Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
book_n canonical_a holy_a scripture_n 5,721 5 6.0092 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A10345 The summe of the conference betwene Iohn Rainoldes and Iohn Hart touching the head and the faith of the Church. Wherein by the way are handled sundrie points, of the sufficiencie and right expounding of the Scriptures, the ministerie of the Church, the function of priesthood, the sacrifice of the masse, with other controuerises of religion: but chiefly and purposely the point of Church-gouernment ... Penned by Iohn Rainoldes, according to the notes set downe in writing by them both: perused by Iohn Hart, and (after things supplied, & altered, as he thought good) allowed for the faithfull report of that which past in conference betwene them. Whereunto is annexed a treatise intitled, Six conclusions touching the Holie Scripture and the Church, writen by Iohn Rainoldes. With a defence of such thinges as Thomas Stapleton and Gregorie Martin haue carped at therein. Rainolds, John, 1549-1607.; Hart, John, d. 1586. aut; Rainolds, John, 1549-1607. Sex theses de Sacra Scriptura, et Ecclesia. English. aut 1584 (1584) STC 20626; ESTC S115546 763,703 768

There are 17 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

of the forme or of the end I meane as either wrought by deceit or to deceit by deceit ifmen did counterfeit the voice to deceit if they hearde it miraculously in deede As it is writen touching the man of sinne that his coming is according to the working of Satan with all power and with lying signes and wonders and with all deceiuablenesse of vnrighteousnesse among them that perish because they receyued not the loue of truth that they might be saued Take héede M. Hart least that which foloweth be verified in you Therefore shall God send them strong delusion to beleue lyes that al they may be damned who beleeued not the truth but had pleasure in vnrighteou●nesse Hart. Take heede vnto your selfe M. Rainoldes that you offend not in this vnrighteousnesse by abusing that famous Doctor of the Church S. Thomas of Aquine For the holy Father Pope Pius the fifth hath honoured his memorie with a double greater feast in his countrie and with a double feast throughout all Christendome to be kept as solemnly as the holy dayes of the foure Doctours of the Church are kept Wherefore you ought to thinke so much the more reuerently of all that he hath writen and not to charge him with forging and falsifying if he haue missed ought but rather to suppose that if the autours haue not that which he alleageth yet he had read it alleaged by some other and of a good affection to the Sée of Rome he thought it to be rightly alleaged and wrote it Rainoldes Of a good affection As you will Let it be so He with such dealing of a good affection hath feasted the Pope and the Pope againe of a good affection hath double feasted him But you graunt then that Doctors of the Church may bee deceyued as through ouersight so through affection too and that these exceptions against them are lawfull Hart. Lawfull if you proue that they be so deceiued For they may be I graunt Rainoldes What And may they not be deceiued also or rather seeme to be deceyued through the affection or ouersight of other men Hart. Of other men How Rainoldes As when a Greeke writer is translated into Latin the translator maketh him sometimes to say that which he neuer meant And before printing the scriueners who copied out bookes with hand committed sundrie scapes Which likewise befalleth vnto printers now So there may be a faute in an autour without the autours faute through ouersight of printers or scriueners or translators For example in the story ecclesiasticall of Eusebius translated by Rufinus it is alleaged out of Clemens that Peter Iames Iohn although Christ preferred them almost before all yet they tooke not the honour of primacie to them selues but ordeined Iames who was surnamed Iust Bishop of the Apostles This had béene a notable testimonie for Iames against the primacie of Peter But I alleaged it not because as I séeke to winne you to the truth so I séeke to doo it by true and right meanes Whereof this were none being an ouersight as it appeereth of Rufinus For in the Greeke Eusebius it is that they ordeined him Bishop of Ierusalem not Bishop of the Apostles Hart. That may be the printers faute or the scriueners perhaps who wrote it out not his who translated it Rainoldes But I thinke it rather the translators faulte For Marianus Scotus doth cite out of Methodius the same touching Iames that they ordeined him Bishop of the Apostles Which belike was taken out of the storie of Eusebius doon into Latin by Rufinus And he hath erred often in in turning Gréeke writers as also his translation of Iosephus sheweth Though I may not charge him with all the faultes therein For where it is auouched by some that Iosephus holdeth the bookes of Maccabees to be holy scripture as in déede he séemeth to doo in the Latin in the Greeke he saith not any such thing nay he doth teach the contrarie but it is vnlikely this came from Rufinus who helde him selfe the Maccabees not to be canonical Howbeit if you say that the Gréeke copie which he translated of Eusebius had that word amisse through the scriueners faulte I will not striue against you But a more certaine example of the faultinesse in scriueners first and printers after is found in Optatus in that he affirmeth Peter was called Cephas because he was head of the Apostles Apostolorum caeput Petrus vnde Cephas appellatus est Upon the which place your lawier doth note that where he had thought it to be an ouersight of a man dreaming that the Syriake word which singifieth a stone is the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth a head now he ghessed rather that the words unde Cephas appellatus est were some foolish glose writen rashly in the margent and then interlaced into the text by scriueners Hart. Like enough But you haue no harme by this glose For though you blot it out yet Optatus saith that Peter was head of the Apostles Rainoldes Neither haue we any harme by that text For I haue shewed before it maketh nought for the Papacie But we may haue harme by that kind of gloses chiefely sith as Viues obserueth on S. Austin vpon the like occasion some glosers haue defiled all the writings of noble autours with such vncleane handling of them Hart. Will you make an ende of excepting against the Fathers and let vs heare at length the Fathers speake themselues Rainoldes The fathers them selues With a very good will But looke that you bring me the Fathers them selues For which is my last exception and so an ende there are many bookes entitled to Fathers which the Fathers made not nay whereof sundry were made by such youthes as are not worthy to beare the Fathers shooes The workes of S. Ierom are abroade in nine volumes of the which nine as good as three are none of his And yet Vitae patrum a legend how wrongfully fathered on S. Ierom your Espencaeus Canus shew is not amongst them Though there are amongst them slippes of the same tree a barbarous and sottish fable as Canus calleth it of the natiuitie of S. Marie and many other treatises of the same kinde which Erasmus hath refuted most diligently rightly The workes of S. Austin haue not béene tampred with so much in this sort Notwithstāding there is not aboue one or two of his ten volumes that hath not more or fewer such pamphlets patched to it Not onely by the iudgement and censure of Erasmus which yet you sée how Canus estéemeth in S. Ierom but also of the Louanists whose censures are the censures of many of your best Diuines and they shew that sundry things beare S. Austins name whereof some are vnlearned some lewde and heretical But what do I speake of Ierom and Austin when there is scarse any amongst all the
or the hauing of it corrupted In the which respect Christ who giueth charge that his sheepe be fedde chargeth that they be taught to obserue those thinges which he commanded his Apostles And Peter hauing shewed that the faithfull are begotten a new by Gods word exhorteth them to desire the milke of the word the sincere milke not corrupt with any trumperie that they may grow thereby And they who are warned to heare the Pharises sitting in the chaire of Moses are warned to beware of the leauen of the Pharises Wherefore a church that will be whole and sound must neither be famished with want of Gods worde nor haue it corrupted But the church of Rome doth bring in both corruption and want of the worde nor onely bring them in but also maintaine them obstinatly as wholesome The church of Rome therefore is not whole and sound nay she séemeth rather to be madde frantike For she bringeth in corruption of the worde to beginne with that by mingling and adulterating the word of God with mans word not one way but sundrie First in that she giueth autoritie canonicall that is diuine autoritie to the bookes called apocrypha which are humane Against the truth of the holy scripture which is gainsaid flatly by certaine pointes in the apocrypha against the cléere euidence of thinges therein recorded which by their repugnancie one vnto another doo shew that men were autours of them against the consent iudgement of the church of the old church wholy and of the best part of the new Secondly in that she receyueth traditions of men with equall reuerence and religious affection as she doth the scripture As though the holy scripture the most exact perfect squire of Gods will and rule of righteousnesse and wisedome sufficed not for faith and maners or the spirit of God could gainsay him selfe which must be imported by this of traditions some whereof do fight one against another some against the scripture In sooth this point is handled with a dutifull care and regarde of scripture which hath no greater reuerence at Rome then traditions and that all traditions are not obserued there it is playne by the Fathers whom them selues alleage Thirdly in that she willeth the Latin translation of the Bible commonly called S. Ieroms to be receiued throughout as sacred and canonicall and not to be refused on any pretense Whereas yet to let go the iudgement of S. Ierom other ancient Fathers the Papists them selues such as are most expert in the toungs amongst them acknowledge that translation to haue missed sometimes the meaning of the holy Ghost and not the words onely Euen Pagninus namely in the old testament Budaeus in the new Andradius and Arias Montanus in them both Fourthly in that about expounding of the scripture she condemneth all senses and meanings thereof which are against the sense that her selfe holdeth or against the Fathers consenting all in one Whereby it falleth out that the sense and meaning of the holy Ghost shall be refused often but meanings and senses deuised by men though crossing one an other yet if they be currant for the time and practised as a Cardinall saith shall go for authenticall the baggage which the Schoole men haue s●iled Diuinitie with out of the Philosophers puddles and their owne shall be accounted holy the things which some Fathers haue handled more soundly shal be set aside as humane inuentions though they agrée with Gods word but other in the which they were ouerséene through weaknes of naturall affection or reason shall be approued as Gods worde though they procéede from mans fansie Fifthly in that she coopleth with the commandements of God the commandements of the church that is to say of men and that is more she coopleth therewith these commandements not as things indifferent but as necessarie to saluation So what soeuer filth deuotion as it is named indéede superstition hath brought or shall bring in that must be déemed to be pure religion and in vaine shall the Lord be worshipped of vs as of the Iewes in olde time with the commandements of men and good intentes as they call them which are abominable to God shall be preferred before obedience voluntarie religion condemned by the scriptures shall be taken vp as a most holy seruice of the Lord. Last of all in that she appointeth images to be had in churches for the instruction of the people as bookes so one supposeth which idiotes may reade in O miserable idiotes the instructing of whom is committed to a stocke which instructeth to vanities whose teacher is an image that is a teacher of lyes if we beléeue the Prophets And is it any maruell if they be naughtie scholers whose masters are dumbe idols the doctours of errours The church of Rome therefore hath brought in such corruption of the word of God what by the apocrypha what by traditions what by faultes of the translation what by the sense of her holding what by commandements of the church what by the teachers of idiotes that she séemeth to haue mingled the sustenance of life not with filth but with poyson and the wine of God not with water but with venoome and the bread of Christ not with leauen but with rats-bane or rather if I might speake so mens-bane As for want of Gods word which is the other cause of sicknesse how wretchedly she hath pined her children therewith our auncestours felt by long experience and aged men may remember and histories of the church doo witnesse and they who are vnder the Popish yoke know For though she permitted sometimes in some places perhaps a small parcell of the word of God if I may call that Gods word which sauoured more of mens deuises then of God to be touched in the presence and assembly of the people by common cryers preachers such as they were yet she hath not onely not permitted to Christians but also hath hindered with no lesse impietie then inhumanitie yea and hindereth still that abundance and plentie which they ought to haue as it is writen Let the worde of Christ dwell in you plenteously with all wisedome For whereas this plenty is gotten obteined by two speciall meanes to weete by hearing by reading the one commanded all in Church-assemblies publikely the other allowed priuatly to euery man at home both vsed and approued by the rules of the holy Ghost and the practise of holy companies and the iudgement of holy churches our Romanists pretending that horrible confusion will ensue thereof and the church of Christ shall be like to Babylon not to Ierusalem as Cardinall Hosius saith if the holy scriptures be read in mother toongs doo kéepe them sealed vp in a straunge toong and sound them out so in their Church-assemblies that
