be very hard for them to discerne that which is true from that which is false Wherfore we will endeauour in euery particuler Controuersy to set downe the true state of the question Afterward we will lay open the foundation of the Catholike doctrine And lastly we will plainly and briefly answere the chiefe obiections of our Aduersaries whether they be drawne out of the Scriptures or taken from the Fathers 3. And because our Aduersaries euermore boast and brag of the written Word of God pretending out of it only to proue their doctrine impugne ours our chiefe care shal be to shew that the Catholike and Roman faith is both euidently and strongly to be confirmed out of the wrirten Word of God and the doctrine of our Aduersaries to haue no foundation at all in the holy Scriptures but is manifestly opposite repugnant therunto yet so as we will set downe the vniforme conseÌ„t of the auncient Church to be agreeing with vs in euery Controuersy leauing the more ample search of antiquity vnto others to whome we will referre the Reader setting downe their particuler names so loath we are that this booke of ours should grow too great and for the same reason we haue thought good to omit many arguments which might be drawne out of the holy Scriptures for confirmation of the Catholike faith contenting our selues to set downe only the more solide and euident proofes because we are resolued to be as briefe as may be CHAP. II. Of the Word of God in generall THE word of God if we speake of it in generall may be considered two wayes either for that One Eternall and Infinite Word which contayneth perfectly in it selfe whatsoeur is in the mind of Almighty God which is the same with the Sonne of God and Word of the Father of whome S. Iohn speaketh in his Ghospell saying In the beginning was the VVord and of this Word we are to say nothing heere but the Word of God may be other wise coÌ„sidered and taken for that Word which was not alwayes nor contayneth all thinges which are in the mind of God but a small part only of them to wit such thinges as God would haue vs know and belieue and of the Word of God in this sense we speake now For this Word is the proper and complete obiect of our faith 2. Moreouer this Word hath two conditions or properties the one is that the same be reuealed vnto vs for there are innumerable verities in the mind of God the which bâ—cause they are not reuealed to vs do not appâ—rtayne to this Word The other is that it be immediatly reuealed by God for such thinges as God manifesteth Rom. 2. v. 19. â—0 Heb. 11. v. 1. vnto vs by naturall reason appertayne not to this Word of God called therfore by the Deuines the reuealed Word of God 3. Of this Word of God so vnderstood there is no Controuersy betwene vs and our Aduersaries but only in wordes for wherâ—s our Aduersaries say that Catholikes affirme that we must with diuine fayth belieue the words of men or which is worse rather belieue the words of men then the Word of God it is a meere slaunder for there is no Catholike so ignorant but he knoweth that the Theologicall vertue Faith relieth altogeather vpon the pure sincere and certayne Word of God alone according to that of S. Paul VVhen you had receiued of vs the 1. Thes 2. v. 13. word of the hearing of God you receaued it not as the word of men but as the VVord of God as indeed it is Neyther can any man doubt but that the reuealed word of God is partly the written Word contayned in the Canonicall bookes of the old and new Testament partly vnwritten and deliuered by tradition and preaching of which vnwritten â— Thes c. 2. v. 14. 1. ad Cor. 15. v. 1. ad Gal. 1. v. â— 1. Pet. 1. v. vlâ— word the Scripture maketh mention in many places but we will first treat of the written Word CHAP. III. Of the written Word of God THE witten Word of God consisteth of two parts of the Letter which euery man may read in the books themselues and in the true seÌ„se of the Letter which is as it were the very soule and life thereof without which the Letter alone rather killeth theÌ„ quickneth or giueth life as we see euidently by experience in the Iewes Arians all other heretikes as well new as old for the Iewes hold theÌ„selues stiffely to the Letter of the old TestameÌ„t the Arians as also in a manner all other heretikes receiue eyther altogeather or for the greatest part the Letter of the new but because they will not acknowledge the true sense of the Letter Iewes they are Heretikes they are Catholikes they are not And surely the Letter alone without the true sense cannot truly and properly be called the Word of God no more then a body without a soule can truly and properly be called a man wherefore they which spoile the Letter of the true sense may be compared to them who beâ—eaue a man of his soule and life 2. But whosoeuer do substitute another contrary sense and meaning in place of the true do no otherwise then they who not only kill a man but by Art Magicke bring into the body of the man killed some other diabolicall spirit by which the dead body is so moued and stirred as it seemeth to many to be aliue all this is so manifest a truth as our Aduersaâ—ies themselues are not able to deny it 3. This to haue byn the doctrine of the auncient Church sufficiently appeareth Aug. ser â—8 de temp by the words of S. Augustine The vnhappy Iewes sayth he more vnhappy Heretikes whilst they attend only to the sound of the Letter as a body without a soule so they remayne dead and voyd of the spirit which quickneth And els where All Heretickes which receiue Aug Epist 22â— the Scriptures and their authority will seem to follow them wheras indeed they follow rather their owne errors and are therefore Heretikes not because they contemne them but because they do not vnderstand them And before him S. Hilary that honour of the French Nation RemeÌ„ber Hil. l. ad Constant Imperat. saith he that there is not one of the heretikes which doth not say that he preacheth now according to the Scriptures euen those thinges in which he blasphemeth albeit he lieth in so saying And a little after All of them speake Scriptures without the true sense meaning they preteÌ„d sayth without fayth indeed for the Scriptures consist not so much in the reading as in the vnderflaÌ„ding neither are they vnderstood of such as go into preuarication but continue and abide in charity Moreouer S. Hierome Let vs not thinke sayth Hieron in c. 1. ad Gal. he the Ghospell to be in the words of the Scripture but in the sense not in the out side but in the inside
Iudocus Ruesten in his first tome defending the Councell of Trent against Kemnitius 4. Secondly a thing may be conteined in expresse words in the holy Scriptures as that Christ is borne suffered and risen againe c. And in this sense we deny that the whole word of God is conteined in the Scripâ—uâ—e That obiection of our Aduersaries by this may easily be answered when they say that we affirme that Traditions are the vâ—written word of God yet we goe about to proue theÌ„ by Scriptures For we do not proue euery particuler Tradition by expresse words of Scripture but we only deduce and gather them out of it and conuince in generall that there are Traditions 5. The third thing which is to be considered is that our Aduersaries being conuinced by truth doe acknowledge that many things were deliuered vnto vs by the Caluin coÌ„t 4. sess Con. Trident. in â—ntid Beza denotis Eccles tom 3. Tract Theoâ— p. 137. edit Anni 1582. Apostles besids those which are written But say they those were only externall rites and ceremonies seruing only for the ornament or discipline of the Church but nothing concerning doctrine of fayth was deliuered by the Apostles which they haue not set downe in writing So Caluin and some others which follow his opinion Wherfore it remayneth for vs to proue that not â—â—ly external ceremonies but also those which belong vnto the doctrine of fayth were deliuered vnto vs by the Apostles that they were neuer expressely â—et downe in writing 6. The fourth thing is that seing our Aduersaries cannot deny that which was obiected vnto them by Catholikes to wit that the Scripture in many places maketh expresse mentioÌ„ of the word of God preached deliuered and diuulged ouer the whole world as we haue already declared euen out of the holy Scriptures they are wont to answere that long since in the Apostles tyme this Word of God was deliuered preached and not written but the Apostles after wards set downe in writing all the preached word of God or at the least as much therof as was necessary vnto saluation The which solutioÌ„ albeit it be very weak and friuolous seing that it relieth vpoÌ„ no sure ground yet notwithstanding tâ—at it may more fully be confuted we will declare hereafter that many of the chiefest points of faith were not expressely set downe in writing by the Apostles And thus much of the state of this Question CHAP. II. Out of the first and chiefest principles of faith it is clearly conuinced that there are Traditions THE first argument wherby we proue Traditions is taken out of some of the chiefest principles of faith For there are three chiefe and most necessary points of faith yea the câ—ieâ—e grounds of our whole faith which are not to be found expressely in Scripture 2. The first that there must needes be some Catalogue or Canon of the sacred Bookes aswell of the old as of the new Testament the which all Christians with an assured faith should imbrace as a most certaine and an vndoubted truth and this is a very necâ—ssary point of faith yea of it dependeth the authority of all the bookes of holy Scripture because by this Canon the sacred and true books of Scripture are discerned and made knowne from all those which be Apocriphall especially because aswell in times past as in these our daies there hath bin so many and so great Controuersyes about the Canonicall and Apocriphall bookes of Scripture and such a Canon was altogeather necessary aswell in the auncient Church before Christ as in our present Church after Christes tyme the which also our Aduersaries themselues haue learned by experience For they haue also placed their new Canon of the books of holy Scripture in their Consession made at Confess Ruâ—ellana Act. 3. â—ochell and in the later end of some of their Bibles and yet neyther in the time of the old Testament nor in the tyme of the new Law was this CanoÌ„ euer written downe in the Bibles themselues 2. I know our Aduersaries that they may escape this argument do runne to the inward instinct of the holy Ghost wherby say they we know what book is Canonicall and what is not But this answere is refuted reiected before where we haue shewed that the holy Ghost doth not moue vs to belieue any thing with the Catholike faith which is not the word of God If Suprac 5. therfore the holy Ghost moue vs to belieue that some bookes are Canonicall and some are not it is necessary that this be the word of God We aske therefore of them whether this is the written word of God or the vnwritteÌ„ if it be the written word in what Booke or Chapter is it to befouÌ„d if it be no where to be found our Aduersaries must needs coÌ„â—esse that by the instinct of the holy Ghost they also belieue the vnwritten word of God or Traditions 3. The second principle of faith is that we must necessarily with an assured and firme faith belieue that all those Bookes eyther of the old or of the new Testament which we now retaine are safely deliuered vnto vs entyre aâ—d vncorrupted through so many handes so many ages so many vexations and persecutions of the Christians for otherwyse the whole credit and authority of those bookes will decay and perish But this is no where extant or written for neyther the Prophets or Apostles haue euâ—r written that their bookes should neuer be falsified or corrupted by any yea it appeareth sufficiently Supra c. 9. 10. 12. 13 by that which hath byn already said that they were falsified and corrupted in many bookes by the Iewes and Hâ—retâ—kes Let our Aduersaries therfore tell vs where it is written that this holy Scripture which we haue now is not corrupted or falsifyed 4. The third principle of fâ—yth is the true sense of the letter For the true word of God consisteth rather in the true sense or meaning of the words then in the words Supra cap. 3. themselues as we haue declared before But the true sense of the words that is to say in what sense or meaning the words are to be vnderstood eyther properly or figuratiuely cannot be had from the holy Scripture alone but also from the doctrine and Traditions of the Church as we haue sayd before in the fourth Chapter wherby it also followeth that the writteÌ„ word of God conteyneth in it the least part of the word of God to wit the bare letter only but the word of God preached and deliuered keepeth and professeth vnto vs the cheif part of the word of God that is to say the true natiue sense of the same S. Basil l. de Spir. sanct c. 27. Brent contra Petr. â— Soto in suis prologom Kemnit cont 4. sess Conc. Trid. cùm agiâ— de 2. gen Tradiâ— 5. And this is that which S. Basil sayth that those who reiect the vnwritten points of fayth as indiscreet persons do
