no man euer dreamed of viz. that we commonly build our faith vpon our English translation So that the Scripture may well be the rule of faith for ought that you haue said against it concerning the first propertie of certaine truth which it were blasphemie to denie of the scripture For the second that the rule must be easie to vnderstand I haue shewed that there is no necessitie of that condition and that the scripture is easie in matters necessary to saluation In the last point of the scriptures defect touching many things that must needs be beleeued you do both wrong God in making his word writtē so vnperfect and by a foolish craft insteed of proouing that the scripture containeth not all matters of faith needfull to saluation vndertake to shew that which no man denieth that all points of beleefe are not expresly set down and determined by scripture And lest we should forget your shuffling in this point you offer new proofe of a needlesse matter from the authoritie of Austin Basil and Epiphanius whose testimonies I alledged before to prooue the sufficiencie of the scripture in all matters necessarie to saluation The places by you alledged are not of such matters neither speake of things not expresly contained but onely shew that for matters of fact ceremonie the Apostles haue not determined al particulars The Apostles saith Austin haue commaunded nothing touching not rebaptising them which haue bene baptised by hereticks but the custome which was pleaded against Cyprian is to be beleeued to haue had beginning from their tradition as there are many things which the Church euery where holdeth that we wel beleeue therefore to haue beene enioyned by the Apostles though they are not found written What is this to prooue that there are matters necessarie to be beleeued to saluation which are not exprest in the scriptures Basil was not the the author of that Treatise at the least of the latter part of it from about the 17. chapter and so forward That appeareth first by obseruing the difference of style being neither like Basils writing nor in one place like an other as Erasmus hath truly obserued who translated it Secondly by the fond discourse he maketh propounding one thing handling an other and concluding a third which not onely Basil would neuer haue done but no man of any discretion Last of all he bewraieth himselfe to be a counterfeit by speaking of Meletius as one dead long before who liued in his time ouerliued him as it is manifest by the Ecclesiasticall historie But admit the booke were Basils what is there in it to proue that all points of doctrine which appertaine to true Christian faith are not expresly set downe in Scripture This Author saith that we must beleeue oraditions VVhat In matters of doctrine There is no such word in him He speaketh of outward carriage in ceremonies and phrases of speech The question in that part of his Treatise is of the preposition with that is to speake that euery man may vnderstand whether it be lawfull to say in the Church seruice and otherwise Glorie be to the Father and to the Sonne with the holy Ghost or whether we must needs say and to the holy Ghost not with For this speech that author pleades tradition Do we denie any such matter Or do we not acknowledge the libertie and authoritie of the Churches in such matters Who sees not that our custome now is to say Glory be to the Father to the Sonne and to the holy Ghost Not that thereby we condemne the other kind of speech but because in matters left to our libertie we take that which seemeth fittest Epiphanius speaking of praier for the dead which hath no warrant of Scripture is glad to helpe himselfe with the authoritie of tradition telling vs that some things must be held by tradition and not all taken out of the scriptures But Epiphanius doth not say that this is a doctrine or action necessarie to saluation A. D. §. 6. Some obiect against this conclusion that place of S. Paul Omnis Scriptura diuinitùs inspirata vtilis est ad docendum c. vt perfectus sit homo c. But this place prooueth nothing against that which I haue said For it saith not that scripture alone is sufficient to instruct a man to perfection but that it is profitable for this purpose as it is indeed and the rather because it commendeth vnto vs the authoritie of the Church which as I shall afterwards proue is sufficient Now it is certaine that to be profitable and to be of it selfe alone sufficient be farre different things Stones and Timber be profitable to the building of an house yet they alone without a worke-man to square them and set them in order be not sufficient for this purpose A. W. Of this place I haue spoken sufficiently otherwhere and shewed that the Scriptures are able to make vs wise to saluation and therefore sufficient to that purpose Now the Apostle hauing giuen that commendation to the scripture vers 15. proceedeth in the next to exemplifie that in particular which he had before said in generall It is able to make thee wise to saluation it is able to fit thee to teaching reproouing correcting instructing Can any reasonable man thinke that the Apostle deliuering by way of amplification his former commendation of the scripture that he might the rather stirre vp Timothie to the studie of it would say lesse then he had done before But it is a great deale lesse to say no more but the scripture is profitable to such purposes then to commend it as able to make a man wise to saluation Therefore though the word indeed doe not expresly signifie sufficiencie yet it cannot be doubted but the profit mentioned implieth such a sufficiencie especially since he addeth perfection which must arise from this word of God And so as I haue shewed elsewhere do Chrysostome and Theophylact vnderstand it who make the Apostle speake to Timothie to this effect that he being now to be offred vp leaueth the scriptures in his steed of which he may in all things take aduise and counsell as if the Apostle himselfe were present with him But you forsooth would make vs beleeue that the scripture is indeed profitable to this end but not sufficient Is not the knowledge of arts tongues philosophy and history of verie good vse also to this purpose Slender then too slender is the commendation our Apostle giueth the scriptures if it be of no greater excellēcy then these humane furtherances but only in a certain degree of profit To helpe the matter you propound one particular for which the scripture is profitable namely to commend vnto vs the authority of the Church But neither doth it cōmend to vs any such authority as you imagin if that be the rule of the scripture one sentēce had bin as good better then
of the fifth to the end of the sixteenth containe the antecedent or first part of his reason and the proofes thereof The seuenteenth addeth and enforceth the maine conclusion The assumption of the second syllogisme That it is necessary to admit c. is handled from the fourth Chapter to the tenth The proposition of the first syllogisme That the faith which the authoritie of the true Catholique Church commendeth to vs ought without doubt to be holden for the true faith is proued by another reason from the ninth Chapter to the thirteenth The assumption of the third syllogisme That those onely which professe the Romane faith are the true Catholique Church is debated from the twelfth Chapter to the seuenteenth This is the generall frame of the whole Treatise as farre as I am able to conceiue of it Now let vs examine the truth therof Wherein that I may proceed the more orderly and plainely I wil first speake a word or 2. of some matters that seeme fit to be vnderstood ere I answer particularly to the seueral propositiōs What the diuerse significations of this word faith are and how many sorts of faith there be I will inquire as farre as it is needfull for this Treatise in my answer to the first Chapter onely we are now to know that by faith and beliefe this Papist vnderstands the matter or doctrine which is to be beleeued This appeares in the rest of this Preface and namely at these words Fourthly because these few plaine points c as also euery where in his Treatise though sometimes as I will shew in due place he take it otherwise The like I say of the word Church which being diuersly taken in Scripture is here to be restrained to a certaine cōpany of men vpon earth as this Author himself shewes in this Preface at the place aforenamed Now then to answer directly to his principall syllogisme I deny the whole antecedent therof Because it takes some things for a knowne truth which are either false or at least full of doubt As for example that the true Catholique Church is a company of men vpon earth whereas who knowes not that the saints that haue bene are and shal be in all ages are members of the true Catholique Church which consists of them all ioyntly That all the seuerall congregations which hold the true doctrine of the Gospell are one and the same Church A doctrine in his meaning without anie warrant of Scripture as it shall be shewed hereafter That there is authoritie in a certaine company of men vpō earth to require that whatsoeuer they deliuer be held for an vndoubted truth vnder paine of damnation to all that wil not so beleeue them whereas God vseth not the authoritie of men but their ministerie to the begetting of faith in them that shall be saued In particular I denie the proposition because all the Churches in the world may erre either in some one point not fundamentall or some in one some in another And therefore some things may be propounded by the true Church of Christ which notwithstanding are not vpon any authoritie of theirs to be held for true To the proofe of the proposition set downe in the second syllogisme I answer by denying the assumption That it is necessary to admit such authoritie in the Church The reasons of my deniall are 1 That God hath giuen no such authoritie to anie companie of men since the Apostles or besides them who had it seuerally euery one in his owne person 2. That there is no necessitie of anie such authoritie for the saluation of the elect or damnation of the reprobate 3. That the Scriptures are left vnto vs for an absolute rule whereby all things that are to be beleeued must be tried I denie also the assumption of the first principall syllogisme and to the proofe of it contained in the third syllogisme I say further that they which professe the doctrine that the Church of Rome now teacheth in many points are members of the Church of Antichrist vnder the Pope the head thereof But if as you say Those that professe the Romane faith are the true Catholique Church how ignorantly and absurdly do your Monkes of Bourdeaux write in their solemne profession of religion where they say that the holy visible catholique and Apostolike Church dispersed ouer the whole world hath communion in faith manners with the Church of Rome If the Catholique Church haue communion with the Church of Rome sure the Catholique Church and the Church of Rome are not all one A. D. §. 4. Vpon which points when he had heard my discourse he desired me for his better remembrance to set downe in writing what I had said The which I had first thought to haue done briefly and to haue imparted it onely to him but by some other friends it was wished that I should handle the matter more at large they intending as it seemed that it might not only do good to him but to others also that should haue need of it as well as he Of which sort of men standing in this need as I could not considering their miserable case but take great pitie so I was easily moued especially at my friends request to be willing to do my endeuour which might be for their reliefe and succour and to take any course which might turne to their helpe and profite A. W. The title of your booke professeth breuitie here you say that you had thought to set downe your discourse briefly but haue handled the matter more at large Either your Title or your Preface is to blame Your Title is iustified afterward where you say that your course of writing is very briefe and compendious Papists talke of pitie who without mercie or conscience wold haue murdred so many thousāds by treason as they thought haue sent them almost quicke to hell soules and bodies together It is not anie pitie of vs but your slauery to the Pope and proud conceit of I know not what merite with hope of making your part strong for rebellion or massacre that drawe from you these goodly treatises A. D. §. 5. Now of all other courses which haue bene and might be vndertaken that which in my speech I did chuse as most expedient for him with whom I did conferre seemed best also for me to prosequute in this my writing for the benefite of him and others and this for foure reasons A. W. I know not what he was with whom as you say you did conferre but I am sure his iudgement was at the most but indifferent good if such a course as begs the question would be any way liked of him You vndertake to shew That it is necessary to admit an infallible authority in the true Catholique Church which you expound to be A companie of men vpon earth VVhat Protestant is there of any knowledge but vnderstands that by Catholique Church we meane ordinarily not any companie in
the truth to flie to the Scriptures And Tertullian reiects that which is brought if it be not in the Scriptures Origen saith Christ is no where to be sought but in the mountaines of the law and the Prophets Yea Ierome makes the Scriptures the bounds of the church beyond which she may not go Are you able to shew this authority in all particuler points of Controuersie whereof a man may doubt Are you not faine in many particulars to deny the sufficiency of the Scriptures and to run a madding after traditions What talke you then of shewing sufficient authority The bestauthority you can alleadge for many matters is the Popes will who cannot erre as you ridiculously imagine And this authoritie is all the reason you haue in diuers points except such stuffe as Durād brings in his Rationale diuinorum officiorum wherof many of your own men are ashamed I had thought your Friers vow of obedience to their superiours or at least the Iesuits special vow of blind fold obedience head bene the height of all perfection in this life but I perceiue now that there is a greater opinion of holinesse in these vowes then there is cause why For you tye the obedience of euery Christian in such sort to the authoritie of the Church and indeed of his particular pastor yea of euery Priest or Iesuite that comes licenced by Blackwell or some new Garnet that be must beleeue without enquiring any reasō whatsoeuer such a fellow shall deliuer to him for truth This is the obedience one of your Cardinals speakes of Obedience without reason saith Cusan is full and perfit obedience namely when a man yeelds obedience without requiring any reason as a beast horse or other obeies his maister So doth your Popish Clergie vse the people as men do their Asses make them beare and do what they list yea euen to the attempting of most horrible and incredible treasons against their Soueraigne and countrey I will not now dispute what agreement there is betwixt faith and reason nor whether of them is the former nor in what case a man may require reason onely that no man may conceiue amisse of our doctrine concerning our demanding of proofe for that we are enioyned to beleeue he is to vnderstand that we aske no farther proofe but to be perswaded that the point deliuered to vs is warranted by Scripture Let it be neuer so much in seeming contrary to reason if it be agreeable to Scripture we hold our selues bound in conscience to take it for truth though we be no way able to answer such reasons as we know are brought against it Neither yet do we rest satisfied as soone as some place of Scripture is alledged in a doubtfull matter but here indeed we hearken after reason Yet not to prooue that true which we find affirmed in Scripture but to make vs perceiue that such and such is the meaning of the Scripture Whatsoeuer the Scripture saith we acknowledge to be absolutely true so farre as it is deliuered for true by the holy Ghost But what the sense of the Scripture is we thinke it must be prooued by the true vse of reason according to the certain principles of diuinitie and such helps as obseruation of circūstances vnderstanding of the tongs conference of like places logical discourse with such other helps reasonably affoord vs. But why should you find fault with demanding reason or not be most willing ready to ioyne it to your authority since as Cusan saith faith is not abased by reason but exalted euen as water in a vessell supports and lifts vp oyle As for your proofe that therfore we may not demand a reason nor so much as enquire whether the points that are taught vs be sutable to the Scripture or no because Christian beliefe must onely be grounded vpon the authority of God speaking by the mouth of the Church we say that you auouch that which is not true For Christian faith must be grounded vpon the authoritie of God speaking by the pens of his Apostles and Prophets in the Scripture not vpon the authoritie of any company of men liuing from time to time in the world The Church you dreame of will I doubt not in another part of my answer be shewed to be nothing but a fancy and a gay word to deceiue the simple when as by it you meane no more but your clergie or perhaps your Bb. onely assembled in a Councell or the Pope himselfe alone who can with no more reason be called the Church then the head may be tearmed the body or the whole man if I should grant you that he is the head which is both false and absurd The Lord vseth not the authoritie of men to enioyne what they list for a matter of faith but their ministery to beget faith by declaring what he hath reuealed in the Scripture through euidence of truth and power of exhortation testified and made effectuall by the mightie grace of the holy Ghost in the hearts of them that shall be saued A. D. §. 11 The which briefe and compendious resolution of faith whosoeuer will as euery one may securely and as in the discourse following shall be declared must necessarily embrace beside the ease he shall also reape this commoditie that cutting off all occasions of needlesse and fruitlesse doubts questions and disputes concerning matters of faith wherin vnsettled minds spend their time and spirit he shall haue good leisure and better liking then ordinarily such vnquiet mindes can haue to employ his endeuours more fruitfully otherwayes to wit in building vpon the firme foundation of stedfast faith the gold and pretious stones of Gods loue and other vertues in practise whereof consisteth that good life which maketh a man become the liuing temple of almightie God the which temple Gods spirit will not onely visite with holy inspirations and blessings oftentimes in this life but he wil also inhabite and dwell continually in it both by grace here and by glory in the other most happy and euerlasting life A. W. The securitie that ariseth from resting vpon the authoritie of the Church is freenesse not from danger but frō care This latter I confesse will easily be wrought by this perswasion in the heart of a carelesse worldling or a man superstitiously ignorant if he can be senslesly obstinate inough in keeping his eyes and eares from seeing and hearing the truth of God in the Scripture for to such men God sends strong delusions to beleeue lyes that they may be damned which haue not receiued the loue of the truth that they might be saued But alas what shall this ease aduantage them but onely that they may go laughing to destruction as a foole doth to the stocks and whip What necessitie can there then be of embracing such a dāgerous resolution Besides the ease you tell vs now of another commodity that may be reapt by embracing that
