mā's estate vpon peraduentures were something hard and not verie rationally done Wherefore I should be glad to conceiue more fully §. 4 The force and efficacitie of these your discourses and persuasiōs VNCLE Why cosen what securitie doe your marchāts your states mē your soliers those that goe to law nay euen those that till their grounds and worke for their liuings what securitie I saie doe all these goe vpon Is it greater thē the securitie which these grounds doe afford Surely no. And yet no man esteeme's them foolish All human affaires are hazardous and haue some aduenture in them And therefore who require's euident certaintie only in matters of Religion discouer's in him self a lesse minde to the goods promised in the next life then to these which he seeke's here in this world vpon weaker assurāce Howsoeuer the greatest euidence that can be to him that is not capable of conuincing demōstrations which the greatest part of mankinde fall shortof is but cōiecturall for men doe not generally distinguish betwixt a solide and a wittie proofe and are as soone taken with a glosse or iesting speach as with a demonstration Let but this verie proofe I haue told you be put to some two men the one more the other lesse iudicious and the one perhapps will hold it for euident the other only for apparent and likly And certainely it is manifest that if our church was once the true church they who made a breach from hir must needes haue euident proofes of hir corruption or else be culpable of faction and schisme And yet of these two men I propose the one peraduenture will take this argumēt only for plausible and at the least checke forgoe it the other looking into the nature of Gouermēt and seeing what a flaw the contrarie position breede's in it and how in effect it destroye's all Gouerment will thinke it so strong that what soeuer is or can be said against it is but the playing of witt against pure euidēce Farther if we Catholikes hold the truth of scripture as conscientiously as anie Protestant and therefore that all controuersies betwixt vs and them are only concerning the sense of it and not touching the truth of it t' is manifest that Catholikes must ether be such dull dunces as not to vnderstand their arguments or so willfull as not to acknowledge what they see ād know otherwise surely they would agree with Protestants in all pointes which they could cōuince and demonstrate And againe this man who perceth deeper into the strength of this argument see 's that although some times learning may faile ād that vertue may haue a bridle for a while yet would not learnīg be learning if it should not for the most part worke it's effect in men and make them more capable of reason then others And much lesse can it be true vertue which is seldome efficacious sithence vertue 's nature is to be operatiue Wherefore this vnderstanding man that see 's there 's a more constant poursuite of vertue and learning on the one side then on the other conclude's euidently that there cā be no extraordinarie weaknesse on the learneder and more vertuous side in cōparison of the other And where he see 's more meanes paines and fruits of learning and vertue on the one side then on the other he will no more doubt supposing this be a constant and setled course on both sides but that of necessitie there must be more learning and vertue on that side where he see 's these effects no more I saie thē he can doubt whether necessarie causes will haue their effects as whether fire and towe put together will burne or whether effects cā be without their causes as howses clockes and the like without Carpenters smiths and other Artizans Yet perhapps he that barely looke's vpon the superficies of this discourse take's it only for a pleasing and probable consequence Ioyne to this the multitudes of Antiquitie I meane those ages wherein the Protestants acknowledge the Raigne of Poperie and surely thē there will not remaine to an vnderstanding man anie iuste cause to feare or complaine of hazard but rather a great occasion to admire and praise God's wisdome who hath prouided so short and secure a meanes for euerie man who is so happy and carefull as to acknowledge and embrace this guide of eternall saluatiō looking with an eye of commiseration vpō those whose dispositiōs being not fitted to the sight of this truth remaine in doubt and ignorance by diuing into questions wherein they are not able to finde satisfaction and so cast them selues awaie not for want of meanes but ether through their owne pride or by the misleading of their Directors Who not seeing what 's conuenient for the dispositiōs of their disciples throwe thē vpon the Rockes in stead of giuing them a fit harbour to anker in for if they would rely vpon this plane and open waie of our discourse commō sense would tell them if not what 's true at least what they ought to follow ād that as cleerely as that two and three are fiue Nephew I confesse the euidence you pleade is greate yet me thinke's one might obiect that seeing we heare it so often and so strongly beatē into vs that all men are falible and that nature it selfe seeme's to teach the same therefore as on the one side your reasons force me to grant that t' is the wiser course to vēter this waie so on the other I still remaine with this disposition that it may peraduenture be false which is able to shake a man's resolution and cowle his affection Vncle. Cosen you desire great matters and peraduenture more then your age and wauering dtsposition is able to beare Yet to complye with your good desires I will put you in the waie if you will haue patience to follow the tracke and you shall see §. 5 That it is no hard matter that Christ's law should haue descended entire vnto vs. FIrst therefore tell me I pray what time thinke you Christ and his Apostles imployed in preaching the Ghospell in anie one countrie Nephew I know Christ imployed some three yeares and a halfe or thereabouts for I thinke the time is not precisely agreed vpon by Cronologers But for the Apostles that I know not nor cā I guesse to what pourpose you aske me this question Vncle. Is it not like the Apostles bestowed neere about as much time S. Paule him self saie's so telling the Clergie of Ephesus that for three yeares he had not ceassed day and night to exhorte them with teares and warne them to take heede of false teachers And we may well thinke the like of the rest of the Apostles wheresoeuer they could conueniently doe it but specially in the churches in which they made their Residence But why thinke you tooke they so much time for so short a doctrine as you see Christian doctrine is being included in our Creede Nephew No doubt but their imployment was to make their
of such an Apostle so by litle and litle it grew froÌ„ one countrie to an other vntill it was spredd ouer the whole Christian world So that some countries had not the new Testament complete that is all the bookes of it for a long time Wherefore no wonder that some haue doubted of seuerall parts thereof being not able to auerre as not assured by reason of some accident that such bookes were truly the workes of such an Apostle or Disciple which not withstaÌ„ding Why the canon of scripture is cheefely to be had from Rome better intelligeÌ„ce being gotten might be afterwards receiued for scripture And here you may note by the way that the Roman church is that church to which in reason wee ought to giue most credit touching the canon of the scripture For Rome being at that time â—that is at least for the first 300 yeares to the Christian world or rather to all the Christians dispersed in diuers parts of the world as London is to England And that wee see the collection of things estimable dispersed in seuerall Prouinces of our Kingdome is sooner and better made in London then in anie other part of our Countrie it must needes follow that the collection of the Holy scripture or new Testament was more exactly faisable at Rome then at anie other place But this by the way For my ayme is to make you iudge whether anie one substantiall point The state of the questioÌ„ which the Apostles whith common conseÌ„t preached through the whole world compared to anie one booke of the new Testament which soeuer you thinke first or best receiued whether I say of these two haue descended vnto vs with more certaintie the one to be the Apostles doctrine the other to be such an Apostle's booke Nephew I should distinguish your question for ether it may be compared to that particular Prouince or church where the Apostle him selfe deliuered it both in word and writing or to the whole church And I confesse that in respect of the whole church that point of doctrine which is euerie where preached must needes haue more certaintie but where both are equaly deliuered by the same Apostle to the same church I should thinke the worke should haue more authoritie theÌ„ the word For t' is an easie matter to let slipp a word some times Whereas writing requireth a more setled consideration Vncle. If the question be but of a particular church or Prouince I doubt it will not be sufficient to giue vs a firme authoritie for ether one or the other vnlesse we add more circumstances then we haue declared And the reason is because one Prouince maye haue had Religion so ruinated in it by the incursion of infidells that recouering theÌ„ selues after a long time they may as well mistake one booke for an other as one doctrine for an other and so this point is not much to our pourpose Although euen in this case the doctrine taught by word of mouth hath these aduantages That it is deliuered to manie the booke to few or in some one place The doctrine heard and vnderstood by manie the booke only to such as can reade nor to all them nether but to such as are carefull The booke belonge's not much to the practize of the multitude the doctrine gouernes their whole liues The booke brought often times by some one maÌ„ as some messeÌ„ger if it be an Epistl or other wise sent from some other place or froÌ„ some one person as from Titus of Timotheus to whom it was first written and vpon whose authoritie only the whole veritie