publican 18. Fiftly the Church hath power and authority to punish VVhat will you 1. Cor. 4. v. vlt. 2. Cor. vlt. v. 2. 2. Cor. vlt. v 10. sayth the Apostle that I come vnto you with a rodde or in charity and with the spirit of mildnesse And in another place If I come againe I will not spare And againe that being present I may not deale hardly according to the power which our Lord hath giuen me vnto edification and not vnto destruction 19. Sixtly the Church absolueth byndeth and retayneth sinnes excommunicateth Matth. 18. v. 19. Ioan. 20. v. 23. as the holy Scriptures doe expresly testify and our Aduersaries doe also confesse all which actes belong vnto Iudges but the Scripture doth none of them 20. The second argument The holy Scripture expresly affirmeth that the Church doth sometymes iudge I indeed absent in body but present in spirit haue 1. Cor. 5. v. 34. 5. already iudged as present him that hath so done in the name of our Lord Iesus Christ you being gathered togeather and my spirit with the vertue of our Lord Iesus Christ to deliuer such an one to Sathan And a little after Do not you iudge of them that are within where the Apostle â— Cor. 5. v. 12. plainly saith that the Pastours of the Church iudge those which are in the Church 21. The third argument is taken from the common practice of the Church aswell in the old as in the new Num. 11. â— 16. 17. 25. Deut. 17. â— 8. â—eq 2. Par. 19. v. â—0 11. Testament For in the old Testament the chiefe iudgement of all causes was ordeined by God himselfe first in the booke of Numbers and afterward it was confirmed in Deuteronomy in which Iudgment the priestes did sit as Iudges and the chiefe Iudge who did giue his sentence for in all thinges which were doubtfull by the expresse commaundement of God the common people were sent to this Iudgment of the Church and not only to the holy Scriptures or to the priuate spirit of any 22. Moreouer till the comming of Christ this manner of iudging continued in the old Law For of it Christ himselfe sayd Vpon the chaire of Moyses haue sitten the sâ—ribes and the Pharisies All thinges therfore whatsoeuer they shall say to you obserue yâ—e and doe yee this Councell or Iudgment in the yeares following by corâ—upting the Greeke word the Iewes called Sanhedrin Matt. 2. v. 2. 3. as it were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say an assembly or Councell 13. In like manner in the new Testament when there arose that controuersy about the obseruation of the legaâ—l ceremonies or customes the Apostles did not Act. 15. v. 28. send their disciples to the holy Scriptures only or to the priuate spirit of any but they assembled themselues togeather and defined what was to be belieued It seemed good say they to the holy Ghost and vs. For Act. 15. v. vlt. Act. 16. v. 4. the holy â—host is as it were the soule of the Church And this Decree of the Apostles S. Paul and S. Barnabas did diuulge and promulgate euery where as appeareth by the same Chapter and the next following where these determinations of the Apostles are called Decrees or according Act. 21. v. 25. to the Greek Phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to sâ—y things already iudged wherupon Act. 21. vers 25. the Apostles doe say that iudging and decreeing they had written this 24. In the same manner in the next ages the Arians the MacedoniaÌ„s the Nestorians Eutichians and other old Heretikes were iudged condemned by the Catholike Church in the generall Councells holden at Nice Constantinople Calcedon and others 25. Lastly our Aduersaries in their Consistories and Assemblies doe vsurpe vnto themselues the authority of iudges neither doe they referre the iudgment to the Scriptures alone or to the priuate spirit of any 26. Yea Caluin conuinced by these reasons confesseth that the writinges of euery priuate person must be submitted to the iudgmeÌ„t of the Church Where he also concludeth thus Neither therefore sayth he do we condemne or diminish the authority of the Church neyther do we giue liberty â—o euery froward Calu. in Antid contra Conâ—il Trid. sess 1. in fine fellow to do what he list I would to God they would shew vs such a Church as the holy Scripture doth paint or describe vnto vs we would easily agree about the honour thereof Thus he But we will shew in the ensuing Chapters such a Church as the Scripture describeth I wish also we may agree concerning the honour and authority thereof 27. There are two principall argumentâ— of our Aduersaries the first is that the holy Ghost is not tyed vnto men but â—udgeth freely in whatsoeuer it pleaseth him therefore he is not tyed vnto the Church But the same argument would proue that there is no certainty in the holy Scriptures For they who wrote the Scriptures were men vnto whome according to our Aduersaries opinion the holy Ghost was not tyed I answere therfore that the holy Ghost is not absolutly bound or tyed vnto men but he is tyed to his owne promise as also to the words and promises of Christ For neither the holy Ghost nor Christ himselfe can deceiue vs in not performing their promises because as the Apostle Tit. 1. v. 2. sayth God cannot lie But God hath promised that he wil be with his Church not only one or two dayes or one yeare but euen till the end of the world He promised that he would giue the holy Ghost to remayne Math. vit v. vlt. and stay with vs not for one or two yeares only but euerlastingly It is needfull therfore that he performe and stand to his promises 28. The second argument If those things which we haue said of the Church as Iudge were true it would also follow that the Church is Iudge of the holy Scripture and consequently of the word of God in generall I answere that the word of God in generall cannot be called in question or doubted of by any which professeth Christ For the diuine faith cannot be without some word of God but where there is noe controuersy there is no neede of any Iudge But if of any one part of the word of God whether it be written or not written there arise any controuersy as for example of the true sense of the written word without doubt we must recurre vnto the iudgement of the Church for it belongeth vnto her to iudge of the truesense of the holy Scripture and of the exposition thereof which is the chiefer Ioan. 14. v. 16. part of the written word as also of any doubtfull letter of the holy Scripture for seeing that in times past there haue beene many controuersyes of diuers books of holy Scripture and of the particuler Chapters and parts thereof as also of the true sense of the letter and other
Calu. l. 4â— Inst cap. 9. sect 13. acknowledge that there is no better or surer remedy to roote out and take away al heresies therfore eyther this is a certaine remedy or els there is none at all the which to affirme were to deny the prouidence of God and his loue to his Church 15. Moreouer that which our Aduersaries say to wit that the later Councels are not lawfull Assemblies because they haue not obserued due manner and forme is a false lye first because it doth not become euery priuate man to be iudge in this matter but it belongeth to the whole Church who hauing receyued for so many yeares all these as lawfull Councells we must not call them any more in question 16. And seing that our Aduersaries do imbrace and approue the six first Councels the lawfull forme to be obserued in Councells is to be fetched from them the which is exactly obserued in the later Councells as Baronius sheweth euidently in euery one of the first six Councells But Caluin acknowledgeth no Calu. c. 9. citato sect â— lawfull manner of any Synodicall assembly nor any such to be gathered togeather in the name of Christ but where all things are proued by Scripture only reiecting all Ecclesiasticall traditions but we haue already proued that the Traditions Goâ—t 1. c. 18. seq of the Church of God are as a principall and chiefest part of the word of God 17. Yea euen this was the only cause why S. Cyprian and so many other holy Byshops erred in the African Councells when they determined that all those who were christned by Heretikes should be baptized againe for they confirmed this their opinion very probably by many places of holy Scripture but they reiected the auncient tradition of the Lyrin lib. coÌ„tra Heraes c. 9. 10. S. Aug. Tom. 7. de baptism coÌ„tra Donatist l. 2. c. 7. in fine cap. 8. 9. S. Aug. Tom. 7. l. 3 de bapt coÌ„tra Donatist c. 4. l. 3. citato c. 2. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. loan 14. â— 9. Church the which they knew very well was opposite to this error as though it had byn contrary to the holy Scriptures as S. Vincentius Lyrinensis declareth very well and before him S. Augustine in many places 18. And that which is more S. Augustine manifestly writeth that he had byn of S. Cyprians opinion by reason of those probable reasons which were deduced out of holy Scripture but that the whole Catholike Church had defined the contrary And as the same holy Father teacheth at large they most of all oppugned the custome of the Church which were in the same error with S. Cyprian obiecting among other thinges that place of the holy Scripture the which our Aduersaries now adayes obiect against vsâ— God saith I am the truth he doth not say I am the custome Vnto whome S. Augustine answereth very well that the custome of the Church is not opposite to Truth but it is euen Truth it selfe 19. Our Aduersaries arguments are of small account or moment Caluin bringeth in the example of Caiphas and of the Iewish Councell wherin Christ was condemned The same argument Beza Bez. in 1. Tim. 2. v. 25. also alledgeth But who doth not know that this was neyther a generall Councell whereunto Christ was not called nor any â—ther true belieuer nor lawfull in it selfe seing that it was not assembled in the name and authority of Christ who was then the supreme head of the visible and militant Church as also because it was called togeather against the true Church of God by the wicked and cursed Synagogue of the Iewes For that was the true Church which adhered vnto Christ and belieued in him but that other which was altogeather depriued had lost the true faith of Christ was rather a fit Church for Sathan and other infernall spirits And I meruaile truly that Caluin and Beza do alledge that Councell as true and lawfull which was assembled against Christ himselfe as also by those who were not true belieuers â—o 15. v. 22. Psal 117. v. 21. Isa 9. v. 9. 10. Isa 6. v. 14. Dan. â— v. 26. Mat. vlt. â— vlt. in Christ yea who were filthily stained with the most heynous synne of infidelity as Christ humselfe witnesseth but we willingly leaue such a Church and Councell to our Aduersaries 20. It was also manifestly foretould by the Prophet that Christ should not be receyued by the Iewes and that the Synagogue of the Iewes should then fall from Ioa. 14. v 16. Calu. c. 9. citato sect 8. S. Aug. ToÌ„ 6. l. 3. contra Maxim Arian Episc c. 14. Beza volu 2. Tract Theol. Tract 3. de pace Christianorum Eccles constit cirâ— fineÌ„ pag. 118. iuxta edit GeÌ„ an 1558. Calu. sect citato Rupel Confess Art 5. in fine her faith But the holy Scriptures teach the plaine contrary of the true Church of Christ to wit that Christ and his spirit shall remayne with her for euer 21. But neyther is that other argument which Caluin and Beza vse any better to wit that S. Augustine would not vrge the authority of the Councell of Nice against Maximinus the Arian For neyther can we vrge the authority of the new testament against the Iewes not because we haue any doubt thereof but because the Iewes do not admit the new Testament In the same manner when that Arian would not admit the Councell of Nice but did plainly reiect it S. Augustine should in vayne haue vrged the authority therof for otherwise it is well knowne that S. Augustine neuer had any doubt of the fayth explicated in the Councell of Nice the which euen our Aduersaries imbrace as the most true word of God 22. Such as desire to see any more concerning this controuersy of the Generall Councells let them read Bellarmine in his first second booke of the Church militant and Coccius in his first Tome the seauenth booke the 21. 22. article CHAP. XI Of the Authority of the auncient Holy Fathers NOw it remaineth we say somewhat of the auncient holy Fathers and of their writinges both because they were in tymes past the chiefest members of the true Church of Christ euen by the confession of our Aduersaries as also because in the particuler controuersies we shall often vse the testimonies authorities of the holy Fathers 2. We know indeed well inough that they were men and that they might haue erred but neyther are they Gods nor Angells who accuse them of their errors We know also that one or more of the sayd holy Fathers haue sometymes erred when they left the more common opinion of others 3. But we affirme this constantly that the auncient holy Fathers receiued by the Church of God haue neuer written any thing with a common and vnanime consent that is eyther contrary to the holy Scriptures or to any point of fayth 4. Moreouer out of the writings of the holy Fathers in foure diuers
