the
Church : for every man is bound to rest upon the proper and
formal object of the faith. But nothing can be more evident
than this, That a man ought not to resolve his faith of this
principle into the sole testimony of the Church. Therefore,
neither is that testimony or tradition, alone, the formal ob-
ject of faith. The learned of yovu" own part grant this:i

Section
XVI.

fidei ultimam rcsolutionem non fieri
in ecclesiaj testimonium, ipste scho-
lasticaj res formas dicendi scholasticas
rapiiint . . . Sed ad rem.] Eorum [hie]
crrorem dissimulare non possum, qui
assei'unt, fidem nostram eo, tanquam
in ultimam credendi causam, redu-
cendam esse, ut credamus ecclesiam
esse veraeem : [cui prius, inquiunt,
assentimur per fidem acquisitam
quam per infusam.] — Melcli. Can[us,]
de locis Tlieolog. lib. ii. cap. 8. [p. 54.
ed. Lovan. 1569.]

1 Ecclesise vox non est [ipsum]
formale fidei objectum. [Probatur 1.
quia absque ea fides haberi potest ....
probatur 2. quia sola ejus vox et
auctoritas ad veri nominis fidem non
potest inducere.] — Stapleton. Relect.
[Scholast. Princip. fid. doct.] Con-
trov. iv. [Capit. de potest. Eccles. in
se consid.] Qusest. iii. Art. 2. [Op.,
torn. i. p. 752.] — And, [(Arg. hteret.
5.) Si Deus per Ecclesiam revelans est
ultima resolutio fidei, et consequen-
ter infallibilis regula omnium creden-
dorum ; profecto hoc ipsum non debet
inter articulos fidei, qui sunt res re-
gulatse, poni. Ponitur autem. Ergo,
&c. Patet minor, quia in Sym-
bolo profitemur, Credo Ecclesiam
Sanctam, &c. lioc est. Credo omnia
quaa Deus per Ecclesiam me docet.
I'atet major, &e. . . . (Respons. ad arg.
hseret. 5.) . . . Dupliciter respondetur ;
Primum, non esse pi-oprie distinctum
articulum fidei. Quod Deus per Eccle-
siam revel at, nee illud] in his verbis
[contineri,] Credo Ecclesiam, etsi
[enim] forte contineatur hoc totum.
Credo ea, quae docet Ecclesia, tamen
non intelligitur necessario quod
Credo docenti Ecclcsise tanquam testi
infallibili : [sunt enim hsec distincta,
ut notavit Waldensis, Doctrin. Fid.

lib. ii. cap. 20. — Stapleton.] ibid. [pp.
754, 755.]— Ubi etiam [Stapleton]
rejicit opinionem Durandi et Gabr.
[Biel. sc. his verbis : (Arg. Scholast.
3.) Credo Deum esse trinum et unum,
quia Scriptura sic dicit. Credo dicenti
Scripturte, quia Dei verbum est.
Credo esse Dei verbum, quia Ecclesia
hoc testatur. Credo Ecclesiam sic
attestant!, quia credo Ecclesiam
regi infallibiliter a Spiritu S, Ergo
a primo ad ultimum primum inter
credibilia quod est ratio credendi
alia, et ad quod fit ultima resolutio
credibilium, est, Credere Ecclesiam
regi a Spiritu S. Sunt argumenta
Durandi in III. Sentent. Distinct,
xxiv. Qusest. Let Gabrielis Biel. ibid.

Distinct, xxiii. Qusest. 2 (Respons.

ad arg. Scholast. 3.) . . . Ultima resolu-
tio credibilium non est. Credere Eccle-
siam regi a Spiritu S., nam adhuc
amplius quseri potest, quare credimus
Ecclesiam regi a Spiritu S. Cui
necessario respondendum est, ideo
nos hoc credere quia Deus nobis hoc
complexum per Ecclesiam sive in
Scripturis sive extra revelavit. Sic
enim alia omnia fidei objecta credo.
Ultima igitur resolutio credibilium
quoad nos, et posita Dei ordinatione,
et ordinarie loquendo, est Deus per
ecclesiam revelans ; sed absolute, et
per se, ultima resolutio est Deus
verax, seu Deus intus in corde reve-
lans, juxta illud Joann. Baptist. Quern
misit Deus, verba Dei loquitur, &c.
Joann. iii. 34. — Stapleton. ibid. p. 754.]
— Et [Stapleton. rejicit opinionem]
Waldens. [ubi ait : Fides autem ut est
Ecclesite Catholica3 in hoc acccdit
fidei Scripturarum : quod non licet
de ipsa dubitare eo quod] testimo-
nium ecclesias Catholicte est objectum
fidei Christianas, et legislatio Scrip-

74 If it were a part, ivould be of more authority than the whole, and

Conference " Although ill that article of the Greedy ' I believe the
Fisher Catholic Church/ pcradventure all this be contained, ' I
believe those things "which the Church teacheth/ yet tliis is
not necessarily understood, That I believe the Church teach-
ing, as an infallible witness." And if they did not confess
this, it were no hard thing to prove.

V. — But here is the cunning of this de\dce. All the au-
thorities of Fathers, Councils, nay of Scripture too,^' though
this be contrary to their own doctrine, must be finally
resolved into the authority of the present Roman Church ;
and though they would seem to have us believe the Fathers
and the Church of old, yet they will not have us take their
doctrine from their own writings, or the decrees of councils :
because, as they say, we cannot know by reading them
what their meaning was, but from the infallible testimony of
the present Roman Church teaching by tradition. Now, by
this, two things are CAddent. First, That they ascribe as
great authority, (if not greater,) to a part of the Catholic
Chiu'ch, as they do to the whole, which we believe in our
Creed, and which is the societv of all Christians. And this
is full of absurdity, in nature, in reason, in all things, That
any part^ should be of equal Avorth, poAver, credit, or

turce canonicae. Suljjicitur tamen ritas, cum sit ad testificandum de

ipsi sicut testis judici, et testimo- Christo, et legibus Ejus, vilior est

Ilium veiitati ; [sicut prajcouizatio Chiisti legibus, et Scripturis Sanctis

definitioni et sicut prteco regi. — necessario postponcnda. — Thorn.

Thom. Waldens.] Doctrinalis Fidel, Wald. Doctrinalls Fidel, tom. 1. lib. 11.

torn. 1. lib. 11. art. 11. cap. 21. art. 11. cap. 21. [fol. 103. col. 1. ubi

[fol. 103. col. 4. ed. Paris. 1532.]— sup.]

[Et tamen Ecclesla proponens est ' Totum majus est sua parte.

causa, sine qua ego non admltterem Axioma [est Item loglcum In dis-

111 ud Evangelium esse j\Iattha3l. Spl- tributionis loco proprium,] nee

ritu itaque S. eecleslam afflatam certe Idco geomctrlcum putandum est,

credo; non ut vcritatem auctorlta- quia geometres eo utatur. Utltur

temve llbrls canonicis tribuat, sed enim tola loglca, [nee Ideo logicam

ut doceat illos, non alios, esse cano- subjeceris geometric. — Petr.] ivaml,

nicos.] Nee si Ecclesla nobis adltum Schol[arum] Math[cmatlcarum, lib.

prtebet ad hujusmodi sacros llbros vil. 9. p. 164. ed. Basil. 1569. J —

cognosccndos, protinus Ibl acquies- And Aristotle vindicates sucli pro-

ccndum est ; sed ultra oportet pro- positions, ra ei> toIs /j^ad-nnaa-i Ka\uv-

gredi, et solida Del veritate nitl. ixtva d^iw/dara, from being usurped

[Qua ex re IntelligUur quid sibl by particular sciences, a-n-ufft yelp virdp-

voluerlt Augustlnus, (contra eplst. x*'> &c- t^'uia convenlunt omni

Fundamentl.) cum ait, Ev.nigelio non enti, et non alicui generi separatlm. —

crederem nisi me Eccleslae moveret Metaph[ysic. lib. iii. (al. Iv.) ] cap. 3.

auctoritas.] — Mclch. Canus, de loc. [in Inlt. AeKT^ov oe, irirfpov mas 1)

Theolog. lib. 11. cap. 8. [p. 59. ed. er^pas eVitrTTjuTjs, n^pi re twv ev

Lovau. 1569.] rots iJia6T],aaat Ka\ovfji.efiov dltoopaTuiv,

Omnls ergo ecclcslastlca aucto- Kn\ -ntpl rvjs oialus. ^avepou Srj, OTt

all Evidence ivould be resolved into the Infallibility of the Church. 75

authority witli the whole. Secondly, That in their doctrine Section

concerning the infallibility of their Church, their proceeding 1_

is most unreasonable. For if you ask them. Why they
believe their whole doctrine to be the sole true Catholic
faith ? their answer is. Because it is agreeable to the word
of God, and the doctrine and tradition of the ancient Chiu'ch.
If you ask them, How they know that to be so ? they will
then produce testimonies of Scripture, Councils, and Fathers.
But if you ask a third time, By what means they are assured,
that these testimonies do indeed make for them and their
cause ? they will not then have recourse to text of Scrip-
ture, or exposition of Fathers, or phrase and propriety of
language in which either of them were first written, or to
the scope of the author, or the causes'^ of the thing uttered,
or the conference with like places," or the antecedents^ and
consequents of the same places ;y or the exposition of the

yuifty T6 Ka\ irjs rov cpiXoaocpov kuI t)
nepl rovTav ecnl CKe^is' anaai yip
VTvdpx^i Tors ovaiv, ccAA.' ov "ytuei tlA
X^^p^s I5ia Twv dXXwv. Kat XP'^^'''"'
^fv TrdvTfs, OTL TOv OVTOS iaxlf fi bv,
fKaaTOP Se rh yevos 6v — Op., torn,
viii. p. 62. ed. Bekker.]

' Intelligentia [enim] dictorum ex
causis est assumenda dicendi ; quia
non sermoni res, sed rei est sermo
subjectus. — S. Hilar, lib. iv. [cap. 14.]
de Trinit. [Op., col. 835. F. ed.
Benedict.] — [Sic etsi carnem ait
nihil prodesse.] ex materia dicti
dingendus est sensus. — TertuU. lib.
de liesur. Carnis, cap. xxxvii. [p. 347.
ed. Eigalt ]

" [Et vide quoniam qusedam qui-
dein similia liabent, alia autem
dissimilia : ut] videns difierentias
similium ad similia, [discas sensum
Scripfurae.] — Origen. Tract, xix. in S.
Matth. [Op., Lat. per Erasm. torn. ii.
p. 112. e^i6eixy\v Stj rh btto toG
'HffcC'iov a(rf.M, ^ov\6ij.evos avrb avue^€-
Tciffai T^ TTapa^oAfj, et Karoi, tuv avTOv
Kiirai 6 damAcav arip-aivoix^vov iv
eKarepa rfj ypacpi}' Kal opa riua fxiv
ofiota exoufrii' al eKTe6(7(TaL Xe^eis,
tiva 5e oxix 'ojJ.ota, 'iva jiK^-Kiav tcls
Stafpopds rujv oj-ifiiwu irpos tol dvo/xoia,
ovTcos iTTiffTriffr)^ Tea vw rrjs ypacpfjs.
— Comment, in Matth. torn. xvii.
cap. 7. Op., tom. iii. p. 775. D. ed.
Benedict.]

" [Sed] recolendum est tmde vene-
rit ilia sententia, et qute illam supe-
riora pepererint, quibusque connexa

dependeat. — S. Aug. Ep. xxix. [lib. ii,
ad Hieronym. sen Epist. clxvii. cap.
3. Op., tom. ii. par. 2. col. 595. G. ed.
Benedict.] — Solet circumstantia Scrip-
tural illuminare sententiam, [cum ea
qure circa Scripta (sc. Scripturam) sunt,
praisentem qu^stionem contingentia,
diligenti discussione tractantur.] — S.
Augustin. lib. Octogintatrium Quaes-
tionum, Qutest. 69. [cap. 2. Op., tom.
vi. col. 56. C. ed. Benedict.]

y Qua3 ambigue et obscure in non-
nullis Scripturce Sacrse locis dicta
videntur, per ea, quje alibi certa et
indubitata habentur, declarantur. —
S. Basil, in regulis contractis, Eeg.
267. [rd d/x(pi^oXa koI einK(Ka\vfj,-
/x^vais eipijaOaL dnKovvra ev Tim tottois
TOV deoirvevarov ypatprjs, vwd twv iu
dWois TOTTOIS o/xoXoyov/xei/aiv craiprivl^e-
Tui. — S. Basil. Eegul. brevius tractat.
Interrog. cclxvii. Op., tom. ii. p. 506.
E. ed. Benedict.] — [Et haec itaque
dispectio tituli, et prteconii ipsius,
fidem utique defendeus vocabulorum,
illuc proficcre debebit, ut si quid
pars diversa turbat obtentu figurarum
et jenigmatum,] manifestiora quaeque
prfBvaleant, et de incertis certiora
praiscribant. — TertuU. de Resurrec-
tione [Christi], cap. xix. [Op., p. 336.
C. ed. Rigalt.] — Et, [Et utique asquum
sit, quod et supra demandavimus,
incerta de certis et obscura de mani-
festis pray'udicari ; vel ne inter dis-
cordiam ccrtorum et inccrtorum,
manifestorum et obscurorum, fides
dissipetur, Veritas periclitetur, ipsa

7G Proof of Divinity of Scripture must be itself divine.

Conference dark and doubtful places of Scripture by tlie undoubted and
Fisher, iiianifest ; Avitli divers other rules given for tlie true know-

ledge and understanding of Scriptm-e^ which do frequently

occur in S. Augustine/- No^ none of these^ or the like
helps : that^ with them^ were to admit a " private spirit/' or to
make way for it. But their final ansAver is : " They know it
to be so^ because the present Roman Church witnesseth it,
according to tradition. ^^ So arguing primo ad ultimum,
" from first to last/^ the present Church of Rome and her
followers believe her own doctrine and tradition to be true
and Catholic, because she professes it to be such. And if
this be not to prove idem per idem, " the same by the same,"
I know not what is : which, though it be most absurd in all
kind of learning, yet out of this I see not how it is possible
to wind themselves, so long as the last resolution of their
faith must rest, as they teach, upon the tradition of the
present Church only.

VI. — It seems therefore to me very necessary,^ that we
be able to prove the books of Scripture to be the Word of
God, by some authority that is absolutely di\ine. For if
they be warranted unto us by any authority less than
divine, then all things contained in them, which have no

divinitas ut inconstans denotetur. locos quam per rationem manifes-

— ibid.] cap. xxi. [p. 357. C] — [Ubi tatur. — Troporum cognitio necessaria,

autem apertius ponuntur, ibi discen- &c.] — S. Aug. de Doctr. Christ, lib.

dum est quomodo in locis intelligan- iii. [cap. 22 — 29. Op., torn. iii. par. 1.

tur obscuris. Neque enim melius col. 55 — 57.]

potest iutelligi quod dictum est Deo, " And this is so necessary, that
Apprehende arma et scutum, et Bellarmine confesses, that if tradition,
exurge in adjutorium mibi, quam ex which he relies upon, be not Divine,
illo loco ubi legitur, Domine, ut he and his can have no faith : Non
scuto bonpe voluntatis Tueb coronasti habemus fidem ; iidcs enim verbo Dei
DOS.] — S. Aug. de doct. Christ, lib. iii. nititur. — De verbo Dei non scripto,
cap. 26. [Op., torn. iii. par. 1. col. 50. lib. iv. cap. 4. [Bellarmine's Avords
B.] — Moris est Scripturarum, obscuris are: Itacjuc hoc dogma tam necessa-
manifcsta subnectere, et quod prius rium, quod scilicet aliqua est Scrip-
sub renigmatibus dixerint, aperta tura Divina, non potest sufficienter
voce proferre. — S. llicron. in Esa. xix. haberi ex sola Scriptura. Proinde
[injprincip. [Op., torn. iii. col. 127. ed. cum fides nitatur verbo Del, nisi
Benedict.] — A'idc [infra,] Sect. 26, habealuus verbum Dei non scriptum,
§. iv. nulla nobis erit fides. — Op., tom. i.
' [S. Augustine's rules, according col. 175. B.]— And A. C. tells us,
to the marginal synopsis in the Bene- p. 47: "To know that Scripture is
dictine edition, are : Ante omnia J)ivine and infallible in every part,
considerandum genus locutionis. — is a foundation so neces.sary, as, if it
Idem verbum non idem significat be doubtfully questioned, all the faith
ubique.— Obscura ex locis apertiori- built upon Scripture falls to the
bus explicanda. — Eundcm locum ground." And he gives the same
varie intelligi nihil prohibet. — Locus reason for it, p. 50. [ubi sup. p. 70.]
incertus tutius per alios Scripturte which Bellarmine doth.

Tlie Authority of the Church is not " simply " Divine. 77

greater assurance tlian the Scripturej in which they are Section
read, are not objects of divine behef. And that once ^
granted will enforce us to yields That all the articles of
Christian belief have no greater assurance than human or
moral faith or credulity can afford. An authority, then,
simply divine, must make good the Scripture's infallibility,
at least in the last resolution of our faith in that point.
This autliority cannot be any testimony or voice of the
Church^' alone. For the Church consists of men subject to
error ; and no one of them, since the Apostles' times, hath
been assisted with so plentiful a measure of the Blessed
Spirit, as to secure him from being deceived. And all the
parts being all liable to mistaking, and fallible, the whole
cannot possibly be infallible in and of itself, and pri^i-
leged from being deceived in some things or other. And
even in those fundamental things in which the whole
universal Church neither doth nor can err, yet even there
her authority is not Divine, because she delivers those
supernatural truths by promise of assistance, yet tied to
means ; and not by any special immediate revelation,
which is necessarily required to the very least degree of
Divine authority. And therefore our worthies do not only
say, but prove, "That all the Church's constitutions are of
the nature of human law."'^ And some among you,*^ not
unworthy for their learning, prove it at large, '^ That all the
Church's testimony, or voice, or sentence," — call it what you
will, — " is but suo modo, or aliquo modo, ' not simply, but in
a manner/ divine." Yea, and A. C. himself, after all his A. C. p. 51.

'' Spiritu [itaque Sancto] ecclesiam ad sacros libros ingrediantur, nisi

afflatam, certe credo ; noa ut veri- Ecclesiss Catholicse unum eundemque

tatem auctoritatemve libris canonicis consensum.] — Ibid. [p. CO.]
tribuat, sed ut doceat illos, non alios, "^ Hooker. [Eccl. Polit.] Book iii.

esse canonicos. Nee si Ecclesia nobis chap. ix. [Sect. 2. Works, vol. i.

aditum prsebet ad hujusmodi sacros p. 481. ed. Keble. — " The greatest

libros cognoscendos, protinus ibi among the school divines (sc. Thorn,

acquiescendum est ; sed ultra oportet Aquin. Prim. Sec. QuEsst. xci. Art. 3.)

progredi, et solida Dei veritate niti. studying how to set down by exact

Qua ex re intcUigitur quid sibi volue- definition the nature of an human

rit Augustinus, cum ait, Evangelio law, (of which nature all the Church's

non crederem, nisi [me Ecclesite move- constitutions are,) found not which

ret auctoritas.]— M. Canus, de locis way better to do it than in these

theolog. lib. ii. cap. 8. fol. 34. B. [p. 59. words : ' Out of the precepts of the

ubi sup. p. 74. note i.] — Non [ita- law of nature, as out of certain com-

que] docet fundatam esse Evangelii mon and undemonstrable principles,

fidem in Ecclesite auctoritate, verum man's reason, &c.' "]
[simpliciter nullam esse certam viam "^ Staph Eelect. Controv. iv. Q[u£cst.]

qua sive infideles, seu in fide novitii, iii. Art. 1. 2. [ubi sup. p. 73. note i]

78 This Proof must be the Word of God.

Conference debate^ comes to that^ and no further, "That the tradition of
Fis^uER ^^^^ Chui'ch is, at least in some sort, divine and infallible."
Now, that which is divine but in a sort or manner, be it the
Church's manner, is aliquo modo non divina, " in a sort not
divine." But this great principle of faith, the groimd and
proof of Avhatsoever else is of faith, cannot stand firm
upon a proof that is and is not — in a manner and not in a
manner — divine ; as it must, if we have no other anchor than
the external tradition of the Church to lodge it upon, and
hold it steady in the midst of those waves which daily beat
upon it.

A. c. p. 49. YII. — Now, here A. C. confesses expressly, " That to prove
the books of Scripture to be divine, we must be warranted

A. C. p. 50. by that which is infallible.'' He confesses farther, " That
there can be no sufficient infallible proof of this, but God's
Avord, written or unwritten." And he gives his reason for

A. C. p. 51. it : " Because if the proof be merely human and fallible, the
science or faith which is built upon it can be no better."
So then this is agreed on by me, (yet leaving other men to
travel by their own way, so be they can come to make
Scripture thereby infallilDle,) That Scripture must be known
to be Scripture by a sufficient, infallible, divine proof. And
that sucli proof can be nothing but the word of God, is
agreed on also by me. Yea, and agreed on for me it shall
be likewise, that God's word may be written and unwritten.
For Cardinal Bellarmine^ tells us truly, that it is not the
writing or printing, that makes Scripture the word of God ;
but it is the prime unerring essential truth, God Himself
uttering and revealing it to His Church, that makes it
verbum Dei, " the word of God." And this Avord of God
is uttered to men, either immediately by God Himself,
Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and so it Avas to tlie Prophets
and Apostles ; or mediate!}", — cither by Angels, to whom God

Mg"] ' had spoken first, and so the law was given,^ and so also the

Luke i. 30. message was delivered to the Blessed Yii-gin, — or by the

' [Et similiter Apostolicoe tradi- a Deo profectum est, [vol immediate,

tiones non scriptte eandera vim lit sunt scrmones Domini, vel median-

habent, quam Apostolicaj traditioncs tibus Apostolis, ut est decretum

seriptiB, ut in Concil. Trident. Sess. Apostolorum, Act. xv.] — Bellavmin.de

iv. asseritur, ct ratio est mauifesta : verbo Dei non scripto, lib. iv. cap. 2.

nam] verbum Dei non est tale, ncc [Op., torn. i. col. 167. B.]
habet ullam auctoritatem, quia ' Lex ordinata per angelos in

scriptum est in membranis, sed quia manu Mediatoris. — Gal. iii. 19.

The Word of God may be written or unioritten.

Prophets § and Apostles, and so the Scriptures were delivered Section
to the Church. But their being written, gave them no "
authority at all in regard of themselves : written or un-
written, the word was the same. But it was written that
it might he the better preserved,^' and continued with the
more integrity to the use of the Church, and the more
faithfully in our memories.^ And you have been often
enough told, (were truth, and not the maintaining of a
party, the thing you seek for,) that if you will show us any
such unwritten word of God delivered by His Prophets and
Apostles, we will acknowledge it to be divine and infallible.
So, written or unwritten, that shall not stumble us. But,
then A. C. must not tell us, at least not think we shall
swallow it into oiir belief, that everything which he says is
the unwritten word of God, is so indeed.

VIII. — I know Bellarmine hath written a whole book, De
verbo Dei non scr'ipto^ " of the Word of God not written,^^ in

^ " The Holy Ghost, &c. which spake
by the prophets," — iu Syinb. l^icen.

^ Nam pseudoprophetiB etiam vi-
ventibus adhuc Apostolis, multas
fingebant corniptehis, sub hoc prte-
textu et titxilo, quasi ab Apostolis
viva voce essent traditae, [sicut supra
ostendimus:] et propter banc ipsam
causam Apostoli doctrinam suam
coeperunt Uteris comprchendere, et
Ecclesiis commendare. — CheTn[nitii,]
Exam. Concil. Trid. de Traditionibus,
sub octavo genere Tradit. [par. 1. p. 76.
col. 2. ed. Genev. 1614.] — And so also
[Corn.] Jansen. in S. Johan. v. 47.
[Com. iu Concord. Evang. caj). xxxvi.
in fin. p. 249. ed. Lovan. 1571.] Sicut
enim firmius est quod mandatur Uteris,
ita est culpabilius et majus non credere
scriptis, quam non credere verbis.

' [Ad primum in oppositum quod]
labilis est memoria, et ideo indigemus
Scriptura : Dicendum quod verum
est, sed hoc non habet, nisi ex inun-
dantia peccatorum. — Henr. a Gaud.
Summ. part. i. Art. viii. Q[uaist.] 4.
[§ 10. torn. i. p. 166. ed. FerrariiB,
1646. — Henricus, cognomine Goethals
.... gente Flander, Gandavensis a
patria dictua, Mudam, prope Ganda-
vum vicum natalem nactus .... cla-
ruit anno 1280, diu in coUegio
Sorbonico philosophiam et theologiam
docuit tanta cum laude ut . . . . Doctor
Solennis appellari meruit . . . . — Cave,
Historia literaria, (Sasculum Scholast.)

torn. ii. p. 326. Cf. Er. Huet, Eecher-
ches, &c. sur Henri de Gand: Gand,
1838.] — [Sed ut quid pulsamus ad
coelum, cum habeamus hie in Evan-
gelio testamentum ] Quia hoc loco
recte possunt terrena ccelestibus com-
parari : tale est quod quivis homi-
num habens numerosos filios, quam-
diu pater prtesens est, ipse imperat
singulis ; non est adhuc necessarium
testamentum : sic et] Christus, [quam-
diu prajsens in terris fuit, quamvis
nee modo desit, pro tempore quic-
quid necessarium erat Apostolis
imperavit. Sed quomodo terrenus
pater, dum se in confinio senserit
mortis, timens ne post mortem suam,
rupta pace, litigent fratres, adhibitis
testibus,] voluntatem suam de pec-
tore morituro transfert in tabulas
diu duraturas : [et si fuerit inter
fratres nata contentio, non itur ad
tumulum, sed quasritur testamentum :
et qui in tumulo quiescit, tacitus de
tabulis loquitur. Vivus, cujus est
testamentum, in coelo est : ergo volun-
tas Ejus, velut in testamentum, sic in
Evangelio requiratur.] — Optat. [Mi-
levit. de Schism. Donatist.] lib. v.
[cap. 3. Op., p. 81. ed. Dupin. — i. e.]
Christus Ipse non transtulit, sed ex
Optati scntentia. Ejus insi^iratione,
si non jussu, Apostoli transtalerunt.

•^ Bellar. de verbo Dei non scripto,
lib. iv.

80 The Unwritten Word not identical with Tradition.

Conference "svliicli lie handles tlic controversy concerning traditions.
FisiiER -^iitl the cunning is^ to make his weaker readers believe,

that all that which he and his are pleased to call traditions,

are by and by no less to be received and honoured than the
unwritten word of God ought to be. Whereas, it is a
thing of easy knowledge, that the " unwritten word of God,"
and " tradition," are not convertible terms, that is, are not all
one. For there are many unwritten words of God, which
were never delivered over to the Chiu'ch, for aught appears :
and there are many traditions, afiii'med, at least, to be such
by the Church of Rome, which were never warranted by
any unwritten word of God.

IX. — First, That there are many unwritten words of God,
which were never dehvered over to the Church, is manifest.
For when or where were the words which Christ spake to
Acts i. 3. His apostles, dui'ing the " forty days" of His couAersing with
them after His resurrection, first delivered over to the Church ?
or Avhat were the unwritten words He then spake ? If neither
He, nor His Apostles or Evangelists, have delivered them to
the Church, the Church ought not to deliver them to her
chikh'cn. Or if she do tradere non traditum.} " make a tra-
dition of that which was not delivered to her," and by some
of them, then she is unfaithful to God, and doth not servare
1 Tim. vi. depositum, " faithfully keep that which is committed to her
•'%im i trust." And her sons, which come to know it, are not
14. bound to obey her tradition against the word of theii' Father."*

For wheresoever Christ holds His peace, or that His words are
not registered, I am of S. Augustine's" opinion, "No man

' Annunciare [ergo] aliquid Christ- torn. i. p. 183.] — And BcUarmine Lim-

ianis Catholicis, prgeter id quod self, that he might the more safely

aceepcrunt, iiuiiquam licuit, nusquam defend himself in the cause of tradi-

licet, nuncjuam liecbit. ��� Yincen. tions, sajs, (but how truly let other

Lirin. cap. xiv. [p. 25.]^ — Et prrcccpit men judge :) Dcinde commune est

nihil aliud innovari, nisi quod tradi- [iisdcm sic agere, quasi ipsi Scripturas

turn est. — S. Cyprian, ad rom])eium tantum, nos Iraditiones tantum defen-

cont. Epist. Stcphan. [in] princip. damus, neque curemus, an traditiones

[Epist. Ixxiv. p. 138. ed. Benedict.] sint secundum Scripturam, an contra

" [Sic ccrte fidelis Sacra Scriptura Scripturam: at non ita est; nam

cognita, et in ipsa Christo invento, Scripturam nos pluris facimus quam

plus verbis Christi in ea credit, quam illi,] nee nllam traditionem admitti-

cuicunquc pracdicatori, quam ctiam mus contra Scripturam. — Lib. iv. de

Ecclesia; testificanti, quia propter verbo Dei [non scripto,] cap. 3. § 7.

illam jam credit Ecclesire, et] si ipsa [Op., torn. i. col. 169. B.]

[quidem] contraria Scripturte diceret, " S. Augustin. in S. Johan. Evang.

ipsi non crederet. — Henr. a Gand. [cap. xvi. 12.] Tractat. xcvi. in ilia

Summ. part. i. Art.x. Q[u£est.] 1. [§ 10. verba, Multa habeo [vobis] dicere, sed

Different senses of the word Tradition. 81

may dare without rashness say they were these, or these." Section
Soj there were many unwritten words of God, which were -^^^^-
never delivered over to the Church; and therefore never
made tradition. And there are many traditions, which can-
not be said to be the unwritten word of God. For, I believe,
a learned Romanist, that will weigh before he speaks, will
not easily say. That to anoint or use spittle in baptism ;
or to use three dippings in the use of that sacrament ; or
divers other like traditions, had their rise from anv word
of God unwritten. Or if he be so hardy as to say so, it is
gratis dictum, and he will have enough to do to prove it.
So there may be an unwritten word of God, which is no
tradition. And there are many traditions, which are no
unwritten word of God. Therefore Tradition must be taken
two ways : — either, as it is the Church's act delivering, or
the thing thereby delivered ; and then it is human authority,
or from it, and unable infallibly to warrant divine faith, or
to be the object of it : or else as it is the unwritten word
of God ; and then wherever it can be made to appear so, it
is of divine and infallible authority, no question. But then
I would have A. C. consider where he is in this particular.
He tells us. We must knoAV infalHbly, that the books of A. C. p. 49.
Holy Scripture are divine, and that this must be done by L" hq^-i'^'
unwritten tradition, but so, as that this tradition is the word
of God u^nwritten. Now, let him but prove that this, or any
tradition which the Church of Eome stands upon, is the
word of God, though unwritten, and the business is ended.
But A. C. must not think, that because the tradition of the A. C. p. 50.
Church tells me these books are verbum Dei, " God's p ^q^"^'
word;" and that I do both honour and believe this
tradition ; that therefore this tradition itself is God's
word too, and so absolutely sufficient and infallible to
work this belief in me. Therefore, for aught A. C. hath yet
added, we must on with our inquiry after this great business,
and most necessary truth.

non potestis portare modo. [Op., torn, illi capere non valebant ? . . . Sed quae-

iii. par. ii. col. 733. C. Nunc ergo nam sint ista quiB Ipse non dixit,

quae ista sint, qufe Apostoli tunc temerarium est velle prtesuniere ac

portare non poterant, vultis forsitan dicere Quae cum Ipse tacuerit,

scire. Sed quis nostrum audeat quis nostrum dicat, Ista vel ilia

eorum se dicere jam capacem, quse sunt?]

VOL. II. LAUD. Q.

82 (2.) The inward Light of Scripture no sufficient proof of its Divinity,

Conference X. — 2. For the sccond way of pro"\dug that Scriptiu'e
Fisher, should be fully aud sufficiently kuown^ as by " divine " and

" infallible " testimony, lumine proprio, by the independency

of that light which it hath in itself only, and by the witness
that it can so give to itself, I could never yet see cause to
allow. For as there is no place in Scriptiu*e that tells us,
Such books, containing such and such particulars, are the
Canon, and infallible will and word of God:° so, if there
were any such place, that were no sufficient proof. For a
man may justly ask another book to bear -witness of that ;
and again of that, another ; and wherever it were written in
Scriptiu'e, that must be a part of the whole : and no created
thing can alone give witness to itself, and make it e^ddent ;
nor one part testify for another, and satisfy where Reason
will but offer to contest; except those principles only of
natural knowledge, which appear manifest by intuitive light
of understanding, without any discourse : and yet they also
to the weaker sort require induction preceding. Now this
inbred light of Scripture is a thing coincident -svith Scrip-
ture itself : and so the principles and the conclusion in this
kind of proof should be entirely the same, which cannot be.
Besides, if this " inward light " were so clear, hoAv could there
have been any variety among the ancient believers touching
the authority of S. James' and S. Jude's Epistles,? and the
Apocalypse,i with other books which were not received for

° Hooker, [Eccl.Polit.] hook ii.ch.iv. Scripture is a sacred and holy rule of

[sect. 2. Works, vol. i. pp. 370, 371. ed. well-doing."]

Kehle. " Finally, we all believe that the p [ToictDra koI to. Ka-rh. rbv '"Io.kw^ov,
Scriptures of God are sacred, and that ov fj^TrpoiTr/ rwv dvo/xa^o/.itvaiv KadoKiKwv
they have proceeded from God ; our- iinaTo\<cu elfai Keyeraf lariov Se ws
selves we assure that we do right well rodiveTui /j-ef ov ttoWoI yuvv t£u Tra-
in so believing. We have for this point KmCHv uvt^js ijJ.vrjij.SvevcTav, ais ovBh rrjs
a demonstration sound and infallible. \eyoiu.ivr]s 'lovSa, fxias kuI uut^s ova-qs
But it is not the word of God which twv en-ra Xiyoixivaiv KudnKiKcov.^ — Eu-
doth or possibly can assure us, that we seb. [Hist. Eccles.] lib. ii. cap. 27. [in]
do well to think it His word. For if fin. ed. Basil. 1549. [cap. 23. torn. i.
any one book of Scripture did give p. 82. apud Hist. Eccl. Script, ed.
testimony to all, yet still that Scrip- llcading.]

ture which giveth credit to the rest, 'i [hro7s voOols KaTaTeraxBoj koItoO

would require another Scripture to Uav\ov Trpd^fODV yj ypa(pri . . . ert ts, oij

give credit unto it ; neither could we e^T^r, ^ 'Iwdwov awoKd\v\i/is el (paveirj,

ever come to any pause whereon to r)V Tiyes, ws ecpvi', ddfTovaii', eVepot

rest our assurance this way : so that 56 iyKpivovai ro7s onoXoyovnUvois.] —

unless beside Scripture there were Euseb. [Hist. Eccles.] lib. iii. cap. 25.

something which might assure us that [torn. i. p. 119. apud Hist. Eccl. Script.

we do well, we could not think we do ed. Keading.J
well, no, not in being assured that

any more than Tradition can be its oivn ivitness. 83

divers years after the rest of the New Testament? For, Section
certainly, the light which is in the Scripture was the same "

then which now it is. And how could the Gospel of S. Bar-
tholomew, of S. Thomas, and other counterfeit pieces, obtain
so much credit with some, as to be received into the Canon,
if the evidence of this light were either universal or infallible,
of, and by, itself ? And this though I cannot approve, yet
methinks you may, and upon probable grounds at least.
For I hope no Romanist will deny,^" but that there is as
much light in Scripture, to manifest and make ostension of
itself to be infallibly the written word of God, as there is
in any tradition of the Church, that it is di^ane, and infal-
libly the unwritten word of God. And the Scriptures
saying from the mouths of the Prophets, " Thus saitli the Isa. xliv. 2.
Lord,^' and from the mouths of the Apostles, that " the Holy ^ijr^*'''*
Ghost spake by them," are at least as able and as fit to bear xxviii. 25.
witness to their own verity, as the Church is to bear witness
to her own traditions, by bare saying they come from the
Apostles. And yourselves woidd never go to the Scripture
to prove that there are traditions, as you do,^ if you do not 2 Thess.
think the Scripture as easy to be discovered by "inbred light j^de Ver 3.
in itself," as traditions by their " light." And if this be so,
then it is as probable at the least (which some of ours affirm)
" That Scripture may be known to be the word of God by the
light and lustre which it hath in itself, '^ as it is (which you
affirm,) " That a tradition may be known to be such by the
light which it hath in itself:" which is an excellent propo-
sition to make sport withal, Avere this an argument to be
handled merrily.

XI. — 3. For the third opinion and way of proving, either
some think that there is no sufficient warrant for this, unless
they fetch it from the testimony of the Holy Ghost, and so

"■ Except A. C, whose boldness excepted against that part of the

herein I cannot but pity. For he de- paper, wherein was said, That the

uies this " light " to the Scripture, and word of God was partly written,

gives it to Tradition. His words are partly unwritten, and would have

(p. 52) : " Tradition of the Church is nothing to be the word of God, but

of a company, which by its own light what is written in Scripture. M.

shows [showeth — A. C] itself to be Fisher, to justify that part of the

infallibly [infallibly — caret A. C] paper, first alleged that text of

a.ssisted [by Christ and His Holy S. Paul, Hold the traditions, &c." —

Spirit], &c." The Relation of the Conference, &c.

* In your Articles delivered to Dr. p. 15.] And A. C. p. 52. [seu potiu.s,

W[hite,] to be answered. ["D.White p. 50. ubi sup. p. 70.]

84 (3.) If it be said that the Holy Spirit testifies to the Divinlfy

Conference look in vaiu after special revelations^ and make themselves,
FisuER ^^y ^^^^^ "^'^^y conceit, obnoxious, and easy to be led by all the

whisperings of a " seducing private spirit/^ or else you would

fain have them think so. For your side/ both upon this and
other occasions, do often challenge, " That we resolve all our
faith into the dictates of a private Spirit ;" from which we
shall ever prove oiir selves as free [as], if not freer than, you.
To the question in hand then : Suppose it agreed upon that
there must be a divine faith/^ cui subesse non 2^otest falsum,
" imder which can rest no possible error," that the books
of Scripture are the written word of God: if they which
go to the testimony of the Holy Ghost for proof of this, do
mean by faith, objectum ficlei, "the object of faith" that is
to be believed, then, no question, they are out of the ordinary
way. For God never sent us by any word or warrant of His,
to look for any such " special and private testimony " to
prove which that book is, that we must believe. But if by
faith they mean the habit, or act, of divine infused faith,
by which \artue they do believe the credible object, and
thing to be believed, then their speech is true, and con-
fessed by all diA'ines of all sorts. For faith is the " gift of
God," -'' of God alone, and an " infused habit," J' in respect

' A Jesuit, under the name of T. S. Sed sunt quidam ex vobis qui noncre-

[J. S.] set out a book, anno 1630, ■which dunt ; et tanquam hujus rei causain

he called, "The Triall of the Protestant exponens, Propterea dixi, inquit,

private Spirit." [The full title of this vobis, quia nemo potest venire ad Me,

book is : " The triall of the Protestant nisi fiierit ei datum a Patre : ut osten-

Private Spirit : wherein their doctrine durct etiam ipsam fidem qua credit, et

making the sayd Spirit the sole ex morte sui cordis anima reviviscit,]

grounde and mcanes of their beliefe dari nobis a Deo, &c. — S. Augustin.

is confuted . . . The Second Part which [Enarr.] in Psalm. Ixxxvii. [Op., torn,

is doctrinall. Written by J. S. of the iv. col. ;-'32. F. ed. Benedict.]
Society of Jesus. Permissu superio- >' [Hanc autem causam Pelagian!

rum. MDCXxx." Its author was J. Scr- ponebant solum liberum arbitrium

geant : and in a Preface he explains honiinis ; et propter hoc dicebant,

how " this Second Part gets birth and quod initium fidci est ex nobis: in

breath, and conies to light before the ((uantum sc. ex nobis est, quod parati

first."] .<iuuus ad assentiendum his, quae

" Ut testimonia Scriptura; certam sunt fidei : sed consummatio fidci est

et indubitatam fidem prastent, neces- a Deo, per quam nobis proponuntur

sarium videtur ostendere, quod ipstvi ea (pia; credere debemus. Sed hoc est

DivintB Scripturaj sint Dei Spiritu falsum], quia [cum] homo, assentiendo

inspiratso. — Origen. irtpl opx^f, lib. iv. his quso sunt fidei, elevetur supra

[cap. 1. Rufin. interpret. Op., toni. i. naturam suam, oportet quod hoc insit

p. 156. ed. J3enedict. fxaprvpiu tcL iic ei ex supernaturali principio interius

rwu TreTnffTfviJ.4vwv Tj/jui' ehat deiocv ypa- movente, quod est Deus : [et ideo

(pwv, T7)ST€ \(yoixivr)s TaXalas ^LaQr\Kr]s, fides quantum ad assentiendum, quod

Kol TTJs KaXov/.Uuris Kaivris, Auyw re irei- est principalis actus fidei, est a Deo in-

pcifieOa KpuTvveiv rifj.aiv T-rjv Triarii'.^ terius movente per gratiam.] — Thorn.

^ 1 Cor. xii. 3, 4. — [Supra dixerat, [Aqnin.] Secund. Secund. Q[u0est.] vi.

of Scripture, this is not true of the medium of proof .

Avliereof the soul is merely recipient ; and therefore tlie sole Section
infuser. tlie Holy Ghost, must not be excluded from that " '
work, which none can do but He. For the Holy Ghost, as
He first dictated the Scripture to the Apostles/ so did He
not leave the Church in general, nor the true members of it
in particular, without grace to believe what Himself had
revealed and made credible.^ So that faith, as it is taken
for the virtue of faith, whether it be of this or any other
article, though " it receive a kind of preparation, or occasion
of beginning, from, the testimony of the Church, as it pro-
poseth and induceth to the faith ; yet it ends in God, reveal-
ing within, and teaching within, that which the Church
preached without/^ ^ For till the Spirit of God move the
heart of man, he cannot believe, be the object never so
credible. The speech is true then, but quite out of the state
of this question f which inquires only after a sufficient means

A[rt.] 1. [in respons.] — And your own
divines agree in this, i}\a,t fides acqui-
sita is not sufficient for any article,
but there must he fides infiiisa, before
there can be divine certainty. [Nee
verus catholicus, quod nonnuUi fin-
gunt, assentitur huic, Ecclesia est verax,
solum per] conjecturas humanas, qui-
bus acquisita fides innititur. Ad quem
modum et Saraceni suis prtsceptori-
bus, et Judaji suis rabbinis, et Gentes
suis philosophis, et omnes [denique]
suis niajoribus inheerent. Non sic, [in-
quam,] Christiani ; sed per interius
lumen infusum a Spiritu Sancto, quo
firmissime et certissime moventur ad
credendum, [ecclesiam Christianam
errare non posse. — Melchior] Canus,
de loc. Theolog. lib. ii. cap. 8. § Jam
si hsec, [p. 59.]

^ Symbol. Nicen. " The Holy Ghost,
[Who] spake by the prophets," &c. — Et
1 Pet. ii. 21. — [Tuitaque, regnatorcre-
aturse tuaj,] quis est modus, quo doces
animas ea qua; futura sunt? Docuisti
enim prophetas Tuos. — S. Augustin.
Confess, lib. xi. cap. 19. [Op., tom. i,
col. 203. D.]

" [Calvini certo argumento respon-
dens dixi :] Nee cum ecclesisB testi-
monium aut judicium prtedicamus,
Dei Spiritum, vel ab ecclesia docente,
vel a nobis audientibus, excludimus,
[ut vel stultissime de nobis imaginan-
tur, vel vafre et scelerate cogitare se
fingunt Protestantes,] sed utrobique
diserte includimus, &c. — Staplcton.

Triplicatio adversus AVhitakerum,
[pro ecclesiiB auctoi'itate,] cap. iii.
[Op., tom. i. p. 1142. C.]

** [Etsi pars objecti formalis sit vox
ecclesite, non tamen in fidem acqui-
sitam resolvitur fides infusa, sed plane
contra tides acquisita resolvitur in in-
fusam : id est,] fides quae cospit ab
ecclesioe testimonio, quatenusproponit
et inducit ad fidem, desinit in Deo
intus revclante et intus docente quod
foris ecclesia prsedicavit. — Staplcton.
Kelect. Controv. [Controv.] iv. [de po-
testat. Eccl. inse, Q[uaest.] iii. A[rt.] 2.
[respons. ad argum. hseret. Op., tom.
i. p. 755. A.] — ["Neither can 1 think
that] when grave and learned men do
sometime hold, that of this principle
there is no proof but by the testimony
of the Spirit, [which assureth our
hearts therein,] it is their meaning to
exclude [utterly] all force [which any
kind] of reason may have in that
behalf; but [I] rather [incline to inter-
pret such their speeches, as if they had
more expressly set down,] that other
motives and inducements, [be they
never so strong and consonant with
reason,] are [notwithstanding] unef-
fectual of themselves to work faith
[concerning this principle], if the
sjiecial grace of the Holy Spirit concur
not [to the enlightening of our
minds."] — Hooker, [Eccl. Polit.]
book iii. eh. viii. [sect. 15. Works,
vol. i. p. 476. ed. Keble.]

<^ De habitu fidei quoad fieri ejus

86 The medium of proof must be such as may be proposed to those without.

Conference to make this object credible and fit to be believed, against
FisnER ^ impeaclimcnt of folly and temerity in belief, whether

—men do actually believe it or not. For which no man may

expect inward private revelation without the external means

of the Church, unless perhaps the " case of necessity'' '^ be

excepted, when a man lives in such a time and place as ex-

chides him from all ordinary means ; in which I dare not

offer to shut up God from the souls of men, nor to tie Him

to those ordinary ways and means to which yet in great

wisdom and providence He had tied and bound all mankind.

XII. — Private revelation, then, hath nothing ordinarily to

do, to make the object credible in this. That Scripture is the

word of God, or in any other article. For the question is of

such outward and evident means, as other men may take

notice of, as well as ourselves. By which, if there arise any

doubting or infirmity in the faith, others may strengthen us,

or we afford means to support them : whereas the testimony

of the Spirit, and all private revelation, is within, nor felt nor

> [but of seen of any but him* that hath it. "^ So that hence can be

jjdit' drawn no proof to others. And miracles are not sufficient

1686.] alone to prove it, unless both they, and the revelation too.

Gal. i. 8. agree with the rule of Scripture, which is now an unalterable

A. C. p. 52. rule by man or angel. To all this A. C. says nothing, save

[the . . . " that I seem not to admit of an infallible impulsion of a^

private Spirit, ex parte subjecti, without any infallible reason,

et generationem, quiim a Deo imme- sanctificatio impletur aliquando in-

diate solo dono gratuito infusus est, visibiliter, cum mysterium baptismi

nihil ad qufestionem, nisi quoad hoc non contemptus religionis, sed arti-

quod pel" Scripturte inspectionem, &c. cuius necessitatis, excludit, (ut scribit

— Henr. a Gand. Summ. [part, i.] idem Augustinus de baptism, contra

A[rt.] X. Q[u£est.] 1. ]). [§ 7. torn. i. p. Donatist. lib. iv. cap. 22.] sic interna

182. His words are : De habitu fidei. . . sola revelatio ad fidem aliquando

nisi quo ad hoc, quod per Scripturnj efhcaciter inducit, cum externa ilia

inspectionem, vel ecclesisc statum, et media non contemptus docentis eccle-

conversationem homini aliquo modo siae, sed articulus aliquis necessitatis

possit rationabiliter pcrsuaderi, ut excludit : ut, videlicet, quia vel in

ei vidcatur assenticndum eis qua3 eremo, vel inter paganos, &c.]

Scriptura dictat aut eeclcsia prajdi- •= [(iuoniam igitur divina providen-

cat : et sic aliquo modo disponitur do tia, non solum singulis hominibus

congruo ad susceptionem habitus fidei quasi privatim, sed universo generi

munere divino.] humane tanquam publice, consulit,]

■• Stapleton. Rclcct. Controv. iv. quid cum singulis agatur, Deus scit

QuEBst. iii. Art. 2. [Op., tom. i. p. 755. quiagit, atque ipsi, cum quibus agitur,

A, B. ubi sup. note ''.] doth not only sciunt. Quid autem agatur cum ge-

affirm it, but proves it too, a paritate nere humano, per historiam commen-

rationis, in case of necessity, where dari voluit, et per prophetiam. — S.

there is no contempt of the external Augustin. de vera Relig. cap. xxv.

means. [His words are : Rursum, sicut [Op., tom. i. col. 763. D.]

A.C.]

(4.) Reason enlightened by Grace, its office in this proof.

and that sufficiently applied, ex parte objecti, which if I did
admit, would open a gap to all enthusiasms, and dreams of
fanatical men." Now for this yet I thank him. For I do
not only " seem not to admit," hut I do most clearly reject,
this frenzy in the words going hefore.

XIII. — 4. The last way, which gives reason leave to come
in, and prove what it can,^ may not justly be denied by any
reasonable man. For though reason without grace cannot
see the way to heaven, nor believe this book, in which God
hath written the way; yet grace is never placed but in a
reasonable creature, and proves by the very seat which it
hath taken iip, that the end it hath is to be spiritual eye-
water, to make reason see what by '' nature only it cannot/'s
but never to blemish reason in that which it can, "compre-
hend." Now the use of reason is very general ; and man,
do what he can, is still apt to search and seek for a reason
why he will believe ; though, after he once believes, his faith
grows stronger than either his reason or his knowledge :''

Section
XVI.

f Utitur tamen sacra doctrina [etiam]
rati one humana, non quidem ad pro-
liandum fidem ipsam, [quia per hoc
toUeretur meritum fidei,] sed ad mani-
festandum aliqua alia, quee traduntur
in hac doctrina — Tliom. [Aquin.
Summ.] par. 1. Q[u8est.] i. A[rt.] 8. ad
Secundum. — Passibus rationis novus
homo tcndit in Deum : [inquit] S.
Augustin. de vera relig. cap. xxvi.
[Op., tom. i. col. 764. F.] passibus,
varum est, sed nee tequis, nee solis.
[S. Augustine's words are : Iste dicitur
novus homo et interior et coelestis,
habens ex ipsa proportione, non annis,
sed provectibus, distinctas quasdam
spiri tales setates suas.] — [Ad tertium
dicendum, quod] invisibilia Dei altiori
modo, quantum ad plura, percipit
fides, quam ratio naturalis ex crea-
turis in Deum procedens. — Thom.
[Aquin.] Secund. Secund. Q[u0est.] ii.
A[rt. 3. respons.] ad Tertium.

s Animalis homo non percipit.— 1
Cor. ii. 14.

^ Quia [alise] scientise certitudinem
habent ex naturali lumine rationis
humanse, quae potest errare : [hasc au-
tem, sc] Theologia, [quae docet et ob-
jectum et notitiam fidei, sicut et fidem
ipsam], certitudinem habet ex lumine
divinse scientiae,qua3 decipi non potest.
— Thom. [Aquin. Summ.] par. 1.
Q[usest. i. A[rt.]5. [in respons.] — [Cum

igitur etiam ego vicissim laudavero
quod credo, et quod credisirrisero,quid
putas nobis esse judicandum, quidve
faciendum, nisi ut eos reliuquamus,
qui nos invitant certa cognoscere, et
postea impei'ant ut incerta credamus;
et eos sequamur, qui nos invitant prius
credere, quod nondum valemus intu-
eri,] ut, ipsa fide valentiores facti, quod
credimus intelligere mereamur, [non
jam hominibus, sed ipso Deo intrin-
secus mentem nostram illuminante
atquefirmantel] — S. Augustin. contra
Epistolam Manichsei, quam vocant
Fundament!, cap. xiv. [Op., tom. viii.
col. 160. D.] — Hoc autem ita intelli-
gendum est, ut scientia certior sit
certitudine evidentise ; fides vero cer-
tior firmitate adhaesionis. Majus lu-
men in scientia, majus robur in fide :
et hoc, quia in fide, et ad fidem actus
imperatus voluntatis concurrit. Cre-
dere enim est actus intellectus vero
assentientis productus [procedens] ex
voluntatis imperio. — [Gabr.] Biel. in
III. Sentent. Distinct, xxiii. Queest. ii.
Art. 1. [These are not, except in por-
tions, the exact words of Gabriel Biel,
but rather an account of his whole
argument. Part of the quotation is
to be found in Nic. de Lyra, apud
Bibl. Sacr. cum Gloss, ordinar, &c.
in .Tohan. iv. 42. sc. Firmiter credere,
quia in fide major est certitudo

88 What Reason can, and what it ca^inot, effect,

Conference and great reason for this, because it sroes hia-lier, and so

WITH O -^

Fisher, iipon a safer principle, tlian either of the other can in this life.
XIV. — In this particular the books called the Scripture
are commonly and constantly reputed to be the word of God,
and so infallible verity to the least point of them. Doth any
man doubt this ? The world cannot keep him from going
to weigh it at the balance of reason, whether it be the word
Oi God or not. To the same weights he brings the tradition
of the Church, the inward motives in Scripture itself, all
testimonies within, which seem to bear witness to it ; and in
all this there is no harm : the danger is when a man -ndll
use no other scale but reason, or prefer reason before any
other scale. For the word of God, and the book containing
it, refuse not to be weighed by reason.' But the scale is not
lai'ge enough to contain, nor the weights to measure out, the
true virtue and full force of either. Reason, then, can give
no supernatural ground into which a man may resolve his
faith. That Scripture is the word of God infalUbly : yet
Reason can go so high, as it can prove that Christian
religion, which rests upon the authority of this book, stands
upon surer grounds of nature, reason, common equity, and
justice, than any thing in the world which any infidel or
mere naturalist hath done, doth or can adhere unto, against

adhaerenti^.quaminscienlia, quamvis cap. xvii. C. [Op., p. 321. ed. Rigalt.]
non sit tauta certitude evidentiis. And — Eationabile est credere Deurn esse
part occurs in Thorn. Aquin. Secund. autorem Scripturaa.— Henr. a Gand.
Secund. Qusest. iv. Art. 1. vide infra, Summ. torn. i. Art, ix. Q[ujest.] 3.
p. 119. note >>.]— Undo Thorn. [Aquin. [The statements in the Qufestio re-
inquit, [Ad Tertium dicendum quod] fcrred to, upon which the conchision
Intellectus credentis determinatur ad referred to by Laud depends, seem
unum, nonperrationem, sedpervohin- these: — Quare cum sacra Scriptura
tatem ; et ideo assensus hie accipitur directa dit humano generi a Deo per
pro actu intellectus, secundum quod a medios prophetas et apostolos et
voluntate determinatur ad unum.— eorum successores: certitudo notitije
Secund. Secund. Q[utest.] ii. A[rt.] 1. veritatis hujus scientise non potest
' Si vobis, rationi et veritati con- attribui alicui mediorum, nisi quia
sentanea videntur, in pretio habete, in ipso cognoscitur primum dirigens
&c. de mysteriis religionis. — Justin. scilicet virtus divina rcfulgens in mi-
Martyr. [Apolog. Trim, cap.] ii. raculis circa medios ad nos scientiam
[These words do not seem to be an istam dcfercntes. — Art. ix. Quajst. 3.
exact translation of Justin Martyr, § 13. p. 180. Kon est igitur inccrta
but an account of the general argu- Dei auctoritas circa banc Scripturam,
ment of the exordium of his first Apo- nee levitatis est ei credere. — Ibid,
logy.]— Igitur, si fuit dispositio m- § 14. p. 181. Conclusio 2. of this
tio)iis [super filium Dei ex virgine Quaestio is: "Kationale est credere
proferendum, cur non ex virgine ac- auctorem hujus sciential fuisse Deum."
ceperit corpu.'*, quod dc virgine protu- — P. 181.]
lit?]— Tertull. lib.de Carne Chrisii,

in sitpplying grounds of faith in the Divinity of Scrrptm'e. 89

a, in tliat wliicli lie makes^ accounts, or assumes as religion Section
to himself. ^'''^-

XV. — The ancient Fathers relied upon the Scriptures, no
Christians more : and, having to do with philosophers (men
very well seen in all the suhtilties which natural reason could
teach or learn), they were often put to it, and did as often
make it good, that they had sufficient warrant to rely, so
much as they did, upon Scripture. In all which disputes,
because they were to deal with infidels, they did labour to
make good the authority of the book of God by such argu-
ments as unbelievers themselves could not but think reason-
able, if they weighed them with indifferency. For though
I set the mysteries of faith above reason, which is their
proper place ; yet I would have no man think they contradict
reason, or the principles thereof. No sure : for reason by
her own light can discover how firmly the principles of
religion are true ; but all the light she hath will never be
able to find them false. Nor may any man think that the
principles of religion, even this. That Scriptures are the word
of God, are so indifiierent to a natural eye, that it may with
as just cause lean to one part of the contradiction as to the
other. For though this truth. That Scripture is the word
of God, is not so demonstratively evident a priori, as to
enforce assent; yet it is strengthened so abundantly with
probable arguments, both from the light of nature itself and
human testimony, that he must be very wilful and self-con-
ceited that shall dare to suspect it.

XVI. — Nay, yet farther,'^ It is not altogether impossible

^ Hooker, [Eccl. Polit.] Book. iii. they should. Neither is it a thing
ch. viii. [.sect. 14. Works, vol. i. impossible, or gi-eatly hard, even by
pp. 575, 576. ed. Keble. " If infidels such kind of proofs so to manifest
or atheists chance at any time to call and clear that point, that no man
it in question, this giveth us occasion living shall be able to deny it, with-
to sift what reason there is, whereby out denying some apparent principle
the testimony of the Church concern- such as all men acknowledge to be
ing Scripture, and our own persuasion true."]— Si [enim] Plato ipse viveret,
which Scripture itself hath confirmed, et me interrogantem non aspernare-
may be proved a truth infallible. In tur, [vel potius, si quis ejus discipulus,
which case the ancient Fathers being eo ipso tempore quo vivebat, eum
often constrained to shew, what war- interrogaret,] &c. — S. Augustin. de
rant they had so much to rely upon vera Relig. cap. iii. [Op., torn. i.
the Scripture, endeavoured still to col. 748. C.]— [Et quoniam de aucto-
maintain the authority of the books ritatis beneficentia, quantum in prse-
of God by arguments such as unbe- sentia satis visum est, locuti sumus,]
lievers themselves must needs think videamus quatenus ratio possit pro-
reasonable, if they judged thereof as gredi a visibilibus ad invisibilia, [et

90 Universal reception of the Gospel, a reasonable proof of its Divinity.

Conference to prove it^ even by reason, a truth infallible, or else to make
FisuER. tliem deny some apparent prineiple of tlieir own. For
example : It is an apparent principle, and with them. That
God, or the absolute prime agent, cannot be forced out of
any possession ; for if He could be forced by another
greater, He were neither prince, nor absolute, nor God,^ in
their own theology. Now they must grant. That that God
and Christ, which the Scriptui'e teaches, and w^e believe, is
the only true God, and no other with Him, and so deny the
Deity which they worshipped, or else deny their own prin-
ciple about the Deity, That God cannot be commanded and
forced out of possession. For'" "their gods, Saturn, and
Serapis, and Jupiter himself, have been adjured by the
name of the true and only God, and have been forced out
of the bodies they possessed, and confessed themselves to be
foul and seducing devils ; and their confession was to be
supposed true in point of reason ; for they that were
adored as gods, would never belie themselves into de\dls, to
their own reproach, especially in the presence of them that
worshipped them, were they not forced." This many of the
unbelievers saw : therefore they could not, in very force of
reason, but they must either deny their God, or deny their
principle in nature. Their long custom would not forsake
theii* God, and their reason could not forget their principle.
If reason therefore might judge among them, they could not
worship anything that was under command. And if it be
reasonable to do and believe this, then why not reasonable
also to believe. That Scripture is His "Word, given to teach

JIatt. xii. Himself and Christ, since there they find Christ " doing

a temporalibus ad feterna conscen- tis, vlcti dolore, quod sunt, eloquun-

dens.] — Ibid. cap. xxix. [col. 766. A.] tur. Nee utiqiie in turpitudincm sui,

' Si vim spectes, Deus valentissi- nonnullis pra>sertim vestrorum assis-

mus est. — Aristot.de M undo, cap. vii. tcntihus, mentiuntur. Ipsis testibus

[TadTa xPV ko.\ irep) Qfov ^lavoitcrOai, esse COS Dajuionas dc se verum confi-

hvva.fj.ei fxkv tivTos l(JX"poTd.Tov, KaKKfLhi tcntibus crcditc. Adjurati enim jaer

evirpeTTecrTd.Tuv, k. t. A. — Op., torn. iii. deura verum ct solum, inviti, [miseri,

p. 152. cd. Bckker.] — Domini et I\Io- corporibus inhorresciint ; et vel exi-

deratores omnium. — Cic. do Legg. Hunt statim, vel evanescuntgradatim,

[lib.] ii. [cap. 7. His words are: prout fides patientisadjuvat,aut gratia

Sit igitur hoc a principio persuasum curantis aspirat.]— Arnob. viii. contra

civibus, dominos esse omnium ac Gent. ; or Minutius Felix, as is now

moderatores Deos, eaque, qua; geran- thought : [sc. in Dialogo Min. Fel.

tur, eorumgeriditioneac numine, &c.] qui inscribitur Octavius, cap. viii.

"' Ipse Saturnus, et Serapis, et p. 253. ed. Lugd. Bat. 1672.]
Jupiter, et quicquid Dsemonum coli-

All Sciences presuppose some admitted principles. 91

that/' and " ffivinsr power to do it after/' which themselves Section
saw executed upon their devil-gods ?

XVII. — Besides, whereas all other written laws have scarce ^I'^^*-

[Mark] XVI.
had the honour to he duly observed, or constantly allowed 17.

worthy approbation, in the particular places where they
have been established for laws ; this law of Christ, and this
canon of Scripture, the container of it, is, or hath been,
received in almost all nations under heaven •,'^ and where-
soever it hath been received, it hath been both approved for
unchangeable good, and believed for infallible verity. This
persuasion could not have been wrought in men of all sorts,
but by working upon their reason, unless we shall think all
the world unreasonable that received it. And certainly God
did not give this admirable faculty of reasoning to the soul
of man for any cause more prime than this, to discover, or
to judge and allow, within the sphere of its own activity,
and not presuming further, of the way to Himself, Avhen and
howsoever it should be discovered.

XVIII. — One great thing that troubled rational men, was
that which stumbled the Manichee, (an heresy it was, but more
than half pagan,) namely. That somewhat must be believed,
before much could be known. Wise men use not to believe,
but what they know ; and the Manichee" scorned the
orthodox Christian as light of belief, promising to lead no
disciple after him, but upon evident knowledge. This

" [Tu in eos] libros, [qui] quoquo ad observantiam Moysis [legis et
modo se liabeant, sancti tamen divi- discipulatum se] Christi [cultumque
narum [que] rerum pleni prope totius tradiderunt.] — Origen. [Ruffin. inter-
generis liumani confessione diffiiman- pret.] lib. iv. Trept o.px<>>v, cap. i. [jaaa
tur, [sine duce irruis, et de his sine ix\v 'EWcis kuI pdp^apos ri Kara, rriv
prasceptore audes ferre sententiam.] — olKovfi^v-qv rfyUcSj', ^TjAcSraj e'xei fivpiovs,
S. Auguslin. de utilitat. credendi, KaraAnrovras rods Trarpcpovs vdixovs Ka\
cap. vii. [Op., torn. viii. col. 56. B.] — vofj.i^ufUuovs Btoiis, ttjs T-qp-Ziaiccs twv
[Civitatem Dei dicimus, cujus ea] Moxre'ios v6p.oiv, ku\ rrjs /.caOriTeius toD
Scriptura [testis est, quae non for- 'Irjaov XpLarov Aoyoov. — Op., torn. i.
tuitis motibus animorum, sed plane] p. 157. ed. Benedict.]
summse dispositione providentiEe, " [Jam vero apud Hipponem — re-
super omnes omnium gentium lite- gium presbyter scripsi librum de
ras, omnia sibi genera ingeniorum utilitate Credendi, ad amicum meum
humanorum divina excellens autbo- quern deceptum a Manicbasis, adbuc
ritate subjecit. — S. Augustin. de Civi- eo errore noveram dctineri, et] irri-
vate Dei, lib. xi. cap. i. [Op., tom. vii. dere in CatholicEe Fidei disciplina,
col. 271. D.] — At [vero] in omni orbe quod juberentur homines credere,
terrarum, in Grtecia, atque universis non autem [quid esset veriun certis-
[exteris] nationibus, innumeri sunt sima ratione docerentur.] — S. Augus-
et immensi, qui relictis patriis legi- tin. Ectractat. lib. i. cap. 14. [Op.,
bus, [et his quos putabant Deos,] tom. i. col. 21. E.]

92 No one of these methods of Proof alone sufficient. — Their relations

Conference stumbles many ; but yct the principle, That somewhat must
Fisher. ^^ believed before much can be known, stands firm in rea-
son still. For, if in all sciences there be some principles
which cannot be proved ; if reason be able to see this, and
confess it ; if almost all artists have granted it ; if in the
mathematics, where are the exactest demonstrations, there
be quccclam postulata, some things to be first demanded and
granted, before the demonstration can proceed ; who can
justly deny that to Divinity, a science of the highest object,
God Himself, which he easily and reasonably grants to
inferior sciences, which are more within his reach ? And as
all sciences suppose some principles ^vithout proving, so
have they almost all some text, some authority, upon which
they rely in some measure : and it is reason they should.
For though these sciences make not their texts infallible, as
Divinity doth ; yet full consent, and prudent examination,
and long continuance, have won reputation to them, and
settled reputation upon them, very deservedly. And were
these texts more void of truth than they are, yet it were fit
and reasonable to uphold their credit, that novices and
young beginners in a science, which are not able to work
strongly upon reason, nor reason upon them, may have
authority to believe, till they can learn to conclude from
principles, and so to know. Is this also reasonable in other
sciences, and shall it not be so in Theology, to have a text,
a Scripture, a rule, which novices may be taught first to
believe, that so they may after come to the knowledge of
those things, which out of this rich principle and treasure
are deducible ?p I yet see not how right reason can deny
these grounds ; and if it cannot, then a mere natural man
may be thus far convinced. That the text of God is a very
credible text.

XIX. — Well, these are the four ways, by most of which

p And therefore S. Augustin. dc diintaxat [eas quos appellantur Cano-

doct. Christ, lib. ii. cap. viii. would nicffi. — Op., torn. iii. par. i. col. 23. C]

have men make themselves perfect in No question but to make them ready

readins^ the letter of the Scripture, against they understood it ; and as

even before they understood it. [Erit schoolmasters make their scholars

igitur diviuarum Scripturarum sol- con their grammar rules liy heart,

lertissimus indagator, ([ui primo totas that thej' may be ready for tlieir use,

legerit,] notasquc habuerit ; ct si non- when they better understand them.
dum intellectu. [jam] tamen lectione.

and combined effect . — S. Augustine on the Tradition of the Church. 93

men offer to prove the Scripture to be the word of God, as by Section

a divine and infallible warrant. And^ it seems^ no one of L_

these doth it alone. (1.) The tradition of the present Church
is too weak, because that is not absolutely divine. (2.) The
light, which is in Scripture itself, is not bright enough; it
cannot bear sufficient witness to itself. (3.) The testimony
of the Holy Ghost, that is most infallible, but ordinarily is
not so much as considerable in this question ; which is not,
how, or by what means, we believe, but how the Scripture
may be proposed as a credible object, fit for belief. (4.) And
for reason, no man expects that that should prove it : it
doth service enough, if it enable us to disprove that wliich
misguided men conceive against it. If none of these, then,
be an absolute and sufficient means to prove it, either we
must find out another, or see what can be more wrought
out of these. And to all this again, A. C. says nothing.

XX. — For the tradition of the Church, then, certain it is,
we must distinguish the Church, before we can judge right
of the vahdity of the tradition. For if the speech be of the
prime Christian Church, the Apostles, disciples, and such as
had immediate revelation from heaven ; no question, but
the voice and tradition of this Church is divine, not aliquo
modo, "in a sort," but simply ; and the word of God from
them is of like validity, written or delivered. And against
this tradition, of which kind this. That the books of Scrip-
ture are the word of God, is the most general and uniform,
the Churcli of England never excepted. And when S.
Augustine i said, " I would not believe the Gospel, unless the
authority of the Catholic Church moved me," which place
you urged at the Conference, though you are now content to
slide by it, some of your own will not endure it should be
understood, save of the Church in the time of the Apostles'

^ [Evangelium mihi fortasse lectu- [apud Goldast. Monarch. S. Eom.

rus es, et inde Manichasi personam Imp. tom. ii. p. 402. ed. Francof.

tentalns asserere. Si ergo invenires 1614.] Intelligitur solum de Eccle-

aliqiiem, qui Evangelio nondum sia qiise fuit tempore Apostolorum.

credit, quid faceres dicenti tibi, Kon — [Ockam's words are : Aliquando

credo V\ Ego vero Evangelio non vero nomen Ecclesiee non solum totam

crederem, nisi me Catholicfe Eccle- congregationem catholicorum viven-

siae commoverit auctoritas. — S. Au- tium, .sed etiam fideles mortuos com-

gustin. contra Epistolam [ManichEei, prehendit. Et isto modo ultimo

quam vocant] Fund[amenti,l cap. v. accipit nomen Ecclesise Augustin.

[Op., tom. viii. col. 153, 154. "G. A.] cum asserit, quod ]S^on crederet Evan-

' Ockam. Dialog, part. i. cap. 4 gelium, &c. Ista enim Ecclesia scrip-

The testimony of the present Church is of weight

Conference Only ; and some/ of the Church in general, not excluding

But sure to include Christ and His Apostles.

■WITU

Fisher.

after ages.

tores Evangelii et omnes Apostolos
comprehendit ; sicut probatum est.
Quarc ex auctoritate Augustiui sane
iutelleeta inferri non potest, quod
magis sit credendum summo pontifici,
cauonum conditori, quam evangelio.
.... Conceditur tamen, quod magis
credendum est Ecdesice, quae est
multitudo catholicorum omnium, qui
fuerunt a temporibus I'rophetarum et
Apostolorum usque modo, quam evan-
gelio : non quia de evangelio sit
aliqualiter dubitandum, sed quia
totum majus est sua parte.] — [T. C.
(t. e. Thorold the Jesuit,) in his
reply to the present work, published
under the title : "Labyrinthus Cantua-
riensis; or Dr. Laud's Labyrinth,
Paris, 1658." p. 78. ; complains of
Laud for saying " some," and quoting
only Ockam. Still iugfleet in his
reply to T. C. " A rational account of
the grounds of the Protestant religion:
being a vindication of the Lord
Archbishop of Canterbury's Relation
of a Conference, from the pretended
answer by T. C," parti, ch. 6. sect. 19.
Works, vol. iv. p. 191. ed. 1709.
adds the following passage from
Gerson : " Et hie aperitur modus in-
telligendi illud Augustini, Evangelio
non crederem, &c. Ibidem enim
Ecclesiam sumit pro primitiva con-
gregatione fidelium eorum, qui
Chi-istum viderunt, audierunt, et sui
testes extitenint. — Job. Gerson. Lect.
ii. de vita spirituali, ad coroll. 7."
(Op., torn. iii. col. 24. C. ed. Dupin.
Antwerp. 1706.) And with respect
to the passage from Ockam, in
which, as Thorold rightly remarks,
(p. 79.) " having perused it very dili-
gently, there are neither those words
cited (by Laud), nor anything like
them," Stillingfleet (ibid.) answers
satisfactorily that, " In Durandus we
have those very words, which his
Lordship by a lapse of memory attri-
butes to Ockam ; for Durandus plainly
says : Hoc autem quod dictum est de
approbationeScripturee per Ecclesiam,
intelligitur solum de Ecclesia quaj
fuit tempore Apostolorum, qui fuerunt
repleti Spiritu Sancto, et nihilominus
viderunt miracula Christi, et audie-
runt Ejus doctrinam, et ob hoc
fuerunt convenientes testes omnium
qu£e Christus fecit aut docuit, ut per
eorum testimonia Scriptura, conti-
nens facta et dicta Christi, approbare-

tur. — Durand. lib. iii. Distinct, xxiv.
Qurest. i. Sect. 9." (fol. ccxc. col. 3.
ed. Paris. 1508.) And to the ob-
jection urged by Thorold, that the
passage from Ockam "doth speak,
not of the Apostolic Church only,
but of the Church in all ages, com-
prehending the Apostles and Evan-
gelists in it/' Stillingfleet (ibid.
p. 192.) answers, "What advantage
this is to your cause I cannot ima-
gine Eor they who speak of

the Church in that comprehensive
sense, do only suppose the infalli-
bility to have been in the primitive
Apostolical Church, but the suc-
cessive Church to be only the channel
of conveyance of that testimony down
to us ; and so they say no more than
we do. Thus Driedo expounds that
place of Augustine : Augustinus cum
dicit, Ego Evangelio non crederem
&c., intelligit de Ecclesia Catholica,
quae fuit ab initio Christianas fidei
secundum seriem successionis Epis
coporum crescens, ad liaec usque tem
pora, quae sane Ecclesia complectitur
collegium Apostolorum. Driedo, (de
Eccl. Script, et Dogmatib.) tom. i.
lib. iv. cap. 4." (De dogmat. var. et
apocrj-ph. p. 561. ed. Lovan. 1533.)]

^ [Gabrielis] Biel, [sacrae theoso-
phiaj licentiati nostra tempestatis
profundissimi, sacri] canonis missaj
[tam mysticaquam litteralis expositio,
&c.] Lect. xxii. [fol. xxx. ed. Johan.
Cleyn. Lugd. 1514. Accipitur etiam
adhuc Ecclesia pro congregatione non
tantum omnium fidelium actu exis-
tentium, sed omnium qui fuerunt] a
tempore Christi et Apostolorum
[usque nunc sibi succedentium : et
distinguitur a Synagoga Moysi. Et
sic accipit beatus Augustinus in Epi.%-
tola fundament!, dicens, Evangelio
non crederem nisi Ecclesias auctoritas
me compellerct. — In this lecture on
the words of the Canon, " In primis
qua3 tibi offerimus pro tota tua
Ecclesia sancta," Biel is explaining
the various acceptations of the term
Ecclesia, and he argues that as the
Evangelist is part of the Church, and
the whole greater than a part, so
the authority of the Church is greater
than that of the Evangelist.] — And so
doth S. Augustine take Ecclesia, [in
his treatise] contra [Epistol.] Fundam.
[ubi supra.]

for unbelievers, and those iveak and unstable in the Faith. 95

And the certainty is tliere^ abundance of certainty in itself ; Section

but how far that is evident to us^ shall after appear.

XXI. — But this will not serve your turn. The tradition of
the present Church must be as infallible as that of the primi-
tive. But the contrary to this is proved before/ because this
voice of the present Church is not simply divine. To what
endj theUj serves any tradition of the present Church ? To
what ? Why^ to a very good end. For, first, it serves by a
full consent to work upon the minds of unbelievers, to move
them to read and to consider the Scripture, which (they
hear by so many Avise, learned, and devout men) is of no
meaner esteem than the word of God. And, secondly, it
serves among novices, weaklings, and doubters in the faith,
to instruct and confirm them, till they may acquaint them-
selves with, and understand, the Scripture, which the Church
delivers as the word of God. And thus, again, some of your
own understand the fore-cited place of S. Augustine, "I
would not believe the Gospel," &c. For he speaks it either
of notices, or doubters in the faith, or else of such as were
in part infidels.*^ You, at the Conference, though you omit it
here, would needs have it, that S. Augustine spake even of
the faithful;^ which I cannot yet think : for he speaks to the

' [Ubi sup.] sect. xvi. no. 6. [p. 77.] clesiaj auctoritas succurrit, quas turn

" [Qua ex re intelligitur quid sibi dubitanti de una parte facile persua-

voluerit Augustinus cum ait, Evan- det, ut qua ratione ceteras admisit,

gelio non crederem, &c. . . . Videlicet nimirum propter auctoritatem eccle-

negotium Augustini erat cum Mani- site, eadem quoque ratione et illam

chaeis, qui absque controversia suo partem admittere non dubitet ; turn

cuidam evangelio credi volebant, et etiam totam Scripturam vel neganti

Manichffiorum fidem adstruere. Eogat vel nescienti sua quoque auctoritate

igitur August, ecquid facturi sint, si persuadet, ut qua ratione fidem Christi

in hominem incidant, qui ne Evangelio accei^it, nimirum ex prasdicatione

quidem credat ; quove genere persua- ecclesite, eadem quoque ratione et

sionis sint eum in suam sententiam scripturas credat, quas commendat ec-

adducturi. Certe se afSrmat non clesia.] — Stapleton. Eelect. Controv.

aliter potuisse adduci ut evangelium [Controv.] iv. [De potestate ecclesise

amplecteretur, quam ecclesife aucto- in se,] Qusest. i. art. 3. Op., tom. i,

ritate victum. Non itaque docet fun- p. 736.]

datam esse evangelii fidem in ecclesige ^ [Postremo hoc tribuit ecclesiae

auctoritate, verum simpliciter nullam Augustinus, (inquit Stapletonus,) in

esse certam viam qua] sive infideles, omnibus locis prius allegatis, ut ca-

sive in fide novitli, [ad suos libros ingre- nonem Scripturse consignet fidelibus :

diantur, nisi ecclesiae catholicse unum Ergo loquitur de se fideli ac catholico.

eundemque consensum. — Melch.] Respondeo : Primo, lioc pugnare cum

Canus, de loc. Tlieolog. lib. ii. cap. 8. ipso Augustino,utdicatse jam fidelem

[pp. 59, 60.]— [Probatio enim omnis a ac catholicum non crediturum evan-

notioribus procedit.] Neganti [ergo gelio nisi ob ecclesiaj tantum auctori-

simpliciter,] aut nescienti omnino tatem. . . . Tertio,] Quid si fateamur

[totam] Scripturam, [ex Scriptura fideles etiam ecclesiae auctoritate

nihil probatur. Utrobique tamen ec- commoveri, ut Scripturas recipiant?

XVI.

Tradition introduces us to the higher evidence of Scripture itself.

WITH

Fisher.

Conference Manicliccs^ and tliey had a great part of the infidel in them.y
And the words immediately before these are, " If thou
shouldst find one qui Evangelio nondum credit, which did
not yet believe the Gospel, what woiildst thou do to make
him believe? Ego vero non, Truly I would not/^ &c.
So to these two ends it serves, and there need be no question
between us. But, then, every thing that is the first inducer
to believe, is not by and by either the principal motive or
the chief and last object of behef, upon which a man may
rest his faith. Unless we shall be of Jacobus Almain's
opinion, that we are per prius et magis, " first and more
bound,^^ to believe the Church than the Gospel.'- Which your
own learned men, as you may see by Mel[chior] Canus,'*
reject as extreme foul; and so indeed it is. The first know-
ledge, then, after the quid nominis is known by grammar,
that helps to open a man^s understanding, and prepares him

Non tamen inde sequitur eos hoc
inodo penitus persuader!, aut nulla
alia fortiorcque ratione induci. (iuis
autem Cliristianus est, queui Ecclesia
Christi, commendans seripturam
Christi, non commoveat ? [Aliud au-
tem est commoveri, aliud persuaderi ■?]
— Whitaker. Disputat. de Sacra Scrip-
tura, Controv. 1. Quaest. iii. cap. 8.
ubi citat locum hunc S. Augustini,
[sc. in Epist. contra Fundam, ubi sup.
p. 93. note i.] [Op., torn. i. p. 325.
cd. Aurel AUobrog. et Genev. 1610.
— Cf. his reply to Stapleton, &c. Op.,
torn. ii. p. 310. et seq.]

y Quibus [ergo] obtemperavi dicen-
tibus, Credite Evangelio, [cur eis non
obtemperem dicentibus mihi. Noli
credere Manichteis * — S. Angustin.]
ibid. [Op., torn, viii col. 154. A.]
Therefore he [S. Augustine] speaks of
himself, when he did not believe.