must originally rely But to returne to our case Doe you not see that the whole church trusteth some one particular man at the first vpon whom she buildeth hir beliefe tht this is such an Apostles worke that is scripture But for anie materiall point of doctrine she relyeth vpoÌ„ the vniuersall knowledge of theÌ„ who heard it preached in diuers parts of the world So that as I doe not intende to say the one is certaine the other not for a particular churche's authoritie may be certaine in some circonstances yet I must needes say that betwixt these two certainties there is such a differeÌ„ce that if the one were to bring in verdict vpon the other it would be much more forcible and euident to conclude that this booke is scripture because it is according and conformable to the doctrine taught and preached then that this doctrine is the Apostle's because it is conformable to this booke For if it be true that the whole church once relyed vpon some one particular church for this veritie it can neuer come to passe that the certaintie of this booke proue greater then was the authoritie of that particular church at that time And consequently the same comparison which is to be made betwixt the authoritie of this particular church and of the vniuersall church the same I say is to be made betwixt the certaintie of this booke 's being scripture and of this point of doctrine's being catholike and Apostolike And for the inconuenience you were jealous of it falleth out quitt contrarie For whether we considere the inspiration and assistance of the holy ghost or the industrie aed carefullnesse of man you shall euer finde that the end is more principally aymed at then the meanes to compasse the end and likewise amongst diuers meanes the most immediate to the end is still most aymed at wherefore in our case the end both of writing and speaking being the deliuerie of this doctrine for the good of the people no doubt I say but that both the AssistaÌ„ce of the holy ghost and the care of man tendeth more principally to the deliuerie of this doctrine then to other things that came in by chance in which only there might be a slipp as you immagine Wherefore sithence tradition containeth not all the words the Apostles spoke but meerely what belong's to ChristiaÌ„ doctrine which was principally deliuered and the cheefe errand of the Apostles and that in the scriptute manie things are written vpon occasion and as it were by the bye no doubt but in both these respects to wit of the assistance of the holy ghost and of the care of man the certaintie will be greater of the doctrine deliuered by word of mouth theÌ„ of the holy writt Besides the slipps you speake of are when things are only once deliuered or spoken without great premeditation whereas this doctrine was a thing perpetually beaten on so as there can be no feare of such slipping HoW the old Testament came to Christians hands For the ould TestameÌ„t as I confesse t' is possible that the Apostles might haue deliuered it in all Countries where they preached so likewise I thinke t' is euident that they neuer did it being that the church hath no such memorie And that the Canon hath beene doubted of by some and the Iewish Canon alleadged whereof there had beene no vse nor neede if the
Apostles had left to all churches the booke it self It is likely therefore that the ould Testament was brought in by the first Christians ' of the CircuÌ„cision who accepted of those bookes which they saw the Apostles honnor and make vse of and from them it came to the Gentill Christians and so by litle and litle was accepted of by all the Christian church with the same veneration that the Apostles and Iewish Christians gaue vnto it But how soeuer shall wee not thinke at least §. 3 That tradition for scripture is more vniuersall then traditioÌ„ for doctrine NEphew Surely vncle for my part I caÌ„not thinke but that the scripture hath a more vniuersall tradition theÌ„ anie point of Christian doctrine or at least then anie of those which are disputed betwixt vs and the Protestants seeing that all Christians doe agree in the acceptation of the scripture and farr fewer in diuers pointes of doctrine For such churches as are in communion with the church of Rome are no such extraordinarie part of christendome if they were compared to all the rest Vncle. For the Extent of the churches I cannot certainely tell you the truth because I feare manie are caled ChristiaÌ„s who haue litle ether in their beliefe or liues to verifie that name But you know in witnesses the qualitie is to be respected as well and more theÌ„ the quantitie So that such couÌ„tries in which Christianitie is vigorous are to be preferred before a greater Extent of such as are where litle remaines more then the name But to come neerer to your difficultie suppose that in a suite in law one side had seuen lawfull witnesses the other had as manie and twentie knights of the post knowne periured knaues or vnlawfull witnesses more would you cast the other side for this wicked rable Nephew No truly for seing the law doth inualidate their testimonie I should wrong the partie to make anie accompt of them and therefore I should judge the parties equall Vncle. Why then you see that who will challenge a more vniuersall Tradition for scripture then for doctrine must first be certaine that there is no lawfull exception against those Christians whom he calleth to witnesse to witt against the Armans NestoriaÌ„s Eutychians and the like Now the Catholike church accounteth these men wicked in the highest degree that is guiltie of Heresie and schisme And therefore the partie which esteemeth of their witnesse must by taking of them for honnest men beare him self for their fellow and account the Roman church wicked and not fitt for testimonie from whom neuerthelesse he hath receiued what soeuer he hath of Christ Besides the witnesse and testimonie which these men giue is only that they receiued scripture from that church which excluded them from communion at their beginnings and euer continued in opposition against them to witt the Catholike Wherefore it is euident that their testimonie addeth nothing to the testimonie of the Catholike church but only declareth what the testifieth nor consequently maketh anie traditioÌ„ more vniuersal Let vs therefore now see whether §. 4 The text of scripture can haue remained incorrupted or no. FOr hitherto we haue only compare the and 〈◊〉 of scripture in itselfe to tradition now we will come a litle closser and compared it as we haue it to the same doctrine deliuered once 〈…〉 tradition I meane that hitherto we haue spoken as if we had those verie bookes which the canonicall writer made with their owne hande and of what authoritie they would be But now we will considere their since we haue but copies of them of what authoritie these copies ought to be Can you resolue this question Nâ—phew I doubt not sir but for that end which wee seeke that is to make a iudge of controuersies euerie word euerie letter and euerie title must be admitted of absolute and vncontrolable certainâ—ie And so I heare the vulgar edition in latine is commaÌ„ded to be held amongst vs. For I easily see that if anie one sentence may be quarrelled euerie one will incurre the same hazard all being equaly deliuered and equaly warranted with reason and authoritie Vncle. You saie verie well for where there is no lesse theÌ„ the soules of the whole world at the stake I see not what aduantage can giue sufficient securitie if there remaine anie notable vncertaintie Our sauiour saith what can all the world auaile anie man if he loose his soule So that where the question is soule or no soule saluation or damnation nothing lesse then certaintie can serue to proceede vpon And therefore no doubt but if the Apostles had intended to leaue the holy writt for the decider of controuersies in Religion they would also haue prouided that infalible copies should haue beene kept and come downe to the church to the end of the world For such care wee see that priuat men haue of conseruing their bargaines and couuenants by making their Indentures vncounterfeitable and enrolling them in publicke offices were they are to remaine vncorrupted the like care hath common wealths to conserue their recordes specially their laws keeping the verie originalls or authenticall copies with verie great care But what neede wee tooke into the examples of â—â—â—en seeing all mightie God in his owne person hath giuen vs a paterne commanding the Deuteronomie to be kept in the Arke which he would haue to be the authenâ—icall copie to iudge betwixt him and his people and this with the greatest veneratioÌ„ that could be imagined or that euer was giuen to anie thing But this was impossible for the Apostles to doe otherwise surely the would haue done it if they had intended that Christs written law should haue beene our iudge by reason of the multitudes of nations and languages which hindered that not anie one booke could be conserued with such securitie and incorruptibilitie as would be requisite in that case both because of the language and of the mutabilitie of the world euer subiect to a thousand accidents whereby such bookes might fall into the hands of those who would not only neglect them but ether willfully corrupt or seeke vtterly to destroy that which was to be the rule and paterne of Christian faith And for that which you saie is commaÌ„ded vs you conceiue amisse For no wise man thinketh that the vulgar edition is so well corrected that much may not be mended How the vulgar edition is to be receiued but t' is that the church hath secured vs that there is nothing against Christian faith or behauiour contained in those bookes which haue so long passed for scripture and are so in deede for the substance of the bookes and therefore hath commanded vs not to refuse this râ—â—â— in anie controuersie on disputation And this wee and wee only caÌ„ doe for the churche's securitie â—â—seth out of this that she hath an other more forcible ground of hir faith to witt tradition by which being assured what the truth is she can confidently pronunce that in
