therein What art what writing of any man is so bare Are the Scriptures onely that come immediatly from the author of true reason to be barred of that priuiledge which all other writings iustly challenge Is not a necessary consequence according to the rules of logicke and reason to be allowed of in Diuinitie as well as in the Mathematicks where consectaries are as certainly true as the theoremes out of which they are drawne Is it not as certaine by Scripture that there are three persons distinct each from other and all three but one God as if these verie words had bin expresly set downe But we must beare with you in this matter who learned this shift of your great Cardinal Bellarmine We say quoth Bellarmine where he deliuereth the opinion of your Church that the whole doctrine of faith and manners is not expresly contained in the Scriptures Expresly contained To be expressed and to be contained are at the least diuers if not contrary But I pray you who saith otherwise Not the Protestants doubtlesse whose opinion he propoundeth presently after this sort They preach saith Bellarmine speaking of vs that all things necessary to faith and manners are contained in the Scriptures What is become now of expresly For pure shame he was glad to leaue out that word though he had craftily stolen it in before Well this may serue to make good my deniall of your proposition A thing may be determinable by Scripture though the determination be not expresly set downe therein Take not aduantage of my words because I say determinable and you determined For the question is not what is determined that is set downe in plaine words but it is sufficient if the Scripture affoord vs the determination of matters by certain consequēce vpon truth therein deliuered Therefore whereas you adde by onely expresse Scripture onely and expresse are but meere shifts nothing at all against that we affirme who require besides onely expresse words of Scripture the ministery and industry of man to gather and conclude points of doctrine out of that which is written in the Scripture Your assumption is true that there are diuers questions not determinable by expresse Scripture and yet as I haue shewed the Scripture is sufficient for the determining of all points of faith necessary to saluation Concerning the particular question you bring for the proofe of your assumption First you seeme to grant and that grant is as much as we require that it may be gathered out of the Scripture by consequence that those books which we and you acknowledge to be the word of God are so indeed otherwise why say you that we shall not find it expresly set downe in a part of Scripture Secondly I demaund as before who moueth this question Not the Protestants who account it a kind of blasphemie to denie it and of infidelitie to doubt of it Your holy Church of Rome is she that hath buzzed this matter into Christian mens eares so that religion is thereby become a scorne to Atheists while you make no conscience of discrediting the word of God so you may by any meanes increase the reputation of your Apostaticall sea The truth is that this opinion is not a matter now a dayes first set abroach for Atheists such as Iulian haue from time to time obiected it therefore might you haue spared to mention it as a question now a dayes moued But it is new and strange yea almost incredible that Christians and those Diuines yea such as thinke religion resteth on their shoulders as the Poets faine heauen doth vpon Atlas should make a question whether the Scriptures be the word of God or no and so giue men occasion to doubt thereof Thirdly if this matter cannot be resolued of by the Scripture we shall be little the nearer for the infallible authoritie you haue deuised Christians need it not who are already perswaded that the bookes of the old and new Testament are the vndoubted word of God and with Christians onely to speake truly and properly hath the Church to do ordinarily But it falleth out sometimes that amongst those which make profession of Christianitie there are some found who are in doubt of this point If this doubt arise in the heart of a man that maketh conscience of religion he is to be taught that it is but a tentation of Satan and therefore not to be hearkened to Further we must demaund the reasons of his doubting shewing him how absurd and vnreasonable a matter it is to make question of that which generally both Protestants and Papists hold and which hath bene held by the space of 1500. yeares vnlesse he be able to giue very sufficient cause why he may doubt His arguments if he bring any must be answered and the Scriptures auowed by the matter and manner of writing which is such as will certainly if not conuert yet conuince any man in the world that man is not the deuiser of those bookes If he be an Atheist that derideth religion and withall so vnreasonable that the former and many other important proofes will not perswade him what remaines but that the magistrate whom God hath appointed to see true religion established cut off so corrupt a member by lawfull authoritie Where this course is not taken what meanes haue you to helpe the matter Will you tell him of an infallible authoritie in the Church He will laugh at your folly who instead of prouing beg the question I doe not beleeue saith he there is any such Church or authoritie If I doubt of the Scripture you proue it by the Church if I beleeue there is not any such Church or authoritie in the Church you will perswade me by Scripture To say the truth who can be so patient or foolish rather as to suffer himselfe to be led vp downe in a ring as it were a doore turning vpon hinges still in the same place The authoritie of the Church is an argument of such waight as that he is not to be counted either a Christiā or a man of reason that is not much moued therewithall yea so much as that he will not dissent from the continuall iudgement of it vnlesse he be driuen to it by certaine reason but yet this authoritie is not infallible Christ euermore iudgeth truly saith Austin but the Ecclesiasticall iudges as being men are very often deceiued And therefore he saith in another place that he is not bound to giue his consent without libertie to refuse to any thing but the Canonicall Scriptures And in an Epistle to Ierome I haue learned saith he to giue this reuerence and honour onely to those bookes that are called Canonicall that I constantly beleeue that no writer of any of them hath erred But to make an end of this needlesse question where both sides are agreed let vs heare Saint Austin speake to the Manichees If you aske vs saith he how we know that these
be the Apostles writings we make you this short answer Thence we know these to be the Apostles whence you know that Manicheus was the author of yours And in his Confessions he setteth out the matter more at large that when he considered how many things we are faine to beleeue for which we haue no certaine proofe it pleased God at the last to perswade him that they were worthy of iust reproofe which would not giue credit to those bookes of God which he had established almost in all countries with such authoritie and that they were at no hand to be hearkened vnto who would aske him how he knew that those bookes were vouchsafed to mankind by the spirit of the onely true God This as Valentia saith may be knowne by the admirable effect these bookes worke in the hearts of men in stirring them vp to vertue without any such eloquence and perswasions as other writers stuffe their books withall and yet neuer moue vs as these do The like hath Stapleton where he speakes of the meanes which the Church vseth to discerne of the Scriptures It is not our meaning to shut out the holy Ghost who is the teacher of the children of God as in other points so also in this but to stop the mouthes of Atheists and importunate men who obiect so vnreasonably against the iudgement of the whole Christian world without authoritie or reason But of the spirit and teaching thereof hereafter Whatsoeuer you gather vpon the former point it must needs be of smal strength because that hath need of better proof But let vs grant that it is true doth it therefore seeme necessary or reasonable to you that we should admit the interpretatiō of the Church as you speake without any triall because by the authoritie thereof we beleeue that the Scriptures are the word of God What if God gaue the Church no further authoritie but onely to assure vs of the Scripture It doth not follow that we must giue credit to whatsoeuer a man will say because in some one point he must be beleeued We may not in reason doubt but that the records which we find in an office are true because they are auouched so to be by the clearke and maister of the office But what of that may we therefore take them for competent iudges so that we must of necessitie hold that to be the meaning of the record which they deliuer to vs as such I am perswaded no man of any vnderstanding will say so Yet do we acknowledge that Austin speaketh with verie great reason For where should an ignorant man enquire of the sense of the Scripture rather then there where be learned it was scripture He shall not deale either kindly or reasonably if he refuse their iudgement other things being alike for any mans else whatsoeuer and therefore I pray you be not offended if we that liued not in the times of Popish ignorance doe giue credit to our owne Church by which we haue bene perswaded that these are the scriptures of God rather then to your Priests and Cleargie from whom we haue not receiued this perswasion But the case in Saint Austins time was farre otherwise The Manichees against whom he wrote that Treatise would not suffer a man to beleeue any thing though it were writtē in scripture vnlesse it were proued true by reason and yet themselues as Austin sheweth in the chapter you alledge were driuen to allow faith without reason and to lay this for a ground that a man must beleeue Christ that is he must beleeue that there was such a man though he haue no proofe for it but report generally continued a long time which Austin confesseth to haue bene the authoritie that first moued him to beleeue Now the Manichees acknowledging thus much of Christ and that onely vpon beleefe without reason brought in monstrous opinions of their owne which could in no sort agree with the scriptures Therefore being pressed hard by the Diuines of that age with scripture they denied all authoritie thereunto farther then they in their ignorance and heresie could make it serue for their vnreasonable conceits Yea they made small or no reckoning of the scriptures in comparison of their fundamentall Epistle and such other blasphemies written by Manes their founder and some of his followers Had not Austin great reason then to answer as he doth not concerning the sense of scripture to which you falsely apply his words but touching those bookes of theirs wherein they had written horrible and senselesse absurdities against religion and reason Surely saith Austin since by their authoritie I haue bene brought to beleeue that there was such an one as Christ because it was so generally held time out of minde I will neuer runne to a few of yours who learned of them that Christ was to know what I must beleeue of him Why should I not rather beleeue them that the scriptures teach what is to be held of Christ then you that in your writings onely is the truth since in this matter you can bring no reason why I should beleeue you rather then them For since by them saith Austin I haue beleeued being mooued by the authoritie of their generall consent if they should faile and could teach nothing which words you craftily leaue out I should easlier perswade my selfe not to beleeue Christ then to beleeue any thing of him by any mans report but by theirs who first made me beleeue in him Your glosse of beleeuing the scriptures to be his word and what is the meaning of his word agree not eyther with the place you alleadge as may appeare euidently to him that will reade it or with their heresie but of both I haue spoken sufficiently A. D. §. 5. Thus I haue prooued that those English translations whereupon Protestants commonly build their faith cannot be a sufficient rule of true Christian faith First because they are not infallibly free from error Secondly for that all men cannot reade them neither can any by onely reading be sure to attaine the right sense without which to haue the words of Scripture is to haue them as Austin saith ad speciem non ad salutem for a shew but not to saluation Lastly for that all points of doctrine which appertaine to true Christian faith are not expresly set downe in scripture as beside my proofe Saint Austin Saint Basil and Epiphanius do affirme Some of which reasons haue also force to prooue that scripture alone in what language soeuer is not a fit meanes to instruct sufficiently all sorts of men in all matters of faith Wherefore I may absolutely conclude that Scripture alone cannot be that rule of faith which we seeke for A. W. Thus in steed of disputing against the scriptures being the rule of faith which was the matter you propounded you haue made a discourse against our translations hauing fancied to your selfe a conceit which besides your selfe I thinke
