that lookes into your Commentaries and bookes of controuersies shall finde very diuers and sometimes contrarie expositions Our Sauiour Christ hath prouided sufficientlie for his Church by deliuering in scripture the grounds of religion so plainely some here some there that any reasonable man may with small labour vnderstand them from which they that haue knowledge of the tongues and arts especiallie of Logick and Rhetorick may come to vnderstand the harder places though perhaps not euery one yet at the least so many and such as shall serue to instruct the people of God in the knowledge of his will for the obtaining of euerlasting life speaker D. B. P. To auoid then such garboyles and intestine contention there vvas neuer yet any Law-maker so simple but appointed some gouernour and Iudge who should see the due obseruation of his Lawes and determine all boubts that might arise about the letter and exposition of the Law who is therefore called the quicke and liuely law and shall we Christians thinke that our diuine Lavv-maker who in vvisdome care and prouidence surmounted all others more than the heauens doe the earth hath left his golden Lawes at randome to be interpreted as it should seeme best vnto euery one pretending some hidden knovvledge from we knovv not vvhat spirit no no It cannot be once imagined vvithout too too great derogation vnto the soueraigne prudence of the Son of God speaker A. W. For the auoiding of outward garboiles by force or preaching false doctrine our Sauiour hath appointed principallie the ciuill magistrate secondarily the gouernors of the Churches For the keeping of his children from perishing by error he hath ordeined beside the outward helps of Pastors and Doctors the most certaine direction of his vicegerent the holy spirit who preserues all that are Christs from falling away from the substance and foundation of truth to damnation Not that euery man may take vpon him to interpret scripture vpon pretence of I know not what spirit but that he may assure himselfe of being kept from all error that may ouerthrow his saluation by the direction of Gods spirit vpon whom he calls by prayer and rests by faith to this purpose as I said before sure and who therefore were appointed to be heard without exception This befals not any men nowadayes and therefore none can iustly claime any such credit The auncients that so wrot in this point of S. Pauls going to see Peter haue wholie mistaken the Apostle who denies that of himselfe which they affirme of him For he saith First that he was not an Apostle of men nor by man Secondly that he went vp to Ierusalem not to haue confirmation of his doctrine from them who were no way superior to him but that the Gentiles might know he taught the same things that the other Apostles did If he had done it for his owne assurance he had not beleeued the vision and discredited our Sauiours extraordinarie teaching of him and had taught for a time such things as he was not sure to be the truth of God But if this should be his case he had sinned grieuously in his former preaching and he had wholie ouerthrowne the authoritie of his ministrie which in these two Chapters he labors especially to vphold auouching that he neither learned any doctrine nor receiued any allowance of his authoritie from Iames Cephas and Iohn which were esteemed to be pillers yea he did openly reprooue Peter if not of error in doctrine yet of misbehauiour in his conuersation As for the controuersie of abrogating Moses law it was a case determined by scripture and no man might refuse to obey any one of the Apostles charge coÌ„cerning that point But that the Brethren might haue the better satisfaction it pleased the holy ghost that the Apostles should in a Councell decide the question by ioynt consent of themselues and the brethren there assembled which any one of them might of himselfe haue ended But because diuers parts of the Church were conuerted by diuers Apostles and each Church made most account of their owne Apostle the readiest and safest way was to conclude of the matter by common consultation so afterward in all lawfull Councels the written word was held sufficient for the consutation of the heresies that arose from time to time but for the better stopping of the heretikes mouths and satisfying of all men sometimes the consent of former Diuines Churches and Councels was added in good discretion for mens sake not for the matter which might be and was abundantlie prooued or discouered as occasion serued by the scriptures speaker D. B. P. See Cardinall Bellarmine I vvill only record tvvo noble examples of this recourse vnto Antiquity for the true sense of Gods vvord The first out of the Ecclesiastical History whereof Saint Gregorie Nazianzen and Saint Basil tvvo principall lights of the Greeke Church this is recorded They were both noble men brought vp together at Athens And aftervvard for thirteene yeares space laying aside all profane bookes imployed their studie vvholie in the holy Scriptures The sense and true meaning vvhereof they sought not out of their owne iudgement and presumption as the Protestants both do and teach others to do but out of their Predecessors writings and authoritie namely of such as vvere knovvne to haue receiued the rule of vnderstanding from the Tradition of the Apostles These be the very words speaker A. W. The examples you bring are nothing against vs in this question Nazianzen and Basil sought the true sense of the Scripture not out of their owne iudgement but out of their predecessors writings and authoritie What then Therefore the Scripture containes not all doctrine necessarie to saluation This consequence hath often been disprooued Neither is the Antecedent true if it be generally taken For their owne writings shew euery where that they vsed the help of learning and discourse to finde out the sense of scripture in many places and set downe that in their Commentaries which by study they came to vnderstand If any thing were doubtfull we presume they did as we are sure the Protestants now doe where they had not apparant reason to the contrarie rest vpon the authoritie of their predecessors rather than vpon their owne This reuerence wee giue to the Fathers writings and reade them with as great diligâ—… as they that make more bragges of thâ—ir knowledge in â—heâ— And if that rule which the storie 〈◊〉 and or you name not but it is Austin speakes of 〈◊〉 one of them which we follw in searching out thâ—… 〈◊〉 of the Scripture â—…treate â—ou to make 〈◊〉 to vs and you shall finde that we will take it 〈◊〉 and vse it diligently if we cannot shew you certaine reasons to the contrarie If the rule be to take for truth whatsoeuer the ancients haue deliuered how many things yea contrarie expositions shal we hold for true If you say the rule is to beleeue the ancientest what
Churches is of great authoritie speaker A. W. Origen teacheth that the Church receiued from the Apostles by Tradition to baptize Infants Origen calles the tradition of the Apostles their practise of baptizing infants which hath sufficient ground of scripture though not in expresse words as your Church also holds and as Origen himselfe acknowledgeth by shewing the reason that moued the Apostles to baptise them as hee conceiues though indeede there is also other better warrant for it speaker A. W. Athanasius saith VVe haue proued this sentence to haue been deliuered from hand to hand by Fathers to Fathers but yee O new Iewes and sonnes of Caiphas vvhat Auncestors can yee shevv of your opinion speaker A. W. Where reason failed the Arians on their side and could not moue them in behalfe of the Church Athanasius addes this as a further proofe for their confutation that the doctrine of Christ being one with his Father had been held from time to time in the Church whereas they had no consent of antiquitie for their opinion Yet had he himselfe prooued the point by many certaine reasons out of the Scripture and brought this argument from the authoritie of men for confutation of their false assertion that the former Diuines were not of that iudgement This Athanasius refuteth by the testimonies of Theognostus Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria whom he calles eloquent and one other Dionysius Bishop of Rome and Origen whom he termes painfull S. Basil hath these words VVe haue the doctrine that is kept and preached in the Church partly vvritten and part vve haue receiued by Tradition of the Apostles in mysterie both vvhich be of the same force to godlines and no man opposeth against these vvho hath at the least but meane experience of the Lavves of the Church See Gregory Nazianzen Orat. 1. in Iulian If you will giue me leaue I will defend Basils speech by that which may be gathered out of him viz. that hee holds them things to be by tradition which are not exprest in the Scriptures My ground for this exposition are these words of his Out of what Scripture haue we saith Basil the very speaker D. B. P. S. Augustine some thousand two hundred yeares agoe recordeth the very forme of arguing which the Protestants vse now-a-daies in the person of Maximinus an Arrian in his first booke against him in the beginning Jf thou shalt saith this Heretike bring any thing out of the Scriptures vvhich is common to all vve must needs heare thee but these vvords vvhich are vvithout the Scriptures are in no sort to be receiued of vs when as the Lord himselfe hath admonished vs and said in vaine do they vvorship me teaching commaundements and precepts of men How S. Augustine opposed against them vnwritten Traditions hath been afore declared The like doth S. Bernard asfirme of certaine Heretikes of his time called Apostolici So that most truly it may be concluded that euen as we Catholikes haue learned of the Apostles and auncient Fathers our noble progenitors to stand fast and hold the Traditions which we haue receiued by word of mouth aswell as that which is written Euen so the Protestants haue receiued as it were from hand to hand of their ignoble predecessors old condemned Heretikes to reiect all traditions and to she vnto the only Scriptures speaker A. W. The Heretike Maximinus asked nothing but reason of Austin if he stood vpon the matter and not vpon the termes neither doth Austin find fault with this condition nor could he in reason because as I answered before himselfe appeales to that kind of triall in that very disputation Neither must I saith Austin to Maximinus alleage the Councell of Nice in preiudice of the matter nor you the Councell of Ariminum neither am I tyed with the authoritie of this Councell nor you with the authoritie of that let matter striue with matter 〈◊〉 with cause reason with reason by the authoritie of the scriptures which are not proper to you or me but common to vs both But will you heare him speake more like Maximinus Reade me this saith Austin out of a Prophet reade it out of a Psalme recite it out of the Lawe recite it out of the Gospell recite it out of an Apostle Thence recite I the Church disperst ouer the whole world and our Lord saying my sheepe heare my voyce And a little after away with mens papers let the voyce of God sound And in another place away with our papers let Gods bookes come forth heare Christ heare the truth speaking If these speeches be hereticall we confesse our selues to be Heretikes but so that we haue Austin on our side for an Arch-Heretike Bernard speakes of the Hereticks called Apostolicks not in his 62. but in his 66. sermon vpon the Canticles where he saith neuer a word of their reiecting Traditions No more hath Austin nor Epiphanius where they write of them And if they did reiect traditions it was because they would establish their owne hereticall bookes viz. the Acts of Thomas and Andrew and the gospell of the Egyptians which to say the truth are to be counted traditions because they haue no warrant of the scripture nor are any part of the Canon It were easie for me to turne your owne sentence against you and as all men may see with good reason but it shall suffice me that I haue refuted your slaunders and shewes with sound proofe of arguments and authoritie I consider loosers must haue leaue to speake The eighth point Of Vowes Our consent speaker W. P. Touching vowes this must bee knowne that wee do not condemne them altogether but onely labour to restore the purity of doctrine touching this point which by the Church of Rome from time to time hath beene corrupted and defaced We hold therefore that a vow is a promise made to God touching some duties to be performed vnto him and it is twofold generall or speciall The generall vow is that which concernes all beleeuers and it is made in the couenant both of the law and of the Gospell I will here onely speake of the vow which is made in the couenant of the Gospell in which there be two actions one of God the other of man God in mercy on his part promiseth to men the remission of sinnes and life euerlasting and man againe for his part promiseth to beleeue in Christ and to obey God in all his commaundements All men euer made this vow vnto God as the Iewes in circumcision which also they renewed so often as they receiued the Passeouer and in the newe Testament all that are baptized doe the like And in baptisme this vow is called the stipulation of a good conscience whereby wee purpose to renounce our selues to beleeue in Christ and to bring forth the fruites of true repentance and it ought to be renued so oft as wee are partakers of the supper of the Lord.
