in all succeeding ages God himself with his owne hand did first write in tables of stone the words of the Decalogue Next after this he gaue it in charge vnto Moses that he should afterwards write and record all things which hee receiued at Gods owne mouth and that the people of God might be assured that the bookes of Moses came not by mans will but were giuen by diuine inspiration the Lord sealed 2. Tim. 3. 16 and testified these writings to be his heauenly oracles by manie great wonders before they were written when they were written and after they were written And Moses wrote the Word of both couenants of both I say Legall and Euangelicall but whereas he gaue but as it were the first lineaments of the Euangelicall couenant he set forth the Legall couenant clearely and in full measure For the legall couenant in the bookes of Moses is cleerely recommended and vrged but the Euangelical more darkly set before vs. For which cause all the doctrine of Moses is said to be legall The Law came by Moses Ioh. 1. After Moses God stirred vp his Prophets whose writings also he confirmed with his great miracles and gaue them great authoritie yet were they not to set forth any thing diuers or contrary to the doctrine of Moses and the Patriarches nor to publish any thing but what was grounded in the bookes of Moses but by diuine reuelation they did ad more cleere interpretations as the morning starre of the new testament did more neerely approch These holy men wrote the summe and chiefe heads of their doctrine euen so much as God himselfe thought meete to be reserued for posterity And these records being written were laid vp with the holie books of Moses which were kept in the side of the Arke Iosh 24. 26. Finally after the incarnation of Christ the Euangelicall doctrine or the Gospell first beganne for certaine yeares to be deliuered by voice and to be preached by Christ himselfe and then after by his Apostles And lastly the same was written by the Apostles The works of Gods law and nature are commanded in the bookes of the new Testament And the verie moral law is expounded by Christ himselfe freed from the leauen and corruption of the Pharisees but the works of the law and nature are not recommended to the end that by them men might be iustified and saued but they be commended either to prepare men to intertaine grace offered or to quicken them to proceed and grow in grace receiued as is before shewed Againe the works of regeneration be commanded not for iustification but as testimonies of that iustification which is by faith and of thankfulnes vnto God for which cause so soone as the Apostle hath taught the doctrine of faith he descends to the works of the lawe teaching men that their life and conuersation must be worthie that high calling whereunto we are called in Christ Iesu See Ephe. 4. 1. 1. Thess 2. 12. But faith in Christ is that which is principally required in all the books of the new Testament And thus farre generally of the written word of the couenant CHAP. VII The number of the controuersies which are concerning the written Word and of the first controuersie whether the Scripture be the word of God THere be two kinds of controuersies concerning the holy Scripture The first kind is of such controuersies as bee more essentiall that is which concerne the very essence if I may so speake or being of the Scripture The second kind is of those controuersies which bee more accidentall and doe not so neerely concerne the essence of the Scripture Of the first kind there are ten controuersies or questions the first is Whether the Scripture Propheticall and Apostolicall bee the word of God The second is How it may appeare that this Scripture is Gods word The third is Of the antiquitie of it The fourth is Of the perspicuity or cleerenes of it The fift is Of the simplicitie or plainnesse of it The sixt is Of the viuacitie quickening power or life of it The seuenth is Of the simple euident necessitie of it The eight is Of the perfection sufficiencie thereof that it is sufficient and perfect in it selfe without all vnwritten verities or traditions whatsoeuer The ninth is Whether the Scripture may bee the iudge to determine all controuersies The tenth is Whether the Scriptures Propheticall and Apostolicall must haue the chiefe place of excellency and be in authoritie aboue the Church As for those eight controuersies which follow the two first they are touching the properties of the holie Scripture and these when we shall haue proued that the Scripture is Gods word will appeare euidently for they are necessary consequents of that Theoreme For grant we this that the Scripture is Gods word then these things must follow necessarily first that it is most ancient secondly most cleere thirdly most simple or pure fourthly most powerfull fiftly most necessarie sixtly most perfect seuenthly the greatest best iudge of all controuersies without exception eightly most excellent But for as much as the aduersaries denie these eight properties therefore as is a foresaid there is of euerie one of them a speciall controuersie We are then to handle these controuersies in order and first of that which by due right naturally is to haue the first place Whether the Scripture be the word of God The Aduersaries graunt generally that the holy Scripture is the word of God but when they are brought from the generall to a speciall they break from vs. To speake more plainely the word of God at this day is twofold in the Church of God 1. immediate 2. mediate I call that the Gods written word immediate word of God which doth proceede immediately out of Gods owne mouth and that I call mediate which the Lord speakes by his preacher or Minister We hold then and auouch that the holie Scripture is that immediate and primarie word of God and to bee vnto vs in steed of that first immediate and liuely voice of God himselfe yea that it serues vs in place not only of that liuely voice of God but also of the secret and insearchable mind of God and of Gods vnspeakeable mysteries Our arguments are these 1. For that this is the verie will of God They haue Moses saith he and the prophets that is the bookes of Moses and the Prophets Luk. 16. 29. 2. If we had nothing to supply the defect of the liuely voice of God then doubtlesse our state were worse then that of the old Church of the Iewes which had the oracles of God but it is against all light of reason so to Rom. 3 1. 2. affirme 3. Our third reason is this The first ground of our faith must be either the liuely voice of God or the verie mind and counsell of God or something to supply the want of Gods liuely voyce and of the secret mind of God which must also be
