disputer to beare the name of a doctour But S. Athanasius saith they fledd to the fathers seinge they coulde not preuaile by the scriptures Be it that S. Athan saith soe it is euident thereby that they alleaged scriptures contrarie to your assertion S. HieroÌ„ whom you drawe in by the eares saith as little to your purpose putt case you cite him truelie which I will not stande to examine For he saith no such thinge as that heretikes alleage not scriptures which you shoulde prooue but because you imagine his sayinge to make against traditions which if you had but one sparke of iudgment you would see howe vnseasonablie you impugne here I will answere it by puttinge you in minde that catholickes pretend not traditions without the testimonie of scriptures butt accordinge to the expresse testimonie thereof which you knowe and therefore is your impertinencie in alleaginge S. Hierome his wordes lesse excusable PILK What then thoughe Satan the Father and heretikes his sonnes abuse the letter of the scripture as you papists nowe doe yett with noe other weapon did Christ conquer him and them to teach vs that they onlie are the sworde of the spirit wherewith the deuill and all his adherents must be putt to flight but this you say is the sence and not the wordes onlie CHAMP Whether you or we abuse the scriptures as Satan did is in controuersie betweene vs and must necessarilie light vppon one side In the meane tyme whilst it appeare whether you or we be the scholers of Satan hence it is clearlie manifest that it is not enoughe for the proofe of anie doctrine to cite scripture for it which is my position against which you haue hitherto wilfullie wrangled And if you will stande to that ignoraunt paradox of yours that with no other weapon then the scriptures our Sauiour conquered the deuill and his children and that to teach vs that they onlie are the sworde of the spiritt where with they are to be putt to flight blott out of your Bibles the whole newe testament as you haue donne manie bookes of the ould for no worde of the newe testament was written diuers yeeres after our Sauiours Ascention into heauen and triumphe ouer the deuill and hel Woulde you haue me conclud this in forme of argument against you Here take it That scripture onlie is the sworde of the spirit which our Sauiour vsed But he vsed noe other scripture then the oulde testament ergo the ould testament oulie is the sworde of the spirit The maior is your owne the minor is euident the conclusion followeth directlie vpon the premisses Whence clearlie followeth this consequence Therefore the newe testament is not necessarie So that you see howe well you argue for the authoritie and dignitie of holy scripture But qui ambulat in tenebris nescit quo vaait PILK Madd Orestes would sweare he were out of his witts that could imagine otherwise For the the Gospell lyeth not in the wordes of the scripture but in the sence not in the rinde but in the pith not in the leaues of speeches but in the grounde of reason saith the same Father Wherein it followeth that gods worde foolishlie vnderstoode is not his worde which consisteth not in reading but in vnderstandinge and that adulteratinge the sence hurteth the truth as much as marringe the sentences of scriptures The sence then is the GarlaÌ„d we striue for which whether it be with you or vs you refer your selfe vnto the incorrupte testimonie of some holy Father that liued a thousand yeres a goe as if you meant to stand to the Fathers verdict whome your good maysters as scornefullie contemne as if they were schoole boyes when once they contradict the sence of the Roman church CHAMP I willinglie ioyne with you in this issue also that the sence of the scripture is the garlande you ought to striue for And if you dare the Fathers shall be the iudge of our plea but you dare as well eat hoat coales as stande to theire verdict PILK When we prooue out of Tertullian that liued 200. yeeres after Christ that Pope Zepherinus fauored the heresie of Montanus contrarie to your newe Roman Sence that Popes cannot erre we must not at all beleeue Tertullian in this point saith Bellarmine For he was a Montanist yea an euill spiritt so carried him that of euill being made worse and worse and most filthie he spued out most horrible blasphemies saith Barronius CHAMP What is this to the purpose of tryinge the true sence of the scriptures haue you so quicklie forgotten the thinge in question But to followe you in your extrauagances least you should thinke your obiection not to be answered Tell me I pray you in the small honestie of a minister whether you geue more creditt to Tertullian nowe a confessed heretike in a matter aduantageous to his errour then to all antiquitie testifyinge Zepherin Pope to haue been an holy Sainte and Martyr Are you so maliuouslie bent against the Pope and sea of Rome that to fix some fault vppon them you will put Saincts out of heauen make martyrs heretikes and that for the bare testimonie of a professed heretike lett the iudicious reader iudge what spiritt you are guided by PILK When we vrge S. Aug. to prooue that in the state of corruption there is no free will in man to that which is good contrarie to your sence Stapleton saith he went beyond all good measure in his dispute against Pelagius with like vsage doe they entertaine the rest when they crosse theire grosse errours CHAMP This obiection is as impertinent as the precedent For be it that the Fathers haue some harde speeches which heretikes abuse to theire owne hurte what maruell sith the holy ghost testifieth the like of the holy scriptures themselues Stapleton speaketh neuer a worde directlie of free will in that chapter nor yett of S. Aug. opinion thereof But hauinge shewed S. August to haue taught that gentills and others not iustified doe not sinne in all theire workes obiecteth to himselfe certaine places out of S Aug. where disputinge against Iulian the Pelagian he seemeth to incline to the contrarie opinion Which hauinge answered and explicated by other of his sayinges in the same places he concludeth Sed vtâ—unque in hac disputatione moaum forâ—asse excesserit Augustinus vt propter aduersarij putuiantissiman impudentiam etiam peccata esse diceret quae vere perfecte bona non essent tamen nusquan alibi id dixisse aut scripsisse legitur vbi sine aduersario non agonostice sed dogmatice scripsit Which are the wordes of StapletoÌ„ you carpe att but why if you consider them a little better you will not easilie shewe PILK For howesoeuer your councell of Trent make a semblance to decree that the scriptures must be interpreted accordinge to the sence which the churche holdeth or the vnanimous consent of the fathers approoueth yett it is plaine that as when Caesar and Bibulus were consulls together whatsoeuer