be whereby we come to assurance that these bookes are the word of God let it suffice all men that both we and you agree they are so But I pray tell me Are the determinations of the Church any more certaine What ground haue I but the word of some men that the Church hath so determined It is not a matter so agreed vpon betwixt vs as the bookes of Scripture are Out of question the ods is on our side It is doubtfull whether you Romanistes are the Church or no it is out of doubt these bookes are the infallible word of God But you will say the Scriptures are hard to be vnderstood as well because they are written in Hebrew and Greeke as also for the kind of writing Are not all the Decrees of your Councels and determinations of your Popes Consistorie written either in Greeke or Latin or in the Italian language in none of which one man among ten thousand hath any skill And is there not as great reason to thinke the Scriptures are rightly translated as your Decrees Decretals and Determinations Especially when as we commonly alledge the interpretations of the ancient Fathers and learned Papists for the auowing of our translations But the Scriptures are hard to be vnderstood though a man be skilfull in the tongues And are the Decrees of your Councels so easie that euery man may vnderstād them who knowes the language they are written in Doth not Bellarmine condemne and confute our writers Caluin Chemnitius and other for not vnderstanding the Decrees of your Councell of Trent written in Latine which language they were as skilfull in as himselfe If they be so easie how chance Bishop Catharin and Frier Soto that were both present at the Councell and heard the debating of matters can not agree about the doctrine of it concerning assurance of saluation which as Soto affirmes was the longest and most troublesome disputation of all in the Councell and therefore should haue bene best vnderstood and plainliest deliuered Yet is it so propounded by the holy fathers the authors of it that Catharin saith boldly he foresaw that most men would vnderstand the words of the Decree otherwise then the holy Synod meant them Was there not great contention within these very few yeares betwixt Archbishop Christophor de Capite fontium and many other Diuines about the meanes of transsubstantiating the bread though in his iudgement the Councel of Trent makes manifestly for him I forbeare to say that some points seeme to haue bene craftily set downe of purpose like the oracles of Apollo that which way soeuer they be taken the Church may not seeme to haue erred Neither will I adde that diuerse matters are deliuered by Councels not as points of faith but as probable coniectures which yet may be and are taken by some of your owne learned writers as if they were resolutely determined for certaine truth These things considered I see no sufficient reason why it should not be as fit and safe to learne of the Scripture which is the infallible truth as of any companie of men whatsoeuer But you labour to commend to vs this resting on the authoritie of the Romish Church by some especiall commodities that shall ensue thereupon The first wherof is ease the 2. certaintie of knowledge He shall not need say you to straine his wits in studying c. If ease were not too much delighted in by men of your profession there would not be such swarms of idle Monks Fryers Nuns nonresident Bishops and Priests amongst you But true Christians vnderstand that it was not Gods purpose to prouide so much for their ease by giuing them leaue to beleeue at aduenture hand ouer head whatsoeuer it should please men to enioyne thē but that it is his good pleasure that all men should carefully and painfully exercise themselues night and day in reading and meditating of the Scriptures He is too nice and dainty a professor of religion that is loth to straine his wits to the vttermost in the study of any thing reuealed by God in Scripture What shall I say of him that cals conference and disputation about euen the greatest points of faith and iustification wasting of words in wrangling Nec se magnanimo maledicere sentit Achilli It is strange you should not haue the wit to perceiue that by this censure you condemne Lombard Thomas and all your schoole men yea the Pope and generall councels who are bound to vse such meanes for the finding out of the truth and as Sotus saith did vse them in a long and troublesome disputation yet forsooth neither the one nor the other at least both together cannot erre No man then ought to refuse study or disputation of controuersies in diuinitie because they are troublesome Therefore to mend the matter you adde that they are also vncertaine what can be certain but only reuelation if the true vse of reason can breed nothing but vncertainty How idly and vainly did your schoolemen imploy themselues if all their study and labour must end in vncertainty What vse is there of Councels for finding out of the truth since the helpe to be had of them is debating of matters by reasoning Do we not find in daily experience that as flint and steele stricken together bring forth fire so truth is as it were beaten out by disputation It is reported you make great shewes of desiring a disputation I maruaile to what end If when all comes to all your auditors shall still remaine vncertaine what is true Shall I go yet farther You tell vs the Church cannot erre we beleeue you not you alledge some places of Scripture to proue it to vs we say they proue no such matter what course will you take It is in vaine to dispute of it that is as you say to wast words in wrangling about it For that is but an vncertaine meanes to find-out the truth Haue you not brought matters to a good passe thinke you when you professe that there is no meanes to discern certainlie whether the Church can erre or no but onely to take her own word for it Yea no meanes left to know that she is the Church For if you will againe fly to the Scriptures you run into the former difficulties and end as before in vncertainty Who would haue to do with such vnreasonable men But that you may not seeme to leaue vs in vncertainty you tel vs that we may most certainly be instructed in all particular points of controuersies by onely enquiring and finding out what is holden generally by the Church for truth c. You send vs to the faith of the Church and namely of the Church of Rome Which say we is onely so farre forth to be yeelded vnto as it is agreeable to the Scriptures Neither do we say so onely but Ambrose long before our time hath said the like We are commanded saith
the scripture For how many points of doctrine are there not yet decreed of by your Church How many thousand places of scripture not yet expounded by it If then it be no hindrance to saluation for a man to be ignorant of the truth in many points and places of scripture may not the written word of God be the rule of faith though diuers things in it be not certainly vnderstood A. D. §. 3. Thirdly they faile in the third condition For the Scriptures are not so vniuersall as the rule of faith had need to be For this rule ought to be so vniuersall that it may be able absolutely to resolue and determine all doubts and questions of faith which eyther haue bene or may hereafter be in controuersie for otherwise there were not sufficient meanes prouided by which schisme and heresies might be auoided vnitie of faith so necessarie to saluation might be conserued among Christian men A. W. The last imperfection you note in the Scripture whereby you would make it insufficient to be the rule of faith is the scantnesse of it that it conteineth not all things necessarie to be beleeued which you go about to prooue thus The rule of faith must be able absolutely to resolue all doubts of faith that haue bene or may be The Scripture is not able absolutely to resolue all such doubts Therefore the Scripture is not the rule of faith I should haue let your proposition passe without any question but that I am so vsed to your craft in speaking doubtfully For feare whereof I would faine vnderstand what the reason is why you put in absolutely If your intent be to signifie that the resolution must be certainly true you might haue spoken plainly as you meant But it may be you vnderstand by resoluing absolutely such a kinde of resolution as shall take away all outward contention which sometimes is indeed brought to passe by the Decrees of your Popes no man daring for feare of his life once to open his mouth against them Such a resolution the scripture cannot giue neither is it to be looked for that the rule of faith should be of that nature It is enough that it shew plainly and certainly what is true in all matters of faith Secondly the controuersies of faith you speake of must be indeed matters that require beleefe otherwise the rule of faith is not to meddle with them To speake more plaine It is not to be held as a duetie of the rule of faith that it should be able to determine of euerie idle question that curious and contentious heads can deuise For example if any man will make question of the Virgin Marie whether she were as you teach fifteene yeare old or perhaps eighteene or nineteen when our Sauiour Christ her Sonne was borne whether she were threescore three whē she died or more or lesse In these a thousād such matters deliuered as points of faith by your Priests and Iesuits it is not to be expected that the rule of faith should affoord any resolution We grant that infinite questions of your schoolemen positiōs of your Diuines cannot be determined by the rule of faith but only thus that they may be cōuinced to be no matters of beleefe that a Christian must needs think thus or thus of thē because they cannot be prooued either one way or other by scripture your proposition therefore is true onely of those things that are needfull to be beleeued all which may be certainly resolued by it What cannot is not of necessitie to be held by faith Your proposition you prooue as you thinke by this reason If there be no sufficient meanes prouided by which schismes and heresies may be auoided and vnitie among Christians conserued vnlesse the rule of faith be able to resolue all such doubts then it must be able to resolue them But there is no sufficient meanes prouided whereby schismes and heresies may be auoided and vnitic conserued vnlesse the rule be able to resolue all such doubts Therefore the rule of faith must be able to resolue them If the proposition be taken in that sense which the former may seeme to haue as I shewed then I denie the consequence therof that is I say it doth not follow that if there be no sufficiēt means prouided whereby schismes and heresies shall de facto and in euēt be auoided vnlesse the rule of faith be able to shew what is true what false in all questions that any man will mooue then the rule must be able so to doe The reason of my deniall is that as before I answered it is sufficient for the rule to shew what is true in matters of faith and let vs know that those are not needfull to be beleeued of the truth whereof it saith nothing anie way The assumption also is false though you speak not of actuall auoiding of heresie and schisme For there is sufficient meanes prouided for the auoiding of schisme because nothing must be held for certain truth which cannot be prooued to be according to the rule which is the onely measure of true vnitie among Christians A. D. §. 4. But the Scriptures be not thus vniuersall For there be diuers questions or doubts moued now a dayes and those also touching very substantiall matters which are not expresly set downe nor determined by onely Scripture For where haue we any expresse Scripture to proue that all those and onely those bookes which Catholickes or Protestants hold for Scripture are indeed Gods word and true Scripure This we shall not find expresly set downe in a part of Scripture This point therefore whereupon dependeth the certaintie of euery point proued out of Scripture cannot be made certaine to our knowledge or beliefe vnlesse we admit some other infallible rule or authoritie wherupon we may ground an vnfallible beleefe which infallible rule if we admit to assure vs that there is at all any Scripture and that those bookes and no other be Canonicall Scripture why should we not admit the same to assure vs vnfallibly which is the true sense and meaning of the same Scripture Hereupon S. Austin saith very well Cur non apud eos diligentissimè requiram quid Christus praeceperit quorum auctoritate commotus Christum aliquid praecepisse iam credidi Tune mihi meliùs expositurus es quid ille dixerit c. Why shold I not most diligently ask or learne of those he meaneth of the Catholicke Church what Christ hath commanded by whose authoritie I was moued to beleeue that Christ commanded any thing at all What wilt thou expound vnto me better what he hath said that is to say the meaning of his words Quae saith he ista tanta dementia est illis crede Christo esse credendum à nobis disce quid ille dixerit multo facilius mihi persuaderem Christo non esse credendum quà m de illo quidquam nisi ab ijs per quos
