the minde of the learned as in the auncient Fathers writings and therefore haue more credit than the Fathers writings Secondly they are commonly recorded of more than one of the Fathers and so haue firmer testimonie than any one of their writings Thirdly if there should be any Apostolical Tradition related but of one auncient Father yet it should be of more credit than any other thing of his owne inuention because that was registred by him as a thing of more estimation And againe some of the rest of those blessed and godly personages would haue reprooued it as they did all other false-hoods if it had not bene such indeed as it was tearmed Which when they did not they gaue a secrete approbation of it for such and so that hath the interpretatiue consent at least of the learned of that age and the following for Apostolicall Tradition But M. P. prooues the contrarie by S. PAVL who sayeth * Act. 26.22 That I continue to this daye witnessing both to small and great saying no other thing then that which the Prophets and MOSES did say should come Why make you here a full poynt let S. PAVL make an ende of his speech and tell vs for what poynts of doctrine hee alleageth MOSES and the Prophets Marrie to prooue that CHRIST should suffer death and rise againe and that hee should giue light to the Gentils For these and such like which were euidently fore-tolde in holy writ hee needed not to alleage any other proofe but when hee was to perswade them to abandon MOSES Lawe he then deliuered to them the decrees of the Apostles and taught them to keepe them * Act. 16. As also when hee instructed the Corinthians in the Sacrament of the Altar he beginneth with Tradition saying * 1. Cor. 12 I deliuer vnto you as I haue receiued from our Lord not in writing but by word of mouth And in the same Chapter putteth downe the contentious scripturist with the custome of the Church saying If any man lust to striue we haue no such custome so that out of S. PAVL wee learne to alleadge Scriptures when they be plaine for vs and when they beare not so cleare with vs to pleade Tradition and the custome of the Church Hitherto I haue confuted what M. P. brought against Traditions Nowe to that which he saith for them in our behalfe First saith he the Catholikes alleage * 2 Thes 2.15 Where the Apostle bids the Church to keepe the Ordinances which he taught them either by word of mouth or by Epistle Hence they gather that besides the written worde there bee vnwritten Traditions that are necessarie to be kept and obeyed M. Perkens ANSWERE It is likely that this Epistle to the Thessalonians was the first that euer PAVL wrote to anie Church and then some-things needefull to saluation might de deliuered by word of mouth but that was afterwardes written in some others of his Epistles REPLIE OBserue first that insteede of Traditions according to the Greeke and Latine word they translate * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ordinances euer flying the word Tradition where any thing is spoken in commendation of them But if any thing sound against them then thrust they in the word Tradition although the Greeke word beare it not See for this their corruption and many other a learned Treatise named The Discouerie of false translations penned by Maister GREGORIE MARTIN a man most singulerly conuersant in the Greeke and Hebrue tongues Secondlie is it not plaine dotage to auouch that this seconde Epistle to the Thessalonians was the first that euer hee wrote Surely if none of his other were written before it yet his firste to the same Church muste needes haue bene written before it But let vs giue the man leaue to dreame some-times To the poynt of the answere that all was written after in some other of his Epistles which before had bene deliuered by word of mouth How prooueth M. P. that the man hath such confidence in his owne worde that hee goeth not once about to prooue it Good Sir hold you not here that nothing is needefull to be beleeued which is not written in the word Shew vs then where it is written in the word that Saint PAVL wrote in his later Epistles that which he taught by word of mouth before or else by your owne rule it is not needefull to beleeue it But yet for a more full satisfaction of the indifferent reader I will set downe the opinions of some of the auncientest and best Interpreters of this place of the Apostle that we may see whether they thought that S. PAVL committed all to writing and left nothing by Tradition S. CHRYSOSTOME in his most learned and eloquent Comentaries vpon this text concludeth thus Hereupon it is manifest that the Apostles deliuered not all in their Epistles but many things also vnwritten and those things are aswell to be beleeued as the written OECVMENIVS and THEOPHILACTVS vpon that place teache the same S. BASIL * De spu cap. 27. speaketh thus I hold it Apostolicall to perseuer in Traditions not written for the Apostle sayeth I commend you that ye are mindfull of my precepts and do hold the Traditions euen as I deliuered them vnto you and then alleageth this text Hold the Traditions which you haue receiued of mee either by Word or Epistle S. IOHN DAMASCEN accordeth with the former saying * Lib. 4. De fide cap. 17 That the Apostles deliuered many things without writing S. PAVL doth testifie when he writeth Therefore brethren stand and hold the Traditions which haue bene taught you either by word of mouth or by Epistle These holy and judicious expositors of S. PAVL free from all partialitie gather out of this text of his that many things necessarie to be beleeued euen vntil their daies remained vnwritten and were religiouslie obserued by Tradition which throweth flat to the ground M. P. his false supposition fenced with neither reason nor authotie that S. PAVL put in writing afterward all that he had first taught by word of mouth Moreouer S. PAVL immediatly before his death in one of the last of his Epistles commandeth his deare disciple TIMOTHY * 2. Tim. 2. To commend vnto the faithfull that which he heard of him by many witnesses not that only which he should finde written in some of his Epistles or in the written Gospell The second Argument for Traditions is this to beleeue that there be so many bookes of holy Scripture and no more and that those be they which are commonly taken so to be is very necessarie to saluation now this is not to be found written in any place of holy Scripture but is receiued onely by Tradition wherefore it is necessarie to saluation to beleeue some Tradition M. P. answereth that the bookes of the Old and New Testament be Scripture is not beleeued on bare Tradition but by the bookes themselues on this maner Let the man who
hath then neede of much confession bitter teares a sharpe combat of watching Idem Am. ad virg lap cap. 8. Orat. in sanct lum and vncessant and continued fasting if the offence were light and more tollerahle yet let the penance be equall vnto it S. Gregory Nazianzen saith It is as great an euill to pardon without some punishment as to punish without all pittie For as that doth loose the bridle to all licentiousnes so this doth straine it too much Idem de paup amor By compassion on the poore and faith sinnes are purged therefore let vs be cleansed by this compassion let vs scoure out the spottes and filth of our soules with this egregious herbe that makes it white some as woole others as snowe according to the proportion of euery mans compassion and almes De helia â—â—eiun S. Ambrose saith We haue many helpes whereby we may redeeme our sinnes hast thou mony Redeeme thy sinne not that our Lord is to be bought and solde but thou thyselfe art solde by thy sinnes redeeme thy selfe with thy workes redeeme thee with thy mony Epist 82. And How could we be saued vnlesse we washed away our sinnes by fasting S. Hierome maketh Paula a blessed Matron say My face is to be disfigured which against the commandement of God I painted my body is to be afflicted that hath taken so great pleasure my often laughter is to be recompenced with continuall weeping Ad Eusioch de obitu Paule my silkes and soft cloathing is to be chaunged into rough haire Reade another Epistle of his to the same Eustochium about the preseruing of her virginity and see what penance himselfe did being a most vertuous young man Epist 54. S. Augustine saith He that is trulie penitent lookes to nothing else then