them as if Christ should teach that we cold deserue life euerlasting by keeping the law And a litle after he concludeth saying This answere of Christ is according to the old law to wit that no man can be accounted iust before God but he who shall satify the law which is impossible And Calu. in 16. Luc. v. 28. Lâ—b 3. Instit c. 17. sect 7. vpon the later place he writeth thus It is impossible sayth he to fulfill what the law commaundeth yea it is a principall axiome with Caluin a coÌ„moÌ„ aÌ„swere to all such places A legal promise sayth he aÌ„nexed to a coÌ„dition impossible proueth nothing thus with sâ—ch impossibilities they dally with vs with the holy Scripture it selfe so far forth as they Calu. Beza in c. 2. ad Rom. dare affirme that the Apostle in one Chapter auoâ—cheth vnto vs seauen times thinges imâ—ossible For wheras the Apostle in the 2. cap. of the Ep. to the Rom. and 6. v. affirmeth Bez. in c. 2. ad Râ— v. 6. annot 6. edit an 1550. 1564. 1565. first that God will render to euery one according to his workes they interprete the place thus that God will indeed giue to meÌ„ according to their good works if there were any such but that no man can do any good worke before God Is there any man saith Beza that shal be able to bring these workes which the Apostle saith shal be rewarded with eternall life And wheras in the seaueÌ„th v. the Apostle saith that God doth render life euerlasting to such as seeke the same by the patience of good works their answere is that he insinuateth a thing impossible and that no man can do any good worke before God no not the iuslest man which is not worthy of eternall damnatioÌ„ Calu. l. 3. Instit c. 19. sect 4. VVhosoeuer saith Caluin haue made the greatest progresse before all others in the way of the Lord if they cast their eyes vpon the Lord God what worke soeuer they attempt or go about they see it to be accursed And surely I for my part could easily belieue that such is the progresse of our aduersarirs in the way of our Lord. See the rest of the Aposiles places in the latin edition 2. The tenth last shift is the wresting of diuers wordes to a wrong sense and to inuâ—nt sundrie different vnderstandings of the wordes to build vpon it many interpretations neuer heard of before and for a finall Conclusion to say the place is obscure and therefore proueth nothing For Luc. 22. v. 19. example hereof those most euident words of Christ This is my body with is giuen for you may suffice for some of theÌ„ wrest the pronowne hoc others the word est others the word corpus others the pronowne meum others the relatiue quod others the preposition pro others the pronowne vobis and others the Verbe datur and ech word they wrest diuers waies so as one more then Anno 1577. thirty yeares ago hath gathered out of their writings two hundred expositions of these few wordes of Christ of which Clâ—uâ—ius de Xainctes numbreth particulerly 84. And that they are both many and different yea repugnant wherwith they labour to make obscure these wordes of our Sauiour no man can doubt See another example in the latin edition And it is worthy of noting that in all these shifts they serue themselues of other places of Scripture to proue what they say whereby it may appeare how easy a thing it is to corrupt the Scripture by other places of Scripture but that the prouideÌ„t and dayly care of the holy Catholike 1. ad Tim. v. 15. Matt. 28. Church opposeth it self against such corruptions worthily therefore called the Pillar and Firmament of truth against which the gates of hell shall neuer preuaile FINIS OF TRADITIONS The second Part of the first Controuersy CHAP. I. Of the true state of the Question HAVING already in the precedent Treatise spoken of the written Word of God and of all other things thereunto belonging now it remaineth we speake a litle of the vnwritteÌ„ word coÌ„moÌ„ly called TraditioÌ„s But to the end that the state of this controuersy may more easily be vnderstood I will heere set downe foure things diligently to be considered in this matter we treate of The first is that by the vnwritten Word we only vnderstand that which is not written in the old oâ— new Testament for of the vnwritten word of God in this sense is our whole Controuersy in this place Wherefore that obiection of our Aduersaries is both friuolous and nothing worth to wit that the word of God which we cal the vnwritten word may be found extant eyther among the holy Fathers or in the books of the Councells or other Canons of the Church But this nothing belongeth vnto this purpose for it is sufficient for vs that this word of God is not written in any book eyther of the old or new Testament 2. The second is that a thing may be coÌ„teined in the holy Scripture 2. wayes The one way is implicite that is to say in some generall principle from whence this other may be certaynly deduced and in this sense we acknowledge that the whole word of God is conteined in holy Writ and not only in Scripture but also in the Apostles S. Aug. in 140. quaest vpon Exodus Tom. 4. Matt. 22. v. 40. Câ—eed yea euen in that one article I belieue the Catholike Church so that it be diligently examined and well vnderstood as S. Augustine very well noteth For so sayth Christ the whole Law and Prophets doe depend vpon two precepts of charity as in the same place S. Augustine noteth For seing that the holy Scripture teacheth that we are bound to beleeue the Church in all things that it can neither deceiue vsnor be deceiued as we will euidently proue in the next Controuersy in the 7. Chapter it consequently also teacheth the whole and entire word of God seing that all that which is not expressâ—d in the holy Scripture is conteyned expressy in the doctrine of the Church the which the Scripture commendeth vnto vs as infallible as S. augustine very well sayth and declareth S. Aug. Tom. 7. contra Crescon Gram. c. â—3 de vnit Eâ—cles c. 22. in fine-Matt 17 v. 5. Matt. 81. v. 17. Luc. 10. 16. in many places For euen as God the Father comprehended in these few words This is my wellbeloued Sonne heare him the whole word of God so Christ proposed vnto vs the whole word of God when he commaunded vs to heare the Church 3. And in this sense do the holy Fathers often tymes say that all the points of fayth are conteined in the holy Scriptures to wit in that generall principle in the which they admonish vs to bâ—lieue the Church but many of the holy Fathers sayings are falsifyed corrupted by Martin KeÌ„ nitius and some Caluinists as may be seene in
or marrow not in the leauâ—s of the words but in the sappeâ—pâ—th or roote os reason And a little after otherwise Matt. 4. v. 6. euen the Diuell himselfe speaketh Scriptures and all heresies according to Ezechiel make vnto themselues pillowes which they may lay vnder the elbow oâ— euery age Ezec. 13. v. 18. 2. By that which hath byn sayd answere may be made to our Aduersaries when they obiect against vs that we affirme the Scripture to be imperfect obscure like a nose of wax which a man may writh which way he will and lastly the origen and spring in a manner of all heresies for we affirme this of the naked and dead letter alone destitute of the true sense or rather of the letter to which the Heretikes adde their owne peruerse sense and meaning neyther haue our Aduersaries any cause to wonder at this seeing S. Paul himselfe saith of the bare letter alone that it killeth and bringeth eternall death 1. Cor. â— v. 6. 7. 9. and damnation But neuer any Catholike did euer attribute any such thing to the liuing letter which hath conioyned with it the true and natiue sense and which alone is truly and properly the word of God CHAP. IIII. How we are to seeke out the true sense and meaning of the holy Scripture THERE is great contentioÌ„ beweene vs and our Aduersaries about the meanes how to finde out the true and naturall interpretation of the letter a thing so necessary to eternall saluation They teach diuers thinges concerning this matter but deliuer nothing that is certayne One assigneth more rules to this purpose another fewer but when they haue sayd all they confesse at last that there was neuer any which hath not at sometyme erred in seeking out the true interpretation of holy Scripture For they gyue not their assent either to the ancient Fathers or to their owne Maisters in all thinges they teach or write nay they cannot assigne any one whom they acknowledge not to haue erred sometyme nor dare affirme to be free from error seeing as they say Euery man is a lyar and so at last all Rom. 3. v. 4. thinges are left by them doubtfull and vncertayne 2. But the Catholikes do proceed after another manner who teach that the certayne vndoubted sense of the Letter is not to be taken from the iudgment of any particuler man but from the vniforme consâ—nt of the ancient Fathers and especially from the iudgment and interpretation of the Catholike Church to whome it appertayneth to iudge of the sense and meaning of the holy Scriptures as the holy and Oecumenicall Councell of TreÌ„t teacheth very well for there is no doubt Concil Trident. sess 4. but that it is more safe to follow such an interpreter as cannot erre then such a one as erreth somtymes or at leastwise may erre but the Church cannot erre in her iudgment seeing that Christ and the â—oly Ghost remayne with her to teach Matt. 28. c vlt. Ioan. 14 v. 16. â—oan 16. v. 13. â—er all truth wherof more herafter when we shall come to treat of the Church 3. It shall suffice to obserue and â—ote here that according to the doctrine of our Aduersaries nothing either solide or certayne is contayned in the holy Scriâ—ture for wheras all dependeth of the â—rue sense of the Letter and with them â—here is no certayne or sure meanes by which to finde out this sense it followeth â—hat they call all into doubt which is in â—he Scripture wherby who seeth not how much they iniure them But contrariâ—yse according to the Catholike doctrine all thinges are euident and cerâ—ayne which are contayned in the holy Scriptures appertayning eyther to faith or good manners the Catholikes hauing euer a certayne and faithful Interpreter to wit the Catholike Church And surely whosoeuer reiecteth the sense which the Church giueth and in place therof substituteth another altogeather repugnant to it doth all one with him who reiecting the holy Scripture should in place therof bring in a new Scripture of his owne forging the sense of the Scripture being no lesse a part of the word of God then the letter which in these few wordes Tertullian confirmeth out of the tradition of the auncient Church The sense adulterated or falsified is no lesse repugnant Tertul. de prâ—sc c. 17. to the truth then the letter or stile corrupted 4. And to conclude it may be inferred that saluation is to be found in the Roman Church only and none at all out Marc. vlt. vers 16. â—om 3. v. 1â— Heb. â—â— v. 9. of it which I proue thus Both the Scripture testifyeth all meÌ„ confesse that diuine fayth is necessary to saluation but such as forsake the RomaÌ„ Church cannot haue diuine faith which wholy relieth vpon the word of God only but meerly humane seing their fayth is founded not in the word of God interpreted by the Church which cannot errâ— but in the word and interpretation of Luther Caluin or some other priuate man who as they themselues graunt may erre and be deceiued such an humane fayth then so doubtfull and vncertayne and only warranted by mans authority cannot iustify or bring a man to eternall saluation CHAP. V. How we may know which is the true letter of the holy Scripture ALL such as forsake the Roman Church and make little account of her authority are not only doubtfull vncertayne which is the true sense of the Scripture but they can haue no assurance at all eyther of the whole or of any part of the letter therof For whilst they goe about to call in question and make doubtfull certayne bookes only of the old Testament before they are aware they take away all authority from all other bookes both of the old and new Testament For whereas there is but one certaine and vndoubted Canon of these bookes to wit that which is receaued and approued by the iudgment of the Catholike Church which cannot erre our Aduersaries reiecting this Canon make all the books doubtfull conteined therin for no certayne testimony can be had of these bookes but eyther by this Canon only or by the auncieÌ„t tradition of the Church but they neyther admit this Canon nor wil stand to this vnwritten TraditioÌ„ or acknowledge it for the true word of God 2. Now as for the Canons lately set out by themselues no man can safely belieue them seeing they neyther agree one with another nor with the auncient Canons of the Church nor are any where found in the writteÌ„ word of God which as they teach is only to be belieued neyther can they bring any thing eyther concerning the Canon of the Hebrewes or any other auncient Canon which they haue not taken from the writings of the auncient Fathers whose authority without the expresse written word of God they will haue to be in no wise sufficient to engender fayth so as euen by the iudgment of our Aduersaries none of all these
