CHAP. I. Wherein is laid down the Design of this Treatise ; and some things are premised for the better understanding of the whole .

IT is acknowledged by all , that the perfection of that Faith , which the Schoolmen call Inform , we Historical , consists in three things , that it be plenary , pure , and firm ; that is , that it believeth all which God hath revealed ; and that without any mixture of errour , or admittance of doubt . That the Faith of Papists is neither plenary nor pure many have demonstrated : That it is not firm or unshaken I here undertake to prove ; and to shew , that admitting their Hypotheses , a Papist cannot with a certain and firm Faith be perswaded of the truth of any thing ; not only not of those Articles , which Rome hath added to the Divine Revelation , but not even of those , which were truly revealed by God.

For since Objects of Faith are inevident of themselves , and deserve assent no otherwise , then as it shall appear that they have been revealed by God ; and Revelation it self not a whit more evident : there is necessarily required one or more Rules , whereby things Revealed may be distinguished from not Revealed . We have only one such Rule , the Holy Scriptures : The Papists many , that so what they want in goodness , they may make up in number . For to Scripture they have added Tradition , Decrees of Popes , Constitutions of Councils and consent of Pastors , not only those who have successively ruled the Church from the first foundation of it , but of those also who govern at any determinate time ; and lastly the belief of the whole Church .

Now that by the means of any Rule our Faith may become firm , two things are necessary : First that the Rule it self be true , containing nothing false or not revealed : And then Secondly , that what we believe manifestly agree with this Rule . If either of these conditions fail ; our Faith must be uncertain . Nor is it only requisite , that a Papist be ascertained both of the truth of the Rules of his Faith , and the conformity of what be believe unto them : But also that he be as firmly perswaded of the truth of these things , as he is of the truth of any Article of his Faith. For since the Faith of Papists depends wholly upon these Rules , and is sustained only by them : How can it be , that the perswasion of the truth of those things , which they believe meerly for the sake of these Rules , should be more firm , than the perswasion of the truth of the Rules themselves , or of the conformity of what they believe unto those Rules ? It being impossible , that an Effect should have more in it , than the Cause can give it : A Conclusion stronger than the Premises ; or a House firmer than the Foundations . Nor do our Adversaries deny this . Holden 1 1 Quamcunque enim certitudinem attribuere possumus assensui intellectûs propter authoritatem Dei revelantis elicito , eam necesse est provenire ac dependere à certitudine medii , quo haec Dei revelantis authoritas intellectui communicatur . — Impossibile est , ut majori certitudine verâ & rationali credat aliquis ea quae dicuntur à Deo revelari , quàm quâ cognoverit Deum eâ revelasse . Holden . Anal. Fid. lib. 1. cap. 2. affirms , that whatsoever certainty we can attribute to an assent of the understanding given for the sake of the authority of God revealing : The same must necessarily be derived from , and depend upon the certainty of the means , whereby the authority of God revealing is communicated to the understanding : And that it is impossible , that any one should believe those things which are said to be revealed by God with a greater degree of true and rational certainty , than wherewith he is assured , that God did reveal them . Aegidius Estrix 2 2 Est . Diat . de Sapientiâ Dei , &c. Assert . 26 , 27 , 28. layeth down and proveth these three Assertions . 1. That an Assent of Faith cannot be more certain than the Principles upon which it depends . 2. That it cannot be more firm than those previous Assents from which it is deduced . 3. That that which is otherwise , is an imprudent assent . And John Martinonus 3 3 Non potest fides supernaturalis superare formali certitudine sumptâ ex merito objecti certitudinem carum veritatum , quae includuntur in ipsius objecto , & in quibus fundatur illa certitudo . Mart. Tom. 5. disp. 20. de Fide Sect. 8. to the same purpose writeth , That supernatural Faith cannot with a formal certainty taken from the merit of the object exceed the certainty of those truths , which are included in its object , and in which that certainty is founded .

Since therefore the perswasion which Papists have of what they believe , either is , or is thought to be , Divine Faith : It hence appears that it cannot be solid , unless they be assured by Divine Faith , or some other not inferior perswasion , that both the Rules of their Faith are true , and that what they believe is entirely conformable to them . This our Adversaries confess : And because some of them hold , that no perswasion is of equal certainty with Divine Faith ; therefore it is necessary , that by Divine Faith they be ascertained of those two things , or at least the first of them . So Ludovicus Caspensis 4 4 Nisi fide divinâ credamus ejusmodi Pontifices esse successores Petri ; nihil est quod possimus fide divinâ credere . Lud. Cisp . de fide , disp. 2. Sect. 6. Unless we can believe , saith he , by Divine Faith that such and such Popes are Successors of Peter ; there is nothing we can believe by Divine Faith. Martinonus 5 5 Neque summus Pontifex posset nos obligare ad credendum de fide , id quod definit ut dictum à Deo : nisi de fide esset ipsum habere potestatem definiendi & infallibilem assistentiam . Mart. de fide disp. 9. Sect. 6. affirms that the Pope could not oblige us to believe de fide , that which he defineth as said by God ; unless it were de fide , that he hath the Power of defining , and infallible assistance . Maimburgh 6 6 Maimb . de la uraye parole , Chap. 3. hath much to the same sence which would be here too long to insert .

If the opinion of these Divines were received by all , the Dispute would be the shorter . For then I need only prove , that none of our Adversaries is by Divine Faith assured of the certainty of the foundations of his Faith : Since all other kind of assurance , being inferior to that of Divine Faith , would not suffice . But because this Hypothesis , although admitted by most , is denied by some few ; and labours with insuperable difficulties , which I will not here touch . I will not have the force of my argument rely upon it . It remains therefore to be inquired , whether our Adversaries can boast of any certainty in this matter distinct from , and as they think , not inferior to the certainty of Divine Faith. But first we must lay down somewhat concerning the kinds and degrees of certainty . Bellarmine 7 7 De Justif . lib. 3. cap. 2. makes a two fold certainty , Evident , and Obscure ; that of things in themselves manifest , this of things that depend upon external proofs and testimonies . To the first kind he assigneth three degrees : whereof first Principles constitute the first ; Conclusions evidently drawn from these , the second ; and things perceived by sense the third : That is certainty of the Intellect , of Science , and of Experience . To Obscure Certainty he giveth as many degrees . The first is of those things which are believed for Divine Authority : The second of those believed upon the account of humane authority , but that so illustrious , that it leaveth no place for doubt ; the third of those things which are confirmed by such and so many arguments , as may exclude anxiety , but not distrust : Or certainty of Divine Faith , which is absolute , certainty of Humane Faith , which is Moral , and certainty of opinion , which is conjectural . Thus far Bellarmine , whose distribution of the kinds of Certainty might be allowed : if the raising a conjectural opinion , even to the lowest degree of it , were not too improper and irrational . But to pass by that , this rather deserveth notice , that he hath made no mention of that kind of certainty , which is so famous in the Schools , as neither wholly evident , nor wholly obscure , but mixt of both . Such have Theological Conclusions ; which are deduced from two propositions , the one evident , the other revealed .

