therein What art what writing of any man is so bare Are the Scriptures onely that come immediatly from the author of true reason to be barred of that priuiledge which all other writings iustly challenge Is not a necessary consequence according to the rules of logicke and reason to be allowed of in Diuinitie as well as in the Mathematicks where consectaries are as certainly true as the theoremes out of which they are drawne Is it not as certaine by Scripture that there are three persons distinct each from other and all three but one God as if these verie words had bin expresly set downe But we must beare with you in this matter who learned this shift of your great Cardinal Bellarmine We say quoth Bellarmine where he deliuereth the opinion of your Church that the whole doctrine of faith and manners is not expresly contained in the Scriptures Expresly contained To be expressed and to be contained are at the least diuers if not contrary But I pray you who saith otherwise Not the Protestants doubtlesse whose opinion he propoundeth presently after this sort They preach saith Bellarmine speaking of vs that all things necessary to faith and manners are contained in the Scriptures What is become now of expresly For pure shame he was glad to leaue out that word though he had craftily stolen it in before Well this may serue to make good my deniall of your proposition A thing may be determinable by Scripture though the determination be not expresly set downe therein Take not aduantage of my words because I say determinable and you determined For the question is not what is determined that is set downe in plaine words but it is sufficient if the Scripture affoord vs the determination of matters by certain consequēce vpon truth therein deliuered Therefore whereas you adde by onely expresse Scripture onely and expresse are but meere shifts nothing at all against that we affirme who require besides onely expresse words of Scripture the ministery and industry of man to gather and conclude points of doctrine out of that which is written in the Scripture Your assumption is true that there are diuers questions not determinable by expresse Scripture and yet as I haue shewed the Scripture is sufficient for the determining of all points of faith necessary to saluation Concerning the particular question you bring for the proofe of your assumption First you seeme to grant and that grant is as much as we require that it may be gathered out of the Scripture by consequence that those books which we and you acknowledge to be the word of God are so indeed otherwise why say you that we shall not find it expresly set downe in a part of Scripture Secondly I demaund as before who moueth this question Not the Protestants who account it a kind of blasphemie to denie it and of infidelitie to doubt of it Your holy Church of Rome is she that hath buzzed this matter into Christian mens eares so that religion is thereby become a scorne to Atheists while you make no conscience of discrediting the word of God so you may by any meanes increase the reputation of your Apostaticall sea The truth is that this opinion is not a matter now a dayes first set abroach for Atheists such as Iulian haue from time to time obiected it therefore might you haue spared to mention it as a question now a dayes moued But it is new and strange yea almost incredible that Christians and those Diuines yea such as thinke religion resteth on their shoulders as the Poets faine heauen doth vpon Atlas should make a question whether the Scriptures be the word of God or no and so giue men occasion to doubt thereof Thirdly if this matter cannot be resolued of by the Scripture we shall be little the nearer for the infallible authoritie you haue deuised Christians need it not who are already perswaded that the bookes of the old and new Testament are the vndoubted word of God and with Christians onely to speake truly and properly hath the Church to do ordinarily But it falleth out sometimes that amongst those which make profession of Christianitie there are some found who are in doubt of this point If this doubt arise in the heart of a man that maketh conscience of religion he is to be taught that it is but a tentation of Satan and therefore not to be hearkened to Further we must demaund the reasons of his doubting shewing him how absurd and vnreasonable a matter it is to make question of that which generally both Protestants and Papists hold and which hath bene held by the space of 1500. yeares vnlesse he be able to giue very sufficient cause why he may doubt His arguments if he bring any must be answered and the Scriptures auowed by the matter and manner of writing which is such as will certainly if not conuert yet conuince any man in the world that man is not the deuiser of those bookes If he be an Atheist that derideth religion and withall so vnreasonable that the former and many other important proofes will not perswade him what remaines but that the magistrate whom God hath appointed to see true religion established cut off so corrupt a member by lawfull authoritie Where this course is not taken what meanes haue you to helpe the matter Will you tell him of an infallible authoritie in the Church He will laugh at your folly who instead of prouing beg the question I doe not beleeue saith he there is any such Church or authoritie If I doubt of the Scripture you proue it by the Church if I beleeue there is not any such Church or authoritie in the Church you will perswade me by Scripture To say the truth who can be so patient or foolish rather as to suffer himselfe to be led vp downe in a ring as it were a doore turning vpon hinges still in the same place The authoritie of the Church is an argument of such waight as that he is not to be counted either a Christiā or a man of reason that is not much moued therewithall yea so much as that he will not dissent from the continuall iudgement of it vnlesse he be driuen to it by certaine reason but yet this authoritie is not infallible Christ euermore iudgeth truly saith Austin but the Ecclesiasticall iudges as being men are very often deceiued And therefore he saith in another place that he is not bound to giue his consent without libertie to refuse to any thing but the Canonicall Scriptures And in an Epistle to Ierome I haue learned saith he to giue this reuerence and honour onely to those bookes that are called Canonicall that I constantly beleeue that no writer of any of them hath erred But to make an end of this needlesse question where both sides are agreed let vs heare Saint Austin speake to the Manichees If you aske vs saith he how we know that these
as you taught vs before of necessitie to saluation that we beleeue entirely all points of faith without misbeleeuing any one what hope of saluation shall be left to any Papist who cannot by any meanes know what is determined by the Church and what is not Or if he may be sure that matters defined by the Pope and a Councell are decided by the Church yet since it is not so determined whether the Pope alone be sufficient to determine of points in controuersie he may refuse to obey some constitutions of the Pope or to beleeue some questions decided by him and thereby shut himselfe out of heauen for not giuing credit to the determination of the Church if that authoritie of determining be in the Pope and he commaund men so to beleeue But if this determination of the Church be ioyntly in the Pope and Councels and that nothing is a matter of faith but that which is so determined to be then was there almost no matter of faith at all in the Church till within these last 800 yeares For it is more then euident to any man that will not be wilfully contentious that the Pope neuer bare any extraordinarie sway in Councels till he had proclaimed himselfe vniuersall Bishop which was by the grant of the murtherer Phocas six hundred yeares after the beginning of the Gospell What shall we thinke of the Churches in the Apostles times and so forward till the Councell of Nice in which the Popes supremacie was not heard of Had Christians then no matters of faith to beleeue How should they if all depend vpon the Pope and a general Councel Let me grant that those Councels in the Acts were generall what was there determined but that the Gentiles were to abstaine from things offered to Idols and bloud and that which is strangled and from fornication VVas nothing a matter of faith but these few points which also till this time were not matters of faith Either shew some good reason why matters of faith were not at this time of the Apostles liuing to be tied to generall Councels and the Pope yet now must be or confesse the truth to the glorie of God that matters of faith haue their authoritie to be matters of faith from the word of God and not from the determination of Pope or Councell or both Neither thinke to shift of the matter by saying they are indeed matters of faith in themselues but not to vs. For so it will come to passe that we shall say the first Christians had no points that were matters of faith to them because they had none determined by the Church in a Councell which opinion is I know not whether of more absurditie or impietie Now that you agreement in matters of faith after the determination of the Church is not so great as you would make the world beleeue it may appeare by the verie ground of religion the Canon of the Scripture which was determined of by your iudgement in the Councell of Carthage wherein the Apocryphall bookes say you were allowed for Canonical yet saith Bellarmine Nicholas Lyra Denys the Carthusiā Hugo de sancto victore Thomas de Vio both these at least the last Cardinals follow Ierom in reiecting thē as Apocryphal But if this Councel may be excepted against sure in your iudgment the Councell of Trent may not which hath receiued those books into the canō of the scripture Yet for all that Sixtus Senensis keeper of the Popes library maketh bold to deny thē such authority euen since that Coūcel as Bellarmine himself confesseth And Arias Montanus since that time doubteth not to say that the Orthodoxe or true Church following the Canon of the Hebrewes accounteth those bookes of the old Testament written in Greeke to be Apocryphal What say you to your Bishop Catharin who being one of the Councell of Trent after the determination of the Councell against assurance of saluation defendeth that such assurance notwithstanding that decree of the Councell may ordinarily be had by them that beleeue You would perswade vs that it is a ruled case of your Church long ago that the Scriptures are not sufficient without tradition What saith Scotus in this case Whatsoeuer pertaineth to heauenly and supernaturall knowledge and is necessarie to be knowne of men in this life is sufficiently deliuered in the holy scriptures The holy scripture saith Gerson is sufficient for the gouernment of the Church or else was Christ an vnperfect Lawgiuer I might runne on in the like course touching other points but these shal serue for a tast and so I passe ouer to your proofe that the learned on your side cannot possibly dissent one from another They which acknowledge that the definitiue sentence of the Pope is to be rested vpon as an vndoubted truth cannot possibly dissent in matters of faith But all Catholick learned men acknowledge that the Popes sentence is such Therefore no Catholicke learned men can possibly dissent in matters of faith All you conclude is that in matters determined by the Pope and a Councell your learned men cannot disagree because they hold that such a determination is certainly true yet for all this as I haue shewed your Church may be rent in peeces with contrarie opinions in matters of as great moment as most are in religion if for all this it cease not to be a true Church why should not the Protestants haue the like priuiledge who haue the same opinion of the Scriptures that you haue of the Pope Be not so iniurious to reason or blasphemous against God as to auouch that no controuersie can be ended by the word because diuers men will expound it diuersly For it is contrarie both to religion and sense to imagine that the Lord would giue his people such a Scripture as cannot be certainely vnderstood in all points necessarie to saluation but by I know not what reuelation to some one man More particularly I denie your Maior They that acknowledge such an authoritie in the Pope may yet differ in opinion about matters of faith I bring you example in that point of assurance wherein Catharin disputed against that doctrine which Sotus and your writers generally since the Councell of Trent affirme to haue bene the certaine decree of the Councell Yet were they both present in the Councell and none of the meanest there assembed The reason of that their dissent and the possibilitie of the like betwixt other men ariseth from this that decrees of Councels and Popes being set downe in writing may be diuersly interpreted and so the meaning of them mistaken as Catharin saith that he foresaw some men would misunderstand the Councell of Trent in that point This is all the inconueniences you can alledge in admitting the Scripture for Iudge and this followeth the decrees of Councels and Popes at the least as much as the writings of the holy Ghost
this world but the whole societie of the faithful from time to time But these gay shewes of Catholike Church Vniuersalitie antiquitie vnitie succession and such like are fit to deceiue the ignorant for which purpose your discourses are written with whō they preuaile by the iust iudgement of God who sends them strong delusions that they may beleeue lyes because they haue not embraced the loue of the truth that they might be saued A. D. §. 6. First because it is very briefe and compendious and consequently such as euery one might haue leysure and should not be much weary to reade it A. W. You deale in your corrupt writings as leud men do in slanderous reports who speake anie thing at aduenture though neuer so vntrue or vnlikely It is hard but some men will either beleeue or make doubt of it at the least So all men reade your writings you care not Though they that are of knowledge and iudgement discerne your falshood yet it is twentie to one but some ignorant fellow will light on them that may be seduced And this practise you follow the rather because you are for the most part out of feare of being shamed by confutation for that you are vnknowne and know well inough that our answers to you are commonly and many times must be so large that one amongst manie can hardly find leisure to reade them Whereas if the authors of your treatises were knowne amongst vs and our answers applied shortly and plainely to the verie point of the argument that being disrobed of the idle ornaments you cloath it withall and laid naked to the view of true reason we should haue as few of your discourses as we haue now of your replies to our refutations of your treatises which are so few that in many yeares it is rare to haue anie second charge by you vnlesse it be in such a fight as requires no more but a brauado without coming to handie blowes A. D. §. 7. Secondly because it standing onely vpon few but most certaine conclusions and grounds is free from many cauils of the captious which more ample discourses are subiect vnto A. W. To speake truly and properly there is but one conclusion in your whole Treatise as I haue shewed out of this your Preface Against which we also oppose one as briefe and more certaine then yours Your conclusion is That the faith and beliefe which the authority of the Romane Church doth commend vnto vs ought without doubt to be holden for the true faith Ours That the faith which the Scripture teacheth vs is the onely true faith If you speake of the seuerall cōclusions belonging to the proofe of the generall there are at the least as many as there are Chapters But if you meane the three grounds which you signifie before and repeate afterwards they are so farre from being certaine that there is neuer a one of them true as you vnderstand them A. D. §. 