that in time of persecution many true Christians may be without opportunitie of meeting together for the true worship of God in hearing his word and calling vpon his name which alwaies accompanieth true preaching and yet still continue true members of Christs mysticall bodie the Church But we say that these men cannot be truly called such a visible Church of Christ as we now seeke for Yet if these men shall ordinarily assemble themselues together to offer vp praier to God and by mutuall conference to edifie each other in knowledge and obedience thogh they haue no certaine minister appointed for the performance of these duties there can no reason be alledgd why they should not be held for a true Church though not perfect complete or why men should not ioine with them hauing no means to become members of any complete congregation properly being a Church The word then in our opinion is simply necessarie and of it selfe sufficient as Luther truly saith where no other signe of a Church can be discerned to conuince a mans conscience that there is a true Church where he findeth the word truly preached Now the administration of the Sacraments is not so necessarie but that there may be a true Church without it vpon occasion as the Iewes had no circumcision amongst them all the fortie yeares when they trauelled through the wildernesse The reason of this difference is assigned to be this that the word is as it were the cause efficient of the Church so that without it there can be no Church but the Sacraments are only seals of Gods mercies and helps for the increasing of those graces which are receiued by the ministerie of the word Now these seales and helpes are not requisite simply to the being of that they seale helpe vs in but onely to the better being and increase of them But if I may be bold with reuerence of other mens iudgement to speake my poore opinion I think this reason sheweth the different necessitie of the word and the Sacraments rather to the making of particular men true Christians thē to the giuing of this or that companie the true being of a visible Church And therefore vnder correction I would rather say that the truth of doctrine deliuered in the ministery of the word and praier are absolutely necessary the administration of the Sacraments not so altogether because the former are such parts of Gods seruice as may and must alwaies be performed when the Church is assembled but the Sacraments neither can alwaies nor need at all such meetings to be administred Which we speake not as if the true vse of the Sacraments were not a necessarie part of Gods seruice to be done vpon all opportunities with reuerence and willingnesse but for that as before I noted there cannot be at all times such opportunitie Yea it may fall out that in some true Church of Christ there shall be no occasion to administer the Sacrament of Baptisme in many yeares This then is that which we hold concerning the markes of a true Church First that wheresoeuer we see the word of God truly taught and the Sacraments truly administred there we may be sure there is a true Church of Christ Secondly that wheresoeuer the former of these is wanting there is no true Church whatsoeuer shew or marke otherwise there be Thirdly that wheresoeuer the word of God is truly preached and accordingly professed there is a true Church though the Sacraments vpon occasion as is aforesaid be not there administred so that they be not neglected vpon any contempt or erroneous conceit of their not being necessarie To disprooue our doctrine concerning the markes of the or rather of a Church you bring this reason If true doctrine be a marke of a true Church then either true doctrine in some pointes or true doctrine in all But neither true doctrine in some points nor true doctrine in all is a marke Therefore true Doctrine is not at all a marke of a true Church I denie you Minor True doctrine in all points is so certaine a marke of a true Church that wheresoeuer we finde that we may be sure there is a true Church But because we enquire after such a marke as may not onely assure vs which is a true Church but also teach vs to know euerie true Church I answer more particularly that true doctrine in some pointes viz. such as are fundamentall is so necessarie a marke as that there is no where any true Church but where there is such true doctrine and that there is vndoubtedly a true Church wheresoeuer that truth is taught and held Your Minor you prooue thus first that true doctrine in some points is no good marke That which is not proper to the true Church but agrees rather to heretickes is no good marke of the true Church But true doctrine in some points onely is not proper to the true Church but agreeth rather to heretickes Therefore true doctrine in some points onely is no good marke of the true Church Againe I denie your minor taking it in the best sense for if I should take it in the worst your whole syllogisme would be nothing to the purpose My answer shall I trust make both these points plaine to euery man I say then that true doctrine in all the fundamentall points of religion is proper to the Church so that no hereticks hold all such points though some haue held many of them Or if any companie do hold them all and yet for some