comparison confirmeth the first part of our argument for such kinds of reasons hath both Christ and his Apostles vsed neither can our aduersaries deuie but that the writings of the new Testament are more excellent then the writings of the olde The other part of our argument is proued by the expresse words of Christ for so far was it from Christ that he wold reprooue the Iewes for searching the Scriptures but did himselfe rather reason after that manner The 7. place That ye may learne by vs that no man presume aboue that which is written c. If we ought not to presume to be wise aboue that which is written and the principles of faith appertain vnto true and perfect wisedome then trulie ought wee to be contented with the scriptures in causes and matters of faith The antecedent is true Therefore the consequent cannot be denied The first parte of our Argument is manifest of it selfe The other part is prooued by the place of the Apostle Yet héere I must allso confesse that this place of the Apostle Paule is otherwise expounded of certayne newe Writers to wit of those things which Paule himselfe had before written The which sence if anye man be willing to followe then thus make we our argument If Paule called backe the Corinthians vnto his owne writings how much more then ought we to be called backe vnto the writings of the whole Scriptures But because the olde writers whome our aduersaryes followe most doo expounde this place of Paule generallye I had rather to frame mine argument from the interpretation of them There maye be also framed an euident and plaine sylogisme in the second mode of the second figure flatlye denieng their assertion in this sort Whosoeuer groundeth anie Article of faith vpō traditions not writtē taketh vpon him to be wise aboue that which is written But no man truly obeying the Christian Apostolike doctrine doth take vpon him to be wise aboue that which is writtē Ergo No man truly obeying the christian apostolike doctrine doth groūd any principle of faith vpon traditions not written The 8. Place Manie other things did Iesus which are not written in this booke but these things are written that you might beleeue that Iesus Christ is the sonne of God and in beleeuing you might haue euerlasting lyfe through his name If the Apostles and Euangelists wrote those things which seemed sufficient and necessarie that we which beleeue may haue eternall life then truely the Articles of our faith are to be grounded vppon the Scriptures and not vpon traditions which are vnwritten which our aduersaries tearme Apostolike The Antecedent is true And therefore the consequent cannot be denied The truth of the first part of our Argument is manifest except peraduenture anie man would goe about to thinke himselfe wiser then either the Apostles or Euangelists the which God forbid that anie man should do The consequent is proued by the words of Iohn The 9. place The lawe of the Lord is perfect giuing life true wisdome vnto man yea the law of the Lord is right and iust more precious then golde sweeter then honnie the wisedome and vnderstanding of the Church he is blessed that meditateth or occupieth himselfe therein If the scriptures of the olde testament in their kinde were perfect because therein is contained true wisedome and made those blessed euen as manie as willinglie and constantlie did meditate therein then trulie after that the writings of the Apostles were ioyned vnto the olde testament the which writings of the Apostles doo explicate and teach the veritie and truth of the saide olde testament then I say by good right consequence the whole scriptures both of the olde and new testament may be called perfect as that which perfectlie containeth all necessarie doctrine for the church of Christ The antecedent is true And therefore the consequence must be also true The antecedent is manifest inough of it selfe The minor is prooued by the recited places For by the name and title of the law is often vnderstood y e whole scriptures of the olde testament as it is manifest by the Apostle Paule Gal. 4. ver 21. as also the circumstance of the afore alleaged place doth most manifestly proue Now frō these and such other places we will gather a true definition of the holye Scriptures after this sort The holie scripture is the word of God giuen by diuine inspiration from God and by the Prophets Apostles and Euangelists mooued by the spirit of God was written in the bookes Canonicall of the olde and new testament that the veritie and truth of God might be taken and set free from the obliuion and corruptings of men that the Church might be perfectlie instructed and confirmed in all those things the knowledge and faith whereof is necessarie to saluation This definition is most perfectly substancially true For it standeth vpon y e Genus differēce containeth al those causes both which y e Logitiās say belōg to y e Subiectū as also y ◠belōg vnto y e Attributū And especially it cōtaineth y e efficiēt cause vnder y e which is added y e instrumētal thē y e final cause which two causes in such kind of matters are especially to be considered The spirit of god is y e cause efficiēt who vsed y e prophets apostles as instrumēts y e cōīeruatiō of y e truth cōfirmation of the church is the end wherefore y e word of God was put in writing so this definition standeth vppon his full partes and the thing defined and the definition doo both agrée together Now from this definition as from a most perfect true ground we make thus our demonstratiue argument Whatsoeuer is the word of God giuen by inspiration from God and written by the Prophets Apostles and Euangelists by the motion of Gods spirit c. that contayneth all principles necessarie to christian faith But the holie Scripture is the word giuen by diuine inspiration c. Ergo the holie Scriptures containe al principles necessarie to the christian faith This argument is most euident and necessarie and standeth grounded vppon grounds of the former places and contayneth the veritie and truth of our whole question Wherefore doth the Scriptures containe all these things the knowledge faith whereof are necessarie vnto saluation Truely because the word of God was written by the Prophets and Apostles to this end that the Church should be perfectly instructed c. Againe whatsoeuer is spoken of the one partie may be sayde of the other Furthermore if anie doe aske what these things be the knowledge and faith whereof are necessarie to saluation I answere the Scriptures And againe when I name the Scriptures I name all those things the knowledge whereof is necessarie to saluation The like also may be said touching the ground
of our argument the which is the definition of the Scripture as is before said wherfore this our demonstration and argument is most manifest and hath brought the truth of our opinion out of all question or doubt to wit that the holy scriptures containe all those principles necessarie to Christian faith the which was our purpose to proue The third Chapter NOW after that the truth of our opinion is made manifest by the former demonstrations affirmatiue disputation as at the first we did determine so will we now come vnto the negatiue disputation which is to refell and refute the opinion of our aduersaries For although y e truth béeing made manifest y e falsehoode must néeds bée confuted ouerthrowen by this our affirmatiue disputation wée haue manifestly proued y t the scriptures do containe all those things the knowledge faith whereof is necessarye to saluation yet notwithstaÌ„ding this ouâ—â—egatiue disputation procéedeth as rising of necessarie consequence which is this That ther is nothing to be sought for out of the holie scriptures the knowledge and faith whereof is necessarie to saluation And by force of the consequence traditions not written by the Apostles are not to be receiued in anie Article and principle of faith yet notwithstanding it commeth to passe I know not by what meanes that we are more delighted in the confuting of errour and falsehoode then in confirming the truth Wherfore I could not let slip this kind of disputation wherby the reader may be throughly confirmed in the knowledge of y e truth This therefore is the opinion of our aduersaries which repugneth w t ours euen as it were Ex Diametro to wit That the holy scriptures do not coÌ„tain al things the knowledge faith whereof is necessarie to saluation The which error we thus confute If Moses the Prophets Christ the Apostles did alwaies confirme the principles of faith by the Scriptures and not by vnwritten traditions our aduersaries on the contrarie part will confirme the principles of faith verie seldome by the Scripture but most vsualliâ—aâ—y vnwritten traditions then truelie our aâ—â—ersaries doo otherwise teach the Church then either did Moses the Prophets Christ or the Apostles The Antecedent is true And so is the consequent And by force of the consequent our aduersaries are not to be allowed in y e manner of instructing y e church The antecedent is true the coÌ„sequeÌ„t is proued by this inductioÌ„ collected froÌ„ places of holy scripture Moses doth call them backe to the lawe written as S. Paule doth interprete it The same Moses coÌ„mandeth the law writen to be published before all the people Iosua exhorteth the Israelits that they do those things which are written in the booke of the lawe In the time of Iosia king of Israel the people sware to obserue those things which were written in the lawe The Prophets each where call the Israelites to the writings of Moses After the people returned from the captiuitie the lawe of Moses was recited the worshipping of God was taken from that lawe written Christ biddeth theÌ„ search the Scriptures Christ speaking to the 〈◊〉 saith yee erre because ye know not the Scriptures They haue Moses and the Prophets let them heare them And Christ opened the vnderstanding of the Apostles that they might vnderstand the Scriptures Paule preached Christ alleadging the law and the Prophets Appollos reproueth the Iewes proueth that Iesus is Christ by the Scriptures The Thessalonians or chiefe of Beraea are praised because they searched the Scriptures whether it were so yea or no as Paule had preached And thus I conclude that I may not bring in all those places of Scripture which Christ and the Apostles most often times alledged This kind of induction is most firme and cannot be refelled by any argument And y e force of y e consequeÌ„t to what end it is directed doth manifestly appeare for y e prophets apostles are ordeined of god to be instructers of y e church were inspired by the holy Ghost And Christ himselfe is the most perfect doctor of the Church wherby we sée y t they which teach y e church of Christ other wise then Christ himself his Apostles and Prophets haue taught that is not laieng those foundations which they layde but other that they instruct the Church of Christ amisse But our aduersaries teach otherwise inasmuch as they call y e church not to the Scriptures alone as is before said but to traditions not written And out of the former argument there ariseth this conclusion If the Apostles who although they wer indued with the spirit of God and taught by mouth yet notwithstanding did referre themselues vnto the Prophetical scriptures then a great deale more ought our aduersaries to referre their principles of doctrine vnto the holye Scriptures And sith they doo not so they are not to be heard The antecedent is true And therefore the consequent must be true The antecedent is manifest by comparison And the truth of the consequent is confirmed in the former argument If all things be not contained in the scriptures the knowledge and faith whereof is necessarie to saluation then it followeth that the spirit of God did not accomplish his effect when he gaue the scriptures vnto the Church But the consequent is most false blasphemous So likewise is the antecedent The consequent of the former proposâ—tion was prooued when we went to search out the causes of the scriptures in y e second chapter of this our disputation where wée affirmed y t the word of God was to this end purpose committed to writing that it might be freed and deliuered from the corruption of man and that it might help the memorie of the godly and finally that the Church might more and more bée instructed and confirmed in those things the knowledg faith whereof is necessarie to saluation Now if all those things be not contained in the scriptures then truly it followeth y â— the spirit of God did not perfectly but in part accomplish his effect the which God forbid And certainly if you graunt this which cannot be denied that the scriptures were giuen vnto the church not rashly nor in vaine but by the great prouidence and wisedome of God then I vrge this and say If the scriptures were giuen by God that the word of god shuld be set frée and deliuered from the corruption of men I pray you would the spirite of God then haue some certaine things necessarie to saluation to be set frée from the corruption of men and some things not If the Scriptures were giuen to helpe the memorie of the godly was it then giuen in part onely or shall we say that of those things which were necessarie to saluation that some things are to be committed to memorie and some things not or if the memorie of those things
