The By-Way, Treatise · Section 11
SECT. XI. The moſt ſubſtantiall poynts of Roman Faith and Doctrine, (as they are now taught and receiued in the Church of Rome) were neuer taught by the Primitiue Church, nor receiued by the ancient Fathers.
NEither are theſe men content to challenge a right to all the Fathers, (although they confeſſe they are not all orthodox and true Fathers) but they likewiſe charge vsus, that,Sebaſt. Flaſh. in profeſſ. Cath. we make no more account of them, then wee doe of the Turkes Alcaron, or Aeſops Fables. Nay (ſaith Briſtow) it is well known to ſuch as heare the Proteſtants Sermons, Briſtow. Mot. 14.or bee in place to heare them, talke boldly and familiarly among themſelues, are not afrayd to confeſſe plainely, that the Fathers are all Papiſts. A ſtrange and ſenſeleſſe fiction deuiſed by theſe men, when not onelyonly our learned Diuines, but the vulgar people, are all eye-witneſſes, that the Booke written by the Iewel of our age, is publiſhed in all the Churches of our kingdom, whoſe challenge for the principall points of our Religion is made good, and will euer remaine vnanſwerable out of the Writings and Authorities of the ancient Fathers. But admit ſome Proteſtants were ſo ignorant or ſenſeleſſe, as to ſay priuately, All the Fathers were Papiſts: what ſtupiditie then may we think it in the chiefe Paſtors of the Romane Church, which by their publike writings, and open confeſſion acknowledge the principall poynts of Controuerſie; yea, their chiefe Articles of Faith, were vnknowne to the ancient Fathers.
We confeſſe it for a truth, that the ancient Fathers, St. Auſten, S. Ambroſe, St. Hierome and the reſt were learned men, they were Inſtruments of Grace, and Mercy: we read them, we reuerence them, we giuegive God thankes for them: but withall wee learne this leſſon frō them: Wee weigh not the writings of men, Auguſt ad Fortunat. Epiſt. 111.bee they neuer ſo worthy, and Catholique, as wee weigh the Canonicall Scriptures, but yeelding that reuerence that is due vntounto them. Wee may miſlike and refuſe ſomething in their writings, if we find they hauehave thought otherwiſe then the trueth may beare: and ſuch (ſaith Auſten) am I in the writings of others, and ſuch I would wiſh others to be in mine. Saint Auſten thought it no preiudice to the Romane Church, nor diſparagement to his own learning, to hauehave his writings examined by the rule of Scripture. Nay more (ſaith he) that which in my bookes thou thinkeſt to bee vndoubtedly true, Quod certū non habebis niſi certum intellexeris noli firmè retinere. Aug in Proae. lib 3. de Trinit.vnleſſe thou perceiue it to bee true indeed, hold it not reſolutely: St. Ambroſe was ſo farre from wiſhing Prince or people to rely vponupon his doctrine, that by way of preuention hee writes to Gratian the Emperour:Nolo argumento eredas ſancte Imperator & noſtrae diſputationi Scripturas interrogemus. &c. Ambroſ de Fide ad Grat l 1 c. 4 Beleeue not (O Emperour) our Arguments and our Diſputations, let vsus aske the Apoſtles, let vsus aske the Prophets, let vsus aske Christ. Now admit a doubtfull Recuſant at this day repaire for inſtruction to a Romiſh Prieſt or Biſhop, will he anſwer him with Auſten, Examine my doctrine by the rule of Scripture, and if you find it not agreeable to that Word, hold it not reſolutely? or will he anſwer him with Ambroſe, Heare not my arguments, beleeue not vsus that are the profeſſed Prieſts and Paſtors of the Church; but read the Scriptures, conſult with the Oracles of God, let Chriſt the Head of the Church reſolue the doubts and controuerſies of Religion? Surely nothing is more to bee wiſhed for by vsus, nothing is leſſe to be hoped for from them.
