be very hard for them to discerne that which is true from that which is false Wherfore we will endeauour in euery particuler Controuersy to set downe the true state of the question Afterward we will lay open the foundation of the Catholike doctrine And lastly we will plainly and briefly answere the chiefe obiections of our Aduersaries whether they be drawne out of the Scriptures or taken from the Fathers 3. And because our Aduersaries euermore boast and brag of the written Word of God pretending out of it only to proue their doctrine impugne ours our chiefe care shal be to shew that the Catholike and Roman faith is both euidently and strongly to be confirmed out of the wrirten Word of God and the doctrine of our Aduersaries to haue no foundation at all in the holy Scriptures but is manifestly opposite repugnant therunto yet so as we will set downe the vniforme conseÌ„t of the auncient Church to be agreeing with vs in euery Controuersy leauing the more ample search of antiquity vnto others to whome we will referre the Reader setting downe their particuler names so loath we are that this booke of ours should grow too great and for the same reason we haue thought good to omit many arguments which might be drawne out of the holy Scriptures for confirmation of the Catholike faith contenting our selues to set downe only the more solide and euident proofes because we are resolued to be as briefe as may be CHAP. II. Of the Word of God in generall THE word of God if we speake of it in generall may be considered two wayes either for that One Eternall and Infinite Word which contayneth perfectly in it selfe whatsoeur is in the mind of Almighty God which is the same with the Sonne of God and Word of the Father of whome S. Iohn speaketh in his Ghospell saying In the beginning was the VVord and of this Word we are to say nothing heere but the Word of God may be other wise coÌ„sidered and taken for that Word which was not alwayes nor contayneth all thinges which are in the mind of God but a small part only of them to wit such thinges as God would haue vs know and belieue and of the Word of God in this sense we speake now For this Word is the proper and complete obiect of our faith 2. Moreouer this Word hath two conditions or properties the one is that the same be reuealed vnto vs for there are innumerable verities in the mind of God the which bâ—cause they are not reuealed to vs do not appâ—rtayne to this Word The other is that it be immediatly reuealed by God for such thinges as God manifesteth Rom. 2. v. 19. â—0 Heb. 11. v. 1. vnto vs by naturall reason appertayne not to this Word of God called therfore by the Deuines the reuealed Word of God 3. Of this Word of God so vnderstood there is no Controuersy betwene vs and our Aduersaries but only in wordes for wherâ—s our Aduersaries say that Catholikes affirme that we must with diuine fayth belieue the words of men or which is worse rather belieue the words of men then the Word of God it is a meere slaunder for there is no Catholike so ignorant but he knoweth that the Theologicall vertue Faith relieth altogeather vpon the pure sincere and certayne Word of God alone according to that of S. Paul VVhen you had receiued of vs the 1. Thes 2. v. 13. word of the hearing of God you receaued it not as the word of men but as the VVord of God as indeed it is Neyther can any man doubt but that the reuealed word of God is partly the written Word contayned in the Canonicall bookes of the old and new Testament partly vnwritten and deliuered by tradition and preaching of which vnwritten â— Thes c. 2. v. 14. 1. ad Cor. 15. v. 1. ad Gal. 1. v. â— 1. Pet. 1. v. vlâ— word the Scripture maketh mention in many places but we will first treat of the written Word CHAP. III. Of the written Word of God THE witten Word of God consisteth of two parts of the Letter which euery man may read in the books themselues and in the true seÌ„se of the Letter which is as it were the very soule and life thereof without which the Letter alone rather killeth theÌ„ quickneth or giueth life as we see euidently by experience in the Iewes Arians all other heretikes as well new as old for the Iewes hold theÌ„selues stiffely to the Letter of the old TestameÌ„t the Arians as also in a manner all other heretikes receiue eyther altogeather or for the greatest part the Letter of the new but because they will not acknowledge the true sense of the Letter Iewes they are Heretikes they are Catholikes they are not And surely the Letter alone without the true sense cannot truly and properly be called the Word of God no more then a body without a soule can truly and properly be called a man wherefore they which spoile the Letter of the true sense may be compared to them who beâ—eaue a man of his soule and life 2. But whosoeuer do substitute another contrary sense and meaning in place of the true do no otherwise then they who not only kill a man but by Art Magicke bring into the body of the man killed some other diabolicall spirit by which the dead body is so moued and stirred as it seemeth to many to be aliue all this is so manifest a truth as our Aduersaâ—ies themselues are not able to deny it 3. This to haue byn the doctrine of the auncient Church sufficiently appeareth Aug. ser â—8 de temp by the words of S. Augustine The vnhappy Iewes sayth he more vnhappy Heretikes whilst they attend only to the sound of the Letter as a body without a soule so they remayne dead and voyd of the spirit which quickneth And els where All Heretickes which receiue Aug Epist 22â— the Scriptures and their authority will seem to follow them wheras indeed they follow rather their owne errors and are therefore Heretikes not because they contemne them but because they do not vnderstand them And before him S. Hilary that honour of the French Nation RemeÌ„ber Hil. l. ad Constant Imperat. saith he that there is not one of the heretikes which doth not say that he preacheth now according to the Scriptures euen those thinges in which he blasphemeth albeit he lieth in so saying And a little after All of them speake Scriptures without the true sense meaning they preteÌ„d sayth without fayth indeed for the Scriptures consist not so much in the reading as in the vnderflaÌ„ding neither are they vnderstood of such as go into preuarication but continue and abide in charity Moreouer S. Hierome Let vs not thinke sayth Hieron in c. 1. ad Gal. he the Ghospell to be in the words of the Scripture but in the sense not in the out side but in the inside
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