ei credidissem discendum What a madnesse is this in thee to say beleeue them to wit the Catholickes that we must beleeue Christ and the Scriptures to be his word yet learne of vs what Christ said that is to say what is the meaning of his word I should saith S. Austin much more easily perswade my self that I ought not to beleeue Christ at all then that I must learne any thing concerning him of any except of those of whom I haue already learned to beleeue in him A. W. I denie your principall Assumption wherein you denie the sufficiencie of the Scripture for the determining of all matters of faith For if the Scripture were not sufficient to this purpose it might be lawfull for men to adde to the word of God that which is wanting but that God hath precisely forbiddē all mē Ye shall put nothing to the word which I command you neither shall you take any thing from it out of which Cardinall Caietane saith we may gather that the law of God is perfect But of this place I haue said more other where and our Diuines are large and plentifull in this argument The Apostle Paul affirmeth of him selfe that he preached nothing but that which had bin spoken by Moses and the Prophets yea our Sauiour euery where auoucheth his doctrine by the writings of the old Testament Indeed of whom should we know the will of God but of God himselfe who doubtlesse hath not deliuered it so sparingly in so many seuerall bookes but that it containeth whatsoeuer is needfull to saluation All things indeed that our Lord did are not written but those saith Cyril that the writers thought to be sufficient for manners and doctrine I could ouerwhelme you with testimonies of the Fathers in this matter A few shall serue The Canonicall Scripture saith Austin is the rule of all The letters of Bb. are reprehended by some other of grauer authoritie Generall Councels correct prouinciall and the former are amended by the latter Let the Scripture be iudge saith another and let those doctrines be held for true that agree with it For the law of God or Scripture as Chrysostom saith is a most exact ballance square and rule Therefore let vs passe by that which he or he thinkes and let vs enquire all things of the Scriptures The holy Scriptures inspired by God are sufficient to shew the truth And therfore as Hilary saith wisely and religiously It were well we would content our selues with those things that are written If we will not this is Basils censure of vs that we are without faith and proud It is a manifest argument of infidelitie saith Basil and a certaine signe of pride if any man reiect ought that is written or attempt to bring in any thing that is not written Therefore Damascen saith that the Church receiueth acknowledgeth and reuerenceth all things that are deliuered by the law the Prophets the Apostles and Euangelists and further seeketh not for any thing I pray you shew me some reason if you can why the Lord that doth not omit necessary matters repeateth those that are lesse needful to be known should fil so many bookes of Scripture with the same histories and points of doctrine oftentimes rehearsed and quite leaue out many things of farre greater importance then some of those are which he hath caused to be written Without the knowledge of many things recorded in the Scriptures a man may be saued but you denie saluation to all men that beleeue not whatsoeuer you teach them and there is no end of your deuices though it haue no warrant in any part of Scripture Is it not better then to rest only vpon that which both you and we acknowledge to be the word of God then to giue an infinite libertie to men of deuising what they wil to lay a grieuous burthē vpon our selues to beleeue vnder pain of damnation whatsoeuer they wil father vpō I know not what impossibilitie of erring Let him that hath eyes see though the blind delight in blindnesse The weaknesse of your principall Assumption concerning the insufficiencie of the Scriptures you striue to fortifie with this slender reason If there be diuers questions moued now a dayes touching substantiall matters which are not expresly set downe nor determined by onely expresse Scripture then the Scripture is not able to resolue all such doubts But there are diuers such questions Therefore the Scripture is not able to resolue all such doubts Ere I answer directly to your syllogisme I must note two things in the propounding of it First by whom the questions you speake of are moued If by Papists it is the shame and sinne of your Church to suffer idle and needlesse questions to be moued of which there can be no determination but by a Councel to be held no man knoweth how many yeares hence euer or neuer If you say these questions are set on foote by vs all the world may discerne your vntruth For we are certainly perswaded that it is not lawfull to accept any doctrine as a point of faith which cannot be proued by the Scriptures But you will say We thinke they are determinable by Scripture though indeed they be not At the least then answer the proofes we bring out of Scripture and on our part the controuersie is ended You wil reply that we will not be answered but interprete Scripture as we list Who sees not that this is a meere slander since we stand not vpon any priuate reuelations but on those rules of interpretation which the fathers according to the light of true reason haue left vs as it were by legacy But this reply is also otherwise insufficient For whereas you yeeld as appeares by this reason that some things may be determined by Scripture this obiection denies that any point of doctrine whatsoeuer can be resolued of by it because if that you say be true we wil in all cases interprete Scripture as we please Secondly I obserue another point in respect of the time If the questions you meane be such as were neuer moued till now and the Scripture neuer failed in any former doubts which seems to be implied in that speech Now a dayes me thinkes there is no shew of reason to imagine that so many and so capitall heresies for the space of 1500 years should be refuted and ouerthrowne by Scriptures and now at the last matters of lesse importance and yet as you say very substantiall should haue no meanes of satisfaction by the like course Doubtlesse if the Scripture hath hitherto bene sufficient it is no small wrong to suspect and accuse it now of insufficiencie especially in very substantiall matters necessary to be beleeued Now concerning your syllogisme I denie the consequence of your propositiō What is the Scripture so poore and weake that it can determine nothing which is not expresly set downe
maintained The Philosophers indeed as Thomas saith had a kind of notion of some points thereof but they had no certaintie as well because they were corrupted with errors as for that very few of them are found to haue agreed in the same truth But in the Church is certaine knowledge and truth Which as Caietan saith is vpheld aloft in it because it is auowed reuerenced and honored aboue all things and it is so founded in the Church that out of it it is not to be found This is the reason as they truly say why the Church is called a pillar Thomas addeth that it is termed the ground in respect of others because men cannot be confirmed in the truth but by the sacraments of the Church This testimonie of Austine is alledged by you otherwise then it was written by him For whereas he spake of that which had then alreadie bene resolued of by the whole Church you make him speake indefinitely of any thing that pleaseth the Church turning iam placuit into placet But we must vnderstand that he writing in that place concerning the rebaptizing of heretickes which question had bene agreed vpon as he saith in the former chapter before the hatching of Donatus heresie saith that the iudgement of the Church in that case is to be held as agreeable to the Scripture This might the Reader haue seene in his words if you had not changed the tense in placet and left out etiam in hac re in the beginning of the sentence The truth of the Scriptures saith Austin is held by vs euen in this thing If you reply farther that the reason which Austin vseth is generall for all questions whatsoeuer namely the authoritie of the Church commended by the Scriptures which cannot erre I answer you first that we haue seene Austins iudgement directly to the contrary viz. that whatsoeuer is of necessitie to saluation is plainly deliuered in the Scriptures and that the authoritie of men without Scripture is insufficient to propound any doctrine as a matter of faith and therefore if he should write otherwise in this place we might with good reason make question of his authoritie Secondly I answer that Austine speaketh here of those points onely which are not determinable by Scripture such as he taketh the question of rebaptizing heretickes to be as it appeareth in the words immediatly before those you alledge being also a peece of the sentence by you omitted Although saith Austin there be no example to be brought out of the Scriptures concerning this matter yet the truth of the same Scriptures is euen in this matter also held by vs when we do that which hath now alreadie pleased the whole Church c. Now in such cases as cannot by Scripture be decided who would or may be so presumptuous as to withstand or mislike the practise of the church in all places Surely the authoritie of the church is so far commended in the Scriptures that it ought in all things of such nature to ouerweigh our iudgement and incline our affection to the liking of that which is agreed on by so generall a consent of so many churches in all nations Therefore that which you gather out of Austins words of following the iudgement of the church in an obscure question is to be restrained to such questions as cannot be determined by the Scriptures and those are few or none of any importance of necessitie to saluation none at all or else your consequence will be nothing worth Austin saith that in questions not determinable by Scripture we must follow the iudgement of the church Therefore we must follow it in all obscure questions whatsoeuer Austins foundation will not beare your building Is it a good reason to say In cases not prouided for by law custome must beare sway therfore it must be followed in all cases So and so weakly do you dispute It is not enough for you to teach vs new diuinitie but you will driue vs to learne new Latin too Caesar could make men free of Rome but not words Credere Ecclesiam Catholicam to beleeue the Catholicke Church in ordinary Latin is to beleeue that there is a Catholicke Church Credo esse I beleeue there is but you would make the ignorant beleeue that credo Ecclesiam and credo Ecclesiae is all one For how else can this sentence reasonably depend vpon the former We must follow the iudgement of the Church Therfore worthily also do we all say Credo Ecclesiam Catholicam What can you meane by this but I beleeue that is I giue credit to the Catholick Church that is I beleeue that to be true which the Catholicke Church teacheth But the article of the Creed hath no such sense as it may appeare by the other that follow all being alike in respect of our beleefe I beleeue the communion of Saints the forgiuenesse of sinnes the resurrection of the bodie and life euerlasting To which of these foure dowe giue any such credit But we beleeue that there is a Church of Christ to which all these priuiledges belong He that translated Epiphanius into Latin more curiously then truly made a difference betwixt beleeuing the church and the other articles We beleeue saith he one holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church we confesse one baptisme for the forgiuenesse of sinnes and looke for the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come But the Greeke which Epiph. reciteth out of the Nicene creed is alike in all the articles in the Church in the baptisme of repentance in the resurrection of the dead And Paschasius doubteth not to say that the ignorance of some drew the preposition in from the former sentence concerning beleefe in the holy Ghost into the article of the church yet as he sheweth credere Deum in Deum greatly differ That there is a God the Apostle saith the diuel beleeueth but no mā is held to beleeue in God but he that religiously puts his trust in him Cyril also reciteth the articles after the same manner without any difference in the particulars yet with In to euerie one of them and in that sense in which we take them Ruffin as Paschasius before denieth that the Creed saith In the holy Church in the forgiuenesse of sinnes in the resurrection of the flesh Because that were to equall our beleefe of these points with our beleeuing in the Father the Son and the holy Ghost But of these articles we are to beleeue that they are true that there is a Church gathered vnto God that there is a remission of sinnes that there is a resurrection of the flesh So doth Austin if those Sermons be his read and vnderstand it I beleeue the Catholicke Church c. We must beleeue that God will vouchsafe the resurrection of bodies and the forgiuenesse of sinnes And whereas in an other Sermon he saith in the Church so doth he
of the Church so that we cannot see it vnlesse she open her mouth and deliuer it to vs nor certainely know it to be true but by giuing credit to her testimonie of it is not a good marke to know the true Church by But true doctrine is so shut vp in the belly of the Church that we cannot see it vnlesse she open her mouth and deliuer it to vs nor certainly know it to be true but by giuing credit to her testimonie of it Therefore true doctrine is no good marke to know the true Church by Your Minor is false in both parts of it First it is vntrue that true doctrine is so shut vp in the belly of the Church yea many a true Church may hold some errors and many an hereticall Church some truth onely the fundamentall points are necessarie to the being of a true Church Secondly though true doctrine be in the belly of the Church as indeed there is no true Church in which it is not yet is it not so shut vp in it as you imagine For it is first and principally in the Scriptures where it may be found without any such authoritie of the Church as you dreame of yea I haue shewed that the Apostles themselues did not beget faith in the hearts of them to whom they preached by any authoritie of the Church but by euidence of the truth it selfe which they taught Concerning your proofe from Austins authoritie I first answer that he expoundeth not that place according to the literal meaning of the Prophet who speaketh not of any belly of the Church but saith that those lewd men of whom he speaketh haue alwaies bene giuen to naughtinesse from their mothers wombe These wicked ones saith Vatablus haue gone astray euer since they came forth of the womb they they haue erred euer since they were borne Yea Austin himselfe as your Glosse saith sometimes expoundeth it otherwise then here God saith Austin foreknew sinners euen from the wombe as he said to Rebecca So doth Ierome also vnderstand it so Theodoret. But let vs take it as Saint Austin doth here mystically expound it what will you prooue by it That truth is so shut vp in the belly of the Church that we cannot see it vnlesse she deliuer it by her mouth There is no such word in him no such thing to be gathered out of him His conclusion is that therefore they which differ from the true Church in doctrine are in error which is certainly true concerning fundamentall points and verie probable in all other points whatsoeuer The other part of your Minor is that true doctrine is so shut vp within the Church that we cannot certainly know it to be true but by giuing credit to her testimonie of it For the disproouing whereof it shall be sufficient to call to minde that which I haue often answered concerning those who beleeued by the Apostles ministerie without any consideration or thought of their being sent by the true Church but onely being conuinced by the manifest truth of that which they deliuered concerning forgiuenesse of sinne by our Sauiour Iesus Christ Your proofe out of Austin is insufficient as it may appeare in this sort If Austin say that he should not beleeue the Gospell vnlesse he were mooued by the authoritie of the Church then true doctrine is so shut vp within the Church that we cannot certainly know it to be true but by giuing credit to her testimonie of it But Austin saith so Therefore true doctrine is so shut vp in the Church that we cannot certainly know it to be true but by giuing credit to her testimonie of