ei credidissem discendum What a madnesse is this in thee to say beleeue them to wit the Catholickes that we must beleeue Christ and the Scriptures to be his word yet learne of vs what Christ said that is to say what is the meaning of his word I should saith S. Austin much more easily perswade my self that I ought not to beleeue Christ at all then that I must learne any thing concerning him of any except of those of whom I haue already learned to beleeue in him A. W. I denie your principall Assumption wherein you denie the sufficiencie of the Scripture for the determining of all matters of faith For if the Scripture were not sufficient to this purpose it might be lawfull for men to adde to the word of God that which is wanting but that God hath precisely forbiddē all mē Ye shall put nothing to the word which I command you neither shall you take any thing from it out of which Cardinall Caietane saith we may gather that the law of God is perfect But of this place I haue said more other where and our Diuines are large and plentifull in this argument The Apostle Paul affirmeth of him selfe that he preached nothing but that which had bin spoken by Moses and the Prophets yea our Sauiour euery where auoucheth his doctrine by the writings of the old Testament Indeed of whom should we know the will of God but of God himselfe who doubtlesse hath not deliuered it so sparingly in so many seuerall bookes but that it containeth whatsoeuer is needfull to saluation All things indeed that our Lord did are not written but those saith Cyril that the writers thought to be sufficient for manners and doctrine I could ouerwhelme you with testimonies of the Fathers in this matter A few shall serue The Canonicall Scripture saith Austin is the rule of all The letters of Bb. are reprehended by some other of grauer authoritie Generall Councels correct prouinciall and the former are amended by the latter Let the Scripture be iudge saith another and let those doctrines be held for true that agree with it For the law of God or Scripture as Chrysostom saith is a most exact ballance square and rule Therefore let vs passe by that which he or he thinkes and let vs enquire all things of the Scriptures The holy Scriptures inspired by God are sufficient to shew the truth And therfore as Hilary saith wisely and religiously It were well we would content our selues with those things that are written If we will not this is Basils censure of vs that we are without faith and proud It is a manifest argument of infidelitie saith Basil and a certaine signe of pride if any man reiect ought that is written or attempt to bring in any thing that is not written Therefore Damascen saith that the Church receiueth acknowledgeth and reuerenceth all things that are deliuered by the law the Prophets the Apostles and Euangelists and further seeketh not for any thing I pray you shew me some reason if you can why the Lord that doth not omit necessary matters repeateth those that are lesse needful to be known should fil so many bookes of Scripture with the same histories and points of doctrine oftentimes rehearsed and quite leaue out many things of farre greater importance then some of those are which he hath caused to be written Without the knowledge of many things recorded in the Scriptures a man may be saued but you denie saluation to all men that beleeue not whatsoeuer you teach them and there is no end of your deuices though it haue no warrant in any part of Scripture Is it not better then to rest only vpon that which both you and we acknowledge to be the word of God then to giue an infinite libertie to men of deuising what they wil to lay a grieuous burthē vpon our selues to beleeue vnder pain of damnation whatsoeuer they wil father vpō I know not what impossibilitie of erring Let him that hath eyes see though the blind delight in blindnesse The weaknesse of your principall Assumption concerning the insufficiencie of the Scriptures you striue to fortifie with this slender reason If there be diuers questions moued now a dayes touching substantiall matters which are not expresly set downe nor determined by onely expresse Scripture then the Scripture is not able to resolue all such doubts But there are diuers such questions Therefore the Scripture is not able to resolue all such doubts Ere I answer directly to your syllogisme I must note two things in the propounding of it First by whom the questions you speake of are moued If by Papists it is the shame and sinne of your Church to suffer idle and needlesse questions to be moued of which there can be no determination but by a Councel to be held no man knoweth how many yeares hence euer or neuer If you say these questions are set on foote by vs all the world may discerne your vntruth For we are certainly perswaded that it is not lawfull to accept any doctrine as a point of faith which cannot be proued by the Scriptures But you will say We thinke they are determinable by Scripture though indeed they be not At the least then answer the proofes we bring out of Scripture and on our part the controuersie is ended You wil reply that we will not be answered but interprete Scripture as we list Who sees not that this is a meere slander since we stand not vpon any priuate reuelations but on those rules of interpretation which the fathers according to the light of true reason haue left vs as it were by legacy But this reply is also otherwise insufficient For whereas you yeeld as appeares by this reason that some things may be determined by Scripture this obiection denies that any point of doctrine whatsoeuer can be resolued of by it because if that you say be true we wil in all cases interprete Scripture as we please Secondly I obserue another point in respect of the time If the questions you meane be such as were neuer moued till now and the Scripture neuer failed in any former doubts which seems to be implied in that speech Now a dayes me thinkes there is no shew of reason to imagine that so many and so capitall heresies for the space of 1500 years should be refuted and ouerthrowne by Scriptures and now at the last matters of lesse importance and yet as you say very substantiall should haue no meanes of satisfaction by the like course Doubtlesse if the Scripture hath hitherto bene sufficient it is no small wrong to suspect and accuse it now of insufficiencie especially in very substantiall matters necessary to be beleeued Now concerning your syllogisme I denie the consequence of your propositiō What is the Scripture so poore and weake that it can determine nothing which is not expresly set downe
