indifferent reader may iudge whether the positions sett downe in the Manuall vnder the title of protestants positions be not truly theirs Manuall protestant positions All articles of faith are so expresselie contained in scriptures as out of them onlie full proofe may be made thereof All articles of faith are at least so contained in holy scriptures as without any testimonie or authoritie of the churche or traditions they may thence be plainly and distinctlie deduced These are the positions in the Manuall in this first controuersie vnder the title of protestant positions which you say are not acknowledged by them And yett if I vnderstande your wordes you admitte them neither can you iuâ—lâ—e denie them as I sayde before but lett vs heare what you say for your selfe PILK They say not that all articles of faith are expresselie sett downe in holy scriptures but either expressely or analogicallie and so they haue a full proofe out of them CHAMP Compare this position with that sett downe by me in the first place and see wherein they differ Only you make the first parte of your position absolute as if it had been so set downe by me but this is your owne fraude and deceipte For I made it not absolute but modall or comparatiue as appeareth by the thinge it selfe The position therefore sett downe by me is yours and therefore to be prooued out of the scriptures as the position it selfe requireth â—herein if you fasle your position will be conuinced to be false and your faith accordinglie PILK Secondlie they admitte of the testimonie of the churche both concerninge articles of faith and the scriptures themselues First to discerne true from false Secondlie publiklie to preache them Thirdlie to interpret and expounde them but euer accordinge to the scriptures themselues without anie addition of her owne either of sufficiencie or perfection vnto them CHAMP That is in good speach they admitt the testimony of the churche so farr as it contradicteth not theire errours Or they admitte of it not to be iudged by it for so all disputes woulde quicklie haue an end but to iudge it themselues for so they knowe they may wrangle eternallie PILK Here then is the difference that the papists say the churche addeth sufficiencie to the scriptures and fulnes The protestants say shee addeth none but sheweth that which is in it The papists say shee brought light vnto them The protestants say shee bringeth none but declareth and manifestesh that which it hath in it selfe This then is theire doctrine CHAMP The catholikes doe teache and beleeue that the churche of God hath infallible authoritie to declare what bookes are holy scripture and also to deliuer the true sence and meaninge thereof neither of which the scriptures do performe by themselues and yett are they both necessarie if not to euerie ChristiaÌ„ in particular yett to the whole churche in generall They doe not teach or beleeue that the churche addeth anie truth or verity to the scriptures which they immediately haue from God himselfe whose word and reuelation they containe but shee declareth vnto vs infalliblie what are the verities contayned in them To which beleefe and doctrine you seeme to come verie neere in your last wordes if you were constant therein But you say and vnsay at euerie turne Nowe lett vs heare the positions which you say the protestants acknowledge in this controuersie PILK ANTITHESIS All truth concerninge faith and good workes necessarie vnto saluation is sufficientlie and fullie deliuered vnto vs in the holy scriptures CHAMP Seinge you voluntarilie enter combate why doe you not obserue the conditions prescribed It was required that in case you woulde impugne the catholike position sett downe and prooued in the Manuall as hitherto you haue laboured to doe you should prooue by expresse scriptures the contradictorie which in that case must necessarilie be yours and not to frame vnto your selfe another which may stand with that you impugned beinge like a shooe that fitteth euerie foote This I say because the position sett downe here by you vnderstoode with these two restrictons is not denyed of anie catholike The first is that it include not the scriptures themselues but suppose them as beleeued The second that it speake onlie of truthes or articles necessary to euerie mans saluation For these are fewe and sufficientlie expressed in holy scripture Your position vnderstoode in this mannet hath noe aduersarie and therefore needeth not your feeble and weake proofes Neuertheles because your proofes seeme to suppose a further meaninge in your position to witt that all thinges whatsoeuer without exception or restriction are to be beleeued either by euerie man in perticular or all men in generall are fullie sett downe in holy scripture which is opposite to the catholike position of the Manuall I will examine your proofes and try what weight they beare PILK Proofe of the protestants position Deuteronomie 4. 2. yee shall not adde vnto the worde which I commaunde you neither shall yee detracte from it that yee may keepe the commaundements of the Lorde your God which I coÌ„maunde you Argument That whereunto nothing must be added nothinge detracted contayneth a perfect and full doctrine of faith and manners such is the scripture ergo CHAMP What will you vnderstand by the word which God heere commaundeth onlie the fiue bookes of Moises which then were onlie extant If you vnderstande it so as trulie you cannott otherwise what will you say to all the reste of the bookes both of the ould newe testament written since were they added against gods commandement you will feare to say so What then will this place serue you for to make a poore shewe of some proofe out of scripture to deceaue your lesse skilfull reader and for noe other purpose But peraduenture you will contend that it ought to be vnderstoode of all that which God shoulde speake aswell after as before and so to comprehend the whole scripture This sence though not verie probable I am content to accept of that you may see I doe not deale niggardlie with you To your argument therefore I say you iugle somethinge in itt but not cunninglie If you woulde conclude anie thinge out of this place of scripture you must say in your minor but such is the word of God And then the conclusion will be directlie against your selfe who detracteth from gods worde both written denyinge manie and sundrie bookes of holy scripture and also vnwritten reiectinge all traditioÌ„s which the scriptures themselues commaunde vs to receiue And so haue you concluded your selfe a manifest transgressour of gods lawe and commaundement When you shall answere sufficientlie this argument I will pay you a fee worthe your doctors Cappe PILK Proofe 2. Prou 30. 5. 6. Euerie worde of God is pure he is a shielde to them that put theire trust in him adde you nothinge vnto his worde least he reprooue thee and thou be founde a lyar CHAMP Therefore what Therefore all articles of faith are fullie
be god worde that they are manifest of themselues and neede not to be prooued Because you will euer be impertinent not knowinge what you say nor what you shoulde prooue and yet are you so full of bable that you will still be be talkinge If one shoulde aske your aduise howe he might knowe good Phisicke and you shoulde say vnto him it is an easie thinge to knowe that For that phisike which coÌ„forteth nature expelleth disseases and restoreth health is certainlie good phisicke doe you thinke he shoulde be much wiser for your aduise whatsoeuer you thinke I knowe he shoulde be as wise as he was before Such is your directions to knowe the scripture vnto such as doe not alreadie knowe or beleeue them And seeinge our Sauiour himselfe prescribeth as a necessarie rule to knowe the scriptures the performance of his fathers will before his doctrine canne be vnderstoode as you well note but stil against your selfe it is euident that they are not so cleare of theÌ„selues nor yett so easie to be knowne as you pretend For that doctrine which must first be practised by humble obedience before it can be vnderstoode or knowne to be of God as our Sauiour saith of the scripture noe man that is not deuoyde of all iudgment wil say is easie to be knowne euen by it selfe PILK I might add all those arguments which both the fathers and schoolemen produce out of the scriptures themselues to prooue them the ofspringe of God which if they be stronge against gentiles I knowe not howe they should be weake against you vid. the maiestie of the doctrine the simplicitie and puritie of the stile antiquitie of the bookes truth of oracles and predictions that manie ages after held their complement with sundrie other to the like purpose but I passe by them and shutt vppe this pointe with that speeche of your Stewchus CHAMP You were well aduised to passe by all such arguments of the fathers and schoolemen as woulde nothinge serue your purpose I woulde you had been so aduised from the begininge for soe shoulde I not haue hadd the labour and paynes to transcribe so manie impertinencies of yours as I haue been forced to doe hitherto The arguments which you here mention taken by themselues are farr from makinge anie sufficient grounde to builde our faith vppon thoughe