no man euer dreamed of viz. that we commonly build our faith vpon our English translation So that the Scripture may well be the rule of faith for ought that you haue said against it concerning the first propertie of certaine truth which it were blasphemie to denie of the scripture For the second that the rule must be easie to vnderstand I haue shewed that there is no necessitie of that condition and that the scripture is easie in matters necessary to saluation In the last point of the scriptures defect touching many things that must needs be beleeued you do both wrong God in making his word writtē so vnperfect and by a foolish craft insteed of proouing that the scripture containeth not all matters of faith needfull to saluation vndertake to shew that which no man denieth that all points of beleefe are not expresly set down and determined by scripture And lest we should forget your shuffling in this point you offer new proofe of a needlesse matter from the authoritie of Austin Basil and Epiphanius whose testimonies I alledged before to prooue the sufficiencie of the scripture in all matters necessarie to saluation The places by you alledged are not of such matters neither speake of things not expresly contained but onely shew that for matters of fact ceremonie the Apostles haue not determined al particulars The Apostles saith Austin haue commaunded nothing touching not rebaptising them which haue bene baptised by hereticks but the custome which was pleaded against Cyprian is to be beleeued to haue had beginning from their tradition as there are many things which the Church euery where holdeth that we wel beleeue therefore to haue beene enioyned by the Apostles though they are not found written What is this to prooue that there are matters necessarie to be beleeued to saluation which are not exprest in the scriptures Basil was not the the author of that Treatise at the least of the latter part of it from about the 17. chapter and so forward That appeareth first by obseruing the difference of style being neither like Basils writing nor in one place like an other as Erasmus hath truly obserued who translated it Secondly by the fond discourse he maketh propounding one thing handling an other and concluding a third which not onely Basil would neuer haue done but no man of any discretion Last of all he bewraieth himselfe to be a counterfeit by speaking of Meletius as one dead long before who liued in his time ouerliued him as it is manifest by the Ecclesiasticall historie But admit the booke were Basils what is there in it to proue that all points of doctrine which appertaine to true Christian faith are not expresly set downe in Scripture This Author saith that we must beleeue oraditions VVhat In matters of doctrine There is no such word in him He speaketh of outward carriage in ceremonies and phrases of speech The question in that part of his Treatise is of the preposition with that is to speake that euery man may vnderstand whether it be lawfull to say in the Church seruice and otherwise Glorie be to the Father and to the Sonne with the holy Ghost or whether we must needs say and to the holy Ghost not with For this speech that author pleades tradition Do we denie any such matter Or do we not acknowledge the libertie and authoritie of the Churches in such matters Who sees not that our custome now is to say Glory be to the Father to the Sonne and to the holy Ghost Not that thereby we condemne the other kind of speech but because in matters left to our libertie we take that which seemeth fittest Epiphanius speaking of praier for the dead which hath no warrant of Scripture is glad to helpe himselfe with the authoritie of tradition telling vs that some things must be held by tradition and not all taken out of the scriptures But Epiphanius doth not say that this is a doctrine or action necessarie to saluation A. D. §. 6. Some obiect against this conclusion that place of S. Paul Omnis Scriptura diuinitùs inspirata vtilis est ad docendum c. vt perfectus sit homo c. But this place prooueth nothing against that which I haue said For it saith not that scripture alone is sufficient to instruct a man to perfection but that it is profitable for this purpose as it is indeed and the rather because it commendeth vnto vs the authoritie of the Church which as I shall afterwards proue is sufficient Now it is certaine that to be profitable and to be of it selfe alone sufficient be farre different things Stones and Timber be profitable to the building of an house yet they alone without a worke-man to square them and set them in order be not sufficient for this purpose A. W. Of this place I haue spoken sufficiently otherwhere and shewed that the Scriptures are able to make vs wise to saluation and therefore sufficient to that purpose Now the Apostle hauing giuen that commendation to the scripture vers 15. proceedeth in the next to exemplifie that in particular which he had before said in generall It is able to make thee wise to saluation it is able to fit thee to teaching reproouing correcting instructing Can any reasonable man thinke that the Apostle deliuering by way of amplification his former commendation of the scripture that he might the rather stirre vp Timothie to the studie of it would say lesse then he had done before But it is a great deale lesse to say no more but the scripture is profitable to such purposes then to commend it as able to make a man wise to saluation Therefore though the word indeed doe not expresly signifie sufficiencie yet it cannot be doubted but the profit mentioned implieth such a sufficiencie especially since he addeth perfection which must arise from this word of God And so as I haue shewed elsewhere do Chrysostome and Theophylact vnderstand it who make the Apostle speake to Timothie to this effect that he being now to be offred vp leaueth the scriptures in his steed of which he may in all things take aduise and counsell as if the Apostle himselfe were present with him But you forsooth would make vs beleeue that the scripture is indeed profitable to this end but not sufficient Is not the knowledge of arts tongues philosophy and history of verie good vse also to this purpose Slender then too slender is the commendation our Apostle giueth the scriptures if it be of no greater excellēcy then these humane furtherances but only in a certain degree of profit To helpe the matter you propound one particular for which the scripture is profitable namely to commend vnto vs the authority of the Church But neither doth it cōmend to vs any such authority as you imagin if that be the rule of the scripture one sentēce had bin as good better then
so many Bishops of their faction Vincentius acknowledgeth a succession continued though secretly from Simon Magus to Priscilian Let vs see ' now whether you bring any better reason for your selues then you haue done against vs They are euen much about one That Church which can shew a line all succession of her Bishops without interruption from the Apostle Peter to Cloment now liuing is Apostolicke But the Church of Rome can shew such a succession without interruption Therefore the Church of Rome is Apostolicke Tertullian thought it sufficient to proue the hereticks not to be Apostolicke that their doctrine agreed not with the Apostles And Ambrose truly affirmed that they haue not the inheritance of Peter which haue not the faith of Peter He saith Nazianzen that professeth the same doctrine of faith is partaker of the same throne But he that embraceth contrary doctrine must be thought an aduersary euen in the throne He may haue the name but the other hath the truth of succession Therefore Irenaeus saith plainly that those Bishops onely are to be obeyed who together with succession haue the truth But of this I spake before Chap. 15. Where there is no beginning what continuance or successiō can there be Is not the question whether Peter were euer at Rome or no full of doubt Are you able in any sort to resolue it by Scripture vnlesse perhaps we may say that he neuer came there because it is no where plainly set downe nor probably to be gathered from thēce that euer Saint Peter was at Rome But it is more vnlikely that euer he was Bishop of Rome I might go forward to aske you who was his successor Linus or Clement which is a point not agreed vpon by auncient writers Since that time you haue had 32. schismes in your Church sometimes two sometimes three Popes at once that your succession cannot be so cleare as you would make it To proue your minor you tell vs that the auncient Fathers did much esteeme succession from the Apostles and vsed it as an argument to confound the hereticks and to confirme themselues in the vnitie of the Catholicke Church Who denieth that succession is to be esteemed and that it hath some force to confute and confirme But what succession is it that is of such price force Personall succession alone without truth VVe heard ere while what Tertullian Irenaeus Nazianzen and Ambrose say concerning succession that without truth it deserueth no credit Yea some of your owne writers confesse that an argument from succession doth not hold affirmatiuely as if there were a true Church wheresoeuer there is succession VVherby doth Irenaeus confound heresies by shewing a personall succession of Bishops from the Apostles VVhat could that helpe the matter vnlesse he be also able to proue that the doctrine he maintaines hath come successiuely from the Apostles by them He speaks plaine enough We confound all errors by the doctrine of the Apostles and the faith preached to men by thē Let not the word tradition trouble any man Irenaeus for that expounds himselfe where he saith that the Apostles first preached the Gospell and afterward by the will of God deliuered it to vs in the Scriptures to be the pillar and foundation of our faith The continuance of this doctrine by succession is vsed by Irenaeus as a motiue to perswade men to the liking of that truth which had receiued so good acceptation and was warranted by so good authority as the teaching of the Apostles themselues In a word Irenaeus saith that heresies might then be refuted by shewing that they who had bene ordained Bb. by the Apostles and their successors continued in the doctrine receiued without any approbation of such hereticall fancies Austin you say was held in the Church as himselfe professeth by the succession of Priests from the verie seat of Peter And why should he not be held by that rather thē leaue the Church for the dreames of the Manichees VVe say as Austin did that such a succession is a better proof of the Church then their bare promise of truth especially since as the same Austin sheweth otherwhere they wold haue their word to be takē as you now would haue yours for sufficient proofe But Austin in the verie same place you alledge addeth withall that if they could shew that the truth was on their side he would preferre it before succession and whatsoeuer other reason that made him continue a member of the Church In this sense did those other ancient writers esteeme and vrge succession whose names you muster to small purpose but onely for shew of authoritie Concerning that speech of Athanasius be not so iniurious either to him or your selues as to presse his testimony to so leud a purpose Would you haue men thinke that he which refuted and confounded Arius and his complices by so many and so worthy proofes out of the holy Scriptures would condemne not onely other men but himselfe also for deriuing his faith in that point from the Scriptures But though you care not what become of all the Fathers so your Popery may flourish yet like a reasonable man consider what a terrible blow you giue your owne cause Is there no other marke of the Church but succession Then by Bellarmines iudgement there is none at all who allowes it not as a certaine light to shew vs the Church But what wants it of blasphemy to pronounce men to be hereticks for making the Scriptures the foundation of their faith to which purpose Irenaeus saith that they were left And I pray you answer me directly why it should not be as lawful for me to groūd my faith vpon the beginning of this succession in the Apostles as vpon the continuance of it in other men Yet might Athanasius well say concerning that point of our Sauiour Christs Godhead that he was to be counted an hereticke that should deriue the beginning of his faith from any other ground then the whole succession wherein the Apostles were comprehended and whose doctrine the Churches of Christ till that time in that matter had followed But how will you proue out of this place of Athanasius that this should be a mark to discerne hereticks by alwaies It was then an excellent and admirable argument in that point not of it owne nature but because the truth had successiuely bene held till those times How will you answer Bellarmine who affirmes confidently and truly that truth goes not alwaies with succession For if it did why should not succession be a certaine mark of a true Church But Bellarmine saith it is not You tell vs that otherwise the ordinance of Pastors made by our Sauiour Christ shall be frustrate of the effect intended by him What vnlesse there be truth wheresoeuer there is succession Then can it not come to passe that any Pastor hauing lawfull ordination can erre For if one
in a matter of such weight The conclusion is that howsoeuer it is indeed a sinne and so in it selfe damnable to misbeleeue or not beleeue all and euery thing which God hath reuealed yet a man may be in the state of grace and saluation though he misbeleeue or through ignorance obstinately not beleeue something so reuealed In a word Not right beleeuing is neuer able to depriue a man of saluation but when that we beleeue amisse is a maine point of saluation obstinately not beleeuing onely then shuts vp heauen against vs when either the points we will not beleeue are fundamentall or our refusing to beleeue is against our owne iudgement and conscience If you had no further reach in this Chapter we were of the same mind with you but in propounding the reason of your assertion you bewray a further matter then at the first a man would imagine A. D. §. 2. The reason of this is because euery point of doctrine yea euery word that almightie God hath reuealed and by his Church propounded vnto vs to be beleeued must vnder paine of damnation be beleeued as we may gather out of Saint Marke where when our Sauiour had giuen charge to his Disciples to preach the Gospell to euery creature the which charge he also gaue in Saint Mathew saying Docete omnes gentes c. docentes eos seruare omnia quaecunque mandaui vobis Teach all nations c. teaching them to obserue all things whatsoeuer I haue commaunded you he pronounceth indefinitely Qui non crediderit condemnabitur He that shall not beleeue shall be condemned not excepting or distinguishing any one point of doctrine as needlesse to be beleeued or which a man might at his pleasure misbeleeue or doubt of without danger A. W. Your first reason lieth thus If euery point and word reuealed by God and propounded by his Church to be beleeued must vnder paine of damnation be beleeued then faith must be entire But euery word so reuealed and propounded must vnder paine of damnation be beleeued Therefore faith must be entire The conclusion of this Syllogisme is acknowledged by vs for a certaine truth Faith must be entire but the premisses seeme liable to iust exception For first the antecedent and the consequent of the proposition are all one and so the proofe and that which is proued differ not What is it to say euery word reuealed by God must be beleeued but to affirme that faith must be entire Indeed if the questiō were of faith as it is a quality then the consequent might be inferred vpon the antecedent but since we speake of the things to be beleeued both are one If euery such word must be beleeued then we must beleeue euery such word It is the same faith by which all and by which some is beleeued but as the obiect or things beleeued make a difference which reacheth not to the faith it selfe within the soule Secondly the Assumption though it be true yet doth it containe something that had need to be warily considered First you so couple the reuealing by God and the propounding of a thing to be beleeued by the church as if the latter were no lesse necessary then the former to make a matter of faith wheras al things that God hath reuealed ought to be beleeued whether the Church propoūd them for such or no. For the reason why they are to be beleeued is that they proceed from God who must needs be credited in whatsoeuer he shal say in respect both of his truth in speaking and his authoritie in commaunding obedience But you Papists make the authoritie of the Church the very foundation of our beleefe The Scripture you say is in it selfe the word of God and so worthy of all credit but to vs it is not so but by the authoritie of the Church vpon the credit whereof we take it for the word of God Yea farther you limit faith in particular points by the determination of the Church so that no man shall be bound to beleeue as a point of faith any doctrine neuer so certainly proued out of Scripture vnlesse the Church haue resolued of it that it is true and whatsoeuer is by the Church concluded for true must be acknowledged for such by faith though it be beside or against the Scripture which as Cardinall Cusan is not ashamed nor afraid to say is fitted for the time and diuersly vnderstood So that it may at one time be expounded one way according to the generall current order of the Church and the same order being changed the Scripture also is changed And why should it not if as another Papist saith the holy Scripture take strength and authoritie from the doctrine of the Church and Bishop of Rome The Apostles saith Pighius haue written certaine things not that their writings should be aboue our faith but that they should be vnder it But what should I stand to recite your blasphemies in this kind which are many and monstrous That which is not to day a point of faith shall be one to morrow if it please the Pope to propound it to be beleeued It is farther to be considered in your Assumption that although whatsoeuer God reuealeth is to be beleeued vpō paine of damnation yet a man may be saued without beleeuing euery thing so reuealed alwayes prouided that he do not against his conscience obstinately refuse to acknowledge any truth If our Sauiour haue said that he which beleeueth not all that his Apostles teach shall be condemned then euery word so reuealed and propounded must be beleeued vnder paine of damnation But our Sauiour hath said so Therefore euery word so propounded must be beleeued vnder paine of damnation This is a proofe of your Assumption wherein for the consequence of your proposition I would haue all men vnderstand that although you craftily imply therein a comparison of equalitie betwixt the charge of beleeuing the Apostles and all other Ministers allowed by you whom you call by the name of the Church to deceiue simple people with so glorious a title yet the truth of that proposition depends not thereupon but onely vpon the necessitie of beleeuing that which God hath reuealed It is a certaine truth that God is to be beleeued in all things he hath reuealed by whom soeuer he propound it in this respect the consequence of your proposition is true That if it were damnable not to beleeue the Apostles deliuering that which God had reuealed it is also damnable not to giue credit to Ministers now when they propound that to be beleeued which God hath reuealed because the reason of beleeuing is that God hath reuealed the things that are deliuered But yet here are two differences to be obserued first that it is lesse sinne to doubt of that which any man besides the Apostles deliuers though it be the word of God then to make question of the same matter vttered by the