this world but the whole societie of the faithful from time to time But these gay shewes of Catholike Church Vniuersalitie antiquitie vnitie succession and such like are fit to deceiue the ignorant for which purpose your discourses are written with whō they preuaile by the iust iudgement of God who sends them strong delusions that they may beleeue lyes because they haue not embraced the loue of the truth that they might be saued A. D. §. 6. First because it is very briefe and compendious and consequently such as euery one might haue leysure and should not be much weary to reade it A. W. You deale in your corrupt writings as leud men do in slanderous reports who speake anie thing at aduenture though neuer so vntrue or vnlikely It is hard but some men will either beleeue or make doubt of it at the least So all men reade your writings you care not Though they that are of knowledge and iudgement discerne your falshood yet it is twentie to one but some ignorant fellow will light on them that may be seduced And this practise you follow the rather because you are for the most part out of feare of being shamed by confutation for that you are vnknowne and know well inough that our answers to you are commonly and many times must be so large that one amongst manie can hardly find leisure to reade them Whereas if the authors of your treatises were knowne amongst vs and our answers applied shortly and plainely to the verie point of the argument that being disrobed of the idle ornaments you cloath it withall and laid naked to the view of true reason we should haue as few of your discourses as we haue now of your replies to our refutations of your treatises which are so few that in many yeares it is rare to haue anie second charge by you vnlesse it be in such a fight as requires no more but a brauado without coming to handie blowes A. D. §. 7. Secondly because it standing onely vpon few but most certaine conclusions and grounds is free from many cauils of the captious which more ample discourses are subiect vnto A. W. To speake truly and properly there is but one conclusion in your whole Treatise as I haue shewed out of this your Preface Against which we also oppose one as briefe and more certaine then yours Your conclusion is That the faith and beliefe which the authority of the Romane Church doth commend vnto vs ought without doubt to be holden for the true faith Ours That the faith which the Scripture teacheth vs is the onely true faith If you speake of the seuerall cōclusions belonging to the proofe of the generall there are at the least as many as there are Chapters But if you meane the three grounds which you signifie before and repeate afterwards they are so farre from being certaine that there is neuer a one of them true as you vnderstand them A. D. §. 8. Thirdly because the matter handled in it is not very high nor hard but common easie and plaine and such as may be vnderstood of any who hauing but a reasonable wit or vnderstanding wil carefully read it as the importance of the matter requireth with iudgement deliberation and which is chiefe with prayer to God and a resolute good will to follow that which he shall find to be right A. W. The matter is as hard by your handling of it as sophistrie can well make it as high as the deepe foundation of religion Yet I denie not but it may be vnderstood by a man of such parts and paines as you require and adde farther that the like may be auowed of the true grounds of religion as they are contained in the Scripture to the reading and meditation whereof the Lord himself hath promised such a blessing as your treatises if they were neuer so true could not looke for Is not the fountaine better then the chanell A. D. §. 9. Fourthly because these fewe plaine points which are here set downe include all other and whosoeuer shall by the helpe of Gods grace and the force of these or other reasons yeeld assent to the points proued in this discourse must by consequence without further disputing or difficultie yeeld to all particular points which the aforesaid Church commendeth for points of faith and will be moued to settle himselfe in the stedfast beliefe of all For if he once admit that there is a Church or company of men on earth infallibly taught by the holy Ghost what is the true faith in all points and that this Church is by Gods appointment to teach all men in all matters of faith which is the infallible truth and further that this Church which is thus taught and must teach vs is no other but that visible company which professeth the Romane faith then he shall not need to straine his wits in studying or to wast words in wrangling about particular points of controuersies or to vse any such troublesome and vncertaine meanes to find out the truth but may easily and most certainly be instructed in all by onely enquiring and finding out which all sorts of men may easily do what is generally holdē by the Church for truth in all particular points whereof they doubt A. W. If these few points be so conuenient because in thē all other are included why should not our doctrine of the Scripture be as conuenient by the same reason Let vs compare our assertions together The first of yours is That a man must admit that there is a company of men on earth infallibly taught by the holy Ghost what is the true faith in all points The first of ours That a man must beleeue that there is a written word of God wherein the holy Ghost hath certainely taught whatsoeuer is needfull to be knowne to saluation Your second is That this company of men is by Gods appointment to teach all men in all matters of faith which is the infallible truth Our second That this written word of God is appointed by him to teach all men in all matters of faith what is true what false Your third That this company of men is no other but the visible company which professeth the Romane faith Our third That this written word is no other but the bookes of the old and new Testament The proofe of your positions and the exceptions you take against ours shal be handled if it please God in their due places in the meane time if any mā be troubled with those ordinarie doubts which you haue buzzed into the common peoples eares concerning the vncertainty and hardnesse of the Scriptures let me intreat him to stay himselfe a while vpon these considerations First that the bookes of the old and new Testament acknowledged by vs are also confessed by you to be the verie word of God in the penning whereof the penners were so directed by the holy Ghost that they could not erre Therefore whatsoeuer the meanes