though vnto you saith he there were anie part of faith wanting or y t you ought or néed to learne anie thing And I sée this opinion of interpreters greatly to please certaine of the learned new writers But other expound the name of faith touching the constancie of faith as in the same chapter he sayth I sent that I might know your faith least Sathan had tempted you by anie kinde of meanes and that our labour had bene in vaine But our aduersaries stande vpon these points First there is attributed vnto the Thessalonians the fulnesse of faith as is before sayd Secondly there is no doubt but that they were baptised and therefore perfectly instructed in christian religion They bring forth many other argumēts vnto this end and chiefly y e whole 2. cha of y e first epistle vnto y e Thessaloniās But let our aduersaries choose which interpretation they will yet shal it not serue anie thing for their purpose Now concerning their consequent I deny it for if by this word faith they vnderstand a through perswasion or constancie of faith the error is in the diuers signification of the word But if they had rather expound it touching doctrine then their cōsequence is false For they doe not well conclude thus they say some thing was wanting to y e faith of y e Thessalonians ergo Paul did not declare by mouth all thinges vnto them or else all thinges were not written by the apostles necessarie to faith For it is one thing to teach another to learne and ther may be a defect in the scholler whē as there is none in the master Therfore Paul saith Phil. 3. It is profitable for you not troublesōe vnto me to repeat those things againe vnto you But that we may return to y e Thessaloniās You know saith he what cōmaundements we gaue vnto you that you should abstein from fornication c. But let vs graunt this yet truly it followeth not because ther was some thing wāting vnto the faith of the Thessalonians that therfore Paule the rest of the Apostles wrote not all the things necessarie to the doctrine of y t gospell These arguments truely are of no value nor force neither yet scātly hang together Therfore we may wel bring thē to an absurditie saying If this argumēt of our aduersaries do preuaile that the apostles reserued many thinges which they taught by mouth vnto traditions beeing necessary to the saluation of the Church because Paule wished that hee might see the face of the Thessalonians that hee might supply those things which wer wanting to their faith thē it wold follow that Paule himselfe was all the apostles the Thessalonians the whole vniuersall church the which is too absurde And therefore wée may turne their argument vpō themselues saying◠If our aduersaries do heereby prooue their traditions because Paule desired to see the face of the Thessalonians that being present he might fully instruct them by mouth Then wold it follow that this appertaineth nothing vnto vs which a long time since could not see the face of Paule But perchance they wil say y ◠the olde fathers wrote those things which Paule then taught when he was present But because I will not say y ◠that is false I will make them this answere If those things were worth y ◠writing why did not Paule himselfe write thē If not why shuld y e old doctors write thē Therefore thus we may auoid their error saying That Paule did therfore desire to sée y ◠Thessalonians y t therby he might the more firmely establish their faith when as he did manifestly perceiue of what great efficacie y e presence of their techer was But séeing we cannot inioy this benefit we must plainly cleaue to the writinges of the Apostles and those their writings ought to bée of so great value vnto vs as if that the Apostles themselues were present to speak vnto vs so much the rather because in those writings we may heare euē y e voice of Christ Paule wrote vnto the Corinthians that when he came vnto them he would set the rest in order ergo he reserued many things to be taught by mouth The antecedent is proued 1. Cor. 11. Thus I answere their antecedent Paule doth not héere speak of the chiefe points of faith but of Ecclesiasticall order For the Gréeke word which he vseth signifieth to determine some matter according to some order As Paule to Tit. 1. chap. saith Ordain elders as I haue commaunded thee where Paule vseth the verie same Gréeke worde And againe 1. Cor. 16. Paule vseth the same word in the actiue voice touching the bestowing of their liberalitie saith because I haue commanded c. And speaketh of an order to be kept in the same matter so the french men say Ordonner in their tongue and we say Ordaine Now I denie their consequent for the error is Secundum figuram dictionis for y ◠proper signification of the worde signifieth another thing then they meane Also their consequence is false Paule would set in order certaine things amongest the Corinthians when hée was present Ergo saie they hée would constitute new principles of faith Againe they reason thus Paule deferred certaine things vntill his comming the which he woulde set in order among the Corinthians ergo hée neuer wrote them Also those things are they which the Prelates of Rome doo obtrude and thrust vppon vs as traditions springing from the Apostles All these arguments are foolish and false or worse if worse may be And therefore wée maye well bring them to an absurditie saying If that be true which our aduersaryes would to wit that Paule then when hee wrote that Epistle had not deliuered to the Corinthians al those things which wer necessarie to faith then would it come to passe which GOD forbid that those thing which followe in his Epistle were not true to wit that the Corinthians were made rich in all knowledge The 1. Corinth Also hee sayth I declare vnto you the Gospell the which I preached the which also ye haue receiued in the which yee stande and by the which also yee are saued 1. Cor. 15. And againe Ye aboūd in al things in faith in word in knowledge in all zeale and in all loue towardes vs euen so see that yee abound in this grace also 2. Cor. 8. And againe What is it in the which you are inferiour to other churches 2. Cor. 12. And manie such like examples Finally this their obiection may be turned vpon themselues and correted as wée haue done in the former arguments Iohn would not write much Ergo hee wrote not all things necessarie to faith The antecedent is proued in the 2. and 3. Epistles of Iohn wher he saith thus Whē I had manie things to write vnto you yet would I not write with paper and inke I admit
their antecedent yet I denye their consequent For these things hang not together Iohn had manye things to write Ergo they were principles of faith Ergo also they are not any wher extāt for otherwise this absurditie would followe That the same Ladie vnto the which Iohn wrote was not fullie instructed in christian religion therefore those hang not together with Iohns speeches whē as he commēdeth the faith of the same ladie as also of hir childrē whō he affirmeth to walk in the truth And therefore this argument may be turned vpon themselues as y e other before Manie other things did Iesus beside those which were written the which if they were euerie one written the whole world would not containe the bookes Ergo all things necessarie to faith are not written by the Apostles The antecedent is proued Iohn 21. I gaunt their antecedent yet I denye their consequent For the error is Secundum ignorantiam Elenchi for they wander héere without the compasse of our question Iohn speaketh in that place of miracles which Christ did our disputation is of doctrine necessarie to faith saluation For these are y e words of Iohn Christ did manie things therfore héerof commeth no consequent Al y e miracles y t Christ did are not written ergo say they all y ◠principles of christian religiō doctrin are not writē Now sée héere how our aduersaries beat themselues with their owne weapons For if our aduersaries refer their traditions vnto those things which Iohn faith are not written Ergo those traditions are infinit with out number so by the force of the consequent without the cōpasse of knowledge And truly I easely confesse that such kind of traditions are so greatly increased that the world now can scantly beare them We may therefore turne their argument vpon themselues thus Iohn saith Christ did manie other things which are not written but he also affirmeth That those things which are written are written to the ende we might beleeue haue eternall life Ergo those things which are written are sufficient to saluation The error therefore of our aduersaries may thus be amended saieng Iohn and the rest of the Euangelists did choose out of those things which Christ did being otherwise infinite those which séemed necessary whereby it commeth to passe y ◠we ought to be contented with the writings of the apostles The Apostles did often recite testimonies taken from the traditions of such auncient men as liued before their daies Ergo wee must not onelie sticke to the Scriptures The antecedent is manifest 2. Tim 3. As Iannes Iambris withstood Moses Againe Iude ver 9. Michael the Archangell disputed about the bodie of Moses And a little after he reciteth the Prophecie of Enoch Behold the Lord cōmeth with manie thousands of his saints To their antecedent I aunswere thus Indéede I confesse that the Apostles didde sometimes recite certaine sentences taken out of the bookes Apocripha And to aunswere the place of Paule in Timothie I doo not doubt but in his time y ◠some booke did remaine touching those Magis Iannes and Iambris for Plinie in his 30. booke of his naturall historie chap. 1. doth there recken vp Iannes amongst the auncient Magi the which he would not haue done except he had learned it out of some booke And furthermore I aunswere that those Ethnickes were not altogether to bée refused of the Apostles for so Paule reciteth certaine verses out of Aratus and Epiminides but I doo affirme that the Apostles did not therfore vse these testimonies that by them they wold confirme any principle of faith for when they would so doo they had alwaies readie expresse places taken out of the writings of the Prophets and those they did expounde according to the motion of the holy Ghost But when they would teach any doctrine touching manners or declare some thing touching the which very few or none did doubt thē if peraduēture they remembred any thing written in the bookes Apocripha or in the writings of those Ethinks they did not so dislike their sentences but that they wold apply them vnto their purpose yet notwithstanding the Apostles did not attribute so great authoritie vnto them that they should be of sufficient authoritie thēselues for god forbid we shuld once think so But they were willing by that meanes to mooue mens mindes the more that they might thereby the easier receiue their doctrine which notwithstanding was otherwise sufficiently confirmed euen by the word of God As for examples sake it is manifest in Exodus that the Magi or wise men of Aegipt withstood Moses what matter is it by what name those Magi were called or can those their names be applyed to any principle of faith No to none truly Also Michael woulde not vse railing words vnto the diuell as Saint Iude saith wherby we may learn much lesse to speak euil of Magistrates ordained of God This exhortation of Iude to the reuerencing of Magistrates is in many places to be found in the scriptures The like is that which Peter saith That the Angels doo not raile on those that haue authoritie 2. Pet. 2. Also the Lord will come saith Iude to rewarde the wicked the which threatnings is vsual in the holy scriptures Whereby we manifestly sée to what ende the Apostles culled out certaine sentences from the bookes Apocripha to the seruing of their own purpose Now we come vnto y e cōsequēt which I denie The Apostles did vse certain sentences taken out of the bookes Apocripha Ergo they vsed them to the confirmation of faith And againe therefore also we ought to runne to traditions so often as we dispute of faith as though the testimonies of the holy scriptures did faile vs. This is a false argument no good consequent can come héerof For the Apostles vsed not such testimonies to confirme principles of religion Yea and euen those testimonies them selues if you marke well the matter you shall sée them confirmed by many expres places of scriptures Wherfore our aduersaries séeme to be forgetful of our purposed questiō while they go about to obiect these things to vs for this is y e state of our questiō whē ther ariseth cōtrouersie touching faith whether we ought to sticke onelye to the testimonies of the Scriptures or els to adde thervnto traditions to the which we may giue the like credite as we maye to the scriptures But you shall finde no such thing in these testimonies which the Apostles vsed as I haue before shewed Yea and I may say that this argument is not rightly applied against vs in this cause taken from the Apostles Let vs retourne this absurditie on our aduersaries saieng thus If because the Apostles did recite certaine sentences out of bookes not Canonicall that therefore it followeth the Apostles did attribute authoritie to those bookes such like in matters of faith
of God so we by the conduction of the same spirit beléeue that that is true which the Church affirmeth y t our faith may neuer rest vpō men but for euer vpon God alone The Apostles did adde vnto the lawe to wit the doctrine of the Gospell Ergo it is lawfull to adde vnto the worde of God To the antecedent I thus aunswere Although the doctrine of the Gospell bée more full and fruitfull then the writing of the olde Testament yet notwithstanding if ye well mark the matter in y e new and olde testament the selfe same doctrine of saluation is contained in them both for that is most true which Paule saith Acts 26. that he taught no other thing then that which the prophets and Moses had before taught And againe in the first to y e Rom. he sheweth y t the gospel was before promised by the Prophets therfore this is false which they say that the Apostles added to the law for it is one thing to adde to the lawe and another to erpound and referre it to his owne proper scope and purpose For let some man bring forth an obligation that we may vse this similitude and the payment being made he addeth at the ende that the Obligation is satisfied I pray you can he well be sayd to adde any thing to the same Obligation So when the Apostles gaue testimonie to the scriptures that Christ by his cōming had fulfilled both the lawe and the prophets they did not adde either to y e law or writings of the Prophets Now their consequent I denie for héere is an error Secundum figuram dictionis as it is manifest by these things which I haue alreadie spoken Yea also the argument cannot well procéed from the Apostles to other men for graunt this that God would adde vnto his lawe and that it was done by the ministerie of the Apostles which wrote by the influence motion of the spirit of God yet truly héereby can nothing happen whereby it shoulde be lawfull for other men to adde vnto y e same word of God Wherefore sithen by the argumentation of our aduersaries there would follow the ouerthrowe of this most noble excellent doctrine touching the similitude of the old and new Testament Therefore we may well amend their error by this most excellent saieng which is extant in the workes of Iustinus Matyre In interg resp wher he asketh this and saith What is the Lawe he aunswereth saith It is the Gospell foreshewed Againe he demaundeth What is the Gospell he auns wereth The Lawe fulfilled By which words it is manifest that the Gospell is not a newe doctrine added vnto the lawe but a new fulfilling of the olde promise And thus we suppose that we haue sufficiently disputed touching the obiections of our aduersaries which they haue wreasted out of the worde of God The 5. Chapter FOrasmuch as the aduersaries themselues sufficiently knowe how weake féeble those argumēts are which they take out of y e scripturs against the scriptures then at the last they flie to the testimonies of the auncient Fathers the which they very diligently endeuour to beate into our heads with Orations long and tedious to the ende that by the heape thereof they might ouer whelme vs. Wherefore it séemeth conuenient in this part of our treatise to set downe some thing whereby not onely the obiections of the Papists but also our aunsweres may the more easier be vnderstood Now therefore y t we maye gather most true and infallible principles let vs adde some certaine rules to this our disputation by whose helpe the mindes of