that he leaues not vnpunished the sinne which he committed For by that meanes not sparing our selues he whose high and iust iudgement no contemptuous person can escape doth spare vs. Li 50. hom Hom. 50. cap. 11. Cap. 15. And he sheweth how that a penitent sinner doth come to the Priest and receiue of him the measure of his satisfaction And saith directly against our Protestants position That it is not sufficient to amend our manners and to depart from the euill which we haue committed vnlesse we doe also satisfie God for those thinges which we had donne Lib. 6. in 1. Reg. S. Gregory saith That sinnes are not only to be confessed but to be blotted out with the austerity of penance I will close vp these testimonies with this sentence of our learned countriman venerable Bede In Psal 1. Delight saith he or desire to sinne when we doe satisfaction is lightly purged by almesdeedes and such like but consent is not rubbed out without great penance now custome of sinning is not taken away but by a iust and heauie satisfaction And if you please in fewe wordes to heare the Protestants workes of penance and satisfaction In steede of our fasting and other corporall correction they fall to eating and that of the best flesh they can get and take in the Lord all such bodely pleasure as the company of a woman will afforde In lieu of giuing almes vnto the poore they pill them by fines and vnreasonable rents and by vsury and crafty bargaines are not ashamed to cousen their nearest kinne Finally in place of prayer and washing away their owne sinnes by many bitter teares they sing meerely a Geneua Psalme and raile or heare a rayling at our imagined sinnes or pretended errours And so leaue and lay all payne and sorrowe vpon Christs shoulders thinking themselues belike to be borne to pleasure and pastime and to make merry in this worlde FIRST OF TRADITIONS M. PARK pag. 134. Traditions are doctrines deliuered from hand to hand either by worde of mouth or writing besides the written word of God OVR CONSENT WE Hold that the very word of God was deliuered by Tradition from ADAM to MOSES who was the first Pen-man of holy Scripture Item that the Historie of the New Testament as some for eight not eightie or as other thinke for twentie yeares went from hand to hand by Tradition till penned by the Apostles or being penned by others was approoued by them Hitherto we agree but not in this which he interlaceth that in the state of Nature euery man was instructed of God immediatly in both matters of faith and religion For that God then as euer since vsed the ministerie aswel of good fathers as godly masters as ENOCH NOE ABRAHAM and such like to teach their children and seruants the true worship of God true faith in him otherwise how should the word of God passe by Tradition froÌ„ ADAM to MOSES as M. P. affirmeth If no childe learned anie such thing of his Father but was taught immediatly from God but M. P. seemeth to regard little such pettie contradictions His 2. concl We hold that the Prophets our Sauiour Christ his Apostles spake did many things good true which were not written in the Scriptures but came to vs by Tradition but these were not necessary to be beleeued For one example he puts that the B. Virgin MARY liued dyed a Virgin but it is necessarie to saluation to beleeue this for HELVIDIVS is esteemed by S. AVGVSTINE an Heretike for denying it * De haeres ad Quod. li. 84. His 3. Concl. We hold that the Church of God hath power to prescribe Ordinances Traditions touching time place of Gods worship And touching order comelinesse to be vsed in the same mary with these foure caueats First that it prescribe nothing childish or absurd See what a reuerent opinion this man carryeth of the Church of God gouerned by his holy spirit that it neuerthelesse may prescribe things both childish absurde But I must pardon him because he speaketh of his owne Synagogue which is no part of the true Church Secondly that it be not imposed as anie part of Gods worship This is contrarie to the conclusion for order and comelinesse to be vsed in Gods worship which the Church can prescribe is some part of the worship Thirdly that it be seuered from superstition c. This is needelesse for if it be not absurd which was the first prouiso it is alreadie seuered from superstition The fourth touching multitude may passe these be but meere trifles That is of more importance that he tearmeth the decree registred in the xv of the Actes of the Apostles a Tradition whereas before he desined Traditions to be all doctrine deliuered besides the written worde Now the Actes of the Apostles is a parcell of the written word as all the world knowes That then which is of record there cannot be tearmed a Tradition THE DIFFERENCE CAtholikes teach that besides the written Worde there be certaine vnwritten Traditions which must be beleeued practised as both profitable and necessarie to saluation We hold that the Scriptures
this wee must beleeue that there is nothing else which wee may beleeue ANSWERE By the Gospell there is vnderstood all our Christian doctrine written and vnwritten and not onelie the written worde of the foure Euangelists else wee should not beleeue the Actes of the Apostles or their Epistles no more than Traditions which Christian doctrine written and vnwritten we onely beleeue by diuine faith to all other Authors we giue such credit as their writings do deserue If anie man desire to see TERTVLLIANS judgement of Traditions let him read his booke of prescriptions against Heretikes where he auerreth that Traditions serue better than the Scriptures themselues to confute all Heresies Heretikes alwaies either not allowing all the bookes of Scripture or else peruerting the sense and meaning of the Scriptures And in his booke De Corona militis he formallie proposeth this question Whether Traditions vnwritten are to be admitted or no and answereth by manie instances that they must be receiued concluding thus For these and the like poynts if thou require law out of the Scriptures thou shalt finde none but Tradition is alleadged to be the Author of them Custome the confirmer and Faith the obseruer So that nothing is more certaine than that TERTVLLIAN thought vnwritten Traditions necessarie to be beleeued Come we now vnto his second testimonie out of S. IEROM * In cap. 23 Mat. who writing as he saith of an opinion that S. IOHN Baptist was killed because he foretold the comming of Christ the good-man would saye ZACHARIE S. IOHNS Father for the Scripture sheweth plainely why S. IOHN lost his head * Mat. 14 But S. IEROM there sayeth this Because it hath not authoritie from Scriptures may as easelie be contemned as approoued But of which particular M. P. shewing himselfe a doughtie Logician would inforce an vniuersall that sorsooth all may be contemned that is not proued by Scripture As if you would prooue no Protestant to bee skilfull in the art of true reasoning because M. P. behaues himselfe in it so vnskilfully But S. IEROM in the same place declareth why that might be as easely reprooued as allowed not hauing anie ground in the Scripture because saith he It is taken out of the dreames of some Apocryphall writings opposing Scripture to other improoued writings and not to approoued Traditions to which hee saith in his Dialogues against the Luciferians before the middle That the Church of God doth attribute the like authoritie as it doth vnto the written Law M. P. His third Author is S. AVGVSTINE * Lib. 2. de doct Chri. cap. 9. In those things which are plainely set downe in Scriptures are found all those poynts which containe faith and maners of liuing well ANSWERE All things necessarie to be beleeued of euerie simple Christian vnder paine of damnation that is the Articles of our Beleefe are contayned in the Scriptures but not the resolution of harder matters much lesse of all difficulties which the more learned must expressely beleeue if they will be saued which distinction S. AVGVSTINE else-where doth signifie * De peccatorū meritis cap. vlt. And is gathered out of manie other places of his workes as in that matter of rebaptizing them who became Catholikes after they had bene baptized by Heretikes He saith * Lib. 5. de bapt contra Donat. cap. 23. The Apostles truely haue commanded nothing hereof in their writings but that custome which was layed against S. CYPRIAN is to bee