the determiner of faith and manners First Because the chief and greatest Controversie is about scripture it â—â—lf viz What 〈…〉 scripture what not Now if it be the determiner of faith as you speak in 〈…〉 is the Catalogue of Canonical bookes 〈◊〉 How may it be proved against Luthâ—â— that St. Iames his Epistle is Canonical 〈…〉 against others that Nicodemus and S. Thomas Gospells are not Or if you reject Tobias Judith the bookes of Wisdom Ecclesiasticus and the Maccabees because the Synagogue of the Jewes did so why â—o â—ou not also deny Christ to be the Messias with them Answer This return is rather an evasion then solid reply and is satisfied in the resolution Protest Duply of the sixt Question to which in reason it ought to be referred yet seing tumultuously diverse things are here heaped together I shall sort and discuss them thus First There is no Christian Church which maketh it a Controversie at all whether scripture be the word of God so this is not the chiefest and greatest Controvesie for it is supposed amongst the principles of Christianity and if the Precognita of other science have ex terminis their own notoreiety We should not argument contra negantes principia against them who deny known principles how can this be denyed to Theology seing if we rest not on some principles we must run our selves out of breath and not know where to sist Basil †Basil on Psal 115. telleth 〈…〉 as in every science there be unqueâ—â—â—able principles which are beleeved withoâ—â—â—â—rther demonstration so in the science of 〈◊〉 Theology This is amongst 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 scripture is the word of God if any 〈◊〉 this controversall he is an Antiscripturiâ—â— and Paganish Secondly There be no Controversie betwixt us and the Papists in that wherein we are agreed but both are agreed that all the bookes which we receive for Canonicall scripture are the word of God Ergo this is no Controversie If all the bookes of scripture which we mantaine be the word of God our Adversaries being judges then iâ— must determine faith and manners or else our faith is humane for Bellarmine †Bel. de verbo Dei lib. 1. â— 2. sayeth that Scriptura est regula credendi tutissima certissima the written word is a most sure and certaine rule of beleeving So sayeth Aquinas †Aquinas in Tim. 6. This is sufficient for confirming the first Answere and refuting the first Exceptionâ— Yet to follow your impertineut digression from the power of the scripture-bench to the number of the books I Answere Secondly that the doctrine concerning the number of the scripture books or the names of all them who penned these if comparatively considered that is if you compare the present number with that of the Jewish and ancient Church in pâ—â—mitive times of Christianity is not expliâ—â—â— known and beleeved by all Fide divin◠〈◊〉 first but we come to the knowledge of â—â—e number which the primitive Church mantained as we doe to the names and number of other bookes seing the Catalogue of Canonicall bookes is not set down in scripture All this we attaine without the aid of Romish Councills For the Jewes to whom were committed the oracles of God Rom. 3. 1. 2. whom holy Augustin on Ps 40. calleth Capsarios librarios Christianorum these who keeped the bookes of the old Testament for Christians and fulfilled as he saith that word in part The elder shall serve the younger divide the bookes of the old Testament according to the letters of their Alphabet into two and twenty sometimes into foure and twenty as Eusebius sheweth yet never added to nor Lib. 3. cap. 10. altered a book of the Canon only they would suÌ„me up now and then the book of Ruth with the Judges the book of the Lamentations with the Prophecies of Jeremy and at other times againe reckon them by themselves So they sometimes made but one book of Samuel one of the Kings one of the Chronicles in some editions the whole Minor Prophets were reckoned but one book by them As the scription and writting of the bible is and hath been diverse yet the doctrine contained therein is stil the rule under every character so the Canon of the old Testament finished by the Prophet Malachy was ever the same in the Jewish Church what ever way they calculated the number of these bookes Hierom translated the books of the old TestameÌ„t from the Hebrew and he did admit all the books admitted by us So did the Greek and Latine Church neither for ought we can learn from Authors was there any alteration or addâ—tion till the third Council of Carthage then Can. 47. they recoÌ„mended other books as profitable to be read which are Apocryphal The Canon of the New Testament was finished by Iohn the Evangelist who out lived the rest of the Apostles and the number we have not disclaimed In universa ecclesia Christiana sayeth Hierom ad Dardanum And according to the Councill of Laodiâ—â—a Can. 59. these books were numbered is Canonick only and appointed to be read in all the Churches of Syrla this Councill was holden Annno Dom. 364. Although Luther cast at the Epistle of James we receive it Secondly Luther by some Learned is said to have made a retractation of that errour Thirdly In his Preface to his works he desireth that men would read his books with some commiseration and remember that once he was a Monk Fourthly Your own Cajetan said as much against the Epistle of James as Sirtus Senensis telleth us Biblioth lib. 6. will it therefore follow that ye have no Canon Fifthly Stapleton saith Princ. doct lib. 9. cap. 14. in Defens Ecc. Author that it is not as yet peremptorily defined by your Church whither ye may adde moe books to the present number but we of the reformed Church are agreed in this that these books of the Old and New Testament number them who wil were the Canon received read and exponed in the Primitive Church and none can adde to or alter the doctrine therein contained under the pain of Anathema Rev. 22. 19. It is an admirable providence that the Jews such enemies to Christianity keeped these Prophesies of the Scripture uncorrupted So saith holy Augustin lib. de Consensu Evang. cap. 26. yet you deride that as if the Lord could not keep that holy Canon in the Jews hand which is a witness against them and testifies of him to their confusion Jo. 5. 39. so your consequence â—s bad and impertinent Answer Third Although the numbering or penning of the Scripture books comparatively considered be not simply necessary to be known or believed fide Divina But we come to the knowledge of these as to the number or penner of other books yet absolutly considered to any discerner the books of Scripture father themselves Lege in facie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Divina read in the face of them divine approbation as in the
not to be thought that privat mâ—n should be barred from searching the scripture seeing it is contrar to that text John 5. 39. where if by searching the Scripture you mean the reading and interpretation of it that cannot be the sense of it For the Apostle Paul saith 1. Cor. 12. GOD hath set in the Church Prophets Apostles Doctors c. Then he addeth are all Apostles are all Prophets are all Doctors do all interpret Then this doth not belong to every man to read and interpret Scripture but to search the deep meaning and sense thereof from the Doctors of the Church For the Jews did search the scripture reading and hearing it read in their Synagogues and yet did deny Christ to be the Messiah which scripture doth clearly testifie Even as Protestants do read Scripture and in it the real presence the power to forgive sins granted to men justification by faith and good works anointing the sick virginity preferred to marriage and yet deny all this Wherefore as Christ exhorteth the Jews to do it with greater reflection and attention not superficially turning and shuffling it over as Protestants do so do I exhort them The word is the sword of the spirit upon which you inferre should any privat man be disarmed amongst his soes So let me tell you that the Apostle calling it a sword sheweth that it should not be put into a mad mans hand or in the hand of a fool i. e. Poor ignorants who as Peter saith wrest it to their own destruction and yet this is your consequence if it should be granted to all privat men Children and fools get not arms amongst their foes wherewith they might rather wrong themselves then their enemies but are under the protection of their Paedagogues and attendants And so the ignorant should not easily handle the sword of the word being ignorant and only capable of the letter but should receive the sense thereof from the Church and her Pastors that it may be to them an arme of defence Pro. Duply 1 Answer first All this is answered fully in the return of the first question to which place I referre the Reader lest I make idle repetition If the rule of right reasoning had been observed nothing of this ought to have come in formerly but here in its own proper place I distinguished betwixt privat men and privat interpretations then betwixt the extraordinar gift of interpreting and the ordinar Thirdly Betwixt the priviledge and the exercise Privat men have the priviledge to search the Scriptures you say it should be by no other then doctors if that be true then the Lord Jesus did not direct the people who heard him to use prayer and meditation for knowing the Scriptures but to go to their rulers Scribes and Pharisees who did what they could to make the Scriptures testifie against him and all his I appeal to the conscience or reason of any if this exposition on the place can hold water Or if an indvidual act such as this being performed by another is an obedience to a command If this exposition be good then when the Lord pronounceth the man blessed who meditats in the Law day and night the sense of it must be if his Pastors do it for him it is enough Who will admit this But the one is as true as the