can establish Fayth concerning this matter 3. Iohn Caluin indeed sayth that it Lib. 1. Inst c. 7. sect 2. in fine is as easy for a faithfull man to discerne Canonicall Scripture from that which is not Canonicall as to one that seeth it is easy to discerne light from darknes and white from black But in so saying See Beâ—l lib. 1. de ver Deic 17. 18 19. he contradicteth both reason and experience for it is euident that in old tyme there was no small controuersy amongst the faythfull yea and amongst learned and godly men concerning many bookes of the old and new Testament yea and also euen now amoÌ„gst such as our Aduersaries esteeme faithfull men which Caluin Calu. pros in Ep. lac Epist ad Heb. ante â— Petri. himself in many places confesseth 4. Moreouer Caluins owne followers well perceauing this fly vnto their owne peculiar spirit by which they say they are chiefly perswaded and moued and not by the only consent of the Church But these speake nothing to the purpose for Rupell Confess art 4. in faith two thinges concurre one is the cause or origen of fayth to wit God himselfe and the holy Ghost whereof there is no controuersy betweene vs and them for we all acknowledge the holy Ghost to be the principall cause of the assent we giue by fayth that is to say that it is the holy Ghost who chiefly perswadeth vs to belieue The other is the obiect of fayth or that which is to be belieued whereof we now dispute for the holy Ghost doth not induce vs to belieue the false vncertaine deuises of men but the puâ—e and sincere word of God only we aske therfore of our Aduersaries by what expresse word of God he reuealeth vnto them that there are so many Canonicall bookes and neyther fewer nor more for we read not this any where in the Scripture and they admit only the written Word of God how can the holy Ghost Calu l. 1. Instit c. 9. sect 1. then perswade theÌ„ to belieue that which is not the word of God For we are not now to expect new reuelations from God as do the Anabaptists and Libertines whom for this cause our Aduersaries condemne It is necessary therefore that if they will haue vs belieue that they are perswaded by the holy Ghost to belieue such books only to be authenticall as they do say are such that they first shew this to be a truth expressely contayned in holy Scripture which they will neuer be able to do Wherfore there is no certainty with them eyther of the sense of the holy InnoceÌ„t 1. ep 3. c. vlt. CoÌ„ il 3. Carthag caÌ„ 47. S. Aug. Epist 335. Câ—cil Trident. sess 4. Scripture or of the Letter nor euer wil be vntill they returne vnto the Church agayne But we Catholikes are certaine of both for we haue a most faythfull Canon receaued in the Church more theÌ„ a thousand and two hundred yeares agoe confirmed by a generall and Oecumenicall Councell 5. And this to haue beene the faith and doctrine of the auncient Church for the discerning of true and authenticall Lib. 4. Inst c. 1â— sect vlt. Scriptures that short but pithy sentence of S. Augustine whome Caluin acknowledgeth to haue byn the best and most faithfull witnes of antiquiy sufficiently testifyeth saying I for my part would not belieue the Ghospell vnlesse I were moued by the authority Aug. coÌ„ Epist Manich. c. 5. of the Church of which place I will say more herafter in the Controuersy of the Church And else where he saith VVe receaue the old and new TestameÌ„t in that nuÌ„ber of bookes which the authority of the holy Catholike Aug. serm 10 de temp Church deliuereth So S. Augustine 6. I know our Aduersaries obiect many thinges against many bookes contayned in our Ecclesiasticall Canon but their chiefe arguments do not only derogate authority from those bookes but also from many others which they receaue as Canonicall For they obiect that some Fathers did sometymes doubt of those bookes which they will not admit but they are not ignorant that some Fathers of old haue doubted of the Epistles of S. Iames and S. Iude of the second Epistle of S. Peter of the 2. and 3. of S. Iohn of the Epistle to the Hebrewes and of the Apocalyps of which bookes they dare Rupell Confess art 3. not now doubt especially Caluins followers as is manyfest by their confession of faith 7. They say further that in those bookes which they reiect there are many thinges obscure difficult and full of contradiction but what booke of Scripture in a manner is there in the which there do not occurre sometymes thinges 2. Pet. 3. v. 16. obscure and hard to be vnderstod did not S. Peter acknowledge as much But as for true contradictions there are none at al how soeuer there may be some things which at the first sight may seeme to imply contradiction yet indeed all thinges agree very well togeather such a contradiction is oftentymes found in those bookes which euen our Aduersaries receaue Aug. dâ— Doâ—t Christia l. 2. c. 41. de ser Dom. in mont l. 1. c. 3. yea euen in the Ghospells themselues which for all that are not to be reiected but humbly soberly and piously to be interpreted as S. Augustine many tymes admonisheth 8. To conclude all the arguments that our Aduersaries make against these bookes are fully answered by Catholike writers which haue set out Commentaries Bell. Greâ—s Contro 1 l. 1. c. 7. sequ 〈◊〉 in sâ—â— Coronol vpon those bookes to wit Cornelius I ansenius vpon Ecclesiasticus Ioannes Laurinus vpon the booke of VVisedome Ioannes Maldonatus and Chrisâ—ophâ—r à Castâ—o vpon Baruch and Nicolas Serarius vpon the rest of the bookes of the old Testament which our Aduersaries call Apocripall to omit the most Reuerend and famous Cardinall Bellarmine and his Champion Iacobus Gretserus as also Iames Gordon Lesmoreus For it is sufficient only to haue cited them seeing that I write only an abridgment of Controuersies not any long commentaries vpon the Scripture And therfore conteÌ„t my selâ—e to haue shewed in this place that our Aduersaries must either receaue the Canon of Scriptures approued be the Councell of Trent or be vtterly destitute of any certayne and assured Canon CHAP. VI. Of the Hebrew Text. OVR Aduersaries when they are vrged with Catholike argumeÌ„ts taken from the Scriptures are wont to fly to the Hebrew Text of the old Testament and to the Greeke text of the new perswading themselues by this meanes to attayne to the true and propter sense of the letter wherfore somthing is to be sayd in this place of the Hebrew Greeke text both which appertayne to the Letter of the holy Scripture 2. We grant indeed that when the Latin translation is either ambiguous or lesse playne the Hebrew text is well and profitably looked into as also that
them as if Christ should teach that we cold deserue life euerlasting by keeping the law And a litle after he concludeth saying This answere of Christ is according to the old law to wit that no man can be accounted iust before God but he who shall satify the law which is impossible And Calu. in 16. Luc. v. 28. Lâ—b 3. Instit c. 17. sect 7. vpon the later place he writeth thus It is impossible sayth he to fulfill what the law commaundeth yea it is a principall axiome with Caluin a coÌ„moÌ„ aÌ„swere to all such places A legal promise sayth he aÌ„nexed to a coÌ„dition impossible proueth nothing thus with sâ—ch impossibilities they dally with vs with the holy Scripture it selfe so far forth as they Calu. Beza in c. 2. ad Rom. dare affirme that the Apostle in one Chapter auoâ—cheth vnto vs seauen times thinges imâ—ossible For wheras the Apostle in the 2. cap. of the Ep. to the Rom. and 6. v. affirmeth Bez. in c. 2. ad Râ— v. 6. annot 6. edit an 1550. 1564. 1565. first that God will render to euery one according to his workes they interprete the place thus that God will indeed giue to meÌ„ according to their good works if there were any such but that no man can do any good worke before God Is there any man saith Beza that shal be able to bring these workes which the Apostle saith shal be rewarded with eternall life And wheras in the seaueÌ„th v. the Apostle saith that God doth render life euerlasting to such as seeke the same by the patience of good works their answere is that he insinuateth a thing impossible and that no man can do any good worke before God no not the iuslest man which is not worthy of eternall damnatioÌ„ Calu. l. 3. Instit c. 19. sect 4. VVhosoeuer saith Caluin haue made the greatest progresse before all others in the way of the Lord if they cast their eyes vpon the Lord God what worke soeuer they attempt or go about they see it to be accursed And surely I for my part could easily belieue that such is the progresse of our aduersarirs in the way of our Lord. See the rest of the Aposiles places in the latin edition 2. The tenth last shift is the wresting of diuers wordes to a wrong sense and to inuâ—nt sundrie different vnderstandings of the wordes to build vpon it many interpretations neuer heard of before and for a finall Conclusion to say the place is obscure and therefore proueth nothing For Luc. 22. v. 19. example hereof those most euident words of Christ This is my body with is giuen for you may suffice for some of theÌ„ wrest the pronowne hoc others the word est others the word corpus others the pronowne meum others the relatiue quod others the preposition pro others the pronowne vobis and others the Verbe datur and ech word they wrest diuers waies so as one more then Anno 1577. thirty yeares ago hath gathered out of their writings two hundred expositions of these few wordes of Christ of which Clâ—uâ—ius de Xainctes numbreth particulerly 84. And that they are both many and different yea repugnant wherwith they labour to make obscure these wordes of our Sauiour no man can doubt See another example in the latin edition And it is worthy of noting that in all these shifts they serue themselues of other places of Scripture to proue what they say whereby it may appeare how easy a thing it is to corrupt the Scripture by other places of Scripture but that the prouideÌ„t and dayly care of the holy Catholike 1. ad Tim. v. 15. Matt. 28. Church opposeth it self against such corruptions worthily therefore called the Pillar and Firmament of truth against which the gates of hell shall neuer preuaile FINIS OF TRADITIONS The second Part of the first Controuersy CHAP. I. Of the true state of the Question HAVING already in the precedent Treatise spoken of the written Word of God and of all other things thereunto belonging now it remaineth we speake a litle of the vnwritteÌ„ word coÌ„moÌ„ly called TraditioÌ„s But to the end that the state of this controuersy may more easily be vnderstood I will heere set downe foure things diligently to be considered in this matter we treate of The first is that by the vnwritten Word we only vnderstand that which is not written in the old oâ— new Testament for of the vnwritten word of God in this sense is our whole Controuersy in this place Wherefore that obiection of our Aduersaries is both friuolous and nothing worth to wit that the word of God which we cal the vnwritten word may be found extant eyther among the holy Fathers or in the books of the Councells or other Canons of the Church But this nothing belongeth vnto this purpose for it is sufficient for vs that this word of God is not written in any book eyther of the old or new Testament 2. The second is that a thing may be coÌ„teined in the holy Scripture 2. wayes The one way is implicite that is to say in some generall principle from whence this other may be certaynly deduced and in this sense we acknowledge that the whole word of God is conteined in holy Writ and not only in Scripture but also in the Apostles S. Aug. in 140. quaest vpon Exodus Tom. 4. Matt. 22. v. 40. Câ—eed yea euen in that one article I belieue the Catholike Church so that it be diligently examined and well vnderstood as S. Augustine very well noteth For so sayth Christ the whole Law and Prophets doe depend vpon two precepts of charity as in the same place S. Augustine noteth For seing that the holy Scripture teacheth that we are bound to beleeue the Church in all things that it can neither deceiue vsnor be deceiued as we will euidently proue in the next Controuersy in the 7. Chapter it consequently also teacheth the whole and entire word of God seing that all that which is not expressâ—d in the holy Scripture is conteyned expressy in the doctrine of the Church the which the Scripture commendeth vnto vs as infallible as S. augustine very well sayth and declareth S. Aug. Tom. 7. contra Crescon Gram. c. â—3 de vnit Eâ—cles c. 22. in fine-Matt 17 v. 5. Matt. 81. v. 17. Luc. 10. 16. in many places For euen as God the Father comprehended in these few words This is my wellbeloued Sonne heare him the whole word of God so Christ proposed vnto vs the whole word of God when he commaunded vs to heare the Church 3. And in this sense do the holy Fathers often tymes say that all the points of fayth are conteined in the holy Scriptures to wit in that generall principle in the which they admonish vs to bâ—lieue the Church but many of the holy Fathers sayings are falsifyed corrupted by Martin KeÌ„ nitius and some Caluinists as may be seene in