very well be applyed in this manner to the Roman Church I know saith he what is written in the holy and Canonicall Scriptures concerning the Church of Rome and the faith therof I know not what you say of her Apostacy or falling from her sayth Truly as we do reade in bookes the which you also do honour reuerence of the Roman Church and faith therof so also reade you vnto vs out of bookes the which we also do honour and reuerence how she forsooke and lost her faith Doth it please you that we should belieue euery slaunderous reproach of men vpon what occasion soeuer it was vttered and obiected against the Roman Church the which the holy Ghost hath both deliuered coÌ„mended vnto vs by his holy Scriptures this indeed is pleasing to you but whom also it should more iustly please you see well inough but you being ouercome by obstinacy will not yield to the truth And a little after Lo heere the Roman Church Rom. 1. v. 7. Rom. 1. v. 8. with whome I communicate where I reade thee her name there finde thou me her saultes if thou canst but if thou cryest and rehearsest them from some other place we following the voyce of our Pastour euidently declareth vnto vs by the mouth of the Apostle S. Paul do not admit belieue or heare Ioan. 10. v. 17. your wordes My sheepe saith our heauenly Pastour heare my voice and follow me His testimony of the Roman Church is not obscure but very cleare and manifest VVhosoeuer will not go astray or wander Rom 1. v. 7. 8. from his flock let him heare him let him follow him Hitherto S. Augustine 20. Finally it is heere diligently to be noted that our Aduersaries neuer durst be so bould as to affirme so strange and absurd things of the Church of Rome so auncient in it selfe and so commended by all the auncient holy Fathers yea and by the Apostle S. Paul himselfe but that they Rom. 1. v. 7. 8. falsely perswade themselues that she hath lost and forsaken the true doctrine of Christ Heereupon they say that Rome is Babylon and they are not ashamed to affirme the Pope to be Antichrist But if it were once proued manifestly that the Roman Church teacheth nothing which is not very agreable to the word of God all our Aduersaries weapons against the Church of Rome will easily be blunted and ouerthrowne and also they wil be forced to confesse with Caluin that the Calu. l. 4. Inst cap. 1. sect 10â— infine breach from this Church is the denyall of God and Christ or that there cannot be imagined any fault more heynous But this God willing shal be more euidently hereafter declared in euery Controuersy CHAP. IX Of the Adoration of the Pope of Rome of the kissing of his feete AMongst other Crimes wherewith the Roman Church is charged by our Aduersaries one at which many take offence is the adoration of the Pope and the kissing of his feete We will therefore in this Chapter say some what in iustification therof for if it shall appeare that nothing is done therein which is not warranted by the written word it will appeare how little reasoÌ„ they haue to tearme that impioâ—â— Idolatry which is nothing els indeed but Religious piety 2. Howbeit we are first to forwarne the Reader to the end he be not deceaued by the name of AdoratioÌ„ that AdoratioÌ„ in the holy Scripture hath two significations in 1. Paral. vlt. v. 28. Gen. 2. v. 7. Gâ—n 27. v. 28. Gen. 49. v. â— the one it appertayneth to God alone in the other it may without any sinne at all yea with great merit be giuen to men And of adoration in both senses are verified those wordes of the Scripture they adored first God and then the King Many other places of Scripture there are which approue this adoration of men of which only we now treate For this adoration only is exhibited to the Pope not that other which belongeth only to God and it is exhibited vnto him as the Vicar of Christ wheras the other cannot be exhibited but to the true God himselfe Now there are foure testimonies of holy Scripture which euidently prooue that the adoration of the Pope is not only lawfull but also dutifull 3. The first testimonie is that which the Phophet I say recordeth in these wordes Isaiae 45. v. 14. Thus saith our Lord the labour of Egipt the merchaÌ„dâ—ze of Ethiopia the eminent men of the Sabeans shall come vnto thee and they shal be thine they shall follow thee they shall go with their handes manacled or bound in chaines and they shall adore thee and make supplication vnto thee It is manistest that the Prophet in this place speaketh not to Christ but to the Church for all the verbes and pronownes in the Hebrew text are of the feminine gender and not of the masculine besides it appeareth euidently by all that goeth before these wordes and all that followeth that this promise was made to the Church of Christ The Prophet therfore saith that the labour negotiatioÌ„ that is the riches gotten togeather by labour and negotiation of Egipt and Ethiopia and the eminent persons of the Sabeans by whome are vnderstood the Princes of the Gentils shall passe ouer to the Church and they shâ—lbe the Churches and they shall walke after the Church in manacles by which are signified Ecclesiasticall lawes and that they shall adore the Church and make supplication to her 4. And it is to be obserued that the Hebrew word in the last coÌ„iugation as it is vsed heere and in a manner euery where els signifyeth to prostrate ones selfe before another not howsoeuer but by way of ador ation as all that are skilfull in the Hebrew tongue know in so much as the adoratioÌ„ done oÌ„ly to God is often expressed by this word This therfore is the true sense and meaning of this place they shall prostrate themselues before thee therby to exibite adoration vnto thee We haue therefore out of the Scripture that the Church and consequently Calu. eoÌ„ment in Isa 45. v. 14. edit ann 1559. GeÌ„ apuds Ioan. â—rispinum the Ministeriall head thereof not only may but must be adored vnlesse we will make God to faâ—sify his promise But the crafty dealing of Caluin heere is to be detected who to abuse the Reader leaueth out in his latin translation twice the Pronowne Te that this adoration may not seeme to be referred to the Church but eyther to God or to Christ for he translateth not adorabunt-te obsecrabunt ie but thus Adorabunt atque obsecrabunt whereas in the Hebrew the particle te is twice put in the â—â—â—â—inine gender so as this adoration and obsecration must needes be referred to the Church and therfore those of Genena durst not omit the same neyther in their French Bibles not in their corrupt translation which they call Vatublus no nor Culuin himselfe