^ Certum est quod tenemur credere
omnibus contentis in sacro canone :
quia ecclesia credit ex ea ratione
solum. Ergo per prius et magis
tenemur credere ecclesisB, quam evan-
gelio. — [Jac] Almain. in III. [Sen-
tent.] Dist. xxiv. [Qutcst. unic]
Conclus. 6. Dub. 6. And to make a
show of proof for this, he falsifies S.
Augustine most notoriously, and reads
that known place, not, Nisi me com-
moveret, as ail read it, but, compel-
leret. Patet, quia dioit Augustiuus,
evangelio non credercm, nisi ad hoc
me compelleret ecclesite auctoritas :

[Sed non tenemur credere evangeliis
appocriphis : quia ecclesia non ex-
hibet ea tanquam credenda : ergo tota
ratio quare tenemur credere evaugelio,
cpistolis apostolorum et prophetarum,
est quia prtesentantur ab ecclesia.
Ergo a fortiori tenemur credere veri-
tati ecclesise quam evangelio. Opus-
cula, fol. Ixxix. s. a. Par. 1517?] —
Ibid. And so also Gerson reads it.
[Est autem ha^c ecclesite auctoritas
tanta utdiceret Augustinus, Evangelio
non crederem nisi me auctoritas eccle-
siie catholica3 compelleret, quanquam
vicissim dici possit, Ecclesi£e non cre-
derem, si non auctoritas sacrae Scriptu-
ral impelleret. Et ita diversis respec-
tibus auctoritas utraque mutua se eon-
firmat.]— In Declarat. Veritatum quaj
credendifi sunt [de necessitate salutis :
(script, an. 1416.) Op., tom. i. col. 22.
C. ed. Dupin. Antwerp. 1706.] But
in a most ancient manuscript in
Corpus Christi College in Cambridge,
the words are, Nisi me conmoveret, &c.
" [Spiritu itaque Sancto ecclesiam
afflatam certe credo, non ut veritatem
auetoritatemve libris canonicis tribuat,
sed ut doceat illo.s, non alios, esse cano-
nicos. Nee si nobis aditum prEebet
ad hujusmodi sacros libros cognoscen-
dos, protinus ibi acquiescendum est;
sed ultra oportet progredi, et solida
Dei veritate niti. — Melch.] Canus, de
loc. Theolog. lib. ii. cap. 8. fol. 34. B.
[p. 59.] [ubi sup.] sect. xvi. [no. 8.
p. 77. note "•.]

Tradition guides to Belief which ultimately rests on SS. itself. 97

to be able to demonstrate a truths and make it evident, is his Section
logic : but wlien he hath made a demonstration, he resolves
the knowledge of his conclusion, not into his grammatical or
logical principles, but into the immediate principles out of
which it is deduced. So in this particular a man is probably
led by the authority of the present Church, as by the first
informing, inducing, persuading means, to believe the Scrip-
ture to be the word of God ; but when he hath studied, con-
sidered, and compared this word with itself and with other
writings, with the help of ordinary grace and a mind
morally induced and reasonably persuaded by the voice of
the Church, the Scripture then gives greater and higher
reasons of credibility to itself than tradition alone could
give. And then he that believes resolves his last and full
assent " that Scripture is of divine authority," into internal
arguments found in the letter itself, though found by the
help and direction of tradition without, and grace within.
And the resolution that is rightly grounded, may not endure
to pitch and rest itself upon the helps, but upon that divine
light which the Scripture, no question, hath in itself, but is
notkindledtill these helps come. " Thy Avord is a light i^^*^ so
David. A light ? Therefore it is as much manifestativum sui,
as alterius, " a manifestation to itself," as to " other things "
which it shows : but still, not till the candle be lighted ;
not till there hath been a preparing instruction, what light
it is. Children call the sun and moon candles — God^s
candles : they see the light as well as men, but cannot dis-
tinguish between them, till some tradition and education
hath informed their reason. And animalis homo,'^ "the
natui'al man/' sees some light of moral counsel and instruc-
tion in Scripture, as well as believers ; but he takes all that
glorious lustre for candlelight, and cannot distinguish be-
tween the sun and twelve to the pound, till tradition of the
Church, and God's grace put to it, have cleared his under-
standing. So tradition of the present Church is the first

b [Repudiatis igitur . . . iis qui] sane- veritati ?] Quid lucem Scripturarum

tarum Scripturarum lumen, [et spiri- vanis umbris [obnubilare conamini ?]

talis populi gratiam, quod Novum — S. Augustin. lib. i. de moribus

Testamentum vocatur, habere nolue- Eccl. Cathol. [et Manichasor.] cap. 35.

runt.]— S. Augustin. lib.de VeraEeli- [Op., torn. i. col. 715. C]

gioae,cap. vii. [Op.,tom.i.col. 752.D.] <^ {^vxikos avdpwiros.'] 1 Cor. ii. 14.
— [Quid obstrepitis pertinacia tantae

VOL. II. — LAUD. jj

1)8 Objections ansivered : (1.) We too alloiv Authority of present Church.

Conference moral motive to belief. But the belief itself, That the
Fisher Seriptiire is the -word of God, rests upon the Scriptiu'e/

-Nvhen a man finds it to answer, and exceed all that which

the Church gave in testimony, as will after appear. And as
in the voice of the primitive and apostolical Church, there
■was simply divine authority, delivering the Scrij)tuji'e as
God's word f so, after tradition of the present Church hath
taught and informed the soul, the voice of God is plainly
heard in Scripture itself. And then here is double authority,
and both divine, that confirms Scripture to be the word of
God : — Tradition of the Apostles delivering it ; and, The
internal worth and argument in the Scripture, obvious to a
soul prepared by the present Church's tradition and God's
grace.

XXII. — The difficulties Avhich are pretended against this
are not many, and they will easily vanish. For, first, you pre-
tend we go to private revelations for light to know Scriptiu-e.
No, we do not ; you see it is excluded out of the very state
of the question : and we go to the tradition of the present
Church, and by it, as well as you. Here we differ : we use
the tradition of the present Church as the first motive, not
as the last resolution, of our faith. We resolve only into
prime tradition Apostolical and Scriptui'e itself.^

■' Origen, TrepJ apxt^", lib. iv. cap. 1. dicltur esse agens per se, nisi quia

•went this way, yet was he a great deal agit in virtute primi agentis, alitor

nearer the prime addition than we are. enim judicaretur agens per accidens.]

For being to prove that the Scriptures — Henr. a Gand. Summ. pai". i.

■were inspired from God, he saith, Art. ix. Queest. 3. [§ 13. p. ISO. —

[Igitur quam poterimus breviter] de Ideo absolute dicendum, quod huic

hoc assignabimus ex ipsis divinis .scientife principaliter credendum est

Scripturis, qua? noscompetenter move- propter Dei auctoritatem, et nuUi alii

rint.— [Ruffino interpret, (pips koI irepi nisi in quantum ex virtute Dei reful-

rovTwv oXiya us iv iiriTOfiTJ 5iaAa/3a)^ei', gente circa ipsum constat eum media-

rd KipovfTa Tj/xcis, us irfpl'eeiwy ypafxp.d- torem Dei in hoc fuisse. — ibid. § 14.]

TQiv, els TovTo TrapaTiBe/j-efoi. — (Jrigeu. Now, if where the Apostles themselves

Op., torn. i. p. 15G. ed. Benedict.] spake, iilthnata reaolutio Jidei Avas

* Pi'incipaliter tamen (etiam et in Deuin, not in ijysos per se, much

hie) credimus propter Dcum, non more shall it be in Deum than in

Apostolos : [inquit] Henr. a Gand. ^>?-6P.<?eJi^em ecdesiam : and into the

[His words are: — Et licet per Pro- writings of the Apostles, than into the

phetas, et Apostolos intermedios ista words of their successors made up into

doctrina tradita sit, et auctoritate a tradition.

eorum divina auctoritas nobis in eis ' Calvin. Instit. lib. i. cap. 7. § 2.

credita sit, tamen propter Christi Christiana EcclesiaProphetarumscrip-

auctoritatem, immo Dei in Chrisfo, tis.et Apostolorum praedicatione initio

ei ipsi principaliter credendum est, fundata fuit, ubicunque reperietur ea

quoniam ita est in agcntibus per doctrina, &c.— [Op., torn. viii. p. 11.

ordinem ad aliquem ett'ectum deter- ed. Amstelod. 1G6
minatum, quod nullum mediorum

(2.) Divine Author-ity attainable through Evidences not Divine. 99

XXIII. — Secondly, you pretend we do not, nor cannot, Section
know the prime Apostolical tradition, but by the tradition of __£Ii_
the present Church ; and that, therefore, if the tradition of
the present Church be not God's unwritten word, and divine,
we cannot yet know Scripture to be Scripture by a divine
authority. Well : suppose I could not know the prime tra-
dition to be di^dne, but by the present Church, yet it doth
not follow that therefore I cannot know Scripture to be the
word of God by a divine authority, because divine tradition
is not the sole and only means to prove it. For suppose
I had not, nor could have, full assm-ance of Apostolical tra-
dition divine ; yet the moral persuasion, reason, and force of
the present Church is ground enough to move any reasonable
man that it is fit he should receive the Scripture, and esteem
very reverently and highly of it. And this once done, the
Scripture hath then in and home arguments enough to put
a soul, that hath but ordinary grace, out of doubt, that Scrip-
ture is the word of God, infallible and divine.

XXIV. — Thirdly, you pretend that we make the Scripture
absolutely and fully to be known, lumine suo, by the light
and testimony which it hath in, and gives to, itself. Against
this you give reason for yourselves, and proof from us.
Your reason is, " If there be sufficient light in Scripture to
show itself, then every man, that can and doth but read it,
may know it presently to be the divine word of God, which
we see by daily experience men neither do, nor can.'' First,
it is not absolutely nor universally true. There is sufficient
light ; therefore every man may see it.s Blind men are men,
and cannot see it; and " sensual men," "^ in the Apostle's 1 Cor. ii.i4.
judgment, are such. Nor may we deny and put out this light
as insufficient, because blind eyes cannot, and perverse eyes
will not, see it, no more than we may deny meat to be

B And where Hooker uses this very Ave cannot saj* is evident. For there

argument, as he doth, book iii. ch. 8, are men that hear it would acknow-

his words are not, " If there be sufH- ledge it in heart, as they do when they

cient light," but, " If that light be hear that every whole is more than

evident" [Hooker's words are : " Scrip- every part of that whole, because this

ture teacheth all supernatural revealed in itself is evident. The others we

truth, without the knowledge whereof know that all do not acknowledge

salvation cannot be attained. The whenthey hear it."— Eccl. Polit. Book

main principle whereupon our belief iii. ch. viii. 12. Works, vol. i. p. 474.

of all things therein contained depend- ed. Keble.]
eth, is, that the Scriptures are the *' [i^ivxikos. 1 Cor. ii. 14.]

oracles of God himself. This in itself

100 (3.) The light of SS. gives Faith, not Demonstrative Knowledge.
Conference sufficient for nourishment, though men that are heart-sick

WITH

Fisher, cannot eat it. Next, we do not say that there is such a full
light in Scripture, as that every man upon the first sight
must yield to it ; such light as is found in prime principles,
" Every whole is greater than a part of the same,^^ and this,
" The same thing cannot be, and not be, at the same time,
and in the same respect." These carry a natural light with
them, and evident ; for the terms are no sooner understood
than the principles themselves are fully known, to the con-
vincing of man's understanding ; and so they are the begin-
ning of knowledge, which, where it is perfect, dwells in full
light : but such a full light we do neither say is, nor require
to be, in Scripture ; and if any particular man do, let him
answer for himself. The question is only of such a light in
Scripture as is of force to breed faith, that it is the word of
God; not to make a perfect knowledge. Now faith, of
whatsoever it is, this or other principle, is an evidence,^ as
well as knowledge ; and the belief is firmer than any know-
ledge can be, because it rests upon divine authority which
cannot deceive ; whereas knowledge, or at least he that
thinks he knows, is not ever certain in deductions from
principles. But the evidence is not so clear ;'^ for it is of
Ileb. xi. 1. "things not seen,"i in regard of the object; and in regard of
the subject that sees, it is in anigmate/'^ '^in a glass, or dark
speaking.'' Now, God doth not require a full demonstrative
knowledge in us, that the Scripture is His word, and therefore
in His pro^^dence hath kindled in it no light for that ; but
He requires our faith of it, and such a certain demonstration
as may fit that. And for that He hath left sufiicient light
in Scripture to reason and grace meeting, where the soul is
morally prepared by the tradition of the Chiu'ch, unless you
be of Bellarmine's opinion, " That to believe there are any
divine Scriptures is not omnino necessary to salvation." "

' iKfjxos. Heb. xi. ]. ex objecto.sed ex vcracitate testis, sei-

'' [Vide supra,] § 16. No. 13. [p. 87.] licet Dei : et] hoc modo facile est vi-

' Heb. xi. 1. dere quomodo fides e.'.t cum penigmate

■" [iv alvlynaTt.] 1 Cor. xiii. 12. And ct obscuritate : quia habensfidem noii

A. C. confesses, p. 52, that this very credit articulum esse verum ex eviden-

thing in question may be known in- tia objecti, sed propter hoc, quod as-

fallibly,when it is known but obscurely. sentit veracitati infundcntis habituni,

EtScotusin III. [Scntent.] Dist. xxiii. ct in hoc revelantis credibilia. — [Op.,

Qusest. i. fol. 41. B. [Et hoc modo torn. vii. p. 462.]

dicendo, fides non habet certitudinem " Bellarmin. lib. iii. do Ecclesia,

Hooker's Authority unfairly alleged by Romanists.

101

XXV. — The authority which you pretend against this, is
out of Hooker :° "Of things necessary, the very chiefest
is to know, AA'hat books we are bound to esteem holy ; which
point is confessed impossible for the Scripture itself to
teach." Of this Brereley,P the storehouse for all priests

Section
XVI.

cap. 14. [Op., torn. ii. col. 149. B.]
Credere uUas esse divinas Scripturas,
non est omnino necessarium ad salu-
tem. [Bellarmine's words are : —
Multa sunt de fide, quai non sunt
absolute necessaria ad salutem. Sane
credere historias Testament! Veteris,
vel Evangelia ilarci et Lucse esse
canonica scripta, imo ullas esse
divinas Seripturas, non est omnino
necessarium ad salutem : nam sine
hac fide multi salvati sunt, antequam
ScripturEB scriberentur, et postea
tempore Novi Testamenti multa3
barbarce nationes.] I will not break
my discourse to rifle this speech of
Bellarmine : it is bad enough in the
best sense that favour itself can give
it. For if he mean by omnino, that
it is not altogether or simplj' ne-
cessary to believe there is divine
Scripture, and a written word of
God ; that is false : that being
granted, which is among all Chris-
tians, that there is a Scripture : and
God would never have given a super-
natural unnecessary thing. And if he
means by omnino, that it is not in
any wise necessary, then it is sensibly
false. For the greatest upholdei's of
tradition that ever were, made the
Scripture very necessary in all the
ages of the Church : so it was neces-
sary, because it was given ; and given,
because God thought it necessary.
Besides, upon Roman grounds, this I
think will follow : That which the tra-
dition of the present Church delivers,
as necessary to believe, is omnino ne-
cessary to salvation : But that there
are divine Scriptures, the tradition of
the present Church delivers, as neces-
sary to believe : Therefore, to believe
there are divine Scriptures, is omnino
(be the sense of the word what it can)
necessary to salvation. So Bellarmine
is herein foul and unable to stand
upon his own ground. And he is the
more, partly, because he avouches this
propo.sitiou for truth after the New
Testament written ; and, partly, be-
cause he might have seen the state of
this proposition carefully examined
by Gandavo, and distinguished by
times. — [Henr. a Gand.] Summ. par. 1.

Art. viii. Qua?st. 4. in fine. [The
whole Qua'st. is on this point. — •
(§ 7. in fin.) Unde nee fides sufiicit
in nobis singula credenda monstrare,
sed oportet ea ex litera respicere, vel
a doctore audire. Secundum quod
scimus centurionem Cornelium, quam-
vis exauditas orationes ejus, et elee-
mosynas respectas ei Angelus nun-
ciavit, Petrus tamen traditum im-
buendum, per quern non solum
sacramenta susciperet, sed etiam
quid credendum, quid sperandum,
quid diligendum esset audiret, ut
(licit Augustinus, et tamen per fidem
interius a Deo prius illustratus fuisse
creditur. — Henr. a Gand. Art. viii.
Quffist. 4. § 7. in fin. p. 166.— Ad
tcrtium, quod erat conscribenda in
usum hominum, dicendum quod ve-
rum est, sed pro tempore cum opus
erat, ut dictum est. — ibid. § 9. p. 160'.
— Ad primum in oppositum, quod
labilis est memoria, et ideo indigemus
Scripture, dicendum, quod verum est,
sed lioc non habet nisi ex inundantia
peccatorum. Unde nee in statu in-
nocentife, nee statim post peccatum
hoc contingebat, et ideo nee illi.s
temporibus erat htec scientia conscri-
benda, sed alice ut dictum est. — ibid.
§ 10. p. 160.]

° Book i. ch. xiv. [Sect i. Eccl. Polit.
Works, vol. i. p. 335. ed. Keble. His
words are : "If only those things be
necessary, as surely none else are,
without the knowledge and practice
whereof it is not the will and pleasure
of God to make any ordinary grant of
salvation ; it may be notwithstanding,
and oftentimes hath been, demanded,
how the books of Holy Scripture con-
tain in them all necessary things,
when of things necessary, the very
chiefest," &c.]

p Protestants' Apology [for the Ro-
man Church,] Tractate i. Sect. 10.
No. iii. [pp. 254, 255.— By John
Brereley, Priest : Permissu Superio-
rum. An. mbcviii. — This work was
also translated into Latin : Apologia
Protestantium pro Romana Ecclesia,
&c. per Guilielmum Raynerium,
Latine ver.sa. — Lut. Par. 1615.]

102 TJiat other Evidence, besides that of Sci'ipture, is needful

CoNFEBENCE tliat wiU bc Icllc^ and yet seem well read, tells us, that
Fisher. "Hooker gives a very sensible demonstration: 'It is not

the word of God, which doth, or possibly can, assure us,

that we do well to think it is His word ; for if any one book
of Scripture did give testimony to all, yet still that Scrip-
ture, which gi^ eth credit to the rest, would requii'e another
[Scripture] to give credit unto it : neither could we ever come
unto any pause, to rest our assurance this way ; so that unless,
beside Scripture, there were something which might assure,
&c/"i And "this he acknowledgeth"'^ (saith Brereley)
'is the authority of God's Church.'^' Certainly, Hooker
gives a true and sensi})le demonstration; but Brereley wants
fidelity and integrity in citing him. For in the first place,
Hooker^s speech is, " Scripture itself cannot teach this ; " nor
can the truth say that Scriptui'e itself can. It must needs
ordinarih'^ have tradition, to prepare the mind of a man to
receive it. And in the next place, where he speaks so
sensibly, that Scripture cannot bear witness to itself, nor
one part of it to another; that is grounded upon nature,
which admits no created thing to be witness to itself; and
is acknowledged by our Saviour : " If I bear witness to My-
self, My witness is not true,^'® that is, is not of force to be
reasonably accepted for truth. But then it is more than
manifest, that Hooker delivers his demonstration of Scrip-
ture alone. For if Scriptiue hath another proof, nay many
other proofs, to usher it and lead it in, then, no question, it
can both prove and approve itself. His words are : " So
that unless, beside Scripture, there be, &c." " Beside Scrip-
ture :'' therefore he excludes not Scripture, though he call
for another proof to lead it in, and help in assui'ance,
namely. Tradition, which no man, that hath his brains about
him, denies. In the two other places, Brereley falsifies
shamefully ; for holding up all that Hooker says in these
words, " This (other means to assure us besides Scripture)
is the authority of God's Church,'^ he wrinkles that worthy

1 Book ii. cli. iv. [Sect. 2. Eccl. cli. viii. [Sect. 14. Eccl. Polit. Works,

Polit. AVorks, vol. i. p. 371. ubi sup. vol. i. p. 475. vide infra, p. 103.

p. 82. note ".] note ".]

Book ii. ch. vii. [Sect. 3. Eccl. ^ S. Joli. v. 31. — He speaks of Ilim-

Polit. Works, vol. i. p. 404. vide self as man.
infra, p. 103. note '.] and Book iii.

That Scripture itself is the ultimate Ground of Faith. 103

author desperately^, and shrinks up his meaning. For in Section

the former place abused by Brereley^ no man can set a better : —

state of the question between Scripture and tradition^ than
Hooker doth. His words are these : " The Scripture is the
ground of our behef ; the authority of man (that is the name
he gives to tradition) is the key which openeth the door of
entrance into the knowledge of the Scripture.'^ "^ I ask now,
when a man is entered, and hath viewed a house, and upon
viewing likes it, and upon liking resolves unchangeably to
dwell there ; doth he set up his resolution upon the key that
let him in ? No sure ! but upon the goodness and com-
modiousness which he sees in the house. And this is all
the difference, that I know, between us in this point ; in
which, do you grant, as you ought to do, that we resolve our
faith into Scripture as the ground ; and we will never deny
that tradition is the key that lets us in. In the latter place.
Hooker is as plain, as constant to himself and truth. His
words are : " The first outward motive, leading men so to
esteem of the Scripture, is the authority of God's Church,
&c. But afterwards, the more Ave bestow our labour in
reading or hearing the mysteries thereof, the more we find
that the thing itself doth answer our received opinion con-
cerning it ; so that the former inducement prevailing some-
Avhat with us before, doth now much more prevail, when the
very thing hath ministered farther reason.""* Here then
again, in his judgment, tradition is the first inducement ;
but the farther reason and ground is the Scripture. And
resolution of faith ever settles upon the farthest reason it
can, not upon the first inducement. So that the state of
this question is firm, and yet plain enough, to him that will
not shut his eyes.

XXVI. — Now here, after a long silence, A. C. thrusts a. C. p. 52.

' Book ii. cli. vii. [Sect. 3. Eccl. know that the first outward motive,

Polit. Works, vol. i. p. 404. Hooker's leading men so to esteem of the

words in full are : " For whatsoever Scripture, is the authority of God's

we believe concerning salvation by Church. For when we know the

Christ, although the Scripture be whole Church of God hath that

therein the ground of our belief; opinion of the Scripture, we judge it,

yet the authority of man is, if we even at the first, an impudent thing

mark it, the key, &c."] for any man, bred and brought up in

« Book iii. ch. viii. [Sect. 14. Eccl. the Church, to be of a contrary mind

Polit. "Works, vol. i. p. 475. Hooker's without cause. Afterwards, the more,

words are : " And by experience we all &c."]

101 Assistance promised to the Church, still less to the Roman Clergy,

Conference himself ill again, and tells me, " That if I Avould consider
Fisher, ^he tradition of the Church, not only as it is the tradition of
a company of fallible men, in which sense the authority of
it, as himself confesses, is but human and fallible, &c. ; but,
as the tradition of a company of men, assisted by Christ
and His Holy Spririt ; in that sense I might easily find it
more than an introduction, indeed as much as would amount
to an infallible motive/' Well, I have considered the tradi-
tion of the present Church both these ways ; and I find
that A. C. confesses, that, in the first sense, the tradition of
the Church is mere human authority, and no more : and
therefore, in tliis sense, it may serve for an introduction to
this belief, but no more. And in the second sense, " as it is
not the tradition of a company of men only, but of men
assisted by Christ and His Spirit;" in this second sense, I
cannot find that the tradition of the present Church is of
di\dne and infallible authority, till A. C. can prove that this
company of men, (the Roman prelates and their clergy he
means,) are so fully, so clearly, so permanently assisted by

' [much Christ and His Spirit, as may reach to infallibility, much less^

Jess

carent ^0 a divine infallibility, in this or any other principle which

"^''*^1"1Ht they teach. For every assistance of Christ and the blessed
and 1686.] _,."'.. it-, i • ^

Spirit, IS not enough to make the authority of any company

of men divine and infallible ; but such and so great an
assistance onl}^, as is purposely given to that effect. Such
an assistance, the Prophets under the Old Testament, and
the Apostles under the New, had; but neither the high-
priest with his clergy in the Old, nor any company of
prelates or priests in the New, since the Apostles, ever had

A. C. r- 52. it. And therefore, though at the entreaty of A. C. I have
"considered" this very well, yet I cannot, no not in this
assisted sense, think the tradition of the present Church
divine and infallible, or such company of men to be Avorthy
of diA-ine and infallible credit, and sufficient to breed in us

AC. p. 52. divine and infallible faith. Which I am sorry A. C. should
affirm so boldly as he doth. What ! That company of men,
the Roman bishop and his clergy, of divine and infallible
credit, and sufficient to breed in us diAdne and infallible
faith ! Good God ! Whither will these men go ? Surely
they are " wise in their generation," but that makes them

does not amount to a Divine InfallibU'dy.

105

never a whit the more " the chiklren of light." And could Section

XVI
they put this home upon the world, as they are gone far

in it, what might they not effect ? How might they, and I^"ke xvi.
would they, then " lord " it over the faith of Christendom,
contrary to S. Peter's rule, Avhose successors certainly in this 1 Pet. v. 3.
they are not ! But I pray, if this company of men be in-
fallibly assisted, whence is it that this very company have
erred so dangerously as they have, not only in some other
things, but even in this particular, by equalling the tradition
of the present Church to the written word of God ? Which
is a doctrine unknown to the primitive Church,'' and which
frets upon the very fovmdation itself, by jostling with it.
So belike, he that hath but half an indifferent eye, may see
this assisted company have erred ; and yet we must wink in
obedience, and think them infallible.

XXVII. — But, A. C. would have me consider again. That A.C. p. 52.

^ S. Basil goes as far for traditions
as any. For he says: Parem vim
habent ad pietatem. — Lib. de Spi-
ritu Sancto, cap. xxvii. [Op., torn. iii.
p. 54. D. ed. Benedict. Tiav iv rfj
fKKXriaia ■Ki(pv\ayfxivu}v Soy/j.a.Twv koX
KripvypLaTcou, to. yuej/ iK rrjs iyypatpuv
Si5a(TKa\ius exofJiei/, to. Sg €^ rijs t<Zv
oLTToaToXoov TrapaSotreais Siu5o9^VTu rifuu
if fj.viTT7]piu irapa^e^d/j-eOa' cnrep a/xtpo-
repa rvjv avTTiv Iffx^J" ^X^' '^p'Js ttju
evai^eiaW koI toutois oCSels avrep^?,
ovKOvv 6<ttIs ye KUTCt, fj.iKpov yovv
6ea/j.(2v eKKXrjaiaariKwi' ireTreipaTai.]
But first, lie speaks of Apostolical
tradition, \\iliv riiuv ere ■na-ripoiv els
il/xas e\Oov(Tuv], not of the tradition
of the present Church. Secondly, the
learned take exceptions to this book
of S. Basil, as corrupted, [ex. grat.
" This (of Traditions) is matter of
opinion, not of practice ; and so
toucheth not the face of the Church.
Exceptions have been made by Eras-
mus, and other learned men, to this
book (de Spiritu Sancto). We op-
pose to it out of Basils treatise de
Fide, which never was questioned till
now, or lately by the Cardinal (Per-
ron), these words : Haud dubio
manifestissimum hoc infidelitatis
argumentum fuerit, et signum super-
bite certissimum, si quis eorum quae
scripta sunt aliquid velit rejicere,
aut eorum quae non sci'ipta intro-
ducere." ('Pavepa eKTrraxTis k. t. \. ubi
sup. p. 61. note 'K)] Bp. Andrewes'
Opuscul. cont. Perron. [?. e. Stric-

turse : or a briefe answer to the xviii.
chapter of the first book of Cardinall
Perron's reply, written in Fi'ench to
King James's answer, &c. London.
1629.] p. 9. Thirdly, S. Basil himself,
Serm. de fide, [Op., tom. ii p. 224. B.
ubi sup. p. 69. note ''.] professes that he
uses sometimes Agrapha, sed ea solum
qua2 non sunt aliena a pia secundum
Scripturam sententia. — aWore aWais,
as av ■)] xpeia. rwv voaovvTwv Karrjvdy-
Kaae, Kal ruvrais TroXXaKis dypd(pois
jxev, bjxws 8' ovv ovk dire^evuifjiivais Tr,s
Kara, ttjv yparp-^s' evcre^ovs Siavoias.^
So he makes the Scripture their
touchstone or trial, and therefore
must of necessity make Scripture
superior, inasmuch as that, which is
able to try another, is of greater force
and superior dignity in that use,
than the thing tried by it. And
Stapleton himself confesses: [Sexto
modo] traditio [vocari potest, quas
non omnium aut temporum, aut
locorum, in quibus Catholica viget
religio, sed vel] recentior et posterior,
vol particularis, [et paucorum con-
suetudo est. H^c vero si contra
fidem et mores nihil contineat,
laudabiliter retineri potest, nee temere
abroganda est . . . tamen] nullo modo
cum Scriptura, vel cum traditionibus
prius cxplicatis, comparanda est. —
Stapleton. Eelect. Controv. [Controv.]
V. [de Potest. Eccl. circa doctrin. non
script.] Qusest. v. art. 2. [Op., tom. i.
p. 794. C]

106 Grounds for trusting to Existing Copies of Scripture.

Conference it is as easy to take tlie tradition of tlic present Clmrch in
WITH ^i^g ^^^ fore-named senses, as the present Scriptures printed

XISHER. ' •*■ ^ ^

— and approA^ed by men of tliis age. For in the first sense,

the very Scriptures, saith he, considered as printed and
approved by men of this age, can be no more than of human
credit. But in the second sense, as printed and approved
by men assisted by God's Spirit, for true copies of that
■which Avas first written, then we may give infallible credit to
them. Well, I have considered this too ; and I can take
the printing and approxdng the copies of Holy Writ in these
tAvo senses ; and I can and do make a difference between
coj)ies printed and approved by mere moral men, and men
assisted by God's Spirit : and yet for the printing only, a
skilful and an able moral man may do better ser\ace to the
Church than an illiterate man, though assisted in other
things by God's Spirit. But when I have considered all
this, what then ? The Scripture being put in writing, is a
thing visibly existent ; and if any error be in the print, it is
easily corrigible by former copies.^ Tradition is not so
easily observed, nor so safely kept. And howsocAcr, to

A. C. p. 53. come home to that which A. C. infers upon it, namely,
That the tradition of the present Chui-ch may be accepted
in these two senses : and if this be all that he will infer,
(for his pen here is troubled and forsakes him, whether by
any check of conscience or no, I know not,) I will [grant,]
and, you see, have granted it akeady without more ado, with
this caution. That every company of men, assisted by God's
Spirit, are not assisted to this height, to be infallible by
divine authority.

A.C. p. 53. XXVIII. — For all this, A. C. will needs give a needless
proof of the business, namely. That there is the promise of

Luke X. 16. Christ's and His Holy Spirit's continual presence and assist-

xxvUi 19 ^^^^} ^o^ only to the Apostles, but to their successors also, the

20. lawfully sent pastors and doctors of the Chui'ch in all ages ;

1,3 ' and that this promise is no less, but rather more expressly

to them in their preaching by word of mouth, than in writ-

>' [Vide infra.] Sect, xviii. No. 4. nullo modo vos potuisse falsare co-

[for a passage from] S. Augustin. dices, qui jam in manibus essent

contra Fauslum, lib. xxxii. cap. 16. omnium Christianorum ? Quia mox,

[Op., torn. viii. col. 459. C. Quid ut facere coepissetis, vetustiorum ex-

faceretis, dicite mihi, nisi clamaretis, emplarium veritate convinceremini.]

Extent of the Promise of Divme Assistance to the Church. 107

ing^ or reading, or printings or approving of copies of what Skction

was formerly written by the Apostles. And to all this I '__

shall briefly say, That there is a promise of Christ's and the
Holy Spirit's continual presence and assistance. I do like-
wise grant most freely, that this promise is, on the part of
Christ and the Holy Ghost, most really and fully performed.
But then this promise must not be extended further than
it was made. It was made of continual presence and
assistance, — that I grant ; and it was made to the Apostles
and their successors, — that I grant too : but in a different
degree. For it was of continual and infallible assistance to
the Apostles ; but to their successors, of continual and fitting
assistance, but not infallible. And therefore, the lawfully
sent pastors and doctors of the Church in all ages have had,
and shall have, continual assistance; but by A. C.'s leave,
not infallible, at least, not divine and infallible, either in
writing, reading, printing, or appro\dng copies. And I
believe A. C. is the first that durst affirm this. I thought
he would have kept the Pope's prerogative entire, that he
only might have been infallible ; and not he neither, but in
cathedra, sat down and well advised. And "well advised!"
Yes, that is right. But he may be sat,'- and not well ad-
vised, even in cathedra. And now, shall we have all the
lawfully sent pastors and doctors of that Church in all ages,
infallible too ? Here is a deal of infallibility indeed, and

' Nam multa) sunt Deeretales errasse dicamus velut privatam per-

hfereticse, sicut elicit Ocham. Et firmi- sonam, et non ut Papam, qui in

ter hoc credo ; sed non licet dogma- qualibct re sacra definienda con-

tizare oppositum, quoniam sunt sulere debet viros doctos Si

determinatse, nisi manifeste constet. ergo nulli homini jure tenemur in

[Quando enim est questio de fide interpretatione sacraram literarum

materia deferenda est ad summum credere, propterea quod quilibet

pontificem : non ut ferat sententiam ; homo solus errare potest, erit neces-

sed ut concilium congreget et con- sario judicium interpretationis penes

cilium indefectibiliter sententiabit.] totam ecclesiam, penes quam jus

— Jac. Almain. in III. Sent. Distinct, fuerat discernendi Sacras Scripturas

xxiv. Qusest. unic. Conclus. 6. Dub. 6. ab humanis.] — Lib. i. adv. Hseres.

in fine. [fol. Ixxix.] And Alplionsus a cap. iv. [col. 20, 21.] — And the

Castro both says and proves, Cselesti- Gloss confesses, Eum errare posse,

nuni papam errasse, non ut privatam in [Decret. ii. par. xi.] Cans. xxiv.

personam, sed ut papam. [His words QuEest. i. cap. (ix.) A recta ergo, [nee

are : Cselestinum papam etiam errasse haereticis novitatibus depravata suc-

circa matrimonium fidelium, quorum cubuit : Gloss. Qutero .... si de ipso

alter labitur in hferesim, res est Papa, qui Ecclesia dicitur .... sed

omnibus manifesta. Neque hie Cteles- certum est quod Papa errare possit.

tini error talis fuit, qui soli negli- xix. de Ana-stas. 4.0. d. Si Paj^a, Sic]
gentise imputari debeat, ita ut ilium

108 Extravagant claims of Jesuits: Arguments alleged from SS. examined.

Conference yet eiTor storc. The trutli is, tlie Jesuits liave a month's
Fisher i^iid to this iufallibility. And though A. C, out of his

bounty, is content to extend it to all the lawfully sent

pastors of the Church, yet to his own society questionless
he means it chiefly : as did the apologist, to whom Casaubon
replies [in a letter] to Fronto Ducajus. The words of the
apologist ^ are : " Let day and night, .... life and death be
joined together, and then there will be some hope, that
heresy may fall upon the person of a Jesuit." Yea marry,
this is something indeed : now we know where infallibility
is to be found. But for my present occasion, touching the
lawfully sent pastors of the Church, &c. I will give no other
confutation of it, than that M. Fisher and A. C, if they be
two men, are lawfully sent pastors and doctors of the
Chui'ch ; at least I am sure, they will assume they are : and
yet they are not infallible ; which, I think, appears plain
enough in some of their errors manifested by this discourse
and elsewhere. Or, if they do hold themselves infallible,
let them speak it out, as the apologist did.

XXIX. — As for the three places of Scripture, Avhich A. C.
cites, they are of old alleged and well known in this contro-

Lukex. 16. versy. The first is in S. Luke x. Avhere Christ saith, " He that
heareth you, heareth Me.'' This was absolutely true in the
Apostles,'' who kept themselves to that which was revealed

» Nam in fide quidem Jesuitam tos Apostolos dicit, acceptandum esse,

errare non posse, atque adeo esse hoc quia qui illos audit, Christum audit,

unicum Toiv ahuvaruiv, coeteris, quaj &c. — S. Cyrillus [Alexandr.], apud

Solent a poetis plurima commemorari, Thorn. [Aquin. in] Caten. [Aurea.

posthac annumerandum, si neseis, No commentary on S. Luke is extant

mi Fronto, et puto nescire, docebo te among S. Cyril's puhlislied works;

ab apologista doctus, hoc ipsum di- but in the tenth vol. of the Classici

sertis verbis afiirmante. Sic ille Auctores, published by Cardinal

cap. iii. ejus exemplaris quod ad sere- Angelo Mai, is printed nearly the

nissimum Regem fuit missum, pagina whole of the commentary inserted in

no. Jungantur in unura, ait, dies the Catena Aurea. Fragments of the

cumnocte, tenebra3 cum luce, calidum same commentary are also published

cum frigido, sanitas cum morbo, vita in the ninth vol. of the Scriptorcs

cum morte ; et erit tum spes aliqua Yeteres, by the same editor ; but it

posse in caput Jesuitaj hferesin cadere. does not appear that the present

[Magnum hoc, deus bone, et singulare passage in the original has been

Societatis vestra; privilcgium.] — Isa. recovered.] — Et[enim] Dominus [om-

Casaubon. Epist. ad Front. Ducreum, nium] dcdit Apostolis suis potesta-

dat.] Lond. [vii. Non. Jul] 1611. tem ILvangelii, per quos et vcritatem,

Isaaci Casaubon. Epist. dccxx. p. 397. hoc est, Dei filium cognovimus; qui-

ed. Almeloveen. lloterod. 1709. — The bus et dixit Dominus, Qui vos audit

"Apologist" alluded to was Bellar- &c.— S. Irenteus, prasfat. in lib. iii.

mine himself. Sec Thuan. Continuat. advers. Heer. fine. [Op., p. 198. ed.

llistor. pp. 51, 52.] Grabe.]
•> Per quod docet quicquid per sane-

Promise, to successors of Apostles, conditional, and not of infallible aid. 109
by Christ : but it was to be but conditionally true in their Section

XII.

successors/ " He that heareth you, heareth Me ; " that is, so
long and so far*^ as you speak INIy words, and not your own.°
For where the command is for preaching, the restraint is
added. '' Go/' saith Christ, " and teach all nations." But
you may not preach all things what you please, but " all Mat. xxviii.
things which I have commanded you." The publication is
yours, the doctrine is Mine : and where the doctrine is not
Mine, there your publication is beyond, or short of, your
commission. The second place is in S. Matthew xxviii.
There Christ says again, " I am with you always, unto the Mat.xxviii.
end of the Avorld." Yes, most certain it is, present by His ' " '
spirit : for else in bodily presence He continued not with
His Apostles, but during His abode on earth. And this pro-
mise of His spiritual presence was to their successors : else,
why " to the end of the world 1" The Apostles did not,
could not, live so long. But then to the successors the pro-
mise goes no further than " I am with you always ;" which
reaches to continual assistance, but not to divine and infal-
lible.^ Or, if he think me mistaken, let him shew me any

[<^ Nee bffic jacto, sed dolens pro- not the preachers' own." — Beda in S.
fero, cum te judicem Dei constituas Luc. x. 15, 16. [apud Caten. Auream.
et Christi, qui] dicit ad Apostolos, ac His words are : Etne quis putaret hanc
per hoc ad omnes praspositos, qui increpationem, illis tantummodo civi-
Apostolis vicaria ordinatione succe- tatibus vel personis convenire, quae Do-
dunt, Qui audit vos, &c. — S. Cyprian. nainumincarnevidentesspernebant, et
lib. iv. Epist. 9. [Epist. Ixix. ad non omnibus qui hodie quoque Evan-
Florentium Pupianum, Op., p. 122. gelii verba despiciunt, consequenter
ed. Benedict.] But S. Cyprian doth adjunxit, dicens. Qui vos audit, &c. .. .
not say, that this speech of our Ut scilicet in audiendo quisque vel
Saviour's was aequaliter dictum, alike spernendo Evangelii praadicationem,
and equally spoken and promised non viles quasque personas, sed Do-
to the Apostles and the succeeding minum Salvatorem, immo ipsum Pa-
bishops. And I believe A. C. will not trem, spernere, &c. — Op., torn. v. col.
dare to .say in plain and express terms, 330. ed. Colon. 1612.]
that this speech, " He that heareth ' Eabanus Maur[us] goes no further
you, heareth Me," doth as amply than " that to the end some will always
belong to every Roman priest as to S. be in the world fit for Christ by His
Peter and the Apostles. No, a great spiritandgrace to inhabit." [His words
deal of difference will become them are : Ex hoc autem intelligitur, quod
well. usque ad finem seeculi non sunt defec-
•* " Be ye followers of me, even as I turi (defuturi) in mundo, qui] divina
am of Christ." — 1 Cor. ii. 1. and 1 mansioneet inhabitatione[sunt]digni.
Thess. i. 6. — Eaban. [Maur.] in S. Matth. xxviii.
"^ And so venerable Beda expressly, 19, 20. [apud Caten. Auream. Com-
both for hearing the word, and for ment. in Matth. lib. vii. Op., tom. v.
contemningit. "For neither of these," p. 159. G. ed. Colon. 1626.] — [Ex-
saith he, "belong only to them which liortor ut . . . ad accipiendam coronam
saw our Saviour in the flesh, but to all spiritali virtute] pergatis, habentes
^orfi'e gwog^te.' but with this limitation, Dominum protectorem et diicem,
ifthey hear or despise £^wan^eZiirer6a, [qui dixit, Ecce ego vobiscum, Sec]

110 The promise of the Hohj Ghost in its fulness restricted to the Apostles.

CoNFERENCK One fatlici' of the Church that extends the sense of this
Fisher pl<'^ce to divine and infallible assistance,, granted hereby to
all the Apostles^ successors. Sure I am S. Gregory? thought
otherwise. For he says plainly, " That in those gifts of God
which concern other men's salvation, of which preaching of
the Gospel is one, the Spirit of Christ, the Holy Ghost, doth
not always abide in the preachers," be they never so lawfully
sent pastors or doctors of the Church. And if the Holy Ghost
doth not alwaj's abide in the preachers, then most certainly
He doth not abide in them to a divine infallibility always.

John xiv. The third place is in S. John xiv. where Christ says, "The
Comforter, the Holy Ghost, shall abide Avitli you for ever."
Most true again. For the Holy Ghost did abide with the
Apostles according to Christ's promise there made, and shall
abide with their successors for ever, to comfort and preserve
them.'^ But here is no promise of divine infallibility made
unto them. And for that promise which is made, and ex-

Jolin xvi. pressly of infallibility, S. John xvi., though not cited by
A. C, that is confined to the Apostles only, for the settling
of them '^ in all truth." xVnd vet not simply all : for there

saitli S. Cyprian, lib. iv. Epist. 1. sanctitas pro aliorum utilitate decla-

[Epist. Ixxxi. ad Kogatianum et ratur. Mansuetudo namque, humilitas,

cseteros confessores, Op. p. 163, ed. patientia, fides, spes,caritas, dona Ejus

Benedict.] But he doth not say, How sunt ; sod ea sine quibus ad vitam ho-

far forth. — And, Loquitur fidelibus si- mines pcrvenire nequaquam possunt.

cutuni corpori, [saith] S. Chrysostom, Prophetite autem, virtus curationum,

Homil. in S. Matth. [His words are : genera linguarum, interpretatio sermo-

oj fiiT eKe'ivuf Se ixovov ilirev eaeadai, num, donaEju.s sunt; sed qua? virtutis

dAAci Kal fj-erd TrdvToiv toij' ^er' eKelfovs Ejus prajsentiam pro correctione intu-

TTiaTivaauTcov ov yap S?; eois rrjs avv- entium ostendunt. In his igitur donis,

reXiias too alobvos oi aivocrToKoi fxei'siu sine quibus ad vitam perveniri noa

efj.f\\ov, d\\' ws hi (TWjj.aTi SiaXey^Tai potest, Sanctus Spiritus sive in prcedi-

To7s irKTrols. — S. Chrysost. in Matth. catoribus suis, sive in electis omnibu.s,

Horn. xc. (al. xci.) cap. 2. Op., torn. vii. semper manet ; in illis autem, quibus

p. 841. D. ed. Benedict.] And if S. per ostensionem Illius non nostra vita

Chrysostom enlarge it so far, I hope servatur, sed aliorum quajritur, nequa-

A. C. will not extend the assistance, quam semper in praedicatoribus per-

given or promised here to the whole manet. — S. Greg. Magn. Moral, lib. ii.

body of the faithful, to an infallible in cap. I. beati Job. cap. Ivi. Op., tom.

and divine assistance in every of them, i. col. 73. ed. Benedict.]
as well as in the pastors and doctors. '' [Ut maneat vobiscum in geter-

K In [his igitur] donis, quibus salus num, q. d.'] Iste consolator non

alioiTim quffiritur, qualia sunt pro- auferetur a vobis, sicut subtrahitur

phetiffi et interpretationes sermonum, humanitas mea per mortem, sed

&c., Spiritus Sanctus nequaquam sem- reternaliter erit vobiscum; hie per

per in praedicatoribus permanet. — S. gratiam, [sed] in future per gloriam.

Greg. [Magn.] Moral, lib. ii. cap. 29. — Lyra, in S. Joh. xiv. 16. [apud Bibl.

(vet. xlii.) in princ. ed. Basil. 1551. Sacr. cum Gloss, ordinar. &:c.] Yoji

[His words are: Alia namque sunt see there the Holy Ghost shall be pre-

dona Illius, sine quibus ad vitam ne- sent by consolation and grace, not by

quaquam pertingitur; alia, quibus vitse infallible assistance.

Tradition a moral, not a divine, Ground of Belief. 1 11

are some truths, saitli S. Augustine/ wliich no man^s soul Section
can comprehend in this life. Not simply all ; but ail those " '
truths, qiue non poterant portare, '' Avhich they were not able to
bear/'' when He conversed with themJ^ Not simply all: but all
that Avas necessary for the founding, propagating, establish-
ing, and confirming the Christian Church. But if any man
take the boldness to enlarge this promise, in the fulness of it,
beyond the persons of the Apostles themselves, that will fall
out Avliich S. Augustine hath in a manner prophesied :
" every heretic will shelter himself and his vanities under
this colour of infallible verity."^

XXX. — I told you a little before,"' that A. C.'s pen was A.C. p. 52.
troubled, and failed him : therefore I will help to make out his
inference for him, that his cause may have all the strength it
can. And, as I conceive, this is that he would have : — The
tradition of the present Church is as able to work in us
divine and infallible faith, that the Scripture is the word of
God, as that the Bible, or books of Scripture, now printed
and in use, is a true copy of that which was first written by
the penmen of the IIolj^ Ghost, and delivered to the Church.
It is most true, the tradition of the present Cluirch is alike
operative and powerful in and over both these works ; but
neither divine nor infallible in cither. But as it is the first
moral inducement to persuade that Scripture is the word
of God, so is it also the first, but moral still, that the Bible
we now have, is a true copy of that which was first written.
But then, as in the former, so in this latter, for the true
copy, the last resolution of our faith cannot possibly rest
upon the naked tradition of the present Church, but must,
by and with it, go higher to other helps and assurances :

' [Proiude quod ait, Docebit vos] loquebatiir, portare non poterant.— S.

omnem veritatem, [vel, Deducet vos in Aiigustin. in S. Johan. [cap.] xvi. 12,

omni veritate,] non arbitror in bac 13. Tract, xcvii. (1.) in princ. [Op.

vita in ciijusquam mente [posse] com- torn. iii. par. 2. col. 736. D.j
pleri : [quis enim vivens in hoc cor- ' Omnes autem insipientissimi Hse-

pore, quod corrumpitur et aggravat retici, qui se Christianos vocari volunt,

animam, possit omnem cognoscere ve- audacias figmentorum suorum, quas

ritatem, cum dicat Apostolus, Ex parte maxima exhorret sensus humanus, bac

scimusl] — S. Augustin. in S. Johan. occasione Evangelicse sentential colo-

[^cap. xvi. 13.] Tract, xcvi. (4.) versus rare conantur, [ubi Dominus ait, Ad-

lin. [Op. tom. iii. par. 2. cob 735. F.] hue multa, &c.]— S. Augustin. in S.

'' Spiritus sanctus, [quem promisit Johan. cap. xvi. 12, 13, Tract, xcvii.

Dominus se discipulis suis esse mis- (3.) circa med. [ibid. col. 738. B.]
surum], qui eos doceret omnem veri- ■" [Ubi sup. Sect, xvi.] No. 27.

tatem, quam tunc, [quando] cum eis [p. 105.]

112 Tradition and Scripture, mutually, yet unequally, confirm each other.

Conference wliere^ I liope^ A. C. will confess we have greater helps to
Fisher discover the truth or falsehood of a copy, than we have
means to look into a tradition; or especially to sift out this
truth. That it was a divine and infallible revelation by which
the originals of Scripture were first written : that being far
more the subject of this inquiry than the copy, which, ac-
cording to art and science, may be examined by former pre-
ceding copies, close up to the very Apostles' times.
A. C. p. 53. XXXI.— But A. C. hath not done yet : for in the last place
he tells us, that tradition and Scripture, without any Aicious
circle, do mutually confirm the authority either of other.
And truly, for my part, I shall easily grant him tliis, so he
will grant me this other : namely, that though they do
mutually, yet they do not equally, confirm the authority
either of other. For Scripture doth infalliljly confirm the
authority of Clnu'ch traditions, truly so called ; but tradition
doth but morally and probably confirm the authority of the
Scripture. And this is manifest by A, C.^s own similitude :
'^For,^' saith he, " it is as a king's ambassador's word of mouth,
and his king's letters bear mutual witness to each other."
Just so indeed : for his king's letters of credence, under
liand and seal, confirm the ambassador's authority infallibly
to all that know seal and hand : but the ambassador's word
of mouth confirms his king's letters but only probably; for
else, why are they called letters of credence, if they give not
him more credit than he can give them? But that which
follows I cannot approve : to wit, " That the lawfully sent
preachers of the Gospel are God's legates, and the Scriptures
God's letters, which He hath appointed His legates to deliver
and expound." So far it is well, but here's the sting : " that
these letters do warrant, that the people may hear and give
credit to these legates of Christ, as to Christ the king Him-
self." Soft : this is too high a great deal. No legate was
ever of so great credit as the king himself" Nor was any
priest, never so lawfully sent, ever of that authority that
John xiii. Christ himself. No, sure : for " ye call Me Master and

Lord; and ye do well, for so I am," saith our Saviour.
And certainly, this did not suddenly drop out of A. C.'s

" Will A, C. maintain that any Legate a latere is of as great credit as the
Pope himself!

Jesuits exaggerate the Authority of living Preachers. 113

pen : for lie told us once before, " That tliis com- Section
pany of men which deliver the present Churches tradition, ^^^'

that is, the lawfully-sent preachers of the Church, are ^- ^- P- 52.
assisted by God's Spirit to have in them divine and infal-
lible authority, and to be worthy of divine and infallible
credit, sufficient to breed in us divine and infallible faith."
Why, but is it possible these men should go thus far to
defend an error, be it never so dear unto them ? They as
Christ ! Divine and infallible authority in them ! " Suffi-
cient to breed in us divine and infallible faith ! " I have
often heard some wise men say, that the Jesuit in the
Church of Rome, and the precise party in the reformed
Churches, agree in many things, though they would seem
most to differ. And surely this is one : for both of them
differ extremely about tradition ; the one in magnifying it,
and exalting it into divine authority ; the other vilifying
and depressing it almost beneath human. And yet, even in
these different ways, both agree in this consequent, — That
the sermons and preachings by word of mouth of the law-
fully sent pastors and doctors of the Clnu-ch, are able to
breed in us divine and infallible faith ; nay, are the very
word of God.i So A. C. expressly : and no less than so,
have some accounted of their own factious words, to say no
more, than as the word of God."^ I ever took sermons, and
so do still, to be most necessary expositions and applications
of Holy Scripture, and a great ordinary means of saving
knowledge ; but I cannot think them, or the preachers of
them, divinely infallible. The ancient fathers of the Church
preached far beyond any of these of either faction ; and yet

1 For this A. C. says expressly of passages alleged to have been erased

tradition, p. 52. And then he adds, by Archbishop Laud from the Fast-

" that the promise for this was no less, book,) rectified, superstition and

but rather more, expressly made to the idolatiy removed, God's sabbaths duly

lawfully-sent pastors and doctors of observed, the suppressed preachers

the Church in all ages, in their teach- and preaching of God's word restored,

ingby word of mouth, than in writing," &c What then can we expect

&c. p. 53. but plagues upon plagues, till such

For the freeing of factious and desperate persecutors be cut oft", and

silenced ministers, is termed " the re- God's word and ministers restored to

storing of God's word to its liberty ; " their former liberty, by our most

in the godly author [W. Prynne] of gracious Sovereign?" — Newes from

the late Newes from Ipswich, p. 5. Ipswich, &c First printed at

[" Certainly till his Majesty shall see Ipswich, and now reprinted for T.

these purgations (viz. of certain Bates. 1641.]

VOL. II. — LAUD. T

114 The evidence of Tradition first in order of Time —

Conference no One of them durst think himself infallible, much less, that
fTsher. whatsoever he preached was the word of God. And it may be

~ observed too, that no men are more apt to say, That all the

fathers were but men, and might err, than they that think
their own preachings are infallible.

XXXII. — The next thing, after this large interpretation
of A. C.J which I shall trouble you Avitli, is, That this method
and manner of proving Scripture to be the word of God,
which I here use, is the same Avhich the ancient Church
ever held, namely, tradition, or ecclesiastical authority, first ;
and then all other arguments, but especially internal, from
the Scripture itself. This way the Church went in S. Au-
gustine's time.® He was no enemy to Church-tradition ;
yet when he would prove that the Author of the Scripture,
and so of the whole knowledge of divinity, as it is super-
natural, is Dens in Ckristo, " God in Christ," he takes this
as the all-sufficient way, and gives four proofs, all internal
to the Scripture : first, the miracles ; secondly, that there is
nothing carnal in the doctrine ; thirdly, that there hath been
such performance of it ; fourthly, that by such a doctrine of
humility, the whole world almost hath been converted. And
whereas, ad muniendam fidem, for the defending of the faith,
and keeping it entire, there are two things requisite — Scrip-
ture and Church-tradition, — Vincent [ins] Lirinens [is] ' places
authority of Scriptures first, and then tradition. And since
it is apparent that tradition is first in order of time, it must
necessarily follow that Scripture is first in order of nature ;
that is, the chief upon which faith rests and resolves itself.
John iv. And your own school confesses this was the way ever. The

' And S. Augustine himself, contra Relig.] cites S. Augustine's book de

Faustum,lib. xiii.cap 5. [Op., tom.viii. vera Religione. In wliicli book, though

col. 254. E.] proves by an internal ar- these four arguments are not found in

gument the fulfilling of the prophets. terms together, yet they fill up the

[His words are : Usque adeo nihil credi scope of the whole book,

confirraatam] Scriptura[rum aucto- ' [Quod sive ego, sive quis alius vel-

ritatem,] quae fidem suam rebus ipsis let exurgentium hasreticorum fraudes

probat, qupc per temporum succes- deprehendere, laqucosque vitare, et in

siones hiec implcri [et effici ostendit, fide sana panus atque integer perma-

quffi tamen, ante quam fierent, pronun- nere,] duplici modo munire fidem

tiavit.] — And Henr. a Gand. Summ. [suam. Domino adjuvante, deberet.]

par. 1. A[rtic.] ix. Q[urest.] 3: [the Primo [scilicet] Divinaj legis auctori-

four arguments are stated in Art. ix. tate ; turn deinde Ecclesiaj Catholicae

Qu8est. 3. §§ 8, 9, 10, 11. p. 179. with traditione. — [Vin. Lirinens.] contra

long quotations from S. Aug. de vera Haer. cap. 1. [p. 4.]

that ofSS. in order of Nature : — alloived by Fathers and Schoolmen. 115

■woman of Samaria is a known resemblance^ but allowed by
yourselves : for " quotidie,^ daily with tliem that are without,
Christ enters by the woman, that is, the Church, and they
believe by that fame which she gives, &c. : but when they
come to hear Christ Himself, they believe His words ' before
the words of the woman : for when they have once found
Christ, ^they do more believe His words in Scripture, than
they do the Chxu'ch which testifies of Him ; because then,
propter illam, for the Scripture, they believe the Church ;
and, if the Church should speak contrary to the Scripture,
they would not believe it/' Thus the school taught then ;
and thus the gloss commented then; and when men have
tired themselves, hither they must come. The key that lets
men into the Scriptures, even to this knowledge of them,
that they are the word of God, is the tradition of the Chuixh :
but when they are in, they hear Christ Himself immediately

Section
XYI.

' [Word. . ,
Editt.
1673, and
1686.]

" Henr. a Gand. Summ. par. 1.
Artie. X. Q[ua3st.] 1. [§10. Ad
fidem autem jam genitam confir-
mandam et coiToborandam in fideli,
maxime valet auctoritas intellecta
Sacrae Scriptura;, cui fidelis adhajret,
etsi videret illos per quos fidem
acceperat a fide resilire, et per impos-
sibile totam Ecclesiam in aliis a fide
discedere, ut possit dicere illud quod
Samaritani ad Christum vocati per
mulierem postquam Christum audie-
runt dixerunt ad earn. Dixerunt
enim illud Jo. 4. " Jam non propter
Tuam loquelam credimus, ipsi enim
audivimus, et scimus, quia Hie est
vere Salvator mundi," ubi dicit Glos.
super illud ; " Et mansit ibi. Sie
quotidie apud illos, qui foris sunt,
nunciatur Christus per mulierem id
est Ecclesiam, et ci'edunt per istam
famam, inde apud eos manet," scilicet
prsesens in Sacra Scriptura, in qua
Ipse immediate loquitur fidelibus :
unde dicitur in alia Gl. " Prius
audierunt famam, postea compere-
runt prtesentem, nee satis est, sed
apud se manere faciunt, ut Ipsius
verbis instruantur, qua3 prseferunt
verbis mulieris." Sic certe fidelis.
Sacra Scriptura cognita, et in ipsa
Cliristo invento, plus verbis Christi
in ea credit, quam cuicunque prsedi-
catori, quam etiam Ecclesia; testifi-
canti, quia propter illam jam credit
Ecclesise, et si ipsa quidem contraria
Scripture diceret, ipsi non crederet,

et ideo talis robur fidei in auetoritate
bujus scientioe perfectissime eonsistit.]
— Sic quotidie, &c. — Gloss, [ordinar.]
in S. Job. cap. iv. [ut sup. apud Henr.
a Gand.]

" Plus verbis Christi, &c. [Henr. a
Gand. ut sup. note ". The gloss
quoted in the above extract con-
tinues : Quia licet doctrina alicujus
aliquis inducatur ad credendum, ta-
men fides innititur divince vei'itati
secundum se ; .... Qui licet excitati
fuerunt per mulieris verbum tamen
magis erediderunt per Christum ....
Per quod significatur, quod licet doc-
trina philosophica fidei nostrse sit in
pluribus accommoda, tamen non credi-
mus propter illam, sed propter sacram
scripturam, et potissime propter
Christi doctrinam. — Gloss. Ordinar. in
S. Johan. cap. iv. 39. et seq.] — [Respon-
deamus ergo et dicamus latitudinem
Christianae credentise sic esse dispo-
sitam, ut] primam fidem tribuamus
Scripturis canonicis ; secundam, sub
isto, definitionibus et consuetudinibus
Ecclesije Catholicte, [juxta ilium arti-
culum iu Symbolo, Credo unam Sanc-
tam Ecclesiam, &c.] Postistas [habent
Christiani credere], non [quidem] sub
poena perfidise, sed proterviie, [vel
crassEC contumaciaj,] studiosis viris [et
amatoribus veritatis.] — [Thom.] Wal-
densis. Doctrinal. Fidei, torn. i. lib. 2.
art. ii. cap. 23. no. 9. [fol. 107. col. 3.
ed. Paris. 1532.]

116 Hence a tioofold Divine and Infallible Testimony.

Conference speaking in Scripture to tlie faithful ;y and " His sheep " do not
fTsVier o^ly " hear/' but knoAv, " His voice." And then here is no

vicious circle indeed of proving the Scripture by the Church,

^ °-^- • and then round about, the Church by the Scriptui'e. Only
distinguish the times and the conditions of men, and all is
safe. For a beginner in the faith, or a weakling, or a doubter
about it, begins at tradition, and proves Scripture by the
Church ; but a man strong and grown up in the faith, and
understandingly conversant in the word of God, proves the
Church by the Scripture. And then upon the matter, we
have a double divine testimony, altogether infallible, to con-
firm unto us, that Scripture is the word of God. The first
is the tradition of the Church of the Apostles themselves,
who delivered immediately to the world the word of Christ :
the other, the Scripture itself; but after it hath received this
testimony. And into these we do, and may safely, resolve
our faith. As for the tradition of after ages, in and about
which miracles and divine power were not so e\adent, we
believe them, by Gandavo's full confession,^ because they do
not preach other things than those former (the Apostles)
left in scriptis certissimis, "in most certain Scriptm'e." And
it appears by men in the middle ages, that these writings
were vitiated in nothing, by the concordant consent in them
of all succeeders, to our own time.

XXXIII. — And now by this time, it will be no hard thing
to reconcile the fathers, which seem to speak differently in
no few places, both one from another, and the same from
themselves, touching Scripture and tradition ; and that as
well in this point, to prove Scripture to be the word of God,
as for concordant exposition of Scriptm'e in all things else.
AVhcn therefore the fathers say, We have the Scriptures by
tradition,'^ or the like, either they mean the tradition of the

y In Sacra Scriptura Ipse immediate Henr. a Gaiid . Summ. par. 1. A[rtic.]

loquitur fidelibus.— Ibid. [Henr. a ix. Q[u?est.] 3. [§ 13. p. 180.]
Gand. ubi sup. note ".] * Scripturas liabemusex traditione.

^ Quod autem credimus posteriori- — S. Cyril. Ilierosolym. Catech. iv.

bus, circa quos non apparent virlutes \tto\v aov <ppnvii.i.unepoi koI eiha^i'mpoi

divinic, hoc est, quia non predicant riffav oi airodroKoi, koX ol apxcuoi ini-

alia quam quEe illi in scriptis certls- ffKoiroi. ul rrjs (KKAyjaias ■npoaTdrai, ol

simis ruliquerunt: quaj constat per toutos ■Kapah6vTes. — Catecbes. iv. cap.

medics in nullo fuisse vitiata ex con- 34. (al. 22.) Op.,p.68. E. ed. Benedict.]

sensione concordi in eis omnium sue- — [Nondum enim erat diligenter ilia

cedentium usque ad tcmpora nostra. — baptismi qua?stio pertractata, sod

The varying Statements of the Fathers reconciled. — Recapitulation. 117

Apostles tliemselves delivering it ; and there^ when it is Section
known to be sncli, we may resolve our faith : or, if they "
speak of the present Chiu-ch, then they mean that the tradi-
tion of iu* IS that by which we first receive the Scripture, as
by an according means to the prime tradition. But because
it is not " simply divine/' we cannot resolve our faith into it,
nor settle our faith upon it, till it resolve itself into the prime
tradition of the Apostles, or the Scripture, or both ; and there
we rest with it. And you cannot shew an ordinary consent
of fathers : nay, can you, or any of your quarter, shew any
one father of the Church, Greek or Latin, that ever said.
We are to resolve our faith, that Scripture is the word of
God, into the tradition of the present Church ? And again,
when the fathers say. We are to rely upon Scripture only,''
they are never to be understood with exclusion of tradition,
in what causes soever it may be had. Not but that the
Scripture is abundantly sufficient, in and to itself, for all
things,<= but because it is deep, and may be drawn into dif-
ferent senses, and so be mistaken, if any man will presume
upon his own strength, and go single without the Church.

XXXIV. — To gather up whatsoever may seem scattered in
this long discourse, to prove that Scripture is the word of
God, I shall now, in the last place, put all together, that so
the whole state of the question may the better appear.

First, then, I shall desire the reader to consider, that (1.)

tamen saluberrimam consiietiidinem [cap. 14. Op., col. 835. C. ed. Bene-

tenebat ecclesia, in ipsis quoque diet.] — [Proinde sive de Christo, sive

scliismaticis et hajreticiis corrigere de ejus Ecclesia, sive de quacunque

quod pravum est, non iterare quod alia re quae pertinet ad fidem vitam-

datum est; saiiare quod vulneratum que vestram, non dicam nos, nequa-

est, non curare quod sanum est. Quam quam comparandi ei qui dixit. Licet

consuetudinem credo ex Apostolica si nos, sed omnino quod secutus

Traditione venieutem : sicut] multa adjecit], Si angelus de coelo annun-

qu£e non inveniuntur in Uteris ciaverit prosterquam quod in Scrip-

[eorum], (sc. Apostolorum), [neque in turis [legalibus et evangelicis ac-

conciliis posterioribus, et tamen, quia cepistis, anathema sit.] — S. Augustin.

per universam custodiuntur eccle- contra [literas] Petiliani, lib. iii.

siam,] non nisi ab ipsis tradita et cap. 6. [Op., tom. ix. col. 301. E.]
commendatacreduntur.^ — S. Augustin. <= Quum sit perfectus Scripturarum

de Baptismo contra Donatist. lib. ii. canon, sibique ad omnia satis superquc

cap. 7. [Op., tom. ix. col. 102. E.] sufficiat, [ut ei ecclesiasticpe intclli-

^ [Nemini autem dubium ease opor- gentiae jungatur auctoritas ?] — Vin.

tet, ad divinarum rerum cognitionem Lirineus. contra Hter. cap. ii.

divinis utendum esse doctrinis.] [pp. 4, 5.] And if it be sibi ad

Neque enim scientiam coelestium per omnia, then to this, to prove itself,

scmet [humana imbecillitas conscque- at least after tradition hath prepared

tur, &c.] — S. Hilar, de Trinit. lib. iv. us to receive it.

118 (1 .) Principles jJi'esupposed, (2.) Principles of TheoIopj7natters of Faith ;

Conference every rational science requires some principles quite without
fTsher ^^^ °^^^ limits, wliich are not proved in that science^ but pre-

supposed. Thus rhetoric presupposes grammar, and music,

arithmetic. Therefore it is most reasonable that, "Theology
should be allowed to have some principles also, which she
proves not, but presupposes.*^ And the chiefest of these is.
That the Scriptures are of divine authority.

(2.) Secondly, That there is a great deal of difference in the

manner of confirming the principles of di\dnity, and those of
any other art or science whatsoever.

Por the principles of all other sciences do finally resolve,
either into the conclusions of some higher science, or into those
principles wliich are per se nota, " known by their own hght,"
and are the grounds and principles of all science. And this
is it, which properly makes them sciences, because they pro-
ceed with such strength of demonstration, as forces reason to
yield unto them. But the principles of di^dnity resolve not
into the grounds of natural reason, — for then there would
be no room for faith, but all would be either knowledge or
■\dsion, — but, into the maxims of divine knowledge super-
natui'al. And of this we have just so much light, and no
more, than God hath revealed unto us in the Scripture.

(3.) Thirdly, That though the evidence of these supernatural

truths, Avhich divinity teaches, appears not so manifest as
that of the natural ; yet they are in themselves much more
sure and infallible then they.*^ For they proceed immediately
from God, that Heavenly Wisdom, which being the foundation
of ours, must needs infinitely precede ours, both in nature

"' Omnis scientia prsesupponit fidem to divinity, which all sciences, nay all

aliquam. — S. Prosper, iu Psalm, cxxiii. things, challenge : namely, some things

[I'erhaps the passage alluded to by to he presupposed and believed.
Laud in citing this maxim may be : « Si vis credere manifestis, invi-

Vide igitur Deum prime per fidem, sibilibus magis quam visibilibus

ut postea possis videre per speciem. — oportet credere. Licet dictum sit

S. Prosper. Aquitan. Expos, in Fs.cxx. admirabile, verum est, &c.— S. Chry-

4. Op., col. 44G. D. ed. Paris. 1711.] sostom. Horn. xlvi. ad Pop. [i. e. in

And S. Cyril. Hierosolym. Catcches. v. S.Matth. Homil. xiii. vide infra, p. 124.

[cap. 3. (al. 2.) Op., p. 72. E. Koi ov note i'.] And there he proves it.— Alice

Trap' ritxtv 76 fxivoLs, toIs Trji' rov Xpiarov scientine certitudiiiem habent ex natu-

TTpoaTjyoplav ix"^<^i-v, /-i-eya to rrjs iri- rali lumine ratiouis humanaj, quae po-

ffTeojs e<7Tli/ ctjicoyua dKKa yoip Ka\ -rravTa test [errare] : h^c (sc. Theologia) au-

rd ev T(c Kca^iui Te\ov/u(va, Ka\ to vno tem [certitudinem habet] ex lumine

tUv aWorpiicv rfjs 'EKKK-rjaias, rfj iriffTet divinte scientite, quce decipi non po-

TeAeirai] shews how all things in test. — Thorn. [Aquin. Secund.] par. 1.

the world do _fide consistere. There- Q[uaest.] i. A[rt.] 5. in conclus.
fore most unreasonable to deny that

(3.) and therefore more sure than those of other Sciences,

119

and excellence. " He that teacheth man knowledge^ shall Section

VTrT

not He know V'^ And therefore, though we reach not the

order of their deductions, nor can in this life come to the P*a. xciv.
vision of them, yet we yield as full and firm assent, not only
to the articles, hut to all the things rightly deduced from
them, as we do to the most evident principles of natural
reason. This assent is called faith; and "faith being of
things not seen,^' would quite lose its honour,? nay itself, if Heb. xL i .
it met with sufficient grounds in natural reason whereon
to stay itself. For faith is a mixed act of the will and the
understanding ; and the will inclines the understanding^ to

f Psal. xciv. 10. Our old English
translation reads it, "Shall not He
punish]" that is, Shall not He know
when, and why, and how to punish ]

s Si sit ratio convincens, et propter
earn quis credat, alias uon crediturus,
toUitur meritum fidei. — [Gabr.] Biel.
in III. [Sentent.] D[istinct.] xxv.
Q[usest.] unica. [Dub. 4. T.] in fine.
[His words are : Ultimo dubitatur
utinim ratio natnralis, inducta ad os-
tendendum fidei veritatem, diniinuat
fidei meritum . . . Kespondetur sic in
beatum Thomam Secund. Secund.
Qna^st ii. art. 10. quod ratio humana,
inducta ad ea quae fidei sunt, duplici-
ter se habere possit. Uno modo ut
prajcedens : puta cum aliquis assentit
veritati fidei propter rationem con-
vincentem, alias uon creditui-us. Et
sic ratio inducta diminuit meritum
fidei, imo totum toUit : ita quod sic
assentiendo non meretur.] — Non est
dicendus credere, cujus judicium sub-
igitur aut cogitur. — Stapleton.
Triplicat. adversus Whitaker. [pro
ecclesiae auctoritate,] cap. vi. p. 61.
[Op., torn. i. p. 1157. A.j

^ [Ecce promittitur (in his verbis
sc. Cum venerit Ille, arguet mundum
&c.,) convictio et redargutio, tamen
non perversio .... Est enim] fides
[voluntaria,] nee fit in nobis nisi
volentibus, [convictio autem fit etiam
nolentibus.] — [Cardinal.] Tolet. in
S. Johan. xvi. Annot. 33. [seu potius,
13. Comment, in Johan. Evangel,
tom. ii. col. 154. F. ed. Lugd. 1615.]
— [Recte itaque idem Spiritus arguit
mundum, et de peccato, quia non credit
in Christum ; et de justitia, quia] qui
voluerunt crediderunt, [quamvis in
quern crediderunt non viderunt.] —
S. Augustin. Serm. Ix. de verb. Dom.
cap. 5. [Serm. cxliii. de verbis Evangelii
Johan. xvi. Ego veritatem &c. Op.,

tom. V. col. 693. A.] — [Non est dicen-
dus credere, cujus judicium subigitur
aut cogitur, quia] fides actus est non
solius intellectus, sed etiam voluntatis,
quiB cogi non potest ; imo magis
voluntatis quam intellectus ; sed
etiam, quatenus ilia operationis
principium est, et assensum, qui
proprie fidei actus est, sola elicit;
nee ab intellectu voluntas, sed a
voluntate intellectus, in at-tu fidei
determinatur. — Stapleton. Triplicat.
adversus Whitaker. cap. vi. &c. [ubi
sup. note s.] _ [Actus autem fidei

est] credere [qui] actus est

intellectus determinati ad unnm ex
imperio voluntatis. — Thom. [Aquin.]
Secund. Secund. Q[u£est.] iv. A[rt.] 1.
in conclus. . — [Et sic dico quod]
non potest dari aliquis assensus
fidei, quicunque sit ille, qui non de-
pendeat in suis causis mediate vel
immediate ab actu voluntatis. — Jac.
Almain. in HI. Sent. D[istinct.] xxiv.
Conclus. 6. Dub. 4. fol. Ixxix. — And
S. Augustine says, Fidei locum esse
cor : [in these words : Quantaslibet
tamen adversum nos erigat machinas,
quando non tenet locum cordis ubi
iides habitat, ejectus est foras.] —
Tractat. lii. in S. Johan. [cap. xii. Op.,
tom. iii. par. 2. col. 642. D.] Where
the heart is put for the whole soul,
which equally comprehends both the
will and the understanding — And so
doth [Gabr.] Biel also, [Ha3c est fides
implicita qua fidelis credit quicquid
ecclesia credit ; utilissima est fideli :
nam si fuerit in corde, dcfendit ab
omni hffiretica pravitate : ut dicit
Ocham &c. . . . Non enim aliquatenus
hfereticari valet, qui corde credit quic-
quid Ecclesia credit.] — in III. Sentent.
l)[istinct.] xxv. Q[u8est.] unic. Art. i.
[Coroll. 4.] F.

120 (4.) Credibility ofSS. not dependent solely on Testimony of Church.

Conference yield full approbation to that "wlicrcof it sees not full proof.
rm™R ^^^ but that there is most full proof of them, but because
the main grounds which prove them are concealed from our
view, and folded up in the uni'evealed counsel of God; God
in Christ resolving to bring mankind to their last happiness
by faith, and not by knowledge, that so the weakest among
men may have their way to blessedness open. And certain
it is, that many weak men believe themselves into heaven,
and many over-knowing Christians lose their way thither,
while they will believe no more than they can clearly know.
In Avhich pride and vanity of theii's they are left, and have
Matt.xi.25. these things "hid from them."

(4.) Fourthly, That the credit of the Scripture, the book in

which the principles of faith are written, as of other writings
also, depends not upon the subservient inducing cause that
leads us to the first knowledge of the author, which leader
here is the Church ; but upon the author himself, and the
opinion we have of his sufficiency, which here is the Holy
Spirit of God, whose penmen the Prophets and Apostles were.
And therefore the mysteries of divinity contained in this
book, as the incarnation of our Saviour, the resurrection of
the dead, and the like, cannot finally be resolved into the
sole testimony of the Church, who is but a subservient cause
to lead to the knowledge of the author, but into the wisdom
and sufficiency of the author, Who being omnipotent and
omniscient, must needs be infallible.

(5.) Fifthly, That the assurance we have of the penmen of

the Scriptures, the holy Prophets and Apostles, is as great
as any can be had of any human authors of like antiquity.
For it is morally as evident to any pagan, that S. Matthew
and S. Paul writ the Gospel and Epistles which bear their
names, as that Cicero or Seneca wrote theirs. But that the
Apostles were divinely inspired Avhilst they writ them, and
that they are the very word of God expressed by them^ this
hath ever been a matter of faith in the Church, and was so
even while the Apostles themselves lived,' and was never a

' The Apostles, indeed, they " knew," " He that savr knows that he says true,

for tlicy liad clear revelation : they to that you, which saw not, might be-

whom they preached might believe, lieve." — Deus in Prophetis, et sic in

but they could not know without the Apostolis,quos immediate illuminabat,

like revelation. So S.John xix. 35. causabat evideutiam. — Jac. Almaiu. in

(5.) Our grounds of Belief the same as those of the first Christians. 121

matter of eiddence and knowledge, at least as knowledge is
opposed to faith. Nor could it at any time then be more .
demonstratively proved than now. I say, not scientifice, not
demonstratively : for, were the Apostles living, and should
they tell us that they spake and writ the very oracles of
God, yet this were but their own testimony of themselves,
and so not alone able to enforce belief on others. And for
their miracles, though they were very great inducements of
belief, yet were neither they evident and convincing proofs,
alone and of themselves ; both because there may be coun-
terfeit miracles,'' and because true ones are neither infallible

Section
XVI.

III. Sent. D[istinct.] xxiv. Q[u£est.]
unic. Conclus. 6. [His words are :
Notandum quod prophetae et apostoli
qui fuerunt fundamenta nostra fidei
habuerunt notitias cartas et evidentes
de aliquibus revelatis et certitudinem
per argumentum topicum sicut habue-
runt Judoei per miracula. . . .Quteritur
ergo circa hoc utruni habebant noti-
tiam evidentem ? videtur quod sic :
quia Deus se solo potest causare omne
genus notitiarum ; sc. evidentiam,
fidem, &c. Et sic quseritur utruni
causaverit evidentiam in prophetis
quos immediate illuminabat Deus
interius sine quocunque signo ex-
teriori : credo quod causabat in eis
evidentiam. — fol. Ixxv.] But for the
residue of men, it is no more, but as
Thomas hath it : [Ad secukdum dicen-
dum, quod argumentari ex auctoritate
est maxime proprium hujus doctrinte,
eo quod principia hujus doctrinte per
revelationem habentur. Et sic] oportet
quod credatur auctoritati eorum, qui-
bus revelatio facta est. — Thom.
[Aquin. Summ.] par. 1. [Qusest.] i.
A[rt.] 8.