wrong and damnify the chiefe parts of the Ghospel yea they euen as it were coÌ„tract or bring the whole preaching of the Ghospell to the bare name thereof 6. Many of our Aduersaries who deale more sincerely with vs conuinced by these arguments do acknowledge that these grounds or principles of our faith are only to be had by Traditions without any written word of God as Ioannes Brentius and Martin Kemnitius who adde also that those Traditions which doe not repugne to the written word of God are to be admitted and receiued and that those only are to be reiected which are opposit vnto the holy Scriptures 7. But whatsoeuer our Aduersaries do answere it is altogeather necessary that they confesse these three principles of our fayth do belong indeed to the very word of God it selfe They must also needs confesse these are not extant in plaine and expresse tearmes in any booke either of the old or new Testament out of which necessarily followeth that the whole intire word of God is not conteyned expresly in the holy Scripture CHAP. III. Wherein it is proued out of other particuler poynts of fayth that there are Traditions THE second argument whereby we proue Apostolicall Traditions is taken out of other particuler poynts of fayth the which almost all our Aduersaries belieue with vs albeit they be no where expressely conteyned in the Scriptures There are many poyntes oâ— sayth of this sort wherof for example sake we will alledge some few But to the end we may vse our accustomed breuity we will rehearse only those which do also manifestly shew out of this opinion of our Aduersaries that nothing appertayneth to the doctrine of fayth which is not expresly conteyned in holy Scripture there are many greeuous errours and heresies in this our age arisen 2. The first point is that in God there are three Persons really distinct among themselues and one only substance for this is now here extant in holy Scripture yea in it nothing is to be found expresly written eyther of the substance or of the person in that signification wherein these words are vsed when we speake of the Blessed Trinity 3. This indeed the Caluinists to their great losse and domage haue sufficiently learned by experience fourty yeares agoe in Transiluania For when one Iohn Huniades whom they called Iohn the secoÌ„d King of HuÌ„gâ—ry was then Gouernour in TraÌ„â—luania a CouÌ„try or Prouince of Hungary had ordained a publike disputatioÌ„ betwixt the Calâ—inists and the Anti-trinitarians that is to say those who oppugned the mystery of the Blessed Trinity and that according to the coÌ„mon doctrine on both syds they should dispute only out of the holy Scriptures the Caluinists could neuer proue out of the Scriptures alone that there is eyther a substance or person in God neyther could they by the Scriptures only declare what is a person or what is a substance 4. Wherefore at the last this was the end of the disputatioÌ„ that almost all those which were present iudged that the Antitrinitarians got the victory and that the Caluinists were shamefully ouercome wherupon it came to passe that the sayd Prince of Transiluania of a Caluinist became an Anti-trinitarian yea one of their chief friends in so much that he tooke some publike Churches from the Caluinists and gaue them to the Anti-trinitarians and he continued miserably in that wicked heresy euen till death which happened in the yeare 1571. the 14. of March 5. All which things are aboundaÌ„tly declared by one Ioannes Sommerus Pirnensis in the funerall Oration which he made at his death where in among other things he affirmeth that the chiefe cause why this Prince left the Caluinists and became an AntitrinitariaÌ„ was this because forsooth in the Scriptures he could fynd nothing of the Blessed Trinity and for that the Caluinists were forced to confesse that the words wherby the mystery of the Blessed Trinity is explicated are not extaÌ„t in the holy Scripture but because this funerall Oration is scarce any where to be found least some should thinke that I falsely coyned these things my selfe I will heare set downe his owne words For after he had most blaspemously spoken as the Anti-trinitarians are wont to doe against the Blessed Trinity the which he calleth heere and there the Roman Idolatry these things he addeth of his Prince 6. This funeral Orat of Ioan Sommer was printedat Claudiopolian Domini 1571. But this our Prince sayth he being instructed by God easily vnderstood what was the truth and with earnest desire imbraced it and with no lesse pleasure of mind defended it for being accustomed euen from his childhood to read the holy Scriptures he made them very familiar vnto him presently he found that such things which were contrary to the phrase of Christ and his Apostles were in the ensuing ages by a wicked curiosity brought into the Church and that they are not at all to be numbred amongst those things which adde any firmity or strength to the Author of our saluation especially seing that the Aduersaries themselues acknowledge that the words wherby these subtilties of this new opinion are explicated if not rather as I may well say more obscured are not to be found in the writings of the Apostles 7. And a little after Wherfore little regarding eyther the multitude of wranglers He meaneth Seruetus who was buâ—ned at Geneua an 1553 as Beza writeth in vita Caluini or the torments and paines which others had endured who first endeauoured to breake this yce he manifestly condemned the falsity of the Trinity freely professing his owne opinion therein And after a few words For what hath he not done what assemblies and disputations hath he not ordayned caused to be had about this matter both in Hungary and in Transiluania that the sense or meaning of the Scripture might the better be explicated by conferring those thinges togeather which were then said or spoken of where he would not only be present himselfe but also taking the place or office of the Iudge and vmpyre in the said disputations he very wisely and grauely confuted the great absurdities of that superstition warning often the Aduersaries that reiecting the fancies or fond expositions of men they should lesse impudently and more sincerly carry themselues in the explication of the heauenly doctrine Thus farre Sâ—â—â—merus of the great care diligence of the Prince of Transiluania in defending the heresy of the Anti trinitarians 8. Moreouer it is also manifest that out of this opinion of our Aduersaries to Seruetus l. 1. de erroribus Trinitat fol. 32. pag. 1. Edit an 1531. wit that we must not belieue any thing which is not expressed in Scriptures this wicked heresy of the Anti trinitariaÌ„s in these our dayes had her beginning For that Michael Seruetus who in our age was the first of them that by printed bookes presumed to oppugne the mystery of the Blessed Trinity doth plainely testify writing in
it weake Sophisticall and erroneous 11. Besides that there are so many and so contrary illations of diuers men that the authority of the Church is altogeather necessary in maters of faith that there may arise a certayne and an vndoubted faith of these matters of which sort Traditions are that is to say the doctrine of the whole Church 12. But when one belieueth such an illation with a diuine or Catholike faith he must needes know two thinges the one is that the expresse place of Scripture from whence this conclusion is deduced must certainly be well vnderstood by him which disputeth the other is that he who maketh such a deduction and collection can neyther deceiue others nor be deceyued himselfe But none can know eyther of these without the Traditions of the Church seeing that otherwise there is none which may not be deceiued sometimes All collections therefore which produce or breed fayth in vs do most clearly conuince and shew the authority and necessity of Traditions CHAP. VII Wherein it is proued that there are Traditions by the absurdities which otherwise would follow THE fifth argument wherby we proue that many things are to be belieued which are not expressed in holy Scriptures is taken out of the absurdities which do ensue of the contrary doctrine For hauing once admitted that nothing is to be belieued which is not expressed in Scripture all old heresies are renewed and a great vncertainty and confusion of all things is brought into the Church of God yea euen the way to Atheisme is layd open because hauing once reiected despised the Traditions of the Church all the poynts of fayth from the Apostles tyme till now explicated and proued by the auncient Fathers against heretiks all those things also which were decreed and determined by all the generall Councâ—lls in times past against the said heretiks loose their chiefâ—st strength and authority the which notwithstanding our Aduersaries do acknowledge themselues to receiue and belieue 2. Neyther do we know by an assured Catholike faith whether there were euer any Fathers or Councells but by the Traditions of the Church But neyther do we know any other way but by fayth whether since the Apostles tyme till now there were any Catholikes or noâ— because of those things which were done since the tyme and death of the Apostles there is nothing extant in holy Scripture seeing that all the bookes thereof were written before the death of the Apostles But such things as haue bâ—n done since till now cannot otherwyse be knowne but by the Tradition of the Church 3. Neyther is it sufficient to say that we know these things by the Ecclesiasticall histories For that fayth which proceedeth of histories without the authority or Traditions of the Catholike Church is but an humane fayth which oftentimes deceaueth others and may be deceiued it selfe and therefore these kind of histories cannot produce a diuine fayth in vs this experience it selfe doth clearly teach vs. For our Aduersaries do somtymes doubt whether S. Peter was euer at Rome or no because forsooth this is not to be found expresly in holy Scripture wheras notwithstanding it is most assuredly proued and testified in many bookes both of the auncient Historiographers and holy Fathers Why may they not as lawfully call other matters in question which are notwithstanding expressely set downe in other auncient writers Our Aduersaries therfore do make all things very doubtfull and vncertayne whiles they will only belieue and admit the Scripture but now lâ—t vs answere their arguments CHAP. VIII Wherein the arguments of our Aduersaries taken out of the old Testament are confuted THE first argument wherby our Aduersaries oppugne Traditions and which they vse very often the which also as inuincible they haue added to the confession of their Rupell Confess Art 5. Deut. 4. v. 2. Deut 12. v. vlt. fayth they take out of these words of Deuteronomy Thou shalt not add any thing to the word which I speake vnto you nor shall you take any thing from it And againe that which I commaund thee do that only neyther add or diminish any thing from it By these places of Scriptures our Aduersaries do inferre that nothing is to be receiued as a point of fayth which is not expressely set downe in Scripture 2. But this argument is erroneous and the weaknes thereof is very great for many causes First because in those words there is no mention made of the Scripture nor of the written word of God but only of the word preached and deliuered viua voce Thou shalt not add sayth the Scripture to the word that I speake vnto you he doth not say that I write vnto you Againe Do only sayth he that which I commaund thee he doth not say that which I write vnto thee 3. Moreouer in these words the holy Scripture doth not only speake of matters of fayth to be belieued but also of ceremonies and customes to be done and obserued but our Aduersaries themselues confesse that these customes may be added by the authority of the Church yea they haue ordeined themselues very many the which they chang euen yet when they please Caluin also acknowledgeth that Calu. coÌ„tra 4 sess Concil Trident. many vnwritten customes were deliuered vnto vs by the Apostles 4. That also according to the phrase of Scripture is said to be added to the word of God which is contrary opposite vnit For Iosue did not transgresse this commaundement of Deuteronomy when he added his booke to the bookes of Moyses Nor did others transgresse it who added the bookes of the Iudges Ruth and of the Kinges which were not written by Moyses which are also to be belieued as contayning pointes of faith But in these bookes there is nothing contrary to that which Moyses wrote And the Hebrew text agreeth very well to this answere for in both places of Deuterâ—nomy this word Ghal is vsed which sigâ—â—tieth oâ—tentines contrary or against so that the sense is Do not add any thing contrary to the word which I commaund and againe yee shall not add any thing contrary to the word which I say vnto you For so is that particie Gâ—â—l taken in the 40. Psalme or according to the Hebrewes 41. in the 2. Psalme also the second verse And in the 14. of Numbers the 2. verse els where very often Euen as also in the new Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which answereth to the Hebrew Ghal signifieth also contrary or agâ—iâ—st when the Apostle writeth to the 1. ad Cor. 4. v. 6. Corinthians that in vs you may learne one not to be puffed vp against another aboue that is writteÌ„ that is to say against the Scripture the which saith we must not be puffed vp in pryde â—s S. Chrysostome and after him Theophilactus others do note vpon that place The which place some bouldly alledge against Traditions wheras the Apostle in that place doth not speake of the whole Calu in