of Nice to follow and which they accordingly followed The bookes of the Euangelists and Apostles and the Oracles of the old prophets plainly instruct vs quoth that worthie Emperour what we are to iudge of matters concerning God Therefore laying aside all enemie-like discord let vs debate ad determine the points in question by the testimonies of the Scriptures inspired by God These as we heard before Ierome makes the bounds of the Church within which she must keepe her selfe and Proclus Archbishop of Constantinople confineth faith to the same place Faith saith he must abide within the Euangelicall and Apostolicall bounds Paschasius a Cardinall of your Church as you say many yeares since tied Macedonius the hereticke to the Scriptures equiring him either to shew by euident testimonies of the word of God that we must beleeue in the Church or else to vrge the point no further For as Chrysostome truly affirmeth If there be any thing needfull to be knowen we shall learne it in the Scriptures I mightfil whole sides with testimonies out of the Fathers to this purpose but I let them passe as needlesse especially since your selfe before confessed that the word of God is infallible and therefore in that respect sufficient to be the rule of faith Now to your conclusion The first part of this first conclusion is false in regard of the infallibilitie of Scripture which it should seeme you saw well enough and therefore balkt that matter and deuised an other point concerning our translation to play withall For what is it but trifling when a man leaues the thing in question and busies him selfe about the refuting of that which besides himselfe no man euer dreamed of What English protestant euer affirmed that our translation was infallible that is such as had no error in it or might not be doubted of Or who euer tooke it for the rule of faith You make babies which you beate as you list Against the Scriptures being the rule of faith which we affirme you say nothing Against the infallibilitie of our translation which we grant not to be the rule of faith you discourse at large wherein I intreate the Reader to consider these few things with me That which he speakes in disgrace of our translation makes no more against it then against all other whatsoeuer For neither is any translation the language in which the Scripture was written and no translators euer had any such infallible assistance by the holy Ghost Sure the author of the vulgar Latin translation had not such help as the Hebrew and Greek originals which the translations of all the learned Papists themselues declare Pagnin Vatablus Isidorus Clarius c. As for Gregory Martins cauils they were answered long since by D. Fulke and I maruell that you can name them without blushing seeing neuer a one of you durst vndertake the defence of them for the space of these 23. yeares Nay which is worse you were not ashamed in the second edition of your Rhemish Testament to bleare your blind followers eyes with a table of hereticall corruptions in translating the Scriptures as if you had propounded some new matter whereas they were all taken out of that booke of Martins and had long before bene iustified by D. Fulke without any reply on your parts You demaund how any vnlearned man can be infallibly sure that in those places which do seeme to fauour our sect our translation doth not erre I answer that there are better meanes of assurance for vnlearned Protestants concerning the truth of our translation then any Papist can haue by your imagined authoritie for your vulgar Latin First it is no slender perswasion to any reasonable man that those places you speake of if not wholy yet for the most part are translated with the same sense in other toungs which they haue in ours as in Spanish French Italian Flemish Dutch Secondly it is a great confirmation of the truth that many of those texts which seeme most to fauor vs are the same in your vulgar and Rhemish editions that they are in ours Thirdly the truth of ours is yet more cleare because euery man may see that in bookes of controuersie betwixt vs our translations are seldome denied by the learned of your side though you condemne our expositions Fourthly who may not easily discerne how much more faithfull our translation of those places all others is then yours seeing we are readie to make triall of it by the originals the learned on your sides being iudges you are afraid of nothing more then to haue yours examined by the Hebrew and Greeke Fiftly in the places you speake of our translations deserue the more credit because we labour to make them plaine for euery mans vnderstanding and shew how they agree with the rest of the booke and chapter wheras your Rhemish Testament is so handled that an English man of good vnderstanding can hardly tell what to make of it for the very words themselues in many places as if you auoided nothing more then plainnesse Sixtly we perswade all men as much as we can to labour for the knowledge of the originall tongues that so they may be able to iudge of our translation you do all you can to keepe men in the mist of ignorance because you are afraid to haue your corruptions discouered Seuenthly though we allow not our ministers such an infinite authoritie as you giue your Cleargie yet we teach that it becoms Christian charitie and modestie neither to suspect a translation where the analogie of faith is kept and the plaine meaning of the holy Ghost not manifestly altered nor to rest vpon priuate conceit against the generall iudgement of the learned without very euident proofe of error These amongst other are reasonable grounds for a Christian to build vpon that he may haue some good assurance of the truth of our translation Now let vs examine yours We must say you admit an infallible authoritie in the Church to assure vs that such or such a translation doth not erre in any point First this is more then neeeds For if that authoritie can assure vs that the translation erreth not in any point needfull to saluation in regard of the sense it may be a sufficient ground for vs to build our faith vpon though it should mistake some words in many points and the sense too in matters of lesse importance Secondly though we do admit such an authoritie in the Church yet may we be farre enough from any such assurance For how shall I be sure that the Church hath so affirmed of this or that translation How shal I know what the Church is A company you say of men vpon earth infallibly taught by the holy Ghost what is the true faith in al points Is this teaching cōmon to euery one of this company seuerally or only annexed to them all ioyntly when they are together What if all what if the greater part assemble