they are probable and prudent considerations and ioyned with the authoritie of the churche and tradition wherby â—e receiue the scriptures they are not without some force to persuade the bookes of the holy Bible to be gods worde and to be written by his inspiration But take you experience of them in your selfe and see whether they are sufficient to persuade that the bookes of Wisdome Ecclesiastious and the rest receiued generallie by the whole churche and namelie by the fathers and schoolemen whose authoritie here you seeme to vrge for canonicall are trulie gods worde and written by his holy spiritt And if you finde them not sufficient groundes for these why woulde you intrude them vppon vs as sufficient for the rest But lett vs heare what you bringe out of our Stewchus PILK They which thinke the authoritie of holy scriptures whereunto all the worlde nowe assenteth to depende vppon the readers faith and not to bringe with them certaine diuine and most potent reasons that drawe vnto them the iudgements of greate mindes are therefore deceiued because they are not of theire number whose mindes both by naturall goodnes and continuall exercitation of wisdome doe prudentlie apprehend the highest and truest thinges whereas if anie haue that wisedome geuen him to esteeme the greatnes of thinges as they deserue he shall feele the weight of diuine oracies to be so greate that the pronunciation of them onlie would suffice to begett a most firme and suddaine faith CHAMP The whole space of a thousand and fiue hundred yeeres geuen you to take your testimonies out of might haue sufficed without alleaginge of moderne writers and those oâ— small note and lesse authoritie Stewchus is an author not wholly receiued and the booke cited by you is put in the index of bookes to be amended or corrected and therefore the testimonie thereof thoughe it were otherwise most formall as it is not is of noe authority against vs. And truelie I wounder you are not ashamed to bring such stuffe for the proofe of your faith and doctrine And that in such sorte as you haue lett passe all other and made choyce of this as of moste strength and force Lett the iudicious reader nowe iudge by that which hath been sayde both by you and me whether the scriptures are so clearelie knowne by themselues and by theire owne light that they neede no other proofe to be gods worde and written by his spiritt And whether it he a needles or disorderlie thinge for him that pretendeth to prooue all the points of his faith by holy scripture to prooue first that there is a holie scripture and then to prooue in what bookes it is contayned And lastlie whether because you refusinge traditions and the churches authoritie by which onlie the holy scriptures are knowne cannot prooue the scriptures to be such and therefore receiuinge them vpon the credit of your owne fancie which consequentlie must be the fundamentall rule of your whole Faith doe not recurre to that shifte to say that the scriptures are so euident of themselues that they neede noe other proofe or testimonie but themselues MANVALL SECTION 7. And here occur by the way two thinges worthy of note The one that the scripture cannot be an vniuersall rule of our faith seeinge somethinges are to be beleeued without proofe of scripture as are for example that there is an holy scripture contayninge gods worde and reuelation and that these these bookes be such therefore of necessitie must there be some other rule of our faith more vniuersall then the scriptures and consequentlie before the scriptures And this cannot be but the authoritie of gods churche which is clearely S. August doctrine who was not a frayde to say I woulde not beleeue the Gospell but that the authoritie of the church doth moue me Seeinge therefore the authoritie of the churche is a sufficient motiue for vs to beleeue what is scripture why shoulde it not haue the like authoritie with vs in other points of faith which is also S. Aug argument in the same place but I will notwithstandinge satisfie our aduersaries in theire owne humour PILK Your former grounde beinge a bedd of sande that scriptures cannott be prooued by scriptures these conclusions that you doe builde vppon it doe of themselues fall to the grounde CHAMP When you shall followinge your principles proue out of the scripture either that there is a scripture or in what bookes it is contayned without supposinge some scripture without proofe then may you terme my grounde to be a bedd of sande and I will also beleeue it so to be But till then I will esteeme it a rock that
more subiect to errour nowe then shee was at that tyme. Therfore that which Driedo saith is that the primatiue churche by reason of the colledge of the Apostles had power to deliuer newe doctrine of faith which the succedinge church hath not but hath infallible authoritie to teache that faith which shee receaued of the Apostles And this you might easilie haue seene to haue been Driedoes Doctrine if you had taken but anie ordinarie heede to his wordes PILK Neuertheles to passe by this to graunte that S. Augustin a Catholicke and a Bishoppe woulde not beleeue the Gospell but that the authoritie of the churche moued him is euerie motiue to beleeue a rule of faith Nothinge lesse For the rule is that whereunto faith is lastlie resolued which is not into the authoritie of the churche as your best diuines teach but into the scriptures CHAMP You might well haue past by all this indeede and also that which followeth had you not rather chosen to fil your paper with your impertinencies to the publishinge of your owne small iudgement If you take the rule of â—aith so strictlie as it contayneth onlie that whereunto faith is lastlie resolued you will make onlie God reuelinge his verities to be the rule of faith and then you must exclude not onlie the churche but the scriptures also But if you take it for a true ground of beleefe then that testimonie which so moueth to faith as it ingendreth faith in vs may trulie be sayde to be a rule of faith such a motiue S. Aug saith the churche is PILK And there vppon Cameracensis speakinge of this place of S. Aug saith that it proueth not that he beleeued the gospell thoroughe the churches authoritie as by a Theologicall principle whereby the gospell might be prooued true but onlie as by a cause mouinge him to creditt it as if he shoulde say I woulde not beleeue the gospell vnles the holynes of the churche or Christes miracles did moue me In which sayinge thoughe some cause of his beleeuinge be assigned yet no former principle is touched whose creditt might be the cause why the gospell shoulde be beleeued CHAMP It appeareth well you vnderstande not what Cameracensis saith or else that you care not what you say so that you say somethinge He saith the scriptures are not prooued by the authority of the churche as by a Theologicall principle or argument ab intrinseco but as a motiue from authority or ab extrinseco which is that all men say and which I only desire to prooue by S. Augustines testimonie For if the church be a motiue to beleeue the scriptures it must necessarilie be before the scriptures and consequentlie be a more vniuersall rule cause or motiue of faith and beleefe then the scriptures PILK Bellarmine saith that S. Aug. speaketh these wordes of the authoritie of the churche as of a cause propoundinge what is to be beleeued and not of the foundation of faith But the proposition of the churche is not the rule and resolution of faith but onlie a condition requisite of beleeuinge as Valent. teacheth in 22. tom 3. de obiecto fidei CHAMP It is a most irkesome and importunate thinge to haue to doe with with an ignorant aduersarie that knoweth not what he shoulde either prooue or denie Such an one you shewe your selfe to be For if you take from the scripture which you trulie teache to be a rule of our faith the authoritie to propose manifest and testify articles of beleefe see howe you will make it a rule of faith Seeinge therefore you geue to the churche these thinges without which the scriptures are not a rule of faith why should you deny it to be also a rule of faith But the churche you say is not the foundation or resolution of faith I speake in your owne phrase thoughe improperlie that you may vnderstande and therfore is it not anie rule thereof If this argument conclude anie thinge it will also prooue the scriptures to be noe rule of faith For it is neither foundation nor resolution of faith if you vnderstande the first and chiefe foundation or last resolution as I tould you before vnles you will make it to be God himselfe But if you take foundation for that which doth grounde our faith in a certaine and sure kinde of infallible testimonie in which sence al men speake that knowe what they speake theÌ„ are both the scriptures and the churche also foundations and groundes of our faith PILK And surelie if S. Aug had meant that the authoritie of the churche had beene this rule which is your inference he had excluded all other rules For he that saith I would not beleeue excepte the authoritie of the churche moued me establisheth one cause remoueth the rest But this none of you dare accorde vnto is as farr from S. Aug. meaninge as your next wordes