excused in your iudgement by ignorance concerning any positiue commaundement of God but out of doubt there are many points of truth reuealed by God onely as positiue not as such meanes to saluation that without the beleefe of them a man cannot be saued Adde hereunto that a Christian may be ignorant of many points held by the Church and that by negatiue ignorance because he could neuer come where he might heare that the Church beleeued such and such things It is therefore an vnreasonable thing to condemne all ignorance for heresie and a most vncharitable conceit to cast all into hell fire that beleeue not in euery point as the Church generally doth yea though they know what the Church mainteines be of a contrarie mind Your proofe which is a comparison of likenesse or equality betwixt infidelitie in denying all Christian religion and heresie in not beleeuing some points of it is a great deale too weake Similitudes argue indeed but rather by way of illustration then proofe And there is no equalitie betwixt denying all and doubting of some The former absolutely ouerthrowes true religion the latter onely misconceiues some points leauing the grounds of truth vntouched and beleeuing them as most certaine A. D. § 6. Fourthly I may confirme the same with the testimonie of the ancient Fathers First of S. Athanasius in his creed which is commonly knowne and approoued of all Quicunque saith he vult saluus esse ante omnia opus est vt teneat Catholicam fidem quam nisi quisque integram inuiolatamque seruauerit absque dubio in aeternum peribit Whosoeuer will be saued before all things it is needfull that he hold the Catholicke faith which vnlesse euerie one doe keepe entire and vnviolate without doubt he shall perish euerlastingly A. W. If the ancient writers should affirme a thing so vnreasonable there were good reason for a man to looke for some proofe of it out of the Scriptures But no doubt we shall finde your citations of their writings as much to the purpose as we haue done your former arguments The first you alleadge is Athanasius in his Creed to which I answer that Athanasius speaks not of all points reuealed by God but of those substantiall matters which are there set downe by him and namely of the Trinitie of persons and Godhead of our Sauiour Iesus Christ This appeares by the last verse of the same Creed where he thus concludeth This is the Catholicke faith which except a man beleeue faithfully he cannot be saued But Athanâ—siuâ— hath not comprehended all points of religion in that Creed for he leaueth out the buriall of our Sauiour Christ vnlesse you will say he put his going downe into hell for it neither doth he require in that place any other point as necessary to be beleeued to saluation but those onely that he there reciteth which must be kept entire and vnuiolate of euery man that will be saued A. D. §. 7. Qui sunt in sacris literis eruditi saith Saint Basil ne vnam quidem sillabam diuinorum dogmatum prodi sinunt sed pro istius defensione si opus est nullum non mortis genus libenter amplectuntur Those that are well instructed in holy Writ doe not suffer one sillable of diuine doctrine to be betraied or yeelded vp but for the defence thereof if need be doe willingly embrace any kinde of death A. W. That of Basil is lesse to the purpose For first he saith nothing of any doctrine propounded by the Church or of your vnwritten traditioÌ„s but only of the Scriptures And how makes this for the beleeuing whatsoeuer the Church wil deliuer without which in your iudgement faith cannot be one or entire Secondly he speakes not of all ignorant men whose faith vpon paine of damnation you will haue entire concerning euery point but of those onely that are learned in the holy Scriptures or at the most so farre as they are learned in them I astly what saith he of these but that which we alwaies require that a christian should not suffer any sillable of true doctrine to be betraied This makes against you who rest wholly vpon Popes and Councils and by that meanes oftentimes betray the truth of God manifested in the Scripture yea so farre are you from mainteining euery sillable of it with hazard of your liues that you doe what you can for shame to destroy it all You Papists depriue the people of them altogether at least for their priuate reading howsoeuer your Pope Pius 4. makes a shew of permitting it You haue thrust out the Authenticall copies of Hebrew and Greeke and in steed of them authorised a corrupt Latine translation which no man may refuse vpon any pretence though it haue 8000 places as Isidorus Clarius a great learned man of your owne affirmeth in which the sense of the holy Ghost is changed yea Cardinal Hosius blusheth not to write That it were better for the Church if there were no written Gospell extant I omit your blasphemies against the Scriptures whereof I haue spoken otherwhere A. D. §. 8. Nihil periculosius saith Nazianzen his haereticis esse potest qui cum integrè per omnia decurrant vno tamen verbo quasi veneni gutta veram illam ac simplicem fidem dominicam inficiunt Nothing can be more perilous then these heretickes who when they runne vprightly through all the rest yet with one word as with a drop of poyson doe infect that true and sincere faith of our Lord. A. W. What if Gregorie Nazianzen complaine that heretickes which held most points soundly according to truth as Arius Eutyches Macedonius Nestorius and diuers other did were very pernitious to the Church because they did more easily and secretly poyson the truth of doctrine by their heresies Will it follow hereupon that therefore a man cannot be saued vnlesse he beleeue euerie point of truth reuealed by God or that a man hath no faith because his beleefe agrees not in euery small matter with other Christians Remember I pray you we denie not that faith should be entire but that it cannot be auaileable to saluation if in any one point it misbeleeue Thus haue I examined the first part of this your Treatise of Faith which I know not how I should apply to your maine syllogisme implied in your preface when you shew the vse of it in any part thereof I will giue you answer accordingly A. D. CHAP. V. That there must be some means prouided by almighty God by which all sorts of men may learne this faith which is so necessary to saluatioÌ„ A. W. The title of this Chapter is so propounded that your meaning may easily be mistaken There must be say you some meanes prouided May not a man gather by these words that as yet there are no such meanes prouided where as you would haue vs beleeue that God hath already made prouision of fit meanes to that
ei credidissem discendum What a madnesse is this in thee to say beleeue them to wit the Catholickes that we must beleeue Christ and the Scriptures to be his word yet learne of vs what Christ said that is to say what is the meaning of his word I should saith S. Austin much more easily perswade my self that I ought not to beleeue Christ at all then that I must learne any thing concerning him of any except of those of whom I haue already learned to beleeue in him A. W. I denie your principall Assumption wherein you denie the sufficiencie of the Scripture for the determining of all matters of faith For if the Scripture were not sufficient to this purpose it might be lawfull for men to adde to the word of God that which is wanting but that God hath precisely forbiddē all mē Ye shall put nothing to the word which I command you neither shall you take any thing from it out of which Cardinall Caietane saith we may gather that the law of God is perfect But of this place I haue said more other where and our Diuines are large and plentifull in this argument The Apostle Paul affirmeth of him selfe that he preached nothing but that which had bin spoken by Moses and the Prophets yea our Sauiour euery where auoucheth his doctrine by the writings of the old Testament Indeed of whom should we know the will of God but of God himselfe who doubtlesse hath not deliuered it so sparingly in so many seuerall bookes but that it containeth whatsoeuer is needfull to saluation All things indeed that our Lord did are not written but those saith Cyril that the writers thought to be sufficient for manners and doctrine I could ouerwhelme you with testimonies of the Fathers in this matter A few shall serue The Canonicall Scripture saith Austin is the rule of all The letters of Bb. are reprehended by some other of grauer authoritie Generall Councels correct prouinciall and the former are amended by the latter Let the Scripture be iudge saith another and let those doctrines be held for true that agree with it For the law of God or Scripture as Chrysostom saith is a most exact ballance square and rule Therefore let vs passe by that which he or he thinkes and let vs enquire all things of the Scriptures The holy Scriptures inspired by God are sufficient to shew the truth And therfore as Hilary saith wisely and religiously It were well we would content our selues with those things that are written If we will not this is Basils censure of vs that we are without faith and proud It is a manifest argument of infidelitie saith Basil and a certaine signe of pride if any man reiect ought that is written or attempt to bring in any thing that is not written Therefore Damascen saith that the Church receiueth acknowledgeth and reuerenceth all things that are deliuered by the law the Prophets the Apostles and Euangelists and further seeketh not for any thing I pray you shew me some reason if you can why the Lord that doth not omit necessary matters repeateth those that are lesse needful to be known should fil so many bookes of Scripture with the same histories and points of doctrine oftentimes rehearsed and quite leaue out many things of farre greater importance then some of those are which he hath caused to be written Without the knowledge of many things recorded in the Scriptures a man may be saued but you denie saluation to all men that beleeue not whatsoeuer you teach them and there is no end of your deuices though it haue no warrant in any part of Scripture Is it not better then to rest only vpon that which both you and we acknowledge to be the word of God then to giue an infinite libertie to men of deuising what they wil to lay a grieuous burthē vpon our selues to beleeue vnder pain of damnation whatsoeuer they wil father vpō I know not what impossibilitie of erring Let him that hath eyes see though the blind delight in blindnesse The weaknesse of your principall Assumption concerning the insufficiencie of the Scriptures you striue to fortifie with this slender reason If there be diuers questions moued now a dayes touching substantiall matters which are not expresly set downe nor determined by onely expresse Scripture then the Scripture is not able to resolue all such doubts But there are diuers such questions Therefore the Scripture is not able to resolue all such doubts Ere I answer directly to your syllogisme I must note two things in the propounding of it First by whom the questions you speake of are moued If by Papists it is the shame and sinne of your Church to suffer idle and needlesse questions to be moued of which there can be no determination but by a Councel to be held no man knoweth how many yeares hence euer or neuer If you say these questions are set on foote by vs all the world may discerne your vntruth For we are certainly perswaded that it is not lawfull to accept any doctrine as a point of faith which cannot be proued by the Scriptures But you will say We thinke they are determinable by Scripture though indeed they be not At the least then answer the proofes we bring out of Scripture and on our part the controuersie is ended You wil reply that we will not be answered but interprete Scripture as we list Who sees not that this is a meere slander since we stand not vpon any priuate reuelations but on those rules of interpretation which the fathers according to the light of true reason haue left vs as it were by legacy But this reply is also otherwise insufficient For whereas you yeeld as appeares by this reason that some things may be determined by Scripture this obiection denies that any point of doctrine whatsoeuer can be resolued of by it because if that you say be true we wil in all cases interprete Scripture as we please Secondly I obserue another point in respect of the time If the questions you meane be such as were neuer moued till now and the Scripture neuer failed in any former doubts which seems to be implied in that speech Now a dayes me thinkes there is no shew of reason to imagine that so many and so capitall heresies for the space of 1500 years should be refuted and ouerthrowne by Scriptures and now at the last matters of lesse importance and yet as you say very substantiall should haue no meanes of satisfaction by the like course Doubtlesse if the Scripture hath hitherto bene sufficient it is no small wrong to suspect and accuse it now of insufficiencie especially in very substantiall matters necessary to be beleeued Now concerning your syllogisme I denie the consequence of your propositiō What is the Scripture so poore and weake that it can determine nothing which is not expresly set downe
and writing Further it is false that a priuate spirit agreeing with the Catholicke Church in doctrine can be in that point of agreement the rule of faith For although the doctrine he teacheth be true yet is it not the rule of faith much lesse is he himselfe because of his authoritie but either as you say by reason of the authoritie of the Church or indeed as we truly affirme for that it is agreeable to the word of God in the Scripture called canonical because it is the rule of faith and manners Now for answer to your Syllogisme I say your Assumption is not simply true but onely so farre forth as the receiued doctrine of the Catholicke Church I speake as you do agreeth with the truth in the Scripture reuealed Neither doth Saint Paul speake of whatsoeuer doctrine receiued by your imagined Catholicke Church of Rome but of that which he himselfe or some other of the Apostles had taught the Galatians to whom he writeth that Epistle This it should seeme you saw well enough and therefore in your crastie discretion for bare to translate the Apostles words which for the most part you set downe alwayes as well in English as in Latine The reason lieth thus He that teacheth contrary to the doctrine which the Galatians had receiued of the Apostles is to be accursed for his preaching so But a priuate spirit that teacheth contrary to the receiued doctrine of the Catholicke Church teacheth contrary to the doctrine which the Galatians had receiued by the Apostles Therefore a priuate spirit teaching contrary to the receiued doctrine of the Catholicke Church is to be accursed for his preaching so Who seeth not that the truth of this Assumption dependeth vpon this point that the Catholicke Church hath receiued no other doctrine then that which the Apostles taught the Galatians But this hath as much need of sound proofe as that for the proofe whereof it is brought and therefore to dispute thus against any man that would hold a priuate spirit to be the rule of faith were to giue him occasion to laugh at you for begging the question in stead of prouing it But to make all men see how small force there is in this your reason for the keeping of a priuate spirit from being the rule of faith I will frame two other syllogismes against a publick spirit or Councel and against the Pope 1. He that must be accursed for his teaching cannot be the rule of faith But a publicke spirit or Councell that teacheth contrary to the receiued doctrine of the Catholick Church must be accursed for his teaching Therefore a publicke spirit or Councell that teacheth contrary to the receiued doctrine of the Catholicke Church cannot be the rule of faith 2. He that must be accursed for his teaching cannot be the rule of faith But the Pope that teacheth contrarie to the receiued doctrine of the Catholicke Church must be accursed for his teaching Therefore the Pope that teacheth contrarie to the receiued doctrine of the Catholicke Church cannot be the rule of faith Haue you not spun a faire threed thinke you to choake the Popes and the Councels authoritie withall Call your wits about you and deuise some cleanly shift for the matter or I can tel you all wil be naught For your Religion is no more able to hold vp head if the Popes authoritie be cast downe then a man that hath neuer a leg is able to stand vpright It will go the harder with you in this matter because if I grant that the Pope cannot erre you are neuer a whit the nearer for the answering of my syllogisme as you may perceiue if you will but assay to apply that point for answer to either part thereof There is no other way but to giue ouer this your first reason against a priuate spirit and to make amends for it in the second if you can A. D. §. 3. Secondly the rule of faith must be infallible plainly knowne to all sorts of men and vniuersall that is to say such as may sufficiently instruct all men in all points of faith without danger of errour as hath bene proued before But this priuate spirit is not such For first that man himselfe cannot be vnfallibly sure that he in particular is taught by the holy spirit For neither is there any promise in Scripture to assure him infallibly that he in particular is thus taught neither is there any other sufficient reason to perswade the same For suppose he haue such extraordinarie motions feelings or illustrations which he thinketh cannot come of himselfe but from some spirit yet he cannot in reason straightwayes conclude that he is thus moued and taught by the spirit of God For sure it is that euery spirit is not the Spirit of God As there is the spirit of truth so there is a spirit of errour As there is an Angell of light so there is a Prince of darknesse Yea sometimes Ipse Sathanas transfigurat se in Angelum lucis Sathan himselfe doth transfigure himselfe into an Angell of light Wherefore he had need very carefully to put in practise the aduise of Saint Iohn who saith Nolite credere omni spiritui sed probate spiritus si ex Deo sint Doe not beleeue euerie spirit but prooue and trie them whether they be of God or no. Neither doth it seeme sufficient that a priuate man trie them onely by his owne iudgement or by those motions feelings or illuminations which in his priuate conceit are conformable to Scripture because all this triall is verie vncertaine and subiect to errour by reason that our owne iudgement especially in our own matters is verie easily deceiued and that Sathan can so cunningly couer himselfe vnder the shape of a good Angell and so colour his wicked designements with pretense of good and so gild his darke and grosse errours with the glistering light of the words and seeming sense of scripture that hardly or not at all he shall be perceiued VVherefore the safest way were to trie these spirits by the touchstone of the true Pastours of the Catholicke Church who may say with S. Paul Nō ignoramus cogitationes Satanae we are not ignorant of the cogitations of Sathan and who may also say with S. Iohn Nos ex Deo sumus qui nouit Deum audit nos qui non est ex Deo non audit nos In hoc cognoscimus spiritum veritatis spiritum erroris VVe are of God he that knoweth God heareth vs he that is not of God doth not heare vs. In this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of errour Now if any will not admit this manner of trying discerning the spirit of truth from the spirit of errour but will trust their owne iudgement alone in this matter feare they may iustly nay rather they may be sure as Cassian saith that they shall worship in their thoughts the Angell of darknesse for the Angel of light to
right to it and then frame such arguments otherwise any man of neuer so little iudgment may find more cause to pity or disdaine your proofe or presumption then to stagger at the force of your reason All things in the Scripture were indeed writtē for our learning and therfore belong to vs so far as the general doctrine reacheth the particular circumstances are alike Wherefore I grant your proposition not because of any succession which could not be in those Scribes and Pharises being of diuers tribes and as your Genebrard saith hauing thrust themselues into the chaire of Moses being empty but because they expoūded the law of Moses among the Iewes as the Ministers of Christ do the Gospell at this day to the Christians Ere I answer to your Assumption I must speake a word of your translation haue sitten The Greeke indeed is so but as Vatablus noteth the praeter tense is put for the present tense Therefore Pagnine doubteth not so to translate it sedent sit Which must needs be our Sauiours meaning For how were it agreeable to reason that he should charge vs to heare the Scribes and the Pharises because they did sometimes sit vpon Moses chaire if now they sit beside it It is our Sauiours purpose to signifie that the expositions of the former Pharisies and of those that taught in his time were not to be reiected or rather it is al one as if he had said do sit But let vs reade the place which way we list it is all one to your minor which I denie To the proofe of it out of the text I answer First the sitting vpon Moses chaire signifieth not succession but teaching the law of Moses For Moses calling was altogether extraordinarie from God both for gouerning and teaching In the former Iosua and the Iudges succeeded him till the people were wearie of Gods ruling of them The other part of his office was to be discharged ordinarily by the Priests and Leuits That ye may teach the children of Israel all the statutes which the Lord hath commaunded them by the hand of Moses The Priests lips should preserue knowledge and they should seeke the Law at his mouth Ieshua and Bani c. and the Leuites caused the people to vnderstand the law And they read in the booke of the Law of God distinctly and gaue the sense and caused them to vnderstand the reading It was one thing to succeed Aaron another to sit on Moses chaire The chaire of Moses saith Cyril signifieth power of doctrine They sit in Moses chaire saith Origen which interprete Moses sayings well and according to reason And a little after The Scribes and Pharises sit naughtily vpon Moses chaire they sat wel that well vnderstood the law What is the meaning of that saith Ambrose The Scribes sat but because letters are written whereupon the Scribes in Greeke are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 following the interpretation of the letter not the sense of the spirit And afterward Therefore they teaching those things that Moses wrote c. So doth Theophylact expound it They that sit in Moses chaire that is that teach the things that are in the law And immediately before They that exhort to euill life do not then teach out of Moses chaire nor out of the Law Therefore to sit vpon Moses chaire is nothing else but to haue authoritie to expound Moses Law as he himselfe did expound it So the Ministers of the Gospell may be said to sit vpon the Apostles chaire because they haue authority to interpret the Gospel which the Apostles themselues preached Secondly I denie that our Sauiour commanded the Iewes or doth now charge vs to beleeue whatsoeuer they that haue authority to teach vs deliuer or to do whatsoeuer they enioyne This is apparent because himselfe refuteth condemneth their interpretations and doctrines many times as Mat. 5. In many points of which that one is most cleare Ye haue heard that it hath bene said thou shalt loue thy neighbour hate thine enemie but I say vnto you loue your enemies c. In vaine do they worship me teaching for doctrines mens traditions And in the same place he calleth them blinde leaders of the blind and addeth further that if the blinde lead the blinde both fall into the ditch Now can any man be so impious I might say blasphemous as to say that our Sauiour commaunded the Iewes to take such a course as should certainely bring them to destruction Nay rather he warneth them to take heed of their doctrine Take heed and beware he doubleth his admonition to make them more carefull of the leauen of the Pharises And what was this leauen The doctrine of the Pharises saith the Euangelist But what need we go out of this chapter for the point in question Doth he not afterwards call them blinde guides vers 16. 24. fooles blind vers 17. 19 Doth he not in the same places condemne and confute their absurd and lewde doctrine of swearing A man would wonder that euer any man professing himselfe a scholler or teacher should bring such miserable proofes in matters of so great weight But alasse we must beare with you you bring such as you haue if you knew any better we should be sure to haue them But these serue to deceiue your deuoted followers who wilfully shut their eies against the truth The iudgements of God are past searching out and his mercie in opening our eies to see your grossnesse greater then we are able to conceiue Well yet perhaps you haue some colour from antiquitie to countenance your exposition withall You quote Austin what None but Austin in a matter of so great doubt But let vs see why you quote him If to prooue that the Pharisies were to be heard and obeyed in all things there is no such word in his sentence alledged by you For he saith no more then we grant that Our Sauiour prouided before hand that we should not refuse good doctrine because it was deliuered by wicked men Indeed that was the verie purpose of our Sauiour and to that doth Austin apply it otherwhere according to the true sense of it What saith he else but heare the voice of the sheepheard though by hirelings such as Austin in that place saith the Pharifies and Scribes were and such as our Sauiour proueth them to be by their hypocrisie ambition couetousnesse The Apostle sheweth saith Austin in an other place that men without charitie may teach somewhat that is wholsome of such our Lord speaketh They sit vpon Moses chaire c. Whereupon also the Apostle speaking of enuious and malitious men yet such as preached saluation by Christ saith Whether by occasion or in truth Christ be preached Ireioice And in a third place He that speaketh wisely and eloquently but liueth wickedly teacheth many that are desirous