therein What art what writing of any man is so bare Are the Scriptures onely that come immediatly from the author of true reason to be barred of that priuiledge which all other writings iustly challenge Is not a necessary consequence according to the rules of logicke and reason to be allowed of in Diuinitie as well as in the Mathematicks where consectaries are as certainly true as the theoremes out of which they are drawne Is it not as certaine by Scripture that there are three persons distinct each from other and all three but one God as if these verie words had bin expresly set downe But we must beare with you in this matter who learned this shift of your great Cardinal Bellarmine We say quoth Bellarmine where he deliuereth the opinion of your Church that the whole doctrine of faith and manners is not expresly contained in the Scriptures Expresly contained To be expressed and to be contained are at the least diuers if not contrary But I pray you who saith otherwise Not the Protestants doubtlesse whose opinion he propoundeth presently after this sort They preach saith Bellarmine speaking of vs that all things necessary to faith and manners are contained in the Scriptures What is become now of expresly For pure shame he was glad to leaue out that word though he had craftily stolen it in before Well this may serue to make good my deniall of your proposition A thing may be determinable by Scripture though the determination be not expresly set downe therein Take not aduantage of my words because I say determinable and you determined For the question is not what is determined that is set downe in plaine words but it is sufficient if the Scripture affoord vs the determination of matters by certain consequēce vpon truth therein deliuered Therefore whereas you adde by onely expresse Scripture onely and expresse are but meere shifts nothing at all against that we affirme who require besides onely expresse words of Scripture the ministery and industry of man to gather and conclude points of doctrine out of that which is written in the Scripture Your assumption is true that there are diuers questions not determinable by expresse Scripture and yet as I haue shewed the Scripture is sufficient for the determining of all points of faith necessary to saluation Concerning the particular question you bring for the proofe of your assumption First you seeme to grant and that grant is as much as we require that it may be gathered out of the Scripture by consequence that those books which we and you acknowledge to be the word of God are so indeed otherwise why say you that we shall not find it expresly set downe in a part of Scripture Secondly I demaund as before who moueth this question Not the Protestants who account it a kind of blasphemie to denie it and of infidelitie to doubt of it Your holy Church of Rome is she that hath buzzed this matter into Christian mens eares so that religion is thereby become a scorne to Atheists while you make no conscience of discrediting the word of God so you may by any meanes increase the reputation of your Apostaticall sea The truth is that this opinion is not a matter now a dayes first set abroach for Atheists such as Iulian haue from time to time obiected it therefore might you haue spared to mention it as a question now a dayes moued But it is new and strange yea almost incredible that Christians and those Diuines yea such as thinke religion resteth on their shoulders as the Poets faine heauen doth vpon Atlas should make a question whether the Scriptures be the word of God or no and so giue men occasion to doubt thereof Thirdly if this matter cannot be resolued of by the Scripture we shall be little the nearer for the infallible authoritie you haue deuised Christians need it not who are already perswaded that the bookes of the old and new Testament are the vndoubted word of God and with Christians onely to speake truly and properly hath the Church to do ordinarily But it falleth out sometimes that amongst those which make profession of Christianitie there are some found who are in doubt of this point If this doubt arise in the heart of a man that maketh conscience of religion he is to be taught that it is but a tentation of Satan and therefore not to be hearkened to Further we must demaund the reasons of his doubting shewing him how absurd and vnreasonable a matter it is to make question of that which generally both Protestants and Papists hold and which hath bene held by the space of 1500. yeares vnlesse he be able to giue very sufficient cause why he may doubt His arguments if he bring any must be answered and the Scriptures auowed by the matter and manner of writing which is such as will certainly if not conuert yet conuince any man in the world that man is not the deuiser of those bookes If he be an Atheist that derideth religion and withall so vnreasonable that the former and many other important proofes will not perswade him what remaines but that the magistrate whom God hath appointed to see true religion established cut off so corrupt a member by lawfull authoritie Where this course is not taken what meanes haue you to helpe the matter Will you tell him of an infallible authoritie in the Church He will laugh at your folly who instead of prouing beg the question I doe not beleeue saith he there is any such Church or authoritie If I doubt of the Scripture you proue it by the Church if I beleeue there is not any such Church or authoritie in the Church you will perswade me by Scripture To say the truth who can be so patient or foolish rather as to suffer himselfe to be led vp downe in a ring as it were a doore turning vpon hinges still in the same place The authoritie of the Church is an argument of such waight as that he is not to be counted either a Christiā or a man of reason that is not much moued therewithall yea so much as that he will not dissent from the continuall iudgement of it vnlesse he be driuen to it by certaine reason but yet this authoritie is not infallible Christ euermore iudgeth truly saith Austin but the Ecclesiasticall iudges as being men are very often deceiued And therefore he saith in another place that he is not bound to giue his consent without libertie to refuse to any thing but the Canonicall Scriptures And in an Epistle to Ierome I haue learned saith he to giue this reuerence and honour onely to those bookes that are called Canonicall that I constantly beleeue that no writer of any of them hath erred But to make an end of this needlesse question where both sides are agreed let vs heare Saint Austin speake to the Manichees If you aske vs saith he how we know that these