decision of controuersies it is not to bee expected that it should bee of it selfe without the churche's authoritie much profitable for that pourpose but to informe our liues by an ordinarie reading of it or by preaching singing and such like vses things recommended in the verie letter it self whereas wee are neuer seÌ„t to the word for the deciding of controuersies And now I hope you are fully satisfied Nephew I am so in deede and giue you manie thankes for I see that how few pointes soeuer the Protestants pretende to be necessarie yet caÌ„ there not anie thing be conuinced out of bare words inuoluing soe manie vncertainties as you haue tould me of Vncle. It is to litle pourpose for them to saie that some few substaÌ„tiall and necessarie pointes may bee proued out of scripture it were fitter they would first proue that the scripture is an instrument made to determine controuersies or anie other of those principles which I shewd you must of necessitie be true if scripture bee our rule But this they can neuer proue And therefore they seeke first to withdraw vs from a secure and naturall meanes of relying vpon our forefathers Which neuerthelesse in all ciuill and oeconomicall conuersation they them selues can not liue without and then to leaue vs to a labyrinth of voluntary and vnendable disputations Reflect then I pray cozen vpon what wee haue said and compare our yesternight's and this our morning's discourse together considering first how manie things are of necessitie to bee conserued in the church for the preseruation of faith and good life in hir subiects Then see how manie pointes haue beene and are quarelled and if anie haue escaped how all the rest may be caled in question with as much probabilitie and apparence as these are Then looke vpon the qualities of that Decider of controuersies where vnto all the Aduersaries of the Catholike church doe seeke to draw vs by which there can be no other end of controuersies but to leaue euerie man to his owne will And then conclude that these positions being put there will nether remaine gouerment in the church nor certaintie or constancie in beliefe nor anie thing to be taught and practized worthie God Allmightie's sending of a lawgiuer muchlesse of sending his owne sonne vpon those hard conditioÌ„s which wee appreheÌ„de of Iesus Christ and reade in the Ghospell Nephew It is verie true but if your leaue mee thus I shall bee like him who had fargot his Pater noster but not learned his Our father For you haue taught mee what I cannot rely vpon but not what I ought to rely vpon And there is so much said against the authoritie of the church by all hir Aduersaries that a man who hath beene euer beaten to those obiections cannot easily leaue them without some scrupule Vncle. You are in the right the most necessarie part is yet behinde for a litle building is better then a great deale of pulling downe Therefore when your leisure serueth you I will bee readie to giue you satisfaction to the best of my power But now this morning is too farr spent to beginne so large a discourse as that question doth require Take an other time and the sooner the more welcome But for the present God be with you I haue some prayers to save THE THIRD DIALOGVE By what meanes Controuersies in Religion may be ended This Dialogue containeth 15. parts or paragraphes 1. THe Preface or Introduction 2. What force the arguments of Protestants against Catholikes ought to haue 3. That standing in likelyhood the Catholike partie is greater more learned and more vertuous 4. Of what efficacitie is this argumeÌ„t 5. That it is no hard matter that Christ's law should haue desceÌ„ded entire vnto vs. 6. That if Christ's law could haue beene conserued it hath beene conserued 7. That no great errour could creepe in to the church of God 8. That the truth of the Catholike doctrine hath continued in the church 9. That the dissention of Catholike Doctours coÌ„cerning the rule of faith doth not hurt the certaintie of tradition 10. That the teaching of Christian doctrine without determining what of necessitie is to be belieued and what not hurte's not the progresse of tradition 11. That no errour can passe vniuersally through the church of God 12. That these precedente discourses beare an absolute certaintie 13. Some obiections are solued 14. The Examples of traditions which seeme to haue failed are examined 15. The conclusion of the whole discourse §. 1 The Introduction NEPHEW I am come vncle to challenge you of your promise for I cannot be quiet vntill you haue setled me in this so weightie a matter If the pointes which are in coÌ„trouersie be as you saie and as you haue clearly shewd me of great consequence and that by scripture we cannot decide them against contentious meÌ„ I see that ether wee must seeke some other meanes or els all Religion wil bee confounded and the truth of Christ's law vnknowne and neglected Wherefore I pray if you can giue mee a strong resolution in this point Vncle. Why nephew if this feruour continue you will not neede be a scholler but for a yeare aÌ„d a day I pray you coÌ„sidere it is a faire daie and you neuer want imployment for the afternoones when the wether 's faire if I should staie you now you would perhapps so repent it that I should not I feare see you againe this month be not so greedie as to take a surfeite Nephew I feare my owne inconstancie and therefore I pray refuse me not discontinuance may breede coaldnesse specially if what you haue alreadie taught me should bee sullyed with worse thoughts and then I should not be so capable of your instructions as I hope I am at this present Which I haue good reason to make great esteeme of Vncle. Well if you will haue it so you must giue me leaue to trench vpon a good part of your Afternoone for I may bee long in this point and I would be loath to breake of in the midle Yet I will bee as short as possibly I can Tell me then had Iesus Christ euer a church or no And I would haue you answere me what you thinke a iudicious Protestant would saie to the same demande Nephew I doubt not but anie Protestant of them all would answere you that at least in the Apostles time Christ had a visible church coÌ„sisting of the faithfull which adhered to the Apostles and such Bishopps as were made by them but that since that time it is fallen into great errours and ether mainely Apostated from the true doctrine of Christ or at least â—o deformed it that a reformation was necessarie euen in pointes of beliefe And this reforme their forefathers vndertooke Vncle. You are likewise persuaded I suppose cozen by the same euidence that in the Apostles time this church was a communion with the particular church of Rome and therefore I will goe a litle further and aske you
disciples and the people vnderstand perfectly and fully comprehende all pointes of Christian doctrine to resolue all doubts and difficulties to make the apprehension of the doctrine sincke into the verie soules of the people and to setle a forme of Gouerment and Conuersatiō and to invre the first Christiās to the practize of this doctrine whereby it might subsist and continue as long as possibly it could For this I see is the dictamē of prudence and wisdome in such a case and the course all those who foūd new institutions Vncle. You saie well And surely such a time for a litle Prouince of about two or three dayes iournay's semidiameter was verie sufficient for the instructing of their disciples in all materiall pointes and setling of instructers to succeede them But in case immediately after the decease or departure of the Apostle there should arise according to our sauiours forewarning false Prophets or Rauenous wolues vnder pretence of sainctitie endeauoring to deuoure the flocke nay that euen some amongst them selues out of vanitie should beginne some new doctrine How controuersies were decided immediatly after the Apostles drawing disciples after them and so making them selues head of a partie and of a doctrine contrarie to that which the Apostle had taught vrging reasons out of nature and texts out of that Apostles owne writings by whom they were taught or out of his follow Apostles and strengthen his partie by the adherence of manie of the weaker sort what I saie would the Gouernors and teachers of the faithfull doe in this case How would they behaue thē selues to hinder the ruine of their weaker breetheren Nephew I doe imagine that meeting together they would examine this new Doctrine taking sor their rule that doctrine which the Apostle deliuered vnto them And knowing that he could nether contradict him self nor anie of his Breetheren being all inspired by the Holy Ghost they would conclude that the Innouators reasons were captious his texts wrong vnderstood if they were obscure or corrupted if they were plaine For nothing could be so euident vnto them as that which for three yeares together had beene perpetually beaten into them where in they had beene continually examined and cleered and which had beene so long the fundation of their new manner of life and practize so that this must needes be the most euident vnto them of all things and therefore they would surely forgoe all other rules to gouerne them selues by this as being most frie from errour Vncle. Your conclusion follow 's plainely For they hauing no other stay of their beliefe then that S. Paul for example had taught them so t is cleere that to them these two questions were but one whether the opiniō proposed was true and whether it was accordimg to what S. Paul had taught them And therefore to be against that which they had beene taught to them was to be false So that there nether was nor could be anie other question in the church at that time in matters of faith but whether the Apostles had taught such a doctrine or no For the Apostles hauing spēt so much time in teaching Christian doctrine in so litle a Prouince what they had not taught must needes be presumed not to be necessarie and consequently not deseruing to make a schisme and breach amongst Christiās and what they had taught to be without all controuersie true and certaine Wherefore if such an