can establish Fayth concerning this matter 3. Iohn Caluin indeed sayth that it Lib. 1. Inst c. 7. sect 2. in fine is as easy for a faithfull man to discerne Canonicall Scripture from that which is not Canonicall as to one that seeth it is easy to discerne light from darknes and white from black But in so saying See Beâ—l lib. 1. de ver Deic 17. 18 19. he contradicteth both reason and experience for it is euident that in old tyme there was no small controuersy amongst the faythfull yea and amongst learned and godly men concerning many bookes of the old and new Testament yea and also euen now amoÌ„gst such as our Aduersaries esteeme faithfull men which Caluin Calu. pros in Ep. lac Epist ad Heb. ante â— Petri. himself in many places confesseth 4. Moreouer Caluins owne followers well perceauing this fly vnto their owne peculiar spirit by which they say they are chiefly perswaded and moued and not by the only consent of the Church But these speake nothing to the purpose for Rupell Confess art 4. in faith two thinges concurre one is the cause or origen of fayth to wit God himselfe and the holy Ghost whereof there is no controuersy betweene vs and them for we all acknowledge the holy Ghost to be the principall cause of the assent we giue by fayth that is to say that it is the holy Ghost who chiefly perswadeth vs to belieue The other is the obiect of fayth or that which is to be belieued whereof we now dispute for the holy Ghost doth not induce vs to belieue the false vncertaine deuises of men but the puâ—e and sincere word of God only we aske therfore of our Aduersaries by what expresse word of God he reuealeth vnto them that there are so many Canonicall bookes and neyther fewer nor more for we read not this any where in the Scripture and they admit only the written Word of God how can the holy Ghost Calu l. 1. Instit c. 9. sect 1. then perswade theÌ„ to belieue that which is not the word of God For we are not now to expect new reuelations from God as do the Anabaptists and Libertines whom for this cause our Aduersaries condemne It is necessary therefore that if they will haue vs belieue that they are perswaded by the holy Ghost to belieue such books only to be authenticall as they do say are such that they first shew this to be a truth expressely contayned in holy Scripture which they will neuer be able to do Wherfore there is no certainty with them eyther of the sense of the holy InnoceÌ„t 1. ep 3. c. vlt. CoÌ„ il 3. Carthag caÌ„ 47. S. Aug. Epist 335. Câ—cil Trident. sess 4. Scripture or of the Letter nor euer wil be vntill they returne vnto the Church agayne But we Catholikes are certaine of both for we haue a most faythfull Canon receaued in the Church more theÌ„ a thousand and two hundred yeares agoe confirmed by a generall and Oecumenicall Councell 5. And this to haue beene the faith and doctrine of the auncient Church for the discerning of true and authenticall Lib. 4. Inst c. 1â— sect vlt. Scriptures that short but pithy sentence of S. Augustine whome Caluin acknowledgeth to haue byn the best and most faithfull witnes of antiquiy sufficiently testifyeth saying I for my part would not belieue the Ghospell vnlesse I were moued by the authority Aug. coÌ„ Epist Manich. c. 5. of the Church of which place I will say more herafter in the Controuersy of the Church And else where he saith VVe receaue the old and new TestameÌ„t in that nuÌ„ber of bookes which the authority of the holy Catholike Aug. serm 10 de temp Church deliuereth So S. Augustine 6. I know our Aduersaries obiect many thinges against many bookes contayned in our Ecclesiasticall Canon but their chiefe arguments do not only derogate authority from those bookes but also from many others which they receaue as Canonicall For they obiect that some Fathers did sometymes doubt of those bookes which they will not admit but they are not ignorant that some Fathers of old haue doubted of the Epistles of S. Iames and S. Iude of the second Epistle of S. Peter of the 2. and 3. of S. Iohn of the Epistle to the Hebrewes and of the Apocalyps of which bookes they dare Rupell Confess art 3. not now doubt especially Caluins followers as is manyfest by their confession of faith 7. They say further that in those bookes which they reiect there are many thinges obscure difficult and full of contradiction but what booke of Scripture in a manner is there in the which there do not occurre sometymes thinges 2. Pet. 3. v. 16. obscure and hard to be vnderstod did not S. Peter acknowledge as much But as for true contradictions there are none at al how soeuer there may be some things which at the first sight may seeme to imply contradiction yet indeed all thinges agree very well togeather such a contradiction is oftentymes found in those bookes which euen our Aduersaries receaue Aug. dâ— Doâ—t Christia l. 2. c. 41. de ser Dom. in mont l. 1. c. 3. yea euen in the Ghospells themselues which for all that are not to be reiected but humbly soberly and piously to be interpreted as S. Augustine many tymes admonisheth 8. To conclude all the arguments that our Aduersaries make against these bookes are fully answered by Catholike writers which haue set out Commentaries Bell. Greâ—s Contro 1 l. 1. c. 7. sequ 〈◊〉 in sâ—â— Coronol vpon those bookes to wit Cornelius I ansenius vpon Ecclesiasticus Ioannes Laurinus vpon the booke of VVisedome Ioannes Maldonatus and Chrisâ—ophâ—r à Castâ—o vpon Baruch and Nicolas Serarius vpon the rest of the bookes of the old Testament which our Aduersaries call Apocripall to omit the most Reuerend and famous Cardinall Bellarmine and his Champion Iacobus Gretserus as also Iames Gordon Lesmoreus For it is sufficient only to haue cited them seeing that I write only an abridgment of Controuersies not any long commentaries vpon the Scripture And therfore conteÌ„t my selâ—e to haue shewed in this place that our Aduersaries must either receaue the Canon of Scriptures approued be the Councell of Trent or be vtterly destitute of any certayne and assured Canon CHAP. VI. Of the Hebrew Text. OVR Aduersaries when they are vrged with Catholike argumeÌ„ts taken from the Scriptures are wont to fly to the Hebrew Text of the old Testament and to the Greeke text of the new perswading themselues by this meanes to attayne to the true and propter sense of the letter wherfore somthing is to be sayd in this place of the Hebrew Greeke text both which appertayne to the Letter of the holy Scripture 2. We grant indeed that when the Latin translation is either ambiguous or lesse playne the Hebrew text is well and profitably looked into as also that
Iudocus Ruesten in his first tome defending the Councell of Trent against Kemnitius 4. Secondly a thing may be conteined in expresse words in the holy Scriptures as that Christ is borne suffered and risen againe c. And in this sense we deny that the whole word of God is conteined in the Scripâ—uâ—e That obiection of our Aduersaries by this may easily be answered when they say that we affirme that Traditions are the vâ—written word of God yet we goe about to proue theÌ„ by Scriptures For we do not proue euery particuler Tradition by expresse words of Scripture but we only deduce and gather them out of it and conuince in generall that there are Traditions 5. The third thing which is to be considered is that our Aduersaries being conuinced by truth doe acknowledge that many things were deliuered vnto vs by the Caluin coÌ„t 4. sess Con. Trident. in â—ntid Beza denotis Eccles tom 3. Tract Theoâ— p. 137. edit Anni 1582. Apostles besids those which are written But say they those were only externall rites and ceremonies seruing only for the ornament or discipline of the Church but nothing concerning doctrine of fayth was deliuered by the Apostles which they haue not set downe in writing So Caluin and some others which follow his opinion Wherfore it remayneth for vs to proue that not â—â—ly external ceremonies but also those which belong vnto the doctrine of fayth were deliuered vnto vs by the Apostles that they were neuer expressely â—et downe in writing 6. The fourth thing is that seing our Aduersaries cannot deny that which was obiected vnto them by Catholikes to wit that the Scripture in many places maketh expresse mentioÌ„ of the word of God preached deliuered and diuulged ouer the whole world as we haue already declared euen out of the holy Scriptures they are wont to answere that long since in the Apostles tyme this Word of God was deliuered preached and not written but the Apostles after wards set downe in writing all the preached word of God or at the least as much therof as was necessary vnto saluation The which solutioÌ„ albeit it be very weak and friuolous seing that it relieth vpoÌ„ no sure ground yet notwithstanding tâ—at it may more fully be confuted we will declare hereafter that many of the chiefest points of faith were not expressely set downe in writing by the Apostles And thus much of the state of this Question CHAP. II. Out of the first and chiefest principles of faith it is clearly conuinced that there are Traditions THE first argument wherby we proue Traditions is taken out of some of the chiefest principles of faith For there are three chiefe and most necessary points of faith yea the câ—ieâ—e grounds of our whole faith which are not to be found expressely in Scripture 2. The first that there must needes be some Catalogue or Canon of the sacred Bookes aswell of the old as of the new Testament the which all Christians with an assured faith should imbrace as a most certaine and an vndoubted truth and this is a very necâ—ssary point of faith yea of it dependeth the authority of all the bookes of holy Scripture because by this Canon the sacred and true books of Scripture are discerned and made knowne from all those which be Apocriphall especially because aswell in times past as in these our daies there hath bin so many and so great Controuersyes about the Canonicall and Apocriphall bookes of Scripture and such a Canon was altogeather necessary aswell in the auncient Church before Christ as in our present Church after Christes tyme the which also our Aduersaries themselues haue learned by experience For they haue also placed their new Canon of the books of holy Scripture in their Consession made at Confess Ruâ—ellana Act. 3. â—ochell and in the later end of some of their Bibles and yet neyther in the time of the old Testament nor in the tyme of the new Law was this CanoÌ„ euer written downe in the Bibles themselues 2. I know our Aduersaries that they may escape this argument do runne to the inward instinct of the holy Ghost wherby say they we know what book is Canonicall and what is not But this answere is refuted reiected before where we haue shewed that the holy Ghost doth not moue vs to belieue any thing with the Catholike faith which is not the word of God If Suprac 5. therfore the holy Ghost moue vs to belieue that some bookes are Canonicall and some are not it is necessary that this be the word of God We aske therefore of them whether this is the written word of God or the vnwritteÌ„ if it be the written word in what Booke or Chapter is it to befouÌ„d if it be no where to be found our Aduersaries must needs coÌ„â—esse that by the instinct of the holy Ghost they also belieue the vnwritten word of God or Traditions 3. The second principle of faith is that we must necessarily with an assured and firme faith belieue that all those Bookes eyther of the old or of the new Testament which we now retaine are safely deliuered vnto vs entyre aâ—d vncorrupted through so many handes so many ages so many vexations and persecutions of the Christians for otherwyse the whole credit and authority of those bookes will decay and perish But this is no where extant or written for neyther the Prophets or Apostles haue euâ—r written that their bookes should neuer be falsified or corrupted by any yea it appeareth sufficiently Supra c. 9. 10. 12. 13 by that which hath byn already said that they were falsified and corrupted in many bookes by the Iewes and Hâ—retâ—kes Let our Aduersaries therfore tell vs where it is written that this holy Scripture which we haue now is not corrupted or falsifyed 4. The third principle of fâ—yth is the true sense of the letter For the true word of God consisteth rather in the true sense or meaning of the words then in the words Supra cap. 3. themselues as we haue declared before But the true sense of the words that is to say in what sense or meaning the words are to be vnderstood eyther properly or figuratiuely cannot be had from the holy Scripture alone but also from the doctrine and Traditions of the Church as we haue sayd before in the fourth Chapter wherby it also followeth that the writteÌ„ word of God conteyneth in it the least part of the word of God to wit the bare letter only but the word of God preached and deliuered keepeth and professeth vnto vs the cheif part of the word of God that is to say the true natiue sense of the same S. Basil l. de Spir. sanct c. 27. Brent contra Petr. â— Soto in suis prologom Kemnit cont 4. sess Conc. Trid. cùm agiâ— de 2. gen Tradiâ— 5. And this is that which S. Basil sayth that those who reiect the vnwritten points of fayth as indiscreet persons do