'' JS'on est evidens vel ista esse vera
miracula, vel ista fieri ad illam veri-
tatem comprobandam. — Jac. Almain.
in III. Sent. D[istinct.] xxiv. Q[ua3st.]
unic. Concl. 6. Therefore the miracles
which Christ and His Apostles did,
were fully sufficient to beget faith to
a.ssent, but not evidence to convince.
[Almain's words are : Jam movetur
dubium : Utrum audiens prsedicari
articulum, et videns fieri miracula,
pro approbatione articuli acquirat
aliquem assensum vel habitum dis-
tinctum ab habitu fidei 1 videtur quod
sic : audiens prasdicari articulum sine
miraculis acquirit fidem, sed cum

hoc videns miraculum acquirit majo-
rem assensum. (Responsio :) Ergo re-
spondet Ocham quarto quodlibeto :
q. vii. quod audiens articulum prsedi-
cai'i, et videns miracula, non acquirit
alium prceter fidem, quamvis acquirat
intentionem. Patet sic : nunquam
acquiritur evidentia per medium quod
potest de se generare assensum falsum
sicut verum : sed ista miracula cum
praedicatione possunt geque generare
assensum falsum sicut verum. Patet
sic : ille qui prajdicaret legem Macho-
meti, et faceret apparentia miracula
sicut fecerunt magi Pharaonis, ita
bene generaret assensum sicut ille
qui prredicat articulum verum, et
facit vera miracula ; ergo de se illud
medium potest ita generare assen-
sum falsum sicut verum : dico quod
nunquam acquiritur evidentia nisi
per simplicem terminorum notitiam
aut per notitias evidentes : prior
tamen assensus illius articuli quem
prcedicat non causatur ex simpliei
terminorum notitia, neque ex isto
assensu solo, 'ista sunt vera miracula:'
sed causatur ex isto assensu, ' ista sunt
vera miracula, et ista sunt ad veri-
tatem illius articuli probandam.' (Ee-
solutio Doctoris.) Jam dico quod
utraque istarum est inevidens : ' ista
sunt vera miracula:' non enim est
evidens neque potest causari assensus
ex simpliei terminorum apprehen-
sione quod judicet firmiter ista sunt
vera miracula. Similiter ista non
est evidens, ' ista hunt ad illam veri-
tatem comprobandam : ' nam aliquis
dicat mihi : stat quod ille mentitur :
non causatur ergo propter qucecunque
miracula assensus articuli inevidentis,
quia non est evidens quod sint vera
miracula, neque quod fiant ad pro-

122 Miracles neither infallible nor insejmrable Evidences ofti^e Doctrine.

Conference nor inseparable marks of truth in doctrine.^ Not infallible,

FisiiER. ^^^' ^l^^y ™^y ^^ marks of false doctrine in the highest

j)e„t, xiii. f^egree : not proper and inseparable, for all which wrote by

1—3. inspiration did not confirm their doctrine by miracles.™ For

we do not find that David, or Solomon, with some other of

2 Thess
ii. 9

Mark xiu. ^j^g prophcts, did any; neither were any wrought by S. John

John X. 41.

bandam veritatem articuli, et sic non
causatur alius assensus praeter fidem.
— fol. Ixxvi.]

' Cautos nos fecit sponsus, quia et
miraculisdecipi nondebemus. — [S.Au-
gustin. in S. Johan. Evang. [cap. iii.
29.] Tractat. xiii. [in ilia verba. Post
haec venit Jesus, &c. Op., torn. iii.
par. 2. col. 399. A.] And he that says
we ought not to be deceived, acknow-
ledges that we may be deceived, even
by miracles. And arguments which
can deceive, are not sufficient to con-
vince, though they be sometimes
too iuU of efficacj' to pervert. And so
plainly Almain out of Ocham. Nuu-
quam acquiritur evidentia per medium
quod de se generat falsum assensum si-
cut verum.— Jac. Almain. in III. Sent.
D[istinct.] xxiv. Q[u0est.] unic. Cone. 6.
[ubi sup. note ''.] And therefore that
learned Eonian Catholic, who tells us
the Apostles' miracles made it evident
that their doctrine was true and divine,
went too far. " Credible " they made
it, but not " evident." And therefore
he is after forced to confess " that
the soul sometimes assents not to
the miracles, but in great timidity,
which cannot stand with clear evi-
dence." And after again, " that the
soul may renounce the doctrine for-
merly confirmed bj- miracles, unless
some inward and supernatural light
be given, &c." And neither can this
possibly stand with evidence. And
therefore Bellarmine goes no farther
than this : [Undecima nota est gloria
miraculorum, sunt autem duo funda-
menta prtemittenda. Unum] quod
miracula sint [necessaria] ad novara
fidem [vel extraordinariam missi-
onem] pcrsuadendam. [Alterum, quod
sint] efficacia et sufficient ia, [nam ex
priore deducemus &c. — Bcllarmin.] de
notis ecclesiae, lib. iv. cap. 14. § 1.
[Op., torn. ii. col. 206. D.] To induce
and persuade, but not to convince.
And Thomas will not grant so much,
for he says expres.sly : Miraculum non
est sufficiens causa inducens fidem :
quia vi lentium unum et idem mira-
culum, quidam credunt, et quidam

non [credunt.] — Thom. [Aquin.] Se-
cund. Secund. Q[urest.] vi. A[rt.] 1. in
conclus. — And Ambrosius Catharinus,
in Kom. x. 15, is downright at Nulla
fides est habenda signo : [his verbis :
sc. Osteudunt, quajso, quisnam mise-
rit eos ] Nemo enim a se ipso
mittitur. Quod si Deus invisibiliter
illos uiittit, ostendant nobis signum:
quanquam etsi darent signum, nulla
fides est habenda signo. Quomodo
autem preedicabunt] examinanda sunt.
— [Ambros. Catharin. in omnes Divi
Pauli Epistolas, &c. p. 100. ed. Paris.
1566 ] — And Anastasius Nictenus
Episcopus, apud Baron, ad An. 360.
Num. 21. [his verbis : sc. Fui et aspexi
hajreticum (sc. Macedonianum) Cyzici
. . . prajdictus episcopus hjereticus. . .
eSicit ut loquerelur mortuus . . . Prop-
terea non oportet, quemlibet, qui signa
facit, tanquam sanctum admittere, sed
examinare convenieuter ei qui dicit,
Nolite omni spiritui credere, &c.] —
[Denique vel ipsa etiam opera miracu-
loinim : nam hsec etiam adulterari pos-
sunt, et ita exterius fingi ut] non sint
necessaria signa verse fidei. . . . [Sola
autem externa signa aut opera non
sufficiunt ad veram ecclesiam consti-
tuendam.] — Suarez, defensio fidei Ca-
tholicfe, [contra Anglican. &c.] lib. i.
cap. vii. § 3. [col. 34. F. ed. Colon.
1614.]

" Operatic virtutum alteri datur,
1 Cor. xii. 10. To one and another,
he saith, not to all, &c. — [Sed quia
Iste Deus et homo esse dignatus est, in
eo quod Deus est, audi ut recreeris ;
in eo quod homo est, audi ut imiteris :
Discite, inquit, a Me, non mundum
fabricare, et creare naturas. . . nee ipse
dicit, Discite a me febres ab ajgrotan-
tibus pellere,] fugare daemonia, mor-
tuos suscitare . . . [nee hoc dicit, Dis-
cite a Me. Haec enim] dedit quibus-
dam discipulis suis, quibusdam non
dedit : (i. e. to do miracles.) — S. Augus-
tin. Serm. xxii. de verbis Apostol. cap.
5. [Scrm. clxiv. de verbis Apostol.
Gal. vi. Invicem onera vestra, &c. cap.
5. Op., torn. V. col. 792. G.]

The first Christians had neither demonstrative nor intuitive Knowledge . 123

the Baptist. So, as credible signs, they were, and are still, Section
of as much force to us as it is possible for things on the

credit of relation to be : for the witnesses are many, and

such as spent their lives in making good the truth which

they saw. But that the workers of them were divinely and

infallibly inspired in that which they preached and writ,

was still to the hearers a matter of faith, '^ and no more

evident, by the light of human reason, to men that lived in

those days than to us now. For, had that been demonstrated

or been clear, as prime principles are, in its own light, both

they and we had apprehended all the mysteries of divinity

by knowledge, not by faith. But this is most apparent was

not. For, had the Prophets or Apostles been ordered by God

to make this demonstratively or intuitively, by discourse or

vision, appear as clear to their auditors as to themselves it

did, that whatsoever they taught was divine and infallible

truth, all men which had the true use of reason must have

been forced to yield to their doctrine. Isaiah could never

have been at Domine quis 7 '' Lord, who hath believed om* Isa. liii. l.

report ? " Nor Jeremy at Domine, f actus sum., " Lord, I am Jer. xx. 7.

in derision daily .^^ Nor could any of S. Paul's auditors

have " mocked at him," as some of them did, for " preaching [Actsxvii.

the resurrection," if they had had as full a view as S. Paul ^^-^

himself had in " the assurance," which God gave of it, in and

by '^ the resurrection of Christ." ° But the way of knowledge Acts xvii.

was not that which God thought fittest for man's salvation. *

For man having sinned by pride, God thought fittest to

humble him at the very root of the tree of knowledge, and

" Here it may be observed how had. So A. C. is wary there, but

warily A. C. carries himself. For comes not home to the business; and

when he hath said, " that a clear reve- so might have held his peace. For the

lation was made to the Apostles," question is not, What clear evidence

which is most true ; and so the Apo- the Apostles had ? but, What evidence

sties knew that which they taught they had which heard them 1

simpliciter a 2)''iori, most demonstra- " Acts xvii. 32. And had Zedekiah

tively from the prime cause, God and the people seen it as clearly as

Himself: then he adds, p. 51. " I say, Jeremy himself did, that the word

clear in attestante." That is, the re- he spake was God's word and infal-

velation of this truth was clear in the lible, Jerusalem, for aught we know.

Apostles that witnessed it. But to had not been laid desolate by the

make it knowledge in the auditors, Chaldeans. But because they could

the same, or like revelation, and as not see this by the way of knowledge,

clear, must be made to tliem. For and would not believe it by way of

they could have no other " knowing " faith, they, and that city, perished

assurance: "credible" they might, and together. Jer. xxxviii. 17.

124 (G.) Assent to Divinity of Scripture a matter of Faith.

Conference make him deny his understanding, and submit to faith, or
Fisher, ^i^zard his happiness. The credible object all the while,
that is, the mysteries of religion and the Scripture which
contain them, is divine and infallible ; and so are the penmen
of them by revelation. But we and all our forefathers, the
hearers and readers of them, have neither knowledge nor
vision of the prime principles in or about them, but faith
only.i' And the revelation, which was clear to them, is not
so to us, nor therefore the prime tradition itself delivered
by them.
(6.) Sixthly, That hence it may be gathered that the assent

which we yield to this main principle of divinity, " that the
Scripture is the word of God,^^ is grounded upon no com-
pelling or demonstrative ratiocination, but relies upon the
strength of faith more than any other principle whatsoever.''
For all other necessary points of divinity may, by undeniable
discourse, be inferred out of Scripture itself, once admitted ;
but this, concerning the authority of Scripture, not possibly :
but must either be proved by revelation, which is not now
to be expected; or presupposed and granted as manifest in
itself, like the principles of natural knowledge, which reason
alone will never grant ; or by tradition of the Church both
prime and present, with all other rational helps, preceding
or accompanying the internal light in Scripture itself, which

P [Haec ideo credimus, quia et illud aA\' ofxws d\7]des, koi Trapd. to7s vovv

de Elia, et hoc de Christo, sancta] ixovai acb6?ipa.i>iJLo\oyTJiJ.ivov. — S. Chiy-

Scriptura testatur, cai nemo pius nisi sostom. in JIatt. Homil. xiii. Op.,

qui credit, [nisi impius nemo non ere- torn. vii. p. 175. C] Quod vero ani-

dit.] — S. Augustin. contra Faustum, mam habemus, unde manifestum ? Si

lib. xxvi. cap. 6. [Op , torn. viii. col. enim visibilibus credere velis, et de

437. F.] Now no man believes the Deo, et de angelis, et de mente, et de

Scripture, that doth not believe anima dul^itatis ; et sic tibi omnia

that it is the word of God. I say, veritatis dogmata deperibunt. Et certe

which doth not "believe;" I do not si manifestis credere velis, invisibilibus

say, which doth not "know." Oportet magis quam visibilibus credere opor-

quodcredaturauctoritati eorumquibus tet. Licet enim admirabile sit dictum,

revelatio facta est. — Thom. [Aquiu. verum tamen, et ajiud mentem haben-

Summ.] par. 1. Q[u£est.] i. A[rt ] 8. tes valde certum, vel in confesso.— Ex

ad .secundum, [ulii .sup. p. 121. Homil. xiii. S. Chrysostom. in S. Matt,

note '.]— oTi Se ij/ux')'' exo^f [ToQev [Op.,] tom. i. edit. Front. [Duca^i,]

ZriXov , ei yap Stj toTs &puifx4vois /j.4\Afis Paris, 1(336.

TrKTrevdv, Kal Trepl Ofou, Kal irepl ayyi- i And this is the ground of that

\wv, Kal TTcpJ vov, Kal Trepl \l/vxvs afj.(pi- which I said before, Sect. XV. No. 1. [ubi

jSoAAeis, Kal ovruis aoi Travra oixVeToi Sup. pp. 61. 62.] that the Scripture

rArris aXriOiias Soy/xaTa. Kahuiye ej only, and not any unwritten tradition,

ro?s (pauepoTs iriareveiu BovXivei, ru7s was the foundation of our faith :

aupaTois /j-tiWof ^] To7s upocfMivois Tna-rev- namely, when the authority of Scri^j-

iLj' Sf? et Kul irapaSu^of to ilprifj.4vov, ture is first yielded uuto.

(7.) Knowledge of the Divine Essence unattainable by Reason.

125

Section
XVI.

though it give Hght enough for faith to believe^ yet light
enough it gives not to be a convincing reason and proof for
knowledge. And this is it Avliich makes the very entrance
into divinity inaccessible to those men, who, standing high
in the opinion of their own wisdom, will believe nothing but
that which is irrefragably proved from rational principles.
For as Christ requires a denial of a man^s self, that he may Luke ix.
be able to follow Him : so as great a part as any of this " '
denial of his whole self, for so it must be, is the denial of his
understanding, and the composing of the unquiet search of
this grand inquisitor into the secrets of Him that made it,
and the overruling the doubtfulness of it by the fervency of
the will.^'

Seventhly, That the knowledge of the supreme cause
of all, which is God, is most remote, and the most difficult
thing reason can have to do with. The quod sit, that there
is a God, blear-eyed reason can see ; ^ but the quid sit,

(7.)

Intellectus credentis determinatur
[ad unum] non per rationem, [sed]
pervoluntatem. — Thorn. [Aquin.] Se-
cund. Seeund. Q[u£est.]ii. A[rt.]l. ad
tertium, [ubisup. p. 88. note '']. And
what power the will hath In case of
men's believing, or not believing, is
manifest, Jer. xliv. But this is spoken
of the will compared with the under-
standing only, leaving the operations
of grace free over both.

^ Communis enim sententia est
patrum et theologorum aliorum, de-
monstrari posse naturali ratione Deum
esse ; sed a posteriori et per eflectus.
Sic Thom. [Aquin. Summ.] par. 1.
Q[ufest.]l. A[rt.] 2. [Ad secundum di-
cendum quod, cum demonstratur causa
per eflfeclum, necesse est uti efFectu
loco definitionis causas ad probandum
causam esse : et hocmaximecontingit
in Deo, quia ad probandum aliquid
esse, necesse est accipere pro medio,
quid significet nomen, non autem quod
quid est, quia quoestio quid est, sequi-
tur ad quEestionem, an est : Nomina
autem Dei imponuntur ab effectibus,
&c.] — Et, [S. Joanu.] Damascen. Or-
thodox. Fid. lib. i. cap. 3. [tom. i.
p. 125. C. ed. Lequien. "Oti fx\v olv
iarl 6eos, ro7s f^ev Tas ayias yparpas
Sexo/J-evois, T-qu tb ■KaKala.v koX Kaivrjv
SiadriKTii', (pVf^h ovK ufjLtpi^dWfTai, ovre
5e TO?s Twv 'EWrifoov TrKelarois' ais yhp
e<f jj/iej/, 7; yvSiais rov fJvai dihv, ipvaiKois

rjfxiu iyKarecrwapTat.^ — Et, [Jac] AI-
maininlll. Sentent. D[istinct.] xxiv.
Q[ugest.] unic. [Almain implies the
same, but denies that the natural know-
ledge of God is that of demonstration:
he says, Ilia propositio, ' Deus est,' est
demonstrabilis apud beatos, et non
apud viatores : cum non possint habere
medium per quod demonstraretur :
puta notitiam simplicem et incom-
plexam Dei. — fol. Ixxiiij.] — But what
may be demonstrated by natural
reason, by natural light may the
same be known. And so the Apostle
himself, Eom. i. 20. Invisibilia Dei
a creatura mundi per ea quae facta
sunt, intellecta conspiciuntur. And
so Calvin most clearly, Instit. lib. i.
cap. 5. § 1. [Op., tom. viii. p. 5. Ad
hffic quia ultimus beata3 vitae finis in
Dei cognitione positus est ; ne cui
prreclusus esset ad felicitatem aditus,
non solum hominummentibu-^indidit
illud quod diximus religionis semen,
sed ita se patefecit in toto mundi opi-
ficio, ac se quotidie palam ofFert, ut]
aperire oculos nequeant, quin aspicere
Eum cogantur: though Bellarmine
would needs be girding at him, de
Gratia et libero Arbitrio, lib iv. cap. 2.
[Joannes Calvinus loco notato scribit,
Ethnicos solo lumine naturae cogno-
vi.sse generatim Deum esse aliquem,
non tamen in vcri Dei notitiam, qui
unus et solus est, devenisse. . . At contra

126

Ot)Iy in the measure in which He ivills to reveal Himself.

Conference what that God is, is infinitely beyond all the fathoms of
reason.* He is a light indeed, but such as no man's reason
can come at for the brightness." If any thing, therefore, be
attainable in this kind it must be by revelation,'' and that
must be from Himself : for none can reveal but he that com-
prehends ;>' and none doth or can comprehend God but
Himself.^ And when He doth reveal, yet He is no farther

WITH

Fisher.

1 Tim. vi.

[16.]

sentiunt fere omnes theologi. — Bellar-
min. Op., torn. iv. col. 624. C.]— Vide-
tur autein et ratio iis qua? apparent at-
lestari : Omnes enim homines de Diis
(ut ille loquitur) liabent existima-
tionem. — Aristot. dc Casio, lib. i. cap.
22. ["Eoi/ce 5' h re A6'yos toTs (paLVO^ie-
vois fiuprvptlv, icaX tcL (paivufiiva tw
\6y<f. riaj'Tes 7ap avSpoorroi irepl Oeuiv
ixovcriv i'TroA7ji|/»', Kcd irar/Tes rbf avoi-
rdrw rw Odcu tottov aTroSiSoaffi, km.
Bdp0apos Kol "EAATji'es, oaoi Trep' dvai
voui^oiiffi 6(ovs, SyAov on ws rw aOavuTCp
TO addvarov <Twr}pTy)p.(vov. — Aristot. de
Coelo, lib.i. cap. 3. Op., torn ii. p. 217.
ed. Bekker.]

' \"Ori fj.fv oiiv eVri 6eos, StJKoV rl
5e effxJ kot' ovaiav koX <pvfftv, aKaTuAri-
irrov TovTO iravTeAws, Kol ayvwaruu. —
S. Joann.] Damascen. Orthodox. Fid.
lib. i. cap. 4. [Op., tom. i. p. 127. A.
ed. Lequicn.]

" ITim. vi.l6. Et ne vestigium sic
accedendi relinquit S. Augustinus, [his
verbis: sc] ISIec si augeas imagina-
tionecogitationis lucem solis [quantum
potes, sive quo sit major, sive quo sit
clarior, millies tantum, aut] innume-
rabiliter, [neque hoc est Deus. Nee
sicut cogitantur angeli mundi spiri-
tu9 coelestia corpora inspirantes, atque
ad arbitrium quo serviunt Deo mutan-
tes atque versantes, nee si omnes,
cum sint millia millium, in unum col-
lati unus fiant,] nee tale aliquid [Deus
est. — S. Augustin.] de Trinit. lib. viii.
cap. 3. [Op., tom. viii. col. 867. C] — •
Solus modus accedendi, preces sunt. —
Boetius, de Consolatione Philosophia;,
lib. V. prosa 3. [Op., p. 1103. ed. Ba-
sil. 1570. His words arc: Igitur nee
spcrandi aliquid, nee deprecandi ulla
ratio est. Quid cnim vel speret quis-
quam, vel etiam d:prccetur, quando
optanda omnia indeilexa series con-
nectit? Auferetur igitur unicum illud
inter homines Deumque commercium,
sperandi .scilicet et deprecandi. Si
quidem justte humilitatis pretio ines-
timabilem vicem divime gratia; pro-
meremur, qui solus modus est, quo

cum Deo colloqui homines posse vi-
deantur, illique inaccessaB luci prius
quoque quam impetrent, ipsa suppli-
candi ratione conjungi, &c.]

^ [Necessai'ium tuit liomini ad
salutem, quod ei nota lierent quaadam
per revelationem divinam,] qune ratio-
ncm humanam excedunt . . . Necessa-
rium igitur fuit, prreter physicas
disciplinas, quse per rationem investi-
gantur sacram doctrinam per reve-
lationem haberi. — Thom. [Aquin.
Summ.] par. 1. Q[ua3st.J i. A[rt.] 1.

>' And therefore Biel is express,
Tliat God could not reveal any thing
that is to come, nisi illud esset a Deo
prajscitum seu prtevisum (;'. e. unless
God did fully comprehend that which
He doth reveal). — [Gabr.] Biel. in III.
Sent. D[istinct.] xxiii. Q[ua;st.] ii.
A[rt.] ]. [Adprimumdiciturquod con-
tingentia quorundam artieulorum fidei
non tollit, nee minuit certitudinem
fidei non plus quam necessitas artieu-
lorum. Tum quia certitudo fidei,
quaj est quredam infallibilitas, non
innititur necessitati veritatis creditae,
sed divinse revelation! quas fallere non
potest : non plus quoniam revelat
contingentia, quam dum revelat ne-
cessaria ; quia revelari non potest esse
futurum nisi illud sit a Deo prajsci-
tum seu prai visum.]

^ Nullus [igitur] intelleetus creatus
videndo Deum, potest cognoscere
omnia quse Deus facit, vel potest
facere. Hoc enim esset comprchen-
dere Ejus virtutem : [sed horum, qua;
Deus facit, vel facere potest, tanto
aliquis intelleetus plura cognoscit,
quanto perfectius Deum videt.] —
Thom. [Aquin. Summ.] par. 1.
Q[ua3st.] xii. A[rt.] 8. in conclus. —
Ad argumentum : [sc. Quicunque
videt speculum, videt ea, quae in
speculo resplendent : i-:edj omnia quaa-
cunque fiunt, vel fieri possunt, in Deo
resplendent, sicut in quodam speculo :
respondet Thom. [his verbis: sc] Ad
secundum [dicendum,] quod videns
speculum non est necessarium, quod

Antecedent grounds for the necessity of Revelation.

127

discernible than Himself pleases.^ Now, since reason^ teaches Section
that the soul of man is immortal and capable of felicity f ^^^'
and since that felicity consists in the contemplation of the
highest cause, which again is God Himself; and since Christ
therein confirms that dictate, that man's eternal happiness
is to know God, and Him whom He hath sent /^ and since John xvii,
nothing can put us into the way of attaining to that con- ^^'^
templation but some revelation of Himself, and of the way to
Himself; I say, since all this is so, it cannot reasonably be
thought by any prudent man that the all-wise God should
create man with a desire of felicity, and then leave him
utterly destitute of all instrumental helps to make the attain-
ment possible ; since " God and nature do nothing but for

omnia in speculo videat, nisi specu-
lum visu suo comprehendat. — Thom.
[Aquin.] ubi sup. A[rt.J 8. ad Secun-
dum. Now no man can comprehend
this glass, which is God Himself.

'^ Deus enim est speculum volun-
tarium, rovelans quaj et quot vult
alicui beato : non est speculum natu-
raliter reprtesentans omnia : [nee
leguntur talia in Deo quasi in libro ;
sed viso Deo, si vult, producit Deus
cognitionem rei illius vel istius.] —
[Gabr.] Biel. Suppl. in IV. Sent, [per
Wendelinum Stambachum ejus audi-
torem collectum,] D[istinct.] xlix.
Q[u£e9t.] iii. propos 3. [fol. cclxxi.
col. 3. ed. Paris. 1521.]

*> For if reason well put to its
search did not find this out, how came
Aristotle to affirm this by rational
disquisition ? Xeiizerai Se tov vovu
\^fj.6vov dvpaOev iireiauvai Kol Qilov eluai
(x6voV ovdiv yap avrov rrj eccp^eioi
Koivcuve^ aoofiaTiK^ ivepyeia.^ Restat,
ut mens sola extrinsecus accedat,
eaque sola divina sit, nihil enim cum
ejus actione communicat actio corpo-
ralis. — Aristot. de generatione anima-
lium, lib. ii. cap. 3. [Op., torn. v.
p. 248. ed. Bekker.] This cannot be
spoken of the soul, were it mortal.
And therefore I must needs be of
Paulus Benius's opinion, who says
plainly, and proves it too, Turpiter
affixam a quibusdam Aristoteli mor-
talitatis animje opinionem. — [Pauli]
Benii [Eugubini] in Timaeum Platonis
Decad[es tres,] Decad. Prima3, lib.
iii. [p. 126. ed. Romte, 1594.]

•^ For if reason did not dictate this
also, whence is it that Aristotle dis-

putes of the way and means of attain-
ing it? Lib. i. Moral, cap. 9. [Tt
oiiv Kai\v€i Keyeiv ev5alfx.nva tov kut'
aper^v nAe'iav iv^pyovvTa, koI toIs
e/CTOs ayaQcils iKavSis Kexopriy7)fj.evoy,
fxT] TOV tvxnvTa xpovou, aWa reAeiou
^iov ; y) irpocrOiTeov, kuI Piuaofxeuoi/
ovTccs, KCi} TeAeuTTjcrovTa Kara, \6yov ;
— Aristot. Ethic. Nicomach. lib. i.
cap. 9. Op., torn. ix. p. 18. ed. Bekker.]
And takes on him to prove, That
felicity is rather an honourable
than a commendable thing, cap. 12.

[tU>V hpisTUV OVK iffTLV 'iTTaiVOS

ouSeis Tr)v iv^aifxoviav iiratveT 6

/Xiv yoLp ivaivos tt/s aperrjs iarlv

7] evSai/xovia tSiv Tifxloov Kol reXeicoV —
ibid. p. 20 ] And after all this, he adds,
Deo beata tota vita est, hominibua
autem eatenus, quatenus similitudo
qufedam ejusmodi opcrationis ipsis
in est. — Aristot. lib. x. Moral, cap. 8.
[■}) rod dfov ifipyna fiaKapioTrjTi
Siacpfpovffa Qicop-qriK)) hv eir]' ical riav
dvdpanrivoov St) &j/ e^rj r/ tout)? avy-

yev€<TrdTr) fi)SaiixoviKWTa,Trj toTs

fxev ydp deois divas 6 ^ios fiandpios'
ro7s S' avBpcoirois, i(p' '6crov o/xoioo/xd
Ti T7)s TOiauTris ivepyeias virdpxei' —
Aristot. Ethic. Nicomach. lib. x.
cap. 8. Op., tom. ix. p. 212.]

■^ Ultima beatitudo hominis con-
si.stit in quadam supernaturali Dei
visione, ad quam quidem visionem
homo pertingere non potest, nisi per
modum addiscentis a Deo doctore,
[secundum illud Joannis, vi. 45.]
Omnis qui audivit a Patre et didieit
[venit ad Me.] — Thom. [Aquin.]
Secund. Secund. Q[uoest.] ii. A[rt.] 3.
in conclus.

128 This Revelation in SS. (8.) Various Evidences of it.

Conference an end," ^ and help there can be none sufficient but by reve-

WITH
FiSHEK.

hition ; and once grant me that revelation is necessary, and
then I will appeal to reason itself, and that shall prove
abundantly one of these two : That either there was never
any such revelation of this kind from the world's beginning
to this day — and that will put the frustra upon God in point
of man's felicity; — or, that the Scriptures which we now
embrace as the word of God is that revelation. And that is
it we Christians labour to make good against all atheism,
profaneness and infidelity.
(8.) Last of all. To prove that the book of God, which we

honour as His Avord, is this necessary revelation of God and
His truth, which must, and is alone able to, lead us in the
way to our eternal blessedness, or else the world hath none,
comes in a cloud of witnesses ; some for the infidel, and some
for the believer ; some for the weak in faith, and some for
the strong, and some for all. For then first comes in the
tradition of the Church — the present Church, so it is no
heretical or schismatical belief ; then the testimony of former
ages, so it is no new belief; then the consent of times, so it
is no divided or partial belief; then the harmony of the
2 Tet. i. 16. prophets, and them fulfilled, so it is not a " devised " but a
forespoken belief; then the success of the doctrine contained
in this book, so it is not a belief stifled in the cradle, l)iit it
hath spread through the world in despite of what the world
could do against it, and increased from weak and unlikely
beginnings to incredible greatness ; then the constancy of
this truth, so it is no moon-belief, for in the midst of the
world's changes, it hath preserved its creed entire through
many generations ; then, that there is nothing carnal in the
doctrine, so it is a chaste belief. And all along it hath
gained, kept, and exercised more power upon the minds of
men, both learned and unlearned, in the increase of virtue
and repression of vice, than any moral philosophy or legal
policy that ever was. Then comes the inward light and
excellency of the text itself, and so it is no dark or dazzling

^ Deus et natura nihil frustra autem est quod non potest habere

faciunt. [b Se Qeos koI t) (piffis ox'iSiv suum usum. — Thom. [Aquin.] ibid.

fidrriv irotovcTiv.] — Aristot. de Coelo, [i. e. in Aristot. lib. de Coelo et

lib. i. cap. 32. [cap. 4. in fin. Op., Mundo, Lect. viii. p. 18. apud torn. ii.

torn. ii. p. 219. cd. Bekkcr.]— Frustra Op., S.Thom. Aquin. ed. A^enet. 1595.]

Infallible Assivrance, through grace, the result of their united force. 129

belief. And it is an excellent text : for see the riches of Section
natural knowledge which are stored up there as well as _L_

supernatural. Consider how things quite above reason con-
sent with things reasonable. Weigh it well what majesty-
lies there hid under humility : what depth ^ there is with a
perspicuity unimitable : what '' delight " ^ it works in the
soul that is devoutly exercised in it : how the sublimest
wits find in it enough to amaze them, while the simplest
want not enough to direct them : ^ and then we shall not
wonder, if, — with the assistance of God^s Spirit, ' Who alone
works faith and belief of the Scriptiu^es and their divine
authority, as well as other articles, — we grow up into a most
infallible assurance ; such an assurance as hath made many
lay down their lives for this truth : such as that, " though
an angel from heaven should preach unto us another Gospel,^' Gal. i. 8.
we would not believe him or it. No, though we should see
as great and as many miracles done over again to dissuade
us from it, as were at first to win the world to it. To which
firmness of assent, by the operation of God's Spirit, the will
confers as much or more strength, than the understanding
clearness ; the whole assent being an act of faith, and not of
knowledge. And therefore the question should not have
been asked of me by F. " How I knew ?" but, " Upon what
motives I did believe Scripture to be the word of God?'^
And I would have him take heed lest hunting too close after

f [Divinus enim sermo . . . . habet cap. 17. [Op., torn. i. col. 698. F.] —

in publico imde parvulos nutriat : Sed nihil sub spiritual! sensu conti-

servat in secreto unde mentes sub- netur fidei nece.ssarium, quod Scrip-

limium in admiratione su.spendat.] tura per literalem sensum alicubi

Quasi quidam [quippe] est fluvius, manifeste non tradat. — Thorn. [Aquin.

[ut ita dixerim,] planus et altus, in Summ.] par. 1. Q[uaest.] i. A[rt.] 10.

quo et agnus ambulet, et elephas Kesp. ad l">'^i.

natet. — S. Gregor. [Magn. Epistola,] ' [Sic ecclesite auctoritas potest

Preefat. in Lib. Moral, [scil. Expos, in nos prime commovere, ut scripturas

libr. Job.] cap. 4. [Op., torn. i. col. 5. agnoscamus : postea vero cum scrip-

E. ed. Benedict.] turas ipsi legimus ac intelligimus,

B In Lege Domini voluntas ejus. — tum veram fidem concipimus et]

Psa. i. 2. — Dulcior super mel et favum. credimus [quidem, non quia ecclesia

— Psa. xviii. 11. et passim. credendum esse judicat, sed cum]

*" [Sed quia] multa dicuntur sub- ob alia multa certiora argumenta

missis et humi repentibus animis (quam est testimonium ecclesias), tum

accommodatius, ut per humana in propter hoc potissimum, quod Spiri-

divina consurgant ; multa etiam figu- tus Sanctus nobis intus has esse Dei

rate, ut studiosa mens et quresitis voces persuadeat. — Whitaker, Con-

exerceatur utilius, et uberius Isetetur trov. de Sacra Scriptura, Controvers. 1.

inventis. — S. Augustin. de Moribus [de Scripturae auctoritate,] Q[u8est.]

Eccl. Cathol. [et Manich. lib. i.] iii. cap. 8. [Op., torn. i. p. 325. col. 2.]

VOL. II. — LAUD. K

1 30 (9.) Such Assurance is of Faith. — Subject treated for edification.

(9.)

Conference a way of knowledge, lie lose the way of faithj and teach other
Fisher, men to lose it too.

So then the way lies thvis, as far as it appears to me. The
credit of Scripture to he divine, resolves finally into that
faith which we have touching God Himself, and in the same
order. For as that, so this, hath three main grounds, to which
all other are reducible. The first is, the tradition of the
Chui'ch : and this leads us to a reverend persuasion of it.
The second is, the light of Nature : and this shows us how
necessary such a revealed learning is, and that no other way
it can be had.^ Nay more, that all proofs brought against
any point of faith, neither are nor can be demonstrations but
soluble arguments. The third is, The light of the Text itself:
in conversing wherewith, we meet with the Spirit of God*
inwardly inclining our hearts, and sealing the full assui'ance
of the sufiiciency of all three unto us. And then, and not
before, we are certain that the Scripture is the word of God,
both by divine and by infallible proof. But our certainty is
by faith, and so voluntary ; not by knowledge of such prin-
ciples as in the light of nature can enforce assent, whether
we vnW or no.

I have said thus much upon this great occasion, because
this argument is so much pressed without due respect to
Scriptui-e. And I have proceeded in a synthetical way, to
build up the truth for the benefit of the Church, and the
satisfaction of all men Christianly disposed. "Whereas, had
I desired only to rid my hands of these captious Jesuits, — for
certainly this question was captiously asked, — it had been
sufficient to have restored the question, thus, " How do you
A.C. p.53. ]^now the testimonv of the Church (bv which, you say, you

"Ft vid " *•'»'

Sect. xvi. know Scripture to be the word of God) to be divine and
No. 28. infallible ?" If they prove it by Scripture, as all of them do,
p. 106.] and as A. C. doth, how do they know that Scriptiu'e to be

'' Cum fides infallibili vcritati in- Deum illuminantem. — S. Augustin.

nitatur : ct idee cum impossibile sit cont. Fund. cap. 14. [His words are :

de vero demonstrari contvarium : se- Eos sequamur, qui nos invitant prius

quitur omnes probationes, qua; contra credere, quod nondum valemus in-

fidem inducuntur, non posse esse tueri, ut, ipsa fide valentiores facti,

demonstrationes, scd soUibilia argn- quod crcdimus intcUigere mereamur,

menta. — Thom. [Aquin. Summ.] non jam hominibus, sed ipso Deo

part. 1. Q[u0est.] i. A[rt.] 8. in intrinsecus mentem nostram illumi-

conclus. nante atque firmante. — Op., torn. viii.

' Fidei ultima resohitio est in col. 160. E. ubi sup. p. 87. note *'.]

Scripture, an assumed principle to Christian men. 131

Scripture ? It is but a circular assurance of theirs^ by -vvliicb Section
they found the Churches infallibility upon the testimony of " '
the Scripture, and the Scripture's infallibility upon the testi-
mony of the Church : that is upon the matter, the Church's
infallibility upon the Church's infallibility. But I labour
for edification, not for destruction. And now, by what I
have here said I will weigh my answer, and his exception
taken against it.

Jp. The 2B. said, That the books of Scripture are prin- [A.C.p.40.]
ciples to be supposed, and needed not to be proved.

25. Why, but did I say that this principle, — the books of § 17.
Scripture are the word of God, — is to be supposed as needing
no proof at all to a natural man ? or to a man newly entering
upon the faith ? yea, or perhaps to a doubter, or weakling in
the faith ? Can you think me so weak ? It seems you do.
But sure I know there is a great deal of difference between
ethnics that deny and deride the Scripture and men that are
born in the Church. The first have a farther way about to
this principle; the other in their very Christian education
suck it in, and are taught so soon as they are apt to learn it,
that the books, commonly called the Bible or Scripture, are
the word of God. And I dealt with you as with a Christian,"^
though in error, while you call Catholic. The words before
spoken by me were, " That the Scripture only, not any
unwritten tradition, was the foundation of faith." The
question between us and you is, "Whether the Scripture do
contain all necessary things of faith ? " Now in this ques-
tion, as in all nature and art, the subject, the Scripture, is
and must be supposed : '^ the query between the Roman
Catholics and the Church of England being only of the pre-
dicate, the thing uttered of it, namely, whether it contain all
fundamentals of faith, all necessaries for salvation within it ?
Now since the question, proposed in very form of art, proves
not, but supposes, the subject,° I think I gave a satisfying

"> Dixi sicut ei congruebat, ad quem evidenter verum, siippositis Scriptu-

scribebam. — S. Augustin. Eetractat. ris. — Bellarm. de Eccl. Milit. lib. iv.

lib. i. cap. 13. [Op., torn. i. col. 20. E.] [i. e. de notis Ecclesiae,] cap. 3. § 3.

" Nor is it such a strange thing to [Op., torn. ii. col. 167. C.]

hear that Scripture is such a supposed ° I)e subjecto enim quferitur sem-

principle among Christians. Quod a per ; non subjectum ipsnm.
Scriptura evidenter deducitur, est

132 77*6- Jesuit's objection, That to assume Scrijiture as a Prcpcognitum,

Conference auswer, That to yovi and mc^ and in this question, Scripture
fTsiier ^^^^ ^ supposed principle, and needed no proof. And I must

tell you, that in this question of the Scripture's perfect conti-
nent, it is against all art, yea, and equity too, in reasoning
to call for a proof of that here, which must go unavoidably sup-
posed in this question. And if any man will be so familiar with
impiety to question it, it must be tried in a preceding question
and dispute by itself. Yet here not you only, but BellarmineP
and others, run quite out of the way to snatch at advantage.

[A.C.p 50.] 5p. Against this I read what I had formerly written in

'[to...A.C.] my reply against' M. John White : wherein I plainly

showed that this answer ^ was not good, and that no

other answer could be made, but by admitting some

word of God unwritten to assure us of this point.

* [The Chaplain saith, That somebody told him, " that the 13. untied the
knot:" But why dofh not the Chaplain tell how he did untie the knot"? It
seemeth the knot was not po well untied, when the Jesuit had a reply so ready,
as is insinuated, by his only going again and reading in the book which he had
so rudely written. Although a ^jrcecor/H2YM??i in faith need not be so clearly
known as a prcecogniium in science, yet there must be this proportion, that as
priminn jtrcecogiutum, the first thing foreknown in a science, must he jrri7no
cofjnitu77i, first known, and must not need another thing pertaining to that
science to be ^v?'n« cognituni, known before it ; so if in faith the Scriptures be
the first and only foundation, and consequently the first thing known, p^imum
])rcecogmttnn, it must be in faith primo cognituni, first known, and must not
need any other thing pertaining to faith to be ^jrjw-s cognitum, known before
it. And so Church-tradition, which is one thing pertaining to faith, could
not, as the Chaplain saith it is, and as indeed it is, be known first, and be an
introduction to the knowledge of Scripture. Moreover, like as sciences which
suppose a principle proved in a higher science, cannot have certainty of that
principle, but either by having seen that principle evidently proved by other
principles borrowed of that higher science, or by giving credit to some that
have seen, or have by succession received it from others that have seen it
evidently so proved : so faith cannot have certainty of her first principles, but
either by seeing proof from the knowledge of the Blessed, which ordinarily no
man now seeth, or by giving credit immediately to some who have seen, as to
Christ Who clearly saw, or to the Apostles to whom clear revelation, — I say, clear
in atfestaide, — was made, or by giving credit to others who by succession have
had it from the first seers. In which last case, the certainty of these principles
can be no greater than is the authority of* that succession. If it be merel}'
human and fallible, the science and Avitli is human and fallible. Neither can
any science or faith be divine and infallible, unless the authority of that suc-
cession be at least in some sort divine and infallible.

The Chaplain therefore, who, as it seemeth. Mill not admit Church-tradition
to be in any sort divine and infallible, while it doth introduce the belief of
Scriptures to be divine books, cannot sufficiently defend the faith introduced
of that point to be infallible, unless he admit an infallible impulsion of the
private spirit ex ^irtr^cm^yVcit, without any infallible suSiciently applied reason
ex parte objecti, which he seemeth not, nor hath reason, to do : for this were

p Quarto, necesse est [nosse, extare posset. — Bellarmin.] de verbo Dei,
libros aliquos vere divines, quod lib. i v. cap. 4 [Op., tom.i. col. 175. B.]
certe nullo modo ex Scripturis haberi And the Jesuit here, apud A. C. p. 49.

implies the infallible Authority of some umvritten Word, of no force. 1 33

to open the gap to enthusiasms of all upstart Anabaptists, and would take Section
away due proportion of object and subject, and the sweet order of things which XVIII.

Divine Providence hath appointed. It may be that if he would but consider the L

tradition of the Church, not only as of a company of fallible men, in which sort
the authority of it is but human and fallible, but also as it is the tradition of a
company which, by its own light, sheweth itself to be assisted by Christ and His
Holy Spirit, far more clearly than Scripture, by its own light, doth shew itself
to be the infallible Word of C4od ; he would find no difficulty in that respect to
account the authority of Church-tradition to be infallible, and consequently not
only able to be an introduction, but also an infallible motive reason, or at least
condition ex imrte ohjecti, to make both itself, and the books of Scripture,
appear infallibly, though obscurely, to our soul, disposed and illuminated by
God's Spirit, to have in them divine and infallible authority, and to be worthy of
divine and infallible credit, sufficient to breed in us divine and infallible faith.

Neither do I see why the Chaplain may not consider the tradition of the
present Church these two ways, as well as the present Scriptures printed and
approved by men of this age. For if the Scriptures, printed and approved by
men of this age, must be considered not only as printed and approved by men,
in regard the credit given to them thus considered can be no more than
human, but also as printed, and, by authority of men assisted by God's Spirit,
approved to be true copies of that which was first written by the Holy Ghost's
penmen, before we can give infallible credit unto them, I see no reason why
the like twofold consideration of the tradition of the present Church may not
be admitted ; especially when as the promise of Christ and His Holy Spirit's
continual presence and assistance (Luke x. 16 ; Matt, xxviii. 19, 20 ; John
xiv. 16,) was made no less, but rather more, expressly to the Apostles and their
successors, the lawl'ully-sent pastors and doctors of the Church in all ages, in
their teaching by word of mouth, than in writing, or reading, or printing, or
approving copies of what was formerly written by the Apostles.

Perhaps the Chaplain will ask me, how I know that any Church, or company
of men of this age, or any age since the Apostles, have the promise of Christ
and His Holy Spirit's assistance l I answer that I know it both by tradition
and Scripture, considered in the twofold manner aforesaid, both which, without
any vicious circle, mutually confirm the authority of each other, as a king's
ambassador's word of mouth, and his king's letter, bear mutual witness of each
other. And I do not want other both outward and inward arguments, or
motives of credibility, which are sufficient not only to confirm the faith of
believers, but also to persuade well-disposed infidels, that both the one and the
other wei'e sent from God ; and that one is the infallible Word of God,
speaking in and by His legates, the lawfully-sent preachers of the Church ; the
other, the infallible Word of God, speaking in and by His letters, the holy
Scriptures, which He hath appointed His said legates to deliver and expound
unto us, and which among other things do warrant that we may hear and give
credit to these legates of Christ, as to Christ the King Himself. — A. C. marg.
note to p. 50.]

2B. I. — Indeed here you read out of a book, wliicli you § 18.
called your own, a large discourse upon this argument. But
surely I so untied the knot of the argument that I set you
to your book again. For yourself confess that against this
you read what you had formerly written. Well, whatever
you read there, certain it is you do a great deal of wrong to
M. Hooker i and myself, that, because we call it a supposed
or presumed principle among Christians, you should fall by
and by into such a metaphysical discourse ^ to prove, that

<i [Eccl. Polit.] Book iii. chap. viii. that in the controversies between you

[Sect. 14. ubi sup. p. 103.] and us: [Agendum est enim non de

Whereas BcUarminc says expressly, stillicidiis et fundis, non dc rebus

134 Prcecognita of Religion not so evident as those of Sciences.

Conference tliat wliicli is a j)raiCognitum,^ foreknoTni in science^ must be of
Fisher sucli light that it must be known of and by itself alone ; and

that the Scripture cannot be so known to be the word of God.

II. — I will not now enter again into that discourse^ lia\ing

said enough alread}', how far the beam, which is very glorious,

especially in some parts of Scripture, gives light to prove

itself. You see, neither Hooker, nor I, nor the Church of

England, for aught I know, leave the Scripture alone to

manifest itself by the light which it hath in itself. No ; but

when the present Church hath prepared and led the way,

like a preparing morning light to sunshine, then, indeed, we

settle for om' direction, but not upon the first opening of the

morning light, but upon the sun itself. Nor will I make

needless inquiry how far, and in what manner, a pr(RCognitumy

or supposed principle in any science, may be proved in a

J [foi'-- • • higher, to which that is subordinate or accepted in' a prime :
Editt.1673, , .^ . ,. . .^ - I, ^ .

and 1686.] nor how it may m divinity, where pr<2- as well as post-cogmta,

things fore-, as well as after, -known, are matters, and under

the manner of faith, and not of science strictly : nor whether

a prcECognitum, a pre-supposed principle in faith, which rests

upon di\ine authority, must needs have as much and equal

light to natural reason, as prime principles have in nature,

while they rest upon reason : nor whether it may justly be

denied to have sufficient light because not equal. Your own

school grants, '-'That in us, which are the subjects both of

faith and knowledge, and in regard of the evidence given in

unto us, there is less light, less e\idence in the principles of

faith, than in the principles of knowledge, upon which there

can be no doubt." ^ But I think the school will never grant

levibus, quEe parum refert, utrum mune principium ab omnibuss con-
sic an aliter so habeant :] non de cessum, undo argumenta ducantur :
metaphysicis subtilitatibus, qna3 sine [denique esse gladium spiritualem,
pcriculo ignorari, et interduni etiam qui in boc eertamine recusari non
cum laude oppugnari possunt, &c. — possit.] — Bellarmin. Praefat. Operibua
Bollarm. Prsefat. Operibus prefix. § 3. prtefix. § ult. [Op., torn, i.] And
[Op., torn, i.] if it be commune 2'>i'incipium ab
» [Porro] his omnibus quECstionibus omnibus concessum, then I hope it
proemittcnda erit, [quasi magnum must be taken as a thing supposed, or
quoddam prooemium,] controversia de as a j)r(Bcognitum, in this dispute be-
verbo Dei. Neque cnim disputari twecn us.

potest, nisi prius in aliquo communi ' Colligituraperte ex Thorn. [Aquin.

principio cum adversariis convenia- Summ.] par. 1. Q[u£est.] i. A[rt.] 5.

mus : convenit autem inter nos et [Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod

omnes omnino hrereticos, verbum Dei nihil prohibet id, quod est certius

esse regulam fidei, ex qua do dog- secundum naturam, esse quoad nos

matibus judicandum sit : esse com- minus certum, propter debilitatem

In what sense Scripture was said to be a Prcscognitum. 135

that the principles of faitli, even this in question^ have not Section
sufficient evidence. And you ought not to do^ as you did,
without any distinction^ or any limitation^ denj a, pracognitum,
or prime principle in the faith, because it answers not in all
things to the prime principles in science, in their light and
evidence ; — a thing in itself directly against reason.

III. — Well, though I do none of this, yet first I must tell
you that A. C. here steps in again, and tells me, " That though
n pr<scognitum in faith need not be so clearly known as aprce-
cognitum in science, yet there must be this proportion between
them, that, whether it be in science or in faith, the praecog-
nitum, or thing supposed as known, must be prius cognitum,
first known, and not need another thing pertaining to that
faitli or knowledge to be known before it. But the Scripture,
saith he, needs tradition to go before it, and introduce the
knowledge of it. Therefore the Scripture is not to be sup-
posed as a prcECognitum, and a thing fore-known.^' Truly
I am sorry to see in a man very learned such wilful mistakes.
For A. C. cannot but perceive, by that which I have clearly
laid down before," that I intended not to speak precisely of a
pr(BCognitum in this argument : but when I said, " Scriptures
were principles to be supposed," I did not, I could not, intend,
they were prius cognitce, known before tradition ; since I
confess everywhere that tradition introduces the knowledge
of them. But my meaning is plain — that the Scriptures are
and must be principles supposed, before you can dispute this
question, " Whether the Scriptures contain in them all things
necessary to salvation." ^ Before which question it must

intellectus nostri. . . .TJnde dubitatio, ^ And my immediate words in the

qu« accidit in aliquibus circa articulos Conference, upon whicli tlie Jesuit

fidei, non est propter incertitudinem asked, How I knew Scripture to be

rei, sed propter debilitatem intellectus Scripture ? were (as the Jesuit himself

humani : et tamen minimum, quod relates it, apud A. C. p. 48.) " That

potest haberi de cognitione rerum the Scripture only, not any unwritten

altissimarum, desiderabilius est, quam tradition, was the foundation of our

certissima cognitio quaj habetur de faith." Now the Scripture cannot be

minimis rebus.] — [Tametsi enim] the only foundation of faith, if it con-

articulorum fidei Veritas non potest tain not all things necessary to salva-

nobis esse evidens absolute, [tamen tion; which the Church of Rome,

potest esse evidens ex hypothesi, id denying against all antiquity, makes

est, supposita veritate Scripturarum.] it now become a question. And in

— Bellarmin. de notis Ecclesite, lib. iv. regard of this, my answer was, That

cap. 3. § 2. [Op., torn. ii. col. 167. C] the Scriptures are and must be

"^ Sect. xvii. xviii. No. 2. [ubi sup. principles supposed, and pracognitce,

p. 131, and p. 134.] before the handling of this question.

136 The Prcecognitum of the Divine Authority of SS. not self-evident,
Conference necessarily be supposed and granted on both sides, that the

WITH

Fisher

^^"" Scriptures are the word of God. For if they be not, it is

instantly out of all question, that they cannot include all
necessaries to salvation. So it is a prrecognitum, not to tra-
dition, as A. C. would cunningly put upon the cause, but to
the whole question of the Scriptures' sufficiency. And yet if
he could tie me to a prcecognitum in this very question, and
provable in a superior science, I think I shall go very near
to prove it in the next paragraph, and entreat A. C. to confess
it too.

IV. — And now having told A. C. this, I must secondly
folloAv him a little farther. For I would fain make it appear as
plainly as in such a difficulty it can be made, what wrong he
doth truth and himself in this case. And it is the common
fault of them all. For when the Protestants answer to this
argument — which, as I have showed, can properly have no
place in the question between us about tradition — they^
which grant this as a prcecognitum, a thing foreknown — as
also I do — were neither ignorant nor forgetful that things
presupposed, as ah'eady knoAvn, in a science, are of two sorts :
for either they are plain and fully manifest in their own
light ; or they are proved and granted already, some former
knowledge having made them evident. This principle then
— the Scriptures are the oracles of God — we cannot say is
clear, and fully manifest to all men simply, and in self-light,
for the reasons before given. Yet Ave say, after tradition
hath been om' introduction, the soul that hath but ordinary
grace added to reason, may discern light sufficient to resolve
our faith that the sun is there. This principle, then, being
not absolutely and simply e\ddcnt in itself, is presumed to
be taught us otherwise. And if otherwise, then it must be
taught in and by some superior science, to which Theology is
subordinate. Now men may be apt to think, out of reverence,
that Divinity can have no science above it. But yoiu* own
school teaches me that it hath. " The sacred doctrine of
Divinity in this sort is a science, because it proceeds out of
principles that are known by the light of a superior know-
ledge, which is the knowledge of God and the blessed in

y Hooker, [Eccl. Polit.] Book iii. chap. viii. [Sect. 14. ubi sup. p. 103, and
p. 133.]

but proved by a higher knowledge in the Divine Mind Itself.

137

heaven."^ In this superior science tliis principle — tlie Scrip-
tures are the oracles of God — is more than evident in full
light. This superior science delivered this principle in full
revealed light to the Prophets and Apostles : this infallible
light of this principle made their authority derivatively
divine :* by the same divine authority they wrote, and delivered
the Scriptiu'e to the Church: therefore from them immediately
the Church received the Scripture^ and that uncorrupt,
though not in the same clearness of Hght which they had.
And yetj since no sufficient reason hath [been], or can be,

Section
XVIII.

^ [Respondeo dicendum,] Sacram
doctrinam esse scientiam. Sed scien-
dum est, quod duplex est scientiarum
genus. Qua3dam enim sunt, quas pro-
cedunt ex principiis notis lumine
natural! intellectus, sicut Arithmetica,
Geometria, et hujusmodi. Qucedam
vero sunt, quae procedunt ex princi-
piis notis lumine superioris scientite :
sicut perspectiva procedit ex princi-
piis notificatis per geometri.am, et
musicaex principiis per arithmeticam
notis. Et] hoc modo sacra doctrina
est scientia ; quia procedit ex princi-
piis notis lumine superioris scientise,
quEe scilicet est scientia Dei et beato-
rum. [Unde sicut musica credit prin-
cipia tradita sibi ab arithmetico, ita
doctrina sacra credit principia revelata
sibi a Deo.] — Thom. [Aquin. Sunim.]
par.l. Q[u0est.] i. A[rt.] 2. — And what
says A. C. now to this of Aquinas]
Is it not clear in him that this prin-
ciple, The Scriptures are the word of
God, of divine and most infallible
credit, is a 2jrcecogHitum in the know-
ledge of Divinity, and provable in a
superior science, namely, the know-
ledge of God and the blessed in hea-
ven 1 Yea, so clear, that, as I told you
he would, A. C. confesses it, p. 51. But
he adds : " That because no man ordi-
narily sees this jiroof, therefore we
must go either to Christ, Who saw it
clearly ; or to the Apostles, to whom it
was clearly revealed ; or to them who
by succession received it from the
prime seers." So now because Christ
is ascended, and the Apostles gone
into the number of the blessed, and
made in a higher degree partakers of
their knowledge ; therefore we must
now only go unto their successors, and
borrow light from the tradition of the
present Church. For that we must
do ; and it is so far well. But that
we must " rely upon this tradition, as

divine and infallible, and able to
breed in us divine and infallible faith,"
as A. C. adds, pp. 51, 52, is a propo-
sition, which, in the times of the pri-
mitive Church, would have been ac-
counted very dangerous, as indeed it
is. For I would fain know why lean-
ing too much upon tradition may not
mislead Christians, as well as it did
the Jews. But they, saith S. Hilary,
[Ipse respondit, omnem plantationem,
quaj non a Patre sit, eradicandam
dicens, id est,] traditionem [hominum
eruendam,] cujus favore legis prsecepta
transgressi sunt. — [S. Hilar.] Canon,
xiv. in S. Matth. [xv. 13. (al. Com-
ment, in S. Matth. cap. xiv. 1.) Op.,
col. 685. A. ed. Benedict.]— Yet to
this height are they of Eome now
grown, that the traditions of the pre-
sent Chuixh are infallible : and by
out-facing the truth, lead many after
them. And as it is, Jer. v. 31, "The
prophets prophesy untruths, and the
priests receive gifts, and My people
delight therein : what will become of
this in the end ? "

'-^ [Ad secundum, quod Deus non
creditur esse auctor hujus scientiaj,
nisi quia homo hoc testificatuv : dicen-
dum quod] non creditur Deus esse
auctor hujus scientife, quia homines
hoc testati sint in quantum homines
nudo testimonio humano, sed in
quantum circa eos efliilsit virtus
divina, et ita Deus eis, et sibi ipsi
in eis, testimonium perhibuit. [Quod
autem credimus posterioribus circa
quos non apparent virtutes divinae,
hoc est quia non prsedicant alia
quam qua3 illi in scriptis certissi-
mis reliquerunt, quee constat per
medios in nuUo fuisse vitiata ex
consensione concordi in eis omnium
succedentium usque ad tompora nos-
tra.] — Henr. a Gand. Summ. p[ar.] i.
A[rt.] ix. Q[ua\st.] 3. [§. 13. p. 180.]

138 Case of Jews parallel to that of Christians.

Conference given, tliat in any substantial tiling it hatli been corrupted,''
Fisher ^* remains firm at tins day, and that proved in the most
supreme science ; and therefore now to be supposed, at least
by all Christians, that the Scripture is the word of God.
So my answer is good, even in strictness^ that this principle
is to be supposed in this dispute.

V. — Besides, the Jews never had, nor can have, any other
proof that the Old Testament is the word of God, than we
have of the New. For theirs Avas delivered by Moses and the
Prophets, and ours was delivered by the Apostles, which were
Prophets too. The Jews did believe their Scripture by a

John ix.29. Divine authority; for so the Jcavs argue themselves: "We
know that God spake with Moses. ^' And that, therefore,
they could no more err in following Moses, than they could
in following God Himself. "^ And our Saviour seems to infer

John V. 47. as'rauch, w here He expostulates with the Jews thus : " If you
believe not Moses his Avritings, how should you believe Me ?"
NoAV how did the Jews know that God spake to Moses ?
How ? why, apparently the same way that is before set down.
First, By tradition. So S. Chrysostom : "We know why:
By whose witness do you know ? By the testimony of our
ancestors.^^ "^ But he speaks not of their immediate ancestors,
but their prime, which were Prophets, and whose testimony
was divine ; into which, namely their writings, the Jews did
resolve their faith. And even that Scripture of the Old

2Pet.i. 19, Testament was a " light,'' and a " shining light " too; and,
therefore, could not but be sufficient Avhcn tradition had gone
before. And yet, though the Jcavs entered this way to their
belief of the Scripture, they do not say, " Audivimus, We
have heard that God spake to Moses," but, " We know it." ^

^ Corrumpi non possuDt, quia in Joann. ix. [29. Scire se Mosi, quem

manibus sunt omnium Christianorum ipsi prajceptorem sequantur, locutum

. . . (piisquis [enim] hoc primitus ausus esse Deum;] itaque non magis crrare

esset, multorum codicum vetustiorum posse eum sequentes, quam si Deura

coUationc confutaretur : maximc, c^uia Ipsum sequerentur.

non una linjfua, sed multis, [cadem] •■ [S. Chrysostom.] Horn. Ivii. in

Scriptura contincretur. [Nam etiam S. Johann. ix. [29. Hom. Iviii. Op.,

nunc] nonnuilaj autem codicum men- torn. viii. p. 340. C] Tifxtls olSanev [on

dositates, vel dc antiquioribus, vel de MoDcret AeAdAT/zcef o deos'] tIvos flnov-

lingua pra^cedente, emeudantur.— S. tos; rivos anayyeiAavTos ; rHv irpoyo-

Augustin. lib. xxxii. cont. Faustum, voiv, di-nal, rwv ■tifj.erep'jii'.

c. 16. [Op., torn. viii. col. 459. D. ubi '^ S. Chrysostom. ubi supra : koI oCk

.sup. p. 106. note ''.] eiirav, 'ijixela ■fiicovffap.^v, [on Moiire? Ae-

<^ Maldonat[us, Comment.] in S. AaKtjKd' 6 eeos,] a\\' oti ol'Sa/xer.

The Witness of the Church, a sufficient practical Assurance. 139

So they resolved their faith higher, and into a more inward Section

XIX.

principle, than an ear to their immediate ancestors and their
tradition. And I would willingly learn of you, if you can
show it me, wherever any one Jew, disputing with another
about their Law, did put the other to prove that the Old
Testament was the word of God. But they still supposed it.
And when others put them to their proof, this way they went.
And yet you say :

5r, That no other answer could be made, but by admitting [A.C.p.51.]
some word of God unwritten, to assure us of this
point.

%. I. — I think I have showed that my answer is good, and § 19.
that no other answer need be made. If there were need,
I make no question but another answer might be made to
assure us of this point, though we did not admit of any
word of God unwritten. I say, to assure us ; and you express
no more. If you had said, '' to assure us by Divine faith,"
your argument had been the stronger. But if you speak of
assurance only in the general, I must then tell you — and it
is the great advantage which the Church of Christ hath
against infidels — a man may be assured, nay infallibly assured,
by ecclesiastical and human proof. Men that never saw
Rome, may be sure and infallibly believe that such a city
there is, by historical and acquired faith. And if consent of
human story can assure me this, why should not consent of
Church story assure me the other, that Christ and His Apostles
delivered this body of Scripture as the oracles of God? For
Jews, enemies to Christ, they bear witness to the Old Testa-
ment; and Christians, through almost all nations, give in
evidence to both Old and New.^ And no Pagan, or other

' [Consequetur namque omnium [Tu in] eos libros, [qui,] quoquo modo
literarum summa perversio, et om- sehabent, sancti tamen divinarum-
nium qui memoriae mandati sunt li- [que] rerumpleni, propetotius generis
brorum abolitio, si quod tanta popu- humani confessione difFamantur, [sine
lorum religione roboratum est,] tanta duce irruis, et de his sine prteceptore
hominum et temporum consensione audes ferre sententiam.] — S.Augustin.
firmatum, [in banc dubitationem ad- de util. credendi, cap. vii. [Op., torn,
ducitur, ut ne historise quidem vulga- viii. col. 56. B.] — Et, [Sibylla porro, vel
ris fidem possit gravitatemque obti- Sibyllaj, et Orpheus, et nescio quis
nere.] — S. Augustin. lib. de moribus Hermes, et si qui alii vates, vel theo-
Eccles. Cathol. [et Manich. lib. i.] logi, vel sapientes, vel philosophi gen-
cap. 29. [Op., tom. i. col. 707. F.]— tium, de Filio Dei vera preedixisse.

140 Yet this Assurance of itself is not Divine Faith.

Conference enemies of Christianity, can give sucli a worthy and consent-
Ji'l'' inff testimony for any authority upon which they rely, or

almost for any principle which they have, as the Scripture

hath gained to itself. And as is the testimony, which it
receives, above all " writings of all nations," » so here is assur-
ance in a great measure, without any divine authority, in a
Avord written or unwritten. A great assurance, and it is
infallible too; only then we must distinguish infallibility.
For, first, a thing may be presented as an infallible object of
belief, when it is true and remains so : for truth, qua talis,
as it is truth, cannot deceive. Secondly, a thing is said to
be infaUible, when it is not only true, and remains so, actually,
but Avlien it is of such invariable constancy, and upon such
ground, as that no degree of falsehood at any time, in any
respect, can fall upon it._ Certain it is that by human autho-
rity, consent, and proof, a man may be assured infallibly that
the Scripture is the word of God, by an acquired habit of
faith, cui non subest falsum, " under which nor error nor false-
hood is :" but he cannot be assured infallibly by divine faith,
cui suhesse non potest falsum, " into which no falsehood can
come," but by a di\dne testimony.'' This testimony is absolute
in Scripture itself, delivered by the Apostles for the word of
God, and so sealed to our soids by the operation of the Holy
Ghost. That which makes way for this, as an introduction
and outward motive,* is the tradition of the present Church ;
but that neither simply divine, nor sufficient alone into
which we may resolve our faith, but only as is before'' ex-
pressed.

ECU dixisse, perhibentur, valet quidem S. Augustin. de civitate Dei, lili. xi.

aliquid ad paganorum vanitatein re- cap. 1. [Op., torn. vii. col. 271. D.]

vincendam, non tamen ad istorum •• Incertum [ergo] esse non potest hos

auctoritatem amplcctendam ; cum il- esse libros canonicos, [et habere pon-

lum Dcum nos colere ostendimus, de dus aucloritatis siiaj, quibus Ecclesia

quo nee illi tacerc potuerunt, (pii suos declaiata per omnes gentes, et ab

congentiles populos idola et dremonia apostolis propagata, testimonium cer-

coleuda partim doeerc ausi sunt, turn reddit.]— [Thom. Walden.s. Doc-

partim prohibere ausi non sunt. — trinal. Fidei, torn. i. lib. 2. art. ii. cap.

S. Augustin.] contra Faustum, lib. xiii. 20. No. 3. fol. 102. col. 1. ed. Paris,

cap. 15. [Op.,tom. viii. col.260. A.B.] 15.32.]

s [Civitatem Dei dicimus, cujus ea ' Canus, Loc. Theolog. lib. ii. cap. 8.

Scriptura testis est, qua; non fortuitis facit Ecclesiam causam sine qua non.

motibus animorum, scd plane summa? [His words are : Non est enini Eccle-

dispositioneprovidentia;,] super omncs sitB auctoritas ratio per se prorsus ad

omnium gentium literas, [omnia sibi credendum, sed causa sine qua non

genera ingeniorum humanorum di- crederemus. — P. 59. ed. Lovan. 1560.]

vina excellcus auctoritatc subjecit.] — ^ Sect. xvi. [No. 6. ubi sup. p. 77.]

Something beside the Tradition of the present Church necessary. 141

11. — And now to come close to the particular. Tlie time Section
was, before this miserable rent in the Church of Christ — ^^^'
which I think no true Christian can look upon but with a
bleeding heart — that you and we were all of one belief. That
belief was tainted, in tract and corruption of times, very
deeply. A division was made, yet so that both parts held the
Creed, and other common principles of belief. Of these this
was one of the greatest, " That the Scripture is the word of
God :" 1 for our belief of all things contained in it depends
upon it. Since this division there hath been nothing done
by us to discredit this principle. Nay, we have given it all
honour, and ascribed unto it more sufficiency, even to the
" containing of all things necessary to salvation,^^ with satis
super que, "^^ enough and more than enough : which yourselves
have not done, do not. And for begetting and settling a
belief of this principle, we go the same way with you, and
a better besides. The same way with you ; because we allow
the tradition of the present Church to be the first inducing
motive to embrace this principle : only we cannot go so far in
this way as you, to make the present tradition always an
infallible word of God unwritten ; for this is to go so far in,
till you be out of the way. For tradition is but a lane in the
Church : it hath an end, not only to receive us in, but
another after, to let us out into more open and richer ground.
And we go a better way than you ; because after we are
moved, and prepared, and induced by tradition, we resolve
our faith into that written word, and God delivering it : in
which we find materially, though not in terms, the very
tradition that led us thither. And so we are sure by divine
authority that we are in the way, because at the end we find
the way proved. And do what can be done, you can never
settle the faith of man about this great principle, till you rise
to greater assurance than the present Church alone can give.

' Sic in alia causa, [sc. de definitione tautummodo anima?] — De moribus

hominis,] S. Augustiaus [his verbis : Eccl. Cathol. [et Manichseor. lib. i.]

sc. lUud est magis quod mihi hoc loco cap. 4. [Op., torn, i. col. 689. F.]
quajrendum videtur, cum] inter omnes '" [Cum sit perfectus scripturarum

pene constat, aut ccrte, id quod satis canon, sibique ad omnia satis superque

est, inter me atque illos cum quibus sufficiat, quid opus est, ut ei ecclesias-

nunc agitur hoc conveniat, [ex anima ticEe intelligenti^ejungaturauctoritas]

et corpore nos esse compositos, quid Quia videlicet &c.1— Vin. Lirinens.

est ipse homo, utrumque horum qua3 contra Hseres. cap. ii. [p. 5.]
nominavi, an corpus tautummodo, an

142 The Divinity of SS. presupposed in the R. C. Controversy.

Conference And therefore once again to that knoAvn place of S. Angustine."
Fisher. ^^^^ woi'ds of the Father are. Nisi comtnoveret, " unless the
authority of the Chureh moved me ;" but not alone, but with
other motives : else it were not commovere, " to move together."
And the other motives are resolvers, though this be leader.
Now, since we go the same way with you, so far as you go
right ; and a better way than you, where you go wrong ; Ave
need not admit any other word of God than we do. And this
ought to remain as a pre-supposed principle among all Clu-is-
tians, and not so much as come into this question, about the
sufficiency of Scripture, between you and us. But you say
that

[A.C.p.53.] ^. From this the Lady called* us, and desiring to hear,

whether the 2B. would grant the Roman Church to be
the right Church, the 23. granted that it was.

§ 20. 25. I. — One occasion, which moved Tertullian to write his
book de Prcescript. adversus Hcsreticos, was, that he saw

* [The Chaplain saith : " Afs it is true that this question was asked, so it is
false, that it was asked in this form, or so answered." I answer that the Jesuit
doth not say that the Lady asked this question in this, or any other precise,
form of words, but only saith she was desirous to hear whether the 13. would
grant the Roman Church to he the right Church : which to have been her
desire the Jesuit is sure, as having particularly spoken with her before, and
wished her to insist upon this point.

Secondly, he is sure, that she did not propound the question in that precise
form, insinuated by the Chaplain, viz. Whether the Roman be a true Church;
as if she meant to be satisfied with hearing the 33. say that the Roman Church
is a true Church, and the Greek Church another, and the Protestant another.
This, I say, could not be her question, for that she was persuaded that all these
were not right and true, and that there was but one Holj' Catholic Church ;
and her desire was to hear whether the 13. would grant the Roman Church, not
only that which is in the city or diocese of Rome, but all that are agreed with
it, to be it ?

Thirdly, what precise form of words the Lady did use, the Jesuit did not
remember perfectly, and therefore did not adventure to set down ; but by the
13. 's answer, which he perfectly remembered, and so set down in these words,
" It was," he thinketh that her question was. Whether the Roman Church was
not the right Church ? viz. once, or in time past, before Luther and others
made a breach from it? To which question so uttered, or so understood, as it
seems by the answer, and the ensuing discourse made by the 13. it was understood,
the 13. might truly, and certainly did, answer, as is related ; to wit, not " It is,"
but " It was," viz. once, or in time past, the right Church. For so the Chaplain
doth here confess, p. 37, " The time was, &c. that you and we were all of one
belief." Out of which answer it may be that the 13. suspected that the Lady
would infer; If once it were the right, what hindereth it now to be? since it
did not depart from the Protestant Church, but the Protestant Church departed
from it. And therefore, as in the text, he was willing to grant that the Pro-
testants made a rent or division from it, &c. — A. C. marg. note to p. 53.]

Contr. Epist. Fund. cap. v. [ubi sup. p. 93. note i.]

The Church of Rome a (not the) True Church, not a Right Church. 143

little or no profit come by disputations." Sure tlie ground Skction
was the same then and now. It was not to deny that dispu- ^^'
tation is an opening of the understandings a sifting out of
truth : it was not to afl&rm that any such disquisition is in
and of itself unprofitable. If it had, S. Stephen would not Acts vi. 9.
have disputed with the Cyrenians, nor S.Paul with the Acts ix. 29.
Grecians, first; and then with the Jews and all comers. No Actsxix.
sure : it was some abuse in the disputants that frustrated ^^"
the good of the disputation. And one abuse in the disputants
is " a resolution to hold their own, though it be by unworthy
means, and disparagement of truth.^' p And so I find it here :
for as it is true that this question was asked, so it is alto-
gether false that it was asked in this form, or so answered, i
There is a great deal of difference, especially as Romanists
handle the question of the Church, between the Church and
a Church ; and there is some between a true Church and
a right Church, which is the word you use, but no man else
that I know : I am sure not I.

II. — For ''the Church^' may import in our language "the
only true Church ;" and, perhaps, as some of you seem to make
it, " the root and the ground of the Catholic.^^ And this I
never did grant of the Roman Church, nor ever mean to do.
But " a Church " can imply no more than that it is a member
of the whole. And this I never did nor ever will deny, if it
fall not absolutely away from Christ. That it is a "true
Church," I granted also ; but not a " right," as you impose
upon me. For ew5 and verum, "being" and "true," are con-
vertible one with another; and every thing that hath a
being is truly that being which it is, in truth of substance.
But this word "right" is not so used, but is referred
more properly to perfection in conditions : and in this sense
every thing that hath a true and real being is not, by and by,
right in the conditions of it. A man that is most dishonest,

" [Adversus htereticos sive Lsereses argutias conjectam. — Senec. Epist.

turn temporis grassantes scripturus xlviii. [Op., p. 258. ed. Paris. 1607.]
Tertullianus,] videns disputationibus i Here A. C. hath nothing to say,

nihil aut parum profici. —Pamelius in but that the Jesuit did not affirm,

Summario, [praefixo] lib. [Tertullian. " That the Lady asked this question

de prsescript. adversus haeretic. Op., in this or any other precise form."

p. 233. ed. Pamelii, Colon. 1617.] No 1 Why, the words preceding are the

_ p [Hoc tibi, cum voles, manifestis- Jesuit's own. Therefore, if these were

simum faciam, et comminui et] debi- not the Lady's words, he wrongs her,

litari generosam indolem, in istaa not I him.

144 A Church which receives SS. and Sacraments, a True Church.

Conference and unworthy the name — a very thief, if you will — is a true
Fisher, man in the verity of his essence, as he is a creature endued
with reason ; for this none can steal from him, nor he from
himself, but death: but he is not therefore a right or an
upright man. And a Church that is exceeding corrupt, both
in manners and doctrine, and so a dishonour to the name,
is yet a true Chiu'ch in the verity of essence ; as a Church is
a company of men which profess the faith of Christ, and are
baptized into His name : but yet it is not therefore a " right"
Chm'ch, either in doctrine or manners. It may be you meant
cunningly to slip in this Avord "right,'^ that I might at
unawares grant it orthodox. But I was not so to be caught ;
for I know well that orthodox Christians are "keepers of
integrity, and followers of right things" (so S. Augustine '"),
of which the Church of Rome at this day is neither. In
this sense, then, no ''right," that is, no " orthodox" Church
at Rome.

III. — And 3'et no news it is, that I granted the Roman
Church to be a true Church. For so much very learned
Protestants have acknowledged before me, and the truth
cannot deny it.^ For that Church which receives the Scrip-
ture as a rule of faith, though but as a partial and imperfect
rule, and both the sacraments as instrumental causes and
seals of grace, though they add more and misuse these, yet
cannot but be a true Church in essence. How it is in manners
and doctrine, I would you would look to it with a single eye ;

•■ [Quae cum ita sint, neque in con- negant, quia papatus in ea est, [quam

fusione paganorum, neque in purga- ii qui papatum affirmant Ecclesiam

mentis hEereticorum,neque in languore ipsam esse.] — Junius, de Ecclesia, lib.

schismaticorum, neque in coecitate [singular.] cap. xvii. [de Ecclesia Ro-

Judteorum, quserenda est religio, sed mana. Op., torn. ii. col. 1020. ed. Ge-

apud eos solos, qui Christiani, catho- nev. 1613.]— And Rej-nolds, Thes. v.

lici, velorthodoxi nominantur, id est,] negat tantum [Romanam ecclesiam]

integri talis custodes,et recta sectantes. esse Catholicam, vel sanum membrum

— [S. Augu.stin. lib.] de vera religione, [Catholicre.] — [Johan. Rainoldi Sex

cap. V. [Op., torn. i. col. 751. D.] Theses de SS. et Ecclesia : Thes. v. in

s ["Notwithstanding, so far as law- tit. p. 123. cd. Lond. 1602.] Nay, the
fully we may,we have held, and do hold, very Separatists grant it: Fr. John-
fellowship with them,(of the Church of son, in his treatise called, A Chris-
Rome,) ... touching those main parts tian Plea, printed 1617, p. 123, &c.
of Christian truth wherein they con- [" IIow can we soundly defend and
stantly persist, we gladly acknowledge retain the visible baptism received in
them to be of the family of Jesus the Church of Rome .... if we do not
Christ," &c.] — Hooker, Eccl. Polit. accordingly acknowledge the Church
B. iii. Ch. i. [Sect. 2. Works, vol. i. of Rome to be a visible Church and
p. 438. cd. Keble.] — [Ita etiam] fallun- the people of God ... a visible Church,
tur [utrique, tum] qui ecclesiam esse I say,though miserably corrupted, &c."

Wfiether' the Churches in communion with Rome are the Cafh. Church ? 115

"for if piety and a peaceable mind be not joined to a good Section
understanding, nothing can be known in these great things/

^n ^^•

IV. — Here A. C. tells us, "That the Jesuit doth not say A. C. p. 53.
that the Lady asked this question in this or any other precise
form of words ; but saith, the Jesuit is sure her desire was
to know of me, whether I would grant the Koman Church
to be the right Church ? " And how was the Jesuit sure the
Lady desired to hear this from me ? Why, A. C. tells us
that too : for he adds, " That the Jesuit had particularly A. C. p. 54.
spoken with her before, and wished her to insist upon that
point." Where you may see, and it is fit the Clergy of
England should consider with what cunning adversaries they
have to deal, who can find a way to prepare their disciples,
and instruct them beforehand upon what points to insist,"
that so they may with more ease slide that into their hearts
and consciences, which should never come there. And this
once known, I hope they will the better provide against it.
But A. C. goes on, and tells us, "That certainly by myA. C. p. 54.
answer, the Lady's desire must needs be to hear from me,
not whether the Church of Rome were a right Church, &c. ;
but whether I would grant that there is but one Holy Catholic
Church, and whether the Eoman Church — that is, not only
that which is in the city or diocese of Rome, but all that
agreed with it — be not it." About " a Church," and " the
Church," I have said enough before,'' and shall not repeat.
Nor is there any need I should; for A. C. would have it
" The Church, the one, holy, Cathohc Church." But this
cannot be granted, take the Roman Church in what sense
they please, in city, or diocese, or all that agree with it.
Yet, howsoever, before I leave this, I must acquaint the
reader with a perfect Jesuitism. In all the primitive times
of the Church, a man, or a family, or a national Church,

A Christian Plea conteyning three potest. — S.Augustin. lib. de util. cred.

Treatises. 1. The first touching the cap. xviii. [Op., torn. viii. col. 70. D.]

Anabaptists, and others mainteyning " And after A. C. saith again, p. 54,

some like errors with them, &c. Made " that the Lady did not ask the ques-

by Francis Johnson, Pastour of the tion, as if she meant to be satisfied

auncient English Church now sojourn- with hearing what I said," so belike

ing at Amsterdam in the Lowe Coun- they take caution beforehand for that

treyes. (No place ) Printed in the too, that whatever we say, unless we

year of our Lord, 1617.] grant what they would have, their

' Si tameu bono ingenio pietas et proselytes shall not be satisfied with

pax quaidam mentis accedat, sine qua it.

de tantis rebus nihil prorsus intelligi " Sect. xx. No. 1. [ubi sup. p. 143.]

VOL. ir. — LAUD. L

146 The Church of Rome, in one sense, was,

Conference were accounted right and orthodox, as they agreed with the
fTs"er. Catliolic Church ; but the Cathohc was never then measured
or judged by man, family, or nation. But now, in the
Jesuit^s new school, the one Holy Catholic Cluu'ch ^ must be
measured by that Avhich is in the city or diocese of Rome,
or of them which agreed with it, and not Rome by the
Cathohc. For so A. C. says expressly, " The Lady would
know of me, not whether that were the Catholic Chiu'ch to
wliicli Rome agreed, but whether that were not the Holy
Catliolic Church, which agreed with Rome." So upon the
matter, belike the Christian faith was committed to the cus-
tody of the Roman, not of the Cathohc, Church ; and a man
cannot agree with the Catholic Church of Christ, in this neAv
doctrine of A. C, unless he agree with the Church of Rome :
but if he agree with that, all is safe, and he is as orthodox
as he need be.