Innouator would not stand to this iudgment he was to be expelled the church as disagreeing from the Christians in the principall rule and soueragne Tribunal of Christianitie by which and only which they could at that time decerne and decide what was Christian doctrine what not Happie that age in which it was so easie to resolue anie difficultie arisning for it was no more then to meete together and aske one an other How haue you beene taught And all was ended and who should haue resisted this decision was to be cast out with common consent as a reprobate But tell me cosen how long doe you thinke this Happinesse cōtinued in the church Nephew For the time of the Apostles and of their disciples who are commonly caled Apostolicall men ther 's no question to be made no nor of the age of the disciples of these Apostolicall men To whom I see not why I may not add yet an other age for doubtlesse those Apostolicall men must needes haue beene of that reputation as that what soeuer was constantly remembred to haue beene their doctrine was likewise to be esteemed the doctrine of the Apostles their Masters supposing it was knowne to bee vniuersally and generally theirs and not the opinion of some one or two of them only Vncle. And will it be a stumbling blocke vnto you if we add yet an other descent to wit of the Grandchildren of these Apostolicall mē for the memorie of publicke and generally practized things is fresh from Grandfathers vnto their Grandchildren So that this degree or goldē age may well consist of fiue descents that is of some 200 yeares allowing 40. yeares to a descēt which is not much seing that witneses of 60. yeares are ordinarily found in euerie busines in the same Prouince and therefore where the question is of a publicke and vniuersall practize which concernes manie countries and nations who haue intercourse and communication together such witneses may be much more easily found But what shall we saie of the next ensuing age Nephew I conceiue that these descents you speake of may easily haue reached to Constātine's time when Christian Religiō being publicke the multitudes of fathers and writers would supplie the deiect of this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or self seeing into the well spring of Christianitie But whether you driue that waie or no I know not Vncle. It is not needfull for sithence the last age doth directly know what was the Apostles doctrine All such ages as can reach to knowe the doctrine and practize of that last age are able certainely to resolue though in a lower degree anie arising difficultie not because they cā immediately tell that such a pointe is contrarie to the doctrine of the Apostles but because they can tell that t' is against the doctrine of the fist descēt which doctrine they know to be the dokrine of the Apostles Wherefore vpon the like ground we may add fiue descēts more which according to our former computation will make vp 400. yeares und peraduenture by extēt may reach to fiue or 600 yeares after Christ that is to the second conuersion of nations I meane to the conuersion of those barberous people which ouerunne the Roman Empire and brought almost all the world backe vnto the formerly extirpated paganisme Nephew Why then wee neede no more for the Protestāts confesse that Poperie hath raigned since Phocas his time nay they sticke not to saie that Gregorie the Great was the last good and first bad Pope seeming to thinke that frō him beganne that which they
call Poperie And truly in his Dialogues which are sett out in English there 's more then enough to show that the Religion of his time was the same which we now professe And we that haue our cōuersion from him according to venerable Bede wee I saie who are descended from the Saxons neuer haue had anie Religiō but that which the Protestants call Poperie And therefore to vs English men it is most cleere that we neuer had anie Religiō since Gregorie the great 's time but Poperie And therefore if the Religion that then raigned was the faith of the Apostles it will euidently follow that Poperie was their faith Vncle. Surely not only writers but euen Records and Monuments are so thicke since the conuersion of those nations which ouer runne the Romā world that no peruerse man cā requite more euidēce And surely it was God's prouidence who setled as it were a new world and purged the old whilest Religion could yet looke backe and see hir head as it were with one vewe But I hoped you would haue induced a farther consequence and applyed the argument to later ages Nephew I am affraid these calculations may ouer reach me for I fee the father and the sonne 's age doe concurre in some part and therefore by counting them seuerally the number of yeares will be greater then in deede ought to be allowed Vncle. You saie well and therefore we will only take that number of yeares which the father ordinarily liueth before the birth of his sonne As if the sonne be supposed to be 20. yeares of age when the father testifieth and the father 60. Which you see is verie cōmon and so the number of yeares of one descent will be 40. Which is the number we put But if the father be 80. when the sonne is 20. then the number of one descent wil be 60. Which though it be some what great because it is rare that a man hath a child at 60. yet t' is not so rare but a thousand may bee found in a competent extent as in the Kingdome of England and this number is amply sufficient for the effect we desire for fiue descents of 60. yeares make 300. yeares And hauing tould you how a generall practize of anie countrie is knowne by a kind of self seeing for fiue descents which include's at least 200. yeares it will follow that coūting downe frō Christ time to ours by two ages at a time we may frame our discourse thus As those who liued in the beginning of the third age could certainely know they held the Apostles doctrine so those who liued in the beginning of the fift age could certainely know they held the doctrine of those of the beginning of the third age that is the doctrine of the Apostles And by the like cōsequēce those of the 7. age will be certaine they are in the same faith of those of the fift and those of the 9. in the faith of those of the 7. And so to our verie selues And all are certaine that they are in the faith of the Apostles The reason of this consequence is because two ages is not so great a space but that certaine knowledge of publicke and generall chāges through a kingdome much more through manie may be easily had nor yet are two ages so litle as that a great errour could lurke vnseene and lye smoothered for so long a time We therefore who now liue in communion with the Roman church know certainely that our forefathers of the 16. and 15 ages did conceiue that this faith and doctrine which we hold did I saie conceiue and thinke it to haue descended vnto them from the Apostles And we know likewise that they could not conceiue and thinke so but that they knew the 14. and 13. ages did belieue the same Nor those of the 14. and 13. ages could not haue the same beliefe vnlesse they had seene and receiued it in and from the 12. and the 11. age And putting all these together the certaintie whereof is immediatly founded in this our age you see they comprehēde six ages if we put 40. yeares to a descent and will comprehende 8. or 9. ages if we put 60. to a descent So that two or at must three such cōpositiōs will reach beyond Christ's birth And therefore we doe not nor cannot want euidence but eyes to see it Nephew Your discourse will be good supposing the pointe in cōtrouersie be some publicke and great matter or a notorious change in the face of God's church But why might not some speculatiue pointe creepe in without being taken notice of such as was the pointe of the Arrians or Pelagians if there had not happened with all so great an opposition and quarelling as shaked almost the whole church why no neW point cā creepe into the church without a great change Vncle. There be two reasons why no pointe of Christian doctrine can be so smale as to creepe in without a great change The one is because Christian doctrine is a discipline whose parts are so knit together as that one thred cānot be broken but it will rauell through manie stiches As frō th' Arriā heresie denying Christ to be God it would follow no Trinitie and so Christians would easily become naturall philosophers and Pagans no Incarnation that is no God and man in one person All the payeres and adorations which the church had vsed hitherto were to be changed The forme of baptisme were to be altered And thus we might goe through the most part of Christian doctrine if we looke into the sequels of Arrianisme And such like consequences may be deduced out of Pelagianisme and out of almost all othet heresies which haue not runne beyōd all face of Christianitie because they were quickly opposed and so hindered from shewing the serpent's taile which lurked behinde The other reason is because no new doctrine can preuaile in the church of God without impeaching tradition the rule of faith for that being once broken and reiected by the same right and principle by which they professe one errour they may professe anie And you see the disciples of Heresiarckes neuer faile to grow worse thē their Masters Luther broke the Ice by appealing to scripture Suinglius went farther then he th' Anabaptists exceeded the Swinglians the Adamistes passed th' Anabaptists the Socinians the Adamistes and some went beyond Christianitie others euen beyond common sense wherefore it is impossible anie breach should be made in the church without a maine and notorious chāge in the whole face of Christianitie Nephew I see now vncle it was not without cause you asked me what time the Apostles imployed in teaching Christiā doctrine to some one Prouince or Countrie your whole discourse seeme's to depende vpō this that the Apostles did not barely tell the faithfull what Christ had donne and taught bud did inculcate and beat it into thē both by words and actions invring thē to the practize of their beliefe their