wrong and damnify the chiefe parts of the Ghospel yea they euen as it were coÌ„tract or bring the whole preaching of the Ghospell to the bare name thereof 6. Many of our Aduersaries who deale more sincerely with vs conuinced by these arguments do acknowledge that these grounds or principles of our faith are only to be had by Traditions without any written word of God as Ioannes Brentius and Martin Kemnitius who adde also that those Traditions which doe not repugne to the written word of God are to be admitted and receiued and that those only are to be reiected which are opposit vnto the holy Scriptures 7. But whatsoeuer our Aduersaries do answere it is altogeather necessary that they confesse these three principles of our fayth do belong indeed to the very word of God it selfe They must also needs confesse these are not extant in plaine and expresse tearmes in any booke either of the old or new Testament out of which necessarily followeth that the whole intire word of God is not conteyned expresly in the holy Scripture CHAP. III. Wherein it is proued out of other particuler poynts of fayth that there are Traditions THE second argument whereby we proue Apostolicall Traditions is taken out of other particuler poynts of fayth the which almost all our Aduersaries belieue with vs albeit they be no where expressely conteyned in the Scriptures There are many poyntes oâ— sayth of this sort wherof for example sake we will alledge some few But to the end we may vse our accustomed breuity we will rehearse only those which do also manifestly shew out of this opinion of our Aduersaries that nothing appertayneth to the doctrine of fayth which is not expresly conteyned in holy Scripture there are many greeuous errours and heresies in this our age arisen 2. The first point is that in God there are three Persons really distinct among themselues and one only substance for this is now here extant in holy Scripture yea in it nothing is to be found expresly written eyther of the substance or of the person in that signification wherein these words are vsed when we speake of the Blessed Trinity 3. This indeed the Caluinists to their great losse and domage haue sufficiently learned by experience fourty yeares agoe in Transiluania For when one Iohn Huniades whom they called Iohn the secoÌ„d King of HuÌ„gâ—ry was then Gouernour in TraÌ„â—luania a CouÌ„try or Prouince of Hungary had ordained a publike disputatioÌ„ betwixt the Calâ—inists and the Anti-trinitarians that is to say those who oppugned the mystery of the Blessed Trinity and that according to the coÌ„mon doctrine on both syds they should dispute only out of the holy Scriptures the Caluinists could neuer proue out of the Scriptures alone that there is eyther a substance or person in God neyther could they by the Scriptures only declare what is a person or what is a substance 4. Wherefore at the last this was the end of the disputatioÌ„ that almost all those which were present iudged that the Antitrinitarians got the victory and that the Caluinists were shamefully ouercome wherupon it came to passe that the sayd Prince of Transiluania of a Caluinist became an Anti-trinitarian yea one of their chief friends in so much that he tooke some publike Churches from the Caluinists and gaue them to the Anti-trinitarians and he continued miserably in that wicked heresy euen till death which happened in the yeare 1571. the 14. of March 5. All which things are aboundaÌ„tly declared by one Ioannes Sommerus Pirnensis in the funerall Oration which he made at his death where in among other things he affirmeth that the chiefe cause why this Prince left the Caluinists and became an AntitrinitariaÌ„ was this because forsooth in the Scriptures he could fynd nothing of the Blessed Trinity and for that the Caluinists were forced to confesse that the words wherby the mystery of the Blessed Trinity is explicated are not extaÌ„t in the holy Scripture but because this funerall Oration is scarce any where to be found least some should thinke that I falsely coyned these things my selfe I will heare set downe his owne words For after he had most blaspemously spoken as the Anti-trinitarians are wont to doe against the Blessed Trinity the which he calleth heere and there the Roman Idolatry these things he addeth of his Prince 6. This funeral Orat of Ioan Sommer was printedat Claudiopolian Domini 1571. But this our Prince sayth he being instructed by God easily vnderstood what was the truth and with earnest desire imbraced it and with no lesse pleasure of mind defended it for being accustomed euen from his childhood to read the holy Scriptures he made them very familiar vnto him presently he found that such things which were contrary to the phrase of Christ and his Apostles were in the ensuing ages by a wicked curiosity brought into the Church and that they are not at all to be numbred amongst those things which adde any firmity or strength to the Author of our saluation especially seing that the Aduersaries themselues acknowledge that the words wherby these subtilties of this new opinion are explicated if not rather as I may well say more obscured are not to be found in the writings of the Apostles 7. And a little after Wherfore little regarding eyther the multitude of wranglers He meaneth Seruetus who was buâ—ned at Geneua an 1553 as Beza writeth in vita Caluini or the torments and paines which others had endured who first endeauoured to breake this yce he manifestly condemned the falsity of the Trinity freely professing his owne opinion therein And after a few words For what hath he not done what assemblies and disputations hath he not ordayned caused to be had about this matter both in Hungary and in Transiluania that the sense or meaning of the Scripture might the better be explicated by conferring those thinges togeather which were then said or spoken of where he would not only be present himselfe but also taking the place or office of the Iudge and vmpyre in the said disputations he very wisely and grauely confuted the great absurdities of that superstition warning often the Aduersaries that reiecting the fancies or fond expositions of men they should lesse impudently and more sincerly carry themselues in the explication of the heauenly doctrine Thus farre Sâ—â—â—merus of the great care diligence of the Prince of Transiluania in defending the heresy of the Anti trinitarians 8. Moreouer it is also manifest that out of this opinion of our Aduersaries to Seruetus l. 1. de erroribus Trinitat fol. 32. pag. 1. Edit an 1531. wit that we must not belieue any thing which is not expressed in Scriptures this wicked heresy of the Anti trinitariaÌ„s in these our dayes had her beginning For that Michael Seruetus who in our age was the first of them that by printed bookes presumed to oppugne the mystery of the Blessed Trinity doth plainely testify writing in
faith is the ground of the Church we speake of the generall faith of the whole Church 19. There are other arguments of our Aduersaries but we may easily answere Canus l. 2. de â—ocis Theol. c. 8. Bellar. l 3. deverbo Dei c. vlt. therunto by that whiâ—h hath byn already said the which Melâ—hior Canus and Bellarmine do prosecute and handle more at large vnto whom we referre the Reader For they are borrowed of the Anabaptists Libertines wherby the authority of the holy Scriptures themselues is no lesse diminished and infringed then that of the Church CHAP. VII That the Church doth not only giue a bare testimony but also authority to the Scripture THIS matter is heere briefly to be examined that it may more clearly be vnderstood how necessary the Churches approbation is to the establishing of the authority of the holy Scriptures But to the end that it may more clearely appeare wherof we dispute in this place it is to be considered that seing that our Aduersaries cannot deny but that the Church aâ—â—oardeth some testimony to the holy Scriptures they affime that this testimony of the Church is only a bare testimony and not a testimony of authority 2. For there are two kindes of testimonyes The one is called a testimony of authority because vpon it the truth of the things testified dependeth Yt is called also a necessary testimony because without it the thing in question is not sufficiently testified The other is called a bare testimony and not necessary that is to say when such a testimony is not so necessary because the matter is otherwise Ioan. 1. v. 7. sufficiently testified Such a testimony was that which S. Sohn Baptist gâ—ue of Christ For Christ had sufficient testimonies besides 3. Of the former testimony of authority Christ saith But I do not receyue my Ioan. 5. v. 34. 36. Ibid. testimony from men to wit the testimony of authority necessary For of the bare testimony he had spoken a little before You sent vnto Iohn and he hath giuen testimony to truth But this was a bare testimony wherfore Christ a little after said I haue a greater testimony then Iohn for the workes which the Father hath giuen me to profit them the very works which I do giue testimony of me that the Father hath sent me And the Father that sent me himselfe hath giuen testimony of me All which saith Christ of the testimony of authority Our Aduersaries therefore say that the Church giueth only a bare testimony to the Scriptures as S. Iohn gaue to Christ but she giueth not a necessary testimony or that of authority 4. But that the testimony of the Church is altogether necessary as that Matt. 3. v. vlt. Matt. 17. v. 5. wherof the authority of the Scriptures dependeth is very manifest by that which is said in the former Chapter And by that also which we alleadged in the first disputation where we shew that there is now no firme testimony wherby we may know certainly which booke is canonicall and which not besides the testimoniy of the Catholike Church For now neyther are the miracles wrought which God did in tymes past neyther doth God speake immediatly by himselfe as he spake in the baptisme and transfiguration of Christ VVherefore there remayneth only the third ordinary manner wherby God speaketh by the mouth of the Church The Church therfore doth not giue a bare testimony only to the holy Scriptures but the testimony of authority to wit that wherof the authority of the Scriptures dependeth as concerning vs and our knowledge 5. Moreouer if the doctrine of S. Paul stood in need of the Churches approbation as we haue already proued out of Supr c. 3. §. 13. huius Controu the Scriptures much more S. Lukes Ghospell who was oÌ„ly S. Pauls choller stood in need therof as Tertullian witnesseth especially because S. Luke receyued not those things which he wrot by reuelation from God Tertu l. 4. contra Marâ—â— 2. Luc. â— v. 2. as S. Paul did but by tradition from others as he hymselfe writeth And the same also may be said of S. Marke whose Ghospell as S. Hierome writeth the Apostle S. Peter approued and by his authority he commaunded it should be read in the Church 6. But neyther is it true that some say that the authority of approuing the Canonicall bookes was only resident in the Apostles and the primitiue Church but the ensuing Church hath it not For the Apostles did not approue all the Canonicall bookes of the new Testament For if they had donne so there had remained no doubt of many of them for many ages after the death of the Apostles euen among Catholike good men as we Supra ca. 5. Contr. 1. haue noted before But many yeares after the Apostles tyme by the generall Councells and Decrees of the Church some bookes were approued wherof there was before some doubt 7. Yea more then six hundred yeares after Christ there were many Catholikes who did not receyue the authority of the Toletan Concil c. 16. Apocalyps as appeareth out of the fourth Toletane Councell 8. And that which is more before the Councell of Trent ther were many Catholikes who thought that it was lawfull for them to doubt of all the bookes of the new Testament the which in tymes past S. Hierome seemed to iudge as doubtfull as are the Epistles of S. Iames the second of S. Peter the second and third of S. Iohn the Epistles of S. Iude the Epistles to the Hebrewes and the Apocalyps And if it had not byn for the Councell of TreÌ„t or some other new Decree of the Church none would as yet condemne them as Heretikes who called those bookes in question 9. By that which hath byn sayd it appeareth manifestly that the Canonicall Scriptures receiue their strength and authority not from the approbation of the primitiue Church but rather from the approbation of the Church succeeding yea euen of this present Church to wit of the Councell of Trent 10 Lastly albeit the present Church should not haue the authority of approuing Scriptures as these men say yet notwithstanding for three other reasons the authority testimony of this present Church is necessary First because we know not certainly what bookes the primitiue Church hath eyther written or not writen approued or reiected but by the testimony of the present Church Secondly neyther do we know whether those bookes came vncorrupted vnto vs or no but by the same testimony Thirdly because we cannot otherwise know which is the true sense of those bookes CHAP. VIII The Argumentes of our Aduersaryes are confuted THE first argument of our Aduersaries is The Church is grounded vpon the word of God and by the word also of God â—t is ingendred nourished and gouerned and it is subiect to the word of God as to the words of her spouse I answere our Aduersaries do in a manner coÌ„found the writen word of God