beleeued to haue flowed from an Apostolicall tradition as there be many things which the vniuersall Church holdeth and therefore are to be beleeued The same saith he of the custome of the Church in Baptizing infants * De genes ad litra lib. 10. cap. 23. And in his Epist 174. of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is not in the holy Scripture and yet neuerthelesse is defended to be vsed in the assertion of faith As also saieth he we neuer read in those bookes that the Father is vnbegotten and yet wee hold that he is so to be called * Lib. 3. cap 3. cont max Arianum And S. AVGVSTINE holdes that the holie Ghost is to be adored though it be not written in the word The like of the perpetuall Virginitie of our B. Ladie * Haeresi 4. out of which and many more such like we gather most manifestlie that S. AVGVSTINE thought many matters of faith not to be contayned in the written worde but to be taken out of the Churches treasurie of Traditions M. P. His last testimonie is taken out of Vincentius Lirinensis who sayth as he reporteth that the Canon of the Scripture is perfecte and fullie sufficient for all things ANSWERE I thinke that there is no such sentence to be found in him he saies by way of objection What neede we make recourse vnto the authoritie of the Ecclesiasticall vnderstanding if the Canon of the Scripture be perfect Hee affirmeth not that they be fullie sufficient to determine all controuersies in religion but throughout all his booke he prooues the cleane contrarie that no heresie can be certainelie confuted and suppressed by only Scriptures without we take with it the sense and interpretation of the Catholike Church Thus M. P. hauing ended with the Law Testimonie addeth in a postscript two other slender reasons vnto his former The first that Christ and his Apostles vsed alwaies to confirme their doctrine with the testimonies of Scriptures and not with Tradition ANSWERE Fist for our Sauiour CHRIST IESVS he out of his diuine wisdome deliuered his doctrine most commonly in his owne name But I saye vnto you And verie seldome confirmeth it with any testimonie out of the Law The Euangelists do often note how CHRIST fulfilled the old prophecies but neuer or very seldome seeke to confirme his doctrine by testimonies their owne they doe sometimes but to saye they neuer wrote any thinge out of Tradition proceedes of most grosse ignorance Where had Saint MATHEVV the adoring of the Sages S. IOHN Baptists preaching briefelie that was done before his owne conuersion but by Tradition S. MARK wrote the most part of his Gospell out of Tradition receiued from S. PETER as witnesseth EVSEBIVS * Lib. 2. hist cap. 14. S. LVLE testifyeth of himselfe that he wrote his whole Gospell * Cap. 1. as he had receiued it by Tradition from them who were eye-witnesses What desperate carelesnesse was it then to affirme that the Apostles neuer vsed Tradition to confirme any doctrine when some of them built not onely parcels but their whole Gospels vpon Traditions His other reason is that if we beleeue vnwritten Traditions were necessarie to saluation then we must aswell beleeue the writings of the auncient Fathers as the writings of the Apostles because Apostolicall Traditions are not else-where to be sound but in their bookes but that were absurde for they might erre ANSWERE That doth not follow for three causes First Apostolicall Traditions are aswel kept in
giuen any credit vnto the Apostles doctrine vnlesse by S. PETER and the other Apostles it had bene first examined and approoued * Tertal li. 4. in M rc Hierom. ep 89. que est 11. inter ep Augustinâ— August lib 28. cont faâ—st c. 4 Againe when there arose a most dangerous question of Abrogating MOSES Lawe Was it left to euerie Christian to decide by the written Worde Or would many of the faithful beleeue S. PAVL that worthie Apostle in the matter Not so but vp they went to Ierusalem to heare what the Pillers of the Church would saye Where by the decree of the Apostles in counsell the controuersie was ended Which S. PAVL afterward deliuered in his Preaching commanding all to obserue and keepe the decree and ordinance of the Apostles * Act. 16. And if it would not be tedious I could in like maner shew how in like sort euery hundreth yeere after errors and heresies rising by misconstruction of the written Word they were confuted and rejected not by the written Worde onely but by the sentence and declaration of the Apostles Schollers and successors See Cardinall BELLARMINE * Tom. 1 lib 3. cap 6 I will onely recorde two noble examples of this recourse vnto Antiquitie for the true sense of Gods word The first out of the Ecclesiasticall Historie * Lib. 11. cap. 9 whereof Saint GREGORY NAZIANZEN and Saint BASIL two principall lights of the Greeke Church this is recorded They were both noble men brought vp together at Athens And afterwarde for thirteene yeeres space laying aside all profaine bookes imployed their studie wholie in the holy Scriptures The sense and true meaning whereof they sought not out of their owne Iudgement and presumption as the Protestants both doe and teach others to doe but out of their Predecessors writings and authoritie namelie of such as were knowen to haue receiued the rule of vnderstanding from the Tradition of the Apostles These be the verie wordes The other example shall be the principall pillar of the Latine Church S. AVGVSTINE who not only exhorteth aduiseth vs to follow the decree of the auncient Church if we will not be deceiued with the obscuritie of doubtful questions * Lib. cont Crescon cap. 33. but plainely affirmeth That he would not beleeue the Gospel if the authoritie of the Church did not mooue him vnto it * Cont. ep fund c. 5. Which words are not to be vnderstood as Caluin would haue them that S. AVGVSTINE had not bene at first a Christian if by the authoritie of the Church hee had not bene thereunto perswaded but that when he was a learned and Iudicious Doctor and did write against Heretikes euen then he would not beleeue these bookes of the Gospell to haue bene penned by diuine inspiration and no others and this to be the true sense of them vnlesse the Catholike Church famous then for antiquitie generallity and consent did tell him which and what they were So farre was he off from trusting to his owne skill and judgement in this matter which notwithstanding was most excellent This matter is so large that it requireth a whole question but being penned vp within the compasse of one objection I will not dwell any longer in it but here fold-vp this whole question of Traditions in the authorities of the auncient Fathers out of whom because I haue in answering M. P. and else-where as occasion serued cited alreadie many sentences I will here be briefe S. IGNATIVS the Apostles Scholler doth exhort all Christians * Euseb lib 30.36 To sticke fast vnto the Traditions of the Apostles some of which he committed to writing POLICARPVS by the authoritie of the Apostles words which he had receiued from their owne mouthes confirmed the faith full in trueth and ouerthrew the Heretikes * Ibid. lib 5 cap. 20. S. IRENEVS who imprinted in his heart Apostolicall Traditions receiued from POLICARP sayeth * If there should be a controuersie about any meane question ought wee not to runne vnto the most auncient Churches in the which the Apostles had conuersed and from them take that which is cleere and perspicuous to define the present question For what if the Apostles had not written any thing at all must we not haue followed the order of Traditions which they deliuered to them to whom they deliuered the Churches ORIGEN teacheth that the Church receiued from the Apostles by Tradition to baptize Infants * Rom. 6 ATHANASIVS sayeth e Lib. de decret Nâ—caeni conâ— We haue prooued this sentence to haue bene deliuered from hand to hand by Fathers to Fathers but ye O new Iewes and sonnes of Caiphas what Auncestors can ye shew of your opinion S. BASIL hath these words * De Spâ— Sanct. c. 2 We haue the doctrine that is kept and preached in the Church partly written and part we haue receiued by Tradition of the Apostles in mysterie both which be of the same force to godlinesse and no man opposeth against these who hath at the least but meane experience of the Lawes of the Church See GREGORY NAZIANZ Orat. 1. in Iulian. Because I haue cited alreadie some of the Latine