It need not much be inquired ; whether our Adversaries have this last certainty of the firmness of the foundations of their Faith. For it is either of the same kind with the certainty of Faith , or of a diverse . If of the same , as some will , then to prove , that our Adversaries have not herein the certainty of Divine Faith , will disprove this . If of a diverse , as most think , then it is inferior to the other , and less firm ; and consequently not sufficient . Besides such who think , that these Theological Conclusions founded upon a mixt certainty , are de fide , as Alphonsus a Castro , and Melchior Canus , must acknowledg that their opinion , oppugned by so many and so great Divines of the same party , cannot be certain . But an incertain opinion , though true in it self , cannot be the foundation of an undoubted certainty , such as is that of Divine Faith. Lastly whether this certainty be , or be not , inferior to that of Divine Faith ; it can have no place here but absurdly and preposterously . For all this certainty is derived from things revealed ; and cannot therefore add any to things revealed . Theological Conclusions are admitted only for the sake of those revealed Propositions , from which they are deduced . Those Propositions therefore cannot be admitted for the sake of these Conclusions , without a manifest and absurd Circle .

I do not remember , that any of our Adversaries have assigned a Conjectural Certainty to the perswasion which they have of the Truth of the Rules of their Faith. And surely such Certainty would be too mean and inconsiderable for this place : Belonging to Opinion rather than Faith , as Bellarmine well notes ; and not excluding distrust , which is absolutely destructive of Divine Faith.

A Moral Certainty is rarely made use of by our Adversaries in this case ; being such as take place only in matters of fact , and not all those neither , but only such as are perceived by the senses of other men , and those , so many and so clearly , as take away all suspicion either of fraud or errour . Whereas those parts of a Papists belief , which have most need of being backed by certainty ; and are subject to the greatest difficulties , are matters of right ; or at least such as fall not under the senses either of himself or others . There are some things indeed , which they would have to be manifest by this kind of certainty , such as the knowledg of a lawful Pope , or a Canonical Council , what the present Church teacheth , or to which Society belong the notes of a true Church , &c. We must consider therefore , whether in these cases this certainty be sufficient . It would suffice indeed , if the opinions of Bagotius or Huetius were admitted : Of whom the first equals , the second prefers Moral Certainty to Metaphysical , and even that which is acquired by demonstration . But few approve these excesses : Many on the contrary depress this certainty too low . However all agree , that it is inferior to that of Divine Faith. For which reason alone I might reject it , but shall notwithstanding be content only then to do it , when it is falsly pretended .

As for an evident certainty our Adversaries , neither do , nor can glory in it . For if the foundations of Faith had that : No previous motion of the will by the Divine influence , no supernatural assistance of grace would be necessary ; which yet all require ; and none but fools and stupid persons could be disbelievers . Besides , that those things which are of positive right , and depend upon the free Will of God , cannot be taught by nature , but must be known only by Divine Revelation . But herein our Adversaries consent to us , as we shall see hereafter , and presume not to boast of evidence in the Objects of their Belief .

There remains therefore only the certainty of Divine Faith , which they can pretend to . Wherefore I shall chiefly consider that ; not neglecting yet the rest , whensoever it can be imagined that they may be made use of by our Adversaries : omitting only the certainty of Theological Conclusions , and that for the reasons beforementioned . I shall now examine all the Foundations of Faith which our Adversaries are wont to produce ; beginning at the Holy Scriptures .

CHAP. II. That the Faith of Papists is not founded on Holy Scripture .

THAT the Scripture is most certain in it self , and most fit to ground our Faith upon is our constant belief and profession . But this cannot suffice our Adversaries , unless they recede from their known Principles . The Scripture may be considered and used for the establishing of our Faith two ways : First as it is in it self , and its own nature : and Secondly as it is confirmed , illustrated , and assisted by the help of Tradition , and the authority of the Church . That Scripture , the first way considered is not a fit foundation of our Faith , our Adversaries not only freely confess but sharply contend : maintaining that , laying aside Tradition and the Church , we cannot be assured either that Scripture is the Word of God , or consists of such Books and Chapters , or that they are delivered incorrupted to us , or faithfully translated ; or that this , or that is the sense of such a place . Of these opinions and arguments their Authors are agreed , their Books are full : that should I recite but the names , much more the testimonies of the maintainers of them ; I should become voluminous .

To this may be opposed , that this is only the opinion of the School Divines and Controversial Writers : that there are many in the Church of Rome , who believe the authority of the Scripture independent from the judgment of the Church , and dextrously use that method of arguing against Atheists ; as H●etius in his Books of Evangelical Demonstration , and the Anonymous Author of the Dissertation concerning the arguments , wherewith the truth of Moses his Writings may be demonstrated : that such as these may have a true and firm belief of those things which Scripture plainly teacheth ; which are all , that are necessary to be believed .

Whilest I congratulate to the Church of Rome these more sober Prosylites , and wish that by a general concurrence therein they would refute my Dissertation : I observe , first , that there are very few among them of this opinion . Secondly that it doth not appear , that even these few are perswaded that their arguments suffice to found a Divine Faith upon the Scriptures demonstrated by them . The Licensers and Approvers of the aforementioned Dissertation seemed to be afraid of this ; while they manifestly distinguish a perswasion arising from those arguments , from true Faith. Lastly that it doth not appear , whether they think that they can without the authority of the Church be obliged to believe , either which are Canonical Books , or what is the sense of those Books . So that until they declare their mind herein , they are not by us to be disjoined from , much less opposed to the rest .

I may therefore take it for granted , that according to our Adversaries the Faith of private men cannot relie upon the Scripture destitute of the assistance of Tradition : since it is what themselves most of all contend for . Now for what concerneth Scripture considered the latter way , as it is fortified by the accedaneous help of Church and Tradition ; I might perhaps omit the handling of it here ; forasmuch as neither Church nor Tradition can confer a greater degree of firmness upon Scripture ; which that they have not themselves , I shall in the proceeding of this Discourse more opportunely shew hereafter . However because some few things occur not improper for this place ; I shall very briefly speak of them .

First then how little help there is for Scripture in Tradition , appeareth hence ; that it can no otherwise teach what is the true sense of Scripture , but by the unanimous consent of the Fathers : which whether it be to be had in any one text of Scripture , may be much doubted . It was a hard condition therefore , 1 1 Nec eam unquam nisi juata unanimem consensum patrum accipiam & interpretabor . which Pope Pius IV. prescribed , in his Profession of Faith , to all which desired admission into the Church of Rome , and which may for ever silence all the Roman Commentators : that they will never receive nor interpret Scripture any otherwise , than according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers . Now I would fain know , how this Law can be observed : since I may confidently affirm , that there is no one place of Scripture explained the same way by all the Fathers . For there are many places , which none of them have touched ; and none , which all have interpreted . Nor will it suffice to say , that they agree , who have interpreted it , and that the silence of the rest is to be taken for consent : as if they must be supposed to consent , who were ignorant of such interpretations , or dead perhaps before they were made , or as if the Antients were wont expresly to reject all interpretations different from their own ; or these might not be rejected , or at least others proposed , in those Books of the Fathers , which are lost . It is not enough therefore to have the consent of a few ; unless we be assured of the concurrence of the rest . But granting that it is , it cannot be denied , that our Adversaries can collect nothing certain out of any place of Scripture , if any one of the Antients have interpreted it otherwise . Hence Alphonsus a Castro 2 2 — Itaapertum & indubitatum , ut nullus ex sacris & probatis Doctoribus illud in aliquo alio sensu interpretetur , juxta quem non possit talis propositio per illud de haeresi convinci . Castr . de justâ haeret . pun . lib. 1. cap. 4. requireth , that among the necessary qualifications of a Text of Scripture to be produced for the conviction of Hereticks , this be the chief ; that it be so plain and undoubted , that none of the sacred and approved Doctors interpret it in some other sence , according to which such a proposition cannot be thereby convinced of Heresie . But if this be true ; how few places will there be , of whose sense we may not doubt ? Certainly there are very few explained the same way by all antient Commentators . This Christopher Gillius 3 3 Multa sunt in sacris literis , quorum sententia neque ex Traditione , neque ex Ecclesiae definitione habetur . — neque semper communis ( Sanctorum ) sententia reperitur ; vel quia diversa sentiunt , vel quia pauci locum aliquem interpretati sunt . Gill. de doctr. sacrâ lib. 1. Tract. 7. cap. 6. Professor of Conimbria , acknowledgeth , who affirms many places to be in Scripture , whose sense can be had neither from Tradition , nor from the Definition of the Church ? neither yet can a concurrent explication of the Fathers be found , either because they were of different opinions , or because few explained the place . And the Anonymous Writer of the Treatise of the Liberties of the Gallican Church 4 4 Pauca sunt ( Scripturae loca ) que S S. Patres varii variè interpretati non fuerint . lib. 3. cap. 11. maintains , that there is few places of Scripture , which the Holy Fathers have not differently interpreted . As will also manifestly appear to any one , who shall consult those Interpreters , that are wont to produce the expositions of the Antient Writers .