will stand for a reason for we will not be the papists schollers but their Iudges Luther will haue it so he saith that he is a Doctor aboue all the popes Dâ—ctors So Luther concluding at last that the word alone shal remayne in his new Testament though it should make all his Aduersaries mad and he addeth further that he is only sory that he had not added two wordes more to the text and translated it after this manner we are iustifyed by only faith without any workes of any law 4. Zwinglius also who first in our age endeauored to perswade many that the body of Christ is not really contayned in the Sacrament of the Eucharist the better to establish this his error goeth about to Zuing. l. de vera falsa relig c. de Euchar. §. 202. in lib. excuso Tiguri 1555. proue that those words of Christ this is my bâ—dy are very well translated thus this signifieth my body with this his new translation he is so rauished as if he had receaued the same from heauen for these are his words So therefore hath Luke with whome we content our selues without citing any other Euangelist And hauing taken bread he gaue thankes brake it and gaue it them saying This signifyeth my body which is giuen for you do this in remembrance of me Thou seest O faithfull soule but yet wrapped in absurd opinions how all thinges heere agree and nothing is violently eyther taken away or added so as thou hast cause to wonder that thou hast not byn alwayes of this opinion and much more that any dare so boldly teare and rent the body of this speach so well ioyned together So Zwinglius in the praise of his new translation wherein he arrogates more authority to himselfe theÌ„ is due so as that of Cicero in his booke de diuinatione may well be applyed to him I neuer saw any man arrogate greater authority to himselfe and in the end say iust nothing 5. Moreouer concerning Caluins and Bezas errors in translating or rather peruerting the holy Scriptures whole books Calu l. 2. instit c. 16. in c. 26. Matt. v. 39. inc 27. â—â—aâ—th v. 46. Item in Catech. Dom. 10. Bez. in c. 5. ad Heb. v. 7. traÌ„ct Theol. pag. 657. iuxta edit Geneu 1582. are extant as also of the corruptions of the Geneua Bibles which are euery yeare increased but this shall much more commodiously be declared heerafter in the particuler CoÌ„trouersies We will only heere set downe one example of a corruption to be found in Caluins Bezas and all the Geneua Bibles And this coruption is forged of purpose by them to confirme a new and notable blasphemy against Christ and himselfe by some apparent testimony of Scripture for they teach in many places that Christ when he praied in the Garden was seized with an extreme feare least God being angry with him for our sinnes for which he had taken vpon him to satisfy should inflict vpon him eternall damnation neither did Christ feare without cause for they say he suffered vpon the Crosse the paynes of a damned person the torments of hell for these are the impioâ—s words of Caluin Christ suffered in his soule the torments of a forlorne and damned man and Beza saith at what tyme Christ hange vpon the Crosse he was in the middest euen of the torments of hell which is as much as to say that God himselfe was not only afraid of the torments of hell but that he suffered and endured them for it is euident that Christ was true God But against these absurd Paradoxes we are to dispute heerafter It shall suffice heere to shew that they haue depraued the holy Scripture to fortify this theyr impious assertion for wheras it is written in the fifth to the Hebrewes Heb. 5. v. 7. and 7. v. that Christ was heard of God for his reuerence Caluin first and after Beza and all the Geneua Bybles make the text to say Christ was heard by reason of his feare or because he was afraid but that in Bez. annot anni 1598. the last Edition Beza hath added more words to the text making it sound thus His prayer being heard he was deliuered frâ—Ì„ this feare Moreouer Caluin in his commentaries and Beza in his annotations seeke to proue out of this text that Christ feared eternall damnation that he was deliuered out of this feare by his prayers which he offered with teares true it is that in the French Bibles lately printed at Geneua in the yeare 1605. they haue put in the margent vel pro sua reuerentia where inforced by truth they manifestly contradict Caluin and Beza who plainly deny that this place is so to be traÌ„slated yet least their inconstancy should be noted they leaue the former words in the text ayant estè exaucé de ce qu' il craignoit that is in latin exauditus est ex â—o vel in eo quod timuit 6. But all others as well Catholikes as their Aduersaires who haue written before Caluin translate pro sua reuerentia vel pro pietate sua as Erasmus Bucer the Tigurines in their Bibles of the yeare 1542. Nay Sebastian Castalio for this cause sharply reprehendeth Castal in defen suae translat Bibl. in fine Castalio for this cause sharply reprehendeth Beza who glorieth that Caluin was the first that found out this new explication in a note of his vpon this 7. v. See his editions the yeare 1560. 1565. 7. The third shift is their false exposition of the text though neuer so truly translated for by diuers commentaries and little notes in the margent they goe about to perswade their Readers the clean contrary to that which is expressely in the text See examples hereof in this Chapter in the latin edition CHAP. XV. The fourth fifth and sixt shift that our Aduersaries vse in deprauing the Word of God THE fourth shift of our Aduersaries is to fly to figuratiue and metaphoricall speaches for it is most true that was Aug. l. 3 dedoct Christ cap. 10. wittily obserued by S. Augustine If sayth he the mind be preoccupated with any erroneous opinion whatsoeuer the Scripture saith to the contrary men take to be a figuratiue speach And surely there is no kind of figuratiue speaking to which our aduersaries at one tyme or another haue not recourse but there are three figures of which our Aduersaries doe oftenest serue themselues in deprauing the holy Scriptures which Matt. â—â— v. 26. Calâ— l. 4. Instit c. 17. sect 21. are these Metonymia Hyperbole and Ironia Metonymia is a figure very familiar with Caluin for by it he peruerteth many places of Scripture yea euen those plaine words of Christ this is my body for hauing disputed long about the sense of those words at last he concludeth thus I omit sayth he Allegories and Parables least any man should thinke that I seeke euasions and to go from the matter in
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
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