eye The mother of our Sauiour the blessed virgin Marie is called in the scripture blessed among women that is as I interpret it after the Hebrue phrase the most blessed of women What thinke you of her Was there any woman in her time aboue her in any thing of name of excellencie and maiestie Hart. Aboue her God forbid Neither in her time nor before her nor after her Rainoldes Yet shée when the holy Ghost was come vpon her now and the power of the highest had ouershadowed her went into the hill country with hast to a citie of Iuda not only to sée but also to salute her coosin Elisabet And her salutation was such that when Elisabet great with child did heare it the babe sprang in her belly and she was filled with the holie Ghost Neither did shée only goe to salute her but taried with her also and that no common time but about three moneths three moneths a great time chiefly for a woman which was conceaued with childe If you tendered not the blessed virgins honor more then you doo Paules your Rhetorike that depresseth Paule beneath Peter would much more debase her beneath Elisabet For shée was coosin to Elisabet according to the flesh Paule was Peters brother according to the spirite a néerer kinne straiter bond of amitie and duetie Shée went a harder iourney into the hill countrie Paule a pleasantor to Ierusalem whither some other causes might allure him also Shée was a woman weaker of bodie and might away with trauell worse Paule a man strong exercised with toyles and troubles Shée went thither in hast Paule after three yeeres Paule went to see Peter shée to salute Elisabet Her salutation was so heauenly that the babes bodie the mothers spirit felt it nothing is written of Paules seeing Peter but only that he saw him She staied with her coosin about three moneths Paul abode with Peter no more then fifteene daies Yet Paule as an Apostle might be and stay any where the virgin as a maide betrothed to a man had greater cause to kéepe home chiefly being with childe Wherefore if Peter were aboue Paule in excellency and maiestie because he did goe to Ierusalem to see him and stayed with him fifteen daies what might Elisabet be aboue the blessed virgin which went into the hill countrie to salute her and abode with her about three moneths Hart. Nay But there is more in the fiftéene dayes of Pauls abode with Peter then in the thrée moneths of Maries with Elisabet Rainoldes More What is that Hart. Marry there is a mysterie as S. Ierome sheweth in the number of dayes which Paule did spend with him Rainoldes You commended the liuely wordes of the text nowe from them you flit to Ierome They be mysteries I sée that must set a helping hand to your supremacy the literall sense of scripture will do nothing for it But what is the mysterie Hart. S. Ierome in an epistle which commonly is printed in the beginning of the Bible because it intreateth of all the bookes of holy scriptures falling into mention of Paule how hee staied with Peter fifteene dayes doth giue this reason of it hoc enim mysterio hebdomadis ogdoadis futurus gentium praedicator instruendus erat for by this mysterie of the number of seuen and eight he who shuld become the preacher of the Gentiles was to be instructed Rainoldes And what did S. Ierome meane by this mysterie of the number of seuen and eight which he diuideth those fifteene dayes into How was Paule I pray to be instructed by it Hart. Looke you to that Those are his owne words wherein you haue as much expressed as I said that it is a mysterie Rainoldes But it is like to be a mysterie still if it be not expounded and wée shall lose the kernell vnlesse the nut be broken Hart. Why What do you thinke S. Ierom meant by it Rainoldes I know not I assure you vnlesse he meant as one I know not the mā but they name him father Maximus expoundeth it that Paule went to learne of Peter and remained with him as it were in a Schoole a certaine number of daies I abode with him saith Paule fifteene daies By the mysticall number of seuen and eight he learned both the olde and the newe Testament Hart. And what doo you say of this exposition Rainoldes I say that father Maximus did doate whē he made it For by this reason Paule should haue learned the gospell of Peter which the Scripture denyeth protesting that he neither receiued it of man neither was taught it but by the reuelation of Iesus Christ. And if you desire candlelight at noone daie to helpe the brightnes of the Sunne shining in his strēgth you may know that the Fathers Austin Chrysostome Ambrose Theodoret Ierom and others affirme the same precisely that Paule came to Peter not to learne of him but of a reuerence and loue to be acquainted with him As for Ierom who séemeth in the epistle which you mention to thinke otherwise against the scripture him selfe no maruaile if sometimes he wēt out of the way through a liking of allegories as a great reader folower of Origen who handled the scriptures too licentiously with wādring mystical senses Himselfe whē he was grown to be of riper iudgemēt acknowledged an ouersight of his youth herein confessing that by trauailing after mysticall senses he rashly folowed allegories in expounding a Prophet whose litterall sense he vnderstood not Hart. What soeuer it were that S. Ierom meant he meant a prerogatiue of Peter ouer Paule which you may not auoid either by his youth or by an allegorie For he gaue the like prerogatiue to Peter without an allegorie in his olde age vpon the manifest wordes of Paule I went vp saith Paule to Ierusalem by reuelation and conferred with them the Gospell which I preach among the Gentiles but particularly with them that were the chiefe least perhaps I shuld run or had run in vaine Paul saith S. Ierom had not had securitie of preaching the Gospel vnlesse it had bene approued by the sentence of Peter and of the rest that were with him Rainoldes You are wont to lay it vnto our charge that we discouer the nakednes of the Fathers In déede you are they who entreate them so Nay you do not onely discouer their nakednes but you blase it out and praise the beautie of their blemishes and thinke them best clad where they are naked most For what a spéech is this which you alleage of Ierom that Paule had not had securitie of preaching the Gospell vnlesse Peter had approued it What Was he called by God to preach the Gospell and durst he not do it except men did like it And when Christ had taught it him by reuelation was he not sure of it but by conference with Peter And had
he agreeth not precisely word for worde with the Cambron-copie Now the Cambron-copie what is it or whence came it that Cyprian should be made the father of such slippes vpon the credit of it alone What if some did note them in the margent of fansie as students vse to doo What if some receiued them into the text of errour What if some of zeale vnto the church of Rome did adde them And why did not Pamelius leaue out the other words of the equalitie of the Apostles in honor and power because the Cambron copie wanteth them as well as adde these of Peters primacie and chaire because the Cambron-copie hath them Did not his conscience tell him that the copie was vnsound or at the least insufficient to force the change of a place of so great importance against the credite of so many both writen bookes and printed If other Licentiates as learned as Pamelius shall vpon one copie as good as the Cambron presume in all the Fathers as he hath in Cypriā to adde the like gloses for the rest of your opinions as these are for the chaire and primacie of Peter it will be hie time for vs to take héede how wee permitte the tryall of controuersies in religion to the consent of the Fathers Wherfore although these matters seeme neuer so small yet there may lie as much on them as concerneth the safety of our soules Neither doo I picke them as quarrels for pretense but I alleage them as reasons for proofe that by the position of your owne author we must deale with you not by their consent but by the scripture onely For he on whom you groūded Vincentius Lirinensis alloweth onely scripture to conuince those errors which haue encreased long wide because the length of time hath geuen them occasion to steale away the trueth and the poyson spreading farther they endeuour to corrupt the writings of the Fathers Your error of the Papacie hath spread farre and growen long you haue endeuoured to corrupt the writinges of the Fathers the forgeries are plaine in Cyprian in Cyrill and in the Councell of Chalcedon the presumptions are great that you haue beene as bold with other as with these For if Thomas of Aquine made no conscience of it what may be thought of such as were more ambitious And if Manutius dealt so with Cyprian in whom hee sought most credit what did his ten yeares labors in setting foorth the rest And if Papistes durste this in the light of printing what may we feare they did in the darcknesse of writing bookes And if the Roman print be folowed at Anwerp the Anwerp at Paris the Paris other-where perhaps and the newer the worser and the worst accounted best by such as D. Stapleton and testimonies alleaged thence as authenticall how much likelyer is it that when they wrote copies in Monasteries and Abbeys they folowed one another with lesser shame and greater loosenes and so did proceede from good to euill from euill to worse and authors of that age did most approue those copies which made for their aduauntage most and brought authorities out of them To conclude therefore euen by his iudgement to whom you appealed Vincentius Lirinensis in that golden booke against the profane innouations of all heresies the touchstone by the which our controuersie must be tryed is the word of God and not the word of men not the consent of Fathers but the holy scripture and the scripture only And this I may protest I speake not of feare as though the Fathers all held with you against vs but of conscience that I may yeelde due glory to God due reuerence to his word For let such forgeries as I haue spoken of be set apart and what haue all the Fathers nay what hath any of them to prooue the pretended supremacie of Peter Hart. The very same Fathers whose wordes I alleaged before and them acknowledged to be their owne not counterfeits geue Peter the supremacie which you call pretended For S. Ierom saith of him Peter was of so great authoritie that Paul wrote Then after three yeares and so forth and S. Austin affirmeth that the primacie of the Apostles is conspicuous and preeminent with excellent grace in Peter and Chrysostome calleth him the mouth of the Apostles the chiefe and toppe of the company and he is named by Theodoret the prince of the Apostles the prince which title also is geuen him by all antiquitie Wherto I may adde that Epiphanius termeth him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as you would say the highest of the Apostles and S. Austin yet farther their head their President the first of them which preeminence he prooueth also out of S. Cyprian who saith that the Lord did choose Peter first S. Ierom teacheth that Peter was chosen one among the twelue to the intēt that a head being appointed occasion of scisme might bee taken away The bookes of the Fathers are full of such sayings but they are all to this effect And therfore these fewe may serue to shew their iudgement Rainoldes These sayings and the like which are alleaged out of the Fathers doo touch three prerogatiues which they giue to Peter the first of authoritie the second of primacie the third of principalitie But none of them all doth proue the supremacy which you pretend to Peter and meane to the Pope For by tha● supremacie is signified the s●lnes of ecclesiasticall or rather Papall power euen a power soueraine of gouerning the Church throughout the whole world in all points matters of doctrine and discipline as you declared Is it not Hart. It is so What then Rainoldes But none of the sayings alleaged out of the Fathers doe geue this soueraine power to Peter Therfore they proue not his pretended supremacie Hart. They geue it him all Rainoldes I wil shew the contrary And to speake in order of the three prerogatiues which by them are geuen him the first out of Ierom that Peter was of great authoritie is nothing to your purpose For it is apparaunt that sith the supremacie dooth note a soueraine power the question is of power and not of authoritie Hart. As who say that power and authoritie did differ so much one from the other Rainoldes Much. For power importeth a right of rule and gouernment which the superiors haue ouer their inferiors for the good ordering of mankind as Princes ouer subiectes Pastors ouer flocks Masters ouer seruants Husbands ouer wiues By authoritie is meant estimation and credite a good opinion of men for that which wée account worthy to bée estéemed For they of whom we think so well in respect of their vertue or wisdome or state or other qualities that we will folow them as authors in our dooings our iudgements factes or words are said to be of credite and authoritie with vs. And this an inferior may haue with his superior As