Hence the Readers may imagine , to what a streight our Adversaries would be reduced ; if they were tied up to their own Laws , and allowed to urge no other places of Scripture against us , than what are unanimously interpreted by the Fathers . A Specimen hereof may be found in Launoy , where he weigheth the Texts of Scripture produced by Bellarmine for the Popes authority ; and shewing that they are diversly explained by the Antients , concludeth thence , that they are wholly ineffectual .

That the sense of Scripture cannot be learned from Tradition , hence appeareth : but neither is it taught any better by the Church . At least She hath not yet taught it . For how many Decrees of the Church is there about the true sense of Scriptures . Decrees I say : for not every simple explication or allegation of a Text is to be lookt upon as an authentick interpretation of it ; but only that which hath an Anathema affixed to the deniers of it , or dissenters from it . Of this kind I find but four or five in the Decrees of the Council of Trent , and in those of elder Councils none at all . For 1500 years the Church delivered not the sense of so much as one place : whence may be judged , both what a faithful Interpreter She is of the Holy Scriptures ! and how small an assistance we are to expect from her in obtaining the true sense of them .

CHAP. III. That Tradition is no better ground for the Papists Faith , than Holy Scriptures .

THUS have we taken from our Adversaries the first and chief foundation of Divine Faith. The Second will be as easily removed . I mean Tradition ; which may be considered two ways , as well as Scripture ; either as it is in it self , or as it is confirmed by the authority of the Church . That it hath no force the first way considered , Bellarmine 1 1 Scriptura , Traditiones , & omnia planè dogmata , nisi certissimi simus , quae sit vera Ecclesia , incerta prorsus erunt omnia . Bell. de Eccles. lib. 3. cap. 10. expresly acknowledgeth , affirming that till we certainly know what is the true Church , Scripture , Tradition , and all matters of belief are utterly uncertain . That Bellarmin is in the right herein , at least as to what concerns Tradition , is manifest by these two reasons .

First , that taking away the attestation of the Church , it cannot be known , that there is any Divine Traditions . For laying aside that , how shall we know , that there is any unwritten Word of God derived down to us ? From Tradition ? that cannot be , since we are now doubting , whether there be any Tradition . From Scripture ? That favours not Tradition : but if it did , it would avail nothing ; since as we shew in the foregoing Chapter , Scripture according to our Adversaries cannot obtain belief ; till it be it self confirmed by Tradition and the Church . Thus doth the truth of Tradition remain uncertain , unless it be sustained by the Churches authority . Gregory a Valentia 2 2 Sicut de authoritate ipsius Scripturae necesse per aliquam aliam certam authoritatem constare ; ita etiam de auctoritate Traditionis , si ea quoque revocetur in dubium . Val. Tom. 3. disp. 1. quaest. 1. punct. 7. § 12. well knew this , who puts Tradition into the same condition with Scripture ; neither being of authority when called in doubt , unless confirmed by some other certain authority .

Secondly , granting that it may be known , that there are Divine Traditions , it cannot yet without the authority of the Church be known , which they are : so many false , dubious and suspected Traditions being carried about ; each of which pretends to the same Character of Divine Authority . The testimonies of the Fathers will not help in this case : since even their judgment is dubious , and in many things it cannot easily be told , what was their opinion . Thus Valentia 3 3 Cum Traditio scriptis ferè Doctorum Orthod. in Ecclesiâ conservetur ; quaestiones ac dubia moveri possunt de sensu illius , sicut dubitatur saepe de sensu ac mente Doctorum . Ejusmodi autem quaestiones — per eandem ipsam Traditionem definiri satis non poterunt . Val. loc. cit . confesseth that Tradition being conserved in the Writings of the Orthodox Doctors is as dubious and uncertain , as the opinion of those Doctors is : and that the doubts raised concerning it cannot be defined by Tradition it self . In like manner George Rhodius 4 4 Neque scire potero Traditionem aliquam esse veram ; nisi vivens regula , id definierit . Rhod. de fide quaest. 2. Sect. 5. § 1. affirms that no Tradition can be known to be true ; unless some living Rule shall so define it . But that this matter , being of no small moment , may be the more manifest ; we may observe that our Adversaries require two things to make the testimony of the Fathers worthy to be relied on . First that they consent ; and secondly that they do not meerly propose what seems most true to themselves ; but testifie moreover that what they teach , was either delivered by Christ , or is of Faith , or , which is all one , the opposite of it , heresie . If either of these fail , then their testimony is not secure . The first condition is required by many and particularly by Alphonsus a Castro , 5 5 Quarta est omnium SS. Doctorum , qui de re illâ scripserunt , concors sententia Castr . de justâ haeret , pun . lib. 1. cap. 4. who enquiring out the ways , whereby a proposition may be convinced to be heretical ; in the fourth place assigns the unanimous consent of all the Fathers , who have written upon that argument . The latter condition is made necessary by many more . Driedo 6 6 Non quia Hieronymus , sic vel sic docei , non quia Augustinus , &c. Dried . de Eccles. Dogm . lib. 4. cap. 1. 6. tells us the authority of the Fathers is of no value any otherwise than as they demonstrate their opinion either from the Canonical Scriptures , or the belief of the universal Church since the Apostles times ; and that they do not always deliver their sense as matters of Faith : but by way of judgement , opinion , and probable reason . Stapleton 7 7 Non enim omnibus eorum dictis haec authoritas datur ; sed quatenus vel Ecclesiae publicam fidem referunt , vel ab Ecclesiâ Dei recepta & approbata sunt . Stapl de princip. doctr. lib 7. cap. 15. writeth that this authority is not allowed to all the sayings of the Fathers , but either as they relate the publick belief of the Church , or have been approved and received by the Church . Gillius 8 8 Testimonium , Patrum vel Doctorum Scholasticorum communiter asserentium ali p●id ad fidem vel Theologiam pertinens , simpliciter tamen , & non indicando esse dogma fidei , esse debet argumentum firmum Theologo , sed citra infallibilitatem fidei . Gill. de doctr. Sacrâ lib. 1. Tract. 7. cap. 13. lastly grants , that the testimony of Fathers and Doctors unanimously asserting somewhat pertaining to Faith and Divinity , if they simply assert it , and do with all tell us it is an Article of Faith , ought to be a firm Argument to a Divine , but without Infallibity of Faith.