other Secondly You contradict your self for once you say that privat men should not interpret Pro. An. 2 Scripture but take it from the mouth of the church then immediatly you exhort them to do it not superficially but with attention and we exhort to no more Thirdly You make all the people who are Pro. An. 3 privat men mad fools and Children by your coÌ„parison in whose hand the word of GOD should not be put then it must be taken from them and how agreeth this with the former exhortation What if this were told to the Kings and Queens who are Popâ—sh By the testimony of your doctors ye are all de clared unfit to rule others for mad men fools children caÌ„not govern In effect ye guide theÌ„ as such in divine matters for ye muzle and blindfold the people all this passeth under the notion of Paedagogy But sad is the case of such pupils â—f they knew what belonged to their peace Let ignorants be catechised and trained in the ways of GOD this may make them more discerning of the sense and meaning of the word of God Seneca telleth Coenant nobiscum quidam quia sunt docti alii ut sint doâ—li Some men suppe with us because they are learned others that they may be learned The testimonies of the Lord make wise the simple should they then be deprived of them Question sixth Ye agree not about the Pa. Qu. 6 rule for some cast at the Epistle of James others receive it Answer None of the pure reformed do Pro. Qu. so it was only rejected by some Lutherians in which we do not owne them Secondly The number of Scripture books is not the question but whither these mantained by all be the rule of saith Seeing all men are murable creatures and at their best state vanity Popes clash with Popes Councils with Councils Pulpits with Pulpits let any judge whither it be safest that the revealed will of God be our rule or the dictats of self contradicting men Reply You say none of these pure reformed Pa. Reply reject the Epistle of James and you disclaime the Lutherians who do so and they you for I am confident they will acknowledge none for pure reformers who take an Epistle for scripture which they hold to be none Then you say the number of Scripture books is not the question Sir you move questions as you please but hear Mr. Hooker one of your most learned Protestants lib. 1. Eccl. pol. Sect. 14. pag. 36. of these things necessar saith he the very chief is to know what books we esteem holy which is impossible for it self to teach Apply this to your only determiner of faith in your first answer And truely I think this should be the first question of all to the pure reformed according to the pure word of God as you cal them which are the books of the pure word of GOD Now if you answer these are mantained by all which you make the rule of faith how few books of Scripture shal be this rule if any at all For there be few or none whereof some have not doubted or flatly denyed Saint Augustin contra Faustum Manichaeum and lib. de mor. Eccl. cap. 1. Saith the Manichees did deny Moses and the Prophets the Jews did deny the New Testament What books of Scripture are mantained by all For by that you make the consent of all judge of canonical Scripture how then can you disclaim tradition and say immediatly after men are mutable creatures and at their best state vanity Seeing upon the consent of men ye take up your rule of faith and number of Scripture books I know other Protestants
Firmament we may see the singer of GOD so here †See Barron against Turnbul tract 9. p. 643. we may behold divine Majestie Heavenly efficacie the consent and harmonie of parts the fulfilling of Prophesies see August lib. 6. Confes cap. 5. Persuasisti mihi non qui crederent libros tuos quos tanta in omnibus fere gentibus authoritate fundasti sed qui non crederent esse culpandos nec audiendos esse si qui forte mihi dicerent unde scis illos libros unius veri Dei spiritu esse humano generi administratos id ipsum maxime credendum erat The Scripture it self then testifieth whose it is holy men of GOD did so speak and writ that ye may know the certainty of these things Luk 1. 4. and believe them Jo. 19. 35. this is taken from the very Scripture and not from any distinct Tradition from iâ— Beside all this we have miracles wonderful providences sealing this word the testimonie of adversaries Jews and Gentiles to the doctrine therein contained the testimonie of old and late writters to our whole Canon And seeing the Lord hath sealed it and it is called his Testament none should adde to it or alter any point contained therein This is expresly forbidden Deut. 4. 2. 12. 32. Pro. 3. 6. how grosly Papists make void the Testament of the Lord by new datives and in that are like the Pharisees Matth. 15. 3. 6. shal appear hereafter Answer fourth Although all books †The Papists reject some of these Apocriphal books from the Canon of Scripture aâ— Esdras the book of Baruch c. are not rejected by us upon this account only because the Iews did so but for many other good reasons for self-murder is commended in Razis there contrar to the 6. Command c. The authours crave pardon for that which is spoken amiss whereby it is acknowledged that they had not the spirit of infallibility in all ages exceptions were made against them as is well proved by our Divines S. Thomas and Nicodemus Gospels have approbation of none so need no refutation Now I referre it to any Reader whither this first reason be sufficiently refuted or if this reflecter understandeth Logick or himself who thus reasoneth The number of Scripture bâ—oks is controverted therefore that which on all hands betwixt PROTESTANTS and Papists is acknowledged to be Scripture is not the determiner of faith Who will not perceive here a mis-stated question and gross non-consequence Yet no greater not that concerning the Messias which deserveth no answer being so absurd and bordering with blasphemie The second Reason Why Scripture cannot Pa. Rea. 2 be the rule of faith is because PROTESTANTS believe many things whereof the Scripture maketh no mention at all as the keeping holy the Sunday for the Sabbath or Saturday the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son the Trinity of Persons in God that there is one person although two natures in Christ for the Scripture maketh no more mention of Persons then of Papish-tran substantiation that Baptism of Hereticks is not to be reiterat against the Donatists that Ordination of lawful Ministers should not be reiterâ—t against Marcion that Baptism and the Lords Supper are Sacraments which are the very fundamentals of your Religion I answer to this that errour is broodie for ere it be confessed by some men they will Pro. An. 1 broach absurd Tenets and shake foundations which appeareth evidently here For this man deâ—yeth the Articles of our Creed to be grounded on Scripture which is most abominable to utter What is not the Trinity the Sacrament of Baptism and the Supper scriptural truths Let not this be heard in Gath. This giveth the Council of †Sess 7 Can. 1. de Sacr. in gen Trent the lie so the author is anathematized by them Let Papists read such as writ positive Divinity these points are aboundantly proved by them from Scripture Catechists will teach them to speak better and it they be not founded there why do your own writters prove them thence Secondly The mysterie of the Trinity is directly in Scripture 1. Io. 5. 7. there are An. 2. three which bear record in Heaven the Father the Word and the Spirit these three are one The Word Person is in Scripture Heb. 1. 3. we indeed make use of words in the doctrine of the Trinity which are not Scripture words but all the things are there otherwise our foundations would soon dissolve This is Augustins answer against the Arrians Contra Max. lib. 3. cap. 5. and Naz. Orat. 5. de Theol. yea your own Bellarmin lib. 2. de Christo cap 2. saith Quadam verba sunt utilia ad explicanda mysteria Scripturae quae licet in Scripturis non habeantur eorum tamen aequivalentia semina ibi habentur i. e. Some words are necessar for explaining the mysteries of Scripture which though they be not contained in the Scriptures yet their parallels and seeds are contained there This he proveth by instances cha 3. 4. 5 which I need not to translate So that the Tenets which we mantaine concerning the Trinity and the two Sacraments being Scripture truths it is gross to say we have no Scripture warrand for these seeing we may make use of words for explaining divine truths any may behold the weakness of this Reply The name Trinity and Sacrament is not in Scripture therefore the thing is not there As for the Sabbath we once prove from Scripture that Saturday is no Sabbath to us Col. 2. 16. 17. then from Scripture that one day of seven behoved to be observed by reason of the fourth Command which is Moral Secondly That the seventh in number â—â— Moral the seventh day in order only ceremonial Thirdly That the Lords-day by right succeedeth †See Palmer Candrey about the Sabbath as is here made out And what day can be more sit then that on which Christ Jesus arose and put an end to the work of Redemption Then our Lord came in amongst the midst of his Disciples Io. 20. 26. which Mâ—ldoâ—at on the place confesseth to be some proof to shew that the Lords-day hath its origen from the will of Christ Acts 20 7. The Disciples conveened to the worship and the breaking of bread that day and 1. Cor. 16 they had their collections that day Hierom contra Vigilantium sayeth that per unaâ— Sabbati is understood the Lords-day And Rev. 1. 10. There is express mention of the Lords day on which place Ribera the Iesuit remarketh that in the Apostles times the solemnity of the Sabbath was changed to the Lords-day and consecrated by the Lords Resurrection Esthius on Gal. 4. v. 10. refuteth you fully by saying Diei Dominicae observationem Apostolicam esse constat ex Scriptura i. e. It is clear from Scripture that the Apostles observed the Lords day How then can you say that we have no Scripture for it Thirdly That the holy