True it is, that St. Hierome in the queſtion betwixt him and St. Auſten, (whether St. Paul reprooued Peter colourably, or in earneſt) alleadgeth ſeuen Fathers againſt St. Auſten; and withall deſires him, to giuegive him leaue to erre with ſeuen Fathers. But what anſwere maketh Auſten? He appeales to St. Paul, Ipſe mihi pro his omnibꝰ et ſuprà hos omnes Apoſtolus Paulus occurrit ad ipſum confugio, ad ipſum ab omnibus qui aliter ſentiūt literarū tractaetoribus prouoco Aug. Ep. 19.and (ſaith he) Inſtead of all, and aboue all, I hauehave Paul the Apoſtle, to him doe I runne, to him I appeale from all Writers that think otherwiſe. Here wee ſee ſeuen principall members of the Church againſt the meaning of one Apoſtle, and yet all they were not able to remooue St. Auſten from that one authoritie; which was preualent againſt all; and I thinke it cannot be denied, but that this Father went the right way to the Goſpel. Againe, when hee was preſſed by Creſconius a Gramarian, with a teſtimony out of Cyprian, hee returnes this anſwere, I am not bound to bee tyed to that Epistle, becauſe I doe not account of Cyprians Epiſtles as of the Canonicall Scriptures, Ego Epiſtola huius authoritate nō teneor, quia &c. Aug. contr. Creſ. lib. 2. c. 32.but I examine them by the Canonicall Scriptures, and what I find in them agreeable to that word, I receiue it with commendations; what I finde to diſagree from it, with his good leaue, I leaue it.
This was the account the ancient Fathers made of their owne writings, and their fellow Biſhops, euen at that time when the Church was moſt viſible, and when the Fathers were in chiefeſt eſtimation in the Chriſtian world.
I ſpeake not theſe things, as if there were leſſe hope to find the truth in the writings of the ancient Fathers, then in new and vpſtart opinions of ſome priuate ſpirits. It is the voice of God and Nature: Aske thy father, Deut. 32.7.and he will ſhew thee, thine ancients, and they ſhall tell thee: and herein we are obedient children, and according to our dutie,Leu. 19.23. Wee riſe vp before the hoarie head, and honour the perſon of the aged. We agree with the Fathers, wherein they agree with the Scriptures, and with themſelues; and if in ſome particular poynts wee diſſent from ſome particular Fathers, yet it is in thoſe things which want vniuerſalitie and conſent, or are doubtfully vttered, or are deliuered as priuate opinions, and not as Articles of Faith: wee follow the Anciens as Leaders, not as Maſters: for their writings are no rules of faith, Scriptae Patrum non ſunt regulae fidei, nec habent authoritatem obligandi. Bell. de Cō cil. author. lib. 2. c. 12.neither hauehave they authoritie to binde: This is Bellarmines confeſſion, this is ours. And that the world may know our aduerſaries hauehave no ſuch cauſe (as they pretend) to bragge of the authorities of the Fathers, let any Proteſtant or Romaniſt, examine the ſubſtantiall poynts of Controuerſie, as they are now publiſhed,Bulla Pij 4. and decreed by the Popes Bull, and Councell of Trent, let them I ſay, obſerue the queſtions, as they are now ſtated with Anathemas, for Articles of faith, & compare them with the doctrines of the ancient Fathers, and they ſhall eaſily diſcerne, that our aduerſaries oftentimes obtrude the Tenets of particular perſons for the generall conſent of Fathers, and produce doubtful opinions, to proue Articles of faith: for I dare confidently avow, that in all fundamentall poynts of difference, either they want Antiquitie to ſupply their firſt ages; or Vniuerſalitie, to make good the conſent of Chriſtian Churches: or vnitie of opinions, to proue their Trent Articles of beliefe. And for tbe better manifeſtation of this my aſſertion, I will giuegive you inſtance in the principall poynts of the Roman faith and doctrine, that by comparing the doctrine of the Fathers in the firſt place, with the Tenets of the Romaniſts in the later, it ſhall appeare, that the Northerne and Southerne Poles ſhall ſooner meet together, then their opinions, ſtanding as they doe, can be reconciled.
Hee therefore that will take vponupon him to proue out of the ancient Fathers, that Chriſt is really preſent in the Sacrament to all faithfull Communicants, let him ſpare the labour, I will confeſſe it: (for wee acknowledge that Chriſt is really preſent, both ſpiritually by faith, and effectually by grace conferred vponupon all worthy receiuers.) But let him proue, that Chriſts body is ſubſtantially, corporally, and carnally in the Sacramēt, vnderunder the accidents of bread and wine; and that Reprobates, and creatures void of reaſon, much more of faith, may really partake of his fleſh and blood, as is now taught and beleeued de fide in the Roman Church, and I will ſubſcribe.
He that will proue out of the ancient Fathers, that the Sacramentall bread and cup were carried home to mens houſes, in the time of perſecution, and ſometime priuately receiued, let him ſpare the labour, I will confeſſe it: but let him ſhew me, that priuate Maſſes, that is, the receiuing of the Euchariſt by the Prieſt alone, without a competent number of Communicants, was the pulique practiſe of the ancient Church, as it is now vſed in the Romane, and I will ſubſcribe.
