meanes to know their Authours the one Ecclesiasticall to wit the perpetuall History of the Church since the Apostles departure whereby is produced a morall persuasion and credibilitie than which none can bee greater in that kinde by reason of the antiquity number consent and sanctitie of the witnesses which testifie this the other totally diuine to wit the matter and forme of Doctrine contained in the the said bookes to be 〈◊〉 and if they be can speake in them And that within those bookes is affirmed by the 〈◊〉 Among which 〈◊〉 are taken from the internall matter and maiesty of the bookes and Gregory Valence contained in the same Scripture c. And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the 〈◊〉 of God is seene by faith in the holy faith The Scripture is a faire 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 You haue before 2. Pet. 1. 19. And 〈◊〉 August And therefore as a 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 others by the same light or 〈◊〉 manifests it selfe so the holy Scripture inlightning the Church demonstrates his owne 〈◊〉 and vertue And thus 〈◊〉 we be first directed and holpen by vnwritten Tradition to know the Scriptures yet the Tradition of the present Church is 〈◊〉 the onely last and principall ground whereunto we resolue 〈◊〉 If the Iesuits Argument be retorted vpon himselfe it will demonstrate that our Faith is finally resolued into holy Scripture and not into vnwritten Tradition for inuerting 〈◊〉 order of the 〈◊〉 and retaining the matter I argue as followeth If the maine and 〈◊〉 points of Faith are 〈◊〉 to be 〈◊〉 because of the 〈◊〉 of perpetuall Tradition vnwritten and 〈◊〉 Tradition vnwritten is beleeued to be Apostolicall because of the authoritie of the Scripture then our resolution that our Faith is Apostolicall resteth finally vpon the Scripture But the Antecedent is true Ergo c. The Assumption is confirmed two waies First by the practise of Papals which confirme their doctrine of Tradition by testimonies of Scripture alledging 2. Thess. 2. 15. 1. Tim. 6. 20. 2. Tim. 1. 16. Secondly because the credit of Tradition in respect of vs dependeth vpon the authoritie of the Church and the authoritie of the Church vpon the Scriptures Both these assertions are maintained by the Papals First They say that the authoritie of Tradition in respect of vs dependeth vpon the Church Gretsar def Bellarm. d. verbo Dei lib. 4. cap. 9. Vitus miletus cont 〈◊〉 loc 27. Error 615. Secondly They confirme the Churches authoritie by the Scriptures 1. Tim. 3.15 Math. 18.17 Eph. 4. 11 12 13 14. Gregorie Valence tom 3. disput 1. punct 1. pa. 40. ibid. punct 7. pa. 327. Driedo d. Eccles. dogm li 2. c. 3. pa. 59. Stapleton triplic c. 15. pa. 179. And thus will they nill they they are compelled to make holie Scripture the last and finall resolution of Faith for if we beleeue Tradition vpon the authoritie of the Church and the Churches authoritie for the Scripture then we must of 〈◊〉 make the Scripture our last and finall resolution of 〈◊〉 which is the Tenet of the Fathers S. Chris. sup Psal. 95. When any thing is deliuered without the warrant of Scripture the hearers thought staggereth sometimes consenting and then againe 〈◊〉 and another while reiecting the same as 〈◊〉 c. but when the testimonie of Diuine Voice is deliuered out of the Scripture it both confirmeth the saying of the Speaker and mind of the Hearer IESVIT So it is that the Scripture of the New Testament 〈◊〉 not be prooued to haue beene deliuered vnto the Church by the Apostles but by perpetuall Tradition vnderwritten conserued in the Church succeeding the Apostles for what other proofe can be imagined except one would prooue it by the titles of the Bookes which were absurd seeing doubt may be made Whether those titles were set on the Bookes by the Apostles themselues of which doubt Tradition only can resolue vs. Besides the Gospell of S. Marke and S. Luke and also the Acts of the Apostles were not written by any Apostles but were by their liuely voice and suffrages recommended vnto Christians as sacred otherwise as also Mr. Bilson noteth they should neuer haue obtained such eminent authoritie in the Church neither should they be now so esteemed but vpon the supposall of Apostolicall approbation but how shall we know the Apostles saw these writings and recommended the same vnto Christian Chnrches but by Tradition ANSVVER The point which the Aduersarie endeauors to prooue is That the Scriptures of the New Testament are beleeued by diuine Faith to come from the Apostles only and principally by the testimonie of perpetuall Tradition vnwritten he endeauoreth to performe this by disproouing other meanes to wit the titles of the Bookes c. The summe of his argument is Either perpetuall Tradition vnwritten is the only ground of this beleefe or else the Titles of the Bookes But the Titles of the Bookes are not the only ground because doubt may be made of their credit c. And some of the Bookes of the New Testament were not penned by the Apostles but by their Suffrages recommended to Christians and so became Authenticall in the Church And this approbation is not expressed in the Titles of the Bookes but is only made knowne by Tradition I answere It followeth not that Tradition vnwritten is the only or principall ground whereupon we beleeue the Scriptures of the New Testament to be Apostolicall although the titles of the Bookes alone are not so for besides the externall Titles there be three other grounds arguing the said Books to be Apostolicall First the inward Subscription 1. Corinth 16.21 and Inscription 1. Rom. 1. 1. of many of these Bookes and namely of all Saint Pauls Epistles except to the Hebrews together with the Reuelations of Saint Iohn and the other Canonicall Epistles Secondly In diuers Bookes there is found apparant testimonie within the same that the Apostles were the Authors Iohn 21. 24. 1. Cor. 15. 10. 1. Tim. 1. 13. Renel 1. 4. Thirdly In those Bookes which want such inward inscription or testimonie the matter and forme of the Bookes their harmonie with the Scriptures of the Old Testament and with those other of the New Testament which haue inscription and the voice of the holy Ghost speaking in them will prooue them to be diuine and if they be diuine then it followeth that they are Apostolicall either by the Apostles owne writing or approbation because the Church of the New Testament is builded vpon the foundation of the Apostles Eph. 2. 20. and our Sauiour himselfe did appoint their Doctrine and Ministerie to be the prime rule of Faith Math. 28. 20. Luc. 10. 16. c. 24. 48 49. And whosoeuer in their daies by preaching or writing instructed the Church must receiue approbation from them Gallath 2. 2. 9. The titles prefixed before the Bookes of the New Testament being ioined with these three grounds formerly
Vertue Deut. 31. 21. Secondly Their doctrine of Pardons ministred daily occasion of intollerable wickednesse For although their Scholemen plastered the same with subtle distinctions yet the people entertained them according to the outward letter and practised accordingly Thirdly By some part of their doctrine they 〈◊〉 people to commit sinne Equiuocation is a doctrine of Periurie To affirme that it is lawfull to depose Princes and take away their 〈◊〉 in case of Heresie is a plaine doctrine of 〈◊〉 worse than murder and if the Pope may command murder why may he not also command adulterie theft and blasphemie The doctrine of the Popes authoritie to dispence with oathes is perilous and pernitio us to the safetie of mankind making way to all kind of fraud and iniustice If the Roman Church be so apparantly and infinitly holy why doth it openly maintaine Stewes and receiue yearely tribute and part stake with Harlots and wherefore are Sanctuaries the harbours and dennes of Assisines and other enormous delinquents tollerated and supported by this Church It is a monstrous doctrine which was hatched by Pope Vrban and approoued by Baronius That they are not to be iudged murtherers which slay excommunicate persons The exemption of 〈◊〉 from being tried in Causes Criminall before Christian Magistrates is a doctrine which maketh way to most outragious offences Gulielmus Nubrigensis lib. 2. cap. 16. The Iudges complained that there were many robberies and rapes and murthers to the number of an hundred then presently committed within the realme by Ecclesiasticall persons vpon presumption of exemption from the censure of the lawes We cannot be persuaded that the Roman Church is holy in such high and extrordinarie manner as our Aduersarie boasteth because the greatest Clerkes of that societie vndertake the defence of such impieties as are detestable in Nature and condemned by the light of common Reason Garnets Powder-plot hath many Patrons Cardinall Baronius commendeth to the skies yong Henrie the Emperors sonne for rebelling against his naturall father for deposing imprisoning and bringing him with sorrow to the graue what Turke or Sauage would be the encomiast of such vnnaturall and enormous villanie IESVIT Most 〈◊〉 Apostolicall 〈◊〉 a most glorious succession of Bishops and Pastors from the Apostles famous in all monuments of Historie and Antiquitie who were neuer noted as deliuering 〈◊〉 doctrines the one to the other In which proofe that these properties agree to the Roman and be wanting in the Protestant Church J will not inlarge my selfe as I otherwise might as well not to wearie your Maiestie as also not to seeme to diffide the matter being most cleere of your Maiesties judgement wherefore it is more than cleere That the Roman Church is the One Holy Catholicke Apostolicke Church by whose Tradition Christian Religion hath beene is and shall be euer continued from the Apostles to the worlds end ANSVVER First If the present Roman Church do want the life and soule of Apostolicall Succession to wit Apostolicall Doctrine locall and titular Succession is only a Pharisaicall cloake or a painted wall Acts 23.3 and common to Caiaphas Paul Samosaten Nestorius and to many other notorious Heretickes Secondly The visible Succession of the Bishops and Pastors of the said Church from the Apostles is not most glorious and famous by the report of all monuments of Historie and Antiquitie but the same hath beene notoriously distained in latter times by Simoniacall entrance of Popes and Prelats by Schysmaticall intrusions and by commutation of the forme of election of Pastors appointed by the Apostles and exercised in the Primatiue Church And whereas the Aduersarie contendeth that Roman Bishops and Pastours hane Succession of doctrine because Ecclesiasticall Historie is silent in noting latter Popes for deliuering contrarie doctrines the one to the other both the Illation it selfe and the antecedent or ground of the Illation are false First it is inconsequent to inserre negatiuely from humane Historie and to say Histories are silent and therefore no such matter was Our Sauiour prooueth the Pharisees and Sadduces to be errants because their present doctrine was repugnant to the Scripture and had the Pharisees or Sadduces replied That their doctrine was the same which Moses the Prophets taught because they had Snccession and Histories were silent when they changed the antient Faith they had iustified themselues vpon as good grounds as Papals do Secondly it is false which this disputer venteth so confidently That Histories and antient Monuments are altogether silent of the Innouations which were made by latter Popes and we are able as in due place it shall appeare to produce testimonies of Historie to the contrarie IESVITS 2. Argument Protestants haue the holy Scriptures deliuered vnto them by and from the One Holy Catholicke and Apostolical Church but they receiued them from no other Church than the Roman Ergo the Roman is the One Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church ANSVVER This Sillogisme is peccant in forme and both the propositions are affirmatiue in the second figure which I note the rather because the Aduersarie at the end of his Argument cryeth Victoria saying An Argument conuicting and vnanswerable I must therefore reduce the same to a lawfull forme and then answer That Church by and from which the Protestants receiue the Scriptures is the Only Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church The Protestants receiue the Scriptures from the Roman Church Ergo The Roman Church to the Only Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church First If this Argument be conuicting and vnanswerable as the Iesuit boasteth then these which follow are such That from which the Russians receiued the Scriptures is the Only Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church The Russians receiued the Scriptures from the Greeke Church Ergo The Greeke Church is the Only Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church Also that Church from which the Apostles receiued the Scriptures was the true Church The Apostles receiued the Scriptures from the Sinagogue of the Iewes gouerned by the Pharisees Ergo The Synagogue of the Iewes gouerned by the Pharisees was the true Church The deliuerie of the Text of the holy Scriptures is common to the true and corrupt Church and not proper to the Only Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church as appeareth by the Synagogue which being a corrupt Church at the time of our Sauiours Aduent yet by the speciall prouidence of God preserued and deliuered the Text of the old Testament Rom. 3.2 And S. Agustine testifieth of the Iewes That they were Librarie keepers to Christians of the Bookes of the Law and Prophets And S. Hierom saith That the Hebrews did not corrupt the Text of the old Testament Also the Donatists and Nouatians deliuered the incorrupt Text of holy Scripture to their followers Secondly the proposition of the former Argument hath another defect The Text of holy Scriptures may be deliuered by a particular Church which is but a member of the vniuersall and therefore it is
inconsequent to conclude That because the Protestants receiued the Scriptures from the Roman Church therefore they receiued them to wit immediatly from the vniuersall Church The Minor proposition to wit the Protestants receiued the Scriptures from no other Church than from the Romane may be taken in a double sence For either it may be vnderstood originally and by way of authoritie that is The Protestants receiued the Scriptures both originally and deriuatiuely from and by the authoritie of the Romane Church onely or else it may bee vnderstood indicatiuely The Protestants receiued the Scriptures by the hand of the Romane Church and were first of all instructed and told by that Church that the same were diuine Bookes yet they receiued them not onely or principally from that church but also from the Primitiue Church which led them originally to the Apostles themselues And besides the former Tradition by reading and studying the holy Scriptures they learned sufficient matter out of those heauenly bookes to confirme them that they were diuine and of God Philemon receiued S. Pauls Epistle by the hand of Onesimus he did not esteeme Onesimus a seruant who had beene a fugitiue an infallible witnesse in himselfe but the argument and contents of S. Pauls Epistle persuaded him that S. Paul was the Author A man may receiue the Kings Proclamation from off a pillar or his great Seale by the hand of a meane clarke So likewise the bookes of holy Scriptures are first conueyed vnto vs by Ecclesiasticall testimonie and Tradition but they containe heauenly veritie and doctrine within themselues which persuade the diligent readers and learners of them that they are diuine IESVIT The Maior I prooue If Protestants haue not the Text of Scripture by and from the one holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church they cannot be certaine they haue the true incorrupt Text the Apostles deliuered and recommended as Diuine to the first 〈◊〉 seeing the Tradition of any other Church is fallible and may deceiue And if it may deceiue how can they be certaine that they are not deceiued seeing they themselues liued not in the Apostles dayes to see with their owne eyes what Copies the Apostles deliuered But Protestants as they pretend be certaine that they haue the true incorrupt Apostolicall Text of Scripture Ergo they haue it vpon the Authoritie of the holy Catholike Apostolike Church ANSWER The Argument whereby the Aduersarie confirmeth his Maior is this If the Protestants receiue the Scriptures from any other but the Holy Catholique Church they cannot be certaine that the same are incorrupt because a fallible Witnesse may deceiue Answ. They which receiue the Scriptures from the hands of a corrupt Church may be deceiued if there be not some other infallible meanes besides the Testimonie of that Church to assure them But if that Church be onely a Messenger to deliuer and there be found in the thing deliuered that which is certaine and infallible in it selfe to wit the Testimonie of the Apostles and of the Spirit of God speaking in and by those Scriptures Acts 24. 