unlearned as well as the unstable wrest the scripture to their own destruction then Scripture can neither be the determiner of faith nor the judge of controversies to them and so they must have another both to instruct the ignorant and settle the unstable as we must all have some infallible judge to know who wrest the Scripture who not otherwise we may well agree in the letter but we will never agree in the sense and meaning thereof But as much say you as containeth the way to salvation is plain so that he may runne who readeth it Sir doth it not belong to salvation that there be three persons in God one in Christ that Baptism is a Sacrament c. Now where find you this in Scripture either running or siting Or if Scripture be so plaine clear as ye make it why be there so many Comments on it among your own men and so different Why is there amongst Protestants 200. expositions upon these four words This is my Body As Cusaâ—us in his holy court observeth Answer first I am glade that the written Pro. An. 1 word of GOD pleaseth you so who have all this time spent words to throw all power out of its hand and hang it at the Popes foot But you say it refuteth what was said formerly This cannot be made good for still I said it was the rule of faith to right discerners and sometime you grant this as in the latter part of your fifth Reason whereby indeed you refute all you have said and yeelds the cause fully Now what contradiction can be here The scripture is the rule to all right discerners and as many as walk according to this rule peace shal be on them but men who wrest the word unlearned unstable soules fall into perdiâ—ion for abuse of the word and destroy themselves hence proceedeth many controversies Is it not a strange consequence to inferre thence that these unlearned unstable soules should have another rule and another judge In the 19. of Luke v. 27. it is said by our Lord that his enemies who would not have him to reign over them should be brought forth and slain before him will it therefore follow that he should not reign over them Or that they Jure should have another King The case is just alike here It is granted that many have their consciences seared 1. Tim. 4. 2. are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. Tim. 3. 8. self-condemned Tit. 3. 11. under stronge delusions 2. Thess 2. 11. Is the Scripture to blame for this You have many faults to that which you like not Hear Optatus Milevitanus adversus Paliner Donatistam Vos dicitis licet nos non licet inter licet vestrum non licet nostrum nutant animi populorum If you seek a judge saith he a Pagan cannot do it nor a Jew they are enemies Christians by their discerning faculty cannot they being impeded studio partium Then upon earth there can be no judge shal we go to Heaven for one Quorsum cum hic habemus iâ— Evangelio testamentum i. e. To what purpâ—se seeing we have the Testament here in the Gospel If there be a contention among brethren saith he quaritur Testamentum the Testament is sought So we must decide our controversies by the Old and New Testament etenim praesentia quae modo facitis futura conspexerat Christus i. e. For Christ did foresee these things as future which ye make to be now present and hath he foreseen it and will he not provide a remedie for it Secondly These unlearned unstable ones Pro. An. 2 who are to be destroyed will not hear understand nor obey his word then is it like that they will understand the voluminous decrees of the Pope May they not wrest his sentence and sense more easily then Scripture words Or dare any say that humane ordinanceâ— will sooner compesâ—e command or regulat them then the word of GOD Thirdly We do not deny Mâ—nisterial Pro. An 3 helps for instructing and seâ—ling the ignorant and unstable nor judicial sentences subaltern and subordinat â—o the law But that there is an infallible man 〈◊〉 to whose sentence I must implicitly submiâ—â—â— is â—â—â—culous to averie it and the broaching of that errour hath occasioned more controversies then were formerly in the Church so far is it from composing differences If ye were more in catechising the unlearned and leâ—s in regal commands the law of GOD would be both better understood and obeyed Fourthly Albeit some places be hard to Pro. An. 4 be understood by the unlearned 1. Pet. 3. 16. other places are not so difficult In the scripture an Elephant may swime and a Lamb may wade And the same particulars you again object are clearly holden forth in scripture as is formerly proved in the vindication of my answer to your 1. Qu. in answer to Rea. 2. Yea the way to salvation is fair and patent there and if we perish our destruction is of our selves seeing that book is not sealed to us Commentaries Church-canons Ecclesiastick sentences are helps and means for edification but scripture is the authentick instrument and all the authority is originally from it And different expositions according to the analogy of faith may be and will be so long as there be diversity of gifts But I ask why ye make use of Commentars Seeing ye resolve all into the sentence of the Pope And why do your Commentators differ so amongst themselves If this hinder not your Ecclesiastick supremacie why should it be brought to weaken scripture authority It is hard to find where you are for sometimes ye would have a judge to authorize scripture to you sometimes you would have only one for the sense of scripture then at last you are for one only to the unlearned and unstable such is your instability in this matter that I wish the word of God may determine you aright in the point Question fourth Were it not better to establish Pa. Qu. 4 a man or an assembly of men judge of Controveâ—sies seeing the Church is the pillar of truth 1. Tim 3. 15. aâ—d hath the promise of presence Matth. 28. 20. then th◠〈◊〉 Sect should be laying claim to the Scripture and yet taking sundry wayes Answer The promulgation of the law is Pro. An. not denyed to the pure Gospel Church truth is mantained and preserved there as the law was keeped in the Ark thus it is called the pillar of it But the Church of Rome is not such being a very strumpet and making the Kings of the earth drunk with the cup of her fornications Rev. 17. 2. thaâ— promise of presence is made to the universal Church but no particular Church such as Rome can claim the measure or duration of it who of these can say that they shal last to the end of the world Albeit Sects lay claim to Scripture yet their abuse cannot take away our lawful use of it To this a Papist replyeth That the question Pap. Reply is not
alleadge for this that the books of Scripture like the Sun shew themselves to be such to him who hath the spirit But I would ask at such why the Rev. St. James Epistle the second of St. Peter and two of St. John did not shew themselves to be Scripture to Luther that spiritual man and the Protestants very first Apostle in the work of reformation in the end you say Let any judge whither it be safest that the revealed will of God be your rule and determiner or the dictats of self contradicting creatures Where you seem to rubbe on Catholicks But Sir this toucheth not them at all for they profess not to believe self-contradicting creatures but the unanimous consent of Councils and fathers or the Catholick Church known to be the only Church established by Christ and his Apostles and by the continued succession of Popes Bishops and Pastors the unity universality and gifts of miracles in all ages c. Which Christ hath called the ground and pillar of truth 1. Tim. 3. 15. and against which he assureth us the gates of hell shal not prevail Math. 16. 18. and which he hath commanded us to hear otherwise to be holden as heathens and publicans Math. 18. 17. so you see that the written word maketh the Church our judge which we should obey and that ye who make so much of the written word do not believe it when ye do not obey her And here I remarke that Protestant Ministers and preachers deceive the people in that they ground their faith on the written word only and Roman Catholicks say they on humane tradition and their Churches authority which being composed of men is subject to errour Whereas the contrar is true for Roman Catholicks believe nothing which the written word believing both the tradition of the Church and Apostles doth not expresly warrand As for the Church what is more expresly said then what I have cited both to prove that we are bound to hear her Mat. 18. 18. and hold her authority infallible Math. 16. 18 and the house of God which is the pillar and ground of truth 1. Tim. 3. 15. Neither doth it avail you to say this is not said of the Roman Church which is not the universal Church but a particular one a strumpet c. For we speak not of any particular Church when we say that the Church is infallible nor when we say the Roman the Catholick do we understand the particular Church at Rome But that Church which professeth constantly the Romans faith spread in saint Pauls time through all the world As we call yet the Roman Empire that which hath its seat in Vien of Austria Yea Protestants calling their own the reformed Church cannot say but we have one Church on earth which Christ commanded us to hear constantly And if the reformed Church be the true Church then she must have taken the place from that church which was deformed and had fallen into an errour and so deserved no more to be called the pillar and ground of truth or to be heard Moreover the very pillars of the Protestant Religion grant all the world to be in an errour before themselves and so against the express written Word must deny the infallibility of any Church whatever For Calv. Instit lib. 4. cap. 18. saith they made all the Kings and People of the earth drunk from the first to the last and Hospinian epist 41. saith Luthers separation was from all the world White in his defence chap. 37. saith Popery was a leprosie breeding so universally in the church that there was no visible company of men free from it Jewel in his Sermon on Luke 11. The whole world Princes and people were overwhelmed by ignorance and bound by oath to the Pope which if it be true that the Church in former ages did erre the reformed Church may erre that themselves do not deny Thence it followeth clearly that the Protestant Church is not the house of GOD called the pillar and ground of truth that she is not Christs Church against which the gates of hell shal not prevail that none are bound to hear her in matters of faith being subject to errour And so Protestants may well desire men to read the Scripture and believe what they found there but not urge any man to follow their doctrine but in so far as they find it conforme to Scripture which all Roman Catholicks protest they do not As for traditions are we not commanded to hold them in the clear written Word 2. Thess 2. 