are from truth If therefore the authoritie of the churche be a sufficient motiue for a motiue it is which none of vs euer denyed but that it is a sufficient motiue neither canne you prooue nor yett S. August anie where auoucheth CHAMP S. Aug. wordes which are to be beleeued before your bare negation are most cleare that without the testimonie or authoritie of the churche he hadd not beleeued the Gospell and consequentlie that the churche was cause rule and motiue of his beleefe not in that degree that God is the rule or foundation of our faith for so we shoulde make S Aug. as sencelesse as Mr. Pilkinton but in the like kinde or degree that the scriptures are but yett before the scriptures because he beleeued them for the churches authoritie And therefore you see S. Aug. to say that which the Manuall saith that there is some other rule of faith before and more vniuersall then the scriptures seeinge that for it and by it the scriptures are beleeued MANVALL SECTIO 8. The second thinge to be noted is that they which beleeue nothinge but that which is prooued by scripture are euidentlie conuinced to beleeue nothinge at all For they that cannott beleeue that there is an holy scripture or what bookes be holy scripture cannott beleeue anie thinge because it is prooued by scripture for it is euident that before they beleeue anie thinge because it is prooued by scripture they must first beleeue that there is a holy scripture and what bookes are scripture But they that beleeue not anie thinge but that which is prooued by scripture cannot beleeue that there is a scripture nor what bookes are holy scripture For neither of these two canne be prooued by holy scripture Therefore they that beleeue not anie thinge but that which is prooued by scripture cannott beleeue anie thinge att all This argument is a playne demonstration and compelleth the protestants either to confesse that they haue noe faith att all or to acknowledge this their position to witt that nothinge ought or can rightlie be beleeued but that which may be prooued
it necessarie to beleeue that they wrote the wordes thereof and then it is not to the purpose to proue your positioÌ„ which is of thinges to be beleeued and not of wordes But if by the creede you vnderstande the matter of it and thinges to be beleeued then it is vntrue that the Apostles writte it not and all thinges contayned therein which thinges haue continued in our churche as the obiect of our faith not for tradition onlie as you ignorantly say but because they are recorded in the holy scripture CHAMP Shewe me then in theire writings I meane the Apostles the discention of our Sauiour into hell and the catholicke churche which Luther loued so little that he turned it the christian churche Thoughe we beleeue not onlie the parcells of the creede but the whole creede together And that the Apostles made it which is no where expressed in scripture And if I say ignorantlie that the creede as it is composed by the Apostles and therefore receiued and beleeued of all christians in al ages hath continued in the church vntill this day by tradition only shewe it me written in the scriptures and I will confesse myne ignorance and correct my wordes But seeinge you cannot performe that I tell you that you impudentlie affirme that it hath other continuance then by tradition opposinge tradition to the canonicall scripture onlie Manuall Proofe 7. They taught Baptisme administred by heretikes to be good and therefore S. Aug. speakinge thereof saith Manie thinges which are not found in the Apostles writinges nor in the latter councells yet because they are obserued by the whole churche are beleeued to be deliuered and recommended by none but by theÌ„ Againe he saith There are manie thinges which the whole church doth hold and therefore are well beleeued to be commaunded by the Apostles albeyt they be not found written PILK That Baptisme ministred by heretikes was preached by the Apostles but not written hath as much truth as the rest For whereas Cyprian hath taught that Baptisme of heretikes was not good and therefore to be reiterated S. Aug. crosseth him and prooueth the contrarie out of the ghospell and out of the wordes of the Apostle Ephe. 4. And this is so frequent with that father that it maketh me thinke you haue not read him of that argument but gleaned out of others that might serue your turne So pâ—lpably are you deceiued to thinke that S. August conceiued this to be an vnwritten tradition without ground of scripture for thus he writeth That I may not seeme to prooue it by humane arguments I will bringe foorth certayne documents out of the scripture And whereas Cyprian had taught that for proofe of this we must haue recourse vnto the fountayne of Apostolicall tradition that is the scriptures S. Aug approoueth it and saith that the Apostles deliuered that there is one God one Christe one baptisme and therefore baptisme of heretikes is firme and not to be repeated When then he saith of this as of other thinges that they are not founde in the Apostles writinges nor in latter councells c. And there be manie thinges which the whole churche doth holde and therfore are well beleeued to be commended by the Apostles albeyt they be not found written Which wordes are in his 2. booke contra Donatistas cap. 7. and not lib. 5. cap. 27. as you cited them His meaninge is they are not written in so manie wordes but the groundes of them are layd in the scriptures and thence necessarilie they may be concluded This is playne out of Aug. for hauinge vttered these wordes vrged by you when he draweth to an ende of this disputation he thus concludeth It might suffice that our reasons beinge so often repeated and diuerselie debated and handled in disputinge and the documents of holy scripture beinge added and so manie testimonies of Cyprian concurringe By this tyme I thinke the weaker sorte of men vnderstande that the baptisme of Christe cannot be violated by the peruersnes of the partie that geueth or receiueth it Loe howe be bringeth documents out of scripture to prooue that the peruersnes of heretikes peruerteth not the baptisme of Christe and therfore baptisme ministred by hereticks is good CHAMP Is it be written by the Apostles that the Baptisme of heretikes is sufficient and not to be reiterated why doe not you shewe the place and confound your aduersarie But you had rather impudeÌ„tlie affirme an vntruth theÌ„ ingeniously acknowledg a cleare veritie As thoughe if it hadd been so clearly fully taught in holy scripture as you are bound to shewe it S. Cyprian who had a much iudgmeÌ„t to discerne it as you att least and noe lesse good will to acknowledge it nor yett lesse industrie and diligence to seeke it could not he haue esped it And howsoeuer here you wilfullie wrangle out of S. Aug as though he acknowledged not the Baptisme of heretikes by tradition yett two pages after you in expresse wordes confesse that he saith neither baptisme of infants nor by heretikes are written in scripture And though you interpret him both here and there to meane that they are not founde written in so manie wordes but that the groundes notwithstandinge from whence they may be necessarilie concluded are layd in the scriptures yett is this your glosse meerelie voluntarie clearlie against S. August meaninge and common sence Or iâ— not why doe not you frame some argument which by necessary consequence may conclude out of the groundes layd in scripture abstractinge from the authoritie of the churche and tradition either of these two articles But it is more easie for you to affirme twentie positions then to prooue one Manuall catholike position 2. The Catholike churche doth and ought to beleeue those thinges which the Apostles deliuered by worde of mouth without writinge in the same degree of faith with those that are written PILK For answere vnto this lett the iudicious reader obserue that it is the vsuall doctrine of Papists to teach that all points of Christian beliefe which are necessarie for all men were publikelie preached by the Apostles to all men and recorded in the register of holy scripture But besides these there were diuers thinges committed to prelats and priests that were more perfect men which they taught them a parte accordinge to that which S. Paule saith we speake wisdome amonge them that are perfect And these be theire traditions which they would haue equallie credited with the scriptures Nowe this was the verie doctrine of the auncient heretikes Valentinians Cerintheans Marcionists c. For abusinge the scripture and aduancinge traditioÌ„s grounded on the same foundation as the fathers tell vs. And these be thinges which the protestants denie to be equall with the scriptures for they graunt that the Apostles in the beginninge of theire embassage write not the whole doctrine which they preached but deliuered parte by worde of mouth and parte by writinge howbeit they consigned the Canon of the scripture and