25. then they which immediately receiue the Text of the Scripture from a fallible Church may be certaine that they are not deceiued It is not necessarie that the Messenger by and from whose hands wee receiue immediately the Text of the Scriptures should be infallible in all things for then wee must receiue them from the hands of no particular Church or particular Councell vnconfirmed by the Pope or from any particular Pastour of the Church because these are fallible And according to our Aduersaries Tenet infallibilitie of Iudgement is found onely in the Pope and Councell confirmed by him And from hence it will in like sort follow that for the first two or three hundred yeeres beginning from the death of the Apostles in which time there was no generall Councell yea for certaine Ages after generall Councels began vntill the Canon of the Scripture was expressely assigned by some generall or particular Councell confirmed by the Pope Christians should haue remained vncertaine touching the sacred Authoritie of Diuine Scripture because the meanes by which they receiued them immediately were fallible The Authoritie of the holy Scripture dependeth vpon the immediate Messenger which deliuereth the Bookes vnto vs no more than the Authoritie of the Kings Proclamation dependeth vpon the Sergeant who proclaymes it or sets it vpon a Pillar to be read of all men but vpon the first Diuine Witnesses which wee know to be the Authors of the Scripture not because Pope Paul the fifth or Clement the eight say so but because the Witnesses themselues affirme it in their Scripture or deliuer that in their Scripture by which it is prooued to such as are eleuated by Grace and taught of God IESVIT Now the Minor That they haue the Scripture from the Romane is apparent For what other Church did deliuer vnto Luther the Text of the Bible assuring him that they had it by Tradition of Ancestors time out of mind as giuen originally by the Apostles which is accordingly acknowledged by M. Whitaker and others but particularly by Luther himselfe Ergo the Romane Church is the one holy Catholike Apostolike Church whose Tradition doth deliuer infallibly vnto vs the Text of Scripture ANSVVER The Protestants receiuing the Bookes of holy Scripture by the hand of the Roman Church proueth not the said Church to be the onely holy Catholike and Apostolike Church any more than the receiuing of Baptisme by Heretikes or the Old Testament by the Synagogue of which the Pharisees were a part proue the same to be the true infallible Church IESVIT And if the true Apostolicall Text then also the true Apostolicall Sense ANSWER The sequele is denyed For it is not necessarie that they which truly deliuer the Text shall also truly deliuer the Apostolicall sense and on the contrarie a lying sence may be deliuered by them which retaine the true and incorrupt Letter of the Text as appeareth by the Pharisees Arrians Donatists and many other Heretikes IESVIT This I proue If the Apostles did not deliuer the bare Text but together with the Text the true sense of Scripture to be deliuered perpetually vnto posteritie then they who by Tradition receiue from the Apostles the true Text must together receiue the true sense But all principall Protestants affirme No man doubteth but the Primitiue Church receiued from the Apostles and Apostolicall men not onely the Text of Scripture but also the right and natiue sense which is agreeable to the Doctrine of the Fathers that from the Apostles together with the Text descends the Line of Apostolicall interpretation squared according to the Ecclesiasticall and Catholike sense ANSVVER The Assumption of the former Argument to wit The Apostles together with the Text deliuered the true sense of all their Scriptures to those people to whom they wrote is vncertaine They deliuered no doubt the sense of the Scriptures
in respect of your exact Iudgement and excelse Dignitie yet in regard of the Author it is a free will Offering intended to the honour of God and of your sacred Maiestie and to confirme your Liege people in right Faith and true loue and obedience of your most iust and gracious Gouernment As an Angell of God so is my Lord the King to discerne good and bad therefore the Lord thy God will be with thee 2. Sam. 14. 17. Your Maiesties Chapleine and Seruant FRAN. WH TO THE READER IT is now two yeeres since I was first called by my Lord Duke of Buckingham to conferre with an Honourable Person who as then began to make Reuolt from the true Faith and Religion professed in our Church By this Occasion J entred into a Disputation with one Mr Iohn Fisher a Jesuit the same person which was the Author of the two Bookes against which my younger Brother Dr Iohn White wrote his Way to the true Church and the Defence of the same After my first Conference with the aforesaid Jesuit ensued not long after a Second at which his most excellent Maiestie himselfe was present The Cause as J afterwards perceiued of his Presence was a gracious desire to recouer the foresaid Honorable Person out of the Fishers Net Then there followed a Third Conference betweene a most Learned and Reuerend Bishop and the said Jesuit intended to the same purpose Lastly his Royall Maiestie in his deepe Judgement hauing obserued by the former Conferences and especially by the second that our Aduersaries are cunning and subtile in eluding our Arguments brought against them but of no strength especially in particular Questions when they come to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and confirmation of their owne Tenet He was pleased to haue Nine Questions of Controuersie propounded to the Jesuit that hee might in writing manifest the Grounds and Arguments whereupon the Popish Faith in those Points was builded For his Maiestie in his owne Judgement and Experience knew most certainely That Romists are not able to confirme 〈◊〉 Faith either by sacred Scripture or by antient Tradition And therefore their manner is when they dispute with Protestants viua voce to auoid other Controuersies and to set vp their rest vpon the Questions of the Visibilitie and Authoritie of the Church Therefore the better to discouer their weakenesse and to plucke them out of their Fox-hole of Personall Succession and Vistbilitie the King imposed this Taske of writing vpon the Nine Questions Besides his Maieftie had experience of the mfaithfull dealing of Pontificians when they make Relation of such things as passe by word of mouth onely in priuate Disputations and hee well vnderstood 〈◊〉 the Cretising Jesuit had dealt with a 〈◊〉 Bishop and with my selfe For had wee beene Schoole-Boyes of thirteene yeeres old he could not haue made vs seeme more childish and vnskilfull than hee did dispersing Hundreds of Papers to his owne prayse and our disgrace Wherefore it was necessarie that some publique Worke containing the Grounds and Arguments of his part and the Answere and Replie on ours might be extant wherein neither his nor our Yea and Nay should take place sed res cum re causa cum causa c. the weight of matter on each part might testifie for it selfe Now who could command this to be done but the King himselfe who therefore made the former proposition of Nine Questions to the Jesuit that the World might see the vttermost of his strength and againe they might haue meanes to iudge rightly of our Cause and of our proceedings in handling the same Mine owne purpose at the first was to haue published in Print a Narration of my two Disputations and as farre as my Memorie would serue me I had to that end collected in writing the summe of those Conferences But obseruing afterwards by another Disputation which was printed that our Aduersaries will perpetually tumultuate and accuse of falsitie all things which passe not vnder their owne hands knowing also that my selfe could not exactly remember all passages of the Jesuits Disputation and mine there being not a word written at the time when wee disputed J deferred the printing thereof vntill this greater Worke was finished The Aduersarie in this Answere which his Friend deliuered the King hath disputed Eight of the Questions propounded by his Maiestie and he declineth the Ninth for Reasons well knowne to the World and in stead of a Disputation he passeth ouer that Article of deposing Kings with a Rethoricall Declamation But before the Nine Questions hee placeth a large Disputation prouided no doubt aforehand and expecting onely a prosperous Wind of Occasion to send it abroad touching the Rule of Faith concerning Scripture and Tradition the Notes of the Church c. Then to counterpoise the Kings Nine Articles he chargeth our Church with Nine remarkable Errors as he accounteth them Jn the former part of his Tractate is contained the summe and substance of the first Conference betweene him and me before the Lord Keeper and the Lord Duke of Buckingham Jn the Questions of Jmages Transubstantiation Communion in both kinds is contained also the summe of the second Conference but there are many Additions in each Question and hee handleth matters more exactly in his written Worke than hee did in his priuate Disputations J haue examined his whole Treatise and answered euery passage thereof printing his Worke verbatim with mine owne The World must take notice that I am a constant Preacher in a Pastorall Charge and therefore J could not ose such expedition as other men may which imploy their whole time strength in writing Besides my Worke being finished before Michaelmas last bath bin long in Printing by reason of the number of Quotations in the Margen These Citations are for this cause word for word out of the Authors placed in my Booke that the Worke may be more vsefull especially to such persons as want the benefit of Libraries and much Reading themselues J haue with as much diligence as morally a Scholler can vse collected my Testimonies out of the very Authors themselues The Reader shall not need to feare or distrust vnlesse where the Printer hath made Escapes which cannot alwayes be auoided in a Worke of this nature And I must entreat the Reader where he obserueth any Error in the Print to correct the same with his Pen. Neither must the vnlearneder sort be offended if they light vpon some hard passages because the matter it selfe is many times very abstruse and disputing with Aduersaries which are Sophisters I am compelled to vse Schollasticke tearmes and to turne their owne Weapons vpon themselues But so farre as I am able I haue endeuored to be perspicuous Of my Aduersaries I request nothing at all for it is in vaine But if they reply it shall be for their greater honour to set downe my Text as I haue done theirs And they shall but beat the ayre vnlesse they confirme the maine Branches of their
certainetie of Christianitie cannot but with it fall to the ground ANSVVER The totall certainetie of Christianitie dependeth not vpon a Church illustrious and conspicuous to the eie of the whole world and hauing such externall pompe and Visibilitie as Papals imagine Therefore if such a Church be ouerthrowne that is be proued in sundrie Articles to be corrupt and vnfound which is our Tenet concerning the present Roman Church the certaintie of Christianitie may still subsist The Tenet which wee maintaine touching the qualitie of the present Roman Church 〈◊〉 to the reformation of errours and abuses in the same and not to the ouerthrowing of the lawfull authoritie of the Visible Church The certainetie of Religion in the time of the Iewes did depend as much vpon the authoritie of the Visible Church of Iuda as it can in our daies depend vpon the authoritie of the Roman Church or of any other for that Church was by office the keeper of the Canonicall Scripture Rom. 3 2. the teacher of heauenly trueth Ezek. 44 23 Mal. 2 7. a ministeriall Iudge of controuersies Deut. 17 9. Ezek. 44 24. and yet notwithstanding the said Church was reprooued by the holie Prophets Mal. 2 8. 2. Chron. 29.6 7. Esay 56 10. Ezek. 34. and the religious kings of Iuda reformed the same 2. Chron. 14.3 4. and cap. 17.7 8 9. and cap. 29.3 c. and cap. 34.3 4. and cap. 33.15 Now like as when a Physition discouereth the diseases of the bodie and prescribeth remedies and medecines he doth thereby heale and not destroy the state of the bodie so likewise they which out of the Oracles of God haue reuealed the errours and corruptions of the Roman Church and sought reformation thereof doe not ouerthrow the certainetie of Christianitie nor impaire the lawfull authoritie of the Church but repaire and establish the same IESVIT If it be hidden and made inuisible men must needs wander in the search of the first deliuered Christian Doctrine without end or hope of euer ariuing at any certaine Issue And if this Controuersie be not examined and determined in the first place disputation by Scripture will proue fruitlesse by the sole euidence whereof no victorie can be gotten against proteruious error or at least not victorie that is verie apparant neither will answers about particular Doctrines satisfie a mind preoccupated with a long continued dislike of them ANSVVER In this Section two things are deliuered First If the Church be hidden c. Secondly Controuersies cannot be decided by sole Scripture c. To the first I answer The Church that is the societie of Christian people professing sauing Faith is at no time totally bidden and inuisible but in Persecution the same may be hidden and vnknowne to them which 〈◊〉 no will to know it 2. Cor. 4 3. or which defire to know it that they may persecute and oppresse it Reuelat. 12 14. And the same may sometimes cease to be largely and in a 〈◊〉 and pompous manner visible Math. 10 23. and 23 34. Heb. 11 38. And in the state of Persecution when the same is hidden and vnknowne to enemies the friends of this Church to whom it is knowne may by the Ministerie thereof exercised in priuate receiue the certaintie of beleefe and if it be vnknowne or hidden to any of them these may by priuat reading or meditation of that which they haue formerly learned supplie the defect of publique Ministerie euen as some Christians at this day being slaues in Turkie or Barbarie may be saued without externall Ministerie And it is also possible for such to be Instruments of conuerting and sauing others Ruffin Hist. Eccles. li. 1. c. 9 10. Besides we do also acknowledge that the Popish Church although it were corrupt and vnsound in many things yet it preserued the Bookes of holie Scripture and taught the Apostles Creed and sundrie parts of Diuine veritie collected from the same and by these Principles of Christianitie preserued in that Church iuditious and pious men might with studie and diligence find out what was the first deliuered Christian Doctrine in such things as are necessarie to Saluation as in the Iewish Church when the same was corrupt in manners and doctrine Mal. 2 8. Esay 56 10. 2. Kings 16 11 16. Marc. 6 34. the Bookes of holie Scripture and many remnants of Diuine truth which were able to saue Gods elect remained and were sufficient Principles from whence all sauing truth might be deriued and pernitious errours and abuses discouered and reformed And thus although the true Church be granted at sometimes to be hidden and inuisible in manner before expressed well affected people shall not want all meanes to vnderstand what was the first deliuered Christian faith The Iesuit in the next passage laboureth to make it appeare impossible to end and determine Controuersies of Religion without the authoritie of a perpetuall visible Church whose iudgement is alwaies infallible and free from all error But if his speech be resolued from a Rhethoricall flourish into forme of Argument the loosenesse of it will appeare For he proceedeth in this or the like manner IESVIT By all such meanes as is of it selfe sufficient to declare what was the first deliuered Christian Doctrine apparant victorie may be gotten against proteruious errour and minds preoccupated with long dislike of particular Doctrines may be satisfied By sole Scripture no apparant victorie can be gotten against proteruious errour neither can long dislike of particular Doctrines be satisfied Ergo sole Scripture is not a sufficient meanes to declare what was the first deliuered Christian Doctrine ANSVVER First If by apparant Victorie be meant such Victorie as proteruious errants will confesse or persuade themselues to bee a Victorie against them then the Maior Proposition is false For when our Sauiour himselfe confuted the Pharisees by such demonstration as none could be greater yet they resisted the Truth and in like sort they resisted St. Stephen Acts 7 53. and S. Paul Acts 28 23. and in the best Councels of Nice Ephesus c. no such apparant Victorie was gotten of proteruious Heretiques Secondly If by apparant Victorie be meant a true and sufficient confutation and conuiction of Errants then the Minor is false for that is a sufficient means to obtaine Victorie by which our Sauiour himselfe subdued Sathan Math. 4.4 7. and the Heretiques of his time Math. 12 3. 22 29 43. and by which St. Paul confuted the Pharisees and other Aduersaries Acts 17 2. and 28 23. And whereby the Fathers of the Nicene Councell conuicted the Arrians Socrat. Hist. l. 1. c. 6. and which are giuen by inspiration to be an effectuall meanes to reprooue and confute error 2. Tim. 3 16. Chrys. d. fid leg nat But the Iesuit may cauil saying that euen as a sword in the hand of a Giant is sufficient to 〈◊〉 an enemie but not in the hand of a child who