15. Hold the traditions which ye have learned whither by word or our epistle Protestants read documents but documents by word and traditions are the same thing on which place Chrysost saith It is evident that the Apostle did not deliver all things by writ but many things by word which are worthy of credit as wel as the other That is Christs word as well as his writ therefore we call them divine and Apostolical traditions Aug. lib. 5. de Trinit cap. 23. speaking of rebaptization The Apostle saith he commanded nothing of it but that customâ— which is believed to proceed from the Apostle is opposed against Cyprian in it as many things are which the whole Church holdeth and therefore are believed to be commanded by the Apostles though not written Aâ—d in the first age saint Dennis chap. 1. speaking of the Ecclesiastick hierarchy saith These our chief captains of Priestly function did deliver to us the chiefest and supersubstantial points partly in written partly in unwritten institutions Epiph. Haeres 61. is of the same minde we must hold traditions saith he for the Scripture hâ—th not all things and Tertullian de praescrip grounds his faith on the authority of the Church and what tradition I believe saith he I received from the present Church the present Church from the primitive that from the Apostles the Apostles from Christ Here I hope you see you must either admit traditions as necessar in themselves and infallible in their authority or else disclaim both Scripture and Fathers All that Protestants can say either against the authority of the Church in general Councils or Apostolick traditions delivered by her is that all her decisions and traditions flow from men and so are not infallible But I answer neither were the Prophets Apostles Evangelists who penned the Scripture but men yet I hope their writtings are not fallible or subject to errour Because they were inspired directly and assisted by the Spirit of God The Fathers of the Church have to this day that promise verified to them Math. 28. 20. which was made as well to their successours as to themselves As for that some Protestante speak of an invisible Church composed of the Elect it is but a shift to delude the ignorant for as it is a Maxime of law Idem est non esse non apparere i. e. it is the same not to be and not to appear to be in the matter of any
pretended right so in the matter of doctrine an invisible Church and no Church is the same For if I cannot see nor know the Elect as being invisible to the eye of man so I cannot know that the Church composed of them speaketh to me or that this Doctrine I hear of any man is infallible more then that he is one of the Elect. Answer I am weary transseribing a number Protest Duply of wordâ— without weight that is a compleet rapsodie and no return to the former question If such digressions were heard in the School the Writter behoved to be sore censured The question was how the Scripture could be the square Seeing all agree not about the number of the books some cast at the Epistle of James as the Lutherans And the answer I gave was that although some Lutherans differre from us about the authority of that epistle yet we both agree here that uncontroverted scripture is the determiner And for the numerick question it was sufficiently answered in the second answer to the first querie so we needed not this tauâ—oligie to make the Reader nauseat If I had to do with a Lutheran then I could prove the divine authority of that Epistle but you do not deny it therefore to what purpose should I insist on that subject against you Mr. Hooker whom you cite maketh nothing against us as is alledged for that which he sayes is first that the light of reason rightly managed is a requâ—sit mean for the knowledge of scripture books and what sayeth that against us seeing we suppose the Readers of Scripture to be â—ational men that reason in its own line may be helpful to them for understanding scripture Secondly Mr. Hooker directly disclaimeth your traditions page 86. and affirmeth that they who betake themselves to that testimonie as divine have not the truth but are in an errour Thus he condemneth you as erronious so it had been your advantage to have spared this tradition neither was it needful to tell us that the Manichees denyed Moses and the Jews the New Testament We have to do with Papists who hold all the books of the Old and New Testament which we hold for Canonick At lest what some others make disputable as Melchior Canus telleth us you put it out of dispute so you are not in bona fide to reason about their number with us seeing ye question none which we mantaine albeit we justly call in question Apocryphal writtings which ye put into the Canon Is it not safer to regulate our faith by these uncontroverted Scriptures then by the dictats of mutable self-contradicting Popes When Church Rulers have been fully corrupted Believers have continued orthodoxe as in the time of the Arrian persecution The Fathers who lived the first 300. year believed without either Pope or General Council as propounders of their faith For then there was no such pretending to infallible supremacy They had no infallible testimony from the Church they acknowledged not her testimony to be such And for ought I can learn theâ—e be no testimony of your Church nor statute enacting her testimony to be infallible If so it is nor according to you de fide however ye make a great noise amongst people with it And if all the faith you have depend upon the testimony of the present Church which is your doctrine your faith is not one with Abrahams faith for the word of God did beget his faith but it is the testimony statute of the Trent Council that begettâ—th yours and I would gladly hear from you whither there was universal consent there or not Such clashing and pocket orders as the author of that history telleth to the world will not permit you to say without a blush that the Council was unanimous and Gospel-like in their way Therefore unless it be against us all their otheracts are made up of ambiguous stuffe like the Delphian responses this is purposely coÌ„trived to cover debates with general termes And if their testimony make the word of GOD Scripture to me living under Popery what rule had they for their faith who made these conclusions Their own testimony could not be the cause of their own belief if you say that the testimonie of the ancient Church was their rule then ye go contrar to your own Doctors who declare that the present Church of Rome is above all former councils and their authority dependeth on her testimony See Bell. lib. de Eccl. cap. 10. Valentia Tom. 3. disp 1. quest 1. Further that the supream power of judging is not in the Council but in the Pope that he is above a general Council that he cannot be subject to it See Bell. lib. 2. de Concil cap. 17. Valentia tom 3. disp 1. Suarez disp 5. de fide and your own Vives in his comment on Augustins 20. book de civit Dei cap. 26. telleth us how little ye make of Councils or of the ancient Church when they militat against you Illa demum videntur iis Concilia quo in rem suam faeiunt reliqua non pluris estimantur quam commenta mulierum in textrina aut thermis i. e. These appear to be Councils to them which make for them the rest are no more esteemed by them then the sables of old women in the weavers shop or sloves Brisâ—â—erius writting against Collag a Jansenist as he is cited by learned Dalleus †See Dâ—lleus de usu Patrum saith Councils are literae mortuae nisi animentur à praesenti Ecclesia i. e. They are dead letters if they be not animated by the present Church This appeareth to be true from experience for ye agree not with the primitive either in doctrine worship or government The ancients thought that Images should not be in the Church See Epiph. epist ad Iohannem Hierosolymitanum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cum vidissem Imaginem penderâ— in Ecclesia contra authoritatem Scripturae i. e. When I saw an Image hang in the Church contrar to the authority of Scripture how grieved was I. But the Council of Trent appointed them to be had in houses and Churches and that debitus honor reverentia Sess 25. eis impertiatur i. e. Due honor and worship be given to them The Fathers thought that the Virgin Marie was conceived in sin so saith Ambrose Augustin Chrysostom as Melchior Canus de loc Theol. lib. 7. telleth The Council of Trent Sess 5. will not conclude heâ— under Original sin The Fathers excluded Tobias Judith Wisdom Ecclesiasticus and both the books of the Maccabees out of the canon of Scripture So did Hierom in his prologue ad libros Solomonis Epiph. lib. de Pond mens cap. 2. pag. 162. Gregorie Nazianzen câ—rm 3. Athanasius epist fest But the Council of Trent anathematizeth them who exclude these books out of the Canon Sess 4 Baptism was delayed till Pasch and Pentecost in the primitive Church it is not so with you The 4. Council of Carthage did forbide women