guifts But this point concerne's not our present discourse Nephew I confesse I now cleerely see that the Christian church hath conserued it self from error supposing that the Pastors and Gouernors of it haue carefully taken notice from time to time of their forefather's doctrine and I am beholden to you for this lesson But may not the church haue beene neglected herein Though I scarsely haue courrage enough to aske you this question for I see you will answere me that nature must needes haue it's recourse and that howsoeuer at some times or places it may haue defects yet must it of necessitie at other times and in other places haue it's returnes and freshly renew it's care and be sollicitous of so great a good which cannot but fall out once within 5. or 600. yeares that is within the terme prefixed wherein she may discouer the doctrine of hir forefathers cōstantly held and generally deliuered to be the doctrine of Christ ād his Apostles Neuerthelesse if you could shew me that the church had in effect so conserued it selfe I should be more able to conuince a peruerse opponent and demonstrate §. 8 That the truth of Christian doctrine hath actually continued in the church VNcle Is it possible you should be so vnreasonable as to aske me to proue a thing which depede's of ma's will yet that you may see how great the workes of Almightie God are and how nothing is so variable but that he can fixe and make it constant I will endeauour to let you vnderstād as much as my self in this point so you will be attentiue and raise a litle your vnderstāding to answere me in the waie of rigorous discourse which you haue some experience in by the mathematickes you haue tasted Tell me then doe you thinke that if anie great congregation of men now liuing hold this maxime for their faith and Religion that nothing is to be held for certaine and as a reuealed truth but what they haue receiued frō their forefathers as a thing deliuered by hand to hand from the Apostles And that what soeuer is not so receiued is not immutable but may be altered if reason commande doe you thinke I saie that this Congregation could in this our age haue begunne to hold this maxime or that as they receiued the rest of their doctrine from their forefathers they must not also haue receiued this tenet Nephew Truly I cannot tell you for me thinke's it were absurde to receiue all the rest from their forefathers ād take this of new which is the rule of all the rest yet I doe not see it so cleerely as that I am able to conuince that t' is so Vncle. Why cosen let vs put the case that there were a Generall Coūcell of all Christendome sitting for example in the yeare 1600. And aftermuch disputation about finding a rule to setle matters of Religion they should agree that to receiue nothing but what had beene deliuered vnto them by hand to hand frō Christ and his Apostles were the best waie to end all disputations of Religion and there vpon decree that hereafter nothing should be held for certaine and immutable but what were so receiued And that amongst these Bishops one should rise vp and make this difficultie we cannot know that anie thing is receiued by hand to hand from Christ vnlesse our forefathers who liued in the last age 1500. haue deliuered it vnto vs as such which they cannot haue deliuered vnto vs but by one of these two waies ether because we knowe they had this same principle which we seeke here ro setle to wit that they tooke nothing for immutably certaine and of faith but what was so deliuered vnto them And then we know what soeuer they haue deliuered vnto vs for a matter of faith was like wise receiued by them or atleast they thought it to be receiued in the same māner and therefore we may be confident of it Or else they must haue declared vnto vs what is so receiued what not that the one part may be accepted by vs and established as matters of faith the other held in lesse esteeme and as no points of faith This secōd we know hath not beene done And therefore if our forefathers had not this principle how should we haue it For if they had it not and haue deliuered our doctrine and Religiō vnto vs without distinctiō we must of necessitie accept much for Religion faith and as receiued frō Christ which we know not whether it was so or no And therefore wee must ether willfully deceiue our selues and our successors accounting and esteeming things which were neuer receiued from Christ to haue beene receiued from him and so falsly deliuer them for such to our successors and consequētly ground both our faith and theirs vpon this vntruth that our tenets were receiued from Christ Or else we must content our selues as our forefathers haue done and setle no new ground of ending cōtrouersies in Religion If one I saie should make this difficultie in that graue Assemblie would it not puzzell them all and put them of from their resolution Nephew Truly vncle it could not chuse vnlesse they were obstinately resolued to damne thē selues and all their posteritie and that impudently in the sight of the whole world which would reproach them with so notorious an imposture Nor can I imagine how such a position though once begunne should take roote The whole world being able to see ād deteste the indignitie of it And because I foresee your drift I will grāt you may frame the same argument for anie age ād cōsequētly there is no age in which this resolutiō could haue beene first taken vp but only in such an one in which it was cleerely knowne what the Apostles taught and what they did not by witnesse from thē who had their doctrine from their owne mouths that is the verie next age after the Apostles So that we may euidently conclude that a church which now holdeth with vniuersall consent this principle which you speake of must of necessitie haue held the same from the next age after the Apostles Vncle. But can you now tell me cosen whether this cōgregatiō as long as it adhere's to this principle can receiue anie thing of this nature and qualitie cōtrarie to what their forefathers deliuered vnto thē vpon this same principle And note I pray I doe not aske whether they can receiue anie thing but what they apprehēd to be so but I aske whether they can receiue anie thing as such but that which truly is so deliuered that is whether they can be cosened in this questiō Whether their forefathers deliuered it vnto them so or no. Nephew T' is euident they cannot For although one mā may be deceiued in what is tould him specially at one time yet to saie whole nations are deceiued in what is tould thē not once or twice but what they are bredd and beatē to is as much as to saie all men are deceiued
certainely knowne hitherto nor euer expressy belieued before Which how they may be reconciled amongst them selues or stand with this that tradition is our rule of faith I confesse I know not Vncle. Truly cozen your obiection is strong yet I hope to content you For the first part of it I see no great matter in the varietie of opinions amongst our Deuines for you see they seeke out the Decider of pointes of doctrine that is by whose mouth we are to know vpon occasions of dispute what and which be our pointes and articles of faith to wit whether the Pope or the Councell or both Which is not much materiall to our pourpose what euer the truth be supposing we acknowledge no articles of faith but such as haue descended vnto vs by tradition from Christ and his Apostles The second part of your obiection seeme's to be of greater force because some Deuines seeme to acknowledge an authoritie in the church which hath power not only to determine ether speculatiue or practicall points of doctrine new or ould in such manner as that the whole church is obliged to accepte or not oppose it's definition which euerie Catholike grante's and the reasons I tould you in our first conference doe euidently conuince But also that this authoritie can so determine euen a speculatiue pointe of doctrine which hitherto was euer vncertaine nor euer acknowledge as reueiled or esteemed as an article of faith that here after the vhole church shal be obliged to receiue acknowledge and belieue it as a reuealed and necessarie point of Christian doctrine and as an article of faith Which opinion you must knowe is but an opinion nor doe the authours of it oblige anie man to belieue it as certaine nor doe they condemne those who nether doe nor euer will acknowledge anie such positiō ād therefore this ought not to trouble you Nay contrariwise all Deuines will generally tell you that no new articles of faith can be made that there 's now no reuelations for new points of doctrine and that Christ Iesus was our only law maker in this kinde hauing suggested to his Apostles all that is necessarie of this nature and qualitie and the Apostles likewise taught their churches all that was necessarie to be knowne of this degree Wherefore you see all agree vpon tradition nor anie one ether denie it or doubt of it Whereas it appeare's by the diuersitie of their opinions that they doe not vniuersally and generally agree in anie other meanes or rule of faith though some admitte of another in waie of opinion Yet to giue you farther satisfaction in this busines I will teach you a point of philosophie which perhapps you neuer fully vnderstood I am sure you will not denie but t' is a differēt questiō to aske how an herbe or tree growe's and to aske how Aristole or Theophrastus saies it growe's for in the same growing there can be no varietie but in their opiniōs there may So in man t' is a differēt thing what he doth or is done in him and what he thinkes he doth or is done in him as in sicknesse disgestion and other naturall workes t' is euident yea and in voluntary actions too Which depende of corporall instruments as to goe runne turne our eyes speake cough spit or the like which we doe freely and voluntarily yet were we examined by what instruments and motiōs we doe thē peraduēture who seeme's to know most would be found short at least amongst manie there would be diuers opinions But doe you thinke the same happen's in our thoughts and iudgmēts which be purely spirituall Nephew I cannot tell yet me thinke's the soule should be