8. Thirdly because the matter handled in it is not very high nor hard but common easie and plaine and such as may be vnderstood of any who hauing but a reasonable wit or vnderstanding wil carefully read it as the importance of the matter requireth with iudgement deliberation and which is chiefe with prayer to God and a resolute good will to follow that which he shall find to be right A. W. The matter is as hard by your handling of it as sophistrie can well make it as high as the deepe foundation of religion Yet I denie not but it may be vnderstood by a man of such parts and paines as you require and adde farther that the like may be auowed of the true grounds of religion as they are contained in the Scripture to the reading and meditation whereof the Lord himself hath promised such a blessing as your treatises if they were neuer so true could not looke for Is not the fountaine better then the chanell A. D. §. 9. Fourthly because these fewe plaine points which are here set downe include all other and whosoeuer shall by the helpe of Gods grace and the force of these or other reasons yeeld assent to the points proued in this discourse must by consequence without further disputing or difficultie yeeld to all particular points which the aforesaid Church commendeth for points of faith and will be moued to settle himselfe in the stedfast beliefe of all For if he once admit that there is a Church or company of men on earth infallibly taught by the holy Ghost what is the true faith in all points and that this Church is by Gods appointment to teach all men in all matters of faith which is the infallible truth and further that this Church which is thus taught and must teach vs is no other but that visible company which professeth the Romane faith then he shall not need to straine his wits in studying or to wast words in wrangling about particular points of controuersies or to vse any such troublesome and vncertaine meanes to find out the truth but may easily and most certainly be instructed in all by onely enquiring and finding out which all sorts of men may easily do what is generally holdē by the Church for truth in all particular points whereof they doubt A. W. If these few points be so conuenient because in thē all other are included why should not our doctrine of the Scripture be as conuenient by the same reason Let vs compare our assertions together The first of yours is That a man must admit that there is a company of men on earth infallibly taught by the holy Ghost what is the true faith in all points The first of ours That a man must beleeue that there is a written word of God wherein the holy Ghost hath certainely taught whatsoeuer is needfull to be knowne to saluation Your second is That this company of men is by Gods appointment to teach all men in all matters of faith which is the infallible truth Our second That this written word of God is appointed by him to teach all men in all matters of faith what is true what false Your third That this company of men is no other but the visible company which professeth the Romane faith Our third That this written word is no other but the bookes of the old and new Testament The proofe of your positions and the exceptions you take against ours shal be handled if it please God in their due places in the meane time if any mā be troubled with those ordinarie doubts which you haue buzzed into the common peoples eares concerning the vncertainty and hardnesse of the Scriptures let me intreat him to stay himselfe a while vpon these considerations First that the bookes of the old and new Testament acknowledged by vs are also confessed by you to be the verie word of God in the penning whereof the penners were so directed by the holy Ghost that they could not erre Therefore whatsoeuer the meanes
the whole volume of the Bible which to say were no lesse thē blasphemy But I am afraid the scriptures that Paul there speaks of which were the books of the old Testamēt are rather vnprofitable thē profitable to that purpose For they often amplify magnify the word of God written in so plaine termes that eueuery man may vnderstand them as for the authority you fancy to your selfe they speake either nothing or little and that very obscurely thereof But we shall see in the rest of your Treatise what proofe you can finde of this authoritie in Moses and the Prophets and the writers of the olde Testament Now at the last you remember your selfe againe and returne to your old shift of Scripture alone Which you deuised of your owne head that you might haue somewhat to confute It is not all one say you to be profitable and to be of it selfe alone sufficient And you tel vs This is certaine Who euer denied it Or who but he that wanted matter to replie against would cast such doubts Especially who would haue wasted time and paper to prooue or declare a thing so certaine and cleare by a needlesse comparison The scripture without any doctrines of men call them what you will imagine what assistance of the spirit you list is sufficient to teach all men the true certaine way to saluation This is that we affirme not as you ridiculously slander vs that there needs no ministerie of man for the instructing of any one in the vnderstanding of any place of scripture or knowledge of any point of religion These are your owne fancies or mōsters rather with which like bugbeares you scare your poore seduced followers and bleare the eies of the ignorant that they may not enquire what we teach indeed but hate our doctrine before they any way vnderstand it But they that haue any care of their owne saluation will not suffer themselues to be led by you hoodwinkt to destruction if any man will needs be wilfully ignorant the Lord shall require his blood at his owne hands we haue done our duetie in teaching and proouing the truth A. D. CHAP. VIII That no naturall wit or learning can be the rule of faith A. W. If you had bestowed that paines and time in confirming your proposition which you waste needlesly in proouing that which no man denieth you might perhaps haue spoken somewhat more to the purpose but it is lost labour to go about the refutatiō of that which besides your selfe no body euer thought on That naturall wit or learning should be the rule of faith is a conceit amongst Christians neuer heard of yet this haue you propounded for to exercise your strength vpon A. D. §. 1. The second conclusion is that no one mans naturall wit and learning neither any company of men neuer so learned onely as they are learned men not infallibly assisted by the holy Spirit of God can either by interpreting Scripture or otherwise be this rule of faith A. W. Here you set out the former proposition more at large in respect of the Antecedent or first part of it Neither any one mans naturall wit nor many mens ioyned together whatsoeuer their learning be or what course soeuer they take as naturall men can be the rule of faith either for any doctrine they shal deliuer or for any interpretation they shall make of Scripture But what needeth all this adoe you do but fight with your owne shadow yet let vs se how you haue bestirred your selfe A. D. §. 2. This I prooue Because all this wit and learning be it neuer so exquisite or rare is humane naturall and fallible and therefore it cannot be a sufficient foundation whereupon to build a diuine supernaturall and infallible faith This reason I confirme Because whatsoeuer a man neuer so wittie and learned propoundeth to others to be beleeued vpon the onely credit of his word wit or humane studie and learning it can haue no more certaintie then is this his word wit and learning But these being all naturall and humane are subiect to errour and deceit For Omnis homo mendax there is no man but he may both deceiue and be deceiued and may if he haue no other helpe but of nature and industrie both be deceiued in thinking that to be Gods word which is not or that to be the true meaning and sense of Gods word which is not and may also deceiue others whilest being too confident of his wit and learning he presumeth to teach others these his erroneous opinions Therefore the beleefe which shall be built vpon such a mans word and teaching is or may be a false beleefe and alwaies is vncertaine and fallible and therefore can neuer be a true Diuine and Christian faith which alwaies is most certaine and infallible And this which I haue said of the wit and learning of one particular man may also be applied to prooue against the wit and learning of any companie of men hauing no assistance but their owne naturall gifts and industrie of studie or reading A. W. No humane naturall and fallible thing can be the rule of faith Naturall wit and learning though neuer so exquisite are humane naturall and fallible Therefore no humane wit nor learning can be the rule of faith I grant this reason and conclusion to be sound and true onely in the confirmation of it I finde some occasion to note one thing for the better vnderstanding of the matter we haue in hand If any man would speake for naturall wit and learning in this question he would not say as the matter is here propounded that any mans wit or learning were the rule of faith but that the wit and learning of man might finde out somewhat at least in the Scripture whereupon faith might safely be grounded For example as I said once before though it be not written any where in the Scripture that there are three persons distinct each from other and all these three but one God yet may a man by naturall wit and learning gather this out of the Scripture and confirme it thence so plainely and certainly that any Christian may holde those points as Articles of faith Not that they are to be taken for such vpon the onely credit of his word which is a second thing wherein you mistake the matter but because though euerie man be a lier yet a man may see and shew a truth which cannot nor may be suspected of falshood or errour And a beleefe builded vpon Doctrine so taught shall be free from possibilitie of erring and as you speake infallible This I thought good to obserue by occasion of your confirmation where you suppose that a man deliuereth matters to be beleeued vpon the bare credit of his word by reason of his wit and learning In this sense it is out of all question that no naturall wit or learning of any many or all the men in the world can be the rule of faith but
the world A man may finde in the Scriptures that the true Church of Christ shal neuer faile but which outward companie of men is this true Church no man by this marke of future continuance can by any meanes discerne Wherupon I conclude that your Catholicknesse is neither for the name nor for the thing any good marke of any true Church whatsoeuer That by Catholicknesse vniuersalitie of time should be signified you presume but proue not and yet I am perswaded you are not able to alledge any one ancient author but late Papists that by the Catholicke Church vnderstands a companie that hath bin alwayes since the beginning of the Christian Church and shall alwayes continue till the second comming of our Sauiour Christ I doubt not that the true Church spoken of in the Scripture and the creed hath so bin and shall be but I say that no man conceiues this propertie to be signified by the word Catholicke The ground of my opinion is that hauing found diuers reasons alledged by the Fathers why the Church is said to be Catholicke I could neuer light vpon that concerning the time Austin ordinarily restraines Catholicknes to place as also Optatus doth Pacianus where he purposely enquires the reason of the name neuer once mentions it no more doth Cyril who yet assignes sixe seuerall respects in which the Church may be said to be Catholicke And surely if by Catholicknesse vniuersalitie of time be signified I see no reason neither I thinke can you shew me any why it should not as well include the time before our Sauiours comming and so the Church of God that then was as that which hath bin since his comming and shall continue till the end of the world So doth Thomas vnderstand the Catholicknesse of the Church stretching it from Abels time to the end of the world But your great maister Bellarmine vtterly denies that the Church before our Sauiours comming was Catholicke restraining this Catholicknesse to the Church of the Christians But because I acknowledge the truth of the doctrine I will not striue about the word though you should haue prooued the sense of the word and not haue giuen too much credit to Bellarmine who brings a place of Austin to prooue that vniuersalitie of time is required to make the Church Catholicke whereas there is not a syllable or a letter touching that matter in the place alledged No more is there in that other place of Bede which also he brings but rather we may proue thence that Catholicke belongeth to place It is therefore called Catholicke saith Bede because it is edified in one and the same faith ouer all parts of the world In the sentence next before he speaketh thus Whence the Church is called Catholicke hee teacheth saying All the Churches through all Iewry Galilee and Samaria had peace So doth your Canon expound Catholicke so Durand though he adde also two other reasons of the name but not that you bring As for the place you quote to prooue a needlesse question what doth it concerne the visible Church being spoken as Ierome sheweth at large and prooueth out of the Apostle of the Church of the elect Iewes or at the most of the elect in generall Before I examine that which you haue here deliuered touching the Catholicknes of the Church in respect of place I hold it very needfull to consider what was intended by the name Catholicke and how it hath bin vnderstood of auncient writers And because this latter point may be a meanes to giue vs some light for the discerning of the former I will begin with it in the first place Whether the word were in vse in the time of the Apostles or no so that any man was called a Catholicke Pacianus seems to stand in some doubt yet he lets it passe as granted that no man was then so called Once it is out of all doubt that it is no where in the Scriptures applied to any church or to any man or at all vsed As for the title Catholicke giuen to the Epistles of Iames Peter the first of Iohn and Iude it came not from the holy Ghost the inditer of those Epistles but was added afterwards by some man when the bookes of the new Testament were gathered together into one volume which may better appeare by the titles of the other Epistles also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. of Saint or holy Paul which inscription questionlesse neuer was of the Apostles owne setting downe That which I would haue obserued is that this name Catholicke was deuised and applied to the Church not by God in the Scriptures but by man and therefore it is of lesse importance and more vncertaintie yet no doubt not giuen at aduenture but vpon good ground and to good purpose For the original of it it is Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through the whole or all which we commonly call by two Latin names vniuersall or generall so that the Catholicke Church and the generall or vniuersall Church are all one To auow the antiquitie of this title giuen to the church the confession of faith which is commonly called the Apostles creede may be alledged wherin we professe that we beleeue the holy Catholick Church That this creed is very ancient it is out of question but that it was penned or indited by the Apostles themselues we haue no certaine proofe But to leaue this point and to returne again to the meaning of the words Catholick Church the auncientest authors in whom I finde them for they are not in Dionysius Ignatius Martialis Polycarpus nor in Iustine Irenaeus Tertullian Origen or any man within the first 200. years are Clemens Alexandr about the yeare 200. and Cyprian about the yeare 250. After them it grew very common especially in the Latin Church Cyprian himselfe hath not that I know of any where deliuered the reason of that title Catholick But Pacianus Bishop of Barcelona in Spaine purposely disputeth the question against Symproniā a Nouatian heretick assigning two reasons of the name in this sort If saith he I must giue a reason of the word Catholicke and expresse the Greeke in Latine Catholicke is euery where one or as the learneder thinke obedience to all Gods commmandements so that by his interpretation the Catholicke Church must be the company of them who in all places here and there professe one faith and liue in obedience to all the commandements of God This vnitie of true faith the Emperors respected Valentinian Gratian and Theodosius when they commanded that all they should be called Catholicks who follow the faith that S. Peter deliuered to the Church of Rome To this purpose is that of Cyril where he saith The Church is called Catholicke because it teacheth all things necessary to be knowne This interpretation of the word and reason of the title the Donatists gaue saying that the