the olde Doctors may be expounded and so by the conduction of those rules as by a clue of thred we may both enter into the many variable writings of the Doctours as into a most daungerous Laborynth and there also kéepe our selues occupied most safely and without hurt Let this therefore be the first Rule THe writings of the auncient Doctors for the establishing and confirmation of our faith are so farre foorth to be receiued as they agree with the holie and diuine scriptures Although this first rule be plain inough of himselfe especially to those that knowe the truth yet will I for the confirmation of the same lay downe certaine proofes If anie preach vnto you otherwise then that which we haue preached vnto you let him be accurssed saith S. Paule And againe Warne some that they teach no other doctrine And againe Marke them diligentlie which cause diuision and offences contrarie to the doctrine which ye haue learned and auoide them And again If anie man teach otherwise he is puffed vp and knoweth nothing And agayne Be not carried about with diuers and straunge doctrines with many more places to this effect Yet least happely our aduersaries shoulde say that these places repeted are to be vnderstood of the word deliuered by tradition and not of the word written leauing those things which in the former parte of this treatise are handeled copiously and at large I will aske them this Question whether they think y e Apostles to haue vttered spoken anie thing in their lectures sermons which doth disagrée with those things which they haue committed to writing I am sure they will in no wise confesse it Wherefore mauger their heades they must agrée with vs that this our first Rule is infallible and most true to wit that the writings of the auncient doctors are so far foorth to be receiued as they doe agrée with the sacred Scripture But if they shall perceiue the auncient Doctours themselues to be of our mind I hope then all doubt remooued they will together with vs agrée to our former rule This therefore is the minde of Origen It behooueth vs to bring the holie Scriptures for witnesses for because our senses and allegations without the witnesse of them are altogether voyde of credite And againe Euen as there is not anie golde sanctified without the temple so ther is no sence without the Scripture that is holie Tertulian What is there contrarie to vs in our writings hee speaketh of the holye Scriptures And againe The same that we are the same they be Chrisostome If anie thing bee spoken without the Scriptures the minde of the hearers is thereby brought into doubt Hierome Whatsoeuer heereafter shall be spoken besides the Apostolicall writings let it be abrogated of no value altogether without credit Agustine Doo thou not bring vs anie cauelles from the writinges of the Bishoppes as of Hillarie or Ciprian against the infallible testimonie of the diuine scriptures Because as it behooueth vs to put a difference betweene that kinde of writing and the Scriptures of GOD for the writings of men are not so to be read that it is not lawfull for vs to thinke the contrarie if at anie time they haue peraduenture thought otherwise then the
truth requireth And againe wee must not agree to the Catholyke Bishoppes if at anie time they are deceiued taking opinion contrarie to the canonical scriptures And againe I haue learned to giue this honour and reuerence onely to those writinges which are called Canonicall that I faithfully beleeue the authours of them haue not in anie point at anie time erred in their writings but other mens writings I doo so reade that though they excell in sanctimonie or holynesse yet I doo not therefore thinke it true because they so affirme but because they are able to perswade mee either by Canonicall Scripture or by probable reason those thinges which dissent not from the truth Thus farre he These things haue our aduersaries themselues recorded amongest their Decretalls insomuch that they maie not denie this first rule least they seeme to denie their owne Decretalls The second Rule THE auncient Doctours doo oftentimes by the name of Traditious vnderstand the same doctrine that is cōtained in the Apostolical writing That this rule is true it shall appeare by that which followeth Irenaeus as it is reported by Eusebius doth saie That Policarpus taught these things which he had learned of the Apostles which things both the Church deliuered and are onely to bee accounted true thus much he He saith Tradit the Church doth deliuer that is doeth teach namely out of the writings of the Apostles If hée were not thus to be vnderstood how could that stand which he hath sayde And those things are onely true which thing is verie easie to be gathered of the forenamed Irenaeus whose wordes are by Eusebius reported Policarpus saith he did report those things which he had heard of the Apostles altogether agreeable to the holy Scriptures And the said Irenaeus saith in another place The Church of Rome wrote to the Church of Corinth shewing them the same tradition which they had receiued of the apostles to wit that there was one God almightie so consequently the doctrine contained in the bookes of Moses And a little after he saith Manie of the vnlearned and barbarous people beeing ignoraunt of the Scriptures doo diligently keepe the olde auncient traditions beleeuing in one God in Iesus Christ born of the virgin Marie Tertulian The Apostolicall doctrine doth allow nothing contrarie to the rule of Gods word namely those things which the Apostles haue taught and committed to writings The third Rule THE auncient Doctors do name that vnwritten traditions which in expresse words are not found in the holy Scriptures but notwithstanding if you diligently mark the effect thereof is contained in the Scriptures So Basil confesseth that he vsed certaine tearmes against heretikes which are not written but yet notwithstāding faith he are not contrarie to the true sence of the Scriptures And Nazianzenus refuteth the Macidonians which did denie the deitie of the holy Ghost because he is not tearmed with plaine words in the holy Scriptures to be the third person in the deitie saying y ◠ther are diuers things in the Scriptures which are not plainly expressed As for example If y ◠say twise two I will say saith he y ◠thou saist foure In like manner Augustine doth proue that the baptisme of infants is contained in holy Scriptures and that they shoulde not be rebaptised The like is to be sayde of the word or tearme Omoousion the trinitie such like concerning the which we haue spoken in the former chapter The 4. Rule THE auncient Doctors vnder the name of traditions do not meane anie certaine grounded opinion touching religion but ecclesiasticall ceremonies and to the end they may the more beautifie and set foorth the order of the Church they commonly ascribe the sayde ceremonies to the Apostles as if they were the principall authours of the same Now many and diuers y e rites and ceremonies of the Church haue béene with what studie and diligence the auncient fathers haue set foorth the same that by all meanes possible they might stoppe Schismes and diuisions in the Church It néedeth not héere perticularlye to declare sith the volumes of the Fathers doo euerie where abound with those things wherfore let the readers consider what Augustine hath written in two Epistles to Ianuarius Hierome hath thus set forth the order and ceremonies of the Church Let each Prouince sayeth he haue authōtrie to determine touching the Institutions of the elders and traditions of the Apostles which words of Hierome are diuersly to be considered And that manye and sundrie orders and institutions of the ancient Fathers are to bée altered and chaunged by reason of many circumstaunces euen our aduersaries themselues haue not denyed neither were it méete in this behalfe that the Ecclesiasticall ceremonies shoulde be made equall to the grounded doctrine of Religion And therefore hath Tertulian said That the onely lawe of sayth doth remaine immutable And Hierome himselfe doeth giue counsell that such orders and customes of the church are to be kept which saith he doo not hinder or hurt our faith The 5. Rule SOme of the olde Fathers hauing theyr faultes did ouermuch fauour these vnwritten traditions and therfore did sometime true consent to heretikes We haue heard afore out of Irenaeus that the auncient heretiks did defend their heresies by vnwritten traditions And Eusebius maketh mention of one Papias which brought in certaine straunge doctrine into the Church affirming the same to be deliuered as comming from the Apostles by tradition The like errour there was of the Chiliastians into y ◠which error Tertulian Iustinus Martire others haue fallen And therfore the works of the auncient Fathers are not to be read without great iudgement The 6. Rule MAnie and diuerse bookes haue beene put forth vnder the name and title of the ancient Fathers which notwithstanding are counterfait It hath come to passe through the fault of those who haue ben the writers printers of bookes y e diuerse bookes haue falsely borne the name of those auncient Doctors which antiquitie hath commended As for erāple the bookes intituled Rapsodiae were attributed to Clement S. Paules Disciple and also the booke of the Reuelation of S. Iohn Baptist his head is authorised vnder the name of Ciprian when notwithstanding there is mention made of Pipin king of Fraunce and to conclude there are diuerse volumes vnder the title and name of Augustine in the which the opinion of Augustine is refuted I néed not to make mētion of an infinit number like vnto these Wherefore that which Hierome did somtune speake of the bookes Apocripha may verie fitly bée spoken of the writinges of the olde Fathers Let a man take heede sayth hée of the bookes Apocripha and if at anie time he bee disposed to read them not for triall of truth but for examples sake of good manners let him knowe they are not bookes of them whose titles and
names they beare but that there are manie corrupt things mixed in them and therefore it is great wisdome how to choose out gold amongest dirt and claie thus much Hierome Now these foundations béeing laid it behooueth vs a little to search and sifte the obiections of our aduersaries which they take from the olde and auncient doctors Clemens Alexandrinus The workeman that is sent foorth into the Haruest of the Lord hath a double husbandrie to wit the vnwritten and the written Againe As the Philosophers had certain secrets touching their opinions which they deliuered by traditions so likewise the Apostles And therefore Paule saith We speake wisedome amongst those that are perfect To this I aunswere thus First that this Author hath not handled the question sincerely and purely and this fault is easely to be found euen by the authoritie of y e scriptures for Christ saith thus What soeuer I speak vnto you in secret that speak openly that you heard in the eare that preach vpon the house top c. Wherefore Alexandrinus is plainly deceiued when he goeth about to mixe the mysterie of Christian religion with the hid secrets of philosophie And Irenaeus and Tertulian doo both witnesse and testifie that the olde heretikes were of that minde which heere Alexandrinus doth hold and therefore abused those words of Paul saieng I speake wisdome amongst those that are perfect as Irenaeus as I haue before said doth affirm And Clemens doubted not to say y e euen y e Grecians were saued by Philosophy wher and ceremonies amongst the which hée â—â—â—koneth vp that most auncient custome whereby the Christians did alwaies stanâ— when they did praye from the time of Easter vntill Whitsontide In this disputation therefore Basil doubteth not to propone that which was commonlye spoken touching the Apostolike mysteries and this is it that our aduersaries so greatlye triumph against vs out of the wordes of Basil but truly as with all my heart I doo acknowledge the goodnesse of the cause wherevpon Basil then stood when he affirmed the holy ghost to be god yet not withstanding without offence of Basil be it spoken me thinketh hée did too curioustye séeke for straunge Argumentes when as that matter might be prooued by playne proper and true groundes of Scriptures The Deitie of the holye Ghost is in diuers places of the holye Scriptures to bée prooued to what ende then shoâ—â—d the Apostles delyuer by Tradition certaine secrete formes touching that matter and as it were as Basil sayeth whisper it into the eares of certayne men I praye you was there any thing to be kept close in this point of doctrine that behooued the Christians especially to know and professe Furthermore to call that thing secrete or hidde which was then publikelye taught almost in the whole worlde I knowe not well how Basil could doe it And inasmuch as this fained Apostolike mysteries was in times past the verie grounde of heresies as before it is shewed neyther furtherod the cause of Basil which otherwise is to bée prooued with most firme reasons I wish that Basil had reformed that kinde of Argument if it bée worthie to bee called an argument especially sith the olde Fathers verie wisely haue warned vs to foresée that many labours shuld not grow of one But howsoeuer the matter goeth our aduersaries haue nothing heere wherof they maye glorie or boast for when Basil affirmeth this hind of speaking of y e holy ghost That it hath sprong from the Apostles tradition By the name of Tradition héere hée vnderstandeth that which although not in manifest and flat words remaineth in the Scripture yet notwithstanding the sum and matter it selfe is there contained touching the which reade our third Rule What if our aduersaries themselues long time since haue not obserued and kept this kinde of speaking in their Churches And that I maye not vrge that that same custome is now growen out of vse forgotten amongst them whereby they héeretofore did stand when they did praye betwéene Easter and Whitsontide as is before sayd Wherefore let our aduersaries consider how properly they expounde the words of Basil which are these Which both are of like force effect to godlines and how well they agrée with Basil himselfe Chrisostome Heere it is manifest that they deliuered not all things by writing but manie things by tradition without writing and these are as worthie to bee beleeued as those which are written Therfore we think the traditions of the Church worthie to be beleeued It is a tradition therefore search no farther for the matter Chrisostome intreating of these wordes of Paule written to the Thessalonians the second Epistle and second chapter saieng Holde fast the Traditions which you haue learned either by word or by Epistle Hée gathereth that not only Paule but also the rest of the Apostles did not deliuer commit all things to writings the which how sure an argument it is wée haue declared in our former chapter But to let this thing passe least wée shoulde séeme to make a nèedlesse repetition I therefore saye that Chrisostome doeth speake touching those traditions which although they are not expressed by word in the holy Scriptures yet in substance are there contained for otherwise these wordes of Chrisostome could not stand saying It is a tradition thou maist seeke no farther thereofâ— For then it should followe that wée shoulde no more search in holy Scriptures the which God forbid that it should come in the minde of so godly a Father who doeth most often inculcate and beat into the minde the reading of the holy Scriptures Therefore I suppose by this worde Tradition of the Church by Chrisostome is meant that doctrine the which the Church being instructed by the writings of the Prophets Apostles doth deliuer ouer vnto the church that is to saie doeth teach instruct whatsoeuer she hath drawne out of y e most pure fountaine of y e Scriptures touching which matter séeke the second rule Nazianzene The doctrine of the Gospell is more excellent through the figures of the Church which beeing receiued by tradition wee haue kept euen vntill this time I expound this place as I did the other afore going to wit that hée speaketh of those traditions which maye bée prooued by the scriptures of the which sée the second and third rules for if that our aduersaryes shall say that the Gospell is made the better through their holie water and through such like trumperâ—es appertaining to their Masse they would make men laugh nay rather I should saie wéepe who reuerently thinke and are well affctioned toward the true worshipping of God Epiphanius Wee must also vse traditions for all thinges cannot bee taken from the holy Scripture Wherefore some things the holy Apostles deliuered vnto vs by the Scriptures and some thing by Tradition Héere Epiphanius disputeth touching certaine rites and ceremonies which the