V. — But A. C. is yet troubled about the form of the Lady's
question : and he will not have it, " That she desired to
know, whether I would grant the Roman Chui'ch to be the
right Church ? '' though these be her Avords, according to the

A.C. p. 54. Jesuit's own setting down; but he thinks the question Avas,
" Whether the Church of Rome was not the right Church ?"
Not " be not," but " was not." " Was not ?■" that is, " was
not once or in time past the right Church, before Luther
and others made a breach from it?" Why truly A. C. need
not have troubled himself half so much about this. For

y And though Stapleton, to magnify legates, Caldonius and Fortunatus,

the Church of Rome, is pleased to say, not to bring the Catholic Church to

[Sola Komana Ecclesia adeo est catho- the communion of Rome, hut Rome

lica, ut] apud veteres pro codem ha- to the Catholic Church : [Quod servis

bita fuerit Romana Ecclesia, [fides, Dei et maxime saccrdotibus justis et

societas,] et catholica ecclesia, [fides, pacificis congruebat, frater carissime,

socictas :] yet he is so modest as to miseramus nuper collegas nostros Cal-

givc this reason of it : [Obtinuit au- donium et Forlunatum, ut non tantum

t(!m apud veteres hie loqucndi modus, persuasionc literarum nostrarum, sod

non quia solius urbis aut dicecesis praj.sentia sua et consilio omnium

Romanic populus ecclcsiam catholicam vestrum enitcrentur, quantum possent,

constituit, (estenimparticularisetpars et] elaboravent, ut ad catholicas eccle-

catholicsB,) sed] quia ejus communio sins unitatem scissi corporis membra

erat evideuter et certissime cum tola componcrent, [et Christianee caritatis

[ecclesia] catholica. — Relect. Controv. vinculo copularent.] Now the mem-

[Controv.] 1. [de ecclesia in se,] bers of this rent and torn body were

Q'usest.] V. A[rt.] 3. [Op., tom. i. they of Rome, then in an open schism

p. 594. B. C] Lo, the communion between Cornelius and Novatian. —

of the Roman was then with the Ca- S. Cyprian, lib. ii. Epist. 10. [ad Cor-

tholicChurch, not of the Catholic with nelium, Epist. xlii. Op., p. 56. ed.

it. And S. Cyprian employed his Benedict.]

and, in one sense, was not, a " Right Church" before the Reformation. 147

let liim take Ms clioice : it shall be all one to me^ Avlietlier
the question were asked by "be," or by "was." For the
Church of Rome neither " is " nor " was " the right Church,
as the Lady desired to hear. A particular Church it is, and
was, and in some times right, and in some times wrong ; and
then in some things right, and in some things MTong : but
" the right Church," or " the Holy Catholic Church," it never
was, nor ever can be; and, therefore, was not such before
Luther and others either left it, or were thrust from it.
A "particular" Church it was; but then A. C. is not distinct
enough here neither. For the Chiu'ch of Rome both was,
and was not, a " right" or orthodox Church, before Luther
made a breach from it. For the word ante, " before," may
look upon Rome and that Church a great way off, or long
before ; and then in the prime times of it, it was a most
"right" and orthodox Church. But it may look also nearer
home, and upon the immediate times before Luther, or some
ages before that ; and then in those times Rome was a cor-
rupt and a tainted Church, far from being right.^ And yet

Section
XX.

^ Cum infiniti abusus, schismata
quoque et hsereses, per totum nunc
Christianum orbem invalescant, Eccle-
siam Dei legitima indigcre rcforma-
tione nemini iion apertum erit. — Petri
de Alliaco, Card Cameracensis, lib.
[tractat.] de lleformatione Ecclesise,
[oblat. in Concil. Constant, an. 141|.
apud J. Gerson. Op., torn. ii. col. 903, et
seqq. ed. Dupin. Antw. 1 706. The above
words do not occur in tliis Tract as
printed in Gerson's work : they are to be
found, in an editorial Conclusion, by 0.
Gratius, apud Fasciculum rerum expe-
tendarum ac fugiendarum, per Orthui-
num Gratium collect, fol. cciii. — ccviii.
ed. Colon. 1535. Similar expressions
occur throughout the Tract itself:
Summopere vigilandum est circa re-
formationem ecclesiaj. — col. 904. A.
apud Gerson. — Propter defectum ce-
lebrationis couciliorum, Ecclesia in
diversa schismata et alia innumerabilia
mala, forte etiam ad heereses disponen-
tia, proh dolor ! lapsa sit, sicut expe-
rientia doeet. — Ibid. col. 905. B. —
Eeformatio totius corporis Ecclesise, et
pai'ticularis ecclesiae ilomanse, est de
arduis pertinentibus "ad hdem : nam
ejus generalis deforniatio non medio-
criter fidem tangit, et per consequens
ejus reformatio. — Ibid. D.] And if
schisms and heresies did then invade
the whole Christian world, let A. C.

consider how Rome escaped free. And
1 think Cameracensis was in this pro-
phetical. For sixty years and more
before Luther was born, and so before
the great troubles which have since
fallen upon all Christendom, he used
these words in the book which himself
delivered up in the Council of Con-
stance : [Hcec autem Deus misericor-
dissimus, qui solus ex mails bona
novit elicere, ideo permittere creden-
dus est, ut eorum occasione Ecclesia
sua in melius reformetur. Quod] nisi
celeriter fiat, audeo dicere quod licet
magna sint quae videmus, tamen brevi
incomparabiliter majora videbimus, et
post ista tonitrua tarn horrenda, alia
[horribiliora in proximo] audiemus. —
[Ibid. col. 905. A.] And it will hardly
sink into any man's judgment that so
great a man as Pet. de Alliaco was in
that Church, should speak thus, if he
did not see some errors in the doctrine
of that Church, as well as in manners.
Nay, Cassander, though he lived and
died in the communion of the Church
of Eome, yet found fault with some
of her doctrines. Consultat. Artie,
xxi. xxii. [De cultu Sanctorum . . .
in quibus omnibus hand leves abusus
et supcrstitiones irrepsisse negari non
potest. — P. 964. — Alter error est quod
homines .... imico illo advocationis
Christi officio obscurato, sanctos atque

148 Tlie Ch, of Rome though it ivere once right has noiv embraced Error.

Conference both tliesc times before Luther made his breach. So here
p7"" a. C. should have been more distinet. For the word

X* Ibxi fiK.

" before " includes the whole time before Luther, in part of

which time that Church of Rome was right, and in other

A. C. p. 54. part whereof it was wrong. But A. C, adds yet, " That I
suspected the Lady would infer, if once that Chui'ch were
right, what hindered it now to be? since that did not
depart from the Protestant Chui'ch,but the Protestant Church
from it." Truly, I neither suspected the inference would
be made, nor fear it when it is made. For it is no news that
any particular Church, E-oman as well as another, may once
have been right, and afterwards wrong, and in far worse case.

Matt. xiii. And SO it was in Rome after " the enemy had sowed tares
among the wheat." But whether these tares were sown
while theii' Bishops slept, or whether they themselves'^ did
not help to sow them, is too large a disquisition for this
place. So though it were once right, yet the tares which
grow thick in it, are the cause why it is not so now. And
then, though that Church did not depart from the Protest-
ants' Church, yet if it gave great and just cause for the
Protestant Church to depart from the errors of it, while it in

imprimis Virgincm Matrem in Illius popes are examined at full.] Et papas

locum substituerunt. — P. 970. Andiu quosdam graves errores seminasse iu

the following sections on the venera- ccclesia Christi luce clarius est. Et

tion of Relics, pp. 972, 973; the cul- probaturaJacob.Almain.Opusc.deAuc-

tus of Images, pp. 974 — 981; the toritat. Ecclesise.cap.lO, [of which the

administration of the Eucharist under conclusion is : Ex his manifesto sequi-

both kinds, &c. pp.981 — 984; Ex- tur, Papam non solum errore pcrsonali,

treme Unction, pp. 985, 986. Op., sed et errore judicial! errare posse in

ed. Paris. 1616.] And Pope Julius materia fidei, sicut et in aliismateriis.

the Third professed at Bononia, [Con- — Tractat. de Auctoritat. Eccles. et

cilium interim Bononiam translatum, concil. general, adversus Thorn, de

paulo post suspensum, et mortuo Vio. apud Jo. Gerson. Op., tom. ii.

Paulo intermissnm, successor Julius col. 1005. A.] And Cassander speaks

III. redauspicatus est, Bononiai3 antea it out more plainly: [Quod autem Ber-

Sessione XI. palam professus,] in nardus addit : Hsec omnia in variam

Sacramentorum Ecclesiie ministerium transire superstitionem, in quam non

innumerabiles abusus irrepsisse. — inciderent, si rationi adorationis ac

[Claud.] Espenca3us in [Epist. ad] vcri cultus attenderent, aut, si igno-

Titum, cap. 1. [Op., p. 480. col. 2. rant, informationem humiliter acci-

A. ed. Paris. 1619 ] And yet he was perent, recte quidemdicitur: sod] uti-

one of the bishops, nay the chief nam illi (he speaks of the bishops and

legate, in the Council of Trent. rectors in the Koman Church), a quibus

" For A. C. knows well what strange hxc informatio aceipienda esset, non

doctrines are charged upon some ipsi harum supcrstitiouum auctores

popes. And all Bcllarmine's labour, cssent ; vel certe eas in animis homi-

though great and full of art, is not num simplicium aliquando quaistus

able to wash them clean. Bellarm. de causa nutrirent. — Cassand. Consultat.

Iiom. Pont. lib. iv. capp. 8— 14. [Op., Art. 21. [de imaginib.] versus fin.

tom. i. coll. 819—856. In these chap- [pp. 979, 980.]
ters the errors charged against several

Who are to blame for the present Division in the Church? 149

some particulars departed from the truth of Christ, it comes Section

all to one for this particular, that the Roman Church, which '

was once right, is now become wrong, by embracing super-
stition and error.

^. Farther he* confessed," That Protestants had made a. C. p. 55.
a rent and^ division from it. .... A. C]

A. C]

2 r
* [The Chaplain having told us that the 13. could be heartily angry, saith : . '-?f -
" The ^. never said nor thought, that Protestants made this rent. The cause ''
of the schism is yours, &c." I answer that the Jesuit is sure, that whatsoever
the 15. thought, which maybe was as the Chaplain now expresseth, to wit, that
we had given cause to the Protestants to do as they did : yet he did say, either
iisdem, or ceqxiipollentibus, verbis, just as is in the Relation. For the Jesuit
did in fresh memory take special notice of this passage in regard it concerned
a most important point, which, being urged by him in the first Conference
against D. White, in these words, " Why did you make a schism ft-om us %
Why do you persecute us ]" the Doctor slipped over that of the schism without
denying it to have been made by them, or laying the cause to us, and only
answered to the other, saying, " We do not persecute you for religion." The
Jesuit therefore, I say, did, as he had reason, take special notice in fresh
memory, and is sure he related, at least in sense, just as was uttered by the 13.
And I ask the Chaplain, what reason the 13. had to discourse so long as he
did, endeavouring to show what reason Protestants had to make that rent or
division, or, if he liked not these words, that discession, to use Calvin's phrase,
or departure, not only from the Church of Rome, but also as Calvin (lib. Epist.
Ep. 141.) confesseth, a toto mundo, from the whole world, if he had not, as the
Jesuit related, confessed that Protestants, being once members of the Roman
Church, separated themselves from it, as the world knows they did, when they
got the name of Protestants, for protesting against it. Now, for the Chaplain's
ascribing the cause of the schism to us, in that by excommunication we thrust
them from us, he must remember, that before this they had divided themselves
by obstinate holding and teaching opinions contrary to the Roman faith, and
practice of the Church, which in S. Bernard's judgment (Serm. de Resur.) is
most great pride. Qucb major su2^erhia, &c. What greater pride than that one
man, Luther for example, should prefer his judgment, not only before a
thousand Austins, and Cyprians, and King Harry-churches, but before the
whole congregation of all Christian churches in the world '] which in S. Austin's
judgment is most insolent madness : for contra id disjjutare See., to dispute
against that which the universal Church doth practice, is, saith S. Austin, most
insolent madness.

What then ] Is it, not only by way of doubtful disputation, but by solemn
and public protestation to condemn the general practice of the Church as
superstitious, and the doctrine as erroneous in faith, yea as heretical and even
Anti christian 1 All this considered, the 13. hath no cause "to be heartily
angry," either with your Jesuit for relating, or with himself for granting,
Protestants to have made a rent or division from the Roman Church, but might
with a safe conscience yet further grant, as one did, — was it not he? — to an
honourable person, " That it was ill done of those who did first make the
separation." Which is not true, both in regard there can be no just cause to
make a schism and division from the whole Church, for the whole Church
cannot universally err in doctrine of faith, and other just cause there is none.
And also for that those who first made the separation, (Luther and his
associates,) gave the first cause in manner aforesaid to the Roman Church to
excommunicate them, as by our Saviour's warrant she might, when they would
" not hear the Church," which did both at first seek to recall them from their
novel opinions, and after their breach did permit, yea invite them publicly
with safe conduct to Rome, to a General Council, and freely to speak what they
could for themselves. And I make no doubt, so far is the Roman Church
from being cause of continuance of the schisms, or hindrance of re-union, that
it would yet, if any hope may be given that Protestants will sincerely seek

1 50 The Protestants, as a ivhole, did not depart from Rome.

Conference nothing but truth and peace, give them a free hearing with most ample and

WITH safe conduct : which is more than even we English Catholics could obtiiin,

FisuER. although we have made otters divers times to come to public dispute; first in

Queen Elizabeth's days, and also in his Majesty's which now is, only requiring

the Prince's word for our safety, and equality of conditions of the dispute.
Unto which otter our adversaries never did, nor ever will, give good answer.
As one saith : Honestum re&ponsimi mUluni, dahiint prader unum quod nun-
quam dahunt ; Regina (Rex) spondet : Advola. — Camp, in rat. Acad, red —
A. C. marg. note to p. 55.]

§ 21. 2B. I. — I confess I could here be heartily angry,'' but that
I have resolved, in handhng matters of religion, to leave all
gall out of my ink ; for I never granted that the lloman
Church either is, or was, the right Church. It is too true
indeed, that there is a miserable rent in the Church, and
I make no question but the best men do most bemoan it ; "=
nor is he a Christian, that would not have unity, might he
have it with truth. But I never said, nor thought, " that the
Protestants made this rent." The cause of the schism is
yours : for you thrust us from you, because we called for
truth and redress of abuses. For a schism '^ must needs be
theirs, whose the cause of it is. The woe runs full out of
Matt.xviii. the mouth of Christ, ever against " him that gives the
' • offence ;" not against him that takes it, ever. But you have,

by this carriage, given me just cause, never to treat with you
or your like, but before a judge or a jury.
A.C. pp.55, II. — But here A. C. tells me, " I had no cause to be angrj^,
either with the Jesuit or myself. Not with the Jesuit, for he
writ down my words in fresh memory, and upon special notice

>> [Quamobrem vellem mihi isti docnerat ?] — Lucif. [Calaritan.] libello

dicerent, in quo genere ponant Ec- de non conveniendo cum hasreticis.

clesiae Catholica;, quem putant, crro- [Max. Bibl. Patrum, torn. iv. p. 222.

rem. Si in primo,] grave omnino E. ed. Lugd. 1677.] He speaks of the

crimen : sed defensionem longinquam Arians, and I shall not compare you

non requirit ; satis est enim negare with them, nor give any offence that

[ita nos intelligere, ut illi cum inve- way. I shall only draw the general

hnntur existimant :] sicut pro Ec- argument from it, thus : If the oi'tho-

clesia olim [argumentabatur], S. Au- dox did well in departing from the

gustinus, in lib. de util. credendi, cap. Arians, then the schism was to be

V. [Op., tom. viii. col. 53. A.] imputed to the Arians ; although

■^ [Quemadmodum ergo nobis in- the orthodox did not depart from

visibilcm, solius Dei conspicuam them. Otherwise if the orthodox had

Ecclesiam credere necessc est ; ita] been guilty of the schism, he could

banc, quae respectu hominum Ecclesia not have said, recte scias nos fecisse

dicitur, observare, ejusque communio- recedendo. For it cannot be that a man

nem colore debemus. — Calvin. Instit. should do well in making a schism,

[lib. iv.] cap. 1. [Op., tom. viii. p. 272.] There may be therefore a necessary

'' Recte [igitur] scias nos fccisse, separation, which yet incurs not the

recedendo a vobis [Deo odibilibus; blame of schism; and that is, when

quomodo ctcnim nos in coetu vestro doctrines arc taught contrary to the

omnibus facinoribus infccto mauere, Catholic faith,
et non vos pestes ac lues fugere

77^6 Jesuit quotes Laud unfairly. 151

taken of the passage, and that I did say either iisdem, or Section

cequipollentibus, verbis, 'either in these or equivalent words/

That the Protestants did make the rent or division from the

Roman Church/' What, did the Jesuit set down my words

in fresh memory, and upon special notice taken, and were

they so few as these, " The Protestants did make the

schism; '' and yet was his memory so short, that he cannot

tell, whether I uttered this iisdem, or cequipollentibus, verbis ?

Well, I would A. C. and his fellows would leave this art of A. C. p. 67.

theirs, and in Conferences, which they are so ready to call

for, impose no more upon other men than they utter. And

you may observe too, that after all this full assertion. That I

spake this iisdem, or cequipollentibus verbis, A, C. concludes

thus : " The Jesuit took special notice in fresh memory, and A. C. p. 55.

is sure he related, at least in sense, just as it was uttered."

What is this, ''at least in sense just as it was uttered?" Do

not these two interfere, and shew the Jesuit to be upon his

shuffling pace ? For if it were "just as it was uttered," then

it was in the very form of words too, not in " sense " only.

And if it were but "at least in sense," then when A. C. hath

made the most of it, it was not "just as it was uttered."

Besides, " at least in sense," doth not tell us in whose sense

it was. For if A. C. mean the Jesuit's sense of it, he may

make what sense he pleases of his own words ; but he must

impose no sense of his upon my words. But as he nnist

leave my words to myself, so when my words are uttered or

written, he must leave their sense either to me, or to that

genuine construction which an ingenuous reader can make

of them. And what my words of grant were, I have before

expressed, and their sense too.

III. — "Not with myself:" that is the next. For A. C. A.C.p.56.
says, " It is truth, and that the world knows it, that the
Protestants did depart from the Church of Rome, and got
the name of Protestants, by protesting against it." No,
A. C, by your leave, this is not truth neither ; and therefore
I had reason to be angry with myself, had I granted it.
For, first, the Protestants did not depart : for departure is
voluntary, so was not theirs. I say, not theirs, taking their
whole body and cause together. For that some among them
were peevish, and some iguorantly zealous, is neither to be

152 Sense in which the Reformation was a Protestation.

Conference doubtocl^ nor is tliere danger in confessing it. Your body is

WITH

FisiiEu. ^ot so perfect, I wot well, but that many amongst you are
as pettish, and as ignorantly zealous, as any of ours. You
must not suffer for these, nor we for those ; nor shoukl the
Chiu'ch of Christ for either. Next, the Protestants did not
get that name by protesting against the Church of Rome,
but by protesting (and that when nothing else would serve)
against her errors and superstitions.*^ Do you but remove
them from the Church of Rome, and our Protestation is
ended, and the separation too. Nor is Protestation itself
such an unheard of thing in the very heart of religion. For
the sacraments both of the Old and New Testaments are
called by your OAvn school, "visible signs protesting the faith,"
Now if the sacraments be protestantia, " signs protesting,"
why may not men also, and Avithout all offence, be called
Protestants, since by receiving the true sacraments, and by
refusing them which are corrupted, they do but protest the
sincerity of their faith against that doctrinal corruption, which
hath invaded the great sacrament of the Eucharist, and other
parts of religion ? Especially, since they are meu,^ which must
protest their faith by these visible signs and sacraments.

A. C. p. 56. IV. — But A. C. goes on, and Avill needs have it, that the
Protestants were the cause of the schism. '^ For," saitli he,
" though the Church of Rome did thrust them from her by
excommunication, yet they had first divided themselves by
obstinate holding and teaching opinions contrary to the
Roman faith, and practice of the Church; Avhicli to do,
S. Bernard thinks is pride, and S. Augustine madness."
So then, in his opinion, First, excommunication on their
part was not the prime cause of this division ; but the " hold-
ing and teaching of contrary opinions." Why, but then in

" Conventus ordinum Imperii Rpirai protestation, therefore, was not simply

celebratur. In quo decretum factum, against the Roman Church, but

ut Edict um 'Wormatiense observetur against the edict, which was for the

contra Novatorcs, {sic appdlarc restoring of all things to their former

plncidt), et ut omnia in integrum estate, without any reformation,

restituantur, {et sic nulla oiimino ' [NuUus autera sauctificari potest

reformatio.) Contra hoc Edictum post peccatum, nisi per Christum

[Elector Johannes et Landgravius et et ideo oportebat, ante Christi adven-

alii] die 16. Aprilis a. d. 1629, so- tumes.se qucedam signa invisibilia,]

lennitcr protcstantur : hinc ortum quibus homo fidem suam protesta-

pervulgatum illud Protcstantium rctur [de future Salvatoris advcntu.]

nomen. — Se[thi] Calvisii [opus] — Thom. [Aquin. Summ.] par. iii.

Chron[ologicum,] ad An. 1529. [pp. QFuEest.] Ixi. A[rt.] 3. [inrespons.l
920, 921. ed. Francof. 1685.] This

S. Beimard, by ''the whole Congregation^' means a particular Church. 153

my opinion, that " holding and teaching was '' not the prime Section
cause neither, but the corruptions and superstitions of Rome,

which forced many men to hold and teach the contrary. So
the prime cause was theirs stilL Secondly, A. C/s words
are very considerable. For he charges the Protestants to
be the authors of the schism, for "obstinate holding and
teaching contrary opinions." To what, 1 pray ? Why, to the
Roman faitli.^'' To the Roman faith ? It was wont to be the
Christian faith, to which contrary opinions were so dangerous
to the maintainers. But all is Roman now with A. C. and
the Jesuit. And then to countenance the business, S.
Bernard and S. Augustine are brought in; whereas neither
of them speak of the Roman, and S. Bernard perhaps
neither of the Catholic nor the Roman, but of a particular.
Church or congregation. Or if he speak of the Catholic, of
the Roman he certainly doth not. His words are, Quce
major superbia, ^c. " What greater pride, than that one man
should prefer his judgment before the whole congregation of
all the Christian churches in the world?" So A. C. as^ out » [as . . . .
of S. Bernard. But S. Bernard not so.^^ For these last "^'^^^
words, " of all the Christian churches in the world," are not 1673, and
in S. Bernard. And whether toti congregationi imply more
in that place than a particular Church, is not very manifest.
Nay, I think it is plain, that he speaks both of, and to, that
particular congregation, to wliich he was then preaching.
And I believe A. C. will not easily find where tota congre-
gratio, "the whole congregation," is used in S. Bernard, or
any other of the Fathers, for the whole Catholic Church of
Christ. And howsoever the meaning of S. Bernard be, it is

e I know Bellarmine, [de Eom. time, passes no deed of assurance that

Pont. lib. iv. cap. 4. § 3.] quotes it shall continue worthy of coni-

S. Jerome : Scito Romanam fidem, mendations among the Eomans

&c. [ul)i] supra. Sect. iii. N"o. 9. [p. 9. through all times,
note ^] But there S. Jerome doth *• [Hi sunt unitatis divisores, ini-

not call it Fidem Romanam, as if mici pacis, charitatis expertcs, vani-

Fides Romana and Fides Catholica tate tumentes, placentes sibi, et magni

'.were convertible; but he speaks of it in oculis suis, ignorantes Dei justi-

/In the concrete, Romana Fides, i. e. tiam, et sua volentes coustituere. Et]

Romanorum Fides, quaj laudata fuit quae major superbia, quam ut unus

ab Apostolo, &;c. Eom. i. 8. — S. homo toti congregationi judicium

Hieron. Apol. cont. Ruffin. lib. iii. suum prteferat ; tanquam ipse solus

[Op., torn. iv. par. ii. col. 449. ed. habeat spiritum Dei % [idololatrite

Benedict.] That is, that faith which scelus est non acquiescere, et quasi

was then at Rome when S. Paul com- peccatum ariolandi repugnarc.] — S.

mended it. But the Apostle's com- Bernard. Serm. iii. de Resurrect,

mending of it in the Eomans at one [fol. 35. col. 2. D. cd. Paris. 1551.]

lo4i S. Augustine spoke of the Catholic, not the Roman, Church.

Conference one tiling for a private man, judicium suum pra'ferre, to
FisuER. prefer and so follow his private judgment before the whole
congregation, which is indeed lepra proprii consilii, as
S. Bernard calls it, "theprond leprosy of the private spirit;"
and quite another thing for an intelligent man, and in some
things unsatisfied, modestly to propose his doubts even to
the Catholic Church. And much more may a whole national
Chu.rch, nay, the whole body of the Protestants, do it. And
for S. Augustine, the place alleged out of him is a known place ;
and he speaks indeed of the whole Catholic Church ; and
he says,' and he says it truly, " It is a part of most insolent
madness for any man to dispute, whether that be to be done,
which is usually done in, and through, the whole Catholic
Church of Christ." Where, first, here is not a word of the
Roman Church, but of that which is tota per orbem, " all
over the world," Catholic, which Rome never yet was.

A.G. p. 56. Secondly, A. C. applies this to the Roman faith, whereas
S. Augustine speaks there expressly of the rites and cere-
monies of the Church, and particularly about the manner
of offering upon Maundy-Thursday,'^ whether it be in the
morning, or after supper, or both. Thirdly, it is manifest
by the words themselves, that S. Augustine speaks of no
matter of faith there, Roman nor Catholic. For frequentat,
and faciendum, are for " things done, and to be done," ^ not

' [Prima ergo inquisitio tua, quam Epist. cxviii. cap. 5. [Epist. liv. scu,

in commonitorio tuo posuisti, ex quo ad inquisitiones Januarii, lib. i. Op.,

trium istorum generum sit, attende. torn. ii. col. 126. B.]

(iuicris enim his verbis : Quid per ^ Quaji'is quid per quintain feriam

quintam feriam ultimoe hebdomadis ultimse hebdomadis (iuadragesimae

Quadragesimaj fieri dcbeat, an offeren- fieri debeat, an ofFerendum sit mane 1

dum sit mane, et rursus post ccenam, &c. — S. Augustin. ibid,

propter illud quod dictum est, Sirni- ' And so Bellarmine most expressly.

liter postquam ccenatum est : an But then he adds, [Secunda regula

jejunandum, ct post ccenam tantum- est: Quando universa Ecclesia aliquid

modo ofl'ercnduni : an etiam jejunan- servat, quod nemo constituerc potuit,

dum, et post oblationem, sicut facere nisi Deus, quod tamen nusquam in-

solemus,coeuandum? Ad hocitaqueita venitur scriptum, necesse est dieere,

rcspondeo, ut quid horum sit faciou- ab ipso Cliristoet Apostolis ejus tradi-

dum, si divinaj ScriptursB prtescribit turn. Ratio est similis supcriori :

auctoritas, non sit dubitandum quin nam] Ecclesia universa non solum

ita facere debeamus ut legimus, ut non potest errarc in credendo, sed nee

jam non quomodo faciendum, sed in operando, ac praesertim in ritu et

quomodo sacramcntum intclligendum cultu divino : [recteque Augustinus

sit, disputemus.] Similiter etiam, si Epist. 118. &c.] — [Bellarniin.] do

quid horum tota per orbem frequentat verbo Dei, lib. iv. cap. 9. § 3. [Op.,

Ecclesia. Nam et hinc quin ita tom. i. col. 193. B.] And if this be

faciendum sit disputare, insolcn- true, what is it to Home ?
tissima; insania; est. — S. Augustin.

That the whole Church cannot err in doctrine, all grant, 155

for tilings believed, or to be believed. So here is not one Section
word for the Roman faitli in either of these places. And ^^^'
after this, I hope you will the less wonder at A. C.^s boldness.
Lastly, a right sober man may, without the least touch of
insolence or madness, dispute a business of religion with the
Roman either Church or prelate, (as all men know Irenteus
did with Victor,"") so it be with modesty, and for the finding
out or confirming of truth, free from vanity and purposed
opposition against even a particular church. But in any
other way to dispute the whole Catholic Church, is just that
which S. Augustine calls it, '' insolent madness."

V. — But now were it so, that the Church of Rome were
orthodox in all things, yet the faith, by the Jesuit's leave, is
not simply to be called the Roman, but the Christian and the
Catholic, faith. And yet A. C. will not understand this ; but A. C. p. 56.
Roman and Catholic, whether Church or faith, must be one
and the same mth him ; and therefore infers, " that there
can be no just cause to make a schism or division from the
whole Church : for the whole Church cannot universally
err in doctrine of faith." That the "whole Church" cannot
" universally " err in the doctrine of faith, is most true ; and
it is granted by divers Protestants : "^ so you will but under-

" [(pepovTai Se koI ai tovtoov (pojval, tempus terere, dum probant absolute

■nK7]KTiKa>ripov KaQairrofxivwv tov B'ucto- ecclesiam jion posse deficere ; nam]

pus' 4v oh Kal 6 Eip7]va7os . . . . tw ye Calvinus et CEeteri liaeretici id conce-

(xku B'lKTopi TTpoaTiKovTois, ois /u?/ aiTo- dunt : sed dicunt, intelligi debere de

KOTTToi uAas iKKArifflas ®eov apxaiov Ecclesia invisibili. — Bellarmin. de

edovs irapiifioaLV iinTiqpovcras, -rrXfTa-ra Ecel. milit. lib. iii. cap. 13. § 1. [Op.,

€Tepa irapaive'i, k. t A.] — Euseb. [Eccl. torn. ii. col. 145. D.] But tbis exception

Hist.] lib. V. cap. 24. [apud Hist. Eccl. of Bellarmine's, that the Protestants,

Script, torn. i. p. 245. ed. Reading.] whom, out of his liberality, ho calls

Et, [ecos o TTjs "Pw^jL-ris iTriaKotros BUrcop, heretics, speak of the invisible Church,

a/x^Tpa Bep/uavdels, aKOLvo}U7)aiav rols is merely frivolous. For the Church

4v TTj 'Aala Tea-ffapeaKaideKaTLTats of the elect is in the Church of them

a,iT€(TTeiKiV ecp' ^ yevofievo} Eipnvalos that are called, and the invisible

.... TOV Bt/fTopos 5i' eiriffToXyis yevvaiois Church in the visible. Therefore, if

KaT€dpufjL^i>, /xefx^afM^fos filu avrov tov the whole Church of the elect cannot

Gep/iiOTTiTa, K. T. A..]— Socrat. Hist. err in fundamentals, the whole visible

Eccl. lib. V. cap. 22. [ibid. torn. ii. Church, in which the same elect are,

p. 292.] cannot err. Now that the invisible

" Qusestio est, an Ecclesia totalis Church of the elect is in the visible,

totaliter considerata, i.e. pro omnibus is manifest out of S. Augustine : Ipsa

simul electis, dum sunt membra est Ecclesia quae intra sagenam

militantis Ecclesije, possint errare, Dominicam cum malis piscibus

vol in tota fide, vel in gravi aliquo natat, [a quibus corde semper et

fideipuncto^ Et respondemus simpli- moribus separatur atque discedit, ut

citer, id esse impossibile. — [Barthol.] exhibeatur viro suo gloriosa, non

Keckerm[an.] Syst. Theol. p. 387. habens maculam neque rugam.] — •

edit. Hannovioe, An. 1G02. — [Notan- S. Augustin. Epist. xlviii. [xciii.

dum autem est, multos ex nostris cap. 9. ad Viucentium Kogatistam;,

1 56 Separation from Rome justifiable when Rome separates from theFaith.

Conference stand its not erring in absolute fundamental doctrines. And

WITH

Fisher.

therefore it is true also^ that there can be no just cause

to make a schism from the whole Church. But here is the

Jesuit's cunning. The whole Churchy with him^ is the Roman,
and those parts of Christendom which subject themselves to
the Roman bishop. All other parts of Christendom are in
heresy and schism, and what A. C. pleases. Nay, soft ! For
another Church may separate from Rome, if Rome will
separate from Christ. And so far as it separates from Him
» [separate and the faith, so far may another Church sever' from it.

Edit.

1686.]

And this is all that the learned Protestants do or can say :
and I am sure all that ever the Chnrch of England hath either
said or done. And that the whole Church cannot err in
doctrines absolutely fundamental and necessary to all men's
salvation, — besides the authority of these Protestants, most
of them being of prime rank, — seems to me to be clear by the

Op., torn. ii. col. 245. D.] — [Et ipsa?
tribus sunt testimonium Israel, id est,
per illas agnoscitur, quia eraiit] grana
inter illam paleam, quando area,
cum viderctur, tota palea putabatur.
— S. Augustin. [Enarr.] in Psalmum
cxxi. [4. Op., torn. ii. col. 1390. A.]
And this is proved at large by Hooker,
["And as those everlasting promises
of love, mercy, and blessedness, belong
to the mystical Cliurch ; even so on
the other hand, when wc read of any
duty which the Church of God is
bound unto, the Church whom this
doth concern is a sensibly kno^vn
company. And this visible Church
in like sort is but one," &c. — Hooker,]
Eccl. Polit. Book iii. ch.l. [3. Works,
vol. i. p. 427. ed. Keble.] For else
the elect or invisible Church is tied
to no duty of Christianity. For all
such duties are required of the
Church, as it is visible, and per-
formed in the Church, as it is visible.
And Dr. Field speaks as plainly :
" [As therefore] we hold it impossible
the Church should ever by apostasy
and misbelief wholly depart from God,
[in proving whereof, Bellarmine (de
Eccl. mil. lib. iii. cap. 13.) confesseth
his fellows have taken much needless
pains, seeing no man of our profession
thiuketh any such thing;] so we hold
that it never falleth into any heresy.
So that he is as much to be blamed for
idle and needless busying himself in
proving, That the visible Church

never falleth into heresy, which we
most willingly grant." — Field, of the
Church. Book iv. chap. 2. [p. 345.
cd. Oxford. 1635.]— "Touching the
Church, as it comprehendeth only the
believers that now are, [and presently
live in the world, it is most certain]
and [agreed upon, that] in things
necessary to be known [and believed]
expressly [and distinctly, it never is
ignorant, much less doth err.]" —
[Field.] ibid. — And Bellarmine him-
self adds ; Calvinus [igitur] dicit
istam propositionem, Ecdema non
2)otest errare, esse veram, si intelliga-
tur cum duplici restrictione. Prima
est, si non proponat dogmata extra
Scripturam, &c. (And indeed Calvin
doth say so, lib. iv. cap. 8. § 13.)
Secunda [restrictio] est, si intelligatur
de sola Ecclesia universali, non autem
[extendatur ad episcopos, qui sunt
Ecclesia] reprsesentative, [ut nostri
loquuntur.] — Bellarmin. de Eccl.
milit. lib. iii. cap. 14. § 2, 3. [Op.,
tom. ii. col. 148. C] And I hope it is
as good, and a better, restriction in
Calvin, to say the Catholic Church
cannot err, if it keep to the Scripture ;
than for Bellarmine to say. The
particular Church of Pome cannot
err, because of the Pope's residing
there ; or the Pope cannot err, if he
keep his chair ; which yet he affirms.
— De Pom. Pont lib. iv. cap. 4. § 2.
[Op., tom. i. col. 812, A. ubi sup. p. 4.
note '.]

The whole Militant Church is holy in degree, 157

promise of Christ. " That the ffates of hell shall not prevail Section

... XXI
against it." Whereas most certain it is^ that the gates of

hell prevail very far against it, if the Avhole militant Church, Matt. xvi.
universally taken, can err from, or in, the foundation ; but
then this power of not erring is not to be conceived as if it
were in the Church, prima et per se, " originally or by any
power it hath of itself:" for the Church is constituted of
men, and humanum est errare, " all men can err." But this
power is in it, partly by the virtue of this promise of Christ :
and partly by the matter which it teacheth, which is the
unerring word of God, so plainly and manifestly delivered to
her, as that it is not possible she should universally fall from
it, or teach against it in things absolutely necessary to
salvation. Besides, it would be well weighed, whether to
believe or teach otherwdse, will not impeach the article of
the Creed concerning the " Holy Catholic Church," which we
profess we believe. For the Holy Catholic Church, there
spoken of, contains not only the whole militant Church on
earth, but the whole triumphant also in heaven. For so
S. Augustine ° hath long since taught me. Now if the
whole Catholic Church in this large extent be holy, then
certainly the whole militant Church is holy, as well as the
triumphant, though in a far lower degree ; inasmuch as all
sanctification, all holiness, is imperfect in this life,i' as well
in churches as in men. Holy then the whole militant
Church is. For that which the Apostle speaks of Abraham,
is true of the Church, which is a body collective made up of
the spiritual seed of Abraham : " If the root be holy, so Rom. xi.
are the branches." Well, then the whole militant Church is ^^'
holy ; and so we believe. Why, but will it not follow then,
that the whole militant Church cannot possibly err in the

" [Rectus itaque confessionis ordo cohaesit Deo, nee ullum malum sui

poseebat, ut Trinitati subjungeretur] casus experta est.] — S. Augustin.

Ecclesia, [tanquam habitatori domus Enchiridion, cap. Ivi. [Op., torn. vi.

sua, et Deo templum suum, et con- col. 217. D.]

ditori civitas sua. Quee] tota hie p [Nee quasi ex toto sanctus debet

accipienda est, non solum ex parte quis de altero judicare : quia scrip-

qua peregrinatur in terns, [a solis tum est in Evangelio, Christo dicente,

ortu usque ad occasum laudans Nolite judicare, &c. : maxime cum]

nonien Domini, et post captivitatem nemo ex toto sanctus [poterit inve-

vetustatis cantans canticum novum:] niri. — S.] Optat. [Milevit. de schism,

varum etiam ex ilia parte quee in Donatist.] contra Parmen. lib. vii.

coelis [semper, ex quo condita est, [cap. 2. Op., p. 103. ed. Dupin.]

158 and cannot err in the foundation of Faith.

Conference foundations of the fiiith ? That she may err in super-
wiTH struetiires and deductions, and other by and unnecessary
truths, if her curiosity or other weakness carry her beyond,
or cause her to fall short, of her rule, no doubt need be
made. But if she can err either from the foundation, or in
it, she can be no longer holy, and that article of the Creed is
gone. For if she can err quite from the foundation, then she
is nor Holy, nor Church, but becomes an infidel. Now this
cannot be : for all divines, ancient and modern, Romanists
and Hcformers, agree in this, That the whole militant Church
of Christ cannot fall away into general apostasy .1 And if
she err in the foundation, that is, in some one or more
fundamental points of faith, then she may be a church of
Christ still, but not holy, but becomes heretical ; and most
certain it is that no assembly, be it never so general, of
such heretics, is, or can be, holy.^ Other errors, that are of a
meaner alloy, take not holiness from the Church ; but these,
that are died in grain, cannot consist with holiness, of which
faith in Christ is the very foundation. And therefore, if we
will keep up our creed, the whole militant Church must be
still holy. For if it be not so still, then there may be a
time, that falsum may subesse fidei Catholica, " that false-
hood,^^ and that in a high degree, in the very article, " may
be the subject of the Catholic faith;" which Avere no less than
blasphemy to affirm : for we must still believe the " Holy

<) Dum Cliristus orat in excelso, clades minantur,] salva tamen maneat.
navicula, id est Ecclesia, turbatur lluc- — Calvin. Institut. lib. ii. cap. 15.
tibus in profundo. [Quia insurgunt §3. [Op., tom.viii. p. 127.] — [Denique]
fluctus, potest ipsa navicula turbari :] ipsa Symboli dispositione admone-
sed quia Christus orat, non potest mur perpetuam residere in Ecclesia
mergi. [Naviculam quippe istam, Christi [dclictorum gratiam : quod
fratres, Ecclesiam cogitate ; turbuleu- Ecclesias velut coustitutaj] remissio
turn mare, hoc stKCulum.] — [Pseudo-] peccatorum [adhuc subjuugitur.] —
S. Augustin. Serm. de verbis Domini, Calvin. lustitut. lib. iv. cap. 1. ^ 27.
xlv. cap. 2. [Eracl. Presbyt. Serm. in [Op., torn. viii. p. 277.] Now remission
Appeudic. ad S. Augustin. Sermones : of sins cannot be perpetual in the
Serm. Ixxii. de verbis Evang. Matth. Church, if the Church itself be not
xiv. 24. apud Op., S. Augustin. torn. v. perpetual. ]5ut the Church itself
app. col. 132. B.] — Et Bellarmin. de cannot he perpetual, if it fall away.
Eccl.miiit.lib.iii.cap.l3. [Op.,tom.ii. ^ {Et non est Spiritua in eis. No-
col. 14,5. D. ubi sup. p. 155. note ".] tandum quod et in isto capitulo,
— [Ergo quoties audimus armari vcntus et spiritus, uno apud Hebraeos
Christum ajterna potestate, memi- nomine appellatur nn ] Spiritum
nerimus hoc] presidio Christi lul- [autem] sanctificationis [vocat, qui]
ciri Ecclesioe pcrpetuitatem : ut in htvjreticorum mentibus non potest
inter tnrbulentas agitationcs [quibus invcniri. — S. Hieron. [lib. ii. Com-
assiduc vcxatur, inter graves] et meat.] in Jerem. Proph. [cap.] x.
formidabiles motus, [qui innumeras [Op., torn. iii. col. 579.]

They are to be blamed, ivho gave cause for the Separation. 159

Catholic Church/' And if she be not still holy, then at that Section

XXI.

time when she is not so, we believe a falsehood under the
article of the Catholic Faith. Therefore a very dangerous
thing it is to cry out in general terms, that the whole
Catholic militant Church can err, and not limit nor dis-
tinguish in time : that it can err indeed, for ignorance it
hath, and ignorance can err ; but err it cannot, either by
falHng totally from the foundation, or by heretical error in
it. For the holiness of the Church consists as much, if not
more, in the verity of the faith, as in the integrity of man-
ners taught and commanded in the doctrine of faith.

VI. — Now in this discourse, A. C. thinks he hath met A. C. p. 56.
with me : for he tells me, " that I may not only safely
grant, that Protestants made the division that is now in the
Church, but further also ; and that with a safe confidence, as
one did, — was it not you ?" saith he, — "That it was ill done
of those who first made the separation." Truly I do not
now remember whether I said it or no. But, because A. C.
shall have full satisfaction from me, and without any tergi-
versation, if I did not say it then, I do say it now, and
most true it is. That it was ill done of those, whoever they
were, that first made the separation. Bu.t then A. C. must
not understand me of actual only, but of causal, separation.
For, as I said before,^ the schism is theirs, whose the cause of
it is. And he makes the separation, that gives the first just
cause of it ; not he, that makes an actual separation upon a
just cause preceding. And this is so evident a truth, that
A. C. cannot deny it ; for he says, it is "most true." Neither A. C. p. 56.
can he deny it in this sense, in which I have expressed it ;
for his very assertion against us, though false, is in these
terms, That we gave the first cause. Therefore he must mean
it of causal, not of actual, separation only.

YII. — But then, A. C. goes on and tells us, "that after A. C. p. 57.
this breach was made, yet the Chiu'ch of Rome was so kind
and careful to seek the Protestants, that she invited them
publicly with safe conduct to Rome, to a General Council,
freely to speak what they could for themselves." Indeed I
think the Church of Rome did carefully seek the Protestants ;
but I doubt it was to bring them within their net. And she
5 Sect. xxi. Ko. 1. [ubi sup. p. 150.]

IGO

Not safe for Protestants to attend a Genei^al Council.

WITH

Fisher.

Conference inAnted them to Rome : — a very safe place, if you mark it, for
tliem to come to, just as the lion in the apologue' invited
the fox to his own den. Yea, but there was " safe conduct "
ofteredtoo? Yes, ''conduct" perhaps, but not "safe;" or
safe perhaps for going thither, but none for coming thence.
Vestigia nulla retrorsum. Yea, but it should have been to a
"General Council?" Perhaps so: but was the "conduct safe,"
that was given for coming to a Council, which they call
General, to some others before them? No sure: John Huss,
and Jerome of Prague,** burnt for all their safe conduct. And
so long as the Jesuits^ write and maintain, "that faith given

' Olim quod vulpes segroto cauta

Leoni
Respondit, referam : Quia me vestigia

terrent
Omnia te adversum spectantia, nulla

retrorsum.
Horat. Epist. i. 1. [73.] ex jEsopo.
" Though I cannot justify all, which
these two men said, yet, safe conduct
being given, that public faith ought
not to have been violated.

^ [His positis, qusestio est, An
quando Catholicus princeps, sive
stecularis sit, sive ecclesiasticus, con-
cedit hffireticis salvum conductum
libere veniendi et redeundi, sive id
faciat jure communi sive speciali,
debeat illi servari fidem, necne :]
Affirmant uno consensu omnes Catho-
lici. — Becanus, disput. theolog. de
fide hsereticis servanda, cap. xii. § 5.
[apud Op., torn. ii. opuscul. theologic.
torn. ii. p. 17. P. ed. Paris. 1633.]
But for all this brag of (Affirmant
uno consensu omnes Catholici), Beca-
nus shuffles pitifully, to defend the
Council of Constance. For thus he
argues: Aiunt Joanni Hussio fidem
violatam esse. Nego. A quo violata
est 1 an a patribus Concilii Constan-
tiensisl At patres fidem illi non
dederunt. An ab Imperatorc Sigis-
mundo] Is dcdit quidem, sed non
violavit. Imo, nee Patres. — Ibid,
cap. xii. [§ 7. p. 17. D.] But all men
know that the Emperor was used by
the Fathers at Constance to bring
Huss thither. Sigismundus Hus-
sum Constantiam vocat, et missis
Uteris publica fide cavet, mense Oetob.
Ann. 1414, &c. Edit, in 160.— Et
etiamsi primo graviter tulit Hussi in-
carcerationem, tamen cum dicerent
fidem haireticis non esse servandam,
non modo remisit ofiensionem, sed

et primus acerbe in eum pronuncia-
vit. — Ibid. This is a mockery. And
Becanus's argument is easily re-
turned upon himself. For if the
Fathers did it in cunning, that the
Emperor should give safe conduct,
which themselves meant not to keep,
then they broke faith ; and if the
Emperor knew they would not keep
it, then he himself broke faith, in
giving a safe conduct which he knew
to be invalid. And as easy it is to
answer what Becanus adds to save that
Council's act, could 1 stay upon it.
Fides hsereticis data servanda non
est, sicut nee tyrannis, piratis, et
ceteris publicis prredonibus, &c. —
Simancas, [Pacensis Episcop. de
Catholic] Instit. [lib.] Tit. xlvi.
§ 52. [p. 365. ed. Roma;, 1575.] And
although Becanus in the place above
cited (§ 13.) confidently denies, that
the Fathers at Constance decreed,
Ko faith to be kept with heretics;
and cites the words of the Council
(Sess. xix.) ; yet there the very words
themselves have it thus : [Prajsens
sancta synodus ex quovis salvo con-
ductu per imperatorem, reges, et alios
sasculi principes, hareticis vel de
hteresi diffamatis, conce.sso, nullum
fidei Catholicaj vel jurisdictioni Ec-
clesiastica; prasjudicium generari, vel
impedimentum prajsentari] posse [seu
debere declarat, quo minus dicto
salvo couductu non obstante, liceat
judici competenti et ecclesiastico, de
hujusmodi persouarum erroribus in-
quircre, et alias contra eos dcbite procc-
dere,] eos[demque] punire, [quantum
justitia suadebit, si sues errores re-
vocare pertinaciter recusaverint,] eti-
amsi de salvo conductu confisi ad
locum venerint judicii, [alias non
venturi : nee .sic promittentem, cum

Who are to blame for continuance of the Division.

is not to be kept witli heretics ; " and the Church of Rome
leaves this lewd doctrine uncensured, as it hath hitherto
doncj and no exception put in of force and violence ; A. C.
shall pardon us that we come not to Rome, nor Avithin the
reach of Roman power, what freedom of speech soever be

161

Section
XXI.

fecerit, quod in ipso est ex hoc in
aliquo remansisse obligatum. — Apud
Becanum, ibid. cap. xiii. p. 18. C] —
And much more plainly Simancas, Inst.
Tit. xlvi. § 52. [ibid. p. 366.] Jure igitur
hoeretici quidam gravissimo Concilii
Constantiensis judicio legitima flam-
ma eoncremati sunt, quamvis pro-
missa illis securitas fuisset. — So they
are not only Protestants, which charge
the Council of Constance with this.
Nor can Becanus say as he doth,
Aflirmant uno consensu omnes Catho-
lic! fidcm hpereticis servandam esse ;
for Simancas denies it. And he
quotes others [Jacob. Menochius,
Salomonius, Thorn. Aquin.] for it,
which A. C. would be loth should
not be accounted Catholics. But
how faithfully Simancas says the
one, or Becanus the other, let them
take it between them and the reader
be judge. In the mean time, the
very Canon of the Council of Con-
stance (Sess. xix.) is this : Quod
non obstantibus salvis conductibus
imperatoris, regum, &c. possit per
judicem competentem de hteretica
pravitate inquiri. — [In this note a
reference for the facts, first, of John
Huss coming to the Council of Con-
stance at Sigismund's request; and,
secondly, of Sigismund's dissatisfaction
with the violation of the safe-conduct
by Huss's imprisonment, is made to
an authority "Edit, in 160." So it
stands in Laud's own edition of the
Conference, 1639. In the editions of
1673 and 1686 the reading is "Edit.
in 16." which is adopted by the Cla-
rendon Press edition of 1839. It is
plain that the name of the authority
has been accidentally omitted. Tho-
rold the Jesuit (T. C.) in his answer to
Laud's Conference, " Laud's Laby-
rinth," p. 157, observes, "But 'all
men know,' says he (Laud) ' that the
Emperor &c.' which he pretends to
prove by a Latin authority of I know
not whom ; for he cites only ' Edit, in
16°.' and afterwards 'Ibid.' leaving us
to guess who his author should be :
but we will show his Lordship all the
respect we can, and suppose he meant
to cite some author of credit. What

VOL. II. LAUD.

doth he say," &c. Stillingfleet, in his
reply to Thorold and vindication of
Lautl, " Historical Account of the
Grounds of Protestant Religion," does
not supply the reference defective in
Laud. The present Editor has not
been able to recover the exact words ;
but the following passages from writers
on either side of the dispute, abun-
dantly confirm the facts which Laud
has left upon anonymous authority.
Hussius damnatur fremente licet Si-
gismundo. — Whittaker. Eespons. ad
rationem IV. Campiani, Op., tom. i.
p. 20. col. 2. — Sigismundus misit no-
biles Bohemos conciliarios suos, ad
Joannem Huss, qui ei persuaderent ut
sub fide publica ... ad Constantiam
veniret. — D. Joannis Molani Sacrte
Theolog. Lovan. Professor, de fide
H£ereticissei'vanda,libriIII.lib ii.cap.
1. p. 63. ed. Colon. 1584. — Cum autem
eo venisset aberat Sigismundus, et
mox a concilio est arrestatus (sc. Joan.
Huss.) . . . Turn rex libentereum, prop-
ter salvum conductum a se datum,
captivitate libei-asset. Sed a doctis
responsum accepit, nullo modo deberi
salvum conductum hseretico pertinaci.
Ex quo agnoscens fidem a se datam,
ex juris dispositione, eo se non exten-
dere, non solum destitit, sed proeterea
. . . Joannem Huss degradatum ad se
recepit, et in pertinacia induratum
excepit, &c. — Ibid. cap. iii. p. 71. —
Eex Sigismundus patriae misertus, et
cleri catholici in Bohemia, per fratrem
Wenceslaum eflPecit, ut Joannes Hus
sub salvo conductu et fide publica
ipsius Sigismundi regis Constantiam
in concilium mitteretur .... Quem
(Hussum sc.) apparitores Papse et Car-
dinalium comprehendentes ... in pa-
latium deduxerunt. Quem rex Iloma-
norum libenter propter salvum con-
ductum liberasset, nisi a doctis accep-
isset responsum, Nullo jure deberi
salvum conductum hseretico in sua
hteresi pcrsistentem.— Cochlasi Histor.
Hussitarum, lib. ii. pp. 70, 74. ed. apud
S. Victorem prope Moguntiam, 1549.
The last citation in Cochlaeus is from
a Avork on the Council of Constance,
written in German, by an eye-witness,
Ulric Reichenthal.]

163 TJie Church of England desires and prays for Christian Unity.

Conference promised US. For to what end freedom of speech on their
FISHER. P^i't, since they are resolved to alter nothing ?y And to

what end freedom of speech on our part, if, after speech hath

been free, life shall not ?

A.C. p. 57. VIII. — And yet for all this, A. C. "makes no doubt, but
that the Roman Church is so far from being cause of the
continuance of the schism, or hindrance of the re-union,
that it Avould yet give a free hearing with most ample safe
conduct, if any hope might be given, that the Protestants
would sincerely seek nothing but trvith and peace." Truly
A. C. is very resolute for the Roman Church, yet how far he
may undertake for it, I cannot tell. But for my part, I am
of the same opinion for the " continuing of the schism,"
that I was for the making of it ; that is, that it is ill, very
ill done of those, whoever they be. Papists or Protestants,
that give just cause to continue a separation. But for free
hearings or safe conducts, I have said enough, till that
Church do not only say, but do, otherwise. And as for truth
and peace, they are in every man's mouth, with you and with
us ; but lay they but half so close to the hearts of men, as
they are common on their tongues, it would soon be better
Avitli Christendom than at this day it is, or is like to be.
And for the Protestants in general, I hope they seek both
truth and peace sincerely. The Chui'ch of England, I am
sure, doth, and hath taught me to pray for both,^ as I most
heartily do. But what Rome doth in this, if the Avorld Avill
not see, I will not censure.

y For so much A. C. confesses, riam ; atque interna intentione con-

p. 45. For if they should give way traria, cujuscunque modi sit species

to the altering of one, then why not of exterior, sacramentum reddi invali-

another, and another, and so of all ? dum. — P. Sarpi.] Hist. Concil. Tri-

And the Trent Fathers, in a great dent. lib. ii. p. 277. ed. Leyd. 1622.

point of doctrine being amazed, and [p. 192. ed. August. Trinobant.

not knowing what to answer to a 1620.]

Bishop of their own, yet were resolved ^ " Beseeching God to inspire con-
not to part with their common error. tinually the Universal Church with
[Hoe rationes Episcopi (sc. Minoren- the spirit of truth, unity, and concord."
sis,) receptam vulgo de necessitate — [" Have mercy upon all Jews, Turks,
inlcntionis ministri opinionem impug- &c. So fetch them home, blessed
nantis, ca;teros theologos dederant Lord, to Thy flock, that they may be
in stuporem, quid ad eas responden- saved among the remnant of the true
dum esset, nescios.] Certum tamen Israelites, and be made one flock
erat doctrinam earn non probare, scd under one Shepherd, Jesus Christ our
(]uam antca didicissent, firmiter Lord," &c.] In the prayer for the
tenere, [veram ministri intentionem militant Church ; and in the third
aut actis, aut potentia, esse necessa- collect on Good-Friday.

Moral Corruption no sufficient ground of Reparation. 1 63

IX. — And for that, wMch A. C. adds, " tliat sucli a free Section
hearing is more than ever the English Catholics could obtain, ^^T^-

though they have often offered and desired it, and that but ' ^'
under the prince's word; and that no answer hath, nor no
good answer can be given :" — and he cites Campian for it : —
how far, or how often this hath been asked by the English
Romanists, I cannot tell, nor what answer hath been given
them. But surely Campian was too bold, and so is A. C.
too, to say, Honestum responsum nullum, " no good answer "
can be given.'^ For this, I think, is a very good answer.
That the Kings and the Church of England had no reason
to admit of a public dispute with the English Romish clergy,
till they shall be able to show it, under the seal or powers of
Rome, that that Church will submit to a third, who may be
an indifferent judge between us and them, or to such a
General Council as is after mentioned.^ And this is an
honest, and I think, a full answer. And without this all
disputation must end in clamour -, and therefore the more
public, the worse ; because as the clamour is the greater, so
perhaps will be the schism too.

Jr. Moreover he said, he would ingenuously acknow- [A.C.p.55.]
ledge, that the corruption of manners in the Romish
Church was not a sufficient cause to justify their
departing from it.

%. I would I could say you did as ingenuously repeat, § 22.
as I did confess. For I never said that corruption of man-
ners was, or Avas not, a sufficient cause to justify their
departure. How could I say this, since I did not grant that

* [Anno prseterito . . . inleriorem in Hanmerus et Charcus. Quid tamen?

Angliam ubi penetrassem, nihil vidi Otiose omnia. Nullum enim respon-

familiarius, quam inusitata supplicia ; sum, praeter unum, honeste dabunt,

nihil certius quam incerta pericula . . . quod nunquam dabunt : Gonditiones

autographon apud me habui, ut me- amplectimur:Beginaspondet: Advola.

cum, si caperer, caperetur. Exemplum Interea clamant isti : sodalitium tuum,

ejus apud amicum deposui, quod, me seditiones tuas, arrogantiam tuam,

quidem nesciente, pluribus communi- proditorem, sine dubio, proditorem.

catum est. Adversavii publicatam Ridicule.] — [Edmund.] Campian. [doc-

schedulam atrociter acceperunt, cum tissimis academicis Oxon. et Canta-

cEetera tum illud invidiosissime crimi- brig, in] praef. prsefix. [Decem] lla-

nantes, quod unus omnibus in hoc tion[ibuspropositis in causa fidei: apud

religionis negotio certamen obtulis- Opuscul., pp. 12, 13. ed. Antverp.

sem ; quanquam solus in acie non 1631.]

eram futurus, si fide publica dispu- ^ Sect. xxvi. No. 1.
tassem. Eesponderunt postulatis meis

M 2

16i Corruption of Manners in the Church of Rome,

Conference thcy did depart, otherwise than is before expressed ? <= There
Fisher, is diflPerence between departure and causeless thrusting from
you ; for out of the Church is not in youi- power (God be
thanked) to thrust us : think on that. And so much I said
expressly then. That which I did ingenuously confess, was
this : " That corruption in manners only is no sufficient cause
to make a separation in the Church :'^ ^ nor is it. It is
a truth agreed on by the Fathers, and received by di^dnes
of all sorts, save by the Cathari, to whom the Donatist and
the Anabaptist after accorded : and against whom Calvin
disputes it strongly.*^ And S.Augustine is plain: "There
are bad fish in the net of the Lord, from which there must
be ever a separation in heart and in manners ; but a corporal
separation must be expected at the sea-shore, that is, the
end of the world." ^ And the best fish that are, must not
tear and break the net, because the bad are with them. And
this is as ingenuously confessed for you, as by me. For if
corruption in manners were a just cause of actual separation
of one church from another, in that catholic body of Christ,
the Church of Rome hath given as great cause as any ; since,
as Stapleton grants, " there is scarce any sin that can be
thought by man, heresy only excepted, with which that see
hath not been foully stained, especially from eight hundi-ed
years after Christ." s And he need not except heresy, into

Sect. xxi. No. 6. [ubi sup. p. 159.] ' [S. Augustin.] Epist. xlviii. [xciii.

Modo ea, qu£e ad cathedi-am perti- &c. ubi sup. p. 155. note".] A malis

nent, recta prajcipiant.— S. Hier. Ep. piscibus corde semper et moribus se-

236. [?] parantur, &e. Corporalem [autem]

* [Tales olim erant Cathari, et . . . separationem in littore maris, hoc est,

Donatistse. Tales hodie sunt ex Ana- in fine steculi [Ecclesia] expectat,

baptistis nonnulli, qui supra alios [corrigens quos potest, tolorans quos

volunt videri profecisse . . . peccant . . . corrigere non potest.]
quod ofiensioni suje modum statuere s [Dccimo, ad reliquas omnes vexa-

ncsciunt. Nam ubi Dominus clemen- tiones accessenint enormia et horrenda

tiam exigit, omissa ilia, totos se im- Rom. pontificum peccata atque flagi-

modcratas severitati tradunt. Quia tia.] Vix [enini] ullum peceatum,

cnim non putant esse Ecclcsiam, ubi sola h«iresi excepta, cogitari potest,

nonestsolidavitjepuritasetintegritas, quo ilia sedes turpiter maculata non

scelerum odlo a Icgitima ecclesia dis- fuerit, maxime ab anno 800 [et infra,

cedunt, dum a factione improborum Et tamen contra tot persecutiones

dccliuarc se putant. AUegant Eccle- externas et internas, sibi quasi succe-

siam Christi sanctam esse. Verum, dentes, post tot hajreses. tot schismata,

ut simul intelligant esse ex bonis et tot domesticas calamitates, tot et tanta

malis permixtam, illam ex ore Christi Romanaj curiaa peccata . . . manet et

parabolam audiant, in qua reti com- stat Romana sedes &c.— Stapleton.]

paratur, &c.— Calvin.] Instit. lib. iv. Relect. Controv. Controv. 1. [de Ecele-

cap. i. § 13. &.C. [Op., torn. viii. p. sia in se.] Qujest. v. Art. 3. [Op..,

274.] tom. i. p. 597. D.J

and also dangerous Errors in Doctrine. 165

which Biel grants it possible the bishops of that see may Section
fall> And Stella ' and Almaine grant it freelj^, that some
of them did fall, and so ceased to be heads of the Church, Eph. i. 23.
and left Christ, God be thanked, at that time of His vicar's
defection, to look to His cure Himself.

iF. But, saith [said] he, besides corruption of manners, a. C. p. 55.
there were also* errors in doctrine ... ' [also. . .

caret

%. This I spake indeed. And can you prove that I spake A. C]
not true in this ? But I added, though here again you are § 23.
pleased to omit it, " that some of the errors of the Boman
Church were dangerous to salvation." For it is not every
light error in disputable doctrine and points of curious
speculation, that can be a just cause of separation in that
admirable body of Christ, which is His Church, or of one
member of it from another. For He gave His natural body
to be rent and torn upon the cross, that His mystical body
might be one. And S. Augustine infers upon it, "that he
is no way partaker of divine charity, that is an enemy to this
unity."'' Now, what errors in doctrine may give just cause of

^ [Veruntamen etsi papa, tanquam alii etiam plurimi contra catholicam

homo viator, nondum in gratia con- fidem tenuerunt, ut Johannes vige-

firmatus, quandoque deviat : quoniam, simus secundus &c.] — Stella, [Enar-

teste Chrysostomo, (seu pot. auctore rat.] in cap. xxii. Lucse Evangel, [torn.

anonymo op. imperfect, in Matth.) ii.p. 339. col. 1. ed. Antverp. 1622.] —

Non loca hominem sanctificant, sed Et, Almain in III. Sentent. Distinct,

homo locum ; (Decret. par. 1. Dis- xxiv. Q[u8est.] i. in fine. [Dubitatur

tinct. xl. cap. 12. Multi : Neque sane- sexto utrum Ecclesia Komana possit

torum filii sunt, qui tenent loca sane- in fide errare ; pro ratione notandum

torum : ut ait Hieronym. (ad Heliodor. quod Ecclesia Eomana capitur multi-

].) eadem distinct, cap. 2. Non est pliciter : . . . . Tertia propositio. Ec-

facile : . . . Non tamen capitis digni- clesia Romana secundo modo capiendo

tatem amittit, nisi in hteresim lapsus pro summo pontifice potest errare in

extra ecclesiam fieret : eadem distinct, tide : nam Leo (Liberius 1) papa

cap. 6. (ex dictis Bonifacii,) Si Paj^a erravit in fide imo fuit Arianus :

. . . cunctos ipse Papa judicaturus a Anastasius fuit depositus a sede

nemine est judicandus, nisi deprehen- apostolica pro hferesi . . . Nam] multse

datur a fide devius.] — Gabr. Biel. sunt decretales hi^reticse, [sicut dicit

Canon. Miss. [Expos,] Lect. xxiii. Ocham, et firmiter hoc credo ; sed non

[fol. xxxii. col. 4. ed. Johan. Cleyn. licet dogmatizare oppositum, quando

Lugd. 1514.] sunt determinatse, nisi manifeste con-

' [Hoc enim verbum, (sc. Ego rogavi stet. Quando enim est quaestio de

pro te &c.) non dixit Cliristus Petro fide, materia deferenda est ad sum mum

tanquam privatae personse, quia Petrus pontificem,non ut ferat sententiam,sed

peccavit post haec verba, et fides in ut concilium congreget, et concilium

eo defecit, et multi pontifices Eomani indefectibiliter sententiabit. — fol.

erraverunt ; sicut Marcellinus, qui Ixxvii.] And so they erred as Popes,
idolis sacrificavit, et Liberius papa, ^ [Extra hoc corpus neminem vivi-

qui Arianis consensit, et Anastasius ficat Spiritus Sanctus : quia sicut ipse

quoquc secundus propter hasresis cri- dicit Apostolus, CaritasDei tsc. (Kom.

men repudiatus fuit ab ecclesia, et v. 5.) Non est autem particeps divine

166 It is lawful for a particular Church to reform itself; as also

Conference separation in this body, or tlie parts of it one from another,
FisuER. '^'cre it never so easy to determine, as I think it is most
difficult, I would not venture to set it down in particular,
lest, in these times of discord, I might be thought to open
a door for schism ; which surely I will never do, unless it be
to let it out. But that there are errors in doctrine, and
some of them such as most manifestly endanger salvation,
in the Church of Rome, is evident to them that will not shut
their eyes. The proof whereof runs through the particular
points that are between us ; and so is too long for this dis-
course. Now here A. C. would fain have a reason given him,

A.C. p. 55. "why I did endeavour to show what cause the Protestants
had to make that rent or division, if I did not grant that
they made it V Why truly in this reasonable demand I will

> [it . . . satisfy him. I did it, partly because I had granted' in the

1686.1 general, that corruption in manners was no sufficient cause
of separation of one particular church from another; and
therefore it lay upon me at least to name in general what
was : and partly because he and his party will needs have it so,
that we did make the separation ; and therefore, though I did
not grant it, yet amiss I thought it could not be, to declare,
by way of supposition, that if the Protestants did at first
separate from the Church of Eome, they had reason so to

A. C. p. 56. do. For A. C. himself confesses " that error in doctrine of
the faith is a just cause of separation ; so just, as that no
cause is just but that." Now, had I leisure to descend into
particulars, or will to make the rent in the Church wider,
it is no hard matter to prove that the Church of Rome hath
erred in the doctrine of faith, and dangerously too : and I
doubt I shall afterwards descend to particulars, A. C.^s
importunity forcing me to it.

[A.C.p.55.] ^ which Avheu the general Church would not

reform, it was lawful for particular Churches to

reform themselves.

caritatis, qui hostis est unitatis. Non mei, nisi] quia Columbse non erant

habent itaque Spiritum Sanctum, qui Ecclesiam dissipaverunt ? Acci-

qui sunt extra Ecclesiam.]— S. Augus- pitres erant, milvi erant. Non laniat

tin. Ep. 1. [lib. ad Bonifacium, seu columba. [Et vidcs illos invidiam

Epist. clxx.w. Op., tom. ii. col. 663. nobis facere quasi de persecutionibus

C.]— [Quarc per simplieitatemcolum- quas passi sunt.] — S. Augustin. in

baj didicit Johannes, quia Hie est qui Johannis Evang. [cap. i.] Tractat. v.

baptizat in Spiritu Sancto, fratres 12. [Op , tom. lii. par. 2. col. 325. C]

to promulgate Cath. Truth, independently of the whole Church. 167

2B. I. — Is it then such a strange thing that a particular Section

Y VT"\7"

Church may reform itself, if the general will not ? I had

thought, and do so still, that in point of reformation of either § ^'**
manners or doctrine, it is lawful for the Church since Christ,
to do as the Church before Christ did, and might do. The
Church before Christ consisted of Jews and proselytes. This
Church came to have a separation upon a most ungodly policy
of Jeroboam's, so that it never pieced together again. To a iKingsxii.
common council to reform all, they would not come. Was '"
it not lawful for Judah to reform herself, when Israel would
not join ? Sure it was, or else the prophet deceives me, that Hos. iv.15.
says expressly, " Though Israel transgress, yet let not Judah
sin." And S. Jerome expounds it of this very particular
sin of heresy and error in religion.^ Nor can you say that
Israel, from the time of the separation, was not a Church ; " for
there were true prophets in it,Elias'' and Elisseus," and others,
and "thousands that had not bowed knees to Baal.'^ And 1 Kinga
there was salvation for these, which cannot be in the ordinary ^^^"
way, where there is no Church. And God threatens to " cast Hos. ix.
them away, to wander among the nations," and be no congre-
gation, no Church. Therefore He had not yet cast them
away in non Ecclesiam, " into no-Church." And they are
expressly called "the people of the Lord" in Jehu's time, 2 Kings ix.
and so continued long after. Nor can you plead that Judah ^•
is your part, and the ten tribes ours, as some of you do ; for

1 Super hcereticis prona intelligen- non amplius requirebant, tamen non

tia est, [ad quos, vel de quibus, adduci posse existimem ut eum cum

dicitur. Si fornicaris tu Israel, &c.]— Jeroboamo post tergum projicerent,

S. Hieron. [Comment, lib. i. in Osee ut] nomen cultumque Ejus [at ipsi et

prophet, cap. iv. 15. Op., torn. iii. eorum sive exemplo, sive hortamentia

col. 1264.] et imitatione,] multi [alii, quamvis in

"' Nee tamen [omni modo] cessavit schismate, aut verius nee schismati

Deus [non solum ilium regem (sc. consentientes, coram vitulis adorantes

Hieroboam), verum etiam successorea licet,] religiose intra se habcrent. De

ejus et impietatis imitatores,] popu- quo numero, eorumve posteris, septena

lumque ipsum arguere per prophetas. illamillia [vivorum] fuisse statuo, qui

Nam ibi extiterunt magni illi et in- in persecutione sub [rege] Achabo

signcs prophetce, [qui etiam mirabilia Deum sibi ab idolatria immunes re-

multa feccrunt,] Elias, et Elisa^us [dis- servasse, [quosque] genua ante Baal

cipulus ejus.]— S. AuguRtin. de civi- non flexisse, [scriptum est, 3 Reg. xix.

tate Uei, lib. xvii. cap. 22. [Op., torn. 18.]— Franc. Moncajus, de vitulo au-

vii. col. 406. B ]— [Non enim tantus reo, lib. i. cap. 12. [apud Criticos

pietatis fervor de subito totus con- Sacros, torn. ix. sive Tractat. Biblicor.

cidisse credi potest, ut diminui solum tom. ii. col. 4456. ed. Loudin. 1660,]
ac defervescere paulo evidentius tunc " 1 Kings xvii. sub Acbabo.

coepisse. Ita tamen ut qui tot illia ° 2 Kings iii. sub Jehoram filio

difficultatibusvicti, a JudaJudaicisque Achabi.
solennitatibus abstinentes, Jehovam

168 Particular Reformation lawful, when the Cath. Ch. cannot act

Conference if that be truCj you must grant that the multitude and
Fisher, greater number is ours : and where, then, is Multitude, your

numerous note of the Chm-cli? For the ten tribes were

more than the two. But you cannot plead it : for certainly
if any " calves " be set up, they are in Dan and in Bethel —
they are not ours.

II. — Besides, to reform what is amiss in doctrine or man-
ners, is as lawful for a particular Church, as it is to publish
and promulgate any thing that is catholic in either. And
your question. Quo Juclice ? lies alike against both. And
yet I tliink it may be proved that the Church of Rome, and
that as a particular Church, did promulgate an orthodox
truth, which was not then catholicly admitted in the Church ;
namely, the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son.
If she erred in this fact, confess her error ; if she erred not,
why may not another particular Church do as she did ?
A learned schoolman of yours saith she may : '' The Church
of Rome needed not to call the Grecians to agree upon this
truth, since the authority of pubhshing it was in the Church
of Rome, especially since it is lawful for every particular
Church to promulgate that which is catholic.^^ p Nor can
you say he means " catholic,^^ as fore-determined by the
Church in general; for so this point, when Rome added
Filioque to the Creed of a General Council, was not. And
how the Grecians were used in the after-Council, such as
it was, of Florence, is not to trouble this dispute ; but
" catholic " stands there for that which is so in the nature of
it, and fundamentally. Nor can you justly say, that the
Church of Rome did, or might do, this, by the Pope's autho-
rity over the Church. For suppose he have that, and that
his sentence be infallible, — I say, suppose both, but I give
neither, — yet neither his authority, nor his infallibility, can
belong unto him, as the particular Bishop of that see, but as
the ministerial head of the whole Chm-ch.i And you are aU
so lodged in this, that Bcllarmine professes he can neither

p Non oportuit ad hoc eos vocare, tern, per cantum ct legendas publicas.]

qiuim auctoritas fuerit publicandi apud — Alb[ert.] Magn. in I. [Sentent.]

Ecclesiam Komanam, pra^cipue cum Dist[inct.] xi. A[rtie.] 9.

uuicuiquc etiam particulari Ecclesiae i Non errare, convenit Papa;, iit est

liceat, id, quod catholicum est, pro- Caput. — Bellarmiu. de Horn. Pontif.

mulgare : [propter aliquam ncces«ita- lib. iv. cap. 3. [Op., torn. i. col. 805. C]

synodically — A free General Council the true Remedy. 169

tell the year when, nor the Pope under whom, this addition Section

was made.'' A particular Church then, if you judge it by
the school of Rome, or the practice of Rome, may publish
any thing that is catholic, where the whole Church is silent ;
and may therefore reform any thing that is not catholic,
where the whole Church is negligent, or will not.

III. — But you are as jealous of the honour of Rome, as
Cappellus^ is, who is angry with Baronius about certain
canons in the second Milevitan Council, and saitli " that
he considered not of what consequence it was, to grant to
particular Churches the power of making canons of faith,
without consulting the Roman see, which,^' as he saith, and
you with him, " was never lawful, nor ever done.^^ But sup-
pose this were so, my speech was not " not consulting,^' but
" in case of neglecting or refusing;" or when the difficulty of
time and place, or other circumstances, are such, that a
General Council cannot be called, or not convene.' For
that the Roman see must be consulted with, before any
reformation be made, first, most certain it is, Capellus
can never prove ; and secondly, as certain, that were it
proved and practised, we should have no reformation. For
it would be long enough before the Church should be cured,
if that see alone should be her physician, which in truth is
her disease.

IV. — Now, if for all this you will say still, that a Pro-
vincial Council will not suffice, but we should have borne

"■ Bellarmiii.deChristo,lib.ii.cap.21. de appellationibus ad transmarina,

[Op., torn. i. col. 351. A, B.] Quando qiios in secunda synodo Milcvitana

aiitem [additum sit ad symbolum illud consUtutos fuisse, arbitratus est.

Filioque, non est plane certum. . . . Neqiie] consideravit, quanti referat

Denique certum est Nicolao I. addi- concedere ecclesiis particularibus jus

tionem banc multo esse antiquiorem. condendorum canonum de fide, in-

. . . Et quamvis non possimus certe consulta Komana sede ; quod nun-

notare annum, aut pontificem certum, quam licuit, nunquam factum est. —

tamen videtur omnino lioc tempore Cappell. de Appellat. Eccl. Africanae,

(sc. paulo post annum Domini 600.) cap. ii. No. 12. [pp. 30,31. ed. Romse,

id esse factum.] So you cannot find 1722.]

records of your own trutbs, wbich are ' Rex confitetur se vocasse Con-
far more likely to be kept: but when cilium tertium Toletanum ; quia de-
errors are crept in, we must be bound cursis retro temporibus hasresis im-
to tell the place and the time, and I minens in tota Ecclesia Catholica
know not what, of their beginnings, agere synodica negotia denegavit, &c.
or else they are not errors. As if — Concil. Toletan. III. Can. i. [This,
some errors might not want a record, as the context shows, is not one of
as well as some truth. the canons, but the speech of King
^ Omnino recte, nisi excepisset [ab Reccaredus on the opening of the
hac censura sua octo Canones contra Council. — Concil. torn. v. col. 997. !)•]
Pelagium, et vigesimum secundum

XXIV.

170 Provincial Councils may reform both in Doctrine and Discipline.

WITH

Fisher.

Conference Avith tilings till the time of a General Council, First, it is
true, a General Council, free and entire, would have been
the best remedy, and most able for a gangrene that had
spread so far, and eaten so deep into Christianity. But
Avhat ? Should we have suffered this gangrene to endanger
life and all, rather than be cured in time by a physician of a
Aveaker knoAvledge and a less able hand ? Secondly, We
live to see since, if we had stayed and expected a General
Council, what manner of one we should have had, if any.
For that at Trent was neither general nor free : and for
the errors which Home had contracted, it confirmed them ;
it cured them not. And yet I much doubt, whether ever
that Council, such as it was, would have been called, if
some provincial and national synods, under supreme and
regal power, had not first set upon this great work of
reformation ; Avhich I heartily Avish had in all places been
as orderly and happily pursued, as the work was right
Christian and good in itself. But human frailty, and the
heats and distempers of men, as well as the cunning of the
dcAdl, Avould not suffer that. For even in this sense also,
" the wrath of man doth not accomplish the will of God."
But I have learned not to reject the good Avhich God hath
Avrought, for any CAil which men may fasten to it.

V. — And yet if, for all this, you think it is better for us to
be blind than to open our OAvn eyes, let me tell you, very
grave and learned men, and of your own party, have taught
me, that when the uni\'ersal Church will not, or for the
iniquities of the times cannot, obtain and settle a free
General Council, it is laAA'ful, nay sometimes necessary, to
reform gross abuses by a national, or a provincial. For,
besides Alb. Magnus, A\'hom I quoted before, ** Gerson, the
learned and devout chancellor of Paris, tells us plainly, " that
he AA ill not deny but that the Church may be reformed by
parts ; and that this is necessary, and that to effect it,
ProAincial Councils may suffice ; and, in some things.
Diocesan."'^ And again, " Either you should reform all

" Sect. xxiv. No. 2. [ubi sup. p. 168. scd ad hoc agendum sufficcrcnt con-
note P.] cilia provincialia, [et ad qutedam .sati.s

^ Nolo tamcn diccre, quin in multis essent concilia dioecesana et syno-

parlibus possitEcclesia per suas partes dalia, &c.] — Jolian. Gerson. ti-actat.

reformari ; immo hoc necesse esset ; dc Concilio general! unius obedientise,

James i. 20.

Several Ancient Instances. 171

estates of the Cliureli in a General Council, or command Section
them to be reformed in Provincial Councils," y Now Gerson
lived about two hundred years since. But this right of
provincial synods, that they might decree in causes of faith,
and in cases of reformation, where corruptions had crept
into the sacraments of Christ, was practised much above a
thousand years ago by many, both national and provincial,
synods. For the Council at Rome ^ under Pope Sylvester,
an. 324, condemned Photinus and Sabellius. (And their
heresies were of high nature against the faith.) The Council
at Gangra,^ about the same time, condemned Eustathius for
his condemning of marriage as unlawful. The first Council
at Carthage,'' being a provincial, condemned rebaptization
much about the year 348. The Provincial Council at
Aquileia,*' in the year 381, in which S. Ambrose was present,
condemned Palladius and Secundinus for embracing the
Arian heresy. The second Council of Carthage*^ handled
and decreed the belief and preaching of the Trinity ; and
this a little after the year 424. The Council of Milevis iu
Africa,*^ in which S. Augustine was present, condemned the
whole course of the heresy of Pelagius, that great and
bewitching heresy, in the year 416. The second Council at
Orange,^ a provincial too, handled the great controversies
about grace and free-will, and set the Church right in them,
in the year 444 [529.] The third Council at Toledo,^ a

part. i. p. 222. F. [Op., torn. ii. col. 26. * Concil. Gang. Can. i.— [Concil.

13. ed. Dupin.] torn. ii. col. 421. B.]