so wel acquainted with hir owne actiōs as that she should not neede anie helpe to know them And all men agree that only man vpon earth can see his owne minde and therefore if it be not cleere to man what himself thinke's nothing is cleere Vncle. You are deceiued cosen for as long as we are in this world we cannot know anie thing of our owne thoughts and affections but as we reflect vpon the corporall motions which accompanie them and which because none feele but our selues none can knowe bur our selues though sometimes it happene's quite contrarie when these motiōs breake forth into outward apparence for thē others discrye our mindes and we our selues through the violēce of passiō are not so wel able ro iudge of them as others who see vs. But to speake of men free from passion and who vse to reflect much vpon their owne thoughts euen in them their internall actions proceede frō a principle directed by a superior guide then their owne reason as appeare's by this that they know nothing of their owne thoughts but by reflection and the reflection is a distinct act from the former vpon which the reflectiō is made so that nether the reflectiō it self is alwaise made by voluntarie designe nor anie act which is made without reflection Besides considere I pray how few know by what verue their vnderstandings are made certaine of those principles and positiōs which they cannot doubt of or by what vertue they adhere so strongly to the conclusion of a sylogisme not one of a thousand who doe these things euerie day Wherefore t' is euidēt that euen in our spirituall actions not all that we doe is done by our proper vnderstāding that is with knowing reflection and designe and therefore the same man may euē in these intellectuall acts doe one thing and thinke he doth an other and diuers men may agree in what they doe and yet disagree in their opinions of what it is they doe And now to close with your difficultie seeing faith is a persuasion or an agreeing in some points by reason af authoritie All the Doctors of the Catholike church may agree in beleeuing that is in acting and practizing their faith in the same manner and yet be deuided in their speculations by which they seeke to determine what it is they doe And it is their doeings which make's them Christians and not their sayings for they liue and beleeue as Christians but speake and deliuer their opinions as Doctors which be qualities farr different from being a Christian And doe you not see that these Doctors belieue after their speculations and framing of their opinions as they did before they thought of or studied this difficultie Nephew I doe not doubt but they doe for the faith of all Christians must needes be the same and consequently all must goe vpon the same motiue though one may vnderstand better and apprehende deeper that motiue then an other doth Vncle. You saie well Considere then that when these Doctors were yong men and had not yet studied Diuinitie and you shall finde that they had no other motiue of their belife but the authoritie of the present church and therefore how soeuer they discourse learnedly in their bookes the conclusion must be in their liues to rest vpon the authoritie of the
follow that such questioÌ„s as are betwixt Catholikes and Protestants concerning those pointes may appeare to be of imporâ—ce and so fundamentall as that Christian Religion cannot haue it's subsistaÌ„ce and progresse without the knowlege of the truth in such questions and positions And certes if credit and authoritie be the only or at least the maine instrument and principall meanes whereby the preachers of Christianitie can presse and promote Christian doctrine And that this credit and authoritie is incomparably more raised and strengthened by the Catholike position then by the Protestant's negatiue it must needes follow that the efficacitie of Christian Preachers and the strength of their cause is without comparison greather amongst Catholikes ten amongst Protestants which doubtlesse cannot but moue anie reasonable man who thinke's and belieue's that our eternall good relye's and depeÌ„de's vpon Christian doctrine I know there be other necessities of the Sacraments As for the vnitie of the church which being dispersed though the whole world could not be otherwise conserued then by the practize of some externall actions common to them all whereby they might know one the other As alsoe for the augmentation of charitie and grace by the frequentation of them But these pointes haue their proper treatises and places belonging vnto them It suffiseth I haue shewd you that there ought to be men appointed whose care function and imployment is to teach and conserue in the people the truth of Christian doctrine and that for this effect those men must needes haue some qualities aboue the ordinarie sort of men to authorise and giue credit to their documents For although this doctrine of it's owne nature tende to the highest degree of perfection and consequeÌ„tly deserue's of it self to be infinitely esteemed and honnored yet being supernaturall that is farre aboue the innate capacitie and reach of man the preachers and teachers thereof must of necessitie be endowed with extraordinarie power and authoritie to giue credit therevnto Which supposed we may procede farthe to the third degree and condition of remouing impediments hindering the prosecution of our eternall good and first enquire whether §. 6 The resolutions of Generall Councells be sufficient to decide controuersies of faith both in pointes of necâ—ssitie and of indifferencie TEll me then cozen is it thinke you lawfull for a priuate man to whose care the church is not committed to doubt in himselfe and breede doubtes in others touching such pointes as these pastors of Christ's flocke who by their function and profession haue the churche's gouermeÌ„t committed vnto them are agreed vpon and teach with common coÌ„sent to the whole church Nephew First I see vncle that such a man shall not easily induce men to belieue him against so great an opposition's and that therefore he had neede of better groundes in such pointes then in others Secondly I see that no wise man will oppose the opinion of so manie authorized experts or held for experts and that in a matter of their profession without farre greater and more pregnant reasons in this particular busines then would be necessarie in an other wherein he had noâ— such maine prudentiall motiues against him But whether there be anie obligation in conscience or whether this be a matter of such importance as to make a fundamentall pointe of Religion of it that I know not For contrariewise me thinke's there should be also an obligation in conscience when a man finde's that these gouernors are mistaken that he should oppose them to the vtmost of his power Vncle. You doe not fully conceiue my question which is this whether because these men haue the charge and care to reach God's law in the church setting a side all other difficulties there be an obligation in reason vpon this precise grounds noâ— easily to oppose their determinatioÌ„ without being certaine and secure of verie good footing nor to attempt anie thing against their verdict with out euideÌ„ce Because saie I to what pourpose is their iudgment if it be as free to oppose them after as before Nephew As for obligation I tould you vncle I know not of anie but this I see common sense and naturall reason teacheth vs that such as haue the charge aÌ„d care of instructing others are supposed to haue more vnderstanding in the doctrine which they teach theÌ„ those who learne of them And therefore if anie disputs or controuersies arrise in such matters I see 't is â—â—ter these teachers should be the iudges thereof then those who learne And in a matter of 〈◊〉 to appeale from them when a great and vniuersall part of the wisest haue giuen their coÌ„senting iugdmeÌ„t to the 〈◊〉 is as absurde as to appeale froÌ„ Maisters to schollers or from men of one profession to men of an other Vncle. Why this is all I aske for where one part is absurde in reason the other must needes be certaine by the same reason And what is absurde in practise t' is certaine that ought to be auoided Wherefore if I mistake not your discourse conclude's that wheresoeuer the question is of â—kill there no man ought to appeale from them who haue charge and care to teach to those who learne in matter of that art And therefore if those who haue the charge and care to teach Christian doctrine doe constantly and generally agree in anie pointe after they haue heard and coÌ„sidered the oppositions made against them nether ought anie man appeale vnto the laietie nor can the laietie wiâ—hout presumptioÌ„ and rashnesse accepte of his appeale nor make them selues iudges in a busines of other men's profession wherein them selues are ignorant or at the most schollers Now therefore sithence in our case there is no meanes for anie man to preuaile against the Clergie whom we suppose agreed amongst theÌ„ selues in anie pointe or position but by making the laietie iudges thereof t' is euideÌ„t that it wil be still against reason for anie man to attempt the innouating of anie new pointe or position against the Clergie's common verdict and generall consent And consequently an obligation of reason and conscieÌ„ce not to doe it Hence it follow 's that there is a power and authoritie in the Clergie of determining and deciding questions of Christian doctrine whereof they are the teachers and a necessitie in the laietie who are their schollers of obeying and quieting them selues For the nature of sedition and factioÌ„ is nothing else What is sedition but to remoue the question from them who truly haue or by their places are supposed to haue skill to them who haue or may be presumed to haue none that is from the Gouernors to the subiects from the skillfull to the ignorant and from natiues to Aliens Secondly it follow 's Nothing but euideÌ„ce is a laW full WarraÌ„t to opoose iudgment that there can be but two cases only in which one may oppose these determieations and decisions For t' is manifest that nothing but euideÌ„ce of the truth can iustifie anie