the whole volume of the Bible which to say were no lesse thē blasphemy But I am afraid the scriptures that Paul there speaks of which were the books of the old Testamēt are rather vnprofitable thē profitable to that purpose For they often amplify magnify the word of God written in so plaine termes that eueuery man may vnderstand them as for the authority you fancy to your selfe they speake either nothing or little and that very obscurely thereof But we shall see in the rest of your Treatise what proofe you can finde of this authoritie in Moses and the Prophets and the writers of the olde Testament Now at the last you remember your selfe againe and returne to your old shift of Scripture alone Which you deuised of your owne head that you might haue somewhat to confute It is not all one say you to be profitable and to be of it selfe alone sufficient And you tel vs This is certaine Who euer denied it Or who but he that wanted matter to replie against would cast such doubts Especially who would haue wasted time and paper to prooue or declare a thing so certaine and cleare by a needlesse comparison The scripture without any doctrines of men call them what you will imagine what assistance of the spirit you list is sufficient to teach all men the true certaine way to saluation This is that we affirme not as you ridiculously slander vs that there needs no ministerie of man for the instructing of any one in the vnderstanding of any place of scripture or knowledge of any point of religion These are your owne fancies or mōsters rather with which like bugbeares you scare your poore seduced followers and bleare the eies of the ignorant that they may not enquire what we teach indeed but hate our doctrine before they any way vnderstand it But they that haue any care of their owne saluation will not suffer themselues to be led by you hoodwinkt to destruction if any man will needs be wilfully ignorant the Lord shall require his blood at his owne hands we haue done our duetie in teaching and proouing the truth A. D. CHAP. VIII That no naturall wit or learning can be the rule of faith A. W. If you had bestowed that paines and time in confirming your proposition which you waste needlesly in proouing that which no man denieth you might perhaps haue spoken somewhat more to the purpose but it is lost labour to go about the refutatiō of that which besides your selfe no body euer thought on That naturall wit or learning should be the rule of faith is a conceit amongst Christians neuer heard of yet this haue you propounded for to exercise your strength vpon A. D. §. 1. The second conclusion is that no one mans naturall wit and learning neither any company of men neuer so learned onely as they are learned men not infallibly assisted by the holy Spirit of God can either by interpreting Scripture or otherwise be this rule of faith A. W. Here you set out the former proposition more at large in respect of the Antecedent or first part of it Neither any one mans naturall wit nor many mens ioyned together whatsoeuer their learning be or what course soeuer they take as naturall men can be the rule of faith either for any doctrine they shal deliuer or for any interpretation they shall make of Scripture But what needeth all this adoe you do but fight with your owne shadow yet let vs se how you haue bestirred your selfe A. D. §. 2. This I prooue Because all this wit and learning be it neuer so exquisite or rare is humane naturall and fallible and therefore it cannot be a sufficient foundation whereupon to build a diuine supernaturall and infallible faith This reason I confirme Because whatsoeuer a man neuer so wittie and learned propoundeth to others to be beleeued vpon the onely credit of his word wit or humane studie and learning it can haue no more certaintie then is this his word wit and learning But these being all naturall and humane are subiect to errour and deceit For Omnis homo mendax there is no man but he may both deceiue and be deceiued and may if he haue no other helpe but of nature and industrie both be deceiued in thinking that to be Gods word which is not or that to be the true meaning and sense of Gods word which is not and may also deceiue others whilest being too confident of his wit and learning he presumeth to teach others these his erroneous opinions Therefore the beleefe which shall be built vpon such a mans word and teaching is or may be a false beleefe and alwaies is vncertaine and fallible and therefore can neuer be a true Diuine and Christian faith which alwaies is most certaine and infallible And this which I haue said of the wit and learning of one particular man may also be applied to prooue against the wit and learning of any companie of men hauing no assistance but their owne naturall gifts and industrie of studie or reading A. W. No humane naturall and fallible thing can be the rule of faith Naturall wit and learning though neuer so exquisite are humane naturall and fallible Therefore no humane wit nor learning can be the rule of faith I grant this reason and conclusion to be sound and true onely in the confirmation of it I finde some occasion to note one thing for the better vnderstanding of the matter we haue in hand If any man would speake for naturall wit and learning in this question he would not say as the matter is here propounded that any mans wit or learning were the rule of faith but that the wit and learning of man might finde out somewhat at least in the Scripture whereupon faith might safely be grounded For example as I said once before though it be not written any where in the Scripture that there are three persons distinct each from other and all these three but one God yet may a man by naturall wit and learning gather this out of the Scripture and confirme it thence so plainely and certainly that any Christian may holde those points as Articles of faith Not that they are to be taken for such vpon the onely credit of his word which is a second thing wherein you mistake the matter but because though euerie man be a lier yet a man may see and shew a truth which cannot nor may be suspected of falshood or errour And a beleefe builded vpon Doctrine so taught shall be free from possibilitie of erring and as you speake infallible This I thought good to obserue by occasion of your confirmation where you suppose that a man deliuereth matters to be beleeued vpon the bare credit of his word by reason of his wit and learning In this sense it is out of all question that no naturall wit or learning of any many or all the men in the world can be the rule of faith but