before of Legat which instance you can neuer answere not satisfy and which onlie is sufficient if you were not obstinatly peruerse to make you ashamed to maintaine so senceles a Paradox and so euidentlie contradicted by perpetuall experience in all ages Your last shifte or euasioÌ„ of interpretinge scripture by scripture vnles there be some agreement or certaintie of the scripture interpretinge more then of the scripture interpreted which abstractinge from the iudgmeÌ„t of the churche cannot be had is a meere mockerie and like as if a man would measure one peece of veluett the measure whereof is as vncertaine as that of the former And to conclude this section it beinge in question betweene the catholikes and protestants who is to be iudge of controuersies in faith yea the roote and key of all controuersies which beinge ended or decided all the rest would haue easie decision you affirminge the scriptures to be this iudge and pretend to prooue this by scripture as al other thinges to be beleeued you are bounde by your owne doctrine to shewe it out of scripture which when you shall doe we will yeelde vnto you in all the rest of the tontrouersies betweene vs. But seeinge you can neuer doe this why doe you not yeelde to vs shewinge you out of manifest scripture the authoritie of the churche to decide controuersies You say the church is a partie and therefore no competent iudge But this hauinge been the cauill of all condemned heretikes and as truly alleaged by them as by you this plea is no more receiueable in you then in them And tell me I pray you the kinge is he not partie in all pleas of felonie or treason that are brought into his courtes yes verilie And yett none euer yet thought of anie such plea as to appeale from the iudgment geuen in his name and by his soueraigne authoritie in such cases Albeit the iudgments geuen in his courtes are farr froÌ„ beinge so assuredly iuste equitable as are the iudgments of the church which hath the infallible promise of the holy ghostes assistance in her decisions and determinations You are therefore fast taken which way soeuer you turne your selfe and this inference of myne That if there be no other iudge of controuersies besides the scriptures God hath not prouided sufficient meanes to saâ—e mens soules which you say is without coherence doth nessarilie followe vppon that supposition that heretikes and namelie protestants doe produce scriptures in proofe of theire false doctrine as catholikes doe for theire orthodoxe beliefe if there be no other iudge to decide the controuersie but only the scripture which inference you haue laboured but all in vaine to ouerthrowe as the indifferent reader will easilie iudge MANVLL SECTION 6. Fiftlie that whereas before I can prooue anie point of Christian beleife by scriptures I should first by good order prooue that there is an holy scripture and secondlie in what bookes of the Bible it is contayned yet because neither of these two canne be prooued by scriptures vnlesse we beleeue some scripture without proofe therfore that I may prooue these pointes of faith wherein the Romane Catholicke churche doth differ from the protestants by holy scriptures which our aduersaries vrge me vnto I must necessarily to satisfy theire disorderlie desire proceede disorderlie and suppose that for truth without proofe which requireth most to be prooued I say without proofe if no proofe be good but that which is made out of scripture PILK All questions are not to be disputed of saith Aristotle but only those whereof man desireth a reason that is not worthie of punishment or lacketh sence For if anie demaunde whether God is to be worshipped or our parents to be loued he deserueth stripes or whether snowe be white he lacketh sence This question of yours whether the scripture be gods worde tendeth to Atheisme and deserueth punishment rather then answere CHAMP In the precedent question to auoyde the authority of the churches iudgment expreslie testified in the scriptures you laboured to maintaine this paradox that notwithstandinge scriptures were produced for either partie of anie controuersie yett the controuersie might be fullie ended and decided by the scriptures alone without anie other iudge decidinge or determininge whether partie vsed the true sence and meaninge of the same scriptures Nowe in this section to auoyde the Authoritie of TraditioÌ„s expreslie also taught in the scriptures you goe aboute to maintaine another paradox no lesse improbable to witt that it is so clearlie manifest not only that there is a written worde of God or holie scripture but also in what booke it is contayned that to moue question in either tendeth to Atheisme and deserueth punishment rather then answere lett vs see howe you make good this your paradox PILK But least you shoulde triumphe before the victorie I answere that as in all humane artes there be certain principles which are knowne of theÌ„selues without anie farther demoÌ„stration So the verties that are contained in the Cannon of the Bible are the principles foundations of diuinitie and receiue not authoritie by other thinges whereby they may be demonstrated saith Cameracensis CHAMP Ignorance in the rudimeÌ„ts of Philosophie maketh you abuse your tearmes egregiouslie For what principles of artes or sciences I pray you are those that are beleeued for themselues none certainlie For the principles of all naturall knowledge are either euidentlie knowne by the light of nature and not beleeued or they are beleeued for the authoritie of a higher knowledge and not beleeued for themselues The verities contayned in the Bible are beleeued not for themselues but for the authoritie of God reueilinge them who onlie is truth it selfe and beleeued for himselfe of whome and from whome they receiue authoritie and haue it not of themselues as you falselie affirme But you say they cannot be demonstrated by other principles It is true for â—â—â—e but the phreneticall or phanaticall Manicheis did desire or expecte demonstration in matter of faith Which as S. August saith is grounded vppon authoritie as knowledge is vppon reason we demaunde therefore of you some authoritie whereby we may reasonablie beleeue the verities contayned in the Bible to haue been reueiled by God without which authoritie we cannot securelie beleeue them to be gods worde PILK Then if the scriptures be principles as it is confessed on both sides it followeth that they are immediate indemonstrable as al other principles are in theire scieÌ„ces where of they are principles but these more theÌ„ others because they are primae veritatis And as the first good for it selfe is to be loued so the first truth for it selfe is to be beleeued saith Aquinas And therefore it is so farr from beinge requisit to prooue the scriptures that S. Aug. saith they are not to be hearde who shoulde say howe doost thou knowe these bookes to be ministred vnto mankinde by the spiritie of the onlie and most true God for this thinge is
christian I woulde aâ—ke you what you esteeme of your father in reformation Martin Luther whome some of his disciples as you knowe stile the seconde Elias the fifte Euangelist the second or thirde person in heauen after Christe who with a greate troope of his schollers doth not onlie open his mouth to call into question diuers of the Apostles writinges but absolutelie casteth them out of the Canon will you censure him to be noe christian if you doe you shall be a cursed childe of a more cursed father Yea what will you thinke of your selfe and all the rest of your crewe who cast out of the Canon so manie of those bookes which S. Aug. whose authoritie you cite alwayes esteemed to be canonicall scripture See whether you haue not pronounced sentence with your owne mouth against your selfe and condemned your selfe to be noe Christian If you shoulde eate noe bread till you quitt your selfe of this indictment I dare vndertake to finde you bread for sixe pence so longe as you liue Howsoeuer hereby at least it is cleare that the scriptures are not such principles of our faith as beinge not prooued to be written by the holy Ghost may be doubted of and therefore necessarilie require to be sufficientlie prooued before they can be groundes of other articles of our faith WheÌ„ you or anie for you shall solue this argument I shall esteeme you not vnworthy of a doctours cap. S. Aug. hath good reason to say that no Christian dare to open his mouth against the scriptures receiued by the catholicke churche For so shoulde he be worthyly esteemed as a publican and heathen by the testimonie of our Sauiour Christ himselfe And therfore is Luther and Caluine with theire viperous generation worthilie censured as heretikes thoughe they had no other errours but that of reiectinge with obstinacie the canonicall scriptures That which you bringe out of Clemens were it as you sett it downe is nothinge to your purpose For we knowe the scriptures to be indemonstrable by reason but yett to be prooued by authoritie as all other articles of fayth are And nowe looke ouer once more your cardes and weigh well with your selfe whether this proposition admitted for true which is one of your principles That nothinge is to be beleeued that is not prooued by scriptures whether I say the Manuall doth not directlie conuince the protestants who professe that they cannot prooue the scriptures to be scriptures to beleeue nothinge at all MANVALL SECTION 9. But nowe hauinge shewed the absurditie of theire doctrine in this point