5" [Quid plura ] Ab Epi.«copis ad ^ Concil. Carth. I. Can. i. — [Concil.

concilium generale venientibus de torn. ii. col. 714. A.]

qualibet provincia, de omnibus in- "^ Concil. Aquiliens.— [Concil, tom.

quirite abusivis consuetudinibus, et ii. col. 979. C]

perniciosis ritibus, quacumque oc- •■ Concil. Carth. XL Can. i. — [Concil.

casione in ecclesiis et hominum tom. ii. col. 1159. B. The ordinary, but

statibus regionum diversarum intro- incorrect, date of this council is 397.]

ductis, ut super deviationibus prte- ^ Qua^dam de causis fidei, unde

missis, et consimilibus,] omnes nunc qucestio Pelagianorum imminet,

ecclesise status vel gencrali concilio in hoc coetu sanctissimo primitus

rcformetis, aut in conciliis provinciali- tractentur, &c. — Aurel. Carthaginen-

bus reformari mandetis, [ut de aucto- sis [Episcop.] in Prjefat. Concil. Mi-

ritate vestra reparetur Ecclesia, et levit. apud Caranzam, [Summ. Concil.

purgetur domus Dei ab immundiciis, p. 203. cd. Duac. 1679.]

vitiis, et crroribus universis.] — Johan. ' Concil. Arausican. II. Can.i. ii. &c.

Gerson. declarat. defectuum virorum — [Concil. tom. iv. col. 1667, et seqq]

Ecclesiasticorum, par. i. p. 209. B. s Concil. Tolet. 111. — [Concil. torn.

[Op., tom. ii. col. 317. D, ed. Dupin.] v. col. 997, The anathemas of this

'• Concil. Roman. II, sub Sylvestro, council were twenty-four in number,

—[Concil. tom, i. col. 1542, B,] —ibid. col. 1003—1005.]

1 72 Objections to the English Reformation answered.

CoKFEUENCE iiatioiial onc^ in the year 589, determined many things against

WITH . " •/ G ^

Fisher. ^^^ Ariau heresy, about the very prime articles of faith, under
' fourteen several anathemas. The fourth Couneil at Toledo

did not only handle matters of faith for the reformation of
that people, but even added also some things to the
creed, " which were not expressly delivered in former
creeds.^"' Nay, the bishops did not only practise this, to
condemn heresies in national and provincial synods, and so
reform those several places, and the Chui'ch itself by parts ;
but they did openly challenge this as their right and due,
and that without any leave asked of the See of Rome. For
in this foui'th Council of Toledo, they decree, " that if
there happen a cause of faith to be settled, a general, that
is, a national synod of all Spain and Gallicia shall be held
thereon.^^ ' And this in the year 643 [633] : where you see it
was then Catholic doctrine in all Spain, that a national synod
might be a competent judge in a cause of faith. And I would
fain know, what article of the faith doth more concern all
Christians in general, than that of Filioque ? And yet the
Church of Rome herself made that addition to the creed
without a General Council, as I have showed already.''
And if this were practised so often, and in so many places,
why may not a National Couneil of the Church of England
do the like ? — as she did. For she cast off the Pope's
usurpation, and, as much as in her lay, restored the King to
his right. That appears by a book subscribed by the
bishops in Hemy the Eighth's time;' and by the records™
in the Archbishop's office, orderly kept and to be seen. In
the Reformation which came after, our princes had their
parts, and the clergy theii-s ; ^ and to these two principally

•> Quae omnia in aliis Symbolis ex- Tolet. IV. Can. iii. — [Concil. torn. v.

plicite tradita non sunt. ^ — Concil. col. 1704. C]

Tolet. IV. Can. i.— [Concil. torn. v. '' Sect. xxiv. No. 2. [ubi sup. p. 168.]

col. 1703. The words cited by Laud ' The Institution of a Christian

are not from the decree of the council ; man: printed an. 1534.

but they are part of Caranza's Summary ■" In Synodo Londinensi, Sess. viii.

of the first Canon. — Summ. Concil. Die Veneris, xxix. Januarii, an. 1562.

P- 368.] " And so in the Reformation under

' Statuimus, ut saltern semel in Hezelviah (2 Chron. xxix.), and under

anno a nobis concilium cclebretur; Josiah (2 Kings xxiii.). And in the

ita tamen, ut si causa fidei est, aut time of Reccaredus, King of Spain, the

qufelibet alia Ecclesiie communis. Reformation there proceeded thus :

generalis[totius] Ilispanije ctGalliciiu t^uuni gloriosissimus princeps omncs

syuodus convocetur, &c. — Concil. rcgimiuis sui pontifices in unum

XXIV.

The Church of Rome prevents Reformation in the Church as a whole. 173

the power and direction for reformation belongs. Tliat oui- Section
princes had their parts, is manifest by their calling together .
of the bishops and others of the clergy, to consider of that
which might seem worthy reformation. And the clergy did
their part : for being thus called together by regal power, they
met in the national synod of sixy-two [1562] ; and the Articles
there agreed on were afterwards confirmed by acts of state
and the royal assent. In this synod the positive truths
which are delivered are more than the polemics ; so that a
mere calumny it is, that we profess only a negative religion.
True it is, and we must thank Rome for it, our confession
must needs contain some negatives ; for we cannot but
deny that images are to be adored ; nor can we admit
maimed sacraments ; nor grant prayers in an unknown
tongue. And in a corrupt time or place, it is as necessary
in religion to deny falsehood, as to assert and vindicate
truth. Indeed, this latter can hardly be well and suffi-
ciently done, but by the former ; an affirmative verity being
ever included in the negative to a falsehood. As for any
error which might fall into this, as any other, reformation,
if any such can be found, then I say, and it is most true ;
reformation, especially in cases of religion, is so difficult a
work, and subject to so many pretensions, that it is almost
impossible but the reformers should step too far, or fall too
short, in some smaller things or other ; which, in regard of
the far greater benefit coming by the reformation itself,
may well be passed over and borne withal. But if there
have been any wilful and gross errors, not so much in
opinion as in fact, sacrilege" too often pretending to reform
superstition, — that is the crime of the reformers, not of the

convenire mandasset, &c. — Concil. vientes ad emendandam vestram im-

Tolet. III. Can. i. [Concil. torn. v. col. pietatem promulgaverunt, res pro-

997. B.] — Cum convenissemus sacer- prias vestras cupide appetit, displicet

dotes Domini apud urbem Toletanam, nobis. Quisquis denique ipsas res

ut regiis imperils atque jussis com- pauperum, vel Basilicas congregatio-

moniti, &c. — Concil. Tolet. IV. in num, [quas sub nomine Ecclesife

princ. apud Caranzam. [p. 388.] And tenebatis, quae omnino non debentur

both these synods did treat of matters nisi ei ecclesiae, quae vera Christi

of faith. Ecclesia est,] non per justitiam, sed

" [Nos eis congregandis laboravi- per avaritiam, tenet, displicet nobis. —

mus, cum scriptum legatis, Labores S. Augustin. Epist. xlviii. vers, finem.

impiorum justi edent. (Prov. xiii. 22.) [Epist. xciii. ad Vincentium Rogatis-

Sed tamen] quisquis occasione hujus tam, cap. 12. Op., torn. li. col. 251. G.]
legis, quam rages terras Christo ser-

174 TFho is to be Judge of these points!

Conference reformation ; and tlicv are long since gone to G od to answer

Fisher, ^^j ^^ wliom I leave tliem.

' VI. — But now before I go off from tliis point, I must put

you in remembrance too, that I spake at that time, — and so
must all that will speak of that exigent, — of the General
Church, as it was for the most part forced under the
government of the Roman see. And this you understand
well enough ; for, in your very next words, you call it the
" Roman Church." Now I make no doubt, but that as the
universal Catholic Church would have reformed herself, had
she been in all parts freed of the Roman yoke ; so while she
was for the most in these Western parts under that yoke, the
Church of Roine was, if not the only, yet the chief, hindrance
of reformation. And then in this sense, it is more than
clear, that if the Roman Church will neither reform, nor
suffer reformation, it is lawful for any other particular
Church to reform itself, so long as it doth it peaceably and
orderly, and keeps itself to the foundation, and free from
sacrilege.P

A. C. p. 57. 5F- I asked, Qwo/wc^ice,* did this appear to be so? Which

question I asked, as not thinking it equity that
Protestants in their own cause should be accusers,
witnesses, and judges of the Roman Church.

* [This question the Jesuit made chiefly against that part of the IS.'s last
speech, in which he said, " there were errors in doctrine " : for if the U. meant,
as the Jesuit understood him to mean, that there were errors of doctrine of faitli
in the General Church, never did any lawful and competent judge so censure,
neither can it so be. No power in earth or hell itself can so far prevail against
the General Church of Christ, huilt upon a rock, as to make it, or the pastors
thereof, err generally in any one point of divine truth. Christ's promises stand

p And this a particular Church may Quare ergo vos separastis ] Quare,
do ; but not a schism. For a schism cum leviora quae fingitis fugitis,
can never be peaceable, nor orderly, ipsum sacrilegium schismatis, quod
and seldom free from sacrilege, est omnibus gravius, commisistis? —
Out of which respects, it maybe, as Cf.item:Deniquequandoalienapeccata
well as for the grievousness of the vos perverse devitanda esse censuistis,
crime, S. Augustine calls it Sacri- alia vestra fecistis sacrilegum schisma
legium Schismatis, de Baptismo populos dividendo, et sacrilegam
contra Dontatist. lib. i. cap. 8. [lib. ii. hferesim contra Dei manifestata pro-
cap. 7. Op., torn. ix. col. 102. B. missa et impleta de ecclesia toto orbe
Contaminabat Cyprianum Sacrile- diflusa nefario spiritu sentiendo. —
gium schismaticorum, an non con- S. Augustin. contra Gaudefet. Do-

taminabat ? Si autem non con- natist. lib. ii. cap. 9. Op., tom. ix.

taminabat, (juo scelere alieno possunt col. 672. C] For usually they go

in imitate contaminari innocentes, si together,
schismatis sacrilegio non possunt ]

Even if the claim to a Supremacy ivere allowed; 175

(Matt. xvi. [18.] and xxviii. [20.] Luke xxii. [32.] John xiv. [16.] and xvi. Section
[13.]), and will never permit this: no, not in Antichrist's days. Particular XXV.

pastors and churches may fall into heresy or apostasy, but the whole Church

cannot. It may sometime not expressly teach or know all divine truths, which
afterwards it may learn by study of Scriptures and other ways : but it never
did, nor can universally, by its full authority teach any thing to be divine truth,
which is not ; and much less anything to be a matter of faith, which is contrary
to divine truth, either expressed or involved in Scriptures rightly understood.
So as no reformation of faith can be needful in the General Church, but only in
particular churches : in which case also, when the need is only questionable,
particular pastors or churches must not take upon them to judge, and condemn
others of error in faith, but, as S. Irenajus intimateth, must have recourse to that
Church which hath more powerful principality, the Church of Rome, and to her
Bishop, being chief pastor of the whole Church, as being successor to S. Peter,
to whom Christ promised the keys (Matt. xvi. [19.]), for whom Christ prays that
his faith might not fail (Luke xxii. [32.]), and whom He charged to confirm his
brethren, and to feed and govern the whole flock, lambs and sheep (John xxi.
[17.]), people and pastors, subjects and superiors; which he shall never refuse
to do in such sort, as that this neglect sliall be a just cause for any particular
man or church to make a schism or separation of himself and others from the
whole General Church, under pretence of reformation either of manners or of
faith.

Protestants therefore did ill in first dividing themselves from the General
Church, and do still ill in continuing divided from it. Neither can those Protest-
ants be excused from intolerable pride and insolent madness, who presume to
be accusers, witnesses, judges, and executioners of the sentence pronounced by
themselves against the Church in General, and against the principal and mother
Church, and the Bishop of Rome, which is and ought to be their judge in this
case. For although it be against equity that subjects and children should be
accusers, witnesses, judges and executioners against their prince and mother
in any case, yet it is not absurd that in some case the prince or_ mother may
accuse, witness, judge, and, if need be, execute justice against unjust or rebel-
lious subjects, or evil children. — A. C. marg. note to p. 57.]

25. I. — You do well to tell the reason now wliy you asked § 25.
this question ; for you did not discover it at the Conference :
if you had, you might then have received your answer. It is
most true : no man in common equity ought to be suffered
to be accuser, witness, and judge in his own cause. But is
there not as little reason and equity too, that any man that
is to be accused, should be the accused, and yet witness, and
judge in his own cause ? If the first may hold, no man shall
be innocent ; and if the last, none will be nocent. And what
do we here with "in their own cause against the Roman
Church '' ? Why, is it not your own, too, against the Pro-
testant Church ? And if it be a cause common to both, as
certain it is, then neither part alone may be judge : if neither
alone may judge, then either they must be judged by a third
which stands indifferent to both,i — and that is the Scripture;
or if there be a jealousy or doubt of the sense of the Scrip-
ture, they must either both repair to the exposition of the

1 Sect. xxi. No. 9. [ubi sup. p. 163.]

176 the Question must still he decided by the Divine Law.

WITH

Fisher.

Conference primitive Churchy and sulimit to that ; or both call, and
submit to, a General Council, Avhich shall be lawfully called,
and fairly and freely held, with indifferency to all parties : and
that must judge the difference according to Scripture, which
must be their rule as well as private men's.

A. C. p. 58. II. — And here, after some loud cry against the pride and
insolent madness of the Protestants, A. C. adds, " that the
Chui'ch of Rome is the principal and mother Church ; and
that, therefore, though it be against common equity that
subjects and children should be accusers, witnesses, judges,
and executioners against their prince and mother in any
case, yet it is not absurd that, in some cases, the prince or
mother may accuse, witness, judge, and, if need be, execute
justice, against unjust and rebellious subjects, or evil chil-
dren." How far forth Rome is a prince over the whole
Church, or a mother of it, will come to be shewed at after.
In the meantime, though I cannot grant her to be either,
yet let us suppose her to be both, that A.C.'s argument may
have all the strength it can have. Nor shall it force me,
as plausible as it seems, to Aveaken the just power of princes
over their subjects, or of mothers over their children, to
avoid the shock of this argument. For though A. C. may
tell us "it is not absmxl in some cases," yet I would fain
have him name any one moderate prince that ever thought
it just, or took it upon him, to be accuser, and witness, and
judge in any cause of moment against his subjects, but that
the law had liberty to judge between them. For the great
philosopher tells us, "that the chief magistrate is custos
juris, the guardian and keeper of the law ; and if of the law,
then both of that equity and equality which is clue unto them
that arc under him." '" And even Tiberius himself, in the
cause of Silanus, when Dolabella w^ould have flattered him
into more power than in wisdom he thought fit then to take
to himself, he put him off thus : " No ; the laws grow less
where such power enlarges : nor is absolute power to be
used where there may be an orderly proceeding by law." *

iffTi 5e &px<^v (pxiKal rov Sinaiov cipibiis, satis ctiam potcntise:] minui

el Se Tov Sthaluv, Kol rod "laov.— Anstot. jura quotiens gliscat potestas; nee

Etli. [Nicom. lib. v.] cap. 6. [Op., utendum imperio, ubi legibus agi pos-

tom.ix. p. 101. ed. Bekker.] sit.— Tacit. Annal. lib. iii. [cap. 69.

' [Ne verterent sapieuter rcperta, ed. Brotier.]
et semper placita : satis oneram prin-

Errors of the Western Church attributable to influence of Rome. 177

And for parents, it is true, when children are young, they Section
may chastise them without other accuser or witness than

themselves; and yet the children are to give them reverence. Heb.xii. 9.

And it is presumed that natural affection will prevail so far

with them, that they will not punish them too much. For

all experience tells us, almost to the loss of education, that

they punish them too little, even when there is cause.*

Yet when children are grown up, and come to some full use

of their own reason, the Apostle's rule is, '^Parents, provoke Coloss. iii.

• • 21

not your children.'' And if the Apostle prevail not with "

froward parents, there is a magistrate and a law to relieve
even a son against unnatural parents, as it was in the case
of T. Manlius against his over-imperious father."^ And an
express law there was among the Jews, when children were I^eut. xxi.
grown up and fell into great extremities, that the parents
should then bring them to the magistrate, and not be too
busy in such cases with their own power. So suppose Rome
be a prince, yet her subjects must be tried by God's law,
the Scripture : and suppose her a mother, yet there is, or
ought to be, remedy against her for her children that are
grown up, if she forget all good nature, and turn step-dame
to them.

III. — Well, the reason why the Jesuit asked the question.
Quo judice? "Who should be judge?" he says was this;
Because there is no equity in it, that the Protestants should
be judges in their own cause. But now upon more delibe-
ration A. C. tells us, as if he knew the Jesuit's mind as well A. C. p. 57.
as himself, (as sure I think he doth,) "that the Jesuit
directed this question chiefly against that speech of mine.
That there were errors in doctrine of faith, and that in the
General Church, as the Jesuit understood my meaning."
The Jesuit here took my meaning right. For I confess I
said there were errors in doctrine, and dangerous ones too,
in the Church of Bome. I said likewise, that when the

* God used Samuel as a messenger ° Crimini ei tribunus inter cajtera

against Eli for his overmuch indul- dabat, quod filium juvenem, nuUius

gence to his sons. 1 Sam. iii. 13. And probri compertum, extorrem urbe,

yet Samuel himself committed the domo, penatibus, foro, luce, congressu

very same fault concerning his own aequalium prohibitum, in opus servile,

sons. 1 Sam. viii. 3—5. And this in- prope in carcerem, atque in ergastu-

dulgence occasioned the change of the lum, dederit. — Liv. dec. 1. lib. vii.

civil government, as the former was [cap. 4.]
the loss of the priesthood.

VOL. II. LAUD. Jf

178 The ivhole Church cannot err in points necessary to Salvation ;

Conference General Cliurcli could not, or would not, reform such, it was
fTsuer. lawful for i^articular Churches to reform themselves. But

^ then I added, "that the General Church (not universally

taken, hut in these Avestern parts) fell into those errors,

1 [later. . . being swayed in these latter' ages by the predominant power

Edit.it373.J ^^ ^j^g Church of Rome, under whose government it was for
the most part forced.'' And all men of understanding know
how oft and how easily an over-potent member carries the
whole with it, in any body, natural, politic, or ecclesiastical.

A. C. p. 57. IV.— Yea, but A. C. tells us, "that never any competent
judge did so censure the Church; and, indeed, that no
power on earth, or in hell itself, can so far prevail against
the General Church as to make it err generally in any one
point of divine truth, and much less to teach any thing by
its full authority to be a matter of faith which is contrary to
divine truth, expressed or involved in Scriptures rightly
understood. And that, therefore, no reformation of faith
can be needful in the General Chm'ch, but only in particular
Cluu-ches." And for proof of this he cites S. Matt. xvi. and
xxviii., S. Luke xxii., S. John xiv. and xvi. In this trouble-
some and quarrelHng age, I am most unwiUing to meddle
with the erring of the Church in general. The Church of
England is content to pass that over. And though she tells
us, " That the Church of Rome hath erred even in matters
of faith," ^ yet of the erring of the Chiu'ch in general she is
modestly silent. But since A. C. -will needs have it, that the
Avhole Church did never generally err in any one point of faith,
he should do well to distinguish before he be so peremptory.
For if he mean no more than " tliat the whole Universal
Church of Christ cannot universally err in any one point of
faith simply necessary to all men's salvation," he fights
against no adversary that I know, but his own fiction. For
the most learned Protestants grant it.>^ But if he mean that
the whole Church cannot err in any one point of divine truth
in general, which, though by sundry consequences deduced

* Art. XIX. Sancto doceri se per verbum Dei pati-

y [Nos] si demus [illud primum,] tur. — Calvin. Inslit. lib. iv. cap. 8. § i:'.

errare non posse Ecclcsiam in rebns [Op., torn. viii. p. 310.] And this alt^o

ad salutem necessariis : hie sensiis is our sense. Yidc supra, Sect. xxi.

noster est, ideo hoc esse, quod abdi- No. 5. [p. 155.]

cata omni sua sapientia, a Spiritu

Yet it may be misinformed and err in points not fundamental. 179

from the principles, is yet^ a point of faitli, and may prove Section
dans^erous to the salvation of some, which believe it and " "

practise after it, as his words seem to import, especially if in ^^^J^^
these the Church shall presume to determine without her Editt. 1673
proper guide, the Scripture, as Bellarmine says she may, ''^^^" ^^^'^
and yet not err f — then, perhaps, it may be said, and witliout
any wrong to the Catholic Church, that the whole militant
Church hath erred in such a point of divine truth and of
faith. Nay, A. C. confesses expressly in his very next words, A. C. p. 58.
" that the Avhole Church may at some time not know all
divine truths, which afterwards it may learn by study of
Scripture, and otherwise." So, then, in A. C/s judgment
the whole militant Church may at some time not know all
divine truths. Now, that which knows not all, must be
ignorant of some ; and that which is ignorant of some, may
possibly err in one point or other ; the rather, because he
confesses the knowledge of it must be got by learning ; and
learners may mistake and err, especially where the lesson is
divine truth out of Scripture, out of difficult Scripture. For
were it of plain and easy Scripture that he speaks, the whole
Church could not at any time be without the knowledge of
it. And for aught I yet see, the whole Church militant hath
no greater warrant against not erring in, than against not
knowing of, the points of divine truth. For in S. John xvi. John xvi.
there is as large a promise to the Church of knowing all points "'
of divine truth, as A. C, or any Jesuit, can produce for her
not erring in any. And if she may be ignorant or mistaken
in learning of any point of divine truth, doubtless in that
state of ignorance she may both err, and teach her error ;
yea, and teach that to be divine truth which is not ; nay,
perhaps teach that as a matter of divine truth which is con-
trary to divine truth, always provided it be not in any point
simply fundamental, of which the whole Catholic Church -
cannot be ignorant, and in which it cannot err, as hath
before been proved.^

V. — As for the places of Scripture which A. C. cites to prove A. C. p. 57.

^ Nostra [igitur] sententia est, Ec- Scripturis, sive non. — Bellarmin. de

clesiam absolute non posse errare, uec Eccl. Mil. lib. iii. cap. 1-4. § 4. [Op.,

in rebus absolute necessariis, nee in torn. ii. col. 148. D.]
aliis, qu£e credcnda, vel facienda nobis " Sect. xxi. No. 5. [ubi sup. p. 155]

proponit, sive habcantur expresse in

180 Passages of Scripture alleged conclude, not InfalUbility,

CoNFERKNCE that the whole Church cannot err generally in any one point
Fisher. ^^ divine truth_, be it fundamental or not, they are known
places, all of them, and are alleged by A. C. three several
times in this short tract, and to three several purposes.
A. C. p. 57. Here, to prove that the Universal Church cannot err; before
A. C. p. 53. this, to prove that the tradition of the present Chiu'ch cannot
A.C.pp.58, err ; after this, to prove that the Pope cannot err. He shoidd
have done well to have added these places a fourth time, to
prove that General Councils cannot err. For so doth both
Stapleton^ and Bellarmine,'^ Sm-e A. C. and his fellows
are hard driven, when they must fly to the same places for
such different purposes : for a Pope may err, where a Council
doth not ; and a General Council may err, where the Catholic
Church cannot. And, therefore, it is not likely that these
places should serve alike for all. The first place is S. Mat-
thew xv4. There Christ told S. Peter, and we believe it most
Mat,t.xvi. assui-edly, "That hell gates shall never be able to prevail
against His Church.'' But that is, that they shall not pre-
vail to make the Chiu'ch Catholic apostatize, and fall quite
away from Christ, or err in absolute fundamentals, which
amounts to as much. But the promise reaches not to this.
That the Chui'ch shall never err ; no, not in the lightest mat-
ters of faith. For it will not follow : Hell gates shall not
prevail against the Church ; Therefore helHsh de\dls shall not
tempt or assault, and batter it. And thus S. Augustine
understood the place : " It may fight (yea, and be wounded
too) but it cannot be wholly overcome.'' ^ And Bellarmine
himself apphes it to prove that the \dsible Church of Christ
cannot deficere, " err so as quite to fall away." " Therefore,
in his judgment, this is a true and a safe sense of this text of
Scripture. But as for not erring at all, in any point of

'" Staplcton. Eelect. [Controv.] in chumen. cap. vi. [Op., torn. vi. col.

prsef. ad lectorem. [Op., torn. i. pp. 554. E.]

511—515.] e [Probare igitur volumus, Eccle-

« [Concilia generalia a pontificD siam visibilem non posse deficere ; et

confirmata, errare non posse, ex scrip- nomine Ecclesise non intelligimus

turis demonstratur.]— Bellarmin. de unum aut alterum hominem Chris-

Concil. [auctoritat.] lib. ii. cap. 2. [in tianum, sed multitudinem congrega-

tit. Op., torn. ii. col. 53. C] tarn, in qua sint prtelati, et subditi.

^ [Ipsa est Ecclesia sancta, Ecdesia Primum, id ostenditur ex scripturis,

una, Ecclesia vera, Ecclesia catholica, ubi aperte nominatur Ecclesia, Slatth.

contra omnes hfereses pugnans :] pug- xvi. 18. Super banc petram, &c.] —

nare potest, expugnari non potest.— Bellarmin. de Eccl. Milit. lib. iii. cap.

S. Augustin. lib. de symbolo, ad cate- 13. § 1, 2. [Op., torn. ii. col. 145. D.j

but, a promise against Defection, and also a promise of Assistance. 181

divine truth, and so making the Church absokitely infallible,
that is neither a true nor a safe sense of this scripture. And
it is very remarkable, that whereas this text hath been so
much beaten upon by writers of all sorts, there is no one
Father of the Church for twelve hundred years after Christ,
the counterfeit or partial Decretals of some Popes excepted,
that ever concluded the infallibility of the Church out of this
place ; but her non-deficiency, that hath been, and is, justly
deduced hence. And here I challenge A. C. and all that
party to show the contrary, if they can. The next place of
Scripture is S. Matthew xxviii., the promise of Christ that
" He will be with them to the end of the world." But this,
in the general voice of the Fathers of the Chiuxh, is a pro-
mise of assistance and protection, not of an infallibility, of
the Church.^ And Pope Leo himself enlarges this presence
and providence of Christ to all those things which He com-
mitted to the execution of His ministers. s But no word of

Section
XXV.

Matt,
xxviii. 21.

' [Sciens ergo Dominus non adver-
sus camem et sanguinem nobis pug-
nam esse, sed ad versus mundi hujus
potentes et nequitias spiritales, ait
Evangelia consummans : Ecce Ego
vobiscum &c. Adest enim : et cum
fideliter invocatur, per naturam suam
prsesens est. Spiritus namque est
omnia penetrans et continens. Non
enim secundum nos corporalis est, ut
cum alicubi adsit, absit aliunde : scd
virtute prcesenti, et se quacunque est
aliquid porrigenti, cum replente omnia
ejus Spiritu in omnibus sit, tamen ei
qui in eum credat adsistit. Nam et
tribus vel duobus in nomine suo con-
gregatis erit praesens, et in circuitu
populi sui est ex hoc nunc et usque in
seternum.] — S. Hilar. [Pictav.Tractat ]
in Psalmum cxxiv. [cap. 6. Op., col.
405. A. ed. Benedict.]— [Ecce Ego
vobiscum &c. Id est, cum sicut oves
introieritis in medium luporum, no-
lite de vesti'a infirmitate trepidare,
sed de mea potestate confidite, qui vos
usque ad consummationem sasculi in
omni hoc opere non derelinquam : non
hoc ut nihil patiamini, sed, quod
multo majus est, prsestiturus ut nulla
esevientium crudelitate superemini.
In mea enim potestate praedicabitis,
&c.] — S. Prosp. [Aquitan. seu potius
ignoti auctoris,] de vocat. [omn.] gen-
tium, lib. ii. cap. 2. [inter Op., S. Pro-
sper, p. 888. col. 2. D. ed. Paris. 1711.]
— [Ut autem noverint corda fidelium

habere se, unde ad supernam sapien-
tiam spretis mundi cupiditatibus va-
leant elevari, spondet nobis Dominus
prcesentiam suam, dicens : Ecce Ego
vobiscum &c. . . . Implet ergo Jesus
proprietatem nominis sui : et qui as-
cendit in ccelos, non deserit adoptatos :
qui sedet ad dexter'am Patris idem
totius habitator est corporis : et ipse
deorsum confortat ad patientiam, qui
seorsum invitat ad gloriam.] — S. Leon.
Magn. Serm. ii. de Resurrect. Domini,
cap. 3. [Serm. Ixxii. (al. Ixx.) Op.,
tom. i. col. 286. ed. Ballerini.]— Et,
[Unde quia non deserit ecclesiam suam
divina protectio, dlcente Domino :
Ecce ego vobiscum &c. — [Id.] Epist.
xxxi. [Epist. Ix. (al. xlviii.) ad Pul-
cheriam Augustam, Op., tom. i. col.
982.]— [Jesus igiter noster solem stare
fecit, non tunc solum, sed multo magis
modo in adventu suo, dum nos bellum
gerimus adversus vitiorum gentes, et
coUuctamur adversus principes, et po-
testates, et rectores harum tenebra-
rum, adversus spiritualia nequitise in
coelestibus. Sol nobis justitite indesi-
nenter assistit, nee deserit unquam
nos, nee festinat occumbere, quia Ipse
dixit : Ecce Ego vobiscum &c.] — S.
Isidor. [Hispalens. Mysticorum expo-
sitiones Sacramentorum, seu, Quaest.
in Vet. Test.,] in Josue cap. xii. [2.
Op., tom. V. p. 486. ed. Lorenzanse,
Rom£e, 1802.]

If [Cui utique operi incessabiliter

183 Inconsistency in alleying S. Luke xxii. both of S. Peter and of the Cli.

AVITH
FiSHEK.

Conference iiifiillibility is to be found there And indeed since Christ,
according to His promise, is present with His ministers in all
these things, and that one and a chief of these " all " is the
preaching of His Avord to the people ; it must follow that
Christ should be present with all His ministers that preach
His word, to make them infallible : which daily experience

Luke xxii, tells US is not so. The third place urged by A. C. is S. Luke
xxii., where the prayer of Christ will effect no more than His
promise hath performed ; neither of them implying an infal-
libility for or in the Church against all errors whatsoever.
And this, almost all his own side confess, is spoken either of
* [succes- S. Peter's person only, or of him and his successors, or' both.''
Of the Chui'ch it is not spoken, and therefore cannot prove
an unerring power in it. For how can that place prove the
Chiu'ch cannot err, which speaks not at all of the Church ?
And it is observable, too, that Avhen the divines of Paris
expounded this place, that Christ here prayed for S.Peter,
as he rej)resented the whole Catholic Church, and obtained
for it that the faith of the Catholic Chiu'ch nunquani cleficeret,
" should never so err as quite to fall away," Bellarmine is
so stiff for the Pope, that he says expressly, " This exposition
of the Parisians is false," and that this text cannot be meant
of the Catholic Church.' Not be meant of it ? Then,

. . . Editt.
3673 and

1086.]

ipse Salvator intervenit,] nee unquam
ab his abest, qufe ministris suis exe-
quenda commisit, [dicens : Ecce Ego
vobiscum &c. lit si quid per servitvitem
nostram bono ordine et gratulando
iinplctur eftectu, nou ambigamus per
Spiritum Sanctum fuisse donatum.]
— S. Leon. Magn. Epist. xci. cap. 2.
[Epist. cviii. (al. Ixxxiii.) ad Tlieo-
dorum Episcop. Forojul. Op., torn. i.
col. 1174. ed. 15allerini.]

'' Est igitur tertia [expositio vera,
quod Dominua duo privilegia Petro
inipetraverit. Unum, ut ipse non pos-
set unquam veram lidein amittcre,
quantumvis teutaretur a diabolo . . .
alteram privilcgium est, ut ipse tan-
([uam pontifex non po.s,sct unquam
docere aliquid contra fidem, sive, ut
in sede ejus nunquam inveniretur, qui
doccret contra veram fidcm. Ex qui-
bus privilcgiis, jirimum fortasse non
nianavit ad posteros : at secundum
sine dubio nianavit ad posteros, sive
successores.] — ]3cllarmin. de llom.
Pontif. lib. iv. cap. 3. § 4. Op., torn. i.

col. 806. C] He understood the place
of both S. Peter and his successors.

' [Qui locus, (sc. Simon, Simon,
ecce Satanas &c.) tribus modis expoui
solet. Prima expositio est quorundam
Parisiensium, quod Dominus hie ora-
verit pro ecclesia univer.sali, sive pro
Petro ut totius ecclesipe figuram gore-
bat ; et hoc impetrasse, ut tides Eccle-
sia; catholicrc uiiiiqiiam deficiat : qua;
expo.sitio si ita intelligeretur, ut dice-
ret immediate oratum esse pro capite
Ecclesia;, et conscquenter pro toto cor-
pora, quod per caput reprtesentatur,
vera csset ; sod non ita ipsi intelli-
gnnt : volunt cnim pro sola Ecclesia
esse oratum.] Qua; expositio falsa est.
Prime, quia [TJominus unam tantum
personam dcsignavit, dicens bis: Si-
mon, Simon, et addens toties prono-
men secunda; persona; Pro te, Fides
ttia, et Tu, Fratrcs tuos.'\ — Bellarmin.
ibid. § 1, 2. [col. 805 C] And he
saj's it is false because the Parisians ex-
pounded it of the Church only. Volunt
cuim pro sola Ecclesia esse oratum.

The promised Comforter was to guide the Ch. into all necessary Truth. 183
certainly, it ouelit not to be alleged as proof of it, as here it Section

XXV

is by A. C. The fourth place named by A. C. is S. Johnxiv. 1_

and the consequent place to it, S. John xvi. These places AC. p. 57.

. . . Johnxiv.

contain another promise of Christ concerning the coming ol le, 17.

the Holy Ghost. Thus, "that the Comforter shall abide John xvi.
with them for ever ;'' that this Comforter is " the Spirit of
truth ;" and that this " Spirit of truth will lead them into all
truth." Now this promise, as it is applied to the Church,
consistins: of all believers which are and have been since
Christ appeared in the flesh, including the Apostles, is
absolute, and without any restriction.'' For the Holy Ghost
did lead them into all truth, so that no error was to be found
in that Church. But as it is applicable to the whole Church
militant in all succeeding times, so the promise was made
with a limitation,' namely, that the Blessed Spirit should
abide with the Church for ever, and lead it into all truth ;
but not simply into all curious truth — no, not in or about
the faith — but into all truth necessary to salvation. And
against this truth the whole Catholic Church cannot err,
keeping herself to the direction of the Scripture, as Christ
hath appointed her. For in this very place where the pro-
mise is made, that the Holy Ghost " shall teach you all
things," it is added, that " He shall bring all things to their John xiv.
remembrance." What? simply all things? No: but "all
things which Christ had told them." So there is a limita-
tion put upon the words by Christ Himself. And if the
Church vrill not err, it must not ravel curiously into unneces-

^ Field, "Of the Cliurch," book iv. succeeding generations 1 So tliat touch-
chap. 2. [p. 344. "If we speak of the ing the Church taken in this sort.
Church, as it comprehendeth tlie whole there is no question, but it is abso-
numberofbelievers, that are, and have lutely led into the knowledge of all
been since Christ appeared in the truth, without any mixture of igno-
flesh, it is absolutely] free from all ranee, error, or danger of being de-
error and ignorance of divine things, ceived."]

[that are to be known by revelation. ' And Theodoret proceeds farther,

Quid cnim latuit Petrum &c. (lib, de and says, Nee divini prophetse, nee

prtescript. hajret.) For as TertuUian admirabiles Apostoli omnia praascivc-

saith rightly and aptly to this pur- runt. Queecunque enim expediebant,

pose. What was hidden and concealed ea illis signilicavlt gratia Spiritus.

from Peter, upon whom Christ pro- [Owte ol 6e7oi 7rpo(p7]rat, ovre ol dea-ire-

mised to build His Church, and to atoi air6aTu\oi iravra TrpoySeffav 'daa

whom He gave the keys of the king- ')dp iAvcrireKe?, irpoeSr]\ov auroTs fi x^'

dom of heaven ? from John the disciple pis rod Tn/eiViaros.] — Theodoret. [Epi-

He so dearly loved, which leaned on scop. Cyren.] in 1 Epist.ad Timoth.iii.

His breast at the mystical supper'? 14,1.5. [Op., torn. iii. p, 477. ed. Paris,

and the rest of that Ijlesscd company ? 1G42.]
that should after be manifested to

184 Particular Churches deferring to SS. and Primitive Ch., may

Conference sary truths^ -svliicli arc out of the promise^ nor follow any

Fisher, otlicr guide than the doctrine which Christ hath left behind

Him to govern it. For if it AviU come to the end, it must

keep in the way. And Christ, Who promised the Spirit

should lead, hath no where promised that it shall follow

' [not ... its leader, " into all truth," and at least ' infallibly, unless you

and 1680 1 ^^^^ hmit, as before. So, no one of these places can make
good A. C.'s assertion, "that the Avhole Church cannot err
generally in any one point of di%ane truth." In absolute
foundations she cannot : ™ in deductions and superstructures
she may.

VI. — Now, to all that I have said concerning the " right
which particular Churches have to reform themselves, when
the General Church cannot for impediments, or will not for
negligence," which I have proved at large before," all the

A. C. p.57. answer that A. C. gives, is: First, Quo judice? "Who shall
be judge?" And that shall be the Scripture and the
primitive Church ; " and by the rules of the one, and to
the integrity of the other, both in faith and manners, any
particular Church may safely reform itself.

VII. — Secondly, " That no reformation in faith can be
needful in the General Church, but oidy in particular

A. C. p. 58. Churches. In which case also," he saith, " particular

Churches may not take upon them to judge and condemn

others of errors in faith." Well, how far forth reformation

even of faith may be necessary in the General Church, I

have expressed already .p And for particular Churches, I

do not say, " that they must take upon them to judge or

condemn others of error in faith." That which I say, is,

"They may reform themselves." Now I hope, "to reform

themselves," and " to condemn others," are two different

works ; unless it fall out so, that by reforming themselves,

they do by consequence condemn any other, that is guilty

in that point in which they reform themselves ; and so far

"" Sect. xxi. No. 5. [uLi sup. p. 155.] Quid autem si neque Apostoli quidem

° Sect. xxiv. No. 1, 2, &c. [ubi sup. scrlpturas reliquissent nobis, nonne

pp. 167, 168.] oportcbat ordinem sequi traditionis,

" Si de [aliqua] modica qutestioue [quam tradiderunt iis quibus com-

disceptatio cssct, nonne oporteret in mittebant Ecclesias]] — S. IrensBus,

antiquissimas recurrere ecclesias, in contra hnereses, lib. ill. cap. 4. [Op.,

quibu.s Apostoli conversati sunt, et ab p. 205. ed. Grabe.]

eis de prsesenti qusestione sumere p Sect. xxv. No. 4. [ubi sup. p. 178.]
quod certura et [re] liquidum est ?

reform themselves, without having recourse to the Ch. of Rome. 185

to iudge and condemn others^ is not only lawful, but Section
necessary. A man that lives religiously, doth not by and ^

by sit in judgment, and condemn with his mouth all pro-
fane livers ; but yet, while he is silent, his very life con-
demns them. And I hope, in this way of judicature, A. C.
dares not say it is unlawful for a particular Church or man
to condemn another. And farther, whatsoever A. C. can
say to the contrary, there are divers cases, where heresies
are known and notorious, in which it will be hard to say,
(as he doth,) That one particular Church must not judge or A. C. p. 58.
condemn another, so far forth, at least, as to abhor and
protest against the heresy of it.

VIII. — Thirdly, If one particular Church may not judge
or condemn another, what must then be done, where par-
ticulars need reformation ? What? Why then A. C. tells
us : " That particular Churches must in that case, as A. C. p 58.
Irenseus intimateth, have recoui'se to the Church of Rome,
which hath more powerful principality, and to her bishop,i
who is chief pastor of the whole Church, as being S. Peter's
successor, ' to whom Christ promised the keys,' for whom Matt. xvi.
He prayed ' his faith might not fail,' and whom He charged to Luke xxii.
' feed and govern the whole flock.' And this," A. C. tells us, John xxi.
" he shall never refuse to do in such sort, as that this neg-
lect shall be a just cause for any particular man or Church,
under pretence of reformation in manners or faith, to make
a schism or separation from the whole general Church."

IX. — Well, first you see where A. C. would have us. " If

any particular Churches differ in points of divine truth, they

must not judge or condemn each other," saith he. No,

take heed of that in any case; that is the office of the

universal Church. And yet he will have it, " That Rome,

which is but a particular Church, must and ought ^ judge all ' [ought
. , to. . . Edit.

other particulars. 1686.]

X. — Secondly, he tells us this is so, "Because the Church
of Rome hath more powerful principality than other par-
ticular Churches, and that her bishop is pastor of the whole
Church." To this I answer, that it is most true indeed ;
the Church of Rome hath had, and hath yet, " more powerful

1 And after he saith, p. 58. " That be, the judge of particular Churches in
the Bishop of Rome is, and ought to this case."

186

Primaci/ of the Roman Patriarch a primacy of order.

Conference principality " tlian any otlier particular Church : hut she
fIVher. ^^'^^^^ ^o* tliis power from Christ. The Roman patriarch,, by
ecclesiastical constitutions, might perhaps have a primacy of
order ; but for principality of power, the patriarchs Avere as
even, as equal, as the Apostles i' were before them. The
truth is, this "more powerful principality^' the Roman bishops^
' [Chris- got under the emperors, after they became Christian ; ^ and
Editt. 1673 ^l^^y ^^sd the matter so, that they grew big enough to
and 16-86.] oppose, nay to depose, the emperors, by the same power
which they had given them. And after this, other par-
ticular Churches, especially here in the West, submitted
themselves to them for succour and protection's sake. And
this was one main cause which swelled Rome into this " more
powerful principality," and not any right given by Christ to
make that prelate' pastor of the whole Church. I know
Bellarmine makes much ado about it, and Avill needs fetch
it out of S. Augustine,'' who says indeed, ''That in the

Eespondeo : Pontificatum [sum-
mum diserte positum ab Apostolo ia
illis verbis : Et Ipse dedit quosdara
quidem Apostolos : et clarius I Cor.
xii. 28, ubi ait : Et Ipse posuit ia
ccclesia primum Apostolos, &c. Si
quidem] summa potestas ecclesiastica
non solum data est Petro, sed etiam
aliis Apostolis: omnes enim poterant
dicere illud S. Pauli, [Instantia
mea quotidiana,] soUicitudo omnium
Ecclesiarum, 2 Cor. xi. 28. — Bellar-
min. de Pom. Pont. lib. i. cap. 9.
[§ 45. Op., tom. i. col. 537. D.] Where
then is the difference between S. Peter
and the rest 1 In this, saith Bellarmine,
(Ibid.) Sed Petro data est summa
potestas ccclesiastica ut ordinario
pastori, cui perpetuo succederctur;
aliis vero, tanijuam delegatis, quibus
non succederctur. This is handsomely
said to men easy of belief. But
that the highest power ecclesiastical,
confessed to be given to the other
apostles as well as to S. Peter, was
given to S. Peter only, as to an
ordinary pastor, whose successors
.should have the same power, which
the successors of the rest should
not have, can never be proved out of
Scripture. Naj', (I will give them
their own latitude,) it can never be
proved by any tradition of the whole
Catholic Church. And till it be
proved, Bellarmine's handsome ex-

pression cannot be believed by me ;
for S. Cyprian hath told me long
since, that Episcopatus unus est, (for
as much as belongs to the calling,) us
wellas Apostolatus. — Lib. desimplicit.
prrelatorum. [S. Cyprian's words arc :
Nisi si per Episcopus tibi videtur qui
episcopo in ecclesia a sodium co-
episcopis facto, adulter atque ex-
traneus episcopus fieri a desertoribus
per ambitum nititur, et cum sit a
Chri.sto una ecclesia per totum mun-
dum in multa membra divisa, item
episcopatus unus cpiscoporum multo-
rum coucordi numerositate diti'usus,
ille po.st Dei traditionem, post con-
nexam et ubique conjunctam Catho-
licse ecclesias nnitatem huuianani
conetar ecclesiam facere, et per pluri-
mas civitates novos apostolos sues
mittat, &c.— S. Cyprian. Epist. lii. ad
Antonianum, Op., p. 73. ed. Benedict.]
^ Sect. XXV. No. 12. [vide infra, p. 194.]
' [Bellarmin.] de Pom. Pont. lib. i.
cap. ix. § 46. [col. 538. B. ubi sup.
note ^]

" [Erat etiam (Carthago) transmari-
nis vicina rcgionibus et fama celcbcr-
rima nobilis : unde non mediocris
utique auctoritatis habebat episco-
pum, qui posset non curare conspiran-
tem multitudinem inimicorum, cum
se videret et] liomana? Ecclesise, in
qua semper Apostolicaj Cathedrte
viguit principalus, [et ceteris terris.

S. Augustine, as alleged by Bdlarmine, explained. 187

Church of Rome there did always flourish the principality of Section
an apostolic chair;'' or, if you Aviil, the apostolic chau- in " "

relation to the West and South parts of the Churcli;, aU the
other four apostolic chairs being in the East. Now, this no
man denies, that understands the state and story of the
Church ; and Calvin'' confesses it expressly. Nor is the
word principatus so great, nor were the bishops of those
times so little, as that principes and principatus are not com-
monly given them, both by the Greeks and the Latin
Fathers of this great and learnedest age of the ChiuTh,
made up of the fourth and fifth hundred years ; always
understanding principatus of their spiritual power, and within
the limits of their several jurisdictions, which perhaps now
and then they did occasionally exceed. And there is not
one word in S. Augustine, "That this principality of the
Apostolic chair in the Church of Eome was then, or ought
to be now, exercised over the whole Church of Christ,'' as
Bellarmine insinuates there, and as A. C. would have it
here. And to prove that S. Augustine did not intend by
principatus here, to give the Roman bishop any power out of
his own limits, (which God knows were far short of the

unde evangelium ad ipsam Africam bislioii in general. — Ascribuntur cpi-

veuit, per communic-atoinas literas scopo ^waania, Bv/xu koI dpxv, im-

esse conjimctum, nbi paratus esset perium, thronus, et principatus ad

causam suam diccre, si adversarii regimen aniniarum. — Greg, Nazianz.

ejus ab eo illas Ecclesias alienare Orat. xvii. [Ka! o tov XpiaTov v6p.os

conarentur.] — S. Augustin. Epist. v-KoriQrjnw v^dis rfj ifxjj Svi^acrTeia kuI

clxii. [Epist. xliii. ad Gloriuni et rai i/j.^ ^r.fjLan' apxa/j.^v yap ku\ avroi'

Eleusium. &c. cap. 3. Op., torn. ii. irpoadriaui d\ oVt uai t^v fxii^ova. kol

col. 91. E.] TfK^wTfpav apx'nv' — S. Greg. Nazianz.

" Opinio [enim ilia, qu£e ncscio Orat. xvii. (ad cives Nazianzenos,)

quomodo] invaluerat, fundatam [et cap. 8. Op., torn. i. pp. 322, 323.

constitutam] earn fuisse Ecclcsiam E. A. ed. Benedict.] — Et, rotavrr)

Petri ministerio, [ad conciliandam o.pxv, bujupmodi iniperium. And be

gratiam et auctoritatem plurimum also speaks of a bisbop. {apxo^Tos Se

valebat ;] itaque in occidente sedes koX Trpoo-Tdrov kukIui', kuI fxaAiara

Afiostolica, bonoris causa, vocabatur. rrjV roiavrriv o.px7]v, t6 jxt) -koKv tuu

— Calvin. Instit. lib. iv. cap. 6. § 16. -koKKcuv ■rrpoe'xei:'.] — Id. Orat. xx,

[Op., torn. viii. p. 298.] [al. xliii. (Orat. Funeb. in S. Basil.)

y [Non enimapostolicus sermo pro- cap. 38. Op., torn. i. p. 800. B.] Nor

bitatis bonestatisque prasceptis liomi- were the.^e any titles of pride in

nem tantum steculo conformat ad bisbops tbcn. For S. Greg. Nazianz.

vitam, neqne rursum per doctrince wbo challenges these titles to himself,

scientiam scribam synagogae instituit Orat. xvii. was so devout, so mild,

ad legem: sed pei-fectum] ecclesias and so humble, that rather than the

principcm [perfectis maximarum peace of the Church should be

virtutura bonis instituit, nt et vita broken, he freely resigned the great

ejus ornetur docendo, et doctrina patriarchate of Constantinople, and

vivendo.]— S. Hilar, de Trinitate, lib. retired ; and this in the First Comicil

viii. [in] princip. [cap. i. Op., col. 947. of Constantinople, and the Second

B. ed. Benedict.] And he .'peaks of a General.

188 Independence of the African Church in S, Augustine's time.

Conference wholc Cliurcli,) I shall make it most manifest out of the
fTsher ^'^^y same epistle. " For afterwards/^ saith S. Augustine,

"when the pertinacity of the Douatists could not be re-
strained by the African bishops only/ they gave them leave
to be heard by foreign bishops.^' And after that he hath these
words : " And yet peradventure jNIelchiades, the bishop of the
Roman Church, with his colleagues, the transmarine bishops,
non debuit, ought not usurp to himself this judgment, which
was determined by seventy African bishops, Tigisitanus
sitting primate. And what will you say if he did not
usurp this power? For the emperor, being desired, sent
bishops judges, which should sit with him, and determine
what was just upon the whole cause.'' '^ In which passage
there are very many things observable ; As first, that the
Roman prelate came not in, till there was leave for them to
go to " transmarine bishops.'' Secondly, that if the pope had
come in wdthout this leave, it had been an "usurpation."
Thirdly, that when he did thus come in, not by his own
proper authority but by leave, there were other bishops
made "judges with him." Fourthly, that these other bishops
were " appointed and sent by the emperor," and his power ;
that which the pope will least of all endm'e. Lastly, lest
the pope and his adherents should say this was an usurpation
in the emperor, S. Augustine'' tells us a little before, in the
same epistle still, " that this doth chiefly belong ad curam
ejus, to the emperor's care and charge, and that he is to give

' [Itaque aut istas omnes causas, sibi usurpai-e judicium, quod ab Afris

quas clades turbulentissimi temporis septuaffinta, ubi primas Tigisitanus

inflixit ecclesiae, Deo judici dimitta- praesedit, fuorat terminatum '? Quid

mus : aut si aliqui in vobis sunt, qui quod nee ipse usurpavit ? Rogatus

certa istorum crimina ita noverint, quippe Imperator, judices misit

ut ea facile valeant edocere, negantes- episcopos, qui cum co scderent, et de

que convincere, et talibus communi- tota ilia causa, quod justum viderotur,

care formidant,] pergant ad fratres statuerent. — S. Augustin. Ibid. [cap.

et collcgas nostros transmarinarum 5. col. 94. D. ut sup. note ".]

ecclesiarum episcopos, [et ibi prius ^ [An forte sicnt quidam dixit,

de istorum factis et contumacia con- quod quidem cum vobis diceretur,

querantur, quod ad judicium colle- displicuit; scd tamen prretermitten-

garum Afrorum male sibi conscii dum non est : ait enim quidam,

venire noluerunt, ut inde illis denun- Non debuit episcopus proconsular!

cietur ut veniant, ibique objectis judicio purgari : quasi vero ipse .sibi

respondeant.] — S. Augustin. Epist. hoc comparaverit, ac non imperator

clxii. [Epist. xliii. cap. 8. col. 92. B. ita quteri jusserit;] ad cujus curam,

ut sup. note ".] de qua rationem Deo redditurus est,

* An forte non debuit Romance res ilia maxima pertinebat. — S.

ecclesia? Melchiades episcopus cum Augustin. Epist. clxii. [cap. 4. col. 93.

collegis transmarinis episcopis illud G. ut sup. note ".]

All Patriarchs supreme ivithin their oivn jurisdiction. 189

an account to God for it." And Melcliiades did sit and judge Section
the business with all Christian prudence and moderation. ^^^^-
So at this time the Roman prelate was not received as
pastor of the whole Church, say A. C. what he please. Nor
had he any supremacy over the other patriarchs; and for
this, were all other records of antiquity silent, the civil law
is proof enough, and that is a monument of the primitive
Church. The text there is : A patriarcha non datur ap-
pellatio,'^ " From a patriarch there lies no appeal." No
appeal. Therefore every patriarch was alike supreme in
his own patriarchate. Therefore the pope then had no
supremacy over the whole Church. Therefore certainly not
then received as universal pastor. And S. Gregory himself,
speaking of appeals, and expressly citing the laws them-
selves, says plainly : " That the patriarch is to put a final
end to those causes, which come before him by appeal from
bishops and archbishops;'^'^ but then he adds, "That where
there is no metropolitan nor patriarch of that diocese, there
they are to have recourse to the see apostolic, as being the
head of all Churches."*^ Where first this implies plainly.
That if there be a metropohtan or a patriarch in those

<^ Nam contra liorum antistitum fiat, propter quamlibet causam, apud

(de patriarchis loquitur) sententias, sanctissimum ejus metropolitam,

non esse locum appellationi a majori- secundum sanctas regulas et nostras

bus nostris constitutum est. — Cod. leges causa judicetur. Et si quis

[Justiniani,] lib. i. tit. iv. 1. 29. ex judicatis contradixerit, ad beatissi-

editione Gothofredi. [warcl yap Sr] mum Archiepiscopuin et Patriarcham

Toiv TuiovTCDV iiTKjKOTToiv aTTo^affidiv dioeccseos llUus refcratuF causa,] et

oiiK elvat x'^P^" ^KK\r)Ttf) to?s irph ille (scil. Patriarcha) secimdum ca-

T^naiv vevofioeeTT]Taf — p. 29. ed. Van nones et leges [huic] praebeat finem.

Leeuwen. Amstel. 1663.] — [Et] si non (And there he cites the Novell itself:

rata habuerit utraque pars quae judi- [viz. Auth. Coll. ix. tit. vi. cap. 22. Si

cata sunt, tunc beatissimus patriarcha quis vero, Novell. Justiniani, cxxiii.

diceceseos illius, inter eos audiat, [et p. 173. ed. Van Leeuwen.) — apud]

ilia determinet quae ecclesiasticis S. Gregor. [Magn. Eegistri Epistolar.]

canonibus et legibus consonant:] lib. xiii. Indict. 6. Epist. xlv. (al. Ivi.)

nulla parte ejus sententias contradi- [seuCapitulareii. Imperial, ad Johann.

cere valente. — Authen. Collat. ix. defensorem. Op., tom. ii. col. 1254. A.

tit. XV. [vi.] cap. 22. [Si quis vero, B. ed. Benedict.]

Novell. Justiniani, cxxiii. p. 173. ed. ^ [Contra h^c] si dictum fuerit.

Van Leeuwen. Kal d /xri ififieivri eKare- quia nec Metropolitanum habeat, nee

pov jxipos Tols KeKpifievois, TTivLKavra, Patriarcham, dicendum est, quia a

d fiuKapicLTaTos iraTpiapxfjs fKeivris riis sede apostolica, quae omnium Ec-

5ioiK7}aeais fxeTa^u avTcSu aKpodadui, clesiarum caput est, causa [hsec]

Kq.Kelva dpiffVco, ariva rols eKK\r](TiaaTi- audienda [ac dirimenda fuerat, sicut

Ko7s Kav6ai koX to?? v6ixois crvvaSfr et praedictus Episcopus petiisse dig-

ovSeuos fiepovs Kara, Trjs \pr](pov avrov noscitur, qui episcopos alieni concilii

avTi\4yeiv Svvafj.ei/ov] habuit omnino suspectos.] — S. Gregor.

■* [Si autem aut a clerico aut laico [Magn.] Ibid. [col. 1254. B.]
quocunque aditio contra episcopum

190

Britain from the first Juul its oivn Primate.

Conference Cliurclics, liis judgment is final ; and thore ought to be no
Fis'iiER appeal to liomc. — Secondly, it is as plain, that in those ancient

times of the Church Government, Britain was never subject

to the see of Rome. For it was one of the six dioceses' of
the West Empire, and liad a primate of its own : Nay
John Capgrave," one of your own, and learned for those
times, and long before him William of Malmesbury, tell us,
"That Pope Urban the Second, at the Council held at
Bari in Apulia, accounted my worthy predecessor S. Anselm
as his own compeer, and said, he was as the apostolic and
patriarch of the other world." (So he then termed this
island.) Now, the Britons having a primate of their ovi n
(which is greater than a metropolitan,) yea, a patriarch,^' if
you Avill, he could not be appealed from to Rome, by S.
Gregory^s own doctrine. — Thirdly, it will be hard for any
man to prove there were any Churches then in the world,
which were not under some, either patriarch or metropolitan.

' Notitia provinciarum occiden-
taliuui per Guidum Pancirollum,
lib. ii. cap. 48. [p. 149. ed. Lugd.
ItJOS. This statement of Pancirollus,
refers only to the civil and military
divisions of the empire, and not, as it
appears, to any ecclesiastical dignities.
The six Vicars of the "Western Empire
were, Urbis Eomaj, Italife, Africaj,
Ilispaniaj, Gallife, Britanniarum.]

e [Lretatur autem apostolicus in
ejus adveutu : et multo in laudem
ejus prosecutiis, virum virtutis ac
totius religionis ilium esse contestans
ait: Eundem] ilium cunctisliberalium
artium disciplinis eruditumpro magis-
Iro teneamus, et quasi comparem,
velut alterius orbis Apostolicum et
Patriarcham, [jure venerandum cen-

scamus In concilio autem

apiid Barrum celebrato Anselmus a
Papa persuasus Gra?cos in processione
Spiritus Sancti, utpote qui a Patro
non a Filio proccdcre astrucbant
crrantcs, rationabili atque calholica
disputatione confutavit : et magnus
apud omnes habitus est, et veneratione
dignissimus comprobatur.] — Joann.
Capgrav. de vitis Sanctorum, in vita
S. Ansclmi : [Nova Icgcuda Anglii\2,
fol. xix. verso, col. 1, 2. ed. Wynkvn
do Worde, ISH).]— Et, Guil. Malmcs-
buriens. deGeslis Pontificum Anglor.
[lib. i.] p. 223. ed. Francof. 1601.
[apud Rcrum Anglicaruni Scriptorcs,

p. 127. ed. Savile, Londin. 159G.

Ut ergo ventum ad concilium est

exciderat animo summi pontificis,
ingrucnte tumultu, ut ei (sc. Anselmo,)
locum delegaret. Sed errorisadmoni-

tus est et Anselmi recordatus

exclamat Pater et Magister

Anselme Anglorum archiepiscope
ubi esl Ille ubi se vocari audivit,
in pedes constitit. Qucm apostolicus
compcUans, Nunc, inquit, magister
opus est scientia, opus eloquentias
tuaj opera : veni, ascende hue, et
defende matrem tuam ecclesiam,
quam Grajci labefactare conantur :
succurre ergo quasi a Deo hue missus.
Continue cuncti astantes, et assidentes
oculos et ora in cum conversi, per-
cunctari quis esset, annitcntibusque
proximis ad con.sessum apostolici
levatus, sedere jussus juxta Romanum
archidiaconum, cui ante papain
sedere moris est. Includamus, inquit,
hunc in orbe nostro, quasi alterius
orbis Papam ]

'' [Prima sedes episcoporum post
Christianitatem Anglorum, Cantuariro

habita est, et habetur ] Ibi

(Cantuarife, i.e.) prima sedes arclii-
episcopi habetur, qui est totius Angliio
l*rimas ct Patriarcha. — Guil. Malmes-
buriensis in Prolog, lib. i. de Gestis
Pontificum Anglorum, p. 195. [ubisup.
p. 111. ed. Londin. 1596.]

AUcyed Separation between the African and Roman Churches. 191

Fourthly^ if any sucli were, it is gratis dictum, and im- Section

possible to be proved, tliat all such Cliurclies, Avhcrever
seated in tlie world, were obliged to depend on Rome. For
manifest it is, that tlie bishops which were ordained in
places without the limits of the Eoman Empire, which
places they commonly called barbarous,^ were all to be
ordained, — and therefore, most probable, to be governed, — by
the patriarch of Constantinople. And for Rome's being the
head of all Churches, I have said enough to that in divers
parts of this discourse.

XI. — And since I am thus fallen upon the Church of
Africa, I shall borrow another reason from the practice of
that Church, Avhy, by principatus, S. Augustine neither did-
nor could mean any principahty of the Chiu'ch, or Bishop of
Rome over the whole Church of Christ. For as the acts of
Councils and stories go, the African prelates, finding that all
succeeding popes were not of Melchiades' temper, set them-
selves to assert their own liberties, and held it out stoutly
against Zosimus, Boniface the First, and Celestine the First,
who were successively popes of Rome. At last it was
concluded in the sixth Council of Carthage, wherein were
assembled two hundred and seventeen bishops, of which
S. Augustine himself was one, that they would not give way to
such a manifest encroachment upon their rights and liberties,
and thereupon gave present notice to Pope Celestine to for-
bear sending his officers amongst them, " lest he should
seem to induce the swelling pride of the world into the
Church of Christ.^'^ And this is said to have amounted into
a formal separation from the Church of Rome, and to have
continued for the space of somewhat more than one hundred

' Praeterea et qui sunt eV to7s by in harbarico, in that Canon, is

liapPapiKols, in barbarico, Episcopi meant, in solo barbarorum. — Annot.

[praxlictarum dioeccseon] ordinentur Ibid. [pp. 94, 95.]

a sanctissiuio throno sanctissimas Con- ■< [Exccutores etiam clericos vestros

slantinopolitanKj ecclesife. [sti Sh kuI quibusque potentibus nolite mitterc,

To7s if To7s ^apl3apiKu7s eTnaKoirovs twu nolite concedere,] ne fumosum typhum

■npoiip-i)p.iV(ui/ Sioiic-f]cTeccv x^'poToj/erueaf saiculi in Ecclesiam Christi, [qiias

virh Tov irpoiip-nixivov dyi.on6.Tov Bpovov lucem simplicitatis et humilitatis

T7)s Kara KwvaTavnvoviToXi.v dyion- diem, Deum videre cupientibus praj-

rdTr)s cKKX-naias.] — Codcx Canonum fert,] videamur inducere, &c. — Epist.

ecclesiaj universaj, Can. ccvi. [apnd Cone. Afric. ad Papam [S.] Ctelesti-

Biblioth. Juris Canonlci Veteris, Jus- num piimum : apud Nicolin. torn. i.

telli, p. 67. ed. Paris. 1661.] And Concil. p. 8U. [Concil. torn. ii. col.

Justellus proves it there at large, that 1676. A.]

XXV,

192 Documentary Evidence alleged in proof of the fact.

Conference years. Now, that such a separation there was of the African
FisnER. Church from Rome, and a reconciliation after, stands upon
the credit and authority of two pubhc instruments, extant
both among the ancient Councils. The one is an Epistle
from Boniface the Second, in whose time the reconciliation
to Rome is said to be made by Eulalius, then bishop of Car-
thage ; but the separation, instigante diaholo, by the " tempta-
tion of the devil.^' ^ The other is an Exemplar Precum, or
copy of the petition of the same Eulalius, in which he damns
and curses all those his predecessors which went against the
Church of Rome."' Amongst which, Eulalius must needs
curse S.Augustine; and Pope Boniface accepting this sub-
mission^ must acknowledge that S. Augustine and the rest
of that Council deserved this curse, and died under it, as
violating recta fidei regulam, " the rule of the right faith," —
so the Exemplar Precum begins — by refusing the Pope^s
authority. I will not deny but that there are divers reasons
given by the learned Romanists and Reformed writers for
and against the truth and authority of both these instru-
ments. But because this is too long to be examined here,
I will say but this, and then make my use of it to my
present purpose, giving the Church of Rome free leave to
acknowledge these instniments to be true, or false, as
they please. That which I shall say is this : These instru-
ments are let stand in all editions of the Councils and
Epistles Decretal; as, for example, in the old edition by
Isidore, anno 1524; and in another old edition of them,
printed anno 1530 ; and in that which was published by
P. Crabbe, anno 1538; and in the edition of Valentinus
Joverius, anno 1555 ; and in that by Surius, anno 1567 ;
aiul in the edition at Venice by Nicolinus, anno 1585 ; and
in all of these without any note or censure upon them. And
they are in the edition of Biuius too, anno 1618 ; but there is
a censure upon them to keep a quarter, it may be, with
Baronius," who was the first, I think, that ever quarrelled

' Epist. Bonifacii 11. : [de recon- " [Qui igitur semel errore ductus

ciliatione Carthaginensis ecclesiae,] est sibi persuasit hoc tempore scissam

apud Nicolin. torn. ii. Concil. p. 544. penitus fuisse Africanam Ecclesiam

— [Concil. torn. iv. col. 1684.] a Romana (prohnefas !) quamenorme

■" Exemp. Precum : apud Nicolin. excogitavit commentum 1 Finxit Bo-

Ibid. p. 545. — [Concil. torn. iv. col. nifacii Secundi Papa3 nomine Episto-

1686.] lam ad Eulalium Episcopum Alexau-

Whether genuine or not, a Dilemma against the Romanists. 193

them, and he doth it tartly. And, since, Bellarmine° follows Section

the same way, but more doubtfully. This is that which I L_

had to say : and the use which I shall make of these instru-
ments, whether they be true or false, is this : They are either
true or false, that is of necessity. If they be false, then
Boniface the Second, and his accomplices at Rome, or some
for them, are notorious forgers, — and that of records of great
consequence concerning the government and peace of the
whole Church of Christ, and to the perpetual infamy of that
see ; and all this foolishly and to no purpose. For if there
were no such separatiou, as these records mention, of the
African Churches from the Roman, to what end should
Boniface or any other counterfeit an epistle of his own, and
a submission of Eulalius ? On the other side, if these in-
struments be true, as the sixth Council of Carthage against
all other arguments makes me incline to believe they are —
in substance at least, though perhaps not in all circum-
stances — then it is manifest that the Church of Africa
separated from the Church of Rome; that this separation
continued above one hundred years ; that the Church of
Africa made this separation in a National Council of their
own, which had in it two hundred and seventeen bishops ;
that this separation was made, for aught appears, only
because they at Rome were too ready to entertain appeals
from the Church of Africa, as appears in the case of
Apiarius,P who then appealed thither; that S.Augustine,
Eugenius, Fulgentius, and all those bishops and other mar-
tyrs which suifered in the Vaudalic persecution, died in the
time of this separation ; that if this separation were not just,
but a schism, then these famous fathers of the Church died,

drinum de reconciliatione Ecclesife primum :] valde mihi eas Epistolas

Carthaginensis cum Koniana . . . Ad- esse suspectas.— Bellarmin. de Rom.

dit etiam ea de re ab alio Eulalio Pont. lib. ii. cap. 25. [§ 46. Op., torn. i.

Episcopo Carthaginensi libellum ad col. 685. D.] — Sed si forte illae Epistolte

ipsum Bonifacium pro reconciliatione ver^e sunt, nihil enim affirmo, [sine

datum . . . Hajc quidem et alia men- dubio non in eum sensum accipiendie

daciorum frigidus concinnator, sed cal- sunt, &c.]— Ibid. § ult. [col. 686. A.]
lidus veterator, ibi habet.] — Baronius, p And so the Council of Carthage

Annal. ad Ann. 419. ISo. [92,] 93, sent word to Pope Celestine plainly,

94. that in admitting such appeals, he

° [Sed contra objicit IllyricusEpis- brake the decrees of the Council of

tolam Bonifacii II. ad Eulalium Alex- Nice. — Epist. Concil. Africani ad

andrinum Episcopum, et Epistolam Cselestinum, cap. cv. apud Nicolin.

Eulalii Episcopi Carthaginensis ad torn. i. Concil. p. 844. [Concil. torn,

eundem Bonifacium . . . Respondeo ii. col. 1675.]

VOL. II. liAUD. O

194 Actual Separation from Rome not in itself Schism.

CoKFERENCE foT Ruglit appcai's, in actual and mirepented schism^i and out
Fisher. ^^ ^^^^ Chui'cli, And if so, then how comes S. Augustine to
be, and be accoiuited, a saint, all over the Christian worid,
and at Rome itself? But if the separation were just, then
is it far more lawful for the Chiu-ch of England, by a Na-
tional Council, to cast off the Pope^s usurpation, as she did,^'
than it was for the African Church to separate ; because
then the African Church excepted only against the pride of
Rome^ in case of appeals, and two other canons less material ;
but the Chui'ch of England excepts, besides this grievance,
against many corruptions in doctrine belonging to the faith,
with which Rome at that time of the African separation w as
not tainted. And I am out of all doubt, that S. Augustine,
and those other famous men in their generations, diu'st not
A. C. p. 58. thus have separated from Rome, had the Pope had " that
powerful principality over the whole Chui'ch of Christ, and
that by Christ^s own ordinance,'^ and institution, as A. C.
pretends he had.

XII. — I told you a little before,* that the popes grew under
the emperors till they had overgrown them. And now lest
A. C. should say I speak it without proof, I \\dll give you a
brief touch of the Church story in that behalf, and that from
the beginning of the emperors becoming Christians to the
time of Charles the Great, which contains about five hundi'ed
years ; for so soon as the emperors became Christian, the
Church, which before was kept under by persecutions, began
to be put in better order. For the calling and authority of
bishops over the inferior clergy, that Avas " a thing of known
use and benefit for preservation of unity and peace in the
Chui'ch.'^ And so much S. Jerome ^^ tells us; though, being

1 [Nisi ea epistola falsa omnino legates petiit, ut tres canones Nicaeni
esse convinci posset,] plane ex ecclesiEe Concilii cxecutioni mandarent : unum
Catholicoe albo expungenda fuissent de appcllationibus episcoporum ad
sanctorum Africanorum martyrum ag- Romaniira pontificem ; alterum, de
mina, qui in persccutione A^andalica appellationibus prcsbyterorum et mi-
pro fide Catholica [magna gloria cer- norum clericorum ad Episcopos vici-
tantes . . . assecuti sunt martyrii pal- nos ; tertium, de non eundo ad comi-
mam.] — Baron. Annal. ad Ann. 419. tatum, id est, nc irent Episcopi Afri
No. 93.— Et, Binius in notis ad Epist. ad aulam Imperatoris.] — Bellarmin.
Bonifacii II. ad Eulalium, [bis verbis: de Eom. Pontif. lib. ii. cap. 25. §2.
sc. Qure omnia commcntitia sunt et [Op., torn. i. col. 679. A.]
notorie falsa. — Concil. tom. iv. col. t Sect. xxv. No. 10.[ubi sup. p. 186.]
1G85.] " Quod autem postea unus electus
Sect. xxiv. No. 5. [ubisup. p. 17.3.] est, qui creteris prfeponeretur, in .schis-
' [Zosimus papa ab Africanis per matis remedium factum est ; ne unus-

Precedency among Bishops in the Early Church.

195

none himself, lie was no great friend to bishops. And this was
so settled in the minds of men from the very infancy of the
Christian Church, as that it had not been to that time con-
tradicted by any. So that then there was no controversy
about the calling ; all agreed upon that ; the only difficulty
was to accommodate the places and precedencies of bishops
among themselves, for the very necessity of order and
government. To do this, the most equal and impartial Avay
was, that " as the Church is in the commonwealth, not the
commonwealth in it," as Optatus tells us,'^ so the honours of
the Church should follow the honours of the state. And so
it was insinuated, if not ordered, as appears by the canons
of the Councils of Chalcedon and AntiochJ And this was
the very fountain of papal greatness, the pope having his resi-
dence in the great imperial city. But precedency is one thing,
and authority is another. It was thought fit, therefore —
though, as S. Cyprian speaks, episcopatus unus est/ "the
calling of a bishop be one and the same," — that yet among
bishops there should be a certain subordination and subjec-
tion. The empii'e, therefore, being cast into several divisions.

Section
XXV.

quisque ad se trahens Christi eccle-
siam rumperet. Nam et Alexanclrise
a Marco Evangelista, [usque ad Hera-
clam et Dionysium Episeopos,] presby-
ter! semper unum ex se electum, in
excelsiori gradu collocatum, Episco-
pum nominabant. — S. Hieron. in
Epist. ad Evagrium, [al. Evangelum,
Op., tom. iv. par. 2. col. 803.] So
even according to S. Jerome, bishops
had a very ancient and honourable
descent in the Church from S. Mark
the Evangelist. And about the end
of the same Epistle he acknowledges
it, traditionem esse apostolicam, [in
these words : Et ut Fciamus tradi-
tiones apostolicas sumtas de veteri
Testamento, quod xVaron et filii ejus
atque Levitae in templo fuerunt, hoc
sibi episcopi et presbyteri et diaconi
vindicent in Ecclesia. — ibid.] Nay
more than so, he affirms plainly, that
ubi non est sacerdos non est Ecclesia
[in these words : Ecclesia autem non
est, qufe non habet sacerdotes.] —
S. Hieron. adv. Luciferianos, [Op.,
tom. iv. par. 2. col. 302] And in
that place most manifest it is that
S. Jerome by sacerdos means a bishop.
For he speaks de sacerdote qui potes-

tatem habet ordinandi, which, in S.
Jerome's own judgment, no mere
priest had, but a bishop only. [Quid
enim facit excepta ordinatione epi-
scopus, quod presbyter non faciat ?] —
S. Hieron. Epist. ad Evagrium, [al.
Evangelum, ut sup.]. So even with
him, no bishop, and no Church.

" Non enim respublica est in Eccle-
sia : sed Ecclesia in republica [est, id
est, in imperio Romano.] — S. Optat.
[Milevit. de schism. Donatist.] lib. iii.
[cap. 3. Op., p. 52. ed. Dupin ]

y Concil. Chalcedon. can. ix. et Actio
xvi. [Kal yap rw Opovco Trjs TrpeaBvTepas
'Pco/u-qs, Std TO ^aoLXiveiv ttjV ttuXlv
kKeiv7)V, of Trarepe? ehcdrcas aTroSeSco/cam
rd Trpea^ua' km tZ avrip (Tkoitw klvov-

fliVOl 01 pV. 6iO(pl\^aTaTOl iwiffKOITOt,

TO. iaa irpefl-jSeia airiveinav rw Trjs veas
'Pfti.urjs dyiooTaTO) dpiv^, €tj\6yo:s Kpi-
vavres rrjv I3aat\flu kol (TvyKKriTw rtfiT}-
Qelaav Tr6\iv, kuI toov trrtav diroAavovaav
irpea^^'uev rfj irpea^uTepa Ba(Ti\i5L'Poifji.v,
ical iv roTs €KKXriaLaaTiKo7s, ws iK^iv-qv
IxiyaXvveaQai Trpdyfiacri, k. t. A. — Con-
cil. tom. iv. col. 795. E.]

'- S. Cyprian, lib. de simplicit. prse-
latorum, [i. e. in Epist. ubi sup. p. 186.
note ■■.]

o 2

196 Rise and Progress of the Papal Power.

Conference w'hicli tliev then called clioceses^ every diocese contained

WITH * .

Fisher, several provinces, every province several bishoprics. The
chief of a diocese, in that larger sense, was called e^ap'^o^,
and sometimes a Patriarch ; the chief of a province, a
INIetropolitau. Next, the bishops in their several dioceses,
as we now use that word. Among these there was effectual
subjection, respectively grounded upon canon and positive
law, in their several quarters ; but over them none at all :
all the difference there was but honorary, not authoritative.
If the ambition of some particular persons did attempt now
and then to break these bounds, it is no marvel; for no
calling can sanctify all that have it. And Socrates tells us,
that in this way the bishops of Alexandria and Rome
advanced themselves to a great height, irepa r?)? lepwavvq'i,^
"even beyond the quality of bishops." Now, upon view
of story, it will appear, that what advantage accrued to
Alexandria, was gotten by the violence of Theophilus,
patriarch there, a man of exceeding great learning, and of
no less violence ; and he made no little advantage out of
this, that the Empress Eudoxia used his help for the
casting of S. Chrysostom out of Constantinople. But the
Roman prelates grew, by a steady and constant watchful-
ness upon all occasions, to increase the honour of that see;
interposing and assuming to themselves to be vindices
canonum^ as S. Gregory Naz [ianzen] speaks, " defenders and
restorers of the canons of the Church ; '^ Avhich was a fair
pretence, and took extremely well. But yet the world took
notice of this their aim. For, in all contestations between
the East and the West, which were nor small nor few, "the

* [Thorold, (T. C. LaiuVs Labyrinth, 'Pco/xaiwi/ einffKOTrrjs oiiolnos rrj 'AA€|-

p. 193.) complains of Laud citing av^pewv nepa rijs iepuxrvv-qs, inl Svva-

these "three Greek weds out of areiai' ^5t} Trd\ai npoeAeovai^s.]

Socrates " without any reference. He '' ["Ea>s /jikv ovi^ ^v iv i.i4au> Qi7os (tkottos,

supplies them from Socrat. TTist. Eccl. Oi)5' rV ffacbis -kw, ttws Trot;' ol rrjs

lib. vii. cap. 11. (apud Hist. Eccl. kairipas

Scriptor. torn. ii. p. 356. cd. Keading.) Thv av^pa Si^ovr, vypM/xivoi Tews,

and observes that "such a place 'S.vyyvuxjrhv i^v irws koI to Xvirilv

clearly shoM-s, not only that Socrates laeTplus

was an enemy of the Eoman Church, Tour,] ws Aeyovcri, [tuv vi^iwv a/x""-

but a favourer of heretics, as di\ers Topas.]

good authors charge him." The (ut aiunt, sive se jactant esse.) — S.

passage from Socrates is: "Axpi yd.p Greg. Nazianz. Carmen do vita sua,

TouTov, NauaTiofol fxeyaAws in] Tris [1.1611 — 1615. tom. ii.] p. 26. [ed. Bil-

'Pcofiris ijvOriffav, tKKAyiaias irXfirrTas lii. Paris. 1630. Op,, torn. ii. p. 758.

fXOVTes, Koi Kaof iroXiiu uvvaOpoli^oi'Tes' ed. Benedict.]
oAA' o (pduvos Kal TovTcov 'i'i\paTO, Trjs

Rights respecting Election of Popes ratified by the Emperors. 197

Western bishops objected levity to the Eastern, and they
again arrogancy to the bishops of the West/^ as Billius''.
observes, and upon very warrantable testimonies. For all
this, the bishop of Rome continued in good obedience to the
emperor, enduring his censures and judgments. And being
chosen by the clergy and people of Rome, he accepted from
the emperor the ratification of that choice ; insomuch, that
about the year 579, when all Italy was on fire with the
Lombards, and Pelagius the Second"^ constrained through

Section
XXV.

"= [<I>U(ra5j'Tes Viixiv eawepiSv re Koi
rpax'i-
(S. Greg. Nazianz ubi sup. 1. 1802.)
His verbis] Oecidentales acerbita-
tis et insolentite [notat :] quemad-
modum etiam Basilius [in epistola
quadam fastus eos atque arrogantia3 in-
simulat, rl SfTrj/MU rfys Suti/cjjs ocppvis ;]
(Quid opus est Occidentali supercilio ])
[inquiens. At contra] Orientalibus levi-
tas [fere semper ab Occidentalibus]
objeeta est. — Billius, Scholia in vit.
S. Greg. Nazianz. No. 153. [Op., torn,
ii. col. 1343. ed. 1630.]