error in other points of lesse moment be counted and be hereticall their heresie is not such as may make them cease to be members of a true Church Thus much of your assumption in the best sense By true doctrine in some points onely you may meane that it is not a propertie belonging to the true Church to beleeue truly some points onely and not all and this indeed is rather proper to heretickes then the true Church because it is the dutie of all true Churches to beleeue all things that the Lord hath taught in the holy Scriptures whereas hereticks take vp conceits of their owne which they mingle with the truth of God either ignorantly or deceitfully I haue reason to suspect this meaning because you thrust in this word onely In this sense your conclusion fighteth with a shadow For we do not make it a marke of a true Church to beleeue some points onely but say it may be and is a true Church though it erre in some points so it hold the fundamentall points soundly and truly This is the proofe of the second part of your minor that true doctrine in all points is not a good marke of the true Church and it is thus concluded Euery good marke of the true Church is apparent or easie to be knowne of all those who should seeke out the true Church But true doctrine in all points is not apparent or easie to be known of
the Church is of infallible and vndoubted truth and that the way not to be deceiued in an obscure question is to aske and follow the iudgement of the Church Wherefore worthily also do we all say Credo Ecclesiam Catholicam I beleeue the Catholicke Church and worthily also may I conclude that neither Scripture alone nor naturall wit and learning nor priuate spirit nor any other thing but onely the teaching of the true Church of Christ is that ordinarie meanes which Almightie God hath prouided whereby all men may learne that one infallible entire faith which I proued to be necessarie to saluation A. W. Saint Paul doth worthily call the Church the pillar and ground of truth but not as you would haue vs beleeue because it is the rule of faith The Greeke Scholiast taketh that speech of the Apostle to be vttered by way of comparison betwixt the Church of Christ and the Iewish Temple Not as the Iewish Temple saith Oecumenius but the pillar and ground of truth for the Temple was the ground of the shadowes of the truth Out of which we may gather that as the Iewish synagogue was the pillar and ground of those shadowes of the truth so is the Church of Christ the pillar and ground of the truth it selfe But that synagogue was not the rule of faith in that point because whatsoeuer it taught was to be held for infallible truth but for that to it were committed the oracles of God and the knowledge and vse of those ceremonies so hath the Church of Christ the truth of doctrine in the scripture and the exercises of Gods worship and religion Therfore is it called the pillar and ground of it because it constantly maintaineth that truth preaching and professing it in despight of all the practises and power of Satan and tyrants of the world As the thighs saith an ancient writer sustaine and beare vp the weight of the whole bodie so also the Apostles like pilars valiantly carry the vniuersall Church of Christians ouer the whole world being for the value of their inuincible courage and stedfastnesse of their holy purpose called marble pillars And a litle after They preached the Gospell with such wisedome and constancie that as if they had bene of marble or adamant they were afraid of no violence nor aduersitie but always continuing firme and inuincible against all the forces of men and diuels shining as it were in the darke by that light of their wisedome by preaching admonishing teaching and glistering with miracles at the last they most happily became conquerors To this effect speake your Glosses The ground of the truth of the Gospell which the Church constantly maintained euen in the greatest persecutions Well vpholding the truth in it self saith another Glosse That it may not fall to the ground though it be afflicted saith Lombard But let vs bring your reason into due frame The pillar and ground of truth is the rule of faith The Church is the pillar and ground of truth Therefore the Church is the rule of faith Your proposition or maior is false vnlesse you restraine it as I haue often said to the truth and then it is so far the rule of faith as it is the pillar and ground of truth Whatsoeuer it holdeth truly according to the scripture is the rule of faith for those points not because of the Churches authoritie but for the truth of the doctrine Yet may it easily come to passe that a Church maintaining the generall truth of the Gospell and all particulars necessary to soluation may faile in many other points of great importance and for all that continue both a true Church and the pillar and ground of truth though not the rule of faith Your minor also as you vnderstand it is vntrue First because the Apostle speaketh not of any such companie as you imagine Pope Bishop Councell but either of the Church of Ephesus in which Timothie to whom he writeth then abode or indefinitely of any and euery Church whatsoeuer where the true Religion of our Sauiour is or shall be professed according to the Gospell