Romanism Discussed, Treatise · Article 5 · Section 1 – Section 2
SECT. I.
The deceit of H. T. is ſhewed in aſſerting an Infallibility and Judicature of Controverſies in the Church, which he means of the Pope▪
H. T. entitles his fifth Article thus, The churches infallibility demonſtrated, and ſaith, Our Tenet is, that the Roman catholick church is the higheſt viſible Judge of controverſies, and that ſhe is infallible both in her Propoſitions and Definitions of all points of faith; having a power from God to oblige all men to believe her under pain of damnation. And ſix pages after p. 70. he ſaith thus, Note here for your better underſtanding this whole Queſtion, that when we affirm, the Church is infallible in things of faith, by the word [Church] we underſtand not onelyonly the Church diffuſed over all the World, unanimouſly teaching, whoſe Doctrine of Faith we hold to be infallible, but alſo the Church repreſented in a Council perfectly oecumenical, (that is to ſay, called out of the whole world, and approved by the Pope) whoſe Definitions of Faith we hold to be infallible.
Anſ. WE have here a moſt arrogant proud claim like that of the King of Tyrus, Ezek. 28. 2, 3. I am God, I ſit in the ſeat of God, there is no ſecret that they can hide from me. For what is this leſs which is here aſcribed to meer men, often the worſt of men, than the prerogative of the Son of God: ſurely it's more than Angels have, Job 4. 18: But though this Author is bold enough in the title and tenet, yet in his after note he hath ſuch ſubterfuges as ſhew his deſpair of making it good, and his deceitful mockage of his unwary reader. For, 1. He deals like a ſophiſter that after his arguments ſtates the queſtion. 2. He doth ſo ſhift off this infallibility from one to another, that he knows not well where to fix it. Fain he would faſten it on the Pope, as he doth in a manner at laſt; and Hart more plainly confeſſeth with Rainold, ch. 7. diviſ. 7. though it behove the Pope to uſe the adviſe of his brethren; and therefore I ſpake of Confiſtories, Courts and Councils; yet whether he follow their adviſe or no his decrees are true. But then the arguments from Scripture and Fathers which ſpeak of the church, not of the Pope, had appeared to be impertinent. Therefore he doth not in plain words diſclaim it's infallibility; but ſaith, When we affirm the church is infallible in things of faith, by the word [church] we underſtand not only the church diffuſed over all the world unanimouſly teaching, whoſe doctrines of faith we hold to be infallible. Wherein you may perceive. 1. Egregious vanity, in making the Roman church Catholick. 2. The Church diffuſed over all the world teaching. 3. Teaching unanimouſly, which are all like a ſick mans dreams of a golden mountain, there having never been any ſuch thing as this in the world, nor ever is likely to be. 2. Egregious deceit in the terming this church infallible, Judge of controverſies, propounding and defining points of faith, having power from God to oblige all men under pain of damnation to believe her: which is meerly to delude ſilly Papiſts ſpeaking of the churches power, which they place in the Pope and ſo draw them into his net. For I would ask this H. T. where or when the Catholick church diffuſed over the whole world diſtinct from an oecumenical council did teach, much leſſe teach unanimouſly, or how they know it? he will certainly ſay, it hath been in councils or the Popes determinations. Why then doth not this Author ſay plainly, the infallibility and judgement of controverſies is not in the Catholick church diffuſed over the world, according to the meaning of the words (which were indeed to ſay all believers were infallible) but ſay, he means not only, which is as if he had ſaid, the Catholick church diffuſed over the world is infallible, but not it only, when he means it not to be infallible at all: nor doth he deal better in placing it in a council. For. 1. He ſuppoſeth ſuch a council perfectly Oecumenical called out of the whole world, as never was nor is likely ever to be. 2. This council he will not have to be infallible without the Popes approbation. 