of it albeit it be immediatly from God to the end it be made manyfest vnto vs. For otherwise we should not be obliged by the authority therof But this is not done now by miracles nor by the immediate or extraordinary reuelation of God Therfore it resteth that we say it is done by the ordinary mediate reuelation of God that is to say by the Church or rather by the holy Ghost which speaketh vnto vs by the Church CHAP. IX That the Church is the Iudge of all Controuersies in matters of Faith SEING that there arise daily so many disputations and Controuersyes of matters of faith none can deny but that there must necessarily be some Iudge appointed who must define end and determine such Controuersyes for otherwise there will neuer be an end of such matters But it is a great difficulty who must be this Iudge The Sectaries of this tyme almost all refuse the Iudgment of the Church For they see very well that if they admit her as iudge all their errors wil be quite ouerthrowne Wherfore some of them affirme that the sole Scripture must be the Iudge of all Controuersies and this was the first doctrine of our Aduersaries to wit Luther Zuinglius 2. But our later Aduersaries when they consider that it is an absurd thing to make the Scripture being a thing Cap. 18. Controu 1. without life the Iudge as we haue declared before they fly vnto their priuate spirit the which they will haue the iudge of all Controuersies But least they may seeme to attribute too much vnto themselues they endeauour to colour their priuate spirit with the famous title or name of the holy Ghost affirming the holy Ghost to be the only iudge of all Controuersyes 3. Wherfore there are three thinges heere to be proued First that the Scripture cannot be Iudge Secondly that neyther the priuate spirit can be it Thirdly that the Catholike Church is the only and most true Iudge of all Controuersies 4. As concerning the first wheras our AduÌ„ersaries euery where teach that nothing is to be belieued which is not expressely to be found in holy Scripture it is a strange thing that they would perswade men that the Scripture is the Iudge of all Controuersies wheras we read no such thing in any place of holy Scripture 5. Yea euen in these testimony is only attributed to the Scriptures and not Iudgment Search the Scriptures saith Christ Ioan. 5. v. 19. and the same are they that giue testimony of me And hence it is that the law of God is often called in Scripture in the Hebrew phrase Eda or Eduth or Tenda that is to say Psalm 118. a Testimony yea euen in one Psalme it is called aboue twenty tymes by that name 6. Moreouer in the Prophet Isay in the same place falsely cited by our Aduersaries that they may proue therby the Scripture to be the iudge of Controuersies it is called a witnesse or a testimony and not a Iudge nay rather to the Isa 8. v. 20. Law saith the Prophet and to the testimony 7. Furthermore one thing is more absurd that in matters of such moment to appoint such a deafe and dumme iudge and who may also be corrupted for both parties and whose sentence eytâ—er party vseth indifferently But it is manifest that the Scripture is such a iudge for it can neyther speake nor heare and so in like manner do all Heretickes ancient and moderne also vse the Scriptures Lastly almost all our Aduersaries do see how absurd these things are and therfore they fly vnto their owne priuate spirit the which they call the holy Ghost Wherfore let vs come now to the second point 8. As concerning therfore this priuate spirit first there is none who doubteth but that the holy Ghost is the chiefe Iudge of all Controuersyes But the question is where this holy Spirit is to be found and in whome it remayneth 9. Moreouer it is certaine that the holy Ghost doth not remayne or is to be found in any booke least peraduenture our Aduersaries should send vs to their Bibles but in the hartes of the belieuers Now we aske whether this holy Ghost which is the Iudge of all be in the hart of euery belieuer or rather in the hart of the whole Catholike Church If they say in the hart of the Catholike Church we haue our desire if they say in the hart of euery priuate man it will follow that no priuate person can erre in his owne iudgment seeing that the holy Ghost cannot erre in his iudgment Heâ—re truly we seeke for that Iudge which caÌ„not erre 10. Furthermore euery priuate man shall be come the Iudge of the whole Church if euery such priuate person haue this spirit which is the Iudge of the whole Church whereupon there will ensue a great confusion in the Church of God 11. Besides that if euery belieuer be the Iudge theÌ„ our Aduersaries must needs admit the auncient Fathers as Iudges of all Controuersies the which they will neuer do for they dare not deny but that the auncient Fathers were true belieuers why therfore do they attribute vnto themselues that which they so vâ—hemently deny to all the auncient Fathers 21. Moreouer if euery belieuer cannot erre in his iudgment much lesse can a great many such erre and least of all can the Church of all belieuers erre Wherefore whatsoeuer our Aduersaries say they wil be forced to confesse and graunt that the holy Ghost is the Iudge as he remaineth in the whole Church speaking and iudging by the mouth therof and in this manner euen out of our Aduersaries doctrine we gather by a necessary consequence our opinion 13. Lastly that which they affirme that the priuate spirit of euery particuler person is Iudge is therby declared to be false that they themselues acknowledge that there is no priuate man which at some tymes cannot erre in his indgment but heere we inquire for a Iudge which cannot erre For otherwise in matters of such moment and of which our eternall saluation dependeth we should dangerously be forced to haue recourse to an erroneous Iudge whose iudgement is variable vncertaine deceitfull and oftentymes manifestly false 14. But now as concerning the third point that the Church is the iudge of all Controuersies we proue by these arguments First the Church hath all the properties of a fit iudge for first she hath an exact knowledge the holy Ghost shall teach you saith Christ all truth 15. Secondly the Church cannot be corrupted by any giftes or praiers For she is as the Apostle witnesseth the pillar and ground of truth 16. Thirdly the Church heareth 2. Tim. 3. v. 15. speaketh giueth her iudgment and examineth the testimonies of Scriptures and Fathers as experience it selfe teacheth vs. 17. Fourthly we are bound to stand to the iudgement of the Church VVho will not heare the Church saith our Lord let Matt. 18. v. 17. him be vnto thee as an â—eathen and
Scripture might seeme to be called in question he was not a shamed to write that Baptisme might be giuen in any liquour and by this meanes it wil be true and lawfull Baptisme though it be giuen in milke wyne yea in Inke or any other filthy liquour Thus are our Aduersaries forced to admit these absurdityes least they might be forced to depart from that their principle of belieuing only Scripture 6. Furthermore to the end that Beza might more easily perswade the ignorant common people to admit this his strang paradox he addeth presently a very grieuous slaunder against the Catholike Doctors Let water be wanting saith Beza Beza ib. Epist 2. and yet the Baptisme of any cannot be deferred with edification nor must not be I truly would as well and as lawfully baptize in any other liquour as in water neyther are the most superstitious Deuines of any other opinion in these matters Thus far Beza But these thinges which he writeth are most false For there is no Catholike nor Scholasticall Doctor Concil Trid. sess 7. car 2. de baptismâ— who hath euer eyther thought or written so yea the playne contrary is defined by the Catholike Church as a poynt of Fayth 7. The fixt poynt of fayth is that bread and wyne is only the necessary matter of the Blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist This poynt of faith is also very necessary for the Church least so great and so excellent a Sacrament should be prophaned yet our Aduersaries will neuer be able to proue it effectually out of Scripture only For by this word Bread any kind of meate is oftentymes signifyed in Scripture of wine it is fâ—â—re more doubtfull For the Scripture maketh only mention of the Chalice and not of the liquor which was in the Chalice and Luc. 22. â— 18. Cal ibid. in sua harmonia Beza Ep. 2. cit Caluin himselfe acknowledgeth that these words of the fruit of the vyne were spoken before the institution of this Sacrament 8. The which when Beza easily preceaued heere also be went about to bring in another error least indeed he should be fored to forsake his former principle of belieuing only Scripture For he was not afraid to write that he erred nothing from the institution of Christ who in the consecration of the Euchâ—rist should vse insteed of the bread appointed for that purpose any other vsuall meate and insteed of the wyne any other ordinary kind of drinke and by this meanes one may consecrate the Eucharist eyther in cheese flesh fish or egges as also in milke water beere or vinager or any other liquor which hitherto was neuer heard of in Gods Church And yet for all this Beza is not ashamed to attribute this most absurd error of his to all the Scholasticall Doctors For of both these errors he treateth in the words before alledged because when he sayth the Scholasticall Doctors were of no other opinion he speaketh as well coÌ„cerning the matter of the Eucharist as of the matter of Baptisme After this manner our Aduersaries do force so many and so great errors out of that their principle of belieuing only Scriptures wherof more might be alledged which for breuities sake we omit 9. But there is one thing I cannot let passe because therby we clearly conuince that the Traditions of the Church do not only contayne vn written points of fayth but that which is more euen in our Aduersaries iudgment they change and abolish such things as are expresly commaunded in Scriptures for euen in the Table of the Law of God which is sayd to be written by Gods owne hand in many and manyfest words the keeping of Exod. â—4 v. 1. Exod 20. v. 8 9. 10. 11. the Sabboth day is comaunded the which notwithstanding now all except a few Anabaptists do confesse to be abrogated by Ecclesiasticall Traditions only without any expresse testimony of Scripture The Anabaptists I say being also deceiued by that coÌ„mon principle of our Aduersaries of belieuing only Scriptures they go about to bring the obseruation of the Sabboth day into vâ—e and custome agayne and for this Viâ—e Prateolum V. Sabatharij cause they are called Sabatharians but not so much the Heresy as the madnesse of these men is condemned of all and namely of Luther in his booke against the Sabbatharians in the seauenth Tome CHAP. V. Wherin it is proued that there are Traditions by the testimonies of the holy Fathers THE third argument wherby we proue that all the points of our fayth are not set downe in writing by the Apostles is the authority Coâ—cius Tom. 1. l. â— Artic. vâ—timo Bellarm. Tom. 1. l. 4â— de verbo Dei c. 7. of the auncâ—eÌ„t Fathers who affirme and teach this in many places The which places of the holy Fathers as well the Greekes as the Latins â—odocus Coâ—cius hath very diligently gathered togeather in his booke intâ—tuled Thesâ—urus Catholicus and before him Bellarmine did the same But least we be longer then the order of Epitomes doth permit especially in a thing so manyfest it shall suffice vs to alledg one chiefe Doctor of the Greeke and another of the Latin Church 2. Among the Grecians S. Chrysostome is the most famous who doth not only affirme it but also manifestly proueth it out of holy Scripture For when he expoundeth those words of the later Epistle 2. Thes â— 2. v. 14. to the Thessalonians Therefore brethren stand and hold the Traditions which you haue learned whether it be by word or by our Epistle he writeth thus Hence it appeareth sayth S. Chrysostome that he did not deliâ—â—r all things vnto them by his Epistle but many things also without his letters but as well these as those other worthily deserue S. Chrys Hom. 4. in 2. ad Thes to be belieued therfore â—e esteeme the Tradition also of the Church to be worthy oâ— credit It is a Tradition seeke no further Thus S. Chrysostome But it is most certayne that the Calu. l. 4. Instit c. 14. sect vlt. S. Aug. Tom. 7. de baâ—t contra Donat. l. 2. cap 7. Apostle and consequently S. Chrysostome also who expouÌ„deth him doth not only speake of ceremonies and customes but also of poynts of Fayth 3. S. Augustine whom Calâ—in acknowledgeth to be the best and most â—aythfull witnesse of antiquity writeth in this manner Many things are not to be sound in the Apostles writings nor in the ensewing Councells and yet notwithstaÌ„ding because they are generally kept through out the whole Catholike Church they are iuged to haue byn deliuered and commended by none but by them Thus S. Augustine Neyther can it be sayd that S. Augustine speaketh of ceremonies and not of poynts of fayth For in that place he proueth against the Donatists that those which were baptized in the accustomed forme and matter by heretikes were not to be baptized againe but none vnlesse he be an Anabaptist will deny that this is a point of fayth CHAP.