If Timothie were as you will not denie Bishop of Ephesus then it is apparent that the Apostle calleth the Church of Ephesus wherein Timothy liued taught and gouerned the pillar and ground of truth yet was it not the rule of faith for then had the rule of faith perished long since with that Church of Ephesus If he speake to him as to an Euangelist who was to follow him from place to place and to establish the Churches which the Apostle had planted then must euery one of those Churches wherein Timothy was to behaue himselfe as he had done in Ephesus be vnderstood to be the pillar and ground of truth and yet neither any nor all of them were the rule of faith which else must haue bene lost with them What remaines then Shall we expound it of all beleeuers in generall I grant it reacheth to all the faithfull but as to them considered in their seuerall Churches because among them so disposed of was Timothy to performe that dutie which the Apostle there enioyneth him But let vs so conceiue of the Church What shall it auaile you or endamage vs All beleeuers are not the companie you pleade for but onely the Pope and your Bishops whom you would haue taken for the rule of faith Secondly I denie your minor in respect of the sense you giue of those words the pillar and ground of truth For you so vnderstand them as if the truth of God depended vpon the verdict of the Church so that nothing may be held for truth but what the Church deliuereth for such and whatsoeuer she so propoundeth must so be receiued vpon paine of certaine damnation How contrary are you in this interpretation and doctrine to the auncient fathers The Apostles saith Irenaeus left vs the Scriptures to be the pillar and ground of our faith Nay say you they left vs the Church to be the pillar and ground of the Scriptures The Gospell and spirit of life saith the same father in the same booke is the pillar and ground of the Church Nay by your leaue reply you the Church is the pillar and ground of the Gospell But Chrysostome handling this place of the Apostle is not afraid to affirme that the truth is the pillar and ground of the Church not as if he would denie that which the Apostle saith for the Church indeed is the vpholder of the truth but to shew that although the Church maintaine and auow the truth yet it is built and founded vpon the truth which as Ierome saith vpholds the building Therfore to make short whē the Apostle saith that the Church is the pillar and ground of truth his meaning is that amongst Christians and among no other sort of men the truth is to be found and amongst and by them it is constantly and worthily
see to haue a corrupted roote and could not perceiue it to haue any liuing branches we should haue cause to affirme absolutely that it were dead and not aliue A. W. He that doth not finde that you are a shamelesse slaunderer lookes verie sleightly into your report of the Protestants congregation You finde it is not holy No doubt you are a man of great intelligence and haue made diligent inquirie after the matter But it well becommeth the Pharisaicall pride of your Romish Synagogue to boast of your owne righteousnesse and in comparison of your selues to despise all men Let vs see what euidence you bring to prooue so greeuous an accusation Most of our men you say are euidently more wicked then men which liued both in old time and in later yeares in the Romane Church How euident you make this we will consider by and by For the present I say no more but that you speake craftily to deceiue vs in comparing most of our men with I know not what men that haue liued in the Roman Church There is no question but that generally the most are the worst euerie where because all men are naturally euill and none good but by the especiall grace of God working in them But if you would haue dealt plainely you should haue shewed that most men in our Churches are more wicked then most men that haue liued in your Romish Church since it became the bodie of Antichrist reuealed For we acknowledge that the Church of Rome was somtimes a true Church of Christ yeelding many worthie martyrs confessors and other holy men and women to the honour of the Gospell of Iesus Christ yea we denie not but that euen at this day there are some true Christians in your Churches and that the generall sort of Protestants are inferiour to some amongest you in regard of outward holinesse as for true inward sanctitie neither the one nor the other haue any part of it I meane neither ordinarie Protestants nor the best of your side who continue in the whole doctrine of your Church To prooue that you say against our Church you bring vs in two kinde of witnesses first generally those men that haue seene the conuersation of your Papists and our Protestants then particularly Luther Smidelin In the former consider how vaine a florish it was for you to compare our men now with Papists that liued in old time and to appeale for proofe to them that haue seene both as if you were able to shew vs some men of 700 or 800. yeares old or of 300. or 400 who haue knowne and considered the behauiour of your men and ours As for them that by trafficke or trauaile otherwise haue had sight and experience of both I dare stand to their iudgement in comparing our liues with