you complaine I know you may haue more bookes if you would haue such as are best for you to read But you would haue such as might nourish your humor from reading of the which they who restraine you are your friendes If a man do surfet of varietie of dishes the Phisicion doth well to dyet him with one wholsome kinde of meat Perhaps it were better for some of vs who read all sortes that we were tyed to that alone suffred part of your restraint We are troubled about many things but one thing is needfull Many please the fansie better but one doth profit more the minde He was a wise preacher who said The reading of many bookes is a wearinesse vnto the flesh and therefore exhorted men to take instruction by the wordes of trueth the wordes of the wise which are giuen by one pastor euen by Iesus Christ whose spirit did speake in the Prophets and Apostles and taught his Church the trueth by them Howbeit for as much as God hath giuen giftes to men pastours and teachers whose labour might helpe vs to vnderstand the words of that one pastor we do receaue thankfully the monuments of their labour left in wryting to the Church which they were set to builde eyther seuerall as the Doctors or assembled as the Councels we do gladly read them as Pastors of the Church Yet so that we put a difference betwene them and that one Pastor For God did giue him the spirite not by measure the rest had a measure of grace and knowledge through him Wherfore if to supply your whatsoeuer wants you would haue the bookes of Doctors and Councels to vse them as helps for the better vnderstanding of the booke of Christ your wants shal be supplyed you shall not need to feare disaduantage in this respect For M. Secretarie hath taken order that you shall haue what bookes you will vnlesse you will such as cannot be gotten Hart. The bookes that I would haue are principally in déed the Fathers and the Councels which all do make for vs as do the scriptures also But for my direction to finde out their places in all poyntes of controuersie which I can neither remember redily nor dare to trust my selfe in them I would haue our writers which in the seuerall poyntes whereof they treate haue cited them and buyld themselues vpon them In the question of the Church and the supremacie Doctor Stapleton of the Sacraments and sacrifice of the Masse Doctor Allen of the worshipping of Sayntes and Images Doctor Harpsfield whose bookes were set forth by Alan Cope beare his name as certaine letters in them shew Likewise for the rest of the pointes that lie in controuersie them who in particular haue best written of them for them al in generall S. Thomas of Aquine Father Roberts Dictates and chiefly the confession that Torrensis an other father of the societie of Iesus hath gathered out of S. Augustine which booke we set the more by because of al the Fathers S. Augustine is the chéefest as well in our as your iudgement and his doctrine is the common doctrine of the Fathers whose consent is the rule whereby controuersies should be ended Rainoldes These you shall haue God willing and if you will Canisius too because he is so full of textes of Scriptures and Fathers and many doe estéeme him highly But this I must request you to looke on the originalles of Scriptures Councels Fathers which they doe alleadge For they doe perswade you that all doe make for you but they abuse you in it They borrow some gold out of the Lordes treasure house and wine out of the Doctors presses but they are deceitful workmen they do corrupt their golde with drosse their wine with worse then water Hart. You shall finde it harder to conuince them of it then to charge them with it Rainoldes And you shall finde it harder to make proofe of halfe then to make claime of all Yet you shall see both youre claime of all the Scriptures and Fathers to bee more confidente then iust and my reproofe of your wryters for theyr corrupting and forging of them as plainly prooued as vttered if you haue eyes to see God lighten your eyes that you may see open your eares that you may heare and geue you both a softe hart and vnderstanding minde that you may be able wisely to discerne and gladly to embrace the trueth when you shall heare it Hart. I trust I shall be able alwayes both to see and to followe the trueth But I am perswaded you will be neuer able to shew that that is the trueth which your Church professeth As by our conference I hope it shal be manifest Rainoldes UUill you then to lay the ground of our conference let me know the causes why you separate your selfe and refuse to communicate with the Church of England in prayers and religion Hart. The causes are not many They may be al comprysed in one Your Church is no Church You are not members of the Church Rainoldes How proue you that Hart. By this argument The Church is a companie of Christian men professing one faith vnder one head You professe not one faith vnder one head Therefore you are not of the Church Rainoldes What is that one faith Hart. The catholike faith Rainoldes Who is that one head Hart. The Bishop of Rome Rainoldes Then both the propositions of which you frame your argument are in part faultie The first in that you say the church is a companie of Christian men vnder one head The second in that you charge vs of the church of England that wee professe not one faith For we do professe that one faith the catholike faith But we deny that the church is bound to be subiect to that one head the bishop of Rome Hart. I will proue the pointes of both my propositions the which you haue denied First that the church must be subiect to the Bishop of Rome as to her head Next that the faith which you professe in England is not the catholike faith Rainoldes You will say somewhat for them but you will neuer proue them Hart. Let the church iudge For the first thus I proue it S. Peter was head of all the Apostles The Bishop of Rome succeedeth Peter in the same power ouer Bishops that he had ouer the Apostles Therefore the Bishop of Rome is head of all Bishops If of Bishops then by consequent of the dioceses subiect to them If of all their dioceses then of the whole church The Bishop of Rome therefore is head of the whole church of Christ. Rainoldes S. Peter was head of all the Apostles The Bishop of Rome is head of all Bishops I had thought that Christ our Sauiour both was and is the head as of the whole church so of Apostles of Bishops of all the members of it For the church is his
the shew of wordes UUherefore it was néedfull sith we séeke herein to finde out Christes will that first we agreed what way the right sense of the scripture may be knowne UUhich séeing you would haue me to fetch from the Pope and I haue no lust to go vnto Rome nor thinke it lodgeth in the Vatican so that by this way no agréement can be made or ende of controuersie hoped for I will take a shorter and a surer way confessed by vs both to be a good way whereby the right sense of the scripture may be found and so the will of Christ be knowne Hart. UUhat way may that be Rainoldes To learne of Christ him selfe the meaning of his word and let his spirit teach it that is to expound the scripture by the scripture A golden rule to know and try the truth from errour prescribed by the Lord and practised by his seruants for the building of his church from age to age through all posteritie For the holie Ghost exhorting the Iewes to compare the darker light of the Prophetes with the cléerer of the Apostles that the day-brigtnesse of the Sonne of righteousnes may shine in their hartes saith that no prophecy of Scripture is of a mans owne interpretation because in the prophecie that is the scripture of the Prophetes they spake as they were moued by the holie Ghost not as the will of man did fansie UUhich reason sith it implieth as the Prophetes so the Apostles and it is true in them all the holie men of God spake as they were moued by the holie Ghost it followeth that all the scripture ought to be expounded by God because it is inspired of God as natures light hath taught that he who made the law should interpret the law This rule commended to vs by the prescript of God and as it were sanctified by the Leuites practise in the olde Testament and the Apostles in the new the godlie auncient Pastors and Doctors of the church haue followed in their preaching their writing their deciding of controuersies in Councels UUherefore if you desire in déede the churches exposition and would so faine finde it you must go this way this is the churches way that is the churches sense to which this way dooth bring you For S. Austin whose doctrine your selfe doo acknowledge to be grounded on the lawes the maners the iudgementes of all the catholike church whom you call a witnesse of the sincere truth and catholike religion such a witnesse as no exception can be made against who assureth you as you say not onely of his owne but also of the common the constant faith and confession of the ancient Fathers and the Apostolike church this S. Austin hath written foure bookes of Christian doctrine wherein he purposely entreateth how men should vnderstand the Scripture and expound it The summe of all his treatise doth aime at this marke which I haue pointed too that the meaning of the Scripture must be learned out of the Scripture by the consideration of thinges and wordes in it that the ende whereto the matter whereof it is all writen be marked in generall and all be vnderstood according to that end and matter that al be read ouer ouer those things chiefly noted which are set downe plainly both precepts of life and rules of beliefe because that all things which concerne beliefe and life are plainly written in it that obscure darke speeches be lightned and opened by the plaine and manifest that to remoue the doubt of vncertaine sentences the cleere and certaine be followed that recourse be had vnto the Greeke and Hebrue copies to cleare out of the fountaines if the translation be muddie that doubtfull places bee expounded by the rule of faith which we are taught out of the plainer places of the scripture that all the circumstances of the text bee weighed what goeth before what commeth after the maner how the cause why the men to whom the time when euery thing is saide to be short that still wee seeke to know the will and meaning of the Authour by whom the holie Ghost hath spoken if we finde it not yet giue such a sense as agreeth with the right faith approued by some other place of scripture if a sense be giuen the vncertaintie wherof cannot bee discussed by certaine and sure testimonies of scripture it might be proued by reason but this custome is dangerous the safer way far is to walke by the scripture the which being shadowed with darke and borowed words when we mind to search let either that come out of it which hath no doubt and controuersie or if it haue doubt let it be determined by the same scripture through witnesses to be found vsed thence wheresoeuer that so to conclude all places of the scriptures be expounded by the scriptures the which are called Canonical as being the Canon that is to say the rule of godlines and faith Thus you sée the way the way of wisedome and knowledge which Christ hath prescribed the church hath receiued S. Austin hath declared both by his preceptes and his practise both in this treatise and in others agréeably to the iudgement of the auncient Fathers Which way sith it is lyked both by vs and you though not so much followed of you as of vs I wish that the woorthinesse thereof might perswade you to practise it your selfe but it must enforce you at least to allow it Hart. I graunt it neither can nor ought to be denyed that euery one of those things and specially if they be ioined all togither doo helpe very much to vnderstand the scriptures rightly But yet they are not so sure and certaine meanes as some other are which we preferre before them Neither do they helpe alwaies nay sometimes they do hurt rather and deceiue greatlie such as expound the Scripture after them This is not onelye said but also proued at large out of the Doctors and Fathers by that worthie man of great wit and iudgement our countriman M. Stapleton Doctor of Diuinitie the Kinges Professor of controuersies in the vniuersitie of Doway Of whose most wholesome worke entitled A methodicall demonstration of doctrinall principles of the faith one booke is wholly spent to shew the meanes way and order how to make authenticall interpretation of the Scriptures In the which hee layeth this for a ground that the Scripture cannot be rightly vnderstood but by the rule of faith Whereupon he condemneth the Protestantes opinion that the sense of Scriptures must be fetched out of the Scriptures Which errour of yours to ouerthrow the more fully he deliuereth foure meanes of expounding the Scriptures the first very certaine and sure the rule of faith the next no lesse certaine the practise of the church the third at least probable the consent of the Fathers the last most