it weake Sophisticall and erroneous 11. Besides that there are so many and so contrary illations of diuers men that the authority of the Church is altogeather necessary in maters of faith that there may arise a certayne and an vndoubted faith of these matters of which sort Traditions are that is to say the doctrine of the whole Church 12. But when one belieueth such an illation with a diuine or Catholike faith he must needes know two thinges the one is that the expresse place of Scripture from whence this conclusion is deduced must certainly be well vnderstood by him which disputeth the other is that he who maketh such a deduction and collection can neyther deceiue others nor be deceyued himselfe But none can know eyther of these without the Traditions of the Church seeing that otherwise there is none which may not be deceiued sometimes All collections therefore which produce or breed fayth in vs do most clearly conuince and shew the authority and necessity of Traditions CHAP. VII Wherein it is proued that there are Traditions by the absurdities which otherwise would follow THE fifth argument wherby we proue that many things are to be belieued which are not expressed in holy Scriptures is taken out of the absurdities which do ensue of the contrary doctrine For hauing once admitted that nothing is to be belieued which is not expressed in Scripture all old heresies are renewed and a great vncertainty and confusion of all things is brought into the Church of God yea euen the way to Atheisme is layd open because hauing once reiected despised the Traditions of the Church all the poynts of fayth from the Apostles tyme till now explicated and proued by the auncient Fathers against heretiks all those things also which were decreed and determined by all the generall Councâ—lls in times past against the said heretiks loose their chiefâ—st strength and authority the which notwithstanding our Aduersaries do acknowledge themselues to receiue and belieue 2. Neyther do we know by an assured Catholike faith whether there were euer any Fathers or Councells but by the Traditions of the Church But neyther do we know any other way but by fayth whether since the Apostles tyme till now there were any Catholikes or noâ— because of those things which were done since the tyme and death of the Apostles there is nothing extant in holy Scripture seeing that all the bookes thereof were written before the death of the Apostles But such things as haue bâ—n done since till now cannot otherwyse be knowne but by the Tradition of the Church 3. Neyther is it sufficient to say that we know these things by the Ecclesiasticall histories For that fayth which proceedeth of histories without the authority or Traditions of the Catholike Church is but an humane fayth which oftentimes deceaueth others and may be deceiued it selfe and therefore these kind of histories cannot produce a diuine fayth in vs this experience it selfe doth clearly teach vs. For our Aduersaries do somtymes doubt whether S. Peter was euer at Rome or no because forsooth this is not to be found expresly in holy Scripture wheras notwithstanding it is most assuredly proued and testified in many bookes both of the auncient Historiographers and holy Fathers Why may they not as lawfully call other matters in question which are notwithstanding expressely set downe in other auncient writers Our Aduersaries therfore do make all things very doubtfull and vncertayne whiles they will only belieue and admit the Scripture but now lâ—t vs answere their arguments CHAP. VIII Wherein the arguments of our Aduersaries taken out of the old Testament are confuted THE first argument wherby our Aduersaries oppugne Traditions and which they vse very often the which also as inuincible they haue added to the confession of their Rupell Confess Art 5. Deut. 4. v. 2. Deut 12. v. vlt. fayth they take out of these words of Deuteronomy Thou shalt not add any thing to the word which I speake vnto you nor shall you take any thing from it And againe that which I commaund thee do that only neyther add or diminish any thing from it By these places of Scriptures our Aduersaries do inferre that nothing is to be receiued as a point of fayth which is not expressely set downe in Scripture 2. But this argument is erroneous and the weaknes thereof is very great for many causes First because in those words there is no mention made of the Scripture nor of the written word of God but only of the word preached and deliuered viua voce Thou shalt not add sayth the Scripture to the word that I speake vnto you he doth not say that I write vnto you Againe Do only sayth he that which I commaund thee he doth not say that which I write vnto thee 3. Moreouer in these words the holy Scripture doth not only speake of matters of fayth to be belieued but also of ceremonies and customes to be done and obserued but our Aduersaries themselues confesse that these customes may be added by the authority of the Church yea they haue ordeined themselues very many the which they chang euen yet when they please Caluin also acknowledgeth that Calu. coÌ„tra 4 sess Concil Trident. many vnwritten customes were deliuered vnto vs by the Apostles 4. That also according to the phrase of Scripture is said to be added to the word of God which is contrary opposite vnit For Iosue did not transgresse this commaundement of Deuteronomy when he added his booke to the bookes of Moyses Nor did others transgresse it who added the bookes of the Iudges Ruth and of the Kinges which were not written by Moyses which are also to be belieued as contayning pointes of faith But in these bookes there is nothing contrary to that which Moyses wrote And the Hebrew text agreeth very well to this answere for in both places of Deuterâ—nomy this word Ghal is vsed which sigâ—â—tieth oâ—tentines contrary or against so that the sense is Do not add any thing contrary to the word which I commaund and againe yee shall not add any thing contrary to the word which I say vnto you For so is that particie Gâ—â—l taken in the 40. Psalme or according to the Hebrewes 41. in the 2. Psalme also the second verse And in the 14. of Numbers the 2. verse els where very often Euen as also in the new Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which answereth to the Hebrew Ghal signifieth also contrary or agâ—iâ—st when the Apostle writeth to the 1. ad Cor. 4. v. 6. Corinthians that in vs you may learne one not to be puffed vp against another aboue that is writteÌ„ that is to say against the Scripture the which saith we must not be puffed vp in pryde â—s S. Chrysostome and after him Theophilactus others do note vpon that place The which place some bouldly alledge against Traditions wheras the Apostle in that place doth not speake of the whole Calu in
â—lla verba 1. â—l Cor. 4. v. 6. word of God but of this one point that we must not be puffed vp in pryde as euen Caluin himselfe acknowledgeth 5. But to omit all such thinges as other Catholike Doctors haue very well and learnedly written of the proper and literall sense of these wordes yea that we may also graunt to our Aduersaries that this which they alledge is the true sense they erre very much in that they thinke that these wordes of Moyses belong vnto vs and that we are no lâ—sle now bound and obliged by them then the Ieues were in tymes past For these wordes do no more appertaine vnto vs then those of the same booke of Deuteronomy Câ—rsed be â—e that Devt 27. v. vâ—â— abideth not in the wordes of this Law and sâ—lfilâ—â—th them not in worke From which wordes S. Paul manifestly teacheth that we are deliuered Ad Gal. 3. l. 10. 1â— and freed by the grace of Christ Iesus But seing that in these wordes which they do heere alledge Moyses commaundeth that the ChildreÌ„ of Israel should obserue fulfill euery word which he had commaunded them for so it is expresly set downe Deuteronomy 12. the last verse in the Hebrew text and in all the Bibâ—s of our Aduersaries and he presently addeth that nothing is to be added or detracted from all these he manifestly commaundeth the keeping of the whole Moysaicall Law and of all the Sacraments Sacrifices and Ceremonies of the old Testament For he doth not only commaund that nothing should be added but also that nothing is to be detracted of all those thinges by him commauÌ„ded Wherefore if our Aduersaries obiect against vs that we adde any thing against this precept we may more iustly obiect vnto then that they detract farre more then we add seing that they neyther obserue the Circumcision nor the legall Sacrifices nor other Ceremonies which are so often and so straitely commaunded in Deuteronomy It cannot truly be denyed but that this is to detract somewhat from those thinges which Moyses commaunded and therâ—ore our Aduersaries must needes confesse that these are the wordes of the old Law and consequently do appertaine nothing vnto vs. Out of this which hath byn said it followeth that our Aduersaries do very indiscretly foolishly boast and bragge of those wordes of Moyses For in the exposition thereof they erre farre from the truth and a great deale more in the application when they go about to proue that we are also bound and obliged by them 6. Our Aduersaries take their second argument out of these wordes of Salomoâ—s Prouerb 30. v. 5. 6. prouerbâ— Euery word of God is fiery it is a sâ—ield of defence to those which hope in it do not add any thing to the words therof and thou shalt not be found and reprehended as a lyar I answere that this place maketh nothing against vs for in that place there is no mention made of Scripture only but of al the word of God And it is most true that nothing should be added to all the whole word of God the which is to be belieued with a Catholike faith as the true word of God For as we haue said before our faith relyeth only on the word of God but the Scripture only is not all the word of God because all Traditions also which contayne poynts of faith belong therunto as we haue sufficiently Supra c. 2. proued already But they add to the word of God are lyarâ— who affirme that God sayd this or that which indeed he neuer spake And of this sort â—re those false Prophets of whome God by the Prophet Ieremy complayneth saying They Hier. 23. v. 16. 21. speake the vision of their hartes not from the mouth of our Lord againe I did not speake vnto them and they did prophesy This place also may very well be vnderstood of those who add any thing contrary to the word of God For in the Hebrew text there is set downe that particle Ghal which often tymeâ— signifieth contrary or against as we haue already declared in our answere to the first argument CHAP. IX Wherin is examined that place of S. Pauls Epistle to the Galathâ—ans which our Aduersaries do obiect against Traditions THE third argument our Aduersaries take out of the first Confess Rupâ—lâ— Art 3. Chapter to the Galathians the which they haue also added to their confession of fayth as inuincible For they haue omitted their second argument as not strong inough for their purpose But thus they frame their argument The Apostle Gal. 1. v. 8. 9. sayth twice an Anathema to those who teach any thing besidâ— that which he hath taught therefore nothing is to be receiued or belieued but Scripture Our Aduersaries haue this place of the Apostle often in their mouthes wherefore it shal be exaâ—ined more exactly We answere therfore thaâ— our Aduersaries do erre heere for two reasons first because our whole controuersy is of the written word of God but in these words there is no mention made of the writteÌ„ word or of Scripture but only of the word preached and deliuered viâ—â— vâ—câ— to the Galathians by S. Paul And hence it is that S. Augustine farre otherwise August Tom. 7. de vnit Ecâ—les c. 24. then our Aduersaries disputing against the Donatists proueth by these words of the Apostle that we are bound to admit and belieuâ— the Traditions of the Church as for exaÌ„ple that those who are once orderly and lawfully christened by Heretiks are not to be baptized againe And well truly for that which is viua voce deliuered is a Tradition and not Scpriture Moreouer if the Scripture only conteyned expressely all the poynts of fayth the Apostle would rather haue proposed the Scripture as the rule of fayth then his owne preaching seing that the Scripture is manifestly well knowne to all Nations but his owne preaching to the Galathians only But our Aduersaries vrge againe and say that all that which the Apostle preached to the Galathians was written eyther before that tyme or afterward by S. Paul and the other Apostles they say this but they proue it not For this is no where written in holy Scripture and so whiles they goe about to perswade vs that all points of fayth are writteÌ„ they coyne inuent a new poynâ— which is no where extant in Scripture that is to say that all such thingâ— as S Paul viua voce taught the Galathians are written But we following herein S. Augustine do 3. Aug. Tom. 9. Tract 96. in Io. Tom 7. de â—nit Eccles c. 21. infine gather much better by these words and infer thus against them If there must be nothing belieued but that which S. Paul preached to the Galathians and that none knoweth certainly what are those things which he preached but by the Traditions and doctrine of the Church it followeth manifestly that besids the Scripture we must also belieue