especiallie to be beleeued Whereupon in another place speakinge of the faith wherewith we beleeue the scriptures he willeth vs to followe those who inuite vs first to beleeue that which we are not able to conceiue that beinge made more stroÌ„ge in faith we may attaine to vnderstande that which we beleeue God himselfe confirminge and inwardlie inligthenninge our mindes and not men This is sufficient to shewe that neither arte nor order requireth at your handes to prooue the scriptures as you disorderlie imagine CHAMP The scriptures or verities conteyned in them are confessed to be principles in respect of all Theologicall conclusions deduced from them and therefore in respect of them they neede no farther proofe to anie christian diuine that beleeueth them to be the worde of God But they are not principles in respect of the articles of our faith in generall but are themselues to be beleeued for the same authoritie of God reueylinge as all other articles of faith are And that they are not necessarie principles of the articles of our â—aith it is manifest by that before the scriptures were written the churche of God beleeued manie of the same articles which nowe it beleeueth Therfore when you say the scriptures or verities contained in them are primae veritatis if ignorance thoughe grosse and not to be excused in a doctour of diuinitie doth not excuse you you will make the scriptures not onlie to be gods worde but also to be God himselfe For besides him there is no prima veritas which is to be beleeued for it selfe as vppon better consideration I thinke you will not dare to denie Seeinge therefore the scriptures are not primae veritatis or first truthe but the testimonies wordes or verities reueiled by the first truthe they are not euen by your owne grounde to be beleeued for themselues but for the truthe and authoritie of the first veritie God himselfe of whose reuelation we must haue sufficient grounde before we canne securelie and prudentlie beleeue the scriptures to be his worde That which you bringe out of S. Thomas maketh euidentlie against you so iudicious are you in your allegations For the scriptures beinge not God they are not the first truth and therefore not to be beleeued for themselues S. Aug. in the first place maketh also against you sayinge that the scriptures are to be beleeued to bee of gods spiritt and not to be knowne For to beleeue this he recurreth not to the scriptures themselues but to the authoritie which they had obtayned throughe the whole worlde The second authoritie of S. Aug. is wholie impertinent to your purpose as the reader thoughe but of meane iudgmeÌ„t will easilie discerne Hee sayinge nothinge that soundeth as if the scriptures were to be beleeued for themselues or without other authoritie And therfore thus farr haue you saide nothinge that may satisfie this assertion of the Manuall that in the orderlie proceedinge in this present poincte the scriptures shoulde first be prooued but you will peraduenture satisfie better hereafter PILK Yett further to satisfy you I answere that the scriptures doe sufficientlie prooue theÌ„selues and these and these bookes to be the scripture both by that inwarde light that is contained in them and that outwarde operation that they haue in vs. For first they are a lanterne to our feete and a light to our path a candle that shineth in a darke place And as a light doth discouer those thinges that are in darkenes and demonstrateth also it selfe vnto the eies saith Aug. so doth the holy scriptures by that connatur all light that is in them manifest themselues vnto those whose vnderstandinge is enlightened to behoulde them Which if you cannot perceiue desire God to remoue the scales from your eies as he did from Paules for this is a case so cleare that Stapleton graunteth it credenti scriptura seipsam probat commendat CHAMP All this proueth noe other thinge then that to christians and catholikes who belieue the scriptures to be the worde of God and vnderstand it in the sence of the churche they haue all these properties of light lampe and lanterne and this is it which Stapleton expreslie saith if hou had taken but verie ordinarie heede to his wordes But to say that either to a Pagan who beleeueth not the scriptures to be Gods worde or to an heretike who vnderstandeth them not in the sence of the churche but accordinge to his owne fancie they are such as doe manifest themselues to be the worde of God is a most sencelesse Paradox contradicted by manifest experience not onlie in Martin Luther and all his disciples who as you knowe reiect diuerse bookes receiued by Caluin and his followers but also of the auncient and holy fathers who did not vniuersallie receiue as Canonicall Scripture all such bookes of the newe testament as nowe are receiued by you And yett none of all these I suppose you will say wanted light to see that which is manifest of it selfe PILK Againe they are knowne by theire operation in vs for the worde of the Lorde is pure and conuerts the soule a two edged sworde Heb. 4. 12. a verie fierie worde psal 119. 14. which purifieth the soules inflameth the affections enlighteneth the vnderstandinge and so softeneth the heart of the hearer that it frameth it sitt to all goodnes Which noe other worde or worke deuised by the witt of men or Angells canne doe Where vppoÌ„ LactaÌ„tius speakinge of the differeÌ„ce betweene the doctrine of the gentills of the churche saith that the wisdome of the Philosophers doth not roote out vice but hide it whereas a fewe precepts of God so change the whole man and mould him a newe by castinge away the ould that one would not thinke him to be the same Geue me a man that is wrathfull euill tougued vnbridled by a fewe wordes of God I will make him meeke as a lambe Geue me a couetous auaritious and tenacious man I will restore him liberall and distributinge his money with his owne handes Geue me a man fearfull of sorrowe and death he shall contemne crosses fires dangers bulls c. By one lauer shall all malice be expelled such is the force of diuine wisdome that beinge powered into the brest of man it expelleth folly att one blowe that is the mother of all vices What man then that hath his hearte thus mollified his will rectified his vnderstandinge cleared and his whole course suddenlie altered can deliberatelie doubte of the scriptures seinge Christe himselfe teacheth vs thus to knowe them Is anie will performe the will of his father he shall knowe of the doctrine whether it be good or noe CHAMP In whome I pray you doth the scripture worke these effects you haue here so industriously numbred vp in those that beleeue them not to be true or to be the worde of God you will not say so I suppose Why doe you therefore bring these arguments to prooue the scriptures to be easily knowne to
by scripture to acknowledge I say this position to be false which notwithstandinge is one mayne grounde of all theire religion PILK When a souldier that killed Marius came to cutt of his head he drewe out his sworde and told him hie est gladius quem ipse fecisti for Marius formerlie had been a cutter The groundes that you haue layde cutt the throate of your faith but raseth not the skinne of the protestants For I haue shewed before that scriptures doe sufficiently prooue themselues to be the worde of God and these and these bookes to be such whereon it followeth your conuincinge demonstration that protestants beleeue nothinge att all to be a windy friuoulous discourse whereas such conclusions may be drawne from your principles as will prooue vulnera in capite canis you will not easilie licke them hole CHAMP Remoue the sworde first from your owne throate whiâ—hâ—â— presseth to harde and after may you atteÌ„pt to pietie your aduersarie with it You haue hitherto made a 〈…〉 able shewe of anie proofe but of your owne in reâ—lible ignorance and impertinencie ioyned with wilfull stande to deâ—eâ—â—e your reader If you defend your proâ—estaâ—â—s no better then hitherto you â—â—â—ue they will be euidentlie concluded to belieue nothinge att all by the argument proposed which 〈…〉 e you cannott tell where to begin to solue oâ— anâ—weâ—e you make a Thrasonicall and glorious shâ—we of contempt of it as manie of yours 〈◊〉 and 〈…〉 elie your grand maister Calluine when 〈…〉 most prest and hath least to say for himselfe Are you nâ—â— ashamed to lett myne argument stand as a â—â—â—phey against you your heresie without saying one worde in answere of it idlie supposinge that you haue sayde somethinge to it before But seeinge you dare not sett vppon