it I denie the consequence of your Maior First because as Austin himselfe saith of Cyprian we are not bound by the authoritie of Austins iudgement as if his writings were Canonicall We do Cyprian no wrong saith Austin when we distinguish his writings whatsoeuer they be from the Canonicall authoritie of the diuine Scriptures And againe I take not Cyprians writings for Canonicall but consider of them according to the Canonicall and allow of that with his commendation which agreeth to Scripture but by his leaue refuse that which disagreeth from Scripture This minde carried Austin to other mens writings this minde he desired other men should carrie to his Secondly I denie the same consequence because Austin might be mooued by the authoritie of the Church to acknowledge the Gospell for true and yet without the same authoritie learne out of the Gospell so acknowledged which is true doctrine which false Concerning Austins testimonie first it is manifest that he deliuereth not a rule for all men to follow as if by should not beleeue he meant that a man ought not to beleeue the Gospell nor sheweth an impossibilitie of beleeuing it vnlesse a man be moued by the authoritie of the Church but at the most declareth that the authoritie of the Church preuailed with him so farre as to make him acknowledge the Gospell for true which else he had either not knowne or doubted of Secondly it is obserued according to the rest of his writings that the Latine word he vseth in the African dialect signifieth Had not beleeued so that the sense is I had not beleeued the Gospell as the truth of God if the authoritie of the Church had not moued me thereunto The first motiue was the authoritie that is the learning consent holinesse of so many worthie men as from time to time had held and did hold the Gospell to be the truth of God Vpon this ground Austin gaue himselfe to the studie of the Scriptures and by the euidence of truth deliuered in it discerned that it was the word of God according to the report and reputation commonly held of it This sense agreeth with Austins purpose who to refute the Manichees that tooke their master Manes for the Apostle of Christ thus reasoneth against them I beleeue not saith Austin that he is Christs Apostle and then demaundeth of the Manichee what course he would take to prooue it to him Perhaps saith he you will read the Gospell to me and assay to prooue Manichaeus person out of it But what if you should light vpon one that doth not yet beleeue the Gospell Then follow the words alledged by you I truly had not beleeued the Gospell if the authoritie of the Church had not moued me This is yet more cleare by that which Austin writeth afterward First saith he we beleeue that which yet we cannot discerne that being made stronger in faith we may attaine to the vnderstanding of that we do beleeue not men now but God himselfe confirming enlightening our minde within But howsoeuer we vnderstand it Austin speaketh not of true doctrine shut vp in the Church so that it cannot be knowne to be true but by giuing credit to the Churches testimonie which is the point in question but onely of acknowledging the Gospell to be the word
reason not only against Scripture were ordained properly as the ministery of the word the seruice of Angels for their sakes that are to be saued according to the election of God Secondly and as it were accidentally for the hardening of them that will not beleeue to leaue them without excuse To make your matter the more likely you tell vs of our Sauiours loue to mankind which in your diuinity is without exception or respect of persons How then can it sute with the purpose of God his Father who hath chosen some to glory refused other meerly of his owne iust will without respect of difference in the parties so chosen refused As for I that loue of mankind wherupon some men conclude that either all or the greatest part of men are loued by God to eternal life it is not to be vnderstood by comparison of men to men but partly of men to the Angels that fell in which respect the Apostle amplifies the mercy of God to vs He tooke not the Angels but he tooke the seed of Abraham partly of men to all other creatures none of which besides man is vouchsafed the honour to be ioyned in vnity of person with the Sonne of God and so to be made heire of euerlasting glory It is needlesse to repeat what I answered before to this place of Isay onely I will say thus much of your exposition that though all that see the Church may know it yet it doth not follow that therefore all men may see it which you make the end of planting a visible Church that euerie man may learne how to be saued We denie not that the markes of the Church are such as that any man who hath the meanes and will vse them with conscience and diligence may come by the grace of God to the acknowledging of it and by the ministerie of it to saluation Such is the truth of doctrine wherein euerie man may be instructed who will submit his reason to the euidence of truth conteined in the holy Scriptures and not wilfully resist or carelesly neglect the worke of the spirit in the ministerie of the word The bands and chaines Austin speaketh of are not said to draw a man out of the world vnto the Church but to hold him in it that is in already And surely he were vnreasonably absurd that being borne in the profession of Christianitie or by any other occasion brought to ioyne himselfe vnto this or that Church would not cōtinue his beleefe vpon those groūds that Austin there mentions as long as there could be no sufficiēt reason brought to the contrarie yea though he could not discerne the truth of many points which he held as he had bene taught But Austin in the same place professeth that the markes he names and all other whatsoeuer whereby he is held in the Catholicke Church are nothing worth in comparison of truth manifestly prooued out of the Scripture But of this matter I shall haue occasion to speake againe hereafter where you propound some of Austins words more at large A. D. §. 2. Of these markes diuers authors haue written at large I for breuitie sake haue chosen out onely these foure Vna Sancta Catholica Apostolica One Holy Catholicke Apostolicke because I hope these will be sufficient and because I finde these especially set forth in Scriptures commended by Councels and generally admitted of all sorts both Catholickes and Protestants as now I am to declare First for the generall admittance of these properties of the true Church I need no other proofe but that both Catholicks and Protestants allow of the Nicene and Constantinopolitane Creed wherein we professe to beleeue the true Church the which Church is there described with those onely foure properties which before I named as though by those onely euery man might sufficiently know that Church which in euerie point they are bound to beleeue Now if besides this proofe out of the generally receiued Counsels some precise man would haue me prooue these properties to agree to the true Church out of the Scripture it selfe this also I may easily doe A. W. So many and diuers are the markes of the Church propounded by your Popish writers that you had good cause to giue some reason why you cull these foure out of all the rest First you alledge breuitie wherof if you had beene so desirous you would not so often haue repeated the same matters You adde the sufficiencie of these their being mentioned in the Scripture commended by Councels and generally admitted by all sorts both Catholickes and Protestants All which taking them in your sense are generally false as shall appeare in the particular handling of them But indeed the true cause is though you will not be knowne of it that Bellarmine out of whom you haue patched vp your whole discourse though he bring fifteene yet confesseth that they may all after a sort be reduced to these foure There are two faults in this proofe whereby you labour to perswade vs that these properties are generally admitted both by Protestants and Papists First though both admit them yet in diuers senses we according to the true meaning of those Councels you according to those phantasies you haue deuised for the establishing of your Apostaticall Synagogue Secondly we admit them not all as markes of the or a visible Church but as hidden properties of the Catholicke Church the mysticall bodie of Iesus Christ which are not to be discerned by the eye of the bodie but by the light of faith as all other articles in the same Creed are What though there be no more properties but those foure there set downe will it follow thence that therefore they are named as though by those onely euerie man might sufficiently know the Church Is that the vse of those points which are deliuered concerning the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost Or rather are they not set before vs as principall matters to be beleeued of them So are also these properties of the Church If any man be so simple as to take your former proofe for good whereas it faileth in the chiefe point you would prooue by it as I haue shewed he is fitter to be pittied then instructed But is it a note of precisenesse to desire proofe for matters of faith out of the scripture Doubtlesse it was then no lesse precisenesse to appoint the scripture for a rule of our faith and as great for our Sauiour Christ and the Apostles to confirme their doctrine out of the scripture For this course of theirs makes vs the bolder to require the like of you whose authoritie we more doubt of whereas if they had stood vpon their priuiledge and neuer troubled themselues with proouing that they deliuered or leauing their doctrine in writing we should easily haue perswaded our selues to rest vpon mens authoritie and not to looke for any proofe by scripture But giue me leaue a little to consider of this
so many Bishops of their faction Vincentius acknowledgeth a succession continued though secretly from Simon Magus to Priscilian Let vs see ' now whether you bring any better reason for your selues then you haue done against vs They are euen much about one That Church which can shew a line all succession of her Bishops without interruption from the Apostle Peter to Cloment now liuing is Apostolicke But the Church of Rome can shew such a succession without interruption Therefore the Church of Rome is Apostolicke Tertullian thought it sufficient to proue the hereticks not to be Apostolicke that their doctrine agreed not with the Apostles And Ambrose truly affirmed that they haue not the inheritance of Peter which haue not the faith of Peter He saith Nazianzen that professeth the same doctrine of faith is partaker of the same throne But he that embraceth contrary doctrine must be thought an aduersary euen in the throne He may haue the name but the other hath the truth of succession Therefore Irenaeus saith plainly that those Bishops onely are to be obeyed who together with succession haue the truth But of this I spake before Chap. 15. Where there is no beginning what continuance or successiō can there be Is not the question whether Peter were euer at Rome or no full of doubt Are you able in any sort to resolue it by Scripture vnlesse perhaps we may say that he neuer came there because it is no where plainly set downe nor probably to be gathered from thēce that euer Saint Peter was at Rome But it is more vnlikely that euer he was Bishop of Rome I might go forward to aske you who was his successor Linus or Clement which is a point not agreed vpon by auncient writers Since that time you haue had 32. schismes in your Church sometimes two sometimes three Popes at once that your succession cannot be so cleare as you would make it To proue your minor you tell vs that the auncient Fathers did much esteeme succession from the Apostles and vsed it as an argument to confound the hereticks and to confirme themselues in the vnitie of the Catholicke Church Who denieth that succession is to be esteemed and that it hath some force to confute and confirme But what succession is it that is of such price force Personall succession alone without truth VVe heard ere while what Tertullian Irenaeus Nazianzen and Ambrose say concerning succession that without truth it deserueth no credit Yea some of your owne writers confesse that an argument from succession doth not hold affirmatiuely as if there were a true Church wheresoeuer there is succession VVherby doth Irenaeus confound heresies by shewing a personall succession of Bishops from the Apostles VVhat could that helpe the matter vnlesse he be also able to proue that the doctrine he maintaines hath come successiuely from the Apostles by them He speaks plaine enough We confound all errors by the doctrine of the Apostles and the faith preached to men by thē Let not the word tradition trouble any man Irenaeus for that expounds himselfe where he saith that the Apostles first preached the Gospell and afterward by the will of God deliuered it to vs in the Scriptures to be the pillar and foundation of our faith The continuance of this doctrine by succession is vsed by Irenaeus as a motiue to perswade men to the liking of that truth which had receiued so good acceptation and was warranted by so good authority as the teaching of the Apostles themselues In a word Irenaeus saith that heresies might then be refuted by shewing that they who had bene ordained Bb. by the Apostles and their successors continued in the doctrine receiued without any approbation of such hereticall fancies Austin you say was held in the Church as himselfe professeth by the succession of Priests from the verie seat of Peter And why should he not be held by that rather thē leaue the Church for the dreames of the Manichees VVe say as Austin did that such a succession is a better proof of the Church then their bare promise of truth especially since as the same Austin sheweth otherwhere they wold haue their word to be takē as you now would haue yours for sufficient proofe But Austin in the verie same place you alledge addeth withall that if they could shew that the truth was on their side he would preferre it before succession and whatsoeuer other reason that made him continue a member of the Church In this sense did those other ancient writers esteeme and vrge succession whose names you muster to small purpose but onely for shew of authoritie Concerning that speech of Athanasius be not so iniurious either to him or your selues as to presse his testimony to so leud a purpose Would you haue men thinke that he which refuted and confounded Arius and his complices by so many and so worthy proofes out of the holy Scriptures would condemne not onely other men but himselfe also for deriuing his faith in that point from the Scriptures But though you care not what become of all the Fathers so your Popery may flourish yet like a reasonable man consider what a terrible blow you giue your owne cause Is there no other marke of the Church but succession Then by Bellarmines iudgement there is none at all who allowes it not as a certaine light to shew vs the Church But what wants it of blasphemy to pronounce men to be hereticks for making the Scriptures the foundation of their faith to which purpose Irenaeus saith that they were left And I pray you answer me directly why it should not be as lawful for me to groūd my faith vpon the beginning of this succession in the Apostles as vpon the continuance of it in other men Yet might Athanasius well say concerning that point of our Sauiour Christs Godhead that he was to be counted an hereticke that should deriue the beginning of his faith from any other ground then the whole succession wherein the Apostles were comprehended and whose doctrine the Churches of Christ till that time in that matter had followed But how will you proue out of this place of Athanasius that this should be a mark to discerne hereticks by alwaies It was then an excellent and admirable argument in that point not of it owne nature but because the truth had successiuely bene held till those times How will you answer Bellarmine who affirmes confidently and truly that truth goes not alwaies with succession For if it did why should not succession be a certaine mark of a true Church But Bellarmine saith it is not You tell vs that otherwise the ordinance of Pastors made by our Sauiour Christ shall be frustrate of the effect intended by him What vnlesse there be truth wheresoeuer there is succession Then can it not come to passe that any Pastor hauing lawfull ordination can erre For if one