â—lla verba 1. â—l Cor. 4. v. 6. word of God but of this one point that we must not be puffed vp in pryde as euen Caluin himselfe acknowledgeth 5. But to omit all such thinges as other Catholike Doctors haue very well and learnedly written of the proper and literall sense of these wordes yea that we may also graunt to our Aduersaries that this which they alledge is the true sense they erre very much in that they thinke that these wordes of Moyses belong vnto vs and that we are no lâ—sle now bound and obliged by them then the Ieues were in tymes past For these wordes do no more appertaine vnto vs then those of the same booke of Deuteronomy Câ—rsed be â—e that Devt 27. v. vâ—â— abideth not in the wordes of this Law and sâ—lfilâ—â—th them not in worke From which wordes S. Paul manifestly teacheth that we are deliuered Ad Gal. 3. l. 10. 1â— and freed by the grace of Christ Iesus But seing that in these wordes which they do heere alledge Moyses commaundeth that the ChildreÌ„ of Israel should obserue fulfill euery word which he had commaunded them for so it is expresly set downe Deuteronomy 12. the last verse in the Hebrew text and in all the Bibâ—s of our Aduersaries and he presently addeth that nothing is to be added or detracted from all these he manifestly commaundeth the keeping of the whole Moysaicall Law and of all the Sacraments Sacrifices and Ceremonies of the old Testament For he doth not only commaund that nothing should be added but also that nothing is to be detracted of all those thinges by him commauÌ„ded Wherefore if our Aduersaries obiect against vs that we adde any thing against this precept we may more iustly obiect vnto then that they detract farre more then we add seing that they neyther obserue the Circumcision nor the legall Sacrifices nor other Ceremonies which are so often and so straitely commaunded in Deuteronomy It cannot truly be denyed but that this is to detract somewhat from those thinges which Moyses commaunded and therâ—ore our Aduersaries must needes confesse that these are the wordes of the old Law and consequently do appertaine nothing vnto vs. Out of this which hath byn said it followeth that our Aduersaries do very indiscretly foolishly boast and bragge of those wordes of Moyses For in the exposition thereof they erre farre from the truth and a great deale more in the application when they go about to proue that we are also bound and obliged by them 6. Our Aduersaries take their second argument out of these wordes of Salomoâ—s Prouerb 30. v. 5. 6. prouerbâ— Euery word of God is fiery it is a sâ—ield of defence to those which hope in it do not add any thing to the words therof and thou shalt not be found and reprehended as a lyar I answere that this place maketh nothing against vs for in that place there is no mention made of Scripture only but of al the word of God And it is most true that nothing should be added to all the whole word of God the which is to be belieued with a Catholike faith as the true word of God For as we haue said before our faith relyeth only on the word of God but the Scripture only is not all the word of God because all Traditions also which contayne poynts of faith belong therunto as we haue sufficiently Supra c. 2. proued already But they add to the word of God are lyarâ— who affirme that God sayd this or that which indeed he neuer spake And of this sort â—re those false Prophets of whome God by the Prophet Ieremy complayneth saying They Hier. 23. v. 16. 21. speake the vision of their hartes not from the mouth of our Lord againe I did not speake vnto them and they did prophesy This place also may very well be vnderstood of those who add any thing contrary to the word of God For in the Hebrew text there is set downe that particle Ghal which often tymeâ— signifieth contrary or against as we haue already declared in our answere to the first argument CHAP. IX Wherin is examined that place of S. Pauls Epistle to the Galathâ—ans which our Aduersaries do obiect against Traditions THE third argument our Aduersaries take out of the first Confess Rupâ—lâ— Art 3. Chapter to the Galathians the which they haue also added to their confession of fayth as inuincible For they haue omitted their second argument as not strong inough for their purpose But thus they frame their argument The Apostle Gal. 1. v. 8. 9. sayth twice an Anathema to those who teach any thing besidâ— that which he hath taught therefore nothing is to be receiued or belieued but Scripture Our Aduersaries haue this place of the Apostle often in their mouthes wherefore it shal be exaâ—ined more exactly We answere therfore thaâ— our Aduersaries do erre heere for two reasons first because our whole controuersy is of the written word of God but in these words there is no mention made of the writteÌ„ word or of Scripture but only of the word preached and deliuered viâ—â— vâ—câ— to the Galathians by S. Paul And hence it is that S. Augustine farre otherwise August Tom. 7. de vnit Ecâ—les c. 24. then our Aduersaries disputing against the Donatists proueth by these words of the Apostle that we are bound to admit and belieuâ— the Traditions of the Church as for exaÌ„ple that those who are once orderly and lawfully christened by Heretiks are not to be baptized againe And well truly for that which is viua voce deliuered is a Tradition and not Scpriture Moreouer if the Scripture only conteyned expressely all the poynts of fayth the Apostle would rather haue proposed the Scripture as the rule of fayth then his owne preaching seing that the Scripture is manifestly well knowne to all Nations but his owne preaching to the Galathians only But our Aduersaries vrge againe and say that all that which the Apostle preached to the Galathians was written eyther before that tyme or afterward by S. Paul and the other Apostles they say this but they proue it not For this is no where written in holy Scripture and so whiles they goe about to perswade vs that all points of fayth are writteÌ„ they coyne inuent a new poynâ— which is no where extant in Scripture that is to say that all such thingâ— as S Paul viua voce taught the Galathians are written But we following herein S. Augustine do 3. Aug. Tom. 9. Tract 96. in Io. Tom 7. de â—nit Eccles c. 21. infine gather much better by these words and infer thus against them If there must be nothing belieued but that which S. Paul preached to the Galathians and that none knoweth certainly what are those things which he preached but by the Traditions and doctrine of the Church it followeth manifestly that besids the Scripture we must also belieue
9. Tract 98. in Euan loan subfinem which is in the holy Scripture For so S. Augustine speaketh in one place But in another he clearly explicateth himselfe by this word praeter to vnderstand contra because we must preach nothing contrary to the holy Scripture That this is the true sense and meaning of S. Augustine it is manifest by the words themselues wherby also he proueth that the word praeter in those words of the Apostle doth signify diuers but not contrary thinges For in this manner he writeth when he warneth his schollers to take heed of the opinions of the Manichaeans other heretikes Ad Gal. 1. v. 6. because these are not only distinct but also contrary to those which the Apostle taught Let the admonition sayth he of the holy Apostle neuer depart from your hart If any shall euangelize vnto you besids that which you haue receiued let him be Anathema He doth not say 1. Thess 3. v. 10. more then you haue receaued but besides that which you haue receaued For if he should say that he should be preiudiciall to himselfe who coueteth to come to the Thessalonians that he might supply that which was wanting to their sayth Now he which supplieth addeth that which is lacking taketh not away that which was But he which ouerposseth Ioan. 16. v. 11. the rule of fayth doth not goe on in the way but departeth froÌ„ the way That therfore which our Lord sayth I haue yet many things to say vnto you but you cannot beare them now were to be added to those things which they knew and not to be ouerthrowen by those they had already learned Hitherto S. Augustine CHAP. X. Whereinâ—other obiections of our Aduersaries against Traditions are refuted THE fourth argument is deduced out of these words of the Apocalyps Apoc. 22. v. 18. Confess Rupell Artic. 5. which they also cite and alledge in their ConfessioÌ„ at Rochell If any man shâ—ll adde to these things God shall adde vpon him the plagues written in this booke But who doth not see that S. Iohn speaketh expresly of the booke of the Apocalyps only and not of the whole Scripture for he sayth I testify to euery one hearing the words of the Prophesy of this booke if any man shall adde to these things c. and in the 19. verse following If any man shall diminish of the words of the booke of this prophesy c. He speaketh therfore only of the propheticall words of the Apocalyps For it is manyfest otherwise out of Ecclesiasticall histories that S. Iohn wrote his Ghospell after the Apocalyps and Hier. de script Eccles in Ioan. Apost consequently that he added many things besids the Apocalyps But let our Aduersaries take heed least they incurre those paynes which S. Iohn threatneth to those which adde or detract any thing from the Apocalyps seing that they so often and so bouldly wrest the prophesies of the Apocalyps to many strang senses against the Pope and the Catholike Church 2. Our Aduersaries alledge many other things but their arguments which be of lesse moment are taken out of those places of Scripture which commend vnto vs the great excellency of holy Scripture But Supra c. 2. all these are very easily confuted by that one ground which as we haue declared before euen our Aduersaries do admit to wit that to the end the holy Scripture be perfect in it selfe and sufficient to euerlasting saluation it is not necessary that it should expresly coÌ„teyne al points of fayth but it is sufficieÌ„t that all such poynts may be deduced by a good consequence out of it But all the Traditions of the Church which belong vnto fayth may be gathered Supra c. 2. as we haue sayd out of Scripture the which also we declare more at large in euery one of these controuersies Our Aduersaries therfore haue not reason to say that we teach the Scripture to be impersect or insufficient For as concerning this sufficiency and perfectioÌ„ of Scripture they are forced at least to yield and subscribe vnto our opinion here in but these their arguments whereof they make great account we haue therfore alledged to the end all may know how badly they interpret the holy Scriptures and by how friuolus reasons they are perswaded to forsake the Catholike fayth 3. But euen this sufficiency of Scripture which they preteÌ„d they proue very foolishly by those wordes of the Apostle wherein he teacheth that the Scripture Ad Tim. 3. v. penut is very profitable as though forsooth euery thing which is profitable for obtayning some particuler end or purpose were also absolutely sufficient then the which nothing can be spoken more absurdly The Head truely is not only profitable but also necessary that a man may liue but who I pray you will say that the head only without the rest of the body is sufficient for the lyfe of man But our late Aduersaries to the end they may make this their discourse or reason the stronger say that in humane thinges not euery thing which is profitable is also sufficient but in diuine matters whatsoeuer Iunius coÌ„tra Bell. controu 1. lib. 4. c. 10. notâ— 44. is profitable is also sufficient whervnto Iunius like a fine young stripling addeth that this can be ouerthrowne by no sophistry But who doth not see that the Eucharist by the diuine vertue thereof is profitable to the obtayning of eternall saluation and yet notwithstanding without Baptisme it is not sufficieÌ„t as also without faith and pennance the same may be sayd of Baptisme and of euery booke of Scripture Yea euen the Apostle doth not speake of the whole Scripture as our Aduersaries thinke he doth when he saith that euery Scripture is profitable but of euery particuler part thereof For how Hier. de Scrip. Eccles in â—oaÌ„ Apost 2. Tim. 1. v. penult could he speake of a thing which was not then extant But as then the Ghospell of S. Iohn was not yet written nor the Apocalyps For these were after S. Pauls death written by S. Iohn Hence it is that the Apostle S. Paul doth not say the whole Scripture but euen Scripture inspired by God is profitable For there is not one part of Scripture which is not profitable vnto vs if it be well vnsterstood Yet for all that notwithstanding euery one part precisely in it selfe abstracting from the rest of the Scripture as all do very well know is not sufficient 4. Finally it is also to be considered that all those places wherin the integrity perfection and vtility of the Scripture is commended vnto vs must nedes be vnderstood not of the bare wordes only but of the same well and rightly vnderstood But this true vnderstanding of the words cannot otherwise be had then by Tradition Supra c. 4. and the vnwritten doctrine of the Church it selfe as we haue already declâ—red Wherefore all those places which do commend vnto vs the holy Scriptures do also