mine argument to satisfi it which you should first haue donne lett vs see what incurable woundes you geue vnto me out of myne owne principles PILK For they that relie theire faith vppon humane testimonies originallie are conuinced to haue no faith att all for faith commeth by hearinge and hearinge by the worde of God But you papists relie your faith vppon humane testimonies originallie when you ground it on the authoritie of the churche which you say is a more vniuersall rule and more auncient then the scriptures Now then make the conclusion as pleaseth you CHAMP I graunte your proposition or maior and deny your minor For where learned you to terme the authoritie of the churche humane testimonie seeinge the holy ghost stileth the churche the house of God the piller and grounde of truth your conclusion therefore is blowne away like a fether So that the wounde which you thought woulde prooue so grieuous is not so much as the blowe of a litle childe Spitt therefore vppon your handes take better hold and strike more manfullie or else geue your bill to another But so hoodewinkt you are either with ignorance or malice that strikinge at your aduersarie you hitt your selfe For whilst you say with S. Paule that faith commeth by hearinge hearinge by the worde of God you prooue that the scripture or the word written which is not hearde but reade is not the first meanes of our saith but the worde of God preached as S. Paule sayth in the same place which was before the scriptures PILK From hence commeth all this warr that we will not grounde our faith vppon the totteringe wall of humane authoritie as you doe but cleaue fast to the sacred scriptures beleeuinge nothinge as Paule taught but that which was written in Moises and the prophetts which we reioyce to haue made the meane grounde of our religion CHAMP A stoute Champion I wisse that after the first blowe and that a verie weake one casteth downe his armes and thinkinge to ouerthrowe his aduersarie with wordes falleth to raylinge as if he hoped to gaine the victorie rather by his stinkinge breath then by strength of hande stroakes You hauing been att the schoole of the father of all falsehoode haue learned to call the churche of God and the infallible authoritie thereof the totteringe wall of humane authoritie which the holy ghoste by the mouth of this Apostle stileth the piller and ground of truth wherby as by manie other passages you shewe what honour and respect you beare vnto the holy scriptures seeinge you dare so disdainfullie debase the house of God which they so highelie prise and extoll You farther glorie in that you beleeue nothinge but which is written in Moises and the prophettes whereby you prooue your selfe to be a Iewe and no Christian Either retract this Iewishe proposition of yours or blotte out of your Bibles the whole newe testament that you may be knowne to be noe Christian and that you may fill vppe the measure of your grande mayster Martin Luther who hath longe since cast out diuers bookes out of the newe testament besides those he hath reiected out of the oulde You seeme to father this your fowle doctrine vppon S. Paule thoughe you dayne him not the honour of S. Paule but why doe you not poynte att the place where he teacheth it If S. Paule had been of this minde that you woulde seeme to make him of in vayne did he write his Epistells in vayne did the rest of the Apostles and Euangelists write theire workes Againe suppose S. Paule had written anie such thinge in his letters or Epistles howe woulde you make anie man beleeue that Epistle to be his and therefore to be canonicall scriptures vnlesse you will vse the authoritie of tradition and the churches testimonie All the witt and cunning you haue yea thoughe you borrowed all that of the rest of the ministers in the worlde will not shape a sufficient answere to this question PILK And which if we coulde not prooue yett canne we not be conuinced to haue noe faith because they are principles against which none dare open his mouth that anie way woulde haue himselfe to be counted a Christian as S. Aug. spake For as other artes and sciences are sufficientlie knowne credited without proofe of theire principles so matters diuine are perfectlie and demonstratiuelie persuaded vnto vs from this indemonstrable principle of the holy scriptures saith Clemens and are not prooued by iudgment but comprehended by faith CHAMP Why doe you say which iâ— we coulde not prooue as thoughe you had some meane to prooue it without traditions and the churches authoritie But they are principle you say and therefore not to be prooued The scriptures are principles of faith in deede in a certayne degree but they are not prime principles which onlie are to be beleeued for themselues without anie further proofe vnles as I toulde you before you will make them to be God who onlie is to be beleeued for his owne proper veritie and all other verities for him And when you say out of S. Aug. that none dare open their mouth against them that will be counted a
indifferent reader may iudge whether the positions sett downe in the Manuall vnder the title of protestants positions be not truly theirs Manuall protestant positions All articles of faith are so expresselie contained in scriptures as out of them onlie full proofe may be made thereof All articles of faith are at least so contained in holy scriptures as without any testimonie or authoritie of the churche or traditions they may thence be plainly and distinctlie deduced These are the positions in the Manuall in this first controuersie vnder the title of protestant positions which you say are not acknowledged by them And yett if I vnderstande your wordes you admitte them neither can you iuâ—lâ—e denie them as I sayde before but lett vs heare what you say for your selfe PILK They say not that all articles of faith are expresselie sett downe in holy scriptures but either expressely or analogicallie and so they haue a full proofe out of them CHAMP Compare this position with that sett downe by me in the first place and see wherein they differ Only you make the first parte of your position absolute as if it had been so set downe by me but this is your owne fraude and deceipte For I made it not absolute but modall or comparatiue as appeareth by the thinge it selfe The position therefore sett downe by me is yours and therefore to be prooued out of the scriptures as the position it selfe requireth â—herein if you fasle your position will be conuinced to be false and your faith accordinglie PILK Secondlie they admitte of the testimonie of the churche both concerninge articles of faith and the scriptures themselues First to discerne true from false Secondlie publiklie to preache them Thirdlie to interpret and expounde them but euer accordinge to the scriptures themselues without anie addition of her owne either of sufficiencie or perfection vnto them CHAMP That is in good speach they admitt the testimony of the churche so farr as it contradicteth not theire errours Or they admitte of it not to be iudged by it for so all disputes woulde quicklie haue an end but to iudge it themselues for so they knowe they may wrangle eternallie PILK Here then is the difference that the papists say the churche addeth sufficiencie to the scriptures and fulnes The protestants say shee addeth none but sheweth that which is in it The papists say shee brought light vnto them The protestants say shee bringeth none but declareth and manifestesh that which it hath in it selfe This then is theire doctrine CHAMP The catholikes doe teache and beleeue that the churche of God hath infallible authoritie to declare what bookes are holy scripture and