Auncient Doctors Insteede of the rest I will recorde out of them in a worde or two how olde rotten Heretikes vsed alwaies to reject vnwritten Traditions and flie wholy vnto the written worde See the whole booke of TERTVLLIANS prescriptions against Heretikes which principally handleth this verie poynt The same doth IRENEVS witnesse of the Valentinians and Marcionis * Lib. 3. c. 2 The Arrians common song vnto the Catholikes was I will not admit to be read any words that are not written in the Scriptures as witnesseth S. HILARY in his booke against CONSTANTIVS the Emperour against whom he alleadgeth the preaching of the Apostles and the authoritie of the auncient Bishops expressed in his liuely colours S. AVGVSTINE some thousand two hundreth yeeres agoe recordeth the very forme of arguing which the Protestants vse now-a-daies in the person of Maximinus an Arrian in his first booke against him in the beginning If thou shalt saith this Heretike bring any thing out of the Scriptures which is common to all wee must needes heere thee but these wordes which are without the Scriptures are in no sorte to bee receiued of vs when as the Lorde himselfe hath admonished vs and said in vaine doe they worship me teaching commandements and precepts of men How S. AVGVSTINE opposed against them vnwritten Traditions hath ben afore declared The like doth S. BERNARD affirme of certaine Heretikes of his time called * Hom. 62 Cantica Apostolici So that most truely it may be concluded that euen as we Catholikes haue learned of the Apostles and auncient Fathers our noble progenitors to stand fast and hold the Traditions which we haue receiued by worde of mouth aswell as that which is written Euen so the Protestants haue receiued as it were from hand to hand of their
that you finde no reliefe at all in Saint Bernard touching the mayne point that either the Pope or Church of Rome is Antichrist And all the world might meruaile if out of so sweete a Doctor and so obedient vnto the Pope anie such poison might be sucked Lib. 2. de Cons ad Fugea specially weighing well what he hath written vnto one of them to whome he speaketh thus Goe to let vs yet enquire more diligently who thou art and what person thou bearest in the Church of God during the time Who art thou A great Priest the highest Bishoppe thou art the Prince of Bishops the heire of the Apostles and in dignity Aaron in authority Moyses in Power Peter thou art he to whome the Keyes were deliuered to whom the sheepe were committed There are indeede also other Porters of Heauen and Pastors of flockes but thou art so much the more glorious as thou hast inherited a more excellent name aboue them they haue their flocks allotted to them to each man one but to thee all were committed as one flocke to one man thou art not only Pastor of the sheepe but of all other Pastors thou alone art the Pastor And much more to this purpose which being his cleare opinion of the Pope how absurd is it out of certayne blinde places broken sentences of his to gather that he thought the Pope of Rome to bee neither sheepe nor Pastor of Christs Church but verie Antichrist himselfe There is a grosse fault also in the Canon of Pope Nicolas as he citeth it that the Popes was to be created by the Cardinals Bishops of Rome As though there were some 30. or 40. Bishops of Rome at once but of the matter of election else where M. PERKINS hauing lightly skirmished with a broken sentence or two out of one Catholike Authour flyeth to a late heretike called Ioachim and quoteth Iewell for relator of it A worshipfull testimonie of one heretike and that vpon the report of an other he the most lying Authour of these dayes As for the late Poet Petrarke his wordes might easely be answered but because he quoteth no place I will not stand to answere it But to close vp this first combat a sentence is set downe out of the famous Martir Ireneus that Antichrist should be Lateinos a Roman Here be as many faults as words That learned auncient Doctor discoursing of Antichrist his proper name Cap. 13. out of these wordes of the reuel the number of the beast is 666. And obseruing the letters of the greeke Alphabet by which they doe number as we doe by ciphers sayeth that among others the word Lateinos doth contayne those letters which amount just to the number of 666. and consequently that Antichrists proper name perhaps might bee Lateinos but more likely it is to be Teitan as he sayeth there and lastly that it is most vncertayne what his name shall be See the place gentle reader learne to beware of such deceiptfull merchants as make no conscience to corrupt the best Authours and being often warned of it will neuer learne to amēd Ireneus leaueth it most doubtfull what shall be Antichrists name And among diuerse wordes esteemeth Lateinos to be the vnlikeliest And yet M. PERKINS reporteth him to say resolutely that his name shall be Lateinos and then to make vp the matter turneth Lateinos a proper name with S. Ireneus into Roman an appellatiue which noteth only his country Fie vpon that cause which cannot be vpholden and maintayned but by a number of such paltry shiftes Thus come we at length to the end of M. PERKINS proofs reproofs in his prologue where we finding litle fidelity in his allegations of the fathers badde construction and foule ouersight in the text of holy Scripture briefly great malice but slender force against the Church of Rome we are to returne the words of his theame to all good Christians Goe out of her my people Forsake the enemies of the Roman Church And as our Ancestors did the Pagan Emperours who drewe out her most pure bloud so let vs flie in matters of faith Religion from all heretikes that of late also spared not to shedde abundance of the same most Innocent bloud vnlesse to your greater condemnation you had leifer be partakers of her sinnes and receiue of her plagues And because I purpose God willing not only to confute what M. PERKINS bringeth against the Catholike doctrine but some what also in euerie Chapter to fortifie and confirme it I will here deliuer what some of the most auncient most learned most holy Fathers doe teach concerning ioyning with the Church and Pope of Rome from whose society Protestants labour tooth and nayle to withdawe vs. And because of this we must treat more amply in the question of supreamacie I will vse here their authority onely whome M. PERKINS citeth against vs. S. Bernard is cited already S. Ireneus Scholler of S. Policarpe he of S. Iohn the Euangelist of the Church of Rome writeth thus To this Church Lib. 3. c. 3. by reason of her more mighty principality it is necessarie that euery Church that is the faithfull on all sides to condescend and agree in and by which alwayes the tradition of the Apostles hath beene preserued of them that be round about her Saint Ierome writing to Damasus Pope of Rome sayeth I following none as chiefest but Christ doe in participation ioyne with thy blessednesse that is with the chayre of Peter I knowe the Church to be builded vpon that Rocke Whosoeuer doth eate the Paschall Lambe out of this house is a profane fellowe he that is not found within the Arke of Noe shall when the floudes arise perish And a litle after I knowe not Vitalis I refuse Meletius I take no notice of Paulinus he that gathereth not with thee scattereth that is he that is not with Christ is with Antichrist Marke and embrace this most learned Doctors Iudgement of joyning with the See of Rome in all doubtfull questions he would not trust to his owne wit skill which were singuler nor thought it safe to rely vpon his learned wise neighbours he durst not set vp his rest with his owne Bishoppe Paulinus who was a man of no meane marke but the Patriarke of Antioch but made his assured stay vpon the see of Rome as vpon an vnmoueable Rocke with which sayeth he if we doe not communicate in faith and Sacraments we are but profane men voyde of all Religion In a word we belong not to Christ but be of Antichrists trayne See how flat contrary this most holy auncient Father is to M. PERKINS M. PERKINS would make vs of Antichrists bande because we cleaue vnto the Bishoppe of Rome Whereas S. Hierome holdeth all to appertayne to Antichrist who be not fast lincked in matters of Religion with the Pope and See of Rome And so to conclude with this point euery true Catholike must say with S. Ambrose Lib.
