View of Some Exceptions Made by a Romanist, Part 2 · Subpart 31
C. 14. Anſw. to Chap. 14.
Section 1 The firſt part of this Chapter in the Apologiſt, is anſwer onelyonly to one of three or foure proofes of his Lordſhip's argument, Section 20. viz. to that againſt the Councels being a rule of hereſy, [when ſome paſſe for Heretiques that are not condemned by any Councell] To this I confeſſe it were ſatisfactory (if it were proved) to ſay that Councels are a rule, but not the onelyonly rule. But then, Firſt, there is no other rule ſpecified. And Secondly, this argument of his Lordſhips is complicated with three others, being joined with which, it is of force to ſtrengthen one of them (though of it ſelfe it were not ſufficient to conclude) and then neither of thoſe are taken notice of. Thirdly, 'tis meant but as a proofe againſt this rule, not againſt any other. And yet Fourthly, his Lordſhip's method being to confute every one of them ſingle, as they lye; all others being diſproved, this muſt be concluded the onelyonly one, or none at all; and however, no more can here be required, then that here he diſprove this from being the rule, not that he diſprove all others in this period.
Section 2 For your way of proofe [that Councels are infallible] Firſt, that is not anſwer to the contrary proofe; And Secondly, it is by a medium as much denied, as it ſelfe (the Infallibility of the Church whoſe quinteſſence it is) and ſo your old acquaintance, petitio principii againe.
Section 3 Your ſecond part about John 22. puts us off to Ciaconius and Caeffeteau, whom in obedience to your direction I ſhould adviſe with, but that I ſee from what you have learned from them, that either you have proved an ill Schollar (and 'twere inſolence in me to hope to be better) or elſe that their reſolutions are not pertinent to his Lordſhip's argument; for the three things that you adde (I conceive from their Writings) are nothing at all to it.
Section 4 Firſt, not that which you grant, for his Lordſhip grants it. Secondly, not that which you deny, for his Lordſhip had not affirmed it (unleſſe from theſe words [he was not alone] you conclude, that that which he contradicted, was generally contradicted; and then what his Lordſhip ſaid, may be as truly ſaid to be generally granted, for he is not you ſee alone in ſo ſaying.) Thirdly, Not that which you ſay you doe not know, for his Lordſhip knowes it as little, and indeed ſayes never a word of it. Whereas the onelyonly thing wherein the force of that part of his Lordſhips argument conſiſted, viz. Bellarmines excuſing Pope John (in his denying of that which you believe) from the no-Councell that had defined againſt him, hath no title ſaid to it, but continues in great ſecurity, to make good the argument, [that you doe amiſſe (and withall either you or Bellarmine are very partiall) to condemne thoſe that are condemned by no generall Councell.]
Section 5 Your Anſwer indeed to the 21. Section, is nearer to the mark, but yet it hits it not; The argument is, that no Councel ever decreed a Councell to be Infallible, therefore as farre as the argument is drawne for beliefe, from the infallibility of the Councell, I am not bound to believe it infallible. To this you anſwer, 1. That for Councels ſo to define, was not needfull, becauſe a Councell is the Church, and the infallibility of that is a praecognitum in all her definitions, otherwiſe it would not be believed in any.
Section 6 Here is excellent contrivance, 1. For Councels to define that Councels are infallible is not needfull; which ſure is needfull, if nothing be to be believed, but what the Councell defines to be ſo, and that muſt be granted, 1. if the Councell be the rule of beliefe; and 2. if the Councell be the Church (as you ſay it is) for that is the onelyonly rule infallible, if you be not deceived. 2. That the Councell is the Church in ſubſtance.] I thought it had beene in repreſentation onelyonly, and that nothing is the Church in ſubſtance, but the Church in its full extent, of which you ſaid before, the Church is onelyonly the quinteſſence, which ſure is not the ſame in ſubſtance with that whoſe quinteſſence it is, but onelyonly the repreſentation of it. 3. That the Infallibility of the Church is a praecognitum; if ſo, then it is a principle; and if ſo, then I am ſure I muſt not looke to ſee it prov'd, and then as long as we deny it, (as we doe, you know) that is petitio principii againe. 4. That unleſſe the Church were preſumed infallible before its determination, it could never be believed in any: this ſuppoſes men very hard-hearted, that never will believe any thing, but what ſome preſumed infallible tels them.