'' Ha3c [autem] una fuit causa,
quare Pelagius injussu principis [turn]
pontifex creatus sit, cum extra ob-
sessam ab hoste urbem mitti quis-
piam non posset. [Nil enim turn a
clero in eligendo pontifice actum
erat, nisi ejus electionem imperator
approbasset. Missus] itaque [Con-
stantinopolim] ad placandum impe-
ratorem Gregorius diaconus, &c. —
Platina, in vita Pelagii II. [Vitse
Pontificum, p. 81. ed. Colon. 1568.]
• — Et, Onuphrius, [Annotat.] ibidem,
[p. 82. In eo, quod Platina scribit
Pelagium pontificem injussu prin-
cipis creatum, niliilque turn a clero
in eligendo pontifice actum esse,
nisi ejus electionem imperator ap-
probasset, non ita accurate rem
banc attigisse visus est, quae sic
se habet. Gothis Italia omni per
Narsem jjatricium pulsis, eaque cum
urbe Eoma orientalis imperii parte
facta ; sub Justiniano imperatore,
ex auctoritate papse Vigilii novus
quidam in comitiis pontificiis mos
inolevit. Is fuit, ut mortuo papa,
nova quidem electio more majo-
rum statim a clero S. P. Q. E. fieret,
verum electus Romanus pontife.K non
ante consecrari, atque ab episcopis
ordinari posset, quam ejus electio ab
imperatore Constantinopolitano con-
iirmata esset, ip.seque litteris suis
patentibus licentiam electo pontifici

concederet, ut ordinari, et consecrari
posset, atque ita jurisdictioneni pon-
tificatus turn obtineret. Pro qua
licentia consequeuda electo necesse
erat certam iDecunire quantitatem
imperator i transmittere. Qua venia
obtenta, ipse postea consecrabatur, et
Komanum administrabat pontifica-
tum. Antea enim idem dies comitio-
rum, et consecrationis pontificis
renuntiati ei'ant. Hoc autem ideo
Justinianum imperatorem, vel ex ejus
auctoritate Vigilium Papam instituisse
credendum est, ut imperator certus
esset de conditionibus novi pontificis,
cujus tum maxima esse auctoritas
coeperat, imperatoribus prsesertim
Italia absentibus, ne aliquo pontifice
factioso, vel imperatoris hoste ordi-
nato, urbs, et Italia eo auctore ab
orientali imperio deficeret, seque
finitimis barbaris traderet, quod
Silverium Papam aliquando qufesiisse
sibi persuadebat. Qua ratione fiebat,
ut in novis comitiis eum potissimum
Eomanum pontificem crearent, quern
imperatori, a quo confirmandus erat,
amicum esse scirent, et de quo ille
confideret nihil in Italia contra im-
perium moliturum, barbaris prteser-
tim Longobardis, earn paulo post
vexantibus. Perduravit hscc con-
suetudo usque ad Benedictum II.
cujus sanctitate permotus Constan-
tinus imperator Heraclii pronepos,
edicto suo jussit, ut deirceps quern
clerus S. P. Q. E. pontificem summum
delegissent, is nulla amplius impera-
toris confirmatione expectata, more
vetustissimo, statim ab episcopis
ordinaretur. Eursus Hadrianus pri-
mus hoc jus, et paulo amplius Carolo
Magno Francorum Eegi, et ejus
successoribus regibus Francorum,
primum, deinde imperatoribus Eo-
manorum concessit: quod successori-
bus ejus ab Hadriano III. ereptum
Othoni primo Germanorum regi, et
Eomano imperatori restituit Leo VIII.

198

No Universal Bishop fur the first six centuries.

Conference the necessity of the times, contrary to the example of liis
fTsher. predecessors, to enter upon the popedom mtliout the
emperor's leave, — S. Gregory, then a deacon, Avas shortly
after sent on embassy to excuse it. About this time broke
out the ambition of John,*^ patriarch of Constantinople,
affecting to be universal bishop ; he was countenanced in
this by INIauricius the emperor, but sorely opposed by
Pelagius and S. Gregory ; insomuch that S. Gregory says
plainly, " that this pride of his shows that the times of anti-
christ were near/'*^ So, as yet — and this was now upon
the point of six hundred years after Christ — there was no
universal bisliop' — no one monarch over the whole militant
Church. But INIauricius being deposed and murdered by
Phocas, Phocas conferred upon Boniface the Third s [a.d. 605]

Id postremo Gregorius VII. Henrico
IV. ademptum, cardinalibus et clero
S. P. Q. R. primum, deinde alii
pontifices, qui sccuti sunt, cardinali-
bus tantum, pcrmisere, quod ad nostra
usque sccula perdurat. Ex epistola
S.Gregorii quarta iibriprimi. Anastasio
Bibliothecano in vitis Pelagii II.
Vitaliani, Agathonis, et Benedictill.
Eomanorum Pontificum ; item post
Carolum Magnum, Gregorii IV.
Sergii II. Leonis IV. Benedicti III.
et Nicolai. Abbate Urspergense ex
Ademaro monaclio S. Germani in
eorundem pontificum enarrationibus.
Registro Gregorii Papse VII. Sige-
berto in Chronico. Guillelmo Tyrio
libro i. cap. 13. de Bello Sacro.
Gratiano in Decretis, distinctione
Ixiii. Concilii Laterancnsis, sub
Alexandro III. Papa celcbrati, Actis,
et aliis vetustis S. R. E. monumentis.]

^ Onuplirius, [Annotat.] in Platin. in
vit. Bonifac. III. [p. 87. Cseterum ali-
quo tempore post sub Pelagio II. .To-
aimes, et qui ei successit Cyriacus,
patriarchfe ConstantinopoUtani, longe
majora moliti, et adversus ipsam sanc-
tam sedem apostolicam insurgere ausi.
Universalis sibi Episcopi nomen, et
primum in ecclesia locum, in prrejudi-
cium non solum omnium ccclcsiarum,
Red ctiam Romana;, assumere conati,
Gregorium papam eorum superbias
resistcntcm habucrc.]

' [Triste tamen valde est,ut paticnter
fcratur, quatcuus despcctis omnibus,
prajdictus frater et coepiscopus meus
solus conetur appellari Episcopus,
Sed] in hac ejus supcrbia quid aliud

nisi propinqua jam Antichristi esse
tempera designatur 1 — S. Gregor.
[Magn. Registri] Epistol. lib. iv. Epist.
78. [lib. V. Indict, xiii. Ejiist. xxi.
(al. xxxiv ) ad Constantinam Augus-
tam, Op., torn. ii. col. 751. G.]

B It may be they will say S. Gregory
did not inveigh against the thing, but
the person : that John of Constanti-
nople should take that upon him which
belonged to the pope. But it is ma-
nifest by S. Gregory's own text, that
he speaks against the thing itself, that
neither the Bishop of Rome, nor any
other, ought to take on him that title.
[Cunctis enim evangelium scientibus
liquet, quod voce Dominica sancto et
omnium Apostolorum Petro principi
Apostolo, totius Ecclesise cura com-
missa est] . . . cura [ei] totius Ecclcsite
et principatus committitur, et tamen
universalis Apostolus non vocatur.—
S. Greg. [INIagn. Registri] Epistol.
lib. iv. Epist. 76. [lib. v. Indict, xiii.
Epist. XX. (al. xxxii.) ad JIauricium
Augustum, Op. tom. ii. col. 748. B,
C] Therefore neither is his successor
universal bishop. Numtjuid ego hac
in re, [piissimc Domine,] propriam
causam defendo? numquid specialem
injuriam vindicol et non magis cau-
sam omnipotcntis Dei et universalis
Ecclesia; 1 — [ibid. D.] where he plainly
denies that he speaks in his own
cause or in the cause of his see ; [Certe
pro beati Petri apostolorum principis
honore,] per venerandam Chalcedo-
nensem synodum hoc nomen Romano
pontiiici oblatum est ; sed nullus
eorum unquam hoc singularitatis no-

Alienation of Italy from the Empire of the East. 199

that very honour, which two of his predecessors had declaimed Section

• ... xxv
against as monstrous and blasphemous^ if not antichristian.''

Where^ by the way, either these ^ two popes, Pelagius and i [those . . ,
S. Gregory, erred in this weighty business, about an fgi^'^nd
universal bishop over the whole Church ; or, if they did not 1686.]
err, Boniface and the rest, which after him took it upon
them, were, in their very predecessors' judgment, anti-
christian. But to proceed. " As yet, the right of election
or ratification of the pope continued in the emperor." ' But
then the Lombards grew so great in Italy, and the empire
was so infested with Saracens, and such changes happened
in all parts of the world, as that neither, for the present, the
homage of the pope was useful to the emperor, nor the
protection of the emperor available for the pope. By this
means, the bishop of Rome was left to play his own game
by himself; a thing which as it pleased him well enough,
so both he and his successors made great advantage by
it. For being grown to that eminence by the emperor, and
the greatness of that city and place of his abode, he
found himself the more free, the greater the tempest was
that beat upon the other. And then first, " he set himself
to alienate the hearts of the Italians from the emperor.^^''

mine uti consensit, ne dum privatum Epist. xix. (al. xxxis.) ad Sabinianum

aliquid daretur uni, honore debito Diaconum, Op., tom. ii. col. 747. A.]

sacerdotes privarentur universi. [Quid ' Vana tunc [enim] habebatur cleri

est ergo quod nos bujus vocabuli glo- ac populi electio, nisi id imperatores,

riam et oblatam non quaerimus, et aut eorum exarcbi, confirmassent. —

alter sibi banc arripere et non oblatam Platina, in vita Severini I. [ut sup.

prajsumit] — Ibid. col. 749. A, B.] p. 91.]

where he plainly says, the Eoman ^ [Joannes Sextus, natione Groecus,
bishops rejected this title. And yet eo tempore pontificatum iuiit,] quo
for all this. Pope Gregory the Seventh Theophylactus Exarchus Imperatoris
delivers it as one of his dictates in a Italiam petens, [primo in Siciliam
Council held at Rome about the year venit. Quod ubi sensere] milites Itali,
1076 : Quod solus Eomauus Pontifex veriti ne quid mali ejus adventus per-
jure dicatur universalis. — Baron. tenderet, quod superioribus temporibus
[Annal.] ad An. 1076. No. 31 et 32. fere magis cum pontificibus quam
[vide infra, note ^] cum imperatoribus sensissent, Ingres
^ [Sed] absit a cordibus Christianis surum [urbem] Romam interficere con-
nomen istud blasphemies, [in quo stituerant. (And the emperor's own
omnium sacerdotum honor adimitur, governor was fain to be defended from
dum ab uno sibi dementer arrogatur.] the emperor's own soldiers by the
— S. Gregor. [Magn. Registr.] Epist. pope's power, who had gotten interest
lib. iv. Epist 76. [lib. v. Indict, xiii. in them against their own master.)
Epist. XX. (al. xxxii.) ad Mauricium — Platina, in vita Johannis VI. [ut
Augustum, Op., tom. ii. col. 749. A.] — sup. p. 104.] Apsimarus, [calling him-
In isto [enim] scelesto vocabulo con- self Tiberius,] was then [a.d. 701]
sentire, nihil est aliud quam fidem emperor: [Justinian II., the lawful
pcrdere. — S. Greg. [Magn. ut sup.] emperor, being exiled.]
lib. iv. Epist. 83. [lib. v. Indict, xiii.

200 Increase of the Papal Power under the Carlovingian dynasty.

Conference Next^ he opposed himself against hira. Aud about the year
FiVher '^^^' Pope Constantino the First did also first of all openly

confront Philippicus the emperor, in defence of images, as J

Onuphrius^ tells us. After him, Gregory the Second, I
[a.D. 716,] and the Third,™ [a.d, 731,] took up his example, "
and did the like by Leo Isaurus. By this time, the Lom-
bards began to pinch very close, and to vex on all sides, not
Italy only, but, Rome too. This drives the pope to seek a
new patron ; and very fitly he meets Avith Charles Martell,
in France, that famous warrior against the Saracens : him
he implores in defence of the Church against the Lombards.''
This address seems very advisedly taken, at least it proves
very fortunate to them both ; for " in short time, it dissolved
the kingdom of the Lombards in Italy," ° — which had then
stood two hundred and four years, — which was the pope's
security ; and it brought the crown of France into the
house of Charles, and shortly after the Western Empire.
And now began the pope to be great indeed ; for by the
bounty of Pipin,P son of Charles, that which was taken from
the Lombards was given [a.d. 753] to the pope. So that now
of a bishop, he became a temporal prince. But when Charles
the Great had set up the Western Empire, then he resumed
the ancient and original power of the emperor, to govern

' Primus omnium Eomanorum pen- Longobardorum rex cupiditate impe-
tificum Imperatori Grseco Pliilippico, randi motus, urbem Romam obsideret
[qui Justiniano juniore orthodoxo . . . Gregorius legates ... ad Carolum
principe oeciso, imperium invaserat,] Francite principem statim mittit, qui
in OS resistere palam ausus [fuit Con- hominem rogarent,] ut primo quoque
stantinus papa]. — Onuph. [Annotat.] tempore laboranti Romaj et Ecclesite
in Platin. in vita Constantini I. [ut auxilium ferret.— Platina, in vita Gre-
sup. p. 107. Bardanes, under the gorii III. [ut sup. p. 110.]
assumed name of Philippicus, was an ° [Gregorius III. . . . orientalibus
usurper, and favoured the Iconoclastic destitutus auxiliis, primus ad Franco-
heresy, and had expelled the ortho- rum opes longe latcque patentes con-
dox patriarch Cyrus.] fugit, et ab ipsorum ducc Carolo Mar-

'" [Leo III. imperator .... edictum telle, Pipini postea regis patre, auxilia

proponit, ut omnes qui sub imperio Ro- contra Longobardos Romam vexautes

mane cssent, sanctorum omnium, mar- imploravit.] Quaeres semel incepta

tyrum et angelerum statuas atque cum Longobardici regni excidio finita

imagines e templis abraderent, &c. . . est.^Onuph. [Annotat.] in Platin.

Gregorius autem tantje impietati non in vita Constantini I. [ut sup. p. 107.]

modenon obtemperat, &c. . . .] — Pla- p Redditus itaque Eomanis exarcha-

tinain vitaGregoriill. [utsup. p. 109.] tus est: quicquid Padum et Apenni-

— Et, [Hie statim ubi pontificatum num interjacet, [a Placentinis usque

iniit, cleri Romani consensu, Leonem ad stngna Yenetorum ; et quicquid

III. ... imperio simul et communione intra Isaurum flumen, Apenninum

fidelium privat, &c. — Id. in vit.] Gre- et Hadriaticum centinetur.] — Pla-

goriilll. [ut sup. p. 110.] tina, in vita Stephani II. [al. III. ut

" [Interim vero cum Luithprandus sup. p. 115.]

Finally settled as supreme under Gregory the Seventh. 201

the Clmrchj to call councils, to order papal elections. And Section

this power continued in his posterity ; for this right of the
emperor was in force and use in Gregory the Seventh's
time, "^who was confirmed in the popedom by Henry the
Fourth, whom he afterward deposed/' i And it might have
continued longer, if the succeeding emperors had had
abilities enough to secure or vindicate their own right.
But the pope, keeping a strong council about him, and
meeting with some weak princes, and they ofttimes dis-
tracted with great and dangerous wars, grew stronger, till
he got the better. So this is enough to show how the popes
climbed up by the emperors till they overtopped them;
which is all I said before, and have now proved. And this
was about the year 1073 ; for the whole popedom of Gregory
the Seventh was begun and ended within the reign of
William the Conqueror. Yet was it carried in succeeding
times, with great changes of fortune and different success :
the emperor sometimes plucking from the pope, and the
pope from the emperor j"^^ winning and losing ground, as
their spirits, abilities, aids, and opportunities were, till at the
last the pope settled himself upon the grounds laid by
Gregory the Seventh,^ in the great power which he now
uses, in and over these parts of the Christian world.

1 Imperator in gratiam cum Gre- chief of these propositions follow

gorio rediit, eundemque in pontifi- here : —

catu confirmavit, ut turn imperatorum Quod solus Eom. pontifex jure dicatur

mos erat. — Platina, in vita Gregor.VII. Universalis,

[ut sup. p. 171.] Quod solius papse pedes omnes prin-

Multi deinde fuerunt imperato- cipes deosculentur.

res Henrico similiores, quam Julio Quod illi liceat imperatores deponere.

Ctesari ; quos subigere non fuit diffi- Quod nulla synodus absque prtecepto

cile, cum domi rerum omnium securi ejus debet Generalis vocari.

[desiderent, ubi maxime opus erat Quod nullum capitulum, nullusque

pontificum cupiditatem virtute et liber canonicus habeatur absque

legitimis modis reprimere.] — Calvin. illius auctoritate.

Instit. lib. iv. cap. ii. § 13. [Op., Quod sententia illius a nullo debeat

tom. viii. pp. 327, 328.] retractari; et ipse omnium solus

* For in a synod at Rome, about the retractare potest,

year 1076, Pope Gregory the Seventh Quod Rom. Ecclesia nunquam erravit,

established certain brief conclusions, nee in perpetuum, Scriptura tes-

twenty-seven in number, upon which tante, errabit.

stands almost all the greatness of the Quod Rom. pontifex, si canonice fuerit

papacy. These conclusions are called ordinatus, mentis B. Petri indubit-

Didatus Papa'; and they are reckoned anter efficitur sanctus, [testante S.

up by Baronius, in the year 1076, Ennodio, &c.]

No. 31, 32, &c. But whether this Quod a fidelitate iniquorum subjectos

dictatorship did now first invade the potest absolvere.
Church, I cannot certainly saj'. The

XXV.

202 An alleged Testimony of Irencms to R. Supremacy examined.

Conference XIII. — Thirdly, A. C. knowing it is not enough to say
Fisher. ^^^^} " That the pope is pastor of the whole Church/' labours
to prove it. And first, he tells us, '^ that Irenoeus intimates
so much;" but he doth not teU us where. And he is much
scanted of ancient proof, if Irenseus stand alone. Besides,
Irenseus was a bishop of the Gallican Church, and a very
unhkely man to captivate the liberty of that Church under
" the more powerful principality" of Rome. And how can we
have better evidence of his judgment touching that princi-
pality, than the actions of his life ? When Pope Victor
excommunicated the Asian Churches, ddpocof, " all at a
blow,"* was not Irenseus the chief man that reprehended
him for it ? A very unmeet and undutiful thing, sure, it had
been in Irenaeus, in deeds to tax him of rashness and in-
considerateness, whom in words A. C. would have to be
acknowledged by him '^the supreme and infallible pastor
of the universal Church." But the place of Irenseus which
A. C. means, I think, is this, where he uses these words
indeed, but short of A. C.'s sense of it : "To this Chui'ch,"
(he speaks of Rome,) "propter potentiorem principalitatem,
' for the more powerful principality of it,' it is necessary that
every Church, that is, the faithful, undique, 'round about,'

A. C. p.58. should have recourse."'^ " Should have recourse," so A. C.
translates it. And what doth this avail him ? Very great
reason was there in Irenaeus' s time, that upon any dif-
ference arising in the faith, omnes undique fideles, " all the
faithful," or, if you ^vill, all the Churches, " round about,"
should have recourse — that is, resort — to Rome, being the
imperial city, and so a Cliurch of " more powerful princi-
pality " than any other at that time in those parts of the

' Euseb. [Eccl. Hist.] lib. v. cap. 24. quoquo modo, vel per sui placentiam

[apud Eccl. Hist. Script, torn. i. p. 245. malam, (al. sibi placentiam,) vel

ed. Heading ; ubi sup. p. 155. note'".] vanam gloriam, vel per cfficitatem

" [Sed quoniam valde longum est, in et malam sententiam, prasterquam

hoc tali volumine omnium ecclcsia- oportet coUigunt.] Ad banc [cnim]

rum enumcrare successiones, maximte, Ecclesiam, propter potentiorem [al.

et antic|uissimtB ct omnibus cognitje potiorem] principalitatem, necesse

a gloriosissimis duobus apostolis Petro est omnem conveuire Ecclesiam, hoc

ct Paulo Rom£e fundataj et constitutaj est, eos qui sunt undique fideles; in qua

ecclesia^ eam quam habet ab apostolis semper ab his, qui sunt uudicjue,

traditionem, et annunciatam homini- conservata est ea qua; est ab apostolis

bus fidem, per succcssiones episcopo- traditio. — S. Irenasus adv. Hoereses,

rum pcrvenientem usque ad nos indi- lib. iii. cap. 3. [Op., p. 20]. ed.

cantes, confundimus omnes eos, qui Grabe.]

Extent of the Roman Jurisdiction in ancient times. 303

world. Well, will tliis exalt Eome to be the head of the Church Section

XXV
universal ? What if the states and policies of the world be —LI — L_

much changed since, and this conveniency of resorting to
Rome be quite ceased ? then is not Rome divested of her
"more powerful principality t" But the meaning of A. C.
is, We must so have recourse to Rome, as to submit our
faith to hers; and then, not only in Irenseus^s time, but
through all times, reform ourselves by her rule ; — that is, all
the faithful, not undique, " round about,''^ but uhique, " every-
where,^^ must agree with Rome in point of faith. This he
means, and Rome may thank him for it. But this Irenseus
saith not, nor will his words bear it ; nor durst A. C. there-
fore construe him so, but was content to smooth it over with
this ambiguous phrase of " having recourse to Rome.^^ Yet
this is a place as much stood upon by them, as any other in
all antiquity. And should I grant them their own sense,
" That all the faithful everywhere must agree with Rome,^' —
which I may give, but can never grant, — yet were not this
saying any whit prejudicial to us now. For, first, here is a
" powerful principahty " ascribed to the Church of Rome. And
that, no man of learning doubts but the Chui'ch of Rome had
within its own patriarchate and jurisdiction ; and that " was
very large," containing all the provinces in the diocese of
Italy,'' in the old sense of the word diocese, which provinces
the lawyers and others term suburbicarias. There were ten
of them: The three islands, Sicily, Corsica, and Sardinia;
and the other seven upon the firm land of Italy. And this,
I take it, is plain in Ruffinus. For he living shortly after
the Nicene council, as he did, and being of Italy, as he was,
he might very well know the bounds of that patriarch's
jurisdiction, as it was then practised. And he says ex-
pressly, "that according to the old custom, the Roman
patriarch's charge was confined within the limits of the

" Ed. Brierwood, of the Jurisdiction in 1613; this tract was printed at

and Limits of the Patriarchs, in the Oxford, in 1641, at p. ^Q, of " Certain

time of the Nicene Council. — Ad. Briefe Treatises written by divers

Qu. i. MS. [" The Patriarchal Govern- learned men concerning the ancient

ment of the Ancient Church, declared and moderne Government of the

by way of answere unto four questions Church." The passage of which Laud

proposed unto Edward Brerewood." gives the substance is at p. 99, taken,

The author, the first Professor of as it would seem, from the then un-

Mathematics at Greshani College, died published MS.]

20 1 Rome ivas then powerful from preserving the Purity of the Faith.

Conference suburbicarian Chm'clios."y To avoid tlie force T of this
Fisher testimony, Cardinal Perron ^ lays load upon Euffinus ; for
he charges him -with passion, ignorance, and rashness. And
one piece of his ignorance is, that he hath ill translated
the canon of the Comicil of Nice. Now, be that as it may,
I neither do nor can approve his translation of that canon ;
nor can it be easily proved, that he purposely intended a
translation. All that I urge is, that Euflfinus, living in that
time and place, was very like well to know and understand
the limits and bounds of that patriarchate of Rome in which
he lived. Secondly, here is, that it had potentiorem, " a
more powerful" principality than other Churches had. And
that the Protestants grant too ; and that, not only because
the Roman prelate was ordine primus, '' first in order and
degree," — which some one must be, to avoid confusion —
" but also, because the Roman see had won a great deal of
credit, and gained a great deal of power to itself in Church
affairs : because, while the Greek, yea, and the African
Churches too, were turbulent, and distracted with many and
dangerous opinions, the Church of Rome all that while, and
a good while after Irenaeus too, was more calm and constant
to the truth.'^^ Thii'dly, here is a necessity, say they,
required, " That every Church — that is, the faithful, Avhich
are everywhere — agree with that Chin'ch." But what ?
simply with that Church, whatever it do or believe ? No,
nothing less. For Ireuseus adds, "With that Chm'ch, in
qua, in which, is conserved that tradition which Avas delivered
by the apostles." And God forbid but it should be ne-
cessary for all Churches, and all the faithful, to agree with

y [Et ut] apud Alexandriam, et in [It is the 33d chapter of Cardinal

urLe l^oma, vetusta consuetudo ser- Perron's first book of the Replique a

vetur, ut [vel] ille ^Egypti, [vel] hie la IJeponse du Roy de la Grande Bre-

suhurbicariai-una ecclesiarum soliei- tagne, which discusses I'additiou du

tudinem gerat. — Ruffin. Eccl. Hist, mot, Eglises suburbicaires, faitte par

lib. i. cap. 6. [or, the continuation of Ruffin a la version Latine des Canons

Eusebius, lib. x. cap. 6. apud Ilist. du Concile de Nicee. — P. 215, &c.

Eccl Auctores, p. 221. cd. Basil. 153U. cd. Paris, l(i20.]
— The Nicene canon is the sixth : » [Accessit ad haec et tertium, quod]

To apxcua edr] KpaTehco' rd iv AiyunTCj) cum Orientales et GroectB ecclesioe,

Kal Ai^vt] Kul UsuTa-n-uAi, cicrre rbv African«5 etiam, multis opinionum

'AA.€|ai/5fi€ias iinaK6iroi/ iravriav tovtuv dissensionibus inter se tumultuaren-

ex^"' TrjV e^ouiTiai', onep Ka\ toj iv rij tur, lirec sedatior aliis, et minus

'Vaifj.r} iiricTKoirw tovto cThurjOis eixTtv' — turlnilenta fucrit. — Calvin. Instit.

Cone. cd. Labbc, torn. ii. col. 32.] lib. iv. cap. 6. §. 16. [Op., torn. viii.

'■ Perron, lib. ii. of his Reply, cap. 6. p. 298.]

In what the Prerogatives of S. Peter consisted. 205

that ancient apostolic Cliurcli in all those things in which it Section
keeps to the doctrine and discipline delivered by the apostles. •

In Irenaius's time^ it kept these better than any other
Church ; and by tliis^ in part^ obtained potentiorem principali-
tatem, " a greater power " than other Churches, but not over
all other Churches. And, as they understand Irenseus, a
necessity lay upon all other Churches to agree with this ;
but this necessity was laid upon them by the "then in-
tegrity of the Christian faith there professed, not by the
universality of the Roman jurisdiction now challenged.^^
And let Rome reduce itself to the observation of tradition
apostolic, to which it then held ; and I will say, as Irenseus
did, " that it will be then necessary for every Church, and
for the faithful everywhere, to agree with it." Lastly, let
me observe too, that Irenseus made no doubt but that
Rome might fall away from apostolical tradition, as well as
other particular Churches of great name have done. For he
does not say, in qua servanda semper erit, sed in qua servata
est : not, " in which Church the doctrine delivered from the
apostles shall ever be entirely kept," — that had been home
indeed — but " in which," by God's grace and mercy, "it was"
to that time of Irenseus so " kept and preserved." So we
have here, in Irenseus's judgment, the Church of Rome
then entire, but not infallible ; and endowed with " a more
powerful principality " than other Churches, but not with an
universal dominion over all other Chui'ches ; — which is the
thing in question.

XIV. — But to this place of Irenseus, A. C. joins a reason A. C.p. 58.
of his own. For he tells us, " the bishop of Rome is S. Peter's
successor," and therefore to him we must have recourse.
The fathers, I deny not, ascribe very much to S. Peter; but
it is to S. Peter in his own person. And among them,
Epiphanius is as free and as frequent in extolling S. Peter
as any of them, and yet did he never intend to give an
absolute principality to Rome in S. Peter's right. There
is a noted place in that father, Avhere his words are these :
"For the Lord Himself made S. Peter the first of the
apostles, a firm rock, upon which the Church of God is built,
and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it, &c. For in
him the faith is made firm every way, who received the key

206 Epiphanius, as alleged, speaks of the Faith of S. Peter personally,

Conference of lieaven, &c. For in liim all the questions and subtleties
fTsiier. ^^ *^^ faith are found.'^^ This is a great place at first sight

too, and deserves a marginal note, to call young readers' eyes

to view it. And it hath this note in the old Latin edition,
at Paris, 1561 : "Petri principatus et prcBstantia," '^Peter's
principahty and excellency." This place, as much show as
it makes for the Roman principahty, I shall easily clear, and
yet do no wrong either to S. Peter or the Roman Church.
For most manifest it is, that the authority of S. Peter is
urged here to prove the Godhead of the Holy Ghost. '^ And
then follow the eulogies given to S. Peter, the better to set
off and make good that authority : as that he was " princeps
apostolorum,^ ^the prince of the apostles,' and pronounced
blessed by Christ ; because as God the Father revealed to
him the Godhead of the Son, so did the Son the Godhead
of the Holy Ghost." After this, Epiphanius calls him
" solidam petram,^ ' a solid rock,' upon Avhich the Church of
God was founded, and against which the gates of hell should
not prevail." And adds, " that the faith was rooted and
made firm in him ^ every way, in him who received the key of
heaven." And after this, he gives the reason of all : " Because
in him," — mark, I pray, it is still " in him," as he was blessed

Matt. xvi. by that revelation from God the Father, S. Matt. xvi. —
" were found all the XeTrroXoyrifxaTa, ' the very niceties ' and
exactness of the Christian faith." ^ For he professed the
Godhead of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; and so, omni

** Ipse autem Dominus constituit t&J \vovtl iirl Trjs yris, Kal SeSvTi eV to?

eum primum apostolorum, pctram ovpavai- ev tovtw yap tart iravra xd

firmain super quam Ecclesia Dei ^riTovjxeva \imoXoyi\iiara ttjj Tr/o-Te&Js

fedificata est, et portaj infcrorum nou evpLaKofxiva.']

valcbunt advcrsus illam, dc. Juxta '^ [<i>7j(7l ovv 6 fxaKcipios Uerpos to?$

omncm cnim niodum in ipso firniata irtpi 'Avavlau] tI on i-mipaaiv [vp.a.s

est fides, qui accepit clavem coeloium, 6 'S.aravd.s xpivaaffOai rw Uvev/xaTi r^

&c. In hoc enim omnes qua^stiones oyiu; Koi (prjal, Ovk i^evaw audpti-Kois

Epiphan. in Ancorato. [cap. ix.] ed. t6 Tluev/xa, St i\j/evffavTo ol airb tou

Paris. Lat. 1564. fol. 497. A. ed. Ttfj.rii.i.aTos voa<(>iadfxfyot.'\ (For there

vero Grajco-Latin. torn. ii. p. 14. begins the argument of Epiphanius.)

[B. cd. Pctav. Paris. 1622. "ESu tov — fibid. p. 14. A.]

■jrpwTov Toov 'Atzo(Tt6k<j>v TTjV irerpav T-qv " \_KaQciis fxapTvpei] 6 K0pv<pai6raT0s

arepeav, (<p' i]v ^ 'EKKArj(Tla tov Qfuv [rcov ^1\.ito(tt6Kwv, 6 KaTa^iaiOels /xaKa-

evKoSofiriTai, Kal TvvKat aSov ov Kuiiaxv- piaBrjvui vnd Kvpiov, on 6 Harr/p avru

ffovaiv o.vTr\s' -rrvAai iJ.ei> aSov at alpeaeis aireKaAvxl/e' — il)id.]
Kal oi aipe(n6.pxo-i' kotcJ navra yap ' tt^v arfpedv ireTpav. — [ibid.]

TpoTTOV eV avTu efrT(piu6ri ?) niaTis, (V ' Kal iravra yap, k. t. A. — [ibid.]

T(2 Aa/SofTJ tVjc k\€7v tuv ovpavniv, 4v s 4v tovtcj) yap, k. t. A. — [ibid.]

and did not hold him, still less his Successors, to be chief in the Church . 207
modo, every poiut of faith was rooted in him. And this Section

is the full meaning of that learned father^ in this passage. __
Now, therefore, "building the Church upon S. Peter," in
Epiphanius^s sense, is not as if he and his successors were
to be monarchs over it for ever ; but it is the edifying and
establishing the Church in the true faith of Christ, by the
confession Avhich S. Peter made. And so he expresses
himself elsewhere most plainly : " S. Peter," saith he, "who
was made to us indeed a solid rock, firming the faith of our
Lord ; on which rock the Church is built juxta omnem modum,
' every way."' First, that he confessed Christ to be the Son
of the living God ; and by and by he heard, ' Upon tliis rock
of solid faith I will build My Church.^ And the same con-
fession he made of the Holy Ghost." Thus was S. Peter a
solid rock, upon which the Church was founded omni modo,
" every way ;" that is, the faith of the Church was con-
firmed by him in every point.' But that S. Peter was any
rock or foundation of the Church, so as that he and his
successors must be rehed on in all matters of faith, and
govern the Church like princes or monarchs, that Epiphanius
never thought of. And that he did never think so, I prove
it thus. For beside this apparent meaning of his context,
as is here expressed, how could he possibly think of a
supremacy due to S. Peter's successor, that in most express
terms, and that twice repeated,'" makes S. James, the brother

^ OS yiyovev [t]uuv aXr^Bus ffrepeci [Op.,] torn. i. p. 500. _[B, C] ed.

Uirpa eefieXiovcra rriv iriaTivrov Kvplov, Grffico-Latin. [Petav. Paris. 1622.]

i<p' rj (fiK0^6fiy)T0 rt iKK\-r}aia Kard irdvTo. ' irspl rov dyiov Ylveifxaros n ain6s

Tp6iroV TTpiaTOV jxlv on cf/j.o\6y7jae dacpaKi^erai rifids. — ibid. [cap. 8.]

XpKTTov t6v v'lov Tov &€ov ToC ^wvTos, ^ lilc piimus, (spcaking of S. Jamcs,

Kol -nKovaev, on eirl t^ Trerpa Tavrri the Lord's brother), episcopalem

rris acT(pa\iis iriarews o'lKoSofj.'^ffa} /j-o'v cathedram cepit, quum el ante ctete-

T'fiv ixK\Tiffiav eTTfiSi) (xacpws avrbv ros omnes suum in terris thronum

ca/xoAoyrja-ev t'lov aAyjOLmv .... 'AWci Dominiis tradidisset. [Kal irpuros

Kol TTfpi TOV ayinv Ui^evixaTOS 6 avros ovros ii\y)<pe Tr]v KaQi^pav rris iiritTKO-

a.a(pa\i^eTai i^p-as, \iywv toIs nepl Trrjs, ^ TreTria-revKe Kvpios tov dp6vov

'Kvaviav, k. t. A.] Qui factus est nobis avrov 67rl Trjs yr}S ■npwTCji-'] — Epiphan.

revera solida petra firmans fidem [adversus Haeres.] lib. iii. torn. ii.

Domini. In qua (petra) tedificata [cap. 7.] Hseres. Ixxviii. [contra

est ecclesia juxta omnem modum. Antidicomarianitas, Op., torn, i ]

Primo, quod confessus est Christum p. 1039. [B. ed. Petav. Paris. 1622.]

esse Filium Dei vivi, et statim audivit, — Et fere similiter, [Karaa-radevTos

Super banc petram solidae fidei »di- €u6i)s 'laKo^0 tov dSeAcpuv Kvpiov kuXov-

ficabo Ecclesiam meam . . . Etiam de u^vov kuI dwoaToAov. ^ttktkottov irpcoTov

Sp. Sancto idem, &c. — Epiphan. v'lov tov 'loxxTjcp (pv(rei ovros, k. t. \.

[adversus Haeres.] lib. ii. tom i. [cap. — Epiphan. [adver,sus Haeres.] lib. i.

7, 8.] Hferes. lix. contra Catharos, tom. ii. [cap. 3. in fin.] Hjcres. xxix.

XXV.

208 What S. Peter received tvas in common with all the Apostles.

Conference of our Lord^ and not S. Pcter, "succeed our Lord in the
Fisher principality of tlie Church ?" And Epiphanius was too full

both of learning and industry, to speak contrary to himself

in a point of this moment.

XV. — Next, since A. C. speeds no better with Irenseus,
he Avill have it out of Scripture. And he still tells us, " the
bishop of Rome is S. Peter^s successor.^^ Well, suppose
that. What then ? What ? Why then he succeeded in all

A. C. p. 58. S. Peter's prerogatives^ which are ordinary, and belonged to
him as a bishop, — though not in the extraordinary, which
belonged to him as an apostle. For that is it which you all
say, but no man proves."" If this be so, yet then I must tell
A. C, S. Peter in his ordinary power was never made
"pastor of the whole Church;" nay, in his extraordinary,
he had no " more powerful principality '' ^ than the other
apostles had. A " primacy of order " ° was never denied him
by the Protestants ; and an " imiversal supremacy of power "
was never granted him by the primitive Christians. Yea,

Matt. xvi. but " Christ promised the keys to S. Peter." True, but so

Matt xviii ^^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^^® ^^^^ °^ ^^^® apostles ; and to their successors
[18]. as much as to his. So it is tibi et illis, not tibi non il/is,

[23.] " ^ give the keys to thee and them," not " to thee to exclude

them;" unless any man will think heaven-gates so easy,
that they might open and shut them without the keys.
And S. Augustine is plain: "If this were said only to
S. Peter, then the Church hath no power to do it;" p which,

[contra Nazarseos, Op., torn. i. p. pope. For by that supremacy is

119. A.] signified the fulness of ecclesiastical,

' Bellarmin. de Eom. Pont. lib. i. or rather papal, power, even a power

cap. 9. § 45. [ubi sup. p. 186. note''.] sovei'eign of governing the Church

™ Sect. XXV. No. 10. [ubi sup. p. 185.] throughout the whole world, in all

" Bellarmin. ibid, [ubi sup. p. 186. points and matters of doctrine and

note ■■.] discipline." — The Sum of the Con-

° " The fathers gave three preroga- ferencc between John Kainoldcs and

tives to S. Peter: of Authority, of John Hart, &c. p. 172. ed. London,

Primacy, and of Principality ; but not 1609.]

of supremacy of power." — KainoldcB p [Unus malus corpus malorum

against Hart, chap. v. Divis. iii. And signiticat : quomodo Petrus corpus

he proves it at large. [His words are: bonorum, immo corpus ecclesise, sed

"These sayings, and the like, which in bonis. Nam si in Petro non esset

are alleged out of the fathers, do Ecclesite sacramentum, non ei diceret

touch three prerogatives which they Dominiis, Tibi dabo claves, &c.] Si

give to Peter: the first, of Authority; hoc Peti-o tantum dictum est, non

the second, of Primacy ; the third, of facit hoc Ecclesia. [Si autem et in

Principality. But none of them all Ecclesia fit, ut quae in terra ligantur,

doth prove the supremacy which you in ccelo ligentur, et qua3 solvuntur in

pretend to Peter, and mean to the terra, solvantur in ccelo, &c. Si hoc

Our Lord's Prayer for S. Peter's Perseverance alleged. 209

God forbid ! The keys therefore were given to S. Peter and Section

Y V V

the rest, in a figure of the Chiirch, to whose power and for '

whose use they were given. But there is not one key in all
that bunch, that can let in S. Peter's successor to a "more
powerful principality universal " than the successors of the
other apostles had.

XVI.— Yea, but Christ prayed '"that S. Peter's faith A. C. p. 58.
mifflit not fail." That is true : and in that sense that Christ Luke xxii.
prayed, S. Peter's faith failed not ; that is, in application to "'
his person, "for his perseverance in the faith," as S.Prosperi
applies it. " Which perseverance yet he must owe and
acknowledge to the grace of Christ's prayer for him, not to
the power and ability of his own free will," as S. Jerome"^
tells us. Bellarmine^ likes not this, "because," saith he,
"Christ here obtained some special privilege for S.Peter,
whereas perseverance in grace is a gift common to all the
elect." And he is so far right. And the special grace
which this prayer of Cln-ist obtained for S. Peter was, that
he should not fall into a final apostasy; no, not when Satan
had sifted him to the bran, that he fell most horribly even
into a threefold denial of his Master, and that with a curse.
And to recover this, and persevere, was aliquid speciale, I
trow, if any thing ever were. But this will not down with
Bellarmine. No ; " The aliquid speciale,^ ' the special thing '

ergo in Ecclesia fit, Petrus, quando decent, Dominum orasse hoc loco pro

claves accepit, ecclesiam sanctam perscverantia solius Petri in gratia

significavit. Si in Petri persona Dei usque ad finem. At contra :primo,

significati sunt in Ecclesia boni, &c.] quia oravit Dominus paulo post pro

— S. Augustin. in Joliann. Evang. perseverantia omnium apostolorum,

[cap. xii.] Tractat. 1. [12. Op.,tom. iii. immo etiam omnium electorum,

par. 2. col. 633. D, E.] (Joan. xvii. 11.) Pater Sancte, serva

1 [In evangelic autem secundum eos, &'c.; non erat igitur ratio cur

Lucam,] Deum dare, ut in fide per- bis pro perseverantia Petri oraret.

severetur, [ita promitur : Dixit autem Secundo, quia sine dubio hie Domi-

Jesus Petro, Simon, Simon, &c.] — S. nus] aliquid speciale [Petro impetra-

Prosper. [seu potius ignot. auctor.] vit, ut patet ex designatione cerfse

de Vocat. Gent. lib. i. cap. 24. [apud personae : perseverantia autem in

Op., S. Prosper, col. 885. A.] gratia est donum commune omnium

"■ [Ego autem] rogavi [pro te] ut non electorum.] — Bollarmin. de Pom.

deficeret, &c. Et certe juxta vos in Pont. lib. iv. cap. 3. [§ 3. Op., torn i.

apostoli erat positum potestate, si col. 806. A.]

voluisset, ut non deficeret fides ejus, ' [Est igitur tertia expositio vera,

[qua utique deficiente, peccatum quod Dominus duo privilegia Petro

subingreditur.] — S. Hieron. [Dia- impetraverit. Unum, ut ipse non

log.] adversus Pelagianos, lib. ii. [Op., posset unquam veram fidem amittere

tom. iv. par. 2. col. 521.] Alteram privilegium est,] ut

' [Altera expositio est quorum- ipse tanquam pontifex non posset

dam, qui hoc tempore vivunt, qui unquam docere aliquid contra fidem,

VOL. ir. — LAUD. p

210 The application of it to his Successors unauthorized by antiquiiij,

Conference here obtained was/' saitli he, "that neither S. Peter himself,
fTshek. ^^^ ^^y other that should sit in his seat, should ever teach

any thing contrary to the true faith/' That S. Peter, after

his recovery, should preach nothing, either as apostle or
bisliop, contrary to the faith, will easily be granted him;
but that none of his successors should do it, but be all
infallible, that certainly never came within the compass of
Rogavi pro te, Petre, " I have prayed for thee, Peter." And
Bellarmine's proof of this is his just confutation. For he
proves this exposition of that text only by the testimony of
1 [ubi sup. seven ' popes in their own cause ; and then takes a leap to
QQ^g p 1 Theophylact, who says nothing to the purpose. So that,
upon the matter, Bellarmine confesses there is not one
father of the Church, disinterested in the cause, that under-
stands this text as Bellarmine doth, till you come down to
Theophylact. So the pope's infallibility appeared to nobody
but the popes themselves, for above a thousand years after
Christ — for so long it was before Theophylact^ lived. And
the spite of it is, Theophylact could not see it neither. For
the most that Bellarmine makes him say, is but this : " Be-
cause I account thee as chief of My disciples, confirm the
rest; for this becomes thee, Avliich art to be a rock and
foundation of the Chm-cli after Me."'' For this is personal
too, and of S. Peter, and that as he was an apostle; for
otherwise than as an apostle, he was not a rock or founda-
tion of the Church, no, not in a secondary sense. The
special privilege therefore which Christ prayed for, was
personal to S. Peter, and is that which before I mentioned.

sive, ut in sede ejus nunquam inveni- privilegium, quia ipse futurus erat

retur, qui doceret [contra veram fidem. princeps, et caput aliorum, ac proinde

Ex quibus privilegiis, primum fortasse dari omnibus aliis, qui illi in princi-

non manavit ad posteros : at secun- patu succederent :] Quia te habeo,

dum sine dubio manavit ad posteros, inquit, principem discipulorum, con-

sive successores.] — Bellarmin. de firma coeteros. Hoc enim decet te,

Kom. Pont. lib. iv. cap. 3. [§ 5, G. qui post me ecclesia; petra es etfunda-

Op., torn. i. col. 806. C] mentum. — Bellarmin. de Eom. Pont.

" Theophylactus, [patria Constan- lib. iv cap. 3. [§ 13. Op., torn. 1. col.

tinopolitanus, Achridiae primarise 807. D. The original words are :

Bulgarorum ecclesite archiepiscopus "On eVeiST^ ere twv fxaOTjToHi' e^apxov

(Cave, sub roc.),] floruit circa An. Ix"" • • • irrripi^ov rovs Konrovs. tovto

Dom. 1072. yap 7rpoff7)K6t aoi, ous /uer' ifj.k ovti rijs

" Prajterhos [poatifices, non desunt iKKK-ncria^ irirpu kuI aTnpiy/j.aTi.'] —

etiam alii auctores, qui eodcm modo Theophylact. in Luc. xxii. [p. 517. B.

exponunt. Theophylactus in cap. xxii. ed. Paris. 1635.]
Lucse apcrte docet, dari Petro hoc

and inconsistent in itself — S. Peter's a personal privilege only. 211

And Bellarmine liimself says^ that " Christ obtained by this Skction
prayer two privileges, especial ones, for S. Peter :"> the one,
" that he should never quite fall from the true faith, how
strongly soever he were tempted;" the other, "that there
should never be found any sitting in his seat, that should
teach against it." Now for the first of these, Bellarmine ^
" doubts it did not flow over to his successors." Why, then,
it is true which I here say, that this was personal to S. Peter.
'' But the second," he says, " out of all doubt passed over to
his successors." Nay, that is not out of all doubt neither :
First, because many learned men have challenged many
popes for teaching heresy; and that is against the true faith.
And that which so many learned men have affirmed, is not
out of all doubt ; or if it be, why does Bellarmine take so
much pains to confute and disprove them as he doth?^
Secondly, because Christ obtained of His Father every thing
that He prayed for, if He prayed for it absolutely, and not
under a condition : " Father, I know that thou hearest Me John xi.
always." Now, Christ here prayed absolutely for S. Peter; ^^'
therefore, whatsoever He asked for him was granted. There-
fore, if Christ intended his successors as well as himself. His
prayer was granted for his successors as well as for liimself.
But then, if Bellarmine will tell us absolutely, as he doth,
"that the whole gift obtained by this prayer for S. Peter
did belong to his successors;"'' and then by and by after,
break this gift into two parts, and call the first part into
doubt, whether it belongs to his successors or no, he cannot
say the second part is out of all doubt. For if there be
reason of doubting the one, there is as mu-ch reason of
doubting the other, since they stand both on the same foot,
the validity of Christ^s prayer for S. Peter.

XVII. — Yea, but " Christ charged S. Peter to govern and

y Impetraverit, &c. — ibid. § 6. [ubi chieily by the Magdeburg Centnria-

sup. p. 209. note',] tors, against several of the popes, forty

^ Ex qiiibus privilegiis primum in number.]

fortasse non manavit ad posteros, at ^ [Quarto,] donum lioc loco Petro

secundum sine dubio manavit ad impetratum, etiam ad successores per-

posteros sive successores. — Bellarmin. tiuet : [nam Christus oravit pro

ibid, [ubi sup. p. 209. note '.] Petro in utilitatem ecclesice ; ecclesia

" Bellarmin. [de Pom. Pont.] lib. iv. autem semper indiget aliquo, a quo

cap. 8. [Op., torn. i. col. 819. et seqq. confirmetur, cujus fides deficere non

Thischapter, and those which follow it, possit.] — Bellarmin. de Pom. Pont,

are occupied by Bellarmine with re- lib. iv. cap. 3. § 3. [Op., torn. i. col.

futing charges which had been made, 806. B.]

212 Charge to S. Peter, in common with the other Apostles, to feed the Flock.

Conference feed His "wliole flock." Nay, soft ! It is but His sheep and His

Fisher, l^mbs ; and that every apostle, and every apostle's successor,

hath eharo-e to do/ But over the whole flock I find no one
John XXI. ° . 1 . • 1 -/-^ .

15. ajDostle or successor set. And it is a poor sniit to say, as

A. C. p. 58. A. C. doth, " that the Bishop of Borne is set over the Avhole
flock, because both over lambs and sheep /' for in every flock,
that is not of barren wethers, there are Iambs and sheep,
that is, weaker and stronger Christians ; '^ not people and
pastors, subjects and governors, as A. C. expounds it, to
bring the necks of princes under Boman pride. And if kings
be meant, yet then the command is, Pasce, " feed" them ; but
deponere,ox occidere, to '^^ depose," or "kill" them, is not pascere
in any sense : lanii id est, non pastoris ; " that is the butcher's,
not the shepherd's, part." If a sheep go astray never so far,
it is not the shepherd's part to kill him ; at least if he do,
non pascit dum occidit, '' he doth not certainly feed while he
kills."

A. C. p. 58. XVIII.— And for the close, " That the bishop of Borne
shall never refuse to feed and govern the whole flock in such
sort, as that neither particular man, nor Church, shall have
just cause, under pretence of reformation in manners or faith,
to make a separation from the whole Church ;" — by A. C.'s
favour', this is mere begging of the question. He says, the
pope shall ever govern the whole Church so as that there shall
be no just cause given of a separation. And that is the very
thing which the Protestants charge upon him ; namely, that he
hath governed, if not the whole, yet so much of the Church
as he hath been able to bring under his power, so as that he
hath given too just cause of the present continued separation.
And as the corruptions in the doctrine of faith in the

•^ Matt, xxviii. 29, [19.] and Matt, qnestion, [Quibus ita pontifex :]

X. 17, [7.] the same power and charge Quaudo, [inqiiit,] Christus ecelesiam

is given to them all. suam Petro comniisit, et dixit, Pasce

"* And this seems to me to allude oves meas, excepitne reges] [Nam

to that of S. Paul, 1 Cor. iii. 2. cum eidem ligandi et solvendi potesta-

and Hel). v. 12: "Some are fed with tein daret, nullum excepit, vel nemi-

milk, and some with stronger meat." nem ejus potenti£e subtraxit.] — Pla-

The lambs with milk, and the sheep tina, [VitcePontific] in vitadreg.VII.

with stronger meat. But here A. C. (p. 173.] And certainly kings are

follows PopcHildcbrand close, who in not exempted from being fed by the

the ca.se of [Henry IV.] the emperor Church; but from being spoiled of

then, [quum instabant ex his, qui their kingdoms by any churchmen,

aderant, nonnulli regem non ita cito that they are.
anathematizandum esse,] asked this

That Bp. of Rome will never give cause for separation, an assumption. 213

Church of Rome were the cause of the first separation, so Section

XXV
are they at this present day the cause why the separation 1 — L_

continues. And further, I, for my part, am clear of opinion,
that the errors in the doctrine of faith which are charged
upon the whole Church, at least so much of the whole as in
these parts of Europe hath been kept under the Roman
jurisdiction, have had their original and continuance from
this, That so much of the universal Church (which indeed
they account all) hath forgotten her own liberty, and sub-
mitted to the Roman Church and bishop ; and so is in a
manner forced to embrace all the corruptions which the
particular Chui'ch of Rome hath contracted upon itself; and
being now not able to free herself from the Roman jurisdic-
tion, is made to continue also in all her corruptions. And
for the Protestants, they have made no separation from the
general Church, properly so called (for therein A. C. said A. C. p. 58.
well, "the pope^s administration can give no cause to separate
from that"), but their separation is only from the Church of
Rome, and such other churches as, by adhering to her, have
hazarded themselves, and do now miscall themselves the
whole Catholic Church. Nay, even here the Protestants
have not left the Church of Rome in her essence, but in her
errors; not in the things which constitute a Church, but
only in such abuses and corruptions as work toward the
dissolution of a Church.

^. I also asked. Who ought to judge in this case ? The [A.C.p.59.]
%. said, A General Council.*

* [It is true, when the question is about the general faith of the Church, the
matter may be made most firm, if the Church in a General Council, with the
full authority of her chief pastor, and all other pastors, whom all people must
obey, (Rom. xv. ; Heb. xiii.) decree what is to be held for divine truth, by Visum
est Spiritui Sancto et nobis, (Acts xv.) and by &Mh\g Anathema to such as resist
this truth. For if this be not firm and infallible, what can be so firm and
well-founded in the Church, which, under pretext of seeming evident Scripture
or demonstration, may not be shaken and called in question by an erring dis-
puter ? For if all pastors being gathered together in the name of Christ,
praying unanimiter for the promised assistance of the Holy Ghost, making
great and diligent search and examination of the Scriptures, and other grounds
of faith, and hearing each pastor declare what hath been the ancient tradition
of his Church, shall, in fine, conclude and decree, in manner aforesaid, what is
to be held for Divine truth, — if, I say, the Council in this decree may err, and
may be controlled by every particular or any particular, unlearned or learned,
man, or Church, pretending evident text of Scripture, or clear demonstration
— supple, Teste et judice seii^sis — what can remain firm or certain upon earth,
which may not by a like pretence be controlled, or at least, by one or other,
called in question ] A General Council, therefore, being lawfully called, con-

214 General Comicih — difficulty of assembling all Bishops.

CoNFERKNCE finuccl and confirmed, is, doubtless, a most competent judge of all controversies

WITH of faith. But what is to be done when a General Council cannot be called, as

Fisher, many times it cannot by reason of manifold impediments ; or if, being called, all

will not be of one mind? as among Protestants and others, who admit no

infallible means, will, or judge, beside "only Scripture," which each man will
interpret as soemeth best to his several private judgment or spirit, it is scarce
to be hoped that all, or the major part, will ever so agree, as to remain constant
in one and the same mind. Hath Christ our Lord in this case provided no
means, no rule, no judge, which may infallibly determine and end contro-
versies, and procure unity and certainty of belief, being so necessary for the
honour of God, and the good of His Church ] Must people, for want of such
a judge, rule, or means, continue, not only months and years, but whole
ages, in uncertainty and disunity of faith, and in perpetual jars about even
main matters of divine truth? There is no earthly kingdom that, in case
matters cannot be composed by Parliament— which cannot be called upon all
occasions and at all times — hath not, beside the law-books, some living magis-
trates and judges, and, above all, one visible king, the highest magistrate and
judge, who hath authority sufficient to end controversies, and procure peace and
unity, and certainty of judgments, about all temporal affairs ; and shall we
think that Christ, the wisest King, hath provided in His kingdom, which is the
Church, only the law-books of Holy Scriptures, and no living visible magistrates
and judges; and, above all, one chief magistrate and judge, so assisted with
His Spirit and Providence, as may suffice to end controversies, and breed unity
and certainty of faith ? which never can be while every man may interpret Holy
Scripture, the law-book, as he list. — A. C. marg. note' to p. 53.]

§ 26. 2B. I. — And surely, Avhat greater or surer judgment you
can have, where sense of Scriptm-e is doubted, than a General
A.C.p. 59. Council, I do not see, nor do you doubt. And A. C. grants
it to be " a most competent judge of all controversies of
faith, so that all pastors be gathered together, and in the
name of Christ, and pray unanimously for the promised
assistance of the Holy Ghost, and make great and diligent
search and examination of the Scriptures, and other grounds
of faith, and then decree what is to be held for Divine truth.
For then,'' saith he, " it is firm and infalUble, or else there is
nothing firm upon earth." As fair as this passage seems,
and as freely as I have granted that a General Council is
the best judge on earth where the sense of Scripture is
doubted, yet even in this passage there are some things
considerable. As first. When shall the Chm-ch hope for such
a General Council, in which " all pastors shall be gathered
together?" There was never any such General Council yet,
nor do I believe such can be had ; so that is supposed in
vain : and you might have learned this of Bellarmine,^ if

« [Praeter hsec argumcnta haereti- hactenus concilium generale, neque

corum, movent Catholici unum du- etiam videtur deinceps futurum; [si

bmm de his, qui intere.ssc debent in aliqui tantum, quinam illi sunt] Non

conciho; nam vel ad generale con- cnim videtur major ratio de uno

cilium faciendum requiruntur omnes quam de alio.]— Bellarmin. de Con-

episcopi totius orbis, vel alicpu tan- ciliis [et Ecclesia,] lib. i. cap. 17 SI

tum :] si omnc-s, nullum fuit [ergo] [Op., torn. ii. col. -34. C]

and of observing the conditions requisite in their proceedings. 215

you will not believe me. Next^ saitli he, " If all these Section

pastors pray unanimously for the promised assistance of the
Holy Ghost/^ Why, but if all pastors cannot meet together,
all cannot pray together, nor all search the Scriptures
together, nor all upon that search decree together ; so that
is supposed in vain too. Yea, but thirdly, " If all that meet
do pray unanimously.^^ What then ? "All that meet'^ are
not simply all. Nor doth the Holy Ghost come and give
His assistance upon every prayer that is made unanimously,
though by very many prelates or other faithful people met
together, unless all other requisites, as well as unanimity,
to make their prayer to be heard and granted, be observed
by them; so that an unanimous prayer is not adequately
supposed, and therefore concludes not. But lastly, how
far a General Council, if all A. C.'s conditions be observed, is
" firm and infallible," that shall be more fully discussed at
after.^ In the mean time, these two words, " firm,'^ and
" infallible," are ill put together as synonymes. For there
are some things most infallible in themselves, which yet
could never get to be made firm among men : and there
are many things made firm by law, both in churches and
kingdoms, which yet are not infallible in themselves. So to
draw all together : to settle controversies in the Church,
there is a visible judge and infallible, but not living; and
that is the Scripture s pronouncing by the Church. And

f Sect, xxxiii. Consid. 1. fuit, (quamvis nee modo desit,) pro

s And this was thought a sufficient tempore quicquid necessarium ei-at,

judge, too, when Christians were as apostolis imperavit. Sed quomodo

humble as learned. I am sure Op- terrenus pater, dum se in coufinio

tatus thought so. Quserendi sunt senserit mortis, timens ne post mor-

judices : si Christiani, de utraque tem suam, rupta pace, litigent fratres,

parte dari non possunt, quia studiis adhibitis testibus, voluntatem suam

Veritas impeditur. De foris qute- de pectore morituro, transfert in ta-

rendus est judex: si paganus, non bulas diu duraturas: et si fuerit inter

potest Christiana nosse secreta: si fratres nata contentio, non itur ad

Judaeus, inimicus est christiani bap- tumulum, sed quseritur testamentum ;

tismatis : ergo in terris de hac re et qui [in] tumulo quiescit, tacitus de

nullum poterit reperiri judicium; de tabulis loquitur. Vivus, cujus est

coelo quserendus est judex. Sed ut testamentum, in ccelo est : ergo volun-

quid pulsamus ad coelum, cum habe- tas Ejus, velut in testamento, sic in

amus hie in evangelio testamentum ] Evangelio requiratur. — S. Optat. [de

Quia hoc loco recte possunt terrena Schism. Donatist.] adv. Parmen. lib. v.

coelestibus comparari : tale est quod [cap. 3. Op., p. 81. ed. Dupin. ubi sup.

quivis hominum habens numerosos p. 79. note '.] This pregnant place of

filios, ' quamdiu pater prsesens est, Optatus,(thatthe Scripture is thejudge

ipse imperat singulis ; non est adhuc of Divine truth whenever it is ques-

necessarium testamentum : sic et tioned,) though Balduin dare not deny,

Christus, quamdiu praesens in terris yet be would fain slide both by it and

XXVI.

A General Council confirmed by being received.

Conference there is a visible and a living judge, but not infallible ; and

Fisher. ^^^^ i^ ^ General Council, lawfully called, and so proceeding.

But I know no formal confirmation of it needful, though

A. C. require it,^ but only that, after it is ended, the w^holc

Church admit it, be it never so tacitly.

by a parallel place as full in S. Augus-
tine in Psalm, xxi. Enarr. 2. [30. Op.,
torn. iv. col. 101. F. Quare litigasl
Fratres sumus, quare litigamus] Non
intestatus mortuus est Pater. Fecit
testamentum, ct sic mortuus est : mor-
tuus est, et resurrexit. Tamdiu con-
tenditur de hacreditate mortuoruni,
quamdiu testamentum proferatur in
publicum ; ct cum testamentum pro-
latum fuerit in publicum, tacent om-
nes, ut tabulae aperiantur et recitentur :
judex intentus audit, advocati silent,
priBcones silentium faciunt, universus
populussuspcnsus est, utlegantur verba
raortui, non seutientis in monumento.
Ille sine sensu jacet in monumento, et
valeut verba ipsius : sedet Christus in
ccelo, et contradicitur testamento Ejus !
Aperi, legamus. Fratres sumus, quare
contendimus %] with this shift, that S.
Augustine in another place [de Bap-
tismo, lib. ii. cap. 7 ; lib. iv. cap. 6,
and lib. v. cap. 23.] had rather use the
testimony of tradition [non tam Scrip-
turam quam traditionem apostolicam]
that is, the testimony nnncupafivi,
potius quam scripti, testcmienti — of the
nuncupative, rather than the written
will of Christ. Balduin. [Annotat.] in
S. Optat. lib. V. [apud Op., p. 145. ed.
Dupin.] But this is a mere shift. First,
because it is pe<«7io 2^'>"'-ncipii, the
mere begging of the question. For
we deny any testament of Christ but
that which is written. And A. C.
cannot show it in any one father of
the Church, that Christ ever left be-
hind him a nuncupative obligatory
will. Secondly, because nothing is
more plain in these two fathers, Op-
tatus and S. Augustine, than that
both of them appeal to the written
will, and make that the judge, with-
out any exception, when a matter of
faith comes in question. In Optatus
the words are h<(/>emv.9 in Evangelio,
We have it in the Gospel. And in
JlJvanr/elio inquiratur, Let it be in-
quired in the Gospel. And Christ
put it intahulus diu duraturaii, into
written and lasting instruments. In
S. Augustine the words are : Our
Father did not die intestate, &c. ; and
tabidcea periantur, Let His will, His

■written instruments, be opened ; and
legantur verba riiortui, Let the words
of Him that died be read. And again,
aperi, leyamus ; Open the will, and
let us read. And legamus, quid
litigamus? Why do we strive 1 Let
us read the will. And again, aperi
testamentum, lege; Open the will,
read. All which passages are most
express and full for His written will,
and not for any nuncupative will, as
Balduin would put upon us. And
Hart, who takes the same way with
Balduin, is not able to make it out,
as appears by D. Rainoldes in his
Conference with Hart, chap. 8. divis. i.
p. 396, &c. [ed. London, 1609.]

^ Sect, xxviii. No. 1. And so plainly
S. Augustine, speaking of S. Cyprian's
error about rebaptization, &c. says;
Illis temporibus, ante quam plenarii
concilii sententia quid in hac re se-
quendum esset, totius ecclesite con-
sensio confirmasset, visum est ei cum
[ferme octoginta coepiscopis suis Afri-
canarum ecclesiarum,] &c. — De Bap-
tism, contra Donatist. lib. i. cap. 18.
[Op., torn. ix. col. 93. G.] So here is first
sententia concilii ; and then the con-
firmation of it is totius ecclesice con-
se7isio, the consent of the whole Church
yielding unto it. And so Gerson :
[Attendendum tamen est, quod non
omnia qusc tradit vel tolerat ecclesia
publico legenda, sunt de necessitate
salutis credenda .... sed duutaxat ilia
quae sub definitione judiciali tradit
esse credenda, vel opposita repro-
banda,] concurrente uuiversali totius
ecclesiac consensu [implicite, vel ex-
plicite, vere vel interpretative.] — In
Declarat. Veritatum, quae credendas
sunt [de necessitate salutLs,] §4. [inter
Gerson. Op., tom. i. col. 22. C. ed.
Dupin. Antwerp. 1706.] For this,
that the pope must confirm it, or else
the General Council is invalid, is one
of the Eoman novelties. For this
cannot be shown in any antiquity void
of just exception. The truth is, the
pope, as other patriarchs and great
bishops used to do, did give his assent
to such councils as he approved. But
that is no corroboration of the council,
as if it were invalid without it, but a

Impediments to the calling a General Council alloived. 217

II. — In the next place, A. C. interposes new matter quite Section

• • • XXVI

out of the Conference. And first, in case of distractions and

disunion in the Church, he would know " Avhat is to be done f •^- PP-^^,
to re-unite, when a General Council" (^yhich is acknowledged
a fit judge) " cannot be had by reason of manifokl impedi-
ments, or if, being called, will not be of one mind ? Hath
Christ our Lord,^^ saith he, " in this case provided no rule, no
judge, infallibly to determine controversies, and to procure
unity, and certainty of belief? Indeed, the Protestants admit
no infallible means, rule, or judge, but only Scripture, which
every man may interpret as he pleases, and so all shall be
uncertain." Truly, I must confess, there are many im-
pediments to hinder the calling of a General Council. You
know in the ancient Church there was' hindrance enough,
and what hurt it wrought. And afterward, though it were
long first, there was provision made for frequent calling of
councils,'^ and yet no age since saw them called according to
that provision in every circumstance : therefore " impedi-
ments'' there were enough; or else some declined them wilfully,
though there were no impediments. Nor will I deny but
that when they were called there were as many practices
to disturb or pervert the Councils.^ And these practices

declaration of his consenting with the prffiteritorum temporum reeordatio et

rest. Sect, xxxiii. Consid. 4. No. 6. prtesentium consideratio ante ociilos

' [Canonesgeneraliumconciliorum] nostros ponunt. [Ea propter liocedicto

a temporihus Constautini [coeperimt. perpetuo] sancimus, [decernimus atque

In praccedentibus namque annis,] per- ordinamus,] ut amodo concilia gene-

seciitione speviente, [docendarum pie- ralia celebrentur ; ita quod primum

biumminimedabaturfacultas.Deinde,] a fine hujus concilii in quinquennium

Christianitasindiversashferesesscissa immediate sequens. Secundum vero a

est, quia non erat licentia episcopis in fineillius [mediate sequentis concilii] in

unum convenire, nisi tempore supra- septennium, et deinceps in decennium

dicti Imperatoris.— Isidor. prasfat. in perpetuo celebretur, &c. — Concil. Con-

Concil. [Origo Conciliorum genera- stant. Sess. xxxix. [Octob. 9.an. 1417.]

Hum, quo tempore soil, concilia apud Gerson. [Op.,] torn. i. p. 230.

celebrari coeperunt; et de quatuor [ed. Paris. 1606. et, torn. ii. col. 290. B.

Conciliis principalibus : Ex Isidoro. ed. Dupin.]— Et, Pet. de Aliaco Card.

Concil. torn. i. p. ?>.'] ed. Venetiis, Cameracensis libellum obtulit in Con-

per Nicolinum, 1585. [This short oil. Constant, de Eeformatione Eccle-

treatise occurs in the above edition site contra opinionem eorum qui puta-

before Isidore's Preface, prefixed to the runt concilia generalia minus ncces-

ordinary editions of the Councils.] saria esse, quia omnia bene a patribus

^ Frequens generalium conciliorum nostris ordinata sunt, &c. — In fascic.

celebratio agri Dominici prsecipua cul- Rerum Expetendarum, [per Orthui-

tura est, [qure vepres, spinas et tri- num Gratium, &c. ed. Colon. 1535.]

bulos hteresum, errorum et schis- fol. 28. [ccviii.]—Etschismatibus debet

matum extirpat, excessus corrigit, ecclesia cito per concilia generalia

deformata reformat, et vineam Domini provideri, ut in primitiva ecclesia

ad frugem uberrima fertilitatis ad- docuerunt apostoli, v^ Act. vi. et

ducit.] Riorum [vero] neglectus pr£e- Act. xv. — Ibid. fol. cciv. A.

missa disseminat atque fovet. Haec ' [Hoc est illud Homousion, quod

218 Failing a General Council, what is the infallible rule in controversy.
Conference were able to keep many Councils from beinsr all of one mind.

WITH • *

Fisher. ^^^^ if> being called, they ^yill not be of one mind, I cannot

help that ; though that very not agreeing is a shi-ewd sign

that the other spirit hath a party there against the Holy

Ghost.

Ill- — NoM^ A. C. ATOuld know what is to be done for reuniting
of a Church divided in doctrine of the faith, when this
remedy by a General Council cannot be had. " Sure Christ
our Lord,^' saith he, " hath provided some rule, some judge, in
such and such like cases, to procure unity and certainty of
behef." I believe so too ; for He hath left an infallible rule,
the Scripture. And that, by the manifest places in it which
need no dispute, no external judge, is able to settle unity
and certainty of belief in necessaries to salvation ; °^ and in
non necessariis, in and about things not necessary, there
ought not to be a contention to a separation.''

IV. — And therefore A. C. does not well, to make that a
crime, that the Protestants admit no infallible rule, but the
Scriptm-e only : or as he (I doubt, not without some scorn)
terms it, beside " only Scripture.'^ For what need is there of
another, since this is most infallible ; and the same which
the ancient Chui'ch of Chi^ist admitted ?° And if it were

in Concilio Nicteno advcrsus htereticos cos baptismum non habere, sine bap-

Arianos, a catliolicispatribus veritatis tismo [tamen] receptis, [cum peceata

auctoritate et auctoritatis veritate fir- eoram tarn immania tamque sacrilega

matum est : quod postea] in concilio super cos esse crederent,] eis tamen

Ariminensi, [propter novitatem verbi communicare, quam separari abunltate

minus quam oportuit intellectum, maluerunt, [dicente Cypriano, Xemi-

quod tamen fides antiqua pepererat,] nem judicantes, aut a jure commu-

multis_ paucorum fraude deceptis, nionis aliquem si diversum senserit

[haeretica impietas, sub hjeretico im- amovcntes.] — S. Augustin.de Baptismo

peratore Constantio labefactare ten- contra Donatistas, Til), ii. cap. 6. [Op.,

tayit.] — S. Augustin. contra Maxi- tom. ix. col. 100. B.] — [A talibua

minum Arianum, lib. iii. [ii.] cap. 14. sacrilegis venientes, sine baptismo, ut

[Op., tom. viii. col. 704. E.] dicitis, si] Cyprianum non contamina-

" Non per difficiles nos Deus ad bant, [quomodo vos contaminare

beatam vitam qua3stiones vocat, [nee poterant non convicti, sed conficti

multiplici eloquentis facundire genere traditores]] — Ibid, in fin. [col. 101. D.]

sollicitat.] In absolute nobis et facili o Recensuit cuneta Sanctis Scrip-

est tetemitas, Jesum [et] suscitatum a turis consona. {koX irepl twv Swd/xfuv

mortuis per Deum credere, et Ipsum avroC, koI nepl Tijs SiSaaKaAias, ws TtapA

esse Dominum confiteri. [Nemo ita- avToiTToi}fTfjs^cL>rjsTovA6yov7rapei\rj<p(os

que ea, que ob ignorationem nostram 6 noXvicapiros, dirriyyiWe -rravTu av/x-

dicta sunt, ad occasionem irreligios- (pwva raTs ypacpais.] — Euseb. [EccL]

itatis usurpet.]— S. Hilar, de Trini- Hist. lib. v. cap. 20. de Irena;o, [apud

tate, lib. x. ad fin. [sect. 70. Op., col. Hist. Eccl. Scriptor. tom. i. p. 239. ed.

1080. E.] Reading.]— Paracletus [autem multa

" [Quomodo ergo non pcrierunt] habens edocere, qute in ilium distulit

Cyprianus ct tot collegjB ipsius ? Qui Dominus, secundum praefinitionem,

cum crederent hfereticos et schismati- ipsum prime Chri.^tum contestabitur.

A rule required which is certain and Jcnoivn.

219

sufficient for the ancient Chiu'cli to guide tliem, and direct Section
their councils, why should it be now held insufficient for ^^^^-
us, at least till a free General Council may be had ? And
it hath both the conditions Avhich Bellarmine requires to a
rule ; namely, that it " be certain, and that it be known ;
for if it be not certain, it is no rule, and if it be not known,
it is no rule to us/'p Now the Romanists dare not deny, but

qualem credimus, cum toto ordine Dei
creatoris, et Ipsum glorificabit^ et de
Ipso comniemorabit ; et sic] de pria-
cipali regnla agnitus, [ilia multa qua3
sunt disciplinarum revelabit, fidem di-
ccnte pro eis iutegritate prsedicationis,
licet novis, quia nunc revelantur ; licet
onerosis, quia nee nunc sustinentur.]
— Tertullian. de itonogamia, cap. 2.
[Op., p. 526. A. ed. Kigalt.] And this
is true, though the author spoke it
when he was lapsed. — [Nee necesse
est ut singula deliramenta qure pro-
ferunt, brevior epistolaa sermo sub-
vertat, quum et tu] ipsas Scripturas
apprime tenens, [non tarn ad eorum
mota sis qua3stiones.] — S. Hieron.
[Epist.] ad Marcellum contra Monta-
num, [xxvii. al. liv.] torn. ii. [Op.,
torn. iv. par. 2. col. 65. ed. Benedict.]
— Hoc quia de scripturis non liabet
auctoritatem, eadem facilitate contem-
nitur, qua probatur. — S. Hieron.
[Comment, lib. iv.] in Matth. cap.
xxiii. 35. Op., torn. iv. par. 1. col. 112.]
— Manifestus est fidei lapsus, et liqui-
dum superbise vitium, vel respuere
aliquid eorum qute Scriptura habet,
vel inducere quicquam quod scriptum
non est. — S. Basil. Serm. de Fide,
torn. ii. p. 154. ed. Basilese, 1565.
l^tpavepd iKirraicTis TriaTecos, k. r. \. —
S. Basil, de Fide, Op., tom. ii. p. 224.
D. ubi sup. p. 61. note i.] — Contra
insurgentes haereses ssepe pugnavi
agraphis, verum non alienis a pia se-
cundum Scripturam sententia. — Ibid,
p. 153. [ubi sup. p. 69. note K]— And
before S. Basil, Tertullian. Adoro
Scripturse plenitudinem, [quae mihi et
factorem manifestat et facta. In
evangelio vero amplius et ministnim
atque ai'bitrum rectoris invenio ser-
monem. An autem de aliqua subja-
centi materia facta sint omnia, nus-
quam adhuc legi. Scriptum esse
doceat Hermogenis officina.] Si non
est scriptum, timeat, Vse illud, adji-
cientibus aut dcti'ahentibus destina-
tum. — Tertullian. advers.Hermog. cap.
xxii. [Op., p. 241. D. ed. Rigalt.]
And Paulinus plainly calls it Eegulam

directionis, [in these words : Enutritus
a puero in sacris Uteris . . . informanos
ad regulam directionis, pasce nos spiri-
tali cibo, id est, verbo Dei, qui est verus
et vivens panis, &c.] — Epist. [ii. al.]
xiii. [Op., S. Paulini Nolani Episcopi,
p. 8. ed. Paris. 1685.] — De hac regula
tria observanda sunt. 1. Regula est,
sed a tempore quo scripta. 2. Regula
est, sed per ecclesiam applicanda, non
per privatum spiritum. 3. Regula est,
et mensurat omnia qupe continet : con-
tinet autem omnia necessaria ad salu-
tem vel mediate vel immediate. Et
hoc tertium habet [Gabr.] Biel. in III.
[Sentent.] D[istinct.] xxv. Q[ua3st. ]
unica, Conclus. 4. M. [Prreterea omnes
usum rationis habentes tenentur cre-
dere quod omne revelatum a Deo est
verum. Item quod Scriptura a Deo
revelata sit vera; sed lioc credens
explicite omnia credibilia credit im-
plicite ; cum omnia credenda sint
revelata a Deo, et omnia continentur
immediate vel mediate in Scriptura.]
— And this is all we say. Hooker,
Eccl. Polit. Book Y. ch. xxii. [sect, i.
Works, vol. ii. p. 114. " The voice and
testimony of the Church acknowledg-
ing Scripture to be the law of the
living God, is for the truth and cer-
tainty thereof, no mean evidence ....
a further commodity this custom of
public reading of the word of God
hath, which is to furnish the very
simplest and rudest soul with such in-
fallible axioms and precepts of sacred
truth, delivered even in the very letter
of the Law of God, as may serve them
for rules whereby to judge the better
all other doctrines and instructions
which they hear."]

p [Deinde] regula Catholicse fidei
certa notaque esse debet : nam si nota
non sit, regula nobis non erit ; si certa
non sit, ne regula quidem erit. — Bel-
armin. de Verbo Dei, lib. i. cap. 2. § 5.
[Op., tom. i. col. 3. C.]— At sacris
Scripturis, [quse propheticis et apo-
stolicis Uteris continetur,] nihil est
notius, nihil certius ; [ut stultissimum
esse necesse sit, qui illis fidem esse

220 ]Vo living Judge sufficient to prevent Heresy.

Conference this rule is " certain ',"^ and that it is sufficiently "known"

■\y T T IT ,

FisuER. 1° the manifest places of it, and such as are necessary to
salvation, none of the ancients did ever deny ; so there is
an infallible rule.

V. — Nor need there be such fear of a " private spirit" in
these manifest things, which being but read, or heard, teach
themselves. Indeed, you Romanists had need of some other
judge, and he a propitious one, to crush the pope^s " more
powerful principality" out of Pasce oves, ''Feed My sheep."
And yet this must be the meaning (if you will have it).

Judges vi. whether Gideon's fleece be wet or dry ; that is, whether there
be dew enough in the text to water that sense or no. But
I pray, when God hath left His Church this infallible rule,
what warrant have you to seek another ? You have showed
us none yet, whatever you think you have. And I hope
A. C. cannot think it follows, that Christ our Lord hath
provided no rule to determine necessary controversies,
because He hath not provided the rule which he would have.
VI. — Besides, let there be such a living judge, as A. C.
would have, and let the pope'' be he ; yet that is not sufficient
against the malice of the devil, and impious men, to keep
the Church at all times from renting, even in the doctrine
of faith, or to solder the rents which are made. For oportet

lCor.xi.l9. essehcereses, "heresies there will be;" and heresies properly
there cannot be, but in doctrine of the faith. And Avliat
will A. C. in this case do ? Will he send Clirist our Lord to
pro\dde another rule than the decision of the bishop of
Home, because he can neither make unity, nor certainty of
belief? And as it is most apparent he cannot do it de facto,
so neither hath he power from Christ over the whole Cluu'ch
to do it ; nay, out of all doubt, it is not the least reason why

habendam nej^et.] — Bcllarmin. Ibid, esse gladium spiritual em, qui in hoc

§6.[col. 3.D.] Therefore the Holy Scrip- certamine recusari non possit.] — Bel-

turc is the rule of Catholic faith, both larmin. in Prrefat. in fin. [Op.,]

in itself, and to us also ; for in things torn. i. And although there per-

simply necessary to Salvation it is haps he includes traditions, yet that

abundantly known and manifest, as was never proved yet. Neither in-

Sect. xvi. No. 5. [ubi sup. p. 74.] deed can he include traditions, for he

1 Convenit [atitem] inter nos et speaks of that word of God, upon

omnes oninino hereticos, verbum Dei which ail heretics consent : but con-

esse regulam fidei ; ex qua de dogma- cerning traditions, they all consent

tibus judicaudum sit : [esse commune not, that they are a rule of faith,

principium ab omnibus concessum, therefore he speaks not of them,

unde argumenta ducantur : denique For so he affirms, [A. C] p. 58.

Though the Ch. is a Kingdom, its Earthly Rule is not Monarchical. 221

de facto he liath so little success^ because de jure he hath Section
no power given. But since A. C. requires another judge '

besides the Scripture, and, in cases when either the time is
so difficult that a General Council cannot be called, or, the
council so set, that they will not agree, let us see how he
proves it.

VII.— It is thus: "Every earthly kingdom,^^ saith he, A.C. p. 60.
" when matters cannot be composed by a parliament, which
cannot be called upon all occasions," (Why doth he not add
here, "and which being called, will not always be of one
mind," as he did add it in case of the council ?) " hath, be-
sides the law books, some living magistrates and judges, and
above all, one visible king, the highest judge, who hath
authority sufficient to end all controversies, and settle unity
in all temporal affairs. And shall we think that Christ, the
wisest King, hath provided in His kingdom, the Church, only
the law-books of the Holy Scripture, and no living visible
judges, and above all, one chief, so assisted by His Spirit, as
may suffice to end all controversies for unity and certainty
of faith ? which can never be, if every man may interpret
Holy Scriptui-e, the law-books, as he list." This is a very
plausible argument with the many, but the foundation of
it is but a similitude ; ^ and if the similitude hold not in the
main, the argument is nothing ; and so, I doubt, it will prove
here. I will observe particulars, as they lie in order.