yours for all parts of outward cariage In which matter I haue bene credibly informed by them whose credit I haue no cause to suspect that the abhomination of your Clergies and peoples liues hath partly bred setled in them a resolute abhorring of your religion to which otherwise they were indifferently affected But you presse vs with Luther and Smidelin who in their earnest exhortations and reproofes accuse our men for increase of sinne after the preaching of the Gospell Is this strange Doth not the holye Apostle tell vs that the Gospell in his time was abused to wantonnesse prophane men which yet made profession of religion taking aduantage of Gods gracious mercie preached in the Gospell to prouoke themselues to sinne Besides the greatest part at the renewing of the Gospell claue vnto Luther rather in a detestation of your religion the falsenesse whereof was most euident to them then in a certaine knowledge of the truth of that which he taught them But of whom spake Luther and Smidelin Of all Protestant Churches How can that be when they knew not the one halfe of them Is it a good reason then to condemne all Protestant Churches or the Protestants Church in generall because Luther and Smidelin complaine against the congregations in which they taught And yet what say they more then the Apostle Paule doth who chargeth the Corinthians with many grosse errors grieuous sinnes yea with such fornication as was not to be heard of among the Gentiles What say you to that sore accusation euen against the ministers of the Gospell All seeke their owne and not that which is Iesus Christs A man of your humour and wisedome would by and by conclude hereupon that the Church of God in the Apostles time was an vnholy congregation If you Iesuits Priests what you are in particular I neither know nor care bestowed as much paines in preaching as you do in plotting treason and hearing consessions such speeches would not seeme any thing strange vnto you But that you may the better perceiue the weakenesse of this your reason hearken a little what is said of your Church What one can you name me saith Bernard among all those that are spirituall rulers that doth not take greater care how he may emptie the peoples purses then how he may roote out their sinnes You say the most of our men are wicked Bernard to quit you for it pronounceth that there is not one of your Cleargie that maketh any conscience of discharging his duetie Haue you forgotten what a Bishop of yours said in the late Councell of Trent least any should thinke that you are better now then you were in Bernardes time The people saith the Bishop are fallen away from Christ to Antichrist from God to Epicurisme and the Priestes haue bene their ringleaders to all kinde of lewdnesse Yea Pope Adrian the sixt I am sure you will beleeue him speaking of your Prelates saith that All of them he putteth in himselfe too were declined cuerie one to his owne waies And that there had bene none of them a great while that had done any good no not one of them If such were and be the state of your Cleargie gesse you what the common people be Compare your witnesses and mine and tell me whether we ouermatch you or no both in number and weight Neuer any Saint of our Church Why do you not refute that which we alledge for our selues against this slander We pleade that Adam Abel Enoch Abraham and all the holy men named in the Scriptures with the Martyrs and confessors since our Sauiour Christs comming in the flesh that all the Apostles except Iudas whom we leaue to your Simoniacall congregation yea that many Bishops of Rome were of our Church To al this you reply not so much as one word but tell them that will beleeue you that there neuer was any Saint or holy man of our Church I cannot greatly blame you though you bind your followers to giue credit to you without looking for proofe of that you deliuer For if you should be put to that all were marred But I wil render you a
the whole volume of the Bible which to say were no lesse thē blasphemy But I am afraid the scriptures that Paul there speaks of which were the books of the old Testamēt are rather vnprofitable thē profitable to that purpose For they often amplify magnify the word of God written in so plaine termes that eueuery man may vnderstand them as for the authority you fancy to your selfe they speake either nothing or little and that very obscurely thereof But we shall see in the rest of your Treatise what proofe you can finde of this authoritie in Moses and the Prophets and the writers of the olde Testament Now at the last you remember your selfe againe and returne to your old shift of Scripture alone Which you deuised of your owne head that you might haue somewhat to confute It is not all one say you to be profitable and to be of it selfe alone sufficient And you tel vs This is certaine Who euer denied it Or who but he that wanted matter to replie against would cast such doubts Especially who would haue wasted time and paper to prooue or declare a thing so certaine and cleare by a needlesse comparison The scripture without any doctrines of men call them what you will imagine what assistance of the spirit you list is sufficient to teach all men the true certaine way to saluation This is that we affirme not