Heretikes would flie to reuelations and thereby defend their errors they might be said not to do against this rule of Tertullian Yea if traditions were of force to prooue they might easily answere Tertullian in this case that it skilled not though they could not maintaine their opinions by Scripture as long as traditions perhaps might make for them But Tertullian condemnes their errors because they cannot be auowed by the Scripture making that the onely triall speaker W. P. Againe We need no curiositie after Christ Iesus nor inquisition after the Gospell When we beleeue it we desire to beleeue nothing beside for this we first beleeue that there is nothing more which we may beleeue speaker D. B. P. By the Gospell there is vnderstood all our Christian doctrine written and vnwritten and not only the written word of the foure Euangelists else we should not beleeue the Actes of the Apostles or their Epistles no more than Traditions which Christian doctrine written and vnwritten we only beleeue by diuine faith to all other Authors we giuesuch credit as their writings do deserue speaker A. W. By the Gospell the doctrine of saluation by Christ is vnderstood which is no lesse plainly and fully deliuered in the other writings of the new Testament than in those foure bookes which we call by that particular name But that traditions should be commended vnder the title of the Gospell it is neither true nor likely You must shew some place of this author or of some other about his time to giue credit to your interpretation But it is apparant you answered at aduenture not knowing where it is to be found in Tertullian speaker D. B. P. If any man desire to see Tertullians iudgement of Traditions let him read his book of prescriptions against Heretikes where he auerreth that Traditions serue better than the Scriptures themselues to confute all Heresies Heretikes alwaies either not allowing all the bookes of Scripture or else peruerting the sense and meaning of the Scriptures speaker A. W. He that hath to doe with such Heretikes as Tertullians aduersaries then were and you Papists in part now are must of necessitie haue recourse to the iudgement of the Church For what other meanes can be vsed against them that denie the sufficiencie of the Scripture Therefore Tertullian and Irenaeus too who had to deale with the same kinde of men labours to beate them with their owne weapons and yet bring not in any new doctrine beside the Scripture but maintaine the doctrine of the Scripture against them that condemne the Scripture by the testimonies of learned men custome of the Church but he saith nothing of giuing like authoritie to the traditions and written word Beside here is no speech of doctrine but only of obseruing certaine outward ceremonies not necessarie to saluation speaker W. P. Augustine booke 2. cap. 9. de doct Christ. In those things which are plainely set downe in Scripture are found all those points which containe faith and manners of liuing well speaker D. B. P. All things necessary to be beleeued of euery simple Christian vnder paine of damnation that is the Articles of our Beleefe are contained in the Scriptures but not the resolution of harder matters much lesse of all difficulties vvhich the more learned must expresly beleeue if they vvill be saued vvhich distinction S. Augustine else-vvhere doth signifie speaker A. W. The question is only of such points as are necessarie to saluation which are all one to the learned and vnlearned vnlesse there be diuers meanes of saluation for them True it is that a Minister ought to haue more knowledge then an ordinarie Christian and that the neglect of laboring for it is damnable to him as all sinne is damnable but that which is necessarie to saluation is equallie necessarie for all men neither doth Austen allow any such distinction but refutes it rather in that verie place for he saith that all that feare God do seeke the will of God in the Canonicall scripture but the words alleaged are most plaine All those points that containe faith and manners of liuing well that is hope and charitie Now what is necessarie for any man to saluation that is not comprized in one of these speaker D. B. P. And is gathered out of many other places of his vvorkes as in that matter of rebaptizing them vvho became Catholikes after they had bin baptized by Heretikes He saith The Apostles truly haue commaunded nothing hereof in their vvritings but that custome which was laid against S. Cyprian is to be beleeued to haue flowed from an Apostolicall Tradition as there be many things which the vniuersall church holdeth and therfore are to be beleeued speaker A. W. In that place Austen makes no mention of any such difference betwixt the learned and vnlearned to saluation but teacheth directlie contrary to your doctrine in both points For the hard matters you speake of thus saith Austin when we dispute of darke matters where the certain and cleere instructions of the holy Scriptures do not help vs a mans presumption must restraine it selfe and not incline to either side This is Austens iudgement he leades vs not in these cases to traditions as you do Now for the other point he addes presently after that if the knowledge of hard questions could not be wanted without losse of saluation there would be some cleere authoritie of Scripture to instruct vs in them so far was Austen from seeking to any traditions as necessarie to saluation This testimonie is falsely alleaged by you in the later part of it which is thus in Austin and therefore are to be beleeued to haue bin enioyned by the Apostles You put the matter indefinitly are to be beleeued that so they may be thought necessarie to saluation of which there is not a word in this place of Austen speaker D. B. P. The same saith he of the custome of the Church in Baptizing Infants And in his Epist. 174. of the vvord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is not in the holy Scripture and yet neuerthelesse is defended to be vsed in the assertion of faith As also saith he vve neuer read in those bookes that the Father is vnbegotten and yet we hold that he is so to be called * And S. Augustine holds that the holy Ghost is to be adored though it be not vvritten in the vvord speaker A. W. Of the custome of baptising infants Austin saith that it is not to be despised nor by any meanes to be thought superfluous and that it were not at all to be beleeued vnlesse it were an Apostolicall tradition where he speakes not of any doctrine necessary to saluation but of the Churches practise and that indeede in a case grounded on the Scripture We speake of doctrine not of words as Austin doth in those places The matter which is signified by those words that Christ is of the same substance with his father
that the father was not begotten may be proued by the Scripture and must needs be held the words are neither in the Scripture nor bring any danger of saluation though they be denyed if the points of doctrine signified by them be beleeued yet were it a great presumption and follie for any man to refuse such words as haue bin fitlie applied by the former Churches The other point of adoring the holy ghost hath a strong foundation on those places of Scripture which prooue him to be God as many do But what is all this to the purpose for the stablishing of any doctrine necessarie to saluation by tradition speaker D. B. P. The like of the perpetuall Virginity of our B. Lady out of vvhich and many more such like vve gather most manifestly that S. Augustine thought many matters of faith not to be contained in the vvritten vvord but to be taken out of the Churches treasurie of Traditions speaker A. W. The fourth heresie in Austin is the Basilidians who held no such opinion of the virgin Mary Indeed there were other heretikes the 6. in number who denyed her virginitie after our Sauiours birth falsely as we verily perswade our selues but this is no matter necessarie to saluation though it be an heresie to hold that as a matter of faith which hath no warrant from the Scripture but rather the contrarie speaker W. P. Vincentius Lyrinen saith the Canon of the Scripture is perfect and fully sufficient to it selfe for all things speaker D. B. P. I thinke that there is no such sentence to be found in him hesaies by way of obiection VVhat need we make recourse vnto the authority of the Ecclesiasticall vnderstanding if the Canon of the Scripture be perfect He affirmeth not that they be fully sufficient to determine all controuersies in religion but throughout all his booke he proues the cleane contrary that no heresie can be certainly confuted and suppressed by only Scriptures without we take with it the sense and interpretation of the Catholike Church speaker A. W. Vincentius saith that the Canon of the Scripture is sufficient and more then sufficient for all things and in another place the Canon of the scripture sufficeth it selfe for all things The former place is those very words which you alleage falsely where Vincentius thus speakes Here perhaps some man will demaund what the authoritie of the Ecclesiasticall vnderstanding of the Scripture needs seeing the Canon of the Scripture is perfect and more then sufficient to it selfe for all things His answere is that the interpretation of the Church is requisite because diuers men expound the Scripture diuersly but what is this against the sufficiencie of the Scripture or for the authoritie of traditions concerning matters not contained in the Scriptures Beside these testimonies other reasons there bee that serue to prooue this point I. The practise of Christ and his Apostles who for the confirmation of the doctrine which they taught vsed alwaies the testimonie of Scripture neither can it be prooued that they euer confirmed any doctrine by tradition Act. 26. 22. I continue vnto this day witnessing both to small and great saying none other things then those which the Prophets and Moses did say should come And by this wee are giuen to vnderstand that wee must alwaies haue recourse to the written worde as beeing sufficient to instruct vs in matters of saluation speaker D. B. P. First for our Sauiour Christ Iesus he out of his diuine wisdome deliuered his doctrine most commonly in his owne name But I say vnto you And very seldome confirmeth it with any testimony out of the Law The Euangelists do oftē note how Christ fulfilled the old prophecies but neuer or very seldome seeke to confirme his doctrine by test monies their owne they do sometimes but to say they neuer wrote any thing out of Tradition proceeds of most grosse ignorance Where had S. Mathew the adoring of the Sages S. Iohn Baptists preaching briefly that was done before his owne conuersion but by Tradition S. Marke wrote the most part of his Gospel out of Tradition receiued from S. Peter as witnesseth Eusebius S. Luke testifieth of himself that he wrote his whole Gospel as he had receiued it by Tradition from them who vvere eye-vvitnesses What desperate carelesnesse was it then to affirme that the Apostles neuer vsed Tradition to confirme any doctrine when some of them built not only parcels but their whole Gospels vpon Traditions speaker A. W. Our Sauiour doth ordinarily confirme his doctrine especially if there be any question of it out of the bookes of the old testament by that he repeld Sathan by that he confuted the Pharises and defended his disciples eating the eares of corne on the Sabbath by that he taxeth the Iewes blindnes and maintaines his owne speaking in parables By the same he ouerthrowes the Iewes traditions and rebukes their hypocrisie he refutes their errors about diuorces but what should I run ouer the particulars the Gospels are full of such examples Master Perkins hath neuer a word of the Euangelist who did but write the history of our Sauiours doings and sayings and yet euen they as your selfe confesse prooue that he is the Messiah by the Scriptures of the old Testament applying them to the things he did and suffered You deuise matters to confute Master Perkins speaketh of confirming doctrine by traditions and you answere that they wrote something out of tradition that is they set downe somewhat in writing which themselues had heard of other and not read in the old Testament And then you aske where S. Mathew had the adoring of the Sages euen there where Moses had the creation of the world and the whole story of Genesis From a better ground then tradition viz. from the Spirit of God the author and enditer of the Scripture from whom also the other Euangelists had the matter and penning of their Gospell though two of them Marke and Luke first came to the knowledge of those things by the preaching of the Apostles which had all one authoritie with the word written This is apparant of Marke by Eusebius himselfe who saith that the Romans intreated him to set downe in writing those things which the Apostle Peter had taught them by word of mouth and which he also had heard him deliuer The like is to be said of S. Luke who was a companion of the Apostle Paul and wrote as the other did that which he heard of him and other of the Apostles But howsoeuer the things deliuered by them came first to their knowledge it wants not much of blasphemy to make traditions the foundation of the Gospels written by them For either the holy Ghost did not inspire them with the matter and manner of their penning or else if it be as you would haue it the holy ghost built vpon tradition which is but an vncertaine kinde of knowledge depending vpon mens