I will ioyne with them in the scriptures as they themselues doe desire obseruinge this methode First I sett downe the Catholicke Romane beleefe in direct and plaine positions then I bringe in proofe of it one two or more places of holy scriptures citinge the auncient vulgar translation and often tymes I add the testimonie of some auncieÌ„t father of the first fiue hundreth yeeres vnderstandinge such scriptures as I cite in the same sence and meaninge that I cite them for Furthermore those fewe places of scripture which seeme to sounde directlie against the catholicke faith I shewe in breefe howe they are to be vnderstoode And last of all I putt downe the position contradictorie to the Catholicke doctrine to the end that the indifferent reader be he catholicke or otherwise may more easily iudge whether doctrine hath better grounde in holy scriptures And further that he that will impugne this treatise may see what he hath to prooue if he will prooue anie thinge to purpose PILK Zebull iudged men to be shadowes of mountaines and you Christian verities nouell absurdities But as Nicomachus the painter answered a skilfull felowe that iudged the picture of Helen drawne by Zeuxes not to be beautifull take myne eyes saith he thou wilt thâ—nke her to be a goddesse So if you looke with spiritual eies you woulde easilie conceiue them to be diuine verities which you imagine to be palbable absurdities For lacke whereof you proceede to beate your aduersaries with theire owne weapons of holy scriptures and you tell them howe you will marshall your forces CHAMP Zebull if you say true imagined men to be shaddowes and you contrariwise imagine shaddowes to be men I doubt not but if I shoulde take your eies to looke vppon your worke I shoulde thinke as you doe a â—rogge to be as faire as Diana You say I proceede to beate my aduersaries with their owne weapons But the scriptures are not mine aduersaries weapons but as they steale them to impugne the truth with as theeues doe true mens weapons PILK First you will sett downe your saith in direct positions and that you haue donne as streight as a Rams horne CHAMP Marke you the crookednes and discouerit that others may see it besides your selfe PILK Secondly you will prooue it by holy scriptures which you cite to as good purpose as the deuill did against Christ. CHAMP Note you the impertinencies when they occurre and discouer them that other men may see them as well as your selfe PILK Thirdlie you will produce them in the auncient vulgar translation no maruell for that hangeth betweene the greeke and the Hebrue as Christ did betweene the two theeues in your friendes opinion whereas it hath been the Cameryne that hath vented from it manie of your errours Hence you haue marriage to be a Sacrament because your translation readeth magnum hoc SacramentuÌ„ and in greeke it is Mysterion Hence almes to be meritorious because huiusmodi sacrificijs promeritur Deus and in the greeke it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hence definitions of councels to proceede froÌ„ the holy ghost because in this corrupte false version it is read the holy spiritt shall suggest vnto you all thinges that I will say whereas it is in the originall that I haue sayde Infinite almost are the additions detractions deprauations wherewith this sweet translation of yours hath corrupted the fountaynes That Isodore Clarius woundered at the negligence of learned men that haue not purged it from these inumerable errours wherewith it swarmeth and wherein himselfe had obserued and rectified eight thousande places and yett this is the apparrell wherein you will sett before vs the holy scriptures CHAMP Take you here the counsell the painter gaue to the vnskilfull censurer of Zeuxis worke which you spake of not farr before and looke vppon the vulgar translation with S. Ambrose S. Aug. S Hierome and S. Gregories eyes with the rest of all the Latine fathers who liued a thousande yeeres before your heresie was hatched whose iudgments are of more authoritie then manie Clarius and you will finde it to be intire perfect and good Your exceptions against it with manie moe are alreadie answered by Bellarmine which answeres shall stande for good till you confute them This is all your learning to repeate olde ouerworne obiections and to conceale their answeres a greate peece of witt I wisse PILK Fowerthlie you will adde the testimonie of some
thinge deliuered in the worde CHAMP That is properlie an article of faith that is beleeued for diuine authoritie whether it be written or noe as were all these thinges the fathers beleeued before the lawe written And because we beleeue the bookes of Genesis for example and the rest of the holy Byble to be written by Gods reuelation therefore doe we beleeue them to be holy scripture and to containe gods worde Which therefore is properlie an article of faith no lesse then the misterie of the blessed trinitie beleeued for the same authoritie PILK Vppon this grounde I answere first in generall that none of these points are articles of faith CHAMP Vppon such a false grounde you are like to builde a good answere Is it no article of faith with you that the booke of Genesis is written by gods reuelation Tell me I pray you vnto what kinde of knowledge or assent you will reduce it I will confesse you a maister in diuinitie if you can make it well appeare by what other act of knowledge or vnderstandinge we assent vnto this veritie besides the act of faith Which if you cannot performe as assuredlie you cannott you must needes see this your first answere to be noe answere att all but a meere supposall of a manifest falsitie PILK Secondlie I answere to euerie one in particular I answere to the the first That all canonicall bookes and euerie parcell thereof be such is prooued out of themselues For besides that the ould testament prooueth the newe and the newe the old for whatsoeuer we read in the ould testament the same is founde in the gospell and whatsoeuer is founde in the gospell that is deduced from the authoritie of the ould testament as Hierome speaketh so in speciall euerie booke prooueth it selfe both by its owne light as formerlie was shewed and by the testimonie of Christ of the Prophets and Apostles that were the secretaries of the holy ghost The testimonie of our Sauiour Christ. Luc. 24. 44. These are the wordes which I spake vnto you while I was with you that all must needes be fulfilled which were written of me in the lawe of Moyses and in the prophetts and in the psalmes Of S. Paule 2. Tim. 3. 16. All scripture is geuen by the inspiration of God and is profitable to doctrine to reproofe to correction to instruction which is in righteousnes Of S. Peter the 2. epist 1. 21. The prophecie came not in olde tyme by the will of man but holy men of God spake as they were moued by the holy Ghost doe abundantlie prooue the bookes of the olde testament to be canonicall besides that there is not anie of them out of which some testimonie is not in the newe testament extant CHAMP Your second answere is as much to the purpose as your first Neither the old testament proouing the newe nor contrariwise vnles the one be beleeued before Yea you make your selfe ridiculous to all men by such a naturall or circulare proofe vnles you suppose the assured beleefe of some parte before For example if one shoulde demaunde of you how you knowe or why you doe beleeue those wordes of our Sauiour which you cite out of the 24 of S. Luke either to haue been spoken by him or written by S. Luke would you say that they euidentlie prooue themselues so to be surely this you must say both accordinge to your doctrine here and accordinge to the necessitie you putt your selfe into by denyinge the authority of tradition and of the churches testimonie And yett in sayinge that you shall euidently prooue your selfe to be senceles For there is noe such euidence of the thinge but anie man that is not moued with the authoritie of gods churche and tradition would esteeme it verie vncertaine and most doubtfull For vnles these wordes and that which I say of them I say of the rest of the scripture were God himselfe and spake to vs as imediatlie as he did to Moises and the rest of his prophetts they cannot be sayde to be knowne by theire owne light nor beleeued for theire owne truth Againe suppose you had certayne knoweledge of this by what meanes soeuer howe could you be certayne that he speaketh of those bookes of Moises psalmes and prophetts which we haue vnder those names This certainlie would be impossible for you to prooue seinge you reiect the authoritie of tradition and the churches iudgment by which onlie it is assuredlie prooued Furthermore you knowe that our Sauiour speakinge in his owne person required not to be beleeued but by the testimonie of his workes sayinge Nisi opera in eis fecissem 〈◊〉 nemo alius fecit peccatum non haberent Much lesse therefore doth he require that we shoulde beleeue a written booke to be his worde without other proofe then the selfe light of the booke which is not so greate as that of his owne liuelie worde◠The sayinge of S Hierome is nothinge to the purpose For he speaketh onlie of the mutuall consent and concord of the two testaments which to