Canonicall books of the Old Testament are these 1. The 5. bookes of Moses 2. Ioshua 1. booke 3. The booke of iudges 1. 4. Ruth 1. booke 5. The bookes of Samuel 2. 6. The bookes of Kings 2. 7. The bookes of Chronicles 2. 8. Ezra 1. booke 9. Nehemias 1. booke 10. Hester 1. booke 11. Iob. 1. booke 12. Psalmes 13. Prouerbs 14. Ecclesiastes 15. The book of Canticles 16. Esaiah 17. Ieremiah 18. Ezechiel 19. Daniel 20. The twelue small Prophets The Canonicall books of the New Testament are these which are commonlie receiued 1. The Gospel according to S. Matthew 2. The Gospel according to S. Marke 3. The Gospel according to S. Luke 4. The Gospel according to S. Iohn 5. The Acts of the Apost 6. S. Pauls Epistle to the Romans 7. S. Pauls Epistles to the Cormthians 2. 8. The Epistle to the Gal. 9. The Epistle to the Ephesians 10 The Epistle to the Philippians 11. The Epistle to the Colossians 12. The Epistles to the Thessalonians 2. 13. The Epistles to Timothie 2. 14. The Epistle to Titus 15. The Epistle to Philemon 16. The Epistle to the Hebrues 17. The Epistle of Saint Iames. 18. The Epistles of Saint Peter 2. 19. The Epistles of Saint Iohn 3. 20. The Epistle of Saint Iude. 21. The booke of the Reuelation of Saint Iohn And whereas some haue doubted for a time of some of these bookes as of the Epistle to the Hebrues the Epistle of Saint Iames the last of S. Peter the 2. and 3. of S. Iohn the Epistle of Iude and the Apocalypse yet they were neuer vtterly reiected but for a time onely doubted of whether they might be accepted as Canonical These Canonical books of the Old and New Testament were written by holy men as they were moued by the holy Ghost 2. Pet. 1. 21. And of these some are called the Prophets which wrote the bookes of the Old Testament so called because they were gouerned by the spirit of prophecy Some be called Apostles so called because of their function these wrote the books of the New Testament The books of the old new Testament some haue their writers names expressely set downe or noted by speciall characters or signes some haue no names at all annexed whereby the holy Ghost would signify vnto vs that these men were but instruments onely and not the very authors of such books wherefore we be not so much to respect their names nor so busily to inquire after them if they be not expressed Thus farre of the Canonicall bookes Now as concerning the Apocryphall bookes they be so called because the Church would haue them kept hid and not to be read or taught publickly in the Churches the priuate reading of them was onely permitted The Apocryphall bookes are such as were found onely annexed to the old Testament and they bee eleuen in number 1 Iudith 2 Tobit 3 Esdras third fourth booke 4 The Wisedome of * falsly so called Salomon 5 Ecclesiasticus 6 Baruch 7 The Epistle of Ieremiah Apocryphall bookes 8 Additions to Daniel 9 The Prayer of Manasses 10 The two bookes of Machabees 11 The supplement of Hester from the third ver of the tenth chap. Among these some there are which the verie aduersaries account to be Apocryphall First the prayer of Manasses Secondly the third and fourth booke of Esdras Thirdly the third and fourth booke of Machabees wherof Athanasius maketh mention in his Synopsis But we are to proue that all these before named bee Apocryphall The first Argument is from the Writers All the Canonicall bookes of the old Testament were written by the Prophets But these were not written by the Prophets Therfore they be not Canonical but Apocryphal I proue the Proposition Luk. 16. They haue Moses and the Prophets that is the bookes of Moses and the Prophets Luke 24. 27. of Christ it is written that he began at Moses and at all the prophets and interpreted vnto them in all the Scriptures the things which were written of him Therefore Moses and the Prophets were the writers of the old Testament To the Rom. 16. He cals the scriptures of the old Testament the Propheticall Scriptures And 2. Pet. 1. 19. The most sure word of the Prophets And for the assumption But these were not written by the Prophets 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I proue it Malachie was the last of the prophets and betweene Malachie and Iohn the Baptist there arose no prophet But these bookes were written after Malachies time and this cannot be denied of some as of Ecclesiasticus the books of y e Machabees Ergo. 2. ARG. This is from the language wherin all the canonical Scriptures were written They were written I say in the language of Canaan in the Hebrue tongue which was the speech of the Prophets wherein they wrote their prophecies But these bookes be not written in the Hebrue tongue but all for the most part in Greeke therfore our proposition or assertion is manifest The Assumption is euident that I shall not neede to cite either the testimonie of the Fathers or the aduersaries owne confession ARG. 3. is from the testimonie of the old Church of the Iewes If these books were Canonicall the old Hebrues had heard some thing of them But they neuer heard of them Therefore they be not Canonicall The Proposition is cleere I proue the Assumption In Ezraes time all the canonicall bookes were gathered into one volume and the Iewes care was such of them that they nūbred all the letters which were found in the Prophets set down the sum of thē how much more would they haue had care of these whole bookes if they had heard of them The 4. ARG. is from the testimonie of the late Church of the Iewes which was in Christs time If these books were canonicall then the latter Rabbins or Iewish Writers would haue accepted them but they did not receiue them but reiect them Therefore they bee not canonicall I proue the Proposition For out of all question if they had not receiued the Canonicall bookes Christ would haue taxed them for it for that he so reprehends them for their sinister and false interpretations of the Canonicall Scriptures The Aduersaries grant the Assumption The 5. ARG. is from the testimonie of Christ and his Apostles If these before named books were canonicall then Christ and his Apostles would haue cited them somewhere for confirmation of their doctrines but that can neuer bee found they did no not in all the new Testament therefore they be not Canonicall The proposition is manifest The matter it selfe will make sure the Assumption The 6. ARG. These Apocryphall bookes containe some things differing from the canonical scriptures some things contrarie some
things false some things fabulous and some things impious Therefore these bookes be not canonicall I proue the Antecedent Tobit 3. 8. and 3. 25. 5. 15. and 11. 12. Iudith 8. 6. and 9. 2. and 9. 13. and 16. 8. Baruch 6. 2. the Additions of Daniel 13. 1. and 14. 32. the Additions to Hester 15. 1. 2 Mach. 2. 1. 7. 8. 27. and 12. 43. and 14. 37. and 15. 39. The 7. ARG. These bookes containe contrarieties and points repugning one another Conferre 1. Mach. 6. 8. with 2. Mach. 1. 16. and 2. Mach. 9. 5. Conferre 1. Mach. 9. 3. and 2. Machab. 10. 1. Conferre 1. Machab. 4. 36. and 2. Mach. 10. 1. Conferre 1. Mach. 6. 17. and 2. Mach. 10. 11. The 8. ARG. is taken from an humane testimonie first of Councels secondly of Fathers the ancient first next the latter writers The Councels which giue canons touching the canonicall bookes and the Apocryphal are these for the most part The Laodicen Councel which was held in the yeere after Christs incarnatiō 300. The 3. Councel of Carthage in the yeere 400. The Trullan in the yeere 600. The Florentine in the yeere 1150. The Tridentine in our age Of these we may reason thus The Laodicen Councell the most ancient here numbred reiects these bookes as Apocryphall See the 59. Canon of that Councell Ergo. But the aduersaries obiect heere that at this time before the third Councell of Carthage the canonicall bookes were not distinctly known I answer first that this councell was not held till foure hundred yeeres after Christ but it is absurd to say that there was no Canon knowne or that the canonicall books were not discerned till this time Ergo. Secondly I answer that Councell was not general but prouinciall But a prouinciall Councell may not prescribe any canon for the Catholike Church Ergo. But they say this Councell was confirmed by that of Trullan I answer that the Laodicen Councell also was approued by this