that we follow not the similitude of truth for truth it selfe and so shoulde bee deceiued with a counterfaite probabilitie of truth which things sith they are so some man maie demaâ—nd wherefore that great Orator Tullie comparing Oratorie with this sharp and schoole like Disputation and peraduenture ouer-well liking his owne Arte saith thus As a flowing Riuer can scarce or not at all be corrupted or putrified but a standing water maie verie soone so likewise by the floud of eloquence the faults of the reprehender are soone wiped awaie when as niggishnes of speach and want of eloquence scarce can defend it selfe thus much Cicero The which as I confesse that it maie happen both in the sophisticall and probable kinde of disputing so do I denie that it can chaunce or agree with true and demonstratiueie Silogismes For as the Riuer that we maie not swarue from the similitude which wee haue propoâ—ed while it runneth afloate 〈◊〉 aboue his bankes doth gather most foule and filthie things of 〈◊〉 sort which 〈◊〉 and are couered while as the flouds are aloft so oftentimes great errors with copiousnesse of speach did are by true and briefe disputations declared laid open for the copie of eloquence taken awaie things doo appeare both naked and manifest as they are But heereof we will speake more in the Preface And now I set downe first a disputation touching the word of god writteÌ„ which as it is chiefe so ought it to be the verie fouÌ„dation of all disputations The other disputations as of the true humane nature of Christ of the presence of Christ in the sacrament of the true and lawfull making of Ministers touching which thinges I wrote some thing about two yeares past against Turrianus that false named Iesuit and will handle it more at large whensoeuer he shal giue anie newe occasion to write also free will Purgatorie and such lyke maye bee grounded on this sayde Disputation And this my bretheren I hope you will dooe either according to this methode which I haue followed or according to that which you shall better like of Wherefore I beseech the defenders of the Romish Church and chiefelye those which challenge vnto them such skill in disputing that they will bring the same from the darke shaddowe of the Schooles into the open and cleere light yea to the true point of disputing in deede and that all mallice put a parte all nipping tauntes set aside let them modestlye and with quiet mindes pursue this my treatise and when they haue entered into disputation with me let them first note what is worthie of reprehention and then let them giue solutions vnto my argumentes and on the other side let them confirme theyr opinions with plaine and euident Sylogismes and Argumentes and so I hope it shall at the last come to passe if GOD permit that when both our opinions are conferred together the truth will shewe it selfe and bee manifestly seene euen of those which bee almost blinde Let therefore those bookes which are repleat with nothing els but with bitter choler spotted stained with the sores of their mastersâ— yea and those seditious Sermons which blovve forth nothing else but fire sword let them I say cease be quite banished in steed hereof let there be meeknes tranquilitie yea let the loue inward affection of the truth beare swaie let those which so greatly affect that excellent name of Catholikes which so often with open mouthes repeat pronounce the same remember what S. Augustin hath written to wit that the Catholike Church doth teach that wee owe loue vnto all and iniurie to none But if there be anie such which go forward with shamelesse faces and obstinate mindes still to write and spread abroad their sichophanticall and infamous Libells or if there bee anie such which so farre degenerateth from men that they had rather obstinately to bark against the truth then to imbrace the same the vvhich amongest others I heare there is one especially vpon whom the fearful exaÌ„ple of Gods most iust iudgment is manifest not onlie for other his vngodlinesse but chiefly for his wicked Apostacie and backe sliding from the Gospell which sometime he professed If I say there bee anie such I vvish vnto them better mindes oppose this my vowe and wish against their shamelesse wickednesse and malitious railing professing that I will not vouchsafe to ansvvere such their pamphlets knowing right well that such their dooings may be vtterly wiped awaie euen with one little spark of patience Againe touching my selfe I professe that I will not reade those their vvritings in the vvhich they spue forth their foule poisoned choler because I haue determined to dispute and not to braule to contend vvith arguments and not vvith impious railings And you my reuerend brethren fight 〈…〉 of faith for I may lavvfully vse the Apostles exhortation vnto you fight 〈…〉 vvorthie battaile of faith and apprehend euerlasting life for vvhich cause you are called haue professed a good profession before manie vvitnesses And therefore regarding nothing at all this vvicked rable run your course vvith stout courage vnremoued constancie and inuincible patience in the truth of the Gospell of God as you haue begun that is that you go forvvard vvith exact diligence and integritie to fight against mans â—rrors that the course of your labours most manfully being finished yee may leaue vnto the posterities to come the puritie of 〈◊〉 and the true vse of ecclesiasticall discipline From my studie the 23 of Februarieâ— An Domini 1580. FINIS A COMMON PLACE TOVCHING THE WORD OF GOD WRITTEN AGAINST THE TRAditions of Men. Handled both Schoole like Diuinely Wherein is intreated of the true method of Disputing THE PREFACE THE Apostle Paule writing to Timothie affirmeth that the holie Scripture is profitable both to teach as also to reproue thereby shewing that men are not onely to be taught but also often times to be reproued For truly it is manifest that men are so corrupt that they doe not onely remaine in ignorance of the truth euen as it were in a palpable and thicke darknesse but also for the most part they hate flie the light of the same And although both are greatly to be lamented yet it is better to haue to doo with those which are ignorant and willing to learne then with them which are delighted with their blindnesse and ignorance because it is a great deale more tollerable to be ignorant then not to be willing to learne Whereby it commeth to passe that because the ministers and the instructors of the congregations must haue to doo with both these kind of men they are therefore willed by the Apostle to be such as shoulde holde fast the word of truth so that they shuld be able to instruct by wholsome doctrine and also to confute the gaine-saiers thereof And as touching these two points in y e true Preacher when Augustine had disputed and compared the
mindes we take vpon vs this most noble conflicte because it otherwise happeneth in this then in other battayles for there hée alone is crowned which vanquisheth but y e ende of this battaile is such that euen hée which is vanquished so that hée acknowledge himselfe ouercome and imbrace the truth shal likewise bée crowned together with the victour And Augustine sayth that it is better to be ouercome of the truth then to be willing to ouercome the truth with falsehoode For whatsoeuer men practise against the truth yet this must they know to wit that veritie cannot be vanquished the which Augustine also calleth perpetuall victorie Furthermore this point of doctrine touching the which our disputation is is of so greate weight that it maye bée thought and that worthelye to bée the verie foundation of all Religion And therefore not without greate cause the Prophet Dauid doeth acknowledge the worde of GOD to bée a Lanterne the which except it lighten our féete of necessitie wée must walke in most horrible darkenesse yea also wée both stumble and fall But the defenders of the Popish Church doo so hotly striue and contende for mans Traditions and thinke them no lesse worthie to bée retayned then some precious Picture of Pallas the which béeing taken awaye they thinke it not possible any longer to defend or maintaine their pontificiall chaire wherein there haue bene so manye Vicars assaulted and nowe at the last Truth preuaylyng shall be quite ouerthrowen and brought vnto naught But that wée maye come to the matter this disputation shall be diuided into sixe parts First we will set downe our owne opinion and then the opinion of the aduersarie then we will trie them both so y â— thereby maye appeare what is the state of our controuersie Secondly we will confirme our opinion by manifest proofe of scriptures and by most sure and flat demonstrations grounded on those places so collected Thirdly we will refell the opinion of the other partie by negatiue disputations Fourthly we will wipe away the obiections of the aduersarie which they wrest out of the scriptures Fiftly we will take away y e foundations which they take out of the writings of the Doctors to ground their opinions on And sixtly we will heare the olde Doctors touching this point agreeing both with vs and the word of God â‚ THE FIRST CHAPTER ¶ At sundrie times and in diuers manners God spake in the olde time to our Fathers by the Prophets In these last dayes he hath spoken vnto vs by his sonne WHen Tertulian would enter into the conflict of disputation and ioyne with the aduersarie hée was woont to bonder the whole summe of the question with certain bondes for so himselfe saith whereby he might not swarue from the matter which he had in hand And that we also may doo the like we will first propone or set down our minde and opinion which is the opinion of each reformed Church touching the word of God by the testimonie of the same word of God which is this All necessarie principles of christiaÌ„ faith are contained in the holy Scriptures This our sentence or opinion we thus expound out of that place of y e Epistle to y e Hebrewes which ministreth vnto vs sufficieÌ„t matter for this disputation God spake in the time of the olde Testament in diuers and sundrie manners to our fathers to wit by oracles visions dreames by Vrim and Thummim finaly by y e prophets speaking by the motion or inspiration of the spirit of God and the same worde of God the spirit of God so commaunding was committed to writing both by Moyses and also by other Prophets and most holy men Now in these last dayes Iesus Christ the chiefe and most perfect Doctour and teacher of his Church being giuen to the world taught the Apostles by mouth ordained them teachers for his Church which did publish in writing the doctrine of the Gospell receiued from Christ by them taught by mouth Sith then y e word of God is the measure of our faith that that word of God remaineth in the most holy monuments or writings of the scriptures it followeth of necessitie that al the principles which are necessarie to faith and saluation of the Church are contayned in the holy Scriptures and whatsoeuer the Apostles haue taught we ought to looke for them in the holy Scriptures neither ought we to receiue any tradition in matter of faith And because matters are made more manifest by uÌ„militudes wée will take our similitude from a King which by mouth proclaimeth an Edict then willeth the same to be printed the which being done men are not wont curiouslye to enquire of others which eyther heard or wer present at the proclamation what is contained in the Kings Edict because the Edict is in print to y e which they must stand and the which they must also beléeue So then I affirme in as much as the word was proclaimed and declared by the Apostles and euangelists and by them committed to writing it were in vayne and foolish now a dayes anye other where to be sought then in the Scriptures what the Apostles and Euangelistes did teach by mouth But now the opinion of the aduersarie is this That all principles of Religion necessarye for our Christian faith are not contained in the holye Scriptures The which theyr opinion they thus expounde Although the worde of God be the measure of our faith yet the whole worde of God is not extant in the scriptures for many things were spoken by the Apostles Euangelists which they writ not Furthermore the Catholike church say they meaning the Church of Rome is so endowed with the spirite of God that she is able of hir selfe to deliuer those things which are necessarie both to faith saluation Wherefore that we may haue the whole word of God the Apostolicall and eccleâ—â—asticall traditions must bée added to the scriptures this is their opinion Now then you may sée manifestlye what is the state or issue of our controuersie for this is that which must be discussed whether the whole word of God deliuered by the Prophets and Apostles and necessary for our saluation be contained in the Scriptures which is the word written or not we affirme that it is they saye naye so then there â—anne bee but one of our opinions true as is manifest by the first groundes of Logicke In anye reasoning the affirmatiue or negatiue 〈◊〉 needes be true but before we goe about the confirmation of our opinion we will set downe the bounds limits of our question both briefely and shorte When we say the word of God we mean not that eternall Word the Sonne of the eternall and euerlasting father being the second person in Trinitie but that externall worde by the which God hath made manifest vnto men his will and pleasure and therefore we adde and say that worde