expressed are sufficient to prooue that the holy Apostles were the Authors or Approuers of all the Scriptures of the New Testament and if these with other humane motiues of credibilitie be not the same doubt which is made concerning them may with greater probabilitie be made concerning vnwritten Traditions And secluding the authoritie of the Scripture it selfe no other diuine testimonie can be produced to satisfie them which are doubtfull touching the veritie of vnwritten Tradition and the authoritie of the present Church If one will not beleeue the Scriptures because of the authoritie of God speaking in them neither will he beleeue the present Church consisting of persons in whom is possibilitie of error IESVIT For we may distinguish three properties of the Doctrine of Faith to wit to be true to be reuealed of God to be preached and deliuered by the Apostles The highest ground by which I am persuaded and resolued that my Faith is true is the authoritie of God reuealing it the highest ground on which I am resolued that my Faith is reuealed is the credit and authoritie of Christ Iesus and his Apostles who deliuered the same as diuine and sacred but the highest ground that mooueth me to beleeue that my Faith was preached by the Apostles is the perpetuall Tradition of the Church succeeding the Apostles that so teacheth me ANSVVER The last part of the former distinction is denied The highest ground meaning diuine which mooueth vs to beleeue that the doctrine of Faith was preached by the Apostles is not the perpetuall Tradition of the Church succeeding the Apostles but the holy Scripture of the New Testament for the perpetuall Tradition of the Church succeeding the Apostles is beleeued because of the authoritie of the said Church and whosoeuer beleeueth that Tradition or Testimonie must first of all know the Church to be an infallible witnesse But the word of God only the greater and most worthie part whereof by our Aduersaries confession is contained in the Scriptures giueth authoritie to the Church for the Church is founded vpon the word of God Eph. 2.20 and the word of God is the immortall seed which produceth and giueth being to the Church Luc. 8.11 Ia. 1.18 it selfe vpon the Apostles 〈◊〉 word and Doctrine which is principally contained in the Scripture 〈◊〉 Into this principle St. Augustine resolued his faith against the 〈◊〉 who pretended the Scriptures were corrupted confuting them by Tradition of the Church affirming that he would not beleeue the Gospell did not the authority of the Catholike Church induce him assigning this as the last stay of his resolution in this point for though he beleeued the Gospel to 〈◊〉 souer aignely certaine and true vpon the authority of God 〈◊〉 it and that it was reuealed of God vpon the authority of the Apostles who as sacred preached it yet that this Gospel as we haue it came incorrupt from the Apostles he could haue no stronger or more excellent 〈◊〉 than the testimony of the present Church descended by continued succession of Bishops from the Apostles neither can we imagine any higher except we flye to particular and to priuate reuelation which is absurd ANSWER St. Augustines words C. Epist. Manichei c. 4. doe not proue that after he was fully conuerted he resolued his faith finally and principally into the authority of the Church succeeding the Apostles First St. Augustine resolued his faith finally and principally into that which he knew to be infallible and totally diuine But he was not so persuaded of the Church succeeding the Apostles because he thought it possible for the principall members of that Church to 〈◊〉 and be deceiued and he prefers the authority of the Scriptures before the iudgement of Councels and Fathers in which some of our aduersaries place the 〈◊〉 of Ecclesiasticall infallibility Moreouer it appeareth by Saint Augustine in the second chapter of this Booke that he did not make the authority of the Church the highest ground of resolution of his faith for he saith that manifest verity is to be preferred before all other tbings whereby he was held in the Catholike Church but that whose authority must be preferred before all other things is the highest ground of faiths resolution Secondly because St. Augustines meaning in this place is obscure and dubious our aduersaries cannot conclude certainely from hence 1. Some Schoolemen hold that he speaketh of acquisite or Historicall Faith which is an introductiō to infused faith and then it is inconsequent to argue that because Saint Augustine at his first conuersion and being a Nouice in Faith did ground his Historicall faith vpon the authority of the Church therefore the authority of the Church is vniuersally and after men are conuerted the highest ground of resolution Most men are at first induced by externall motiues to giue credit to the Scriptures as the people of Samaria were by the testimony of the woman to beleeue that Christ was a Prophet Ioh. 4.42 Altisiodor summa in prolog li. 3. tr 3.9.4 But as these people afterwards beleeued because of Christs owne words so they which by the Churches authority are first persuaded to heare and reade the doctrine of the Scriptures afterwards by the light of grace doe perceiue the diuine Maiestie wisedome efficacie and verity of the said doctrine and resolue their faith into the diuine authority of the holy Ghost manifesting himselfe in the Scripture or doctrine of the Scripture Secondly other learned Papists hold that St. Augustine in the place obiected by the authority of the Church vnderstood the Church wherein the Apostles themselues gouerned and of which they were parts and then no meruaile if he resolued his faith into the authority of the Church because in this notion the Church comprehends the Colledge of the Apostles whose testimony concerning the Scripture was altogether Diuine And although St. Augustine conioyneth the authority of the latter Church with the former wherein were the Apostles yet he did not equally and with the same manner of beleeuing ground his faith vpon both for when a Preacher deliuereth Apostolicall doctrine we beleeue both the Preacher and the Doctrine and we could not haue knowne the doctrine but by the Preacher yet we resolue not our faith finally and principally into the authority of the Preacher but into the diuine verity it selfe preached by him Euery thing by which we are mooued to beleeue and without whose authority we should not haue beleeued is not the principall obiect whereunto diuine faith is finally resolued as appeareth by miracles preaching instruction of Parents c. IESVIT Vpon the former place of Saint Augustine the Iesuit inferreth That because we haue no stronger or more excellent proofe than the testimonie of the present Churcb descended by continuall succession of Bishops from the Apostles to confirme that the Gospell as wee haue it came incorrupt from the Apostles therefore Saint Augustine resolued his faith that
Church since the Apostles is the prime originall ground of Faith more fundamentall than the Scripture This assertion is Antichristian and impudent for can any thing be more fundamentall than the foundation or of greater authoritie than the word of God S. Peter speaking of the Propheticall Scriptures equalleth the same to the sensible voice of God which was vttered in the Apostles audience from heauen Math. 3.17 c. 17.5 saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We haue the most sure word of Prophesie c. vpon these words S. Augustine d. verb. Apostoli serm 29. commenteth as followeth Et cum dixisset hanc vocem audiuimus de Coelo delatam subiunxit atque ait habemus certiorem propheticum sermonem sonuit illa vox de Coelo certior est propheticus sermo when the Apostle had said We heard this voice from heauen he addeth further and saith We haue a more sure word of prophesie That voice sounded from heauen and yet the propheticall word is more sure he said more sure not better or truer because that word from heauen was as good and as profitable as the word of prophesie Why therefore more sure Because the hearer was more confirmed by it Our Sauiour himselfe in the Gospell examineth the Traditions of the Pharises and of the Iewish Church then being by the Scriptures Math. 5.6 and 7. Ch. 12.5 c. 15.4 19.4 And the holy Ghost in the new Testament both in the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles confirmeth the Truth which was taught by the authoritie of the Scriptures and Christ Iesus perpetually submitteth himselfe and his doctrine to the triall of the Scriptures and the Apostles after him did the like Acts 26.22 The antient Fathers affirme that the Scriptures are of most eminent authoritie and that wee are aboue all things to giue credit to them and that they are the mouth of God and the verie hand of God and Paul and Peter and Iohn and the whole companie of the Prophets do speake with vs by them and that Faith it selfe by which a iust man liueth is conceiued by them and the Church it selfe is demonstrated to wit tanquam à priori by them But on the contrarie Traditions receiue their authoritie from the Scriptures and may not be admitted vnlesse they agree with the Scriptures And in our Aduersaries Tenet men must first beleeue the authoritie of the Church before they can receiue or beleeue Tradition from all which it followeth that Tradition of the present Church is neither the prime originall ground of Faith nor yet more fundamentall concerning Faith than the Scripture The Trident Councell held it sufficient to equall Tradition with the Scriptures This new master with Baronius Pighius preferreth them before the Scriptures These men perceiue that the Roman Faith cannot subsist vnlesse they depresse the written word of God and exalt the prophane bastardly and Apocriphall Traditions of the Pope They say the Scripture is a breathlesse lumpe a nose of wax a leaden rule Andradius writeth That in the Books of the Scriptures themselues there is no diuinitie or any thing else binding vs to beleeue Stapleton saith That being considered as written it can no way be called the Temple or Tabernacle of the holy Ghost Bosius saith The holy Ghost resideth in the Church more effectually and nobly than in the Bookes of the Scripture And Majoranus hath these words The consent of the Church alone which neuer wanted the spirit of God ought to be of greater esteeme with vs than all mute and tonguelesse Bookes and than all the written volumes which are or euer were and which haue in all ages ministred fuell of contention to the wits of men And Gretsar the Iesuit There would haue beene fewer contentions in the world as I supose if there had beene no Scripture at all Iacob Brower a Reader of Doway saith I would not beleeue the Gospell did not the authoritie of Pope Paul the fift mooue me And lastly it is one of the dictates of Pope Hildebrand canonised by Baronius That no Chapter or Booke of Scripture must bee esteemed canonicall without his authoritie I doubt not but that Romists are able with faire glosses and distinctions to salue these blasphemies and to reconcile dark nesse with light but he that diggeth a pit for people to fall into althought he couer the same with some superficiall tecture is accused by the antient sentence of diuine Law Exod. 21.33 Towards the end of this Section the Iesuit addeth First That the Scripture is not knowne to bee Apostolicall but by Tradition This is false for the Scripture is knowne to come from the Apostles by inward grounds and testimonies contained in it selfe and by the vertue and effects of it as well as by the Tradition of the Church Secondly it is most vntrue that Tradition is knowne to come from the Apostles by it owne light but not Scripture for what internall light hath Tradition more than or aboue the Scripture If it haue then the articles of Popish Tradition Purgatorie adoration of Images c. are more manifest than the articles which Scripture teacheth concerning the incarnation and resurrection of Christ than Heauen and Hell c. Also sacred Scripture is receiued as diuine by all Christians Popish Tradition onely by some The Catalogue of Romish Tradition could neuer to this day be specified and distinctly assigned but the Canon of holy Scripture may Moreouer holie Scripture hath the perpetuall and vnanimous consent of the Primitiue Church Popish Tradition hath not Againe Bellarmine confesseth that nothing is better knowne and more certaine than holy Scripture but if nothing be better known then nothing hath clearer light Thirdly the confirmation of the former to wit What more euident c. is insufficient because that which is known to come from the Apostles by their owne immediat testimonie in writing is more euidently knowne to come from them than that which is affirmed to come from them onely by the report of men which are deceiueable Diuine testimonie maketh things more certaine and infallible than humane The testimonie of the Apostles extant in writing is totally diuine the report of Bishops is in part humane IESVIT And this may bee clearely prooued to omit other pregnant testimonies by the words of our Sauiour in the last of Matthew Going into the whole world teaching all nations baptizing them In the Name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost teaching them to keepe all that I haue commanded you all dayes euen to the consummation of the world A promise of wonderfull comfort vnto them that pawne their soules and saluation vpon Gods word deliuered by perpetuall Tradition For in this sentence appeare these fixe things First That there is still a Christian Church all dayes not wanting in the world so
where they preached so 〈◊〉 was necessarie but that they made a large and entire Commentarie vpon all their Scriptures and deliuered the same to posteritie to continue perpetually is not prooued by the confession of Chemnitius and the discord which is in the Commentaries of the Fathers yea of Romists themselues vpon the Scriptures argueth the contrarie IESVIT Whereupon S. Augustine argueth That they that deliuer the Text of Christs Gospell must also deliuer the Exposition affirming That he would sooner refuse to beleeue Christ than admit any interpretation contrarie to them by whom he was brought to beleeue in Christ. For they that can deliuer by vniforme Tradition a false sense why may they not also deliuer a false Text as receiued from the Apostles An argument conuincing and vnanswerable ANSVVER Saint Augustine in the place obiected Lib. d. vtil Cred. cap. 14. confuteth the Manichees who condemned Faith and affirmed That people ought to credit nothing but that which is demonstrated by reason And hee argueth against these Heretikes first out of some of their owne grounds for they were compelled to beleeue something in their Religion vpon report of others and they required people to giue credit to certaine Narrations which could not be demonstrated by reason onely Secondly This Father prooueth the necessitie of Faith because without giuing credit to some report it was impossible to receiue the knowledge of Christ. Thirdly Whereas the Manichees required that men should learne to know Christs word from them Saint Augustine saith That if he had no better Guides to follow than such new and turbulent Companions as those Heretikes were he should sooner persuade himselfe not to beleeue in Christ than to beleeue vpon their bare report or to receiue this Faith from any other than from those by which he first beleeued But Saint Augustine in this place treateth not of the sense of the Scripture neither doth he say absolutely that he would sooner refuse to beleeue Christ than to admit any interpretation contrarie to them by whom he was brought to beleeue in Christ but he speaketh comparatiuely and according to humane reason hee should more easily be persuaded to beleeue nothing than forsaking the authoritie and testimonie of his first Teachers yeeld credit to these men vpon their Hereticall grounds It is cleare that Saint Augustine did not alwayes tye himselfe to the same exposition of Scripture which those that were before him had deliuered For in the questions of Grace and Free-will he found out many expositions by searching the Scriptures which both himselfe and other men before him were ignorant of vntill the heresie of Pelagius arose and in his worke De Doctrina Christiana he makes twofold charitie the modell of expounding Scripture and not the authoritie of Ecclesiasticall Teachers whom hee oftentimes expoundeth with mitigation or reiecteth with modestie and hee is most constant in aduancing the authoritie of Scripture before any Ecclesiasticall authoritie whatsoeuer IESVIT For they that can deliuer by vniforme Tradition a false sence Why may they not also deliuer a false Text as receiued from the Apostles An argument conuincing and vnanswerable ANSWER The Iesuit imagineth that this Argument is inuincible But let not him that girdeth on his harnesse boast himselfe as hee that putteth it off 1. Kings 20. 