and that the Trullan Councel is reiected by the Papists themselues in manie things Thus far of Councels now for the ancient Fathers they also did reiect these bookes as Apocryphall Ergo. I proue this by an induction 1. Athanasius in his Synopsis 2. Cyril of Ierusalem 3. Hilary Bishop of Pictauia 4. Melito bishop of Sardinia 5. Nazianzen in his poem 6. Hierom in his prologo Galeato which is prefixed before the books of Kings 7. Gregorie the Great 8. Ioseph against Appian 9. Ruffin in the exposition of the Symbole Apostolicall 10. Augustine The aduersaries here except saying But these men haue spoken of the canon of the old Testament of the Hebrues say they not of Christians I answer first as if the Hebrues had one canon the Christians another Secondly they did approue that very canon of the Hebrues But it may be say they that then peraduēture there was no Canon known or determined of by the Church I answer and I demand then when was this decreed and in what Councell was this done in the Councell of Trent but this is too late for this Councell was euen in our age Was it decreed in the Florentine Councell that is but little elder Was this Canon agreed vpon in the third Councell of Carthage But that Councell 1. was but prouinciall 2. and this is reiected of the very Papists themselues in some things as in the canon of the high Priest which in number is the 26. They will say this Councell was confirmed by the Trullan Councell I answer 1. So was the Laodicen 2. So the canon was concluded or established later to wit in the yeare of Christ 400. 3. The Trullan Councell is reiected in many things of the verie Papists 4. After the Trullan Councell there were Fathers which would not receiue the Apocryphall bookes And so now let vs come to the second classe of Fathers that is to the latter Writers Heere then I reason thus The late Writers doe not reckon these bookes among the Canonicall Ergo. This I proue by an induction * Lib. de Officiis Isidore Iohn Damascen Nicephorus Leontius Rabanus Maurus Radulphus Lyranus Carthusianus Abulensis Antoninus Hugo Cardinalis Erasmus in some of his writings Cardinall Caietanus All these were after the Trullan Councell yea some of them were reputed for sonnes by the Church of Rome after the Florentine Councell By these testimonies first of Councels next of Fathers it is euident that none of these bookes was accepted for Canonicall in anie lawfull iudgment for if there had beene anie such matter so manie ancient and late Writers would no doubt haue so acknowledged Wherefore these bookes are Apocryphall and so to be accounted The aduersaries for their defence alleage also humane testimonies and this in a manner is all they can say They cite the Councels before named as the third of Carthage the Trullan Florentine and the Councell of Trent But we reiect the two latter as tyrannicall and congregate purposely to oppresse the truth and light of God And touching the Trullan and the third Councel of Carthage we haue set downe our iudgment And as for Fathers they bring forth for this matter principally the Popes themselues as Pope Innocentius and Gelasius and Augustine in some place But I answer that they cannot bring so many as we can nor so ancient for themselues Secondly when these Fathers which they name call these bookes canonicall which we reiect as Apocryphall they take the name of Canonicall bookes more largely then we to wit for bookes which haue some such sanctity as in prophane Writers cannot be found and they call them so not for that they meane that they are of like authoritie with the Canonicall bookes of Scripture And we denie not but that in many of these such holinesse may appeare as cannot be found in the bookes of prophane authours And thus farre of the Apocryphall bookes CHAP. XVIII Of the authenticall Edition of the Bible WHereas there be extant many Editions of the Bible in diuers languages as the Hebrue Greek and Latine other proper tongues it is a question which of these must be reputed for authenticall I answer the Hebrue edition of the old and the Greek of the new Testament is authenticall so must be accounted so that all things are to be determined by these all other editions must be approoued so far as they agree with these Wee will therefore first speake of the Hebrue edition of the old Testament we auouch then that the Hebrue edition of the old testament is authenticall This proposition shall haue his confirmation after we haue giuen a short preface touching the Hebrue tongue and the writing of the old testament in that language and the preseruation of these bookes of the old testament written in the Hebrue tongue to this day The Hebrue tongue was the first and the * The Hebrue tongue onely before the floud Gen. 11. 1. only language on earth to the floud and to the building of the tower
the Church is one The aduersaries withstand this conclusion and infring it with these arguments First the scripture is not written in mens hearts with the finger of God neither is it the primary voice of God Secondly the scripture is of no antiquity Thirdly it is obscure Fourthly ambiguous c. Bellarmine ads more to these of which ye may read in him They conclude that the voice of the Church is the principall and proper voice of the holy Ghost as he is the Iudge of controuersies Their proofe is this The scripture is written in the heart of the Church with Gods own finger this is the primary voice of God And whatsoeuer excellency wee doe ascribe to the scripture that they attribute to their owne Church which is nothing els but a den of theeues And that the spirit being this great iudge is not bound to one sort of men as those of the Ecclesiasticall function the Pope and Councels as they speak but doth performe this office without all respect of persons in whom and by whom soeuer it seemeth good vnto himselfe this is manifest first for if the holy Ghost be not the Iudge both of the very context of the scripture whether it be Gods word and of the interpretation of scripture if he be not I say in man himselfe assuredly there can be no faith For the spirit only begetteth faith in mans heart Secondly the holy Ghost executeth his other offices freely in by any man therefore so may he this function of iudging What is meant by iudging in the holy Ghost For I demand what els is it to iudge but to inlighten to teach that the scripture is giuen of God by inspiration and that this is the naturall sense of this scripture Thirdly the same we be taught by our experience for we find it true by experience that he doth freely iudge in and by whom it pleaseth him Testimonies of scripture proue also this assertion 1. Cor. 12. 11 And all these things worketh euen the selfe same spirit distributing to euery man seuerallie as he will And Esay 54. All thy children shall be taught of God Ier. 31. I will write my lawes in their harts The aduersaries impugne this truth of God with some argumēts of their owne of which ye may reade in Bellarmine And these men binde the holy Ghost to the Pope and to councels confirmed by him which point our men impugne also refute with many arguments of which this is one that of their conclusion this must be the consequent that the Pope and his councels must be aboue the scriptures which thing is absurd to be graunted See more arguments of this subiect in their disputations CHAP. XVI Of the eight propertie and the tenth controuersie LASTLY we auouch that the sacred scripture is of highest authority excellency and 10. Propertie dignity on the earth Here againe by this word scripture we vnderstand both the substance of it and the writing And here wee meane it hath such excellency as makes it most worthie of credit and whereby also it gaines authority and estimation to the Church For which cause the Church is called the Pillar and ground of truth 1. Tim. 3. 