infallible the councels interpretation And these meanes he saith are the onely certaine sure infallible meanes of vnderstanding and expounding the Scripture aright As for other meanes which learned men do vse such as you obserued out of S. Austin he graunteth they are profitable but deceitfull many waies if ech of them be seuerally taken by it selfe Which he proueth in particular by the chiefest of them first the weighing of circumstances what goeth before what commeth after next the wordes and kinde of speeches vsed in the Scriptures thirdly the conferēce of places togither one to be lightned by an other fourthly recourse to the fountaines of the Greeke and the Hebrue text Wherefore though I acknowledge your way to be a good way and such as I am well content to walke in when these our waies shall lead me to it notwithstanding sith it is common to vs with all Heretikes yea with Iewes and Painims who do all conferre places obserue the kinde of spéeches looke on the Gréeke and Hebrue fountaines marke what goeth before what commeth after and such like thinges and yet they are verye farre from the true vnderstanding of the scriptures I will my selfe practise it when I shall see good but there is no reason of yours that can enforce me to allow it simply Rainoldes The treatise of your Doctor against the Protestants opinion is like the army of Antiochus prepared against the Romans verie great and huge of men of many nations but white liuered souldiours neither so strong with armour as glistering with gold and siluer Antiochus him selfe was amazed at it and thought it vnuincible so did the simple fooles of his country too But the Romans contemned it and Annibal iested at it The name of Protestants which he vseth tauntingly as all one with Heretikes wée are no more ashamed of then were the Prophets and Apostles whom the Spirit of God hath honored with that title because they did make a protestation of their faith vpon the like occasion as did the faithfull in Germany when they were noted by that name The Protestants opinion I haue alreadie shewed to be the opinion of the auncient Protestants the Fathers the Apostles the holie Ghost who spake by them If you call it an errour we are content to erre with them If he thinke it an heresie we are no better then Paul who in such heresie serued God The ground which he layeth for the disproofe of it is such that it séemeth his wits and he had made a fray when he layed it He saith that the scripture ought to be expounded by the rule of faith and therfore not by scripture onely Which is in effect as if a man should say the church must be taught by liuing creatures endued with reason and therefore not by men onely For as a liuing creature endued with reason and a man is all one which euerie childe knoweth by the principles of logicke so the rule of faith and scripture is all one doth not your Doctor know it It is a principle of diuinitie deliuered by S. Austin whom he pretendeth chiefly in this point to follow Hart. And doth he not follow him Doth he not alleage S. Austins owne wordes In a doubtfull place of scripture let a man seeke the rule of faith which rule hee hath learned of plainer places of the scriptures and of the authoritie of the church to proue that the rule of faith must be fetched out of the authoritie of the church also not out of scriptures onely Rainoldes Yes he doth alleage S. Austins wordes in déed but as the false witnesses alleaged Christes wordes of destroying the temple and building it in three dayes the wordes against the meaning Which tricke the law noteth as an abusing of the lawe yet is it common with your Doctor For as Christ when he spake of raising the temple by the temple meant his bodie the witnesses did wrest it to the temple of Ierusalem so the authoritie of the church is mentioned by S. Austin as teaching scriptures onely your Doctor alleageth it as teaching somewhat beside the scriptures Hart. This is strange that S. Austin by the authoritie of the church meant no more then by the plainer places of the scriptures For so much you séeme to say in effect Rainoldes Be it strange yet is it true For him selfe declareth that to be his meaning not onely by the rest of his whole treatise wherein he doth establish the scriptures alone for the rule of faith to shew the sense of doubtfuller places by the plainer but also by the ende of this your owne sentence which Stapleton in alleaging it either negligently passed or craftily suppressed vnlesse the fault perhaps be in some other with whose eyes he read it For after these wordes let him seeke the rule of faith which rule he hath learned of plainer places of the scriptures and of the authoritie of the church it followeth in S. Austin Of which rule we haue sufficiently entreated in the first booke when we spake of thinges Now in that discourse to which he referreth vs he spake not of any thing as taught by the church but what is in the scripture Wherefore in these wordes by the authoritie of the church he meant not any thing beside the scripture If he did shew it If he did not acknowledge it Hart. He did For in the first booke where he spake of things hee shewed that the doctrine of the Trinitie is comprised in that rule of faith Which yet is not expresly set downe in the scriptures Rainoldes Expresly What meane you by this word expresly Hart. I meane that it is not expressed in the scriptures Rainoldes What Not the doctrine of the blessed Trinitie the Father the Sonne and the holie Ghost Hart. Not all that our faith doth hold of the Trinitie Rainoldes God forbid that we should hold of such a mysterie more then he teacheth by his word Hart. Certainly S. Austin writing to an Arian who denied that God the sonne is consubstantiall with the Father saith that as we reade not in the holie scriptures the Father vnbegotten yet it is defended that it must be said in lyke sort it may be that neither consubstantiall is founde written there and yet being said in the assertion of faith may bee defended And again disputing against Maximinus a Bishop of the Ariās Giue me testimonies saist thou where the holy Ghost is worshipped as though by those things which we do read we vnderstood not some thinges also which wee reade not But that I be not inforced to seeke many where hast thou read God the Father vnbegotten or vnborne And yet it is true Rainoldes And thinke you that S. Austin meant by these spéeches that the scriptures teach not that God the holy Ghost is to be worshipped God the Sonne is of one substance with the Father God the Father is
not begotten or borne Hart. Hée séemeth to haue meant it And Torrensis who gathered S. Austins Confession out of all his workes alleageth these places to proue that Christians ought to belieue manie things which haue come to vs from the Apostles themselues deliuered as it were by hand although they bee not written expresly in scriptures Rainoldes The Iesuit Torrensis dooth great wrong herein to the truth of God to S. Austins credit and to you who reade him And yet with such a sophisme in the word expresly that if it should be laid vnto his charge he would wash his handes of it as Pilate did of Christes blood For he alleageth those places of S. Austin thereby to proue Traditions as though we had receiued that doctrine touching God by tradition vnwritten not by the written word S. Austin no such matter But dealing with an Arian who required the verie word consubstantiall to be shewed in scripture doth tell him that the thing it selfe is there founde though not that word perhaps Wherevpon he presseth him in like sort with the word vnbegotten which the Arian hauing giuen to God the Father and defending it S. Austin replieth that as he had termed the Father vnbegotten well although the word not written so might the Sonne also be termed consubstantiall sith the scripture proueth the thing meant therby And as with this Arian so with their bishop Maximinus Who hauing himself termed God the Father vnbegotten or vnborne denied the holie Ghost to be equall to the Sonne because it is not written that he is worshipped To the which cauill of his S. Austin answereth that although it be not written in flat termes yet is it gathered by necessarie consequence of that which is written Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God the holy Ghost is God therefore to bee worshipped Thus S. Austins meaning was of these pointes that the scripture teacheth them Whereby you may perceiue the fraude of Torrensis Who saying that they are not expresly written in the scriptures left him selfe this refuge that hee might say they are not in expresse wordes though for sense and substance they are in the scriptures And yet by referring that title to traditions induceth his reader to thinke that they are taught by tradition not by scripture A doctrine which Arians will clappe their handes at that the Sonne of God is not by scripture of one substance with the Father But let it be far from you M. Hart to thinke so prophanely of the word of God And if you rest so much on Doctors of your owne side rest here on Thomas of Aquine rather who saith that concerning God wee must say nothing but that which is founde in the holie scripture either in words or in sense Which as he confirfirmeth by Denys and Damascen so was it the common iudgement of the Fathers of S. Austin chiefly as his bookes touching the Trinitie doo shew And in the conclusion thereof for euident proofe of that which you denied he giueth the name of the rule of faith to that which is plainly set downe in scripture of the Trinitie Wherfore the scripture cōpriseth the rule of faith for that point And as for that point so for all the rest which in that very booke whereof we spake S. Austin noteth It remaineth therfore that S. Austin meant not by the authoritie of the church more then he signified by plainer places of the scriptures Hart. Yes his own words in that verie sentence doo yéeld sufficient proofe me thinkes that he did For if he signified by plainer places of the scriptures as much as he meant by the authoritie of the church then was it idle when he had named the one to adde the other to it chiefly in such sort as that is added by S. Austin For both the coniunction the places of scriptures and the authoritie of the church should import thinges different and I may say of wordes as the Philosopher saith of things That is done in vaine by more that may be done by fewer Rainoldes Nothing is done in vaine that is done to edifie The church might well be mentioned as an interpreter of the worde though it teach not any thing beside the word of God The people of Israel did beleeue the Lord and his seruaunt Moses yet Moses did nothing but that the Lorde commaunded him The wise man doth charge his sonne to hearken to the instruction of his father and forsake not the doctrine of his mother yet they both the father and mother teach one lesson the chiefest wisedome the feare of God The same is fulfilled in this Moses and the Lord or rather in this mother and our heauenly Father of whom it hath bene said well He cannot haue God to be his Father who hath not the church to be his mother For God hauing purposed to make vs his children and heires of life eternall as he prepared his word to be first the séede the immortall seed of which we are begotten a new afterward the milke the sincere milke whereby wee béeing borne grow so he ordeined the church by her ministerie to teach it as it were a mother first to conceaue and bring foorth the children afterward to nourish them as babes new borne with her milke Which appeareth as by others so chiefly by S. Paul who traueiled of them in childbirth whom he sought to conuert and when they were new borne he nourished them with milke to set before our eyes the duetie of the church and all the churches Ministers in bearing children vnto Christ. Now the milke which the church giueth to her children shée giueth it out of her brestes and her two brestes are the two testaments of the holie scriptures by S. Austins iudgement the old Testament and the new S. Austin therefore saying the rule of faith is receiued of the authoritie of the church meant not that the church should deliuer any thing but onely what shee draweth out of the holie scriptures Hart. Not for milke perhaps which babes are to sucke but for strong meate wherewith men are nourished For mothers féede not their children being growne with mylke out of theyr brestes Rainoldes But S. Austin addeth that the holy scriptures haue both milke for babes and strong meat for men milke in plainer thinges and easier to be vnderstood strong meate in harder and greater mysteries Yea where Christ said that euerye Scribe which is taught vnto the kingdome of heauen is lyke vnto an housholder who bringeth foorth out of his treasure thinges both newe and olde S. Austin iudgeth that hée meant by newe thinges and olde the olde and newe testament Wherefore sith euery pastor and teacher of the church is meant you graunt by this Scribe it foloweth by S. Austin that the meate which he is to fetch out of his storehouse for the
dastardes which you set against them My former wordes of the Apostles as being equall in power agrée well with these of Peter and Paule For I say not that Paule was aboue Peter but that he might haue bene aboue him in power for all the honour which he gaue him And this is sufficient to ouerthrowe your reason But if my example of the Pope and Emperour did cause you to mistake me you may take an other and fitter for the purpose the Colledge Apostolike as the Pope dooth call them I meane the Cardinalles of Rome Who though they be in states orders and liuings one aboue an other yet in all things and with all curtesies they all giue hie reuerence one vnto an other And when any of them doth come into the chappell of the Popes holinesse to say his deuotions he turneth towardes the Cardinalles of his owne order and goeth not directly to his own place vnlesse he be the lowest but beginning at the lowest as though he wold abide there he is desired entreated of euery one to go higher vntil hee come directly to his own place vnlesse he be the lowest himselfe demurely once again desireth him who is next vnto him that he will go before him at lēgth he sitteth down in his place This is a foule trouble to make so much adoo at the comming in of euerie Cardinall to prayers chiefly when prayers are begun Yet to shew how modestly they thinke of themselues and how they honour one an other euery one that commeth after others dooth it whither the Pope be there or no. Out of doubt Cardinalles men of such wisedome would not commit this folly if euery one whom they honour must be aboue them in power But you deale iniuriously with me to say that you framed your reason out of the scriptures and Fathers and I bring the booke of Ceremonies to kill it For neither did you ground vpon the wordes of scripture but onely on a circumstance obserued by the Fathers that Paule went to Peter of reuerence to honour him and I slew the reason which you made thereof with the sword of scriptures I vsed the booke of Ceremonies but as an Irish Lackey to cut off a dead mans head I would not haue vouchsafed as much as to name him but to cast the doong of your solemnities in your faces and to shewe the fondnesse of a Popish reason by practise of a Papall mockery Though I sée not why you should preferre so the scriptures and Fathers before the booke of Ceremonies For the booke of Ceremonies speaketh more good of the Pope in one leafe then both the other doo throughout all their volumes