Praxeas the defence oâ— Christians against Idolatry c. The Martyr Cyprian who lived anno 258. writteth some eplstles treatises and sermons about the cases of his time Lactantius and Arnobius flourished in the beginning of the fourth Centurie and did writ against the Gentiles but the Popish trash was unknown to them So it is not strange albeit the Negarives of our Religion were not handled directly by the Fathers seeing then the Popish controversies were not started however the Jesuits do wâ—est some sayings of these Fathers for their own ends yet an attentive Reader will find that they make not for them as Scultetus and Dr. Forbes Dr. Usher and Dr. Morton have sufficiently proved In the following ages they had to do with Arrius Macedonius Nestorius Eutiches but Popery then was under the hatches and the decrees of the Trent Council wholly unknown Further controversies betwixt us and Papists can hardly be decided by the Fathers for some of them made retractations others held forth the opinion of others frequently then what they propose sometime is esteemed by them probable not certain and all of them Printed since the Trent council have been castrated by the Popish Index expurgatorius Therefore they cannot be thought the sittest Umpyres in our present debates neither are they made judges either by the Popish partie or ours for they appeal to the Pope we to the Scriptures and do make use of them as Commentators and historians only Further the Fathers desire us to look on them only as such I shal ciâ—e three testimonies proving this to the full One is that of Augustin in his opist to Hierom concerning the interpretation of the 2. chap. to the Galatians When he is pressed with the testimonie of old authours Ego didici hunc honoreÌ„ deferre tantuÌ„ Scripturarum libris qui Cano ni ci appellantur ut nullum eorum authorum in scribendo aliquid errasse firmâ—tâ—r credaâ— nec arbitror mi frater te velle tuos libros sic lâ—gi tanquam Prophetarum Apostolorum i. e. I have learned to give that honour onlâ— to the books of Scripture which are canonick thâ—t their authours have not errod And a little thereafter I do not think my brother that you would have your books so read as the books of the Prophets and Apostles The second testimony is in his third Epistle to Fortunatus Nec quorumlibet disputationes tanquam Scripturas Canonicâ—s habere debemus ut non liceat salva honorisicentia quae iis debetur aliquid in eorum scriptis improâ—are si forte aliter senserint quam veritas habet talis ego sum in scriptis aliorum tales volo esse lectores meorum i. e. We ought not to look on the writtings of men as the Scriptures of GOD but may disprove that which is not truth in their books if they have not set down the truth such I am in the writings of others such I desire to be the readers of my own The third testimony is that of Hierom lib. 2. contra Ruffinum where speaking of Origen and other Fathers he saith fierâ— potest ut simpliciter â—rrarint vel alio sensâ— scripsâ—rint vel à librariis imperitis eorum scripta paulatim corrupta sunt vel antequam Arrius natus sit minus caute loquâ—ti sint i. e. It may be they have erred and spoken in another sense or their books have been corrupted or before Arrius they have not spoken so warily on the point If then we hold Fathers in their own room according to their desire no wrong is done to them Fourthly That none think we disside the Fathers or Councils it will be found that pure antiquity savoureth us more then Popery This you deny and cites for you Beza his epist ad Dudithium whereby your studied endeavour to deceive people may appear for Beza there is only answering an objection brought in amongst others by Dudithius for resolution that he might be confirmed in the faith by him Wherein Beza doth judiclously give resolution Will it then follow that Dudithius was of this opinion So deal you with Martyr and Chemnitius who assert no such thing It is known both of them were good Antiquaries and confirm our tenets by several testimonies of Ancients It is like you have taken these citations from your Index and not from the Authours Neither Luther Calvin Whitgift Fulke or any reformed Divine hold from Fathers or Councils their due Yea we reverence them more then ye do You bring the four Councils for the Popes universal supremacie and infallibility If this be not it which you intend to prove your answer meereth noâ— mine This is a negative of our Religion was it heard of the first 300 years You say not so But in the next 300. years was the Popes universal supremacie or infallibility heard of This you alleage and by providence contradict your self it is known that in the Council of Nice no mention is made of an universal far less infallible Pope You cite the 29. Canon of the Nicaen Council whereas there were but 22. of them in whole saith Ruffinus lib. 1. cap. 6. Their sixth Canon is far from that If that had been in their Creed they needed no Council the Pope in Cathedra would have done all And in the council of Constantinople they establish the power of their own Patriarch Why then say you that he was established there universal infallible Monaâ—ch of the whole Church Will ye remember better your connexions Was he Peters successour according to the council of Ephesus Then no universal Monarch He was a Presbyter an Elder not a Lord over GODS heritage see 1. Peter 5. 3. Thirdly Expone this and reconcile it with the Popedom if you can Was he Patriarch of old Rome Then no universal head these two seem to clash and the council wordeth it better But why do you not mention his infallibility in your Reply It is the koy of Popery and let you it thus slip out amongst your hands Not one Father or primitive Council is cited for this The Council of Chalcedon saith expresly that the Pope of Rome hath no priviledge from Christ above others but only because it was the seat of the Roman Empire Act 15. you will not then have the four Councils for you except you coine some new acts as the 29. of Nice By which also it may appear how groundless and vain your boasting is of having 90. Fathers of an 100. for this point The opposition of the Ancients thereto is clearly demonstrated by learned Morton in his Grand Impostor Here that you seem not to be silent you bring forth impertinently these texts of Scripture formerly explained Tell the Church c. To which I referre the Reader for satisfaction there be no more priviledge there concerning the Church of Rome then the Church of SCOTLAND and not so much as it is how constituted and adulterated We do believe an universal Church but it is far from our thoughts that
year and that not without blood to typifie Jesus Christ he spoke also in the vulgar language of the Nation And was not all their administrations in Hebrew their mother tongue How then can you say that any of their worship was in an unknown tongue As for that you adde of the 13. verse and verse 16. it is so dark nonsense â—hat to me now ye speak in an unknown tongue and deserves no answer He desireth them to speak with tongues and interpret them to the unlearned for the use of edifying that all might say Amen What can be more clear against you At last you come off this as formerly and yeeld the cause and say that the liturgie of the Catholick Church is interpreted to every one and the greatest part of the publick prayers translated to the people and set down in their own prayer books And this place of Scripture maketh not against us but Ministers who with their extemporarie prayers speak non sense which hath made one of your own Poets say fools do not understand us nor wise men you I am glad to hear that this point which was deryed at the Council of Trent is now granted and if it be so why jangled you so much formerly But I find it is not so for you are taught to equivocat And what your greatest part meaneth is unknown here it is certain your Masses Aves c. are yet muttered and worded in Latine ye are ashamed to owne it not without reâ—son For your reflection on our worship we are for reasonable service and lively work to a living GOD not for none-sense and would to the Lord your worship were as pure as ours is this day many souls might be edified thereby Thirdly Invocation of Saints and Angels is will worship Col. 2. 23. How can we call Inst. 3. on him in whom we do not believe Rom. 10. 14. or lay stress of belief on a creature Beside they know not what we say Abraham is ignorant of us and Israel acknowledgeth us not Isaiah 63. 16. To this your return is that I wrest the Papists Reply scripture Col. 3. which speâ—keth only of the duty of Masters and Servants and not one word against the worship of Saints or Angels And that place Rom. 10. 14. is concerning prayer to GOD only not about prayer to Saints or Angels Because we will supplicat men on earth in whom we do not believe And the text Isaiah 63. 