Section 7 There is a beliefe (as well as a certainty) cui non ſubeſt dubium, of which a man doth not doubt, as well as cui non poteſt ſubeſſe falſum, in which there can be no falſity; and the Schooles have told you of a certainty of adherence, where there is none of evidence; and let me tell you, this is the difference betwixt beliefe and knowledge, the latter onelyonly is inferr'd demonſtratively, or by premiſes that cannot be otherwiſe, the former being content with probable arguments, ſo they be ſtrongly probable, and ſuch as have not any the like, or of as conſiderable weight to be ballanced againſt them. And this ſure is the reaſon that Faith is by God thought fit to be rewarded, as being an act of the Believers choyce, (and knowledge not, becauſe it is neceſſarily and irregably induced) and yet ſuch, as that it will be all obſtinacy and perverſneſſe to reſiſt, when it comes well provided with arguments extreamly probable.
Section 8 For, if you marke it, the moſt weighty actions of our lives, and thoſe which we doe moſt conſtantly, and moſt confidently, are founded no deeper then on probabilities. We eate and drinke for the ſtrengthening and refreſhing of our bodies, and yet conceive not our ſelves to have any certainty of evidence or demonſtration, that every bit we eate, or drop we drinke, may not choake, or poyſon us; yet having probabilities, on which to ground a beliefe, that they are wholſome, and no ſtrong contrary probability, that our table ſhall become a ſnare, or death unto us, we doubt not to feed as ſecurely, as if Euclid had beene our ſurety by one of his Demonſtrations.
Section 9 So in every piece of land I buy, or eſtate I enjoy from my Anceſtors, 'tis poſſible (and the contrary not demonſtrable, or certaine in that ſenſe) that there may be ſome flaw which may undoe me, and yet when I have ſearcht my evidences, and have the opinion of wiſe men upon the matter, I ſit downe, and trade, and live ſecurely, and all this but upon probabilities, without the foreign, or full armour of infallibility or demonſtration.
Section 10 And ſo in all matters of fact, which we ſee or heare not with our owne eies or eares, but as with perſpectives and otacouſtickes, I meane where we are faine to truſt the relations of others, be it that there was a Julius Caeſar, or a Henry the eight, the ground of our beliefe is but a probability, viz. the topick ab authoritate, the argument taken from the authority of the relators; which though it be never ſo ſtrengthened by the univerſall concurrence and nondiſſenting of all witneſſes, cannot yet aſcend higher, then to be extreamly probable, and yet ſure is as firmely believed of us; and although it may poſſibly be otherwiſe (the contrary implying no repugnance, or contradiction in nature, and he that ſhould be ſo mad to affirme it, being not confutable either by rationall, or ocular demonſtration) yet as little doubted of by any man in his right wits, and as little lyable to any ſcruple, or matter of doubt, as what is moſt viſible before our eies.
Section 11 This I have ſaid perhaps ex abundanti (yet ſhall not repent of it becauſe it is uſefull to be conſidered in order to other difficulties) to ſhew you the falſneſſe, and inconſequence of that argument, that unleſſe the Church were preſumed infallible before its determinations, it could never be believed in any. For hereby it hath appeared, that that may be believed, nay cannot ſometimes without pertinacy and ſinne be not believed, (as in caſe the arguments, though but probable, be exceſſively ſo) which brings not with it demonſtration, or any thing of equall power or force with it, and ſuch is infallibility.
Section 12 And from thence you will eaſily diſcerne, how poſſible it may be for us Proteſtants to believe the univerſall Church in all things, wherein the teſtimony appeares to be univerſall; nay to believe the Church of Rome in many things, wherein the arguments produced by her, doe actually perſwade with us, (ſuch are her conſonancy with antiquity, and the like) and yet to remaine conſtant to our preſent undertakings, that ſhe is not infallible.
