because the verities therein contained are necessary to be belieued for this very necessity you cannot belieue but by belieuing aforehand the Scripture but contrarily you may reiect the verities themselues if you be not preobliged to belieue the diuine authority of the bookes wherein they are contained 5. Againe you say that Scripture is the only Rule of Christian Fayth (e) Cap. 2 per totum yet it is not necessary to Saluation to belieue it to be a rule of Fayth no nor to be the Word of God The first part of this doctrine is the scope of your whole second Chapter The second is taught purposely and at large in the same Chapter (f) Pag. 116. pag. 116. n. 159. Ioyne these two assertions and the Conclusion will be That we are not obliged to receiue that which is the only ordinary meanes of attayning Christian Fayth namely the Scriptures And therefore in the ordinary way we cannot be bound to imbrace Christian Fayth seeing it cannot be compassed without the meanes to attaine to it For how can one be obliged to attayne an end and yet be left free to reiect the only meanes of atchieuing that end I am the freer to make this question because you concurre with me in the answere when you say (g) Pag. 16. It was necessary that God by his prouidence should preserue the Scripture from any vndiscernable corruption in those things which he would haue knowne otherwise it is apparent it had not been his will that these things should be knowne the only meanes of continuing the Knowledge of them being perished Now is it not in effect all one whether the Scripture haue perished or whether it be preserued if in the meane time we be not bound to belieue that it is the Rule of Fayth and word of God Nay seeing as things now stand we may find the verityes contayned in Scripture sufficiently expressed in innumerable other bookes we may at this present in conformity to your doctrine reiect all the holy Scripture contenting our selues with the contents thereof taken from other Authors and not from the writers of the Bible 6. The Doctrine which he carryeth through his whole Booke but particularly insisteth vpon in his third Chapter that we cannot learne from Scripture it selfe that it is Canonicall but only from Tradition of men deliuering it from hand to hand is no lesse iniurious and derogatiue to holy Scripture then the former speaking of men in his sense that is not as endued with any infallible assistance of the holy Ghost which Catholicks belieue of the Church but only as wise or many men or for the like human qualifications for to this effect he sayth (h) Pag. 72. n. 51. Tradition is a principle not in Christianity but in Reason not praper to Christians but common to all men This is certainly the right course to blast the Authority of holy Scripture not to maintaine it For besides that which I haue touched already that by this meanes we are not so certaine of Scripture as of profane bookes he must come at length to resolue the beliefe of Scripture into the Tradition or Authority of Pagans Iewes Turkes or condemned Hereticks as well as of true Christiās For seeing errours against fayth or Heresies cannot in his principles be discerned but by Scriptures before they be receaued the testimony of one man concerning the admittance of them must weigh as much as of another and be considered only as prooceeding from a number of men be they faythfull or Infidels true Christians or condemned Hereticks 7. And further according to the same principles he must acknowledge that he belieueth some parts of Canonicall Scripture with a more firme assent then others to wit as they haue been deliuered with more or lesse generall consent or haue been more or lesse once questioned which is to depriue Canonical Scripture of all Authority For if once we giue way to more or lesse in the behalfe of Gods word we shall end in nothing And this hath the more force in this mans doctrine who professeth that the greatest certainty which he hath of any part of Scripture is within the compasse of probability What certainty then shall those Scriptures haue which participate of that probability in a lesse and lesse degree according as they haue been deliuered with different tradition and consent How this doctrine will sound in the eares of all true Christians I leaue to be considered contenting my selfe to oppose your Assertion with the discourse of D. King afterward Bishop of London in the beginning of his first Lecture vpon Ionas where amongst other things he sayes Comparisons betwixt Scripture and Scripture are both odious and daungerous The Apostles names are euenly placed in the writings of the holy foundation With an vnpartiall respect haue the children of Christs family from time to time receiued reuerenced imbraced the whole volume of Scriptures You on the other side speake in a different strayne and say thus (i) Pag. 67. n. 36. I may belieue euen those questioned Bookes to haue been written by the Apostles and to be Canonicall but I cannot in reason belieue this of them so vndoubtedly as of those bookes which were neuer questioned And elswhere The Canon of Scripture (k) Pag. 69. n. 45. as we receiue it is built vpon vniuersall Tradition For we do not professe our selues so absolutly and vndoubtedly certaine neither do we vrge others to be so of those Bookes which haue byn doubted as of those which neuer haue By this meanes what will become of the Epistle of S. Iames