Both conditions are required by Canus , 9 9 Can. Loc. Theol. lib. 3. cap. 4. and Bannes 10 10 Bann . in 2. quaest. 1. art. 10. Si quod dogma fidei Patres ab initio secundum suorum temporum successiones concordissimè tenuerunt , hujusque contrarium ut haereticum refutârunt , who laying down Rules , whereby true Traditions may be discerned from false ; both assign this in the second place and in the same words : If the Fathers have unanimously from the beginning , all along the Succession of their times , held any Article of Faith , and refuted the contrary as heretical , Bellarmine and Gretser 11 11 Bell. & Grets . de verbo Dei lib. 4. cap. 9. give this for their fourth Rule . When all the Doctors of the Church teach any thing by common consent to have descended from Apostolical Tradition , either gathered together in a Council , or each one a part in their Writings . Suarez 12 12 Licet Patres vel Scholastici in aliquâ sententiâ conveniant , non asserendo illam esse de fide , sed judicium suum in eâ proferendo , non faciens rem de fide ; quia semper manent intra mensuram authoritatis humanae . Suarez de fide disp. 2. Sect. 6. writeth , that although the Fathers and Schoolmen agree in any opinion not asserting it to be of Faith : But delivering their Judgment in it , they will not make it to be of Faith , because they remain always within the limits of humane authority . Filliutius 13 13 — quae unanimi consensu Patrum tanquam de fide proponuntur . Fill. in Decal . Tract. 22. cap. 1. reckoning up the seven degrees of things pertaining to Catholick verity , assigns the Sixth degree to those truths , which by the unanimous consent of the Fathers are proposed to be of Faith. Martinonus 14 14 Certum est nullum ex S S. Patribus vel Doctoribus seorsim sumptum esse Regulam Fidei , — jam de eorundem simul sumptorum consensu distinguendum . Vel enim loquuntur ex proprio sensu , non asserendo rem tanquam de fide , & judicium suum de eâ proferendo ; & sic non Regula Fidei . Mart. de fide disp. 8. Sect. 3. that none of the Holy Fathers or Doctors taken separately is the Rule of Faith ; nor all yet together conjunctly , unless they assert their common opinion to be of Faith , and not meerly propose their own judgment . Lastly Natalis Alexander 15 15 Cum omnes Patres in eandem sententiam conspirant , eamque propugnant , ac proponunt , ut Apostolicam doctrinam , & Ecclesiae dogma Catholi . eâ fide credendum : tunc eorum authoritas necessarium argumentum sacrae doctrinae subministrat . Alex. saecul . 2 p. 1022. affirms , that when all the Fathers conspire in the same opinion , defend it , and propose it as Apostolick Doctrine , and an Article of the Church to be believed by Catholick Faith : Then doth their authority afford a necessary argument of Sacred Doctrine

Thus far these Writers : And that the rest do not disagree from them we shall soon be perswaded ; if we consider , how unlikely it is , that a greater infallibility should be allowed even to an unanimous testimony of the Fathers ; than to Pope , or Council , or both together , or the present Universal Church : All which our Adversaries grant may erre in those things which they simply affirm or teach , and define not to be of Faith.

It sufficeth not therefore , either that many Fathers deliver an opinion as of Faith ; or that all should simply teach it , but not affirm it to be of Faith. Now if these two conditions be observed ; How few Articles of Christian Faith shall we receive from Tradition ? For the Fathers seldom all agree , and more rarely admonisheth us , that what they teach , is of Faith. So that if you take away all Articles , wherein either of these conditions is wanting ; it may well be doubted , whether any one will remain . Certainly if our Controversial Divines should so far make use of this observation , as to reject all testimonies of the Fathers produced by our Adversaries against us , with which themselves will not be obliged , that is , such as are deficient in either of the conditions before laid down : They would be reduced to silence , and not have one authority left to boast of .

From what hath been said , it appears that matters of Tradition and belief cannot be learned from the Fathers . Hence Aegidius Estrix 16 16 Est . Apol. Sect. 4. vehemently inveighs against Peter-Van Buscum a Divine of Gaunt ; who in his Instruction had remitted young Divines to the Fathers to learn the Christian Doctrine from them . 17 17 Nuet . adv. Claud. de Eucharist . in praefat. And Nuetus the Jesuite likens those Writers of Controversie , who passing by the Scripture betake themselves to the Fathers , to Thieves and Rogues , who deserting the Cities , flee into thick Woods , that they may more securely hide themselves .

If the Fathers therefore teach not Tradition ; there remains only the Church , whence it can be known . Whether the Church therefore hath that power , as to confer the desired Certainty upon what She pronounceth to be revealed and to be believed , is next to be inquired . Which , because our Adversaries here chiefly fasten their hold , easily giving up the former means of conveying Tradition ; shall be somewhat more accurately discussed .

CHAP. IV. That the Faith of Papists cannot be founded even upon the Definitive Judgment of the Church . First because it is neither evident , nor of Faith , that the Judgment of the Church is certain .

BY the name of Church , whereon our Adversaries would have the Faith of all men to be founded , they are wont to design two things . First that visible Congregation of men , which consists of Pope , Clergy , and Laicks ; all professing the same Faith. Secondly that part of this first Church , whose office it is to Rule the rest , and prescribe Laws of acting and believing to them : Whether this part be the Pope , or a Council . The former they call the Universal , the latter the Representative or the Regent Church . To both they ascribe infallibility , but in a different way ; to the first in believing , to the second in defining , or as they chuse to speak , in proposing . So that whatsoever the Universal Church believeth , or the Representative proposeth to be believed , must necessarily be true , and revealed by God ; and the denial of it , heresie . We shall examine each in order : But first of the Representative Church .

Our Adversaries believe to have been instituted by God a living and visible Authority , whose office it should be to define matters of belief and practice , infallibly determine emergent Controversies , and judge of Heresie . That whatsoever this power , which some call the Chair , others more accurately the Tribunal , defineth , proposeth , or judgeth ; may and ought to be received of all Christians as an Article of Faith : and that this is the ordinary and immediate foundation of the Faith of private Christians . Indeed in assigning this Tribunal , what and where it is , all do not agree . But that there is such an one , whatsoever it is , all do contend . Whether there be such an one , is a great question , and may justly take up another Discourse . But now we only consider , whether the judgment and definition of this Tribunal be such , as that whosoever relyeth upon it , can or ought to be certain , that he doth not err , and that what he believes , is true . For it is not enough that this Tribunal be infallible , unless its infallibity be also manifest . Since if it had such a priviledge , but either unknown or uncertain ; he indeed , that acquiesced in its definitions , would not err , but could never be certain , that he doth not err , and might reasonably doubt , whether he doth or no. I enquire therefore , whether our Adversaries can be certain that the Church in defining cannot err .

If the Papists have any certainty of the infallibility of the Church defining ; it must be either Moral , or evident , or that of Divine Faith : For the rest we have excluded before . But it can be none of these . Not Moral , for that depends upon the testimony of anothers senses : But the Infallibility of the Church cannot be perceived either by our own , or by anothers senses . Nor indeed is it here pretended to by our Adversaries : No more than Evident Certainty , which they expresly acknowledge they have not herein . So Andrew du Val 1 1 Non potest firmiter & infallibiliter sciri nisi ex Divinâ Revelatione , Du Val in 2. 2. pag. 16. tells us The Infallibility of the Church can be certainly known only by Divine Revelation . Arriaga 2 2 Non est veritas per se nota , Arr. de Fide Disp 3. Sect. 1. that it is not a Truth known by it self , or self evident . Conink 3 3 Solâ Fide ex Scripturae testimonio constat ; solos fideles dirigit . Con. de act . Cupern . Disp. 9. dub. 5. that it is known to us only by Faith from the testimony of the Scriptures , and serveth to direct only the Faithful . Ysambertus 4 4 Non potest sciri ab hominibus infallibiliter , nisi ex divinâ revelatione . Ysamb . de Fide Disp. 26. art. 2. that it cannot be known infallibly by men , otherwise than by Divine Revelation . Rhodius 5 5 Cognos●itur tantùm Fide divinâ . Rhod. de Fide quaest. 1. Sect 4. §. 4. that it is known only by Divine Faith. Lastly Antonius Arnaldus 6 6 Non est quid ex se evidens . Arn. Perpert . de la Foy , liv . 1. chap. 7. that it is not self evident .