VIII. — And first, he will have the whole militant Church,
for of that we speak, " a kingdom." But this is not certain ;
for they are no mean ones, which think our Saviour Christ
left the Church militant, in the hands of the apostles and
their successors, in an aristocratical, or rather, a mixed
government ; and that the Church is not monarchical,'

' Quae [autem] subtilissime de hoc similibus, si similiter se habent.)

disputari possunt, ita ut non simili- [olou, el eirjo-rijyurj /^la irXftSvoov, kuI

tudinibus quse plerumque fallunt, sed Su^a- Kal el rh oxj^tv ex^''' opav, Kal to

rebus ipsis satis fiat, [ne in praesentia aKorjv exfiv aKoveiv 6/j.oiccs 6e kuI inl

expectes.] — S. Augustin. [lib.] de quan- rcBv aWwu, Koi i-rrl twv ovtoiv koL twv

titate animae, cap. xxxii. [Op., torn. i. Bokovvtwv — Aristot. Topic, lib. ii.

col. 433. F.] Whereupon the logi- cap. 10. Op., torn. i. p. 294. ed.

cians tell us rightly, that this is a Bekker.]

fallacy, unless it be taken reduiMca- ' When Gerson wrote his tract De

tive, i. e. de similibus quce, similia Auferibilitate Papaa, sure he thought

sunt. And hence Aristotle himself, 2. the Church might continue in a very

Top. Loc. xxxii. says : iraAiv iirl Twv good being, without a monarchical

6iJ.oiuv, fl ofxolus exer (rursum in head ; therefore, in his judgment, the

222

Its Constitution is Ai'istocratical under Bishops.

WITH

Fisher

Conference otherwise than the triumphant and mihtant make one body
under Christ the Head. And in this sense indeed^ and in
this only, the Church is a most absolute kingdom. And the
very expressing of this sense is a full answer to all the
places of Scripture, and other arguments brought by Bellar-
mine/ to prove that the Chui-ch is a monarchy. But the
Church being as large as the world, Christ thought it fitter
to govern it aristocratically — by divers, rather than by one
viceroy. And I believe this is true; for all the time of the first
three hundred years, and somewhat better, it was governed
aristocratically, if we will impartially consider, how the bishops
of those times carried the whole business of admitting any
new consecrated bishops or others to, or rejecting them from,
their commu^nion. For I have carefully examined this for
the first six hundred years, even to and within the time
of S. Gregory the Great ; '^ who, in the beginning of the
seventh hundred year, sent such letters to Augustine, then
archbishop of Cantcrbuiy, and to Quirinus,y and other

Chiireli is not by any command or
institution of Clirist, nionarcliical.
[Non in eo versatur iste tractatus ut
papam ab ccclesia penitus auferri
posse ostendat, ut quidam perperam
existimarunt, sed in eo scilicet, lioc
contingere posse, ut Ecclesia careat
per aliquod tempus pontifice, necnon
in nonnullis casibus ab ecclesia posse
deponi. — Libell. de auferibilitate
papae ab ecclesia, apud] Gerson.
[Op., tom. ii. col. 209. ed. Dupin.]
par. 1. p. 154. [ed. 1606.]— When
S. Jerome wrote thus : Ubicunque
fuerit episcopus, sive Romte, sive
Eugubii ; sive Constantinopoli, sive
Rhcgii ; sive Alexandrin3, sive Tanis,
ejusdem meriti, ejusdem est ct
sacerdotii. — S. Hieron. Epist. [ad
Evangelum, al.] Evagrium, [cii. Op.,
tom. iv. par. 2. col. 803.] doubt-
less he thought not of the Koman
bishop's monarchy. For what bishop
is of the same merit, or of the same
degree in the priesthood, with the
pope, as things are now carried at
Rome? — .iffirmamus etiam, patribus,
et Graecis ct Latinis, ignotas esse
voces de Petro aut Papa monarcha et
monarchia. Nam quod in superiori-
bus observabamus, reperiri eas dic-
tiones positas pro episcopo ct episco-
patu, nihil hoc ad rem facit. — Isaacus
Casaubon. Excrcitatione xv. ad An-

nales Ecclesiasticos Baronii, § xii.
p. 378. [p. 272. ed. Francof. 1615.]
et § xi. p. 360. [ibid. pp. 256—262.]
diserte asserit et probat ecclesiae regi-
men aristocraticum fuisse.

" [Xam secundum Scripturas ec-
clesia non est democratia, vel aristo-
cratia, sed monarchia, sive regnum
Chrlsti, juxta illud P.s. ii. Ego autem
constitutus sum Rex, &c. ; et Lucae,
cap. i. Regni Ejus non erit finis ; et
Joann. xviii. Regnum Meum non
est, &c. . . . Denique Scriptura passim
vocat Christum regem, &c.] — Bellar-
min. de Concili[orumauctoritate,] lib.
ii. cap. 16. § 1, 2, 3. [Op., tom. ii. col.
93. C]

* B. Gregor. [Magn. Registr.l Epis-
tol. lib. ix. Epist. Iviii. [lib. xi.
Indict. 4. Epist. xxviii. Op., tom. ii.
col. 1109. E.]— Et, lib. xii. Epist. XV.
[lib. xi. Indict. 4. Epist. Ixiv, Ixv.
Op., tom. ii. col. 1150. B. et seqq.]

y S. Gregor. [Magn. Registr. Epis-
tol.] lib. ix. Epist. Ixi. [lib. xi. Indict.
4. Ejji.st. Ixvii. Op., tom. ii. col. 1166.
D. This epistle the Benedictine editors,
following the authority of Peter do
Marca, Cardinal Bona, and others, in-
scribe Quirico, et ceteris episeopis in
Jliheria— not Hil)ernia — Catholicis.
It seems impossible that the epistle
could have been addressed to any Irisli
bishops, not only because its subject is

This argued further from relation of the Church to the State. 223

bisliops in Ireland. And I find^ that the literce communicato- Section
rice, which certified from one great patriarch to another who -^-^^^^'
were fit or unfit to be admitted to their communion^ if they
upon any occasion repaired to their sees, were sent mutually;
and as freely^ and in the same manner, from Kome to the
other patriarchs, as from them to it. Out of which I think
this will follow most directly, That the Church government
then was aristocratical. For had the bishop of Rome been
then accounted sole monarch of the Church, and been put
into the definition of the Church, as he is now by Bellar-
mine,^ all these communicatory letters should have been
directed from him to the rest, as whose admittance ought to
be a rule for all to communicate; but not from others to
him, or at least not in that even, equal, and brotherly way,
as now they appear to be written. For it is no way proba-
ble that the bishops of Rome, which even then sought their
own greatness too much, would have submitted to the other
patriarchs voluntarily, had not the very course of the Church
put it upon them.

IX.^ — Besides, this is a great and undoubted rule, given by
Optatus,^ " That wheresoever there is a Church, there the
Chm'cli is in the commonwealth, not the commonwealth in
the Church. And so also the Church was in the Roman
empire." Now from this ground I argue thus : If the
Church be within the empire or other kingdom, it is impos-
sible the government of the Church should be monarchical.
For no emperor or king will endure another king within his
dominion that shall be greater than himself, since the very
enduring it makes him that endures it, upon the matter, no
monarch. Nor will it disturb this argument, that two great
kings in France and Spain permit this. For he that is not
blind may see, if he will, of what little value the pope's

the reception of Nestorians into the fidei professione, et eorundetn sacra-
Church, while the heresy of Nestorius mentonim communione colligatum,
does not appear to have extended sub regimine legitimorum pastorum,
beyond the Oriental Church ; but be- ac prtecipue unius Christi in terris
cause an allusion is made to the fact, Vicarii Romani Pontificis.]— Bellar-
that the legate of the bishops, to whom min. de Ecclesia Militante, lib. iii.
S. Gregory was addressing himself, cap. 2. § 9. [Op., torn. ii. col. 108. D.]
had lost certain letters at Jerusalem.] » Non enim respublica est in eccle-
^ Nostra autem [sententia est, sia : sed ecclesia in repiiblica : id est, in
Ecclesiam unam tantum esse, non imperio Romano.— S.Optat. [Milevit.]
duas, et illam unam et veram esse lib. iii. [cap. 3. Op., p. 52. ubi sup.
ctetum hominum cjusdem Christianse p. 195. note ^.1

The Law of Appeals shows this Aristocratic Constitution.

Conference power is ill those kingdoms, farther than to serve their own
Fisher, ^urns of him, which they do to their great advantage. Nay,
farther, the ancient canons and fathers of the Chui'ch seem
to me plain for this, for the Council of Antioch ^ suhmits
ecclesiastical causes to the bishops. And what Avas done
amiss by a bishop, was corrigible by a sjmod of bishops,'^
but this with the metropolitan.'* And in case these did not
agree, the metropohtan •^ might call in other bishops out of
the neighbouring provinces. And if things settled not this
way, a General Council, under the Scripture,'' and directed
by it, was the highest remedy. And S. Cyprian, even to
Pope Cornelius himself, says plainly, that " to every bishop
is ascribed a portion of the flock for him to govern.'^ s And
so not all committed to one. In all this the government
of the Church seems plainly aristocratical. And if all other
arguments fail, we have one left from Bellarmine, who
opposes it as much as any, twice for faihng.'^ And yet,
where he goes to exclude secular princes from Church

^ Concil. Antioch. [an. 341.] Can.
ix. p. 5C7. [Concil. torn. ii. col. 565. A.
Tovs Kad' eKciffTrjv iirapxiuv fTrtffKiTrous
eiSefai xpT'J '''ov iv rrj ^T)Tpotr6\ii wpoe-
(TTWTa iwiaKoiroy, kcLl r^f (ppofriSadva-
56X«f^o!' TraffTjs t-^s inapxias' k. t. A.]

■= Cone. XicEen. I. [an. 325.] Can. v.
[Concil. torn. ii. col. 32. B. 'Lva koivtj
iravTwv rcHv iTn(TK6irwv ttjs eTrapxias €7ri
TO avTd rrvvayo/xevcoy, TtJ roiavra fjjT?/-
fxara e|eTafoi' k. t. A.] — Et, Concil.
Antioch. Can. xii. [ubi sup. col. 568. A.
elf T(s vird Tov ISiov ^ttktkotzov Kadaipe-
6f\i .... Scoi' inl fie'i^oua iirLCTK6iru>v
ffvvoSov rpeir^adui .... irpoffavacpipetv
trKeioaiv i-mcFKOTTOis' k. t. \.]

^ Concil. NicEen. I. Can. iv. [ubi
sup. col 30. E. t6 5t Kvpos twv 711/0-
fxevtjiv Si5oa6at Kaff iKamrjv eirapxl-o-v tc^
/i7jTpo7ro\iTrj ] — Et, Concil. Antioch.
Can. ix. [ubi sup. col. 565. C. wepaiT^pw
Sf /xr]5kv TrpaTTfiv iirixeipe^v Six^ Tou
TTJs fir]TpoTr6\€iiis iinaKSnoV k. t. A.]

" Concil. Antioch. Can. xiv. [ubi sup.
col. 568. D. ef res eVtV/fOTros iiri rtaiv
iyK\ri,ua(Ttv Kpivoiro, iirara arvuBdi-q
irepl avTov 5ia<pcovuv roi/s iv rfj tnapxia
iwiaKOTTovSyTwv fjL^u dCcuov tov Kptv6fj.evov
aTTo<pai.v6vTwv, twv he fvoxov iirep
UTraWay^s ndarjs dfj.(piBr]Ti'iaeci>s, eSo^e
rf) 07101 ai'VLStf! T(V TTJS uriTpowSKews
4Trl(TKOTrov dir'o Trjs Tt\r](Tiox<^pov iirap-
X'ar fj.eTaKa\iT(jOai irepovs Tivds tovs

eiriKpLvovvras, Kal r^f diu.(pLiTPTJT7](Tiv
Sia\v(TovTas, TOV Bepaiwrrai ai)v Tots T7J!
iTrapx'to.s t6 TrapiffTajJ-ivov.^

' [Quis autem nesciat sanctam]
Scripturam canonicam, [tam veteri?
quani novi Testamenti, certis suis ter-
minia contineri, eamque omnibus pos-
terioribus episcoporum Uteris ita]
praeponi, [ut de ilia omnino dubitari
et disceptari non i^ossit, utrum verum
vel utrum rectum sit, quidquid in ea
scriptum esse constiterit: episcoporum
autem literas, &c.] — S. Augustin. de
Baptismo contra Donatist. lib. ii. cap.
3. [Op., torn. ix. col. 98. A.]

B Nam cum statutum sit ab] omni-
bus nobis, [et a^cjuum sit paritcr ac
justum, ut uniuscujusque causa illic
audiatur ubi est crimen admissum,]
ct singulis pastoribus portio gregis
[sit adscripta, quam regat unusquis-
que et gubernet, rationem sui actus
Domino rcdditurus, &c.] — S. Cyprian,
lib. i. Ep. 3. [Epist. Iv. ad Cornelium,
p. 86. ed. Benedict.]

'■ [Quod non sit ecclesiasticum re-
gimen prajcipue penes episcopos.] —
Bellarmin. de Rom. Pont. lib. i. cap. 8.
in tit. Op., torn. i. col. 526. D.]— Et,
Non esse in Concilio summam potes-
tatem.]— Id. de ConciliLorum auctori-
tate,] lib. ii cap. 16. [in tit. Op , torn,
ii. col. 93. C]

The Papal Scheme tends to the sway of one Temporal Empire. 225

government, all his quotations ' and all liis proofs run upon Section
this head, to show " that the government of the Church was ^ "

ever in the bishops." What says A. C. now to the con- A.C. pp.64,
fession of this great adversary, and in this great point,
extorted from him by force of truth ? Now if this be true,
then the Avhole foundation of this argument is gone. The
Church militant is no kingdom, and therefore not to be
compared or judged by one : the resemblance will not
hold.

X. — Next, suppose it a kingdom ; yet the Church mili-
tant remaining one, is spread in many earthly kingdoms,
and cannot well be ordered like any one particular kingdom.*^
And therefore, though in ' one particular kingdom there be ' [as . . .
many visible judges and one supreme, yet it follows not ^dtt
that in the universal militant Church there must be one 1686.]
supreme. For how will he enter to execute his office,
if the kings of those kingdoms will not give leave ?

XI. — Now here, though A. C. expresses himself no farther,
yet I well know what he and his fellows would be at. They
would not be troubled to ask leave of any several kings in
their several dominions. No ; they would have one emperor
over all the kings, as well as one pope over all the bishops.
And then you know who told us of " two great lights to
govern the world, the sun and the moon — that is, the pope

' [Quod non sit ecclesiasticum regi- argument. That monarchical govern-

men peues principes sseculares.] — Bel- ment is the best, and therefore undoubt-

larmin. de Kom. Pont. lib. i. cap. 7. edly that which Christ instituted for his

[in tit. Op., torn. i. col. 522. D.] Church, it is sufficient to answer, That

^ [Et ideo] licet sit expediens, quod a monarchy is the best form of govern-

uni populo partiali fideli prsesit unus ment in one city or country. Aristot.

episcopus, non expedit tamen quod toti Ethic. [Nicom ] lib. viii, cap. 10.

populo fideli pr8e.-*it unus solus. Turn [tovtwu Se ^eXriarri fxhu rj fiacnAeia . . .

quia omnia negotia unius populi par- irapiK^acns Se ^aatXeias fiiv rvpavvis-

tiaiis potest sustinere unus solus; o.ix(bw yap ixovapxiai. — Op., torn. ix.

millus autem unus potest sustinere p. 166. ed. Bekker] But it follows

omnia negotia etiam majora omnium not, that it is the best in respect of

Christianorum : tum quia minus the whole world, where the parts are

malum est, ut populus partialis et so remote, and the dispositions of men

parvus inficiatur ab uno episcopo, so various. And therefore Bellarmine

quam ut totus, vel fere totus, populus himself confesses, Monarchiam aristo-

Christianus inficiatur ab uno capite, cratias et democratize admixtamiitilio-

quod omnibus prosit. — Ockam. J)ial, rem esse in hac vita, quam simplex

lib. ii. tract, i. par. 3. cap. .30. ad 8. monarchia est.— [Bellarmin] de Rom.

[apudGoldast. S.Rom. Imper.Monarch. Pont. lib. i. cap 3. H- [in tit. Op.,

tom. ii.pp.818, 819. ed.Francof. 1614. torn. i. col. 515. C. Bellarmine's words

These dialogues are, according to Tho- are: Regimen temperatum ex omni-

rold,(T.C.,— Laud's Labyrinth, p. 254.) bus tribus formis, propter nature

in thelndex Expurgatorius.] And be- humanae corruptionem, utilius est,

sides this of Ockam, to that common quam simplex monarchia, &c.]

VOL. II. — LAUD. Q

22G

Application of the type of the Sim and Moon,

CoNFEKENCK aHcl tliG cmperor." ^ At the first it began with more modesty —
the emperor and the pope ; and that was somewhat tolerable.

WITH

Fisher.

For S. Augustine tells us,"' " that the militant Church is
often in Scripture called the moon, both for the many
changes it hath, and for its obscurity in manj'^ times of its
peregrination.'^ And he tells us too, " that if we will
understand this place of Scripture in a spiritual sense, our
Saviour Christ is the sun, and the militant Church, as beine:
full of changes in her estate, the moon.""^ But now it must be
a triumphant Church here — mihtant no longer. The jiope
must be the sun, and the emperor but the moon. And
lest Innocent's own power should not be able to make good
his Decretal, Caspar Schioppius" doth not only avow the

' In the first gloss, ascribed to
Isidore, in Gen. i. 16. it is, Per solem
intelligitur regnum ; per lunam, sacer-
dotium. [This passage does not occur
literally either in the Gloss. Ordinar,
or in S. Isidore in Genesin, from
which it is taken. In one passage on
Gen. i. 16. S. Isidore says : Lumi-
naria in firmamento, id est, legis

doctores, SS. inhaerentes, &c

siderum turba, id est, virorum sancto-
rum numerositas ; and in another
cited from him as the Gloss on Gen. i.
19. : Splendor siquidem solis regni
figurat excellentiam, jjlebem obtem-
perantem regi lunce splendor osten-
dit, tanquam synagogam. Stellte vero
principes ejus sunt, &c. This last
place is slightly varied from S. Isi-
dore's Comment, in Genesin, cap. ii.
Op., torn. V. p. 266. ed. Lorenzanje ;
et, cap. iii. p. 285. A. ed. Colon. 1617.]
But Innocent the Third, almost six
hundred years after Isidore's death,
perverts both te.\t and gloss, thus :
Ad firmamentum [igitur] coeli, hoc
est, universalis ecclesite, fecit Deus
duo magna luminaria, id est, duas
instituit dignitates, quaj sunt ponti-
ficalis auctoritas et regalis potestas.
[Sed ilia, qute pra3est dicbus, id est,
spiritualibus, major est : quae vero
carnalibus, minor :] ut quanta [est]
inter solem et lunam, tanta inter pon-
tifices et regcs differentia cognoscatur.
— Epi.st. ad Imperat. Conslantino-
politanum, [an. 1198.] Decret. [al.
Gregor. IX.] lib. i. de Majoritate et
Obedicntia, tit. 33. cap. [6.] SoliUe.

'" [Ecclesia vero adhuc in ista mor-
talitale carnis constituta,] propter
[ipsam] mutabilitatem, lunaj nomine

in scripturis signatur. [Unde est illud
Ps. X. 3. (secundum LXX.) Paraverunt
sagittas suas in pharetra, ut sagittent
in obscura luna rectos corde.] — S.
Augustin. Epist. cxix. cap. 6. [ad in-
quisitiones Januarii, lib. ii. seu Epist.
Iv. cap. 6. Op., torn. ii. col. 131. E.]

" [J'ecit lunam in tempora :] Intel-
ligimus spiritaliter ecclesiam [cres-
centem de minimo, et ista mortalitate
vitJB quodam modo senescentem ; sed
ut propinquet ad solem. Non istam
lunam dico visibilem oculis, sed qu^
hoc nomine significatur. Ista quando
obscura erat ecclesia, quando nondum
apparebat, nondum eminebat, seduce-
bantur homines, et dicebatur, Hsec
est ecclesia, hie est Christus: ut sa-
gittarent in obscura luna rectos corde
(Ps. X. 3.) ... . Hie enim temporaliter
transit Ecclesia : non enim hie erit
semper ista mortalitas. Augeri et
minui aliquando transibit: in tem-
pora focta est. Sol agnovit occasum
suum.] Et hie quis sol, nisi sol [ille]
justitia;, [quem siln non ortum impiii
plangent in die judicii t] — S.Augustin.
in P.s. ciii. [Enarr. Sermo iii 19. Op.,
tom. iv. col. 1163. B. — Cf. Enarr. in
Ps..x. ibid. col. 59. C]

" Gasp[ar] Schiop[piu.s, in] L[ibro]
dicto Ecclesiasticus, [auctoritati Sere-
nissimi D. Jaeobi Magnse Britanni£e
Regis oppositus.] cap. 145. [Scioppius
is meeting an argument derived from
Pope Innocent's word.s, against the
union of spiritual and temporal
supremacy in the Pope. The points
of correspondence which he inci-
dentally gives are these : Sicut luna
proprium lumen non habet, sed id a
sole mutuatur : sic etiam sajculari

by Fope Innocent the Third. 227

allusion or interpretation, but is pleased to express many Section
circumstances, in wliich he would fain make the world ^'^^^-
believe the resemblance holds. And lest any man should
not know how much the pope is made greater than the
emperor by this comparison, the Gloss i' furnishes us with that
too, and tells us " that by this it appears, that since the earth
IS seven times greater than the moon, and the sun eight
times greater than the earth, it must needs follow, that the
pope^s power is forty-seven times greater than the emperor's. '^
I hke him well — he will make odds enough. But what, doth
Innocent the Third give no reason of this his Decretal ? Yes.
And it is, saith he, " because the sun, which rules in the
day, that is, in spiritual things, is greater than the moon,
which rules but in the night, and in carnal things.'' i But is it
possible that Innocentius the Third, being so wise and so able,
as " that nothing which he did, or commended, or disproved
in all his life, should after his death be thought fit to be
changed, " ^ could think that such an allusion of spiritual
things to the day, wliich the sun governs, and worldly business
to the night, which the moon governs, should carry weight
enough with it to depress imperial power lower than God hath
made it ? Out of doubt he could not ; for he well knew that
omnis anima, " every soul," was to "be subject to the higher Rom. xiii.

potestati spiritualis auctoritatem prse- hath no ground of truth at all ; for the

bet, cum ei etiam propter conscien- emperor being solo Deo minor, (Ter-

tiam subditos esse jubet. Et sicut tul. ad Scap.) cannot be a moon to any

luna videtur lumiuare magnum cum other sun. [TertuUian's words are :

tamen multis stellarum minor sit ; Colimus ergo et imperatorem sic, quo-

similiter seecularis potestas amplis- modo et nobis licet, et ipsi exped it, ut

sima videtur, cum tamen sacerdotio hominem a Deo secundum ; et quic-

longe sit inferior. — P. 527. ed. Hart- quid est, a Deo consecutum, et solo Deo

bergEe, 1611.] minorem. Hoc et ipse volet. Sic enim

p Igitur cum terra sit septies major omnibus major est, dum] solo Deo

luna, sol autem octies major terra ; [vero] minor [est. Sic et ipsis Diis

restat ergo ut pontificalis dignitas major est, dum et ipsi in potestate sunt

quadragesies septies sit major regali ejus. Itaque et sacrificamus pro salute

dignitate. — Gloss, in Decret. preedict. imperatoris, sed Deo nostro et ipsius,

Where, first, the Gloss is out in his sed quomodo prsecepit Deus, pura

Latin : he might have said quadra- prece. — TertuUian. ad Scap. cap. ii.

gies, for quadragesies is no word. Op., p. 69.]

Next, he is out in his arithmetic ; for '' Sed ilia potestas, quae praeest die-
eight times seven makes not forty- bus, i. e. in spiritualibus, major est ;
seven, but fifty-six ; and then he is quse vero carnalibus, minor.— Inno-
much to blame for drawing down the cent. Ill, ubi sup. [p. 226. note '.]
pope's power from fifty-six to forty- [Cujus vita adeo probata fuit,] ut
seven. [The margin ofthe Gloss adds: post ejus mortem, nil earum rerum,
A lias, quinquagies septies ; — of which qu^ in vita egerit, laudaverit, improba-
the arithmetic is also open to Laud's veritque, immutatum sit. — Platiua in
remark.] And, lastly, this allusion vitaInnocent.in.[Vit.Pontific. p.214.]

Q 2

228 Antiquity teaches the subordination of the Clergy to the Civil power

Conference power." And " the higher power " ^ there mentioned^ is the
Fisher, temporal. And the ancient fatlicrs^ come in with a full
consent, that omnis anima, "every soul/' comprehends there
all without any exception; all spiritual men, even to the
highest bishop, and in spiritual causes too, so the foundations
of faith and good manners be not shaken ; and Avhere they
are shaken, there ought to be prayer and patience, there
ought not to be opposition by force. Nay, he knew Avell,
that emperors and kings" are custodes utriusque tabula,

' Patres veteres, et prEesertim Au-
gustin. Epist. liv. [ad Macedonium,
et Chrysostomus (v. infra,) prjesenti
loco,] Apostolum interpretantur de
potestate sajculari tantum loqui, quod
et ipse textus subindicat, &c. — Sal-
meron. Disput. iv. in Kom. xiii. § [5.
Salmeron. Comment. &c. torn. xiii.
p. 676.]

' [koI ^iiKviis OTt] Tzaai ravra SiaTar-
Terat, Kal 'iepevai, \^Kat /xovaxoh, o^x'

To?S ^LUTlKOiS IxivOV, 6/C ■KpOOlfJ.iojl' avTO

SriKov iiroir]aii' o'iroi \i-yoov' TTucra ^i>x'')>
K. T. A. Kav aTToffToKos 1JS, Kav eua^ye-
AiffTT}?, Kav Trpu<pr]Tris , Ko.i' oariaovv
oiSSe yap avarpiTn^i Trjf evai0eiay uvrr]
7} vnoTayi].] Omnibus ista imperantur,
et sacei-dotibus, et monachis, &c.
Etiamsi apostolus sis, si evangelista,
si proplieta, sive quisquis tandem
fueris.— S. Chrysostom. [in Epist.] ad
Eom. Homil xxiii. [1. Op.,tom. ix.
p. 686. B.] — Sive est sacerdos [ali-
quis,] sive antistes, &c.— Theodoret.
in Eom. xiii. [eire tepevs tIs iarlu,
eire dpxtepeiis, dre ruv fxovripr} Piou
eirayy^Wd/xevos, roTs rds dpxas ireTri-
(TTfvfieuots e'lKeToi. — Theodoret. Op.,
tom. iii. p. 99. D. ed. Paris. 1642.] —
[Omnis anima (inquit liom. xiii. 1.)
potest atibus sublimioribussubdita sit.]
Si omnis et vcstra. Quis vos excipit
ab universitate ? [Si quis tentat ex-
cipere, conatur deciperc. Nolite illo-
rum acquiescere consiliis, qui cum
sint Christiani, Clirisli tamen vel
sequi focta, vel obsequi dictis, op-
probrio ducunt] Ipsi sunt qui vobis
dicere solent, servate vcstra) sedia
honorem. [Decebat quidem ex vobis:
vobis commissam ecclesiam crescere;
nunc vero saltem in ilia quam sus-
cepistis maneat diguitate. Et vos
enim vestro prrodecessore impoten-
tior? Si non crescit per vos, non
decrescat pervos. Hfccisti.] Christus
aliter et jussit et gessit. [Redditc,
ait, qufe sunt Ca;saris, Ctcsari ; et

qnte sunt Dei, Deo.] — S. Bernard.
Epist. xiii. ad Henricum Senonensem
Archiepiscopum, [Op., fol. 199. col. 4.
M. ed. Paris. 1551.]— And. Theopliy-
lact. in Pom. xiii. [naiSevwi' irdauv
^"XV^'t Ka,v Upevs p ris, Kav fj.ovaxos,
Kav aTrJffToAos, vnordaaiatlaL ro7s dp-
Xovfftv. — Theophylact. in Epist. D.Pauli
Comment, ed. Lindsell. Londin. 1636.]
Where it is very observable, that
Theophylact lived in the time of Pope
Gregory the Seventh, and S. Bernard
after it, and yet this truth obtained
then ; and this was about the year
1130.

" An forte de religione fas non est
ut dicat imperator, vel quos miserit
imperator? cur ergo ad imperatorem
vestri venere legati ] cur eum fcce-
runt causae suoe judicem, non sccuturi
quod ille judicaret .' — S. Augustin.
contra Epistolam Parmeniani, lib. i.
cap. 9. [Op., tom. ix. col. 20. D.] —
[Sed quorsum ista dicuntur?] num-
quidnam, etiam si obtineant non
pcrtinerc ad imperatorem adversus
eos aliquid statuere, qui prava in
religione sectantur, [propterea si in-
terfecorit eos, quos punierit martyres
erunt ?]— Ibid. [col. 20. E.] Nor can
this be said to be usurpation in tl)e
Emperor. For elsewhere S. Augus-
tine speaks thus : [An forte sicut
quidam dixit, quod quidem cum
vobis diceretur, displicuit ; sed tamen
prtBtermittendum non est: ait enim
quidam, Non debuit episcopus pro-
consulari judicio purgari : quasi vero
ipse sibi hoc comparaverit, ac non]
imperator [ita qu;eri jusserit;] ad
cujus curam, de qua rationem Deo
redditurus esset, res ilia maxime
pertinebat. [Arbitrum enim et judi-
cem causae traditionis et schismatis
illi eum fecerant, &c.J — S. Augustin.
Epist. clxii. [Epist. xliii. ad Glorium
et Eieusium, tvc. cap. 4 Op., tom. ii.
col. 93. G.] and, [Postea vero quam

The power of Kings in Ecclesiastical causes under the Law.

229

Section
XXVI.

Deut xvii.
18.

" tliey^ to whom the custody and preservation of l)oth tables
of the law/' for worship to God and duty to man^ " are com-
mitted ; " that a book of the law was, by God's own com-
mand in ]\Ioses' time, to be given the king ; that the
kings under that law, but still according to it, did proceed
to necessary reformations in Church businesses ; and therein
commanded the very priests themselves, as appears in the
acts of Hezekiah and Josiah, who yet were never censured, 2 Chrou.
to this day, for usurping the high priest's office. Nay, he 2^j^^n"-s
knew full well, that the greatest emperors for the Church's xxiii. 2.
honour — Thtodosius the Elder, and Justinian, and Charles
the Great, and divers others — did not only meddle now and
then, but did enact laws, to the great settlement and increase
of religion in their several times. But then, if this could
not be the reason why Innocentius made this strange
allusion, what was ? Why, truly, I will tell you : The pope
was now grown to a great and a firm height. Gregory the
Seventh ^ had set the popedom upon a broad bottom, before
this Innocent's time ; so that now it is the less wonder if
he make so bold with the emperor as to depress him as low
as the moon, upon no better ground than a groundless

coepit impleri quod scriptum est,
(Ps. Ixxi. 11.) Et adorabunt Eum
omnes reges terraj, &c.] quis mente
sobrius regibus dicat, Nolite curare
in regno vestro a quo teneatur, vel
oppugnetur, ecclesia Domini vestri :
[non ad vos pertineat, in regno vestro
quis velit esse sive religiosus, sive sacri-
legus : quibus dici non potest, Non ad
vos pertineat, in regno vestro quis velit
pudicus esse, quis impudicusl] — S. Au-
gustin. Epist. iv. [lib. de correctione
] )onatist. seu Epist. clxxxv. ad Boni-
facium,cap. 5. Op., torn. ii. col. 651.E.]
• — [Ideo dictum est a Paulo : Potestas
sit tcrrori malo operi, et honori bono :
et] antiquitas recte dixit, Magistratus
e>t custos legis, scilicet primaj et
secundas tabulte, quod ad disciplinam
aitinet. — Confessio Saxonica, cap.
xxiii. [apud Syllog Confess, p. 314.
ed. Oxon. 1827.]— Et,' [Magistratui
divinitus commissa e.st custodia legis
divinas ; jam vero ad legem divinam
pertinet non solum posterior decalogi
tabula de officiis proximo pr^standis,
verum etiam prior de cultu divino,
cj usque publico exercitio .... (Deut.

xvii. 18.). . . Ex quibus omnibus sic
concludimus : Cui custodia legis
divince est commissa, ad ilium quoque
spectat religionis et sacrorum cura.
Sed magistratui commissa est legis
divinse custodia. Ergo ad magistra-
tum etiam spectat religionis et sacro-
rum cura.] — Gerhardus, Locor. Theo-
logor. [loc. XXV. par. 2.] cap. 7. \ 5.
membr 1. [tom. xiv.p.24.ed. Tubingse,
1776.] probat ex Deut. xvii. 18.

^ [Illud tantum dicam] hunc maxi-
mum pontificem, totius ecclesiasticae
libertatis unicum assertorem [fuisse,
qui quanquam vir sanctissimus esset,
&c.]— Onuph. [Annotat.] in Platin. in
vit. Gregor. VII. [apud Platin Vit.
Pontific. p. 177.] For, taking occa-
sion by the war which Henry the
Fourth had with the Saxons and their
neighbours, and the complaint of the
Saxons made to the pope, (of which
Platina in the life of Gregory the
Seventh,) the pope, wise enough for
his own advantages, sought not only
to free himself from the emperor, but
to make the emperor subject to him;
and for this the history is plain enough.

230 Extravagant Authority claimed bij Popes over Emperors.

Conference resemblance. But beside this prime reason, there are divers
FisiiEK. others, which may easily be draAvn out of the same resem-
blance. For, since Innocentius' main aim was to publish
the pope's greatness over kings and emperors, why doth he
not tell us that the pope is as the sun, and the emperor
as the moon? because, as the moon borrows all her light
from the sun, so the emperor borrows all his true light from
the pope ; or because, as the moon still increases in light so
long as she follows the sun, but so soon as ever she steps
before the sun she wanes presently and her light decreases, —
so the emperor, so long as he is content to follow the pope,
and do all that he would have him, his light and his power
increase ; but if he do but offer to step before, though that
be his proper place, then his light, and honour, and power,
and all decrease. And this Pope Gregory the Seventh made

1 [Third... too good upon the Emperor Henry the Fourth;^ and Pope
EditU673 Adrian the Fourth, and Alexander the Tliird,^ and Lucius
and 1G86 ] the Third, with some others, upon Frederick Barbarossa.

2 [Fourth . , ^, K■^ n 1 , ..^

{male) . . . Anci some other emperors Avere alike served, where they did
fers* 1 ^^^^ submit. And I hope no man will blame the pope's
1686.] holiness for this. For if the emperors kept the popes under
for divers years together — whereas Bellarminey tells us it
was against all right they should so do, the pope being never
rightfully subject unto them — I hope the pope, ha\dng now
got power enough, may keep the emperors under, and not
suffer them any more to step before the sun, lest, like moons
as they are, they lose all their light. Or because, as the
moon is but vicaria solis, "the vicar or substitute of the

y [Eodem igitur modo Christian! Bellarmiue is at the same argument

subditi imperatoribus ethnicis, obedi- for deposing of kings too. Quod si

entiam illis debebant secundum Christiani [olim non deposuerunt Ne-

conscientiam :] summus [autem] rouem, ct Dioclctianum, et Julianum

pontife.Y [Christi] Regis regum vica- Apostatam, ac Yaleutem Arianum, et

rius imperatoribus terrenis jure sub- similes, id fuit] quia deerant vires

ditus non erat, [ac per hoc obedien- temporalcs Christianis. — Bellarmin.

tiam illis non debebat:] sed [tamen,] de Rom. Pont. lib. v. cap. 7. [§ 13.

turn quia potestas ejus nota non crat Op., tom. i. col. 904. B.] Now this

[imperatoribus paganis,] turn quia is a most loud ' untruth, as appears

viribus temporalibus dcstitutus erat, in TertuUian, who lived about the

vellet noUet, [ut dixi,] subjectus esse year 200, under Severus. And the

cogebatur. — Bellarmin. in Apologia Christians then had strength enough

[pro responsione ad librum Jacobi against the emperor, had they had

regis, cujus titulus est, Triplici nodo right enough with it.

triplex cuncus, &c. cap.] xv. Respons.

ad mendacium x. [(p. 37.) Op., tom.

vii. col. 818. B. ed. Colon. 1617.] And ' [lewd Edit. 1686.]

Difficulties in the Scheme for reducing all under one Empire. 231

sun/' as Philo^ tells us, so the emperor^ at least in all Section
spiritual causes, is but tlie pope's substitute, and that for the ^^^'
night, that his holiness may sleep the quieter on the other
side of the sphere. Or, lastly, if you will abuse the Scripture,
as you too often do, and as Innocentius did in the Decretal
very grossly, you may say it is because the woman, which
all grant represented the Church, is " clothed with the sun," Kev. xii. i.
that is, with the glorious rays of the pope, and had the
moon, that is, the emperor,* under her feet. For this is as
good, as literal, as proper interpretation of these w^ords,
as that of Innocentius is of the words, " God made two Gen. i. 16.
great lights, the greater light to rule the day, and the less
to rule the night." Thus, he or you may give your Avits
leave to play, if you will, for the pope's Decretal is a mere
fancy. But the true reason, indeed, why Innocentius made
it, was that above mentioned. He was now in that great-
ness, that he thought he might pass anything upon the
Christian world, that pleased him ; and was therefore re-
solved to bring it into the body of the Canon, that after-
times might have a law to legitimate and make good their
predecessors' usurpation over emperors and kings. And
rather than fail of this, he w^ould not spare the abusing of
Scripture itself. Where, by the way, dares A. C. say this
pope did not err in cathedra when he was so dazzled be-
tween the sun and the moon, that he wanted light in the
midst of it to expound Scripture ? Well, I would have the
Jesuits leave their practising, and remember : First, that one
emperor will not always be able to establish and preserve
one only uniform practice and exercise of religion. Secondly,
that, supposing he both can and will so do, yet the Jesuits
cannot be certain that that one uniform exercise of religion
shall be the Roman Catholic. And thirdly, that as there is
a body of earth, a world of confusion, to eclipse their moon,
the emperor, — so in the same way, and by like interposition,
the moon, when it is grown too near in conjunction, may
eclipse their sun, the pope. And there is no great doubt but

^ [a^Xrivriv S' v-wr)fjirriv Koi tidSoxov Friderici Primi pede comprimcbat,

TjXiov, K. T. A.. — Philo Jiid.] de Mon- et dixit, Scriptiim est, Super aspidem

arch. lib. [i. cap. 1. Op., p. 812. D. et basiliscum, &c. — Jo. Nauclerus,

ed. Paris. 1640.] Chron. Generationc xl. circa an. 1170.

" Sic enim Alexander Tertius collum [vol. iii. p. 235.]

232 Jesuits' desi(jn to transfer the Empire to the Kiny of Spain.

CoNFEKENCE lic wlll^ coiisiclering what some great kings make of tlie
Fisher, pope's power at this day, wheu it pleases them.

XII. — And since mc are in this comparison between the
snn and the moon, give me leave a little farther to examine,
who A. C. and his fellow Jesuits, with some others, would
have to be this one emperor. I am not willing to meddle
with any the secret designs of foreign states ; but if they will
express their designs in print, or publish them by great and
full authority, I hope then it shall neither be unlawful nor
unfit for me either to take notice or to make use of them.
AVhy, then, you may be pleased to know, they would have
another translation of the empire from Germany to Spain.
They think, belike, this emperor^s line, though in the same
house, is not Catholic enough. And if you ask me how I
know this secret, I will not take it up upon any common
report, though I well know what that says; but I will tell
you how I know it. Somewhat about four hundred years
after Innocentius made his comment upon the two great
lights, the sun and the moon, the pope and the emperor, a
Spanish friar'' follows the same resemblance between the
monarchies of Rome and Spain, in a tract of his, entitled
'' The Agreement of the two Catholic INIonarchies,^' and
printed in Spanish, in INIadrid, anno 1612. In the frontis-
piece or title-page of this book, there are set out two
escutcheons : the one, bearing the cross keys of Rome ; the
other, the arms of Castile and Leon ; both joined together
with this motto : In vinculo pads, " In the bond of peace."
On the one side of this, there is a portraiture resembling
Rome, with the sun shining over it and darting his beams
on S. Peter's keys, with this inscription : Luminare majus,''

•> John (le Puentc, [Tomo primero de] both licensed and printed : but doubt-
la conveniencia de las dos Monarquias less, whoever peruses the contents of
Catolicas, la de la Iglesia Romana, yla it impartially, will judge it was both
del Imperio Espanol, y defensa de la licensed and printed rather for its
precedencia de los Keyes Catolicos de witty conceit, and divertiseuient for
Espafia a todos los Keyes del Mundo the king and his coui'tiers, than for a
[Autor el Maestro fr. Juan de la solid foundation, whereon to build
Puente, de la orden de Predicadores, any serious and dogmatical assertion."
Chronista de la !Mag'' Catolica, The work itself bears no evidence of
Calificador de la Inquisicion y Prior other than a serious purpose, in its
de S'" Tomas de :\radrid. 1612. With author.]

reference to this work, Thorokl (T. C.) ^ Luminare majus, ut prfesit urbi

Laud's Labyrinth, p. 227, observes : et orhi. [orhis in the original, cor-

" We deny not but such a book was rected by Laud.]

Evidence from John de Puente's Book. 233

" the greater light/' that it may govern the city — tliat is. Section
Home — and the whole world ; and on the other side there is ^

another image designing Spain, with the moon shining over
that, and spreading forth its rays upon the Spanish
escutcheon, with this impress : Luminare minus,'^ " the less
light/' that it may be subject to the city, — of Rome, he
means, — and so be lord to govern the whole world besides.
And over all this, in the top of the title-page, there is printed
in capital letters. Fecit Dens duo luminatia magna, " God
made two great lights." There follows after, in this aathor,
a discovery at large ^ of this blazoning of these arms ; but
this is the substance of it, and abundantly enough to show
what is aimed at — by whom — and for whom. And this book
was not stolen out without the will and consent of the
state, for it hath printed before it all manner of licence
that a book can well have : for it hath the approbation of
Father Pedro de Buyza, of the company of the Jesuits;
of John de Arcediano, provincial of the Dominicans; of
Diego Granero, the licenser appointed for the supreme
Council of the Inquisition. And some of these revised this
book, by order from the lords of that Council.^ And last
of all, the king's privilege s is to it, with high commendation
of the Avork. But the Spaniards had need look to it, for all
this, lest the French deceive them. For now lately Friar
Campanella hath set out an eclogue upon the birth of the
Dauphin, and that permissu superiorum, " by licence from his
superiors," in which he says expressly : " That all the ' ' [the . . .
princes are now more afraid of France than ever, for that Editt.1673
there is provided for it regnum universale, 'the universal ^"^^ 1*^86.]
kingdom, or monarchy.' " ''

'' Luminare minus, ut subdatur num, ex singulis centenis sumendo

urbi, et dominetur orbi. unum, colligit 200,000 strenuorum

^ [Declaracion del blason que csta militum stipendiatorum, commode,

en la cabe^a deste libro. — This occu- perpetuoque. Propterea omnes terrse

pies five pages.] jirincipes nietuunt nunc magis a

f Por orden de los Seniores del Gallia, quam unquam [aut] ab aliis ;

Consejo Supremo, [e visto este pri- paratur enim illi refinvm universale.

mero tomo, &c.] — Ecloga [Christianissimis Eegi et

s Por mandado del Eey nuestro reginee] in [portentosam] Delphini

Sefior. [In both cases the words seem [orbis Christian! summae spei] nativi-

to mean that the works were examined tatem. F. Thomae Campanellte [ord.

and the licence signed by order of Prsed. SEeculorum excubitoris cantus.]

the respective authorities, and to be cum annot. Discip. Parisiis, 1639.

merely the ordinary forms of licensing.] [p. 4. annot. ''.] Cum permissu superi-

^ Quum Gallia alat 20,000,000 homi- orum.

'^^^ ^^f^(i analoyy of States and secular Legislature

Conference XIII.— But it is time to return. For A. C. in this passage
F^JuER. ^I'^tl^ been very careful to tell us of a parliament, and
AC. p. 60 ^^ ^^'^^ magistrates and judges, besides the laAv-books.
Thirdly, therefore, The Chm-ch of England, God be thanked,
thrives happily under a gracious prince, and well under-
stands that a parliament cannot be called at all times ; and
that there are visible judges besides the law-books, and one
supreme (long may he be, and be happy !) to settle all tem-
poral differences; which, certainly, he might much better
perform, if his kingdoms were well rid of A. C. and his
fellows. And she believes too, that our Saviour Christ
hath left in His Church, besides His law-book the Scripture,
visible magistrates and judges — that is, archbishops and
bishops, under a gracious king, to govern both for truth and
peace according to the Scripture ; and her own canons and
constitutions, as also those of the Catholic Church, which
cross not the Scripture and the just laws of the realm/
But she doth not believe there is any necessity to have one
pope or bishop over the whole Christian world, more than
to have one emperor over the whole world — which, were it
possible, she cannot think fit. Nor are any of these inter-
mediate judges, or that one which you would have supreme,
infallible.
A. C.p.60. XIV. — But since a "kingdom'^ and a "parliament" please
A. C. so well to pattern the Church by, I will follow him in
the way he goes, and be bold to put him in mind, that in
some kingdoms there are divers businesses of greatest con-
sequence, Avliich cannot be finally and bindingly ordered,
but in and by parliament ; and particularly the statute laws,
which must bind all the subjects, cannot be made and
ratified but there. Therefore, according to A. C.'s own
argument, there will be some business also found, (Is not
the settling of the divisions of Christendom one of them ?)
which can never be well settled, but in a General Council;''

' [Ad primam illarum respondetur reges gubernantes plura regna. —

. . . quod Christus est caput tidclium : Ockam. Dial. lib. ii. tract, i. par. 3.

ideo Christiani non subsunt uni capiti cap. 30. ad. 1. [apud Goldast. S. Kom.

sub Christo. Ad ralionem autem in Imper. Monarch, torn. ii. p. 818. ed.

contrarium respondetur, quod] non Francof. 1614.]

est necesse, ut .sub Christo sit unus "^ [Ex quibus omnibus arguitur a

rector totius ecdesiae, sed sufficit quod simili, quod etiam] propter defectum

sint plures diversas regentes pro- concilionim generalium totius Ecclc-

vincias, quemadmodum sunt plures siie, quae sola audet intrcpidc corri-

suggests that the Church should be regulated by Councils. 235

and particularly tlie making of canons, which must bind all Section

-Y" V \7 T

particular Christians and Churches, cannot be concluded and _f^ :_

estabhshed but there. And again, as the supreme magis-
trate in the state civil may not abrogate the laws made in
parliament, though he may dispense with the sanction or
penalty of the law, quoad hie et nunc, as the lawyers
speak, — so in the ecclesiastical body, no bishop, no, not
the pope, where his supremacy is admitted, hath power to
disannul ^ or violate the true and fundamental decrees of a
General Council, though he may perhaps dispense in some
cases with some decrees. By all which it appears, though
somewhat may be done by the bishops and governors of the
Church, to preserve the unity and certainty of faith, and to
keep the Church from renting, or for uniting it when it is
rent ; yet that, in the ordinary way which the Church hath
hitherto kept, some things there are, and upon great
emergent occasions may be, which can have no other help
than a lawful, free, and well composed General Council.
And when that cannot be had, the Church must pray that it
may, and expect till it may; or else reform itself ^erjoar/e^,
by national or provincial synods, as hath been said be-
fore.™ And in the mean time, it little beseems A. C, or any
Christian, to check at the wisdom of Christ,'' if He have not

gere omnes, ea mala quse universalem superioribus duobus capitulis osten-

tangunt Ecclesiam manentia diu in- dimus quod Eoinanus pontifex prte-

correcta crescimt, [et inventa sunt de rogativa primatus sui poterat tam

malo in pejus, donee tandem iniqua, interpretari dubia qute in canonibus

sub fictione consuetudinis, reputentur conciliorum sacrorum orirentur quam

licita. — Joann.] Gerson. declarat. dispensare in illis ; nunc restat osteu-

Defectuum Virorum Ecclesiasticorum, dere quod etiam possit tam canones

[Op.,] tom. i. p. 209. [ed. Paris. 1606. universalium conciliorum quam de-

tom. ii. col. 318. C. ed. Dupin. 1706.] creta suorum prcedeeessorum aliquo-

' Sunt enim indissolubilia decreta, rum pro temporum et causarum ne-

quibus reverentia debita est. — S. Pros- cessitate revocare toUere atque

per. [Aquitan. lib.] contra CoUatorem, mutare : licet non universaliter.] — Et

[i.e. pro def. S.Augustin. contra Cassia- postea, Papa non potest revocare

num,] cap. i. [Op., col. 310. B. His decreta primorum quatuor concilio-

words are : Ecce salva Catholicae pace rum, quia non sunt nisi declarativa

victoriee, salva indissolubilium reve- articulorum fidei. [His words ai'C:

rentia decretorum, parati sumus patro- Et sic dicimus quod hoc competat

nosdoctrinpe emendatiorisaudire, &c.] illis quatuor conciliis (sc. primis,)

And Turrccremata, who says every- quod revocari non possunt, propter

thing that may be said for the pope's hoc : sc. quia non fuenint nisi decla-

supremacy, yet dares not say, papam rativa articulorum fidei.] — Ibid. cap.

posse revocare et tollere omnia statuta 57. [Respons.] ad secundum,
generalium conciliorum, sed aliqua " Sect.xxiv. No. l.[ubi sup. p. 167.]

tantum. — Joann. de Turrecremata, " "And shall we think that Christ,

Summae de Ecclcsia, lib. iii. cap. 55. the wisest King, hath not provided,"

[ed. Lugd. 1496. His words are : In &'c.— A. C. p. 60. Where I cannot

236 Tlie Council of Trent not General : (1 .) Because its abettors maintained

Conference taken tlie way they think fittest' to settle Chnreli difFerenees ;
Fisher ^^ ^^' ^^^ ^^ Chui'eh's sin or trial, the way of composing

iTTIT^ them be left more uncertain than they would have it, "that

[fatting... _ •' '

E(litt.i673, they which are approved may be known." ]5ut the Jesuit
■J had told me before, that a General Council had adjudged
19 ' these things already. For so he says.

[A.C.pp.
59, 60.]
2 [the Pro-
testant,
... A. C]
^ [error
. . . A.C.]

§27.

i?. I told him, that a General Council, to wit, of Trent,
had already judged, not the Roman Churcli, but the
Protestants,- to hold errors.^ " That," said the 2B.
" was not a lawful* Council."

* [The Chaplain saith, " That the 13. said not only so, but that it was no
General Council." I answer, that if the 13. said so, it was only for want of
memory that the Jesuit did not relate it so ; for the exceptions which the \j.
did or can make against the lawfulness or generalness of the Council of Trent,
may be made by Arians against the Council of Nice. It is not necessary to the
lawfulness and generalness of a Council, that all bishops of the world be actually
present, and actually subscribe or yield assent ; but that such promulgation be
made as is morally sufficient to give notice that such a Council is called, and
that all may come if they will, and that a competent number, at least the
m;ijor part, of those which be present, yield assent to the decree. — A. C. marg.
note to p. 60.]

2B. I. — It is true that you replied for the Council of Trent ;
and my answer was, not only that the Council was not legal
in the necessarj'^ conditions to be observed in a General
Council, but also that it was no General Council — which
again you are content to omit. Consider it well. First, Is
that Council legal, the abettors whereof maintain publicly
that it is lawful for them to conclude any controversy, and
make it be de fide, and so in your judgment fundamental,
though it have not — I do not say now, the written word of

commend either A. C.'s modesty,
that he doth not— or his cunning, that
he will not — go so far as some have
done before him, though in these
words, "Fhall we think," &c. he goes
too far. [Nam] non vidcretur discrc-
tus Dominus fui-se, ut, cum reverentia
Ejus loquar, nisi uuicum post se talem
vicarium reliquissct, qui htec omnia
potest. Fuit autem [iste] vicarius
ejus Petrus. (Matt, xv.) Et idem
dicendum est de successoribus Petri,
cum eadem absurditas sequeretur, si
post mortem Petri, humauam natu-
ram a se crcatam sine regiminc unius
persona) reliquisset . . . [Et ideo Boui-
facius Octavus motus multis aliis

efficacibus rationibus, et exemplis, et
auctoritatibus sacraj Scripturaj decla-
ravit, dixit, et definivit subesse Ro-
mano pontifici omncm humanam
creaturam de necessitate salutis, ut in
Decretali, Unam Sanctam, ivc] —
Extrav. Comm. [lib. i.] Tit. viii. de
Jlajoritate et Obedientia, cap. Unam
S'ladam, &c.in addition. -D[om.] Petri
Bernardi, ed. Paris. 1585. [in Petr.
Bernard. Tract, de Jurisdict. Eccles.
et S»cul. quaest. iv. apud Tractat.
Juris Utriusque, tom. xii. fol. 414.
col. 1. cd. Yenet. 1584. Extat quoque
in Max. Bibl. Vet. Patrum, tom. xxvi.
p. 134. G.]

that it might conclude what was ivithout warrant of Scripture. 237

God for warrant, either iu express letter or necessary sense
and deduction, (as all unerring councils liave had^ and as
all must have that will not err,) but,— not so much as pro-
bable testimony from it, nay, quite extra, " without" the Scrip-
ture ?° Nay, secondly, Is that Council legale where the

Section
XXVII.

° [Sed qu£e Ecclesia ab apostolorum
usque temporibus prima et certa tra-
ditione accepit, vel contra hfereses in
causa fidei maturo judicio definivit,
vel pro loco et tempore in moribus
definiendum consult,] etiamsi nuUo
Scripturarum, [aut evident!, aut] pro-
babili testimonio confirmetur, [soli-
dum tamen et indubitatum cuivis
fideli et vero Ecclesite filio esse debet.]
— Stapleton. Relect. Controv. [Con-
trov. iv. de potestate Ecclesise in se,]
Q[u£est.] 1. Ar[tic.] 3. [Op., torn. i.
p. 744. A. ubi sup. p. 32. note "'.]

p Here A. C. tells us, " that doubt-
less the Arians also did mislike that,
at Nice, the pope had legates to carry
his messages, and that one of them
in his place sat as president." Why,
but first, it is manifest that Hosius
was president at the Council of ISTice,
and not the Bishop of Rome, either by
himself or his legates. And so much
Athanasius himself (who was present,
and surely imderstood the Council of
Nice, and who presided there, as well
as A. C.) tells us : Hosius hie est
princeps synodorum. (So, belike, he
presided in other councils as well as
at Nice.) Hie formulam fidei in
Nicaana synodo concepit. (And this
the Arians themselves confess to Con-
stantius the emperor, then seduced to
be theirs.)— Apud S. Athanas. Epist.
ad solitar. vitam agentes. [oTnos koX
awoScov KaOriyelrai, Kal ypdfpoov aKovirai
■navraxov' ovros Kal Triv iu NLiiaiaviariu
f^edtro, Kal tovs 'Apeiavovs iKijpv^ev
atpfTiKoi/s elvai navraxov' — S. Athanas.
Historia Arianorum ad Monachos,
cap. xlii. Op., torn i. p. 369. B.] But
then, secondly, I do not except against
ihe pope's sitting as president, either
at Nice or Trent ; for that he might
do when called or chosen to it, as well
as any other patriarch, if you con-
sider no more but his sitting as pre-
sident. But at Nice the cause was
not his own, but Christ's against the
A rian ; whereas, at Trent, it was
merely his own — his own supremacy,
and his Church's corruptions, against
the Protestants ; and, therefore,
surely not to sit president at the
trial of his own cause, though in other

causes he might sit, as well as other
patriarchs. And for that of Bellarmine,
de Conciliis [et Ecclesia,] lib. i. cap.
21. § [6. Op., torn. ii. col. 51. C]
Tertia conditio [iniqua est : quia
Romanus pontifex non potest privari
jure suoindicendi concilia, et eis praj-
sidendi, in cujus possessione jam fuit
per 1500 annos, nisi prius iu legitime
judicio convincatur, non esse summus
pontifex.] viz. " That it is unjust
to deny the Roman prelate his right
(jus suum) in calling General Coun-
cils, and presiding in them ; in pos-
session of which right he hath been
for 1500 years." That is but a bold
assertion of the cardinal's, by his
leave ; for he gives us no proof of it,
but his bare word. Whereas the very
authentic copies of the Councils, pub-
lished and printed by the Romanists
themselves, affiim clearly they were
called by emperors, not by the pope ;
and that the pope did not preside in
all of them. And I hope Bellarmine
will not expect we should take his
bare word against the Councils. And
most certain it is, that, even as Hosius
Dresided the Council [an. 325.] at
Nice, and no way that as the pope's
legate ; so also in the second [an. 381.]
General Council, which was the first
of Constantinople, Nectarius, Bishop
of Constantinople, pi'esided. — Concil.
Chalced. Act. vi. p. 136. apud Bi-
nimu. [Concil. torn. ii. col. 953. B.] —
In the third, [an. 431.] which was
the first at Ephesus, S. Cyril of
Alexandria presided ; and though
Pope Caelestine was joined with him,
yet he sent none out of the West to
that council till many things were
therein finished ; as appears apud Act.
Concil. tom. ii. capp. 16, 17. [Concil.
torn. iii. col. 609, et seqq.] — In the
fourth, [an. 451.] at Chalcedon, the
legates of the bishop of Rome had
the prime place. — [Concil. tom. iv.
col. 786.] — In the fifth, [Constantinop.
II. an. 553.] Eutychius, bishop of Con-
stantinople, was president. — [Concil.
tom. V. col. 416.] — In the sixth, [Con-
stantinop. III. an. 681.] and .seventh,
[Nic«n. II. an. 787.] the legates of
the pope were president; yet so as

238 (2.) The Pope xoas judge in his own cause. (3.) The Eastern,

Conference pope, the chief person to be reformed, shall sit president in
Fisher. ^^> ^"^^ ^® chief judge in his own cause, against all law,
divine, natural, and human ? In a place not free, but in, or
too near, his own dominion ? To which all were not called
that had deliberative or consultative voice ? In which none
had suffrage but such as were sworn to the pope and the
Church of Home, and professed enemies to all that called
for reformation, or a free council ? And the popei himself, to
show his charity, had declared and pronounced the appel-
lants heretics, before they were condemned by the council ?
I hope an assembly of enemies are no j^lawful council ; and
I think the decrees of such a one are omni jure nulla, and
carry their nullity with them through all law.

II. — Again : Is that council general, that hath none of the

Eastern Churches' consent, nor presence there ? Are all

the Greeks so become non ecclesia, "no church,^' that they have

no interest in General Councils ? It numbers, indeed,

among the subscribers six Greeks. They might be so by

nation, or by title, purposely given them ; but dare you say

they were actually bishops of, and sent from, the Greek

Church to the Council ? Or is it to be accounted a General

1 rjjjjj^ jj^ Council, that in many sessions had scarce ten archbishops,

the five or forty or fifty bishops, present ? And for the West of

sions of Christendom, nearer home, it reckons one Enghsh, S. Asaph.

that Conn- g^^ Cardinal Pole was there too : and English indeed he

Cll . . . _ .

Edit. 1673. was by birth, but not sent to that Council by the king and
thefive^ Church of England, but as one of the pope's legates ;i' and so
first ses- we find him in the fifth session of that Council, but neither
that Coun- before nor after.' And at the beginning of the Council he
F^t " ^^'^^ ^^^* bishop in the Church of England; and after he
1686.] vvas Archbishop of Canterbury, he never went over to the

that almost all the duty of a mode- been possessed of this right of pre-

rator or president was performed in siding in General Councils for the

the seventh hy Tharasius, bishop of space of 1500 years 1"

Constantinople, as appears manifestly i Leo X. Bull. Jun. 8, 1520. [Pro

in the Acts of that Council. — [Con- pastoralis igitur officii, divina gratia

cil. tom. vi. col. 587. and Concil. torn. nobis injuncti, cura quam gcrimus,

vii. col. 1. and col. 161. &c.]— And prtcdictorum errorum virus pestiferum

since these seven are all the General ulterius tolerare sou dissimulare ....

Councils M'hieh the Greeks and Latins non possumus. — In Bull. E.rurge Do-

joiutly acknowledge, and that in mine, &c. dat. xvii. Kalend. Julii, an.

these other patriarchs and bishops 1520. apud Bullarium, tom. i. p. 610.

presided, as oit at least as the bishop ed. Luxemburg. 1727.]

of Rome, what is become of Bellai-- "■ Concil. Trid. Sess. 5. \carent,

mine's brag, "that the pope hath Editt. 1673, and 1686 J

and many Western, Churches ivere not legitimately represented. 239

Council. And can you prove tliat S, Asaph went thither by Section
authority ? There were but few of other nations, and, it

may be, some of them reckoned with no more truth than
the Greeks. In all the sessions under Paul the Third, but
two Frenchmen, and sometimes none — as in the sixth under
Julius the Third, when Henry the Second of France pro-
tested against that Council ; and in the end it is well known
how all the French, which were then a good part, held off
till the Cardinal of Lorraine was got to Rome. As for the
Spaniards, they laboured for many things upon good grounds,
and were most unworthily overborne.

III.— To all this A. C. hath nothing to say, but " that it A. C p. 61.
is not necessary to the lawfulness and generalness of a
Council that all bishops of the world should be actually
present, subscribe, or consent ; but that such promulgation
be made as is morally sufficient to give notice that such a
Council is called, and that all may come, if they will; and
that a major part at least of those that are present give
assent to the decrees." I will forget that it was but p. 59 in A. C. p. 59.
which A. C. speaks of " all pastors," and those not only
summoned, but " gathered together." And I will easily grant
him, that it is not necessary that all bishops in the Christian
world be present and subscribe ; but, sure it is necessary to
the " generalness" of a Council that some be there, and
authorized for all particular Churches f and to the "freedom "
of a Council, that all that come may come safe ; and to the
" lawfulness" of a council, that all may come unengaged,
and not fastened to a side, before they sit down to argue or
deliberate. Nor is such a " promulgation" as A. C. men-
tions sufficient, but only in case of contumacy ; and that
where they which are called, and refuse to come, have no
just cause for their not coming, as too many had in the case
of Trent. And were such a " promulgation" sufficient for
the " generalness" of a council, yet for the '■' freedom" and the
" lawfulness" of it it were not.

= Quarta, ut saltern [ex majori parte [a summo pontifice, qui suppleant

Cliristianarum provinciarum aliqui aliorum locum.] Et [e contrario si

adveniant, et si quidem concilium fit celebretur in OccidenteJ conveniant . .

in Oriente, semper visum est sufficere, [multi, ex Oriente autempauci] aliqui

si ex provinciis omnibus Orientis veniant, [nomine aliorum,] &c. — Bcl-

episcopi conveniant multi ; ex toto larmin. de Concil. [et Ecclesia,] lib. i.

autem Occidente] si mittantur aliqui cap. 17. § [5. Op., tom. ii. col. 35. A.]

210 What Confirmation is needed ? — Ou Spiritual authority of Decrees.
Conference ^. '^ So/' said T, "would [the] Arians'^ say of the Council

WITH

Fisher. of Nice." The 25. would not admit the case to he

[A.c.p.61.] lihe . . .

* [As Protestants do think that the Council of Trent is not lawful, for having,
in llieir jiidgmeut, departed from the letter and sense of Scripture, so did the
Arians think of the Council of Nice. And as Protestants do justify that some
were sent from the pope to Trent, and that the pope was president, so, doubl-
Icss, did the Arians mislike that at Nice the pope had legates, who did carry
his messages, and one of them in his place sat as president. — A. C. marg. note
top. 61.]

§ 28. 2B. So indeed you said ; and not you alone. It is the
common objection made against all that admit not every
latter council as fully as that Council of Nice, famous
through all the Christian world. In the mean time, nor you
nor they consider that the case is not alike, as I then told
you. If the case be alike in all, why do not you admit that
which was held at Ariminum, and the second of Ephesus, as
well as Nice ? If you say, as yours do, it was because the
pope approved them not, that is a true cause, but not
adequate, or full. For it was because the whole Church
refused them ; with whom the Roman prelate, standing then
entire in the faith, agreed, and so, for his patriarchate,
refused those councils.' But suppose it is true that these
synods were not admitted because the pope refused them,
yet this ground is gained. That the case is not alike for
men's assent to all councils. And if you look to have this
granted. That the pope must confirm, or the council is not
lawful, Ave have far more reason to look that this be not
denied, That Scripture must not be departed from in
letter or necessary sense, or the council is not lawful.'^
For the consent and confirmation of Scripture is of far
greater authority to make the council authentical, and the
decisions of it de fide, than any confirmation of the pope
can be. Now of these two, the Council of Nice, we are sure,
had the first, the rule of Scripture ; and you say it had the

t Sect. xxvi. No. 1. [ubi sup p. 216.] against the Arian. So is it not here

" Here A. C. tells us, that the against the Protestant for Trent ; for

Arians thought so of the Council of they offer to be tried by that very

Nice, p. 61 ; namely, that they de- Council of Nice, and all the ancient

parted from letter and sense of Scrip- councils and fathers of the Church

ture. They said so, indeed. But the within the first four hundred years,

testimony of the whole Church, both and somewhat farther,
then and since, went with the Council

no parallel between the Councils of Nice and Trent. 241

second, the pope's confirmation. The Council of Trent^ Section

XWIII
we are able to prove, had not the first, and so we have no — '. L

reason to respect the second. And to what end do your
learned men maintain that a council may make a conclusion
de fide, though it be simply extra,'' "out of all bound " of
Scripture, but out of a jealousy at least, that this of Trent,
and some others, have in their determinations left both
letter and sense of Scripture ? Show this against the
Council of Nice, and I will grant so much of the case to
be like. But what will you say, if Constantiney required
" that things thus brought into question should be an-
swered and solved by testimony out of Scripture?" And
the bishops of the Nicene Council never refused that rule.
And what will you say, if they profess they depart not from
it, " but are ready by many testimonies of divine Scripture
to demonstrate their faith ?"''' Is the case then ahke
betwixt it and Trent ? Surely no. But you say that I
pretended something else, for my not admitting the case to
be alike.

^ pretending that the pope made bishops of [A.C.p.61.]

purpose,'^ for his side. But this the 2B. proved not.

* [The Chaplain saith, That the 13. did not say, That the Pope made bishops
of purpose, &c. I answer, that the Jesuit doth not say that the 13. expressly
said so; but that by insinuation he did pretend so much, which in effect the
Chaplain seemeth to grant, when he saith, p. 40, the U. said, The Pope made
himself a strong party in it. For although these words may be taken in
another sense, yet they may also be taken in that sense which the Jesuit, by
the circumstances of the 13.'s speech, did then understand and express in his
Relation : for that a great number of Italian Bishops, which the Chaplain saith
the 13. alleged as a proof, may very well import that the 13. conceived the Pope
to have made more Italian Bishops than of other countries, of purpose to have

^ So Stapleton often, [ubi sup. p. 32. oZv dneXdaavTes ipiv, sktwu Oeoirveva-

note ™ ;] but the fathers quite other- twv xiywv xdPco/jLev tQu ^nrovfj.epwi'

wise. [Prtemitto interim pignusfuturi rrif Xvaiv. — Orat. Constant, in Gelasii

apud te sermonis mei.] Non [aliqua Histor. Concil. Nicteni, apud Concil.

ad scandalum, neque] quae extra Evan- torn. ii. col. 166. D.]
gelium sunt, defendam. — S. Hilar. ^ lb. in Osii sententia, p. 517. Pa-

[Pictav.] ad Constantium, lib. ii. [cap. rati ex bancti Spiritus arbitrio per

11. Op., col. 1230. E.] plurlma divinarum Scripturanim tes-

y Literarum divinitus inspiratarum timoniadcmonstrarehajcitasehaliere.

testimoniis. — lib. ii. in Syn. Nic. torn, [eVoi'iUcos ix^v''^^ rjfxoov, aw fvSoKia. rod

i. per Nicolinum. [ed. Venet. 1585. dyiov Tlfeu/j-aTos, Sm trXeiaroiv oawv

ivayyeXiKoX yap /3i;3Aoi, kuI dTrocrroAtKal, ixaprvptoii' t(Sv in rwv dudiv ypaipm'

Kol Toiu iraXaiwv ■Kpo(prjT^v rd deffni- Ssilai, ravTa oxItuis ex^"'- — ^^ Gelasil

o-yuaTao-afc5s7jAtasan-epxP^'^«P^'^<'''^«''o" Histor. Concil. Nic£eni, apud Concil.

<ppovuv tKiraiSevovci' Trju iroXe^OTTOwv tom. ii. col. 174. D.]

VOL. II. — LAUD. R

242 Papal Influences at the Council of Trent.

Conference ^ strong faction. But this proof was so wealc, as the Jesuit mislit well say it

WITH was no proof, not wortliy of answer, or of looliing into the book for it ; it being

Fisher, o^b' a surmise of adversaries, who are apt to interpret every thing to the

. ' worst. Italian Bishops might be more, as being nearer — as in Greek Councils

more Grecians were present — without any factious combination with the Pope,
in any other sort than all the Catholic Bishops in the world, who are as much
united with the Pope for matters of faith, defined in the Council, as any Italian
Bishop. Neither can the 15. prove that any Catholic French, or Spanish,
or of any other country, or the schisniatical Greeks, did agree with Pro-
testants in those points which were defined in the Council, especially after it
was confirmed by the Pope. For they all, even Grecians, did, and do at this
day, unanimously oppose Protestants, as apppareth by the censure of Hieremias,
the Grecian Patriarch. So as, if such a free Council as the C and others wished
were gathered out of East and AVest, Protestants doubtless would be con-
demned for heretics, and their negative refutes and denials of ancient articles
for heresies, by more than double the major part, compared to those who would
take their part. For although, as all heretics use to do, Protestants per-
suade themselves Scriptures to be evident for their opinions, and that with
evident demonstrations they should he able to convince all the world that they
teach truth, and nothing but truth, yet they would find innumerable others as
learned, to say no more, and as well studied in Scripture, and skilful in
making demonstrations, who are of another mind.— A. C. marg. note to
p. 61.]

§ 29. 2B. I. — No : nor had I reason to take on me to prove what

I said not. I know it will be expected I should prove what
I say. And it is hard to prove the purpose of the pope's
heart. For if it be proved that he made bishops at that time ;
that some of them were titular only, and had no livelihood
to subsist, but out of his purse, and so must hang their
judgment at the strings of it ; that some of these thus
made were sent to the Council — and sure not without their
errand ; — yet if the pope will say he neither made nor sent
them to overrule the Holy Ghost at that meeting, or of pur-
pose for his side, (as no question but it will be said,) who
can prove it, that is not a sm'veyor of the heart ? But
though the pope's heart cannot be seen, yet if these and the
like presumptions be true, it is a great sign that Trent was
too corrupt and factious a meeting for the Holy Ghost to be
at. And sure the case in this not alike at Nice.

II. — That which I said was, " that Trent could be no
indifferent Council to the Church, the pope having made
himself a strong party in it." And tliis I proved, though
you be here not only content to omit, but plainly to deny the
proof. For I proved it thus, (and you answered not,)"*

• Here A. C. is angri*, and says, pret to the worst." Secondly, because

" This was no proof, nor worthy of any " there might be more Italian bishops

answer, or looking into the book for there, as being nearer, yet without any

it." First, because it is only " a surmise factious combination with the pope ;

of adversaries, who arc apt to inter- as in the Greek Councils more Gre-

Preponderance of Italian Bishops. 248

" That there were more Italian hishops there than of all Section
Christendom besides." More? Yea,, more than double. ^^^ '
And this I proved out of the Council itself, which you had
in your hand, in decimo sexto, but had no great heart to look
it. For, where the number of prelates is expressed, that had
suffrage and vote in that Council, the Italians are set down
to be one hundred and eighty-seven, and all the rest make
but eighty-three ; so that there were more Italian bishops,
by one hundred and four, than of all the rest of Christendom.
Sure the pope did not mean to be overreached in this
Council. And whatsoever became of his infallibility other-
wise, he might this way be sure to be infallible in whatsoever
he would have determined ; and this, without all doubt, is
all the infallibility he hath. So I proved this sufiiciently,
I think. For if it were not to be sure of a side, give any
satisfying reason why such a potent party of Italians, more
than double to the whole Christian world, should be there ?
Show me the like for Nice, and I will give it that the case is
alike between these two Councils.

III.—Here Bellarmine comes in to help. But sure it will
not help you, that he hath offered at as much against the
Council of Nice, as I have urged against that at Trent. For
he tells us, " that in the Council at Nice there were as few
bishops of the West present as were of the East at Trent,"''

cians were present." — A. C. p. 62. " No General Councils, especially free ones,

proof," or a " weak" one ! Let the reader Multi suspicantur, quod hajc dissimu-

judgethat. But why " no proof ?" Be- laverit Eomana curia, et [super his]

cause " a surmise of adversaries." Is concilia fieri neglexerit, ut possit ad

that a surmise of adversaries that is suse voluntatis libitum plenius domi-

taken out of the Council itself? Is nari, et jura aliarum ecclesiarum libe-

that Council then become 7-egnum di- rius usurpare. Quod non assero esse

visum, and apt to interpret the worst verum ; sed quia [contra earn] hujus-

of itself 1 Yea, " but there were more modi laborat infamia, ideo, &c. — Pet.

Italian bishops, as being nearer." Most de Alliaco, Card. Cameracensis lib.

true : nearer a great deal than the [tractat.] de Reformat. Eccles. [oblat.

" Grecian" bishops ; but the bishops of in Concil. Constant.] apud Faseic.

France and of some parts of Germany rerum expetendarum [ac fugienda-

were almost as near as the Italians rum,] fob cciv. B. [et, apud Joann.

themselves ; and why, then, came no Gerson. Op., tom. ii. col. 903, &c. ed.

more of these, that were near enough ] Dupin.]

Well ; A. C. may say what he will, '• [Sic] in Concilio Nicaeno I. ex

but the pope remembered well the occidente solum fuerunt duo pres-

Councils of Constance and Basil, and byteri missi ex Italia, unus episcopus

thought it wisdom to make sure work ex Gallia, unus ex Hispania, et unus ex

at Trent. For in later times (for their Africa. — Bellarmin. lib. i. de Concil.

own fears, no doubt), the bishops of cap. 17. § antepenult. [Op., torn. ii.

Eome have been no great friends to col. 35. A.]

R 2

244 Decrees of Trent neither confirmed nor acknoivledged by Eastern Ch.
Conference but five in all. Be it SO : vet tliis will not make tlie case

WITH

FisHKR. filike between the two Councils. First, because I press not
the disparity in number only, but with it the pope's car-
riage, to be sure of a major part ; for it lay upon the pope to
make sure work at Trent, both for himself and his Church.
But neither the Greek Church in general, nor any patriarch
of the East, had any private interest to look to in the Council
at Nice. Secondly, because I press not so much against the
Council of Trent, that there were so exceeding many
bishops of the West compared with those of the East — for
that must needs be, when a Council is held in the West — but,
that there were so many more Italians, and bishops ob-
noxious to the pope's power, than of all Germany, France,
Spain, and all other parts of the West besides. Thirdly,
because both Bellarmine and A. C. seek to avoid the dint of
this argument, by comparing the Western with the Eastern
bishops, and are content to say nothing about the excessive
number of Italians to others of the West. That will receive
a fuller answer than any of the rest. For though very few
Western bishops were at the Council of Nice, being so
' [at . . . remote, yet at' the same time Pope Sylvester held a Council

caret Edit. ^ . i--,t ., i-,n

1686.] at Rome, m which he, with two hundred and seventy-five

bishops of the West, " confirmed the Nicene Creed, and
anathematized all those which should dare to dissolve the
definition of that holy and great Council."'^ Now, let Bel-
larmine, or A. C, or any else, show, that Avhen the Council
of Trent sat, there was another Council — though never so
privately, in regard of their miserable oppression — which sat
in Greece, or anywhere in the East, under any patriarch or
Christian bishop, Avhicli did confirm the canons of the
Council of Trent, and anathematize them which admitted
them not ; and I will confess they speak home to the com-
parison between the Councils, else a blind man may see the
difference, and it is a vast one.
A.C. p. 62. IV. — But here A. C. makes account he hath found a
better reply to this ; and now tells us, that " neither French,

•^ Omnes qui ausi fuerint dissolvere principis Constantini Augusti,] ana-

definitioncm sancti et magni concilii, tliematizamus.— Concil. Roman. III.

(jiiod apud Nicajam congregatum est, sub Sylvcstro, apud Binium, p. 449.

[sub prtesentia piissimi et vcnerandi [Concil. torn. ii. col. 410. E.]

No settlement can be final till a free General Council. 245

nor Spanish, nor schisraatical Greeks, did agree with Pro- Skction

testants in those points which were defined in that conncil, 1 L_

especially after it was confirmed by the pope, as appears by
the censure of Jeremias, the Greek patriarch." Who agreed
with the Protestants in the points defined by that Council,
as he speaks — or rather, to speak properly, against the
points there defined — I know not. And for aught A. C.
knows, many might agree with them in heart, that in such a
Council durst not open themselves. And what knows A. C.
how many might have been of their opinion in the main,
before the Council ended, had they been admitted to a fair
and a free dispute ? And it may be too, some decrees would
have been more favourable to them, had not the care of the
pope's interest made them sourer. For else what mean
these words, " especially after it was confirmed by the pope ?"
As for Jeremias, it is true, his censure is in many things
against the Protestants ; but I find not that that censure of
his is warranted by any authority of the Greek Church, or
that he gave the Protestants any hearing before he passed
his censure. And, at the most, it is but the censure of a
schismatic, in A. C.'s own judgment. And for his flourish
which follows, " that East and West would condemn Pro-
testants for heretics," I would he would forbear prophesying,
till both parts might meet in a free General Council that
sought Christ more than themselves. But I find the Jesuit
hath not done with me yet, but adds :

ip. In fine, the 2B. wished, that a lawful * General [A. C. pp.
Council were called, to end controversies. The per-
sons present said, that ' the king was inclined ' [that . . .
^ *= . . carttA.G.]

thereunto, and that ^ therefore we Catholics might ^ [that . . .

caret A.G.]
do well to concur.

* [I marvel in what sort the li. will describe such a General Council ; and
how it should be gathered ; and what rules are in it to be observed, which are
morally likely so to be observed, as to make an end of controversies, better
than our Catholic General Councils. — A. C. marg. note to p. 62.]

23. And what say you to my wish ? You pretend great ^ 30.
love to the truth : would you not have it found ? Can you
or any Christian be offended, that there should be a good
end of controversies ? Can you think of a better end than

246 Such Council need only observe conditions required in Primitive Ch.

CoNPERENOE bj a General Council ? And if you have a most gracious

Fisher ^i^& inclined unto it, as you say it was offered, how can you

acquit yourselves if you do not consent ? Now here A. C.

A. C. p. 62. " marvels what kind of General Council I would have, and
what rules I would have observed in it, which are morally
like to be observed, and make an end of controversies, better
than their Catholic General Councils/^ Truly, I am not
willing to leave A. C. unsatisfied in any thing; nor have I
any meaning to trouble the Church with any new devisings
of mine. Any General Council shall satisfy me — and, I
presume, all good Christians — that is lawfully called, con-
tinued, and ended, according to the same course, and under
the same conditions,'' which General Coimcils observed in
the primitive Church; which, T am sure, were Councils
General and Catholic, whatever yours be. But I doubt, that
after all noise made about these requisite conditions, A. C.
and his fellows will be found as much, if not more defective
in performance of the conditions, than in the conditions
themselves. — Well, the Jesuit goes on, for all this :

[A.C.p.63.] ^. I asked the 25. whether he thought a General

Council might err ? He said. It might.