this manner For the solution saith he L. Item apud §. A it Prâ—tor ff dâ— iniurijs of all things which may heere be alledged by the Philosophers for thus he calleth the Catholikes thou must obserue this rule which is an axiome among Lawiers that those thinges which do not deserue any speciall note or marke are vnderstood and esteemed as things neglected vnlesse they be specially noted But I pray thee iudge whether this article of the Trinity deserue any speciall note or no seeing that it is the chiefest and first ground of all our faith whereof the whole knowledge of God and Christ dependeth And whether it be expressely noted or no may be seene by reading ouer the Scriptures seing that there is not one word to be fouÌ„d of the Trinity in the whole Bible nor of the persons therof nor of the essence or vnity of the supposition nor of the vnity of nature in many distinct thinges and such like Thus farre Seruetus By this it euidently appeareth that all these monstrous strange opinions of latter Arians who are also called Anti-trinitarians do proceed from this one principle of our Aduersaries to wit that we must only belieue Scriptures and by this they are encreased But let vs now see other matters 9. The second point of faith is that Infants are to be baptized But our Aduersaries will neuer shew this in the holy Ioan. 3. v. 1. Scriptures For that one place which doth clearly conuince this to wit vnlesse he be borne againe of water and the spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdome of God they wrest and expound it in another sense For they will Calu. in cap. 5. Ioan. v. 5. not haue this word water to signify the element of water but the holy Ghost so Caluin Hence arose that wicked sect of the Anabaptistes who affirme now adayes that it is an vnlaw full and prophane thing to baptize Infants seing that there is no solide reason heereof extant in the Scriptures 10. For that wherunto Caluin and his followers do fly for refuge to wit that in the old Law Infants were circuÌ„cised Genes 17. v. 10. the Anabaptistes do easily confuâ—e both because coÌ„cerning that there was an expresse precept of God but there was none of the baptisme of Infants and the similitude also betwixt circumcision and baptisme doth not hold in all thinges for otherwise S. Aug Tom. 6. de haer cap. 84. S. Hier. coÌ„tra Hel uid Author de Eccl. dogm cap. 69. S. Ambros in Epist 7. ad SiriciuÌ„ Papam Epiph. haer 78. lunius coÌ„tra Bellar Controu 1. lib. 4. c. 9. nota 5. women should not be baptized but only men 11. The third point of faith is that the Blessed Virgin Mary the mother of God remayned allwayes a Virgin euen after her childbyâ—th For this is extant no where in Scripture and yet Heluidius was condemned as an Heretike by the whole auncient Church because he presumed to deny it 12. When Card. Bellarmine had alleadged this vn writteÌ„ point of faith to proue that all such pointes of faith were not expresly set downe in holy Writ Francisâ—us Iunius to answere vnto this difficulty was forced to take and approue the condemned heresy of Heluidius For he denyeth that we ought to belieue as a point of faith the perpetuall Virginity of our B. Lady But the ancient Fathers had neuer condemned Heluidius aâ— an Heretike vnlesse he had denyed a point of faith But in this manner are our Aduersaries forced to renew the old heresies of tymes past to the end they may defend this their paradoxe that we must only belieue Scriptures CHAP. IIII. Whether there are any pointes of faith to be alleadged which are no where extant in the Bible THE fourth Point that our Aduersaries also belieue but without expresse Scripture for it is that Christians cannot lawfully Concil Trident. sess 24. c. 2. haue more wyues at once for the Councell of Trent hath very well defined this to be a point of faith against the heresy of these tymes wherof we will speake more presently But yet our Aduersaries can neuer proue this out of Scripture only abstracting from the authority of the Church albeit they also agree with vs in the beliefe heerof Yea the examples of holy Scripture do rather perswade the coÌ„trary For those most holy men Abraham Iacob Dauid and many others had more wyues at once yet neuer did God reprehend this in them albeit he often sâ—ake vnto them Beza Ep. 1. ad Andream Dudiâ—ium 2. When Bernardine Ochiâ—e one of Caluins schollers did consider this he was not afrayd to perswade both by word and writing that Polygamy was yet lawfull of whome and of his most wicked life Beza writeth at large â— But Ochinus grounded only this his heresy in that principle of our Aduersaries before alledged to wit that we must belieue nothing which is not expresly in Beza in lib de Poligamia extat in iâ—it voluminis 2. suarum Tract Theol. Scripture And whereupon Beza himself in his booke which he wrote against the same Ochinus doth testyfy that Ochinus vsed this argument where Beza also manifestly acknowledgeth that Polygamy is not forbidden in holy Scripture by any expresse Law The other argumenâ— saith Beza of Ochinus is that Polygamy is not forbidden by any expresse law to the contrary but I answere that there are not lawes written of all thinges Thus Beza 3. But after ward indeed Beza goeth about to proue that Poligamy is contrâ—ry to the Law of Nature but the same difficulty still remayneth For according to our Aduersaries doctrine all thinges necessary to saluation are expressed in holy Scripture but the obseruatioÌ„ of all things belonging to the Law of Nature is altogeather necessary to saluation therefore the obseruation of these thinges is expressed in Scriptures or els truly many thinges necessary to saluation must be sought for out of the Scriptures Moreouer that Poligamy is vnlawfull is a point of faith but this as Beza confesseth is not expressely contayned in Scriptures therfore all the pointes of faith are not expressely contained in Scriptures 4. The first point of faith is that the Sacrament of Baptisme may only be giuen in water For this point is also very necessary for the Church least so great and worthy a Sacrament be prophaned contrary to the institution of Christ and yet our aduersaries will neuer be able to proue this out of the Scriptures only who deny that the forsaid place of S. Iohn is to be vnderstood of true water as we haue said before in the second point For the examples of holy Scripture do proue indeed §. 9. cap. praeced Beza Epist 2. ad Tho. Tilium fratrem Symmistam suum that water is the fit matter of Baptisme but they do not proue that there can be no other matter 5. When Beza did consider this well least that his foresayd principle that we must belieue nothing but
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
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