christians that alreadie beleeue them both to be the worde of God is no small confirmation of the veritie of the doctrine they both contayne PILK The Gospells of the Euangelists the Acts and Epistles of the Apostles the reuelation of S. Iohn prooue themselues out of themselues to be theires whose titles they beare And if we creditt the bookes of historians and Philosophers auncient and moderne diuine and humane to be theires whose names they carrie in theire foreheads what madnes were it to thinke the diuine scriptures not to be written by them who are said to be theire penmen after the defluxion of so manie ages wherein neuer anie good christian called them in question besides wicked Iesuits impure Manichees Cerdonians Marcionists and Ebionites CHAMP None of all these bookes say they were written by such and such as is manifest And thoughe they did yett were not this sufficient to prooue them theirs vnles it were certaine this were theire testimonie and that they were infallible in their testimonie As for the titles they beare there is the same difficultie For it is not otherwise knowne to be theirs then by faith and beleefe of which we seeke the grounde And if titles were sufficient proofes of the true gospells we should haue manie moe gospells then we haue as you cannot be ignorant Againe the Epistle to the Hebrues beareth not the name of anie of the Apostles and howe longe it was thought by diuerse not to be S. Paules you knowe vnles you be verie ignorant For the workes of other humane authors why doe you beleeue them to be theirs if it be not for the testimonie of all succeedinge ages brought vnto vs by tradition Giue some other sufficient grounde of your beleefe in this poynte if you can and if you cannot say you are senceles to reiect ecclesiasticall tradition in receiuinge the bookes of the Bible or else that your iudgment is foolishe and idle
CHAMP This authoritie is like the rest impertinent to your purpose and rather against you then for you For he that defendeth the authoritie of the churche and these thinges that are taught by her defendeth nothinge from without the bookes of God but he that defendeth the contrarie as you doe doth euidently impugne the gospell S. Hill willeth the Arrian Emperour to heare these thinges that are written of Christ as this he is one with his father and the like and then he should be farr from beleeuinge that which is no where written to witt that he is a creature and inferiour to his father Your cause is most miserable and despicable seeinge it is forced to begge testimonie of such extorted witnesses And nowe I leaue to the iudicious reader be he catholicke or protestant to iudge whether the catholicke positions of this first controuersie sett downe in the Manuall be not both more clearlie expressed and more firmelie and trulie prooued by scripture then the protestant position sett downe by Mr. Pilkinton which is the chiefe issue of our controuersie and dispute And further whether the positions sett downe in the Manuall vnder the title of protestant positions be not truly and iustly ascribed vnto them and more directlie pertayninge to the controuersie heere discussed then the others proposed by him MANVALL The second Controuersie of traditions Catholike position 1. The holy Apostles diliuered by worde of mouth moe thinges to be beleeued obserued by the churche then either they found written or wrote themselues And these thinges are vsuallie called traditions PILK You haue gotten a wolfe by the eare when you fasten on traditions if you lett them goe they carrie with them a great parte of your faith if you holde them fast you shewe you cannot prooue your faith from scriptures For you freelie and plainlie tell vs what your churche meaneth by traditions not interpretation of that which is written but addition and suppliment of that which is not For moe thinges say you are to be beleeued and obserued then either the Apostles wrote or founde written and these are traditions Let the reader marke this for the question here betwixt vs is not of interpretation of scriptures nor of rites and ceremonies that haue correspondence with them which here he carrieth vnder the name of thinges to be obserued but of doctrines and matters of faith which are thinges to be beleeued all which saith he were neuer written in the old testament nor yet in the newe CHAMP You putt me in minde of the fable of the fox that hauinge lost his owne tayle would needes perswade his fellowes to cutt of theires So you beinge out of loue with traditions woulde perswade vs to reiect them also But we are not so soone moued we professe to beleeue diuerse things for traditions sake and that by warrant of scripture whereunto if you did geue so much creditt as you would be thought to doe you woulde also beleeue the same And seing you yeeld alreadie the one halfe of the controuersie to witt traditions of thinges to be obserued for of these thinges you say there is no question betweene vs I will not dispaire to euict the other part of thinges also to be beleeued from you PILK Nowe this is a manifest vntruth For there is not anie article of faith which the Apostles founde not in the scriptures of the prophetts nor which either the euangelists or themselues did not consigne vnto vs in theire writings which thinge any man may finde to be true that will take paines to consider the articles of the Apostolike creede one by one which either haue proofe out of the ould testament or else the Apostles did not double all theire doctrines out of the scriptures Contrary to S. Paules practise acts 26. 22. CHAMP Howe manifest an vntruth it is that the Apostles taught more then either they found written or wrot themselues we shall see in the processe of this controuersie In the meane while I tell you that you affirme boldlie but prooue nothinge And why doe you referr vs to the Apostles creede for proofe of your vniuersall affirmation Is nothinge to be beleeued but that which is therein contayned what find you I pray you in the creede touchinge either the number or the nature of the Sacraments of theire efficacie or necessitie of originall sinne of the fall of the Angells with manie moe articles beleeued by all christians And yett you confirme your proofe farr more absurdlie by supposinge that the Apostles doubled that is your worde where you learned it I knowe not al theire doctrine out of scripture which is the thinge in question and therefore most absurdlie brought for proofe of the same Againe what necessitie had the Apostles to double theire doctrine as you say out of the scriptures Hadd they not authoritie to preach anie thinge but what they founde alreadie in the scriptures What Christian euer dreamed of such doctrine as you haue deliuered here But this was S. Paules practise you say But you are either ignorantlie or wilfullie mistakē and that most grosselie For thoughe S. Paule and the rest of the Apostles preached nothinge contrarie to the doctrine of the old testament but contrariwise shewed howe the auncient prophecies were fulfilled by our Sauiour Christ which S. Paules auditours at Boerea findinge by conferinge his doctrine with the prophets were much confirmed in theire faith yett is it noe where sayd that either he or the rest preached nothinge but that they founde written Neither did this paradoxe euer enter into anie mans heade but Mr. Pilkintons PILK Reade saith Ireneus diligentlie the Gospell which the Apostles haue geuen vs and read also diligentlie the prophetts and you shall finde all the actions and passions of our lorde yea all his doctrine for to be preached your proofes haue as much truth as the Carthaginians faith CHAMP S. Ireneus saith no more but that there is a great and manifest conformitie or agreement betweene the Prophetts and Apostles preachinge and doctrine which as it is most true so is it as much to your purpose as Paules steeple is to Charinge Crosse And whether my proofes or yours haue more affinitie with the Carthaginian faith lett the indifferent reader iudge MANVALL Proofe of the catholike position 1. Hauinge moe thinges to write vnto you I woulde not by paper and Inke For I hope I shall be with you and speake mouth to mouth PILK These well conclude that in this shorte Epistle S. Iohn did not write all the poyntes of faith but that others of the Apostles did not write them he saith not a word What loose reasoninge is this S. Iohn did not write all in these Epistles therefore the rest did not For whatsoeuer is necessarie vnto saluation and of faith though there it be not to be found yet in the writings of the other Apostles it is to be read CHAMP Seeinge I haue by your confession prooued out of the scripture that this Apostle