11. And Sauls brags That God had deliuered Dauid into his hand prooued vaine 1. Sam. 23. 14. and 24. 5. The Argument reduced to forme will discouer its owne weakenesse If the Text of the Scripture may 〈◊〉 easily bee corrupted as the sence then all they which can deliuer by vniforme Tradition a false sence may also deliuer a false Text. But the Text of the Scripture may as easily bee corrupted as the sence Ergo All they which can deliuer by vniforme Tradition a false sence may also deliuer a false Text. The assumption of this Syllogisme which although it were concealed by the Paralogist yet it must bee added to make the Argument perfect is apparantly false and the contrary is true The Text of the Scripture cannot so easily bee corrupted as the sence and therefore it is not necessarie that they which following humane Tradition or their owne inuention may deliuer a false sence shall likewise deliuer a false Text. First the Text of the Scripture is contained in Records and Bookes which are dispersed throughout the whole Christian world and preserued in all Churches and the Coppies and Transcripts of them are innumerable Tradition is in the brest of a few and authentically as Papals affirme in the brest of the Pope and his Church onely Secondly when God Almightie would haue the knowledge and memorie of things to bee perpetuall he commanded that they should bee committed to writing Exod. 17. 14. and 34. 27. Deut. 31. 19. And although the law of nature was ingrauen in mans heart and might haue beene preserued for euer by vniforme succession yet God himselfe wrote the same in Tables Deut. 10.4 and inspired Moses to write it in Bookes Exod 20. Deut. 5. And although the Precepts of the Law of Nature were more firmely fixed in mans heart and the Tradition thereof was more generally diffused than any positiue Tradition can bee yet in processe of time many parts thereof were corrupted both in regard of knowledge and practise Thirdly experience of all ages testifieth that the Text of the Scripture hath beene preserued inuiolable euen among Iewes and Heretickes whereas the sence of the Scripture made knowne by Tradition onely is forgotten in part and they which disagree about the sence and some parcels of the Canon of the Scripture are at one concerning the verie letter of the Text. For although there were some which in antient time reiected the Epistle of St. Iames and the latter of St. Peters c. yet the literall Text of these Scriptures was faithfully preserued alwayes in the Church Fourthly whereas the Iesuite compareth vnanimous Tradition of the sence of Scripture with the written letter and Text of the Scripture vnlesse he equiuocate in the name terming that Tradition which is collected from the Scripture such vniforme Tradition as he boasteth of is verie rare for it must be such as in all ages and in all Orthodoxall Churches hath beene the same Now the most vndoubted and vniforme Tradition of all other is concerning the number and integritie of the Bookes of holy Scripture and yet in this difference hath beene betweene one Church and another and the later Romane Church disagreeth with the antient the one denying and the other affirming d the bookes of Macchabees to be Canonicall The Articles also of the late Popish Creed compiled by Pope Pius the fourth are not agreeable to the antient Tradition of the Catholike Church or to the Tradition of the elder Romane Church it selfe and among sundrie other matters in question betwixt vs this Iesuit is not able to shew by
must be Doctrines vnchanged comming from the Apostles ANSVVER This Proposition may hold in prime and essentiall Articles of Doctrine but not generally in all Doctrines and some learned Papists hold that it is possible for the visible Church of one age to erre or be deceiued by a blamelesse and inuincible ignorance in points of Doctrine the expresse knowledge whereof is not necessarie to Saluation IESVIT But it is most cleere and confessed by the Protestants whose testimonie plentifull in this behalfe if need require shall be brought First that the Doctrines of the Roman Church which Protestants refuse haue beene vniuersally receiued for many ages a thousand yeares agoe at least euer since Boniface the third ANSWER It is neither cleere in it selfe nor yet confessed by Protestants that the Doctrines of the Roman Church which Protestants refuse haue been vniuersally receiued for 1000 yeres at least c. The article of the Popes Supremacie and of Purgatorie Adoration of Images forbidding married Priests to liue with their wiues were euer opposed and reiected by the Greek Church The Doctrine of the Trident Councell concerning the Canon of the holy Scriptures and the preheminence of the vulgar Translation before the Hebrew and Greeke Text was not vniuersally 〈◊〉 for a thousand yeeres The temporal authoritie of the Pope the merit of Condignitie publicke seruice in an vnknowne language Iubilees and Popes pardons Communion in one kind Transubstantiation Blessing or baptising of Bells c. were not generally receiued in the Church vniuersall for a thousand yeeres at least And a great number of Beleeuers which in this West part of the world haue alwayes denied and resisted these Articles and among other opponents there were a people called Waldenses Leonistae pauperes de Lugduno c. many in number and largely diffused through diuers Countries who denied the foresaid Popish Articles and whose Doctrine in the most points was consonant to that which reformed Churches doe now professe Reinerius an Inquisitour of the Church of Rome liuing about the yeere one thousand two hundred fiftie foure in a Booke Printed at Ingolstade writeth in this manner of the Waldenses which hee calleth Leonists Among all Sects which are or haue formerly beene none is more pernicious to the Church than that of the Leonists First because it continued longer than any other for some say it hath lasted euer since Pope Siluester others say euer since the Apostles Secondly because no Sect is more generall than this for there is scarce any countrey in which it is not found Thirdly whereas other Sects deterre men with their horrible blasphemies this Sect of the Leonists maketh a great shew of godlinesse because they liue righteously before men and beleeue all things rightly touching God and concerning all other Articles of the Ceed onely they blaspheme the Romane Church and Clergie in which thing the Laitie is forward to giue credit vnto them IESVIT Secondly That Protestants cannot tell the time when the Church of Rome began to change and deuiate from the Apostolicall Doctrine deliuered by succession Ergo the Roman Church neuer changed her Faith ANSWER If the Antecedent were true yet it followeth not Ergo the same Roman Church neuer changed her Faith For although we cannot tell the time when the progenitors of Abraham first began to change and deuiate from the Doctrine of Noah and Sem yet it is certaine that they had changed their Religion Iosh. 24. 2. And were not the Sodomites transgressors of the Law of Nature because the first beginning of their transgression cannot be knowne How many wicked Customes haue beene common in the World whose authors and first beginners were vnknowne to Posteritie The time is not knowne when the late Iewish Church did first change and corrupt the sense of the Morall Law and brought in the Traditions condemned by our Sauiour and yet they had corrupted and changed the same Matth. 5. 6. 7. 15. 19. 23. If a Tenant haue by himselfe and his predecessors long held an House which is now in decay and readie to drop downe the Landlord by this Law of the Iesuits Ergo shall neuer compell the Tenant to make reparation vnlesse he be able to demonstrate to the Tenant in what yeere and moneth euerie Wall and Rafter began to decay A Physician shall not purge a malignant humor out of a diseased bodie vnlesse hee or his Patient be able to name the time and manner of that misdiet which bred the first seed of this distemper IESVIT So that her Doctrines are to be receiued as Apostolicall supposing the Maior of this Argument be true That Doctrines vniuersally receiued whose beginning is not knowne are to be beleeued as Apostolicall which is a Principle set downe by Saint Augustine allowed by Doctor Whitgift late Archbishop of Canturburie who in his Bookes written by publike authoritie against Puritans citing diuerse Protestants as concurring in opinion with him saith Whatsoeuer Opinions are not knowne to haue begun since the Apostles times the same are not new or secundarie but receiued their originall from the Apostles But because this Principle of Christian Diuinitie brings in as M. Cartwright speaketh all Poperie in the iudgement of all men I will further demonstrate the same though of it selfe cleare enough ANSWER If the Maior of this Argument were graunted to wit Doctrines vniuersally receiued whose beginning is not knowne are to be 〈◊〉 as Apostolicall yet the inference is false because the Romane Doctrines opposed by vs were neuer vniuersally receiued but by many eyther not heard of or reiected and contradicted Neyther is the former Principle sufficiently prooued out of S. Augustine First because hee speaketh in all the places obiected of Customes and matters of Fact and Practise the right and Doctrine whereof is found in holy Scripture Secondly the Iesuit conueyeth into his Proposition certaine words to wit Doctrines vniuersally receiued c. which are not found in S. Augustine And this Father did neuer allow that the vniuersall Church should beleeue any thing as Doctrine of Faith which was not contained expressely or deriuatiuely in holy Scripture And in the same bookes out of which these Obiections are collected he confuteth rebaptising by Scripture and confirmeth the lawfulnesse of Infants Baptisme by Scripture So that his meaning is when matters being in common vse and practise are questioned the right and lawfulnesse hath warrant from the Scripture although no especiall example be found in the written Bookes of the Apostles of such practise yet the generall custome and vse of the vniuersall Church in all Ages argueth that such practise receiued it beginning from the Apostles For example That the Apostles baptised Infants is not particularly reported in their Writings but sufficient grounds are found in them to prooue the necessitie and to warrant the practise thereof In this and in all other the like cases Quod vniuersa tenet Ecclesia nec
though he lead vs to hell bring something euident and manifest out of the holy Scripture Si diuinarum Scripturarum earum scilicet quae canonicae in Ecclesia nominantur perspicua firmatur Authoritate sine vlla dubitatione credendum est 〈◊〉 vero testibus vel testimonijs quibus aliquid credendum esse suadetur tibi credere vel non credere liceat c. If saith S. Augustine it be confirmed by the perspicuous authoritie of those diuine Scriptures which are Canonicall it must without all question be beleeued but as for other witnesses and testimonies by which any thing is persuaded to be beleeued it is lawfull for thee to beleeue or not beleeue them as thou shalt perceiue them to deserue credit IESVIT Fundamentall errours of the first kinde Protestants haue 〈◊〉 particularly these Nine ANSWER Malice alwayes fighteth against Vertue and laboureth to impose and rub off her owne faults vpon it and all they whose brests and minds are inhabited by Satan testifie their venemous rage with furious words If this Traducer be able to conuince the Protestants of Nine or of any one fundamentall errour wee must acknowledge that we are in a perillous state but if hee onely depraue and falsifie our doctrine or affirme that to be fundamentall errour which is diuine veritie then he prooueth himselfe to be one of his Ministers of whom S. Gregory speaketh Perfidious dealing is in the Tabernacle of Antichrist whereby he gainesayeth the faith of the Redeemer IESVIT First their Doctrine against Traditions vnwritten whereby the foundation is ouerthrowne on which wee beleeue all other substantiall and fundamentall points as hath beene shewed ANSVVER Either you wilfully falsifie or ignorantly mistake the Protestants Doctrine concerning vnwrttten Tradition First we admit in generall all vnwritten Traditions agreeing with the holy Scripture which are deriued from the Apostles and deliuered vnto vs by the manifest and perpetuall testimonie of the Primitiue Church and by the vniforme consent of succeeding Churches in all ages Secondly we beleeue in particular the historicall Traditions of the Primatiue and succeeding Churches concerning the dignitie authoritie perfection authors number and integritie of the bookes of Canonicall Scripture and also the Historicall Tradition of the said Church concerning the perpetuall virginitie of the blessed Virgin Marie and concerning the baptisme of infants and all other genuine Traditions which maintaine the Faith and Doctrine contained expressely or by consequent in the Scripture Thirdly we embrace such exposition of holy Scripture as being consonant to the rule of Faith and to the text of Scripture is affirmed by antient Tradition to haue descended from the holy Apostles Fourthly we beleeue the rule of Faith contained in the Apostles Creed both vpon the authoritie of Christs written word and also vpon the voice and testimonie of vnwritten Tradition If it shall then be demanded Wherefore do the Romists and you so eagrely contend about the question of Traditions and wherein lies your difference we answer as followeth First we yeeld the highest and most soueraigne authoritie to the sacred Scripture and make the voice and sentence thereof a supreame rule and iudge of supernaturall Veritie and we make Tradition vnwritten subordinate and ministeriall to holy Scripture admitting the same so farre forth only as it is conformable to the Scripture and reiecting the contrarie Secondly we affirme that the Canonicall Scriprure containeth all supernaturall Veritie necessarie to saluation and being receiued and vnderstood is a sufficient and perfect rule of Faith and the sole doctrine thereof is sufficient to instruct the whole Church and euery member thereof to saluation And that Tradition vnwritten maketh no addition or increase of new Articles of Faith but is only an helpe and instrument to deliuer applie and interpret the doctrine expresly deliuered or intended by the holy Ghost in the Scripture Thirdly we receiue no Tradition as diuine or apostolicall but such as hath the plaine manifest and vniforme testimonie and approbation of the Primatiue Church But our Aduersaries either equall or preferre vnwritten Tradition before the Scripture and they make Tradition a diuers and larger part of the rule of Faith containing many Articles which are neither expressely nor inuoluedly reuealed in the Scripture and they make the present Roman Church an infallible witnesse of such Tradition affirming that we are bound to beleeue euerie Article which the said Church deliuereth as a Tradition with the same assurance of Faith wherewith we beleeue any written testimonie of S. Paul or the holy Euangelists And many of them teach That it is not necessarie to deriue Tradition by a perpetuall descent and current through all ages but the voice of the present Church is sufficient to make any Article ctedible and authenticall to vs Lastly many particularopinions of antient Fathers which they deliuered coniecturally or probably onely and concerning which they haue not affirmed that they were diuine or apostolicall Traditions are ranked by latter Pontificians in the number of diuine 〈◊〉 and made parts of the vndoubted word of God And thus the present Roman doctrine concerning Traditions vnwritten is a Seminarie of Errour and by pretext hereof Pontificians obtrude vpon the Church many prophane fabulous and superstitious 〈◊〉 fansies and nouelties repugnant to holy Scripture and the antient Catholicke Faith Let therefore impartiall Readers consider whether this Romish doctrine debasing the sacred Scripture and aduancing humane Traditions tendeth not to the corrupting of Christian Faith and consequently whether the same be not rather a fundamentall Errour than an Orthodoxall Veritie And on the contrarie whether the doctrine of the Protestants maintaining the supreame authoritie of the sacred Scripture which is Gods vndoubted word and withall yeelding to genuine Tradition the credit and honour which the antient Church gaue thereunto is not fundamentall Veritie and a soueraigne meanes to preserue right Faith IESVIT Secondly their questioning the infallibe authoritie of lawfull generall Councels thereby casting downe the foundation of Vnitie in Gods Church ANSWER They which will not permit generall Councels to assemble or to proceed lawfully and which oppose the decrees of antient Councels are the Romists and not the Protestants First The moderne Popes vsurpe the whole right and authoritieof calling and conuocating Councells contrarie to the antient custome and practise of the Church Secondly They receiue and admit no Assessors and Iudges in Councels but onely their fast friends to wit men aforehand oblieged by solemne oath to proceed according to the will and purpose of the Pope Thirdly The Pope alone is appointed the authenticall Iudge of all causes and matters which are concluded in Councels he approoueth or refuseth whatsoeuer himselfe pleaseth and all other Iudges and Assessors are onely his shadowes and creatures Fourthly Whereas in words and tearmes they seeme to aduance