And it is solemnely printed at Rome with Peters picture in the front and the keies in his handes and Feede my sheepe written about him as a booke of great account where many of the Fathers doo lye in the dust of the Vatican Library and cannot come into the light Notwithstanding if you be willing to yéeld your selfe prisoner to the Fathers as Gentlemen thinke the booke of Ceremonies to be a raskall souldiour whom you disdaine to yéeld vnto behold your owne witnesses who make not Paule inferiour to Peter otherwise then in the time of his Apostleship the one made first the other last S. Ierome who putteth an equalitie betweene them though Paule did honour him as an Apostle before him S. Chrysostome who pronounceth that Paule to say no more of him was Peters peere in dignitie S. Ambrose who giueth a primacy to them both and saith that Paule was euen such an other as Peter S. Austin who declareth their authoritie to haue beene equall and that for Paules honor what he wanteth in time is supplied by Christes glory in that he made him an Apostle not as the rest vpon the earth but when he raigned now in maiestie And these things are written by the same Fathers whose wordes touching the honour that Paule gaue to Peter your Doctor setteth in a beadrole as though in their iudgement Paule acknowledged Peter his supreme head thereby Wherein you may perceiue both his deceitfull dealing that alleageth their wordes as setting one aboue the other who in expresse words doo make one equall to the other and your expositions how iumpe they méete with the Fathers who gathered an equalitie of Peter and Paul by the epistle to the Galatians whence you conclude Peters supremacy ouer Paule Hart. How the Fathers all agrée with one consent of Peters supremacy it shall be shewed hereafter As for the circumstance which I obserued out of them touching the fact of Paule y● when he went to see Peter he went of reuerence to honour him I doo not account so greatly thereof as of the fact it selfe nor vrge I the Fathers so much obseruing that as the report of this made by the Scriptures For they set it forth with so liuely wordes as if it were of purpose to paint out Peters primacie Then after thre yeares I went to Ierusalem saith Paule to see Peter and taried with him fifteene daies Marke his words I pray and sée what weight they cary with them He went to Ierusalem so farre so long a iourney and he went notwithstanding his great affaires ecclesiastical and he went to see Peter not in the vulgar maner but as S. Chrysostom noteth that the Gréeke word importeth to behold him as men behold a thing or person of name excellencie and maiestie Neither did he go onely to see him but he abode with him also to fill him selfe with a perfit viewe of his behauiour And he abode with him no common time but fifteen daies fiftene daies a great matter and more then many would thinke who doo not search the depth of scriptures In such estimation was Peter with Paule and will you yet deny his primacy Rainoldes King Agesilaus when one praysed an Orator that he could amplifie thinges and make them of small to séeme great I saith hée would neuer count him a good shoomaker who would put a great shoo vpon a small foote You play the Orator M. Hart with your amplifications and that in such sort as you passe the shoomaker of Agesilaus For you do not only put a great shoo vpon a small foote but you stretch the leather with your ●éeth too And yet when you haue wéeried your selfe with stretching it you will haue stretched it in vaine For though your shoo be too great for the primacy of Peter yet will it be too small for the supremacy of the Pope Hart. We speake not of the Pope now but of Peter Why stray you from the point Rainoldes I thought they had béene things both of one nature and differing in name only But I will speake of Peter And that you may sée that the shoo which you made is too great for his foote I will shew it by a plaine demonstration to the
feathers They report that Plato defined a man so a man is a liuing creature two-footed vn-feathered For which definitiō when he was commended Diogenes tooke a Capon and hauing pluckt his feathers off did bring him in to the schoole of Plato saying This is Platoes man The holy word of God is the same in the Church that reason is in a man Whereupon we giue it for an essential marke as I may terme it of the Church by which the Church is surely known and discerned But the shew of Gods word is such in many heretikes as of reason in brute beastes that some who haue no skill to discerne that marke doo thinke it impossible to know the Church by it Your felowes hereupon describe the Church by outward and accidentall markes as namely by antiquity succession consent These are very plausible and many do commend them highly But he that hath halfe an eie of a Philosopher I meane a wise Christian néede not playe Diogenes in plucking feathers off to shew that these markes may agrée to a capon Now as they deale with the markes of the Church so doo you M. Hart with the markes of the truth Not Vincentius but you who couer your errors with the name of Vincentius and take thinges as necessary and sure proofes of truth which he did note as probable and likelye tokens of it onely For he deliuered them not as neuer failing but as holding often and such as albeit they doo hit sometimes yet do they misse sometimes also Whereof him selfe is witnesse in that he disproueth them the first vniuersality by the example of the Arians and flyeth from it to antiquitie the second antiquitie by the example of the Donatistes and flyeth from it to consent Hart. But the third consent he speaketh of as neuer failing as a necessarie token to know and trie the truth by as an essentiall marke and proper to the pointes of Catholike faith and truth And this is the marke which chiefly I regarded when I alleaged Vincentius that our questions might be tried by the consent of the Fathers Rainoldes In déede he preferreth this marke before the rest as hauing held when they fayled Neuerthelesse he speaketh not so of it neither as that it may serue for tryall and decision of questions betwéene vs. For what doth he acknowledge to bee a point approued such as we are bound to beléeue by this marke Euen that which the Fathers all with one consent haue held written taught plainely commonly continually And who can auouch of any point in question that not one or two but all the Fathers held it nor onely held it but also wrote it nor onely wrote it but also taught it not darkely but plainely not seldome but commonly not for a short season but continually Which so great consent is partly so rare and hard to be found partly so vnsure though it might be found that him selfe to fashion it to some vse and certainetie is faine to limit and restraine it First for the matters that we are to seeke and follow their consent not in all litle questiōs of the scripture but in the weighty pointes of faith Then for the persons that we must folow all or the greater part because in many pointes all of them consent not Finally which cometh néerest to our purpose he graunteth that there may such heresies arise as must be dealt withall by the scripture onely and not by the Fathers for purposing to shew both in what maner and what kind of heresies may be found out and condemned by the consenting sentences of the Fathers he saith and confirmeth that neither all heresies must be assaulted in this sort nor alwaies but only such as are new and greene to weete when first they spring vp before they haue falsisied the rules of auncient faith the very straitenes of time not suffering them to do it and before the poyson spreading abroad farther they endeuour to corrupt the writings of the Fathers But heresies that are spread abroad and waxed old must not be set vpon in this sort because they by long continuance of time haue had long occasion to steale away the truth And therefore whatsoeuer profanities there be either of schismes or heresies that are waxed auncient we must in no case deale otherwise with them then either to conuince them if it bee nedeful by the authoritie of scriptures onely or at the least auoid them being of old time conuicted and condemned alreadie by the generall councels of Catholike Bishops Lo when heresies are growne to be in yeares auncient and ample in places when they haue got antiquitie and vniuersality then must we fight against them not by consent of Fathers but by the authoritie of the scriptures only This is the sentence of Vincentius Lirinensis in that passing fine booke against the profane innouations of all heresies Is it not a golden sentēce Hart. The cause why Vincentius affirmeth that heresies when they are spread far and haue long continued are to be confuted by the scriptures onely not by consent of Fathers is that which he dooth point too of endeuouring to corrupt the writings of the Fathers a common practise of heresies if occasion and time serue them But there is no colour why therefore you should refuse to deale with vs by the consent of Fathers For neither are the doctrines which we professe heresies much lesse olde and ample heresies such as he speaketh of nor haue wée endeuoured to corrupt the writings of the Fathers nay wée haue kept them and endeuour daily to set them foorth most perfitly But your heresies in déede although they sprang of late and may be counted new and greene yet haue they endeuoured to corrupt the Fathers since and haue done it The practise of Erasmus is famous therein Of whom to say nothing what censures haue béen giuen by other worthy men whō Torrensis nameth Marian Victorius in Cōmentaries that he set foorth vpon the former thrée tomes of S. Ierome reproueth most learnedly more then sixe hundred errours thrust into them by Erasmus either in expounding or ill correcting them And Torrensis in his preface to the Confession of S. Austin declareth sundry bookes to be S. Austins owne which Erasmus had noted as falsly fathered on him Wherefore if by Vincentius you minde to touch them who endeuour to corrupt the writings of the Fathers cast out the beame out of your owne eie before you séeke a m●at● in ours Rainoldes Yet you sée by the way though you make hast away from it what rotten postes they be whereon as principall pillars your church and faith is built vniuersalitie antiquitie consent Of which it is shewed by Vincentius himselfe that heresies may iustly claime the two former vniuersalitie and antiquitie and make a faire chalenge to the third consent in processe of time so cunningly can they file the Fathers to their
two and twentéeth as they number it For where it should be read as our Latin hath it and the Greeke also they haue pearced my hands and my feete the Hebrues now do reade not Caaru that is they haue pearced but Caari that is as a Lion as a Lion my hands and my feete Whereby a notable prophecie describing so plainely the maner and kind of the passion of Christ should bée taken out of our hands through the trechery of the Iewes if wée should folow the Hebrew text as it is now But it is so manifestly knowne to be corrupted that your selues though allowing the Hebrew as authenticall yet folowe it not in this place in your English Bibles Rainoldes This is the onely argument that Lindan hath of any shew to proue that the Iewes haue corrupted the Hebrew text But if it be weighed with an euen ballance you shall find it a meere cauill For what will you say of your owne selues Did the Church of Rome corrupt the Latin text in the third of Genesis where it is read of the woman she shall bruse thy head for that which should be read of thewomans séed he shall bruse thy head Hart. Some of your men say so But they do great iniury to the Church therin Rainoldes They haue as great cause at least if not greater to say this of Romanistes as you the other of the Iewes For if we match the prophecies this is more notable which is corrupted in your Latin of the victorie of Christ ouer Satan and ours through him If we compare errors this is more manifest in so much that it is proued to be an error euen by Lindan also not onely by others and the Hebrue text with the Chaldee paraphrase and the Greeke translation do all make against it as the Diuines of Louan graunt Hart. But this might créepe in by some humane ouersight or negligence of scriueners as sundry such errours haue crept in to writen bookes of all sortes euen in the best copies The words ipsa and ipse in which the variance lyeth doo not so greatly differ but that a man might easily mistake the one for the other Rainoldes No more do the wordes Caaru Caari The differēce is as smal Wherfore if the one might be an ouersight of scriueners in the Latin as you say and truely why might not the other be likewise in the Hebrew as it is gessed by Andradius And that it was so it is declared at large by Arias Montanus who for his singular knowledge and iudgement both in artes and tongues was chosen as I said to ouersée the setting foorth of that famous Bible in Hebrewe Chaldee Greeke and Latin which was printed at Anwerpe with the approbation of your Popes and Doctors For in the sixth tome of that worke he sheweth that when the Iewes returned into their countrey after their captiuitie of seuentie yeares in Babylon it befell vnto them partly by occasion of their long troubles which did distract their mindes partly by corruption of their natiue tongue which was growne out of kind first into the Chaldee and afterward into the Syriake that they neither knewe nor pronounced so wel the words of the scripture writen as the maner was without vowels Whereby it came to passe that in the writing of them their crept in some faulte either through iniury of the times or by reason of troubles which fell vpon the people or by negligence of some scriueners But this inconuenience was met withall afterward by most learned men such as Esdras was and afterward Gamaliel Ioseus Eleazar and other of great name who prouided by common trauell with great care and industry that the text of