Section 13 But it now appeares that I might have ſpared this paines, in preſſing theſe inconveniences on that firſt anſwer of yours. For it ſeemes by what followes, that all that anſwer was needleſſe; For now upon better conſideration, 'tis true (with a diſtinction) that the Councell doth virtually, and in actu exercito, define its owne infallibility; and that you prove, Firſt, becauſe it pronounceth anathema's againſt thoſe that ſubmit not; Secondly, it doth it by ſaying [Viſum eſt Spiritui Sancto, &c.]
Section 14 Not to examine your phraſe of actus exercitus, as 'tis here applyed; To your arguments we anſwer, Firſt, that our Councels denounce anathema's too, yet you know doe not pretend to infallibility.
Section 15 That forme, I conceive, ſignifies not, that all are damned that believe not what we believe, but that all they that ſhall diſ-believe may be excommunicated, if they be refractory; and that againe onelyonly in reference to thoſe that are under dominion; but not that all others that are not under us, ſhould by us be ſo handled; or that thoſe that are not excommunicate, are in that other danger; or if theſe are, yet not for the ſinne of diſ-believing an infallible doctrine, but for not believing our lawfull ſuperiours; which may be a damning ſinne, though they be not infallible, their being in the truth, when they make ſuch conſtitutions, is ſufficient for that. Secondly, the forme of [Viſum eſt Spiritui Sancto] is onelyonly a forme tranſcribed from the Acts, arguing it their opinion (that uſe it) that this particular is the dictate of the Holy Ghoſt, not at all their beliefe, that the Holy Ghoſt was bound to aſſiſt irreſiſtibly: which he muſt (as well as aſſiſt) to make the infallibility; for otherwiſe when he aſſiſts, we may poſſibly not make uſe of his aſſiſtance. In plaine, 'tis an evidence that they thinke they are in the truth, not that they cannot be in the wrong.
Section 16 To the 22. Section, though you anſwer not a word, yet you are as diſcreet as if you did, you doe another thing in ſtead of it, you aske a queſtion, and harangue upon it at large; the Queſtion is pertinent enough (though not to this Section, yet) to the buſineſſe in groſſe, and we anſwer it in a word, that the Word of God muſt regulate our beliefe, and reaſon, in the uſe of all the meanes that you will commend to us, and you have given us a pledge already, that you will not quarrell with us for this anſwer; as for diſcipline, and keeping in unity, we had, bleſſed be God, meanes very ſufficient to that end, till the ſword wreſted them (as all other our lawfull poſſeſſions) out of our hands; and I believe the Infallibility of the Church is not weapon-proofe, or able to keepe Reſiſters in obedience, or Schiſmatiques in unity.
Section 17 As for your uncharitable judgement, that want of an Infallible Church (which muſt be but want of that inſolence to undertake our ſelves to be Infallible) is (that and no other) the *That paſſage in the Apologiſt to which this was returned, is by him in his laſt thoughts held better to be omitted, and accordingly I have left it out there.cauſe of all our preſent miſeries; and his Lordſhips doctrine in this Book, (although never ſo remote) the cauſe of his death: This is but to let us ſee your change or variety, that you can uſe non cauſa pro cauſa, and not deale onelyonly in petitio principii; thus was Tenterden Steeple the cauſe of Goodwin Sands, and that is all I ſhall returne to your State-obſervation; the cauſe of our preſent calamities, I conceive, came not out of the Church, but when it was infamous, it fled to it for a Sanctuary, to give it an honeſt Name, and a protection together; and I could tell you that the League in France was once pretty parallel to ours, and then 'twas the obſervation of a knowing man, that if a true ſtory of the cauſes of that Warre ſhould be written, the buſineſſe would be traced into ſuch or ſuch a brothell houſe, that made as if it came out gravely from the Church; a competition or animoſity, the foreign, or true cauſe, when religion was onelyonly the foreign, or the pretended. Beſides, let me tell you, that deciſions and anathematizings have ſometimes done as much hurt toward occaſioning of breaches, as licence and acknowledgement of fallibility hath done; (and if you marke, the onelyonly colour of charge at this time againſt our Church, hath beene the impoſing too much) and truly whatever your opinion is, I conceive meekneſſe hath the promiſe of this life, and I never knew that pretending to Infallibility is the onelyonly Symptome of that.