publican 18. Fiftly the Church hath power and authority to punish VVhat will you 1. Cor. 4. v. vlt. 2. Cor. vlt. v. 2. 2. Cor. vlt. v 10. sayth the Apostle that I come vnto you with a rodde or in charity and with the spirit of mildnesse And in another place If I come againe I will not spare And againe that being present I may not deale hardly according to the power which our Lord hath giuen me vnto edification and not vnto destruction 19. Sixtly the Church absolueth byndeth and retayneth sinnes excommunicateth Matth. 18. v. 19. Ioan. 20. v. 23. as the holy Scriptures doe expresly testify and our Aduersaries doe also confesse all which actes belong vnto Iudges but the Scripture doth none of them 20. The second argument The holy Scripture expresly affirmeth that the Church doth sometymes iudge I indeed absent in body but present in spirit haue 1. Cor. 5. v. 34. 5. already iudged as present him that hath so done in the name of our Lord Iesus Christ you being gathered togeather and my spirit with the vertue of our Lord Iesus Christ to deliuer such an one to Sathan And a little after Do not you iudge of them that are within where the Apostle â— Cor. 5. v. 12. plainly saith that the Pastours of the Church iudge those which are in the Church 21. The third argument is taken from the common practice of the Church aswell in the old as in the new Num. 11. â— 16. 17. 25. Deut. 17. â— 8. â—eq 2. Par. 19. v. â—0 11. Testament For in the old Testament the chiefe iudgement of all causes was ordeined by God himselfe first in the booke of Numbers and afterward it was confirmed in Deuteronomy in which Iudgment the priestes did sit as Iudges and the chiefe Iudge who did giue his sentence for in all thinges which were doubtfull by the expresse commaundement of God the common people were sent to this Iudgment of the Church and not only to the holy Scriptures or to the priuate spirit of any 22. Moreouer till the comming of Christ this manner of iudging continued in the old Law For of it Christ himselfe sayd Vpon the chaire of Moyses haue sitten the sâ—ribes and the Pharisies All thinges therfore whatsoeuer they shall say to you obserue yâ—e and doe yee this Councell or Iudgment in the yeares following by corâ—upting the Greeke word the Iewes called Sanhedrin Matt. 2. v. 2. 3. as it were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say an assembly or Councell 13. In like manner in the new Testament when there arose that controuersy about the obseruation of the legaâ—l ceremonies or customes the Apostles did not Act. 15. v. 28. send their disciples to the holy Scriptures only or to the priuate spirit of any but they assembled themselues togeather and defined what was to be belieued It seemed good say they to the holy Ghost and vs. For Act. 15. v. vlt. Act. 16. v. 4. the holy â—host is as it were the soule of the Church And this Decree of the Apostles S. Paul and S. Barnabas did diuulge and promulgate euery where as appeareth by the same Chapter and the next following where these determinations of the Apostles are called Decrees or according Act. 21. v. 25. to the Greek Phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to sâ—y things already iudged wherupon Act. 21. vers 25. the Apostles doe say that iudging and decreeing they had written this 24. In the same manner in the next ages the Arians the MacedoniaÌ„s the Nestorians Eutichians and other old Heretikes were iudged condemned by the Catholike Church in the generall Councells holden at Nice Constantinople Calcedon and others 25. Lastly our Aduersaries in their Consistories and Assemblies doe vsurpe vnto themselues the authority of iudges neither doe they referre the iudgment to the Scriptures alone or to the priuate spirit of any 26. Yea Caluin conuinced by these reasons confesseth that the writinges of euery priuate person must be submitted to the iudgmeÌ„t of the Church Where he also concludeth thus Neither therefore sayth he do we condemne or diminish the authority of the Church neyther do we giue liberty â—o euery froward Calu. in Antid contra Conâ—il Trid. sess 1. in fine fellow to do what he list I would to God they would shew vs such a Church as the holy Scripture doth paint or describe vnto vs we would easily agree about the honour thereof Thus he But we will shew in the ensuing Chapters such a Church as the Scripture describeth I wish also we may agree concerning the honour and authority thereof 27. There are two principall argumentâ— of our Aduersaries the first is that the holy Ghost is not tyed vnto men but â—udgeth freely in whatsoeuer it pleaseth him therefore he is not tyed vnto the Church But the same argument would proue that there is no certainty in the holy Scriptures For they who wrote the Scriptures were men vnto whome according to our Aduersaries opinion the holy Ghost was not tyed I answere therfore that the holy Ghost is not absolutly bound or tyed vnto men but he is tyed to his owne promise as also to the words and promises of Christ For neither the holy Ghost nor Christ himselfe can deceiue vs in not performing their promises because as the Apostle Tit. 1. v. 2. sayth God cannot lie But God hath promised that he wil be with his Church not only one or two dayes or one yeare but euen till the end of the world He promised that he would giue the holy Ghost to remayne Math. vit v. vlt. and stay with vs not for one or two yeares only but euerlastingly It is needfull therfore that he performe and stand to his promises 28. The second argument If those things which we haue said of the Church as Iudge were true it would also follow that the Church is Iudge of the holy Scripture and consequently of the word of God in generall I answere that the word of God in generall cannot be called in question or doubted of by any which professeth Christ For the diuine faith cannot be without some word of God but where there is noe controuersy there is no neede of any Iudge But if of any one part of the word of God whether it be written or not written there arise any controuersy as for example of the true sense of the written word without doubt we must recurre vnto the iudgement of the Church for it belongeth vnto her to iudge of the truesense of the holy Scripture and of the exposition thereof which is the chiefer Ioan. 14. v. 16. part of the written word as also of any doubtfull letter of the holy Scripture for seeing that in times past there haue beene many controuersyes of diuers books of holy Scripture and of the particuler Chapters and parts thereof as also of the true sense of the letter and other