the second Epistle of S. Peter the second and third of S. Iohn the Epistle to the Hebrewes and the Apocalyps of S. Iohn And what part of Scripture hath not been questioned by some and those some so many as would haue made vs doubt of the works of Tully or Liuy c. if they had affirmed them not to haue been written by such Authours And the only doubting of Erasmus or some such other about the workes of some Fathers hath caused them to be questioned by diuers vpon much weaker grounds as difference of stiles or the like 8. In another place you tell vs (l) Pag. 68. n. 43. that to receiue a Booke for Canonicall it is inough to haue had attestation though not vniuersall yet at least sufficient to make considering men receiue them for Canonicall which were sometimes doubted of by some yet whose number and authority was not so great as to preuaile against the contrary suffrages Obserue vpon what inextricable passages and lesse degrees of probability this man doth put vs in our beliefe of holy Scripture First we must settle our Fayth on men then on considering men though the consent be not vniuersall thirdly vpon the greater and more preualent number and authority of suffrages as if the greater number alone without infallible assistance of the holy Ghost were a sufficient ground for Christian Fayth You deny pag.
I cannot perceiue some fallacy in my reasons against it or neuer hereafter open your mouth in defence of it I answere it seemes to me that your reasons are already sufficiently prooued to be fallacyes since from them either nothing can be deduced for your purpose or else you must acknowledge your selfe to haue no certainty that there is a God that vertue is to be imbraced or that Christian Fayth is euen probable 7. And yet I adde that you must in another respect also solue your owne obiections Remember these your words (zz) Pag. 36.37 Yet all This I say not as if I doubted that the spirit of God being implored by deuout and humble prayer and sincere obedience may and will by degrees aduance his seruants higher and giue them a certainty of adherence beyond their certainty of euidence And elswhere (a) Pag. 112. Gods spirit if he please may work more a certainty of adherence beyond certainty of euidence Now you caÌ„not deny but that these men may be tempted against their Fayth by inuoluntary doubting that they may increase in it that they may commit some deliberat sinne and may make daily progresse in Charity and good workes euen by the greater increase of their Fayth and yet you graunt them a certainty of adherence beyond their certainty of euidence And so in this case your selfe must answere your owne arguments and confesse them to be but fallacies Euen your maine reason that Christian Fayth can be endued with no stronger certainty then the probable motiues on which it relyes by this selfe same instance is proued a Sopbisme For now you grant a certainty of Fayth not without probable arguments of credibility yet not for them it being more certaine then they are and therefore you are still put vpon a necessity of answering your owne arguments And whereas pag. 330. you make a shew of answering this particuler obiection really you do not answere but plainly contradict your self labouring to prooue that it is impossible that there should be a certainty of adherence beyond the certainty of euidence as the Reader may cleerly see and shall be demonstrated in due time 8. One thing more I must not let passe and it is That whereas you say We would fayne haue Christian Fayth belieued to be infallible that there might be some necessity of our Churches infallibility it seemes you are apt inough to yield infallibility to Gods Church if once it be granted that Christian Fayth is infallible And with good reason For seeing you teach that vniuersall Tradition and other arguments of credibility cannot produce an infallible beliefe of holy Scripture and of the mysteries belieued by Christians it must follow that some other infallible meanes must be found out for the propounding to vs the holy Scriptures which other infallible meanes euen according to your persuasion being not Scripture it selfe nor euery mans priuate spirit there remaynes only the authority of the Catholicke Church which as an instrument of the holy Ghost may be an infallible propounder both of Scripture and all diuine verities Wherein there is a large difference betweene the Church and other Iudges These in their sentences or determinations intend not to deliuer points of infallible Fayth as the Church must intend and do it if once it be granted that from her we must receiue holy Scriptures and belieue them with a certaine and infallible assent of Christian Fayth The second Doctrine Chap. 3. That the assurance which we haue of Scriptures is but morall CHAP. III. 1. THis man magnifies holy Scriptures in many places as the only thing on which he relyes his Saluation but whosoeuer shall walke along with him from place to place marke well his wayes will find that they lead to the quite contrary and shew that he neither doth value them to their right worth nor doth lay any other grounds but such as are more apt to breed disesteeme then esteeme of them This may be seene in that he teacheth (b) Pag. 141. 