with himselfe in adoration IESVIT Secondly whereas he saith that the Councell of Nice brought in the worship of Jmages yet forbad that any Image should be adored with diuine honor he both contradicts himselfe and vttereth another manifest falshood He contradicts himselfe in saying that the Nicene Councell forbad diuine worship of any Images Seeing in another place he thus writeth Both the Councell of Nice and the Diuines of the Church of Rome hold the Jmages of God and our Sauiour and the Crosse must be adored with diuine adoration It is apparantly false that the said Nicene Councell brought in the worship of Jmages which might be prooued by many testimonies but this only may suffice that Leo Isauricus before the Councell of Nice opposed Image worship not as then beginning but for many yeares before established in the Church boasting that he was the first Christian Emperor the rest hauing beene Idolaters because they worshipped Images so manifestly did he oppose Antiquitie and so little truth there is in M. Whites Assertion ANSWER The second Nicene Synod brought in the worship of Images not simply but by defining the same to be necessarie and by appointing the practise thereof to be receiued vniuersally otherwise M. Iohn White was not ignorant that the Israelites worshipped molten Images in Dan and Bethell and the Simonians worshipped Images Eusebius Eccles. Hist. lib. 2. ca. 13. and the Gnostickes worshipped Christ his Image Iren. lib. 2. cap. 24. And Marcellina worshipped the Images of Iefu and Paul c. Aug. d. Haer. 7. Haeres The Marsilians also or people thereabout worshipped Images in the daies of Serenus Greg. li. 7. Epist. 109. lib. 9. Epist. 9. But all these were condemned of superstition by the Catholicke Church and the second Nicene Synod was censured and the definition thereof resisted by many as I haue formerly prooued pag. 210. And because the Iesuit rehearseth a storie out of Zonaras an Author which themselues regard not I will requite him with a more certaine Historie out of Roger Houeden a natiue Historian of the affaires of Britaine his words are these Charles the French king sent a Synodal into Britaine directed vnto him from Constantinople in the which booke many things out alas inconuenient and repugnant to right Faith were found especially it was confirmed almost by the vnanimous consent of all the Easterne Doctours no lesse than three hundred or more That Images ought to be worshipped which thing the Church of God doth altogether detest Against which Synodal Booke Albinus wrote an Epistle marueilously confirmed by authoritie of diuine Scripture and carried the same to the French king together with the foresaid Booke in the name of our Bishops and Princes IESVIT Thirdly to passe yet vp higher That Images began in Gregorie the Great his time and that he forbad the worship of them containes other three falshoods First Gregorie is abused who onely commanded that none should worship Images as Gods 〈◊〉 as Gentiles did that some Godhead was affixed vnto them as he elsewhere declareth himselfe And so manifestly did he teach Image worship establishing Pilgrimages vnto them by Indulgences as Frier Bale accuseth him thereof Yea M. Symonds and M. Bale write that Leo an hundred and fortie yeares before Gregorie decreed the worship of Images ANSWER Gregories words are Imagines adorare omnibus modis deuita By all meanes shunne the worshipping of Images Aliud est Picturam adorare aliud per Picturae historiam quid sit adorandum addiscere It is one thing to worship a Picture another by the storie of the Picture to learne what is to be worshipped Non ad adorandum in Ecclesijs sed ad instruendas solummodo mentes fuit nescientium collocatum It was placed in the Church only to instruct the minds of the ignorant and not to be worshipped And in another Epistle Quatenus literarum nescij haberent vndè scientiae historiam colligerent First in these passages of S. Gregorie we find no vse of Images allowed but onely historicall Secondly he saith positiuely They are not set vp to be worship ped but onely to instruct the ignorant And although in the place obiected he saith Non vt quasi Deum colas Not that thou shouldest worship them as God yet he doth not approoue the worshipping of them any other way but addeth We do not bow downe before them as before the Dietie he saith not quasi ad Dietatem as to the Dietie sed quasi ante as before the Dietie Thirdly Cassander a learned Papist confesseth ingenuously That Gregorie the Great forbad all worship of Images But our latter Idolists vse no measure or modestie in eluding and peruerting the euident sentences of the Fathers IESVIT Secondly Polydore in this point is egregiously falsified for he saieth not as the Minister makes him speake All Fathers condemned the worship of Jmages for feare of idolatry but his words are cultum Imaginum teste Hieronimo omnes veteres Patres damnabant metu Idololatriae All the old Fathers as Hierom witnesseth did condemne worship of Images for feare of idolatrie by the old Fathers meaning the Fathers of the Old Testament not of the New which appeares because in proofe of his saying he brings not the testimonie of any Father of the New Testament but onely of the Old as of Moses Dauid Ieremie and other Prophets and the scope of the whole Chapter is to declare that the reason why in the Old Testament the Fathers misliked the worship of the Images of God was because they could not paint him aright Cum Deum nemo vidisset vnquam because then no man had seene God Afterwards God saith Polidore hauing taken flesh and being become visible to mortall eyes men flocked vnto him and did without doubt behold and reuerence his face shining with the brightnesse of diuine light and euen then they began to paint or carue his Image alreadie imprinted in their minds and those Images saith he they receiued with great worship and veneration as was reason the honour of the Image redounding to the originall as Basill writes Which custome of adoring Images the Fathers were so farre from reproouing as they did not only admit therof but also decreed and commanded the same by generall Councels in the time of Iustinian the second and Constantine his sonne What man then is there so dissolute and audatious as can dreame of the contrarie and doubt of the lawfulnesse of this worship established so long agoe by the decree of most holy Fathers Thus writeth Polidore and much more to the same purpose in the verie place where the Minister citeth him to the contrarie which shewes how notoriously his credulous Readers are abused in matters of most moment whence appeareth the third falshood that in Gregories daies Images began to be set vp in Churches which to haue beene in Churches long before the testimonies of S. Basil Paulinus Lactantius and Tertullian doe
Luc. 22.18.1 Cor. 10.16 11.26.27.28 Secondly the same affirmeth not that the substance of Bread and Wine is abolished Thirdly naturall reason sheweth that accidents must haue a subiect of inhaerencie and that bare formes and shadowes of things cannot nourish without corporall substance Fourthly the sences of Tast and Feeling discerne apparantly a corporietie in the elements receiued In this case there is no reason to imagine that our sences are deluded or that God almightie by miracle worketh in a contrarie manner to the course of nature and to that which he hath otherwise reuealed in his word It is not sufficient for Romists to affirme That God vseth a miraculous course in these things and to palliate absurdities repugnant to sence reason and scripture vnder pretext of Gods omnipotencie but they must prooue by diuine Reuelation that he will doe this for God effecteth not all things by his omnipotencie which men may imagine to be possible In the wordes of our Sauiour This is my Bodie This cuppe is the new Testament in my Bloud c. there is not a sillable concerning accidents without a subiect or concerning any miracle wrought in the Sacrament by omnipotencie neither is there any such doctrine elsewhere reuealed And if Christs words be expounded figuratiuely according to S. Augustine Tertullian Theoderit Origen Bertram c. they make nothing for corporall presence by indistance of place and if they be vnderstood literally they prooue not Transubstantiation for Bread may be called the bodie of Christ by an inusitate forme of speaking which according to the Tenet of some learned Diuines is no trope or figure And if neither of these expositions content our Aduersaries they might haue beleeued the words of the holy Text as they sound literally and a reall presence of Christs Bodie and Bloud wrought by the power of the holy Ghost without defining and determining the expresse manner how For if they beleeue that accidents subsist without a substance and nourish and are tasted and felt and passe into the stomach and yet are not able to expresse the distinct manner how and if they beleeue a substantiall presence of Christs indiuiduall humane bodie in many hosts and yet are vnable to declare the maner how Why might they not haue suspended other questions concerning the distinct manner of presence and maintained onely a true and mysticall presence the distinct manner whereof is incomprehensible in this life and not haue disturbed the peace of the Church by defining as an article of Faith such a doctrine as hath no foundation in diuine Reuelation to make it appeare certaine and infallible IESVITS 1. Consideration The first is grounded vpon the supposall of two things most certaine First that the Primitiue Church preaching vnto Pagans Iewes and other Infidels the rest of Christian mysteries as the Trinitie the Incarnation the Resurrection of the bodie did most carefully keepe as much as might be from their knowledge the mysteries of the Eucharist yea Catechumens and Nouices were not before Baptisme fully taught or instructed therein Secondly the reason moouing the Primitiue Church to be carefull in this point was least Catechumens and Infidels being fully acquainted with the whole mysterie the one should be scandalized and the other mocke thereat Hence it was accounted such a haynous offence that Christians should discouer this secret vnto Infidels or dispute about the difficulties thereof in their presence The Councell of Alexandria relating the crimes of Arians number this as one of the greatest They were not ashamed in publique and as it were vpon a scaffold to treat of the mysteries before Catechumens and which is worse before Pagans And a little after Jt is not lawfull to publish the Mysteries before them that are not initiated for feare least Pagans out of ignorance mocke and Catechumens entring into curiosities be scandalized And againe Before Catechumens and which is more before Iewes and Pagans blaspheming Christianitie they handled a question about the Bodie and Bloud of our Sauiour S. Ambrose saith To declare the mysteries vnto them that be Catechumens is not Tradition but Prodition seeing by such declarations danger is incurred least they be diuulged vnto Jnfidels that will scoffe at them This supposed I infer that the seeming absur dities of the Catholique reall presence should incourage a true Christian mind to beleeue it for a true Christian desires to beleeue and firmely cleaue vnto the reall presence that was beleeued by the Primitiue Church But this was a reall presence accompanied with many so seemingly grosse absurdities that the Church had no hope to satisfie Infidels therein or to keepe them from blaspheming but by concealing the mysterie from them and consequently they held the Catholique not the Protestant Doctrine in this point The Protestant Doctrine that makes Christs bodie present spiritually by Faith vnto the deuout Receiuer that communicating thinks sweetly of Christs passion and death containes no mysterie to be concealed in respect of the seeming absurdities ANSWER In the daies of the Fathers Heathens Iewes and Heretickes might enter into the Church and heare the publicke Sermons and preaching as appeareth by the fourth councell of Carthage and Infidels might read the bookes and tractates of the Fathers But the Fathers in their sermons to the people and also in their written bookes deliuered the Doctrine of the holy mysteries as appeareth by Ireneus Iustin Martyr S. Cyprian Gregorie Nissen Cyrill of Hierusalem S. Chrysostome S. Augustine S. Ambrose c. Neither is it apparant that the said Fathers taught any other secret Doctrine touching the holy mysteries than such as they preached in their Homilies and penned in their Bookes and therefore these Homilies and Bookes being publique it appeareth not that the Primitiue Church was more carefull to conceale the Doctrine of the Eucharist than of Baptisme or of the Trinitie The Obiections out of Athanasius and S. Ambrose shew that it was held vnlawfull in those ages to treat or dispute of the holy Eucharist intempestiuè that is before Heathens which were not at all instructed in the first Principles of Religion or to treat of this Doctrine in prophane places or auditories But what is this to Transubstantiation For it was held vnlawfull in the Primitiue Church in maner aforesaid that is in an vndue time order place to treat or dispute of the mysteries of Baptisme or of other profound mysteries belonging to Christian faith Also if it were granted that some antient Fathers beleeuing a reall Presence did therefore conceale the doctrine of the holy Eucharist Ratione scandali because of offence of Infidels arising vpon many difficulties and seeming contradictions to sence and common reason it followeth not from hence that those Fathers beleeued Popish Transubstantiation for many difficulties and repugnances to sence and common reason are found in Consubstantiation as well as in Transubstantiation and sundrie places of the Fathers may with more