be set to worke and if it doe not act that which it is set too then there wanted some thing requisite And consequently that was not the whole cause of that worke Now to the second proposition But their imagined faith can not apply to themselues Christs righteousnes without the presence of hope and charity For else he might be justified without any hope of heauen and without any loue towardes God and estimation of his honour which are thinges most absurd in themselues but yet very well fitting the Protestants justification which is nothing else but the playne vice of presumption as hath beene before declared Yet to auoid this inconuenience which is so great M. PE. graunteth that both hope and charity must needes be present at the justification but doe nothing in it but faith doth all as the head is present to the eie whē it seeth yet it is the eie alone that seeth Here is a worthy peece of Philosophy that the eie alone doth see whereas in truth it is but the instrument of seing the soule being the principall cause of sight as it is of all other actions of life sence and reason and it is not to purpose here where we require the presence of the whole cause not only of the instrumentall cause And to returne your similitude vpon your selfe as the eie cannot see without the head because it receiueth influence from it before it cā see so cannot faith justifie without charity because it necessarily receiueth spirit of life from it before it can doe any thing acceptable in Gods sight The fourth reason if faith alone doe justifie then faith alone will saue but it will not saue ergo M. PERKINS first denyeth the proposition and saith That it may iustifie and yet not saue because more is required to saluation then to iustification Which is false for put the case that an Innocent babe dye shortly after his baptisme wherein he was justified shall he not be saued for want of any thing I hope you will say yes euen so any man that is justified if he depart in that state no man makes doubt of his saluation therefore this first shift was very friuoulous Which M. PERKINS perceiuing flies to a second that for faith alone we shall also be saued that good workes shall not be regarded at the day of our judgement Then must those wordes of the holy Ghost so often repeted in the Scriptures be razed out of the text God at that time will render vnto euery man according to his workes But of this more amply in the question of merits 5. Reason There be many other vertues vnto which justification and saluation are ascribed in Gods word therefore faith alone sufficeth not The Antecedent is proued first of feare it is said He that is without feare Ecclesias 1. Rom. 8. Luc. 13. 1. Ioan. 3. cannot be iustified We are saued by hope Vnlesse you doe penance you shall all in like sort perish We are translated from death to life that is justified because we loue the brethren Againe of baptisme Vnlesse you be borne againe of water and the holy Ghost you cannot enter into the Kingdome of heauen Lastly we must haue a resolute purpose to amend our euill liues Rom. 6. For we are buried together with Christ by baptisme into death that as Christ is risen from the dead c. So we may also walke in newes of life To all these and many such like places of Holy Scripture it pleased M. PERKINS to make answere in that one Rom. 8. You are saued by hope to wit that Paules meaning is only that we haue not as yet saluation in possession but must wayte patiently for it vntill the time of our full deliuerance this is all Now whether that patient expectation which is not hope but issueth out of hope of eternall saluation or hope it selfe be any cause of saluation he sayeth neither yea nor nay leaues you to thinke as it seemeth best vnto your selfe S. Paul then affirming it to be a cause of saluation it is best to beleeue him so neither to exclude hope or charity or any of the foresaid vertues from the worke of justification hauing so good warrant as the word of God for the confirmation of it To these authorities and reasons taken out of the holy Scriptures let vs joyne here some testimonies of the auncient Church reseruing the rest vnto that place wherein M. PER. citeth some for him The most auncient and most valiant Martir S. Ignatius of our justification writeth thus Epist ad Philip. The beginning of life is faith but the end of it is charity but both vnited and ioyned together doe make the man of God perfect Clement Patriarch of Alexandria saith Faith goeth before Libr. 2. strom but feare doth build and charity bringeth to perfection Saint Iohn Chrysostome Patriarch of Constantinople hath these wordes Least the faithfull should trust that by faith alone they might be saued Hom. 70. in Mat. he disputeth of the punishment of euill men and so doth he both exhort the Infidels to faith and the faithfull to liue well Lib. 3. hypognost S. Augustine cryeth out as it were to our Protestants and saith Heare O foolish Heretike and enemy to the true faith Good workes which that they may be donne are by grace prepared and not of the merits of free will we condemne not because by them or such like men of God haue beene iustified are iustified and shall be iustified De side oper c. 14. And Now let vs see that which is to be shaken out of the harts of the faithfull Least by euill security they lose their saluation if they shall thinke faith alone to be sufficient to obtayne it Now the doctrine which M. PERKINS teacheth is cleane contrary For saith he A sinner is iustified by faith alone that is nothing that man can doe by nature or grace concurreth thereto as any kind of cause but faith a lone Farther he saith That faith it selfe is no principall but rather an instrumentall cause whereby we apprehend and apply Christ and his righteousnes for our iustification So that in fine we haue that faith so much by them magnified and called the only and whole cause of our justification is in the end become no true cause at all but a bare condition without which we cannot be justified If it be an instrumentall cause Conditio sine qua non let him then declare what is the principall cause whose instrument faith is and choose whether he had leifer to haue charity or the soule of man without any helpe of grace But to come to his reasons The first is taken out of these wordes As Moyses lift vp the serpent in the desart Ioh. 3. so must the sonne of man be lift vp that whosoeuer beleeueth in him shall not perish but haue life euerlasting True if he liue accordingly and as his faith teacheth
containe in them all doctrine needfull to saluation whether it concerne faith or maners and acknowledge no Traditions for such as hee who beleeueth them not cannot be saued Before wee come to the Protestants reasons against Traditions obserue that we deuide Traditions into three sorts The first we tearmed Diuine because they were deliuered by our blessed Sauiour who is God The second Apostolicall as deliuered by the holy Apostles The third Ecclesiasticall instituted and deliuered by the Gouernours of the Church after the Apostles daies And of these three kindes of Traditions we make the same account as of the writings of the same Authors to wit we esteeme no lesse of our Sauiours Traditions than of the soure Gospels or any thing immediatly dictated from the holy Ghost Likewise asmuch honor credit do we giue vnto the Apostles doctrine vnwritten as writtē For incke paper brought no new holines nor gaue any force and vertue vnto either Gods on the Apostles words but they were of the same value and credit vttered by word of mouth as if they had bene written Here the question is principally of diuine Traditions which we hold to be necessarie to saluation to resolue determine many matters of greater difficultie For we deny not but that some such principall poynts of our Faith which the simple are bounde to beleeue vnder paine of damnation may bee gathered out of the holie Scriptures as for example that God is the Creator of the world Christ the Redeemer of the world the Holy Ghost the Sanctifier and other such like Articles of the Creede M. P. goeth about to prooue by these reasons following that the Scriptures containes all matter of beleefe necessary to saluation Testimonie * Deut. 4.2 Thou shalt not adde to the words that I command thee nor take any thing there from Therefore