not the Virgin Mary in your seruice called the promise of the Prephets the Queene of the Patriarkes the schoolmistris of the Euangelists the teacher of the Apostles the comforter of the quick and the dead Who thâ—… saios deuoutly this short prayer daily saith the Rubrick shall not depart out of this world without penance and ministration of the holy Sacrament In another prayer in the same booke shee is called the most true schoolmistris of the Euangelists the most wise teacher of the Apostles The booke was printed at Paris by Francis Regnault 1526. What profound piercing into such naturall affection can exccuse these speeches what French phrase can warrant it But what should we striue about the forciblenes of her prayers when it is not nor can be prooued that she prayes at all speaker W. P. Therefore we haue good cause to blesse the name of God that hath freed vs from the yoke of this Roman bondage and hath brought vs to the true light and libertie of the Gospell And it should be a great height of vnthankfulnesse in vs not to stand ouer against the present Church of Rome but to yeelde ourselues to plots of reconciliation To this effect and purpose I haue penned this little Treatise which I present to your worship desiring it might be some token of a thankfull minde for vndeserued loue And I craue withall not onely your Worshipfull which is more common but also your learned protection being well assured that by skill and arte you are able to iustifie whatsoeuer I haue truelie taught Thus wishing to you and yours the continuance and the increase of faith and good conscience I take my leaue Cambridge Iune 28. 1597. Your W. in the Lord VVilliam Perkins Wherefore to conclude this Epistle if there be no waightier cause then this by you here produced vvhy you and your adherent doe not reconcile your selues vnto the Church of Rome you may shortly by Gods grace become nevv men for vve are so farre off from making our Sauiour Christ a Pseudochâ—â—st or from dravving one iote of excellencie from his soueraâ—gne povver merits or dignitie that vve in the very points by you put downe doe much more magnifie him then you doe For in maintaining the authority by him imparted vnto his deputies our spirituall Magistrates and of their merits and satisfaction We first say that these his seruants prerâ—… be his hee gifts of 〈…〉 grace bestovved on vvhom he pleaseth vvhich is no finall praise of his great liberality And vvithall affirme that there is an infinite difference betvveene his ovâ—ne povver merits and satisfaction and ours Wherein his soueraigne honour is preserued entire to himselfe vvithout any comparison Novv you make Christs authoritie so base his merits and satisfaction so meane that if he â—…part any degree of them vnto his seruants he looseth the honour of all from himselfe Whereupon it follow eth inuinciblie if you vnfeignedly seeke Christ Iesus his true honour and vvill esteeme of his diuine giftes vvorthelie you must hold out no longer but vnâ—te your selfe in these necessarie heades of Religion vnto the Catholike Church of Rome which so highly exalted him both in his owne excellencie and in his singular giftes to his subiects speaker A. W. The least of these is cause sufficient to withhold vs from ioyning with the Church of Rome at least in that point The Kings authoritie is not abased because he cannot communicate any of his royalties to his subiects That Christ must needes lose by it I shewed before for it argues an insufficiencie in his satisfaction speaker W. P. THE AVTHOR TO THE CHRISTIAN READER BY a Reformed Catholike I vnderstand any one that holds the same necessarie heades of religion with the Roman Church yet so as he pares off and reiects all errours in doctrine whereby the said religion is corrupted How this may be done I haue begun to make some little declaration in this small Treatise the intent whereof is to shew how neere we may come to the present church of Rome in sundrie points of religion and wherein we must for euer dissent My purpose in penning this small discourse is threefold The first is to confute all such Politikes as hold and maintaine that our religion that of the Roman Church differ not in substance and consequently that they may be reconciled yet my meaning is not here to condemne any Pacification that tends to perswade the Roman Church to our religion The second is that the Papists which thinke so basely of our religion may be won to a better liking of it when they shall see how neere we come vnto them in sundrie points The third that the common Protestant might in some part see conceiue the point of difference betweene vs and the Church of Rome and know in what manner and how farre forth we condemne the opinions of the said Church I craue pardon for the order which I vse in handling the seuer all points For I haue set them downe one by one as they came to minde not respecting the lawes of Method If any Papist shall say that I haue not alleadged their opinions aright I answere that their bookes be at hand and I can iustifie what I haue said Thus crauing thine acceptation for this my paines and wishing vnto thee the increase of knowledge and loue of pure and sound religion I take my leaue and make an ende speaker D. B. P. AN ANSWERE TO THE Preface VPON your preface to the Reader I will not stand because it toucheth no point of controuersie let it be declared in your next what you meane when you desire your reformed Catholike to hold the same necessarie heades of Religion with the Romane Church for if the Romane Church doth erre in the matter of faith and iustification in the number and vertue of the Sacraments in the bookes and interpretation of the word of God if she raze the foundation and make Christ a Pseudochrist and an Idoll to omitte twenty other eâ—rors in substantial points of faith as in this your small discourse you would perswade there will remaine verie few necessarie heades of Religion for them to agree in And be you well assured that you are so wide from winning Catholikes by this your worke to a better liking of your Religion that you haue taken the high way to lead them to a farre greater dislike of it by teaching that in so many materiall points it differeth so farre from theirs For all Catholikes hold for most assured that which the most auncient learned and holie Doctor Athanasius in his creede deliuereth in the 2. vers VVhich Catholike faith vnlesse euery man obserue wholy and inuiolably not omitting or shrinking from any one article of it vvithout doubt he shall perish euerlastingly If S. Basil that reuerent and blessed Father of the Church doth hold it the dutie of euerie good Christian rather to loose his life then to condescend to the alteration
of any one syllable in matter of faith you may be sure that we Catholikes cannot but carrie a verie base conceipt of your doctrine who goe about vnder the ouerworne and thredbare cloake of reformation to deface and corrupt the purer and greater part of Christian Religion especially when they shall perceiue the most points of your pretended reformation to be nothing else but olde rotten condemned heresies new scoured vp and furbushed and so in shew made more saleable vnto the vnskilfull as in this treatise shall be proued in euery Chapter speaker A. W. TO THE REFORMATION OF THE PREFACE THere are many necessarie heads of saluation wherein we and you agree 1. The Trinitie 2. Redemption by Christ against all Iewes and Heathen 3. The Godhead of Christ against Arius 4. The vnitie of his person against Nestorius 5. The truth of his Manhood though by consequence you ouerthrow it against Eutyches 6. The Godhead of the holy Ghost against Macedonius and many other Which I alleage not to make any Papist beleeue that the differences betwixt vs and you are few or small but to shew that Master Perkins speakes not against reason We are perswaded that no man may shrinke from the truth of that which is deliuered in Athanasius Creede though we dare not peremptorily condemne euery man that hath not a distinct knowledge and beleefe of euery one of the seuerall articles We are wholy of I asils iudgement that euery one ought rather to lose his life than to suffer any one syllable of Gods truth in the Scripture to be betrayed and therefore wee forbeare to ioyne with the Church of Antichrist which preferres a corrupt translation before the text it selfe speaker W. P. REVEL 18. 3. And I heard another voyce from heauen say Goe out of her my people that ye be not pertakers of her sinnes and receiue not of her plagues speaker D. B. P. ANSWERE TO THE Prologue THE learned know it to be a fault to make that the entrie vnto our discourse which may as properly fit him that pleadeth against vs but to vse that for our proeme which in true sence hath nothing for vs nay rather beareth stronglie for our aduersarie must needs argue great want of iudgement Such is the sentence aboue cited out of S. John by M. Perkins for it being trulie vnderstood is so farre off from terrifying any one from the Catholike Romane Church as it doth vehementlie exhort all to fire vnto it by forsaking their wicked companie that are banded against it speaker A. W. TO THE REFORMATION OF THE PROLOGVE IF it fall out as I make no question but it will doe that the place chosen by Master Perkins be prooued to belong to the Church of Rome where is the fault then speaker W. P. IN the former chapter S. Iohn sets downe a description of the whore of Babylon and that at large as he saw her in a vision described vnto him In the sixteenth verse of the same chapter he foretels her destruction and in the three first verses of this 18. chapter he goeth on to propound the sayd destruction yet more directly and plainely withall alleadging arguments to prooue the same in all the verses following Now in this fourth verse is set downe a caueat seruing to forewarne all the people of God that they may escape the iudgement shall befall the whore and the wordes containe two parts a commaundement and a reason The commaundement Come out of her my people that is from Babylon The reason taken from the euent least ye be partakers c. Touching the commaundement first I will search the right meaning of it and then set down the vse thereof and doctrine flowing thence In historie therefore are three Babylons mentioned one is Babylon of Assyria standing on the riuer Euphrates where was the confusion of Languages and where the Iewes were in captinitie which Babylon is in Scripture reproched for Idolatrie and other iniquities The second Babilon is in Egypt standing on the riuer Nilus and is now called Cayr of that mention is made 1. Pet. 5. v. 13. as some thinke though indeede it is as likely and more commonly thought that there is meant Babylon of Assyria The third Babylon is mystical whereof Babylon of Assyria was a tipe and figure and that is Rome which is without question here to be vnderstood And the whore of Babylon as by all circumstances may be gathered is the state or regiment of a people that are the inhabitants of Rome and appertaine thereto This may be prooued by the interpretation of the holy Ghost for in the last verse of the 17. chapter the woman that is the whore of Babylon is said to be a citie which raigneth ouer the kings of the earth now in the daies when S. Iohn penned this booke of Reuelation there was no citie in the world that ruled ouer the kings of the earth but Rome it then being the seate where the Emperour put in execution his Imperiall authoritie Againe in the seuenth verse shee is said to sit on a beast hauing seuen heads and tenne hornes which seuen heads bee seuen hils vers 9. whereon the woman sitteth and also they bee seuen kings Therefore by the whore of Babylon is meant a citie standing on seuen hills Now it is wel known not onely to learned men in the Church of God but euen to the heathen themselues that Rome alone is the citie built on seuen distinct hills called Caelius Auentinus Exquilinus Tarpeius or Capitolinus Viminalis Palatinus Quirinalis Papists to helpe themselues doe alleadge that old Rome stood on seuen hills but now is remooued further to the plaine of Campus Martins I answer that howsoeuer the greatest part of the citie in regard of habitation bee not now on seuen hils yet in regard of regiment and practise of religion it is for euen to this day vpon these hilles are seated certaine Churches and Monasteries and other like places where the Papall Authoritie is put in execution and thus Rome being put for a state and regiment euen at this day it stands vpon 7. hils And though it be come to passe that the harlot in regard of her latter dayes euē changed her seate yet in respect of her younger times in which she was bred and borne she sate vpon the 7. hills Others because they feare the wounding of their own heads labour to frame these words to another meaning say that by the whore is meant the company of all wicked men in the world whersoeuer the diuell being the head thereof But this exposition is flat against the text for she is opposed to the kings of the earth with whom she is said to commit fornication and in the last verse she is called a citie standing on seuen hils and raigning ouer the Kings of the earth as I haue said and therefore must needs be a state of men in some particular place speaker D. B. P. For by the