euen now before it passe without controule Nephew Truly sir me thinke's you speake with reason and common sense Yet this authoritie being so great I see not Why it may not of it selfe and by it's instruments worke such an effect as that learned men vpon whose number I am to rely may not become partially affected in the iudgment of Religion and consequently the greater number be more corrupted then the lesser and so the opinion of three were to be preferred before the opinion of the seuēteene Nay in my iudgment experience tell 's vs that not euerie tenth person amongst learned Catholikes doe know the true value and force of our Aduersaries arguments but with a preoccupated dispositiō vndervalue them when perhapps they cannot giue a full and satisfactorie answere vnto them And how should it be otherwise sithence from our childhood we are taught to rely vpon the church for matters of Religion and to reiect and hate anie mā who should seeke to make a contrarie impression in vs. This being plāted in vs in our tender age and growing with nature cannot choose but make a vehement preoccupation in vs whē we come to be able to iudge of controuersies in Religion Nor is it to the pourpose whether it be fit that we haue such an impression or no for I oppose not the thing but the argument which vrge's for the greater number of learned men Vncle. And haue you not marked the like amongst Protestāts ād much more amōgst Puritants And doe you not finde that those who slight Catholike arguments are no lesse preoccupated then the Catholikes you speake of Nay if you marke it they greatest contemners of their Aduersarie's argumēts be they Catholikes or Protestants are commonly the most zealous or rather the most ignorant of the zealous So that in deede the true cause of this partialitie is ignorance and not anie prohibition which contrariwise is a great prouoker to make men doubt of their Religion For euer since our Grand mother Eue harkened to the first why did God all precepts whose reason we vnderstand not haue beene suspicious vnto vs. Tell me then I pray if you were in a shipp where there were a Pilote and his mate and some Captane who had neuer beene at sea before and in a controuersie about their iournay they fall to variance The Pilote and his Mate saying this is the waie the Captane by reports or guesses of his owne saie's that 's not the waie And therevpon the Cōpanie in the shipp take's parts whether side in this case would you iudge to be partiall Nephew T' is cleere that those who ioyne with the Captane are partiall for where the one side hath skill the other none t' is euident that if the question be of skill we ought adhere to the skilfull This I saie is euidēt if there be no particular circumstāce or speciall reason to the contrarie As in our case if the Pilote had some interest to carrie his shipp out of the waie then it were an other matter but stāding precisely in the termes of your case t' is cleere ō which side the partialitie is for the Pilote hauing skill the captaine none the Pilot's aduise were to be preferred in common sense and to side with him were wisdome Vncle. Why then who adhere's to vnskillfull iudgers in matters of Religion are partiall and who adhere's to experts in those matters are wise and rationall Wherefore if the seuenteene adhere to the Mistrisse and teacher of Religiō and the three fly from hir doth not these by this verie act make them selues partiall and those impartiall You must first know whether side goes the right waie before you can suppose ether side to be partiall and consequently the number will still preuaille as long as t' is in doubt whether side is partiall And if one side adhere to that part which was in prepossession the other plead against possession you are bound by the law of nature by the institution of all cōmunities and by commō sense to iudge the pleaders against possession to be partiall vntill they haue proued their motiō so reasonable as wil ouer balāce the great authoritie of possession which is against them Farther if you considere that Christian Religion is supernaturall that is such an one as cannot be learned but frō Almightie God to wit from the Apostles or from them whō the Apostles or their Disciples haue taught you will see that there is no disputing about Religion but only to aske what hath beene taught vs which none can tell vs but those whose life and professiō it is to teach vs that doctrine which them selues first learned to wit the Bishopps and Pastors of the church So that who doubt's of what these mē haue taught and doe teach vs must needes be ignorant of the meanes and waie of knowing Christian doctrine and passionately refuse the true ād certaine rule thereof Nephew I see myne errour and it was the same as if one should condemne a man of partialitie who keepe 's possession of his owne because he yeild's not vp the state whereof he is possessed before iudgmēt be giuē against him whereas contrariwise in the Ciuill law which I once studied a litle if one be put out of quiet possession his Aduersarie may not pleade vntill he be put in againe And sure of all cases the fowlest is to doubt in matters of Religion before one hath reason for where authoritie is plainely on the one side there none cā doubt without wronging that Authoritie vnlesse he haue a reason which doth ouer ballance it And so I am satisfied in this pointe Vncle. Take this with you nephew that generally no cōtrouersies of Religion fall out without some motiues of interest on both sides and so both sides may be suspected of partialitie but cheefely that which beginne's the change Wherefore suppose men were forbiddē to doubt that would be of litle force if once they sawe their commanders were interessed vnlesse they sawe withall that they could not mende them selues Besides in our schooles all things are caled in question which would not be suffered if it endāgered the churche's beliefe Lastly being t' is great schollers that gouerne men's iudgments if they did finde by their learning anie other sure ground of Religion then standing to the churche's authoritie and iudgment they would esteeme as much of hir Commandes and Sampson did of the Philistins shutting their gates vpon him And so wee see by experience that all truly learned ād vnpassionat mē on our side besides the motife of the churche's authoritie adhere vpon pure reason to the Catholike tenets and will protest vpon all that 's holy that they would be of the same Religiō though there were no commande finding it most conformable to reason and to the grounds of Christianitie Nephew The truth is I know not how to answere your discourse yet perhapps a Protestant would saie that all 's but probabilitie and likelihood and therefore to hazard a
in iudging white froÌ„ blacke because for sooth some weake eyes are now aÌ„d theÌ„ mistaken or as to saie no bodie can walke because some haue the palsey which were in deede to destroye nature and it's constancie in vniuersalls because of it's defectibilitie in it's particulars which is against common sense and reason Vncle. Well then doe you thinke their immediate forefathers could teach theÌ„ anie thing as of this qualitie but what themselues belieued and had receiued in the same manner Nephew No surely their immediate forefathers could not deliuer anie thing as of this nature to their successors against the doctrine which they had receiued from their predecessours euer standing in this principle that nothing is to be belieued as of necessitie in this degree but what came by hand to hand froÌ„ Christ or his Apostles Vncle. Tell me then I pray whether in the two last pointes that is whether ether we can be deceiued in what was deliuered by our immediate forefathers vnto vs as of this kinde or they deliuer vs anie doctrine as of this qualitie but what them selues receiued in the like sort whether I saie in ether of these two points there be anie differeÌ„ce betwixt anie former age and this our presentage or that what you haue granted of this age the same must not necessarily hold in all other ages euer since Christ Nephew I confesse I see noe difference Vncle. Reflect then vpon what you haue granted and considere whether anie error against a receiued doctrine aÌ„d practize of this nature could so creepe in as that there shoud be no determinate age of it's beginning in which it first tooke roote and flourished Nephew T' is not possible that anie thing should beginne and yet beginne in no time For I conceiue that an age is no smale time aÌ„d giue 's no litle growth to anie thing that beginne's so that to saie anie point of doctrine is a whole age in growing aÌ„d to saie with all it is imperceptible and after a whole age vnsensible is without doubt senslesse Yet if anie should saie that an error had beene begun by a priuate man and taught to some in one age which being neglected grew into practize in some one countrie and froÌ„ theÌ„ce by the like neglect grew likewise to be customarie in the next adioyning and so spredd it self vntill it had possessed the hart of Christendome and this for manie yeares so that now all memorie that euer the contrarie had beene in credit and practize were lost if this I saie one should tell me I doubt whether I should be able to giue him a conuincing answere and demonstratiue satisfaction Vncle. Cosen this question trencheth vpon what we haue alreadie talked of therefore I will only giue you such a hint as your self may worke vpon First it is as manifest an impossibilitie that a change of Religion should be introduced insensibly into anie one Countrie as that a burning feauer should for as long time consume the same whole couÌ„trie without being taken notice of or sought to be preuented sithence as we saide nature permit's vs not generally to be sleepie in Religion Secondly to saie it shall passe imperceptible from country to countrie and so get possession of the whole Christian world is farr more impossible men's natures and dispositioÌ„s being so diuers that if they were put to we are cappes or shoes a like it could not be effected but by some publicke force or commande