also to deliuer the true sence and meaninge thereof neither of which the scriptures do performe by themselues and yett are they both necessarie if not to euerie ChristiaÌ„ in particular yett to the whole churche in generall They doe not teach or beleeue that the churche addeth anie truth or verity to the scriptures which they immediately haue from God himselfe whose word and reuelation they containe but shee declareth vnto vs infalliblie what are the verities contayned in them To which beleefe and doctrine you seeme to come verie neere in your last wordes if you were constant therein But you say and vnsay at euerie turne Nowe lett vs heare the positions which you say the protestants acknowledge in this controuersie PILK ANTITHESIS All truth concerninge faith and good workes necessarie vnto saluation is sufficientlie and fullie deliuered vnto vs in the holy scriptures CHAMP Seinge you voluntarilie enter combate why doe you not obserue the conditions prescribed It was required that in case you woulde impugne the catholike position sett downe and prooued in the Manuall as hitherto you haue laboured to doe you should prooue by expresse scriptures the contradictorie which in that case must necessarilie be yours and not to frame vnto your selfe another which may stand with that you impugned beinge like a shooe that fitteth euerie foote This I say because the position sett downe here by you vnderstoode with these two restrictons is not denyed of anie catholike The first is that it include not the scriptures themselues but suppose them as beleeued The second that it speake onlie of truthes or articles necessary to euerie mans saluation For these are fewe and sufficientlie expressed in holy scripture Your position vnderstoode in this mannet hath noe aduersarie and therefore needeth not your feeble and weake proofes Neuertheles because your proofes seeme to suppose a further meaninge in your position to witt that all thinges whatsoeuer without exception or restriction are to be beleeued either by euerie man in perticular or all men in generall are fullie sett downe in holy scripture which is opposite to the catholike position of the Manuall I will examine your proofes and try what weight they beare PILK Proofe of the protestants position Deuteronomie 4. 2. yee shall not adde vnto the worde which I commaunde you neither shall yee detracte from it that yee may keepe the commaundements of the Lorde your God which I coÌ„maunde you Argument That whereunto nothing must be added nothinge detracted contayneth a perfect and full doctrine of faith and manners such is the scripture ergo CHAMP What will you vnderstand by the word which God heere commaundeth onlie the fiue bookes of Moises which then were onlie extant If you vnderstande it so as trulie you cannott otherwise what will you say to all the reste of the bookes both of the ould newe testament written since were they added against gods commandement you will feare to say so What then will this place serue you for to make a poore shewe of some proofe out of scripture to deceaue your lesse skilfull reader and for noe other purpose But peraduenture you will contend that it ought to be vnderstoode of all that which God shoulde speake aswell after as before and so to comprehend the whole scripture This sence though not verie probable I am content to accept of that you may see I doe not deale niggardlie with you To your argument therefore I say you iugle somethinge in itt but not cunninglie If you woulde conclude anie thinge out of this place of scripture you must say in your minor but such is the word of God And then the conclusion will be directlie against your selfe who detracteth from gods worde both written denyinge manie and sundrie bookes of holy scripture and also vnwritten reiectinge all traditioÌ„s which the scriptures themselues commaunde vs to receiue And so haue you concluded your selfe a manifest transgressour of gods lawe and commaundement When you shall answere sufficientlie this argument I will pay you a fee worthe your doctors Cappe PILK Proofe 2. Prou 30. 5. 6. Euerie worde of God is pure he is a shielde to them that put theire trust in him adde you nothinge vnto his worde least he reprooue thee and thou be founde a lyar CHAMP Therefore what Therefore all articles of faith are fullie
the scriptures for decidinge thereof no such thinge but he geueth diuerse rules or markes whereby he that is in doubte whether parte to followe may iudge who hath the true sence and meaninge of the scriptures And after one or two rules he addeth this Vt autem manifestius dicam But that I may speake more plainlie they to witt heretikes haue certayne men of whom they are named for the sect is named of the author but wee to witt the catholikes haue not our name of anie man And a little after answeringe to the same question more fullie he addeth What are we cutt off from the church haue we Archeheretickes are we surnamed of anie man haue we a captayne anie particular man as these haue Marcion these Manicheus a thirde Arrius and other heresies haue theire sect masters As Lutherans haue Luther Caluinists haue Caluin and the like And though we haue the name of anie one â—et is is not of the father of anie heresie but of those who are our pastours and doe gouuerne the churche We haue not Maisters vppon Earth as all heretikes haue God forbidde we haue one in heauen Thou wilte say that they pretende the same But they haue a name that accuseth them and giueth them theire names Thus farr S. Chrisostome whereby it appeareth not onlie how impertinent or fraudulent Mr. Pilkinton is in his allegations but also of what moment the auncient fathers esteemed the argument taken from the surnames of sects for the discouerie of theire heresies and false doctrines PILK Loe in these cases wherein scriptures were produced on both sides the fathers fledd for resolution vnto other scriptures where it appeareth your inferrence to be without coherence that if there be not a iudge without the scriptures God hath not prouided sufficient meanes to saue mens soules seeinge that composinge of controuersies reconcilinge of differencies clearinge of doubtes manifestation of truth is not from without to be fetched but in the testament it selfe to be learned that we may knowe scriptures and them onlie to be the supreme iudge from whence decision of doubtes in matters of faith is to be deriued CHAMP Marke iudicious reader whether this be anie other thinge then that which I sayde in this section One chieâ—e ground of the prosestants doctrine to be that the wordes of the scripture are the iudge of all controuersies For the which Mr. Pilk hotly reprehendeth me of fraude and falsehodde See his wordes a little before at this marke †in the margent and maruell at his witt iudgment and memorie Nowe to the purpose Noe one of all the testimonies alleaged by you doth say that where scriptures are produced by both partes they are sufficient to decide the controuersie Thoughe I doe not denie but for the moste part the inequallity is so greate in the catholike partie as it also falleth out in the cause betweene the protestaÌ„ts and catholikes at this day that anie man of indifferent witt iudgment and desire to find out the truth may see on whether side the scripture standeth But that they are not absolutelie sufficient where there is obstinacie on anie side I shall make your selfe to coÌ„fesse thoughe peruerse enoughe or else I shall much marueill that by the verie example vsed by S. Optatus and S. Aug and approoued here by your selfe Put therefore the case that the children of a deceased father contend aboute the inheritance euerie one of them