62. That our assurance that the Scripture hath been preserued from any materiall alteration and that any other booke of any profance writer is incorrupted is of the same kind and condition both morall assurances 2. If this may be allowed it must necessarily follow that the assurance which we haue of Scripture must in degree be much inferiour to the assurance which we haue of such bookes of prophane Authors as haue a more full testimony and tradition of all sorts of men to wit Atheists Pagans Iewes Turkes Christians wheras the bookes holy Scripture are either vnknowne or impugned by all except ChristiaÌ„s by some also who would beare of Christians and consequently the morall assurance of them and of the incorruptednesse of them is the much the lesse and of lesse morall credit And by so same reason whosoeuer builds vpoÌ„ this mans grouÌ„ds cannot haue so great assurance that there was a Iesus Christ that he had disciples and much lesse that he wrought wonderous things and lesse then this that those wonders were true miracles as that there was a Coesar Alexander Pompey c. or that they fought such battailes and the like For these things descend to vs by a more vniuersall tradition then the former (c) Pag. 116. Do not your selfe speake thus We haue as great reason to belieue there was such a man as Henry the Eight King of England as that Iesus Christ suffered vnder Pontius Pilate You should haue said we haue greater reason to belieue it if we consult humane inducements only and consequently if Christian Fayth be not absolutely infallible euen aboue the motiues of credibility we are more certaine that there was a King Henry then a Iesus Christ A thing which no true Christian can heare without detestation 3. That which followes out of the same 116. page is of the like nature laying a ground for vn wary people to reiect Scripture For hauing spoken of some barbarous Nations that belieued the doctrine of Christ and yet belieued not the Scripture to be the word of God (d) Pag. 116. for they neuer heard of it and Fayth comes by hearing you adde these words Neither doubt I but if the bookes of Scripture had byn proposed to them by the other parts of the Church where they had been before receiued and had been doubted of or euen reiected by thâ—se barbarous nations but still by the bare beliefe and practise of Christianity they might be saued God requiring of vs vnder paine of damnation only to belieue the verities therein contained and not the diuine authority of the bookes wherein they are contained 4. If this be granted why might not any Church haue reiected the Scriptures being proposed by other parts of the Church And why may not we do so at this day Nay seeing de facto we know the verities of Christian Fayth by Scripture only according to your doctrine we cannot be obliged to belieue the Scriptures
knew to be such so in this place his owne Iudgment touching some things which God had not particularly reuealed vnto him This doctrine is subiect to the same iust exceptions which were alleadged against the former For if once we deny vniuersall infallibility to the Apostles we cannot belieue them with infallibility in any one thing but still we may be doubting whether they speake out of their owne spirit and not by diuine Reuelation though they should euen declare in what sort they intend to speake because we may feare they are deceiued in those very declarations And as you will perhaps say they write Diuine Reuelations except in things which they professe to deliuer as the Dictates of human human reason and prudence another will say that they must or may be vnderstood to deliuer the dictats of human reason and prudence whensoeuer they do not in expresse rearmes professe to deliuer diuine Reuelations which is very seldome the ordinary custome of holy Scripture being to deliuer verityes without any such qualifying of them And if S. Paul when in the Epistle and Chapter by you cited v. 40. sayes of himselfe I thinke that I also haue the spirit of God might be deceiued in that thought of his we may also say he might be deceiued euen when he affirmes that he writes by the spirit of God and much more may we doubt when he expresses no such thing as commonly neither he nor any other Canonicall writers doe 6. In the words which you cite To the rest speake I not the Lord S. Paul treates of a very important matter that is of the wiues departing from her husband or the husbands from his wife Wherein if S. Paul were subiect to errour he might chance to haue taught a point of great Iniustice against the commaund of our Sauiour declaring the very Law of nature What God hath ioyned togeather let not man separate (s) Mat. 19.6 And as for the words you alleadge in the second place Concerning virgins I haue no commandment of our Lord but I deliuer my Iudgment the Apostle afterwards within the compasse of the selfe same discourse sayes that a man sinnes not if he marry wherin if S. Paul may be deceiued as speaking out of his owne spirit as you say he doth in some precedent words you will not only want this text to prooue with certainty that marriage is lawfull but whensoeuer marriage is allowed in any other place of Scripture as Hebr. 13. v. 4. Marriage is honourable in all you haue put into the mouthes of the old and moderne heretiques who impugned the lawfullnes of marriage a ready answere that those texts of Scripture were but the Dictats of human reason and prudence wherein the writers of Canonicall Scripture might be deceiued 7. The other words Speake I not the Lord shew only that our Sauiour left power for the Apostles