9. Tract 98. in Euan loan subfinem which is in the holy Scripture For so S. Augustine speaketh in one place But in another he clearly explicateth himselfe by this word praeter to vnderstand contra because we must preach nothing contrary to the holy Scripture That this is the true sense and meaning of S. Augustine it is manifest by the words themselues wherby also he proueth that the word praeter in those words of the Apostle doth signify diuers but not contrary thinges For in this manner he writeth when he warneth his schollers to take heed of the opinions of the Manichaeans other heretikes Ad Gal. 1. v. 6. because these are not only distinct but also contrary to those which the Apostle taught Let the admonition sayth he of the holy Apostle neuer depart from your hart If any shall euangelize vnto you besids that which you haue receiued let him be Anathema He doth not say 1. Thess 3. v. 10. more then you haue receaued but besides that which you haue receaued For if he should say that he should be preiudiciall to himselfe who coueteth to come to the Thessalonians that he might supply that which was wanting to their sayth Now he which supplieth addeth that which is lacking taketh not away that which was But he which ouerposseth Ioan. 16. v. 11. the rule of fayth doth not goe on in the way but departeth froÌ„ the way That therfore which our Lord sayth I haue yet many things to say vnto you but you cannot beare them now were to be added to those things which they knew and not to be ouerthrowen by those they had already learned Hitherto S. Augustine CHAP. X. Whereinâ—other obiections of our Aduersaries against Traditions are refuted THE fourth argument is deduced out of these words of the Apocalyps Apoc. 22. v. 18. Confess Rupell Artic. 5. which they also cite and alledge in their ConfessioÌ„ at Rochell If any man shâ—ll adde to these things God shall adde vpon him the plagues written in this booke But who doth not see that S. Iohn speaketh expresly of the booke of the Apocalyps only and not of the whole Scripture for he sayth I testify to euery one hearing the words of the Prophesy of this booke if any man shall adde to these things c. and in the 19. verse following If any man shall diminish of the words of the booke of this prophesy c. He speaketh therfore only of the propheticall words of the Apocalyps For it is manyfest otherwise out of Ecclesiasticall histories that S. Iohn wrote his Ghospell after the Apocalyps and Hier. de script Eccles in Ioan. Apost consequently that he added many things besids the Apocalyps But let our Aduersaries take heed least they incurre those paynes which S. Iohn threatneth to those which adde or detract any thing from the Apocalyps seing that they so often and so bouldly wrest the prophesies of the Apocalyps to many strang senses against the Pope and the Catholike Church 2. Our Aduersaries alledge many other things but their arguments which be of lesse moment are taken out of those places of Scripture which commend vnto vs the great excellency of holy Scripture But Supra c. 2. all these are very easily confuted by that one ground which as we haue declared before euen our Aduersaries do admit to wit that to the end the holy Scripture be perfect in it selfe and sufficient to euerlasting saluation it is not necessary that it should expresly coÌ„teyne al points of fayth but it is sufficieÌ„t that all such poynts may be deduced by a good consequence out of it But all the Traditions of the Church which belong vnto fayth may be gathered Supra c. 2. as we haue sayd out of Scripture the which also we declare more at large in euery one of these controuersies Our Aduersaries therfore haue not reason to say that we teach the Scripture to be impersect or insufficient For as concerning this sufficiency and perfectioÌ„ of Scripture they are forced at least to yield and subscribe vnto our opinion here in but these their arguments whereof they make great account we haue therfore alledged to the end all may know how badly they interpret the holy Scriptures and by how friuolus reasons they are perswaded to forsake the Catholike fayth 3. But euen this sufficiency of Scripture which they preteÌ„d they proue very foolishly by those wordes of the Apostle wherein he teacheth that the Scripture Ad Tim. 3. v. penut is very profitable as though forsooth euery thing which is profitable for obtayning some particuler end or purpose were also absolutely sufficient then the which nothing can be spoken more absurdly The Head truely is not only profitable but also necessary that a man may liue but who I pray you will say that the head only without the rest of the body is sufficient for the lyfe of man But our late Aduersaries to the end they may make this their discourse or reason the stronger say that in humane thinges not euery thing which is profitable is also sufficient but in diuine matters whatsoeuer Iunius coÌ„tra Bell. controu 1. lib. 4. c. 10. notâ— 44. is profitable is also sufficient whervnto Iunius like a fine young stripling addeth that this can be ouerthrowne by no sophistry But who doth not see that the Eucharist by the diuine vertue thereof is profitable to the obtayning of eternall saluation and yet notwithstanding without Baptisme it is not sufficieÌ„t as also without faith and pennance the same may be sayd of Baptisme and of euery booke of Scripture Yea euen the Apostle doth not speake of the whole Scripture as our Aduersaries thinke he doth when he saith that euery Scripture is profitable but of euery particuler part thereof For how Hier. de Scrip. Eccles in â—oaÌ„ Apost 2. Tim. 1. v. penult could he speake of a thing which was not then extant But as then the Ghospell of S. Iohn was not yet written nor the Apocalyps For these were after S. Pauls death written by S. Iohn Hence it is that the Apostle S. Paul doth not say the whole Scripture but euen Scripture inspired by God is profitable For there is not one part of Scripture which is not profitable vnto vs if it be well vnsterstood Yet for all that notwithstanding euery one part precisely in it selfe abstracting from the rest of the Scripture as all do very well know is not sufficient 4. Finally it is also to be considered that all those places wherin the integrity perfection and vtility of the Scripture is commended vnto vs must nedes be vnderstood not of the bare wordes only but of the same well and rightly vnderstood But this true vnderstanding of the words cannot otherwise be had then by Tradition Supra c. 4. and the vnwritten doctrine of the Church it selfe as we haue already declâ—red Wherefore all those places which do commend vnto vs the holy Scriptures do also
is to say to vphould the house to strengthen it The Apostle heere attributeth theÌ„ both to the Church the one when he calleth hâ—r the pillar of truth the othâ—r when â—â— calleth her the ground of the same truth For the pillar also of the earth according to the Hebrew Iob. â— v. 6. Psal 74. vel inxta Hebrâ—os 79. v. 4. phrase doth signify the lowest fouÌ„dations of the earth So God is sayd to shake the pillars of the earth elswhere to strengthen the pillars of the earth that is to say the very foundations thereof 17. These so manifest and perspicuous Calu. inâ— ad Tim. 3. v. 15. words of the Apostle do compell Caluin at the last to be of our opinion albeit after his accustomed maÌ„ner at the first he wrongfully slaundereth vs affirming that Catholiks hold or to vse his owne words do blab out this horrible blasphemy that is to say that the truth of God is not strong inough vnlesse it be vphoulden by the shoulders of men and that the word of God is vncertayne till by humble prayers as it were it borroweth some certaymy from men And afterward he affirmeth that the Apostle in this place would nothing els but that the truth of God is supported by the pure preaching of the Ghospell But that which he sayd first is a meere slaunder for we do not say that the truth or the word of God absolutly and considered precisely in it selfe receiueth it certainty and strength from the Church for in this sense it receyueth a most perfect strength and large authority from God himselfe but in regard of men and in consideration of our knowledge it receiueth it certainty froÌ„ the Church Infra hac Controu cap. 16. in fine as afterward we will declare more at large the which also Caluin in the words immediatly following acknowledgeth to be most true when he writeth in this Calu. loco citato Rom. 10. v 17. sorte S. Paul simply vnderstandeth sayth Caluin that which in other words he sayth in the tenth Chapter to the Romans because fayth is by hearing there wil be no fayth vnlesse there he some that preach Therfore in regard of men the Church supporteth the truth because it maketh it famous by her prayse and commendation because the retayneth it in sincerity and purity and because the deliuereth and sendoth it to her posterity Thus Caluin 18. But that which secondly he addeth that the truth of God is supported and vpholden by the pure preaching of the Church is indeed most true but he should haue considered that this pure preaching of the Ghospell cannot be fouÌ„d but only in the Church and that no others but men can preach the pure Ghospell Wherefore if the truth of God be sustayned by the pure preaching of the Ghospell it necessarily followeth also that the Church must be sustained by men and consequently that the Church of Christ is the gound of truth albeit not absolutly yet in regard of vs and our Beza in 1. ad Tim. 3. v. 15. knowledge So as Beza also is forced to coÌ„fesse the same exâ—licating those words of the Apostle the pillar and ground of truth Vnderstand this sayth Beza not simply in it selfe but in regard of vs. Thus he 19. It is therfore manifest as well out of Caluin as Beza that the Church in regard of vs is the ground of truth or of the word of God and consequently of our fayth which relyeth thereon But that which in