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
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
rule of faith Chap. 9. That priuate spirit cannot be this rule Chap. 10. That the doctrine or teaching of the true Church of Christ is the rule or meanes wherby all men must learne the true faith Chap. 11. That this true Church of Christ of which we must learne the true faith is alwayes to continue without interruption vntill the worlds end Chap. 12. That this same Church must alwayes be visible Chap. 13. How we should discerne or know which company of men is this true visible Church of which we must learne true faith Chap. 14. That those Notes or markes which heretikes assigne to wit true doctrine of faith and right vse of Sacraments be not sufficient Chap. 15. That these foure Vna Sancta Catholica Apostolica One Holy Catholique Apostolique be good markes whereby men may discerne which is the true Church Chap. 16. That these foure markes agree onely to the Romane Church That is to say to that company of men which agreeth in profession of faith with the Church of Rome § 1. That the Romane Church onely is One. § 2. That the Romane Church onely is Holy § 3. That the Romane Church is onely Catholique § 4. That the Romane Church is onely Apostolique Chap. 17. The conclusion of the whole discourse viz. That the Romane Church is the onely true Church of Christ of which all men must learne the one infallible entire faith which is necessary to saluation And that the Protestants Congregations cannot be this true Church THE PREFACE BEing moued by some friends to conferre with one of indifferent good iudgement and of no ill disposition of nature though verie earnest in thaet religion which he did professe I was desirous to do my best endeuors to let him plainely see that the Catholique Romane faith was the onely right A. W. Being requested by some friends to maintaine the truth of Christian religion professed amongst vs against the antichristian cauils of this popish proctor I thought it my best course first to answer in generall to the whole substance of his booke and then to examine euerie particular Chapter In the former I first consider his drift and scope then how he proues that which he intends His drift is to shew That the Catholique Romane faith is the onely right wherein he craftily begs that which is in question That the Romane faith is the Catholique faith which himselfe propounds as the second thing to be proued by him That those onely which professe the Romane faith are the true Catholique Church Neither can it be auouched by the authority of anie ancient writer or by any good reason that it is lawfull or fit to ioyne the terme Catholique as Papists take it to any particular Church whatsoeuer There was great strife about the Catholike Church vpon earth in Austins time which the Donatists would haue confined to Affrica but the true Christians freed it from that bondage and bounded it with no other limits then the compasse of the whole world Let the Papists shew if they can that in this whole cōtrouersie the Catholique Church was euer restrained or coupled to anie one Citie Dioces Prouince or Nation as it is now by them to Rome If they cannot let them acknowledge and renounce this their noueltie A. D. §. 3. For which purpose I did chuse to let passe disputes about particular points and in generall to shew First that it is necessary to admit an infallible authoritie in the true Cathòlique Church by reason whereof euery one is to learne of it onely which is the true faith of Christ Secondly that those onely which professe the Románe faith are the true Catholique Church The which hauing proued I did consequently conclude that the faith and beliefe which the authority of the Romane Church doth cōmend vnto vs ought without doubt to be holden for the true faith A. W. Indeed the best and onely way to auow the doctrine of the Romish Church is to leade men hoodwinckt in ignorance of the particular points it holds many whereof are so palpably false that he that knowes them will easily be perswaded to abhorre them But let vs see what you shew in generall Thus you dispute The faith which the authoritie of the true Catholique Church commends vnto vs ought without doubt to be holden for the true faith But the faith which the authoritie of the Church of Rome commends vnto vs is the faith which the authoritie of the true Catholique Church commends vnto vs. Therfore the faith which the authoritie of the Church of Rome commends vnto vs ought without doubt to be holden for the true faith The conclusion of this syllogisme is set downe by you in plaine words there The which hauing proued I did consequently cōclude that the faith c. The proposition or major is not exprest no more is the assumption or minor but instead of them you haue deliuered the proofes of them thus to be concluded First for the proposition at those words That it is necessary to admit an infallible c. If it be necessary to admit an infallible authoritie in the true Catholique Church by reason whereof euery one is to learne of it onely which is the true faith of Christ then the faith which the authoritie of the true Catholique Church commends vnto vs ought without doubt to be holden for the true faith But it is necessarie to admit such an authoritie in the true Catholike Church Therefore the faith which the authoritie of the true Catholike Church commends vnto vs ought without doubt to be holden for the true faith Onely the assumption of this syllogisme is propounded the rest omitted The proofe of your principall assumption is at those words That those only which professe the Romane c. And as in the former syllogisme the assumption onely is exprest the rest vnderstood Thus If those onely which professe the Romane faith are the true Catholike Church then the faith which the authoritie of the Church of Rome commends vnto vs is the faith which the authoritie of the true Catholike Church commends vnto vs. But those onely which professe the Romane faith are the true Catholique Church Therefore the faith which the authoritie of the Church of Rome commends vnto vs is the faith which the authoritie of the true Catholique Church commends vnto vs. We see now what his drift is how he proues that he intends and by what reason he confirmes his proofe It remaines that we consider in general to what part of his proofe or confirmation thereof euery Chapter in his Discourse appertaineth In the 4. first Chapters he layeth certaine grounds concerning faith in the 13. following he disputeth the matter propounded First he shewes the necessitie of faith Chap. 1. then he deliuereth three properties required to true faith That it is one Ch. 2. That it is infallible Chap. 3. That it is entire Chap. 4. In his dispute the twelue former Chapters from the beginning
this world but the whole societie of the faithful from time to time But these gay shewes of Catholike Church Vniuersalitie antiquitie vnitie succession and such like are fit to deceiue the ignorant for which purpose your discourses are written with whō they preuaile by the iust iudgement of God who sends them strong delusions that they may beleeue lyes because they haue not embraced the loue of the truth that they might be saued A. D. §. 6. First because it is very briefe and compendious and consequently such as euery one might haue leysure and should not be much weary to reade it A. W. You deale in your corrupt writings as leud men do in slanderous reports who speake anie thing at aduenture though neuer so vntrue or vnlikely It is hard but some men will either beleeue or make doubt of it at the least So all men reade your writings you care not Though they that are of knowledge and iudgement discerne your falshood yet it is twentie to one but some ignorant fellow will light on them that may be seduced And this practise you follow the rather because you are for the most part out of feare of being shamed by confutation for that you are vnknowne and know well inough that our answers to you are commonly and many times must be so large that one amongst manie can hardly find leisure to reade them Whereas if the authors of your treatises were knowne amongst vs and our answers applied shortly and plainely to the verie point of the argument that being disrobed of the idle ornaments you cloath it withall and laid naked to the view of true reason we should haue as few of your discourses as we haue now of your replies to our refutations of your treatises which are so few that in many yeares it is rare to haue anie second charge by you vnlesse it be in such a fight as requires no more but a brauado without coming to handie blowes A. D. §. 7. Secondly because it standing onely vpon few but most certaine conclusions and grounds is free from many cauils of the captious which more ample discourses are subiect vnto A. W. To speake truly and properly there is but one conclusion in your whole Treatise as I haue shewed out of this your Preface Against which we also oppose one as briefe and more certaine then yours Your conclusion is That the faith and beliefe which the authority of the Romane Church doth commend vnto vs ought without doubt to be holden for the true faith Ours That the faith which the Scripture teacheth vs is the onely true faith If you speake of the seuerall cōclusions belonging to the proofe of the generall there are at the least as many as there are Chapters But if you meane the three grounds which you signifie before and repeate afterwards they are so farre from being certaine that there is neuer a one of them true as you vnderstand them A. D. §. 8. Thirdly because the matter handled in it is not very high nor hard but common easie and plaine and such as may be vnderstood of any who hauing but a reasonable wit or vnderstanding wil carefully read it as the importance of the matter requireth with iudgement deliberation and which is chiefe with prayer to God and a resolute good will to follow that which he shall find to be right A. W. The matter is as hard by your handling of it as sophistrie can well make it as high as the deepe foundation of religion Yet I denie not but it may be vnderstood by a man of such parts and paines as you require and adde farther that the like may be auowed of the true grounds of religion as they are contained in the Scripture to the reading and meditation whereof the Lord himself hath promised such a blessing as your treatises if they were neuer so true could not looke for Is not the fountaine better then the chanell A. D. §. 