is to say to vphould the house to strengthen it The Apostle heere attributeth theÌ„ both to the Church the one when he calleth hâ—r the pillar of truth the othâ—r when â—â— calleth her the ground of the same truth For the pillar also of the earth according to the Hebrew Iob. â— v. 6. Psal 74. vel inxta Hebrâ—os 79. v. 4. phrase doth signify the lowest fouÌ„dations of the earth So God is sayd to shake the pillars of the earth elswhere to strengthen the pillars of the earth that is to say the very foundations thereof 17. These so manifest and perspicuous Calu. inâ— ad Tim. 3. v. 15. words of the Apostle do compell Caluin at the last to be of our opinion albeit after his accustomed maÌ„ner at the first he wrongfully slaundereth vs affirming that Catholiks hold or to vse his owne words do blab out this horrible blasphemy that is to say that the truth of God is not strong inough vnlesse it be vphoulden by the shoulders of men and that the word of God is vncertayne till by humble prayers as it were it borroweth some certaymy from men And afterward he affirmeth that the Apostle in this place would nothing els but that the truth of God is supported by the pure preaching of the Ghospell But that which he sayd first is a meere slaunder for we do not say that the truth or the word of God absolutly and considered precisely in it selfe receiueth it certainty and strength from the Church for in this sense it receyueth a most perfect strength and large authority from God himselfe but in regard of men and in consideration of our knowledge it receiueth it certainty froÌ„ the Church Infra hac Controu cap. 16. in fine as afterward we will declare more at large the which also Caluin in the words immediatly following acknowledgeth to be most true when he writeth in this Calu. loco citato Rom. 10. v 17. sorte S. Paul simply vnderstandeth sayth Caluin that which in other words he sayth in the tenth Chapter to the Romans because fayth is by hearing there wil be no fayth vnlesse there he some that preach Therfore in regard of men the Church supporteth the truth because it maketh it famous by her prayse and commendation because the retayneth it in sincerity and purity and because the deliuereth and sendoth it to her posterity Thus Caluin 18. But that which secondly he addeth that the truth of God is supported and vpholden by the pure preaching of the Church is indeed most true but he should haue considered that this pure preaching of the Ghospell cannot be fouÌ„d but only in the Church and that no others but men can preach the pure Ghospell Wherefore if the truth of God be sustayned by the pure preaching of the Ghospell it necessarily followeth also that the Church must be sustained by men and consequently that the Church of Christ is the gound of truth albeit not absolutly yet in regard of vs and our Beza in 1. ad Tim. 3. v. 15. knowledge So as Beza also is forced to coÌ„fesse the same exâ—licating those words of the Apostle the pillar and ground of truth Vnderstand this sayth Beza not simply in it selfe but in regard of vs. Thus he 19. It is therfore manifest as well out of Caluin as Beza that the Church in regard of vs is the ground of truth or of the word of God and consequently of our fayth which relyeth thereon But that which in regard of men is the ground of our fayth that is the true ground therof because our fayth cannot well nor must not be considered but in regard of men seeing that our fayth cannot be found but in men only if therfore in regard of men the Church be the ground of truth it is also most truly and necessarily the ground of our fayth 20. Furthermore that the ancient Church of the holy Fathers did coÌ„stantly hold the preaching and authority of the Catholike Church to be the ground of our fayth those excellent words of S. Augustine do manifestly declare when he S. Aug. Tom. 6. contra Epist Manich. cap. 5. Calu. l. 1. Instit sect 3. writeth thus disputing against the Maniches I sayth he would not belieue the Ghospell but that the authority of the Catholike Church moued me therunto this seÌ„teÌ„ce of S. Augustine vexeth our Aduersaries very much Caluin goeth about to perswade the ignoraÌ„t people that S. Augustin speaketh of himselfe yet remayning a Manichean Heretike and not of himselfe as being conuerted and made a Catholike But this is a ridiculous euasion for the words which follow a litle after do shew that this is a false interpretation of Caluin If thou doest hold thy selfe to the Ghospell S. Augustine speaketh vnto a Manichean heretike I would hold my selfe to those by whose commandment I beliued the Ghospell He speaketh therfore of himselfe as now being a Catholike and after a few words VVhose authority sayth he being infringed weakned I could not now euen belieue the Ghospel it selfe Where he sheweth plainly that our faith doth so depend of the authority of the Church that it being weakned or taken a way it could not remayne or continue by any fayth of the Ghospell Wherby it is manifest that it is false which Iunius writeth that S. Augustine did only speake of the accidentary and not of the necessary cause 21. Others say that S. Augustine did speake of this or that booke of the Gospell and not of the whole Gospell in generall but the very words of S. Augustine doe teach the contrary because he speaketh euery where of the Gospell it selfe in generall Moreouer one and the same reason is of one booke of the Ghospell and of all the rest as concerning fayth 22. Others lastly do answere that S. Augustine did not speake of the Church of his time but of the primitiue Church wherin were the Apostles who approued the Ghospell But this solution is also easily refuted out of the words next following to whom saith S. Augustin I haue obeied saying Belieue the Gospell why should I not obey them then saying vnto me Doe not belieue Manicheus But it is manifest that the primitiue Church spake nothing of Manicheus but that Church only which was in S. Augustines time sayd vnto him doe not belieue Manicheus For Manicheus liued many yeares 8. Aug. Tom. 6. contra FaustuÌ„ l. 13. c. 4. after the primitiue Church yea euen after S. Cyprian that is to say almost three hundred yeares after Christ as the same S. Augustine testifyeth and it is otherwise sufficiently well knowen that the Manichean heresy was vnknowne in the world before the yeare 277. See Baronius in his 2. Tome in the yeare 277. in the 2. number and others following CHAP. VI. The Arguments of our Aduersaries are confuted NOVV it remayneth we answere to the arguments of our Aduersaries for by our answers the difficulty of this whose controuersy wil be more
perspicuously resolued Their first argument is if the authority of the Church were the ground of fayth then it would follow that our faith relied vpon men and not vpon God for the Church consisteth of men Our Aduersaries do often repeate and inculcate this argument vnto vs. I answeere that the same argument if it were any thing worth would also proue that we should not belieue Scriptures because althose who wrot the books of the Bibles were also men buâ—â—â— we do belieue their writinges not because they were men but because they had a certaine peculiar assistaÌ„ce of the holy Ghost who did so gouerne and direct them that they could not erre so in like manner we belieue the Church and make it the ground of our fayth not as it consisteth of men but as it hath a speciall and continuall assistance of the holy Ghost by whome she is continually gouerned and directed wherby it commeth to passe that she can neuer erre as we haue proued Cap. 7. praeced a little before 2. Wherefore to make the Church the ground of our fayth is nothing els then to make the holy Ghost and Christ himselfe the ground therof For it is he who speaketh vnto vs by the mouth of the Church according to that saying of S. Paul Seeke you an experiment of him that speaketh in me Christ And in another place speaking of his own 2. Cor. 13. v. 3. 1. Thess v. 8. doctrine he sayth therfore he that despiseth these things despiseth not man but God who also hath giueÌ„ his holy spirit in vs. But our Aduersaries do thinke speak too basely of the Church as though it consisted of men only as the Churches of Infidells and Heretikes seeing that the chiefe part of the true Church of Christ is the holy Ghost who is as it were the soule and spirit of the Church 3. But neither is this to make the Scripture or the holy Ghost subiect inferito our men as our Aduersaries are woÌ„t to cauil but oÌ„ly to shew that the holy Ghost is euery where conformable to himself that in all things he neuer differeth or disagreeth froÌ„ himselfe Whether he speak vnto vs by the holy Scripture or by the mouth of the Church as Caluin acknowledgeth Calu. l. 1. Instit c. 9. sect 2. disputing against the Anabaptists and Libertines who by such an argument went about to reiect the holy Scriptures to wit least the holy Ghost might be made subiect and inferiour vnto them 4. The second argument is that Christians may and ought to iudge and examine all things as the Apostle sayth therefore the spirit of euery Christian ought to be the grouÌ„d of al things I answere that by the same argumeÌ„t the Anabaptists Libertines 1. Cor. v. 15. reiectâ—d all the Scriptures that they might only retaine the spirit as witnesseth Caluin but badly for euen as Christians must discerne and iudge all things so must Calâ—â— c. 9. citat sect 1. they also obserue the rule and methode in iudging which the Scripture doth prescribe vnto them and which himselfe appointed but this rule is not euery ones priuate spirit but the spirit of the whole Church For it is altogeather necessary that the rule of fayth be most certayne free from all errors as the spirit of the whole Church is and not that of euery priuate man Hereupon sayth S. Iohn He 1. Ioan. 4. v. 6. which knoweth God heareth vs he who is not of God doth not heare vs in this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error We must tâ—erfore iudge of euery man by that they eyther heare or do not heare the Church c because they either agree or disagree from the spirit of the Catholike Church 5. The third argument is that Catholikes proue the Church and the authority thereof by the Scripture therfore Scripture is rather the ground of fayth then the Church I answere first that the proofe of the Church which is taken out of Scriptures when we dispute against heretikes is an argument called by Philosophers ad hominem and it is deduced out of the premises already graunted in which manner also the first principles or grounds of euery science may be proued and out of those thinges also which of themselues are not very strong and certayne So out of the old Testament agaynst the Iewes we proue the new Testament albeit this also is the ground of our fayth because the Iewes do admit and receiue the old Testament but not the new yea also euen out of the Iewish Talmud we proue many things against the Iewes because they admit and approue it as the word of God but yet their Talmud is not the ground of our fayth because this only is as I sayd an argument deduced out of such thinges as they graâ—â—t vnto vs. So in like maÌ„â—er because almost al heretikes admit the Scripture and reject the authority of the Church therefore when we dispute against them we proue the authority of the Church by the Scriptures as premisses already graunted by them But if we were to deale with Infidells or others who doe not admit the Scriptures then the sayd Scriptures were to be proued by the authority of the Church and not contrarywise For it is a thing farre better and more commonly knowne that there Infra 18. buius coÌ„ â—r §. 10. is a Church then that there are the holy Scriptures as afterward we will shew more clearly 6. Secondly I answere that there is so great connexion betwixt the Scripture and the Church that the Scripture may very well be proued by the authority of the Church and againe the church by the authority of the Scripture Neyther should this seeme strange to our Aduersaries For Logicians also know very well that that which by it owne nature is more certaine better knowne may be proued by that which is more certaine and beter knowne vnto vs by a demonstration called by them à posteriori And coÌ„trary wise that which is better knowne vnto vs may be proued by that which is better knowne and more certaine in his owne nature by a demonstration called à priori So the cause is proued by the effect the effect by the cause as fyre is proued by heate à posteriori and heate by the nature of fyre à priori So in like manner by the authority of the Church the which in regard of vs is more certayne and better knowne we proue the Scripture as it were à posteriori and by the authority of the Scripture which in it owne nature is more certaine we proue the true Church of Christ as it were à priori 7. The fourth argument S. Paul testifyeth that the Church is supported by the ground and foundation of the Prophets and Apostles that is to say by their Propheticall and Apostolicall doctrine but if the foresaid doctrine be the ground of the Church it necessarily followeth that this doctriue appeareth to