regard of men is the ground of our fayth that is the true ground therof because our fayth cannot well nor must not be considered but in regard of men seeing that our fayth cannot be found but in men only if therfore in regard of men the Church be the ground of truth it is also most truly and necessarily the ground of our fayth 20. Furthermore that the ancient Church of the holy Fathers did coÌ„stantly hold the preaching and authority of the Catholike Church to be the ground of our fayth those excellent words of S. Augustine do manifestly declare when he S. Aug. Tom. 6. contra Epist Manich. cap. 5. Calu. l. 1. Instit sect 3. writeth thus disputing against the Maniches I sayth he would not belieue the Ghospell but that the authority of the Catholike Church moued me therunto this seÌ„teÌ„ce of S. Augustine vexeth our Aduersaries very much Caluin goeth about to perswade the ignoraÌ„t people that S. Augustin speaketh of himselfe yet remayning a Manichean Heretike and not of himselfe as being conuerted and made a Catholike But this is a ridiculous euasion for the words which follow a litle after do shew that this is a false interpretation of Caluin If thou doest hold thy selfe to the Ghospell S. Augustine speaketh vnto a Manichean heretike I would hold my selfe to those by whose commandment I beliued the Ghospell He speaketh therfore of himselfe as now being a Catholike and after a few words VVhose authority sayth he being infringed weakned I could not now euen belieue the Ghospel it selfe Where he sheweth plainly that our faith doth so depend of the authority of the Church that it being weakned or taken a way it could not remayne or continue by any fayth of the Ghospell Wherby it is manifest that it is false which Iunius writeth that S. Augustine did only speake of the accidentary and not of the necessary cause 21. Others say that S. Augustine did speake of this or that booke of the Gospell and not of the whole Gospell in generall but the very words of S. Augustine doe teach the contrary because he speaketh euery where of the Gospell it selfe in generall Moreouer one and the same reason is of one booke of the Ghospell and of all the rest as concerning fayth 22. Others lastly do answere that S. Augustine did not speake of the Church of his time but of the primitiue Church wherin were the Apostles who approued the Ghospell But this solution is also easily refuted out of the words next following to whom saith S. Augustin I haue obeied saying Belieue the Gospell why should I not obey them then saying vnto me Doe not belieue Manicheus But it is manifest that the primitiue Church spake nothing of Manicheus but that Church only which was in S. Augustines time sayd vnto him doe not belieue Manicheus For Manicheus liued many yeares 8. Aug. Tom. 6. contra FaustuÌ„ l. 13. c. 4. after the primitiue Church yea euen after S. Cyprian that is to say almost three hundred yeares after Christ as the same S. Augustine testifyeth and it is otherwise sufficiently well knowen that the Manichean heresy was vnknowne in the world before the yeare 277. See Baronius in his 2. Tome in the yeare 277. in the 2. number and others following CHAP. VI. The Arguments of our Aduersaries are confuted NOVV it remayneth we answere to the arguments of our Aduersaries for by our answers the difficulty of this whose controuersy wil be more
with the word of God in generall the which they should not doe for ther are three sorts of the word of God to wit that which is belieued preached and written The belieued word is in the hart of the Church that which is preached is in her mouth and that which is written is in her bookes Of the belieued and preached Word the Apostle sayth the word is in thy mouth and in thy hart this is the word of fayth which we preach We Rom. 20. v. 8. confesse that in the belieued and preached word the Church is founded because by the same it is ingendred nourished Rom. 10. v. 10. Ibid v. 14. and gouerned and that vnto this word it is subiect and obedient as vnto the Words of her spouse For indeed this kind of word is necessary for the Church For with our hart sayth the Apostle we belieue vnto Iustice but with the mouth confession is made to saluation And againe How shall they heare without a preacher 2. But the nature of the written word is farre different for this is neyther altogeather necessary for the Church seeing that the Church was without it more then two thousand yeares neyther can the written word be profitable to the Church vnlesse it be also rightly preached and belieued For what doth it profit a man to haue the Bible vnlesse he rightly belieue and vnderstand it 3. But the Scripture whereof we now dispute doth only conteyne the written word but the belieued and preached word is conteined in the visible Church as the necessary and essentiall parts therof seing the one is as it were the life in the hart of the Church the other as it were the speach in her mouth neither can they euer be separated from her according to that saying and promise of God The words which I haue put in thy mouth shall not Isa 59. v. vlt. depart from thy mouth nor from the mouth of thy seede nor from the mouth of thy seedes seede from henceforth for euermore 4. Wherefore this argument doth proue the quite coÌ„trary for seeing that the written word receiueth it profit and authority from the rightly belieued and preached word which are the partes of the Church it is necessary that the written word receiue that authority and vtility from the Church as that wherin only the word rightly preached and belieued is to be found 5. The second argument If the Church should teach any thing contrary to the Scriptures we were not to belieue the Church Therefore the Scripture doth not receiue that authority from the Church but rather the Church from the Scripture I answere that in the same maÌ„ner it may be said that if the Scripture should conteine any thing against truth we should not also belieue it if the holy Ghost should vtter and speake any lye we should not belieue him But thâ—se conditions are indeed impossible and blasphemous against God wherefore they are not only to be admitted but not euen to be proposed of Christians For it is impossible that the Church should teach any thing contrary to the Scriptures for then the holy Ghost should lye because he should teach one thing by the Church and the contrary by the Scriptures 6. The third argument if the Scripture receiue that authority from the Church then the Church should be aboue the Scripture which seemeth to be very absurd I answere That the Church is aboue the Scriptures may be vnderstood two wayes First because the Church exceedeth the Scripture in dignity and excellency and in this sense without all doubt the Church is about the Scripture for the Scripture is made for the Church and not contrary wise All things sayth the Apostles 1. Cor. 4. v. 51. are done for you Christ dyed for the Church and not for the Scriptures the Church belieueth hopeth loueth and prayseth God but the Scripture doth none of these The Church shall reigne and liue euerlastingly with Christ in heauen the Scripture shall perish after the day of Iudgement Lastly the Church conteineth in it the word of God rightly belieued preached and the Holy Ghost it selfe all which do farre exceede the written word in excellency and dignity 7. Secondly it may be vnderstood that the Church is aboue the Scripture so as she may change the Scripture or of Scripture make no Scripture or lastly she may teach some what contrary to Scripture or depart from the true sense of Scripture In which sense the Sectaries of this tyme say that we affirme the Church to be aboue the Scripture And thus it is false that the Church is aboue the Scripture but neyther is there any Catholike which in this sense will affirme that the Bellar. l. 3. de verbo Dei c. vlt. in resp ad 14. argum Church is aboue the Scripture as Bellarmine truly affirmeth For if the Church were in this sense aboue the Scripture the Church should erre and be opposite vnto her â—elfe because in that the Church hath once approued the Scripture she cannot any more reiect and disproue it vnlesse she contradict her selfe which is impossible 8. The fourth argument The holy Scripture receiueth her authority immediatly from God himselfe because he is the Author of the Scripture therefore it doth not receiue it authority from the Church I answere there be two kinds of certaynties the one of the thing in it owne Nature the other in respect of vs so also there are two kinds of authorityes the one of the thing considered in it selfe and this hath the Scripture from her principall Author to wit God himselfe the other is in respect of vs and this it hath from the Church as we haue Cap 13. praeced §. 17. 19. proued before out of Caluin and Beza For we know not otherwise that God is the Author of the Scripture with any certainty of fayth but by the testimony of the Church 9. And that which we haue sayd of the Scripture may also be euidently seene in Christ our Lord who is aboue the Scripture For Christ was forced to proue his authority by miracles that it might the better be knowen and allowed of men For otherwise the Iewes had not beene bound to haue admitted his authority Ioan. 15. v. 14. S. Aug. Tom. 9. Tract 91. in Ioan. Hereupon saith Christ speaking vnto his disciples of the Iewes If I had not done among them workes that no other man hath done they should not haue sinned that is to say of Infidelity not belieuing in Christ aâ— S. Augustine very well expoundeth And in another place speaking vnto the Iewes Ioan. 10. v. 17. he sayth If I doe not the workes of my Father belieue me not 10. But if the authority of Christ which was most exellent in it selfe and immediatly from God stood in need of those meanes wherby it might become knowne vnto vs to the end it might oblige vs to belieue it much more the authority of the Scripture will stand in need