The whole matter therefore comes to this , whether the Infallibility of the Church be of Faith. That it is our Adversaries , as we see , pretend ; that it is not , I prove many ways . First this seems to be the opinion of a man of great Name among them , Launoy , who every where oppugneth the Infallability of the Pope , and sheweth that the Infallibility of a Council appears to him not to be of Faith ; while he saith 7 7 Quamvis certum sit non errandi privilegium inesse Concilio ; longè tamen certius est apud Theologos Ecclesiae inesse . Laun. Epist . ad Vallant . Tom. 2. that although it be certain the priviledge of not erring is in a Council ; yet that it is far more certain among Divines that it is in the Church : Which he would never have said , if he had believed the Infallibility of a Council to be of Faith. For then it would be no less certain than the Infallibility of the Church .

Besides it is the common opinion of our Adversaries ; that nothing is of Faith , of which Disputes are raised in the bosom of the Church , She being conscious of them . Thus Holden 8 8 Certum est illud non esse Fidei divinae & Catholicae dogma , cujus oppositum a plurimis piissimis & doctissimis Catholicis viris publicè sustentari vidimus , sciente nimirum & jacente Ecclesiâ universâ . Hold. Anal. fid. lib. 1. cap. 9. affirms , that is not an Article of Divine and Catholick Faith ; whose opposite is publickly maintained by many pious and learned Catholicks , the Universal Church knowing of it , and winking at it . To the same purpose Canus 9 9 Sunius aut paucorum opinatio non fuerit ab Ecclesiâ rejecta , tum plurimorum authoritas — nihil certum firmumque conficiet . Can. loc. Theol. lib. 7. cap. 3. teacheth , that if the opinion of one or a few be not rejecsed by the Church ; then the ( contrary ) authority of many will produce nothing firm or certain . There is extant among the works of the Fratres Valemburgii a Treatise called the Rule of Faith , written formerly in French by Veron , and translated into Latine by the Valemburgii , and so openly adopted by them , that whatsoever Veron writ of himself in the singular , they translate in the plural . So that whatsoever is contained in it , may be lookt upon as the sense of all three Writers . Now the chief scope of this Book is to shew , that not a few opinions taught by many of their Doctors , and by us affixed to the whole Church of Rome , are not of Faith , but may be safely denied . To the obtaining of this end they make use chiefly of two means , the silence of the Council of Trent , and the testimonies of Doctors of a contrary opinion : and Section 15. 10 10 Variae sunt hâc de re Doctorum sententiae ; quod vel solum sufficit probando id non esse de fide Catholicâ . have these words , That the different judgement of the Doctors herein may aloné suffice to prove , that it is not of Faith. Upon this foundation proceed all those Divines ; who maintain that the Pope is infallible , or superiour to a Council . Thus the Valemburgii 11 11 Eâ solìen de causâ non affirmamus hanc propositionem fide Catholicâ esse tenendam ; quòd Authores , qui contrarium sentiunt , nondum videamus ab Ecclesiâ damnatos pro haereticis . Val. Tom. 1. Tract . 1. Exam. 3. num. 111. write , that for this cause only , they will not affirm this proposition to be of Catholick Faith , because Authors of the contrary opinion are not condemned by the Church for Hereticks . So Bannes 12 12 Bann . in 2.2 . quaest. 1. art. 10. dub. 2. , Bellarmine 13 13 Bell. de Pont. lib. 4. cap. 2. , Vasquez 14 14 Vasq. in 3. disp. 137. cap. 1. , and Duval 15 15 Duval . in 2.2 . p. 344. tells us , that they will not assert the contrary opinion to be heresie ; because it is not yet condemned by Popes or Councils , and is tolerated in the Church . But Gillius 16 16 Quare rigida videtur censura , quâ Bannes oppositam notat ( sententiam ) vocans eam temerariam . Gill. de doctr. Sacrâ lib. 1. Tract. 7. cap. 4. goes farther , and reprehendeth Bannes for inflicting even a mark of rashness upon the opinion of one only sense of Scripture , since four Divines , Alensis , Albertus , Henricus , and Medina had defended it .

This opinion of our Adversaries is grounded on a double foundation . The first Gillius declareth in express words , viz. that it is not credible that so many learned and pious persons should either not know what the Catholick Faith teacheth , or knowing it should oppose it . The Second is , that it would be a most unpardonable neglect of the Church to see the Faith torn in pieces by her Children , and be silent in so urgent an occasion . For by that connivance She should at least indirectly confirm heresie : it being a Rule of the Canon Law , 17 17 Error , cui non resistitur , approbatur , Dist. 83. that an Errour , which is not resisted , is approved .

If therefore I demonstrate , that not one or two , but many of the Roman Divines , and those the most celebrated , and by their merit preferred to the greatest dignities in the Church , were not only ignorant of , but also openly denied this Infallibility : I shall at the same time prove , that it is not of Faith. The former will easily be performed . For first , the most noble and learned Jo. Fr. Picus 18 18 Voluerunt multi Concilium si unâ cum Pontifice in iis quae ad essentiam fidei pertinent , sententiam ferat , nullo pacto errare posse . Restitêre alii , affirmantes errare posse Concilia , & jam errâsse — nec ad huc aliquid ( quod sciam ) promulgatum est , cujus vi ad alterutrum credendum obstringamur . Picus ad Theor. 4. Prince of Mirandula confesseth , that their Doctors and Canonists are divided in their opinions , whether a Pope and Council conjunctly defining matters of Faith can err or not : and that we are not obliged to believe either opinion . That Picus his testimony is true any one will be convinced , that considereth how many things repugnant to this Infallibility the greatest men of the Roman Church have taught . These may be reduced to four heads . First , the testimonies of those which teach that the Pope and Council ( to whom alone this Infallibility is assigned ) can err . Secondly , of those which deny that Church which is unerring and indesectible , to be so tied to the Clergy , that it may not wholly consist in others . Thirdly , of those who assert that the Faith of all men , one only excepted , may fail ; and so the Church subsist in a single Laick or Woman . Fourthly of those who imagine that the Faith may perish in all adult persons , and so the Church consist only in baptized infants .