with the word of God in generall the which they should not doe for ther are three sorts of the word of God to wit that which is belieued preached and written The belieued word is in the hart of the Church that which is preached is in her mouth and that which is written is in her bookes Of the belieued and preached Word the Apostle sayth the word is in thy mouth and in thy hart this is the word of fayth which we preach We Rom. 20. v. 8. confesse that in the belieued and preached word the Church is founded because by the same it is ingendred nourished Rom. 10. v. 10. Ibid v. 14. and gouerned and that vnto this word it is subiect and obedient as vnto the Words of her spouse For indeed this kind of word is necessary for the Church For with our hart sayth the Apostle we belieue vnto Iustice but with the mouth confession is made to saluation And againe How shall they heare without a preacher 2. But the nature of the written word is farre different for this is neyther altogeather necessary for the Church seeing that the Church was without it more then two thousand yeares neyther can the written word be profitable to the Church vnlesse it be also rightly preached and belieued For what doth it profit a man to haue the Bible vnlesse he rightly belieue and vnderstand it 3. But the Scripture whereof we now dispute doth only conteyne the written word but the belieued and preached word is conteined in the visible Church as the necessary and essentiall parts therof seing the one is as it were the life in the hart of the Church the other as it were the speach in her mouth neither can they euer be separated from her according to that saying and promise of God The words which I haue put in thy mouth shall not Isa 59. v. vlt. depart from thy mouth nor from the mouth of thy seede nor from the mouth of thy seedes seede from henceforth for euermore 4. Wherefore this argument doth proue the quite coÌ„trary for seeing that the written word receiueth it profit and authority from the rightly belieued and preached word which are the partes of the Church it is necessary that the written word receiue that authority and vtility from the Church as that wherin only the word rightly preached and belieued is to be found 5. The second argument If the Church should teach any thing contrary to the Scriptures we were not to belieue the Church Therefore the Scripture doth not receiue that authority from the Church but rather the Church from the Scripture I answere that in the same maÌ„ner it may be said that if the Scripture should conteine any thing against truth we should not also belieue it if the holy Ghost should vtter and speake any lye we should not belieue him But thâ—se conditions are indeed impossible and blasphemous against God wherefore they are not only to be admitted but not euen to be proposed of Christians For it is impossible that the Church should teach any thing contrary to the Scriptures for then the holy Ghost should lye because he should teach one thing by the Church and the contrary by the Scriptures 6. The third argument if the Scripture receiue that authority from the Church then the Church should be aboue the Scripture which seemeth to be very absurd I answere That the Church is aboue the Scriptures may be vnderstood two wayes First because the Church exceedeth the Scripture in dignity and excellency and in this sense without all doubt the Church is about the Scripture for the Scripture is made for the Church and not contrary wise All things sayth the Apostles 1. Cor. 4. v. 51. are done for you Christ dyed for the Church and not for the Scriptures the Church belieueth hopeth loueth and prayseth God but the Scripture doth none of these The Church shall reigne and liue euerlastingly with Christ in heauen the Scripture shall perish after the day of Iudgement Lastly the Church conteineth in it the word of God rightly belieued preached and the Holy Ghost it selfe all which do farre exceede the written word in excellency and dignity 7. Secondly it may be vnderstood that the Church is aboue the Scripture so as she may change the Scripture or of Scripture make no Scripture or lastly she may teach some what contrary to Scripture or depart from the true sense of Scripture In which sense the Sectaries of this tyme say that we affirme the Church to be aboue the Scripture And thus it is false that the Church is aboue the Scripture but neyther is there any Catholike which in this sense will affirme that the Bellar. l. 3. de verbo Dei c. vlt. in resp ad 14. argum Church is aboue the Scripture as Bellarmine truly affirmeth For if the Church were in this sense aboue the Scripture the Church should erre and be opposite vnto her â—elfe because in that the Church hath once approued the Scripture she cannot any more reiect and disproue it vnlesse she contradict her selfe which is impossible 8. The fourth argument The holy Scripture receiueth her authority immediatly from God himselfe because he is the Author of the Scripture therefore it doth not receiue it authority from the Church I answere there be two kinds of certaynties the one of the thing in it owne Nature the other in respect of vs so also there are two kinds of authorityes the one of the thing considered in it selfe and this hath the Scripture from her principall Author to wit God himselfe the other is in respect of vs and this it hath from the Church as we haue Cap 13. praeced §. 17. 19. proued before out of Caluin and Beza For we know not otherwise that God is the Author of the Scripture with any certainty of fayth but by the testimony of the Church 9. And that which we haue sayd of the Scripture may also be euidently seene in Christ our Lord who is aboue the Scripture For Christ was forced to proue his authority by miracles that it might the better be knowen and allowed of men For otherwise the Iewes had not beene bound to haue admitted his authority Ioan. 15. v. 14. S. Aug. Tom. 9. Tract 91. in Ioan. Hereupon saith Christ speaking vnto his disciples of the Iewes If I had not done among them workes that no other man hath done they should not haue sinned that is to say of Infidelity not belieuing in Christ aâ— S. Augustine very well expoundeth And in another place speaking vnto the Iewes Ioan. 10. v. 17. he sayth If I doe not the workes of my Father belieue me not 10. But if the authority of Christ which was most exellent in it selfe and immediatly from God stood in need of those meanes wherby it might become knowne vnto vs to the end it might oblige vs to belieue it much more the authority of the Scripture will stand in need
in the former edition Calu. in epist ad Reg. Angl. ante coÌ„ment in Isaiam edit illiâ—â— anni 1559. of his Commentaries vpon Isaias which was set forth in French in the yeare 1552. but in his latter latin edition in the yeare 1559. which he will needs haue accounted a new worke being now become more wary he twice omitteth that particle and that not vnaduisedly but of seâ— purpose as is manifest by his former edition 5. The second testimony is also in the same Prophet â—saiâ— in which much more clearly is declared the exceeding great honour which the Kinges and Princes of the earth shall doe vnto the Church for thus God speaketh to the Church of Isa 49. v. 23. Christ Kinges shal be thy nursing Fathers and Queenes shal be thy nursed thy shall adore thee with their faces bowed downe to the earth and liâ—ke vp the dust of thy feete Where not only is expressed that humble adoration by which one prostrateth himselfe before another bowing downe his face euen to the earth but there is further added a new metaphor of imbracing and kissing of seete put in practice by Christian Emperours Kinges and Princes therby to honour the vicar of Christ and in him the Church or rather Christ himselfe for whosoeuer with greedines and feruour hasten to the imbracing and kissing of the feete of any man seeme as it were to licke and thereby to wipe away the dust of his feete for the Hebrew word signifyeth to wipe away in what manner soeuer as may be seene in the booke of Numbers the 22. Chap. and the 4. v. and the 3. of Kings Chap. 18. v. 38. 6. The Prophet Isay then in these wordes foretold that Kings Queenes that is Princes men and women should prostrat theÌ„selues down to the earth at the feet of the Church so as by imbracing and kissing therof they should seem to wipe away the very dust of the Churches feet which prophesy hath byâ— fullfilled of old and as we see is still fullfilled in the Roman Church by the humble and Religious submission expressed by Christian Catholike Princes in the imbracing and kissing of the Bishop of Romes feet the supreme head of the Church on earth which kind of Religious worship seeing it was so many ages agoe foretold by the Prophet our Aduersaries haue smal reason to thinke the same so absurd a thing or so much estranged from Christian piety 7. The third testimony is taken from the same Prophet which no lesse manifestly doth shew vnto vs that such an adoration and kissing of the Churches feete was to be practised as hath byn sayd for amongst many other thinges which he fore telleth appertayning to the Maiesty and powerfull authority of the Kingdome of Christ Isa 60. v. 14. to come he setteth downe this promise made by God to the Church The sonnes of them that humbled and afflicted thâ—â— shall come and bow vnto thee and all they that detracted from thee shall adore thy footsteeps which in the Hebrew is much more cleare where it is thus they shall adore the bendings of thy feete then the which nothing could be sayd more manifestly for the adoration of the Churches feete in her visible head for the beÌ„dings of the feete by the figure Synecdoche signify the feet themselues as may be seene in the third of Iâ—suâ— and the 13. v. For the bendings of the feete in that place are in the 15. v. follownig called feet so the bendings of the hands themselues 1. Reg. 5. v. 4. and 4. Reg. 9. c. v. 35. which wordes of the Prophet conuince Caluâ—n as malbe sayd We see then how the Prophet Isaias not in one place only but in many fortelleth this adoration as a thing very remarkable and which greatly setteth forth the honour and excellency of the Church of Christ 8. The fourth testimony is to be seene in the Apocalyps where S. Iohn testifieth in expresse tearmes that God made such a promise to the Angell that is to the Bishop of the Church of Philadelphia Behold I will make them coâ—e and adore before thy seete and they shall know that I haue loued thee Apocal. â— v. 9. which is all one as if he had said I will make them come and adore thy feere for in the Scripture according to the Hebrew phrase to adore before any thing 1. Reg. 1. v. 19. is to adore the thing so Elcana and Anna his wife are said to haue adored before our Lord when they adored our Lord himselfe so S. Iohn in his Apocalyps writeth that all Nations shall come and adore before God Apoc. 15. v. 4. that is they shall adore God himselfe lastly that which by S. Lukâ— is expressed in these wordes if thou shalt adore before me Luc. 4. v. 7. Matth. 4. v. 9. S. Matthew expresseth thus if falling downe thou shalt adore me It is all one therfore in the Scripture to adore before a thing and to adore the thing Moreouer if God was willing and pleased that men should adore th◠〈◊〉 of the Bishop of Philadelphia much more gratefull and acceptable will it be to him that Christians with a godly affection should prostrate themselues at his feeâ—e who is the supreme Bishop of the whole Church and by kissing of them exhibite vnto him not only a Câ—â—ill but also a Religious adoration adoring him in God and for God which is well Apoc. 3. v. 9. expressed by God himselfe when he saith they shall know that I haue loued thee so as this adoration must be admitted or expresse Scriptures denied 9. Neyther is this any whit differing from the custome of the auncient Church as our Aduersaries obiect but rather very conformable and agreable therunto for it is manifest that kissing of feete was exhibited of old not only to Hier. pist 61 ad Pamach n. â—5 iux edit Mariani Victor Chrys HoÌ„ 14. in 1. epist ad Tim. the Bishop of Rome but also to other holy personages For thus writeth S. Hierome of blessed Epiphanius Men and women of all ages did flock vnto him in great troupes offering their little ones kissing his feete c. And S. Chrysostome vehemently exhorteth the people to prostrate themselues at the feete of all Monkes in signe of honour and reuerence Come saith he and touch thir holy feet for it is much more hâ—â—â—â—â—rable to touch their fâ—â—t then to touch the head of others 10. And that it was an auncient custome in the Roman Church that such as came to salute the supreme Bishop should prostrate themselues and kisse his feete is sufficiently proued by the history of S. Susanna recited by Baronius and Tertullian Baron ToÌ„ 2. an 294. n. vlt. who liued a hundred yeares before Susanna maketh also not obscure mention hereof for describing the manner after which in his tyme penitents were wont to be receaued in the Roman Church amongst other thinges he saith that penitents were wont to fall downe to the