challenginge it as appertayninge to himselfe in proofe or confirmation of his clayme alleageth the testament and will of his father which he protesteth to be cleare for him and against his competitours beinge rightlie vnderstoode persisting most stifly in his opinion and in deffence of his right clayme as he is perswaded The case beinge putt thus which is the verie same with ours in the controuersy of religion will you say in the sinceritie of your hearte that the sole will or testament of the father is a sufficient iudge to decide this difference and to bringe the parties to an accorde And that there needeth not anie other iudge or arbiter to determine vppon the true sence and meaninge of the fathers will whereby they all pretende to make theire clayme and to grounde theire title you will not I thinke say yea to this question And well I wote that were the case your owne betwixte your selfe your bretheren concerninge a temporall inheritance experience which though shee be the mistres of fooles is not for all that a foolish mistres woulde teach you that it is a meere Paradoxe to maintayne that the sole testament of your deceased father could in this case decide the controuersie amongst you his disagreeinge children So that the example brought by your selfe out of the fathers is prooued to make manifestlie against you Which will yet be much more cleare if the case be putt as it is indeede with vs that these brethren doe not only contend aboute the true sence and meaninge of theire fathers testament but also aboute the testament it selfe the one contestinge the whole writinge contayned in the booke vnder the title of his will to be his true testament another not receiuinge the whole contendeth diuers partes and parcells not to belonge therunto And another yett reiectinge more as it falleth out betweene vs and the protestants Caluin castinge out of the testament of God fiue whole bookes besides some large partes of other bookes which the catholikes belieue to appertayn to his true testament Luther reiectinge besides these diuerse other whole bookes The case therefore beinge thus howe is it possible that the sole written testament of God shoulde decide the controuersie betweene these competitors and bring them to an accorde who doe not agree so much as in what bookes or writinges the testament is contayned so farre are they from beinge at accorde of the true sence and meaninge thereof It is therefore no other thinge to say in this case that the scriptures must iudge all controuersies then to say that the controuersie it selfe must be iudge of the controuersie which is more then madnes to thinke For the controuersie beinge not onlie what the scripture saith or meaneth but also what is scripture it is all one to say that scriptures must iudge and decide all controuersies and to say the controuersies themselues must decide all controuersies Againe seeinge you Mr. Pilkinton seeme to geue so much to holy scripture as to be able and sufficient to decide all doubtes and determine all differences in matter of faith Why doe you not hearken vnto them when they send you to the churche and to the pastours and doctours thereof as to liuelie iudges hauinge the keyes of knowledge to vnderstande the scriptures But you desiringe nothinge lesse then to come to a iust and competent tryall of your cause holde your selues close to that principle by which the most detestable vile and contemptible heretike that euer was may maintaine his heresie without beinge conuinced thereof as I toulde you
thinge deliuered in the worde CHAMP That is properlie an article of faith that is beleeued for diuine authoritie whether it be written or noe as were all these thinges the fathers beleeued before the lawe written And because we beleeue the bookes of Genesis for example and the rest of the holy Byble to be written by Gods reuelation therefore doe we beleeue them to be holy scripture and to containe gods worde Which therefore is properlie an article of faith no lesse then the misterie of the blessed trinitie beleeued for the same authoritie PILK Vppon this grounde I answere first in generall that none of these points are articles of faith CHAMP Vppon such a false grounde you are like to builde a good answere Is it no article of faith with you that the booke of Genesis is written by gods reuelation Tell me I pray you vnto what kinde of knowledge or assent you will reduce it I will confesse you a maister in diuinitie if you can make it well appeare by what other act of knowledge or vnderstandinge we assent vnto this veritie besides the act of faith Which if you cannot performe as assuredlie you cannott you must needes see this your first answere to be noe answere att all but a meere supposall of a manifest falsitie PILK Secondlie I answere to euerie one in particular I answere to the the first That all canonicall bookes and euerie parcell thereof be such is prooued out of themselues For besides that the ould testament prooueth the newe and the newe the old for whatsoeuer we read in the ould testament the same is founde in the gospell and whatsoeuer is founde in the gospell that is deduced from the authoritie of the ould testament as Hierome speaketh so in speciall euerie booke prooueth it selfe both by its owne light as formerlie was shewed and by the testimonie of Christ of the Prophets and Apostles that were the secretaries of the holy ghost The testimonie of our Sauiour Christ. Luc. 24. 44. These are the wordes which I spake vnto you while I was with you that all must needes be fulfilled which were written of me in the lawe of Moyses and in the prophetts and in the psalmes Of S. Paule 2. Tim. 3. 16. All scripture is geuen by the inspiration of God and is profitable to doctrine to reproofe to correction to instruction which is in righteousnes Of S. Peter the 2. epist 1. 21. The prophecie came not in olde tyme by the will of man but holy men of God spake as they were moued by the holy Ghost doe abundantlie prooue the bookes of the olde testament to be canonicall besides that there is not anie of them out of which some testimonie is not in the newe testament extant CHAMP Your second answere is as much to the purpose as your first Neither the old testament proouing the newe nor contrariwise vnles the one be beleeued before Yea you make your selfe ridiculous to all men by such a naturall or circulare proofe vnles you suppose the assured beleefe of some parte before For example if one shoulde demaunde of you how you knowe or why you doe beleeue those wordes of our Sauiour which you cite out of the 24 of S. Luke either to haue been spoken by him or written by S. Luke would you say that they euidentlie prooue themselues so to be surely this you must say both accordinge to your doctrine here and accordinge to the necessitie you putt your selfe into by denyinge the authority of tradition and of the churches testimonie And yett in sayinge that you shall euidently prooue your selfe to be senceles For there is noe such euidence of the thinge but anie man that is not moued with the authoritie of gods churche and tradition would esteeme it verie vncertaine and most doubtfull For vnles these wordes and that which I say of them I say of the rest of the scripture were God himselfe and spake to vs as imediatlie as he did to Moises and the rest of his prophetts they cannot be sayde to be knowne by theire owne light nor beleeued for theire owne truth Againe suppose you had certayne knoweledge of this by what meanes soeuer howe could you be certayne that he speaketh of those bookes of Moises psalmes and prophetts which we haue vnder those names This certainlie would be impossible for you