the written worde is sufficient for all doctrine pertaining to saluation If it be saide that this is spoken as well of the vn-written as written worde for there is no mention in the texte of the written worde then M. P. addeth that it must bee vnderstood of the written worde onely because these wordes are as a certaine preface set before a long Comentarie made vpon the written Law ANSWERE Let the words be set where you will they must not bee wrested beyond their proper signifycation The words cited signifie no more then that wee must not either by addition or subtraction change or peruert Gods commandements whether they be written or vnwritten Now to infer that because they areas a preface vnto MOSES Law that therfore nothing must be added vnto the same Law is extreame dotage Why then were the bookes of the Old Testament written afterward if God had forbidden any more to be written or taught besides that one booke of Deuteronomy Shall we thinke that none of the Prophets that liued and wrote many volumes after this had not read these words or that they either vnderstood them not or that vnderstanding them well did wilfullie transgresse against them one of these the Protestants must needes defend or else for very shame surcease the alleadging of this text for the all-sufficiencie of the written word M. P. His testimonie * Esa 8.2 ◠To the Law and testimonie if they speake not according to this word it is because there is no light in them Here the Prophet teacheth saith M. P. What is to be done in cases of difficultly men must not runne to the Wizardes and Soothsayers but to the Lawe and to the Testimonie commending the written word as sufficient to resolue all doubts whatsoeuer ANSWERE By the Lawe and testimonie in that place the fiue bookes of MOSES are to bee vnderstood if that written Worde bee sufficient to resolue all doubts what-so-euer What neede wee then the Prophets what neede wee the Euangelists and the Epistles of the Apostles What Wizarde would haue reasoned in such sorte The Prophet willeth there that the Israelites who wanted wit to discerne whether it be better to flie vnto God for councell than vnto Wizardes and Sooth-sayers to see what is written in the Lawe of MOSES concerning that poynt of consulting-Wizards which is there plainely forbidden in diuerse places Now out of one particular case whereof there is expresse mention in the written worde to conclude that all doubts and scruples whatsoeuer are thereby to be decided is a most vnskilfull parte arguing as great want of light in him as was in those blinde Israelites 3. Testimonie * Iohn 20.31 These things were written that ye might beleue that IESVS is the CHRIST and in beleeuing might haue life euerlasting Here is set down the full end of the Gospell that is to bring men to faith and consequently to saluation to which the whole scripture alone is sufficient without Traditions ANSWERE Here are more faults than lines First the text is craftily mangled Things being put insteede of Miracles For S. IOHN sayeth Many other Miracles CHRIST did c. but these were written c. Secondly S. IOHN sayth not that for faith we shall be saued but beleeuing we should haue saluation in his name which hee clipped off thirdly remember to what faith S. IOHN ascribes the meanes of our saluation not to that whereby we applie vnto our selues Christs righteousnes but by which we beleeue IESVS to be CHRIST the MESSIAS of the Iewes and the Sonne of God which M. P. also concealed Now to the present matter S. IOHN saith that these miracles recorded in his Gospell were written that wee might beleeue IESVS to bee the Sonne of God and beleeuing haue saluation in his name c. Therefore the written word containes all doctrine necessarie to saluation ANSWERE S. IOHN speakes not a word of doctrine but of myracles and therefore to conclude sufficiencie of doctrine out of him is not to care what one sayeth But M. P. sore-seeing this sayeth it cannot be vnderstood of miracles onely for miracles without the doctrine of CHRIST can bring no man to life euerlasting True and therefore that texte speaking onely of myracles prooueth nothing for the sufficiencie of the written Worde CHRISTS miracles were sufficient to prooue him to bee the Sonne of GOD and their MESSIAS But that prooueth not Saincte IOHNS Gospel to containe al Doctrine needful to saluation For many other poynts of faith must be beleeued also And if it alone be sufficient what neede we the other three Gospelles the Actes of the Apostles or any of their Epistles or the same S. IOHNS Reuelations Finallie admit that S. IOHNS Gospell were all-sufficient yet should not Traditions be excluded for Christ sayeth in it in plaine tearmes * Ioh. 16. that he had much more to saye vnto his Apostles but they as then being not able to be are it he reserued that to be deliuered vnto them afterward of which high mysteries S. IOHN recordeth not much in his Gospell after Christs resurrection and so many of them must needes be deliuered by
bookes of holy Scripture put together do contayne all necessary instruction Now then the argument followeth but some of those bookes of holy Scripture haue bene lost therefore some poynts of necessarie doctrine contayned in them are not extant in the written worde and consequently to be learned by Tradition M. P. answereth First supposing some of the bookes to be lost that all needfull doctrine which was in them is in some of the others preserued But why did he not solue the Argument proposed were then those bookes supersluous Doth the Holie Ghost set men to pen needelesse discourses which this answere supposeth Therefore he giues a second more shamefull that none be perished which is most contrary vnto the plaine Scriptures * 1. Paral. vlt. 2. Paral 9. as S. IOHN CHRYSOSTOM prooueth * Hom. 9. in Mat. E◠Hom. 7. in priorem ad Corinth where he hath these expresse words That many of the Propheticall bookes are lost may be prooued out of the historie of Paralipomeneon which they translate Cronicles Now as for M. P. gesses that some of them are yet extant but otherwise called some were but little rolles of Paper some profane and of Philosophie I holde them not worth the discussing beeing not much pertinent and avowed one in word onely without either any reason or authoritie M. P. His fourth objection of the Jewish Cabala is a meere dreame of his owne our Argument is this MOSES who was the Pen-man of the Olde Law committed not all to writing but deliuered certaine poynts needefull to saluation by Tradition nor any Law-maker that euer was in any Countrey comprehended al in letters but established many things by customes therefore not likelie that our Christian law should be all written That MOSES did not pen all thus we prooue It was as necessarie for women to be deliuered from Originall sinne as men Circumcision the remedie for men could not possible be applyed to women as euery one who knoweth what circumcision is can tell neither is there any other remedie prouided in the written law to deliuer women from that sinne Therefore some other remedie for them was deliuered by Tradition Item if the Childe were likely to die before the eight daie there was remedie for them as the most learned doe hold yet no where written in the Law Also many Gentils during that state of the Old Testament were saued as IOB and many such like according to the opinion of all the auncient Fathers yet in the Law or any other part of the Old Testament it is not written what they had to beleeue or how they should liue wherefore many things needefull to saluation were then deliuered by Tradition To that reason of his that God in his prouidence should not permit such a losse of any parte of the Scripture I answere that God permitteth much euill Againe no great losse in that according to our opinion who hold that Tradition might preserue what was then lost Now insteede of M. P. his fift reason for vs of milke and stronge meate wishing him a Messe of Pappe for his childish proposing of it I will set downe some authorities out of the written word in proofe of Traditions Our Sauiour said being at the point of his passiō * Ioh. 16.12 that he had many things to say vnto his Apostles but they could not as then beare them * Act. 10. Our Sauiour after his resurrection appeared often vnto his Disciples speaking