the Church is of infallible and vndoubted truth and that the way not to be deceiued in an obscure question is to aske and follow the iudgement of the Church Wherefore worthily also do we all say Credo Ecclesiam Catholicam I beleeue the Catholicke Church and worthily also may I conclude that neither Scripture alone nor naturall wit and learning nor priuate spirit nor any other thing but onely the teaching of the true Church of Christ is that ordinarie meanes which Almightie God hath prouided whereby all men may learne that one infallible entire faith which I proued to be necessarie to saluation A. W. Saint Paul doth worthily call the Church the pillar and ground of truth but not as you would haue vs beleeue because it is the rule of faith The Greeke Scholiast taketh that speech of the Apostle to be vttered by way of comparison betwixt the Church of Christ and the Iewish Temple Not as the Iewish Temple saith Oecumenius but the pillar and ground of truth for the Temple was the ground of the shadowes of the truth Out of which we may gather that as the Iewish synagogue was the pillar and ground of those shadowes of the truth so is the Church of Christ the pillar and ground of the truth it selfe But that synagogue was not the rule of faith in that point because whatsoeuer it taught was to be held for infallible truth but for that to it were committed the oracles of God and the knowledge and vse of those ceremonies so hath the Church of Christ the truth of doctrine in the scripture and the exercises of Gods worship and religion Therfore is it called the pillar and ground of it because it constantly maintaineth that truth preaching and professing it in despight of all the practises and power of Satan and tyrants of the world As the thighs saith an ancient writer sustaine and beare vp the weight of the whole bodie so also the Apostles like pilars valiantly carry the vniuersall Church of Christians ouer the whole world being for the value of their inuincible courage and stedfastnesse of their holy purpose called marble pillars And a litle after They preached the Gospell with such wisedome and constancie that as if they had bene of marble or adamant they were afraid of no violence nor aduersitie but always continuing firme and inuincible against all the forces of men and diuels shining as it were in the darke by that light of their wisedome by preaching admonishing teaching and glistering with miracles at the last they most happily became conquerors To this effect speake your Glosses The ground of the truth of the Gospell which the Church constantly maintained euen in the greatest persecutions Well vpholding the truth in it self saith another Glosse That it may not fall to the ground though it be afflicted saith Lombard But let vs bring your reason into due frame The pillar and ground of truth is the rule of faith The Church is the pillar and ground of truth Therefore the Church is the rule of faith Your proposition or maior is false vnlesse you restraine it as I haue often said to the truth and then it is so far the rule of faith as it is the pillar and ground of truth Whatsoeuer it holdeth truly according to the scripture is the rule of faith for those points not because of the Churches authoritie but for the truth of the doctrine Yet may it easily come to passe that a Church maintaining the generall truth of the Gospell and all particulars necessary to soluation may faile in many other points of great importance and for all that continue both a true Church and the pillar and ground of truth though not the rule of faith Your minor also as you vnderstand it is vntrue First because the Apostle speaketh not of any such companie as you imagine Pope Bishop Councell but either of the Church of Ephesus in which Timothie to whom he writeth then abode or indefinitely of any and euery Church whatsoeuer where the true Religion of our Sauiour is or shall be professed according to the Gospell If Timothie were as you will not denie Bishop of Ephesus then it is apparent that the Apostle calleth the Church of Ephesus wherein Timothy liued taught and gouerned the pillar and ground of truth yet was it not the rule of faith for then had the rule of faith perished long since with that Church of Ephesus If he speake to him as to an Euangelist who was to follow him from place to place and to establish the Churches which the Apostle had planted then must euery one of those Churches wherein Timothy was to behaue himselfe as he had done in Ephesus be vnderstood to be the pillar and ground of truth and yet neither any nor all of them were the rule of faith which else must haue bene lost with them What remaines then Shall we expound it of all beleeuers in generall I grant it reacheth to all the faithfull but as to them considered in their seuerall Churches because among them so disposed of was Timothy to performe that dutie which the Apostle there enioyneth him But let vs so conceiue of the Church What shall it auaile you or endamage vs All beleeuers are not the companie you pleade for but onely the Pope and your Bishops whom you would haue taken for the rule of faith Secondly I denie your minor in respect of the sense you giue of those words the pillar and ground of truth For you so vnderstand them as if the truth of God depended vpon the verdict of the Church so that nothing may be held for truth but what the Church deliuereth for such and whatsoeuer she so propoundeth must so be receiued vpon paine of certaine damnation How contrary are you in this interpretation and doctrine to the auncient fathers The Apostles saith Irenaeus left vs the Scriptures to be the pillar and ground of our faith Nay say you they left vs the Church to be the pillar and ground of the Scriptures The Gospell and spirit of life saith the same father in the same booke is the pillar and ground of the Church Nay by your leaue reply you the Church is the pillar and ground of the Gospell But Chrysostome handling this place of the Apostle is not afraid to affirme that the truth is the pillar and ground of the Church not as if he would denie that which the Apostle saith for the Church indeed is the vpholder of the truth but to shew that although the Church maintaine and auow the truth yet it is built and founded vpon the truth which as Ierome saith vpholds the building Therfore to make short whē the Apostle saith that the Church is the pillar and ground of truth his meaning is that amongst Christians and among no other sort of men the truth is to be found and amongst and by them it is constantly and worthily
maintained The Philosophers indeed as Thomas saith had a kind of notion of some points thereof but they had no certaintie as well because they were corrupted with errors as for that very few of them are found to haue agreed in the same truth But in the Church is certaine knowledge and truth Which as Caietan saith is vpheld aloft in it because it is auowed reuerenced and honored aboue all things and it is so founded in the Church that out of it it is not to be found This is the reason as they truly say why the Church is called a pillar Thomas addeth that it is termed the ground in respect of others because men cannot be confirmed in the truth but by the sacraments of the Church This testimonie of Austine is alledged by you otherwise then it was written by him For whereas he spake of that which had then alreadie bene resolued of by the whole Church you make him speake indefinitely of any thing that pleaseth the Church turning iam placuit into placet But we must vnderstand that he writing in that place concerning the rebaptizing of heretickes which question had bene agreed vpon as he saith in the former chapter before the hatching of Donatus heresie saith that the iudgement of the Church in that case is to be held as agreeable to the Scripture This might the Reader haue seene in his words if you had not changed the tense in placet and left out etiam in hac re in the beginning of the sentence The truth of the Scriptures saith Austin is held by vs euen in this thing If you reply farther that the reason which Austin vseth is generall for all questions whatsoeuer namely the authoritie of the Church commended by the Scriptures which cannot erre I answer you first that we haue seene Austins iudgement directly to the contrary viz. that whatsoeuer is of necessitie to saluation is plainly deliuered in the Scriptures and that the authoritie of men without Scripture is insufficient to propound any doctrine as a matter of faith and therefore if he should write otherwise in this place we might with good reason make question of his authoritie Secondly I answer that Austine speaketh here of those points onely which are not determinable by Scripture such as he taketh the question of rebaptizing heretickes to be as it appeareth in the words immediatly before those you alledge being also a peece of the sentence by you omitted Although saith Austin there be no example to be brought out of the Scriptures concerning this matter yet the truth of the same Scriptures is euen in this matter also held by vs when we do that which hath now alreadie pleased the whole Church c. Now in such cases as cannot by Scripture be decided who would or may be so presumptuous as to withstand or mislike the practise of the church in all places Surely the authoritie of the church is so far commended in the Scriptures that it ought in all things of such nature to ouerweigh our iudgement and incline our affection to the liking of that which is agreed on by so generall a consent of so many churches in all nations Therefore that which you gather out of Austins words of following the iudgement of the church in an obscure question is to be restrained to such questions as cannot be determined by the Scriptures and those are few or none of any importance of necessitie to saluation none at all or else your consequence will be nothing worth Austin saith that in questions not determinable by Scripture we must follow the iudgement of the church Therefore we must follow it in all obscure questions whatsoeuer Austins foundation will not beare your building Is it a good reason to say In cases not prouided for by law custome must beare sway therfore it must be followed in all cases So and so weakly do you dispute It is not enough for you to teach vs new diuinitie but you will driue vs to learne new Latin too Caesar could make men free of Rome but not words Credere Ecclesiam Catholicam to beleeue the Catholicke Church in ordinary Latin is to beleeue that there is a Catholicke Church Credo esse I beleeue there is but you would make the ignorant beleeue that credo Ecclesiam and credo Ecclesiae is all one For how else can this sentence reasonably depend vpon the former We must follow the iudgement of the Church Therfore worthily also do we all say Credo Ecclesiam Catholicam What can you meane by this but I beleeue that is I giue credit to the Catholick Church that is I beleeue that to be true which the Catholicke Church teacheth But the article of the Creed hath no such sense as it may appeare by the other that follow all being alike in respect of our beleefe I beleeue the communion of Saints the forgiuenesse of sinnes the resurrection of the bodie and life euerlasting To which of these foure dowe giue any such credit But we beleeue that there is a Church of Christ to which all these priuiledges belong He that translated Epiphanius into Latin more curiously then truly made a difference betwixt beleeuing the church and the other articles We beleeue saith he one holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church we confesse one baptisme for the forgiuenesse of sinnes and looke for the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come But the Greeke which Epiph. reciteth out of the Nicene creed is alike in all the articles in the Church in the baptisme of repentance in the resurrection of the dead And Paschasius doubteth not to say that the ignorance of some drew the preposition in from the former sentence concerning beleefe in the holy Ghost into the article of the church yet as he sheweth credere Deum in Deum greatly differ That there is a God the Apostle saith the diuel beleeueth but no mā is held to beleeue in God but he that religiously puts his trust in him Cyril also reciteth the articles after the same manner without any difference in the particulars yet with In to euerie one of them and in that sense in which we take them Ruffin as Paschasius before denieth that the Creed saith In the holy Church in the forgiuenesse of sinnes in the resurrection of the flesh Because that were to equall our beleefe of these points with our beleeuing in the Father the Son and the holy Ghost But of these articles we are to beleeue that they are true that there is a Church gathered vnto God that there is a remission of sinnes that there is a resurrection of the flesh So doth Austin if those Sermons be his read and vnderstand it I beleeue the Catholicke Church c. We must beleeue that God will vouchsafe the resurrection of bodies and the forgiuenesse of sinnes And whereas in an other Sermon he saith in the Church so doth he
Let vs therefore proceede in examining this discourse A. D. §. 1. Hitherto I haue shewed that the rule of faith which all men ought to seeke that by it they may learne true faith is the doctrine of the Church of Christ and that this Church doth continue and is alwayes visible that is to say such as may be found out and knowne Now the greatest question is sith there are diuers companies of them that beleeue in Christ euery one of which challenge to themselues the title of the true Church how euery man may come to know assuredly and in particular which companie is indeed the true visible Church of Christ whose doctrine we must in all points beleeue and follow To this question I answer that euery companie which hath the name of Christians or which challenge to themselues the name of the Church are not alwayes the true Church For of heretickes we may well say as S. Austin doth Non quia Ecclesiae Christi videntur habere nomen idcirco pertinent ad eius consecrationem They doe not therefore pertaine to the consecration of the Church of Christ because they seeme to carry the name of the Church of Christ. For as the same S. Austin saith in another place heretickes are onely whited ouer with the name of Christians when indeed Si haeretici sunt as Tertullian sayth Christiani esse non possunt If they be heretickes the cannot be true Christians The reason whereof the same Tertullian insinuateth to be because they follow not that faith which came from Christ to his Apostles and Disciples and which was deliuered by them from hand to hand to our forefathers and so to vs but they follow that faith which they chose to themselues of which election or choise the name of hereticke and heresie did arise A. W. Hitherto you haue laboured to proue the maior of your maine syllogisme propounded in your preface namely that the faith which the authoritie of the true Catholick Church commends vnto vs is to be held for the true faith What successe you haue had in this proofe let them say that haue compared your arguments and my answers together Now you are to proceed to the proofe of your maine assumption that they onely are the true Church which make profession of the Romane faith Your syllogisme is thus framed They onely are the true Church to whom the certaine marks by which the Church is to be knowne belong But they that professe the Romane faith are they to whom those markes belong Therefore they onely that professe the Romane faith are the true Church The proposition or maior of this Syllogisme is not exprest by you but necessarily implied in this thirteenth Chapter where you say that the way to discerne which is the true Church is first to set downe which be the certain marks whereby all men may easily know the Church The assumption or minor you endeuour to proue in the fiue Chapters following by a Syllogisme thus concluded They onely who are one holy Catholicke Apostolicke Church are they to whom the certaine markes of the true Church belong But they that professe the Romane religion are they who are one holy Catholicke Apostolicke Church Therefore they onely that professe the Romane faith are they to whom the certaine markes of the true Church belong Your proposition or maior is in the two next Chapters your assumption or minor in the sixteenth In handling the proposition first you labour to disproue the markes of a true church which we assigne and that in Chapt. 14. then you assay to propound and confirme other of your owne as we shall see hereafter if God will when we come to Chap. 15. Whereas you expound what you meane by a visible Church viz. such a one as may be found out and knowne you straighten the question and auow that which no man denieth For the question betwixt vs is not whether the Church may be found out or no but whether it be so visible and famous a congregation that it may at all times be knowne of all men If this be not that you should proue what will become of your grand reason that therefore there must alwayes be a knowne Church the doctrine whereof euery must rest vpon in all matters of faith because otherwise it cannot be vniuersally true that God will haue all men to be saued It is indeed a matter worth the enquiring which companies of them that professe Christian Religion are the true Churches of Christ For that all are not it is apparent by your Antichristian Synagogue and that all true Christians are bound as much as lieth in them to become members of some true church of Christ it is manifest because else they cannot ordinarily performe the duties of his true outward worship which are no where done but in his true churches If the choise of any doctrine not receiued from Christ be sufficient to make men heretickes and churches hereticall what may the world thinke of your synagogue which is not ashamed openly to professe that she holdeth many points of doctrine which haue not proofe out of the written word of God For whereas to shift off the matter you come in with deliuerie of I know not what from hand to hand by the Apostles and your forefathers who sees not that this conceit of yours both condemneth the Scriptures of insufficiencie and maketh the reports of men the rule of the true faith and openeth a wide gate to let in all deuices of mans corruption What auailes it to know that all doctrine is heresie which comes not from our Sauiour Christ if we must beleeue that all came from him which your Pope and his Councell tell vs they haue receiued by tradition why should we not rather hearken to your Occham who truly affirmed that heresy is an opinion chosen by a man contrary to the holy Scripture Surely there is great cause to suspect them of heresie who refuse to make triall of their doctrine by Scripture whatsoeuer they talke of tradition from the Apostles by their forefathers A. D. §. 2. The way therefore to discerne which is the true Church is irst to set downe which be the certaine markes by which all men may easily know the Church and then to examine to whom these markes doe agree The which that I may the better performe in the Chapter following here I thinke good first briefly to note what belongeth to the nature of a good and sufficient marke Note therefore that two things are required in euery sufficient marke The first is that it be not common to many but proper and onely agreeing to the thing whereof it is a marke As for example it is no good marke whereby to know any particular man to say he hath two hands or two eares because this is common to many and therefore no sufficient note or marke whereby one may be distinguished or knowne from all other But a marke whereby we may discerne