3. He placeth the words [whoſe definitions of faith we hold to be infallible] ſo as that a reader may conceive either he means the councils or the Popes definitions. However it is certain he makes the council without the Pope not infallible, ſo that the Pope hath the negative voice. But indeed this Author or many of his fellows at leaſt hold, that if the Pope himſelf without a council define any point of faith it muſt be received; yea Bellarmin ſaith l. 4. de Pontifice Romano. c. 5. if the Pope ſhould erre in commanding vices or forbidding vertues, the church ſhould be bound to believe vices to be good and vertues to be evil, unleſs ſhe would ſin againſt conſcience. So that however the church be pretended, it is the Pope who is intended, who is masked under the name of the church, but ſometimes termed the Paſtor of the Church, as if the ſame perſon could be relative and correlative too, Paſtor and Church both. And this one perſon (as if all knowledge lay in his breaſt) muſt be the Judge of all controverſies of faith, though perhaps an infidel in heart, one of the greateſt perverters of the faith of Chriſt in the world, and the greateſt offender, and moſt juſtly accuſed of any in the world, being notoriouſly and horribly vitious, and maintain manifeſt ſins, (not only erre in doubtful matters, as Bellarmin would ſeem to limit his ſpeech in his recognition) even theſe monſtrous ſins, of breaking oaths and leagues, killing Kings, allowing inceſtuous marriages, making and worſhipping of Images, Yea though he be ſo unlearned (as it is ſaid of one) as not to underſtand Grammer, Pope Gregory the great himſelf underſtood not Greek, Pope Zachary condemned Biſhop Vigilius as an heretick for holding Antipodes, though he be ſeldome a Divine, for the moſt part a meer Canoniſt, whoſe very decrees, Breves and Bulls ſhew ſuch groſſe ignorance and pervertings of Scripture, as a graduate in the Engliſh Univerſities would be aſhamed of, yet he muſt be Judge of controverſies between the moſt learned Divines in the world and in the moſt weighty points of faith. Surely were not Papiſts either very ſilly or very Atheiſtical, or very much bewitched with the Romiſh ſorceries they would never be ſo ſottiſh as they are to truſt to the Popes definitions in points of faith, but of any other moſt ſuſpect them, eſpecially conſidering how much reſpect to their own gain and greatneſſe, how little to the good of mens ſouls is in all their determinations. No marvail though different parties appeal to the Pope, yet neither ſtand to his ſentence, as of old have been ſeen in ſundry points, and as at this day in the late controverſies between Janſeniſts and Moliniſts in France.
SECT. II.
Luke 10. 16. proves not the Roman or Catholick churches infallibility.
BUt let us view the proofs that are brought by H. T. for his monſtrous aſſertion of the Roman Catholick (as he terms it) churches judicature of controverſies, infallibility in her propoſitions and definitions of all points of faith and power from God to oblige all men to believe her under pain of damnation: where firſt he brings four arguments for her infallibility. The firſt is thus. No man by hearing (or believing) Chriſt can hear an errour in faith. But every man by hearing the church hears Chriſt, therefore no man by hearing the church can hear an errour in faith, therefore ſhe is infallible. The Major muſt be granted, otherwiſe you charge Chriſt to be the Author of damning lyes. The Minor is proved; he that beareth you (the church) heareth me, and he that deſpiſeth you deſpiſeth me. St. Luk. 10 16. The conſequences are both unavoidable.
Anſw. 1. The concluſion is not the ſame with the tenet, which was that the Roman Catholick church is infallible, but in the concluſion is no mention of the Roman church more then of any other church, to wit, the Hieroſolymitan or Antiochian, and ſo that which was to be proved is not proved. 2. The Minor is denyed, and in the proof from Luk. 10. 16. is with a ſhameleſſe fraud foiſted in (the church) it being certain that at that time there was no Catholick church diffuſed over the world, much leſſe Roman church at all, to whom thoſe words of Chriſt could be directed, but by [you] are meant either the ſeventy Diſciples, or the twelve Apoſtles, as comparing, Luk. 10. 16. with Matth. 10. 40. makes it probable. Nor doth Chriſt ſay, he that heareth you heareth me, and he that despiſeth you despiſeth me in any caſe whatſoever, for then the high Prieſts had heard Chriſt when they heard Judas (who was one of the Apoſtles) offer and promiſe to ſell Chriſt for money, and Peter when …e denied Chriſt: but then when the Apoſtles or ſeventy ſpake the words and meſſage of Chriſt. In which caſe I grant the church of Rome and Pope, yea and Biſhop of Jeruſalem, Corinth or any private Chriſtian, though but a woman, are to be heard and are infallible. So that this place is groſſely abuſed for proof of the Catholick Roman Churches, or oecumenical councils, or Popes infallibility in their definitions of faith, till it be proved that they define what Chriſt did before deliver.