be whereby we come to assurance that these bookes are the word of God let it suffice all men that both we and you agree they are so But I pray tell me Are the determinations of the Church any more certaine What ground haue I but the word of some men that the Church hath so determined It is not a matter so agreed vpon betwixt vs as the bookes of Scripture are Out of question the ods is on our side It is doubtfull whether you Romanistes are the Church or no it is out of doubt these bookes are the infallible word of God But you will say the Scriptures are hard to be vnderstood as well because they are written in Hebrew and Greeke as also for the kind of writing Are not all the Decrees of your Councels and determinations of your Popes Consistorie written either in Greeke or Latin or in the Italian language in none of which one man among ten thousand hath any skill And is there not as great reason to thinke the Scriptures are rightly translated as your Decrees Decretals and Determinations Especially when as we commonly alledge the interpretations of the ancient Fathers and learned Papists for the auowing of our translations But the Scriptures are hard to be vnderstood though a man be skilfull in the tongues And are the Decrees of your Councels so easie that euery man may vnderstād them who knowes the language they are written in Doth not Bellarmine condemne and confute our writers Caluin Chemnitius and other for not vnderstanding the Decrees of your Councell of Trent written in Latine which language they were as skilfull in as himselfe If they be so easie how chance Bishop Catharin and Frier Soto that were both present at the Councell and heard the debating of matters can not agree about the doctrine of it concerning assurance of saluation which as Soto affirmes was the longest and most troublesome disputation of all in the Councell and therefore should haue bene best vnderstood and plainliest deliuered Yet is it so propounded by the holy fathers the authors of it that Catharin saith boldly he foresaw that most men would vnderstand the words of the Decree otherwise then the holy Synod meant them Was there not great contention within these very few yeares betwixt Archbishop Christophor de Capite fontium and many other Diuines about the meanes of transsubstantiating the bread though in his iudgement the Councel of Trent makes manifestly for him I forbeare to say that some points seeme to haue bene craftily set downe of purpose like the oracles of Apollo that which way soeuer they be taken the Church may not seeme to haue erred Neither will I adde that diuerse matters are deliuered by Councels not as points of faith but as probable coniectures which yet may be and are taken by some of your owne learned writers as if they were resolutely determined for certaine truth These things considered I see no sufficient reason why it should not be as fit and safe to learne of the Scripture which is the infallible truth as of any companie of men whatsoeuer But you labour to commend to vs this resting on the authoritie of the Romish Church by some especiall commodities that shall ensue thereupon The first wherof is ease the 2. certaintie of knowledge He shall not need say you to straine his wits in studying c. If ease were not too much delighted in by men of your profession there would not be such swarms of idle Monks Fryers Nuns nonresident Bishops and Priests amongst you But true Christians vnderstand that it was not Gods purpose to prouide so much for their ease by giuing them leaue to beleeue at aduenture hand ouer head whatsoeuer it should please men to enioyne thē but that it is his good pleasure that all men should carefully and painfully exercise themselues night and day in reading and meditating of the Scriptures He is too nice and dainty a professor of religion that is loth to straine his wits to the vttermost in the study of any thing reuealed by God in Scripture What shall I say of him that cals conference and disputation about euen the greatest points of faith and iustification wasting of words in wrangling Nec se magnanimo maledicere sentit Achilli It is strange you should not haue the wit to perceiue that by this censure you condemne Lombard Thomas and all your schoole men yea the Pope and generall councels who are bound to vse such meanes for the finding out of the truth and as Sotus saith did vse them in a long and troublesome disputation yet forsooth neither the one nor the other at least both together cannot erre No man then ought to refuse study or disputation of controuersies in diuinitie because they are troublesome Therefore to mend the matter you adde that they are also vncertaine what can be certain but only reuelation if the true vse of reason can breed nothing but vncertainty How idly and vainly did your schoolemen imploy themselues if all their study and labour must end in vncertainty What vse is there of Councels for finding out of the truth since the helpe to be had of them is debating of matters by reasoning Do we not find in daily experience that as flint and steele stricken together bring forth fire so truth is as it were beaten out by disputation It is reported you make great shewes of desiring a disputation I maruaile to what end If when all comes to all your auditors shall still remaine vncertaine what is true Shall I go yet farther You tell vs the Church cannot erre we beleeue you not you alledge some places of Scripture to proue it to vs we say they proue no such matter what course will you take It is in vaine to dispute of it that is as you say to wast words in wrangling about it For that is but an vncertaine meanes to find-out the truth Haue you not brought matters to a good passe thinke you when you professe that there is no meanes to discern certainlie whether the Church can erre or no but onely to take her own word for it Yea no meanes left to know that she is the Church For if you will againe fly to the Scriptures you run into the former difficulties and end as before in vncertainty Who would haue to do with such vnreasonable men But that you may not seeme to leaue vs in vncertainty you tel vs that we may most certainly be instructed in all particular points of controuersies by onely enquiring and finding out what is holden generally by the Church for truth c. You send vs to the faith of the Church and namely of the Church of Rome Which say we is onely so farre forth to be yeelded vnto as it is agreeable to the Scriptures Neither do we say so onely but Ambrose long before our time hath said the like We are commanded saith
of Nice to follow and which they accordingly followed The bookes of the Euangelists and Apostles and the Oracles of the old prophets plainly instruct vs quoth that worthie Emperour what we are to iudge of matters concerning God Therefore laying aside all enemie-like discord let vs debate ad determine the points in question by the testimonies of the Scriptures inspired by God These as we heard before Ierome makes the bounds of the Church within which she must keepe her selfe and Proclus Archbishop of Constantinople confineth faith to the same place Faith saith he must abide within the Euangelicall and Apostolicall bounds Paschasius a Cardinall of your Church as you say many yeares since tied Macedonius the hereticke to the Scriptures equiring him either to shew by euident testimonies of the word of God that we must beleeue in the Church or else to vrge the point no further For as Chrysostome truly affirmeth If there be any thing needfull to be knowen we shall learne it in the Scriptures I mightfil whole sides with testimonies out of the Fathers to this purpose but I let them passe as needlesse especially since your selfe before confessed that the word of God is infallible and therefore in that respect sufficient to be the rule of faith Now to your conclusion The first part of this first conclusion is false in regard of the infallibilitie of Scripture which it should seeme you saw well enough and therefore balkt that matter and deuised an other point concerning our translation to play withall For what is it but trifling when a man leaues the thing in question and busies him selfe about the refuting of that which besides himselfe no man euer dreamed of What English protestant euer affirmed that our translation was infallible that is such as had no error in it or might not be doubted of Or who euer tooke it for the rule of faith You make babies which you beate as you list Against the Scriptures being the rule of faith which we affirme you say nothing Against the infallibilitie of our translation which we grant not to be the rule of faith you discourse at large wherein I intreate the Reader to consider these few things with me That which he speakes in disgrace of our translation makes no more against it then against all other whatsoeuer For neither is any translation the language in which the Scripture was written and no translators euer had any such infallible assistance by the holy Ghost Sure the author of the vulgar Latin translation had not such help as the Hebrew and Greek originals which the translations of all the learned Papists themselues declare Pagnin Vatablus Isidorus Clarius c. As for Gregory Martins cauils they were answered long since by D. Fulke and I maruell that you can name them without blushing seeing neuer a one of you durst vndertake the defence of them for the space of these 23. yeares Nay which is worse you were not ashamed in the second edition of your Rhemish Testament to bleare your blind followers eyes with a table of hereticall corruptions in translating the Scriptures as if you had propounded some new matter whereas they were all taken out of that booke of Martins and had long before bene iustified by D. Fulke without any reply on your parts You demaund how any vnlearned man can be infallibly sure that in those places which do seeme to fauour our sect our translation doth not erre I answer that there are better meanes of assurance for vnlearned Protestants concerning the truth of our translation then any Papist can haue by your imagined authoritie for your vulgar Latin First it is no slender perswasion to any reasonable man that those places you speake of if not wholy yet for the most part are translated with the same sense in other toungs which they haue in ours as in Spanish French Italian Flemish Dutch Secondly it is a great confirmation of the truth that many of those texts which seeme most to fauor vs are the same in your vulgar and Rhemish editions that they are in ours Thirdly the truth of ours is yet more cleare because euery man may see that in bookes of controuersie betwixt vs our translations are seldome denied by the learned of your side though you condemne our expositions Fourthly who may not easily discerne how much more faithfull our translation of those places all others is then yours seeing we are readie to make triall of it by the originals the learned on your sides being iudges you are afraid of nothing more then to haue yours examined by the Hebrew and Greeke Fiftly in the places you speake of our translations deserue the more credit because we labour to make them plaine for euery mans vnderstanding and shew how they agree with the rest of the booke and chapter wheras your Rhemish Testament is so handled that an English man of good vnderstanding can hardly tell what to make of it for the very words themselues in many places as if you auoided nothing more then plainnesse Sixtly we perswade all men as much as we can to labour for the knowledge of the originall tongues that so they may be able to iudge of our translation you do all you can to keepe men in the mist of ignorance because you are afraid to haue your corruptions discouered Seuenthly though we allow not our ministers such an infinite authoritie as you giue your Cleargie yet we teach that it becoms Christian charitie and modestie neither to suspect a translation where the analogie of faith is kept and the plaine meaning of the holy Ghost not manifestly altered nor to rest vpon priuate conceit against the generall iudgement of the learned without very euident proofe of error These amongst other are reasonable grounds for a Christian to build vpon that he may haue some good assurance of the truth of our translation Now let vs examine yours We must say you admit an infallible authoritie in the Church to assure vs that such or such a translation doth not erre in any point First this is more then neeeds For if that authoritie can assure vs that the translation erreth not in any point needfull to saluation in regard of the sense it may be a sufficient ground for vs to build our faith vpon though it should mistake some words in many points and the sense too in matters of lesse importance Secondly though we do admit such an authoritie in the Church yet may we be farre enough from any such assurance For how shall I be sure that the Church hath so affirmed of this or that translation How shal I know what the Church is A company you say of men vpon earth infallibly taught by the holy Ghost what is the true faith in al points Is this teaching cōmon to euery one of this company seuerally or only annexed to them all ioyntly when they are together What if all what if the greater part assemble
the Church is of infallible and vndoubted truth and that the way not to be deceiued in an obscure question is to aske and follow the iudgement of the Church Wherefore worthily also do we all say Credo Ecclesiam Catholicam I beleeue the Catholicke Church and worthily also may I conclude that neither Scripture alone nor naturall wit and learning nor priuate spirit nor any other thing but onely the teaching of the true Church of Christ is that ordinarie meanes which Almightie God hath prouided whereby all men may learne that one infallible entire faith which I proued to be necessarie to saluation A. W. Saint Paul doth worthily call the Church the pillar and ground of truth but not as you would haue vs beleeue because it is the rule of faith The Greeke Scholiast taketh that speech of the Apostle to be vttered by way of comparison betwixt the Church of Christ and the Iewish Temple Not as the Iewish Temple saith Oecumenius but the pillar and ground of truth for the Temple was the ground of the shadowes of the truth Out of which we may gather that as the Iewish synagogue was the pillar and ground of those shadowes of the truth so is the Church of Christ the pillar and ground of the truth it selfe But that synagogue was not the rule of faith in that point because whatsoeuer it taught was to be held for infallible truth but for that to it were committed the oracles of God and the knowledge and vse of those ceremonies so hath the Church of Christ the truth of doctrine in the scripture and the exercises of Gods worship and religion Therfore is it called the pillar and ground of it because it constantly maintaineth that truth preaching and professing it in despight of all the practises and power of Satan and tyrants of the world As the thighs saith an ancient writer sustaine and beare vp the weight of the whole bodie so also the Apostles like pilars valiantly carry the vniuersall Church of Christians ouer the whole world being for the value of their inuincible courage and stedfastnesse of their holy purpose called marble pillars And a litle after They preached the Gospell with such wisedome and constancie that as if they had bene of marble or adamant they were afraid of no violence nor aduersitie but always continuing firme and inuincible against all the forces of men and diuels shining as it were in the darke by that light of their wisedome by preaching admonishing teaching and glistering with miracles at the last they most happily became conquerors To this effect speake your Glosses The ground of the truth of the Gospell which the Church constantly maintained euen in the greatest persecutions Well vpholding the truth in it self saith another Glosse That it may not fall to the ground though it be afflicted saith Lombard But let vs bring your reason into due frame The pillar and ground of truth is the rule of faith The Church is the pillar and ground of truth Therefore the Church is the rule of faith Your proposition or maior is false vnlesse you restraine it as I haue often said to the truth and then it is so far the rule of faith as it is the pillar and ground of truth Whatsoeuer it holdeth truly according to the scripture is the rule of faith