to prooue seinge you reiect the authoritie of tradition and the churches iudgment by which onlie it is assuredlie prooued Furthermore you knowe that our Sauiour speakinge in his owne person required not to be beleeued but by the testimonie of his workes sayinge Nisi opera in eis fecissem 〈◊〉 nemo alius fecit peccatum non haberent Much lesse therefore doth he require that we shoulde beleeue a written booke to be his worde without other proofe then the selfe light of the booke which is not so greate as that of his owne liuelie worde◠The sayinge of S Hierome is nothinge to the purpose For he speaketh onlie of the mutuall consent and concord of the two testaments which to christians that alreadie beleeue them both to be the worde of God is no small confirmation of the veritie of the doctrine they both contayne PILK The Gospells of the Euangelists the Acts and Epistles of the Apostles the reuelation of S. Iohn prooue themselues out of themselues to be theires whose titles they beare And if we creditt the bookes of historians and Philosophers auncient and moderne diuine and humane to be theires whose names they carrie in theire foreheads what madnes were it to thinke the diuine scriptures not to be written by them who are said to be theire penmen after the defluxion of so manie ages wherein neuer anie good christian called them in question besides wicked Iesuits impure Manichees Cerdonians Marcionists and Ebionites CHAMP None of all these bookes say they were written by such and such as is manifest And thoughe they did yett were not this sufficient to prooue them theirs vnles it were certaine this were theire testimonie and that they were infallible in their testimonie As for the titles they beare there is the same difficultie For it is not otherwise knowne to be theirs then by faith and beleefe of which we seeke the grounde And if titles were sufficient proofes of the true gospells we should haue manie moe gospells then we haue as you cannot be ignorant Againe the Epistle to the Hebrues beareth not the name of anie of the Apostles and howe longe it was thought by diuerse not to be S. Paules you knowe vnles you be verie ignorant For the workes of other humane authors why doe you beleeue them to be theirs if it be not for the testimonie of all succeedinge ages brought vnto vs by tradition Giue some other sufficient grounde of your beleefe in this poynte if you can and if you cannot say you are senceles to reiect ecclesiasticall tradition in receiuinge the bookes of the Bible or else that your iudgment is foolishe and idle
of the catholique positions sett downe by me admitted and acknowledged as true and orthodoxe then is not the contradictorie position inforced or imposed vppon them to prooue But if they reiect all the Catholicke positions as false and erroneous as they will be found to doe then must they whether they will or noe acknowledge the contradictorie position to be theirs vnles they will graunt that both contradictorie positions may be true or both false which noe man euer yett admitted And thus much sir for your charge of forged positions in generall now we will examine the particular PILK POSITIO I. Forged positions All Articles of faith are contayned expressly in holy Scripture CHAMP Of this position thus sett downe it is true you say that it is forged but it is by your selfe not by mee for it is no where sett downe by me The position of mine which you aime at beinge this page 20. vnder this note Protestant position 1. All articles of faith are so expresselie contained in scripture as out of them onlie full proofe may be made thereof Which position if you will denie to be yours take here your owne wordes in witnes against you If you meane the sence and substance and that which may be deduced by necessarie consequence then it is false that full proofe cannot be made of all articles of faith out of scripture I am content to bringe your owne Testimonie onlie in a thinge so manifest without further proofe out of other of your owne sect Onlie I cannot sufficientlie marueyle what complexion you are of that haue so littell care and feelinge of your owne credit and of the cause you would defend that you committ so manie fowle fayles in so fewe lines Certainlie if you hold on in this manner you shall haue the prise of all either falle or foolishe fellowes that euer blotted paper but let vs proceede further PILK POSITIO II. All places of holy scriptures contayninge articles of faith are easie to be vnderstoode CHAMP You fayle in puttinge downe this position also so harde it is for you to deale honestlie which in the Manuall is sett downe thus All places of holy scripture contayninge articles of faith the obstinate misbeleefe where of is damnable are easie to be vnderstoode and therefore require noe rule to be interpreted by Which proposition you cannot denie to be yours without denyinge your selfe For doe you not remember that in your third Antithesis you say I contradict S. Epiphaniu for sayinge that the scriptures are darke and difficult to be vnderstoode why doe you therfore denie this position All places of scripture contain 〈…〉 matters of faith are easie to be vnderstoode here sett downe by you to be yours vnles you will also coÌ„tradict that holy Father which you falselie obiect vnto me but it is is a bootles thinge to tell you of contradictions they are so frequent with you Therfore to lett that passe that you may knowe if you were so ignorant in your owne doctrine as you knewe it not before that it is good protestant doctrine heare your Father and founder Luther what he saith of his matter We must geue this sentence the scripture beinge iudge that it is of it selfe most certaine most easie most open or apparant interpreter of it selfe proouinge all thinges iudgeing all thinges and illustratinge all thinges And in another place I say of the whole scripture I will haue noe part thereof to be obscure And this shall suffice for the present to purge me of forgerie in this matter hauinge more to say thereof hereafter when we shall come to speake of the article it selfe if we goe together so farre PILK POSITIO III. The true churche of Christ is not necessarilie Catholike or vniuersall neither in respect of tyme nor place CHAMP This position you sett downe trulie which I maruel that you denie to be yours Bycause the contradictorie position being admitted for true as it must necessarilie be if this be false your protestant churche which noe witt nor coninge can euer shewe to haue hadd either kinde of vniuersalitie must of necessitie be a forged or counterfait churche And for what other cause thinke you did Luther in the Creede turned by him into Dutch in steede of the Catholicke churche thrust in the Christian churche but to auoyde the force of the worde Catholicke which he did so dislike that his disciples in the conferrence att Altemberge reiected a certayne proposition ascribed to him wherein was this worde Catholicke â—lleadginge for a sufficient reason of theire so doinge because that worde Catholicke did not sauour Luthers phrase And for full proofe that this position is truly protestanticall reade the laborious booke De authore essentia protestanticae Ecclesiae authore Richardo Smitheo printed this yeare containinge tenne ineuitable demonstrations taken out of the protestants owne doctrine that Luther was the author of the sayde protestants churche whence it necessarilie is concluded that in theire doctrine the true church is not necessarilie Catholicke neither in respect of tyme or place PILK POSITIO IV. The true churche of Christ may be without a lawfull personnall succession CHAMP If you denie this position to be true in