this possibilitie tooke effect in me I may thanke my selfe more then God so that by this doctrine the glorie of euerie particular mans saluation is more due to the partie saued then to God the Sauiour Now on the contrarie side if that we teach be true the losse falles on mans part and not vpon Gods Is any man drawne out of the Iawes of hell and damnation The whole glorie redounds to God It was he that prouided meanes of saluation it was he that gaue me in particular knowledge of that meanes It was he that when I was as vntoward and vnwilling to be saued as the most damned reprobate wrought me to beleeue can I euer be vnmindfull or vnthankfull by inclining my heart to like and accept of his grace and faith in Christ But in the meane while I loose the commendation and the glory of vsing the grace of God well by my free-will O Adam Adam earth and ashes how fast doth that pride of nature whereby thou wast destroyed in thy selfe though in thee it were not naturall cleaue to euerie one of thy posteritie We had rather be thought able to gouerne our selues then be gouerned by God It is more pleasing to vs to hazard our saluation vpon the nice choise of our owne free-will then to be assured of it by the mercie of God working in vs this choise to will O that as we are all partakers of Adams pride so we might also partake with his repentance and faith Would Adam trow ye if it might be put to his choise againe venture vpon his owne free-will though he were as pure as euer he was rather then rest secure vpon Gods almightie and most certaine protection No no blessed soule he knoweth by wofull experience though by Gods vnspeakable goodnesse to his and our greater glorie that he and he only is out of danger who resignes himselfe into Gods hands to be disposed of at his gracious pleasure Why refuse we to be like to Adam in this Will we follow him in that onely of which onely he is ashamed Is it not more glorie to arise with him then to haue fallē with him O why do we euery day renew the memorie of his fault by committing the like Doth the brightnesse of the truth in these points dazle your eies Me thinks I see many of you offering to presse forward as it were to take the kingdome of heauen the doctrine of the Gospell by violence why recoile you Why quaile you on a sodaine The bare name of the Church not onely stayeth you but beateth you backward The Romish Church cannot erre VVho telleth you so Surely they that can erre your Priests and Iesuits Giue me leaue I pray you to question with you a little and for a minute of an hower be content to make vse of that reason and knowledge which God hath giuen you without forestalling your iudgements by preiudice of the authoritie of the Church Doth it not appeare to you by the light of naturall reason that the maine end of all religion is the glorie of God Do not your owne consciences testifie in the simplicitie of your hearts that it maketh more for the glorie of God that men should be beholding to his Maiestie for their saluation then that they should procure it to themselues Is it not also apparent to you in the secret of your owne soules that our doctrine by beating downe the pride of mans free-will aduanceth the glorie of Gods mercie and yours by hoysing vp the conceit of mans good choise presseth downe the estimation of Gods vnspeakable goodnesse And shall an idle sound weigh more with you then sound reason Consider I beseech you what weake grounds you build this opinion of the Church vpon I will point at that which in my answer I haue handled Can you in any sort compare the opinion of the Churches authoritie with the euidence of those matters wherewith before I pressed you Is it as cleere that there are certaine men whom I must beleeue whatsoeuer they teach as it is that I must seeke the aduancing of Gods glory more then of mine owne pride Are you as sure that these Priests and Iesuits which are your teachers be sent by the true Church and deliuer nothing but the doctrine of the true Chruch as you are that they who perswade you to rest wholy vpon God and not at all vpon your selues shew you the right way to procure Gods glory and your owne saluation Tush say you all is nothing vnlesse I beleeue it vpon the credit of the Church Alaste how did the first Christians who neuer thought on the authoritie of the Church when they heard and beleeued the Apostles doctrine Looke ouer all the Historie of the Actes peruse the Sermons of Peter and Paule and tell me whether you finde that euer they pleaded the authoritie of the Church to procure beleefe of their doctrine After men are conuerted the authoritie of the Church hath her due place and must beare sway in matters in different but for the auowing of truth her bare word is neuer of sufficient importance It was the doctrine of the Apostles that wrought vpon the hearts of men by the cleare euidence of it through the power of the Spirit wherewith it was accompanied What that doctrine was where should we learne but in the scriptures wherein they haue written what they preached These you say giue such authoritie to the Church This were somewhat if you made not their authoritie in respect of vs to depend vpon the Church The scriptures say your Doctors haue in themselues authoritie as being from God but they are not of authoritie to vs but onely by the authoritie of the Church I perceiue you are ashamed of these absurdities The Church must be beleeued vpon her word Why so The Scripture saith so How shall I know that these bookes are scripture The Church saith so The Church and the scripture prooue each other by their mutuall testimonie they giue each of other I beleeue the Church because the scripture biddeth me I beleeue the scripture because the Church biddeth me If these things seeme to be absurd as indeed they are most absurd blinde not your selues any longer with such mists of errour but come out of them to the cleare light of the scriptures reade them diligently meditate in them carefully call vpon God for his grace earnestly resigne your selues and your free-will to him sincerelie and the Lord that is most readie to blesse them that vse the meanes of knowledge and faith in humilitie and singlenesse of heart will assuredly enlighten your vnderstanding and incline your affections that you shall discerne like of and embrace the true doctrine of Iustification by faith in Iesus Christ and shall renounce your owne righteousnesse and free-will to the glorie of his grace and the present comfort and euerlasting saluation of your bodies and soules through the same his sonne to whom with the Father and the holy Ghost be all
exposition of that which is read giue me some reason why reading should not be more sufficiēt since he that readeth may easier vnderstand and better weigh that he readeth then he that doth onely heare an other reade But of this point I shall haue occasion to say more hereafter Now for the second point that we cannot heare vnlesse some lawfully sent that is as you vnderstand it vnlesse some sent by the authority of the Church do preach vnto vs first how shal this warrant the Apostles preaching of which S. Paul here speaketh For who knowes not that they were sent immediatly by our Sauiour not by any ordinary course in the Church Secondly it seemes you fortet what is written in the Ecclesiasticall histories of a captiue maid that conuerted the queene of Iberia she the king he his countrey What is recorded of Aedesius Frumentius by whom the Indians were brought to the knowledge of the Gospell How Alexander Bishop of Ierusalem and Theoctistus Bishop of Caesarea defend Origens preaching publickly when as yet he was not allowed by the Church for a minister Which fact of his they maintaine by the like examples of Euelpis Paulinus and Theodorus who had preached without any ordinarie sending And it is verie likely say they that the same hath beene done in other places though we know it not How little care you had of writing plainely any man may guesse by this one sentence wherein this needlesse word infallible is vsed in two diuers senses for certainty of truth where you speake of that we are to beleeue for assurance of beleefe without doubting where you meane faith it selfe A. D. §. 2. Fides saith S. Basile est eorum quae dicta sunt assentiens approbatio sine vlla haesitatione cum animi persuasione de eorum veritate quae Dermunere praedicata sunt Faith is a consenting approbation of those things which are said an vndoubted perswasion of minde of the truth of those things which are preached by the gift of God Fides saith Saint Chrysostome dici non potest nisi circa ea quae non videntur ampliùs quà m circa ea quae videntur certitudinem quis habeat It cannot be called faith vnlesse one be more certaine of those things which are not seene then of those things which are seene The reason whereof the same Saint Chrysostom declareth in an other place saying Superet sensum rationem nostram sermo ipsius Dei nam verbis eius fraudari non possumus sensus verò noster deceptu facillimus est Let Gods word saith he surmount our sense and reason for we can not be deceiued by his words but our sense is most easily deceiued A. W. These testimonies are more for ostentation to shew your learning then for necessitie to confirme a matter not doubted of Yet I must put you in minde that these descriptions and commendations of faith are not brought by the authors to condemne all as cast-awaies that sometimes doubt but to declare what faith is in it owne nature A. D. § 3. Sith therefore our faith is grounded on the word of God reuealed to vs by Iesus Christ our Lord speaking by the mouth of the Church as he saith himselfe Qui vos audit me audit he that heareth you heareth me we ought to receiue the word of faith preached by the true Church not as the word of man but as it is truely the word of God and consequently we must account it a thing most certaine and absolutely infallible A. W. Our Sauiour Christ doth no farther speake by the mouth of the Church then the Church speakes according to the Scripture whom so speaking whosoeuer heareth without doubt he heareth God both because it is the word of God that is spoken and because God hath commaunded vs to heare them that so speake But here againe for a shew the name Church is brought in whereas the testimonie belongs onely to the Apostles if you take it for them that must absolutely be heard without all doubting of that they deliuer and to euery one of them seuerally who doubtlesse is not the Church or else to all Ministers of the gospell from time to time but not without that restraint I mentioned before of speaking agreably to the word If you will stretch the place to other beside the Apostles in that point of being absolutely heard shew some reason why euery Pastor and licensed Preacher may not claime the same priuiledge of being heard and beleeued whatsoeuer he teach But that this is absord it may appeare because our Sauiour Christ foretold that there should come false prophets who alwaies are to be discerned by their doctrine And who is ignorant that the greatest hereticks had many of them lawfull calling in the Churches and yet ranne into monstrous heresies Doth not our Sauiour also will the Iewes to heare the Scribes and Pharisies what absolutely If they will teach their owne deuises saith Austin heare them not do not as they say But what name I Austen Doth not Christ himselfe giue the same charge Take heed and beware of the leuen of the Scribes and Pharises And what is their leuen but their doctrine by the holy Ghosts owne exposition Iansenius Bishop of Gant expounds the place of the Apostles and though he gather from thence the power of the Ecclesiasticall gouernours yet he restraineth it to their inioyning of that which is right Wee are to note saith he how great the authoritie of Ecclesiasticall gouernours is since we must obey them no otherwise then we must Christ when they commaund those things that are right Doe you not see your owne Bishops limitation vpon this verie place you alleage The ancient writers expound the place of the Apostles Your glosse requires deuotion and reuerence to the hearing of Christs Disciples for the reuerence of God whose doctrine principally it is which they deliuer So that they which preach not Christs doctrine cannot looke for so much as reuerence There fore true doctrine is alwaies to be receiued whosoeuer deliuer it whether he be lawfully sent or no and false doctrine neuer though it be preached by a Pope who being no Apostle can shew no charter for his being kept from error though his priue and your flatterie exalt him aboue all saue Peter A. D. CHAP. IIII. That this one infallible faith necessary to saluation must also be entire A. W. Whereas you say obscurely in your title Faith must be entire your meaning is that a Christian must beleeue all things appointed by God propoūded by the Church to be beleeued Wold you not haue said so if you had loued plainnesse What if I should ask you a reason why the title of this Chapter is not set downe in the same forme the rest are Faith is necessary Chap. 1. is one Chap. 2. is infallible Chap. 3. But in this 4. Chap.
Apostles because they spake immediatly by the direction of the spirit and therefore could not possibly erre in any point whereas all other men are subiect to error and their doctrine to examination ere it need be credited Secondly we must remember it doth not follow that if our Sauiour said whosoeuer beleeued not the Apostles should be damned then he that beleeues not the Ministers now in all they propound to be beleeued should be therefore liable to condemnatiō I haue stood the more vpon this proposition because the consequence being true may breed an error in the conceit of many if the reason of it be not truly vnderstood Your Assumption or minor is thus to be limited according to that which I before deliuered He that beleeues the Apostles spake immediatly by the inspiration of the spirit of God and yet doubts of the truth of some things they preached cannot without reforming this error be saued because he holds that the holy Ghost may inspire an vntruth No more can he that doth not beleeue they spake by such inspiration For of them our Sauiour hath absolutely said He that despiseth you despiseth me The second limitation is about the things themselues The ignorance of some points deliuered by the Apostles vtterly excludes a man out of heauen some other again may be vnknowne and a man notwithstanding that his ignorance be saued Therefore though our Sauiour except no point nor distinguish betwixt matters of doctrine yet the not beleeuing of some is no farther damnable then a man doth wilfully refuse to beleeue that which he confesseth to be truth in his heart or at the least in which he thinkes the Apostles were deceiued or which he despiseth as needlesse and so condemnes the wisedome of God in propounding it to be beleeued A. D. §. 3. And this not without reason for not to beleeue any one point whatsoeuer which God by reuealing it doth testifie to bee true and which by his Church he hath commaunded vs to beleeue must needs be damnable as being a notable iniurie to Gods veritie and a great disobedience to his will But all points of faith are thus testified by God and commaunded to be beleeued otherwise they be not points of faith but of opinion or some other kinde of knowledge Therefore all points of faith must vnder paine of damnation be beleeued beleeued I say eyther expresly and actually as learned men may doe or implicite and virtually as vnlearned Catholicks commonly doe who beleeuing expresly those articles which euerie one is bound particularly to know doe not in the rest obstinately doubt or hold some errour against the Church but haue a minde prepared to submit themselues in all things to the authoritie of the Church which they are sure is taught and directed by the spirit of God and doe in generall hold for vndoubted truth whatsoeuer the Catholicke or vniuersall Church doth beleeue A. W. Now followeth the second proofe of your assumption in this manner Euerie notable iniurie to Gods veritie and disobedience to his will is damnable But misbeleeuing or absolutely not beleeuing any one point reuealed by God and propounded by his Church to be beleeued is a notable iniurie to Gods veritie and a great disobedience to his will Therefore misbeleeuing or obstinately not beleeuing any one point reuealed by God and propounded by his Church to be beleeued is damnable To let passe this craftie conueyance whereby you still shuffle in the Church whereas without it the matter is as true and the proposition as perfect I answer to your assumption that all misbeleeuing or obstinately not beleeuing is not a notable iniurie to Gods truth nor a great disobedience to his will where it proceeds simply of ignorance and not of wilfulnesse except in such cases as I shewed in the end of the last section which I speake not to excuse any man as if he did not sinne in misbeleeuing or as if there were some sinne not deadly according to your erroneous conceit but onely to distinguish notable iniuries and great disobedience from some kinde of misbeleeuing The conclusion is thus to be conceiued That misbeleeuing is in it selfe damnable not that no man can be saued which misbeleeueth This distinction of beleeuing expresly and implicitly as you terme it confirmes part of that which I haue hitherto said for by your confession there are some points to the beleefe whereof a general faith will not serue the turne but a man must know the particulars and assent actually to the truth of them For example it is not enough for a man to beleeue in grosse that he must be saued by such meanes onely as God hath reuealed and the Church hath propounded to be beleeued but it is absolutely necessarie to saluation that he know what the Church holdeth in this case concerning redemption by our Sauiour Christ and in his heart acknowledge the truth thereof Againe there are many other points which so a man neglect not the meanes to know them may be vnknowne and beleeued onely in generall without danger of damnation by reason of such ignorance Now this generall beleefe is not as you falsely say to be folded vp in the faith of the Church but to be tied to the Scripture all things wherein I acknowledge to be most true and beleeue all points whatsoeuer as they are eyther expressed or contained in Scripture howsoeuer I be ignorant what is true touching perhaps very many particulars To the authoritie of the Church I willingly submit my selfe thus farre as that I hold it a sinfull presumption for me or any man eyther to compare my priuate opinion with the generall iudgement of other Christians especially Ministers or to condemne or suspect that of falshood which they deliuer vnlesse I haue apparent proofe for the one and great likelihood for the other In which cases I set not my owne conceit against the doctrine of the Church but preferre the truth of God before the opinions of men As for any infallible authoritie in the Church vpon supposall of such a certaine direction by the spirit of God I hold it neither for true nor probable as shall appeare hereafter In the meane while I desire the Reader to consider these few testimonies cōcerning the authority of men Other writers saith Austin I reade with this prouiso that be their learning or holinesse neuer so great I will not thinke a matter true because they haue thought so but because they haue bene able to perswade me eyther by other Canonicall writers or by some likely reason In an other place We may not consent to Bishops though they be Catholicke if at any time they be deceiued so that they iudge contrarie to the Canonicall Scripture of God Of necessitie saith Origen must we call for the testimonie of the Scriptures for our senses and declarations without them as witnesses haue no credit And this charge Basil layeth vpon vs that when we heare we examine