15. And it hath many other titles which are giuen to it often in the scriptures This is prooued by the former demonstrations as these The scripture is the word of God it is most perspicuous it is most pure and simple c. Ergo. The aduersaries vary in iudgment touching this authority of Scripture For some of them detract from this soueraigne authority of it affirming that of it selfe it is not authentical but takes authoritie and estimation from the Church Of this minde are these Eckius in Enchiridio Pighius in his booke de Hierarchia and one Hermannus an impudent Papist he with a black mouth auoucheth it that the scripture is of no more validity without the testimony of the Church then AEsops Fables c. Others more late writers and more subtile say that the scripture hath authoritie in and by it selfe and is authentical but not to vs before the church approue it and ascertain it to be so Of this iudgmēt be these Bellarmine Coclaeus Canus Stapleton Canisius c. They which speake thus that the written word of God is not authenticall to vs before the iudgment of the Church be manifested these men I say haue this meaning that we bee not bound to beleeue that the Scriptures bee authenticall before the iudgment of the Church be past of it and that we sinne not at all if wee beleeue them not before the definitiue sentence of the Church But we hold this to be false also to say that the scripture is not to vs authenticall without the authority of the Church For it is the holy Ghost that teacheth euery man to know beleeue that the scripture is authenticall and hath soueraigne authority in it selfe And this he teacheth not by any externall meane How the holy Ghost teacheth vs what authority the scripture hath first but by the very sacred scripture by which alone he properly breeds faith in our hearts to beleeue and apprehend this truth of God And so we resting on this illumination of the holy ghost teaching vs by the scripture that this is the excellencie and authority of the scripture doe beleeue this to be so albeit the whole world did oppose it selfe against vs. And thus farre of the more essentiall questions concerning scripture CHAP. XVII Questions more accidentall concerning the holy Scripture and first of the bookes wherein the same is contained THE first question is concerning the books of holy scripture These bookes are commonly called for the excellency of them The Bible The Bible as it is commonly receiued and caried in hands containes in it two sorts of books the first is of books Canonicall and the second is Apocryphal Regular or Canonicall bookes are such as giue rule and direction touching faith and manners The bookes of Moses are the first Canon or president sent from God First Canon which may not be iudged or tryed by any other externall Canon whatsoeuer For there was no booke extant before the books of Moses The authoritie of the writer so holy and the euidence of the spirit so powerfull and the holinesse of these books to passe by other arguments so great hath gained these books this high estimation and authority in the Church The books of the Prophets make vp the second Canon which bee adiudged canonicall Second Canon by that externall Canon of the Mosaicall books by which they were examined Next they were and are discerned of such as be taught of God inwardly by the holy Ghost by the great euidence of Gods spirit which is manifested in them both in words and matter The third Third Canon Canon are the Apostolical books of the New Testament which are adiudged and approoued as Canonicall partly by the Canonicall books of Moses partly by the bookes of the Prophets partly by the spiritual euidence they carry in themselues which the Sons of God instructed by his holy spirit can easily discerne The Canonicall bookes of the Bible are either of the Old or of the New Testament The
of Babel Gen. 11. 1. 9. The whole earth was of one lauguage and of one speech or * Et verba erant eadem had the same words At the building of Babel began the confusion of languages and from the Hebrue as from the mother of all the rest all other tongues had their first beginning for all other languages are nothing els in a manner but as Dialects to the The Hebrue tongue mother of all the rest Hebrue tongue of which some resemble their mother more then other some be more estranged from her In that confusion of tongues the Hebrue was preserued as the wombe or mother as Hierome speaketh of all the rest this was preserued I say in the family of Heber who was the fourth from Noah and liued that verie time Hebers family kept the Hebrue tongue that the tower of Babel was built and when the confusision of languages began The Hebrue tongue then was so called first of Heber from him it came to his posteritie not to all but to them onely of whom came Abraham and from him continued to the verie last of all the Prophets for Haggai Zacharias Malachie wrote their prophecies in this very language Thus farre of the Hebrue tongue The olde testament was written first in this Hebrue and holy tongue The first writer was Moses the prophets The old testamēt written in Hebrue followed him of whom some wrote before the captiuitie some in the captiuitie some after the captiuitie and they writ all in Hebrue except Daniel and Ezra which wrote some things in the Chaldee tongue And this letteth not but that we may say that all the old testament was written in the Hebrue tongue for that the Chaldee and Hebrue haue no great diuersitie Now to speake of the preseruation of these bookes of the old Testament the bookes of Moses the prophets that is the old Testament written in Hebrue was kept by the admirable prouidence of almighty God vnto this day They were preserued I say in most perillous hard times as in the burning of the citie and of the temple of The admirable prouidence of God in the preseruation of the Bible Ierusalem in the captiuity in that most grieuous persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes for hee raged also against these very books in the great persecutions which were after Christ vnder the Roman Emperours But here it is demanded whether the same very books which were written by Moses the Prophets before the captiuity be come into our hands I answer for this matter diuers men haue thought diuersly For there were that thought that those bookes which Moses the prophets left were lost when the temple and the citie were destroyed with fire and that these which we haue were repaired and written ouer againe by Ezra the Scribe inspired by God called extraordinarily for this purpose Of this iudgment are these a Epist ad Chilonem Basil Irenaeus Tertullian Clemens Alexandrinus b Lib. de Offic. Isidorus Rabanus Maurus Leontius It may be they were thus minded because of that storie or fable rather which we may reade Esdras 4. 