refuse it if they say anie thinge for you But neither of the fathers cited by you saith that the Apostles wrote all they preached which is our issue heere And as fo◠the former to witt S. Ireneus you haue his plaine meaninge layd downe vnto you before in the beginninge of our dispute to witt in the answere to your second Antithesis which you frame out of these selfe same wordes of S. Ireneus And as for S. Aug. he saith not that Christ commanded to bee written whatsoeuer he woulde haue vs to beleeue of him or his workes but onlie whatsoeuer he woulde haue vs to reade Which is most true For he could not will that we shoulde read anie thinge but that which was written But lett vs yeelde yett further vnto you and suppose these fathers to say as much for your purpose as you would haue which you see is farr otherwise yett woulde I aske you where they had that doctrine not from the scripture for no such thinge appeareth therein If therefore you will admitte of theire doctrine though not taken out of the scripture why doe you professe that nothinge is to be beleeued but that which is written and contayned in the scripture And thus you see your selfe so inuolued with your doctrine that you can finde noe way to escape some manifest absurditie Manuall Proofe 4. They the Apostles taught baptisme giuen to infants to be good and lawfull or else the Anabaptists are not heretikes for rebaptisinge them PILK The Baptisme of infants may by good and necessarie consequence be deriued from the scriptures otherwise your friend Bellarmine hath brought chaffie arguments against the Anabaptists The first is from the figure of the olde testament children were circumcised therefore they ought to be baptised this is so stronge saith he that it cannot be eluded The second is taken out of the thirde of Iohn Except a man be borne againe of water and the holy Ghost he cannot enter into the kingdome of heauen Whereunto may be added Christs commaundment Matt. 19. 14. Suffer little children to come vnto me for of such is the kingdome of heauen And in howe manie places doth S. Aug. prooue from the holy scriptures the necessitie of Baptisme against the Pelagians who imagininge children to be without original sinne thought it vnnecessarie wheras he sheweth out of Iohn that without it originall sinne is not remitted and therefore if it be needfull certainlie it is lawfull CHAMP The arguments vsed by Bellarmine are not chaffie but substantially good because they are taken from the scripture interpreted by the authoritie of the churche and the canonicall practise thereof receiued from the Apostles which is sufficient to prooue the Anabaptists to be heretike denyinge the Baptisme of infants to be lawfull And seeing you confesse the testimonie of the 3. of S. Iohn to be so effectuall to prooue the lawfulnes of the Baptisme of infants you must likwise confesse Caluin and all his followers to be heretikes For he denyeth the necessity of Baptisme to saluation which is much more clearlie prooued out of that place then is the Baptisme of infants And so whilst you woulde auoyde one euill you fall into a worse The same inconuenience followeth against you vppon the argument of S. August For if he prooue rightlie against the Pelagians that Baptisme is necessarie he concludeth directlie against your Master Caluin Yea against the doctrine deliuered in the first dayes conference of Hampton Courte Read it and see whether I say not true Manuall Proofe 6. They the Apostles taught the sunday to be solemnised and the Iewes Sabboth to be lefte without all solemnitie Thoughe moste strictly commaunded by God to be solemnised as an euerlastinge Couenant PILK The obseruation of the sunday and alteration from the Iewishe Sabboth we finde written in the scriptures For Iohn tearmeth it the Lordes day not onlie for that it was consecrated to his publike seruice but for that he was the instituter and ordayner thereof as S. Aug speaketh It was prefigured in the eight day wherein the Iewes vsed circumcision as both the same father and Chrisost teach and if prefigured then prescribed In this day did the Apostles come together acts 20. 7. and accordinglie they taught the churche to obserue it not by voyce onlie but by writinge 1. cor 16. 2. Euerie first day of the weeke lett euerie one of you put a side by himselfe and though it were commaunded by God to be obserued as an euerlastinge couenant yett who is so meanlie skilled in the Hebrue that knoweth not Gnolam sometymes to signifie eternitie sometimes a definit tyme as to the Iubilee Exad 21 6 then his master will bringe him vnto the iudges and sett him to the dore or the poste and his maister shall bore his eare throughe with an awle and he shall serue him for euer and as the passeouer was tearmed Exo 12. 14. an euerlastinge ordinance which yett was but to continue till the fulnes of tyme. So the Sabboth is tearmed an euerlasting couenant which yett for the day was onlie vnder the state of the olde testament CHAMP Here you exceede your selfe in impertinencie and wilfull obstinacie If I should haue brought out of the scriptures for traditions such proofes as you doe to ouerthrowe them you would make sporte therat and worthelie saying they were not onlie loose arguinge but verie seelie Sophistrie S. Iohn tearmeth one day the Lordes day ergo say you the scripture testifieth the abrogation of the Iewes Sabboth and establishment of the sunday and that fully for of full proofe and testimonie wee here dispute Againe the Apostle willed the Corrinthians euerie first day of the weeke to lay a side by themselues c. Ergo say you the Apostle did not onlie teach by voice but by writinge also the obseruation of the christians sunday insteede of the Iewishe Sabboth These are your best and strongest arguments in this matter which if you trulie thinke to be fully sufficient of themselues to prooue that you desire with what face or conscience can you reiect the proofes of expresse scripture and cleare instances brought for the catholike position as not sufficient to prooue the same Manuall Proofe 6. They deliuered and taught the creede by worde of mouthe and not in writinge which from theire tyme till nowe hath cōtinued in the churche by tradition onlie PILK The creede we confesse the Apostles taught and finde euerie parcell and portion thereof in theire writings which if you denie we can quickelie make good S. Aug. telleth vs so much These wordes which you haue hearde he speaketh of the Simboll are scattered in the holy scriptures from them collected and reduced into one to helpe the memorie of dull men But here you delude your reader againe with a triflinge Homonomie of this worde creede For if thereby you meane wordes and sillables then it is true that the Apostles vse not in theire writings some wordes expressed in the creede neither is
writte that formerlie they had deliuered as Ireneus and August doe teach This beinge the true state of the question if the papists meane not these former secret matters that Bellarmine mentioneth and are not written his position is de non ente For that there is nothinge or faith nowe which the Apostles did not after they preached either finde or leaue in writinge vnto the churche and these beinge deliuered at first partely by liuelie voyce partely by letters were to be embraced with like acceptance and creditt But if he meane these secret doctrines deliuered a parte and only by worde neuer by them written then we denie that the Apostles left any such thinge equallie to be credited with the holy scriptures neither the allegations inferre anie such matter CHAMP You haue here multiplyed a greate heape of vnnecessarie wordes making the thinge obscure which of it selfe is cleare enough The question is not now as you say whether the Apostles taught not more by word of mouth whether in secret or in publicke that importeth not that hauinge been disputed before and prooued against you But of what authoritie the thinges deliuered only by worde of mouth are of which question you haue the beleefe of the catholicke churche sett downe directlie in the position of the Manuall and the proofe thereof out of expresse scripture whereunto lett vs heare your answere Manuall Proofe 1. Therefore brethren stand and holde the traditions which you haue learned whether it be by worde or by our Epistle S. Basill saith I account it Apostolike to continue firmelie in vnwritten traditions and alleageth this place of S. Paule S. Chrisost cited by fulke himselfe saith this Hereof it is manifest that they the Apostles deliuered not all by Epistles but manie things without letters and the one is of as great creditt as the other Therefore we thinke the traditions of the churche to be worthy of creditt it is tradition inquire noe more PILK To your first testimonie if I shoulde answere that S. Paule meaneth not he deliuered some thinges by writinge somethings by worde only but the very same by both first preachinge it and after writinge it would trouble you to prooue the contrarie For the disiunctiue whether argueth not diuersitie of thinges deliuered but diuers wayes of deliueringe the same as in other places Rom. 14. 8. whether we liue or whether we dye wee are the lordes it followeth not dying we are one and liuinge we are another 1. Cor. 5. 