Peter as we heard Bellarmine say signifieth no more but that God keepes no man from being saued but hath vouchsafed the word and sacraments in common to all Your Glosse restraines that Any to them that are to be conuerted that is to the elect That other which are to be conuerted may be conuertea Thomas and Holkot interprete it de voluntate signi of that wil of God which we may gather by the signes he sheweth as for example God calleth all men from danger of damnation by precepts counsels threatnings rewards These are signes to vs that God would haue all men to be saued but there is another will called volunt as beneplaciti the good pleasure of God which is indeed truly that which God intendeth Thomas addeth also a second exposition out of Damascen but it can proue nothing because it cannot be necessarily enforced out of the text rather then the other which is also more warrantable for the truth of it as I will shew another time vpon more iust occasion if it please God Caietan alledgeth three seuerall interpretations that of Damascens a second of All kind of men whereof before and a third of the elect which also he doth exemplifie in the person of Peter Thus I haue shewed that the maine foundation you build vpon is but weak wanting ground of warrant from the word of God But admit it were neuer so true that God would haue euery man to be saued which in some sense as I haue said indeed is most true yet were not the consequence of your proposition proued For there might be sufficient meanes for euery mans saluation though there were no meanes to bring him to that same one infallible entire faith which you conceit but onely to so much faith and knowledge as is necessary to saluation by which he might be sufficiently instructed in matters of faith which is all that you craftily seeme to require in the conclusion of this section whereas before in your proposition no lesse would serue the turne then infallible instruction in all points questions and doubts of faith A. D. §. 2. To this purpose saith S. Austin Si Dei prouidentia praesidet rebus humanis non est desperandum ab eodem ipso Deo auctoritatem aliquam constitutam esse qua velut certo gradu nitentes attollamur in Deum If Gods prouidence saith he rule and gouerne humane matters as he proueth that it doth we may not despaire but that there is a certain authoritie appointed by the same God vpon which staying our selues as vpon a sure step we may be lifted vp to God Saint Austin therefore doth acknowledge some authoritie to be needfull as a meanes whereby we may be lifted vp to God The which lifting vp to God is first begun by true faith And because this authoritie is so needfull a meanes he would not haue vs doubt but that God whose prouidence stretcheth it selfe to all humane matters hath not failed to prouide this meanes for vs it being a principal matter and so principall as vpon which according to the ordinary course dependeth the summe of our saluation We are not therefore I say to doubt but that Almghtie God hath prouided a meanes whereby Animalis homo qui non percipit ea que sunt spiritus Dei a sensuall man who hath no vnderstanding of the diuine mysteries of faith may come to know them by a firme and infallible beleefe A. W. To what purpose doth Saint Austine bring this To proue that God hath appointed a rule by which all men may come to your infallible faith Nothing lesse but to shew that where truth is not euident as to men ordinarily it is not there God hath prouided meanes to stirre them vp to a diligent enquiry after it or rather as he plainly affirmeth to a ridding of themselues of the cares and pleasures of this life which he cals purging of the soule that so they may be fit to embrace the truth Authoritie saith Austin is at hand for a man that is not able to discerne the truth that he may be fitted to it and suffer himselfe to be purged What is this authoritie what is the vse of it Miracles multitude make vp this authoritie whereby men not able to see truth in it self are moued to a reuerend respect of the Church so to an examination of the doctrine which vpon triall is found true Thus doth the wisedome of God prouide for mens ignorance that authoritie of miracles and multitude may draw them to a consideration of the truth which whensoeuer it shewes it selfe so plainly that it cannot be doubted of is to be preferred before all other meanes of perswading a man to beleeue or holding him in beleefe whatsoeuer as the same Austin saith we denie not these to be good helpes and strong meanes to the searching and finding of the truth but to be sufficient and infallible grounds of religion that a man should relie vpon them without trying the doctrine by the truth of God reuealed in the Scriptures It is indeed out of doubt among Christians that God hath prouided some meanes by which a naturall man whom you absurdly call sensuall whereas the Apostle meaneth a man in his best natural estate since his fal who cānot discerne of Gods truth nor admit of it may come to the knowledge thereof Because it was impossible saith Irenaeus to learne God without God he teacheth men by his word his sonne to know God It is he that hath vouchsafed vs this knowledge by the ministery of men worke of the spirit in their hearts that beleeue according to the word of God in the Scriptures Let vs not heare saith Austin This I say This thou sayest but let vs heare This saith the Lord there are the Lords bookes extant to the authoritie whereof both of vs consent both of vs giue credit both of vs obey there let vs seeke the Church there let vs discusse our question Other meanes of triall then by the Scripture he accounteth and calleth deceitfull The Scriptures are the bounds of the Church beyond which she may not wander Whatsoeuer any man since the Apostles hath seene without warrant of Scripture let him be neuer so holy neuer so eloquent it is of no authoritie but onely to mooue vs to a consideration of that he saith A. D. §. 3. Onely the question is what manner of thing this meanes must be and where euerie man must seeke and finde it that hauing found it he may as S. Austen speaketh stay himselfe vpon it as vpon a sure step thereby to be lifted vp to a true faith and by faith to God The which question being of so great consequence that it being well determined a man need neuer make more question in matters of faith I wil God willing in the chapters following endeuor to resolue it as clearely as I can And this I purpose to do first by
setting downe what cōditions or properties this rule of faith must haue afterwards by proouing particularly that neither Scripture alone not any natural wit or humane lerning nor priuat spirit can be this rule of faith And finally that this rule which all mē may safely must necessarily follow can be no other but the teaching of the Catholicke Church A. W. It is onely thus farre agreed betwixt vs that there must needs be meanes appointed by Almightie God whereby all sorts of men may come to such a measure of knowledge and faith as is necessarie to saluation not wherby euery man may be infalliblie instructed in all points of religion that he need neuer make more question in any matter of faith though we grant that there is such a meanes prouided by God howsoeuer we in our weaknesse cannot make such vse of it But that we may vnderstand matters aright as we go forward I must intreate the Reader to remember that if all things to come in this your Treatise be sufficiently prooued yet you faile much of your maine purpose For this last Syllogisme is the foundation of all yet behinde concerning one of the principall points which you propoūded in the beginning viz. That it was necessarie to admit such an infallible authoritie in the Catholicke Church Now the proposition of this Syllogisme I haue denied and refuted Therefore if the assumption therof were most certainly true as it is vndoubtedly false yet could your conclusion be nothing sure because the syllogisme failes in the proposition but let vs see how you prooue the assumtion If neither the Scripture alone nor naturall wit or learning nor a priuate spirit can be such a rule then God hath prouided no such rule vnlesse we admit an infallible authority in the Catholicke Church But neither the Scripture alone nor naturall wit or learning nor a priuate spirit can be such a rule Therefore God hath prouided no such rule vnlesse we admit an infallible authority in the Catholicke Church This proposition is not set downe by you in plaine termes but necessarily and certainly gathered out of the course you hold in the fiue next chapters wherein the assumption and conclusion are manifestly contained that in the foure former this in the tenth The consequence of your proposition is verie weake For what if none of these seuerally be such a rule may not all these together be Sure there is nothing brought by you to the contrary But if all these faile what can you say to the contrarie why a generall Councell without the Popes authority should not be such a rule Or to goe farther doe you not thinke that the Pope alone may serue the turne And yet in your opinion neither the Councell nor the Pope seuerally considered are the Church Therefore it seemes there may be such a rule though there be no companie of men that hath any such authoritie as you speake of Secondly your consequence is but feeble in an other respect For it presumeth that if there be such an authoritie there is such a rule Whereas many thousands in the world may be vtterly without meanes of knowing that there is such an authoritie and so the meanes as in regard of them insufficient Adde hereunto that although it were possible and easie for euery man to know and see the Church yet the meanes might be insufficient because there is no certaine reason to perswade them that they must beleeue this Church in all things so that still according to your doctrine the Lord must needs haue failed much in his prouidence though he haue giuen this authority to the Church because he hath prouided no meanes whereby euery man may certainly be perswaded that the Church hath such authoritie Will you say He hath appointed that all men should beleeue the Church What can that helpe when he hath not prouided meanes for all men to know that they must beleeue her Must we not come now to a priuate spirit that is to the teaching of Gods spirit in the hearts of particular men And if this must needs be in this one case how prooue you it may not be so in other To answer we must beleeue the Church is to beg the question against all reason A. D. CHAP. VI. VVhat conditions or properties must be found in the rule of Faith THis rule which Almightie God hath prouided as a sufficient meanes to direct men to the knowledge of true faith necessarie to saluation must haue three conditions or properties First it must be certaine and infallible for otherwise it cannot be a sufficient foundation whereupon to build faith which as is proued before is absolutely infallible Secondly it must be such as may be certainly and plainly knowne of all sorts of men For if to any sort it could not be knowen or not certainly knowen it could not be to them a rule or meanes whereby they might direct themselues to the certaine knowledge of the true faith Thirdly it must be vniuersall that it may not onely make vs know certainly what is the true faith in some one or two or moe points but absolutely in all points of faith For otherwise it were not a sufficient meanes whereby we may attaine to an entire faith which integritie of faith is necessarie to saluation in such wise as hath bene declared and prooued before A. W. Your assumption had three points and as it were parts making three seueral sentences or propositions which for the more plainnesse I will handle seuerally as you haue done First of the Scripture The rule of faith must be certaine and infallible certainly and plainly knowen and vniuersall The Scripture alone is not so Therefore the Scripture alone is not the rule of faith Ere I come to answer your Syllogisme giue me leaue to shew how obscurely and doubtfully these properties are deliuered by you First infallible is taken in two diuers senses Faith must be infallible The rule must be infallible In the former we must needs expound infallible not being deceiued by holding any errour or nor doubting of that which it beleeueth In the latter what can infallible signifie but either that which is certainly true or that which may not be doubted of Is it plaine dealing to speake so doubtfully Or is it a good kinde of reasoning to runne the ring and to dispute in a circle as they speake in the Schooles Before you would prooue the infallibility of faith by the infallibility of the word of God which it must beleeue now you conclude the infallibility of the rule from the infallibility of faith Is not this to trifle rather then to reason Would you not laugh at vs if we should dispute thus The elect cannot fall away because the holy Ghost that vpholds them is true God The holy Ghost is true God because the elect whom he vpholds cannot fall away View your selfe in this glasse Secondly what would a reasonable man conceiue by these words The rule must be
and writing Further it is false that a priuate spirit agreeing with the Catholicke Church in doctrine can be in that point of agreement the rule of faith For although the doctrine he teacheth be true yet is it not the rule of faith much lesse is he himselfe because of his authoritie but either as you say by reason of the authoritie of the Church or indeed as we truly affirme for that it is agreeable to the word of God in the Scripture called canonical because it is the rule of faith and manners Now for answer to your Syllogisme I say your Assumption is not simply true but onely so farre forth as the receiued doctrine of the Catholicke Church I speake as you do agreeth with the truth in the Scripture reuealed Neither doth Saint Paul speake of whatsoeuer doctrine receiued by your imagined Catholicke Church of Rome but of that which he himselfe or some other of the Apostles had taught the Galatians to whom he writeth that Epistle This it should seeme you saw well enough and therefore in your crastie discretion for bare to translate the Apostles words which for the most part you set downe alwayes as well in English as in Latine The reason lieth thus He that teacheth contrary to the doctrine which the Galatians had receiued of the Apostles is to be accursed for his preaching so But a priuate spirit that teacheth contrary to the receiued doctrine of the Catholicke Church teacheth contrary to the doctrine which the Galatians had receiued by the Apostles Therefore a priuate spirit teaching contrary to the receiued doctrine of the Catholicke Church is to be accursed for his preaching so Who seeth not that the truth of this Assumption dependeth vpon this point that the Catholicke Church hath receiued no other doctrine then that which the Apostles taught the Galatians But this hath as much need of sound proofe as that for the proofe whereof it is brought and therefore to dispute thus against any man that would hold a priuate spirit to be the rule of faith were to giue him occasion to laugh at you for begging the question in stead of prouing it But to make all men see how small force there is in this your reason for the keeping of a priuate spirit from being the rule of faith I will frame two other syllogismes against a publick spirit or Councel and against the Pope 1. He that must be accursed for his teaching cannot be the rule of faith But a publicke spirit or Councell that teacheth contrary to the receiued doctrine of the Catholick Church must be accursed for his teaching Therefore a publicke spirit or Councell that teacheth contrary to the receiued doctrine of the Catholicke Church cannot be the rule of faith 2. He that must be accursed for his teaching cannot be the rule of faith But the Pope that teacheth contrarie to the receiued doctrine of the Catholicke Church must be accursed for his teaching Therefore the Pope that teacheth contrarie to the receiued doctrine of the Catholicke Church cannot be the rule of faith Haue you not spun a faire threed thinke you to choake the Popes and the Councels authoritie withall Call your wits about you and deuise some cleanly shift for the matter or I can tel you all wil be naught For your Religion is no more able to hold vp head if the Popes authoritie be cast downe then a man that hath neuer a leg is able to stand vpright It will go the harder with you in this matter because if I grant that the Pope cannot erre you are neuer a whit the nearer for the answering of my syllogisme as you may perceiue if you will but assay to apply that point for answer to either part thereof There is no other way but to giue ouer this your first reason against a priuate spirit and to make amends for it in the second if you can A. D. §. 3. Secondly the rule of faith must be infallible plainly knowne to all sorts of men and vniuersall that is to say such as may sufficiently instruct all men in all points of faith without danger of errour as hath bene proued before But this priuate spirit is not such For first that man himselfe cannot be vnfallibly sure that he in particular is taught by the holy spirit For neither is there any promise in Scripture to assure him infallibly that he in particular is thus taught neither is there any other sufficient reason to perswade the same For suppose he haue such extraordinarie motions feelings or illustrations which he thinketh cannot come of himselfe but from some spirit yet he cannot in reason straightwayes conclude that he is thus moued and taught by the spirit of God For sure it is that euery spirit is not the Spirit of God As there is the spirit of truth so there is a spirit of errour As there is an Angell of light so there is a Prince of darknesse Yea sometimes Ipse Sathanas transfigurat se in Angelum lucis Sathan himselfe doth transfigure himselfe into an Angell of light Wherefore he had need very carefully to put in practise the aduise of Saint Iohn who saith Nolite credere omni spiritui sed probate spiritus si ex Deo sint Doe not beleeue euerie spirit but prooue and trie them whether they be of God or no. Neither doth it seeme sufficient that a priuate man trie them onely by his owne iudgement or by those motions feelings or illuminations which in his priuate conceit are conformable to Scripture because all this triall is verie vncertaine and subiect to errour by reason that our owne iudgement especially in our own matters is verie easily deceiued and that Sathan can so cunningly couer himselfe vnder the shape of a good Angell and so colour his wicked designements with pretense of good and so gild his darke and grosse errours with the glistering light of the words and seeming sense of scripture that hardly or not at all he shall be perceiued VVherefore the safest way were to trie these spirits by the touchstone of the true Pastours of the Catholicke Church who may say with S. Paul Nō ignoramus cogitationes Satanae we are not ignorant of the cogitations of Sathan and who may also say with S. Iohn Nos ex Deo sumus qui nouit Deum audit nos qui non est ex Deo non audit nos In hoc cognoscimus spiritum veritatis spiritum erroris VVe are of God he that knoweth God heareth vs he that is not of God doth not heare vs. In this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of errour Now if any will not admit this manner of trying discerning the spirit of truth from the spirit of errour but will trust their owne iudgement alone in this matter feare they may iustly nay rather they may be sure as Cassian saith that they shall worship in their thoughts the Angell of darknesse for the Angel of light to