and his Church to aduise counsaile ordaine or commaund some things as occasion might require which himselfe had not commaunded or determined in particular which truth if you hold to be only a Dictate of human reason you open a way for refractary spirits to oppose the ordinances of their Superiours and Prelats in things not expressely commaunded by our Lord. 8. The last Words v. 25. Concerniug virgins I haue no commandment of the Lord but I deliuer my Iudgment which we translate but I giue counsaile prooue indeed our Catholicke Doctrine concerning workes of supererogation or Counsayles in regard that the Apostle in this place persuades virginity as the better but commaunds it not as necessary Yet they do in no wise imply any doubtfulnesse or fallibility in the Apostles neuer any hitherto besides your selfe offering to answere our argumeÌ„t by saying the Apostle wrote only the dictate of human reason or prudence and so might be deceiued Which answere had been very obuious if they had presumed to be so bold as you are with the Apostles and therefore it is a signe that no man besides your selfe durst deliuer this doctrine 9. Certainly if the Apostles did sometimes write by the motion of the holy Ghost and at other times out of their owne priuate Iudgment or spirit though it were granted that themselues could discerne the diuersity of those motions or spirits which one may easily deny if their vniuersall infallibility be once impeached yet it is cleere that others to whom they spake or wrote could not discerne the diuersity of those spirits in the Apostles For which cause learned Protestants acknowledge that although ech mans priuate spirit were admitted for direction of himselfe yet it were not vsefull for teaching others Thus you say pag. 141. A supernaturall assurance of the incorruption of Scripture may be an assurance to ones selfe but no argument to another And as you affirme (t) Pag. 62. that bookes that are not Canonicall may say they are and those that are so may say nothing of it so we cannot be assured that the Apostles deliuer diuine Reuelations though they should say they doe nor that they deliuer not such Reuelations though they say nothing thereof if once we deny their vniuersall infallibility 10. Now I beseech the good Reader to reflect vpon this mans endeauours to ouerthrow the holy Scriptures and Christianity and to what at last he tends by these degrees First he sayth our beliefe that Scripture is the word of God exceedes not probability 2. Amongst those Bookes which we belieue to be the word of God we belieue some with lesse probability then others Thirdly we may be saued though we neither belieue that Scripture is the Rule of Fayth nor that it is the word of God Fourthly our assurance that Scripture or any other Booke is corrupted is of the same kind and condition both only morall assurances Fifthly the writers of holy Scripture might erre in things which they deliuered not constantly or not as diuine Reuelations but dictates of human reason or if they deliuered any doctrine not confirmed by miracles Sixtly vpon the same ground he might say that the Apostles were infallible only when they deliuered things belonging to Fayth Piety or Religion not when they wrote things meerely indifferent or of no great moment in themselues as some Socinians (u) Volkel l. 5. c. 5. Dom. Lopez de Authorit sac Script eyther grant or care not much to deny And then further it will be left to euery mans iudgement what is to be accounted a matter of moment And soone after it will be said that to search whether the doctrine of the Blessed Trinity for example be contained in Scripture or no is not much necessary since a man without knowledge of that speculatiue doctrine may belieue and loue God as a chiefe Socinian teaches (w) Iren. Philâ—leth dissertatione de Pace Ecclesiae and your selfe affirme (x) Pag. 37. that any Fayth if it worke by loue shall certainly auaile with God and be accepted of him And then will some say Why may not a
should subiugate their vnderstandings to the beliefe of contradictions which yet as I said before he iudgeth either impossible or at least vnreasonable (d) Ibid. And who I pray can vndertake against a cauilling wit to answere all arguments obiected against the Blessed Trinity Incarnation and other sublime verityes of Christian Fayth and compose all seeming repugnances after an intelligible manner Deuines are not ignorant what inexplicable difficulties offer themselues euen concerning the Deity it selfe for example his Immutability Freedom of will voluntary decrees knowledge of creatures and the like Must we then deny them because we are not able to compose all repugnances after an intelligible manner It may seeme that you are of opinion that we must to which persuasion if you adde another Doctrine of yours That there is no Christian Church assisted with Infallibility fit to teach any man euen such articles as are fundamentall or necessary to saluation but that euery one may and must follow the Dictates of his owne reason be he otherwise neuer so vnlearned what wil follow but a miserable freedome or rather necessity for men to reiect the highest and most diuine misteries of Christian Fayth vnlesse you can either compose all repugnances after a manner euen intelligible to euery ignorant and simple person which I hope you will confesse to be impossible or els say it is reasonable for men to belieue