9. Fourthly because these fewe plaine points which are here set downe include all other and whosoeuer shall by the helpe of Gods grace and the force of these or other reasons yeeld assent to the points proued in this discourse must by consequence without further disputing or difficultie yeeld to all particular points which the aforesaid Church commendeth for points of faith and will be moued to settle himselfe in the stedfast beliefe of all For if he once admit that there is a Church or company of men on earth infallibly taught by the holy Ghost what is the true faith in all points and that this Church is by Gods appointment to teach all men in all matters of faith which is the infallible truth and further that this Church which is thus taught and must teach vs is no other but that visible company which professeth the Romane faith then he shall not need to straine his wits in studying or to wast words in wrangling about particular points of controuersies or to vse any such troublesome and vncertaine meanes to find out the truth but may easily and most certainly be instructed in all by onely enquiring and finding out which all sorts of men may easily do what is generally holdē by the Church for truth in all particular points whereof they doubt A. W. If these few points be so conuenient because in thē all other are included why should not our doctrine of the Scripture be as conuenient by the same reason Let vs compare our assertions together The first of yours is That a man must admit that there is a company of men on earth infallibly taught by the holy Ghost what is the true faith in all points The first of ours That a man must beleeue that there is a written word of God wherein the holy Ghost hath certainely taught whatsoeuer is needfull to be knowne to saluation Your second is That this company of men is by Gods appointment to teach all men in all matters of faith which is the infallible truth Our second That this written word of God is appointed by him to teach all men in all matters of faith what is true what false Your third That this company of men is no other but the visible company which professeth the Romane faith Our third That this written word is no other but the bookes of the old and new Testament The proofe of your positions and the exceptions you take against ours shal be handled if it please God in their due places in the meane time if any mā be troubled with those ordinarie doubts which you haue buzzed into the common peoples eares concerning the vncertainty and hardnesse of the Scriptures let me intreat him to stay himselfe a while vpon these considerations First that the bookes of the old and new Testament acknowledged by vs are also confessed by you to be the verie word of God in the penning whereof the penners were so directed by the holy Ghost that they could not erre Therefore whatsoeuer the meanes
saued that doth not certainly beleeue that there is no name vnder heauen by which he may be saued but the name of Iesus and that in him there is saluation yet may a man attaine to saluation that is not resolued of many points which are determined by the Church that is by any company of men whatsoeuer Secondly faith is necessary to saluation because no man can be saued that doth not beleeue in Iesus Christ that is that doth not wholy renounce himselfe and rest vpon Iesus Christ to be iustified by his obedience and sacrifice But the Lord hath not so tied his owne hands that he cannot worke both these in the heart of whō he wil without some man to tell him by word of mouth that he must thus beleeue The proofe you bring out of the Apostle is vtterly false both for the translation and application The word vsed by the Apostle is no where to be found either in the passiue or middle voyce as it must needs be if it should signifie shall not be knowne but is meerly actiue the first present tense of the Imperatiue moode or as Ramus cals it the first future infect and is as much in English as let him be ignorant so do the learned of your owne side translate it Vatablus Pagninus Caietan Salmero so do they expoūd it as if he should say quoth Vatablus If any man will not know these things and will be ignorant let him be ignorant at his owne peril I will not striue saith Cardinal Caietan with thē that know not these to be the Lords cōmandemēts but if any man be ignorāt let him be ignorāt The same sense giue Chrysostom Theophylact and Oecumenius As if the Apostle by a kind of ironicall concession should as it were leaue euery man to himself to think and do in those matters as should please him And therefore Chrysostome expounds it by that If any man list to be contentious we haue no such custom nor the Churches of God As if he should say let him that will refuse to be ruled by me in these cases it is enough for vs that the Churches of God and we Apostles haue no such custome It is further to be obserued that the Apostle speaks not of such points as by their being vnknown might endanger a mans saluatiō but of matters of lesse momēt cōcerning the orderly and decent cariage of things in the publick congregation This Chrysostome notes saying that the Apostle doth not vse thus kind of reproofe euery where but when the faults are not great But it is an exceeding great fault for a man not to acknowledge the truth of those points without beleefe whereof he cannot be saued Therefore in Chrysostome his iudgement the Apostle speaks not in that place of the want of such a faith as is so necessary a means to saluation as that without it a man cannot attaine thereunto A. D. CHAP. II. That this faith necessary to saluation is but one A. W. If the plainnesse pretended in the title of this booke had bene truly intended and performed we should not haue had the contents of this chapter so obscurely deliuered This faith necessarie to saluation is but one VVhat should a man make of these words An ordinarie Reader would thinke you meant that there is but one kinde of faith necessarie to saluation how easie had it bene for you to haue said so plainely to the capacitie of the simplest But it is a humor in men commonly to wonder at the depth of that they vnderstand not and these great schollers may not abase themselues to speake like vs of the meaner sort and yet a wise Philosopher said That a man should thinke as the wise doe but speake as the people doe But we must remember that in poperie there is most deuotion where there is least vnderstanding Well let vs take the words as they are once his meaning is as himselfe afterwards expresseth it that the beleefe of one man differeth not from the beleefe of another and that euerie faithfull man beleeueth euerie point for one and the same reason A. D. §. 1. This faith which I haue shewed to be absolutely necessarie to saluation is but One onely This is plainly prooued out of Saint Paul who saith Vnus Dominus vna fides vnum baptisma signifying that like as there is but one Lord and one Baptisme so there is but One faith A. W. Faith as I shewed before is taken sometimes for the habit vertue gift grace qualitie call it what you will whereby we haue power to beleeue sometimes for the points that are to be beleeued Here the question is of the former as any man would gather both by the title and by some of the proofes The first whereof is a place of Scripture There is one Lord one faith one baptisme of which I say first as of the whole Chapter that it might well haue bene spared considering that we acknowledge the truth of the matter in the same sense in which himselfe propoūds it Secondly I think it had bin a point of good iudgement to haue forborne the allegation of a text so insufficient for the purpose for the Apostle hath no meaning to shew by those words one faith that one mans beliefe taking faith for the inward quality differeth not from another mans but that all the beleeuing Ephesians and so all true Christians professe one and the same religion as they worship the same Lord and receiue the same baptisme and therefore ought to agree in peace one with another and not to make the gifts of God diuersly bestowed vpon diuers men an occasion of schisme and diuision This might you haue learned of Alphonsus Salmero a Iesuite who brings this place to proue that nownes that signifie qualities or habits are taken also for the obiects to which they appertaine as faith signifieth saith he the articles which are beleeued by faith according to that of Paul There is one faith The like hath Bellarmine By the name of faith saith he speaking of this place the obiect of faith seemes to be noted out So that the sense is we all beleeue the same thing as we haue bene all baptized after the same manner One faith saith Catharin because we beleeue one thing And this interpretation is acknowledged for good by Lombard Thomas and Caietane though they allow of the other also which notwithstanding I am the bolder to refuse because the places you bring out of the fathers agree better to the former exposition A. D. §. 2. The same is confirmed with the authoritie of the ancient Fathers Nisi vna est saith S. Leo Fides non est dicente Apostolo Vnus Dominus vna fides vnum baptisma Vnlesse it be one it is not faith sith the Apostle saith one Lord one faith one Baptisme A. W. Faith that is sound saith
must be entire Can you giue me a sufficient reason of this difference A. D. §. 1. This one infallible faith without which we cannot please God must also be entire whole and sound in all points and it is not sufficient to beleeue stedfastly some points misbeleeuing or not beleeuing obstinately other some or any one A. W. There are two things to be considered in your propounding of this questiō concerning the entirenesse of faith in what sense all points must be beleeued and what it is to misbeleeue or obstinately not to beleeue Whatsoeuer is deliuered in Scriptures is a matter of faith because it is the word of God who can neither deceiue nor be deceiued and hath propounded it to men for a truth to be beleeued But yet there is a great difference betwixt things set downe in Scripture and that difference is in 2. respects For neither are all points therein true in the like sense neither is there like necessitie of beleeuing euery particular Concerning the former the generall reason why all things in the Scriptures are true is this because all things therein are recorded deliuered by God for true therfore questionles they are true yet as once before I noted onely so farre forth true as they are intended to be held for true by the holy Ghost the author of the Scripture Whatsoeuer is registred therein by vvay of report as a story is to be taken as true onely in respect of story that we may not doubt whether such or such things were done and said or no. There is no doubt to be made but that the fiue bookes of Moses the bookes of Iosua Iudges Ruth Samuel Kings Chronicles c. containe a true and certaine story of those things whereof they intreate But in these bookes we haue some worthy and holy speeches of godly men some leud and blasphemous words of profane wretches The former are to be acknowledged for the truth of God euery way As for example it is true that Iacob vttered those prophesies of the twelue Patriarks his sonnes and it is also true that those prophesies of his were the very truth of God It is as true that Rabshaketh deliuered those blasphemous threanings against the Lord and his people but it is not true that those words came from God as Iacobs did so Iacobs were to be taken as euery way true Rabshakeths onely as truly reported from his mouth Now that all points are not alike necessary to saluation no man can make any question if he remember that a man may be saued though he haue neuer heard of many things that are recorded in the Scripture which is the case generally of the greatest part both of Protestants and Papists and hath alwayes bene the case of Christians in all ages As for misbeleeuing or not beleeuing obstinately one of these differs a great deale from the other and the latter of the two was needlesse if the former can be proued For if mistaking some point of doctrine be damnable it is out of doubt that obstinate refusing to beleeue the same point must needs make a man much more liable to damnation But indeed misbeleeuing is not in all points so dangerous though of it selfe as a sinne it is subiect to be punished with the eternall wrath of God in hell fire To make plaine that I say A man may misunderstand diuers places of Scripture and thereupon hold that to be true which is false and yet be saued for all this error For example