14. But that booke is Apocryphall and reiected not onely of our Church but also of the Church of Rome The point may be thus refuted If Ezra had written ouer these bookes againe then assuredly it is most like that he would haue written them not in the Hebrue but in the Chaldee tongue or in a mixt language of Hebrue and Chaldee together for that Ezra did write two bookes in that mixt maner euen those two bookes of Esdras Secondly Nehem 8. Ezra is said to haue brought forth and to haue read not his owne bookes or bookes which he had written but the bookes of the law of Moses Thirdly it is not like but some godly man or Prophet or some other was left which in that time of the fire preserued these sacred books or kept some copie of them the rather for that thē out of al doubt Ezechiel Daniel the prophets liued 4. The very name which Daniel giues to the Chaldee monarchie calling it the golden empire doth argue that this did not so rage against the sacred books of God for if this monarchy had laide such violent hands on Gods books assuredly the holy Ghost would not haue giuen it a name of such excellency Therefore that assertion is false and the contrary is true to wit that the books of Moses the old Prophets were preserued from daunger when the Temple and the City were consumed with fire as also in the captiuity and so be reserued by diuine prouidence and so deliuered by Gods owne hand at last into our possessions Neither yet do we gaine-say what the godly haue recorded that is that Ezra after the captiuity did reuise the books of Moses and the Prophets digested them into one volume and set them downe in this certaine order Thus farre of this question Now it resteth after the premisses that we prooue the Hebrue edition of the old Testament to be only authenticall That edition which was written in the first language that euer was and first in the primarie language and hath beene preserued in that tongue purely fully euen vnto our times I say that edition of the old Testament is authenticall But such is the Hebrue edition Ergo. The aduersaries cannot deny but that it was written in the first language and mother tongue and also that it was first written in it and they cannot deny but that it was preserued in some purity euen vnto this day but they will not graunt or allow it this excellency of sincerity and purity which we auouch Bellarmine hath obserued out of all the old Testament 5. places only whereby hee would prooue that the Hebrue fountaine hath lost some part of this puritie The first place is Esay 9. 6. And he Vajikra Schemo Pele shall call his name to wit the Lord Wonderfull But the vulgar Latine readeth and he shal be called which reading Caluin approoueth And therefore by Caluins confession heere the Hebrue fountaine it selfe is not cleere I answere first the sense is the same whether ye reade shall call or shall be called Secondly the letters are the same in both words in the Hebrue shall call and shall be called the Vajikra points being diuers do not make the body of the word to be of diuers significations Thirdly the Hebrue Doctors as Uatablus say often that with the Hebrues a verbe personal of the third person is taken for an impersonall as heere shall call for shal be called Fourthly Tremelius and Iunius retaine the Hebrue reading and say thus and he doth cal his name c. The second place is Ier. 23. 6. And this his name wherewith he shal cal him the Lord our righteousnes But the vulgar Vezeh Schemo asher jikreo Iehouah Tsidkenu Latin edition saith that they shall cal him the Lord our righteousnesse and
and to vs most manifest it followeth according to their iudgement that it yeelds light vnto the Scripture not only in respect of vs but also in respect of the Scripture it selfe yet is it in verity but a certaine secondary Scripture and a certaine secondary voice For as they auouch it the voice of the Church is as Gods owne voice sounding from heauen seruing to confirme the voice of the Scripture which now is but mans voice only and to ratifie and make authenticall the very Scripture as being written but by certaine Scribes and published onely by the hands of men This must bee the consequent of their principles or conclusion of their premisses albeit other men be of another iudgment As for our selues like as we denie the conclusion which they inferre vpon the former principles so we reiect also their very principles For we denie refuse their first ground to wit that the voice of the Church is to be accounted the liuely voice of God himselfe and that the Scripture written in the heart of the Church is to be accounted for that scripture which was written by the very finger of God And we affirme that the only propheticall and apostolical scripture is to be esteemed as the liuely voice of God we auouch it I say that this Propheticall and Apostolicall scripture only serueth vs in steed of that scripture which was written by Gods owne finger We adde also that the sacred Scripture is vnto vs a booke of reuelation of those diuine mysteries which were hidden in Gods owne breast from eternitie for this is the very will of God that we attend on him speaking in the scripture as it were in his owne liuely voice They haue saith he Moses and the Prophets Luk. 16. vers 29. that is the bookes of Moses and the prophets And God will not haue this scripture in no lesse account then that scripture which hee wrote in times past with his owne finger in tables of stone The voice of the Church I meane the true Church not the lying papisticall synagogue is but as the voice of the handmaide or as the voice of a crier which is to publish and to proclaime that voice of God full of excellencie speaking in the scripture But the scripture in the heart of the Church that is the Maximes of Gods truth written in the hearts of the faithfull they be nothing els but a certaine secundarie scripture taken out by the holy ghost out of that primarie and most sacred scripture and ingrauen in the minds of men For how much think you of that ful measure of the Propheticall Apostolicall scripture is there taken forth and ingrauen in our minds I say that if all mens hearts were bound together yet all they could not comprehend all those things fully and perfectly which be recorded in the Propheticall and Apostolicall scriptures For the catholicke Church so long as it is conuersant on the earth is not capable of al that light which shineth in the sacred scriptures of y e apostles the prophets Let their first principle be thus beaten downe and their Corolatie or second conclusion to wit that the voice of the Church is most manifest both in it selfe and vnto vs will fall to the ground of it owne accord and so both principles being shaken their conclusion which they inferre is of no strength to stand but must fall away CHAP. IX Of the first proprietie of the sacred Scripture WE are now to proceed and to make it manifest that the holy scripture is of greatest antiquitie and this is the first proprietie The 1. propriety of the scripture most ancient before ascribed to the Scripture Here first we be to find out the diuers acceptations of this word Scripture This word Scripture may be taken either for the matter onely and Acceptation of the word scripture the very substance which is contained in the words and letters or not only for the matter and substance but also for the verie writing it selfe or the forme wherein that substance is expressed and set before vs. Now if by this word Scripture ye vnderstand the verie substance it selfe it is without all controuersie that the Scripture is most ancient because it is the substance of those diuine oracles which not only Patriarches and Prophets haue spoken but also God himselfe vttered which things also were hidden in Gods mind from eternitie But if yee vnderstand by this word not onely the substance but the very