16. cited by you is meaned of the knowledge of approbation as Hierom interpreteth the place According to which it will rather follow that tâ—ey did know what passed here below and disowned a degenerated multitude Answer I confess if I had cited that place which you mention upon this subject I had not only wrested but martyred Scripture Prote ∣ stants Duply You may believe it never entered into my mind to do so The place I cited was the 2. chapter of the Collâ—ssians verse 23. where worshipping of Angels is termed will worship And what can you say to that I would suspect that you purposely have omitted this scripture yet this might as easily be refuted by you as 1. Cor. 14. For he who said the one said also the other The 10. Rom. 14. you labour to interpret thus that it is meaned of prayer to GOD not of calling on men or Angels because we will call on men on earth in whom we do not believe The words are general and the interrogative is equivalent to a negative None can call on them in whom they do not believe You say we call on men on earth What do we pray to men The calling here is a part of religious worship which cannot be given to the greatest Potentat in the World Then you tell that the 63 of Isaiah is meaned of a knowledge of approbation like that depart from me I know you not id est I approve you not so Hierom expâ—undeth the â—ext and accâ—rding to this expâ—sition it wâ—ll rather follow that they did know wâ—â—t passed â—ere below and disowned a degenerated 〈◊〉 I â—nswere that exposition of Is â—â— is contraâ—e to the strâ—â—â—o Interpreters Yet to the connexion of the words For it is a prayer put up to God and the 〈…〉 to be this Thou O Lord knowest how â—o helpe us although Abraham knoweth noâ— what is become of us So it is an opposition between divine knowledge and that of Abraham Doubtless thou art our father c. But supposing Hieromâ— interpretation to be true it will not follow that they knew what was done on earth but only this that if Israel were on earth they were so 〈◊〉 degenerated that he would not know â—is posteritie I 'le close this with the testimony of your own Eckius in his Enchir. ch 15. there is no warrand for invocation of Sâ—ints â—r Aâ—gels from the scripture and that the Apostieâ— either by word or writ left any thing behind them to be done c. He might have said more there be warrand for the contrar Fourthly Your worshipping of Imâ—ges is Inst. 4 an express breach of the second Command which forbiddeth any sort of worship to any Image in Heaven or in Earth Ex. 20. 4. And ye Papists being conscious of your guilt herein have thievously stoln out the second Command and divided the tenth into two branches witness Bellarmins Catechism and your other writters To this you answer That the division of the Commands is not in scripture so we cannot know the second or third How then standing Papists Reply by scripture your only determiner shal we judge of tâ—is And if you come to authority or reason I appeal to your self whither it be Idolatrie to worship Images Seeing all Idolatrie is against the first Command It being the worship of a creatâ—re in the place of GOD. Therefore Bellarmin and others take what ye call the second Command for a further explanation of the first and so set down but the substantial words Thou shalt have no oâ—her Gods but me Yet take not the rest out of the Bible which is there set down at length But Protestanâ—s take away all the Commandments saying it is impossible to keep them For there is no Command where there is no obligation of keeping aâ—d Nemo â—enetur ad impossibile Then reason mâ—keth for dividing the tenth Commandment in two For as theft and adulterie are forbidden by two Commands so the inward desire of the heart after a mans wife and goods should likewise in reason be rather forbidden by two Commandments then Idolatrie alone by two But if making of Images kneeling before them or worshippâ—ng them not as Gods but as things which keep us in mind of GOD and his Saints as the seventh general Council saith as the holie boâ—ks Why did GOD make man to his own Image and obliedge us to honour him as his Image Why did he put two Cherubs on the Aâ—k before which the Jews kneeled Why commanded he the Jews to adore the same Ark
hoâ—ny or milk â—o the Sacrament of the Supper Neither is it reason to â—rgue from tâ—e name to the thing Wâ— call it Baptiâ—m with the Scripture And seeing his implyeth washing with water â—â— is grâ—â—â— superstition to do this without a warrand which hath â—o relation to washing 〈◊〉 would have mâ— râ—semblance with that then salt The name Sacrament is acknowledge I not to be a Scripture word But what Logick is thâ—â— The seals of the Covenant are named Sacraments by the Church Ergo we may adde materials to the work without a warrand The practise of the Baptist objected by me seemeth unanswerable for you fail by it as by a rock which is not candid dealing Yet it is your ordinar manner to pass with silence material arguments Seventhly Ye adde to the Bible humane § 7. Inst traditions which ye equalize and in a sort preferre to it This is point blank contrar to the Word Deut. 4. 2. Rev. 22. 18. If any man adde to these things GOD shal adde to him the plagues written in this book so ye have â—o fear a plague in due time Reply These are open calumnies made Papists Reply to deceive the people in Pulpits as I have shewed reflecting on your sixt answer And prove againe summarily by this Syllogism what is expresly contained in Scripture is not contrar to it But this is expresly commanded 2. Thess 2. 1. Hold fast the traditions which ye have received Neither are your citations of Deut. or Rev. to any purpose For when it is said there If any man shal adde to these things GOD shal adde to him the plagues written in the book Of necessity it must be understood of these books only adding any thing as a part of them otherwise it will exclude all other Scripture as well as tradition But it may be you think the Revelation the last written book of Scripture and that St. John there did speak of all the Bible But this is a conceit out of ignorance seeing Chemnitius your great Gun sayes his Gospel was written after the Revelation And some say so of his Epistles in the very last of which and last verse he sayes I have many things to writ unto you but not with pen and ink but I trust to come unto you and speak face to face But ye would not have believed him speaking face to face who will believe nothing but that which is written Answer You again defend traditions by your old argument A genere ad speciem affirmative Prote ∣ stants Duply which is none concludent as I have proved fully already upon the sixth question to which I referre the Reader And your answer to the 4. Deut. and Rev. 22. confuteth your self For you grant that it is not lawful to adde any thing as a part of these books Then say I it is as unlawful to adde traditions as a part of the Bible and make an entire object of faith with both which is your doctrine If the Pirrat was faulty for taking a ship Alexander was more faulty by taking of Nations We will put nothing to the Scripture that way For then we might make a new Bible and nothing into our Creed but what was written by the Penneâ—s of it You make me ignorant of the time when the Revelation was written and goes about to father that on me which came not into my mind How far and wherein we hold traditions Vide supra on Quest sixth I have no delight to make repetitions Eightly Ye mis-regard the Lords-day and § 8. Inst celebrate dayes of your own devysing contrar to and without any warrand from the Word see Gal. 4. 10. You reply that these are calumnies for we Papists Reply are taught to keep the Lords-day most religiously and with it the holy dayes of Christs-Birth Circumsion adoration by the Kings presentation in the Temple the feasts of the Mother of GOD of the twelve Apostles of some Martyrs and other Saints upon the same ground of Apostolick tradition and ordinance of the Church which the Scripture commandeth us to hear hold fast so what we do in this is neither contrar to Scripture nor without warrand from the written Word And your citation may be as well applyed against your observation of dayes of humiliation and thanks-giving For that place forbiddeth only Heathenish or Jewish days or dismal days superstitiously keeped on frivolous remarkes See Hierom on the place Aug. cont Argenant cap. 16. and in his epist 118. cap. 7. and hear the same Aug. speaking of all our holy dayes in express terms which Protestants taking away what St. Aug. saith may creep in both ungrateful forgetting of Christs mysteries and unkind oblivion of his Saints You call this Argument a Calumnie but it in too well known how small regard is had Prote ∣ stants Duply to the Lords day throughout the Popes Dominions And how farre other dayes of humane institution are by you preferred to them And for Aug. whom you cite as the main patron of them he was so far from approving the trash of his time brought in by the devices of men in the worship of God that in his 119. ep he sayeth If they continue they will become Heathnish and Judaize in many things So according to Hieroms exposition on the text Gal. 4. 10. concerneth you for some of your stust is Judaicall some Paganish Polyd. Virgil de invent lib. 4. in proaemio sayeth That a verie world of Jewish and Heathnish ceremonies pestereth the Lords field Agrippa de Vanit cap. 6. sayeth That Christians now are more oppressed with ceremonies then the Jewes were The Jewish holy dayes were but few in respect of the Romish for they had but their Passover Pentecost feast of Tabernacles of Trumpets Reconciliation New-Moons Purim and Dedication the most of which were of divine institution These have holy dayes for every Saint All saints all soules for the Cross Corpus Christi two dayeâ— every week Lent fast c. without any warrand from scripture or pure antiquitie For Aug. sayeth ep 86. against Urbicus we are indeed commanded to fast but I find not the dayes prescribed in the Evangelicall or Apostolicall writtings The same saith Socrates that it was left by the Apostles to every mans free choise lib. 5. cap. 22. and Erasmus on the 11. of Matth. complaineth that in Hieroms time there were few holy dayes beside the Lords day but now they were unreasonable and burdensome because of their multitude Thus you see neither Hierom nor Aug. savour your holy dayes unless it be in yoâ—r Utopian tractate contra Argentinant for there is non-such among his workes You might easily perceive that Gal. 4. 10. doth not militate as much against our dayes of humiliation or thanksgiving as your holy dayes if you woâ—ld consider First We have more regarde to he Lords-day nor any of these this we desiderar mâ—inly in you for as ye preferre humane traditions to the Scripture so do you these your dayes