that I may giue instāce in a matter of no small importance How many Christians yea how many great Diuines haue bin deceiued in the vnderstanding of our Sauior Christs genealogie and by their misconceiuing of the Euangelists haue fallen into no smal error that Salomon was the father of the Messiah By which opinion to omit many other things that I may not be too long the truth of a prophesie vttered by Ieremy which makes Ieconiah childlesse hath bin ouerthrown from whom our Sauiour must needs haue descended if he had bene the sonne of Salomon as some erroneously gather out of Saint Mathew and not of Nathan as it is manifest by S. Luke he was Shall I exemplifie this matter in another point The Apostles themselues for a long time euen til after the ascension of our Sauiour into heauen and till the comming of the holy Ghost vpō them looked for the establishing of an earthly kingdome in this world by their Lord and maister Did they not slip into this error by misbeleeuing the prophesies of the old testament concerning the Messiahs kingdome yet were they out of danger of damnation and in the state of grace all that time because they rested on our Sauiour Christ as the spirituall Sauiour of their soules that should tak away their sinnes and bring them to euerlasting life in heauen though they erroneously hoped for a temporall kingdome also The other branch of this distribution which concernes obstinately not beleeuing though it be a farre greater sinne then the former yet it is not such that it doth absolutely cut a man off from saluation This obstinate refusall to beleeue is either of ignorance or of wilfulnesse if a Christian stand stifly in some false opinion which he certainly holdeth to be true in his error the fault of his iudgement may continue without the damnation of his soule If wilfully he refuse to beleeue that truth of God which he discerneth no man can promise him any hope of saluation without true repentance This I speake vpon a supposition that it is possible for a man not to beleeue that which he perceiueth to be true though indeed there is a contradiction implied herein For to beleeue is to assent to the truth which a man cannot chuse but do that sees it that is no man can think the same thing in the same respects true and false But this not beleeuing in such a case is a frowardnesse of the heart not yeelding to acknowledge that he knowes rather then a false opinion in the braine by which a man is misled We are further to obserue that there is a second difference in this point in regard of the matter which is not beleeued If a man in his ignorance deny to beleeue that there is but one God that there are three persons that Iesus is the Messiah that we are redeemed by him that we are iustified by faith without workes or any other fundamentall point of religion he doth thereby shut himselfe out from all possibilitie of saluation as long as he continues in these errors or any of them But other points there are and those many more in number which a man by reason of his ignorance may obstinately refuse to beleeue and yet not be excluded out of heauen for such his error Let the former examples serue for breuities sake I haue bene longer then I would or meant to be but I was desirous to speake plaine
of Nice to follow and which they accordingly followed The bookes of the Euangelists and Apostles and the Oracles of the old prophets plainly instruct vs quoth that worthie Emperour what we are to iudge of matters concerning God Therefore laying aside all enemie-like discord let vs debate ad determine the points in question by the testimonies of the Scriptures inspired by God These as we heard before Ierome makes the bounds of the Church within which she must keepe her selfe and Proclus Archbishop of Constantinople confineth faith to the same place Faith saith he must abide within the Euangelicall and Apostolicall bounds Paschasius a Cardinall of your Church as you say many yeares since tied Macedonius the hereticke to the Scriptures equiring him either to shew by euident testimonies of the word of God that we must beleeue in the Church or else to vrge the point no further For as Chrysostome truly affirmeth If there be any thing needfull to be knowen we shall learne it in the Scriptures I mightfil whole sides with testimonies out of the Fathers to this purpose but I let them passe as needlesse especially since your selfe before confessed that the word of God is infallible and therefore in that respect sufficient to be the rule of faith Now to your conclusion The first part of this first conclusion is false in regard of the infallibilitie of Scripture which it should seeme you saw well enough and therefore balkt that matter and deuised an other point concerning our translation to play withall For what is it but trifling when a man leaues the thing in question and busies him selfe about the refuting of that which besides himselfe no man euer dreamed of What English protestant euer affirmed that our translation was infallible that is such as had no error in it or might not be doubted of Or who euer tooke it for the rule of faith You make babies which you beate as you list Against the Scriptures being the rule of faith which we affirme you say nothing Against the infallibilitie of our translation which we grant not to be the rule of faith you discourse at large wherein I intreate the Reader to consider these few things with me That which he speakes in disgrace of our translation makes no more against it then against all other whatsoeuer For neither is any translation the language in which the Scripture was written and no translators euer had any such infallible assistance by the holy Ghost Sure the author of the vulgar Latin translation had not such help as the Hebrew and Greek originals which the translations of all the learned Papists themselues declare Pagnin Vatablus Isidorus Clarius c. As for Gregory Martins cauils they were answered long since by D. Fulke and I maruell that you can name them without blushing seeing neuer a one of you durst vndertake the defence of them for the space of these 23. yeares Nay which is worse you were not ashamed in the second edition of your Rhemish Testament to bleare your blind followers eyes with a table of hereticall corruptions in translating the Scriptures as if you had propounded some new matter whereas they were all taken out of that booke of Martins and had long before bene iustified by D. Fulke without any reply on your parts You demaund how any vnlearned man can be infallibly sure that in those places which do seeme to fauour our sect our translation doth not erre I answer that there are better meanes of assurance for vnlearned Protestants concerning the truth of our translation then any Papist can haue by your imagined authoritie for your vulgar Latin First it is no slender perswasion to any reasonable man that those places you speake of if not wholy yet for the most part are translated with the same sense in other toungs which they haue in ours as in Spanish French Italian Flemish Dutch Secondly it is a great confirmation of the truth that many of those texts which seeme most to fauor vs are the same in your vulgar and Rhemish editions that they are in ours Thirdly the truth of ours is yet more cleare because euery man may see that in bookes of controuersie betwixt vs our translations are seldome denied by the learned of your side though you condemne our expositions Fourthly who may not easily discerne how much more faithfull our translation of those places all others is then yours seeing we are readie to make triall of it by the originals the learned on your sides being iudges you are afraid of nothing more then to haue yours examined by the Hebrew and Greeke Fiftly in the places you speake of our translations deserue the more credit because we labour to make them plaine for euery mans vnderstanding and shew how they agree with the rest of the booke and chapter wheras your Rhemish Testament is so handled that an English man of good vnderstanding can hardly tell what to make of it for the very words themselues in many places as if you auoided nothing more then plainnesse Sixtly we perswade all men as much as we can to labour for the knowledge of the originall tongues that so they may be able to iudge of our translation you do all you can to keepe men in the mist of ignorance because you are afraid to haue your corruptions discouered Seuenthly though we allow not our ministers such an infinite authoritie as you giue your Cleargie yet we teach that it becoms Christian charitie and modestie neither to suspect a translation where the analogie of faith is kept and the plaine meaning of the holy Ghost not manifestly altered nor to rest vpon priuate conceit against the generall iudgement of the learned without very euident proofe of error These amongst other are reasonable grounds for a Christian to build vpon that he may haue some good assurance of the truth of our translation Now let vs examine yours We must say you admit an infallible authoritie in the Church to assure vs that such or such a translation doth not erre in any point First this is more then neeeds For if that authoritie can assure vs that the translation erreth not in any point needfull to saluation in regard of the sense it may be a sufficient ground for vs to build our faith vpon though it should mistake some words in many points and the sense too in matters of lesse importance Secondly though we do admit such an authoritie in the Church yet may we be farre enough from any such assurance For how shall I be sure that the Church hath so affirmed of this or that translation How shal I know what the Church is A company you say of men vpon earth infallibly taught by the holy Ghost what is the true faith in al points Is this teaching cōmon to euery one of this company seuerally or only annexed to them all ioyntly when they are together What if all what if the greater part assemble
take away lothing But as he addeth in those places which are plaine in the Scriptures all those matters are found which containe faith and good manners that is hope and charitie This is that which Marsilius of Padua aboue 800 years since disputed against the Pope That the Gospel was very sufficient perfect cleare of it self that by it we may be directed immediatly concerning and in all things which belong to a mans obteyning of euerlasting life and auoiding miserie As in the former propertie hauing propounded your matter against the Scripture you reason only against the English translation so in this that one may be some what sutable to the other being to speake of the obscuritie of the Scripture you shew that it is hard to one kinde onely viz vnlearned men though you helpe the matter a little afterward by auouching the hardnesse of it euen to the learned also The Scriptures say you are not the rule of faith Why so Because they are hard to be vnderstood of those vnlearned mē that cannot reade them Is not the teaching of the Church whereto you ascribe so much vnpossible to be vnderstood by them that cannot heare Is it therefore no sufficient rule But the Scripture is not so hard as you imagine no not to them that cannot reade as long as they may heare it read and haue care to vnderstand and remember what they heare Yea there are many in England that know neuer a letter on the booke who notwithstanding are able to giue a better sense of many places of Scripture then some of your Masse-priests that can read their whole Portuise Seruice booke Idle therefore and ridiculous is your example of a man lockt vp with a Bible since by hearing it read though himselfe cannot read he may attaine to more knowledge then many of your blinde guides haue who for all their skill in reading vnderstand neuer a word of their Epistles Gospels which they daily say at Masse like prating parrots Now for your conclusions inferred hereupon the first as I haue shewed is false that any such entire and infallible faith is necessarie so that without it a man cannot be saued the second of the meanes without which such a faith cannot be had is ordinarily true the third which denies the Scripture alone to be such a meanes is either false and not prooued by you or nothing to the purpose Can any man truely say that God hath not prouided sufficient meanes for euerie mans saluation because some men are vnable