with them of the kingdome of God of which little is written in any of the Euangelists * 1. Cor. 11 I commende you brethren that you remember me in all things and keepe the Traditions euen as I haue deliuered them to you * 1 Tim. 6. O TIMOTHY keepe the dispositum that is true which I deliuered thee to keepe * 2. Tim. 1 Hold fast by the holy ghost the good things committed vnto thee to keepe which was as S. CHRISOSTOM and THEOPHILACT expounde the true doctrine of CHRIST the true sence of holy Scriptures the right administration of the Sacramentes and gouernment of the Church To which alludeth that auncient holy Martir S. IRENEVS * Lib. 3. c. 4 saying that the Apostles layd vp in the Catholike Church as in a rich treasurie all things that belong to the trueth S. IOHN who was the last of the Apostles left aliue said * Epi. 3.13 that hee had many other things to write not idle or superfluous but would not commit them to inke and pen but referred them to be deliuered by word of mouth And to specifie for example sake some two or three poynts of greatest importance where is it written that our Sauiour the Sonne of God is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is of the same substance with his father Where is it written that the Holy Ghost proceedeth from the Sonne aswell as from the Father Where is it written that there is a Trinitie that is three persons reallie distincte in one and the very same substance And that there is in our Sauiour CHRIST IESVS no person of man but the substance of God man subsisting in the second person of the Trinitie Be not all and euerie of these principall articles of the Christian faith and most necessarie to be beleeued of the learned and yet not one of them in expresse tearmes written in any parte of the holie Bible Wherefore wee must either admit Traditions or leaue the highest mysteries of our Christian faith vnto the discretion and courtesie of euerie wrangler as shal be more declared in the argument following The sixt and last reason for Traditions Sundrie places of holy Scriptures be hard to be vnderstood others doubtfull whether they must be taken liberally or figuratiuely If then it be put to euery Christian to take his owne exposition euery seueral sect will coyne interpretations in fauour of their own opinions so shal the word of God ordayned only to teach vs the trueth be abused and made an Instrument to confirme all errors To auoide which inconuenience considerate men haue recourse vnto the Traditions and auncient Records of the Primitiue Church receiued from the Apostles and deliuered to the posteritie as the true copies of Gods word see the true Exposition and sense of it and thereby confute and reject all priuate and new glosses which agree not with those auncient and holy Comentaries So that for the vnderstanding of both difficult and doubtfull texts of Scripture Traditions are most necessarie M. P. His answere is that there is no such neede of them but in doubtfull places the Scripture it selfe is the best glosse If there be obserued first the analogie of faith which is the summe of religion gathered out of the cleerest places Secondly the circumstance of the place and the nature and signifycation of the wordes Thirdly the conference of place with place and concludeth that the Scripture is falsely tearmed the matter of strife it being not so of it selfe but by the
in outward things and as it is in vs also it doth consist chiefely in inward worshippe by faith hope charitie and religion in whose kingdome Vowes hold a honorable ranke but a great part of this worship among vs dependes of outward things for be not the two onely parts of Gods worship amonge Protestants as M. P. sayeth in this question Baptisme and our Lords Supper both which partly consist in outwardly both speaking and doing And is not faith which is the roote of all Christian Religion gotten by outwarde preaching and hearing But it would wearie a willing man to trayle after all M. P. his impertinent errors Let vs then at length come vnto the principall poynt in controuersie Catholikes saith he maintaine such Vowes to be made as are not agreeable to the rules afore-named The first is that of Continencie whereby a man promiseth to God to keepe chastity in a single life that is out of the state of Wedlocke This kinde of Vowe is flat against the word of God as he sayeth which he prooueth first out of S. PAVL If they can not containe then let them Marrie True if they haue not Vowed Chastitie before * 1. Cor. 7. as the common Christians of Corinth to whom S. PAVL there speaketh had not For such if they can not liue otherwise chastelie it is better they marrie then be burned that is defiled with incontinencie But to them who had Vowed chastitie before S. PAVL writeth in an other stile That if they but desire to marrie they incurre damnation * 1. Tim. 5 because they haue made frustrate and broken their former saith and promise made vnto God of their chastetie So that this first text is a Furlong wide at the least from the marke The second is much like * 1. Tim. 4. It is a doctrine of diuels to forbid to marrie truth if one should hold mariage in it selfe to be wicked therefore condemne it in all sorts of persons as Mountanus the Manichees did But we haue a more reuerende opinion of marriage than the Protestants themselues For we with the Apostle * Ephes 5. hold it to be a great Sacrament they that it is a morall contract onely Notwithstanding we maintaine that such persons who being of ripe yeeres haue aduisedly Vowed chastitie may not marrie not because marriage is not honorable but for that they haue solemnlie promised to God the contrarie which we also hold to be better than if he had married And so to vse S. AVGVSTINES words He forbiddeth to marrie who sayeth it to be euill but not he who before this good thing preferreth a better And a little after you see saith he that there is great difference betweene perswasion to Virginitie by preferring the greater good before the lesser and forbidding to marrie by accusing lying together for issue The first is the doctrine of the Apostles which we teach the latter only of deuils Lib 3. cont Faust Manich cap. 6. M. P. His third and last text is * Heb. 13.4 Marriage is honorable among all and the bed vndefiled The strength of this place lyeth a double corruption of the text For this verbe is is not in the text nor cannot be the course of the Apostles speech requiring a verbe of the Imperatiue Moode as both the sentences besore and after do conuince Againe if you will haue the Apostle saye that Marriage is honorable among all men wee must also needes take him to say that the bedde is also vndefiled among all which was not true Also that their conuersation was without couetousnesse c. For there is no reason why this word is should be ioyned with the one more than with the other And nothing but passion doth cause them to make the middle sentence an affirmatiue when they turne both the other into exhortations The second corruption is in these words among all when they should translate in all and the adjectiue being put without a substantiue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must in true construction haue this worde things joyned with it and not men wherefore the text being sincerelie put into English it would carrie no colour of their error For the Apostles saying is Let Marriage be honorable in all things and the bed vndefiled Here is no willing of anie man to marrie but onely a commandement to them that be marryed to liue honestlie in marriage to keepe as he else where sayeth their vessels in sanctifycation and not in dishonour and then shall their marriage bee honorable in all things that is in all poynts appertaining to Matrimony So that now you see that M. P. is not able to bring any one place out of Scripture to disprooue the Vowe of chastitie the Scripture being so barren for him he shall belike recompence it with the abundant testimonie of antiquitie in fauour of his cause but oh vnhappie chance he hath cleane forgotten in this question the recorde of the auncient Church What was there not one Father who with some one broken fragment of a sentence or other would releeue you in this your combat against the Vowe of Chastitie I will helpe you to one but I feare me you will scarse thanke