which was deliuered taught by the Apostles and Prophets so that it may be more manifest what we meane by the word of God Also this word Tradition maye not onely be referred to the word taught by mouth but also to the word written as it is manifest in the second to the Thessalonians the second chapter where the Apostle saith Stand fast and keepe the traditions or instructiōs which you haue ben taught either by word or by Epistle And euen after this sort also haue the old fathers vsed to speake as we will shewe in the proper place notwithstanding in this question according to the manner of speaking it is restrained to that worde which is taught by mouth Furthermore we meane by the word of God necessary to our saluation al those things which God hath commaunded vs to beléeue with a most sure perswasion of faith so that we maye make a difference betwéene faith and opinion and betwéene the principles of Christian religion and the probable disputations and ordinaunces of men Last of all by y e name of the holy Scripture we vnderstand all the bookes Canonicall both of the new and olde testament And thus much I thought good to speak briefly touching the explication of our question The second Chapter HEther to we haue declared our minde opinion touching the worde of God nowe it resteth that wée confirme the same by most certaine proofes and arguments deriued and taken out of the same word of God and so at the last a flatte demonstratiue or most true argument being gathered from most true principles wée may rid the whole matter out of all obscuritie placing it in the most manifest lyght of truth And to bring this to passe we wil follow this order First to set downe certaine places of scripture from whence we will draw our arguments Secondly the places of Scripture being collected and brought together we will fet a true definition of the word of God the which definition also shall be y e proofe of our argument cutting away all exception doubt And although in the reciting of the places of scripture I doo not curiously labor touching the order thereof for each place of scripture is of sufficient authority to make anye conclusion yet notwithstanding I haue taken some care that the order of the places of scripture maye aunswere vnto each parts of the definition asmuch as may be Wherefore let vs begin with this place of the Apostle which hath ministred occasion vnto vs of this disputations The first place God at sundrie times and indiuers manners in the old times spake to our fathers by the Prophets but in these last daies he hath spoken vnto vs by his sonne Whereby we conclude thus If the word of God being sufficient or necessarie vnto the saluation of the church was deliuered first vnto vs by the Prophets and then by Christ and his Apostles and that worde of GOD so deliuered by the Prophettes is this daye onelye to bee sought for in the writings of the Prophets Then truly the word of God deliuered vnto vs by Christ and his Apostles must bee sought for onely in the writings of the Apostles except any good reason may be giuen to the contrarie But the word of God necessarie to the saluation of the Church was deliuered first vnto vs by the Prophets then by Christ his Apostles the same word of God deliuered by the Prophets is this day onely to be sought in the writings of the Prophets no wher els neither any good reson to the cōtrarie can be rendred why the like shuld not be touching the word of god deliuered by Christ and his Apostles Wherefore we conclude that the word of god necessarie to the saluatiō of the church is onely to be sought for in the writings of the Prophets and Apostles Now let vs trye our argument This syllogisme or argument is hypothetical or double y e vse wherof is verie necessarie so often as we shall be occupied in y e comparing of things together And y e hypothetical or double arguments are verie néedful in diuine disputations is manifest both by the old Doctors also by y e new schoolemen who most often vse them Wherefore I doubt not to vse these euen as well as the categoricall arguments because the matter or grounds of our disputations are not Topicall or standing on the inuention of art but grounded on expressse places of Scriptures and therefore those kind of arguments are not inferiour to others The ground or matter therefore of our argument is made manifest euen by the light of nature who biddeth vs of things like to iudge the like And these principles which we haue drawne from nature her selfe the Apostle teacheth vs that they are not to be reiected when as in the matter of regeneration he bringeth the Corinthians to the consideration of nature For being schooled by natures rule sayth Tertulian thou maist the easilier beléeue the Prophesie Now if wée marke the substance we shall finde the worde of God both in the olde testament and in the new to bée all one For the Apostle professeth saying That he hath spoken nothing but that which the Prophets and Moses had before spoken I confesse that the publishing of the word of God in y e new Testament was a great deale more excellent and fruitfull then before yea and that maketh for our cause and therefore farre wide is it that it shuld hurt vs or our matter as héereafter in our disputation we will more at large proue Let vs then make a comparison betwéene the olde and newe Testament as much as appertaineth to the word of God exhibited in them both after this sort If God spake by the Prophets in the old testament then also he hath spoken by the Apostles in the new testament And if the prophets taught the word of God by mouth the like so thē the apostles haue done And if the prophets committed to writing the word of God so also haue the Apostles Wherefore if the prophets comprehended the whole doctrine of y e old testament in their writings why should not we say y t the Apostles haue also comprised the whole doctrine of the gospel in their bookes Now let the defenders of the contrarie opinion bring foorth shewe some reason to disprooue this my assertion I say some good reason not borowed from the dreames of mens braines nor from topicall cauilling arguments but deriued from the word of God But this they cannot doo Furthermore I vrge this place of the Apostle which we haue in hand reason thus If the word of God deliuered after diuers manners waies and at manie times be now altogether to be found in y e writings of the prophets why should not we say the like of y e Gospell being y e word of god which as y e apostle witnesseth was not at sundrie times or in diuers manners
of this law which is writen in this booke And Paule in the Act. 24. I beleeue saith he all those things which are written in the Lawe in the Prophets And that which Moses saith Deut. 27. Let each one be accursed which abideth not in all the words of this lawe Paule thus expoundeth Gal. 3. saieng In all things which are written in the booke of the lawe By which places we may easily perceiue that the word of God touching the which Moses speaketh is not to be interpreted the writings of Moses alone neither to be applied vnto certaine vnwritten verities deliuered onely by the mouth of Moses as the Iewes doctors doo falsly surmise whose errors haue long time since bene euen hissed out of the Church of Christ The 4. place Get thee to the lawe and testimonie If they say not after this worde there is no light in them Héereof we frame this argument If the people vnder the lawe ought to repaire to the Scriptures and nothing was to be receiued in matters of faith the which was not contained in the holy Scriptures then truly by greater reason afterward that the doctrine of the Gospell written of the Apostles was ioyned to the writings of the olde Testament the which Apostles did explicate and teach the true meaning of the law those things alone must be receiued in matters of faith which are contained in the writings of the olde and new testaments The antecedent is true Wherefore also the consequent must be true The first part of our argument is manifest of it selfe through the force of comparison Although if we haue respect to the ground and substaunce thereof the Apostles spake no other thing then y â— which was before spokeÌ„ by Moses the prophets as Paul affirmeth Act. 26. Yet no christian hath at anie time doubted but y â— the publishing of the word of God was far more excellent and plentifull after the Incarâ—ation of Christ then it was before lyke as y e apostles in diuers places haue taught Wherefore if before his incarnation they ought to be ruled by the word of god writen how much more then ought we now The minor is manifest by the recited places And hâ—re I am not ignorant that this afore recited place of the prophet is diuersly expounded of the learned but howsoeuer they expound these words it coÌ„meth to this effect that they liue in most horrible darknesse which despising the worde of God take vnto themselues the errors of inchanters witches and mans dreames The fift place Thou hast knowne the holie Scriptures of a childe which are able to make thee wise vnto saluation through the faith which is in Christ Iesus for the whole Scripture is giuen by inspiration of God and is profitable to teach to reproue to correct to instruct in righteousnesse that the man of God may be absolute beeing made perfect to euerie good worke If such be the force of the holie Scriptures that it maketh a man wise perfectlie instructed vnto saluation then ought we to be content with the holie Scriptures in causes and matters of faith The Antecedent is true And therefore the consequent must be the like The first part of our argument is manifest through the nature of perfection for if y e scriptures make vs perfect to what ende then serue traditions not written And vnto this ende serueth the saying of Paule before alleadged The minor is manifest and prooued by the place recited of Paule But peraduenture our aduersaries will héere obiect and saye that Paule spake héere onely of the scriptures of the olde Testament because Timothie was instructed from his youth But sith Paule héere addeth and saith Through the faith that is in Christ Iesus he doeth manifestly declare that the doctrine of the Gospell was ioyned with the knowledge of the old Testament But they may saye that the Gospell was not then published in writing but onely deliuered and taught by mouth First let them tell me whereby they gather this for it is manifest by the fourth Chapter of that his Epistle that Paule wrote this same Epistle verie néere about the time of his death And héere if you will make a good account of the times you shall easilye perceiue that then when this Epistle was sent vnto Timothie all the Epistles of the Apostles or well néere all were put in writing And furthermore what matter were it if then the doctrine of the Gospell had not bene published in writing inasmuch as it was afterward done Finally if ye would that Paule should héere speak touching the writing of the olde Testament onely then woulde I make mine argument of more force and reason thus If the writings of the olde Testament were of such force that they were able to make men wise vnto saluation how much more shall the whole Scripture of the olde and new Testament be able to perform the same But he which shall denie y â— this same excellent sentence of Paule touching the whole Scriptures to wit that it was giuen by inspiration of God and is profitable to teach doth appertaine vnto the writings of the new testament he is not onely to be thrust out of the number of diuines but is also to be banished out of the societie of Christians Neither yet let them goe about to cauill with vs for that the olde translation hath this word Prepared and not absolute Perfect to all good workes For truly that I maye not omit anie thing and so swarue from our argument the Gréeke word signifieth Perfection as in the Actes 21. ver 5. But when the daies were full perfected and ended we went on our iournie c. Where and in which place Luke vseth the same Gréeke word which Paule doth vse in the Texte to Timothie signifieng as you sée Absolute and Perfect Also the compounde of the same verbe in Gréeke hath the lyke signification As Mathew 21. ver 26. By the mouthes of babes and sucklings thou hast made perfect thy praise Againe 1. Thessa 3. ver 10. Night day praieng exceedingly that we might see your face and might accomplish or make perfect that which is wanting in your faith And again Heb. 13. ver 22. The 6. place Search the Scriptures for in them you thinke to haue eternall life If the people in times past vnder the lawe doo thinke and that not without good cause to haue eternall life in the Scriptures that is that all those things were contained in the Scriptures the knowledge and faith wherof attained euerlasting life then trulie by greater reason we ought to beleeue the selfe same being now vnder the Gospell after that to the scriptures of the old testament the writings of the Apostles was also ioyned which interprete and teach the veritie and truth of the olde testament The antecedent is true And therefore there is no doubt of the consequent The force of