your doctrine then must you necessarilie graunt the contradictorie to be true which if you doe your newlie reformed churche will euidentlie appeare no lawfull churche And for further proofe of the want of succession of pastours in your Englishe Churche I referr you to my booke in answere to Mr. Mason which till it be answered I say answered indeede and not onlie replyed vnto in a heape of wordes as you haue donne to my Manuall I shall euer holde as a sufficient proofe and as for your Sister churches of Fraunce they make profession in theire verie confession of theirâ— faith that the state of the churche haueinge been interrupted it was necessarie that God shoulde raise vppe men by extraordinarie meanes to repaire his church a newe which was ruined Iudge you therefore whether they denie the position which you say is forged by me against you PILK POSITIO V. The lawfull succession of pastours may be without Consecration or authenticall mission by anie ordinarie power residinge in the Churche CHAMP If you houlde your Sister churches of France to be lawfull churches you cannot denie this position to be true in your doctrine as appeareth by theire confession euen nowe alleaged whereunto I referr you And as for the consecration of your pastours of your newe churche of Englande it is so farr from beinge ordinarie that it was neuer hearde of before Kinge Edwarde the sixt his raigne when first it was deuised as I haue euidentlie prooued in my booke against Mr. Mason And therefore thoughe you would seeme to denie this position in worde yett must you necessarilie admitte it in deede vnles you wil graunt freelie that which is true that you haue no true pastours att all PILK POSITIO VI. It is not necessarie for euerie mans
tract 98. in Ioh before mentioned Nowe your argument out of all these places is shewed to be vayne and of noe force by the particular answere to euerie authoritie And thus farr haue you brought nothinge more for the proofe of your position thē anie heretike in the worlde may or might haue brought for the proofe of his heresie For euerie heretike can bringe single places of scripture yea and of fathers in fauour of his heresie But to bringe scriptures interpreted by the fathers in fauour of theire heresie is a thinge if not impossible at least verie harde and rare beinge the priuiledge of the catholike churche alone PILK ANTITHESIS 2. The scriptures contayne in themselues a perfect doctrine of saith and good workes necessarie to saluation without testimonie authoritie or tradition of the churche addinge vnto them or bringinge from without them anie other doctrine CHAMP This position is the same in sence if either of them haue anie sence with the former and therefore vainlie is tearmed by you a second Antithesis vnlesse euerie tyme you write a position varyinge a fewe wordes in it but retayninge the same sence you will say it is a newe positiō But to lett this passe your proofes so farr as they make anie thinge against the catholike veritie are to be pondered PILK Proofe 1. 2. Tim. 3. 16. The whole scripture is diuinelie geuen and profitable for doctrine for reproofe for correction for instruction which is in righteousnes that the man of God may be perfectlie instructed in euerie good worke That which perfecteth the man of God to euerie good worke contayneth perfect doctrine of faith and manners without addition of anie othèr but the scriptures do so Ergo. CHAMP It must needes be obstinacie in errour and not ignoraunce as I thinke that maketh you abuse this place For first you cannot be ignorant that the Apostle speaketh there of the scriptures of the olde testament wherewith S. Timothy was acquainted from his infancie which if you will say to contayne a perfect doctrine then is all the newe testament either superfluous or at the least not necessarie Secondlie the Apostle peaketh not of the whole scripture taken together but of euerie parte thereof seuerallie meaninge that euerie parte of scripture is proffitable to teach correct and instruct which is true but nothinge to your purpose And that he speaketh not of the whole scripture in the former sence but in the latter it is manifest For when he wrote this to Timothie the whole scripture which the church nowe hath was not written Lastlie lett it be sayd that he speaketh it of the whole scripture in the former sence yett he saith no more but that it is profitable to teache instruct c. which I easilie graunt you and yett I say your argument drawne from thence is most friuolous as appeareth by the like sett downe before in answere of this of yours wherunto I referre you PILK Proofe 2. Iohn 5. 35. Search the scriptures for in them you thinke to haue eternall life Luke 16. 29. They haue Moises the prophetts lett thē heare them That which teacheth how we may come to eternall life and shunne or escape eternall death contayneth a perfect doctrine of faith and good workes But the scriptures doe soe ergo CHAMP Make your minor proposition this as it should be but the olde Testament doth soe for of the olde testament onlie these places speake as is manifest and your conclusion will serue directlie to exclude the whole newe testament from the perfect rule of faith Fye I am ashamed in your behalfe of such childishnes as you shewe in these arguments PILK Proofe 3. Acts 1. 1. The former treatise haue I made ô Theophilus of all that Iesus began to doe and teach These thinges that Christ did and taught contayne a perfect doctrine but these thinges are written CHAMP Conclude therefore the onlie ghospell of S. Luke contayneth a perfect doctrine Is this your intent noe but blinde malice against the euident truth draweth you into these grosse absurdities If you haue noe care of your soule haue yett for shame some care of your credit and reputation for the gayninge of which you haue trauelled these fower or fiue yeeres to bringe foorthe this miserable heape of vnshapen absurdities A miserable labour I wisse whereby you gaine nothinge but the reputation of an impertinent minister deuoyde of ordinarie iudgment To these fewe testimonies of scripture so miserablie mistaken you adde some passages of the fathers to as good purpose as you did in the former Antithesis These they are PILK Proofe 4. If you be the disciples of the gospell saith Athanasius speake not iniquitie against God but walke in those thinges which are written or donne For if you will speake diuers thinges from these thinges that are written why striue you with vs without them The scriptures are perfect as spoken from the worde of God and his spiritt CHAMP S. Athanasius speaketh of such thinges as are not onlie not directly in scriptures but are against and contrarie to scriptures S. Ireneus saith the scriptures beinge spoken by the spiritt of God are perfect as the thinges spoken by men are not which haue imperfections and therefore are subiect to corrections and amendments You abuse therefore your reader with an equiuocall tearme of perfect PILK Proofe 5. The order of this present tecture teacheth that we must nott adde anie thinge to the diuine precepts for if thou addest or detractest it is a preuarication of the precept Oftentymes when a witnes addeth anie thinge of his owne he spotteth the whole creditt of his testimonie with a lye nothinge therefore thoughe it seeme good must be added And a litle after if S. Iohn hath sayde of his writinge if anie man adde vnto these thinges God shall adde vnto him the plagues that are written in this booke and if anie man shall take away from the worde of this prophecie God shall take away his parte from the booke of life howe much more nothinge is to be added to godds precepts CHAMP That which is taught or commēded by the churche which the scripture commandeth vs to heare is not superadded to gods commandements or precepts but is comprised in them you therefore that will not heare and obey the churche which you are so expressely commaunded to heare euidentlie and damnablie detract from diuine precepts Therefore this authoritie is so farr from proouinge anie thinge to your purpose that it ouerthroweth it rather PILK Proofe 6. O Emperour doost thou demaunde what our faith is Heare it not out of newe papers but out of the bookes of God heare I pray thee the thinges that are written of Christ least vnder them those thinges that are not written should be preached Open thy eares to those thinges that shall speake out of the bookes lifte vppe thy faith vnto God I will not defend any thinge scandalous nor anie thinge that is from without the gospell