Tertul. de paenitent c. 9. Priests and to kneele to the dearely beloued of God which is nothing â—lâ— but kneeling downe to adore And the same Tertullian els where saith that they were Tertul. de pudicit c. 13. wont to licke vp the footesteps of euery one that past where he seemeth to allude to those wordes of the Prophet Isay cited Isa 49. v. 23. Isa 60. v. 4. a little aboue they shall licke vp the dust of thy seete and adore the steppes of thy feete Now if it be so that they licked the footestepeâ— of all Christians much more doubtlesse the footesteps of the supreme Bishop who receaued them into the Church and who at that tyme was called the blessed Pope as the same Tertullian witnesseth 11. Neyther doth this adoration derogate any thing from the honour of God or Christ but rather much more illustrate and set it forth for this honour is exhibited to the Bishop of Rome not for his owne holines or any other quality with which he is adorned as a priuate person but only for that authority and spirituall power which he receaued from Christ and which indeed properly appertayneth to God and to Christ and therefore in him and by him Christ whose person he representeth is honored and adored according to those words of Tertullian VVhen Tertul. de pâ—niteÌ„t ceâ—o therefore saith he thou stretchest thy selfe sorth to the knees of thy brethreÌ„ thou layest hold on Christ and makest thy supplication to Christ And this Caluin himselfe by the force of truth confesseth when he speaketh of the AdoratioÌ„ of the Church For expounding those wordes of the Prophet Isay they shall adore the steppes of thy feete or as he translateth they shall bow themselues downe to the plantes of thy feete thus he writeth Heere some man Calu in c. 60. Matth. v. 14. will aske whether this honour of which the Prophet speaketh be not too much and greater then is to be exhibited to the Church for to how our selues down and prostrate our selues are signes of that honour which no man ought to admit I answere this honour is not exhibited to the meÌ„bers but to the head to wit Christ who is adored in the Church so Caluin which also those words of God in the Apocalyps manifestly declare to be true I will make them adore thee before thy feete and they shall know that I haue loued thee for therefore is this honour exhibited to the supreme Bishop because God hath so exalted the Roman Sea and bâ—ene so liberall towards it which is a signe of exceeding great loue And heere hence it is that the same veneration is exhibited to all Bishops of Rome as well to the bad as to the good for they are not honored for their owne goodnes but for the office which Christ bestoweth vpon them As also they are called holy and most holy not for their Act. 28. v. 15. owne personall holynes but for the holines of Christ whose person and place they susteine vpon earth and for the holynes of the office which they receaue from God euen as S. Paul called Festus President of Iury very good not for any goodnes of his Baron ToÌ„ 1. anno 58. num 13. owne for he was an Infidel and a wicked man but in regard of his office for so the Presidents of Proninces were wont to be stiled as well noteth Baronius 12. Moreouer whereas in the Scripture feet signify diuine mission and vocation which is most ample in the Bishop of Rome no meruaile Rom. 10. v. 15. if greater veneration be exhibited to his feet it is to be obserued that there is a Crosse vpon his shoe which all kisse to giue vs to vnderstand that the honor is not exhibited to him but to Christ crucified whom he representeth 13. To conclude heere hence is easily solued that which our obiect of S. Peters refusing to be adored by Corneleus Act. 10. v. 25. 26. the Centuâ—ion for Cornelius adored not S. Peter in respect of Christ whose Vicar he was but in respect of himselfe whom he took to be some God as did the Licaonians Act. 10. v. 10. Hieron aduers Vigil ep 53. n. 12. iuxta edit Marian victorij thinke of Paul Barnabas so S. Hierome or surely they thought Peter to be more theÌ„ a maÌ„ as manifestly appareth by S. Peters answere Arise for I also am a man therfore Cornelius was to be admonished corrected for adoration is eyther good or bad according to the cause or reason for which it is exhibited Now the cause for which Catholikes exhibite the same to the Bishop of Rome is very good to wit the excellent power of Christ or rather Christ himselfe gouerning ruling his Church in his Vicar Act. 16. v. 26. and therfore this adoration is good and gratefull to God but the cause of Cornelius adoration was fond and false and therfore his adoration was naught and worthily reprehended 14. I know our Aduersaries often obiect that Pope Alexander the third did insolently trample vnder his feete Frederike the Emperour but this foolish fable is soundly and copiously refuted by Baronius citing the testimonies of such as were present and haue commited to writing all that passed in which there was nothing vnusuall but the Pope admited from Frederike the accustomed adoration He that desireth more concerning the kissing of the Popes feet may read Ioseph Stephâ—nus who hath written a whole booke therof it is sufficient for vs to haue briefly proued the same by many euident testimonies of holy Scripture CHAP. X. Of Generall Councells GENERAL Councells doe represent the whole body of the Catholike Church wherefore we will now speake a little of them for seeing that we haue already spoken of the head of the Church it remayneth we treat of the body therof But this we will do briefly For our Aduersaries now adaies graunt many thinges concerning this matter which in tymes past they denyed To the end therfore that the true state of this Controuersy may the better be vnderstood three thinges are to be considered which our Aduersaries hauing now learned by experience to be true do willingly graunt vnto vs. 2. The first is that these Councells are very profitable that the authority therof is not to be despised For seing that Hebr. vlâ— vers 17. the Apostle warneth vs to obey euery true Pastor much more are we bound to obey many assembled togeather For which cause our Aduersaries would also that we should all obey their synodicall assemblies Hereupon sayth Caluin Truly Calu. l. 4. Inst c. 9. sect 13. we do willingly graunt that if there happen debate about any doctrine there is no better nor surer remedy then if a Synod of true Bishops assemble togeather where the doctrine in controuersy may be discussed Thus he And euen naturall reason it selfe conuinceth this to be true as Caluin also confesseth For it is an easieâ— matter for many