for because the grace of God cannot be written Of which opinion is Thomas whom y e whole swarme of schoolemen and Questionarye Doctors doo most estéeme But some had rather this to be the cause for that y e doctrine of the Lawe began from writing for by and by the Tables of the Law being written were publyshed but the doctrine of the gospell began from the preching of Christ his Apostles Touching the which controuersie that we maye not wander out of our determined limits let the Reader looke Lira his eight chapter in the Epistle to the Hebrewes chap. 10. But for as much as appertayneth to the former Obiection wée saye that neyther Ieremie nor Paule doo there denie the writings of the newe Testament but that they onelye dispute there touching the esstcacie of the spirituall giftes of the holye Ghost which were farre greater in the time of the newe Testament then euer at any time before according to the Prophecie of Ioel which Peter expoundeth the second to the Acts. Wherefore those places must be vnderstoode by comparison for otherwise it would followe that the lawe of God was not written in the minde and heart of the godly which liued in the time of the olde Testament which thing these places of Scripture which héere we alleadge doo otherwise prooue Esa 51. Harken vnto me ye which know iustice the people in whose hart is my law And Psa 37. The law of the Lord is in his heart Also 51. Recreate a new heart within me O God and renue a right spirit within me Also Deut. 30. The Lord will circumcise the heart And againe Psal 1. His delight is in the lawe of the Lord doth meditate therein daie and night And in diuers other places doeth Dauid testifie that hée hath the lawe of the Lord euen as it were ingraffed within his minde And finally that I may passe ouer many such like places when Salomon sheweth forth precepts out of the law of God he biddeth that they should be written in the tables of y e heart And thus much touching the Anteredent where our aduersaries commit most great errour reasoning Secundum quid ad id quod impliciter Now therefore I denie their consequent the errours of the which I will perticularly recite The first errour is that y e consequent cannot follow for it followeth not to saie the doctrine of the lawe was written in Tables ergo the doctrine of the Gospell is not written at all Againe the Gospell is written in the heart ergo it is not written in Tables Who séeth not that these are friuolous argumentes and that their consequents are false Againe they bring in a new kind of reasoning and reason from an vniuersall affirmatiue to a particular negatiue for thus they say God wrote al the doctrine of the Gospell in the minde of the godly Ergo certaine things appertaining vnto the doctrine of the Gospell are not written by the Apostles The which kinde of concluding euen children would hisse at for of necessitie thus they must reason Nothing y t is written in the heart is written in tables but the whole doctrine of the Gospell is written in the heart ergo no part of the doctrine of the Gospel is written in tables The Maior is so false that euery man may sée it The second errour is Falacia in figura dictionis as y e Logitians terme it for they confound words of one signification with those of diuerse significations for to write in tables is a proper kinde of spéech but to write in the heart is a borowed kinde of spéech and therefore of diuers significations spoken by a Metaphore and similitude Whereby it commeth to passe that Paule vsed another kinde of speaking when hée sayde that the Corinthians were his Epistle for hée went forwarde with the argument he had in hande which was when false Apostles would haue crept into the mindes of the Corinthians by Letters of commendations then sayth he I haue no néed of such Epistles for you are mine epistle for my labor my diligence is manifest towards you euen in the eies of all men For all sée and as I may saie may reade in you the doctrine of Christ which I haue preached vnto you and to conclude this is the summe that the Corinthians were so perfectly instructed and so well taught in the doctrine of y e gospel y t they might well remaine therin Whosoeuer thefore doth gather by these words of y e apostle that the apostles did not write all things necessarie to saluation truly he may be thought not to be well in his wits The third errour is for that they make the efficient cause to repugne with the cause instrumentall For God is hée who writeth the Gospell in the heart but Mathew Paule and the rest write the doctrine of the Gospell in tables and were the instruments of the spirit of God Therefore Paule in that place sayd that the Corinthians were his Epistle the epistle of Christ ministred saith hée by vs Loe héere you may sée that hée maketh distinction betwéene his owne ministerie and the efficacie of the holie Ghost Wherefore our aduersaries conclude as if one should reason thus God hath restored a sicke person vnto his former health ergo the Phisition prescribed nothing gaue him nothing to drinke neither yet vsed anie outwarde remedies Now if this conclusion be of anie force then this must néeds followe GOD wrote the Gospel in the minde ergo the Apostles wrote not the whole doctrine of the Gospell in Tables The fourth errour is because the consequent agréeth not with their antecedent for if in the antecedent they oppone y e inuisible Scriptures vnto y e visible then trulie they would bring this to pase y e one scripture being y e other caÌ„not be for vnto what other ende doe they applie their opposition opponing y e inuisible scriptures to the visible but y t they may coÌ„clude somwhat But in the consequent they come backe againe and say that certaine things are not written necessary to saluation when as they should haue said if so be they wold reason like logitians as before it is shewed y â— ther was nothing writteÌ„ necessary to saluatioÌ„ But the manifest truth in this point hath amased them And that they may sée howe vnhansomely they goe to worke in their â—pposition I demaund this whether the faithfull haue not all those things written in their hearts which are written in Tables being necessarie to faith and saluation Truly I thinke yes For Saint Iohn saith These things are written that ye might beleeue and in beleeuing haue eternall life So farre void is it therefore that the one being the other shuld be cleane taken awaie but rather the one is a helpe to the other to wit that the visible writings of the Apostles is a furtherance vnto the inuisible writings of the spirite of God The 5. Error is
Secundum ignorantiam Elenchi as the Schoolemen saie because they put in other words then the Apostle Paule vsed For thus Paule saith Yee are our Epistle not written with inke but with the spirite of God for he speaketh of the inuisible Scriptures neither doth he therfore vtterly take awaie the visible as his Epistle which he then wrote to the Cornthians is witnesse But our aduersaryes reason farre otherwise for they say the Epistle not written in Tables but deliuered by hand the which is farre both from the words and minde of the Apostle Now let vs ouerthrowe the consequence of our aduersaries being ful of absurdities and without reason If we must not absolutely stick vnto the writings of the Apostles because God hath written the Gospell in the mindes of the godly the should it followe that the writings of the Apostles are not necessarie for godlie men If all things as they saie are not written which are necessarie to saluation to what end then appertaineth the scriptures For all things saie they that are necessarie to saluation God hath written in the mindes of the godlie But this argument cannot bee concluded in one part onely for either it is vniuersallie true or els vniuersally false so the whole authoritie of the scriptures must bee vtterly abolished the which God forbid Againe If this consequence be of anie force that is to saye we must haue recourse to vnwritten traditions because GOD hath written the gospell in the minds of the godly then would it followe that the spirituall efficacie of God should be confounded with the externall and visible ministerie of the Apostles and that traditions deliuered by mouth are the inuisible Scriptures of God the which the holie Ghost did imprint in the mind of the faithfull the which thing is most false Againe if they make any good conclusion out of that place of Ieremie that all thinges are not written that appertaine to the Gospell because vnder the new testament God doth write his law in the minds of the faithfull when as it was written in tables vnder the old testament Ergo by the force of this opposition it followeth that God in the old testament did onely remit sinne in part and that he was the God of the Israelites but in part also because that Ieremie addeth saieng that it wil come to passe that in the new testamēt God will remit the sins of the people and be their God The which is too too absurde and contrarie to the opinion of all men Now finally let vs turne this argument of our aduersaries vpon themselues saie thus All the lawes of God are written in the hearts and minds of the faithfull as our aduersaries seeme to affirme by the former places cited for Paule saith it is not written with inke but with the spirit of God but none of the traditions of our aduersaries are written in the minds of the godly for they are written with inke and not with the spirit of God Ergo none of our aduersaries traditions are the lawes of God So that héereby it is most manifest as I suppose how foolish or rather no argumēt at al this argument of our aduersaries is y ◠which that we may correct we must saie with the word of God that the writings of the Apostles and Euangelists doth containe all that doctrine of the Gospell the which the Apostles and Euangelistes did teach and afterward put in writings the which also God by his spirit did write in the mindes of the godly thus much touching this obiection And now we come vnto the second The Church of Christ for the space of 20. yeares wanted the writings of the Apostles and was only contented with their traditions Ergo the writings of the Apostles are not absolutely necessarie vnto saluation neither is it needfull that al things appertaining to the doctrine of the Gospel shuld be contained in the writings of the Apostles The Antecedent is manifest by reading of histories Although I doo not meddle much with the antecedent neither doo dispute touching the number of yeares yet would I that the readers should call to their remēbraunce that the Church wanted not the scriptures before that the Gospell was extant by the writings of the Apostles Yea that Christ himselfe and the Apostles did preach the Gospell out of the writings of the Prophets as before in his proper place we haue shewed Wherefore the antecedent of our aduersaries is no other thing then a foundation laid vpon sand or water so that the conclusion which they bring cannot stand Therefore I denie the consequent for the errour is as the Logitians tearme it Secundum ignorantiam Elenchi for they chaunge the forme of affirmation come from the time past vnto the time present and the time to come The Church saye they wanted the gospel Be it so although the writings of the Prophets to contayne the promises of the Gospell insomuch that the Apostles did altogether depende vppon the sayd writings of the Prophets adde héer vnto also if it please you that the writings of the Apostles were not altogether necessarie what doo you héereof conclude That they are not now therfore necessarie or héereafter shall not bée What man is so ignorant to grant that This is the difference y ◠the Apostles ought first to haue preached by mouth before they committed anie thing to writing And when the Apostles did preach the gospell they did then publish by mouth those thinges which afterward they wrote But sithens the Apostles died coulde not by mouth instruct the Church without doubt their writings are now so necessarie vnto vs as their preching by mouth was in those dayes in stéede whereof their writinges doo nowe remaine Let vs bring them therfore to an absurditie If the consequence of our aduersaries be of force or value this is also of force or value the Church of the Isralites not twentie yeares but two thousande yeares or somewhat more wanted the law written therefore it was not necessarie to the Church that the lawe should be written or the law written contained not all those things y e wer necessarie to y e doctrine of y e old testamēt But this is very absurd Let vs turne the argument of our aduersaries against themselues after this manner If God being perfect wise hath not suffered the church of Christ long time to want the writings of the Apostles both that hee might maintaine the truth of the Gospell as also he might prouide for the safegarde of his church Ergo these men are blasphemous against the prouidence of god which denie that all things are contained in the apostolicall writings which are necessarie to the doctrine of the Gospell For to what end would God by his diuine prouidence that the Apostles should write the gospell which they by mouth did preach was it because they should deliuer an vncertain and imperfect doctrine Furthermore if
at anie time the Church was contented with the preaching of the Apostles to wit in the first primitiue church I beseech you why shall not she nowe at this time be contented with the writings of the Apostles y t which as is before said are now in stéed of the apostles prechings rather then to runne to the fained forged false traditions which wer neuer writtē by the Apostles Wherefore the argument of our aduersaries is false the which wée thus correct In the first primitiue Church the Apostles depending vpon the writings of the Prophets did first of all preach by mouth the Euangelicall doctrine out of the writings of the Prophets And afterwarde least that the doctrine by them preached should be either corrupted of men or els such is the infirmitie of man the remembrance thereof shoulde by little and little slide out of the hearts of men That therefore they might leaue y t holy veritie which they preached vnto vs most firme sure they committed y e same vnto writings by the working of y e holy ghost to be a pledge for y e posterities which after should come Christ being cōuersant with his apostles 40 daies after his resurrection taught thē those things which did appertain vnto the kingdōe of god neither are those things which he taught thē now extāt in anie writings Ergo al things appertaining to the kingdō of god are not writtē of the apostles therfore are to be sought for in traditions not writtē of the apostles The antecedent is manifest in the first chap. of the Acts of the Apo. ver 3 I admit the former part of the Antecedent but I denie the latter for the Error is in Fallacia petitionis principij as the Schoolemen saie I therefore denie the consequence For from whence haue they learned or rather dreamed that those things which Christ did then teach were not written of the apostles nay that dreame of our aduersaries is plainly and manifestly refelled and confuted Mathew 28. Marke 16. Luke 24. Iohn 20. and. 21. All which foure Euangelists doo shew vs things which Christ then taught And Luke in speciall wordes dooth witnes y e Christ did expound those things which were written of him so vnlikely it is that he should call vs backe to traditions not written But let vs bring them to an absurditie If Christ after his resurrection did teach all those things which did appertaine vnto the kingdome of God for that seemeth to be the verie sense meaning of the words of Saint Luke which are these Act. the first verse 3. He spake those things which appertaine to the kingdome of God And those things which he then taught are not written of the Apostles Ergo those thinges which are written of the Apostles doe not appertaine vnto the kingdome of God An absurde and a blasphemous argument Let vs turne it against themselues thus If the Apostles were fullie instructed and taught of Christ touching those things which appertaine to the kingdome of God And the holie Ghost inspiring them did write touching the same kingdome of God ergo they wrote all things most fully and omitted nothing whereby we should runne to fetch anie thing from traditions not written That therfore we may now correct and amend this their errour we saie y e Christ to the end hée might appoint his Apostles to be most perfect Doctors