contradictinge your owne rule non credimu◠quia non legimus Agayne S. Paule exhortinge Timothie to teach others and not to write vnto them these thinges which he had hearde of him not read out of his writinges doth manifestly shewe that not onlie thinges writter◠but also thinges spoken yea these principallie are to be beleeued And therefore this arguinge is not wilde but that your witts were one wooll-gatheringe when you wrote this and sawe not the force of the argument vnles peraduenture you woulde be politike in dissembling the force thereof because you coulde not auoyde it And though S. Paule confirmed much of his doctrine by the authoritie of the oulde testament yett that he taught nothinge more then that which was written before I suppose you will not dare to say And if you thinke the commentarie of S. Thomas here alleaged by you to be true why doe you condemne the beleeuinge of thinges not written seeinge you finde not his comment written in all the whole Bible Or if you condemne it not in him why should you condemne it in vs or abhorr it in your selfe And thus you see you are forced which way soeuer you turne your selfe to admitte of vnwritten doctrine for good and canonicall when you haue spited all your canne against it PILK Nowe that you may knowe that protestants haue bothe a shielde to defend themselues and a sworde to wound theire aduersaries heare theire positions with the confirmation thereof CHAMP If your sworde be no sharper then your shielde is stronge it will no more wounde your aduersaries thē the other hath kept your doctrine whole Which hath been so often pierced as hadd your shoulders receiued so manie but drie blowes as your doctrine hath donne ouerthrowes they would geue you but small rest till you had taken some soueraigne Elixir to cure them And why doe you not put downe the protestants positions sett downe in the Manuall If you had disliked them you should haue tould vs why if you did not dislike them they had been more easily sett downe in theire owne wordes then in others Well I will here sett them downe that the reader may see them in theire owne shape Manuall protestant position 1. The holy Apostles deliuered not by worde of mouth moe thinges to be beleeued and obserued by the churche then they either found written or wrote themselues And therefore are there no traditions to be holden or beleeued Position 2. The catholike churche ought not to beleeue those thinges which the Apostles deliuered onlie by worde of mouth without writinge in the same degree of faith with those which are written Nowe lett vs heare yours PILK ANTITHESIS 1. The Apostles deliuered not by worde of mouth more thinges to be beleeued or obserued by the churche as necessarie to saluation then they wrote themselues or found writen Proofe 1. Acts. 26. 22. hauinge therefore obtayned helpe of God I continue vnto this day witnessinge both to greate and small sayinge none other thinges then those which the prophetts and Moses did say shoulde come Argument They that preached no other thinges then that which is in Moises and the prophets deliuered no more by worde of mouth then is written then was written you shoulde haue sayd but the Apostles did so Ergo. CHAMP Your argument if it did prooue anie thinge would conclude that the Apostles taught nothinge more then which was written in Moises and the prophets which if it be true what necessitie or profitt◠is there of the gospells and the rest of the bookes of the newe testament Whilst therefore you impugne traditions you ouerthrowe the whole newe testament S. Paule therefore taught nothinge contrarie to the lawe and prophetts yea those thinges which he preached to the Iewes of our Sauiour Christe he prooued to be conformable to theire owne prophetts Which kinde of proofe to the gentills would haue been of small moment and therefore you see your argument not to be effectuall nor to conclude vniuersallie Againe why doe you vse the like manner of reasoninge which you reprehended in me a litle before concludinge that because S. Paule at one tyme or in one audience preached nothinge without the lawe and prophetts that therefore neither he or anie other tymes nor anie other of the Apostles did preach anie thinge more then that which is contayned in them Which kinde of argument thoughe I may iustly maintaine against you as conformeable to your owne principles denyinge traditions and beleeuinge nothinge but that which is written yett are you ridiculous to vse it against me who professe to beleeue manie thinges not written And much more ridiculous you are to vse it for the impugninge of traditions assuminge that for the grounde of your proofe which you knowe is denyed you and which oughte firste to be prooued Further where doe you finde in all the prophetts or Moises the vision whereof S. Paule maketh a recitall in the chapter cited by you Certainlie no where And yett this he preached with much vehemencie in an assemblie of greate personages and himselfe thought it worthy of beleefe Somethinge therefore you see he preached more then that which was contayned in Moises and the prophetts And this I geue you for an example onlie and not as the sole thinge wherein instance may be made PILK Proofe 2. 2. Tim. 3. 16. From a childe thou haste knowne the holy scriptures which are able to make thee wise vnto saluation thoroughe faith which is in Christe Iesus Argument The Apostles deliuered no more by worde nor writtinge but that which maketh a man wise to saluation But all this written CHAMP If you dare stand to this argument I will easilie prooue you to be more a Iewe then a christian by this Sillogisme He that holdeth al that which is able to make a man wise to saluation so that no other thinge is necessarie to be written in the oulde testament is more a Iewe then a Christian But Mr. Pilkinton holdeth this Ergo. The minor which onlie needeth proofe I shewe thus Maister Pilkinton holdeth the scripture which S. Timothie knewe from a childe to be able to make a man wise to saluation But this was onlie the olde testament Ergo. By that tyme that you shall haue quitte your selfe of this argument you will I suppose finde your owne not to deserue the name of an argument nor yett of a wittie Sophisme For to beleeue one only God is able to make a man wise to saluation because it maketh him wise in some thinge necessarie to saluation as no man of common sence will denie And yett that alone is not sufficient to saluation as I thinke you yourselfe will confesse PILK Proofe 3. Io. 20. 31. These are written that yee might beleeue that Iesus is the sonne of God and beleeuinge you might haue life thoroughe his name Argument They that writte all thinges whereby we might come to eternall life wrote all thinges necessarie vnto saluation and more they preached not But the