age afterward she hath done the same For since the sixt hundred yeare all these Nations were conuerted to the faith of Baron Tom. 9. 10. 11. 12. Magdeb Cenâ— 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. vbiq cap. â— Christ by the children of the Roman Church the Germanes the Francones Bauarians VVandalls Bulgarians Sclâ—uonians Polonians Danes Morauians Hungarians Nâ—râ—egians Frisones Normans Sueuians Visigothes Lituanians as not only Catholike writers do testify which Baronius alleadgeth but euen our Aduersaries also in their Ecclesiasticall histories And in this our age how many haue byn conuerted from Idolatry to the faith of Christ in the East and VVest Indies by the preachers of the Roman Church only none is ignorant 11. This office of the Church in tymes past Tertullian obserued VVhat shall I Tertull. de praesc aduers Haeret. 42. speake of the preaching and administration of the word of God seing that this office and busines belongeth not vnto them he speaketh of heretikes who do not conuert Infidells but ouerthrowe and peruert Christians 12. And S. Augustine for the same cause S. Aug. Tom. 8. l. 13. cont â—austum Manich. c. 12. Ierem. 7. v. 11. saith that Heretikes are compared to a Partridge by the Prophet Ieremy where it is said That a Partridge nourisheth and gathereth togeather those which she hath not brought forth For S Augustine affirmeth that Heretikes go about to seduce and deceyue Christians whom they see borne againe to God by the Ghospell of Christ 13. The third reason The proper office of the Church is to preuaile against all persecutors The gates of hell saith our Matt. 16. v. 18. S. Hilar. l. 7. de Trinit circa principiâ—m Lord shall not preuaile against my Church Hereupon saith Hilary This is the propertie of the Church that she then preuâ—ileth most when she is persecuted then she is vnderstood when she is reprehended then she getteth the victory when she is as it were forsaken But the Roman Church hath susteyned hitherto many persecutions contradictions assaults and false slaunders but she hath euer gotten the victory both of the Gentills Heretikes bad ChristiaÌ„s persecuting the Church of God as all Ecclesiasticall histories experience also doth testify For euen to this day for the space of almost a thousand and six hundred yeares she is still constant immoueable and inuincible in despite of all her Aduersaries 14. Our Aduersaries indeed in diuers bookes published against the Pope of Rome heape vp togeather many in diuers ages who haue opposed themselues against him but they can find none who haue at any time quite ouerthrowne the Roman Church VVe know very well that wicked men are neuer wanting who vehemently oppose themselues against Balâ—us Magdeb. Centur. the deuout seruants of God but at the last they are all ouercome by the Church and they shall neuer get the victory against her For Christ did not say that the gates of hell should not oppugne his Church but that they should neuer preuaile against her 15. Finally looke how many oppugners and perlecutors of the Roman Matt. 16. v. 18. Church our Aduersaries heape togeather so many famous monumeÌ„ts vnawares do they erect by which the triumphes of the Roman Church are commended to posterity against their wills But there cannot be a famous victory vnlesse some conflict went before so we see truly fullfilled in the Church of Rome that which loÌ„g before was foretold by the Prophet Dauid in the person of the true Church of God They haue often oppugned me euen from any youth but they could not preuaile the which is Psal 128. vel tuxta Heb. 129. v. 2. better expressed in the Hebrew text as may be seene in the Latin Edition 16. This continuall victory of the Romane Church against her enemies S. Paul foretold very clearly when he wrote in this manner to the same Church the God of peace wil crush SataÌ„ vnder your feete quickly Rom. vlt. v. 20. S. Hier. in Apol. aduers Ruffin S. Cypr. Epist 55. ad Cornel seul 1. Epist 3. To this very place appertaineth that which S. Hierome writeth to wit that the Roman faith being confirmed by the althority of S. Paul cannot be changed albeit an Angell should teach the contrary to that which was once preached And before him S. Cyprian when he sayth that the Romans are those vnto whom falshood or infidelity can haue noe accesse 17. The fourth reason The office of the true Church to is keepe and preserue alwayes fayth sound and without any stayne of heresy which then she performeth when she discouereth and condemneth all hereticall and erroneous opinions and when she explicateth and declareth all doubtfull and obscure points of fayth Moreouer she commaundeth obstinate and wilfull persones to hold their peace Finally she ceÌ„sureth all erroneous and daungerous books lest Catholikes be indomaged therby eyther in fayth or in good manners All these things the Roman Church and no other as appeareth by all historiographers hath alwayes euer since the Apostles tyme performed yea there are many heresies the which euen our Aduersaries doe condemne which were in tymes past not by any generall Councell but only by the Church of Rome suppressed as that of the Pelagians Donatists Priscillianistes c. 18. The fifth reason The office of S. Ambr in orat de obitufratris Satyri Victor l. 1. 2. de Vandal persecut the true Church is by her name coÌ„munion to distinguish true Catholikes from false and counterfaite but by the name and Communion of the Roman Church Catholikes were alwayes distinguished from heretikes He asked the Bishop sayth S. Ambrose speaking of his brother whether he agreed with the Catholike Bishops that is to say with the Roman Church So also S. Ambrose and S. Victor S. Greg. Turon l. 1. de glor Mart. c. 25. 79. 80. Vide CoÌ„cil 3. Tolet. in princ Baron Tom. â— an 584. n. 35. in fine Euthin 2. pan tit 21. Vticensis who liued in S. Augustines tyme do testify that the Arians were wont to call Catholikes Romans or Romanists the same writeth S. Gregory Turonensis of the Arian Gothes which were in Spaine The Bishops also of Spayne being coÌ„uerted from Arianisme to the Catholike â—ayth among other things they condemned a certayne booke set forth by the Arians with this title The passage of the Romans to the Arian Church So the heretiks called Paulinians called Catholikes Romanists as Euthimius testifieth Soe finally now a dayes Catholikes are by our Aduersaries called Papists and Romanists of the Pope and Bishop of the Roman Church 19. The sixt reason the office of the true Church is to keepe and mayntaine the holy Scripture faithfully continually But our Aduersaries can assigne noe other Church as keepers of the holy Scriptures besides the Roman Church Therfore it is only the true Church of God For our Aduersaries cannot say that they receaued the holy Scripture from heauen not from
in the former edition Calu. in epist ad Reg. Angl. ante coÌ„ment in Isaiam edit illiâ—â— anni 1559. of his Commentaries vpon Isaias which was set forth in French in the yeare 1552. but in his latter latin edition in the yeare 1559. which he will needs haue accounted a new worke being now become more wary he twice omitteth that particle and that not vnaduisedly but of seâ— purpose as is manifest by his former edition 5. The second testimony is also in the same Prophet â—saiâ— in which much more clearly is declared the exceeding great honour which the Kinges and Princes of the earth shall doe vnto the Church for thus God speaketh to the Church of Isa 49. v. 23. Christ Kinges shal be thy nursing Fathers and Queenes shal be thy nursed thy shall adore thee with their faces bowed downe to the earth and liâ—ke vp the dust of thy feete Where not only is expressed that humble adoration by which one prostrateth himselfe before another bowing downe his face euen to the earth but there is further added a new metaphor of imbracing and kissing of seete put in practice by Christian Emperours Kinges and Princes therby to honour the vicar of Christ and in him the Church or rather Christ himselfe for whosoeuer with greedines and feruour hasten to the imbracing and kissing of the feete of any man seeme as it were to licke and thereby to wipe away the dust of his feete for the Hebrew word signifyeth to wipe away in what manner soeuer as may be seene in the booke of Numbers the 22. Chap. and the 4. v. and the 3. of Kings Chap. 18. v. 38. 6. The Prophet Isay then in these wordes foretold that Kings Queenes that is Princes men and women should prostrat theÌ„selues down to the earth at the feet of the Church so as by imbracing and kissing therof they should seem to wipe away the very dust of the Churches feet which prophesy hath byâ— fullfilled of old and as we see is still fullfilled in the Roman Church by the humble and Religious submission expressed by Christian Catholike Princes in the imbracing and kissing of the Bishop of Romes feet the supreme head of the Church on earth which kind of Religious worship seeing it was so many ages agoe foretold by the Prophet our Aduersaries haue smal reason to thinke the same so absurd a thing or so much estranged from Christian piety 7. The third testimony is taken from the same Prophet which no lesse manifestly doth shew vnto vs that such an adoration and kissing of the Churches feete was to be practised as hath byn sayd for amongst many other thinges which he fore telleth appertayning to the Maiesty and powerfull authority of the Kingdome of Christ Isa 60. v. 14. to come he setteth downe this promise made by God to the Church The sonnes of them that humbled and afflicted thâ—â— shall come and bow vnto thee and all they that detracted from thee shall adore thy footsteeps which in the Hebrew is much more cleare where it is thus they shall adore the bendings of thy feete then the which nothing could be sayd more manifestly for the adoration of the Churches feete in her visible head for the beÌ„dings of the feete by the figure Synecdoche signify the feet themselues as may be seene in the third of Iâ—suâ— and the 13. v. For the bendings of the feete in that place are in the 15. v. follownig called feet so the bendings of the hands themselues 1. Reg. 5. v. 4. and 4. Reg. 9. c. v. 35. which wordes of the Prophet conuince Caluâ—n as malbe sayd We see then how the Prophet Isaias not in one place only but in many fortelleth this adoration as a thing very remarkable and which greatly setteth forth the honour and excellency of the Church of Christ 8. The fourth testimony is to be seene in the Apocalyps where S. Iohn testifieth in expresse tearmes that God made such a promise to the Angell that is to the Bishop of the Church of Philadelphia Behold I will make them coâ—e and adore before thy seete and they shall know that I haue loued thee Apocal. â— v. 9. which is all one as if he had said I will make them come and adore thy feere for in the Scripture according to the Hebrew phrase to adore before any thing 1. Reg. 1. v. 19. is to adore the thing so Elcana and Anna his wife are said to haue adored before our Lord when they adored our Lord himselfe so S. Iohn in his Apocalyps writeth that all Nations shall come and adore before God Apoc. 15. v. 4. that is they shall adore God himselfe lastly that which by S. Lukâ— is expressed in these wordes if thou shalt adore before me Luc. 4. v. 7. Matth. 4. v. 9. S. Matthew expresseth thus if falling downe thou shalt adore me It is all one therfore in the Scripture to adore before a thing and to adore the thing Moreouer if God was willing and pleased that men should adore th◠〈◊〉 of the Bishop of Philadelphia much more gratefull and acceptable will it be to him that Christians with a godly affection should prostrate themselues at his feeâ—e who is the supreme Bishop of the whole Church and by kissing of them exhibite vnto him not only a Câ—â—ill but also a Religious adoration adoring him in God and for God which is well Apoc. 3. v. 9. expressed by God himselfe when he saith they shall know that I haue loued thee so as this adoration must be admitted or expresse Scriptures denied 9. Neyther is this any whit differing from the custome of the auncient Church as our Aduersaries obiect but rather very conformable and agreable therunto for it is manifest that kissing of feete was exhibited of old not only to Hier. pist 61 ad Pamach n. â—5 iux edit Mariani Victor Chrys HoÌ„ 14. in 1. epist ad Tim. the Bishop of Rome but also to other holy personages For thus writeth S. Hierome of blessed Epiphanius Men and women of all ages did flock vnto him in great troupes offering their little ones kissing his feete c. And S. Chrysostome vehemently exhorteth the people to prostrate themselues at the feete of all Monkes in signe of honour and reuerence Come saith he and touch thir holy feet for it is much more hâ—â—â—â—â—rable to touch their fâ—â—t then to touch the head of others 10. And that it was an auncient custome in the Roman Church that such as came to salute the supreme Bishop should prostrate themselues and kisse his feete is sufficiently proued by the history of S. Susanna recited by Baronius and Tertullian Baron ToÌ„ 2. an 294. n. vlt. who liued a hundred yeares before Susanna maketh also not obscure mention hereof for describing the manner after which in his tyme penitents were wont to be receaued in the Roman Church amongst other thinges he saith that penitents were wont to fall downe to the