the world A man may finde in the Scriptures that the true Church of Christ shal neuer faile but which outward companie of men is this true Church no man by this marke of future continuance can by any meanes discerne Wherupon I conclude that your Catholicknesse is neither for the name nor for the thing any good marke of any true Church whatsoeuer That by Catholicknesse vniuersalitie of time should be signified you presume but proue not and yet I am perswaded you are not able to alledge any one ancient author but late Papists that by the Catholicke Church vnderstands a companie that hath bin alwayes since the beginning of the Christian Church and shall alwayes continue till the second comming of our Sauiour Christ I doubt not that the true Church spoken of in the Scripture and the creed hath so bin and shall be but I say that no man conceiues this propertie to be signified by the word Catholicke The ground of my opinion is that hauing found diuers reasons alledged by the Fathers why the Church is said to be Catholicke I could neuer light vpon that concerning the time Austin ordinarily restraines Catholicknes to place as also Optatus doth Pacianus where he purposely enquires the reason of the name neuer once mentions it no more doth Cyril who yet assignes sixe seuerall respects in which the Church may be said to be Catholicke And surely if by Catholicknesse vniuersalitie of time be signified I see no reason neither I thinke can you shew me any why it should not as well include the time before our Sauiours comming and so the Church of God that then was as that which hath bin since his comming and shall continue till the end of the world So doth Thomas vnderstand the Catholicknesse of the Church stretching it from Abels time to the end of the world But your great maister Bellarmine vtterly denies that the Church before our Sauiours comming was Catholicke restraining this Catholicknesse to the Church of the Christians But because I acknowledge the truth of the doctrine I will not striue about the word though you should haue prooued the sense of the word and not haue giuen too much credit to Bellarmine who brings a place of Austin to prooue that vniuersalitie of time is required to make the Church Catholicke whereas there is not a syllable or a letter touching that matter in the place alledged No more is there in that other place of Bede which also he brings but rather we may proue thence that Catholicke belongeth to place It is therefore called Catholicke saith Bede because it is edified in one and the same faith ouer all parts of the world In the sentence next before he speaketh thus Whence the Church is called Catholicke hee teacheth saying All the Churches through all Iewry Galilee and Samaria had peace So doth your Canon expound Catholicke so Durand though he adde also two other reasons of the name but not that you bring As for the place you quote to prooue a needlesse question what doth it concerne the visible Church being spoken as Ierome sheweth at large and prooueth out of the Apostle of the Church of the elect Iewes or at the most of the elect in generall Before I examine that which you haue here deliuered touching the Catholicknes of the Church in respect of place I hold it very needfull to consider what was intended by the name Catholicke and how it hath bin vnderstood of auncient writers And because this latter point may be a meanes to giue vs some light for the discerning of the former I will begin with it in the first place Whether the word were in vse in the time of the Apostles or no so that any man was called a Catholicke Pacianus seems to stand in some doubt yet he lets it passe as granted that no man was then so called Once it is out of all doubt that it is no where in the Scriptures applied to any church or to any man or at all vsed As for the title Catholicke giuen to the Epistles of Iames Peter the first of Iohn and Iude it came not from the holy Ghost the inditer of those Epistles but was added afterwards by some man when the bookes of the new Testament were gathered together into one volume which may better appeare by the titles of the other Epistles also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. of Saint or holy Paul which inscription questionlesse neuer was of the Apostles owne setting downe That which I would haue obserued is that this name Catholicke was deuised and applied to the Church not by God in the Scriptures but by man and therefore it is of lesse importance and more vncertaintie yet no doubt not giuen at aduenture but vpon good ground and to good purpose For the original of it it is Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through the whole or all which we commonly call by two Latin names vniuersall or generall so that the Catholicke Church and the generall or vniuersall Church are all one To auow the antiquitie of this title giuen to the church the confession of faith which is commonly called the Apostles creede may be alledged wherin we professe that we beleeue the holy Catholick Church That this creed is very ancient it is out of question but that it was penned or indited by the Apostles themselues we haue no certaine proofe But to leaue this point and to returne again to the meaning of the words Catholick Church the auncientest authors in whom I finde them for they are not in Dionysius Ignatius Martialis Polycarpus nor in Iustine Irenaeus Tertullian Origen or any man within the first 200. years are Clemens Alexandr about the yeare 200. and Cyprian about the yeare 250. After them it grew very common especially in the Latin Church Cyprian himselfe hath not that I know of any where deliuered the reason of that title Catholick But Pacianus Bishop of Barcelona in Spaine purposely disputeth the question against Symproniā a Nouatian heretick assigning two reasons of the name in this sort If saith he I must giue a reason of the word Catholicke and expresse the Greeke in Latine Catholicke is euery where one or as the learneder thinke obedience to all Gods commmandements so that by his interpretation the Catholicke Church must be the company of them who in all places here and there professe one faith and liue in obedience to all the commandements of God This vnitie of true faith the Emperors respected Valentinian Gratian and Theodosius when they commanded that all they should be called Catholicks who follow the faith that S. Peter deliuered to the Church of Rome To this purpose is that of Cyril where he saith The Church is called Catholicke because it teacheth all things necessary to be knowne This interpretation of the word and reason of the title the Donatists gaue saying that the