enough not spared to say That what the B. would not acknowledge in this cause you would wring and extort from him then indeed you said as before that it had erred And this no man denyed But euerie Error denyes not Christ the Foundation or makes Christ denie it or thrust it from the Foundation F. The B. said That the Error was not in Point fundamentall B. The B. was not so peremptorie His speech was That diuers learned men and some of your owne were of opinion That as the Greekes expressed themselues it was a Question not simply Fundamentall The B. knowes and acknowledges that Error of denying the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Sonne to be a grieuous Error in Diuinitie And sure it would haue grated the Foundation if they had so denyed the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Sonne as that they had made an inequalitie betweene the Persons But since their forme of speech is That the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father by the Sonne and is the Spirit of the Sonne without making any difference in the consubstantialitie of the Persons the B. dares not denie them to be a true Church for this though he confesses them an erroneous Church in this particular Now that diuers learned men were of opinion That à Filio per Filium in the sense of the Greeke Church was but a Question in modo loquendi in manner of speech and therefore not fundamentall is euident The Master and his Schollers agree vpon it The Greekes saith hee confesse the holy Ghost to be the Spirit of the Sonne with the Apostle Galat. 4. and the Spirit of Truth S. Ioh. 16. And since Non est aliud It is not another thing to say The Holy Ghost is the Spirit of the Father and the Sonne then that he is or proceeds from the Father and the Sonne in this they seeme to agree with vs in eandem Fidei Sententiam vpon the same Sentence of Faith though they differ in words Now in this cause where the words differ but the sentence of Faith is the same 〈◊〉 eadem euen altogether the same Can the Point be fundamentall You may make them no Church as Bellarmine doth and so denie them saluation which cannot be had out of the true Church but the B. dares not It ought to be no easie thing to condemne a man of Heresie in foundation of Faith much lesse a Church least of all so ample and large a Church as the Greeke especially so as to make them no Church Heauen Gates were not so easily shut against multitudes when S. Peter wore the Keyes at his owne Girdle And it is good counsaile which Alphonsus à Castro one of your owne giues Let them consider that pronounce easily of Heresie how easie it is for themselues to erre Or if you will pronounce consider what it is that seperates from the Church simply and not in part onely I must needs professe that I wish heartily as well as others that those distressed men whose Crosse is heauie alreadie had beene more plainely and moderately dealt withall though they thinke a diuerse thing from vs than they haue beene by the Church of Rome But hereupon you say you were forced F. Whereupon I was forced to repeat what I had formerly brought against Dr. White concerning Points Fundamentall B. Hereupon it is true that you read a large discourse out of a Booke printed which you said was yours The particulars all of them at the least the B. tells me he doth not now remember and is sure he did not then approoue But if they be such as were formerly brought against 〈◊〉 White they are by him formerly answered The first thing you did was the righting of S. Augustine Which Sentence the B. doth not at all remember was so much as named in the third Conference much lesse was it stood vpon and then righted by you Another place of S. Augustine indeed was which you omit but the place of it comes after about Tradition to which I remit it But you tell vs of a great proofe made out of this place These words containe two Propositions One That all Points defined by the Church are Fundamentall The other That this is prooued out of this place of S. Augustine 1. For the first That all Points defined by the Church are Fundamentall It was not the least meanes by which Rome grew to her Greatnesse to blast euerie Opposer shee had with the name of Heretike or Schismatike for this serued to shriuell the credit of the persons and the persons once brought into contempt and ignominie all the good they desired in the Church fell to dust for want of creditable persons to backe and support it To make this proceeding good in these later yeeres this course it seemes was taken The Schoole that must maintaine and so they doe That all Points defined by the Church are thereby Fundamentall necessarie to be beleeued of the substance of the Faith and that though it be determined quite Extra Scripturam And then leaue the wise and actiue heads to take order that there be strength enough readie to determine what is fittest for them But since these men distinguish not nor you betweene the Church in generall and a Generall Councell which is but her Representation for determinations of the Faith the B. though he be very slow in sifting or opposing what is concluded by lawfull generall and consenting Authoritie though hee giue as much as can be giuen to the definitions of Councels truly generall nay suppose hee should graunt which hee doth not That Generall Councels cannot erre yet this cannot downe with him That all Points euen so defined are Fundamentall For Deductions are not prime and Natiue Principles nor are Superstructures Foundations That which is a Foundation for all cannot be one and another in different Christians for then it could be no constant Rule for any nor could the soules of men rest vpon a shaking Foundation No If it be a true Foundation it must be common to all and firme vnder all in which sense the Articles of Christian Faith are Fundamentall And Irenaeus layes this for a ground That the whole Church howsoeuer dispersed in place speakes this with one mouth Hee which among the Guides of the Church is best able to speake vtters no more than this and lesse than this the most simple doth not vtter Therefore the Creed of which hee speakes is a common is a constant Foundation and an Explicite Faith must be of this in them which haue the vse of Reason for both Guides and simple people all the Church vtter this Now many things are defined by the Church which are but Deductions out of this which suppose them deduced right mooue farre from the Foundation without which Deductions explicitely beleeued many millions of Christians goe to Heauen and cannot therefore be Fundamentall in the Faith True
rewarder of them that seeke him F. I asked How then it happened as Mr Rogers saith that the English Church is not yet resolued what is the right sense of the Article of Christ's descending into Hell B. The English Church neuer made doubt that I know what was the sense of that Article The words are so plaine they beare their meaning before them Shee was content to put that Article among those to which she requires subscription not as doubting of the sense but to preuent the Cauills of some who had beene too busie in crucifying that Article and in making it all one with the Article of the Crosse or but an Exposition of it And sure the B. thinkes and so doe I That the Church of England is better resolued of the right sense of this Article than the Church of Rome especially if she must be tryed by her Writers as you trie the Church of England by Mr Rogers For you cannot agree whether this Article be a meere Tradition or whether it hath any place of Scripture to warrant it Scotus and Stapleton allow it no footing in Scripture but Bellarmine is resolute that this Article is euerie where in Scripture and Thomas grants as much for the whole Creed The Church of England neuer doubted it and S. Augustine prooues it And yet againe you are different for the sense For you agree not whether the Soule of Christ in triduo mortis in the time of his death did goe downe into Hell really and was present there or virtually and by effects onely For Thomas holds the first and Durand holds the latter Then you agree not whether the Soule of Christ did descend really and in essence into the lowest Pit of Hell and place of the Damned as Bellarmine once held probable and prooued it or really only into that place or Region of Hell which you call Limbum Patrum and then but virtually from thence into the Lower Hell to which Bellarmine reduces himselfe and giues his reason because it is the common opinion of the Schoole Now the Church of England takes the words as they are in the Creed and beleeues them without further dispute and in that sense which the antient Primitiue Fathers of the Church agreed in And yet if any in the Church of England should not be throughly resolued in the sense of this Article Is it not as lawfull for them to say I conceiue thus or thus of it yet if any other way of his Descent be found truer than this I denie it not but as yet I know no other as it was for Durand to say it and yet not impeach the Foundation of the Faith F. The B. said That Mr Rogers was but a priuate man But said I if Mr Rogers writing as he did by publike Authoritie be accounted onely a priuate man c. B. The B. said truth when he said Mr Rogers was a priuate man And I take it you will not allow euerie speech of euerie man though allowed by Authoritie to be printed to be the Doctrine of the Church of Rome This hath beene oft complained of on both sides The imposing particular mens Assertions vpon the Church yet I see you meane not to leaue it And surely as Controuersies are now handled by some of your partie at this day I may not say it is the sense of the Article in hand but I haue long thought it a kind of descent into Hell to be conuersant in them I would the Authors would take heed in time and not seeke to blind the people or cast a mist before euident Truth least it cause a finall descent to that place of Torment But since you hold this course Stapleton was of greater note with you than Rogers is with vs and as he so his Relection And is it the Doctrine of the Church of Rome which he affirmes The Scripture is silent that Christ descended into Hell and that there is a Catholike and an Apostolike Church If it be then what will become of the Pope's Supremacie ouer the whole Church Shall hee haue his power ouer the Catholike Church giuen him expressely in Scripture in the Keyes to enter and in Pasce to feed when he is in and when he hath fed to confirme and in all these not to erre and faile in his ministration And is the Catholike Church in and ouer which he is to doe all these great things quite left out Belike the Holy Ghost was carefull to giue him his power Yes in any case but left the assigning of his great Cure the Catholike Church to Tradition And it were well for him if hee could so prescribe for what he now claymes But what if after all this Mr Rogers there sayes no such thing as in truth he doth not His words are All Christians acknowledge he descended but in the interpretation of the Article there is not that consent that were to be wished What is this to the Church of England more than others And againe Till wee know the natiue and vndoubted sense of this Article is Mr Rogers Wee the Church of England or rather his and some others Iudgement of the Church of England F. But if Mr Rogers be onely a priuate man In what Booke may wee find the Protestants publike Doctrine The B. answered That to the Booke of Articles they were all sworne B. What was the B. so ignorant to say The Articles of the Church of England were the publike Doctrine of all the Protestants or That all Protestants were sworne to the Articles of England as this speech seemes to implie Sure he was not Was not the immediate speech before of the Church of England And how comes the subiect of the speech to be varyed in the next Lines Nor yet speake I this as if other Protestants did not agree with the Church of England in the chiefest Doctrines against which they ioyntly take exceptions against the Romane Church as appeares by their seuerall Confessions Nor did the B. say That the Booke of Articles onely was the Continent of the Church of Englands publike Doctrine Shee is not so narrow nor hath shee purpose to exclude any thing which shee acknowledges hers nor doth shee wittingly permit any crossing of her publike declarations Yet shee is not such a Shrew to her Children as to denie her Blessing or denounce an Anathema against them if some peaceably dissent in some particulars remoter from the Foundation as your owne Schoolemen differ And if the Church of Rome since shee grew to her greatnesse had not beene so fierce in this course Christendome I persuade my selfe had beene in happier peace at this day F. And that the Scriptures onely not any vnwritten Tradition was the Foundation of their Faith B. The Church of England grounded her Positiue Articles vpon Scripture and her Negatiue Refute where the thing affirmed by you is not affirmed in Scripture nor directly
to be concluded out of it And since you are pleased before to passe from the Church of England to all Protestants you may know for your comfort that all Protestants agree most strongly in this That the Scripture is sufficient to saluation and containes in it all things necessarie to it The Fathers are plaine the Schoolemen not strangers in it And haue not wee reason then to account it as it is The Foundation of our Faith And Stapleton himselfe though an angrie Opposite confesses That the Scripture is in some sort the Foundation of Faith that is in the nature of Testimonie and in the matter or thing to be beleeued And if the Scripture be the Foundation to which wee are to goe for Witnesse if there be doubt about the Faith and in which we are to find the thing that is to be beleeued as necessarie in the Faith we neuer did nor neuer will refute any Tradition that is Vniuersall and Apostolike for the better exposition of the Scripture nor any definition of the Church in which she goes to the Scripture for what shee teaches and thrusts nothing as fundamentall in the Faith vpon the world but in what the Scripture is Materia Credendorum the substance of that which is to be beleeued whether immediately and expressely in words or more remotely till a cleare and full deduction draw it out F. I asked How he knew Scripture to be Scripture and in particular Genesis Exodus c. These are beleeued to be Scripture yet not prooued out of any place of Scripture The B. said That the Bookes of Scripture are Principles to be supposed and needed not to be prooued B. I did neuer loue too curious a search into that which might put a man into a Wheele and circle him so long betweene proouing Scripture by Tradition and Tradition by Scripture till the Deuill find a meanes to dispute him into Infidelitie and make him beleeue neither I hope this is no part of your meaning yet I doubt this Question How doe you know Scripture to be Scripture hath done more harme than you will be euer able to helpe by Tradition But I must follow that way which you draw me And because it is so much insisted vpon by you and is it selfe a matter of such consequence I will sift it a little further Many men labouring to settle this great Principle in Diuinitie haue vsed diuers meanes to prooue it All haue not gone the same way nor all the right way You cannot be right that resolue Faith of the Scriptures being the Word of God into onely Tradition for onely and no other proofe are equall To prooue the Scripture therefore so called by way of Excellence to be the Word of God first some flye to the Testimonie and Witnesse of the Church and her Tradition which constantly beleeues and vnanimously deliuers it secondly some to the Light and the Testimonie which the Scripture giues to it selfe with other internall proofes which are obserued in it and to be found in no other Writing whatsoeuer thirdly some to the Testimonie of the Holy Ghost which cleares vp the Light that is in Scripture and seales this Faith to the soules of men that it is Gods Word fourthly All that haue not imbrutished themselues and sunke below their Species and order of Nature giue euen Naturall Reason leaue to come in and make some proofe and giue some approbation vpon the weighing and the consideration of other Arguments 1. For the first The Tradition of the Church taken and considered alone it is so farre from being the onely that it cannot be a sufficient proofe to beleeue by Diuine Faith That Scripture is the Word of God for that which is a full and sufficient proofe is able of it selfe to settle the soule of man concerning it Now the Tradition of the Church is not able to doe this for it may be further asked Why he should beleeue the Churches Tradition And if it be answered Because the Church is infallibly gouerned by the Holy Ghost it may yet be demanded How that may appeare And if this be demanded either you must say you haue it by speciall Reuelation which is the priuate Spirit you obiect to other men or else you must attempt to prooue it by Scripture as all of you doe And that very offer is sufficient acknowledgement that the Scripture is a higher proofe than the Churches Tradition which in your owne grounds is or may be questionable till you come thither Againe if the Voice of the Church saying The Bookes of Scripture commonly receiued are the Word of God be the formall Obiect of Faith vpon which alone and absolutely and lastly I may resolue my selfe then euerie man not onely may but ought to resolue his Faith into the Voice or Tradition of the Church for euerie man is bound to rest vpon the proper and formall Obiect of the Faith But nothing can be more euident than this That a man ought not to resolue his Faith of this Principle into the Testimonie of the Church therefore neither is that Testimonie or Tradition the formall Obiect of Faith The Learned of your owne part grant this Although in the Article of the Creed I beleeue the Catholike Church peraduenture all this be contained I beleeue those things which the Church teacheth yet this is not necessarily vnderstood That I beleeue the Church teaching as an infallible Witnesse And if they did not confesse this it were no hard thing to prooue It seemes to me verie necessarie that we be able to prooue the Bookes of Scripture to be the Word of God by some Authoritie that is absolutely Diuine for if they be warranted vnto vs by any Authoritie lesse than Diuine then all things contayned in them which haue no greater assurance than the Scripture in which they are read are not Obiects of Diuine Beleefe And that once granted will enforce vs to yeeld That all the Articles of Christian Beleefe haue no greater assurance than Humane or Morall Faith or Credulitie can affoord An Authoritie then simply Diuine must make good Scripture's Infallibilitie This Authoritie cannot be any Testimonie orVoice of the present Church for our Worthies prooue That all the Churches Constitutions are of the nature of humane Law And some among you not vnworthie for their Learning prooue it at large That all the Churches Testimonie or Voice or Sentence call it what you will is but suo modo or aliquo modo not simply but in a manner Diuine Now that which is Diuine but in a manner be it the Churches manner is suo modo non Diuina in a sort not Diuine But this great Principle of Faith the ground and proofe of whatsoeuer else is of Faith cannot stand firme vpon a proofe that is and is not in a manner and not in a manner Diuine as it must if wee haue no other Anchor than the externall Tradition of the Church 2. For the second That Scripture