§ 31. 25. I presume, you do not expect I should enter into the
proof of this controversy. Whether a General Council may
err in determination, or not ? Yourself brought no proof
that it cannot ; and till that be brought, my speech is good
that it can ; and yet I hope to be found no infringer of any
power given by Christ to His Church. But it seems by that
which follows, you did by this question, " Can a General
Council err?^^ but seek to win ground for your other, which
folloAvs :

[A.C.p.63.] ^- " If a General Council may err, what nearer are we

then,'' said I, " to unity, after a Council hath deter-
mined ?" ''Yes,'' said he, "although it may err,

^ Ex iis conciliis quaa omnium conditiones[et] sufficereetrequiri, [ad

consensu gencralia fuerunt, qualia gencrale Concilium.]— Bcllarmin. de

sunt quatuor prima : ex consuetudine Concil. lib. i. cap. xvii. § 2. [Op.,

autcm EcclesiiB colligimus quatuor torn. ii. col. 34. C]

Distinctions as to jjossibility of a General Council falling into Error. 247

yet we should be bound* to bold with' it till another Section
come to reverse it

„ XXXII.

* [The Chaplain saith, that the IS. added a caution, which the Jesuit caret A.b'l
omitteth, saying : The determination of a General Council erring was to stand
in force, and have external obedience at least jielded to it, till evidence of
Scripture, or a demonstration to the contrary, made the error appear, and until
thereupon another Council of equal authority did reverse it. I answer. That
added caution, which either was not there added, or not remembered by the
Jesuit, maketh the U.'s answer far worse than as the Jesuit did relate. For
whereas the Jesuit relateth only thus, " although it may err," this caution
maketh the case to be, "that it doth actually err." And whereas the Jesuit
relateth, " that we," not knowing whether it do err or not, but only that it may
err, " are bound to hold it until another come to reverse it ;" this caution doth
put the case so, as if the determination of a General Council actually erring,
were, not ipso jure invalid, but, such as is to stand in force, and to have ex-
ternal obedience at least yielded unto it, till not only moral certainty, but,
evidence of Scripture, or a demonstration to the contrary, make the error
appear ; and after the error appeareth, yet we must continue this yielding of
obedience. And how long ? "Until thereupon a council," and not every council,
but "of equal authority, do reverse it," which perhaps will not be found in a
whole age. Verily I cannot believe, that the 13. upon better advisement will
allow this caution, or give any thanks to his Chaplain for setting it down ; but
will commend the Jesuit for relating his speech more truly, and at least less
disgracefully. — A. C. marg. note to p. 63.]

33. I. — Whether a General Council may err or not, is a § 32.
question of great consequence in the Church of Christ. To
say it cannot err, leaves the Church not only without
remedy against an error once determined, but also without
sense that it may need a remedy, and so without care to
seek it ; which is the misery of the Church of Rome at this
day. To say it can err, seems to expose the members of
the Church to an uncertainty and wavering in the faith;
to make unquiet spirits ; not only to disrespect former councils
of the Church, but also to slight and contemn whatsoever it
may now determine ; into which error some opposers of the
Clnu'ch of Rome have fallen. And upon this is grounded
your question, " Wherein are we nearer to unity, if a council
may err ? " But in relating my answer to this, you are not
so candid ; for my words did not sound as yours seem to do,
" That we should hold with the council, err or not err, till
another came to reverse it ;" as if grounds of faith might
vary at the racket, and be cast of each side as a cunning
hand might lay them.

II. — You forget again — omit, at least— and with what
mind you best know, the caution which I added. For I
said, " The determination of a General Council erring was to
stand in force, and to have external obedience at the least

248 A Gen. Counc. may err, on R. C. (/rounds, unless confirmed by the Pope.

WITH
FlSIIER.

Conference yielded to it, till evidence of Scripture/ or a demonstration
to tlie contrary, made the error appear ; and until thereupon
another Council^ of equal authority did reverse it,^' And,
indeed, I might have retui'ned upon you again : If a General
Council not confirmed by the pope may err, (which you
affirm,) to what end then a General Council ? And you may
answer. Yes ; for although a General Council may err, yet
the pope, as head of the Church, cannot. An excellent
means of unity, to have all in the Church as the pope will
have it, Avhatever Scripture say, or the Church think ! And
then, I pray, to what end a General Council ? Will his
holiness be so holv, as to confirm a General Council if it
determine against him ? And as for Bellarmine's ^ reasons

" Sect, xxxiii. Consid. 5. No. 1, 2.
[vide infra, pp. 272. 273.] And the
reason of this is, because to have a Ge-
neral Council deceived, is not impos-
sible : but altogether impossible it is,
that demonstrative reason or testimony
divine should deceive. — Hooker. Eccl.
Polit. Book ii. ch. vii. [Sect. 5. Works,
Vol. i. p. 407. His words are : " I grant
that proof derived from the authority
of man's judgment is not able to work
that assurance which doth grow by a
stronger proof; and therefore although
ten thousand General Councils would
set down one and the same definitive
sentence concerning any point of
religion whatsoever, j^et one demon-
strative reason alleged, or one mani-
fest testimony cited from the mouth
of God Himself to the contrary, could
not choose but overweigh them all ;
inasmuch as for them to have been de-
ceived, it is not impossible ; it is, that
demonstrative reason or testimony
divine should deceive."]

' In which case, Maldonat[us] puts
in the shrewdest argument; namely.
That this way we should never have a
certain end of controversies ; for, to
trj' whether any thing were decreed
according to the word of God by one
General Council, we should need
another Council ; and then another to
try that ; and so in infinitum. So
our faith should never have where to
settle and rest itself. — Maldonat. in
S. Matth. xviii. 20. [His words are :
Quod autem hteretici judicandum esse
dicunt utrum in nomine Christi cou-
veneriut, si uiliil nisi ex vcrbo Dei
constituerint, perverso faeiunt judicio.

Non enim, quia nihil nisi ex verbo
Dei decernunt, in nomine Christi
convenerunt : sed quia in nomine
Christi convenerunt, nihil nisi ex
verbo Dei possunt decernere. Priua
enim in nomine Christi conveniunt,
quam aliquid decernant. Et qui in
Christi nomine non convenerunt,
possunt aliquando ex verbo Dei omnia
decernere. Itaque incertam nobis
hasresim, et fallacem regulam tradunt,
quEe si vera esset, nunquam sciri
posset, an aliquod concilium in no-
mine Christi convenisset. Nam ad
examinandum, utrum aliquid non ex
verbo Dei decrevisset, alio concilio
opus esset : et ad examinandum, an
illud alterum aliquid dixisset prteter
verbum Dei, rursus opus altero : sic
nusquam fides nostra gradum figeret.]
But to this I answer. That the ancient
Church took this way, as will after-
ward appear in S. Augustine. Next,
here is no uncertainly at all ; for no
General Council lawfully called, and
so proceeding, can be questioned in
another, unless it so fall out, that
evident Scripture or a demonstration
appear against it. But either of these
are so clear and manifest, that there
need be no fear of proceeding in in-
Jinifum, and leaving the faith in
uncertainty, in necessaries to salva-
tion. And in curious speculations it
is no matter, whether there be cer-
tainty or no, with or without a coun-
cil. — [Vide infra, Sect, xxxiii. Consid.
5. No. 1, 2. [pp. 272, 273.]

s [Secnnda i-atio. Si solus pontifex
potest infallibiliter dcfinire dogmata
fidei, ergo frustra fiunt concilia, vel

Supposed case of a General Council erring. 249

why a General Council should be useful, if not necessary, Section

\XXIT

though the pope be infallible, they are so weak in part.

and in part so unw^orthy, that I am sorry any necessity of
a bad cause should force so learned a man to make use of
them.

III. — Here A. C. tells me : "The caution mentioned asA. C. pp.
omitted, makes my answer worse than the Jesuit related it; ' '
and that in two things. First, in that the Jesuit relates it
thus : ' although it may err ;' but the caution makes it as if it
did actually err. Secondly, in that the Jesuit relates ' that we
are bound to hold it till another come to reverse it •' that is,
we not knowing whether it do err or not, but only that it may
err. But the caution puts the case so, as if the determina-
tion of a General Council actually erring were not ipso jure
invalid, but must stand in force, and have external obedience
yielded to it, till not only moral certainty, but evidence of
Scripture, or a demonstration to the contrary, make the
error appear ; and when it appears, we must yield our obe-
dience till a council of equal authority reverse it, which per-
haps will not be found in an whole age. So either the Jesuit
relates this speech [more] truly, or less disgracefully." And
A. C. thinks that, upon better judgment, I will not allow
this caution. Truly, I shall not thank the Jesuit for any
his kindness here. And for the " caution,'^ I must and do
acknowledge it mine, even upon "advisement," and that
whether it make my answer worse or better. And I think
farther, that the Jesuit hath no great cause to thank A. C.
for this Defence of his Relation.

IV. — First, then, the Jesuit, so says A. C, doth in his Rela- A. C. p. 63.
tion make it but a supposition, that a General Council may err;
but the " caution" expresses it as actually erring. True ; but
yet I hope this expression makes no General Council actually
err. And then it comes all to one, whether I suppose that
such a Council may err, or that it do err ; and it is fitter for
clearing the difficulties into which the Church falls in such
a case, to suppose — and more than a supposition it is not — a
General Council actually^ erring, than as only under a possi-

certc non sunt necessaria. Eespondeo; ordinaria, &c.] — Bellarmin.de Rom.

id non sequi. Nam etsi in pontificc Pont. lib. iv. cap. 7- § 3. at seqq. [Op.,

sit infallibilitas, tamen non debet toni. i. col. 816. B, C.]

ipse contemnere media humana et '• [Hsec est ecclesia symbolica, ec-

250 Under ivhat conditions Decisions of a General Council

Conference bility of erriug. For the Church hath much more to do to

WITH

Fisher, vindicate itself from such an error actually being, than from
any the like error that might be.
A. C. p. 63. V. — Secondly, A. C. thinks he hath got great advantage
by the words of the "caution/' in that I say, "a General
Council erring is to stand in force, and have external obe-
dience,^^ at least so far as it consists in silence, patience, and
forbearance yielded to it, " till e^ddence of Scripture, or a
demonstration to the contrary, make the error appear, and
until thereupon another Council of equal authority did re-
verse it.^' Well ! I say it again. But is there any one
word of mine in the caution, that speaks of our " kno-^ing" of
this error ? Surely not one; that is A. C.'s addition. Now,
suppose a General Council actually erring in some point of
Divine truth, I hope it will not follow that this error must
be so gross as that forthwith it must needs be known to
private men ; and, doubtless, till they know it, obedience
must be yielded ; nay, when they know it, if the error be
not manifestly against fundamental verity, (in which case a
General Council cannot easily err,) I would have A. C. and
all wise men consider, whether "external obedience" be
not even then to be yielded ; for if controversies arise in
the Church, some end they must have, or they will tear all
in sunder ; and I am sure no wisdom can think that fit.
Why, then, say a General Council err, and an erring decree
be ipso jure, by the very law itself, invalid; I would have it
wisely considered again, whether it be not fit to allow a
General Council that honour and privilege which all other
great courts have — namely, that there be a declaration of the
invalidity of its decrees, as well as of the laws of other
coiu'ts, before private men can take liberty to refuse obe-
dience. For, till such a declaration, if the council stand not in
force, A. C. sets up private spirits to control General Coun-

clesia Christi inquam catholica et non quidem] in generali synodo [con-

apostolica mater crudentium popu- gregata], qiiam aliquoties errasse per-

lorum, qu£e fidem habet indefectibi- cepinius, [velut ilia Ariminicusis . . .

lem, secundum promissum Christi ad sed est ecclesia Christi catholica per

Potrum qui tunc figuram gessit Eeclc- totum mundum dispersa.] — [Thorn.]

site, Ego rogavi, &c. Non est ergo spe- Waldensis, Doctrinal. Fidei, torn. i.

cialis ecclesia, non Africana, ut Do- lib. ii. artic. ii. cap. xix. § 1. [fol. xcix.

natus dixit. Nee utiquc particularis col. 1, 2.]
ilia Romana, sed universalis ecclesia,

are to be observed, until set aside by subsequent authority. 251

cils ; which is the thins; he so often and so much cries out Section

XWII
against in the Protestants. Therefore it may seem very fit and — ~ — '-

necessary for the peace of Christendom that a General
Council thus erring should stand in force till " evidence of
Scripture/' or a " demonstration/' make the error to ap-
pear^ as "that another council of equal authority reverse it."'
For as for " moral certainty/' that is not strong enough in
points of faithj which alone are spoken of here. And if
another council " of equal authority " cannot be gotten to-
gether in an age, that is such an inconvenience as the
Church must bear when it happens. And far better is that
inconvenience than this other, That any authority less than
a General Council should rescind the decrees of it, unless it
err " manifestly and intolerably ;" ^ or that the whole Church,
upon peaceable and just complaint of this error, neglect or
refuse to call a council and examine it ; and there come in
national or provincial councils to reform for themselves.^
But no way must lie open to private men to refuse obe-
dience"' till the council be heard and weighed, as well as that
which they say against it ; yet with Bellarmine's exception
still, " so the error be not manifestly intolerable." "^ Nor is it
fit for private men, in such great cases as this, upon which
the whole peace of Christendom depends, to argue thus :
The error appears. Therefore the determination of the council
is 12380 jure invalid ; but this is far the safer way— I say still,
when the error is neither fundamental nor in itself manifest —
to argue thus : The determination is by equal authority, and
that secundum jus, " according to law/' declared to be invalid.
Therefore the error appears. And it is a more humble and

• It is not long since A. C. com- " [Alii dicunt concilium illud (so.
pared Councils to Parliaments ; it was Judteorum contra Christum) errasse,
but p. 60. And I hope a parliament, quia non processit secundum morem
and the acts of it, must stand in force, legitimi judicii : sed tumultuaria con-
though something be mistaken in spiratione, &c. . . Quia tamen] non est
them, or found hurtful, till another inferiorumjudicare, ansuperioreslegi-
parliament of equal authority reverse time procedant, necne, nisi manifestis-
it and them. For I presume you will sime constet intolerabilem eiTorem
not have any inferior authority to committi. — Bellarmin. de Concil.
abrogate Acts of Parliament. [auctoritate,] lib. ii. cap. viii. § 8.

^ Sect, xxxiii. Consid. 4. No. 1. [vide [Op., tom. ii. col. 64. B.]— Nisi mani-

infra, p. 266.] feste constet, &c.— Jac. Almain in III.

' Sect. xxiv. No. 1. [ubi sup. p. Sentent. D[istinct.] xxiv. Q[u£est.]

167] unica, in fine, [ubi sup. p. 165. note '.]

"' Sect, xxxviii. No. 15.

252

On General Councils — Source and extent of their authority.

WITH
FlSIIER.

33.

Conference conscientious way for any private man to suffer a council to
go before him^ than for liim to outrun the council ; but
weak and ignorant men's outrunning both God and His
Church, is as bold a fault now on all sides, as the daring of
the times hath made it common. As for that which I have
added concerning the possibility of a General Council's
erring, I shall go on with it, Avithout asking any farther
leave of A. C.

For, upon this occasion, I shall not hold it amiss a little
more at large to consider the point of General Councils,
How they may, or may not err ; and a little to look into the
Roman and Protestant opinion concerning them ; Which is
more agreeable to the power and rule which Christ hath
left in His Church ; and. Which is most preservative of peace
established, or ablest to reduce perfect unity into the Church
of Christ, when that poor ship hath her ribs dashed in
sunder by the waves of contention. And this I will adven-
ture to the world, but only in the nature of a consideration,
and with submission to my mother, the Church of England,
and the mother of us all, the Universal Catholic Church of
Christ : as I do most humbly all whatsoever else is herein
contained.

First, then, I consider. Whether all the power that an
(Ecumenical Council hath to determine, and all the assist-
ance it hath not to err in that determination, it hath it not
all from the cathohc universal body of the Church," and
clergy in the Church, whose representative p it is? And
it seems it hath. For the government of the Church being

' [the head not monarcliical,i but as Christ is' head, this principle is

Consid. I.

1686.]

n '*■ inviolable in nature : Every body collective that represents.

° [Quod] si ecclcsiffi universitati
non est data ulla auctoritas,ergo ncque
concilio general i, (juatenus ecclesiam
universalem repra^sentat.— Bellarmin.
de Concil. [auctoritat.] lib. ii. cap. 16.
§ 4. [Op. torn. ii. col. 94. C]

1' Dubit. sexfc. Sccunda propositio,]
Concilium generalc, [earn (scil. eccle-
siam Komanam)] representans, [legi-
time congregatum, non potest errarc
in fide.] — Jac. Almain. in III. Sentcnt.
D[istinct.] xxiv. Q[uajst.] unica. [fol.
Ixxii.] — [Sccunda restiictio est, ut

illud, Ecclesia non potest errarc, in-
telligatur de sola ecclesia universali,
non autem extendatur ad] episcopos,
qui sunt Ecclesia rcprtesentative, ut
nostri loquuntur: [quilibet cnim epi-
scopus gerit personam suaj ecclesiaj
particularis, et proinde omnes episcopi
gerunt personam totius ecclesise. —
Bellarmin. de Ecclesia Militante, lib.
iii. cap. 14. § 3. [Op., torn. ii. col.
148. C, D.]

1 Sect. xxvi. No. 8. [ubi sup. p.
221.]

No representative body coterminous loith those whom it represents. 253

receives power and privileges from the body which is repre- Section
sented ; else a representation might have force without the XXXIII.
thing it represents^ which cannot be. So there is no power
in the council, no assistance to it, but what is in and to the
Church. But then it may be questioned, Whether the re-
presenting body hath all the power, strength, and privilege
which the represented hath ? "^ And suppose it hath all the
legal power, yet it hath not all the natural, either of strength
or wisdom, that the whole hath. Now, because the repre-
sentative hath power from the whole — and the main body
can meet no other way — therefore the acts, laws, and
decrees of the representative, be it ecclesiastical or civil, are
binding in their strength ; but they are not so certain, and
free from error, as is that wisdom which resides in the
whole : for in assemblies merely civil, or ecclesiastical, all
the able and sufficient men cannot be in the body that
represents. And it is as possible so many able and sufficient
men,^ for some particular business, may be left out, as that
they which are in may miss or misapply that reason and
ground upon which the determination is principally to rest.
Here, for want of a clear view of this ground, the repre-
sentative body errs ; whereas the represented, by virtue of
those members which saw and knew the ground, may hold
the principle in\'iolated.

Secondly, I consider, That since it is thus in nature and Consid. II.
in civil bodies, if it be not so in ecclesiastical too, some
reason must be given why; " for that body also consists of

'Omnis representatio virtute minor rudi populo traderentur, ut sic saltem

est re ipsa, vel veritate, ciijus repre- ea implicite cognoscerent, duin illis

sentatio est. Colligitur aperte ex figuris deservirent ad honorem Dei.

S. Thorn. [Aquin. Summ. Prim. Se- Ad Secundum dicendum, quod sicut

cund. Q[ii£est.] ci. Art. 2. [Rcspons.] poetica non capiuntur a ratione

ad 2. [His words are : Conclusio : humana propter defectum veritatis, qui

Cum tradenda hominibus non sunt est in eis, ita etiam ratio humana

divina mysteria nisi secundum eorum perfectc capere non potest divina

capacitatem, ne contemnant quod propter excedentem ipsorum verita-

capere non possunt : recte casremo- tem : et ideo utrobique opus est re-

nialia veteris legis prascepta sub sensi- prresentatione per sensibiles figuras.]
bilium figurarum velamine rudi illi ^ [Quia] posset contingere quod con-

populo tradita sunt .... Ad Primuji gregati in Concilio General! essent

ergo dicendum, quod divina non sunt pauci et viles, tarn in re, qiiam in homi-

revelanda hominibus nisi secundum num reputatione, respectu illorum, qui

eorum capacitatem, alioquin daretur ad illud Concilium Generale minime

in eis prajcipitii materia, dum con- convenissent, &c. — Ockam. Dial. par.

temnerent quae capere non possent. Et 3. lib. iii. cap. 13. [apud Goldast.

ideo utilius fuit, ut sub quodam Monarch. S. Roman. Imper. tom. ii.

figurarum velamine divina mysteria p. 829.]

254 The assistance of the Holy Ghost pledged to the Councils of the Church.

Conference men ;" ^ those men, neither, all equal in their perfections of
Fisher knowledge and judgment, whether acquired by industry, or

rooted in nature, or infused by God ; — not all equal, nor

any one of them perfect and absolute, or freed from
passion and human infirmities. Nor doth their meeting
together make them infallible in all things ; though the
act which is hammered out by many together, must in
reason be perfecter than that which is but the child of one
man's sufficiency. If, then, a General Council have no
ground of not erring from the men or the meeting, either it

1 [not . . . must not' be at all, or it must be by some assistance and
Edit I'ese'^l power upon them when they are so met together ; and this,

if it be less than the assistance of the Holy Ghost, it cannot
make them secure against error.
Consid.lll. 1. — Thirdly, I consider, That the assistance of the Holy
Ghost is without error. That is no question ; and as little
there is. That a council hath it. But the doubt that troubles

2 [the as- ,is. Whether air assistance of the Holy Ghost be afforded in
Editt.i673jsu.ch a high manner, as to cause all the definitions of a
and 1686.] j council in matters fundamental in the faith, and in remote

' deductions from it, to be alike infallible ? Now the Romanists,
to prove there is " infallible assistance,"" produce some
places of Scripture ; but no one of them infers, much less
enforces, an infallibility. The places which Stapleton there
rests upon, are these : " I will send you the Spirit of Truth,
Which will lead you into all truth.'' And, " This Spirit
shall abide with you for ever." And, " Behold, I am with
you to the end of the world." To these, others add, " The
founding of the Church upon the rock, against which the
gates of hell shall not prevail." And Christ's prayer for
S. Peter, " that his faith fail not." And Christ's promise,
" that where two or three are gathered together in His
name. He will be in the midst of them." And that in the
Acts, " It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us."

' Ecclesia est unum corpus mysti- vatur.] — [Gabr.] Biel. in Exposit. Can.

cum per similitndinem ad naturale. Misste, &c. lect. xxiii. [fol. xxxi. v.

— Durand. in III. Sentent. Distinct. col. 2.]

xiv. Quaist. i. No. 5. — [Ilrec ordinatio " Omnem veritatem infallibiliter

in coelo prtefulget : in naluris oslcn- doceudi, &c. — Stapleton. l?elect. [Con-

ditur : in Christo operibus exempla- trov.] Prajf. ad Lectorem. [Op., tom.i.

tur : in divinis legibus prascipitur : in p. 514.]
toto corpore CLristi niystico obser-

John

xvi.

13.

.John

xiv.

16.

Matt.

xxviij

i. 20.

Matt.
18.

xvi.

Luke

xxii.

32.

Matt.

xviii.

20.

Actsxv.28.

A promise to lead into all truth is of all necessary truth. 255

2. — For tlie first, wliicli is, " leading into all truth," and Section

V V V T T T

that " for ever ;" " all," ^ is not always universally taken in
Scripture. Nor is it here simply for " all truth :" for then
a General Council could no more err in matter of fact than
in matter of faith, in which yet yourselves grant it may errJ
But " into all truth," ^ is a limited " all :" " into all truth
absolutely necessary to salvation ;" and this, when they
suffer themselves to be led by the Blessed Spirit, by the
word of God ; and all truth which Christ had before, at
least fundamentally, delivered unto them : " He shall receive john xYi.
of Mine, and show it unto you." And again, " He shall ^^•
teach you all things, and bring all things to your remem- 26. ° ^
brance, which I have told you." And for this necessary
truth, too, the Apostles received this promise, " not for
themselves and a council, but for themselves and the whole
Catholic Church," ^ of which a council, be it never so general,
is a very little part. Yea, and this very assistance is not so ab-
solute, nor in that manner, to the whole Church, as it was to
the Apostles ; neither doth Christ in that place speak directly
of a council, but of His Apostles' preaching and doctrine.

3. — As for Christ's " being with them unto the end of the
world," the fathers are so various, that, in the sense of the
ancient Church, we may understand Him present in majesty,^

^ [Et quod de omni Israele dici vi- modum et verbum siiggeret eo utique

detur, in his tantum qiios sibi gratias refertur.] Non repugnabo, si quis ita

electio reliquos fecit, ostenditur .... velit interpretari, &c. — Maldonat. in

ut unum genus in duas species intelli- S. Johan. xiv. [26.]

geremus esse divisum, et omnem ho- * Bellarmin. de Cone, [auctorit.]

minem, omnem plenitudinem, omnem lib. ii. cap. 9. § [3. Op., torn. ii. col.

Israelemnon semper ad universitatem, 80. A.] Assistit [enim concilio] Spi-

sed plemmque ad partem esse refer- ritus Sanctus non [tarn] propter [ip-

endum. — S.] Prosp. [Aquitan. seu po- sum] concilium, quam [propter] Ec-

tius, ignoti auctoris,] de vocat. [omn.] clesiam universam.

gentium, lib. i. cap. 10. [apud S. *> [Loquebatur enim, (sc. Johan.

Prosper. Op., col. 862. B — D.] cap. xii. 8. Me autem non semper

y Bellarmin. de Concil. [auctorit.] habebitis,) de praesentia corporis Sui.

lib. ii. cap. 8. § [5. Op., torn. ii. col. Nam secundum majestatem Suam, se-

64. A.] Where he saith, Piespondeo, cundum providentiam, secundum in-

quidam [aiunt,] qurestionem fuisse de eflabilem et invisibilem gratiam, im-

facto, non de jure, [quam Concilium pletur quod ab Eo dictum est, Ecce

illud judicavit, videlicet, num Jesus Ego vobiscum, &c.] — S. Augustin. in

necandus esset ;] in ejusmodi [autem] Johan. [Evang. cap. xii.] Tract. 1. [Op.,

judiciis concilia errare posse, non du- torn, iii, par. 2. col. 634. A.] — [Christus

bium est. in ccelum ascendens, discessit quidem

■' Dubium est, an quod dicit, Docebit c;irne, scd prsesens est majestate, se-

omnia, S. Job. xiv. 26. referendum cundum illud, quod ait; Eccc Ego

sit, (ad illud [verbum,] Qusecunque vobiscum, &c.] — S. Isidor. [Hispalens.]

dixero vobis,) quasi non aliud doc- Sentent. lib. i. cap.l4. [§ 17. Op., torn,

turum Spiritum Sanctum dicat, quam vi. p. 151. ed. Lorenzanse.]
quod Ipse antea docuisset, [quemad-

256

Patristic interpretations of these and the kindred texts vary.

Conference in power/ in aid and assistance"^ against the difficulties
fTsheu. ^^^^y should find for preaching Christ ; which is the native

sense, as I take it : and this promise Avas made to support

their weakness. As for His presence " in teaching by the
Holy Ghost,"*^ few mention it ; and no one of them which
doth, speaks of any infallible assistance, farther than the
succeeding Church keeps to the word of the Apostles,
as the Apostles kept to the guidance of the Spirit. Besides,
the fathers^ refer their speech to the Church Universal, not
to any council or representative body. And Maldonate
adds, " That this His presence by teaching is, or may

•= [Sed quid sibi vult, esse Eum in
circuitu populi Sui, ex hoc nunc et
usque in sa3culum ; quia non relin-
quet virgam peccatorum, &c. 1 In
virga potestatem intelligi convenit;
insigne enim potestatis est.] — S. Hilar.
[Pictav. Tractat.] in Ps. cxxiv. [cap. 7.
Op., col. 405. C.]— S. Justin. Martyr.
Dialog, cum Try phone. [There is no
passage in Justin Martyr's dialogue
withTrypho—nor does there appear
to be one in any of his works — which
comments on the text announcing
our Lord's perpetual presence in the
Church.] — [Quod utitjue nunc eadem
potentia Dominus indesincnter ope-
ratur, qui ait, EcceEgo vobiscum,cS.c.]
— S. Prosper. [Aquitan. seu potius,
ignoti auctoris,] ad Demetriadem
[virgin.]Epist. [cap.l 3 . apud S.Prospcr .
Op., col. 945. A.]

^ [Sciens ergo Dominus, &c.] S.
Hilar, in Ps. cxxiv. [ubi sup. p. 181.
note f.] — [Et ne prjedicantium minis-
teria humano tantum viderentur
opere peragenda, inquit, Ecce Ego
vobiscum, &c. Id est, cum sicut oves
introieritis in medium luporum, nolite
de vestra infirmitate trepidare, sed de
Mea potestate confidite, qui vos usque
ad consummationem sasculi in onini
hoc opere non derelinquam ; non hoc
ut nihil patiamini, sed, quod multo
majus est, prjestiturus ut nulla
SEBvientium crudelitate siiperemini.
In ilea enim potestate prtedicabilis,
&c.] — S.Prospcr. [Aquitan. seu potius,
ignoti auctoris,] de vocat. [omn.] gen-
tium, lib. ii. cap. 2. [apud .S. I'rosper.
Op., col. 888. D.]— [Utaulcmnoverint
corda fldelium habere se, unde ad
supcrnam sapientiam spretis mundi
cupiditatibus valeant elevari, spondet
nobis Dominus prtesentiam suam,
dicens, Ecce ego vobiscum, &c.]— S.

Leon. [Magn.] de Resurrect. Domini,
Serm. ii. cap. 3. [Serm. Ixxii. (al.
Ixx.) Op., tom. i. col. 286. ed. Bal-
lerini, ubi sup. p. 181. note ^.] — Jesus
igitur noster solem stare fecit, &c.] —
S.Isidor. [Hispalens.] in Josue, cap.
xii. [ubi sup. p. 181. note '.]

" ['l5oi) iyw fliO' VfJ-WV, K. T. A. ivifXtl/i

5^ rifuv e| ovpavov tov ■Kapa.K\7}Tuv, 5i'
oi) KaX iv 6& |Ue6' rifxHv tan Ka\ tv rifxiv
avKi^trai, ovk oOv^lov riixiv tyx^'^v, dwd
TO Trjs ovaias avTOv, Koi rrjs tov Trarpds
'iStov Tryevfj.a.'lS. Cyril. [Alexaudr.]
de[Sancta] Trinitat. dialog, vii. [Op.,
tom. V. p. 642. A. ed. Aubert. Venet.
1638.]— [Quod utique, &c.] — S. Pros-
per. [Aquitan. seu potius, ignot. auc-
tor.] ad Demetriad. [ubi sup. note ■=.]
' [.Sciens ergo Dominus . . . . ei qui
in Eum credat adsistit.] — S. Hilar, in
Ps. cxxiv. [ubi sup. p. 181. note '.] —
[ISov 67ci, /C.T.A.] — S.Cyril. [Alexandr.]
de[Sancta]Trinitate, lib. vii. [ubi sup.
note''.] — [Sic eos allocutum Deum,
quemadmodum Christus nos nondum
natos, etiam longe post futures, ncc
tantum no.s, sed etiam eos omnes qui
futuri sunt post nos. Omnibus enim
dicebat, quos sues futuros videbat,
Ecce Ego vobiscum, &c.] — S.Augustin.
de Genesi ad literam, [lib.] vi. cap. 8.
[Op., tom. iii. par. 1. col. 201. G.] —
[Idem est super ccelorum altitudines
victor mortis ascendens, et usque ad
consummationem sseculi universam
ecclesiam non relinquens.] — S. Leon.
[Magn.] de Nativitat. Dom. Serm. x.
cap. 5. [Serm. xxx. (al. xxxi.) Op.,
tom. i. col. 109. ed. Ballerini.] — [Jesus
igitur noster solem, &c.] — S. Isidor.
[Hispalens.] in Josue, cap. xii. [ubi
sup. p. 181. note ^] In all which
places, vohiscuvi is either interpreted
cum suis, or fidelihus, or universa
ecclesia.

The Rock {Matth. xvi. 18.) is the Faith, not the Person, ofS. Peter. 257

be, a collection from the place, but is not the intention of
Christ/' s

4. — For "the rock upon which the Church is founded/^
which is the next place, we dare not lay any other foun-
dation than Christ : Christ laid His Apostles, no question, but
upon Himself. With these S. Peter was laid, no man
questions, and in prime place of order, (Would his claiming
successors be content with that ?) as appears, and divers
fathers witness, by his particular designment, Tu es Petrus.
But yet the " rock'' even there spoken of is not S. Peter's
person, either only or properly, but the faith which he
professed. And to this, besides the evidence which is in
text and truth, the fathers come in' with very full consent."^

Section
XXXIII.

[Matth.
xvi. 18.]
1 Cor. iii.
11.
Eph.ii. 20.

1 [in

carent
Editt.
1673, aud
1686.]

s [Fateor Christum, quatenus Deus
est, ubique esse, sed aliam hie prse-
sentiam suam Apostolis pollicetur;
fateor Christum misso Spiritu s^ancto
ecclesiam usque ad consummationem
saeculi gubernaturum,] idque ex hoc
loco colligi non nego, [quemadmodum
illi, quos modo nominavimus, auc-
tores (sc. S. Cyril. Alexandr., Salvian.,
et S. Leo,) recte collegerunt;] sed non
qucerimus, quid [ex eo, quod Christus
dixit,] colligatur, sed quid dicere
voluerit. — Maldonat. in S. Matth.
xxviii. [20.]

^ S. Ignatius, Epist. ad Philadelph.
Qui suam firmavit Ecclesiam super pe-
tram, sedificatione spirituali. \os Kara
TO idwv PovATj/xa ^ffTTjpi^ev avrov /Se/8ai&is
TYjV fKKXrjcriai' iirl rrj mTpa., ot«o5o^^
trvevfxuTiKfi, axiipoTrovi)TCf, k. t. A. —
S. Ignat. Epist. Interpolat. ad Phila-
delph. in Inscript. apud Patr. Apostol.
torn. ii. p. 75. ed. Cotelerii, Amst.
1724.] — Super banc igitur confes-
sionis petram Ecclesise aedificatio est.
— S. Hilar, de Trinitat. lib. vi. [§ 36.
Op., col. 903. E.]— Et paulo post, Haec
fides, ecclesi^ fundamentum est : [per
hanc fidem infirmes adversus earn sunt
portae inferorum. — Id. col. 904. A.] —
Super hanc petram eedificabo Eccle-
siam Meam, super confessionem vi-
delicet Christi, [quia dixerat : Tu
es Christus, filius Dei viventis.] —
[Pseudo-] S. Gregor. Nyssen. de Trin.
adver.sus Judseos, [seu potius, Testi-
monia de adventu Domini in carne,
adversus Judseo.s, cap. ult. Op., tom.
ii. p. 162. B. ed. Paris. 1638.]— Ut
hac ratione certam omnibus confes-
sionem traderet, quam ab eo inspiratus
Petrus tanquam basim, ac fundameu-

VOL. II. — LAUD.

tum jecit, super quod Dominus Ec-
clesiam suam extruxit. [dA.Aa t^iv
dacpaXri ojxoKoyiav StSd^ai Trdvras Pov\6-
fxivos, 7)V i/xivvevadels 6 neVpos Trap'
avTOv ws KprimSa Kol Badpov ctTreflfTO,
4<p' 7? TTJu eavTov iKKArjcriau 6 Kiiptos
(pKoS6,a7]cre.] — S. Isidor. Pelusiot. [de
interpret. SS.] Epistol. lib. i. Epist.
ccxxxv. [ad Serenum, Op., p. 67. B.
ed. Paris. 1638.] — Petram opinor quasi
denominative, aliud nihil quam incon-
cussam et firmissimam discipuli
fidem appellans, in qua Ecclesia
Christi ita fundata, et firmata esset,
ut non laberetur, &c. [ireTpai' oJ/nai
■n-apu>vvfj.a>s, hnpov ov^lv, 7J rrfv aKaTa-
aeiffTov KoL ehpaioTarrju rod fj.ad-i]Tov
iriariv aizoKaXwv, i<p' p Koi a5iaTrTC<jTais
iprjpeiffTaire Koi SiairfTrriyei' rj eKKXriaia
XpL(Trov, Kal avTois dvahuTOs reus a,Bov
TzvKats eiVaeJ ^lafxivovaa.] — S. Cyril.
Aleixandr. de Trinitat. lib. iv. [Op.,
tom. V. p. 507. E.] — Petram appellat
fidei pietatem, veritatis professionem,
&c. Et super hanc petram sedificabo
Ecclesiam Meam. [/caA€( 5e oi/'ttjj/ 4v
T-p ffK€TTTj Trjs ir€Tpas, 'Iva fj.ri ■kolMv fie-
Attiva yiv7]rai' ir4rpav 8e KaAe7 rrju
evcrefirj iriarty, r-f/v d\ri67J ofxoAoyiav'
Kal yd.p Toj Kvpici) eiprjKdri . . . Tlerpos
f(prj(Te' 2i) ei d XpicrTos, k. t. A. ^
d-KeKpivajo Aeyoov . . . 2i) el Uerpos,
K. T. A.] — B. Theodoret. [Episcop.
Cyren. Interpi-et.] in Cantic. [Cantic.
ii. 14. lib. ii. Op., tom. i. col. 1028.
D. ed. Sirmond. Paris. 1642.] — In
vera fide persistite, et vitam vestram
in petra Ecclesiae, hoc est, in con-
fessione beati Petri apostolorum prin-
cipis solidate. — S. Gregor. [Magn.
Eegistr.] Epistol. lib. iii. Epist. xxxiii.
[lib. iv. Indict. 12. Epist. xxxviii. ad

258 The Promise [Matth. xvi. 18.) is of indef edibility not of infallibility .

WITH

Fisher.

Conference And this, " tliat the gates of hell shall not prevail against
it/^ is not spoken of the not erring of the Church princi-
pally, but of the not falhng away of it from the founda-
tion.' Now, a Church may err, and dangerously too, and

profess it is propter robur confessionis.
[Ex. grat. K0.\ yap t'iuv &eov XpiaT^v
Hard. Tt)V Tov narpbs avTov aTroKa\vil/iu
iin'yv6vra avrov 'iva rwv /xadriruiv avrov
'S.ijJ.oii^a TrpcTf pov KaXoiifxevov, ewuvofxacre
nerpoj'.] — Justin. Martyr. Dialog, cum
Tryphon. [Jud. Sect. c. Op., p. 195. D.
ed. Benedict.] — [koI 'Iva ixd&ris on S'lKaiot
4\4q> Tfix'^^ovTai, aKove ti (priat tw U^rpoi,
Tcp aTv\(f>, Tj; KprjirlSi, rif Sia tovto kAt}-
BevTtVliTpci}, i-KeiSri TT] Tri(TT€i TreTrerpaifj.i-
vos vv, 'S.i/xctiy, 'Slp.oiv, K. T. A. — Pseudo-]
S. Clirysostom. Horn. ii. in Ps. 1. [§ 2.
Op., torn. V. p. 584. C. ed. Benedict.] —
[Bene conscius sui non ad tempiis
adsumtum, sed jamdudiim Deo cogni-
tum, Pctrus testificatur affectum.
Quis est enim alius qui de se hoc
facile profiteri possit 1 Et ideo quia
solus profitetur ex omnibus, omnibus
antefertur; major enim omnibus cari-
tas.]— S. Ambros. Expos. Evang. sec.
Lucam, lib. x. in cap. xxiv. [175, &c.
Op., torn. i. col. 1542. D. ed. Benedict.]
— And S. Gregory gives it for a rule,
-n-hen 2)etra is read in the singular
number, (and so it is here,) Christus
est, " Christ is signified." [Quem alium
signat petra, nisi Eum, de quo per
Paulum dicitur, Petra autcm erat
Christus]— S. Gregor. Moral, lib. iii.
in cap. ii. B. Job. cap. 30. Op., tom.
i. col. 96. E. — Et, Quia petrse nomine
Christus accipitur, &c. — Id. Moral,
lib. xix. in cap. xxix. B. Job. cap. 15.
Op., tom. i. col. 616. D. — Et, In sacro
eloquio cum singulari numero petra
nominatur, quis alius quam Christus
accipitur 1 — Id. Moral, lib. xxxi. in
cap. xxxix. B. Job. cap. 48. Op.,
tom. i. col. 1040. D.]

' [Et nos transeamus ad ea qure se-
quuntur: Tenui Eum, nee dimittam,
&c. (Cant. iii. 4.) Ita est, ex tunc et de-
inceps] non deficit [genus Christianum,
nee fides de terra, nee caritas de eccle-
sia.]— S. Bernard. Serm. Ixxix. in Cant,
[fol. 181. col. 4. L.]— And Bellarmine
himself, going to prove Ecchsiam
{visihilem] non j^osse deficere, begins
with this very place of Scripture.
[Primum, id ostenditur ex Scripturis,
ubi aperte nominatur Ecclesia, Matt.
xvi. (18.) Super banc petram, &c.—
Bellarmin.] de ecclesia [militante,]
lib. iii. cap. 13. [§ 2. Op., tom. ii.
col. 145. D.]

Theodelindam Eeginam, Op., tom.
ii. col. 718. D.] — Super eum fedifi-
cavit Ecclesiam, quia enim confessus
erat, &c. quod hajc confessio funda-
mentum erit, &c. [djuei'iSeTai riv
nirpov 6 Kiipios, fxivOdv avrw Sl5ovs
fieyav, t6 eir' avraj olKo5oixr]6rivai riju
fKKXi)(jiaV iniL yap wfJLoK6yr)aev aurov
Tlov 0eoG d neVpos, <p7)a\v on, avrr) ri
ojxoXoyia riv ufMoAoyTjaas, OefieXioi' fiix-
Xetv eluai twv TrtaTevovTbii'' warf
■navra avQpuiirov fXiWovra Kri^eiv rhv
Trjs iriarews oIkov, TavTr]V Ti)v ofioAoyiav
vironeevai 06^6'Aiov.] — Thcophylact.
[Comment.] in Matt. xvi. [p. 93. E.
ed. Paris. 1635.] — Quid est, super
banc petram 1 &c. Super banc fidem,
super id quod dictum est, Tu es
[Christus, filius Dei vivi.] — S. Au-
gustin. in 1. Epistol. Johann. cap. 5.
Tractat. x. [Op., tom. iii. col. 894. B.]
— Hanc confessionem Christus petram
cum nominasset, Petrum nuncupat
eum qui primum illam est confessus,
donans illi hanc appellationem tan-
quam insigne, et monumentum hujus
confessionis. Haec enim est revera
pietatis petra, hajc salutis basis, &c.
\^rav77)v rrjv ofxoXoyiav Trerpav KaKecras
6 XpiaTos, TleTpoi/ ovo/xd^fL tov wpooToos
TavTrjv o/j-oAoyriffavTa' yvcopia/xa ttjs
ofJioXoyias rrju irpoarjyoplai' Boopovfxevos'
avTT) yap dXridcos tvs evcre^eias tj impa'
avTT) rris <rwT7)pias v Kprjtris' tovto ttjs
■KLdTiOis TO Telxos' ovTos 6 T7]S dAr)9eias
OefieAios' Be/xiXiov yd.p dWov o^Sels hvva-
Tai, K. T. A.] — S. Basil. Seleucise, Orat.
XXV. [in fin. Op., p. 142. B. ad calc.
Op., S. Gregor. Thaumaturg. &c. ed.
Paris. 1622.] — \^iva yivriTai iram to7s
el uvTwv fji.fTa\aiJ.$dvov(nv (Is actieffiv
dfJ.apTicov Kal fls ^corlv alwviou, us dyiaa-
fxov \l/vxtcv KoX (TUfxdTuiv,(ls Kapirocfiopiau
ipywv dyaQuv, us aTripiy/j-ov ttJs dyias
crov KaOoAtKi^s Ka\ diroa-ToXtKrjs fKKAr}-
(Tias, v'^ edeixeXiuiaas^ (ttI T-qv TreTpav
T^y ■KiaTfuis, ['/ra irvhai aSov /xri KaTiffx^'
ffaiaiv avTrjs, l>v6fxevos avTriv dird ndaris
alpeaews Kal aKavidXwv koX twv Ipya^o-
ixivoov Ti)v dvojxlav, Sta(pv\dTTWt> avTrjv
fxexpl Tfjs ffvvTfXdas tov attoros.]— S.
Jacobi Liturgia [Hicro.'^olymitana,
apud Assemanni Cod. Liturg. (lib.
iv. par. 2.) tom. v. pp. 40, 41. Con-
siderable doubt has been thrown
upon the genuineness of the latter
clauses of this praj'cr.] — And some
which join the person of S. Peter,

Our Lord' s prayer {Luke xxii. 32.) urns only for S.Peter's perseverance. 259

yet not fall from the foundation, especially if that of Bellar- Section

. XXXIII
mine be true, " that there are many things, even defide, ' of -LLl 1

the faith,' which yet are not necessary to salvation/'"^ Besides,
even here again, the promise of this stable edification is to
the whole Church, not to a council ; at least no farther than
a council builds as a Church is built— that is, upon Christ.

5. — The next place is "Christ's prayer for S.Peter's faith." [Lukexxii.

on T

The native sense of which place is, that Christ prayed^ and '^
obtained for S. Peter perseverance in the grace of God
against the strong temptation which was to winnow him
above the rest. But to conclude an infallibility hence in
the pope, or in his chaii", or in the Roman see, or in a
General Council, though the pope be president, I find no
one ancient father that dare adventure it. And Bellarmine ^
himself, besides^ some popes in their own cause — and that in ' [beside...
epistles counterfeit or falsely alleged — hath not a father to jg^g '^^^
name for this sense of the place till he come down to Chryso- 1686.]
logus, Theophylact, and S.Bernard; of which Chrysologus'
speech is but a flash of rhetoric, and the other two are men
of yesterday, compared with antiquity, and lived when (it
was God's great grace and learned men's wonder) the cor-
ruption of the time had not made them corrupter than they
are. And Thomas™ is resolute, that what is meant here beyond

^ Quinto, si esset [vera Calvini sen- liorum, ante concilium Chalcedonense,

tentia, maxima pars dogmatum fidei Hortamur te, inquit, frater lionora-

in dubium revocari posset : nam] bilis, ut his, quae a beatissimo papa

multa sunt de fide, quse non sunt ab- Romanae civitatis scripta sunt, obe-

solute necessaria ad salutem. — [Bel- dienter attendas ; quoniam B. Petrus,

larmin.] de ecclesia [militante,] lib. iii. qui in propria sede vivit, et praesidet,

cap. 14. § 13. [Op., torn. ii. col. 150. prgestat quaerentibus fidei veritatem.

A.] (Cf. Concil. torn. iv. col. 38. A.)

' [For the passages from the Bernardus in Epist. cxc. ad Innocen-

writings of the popes, vindicating the tium: (Op., fol.227. col.2. E.) Oportet,

papal infallibility, vide supra, p. 20. inquit, ad vestrum referri apostolatum

note p. Bellarmine adds,] de Rom. periculaquaequeetscandala emergen tia

Pont. lib. iv. cap. 3. [§13. Op., torn. i. in regno Dei, ea praesertim qute de

col. 807. D. : Praeter hos pontifices fide contingunt. Dignum namque

non desunt etiam alii auctores, qui arbitror, ibi potissimum resarciri

eodem modo exponunt. Theophylactus damna fidei, ubi non possit fides sen-

in Lucae cap. xxii. aperte docet dari tire defectum. Haec quippe hujus

Petro hoc privilegium, quia ipse futurus praerogativa sedis. Cui enim alteri

erat princeps, et caput aliorum, ac aliquando dictum est, Ego pro te, &c?]
proinde dari omnibus aliis, qui illi '" [S. Thorn. Aquin. Summ.] Se-

in principatu succederent : Quia te cund. Secund. Q[u£est.] ii. A[rtic.] 3.

habeo, inquit, principemdiscipulorum, [seu potius, Ibid. Quaest. i. Artie. 10.

confirma caeteros. Hoc enim decet te, Unde et Dominus, Luc. xxii. Petro

&c. (ubi sup. p. 210. note \) Petrus dixit, quern summum pontificem

Chrysologus in Epistola ad Eutyche- constituit. Ego pro te rogavi, &c. Et

tern, quae habetur in primo tomo Conci- hujvis ratio est, quia una fides debet

s 2

260 Promise of our Lor d^s presence alleged for infallibility of Gen. Councils

WITH

Fisher.

Conference S. Peter's person is referred to the whole Church. And the
Gloss upon the Canon Law is more peremptory than he, even
to the denial that it is meant of the pope." And if this
place warrant not the pope's faith, where is the infallibility
of the council that in yom' doctrine depends upon it ?

6. — The next place is Bellarmine's choice one, and his
first ; and he says, " it is a proper place for proof of the in-
fallibility of General Councils." ° This place is Christ's pro-
mise : " Where two or three are gathered together in My
name, there am I in the midst of them ;" and he tells us,
" the strength of the argument is not taken from these words
alone, but as they are continued with the former ; and that
the argument is drawn a minori ad 7najus, ' from the less to
the greater.'" P Thus : "If two or three gathered together
in My name do always obtain that which they ask at God's

Matt.xviii.
19, 20.

esse totius Ecclesise ; secundum illud,
1 Cor. i. (10.) Id ipsum dicatis omnes,
&c.] Probat enim [S. Thom. Aquin.]
ex his verbis, fidem Ecclesise univer-
salis non posse deficere.

° [Quaero, de qua Ecclesia intelligas,
quod hie dicitur, quod non possit
errare 1 Si de ipso papa, qui ecclesia
dicitur, &c. Sed] certum est, quod Papa
errare potest. — -Gloss, [in Decret. par.
ii.] Caus. xxiv. Qusest. 1. cap. (ix.) A
recta ergo.

° Testimonia propria sunt tria :
primum est Matt, xviii. (19.) [ubi sunt
duo, &c.] — Bellarmin. de concil. [auc-
toritat.] lib. ii. cap. 2. § 3. [Op.,
torn. ii. col. 53. C. The title of
the chapter is : Concilia generalia a
pontifice confirmata, errare non posse,
ex Scripturis demonstratur.] — [Ad
tertium dicendum, quod] firmitas
conciliorum illis [Christi] verbis pro-
prie non innititur : [quia nee Christus
ibi de conciliis episcoporum loquitur,
sed de quavis fidelium unanimi con-
gregatione ; nee etsi Christus adsit in
medio talium, tamen ad omnem af-
fectum adest, aut ad hunc (jui est
judicare de fide.] — Stapleton. Kclect.
Controv. [Controv.] vi. [de medio
judic. Eccles in causa fidei,] Q[uiE8t.]
iii. A[i-tic.] 4. [Respons.] ad 3. [Op ,
torn. i. p. 821. D.] — Non [enim
ad infallibilem certitudinem alicujus
sententiae, in quam plurcs in nomine
Christi consentiant,] locus hie [evan-
gelii 1 proprie accommodari debet, [sed
ad efficaciam consensionis plurium ad
id impetrandum, quod unanimiter in

Christi nomine petunt, si id quidcm
ad eorum salutem expediat. — Gregor.
de] Valentia, [Commentar. Theologic.
in [Secund. Secund.] S. Thom. [Aquin.
tom. iii. Disp. i. [de fide,] Q[u8est.] 1.
[de objecto fidei,] Punct. vii. §45. [de
Conciliis, col. 320. C. ed. Paris. 1609.]
p [Calvinus non adeo magni facit
hoc testimonium, propterea quod ex eo
videaturprobari posse, etiam concilium
duorum hominum non posse errare. Sed
is hoc testimonium non contemnet, qui
observarit, argumentum sumi non
simpliciter ex his verbis, sed ex his
verbis continuatis cum superioribus,
et propterea] addita argumentatione
a minori ad majus. [Dixerat enim
antea Dominus de homine incorrigi-
bili : Die ecclesite, &c. At ne quis
ecclesiam, sive congregationem prasla-
torum contemnendam putaret, ad-
junxit continue : Amen dice vobis,
qusecunque ligaveritis, &c.] — Bellar-
min. de Concil. [auctoritat.] lib. ii.
cap. 2. § 3. [Op., tom. ii. col. 54. A.]
— Et, [llasc tamen Christi verba ad
conciliorum firmitatem merito appli-
carunt Patres in Synodo VI. (Constant.
III.) Act. xvii. (Gr. xviii.) et in Synodo
Chalcedon. in Epist. ad Leonem, (cf.
Concil. tom. vi. col. 1023. D. et, Concil.
tom. iv. col. 834. D.) per argumen-
tum a minore ad majus : quia si in
duorum aut trium conventu Christus
adest .... multo magis in concil io
tot pastorum, &;c.] — Stapleton. Relcct.
Controv. [Controv.] vi. Q[u£est.] iii.
A[rtic.] 4. [ut sup. note ". Op., tom. i.
p. 822. A.]

Its primary meaning. — Bellar mine's argum. a minor, examined. 261

hands, to wit, wisdom and knowledge of those thiners which Section

• XXXFTT

are necessary for them, how much more shall all the bishops ^
gathered together" in a council " always obtain wisdom and
knowledge to judge those things which belong to the direc-
tion of the whole Church ? " ^ I answer, first : It is most
true that here is little strength in these words alone ; for
though the fathers make different interpretations of this
place of Scripture, yet most of them agree in this. That this
place is to be imderstood of consent in prayer -J and this is
manifest enough in the text itself. Secondly, I think there
is as little strength in them by the argument drawn a minori
ad majus ; and that I prove two ways. First, because
though that argument hold in natural and necessary things,
yet I doubt it holds not either in voluntary or promised
things, or things which depend upon their institution : for
he that promises the less, doth not hereby promise the
greater ; and he which will do the less, will not always do
the greater. Secondly, because this argument from the
less to the greater can never follow but where and so far as
the thing upon which the argument is founded agrees to the
less; for if it do not always agree to the less, it cannot
necessarily pass from thence to the greater. Now, that

•J [Quorum verborum haec sententia avfi<p<avlas' a-vfirpoovoivTes Se voovvrat,

est :] Si duo vel tres congregati in ovx ot enl kuk^ awepx^fJ-evoi, dw' oi

nomine Meo, obtinent semper quod eTr' dyadii' opa ydp tI iliref edu Svo

petunt a Deo, [nimirum sapientiam, vfiZv, rovria-Ti tSiv ■Ki<mv6vr(oi', tu>v

et lumen, quod sufficit eis ad cogno- kvapkruiv .... Sfrre Zid touto woWdKis

sceuda ea, quae ipsis necessaria sunt, evxdM-evoi oi Xafj-^cvo/j-fy, Sio'tj ovSe

quanto magis episcopi omnes congre- ffvfj.<pa>viav irpos dK\7]\ovs exoixiv'\ —

gati in nomine Meo, semper obtine- Theophjd. in [loc. (so.] Matth. xviii.

bunt, quod juste petunt, id est, sapien- [20.) p. 106. D.]— [Ubicunque fuerint

tiam, et lumen ad indicanda ea, qute duo aut tres, &c. non homines ab

ad totam ecclesiam dirigendam per- ecclesia dividit qui instituit et fecit

tinent.] — Bellarmin. ibid. § 4. [Op., ecclesiam, sed exprobrans discordiam

tom. ii. col. 54. C] perfidis, et fidelibus pacem sua voce

>■ Ubi duo vel tres pari spiritu et commendans, ostendit magis esse se

voluntate collect! sunt, &c. [/caJ yb.p cum duobus aut tribus unanimiter

aitiiKriaas iK^lva rp (i)i\oveiKia, rd orantibus, quam cum dissidentibus

fieyd\aevTavdarris'ffv,u.(b(ii'iasTieriaiv plurimis, plusquam impetrari posse

iiradXa- dye Koi rbv iraTepa Teleov<Tiu paucorum concordi pace quam dis-

ol avixcpaivovures, virep wv alrovcTL, koI cordiosa oratione multorum.] — S.

Tov XpiffTov exovtTiv els to /xiaou.] — Cyprian, lib. iv. Epist. 4. [de unitate

S. Chrysostom. Hom. [Ix. al.] Ixi. in ecclesite. Op., p. 198. ed. Benedict.]

Matth. xviii. [20. Op., tom. vii. — [Ipse enim quia pax atque charitas

p. 608. D.] — [avvdyei Tj/xcis Sici rcav est, sedem atque habitationem in

roiovTuv prjfxdTwv els t))v aydiryiu- eirel bonis atque pacificis voluntatibus

ydp eKoiKvaev r]ixas and tov ffKavoaXi^eiv CoUocabit.] — S. Hilar, in Matth. xviii.

a\\7]\ovs, KUL kf^dirreiv koI ^KdirTecrQai, [20. apud Catenam Auream.]
vvv \4yei Koi irepl ttjs -n-pos dAA.'^A.ous

263 Conditions necessary for obtaining the objects of prayer.

Conference upon which this argument is grounded here, is infallible
fTsher. liearing and granting the prayers of two or three met

together in the name of Christ ; but this infallibility is not

always found in this less congregation where two or three
are gathered together. For they often meet and pray, yet
obtain not ; because " there are divers other conditions neces-
sai'ily required/' as S. Chrysostom observes, " to make the
prayers of a congregation heard," beside their gathering to-
gether in the name of Christ f and therefore it is not
extended to a greater congregation or council, unless the
same conditions be still observed : neither doth Christ's
promise, Ero in medio, " I will be in the midst of them," infer
that they — the greater or the less, three or three hundred —
have all, even necessary things, infallibly granted unto them
as oft as they ask, if they ask not as well as they ought
as what they ought.' And yet most true it is, that where
more or fewer are gathered together in the name of Christ,
there is He in the midst of them — but to assist and to grant
whatsoever He shall find fit for them, not infallibly whatso-
ever they shall think fit to ask for themselves; and there-
fore S. Cyprian, though he use this very argument, a minori
ad majus, " from the less to the greater," yet he presumes
not to extend it as Bellarmine doth, to the obtaining of in-
fallibility ; but only useth it in the general way, in which

' Quomodo igitur a Patre cuncta talium, tamen ad omnem effectum

non consequentur ? Quia multae sunt adest, aut ad hunc qui est judicare

caus£e non impetrandi, &c. [UiUs ovu de fide.— Stapleton. llelect. Controv.

oil ■travTa iniTvyxai^ovcTw ; on ttoWoI [Controv.] vi. Q[uoest.] iii. A[rtic.] 4.

al ahiat roO dtroTvyxdvuv ?; yctp [ubi sup. p.260. note".]— [Nos veroper

davfj.(popa TToWaKis airodai. Kal ri inductionem ex contrario concludi-

euvud^iis el iTfpoL TiPis, uTTovye koI mus : si singuli, ergo et omnes simul

UavXos TovTo eiraeej/, r)vlKa ^Kovaev, errare possunt, quamvis in nomine

apKdaoiT) x^pi-s l>-ov.'\ — S. Chi-j'sostom. Domini congregati et uno ore do-

Horn. [Ix. al. Ixi.] in Matth. xviii. centes. At dixit Deus se fore in

[20. Op., torn. vii. p. 608. D.] — Et medio eorum. Certe dixit, et est in

Bellarminus ipse, [his verbis : sc.] medio ipsorum ut Deus : etiam in

Si congregari in nomine Christi sit medio errantium, ne aberrent ad

nota Ecclesia?, [certe] non erit con- mortem :] sed nee illi semper ad

gregari quomodocunque [in nomine Deum respiciunt, qui in medio

Christi :] sic enim omnes hrereses ipsorum est: nee Deus sic adest iis

et schismata congregantur in nomine qui respiciunt ad Ipsum, ut omnem

Christi. Sed [erit congregari ab illis, veritatem doceat in instanti et omni

qui funguntur Christi auctoritate, tempore simul : [omnem veritatem

quales sunt episcopi legitime or- docet, nos vero successive capimus. —

dinati, &c. — Bellarmin.] de notis Fr."l Junius in Bellarmin. [Controv.

ecclesife, lib. iv. cap. 2. § [16. Op., iv.] de Concil. [et Eccles.] lib. ii.

tom. ii. col. 164. D.] in cap. 2. [Op., tom. ii. col. 1070.

' Nee etsi Christus adsit in medio ed. Genevae, 1613.]

Acts XV. 28. alleged for Infallibility of General Councils. 263

there neither is nor can be doubt of the truth of it. Thus : Section
" If two that are of one mind to Godward can do so much, •^-^-^^"'

what might be done if there were unanimity among all
Christians?"'' Undoubtedly more, but not all whatsoever
they should ask, unless all other requisites were present.
Thirdly : In this their own great champions'' disagree from
Bellarmine, or he from them. For Gregory de Valentia and
Stapleton tell us, "That this place doth not belong pro-
perly to prove an infallible certainty of any sentence in
which more agree in the name of Christ, but to the efficacy
of consent for obtaining that which more shall pray for in
the name of Christ, if at least that be for their souls' health :
For else you may prove out of this place, that not only the
definition of a General Council, but even of a provincial —nay,
of two or three bishops gathered together, — is valid, and that
without the pope's assent."

7. — The last place mentioned for the infallibility of Actsxv.28.
General Councils is that, where the Apostles say of them-
selves and the council held by them, " It seems good to the
Holy Ghost and to us." And they might well say it ; for
they had infallibly the assistance of the Holy Ghost, and
they kept close to His direction. But I do not find that any
General Council since, though they did implore, as they
ought, the assistance of that Blessed Spirit, did ever take
upon them to say, in terminis, " in express terms," of their
definitions. Visum est Sphntui Sancto et nobis, " It seemed
good to the Holy Ghost and to us ;" — acknowledging even
thereby, as I conceive, a great deal of difference in the cer-
tainty of those things which a General Council at after
determined in the Church, and those which were settled by
the Apostles when they sat in council. But though I do not

" Si duo unanimes tantum possunt; loco probabitur, &c. — Greg, de Valen.

quid, si unanimitas apud omnes essef? torn. ii. in Thorn. Disput. i. Q[u:Bst.] i.

— S. Cypr. lib. iv. Epist. iv. [de unitate Punct. vii. § 45. [ubi sup. p. 260.

ecclesias, ubi sup. p. 261. note ^] note ".] And although Stapleton

^ Non ad infallibilem certitudinem approves this argument a minori ad

alicujus sententise, in quam plures rtiajus, yet withal he says: Firmitas

in nomine Christi consentiant, locus conciliorum illis Christi verbis proprie

hie Evangelii proprie accommodari non innititur: quia nee Christus ill

debet, sed ad efficaciam consensionis de conciliis episcoporum loquitur, sed

plurium ad id impetrandum, quod de quavis fidelium unanimi congrega-

unanimiter in Christi nomine petunt, tione. ]Srecetsi,&c.— Stapleton. Kelect.

si id quidem ad eorum salutem ex- Controv. [Controv.] vi. Q[u8cst.] iii.

pediat. Secus enim non modo ex illo A[rt.] 4. [ubi sup. p. 260. note °.]

2G4. Because Apostles were guided infallibly by H. G. it does not follow

WITH

Fisher

Conference find, that they used this speech punctually, and " in terms/'
yet the fathers, when they met in council, were confident,
and spake it out, that they had assistance from the Holy
Ghost ; yet so, as that they neither took themselves, nor
the councils they sat in, as infallibly guided by the Holy
Ghost, as the Apostles were. And Yalentia is very right :
" That though the council say they are gathered together in
the Holy Ghost, yet the fathers are neither arrogant in using
the speech, nor yet infallible, for all that."y And this is
true, whether the pope approve or disapprove their defini-
tions ; though Valentia will not admit that : the pope must
be, with him, infallible, whatever come of it. Now though
this be but an example, and include no precept, yet both
Stapleton'^ and Bellarmine'* make this place a proper proof
of the infallibility of General Councils ; and Staplcton'* says
the decrees of councils are " the very oracles of the Holy
Ghost,'' which is little short of blasphemy ; and Bellarmine

y Quintum argumentum : [Concilii
patres asserunt se in Spiritu Sancto
legitime congregari : itemque sta-
tuunt sub anathemate, &c. At nisi
infallibiliter per se definiunt, arro-
ganter id quidem ab illis vel dici vel
fieri videri posset.] Aiit sunt igitur
arrogantes, quod putandum non est,
aut infallibiliter [profecto] definiunt.
[Eespondeo : In Spiritu Sancto le-
gitime congregare concilium non
aliud est, quam omnino placcrc Deo, ut
ex prgescripto pontificis conveniant
patres ad decemendum, eisque proinde
Spiritum Sanctum assistere, ut per
pontificem postea vel confirmantem
vel emendantem eorum decreta, in-
fallibiliter de veritate doceantur.
Quod vero statuunt sub anathemate,
faciunt quidem hoc illi, ut quantum
est in se, astringant hac ratione magis
obligationem earn, quam sperant per
pontificis futuram confirmationem,
robur habituram. Et vero Concilia
olim nisi prius accepisscnt sedis
apostolicao decrctum, controversias
fidei non dcfinicbant, ut ostendit
Turrecremata (Summ. do Eccl. cap.
xxxiii.) Quod ipsum magno argu-
mento est, verissimum id esse quod
docemus, Concilii universalis decreta
ante pontificis confirmationem non
habere certitudinem infallibilcm. —
Gregor. de] Valentia [sic] respondet
concedendo neutnim : [Commentar.

Theolog.] in [Secund. Secund.] S.
Thom. [Aquin.] tom. iii. Di.sp. i. [de
fide,] Q[ua3st.] 1. [de objecto fidei,]
Punct. vii. § 45. [col. 321. D.]

^ Ad tertium [dicendum, quod fir-
mitas Conciliorum illis Christi verbis
proprie non innititur . . . sed potius]
exemplo primi concilii apostolici
eorum firmitas nititur, [vel aliis
Christi in Evangelio promissionibus
apostolis suis proprie factis.] — Staple-
ton. Relect. Controv. [Controv.] vi.
&c. Q[ua3st.] iii. A[rtic.] 4. [Respons.]
ad 3. [Op., tom. i. pp. 821, 822. ubi
sup. p. 260. note ".]

" Et Bellarminus dicit locum hunc
esse tertium e propriis. [His words
arc :] Tertius locus [est Act. xv. ubi
primiim concilium confidenter ait :
A'isum e.st Spiritui Sancto et nobis.
Si autem illud concilium, ex quo
formam acceperunt omnia alia con-
cilia, asserit decreta sua esse decreta
Spiritus Sancti, certe idem asserere
possunt csetera legitima concilia, &c.
— Bellarmin.] de Concil. [auctoritat.]
lib. ii. cap. 2. § [7. Oj)., tom. ii.
col. 55. A.]

'' [Sed contra est quod in prime
concilio apostolico dicitur: Act. xv.
A'isum est Spiritui Sancto et nobis.
Ergo] conciliorum decreta sunt Spiri-
tus Sancti oracula. — Staplcton. ibid.
Sentent. Orthodox, i. [ut sup. p. 820.
B.]

that the Councils are — especially those ivhich do not imitate them. 265

adds, that because " all other councils borrowed their form Section

XXXIII
from this, therefore other lawful councils may affirm also 1 :

that their decrees are the decrees of the Holy Ghost ;" "^
little considering therewhile, that it is one thing to borrow
the form, and another thing to borrow the certainty and the
infallibility, of a council. For suppose that after-councils
did follow the form of that first council exactly in all circum-
stances, yet I hope no advised man will say there is the like
infallibility in other councils, where no man sat that was in-
spired, as was in this, where all that sat as judges were
inspired ; or if any Jesuit will be so bold as to say it, he had
need bring very good proof for it, and far better than any is
brought yet. Now that all councils are not so infallible as
was this of the Apostles, nor the causes handled in them as
there they were, is manifest by one of their own, who tells
us plainly, " That the Apostles in their council dealt very
prudently; did not precipitate their judgment, but weighed
all things ; for in matters of faith, and which touch the
conscience, it is not enough to say Volumus et mandamus, ' We
will and command.' And thus the Apostles met together in
simplicity and singleness, seeking nothing but God and the
salvation of men. And what wonder if the Holy Ghost
were present in such a council ? Nos aliter : but ' we meet
otherwise,' in great pomp ; and seek ourselves, and promise
ourselves, that we may do anything ou.t of the plenitude of
our power. And how can the Holy Ghost allow of such
meetings ?"'* And if not ^^ allow " or approve the meetings,

■^ Si illud concilium, ex quo formam magna pompa, nosque ipsos quaeri-

acceperunt omnia alia concilia, asserit mus, atque nobis pollicemur nihil

decreta sua esse decretaSpiritusSancti, nobis non licere de plenitudine potes-

certe idem asserere possunt cajtera tatis. Et quomodo Spiritus Sanctus

legitima concilia, &c. — Bellarmin. ejusmodi conventus probare possit?—

ibid, [ut sup. note ^] Ferus in Act. xv. 7. [p. 180. ed. Colon.

•* Vide quam prudenter agunt, non 1567. — Joannis Feri Franciscani

praecipitant sententiam, sed singula ex- Opera omnia in Komano indice (Clem,

pendunt. In rebus enim fidei et quae VIII. an. 1595.) prohibita sunt, ex-

conscientiam tangunt, non satis est ceptis annotationibus et commen-

dicere Volumus, mcmdajnus. Vides tariis in Matth. et Joann. Evangelia,

igitur quomodo conveniunt Apostoli. etinJoannisEpist. 1. Romae recognitis

Simpliciter conveniunt, nihil nisi et impressis. Possevin. Apparat. Sacr.

Deum quaerunt, et aliorum salutem p. 875. (quoted by Thorold, T. C.

expetunt, [denique omnia prudenter Laud's Labyrinth, p. 254.) In a Por-

perpendunt.] Quid igitur mirum si tuguese Index Expurg. : sc. Index

in hoc concilio fuerit Spiritus Sane- auctorum damnata3 memoriae, Ulys-

tus^ [Juxta promissum Domini, ubi sipp. 1624. p. 782. the Commentary

duo vel tres congregati fueriut, &c.] on the Acts is expurgated. In the

Nos aliter convenimus, nempe, cum Index of Madrid, 1640. Index Libb.

26G All agree that the Church in genen'ol cannot err from

Conference then certainly not concur to make every thing infallible
Fisher. *^^* shall be concluded in them.

8. — And for all the places together, weigh them with
indifferency, and either they speak of the Church, including
the Apostles, as all of them do — and then, all grant the
voice of the Church is God's voice, divine and infallible ; —
or else they are general, unlimited, and appliable to private
assemblies as well as General Councils, which none grant to
^ be infallible but some mad enthusiasts ; — or else they are
limited, not simply into " all truth," but " all necessary to
salvation;" in which I shall easily grant a General Council
cannot err, suffering itself to be led by this Spirit of truth
in the Scripture, and not taking upon it to lead both the
Scripture and the Spirit. For, suppose these places, or any
other, did promise assistance, even to infallibility, yet they
granted it not to every General Council, but to the Catholic
body of the Church itself; and if it be in the whole Church
principally, then is it in a General Council but by conse-
quent, as the council represents the whole. And that which
belongs to a thing by consequent, doth not otherwise nor
longer belong unto it than it consents and cleaves to that
upon which it is a consequent. And therefore a General
Council hath not this assistance, but as it keeps to the whole
Church and spouse of Christ, whose it is to hear His word,
and determine by it. And therefore if a General Council
will go out of the Churches way, it may easily go without
the Church's truth.

Consid. IV. 1. — Fourthly, I consider, that all agree. That the Church in
general can never err from the faith necessary to salvation ;

Matt. xvi. no persecution, no temptation, no "gates of hell," whatsoever
is meant by them, can ever so " prevail against it." For all
the members of the militant Church cannot err, either in
the whole faith, or in any article of it ; it is impossible.
For if all might so err, there could be no union between
them as members, and Christ the head ; and no union
between head and members, no body; and so no Church;

prohib. et cxpurg. de concilio sii- S. John's Gospels, — S. John 1 Epist. —

prcmae Senat. S. General. Inquisit. and S. Paul to the Romans : C^etera

Joannes Ferus, fraude sectariorum ejus opera, sectariis vitiata, prohib.

vitiatus (p. 70C.) is expurgated in the donee recognoscantur, (p. 712.) The

Commentaries on S. Matthew's and same in the Index of Madrid, 1667.]

necessary faith : not that a General Council cannot.. 267

which cannot be. But there is not the like consent, That Section

XXXTTT

General Councils cannot err.^ And it seems strange to me, " "
the fathers having to do with so many heretics, and so many
of them opposing Church authority, that in the condemna-
tion of those heretics, this proposition, even in terms, " A
General Council cannot err," should not be found in any
one of them, that I can yet see. Now suppose it were true,
that no General Council had erred in any matter of moment
to this day — which will not be found true — yet this would
not have followed. That it is therefore infallible, and
cannot err. I have no time to descend into particulars ;
therefore to the general, still. S. Augustine^ puts a dif-
ference between the rules of Scripture, and the definitions
of men. This difference is, Praponitur Scriptura, " That
the Scriptiu^e hath the prerogative." That prerogative is,
" That whatsoever is found written in Scripture, may neither
be doubted nor disputed whether it be true or right. But
the letters of bishops may not only be disputed, but cor-
rected, by bishops that are more learned and wise than they,
or by National Councils ; and National Councils, by Plenary
or General; and even Plenary Councils themselves may be
amended, the former by the latter." s It seems it was no

^ [Hsec est ecclesia sytnbolica,] stiterit ; episcoporum autem literas

ecclesia [Christi inquam] catholica qute post confirmatum canonem vel

[et apostolica, mater credentium popn- scriptae sunt vel scribuntur, et per

lor\im, qu£e] fidem habet indefectibi- sermonem forte sapientiorem cujus-

lem, [secundum promissum Christi, libet in ea re peritioris, et per aliorum

&c.] . . . Nee utique particularis ilia episcoporum graviorem auctoritatem

Romana, sed] universalis ecclesia, non doctioremque prudentiam, et per

quidem in generali synodo congregata, concilia licere reprehendi, si quid in eis

quam aliquoties errasse percepimus, forte a veritate deviatum est : et ipsa

&c. — [Thorn.] Waldens. Doctrinal. concilia quae per singulas regiones vel

Fidei, [torn, i.] lib. ii. Artie, ii. provincias fiunt, plenariorum concilio-

cap. xix. § 1., Et § 38. No. 4. [fol. xcix. rum auctoritati quae fiunt ex universo

&c. ubi sup. p. 250. note "^.j orbe Christiano, sine ullis ambagibus

' [Vos certe nobis objicere soletis cedere : ipsaque plenaria saepe priora

Cypriani literas, Cypriani sententiam, posterioribus emendari ; cum aliquo

Cypriani concilium : cur auctoritatem experimento rerum aperitur quod

Cypriani pro vestro schismate assumi- clausum erat, et cognoscitur quod

tis, et ejus exemplum pro ecclesise latebat; sine ullo typho' sacrilegse

pace respuitis 1 Quis autem nesciat superbice, sine ulla inflata cervice

sanctam Scripturam canonicam, tam arrogantiae, sine ulla contentione

veteris quam novi Testamenti, certis lividEeinvidiae, cum sanctahumilitate,

suis terminis contineri, eamque omni- cum pace catholica, cum caritate

bus posterioribus episcoporum Uteris Christiana f\ — S. Augustin. de Bap-

ita praeponi, ut de ilia omnino tismo contra Donatist. lib. ii. cap. 3.

dubitari et disceptari non possit, [Op., torn. ix. col. 98. A.]

utrum verum vel utnim rectum sit, s ipsaque plenaria saepe priora a pos-

quidquid in ea scriptum esse con- terioribus emendari. — [ut sup. note f.]

2G8 Attempts to explain awaij a remarkable passage of S. Augustine.

Conference news witli S. Augustine, that a General Council might err;
FisuER. ^^^ therefore inferior to the Scripture, which may neither
be doubted nor disputed where it affirms. And if it be so
with the " definition " of a council too, as Staplcton '' would
have it, that that may neither be doubted nor disputed,
where is then the Scripture's prerogative ?

2. — I know there is much shifting about this place, but
it cannot be wrastled off. Staplcton says first, " That
S. Augustine speaks of the rules of manners and disci-
pline.'' ^ And this is Bellarmine's last shift. Both are out,
and Bellarmine in a contradiction. Bellarmine in a contra-
diction ; for first he tells us, " General Councils cannot err
in precepts of manners;"^ and then, to turn off S. Augus-
tine in this place, he tells us, " That if S. Augustine doth
not speak of matter of fact, but of right, and of universal
questions of right, then he is to be understood ^ of precepts
of manners, not of points of faith : " where he hath first
run himself upon a contradiction ; and then we have gained
this ground upon him. That either his answer is nothing;
or else, against his own state of the question, " A General
Council can err in precepts of manners." So, behke, when
Bellarmine is at a shift, a General Council can, and cannot,
err in precepts of manners. And both are out; for the
whole dispute of S. Augustine is against the error of
S. Cyprian, followed by the Donatists, which was an error
in faith — namely : "" That true baptism could not be given

i" Est [autem] ecclesiae [testificantis A[rtic.] 4. [Eespons.] ad 1. [Op.,

et docentis] vox [sic ab omnibus torn. i. p. 821. C]

fidelibiis audienda,] ut non de ca ^ [Catholici vero omnes constanter

judicemus rectcne an secns docuerit, decent, Concilia generalia a summo

[sod satis nobis sit quod ecclesia hoc pontifice confirmata, errare non posse,

vel illud docuerit.] — So Stapleton, nee in fide cxplicanda, nee in traden-

Eelect. Controv. [Controv.] iv. [de dis morum prfeccptis toti ecclesite

potestate ecclesijs in se,] Q[u0est.] i. communibus.— Bellarmin.] de Concil.

A[rtic.] 1. [Eespons. ad 7. Op., [auctoritat.J lib. ii. cap. 2. in init.

torn. i. p. 731. B.] [§. i. Op., torn. ii. col. 53. D.]

' Ad pnmum [ergo dicendum, quod i Potest etiam [tertio dici, si con-

Augustinus loquitur] de regulis mo- tendant adversarii eum loqui de

rum ac disciplinse, [quas ad fectum universalibus quajstionibus, Concilia

pertinent, &c Sed si etiam de priora emcndari per posteriora, quoad

causa fidei loquatur .... sensus est prtecepta morum, non quoad dogmata

quod posteriora concilia emcndant, id fidei ; prajcepta enim mutantur juxta

est, perfectius explicant fidem in temporum, locorum, et personarum

seraine antiquaj doctrinal latentem, mutationes, &c.— Bellarmin.] ibid,

quam priora, cS^c.]— Stapleton. Eelect. cap. 7. [§ 8. Op., torn. ii. col. 62. B.]
Controv. [Controv.] vi. Q[ua3st.] iii.

He plainly meant that a Plenary Council might err. 269

bv heretics, and such as were out of the Chui'ch/' And the Section
proof which Stapleton and Bellarmine draw out of the ±11 1

subsequent words^ ''When by any experiment of things,
that which was shut is opened/'™ is too weak. For experi-
ment there is not, of fact ; nor are the words, Conclusum est,
as if it were of a rule of discipline concluded, as Stapleton
cites them, but a farther experiment or proof of the
question in hand, and pertaining to faith, which was then
shut up, and, as S. Augustine after speaks, "wrapped up in
cloudy darkness." '^

3. —Next, Stapleton will have it, That if S. Augustine
do speak of a cause of faith, then his meaning is, that later
General Councils can mend, that is, " explicate more per-
fectly, that faith which lay hid in the seed of ancient doc-
trine." ° He makes instance, That about the divinity of
Christ, the council of Ephesus explicated the first of Nice ;
Chalcedon, both of them ; Constance,' Chalcedon. And \[Constaii-
then concludes : " In all which things, none of" (these) E^ut.
" councils taught that which was erroneous." p An excellent Iggg'-.^'^'^
conclusion ! These councils, and these in this thing, taught
no error, and were only explained ; Therefore no council can
err in any matter of fa