for those points not because of the Churches authoritie but for the truth of the doctrine Yet may it easily come to passe that a Church maintaining the generall truth of the Gospell and all particulars necessary to soluation may faile in many other points of great importance and for all that continue both a true Church and the pillar and ground of truth though not the rule of faith Your minor also as you vnderstand it is vntrue First because the Apostle speaketh not of any such companie as you imagine Pope Bishop Councell but either of the Church of Ephesus in which Timothie to whom he writeth then abode or indefinitely of any and euery Church whatsoeuer where the true Religion of our Sauiour is or shall be professed according to the Gospell If Timothie were as you will not denie Bishop of Ephesus then it is apparent that the Apostle calleth the Church of Ephesus wherein Timothy liued taught and gouerned the pillar and ground of truth yet was it not the rule of faith for then had the rule of faith perished long since with that Church of Ephesus If he speake to him as to an Euangelist who was to follow him from place to place and to establish the Churches which the Apostle had planted then must euery one of those Churches wherein Timothy was to behaue himselfe as he had done in Ephesus be vnderstood to be the pillar and ground of truth and yet neither any nor all of them were the rule of faith which else must haue bene lost with them What remaines then Shall we expound it of all beleeuers in generall I grant it reacheth to all the faithfull but as to them considered in their seuerall Churches because among them so disposed of was Timothy to performe that dutie which the Apostle there enioyneth him But let vs so conceiue of the Church What shall it auaile you or endamage vs All beleeuers are not the companie you pleade for but onely the Pope and your Bishops whom you would haue taken for the rule of faith Secondly I denie your minor in respect of the sense you giue of those words the pillar and ground of truth For you so vnderstand them as if the truth of God depended vpon the verdict of the Church so that nothing may be held for truth but what the Church deliuereth for such and whatsoeuer she so propoundeth must so be receiued vpon paine of certaine damnation How contrary are you in this interpretation and doctrine to the auncient fathers The Apostles saith Irenaeus left vs the Scriptures to be the pillar and ground of our faith Nay say you they left vs the Church to be the pillar and ground of the Scriptures The Gospell and spirit of life saith the same father in the same booke is the pillar and ground of the Church Nay by your leaue reply you the Church is the pillar and ground of the Gospell But Chrysostome handling this place of the Apostle is not afraid to affirme that the truth is the pillar and ground of the Church not as if he would denie that which the Apostle saith for the Church indeed is the vpholder of the truth but to shew that although the Church maintaine and auow the truth yet it is built and founded vpon the truth which as Ierome saith vpholds the building Therfore to make short whē the Apostle saith that the Church is the pillar and ground of truth his meaning is that amongst Christians and among no other sort of men the truth is to be found and amongst and by them it is constantly and worthily
also in the forgiuenesse of sinnes and the meaning is all one And in a third Sermon he giueth vs this caueat we must know saith he that we must beleeue the Church not beleeue in the Church that is must beleeue there is a Church So then To beleeue the Catholicke Church is not to beleeue all that the Church saith which neither the Greeke nor the Latin will beare but to beleeue there is a Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Credo esse Ecclesiam which in the phrase of the new Testament for the Greeke might be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which is word for word I beleeue that there is a Church Now if any man shall demaūd of me what the meaning of this article is or what we beleeue by beleeuing there is a Church and what that Church is to which so many gracious promises are made and of which so many glorious things are spokē in the scripture I will indeuor to satisfie him as briefly as I can with plainnesse First then leauing the holinesse and catholicknesse of this church to be discussed in due place I say that by beleeuing the Church we beleeue that there is a company of men called to true faith in Iesus Christ and to the participation of those priuiledges which belong to all the true members of his mysticall bodie some of the principall whereof are recited in the articles following But we may not imagine as the Papists doe without any likelihood of true reason that this company is their Pope and Bishops assembled in a generall councel or that they of this companie make one visible congregation but that they are all one Church in regard of the common meanes of saluation which they embrace and their dependance vpon on mysticall head Iesus Christ of whose bodie they are all members So that by Church in the Creed we vnderstand such of the elect as are by faith liuely members of our Sauiours bodie or at the least are by the baptisme of the spirit and water in corporated into that bodie howsoeuer as yet they haue not faith I denie not that all the elect euen those which are yet vnborne belong to the Church of Christ but I thinke the Creed doth not stretch so farre but onely to them that are actually members of Christ not to all that are so in Gods euerlasting predestination In this sense namely for the liuing members of Christs bodie the word Church is often vsed in the Scripture Vpon this rocke will I build my Church The Church which he hath purchased with his blood God hath giuen Christ ouer all things to be the head of the Church which is his bodie the fulnesse of him that filleth all in all things Christ is the head of the Church and the same is the Sauiour of his bodie So is it taken in the same chapter diuers times He is the head of the bodie of the Church Thus doe the ancient writers speake of the Church Austin denieth that he dares take any for the Church of Christ but those that are iust and holy no though they haue bene baptised For as he saith in another place they that are condemned by Christ are not now in his bodie which is the Church because Christ cannot haue members condemned As for the reprobate saith the same Author whether they seeme to be within the Church or be apparantly out of it they are alwaies diuided from the vnitie of the Church which is without spot or wrincle The Church saith Clement of Alexandria is the company of the elect Therefore saith Cyprian that the vnitie of Christ and the Church is coupled together with indiuisible links For as he saith otherwhere the Church that beleeueth in Christ and holds that which once it hath receiued neuer departeth wholy frō him they are the Church that cōtinue in the house of God but they are not a planting planted by God who are not setled with the fastnesse and soundnesse of wheat but are scattered like chaffe by the breath of the enemie Sathan The Church standeth on the right hand saith Ierome and hath nothing in it belonging to them on the left hand And againe He that is a sinner and defiled with any filthinesse cannot be called one of Christs Church nor be said to be subiect to Christ There are many such sayings in the writings of the Fathers grounded vpon the booke of Canticles which all men know intreateth of the true church There is no doubt saith Bernard vpon the Canticles but the elect are the Church of God But the reprobat as one of your Cardinals saith are not truly mēbers of the Church Of many beleeuers purged from their sinnes there is made one Church saith Albertus magnus Thomas his master Thomas himselfe expounding that place of the Reuelation In the Temple of my God saith that by the temple of God the Church of the faithfull is vnderstood which is the speciall temple of God and to that purpose he alledgeth that of the Apostle The temple of God is holy which you are And in an other place he saith that the mysticall bodie of Christ is the Church Now the vnion of this mystical bodie is spiritual by which through faith and charitie they are vnited to God and one to another As the godly or they that are holy are the members of Christ so the wicked saith Ambrose are the members of the Diuell The congregation of them that beleeue aright is the Church saith Altissiodorensis Who can reasonably doubt whether this be the Church spoken of in the Creed or no As for the promises and commendations giuen to the Church in the Scripture to what other Church should they appertaine The Doue and the perfect one praised in the Canticles is as Epiphanius truly saith the holy spouse and Catholicke Church Whereas the Church in the Canticles saith Austin is described to be a garden inclosed a fountain sealed vp a wel of liuing water c. I dare not vnderstand this but of the holy and righteous not of couetous men not of deceiuers extortioners vsurers drunkards enuious persons although they haue receiued the same baptisme but haue not the same charitie or sanctifying grace The promises praises belong either seuerally to euery one of the elect called as that the gates of hell shall not preuaile against the Church that the Church is loued and cherished by Christ her husband head or to the congregations of beleeuers in regard of the elect amongst them Once this I dare boldly affirme let any Papist disproue it if he can that the Church is no where in all the Scripture taken for one companie through the world in respect of any outward gouernment or dependance which is the foundation of all your doctrine touching the Church but in regard of the common meanes of saluation by faith in Christ And here I might
may also thus vnderstand it that Christ appeared to be the word and the truth and wisedome frō the beginning of the creatiō of the world to the last writing of the Apostles that is from Genesis to the Apostles books after which there are none of like authoritie or beleef Or thus that the Law and the Prophets continued till Iohn in whom the brightnesse of truth was The East was the Law the West Iohn the end of the Law Now onely the Church neither takes away the word and sense of this brightnesse nor addes any thing else as propheticall The place you bring lieth thus Euery doctrine professing it selfe to be truth when it is not truth either among the Gentiles or among the Barbarians is in some sort Antichrist going about to seduce as truth and to seuer vs from him that said I am the truth Therefore we must not giue eare to them which say Behold here is Christ but do not shew him in the Church which is full of brightnesse from the East to the West which is full of the true light which is the pillar and ground of truth in which whole Church the whole comming of the Sonne of man is Now the comming of the Sonne of man is before expounded by him to be the word of truth Doubtlesse if you had not taken this proofe vpon Bellarmines or some other mans credit you would neuer haue brought it to proue the visibilitie of the Church to all men at all times What saith Cyprian in the place alledged but that the Church is dispersed ouer the whole world Doth this proue that it is at all times visible to all men Or hath Cyprian any such purpose in that place Is not his whole drift to shew that there is but one Church because the truth they professe is but one The title of his booke is Of the vnitie of the Church The place you bring concludes that howsoeuer the beames are scattered or spread here and there yet the light is but one The Church that is true beleeuers were in this land in the dayes of persecutiō and is now in Spaine Italy and perhaps in Rome it selfe This proues not a perpetuall visibilitie What need we any other answer to this testimonie of Chrysostome then that which your owne exposition affoords vs Chrysostoms meaning is that the Church cannot be quite without light say you What thē Must it needs be visible then to al men The Moone is neuer wholy darkened no not in the greatest eclipse nor in the change but is alwayes in the one halfe light and yet he were mad that would conclude hereupon that therefore it may be seene at all times of all men Indeed Chrysostome speaketh of the continuance of the Church not of the visiblenesse thereof That may appeare by his saying that the Church hath her roote in heauen rather then in the earth This argues stabilitie not visibilitie And what Church hath rooting in heauen but onely the Church of the elect The Church saith Chrysostome in the same place is more honorable then heauen because heauen is made for it not it for heauen Is heauen made for any Church but that of the elect Besides it was not the visibility but the being of the Church against which those tyrants whom Chrysostome there mentioneth so mightily laboured which yet continued in despight of them all These and such like places of Austin shew the flourishing estate of the Churches in those times and conuince the Donatists against whom Augustine writ of wofull blindnesse who would see no church but their owne heretical assembly in a part of Africa But they neither were intended not can with any reason be applied to proue that the church is alwayes visible to all men The former of the two places as I shewed before is interpreted by the Fathers of the Apostles That the Apostles saith Ierome should not hide themselues for feare but freely shew themselues he teacheth them to preach boldly when he saith A citie set vpon an hill cannot be hid But let vs take it to be meant of the Church It must needs be a monstrous hill that can shew a citie set vpon it to the whole world A citie standing on a hill is the easier and the farther to be seene but there is no hill high enough to be seene ouer the whole world I would farther know whether euery particular Church be not a citie vpon an hill or no. And yet is no such Church to be seene of all men Concerning the latter place Austin worthily cals them blind that could not or rather as he truly saith would not see that great mountaine vpon which the Church then stood but would shut their eyes against the light that shined vpon them Yet who is so ignorant that he knowes not or so shamelesse that he will not cōfesse that there were many aliue at that very time which had no knowledge that there was any Church in the world But there neither were nor could be any such among the Donatists or other like heretickes who forsooke the Church to follow their owne fantasies The candle is the Minister or the word shining by his ministery the candlesticke is the particular Church where that ministery is if any liuing in or neare the place where such a candle burneth bright will not see the light of it he may well be called wilfully blind So may not they which are so far that the beames of the light cannot shine vnto them Now the summe of that which hath bene answered concerning the perpetuall continuance and visiblenesse of the church is this that the church to which that continuance is promised is the number of the elect and not any one outward companie of men succeeding one another in a famous and visible profession of Christian Religion Yea farther though we do not vndertake to affirme that there hath not bin at all times some one companie or other of true Christians knowne to them among whom they liued to be professors of the Gospell yet we doubt not to say that there can be no sufficient proofe brought out of the Scriptures that there must of necessitie be alwayes such a company as if our Sauior Christs promises to his church were not performed vnlesse the world might at all times perceiue where such a companie were to be found A. D. CHAP. XIII How we should discerne and know which is the true visible Church of Christ A. W. It may perhaps seeme needlesse that I should proceed any further in the confutation of this treatise because still the maine point that there is such a Church is presupposed and not proued But howsoeuer it be true that there is indeed no one visible church of Christ which may challenge or beare the name of the whole church yet it will be worth the doing to finde out the markes or signes by which we may discerne which congregation is a true church of Christ and which is not