to reade the Scriptures which are those meanes Hath not God done his part in making all men capable to reade though many neglect to learne Therefore if the Scripture be sufficient for all mens instruction as I haue prooued it to be for all your supposed obscurity God cannot be charged with want of care because men are carelesse to vse the meanes of their owne saluation But if by Scripture alone you meane Scripture without any helpe of man all you say is besides the matter For no man euer was so foolish as to make Scripture alone in that sense either the rule of faith or a meanes of any good whatsoeuer vnlesse perhaps you Papists according to the rest of your superstition in Agnus Deis hallowed Granes and such like may haue a conceit as those priests of whom an ancient writer speaketh had that a part of the Gospell hung about ones necke may be a preseruatiue against I know not what bodily or ghostly danger You haue vndertaken to prooue that the scriptures are not the rule of faith because they are hard to be vnderstood Their hardnesse in respect of the ignorant was auowed by you onely against those that cannot reade Now for the learned you tel vs that they cannot by onely reading the Scriptures be infallibly sure that they rightly vnderstand them What then Therefore can they not at all be sure Because reading onely will not assure them therefore is there no meanes whereby they may be assured Call to minde what I alledged before out of Ambrose Origen Chrysostome and Austin who doubt not to assure men that they may come to the vnderstanding of the Scripture if they will vse the meanes of praier and diligence Whom shall we beleeue These worthies of the Church speaking also vpon manifold experience or you whom we know not so much as by sight or name If you can so farre bewitch any of your owne poore ignorant soules yet sure ther is no man of any indifferent good iudgment that will be carried away with this your simple authoritie against the ioynt consent of those famous Diuines But you will adde reason to your authoritie let vs heare it It may be say you they ought to be vnderstood otherwise Therefore they cannot be sure they rightly vnderstand Tell me I pray you for my better instruction whether you make this doubt of all places of scripture or of some onely It will not sinke into my head that you doe so much condemne the scripture of obscuritie that you thinke no one place of it can be certainely vnderstood Nay it is vnpossible you should so despise the iudgment of those I named er while or condemne your owne capacitie as to denie that many texts of scripture are so euident that a childe cannot mistake the meaning of them Then that antecedent It may be they ought to vnderstand otherwise in some places of scripture can haue no place Let vs limit it that the truth may appeare Some places of scripture are so hard that a man may vnderstand them otherwise then in truth they are to be vnderstood This proposition is out of all question what wil you conclude hereupon That men cannot be sure they rightly vnderstand these places I grant this too Therefore these doubtfull places are not to be made the foundation of our faith but as Austin saith We must rest vpon those places of scripture which are verie manifest that by them the harder may be expounded But admit there were diuers texts of scripture which can by no meanes be certainly vnderstood which yet for my part sauing other mens better iudgement I do not thinke to be true because God hath appointed euerie syllable of the scripture for our instruction in this life but admit I say there were such places yet would it not follow hereupon that because those texts cannot be vnderstood therefore the scripture is so obscure that it cannot be the rule of faith For there may be sufficient means of saluation plainly discouered in the scriptures though these places be not vnderstood yea it may be and it is verie likely that the verie same things which in these places are signified are otherwhere in scripture apparently set downe You will say this prooueth that the scripture is obscure in some places VVho euer denied it But this doth not prooue that it is hard to be vnderstood in those points that are necessary to saluation Remember I denied
that second property of your rule when I answered to your proposition A man may be saued though he vnderstand not the true sense of euery verse in the Bible so he do not acknowledge it to be the word of God and withall denie it to be true But if it be so hard to vnderstand the Scripture aright is it good dealing in you to vrge the expositions of men with such perē ptorinesse as if it were an hainous sinne not to giue credit to euery interpretation of the Fathers We acknowledge their learning and pietie but we remember they are men and therefore may be deceiued Where they bring reason for their expositions we consider of it with reuerence to them where they bring none we trie whether we can bring any proofe of their interpretation If we finde none we labour to expound the text so as true reason so farre as we can iudge shewes that we ought to doe Where our weakenesse affoords no proofe for our interpretation nor against theirs we are willing and readie to giue more credit to them then to our selues But it is no disgrace to them that processe of time by Gods blessing vpon mens endeauours should bring somewhat to light now which in former ages hath not bene vnderstood It cannot be hidden from any man saith your Bishop of Rochester that many things are now more cleerely beaten out and vnderstood as well in other things as in the Gospell then heretofore because the ancient writers had not the Ice broken before them neither did their time suffice to sound the deepth of Scripture in all places VVe may adde hereunto another reason obserued by Stella that though of our selues we were but Pigmees or dwarfes yet being carried vpon the shoulders of them as it were vpon Giants we may see farther then they could VVhich is the reason why an other of your writers doubts not to affirme that the latter doctrines or expositions are the quicker sighted But diuers men you say expound diuersly and thereupon you demaund how any man can be sure he expounds truly hauing nothing to assure him but the seeming of his owne sense and reason VVhen I read this obiection me thought I saw one of the old Academicks or Scepticks sweating to prooue that there is no truth in any thing to be knowen but that we must be content to rest vpon likelihood I pray you answer me in good earnest Are you perswaded of your selfe I speake to a Scholler that you vnderstand not the true meaning of any one place in Aristotles Physicks with the commentaries vpon him expounding diuersly Surely if your ignorance had bene so great I presume neither Rome Rhemes Doway nor any other Vniuersitie or Colledge would haue vouchsafed you the degree of a Batcheler in Arts. And yet Aristotle himselfe professeth of that booke that he set it out as if he had not set it out because no bodie for sooth could vnderstand it but he that had or should heare him teach by word of mouth as you speake of the preaching of the Church If then it be possible to vnderstand Aristotles meaning and that certainly for all the diuers interpretations of his expositors and his owne intended obscuritie giue vs leaue to thinke that the Lord God purposing to reueale his will by the scriptures hath written in such sort that man his creature to whom as Gregorie saith he writ them may without any iust cause of doubting vnderstand so much at the least as is necessarie for his saluation which was Gods end in writing But euerie interpreter thinks that himselfe hath attained to the right sense What of that Therefore is there no meanes to discerne which interpretation is true which false Doth not this doubt accompanie the writings of the Philosophers as well as the scriptures Neuer go about to perswade vs to such an iniurious and vnthankfull conceit towards God as to imagine that he hath vouchsafed vs the vse of reason and the treasure of his word to so little purpose If it be vnpossible to know whē we haue the true sense of the scripture it had bene farre better that no scripture had bene written but all left to the direction of your Pope frō time to time Such blasphemies as I haue shewed some of your side vtter but a true Christiā is so throughly perswaded of Gods wisdom that by his giuing the scripture he seeth al these your cauils shifts refuted Now in the last place you tell vs that there be many things required to the perfect vnderstanding of scripture which are found in very few If by perfect vnderstanding you meane an exact knowledge of all places that you say is true but not much to the purpose For there is no such knowledge necessary but that the scripture may be the rule of faith though euery text in it cannot be certainly vnderstood But consider a little that if there be means of attaining to a perfect vnderstāding of scripture thogh they be many yet by your confession they may be had else are they in vaine if neither any man nor all men can attaine vnto them some to one some to more as it pleaseth God to bestow his gifts seuerally If you meane that many things are required to a perfect vnderstanding of points necessarie to saluation see how much you differ from the iudgement of the ancient Fathers The truth is not hid saith Chrysostom but from thē that will not seeke it And in an other place The Scripture expoundeth it selfe suffereth no man to erre Let him that hath an heart saith Austin read those things that go before and those that follow and he shall finde the sense For as Ierome truly saith the Lord hath spoken by his Gospell not that a few should vnderstand him but that all should Austin gaue vs the reason before why he speakes plaine in some places and not in all To feed our hunger and to keepe our queasie stomacks from loathing our meate But you require I know not what infallible assurance that they which haue these gifts may be sure they neuer erre in any of their priuate expositions What assurance looke you for No reuelation I hope They may be sure not to erre if they deliuer no expositions but such as they can euidently prooue to be true For other places where the sense is hard let them vse all the diligence they can and if it prooue not verie plaine and certaine let thē leaue it y vncertain til it please God some other man may finde the true meaning of it and so make it knowen to men for the rule of faith in that point it concerneth as it is alwaies in it selfe Are youe afraid lest it should come to passe hereby that many matters of faith should be vnknowen The ignorance of these things cannot hinder a mans saluation and this inconuenience followeth the preaching of your Church as well as the reading of
