The Sovereign Judge of Controversies in Matters of Religion, Chapter 6 – Chapter 7
CHAP. 6.
The verification of the first meanes of Nullitie against the third, and fourth allegation.
3 BVt (if as by the third allegation it seemes) the Scripture bee ambiguous. and capable of divers interpretations, wherefore and with what reason is it, that the Doctors that terme themselues Catholickes doe make more account, of one expression of Scripture, then of another, grounding themselues either vponupon the circumstances of the very text, which is expounded, or vponupon some other passage of the Scripture, the sense whereof is cleare, manifest and certaine, and not simply vponupon the authority of the Church?
If the Scripture be as they say, a nose of waxe, Theramenes buskin, a shoe for both feete, a wethercock which turnes with the winde: wherefore do they refute by Scripture the interpretations, nay, rather the false glosses of heretiques? Wherefore do they not barely alleage vntounto them the authority of the Church? Verily according to their reckoning, for the prooueing of transubstantiation, they neede no more vrge the words of the Scripture, hoc est corpus meum, neither to say that they must be taken as they sound, as being words of a last will and testament, seing that this passage being a part of the Scripture, is according to the nature of the Scripture (if their allegation be true) ambiguous and capable of divers interpretations: and therefore they ought not to beleiue transubstantiation by reason of this place of Scripture, but because it hath pleased the Church so to interpret it: and so the beliefe of the Church of Rome will not bee grounded vponupon the Scripture, nor ruled according to it; but quite contrary, the sence of the Scripture, is ruled and grounded vponupon the knowledge of the Church; so that the foundation is builded vponupon the house, and the building is the levell and the square.
And to conclude, how commeth it to passe that they say that the Scripture proueth so distinctly, so clearely, so evidently the pretended authority of the Church, that they wonder how those that do but read the Scripture can admit it, if so bee that the Scripture bee ambiguous, and of a double meaning as hath beene pretended by the third allegation.
4 Touching the fourth defect objected against the Scripture, to wit that it is imperfect, and doth not sufficiently furnish vsus with reasons, for to proue or refute what is to be beleeued, in matters of controversie betwixt vsus. If this objection bee received, how hauehave the Doctors of the Church, which is called Catholique, vndertaken to proue all the points of the Romish Religion by the Scripture? HaueHave they taken vponupon them rashly a thing impossible? would they shew themselues in this sophisters and cavilling disputers, seeking in the Scripture that which is not there to be found and prouing a truth by a lye? or are there some points of doctrine beleeued in the Church termed Catholique, which are not contained in the Scripture? who amongst them all dare vndertake to make a catalogue of any such points? what may those points of doctrine be, that are not handled in the Scripture, for being silent in which, the Scripture is termed imperfect?
They are not points touching the Trinity, the incarnation of the Sonne of God, the redemption of mankind, or of faith in Iesus Christ, of hope, charity and repentance, of the necessity and practise of good workes, of life eternall, of Baptisme, of the preaching of the word, of the holy supper; these points and those that depend on them are without doubt retained in the Scripture.
What then can these articles of faith bee, of which the Prophets, the Apostles, nay God himselfe hath spoken in the Scripture? Is it the article of the popes authority, not only now to excommunitate, but also to depose Kings? his authority of dispēcing with mariages, with which God dispenceth not in his word? to make eating of flesh in Lent (a thing of it selfe indifferent) to bee a sinne? and that an incestious mariage be not incestious, or else the article of his imperiall dominion so soveraigne and supreme that although hee should lead whole troupes of silly soules into hell, none may presume to say vntounto him my Lord why do you so? and of so large extent that it reacheth vntounto the soules both of the liuing and the dead? Or are they the articles of worshipping of Images, of invocation of Saints, of the fier of purgatory, as hote as that of hell, of workes of supererogation, of merit ex congruo & ex cōdigno, that Iesus Christ hath sacrificed himselfe vponupon earth twice, to wit, when he celebrated the holy Supper with his disciples, and not once alone vponupon the crosse, that divine service ought to be sayd in an vnknowne tongue, that Christ hath not saued by his death the litle children which dye without baptisme. And if there be any other article of this sort of which the holy Ghost hath made no mention, and the Prophets, and Apostles hauehave written nothing. No the holy Ghost hath dictated, the Prophets and Apostles hauehave written the cleane contrary, That the temporall authority of Kings is immediatly from God. Rom. 13. 1. 2. Cor. 4. 5.That every man is subiect to, and not aboue the law of God. That the very Apostles are the servants, but not the lords of the Church. Apoc. 14. 13.That the soules of them which dye in Christ rest from their labours. Rom. 10. 14.That wee must not call on him in whom we have not beleeued. That wee must not bowe downe to images. Exod. 20. Luc. 17. 10. Heb. 9. & 10. cb.That when we hauehave done all wee can, wee are vnprofitable servants. That Christ hath not offered himselfe oftentimes, but once. That the vse of an vnknowne tongue in the Church is a curse. 1. Cor. 14. 21. Mat. 1…. 1…,That Christ receiued the litle Children, yea before baptisme.
CHAP. 7.
A verifying of the first meanes of nullity against the fift and sixt …llegation.
AND for the fifth reproach cast vponupon the Scripture, to wit, that those who make profession to end their controversies by its determination, are disagreeing in opinion, if this consideration should make that God speaking in the Scripture or by the Scriptures, were not a competent Iudge to determine our controversies, it would follow also from thence that neither the Church should be our Iudge, since in this respect there is no difference. For in the times of the Primitiue Church, both Arrians and Orthodoxes, Donatistes & Catholiques, did pretend to follow the judgement of the Church. The Arrians did reject the Councell of Nice, required a new Councell: yea many Arrians in effect protested that they would hold themselues to the Councell of Nice: so that by this account the Church it selfe shall not be the Iudge, if from the discord of them, who professe to referre themselues to the decision of a Iudge, wee shall conclude the insufficiencie of the Iudge.
Finally amongst the Doctors, who call themselues Catholiques, and protest all with one full consent to submit themselues to the judgment of the Church, what jarres? what contentions are there? The Angelicall D S Thomas Discord amongst the Romish Doctors.holds that the Crosse is to be worshiped with a religious worship, to this purpose hee brings the authority of the Church: and proveth that the image is to bee worshipped with the veryTho. 2a 2ae qu. 103. art. 3. & 3. q 25. art. 40. Bellar. lib. 2. de magin. c: 20. 2… same worship which is due to the same thing represented by the Image. Bellarmine is not of the same opinion, assigning a lower degree of worshippe to the Image, then to the thing whereof it is an Image, and for strengthening of his opinion hee also alleageth the authority of the Church. wherefore then cast they this reproach rather on the sacred word, then the Church? And whereas in the sixth place, they endeavour to prooue that, God speaking in the Scripture, cannot be judge of our differencies, vnderunder a colour that Hereticks do challenge and attribute to themselues the Scripture, by the same reason they conclude also that neither the Church shall bee Iudge: for heretiques makeConcil. Cal… Act. 1. vse of the authority of the Church as of a cloake, Cite the Fathers, the Councels, the traditions of the Church. But if it bee replyed, that this is for shew only and in Sophisticall manner; the answer also is easie, and at hand, to wit they do the like in alleaging the Scripture: therefore things stand vponupon the very same tearmes, were it not that some though they dare not speake, yet do thinke that the Scripture indeede favoureth Heretiques, which were all one as to imagine that God by his word doth cover (as with a cloake) the devils lyes, which were as impious to thinke, as blasphemous to speake.