as you ridiculously slander vs that there needs no ministerie of man for the instructing of any one in the vnderstanding of any place of scripture or knowledge of any point of religion These are your owne fancies or mōsters rather with which like bugbeares you scare your poore seduced followers and bleare the eies of the ignorant that they may not enquire what we teach indeed but hate our doctrine before they any way vnderstand it But they that haue any care of their owne saluation will not suffer themselues to be led by you hoodwinkt to destruction if any man will needs be wilfully ignorant the Lord shall require his blood at his owne hands we haue done our duetie in teaching and proouing the truth A. D. CHAP. VIII That no naturall wit or learning can be the rule of faith A. W. If you had bestowed that paines and time in confirming your proposition which you waste needlesly in proouing that which no man denieth you might perhaps haue spoken somewhat more to the purpose but it is lost labour to go about the refutatiō of that which besides your selfe no body euer thought on That naturall wit or learning should be the rule of faith is a conceit amongst Christians neuer heard of yet this haue you propounded for to exercise your strength vpon A. D. §. 1. The second conclusion is that no one mans naturall wit and learning neither any company of men neuer so learned onely as they are learned men not infallibly assisted by the holy Spirit of God can either by interpreting Scripture or otherwise be this rule of faith A. W. Here you set out the former proposition more at large in respect of the Antecedent or first part of it Neither any one mans naturall wit nor many mens ioyned together whatsoeuer their learning be or what course soeuer they take as naturall men can be the rule of faith either for any doctrine they shal deliuer or for any interpretation they shall make of Scripture But what needeth all this adoe you do but fight with your owne shadow yet let vs se how you haue bestirred your selfe A. D. §. 2. This I prooue Because all this wit and learning be it neuer so exquisite or rare is humane naturall and fallible and therefore it cannot be a sufficient foundation whereupon to build a diuine supernaturall and infallible faith This reason I confirme Because whatsoeuer a man neuer so wittie and learned propoundeth to others to be beleeued vpon the onely credit of his word wit or humane studie and learning it can haue no more certaintie then is this his word wit and learning But these being all naturall and humane are subiect to errour and deceit For Omnis homo mendax there is no man but he may both deceiue and be deceiued and may if he haue no other helpe but of nature and industrie both be deceiued in thinking that to be Gods word which is not or that to be the true meaning and sense of Gods word which is not and may also deceiue others whilest being too confident of his wit and learning he presumeth to teach others these his erroneous opinions Therefore the beleefe which shall be built vpon such a mans word and teaching is or may be a false beleefe and alwaies is vncertaine and fallible and therefore can neuer be a true Diuine and Christian faith which alwaies is most certaine and infallible And this which I haue said of the wit and learning of one particular man may also be applied to prooue against the wit and learning of any companie of men hauing no assistance but their owne naturall gifts and industrie of studie or reading A. W. No humane naturall and fallible thing can be the rule of faith Naturall wit and learning though neuer so exquisite are humane naturall and fallible Therefore no humane wit nor learning can be the rule of faith I grant this reason and conclusion to be sound and true onely in the confirmation of it I finde some occasion to note one thing for the better vnderstanding of the matter we haue in hand If any man would speake for naturall wit and learning in this question he would not say as the matter is here propounded that any mans wit or learning were the rule of faith but that the wit and learning of man might finde out somewhat at least in the Scripture whereupon faith might safely be grounded For example as I said once before though it be not written any where in the Scripture that there are three persons distinct each from other and all these three but one God yet may a man by naturall wit and learning gather this out of the Scripture and confirme it thence so plainely and certainly that any Christian may holde those points as Articles of faith Not that they are to be taken for such vpon the onely credit of his word which is a second thing wherein you mistake the matter but because though euerie man be a lier yet a man may see and shew a truth which cannot nor may be suspected of falshood or errour And a beleefe builded vpon Doctrine so taught shall be free from possibilitie of erring and as you speake infallible This I thought good to obserue by occasion of your confirmation where you suppose that a man deliuereth matters to be beleeued vpon the bare credit of his word by reason of his wit and learning In this sense it is out of all question that no naturall wit or learning of any many or all the men in the world can be the rule of faith but