the whole volume of the Bible which to say were no lesse thē blasphemy But I am afraid the scriptures that Paul there speaks of which were the books of the old Testamēt are rather vnprofitable thē profitable to that purpose For they often amplify magnify the word of God written in so plaine termes that eueuery man may vnderstand them as for the authority you fancy to your selfe they speake either nothing or little and that very obscurely thereof But we shall see in the rest of your Treatise what proofe you can finde of this authoritie in Moses and the Prophets and the writers of the olde Testament Now at the last you remember your selfe againe and returne to your old shift of Scripture alone Which you deuised of your owne head that you might haue somewhat to confute It is not all one say you to be profitable and to be of it selfe alone sufficient And you tel vs This is certaine Who euer denied it Or who but he that wanted matter to replie against would cast such doubts Especially who would haue wasted time and paper to prooue or declare a thing so certaine and cleare by a needlesse comparison The scripture without any doctrines of men call them what you will imagine what assistance of the spirit you list is sufficient to teach all men the true certaine way to saluation This is that we affirme not as you ridiculously slander vs that there needs no ministerie of man for the instructing of any one in the vnderstanding of any place of scripture or knowledge of any point of religion These are your owne fancies or mōsters rather with which like bugbeares you scare your poore seduced followers and bleare the eies of the ignorant that they may not enquire what we teach indeed but hate our doctrine before they any way vnderstand it But they that haue any care of their owne saluation will not suffer themselues to be led by you hoodwinkt to destruction if any man will needs be wilfully ignorant the Lord shall require his blood at his owne hands we haue done our duetie in teaching and proouing the truth A. D. CHAP. VIII That no naturall wit or learning can be the rule of faith A. W. If you had bestowed that paines and time in confirming your proposition which you waste needlesly in proouing that which no man denieth you might perhaps haue spoken somewhat more to the purpose but it is lost labour to go about the refutatiō of that which besides your selfe no body euer thought on That naturall wit or learning should be the rule of faith is a conceit amongst Christians neuer heard of yet this haue you propounded for to exercise your strength vpon A. D. §. 1. The second conclusion is that no one mans naturall wit and learning neither any company of men neuer so learned onely as they are learned men not infallibly assisted by the holy Spirit of God can either by interpreting Scripture or otherwise be this rule of faith A. W. Here you set out the former proposition more at large in respect of the Antecedent or first part of it Neither any one mans naturall wit nor many mens ioyned together whatsoeuer their learning be or what course soeuer they take as naturall men can be the rule of faith either for any doctrine they shal deliuer or for any interpretation they shall make of Scripture But what needeth all this adoe you do but fight with your owne shadow yet let vs se how you haue bestirred your selfe A. D. §. 2. This I prooue Because all this wit and learning be it neuer so exquisite or rare is humane naturall and fallible and therefore it cannot be a sufficient foundation whereupon to build a diuine supernaturall and infallible faith This reason I confirme Because whatsoeuer a man neuer so wittie and learned propoundeth to others to be beleeued vpon the onely credit of his word wit or humane studie and learning it can haue no more certaintie then is this his word wit and learning But these being all naturall and humane are subiect to errour and deceit For Omnis homo mendax there is no man but he may both deceiue and be deceiued and may if he haue no other helpe but of nature and industrie both be deceiued in thinking that to be Gods word which is not or that to be the true meaning and sense of Gods word which is not and may also deceiue others whilest being too confident of his wit and learning he presumeth to teach others these his erroneous opinions Therefore the beleefe which shall be built vpon such a mans word and teaching is or may be a false beleefe and alwaies is vncertaine and fallible and therefore can neuer be a true Diuine and Christian faith which alwaies is most certaine and infallible And this which I haue said of the wit and learning of one particular man may also be applied to prooue against the wit and learning of any companie of men hauing no assistance but their owne naturall gifts and industrie of studie or reading A. W. No humane naturall and fallible thing can be the rule of faith Naturall wit and learning though neuer so exquisite are humane naturall and fallible Therefore no humane wit nor learning can be the rule of faith I grant this reason and conclusion to be sound and true onely in the confirmation of it I finde some occasion to note one thing for the better vnderstanding of the matter we haue in hand If any man would speake for naturall wit and learning in this question he would not say as the matter is here propounded that any mans wit or learning were the rule of faith but that the wit and learning of man might finde out somewhat at least in the Scripture whereupon faith might safely be grounded For example as I said once before though it be not written any where in the Scripture that there are three persons distinct each from other and all these three but one God yet may a man by naturall wit and learning gather this out of the Scripture and confirme it thence so plainely and certainly that any Christian may holde those points as Articles of faith Not that they are to be taken for such vpon the onely credit of his word which is a second thing wherein you mistake the matter but because though euerie man be a lier yet a man may see and shew a truth which cannot nor may be suspected of falshood or errour And a beleefe builded vpon Doctrine so taught shall be free from possibilitie of erring and as you speake infallible This I thought good to obserue by occasion of your confirmation where you suppose that a man deliuereth matters to be beleeued vpon the bare credit of his word by reason of his wit and learning In this sense it is out of all question that no naturall wit or learning of any many or all the men in the world can be the rule of faith but
may also thus vnderstand it that Christ appeared to be the word and the truth and wisedome frō the beginning of the creatiō of the world to the last writing of the Apostles that is from Genesis to the Apostles books after which there are none of like authoritie or beleef Or thus that the Law and the Prophets continued till Iohn in whom the brightnesse of truth was The East was the Law the West Iohn the end of the Law Now onely the Church neither takes away the word and sense of this brightnesse nor addes any thing else as propheticall The place you bring lieth thus Euery doctrine professing it selfe to be truth when it is not truth either among the Gentiles or among the Barbarians is in some sort Antichrist going about to seduce as truth and to seuer vs from him that said I am the truth Therefore we must not giue eare to them which say Behold here is Christ but do not shew him in the Church which is full of brightnesse from the East to the West which is full of the true light which is the pillar and ground of truth in which whole Church the whole comming of the Sonne of man is Now the comming of the Sonne of man is before expounded by him to be the word of truth Doubtlesse if you had not taken this proofe vpon Bellarmines or some other mans credit you would neuer haue brought it to proue the visibilitie of the Church to all men at all times What saith Cyprian in the place alledged but that the Church is dispersed ouer the whole world Doth this proue that it is at all times visible to all men Or hath Cyprian any such purpose in that place Is not his whole drift to shew that there is but one Church because the truth they professe is but one The title of his booke is Of the vnitie of the Church The place you bring concludes that howsoeuer the beames are scattered or spread here and there yet the light is but one The Church that is true beleeuers were in this land in the dayes of persecutiō and is now in Spaine Italy and perhaps in Rome it selfe This proues not a perpetuall visibilitie What need we any other answer to this testimonie of Chrysostome then that which your owne exposition affoords vs Chrysostoms meaning is that the Church cannot be quite without light say you What thē Must it needs be visible then to al men The Moone is neuer wholy darkened no not in the greatest eclipse nor in the change but is alwayes in the one halfe light and yet he were mad that would conclude hereupon that therefore it may be seene at all times of all men Indeed Chrysostome speaketh of the continuance of the Church not of the visiblenesse thereof That may appeare by his saying that the Church hath her roote in heauen rather then in the earth This argues stabilitie not visibilitie And what Church hath rooting in heauen but onely the Church of the elect The Church saith Chrysostome in the same place is more honorable then heauen because heauen is made for it not it for heauen Is heauen made for any Church but that of the elect Besides it was not the visibility but the being of the Church against which those tyrants whom Chrysostome there mentioneth so mightily laboured which yet continued in despight of them all These and such like places of Austin shew the flourishing estate of the Churches in those times and conuince the Donatists against whom Augustine writ of wofull blindnesse who would see no church but their owne heretical assembly in a part of Africa But they neither were intended not can with any reason be applied to proue that the church is alwayes visible to all men The former of the two places as I shewed before is interpreted by the Fathers of the Apostles That the Apostles saith Ierome should not hide themselues for feare but freely shew themselues he teacheth them to preach boldly when he saith A citie set vpon an hill cannot be hid But let vs take it to be meant of the Church It must needs be a monstrous hill that can shew a citie set vpon it to the whole world A citie standing on a hill is the easier and the farther to be seene but there is no hill high enough to be seene ouer the whole world I would farther know whether euery particular Church be not a citie vpon an hill or no. And yet is no such Church to be seene of all men Concerning the latter place Austin worthily cals them blind that could not or rather as he truly saith would not see that great mountaine vpon which the Church then stood but would shut their eyes against the light that shined vpon them Yet who is so ignorant that he knowes not or so shamelesse that he will not cōfesse that there were many aliue at that very time which had no knowledge that there was any Church in the world But there neither were nor could be any such among the Donatists or other like heretickes who forsooke the Church to follow their owne fantasies The candle is the Minister or the word shining by his ministery the candlesticke is the particular Church where that ministery is if any liuing in or neare the place where such a candle burneth bright will not see the light of it he may well be called wilfully blind So may not they which are so far that the beames of the light cannot shine vnto them Now the summe of that which hath bene answered concerning the perpetuall continuance and visiblenesse of the church is this that the church to which that continuance is promised is the number of the elect and not any one outward companie of men succeeding one another in a famous and visible profession of Christian Religion Yea farther though we do not vndertake to affirme that there hath not bin at all times some one companie or other of true Christians knowne to them among whom they liued to be professors of the Gospell yet we doubt not to say that there can be no sufficient proofe brought out of the Scriptures that there must of necessitie be alwayes such a company as if our Sauior Christs promises to his church were not performed vnlesse the world might at all times perceiue where such a companie were to be found A. D. CHAP. XIII How we should discerne and know which is the true visible Church of Christ A. W. It may perhaps seeme needlesse that I should proceed any further in the confutation of this treatise because still the maine point that there is such a Church is presupposed and not proued But howsoeuer it be true that there is indeed no one visible church of Christ which may challenge or beare the name of the whole church yet it will be worth the doing to finde out the markes or signes by which we may discerne which congregation is a true church of Christ and which is not