and teachers of the Church did after his resurrection for y e space of 40. daies most diligently instruct them touching all those points of doctrine which appertained vnto the Gospell that the Apostles being so instructed might not onely declare the same doctrine by mouth but also that they might commit all those thinges vnto writings which appertaine to the kingdome of God saluation of his Church Paule confesseth that he wrote in parte and not in whole ergo Paule wrote not all things which are necessarie to the saluation of the Church The antecedent is prooued Rom. 15. I haue written vnto you brethren somewhat boldly saith hee after a sort or as the verie Greeke is In part Now let vs make plaine the antecedent Paule saith that he hath written to y e Romanes in part and this word In part the which the olde interpreters haue translated worde by worde is not to be ioyned with this vearbe I haue written but this word More boldly the which the verie order of the text and the Gréeke phrase doo most manifestly shew for otherwise the Apostle must haue sayde Tomeros not haue added the Preposition Apio the like phrase is manifest in y e 2. Co. 2. c. 5. ve which is thus If any haue caused sorow y ◠same hath not made me sorrie but partly or in part lest it shuld more gréeue you al. I deny y e consequence of their argument The errour is secundū figuram dictionis their consequēce hangeth not w t their antecedent For Paul wrote not all to the Romanes say they ergo he wrote not all necessarie to saluatiō But Paul wrote more thē y t which he wrote to the Romanes so héere we sée y t their consequēt on cōclusiō agréeth not with their first proposition Paul wrote not all ergo al things necessary to saluation is not contained in the writings of the apostles This is too too absurd an argumēt and not worth the aunswering Christ said vnto his Apostles that he had many things to speake vnto thē which they could not beare away ergo the apostles haue not written all things necessarie to saluatiō The antecedent is proued in the 16. chapter of the Gospell after Iohn Now touching their antecedent first of al I do greatly wonder y t our aduersaries doo stick their ship vpon those rocks vpō which y e heretikes héertofore haue made so great shipwracks S. Augustine in his Tract 97. vpon Iohn doth testifie y t the heretiks were wont to take this place of Iohn to coulour their errours but Augustine himselfe doth handle those words of Christ with so great reuerēce y t if they wold heare him he wold easily withdraw our aduersaries frō their curiositie for Augustine vpon y e same saith Which of vs can declare those things that Christ would not speak which of vs can do that for which ther is not sufficiēt authoritie of prophets or Apostles Thus far August But let Augustine cease to inquire those things for the Papists are now growen to this point y t they rehearse vnto vs things which Christ neuer spake and that with great boldnesse when as they commend set forth vnto men the rites and ceremonies of their Masse and other like trumperie And I would to God that they would be perswaded that those their traditions that is to saie the foule filth of their errours and superstitions could neuer flow from so pure a fountain to wit as Christ But let vs returne vnto the exposition of
y e same place the which we will take and drawe from the verie place it selfe Christ his words are these I haue manie things to speake vnto you but you cannot beare them awaie nowe but when the spirit of truth shall come hee shall leade you into all truth Wherefore that we may now vse rather the wordes of Tertulian then our owne we saie thus Christ sayd plainly I haue manie things to saie vnto you but yet adding this When the spirit of truth shall come he shal lead you into all truth he héerby sheweth that the Apostles were not ignorāt of any thing c. Wherby it cōmeth to passe that the Apostles taught all those things which were necessarie to saluation as Tertulian saith did publish a sufficiēt rule vnto al men Therfore Christ in this place meaneth thus y t then y e Apostles should be fully perfectly instructed when they shuld be indowed with y e visible miraculous gifts of the holy ghost this our expositiō is easily gathered from Iohn Nowe I come to the consequence or conclusion in y e which truely I find not anie shew of truth nor any kind of tast of true diuinitie for their error is secundū ignorātiam elenchi as the schoolmen say inasmuch as y ◠like proportiō of time is not obserued The Apostles before y e resurrectiō of Christ before they had receiued the miraculous gifts of y e holy ghost were not able sufficiently to bere away al things which appertained to y e mysteries of christian religion ergo say they the Apostles were ignorant of those mysteries after the resurrection of Christ after the receiuing of the gifts of y e holy Ghost Truly a verie foolish kind of reasoning Christ had many things to declare vnto them ergo say our aduersaries they must be those which y e papistical massing prists do fondly dreame of No doubt of y t their consequence hangeth not with their antecedent therfore we may vrge thē to this absurditie If the Apostles wrote not all things which were necessarie to saluation because they could not beare awaie manie things which Christ had to speake before his resurrection and before the sending of the Holie ghost then would it followe that the Apostles were not led into all truth by the holie ghost after that he was sent vnto them The which is most false and reproued euen by the place of Iohn For he saith And he shal lead you into all truth Also it would folow that Paule did neuer declare the full counsel of god the which thing is most false as Paul himselfe affirmeth Act 20. and 27. Now therefore we will turne this their argument vpon their owne heads saieng thus If the apostles wrote not al things because they could not beare awaie all things thē trulie did they neuer teach all things by mouth And by force of the consequent this place of Iohn can nothing appertaine vnto traditions of the apostles not written But perchance they will say that those mysteries of saluation y e which Christ hid frō his apostles wer reueled to y e Bishops of Rome y ◠which if it wer true then truly the Bishops of Rome were no more to be called the successors of the Apostles onely but those who farre did excéede all the Apostles the which God forbid that wée once should thinke Let vs therfore amend this error in this sort and affirme that although the Apostles before the sending of the holie Ghost were not so fully capable of the mysteries of God which appertain vnto the doctrine of the Gospell yet notwithstanding after the comforter was sent and after they were led into all truth it is most vndoubted that the whole truth which appertaineth vnto our saluation was both taught by mouth by the Apostles as also published in writing Paule commendeth the Corinthians because they kept his traditions Ergo Paule taught manie things by mouth which hee wrote not The antecedent is prooued 1. Cor. 11. I praise you bretheren saith Paule that you remember all my things and keepe the traditions or ordinaunce as I haue deliuered them vnto you Nowe let vs come to the examining of theyr Antecedent This place of Paule is expounded by Chrisostome and Ambrose as also of many other learned of this our time not touching doctrine but touching ecclesiasticall rytes and ceremonies Others againe confesse indéede that Paule doth héere intreate of certaine rytes both appertaining to good order and comlinesse But yet notwithstanding our aduersaries denie that these wordes which they obiect vnto vs are to be restrained to those rytes and they rather vnderstande and interpret this place generally because Paule héere hath spoken it generally for he saith I commende you brethren for that you haue remembred all my thinges c. Also they adde this word Traditiō héere vsed indefinite or generally scarce sound in the writings of the Apostles restrained or tied only to traditions which appertain to orders and rytes of the Church Wherfore they expound Paules words after this sort You will keepe in memorie all those things which I haue taught therein truly I gretly praise you But because amongst other things which I deliuered vnto you to be obserued touching rytes and ceremonies in your Ecclesiastical assemblies and for that certaine are contencious amongst you which doo not so well lyke of them therfore I declare these my reasons by the which I was ledde to deliuer them vnto you this is theyr exposition of this place But after what sorte soeuer our aduersaries doo vnderstand it yet truly their conclusion shall neuer be of any force For if he dispute there touching rites and ceremonies only then is this place without the compasse of our disputation for we dispute touching those things which are necessarie to saluation and not of rites and ceremonies which may be chaunged for diuers causes Againe if they be willing héere that he should intreate of doctrine yet serueth it not anie thing for their purpose as I wil now declare for I denie the consequent Paule deliuered many things to the Corinthians Ergo some of them saye they are not written The consequent hereof is false Yet I confesse that this place hath deceiued Theophilact and some others Yet truly that I may speake it by the fauour of all the godly they haue héere fowlie stūbled in a plain leuel way For first Paul did write that same tradition touching the rytes of the which he there speketh Again although he had not written to the Corinthians yet he might write vnto others To conclude if they were not extant in the writings of Paul yet might they be found in the writings of the other Apostles But Paule saith Be followers of me as I follow Christ He therfore deliuered nothing that might in one iote be repugnaunt with Christ the which notwithstanding our aduersaries doo I will héere annexe certaine other places
Ergo because some of the Apostles did recite some out of the Ethnicks bookes it must follow that the Apostles did attribute authoritie to those bookes in matters of faith which thing is absurde and contrarie to the opinion of all men Let vs tourne this obiection vppon our aduersaries after this sort If the Apostles did at anie time recite the traditions of auncient fathers but onelie to beautifie those things which wer established and confirmed by most firme testimonies of holie scriptures How much lesse then ought wee to recite the traditions of the olde fathers to the confirming of those things which want testimonie of the Scripture Thus therefore we may amend the errour of this their obiection and saye that the Apostles whereas they did applie thēselues to the capacitie of men that they might thereby the better stirre them vp or the more easily conuince them they vsed some times the bookes Apocripha as also sentences gathred from Ethincks to wit when they did dispute of those things the truth whereof was manifest in the holye scriptures The heretikes did wreast the writinges of Paule that in the verie time of the Apostles and also it is most manifest that the heretiks yea Sathan himselfe haue cloked their heresies euen with the Scriptures ergo we must not cleaue to the Scriptures alone The antecedent is proued 2. Pe. 3. as also by the Ecclesiasticall historie and also Math 4. If thou be the sonne of GOD cast thy selfe down headlong for it is written he shal giue his Angells charge ouer thee c. I admit their antecedent But I denie their consequent Neither doth Peter so conclude but rather calleth them vnto the writings of Paule then in anie part to abridge the same The error is as the Logitians say Secundum non causam vt causam The heretikes abused the Scriptures wrested the writings of the Apostles into a contrarie sence ergo saye they we ought to run other where then to the scriptures to the establishing of our faith The Scripture is not in fault but onely men themselues which doo wrest so worthie a matter vnto their owne errours Wherefore this is so farre from the Apostles minde that we should leaue the aide of the scripture because heretikes haue abused them that rather the heretikes are by the verie scriptures to be conuinced like as we haue alreadie proued out of the places of Paule 2. Tim. 3. Tit. 1. And when Sathan abused the Scriptures that he might weaken the faith of Christ truely Christ went not to traditions but with the Scriptures again ouerthrew the enimy For sathan obiecting and saying it is written Christ also on the other side answered it is written and not left in tradition And therefore we must bring them to this inconuenience saying If because the heretikes falsified the Scriptures we may not therefore only cleaue vnto the Scriptures then truely because the heretikes falsely fathered traditions to be Apostolike as wee haue prooued before both out of the writings of the Apostles as also out of Irenaeus and Eusebius therefore wee may not sticke onely to traditions And againe because heretikes abused both Scriptures and traditions therefore we must neyther cleaue to Scriptures nor to traditions the which is absurde and euen our aduersaries themselues yeeld to the same Let vs therefore turne their argument vpon themselues saying If like as Sathan abused the Scriptures against Christ so likewise the heretiks do against true Christians Then truly as Christ vsed the Scripture onely to repell Sathan so likewise the true Christians must vse onely the Scriptures in repelling of heretikes And therefore we may amend their error thus If such be the wickednes of the heretikes y e they abuse y e scriptures then ought we to giue al diligēce y t the scripture may kéepe both their authoritie and puritie the which will be if the heretiks be conuinced by the Scriptures alone and those places which shall séeme somewhat obscure maye take their interpretation from places more plaine But if our aduersaries hearken not vnto vs yet at the least waies let them giue eare euen vnto themselues in whose decretalls this sentence remaineth That from the Scriptures themselues the sence of truth must be taken The doctrine touching the baptisme of Infants is not found in the holy Scriptures neither these words Trinitie like substance persons manie such like all which words notwithstanding do appertaine vnto groūds and principles of faith Ergo all things appertaining vnto faith are not to be found in the Scriptures The antecedent is found true by reading of the Scriptures Now touching their antecedent I saie thus In that they affirme the doctrine concerning Baptisme of children not to be found in the Scriptures is most false like as our late writers haue taught in theyr learned workes against the Anabaptistes touching the which I will not héere make any longer disputation least I shuld séeme to wander without y e compasse of my proponed questiō Now touching these words Trinitie like substance and persons I confesse they are not found in the writings of the Apostles but yet I saie y ◠the verie doctrine which is signified by these words is deriued from the Scriptures for when certaine heretiks rose vp which denied y e veritie of y e doctrine then the godly Fathers which liued in those daies hauing care of y e circumstances added these wordes by the which they might the more easily explicate declare the doctrine touching y e trinitie y ◠which doctrine they had before confirmed by expresse and manifest testimonies of the holy Scriptures Now touching their consequence The error is Secundum fallaciam figurae dictionis These words Trinitie the baptisme of infants like substance are not found in the Scripture it is called Omonomos for the words indéede are not found in the holie Scriptures but the things signified by the words are there found And our christian faith consisteth not in the title of words but in substance of matter not in many volumes of bookes as S. Hierom saith but in the verye ground of reason And therefore Basil confesseth y ◠he vsed against the heretikes certaine termes which were not found written but yet notwithstanding saith he they were nothing contrary to the sence of the holy Scriptures And therfore our aduersaries reasoning thus we may wel bring them to an absurditie saying If because the persons the trinitie and such like words be not extant in the holy Scriptures it therfore followeth that all things necessarie to faith are not found in the holye scriptures Ergo these words are necessarie to faith and so by force of the consequent Sith this worde Omoousios that is like substance and such other wordes were onely found out by the godly Doctors after the heresie of Arius began to spring then wold it followe that the Church of Christ before the time