reason not only against Scripture were ordained properly as the ministery of the word the seruice of Angels for their sakes that are to be saued according to the election of God Secondly and as it were accidentally for the hardening of them that will not beleeue to leaue them without excuse To make your matter the more likely you tell vs of our Sauiours loue to mankind which in your diuinity is without exception or respect of persons How then can it sute with the purpose of God his Father who hath chosen some to glory refused other meerly of his owne iust will without respect of difference in the parties so chosen refused As for I that loue of mankind wherupon some men conclude that either all or the greatest part of men are loued by God to eternal life it is not to be vnderstood by comparison of men to men but partly of men to the Angels that fell in which respect the Apostle amplifies the mercy of God to vs He tooke not the Angels but he tooke the seed of Abraham partly of men to all other creatures none of which besides man is vouchsafed the honour to be ioyned in vnity of person with the Sonne of God and so to be made heire of euerlasting glory It is needlesse to repeat what I answered before to this place of Isay onely I will say thus much of your exposition that though all that see the Church may know it yet it doth not follow that therefore all men may see it which you make the end of planting a visible Church that euerie man may learne how to be saued We denie not that the markes of the Church are such as that any man who hath the meanes and will vse them with conscience and diligence may come by the grace of God to the acknowledging of it and by the ministerie of it to saluation Such is the truth of doctrine wherein euerie man may be instructed who will submit his reason to the euidence of truth conteined in the holy Scriptures and not wilfully resist or carelesly neglect the worke of the spirit in the ministerie of the word The bands and chaines Austin speaketh of are not said to draw a man out of the world vnto the Church but to hold him in it that is in already And surely he were vnreasonably absurd that being borne in the profession of Christianitie or by any other occasion brought to ioyne himselfe vnto this or that Church would not cōtinue his beleefe vpon those groūds that Austin there mentions as long as there could be no sufficiēt reason brought to the contrarie yea though he could not discerne the truth of many points which he held as he had bene taught But Austin in the same place professeth that the markes he names and all other whatsoeuer whereby he is held in the Catholicke Church are nothing worth in comparison of truth manifestly prooued out of the Scripture But of this matter I shall haue occasion to speake againe hereafter where you propound some of Austins words more at large A. D. §. 2. Of these markes diuers authors haue written at large I for breuitie sake haue chosen out onely these foure Vna Sancta Catholica Apostolica One Holy Catholicke Apostolicke because I hope these will be sufficient and because I finde these especially set forth in Scriptures commended by Councels and generally admitted of all sorts both Catholickes and Protestants as now I am to declare First for the generall admittance of these properties of the true Church I need no other proofe but that both Catholicks and Protestants allow of the Nicene and Constantinopolitane Creed wherein we professe to beleeue the true Church the which Church is there described with those onely foure properties which before I named as though by those onely euery man might sufficiently know that Church which in euerie point they are bound to beleeue Now if besides this proofe out of the generally receiued Counsels some precise man would haue me prooue these properties to agree to the true Church out of the Scripture it selfe this also I may easily doe A. W. So many and diuers are the markes of the Church propounded by your Popish writers that you had good cause to giue some reason why you cull these foure out of all the rest First you alledge breuitie wherof if you had beene so desirous you would not so often haue repeated the same matters You adde the sufficiencie of these their being mentioned in the Scripture commended by Councels and generally admitted by all sorts both Catholickes and Protestants All which taking them in your sense are generally false as shall appeare in the particular handling of them But indeed the true cause is though you will not be knowne of it that Bellarmine out of whom you haue patched vp your whole discourse though he bring fifteene yet confesseth that they may all after a sort be reduced to these foure There are two faults in this proofe whereby you labour to perswade vs that these properties are generally admitted both by Protestants and Papists First though both admit them yet in diuers senses we according to the true meaning of those Councels you according to those phantasies you haue deuised for the establishing of your Apostaticall Synagogue Secondly we admit them not all as markes of the or a visible Church but as hidden properties of the Catholicke Church the mysticall bodie of Iesus Christ which are not to be discerned by the eye of the bodie but by the light of faith as all other articles in the same Creed are What though there be no more properties but those foure there set downe will it follow thence that therefore they are named as though by those onely euerie man might sufficiently know the Church Is that the vse of those points which are deliuered concerning the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost Or rather are they not set before vs as principall matters to be beleeued of them So are also these properties of the Church If any man be so simple as to take your former proofe for good whereas it faileth in the chiefe point you would prooue by it as I haue shewed he is fitter to be pittied then instructed But is it a note of precisenesse to desire proofe for matters of faith out of the scripture Doubtlesse it was then no lesse precisenesse to appoint the scripture for a rule of our faith and as great for our Sauiour Christ and the Apostles to confirme their doctrine out of the scripture For this course of theirs makes vs the bolder to require the like of you whose authoritie we more doubt of whereas if they had stood vpon their priuiledge and neuer troubled themselues with proouing that they deliuered or leauing their doctrine in writing we should easily haue perswaded our selues to rest vpon mens authoritie and not to looke for any proofe by scripture But giue me leaue a little to consider of this
surely you must needs according to this first part of your reason haue condemned the innocent and iustified the wicked For the Apostles Church was not one because it had varied from some opinions formerly held by it which the other companie still retained As for your odious manner of propounding the point according to the varietie of times and persons it is but a froth of words and might in regard of the change haue bin charged in like sort vpon the Apostles As for the dissent of learned men one from another neither was the Church euer so happie as to be without it and you acknowledge it among your owne writers though not in matters of faith the contrary whereof I will shew when I come to that place But if by matters of faith you meant such points as are fundamental I could somewhat the rather hearken to you And yet what shall it hinder a Church from being one that the learned men of it make question of such maine matters as long as the Church is not tainted with their priuate errors Did the Churches of Corinth or Galatia cease to be true Churches because some among them and as it should seeme no small number in the former denied the resurrection of the flesh in the other ioyned the workes of the law with faith to iustification yet were both these fundamētall errors the continuance wherin without repentance must needs bring certaine damnation But your matters of faith are all points though neuer so friuolous or false that your Church hath determined by her lawlesse tyrannie whereas many matters of farre greater importance not so decreed are left free for euery man to erre in or to be ignorant of without any danger of damnation or breach of vnitie This last point as you say is the principall matter appertaining to vnitie that there be meanes in the Church to end controuersies But why or how should this be so principall when as the Church may agree in the same points of doctrine though priuate men dissent from each other Indeed to the procuring of an outward peace it is very requisite that particular men be not suffered to preach or write one against another But neither is this peace so much worth as that for it the Church should be corrupted with errors and the chiefe power for the remedying of this inconuenience is in the hands of the chiefe Magistrate whose dutie it is to prouide that his subiects may leade a quiet and a peaceable life in all godlinesse and honestie Therefore neither doth this disagreement among the learned make the Church cease to be one though there be no meanes to end it which yet are not wanting in the true Churches Your minor also is false in euery part of it Variablenesse in points of faith according to the variety of times and persons is when in regard of these two the doctrine of the Church is altered Now who is so shamelesse as to charge vs with hauing altered and dayly altering our iudgements in respect of either of these What necessitie or occasion can varietie of time bring for the change of doctrine But for persons what sect profession church or companie in the world euer was or could be freer from depending on any mans person then we are who absolutely disclaime all mens authority ouer our faith Are not you they that charge vs with leauing the interpretation of Scripture and consequently the beliefe of euerie man to his owne priuate humour And yet you are not ashamed to accuse vs for variablenesse in our doctrine according to the varietie of persons If malice were not blind it were vnpossible you should slaunder vs with so manifest contrarieties You are the men whose faith dependeth vpon the persons of your Popes whom you follow blindfold whither soeuer any of them leadeth you We attribute to our teachers no impossibilitie of erring though we haue a reuerend opinion of their knowledge and faithfulnesse in regard whereof we do not lightly reiect any doctrine or exposition deliuered by them vnlesse it be apparently false Yet doe we not tie our selues to take whatsoeuer they teach as a matter of faith though we are readie to yeeld to any thing which is plainly prooued to vs out of the word of God how contrary soeuer it be to our former opinions For we know that men are subiect to error and that God doth not miraculously reueale all truth at once to any man but as it seemes good to his gracious wisedom peece by peece enlighteneth the vnderstanding of his seruants with the knowledge of his will and word according to their sinceritie in depending on him faith in calling vpon him diligence in searching the Scriptures the only sufficient meanes of instruction The second part of your slander is that our learned men so iarre in matters of faith that it is hard to find three in all points of one opinion Remember what you call matters of faith points of doctrine defined by the Church and forbeare blushing if you can when you reade this your accusation against vs. What other refutation shal I need to vse then the bare naming of the harmonie of our confessions wherein the most partial Reader of your side may discerne your shamelesse hyperbole that I may giue it a cleanlier terme then it deserueth To requite your kindnesse I challenge you to name me if you can any one of your schoole-men that hath not refuted some of his owne fellowes in some points or bene refuted by them I confesse there are many of them that I haue not read but I am so well acquainted with their courses and contradicting of one another that I may venture without aduenture to make this challenge Last of all your minor affirmes that our learned men haue no meanes to end their controuersies If you speake of the euent that our meanes are not sufficient de facto to make them that striue to agree in one opinion or to make all men to be of one mind I graunt that you say to be true but I adde withall that we may haue when we will as good meanes to this purpose as your Church hath For it is no more but to appoint some man to whose iudgement we will stand in all matters of controuersie What hereticall Church may not haue the same meanes of vnitie if it please But if you denie that de iure wee haue meanes sufficient for the ending of all questions I say your minor is vtterly false because we haue the Scriptures appointed and blessed to that end by God himselfe Now as the ministerie of the word is most sufficient for the begetting of faith and sauing of men though it haue not this excellent effect in all so the Scriptures are of absolute sufficiencie to cut off all controuersies howsoeuer men will not alwayes be ruled by them Your minor as we haue seene containes a grieuous accusation of vs in three points of no small importance To
rule of faith Chap. 9. That priuate spirit cannot be this rule Chap. 10. That the doctrine or teaching of the true Church of Christ is the rule or meanes wherby all men must learne the true faith Chap. 11. That this true Church of Christ of which we must learne the true faith is alwayes to continue without interruption vntill the worlds end Chap. 12. That this same Church must alwayes be visible Chap. 13. How we should discerne or know which company of men is this true visible Church of which we must learne true faith Chap. 14. That those Notes or markes which heretikes assigne to wit true doctrine of faith and right vse of Sacraments be not sufficient Chap. 15. That these foure Vna Sancta Catholica Apostolica One Holy Catholique Apostolique be good markes whereby men may discerne which is the true Church Chap. 16. That these foure markes agree onely to the Romane Church That is to say to that company of men which agreeth in profession of faith with the Church of Rome § 1. That the Romane Church onely is One. § 2. That the Romane Church onely is Holy § 3. That the Romane Church is onely Catholique § 4. That the Romane Church is onely Apostolique Chap. 17. The conclusion of the whole discourse viz. That the Romane Church is the onely true Church of Christ of which all men must learne the one infallible entire faith which is necessary to saluation And that the Protestants Congregations cannot be this true Church THE PREFACE BEing moued by some friends to conferre with one of indifferent good iudgement and of no ill disposition of nature though verie earnest in thaet religion which he did professe I was desirous to do my best endeuors to let him plainely see that the Catholique Romane faith was the onely right A. W. Being requested by some friends to maintaine the truth of Christian religion professed amongst vs against the antichristian cauils of this popish proctor I thought it my best course first to answer in generall to the whole substance of his booke and then to examine euerie particular Chapter In the former I first consider his drift and scope then how he proues that which he intends His drift is to shew That the Catholique Romane faith is the onely right wherein he craftily begs that which is in question That the Romane faith is the Catholique faith which himselfe propounds as the second thing to be proued by him That those onely which professe the Romane faith are the true Catholique Church Neither can it be auouched by the authority of anie ancient writer or by any good reason that it is lawfull or fit to ioyne the terme Catholique as Papists take it to any particular Church whatsoeuer There was great strife about the Catholike Church vpon earth in Austins time which the Donatists would haue confined to Affrica but the true Christians freed it from that bondage and bounded it with no other limits then the compasse of the whole world Let the Papists shew if they can that in this whole cōtrouersie the Catholique Church was euer restrained or coupled to anie one Citie Dioces Prouince or Nation as it is now by them to Rome If they cannot let them acknowledge and renounce this their noueltie A. D. §. 3. For which purpose I did chuse to let passe disputes about particular points and in generall to shew First that it is necessary to admit an infallible authoritie in the true Cathòlique Church by reason whereof euery one is to learne of it onely which is the true faith of Christ Secondly that those onely which professe the Románe faith are the true Catholique Church The which hauing proued I did consequently conclude that the faith and beliefe which the authority of the Romane Church doth cōmend vnto vs ought without doubt to be holden for the true faith A. W. Indeed the best and onely way to auow the doctrine of the Romish Church is to leade men hoodwinckt in ignorance of the particular points it holds many whereof are so palpably false that he that knowes them will easily be perswaded to abhorre them But let vs see what you shew in generall Thus you dispute The faith which the authoritie of the true Catholique Church commends vnto vs ought without doubt to be holden for the true faith But the faith which the authoritie of the Church of Rome commends vnto vs is the faith which the authoritie of the true Catholique Church commends vnto vs. Therfore the faith which the authoritie of the Church of Rome commends vnto vs ought without doubt to be holden for the true faith The conclusion of this syllogisme is set downe by you in plaine words there The which hauing proued I did consequently cōclude that the faith c. The proposition or major is not exprest no more is the assumption or minor but instead of them you haue deliuered the proofes of them thus to be concluded First for the proposition at those words That it is necessary to admit an infallible c. If it be necessary to admit an infallible authoritie in the true Catholique Church by reason whereof euery one is to learne of it onely which is the true faith of Christ then the faith which the authoritie of the true Catholique Church commends vnto vs ought without doubt to be holden for the true faith But it is necessarie to admit such an authoritie in the true Catholike Church Therefore the faith which the authoritie of the true Catholike Church commends vnto vs ought without doubt to be holden for the true faith Onely the assumption of this syllogisme is propounded the rest omitted The proofe of your principall assumption is at those words That those only which professe the Romane c. And as in the former syllogisme the assumption onely is exprest the rest vnderstood Thus If those onely which professe the Romane faith are the true Catholike Church then the faith which the authoritie of the Church of Rome commends vnto vs is the faith which the authoritie of the true Catholike Church commends vnto vs. But those onely which professe the Romane faith are the true Catholique Church Therefore the faith which the authoritie of the Church of Rome commends vnto vs is the faith which the authoritie of the true Catholique Church commends vnto vs. We see now what his drift is how he proues that he intends and by what reason he confirmes his proofe It remaines that we consider in general to what part of his proofe or confirmation thereof euery Chapter in his Discourse appertaineth In the 4. first Chapters he layeth certaine grounds concerning faith in the 13. following he disputeth the matter propounded First he shewes the necessitie of faith Chap. 1. then he deliuereth three properties required to true faith That it is one Ch. 2. That it is infallible Chap. 3. That it is entire Chap. 4. In his dispute the twelue former Chapters from the beginning
of saluation and giuen commandements which if all men should obserue they should be saued But what need I be long in this matter when as your selfe as it should seeme so vnderstood it In the title you say All sorts of men in the Chapter you repeate those same words and adde two sorts learned and vnlearned which also you do afterward It may therefore seeme strange perhaps to some man that I trouble my self and the reader with this exception against your proposition But I do it not without iust cause For although both title and chapter make profession as it were of that meaning yet within halfe a dozē lines after you giue me occasiō to suspect the other sense where you say God hath prouided meanes whereby euery man learned and vnlearned may sufficiently be instructed And indeed whereto else tendeth that discourse of the visibilitie of the Church so much magnified and vrged by you In that sense then I denie the consequence of the proposition But if you vnderstand it according to the plaine words not of euery man but of all sorts of men I still denie the consequence For though it be out of doubt that God hath appointed as wel vnlearned as learned to euerlasting life yet it is false that there needeth any such rule or meanes as of necessitie to saluation I denie your assumption For God hath prouided a rule whereby a man may be instructed in all points and questions of faith Let them that would attaine to saluation saith Chrysostom bestow their time in the Scriptures And againe If we search the Scriptures diligently we shall attaine to saluation We are not commaunded saith Iustin the martyr by Christ to giue credit to the doctrines of men but to those which the holy Prophets haue published and Christ hath taught Therefore doth Tertullian call Hermogenes to the Scripture and adore the sufficiency thereof By which onely as one saith after heresie once hath possest the Churches the true Church of Christ is to be found A little after He that would know which is the true Church of Christ how shall he know it but only by the Scriptures From and in which only assurance of faith is to be had as he saith presently after God hath a true will which also certainly taketh effect that some mē of al sorts shold be saued but not that euery particular man should as I proued before by your reason because he hath not vouchsafed euery one the means Cōcerning the first place alledged by you the Apostles owne interpretation seemeth to allow that which I brought before out of Austin of the diuers conditions and sorts of men For so himselfe speaketh I will that prayers supplications and intercessions be made for all men for Kings and for all that are in authoritie He sheweth in these last words what he meaneth by all men All sorts of men The reason why he nameth Kings and magistrates is because they were at that time not onely heathen but also enemies and persecutors so that no such doctrine can be certainly and necessarily concluded out of this text that God would haue euery particular man to be saued For the auowing of the former exposition we must vnderstand that the word all is often vsed in Scripture for euery kind Iesus healed euery sicknesse and euery disease not euery particular but all kind of diseases Euery sinne and blasphemy shal be forgiuen not euery particular sinne but euery kind of sin saue onely that against the holy Ghost We heard before that of Iohn I wil draw all to me and Saint Austins iudgement thereupon And if it were true that God had as you speak a true wil that all men should be saued how can that be true which not we onely but the learnedst of your Papists hold according to the Scriptures that he appointed some to damnation as wel as other some to saluation and that there can be no reason giuē why this man in particular is vouchsafed faith and saluation that man is not but onely the wil of God As it is euidently proued by Thomas of Aquin Rom. 9. and long before him by S. Austin in many places Ad Simplician lib. 1. q. 2. de praedest grat cap. 46. Enchir. ad Laurent cap. 32. 99. Epist 105 ad Sixtū you therfore do Austin wrong who alledge him in your margin as if he thought that God wold haue euery particular mā to be saued against which his doctrine in so many places is direct and which as I shewed before he purposely refuteth Prosper also is of the same opinion as hauing defended that doctrine of Austin against his aduersaries which also is the title matter of a whole chapter in one of his bookes That the saying of the Apostle God wil haue all men to be saued is meant of all kind of men Therfore the place you bring must be vnderstood according to the course of Prospers writings in the same treatise that God hath not barred any nation nor kept back any man from hearing beleeuing the Gospel And farther hath by his general prouidence and benesiles affoorded meanes to stir vp all to seeke God as himself speakes in two of the places you bring and in some other In one place when he had said that many infants are dead who certainly haue no part in the citie of God he addeth And where is that which by some that vnderstand it not is obiected to vs as contrary hereunto that God wil haue all men to be saued and come to the knowledge of his truth Are not they to be reckoned among those All men who heretofore from time to time haue perished without the knowledge of God This might serue for answer to you in this point concerning Gods will to haue all men saued But for your better satisfactiō or if that will not be for the closer stopping of your mouth I will adde that solution which your great Cardinall Bellarmine giues to these three places of Scripture that you alledge though in another question These places saith Bellarmine only signifie that God hindereth no man from saluation yea that he hath appointed remedies and helps in common and that he would haue the preaching of the word and the sacraments to be common to all In the same sense is God said to be the Sauiour of all because by his generall prouidence he hath care of all and hath left no man vntoucht but either by the Gospell or by the law or by nature it selfe hath moued him to seeke after God as Prosper saith yea hath affoorded meanes whereby euery man may be saued This place as Bellarmine saith can hardly haue any other exposition then that latter Your Glosse expoundeth it of Gods goodnes to all men in respect of outward blessings who makes his Sun to shine saith it vpon good and bad The other place of