Het at will proue out of the ancient Fathers, that the conſecrated bread was ſomtimes giuen without the cup to ſicke folkes, to impotent, and abſtenious perſons; let him ſpare the labour, I will confeſſe it: but let him proue that the Fathers did generally forbid the Lay people, and the communicating Prieſt, to partake of the Sacramentall cup, and that the bread alone was adiudged ſufficient without the Cup, as it is now receiued in the Roman Church De fide, as an Article of Faith, and I will ſubſcribe.
He that will proue out of the ancient Fathers, that Prayers and Seruice in the Roman Church was commonly taught and practiſed in the Latin tongue, let him ſpare the labour, I will confeſſe it; (for it was the common and knowne language of the Latin Church) but let him ſhew mee that Prayers and Seruice was deliuered in a tongue vnknowne, and not vnderſtood of the common people, as it is now vſed and receiued with Anathema in the Roman church, and I will ſubſcribe.
He that will proue out of the ancient Fathers, that Images were allowed for memory, for hiſtory, for ornament, let him ſpare the labour, I will confeſſe it: but let him prooue that they were allowed by the Fathers for publique and priuate veneration, or religious worſhip; and that ſuch worſhip was eſtabliſhed as a doctrine of Faith, as it is now vſed in the Roman Church, and I will ſubſcribe.
He that will proue out of the ancient Fathers, that the Biſhop of Rome, and all other Biſhops had power to diſpence with the rigour of Eccleſiaſticall Penance, by Pardons, and Indulgences, let him ſpare the labour, I will confeſſe it: but let him proue that thoſe Indulgences were the treaſure of the Church, by the application of Saints merits, and that priuate ſatisfactions which were left to the diſcretion of eueryevery Biſhop were tranſferred wholly to the power of the Pope, and ſo receiued de Fide, as an article of faith, as it is now vſed in the Romane Church, and I will ſubſcribe.
He that will proue out of the ancient Fathers, that Confirmation, Penance, Orders, Matrimonie, are oftentimes called by the name of Sacraments, let him ſpare the labour, I will confeſſe it: But let him proue the poynt in queſtion, that al thoſe Sacraments were inſtituted by Chriſt in the new Teſtament, and that there are neither more nor leſſe, then ſeuen termed by the name of Sacraments, and thoſe onelyonly were properly ſo called, and that number of ſeuen was receiued de fide, as an Article of faith, and I will ſubſcribe.
He that will proue out of the ancient Fathers, that St. Peter had a primacie of Order amongſt the Apoſtles, and that the Biſhop of Rome had the firſt place amongſt other Biſhops; let him ſpare the labour, I will confeſſe it: but let him proue that Peter had iuriſdiction ouer the Apoſtles, and that the Biſhop of Rome was helde Chriſts Vicar generall, and Head of the Vniuerſall Church, and that ſuch his power and Supremacie was receiued de fide, as an article of faith, as it is now taught in the Roman Church, and I will ſubſcribe.
Laſtly, he that will proue out of the ancient Fathers, that out of the Cath. church there is no ſaluation, let him ſpare the labor, I will cōfeſſe it: but let him proue, that the preſent Roman Church, is that Catholike Church, as it is decreed de fide, by their laſt Article of their Creed, and I will ſubſcribe.
Thus briefly I hauehave giuen you my poore opinion how to examine the Trent Faith and doctrine, whereby you may eaſily diſcouer the vanitie of thoſe men, who challenge an intereſt in all the Fathers, in behalfe of their Religion: and certainly if this rule bee rightly obſerued, and purſued by any indifferent Iudge, he ſhal finde there is not greater diſtance in the times, then difference in their doctrine.
This is ſo well knowne to the beſt learned on their ſide, that when wee charge them, that they hauehave created new Articles of Faith, vnknowne to the firſt and beſt ages: by way of preuention they giuegive this ſolution; that true it is, many poynts of doctrine were not explicitè reuealed, and publikely declared, as Articles of faith in the dayes of the ancient Fathers, becauſe no heretikes did then oppoſe them: but (ſay they) they were, implicitè, obſcurely, ſecretly, reſeruedly knowne, and receiued of the Ancients, with an implicit faith: by which confeſſion, their later errour will bee greater then the firſt; for as one way they would ſeemingly auoyd the creating of new Articles of faith: ſo by acknowledgement of an implicit faith, they ouerthrow by conſequence the Viſibilitie of their Church: for if the Church of Rome had but an implicite beliefe in thoſe things which are now publikely declared, without doubt the Church at that time was not viſible in the faith, it was not like a Citie vponupon a hill, knowne and conſpicuous to all perſons; and thereupon the grand poynt of Viſibilitie, (which they ſo much magnifie among themſelues) will eaſily be called in queſtion.