of Arius yea the Apostles theÌ„selues knew not al things necessarie vnto faith The which thing is most absurd sauouring of Athisme And therefore we may well turne this argument home againe vnto our aduersaries saying If such were the religion of the auncient fathers that they would not inuent anie one word to the intreating vpon anie principle of faith the which was not grounded vpon expresse places of scriptures as it is manifest by these words trinitie substance persons such like what shal we then think of our aduersaries which do not only inueÌ„t words but also eueÌ„ matter it self altogether abhorring contrarie to the Scriptures of God And therefore we may amend y e error of this their obiection saying That it is lawfull for the godly fathers of the church of God to vse inuent certaine words and tearmes whereby the matter contained in the scriptures may the better easier bée expressed If we must altogether beleeue the church in no part swarue from the credit of the church we beleeue the church in this part affirming that the scriptures came from the spirit of God theÌ„ truly we ought to beleeue the church likewise affirming that these such other like traditions came from the Apostles The antecedent is true and therfore it must follow that the coÌ„sequeÌ„t is also true The Maior hath two parts touching the which we will particularly speake And touching the first point I doe make a distinction of the Church which Paule calleth the house of God the piller foundation of truth which heareth y e voice of her spouse onely dependeth vpon his mouth and is alwaies gouerned by the spirit of God cannot be séene because shée is not tied to circuÌ„stances of place time or persons yet notwithstaÌ„ding we beleeue y â— the same church is vpholden by the word of God that she nothing estéemeth mans traditions But this or y e visible Church or the companie of many visible congregations may swarue from the truth as it is manifest touching the Churches in the East of which y â— most part haue turned to Mahumet I will not héere bring in the ancient counsells which haue both allowed brought into y e church great gréeuous errors And touching this church we may thus determine inasmuch as she is subiect to many errors she is not otherwise to be heard except shée speake those thinges which are agréeable to the Scriptures touching which matter I haue disputed more at large in another place wherefore this hath héere no place which they say affirme y â— wée must altogether beléeue the church in part swarue froÌ„ the credit of the same theÌ„ must we beléeue the visible Churches when as they propound nothing els vnto vs but the word of God on the other side we ought not to beléeue the visible churches when they swarue froÌ„ the word of God for I make my example by the Sinagogue which very religiously hath reserued the Cannons or bookes of the Scriptures yet notwithstanding she hath innumerable errors So theÌ„ we may beléeue the same Sinagogue whereby she saith y â— the Canonicall bookes haue sprong from y e spirit of God againe we may not beléeue her when she reiecteth casteth away the doctrine of Christ Therfore in y â— respect Christ saith The Scribes Pharesies sitting in Moses chaire are to be heard yet notwithstanding in another place he reprehendeth reproueth their traditions whereby wée sée proued that in one parte they ought to be heard on the other not Wherfore their Minor is not true so the consequence cannot stand because there is an error Secundum fallaciam figurae dictionis And they reasoning thus we may well bring theÌ„ to a great inconuenience saying In the time of Tertulian the church did affirme that an oblation for birth daies was a tradition receiued from the Apostles but in the time of the NiceÌ„e couÌ„sel the church did affirme that oblation for birth daies was not a tradition of the Apostles as in his proper place I haue proued ergo if wee must in all parts beleeue the Church and in no parte swarue from the Church then must we beleeue the things which are manifest opposit contarrie one to the other the which is impossible Wherefore we may turne their obiection vpon themselues after this sort saying Whosoeuer affirmeth the scripture to be the word of god the which we ought to beleeue likewise affirmeth that traditions not written are to be receiued speketh coÌ„traries But the Church of Rome affirmeth the scriptures to be the word of god which we ought to beleeue also affirmeth that traditions not writteÌ„ are to be receiued Ergo the church of Rome affirmeth contraries by force of the consequent we must beleeue hir in one part in another not if this be of anie force that we must beleue the church in all parts swarue froÌ„ hir in no part theÌ„ this foloweth by their argumeÌ„t that the Church may not wel be called the Church For y e truth of the maior proposition is proued thus If you did me beléeâ—e the scriptures truly I will beléeue y t there is nothing to be added thervnto because y t it is so commanded in them as I haue in diuers places of my booke proued therefore this sentence of Tertulian is highly to be imbraced WheÌ„ we beleeue saith he this first we must beleeue that there is nothing els that we ought to beleue Now if we wil consider the traditions of our aduersaries we shal easily perceiue y t they are not only added by inuentions but also contrarie to expresse places of scripture so ye sée y t we cannot beléeue the scriptures also the traditions of our aduersaries And therefore we may amend the error of the former obiection after this manner Sith we ought to beléeue God alone then most diligently ought we to take héede least vnder the shew of pietie we be seduced into errour and because the name of the Church is verie glorious therefore if anie thing be proposed vnto vs vnder the title of the Church we ought to giue atteÌ„tiue diligence whether it be y e voyce of the true church or not which we heare y t we may be able so to doo we must take counsell with the word of God set foorth vnto vs in the Scriptures from the which the true church of God neuer swerneth wheÌ„ therefore the Church affirmeth vnto vs that the scriptures are the word of God we acknowledge the same to be true not onely because the church so affirmeth but because of the inward efficacie of the spirite of God by the which the truth of the scriptures is sealed in our hearts lyke as the church by the conduction of the spirite of God affirmeth vnto vs y t the scripture is the word
Scriptures Againe If anie of those men vvhich are reported to haue the holie spirit of God doo saie anie thing of himselfe vvhich may not be proued by the holie Scriptures beleeue him not Doth Manes the Heretike say that the summe or the monie worke anie thing of themselues Where hast thou read this If he haue not read it in the Scriptures but speaketh it of himselfe it is manifest that he hath not the spirit of God And againe those that are true Christians let them betake themselues to the Scriptures because there canne be no other proofe of true christianitie then the diuine and holy Scriptures Basil It is a manifest Argument of infidelitie a flat signe of pride if anie man will reiect anie of those thinges which are not vvritten or bring into the Church anie of those things vvhich are not vvritten sith the Lord himselfe sayth My sheep heare my voyce and follovve not a straunger Againe Whatsoeuer vve speake or doo that ought to be confirmed by the testimonie of the holie Scriptures Also the Apostle taking the example from men Gal. 3. doth most vehemently forbid that anie of those thinges which are in the holy Scripture should be put out or else vvhich God forbid that anie thing should be added Againe If vvhatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne and faith commeth by hearing and hearing by the vvorde of GOD Then vvithout doubt sith vvhatsoeuer is vvithout the scriptures is not of faith the same is sinne And in another place Let vs stande to the iudgement of the holy Scriptures proceeding from GOD and vvith vvhome so euer are founde pointes of religion agreeing to the holie Scriptures to them let the vvhole opinion of truth bee alotted Againe of all those things vvhich vve haue in vse both of vvords and deeds some are distinctly set dovvne in the Scriptures some omitted but those things which are contained in the scriptures by no meanes must be omitted but of those things which are not found in the scriptures we haue a flat rule deliuered vnto vs by Paule All things are lawful but all things are not necessarie Hierome The vniuersall Church of Christ hauing in possession all the Churches in the world is vnited together by the vnitie of the spirit and hath the words of the Lawe of the Prophets of the Gospell and of the Apostles and she may not passe hir bounds that is from the holie Scriptures Againe Those things which men faine with out authoritie of Scripture as comming frō the Apostles by Tradition the sworde of God which is his word doth cut away And also that which hath not the authoritie of the Scriptures is with the same facilitie contemned with the which it was allowed Augustine Neither ought I to alleadge the Nicene counsell neither thou the counsell of Aremineus as though we would determine causes therewith for neither I am boūd vnto the authoritie of the one neither thou of the other but let each thing with other each cause with cause reason with reason be tried by the authoritie of the scriptures And again Ther is cōstituted ordained one ecclesiasticall cannon or rule vnto the which belongeth the bokes of the Prophets and Apostles by whose writings we ought to iudge touching the writings of others whether they be faithfull or vnfaithfull Againe Our Lord wold that we shuld beleeue nothing against the confirmed authoritie of the Scriptures Againe Let vs bring foorth the diuine Ballaunce of the holie Scriptures and let vs weigh in them what so euer is of anie waight or value Damascene As a tree planted by the riuers of waters euen so doth the soule of man which is moistened by the heauenlie scriptures bring foorth timelie fruite which is true and perfect faith And againe Let vs receiue acknowledge and reuerence all those things which are deliuered vnto vs by the Lawe Prophets Apostles and Euangelists seeking nothing which is not contained in them And least we should seeme altogether to neglect and despise the Schoolemen heare what Scotus saith It is most manifest that the Scriptures sufficiently doo containe all doctrine necessarie to the pilgrime that trauaileth heere in the world Peter Stelliaco Wee must runne vnto the scriptures alone that we may attain eternall life And Gracianus in his decrees doeth repeat that sentence of Augustine which wee haue before rehersed And many more may be recited vnto the like effect but heere we cease because wee will wander no farther That we may now therefore make an ende of the obiections of our aduersaries which they gather from y e writings of the Doctors we will comprehend the effect of all those their obiections which they haue or can bring forth in an argument which is thus The Doctors of the Church haue thought that besides the holie Scriptures traditions not written ought also to be receiued Ergo all those things which are necessarie vnto faith and saluation are not contained in the Scriptures Let vs now trie their antecedent It is manifest by y e testimonies of the ancient Fathers which before wée haue alleadged y t those auncient fathers haue not written all alike touching traditions for first it behooued to knowe the minde and opinion of the olde Doctors before they obiect them to vs. But let this be the full summe of all those things which the auncient doctors who are most to be accounted of haue written touching Traditions All those things which are deliuered either appertaine to the principles of religion and constitution of manners or else vnto ecclesiasticall rites and orders of the Church but those thinges which appertaine to principles of faith and manners are most surely contained in the Scriptures neither is it anie hinderāce if certaine kinds of spéech to the easie explication of doctrine principles of religion be not found by expresse words in the holy Scriptures so that the matter it selfe the sence signified by these tearms be extant in the scriptures But as touching those things which appertain vnto rites ecclesiasticall order if they agrée with the Scriptures and serue to the edification of the Church Yea finally if they be receiued with the common consent of the whole Church then are they with greate reuerence to be receiued and that this was the opinion and minde of the auncient Fathers I thinke it is sufficiently made manifest by these things which haue bene alleadged before whereby we may sée that the ground and matter of our aduersaries is false Now therfore I denie their consequent for the errour is in forme of reasoning the Argument is grounded vpon the misvnderstanding of the fathers Another errour is this for that they take that to bée graunted which lyeth betwéene vs in controuersie For thus standeth the case betwéene vs whether in confirming principles of faith the scriptures alone be to bée harde yea or nay But our aduersaries