For the first we shall produce Ockam , or at least them , whose opinions he relates . ( For in his Dialogues he never speaks in his own person ) 19 19 Vna sola est Ecclesia militans , quae contra fidem errare non potest . — Temerarium est dicere , quod Concilium Generale contra fidem errare non potest . Occam . Dial. part. 1. lib. 5. cap. 25. He therefore affirms , that it is rash to say a General Council cannot err against the Faith ; that being the peculiar priviledge of the Church Militant . That 19 19 Scripturae divinae , universali Ecclesiae , & Aposiolis absque allâ dubitatione in omnibus credendum . Nullis vero aliis , quantâcunque doctrinâ vel Sanctitate praepolleant , — It a quod nec in Concilio generali , si esset congregata universalis Ecclesia , nec Decretis Pontisicum , nec Doctorum dictis est necessario credulitas in omni dicto absque omni exceptione praestanda . Id. part . 3. Tract. 1. lib. 3. cap. 4. the Scriptures , the Universal Church and the Apostles are without hesitation to be believed ; but none others how eminent soever in holiness and Learning , no not a General Council , although the Universal Church were gathered together in it , nor the Decrees of Popes , nor the Judgments of Doctors . Lastly 20 20 Si quaeratur , quis habet judicare , an Concilia suerint Catholicè celebrata , respondetur quod periti in Scripturis habent judicare per modum firmae assertionis , quod definita ab iis sunt Catholicè definita . Id. cap. 19. that it belongs to every man skilful in the Scriptures , with a firm assurance to judge whether Councils have been celebrated Canonically , or defined Catholickly .

Peter de Alliaco 21 21 1. Concilium generale potest difformari legi Christi . 2. Ecclesia Romana , quae distinguitur a tot â congregatione sidelium , ut pars à toto , potest haereticari . 3. Tota multitudo Clericorum & Laicorum virorum potest à fide deficere . All. in quaest. vesper . art 3. Cardinal of Cambray , and one of the Presidents of the Council of Constance , layeth down these Three Assertions . 1. That a General Council can depart from the Law of Christ . 2. That the Church of Rome , which is distinguished from the whole Congregation of the Faithful , as the part from the whole , may fall into Heresie . 3. That the whole multitude of Clergy and Laity may apostatize from the true Faith. This Lecture opposed by a Parisian Doctor he afterwards largely defended in his Reply , which he Entitled de Resumptâ : Where among other things to this purpose he enquireth , what is to be done , when a General Council errs , and the State of Christendom is so depraved , that Hereticks have all the Power , the Faithful being become few and contemptible : And in this case adviseth to make divers Appeals , commit themselves to the Divine Grace , and bear the injury with Patience .

Waldensis 22 22 Non est ergo specialis Ecclesia , non Africana , nec utique particularis illa Romana , sed universalis Ecclesia , non quidem in generali Synodo congregata , quam aliquotiens errâsse percepimus . Sed est &c. Vald. doctr. Fid. Tom. 1. lib. 2. cap. 19. Paulo post . Quia nulla harum ( Synodi Episcopalis , &c , ) est Ecclesia Catholica Symbolica , nec vendicat sibi sidem dari sub paenâ perfidiae . Sed &c. — Nec movere quenquam debet , qued talem concordem professionem Patrum praeposui decreto generalis Concilu , etiamsi è toto orbe existentes convenirent Episcopi . Et cap. 27. Nec tamen alicui jam dictae ( Ecclesiis Apostolicis , maxlmè verò Romanae , & authoritati Concilii Generalis ) ita obediendum censeo , & tam pronâ fide , sicut primae fidei Scripturae , vel Ecclesiae Christi Symbolicae , sed sicut institutionibus Seniorum & monitioni paternae . teacheth , that the Church , which is the Infallible Rule of Faith , is neither Pope nor Council , which have sometimes erred ; but the Series and Collection of all Doctors successively from the Apostles to our times . That neither an Episcopal Synod , nor the common decree of the Roman Church , nor yet a General Council of all the Bishops of the World , is that Catholick Symbolical Church , that can challenge assent upon pain of insidelity : But the Universal succession of the Holy Fathers throughout all Ages . That an unanimous consent of the Fathers is to be preferred before the Decree of a General Council , although all the Bishops of the World be therein . That Obedience is not so readily and intirely to be given to the dictates of any particular Church , or even to the authority of a General Council , as to the first Faith proposed by Scripture , or the Symbolical Church of Christ : The other being to be regarded only as the institution of the Elders , and paternal admonition .

Cardinal Panormitan 23 23 Ideo in concernentibus sidem Concilium est supra Papam — Puto tamen quod si Papa moveretur melioribus rationibus & authoritatibas qudm Concilium , quod standum esset sententiae suae . Nam & Concilinm potest errare , sicut aliâs erravit , &c — Nam in concernentibas sidem etiam dictum unius privati esser praeferendum dicto Papae , si ille moveretur melioribus rationibus N. & V. Testamenti quam Papa , Panorm. in Cap. Significâsti de electione . writeth , that in things indeed concerning Faith a Council is above the Pope . Yet if the Pope be moved with better reasons and authorities than the Council , we are to stand to his determination . For even a Council may err , and hath erred . That in matters of Faith the judgment even of one private man is to be preferred before the Sentence of the Pope ; if he were moved with better Arguments drawn from the Old and New Testament , than the Pope . And much more to the same purpose . Antony 24 24 Ant. Summ. Theol. part . 3. Tit. 23. Cap. 2. §. 6. Archbishop of Florence hath transcribed this whole passage of Panormitan into his sum of Divinity without making the least mention of him ; and delivers it as his own opinion .

Cardinal Cusanus 25 25 Notandum est experimento rerum Concilium universale plenartum posse deficere ; quomodo etiam varia Concilia talia fuerunt , quae judicando errârunt . Cusan . Concord . Cath. lib. 2. cap. 3. & 4. alloweth indeed Oecumenical Councils to be infallible : But to this End requireth so many conditions , that it is very difficult they should all be had , and impossible to be known when had . The fourth condition is , that the Council regulate it self by the Rules of the Holy Ghost laid down in Scripture , and the definitions of precedent Councils . Otherwise that , howsoever free and universal , they may be appealed from , and protested against . And at last concludes , that it is to be seen by experience , that a full General Council can err ; as diverse such Councils have been , which have erred in defining . Thus he of Councils ; who hath much more about the errability of the Pope . Wherefore Bellarmine reckons him among the Parisians . Nicholas de Clemangis 26 26 Clem. in Disp. de Conciliis . expresly Disputes against the Infallibility of Councils . But because he preadmonisheth he affirms nothing , but only to dispute for finding out the truth : I shall not urge his Testimony .

Cardinal Dominicus Jacobatius 27 27 Quia Concilium potest errare , ut patet in Conctlio Ariminen●i , Ephesino . 2. Africanâ Synodo tempore Cypriani , & in aliis multis . Nec obstat si dicatur , quòd Ecclesià non potest errare ; quia intelligitur de Ecclesiâ universali . Sed Concilium repraesentativè dicitur Ecclesiâ ; in Concilio enim verè non est universalis Ecclesia . Jacob. de Concil. lib. 6. pag. 239. asserteth , that when Popes and Councils disagree in defining ; that judgment is to be preferred , which is consonant to the definitions of precedent Councils . If none of which have passed Sentence in this matter ; then the Councils definition shall not be received , if the Popes be founded upon better reasons and authorities . For that a Council can erre ; as appears by that of Ariminum , the Second of Ephesus , that of Africk under Cyprian , and many others . That the Infallibility of the Universal Church proves not the same to be in a Council : Since the Universal Church is not truly in a Council . That in the case of contrary definitions by the Pope and a Council , it is not yet defined , what is to be done or observed . That his Opinion however is , that he which should hold to and observe either part , should not therefore incur the danger of Damnation although he died in the observation of it .