For a concluſion of this poynt, I will giuegive you but one inſtance, whereby you may the better iudge of the reſt. Looke vponupon the learned Treatiſe of the right Reuerend Biſhop of Meath, (now Primate of Armach) wherein the iudgement of the ancient Fathers,An Anſwer to a challenge made by a Ieſuite in Ireland. 1624. touching ſeuerall poynts of controuerſie, is faithfully deliuered in our behalfe: what Reply (might wee thinke) could bee made by our aduerſaries, to thoſe Authorities ſo rightly produced▪ Behold, a Ieſuite by Order, W. Malone by name,A Reply to Mr. Vſhers anſwere. hath made a Reply, wherein hee hath produced in number many more authorities of Fathers, in behalfe of the Roman Church, and Trent Doctrine. The encounter being made, the end of the victory may ſeeme doubtfull: for the Fathers are produced by both contending parties, and ſeemingly they adhere to both ſides, as if they made both for Papiſt and Proteſtant, in one and the ſame ſubſtantiall poynts of doctrine. The reaſon being examined, it will appeare the Fathers do not vary from themſelues, nor from vsus in poynts of faith: but the Ieſuite produceth Authorities impertinent to the poynt in queſtion: As for inſtance in the firſt Article of Traditions.
Our Reuerend Biſhop tels the Ieſuite by way of preuention,B Vſher cap. Traditions p. 35. that Traditions of all ſorts, are not promiſcuouſly ſtrucke at by vsus, but ſuch vnwritten traditions which are obtruded for Articles of Religion: As for example. It is the firſt part of the Article of the Roman Creed: I admit and imbrace the Apoſtolicall and Eccleſieſticall Traditions. To this firſt part of the article, the reformed Churches doe ſubſcribe: but the other Obſeruances and Conſtitutions of the Church, which is the latter part of the Article, we thinke it great reaſon to gaineſay: for vnderunder the pretence of (other Obſeruances) the Church of Rome doeth vphold her priuate Maſſe, her Latine Seruice, her halfe Communion, her Inuocation of Saints, her worſhip of Images, & the like: all which are admitted for part of Gods worſhip, and accepted by them for Apoſtolike Traditions, when as in truth they are flat contrary to the doctrine of the written Word. The queſtion then is not whether the doctrine deliuered by Chriſt or his Apoſtles by word of mouth were of equall authoritie with the Word written (for this neuer any Proteſtant denied:) but whether the vnwritten Doctrine now taught in the Romane Church, were deliuered by Chriſt and his Apoſtles: whether their Eccleſiaſtical Obſeruations and Conſtitutions now vſed, bee of equall authoritie with the written Word: whether their Papal Traditions were alwayes, or euer admitted into the rule of faith: and laſtly, whether the Scriptures are not ſufficient for the ſaluation of the beleeuer, without the helpe of thoſe Traditions. Let theſe queſtions bee rightly propounded in our behalfe, and the multitude of the Ieſuites authorities will fall to ground of themſelues: for what Father hath hee produced to proue that the Papall Traditions now receiued de fide, in the Church of Rome, were deliuered by word of mouth by the Apoſtles? what Father hath hee cited, to prooue that the Conſtitutions of their Church had a conſtant and continuall ſucceſſion from the time of the Apoſtles, (as Articles of faith ought to hauehave?) what Fa her hath he vrged, that admitted doctrinall Traditions vnwritten into the Rule of faith? Laſtly, what ancient Father hath hee truely alleadged, that denies the Scriptures to bee ſufficient for all beleeuers, without the helpe of Romiſh Traditions?
It were no difficult matter as I conceiue, to giuegive a full anſwer to the Ieſuits replie in the right ſtating of the Queſtions, wherby it might eaſily appeare, that hee and his aſſociates hauehave taken great paines to little purpoſe: but I ſubmit my opinion to the iudgment of the learned, & proceed from the Fathers in generall, to particulars, wherin I wil inſtance in two principall Lights of the Weſterne Church, St. Auſten, and St. Gregory, the one Biſhop of Hippo, the other Biſhop of Rome, whereby you ſhal plainly diſcerne how the later Popes and Biſhops doe differ from the former, and how theſe two Fathers of the Church concurre expreſly with the doctrine profeſſed in the Reformed Churches, different from the Roman.