contradictions at the same time which by your confession were very vnreasonable 5. And here I appeale to your owne Conscience whether in true Philosophy the obiections which may be made against the mystery of the Blessed Trinity and the Incarnation of the sonne of God be not incomparably more difficult then any which can be brought against Trāsubstantiation Some one whom you know could say in some company where there was occasion of arguing Either deny the Trinity or admit of Transubstantiation and it was answered We will rather admit this then deny that And with good reason For if we respect human discourse there are more difficult obiections against that mistery then against this And if we regard Reuelation Scripture is more cleare for the reall presence and Transubstantiation then for the mystery of the Blessed Trinity But no wonder if they who reduce all certainty of Christian Fayth to the weight of naturall reason are well content vnder the name of Transubstantiation to vndermine the doctrine of the Blessed Trinity and all the prime verityes proper to Christian Fayth For which cause I haue some reason as I touched before (d) Chap. 6. n. 6. not to be satisfyed that this man for all his bragges of belieuing Scripture doth make that account of it which Christians doe and ought to doe but deludes the Reader with specious words as for example when speaking of the holy Scripture he sayes (e) Pag. 376. Propose me any thing out of this Booke and require whether I belieue it or not and seeme it neuer so incomprehensible to human reason I will subscribe it with hand and hart as knowing no demonstration can be stronger then this God hath said so Therefore it is true These are glorious words but contrary to his owne principles For resoluing Fayth into Reason he cannot belieue that which to his reason seemes contradictory but must thinke that the Motiues for which he receiues Scripture being but probable and subiect to falshood must of necessity yield to arguments more then probable and demonstratiue to human reason And how then can he subscribe to Mysteryes incomprehensible to human reason and capable of obiections which cannot alwayes be answered after a manner intelligible as he requires And consequently he must to vse his owne words giue me leaue to belieue that either he doth not belieue those misteryes or els that he subiugates his vnderstanding to the beliefe of seeming contradictions which he acknowledges to be vnreasonable and a thing which men should not doe according to his owne words (f) Pag. 217. And the Reader had need to take heed that he be not taken also with that protestation of his (g) Pag. 376. I know no demonstration can be stronger then this God hath said so Therefore it is true since he teaches that he knowes not that God hath said so otherwise then by probable inducements and only by a probable assent So that in fine this must be his strong demonstration Whatsoeuer God speakes or reueales is most certainly true But I am not certaine that God speakes in the Scripture Therefore I am certaine that whatsoeuer is in Scripture is true Behold his demonstration that is a very false Syllogisme according to his owne discourse in another place where he not only graunts but endeauours to prooue that the minor of this Demonstration exceedes not probability and consequently cannot inferre a conclusion more them probable Somewhat like to this is an other cunning speach of his (h) Pag. 225. n. 5. That he hartily belieues the Articles of our Fayth be in themselues Truths as certaine and infallible as the very common principles of Geometry or Metaphysicke Which being vnderstood of the Obiects or Truths of Christian Fayth in themselues is no priuiledge at all For euery Truth is in it selfe as certaine as the Principles of Geometry it being absolutely impossible that a Truth can be falshood But the point is that he does not certainely know or belieue these Truths as he does the Principles of Metaphysicke but onely with a probable assent and so to him the Truths cannot be certaine The like art also he vses pag. 357. saying in these wordes I doe belieue the Gospell of Christ as verily as that it is now day that I see the light that I am now writing for all this florish signifies only that he is certaine he belieues the Gospel of Christ with probable assent As for the argument it deserues no answere For who knowes not that contradictories inuolue two propositions but he who captiuates his vnderstanding assents to one part only Chap. 10. and therefore is sure inough not to belieue contradictories at the same time as he pretends All which considered the Reader will easily see that his Doctrines vndermine the chiefest mysteries of Christian Fayth and ouerthrow Christianity The ninth Doctrine Layes grounds to be constant in no Religion CHAP. X. I. I Said in the beginning that as we could not know the way vnlesse we first be told whither we goe so it could litle auayle vs to be put in a way if by following it we might be misled But suppose the end of our iourney be knowne and the right way found what better shall we be if withall we be continually harkning to some suggestions which neuer let vs rest till we haue abandoned that path by following other crosse-wayes as we chance to fall vpon them This is the case of the man with whome we haue to deale I will not build vpon his deeds I meane his changes first from Protestant to