All these manifestly teach that both a Pope , and Council , to whom alone active Infallibility is attributed may erre . Nor is it enough to say , that herein they deliver their judgments of the Pope and Council , disagreeing one from another , and not conjunctly defining . This indeed may seem to be said with some colour of Truth in Jacobatius : But as for Occam and Alliacensis , it doth by no means fit them . Nor yet doth it in the least enervate the Testimonies of the rest : Since whensoever they deny infallibility to Pope or Council ; they do not thereto oppose the consent of both , but either the Symbolical and successive Church , as Waldensis ; or the Universal , as all the rest . Besides they deny infallibility to belong to the representative Church , and to be the property of the Universal , whereas every one knoweth and acknowledgeth that only the representative Church is in a Council . As for Jacobatius his opinion it plainly is , that obedience is then immediately to be given to the Decree of a Pope or Council when it is consonant to the definition of some former , even particular Council , which had been received by the universal Church ; that this obedience therefore is to be paid , not for the authority of the present definition , but the approbation of the Universal Church , which She is supposed to have given to it by a long reception . But what clears the matter beyond all exception , is that Jacobatius is one of those , who think the Church may fail , except one woman only : as we shall see afterwards under the third head .

The second Classis contains the testimonies of Doctors asserting the Church , for which Christ prayed , and promised the Gates of Hell should not prevail against it , not to be confined to the Ecclesiastick order , but may consist of believers of whatsoever rank and order . This Petrus Alliacensis expresly affirms in the place by us above cited . So the Author of the Glosse 28 28 Quaero de quâ Ecclesiâ intelligas quod hîc dicitur , quòd non possit errare ? de ipso Papâ , qui Ecclesia dicitur ? sed certum est , quòd Papa errare potest . Respondeo , ipsa congregatio fidelium hic dicitur Ecclesia . Et talis Ecclesia non potest non esse . Nam ipse Dominus orat pro Ecclesia . Caus. 24. quaest. 1. upon the Canon Law , inquiring what Church it is that cannot err , determineth it to be the Congregation of the faithful ; which cannot fail , Christ having prayed for it : and Nicolas Lyra 29 29 A verâ se . fide subvertendo : Ex quo patet , quòd Ecclesia non consistit in hominibus ratione potestatis vel dignitatis Ecclesiasticae vel saecularis ; quia multi principes , & summi Pontifices , &c. inventi sunt apostatâsse a fide . Propter quod Ecclesia consistit in illis personis ; in quibus est notitia vera , & confessio fidei & veritatis . Lyra in Matth. 16.18 . to those words , The Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it , affixeth this Glosse — that is , to subvert it from the true faith . To which he subjoyns . Whence is manifest that the Church consists not in men in respect either of Ecclesiastical or Secular Dignity ; ( for they have sometimes apostatized from the Faith ) but in those persons in whom remains a true knowledge and confession of the faith and truth .

The third Classis comprehendeth the testimonies of those who teach , that the whole Church may fail , except one only person , and that either Ecclesiastick or Laick , Man or Woman , and so the Church consist in that person alone . That the Church actually did so at the time of our Saviours Passion , Tostatus 30 30 Tost . in Matth. praef quaest. 14. ( doth not assert , as Suarez 31 31 Suar. de fide disp. 9. Sect. 3. and Bannes 32 32 Bann . in 2.2 . q. 1. art. 10. dub . salsly relate , but ) tells us it was the common opinion in his time . The same writes Aeneas Sylvius in his History of the Council of Basil . Bannes and Turrecremata 33 33 Terrec . de Eccles. lib. 3. cap 6. attribute this opinion to Alexander Alensis , Hagutius , and Durandus Asimatensis : the latter ascribe it also to the whole multitude of Preachers ; and produceth out of Alensis 34 34 Opinio que dicit , quid in s●lâ Vin ine stetit Ecclesia , in q●●d s●la sides mansit in passione , videtur nobis vera . this sentence . That opinion , which saith the Church consisted in the Virgin alone , in whom alone romained true faith at the passion , seems true to us : which Turrecremata also himself defends in many places , particularly Summ. de Eccles. lib. 1. cap. 30. lib. 3. cap. 61. Beside these four there are not , a few , of the same mind . Ockam 35 35 In uno sdo potest stare tota sides Ecclesiae ; quem ●dmedum tempare mortis Christi tota siles Ecclesiae in B. Virgine remanebat . Non est ctiam credendum , &c. Occ. Dial. part 1. lib. 2. cap. 25. affirms that the whole Faith of the Church may remain in one single person , as it did in the blessed Vargin at the time of our Lords passsion ; that if God permitted this in the days of the Apostles ; he will much sooner permit it in these latter Ages ; and that the contrary opinion is rash . Panormitan 36 36 Passibile est , quòd vera sides Christi remaneret in uno solo — Hoe patuit post passionem Christi . Nam , &c. Et fortè hine dicit Glossa , qu●d ubi sant bmi , ibi est Ecclesia Romana . Panorm. loc. cit . in the words immediately following those before cited , saith it is possible the Faith of Christ may remain in one only person . That at the Passion of our Saviour it remained only in the blessed Virgin ; and that for this cause probably the Glosse saith , where ever good men are , there is the Church of Rome . This passage also , as well as the former , Antonius Florentinus translated into his Sum. Peter de Monte 38 38 Quia sides potest remarere etiam apud simplicem Laicum , & in aliis omnibus jerire , sicut accidit in personâ B. Mariae in passione Christi . Pet. de Monte lib. de Monarchiâ Bishop of Brixia gives this reason , why Laicks ought to be admitted into the Council ; because the Faith may possibly remain in one simple Laick , as it did formerly in the Blessed Virgin. Clemangis 39 39 In soli potest mulierculâ per gratiam manere Ecclesia ; sicut &c. Clem. disp. de Concil. asserts the Church may by grace remain in one single woman , as formerly in the Virgin. Jacobatius 40 40 Nam & remansit sides in B. Virgine aliis deficientibus post passionem , ut astenderetur quid non possi : defi●ere sides , pro quâ Christus oravit , cùm diait Petro. Et ego pro te rogavi , ut non desietat svies tua . Et non intelligitar , & Jac. de . Concil. lib. 6. p. 242. writeth that after the passion faith remained in the Blessed Virgin alone , that so the promise of indefectibility made by Christ unto his Church might not fail ; which promise was made not to the representive Church ( or a Council ) but to the Universal . Lastly J. Fr. Picus M●randula 41 41 Christi tempore desicientibus in side Apostolis integra & omnino persectissima fides in solae Virgine Domini matre remansit . Pic. Theor. 13. saith that in the time of Christ the Apostles falling away from the Faith , it remained intire and perfect in the Virgin alone .

The fourth Classis exhibits only Jandovesius of Minorca , who by the relation of Banncs 40 40 Bann . Comm. sus . in 2.2 . quaest. 1. art. 10. dub. 1. taught about the year 1363. that in the time of Antichrist the Church should consist only of baptized infants , all adult persons apostatizing from the Faith.

Thus far these testimonies , which occurred to me in a hasty search . If I had time or opportunity to turn over the Writings of the XIII . XIV . and XV. Ages ; I doubt not but I should find many more . However any one may see , how utterly repugnant these which I have produced are to the Infallibility of Pope and Council . Yet there is no sentence pronounced against these Writers , no mark set upon them , not the least censure inflicted on them . How can this be , if they had taught right down heresie ? Nay this opinion is not only not condemned , but also many ways approved . First , in that the Defenders of it have been preferred to the greatest dignities of the Church ; some made Cardinals , others Presidents of Councils , one ( Antoninus Florontinus ) Sainted and at this day Worstripped . Which surely would not have been done , if he had taught Heresie . But what is more express , and which cannot be eluded , is that Thomas Waldensis's work , whence he produced the clearest passages , was solemnly approved by Pope Martin V. This Trithemius 42 42 Quod Martinus Papa V. examinatum authoritate Apostolicâ confirmavit . Trithem in Vald. affirms telling us that Martin V. examined this work , and confirmed it by Apostolical authority . The Bull of approbation also may be seen presixed before the third Volume ; with the Examination subjoyned , which lasted above a month ; when the work being presented to the Pope , it was by him confirmed in full Consistory . So that after this strict examination and solemn approbation to imagine heresie is contained in this Book , will draw the Pope , who approved it , and the whole Church ( which never opposed this approbation ) into the suspicion of heresie .