scripture and the true reading thereof should be preserued most sound and vncorrupt And from these men or from their instruction being receaued and poolished by their scholers in the ages folowing there came saith he as we iudge that most profitable treasure which is called Masoreth that is to say a deliuery because it doth deliuer aboundantly and faithfully all the diuers readings that euer were of the Hebrewe Bibles Wherein there appeareth an euident token of the prouidence of God for the preseruation of the sacred bookes of scripture whole and sound that the Masóreth hath beene kept till our time these many hundred yeares with such care and diligence that in sundry copies of it which haue bene writen no difference was euer found and it hath beene added in all the writen Bibles that are in Europe Afrike or Asia each of them agreing throughly therein with other euen as it is printed in the Venice-bibles to the great wonder of them who reade it Now in this Masoreth made so long ago so diligently writen so faithfully kept in so many countryes through so many ages as Arias Montanus witnesseth the Iewes them selues acknowledge by their owne testimonie that where in common bookes it is read Caari in certaine it is Caaru Wherefore if some Iewish scriueners who wrote out bookes depraued it of malice and spite which might be though they who accuse them doo bring neither autour nor time nor any sure argument to proue it but if some depraued it yet séeing their Masôreth doth note the diuerse reading and in part doth iustifie that which is the truer it is hard to charge them as you doo with corrupting of the Hebrewe text Much harder then if we should charge your Romish church with corrupting of the Latin where you read ipsa in stéed of ipse not he but she shall bruse thy head Hart. Not so for we haue kept also that reading ipse euen in our vulgar Latin translation For the Diuines of Louan do note that it is found in two writen copies And we do confesse it to be more agréeable both to the Hebrewe text and the Chaldee paraphrase the Greeke translation yea that S. Ierom read it so too as you may see in the Notations of Franciscus Lucas to which our latin Bibles set forth by the Diuines of Louan doo referre you Rainoldes Yet Franciscus Lucas doth wrangle still about it and saith that all the Latin copies which they could finde doo read it ipsa and of the two which you mention he doubteth whether one did folow the Latin or the Hebrewe and hee maketh shew of proofe that the Hebrew may well agree to the Latin with a litle hammering of it Yea and that is more as in al the Bibles that I haue séene of yours the Latin hath ipsa not ipse shee not he though your greatest frends haue wished you forshame to mēd it so in an Hebrue text of the famous Bible of king Philip which but now I mētioned the word he is altered according to the latin shee and that not of errour but of purpose as it is witnessed by Franciscus Lucas Which is greater boldnes in corrupting the Hebrue thē you can
iustly charge the Iewes with But if it besufficient to cléere both the Latin edition your selues that you haue found a booke or two wherein ipse is read as your Diuines say how much more iustly may we cléere both the Hebrue text and the Iewes who as it is noted in their Masóreth found sundrie bookes with Caaru Chiefly sith they commend the bookes as wel corrected which had that reading you commend not yours And they reproue a note which some had made rashly to bring in the other reading in steed of that you make such notes your selues And they vpon the text where Caari is read doo note that the word hath another meaning then where it signifieth as a Lion what note you so of ipsa And you these many ages haue kept in your Bibles a faulty reading without any mention of the true they haue done the contrarie in theirs of auncient time Finally where you can finde but two copies in which the Latin edition doth read ipse not ipsa if yet you can finde two for of them you doubt they beside the copies extant at the time that the Masóreth was writen haue had sundrie amongst them euen till our dayes in which it is read not Caari but Caaru For it is auouched out of many singular good copies by Andradius Isaac protesteth that hée saw such a one him selfe with his grandfather and Petrus Galatinus saith that euen yet it is found so writen in certaine copies most auncient Whereby you may sée withall how vniustly you cast vs in the téeth that our English Bibles folow not the Hebrue text in this place For tell me I pray In the English translation of the new Testament which you at Rhemes did trauell in translated you neuer a worde that you found not in the common text of the Latin edition Hart. Yes when by the Greeke or the Fathers wee saw it was a manifest faulte of the writers heretofore that mistooke one word for another Rainoldes Yet when you did so you translated faithfully out of the authentical Latin into English Hart What els Because we did it according to the best corrected copies of the Latin Rainoldes And why say you then that wee translate not according to the Hebrue when we translate according to the best corrected copies of the Hebrue Specially when we beside the Masoreth do follow the consent of written copies so many where you sometime translate that which was found in one though all the rest were against it But thus shall they dash their foote against the stones who will runne when they are blinde Hart. Nay you are blinde rather who doo call vs blinde We can speake such wordes as easily of you as you may of vs. Rainoldes As easily but not as iustly For it is notorious that in this opinion which you hold out of Stapleton and he ●ut of Lindan both they and you are blinded what through ignorance of truth touching the Hebrue text what through fansie to error in the Latin translation Through ignorance of the Hebrue in that you say the Iewes haue shamefully corrupted it Which Arias Montanus no partiall iudge herein noteth to be their saying who know not the Masoreth Through fansie to the Latin in that you account of it as authenticall And refusing the originall text vnder colour that one place therof hath in some copies a fault in one letter you preferre a translation which hath many such throughout all copies as the Diuines of Louan shew which hath by confession of your owne Lindan monstrous corruptions of all sortes which is printed so euen among your selues that scarce one copie can bee found that hath one booke of scripture whole vndefiled in which there are many pointes that are translated too intricately and darkely yea some improperly some abusiuely some not so fully yea not so well and truely and to be short which hath sundrie places thrust out from their plaine and naturall sense chiefly in the Psalmes and the new Testament as Lindan not content to vouch it of him selfe doth prooue by the testimonies of the auncient Fathers Austin and Ierom and Hilarie and Victorinus Are not they blinde who preferre a translation and such a translation before the originall yea who bind men to receiue it as authentical or rather as holy as sacred as canonicall vnder paine of damnation And if they thinke themselues not to be blinde in that they do so are they not so much the blinder like the Pharises because they say we see Hart. You take much paines in vaine with this talke about the Hebrue For I will not yéelde one iot from the decrée of the Councell of Trent Wherefore if you can proue out of our authenticall latin translation that the Priest is not meant by the iudge in that place of Deuteronomie I will harken to you Otherwise you may alleage the Hebrue against the Iewes for it shall neuer moue me Rainoldes I am sorie if you be so frowardly set Yet well fare Andradius who thinketh that the Councel of Trent did not meane either to condemne the Hebrue trueth as he calleth it or to acquite the latin translation from all error when they named it authenticall but onely that the latin hath no such error by which any pestilent opinion in faith and maners may be gathered But if you will not be moued with the Hebrue what say you to the Chaldee paraphrase Or if that also haue as small credit because it expresseth the Hebrue so faithfully in the bookes of Moses what say you to the Greeke of the seuentie interpreters Which the auncient Fathers who either knew not your latin at all or had it not in such price did marueylously estéeme off In them it is as in the Hebrue to the Priest or the iudge whereby it is apparant they thought the iudge one and the Priest another Will you be moued by them or may I alleage the Greeke against the Grecians too Hart. I reuerence the Greeke of the seuentie interpreters But I thinke it might be corrupted more easily then the latin might yea and that it hath béene so in many places Wherefore I appeale still vnto our latin and will not forsake it vnder any pretense Rainoldes Let vs examin then if there bée no remedie the wordes of your latin He that shall presumptuously refuse to obey the commandement of the Priest by the decree of the iudge shall that man dye Is there not a difference put euen by this spéech betwéene the Priest and the iudge the Priest as ecclesiasticall the iudge as ciuil magistrate Let the iudge put him to death who disobeyeth the Priest Hart. I denye not but the sworde of iustice is giuen to the ciuil magistrate and so there is a difference betwéene the iudge the Priest Yet amongst the Iewes sometimes both the offices did méete in one person as you
to winne you to the truth doo bring you the confessions of your own men who witnesse a truth Hart. A truth Why will you graunt vs that the Popes supremacie came in by tradition if we will graunt you that it can not be proued by scripture Rainoldes By tradition I if you meane tradition as S. Peter doth where he teacheth Christians that they are redeemed from their vaine conuersation of the tradition of their Fathers Hart. You are disposed to play with your owne fansies You know my meaning well enough Will you graunt that it came in by tradition of the Apostles Rainoldes I should play in déede with your owne fansies if I should graunt you that Hart. But they whom you alleaged doo say that it did so as your selfe haue shewed Rainoldes But I will proue that they spake no truer in that then you haue doone in the other Hart. But what an iniurie is this to presse mee with their former wordes of the scripture whereas your selfe beleeue not the later of tradition Rainoldes What thinke you of S. Paule Did hee beleeue those thinges which the heathnish Poets do write of Goddes and Goddesses Bacchus Diana Minerua Mercurie Hart. He did not What then Rainoldes Yet he alleaged them to perswade the Athenians that in God we liue and moue and haue our being What an iniury was that to presse the Athenians with Poets words of God whereas himselfe beléeued not their wordes of Gods and Goddesses Hart. The Poets might say well and did in the former though in the later they missed Rainoldes Now wil you deale as frendly with me as with S. Paule His case and mine are coosins Hart. Nay you in the selfe same sentence of our men cull out a péece of it and yet an other péece of it you allow not Rainoldes Euen so did S. Paule For that which he auouched out of their owne Poets the meaning of it is in sundry the very wordes in Aratus they spake it of Iupiter who was a wicked man but thought of them to be God S. Paule allowing not their error in the person culled out their sentence concerning the thing and proued a truth by it Hart. Well if you may diuide the sentence of Canus and other sort then I haue done Rainoldes That I wish For the truth is like vnto camomill the more you presse it down the faster it groweth and spreadeth fairer and smelleth sweeter Hart. So much of scripture then Now to tradition by which the Popes supremacie may be cléerely proued Rainoldes By tradition Why Do you acknowlege then that it cannot be proued by scripture Hart. I tell you no once againe How often must I say it Rainoldes Once saying will serue if you do not vnsay your saying But here in my iudgement you séeme to vnsay it For you disclaime the title pretended by scripture when you claime by tradition Hart. Why so Might not the same thing both be writen in scripture and deliuered by word of mouth Rainoldes It might was no dout as the traditions shew which S. Paule doth mention which signify the doctrine that hee deliuered out of the scriptures But you meane a doctrine not writen in the scriptures when you speake of tradition For you doo imagin that the gospell of Christ is partly contained in writen bookes that is the scriptures partly in vnwriten things that is traditions as the Iewish Rabbines do say that God by Moses deliuered not only the law that is writen but also an vnwriten law which they call Cabala Hart. Sée as the Iewish Rabbines You haue inured your mouth to such venemous spéeches· Rainoldes Beware or els through my side you will wound your freend For Bishop Peresius your chiefest patrone of traditions doth proue them solemnly by this point of the Iewish Rabbins and the Cabala Neither is the proofe vnfit if it be weighed For as they pretend this ground for the Cabala that it openeth the hidden meaning of the scriptures so do you for traditions And as they in processe of time brought in doctrine contrarie to the scriptures vnder pretense of traditions so do you with your Cabala And as Cabalists among the Iewes do call them scripture-men by way of reproch who cast off traditions and cleaue to scriptures only so doo traditionists among you reproch vs with the same terme Yea Lindan and Prateolus doo note it for a speciall heresie But to leaue this venemous spéech it is manifest that you renounce the scripture for proofe of any title which you lay claime to by tradition For scripture is writen tradition vnwriten Wherefore if by tradition you minde to proue the Popes supremacie you must acknowlege first that it cannot be proued by scripture If you bee not willing to ackonwlege that I must debarre you from tradition Hart. Then I will proue it by the Fathers Rainoldes Nay that you shall not neither vnlesse you will forgo the scripture Hart. And why so I pray Rainoldes Because they say forsooth that it is held by tradition So that their euidences make against you if scripture be your plea for it Hart. That is very false For by the words Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke in the sixtéenth of Matthew the first Popes of Rome most holy martyrs haue proued it Anacletus Alexander the first Pius the first Victor Zepherinus Marcellus Eusebius Melchiades Iulius Damasus and likewise others by other places as D. Stapleton alleageth farther Wherefore that the Fathers tooke it as you say to be held by tradition it is a flat lye Rainoldes Say you so Then Canus and Father Robert do lye flatly but that is no maruell who grounding it both on tradition the one doth cite for witnesses thereof the first Popes of Rome most holy martyrs Anacletus Sixtus the first Eleutherius Victor Sixtus the second Zepherinus Marcellus Melchiades Marcus Iulius the other not contenting himselfe with particulars doth alleage in grosse f●●st the generall Councels next the Popes and last the Fathers Hart. Yet more of Canus and Father Robert I take not their defense vpon me and why againe doo you tell me of them Rainoldes That you may sée how the Lord doth sheath the swordes of Madianites in their own sides to the confusion of them who pitch their campe against Israel For the same Popes which are alleaged by Canus to prooue that their supremacie is an vnwritten truth the verie same Popes are alleaged by Stapleton to prooue that it is writen euen Anacletus Victor Zepherinus Marcellus Melchiades and Iulius Yea and that is more the very same epistles of theirs are alleaged by Stapleton which by Canus If rightly by Canus how may we trust Stapleton If rightly by Stapleton how may wee trust Canus If rightly by them both what trimme Popes are they who with one