which it can comprehend Now the vse of Reason is verie generall and man doe what he can is still apt to search and seeke for a Reason why he will beleeue though after he once beleeues his Faith growes stronger than either his Reason or his Knowledge and great reason for this because it goes higher than eyther of the other can in this life In this particular the Bookes called the Scripture are commonly and constantly reputed to be the Word of God and so infallible Veritie to the least Point of them Doth any man doubt this The World cannot keepe him from going to weigh it at the Ballance of Reason whether it be the Word of God or not To the same Weights he brings the Tradition of the Church the inward motiues in Scripture it selfe all Testimonies within which seeme to beare witnesse to it and in all this there 's no harme the danger is when a man will vse no other Scale but Reason for the Word of God and the Booke containing it refuse not to be weighed by Reason But the Scale is not large enough to containe nor the Weights to measure out the true vertue and 〈◊〉 force of either Reason then can giue no supernaturall ground into which a man may resolue his Faith That Scripture is the Word of God infallibly yet Reason can goe so high as it can prooue that Christian Religion which rests vpon the Authoritie of this Booke stands vpon surer grounds of Nature Reason common Equitie and Iustice than any thing in the World which any Infidell or meere Naturallist hath done doth or can adhere vnto against it in that which he makes accounts or assumes as Religion to himselfe The antient Fathers relyed vpon the Scriptures no Christians more and hauing to doe with Philosophers men verie well seene in all the subtleties which naturall Reason could teach or learne they were often put to it and did as often make it good That they had sufficient warrant to relye as much as they did vpon Scripture In all which Disputes because they were to deale with Infidels they did labour to make good the Authoritie of the Booke of God by such arguments as vnbeleeuers themselues could not but thinke reasonable if they 〈◊〉 them with indifferencie And it is not altogether impossible to prooue it euen by Reason a Truth infallible or else to make them denie some apparant Principle of their owne For example It is an apparant Principle and with them That God or the absolute prime Agent cannot be forced out of any possession for if hee could be forced by another greater he were neither Prince nor Absolute nor God in their owne Theologie Now they must graunt That that God and Christ which the Scripture teaches and wee beleeue is the onely true God and no other with him and so denie the Deitie which they worshipped or else denie their owne Principle about the Deitie That God cannot be commanded and forced out of possession For their Gods Saturne and Serapis and Iupiter himselfe haue beene adiured by the name of the true and onely God and haue beene forced out of the bodies they possessed and confessed themselues to be foule and seducing Deuils And their confession was to be supposed true in point of Reason for they that were adored as Gods would neuer belie themselues into Deuils to their owne reproach especially in the presence of them that worshipped them were they not forced This many of the vnbeleeuers saw therefore they could not in verie force of Reason but they must either denie their God or denie their Principle in Nature Their long Custome would not forsake their God and their Reason could not forget their Principle If Reason therefore might iudge among them they could not worship any thing that was vnder command And if it be reasonable to doe and beleeue this then why not reasonable also to beleeue that the Scripture is his Word giuen to teach himselfe and Christ since there they find Christ doing that and giuing power to doe it after which themselues saw executed vpon their Deuill_Gods Besides whereas all other written Lawes haue scarce had the honour to be duly obserued or constantly allowed worthie approbation in the particular places where they haue beene established for Lawes this Law of Christ and this Canon of Scripture the container of it is or hath beene receiued in almost all Nations vnder Heauen And wheresoeuer it hath beene receiued it hath beene both approoued for vnchangeable Good and beleeued for infallible Veritie This persuasion could not haue beene wrought in men of all sorts but by working vpon their Reason vnlesse wee shall thinke all the World vnreasonable that receiued it And certainely God did not giue this admirable facultie of Reasoning to the Soule of man for any cause more prime than this to discouer or at least to iudge and allow of the way to himselfe when and howsoeuer it should be discouered One great thing that troubled Rationall men was that which stumbled the Manichee an Heresie it was but more than halfe Pagan namely That somewhat must be beleeued before much could be knowne Wise men vse not to beleeue but what they know And the Manichee scorned the Orthodox Christian as light of beleefe promising to lead no Disciple after him but vpon euident knowledge This stumbles many but yet the Principle That somewhat must be beleeued before much can be knowne stands firme in Reason still For if in all Sciences there be some Principles which cannot be prooued if Reason be able to see this and confesse it if almost all Artists haue granted it Who can iustly denie that to Diuinitie A Science of the highest Obiect God himselfe which he easily and reasonably grants to inferior Sciences which are more within his 〈◊〉 And as all Sciences suppose some Principles without proouing so haue they almost all some Text some Authoritie vpon which they relye in some measure and it is Reason they should For though these make not their Texts infallible as Diuinitie doth yet full consent and prudent examination and long continuance haue woon reputation to them and settled reputation vpon them verie deseruedly For were these Texts more void of Truth than they are yet it were fit to vphold their credit that Nouices and young beginners in a Science which are not yet able to worke strongly vpon Reason nor Reason vpon them may haue Authoritie to beleeue till they can learne to conclude from Principles and so to know Is this also reasonable in other Sciences and shall it not be so in Theologie to haue a Text a Scripture a Rule which Nouices may be taught first to beleeue that so they may after come to the knowledge of those things which out of this rich Principle and Treasure are deduceable I yet see not how right Reason can denie these grounds and if it cannot then a meere naturall man may be thus farre conuinced That the
Text of God is a verie credible Text. Well these are the foure by most of which men offer to prooue the Scripture to be the Word of God as by a Diuine and infallible warrant and it seemes no one of these doth it The Tradition of the present Church is too weake because that is not absolutely Diuine The Light which is in Scripture it selfe is not bright enough it cannot beare sufficient witnesse to it selfe The Testimonie of the Holy Ghost that is most infallible but ordinarily it is not so much as considerable in this Question which is not how or by what meanes we beleeue but how the Scripture may be proposed as a credible Obiect 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 And for Reason no man expects that that should 〈◊〉 it it doth seruice enough if it enable vs to disprooue that which misguided men conceiue against it If none of these then be an absolute and sufficient meanes to prooue it eyther wee must find out another or see what can be more wrought out of these For the Tradition of the Church then certaine it is we must distinguish the Church before wee can iudge right of the validitie of the Tradition For if the speech be of the Prime Christian Church the Apostles Disciples and such as had immediate Reuelation from Heauen no question but the Voice and Tradition of this Church is Diuine not aliquo modo in a sort but simply and the Word of God from them is of like validitie written or deliuered And against this Tradition of which kind this That the Bookes of Scripture are the Word of God is the most generall and vniforme the Church of England neuer excepted And then here 's the Voyce of God of which no Christian may doubt to confirme his Word For the Apostles had their Authoritie from Christ and they prooued that they had it by apparant Miracles which were beyond exception And when S. Augustine said I would not beleeue the Gospell vnlesse the Authoritie of the Catholike Church mooued me whichplace you vrged at the Conference though you are now content to slide by it some of your ownewill not endure should be vnderstood saue of the Church in the time of the Apostles onely and some of the Church in generall not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but sure to include Christ and his Apostles the 〈◊〉 is there But this will not serue your turne The Tradition of the present Church must be as infallible as that of the Primitiue But the contrarie to this is prooued before because this Voyce of the present Church is not simply Diuine To what end then serues any Tradition of the present Church To what Why to a very good end For 〈◊〉 it serues by a full consent to worke vpon the minds of vnbeleeuers to mooue them to reade and to confider the Scripture which they heare by so many wise learned and 〈◊〉 men as of no meaner esteeme than the 〈◊〉 of God It 〈◊〉 among Nouices Weakelings and Doubters in the Faith to instruct and confirme them till they may acquaint themselues with and vnderstand the Scripture which the Church deliuers as the Word of God And thus againe some of your owne vnderstand the fore cited place of S. Augustine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Gospell c. For he speakes it eyther of 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 in the Faith or else of such as were in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 You as the B. tells me at the Conference though you 〈◊〉 it here would needs haue it that S. Augustine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Faithfull which I cannot yet thinke For hee speakes to the 〈◊〉 and they had a great part of the 〈◊〉 in them And the words immediately before those are If thou shouldst find one Qui Euangelio nondum credit which did not yet beleeue the Gospell what wouldst thou doe to make him beleeue Ego vero non Truly I would not c. So to these two ends it serues and there need be no question betweene vs. But then euerie thing that is the first Inducer to beleeue is not by and by either the principall Motiue or the chiefe and last Obiect of Beleefe vpon which a man may rest his Faith The first knowledge that helpes to open a mans vnderstanding and prepares him to be able to demonstrate a truth and make it euident is his Grammar but when he hath made a Demonstration he resolues the knowledge of his Conclusion not into his Grammar Rules but into the immediate Principles out of which it is deduced So in this particular a man is probably led by the Authoritie of the present Church as by the first informing inducing persuading meanes to beleeue the Scripture to be the Wordof God but when hee hath studied considered and compared this Word with it selfe and with other Writings with the helpe of ordinarie Grace and a mind morally induced and reasonably persuaded by the voyce of the Church the Scripture then giues greater and higher reasons of credibilitie to it selfe than Tradition alone could giue And then he that beleeues resolues his last and full assent That Scripture is Diuine Authoritie into internall Arguments found in the Letter of it selfe though found by the helpe and direction of Tradition without and Grace within And the Resolution that is rightly grounded may not endure to pitch and rest it selfe vpon the helpes but vpon that Diuine Light which the Scripture no question hath in it selfe but is not kindled till these helpes come Thy Word is a Light so Dauid A Light therefore it is as much manifestatiuum sui as alterius a manifestation to it selfe as to other things which it shewes but still not till the Candle be lighted not till there hath beene a preparing instruction what Light it is Children call the Sunne and Moone Candles Gods Candles They see the Light as well as men but cannot distinguish betweene them till some Tradition and Education hath informed their Reason And animalis homo the naturall man sees some Light of Morall counsaile and instruction in Scripture as well as Beleeuers but he takes all that glorious Lustre for Candle-Light and cannot distinguish betweene the Suune and twelue to the pound till Tradition of the Church and Gods Grace put to it haue cleared his vnderstanding So Tradition of the present Church is the first motiue to Beleefe but the Beleefe it selfe That the Scripture is the Word of God rests vpon the Scripture when a man finds it to answere and exceed all that which the Church gaue in Testimonie And as in the voyce of the Primitiue and Apostolicall Church there was simply Diuine Authoritie deliuering the Scripture as Gods Word so after Tradition of the present Church hath taught and informed the Soule the voice of God is plainely heard in Scripture it selfe And then here 's double Authoritie and both Diuine that confirmes Scripture to be the Word of God Tradition of the Apostles deliuering it and the internall worth and argument in the Scripture obuious
to a soule prepared by the present Churches Tradition and Gods grace The Difficulties which are pretended against this are not many and they will easily vanish 1. First you pretend wee goe to priuate Reuelations for Light to know Scripture No wee doe not you see it is excluded out of the very state of the Question and wee goe to the Tradition of the present Church and by it as well as you Here wee differ wee vse this as the first Motiue not as the last Resolution of our Faith wee resolue onely into prime Tradition Apostolicall and Scripture it selfe 2. Secondly you pretend wee doe not nor cannot know the prime Apostolicall Tradition but by the Tradition of the present Church and that therefore if the Tradition of the present Church be not Gods vnwritten Word and Diuine we cannot yet know Scripture to be Scripture by a Diuine Authoritie First suppose I could not know the prime Tradition to be Diuine but by the present yet it doth not follow that then I cannot know Scripture to be Scripture by a Diuine Authoritie because Diuine Tradition is not the sole and onely meanes to prooue it For suppose I had not nor could haue full assurance of Apostolicall Tradition Diuine yet the morall persuasion reason and force of the present Church is ground enough to mooue any reasonable man that it is fit hee should reade the Scripture and esteeme very reuerently and highly of it And this once done the Scripture hath then In and Home Arguments enough to put a soule that hath but ordinarie Grace out of doubt That Scripture is the Word of God infallible and Diuine Secondly Next the present Tradition though not absolutely Diuine yet by the helpe of Diuine Arguments internall to the Scripture is able to prooue the very prime Tradition for so long as the present agrees both with the prime Tradition and with the Scripture it selfe deliuered by it as in this it is found and agreed vpon that it doth and Hell it selfe is not able to belch out a good Argument against it it is a sufficient testimonie of the Scriptures Authoritie not by or of it selfe because not simply Diuine but by the prime Tradition and Scripture vpon which it grounds while it deliuers And both these are absolutely Diuine 3. Thirdly you pretend that wee make the Scripture absolutely and fully to be knowne Lumine suo by the Light and Testimonie which it hath in and giues to it selfe Against this you giue reason and proofe from our selues Your reason is If there be sufficient Light in Scripture to shew it selfe then euerie man that can and doth but reade it may know it presently to be the Diuine Word of God which we see