writing and in this respect also the scripture may be said to be most ancient For as touching the Propheticall and Apostolicall scriptures in respect also of the writing and manner of reuealing of them as wee said often before it is Gods will that we so esteeme them not onely as the liuely voice of the Prophets and Apostles nor onely as the liuely voice of God himselfe or as a booke written with his owne hand as the Decalogue was set downe with his owne finger in tables of stone but also that we so accept them as the very mysteries and if I may so speake as the verie diuine notions which were ingrauen in Gods owne mind from eternitie To cleare this point a little The veritie kept secret in Gods mind from eternitie was in time manifested manie wayes or in diuers formes for it was reuealed partly by the liuely voice of God himself partly by the voice of the Patriarches Prophets and Apostles to passe by Angels in silence and partly also by the scripture which was written by the Prophets and Apostles The liuely and immediate voice of God did cease long since neither haue we that copie which God himselfe wrote the Patriarches How to esteem of the written word of God also the Prophets and y e Apostles haue ceased to speake the writings only of the Prophets and Apostles remaine to this day Wherefore this we hold as necessary vnto faith that we accept these writings or books first in steed of the liuely voice of the Prophets and Apostles 1 Next in place of the liuely voice of God himself 2 Thirdly of the Scripture written with Gods owne finger 3 Fourthly and lastly as that holy veritie and diuine mysteries 4 which are recorded in Gods owne breast which Oracles being simply without comparison of greatest antiquitie it is very manifest that the Propheticall and Apostolicall scripture is after a sort most ancient For what may be auouched of the liuely voice of God himselfe or of the Oracles of his mind the same in some respect may be said of the scripture supplying vnto vs their defect For Substance of the scripture simply most ancient if I may truly say in some sort the scripture is the liuely voice of God himselfe doe I not as truly speake also in like manner the scripture is most ancient for as much as the voice of God is most ancient But it shall suffice vs to commend the antiquitie of scripture to
let him be accursed Ioh. 20. These things are written that ye may beleeue c. And as for the iudgment of the Aduersaries in this matter which affirme that the scripture is lame and maimed chiefly note Bellarmine and his arguments for this purpose They teach the scriptures to bee defectiue and weake that we might giue place to their traditions and forgeries wherefore let vs a little consider this matter of Of Traditions traditions The word Tradition is generall and signifieth any doctrine written or vnwritten and so this word is vsed both in the sacred scriptures and in the ancient Writers albeit the Papists affirme that the Fathers vse this word onely to signifie a doctrine not written Testimonies of scripture which cleere the generall acceptation of the word are these Act. 6. 14. And shall change the ordinances which Moses * Quos nobis tradidit Moses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gaue vs or which wee had from Moses by tradition 2. Thess 2. 15. Keepe the tradition or doctrine * Traditam doctrinam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 deliuered vnto you which ye were taught either by word or by our Epistle The word tradition in Scripture is giuen other whiles to things ncessarie and continuing and sometimes to things not necessarie and temporarie The testimonie which is 2. Thess 2. vers 15. is of necessarie doctrine The place which is cited out of the Acts 16. 4. is of ceremonies for heere the Spirit speaketh of a decree of the Councell holden at Ierusalem concerning bloud and things offered to idols and that which is strangled Of which Act. 15. 28. As touching traditions which concerne necessarie points of faith manners they were first deliuered by the liuely voice of Christ his Apostles and then the short summe of them recorded in bookes as may appeare by that speech of the Apostle concerning the Lords supper 1. Cor. 11. 23. And againe 1. Thess 4. 2. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where he giueth rules of an honest conuersation And againe 2. Thess 2. 15. And as touching traditions which be not necessarie but ceremoniall they were either recorded as of Ecclesiasticall rites 1. Cor. 11. 14. or not recorded 1. Cor. 11. 34. Other things will I set in order when I come He promiseth heere to set in order but ceremonies and namely such as did concerne the Lords supper Of ceremonies onely this I wil say they did no way exceed neither were Of Ceremonies Good rules they vnprofitable neither were they deliuered with anie 1 opinion of necessity to bind mens consciences neither 2 were they contrarie to those things which were written 3 yea this I auouch y t there was nothing deliuered by way 4 of tradition or touching ceremonies by the Apostles which had not good ground warrant in Gods word that is in the bookes of the Prophets and in the doctrine of Christ which not long after was written by the Euangelists and Apostles And as for Popish traditions Popish traditions and ceremonies and ceremonies there is no end of them they are vnprofitable they are like old wiues fables all for the most part deliuered with an opinion of necessitie and most of them most repugnant to the Apostolicall doctrine And thus do we distinguish traditions The aduersaries vnderstand by Tradition their vnwritten veritie not that which is no where found written but that which is not written by the first author thereof that is by him which deliuered the same by his owne liuely voice This then the Papists do here professe that they cannot find their traditions in the Scriptures nor proue them by the Scriptures CHAP. XV. Of the seuenth propertie and ninth controuersie THE sacred scripture is the iudge of all controuersies I meane such controuersies as are concerning religion Now there bee two principall controuersies concerning religion the first is of the scripture it selfe who shall be iudge here or how it may be tryed that the scripture is the word of God The second The iudge of the scripture is of the sense and interpretation of the scripture who shal iudg of that or how it may appeare that this or that is the very naturall sense of the Scripture I meane by iudgement here a definitiue sentence pronounced and giuen with such authority as that all men must herein rest By the word scripture I meane not only the substance thereof but also the form of reuelation which is also by diuine inspiration Againe this manner of speaking is improper when we say of the scripture that it is the iudge of controuersies For to speake properly the holy Ghost is the iudge for the iudge must be a person and the holy Ghost he is the third person in Trinity The Scripture therefore is not properlie said to be a iudge but it is the voice and sentence which the Iudg hath giuen the principall instrument or meane wherby y e spirit sets forth his iudgment whereby he teacheth vs and worketh faith in our hearts And the spirit here iudgeth freely in and by whom he pleaseth being not tied to any one kind of men as Pastors Doctors but in and by whom it seemeth good to him Here then three things must be considered of vs First whether the holy ghost be a iudge Secondly whether the scripture