beleeue a simple husbandman a child or an old woman rather then the Pope and a thousand Bb. if these speake against the Gospell and the other with it Then belike a priuate man may see some truth which is not generally discerned The place of Austin you bring doth not condemne all interpretations or opinions which some one man findeth out and holdeth but onely reproueth them who in expounding the places of Scripture which wil beare a diuers sense vrge one onely not because it is truth but because they like it best His example is out of Genesis concerning the sense of those words In the beginning God created heauen and earth They know not which of those diuers senses that may be Moses did intend saith Austin but they loue their owne opinion not because it is true but because it is their owne What doth this concerne vs who as we giue euery man of iudgement leaue to propound his interpretation to be examined so permit no man to thrust any exposition vpon the Church which he cannot make euident proofe of by sound reason Neither is it then taken as his priuate conceit but acknowledged as the truth of God manifested by his industrie In doubtfull places we follow the likeliest sense without any resolute determining what is true what false therefore cannot with any shew of reason be charged to appropriate the knowledge of Gods truth to our selues where it hath pleased his Maiestie so to propound it that of diuers senses a man cannot certainly affirme that this or that is true A. D. CHAP. X. That the doctrine and teaching of the true Church is the rule of faith A. W. If you had mentioned nothing but the doctrine of the true Church we might haue vnderstood you without any cause of doubting but now you ad teaching to doctrine we are enforced to enquire farther into your meaning For we are vncertaine whether by those words you meane one and the same thing or no. The doctrine of the Church is that which the Church propoundeth to be beleeued whether by word of mouth or in writing Teaching if we make it differ from doctrine is that onely which is deliuered by voice to the eare If we vnderstand you in the former sense for teaching by writing as well as by word of mouth the latter word was needlesse if in the latter of writing onely then the same doctrine written is not the rule of faith which vttered by a teacher will become such a rule not because it is true but because it is taught by authoritie A. D. §. 1. The fourth conclusion is that this infallible rule which euery one ought to follow in all points of faith is the doctrine and teaching of the true Church or companie of the true faithfull of Christ A. W. That we may the better vnderstand what you say and how you proue your saying there are a few things to be considered in this fourth condition First by the faithfull of Christ you must meane those that professe Christian Religion whether they beleeue as they professe or no as I haue shewed out of Bellarmine who doubtlesse knoweth what the Church is as well as you If you be of any other opinion by your owne rule we may reiect it for the priuatnesse thereof Secondly where you say the true faithfull it is not your purpose to speake as we for whom you writ this commonly doe of them that haue a true iustifying faith but of them that professe the doctrine of the Gospell according to the true sense and meaning of it whether they haue any iustifying faith or no. Thirdly by this companie or Church whom vnderstand you If the whole number of the beleeuers as well Laitie as Cleargie I oppose the iudgement of your owne Doctours against you who speaking of the Churches doctrine and teaching restraine the word onely to the Pope and Bishops The spirit saith Bellarmine is certainly found in the Church that is in a Councell of Bishops confirmed by the chiefe Pastor of the whole Church or in the chiefe Pastor with a Councell of the other Pastors If you follow Bellarmine I demaund whether your Laity be none of the true faithfull of Christ nor parts of the Church But to leaue this doubt wee are thus to conceiue your meaning that the doctrine which the Pope and other Pastors of the Church namely Bb. deliuer in a Councell is the rule of faith Now let vs propound your reason and examine it but first I confesse that I dare not resolutely determine whether it be brought in by you for a proofe of any thing that hitherto hath bene spoken or intended onely as a discourse concerning the authoritie of the Church If we apply it to any matter alreadie past as farre as I am able to conceiue it must be a second proofe of the proposition or maior of your maine Syllogisme in this manner If the doctrine and teaching of the true Church be the infallible rule which all men ought to follow then the faith which the authority of the true Church commends to vs is to be holden for the true faith But the doctrine and teaching of the true church is the infallible rule that all men ought to follow Therfore the faith which the authoritie of the true Church commendeth to vs is to be holden for the true faith This reasonable coherence we may make betwixt this Chapter and your former course without changing or weakning any part or point of your proofe which is applied to the confirming of this last minor the argument of this Chapter A. D. §. 2. This I proue by this reason If our Sauiour Christ hath promised to any company of men the presence of himselfe and the assistance of his holy spirit of purpose to instruct and teach them all truth giuing withall peculiar charge and commission to them to teach all nations and to preach to euery creature giuing also warrant to all that they may safely heare them giuing also commandement whereby he bindeth all to do in all things according to their saying and threatning greatly those who will not heare and beleeue them then certainly the doctrine and teaching of these men is in all points most true and infallible and such as if the other conditions required in the rule of faith be not as they are not wanting may well be proposed to all sorts as an assured ground whereupon they may safely build an infallible Christian faith For looke what our Sauiour Christ hath promised must needs be performed and whatsoeuer he warranteth or commandeth may safely and without danger of error be done nay must of necessitie be done especially when he threatneth those that will not do it and consequently if he haue promised to send his holy Spirit to teach any companie of men all truth it is not to be doubted but that he sendeth this his holy Spirit and by it teacheth them all truth and fith the teaching of his
of God Now the same Church or partie which assureth vs that the Gospell is true may notwithstanding erre in the meaning of some points in it and a man may discerne these errours by the light which shineth in the Scriptures thus acknowledged First it is here confessed by your selfe that Austins speach is not of all fundamentall points of true doctrine but onely as I said of knowing the Scripture to be the word of God for so onely you reason out of it and thereby shew plainly to all that will see that it cannot prooue the matter for which you brought it Secondly you proceed farther to prooue the point by an other reason but faultie like the former If say you without the testimonie of the Church we could not haue bene infallibly sure that there is any Gospell at all nor haue knowne that the Gospels of Matthew Marke Luke and Iohn are true Canonicall Scripture rather then those of Nicodemus and Saint Thomas then we cannot know true doctrine to be true but by giuing credit to the Churches testimonie of it But we could not haue knowne those things without the testimonie of the Church Therefore we cannot know true doctrine to be true but by giuing credit to the Churches testimonie of it A man that is so full of his compound syllogismes as you are might learne to make better consequences in his Maior then you commonly bring vs. Let vs grant you that we could not know that there is any Gospell or which is the Gospell without the testimonie of the Church All that will follow thereupon is this that we cannot know these two points of doctrine to be true without giuing credit to the testimonie of the Church Yea if I were disposed to trouble you I would yet farther denie your said consequence because though we cannot know these matters without the Churches testimonie yet we might know them without resting vpon the Churches authoritie For the testimonie of the Church may be had by the ministerie thereof without any such absolute authoritie of enioyning beleefe or giuing credit to that she affirmeth as an vndoubted truth This Minor as the former in this chapter consisteth of two parts and is false in both of them as I will shew particularly First you say that without the testimonie of the Church we could not haue bene infallibly sure that there is any Gospell Your meaning is that we could not haue knowne this certainely but by giuing credit to the report of the Church as a certaine truth First for the doctrine of the Gospell to saluation it hath bene had and may be had without any testimonie of the Church at all taking the testimonie of the Church as you do for the preaching of men publickly authorised to this dutie by a companie of men so qualified as you before describe your Church I shall need no better proofe then to put you in minde againe of those nations many and great who attained to faith and saluation by the teaching of the Apostles seuerally without any such argument of the Churches absolute authority Secondly taking the Gospell for the 4. bookes of the Euangelists I answer that there may be true faith true Churches without the knowledge of those bookes yea without the verie being of them as it is manifest by the former example many thousands being conuerted and many Churches setled without the knowledge and before the publishing or penning of them But to come to the verie point I answer further that it is a grosse absurditie to make men beleeue that there can be no certaine knowledge had that there is any Gospell but by giuing credit to the Church whereas no man can know that there is any such authoritie in the Church or any Church at all but by the authoritie of the Scripture It is more then ridiculous for me to beleeue that there is a companie of men infallibly taught of God which is the truth with authority to enioyne obedience to all men in whatsoeuer they will teach if I haue no better proofe of it then their owne word For since God hath indued man with reason it is both simplenesse and sinne for him to beleeue that which is vtterly against the light of reason if he haue no warrant from God so to do But warrant he can haue none to beleeue such a conceit of any company but from the scriptures as it is euident by your own course who make a place of scripture the ground of your whole disputation Therefore whereas you teach men first to know the Church and then by the Church the Scriptures we say this course is vtterly vnwarrantable hauing no foundation either in reason or reuelation Yea contrariwise we truly affirme that the Scripture must first be knowne at the least in that point of the authoritie of the Church and then the Church by the Scripture And this is Austins iudgement directly Let vs not heare saith he this I say this you say but let vs heare this saith the Lord. There are the Lords bookes to the authoritie of which both of vs consent both of vs giue credit both of vs yeeld obedience there let vs seek the Church there let vs discusse our question And afterward I will not haue the Church to be shewed by mens doctrines but by the Oracles of God And againe Let vs seeke the Church in the Canonicall Scriptures The like speeches are euerie where in that booke Whether we be schismaticks or you saith the same Austin let neither you nor me but Christ be asked that he may shew vs his Church But where shall we know what our Sauiour saith concerning his Church and how he would haue it knowne but in the Scriptures Yet I denie not that the ministerie of men is necessarie to giue notice that there are certaine bookes in which it hath pleased God to reueale the meanes of saluation to mankinde though I acknowledge not any authority in the Church whereby men should be bound to beleeue this their report when as yet they are ignorant that there is any such Church You will say then what shall we doe or how shall we know that there is any Gospell If you will giue me leaue I will shew you what course is to be takē When you vnderstand that there hath bin and is still an opinion that there are certaine bookes written by Gods authoritie and appointment to teach men the way to saluation do as any reasonable man would do in a matter of such importance Get the bookes reade and studie them with a true desire to see whether they be such as they are reported to be or no. And because thou knowest by nature that there is a God and that he onely is all-sufficient to discouer the truth of his owne purpose touching the estate of his creature call vpon him though in ignorance and weaknesse that it would please him to direct thee in this enquiry after the means of thy saluation
or happinesse This done thou shalt be sure to find by the euidence of truth manifested in those bookes that they are sent from God and not deuised by man If thou liue in such a place as affoordeth the interpretation of these bookes by the ministery of men vse that singular blessing of God with reuerence and care to vnderstand and thou shalt by the mercifull teaching of God acknowledge these books to be the word of God ordained for the saluation of thy selfe and other This will some man say may perhaps breed a perswasion that these bookes are from God but how shall we come to be infallibly sure of it How else but by the worke of the spirit of God in thy heart What say you must we runne to reuelations Who knowes the secrets of God but the spirit of God The truth it selfe discerned by that light which the spirit kindleth in our hearts worketh assurance of beleefe to which the testimonie of the spirit is added for our further confirmation Neither is this any other reuelation then you Papists require in this case For according to your doctrine no man can be perswaded infallibly of the truth of the Scripture either for the text or the interpretation but by the especiall teaching of the spirit otherwise he hath not faith but opinion of these matters Onely herein stands the difference betwixt vs that you say the argument whereby the spirit perswades vs to acknowledge the Scripture is the authoritie of the Church we affirme it is the euidence of truth which he makes vs to discerne by our vnderstanding enlightened and to approue by our will thereto inclined through his mightie and gracious worke vpon our soules The second part of your minor is that we could not haue knowne the Gospels of the foure Euangelists to be canonicall Scripture rather then those of Nicodemus and Thomas if we had not the testimonie of the Church Of the falsnesse of which opinion I shall need to say little because it is refuted in my answer to the former part For this knowledge is not bred in vs by resting vpon the Churches authoritie but by yeelding to the euidence of the truth discouered to our hearts by the teaching of the holy Ghost Concerning the authoritie of the Church in this point it were a presumptuous and vnreasonable thing for any man without very good proof or great likelihood of reason to deny or doubt of that which hath bin auouched so many yeares by the whole Christian world But to make question of the bookes of Scripture whether they be the word of God or no and to denie that there is any meanes to know them for such but the authoritie of the Church is the next way to open a gap to Atheisme to lay open Religion to the scorne of the world Can I not know the Scripture to be of God but by the authoritie of the Church How shal I then know it at all since it is not reasonable to beleeue there is any Church that hath such authoritie but by the warrant of the Scripture They do all they can to turne reasonable creatures into beasts who teach vs that we must beleeue the Church cannot erre because the Scripture saith so and yet denie that we can know there is any Scripture but by beleeuing it because the Church saith so This is to dance in a circle as if a man were coniured that he could not get out of it How shall I know there is a Church by the Scripture How shall I know there are any Scriptures by the Church Would your proud Clergie thus make fooles of Christian men if they did not despise them as voyd of all reason I wonder how your Pope Cardinals Bishops and the rest of your Cleargie can for beare laughing when they looke one vpon another and remember how they cosen and if I may vse the word in a matter of such importance gull the world with such palpable fooleries But your strumpet of Babylon hath made the Kings of the earth and all nations drunke with the cup of her fornications exalting her selfe aboue all that is called God and making her selfe the God of her slauish vassals But the Lord is iust who according to the Apostles prophefie hath sent the world strong delusions that they should beleeue lies that all they might be damned which beleeued not the truth but had pleasure in vnrighteousnesse And certainly if there were not a great measure of 12. blindnesse and sottishnesse in the hearts of men that Gods purpose might take effect it were vnpossible that reasonable men should so be lead by the nose to errour and destruction A. D. §. 