not perceiue those things which are of the Spirit of God For sith none by the onely power of naturall wit which in vnderstanding vseth the helpe of outward senses can obtaine the supernaturall knowledge of diuine mysteries which we beleeue by our faith neither doth the Spirit of God who as the principall cause infuseth this gift of faith into our soules ordinarily instruct any man in the knowledge of true faith immediatly by himselfe alone or by an Angell sent from heauen we must needs if we will haue true faith seeke first for that which it pleaseth Almightie God to vse as the ordinarie instrument and as a necessary meanes by which men may learne true faith the which is no other but the preaching and teaching of the true church according to that saying of S. Paul Quomodo credent ei quem non audierint quomodo audient sine praedicante quomodo praedicabunt nisi mittantur How shall they beleeue him whom they haue not heard how shall they heare without a Preacher how shall they preach vnlesse they be sent Therefore the true Church which only hath preachers truly sent of God must first be found out that by it we may heare and know which is the true faith Therefore of the two the true Church is rather a mark whereby we may know the true preaching and consequently the true doctrine of faith then contrarie that as heretickes say the doctrine should be a marke whereby all men must know which is the true Church A. W. Belike as you had good cause you suspected your abilitie to proue simply that the true preaching of the word in all matters fundamentall and the right administration of the sacraments are not a good marke of a true Church And therefore you rather chose to proue by way of comparison that the true church is rather a marke to know true doctrine then true doctrine a marke to know the true Church by For so runs your conclusion directly If the end of seeking the true Church say you be principally that we may by it as a necessarie and infallible meanes learne true doctrine in all points to which otherwise we cannot attaine then the true Church is rather a marke to know true doctrine then true doctrine a marke to know the true Church by But the end of seeking the true Church is principally that we may by it as a necessarie and infallible meanes learne true doctrine in all points which otherwise wee cannot attaine to Therefore the true Church is rather a marke to know true doctrine then true doctrine a marke to know the Church by Though the conclusion as I said be not directly to the question which is not comparatiue but simple whether true doctrine be a good mark to discerne a true Church by or no yet I will take it as it is and answer to the parts of it Your maior in the antecedent may haue a double meaning First that we cannot in any point learne true doctrine but by the Church and then I denie the consequence For true doctrine in the fundamentall points of Religion may be a good marke of the true Church though we seeke the true Church because there are many points which we cannot learne without it But howsoeuer you vnderstand the maior the minor is euidently false First because the principall end of seeking the true Church is that we may truly worship God in the assembly of his children to his greater glorie and our farther assurance of his loue to vs as we may see euery where in the booke of the Psalmes Secondly because we are not to learne of the true Church as a necessarie and infallible meanes but of the ministers thereof who are appointed by God to giue vs knowledge of the meanes of saluation by expounding the word of God to vs not to binde vs to beleefe by their authoritie Your minor you offer to proue in this maner If no man without faith can obtaine the supernaturall knowledge of diuine mysteries and faith be not to be had but by the teaching of the true Church then the end of seeking the true Church is principally that we may learne by it as a necessarie and infallible meanes true doctrine in all points to which otherwise we cannot attaine But no man without faith can obtaine the supernaturall knowledge of diuine mysteries nor faith be had but by the teaching of the true Church Therefore the end of seeking the true Church is principally that we may by it as a necessary and infallible meanes learne the true faith in all points to which otherwise we cannot attaine The consequence of your maior is naught It doth not follow that we seeke the true Church to learne of it as a necessary and infallible meanes because we cannot know the mysteries of Religion without faith which commeth by the teaching of the true Church For there may well be teaching and learning without any such authoritie in the Church that teacheth Your minor is very doubtfull as I will shew in answering seuerally to the parts of it First then whereas you say that no man without faith can obtaine the supernaturall knowledge of diuine mysteries if you meane that a man cannot acknowledge the truth of such mysteries without faith your minor in that part is true but if your meaning be that a man cannot vnderstand what the meanes of saluation appointed by God are without faith I take your minor to be false For though those meanes be indeed such as no discourse of man euer could deuise or thinke on being vtterly supernaturall yet it is possible for a meere naturall man to learne what they are out of the Scriptures and that without faith because the Scriptures may be vnderstood by such helpes of the tongues and arts as humane learning doth affoord vs though to the sauing knowledge thereof the especiall grace of God be absolutely necessarie The other point that faith cannot be found but by the teaching of the true Church may also haue a double sense The first that faith cannot be wrought in any mans heart but by the preaching of some man authorized to that purpose by the true Church and this as I shewed before is not alwayes true for faith may be and hath bene begotten in some by the reading of the Scriptures where the ministery of the word was not to be had and by the teaching of ordinarie Christians not set apart to preach the Gospell The other meaning is this that faith cannot be attained to but by our hearkning to the voyce of such a Preacher as we alreadie know to be sent by the true Church And this indeed specially fits your purpose but hath no likelihood of truth in it For they that came to faith by the Apostles preaching did not beleeue them as men autorized for their instruction by the true church but as being conuinced in their consciences by the euidence of the truth they deliuered without
any regard or knowledge of their being sent by the true Church This weake minor of yours is vnderpropt in each part with a pillar of the holy Scripture the former thus No sensuall man can obtaine the knowledge of diuine mysteries Euery man without faith is a sensuall man Therefore no man without faith can obtaine the knowledge of diuine mysteries If by obtaining the knowledge of diuine mysteries you meane assenting to the truth of God concerning saluation I grant your whole syllogisme and in this sense it was needlesse to proue that part of your minor In the other sense that a man cannot attaine to the knowledge of them but by faith which the words manifestly import I denie the maior for the reason before alledged but whatsoeuer your meaning be the Apostle saith no more but that a naturall man without the grace of God can neither once imagine any such meanes of saluation and other there is none nor acknowledge those meanes as true and sufficient Of the former the Apostle speakes in the ninth verse affirming that the means of saluation prepared by God for men are such as neither eye hath seen nor eare hath heard nor euer entred into any mans heart Of the latter is the place alledged by you where the word signifieth rather an approuing and receiuing then a perceiuing and the spirituall man whom he there opposeth to the naturall is said to discerne of spirituall things rather by acknowledging the truth of them then by vnderstanding the meaning of the word preached concerning them Your translation which I touched before where you terme hominem animalem a sensuall man is senslesse For who knowes not that by a sensuall man we meane a voluptuous man giuen vp to his pleasures and sensualitie But the Apostle speakes not of such onely but euen of the wisest and most vertuous that euer were amongst men without grace so that in his meaning as well temperate Xenocrates and learned Aristotle called for his knowledge natures darling vertuous Socrates and wise Solon as Sardanapalus Thersites Nero and such like are naturall men that is such as haue no grace of God but that shadow of it which remaineth in all men by nature and is helped by education and humane learning It is true that Animalis naturalis is not all one in nature yet doth Naturall better expresse the Apostles meaning then sensuall and generally all writers haue made an opposition in this sense betwixt Nature and Grace not betwixt Sensualnesse and Grace as you may see throughout Austins Prospers Ieromes and your owne Schoolemens writings Neither will it helpe the matter to say as you doe that Naturall wit in vnderstanding vseth the helpe of outward senses For sensuall signifieth not him that vseth his senses to the vnderstanding of this or that but him that is drowned in Sensualitie Besides naturall wit doth not vse the helpe of the outward senses alwaies in vnderstanding yea there are many and the most excellent pointes of Philosophie in which Sense hath nothing to doe as in the discourse of Reason and the knowledge of Logicke with all those hard and worthie Questions of the Soule and of God himselfe as farre as they are to be conceiued of by the light of nature If you will say that we learne these things partly by reading and hearing I aunswer both that we finde out many things in Philosophie of our selues by studie without anie helpe of Sense which rather is an hinderance to the soule in the search of such pointes and also that the knowledge we haue of diuine mysteries is first brought to vs and continually increased in vs by the same Senses of seeing and hearing else were your Church as good be without those preachers you so much brag of The other part of your Minor that faith cannot be had but by the teaching of the true Church you prooue or rather endeauour to prooue in this sort If no man can beleeue without he heare nor heare without one preach and no man can preach except he be sent then Faith cannot be had but by the teaching of the true Church But no man can beleeue without he heare nor heare without one preach and no man can preach without he be sent Therefore faith cannot be had but by the teaching of the true Church I denie the consequence of your Maior and affirme that faith may be had without the teaching of the true Church though no man can beleeue without he heare c. For I haue shewed that some countries haue bene brought to beleefe without any such teaching by authoritie from the true Church I also referre the Reader to my answer to your Minor That place of the Apostle concerneth not the ordinarie ministerie of the word but the knowledge of the means of saluation which as the Apostle truly saith could neuer haue bene thought on by any man if it had not pleased God to giue notice thereof to the world by men appointed and authorised to that purpose by himselfe But of this place and matter I spake sufficiently before in this and in a former chapter A. D. §. 4. Thirdly true faith is included in the true Church and as it were enclosed in her belly as Saint Austin saith vpon those words of the Psalme Errauerunt ab vtero loquuti sunt falsa In ventre Ecclesiae saith he veritas manet quisquis ab hoc ventre separatus fuerit necesse est vt falsa loquatur Truth remaineth in the belly of the Church whosoeuer is separated to wit by difference in doctrine from this belly of the Church must needs speake false Therefore like as if a man had Gold in his belly we must first finde the man before we can come to see the gold it selfe so we must first by other markes finde out the true Church which hath the gold of true faith hidden in her belly before we come to see the gold of true faith it selfe Sith especially we cannot see it vnlesse she open her mouth and deliuer it vnto vs and that we cannot being spiritually blinde certainely know it to be true and not counterfeit but by giuing credit to her testimonie of it According as the same Saint Austin saith Euangelio non crederem nisi me Ecclesiae authoritas commouerer I should not beleeue the Gospell it selfe vnlesse I were mooued by the authoritie of the Church For if we had not the testimonie of the Church how should we haue bene infallibly sure that there were any Gospell at all Or how should we haue knowen that those bookes which â—eare title of the Gospell according to Saint Mathew Marke Luke and Iohn are true Canonicall Scripture rather then those bookes which are written in the name of Nicodemus and Saint Thomas bearing the same title or inscription of Gospell A. W. Your third reason is thus to be framed That which is shut vp in the belly
of God Now the same Church or partie which assureth vs that the Gospell is true may notwithstanding erre in the meaning of some points in it and a man may discerne these errours by the light which shineth in the Scriptures thus acknowledged First it is here confessed by your selfe that Austins speach is not of all fundamentall points of true doctrine but onely as I said of knowing the Scripture to be the word of God for so onely you reason out of it and thereby shew plainly to all that will see that it cannot prooue the matter for which you brought it Secondly you proceed farther to prooue the point by an other reason but faultie like the former If say you without the testimonie of the Church we could not haue bene infallibly sure that there is any Gospell at all nor haue knowne that the Gospels of Matthew Marke Luke and Iohn are true Canonicall Scripture rather then those of Nicodemus and Saint Thomas then we cannot know true doctrine to be true but by giuing credit to the Churches testimonie of it But we could not haue knowne those things without the testimonie of the Church Therefore we cannot know true doctrine to be true but by giuing credit to the Churches testimonie of it A man that is so full of his compound syllogismes as you are might learne to make better consequences in his Maior then you commonly bring vs. Let vs grant you that we could not know that there is any Gospell or which is the Gospell without the testimonie of the Church All that will follow thereupon is this that we cannot know these two points of doctrine to be true without giuing credit to the testimonie of the Church Yea if I were disposed to trouble you I would yet farther denie your said consequence because though we cannot know these matters without the Churches testimonie yet we might know them without resting vpon the Churches authoritie For the testimonie of the Church may be had by the ministerie thereof without any such absolute authoritie of enioyning beleefe or giuing credit to that she affirmeth as an vndoubted truth This Minor as the former in this chapter consisteth of two parts and is false in both of them as I will shew particularly First you say that without the testimonie of the Church we could not haue bene infallibly sure that there is any Gospell Your meaning is that we could not haue knowne this certainely but by giuing credit to the report of the Church as a certaine truth First for the doctrine of the Gospell to saluation it hath bene had and may be had without any testimonie of the Church at all taking the testimonie of the Church as you do for the preaching of men publickly authorised to this dutie by a companie of men so qualified as you before describe your Church I shall need no better proofe then to put you in minde againe of those nations many and great who attained to faith and saluation by the teaching of the Apostles seuerally without any such argument of the Churches absolute authority Secondly taking the Gospell for the 4. bookes of the Euangelists I answer that there may be true faith true Churches without the knowledge of those bookes yea without the verie being of them as it is manifest by the former example many thousands being conuerted and many Churches setled without the knowledge and before the publishing or penning of them But to come to the verie point I answer further that it is a grosse absurditie to make men beleeue that there can be no certaine knowledge had that there is any Gospell but by giuing credit to the