not perceiue those things which are of the Spirit of God For sith none by the onely power of naturall wit which in vnderstanding vseth the helpe of outward senses can obtaine the supernaturall knowledge of diuine mysteries which we beleeue by our faith neither doth the Spirit of God who as the principall cause infuseth this gift of faith into our soules ordinarily instruct any man in the knowledge of true faith immediatly by himselfe alone or by an Angell sent from heauen we must needs if we will haue true faith seeke first for that which it pleaseth Almightie God to vse as the ordinarie instrument and as a necessary meanes by which men may learne true faith the which is no other but the preaching and teaching of the true church according to that saying of S. Paul Quomodo credent ei quem non audierint quomodo audient sine praedicante quomodo praedicabunt nisi mittantur How shall they beleeue him whom they haue not heard how shall they heare without a Preacher how shall they preach vnlesse they be sent Therefore the true Church which only hath preachers truly sent of God must first be found out that by it we may heare and know which is the true faith Therefore of the two the true Church is rather a mark whereby we may know the true preaching and consequently the true doctrine of faith then contrarie that as heretickes say the doctrine should be a marke whereby all men must know which is the true Church A. W. Belike as you had good cause you suspected your abilitie to proue simply that the true preaching of the word in all matters fundamentall and the right administration of the sacraments are not a good marke of a true Church And therefore you rather chose to proue by way of comparison that the true church is rather a marke to know true doctrine then true doctrine a marke to know the true Church by For so runs your conclusion directly If the end of seeking the true Church say you be principally that we may by it as a necessarie and infallible meanes learne true doctrine in all points to which otherwise we cannot attaine then the true Church is rather a marke to know true doctrine then true doctrine a marke to know the true Church by But the end of seeking the true Church is principally that we may by it as a necessarie and infallible meanes learne true doctrine in all points which otherwise wee cannot attaine to Therefore the true Church is rather a marke to know true doctrine then true doctrine a marke to know the Church by Though the conclusion as I said be not directly to the question which is not comparatiue but simple whether true doctrine be a good mark to discerne a true Church by or no yet I will take it as it is and answer to the parts of it Your maior in the antecedent may haue a double meaning First that we cannot in any point learne true doctrine but by the Church and then I denie the consequence For true doctrine in the fundamentall points of Religion may be a good marke of the true Church though we seeke the true Church because there are many points which we cannot learne without it But howsoeuer you vnderstand the maior the minor is euidently false First because the principall end of seeking the true Church is that we may truly worship God in the assembly of his children to his greater glorie and our farther assurance of his loue to vs as we may see euery where in the booke of the Psalmes Secondly because we are not to learne of the true Church as a necessarie and infallible meanes but of the ministers thereof who are appointed by God to giue vs knowledge of the meanes of saluation by expounding the word of God to vs not to binde vs to beleefe by their authoritie Your minor you offer to proue in this maner If no man without faith can obtaine the supernaturall knowledge of diuine mysteries and faith be not to be had but by the teaching of the true Church then the end of seeking the true Church is principally that we may learne by it as a necessarie and infallible meanes true doctrine in all points to which otherwise we cannot attaine But no man without faith can obtaine the supernaturall knowledge of diuine mysteries nor faith be had but by the teaching of the true Church Therefore the end of seeking the true Church is principally that we may by it as a necessary and infallible meanes learne the true faith in all points to which otherwise we cannot attaine The consequence of your maior is naught It doth not follow that we seeke the true Church to learne of it as a necessary and infallible meanes because we cannot know the mysteries of Religion without faith which commeth by the teaching of the true Church For there may well be teaching and learning without any such authoritie in the Church that teacheth Your minor is very doubtfull as I will shew in answering seuerally to the parts of it First then whereas you say that no man without faith can obtaine the supernaturall knowledge of diuine mysteries if you meane that a man cannot acknowledge the truth of such mysteries without faith your minor in that part is true but if your meaning be that a man cannot vnderstand what the meanes of saluation appointed by God are without faith I take your minor to be false For though those meanes be indeed such as no discourse of man euer could deuise or thinke on being vtterly supernaturall yet it is possible for a meere naturall man to learne what they are out of the Scriptures and that without faith because the Scriptures may be vnderstood by such helpes of the tongues and arts as humane learning doth affoord vs though to the sauing knowledge thereof the especiall grace of God be absolutely necessarie The other point that faith cannot be found but by the teaching of the true Church may also haue a double sense The first that faith cannot be wrought in any mans heart but by the preaching of some man authorized to that purpose by the true Church and this as I shewed before is not alwayes true for faith may be and hath bene begotten in some by the reading of the Scriptures where the ministery of the word was not to be had and by the teaching of ordinarie Christians not set apart to preach the Gospell The other meaning is this that faith cannot be attained to but by our hearkning to the voyce of such a Preacher as we alreadie know to be sent by the true Church And this indeed specially fits your purpose but hath no likelihood of truth in it For they that came to faith by the Apostles preaching did not beleeue them as men autorized for their instruction by the true church but as being conuinced in their consciences by the euidence of the truth they deliuered without
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
Aposiles without change is Catholicke The Romane Church is vniuersall in time place and doctrine of the Apostles without change Therefore the Romane Church is Catholicke If to make a Church Catholicke it be required that she continue in the doctrine of the Apostles how did you before denie that the doctrine of the Apostles is a necessary and certaine marke of the true Church But if you leaue this out and affirme that Church to be Catholicke which is vniuersall in doctrine and thinke it not needfull that the doctrine professed be the Apostles I denie your maior The reasons of my deniall I deliuered in the former Chapter when I shewed that truth of doctrine was the most proper and true marke of the Church But whatsoeuer your maior be your minor is euidently false in euery part of it The very foundations of the doctrine of the Apostles are ouerthrowne by your Church in the heresies you hold concerning predestination iustification free will the insufficiencie of the Scriptures and the headship of Antichrist your Pope Neither do you onely faile in the doctrine of the Apostles but in your vniuersalitie of time For how can that doctrine be said to haue bin always which was not taught by our Sauiour and his Apostles As for vniuersalitie in regard of the ample vniformitie of your doctrine if you speake of your Churches determination many points of great moment are not as yet defined by it for example take those maine questions whether the Pope be aboue the Councell or no whether he haue without a Councell priuiledge of not erring or no whether there be any merit of congruitie or no and such like Yea your Church denieth the chiefe point of all which in the Apostles time was held by all true Christians that iustification is by faith without the workes of the law I forbeare to shew the reasons of that I affirme because any man may setch them out of my former answer in this and the last Chapter I looked for proofe of your minor but you were too wise to vndertake a matter so vnpossible and therefore in stead of that you challenge vs to shew and proue the contrarie forgetting that it is the repliers part to proue and not the answerers But I pray you tell me in earnest did you neuer heare of any particulars whereby we except against your doctrine as none of the Apostles What a vaine flourish is this then to demaund new proofes of vs and neuer once assay to answer those we haue alreadie brought But I haue made answer to your challenge in my refutation of your proofe that your Church is one Yea our mens bookes are full of these points and proofes both out of Scriptures and Fathers As for your brag of being able to shew diuers points that we hold or denie otherwise then the true Church did in the time of the Apostles it is well knowne that in most controuersies betwixt vs you are faine to flie from the Scriptures of God to the writings of men and deuise interpretations to serue your turne In some points we denie not but that we dissent from the opinion of some writers of former ages but that we go against the iudgement of the whole Church before it became Antichristian neither we graunt nor you can proue And euen for those times of error we want not the testimonie of learned men to auouch our doctrine against your heresies But you call vpon vs to set downe the point of doctrine the author the time the place what companie did oppose themselues against it and who they were that did continue in the profession of the former faith What needs all this ado Wil it not serue the turne if we make it manifest that your doctrine is contrary to that the Apostles taught vnlesse we can shew you when euery one of your errors was first hatched What if the Scribes and Pharises had demaunded the like questions of our Sauiour Christ touching their errors reproued by him There is no doubt but that as he was God he could haue declared euery one of these particulars but do you thinke he would haue fed their foolish humor in this case and not haue contented himselfe with shewing that it was not so from the beginning Some of our Ministers haue truly and wittily refuted this conceit of yours by shewing how absurd it is for a man that is sicke of the plague a surfet or any such disease to denie that he is so diseased because the Physition cannot tell him at what time and in what place vpon what occasion in what companie he first tooke the infection or distempered his bodie by ill diet Is it a good plea against plaine and sound euidence whereby I proue that such a Lordship ought to be mine that I cannot shew when and how I lost the possession of euery seuerall close and meadow farme and cottage But to take away all iust excuse from you our writers haue shewed the first beginnings of many of your errors and might haue done of more if al were extant that hath bin written and your inquisitors and censurers had not as you call it purged indeed corrupted and maimed the writings of former ages wheresoeuer they made against you if you could light on them before they were too well knowne in the world This challenge hath as much reason as the former We must proue that there haue not bene some in euery countrey where the Gospell hath bene professed that haue held your Romane faith Or rather must not you proue your Catholicknesse by such induction But we confesse it to be likely that the diuell hath from time to time sowed some of your tares amongst the Lords wheate But that your whole faith as now you hold it was euer maintained any where till the last Councell of Trent we challenge you to proue if you can Surely the Greeke Church euen till this day dissenteth from you in many and some no small matters as your Popes supremacie that I may not name those Christians who are in precious Iohns countrey in Armenia and other parts of the world to whom your doctrine is as little knowne in a manner as ours is to those Indians you spake of Amongst whom for ought you can proue or know to the contrary there may be and in all liklihood are some to whom the Lord hath giuen grace to rest wholly vpon Iesus Christ for pardon of their sinnes without any mingling of their owne workes with Christs to procure them the inheritance of heauen All such we challenge to be of our Church though they agree with you in many of your errors through their ignorāce of the Scriptures As for our countrey of England which like that harlot you call deare as oft as you conceiue hope of bringing it into subiection to the Pope but otherwise wish it wholly destroyed as shee did the child it neither was conuerted by your proud Monke Austine but peruerted rather