If any man preach vnto you more then you haue receyued but beside that you haue receyued For if he should say that he should be preiudiciall to him selfe who desired to come to the Thessalonians that he might supply that which was wanting to their faith Now he that supplyeth addeth that which was wanting taketh not away that which was and so forth Whereby S. Austin sheweth that we may preach more then the scripture hath but not beside it that is to say against it Rainoldes He sheweth nothing lesse as any man that readeth his discourse may see For that which he speaketh of more and of wanting is not meant of scripture that is the worde writen but of the worde preached deliuered by mouth Wherein he declareth that the Apostles maner of instructing men was to feede them first with milke not with strong meat So that which was wanting to the Thessalonians was stronger doctrine of the faith that which they had was easier Wherof though in the one he taught them more then in the other yet no more in either then the scripture hath And thus S. Austins more to be no more then scripture himselfe maketh manifest by the example also which he giueth of it For the doctrine of the manhead of Christ he calleth milke of the Godhead strong meat Now they who are taught to know him to be God learne more then they had learned when they receaued him as man But they learne no more then the scripture hath which teacheth him both God and man Wherefore that S. Austin condemning all who preach ought beside the scriptures of the law the gospell meant that more then scriptures may be preached but nought against them it is not S Austins glose but your Louanists and in truth repugnant to S. Austins text For in the same place S. Austin making mention how the Donatists hated him for preaching of the truth and confuting their heresie as though saith he we had commanded the Prophets and Apostles who were so long before vs that they in their bookes should set downe no testimonies whereby the Donatists might be proued to be the church of Christ. Which words doo shew plainly that as by the scriptures of the law the gospel he signified the bookes of the Prophetes Apostles so by condemning all that is beside the scriptures he meant not all that is against but all that is not in the scriptures And that this was his meaning he sheweth yet more plainely by willing them to proue their doctrine by the testament which your Louan Doctors the greater shame for them to wrest S. Austins wordes against his sense doo note also For as amongst men the testament doth open the will of the testa●or so did S. Austin thinke that the controuersie betwixt the Donatists and the Church should be decided by the Scriptures which Christ hath left to Christians as his will and testament For Christ hath dealt with vs as an earthly Father is wont with his children who fearing least they should fall out after his decease doth set downe his will in writing vnder witnesses if there arise debate amongst the brethren they go to the testament He whose word must end our controuersie is Christ. Let his wil be sought in his testament saith Optatus Which reason of Optatus S. Austin vrging against the Donatists as he doth other often we are brethrē saith he to them why doo we striue Our father died not vntestate he made a testament so died Men do striue about the goods of the dead till the testament be brought foorth when that is brought they yeeld to haue it opened read The iudge doth hearken the counsellours be silent the cryer biddeth peace all the people is attentiue that the wordes of the dead man may be read heard He lyeth voide of life feeling in his graue and his words preuaile Christ doth sit in heauen and is his testament gainesaied Open it let vs reade we are brethren why do we striue Let our mindes be pacified Our father hath not left vs without a testament He that made the testament is liuing for euer He doth heare our words he doth know his owne word Let vs reade why doo we striue Were not this a séely spéech of S. Austin if hee had meant as you say that all the Lords will is not declared in his testament that thinges beside his owne worde may be proued by mens words Let him be accursed who preacheth any point of faith or life beside the scriptures True beside the scriptures that is against the scriptures say your Louan Doctours Sée what skil can doo If they were Doctours of the Arches we should haue ioly law For a coosining marchant might claime a thousand pound of a dead mans goods who had bequeathed him a legacy of twētie grotes they might adiudge it him with good consciences as not against the testament though beside the testament Nay they might do this with so much better reason then they doo the other by how much the testament of God is more perfit thē any mans can be and that which Christ bequeathed the Pope is farre lesse in comparison of the supremacie then twentie grotes of a thousand poundes Wherfore say the Doctors of Louan what they li●t perhaps they speake for their fée S. Austin meant plainely that sith the Donatists claimed the inheritaunce of Christ to them selues they must proue their title by his will and testament Which if they could not doo or rather séeing that they could not he pronounceth of them they had no right vnto it And thereupon he commeth to the generall sentence of the heauenly iudge denouncing them accursed who in any point either of faith or life doo preach beside that which is deliuered in the scriptures of the law and the gospel Wherein if beside do signifie against then all in this respect is against a testament which is beside a testament Hart. S. Austin and Optatus against the Donatists doo speake reason that vnlesse they can proue their right by Christes testament they may not shut the Catholikes out from his inheritance and claime his goods vnto them selues For it is meete that the will of the testator should be kept But a learned lawier one Francis Baldwin who hath set foorth Optatus and writen notes vpon him doth shew that a testament may be either nuncupatiuum as he calleth it or scriptum either set down in writing or vttered by word of mouth What say you to testamentum nuncupatiuum Rainoldes I graunt that a testament may be made without writing so that it be done before a solemne number of witnesses But the testament of Christ is writen I hope and so doo both Optatus and Austin speake of it Wherefore your learned Lawier may kéepe that law in st●re vntill his client néede it Hart. As who say the testament of Christ might not be writen in part though
which they did gather of those wordes then might we know the times whereof our Sauiour saith that it is not for man to knowe them And vpon this reason S. Austin doth reproue that fansie of sixe thousand yeares as rash and presumptuous Hart. So doo we also For Lindan and Prateolus doo note it in Luthers and Melanchthons Chronicles as a Iewish heresie Rainoldes Good reason when Luther and Melanchthon write it But when Irenaeus Hilarie Lactantius and other Fathers write it what doo they note it then Hart. Suppose it were an ouersight But what néedes all this As who say you douted that we would maintaine the Fathers in those things in which they are conuicted of error by the scriptures Rainoldes I haue cause to dout it For though there be no man lightly so profane as to professe that he will doo so yet such is the blindnes o● mens deuotion to Saintes there haue béene heretofore who haue so done and are still There is a famous fable touching the assumption of the blessed virgin that when the time of her death approched the Apostles then dispersed throughout the world to preach the gospell were taken vp in cloudes and brought miraculously to Ierusalem to be present at her funerall This tale in olde time was writen in a booke which bare the name of Melito an auncient learned Bishop of Asia though he wrote it not be like But whosoeuer wrote it he wrote a lye saith Bede because his words gaine say the wordes of S. Luke in the actes of the Apostles Which Bede hauing shewed in sundrie pointes of his tale he saith that he reherseth these thinges because he knoweth that some beleeue that booke with vnaduised rashnesse against S. Lukes autoritie So you sée there haue béene who haue beléeued a Father yea perhaps a rascall not a Father against the scriptures And that there are such still I sée by our countrymen your diuines of Rhemes who vouch the same fable vpon greater credit of Fathers then the other but with no greater truth Hart. Doo you call the assumption of our Ladie a fable What impietie is this against the mother of our Lord that excellent vessell of grace whom all generations ought to call blessed But you can not abide her prayses and honours Nay you haue abolished not onely her greatest feast of her assumption but of her conception and natiuitie too So as it may bee thought the diuell beareth a special malice to this woman whose seede brake his head Rainoldes It may be thought that the diuell when he did striue with Michael about the bodie of Moses whom the Lord buried the Iewes knew not where did striue that his bodie might bee reuealed to the Iewes to the entent that they might worship it and commit idolatrie But it is out of doubt that when he moued the people of Lystra to sacrifice vnto Paul and Barnabas and to call them Gods he meant to deface the glory of God by the too much honouring and praysing of his Saintes We can abide the prayses of Barnabas and Paule but not to haue them called Gods We can abide their honours but not to sacrifice vnto them Wee know that the diuell doth beare a speciall malice both to the woman and to the womans seed But whether he doth wreake it more vpon the séede by your sacrificing of prayses and prayers to the woman or by our not sacrificing let them define who know his policies The Christians of old time were charged with impietie because they had no Gods but one This is our impietie For whatsoeuer honour and prayse may bee giuen to the Saintes of God as holy creatures but creatures we doo gladly giue it We thinke of them all and namely of the blessed virgin reuerently honourably We desire our selues and wish others to folow her godly faith and vertuous life We estéeme her as an excellent vessell of grace We call her as the scripture teacheth vs blessed yea the most blessed of all women But you would haue her to be named and thought not onely blessed her selfe but also a giuer of blessednesse to others not a vessell but a fountaine or as you entitle her a mother of grace and mercy And in your solemne prayers you doo her that honour which is onely due to our creator and redeemer For you call on her to defend you from the enimie and receiue you in the houre of death Thus although in semblance of wordes you deny it yet in déede you make her equall to Christ as him our Lord so her our Ladie as him our God so her our Goddesse as him our King so her our Queene as him our mediator so her our mediatresse as him in all thinges tempted like vs sinne excepted so her deuoide of all sinne as him the onely name whereby we must be saued so her our life our ioy our hope a very mother of orphans an aide to the oppressed a medicine to the diseased and to be short all to all Which impious worship of a Sainte because you haue aduanced by keping holy dayes vnto her the feastes of her conception natiuitie assumption therefore are they abolished by the reformed Churches iustly For the vse of holy dayes is not to worship Saintes but to worship God the sanctifier of Saintes As the Lorde ordeined them that men might meete together to serue him and heare his worde Hart. Why keepe you then still the feastes of the Apostles Euangelists other Saintes and not abolish them also As some of your reformed or rather your deformed Churches haue doon Rainoldes Our deformed Churches are glorious in his sight who requireth men to worship him in spirite truth though you besotted with the hoorish beauty of your synagogues doo scorne at their simplenesse as the proude spirite of Mical did at Dauid when he was vile before the Lord. The Churches of Scotland Flanders France and others allow not holy dayes of Saintes because no day may be kept holy but to the honour of God Of the same iudgement is the Church of England for the vse of holy dayes Wherefore although by kéeping the names of Saintes dayes we may séeme to kéepe them to the honour of Saintes yet in déede we kéepe them holy to God onely to prayse his name for those benefits which he hath bestowed on vs by the ministerie of his Saintes And so haue the Churches of Flanders and Fraunce expounded well our meaning in that they haue noted that some Churches submit them selues to their weakenesse with whome they are conuersant so farre foorth that they keepe the holy dayes of Saintes though in an other sorte nay in a cleane contrarie then the Papists doo Hart. But if you kéepe the feastes of other Saintes in that sorte why not