then admitting the purpel harlot to signifie the Roman state wee doe say that the state of Rome must bee taken as it was then when these words were spoken of it that is Pagan Idolatrous and a hot persecutor of Christians Such it had beene a little before vnder that bloodie Tyrant Nero and then was vnder Domitian which we confirme by the authoritie of them who expound this passage of the Roman state The commentary on the Apocalyps vnder Saint Ambrose name sayth the great where sometime doth signifie Rome specially vvhich at that time vvhen the Apostle vvrote this did persecute the Church of God but othervvise doth signifie the whole Citie of the Diuell And Saint Ierome who applieth the place to Rome affirmeth that she had before his dayes blotted out that blasphemie vvritten in her forhead because then the state was Christian which before had beene Heathen so that vnto the partie Pagan and not vnto the Church of God he ascribeth these works of the wicked Harlot which also the very text it selfe doth conuince for it hath That she vvas drunke vvith the blood of the Martâ—rs of Iesus Now the Church of Rome hath not then by the confession of all men drawne any blood of Christs Saints but in testimonie of his trueth had powred out abundance of her best blood Wherefore it is most manifest that the harlot could not signifie the Church of Rome so pure and free from slaughter but the Romane Empire vvhich vvas then full gorged vvith that most innocent and holy blood Againe that vvhoore is expounded To be a Citie vvhich had kingdome ouer the Kings of the earth But the Church of Rome had then no kingdome ouer the earth or any temporall dominion at all but the Romane Emperours had such soueraigne commaundement ouer many Kings vvherefore it must be vnderstood of them and not of the Church Novv to take Kingdome not properly for temporall soueraignty but for spirituall Iâ—…isdiction as some shifters doe is to she vvithout any vvarrant from the natiue signification of the vvord vnto phantasticall and voluntarie imagination And vvhereas M. Perkins saith that Ecclesiasticall Rome in respect of state princely dominion and cruelty against the Saints is all one vvith the heathâ—…sh Empire he both seeketh to deceiue and is greatly deceiued he vvould deceiue in that he doth applie vvords spoken of Rome aboue 1500. yeares agoe vnto Rome as it is at this day and yet if that were granted him he erreth foâ—â—e in euery one of his particulars For first touching princâ—â—e dominion the Romane Empire held then all Italy all Fraunce all Spayne all England a great part of Germanie of Asia and also of Afrike hauing their Proconsulles and other principall Officers in all those Countries drawing an hundred thousand millions in mony and many other commodities out of them Wherefore in princely dominion and magnificall state it surmounted Ecclesiasticall Rome which hath not temporall dominion ouer the one halfe of that one kingdome of Italy more then an hundred degrees And as for persecution the Empire slew and caused to be slaine more Saints of God in one yeare then the Church of Rome hath done of reprobates and obstinate heretikes in 1600. yeares Hauing thus proued that the whoore of Babilon signifieth the heathen state of Rome and not the Ecclesiasticall let vs now heare what you say against it Marry that the distinction of the Empire of Rome and Church of Rome is foolish and coyned of late to serue our turne which to be farre otherwise I proue out of those verie Authors who doe interpret that harlot to signifie Rome who are neither foolish nor of late daies you haue heard it before out of S. Ambrose commentaries And farther we gather it out of S. Hierome in the Epistle which you cite for he hauing resembled Rome vnto Babilon for the multitude of the wicked which yet remained in it pointeth out a more pure part saying There is in deede the holy Church there are the triumphant monuments of the Apostles and Martyrs there is the true confession of Christ there is the faith praised by the Apostle c. Be not there expressed two distinct parts of Rome Againe Tertullian who liued in the second hundred yeare vnder those persecuting Emperours saith in one place that Babilon is a figure of Rome in respect of her proud Empire and persecution of the Saints And in an other that Rome was most happie for her holy Church vnto vvhich the Apostles vvith their blood had poured forth their vvhole doctrine see a plaine distinction betweene the Heathen Empire and the holie Church of Rome Which finallie may be gathered out of the expresse word of God VVhere the Church in Babilon coelect is distinguished from the rest of that citie which was Pagan You say but without any authour that Babilon there doth not signifie Rome but either a citie in Aegypt or Assyria But Eusebins lib. 2. hist. c. 14. and S. Jerom. de Eccles. script vers Marcus with other Authors more worthie of credit doe expound it of Rome And you your selues take Babilon so Rome where you thinke that any hold may be taken against it as in the 17. of the Reuel but in S. Peters Epistle they will none of it because it would proue too plainely that S. Peter had been at Rome speaker A. W. Master Perkins hauing prooued that by Babylon Rome is signified proceedes to answere two obiections First that the citie of Rome stands not now vpon seuen hils But it did in S. Iohns daies as his reason lies and at this day popish Churches or Monasteries are situated vpon them vnder the Popes authoritie Secondly that by the whore the companie of the wicked vnder their head the diuell is vnderstood But this the text will not beare the whore being opposed to the Kings of the earth and ruling ouer them vpon this foundation Master Perkins thus builds his reason Either Rome Heathenish or Rome Christian is the whore of Babylon But Rome Heathenish is not Therefore Rome Christian is This is plainly his reason and not that which you gather The proposition is euident because the state of Rome was neuer but either Heathenish or Christian. The assumption Master Perkins proues But I must be faine to leaue his course and to follow this reformers steps The state of Rome must be taken as it is the seate of Antichrist but it was not the seate of Antichrist in S. Iohns daies for Antichrist according to your doctrine is not yet come Againe it was no mysterie for heathenish Rome to be an Idolatrous and bloody persecutor of the Christians Thirdly the state that S. Iohn calles the harlot continues till the finall destruction spoken of by him and S. Paul but the estate of heathenish Rome was decayed long since Your proofe is insufficient for you alleage but two of many that make Rome Babylon who as they deserue
they behaued themselues corruptly in their callings And so this maketh more against you then for you approouing the lavvfull officers of Rome to be Christs Ministers The second plaâ—e is alleadged out of him yet more impertinently your selfe confessing presently that those vvords vvere not spoken of the Pope but of his enemy The reason yet there set dovvne pleaseth you exceedingly vvhich you vouch so clearely that it seemeth to beare flat against you for you inferre that the Pope and all others since that time be vsurpers out of this reason of S. Bâ—â—nard Because forsooth that the Antipope called Innocentius vvas chosen by the King of Almaine France England c and their vvhole Clergie and people For if fnnocentius vvere an Antichrist and vsurper because he vvas elected by so many Kings and people then belike he that had no such election but is chosen by the Cardinals of Rome onely is true Pope This your vvords declare but your meaning as I take it is quite contrary But of this matter and manner of election shall be treated hereafter if need require It sufficieth for this present that you finde no reliefe at all in S. Bernard touching the maine point that either the Pope or Church of Rome is Antichrist And all the world might meruaile if out of so sweet a Doctor and so obedient vnto the Pope any such poison might be sucked specially weighing wel what he hath written vnto one of them to whom he speaketh thus Goe to let vs yet enquire more diligently who thou art and what person thou bearest in the Church of God during the time VVho art thou A great Priest the highest Bishop thou art the Prince of Bishops the heire of the Apostles and in dignitie Aaron in authoritie Moses in povver Peter thou art he to vvhom the Keyes were deliuered to vvhom the sheepe vvere committed There are indeede also other Porters of Heauen and Pastors of flockes but thou art so much the more glorious as thou hast inherited a more excellent name aboue them they haue their flockes allotted to them to each man one but to thee all were committed as one flocke to one man thou art not onely Pastor of the sheepe but of all other Pastors thou alone art the Pastor And much more to this purpose which being his cleere opinion of the Pope how absurd is it out of certaine blind places and broken sentences of his to gather that he thought the Pope of Rome to be neither sheepe nor Pastor of Christs Church but very Antichrist himselfe There is a grosse fault also in the Canon of Pope Nicolas as he citeth it that the Pope was to be created by the Cardinals Bishops of Rome As though there were some 30. or 40. Bishops at once but of the matter of election else where M. Perkins hauing lightly skirmished with a broken sentence or two out of one Catholike Authour flieth to a late hereâ—â—ke called Ioachim and quoteth Iewell for relator of it A worshipfull testimony of one heretike and that vpon the report of an other and he the most lying Authour of these daies As for the late Poet Petrarke his words might easilie be answered but because he quoteth no place I will not stand to answere it But to close vp this first combat a sentence is set downe out of the famous Martyr Ireneus that Antichrist should be Lateinos a Roman Here be as many faults as words That learned auncient Doctor discoursing of Antichrist his proper name out of these words of the Reuel the number of the beast is 666. And obseruing the letters of the Greeke Alphabet by which they doe number as wee doe by ciphers saith that among others the word Lateinos doth containe those letters which amount iust to the number of 666. and consequently that Antichrists proper name perhaps might be Lateinos but more likely it is to be Teitan as he saith there lastly that it is most vncertaine what his name shall be See the place gentle reader and learne to beware of such deceitefull merchants as make no conscience to corrupt the best Authours and being often warned of it will neuer learne to amend Jreneus leaueth it most doubtfull what shall be Antichrists name And among diuers words esteemeth Lateinos to be the vnlikeliest And yet M. Perkins reporteth him to say resolutely that his name shall be Lateinos and then to make vp the matter turneth Lateinos a proper name with S. Ireneus into Romane an appellatiue which noteth onely his country Fie vpon that cause which cannot be vpholden and maintained but by a number of such paltrie shirtes Thus come we at length to the end of M. Perkins proofes and reproofes in his prologue where we finding litle fidelitie in his allegations of the Fathers badde construction and foule ouersight in the text of holy Scripture briefely great malice but slender force against the Church of Rome we are to returne the words of his theame to all good Christians Goe out of her my people Forsake the enemies of the Romane Church And as our Ancestors did the Pagan Emperours who drew out her most pure blood so let vs file in matters of faith and Religion from all heretakes that of late also spared not to shedde abundance of the same most innocent blood vnlesse to your greater condemnation you had leifer be partakers of her sinnes and receiue of her plagues speaker A. W. They were the Ministers of Christ by their profession as the Pope calls himselfe the seruant of seruants though both he is in truth Antichrist and they his ministers M. Perkins reason out of Bernard lyeth thus He that gets into Peters chaire without the consent of the Princes Clergie and people of Christendome is the beast spoken of in the Apocalypse But all the Popes from that schisme hitherto haue so gotten into Peters chaire viz. with consent of the Cardinals onely Therefore all the Popes since that schisme are the beast in the Apocalypse The proposition is Bernards in effect though notin words for he pronounces the Pope to be the Beast in the Reuelation because he was not chosen by consent of the Princes Clergie and people of Almaine France England c. And this Master Perkins sets downe very plaine at these words And thus Bernard c. How wide then are you from his meaning who make the quite contrarie collection in his name For if Innocentius say you were Antichrist and an vsurper because he was chosen by so many Kings and people then belike he that had no such election but is chisen by the Cardinals of Rome onely is true Pope He concludes out of Bernard that he was Antichrist because he was not chosen by the Kings Clergie and people but onely by the Cardinals you that he was true Pope because he was not chosen by the Kings and but onely by the Cardinals The reason out of Bernard you answere not but shift off the matter with alleaging
and most holy Fathers doe teach concerning ioyning with the Church and Pope of Rome from whose societie Protestants labour tooth and nayle to withdraw vs. And because of this we must treate more amply in the question of supremacie I will vse here their authoritie only whom M. Perkins citeth against vs. S. Bernard is cited already S. Ireneus Scholler of S. Polycarpe and he of S. Iohn the Euangelist of the Church of Rome writeth thus To this Church by reason of her more mightie principalitie it is necessary that euery Church that is the saithfull on all sides to condescend and agree in and by which alwaies the tradition of the Aposiles hath been preserued of them that be round about her Saint Jerome writing to Damasus Pope of Rome saith I following none as chiefest but Christ doe in participation ioyne with thy blessednesse that is with the chayre of Peter I know the Church to be builded vpon that Rocke VVhosoeuer doth eate the Paschall Lambe out of this house is a prophane fellovv he that is not found vvithin the Arke of Noe shall when the floudes arise perish And a litle after knovv not Vitalis I refuse Meletius I take no notice of Paulinus he that gathereth not vvith thee scattereth that is he that is not vvith Christ is vvith Antichrist Marke and embrace this most learned Doctors iudgement of ioyning vvith the See of Rome in all doubtfull questions he vvould not trust to his ovvne vvit and skill vvhich vvere singular nor thought it safe to relie vpon his learned and vvise neighbours he durst not set vp his rest vvith his ovvne Bishop Paulinus vvho vvas a man of no meane marke but the Patriarke of Antioch but made his assured stay vpon the See of Rome as vpon an vnmoueable Rocke vvith vvhich saith he if vve doe not communicate in faith and Sacraments vve are but profane men voide of all Religion In a vvord vve belong not to Christ but be of Antichrists traine See hovv flat contrarie this most holy ancient Father is to M. Perkins M. Perkins vvould make vs of Antichrists band because vve cleaue vnto the Bishop of Rome Whereas Saint Hierome holdeth all to appertaine to Antichrist who be not fast lincked in matters of Religion with the Pope and See of Rome And so to conclude with this point euerie true Catholike must say with Saint Ambrose I desire in all things to follovv the Church of Rome And thus much of his Prologue speaker A. W. It is a weake fortifying of Popish doctrine to alleage a few sentences written one thousand or more yeeres since in approbation of the Church of Rome as it was then Irenaeus Hierome Ambrose would haue all men ioyne with the Church of Rome which florished in their daies therefore no man may separate from it in these our daies Who sees not the feeblenes of this consequence And yet this is all the force that can be in the reason till they haue prooued that the Church of Rome either was then or is not now the Church of Antichrist