I have done with the first argument . The second shall be drawn from the silence of the Council of Trent ; which alone proveth that they thought it not an Article of Faith ; since they condemned not the Protestants on that account , although no less vigorously impugning it , than any other Article of their Church . This argument is so much the stronger , in that our Adversaries frequently urge the silence of the Council of Trent to prove Articles , by us objected to them , not to be of Faith. So Veronus , and the Valemburgian Brethren in the book above-mentioned . So the Bishop of Meaux in that Famous Book , which hath illuded so many . If they reasoned well herein ; why may not we use the same Arguments ? And then the Infallibility of the Church cannot be of Faith , because wholly pretermitted by the Tridentine Council .

Lastly , that it is not of Faith may be proved hence , that no soundation of such a Faith can be alledged . For if any were , it must be either Scripture , or Tradition , or some decree of the Ruling Church , or the consent of the Universal Church . That Scripture and Tradition cannot be produced in this Case , we have already demonstrated , for this reason especially , because the certainty of both depends upon the testimony of the Church . Yet Amicus 43 43 Sumi possunt Traditio & Scriptura primo modo ut approbatae infallibili judicio ipsius regulae animatae , quo pacto sunt authoritatis divinae & credendae fide insusâ Hoc autem modo a nobis non sumuntur ad probandam infallibilem authoritatem regulae animatae . Secundo modo sumi possunt , ut testatae signis & rationibus humanis , ut qued , &c. quo pacto sunt authoritatis humanae & credendae fide acquisitâ , Atque hoc modo sumuntur , ad probandam , &c. Amic . de Fide disp. 6. n. 52. slieth thither ; who after he had objected our argument to himself , answers that Scripture and Tradition may be taken either as approved by the infallible judgment of the living Rule , and so of divine authority , and to be believed by infused Faith. That thus considered they cannot be produced to prove the authority of the living Rule : Or they may be taken as only testified and confirmed by humane reason , and so of humane authority , and to be believed by acquired Faith : That this way considered they are produced to prove the living Rule : wanting indeed infallible divine authority , but having such humane authority , as by the accession of Christs Providence over his Church becomes infallible .

I wish the Jesuit in writing this had first objected to himself our whole Argument . For that is drawn not only from the impossibility of knowing , according to our Adversaries , the Divinity of Scripture or Tradition without being first assured of the infallibility of the Church ; but also from hence , that they teach it cannot be known which are the Canonical books , whether received by us uncorrupted , or faithfully Translated , and is the true sense of them , without the same previous assurance . If he had objected all this to himself ; he must either have departed from all the rest of their Divines , and denied their so much boasted of arguments , or have yellded herein . Yet let us examine wh●● he offers . First therefore his joyning the provid . 〈…〉 the yet human authority of Scripture and Tradition is 〈◊〉 and absurd . For of that we are assured no otherwise then by Faith , and consequently it cannot be a foundation to Faith. Now this being taken away , the other Arguments of the Truth of Scripture and Tradition according to the Jesuits argumentation become fallible , and so no sit foundation for infallible Faith. Besides I would know whether this acquired Faith carrieth with it indubitable Truth , and be of the same certainty with . Divine or infused faith , or at least sufcient to found Divine Faith upon . For if it be not , our argument returns : If it be , why may we not have without the assistance of the Churches authority a Divine Faith of those things , which Scripture , or if you will , Tradition also , clearly and plainly teach , at least as clearly , as they are thought to teach that infallibility of the Church .

But Amicus hath a reserve for this . He pretends 43 43 Ibid. num. 49. that although the human Arguments of the Truth of Scripture and Tradition be self evident avd sufficient to create a Divine Faith ; yet that we are forbidden by God to believe them with a Divine Faith ; till his Vicar the Pope shall have confirmed them . A miserable refuge , which lyeth open to a thousand inconveniencies . For to omit asking where this prohibition of God is to be found ; not to urge that hereby all their Arguments drawn from the nature of the thing concerning the uncerainty of any revealed Article without the supervenient Authority of the Church , are wholly destroyed ; not to say , that hereby the controversie is turned from matter of Right into matter of Fact , and become a meer enquiry , whether God hath made any such prohibition : Laying aside I say all these things , I will insist upon this one Observation . It is not here enquired , whether Scripture and Tradition proposed by any other than the Pope oblige us to assent or not ; but only whether any one , either obliged or not obliged , can receive them howsoever proposed and thence build his Faith upon them . If he can , then our Argument returns ; and we may also believe with Divine Faith what we find taught in Scripture . If he cannot , I would fain know which way then Papists can admit Scripture and Tradition , and from them learn the Infallibity of the Church ; since Amicus had before denied that it could be Learned , or ought to be believed for the testimony of Scripture and Tradition , as infallibly proposed by the Church .

It is manifest therefore , the belief of the Insallibility of the Church cannot rest on Scripture or Tradition . But neither can it on the judgment of the Ruling Church . For besides that no such judgment is produced ; if it were , it would be fruitless . For then , what was never granted , the Church will be judge and give sentence in her own cause : which Alphonsus a Castro 45 45 Si de Scripturâ ipsâ est quastio , non poterit ipsamet esse Judex : quia tunc erit abire in infinitum . In propriâ causà nallius restimonium est validum . Castr . de justâ baret . punit . lib. 1. cap. 5. denieth to Scripture ; because that were to run in infinitum , and no testimony can be valid in its own cause . For imagine any one , that believed not the Church to be infallible now to begin to believe it : This first act of belief cannot be founded upon the judgment of the Church . For whosoever believeth any thing for the sake of the Churches judgment , did before believe that judgment to be certain ; which destroyeth the supposition .

This our Adversaries confess . So Conink 46 46 Judicium quo judicamus nobis credendum esse Ecclesiam habere infallibilem omnino authoritatem proponendi res fidei , debet aliis notis , sive alio fundamento niti . Conink . de actib . sup. disp. 17. dub. 3. . The judgment , whereby we judge that we are to believe the Church hath infallible authority of proposing matters of Faith , ought to be grounded upon other arguments or some other foundations So also Moeratius 47 47 Nemo potest credere hunc Articulum fidei nostrae , interveniente ad assensum hunc ipsâ Ecclesiae authorit●te , tanquam regulà res credendas infallibiliter proponente . Maerat . de fide disp. 17. Sect. 2. . None can believe this Article of our Faith ( the Infallibility of the Church ) the Churches authority it self intervening to this assent , as the rule infallibly proposing matters of belief .

There remains therefore only the belief of the Universal Church , wherein this Faith of private Papists herein can relie . Many things might here be said : but because we shall handle that matter more fully at the end of this Treatise ; we will not anticipate our arguments here . I shall only in a word observe the absurdity of it . Our Adversaries say , that private persons ought to believe the active infallibility of the Ruling Church ; because they seeit believed by the Universal Church . But why doth the Universal Church believe it : truly for no other reason , but because She do believe it . For the Universal Church is nothing else , but the collection of all single believers .