Peter as we heard Bellarmine say signifieth no more but that God keepes no man from being saued but hath vouchsafed the word and sacraments in common to all Your Glosse restraines that Any to them that are to be conuerted that is to the elect That other which are to be conuerted may be conuertea Thomas and Holkot interprete it de voluntate signi of that wil of God which we may gather by the signes he sheweth as for example God calleth all men from danger of damnation by precepts counsels threatnings rewards These are signes to vs that God would haue all men to be saued but there is another will called volunt as beneplaciti the good pleasure of God which is indeed truly that which God intendeth Thomas addeth also a second exposition out of Damascen but it can proue nothing because it cannot be necessarily enforced out of the text rather then the other which is also more warrantable for the truth of it as I will shew another time vpon more iust occasion if it please God Caietan alledgeth three seuerall interpretations that of Damascens a second of All kind of men whereof before and a third of the elect which also he doth exemplifie in the person of Peter Thus I haue shewed that the maine foundation you build vpon is but weak wanting ground of warrant from the word of God But admit it were neuer so true that God would haue euery man to be saued which in some sense as I haue said indeed is most true yet were not the consequence of your proposition proued For there might be sufficient meanes for euery mans saluation though there were no meanes to bring him to that same one infallible entire faith which you conceit but onely to so much faith and knowledge as is necessary to saluation by which he might be sufficiently instructed in matters of faith which is all that you craftily seeme to require in the conclusion of this section whereas before in your proposition no lesse would serue the turne then infallible instruction in all points questions and doubts of faith A. D. §. 2. To this purpose saith S. Austin Si Dei prouidentia praesidet rebus humanis non est desperandum ab eodem ipso Deo auctoritatem aliquam constitutam esse qua velut certo gradu nitentes attollamur in Deum If Gods prouidence saith he rule and gouerne humane matters as he proueth that it doth we may not despaire but that there is a certain authoritie appointed by the same God vpon which staying our selues as vpon a sure step we may be lifted vp to God Saint Austin therefore doth acknowledge some authoritie to be needfull as a meanes whereby we may be lifted vp to God The which lifting vp to God is first begun by true faith And because this authoritie is so needfull a meanes he would not haue vs doubt but that God whose prouidence stretcheth it selfe to all humane matters hath not failed to prouide this meanes for vs it being a principal matter and so principall as vpon which according to the ordinary course dependeth the summe of our saluation We are not therefore I say to doubt but that Almghtie God hath prouided a meanes whereby Animalis homo qui non percipit ea que sunt spiritus Dei a sensuall man who hath no vnderstanding of the diuine mysteries of faith may come to know them by a firme and infallible beleefe A. W. To what purpose doth Saint Austine bring this To proue that God hath appointed a rule by which all men may come to your infallible faith Nothing lesse but to shew that where truth is not euident as to men ordinarily it is not there God hath prouided meanes to stirre them vp to a diligent enquiry after it or rather as he plainly affirmeth to a ridding of themselues of the cares and pleasures of this life which he cals purging of the soule that so they may be fit to embrace the truth Authoritie saith Austin is at hand for a man that is not able to discerne the truth that he may be fitted to it and suffer himselfe to be purged What is this authoritie what is the vse of it Miracles multitude make vp this authoritie whereby men not able to see truth in it self are moued to a reuerend respect of the Church so to an examination of the doctrine which vpon triall is found true Thus doth the wisedome of God prouide for mens ignorance that authoritie of miracles and multitude may draw them to a consideration of the truth which whensoeuer it shewes it selfe so plainly that it cannot be doubted of is to be preferred before all other meanes of perswading a man to beleeue or holding him in beleefe whatsoeuer as the same Austin saith we denie not these to be good helpes and strong meanes to the searching and finding of the truth but to be sufficient and infallible grounds of religion that a man should relie vpon them without trying the doctrine by the truth of God reuealed in the Scriptures It is indeed out of doubt among Christians that God hath prouided some meanes by which a naturall man whom you absurdly call sensuall whereas the Apostle meaneth a man in his best natural estate since his fal who cānot discerne of Gods truth nor admit of it may come to the knowledge thereof Because it was impossible saith Irenaeus to learne God without God he teacheth men by his word his sonne to know God It is he that hath vouchsafed vs this knowledge by the ministery of men worke of the spirit in their hearts that beleeue according to the word of God in the Scriptures Let vs not heare saith Austin This I say This thou sayest but let vs heare This saith the Lord there are the Lords bookes extant to the authoritie whereof both of vs consent both of vs giue credit both of vs obey there let vs seeke the Church there let vs discusse our question Other meanes of triall then by the Scripture he accounteth and calleth deceitfull The Scriptures are the bounds of the Church beyond which she may not wander Whatsoeuer any man since the Apostles hath seene without warrant of Scripture let him be neuer so holy neuer so eloquent it is of no authoritie but onely to mooue vs to a consideration of that he saith A. D. §. 3. Onely the question is what manner of thing this meanes must be and where euerie man must seeke and finde it that hauing found it he may as S. Austen speaketh stay himselfe vpon it as vpon a sure step thereby to be lifted vp to a true faith and by faith to God The which question being of so great consequence that it being well determined a man need neuer make more question in matters of faith I wil God willing in the chapters following endeuor to resolue it as clearely as I can And this I purpose to do first by
intēded by the holy Ghost at the least in many places it cannot be the Apostles meaning that no man knoweth the sense of our Lord in the Scripture But the more you mistake the sense of the holy Ghost in Scripture the better you proue your opinion that no naturall wit or learning can bring a man to the vnderstanding thereof onely you must take heed of ouerweening your owne wit and learning and so of erring by drawing a generall conclusion against all men from your owne defect which also perhaps is not so much for want of wit or learning as for lacke of paines taking and because of a preiudicate conceit against the truth A. D. §. 4. Hence I inferre that those who for matters of faith relie wholy either vpon their owne priuate opinion or iudgement of the sense and meaning of Scripture or vpon the learning and iudgement of others who are but men not infallibly assisted by the holy Ghost nor by him vnfallibly preserued from errour as many or rather all Protestants do those I say cannot haue diuine and Christian faith but onely fallible opinion and humane faith As before I granted your conclusion that naturall wit and learning cannot be the rule of faith so I now acknowledge the truth of your illation which you bring in thereupon that he which relieth wholly vpon his owne priuate opinion or any other mans iudgement can haue no true faith Yet must I again remember that to rely vpon such opinion or iudgement is to take that for truth which is taught barely vpon the credit of the teacher For otherwise a man may haue a true faith that is a certain and infallible assent to the truth though he beleeue vpon euident reason those points interpretations which are proued to him by men without any infallible authoritie of the Church But whereas you charge many or rather all Protestants to rely so vpon the iudgement of men I hope you do it without the authoritie of your Church that cannot erre for I am sure you do it without any shew of truth No Protestant of any discretion not onely not all beleeueth the doctrine of the Gospell in generall or any one particular interpretation as a matter of faith vpon any mans credit whatsoeuer This reuerence indeed we giue to our teachers that we rather trust their iudgement then our owne and dare not dissent from them but where we haue great likelihood of reason at least to the contrary Howsoeuer we ground no point of faith vpon any interpretation which is not plaine and euident to any man that will take paines to examine it according to true reason A. D. CHAP. IX That a priuate spirit cannot be the rule of faith A. W. A man may easily perceiue that you chuse to say any thing rather then nothing and therefore you make your selfe worke Chapter after Chapter I shall not need to repeate that which I haue noted before this Chapter giueth sufficient euidence of that I say What a strange kind of speech is this that a priuate spirit is the rule of faith No spirit neither priuate nor publick is ordinarily the rule of faith no not the most holy spirit of God but onely as he speaketh in the Scripture who alwayes teacheth one and the same truth publickly and priuately A. D. §. 1. The third conclusion is that no priuate man who perswadeth himselfe to be singularly instructed by the spirit can be this rule of faith especially so farre forth as he beleeueth or teacheth contrary to the receiued doctrine of the Catholicke Church A. W. This is the interpretation of the title of your Chapter No priuate spirit that is no priuate man who perswadeth himselfe to be singularly instructed by the spirit c. I cannot tel whether I shold thinke you haue forgotten to speake English or purposely affect as strange doctrine so strange speech also To be singularly instructed with vs plaine Englishmen is to be taught in rare and excellent sort not to be apart or seuerally alone instructed which is your meaning I grant mens priuat opinions are called singular and the men themselues that haue such conceits are also so termed but he that professeth plainnesse to teach all kind of men should labour to speake so that all might vnderstand him But to the matter Whose opinion is it that any such man as you conceit or any man at all can be the rule of faith Sure not ours who as it hath often bene said giue this honour only to the word of God If any man hold that opinion vnlesse perhaps the senslesse Anabaptists with whom we haue nothing to do you are they who as it seemeth by the exception you adde grant that with limitation a man may be the rule of faith For you say he cannot be the rule of faith especially so farre forth as he beleeueth or teacheth contrary to the receiued doctrine of the Catholicke Church Do you not imply in this speech that so farre forth as he agreeth with the doctrine of the Catholick Church he may be the rule of faith But I obserue one rare thing in your course of disputing that you ordinarily propound your matter in such sort that you are faine presently after to make one exception or other Scripture alone say you cannot be the rule of faith is this all you meane No a limitation followeth Especially as it is translated by Protestants into English No naturall wit or learning can be the rule of faith What by no meanes except they be infallibly assisted by the holy spirit of God In this Chapter we haue the like course held by you But leaue we this and be take our selues to consider your proofe A. D. §. 2. This I proue first because Saint Paul saith Si quis vobis euangelizauerit praeter id quod accepistis Anathemasit pronouncing generally that whosoeuer teacheth or preacheth contrary to the receiued doctrine of the Catholicke Church should be held Anathematized or accursed A. W. Your reason is thus to be framed He that must be accursed for his teaching cannot be the rule of faith But a priuate spirit that teacheth contrary to the receiued doctrine of the Catholicke Church must be accursed for his teaching Therefore a priuate spirit that teacheth contrary to the receiued doctrine of the Catholicke Church cannot be the rule of faith First I desire all men to obserue that this argument of yours doth not proue that a priuate spirit cannot be the rule of faith but onely so farre forth as he doth disagree from the doctrine of the Church otherwise for all this reason he may be Wherein you speake absurdly and falsly Absurdly in propounding such a question to refute as neither we whom you professe to refute nor any reasonable man would euer once imagne viz. that a priuate spirit teaching an vntruth might be the rule of faith For how can that be but an vntruth which is contrary to that the Apostle deliuered by his preaching
whereupon he beareth himselfe so high and stout I make no doubt but we shal heare of you in this Treatise till when I forbeare to say anie more A. D. §. 4. But suppose one could assure himselfe that he were taught by Gods Spirit immediately what is the true faith in all points in such sort that he could erre in none as it is not the manner of Almightie God to teach men immediately by himselfe alone or by an Angell but rather as the Scripture telleth vs Fides ex auditu Faith is bred in vs by hearing and is to be required ex ore Sacerdotis out of the mouth of the Priest and is to be learned of Pastors and Doctors whom God hath appointed in his Church of purpose to instruct vs and continue vs in the ancient faith But suppose I say that one could assuredly perswade himselfe to be immediatly taught of God what is the truth in all points how should he without testimonie of miracle giue assurance to others that he is thus taught Especially when he teacheth quite contrarie to the Catholicke Church which by plaine promises and testimonies of Scripture we know to be taught of God A. W Hitherto you haue prooued that a man cannot assure himselfe that he is infallibly instructed by the holy Ghost Now you are to shew that howsoeuer the point might be cleere to him yet he hath no meanes to perswade other men thereof but that still there will be cause of doubting whether he be so taught or no. But by the way you tell vs that it is not Gods manner to teach vs immediatly by himselfe alone or by an Angel but rather as the scripture telleth vs faith is bred in vs by hearing For the generall that God teacheth not immediately we are wholy of your opinion and that the ordinarie meanes of faith is preaching but we see no sufficient reason to disable the word of God in the scripture as if it were not of force to bring forth the same effect where Gods ordinance of preaching cannot be had or is not neglected For since the matter deliuered in true preaching and reading the scripture is all one vnlesse it be verie apparent that the holy Ghost wil not giue a blessing to him that readeth hauing not opportunitie to heare out of question faith may come by reading Faith saith Bellarmine cannot arise in the heart but by diuine reuelation which is either immediately from God alone or by the instrument of the word preached or read And whereas the Apostle speaketh in that place of preaching and hearing it is not his purpose to disable the word read but to shew partly as otherwhere that the meanes of saluation were not nor could be deuised by man but proceed wholy from God partly that no man may excuse himselfe by ignorance because God hath sent his seruants into all parts of the world to giue notice of the way of saluation without which commaundement of his no man might haue vndertaken the office of preaching the Gospell either by word of mouth or writing and without the Gospell had bene published no man could haue beleeued For as it is in the same chapter a little before How shall they beleeue in him of whom they haue not heard and how shall they heare without a preacher And how shall they preach except they be sent Faith then is by hearing that is as one rightly expoundeth it by the sense of the scripture truly vnderstood I do not equall reading to preaching nor promise any blessing but rather threaten a curse where men refuse to heare the Pastors and Ministers of the seuerall congregations wherein they liue or any other that by lawfull authoritie preach truly and faithfully but I would haue no man by any conceit weaken the power of God speaking in his word to all that can and will reade and heare Now to your argument He that hath not testimonie of miracles cannot giue assurance to others that he is infallibly taught by the Spirit of God But a priuate spirit hath not testimonie of miracles Therefore he cannot giue assurance to others that he is infallibly so taught First I note two things in the propounding of this reason the one that you adde an exception according to your custome the other that you seeme to giue ouer great force to miracles Your exception is that he can giue no assurance if he teach contrarie to the Catholicke Church why so Because we know that she is taught of God Suppose that to be true yet may he giue assurance to them that know no such thing of the Church and so be to them the rule of faith But it is worth the marking that you preferre miracles before the authoritie of the Church For by them a man in your opinion may haue assurance to others that he is taught by the holy Ghost though he teach quite contrarie to the Catholicke Church But the Apostle hath accursed them that receiue any other doctrine then he taught though it be preached by an Angell from heauen What will become of the faith of such men when Antichrist comes with signes and lying wonders But why should I aske that question Your selfe and the rest of your popish brood haue answered it alreadie For you are made drunke with the cup of fornication of the whore of Babylon and bewitched with the miracles of that great Antichrist the Pope of Rome to beleeue lies against the manifest truth of God in scripture But we haue a most sure word of the Prophets confirmed expounded by the Apostles contrarie to which or without warrant of which we will beleeue nothing as necessarie to saluation for all the miracles that your Antichrist or the Diuel himselfe can worke For mine owne part vnder correction I speake it I am not perswaded that euer any true miracle was or shall be wrought for confirmation of false doctrine how soeuer the Diuel may serue his turne by a shew of such matters But it is all one to the moouing of a man whether the thing done be in truth a miracle or onely such in his opinion Be it neuer so true it may bring no credit to any point of doctrine contrarie to the word of God in the scripture Yet since false shewes will worke the same effect in their hearts whom God hath giuen ouer to the beleeuing of lies that true miracles will me thinkes I see no sufficient cause to imagine that God will employ his infinite power to the countenācing of any vntruth where no such thing is needfull I say then for your proposition that no assurance can be giuen either without or with neuer so many miracles if a mans doctrine be contrarie to the teaching of the Church when the Church teacheth according to the Scripture But in those points wherein the Church shall faile of her dutie the exposition of the word may giue assurance of truth spoken by
beleeue a simple husbandman a child or an old woman rather then the Pope and a thousand Bb. if these speake against the Gospell and the other with it Then belike a priuate man may see some truth which is not generally discerned The place of Austin you bring doth not condemne all interpretations or opinions which some one man findeth out and holdeth but onely reproueth them who in expounding the places of Scripture which wil beare a diuers sense vrge one onely not because it is truth but because they like it best His example is out of Genesis concerning the sense of those words In the beginning God created heauen and earth They know not which of those diuers senses that may be Moses did intend saith Austin but they loue their owne opinion not because it is true but because it is their owne What doth this concerne vs who as we giue euery man of iudgement leaue to propound his interpretation to be examined so permit no man to thrust any exposition vpon the Church which he cannot make euident proofe of by sound reason Neither is it then taken as his priuate conceit but acknowledged as the truth of God manifested by his industrie In doubtfull places we follow the likeliest sense without any resolute determining what is true what false therefore cannot with any shew of reason be charged to appropriate the knowledge of Gods truth to our selues where it hath pleased his Maiestie so to propound it that of diuers senses a man cannot certainly affirme that this or that is true A. D. CHAP. X. That the doctrine and teaching of the true Church is the rule of faith A. W. If you had mentioned nothing but the doctrine of the true Church we might haue vnderstood you without any cause of doubting but now you ad teaching to doctrine we are enforced to enquire farther into your meaning For we are vncertaine whether by those words you meane one and the same thing or no. The doctrine of the Church is that which the Church propoundeth to be beleeued whether by word of mouth or in writing Teaching if we make it differ from doctrine is that onely which is deliuered by voice to the eare If we vnderstand you in the former sense for teaching by writing as well as by word of mouth the latter word was needlesse if in the latter of writing onely then the same doctrine written is not the rule of faith which vttered by a teacher will become such a rule not because it is true but because it is taught by authoritie A. D. §. 1. The fourth conclusion is that this infallible rule which euery one ought to follow in all points of faith is the doctrine and teaching of the true Church or companie of the true faithfull of Christ A. W. That we may the better vnderstand what you say and how you proue your saying there are a few things to be considered in this fourth condition First by the faithfull of Christ you must meane those that professe Christian Religion whether they beleeue as they professe or no as I haue shewed out of Bellarmine who doubtlesse knoweth what the Church is as well as you If you be of any other opinion by your owne rule we may reiect it for the priuatnesse thereof Secondly where you say the true faithfull it is not your purpose to speake as we for whom you writ this commonly doe of them that haue a true iustifying faith but of them that professe the doctrine of the Gospell according to the true sense and meaning of it whether they haue any iustifying faith or no. Thirdly by this companie or Church whom vnderstand you If the whole number of the beleeuers as well Laitie as Cleargie I oppose the iudgement of your owne Doctours against you who speaking of the Churches doctrine and teaching restraine the word onely to the Pope and Bishops The spirit saith Bellarmine is certainly found in the Church that is in a Councell of Bishops confirmed by the chiefe Pastor of the whole Church or in the chiefe Pastor with a Councell of the other Pastors If you follow Bellarmine I demaund whether your Laity be none of the true faithfull of Christ nor parts of the Church But to leaue this doubt wee are thus to conceiue your meaning that the doctrine which the Pope and other Pastors of the Church namely Bb. deliuer in a Councell is the rule of faith Now let vs propound your reason and examine it but first I confesse that I dare not resolutely determine whether it be brought in by you for a proofe of any thing that hitherto hath bene spoken or intended onely as a discourse concerning the authoritie of the Church If we apply it to any matter alreadie past as farre as I am able to conceiue it must be a second proofe of the proposition or maior of your maine Syllogisme in this manner If the doctrine and teaching of the true Church be the infallible rule which all men ought to follow then the faith which the authority of the true Church commends to vs is to be holden for the true faith But the doctrine and teaching of the true church is the infallible rule that all men ought to follow Therfore the faith which the authoritie of the true Church commendeth to vs is to be holden for the true faith This reasonable coherence we may make betwixt this Chapter and your former course without changing or weakning any part or point of your proofe which is applied to the confirming of this last minor the argument of this Chapter A. D. §. 2. This I proue by this reason If our Sauiour Christ hath promised to any company of men the presence of himselfe and the assistance of his holy spirit of purpose to instruct and teach them all truth giuing withall peculiar charge and commission to them to teach all nations and to preach to euery creature giuing also warrant to all that they may safely heare them giuing also commandement whereby he bindeth all to do in all things according to their saying and threatning greatly those who will not heare and beleeue them then certainly the doctrine and teaching of these men is in all points most true and infallible and such as if the other conditions required in the rule of faith be not as they are not wanting may well be proposed to all sorts as an assured ground whereupon they may safely build an infallible Christian faith For looke what our Sauiour Christ hath promised must needs be performed and whatsoeuer he warranteth or commandeth may safely and without danger of error be done nay must of necessitie be done especially when he threatneth those that will not do it and consequently if he haue promised to send his holy Spirit to teach any companie of men all truth it is not to be doubted but that he sendeth this his holy Spirit and by it teacheth them all truth and fith the teaching of his