If that principalitie Irenaeus speaks of were in the Church of Rome by any right of authoritie from God how should the same Irenaeus be excused who reprooues Victor B. of Rome for taking vpon him to excommunicate some of the Easterne Churches about obseruing of Easter If it be in respect of the truth which then florished at Rome no doubt all men must cleaue vnto it as farre as it cleaues to the truth of God Hierome a Romane and at that time a yong man liuing in Syria being pressed by an Arian Bishop to allow by subscription that which might tend to the countenancing of Arianisme writes to Damasus his owne Bishop for his aduice in the matter But that he did not in respect of his place as if hee could not erre because he was Bishop of Rome for Liberius the very next Bishop before Damasus by Hieroms owne confession had subscribed to Arianisme but in regard of his iudgement which was sound against that heresie so that whosoeuer in that question gathered not with him scattered and held with Antichrist against Christ. Those all things that Ambrose speaks of are according to the place alleaged by you to be restrained to the Liturgie and Ceremonies of the Church of Rome Wherein though Ambrose professe himselfe desirous to follow the Church note by the way that the Church of Rome is taken as a particular Diocesan Church such as the Church of Millan also was at that time and not as the vniuersall Catholike Church yet he did not so follow it because reason led him another way his words are these In all things I desire to follow the Romane Church but yet we also being men haue vnderstanding therefore that which is otherwhere better obserued we also rightly keepe We follow the Apostle Peter himselfe we sticke vnto his deuotion c. Out of which speech of Ambrose these points are to be obserued First that the vnderstanding of Christian men is to direct them wherein they are to follow the Church of Rome wherein to leaue it Secondly that some other Churches might and did better obserue diuers things than the Church of Rome did Thirdly that the Church of Rome did not obserue that which the Apostle Peter at least in Ambrose his iudgement had deuoutly performed Thus we see what helpe there is in the ancient writers to free the Pope and Church of Rome that now are from being the very Antichrist foretold of in the Reuelation speaker W. P. Now touching the dutie of separation I meane to speake at large not standing so much to prooue the same because it is euident by the text as to shew the manner and measure of making this separation and therein I will handle two things First how far forth we may ioyne with them in the matter of religion secondly how far forth and wherein we must dissent and depart from them And for this cause I meane to make choice of certaine points of religion and to speake of them in as good order as I can shewing in each of them our consent and difference and the rather because some harpe much vpon this string that a Vnion may be made of our two religions and that we differ not in substance but in points of circumstance speaker D. B. P. Afterward he taketh vpon him to prescribe and shew vs how far forth we may ioyne with the Church of Rome by proposing many points in controuersie betweene vs and them and in each shewing in what points we consent togither and in what we differ I meane by Gods grace to follow him step by step although he hath made many a disorderly one aswell to discouer his deceits and to disproue their errors as also to establish the Catholike Doctrine the which I will endeuour to performe by the helpe of God with all simplicitie of language and with as much breuity as
memories which may often faile them especially in carrying away speeches of discourse and disputation speaker W. P. II. If the beleeuing of vnwritten traditions were necessary to saluation then we must beleeue the writings of the auncient Fathers as well as the writings of the Apostles because Apostolicall traditions are not elsewhere to be found but in their bookes And wee may not beleeue their sayings as the worde of God because they often crie beeing subiect to errour and for this cause their authoritie when they speake of traditions may be suspected and we may not alwaies beleeue them vpon their word speaker D. B. P. His otherreason is that if we beleeue vnwritten Traditions were necessary to saluatiō then we must aswel beleeue the writings of the ancient Fathers as the writings of the Apostles because Apostolicall Traditions are not elsewhere to be found but in their books but that vvere absurd for they might erre Ans. That doth not follovv for three causes First Apostolicall Traditions are aswell kept in the mind of the learned as in the auncient Fathers vvritings and therefore haue more credit then the Fathers vvritings speaker A. W. It may be they were kept in the mind of the learned till they were written but that afterward and to this day they are in mens minds otherwise then as they haue learned them by reading it is not very likely Beside how can traditions be kept without adding and altering if they haue no better guide then the memories of men speaker D. B. P. Secondly they are commonly recorded of more then one of the Fathers and so haue firmer testimonie than any one of their writings speaker A. W. What is that to Master Perkins reason vnlesse you will say that we are as well to beleeue the writings of the fathers where more then one writ the same thing as we are one of the Apostles or Euangelists alone which I perswade my selfe you will not affirme speaker D. B. P. Thirdly if there should be any Apostolicall Tradition related but of one auncient Father yet it should be of more credit than any other thing of his ovvne inuention because that vvas registred by him as a thing of more estimation And gaine some of the rest of those blessed and Godly personages vvould haue reproued it as they did all other falshoods if it had not binsuch indeed as it vvas tearmed Which vvhen they did not they gaue a secret approbation of it for such and so that hath the interpretatiue consent at least of the learned of that age and the follovving for Apostolicall Tradition it so because they were taught by our Lord yet Pauls case is proper to himselfe and altogether extraordinarie The third particular is somewhat more to purpose because S. Paul hauing prooued by many reasons that women might not come into the congregations bareheaded addes in the conclusion that it was enough to stop any contentions mans mouth that the Apostles and the Churches of God allowed of no such custome But first this hatescripture Papist must be put in minde that whereas he calles these wranglers scripturists as if they had alleaged scripture for their defence there is no such thing in the text nor any one obiection so much as signified by the Apostle Secondly this custome of the Church is not alleaged because as he seemes to presume by his conclusion afterward he wanted other reason to prooue the point For as Chrysostome and others haue obserued he hath in the former part of the chapter proued it to be against nature and against scripture too Thirdly he reasons not about any matter of doctrine but about the outward carriage of men and women in the assemblie of Gods seruice Lastly it doth no way follow that because the custome of the Church must ouer-way priuate mens fancies in things indifferent therefore the Scripture containes not all things necessarie to saluation but must be supplied therein by traditions Neither doth the Apostles example warrant his conclusion The Apostle hauing proued that he exhorts to by reason and Scripture last of all alleages custome against contentious men in a thing which they tooke to be indifferent therefore wee must alleage Scriptures when they be plaine for vs and when they are not plaine tradition euen in matters of saluation Who sees not that this followes not vpon that Obiections for Traditions speaker W. P. First they alleadge 2. Thess. 2. 15. where the Apostle bids that Church keepe the ordinances which he taught either them by word or letter Hence they gather that beside the written word there be vnwritten traditions that are indeede necessarie to be kept and obeyed Answ. It is very likely that this Epistle to the Thessalonians was the first that euer Paul writ to any Church though in order it haue not the first place and therefore at the time when this Epistle was penned it might well fall out that some thinges needefull to saluation were deliuered by word of mouth not beeing as yet written by any Apostle Yet the same things were afterward set downe in writing either in the second Epistle or in the Epistles of Paul speaker D. B. P. Obserue first that insteed of Traditions according to the Greek and Latin vvord they translate Ordinances euer flying the vvord Tradition vvhere any thing is spoken in commendation of them But if any thing sound against them then thrust they in the vvord Tradition although the Greeke vvord beare it not See for this their corruption and many other a learned Treatise named The Discouery of false translation penned by M. Gregorie Martin a man most singulerly conuersant in the Greeke and Hebrevv tongues speaker A. W. Gregory Martinus cauils were answered long since by Doctor Fulke and the answer neuer yet replied to that euer I heard of by any Papist Your old translation hath in steed of traditions precepts and in the Gospell euery where traditions and yet the former place is to the commendation of traditions and all in the Gospell to their dispraise Vatablus also vseth his libertie in translating this word sometimes Instituta sometimes Constitutio sometimes Institutio the difference in our translation as farre as I can perceiue is this that we call mens precepts traditions the Apostles doctrines ordinances speaker D. B. P. Secondly is it not plaine dotage to auouch that this second Epistle to the Thessalonians was the first that euer he wrote Surely if none of his otherwere written before it yet his first to the same Church must needs haue been written before it But let vs giue the man leaue to dreame sometimes speaker A. W. It is easie to see that Master Perkins compares not this epistle with the other to the same Church but with other that were written to other Churches and generally with the bookes of the new Testament among which if wee may beleeue Irenaeus it was the ancientest except the former and perhaps the Gospell of S. Matthew for it was written
this gift the children of God are enabled or rather directed by the spirit of God to acknowledge those bookes to be scripture though they can not determine of euery particular among them Austins iudgement we reuerence in this and other matters though we cannot alwaies rest vpon it He calls the bookes Canonicall not properly but because they were vsed in the Church to be read as the Canonicall were but he makes them not of equall authoritie with the other because they were not then so generally receiued in which respect he made some doubt of those which were indeede Canonicall Thus we expound Austin that he may not be thought to contradict other fathers in this point speaker D. B. P. His second is that he who goeth about to discerne whether the booke be Canonicall or no must consider the Author who is God If he must at the first take God to be the Author of the booke what needs any further labour It must needs be Canonicall that hath God for the Author This mans wiâ—s were surely from home when he discoursed thus and therefore it should be but follie to stand vpon his particularities speaker A. W. Is there no difference trow you betwixt saying God is the professed Author and God is the Author Let a man consider God who is professed to be the author of these bookes and seeing how the things in them agree to that which is befitting God according as he hath learned by men and bin perswaded by the holy ghost he shall come to acknowledge them indeed to be from God wherein his glory is principally aymed at and in the penning whereof his diuine Maiestie cleerely shines speaker D. B. P. Let this one reason in generall serue to confute him all this manner put together serueth only to helpe particular men to discerne vvhich bookes are Canonicall who may easily after their dâ—lâ—gent inquirie erre and be deâ—â—iâ—ed in this point because euery man is a lyar And if there be 〈◊〉 more certaine meanes to assure them of this which is the ground of all their Religion then euery particular mans discretion and iudgement then out of doubt their whole Religion is most vnvvisely builded vpon meane mens inuentions and discretion who also for the most part doe neither vnderstand the language in which they were first penned nor the vsuall phrases of Scriptures translated that I say nothing of the figures parables prophecies and controueâ—sies which seeme to be and many other difficulties and yet these men need not doubt hauing learned some halfe-dozen-lines of Master Perkins but that reading any booke they shall be able presently to discerne whether 〈◊〉 be Canonicall or no. A goodly mocketie speaker A. W. If this reason be good since all men together are liers as well as euery man in particular and so may be deceiued though not so easily we are little the neerer at the least not sure for any help you can affoord vs. There is yet a better assurance by the holy ghosts directing the elect in this triall and teaching and assuring them so farre as shall serue for their necessarie instruction and saluation Men were not so taught in the Primitiue Church but the most skilfull and wisest in discerning Canonicall bookes trusted not vnto their ovvne iudgement but leaned alvvaies vpon Apostolicall Traditions So did Serapion an auncient holy vvriter as Euseâ—â—us reporteth reiect certaine bookes set out in the Apostles names because they had not receiued from their Predecâ—ssoâ—s any such The like doth element of Alexandria and that famous Origen of the same booke who obserue the Eâ—clesiasticall Canon as he had learned and receiued by Tradition So doth he deliuer his opinion of the foure Euangelists and other bookes of Canonicall Scripture and not relying on his owne wit which was excellent or learning which was singular in all manner of languages and matters That S. Augustine was of the same mind may be gathered out of these words of his * Contra Faustum