be his principal voice wherby he giueth First whether the holy Ghost be a iudge sentence or determineth any question Thirdly whether he iudg in and by any man without difference or respect of persons or be bound to one certaine kinde or sort of men For the first question I answere the holy Ghost is a Iudge first for that he was promised of Christ Io 14. Math 28. Mar. 16. vnto his church at his last departure from the Apostles is giuen as it were deputed Christs vicar on earth both to teach and to iudge c. Secondly for that among other offices of the holy Ghost this is one to iudge But because the aduersaries do not much gainsay this assertion concerning Io. 16. Gods spirit that by him all things are to be iudged and tried and that by him the scriptures are to be interpreted therefore we will be briefe in this point Now for the second point that the holy scripture is the primarie Secondly that the holy scripture is the principall voice of the iudg voice of this iudge iudiciarie and proper to him whereby he begets faith in our harts may appeare by these reasons following First the scripture is the word of God Secondly it is most auncient Thirdly it is most cleere or euident To these I ad the testimonie of the scripture it selfe Ioh. 14. 25. 26. He shall teach you all things and bring all things to * Suggeret remembrance which I haue told you And hereunto may also be added the common experience of the Saints There are other meanes to prooue this but lesse principall among which the testimony of
or common prayers of the Church ought to be in the mother tongue Thirdly whether it shal be lawfull for the common people to read the scriptures translated into their owne language or mother tongue To the first question we answer that it is lawfull yea also that it is expedient it should be so and this we proue by some few arguments First the sacred scriptures must be read publiquely before all the people therefore must they be translated into their owne known language for otherwise it were in vain to read them The antecedent is proued Deut. 31. ver 11. 12. The Lord commandeth that the books of Moses be read to all indifferently when they were assembled Men Women and Children with the strangers Ier. 36. chargeth Baruch the scribe that hee should read before all the people the book which he had Translating of the scripture into the vulgar tongues First argument written from his mouth But some will heere obiect that this precept was to indure but for a time I answer the end shewes it must be perpetuall Deut. 31. The end being this that this people may heare learne and feare the Lord. This end is perpetuall therefore so is the law in like manner specially seeing that the reading of the Scripture is the ordinarie and necessarie meanes whereby we be to come to this appointed end So the antecedēt being thus cleered it followeth necessarily that the scripture must be translated into our knowne mother tongue Arg. 2. The people are permitted to read y e Scriptures Second argu therfore they are to be translated into the vulgar tongue for otherwise the common people could neuer reade them The antecedent I proue thus The Sacred Scriptures do furnish vs with weapons against the Deuil as we be taught by Christs example Matth. 4. who gaue Sathan the repulse vsing none other weapons against him but testimonies of Scripture Ioh. 5. chap. Christ commaunded the multitude to search the scriptures Acts chap. 17. the Christians of Beroea are commended for searching the scriptures whether the points were sound and good agreeable to the sriptures which were taught by the Apostles But see more of this antecedent in the handling of the 3. question Arg. 3. The very Papists graunt the scriptures may be read before the people but they say it must be done in an Third argu vnknowen tongue wherefore I reason thus If the scriptures must be read before the multitude in an vnknowen tongue that shall be fruitlesse and without all edification therefore they must be translated into their knowen language The Antecedent is prooued by 1. Corin. 14. 6. If I shal come vnto you speaking in tongues what shal I profit you q. d. nothing And after in the same Chap. ver 19. I had rather speake fiue words with my vnderstanding that I might also instruct others then ten thousandwords in a strange tongue But of this point more hereafter The fourth argument God requires in his people wisdome knowledge and instruction Therefore the scriptures Fourth argu must be read and therefore translated into the vulgar tongues The antecedent I prooue thus Deut. 4. God wil haue his people to be wise of vnderstanding that the nations round about hearing of this might bee smitten with an admiration and say ver 4. Only this people is wise and of vnderstanding and a great nation The Apostle Col. 3. 16. will haue Gods worde to dwell in them richly or plenteously Paul in his Epistles euery where requires the Churches to whom he writes to be filled with all knowledge The aduersaries contend and dispute much against this knowledge which God requires in the common people The fift argument Christ while he liued among the Iewes spake and preached vnto them in their owne mother Fift argu tongue The Apostles of Christ in like manner did preach the Gospell in their vulgar tongue as in the day of Pentecost and after and for this very cause that they might speake to euery nation in their owne knowen language that gift of tongues was giuen them Thus then I reason If to preach the Gospell in the vulgar known languages was no profanatiō of the Gospell then so in like maner to write the Gospel in the vulgar known languages is no profanation of the same for there is like reason of both The sixt argument is from the perpetuall vse and practise Sixt argu of all the auncient Church For in the Primitiue Church the sacred Scripture was translated neere hand into all languages as the Chaldiac the Syriac the Arabian the Armenian the Egyptian the Ethiopian the Indian the Persian the Scythian the Sarmatian tongue There are not a few do auouch this a Homil. 1. in Io. Chrysostome * De corrigend Graecorum Affectib lib. 5. Theodoret c De doctr Chri. lib. 2. cap. 15. Augustine with others And at this day there be extant the Chaldiac the Syriack the Arabick the Egyptian and the Ethiopian translations all which the learned say were done in the Apostles times Chrysostome turned the sacred Scripture into the Armenian tongue as Sixtus Senēsis reporteth Ierom trāslated the scripture into the * Lingua Dalmatica Dalmatick tongue as these men do testify Alphonsus a Castro Eckius Hosius Erasmus Methodius translated it into the Sclauonian tongue as saith Auentine in his Chronicle * Socrates tripartita historia Vlphilas Bishop of the Gothes translated the same into the Gothes language * De ciuitate Dei lib. 15. Augustine writeth that the old Testament was translated into Syriack Harding against Iuel and Eckius write that the Muscouites and the people of Russia had the scripture in their owne mother tongue The historie of England written by Beda affirmeth that the scriptures were translated into the English tongue before his time Beda saith he translated part of the new Testament himselfe Thus far the practise of the old church whereby as by the rest of the arguments afore going it followeth that the sacred Scripture is to be translated into euery countrey vulgar language Now it resteth to see what the Papists answer to this question we haue in hand Some few yeares past they vtterly denied that the sacred Scripture might bee translated into any mother tongue * De choris canonicis Petrus Asoto Censura Coloniensis and Harding before named these write that some are of this iudgment The Scriptures are not to be translated into the vulgar languages And for this cause such as translated Scriptures they were banished and condemned by the Pope and their bookes were prohibited and burnt And when they saw this to be odious to all men these graue Fathers changed their minds and now forsooth they auouch the Scriptures may be translated into the vulgar languages yet by the Popes permission And this albeit it seeme to be something diuers from the former assertion yet in effect it is the verie same For the Pope will permit no man to