by dayly experience men neither doe nor can First it is not absolutely nor vniuersally true There is sufficient Light therefore euerie man may see it Blind men are men and cannot see it and sensuall men in the Apostles iudgement are such Nor may wee denie and put out this Light as insufficient because blind Eyes cannot and peruerse Eyes will not see it no more than we may denie meat to be sufficient for nourishment though men that are heart-sicke cannot eate it Next wee doe not say That there is such a full Light in Scripture as that euerie man vpon the first sight must yeeld to it such Light as is found in prime Principles Euerie whole is greater than a part of the same and this The same thing cannot be and not be at the same time and in the same respect These carrie a naturall Light with them and euident for they are no sooner vnderstood than fully knowne to the conuincing of mans vnderstanding and so they are the beginning of knowledge which where it is perfect dwells in full Light but such a full Light wee doe neyther say is nor require to be in Scripture and if any particular man doe let him answere for himselfe The Question is onely of such a Light in Scripture as is of force to breed Faith that it is the Word of God not to make a perfect Knowledge Now Faith of whatsoeuer it is this or other Principle it is an Euidence as well as a Knowledge and a firmer and surer Euidence than any Knowledge can haue because it rests vpon Diuine Authoritie which cannot deceiue whereas Knowledge or at least he that thinkes he knowes is not euer certaine in deductions from Principles I say firmer Euidence but not so cleare For it is of things not seene in regard of the Obiect and in regard of the Subiect that sees it is in aenigmate in a Glasse or darke speaking Now God doth not require a full demonstratiue Knowledge in vs that the Scripture is his Word and therefore in his prouidence kindled in it no Light for that but he requires our Faith of it and such a certaine Demonstration as may fit that And for that he hath left sufficient Light in Scripture to Reason and Grace meeting where the soule is morally prepared by the Tradition of the Church vnlesse you be of Bellarmine's opinion That to beleeue there are any Diuine Scriptures is not omninò necessarie to saluation The Authoritie which you pretend is out of Hooker Of things necessarie the verie chiefest is to know what Bookes wee are bound to esteeme holy which Point is confessed impossible for the Scripture it selfe to teach Of this Brierly the Store-house for all Priests that will be idle and yet seeme well read tells vs That Hooker giues a verie sensible Demonstration It is not the Word of God which doth or possibly can assure vs that we doe well to thinke it is his Word for if any one Booke of Scripture did giue testimonie to all yet still that Scripture which giueth credit to the rest would require another to giue credit vnto it Nor could wee euer come to any pause to rest our assurance this way so that vnlesse beside Scripture there were something that might assure c. And this he acknowledgeth saith Brierly is the Authoritie of Gods Church Certainely Hooker giues a true and a sensible Demonstration but Brierly wants fidelitie and integritie in citing him For in the first place Hookers speech is Scripture it selfe cannot teach this nor can the Truth say that Scripture it selfe can It must needs ordinarily haue Tradition to prepare the mind of a man to receiue it And in the next where hee speakes so sensibly That Scripture cannot beare witnesse to it selfe nor one part of it to another that is grounded vpon Nature which admits no created thing to be witnesse to it selfe and is acknowledged by our Sauiour If I beare witnesse to my selfe my witnesse is not true i. not of force to be reasonably accepted for Truth But then it is more than manifest that Hooker deliuers his Demonstration of Scripture alone For if Scripture hath another proofe to vsher it and lead it in then no
of your Quarter shew me any one Father of the Church Greeke or Latine that euer said Wee are to resolue our Faith that Scripture is the Word of God into the Tradition of the present Church And againe when they say wee are to relye vpon Scripture onely they are neuer to be vnderstood with exclusion of Tradition in what causes soeuer it may be had Not but that the Scripture is abundantly sufficient to it selfe for all things but because it is deepe and may be drawne into different senses I haue said thus much vpon this great occasion because this Argument is so much pressed without due respect to Scripture I will not say to the weakening our beleefe of it Now out of this I will weigh the B. his Answer and your Exception taken against it F. The B. said That the Bookes of Scripture are Principles to be supposed and needed not to be prooued B. Why but did the B. say That this Principle The Bookes of Scripture are the Word of God is to be supposed as needing no proofe at all to a naturall man or to a man newly entring vpon the Faith yea or perhaps to a doubter or weakeling in the Faith Can you thinke the B. so weake It seemes you doe But sure hee knowes that there is a great deale of difference betweene Ethnicks that denie and deride the Scripture and men that are borne in the Church The first haue a farther way about to this Principle the other in their very Christian education sucke in this Principle and are taught so soone as they are apt to learne it That the Bookes commonly called the Bible or Scripture are the Word of God The B. dealt with you as with a Christian though in Error while you call Catholike The words before spoken by the B. were That the Scripture onely not any vnwritten Tradition was the Foundation of Faith The Question betweene vs and you is Whether the Scripture doe containe all such necessarie things of Faith Now in this Question as in all Nature and Art the Subiect the Scripture is and must be supposed the Quaere betweene the Romane Catholikes and the Church of England being onely of the Predicate the thing vttered of it namely Whether it containe all Fundamentalls of Faith all necessaries for Saluation within it Now since the Question proposed in verie forme of Art prooues not but supposes the subiect I thinke the B. gaue a satisfying answere That to you and him and in this Question Scripture was a supposed Principle and needed no proofe And I must tell you that in this Question of the Scriptures perfect continent it is against all Art yea and Equitie too in reasoning to call for a proofe of that here which must goe vnauoidably supposed in this Question And if any man will 〈◊〉 familiar with Impietie to question it it must be tryed in a preceding Question and Dispute by it selfe Yet here not you onely but Bellarmine and others run quite out of the way to snatch at aduantage F. Against this I read what I had formerly written in my Replie against Mr Iohn White wherein I plainely shewed that this answere was not good and that no other answere could be made but by admitting some Word of God vnwritten to assure vs of this Point B. Indeed here you read out of a Booke which you called your owne a large discourse vpon this Argument but some bodie told me the B. vntyed the Knot of the Argument and set you to your Booke againe Besides you doe a great deale of wrong to Mr Hooker and the B. that because they call it a supposed or presumed Principle among Christians you should fall by and by into such a Metaphysicall discourse as the B. tells me you did to prooue That that which is praecognitum foreknowne in Science must be of such Light that it must be knowne of and by it selfe alone and that the Scripture cannot be so knowne to be the Word of God Well I will not now enter into that discourse more than I haue how farre the Beame which is verie glorious especially in some parts of Scripture giues Light to prooue it selfe You see neither Hooker nor the B. nor the Church of England for ought I know leaue the Scripture alone to manifest it selfe by the Light which it hath in it selfe but when the present Church hath prepared and led the way like a preparing Morning-Light to Sunne-shine and then indeed wee settle not but in that Light Nor will I make needlesse enquirie how farre or in what manner a praecognitum or supposed Principle in any Science may be prooued in a higher to which that is subordinate or accepted in a Prime nor how it may in Diuinitie where prae as well as post cognita things fore as after-knowne are matters and vnder the manner of Faith and not of Science strictly nor whether a praecognitum a presupposed Principle in Faith which rests vpon Diuine Authoritie must needs haue as much and equall Light to Naturall Reason which prime Principles haue in Nature while thy rest vpon Reason Nor whether it may iustly be denyed to haue sufficient Light be cause not equall Your owne Schoole grants That in vs which are the subiects both of Faith and Knowledge and in regard of the Euidence giuen in vnto vs there is lesse Light lesse Euidence in the Principles of Faith than in the Principles of Knowledge vpon which there can be no doubt But I thinke the Schoole will neuer grant that the Principles of Faith euen this in question haue not sufficient euidence And you ought not to doe as you did without any distinction or any limitation denie a Praecognitum or prime Principle in the Faith because it answers not in all things to the prime Principles in Science in their Light and Euidence a thing in it selfe directly against Reason Well though I doe none of this yet I must follow you a little for I would faine make it appeare as plainely as such a difficultie can what wrong you doe Truth and your selfe in this case When the Protestants therefore answere to this Argument which as I haue shewed can properly haue no place in the Question betweene vs about Tradition they which grant this as a Praecognitum and thing fore-knowne as the B. did were neither ignorant nor forgetfull That things presupposed as alreadie knowne in a Science are of two sorts Either they are plaine and fully manifest intheir owne Light or they are prooued and granted alreadie some former knowledge hauing made them euident This Principle then The Scriptures are the Oracles of God wee cannot say is cleare and fully manifest to all men simply and in selfe-Light For as is formerly said if it were so euident then all that heare it reade it and doe but vnderstand 〈◊〉 tearmes could not but presently assent vnto it as they doe to Principles euident in themselues which hourely experience tells vs is not so
present Church to be the first inducing motiue to embrace this Principle onely wee cannot goe so farre in this way as you to make the present Tradition alwayes an infallible Word of God for this is to goe so farre in till you be out of the way For Tradition is but a Lane in the Church it hath an end not onely to receiue vs in but another after to let vs out into more open and richer ground And a better way than you Because after we are mooued and prepared and induced by Tradition wee resolue our Faith into that written Word and God deliuering it in which wee find the Tradition which led vs thither And so wee are sure by Diuine Authoritie that wee are in the way because at the end wee find the way prooued And doe what can be done you can neuer settle the Faith of man about this great Principle till you rise to greater assurance than the present Church alone can giue And therefore once againe to that knowne place of S. Augustine The words of the Father are Nisi commoueret Vnlesse the Authoritie of the Church mooued me but not alone but with other motiues else it were not commouere to mooue together And the other motiues are Resoluers though this be Leader Now since wee goe the same way with you so farre as you goe right and a better way than you where you goe wrong wee need not admit any other Word of God than wee doe And this ought to remaine as a presupposed Principle among all Christians and not so much as come into this Question about the sufficiencie of Scripture betweene you and vs. F. From this the Person doubting called vs and desiring to heare Whether the B. would graunt the Romane Church to be the Right Church The B. graunted that it was B. One occasion which mooued Tertullian to write his Booke de Praescrip aduersus Haereticos was That he saw little or no profit come by Disputations Sure the ground was the same then and now It was not to denie that Disputation is an opening of the Vnderstanding a sifting out of Truth it was not to affirme that any such Disquisition is in and of it selfe vnprofitable If it had S. Stephen would not haue disputed with the Cyrenians nor S. Paul with the Grecians first and then with the Iewes and all Commers No sure it was some abuse in the Disputants that frustrated the good of the Disputation And one abuse in the Disputants is a Resolution to hold their owne though it be by vnworthie meanes and disparagement of Truth The B. finds it here For as it is true that this Question was asked so it is altogether false that it was asked in this forme or so answered There is a great deale of difference especially as Romanists handle the Question of the Church betweene The Church and A Church and there is some betweene a True Church and a Right Church which is the word you vse but no man else that I know I am sure not the B. The Church may import in our Language The onely true Church and perhaps as some of you seeme to make it the Root and the Ground of the Catholike This the B. neuer did neuer meanes to graunt A Church can imply no more than that it is a member of the whole This the B. neuer did nor euer will denie if it fall not absolutely away from Christ. That it is a True Church he graunted also but not a Right as you impose vpon him For Ens and Verum Being and True are conuertible one with another and euerie thing which hath a Being is truly that Being which it is in truth of substance But this word Right is not so vsed but is referred more properly to perfection in Conditions And in this sense euerie thing that hath a true and reall being is not by and by right in the Conditions of it A man that is most dishonest and vnworthie the name a verie Theefe if you will is a True man in the veritie of his essence as he is a Creature endued with Reason for this none can steale from him nor hee from himselfe but Death but hee is not therefore a right or an vpright man And a Church that is exceeding corrupt both in Manners and Doctrine and so a dishonour to the name is yet a True Church in the veritie of essence as a Church is a companie of men which professe the Faith of Christ and are baptised into his Name but yet it is not therefore a Right Church eyther in Doctrine or Manners It may be by this word Right you meant cunningly to slip it in that the B. should graunt it Orthodoxe This hee neuer graunted you For Orthodoxe Christians are keepers of integritie and followers of right things so Saint Augustine of which the Church of Rome is neyther In this sence then no Right that is Orthodoxe Church at Rome And yet no newes that the B. graunted the Romane Church to be a True Church For so much verie learned Protestants haue acknowledged before him and the Truth cannot denie it For that Church which receiues the Scripture as a Rule of Faith though but as a partiall and imperfect Rule and both the Sacraments as instrumentall Causes and Seales of Grace though they adde more and misuse these yet cannot but be a True Church in essence How it is in Manners and Doctrine I would you would looke to it with a single eye For if Pietie and a peaceable minde be not ioyned to a good vnderstanding nothing can be knowne in these great things F. Further he confessed That Protestants had made a Rent and Diuision from it B. The B. I know from himselfe could here be heartily angrie but that he hath resolued in handling matters of Religion to leaue all gall out of his Inke and makes me straine it out of mine There is a miserable Rent in the Church and I make no question but the best men doe most bemoane it Nor is hee a Christian that would not haue vnitie might hee haue it with Truth But the B. neuer said nor thought that the Protestants made this Rent The cause of the Schisme is yours for you thrust vs from you because wee called for Truth and redresse of Abuses For a Schisme must needs be theirs whose the cause of it is The Woe runs full out of the mouth of Christ euer against him that giues the offence not against him that takes it euer But you haue giuen the B. iust cause neuer to treat with you or your like but before a Iudge or a Iurie F. Moreouer hee said hee would ingenuously acknowledge That the Corruption of Manners in the Romish Church was not a sufficient cause to iustifie their departing from it B. I would the B. could say you did as ingenuously repeat as hee did confesse Hee neuer said That Corruption of Manners was not a sufficient cause to