as you taught vs before of necessitie to saluation that we beleeue entirely all points of faith without misbeleeuing any one what hope of saluation shall be left to any Papist who cannot by any meanes know what is determined by the Church and what is not Or if he may be sure that matters defined by the Pope and a Councell are decided by the Church yet since it is not so determined whether the Pope alone be sufficient to determine of points in controuersie he may refuse to obey some constitutions of the Pope or to beleeue some questions decided by him and thereby shut himselfe out of heauen for not giuing credit to the determination of the Church if that authoritie of determining be in the Pope and he commaund men so to beleeue But if this determination of the Church be ioyntly in the Pope and Councels and that nothing is a matter of faith but that which is so determined to be then was there almost no matter of faith at all in the Church till within these last 800 yeares For it is more then euident to any man that will not be wilfully contentious that the Pope neuer bare any extraordinarie sway in Councels till he had proclaimed himselfe vniuersall Bishop which was by the grant of the murtherer Phocas six hundred yeares after the beginning of the Gospell What shall we thinke of the Churches in the Apostles times and so forward till the Councell of Nice in which the Popes supremacie was not heard of Had Christians then no matters of faith to beleeue How should they if all depend vpon the Pope and a general Councel Let me grant that those Councels in the Acts were generall what was there determined but that the Gentiles were to abstaine from things offered to Idols and bloud and that which is strangled and from fornication VVas nothing a matter of faith but these few points which also till this time were not matters of faith Either shew some good reason why matters of faith were not at this time of the Apostles liuing to be tied to generall Councels and the Pope yet now must be or confesse the truth to the glorie of God that matters of faith haue their authoritie to be matters of faith from the word of God and not from the determination of Pope or Councell or both Neither thinke to shift of the matter by saying they are indeed matters of faith in themselues but not to vs. For so it will come to passe that we shall say the first Christians had no points that were matters of faith to them because they had none determined by the Church in a Councell which opinion is I know not whether of more absurditie or impietie Now that you agreement in matters of faith after the determination of the Church is not so great as you would make the world beleeue it may appeare by the verie ground of religion the Canon of the Scripture which was determined of by your iudgement in the Councell of Carthage wherein the Apocryphall bookes say you were allowed for Canonical yet saith Bellarmine Nicholas Lyra Denys the Carthusiā Hugo de sancto victore Thomas de Vio both these at least the last Cardinals follow Ierom in reiecting thē as Apocryphal But if this Councel may be excepted against sure in your iudgment the Councell of Trent may not which hath receiued those books into the canō of the scripture Yet for all that Sixtus Senensis keeper of the Popes library maketh bold to deny thē such authority euen since that Coūcel as Bellarmine himself confesseth And Arias Montanus since that time doubteth not to say that the Orthodoxe or true Church following the Canon of the Hebrewes accounteth those bookes of the old Testament written in Greeke to be Apocryphal What say you to your Bishop Catharin who being one of the Councell of Trent after the determination of the Councell against assurance of saluation defendeth that such assurance notwithstanding that decree of the Councell may ordinarily be had by them that beleeue You would perswade vs that it is a ruled case of your Church long ago that the Scriptures are not sufficient without tradition What saith Scotus in this case Whatsoeuer pertaineth to heauenly and supernaturall knowledge and is necessarie to be knowne of men in this life is sufficiently deliuered in the holy scriptures The holy scripture saith Gerson is sufficient for the gouernment of the Church or else was Christ an vnperfect Lawgiuer I might runne on in the like course touching other points but these shal serue for a tast and so I passe ouer to your proofe that the learned on your side cannot possibly dissent one from another They which acknowledge that the definitiue sentence of the Pope is to be rested vpon as an vndoubted truth cannot possibly dissent in matters of faith But all Catholick learned men acknowledge that the Popes sentence is such Therefore no Catholicke learned men can possibly dissent in matters of faith All you conclude is that in matters determined by the Pope and a Councell your learned men cannot disagree because they hold that such a determination is certainly true yet for all this as I haue shewed your Church may be rent in peeces with contrarie opinions in matters of as great moment as most are in religion if for all this it cease not to be a true Church why should not the Protestants haue the like priuiledge who haue the same opinion of the Scriptures that you haue of the Pope Be not so iniurious to reason or blasphemous against God as to auouch that no controuersie can be ended by the word because diuers men will expound it diuersly For it is contrarie both to religion and sense to imagine that the Lord would giue his people such a Scripture as cannot be certainely vnderstood in all points necessarie to saluation but by I know not what reuelation to some one man More particularly I denie your Maior They that acknowledge such an authoritie in the Pope may yet differ in opinion about matters of faith I bring you example in that point of assurance wherein Catharin disputed against that doctrine which Sotus and your writers generally since the Councell of Trent affirme to haue bene the certaine decree of the Councell Yet were they both present in the Councell and none of the meanest there assembed The reason of that their dissent and the possibilitie of the like betwixt other men ariseth from this that decrees of Councels and Popes being set downe in writing may be diuersly interpreted and so the meaning of them mistaken as Catharin saith that he foresaw some men would misunderstand the Councell of Trent in that point This is all the inconueniences you can alledge in admitting the Scripture for Iudge and this followeth the decrees of Councels and Popes at the least as much as the writings of the holy Ghost