Of what booke can there be any assurance if the letters which the Church propagated by the Apostles and by such excellencie declared throughout all Nations doth teach and hold to be the Apostles should be vncertaine whether they be the Apostles or no So that he maketh the declaratioÌ„ of the Church descended of the Apostles to be a sure pillar to rest vpon for the certaine knowledge of Canonical Scripture and other spirits whatsoeuer if they follow not that rule to be reiected so far is he off from encourageing euery sheepe of Christs fold to take that weighty matter vpon himselfe as M. Perkins doth And what can be more against the most prudent prouidence of the diuine wisdome than to permit euery one to be a iudge of the bookes of Canonicall Scripture For if all those books and no others should pasâ—e â—uâ—rant for Caâ—…call which any Christian taking vpon him the spirit of discerning would câ—nsure to be such then alway with all the Old Testament because diuers esteemed it to proceed of some euill spirits as witnesseâ—h Iâ—â—neus and Epâ—…s Yea not only all the Old must be abrogated but all the New also because it hath many falsehoods mixed with the truth as some prefuming greatly of their spirit and skill in dâ—…ning did teach so testifieth 〈◊〉 Augustine 〈◊〉 Faâ—…st Some would haue had but one of the foure Gospels some fiue some sixe some seauen some reiected all S. Pauls Epistles Many and those of the faithfull did not admit for Canonicall some of the other Apostles Epistles not the Reuelations If then the diuine fore-sight of our Sauiour had not preuented this most foule inconueniencie by instituting a more certaine meanes of â—iscerning and declaring which books were penned by inspiration of the holy Ghost which not then by leauing it vnto euery mans discretion he might be thought to haue had but slender care of our saluation which euery true Christian hart doth abhorre to thinke and therfore we must needs admit of this most holy and prouident Tradition of them from hand to hand as among the Protestants Brentius doth in his Prolegomenis and also Kemnitius handling the second kind of Traditions in his examination of the Councell of Trent albeit they reiect all other Traditions besides this one speaker A. W. Neither doth Master Perkins or any Minister teach the people now to rely on their owne wit or iudgement but to vse the meanes prescribed and by prayer and faith to call and to rest vpon the spirit of God for assurance in this case The iudgement of the Church wee are so farre from discrediting that we hold it for a very speciall ground in this matter condemning them as void of shame and reason that refuse those bookes vpon their owne iudgement which haue bin from time to time euen from the Apostles dayes counted Canonicall But it is vtterly from the question in hand to dispute this point and beside diuers other Doctor Whitacker hath handled this matter
Now as for M. Perkins gesses that some of them are yet extant but otherwise called some were but little rolles of paper some profane and of Philosophie I hold them not worth the discussing being not much pertinent and auowed on his word only without either any reason or authoritie speaker A. W. Sauing the better iudgement of Chrysostome and other learned men I cannot perswade my selfe that any part of the Canonicall scripture is lost when you haue brought your proofe out of any place of the scripture I will either answere or yeeld to it But it makes nothing to your argument whether any be lost or no for as you see I deny your assumption and the proofe of it which ouerthrowes your whole reason The Iewes and the skilfullest Christians in the Rabbines and antiquities of the Iewes that I know are of a diuers iudgement from Chrysostome concerning this point speaker W. P. Obiect IV. Moses in mount Sina beside the written law receiued from God a more secret doctrine which he neuer writ but deliuered by tradition or word of mouth to the Prophets after him and this the Iewes haue now set downe in their Cabala Answ. This indeede is the opinion of some of the Iewes whom in effect and substance sundry Papists follow but we take it for no better then a Iewish dotage For if Moses had knowne any secret doctrine beside the written law he could neuer haue giuen this commandement of the said lawe Thou shalt not adde any thing thereto speaker D. B. P. Master Perkins his fourth obiection of the Iewish Cabala is a meere dreame of his owne our Argument is this Moses who was the pen man of the old Law committed not all to vvriting but deliuered certaine points needfull to saluation by Tradition nor any Lavv-maker that euer was in any Country comprehended all in letters but established many things by customes therefore not likely that our Christian Lavv should be all vvritten speaker A. W. Your argument is in effect all one with his but let vs take yours Moses committed all to writing that was necessarie to saluation so doe all wise lawmakers and if any thing be left vnprouided for that is of moment it is because the lawgiuer perceiued it not or knew not how to helpe it which in Gods lawes and Moses the holie Ghosts Scribes writing could be no hinderances For what is there that God seeth not by his wisedome or cannot order as he list by his power speaker D. B. P. That Moses did not pen all thus vve proue It vvas as necessarie for vvomen to be deliuered from Originall sinne as men Circumcision the remedy for men could not possibly be applied to vvomen as euery one vvhoknovveth vvhat circumcision is can tell neither is there any other remedie prouided in the vvritten lavv to deliuer vvomen from that sin Therefore some other remedie for them vvas deliuered by Tradition speaker A. W. Circumcision was not prouided for remedie of originall sinne any more than for actuall neither did it remedie the one or the other nay it was not of Moses appointing but was long before him The remedie for all sinne is the sacrifice of the Messiah the meanes to applie it faith which Moses taught in diuers places of those fiue bookes If women without circumcision cannot be freed from originall sinne how were Adam and Eue freed and all that died before God enioyned it to Abraham speaker D. B. P. Item if the Child vvere likly to die before the eight day there was remedie for them as the most learned doe hold yet no vvhere vvritten in the Lavv Also many Gentiles during that state of the old Testament vvere saued as Iob and many such like according to the opinion of all the auncient Fathers yet in the Lavv or any other part of the old Testament it is not vvritten vvhat they had to beleeue or how they should liue vvherefore many things needfull to saluation vvere then deliuered by Tradition speaker A. W. The remedie for infants aswell before the eight day as vpon it and after it was the mercie of God vpon his couenant As for the meanes you would imagine which were you cannot tell what and deuised by you cannot tel whom remember what you answered about the Chaldee word in Daniel To meanes and authors in the ayre no thing need be nor can be answered speaker D. B. P. To that reason of his that God in his prouidence should not permit such a losse of any part of the Scripture I ansvvere that God permiteth much euill Againe no great losse in that according to our opinion who hold that Tradition might preserue vvhat was then lost Although God in his prouidence permits much euill it followes not nor is at al likely that he would suffer his own holie word indited by his spirit to perish Neither can it helpe the matter that tradition might preserue the truth vnlesse God should miraculously hold in men from mingling their inuentions with his traditions Experience makes the matter cleere few things or none yet remaining that are indeede of antiquitie both for the substance and vse of them But what answere you to Master Perkins other reason out of S. Paul That was too heauie for your shoulders speaker W. P. Obiect V. Heb. 5. 12. Gods word is of two sortes milk and strong meate By milke we must vnderstand the worde of God written wherein God speakes plainely to the capacitie of the rudest but strong meate is vnwritten traditions a doctrine not to bee deliuered vnto all but to those that grow to perfection Answ. We must know that one and the same word of God is milke and strong meate in regard of the manner of handling and propounding of it For being deliuered generally and plainely to the capacitie of the simplest it is milke but beeing handled particularly and largely and so fitted for men of more vnderstanding it is strong meate As for example the doctrine of the creation of mans fall and redemption by Christ when it is taught ouerly and plainly it is milke but when the depth of the same is throughly opened it is strong meate And therefore it is a conceit of mans braine to imagine that some vn written word is meant by strong meate speaker A. W. Novv insteed of M. Perkins his fift reason for vs of milke and strong meate vvishing him a Messe of Pappe for his childish proposing of it I vvill set dovvne some authorities out of the vvritten Word in proofe of Traditions I make no question but Master Perkins had al the reasons he propounds for you in any matter in some of your owne writers as perhaps hereafter vpon better search at more leisure I shall finde and prooue to all the world To the testimonies I answere in generall that no argument can be drawne from any or all of them to proue that any doctrine necessarie to saluation is to be learned by tradition and is not written in the Scripture Let any
shall we doe where they say nothing where their expositions are contraried by those you name and other about their time But this can be no rule of vnderstanding any more of the Scripture than that which they haue expounded which is very little and Origen one of the ancientest and greatest expositors is generally condemned for an Heretike by Epiphanius Ierome Austin and the best writers in Diuinitie Yea Bellarmine sheweth that Origen was seene in hell with Arius and Nestorius and affirmeth that the fift Synod cursed him amongst other Heretikes This rule if it be a rule will serue in very few places of the Scripture speaker D. B. P. The other example shall be the principal pillar of the Laten Church S. Augustine who not only exhorteth and aduiseth vs to follow the decree of the auncient Church if we will not be deceiued with the obscurity of doubtfull questions but plainly affirmeth That he vvould not beleeue the Gospell if the authoritie of the Church did not moue him vnto it Which words are not to be vnderstood as Caluine would haue them that S. Augustine had not bin at first a Christian if by the authority of the Church he had not bin thereunto perswaded but that when he was a learned and iudicious Doctor and did write against Heretikes euen then he would not beleeue these bookes of the Gospel to haue bin penned by diuine inspiration and no others and this to be the true sense of them vnlesse the Catholike Church famous then for antiquity generality and consent did tell him which and what they were So farre was he oft from trusting to his owne skill and iudgment in this matter which notwithstanding was most excellent This matter is so large that it requireth a whole question but being penned vp within the compasse of one obiection I wil not dwel any longer in it but here fold vp this whole question of Traditions in the authorities of the auncient Fathers out of whom because I haue in answering M. Perkins and else-where as occasion serued cited already many sentences I will here be briefe speaker A. W. Austin wils vs to consult with that Church which the holy Scripture shewes vs to be the Church without any ambiguitie the ancient Church hee names not but by the Church so commended hee vnderstandeth the vniuersall Church as he calles it that is he appeales in the question about Baptisme among the Donatists to the generall practise of the Church in the seuerall congregations which no doubt is of great force to perswade any reasonable man in any matter that cannot be decided by the scripture For in matters of indifferencie the Churches iudgement is a kinde of law so that he which in such things would not be deceiued cannot doe better than to follow it There is no word in that place of Austin to allow your interpretation of that sentence but rather the whole course of the speech makes for Caluin I will propound the matter let any indifferent man iudge Manes or Manicheus in his epistle of the foundation as he termed it called himselfe the Apostle of Christ Austin answeres that he did not beleeue him to be so and then demaunds of the Manichean what course hee would take to prooue it to him Perhaps saith Austin you will reade the Gospell to me and assay to prooue Manicheus person to me out of it But what if you should light vpon one that doth not yet beleeue the Gospell I truly had not beleeued the Gospell if the authoritie of the Church had not moued me why should I not obey them saith Austin when they will me not to beleeue Manicheus whom I obeyed when they willed me to beleeue the Gospell These are Austins words to which I will adde those that follow afterward that First wee beleeue that which as yet we cannot discerne that being made stronger in faith we may attaine to the vnderstanding of that we doe beleeue not men now but God himselfe confirming and enlightening our minde within speaker A. W. S. Ignatius the Apostles Scholler doth exhort all Christians To sticke fast vnto the Traditions of the Apostles some of which he committed to writing I shewed before what little credit many of the writings wee haue of Ignatius deserue Eusebius authoritie is more worth but hee is neither quoted nor alleaged truly The former I take to be the Printers fault the latter must needes be yours Ignatius saith Eusebius as he past through Asia vnder guard in euery Citie where he came by preaching and exhortation strengthened the parishes that they should especially take heed of heresies then first newly sprung vp and should cleaue fast to the Tradition of the Apostles which also for more suretie he thought it necessarie for him to write Now the heresies which at that time troubled the Church were those of the Simonians Menadcians Ebionites Nicolaitans Cerinthians Saturninians Basilidians for the refuting whereof the scripture is alsufficient to a reasonable man speaker D. B. P. Polycarpus by the authority of the Apostles words which he had receiued from their owne mouthes confirmed the 〈…〉 truth and ouerthrew the Heretikes speaker A. W. Polycarpus might well refute them by authoritie of the Apostles words which himselfe had heard if without the Scripture they would beleeue him that hee heard them of the Apostles But Eusebius reports of him in Irenaus words that he recited all things in that refutation agreeable to the holy Scriptures It was much for the perswading of the people to whom as Irenaeus saith he spake those things that he could truly say he had heard those things of the Apostles by word of mouth which they might finde written in the Scriptures speaker D. B. P. S. Ireneus who imprinted in his hart Apostolicall Traditions receiued from Policarp saith If there should be a controuersie about any meane question ought vve not to runne vnto the most auncient Churches in the vvhich the Apostles had conuersed and from them take that which is cleere and perspicuous to define the present question For vvhat if the Apostles had not vvritten any thing at all must vve not haue follovved the order of Traditions vvhich they deliuered to them to vvhom they deliuered the Churches speaker A. W. Irenaeus in his epistle to Florinus aboue mentioned saith that he imprinted in his heart the whole carriage and discourse of Polycarpus refuting the Heretikes but of Apostolicall traditions hee speakes neuer a word more than that Polycarpus had heard those things of the Apostles which he then deliuered agreeable to the Scriptures In any such meane question as is not resolued of in Scripture it was fit to haue recourse to those Churches in which the Apostles had liued yea if they had written nothing we must haue repaired to the books of the old Testament the knowne word of God for all matters of substance in things indifferent the iudgment of such