5. Fourthly if the true doctrine of faith in all particular points must be foreknowne as a marke whereby to know the true Church then contrarie to that which hath bin proued the authoritie of the Church should not be a necessarie meanes whereby men must come to the knowledge of the true faith For if before we come to know which is the true Church we must by an other meanes haue knowne which is the true faith what need then is there for getting true faith already had to seeke or bring in the authoritie of the same Church A. W. This fourth reason and the next labour to proue that part of your first assumptiō in this Chapter which we deny not that the true doctrine of faith in euery particular point is not a good marke of the Church It would therefore be but lost labour to spend much time in the examining of them yet somewhat I must say and first to the former If the true doctrine of faith in all particular points must be foreknowne as a marke to know the true Church by then is not the autoritie of the true Church a necessary meanes to know the true doctrine of faith by But the authoritie of the true Church is a necessary meanes to know the true faith by Therefore the true doctrine of faith must not be foreknowne in all particular points as a marke to know the true Church by Your conclusion is no more then we grant the consequence of your maior about which you take some paines needs not your helpe for the proofe of it Your minor is false That which you brought before to prooue it before was answered A. D. §. 6. Fiftly if before we giue absolute and vndoubted credit to the true Church we must examine and iudge whether euery particular point of doctrine which it holdeth be the truth with authoritie to accept that onely which we like or which seemeth in our conceit right and conformable to Scripture and to reiect whatsoeuer we mislike or which in our priuate iudgement seemeth not so right and conformable then we make our selues examiners and iudges ouer the church and consequently we preferre our liking or disliking our iudgement and censure of the interpretation and sense of Scripture before the iudgement and censure of the
did borrow the propagation of faith and seeds of doctrine I make bold to alter your translation let the skilfull Reader iudge whether I haue cause or no. But what of all these Tertullian doth not say that no Church is to be accounted Apostolicke but that which can without interruption shew her descent from the Apostles nor that euery Church is true that can make such proofe of her original But whereas the hereticks against whom he there dealeth reiected and receiued Scripture at their choise and would neuer leaue wrangling Tertullian appeales to the iudgement of those Churches which were knowne to be founded by the Apostles and in which the truth was most likely to be found As for your argument of succession you shall heare Tertullians iudgment of it Let hereticks saith Tertullian in the same book faine a succession from the Apostles they shall get nothing by it For their doctrine compared with that the Apostles taught by the diuersitie and contrarietie thereof will declare that it came not from any Apostle or Apostolicke man because as the Apostles would not teach contrary one to another so Apostolick men would not deliuer doctrine contrary to the Apostles vnlesse they were such as were fallen away from the Apostles to preach otherwise then they did So then the chiefe triall of a true Church is by the doctrine of the Apostles and their successors in the truth because it is possible for hereticks to shew their descent from the Apostles or some Churches which had their beginning from the Apostles or Apostolicke men Yea it is manifest that the greatest heresies as the foure maine ones condemned in the foure first generall Councels had their beginning of them who could shew their pedegree step by step from the Apostles in respect of outward succession We haue soone how weakly you haue proued that personall succession is a thing belonging to the true Church it remaines that you proue it to be proper to the church and not common to it with heretickes To which purpose you thus reason No vpstart noueltie contrary to the former faith of the Church can haue any Apostle or Apostolicke man for founder thereof Euery heresie is an vpstart noueltie contrary to the former faith of the Church Therefore no heresie can haue any Apostle or Apostolicke man for the founder thereof How much more truly and reasonably spake Tertullian of the like matter when he said that no Apostolicke man taught contrary to the Apostles vnlesse he were such a one as was fallen from the Apostles He saw and acknowledged that it was possible for a man instructed by the Apostles themselues to forsake the truth of doctrine and become an author or maintainer of heresie Doth not Saint Iohn speake of some who being bred vp in the church by heresie departed from it What should I name Hymenaeus Alexāder Phygellus Hermogenes Nicolas and such like Hardly can you name me any heresie that euer tooke rooting but the first plant of it sprung vp in the nursery of the Church Therefore your maior is altogether vntrue being vnderstood as it is of Apostolicke men in respect of personall succession not of succeeding the Apostles in truth of doctrine But you thinke to make good your proposition by Tertullians authoritie who challengeth the heretickes to shew the beginning of their Churches from some Apostolicke men Is it possible you should either write or reade that sentence of Tertullian and not perceiue that it cuts the very throate of your cause Doth not Tertullian in the sentence alledged by you directly confirme our opinion and ouerthrow yours Let them shew vs their beginning saith Tertullian from some Apostolicke man Is that enough I if we beleeue you who define Apostolicknes by personal succeeding the Apostles But what saith Tertullian He in plaine termes requires such an Apostolicke man as perseuered with the Apostles and forsooke them not Now that by this perseuering with the Apostles and not forsaking them he meanes agreement in doctrine I proue it euidently by that which followeth in the same Chapter First Tertullian shewes that it is in vaine for them to pleade succession in place if their doctrine be found contrary to that which the Apostles deliuered I set downe the sentence before Secondly he doubts not to say that by the hereticks disagreeing from the Apostles in doctrine those Churches which cannot proue themselues to be Apostolicke by naming any Apostle or Apostolicke man as the first founder of them may yet conuince them not to be Apostolicke and are themselues to be counted Apostolicke because of their consent in doctrine with the Apostles This is the summe of Tertullians words the words themselues run thus To this triall namely by doctrine as the next sentence before sheweth shall the hereticks be called by those Churches which though they cannot alledge any Apostle or Apostolicke man for their founder as being of late and now daily planted yet agreeing in the same doctrine are neuerthelesse counted Apostolicke by reason of their agreement in doctrine Do you not see that Tertullian disputeth for vs against your pretended succession That he confesseth heretickes may alledge personall succession That he acknowledgeth those Churches for true which cannot deriue their pedegree from the Apostles or any Apostolicke man That he maketh the truth of doctrine agreeing with the Apostles a certaine and necessarie marke of the true Church And are you not ashamed for all this to bring Tertullian for an author of so grosse an error VVere you so blinde that you discerned not this your selfe or did you so despise your Readers that you presumed they would neuer haue the wit to see your ignorance or craft It is now discouered sufficiently and yet this one point more must be added that Tertullian requireth this shew of their Churches beginning not of all heretickes as you deceitfully alledge him if you read him your selfe and tooke him not vpon credit at some other mans hands but onely of those who pleade their continuance from the time of the Apostles If any heresies saith Tertullian dare fetch their continuance from the Apostles time that therefore they may seeme Apostolicke because they were while the Apostles liued we may say let them shew the beginning of their Churches let them vnfould the succession of their Bishops c. With such learning and conscience doe you Papists alledge the Fathers that he must needes be honester and wiser then you that will not beleeue you vpon your bare word VVe see then that to be Apostolicke in your sense is no good marke of a true Church because Hereticall Churches may so be Apostolicke and true Churches not Apostolicke and contrariwise that to be Apostolicke in doctrine as we expound it is a most certaine note whereby a true Church may be knowne and the same that we onely allow of A. D. §. 7. It appeareth therefore plaine enough that these foure properties One Holy
the Gospell he saw his kingdome againe in hazard he betooke himselfe to his former shifts and spread abroad the poyson of heresie in diuers countries that he might giue you his vassals occasion to slaunder the doctrine of the Gospell as if from it these heresies had risen This is one of his delusions wherby he deceiues and misleades many to damnation though the children of God perceiue his subtilty and rest vpon the manifest truth of the Scripture for all Sathans practises to discredit it by this and such other inconueniences with which he endeauours to haue the preaching of the Gospell accompanied for the disgrace thereof This course also he tooke in the first beginning of the Gospell as it is manifest by the multitude and grossenesse of those heresies which brake out within the first 400 yeares and were neuer since equalled for number or haynousnesse in twice so long a time that the likenesse of Sathans dealing may be an argument of the like truth he now laboreth to ouerthrow or discredit A. D. §. 3. My chiefe question and comparison therefore shall be betwixt the Romane Church that is to say that companie which communicateth agreeth in profession of faith with the Church of Rome and liueth vnder the obedience as touching spirituall matters of the Bishop of Rome and other Bishops and Pastours vnder him and the Protestants that is to say that companie which from Luther his time hitherward haue opposed themselues against the Romane Church either all or any one sect of them my question I say or comparison shal be to which of those two the foure forenamed marks agree and consequently which of them is the true Church A. W. Here you propound the matter and argument of this chapter which you call a comparison as if the question were whether of the Churches be beautified with those foure properties consequently whether of them is the true Church But to speak properly there is no comparison intended therein For our question is not whether your Synagogue or our congregations come nearer the state of true Churches which seemeth to be implied in making a comparison betwixt them but whether of them are indeed true Churches If I should compare your Church of Rome with the Synagogues of the Iewes the profession of the Mahometans or the companies of Anabaptists or other Hereticks I might finde that your doctrine came nearer to the truth in many points and so were more likely to shew me the true Church or that these foure properties agreed better to you then to them But this comparison would not settle me in the knowledge of a true Church The point is as before I shewed the proofe of your Minor that the Church of Rome is she to whom those properties belong For the further confirmation whereof you vndertake to prooue that our congregations haue no interest to these titles and this you do not by way of comparison but by an argument of contraries But let vs take it as it is and fall to the examination of your proofes yet still with this prouiso that the Church of Rome cannot be concluded to be the true Church nor our congregations false Churches though you had and we wanted all these markes as you vnderstand them A. D. §. 4. § SECT I. That the Romane Church onely is one First I finde that the Protestants Church is not perfectly One or vniforme in dogmaticall points of faith but variable according to the varietie of times and persons now holding one thing then an other and that the learned men thereof are so much at iarre among themselues in matters of faith that it is hard to finde three in all points of one opinion and which is chiefely to be pondered as principally appertaining to the marke of Vnitie they haue no meanes to end their controuersies so to returne to Vnitie and to continue therein For while as they admit no rule of faith but only Scripture which scriptures diuers men expoūd diuersly according to the diuers humours and affections opinions and phantasies of euerie one neuer one admitting any one head or chiefe ruler infallibly guided by the holy Ghost in his doctrine to whose censure in matters of faith euerie one should of necessitie submit themselues Vt capite constituto schismatis tollatur occasio that as Saint Ierome speaketh a head or chiefe ruler being ordained occasion of schisme or diuision may be taken away Whilest they do thus as they all doe thus all proclaiming to be ruled by onely Scripture and yet almost in euerie one in one point or other expounding Scripture diuersly and one contrarie to an other according to the diuers seeming of euerie ones sense and neuer one admitting any one superiour infallibly guided by the holy Ghost to whose definitiue sentence he and the rest will be bound to submit their doctrine and expositions whilest I say they doe thus it is vnpossible that they should In fidei occurrere vnitatem meet as Saint Hierome counselleth in the vnitie of faith The which vnitie in profession of faith notwithstanding is one principall thing pertaining to the vnitie of the Church and vnitie of the Church is one chiefe marke by which we must discerne which is the true Church Contrariwise the Romane Church is alwaies one and vniforme in faith neuer varying or holding any dogmaticall point contrarie to that which in former times from the beginning it did hold The learned men thereof though sometimes differing in opinion in matters not defined by the Church yet inmatters of faith all conspire in one And no marueile because they haue a most conuenient meanes to keepe vnitie in profession of faith sith they do acknowledge one chiefe Pastor appointed ouer them to wit the successour of Saint Peter to whose definitiue censure in matters concerning religion they wholly submit themselues knowing that to Saint Peter and his successours Christ our Sauiour promised the keyes of the kingdome of Heauen and that he would vpon him and his successours as vpon a sure rocke build his Church Knowing also that the same our Sauiour did specially pray for Saint Peter and euerie one his lawfull successour that this faith should not faile at least so farre as to teach the Church a false faith to the intent that he might be alwaies able to confirme his brethren if at any time they should faile in the doctrine of faith Knowing lastly that to Saint Peter and his successours which word I adde not without sufficient authoritie and reason Christ our Lord gaue most ample power ouer his vniuersall Church saying Pasce oues meas feed my sheepe that is to say Rule or gouerne as chiefe Pastour vnder me my sheepe that is all those that pertaine to the sheepfold which is the Church giuing him and his successours charge to feed them with the food of true doctrine of faith and consequently binding these his sheepe to receiue obediently this food of true doctrine of faith at