manners some forcible and conuincing arguments may be taken 5. First out of the common consent of all or at the least of the most part without any contradiction at all For if they had all erred in a necessary point of saluation the whole auncient Church should also haue erred the which euen our Aduersaries Cap. 7. huius â—oÌ„t acknowledge to be false as we haue declared before 6. Secondly that promise of Christ Matth. vâ—t v. penuit vit wherby he assured vs that he would be alwayes preseÌ„t with his Church was properly made to the Pastors and Doctors of the same for he promised that he would be present with those whom he sent to baptize and preach to wit the Pastors of the Church 7. Thirdly Pastors and Doctors Ad Ephes 4. v 11. 12. 13. 14. were ordained by God in his Church as the Apostle witnesseth to the end that we be not carried about with euery wind of Doctrine but that we may continue in the vnity of sayth till we meet with Christ in the last day But if all the Pastors and Doctors of the Church could erre we might easily be carried away with many blastes of strange doctrines neyther could the vnity of fayth alwayes continue and in this manner God should haue prouided very badly for his Church that it should neuer erre 8. Finally if all the Pastors and Doctors of the Church should teach any doctrine contrary to fayth there should no sincere and true preaching of the word of God remayne in the Church seeing that only Pastors and Doctors are lawfully called to the preaching of the true fayth of God But without the sincere preaching of the Suprac 8. huius controu §. 15 word of God it is impossible that the Church of Christ should consist as euen our Aduersaries confesse and as we haue declared before 9. Secondly we take arguments out of the auncient holy Fathers as out of most faythfull and true witnesses of that fayth which in their tymes was preached in the Catholike Church For our Aduersaries acknowledge that in their tyme the true and sincere fayth of Christ was preached We therefore alledge them as witnesses of that fayth for if we do not belieue them who lieued at that time whom will we belieue but they were both eye witnesses and nothing suspected of falshood as S. Augustine declareth very well disputing against the Pelagians 10. Thirdly we take arguments out S. Aug. Tom. 7. cont IulianuÌ„ Pelag. l. 2. cap. vlt. of the holy Fathers as out of those Doctors whose writings haue byn receiued and approued by the auncient Church of God For it was wont to impugne and condeÌ„ne those writers who wrote any thing contrary to the true fayth least their writings might be hurtfull to the future Church and on the other side it approued their writings who taught the true fayth There is yet extant a Decree of the Vide Tâ— 2. Concil inter Decreta S. Gelasij Papae Roman Councell set forth almost a thousand two hundred yeares agoe concerning these writings They therfore who haue beene approued by the auncient Church are most worthily to be belieued because the primitiue Church as our Aduersaries confesse hath neuer erred in iudgement concerning matters of fayth 11. Eourthly we take arguments out of the holy Fathers as out of the most holy and learned men and Blessed Saints of God For eyther they had the sincere true fayth and if it be so we should imbrace the same or they had it not and if it be so they were not Saynts of God nor could they be acceptable vnto him as the Apostle testifyeth 12. By this very argument the Catholiks Socrat. l. 5. c. 10. Soâ—oÌ„ l 8. c. 12. historiae Eccles in tymes past ouercame the Arians for they vrged them to receiue the holy Fathers who wrote before Arius his tyme or they should excommunicate them as Socrates and Sozomenus do testify 13. And to this purpose serue very fitly those words of S. Augustine wherein S. Aug. Tom 7. contra Iuli â—â—â— Peâ—agianuÌ„ l. 2. c. vlt. he declareth what was the iudgment of the primitiue Church concerning this matter For thus speaketh S. Augustine to the heretiks of his time whiles he vrgeth them with the testimony and authority of the auncient Fathers who were before him They had saith he no regard eyther to our friendship or to yours neyther were they enemies to either of vs they are neyther angry with you nor with vs they were not moued with pitty and compassion on eyther side what they found in the Church that they hâ—ld what they had learned that they taught they deliuered to their Children that which they had receiued from their owne Fathers VVe pleaded in our cause against you before these iudges and yet by them our cause was ended long since neyther we nor you were so much knowne to them and yet we bring sorth their sentences giuen in our fauour against you VVe had not as yet begunne any combat with you and yet so long agoe they proclaymed our victory So farre S. Augustine 14. Finally Vincentius Lyrinensis a French man who liued at the same tyme with S. Augustine proueth the same very well by many reasons and examples throughout all that most learned booke the which he wrote against the prophane Nouelties of all heresies And we will conclude and end this Chapter of the authority of Vide prâ—sertim c. 4 40. eiusdeÌ„ libelli holy Fathers and this our whole disputation of the Church of God with the same words wherewith he ended that his golden booke For thus he writeth in the end of it If neyther the Apostolicall definitions nor ecclesiasticall decrees be to be violated wherby according to the most holy and vniforme consent of all antiquity all heretikes and lastly Pelagius Celestius and Nestorius for these were the last Heretiks that liued in Vincentius his tyme haue bin alwayes most iustly condemned it is necessary in truth that all those Catholikes who will heereafter proue and shew themselues to be the true and lawfull children of our holy mother the Catholike Church should adhere and vnite themselues stedfastely as also dy in the profession of that sacred saith of those holy Fathers lastly that they should abhorre detest banish and persecute all the prophane nouelties of all most wicked Heretikes Hither to S. Vincentius The end of the second Controuersy THE faults escaped in printing it may please the gentle Reader to correct them of his courtesy FINIS
written poynts of fayth it is manifest that no◠other Iudge but the Catholike Church hath ended or defined all these controuersyes 29. But in this iudgement of the Church there are two thinges to be considered the one that the Church doth not iudge of any part of the word of God out of her owne proper sense and iudgment or at her owne pleasure without the word of God as her Aduersaries and namely Caluin do wrongfully slaunder her but by one part of the word of God which is better knowen she iudgeth of that which is lesse knowen and manifest vnto vs as for example by the word of God deliuered by Traditions she iudgeth of the written word of God and of the true sense therof 30. The other thing to be considered is that when the Church doth iudge of these things they are not men only Act. 15. v. 28. which iudge as our Aduersaries pretend but the holy Ghost also himselfe who iudgeth and speaketh vnto vs by the Church It seemed good say the Apostles to the holy Ghost and vs. For euen as the actions of a mans body are not so properly the actions of the body as of the soule which quickneth and moueth the body so the actions of the whole Catholike Church are not so much to be attributed vnto men who are as it were the body of the visible Church as vnto the holy Ghost who is as it were the soule which giueth life and motion to the body of the Church They therfore who deny this iudgment of the Church are not only iniurious to the Church but also to the holy Ghost Hitherto of the properties offices and power of the true Church of Christ It Calu. in Antid cōtra 4. sess Concil Trid. in fine remayneth now we shew such a Church as the Scripture declareth and describeth vnto vs the which Caluin as we haue sayd before earnestly desired of vs. FINIS OF THE MARKES OF THE TRVE CHVRCH The third Part of the second Controuersy CHAP. I. Of the false and true Signes or Markes of the Church in generall HAVING in the precedent Controuersyes declared that Christ and all that good is can only be found in the true Church and that out of it there is nothing but euerlasting damnation now it remayneth that we inquire which is that true Church where it may be found and how it is described and set forth in holy Scripture for all the sectes of heresies go about to challenge her vnto themselues yea euen those who otherwise haue a very bad conceyt and opinion of her For they see very well that out of her they can expect or hope for no saluation But to the end we may not erre in matter of so great moment we will seeke out the true Markes and Signes whereby the true Church may be certainly knowne and discerned from euery false and counterfait Church 2. Our Aduersaries doe commonly Calu. l. 4. Inst c. 7. sect 9. 10. Bez. in sua confess c. 5. Art 7. Centuriatores 1. Centur. l. 1. c. 4. l. 2. cap. 4. set downe two signes or markes of the true Church to wit the sincere preaching of the word of God and the lawfull administration of the Sacraments Bez◠addeth a third signe to wit the Ecclesiasticall discipline practised agreable to the word of God The Lutherans annexed vnto these a fourth signe to wit an Obedience towards ministers Of this fourth signe we will speake a little after for it is reduced to the vnity of the Church But the three signes set downe by the Caluinists are altogeather foolish and friuolous the which we proue thus 3. First by the very nature of a signe For euery signe of it owne nature S. Aug. Tom. ◠l. 2. de doct Christ cap 1. 3. Calu. l. 4. Inst cap. 17. sect 11. is a sensilbe thing as all teach following therein S. Augustine and our Aduersaries confesse this to be true when they treate of the Sacraments Yea Caluin writeth that this was alwaies as it were a matter of faith in the Church And so do all teach now who are of vnderstanding Truly none will say that which is only belieued in the Sacrament is a signe but that which is seene But these signes of the Church prescribed by our Aduersaries can neyther be seen nor perceyued by any sense Yea not euen by our vnderstanding vnlesse it be illuminated by fayth For by faith only are they preceyued because none can know which is the sincere preaching lawfull administration of the Sacraments or Ecclesiasticall discipline prescribed by Christ but by faith wherefore they who say that these are the signes and markes of the Church do not indeed know what they say euen as if one should affirme that in the Sacrament of baptisme the ablution and the wordes are not signes but the effect of baptisme which is not seene which euery man seeth how absurd it is 4. The second reason Euery signe of any thing must be more manifest and better knowne then the thing it selfe whose signe it is because it is put for that end that it may be a signe or token wherby that other thing may be known but these signes of the Church alleadged by our Aduersaries are more obscure and vncertaine then the Church it self For the Church is at the least oftentymes visible as they thēselues confesse but these their signes be neuer visible but alwaies inuisible for they can only be knowne by faith as we haue already declared but that which is by faith declared is necessarily obscure because faith as witnesseth the Heb. 11. v. 1. Apostle is the argument of things not appearing hence it is that all sectes do bragge and boast that they haue these signes because indeed they cānot be clearly seene of any 5. The third reason Our Aduersaries do alledge in vayne these signes for therfore do we enquire for signes and Markes of the Church that they which are ignorant of her may therby come to know her for they who already know any thing do not need any signes as for example he who already knoweth very well this Citty needeth no marke or signe therof wherby he may know it But he stādeth in need of signes who neuer saw this Citty So in like manner they who are out of the Church and know her not do most of all need some signes and markes wherby to know her but these which our Aduersaries assigne can be knowne by none but by those who are already within the Church and know her very well hauing the true faith and beliefe therof but they cannot be vnderstood by those who know not the true Church to the end they may seeke and fynd her because they are only perceyued and knowne by faith they are therfore alleadged in vaine by our Aduersaries 6. But neyther can these signes be knowne of all those who are in the Church but only of the more learned in the Church For euery one of the common