and without Christ can do nothing Iohn 15 5. If you say more speak it out for it will be plain Pelagianism Exhorrations and communications are means to make us willing and obedient It is not in our power to think a good thought as of our selves dare you deny this Why then fall you fondly on us speaking with the Scripture Luke 17. 10. By grace we are saved freely through faith and eternal life is the gift of GOD the reward is a free remuneration and may be without our merits we grant free-will in Augustins sense and Jansenius proveth that this is true liberty by arguments which were never yet answered But we do disclaim Jesuitical indifferencie because it taketh away divire providence the power of grace and setteâ—h up anti-providences from the will of man Because we sin willingly who can deny that we are punished justly Neither take we the Scripture Catalogue from the Iewes but make use of reason testimonies from old Writters universal consent to be a porch for eâ—trie to the knowledge of the numerick controversie and how can you say so of our Catalogue seeing we mantain no book to be Scripture but such as ye allow And are ye not helped by the Jewes herein as wel as we Only we lay that the authority of the Scripture dependeth not on humane testimonie as upon its principal foundation nor yet upon unwritten tradition because divine faith must be begotten by a divine testimonie And we believe the Scriptures authority and truth side lâ—â—ina because the Lord hath spoken it In this true faith must be finally resolved else it is not divine It is a calumny to say we patch the Word seeing we make Scripture the only rule of our faith There be none in the Christian Church who adde such patches to the word of GOD as ye Our Reformation had authority both from Heaven and men on earth The Lawes of the Land can restifie this which are yet in vigor for it and against you And there may be new light in time of darkness which was formerly dimmed or put out which light is the good old light proceeding from the Father of lights If ye condemned this the world should have still continued Arrian when it was over-clouded with it and all Reformation even the Scripture one is unlawful see you not your absurdity here Yea it was prophesied Dan. 12. 4. that in the latter times knowledge should encrease and light also be extended but light without verity deserveth not the name Privat men have the liberty of discerning allowed to them Acts 17. 11. 1. Io. 4. 1. Yea such may have publict spirits and be called to publict employments But what you mean by this I conceive not For the Gospel worship which we mantain hath the consent of all the Scriptures Churches and primitive Fathers as is formerly proved to the full We wish the hearts of all our Pastors may be established by grace that they may be subjected to him who hath the government on his shoulder and by their faith working by love glorifie the chief Shepheard of the stock We will not recriminat ralling for railing but it were easie to shew Ye have a Church composed state-wayes Your policie devouâ—eth all pâ—â—ty Your superstitious vowes against marraâ—ge all chastity Your impeaching of the Scriptures all divine verity Your blind allegiance to the Pope all loyalty Your superstitious buskings all puritie Your worship in an unknown tongue all fervencie Your addition to the one Sacrament and mutitation of the other all sincerity Your universal infallible supremacie all primitive antiquity It is not long since this Reply came to my hand at the first view whereof I intended to take in and discuss arguments proposed by Dr. Vane in that Pamphlet entituled The lost sheep found And these contained in another of the same kind called Presbytries tryall And to survey the other two entituled The Touchstone and Fâ—at lux But finding the substance of all these in this reflecter and that he hath little of his own but maketh malt for the most of their barley by answering this all the foure are macerially answered which a discerning Reader will find to be true Now to close I obtest all who read this Vindication of the reformed Religion to consider the cause seriously without partialitie pride passion prejudice Remember that Iames 2. 1. Have not the faith of our Lord Iesus with respect of persons And the spirit of truth lead you into all truth The spirit of errour and lies be rebuked and resisted by the Lord That a pure offering may be offered to Him from the rising of the Sun to the going down thereof FINIS A POSTSCRIPT Containing an Advertisement and Advice to the Merchants of DVNDIE who travell abroad that they be not ensnared with the fopperies of Poperie AFter the writting of this VINDICATION I judged it expedient to give this word of Advertisement and Advice to such as be called by their affairs to negotiaâ— in Countreys where the Popish worship is only professed and mantained Because many travellers return home from these places as that French fool came back from Rome who passing through Ravenna least he should return empty to his friends gathered in that Forrest a multitude of bees and flees which being closed into a cloath bagge he poured forth amongst his relatives to their prejudice and offence And all they gained by his voyage was made up of stings and buzings So when travellerâ— return from forrain Nations either Neutral Nullisidians or leavened with Popish saperstition what is their purchase Nothing that can edifie any Will ever practical Atheism Gallioeâ— temper or tampering betwixt truth and errour advantage a man at the long runne Not at all These will sting like a serpent more then themselves a wound and dishonour may they have by it but nothing else The hazard which some Travellers tunne cannot be unknown to you For the man who in this City hath become Popish and stingeth some is thought by all that know him to have received the first dye thereof abroad when he travelled thither And although the flecks of that pestiferous malady broke nor forth immediatly after his return till the Carduns Maledictus of prejudice against some fellow Citizens made them appear yet there probably he was first infected Now if he who was gifted above many Merchants catched so sore a back-ward fall abroad that he hath now turned his back on that Church wherein he was born and iostered Have ye not reason with full purpose of heart to cleave to the truth of GOD which can only set you free It is not for nought that our Saviour said to his Disciples Luke 17. 32. Remember Lots wife It is certain that the Church of SCOTLAND is a great eye-sore to Papists and they craftily lay snareâ— to seduce her members at home and abroad Their hooks are feathered with variety of colours and the Convent at Rome de Propagan fide furnisheth many Emissaries who
to baptize Canon 100. ye allow it The Sacrament was administred in the primitive Church to all present and they who did not partake were appointed to remove Ite missa est exite foras qui non vultis accipere Sacramentum i. e. Go it is closed go forth ye that will not receive the Sacrament Now the words are muttered and administred before all They took with their hand and the bread was broken of old Now it is not for ye make whole wasers and put them into their mouth For fourthteen hundred years the Church appointed the Sacrament to be administred by bread and wine to the people all Christians of whatever judgement except Papists do so communicat as yet Petau de poenit pub lib. 2. sheweth that it cannot be denyed nisi ab homine insigniter supra omnem modum vel impudenti vel imperito i. e. Except by a man remarkably and above all measure either impudent or unskilful that this was the primitive practise yet the Council of Constance hoc non obstante and the Council of Trent decree the contrar The primitive Church heard nothing of the Popes universal supremacie or infallibility which now by you iâ— made Summa rei See Cyprian ep 55. â—â— Cornelius Bishop of Rome and how he stileth him fâ—ater c. and he saith that they were formerly chosen to officiat Non sine consensu plebis not without the Popes consent ep 68. Ipsa plebs habet potestatem c. Is not this far from your imperious pompous way of Monarchy how then can you so boldly averre that ye have the unanimous consent of Councills and fathers for you when indeed ye do not regard them so much as we Hear your own Cornelius Mus †See Dâ—lleus ubi supra ep Biâ—ont in ep ad Rom. cap 14. Ego ut ingenue fâ—teâ—r plus uni summo pontisici crederem in his quae fidei misteria tangunt quam mâ—lle Hieronymis Augustinis Gregoriis Credo enim scio quod summus Pontifex in his quae fidei sunt errare non potest quia auctoritas determinandi quae ad fidem spectant in Pontisice residet i. e. That I may ingenuously confesse I would give more credit to one Pope in tâ—e things which belong to the misteries of truth then to a thousand such as Augustin Jerom or Gregory For I know certainly that the Pope cannot erre in these things that belong to faith because the authority of determining matters of saith resideth in the Pope yet ignorant people are made to believe that Papists have the consent and practise of the primitive Church along with them and Melchior Canus lâ—c Theol. lib. 7. cap. 3. num 10. Sequi majores nostros per omnia in illorum vestigiis pedes nostros figere ut pueri faciunt per lusum nihil aliud est quam ingenia nostra dâ—mnare judicio nos privare nostro facultate inquirendae veritatis i. e. to follow our ancestors in all things and to â—race their footsteps and fixe in them as children use to do in play is no other thing but to condemn our own wit and to deprive our selves of our own judgement and faculty of searching the truth Salmeron in cap. 5. epist ad Rom. disp 5. asserteth quo juniores eo perspicaciores sunt doctores and citeth Exod. 23. follow not the multitude viz. of ancients This is sufficient to prove that as the Papists are jealous of Scripture so are they of the Primitive Church her consent But it is alleadged that ye have the word of God for your warrand Matth. 