possessed any they bore not themselues as Lordes of the whole Countie I meane they neyther claimed nor vsed the supremacie Hart. But will you graunt that so much then of the suprepremacie as they claimed or vsed belongeth to their Sée and is theirs of right Rainoldes No. For the exception which I made against them was of two branches one that they auouch not the supremacie of the Pope the other that they auouch more through affection then is true and right And this is very manifest not onely by the dealinges of them whom I named but also by the writinges of them whom you alleaged Hart. Of the thirde sort of Popes if you meane they may be refused perhaps with greater shewe of reason But they whom I alleaged of the second sort were holy men and Saints Rainoldes The Apostles of Christ I hope were Saintes too Yet hath the spirite of God set down for our instruction that they did not onely desire superioritie but also striue about it Innocentius Leo Gelasius Vigilius Pelagius and Gregorie the men whō you alleaged were not greater then the Apostles And the praise which they giue to their See of Rome doth so excéede the truth that it beareth euident markes of their affection You might haue perceiued it in that which you cited out of Innocentius concerning the Fathers and the sentence of God by which he saith they decreed that whatsoeuer was done in prouinces farre off it should not be concluded before it came to the notice of the See of Rome For what were the Fathers who decréed that where is the sentence of God by which they did it Though this is the least of many friendlie spéeches which not Innocentius onely but the rest too as I haue shewed in Leo doo lend their Church Peter Yea some flat repugnant to the holy scripture and that confessed by your selues For they say that all Churches tooke their beginning from the Roman The holy scripture maketh Ierusalem the spring of them They say that all Bishops had their honor and name from Peter The holy scripture teacheth that many had it from other Apostles not from him They say that the Church of Rome hath neither spot norwrinckle nor any such thing The holy scripture sheweth that the Church is san●ctified framed to be hereafter not hauing spot or wrinckle or any such thing whē Christ shal make it glorious triumphant in heauen not but that it hath such while it is militant on the earth Which is so apparant that not the Fathers only but Thomas of Aquine also and D Stapleton confesse it Wherefore howsoeuer holy men they were of the second sort of Popes which you alleaged it cannot be denied but they had affections and yéelded thereunto as men Howbeit the thirde sort I graunt are best worthy to be excepted against for this fault For it is a small thing with them to vse spéeches repugnant to the Scripture but they must abuse yea coine scripture too for maintenance of their Papall port They can teach the Church that the Pope may offer to confirme Archbishops vpon this condition if they will be sworne to him because whē Christ committed his sheepe vnto Peter he did condition with him saying if thou loue me feede my sheepe They can teach the Church that the Pope hath power ouer all powers Princes of the earth none hath power ouer him because the spirituall man iudgeth all thinges yet hee himselfe is iudged of no mā They can teach the Church that Christ ordeyned Peter and Peters successors to be his vicars who by the testimony of the booke of kinges must needes be so obeyed that he who obeieth them not must die the death and as it is read otherwhere Hee that forsaketh the Bishop of Romes chaire cannot bee in the Church Hart. That which is cyted out of the booke of kinges is in the booke of Deuteronomie The text is true scripture though the place mistaken And though it belong not to the Pope immediatly Rainoldes Nay neuer goe about to salue it M. Hart. That of Deuteronomie we haue alredy handled Pope Leo the tenth and his Councel of Laterane had a strong affection to make the Popes Kinges when they alleaged the booke of kinges for Deuteronomie Deuteronomie for the Papacie But what soeuer you think of the third or seconde or any sort of Popes it is against all law both of God and man that they should bée witnesses in their own matter And therefore if your proofe of their supremacie be no better the iury will cast you out of all controuersie For if I should beare witnesse of my selfe saith Christ my witnesse were not true None are fit witnesses in their own causes no not though they were as worthy mē as Scipio was amōgst the Romans It were a bad plea in Westminster Hall Iohn a Noke must haue this land for Iohn a Noke saith so The Canonistes themselues when Popes alleage Popes for proofe of certaine pointes touching their supremacie doe note that it is a familiar kind of proofe meaning such belike as that in the common prouerbe Aske my felow if I be a theefe Which they might note the better because it is euidēt that the Popes haue stretched out their owne frindges in laying claime to large power as great Diuines among you haue written in these very termes Hart. The power which they claimed hath séemed ouer large to enuious and malicious men But it was no more then their right and due Which because you thinke not sufficiently prooued by the Popes themselues I will prooue it farther by the wordes and testimonies of other ancient Fathers Rainoldes Of whom Hart. Of the chéefest of them both Gréeke and Latine For it was the prerogatiue of the Popes office that made S. Bernarde séeke to Innocentius the third Epist. 190. S. Austin and the Bishops of Afrike to Innocentius the first and to Caelestinus Epist. 90.92.95 S. Chrysostome to the saide Innocentius Epist. 1. 2. S. Basil to the Pope in his time Epist. 52. S. Ierom to Damasus Epist. 57.58 tom 2. and other likewise to others that by them they might be confirmed in faith and ecclesiasticall regiment Rainoldes If you bring such witnesses to proue the Popes supremacie I must request the iury to haue an eye to the issue For some of these Fathers desired to be helped by their aduise and counsell some by their autoritie and credit some by both By their aduise and counsell as Ierom of Damasus By their autoritie credit as Chrysostome of Innocentius By both as Basill Austin and the Bishops of Afrike of the Popes in their time Bernard somewhat more But he liued yesterday in comparison of the rest and therfore not to be numbred amongst the auncient Fathers Though neither he by this
is it fully written by S. Iohn Let vs heare him selfe speake These things saith he are writen that ye may beleeue that Iesus is the Christ the sonne of God and that in beleeuing yee may haue life through his name In which wordes the summe and end of the gospell is set downe by Iohn the summe that we may beleeue that Iesus is the Christ the Christ that is the soueraine Priest Prophet and King the Sauiour of men the end that we beleeuing in Christ the sonne of God may through him haue life euen that which alone is called life rightly to wit eternall life Which things being so as the Euangelist him selfe teacheth it must néedes be granted that those things which are writen in the gospell are sufficient for vs both to the way of life and to life As much then as sufficeth to faith and saluation so much is writen in the gospell For if the things which are writen had not béene sufficient to faith and saluation there were mo thing● which might haue bene writen so many as the world could not haue conteined But these were omitted by the spirit of God because the other were enough for his purpose For he giueth this reason why mo were not writen these things are writen that yee may beleeue and in beleeuing may haue life There is contained therefore in S. Iohns gospell so much as is sufficient to faith and saluation Then if S. Iohns gospell alone haue sufficient how plentifully hath Christ prouided for his Church as a most bountifull Lord for his houshold to which he hath giuen so many Apostles and Euangelists witnesses and expounders of the same doctrine Wherefore the scripture doth not onely teach the Church but also amply and plentifully teach it all things behoofull to saluation For although the substance of the Christian faith be single and the same wherewith as with meate the seruants of God are fedde to life eternall yet as the ages of the seruants differ and in ages different their cases differ too so was it méete there should be sundry sortes and waies to diuide that meate and as it were to season it for ech one his part as it might best agrée with him Whereof that we might haue a true liuely paterne set foorth by Christs owne spirit in the word of life for the féeding of the faithfull therefore hée gaue sundry woorkemen so to terme them and writers of his faith that although they deliuered all the same foode yet they did not dresse it all in one sort And so it cometh to passe that in those writers of the faith of Christ both the vnitie of doctrine in the diuersitie of deliuering yeldeth a swéete tast in the spirituall mouth of the godly minde and the manifold vse ministreth holesome nourishment to euery mans stomake the euident plainnesse in the groundes of faith maketh that euen they who are of deintiest mouthes can not refuse it for the toughnes and the hidden wisedome in the secretes of scripture both trieth the strongest and satisfieth them who are sharpest set and to say that in a word which no wordes can expresse enough the infinite treasures bring infinite fruits to the faithfull to procure them a blessednes that is exceeding great and infinite Wherefore it is a thing so cléere and so sure that those secretaries of the holy Ghost ioyned togither doo open to the Church in the holy scriptures all things behoofefull to saluation that he who knoweth it not may be iustly counted ignorant hée who acknowledgeth it not lewde hée who dissembleth it vnthankfull hée who denieth it more then wicked For what can there be in cléerenesse more euident or in peise more weightie or in strength more sound or in truth more certaine then that generall principle which S. Paul deliuereth not as Moses of the law not as Iohn of the gospell but of the whole scripture and holy writt to Timothee The whole scripture is giuen by inspiration of God and is profitable to teach to improue to correct to instruct in righteousnes that the man of God may bee furnished throughly furnished to euery good worke Thus if you demaund of what autoritie scripture is it came from God by inspiration if you regard what vse it hath it teacheth improueth correcteth instructeth if you would sée to what end it is that the man of God may be furnished Our dutie in Christ Iesus is faith woorking by loue Faith embraceth sound doctrine loue requireth a godly life Soundnes of doctrine is held if true things be taught and false refuted Godlines of life is kept if we fly from euill and folow good But the holy scripture teacheth the truth improueth errour correcteth iniquitie instructeth to righteousnes as it appéereth by the Apostles wordes Therefore it setteth foorth a mans whole dutie in Christ Iesus that is as I suppose so much as sufficeth to saluation For it is not onely profitable to these things as some doo mince the matter but sufficient too in so much that it is able to make a man wise to saluation through faith and to furnish him Yea to furnish what maner of man the man of God that is the Lordes interpreter the Minister of the worde the teacher of the Church the Pastour of the flocke euen Timothee himselfe much more the flock of the faithfull in whom so great furniture of wisdome is not necessary Howbeit the Apostle neither so contented with saying that the man of God may be furnished addeth to beat the absolute perfection of the scripture into our mindes and memories with as many reasons as he vseth wordes that the man of God may be furnished throughly furnished to euerie good worke Whereupon it foloweth that there is nothing at all that can be wished for either to soundnes and sinceritie of faith or to integritie and godlines of life that is to mans perfection and the way of saluation which the scripture geuen by inspiration of God doth not teach the faithfull seruantes of Christ. It is the iudgement therefore of the holy Ghost whose sentence I defend as I am bound by duetie that the holy scripture teacheth the Church all things necessarie to saluation Here if some perhaps desire the testimonies of the Fathers though to what purpose sith ye haue heard the Father of Fathers notwithstanding if any would heare the scholers iudgement when he hath heard the masters he shall heare the iudgement not of this or that man of whom he might dout but of the whole Church and of all the Saints For they with one agréement and generall consent haue termed the bookes of scripture Canonicall of the word Canon which signifieth a rule because they containe a worthy rule and squire of religion faith and godlines according whereunto the building of the house of God must be fitted Which opinion touching the Canon of the scripture allowed by Andradius himselfe the chiefest patrone of the Popish faith hath béene