note that in your cōsequent or conclusion you call Images holy as if by I know not what holynes they had some right to be placed in Churches as also you speake afterward where should holy pictures of holy men be more properly bestowed then in holy places Nothing is to be counted holy but that which either hath a qualitie of holines in it as all that are sanctified haue or else is belonging to the seruice of God And whatsoeuer is of this later kind is rather hallowed then holy and hath no holines in it but by being consecrated to such a vse Neither is this consecration as that of the Ceremoniall lawe was whereby a thing was made indeed holy ceremonially as nothing with vs can be the ceremonies being abrogated So that such things are no longer nor farther holy then they are employed in that seruice and therefore the water with which we baptise and the bread and wine with which we celebrate the Supper of the Lord after those actions are past are no more holy then any other matter bread or wine Images therefore can no way be holy more then any other worke in Churches therfore setting apart this bare title of holines I denie the consequence of your Enthymem Salomon adorned the inner parts of the Temple where the people came not with pictures of Cherubins Therefore it is lawfull to set vp images in Churches where the people ordinarily come Who seeth not great difference betweene the Antecedent and the Consequent To omit that which I answered before on Master Perkins behalfe concerning Salomons warrant for his so doing his father and himselfe being Prophets speaker D. B. P. Which is fortified by the testimony of Tertullian in the place cited before where he saith that our Sauiour was Pictured vpon holy Chalices which were vsed at the Altars and of Sozomenus vvho vvitnesseth that our Sauiours Picture vvas taken into the Church speaker A. W. The authoritie of other mens doings is of lesse waight Tertullian saith Christ was pictured like a Shepheard vpon the chalices Nazianzen trimmed vp Images Basil allowed of the Martyr Barlaams picture in the Churches Damasus saith Constantine set vp a siluer image of our Sauiour Chrysostome and Austin say that the Crosse was on the holy tables Therefore it is lawfull to set vp Images in Churches Of the Antecedent by and by in the meane while I deny the consequence They allow of Images therefore they are lawfull If your Church thinke it possible for these men to erre as I am sure it doth then may it not be takē for lawfull because they approue it But to the Antecedent what doth Tertullian but tell vs what the Chalice-maker had done in likelyhood for the setting forth of his worke both this and that of Sozomens report is answered before it is not proued there euer was any such Image of our Sauiour speaker A. W. S. Gregorie Nazianzen maketh mention of Images in the Church of Neocaesarea trimmed vp by himselfe Saint Basil pointeth to that holy mans Picture standing in the Church Nazianzen and Basil speake not of images to any vse of Religion whereof only our question is but either for ornament as the former saith All our labour and care in the beautifying of it or for honor to the martyr which was ciuill not religious and yet scarce iustifiable Damasus shevveth hovv Constantine in the Church of S. Iohn Lateran erected a siluer Image vnto our Sauiour speaker A. W. S. Chrysostome 〈◊〉 demonst quod Christ. sit Deus And S. Augustine do teach that the Crosse was on the holy Tables and vsed at all holy functions This report of Constantines erecting a siluer image seemeth to depend vpon the tale of his being baptised at Rome by Syluester whereas it is apparant by Eusebius and Theodoret that he was not baptised till the very end of his life and in Asia many hundred miles from that Church of Saint Iohn Lateran in Rome in Nicomedia now called by the Turke who possesseth it Nichor a towne of Bythinia Chrysostome speaketh of the generall vse of the crosse in all places not for any holines of the signe but as a marke of profession The crosse saith he is in the purple robes in the Crownes the crosse is at our prayers the crosse is in our armor the crosse is vpon the holy table the crosse is ouer all the world yea the crosse glisters aboue the sunne If this crosse were an Image Optatus as we heard before counts the presence of it a defiling of the Altar That place of Austin intreates of the crosse both for the signe and image of it most superstitiously ascribing strange effects to it which no moderate or reasonable man can defend except he will expound it as I shewed before of an outward ceremonie vsed in prayer to which purpose wee may applie that speech of his in the end of that discourse Looke what the presence of Christs body did vpon the earth that doth the famous memory of the victorious crosse with a faithfull calling vpon the name of Christ. Otherwise it is wonderfull strange that Austin should so highly esteeme of the crosse whereas Optatus a worthie Bishop of the same countrey in the beginning of Austins time accounts so meanely of it speaker D. B. P. And the reason why Images should principally be set in Churches is very pregnant For where should holy Pictures of holy men be more properly bestovved than in holy places And the Church being a resemblance of heauen as S. Paul teacheth is most conueniently decked vp vvith Images the representations of heauenly creatures that men entring into that holy place may by the vievv and consideration of such a heauenly shew retire their minds from worldly busines and lift them vp vnto the soueraigne Monarch of both heauen and earth speaker A. W. The Apostle saith no such thing of any Church now but affirmes that the Tabernacle of the Iewes was ceremonially a shadow of heauenly things And yet it would be remembred that the Tabernacle and Temple had no Images but in the holie places where the people came not We hold it very conuenient to haue our Churches modestly adorned rather than sumptuously and with such kinde of ornaments as may not carrie away the minde by the outward sense either to a vaine imagination or to some superstitious conceit speaker D. B. P. Now let vs come to those tvvo obiectione of M. Perkins vvhich see me to be against the erection of Images in Churches The first is out of the Councell of Eliberis cap. 36. which commandeth that nothing should be painted on the walles of the Church that was adored of the people Ans. That if the Councell speake of the Image of God in vvhich sense M. Perkins citeth it and the word adored doth insinuate then it may be said that the Councill inhibiteth that sort of Gods Images vvhich are made
to expresse the diuine nature If it be extended vnto all sorts of Images I answere that they were then forbidden to be drawen vpon the Church vvalles but not to be set in Tables vpon the Altar or in any other place The reason is because that Councell vvas holden in time of persecution as appeareth by the twenty fiue Canon of it and then if the persecutor had found out the place of their assembly as they often did those Pictures must needs either haue been defaced by themselues or left vnto the derision and despight of the Heathens And Pictures also painted vpon such poore walles as they had then to their Churches vvould either by the moysture of the vvalles or other incommoditie haue bin quickly disfigured wherefore to the greater honor of such sacred things those graue Fathers thought it not meete to haue them dravven vpon the Church vvalles there being many more meete places for them in the Churches speaker A. W. You come backe now to those two allegations which should and might haue been answered as fitly in their due place Your first answere hath no shew of reason in it For it is absurd to imagine that any Christians to whom onely the Councill speakes would thinke the diuine nature which is spirituall and infinite could be exprest by any picture But if it be possible for the people to be so blind yet the Bishops and Ministers who had the charge of such places must needs know it to bee vnlawfull and vnpossible Besides if they meant to forbid such Images onely why doe they not call them Idols after your distinction why doe not they expresse their meaning more plainly but speake so dangerously to make all Images thought vnlawfull As the word Adored was in your opinion a warrant for Master Perkins to applie that Canon to the Images of God so by the same reason is the other word worshipped which the Councill hath a sufficient authoritie to stretch the decree to all Images that may bee worshipped Your coniectures are meere shifts refuted by the very words of the Councill It is decreed saith the Councill that there may be no Images in the Church what will become then of your Images vpon Altars vnlesse you will remoue your Altars out of the Church That which followeth doth not respect the walles more than any other part of the Church but names them specially vpon which Images most commonly were painted But what a toy is it that you talke of persecutors finding out the place of their assemblie when they could hold a Councill and had Churches to repaire to Could their Churches be vnknowne Further if their care had bin to prouide that the moysture of the walles might not disfigure the Images they would haue said plainly We will haue no Images on Church walles least that which is adored and worshipped come to some disgrace and this would also haue included the other reason of the persecutors despight But it is manifest that the meaning of the decree is this that they will not suffer any Images in Churches because that which is worshipped and adored may not bee resembled by pictures The decree indeede speakes onely of the Images of God to whom only religious adoration and worship is due and may lawfully be performed speaker D. B. P. The second obiection is out of a post-script of Epiphanius letter vnto Iohn Patriarke of Ierusalem in which is written as M. Perkins falsely reporteth that it is against the authority of Scripture to see the Pictures of Christ or of any Saint to hang in the Church Ans. It is there only to see the Picture of a man Novv that he should meane of Christ or of some Saint is only gathered yet M. Perkins makes no bones to thrust them both into the Text euen so do we thinke that some old enemy of Images added that post-script vnto Epiphanius letter Our reasons are because it hath no coherence with the former letter or stâ—e Againe in the seauenth Councell when all that could be found out of antiquity vvas cited against Images no tidings there of this place which if it had bin true might haue bin one of the principall Thirdlie in the same Councell other tvvo places brought as it were out of Epiphanius vvorkes vvere found to be none of his And for Images vvas alleadged that Epiphanius ovvne disciples erected an Image to their Master and set it in the Church vvhich they would neuer haue done if he had taught them to be against the Scripture so to doe speaker A. W. Master Perkins doth not vndertake to report Epiphanius words but his matter which hee performes truly I found saith Epiphanius speaking of a Church at Anablatha in his trauell to Bethel in the Church doore a vaile hanging stained and painted and hauing the Image as it were of Christ or some Saint for I remember not well whose image it was When I saw this that against the authoritie of the Scripture the image of a man hung in the Church of Christ I rent it These are Epiphanius words whereout I obserue first that it is against the authoritie of the Scripture and therfore against Gods Commandement that the image of a man should hang in Christs Church But the Images of al your Saints are such those of the Trinitie too except that Doue for the holie Ghost Secondly I adde that it is rightly gathered by necessarie consequence which is as good euery whit as plaine words that it is against Scripture to haue the picture of Christ or any Saint in the Church For he saith expresly that the Image he saw was the image of Christ or some Saint and that it was vnlawfull to haue any Image of a man there There is no reason to call it a post-script vnlesse euerie last point of any letter not depending vpon the former be a post-script Hierome that translated the Epistle out of Greeke into Latin found no such diuersitie of stile in it neither indeed is it to be found and this latter part is brought in according to the course of writing in the former Epiphanius cleeres himselfe to Iohn Bishop of Ierusalem for hauing ordered a Deacon in his Diocesse he begins his excuse thus I haue heard c. In the latter part he defends himselfe concerning the renting of the vaile and begins that also in the like sort I haue heard This was written and translated three hundred yeeres before that Idolatrous Councill though perhaps they thought it no wisedome to take knowledge of it The other places brought in that Councill were for Images and so allowed of by that Councill and haue since been discerned to be counterfeit as that is of his Disciples no thankes to that counterfeit Synod which dealeth in the same sort also with Basil you afterward alleage the place for Images with Cyrill Ambrose Athanasius Chrysostome Gregorie and the Apostles themselues as I shewed before speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins obserues a special reason