iustification which is by Christ onely by the grace of God only by faith only for al these haue one respect and purpose Obserue then here by the way what the palpable blindnesse of the Papists is in this cleere light of the Gospell Popish blindnes First they see not how nature is plainlie lost as touching sanctitie Secondly they know not the sole grace and mercie of God neither do they vnderstand what the excellency is of Christs merit Thirdly they perceiue not how that couenant of works is abolished to them which are in Christ as touching iustification Fourthly they conceiue not that the only couenant of grace is made with mankinde after the fall speciallie now after the incarnation of Christ in the Gospell and that vnto iustification and life eternall Fiftly they see not that the works of free will as they call them if there were any such to be duties only and testimonies of thankefulnesse according to the first institution of the couenant of works which be done by the strength of nature but ascribe some speciall meritorious vertue vnto them Wherefore we conclude concerning these men that albeit they be not iust of one minde with those old Iewes against whom the Apostle disputed in the Epistle to the Romans yet they hold much on their side striuing to defend that nature is in part good and holy so contending against the pure and only grace of God and to diuide iustification and The popish iustification mans saluation betweene Christ and Gods free grace the vertues and workes of nature whereas notwithstanding these two nature and grace can neuer stand together in the worke of our saluation For whosoeuer shall conioine or make a mixture of grace and nature in this matter shall quite ouerthrow and extinguish grace which either is alone or not at all as Rom. 11. 6. If it be of grace it is no more of works for otherwise grace were no more grace And in the Epistle to the Galathians he doth purposelie dispute against those Iewes which did couple together in the matter of iustification the guifts and works of nature with Christ with the grace of God and with the Gospell And these Iewes as I iudge the Papists seeme most to resemble I meane those Iewes against whom he wrote in the Epistle to the Galathians For in that other epistle to the Romans he disputeth against such Iewes as did openly deny Christ and reiect him but to the Galathians his disputation is against such Iewes as were not content with Christ only but would haue Christ and the law ioined together Thus far of the comparison betweene Paul and vs on the one side the old Iewes and the Papists on the other Now because it will be demanded what Paul thought of the works of regeneration and what we and what the aduersaries thinke also therefore I will touch this question in few wordes Here then some one will say did Paul then in that disputation to the Rom. and to the Galathians oppugne the works of grace and regeneration I answer Paules chiefe purpose in that disputation is against the works of nature which the Iewes thought to be holy and iust and also meritorious he did not reiect the works of regeneration as they be duties and testimonies of thankfulnesse vnto God but in that respect commends them Rom. 6. 7. 8. Chapters and in other places But as touching the cause of iustification he would not haue these workes as we call them of regeneration coupled with the grace of God or with Christ or with faith as anie cause or as part of anie meritorious cause of saluation To this purpose he saith Rom. 4. that Abraham himselfe being regenerate was not iustified before God by anie works of his regeneration And Rom. 6. hauing commended the works of sanctification in the end vers 23. where he attributeth death to the merit of sinne hee doth not there notwithstanding ascribe life eternall to the merit of the works or fruits of sanctification but when he had said that the wages of sin is death he doth clearely auouch it that eternall life is the free gift of God in Christ Iesu In which place if the Apostle had beene of this iudgement that the works of regeneration be in anie respect meritorious assuredly he would not so passe ouer the commendation of the works of regeneration specially for that this heere is principally intended Wherefore the Apostle to the Romans so reiecting the works of nature which the couenant of works requireth yet hee vnderstandeth also all kinds of workes morall and naturall going before grace and faith as also all ceremoniall works and the very fruits of regeneration which follow grace and faith that faith onely Christ only grace only may herein be all in all Thus far of S. Paules iudgment We at this day are of one and the same mind with the Apostle concerning works of regeneration Our aduersaries granting there be such works ascribe too much vnto them for they will not haue them to be duties and testimonies onely of thankfulnesse vnto God but also that they be meritorious causes of that iustification which they call the second iustification Again we are to remember that the aduersaries iudgment concerning works of regeneration is that they proceed not onely from infused grace and first iustice as they speake but also from nature and free-will which works together with that iustice in respect whereof also they account good works meritorious as was before The popish opinion of good works shewed so ascribing their good works in part to that their first grace and in part to free-will And thus farre of this comparison wherby it appeares whether we or our aduersaries haue the better or the more sound iudgment concerning both couenants of the grounds of both nature grace and Christ as also of the effect of both which we call mans iustification And lastly for that this is the most fundamentall point of true religion we may hereby discerne also whether we or the aduersaries haue the religion and worship of God the more purely soundly established amongst vs. CHAP. VI. Of the written Word or of the written Couenant of God THe word in both couenants was for a long time in the world euen from Adams time till Moses vnwritten deliuered as from hand to hand and continued by a liuelie voice for I passe ouer such matters as Ioseph recordes to be ingrauen in columnes before the floud as also the Apocryphals of Henoch And whē as in continuance of time corruptions grew by these traditions and the puritie of the doctrine of the couenant could not thus be preserued and y t God would no longer follow the former course onely he beganne in Moses time to ordaine and to publish another forme to wit this to preserue and to continue the puritie of the celestiall doctrine in written books approued and sealed by diuine authoritie and testimonie the more to commend his written word vnto men