that name to the Morauians at their first Conuersion to the faith of Christ but this was 880. yeares after Christ and this custome was of no long continuance amongst them as appeareth Baron Tom. 10. an 880. n. 19. Tom. 11. an 1080. n. 1. by that which Pope Gregory the sâ—auenth writeth to the Duke of Bohemia is to be seene in Caesar Baronius 6. The third assertion To translate the Scripture into the vulgar tongue is neyther in it selfe vnlawfull nor forbidden by any Ecclesiasticall law so it be truly translated Nay such a translation serueth Preachers to great vse who are to cite and expound the Scriptures to the people in the vulgar tongue Hereticall translations are indeed forbidden especially of the new Testament because in them many places of holy Scripture are by false translating corrupted 7. The fourth assertion It is not a thing profitable to all to read the Scriptures in the vulgar tongue yea to many it is rather pernicious for we are taught by â— Pet. vlt. v. 26. the Apostle S. Peter that in the Scriptures are many thinges hard to be vnderstood which vnlearned and vnstayed persoÌ„s depraue to their owne destruction Many also there are vncapable of meate and solid sustenance who are therefore to be â— Cor. 3. v. 2. Heb. â— v. 12. fed with milke as the Apostle speaketh and for such it is more wholesome to be fed by the sermons and instructions of their Pastors then to feede themselues with reading the Bible It was therefore great prudence of the Church to forbid that the Bible though translated and set forth by Catholikes should be read of Index li. â—rohâ—â— Reg. 4. all indifferently and without the approbation and leaue of the Bishop Pastor or Ghostly Father 8. Our Aduersaries obiect certayne places of S. Chrysostome and S. Hierome in which they exhort to the reading of the Scripture but they should haue obserued that those Fathers speake of reading the Scripture in the Greek tongue then extant or in the Latin according to the old edition which was neuer forbidden to any by the Church whereas our Controuersy is about the translations of the holy Scripture out of the Hebrew Greek and Latin into the vulgar tongue which are all for the most part corrupted 9. And it is worthy the noting that our Aduersaries spend their tyme in vayne in gathering togeather arguments by which to perswade men that it is necessary for them to read the Scriptures in the vulgar tongue to the end they may learne out of them what they must necessarily know if they wil be saued for how truly or plainly soeuer they be translated no man shall euer receyue any fruite by them vnlesse he first belieue aright and be guided by the holy Ghost to whome it appertayneth to guide vs into the right Psal 142. v. 8. 1â— land to make knowne vnto vs the way in which we are to walke to teach vs the will of God which we are to fulfill VVhich is manifestly to be seene in the Iewes who vnderstaÌ„d the Hebrew text much better then Christians in which there is so ample and cleare mention of Christ and yet for all that they do not belieue in Christ Our Aduersaries therefore haue little reason to keep such ado about the wordes of Scripture or the translation of them let them first imbrace the true Faith which is in the Church only let them seeke after the holy Ghost who is not to be found out of the Church let them seeke out the true sense of the Letter which the Church only conserueth vncorrupteed and it will easily be graunted vnto them to haue the Scriptures in what tongue soeuer they will so they be truly and vncorruptedly translated and that they vse them to their owne saluation and not to their destruction as many do wherof we haue for witnesse not only the Scripture but dayly experience And this shall suffice concerning the translatioÌ„ of the Scripture into the vulgar toÌ„gue 10. For of the prayers in Latin eyther priuately made by the people or publikely offered by the Priest at masse and in the administratioÌ„ of the SacramoÌ„ts we wil treat hereafter in their proper places CHAP. XIII That our Aduersaries vse many sleightes in corrupting the Word of God OVR Aduersaries often require vs to proue all that which we say out of the written Word of God but when we cite the same in expresse tearmes they haue many wayes by which they depraue it Wherfore before I make an end of this Controuersy concerning the written Word it shall not be from the purpose briefly to detect such their corruptions partly to the end that no man be deceaued by them and partly that euery man may vnderstand nothing to be so plainely and clearely set downe in the written VVord which by the Commentaries of crafty and subtile wittes may not be weakned and made of little force if no regard be had to the authority and iudgment of the Church And that no man may thinke that I herin calumniate them or deale lesse sincerely with them I will set downe out of their owne writings some one or two exaÌ„pls of each manner of corrupting wherof many will occure in ech Controuersy 2. The first manner of shifting of places alleadged out of the written Word is to say that the originall text is corrupted and what is alleadged is crept out of the margent into the text whereof see many examples in the 12. and 18. Chapter of the Latin Edition of this CoÌ„ttouersy 3. Their second shift is to reiect the vulgar translation and insteed thereof to cite some new and corrupt translation of their owne It is euident inough that Luther in his first version of the new Testament into the German tongue set forth in the yeare 1522. hath more then a thousaÌ„d eâ—rors as many haue obserued amoÌ„gst Ioannes Cocl eus de actis Luther an 1522. which neyther the last nor the least is his presuming to add to the text of S. Paul the 3. Chapter and 28. verse the particle alone thereby the stronglier to establish his doctrine that Fayth alone iustifieth for this place of the Apostle VVe thinke a man iâ— Rom. 3. v. 28. iustifyed by fayth he traÌ„slateth by sayth alone when a certaine friend of his to whome the same was obiected by a Catholike asked the cause why he so translated it he no lesse ridiculously then proudly answereth in a certayne little booke set forth by him in the yeare 1530. vnder this title A certaine information or answere made to two questions proposed by a certayne good friend concerning the translation of Scripture and the inuocation of Saints In which he aduiseth his friend to answere the Catholikes obiection after this manner D. Martin Luther Luth. â—0 4. Germ. excuso VVittemb an 1551. fol. 475. will haue it so and sayth that a Papist and an Asse iâ— all one thing so I will so I command let my