well make an end of answering to this treatise because I haue ouerthrowne the maine strength of your discourse and discouered to all men that will not be wilfully blind the weaknesse of your reason but for the better satisfaction of the vnlearned I will follow you from Chapter to Chapter that the truth may the more easily be discerned A. D. CHAP. XI That the Church whose doctrine must be to vs the rule of faith must alwayes continue without interruption from Christ his time till the worlds end A. W. That there alwayes hath bene since the beginning of the world excepting perhaps the time betwixt the fall of our first parents and their faith in the Messiah that there is and alwaies shal be a Church viz. certaine men that are predestinate to life and actually beleeue in Iesus Christ it neuer came into any of our minds to be doubted of that there should be such a companie as you conceipt all the Papists in the world cannot proue A. D. §. 1. Considering what hath bene proued in the former Chapter about the infallible authoritie of the doctrine of the true Church I hope no Christian will deny but that so long as this Church doth continue we haue of it a sure pillar and a firme foundation whereupon we may safely build our beleef For either a man must deny that euer our Sauiour did make any such promise gaue such charge and commission left any such warrant set forth such a commaundement or thundred out any such threats as before is rehearsed which were to denie the Scriptures which scriptures are generally receiued by all Christians no otherwise then as they are the vndoubted word of God or else he must wrest the interpretation thereof both from that which the words of themselues naturally yeeld and also from the common sense and vnderstanding either of all or the most learned and almost of the vnlearned also of the whole Christian world or else he shall be forced to confesse that which not I but Saint Paul hath said Ecclesia est columna firmamentum veritatis the Church is the pillar and ground of truth Onely it may perchance seeme to some of those that doe at this day oppose themselues against the authority of the Church that this was true for Saint Pauls time and perhaps for some three foure fiue or six hundred yeares after but not to be presumed vpon in latter times and namely when Luther began his reformation as they tearme it or now adaies A. W. Considering how weake your proofes haue bene as in the former Chapters so namely in the last about the infallible authoritie of the doctrine of the true Church I hope there is no reasonable man not only no Christian that will build his faith and saluation vpon so tottering a pillar and so slipperie a foundation But because you seeme to dote so much vpon your last Chapter I wil once againe be content to examine the substance of it as it is here repeated by you with some litle alteration Either we must denie that our Sauiour hath so promised charged warranted threatned or we must falsely interprete the scriptures or else we must grant that the authoritie of the Church is a sure pillar and firme foundation whereupon we may safely build our faith But we neither may denie that our Sauiour hath so promised charged warranted commaunded threatned neither may we falsely interpret the Scriptures Therefore we must grant that the authoritie of the Church is a sure pillar and firme foundation whereupon we may safely build our beleefe First in general for your whole syllogisme if the cōclusion you intend were no other thē that you pretēd propoūd that the Church is the pillar groūd of truth as S. Paul saith there would be no question in this matter betwixt vs. For we haue learned to acknowledge the truth of all and euerie part of the scripture But the beginning of this Chapter sheweth that you meane by the Churches being the pillar and ground of truth that we may safely build our beleefe vpon the Churches authority which as I prooued in my answer to that Chapter is no part of the Apostles meaning In this sense must we take your conclusion Secondly in particular I denie your Maior because your disiunction is naught presuming a necessitie where there is none For neither we need to denie that our Sauiour hath so promised charged warranted commanded threatned neither is there any cause why we should falsely interprete the Scriptures and yet we haue no reason to grant that our faith may safely be built vpon the authoritie of the Church No such thing as I haue shewed can follow vpon the words of scripture alledged by you Therefore we need not denie the promises charge warrant commandement or threatning of our Sauiour or else grant the Church such an vnlimited authority Neither will the true sense of those Scriptures either enforce or beare any such illation or conclusion touching the infallible authoritie of the Church And whereas you thinke to face out the matter with naming the common sense and vnderstanding either of all or the most learned and almost of the vnlearned also of the whole Christian world my answer propounding the iudgement of many excellently learned and ancient writers of those places prooueth that to be but a vaine popish brag without all likelihood of truth especially since you that spare not to heape vp testimonies of Fathers when they are needlesse and to quote their bookes and chapters sometimes for a bare phrase alledge not so much as the name of any one author for the proofe of your interpretation of twelue seuerall places of scripture Your proffered seruice in helping vs with this distinction hath more shew of kindnesse then good meaning For it is not brought in to confirme our answer but to giue your selfe occasion of vttering that which you are taught to vrge for proofe of this question But we neither need your aide and haue good cause to suspect your fauours In a word your distinction is such as none of vs euer brought or would bring to answer those places of scripture We confesse that whatsoeuer was promised to the Church in those texts was promised for continuance to the end of the world but we say that the first promise was not concerning the Churches not erring the three last are particular to the Apostles at least for such a measure of teaching But what should I repeat that which was deliuered in the verie last Chapter The thing you harpe vpon though vntunably is that your Romish church or rather the Church of the East West were indeed the pillar and ground of truth for the space of some 600. yeares after Christ but afterwards fell away from that soundnesse of doctrine which before it had cleaued vnto Such a matter there is acknowledged by our Diuines yet no man saith either that the Church erred not in any point during that
of the Church so that we cannot see it vnlesse she open her mouth and deliuer it to vs nor certainely know it to be true but by giuing credit to her testimonie of it is not a good marke to know the true Church by But true doctrine is so shut vp in the belly of the Church that we cannot see it vnlesse she open her mouth and deliuer it to vs nor certainly know it to be true but by giuing credit to her testimonie of it Therefore true doctrine is no good marke to know the true Church by Your Minor is false in both parts of it First it is vntrue that true doctrine is so shut vp in the belly of the Church yea many a true Church may hold some errors and many an hereticall Church some truth onely the fundamentall points are necessarie to the being of a true Church Secondly though true doctrine be in the belly of the Church as indeed there is no true Church in which it is not yet is it not so shut vp in it as you imagine For it is first and principally in the Scriptures where it may be found without any such authoritie of the Church as you dreame of yea I haue shewed that the Apostles themselues did not beget faith in the hearts of them to whom they preached by any authoritie of the Church but by euidence of the truth it selfe which they taught Concerning your proofe from Austins authoritie I first answer that he expoundeth not that place according to the literal meaning of the Prophet who speaketh not of any belly of the Church but saith that those lewd men of whom he speaketh haue alwaies bene giuen to naughtinesse from their mothers wombe These wicked ones saith Vatablus haue gone astray euer since they came forth of the womb they they haue erred euer since they were borne Yea Austin himselfe as your Glosse saith sometimes expoundeth it otherwise then here God saith Austin foreknew sinners euen from the wombe as he said to Rebecca So doth Ierome also vnderstand it so Theodoret. But let vs take it as Saint Austin doth here mystically expound it what will you prooue by it That truth is so shut vp in the belly of the Church that we cannot see it vnlesse she deliuer it by her mouth There is no such word in him no such thing to be gathered out of him His conclusion is that therefore they which differ from the true Church in doctrine are in error which is certainly true concerning fundamentall points and verie probable in all other points whatsoeuer The other part of your Minor is that true doctrine is so shut vp within the Church that we cannot certainly know it to be true but by giuing credit to her testimonie of it For the disproouing whereof it shall be sufficient to call to minde that which I haue often answered concerning those who beleeued by the Apostles ministerie without any consideration or thought of their being sent by the true Church but onely being conuinced by the manifest truth of that which they deliuered concerning forgiuenesse of sinne by our Sauiour Iesus Christ Your proofe out of Austin is insufficient as it may appeare in this sort If Austin say that he should not beleeue the Gospell vnlesse he were mooued by the authoritie of the Church then true doctrine is so shut vp within the Church that we cannot certainly know it to be true but by giuing credit to her testimonie of it But Austin saith so Therefore true doctrine is so shut vp in the Church that we cannot certainly know it to be true but by giuing credit to her testimonie of it I denie the consequence of your Maior First because as Austin himselfe saith of Cyprian we are not bound by the authoritie of Austins iudgement as if his writings were Canonicall We do Cyprian no wrong saith Austin when we distinguish his writings whatsoeuer they be from the Canonicall authoritie of the diuine Scriptures And againe I take not Cyprians writings for Canonicall but consider of them according to the Canonicall and allow of that with his commendation which agreeth to Scripture but by his leaue refuse that which disagreeth from Scripture This minde carried Austin to other mens writings this minde he desired other men should carrie to his Secondly I denie the same consequence because Austin might be mooued by the authoritie of the Church to acknowledge the Gospell for true and yet without the same authoritie learne out of the Gospell so acknowledged which is true doctrine which false Concerning Austins testimonie first it is manifest that he deliuereth not a rule for all men to follow as if by should not beleeue he meant that a man ought not to beleeue the Gospell nor sheweth an impossibilitie of beleeuing it vnlesse a man be moued by the authoritie of the Church but at the most declareth that the authoritie of the Church preuailed with him so farre as to make him acknowledge the Gospell for true which else he had either not knowne or doubted of Secondly it is obserued according to the rest of his writings that the Latine word he vseth in the African dialect signifieth Had not beleeued so that the sense is I had not beleeued the Gospell as the truth of God if the authoritie of the Church had not moued me thereunto The first motiue was the authoritie that is the learning consent holinesse of so many worthie men as from time to time had held and did hold the Gospell to be the truth of God Vpon this ground Austin gaue himselfe to the studie of the Scriptures and by the euidence of truth deliuered in it discerned that it was the word of God according to the report and reputation commonly held of it This sense agreeth with Austins purpose who to refute the Manichees that tooke their master Manes for the Apostle of Christ thus reasoneth against them I beleeue not saith Austin that he is Christs Apostle and then demaundeth of the Manichee what course he would take to prooue it to him Perhaps saith he you will read the Gospell to me and assay to prooue Manichaeus person out of it But what if you should light vpon one that doth not yet beleeue the Gospell Then follow the words alledged by you I truly had not beleeued the Gospell if the authoritie of the Church had not moued me This is yet more cleare by that which Austin writeth afterward First saith he we beleeue that which yet we cannot discerne that being made stronger in faith we may attaine to the vnderstanding of that we do beleeue not men now but God himselfe confirming enlightening our minde within But howsoeuer we vnderstand it Austin speaketh not of true doctrine shut vp in the Church so that it cannot be knowne to be true but by giuing credit to the Churches testimonie which is the point in question but onely of acknowledging the Gospell to be the word
of God Now the same Church or partie which assureth vs that the Gospell is true may notwithstanding erre in the meaning of some points in it and a man may discerne these errours by the light which shineth in the Scriptures thus acknowledged First it is here confessed by your selfe that Austins speach is not of all fundamentall points of true doctrine but onely as I said of knowing the Scripture to be the word of God for so onely you reason out of it and thereby shew plainly to all that will see that it cannot prooue the matter for which you brought it Secondly you proceed farther to prooue the point by an other reason but faultie like the former If say you without the testimonie of the Church we could not haue bene infallibly sure that there is any Gospell at all nor haue knowne that the Gospels of Matthew Marke Luke and Iohn are true Canonicall Scripture rather then those of Nicodemus and Saint Thomas then we cannot know true doctrine to be true but by giuing credit to the Churches testimonie of it But we could not haue knowne those things without the testimonie of the Church Therefore we cannot know true doctrine to be true but by giuing credit to the Churches testimonie of it A man that is so full of his compound syllogismes as you are might learne to make better consequences in his Maior then you commonly bring vs. Let vs grant you that we could not know that there is any Gospell or which is the Gospell without the testimonie of the Church All that will follow thereupon is this that we cannot know these two points of doctrine to be true without giuing credit to the testimonie of the Church Yea if I were disposed to trouble you I would yet farther denie your said consequence because though we cannot know these matters without the Churches testimonie yet we might know them without resting vpon the Churches authoritie For the testimonie of the Church may be had by the ministerie thereof without any such absolute authoritie of enioyning beleefe or giuing credit to that she affirmeth as an vndoubted truth This Minor as the former in this chapter consisteth of two parts and is false in both of them as I will shew particularly First you say that without the testimonie of the Church we could not haue bene infallibly sure that there is any Gospell Your meaning is that we could not haue knowne this certainely but by giuing credit to the report of the Church as a certaine truth First for the doctrine of the Gospell to saluation it hath bene had and may be had without any testimonie of the Church at all taking the testimonie of the Church as you do for the preaching of men publickly authorised to this dutie by a companie of men so qualified as you before describe your Church I shall need no better proofe then to put you in minde againe of those nations many and great who attained to faith and saluation by the teaching of the Apostles seuerally without any such argument of the Churches absolute authority Secondly taking the Gospell for the 4. bookes of the Euangelists I answer that there may be true faith true Churches without the knowledge of those bookes yea without the verie being of them as it is manifest by the former example many thousands being conuerted and many Churches setled without the knowledge and before the publishing or penning of them But to come to the verie point I answer further that it is a grosse absurditie to make men beleeue that there can be no certaine knowledge had that there is any Gospell but by giuing credit to the Church whereas no man can know that there is any such authoritie in the Church or any Church at all but by the authoritie of the Scripture It is more then ridiculous for me to beleeue that there is a companie of men infallibly taught of God which is the truth with authority to enioyne obedience to all men in whatsoeuer they will teach if I haue no better proofe of it then their owne word For since God hath indued man with reason it is both simplenesse and sinne for him to beleeue that which is vtterly against the light of reason if he haue no warrant from God so to do But warrant he can haue none to beleeue such a conceit of any company but from the scriptures as it is euident by your own course who make a place of scripture the ground of your whole disputation Therefore whereas you teach men first to know the Church and then by the Church the Scriptures we say this course is vtterly vnwarrantable hauing no foundation either in reason or reuelation Yea contrariwise we truly affirme that the Scripture must first be knowne at the least in that point of the authoritie of the Church and then the Church by the Scripture And this is Austins iudgement directly Let vs not heare saith he this I say this you say but let vs heare this saith the Lord. There are the Lords bookes to the authoritie of which both of vs consent both of vs giue credit both of vs yeeld obedience there let vs seek the Church there let vs discusse our question And afterward I will not haue the Church to be shewed by mens doctrines but by the Oracles of God And againe Let vs seeke the Church in the Canonicall Scriptures The like speeches are euerie where in that booke Whether we be schismaticks or you saith the same Austin let neither you nor me but Christ be asked that he may shew vs his Church But where shall we know what our Sauiour saith concerning his Church and how he would haue it knowne but in the Scriptures Yet I denie not that the ministerie of men is necessarie to giue notice that there are certaine bookes in which it hath pleased God to reueale the meanes of saluation to mankinde though I acknowledge not any authority in the Church whereby men should be bound to beleeue this their report when as yet they are ignorant that there is any such Church You will say then what shall we doe or how shall we know that there is any Gospell If you will giue me leaue I will shew you what course is to be takē When you vnderstand that there hath bin and is still an opinion that there are certaine bookes written by Gods authoritie and appointment to teach men the way to saluation do as any reasonable man would do in a matter of such importance Get the bookes reade and studie them with a true desire to see whether they be such as they are reported to be or no. And because thou knowest by nature that there is a God and that he onely is all-sufficient to discouer the truth of his owne purpose touching the estate of his creature call vpon him though in ignorance and weaknesse that it would please him to direct thee in this enquiry after the means of thy saluation