Church whereas no man can know that there is any such authoritie in the Church or any Church at all but by the authoritie of the Scripture It is more then ridiculous for me to beleeue that there is a companie of men infallibly taught of God which is the truth with authority to enioyne obedience to all men in whatsoeuer they will teach if I haue no better proofe of it then their owne word For since God hath indued man with reason it is both simplenesse and sinne for him to beleeue that which is vtterly against the light of reason if he haue no warrant from God so to do But warrant he can haue none to beleeue such a conceit of any company but from the scriptures as it is euident by your own course who make a place of scripture the ground of your whole disputation Therefore whereas you teach men first to know the Church and then by the Church the Scriptures we say this course is vtterly vnwarrantable hauing no foundation either in reason or reuelation Yea contrariwise we truly affirme that the Scripture must first be knowne at the least in that point of the authoritie of the Church and then the Church by the Scripture And this is Austins iudgement directly Let vs not heare saith he this I say this you say but let vs heare this saith the Lord. There are the Lords bookes to the authoritie of which both of vs consent both of vs giue credit both of vs yeeld obedience there let vs seek the Church there let vs discusse our question And afterward I will not haue the Church to be shewed by mens doctrines but by the Oracles of God And againe Let vs seeke the Church in the Canonicall Scriptures The like speeches are euerie where in that booke Whether we be schismaticks or you saith the same Austin let neither you nor me but Christ be asked that he may shew vs his Church But where shall we know what our Sauiour saith concerning his Church and how he would haue it knowne but in the Scriptures Yet I denie not that the ministerie of men is necessarie to giue notice that there are certaine bookes in which it hath pleased God to reueale the meanes of saluation to mankinde though I acknowledge not any authority in the Church whereby men should be bound to beleeue this their report when as yet they are ignorant that there is any such Church You will say then what shall we doe or how shall we know that there is any Gospell If you will giue me leaue I will shew you what course is to be takē When you vnderstand that there hath bin and is still an opinion that there are certaine bookes written by Gods authoritie and appointment to teach men the way to saluation do as any reasonable man would do in a matter of such importance Get the bookes reade and studie them with a true desire to see whether they be such as they are reported to be or no. And because thou knowest by nature that there is a God and that he onely is all-sufficient to discouer the truth of his owne purpose touching the estate of his creature call vpon him though in ignorance and weaknesse that it would please him to direct thee in this enquiry after the means of thy saluation
or happinesse This done thou shalt be sure to find by the euidence of truth manifested in those bookes that they are sent from God and not deuised by man If thou liue in such a place as affoordeth the interpretation of these bookes by the ministery of men vse that singular blessing of God with reuerence and care to vnderstand and thou shalt by the mercifull teaching of God acknowledge these books to be the word of God ordained for the saluation of thy selfe and other This will some man say may perhaps breed a perswasion that these bookes are from God but how shall we come to be infallibly sure of it How else but by the worke of the spirit of God in thy heart What say you must we runne to reuelations Who knowes the secrets of God but the spirit of God The truth it selfe discerned by that light which the spirit kindleth in our hearts worketh assurance of beleefe to which the testimonie of the spirit is added for our further confirmation Neither is this any other reuelation then you Papists require in this case For according to your doctrine no man can be perswaded infallibly of the truth of the Scripture either for the text or the interpretation but by the especiall teaching of the spirit otherwise he hath not faith but opinion of these matters Onely herein stands the difference betwixt vs that you say the argument whereby the spirit perswades vs to acknowledge the Scripture is the authoritie of the Church we affirme it is the euidence of truth which he makes vs to discerne by our vnderstanding enlightened and to approue by our will thereto inclined through his mightie and gracious worke vpon our soules The second part of your minor is that we could not haue knowne the Gospels of the foure Euangelists to be canonicall Scripture rather then those of Nicodemus and Thomas if we had not the testimonie of the Church Of the falsnesse of which opinion I shall need to say little because it is refuted in my answer to the former part For this knowledge is not bred in vs by resting vpon the Churches authoritie but by yeelding to the euidence of the truth discouered to our hearts by the teaching of the holy Ghost Concerning the authoritie of the Church in this point it were a presumptuous and vnreasonable thing for any man without very good proof or great likelihood of reason to deny or doubt of that which hath bin auouched so many yeares by the whole Christian world But to make question of the bookes of Scripture whether they be the word of God or no and to denie that there is any meanes to know them for such but the authoritie of the Church is the next way to open a gap to Atheisme to lay open Religion to the scorne of the world Can I not know the Scripture to be of God but by the authoritie of the Church How shal I then know it at all since it is not reasonable to beleeue there is any Church that hath such authoritie but by the warrant of the Scripture They do all they can to turne reasonable creatures into beasts who teach vs that we must beleeue the Church cannot erre because the Scripture saith so and yet denie that we can know there is any Scripture but by beleeuing it because the Church saith so This is to dance in a circle as if a man were coniured that he could not get out of it How shall I know there is a Church by the Scripture How shall I know there are any Scriptures by the Church Would your proud Clergie thus make fooles of Christian men if they did not despise them as voyd of all reason I wonder how your Pope Cardinals Bishops and the rest of your Cleargie can for beare laughing when they looke one vpon another and remember how they cosen and if I may vse the word in a matter of such importance gull the world with such palpable fooleries But your strumpet of Babylon hath made the Kings of the earth and all nations drunke with the cup of her fornications exalting her selfe aboue all that is called God and making her selfe the God of her slauish vassals But the Lord is iust who according to the Apostles prophefie hath sent the world strong delusions that they should beleeue lies that all they might be damned which beleeued not the truth but had pleasure in vnrighteousnesse And certainly if there were not a great measure of 12. blindnesse and sottishnesse in the hearts of men that Gods purpose might take effect it were vnpossible that reasonable men should so be lead by the nose to errour and destruction A. D. §. 5. Fourthly if the true doctrine of faith in all particular points must be foreknowne as a marke whereby to know the true Church then contrarie to that which hath bin proued the authoritie of the Church should not be a necessarie meanes whereby men must come to the knowledge of the true faith For if before we come to know which is the true Church we must by an other meanes haue knowne which is the true faith what need then is there for getting true faith already had to seeke or bring in the authoritie of the same Church A. W. This fourth reason and the next labour to proue that part of your first assumptiō in this Chapter which we deny not that the true doctrine of faith in euery particular point is not a good marke of the Church It would therefore be but lost labour to spend much time in the examining of them yet somewhat I must say and first to the former If the true doctrine of faith in all particular points must be foreknowne as a marke to know the true Church by then is not the autoritie of the true Church a necessary meanes to know the true doctrine of faith by But the authoritie of the true Church is a necessary meanes to know the true faith by Therefore the true doctrine of faith must not be foreknowne in all particular points as a marke to know the true Church by Your conclusion is no more then we grant the consequence of your maior about which you take some paines needs not your helpe for the proofe of it Your minor is false That which you brought before to prooue it before was answered A. D. §. 6. Fiftly if before we giue absolute and vndoubted credit to the true Church we must examine and iudge whether euery particular point of doctrine which it holdeth be the truth with authoritie to accept that onely which we like or which seemeth in our conceit right and conformable to Scripture and to reiect whatsoeuer we mislike or which in our priuate iudgement seemeth not so right and conformable then we make our selues examiners and iudges ouer the church and consequently we preferre our liking or disliking our iudgement and censure of the interpretation and sense of Scripture before the iudgement and censure of the
end of the world professing the true faith and being built vpon Christ vpon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles If then we restraine the Catholicknesse of the Church to vniuersalitie of place wherein as we haue seene persons are also contained The Catholicke Church is nothing else but the companie of the elect taken now ordinarily not onely out of the Iewes as heretofore till the comming of our Sauiour but also out of all nations and people whatsoeuer If we stretch it farther to vniuersalitie of time also which can hardly be prooued out of the ancient writers it comprehendeth all the elect that haue bene are and shall be from the beginning of the world to the end thereof And thus much of the Catholicke Church concerning the meaning and reason of the word Now to your proofe as it lieth not by way of refutation but of explication We grant as I haue said often that the Church is common to all people and places not shut vp any longer within the land of Iewry nor appropriated to the Iews and we condemne them of error who teach as sometimes the Donatists Rogatians did that it is enclosed in Affrick or Europe or Asia or America or any of these and not common to euerie one of them aswell as to any of them But this is not so to be vnderstood as if the Church of Christ must needs be in all these or many of these at once in any one time It is enough that we acknowledge the vniuersality of it de iure thogh we denie it to be here or there de facto To speake plaine it belōgeth to the nature of the Church of Christ to haue all places open to it it is no more tied to Rome or Ierusalem then it is to London or Paris yea it hath spred it selfe ouer the face of the whole earth and hath bene or shall be in euerie particular countrie but this largenesse hath not bene nor perhaps shall be at any one time but by succession as it hath pleased God to affoord the meanes of the Gospell and giue a blessing to it sometimes in one place sometimes in an other as your selfe presently acknowledge But this doth not prooue that it is a marke to know the Church by This reason of the name Catholicke is a mere deuise of your owne and without warrant of antiquitie I say more it is false too vnderstanding it as you do not of the Church of the elect but of a companie of men making knowne profession of the true faith For in the beginning when the Church of Christ was as pure and as glorious as euer it was since it stretched not it selfe beyond the borders of Iewrie but was for a time shut vp within the walles of Ierusalem till the Lord by Herods persecution made way for it to passe into all the world From that time forward it grew mightily and setled it selfe in many countries yea it ceased not to multiply till the reuealing of Antichrist who by little and little corrupted the truth of doctrine euen in the fundamentall points and so destroyed the Church of God out of these parts of the world where it had florished some hundreds of yeares Yet was not the world left without a true Church no not in these westerne countries but such was the state of it as that it remained in a few chosen seruants of God who were hidden like those fifties in Israel from the eies of your rauenous wolues the bloudthirsty Cleargy of your Romish Synagogue Saint Austin in that booke you alledge had to do with the Donatists who insolently and wickedly rent themselues from the vnion of all the christian Churches then in the world allowing no other Church of Christ but that faction of their owne in a part of Africa They neither could nor did charge the Churches which they condemned with any grosse error in doctrine but confidently affirmed without all ground of truth or likelihood of reason that the Churches planted by the Apostles were vanished out of the world for supply whereof I know not by what miracle their Church forsooth sprung vp vpon a sodaine in that corner of Africa This ridiculous conceit of theirs Austin refuteth by shewing that the Church is to be sought and found in the Scriptures and not in the deuises and dreames of men Let vs not heare saith Austin this I say this you say but let vs heare this saith the Lord The Lords bookes are to be had to the authoritie whereof both of vs consent both giue credit both of vs obey There let vs seeke the Church there let vs trie our cause And a little after I will not haue the Church shewed me by mens deuises but by the Oracles of God And againe afterward when the hereticks expound the performance of the promise made to Abraham Thy seed shall be as the sand of the sea and as the Starres of heauen as if it had bene fulfilled in Donatus and his companie Austin answereth Reade vs this out of the Law out of the Prophets out of the Psalmes out of the Gospell it selfe out of the Apostles writings reade it and we beleeue it This foundation being laid in the fiue first chapters Austin proceedeth to prooue the vniuersalnesse of continuance of the Church out of the Scriptures out of the old Testament in the three next chapters out of the new in the test So that the argument you speake of beginneth at the sixt chapter the Maior or propositiō is in the first chapters to the sixt the Assumption or Minor in the other that follow But because you leaue those three chapters that shew what the Church should be out of the old Testament I will follow your course and begin at the ninth where Austin sheweth that the Church was to begin at Ierusalem and so to passe into Samaria and from thence to spread it selfe through the whole world To this he bringeth in the Donatists thus answering These things say they we beleeue and confesse that they are fulfilled but afterward the world fell away and onely Donatus companie remained VVhat doth Austin replie Let them reade this to vs saith Austin as they reade of Enoch of Noe of Abraham Isaac and Iacob and of the Tribes which remained the rest rending themselues away and of the twelue Apostles who continued faithfull when all other fell away These examples the Donatists had brought to countenāce their schisme Austin willeth them to prooue their stedfastnesse when all other Churches failed by the same Scriptures which were to beare witnesse of those whom they alledged He goeth forward to refute other arguments of theirs in the chapter following still pressing them with this that they should shew out of the Scriptures that the Church founded by the Apostles was to vanish away and their faction onely to remaine sincere This was his course and indeed what other course could he haue taken The hereticks as before I