me for my paines It is such a one as is neither holy nor father but the auncient Christian Epicure IOVINIAN who as S. AVGVSTINE hath recorded * Heres 82 ad Quod vult and S. IEROM * Lib. 1. cont Ioui did hold that Virginitie of professed persons men and women was no better then the continencie of the married So that many professed Virgins beleeuing him did marrie yet himselfe did not marrie as Fryer Luther did not because hee thought chastitie should be rewarded in the life to come with a greater crowne of glorie but because it was fit for the present necessitie to auoyde the troubles of marriage see just the verie opinion of M. P. and our Protestants But this heresie saith S. AVGVSTINE in the same place was quickly suppressed and extinguished it was not able to deceiue any one of the Priestes And in an other place * Lib. 2. reâ—roct 22. thus he speaketh of IOVINIAN Holy Church most faithfully and valiantly resisted this monster So that no maruaile if that M. P. could finde small reliefe in antiquitie for this his assertion which the best of them esteemed no better than a monstrous sacrilegious heresie But M. P. hath an argument that shall neuerthelesse demonstrate the Vowe of perpetuall chastitie to be intollerable For sayth he this Vowe is not in the power of him that Voweth for continencie is the gifte of God who giueth it not vnto all but vnto whom he will when he will and as long as he will And if wee object that by prayer and fasting the gift of continencie may be obtained of God he aunswereth that it cannot because it is not necessarie to saluation We replie that it is necessarie for all them that haue Vowed chastitie And be it
represented and so in the seauenth generall Councell the drawing of the Holie Ghost in forme of a Doue as he appeared Mat. 3. is approoued The first poynt then being obtayned that such Images of God may be made I come to the seconde That all holie Pictures may bee placed in Churches which I prooue by the argument that M. P. made for our first objection In SALOMONS Temple were erected Cherubins which were Images of Angels on the Mercie seate where God was worshipped and vppon the walles and verie doores of the same pictured To this M. P. answereth that they were erected by speciall commandement from God who prescribeth the verie forme of them and the place where they should be set and thereby MOSES had a warrant to make them let them shewe the like warrant for their Images if they can Secondly sayth he the Cherubs were placed in the most inward place of the Temple so were remooued from the sight of the people and the Cherubs without the vaile though they were seene yet were they not worshipped REPLY This mans wits were gone a wool-gathering when proposing to himselfe the Cherubs erected in SALOMONS Temple he answereth of the Cherubs made by MOSES 350. yeares before a most grosse ouer-sight and a shameful shift but such as men desperatly defending vntruths must needes vse For if he had answered directly he had not had a word to saye for neither did God prescribe the forme of them nor giue any speciall commandement to SALOMON to make and erect any such Cherubs as he that pleaseth to read the Chapter may see there they were placed not onely in the inwarde but also in the outward parts of the Temple vpon the walles and very doores that they might be seene of all the people which M. P. finding flitted from thence and did flie vnto an other which because it spake of Cherubs he thought would serue to blinde his simple followers MOSES indeed had an expresse precept for the making of them as he had for the Curteines and Curteine-rods and euery particular belonging to the Tabernacle But SALOMON without any speciall commandement out of his high and holy wisedome vnderstood that he might most lawfully and lawdably imitate that heauenly patterne of MOSES And as the building was far more sumptuous and stately so in the number and quantie of pictures exceeded which is a sufficient instruction warrant for all men after his daies to make and set Images in the Church And this finallie M. P. seemes to graunt when he sayeth that these Cherubs without the veyle were there to be seene but not to be worshipped so that wee haue gotten one step further that Images may not onely be made but also be set vp in the Churches which is fortifyed by the testimonie of TERTVLLIAN in the place cited before where he sayeth that our Sauiour was pictured vpon holy Chalices which were vsed at the Altars and of SOZOMENVS who witnesseth that our Sauiours Picture was taken into the Church S. GREGORY NAZ * Epist 49. maketh mention of Images in the Church of Diocesaraea trimmed vp by himselfe Saint BASIL * Orat. in Barlaam poynteth to that holy mans Picture standing in the Church DAMASVS * In vita Siluest shewes how CONSTANTINE in the Church of S. IOHN LATERAN erected a siluer Image vnto our Sauiour S. CHRYSOSTOME In demonst quod Christ sit Deus And S. AVG. * Serm. 19 de sanc do teach that the Crosse was on the holie Tables and vsed at all holy functions And the reason why Images should principallie be set in Churches is verie pregnant For where should holy pictures of holy men be more properlie bestowed than in holie places And the Church being a resemblance of heauen as S. PAVL teacheth * Heb. 9 is most conueniently decked vp with Images the representations of heauenlie creatures that men entring into that holie place may by the viewe and consideration of such a heauenly shewe retire their mindes from worldly businesse and lift them vp vnto the soueraigne monarch of both heauen and earth Now let vs come to those two objections of M. P. which seemes to bee against the erection of Images in Churches The first is out of the Councell of ELIBERIS cap. 36. which commaundeth that nothing should bee paynted on the walles of the Church that was adored of the people ANSWERE That if the Councel speake of the Image of God in which sense M. P. cyteth it and the word adored doeth insinuate then it may bee saide that the Councell inhibiteth that sort of Gods Images which are made to expresse the diuine nature If it be extended vnto all sorts of Images I answere that they were then forbidden to be drawen vpon the Church walles but not to be set in Tables vpon the Altar or in any other place The reason is because that Councell was holden in time of persecution as appeareth by the twentie fiue Canon of it and then if the persecutors had found out the place of their assembly as they often did those pictures must needes either haue bene defaced by themselues or left vnto the derision and despight of the Heathens And pictures also paynted vpon such poore walles as they had then to their Churches would either by the moysture of the walles or other incommoditie haue bene quick y disfigured wherefore to the greater honour of such sacred things those graue Fathers thought it not meete to haue them drawen vpon the Church walles there being manie more meete places for them in the Churches The second objection is out of a post-script of EPIPHANIVS letter vnto IOHN PATRIARKE of Ierusalem in which is written as M. P. falsely reporteth that it is against the authoritie of Scripture to see the Pictures of Christ or of any Saint to hang in the Church ANSWERE It is there only to see the picture of a man Now that he should meane of Christ or of some Saint is onely gathered yet M. P. makes no bones to thrust them both into the Texte euen so doe wee thinke that some olde enemie of Images added that postscript vnto EPIPHANIVS letter Our reasons are because it hath no coherence with the former letter or stile Againe in the seauenth Councell when all that could be found out of antiquitie was cited against Images no tidings there of this place which if it had bene true might haue bene one of the principall Thirdly in the same Councell * Act. 6. other two places brought as it were out of EPIPHANIVS workes were found to be none of his And for Images was alleadged that EPIPHANIVS owne disciples erected an Image to their maister and set it in the Church which they would neuer haue done if he had taught them to be against the Scripture so to doe M. P. obserues a speciall reason in EPIPHANIVS other counterfeit testimonie That Images must not be suffered in the common house because wee must carrie God in our mindes To which