or happinesse This done thou shalt be sure to find by the euidence of truth manifested in those bookes that they are sent from God and not deuised by man If thou liue in such a place as affoordeth the interpretation of these bookes by the ministery of men vse that singular blessing of God with reuerence and care to vnderstand and thou shalt by the mercifull teaching of God acknowledge these books to be the word of God ordained for the saluation of thy selfe and other This will some man say may perhaps breed a perswasion that these bookes are from God but how shall we come to be infallibly sure of it How else but by the worke of the spirit of God in thy heart What say you must we runne to reuelations Who knowes the secrets of God but the spirit of God The truth it selfe discerned by that light which the spirit kindleth in our hearts worketh assurance of beleefe to which the testimonie of the spirit is added for our further confirmation Neither is this any other reuelation then you Papists require in this case For according to your doctrine no man can be perswaded infallibly of the truth of the Scripture either for the text or the interpretation but by the especiall teaching of the spirit otherwise he hath not faith but opinion of these matters Onely herein stands the difference betwixt vs that you say the argument whereby the spirit perswades vs to acknowledge the Scripture is the authoritie of the Church we affirme it is the euidence of truth which he makes vs to discerne by our vnderstanding enlightened and to approue by our will thereto inclined through his mightie and gracious worke vpon our soules The second part of your minor is that we could not haue knowne the Gospels of the foure Euangelists to be canonicall Scripture rather then those of Nicodemus and Thomas if we had not the testimonie of the Church Of the falsnesse of which opinion I shall need to say little because it is refuted in my answer to the former part For this knowledge is not bred in vs by resting vpon the Churches authoritie but by yeelding to the euidence of the truth discouered to our hearts by the teaching of the holy Ghost Concerning the authoritie of the Church in this point it were a presumptuous and vnreasonable thing for any man without very good proof or great likelihood of reason to deny or doubt of that which hath bin auouched so many yeares by the whole Christian world But to make question of the bookes of Scripture whether they be the word of God or no and to denie that there is any meanes to know them for such but the authoritie of the Church is the next way to open a gap to Atheisme to lay open Religion to the scorne of the world Can I not know the Scripture to be of God but by the authoritie of the Church How shal I then know it at all since it is not reasonable to beleeue there is any Church that hath such authoritie but by the warrant of the Scripture They do all they can to turne reasonable creatures into beasts who teach vs that we must beleeue the Church cannot erre because the Scripture saith so and yet denie that we can know there is any Scripture but by beleeuing it because the Church saith so This is to dance in a circle as if a man were coniured that he could not get out of it How shall I know there is a Church by the Scripture How shall I know there are any Scriptures by the Church Would your proud Clergie thus make fooles of Christian men if they did not despise them as voyd of all reason I wonder how your Pope Cardinals Bishops and the rest of your Cleargie can for beare laughing when they looke one vpon another and remember how they cosen and if I may vse the word in a matter of such importance gull the world with such palpable fooleries But your strumpet of Babylon hath made the Kings of the earth and all nations drunke with the cup of her fornications exalting her selfe aboue all that is called God and making her selfe the God of her slauish vassals But the Lord is iust who according to the Apostles prophefie hath sent the world strong delusions that they should beleeue lies that all they might be damned which beleeued not the truth but had pleasure in vnrighteousnesse And certainly if there were not a great measure of 12. blindnesse and sottishnesse in the hearts of men that Gods purpose might take effect it were vnpossible that reasonable men should so be lead by the nose to errour and destruction A. D. §. 5. Fourthly if the true doctrine of faith in all particular points must be foreknowne as a marke whereby to know the true Church then contrarie to that which hath bin proued the authoritie of the Church should not be a necessarie meanes whereby men must come to the knowledge of the true faith For if before we come to know which is the true Church we must by an other meanes haue knowne which is the true faith what need then is there for getting true faith already had to seeke or bring in the authoritie of the same Church A. W. This fourth reason and the next labour to proue that part of your first assumptiō in this Chapter which we deny not that the true doctrine of faith in euery particular point is not a good marke of the Church It would therefore be but lost labour to spend much time in the examining of them yet somewhat I must say and first to the former If the true doctrine of faith in all particular points must be foreknowne as a marke to know the true Church by then is not the autoritie of the true Church a necessary meanes to know the true doctrine of faith by But the authoritie of the true Church is a necessary meanes to know the true faith by Therefore the true doctrine of faith must not be foreknowne in all particular points as a marke to know the true Church by Your conclusion is no more then we grant the consequence of your maior about which you take some paines needs not your helpe for the proofe of it Your minor is false That which you brought before to prooue it before was answered A. D. §. 6. Fiftly if before we giue absolute and vndoubted credit to the true Church we must examine and iudge whether euery particular point of doctrine which it holdeth be the truth with authoritie to accept that onely which we like or which seemeth in our conceit right and conformable to Scripture and to reiect whatsoeuer we mislike or which in our priuate iudgement seemeth not so right and conformable then we make our selues examiners and iudges ouer the church and consequently we preferre our liking or disliking our iudgement and censure of the interpretation and sense of Scripture before the iudgement and censure of the
Church of God But it is absurd both in reason and religion to preferre the iudgement of any priuate man be he neuer so wittie and learned or neuer so strongly perswaded in his owne minde that he is taught by the Spirit before the iudgement and definitiue sentence of the Church of God the which is a companie of men many of which both are and alwayes haue bene vertuous wise and learned and which is chiefe is such a companie as according to the absolute and infallible promises of our Sauiour hath vndoubtedly the holy spirit among them guiding them and teaching them all truth and not permitting them to erre as before hath bin proued A. W. There is the same fault in this fift argument which was in the former that it is brought to proue a proposition which we denie not If before we giue absolute credit to the Church we must iudge whether euery particular point it holdeth be true or no then we may make our selues iudges ouer the true Church But we may not make our selues iudges ouer the true Church Therefore we must not iudge whether euery particular point the Church holdeth be true or no before we giue absolute credit to the Church This conclusion supposeth that which can neuer be proued that we are first or last to giue absolute credit to the Church whereof in this Chapter there is no question The point you vndertake to disproue is that the true doctrine of faith in euery particular point is a good marke of a true Church This therfore you should haue concluded though indeed it make nothing against our opinion who require not for a marke of the true Church truth of doctrine in euery point but in all points fundamentall Your proposition is deceitfully propounded as if we granted a companie to be the true Church and yet would take vpon vs to receiue and reiect what we list whereas we hold that we cannot acknowledge any true Church but we must withall yeeld that it maintaineth all substantiall points of Religion from which we may not vary Secondly for a man to make himselfe iudge ouer the Church is to take authoritie vpon him to censure reproue and condemne the Church wheras all that we desire is that it may be free for vs to discerne that the doctrine held by this or that Church is agreeable to the Scriptures before we acknowledge it to be a true Church It is meere absurd and vnreasonable to prefer any priuate mans iudgement before the definitiue sentence of the church of God But it is agreeable both to reason and Religion that euery priuate man whose saluation lieth vpon his true or false beleeuing should consider whether that which he is enioyned by men to beleeue be warrantable by the word of God or no. The Scribes and Pharises were the leaders of the people in the matters of Religion yet were they blinde guides and the blind people by depending vpon their iudgement were caried headlong into the same pit of destruction with them Were not the men of Beroea commended by the holy Ghost for searching the Scriptures that they might see whether the doctrine deliuered by Paul were agreeable thereto or no And yet shall it be a fault in vs to enquire of the same Scripture concerning the doctrine of your Apostaticall synagogue I say farther it is against reason and Religion to prefer any one mans iudgement before the definitiue sentence of many wise vertuous and learned men such as the Church hath vsually some amongst the members thereof But it is most reasonable and religious to prefer the truth of God manifested by one simple man before the contrary determination of all that euer haue bin or shal be of the Church though neuer so wise vertuous and learned This is that which we teach concerning this matter First that no man is bound to take any thing for a matter of faith but that which is proued to him by the Scriptures the rule of faith Secondly that no man is to condemne any thing held by the Church vnlesse he haue euident proofe on his side out of the Scriptures Thirdly that euery man in matters not determinable by Scripture none of which are necessarie to saluation should yeeld to the iudgement of the Church whereof he is a member and euery Church to the iudgement of the Christian Churches other where vnlesse there be some good reason to the contrary It is very possible for wise vertuous and learned men to erre for your priuiledge of not erring hath bin found to be counterfait who oftentimes follow the opinion of some one man whose learning and pietie they cannot chuse but admire Domingo à Soto affoords vs an example of this matter where hauing alledged a sentence out of Austin he addeth these words By reason of this saying of Austin quoth Soto all the Fathers afterward and the whole multitude of Diuines haue by good right deliuered it as a truth that the glorious Virgin neuer committed any actuall sinne though Chrysostome auncienter then he were of another opinion Let it be then vnlawfull as it is for a priuate man to prefer his owne opinion before the iudgement of a whole Church and in this sense I graunt your minor yet is it not vnlawfull for him to examine what any or all Churches teach or to dissent from it if he haue the Scripture for his warrant A. D. §. 7. But you may perhaps say that in Scripture we are willed not to beleeue euery priuate spirit but to trie spirits whether they be of God or no and that therefore we must examine and trie the spirit of the Church by looking into euery particular point of doctrine which it teacheth I answer that in that place of Scripture it is not meant that it belongeth to euery particular man to trie all spirits but in generall the Scripture giueth the Church warning not to accept euery one that boasteth himselfe to haue the Spirit and willeth that they should trie those spirits not that euery simple or priuate man should take vpon him to trie them but that those of the Church to whom the office of trying spirits doth appertaine to wit the Doctors and Pastors which Almightie God hath put in his Church of purpose Vt non circumferamur omni vento doctrinae that we may not be caried away with euery wind of doctrine and Vt non simus paruuli fluctuantes that we may not be little ones wauering with euerie blast of those that boast themselues to be singularly taught by the spirit So that this trying of spirits is onely meant of those spirits of which men may well doubt whether they be of God or no and then also this triall belongeth to the Pastors of the true church But when it is certaine that the spirit is of God we neither neede nor ought doubtfully to examine or presumptuously to iudge of it but submitting obediently the iudgement of our owne sense
which we pleade not guiltie and looke to heare what euidence commeth against vs to proue the enditement But you rather like the foreman of the grand enquest then the plaintiffe that endites vs instead of prouing come in with I find that the Protestants Church is not perfectly one This will not serue the turne we must know how you finde it or at least be assured that you haue found it Who would not laugh at such an euidence But though you leaue the two former points to the credulousnesse of your Popish followers yet you attempt the proofe of the last by this Syllogisme They that admit no rule of faith but onely Scriptures and allow no infallible interpreter thereof to whose iudgement they will stand haue no meanes to end their controuersies and returne to vnitie But the Protestant Churches admit no rule of faith but onely Scriptures and allow no infallible interpreter thereof to whose iudgement they will stand Therefore the Protestant Churches haue no meanes to end their controuersies and returne to vnitie I denie your maior for the Scripture alone containes all truth necessarie to be beleeued and that so plainly that without any such soueraigne iudgement of any man it is possible for a reasonable man to discerne truth from falshood But if any man will be contentious we haue the sword of the magistrate and the censure of excommunication to bring him into order or to cut him off if he be incurable that the vnitie of our Churches be not dissolued either by heresic or schisme But to confirme your proposition you alledge Ieromes authoritie that there must be a head or chiefe ruler that occasion of schisme may be taken away The danger of schisme that Ierome speakes of in his first booke against Iouinian not as your Printer quotes it in the second was not in respect of doctrine but of outward peace Neither was this course held from the beginning as Ierome saith but in discretion appointed vpon occasion Before that by the malice of the diuell saith Ierome the Church was deuided into factions and one man held of Paul another of Apollo another of Cephas Churches were gouerned by common consent of the Presbyters but after that euery man began to thinke that those which hee had baptized were his and not Christs it was decreed ouer all the world that one chosen from among the Presbyters should be set ouer the rest to whom the whole care of the Church should appertaine and that the seeds of schismes might be taken away Out of which sentence of Ierome we may obserue these points First that this meanes of procuring vnitie belongeth not necessarily to the nature of the Church for then it must needs haue bene as auncient as the Church But Ierome telleth vs that there was a time when the Church was without it and that in her best estate while the Apostles liued By little and little saith Ierome afterward that the plants of dissention might be plucked vp the whole care was layed vpon one Secondly whereas in the place alledged by you Ierome acknowledgeth such a superioritie in Peter aboue the other Apostles in respect of age for which as he saith he was preferred before Iohn yet there is more heede to be taken to his iudgement in this place where he disputes the question without all passion then to that which hee speakes in the heate of disputation against Iouinian But what neede we any better proofe of this point then Saint Paul affoords vs He blameth the Corinthians because some held of Paul some of Apollos some of Cephas Cephas or Peter is the last why not the first rather if he were as you say the head Or why should the Corinthians be reproued for cleauing to him especially if he were appointed to be the chiefe It might be a fault to depend on Paule or on Apollos who were in your iudgement vnderlings but it was a great vertue to hang vpon Cephas the head How forgetfull was the Apostle Paul both of his dutie to Peter his head and of so readie a meanes to end that schisme that would not tell them that Peter was appointed head to the end all occasion of schisme might be taken away Thirdly we are not so to vnderstand Ierome as if he had said that there was one head appointed ouer the whole world but that in all places where there were multitudes of Presbyters order was taken that some one chosen from among the rest should be chiefe and principall in that Diocesse as I may speake and ouer all them which were in some sort accounted to be but one bodie This agreeth with the practise of those times and with that of Cyprian Here of spring heresies and schismes arise that the Priest of the Lord is not obeyed Which Cyprian speakes of euery seuerall Bishop in his Diocesse Whereunto also belongs that of Ierome There be seuerall Bishops of Churches seuerall Archbishops and seuerall Archdeacons and all the Ecclesiasticall order is stayed by the gouernours Whereby saith the Glosse Ierome proueth that there may not be two or more Bishops in one Church but that there must be a seuerall Bishop in euery seuerall Church To which purpose I may farther alledge another place of Ierome Vnlesse saith Ierome the Bishop haue a speciall power aboue other there will be as many schismes in the Church as there be Priests This course then of authorizing some one of the Presbyters aboue the rest was for the preseruing of order and keeping out of schisme not for the determining of controuersies in Religion as if all must haue stood to one mans iudgement in questions of Diuinitie which either may be ended by the authoritie of the Scriptures if they be necessary to be determined or if they be not may be forbidden to be proceeded in without any danger to the Churches libertie So that the Protestant Churches fully agree in matters of substance and want not meanes to settle peace in questions of lesse importance or if they did might easily haue as good meanes as your Church by appointing a Pope ouer themselues as in policie you haue done But as yet they finde no such need especially where the remedie is worse then the disease as it must needs be in so lawlesse a tyrannie Is it not more for the glory of God good of the Church as I haue said otherwhere that there should be continuall disagreement in some matters of Religion then that all should beleeue maintain false doctrine Were not our Sauiour Christ better haue a troubled church thē none at all Honorable war is to be preferred before dishonorable peace in the iudgement of any wise states-man And can it be more glorious to God to haue outward quietnesse in the Church with heresy yea with Antichristianisme then truth with contention True Christian vnitie consists principally in truth of religion without which the greatest agreement is but a conspiracy against God
as you taught vs before of necessitie to saluation that we beleeue entirely all points of faith without misbeleeuing any one what hope of saluation shall be left to any Papist who cannot by any meanes know what is determined by the Church and what is not Or if he may be sure that matters defined by the Pope and a Councell are decided by the Church yet since it is not so determined whether the Pope alone be sufficient to determine of points in controuersie he may refuse to obey some constitutions of the Pope or to beleeue some questions decided by him and thereby shut himselfe out of heauen for not giuing credit to the determination of the Church if that authoritie of determining be in the Pope and he commaund men so to beleeue But if this determination of the Church be ioyntly in the Pope and Councels and that nothing is a matter of faith but that which is so determined to be then was there almost no matter of faith at all in the Church till within these last 800 yeares For it is more then euident to any man that will not be wilfully contentious that the Pope neuer bare any extraordinarie sway in Councels till he had proclaimed himselfe vniuersall Bishop which was by the grant of the murtherer Phocas six hundred yeares after the beginning of the Gospell What shall we thinke of the Churches in the Apostles times and so forward till the Councell of Nice in which the Popes supremacie was not heard of Had Christians then no matters of faith to beleeue How should they if all depend vpon the Pope and a general Councel Let me grant that those Councels in the Acts were generall what was there determined but that the Gentiles were to abstaine from things offered to Idols and bloud and that which is strangled and from fornication VVas nothing a matter of faith but these few points which also till this time were not matters of faith Either shew some good reason why matters of faith were not at this time of the Apostles liuing to be tied to generall Councels and the Pope yet now must be or confesse the truth to the glorie of God that matters of faith haue their authoritie to be matters of faith from the word of God and not from the determination of Pope or Councell or both Neither thinke to shift of the matter by saying they are indeed matters of faith in themselues but not to vs. For so it will come to passe that we shall say the first Christians had no points that were matters of faith to them because they had none determined by the Church in a Councell which opinion is I know not whether of more absurditie or impietie Now that you agreement in matters of faith after the determination of the Church is not so great as you would make the world beleeue it may appeare by the verie ground of religion the Canon of the Scripture which was determined of by your iudgement in the Councell of Carthage wherein the Apocryphall bookes say you were allowed for Canonical yet saith Bellarmine Nicholas Lyra Denys the Carthusiā Hugo de sancto victore Thomas de Vio both these at least the last Cardinals follow Ierom in reiecting thē as Apocryphal But if this Councel may be excepted against sure in your iudgment the Councell of Trent may not which hath receiued those books into the canō of the scripture Yet for all that Sixtus Senensis keeper of the Popes library maketh bold to deny thē such authority euen since that Coūcel as Bellarmine himself confesseth And Arias Montanus since that time doubteth not to say that the Orthodoxe or true Church following the Canon of the Hebrewes accounteth those bookes of the old Testament written in Greeke to be Apocryphal What say you to your Bishop Catharin who being one of the Councell of Trent after the determination of the Councell against assurance of saluation defendeth that such assurance notwithstanding that decree of the Councell may ordinarily be had by them that beleeue You would perswade vs that it is a ruled case of your Church long ago that the Scriptures are not sufficient without tradition What saith Scotus in this case Whatsoeuer pertaineth to heauenly and supernaturall knowledge and is necessarie to be knowne of men in this life is sufficiently deliuered in the holy scriptures The holy scripture saith Gerson is sufficient for the gouernment of the Church or else was Christ an vnperfect Lawgiuer I might runne on in the like course touching other points but these shal serue for a tast and so I passe ouer to your proofe that the learned on your side cannot possibly dissent one from another They which acknowledge that the definitiue sentence of the Pope is to be rested vpon as an vndoubted truth cannot possibly dissent in matters of faith But all Catholick learned men acknowledge that the Popes sentence is such Therefore no Catholicke learned men can possibly dissent in matters of faith All you conclude is that in matters determined by the Pope and a Councell your learned men cannot disagree because they hold that such a determination is certainly true yet for all this as I haue shewed your Church may be rent in peeces with contrarie opinions in matters of as great moment as most are in religion if for all this it cease not to be a true Church why should not the Protestants haue the like priuiledge who haue the same opinion of the Scriptures that you haue of the Pope Be not so iniurious to reason or blasphemous against God as to auouch that no controuersie can be ended by the word because diuers men will expound it diuersly For it is contrarie both to religion and sense to imagine that the Lord would giue his people such a Scripture as cannot be certainely vnderstood in all points necessarie to saluation but by I know not what reuelation to some one man More particularly I denie your Maior They that acknowledge such an authoritie in the Pope may yet differ in opinion about matters of faith I bring you example in that point of assurance wherein Catharin disputed against that doctrine which Sotus and your writers generally since the Councell of Trent affirme to haue bene the certaine decree of the Councell Yet were they both present in the Councell and none of the meanest there assembed The reason of that their dissent and the possibilitie of the like betwixt other men ariseth from this that decrees of Councels and Popes being set downe in writing may be diuersly interpreted and so the meaning of them mistaken as Catharin saith that he foresaw some men would misunderstand the Councell of Trent in that point This is all the inconueniences you can alledge in admitting the Scripture for Iudge and this followeth the decrees of Councels and Popes at the least as much as the writings of the holy Ghost
