A53737:124
A vindication of the Animadversions on Fiat lux
A vindication of the Animadversions on Fiat lux wherein the principles of the Roman church, as to moderation, unity and truth are examined and sundry important controversies concerning the rule of faith, papal supremacy, the mass, images, &c. discussed / by John Owen.
London: printed for Ph. Stephens, 1664
A Vindication of the Animadversions on Fiat Lux. › Chapter 4
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
And the Catholic Proposition that he asserts himself, is, that, Summus Pontifex, cum totam Ecclesiam docet in his quae ad fidem pertinent, nullo casu errare potest. The Pope when he teacheth the whole Church, can in no Case err in those things which appertain unto faith. De Rom. Pontif. lib. 4. cap. 2, 3. What a Blind that is, of teaching the whole Church, children can see. The Pope can no way teach the whole Church, but as he declares his opinion, or judgement, which may be divulged unto many, as those of another man. Let us see then, how well they have made good this their Infallibility; and how well their judgement hath been approved of by the Church of old. I will not here mind you of the Decree fathered on Clemens, wherein he determines that all things among Christians ought to be common; and, among them, wives; because I know, it is falsely imposed on him, though you may be justly charged with it, who are the Authors of those forgeries whereof that is a part. Nor shall I rake the Epistles which you ascribe unto divers of the Ancient Bishops of Rome, that are full of ignorance, errors, and pittifull ⟨p. 84⟩non-sence; because they are, questionless, Pseudopigraphcall, though you who own them, may be justly charged with their follies. Nor will I much insist on the Testimony of Tertullian in his Book against Praxeas, that the Bishop of Rome owned the Prophesies of Montanus, until Praxeas persuaded him to the Contrary; because, it may be, you will say, that perhaps Tertullian spake partially in favour of a Sect whereunto he was himself addicted; though, for ought I know, he is as sufficient a Witness in matter of fact, as any one man upon the Roll of Antiquity. But what say you to Marcellinus? Did he not sacrifice to Idols, which, according unto you, is a mixed misdemeanour in faith and manners, (Con. Tom. 1. Vita Marcel.) and therefore certainly a shrewd impeachment of his Infallibility: and was he not judged for it? What think you of Liberius, did he not subscribe to Arianism? Soomen tells you expressly that he did so; Lib. 4. cap. 15. And so doth Athanasius Epist. ad Solitarios, giving the reason why he did so, namely out of fear. And so doth Hierome both in Script. Ecclesiast. Fortunate. and in Euseb. Chron. Pope Honorius was solemnly condemned for a Monothelite-Heretic in the sixth general Council, Act. 12, 13.
And the Catholick Pro•osition that he asserts himself, is, that, Summus Pontifex, cum totam Ecclesiam docet in his quae ad fidem pertinent, nullo casu errare potest. The Pope when he teacheth the whole Church, can in no Caseerre in those things which appertain unto faith. De Rom. Pontif. lib. 4. cap. 2, 3. What a Blind that is, of teaching the whole Church, children can see. The Pope can no way teach the whole Church, but as he declares his opinion, or judgement, which may be divulged unto many, as those of another man. Let us see then, how well they have made good this their Infallibility; and how well their judgement hath been approved of by the Church of old. I will not here mind you of the Decree fathered on Clemens, wherein he determines that all things among Christians ought to be common; and, among them, wives; because I know, it is falsly imposed on him, though you may be justly charged with it, who are the Authors of those forgeries whereof that is a part. Nor shall I rake the Epistles which you ascribe unto divers of the Ancient Bishops of Rome, that are full of ignorance, errors, and pittifull