16. 18. Matth. 18. 18. 1. Tim. 3. 15. To this I answere that the first Text is meaned of the collective body of the Church which fall not away this is clear from the context for it is the Church builded on that confession mentioned by the Apostles and an house so builded cannot fall because it is builded on a rock Matth. 7. 25. Yet it will not follow that there be no drops in it for particular beleevers cannot totally and finally fall away but that they are infallible who can say see Iohn 10. 28. and comyare it with 1. Cor. 13. 9. Iames 3. 2. beside your own writters interpret it so see Melchior Canus lib. 5. de loc Theol. cap. 5. and Panormitan on the place The second Text Mat. 18. is to be understood of a particular Church which you grant is not infallible so Chrysostom interpreteth the place and it is further clear from the Connexion for it is the Church to which appeals should be made in prima instantia this undoubtedly is a particular Church But admitting that it is meaned of the universal church your Pope nor your Church is not it The third Text 1. Tim. 3. 15. holdeth forth no more then what is granted in the answer to the fourth question or if you please to take learned Cameron his exposition who knitteth these words with the 16. verse you may do well But what ever be the priviledges of the true Gospel Church which is the Bride of Jesus Christ Rome hath forefaulted all these and is but a leprous part of the universal Church you grant that the church of Rome is but a particular church Why plead you then for the whole priviledges of the universal Church Is not this absurd arrogance Nor doth Calvin Hospinian Luther or White speak absolutly as ye alleadge but assert that the generality for a time was leavened by Popery which is truth But what then followeth That the mysterie of iniquity did arise by degrees and over-runne all for the most we grant so did the Arrian heresie therefore was not Athauasius and such as adbered to the truth right in their way The whole world in the Apostles time did ly in wickedness 1. Iohn 5. 19. Therefore were they not Sons of truth who endeavoured a Gospel reformation Your last hold is tradition and you say we are commanded to hold them 2. Thes 2. 15. for this you cite Aug. Cyprian St. Dennis Epiphanius To this I answer we are not against Apostolick traditions nor Church history in matters of fact We make use of traditions there mentioned But for your Legends we deny that they are such and disclaim them Have you Sir learned Logick Why do you argument so a genere ad speciem affirmative Is this a good argument Est annual ergo est homo he is a living creature therefore he is a man Can this be better there were traditions delivered to the Church of Thessalonica ergo yours are these Credat Judaeus Appella Secondly If there were unwritten traditions why do you dare to writ these things which the Apostles would not writ Thirdly Will that argue the Scripture of imperfection You may as well argue the Minister writteth a book the summe of which he hath preached to people Ergo his book is imperfect You have then to prove for your end that these traditions mentioned 2. Thess 2. 15. were
about matters of faith Secondly If so they be no where written in Scripture Thirdly That if they be not written they be the same which ye deliver to the people and by what authority ye press and writ them But to take this text wholly from your mis-interpretation hear Theodoret who saith that the Apostle spake not of diverse doctrines but of the same diversely delivered For first he preached to the Thessalonians and then did writ the substance of it But as where ever ye find fire in the Scripture ye make it Purgatory so where ye find tradition ye make it pari ratione yours Will ye listen to Bell. lib. 4. de verbo Dei cap. 10. and he will put all out of doubt for he granteth that all in substance were written by the Apostles which they preached to the people or were necessar to salvation Cyprian in his epist ad Pompeium admitteth not any traditions but such as may be perceived to be in the Evangels in the Epistles or Acts of the holy Apostles Therefore it is a perfect rule to all discerners say I and no more was at first asserted Your Maxime Idem est non esse non apparere holdeth in law but not in divinity For the soul is not visible yet who can deny the being of it What is more in the Reply I judge not worthy the noticeing and I am forced to make digression because of an impertinent return Is it not strange that when I called men mutable creatures and at their best state vanitie subject to clashing contradiction and that the written Word is the only infallible rule for direction that upon this tradition universal consent should be so prolixely commented on without any connexion They who follow this reflecter must resolve to deviat from tho high way Question seventh Your Church which ye Papists Quest. 7 call reformed is but of yesterday where was it before Luther Answer It is as old in its doctrinals as Prote ∣ stants Answer the Scripture therefore not of yesterday See what societie from the beginning professed the doctrine mantained there that was out Church The Romans Corinthians Ephesians Philippians Thessalonians as taught by the Apostle Paul are our Church of old so it is not new Secondly In all ages there have been and are eminent professours of that doctrine which we mantaine as is abundantly proved by Flaccus Illyricus in his Catalogue Testium veritatis and learned Dr. Usher in successione Ecclesiae reform which testimonies no Popish shaveling of what ever ordour yet could answer Thirdly where was the church of Rome as now constituted before the council of Trent Nay more was the Popes supremacy and infallibility heard of the 600 year after Christ Is not all Popish faith as such resolved into a lie viz. the infallibility of the Pope or Council which though errand untruths are the key of the Popish Religion Fourthly All the positives of the reformed Religion were mantained substantially in the Primitive church the first 300. years I speake not of changeable circumstances nor integrals but essentials and the negatives could not be there because the controversies were not then started But ye Papists have amassed a body of humane inventions gross errours contrare to scripture obtruding them under Anathema to be the established doctrine of the Church And because we of the reformed Profession will not own these and call that which is new old ye excommunicat us as Hereticks Reply In your seventh Answere you say Papists Reply your doctrine is as old as scripture and your Church as the Apostles and this is common to you with all sectaries to claime the scripture and the Church in the time of the Apostles And like to that answer of the common people we are all come of Adam and Eve But I shall let you presently see how contrar your doctrine is to that scripture and how unlike your Church is to that of the Apostles the first 300 year In the second part ye pretend that Illyricus and Doctor Usher have sufficiently shewed that there have been eminent men of your Profession in all ages and that without a Reply of any Popish shaveling of whatever ordour But Sir I am sorrie that you who are a Nazarian and not a shaveling shoule be so ill versed in books of controversie as not to have seen so many Catholick writters who demonstrat clearly that of all these eminent men before Calvin you pretend to be yours there is not one hath holden all the same tenets with you and no more For it is enough for you that they dissent from the Church of Rome and sling at the Popes authority what ever tenets they hold in matters of belief to call them yours Which hath made Dr. Vane Chaplain to our late King judiciously compare them to Sampsons foxes which were all bound together by the tails although their heads went diverse wayes So that when you call the Luthereans Valdenses Albigenses Hussites Catharists Wicklessians Graecians Egyptians yours you may as well call the Turks and Tartars yours if we trust all records which speake of their tenets And as for the Fathers hear if they were yours in the opinion of the most learnea Protestants Dudithius apud Bezam ep 1. If that be true which Papists say the Fathers with mutual consent are altogether on their side Pet. Martyr 2. de verbo col 1539. as long as we stand to Councils and fathers we shal alwayes remain in the same errours And fully confesseth that Hierom Ambrose and Augustin held the invocation of Saints Chemnitius in ex concil trid art 3. pag. 100. did not disput but avouch that most of the Fathers said the souls of the Martyrs heard the petition of those that prayed to them they went to monuments and invocated Martyrs by name Whitgift in his defence pag. 473. all the Bishops and writters of the Greek and Latine Church too who no doubt were the Fathers for the most part were spotted with the doctrine of Free-will Merit Invocation of Saints Judge then Sir if they were pure In the third part you ask where was the Church of Rome before the council of Trent I answer you even where she is now except in Jappony India China and some parts of America where by their Christian labours and by the blessing of GOD she hath been established since Neither can you instance that she is not constantly the same in all points Nay more say you was the Popes infallible universal supremacie heard of the first 600. years Where it seems you must be very deaf who hear not the voice of 1200. Fathers speaking only in the four first general Councils He who holdeth the See of Rome is chief and head of all Patriarchs saith right seeing he is the first as Peter to whom all power is given over all Christian Princes and all their people and who ever contradicteth this is excommunicated Can. 29. Concil Nicaeni anno 325. Where 316 Bishops were conveened Secondly