be whereby we come to assurance that these bookes are the word of God let it suffice all men that both we and you agree they are so But I pray tell me Are the determinations of the Church any more certaine What ground haue I but the word of some men that the Church hath so determined It is not a matter so agreed vpon betwixt vs as the bookes of Scripture are Out of question the ods is on our side It is doubtfull whether you Romanistes are the Church or no it is out of doubt these bookes are the infallible word of God But you will say the Scriptures are hard to be vnderstood as well because they are written in Hebrew and Greeke as also for the kind of writing Are not all the Decrees of your Councels and determinations of your Popes Consistorie written either in Greeke or Latin or in the Italian language in none of which one man among ten thousand hath any skill And is there not as great reason to thinke the Scriptures are rightly translated as your Decrees Decretals and Determinations Especially when as we commonly alledge the interpretations of the ancient Fathers and learned Papists for the auowing of our translations But the Scriptures are hard to be vnderstood though a man be skilfull in the tongues And are the Decrees of your Councels so easie that euery man may vnderstād them who knowes the language they are written in Doth not Bellarmine condemne and confute our writers Caluin Chemnitius and other for not vnderstanding the Decrees of your Councell of Trent written in Latine which language they were as skilfull in as himselfe If they be so easie how chance Bishop Catharin and Frier Soto that were both present at the Councell and heard the debating of matters can not agree about the doctrine of it concerning assurance of saluation which as Soto affirmes was the longest and most troublesome disputation of all in the Councell and therefore should haue bene best vnderstood and plainliest deliuered Yet is it so propounded by the holy fathers the authors of it that Catharin saith boldly he foresaw that most men would vnderstand the words of the Decree otherwise then the holy Synod meant them Was there not great contention within these very few yeares betwixt Archbishop Christophor de Capite fontium and many other Diuines about the meanes of transsubstantiating the bread though in his iudgement the Councel of Trent makes manifestly for him I forbeare to say that some points seeme to haue bene craftily set downe of purpose like the oracles of Apollo that which way soeuer they be taken the Church may not seeme to haue erred Neither will I adde that diuerse matters are deliuered by Councels not as points of faith but as probable coniectures which yet may be and are taken by some of your owne learned writers as if they were resolutely determined for certaine truth These things considered I see no sufficient reason why it should not be as fit and safe to learne of the Scripture which is the infallible truth as of any companie of men whatsoeuer But you labour to commend to vs this resting on the authoritie of the Romish Church by some especiall commodities that shall ensue thereupon The first wherof is ease the 2. certaintie of knowledge He shall not need say you to straine his wits in studying c. If ease were not too much delighted in by men of your profession there would not be such swarms of idle Monks Fryers Nuns nonresident Bishops and Priests amongst you But true Christians vnderstand that it was not Gods purpose to prouide so much for their ease by giuing them leaue to beleeue at aduenture hand ouer head whatsoeuer it should please men to enioyne thē but that it is his good pleasure that all men should carefully and painfully exercise themselues night and day in reading and meditating of the Scriptures He is too nice and dainty a professor of religion that is loth to straine his wits to the vttermost in the study of any thing reuealed by God in Scripture What shall I say of him that cals conference and disputation about euen the greatest points of faith and iustification wasting of words in wrangling Nec se magnanimo maledicere sentit Achilli It is strange you should not haue the wit to perceiue that by this censure you condemne Lombard Thomas and all your schoole men yea the Pope and generall councels who are bound to vse such meanes for the finding out of the truth and as Sotus saith did vse them in a long and troublesome disputation yet forsooth neither the one nor the other at least both together cannot erre No man then ought to refuse study or disputation of controuersies in diuinitie because they are troublesome Therefore to mend the matter you adde that they are also vncertaine what can be certain but only reuelation if the true vse of reason can breed nothing but vncertainty How idly and vainly did your schoolemen imploy themselues if all their study and labour must end in vncertainty What vse is there of Councels for finding out of the truth since the helpe to be had of them is debating of matters by reasoning Do we not find in daily experience that as flint and steele stricken together bring forth fire so truth is as it were beaten out by disputation It is reported you make great shewes of desiring a disputation I maruaile to what end If when all comes to all your auditors shall still remaine vncertaine what is true Shall I go yet farther You tell vs the Church cannot erre we beleeue you not you alledge some places of Scripture to proue it to vs we say they proue no such matter what course will you take It is in vaine to dispute of it that is as you say to wast words in wrangling about it For that is but an vncertaine meanes to find-out the truth Haue you not brought matters to a good passe thinke you when you professe that there is no meanes to discern certainlie whether the Church can erre or no but onely to take her own word for it Yea no meanes left to know that she is the Church For if you will againe fly to the Scriptures you run into the former difficulties and end as before in vncertainty Who would haue to do with such vnreasonable men But that you may not seeme to leaue vs in vncertainty you tel vs that we may most certainly be instructed in all particular points of controuersies by onely enquiring and finding out what is holden generally by the Church for truth c. You send vs to the faith of the Church and namely of the Church of Rome Which say we is onely so farre forth to be yeelded vnto as it is agreeable to the Scriptures Neither do we say so onely but Ambrose long before our time hath said the like We are commanded saith