surely you must needs according to this first part of your reason haue condemned the innocent and iustified the wicked For the Apostles Church was not one because it had varied from some opinions formerly held by it which the other companie still retained As for your odious manner of propounding the point according to the varietie of times and persons it is but a froth of words and might in regard of the change haue bin charged in like sort vpon the Apostles As for the dissent of learned men one from another neither was the Church euer so happie as to be without it and you acknowledge it among your owne writers though not in matters of faith the contrary whereof I will shew when I come to that place But if by matters of faith you meant such points as are fundamental I could somewhat the rather hearken to you And yet what shall it hinder a Church from being one that the learned men of it make question of such maine matters as long as the Church is not tainted with their priuate errors Did the Churches of Corinth or Galatia cease to be true Churches because some among them and as it should seeme no small number in the former denied the resurrection of the flesh in the other ioyned the workes of the law with faith to iustification yet were both these fundamētall errors the continuance wherin without repentance must needs bring certaine damnation But your matters of faith are all points though neuer so friuolous or false that your Church hath determined by her lawlesse tyrannie whereas many matters of farre greater importance not so decreed are left free for euery man to erre in or to be ignorant of without any danger of damnation or breach of vnitie This last point as you say is the principall matter appertaining to vnitie that there be meanes in the Church to end controuersies But why or how should this be so principall when as the Church may agree in the same points of doctrine though priuate men dissent from each other Indeed to the procuring of an outward peace it is very requisite that particular men be not suffered to preach or write one against another But neither is this peace so much worth as that for it the Church should be corrupted with errors and the chiefe power for the remedying of this inconuenience is in the hands of the chiefe Magistrate whose dutie it is to prouide that his subiects may leade a quiet and a peaceable life in all godlinesse and honestie Therefore neither doth this disagreement among the learned make the Church cease to be one though there be no meanes to end it which yet are not wanting in the true Churches Your minor also is false in euery part of it Variablenesse in points of faith according to the variety of times and persons is when in regard of these two the doctrine of the Church is altered Now who is so shamelesse as to charge vs with hauing altered and dayly altering our iudgements in respect of either of these What necessitie or occasion can varietie of time bring for the change of doctrine But for persons what sect profession church or companie in the world euer was or could be freer from depending on any mans person then we are who absolutely disclaime all mens authority ouer our faith Are not you they that charge vs with leauing the interpretation of Scripture and consequently the beliefe of euerie man to his owne priuate humour And yet you are not ashamed to accuse vs for variablenesse in our doctrine according to the varietie of persons If malice were not blind it were vnpossible you should slaunder vs with so manifest contrarieties You are the men whose faith dependeth vpon the persons of your Popes whom you follow blindfold whither soeuer any of them leadeth you We attribute to our teachers no impossibilitie of erring though we haue a reuerend opinion of their knowledge and faithfulnesse in regard whereof we do not lightly reiect any doctrine or exposition deliuered by them vnlesse it be apparently false Yet doe we not tie our selues to take whatsoeuer they teach as a matter of faith though we are readie to yeeld to any thing which is plainly prooued to vs out of the word of God how contrary soeuer it be to our former opinions For we know that men are subiect to error and that God doth not miraculously reueale all truth at once to any man but as it seemes good to his gracious wisedom peece by peece enlighteneth the vnderstanding of his seruants with the knowledge of his will and word according to their sinceritie in depending on him faith in calling vpon him diligence in searching the Scriptures the only sufficient meanes of instruction The second part of your slander is that our learned men so iarre in matters of faith that it is hard to find three in all points of one opinion Remember what you call matters of faith points of doctrine defined by the Church and forbeare blushing if you can when you reade this your accusation against vs. What other refutation shal I need to vse then the bare naming of the harmonie of our confessions wherein the most partial Reader of your side may discerne your shamelesse hyperbole that I may giue it a cleanlier terme then it deserueth To requite your kindnesse I challenge you to name me if you can any one of your schoole-men that hath not refuted some of his owne fellowes in some points or bene refuted by them I confesse there are many of them that I haue not read but I am so well acquainted with their courses and contradicting of one another that I may venture without aduenture to make this challenge Last of all your minor affirmes that our learned men haue no meanes to end their controuersies If you speake of the euent that our meanes are not sufficient de facto to make them that striue to agree in one opinion or to make all men to be of one mind I graunt that you say to be true but I adde withall that we may haue when we will as good meanes to this purpose as your Church hath For it is no more but to appoint some man to whose iudgement we will stand in all matters of controuersie What hereticall Church may not haue the same meanes of vnitie if it please But if you denie that de iure wee haue meanes sufficient for the ending of all questions I say your minor is vtterly false because we haue the Scriptures appointed and blessed to that end by God himselfe Now as the ministerie of the word is most sufficient for the begetting of faith and sauing of men though it haue not this excellent effect in all so the Scriptures are of absolute sufficiencie to cut off all controuersies howsoeuer men will not alwayes be ruled by them Your minor as we haue seene containes a grieuous accusation of vs in three points of no small importance To
sed ascendit aliunde ille fur est latro He that entreth not in by the doore into the sheepfold but ascendeth by some other way he is a theefe and a robber who commeth not to feed the sheepe but to steale kill and destroy them So that we haue not I say to expect any to be sent of God to feed vs with the food of true doctrine of faith but such onely as come in this ordinarie manner as it is certaine that Luther and Caluin when they left their former profession and tooke vpon them to preach this new faith did not come visibly called consecreated and sent for this purpose by any lawful authority according to the ordinary manner or if it should please God to send any one in extraordinary manner it appertaineth to his prouidence to furnish him with the gift of miracles as he did his Sonne our Sauiour Christ or with a miraculous conceptiō with strange and extraordinary sanctity of life as was seene in S. Iohn Baptist or finally with some euident token that it may be plainly knowne that he is assuredly sent of God Otherwise the people should not be bound to beleeue him but might without sinne reiect his doctrine according as our Sauiour said of himselfe Si non facio opera patris mei nolite credere mihi If I do not the works of my Father do not beleeue me And againe Si opera non secissem in eis quae nemo alius fecit peccatum non haberent If I had not done works among them that no other hath done they should not haue sinned to wit in not beleeuing Nay the people should now an ordinary course being by our Sauiour set downe to continue till the worlds end as before hath bene prooued the people I say should now sinne in beleeuing any one that shall come and tell them that he is extraordinarily sent of God if he teach contrarie to that doctrine which by ordinarie Doctors and Pastors of the Catholicke Church is vniuersally taught For although it should happen that the liues of these Pastors should not be so commendable or be sometimes euidently bad yet their doctrine must alwaies be regarded and obserued according to that saying of our Sauiour Super Cathedram Moysisederunt Scribae Pharisaei omnia ergo quae cunque dixerint vobis seruate facite secundū verò opera eorum nolite facere Vpon the chaire of Moses the Scribes and Pharisees haue sitten all things therefore whatsoeuer they say to you obserue ye and do but according to their workes do ye not By which saying we are assured that notwithstanding the Pastors of the Catholicke Church should at any time in their liues be like Scribes and Pharisies yet we may alwaies safely yea we must necessarily follow their doctrine and must not in any wise admit any that shall offer to teach vs a contrarie doctrine according as we are willed by Saint Paule who saith Si quis vobis euangeliz auerit praeter id quod accepistis anathema sit If any shall euangelize or preach vnto you beside or contrarie to that which you haue alreadie receiued be he anathema So that sith the people did once receiue from the ordinarie Pastors that doctrine which hath descended from hand to hand from Christ and his Apostles themselues according to that of Saint Austin Quod inuenerunt in Ecclesia tenuerunt quod didicerunt docuerunt quod à patribus acceperunt hoc filijs tradiderunt That which they found in the Church they held that which they learned they taught that which they receiued from their fathers that they deliuered to their children whosoeuer he be that shall euangelize any thing opposite to this receiued doctrine whether he seeme to be an Apostle or an Angell and much more if he be another to wit one of these new masters who faile very much to say no more from Apostolicall perfection and Angelicall puritie of life according to Saint Paule anathema sit be he anathema Yea such a one that doth not onely not bring this Catholicke or generally receiued doctrine but bringeth in a new and contrary doctrine we should not according to Saint Iohn salute him vnlesse vpon some need or some good respect or say Aue vnto him and much lesse should we giue credit to his words or vse him as a rule of our faith or preferre his teaching before the teaching of the Catholicke Church And surely me thinkes though there were none of these euident proofes which I haue brought out of Scripture yet euen reason it selfe would teach that we ought to giue more credit to the vniuersall companie of Catholickes which haue bene at all times and are now spred ouer all the Christian world then to any particular priuate man or some few his fellowes and followers It is a prouerbe common amongest all men Vox populi vox Dei The voice of the people or whole multitude is the voice of God that which all men say must needs be And on the contrarie part to that particular man or his priuate company which will oppose themselues against this generall voice of all like Ismael of whom it is written Manus eius contra omnes manus omnium contra cum his hands are against all men and the hands of all are against him it may well be obiected that which Luther who was the first in this our age which did so cōfesseth was obiected to himself by his owne conscience or rather principally by the mercy and grace of the Almightie God seeking to reclaime him from his errour while there was any hope Num tu solùm sapis Art thou onely wise Luthers words be these Quoties mihi palpitauit tremulum cor reprehendens obiecit fortissimum illud argumentum Tu solus sapis Totne errant vniuersi Tanta secula ignorauerunt Quid si tu erres tot tecum in errorem trahas damnandos aeternaliter How often did my trembling heart pant and reprehending me did obiect to me that most strong and forcible argument Art thou alone wise haue there so many vniuersally erred haue so many ages bene blinde and liued in ignorance What rather if thou thy selfe erre and drawest so many after thee into errour who therefore shall be damned eternally This did Almightie God obiect to Luther the which might doubtlesse haue done him good but that he presuming vpon his owne vnderstanding of Scripture and preferring his owne iudgement before the iudgement of the Church hardened his heart against such heauenly inspirations which he tearmed Papisticall arguments And this same may well be obiected to any priuate man or any few who leauing the Kings broad street or beaten hye way of the Catholicke Church will seeke out a by-path as being in their conceit a better easier more direct way to heauen To them I say wel may be said Are you only wise are all the rest in former ages fooles haue you onely after so many hundred
yeares after Christ found out the true faith and the right way to heauen haue all the rest liued in blindnesse darknesse and errour consequently are you onely they that please God and shall be saued for as I haue prooued before without true and entire faith none can be saued and were then all the rest so many millions your owne forefathers and ancestors many of which were most innocent men and vertuous liuers and some of which shed their bloud for Christs sake were I say all these hated of God did all these perish were they all damned shall all these endure vnspeakable paines in hell for euer O impious cruell and incredible assertion Nay surely I am rather to thinke that you are vnwise who pretending to trauell toward the happie kingdome of heauen and to go to that glorious citie the heauenly Ierusalem wil leaue the beaten street in which all those haue walked that euer heretofore went thither who by miracles sometimes as it were by letters sent from thence haue giuen testimonie to vs that remaine behind that they are safely arriued there You I say are vnwise that will leaue this way and will aduenture the liues not onely of your bodies but of your soules in a path found out of late by your selues neuer tracked before in which whosoeuer haue yet gone God knowes what is become of them sith we neuer had letter of miracle or any other euident token or euer heard any word from them to assure vs that they safely passed that way me thinks I may account you most vnwise men that will aduenture such a precious iewell as your soule is to be transported by such an vncertaine and dangerous way I must needs thinke that sith there is but one right way and that the way of the Catholicke Church is a sure and approued safe way you are very vnaduised who with the aduenture of the irreparable losse of your dearest and peerlesse treasure your soule will leaue this safe and secure way to seeke out a new vncertaine and perillous way I must needs think sith the Catholick Romane Church is as I haue proued the light of the world the rule of faith the pillar sure ground of truth that you leauing it leaue the light and therefore walke in darknesse forsaking it forsake the direct path of true faith and therefore are misled in the mist of incredulitie into the wildernesse of misbeleefe and finally that you hauing thus lost the sure ground of truth do fall into the miry ditch of many absurdities and must needs be drowned in the pit of innumerable errors and erring thus from the way the veritie and the life which is Christ Iesus residing according to his promise in the Catholicke Church must needs vnlesse you wil which I hartily wish returne to the vnitie of the same Church incur your owne perdition death and damnation of body and soule from which sweet Iesus deliuer you and vs all to the honor and perpetuall praise of his holy name Amen A. W. To these idle questions of yours I answer first in generall that we may with reason enough perswade our selues that we haue the true faith and true Churches because we see that the very quintessence of Bellarmines sophistry distilled againe in your limbeck is of no force to purge out or alter such perswasion This appeares in the particulars viewed and examined To which I answer seuerally in a word The doctrine of the true Church we gladly admit and receiue yet not vpon the authoritie thereof but because it is agreeable to the Scriptures If you ask vs then why we are perswaded that we haue true faith we returne you answer that we are therefore so perswaded because we finde that which we beleeue auowed in Scripture and confirmed in our hearts by the witnesse of the holy Ghost Hereupon we conclude as well we may that we are members of the true Church our congregations true Christiā churches For wheras you charge some of vs but craftily forbeare to name them with chalenging to our selues the title of the true Church it is a slaunder of yours and no challenge of ours saue only thus far that we affirme there is no true Church which agreeth not with vs in the fundamentall points of the Gospell But we are far frō appropriating the Church to our congregations as if all true Churches depended vpon vs according to that you teach of your Romish synagogue And whereas you condemne vs for no true Churches because we want the markes of true Churches we say that you take those for markes which are not so as you vnderstand them and farther that euery one of them rightly conceiued is to be found in our seuerall congregations It is one because it holdeth that one meanes of saluation preached by the Apostles euen faith in Iesus Christ without mingling of any workes therewith of the ceremoniall or moral law before or after grace to deserue iustification of congruitie or euerlasting life of condignitie The contrary errors held by your synagogue make and proue it to be no true Church But how foolish is the reason you bring against vs The Protestants Church is not one because it hath no meanes to keepe vnitie It hath meanes sufficient viz. the truth of the Scriptures and teaching of the spirit of God Put case it wanted meanes to continue vnitie would it follow thereupon that it is not One Surely no more then that a man is not aliue because he hath not means to keepe himselfe aliue Our Church hath had and by the blessing of God hath many holy men and women whose workes haue giuen and dayly do giue cleare testimonies of their inward graces Indeed we want vnholy legendaries to deuise and publish monstrous lies for miracles by which you haue gotten the aduantage of vs in the conceits of them to whom God hath sent strong delusions that they might beleeue lies But wisedome is iustified of her children though you proud Pharises despise her Our doctrine teacheth nothing but holinesse that we were chosen to be holy that we are freed from our sinnes to the end we might sinne no more that we are washed iustified and sanctified by the bloud of Christ buried with him in baptisme that we might die to sinne raised from sinne to righteousnesse by the power of his resurrection that holines of life is a part of our glorie without which no man shall euer see God that he which saith he is iustified and shewes himselfe to be vnsanctified deceiues his owne soule and is in the state of damnation Onely we neither giue the glorie of our saluation to our selues as if by the power of our freewill without speciall inclination thereof by the holy Ghost we had receiued faith which other men haue refused though they might haue embraced it as well as we for ought God did for or to vs more then for or to them nor looke to merit heauen by the worthinesse of our workes as