did borrow the propagation of faith and seeds of doctrine I make bold to alter your translation let the skilfull Reader iudge whether I haue cause or no. But what of all these Tertullian doth not say that no Church is to be accounted Apostolicke but that which can without interruption shew her descent from the Apostles nor that euery Church is true that can make such proofe of her original But whereas the hereticks against whom he there dealeth reiected and receiued Scripture at their choise and would neuer leaue wrangling Tertullian appeales to the iudgement of those Churches which were knowne to be founded by the Apostles and in which the truth was most likely to be found As for your argument of succession you shall heare Tertullians iudgment of it Let hereticks saith Tertullian in the same book faine a succession from the Apostles they shall get nothing by it For their doctrine compared with that the Apostles taught by the diuersitie and contrarietie thereof will declare that it came not from any Apostle or Apostolicke man because as the Apostles would not teach contrary one to another so Apostolick men would not deliuer doctrine contrary to the Apostles vnlesse they were such as were fallen away from the Apostles to preach otherwise then they did So then the chiefe triall of a true Church is by the doctrine of the Apostles and their successors in the truth because it is possible for hereticks to shew their descent from the Apostles or some Churches which had their beginning from the Apostles or Apostolicke men Yea it is manifest that the greatest heresies as the foure maine ones condemned in the foure first generall Councels had their beginning of them who could shew their pedegree step by step from the Apostles in respect of outward succession We haue soone how weakly you haue proued that personall succession is a thing belonging to the true Church it remaines that you proue it to be proper to the church and not common to it with heretickes To which purpose you thus reason No vpstart noueltie contrary to the former faith of the Church can haue any Apostle or Apostolicke man for founder thereof Euery heresie is an vpstart noueltie contrary to the former faith of the Church Therefore no heresie can haue any Apostle or Apostolicke man for the founder thereof How much more truly and reasonably spake Tertullian of the like matter when he said that no Apostolicke man taught contrary to the Apostles vnlesse he were such a one as was fallen from the Apostles He saw and acknowledged that it was possible for a man instructed by the Apostles themselues to forsake the truth of doctrine and become an author or maintainer of heresie Doth not Saint Iohn speake of some who being bred vp in the church by heresie departed from it What should I name Hymenaeus Alexāder Phygellus Hermogenes Nicolas and such like Hardly can you name me any heresie that euer tooke rooting but the first plant of it sprung vp in the nursery of the Church Therefore your maior is altogether vntrue being vnderstood as it is of Apostolicke men in respect of personall succession not of succeeding the Apostles in truth of doctrine But you thinke to make good your proposition by Tertullians authoritie who challengeth the heretickes to shew the beginning of their Churches from some Apostolicke men Is it possible you should either write or reade that sentence of Tertullian and not perceiue that it cuts the very throate of your cause Doth not Tertullian in the sentence alledged by you directly confirme our opinion and ouerthrow yours Let them shew vs their beginning saith Tertullian from some Apostolicke man Is that enough I if we beleeue you who define Apostolicknes by personal succeeding the Apostles But what saith Tertullian He in plaine termes requires such an Apostolicke man as perseuered with the Apostles and forsooke them not Now that by this perseuering with the Apostles and not forsaking them he meanes agreement in doctrine I proue it euidently by that which followeth in the same Chapter First Tertullian shewes that it is in vaine for them to pleade succession in place if their doctrine be found contrary to that which the Apostles deliuered I set downe the sentence before Secondly he doubts not to say that by the hereticks disagreeing from the Apostles in doctrine those Churches which cannot proue themselues to be Apostolicke by naming any Apostle or Apostolicke man as the first founder of them may yet conuince them not to be Apostolicke and are themselues to be counted Apostolicke because of their consent in doctrine with the Apostles This is the summe of Tertullians words the words themselues run thus To this triall namely by doctrine as the next sentence before sheweth shall the hereticks be called by those Churches which though they cannot alledge any Apostle or Apostolicke man for their founder as being of late and now daily planted yet agreeing in the same doctrine are neuerthelesse counted Apostolicke by reason of their agreement in doctrine Do you not see that Tertullian disputeth for vs against your pretended succession That he confesseth heretickes may alledge personall succession That he acknowledgeth those Churches for true which cannot deriue their pedegree from the Apostles or any Apostolicke man That he maketh the truth of doctrine agreeing with the Apostles a certaine and necessarie marke of the true Church And are you not ashamed for all this to bring Tertullian for an author of so grosse an error VVere you so blinde that you discerned not this your selfe or did you so despise your Readers that you presumed they would neuer haue the wit to see your ignorance or craft It is now discouered sufficiently and yet this one point more must be added that Tertullian requireth this shew of their Churches beginning not of all heretickes as you deceitfully alledge him if you read him your selfe and tooke him not vpon credit at some other mans hands but onely of those who pleade their continuance from the time of the Apostles If any heresies saith Tertullian dare fetch their continuance from the Apostles time that therefore they may seeme Apostolicke because they were while the Apostles liued we may say let them shew the beginning of their Churches let them vnfould the succession of their Bishops c. With such learning and conscience doe you Papists alledge the Fathers that he must needes be honester and wiser then you that will not beleeue you vpon your bare word VVe see then that to be Apostolicke in your sense is no good marke of a true Church because Hereticall Churches may so be Apostolicke and true Churches not Apostolicke and contrariwise that to be Apostolicke in doctrine as we expound it is a most certaine note whereby a true Church may be knowne and the same that we onely allow of A. D. §. 7. It appeareth therefore plaine enough that these foure properties One Holy
which we pleade not guiltie and looke to heare what euidence commeth against vs to proue the enditement But you rather like the foreman of the grand enquest then the plaintiffe that endites vs instead of prouing come in with I find that the Protestants Church is not perfectly one This will not serue the turne we must know how you finde it or at least be assured that you haue found it Who would not laugh at such an euidence But though you leaue the two former points to the credulousnesse of your Popish followers yet you attempt the proofe of the last by this Syllogisme They that admit no rule of faith but onely Scriptures and allow no infallible interpreter thereof to whose iudgement they will stand haue no meanes to end their controuersies and returne to vnitie But the Protestant Churches admit no rule of faith but onely Scriptures and allow no infallible interpreter thereof to whose iudgement they will stand Therefore the Protestant Churches haue no meanes to end their controuersies and returne to vnitie I denie your maior for the Scripture alone containes all truth necessarie to be beleeued and that so plainly that without any such soueraigne iudgement of any man it is possible for a reasonable man to discerne truth from falshood But if any man will be contentious we haue the sword of the magistrate and the censure of excommunication to bring him into order or to cut him off if he be incurable that the vnitie of our Churches be not dissolued either by heresic or schisme But to confirme your proposition you alledge Ieromes authoritie that there must be a head or chiefe ruler that occasion of schisme may be taken away The danger of schisme that Ierome speakes of in his first booke against Iouinian not as your Printer quotes it in the second was not in respect of doctrine but of outward peace Neither was this course held from the beginning as Ierome saith but in discretion appointed vpon occasion Before that by the malice of the diuell saith Ierome the Church was deuided into factions and one man held of Paul another of Apollo another of Cephas Churches were gouerned by common consent of the Presbyters but after that euery man began to thinke that those which hee had baptized were his and not Christs it was decreed ouer all the world that one chosen from among the Presbyters should be set ouer the rest to whom the whole care of the Church should appertaine and that the seeds of schismes might be taken away Out of which sentence of Ierome we may obserue these points First that this meanes of procuring vnitie belongeth not necessarily to the nature of the Church for then it must needs haue bene as auncient as the Church But Ierome telleth vs that there was a time when the Church was without it and that in her best estate while the Apostles liued By little and little saith Ierome afterward that the plants of dissention might be plucked vp the whole care was layed vpon one Secondly whereas in the place alledged by you Ierome acknowledgeth such a superioritie in Peter aboue the other Apostles in respect of age for which as he saith he was preferred before Iohn yet there is more heede to be taken to his iudgement in this place where he disputes the question without all passion then to that which hee speakes in the heate of disputation against Iouinian But what neede we any better proofe of this point then Saint Paul affoords vs He blameth the Corinthians because some held of Paul some of Apollos some of Cephas Cephas or Peter is the last why not the first rather if he were as you say the head Or why should the Corinthians be reproued for cleauing to him especially if he were appointed to be the chiefe It might be a fault to depend on Paule or on Apollos who were in your iudgement vnderlings but it was a great vertue to hang vpon Cephas the head How forgetfull was the Apostle Paul both of his dutie to Peter his head and of so readie a meanes to end that schisme that would not tell them that Peter was appointed head to the end all occasion of schisme might be taken away Thirdly we are not so to vnderstand Ierome as if he had said that there was one head appointed ouer the whole world but that in all places where there were multitudes of Presbyters order was taken that some one chosen from among the rest should be chiefe and principall in that Diocesse as I may speake and ouer all them which were in some sort accounted to be but one bodie This agreeth with the practise of those times and with that of Cyprian Here of spring heresies and schismes arise that the Priest of the Lord is not obeyed Which Cyprian speakes of euery seuerall Bishop in his Diocesse Whereunto also belongs that of Ierome There be seuerall Bishops of Churches seuerall Archbishops and seuerall Archdeacons and all the Ecclesiasticall order is stayed by the gouernours Whereby saith the Glosse Ierome proueth that there may not be two or more Bishops in one Church but that there must be a seuerall Bishop in euery seuerall Church To which purpose I may farther alledge another place of Ierome Vnlesse saith Ierome the Bishop haue a speciall power aboue other there will be as many schismes in the Church as there be Priests This course then of authorizing some one of the Presbyters aboue the rest was for the preseruing of order and keeping out of schisme not for the determining of controuersies in Religion as if all must haue stood to one mans iudgement in questions of Diuinitie which either may be ended by the authoritie of the Scriptures if they be necessary to be determined or if they be not may be forbidden to be proceeded in without any danger to the Churches libertie So that the Protestant Churches fully agree in matters of substance and want not meanes to settle peace in questions of lesse importance or if they did might easily haue as good meanes as your Church by appointing a Pope ouer themselues as in policie you haue done But as yet they finde no such need especially where the remedie is worse then the disease as it must needs be in so lawlesse a tyrannie Is it not more for the glory of God good of the Church as I haue said otherwhere that there should be continuall disagreement in some matters of Religion then that all should beleeue maintain false doctrine Were not our Sauiour Christ better haue a troubled church thē none at all Honorable war is to be preferred before dishonorable peace in the iudgement of any wise states-man And can it be more glorious to God to haue outward quietnesse in the Church with heresy yea with Antichristianisme then truth with contention True Christian vnitie consists principally in truth of religion without which the greatest agreement is but a conspiracy against God
Aposiles without change is Catholicke The Romane Church is vniuersall in time place and doctrine of the Apostles without change Therefore the Romane Church is Catholicke If to make a Church Catholicke it be required that she continue in the doctrine of the Apostles how did you before denie that the doctrine of the Apostles is a necessary and certaine marke of the true Church But if you leaue this out and affirme that Church to be Catholicke which is vniuersall in doctrine and thinke it not needfull that the doctrine professed be the Apostles I denie your maior The reasons of my deniall I deliuered in the former Chapter when I shewed that truth of doctrine was the most proper and true marke of the Church But whatsoeuer your maior be your minor is euidently false in euery part of it The very foundations of the doctrine of the Apostles are ouerthrowne by your Church in the heresies you hold concerning predestination iustification free will the insufficiencie of the Scriptures and the headship of Antichrist your Pope Neither do you onely faile in the doctrine of the Apostles but in your vniuersalitie of time For how can that doctrine be said to haue bin always which was not taught by our Sauiour and his Apostles As for vniuersalitie in regard of the ample vniformitie of your doctrine if you speake of your Churches determination many points of great moment are not as yet defined by it for example take those maine questions whether the Pope be aboue the Councell or no whether he haue without a Councell priuiledge of not erring or no whether there be any merit of congruitie or no and such like Yea your Church denieth the chiefe point of all which in the Apostles time was held by all true Christians that iustification is by faith without the workes of the law I forbeare to shew the reasons of that I affirme because any man may setch them out of my former answer in this and the last Chapter I looked for proofe of your minor but you were too wise to vndertake a matter so vnpossible and therefore in stead of that you challenge vs to shew and proue the contrarie forgetting that it is the repliers part to proue and not the answerers But I pray you tell me in earnest did you neuer heare of any particulars whereby we except against your doctrine as none of the Apostles What a vaine flourish is this then to demaund new proofes of vs and neuer once assay to answer those we haue alreadie brought But I haue made answer to your challenge in my refutation of your proofe that your Church is one Yea our mens bookes are full of these points and proofes both out of Scriptures and Fathers As for your brag of being able to shew diuers points that we hold or denie otherwise then the true Church did in the time of the Apostles it is well knowne that in most controuersies betwixt vs you are faine to flie from the Scriptures of God to the writings of men and deuise interpretations to serue your turne In some points we denie not but that we dissent from the opinion of some writers of former ages but that we go against the iudgement of the whole Church before it became Antichristian neither we graunt nor you can proue And euen for those times of error we want not the testimonie of learned men to auouch our doctrine against your heresies But you call vpon vs to set downe the point of doctrine the author