infallible and vniuersall rule accommodate to the capacitie of euerie one the which rule cannot be any other but the doctrine and teaching of the true Church the which Church is alwaies to continue visible vntill the worlds end and is to be knowne by these foure markes Vna Sancta Catholica Apostolica One Holy Catholicke Apostolicke the which markes agree onely to the Romane Church that is to say to that companie which doth communicate and agree in profession of faith with the Church of Rome whereupon followeth that this Church or companie is the onely true Church of which euerie one must learne that faith which is necessarie to saluation Considering I say all this I would demaund of the Protestants how they can perswade themselues to haue that faith which is necessarie to saluation sith they will not admit the authoritie and doctrine of the Church of which onely they ought to learne this faith Or how they can as some of them do challenge to themselues the title of the true Church sith their companie hath neuer one of the foure markes which by common consent of all must nedes be acknowledged for the true markes of the Church How can their congregation be the true Church which neither is One because it hath no meanes to keepe vnitie nor Holy because neither was there euer any man of it which by miracle or any other euident testimony can be prooued to haue bene truly holy neither is their doctrine such as those that most purely obserue it do without faile thereby become holy nor Catholicke because it teacheth not all truths that haue bene held by the vniuersall Church in former times but denieth many of them neither is it spred ouer all the Christian world but being diuided into diuers sectes euerie particular sect is contained in some corner of the world Neither hath it bene in all times euer since Christ but sprong vp of late the first founder being Martin Luther an Apostata a man after his Apostasie from his professed religious order knowne both by his writings words deeds and manner of death to haue bene a notable ill liuer Nor Apostolicke because the preachers thereof cannot deriue their Pedegree lineally without interruption from any Apostle but are forced to beginne their line if they will haue any from Luther Caluin or some latter How can they then brag that they haue the true holy Catholicke and Apostolicke faith sith this is not found in any companie that differeth in doctrine from the onely true holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church For if it be true which Saint Austin saith that in ventre Ecclesiae veritas manet the truth remaineth in the bellie of the Church it is impossible that those who are disioyned by difference of beleefe from that companie which is knowne to be the true Church should haue the true faith For true faith as before hath bene prooued is but one wherefore he that differeth in beleefe from them which haue the true faith either he must haue a false faith or no faith at all Againe one cannot haue true faith vnlesse he first heare it according to the ordinarie rule of Saint Paule saying Fides ex auditu faith commeth of hearing but how can one heare true doctrine of faith sine praedicante without one to preach truly vnto him And how should one preach truly at least in all points nisi mittatur vnlesse he be sent and consequently assisted by the spirit of God Now how should we know that Luther or Caluin or any other that will leap out of the Church leaue that company wherin is vndoubted succession and by succession lawfull mission or sending from God how should we I say know that these men teaching a new and contrarie doctrine were indeed sent of God Nay certainly we may be most sure that they were not sent of God For sith Almightie God hath by his Sonne planted a Church vpon earth which Church he would haue alwaies continue vntill the worlds end and hath placed in it a visible succession of lawfull ordinarie Pastours whom he will with the assistance of himselfe and his holy Spirit so guide that they shall neuer vniuersally faile to teach the true faith and to preserue the people from errours we are not now to expect any to be sent from God to instruct the people but such onely as come in this ordinarie manner by lawfull succession order and calling according as S. Paule saith Nec quisquam sumit sibi honorem sed qui vocatur à Deo tanquam Aaron Neither doth any man take to himselfe the honour but he that is called of God as Aaron was to wit visibly and with peculiar consecration as we reade in Leuiticus cap. 8. To which accordeth that which we reade 2. Paralip 26. where Azarias said to king Ozias Non est tui officij Ozia vt adoleas incensum Domino sed Sacerdotum hoc est filiorum Aaron qui consecrati sunt ad huiusmodi ministerium egredere de sanctuario c. It is not thy office O Ozias to offer incense to our Lord but it is the office of Priests to wit of the sonnes of Aaron who are consecrated to this function or ministerie go out of the Sanctuarie Which bidding when Ozias contemned and would not obey he was presently stricken with a leprosie and then being terrified feeling the punishment inflicted by our Lord he hastened away as in the same place is declared By which places we may learne that it doth not belong to any one to do priestly functions as to offer incense or sacrifice to God or take vpon them the authoritie to preach and instruct the people but onely to Priests called visibly and consecrated for this peculiar purpose as Aaron and his children were For though the priesthood of the Pastors of the new law be not Aaronicall yet it agreeth with the Priesthood of Aaron according to S. Paul his saying in the foresaid place in this that those that come to it must not take the honor of themselues but must be called vnto it of God as Aaron was to wit visibly and by peculiar consecration In which ordinarie maner whosoeuer cometh he may be truly called Pastor ouium a Pastor of Christs flocke because intrat per ostium he entereth in by the doore to wit by Christ himselfe who first visibly called consecrated and sent immediately the Apostles and the Apostles by authoritie receiued from him did visiblie by imposition of hands call consecrate and send others and those in like manner others from time to time without interruption vntill these present men who now are Priests of the Catholicke Romane Church These therefore enter in by Christ who is the doore and therefore these be true Pastours and whosoeuer entereth not thus in at the doore but commeth in another way our Sauiour telleth vs how we should account of him when he saith Qui non intrat per ostium in ouile ouium
this possibilitie tooke effect in me I may thanke my selfe more then God so that by this doctrine the glorie of euerie particular mans saluation is more due to the partie saued then to God the Sauiour Now on the contrarie side if that we teach be true the losse falles on mans part and not vpon Gods Is any man drawne out of the Iawes of hell and damnation The whole glorie redounds to God It was he that prouided meanes of saluation it was he that gaue me in particular knowledge of that meanes It was he that when I was as vntoward and vnwilling to be saued as the most damned reprobate wrought me to beleeue can I euer be vnmindfull or vnthankfull by inclining my heart to like and accept of his grace and faith in Christ But in the meane while I loose the commendation and the glory of vsing the grace of God well by my free-will O Adam Adam earth and ashes how fast doth that pride of nature whereby thou wast destroyed in thy selfe though in thee it were not naturall cleaue to euerie one of thy posteritie We had rather be thought able to gouerne our selues then be gouerned by God It is more pleasing to vs to hazard our saluation vpon the nice choise of our owne free-will then to be assured of it by the mercie of God working in vs this choise to will O that as we are all partakers of Adams pride so we might also partake with his repentance and faith Would Adam trow ye if it might be put to his choise againe venture vpon his owne free-will though he were as pure as euer he was rather then rest secure vpon Gods almightie and most certaine protection No no blessed soule he knoweth by wofull experience though by Gods vnspeakable goodnesse to his and our greater glorie that he and he only is out of danger who resignes himselfe into Gods hands to be disposed of at his gracious pleasure Why refuse we to be like to Adam in this Will we follow him in that onely of which onely he is ashamed Is it not more glorie to arise with him then to haue fallē with him O why do we euery day renew the memorie of his fault by committing the like Doth the brightnesse of the truth in these points dazle your eies Me thinks I see many of you offering to presse forward as it were to take the kingdome of heauen the doctrine of the Gospell by violence why recoile you Why quaile you on a sodaine The bare name of the Church not onely stayeth you but beateth you backward The Romish Church cannot erre VVho telleth you so Surely they that can erre your Priests and Iesuits Giue me leaue I pray you to question with you a little and for a minute of an hower be content to make vse of that reason and knowledge which God hath giuen you without forestalling your iudgements by preiudice of the authoritie of the Church Doth it not appeare to you by the light of naturall reason that the maine end of all religion is the glorie of God Do not your owne consciences testifie in the simplicitie of your hearts that it maketh more for the glorie of God that men should be beholding to his Maiestie for their saluation then that they should procure it to themselues Is it not also apparent to you in the secret of your owne soules that our doctrine by beating downe the pride of mans free-will aduanceth the glorie of Gods mercie and yours by hoysing vp the conceit of mans good choise presseth downe the estimation of Gods vnspeakable goodnesse And shall an idle sound weigh more with you then sound reason Consider I beseech you what weake grounds you build this opinion of the Church vpon I will point at that which in my answer I haue handled Can you in any sort compare the opinion of the Churches authoritie with the euidence of those matters wherewith before I pressed you Is it as cleere that there are certaine men whom I must beleeue whatsoeuer they teach as it is that I must seeke the aduancing of Gods glory more then of mine owne pride Are you as sure that these Priests and Iesuits which are your teachers be sent by the true Church and deliuer nothing but the doctrine of the true Chruch as you are that they who perswade you to rest wholy vpon God and not at all vpon your selues shew you the right way to procure Gods glory and your owne saluation Tush say you all is nothing vnlesse I beleeue it vpon the credit of the Church Alaste how did the first Christians who neuer thought on the authoritie of the Church when they heard and beleeued the Apostles doctrine Looke ouer all the Historie of the Actes peruse the Sermons of Peter and Paule and tell me whether you finde that euer they pleaded the authoritie of the Church to procure beleefe of their doctrine After men are conuerted the authoritie of the Church hath her due place and must beare sway in matters in different but for the auowing of truth her bare word is neuer of sufficient importance It was the doctrine of the Apostles that wrought vpon the hearts of men by the cleare euidence of it through the power of the Spirit wherewith it was accompanied What that doctrine was where should we learne but in the scriptures wherein they haue written what they preached These you say giue such authoritie to the Church This were somewhat if you made not their authoritie in respect of vs to depend vpon the Church The scriptures say your Doctors haue in themselues authoritie as being from God but they are not of authoritie to vs but onely by the authoritie of the Church I perceiue you are ashamed of these absurdities The Church must be beleeued vpon her word Why so The Scripture saith so How shall I know that these bookes are scripture The Church saith so The Church and the scripture prooue each other by their mutuall testimonie they giue each of other I beleeue the Church because the scripture biddeth me I beleeue the scripture because the Church biddeth me If these things seeme to be absurd as indeed they are most absurd blinde not your selues any longer with such mists of errour but come out of them to the cleare light of the scriptures reade them diligently meditate in them carefully call vpon God for his grace earnestly resigne your selues and your free-will to him sincerelie and the Lord that is most readie to blesse them that vse the meanes of knowledge and faith in humilitie and singlenesse of heart will assuredly enlighten your vnderstanding and incline your affections that you shall discerne like of and embrace the true doctrine of Iustification by faith in Iesus Christ and shall renounce your owne righteousnesse and free-will to the glorie of his grace and the present comfort and euerlasting saluation of your bodies and soules through the same his sonne to whom with the Father and the holy Ghost be all
of Idoll and Image p. 386. Papists worship the Image it selfe p. 386. No religious vse of any Image to be allowed p. 360. Ignorance the strength of Poperie p. 4. 70. All ignorance is not heresie p. 50. How it shuts men out from saluation p. 40. 44 49. 50. 274. Ignorance can excuse no man the Gospell being preached euerie where p. 113. Ieconiah childlesse p. 39. K 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 283. The keyes and power to bind and loose common to all the Apostles p. 325. 326. Why kings are called humane creatures p. 274. He refuseth not to be subiect to the king that doth not absolutely obey him in all things p. 275. L The Lawe cannot be kept perfectly p. 363. How it is not gricuous p. 363. One learned mans iudgement oftentimes drawes many to it p. 250. The Leuen of the Pharisies what it is p. 37. 141. No life but in the bodie of Christ p. 273 The light must shine to them that are in the house p. 182. The loue of God whence it ariseth p. 20 Is not alike to all p. 257. M Gregory Martins eauils were answered long since p. 69. Markes of the Church p. 221. 222. 226. 259. Must be proper to it always p. 222. 280. Easier to be knowne then the Church it selfe p. 222. 223. True doctrine in the fundameÌ„tal points is a sure marke of the Church p. 228. 229. 301. 374. 375. The Masse was brought in by peece meale p. 384. Ouergreat zeale of Martyrdome p. 189 Messiah not Salomons sonne p. 39. The ministery not the authority of men is vsed to beget faith p. 6. 19. 234. 243 244. Needful for the instruction of the ignorant p. 98. No charge practise or warrant for any vniuersal ministery since the Apostles time p. 179. Luthers preuailing in his ministery and his preseruation wanted litle of a miracle p. 355. Ministers to be heard so farre as they speake according to the Scriptures p. 36. 112. 137. 142. 146. Yet lesse danger not to heare them so speaking then not to heare the Apostles p. 43 112. Origen preached before he was a Minister p. 35. Antichrists miracles p. 114. 352. Miracles are often counterfetted p. 352. 358. Preferred before the authoritie of the Church p. 114. The vse of miracles is to confirme doctrine not to testifie of holinesse pa. 172. 351. There neuer was any true miracle wrought for confirmation of false doctrine p. 115. Miracles are not to be beleeued for any doctrine against Scripture p. 115. False miracles cannot alwayes be discerned by men p. 115. 352. 353. Luther and Caluin did not attempt the working of miracles p. 355. N A naturall man what he is p. 61. 236. Absurdly called sensuall pa. 60. 61. 236. 237. May vnderstand the Scripture though not beleeue it to saluation p. 236. Necessitie not constraint taught by Protestants p. 344 345. P Papists treason Nouemb. 5. 1605. pa. 8. 346. 347. 379. The wickednesse of Papists testified by their owne writers p. 340. 346. Papists rest vpon the Pope and Councels p. 51. 312. Are Pharisaicall boasters p. 338. 363. No Papist holding the authoritie of the Church and the impossibilitie of the Popes erring can be a good Christian or a faithfull subiect p. 72. Papists not sonnes of God but seruants of the law p. 343. 364. Papists count murdering of Princes a meritorious worke p. 361. Outward peace is not so tâ—â—ch worth as that for it the Church should be corrupted with errors p. 312. Must be prouided for by the ciuill magistrate p. 312. Saint Peter the Popes Lord. p. 388. Why our Sauiour prayed especially for him p. 326. Why hee asked him thrice if hee loued him p. 327. Peters accepting of the soueraigntie a poore proofe of his loue to Christ p. 327. His superioritie was in respect of age p. 315. It is vncertaine whether euer he were at Rome or no. p. 328. 393. The Pope the Papists Lord God p. 112. How he came to his height p. 382. Head of the Church though he beleeue not in heart p. 23. He that is no Christian may be Pope of Rome 23. 111. The Pope cannot erre p. 71. Can shew no charter for his not erring p. 37. 71. 72. May erre by the iudgement of Papists p. 323. Euen with a generall Councell p. 330. 331. It is not determined that the Pope alone cannot erre p. 320. Pope Iohn 22. doubted of the immortalitie of the soule p. 111. Pope Leo 10. counted the historie of Christ a fable p. 111. Many Popes haue bene found to be Apostataes from the faith p. 323 324. Many decrees of Popes are contrarie one to another p. 324. Pius 5. and Clement 8. â—â—â—olue concerning the words of consecration contrary to the Councell of Trent pag. 324. Popish religion cannot hold vp the head without the Popes authoritie p. 108. The Pope appoints the holy Ghost an office of his owne deuising p. 388. Our Sauiour and his Apostles hid themselues from persecutors p. 186. No necessitie to worship God publikly in time of persecution p. 190. 191. The Pharises were blind guides p. 249. To what purpose our Sauiors perpetual presence serueth p. 132. Predestination doth not take away free will p. 361. Without true beleefe of predestination and iustification there can hardly be any true religion p. 290. Prayer for the dead p. 96. How euery one that prayeth receiueth p. 116 117. Preaching the ordinarie means of faith p. 113. 409. No man might haue preached the Gospell without warrant from God pag. 113. How Luther may bee said to haue first preached Christ p. 392. Pride in opposition against a matter of doctrine is sometimes in a sanctified man p. 274. What outward profession of religion is how farre necessarie p 188 189 192. What it is to confesse with the mouth p. 191. False Prophets to be knowne by their doctrine p. 36. How all prophesies in the scripture are alwayes true p. 206. Purgatorie ends with the world p. 365 Q Questions of religion how to be decided pag. 61 R Reason how farre it may be required in points of diuinitie p. 16. 17. 18. Light of reason caÌ„not find out all things necessarie to saluation p. 25. The reason of Gods counsel and doings is oftentimes hid from men p 204. Nothing against reason is to be beleeued without warrant froÌ„ God p. 244. The religion of the Popish Church at this day is fetched from the Councell of Trent p. 358. 377. Our Sauiour did not pray that the reprobate might be one with his father and him p. 264. Reuelation of the spirit required by the Papists to beleeue that the Scriptures are the word of God p. 245. The Church of Rome sometimes a true Church p. 338. Rome was not built in a day p 382. S What is absolutely necessary to saluatioÌ„ p. 46. 55. 59. 65. 77. 188. 243. 319. Assurance of saluation p. 150. 354. Sufficient meanes of saluation prouided for euery man p. 53. 55. 58. Euery man hath not the meanes p. 57.