VI. Wherin euen by the doctrine of our Aduersaries it is proued that there are Traditions THE fourth argument wherby we proue Traditions is taken out of the doctrine of our Aduersaries For all those things which our Aduersaries do affirme to be points of fayth against the Catholike doctrine they teach and belieue them without any expresse Scripture For it cannot be found expressely in Scripture that fayth only iustifyeth that there are only two Sacraments of the new law that none should pray for the deâ—d c. for all these things and many others which they teach against vs they gather only out of Scriptures and that by some false and very weake consequence but it is no where expressely written that fayth only iustifieth that there are only two Sacraments that we must not pray to Saynts or for the dead c. 2. Moreouer there can no Catholike be found who doth not receaue and assuredly belieue the whole authenticall text of the holy Scripture why do they therfore condemne vs when they affirme that nothing is to be belieued besiâ—â— the text of Scripture wheras the whole Controuersy betwixt them and vs is of the vnwritten points of fayth which we affirme they deny 3. Our Aduersaries being conuinced by this argument do now at the last confesse that not only that is to be admitted and belieued as the pure word of God Beza de nâ—â—iâ— Ec. pag. 137. voluÌ„ 2. Theol. Tract â—dit an 1581. which is expresly written in holy Scripture but all that also which by a necessary consequence may be gathered out of it 4. But when they answere thus they are forced to depart and forsake that their first principle wheâ— by they affirmâ—d that all the poynts of fayth are expresly conteyned in Scriptures and that they were set downe in writing by the Apostles 5. Furthermore not perâ—auing so much they ioyne in opinion with vs so that they must needes indeed confesse that the Traditions of the Church are altogeather necessary For such things as are gathered out of Scriptures do rather belong to Traditions then to expresse Scripture For that which only consequently by reasoning discoursing is gathered out of Scripture albeit it very well and necessarily may be deduced from thence is not expressely in Scripture but only obsâ—urly secretly or vertually is conteined therin For no man can truly say that the conclusion which is only inferred out of the premisses is expresly conteined in the same premisses for otherwise our discourse and arguing were vayne and to no purpose But therfore do we reason and discourse to the end that that which lieth hidden vertually in the premisses may be expresly manifested in the conclusion 6. And that we may alleadge an example out of the Scriptures themselues when God the Father sayd this is my welbeloued Matt. 17. v. 5. Sonne heare him Out of these wordes we may very well gather and by a necessary consequence that the whole doctrine of Christ our Lord is to be heard and receiued of all yet none will say that al the doctrine of Christ is conteyned expresly in these few wordes And truely the holy Scripture is so fertill plentifull that many points of faith do as yet lye hidden and vnknowne therin which hitherto haue neuer byn gathered togeather by any but these thinges are conteyned vertually and not expressely in it 7. Moreouer after so many debates and contentions after so many bookes set forth against vs after so many slaunders wherby our Aduersaries charge vs as though we taught that the Scriptures are imperfect they at the last returne to our opinion For we do not deny yea we willingly acknowledge that all those things which rightly and without errour are deduced or gathered out of the expresse wordes of the holy Scriptures do belong vnto the written word of God and are contayned in holy writ obscurely not expressely vertually and not plainly For in that God doth reueale any thing in expresse wordes consequently and vertually he reuealeth all things which necessarily and without any errour may be deduced from thence 8. We graunt also that the Scripture consequently mediatly vertually as in a generall principle conteyneth all things necessary to saluatioÌ„ yea in that one only article of the Creed I belieue the holy Catholike Church in those few words also of Christ Luc. 19. v. 16. he who heareth you heareth me if the collection be rightly framed as we haue also said before in the 25 Chapter But when these thinges are gathered togeather which are not expressely in Scripture there is scarse any of them which is not vncertayne doubtful without the authority and Traditions of the Church Wherefore these collections do manifestly conuince the necessity and authority of Traditions 9. But that these collections may be vncertâ—yne and deceytfull both experieÌ„ce reasoÌ„ teacheth vs experieÌ„ce because almost all Heresies haue had their begâ—nning not from the Scripture alone in it selfe but from these collections badly framed and made For there is not almost any one heresy which is only grounded on the expresse wordes of Scripture without some other collection seing that almost all Heretikes both in tymes past as now alâ—o go about to proue and gather their heresies from the Scripture by certayne deceytfull sophistical arguments Arius for example out of those wordes of Christ the Father is greater then I did gather Ioan. 14. v. 28. but badly that Christ euen according to his diuine Nature was inferiour to his Father The new Arians out of those words of the ten coÌ„mauÌ„demeÌ„ts thou shalt not haue straÌ„ge Gods before me do gather but foolishly that Exod. 20. v. 3. the SoÌ„ne is not God the holy Ghost is not God So the Diuell himself against Christ Matt. 4. v. 6. vsed this reason It is written God hath giuen his Angells chargâ— of thee therfore cast thy selfe downe headlong Lastly all the arguments indeed which our Aduersaries at this tyme alledge against vs out of Scriptures and all the errours which they haue inueÌ„ted do take their beginning and strength from their new illations and reasons and not out of the bare and playne words of Scripture as will manifestly appeare in euery one of these Controuersies 10. The reason also is manifest why these their collections and reasons are vncertaine and doubtfull For in nothing can one more easily or more often erre then in these illations The which may proceed of many causes eyther because the illation it selfe is bad and Sophisticall or because the place of Scripture from whence it is gathered is falsified by some false exposition therof or because the proposition which is assumed and adioyned to the wordes of Scripture is false and ambiguous or because one or more wordes in that collection are vsed doubtfully that is to say in one sense in the premises and in another in the conclusion or lastly because there hapneth some errour to be in the collection which maketh
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