the time the place what companie did oppose themselues against it and who they were that did continue in the profession of the former faith What needs all this ado Wil it not serue the turne if we make it manifest that your doctrine is contrary to that the Apostles taught vnlesse we can shew you when euery one of your errors was first hatched What if the Scribes and Pharises had demaunded the like questions of our Sauiour Christ touching their errors reproued by him There is no doubt but that as he was God he could haue declared euery one of these particulars but do you thinke he would haue fed their foolish humor in this case and not haue contented himselfe with shewing that it was not so from the beginning Some of our Ministers haue truly and wittily refuted this conceit of yours by shewing how absurd it is for a man that is sicke of the plague a surfet or any such disease to denie that he is so diseased because the Physition cannot tell him at what time and in what place vpon what occasion in what companie he first tooke the infection or distempered his bodie by ill diet Is it a good plea against plaine and sound euidence whereby I proue that such a Lordship ought to be mine that I cannot shew when and how I lost the possession of euery seuerall close and meadow farme and cottage But to take away all iust excuse from you our writers haue shewed the first beginnings of many of your errors and might haue done of more if al were extant that hath bin written and your inquisitors and censurers had not as you call it purged indeed corrupted and maimed the writings of former ages wheresoeuer they made against you if you could light on them before they were too well knowne in the world This challenge hath as much reason as the former We must proue that there haue not bene some in euery countrey where the Gospell hath bene professed that haue held your Romane faith Or rather must not you proue your Catholicknesse by such induction But we confesse it to be likely that the diuell hath from time to time sowed some of your tares amongst the Lords wheate But that your whole faith as now you hold it was euer maintained any where till the last Councell of Trent we challenge you to proue if you can Surely the Greeke Church euen till this day dissenteth from you in many and some no small matters as your Popes supremacie that I may not name those Christians who are in precious Iohns countrey in Armenia and other parts of the world to whom your doctrine is as little knowne in a manner as ours is to those Indians you spake of Amongst whom for ought you can proue or know to the contrary there may be and in all liklihood are some to whom the Lord hath giuen grace to rest wholly vpon Iesus Christ for pardon of their sinnes without any mingling of their owne workes with Christs to procure them the inheritance of heauen All such we challenge to be of our Church though they agree with you in many of your errors through their ignorāce of the Scriptures As for our countrey of England which like that harlot you call deare as oft as you conceiue hope of bringing it into subiection to the Pope but otherwise wish it wholly destroyed as shee did the child it neither was conuerted by your proud Monke Austine but peruerted rather
this possibilitie tooke effect in me I may thanke my selfe more then God so that by this doctrine the glorie of euerie particular mans saluation is more due to the partie saued then to God the Sauiour Now on the contrarie side if that we teach be true the losse falles on mans part and not vpon Gods Is any man drawne out of the Iawes of hell and damnation The whole glorie redounds to God It was he that prouided meanes of saluation it was he that gaue me in particular knowledge of that meanes It was he that when I was as vntoward and vnwilling to be saued as the most damned reprobate wrought me to beleeue can I euer be vnmindfull or vnthankfull by inclining my heart to like and accept of his grace and faith in Christ But in the meane while I loose the commendation and the glory of vsing the grace of God well by my free-will O Adam Adam earth and ashes how fast doth that pride of nature whereby thou wast destroyed in thy selfe though in thee it were not naturall cleaue to euerie one of thy posteritie We had rather be thought able to gouerne our selues then be gouerned by God It is more pleasing to vs to hazard our saluation vpon the nice choise of our owne free-will then to be assured of it by the mercie of God working in vs this choise to will O that as we are all partakers of Adams pride so we might also partake with his repentance and faith Would Adam trow ye if it might be put to his choise againe venture vpon his owne free-will though he were as pure as euer he was rather then rest secure vpon Gods almightie and most certaine protection No no blessed soule he knoweth by wofull experience though by Gods vnspeakable goodnesse to his and our greater glorie that he and he only is out of danger who resignes himselfe into Gods hands to be disposed of at his gracious pleasure Why refuse we to be like to Adam in this Will we follow him in that onely of which onely he is ashamed Is it not more glorie to arise with him then to haue fallē with him O why do we euery day renew the memorie of his fault by committing the like Doth the brightnesse of the truth in these points dazle your eies Me thinks I see many of you offering to presse forward as it were to take the kingdome of heauen the doctrine of the Gospell by violence why recoile you Why quaile you on a sodaine The bare name of the Church not onely stayeth you but beateth you backward The Romish Church cannot erre VVho telleth you so Surely they that can erre your Priests and Iesuits Giue me leaue I pray you to question with you a little and for a minute of an hower be content to make vse of that reason and knowledge which God hath giuen you without forestalling your iudgements by preiudice of the authoritie of the Church Doth it not appeare to you by the light of naturall reason that the maine end of all religion is the glorie of God Do not your owne consciences testifie in the simplicitie of your hearts that it maketh more for the glorie of God that men should be beholding to his Maiestie for their saluation then that they should procure it to themselues Is it not also apparent to you in the secret of your owne soules that our doctrine by beating downe the pride of mans free-will aduanceth the glorie of Gods mercie and yours by hoysing vp the conceit of mans good choise presseth downe the estimation of Gods vnspeakable goodnesse And shall an idle sound weigh more with you then sound reason Consider I beseech you what weake grounds you build this opinion of the Church vpon I will point at that which in my answer I haue handled Can you in any sort compare the opinion of the Churches authoritie with the euidence of those matters wherewith before I pressed you Is it as cleere that there are certaine men whom I must beleeue whatsoeuer they teach as it is that I must seeke the aduancing of Gods glory more then of mine owne pride Are you as sure that these Priests and Iesuits which are your teachers be sent by the true Church and deliuer nothing but the doctrine of the true Chruch as you are that they who perswade you to rest wholy vpon God and not at all vpon your selues shew you the right way to procure Gods glory and your owne saluation Tush say you all is nothing vnlesse I beleeue it vpon the credit of the Church Alaste how did the first Christians who neuer thought on the authoritie of the Church when they heard and beleeued the Apostles doctrine Looke ouer all the Historie of the Actes peruse the Sermons of Peter and Paule and tell me whether you finde that euer they pleaded the authoritie of the Church to procure beleefe of their doctrine After men are conuerted the authoritie of the Church hath her due place and must beare sway in matters in different but for the auowing of truth her bare word is neuer of sufficient importance It was the doctrine of the Apostles that wrought vpon the hearts of men by the cleare euidence of it through the power of the Spirit wherewith it was accompanied What that doctrine was where should we learne but in the scriptures wherein they haue written what they preached These you say giue such authoritie to the Church This were somewhat if you made not their authoritie in respect of vs to depend vpon the Church The scriptures say your Doctors haue in themselues authoritie as being from God but they are not of authoritie to vs but onely by the authoritie of the Church I perceiue you are ashamed of these absurdities The Church must be beleeued vpon her word Why so The Scripture saith so How shall I know that these bookes are scripture The Church saith so The Church and the scripture prooue each other by their mutuall testimonie they giue each of other I beleeue the Church because the scripture biddeth me I beleeue the scripture because the Church biddeth me If these things seeme to be absurd as indeed they are most absurd blinde not your selues any longer with such mists of errour but come out of them to the cleare light of the scriptures reade them diligently meditate in them carefully call vpon God for his grace earnestly resigne your selues and your free-will to him sincerelie and the Lord that is most readie to blesse them that vse the meanes of knowledge and faith in humilitie and singlenesse of heart will assuredly enlighten your vnderstanding and incline your affections that you shall discerne like of and embrace the true doctrine of Iustification by faith in Iesus Christ and shall renounce your owne righteousnesse and free-will to the glorie of his grace and the present comfort and euerlasting saluation of your bodies and soules through the same his sonne to whom with the Father and the holy Ghost be all
no man euer dreamed of viz. that we commonly build our faith vpon our English translation So that the Scripture may well be the rule of faith for ought that you haue said against it concerning the first propertie of certaine truth which it were blasphemie to denie of the scripture For the second that the rule must be easie to vnderstand I haue shewed that there is no necessitie of that condition and that the scripture is easie in matters necessary to saluation In the last point of the scriptures defect touching many things that must needs be beleeued you do both wrong God in making his word writtē so vnperfect and by a foolish craft insteed of proouing that the scripture containeth not all matters of faith needfull to saluation vndertake to shew that which no man denieth that all points of beleefe are not expresly set down and determined by scripture And lest we should forget your shuffling in this point you offer new proofe of a needlesse matter from the authoritie of Austin Basil and Epiphanius whose testimonies I alledged before to prooue the sufficiencie of the scripture in all matters necessarie to saluation The places by you alledged are not of such matters neither speake of things not expresly contained but onely shew that for matters of fact ceremonie the Apostles haue not determined al particulars The Apostles saith Austin haue commaunded nothing touching not rebaptising them which haue bene baptised by hereticks but the custome which was pleaded against Cyprian is to be beleeued to haue had beginning from their tradition as there are many things which the Church euery where holdeth that we wel beleeue therefore to haue beene enioyned by the Apostles though they are not found written What is this to prooue that there are matters necessarie to be beleeued to saluation which are not exprest in the scriptures Basil was not the the author of that Treatise at the least of the latter part of it from about the 17. chapter and so forward That appeareth first by obseruing the difference of style being neither like Basils writing nor in one place like an other as Erasmus hath truly obserued who translated it Secondly by the fond discourse he maketh propounding one thing handling an other and concluding a third which not onely Basil would neuer haue done but no man of any discretion Last of all he bewraieth himselfe to be a counterfeit by speaking of Meletius as one dead long before who liued in his time ouerliued him as it is manifest by the Ecclesiasticall historie But admit the booke were Basils what is there in it to proue that all points of doctrine which appertaine to true Christian faith are not expresly set downe in Scripture This Author saith that we must beleeue oraditions VVhat In matters of doctrine There is no such word in him He speaketh of outward carriage in ceremonies and phrases of speech The question in that part of his Treatise is of the preposition with that is to speake that euery man may vnderstand whether it be lawfull to say in the Church seruice and otherwise Glorie be to the Father and to the Sonne with the holy Ghost or whether we must needs say and to the holy Ghost not with For this speech that author pleades tradition Do we denie any such matter Or do we not acknowledge the libertie and authoritie of the Churches in such matters Who sees not that our custome now is to say Glory be to the Father to the Sonne and to the holy Ghost Not that thereby we condemne the other kind of speech but because in matters left to our libertie we take that which seemeth fittest Epiphanius speaking of praier for the dead which hath no warrant of Scripture is glad to helpe himselfe with the authoritie of tradition telling vs that some things must be held by tradition and not all taken out of the scriptures But Epiphanius doth not say that this is a doctrine or action necessarie to saluation A. D. §. 6. Some obiect against this conclusion that place of S. Paul Omnis Scriptura diuinitùs inspirata vtilis est ad docendum c. vt perfectus sit homo c. But this place prooueth nothing against that which I haue said For it saith not that scripture alone is sufficient to instruct a man to perfection but that it is profitable for this purpose as it is indeed and the rather because it commendeth vnto vs the authoritie of the Church which as I shall afterwards proue is sufficient Now it is certaine that to be profitable and to be of it selfe alone sufficient be farre different things Stones and Timber be profitable to the building of an house yet they alone without a worke-man to square them and set them in order be not sufficient for this purpose A. W. Of this place I haue spoken sufficiently otherwhere and shewed that the Scriptures are able to make vs wise to saluation and therefore sufficient to that purpose Now the Apostle hauing giuen that commendation to the scripture vers 15. proceedeth in the next to exemplifie that in particular which he had before said in generall It is able to make thee wise to saluation it is able to fit thee to teaching reproouing correcting instructing Can any reasonable man thinke that the Apostle deliuering by way of amplification his former commendation of the scripture that he might the rather stirre vp Timothie to the studie of it would say lesse then he had done before But it is a great deale lesse to say no more but the scripture is profitable to such purposes then to commend it as able to make a man wise to saluation Therefore though the word indeed doe not expresly signifie sufficiencie yet it cannot be doubted but the profit mentioned implieth such a sufficiencie especially since he addeth perfection which must arise from this word of God And so as I haue shewed elsewhere do Chrysostome and Theophylact vnderstand it who make the Apostle speake to Timothie to this effect that he being now to be offred vp leaueth the scriptures in his steed of which he may in all things take aduise and counsell as if the Apostle himselfe were present with him But you forsooth would make vs beleeue that the scripture is indeed profitable to this end but not sufficient Is not the knowledge of arts tongues philosophy and history of verie good vse also to this purpose Slender then too slender is the commendation our Apostle giueth the scriptures if it be of no greater excellēcy then these humane furtherances but only in a certain degree of profit To helpe the matter you propound one particular for which the scripture is profitable namely to commend vnto vs the authority of the Church But neither doth it cōmend to vs any such authority as you imagin if that be the rule of the scripture one sentēce had bin as good better then