2. Synod 7. I honour the historie of the Images and doe properly worship them Finally in the 7. general Councell holden 900. yeeres past they are condemned of heresie that denie the vse and vvorshipping of holy Images speaker A. W. Lactantius though he were an ancient Christian was not diuine and in these verses if they be his he sheweth himselfe liker a light Poet then a graue writer whose authority should be taken in so great a matter Ierom reporteth what Paula did in Ierusalem For which he that well considereth what it was may find more cause to commend her zeale then to like of her actions She went into the Sepulcher and kist the stone of his resurrection which the Angell had remoued from the doore of the Tombe The place of his bodie where the Lord had lien as if she had thirsted for the desired waters she lickt with her faithfull tongue who sees not more zeale then knowledge in this behauiour Neither Pâ—ter nor Iohn nor any of the Disciples are reported to haue done any such thing though they came to the graue by and by after our Sauiours resurrection Was she more deuout no but more ignorant and passionat This testimony of Basil is no where to be found but in this Councell which was packed for the nonst to confirme Idolatrous Image worshippers I shewed the like practise of the Councell before concerning other writers Now for a conclusion of this point I will briefly note the beginning of Images among the Christians and speake a little of that seauenth Councell so often alleadged against vs. The first vse of any Images after our Sauiours ascension was brought in by Simon the Sorcerer who was also the first and principall Heretik Of whom Theodoret and Austin write that he gaue his owne and his strumpet Selenes Images to his followers to be worshipped by them After him one Marcellina of the sect as it is said of the Carpocratians worshipped the Images of Iesus Paul Homer and Pythagoras The Gnosticks presently after her worshipped the Images of Christ and are condemned for it by Irenaeus They haue painted Images saith Epiphanius of Carpocrates and the Gnosticks which they say are the Images of Iesus and that they were made vnder Pontius Pilate while our Sauiour liued but they keepe these Images secret yet as he obserueth they worshipped those Images Amongst true Christians the beginning of Images may wel be thought to haue bin such as Eusebius guesseth it was namely an imitation of the Gentiles who vsed to make and keepe the Images of them by whom they had receiued any speciall good Yea the Gentiles being newly conuerted could not by and by be weaned from all vse of Images more then from other superstitions It was necessary saith Tertullian in former times to yeeld many things to the Christians who for the most part were conuerted from Paganisme to religion when they were old and so could hardlie leaue those things to which all their life time they had bin accustomed But as yet they had no Churches nor vse of Images in their assemblies That seemes to haue growen by the painting of the histories of Martyrs in tables and setting them vp in Churches Which aduantage the Deuill that alwaies watcheth his oportunitie to bring in Idolatry by little and little greedilie apprehended and followed and at the last brought to such a height that the Emperour Leo the third surnamed Isaurius was faine to call a Councell at Constantinople about the yeere 729. wherein it was decreed that the Images should be pulled downe This Gregorie the second Bishop of Rome who some 13. yeeres before had caused Images to be allowed in a Councell at Rome tooke very hainously and so much the rather because the Emperour had required obedience of the Latin Church to the decrees past in that Councell at Constantinople But the Bishop was so farre from yeelding obedience that he tooke this commandement of the Emperour as an occasion to withdraw his allegeance from his Soueraigne and seized into his hands all the authoritie that was yet remaining to the Empire in Italie This contention after the death of Leo grew more hot in so much that his sonne Constantine Copronymus to make some good end of the matter assembled another Councell at Constantinople about the yeere 755. which he calleth the seauenth general Councel where there were present 308. Bishops and wherein Images were again condemned About some 34. yeeres after Irene daughter to a King of the Tartars and widow to the Emperour Leo the 4. a Pagan by birth and little better in religion during the nonage of her sonne Constantine called a Councell at Constantinople wherein a great number of Bishops maintained by the word of God that Images ought to bee abolished Which the Empresse perceiuing found meanes to break vp the Councill and afterwards appointed another again the next yeere at Nice in Bythinia wherein it was decreed that Images should bee worshipped and that Councill of Nice should be counted the seuenth generall Councell and not the other which had been held before at Constantinople against Images This is that seauenth Councell which our Papists so magnifie and it passeth vnder the name of that famous Councell of Nice wherein Arius was condemned euery man not knowing that this was a second Councell betwixt three and foure hundred yeere after the former But that all men may be the better able to iudge of this foresaid Councell let me propound the speeches of some of the Bishops on the behalfe of Images I receiue and embrace honorablie saith Constantine Bishop of Constans in Cyprus holy and reuerend Images according to the seruice of adoration which I performe to the Consubstantiall and life giuing Trinitie And them that do not so thinke nor glorifie them I separate from the Catholike and Apostolicall Church and lay them vnder the Cursse and ioyne them with such as haue denied the Incarnation of Christ our God for our saluation The holy Father hath said plainly that the Image of the King is called the King and yet there are not two Kings so that it is cleere that he which shall adore the Image and say it is Christ sinnes not The most holy Patriarke Tharasius said let vs obserue that the old Scripture â—ad signes and that out of it the new hathtaken Cherubins of glorie shaddowing the propitiatory The holie Synode answered very well Sir so is the truth The most holy Patriarke said if the old Scripture had Cherubins shadowing the Propitiatorie we also will haue the Images of Iesus Christ and of the holy mother of God and of the Saints shadowing our Altars Theodosius Bishop of Ancyra said whatsoeuer things are written are written for our learning therfore the holy Images and Pictures grauen and painted are painted and set vp for our learning zeale and example Elias the most holy Bishop of Creet said According
to the most reuerend letters of Adrian most holy Pope of old Rome I confesse and hold Images to be holy and worthy of worship neuer laying them away but adoring them perfectly them that confesse otherwise I accursse The othet most holy Bishops and venerable Monkes cried out And we all together receiue and embrace and adore Images with very great honour Stauratius Bishop of Chalcedon said I receiue embrace and honour Images as being the pledges of my saluation Peter Bishop of Nichor said I receiue venerable Images and adore them and will alwaies teach the doctrine that I may one day giue account to God our Iudge in the world to come Iohn the most religious Priest Lieue-tenant of the Apostolike thrones said Therefore an Image is greater then prayer And this is come to passe by the prouidence of God for ignorant mens sakes The same man counteth the denying of worship to Images the worst of all heresies as that which ouerthrowes the gouernment of our Sauiours house I forbeare to set downe their reasons which are taken from Tradition miracles and some places of Scripture so ridiculously applied that it is little better then blasphemie to make the holy Ghost president of so Idolatrous and sottish a Councell Constantine hauing subscribed to this Councell by his mothers perswasion and example in his none-age after he came to yeeres of discretion and his owne gouernment by the aduise of diuers learned men repealed the decrees of it concerning Images and ere long after tooke the whole sway of the Empire from his mother who had vsurped it as protectrix into his owne hands which dealing of his did incense the ambitious and idolatrous woman that shee caused certaine traitours first to plucke out his eyes and afterward to murder him yea so great was her malice and feare that shee ceased not till shee had made his sonnes her grand-childrens or neuewes eyes to be pulled out also such an author and patrones had that Idolatrous and wicked Councell the chiefe foundation of Popish Images Such as it was notwithstanding the decrees of it were sent by Pope Adrian the first to the Emperour Charlemaine that he might allow of them But he held another Councell at Franckfort wherin it was concluded that the second Councell of Nice whereof we haue spoken should not be held either for generall or for the seauenth or for a thing of any worth The decrees of that Councell condemning Images were by this repealed and a book written by expresse commandement of the Councell of Franckfort and published in the name of Charlemaine in which as the Councell of Constantinople is reproued for taking away all vse of Images euen for history and memory so that second Councell of Nice is particularly confuted and condemned The like entertainment found the decrees of that Councell amongst our countri-men here in England as you shall see by the testimony of a Monke that writ 300. yeeres agoe The same yeere saith Mathew of Westminster Charles King of the French-men sent into Britaine a booke of decrees wherin many things were found contrary to the true faith and that especially that it was determined by the ioynt consent of almost all the Doctors of the East That Images are to be adored which the Catholike Church vtterly detests Against this Albinus writ an Epistle wonderfully endited according to the authority of the holy Scriptures â—â—d carried together with that booke of decrees to the King of Frâ—…ce in the name of the Bishops and Nobles Yet was not this Councell of Franckfort nor the Epistle written by Albinus nor the booke set out in Charlemaines name of sufficient strength to stop the course of Idolatry so violent it is where it finds any way made for it whereupon Claudius Bishop of Turin hauing bin brought vp and preferred by Charlemaine opposed himselfe by writing afresh against it and as Ionas Bishop of Orleans saith who writ against him proceeded farther to cast them out of all the Churches of his dioces This opinion and fact of his Ionas writ against yet so as that he wholy agreed with him about the vnlawfulnes of adoring Images against the second Councell of Nice But in the East the quarrels about Images were more hot and dangerous which mooued the Emperours Michaell and Theophilus to send their Embassadors into France to the Emperour Lewis the curteous sonne of Charlemaine about the yeare 823 to signifie to him that the superstitious abuse of Images in their dominions had made them assemble a Councell about the matter in which it was decreed that they should not be worshipped with incense lights kneeling prayers songs and seruice before them all which notwithstanding that some of their clergy refusing to yeeld obedience had withdrawne themselues to the Pope of old Rome complaining to him and slandering the East Church that they therefore had sent their Ambassadors both to him and to the Pope for the clearing of themselues of all such false imputations and that they might vnderstand what the iudgement of their Churches was in those points Hereupon Lewis the Emperour called a nationall Councel at Paris the yere following 824. wherein the conclusion was as in the Councell of Franckfort against both pulling downe and worshipping of Images as appeareth by an Epistle sent from the said Synode to Lewis and Lotharius by two Bishops Italitgarius and Flamarius and according thereunto answere was returned to the Emperours Michaell and Theophilus Thus much I thought good to set downe as briefely as I could hee that would reade of these matters more at large may finde enough to content him in that excellent treatise of the Lord Plessy against the Masse in the second booke the second third and fourth Chapters The iudgement of all these matters I leaue to all men whatsoeuer that will vouchsafe to waigh things by the Ballance of the Sanctuary with the hand of true reason Others that had rather beleeue what is told them then try that they beleeue I commit and commend to the mercy of God Whom I beseech according to his good pleasure to enlighten our hearts and incline our affections euery day more and more that we may discerne and acknowledge his most holy truth to his glory the good of his Church and our owne euerlasting saluation through his Sonne Iesus Christ. To whom with the Father and holy Spirit one God immortall inuisible and only wise be all glorie power obedience and thanksgiuing for euer and euer Amen FINIS Errata Pag. 11. lin 1. read in our time p. ead l. 29. r. yes p. 17. l. 11. r. were not dedicated p. 36. l. 22. r. out p. 44. l. 10. in the margin r. Popes breast p. 45 l. 21. r. and that p. 57. l. 17. r. c. p. ead l. 35. r. them Cardinall p. 68. lin 18. r. is moued p. cad l. 22. dele as p. 87. l. 4. in the margin r.