Thirdly that this should be for so long a terme that the coÌ„trarie practize should be quit forgotteÌ„ to haue beene formerly in vse and request is yet beyoÌ„d both So that who soeuer is troubled with this doubt doth not rightly vnderstand the nature of Christian Religion which is a truth of the qualitie of science hanging all together Wherevnto a truth may be added and yet remaine whole but if anie falsitie or crosse position be admitted it will not only destroy the positioÌ„ immediatly opposite but also what soeuer dependeth of it that is all in deede but cheefely tradition And so we see by experience that none euer moued anie point of faith but if their reuolt dured loÌ„g they proceeded so farr as to take a waie tradition the rule of all we are to belieue But can you tell me haue we reached to the resolution of your demande aÌ„d are you fully satisfied Nephew This you haue concluded that if our church rely vpon traditioÌ„ now it euer did so And if it euer did rely vpon tradition it must needes haue maintained the same doctrine from Christ's time to ours for nether could anie former age deliuer anie thing contrarie to what they had receiued vpon this principle nor we mistake what they deliuered so that nothing contrarie to the first receiued doctrine can be admitted This yet me thinke's waÌ„teth To shew that the present Roman church rely's vpon tradition which I confesse to me is euident at least that what soeuer we haue receiued froÌ„ our forefathers as comming by-hand to hand from Christ that we reuerence and receiue all such pointes as being necessarie to be belieued Only I haue one scruple wherein I must craue your helpe And it is Whether this rule of traditioÌ„ which you giue to be so constantly held to be the rule of faith whether I saie it be so admitted of by all Catholikes or no for I feare the varietie of contrarie opinions which I heare are amoÌ„gst our learned men will preiudice your argumeÌ„s Wherefore I could wish you woud shew me §. 9 That the dissention of Catholike Doctor concerning the rule of faith doth not hurt the certaintie of Tradition FOr I am tould how true I know not that some of our Deuines mantaine that in the person of the Pope reside's the rule of faith by a singular guift and priuiledge bestowed vpon S. Peeter and his successors And this so rigorously that no Generall Councell no not although the Pope's Legats be present and confirme it is of force to oblige â—â— of faiht vntill the personall confirmation of his Holinesse be obtained Others they saie esteeme the Councell aboue the Pope and so doe not hold the Pope's approbation of a Councell to be necessarie but that this rule of faith reside's in the Councell Others I heare to make all safe ioyne both in one and nether admit the Councell without the Pope not the Pope without the Councell to breede anie obligation of faith And farther I heare that amongst these Deuines of what opinion soeuer they be touching the subiect in which this rule or highest authoritie doth reside there be some which thinke that not anie new doctrine or position can be broached or proposed as certaine and as an article of faith by what authoritie soeuer vnlesse that doctrine was esteemed certaine before and euer belieued as such Yet I am tould there be manie who mantaine and â—ouch that this highest authoritie of the church wheresoeuer it be may and can define points of doctrine not
present church as before they did Nephew Nay if you goe that waie to worke I feare you will fall short of your intent For the child belieue's father and mother the parishoner his Pastor without reflection of the present church T' is like therefore these Deuines rely vpoÌ„ the motiues which they mantaine what soeuer they did when they were yong Vncle. Not so nether for as the water of the new riuer which is brought to London come's to a particular house by a smale pipe yet t' is continuate to the whole bodie of the riuer so the instruction of faith though it come to a child by his parents and to a parishoner by his Pastor yet the dependence of the doctrine is from the whole church whose members and instruments these parents and Pastors are if they be in the church to which you know I tould you what is required And t' is the like when parents teach their children what is to be done or auoided according to the lawes of the couÌ„try for though the father speake yet t' is the common wealth which preuaileth and bindeth Nephew At least me thinke's vncle such great Doctors should not be ignorant of a point agreed vpon by the whole church and therefore since they disagree about the motiue of faith I doe not see how you can saie t' is generally agreed on in the Catholike church Vncle. Had this agreemeÌ„t beene made in a Generall Councell or in some vniuersall meeting of faithfull ChristiaÌ„s and so recorded I doubt not but these learned Clarkes would haue knowne it but it was not so agreed on Yet as by the vniuersall blessing of crescite multiplicamini Gen. 1. all men and beasts agreed vpon feeding and filling the world euerie one in his kinde by the directioÌ„ of their maker knocking at their stomackes when they were hungrie and at their pharisie when they were full to set on worke those instruments by which the se coÌ„mands of Almightie God were to be fullfilled Marc 16 Euen so by the like blessing of Euntes in mundam vniuersum praedicate omni creaturae the Apostles being dispersed into all natioÌ„s by the vertue of doeing miracles found credulitie or rather forced faith out of the flintie harts of the corrupted world and hauing setled Christs doctrine dying left in their successors soules and mindes this agreement To belieue what was deliuered from them and to trust those who had heard them speake and afterwards to trust those who had heard it from them who had their instruction from the Apostles and lastly to trust the publike consent which affirmed that they held their faith by entaile from them though manie ages after This agreement being written in harts and not in bookes t' is easie for learned men who seeke their learning in bookes and not in harts to mistake As in Philosophie whilest great Clarkes seeke nature not in it self but in other men's sayings they are deuided and few in the right the truth being but one Nephew You haue beene as good as you word For I see it importe's not that our Deuines be of different opinions in this point so that in their liues and practize they agree And truly I neuer heard of anie Catholike that ether doubted but that Christian doctrine was descended by Tradition or thought that what was so descended could be false nay I thinke euerie moderate and wise Protestant will make no question of that which he conceiues to haue descended from the Apostles by succession For Catholikes wee all rely vpon the censure of the present church nor can or â—are anie man appeale froÌ„ it and call him self a Catholike for we all account them infidels and publicans who are refractorie to this tenet Wherfore t' is euident that what soeuer the church speake's and deliuer's for Tradition is agreed vpon by all Catholikes to be certaine and vnrefusable and sithence all other motiues or rules of faith are not vniuersally receiued t' is euident likewise that this is the rule which can oblige vs to certaintiem matters of beliefe But I haue an other great difficultie to wit that I see our Catechists and preachers wheÌ„ they teach vs Christian doctrine tell vs this you are to belieue this you are to practize without expressing the differences which are betwixt the points of doctrine whereof perhapps some are but only the answeres of learned men some definitioÌ„s of the church and some matters of traditioÌ„ And the like I belieue of former ages Christian doctrine descending vnto vs in a heape or confusion and therefore t is hard to distinguish what is of Tradition what the generall consent of the church and what only learned men's opinions Why then may not some position of this last rancke passe for a tradition by the adoption of some ages in which it will be forgotten that euer it had it's beginning froÌ„ the wit and industrie of priuate men And to satisfie me in this point you must let me see how that The teaching of Christian doctrine without determining what is of necessitie to be belieued what not hurte's not the progresse of tradition VNcle If I should answere you that former ages haue beene more exact in distinguishing things certaine from vncertaine it would not be without ground as you may see by the framing of antient creedes aÌ„d other professions of faith as occasions required but this were to send you to antiquitie whereas in this discourse you know we both desire that common sense and reason without farther enquiry should be our iudge Wherefore the point you speake of which you feare might deceiue vs by the likenesse of tradition is ether true or false if true then I pray what incoÌ„uenience is there if it surprise vs in the qualitie of it's certaintie Nephew This I feare and thinke that it would breake the rule and certaintie of Tradition Where vpon relye's the whole building and frame of our faith according to your discourse For if once truth not deliuered by traditioÌ„ may passe for so deliuered what securitie can we haue that a falsitie may not likewise passe in the same maÌ„ner and so bring an errour amongst vs Vncle. I put you only that part of the question if the point were true which you draw into the contrarie if it were false wherefore if it doe not follow that an vntruth can deceiue vs in that kinde then there is no incoÌ„uenieÌ„ce in the consequeÌ„ce of the former part to wit that truth may be taken as deliuered by traditioÌ„ which truly is not so deliuered And the reason is cleare for seeing the truths of ReligioÌ„ are knowne for the framing of our liues conformably vnto them it importe's litle in respect of vertue vpon what grounds they are held in particular so they be vniuersally and coÌ„stantly held for an action done in consequence of such belieued truths is neuer the worse for the qualitie of the certaintie of it's obiect Yet for your farther satisfaction this I will adde