11. whether I or they so we preach and therefore Paule preached one gospell the Apostles another CHAMP You doe wiselie not to stand much vppon your newe inuention least to your owne companions you might become ridiculous neither though you should stande there vppon shoulde it putt me to much trouble to prooue the contrary vnles to establishe your noueltie you woulde thinke to inuert the common and vsuall manner of speakinge and vnderstandinge of all men For the disiunctiue whether doth alwayes signifie the diuersitie of the thinge ioyned with it as is manifest euen in your examples whether we liue or dye whether I or they but so as one and the same thinge is affirmed of them both so it is in our testimonie as also in these sayinges followinge retayne the goods you haue receiued whether in money or marchandise Keepe the present I sent you whether in Iewells or in plaie With fiue thousand moe And it is a ridiculous conceipt to thinke that the Apostle commended vnto his disciple the same thinges both written and preached in which sence his sayinge shoulde be no more disiunctiue but copulatiue in this manner hold those thinges which you haue learned both by worde and Epistle Which is not to interprett the Apostle but manifestly to corrupt him Seeinge therefore you dare not stand vppon this interpretation let vs heare your auowed answere PILK But I adde that if one vnderstand these thinges of diuerse pointes of Christian religion which S. Paule deliuered vnto the Thessalonâ—aÌ„s and writte them not it will not followe that other Apostles writte them not and still your thesis is de non ente this testimonie is to no purpose sith what point of doctrine Paule deliuered by voyce we finde recorded in the scriptures CHAMP It followeth right well that the other Apostles writte not these thinge which S. Paule deliuered onlie by worde if your rule be true non credimus quia non â—egimios For it is noe where written that they wrote those thinges therefore accordinge to your doctrine not to be beleeued Againe I hauinge prooued by expresse scripture interpreted by the fathers that the Apostle taught somethinge more then he wrote and commanded it to be beleeued equally with his writinge which is the position of the Manuall it behooueth you that maintayne the contrarie to prooue it by expresse scripture or else to confesse that the catholike doctrine hath better and more firme ground in the scripture then Protestantisme You prooue brauely my thesis to be de non enâ—e and the proofe thereof to be to no purpose by your ordinarie miserable absurde and ridiculous begginge of that which is in question supposinge that for true and graunted which is expresselie denyed But to such shameful shifts is falsitie worthely driuen Lett vs see the rest of your answere if it be anie better PILK The testimonie cited out of Basill is wrongfullie fathered on that worthy-Bishoppe and contradicteth that which he writeth in other places and are acknowledged on both sides to be his and namelie his sermon de fide where he saith that it is a manifest desection from faith to bringe in anie thinge that is not written Besides in this verie chapter mentioned by you he speakes of Meletus as a rare man that liued an dyed before his tyme as appeareth by diuers of his Epistles And if we creditt Baronius he dyed after Basill For Basill dyed 378. and Meletus 381. CHAMP Here indeede you goe roundlie to worke and like yourselfe for not knowinge howe to answere the authoritie you denie the author for two weighty reasons I wisse The first is a pretence of a contradiction which is as much a contradiction as to affirme Mr. Pilkinton to be a minister and a doctor For he affirminge it to be Apostolike to continue firmelie in vnwritten traditions saith it is infidelitie to adde any thinge to the scriptures that is contrarie vnto them The second is a weake coÌ„iecture that he liued after one Meletus who notwithstandinge is sayde to die after him PILK Chrisostome is the onlie man that seemeth to fauour your assertion but trulie vnderstood he helpeth it nothinge For he speaketh not of traditions that are not written at all but of such as are not written in so manie wordes And it is vsuall with the fathers to call them vnwritten traditions which are not verbatim sett downe in the scriptures and yett haue a true ground in them as formerlie I shewed out of S. Aug. who saith that
are vppon what ground doe you assume in your minor But the holy scriptures are greater then â—he testimonie of Iohn not out of the texts of of scripture cited by you for they say no such thing They say that indeede of the workes of Christe and of his fathers testimonie which notwithstandinge were noe where then written but of the scripture they say no such thinge And therefore your argument is as fitlie founded vppon these text of scripture as those are which Pruritanu sett downe in the name of your felowes the author of which pamplett had he seene your booke might haue increased his not a little out of it As with this for example I have greater witnes then Iohn â—râ—â— ther are noe traditions or traditioÌ„s are not to be beleeued equallie with scriptures For amongst all his I knowe not whether there be one more impertinent then this But you will thinke to make some force out of the laste sentence search the scriptures c. but with as much probabilitie as out of the other For were it as you read For in them yee haue eternall life and not For in them you thinke to haue eternall life Which is the true texte yett haue you thence no other thing then that the old testament for of that onlie our Sauiour speaketh doth testifie of him Which how it either prooueth your Antithesis or improoueth my position iudge you by this consequence The old testament in which the Iewes thought to haue eternall life beareth witnes of our Sauiour Christ Ergo traditions are not of equall authoritie with scripture Doe doctors in Oxeforde vse to make such consequences if they doe I dare say it is the paine of sinne and heresie for the which they are depriued of the verie light of naturall reason and discourse PILK Proofe Whatsoeuer is confirmed by the authoritie of diuine scriptures which in the churche are called canonical is without al doubte to be beleeued But you may beleeue or not beleeue other witnesses or testimonies which men persuade you to beleeue as much as they deserue or not deserue to bee credited by the force yee finde in them CHAMP If you dare stand to this authoritie I will euidentlie prooue against you that you are to beleeue purgatory prayers for the dead the guaâ—de of Angells and diuers other thinges which you condemne in the catholikes For these thinges are euidentlie confirmed in those scriptures which the churche in S. August tyme did call canonicall as he witnesseth Further the bookes receiued by your selfe for canonicall doe confirme the authoritie of traditions as is playne out of the second Epistle to the Thessalo cited before Againe it is not onlie men but gods churche and consequentlie God himselfe by her that perswadeth vs to beleeue traditions and therefore this your argument is as foolishe as the rest PILK Proofe Abraham when he was desired to send Lazarus answered they haue Moises and the prophetts if they will not beleeue them nether will they heare the dead raysed vppe Christe bringeth him speakinge in a parable to shewe that he woulde haue more faith geuen to the scriptures then if the dead should reâ—iue Moreouer Paul and when I mention Paule I mean Christe for he knewe his minde preferreth scriptures before Angells that descend and that in great congruitie For an Angell thoughe verie greate yett are they seruants and ministers but all scriptures came vnto vs not from seruants but from God Lord of all Chrisostome in cap. 1. ad Gallatas CHAMP There is no end of your impertinencies and absurd parologismes Christ woulde haue more faith geuen to the scriptures then if the dead shoulde reuiue say you Ergo what Ergo Mr. Pilkinton knoweth not what he saith Certainlie this is the best consequence anie man can make of this testimonie as it is cited by him Againe S. Paule yea our Sauiour Christ preferre scriptures before angells that shoulde teach anie thinge against that which the Apostles had taught say you because the angells are ministers but the scriptures came to vs from God the Lord of all Ergo traditions are not to be beleeued equallie with scriptures A learned consequence I wisse and like the rest of your doctrine hauinge as much truth and connexion in it as hath this God is in heauen Ergo Mr. Pilkinton is a Roman Catholike Nowe looke backe I pray thee iudicious reader vpon the catholicke positions sett downe in the Manuall with the proofes thereof out of the scriptures and compare them with Mr. Pilkintons Antitheses and the proofes thereof and passe thy impartiall iudgment on them whether of them haue better grounde in holy scripture Thus farr I haue gone with your Parallel Mr. Pilkinton examininge the weight and truth thereof and in a fewe leaues haue founde so manie absurdities falsities and impertinencies that your whole booke seemeth to me to be no other thing then a deformed lumpe or masse of mouldinge past which maketh not anie resistance but is without all difficultie cutt in peeces pearced or thrust thoroughe euen with euerie wooden knife or other instrument For if I had no more difficultie to coppie and transcribe your wordes out of your booke into my paper that they might goe to the printe with my reply then I had to confute them you shoulde not haue been so manie dayes without your answere I goe no further with you in discussinge your doctrine because I will not bestowe good howers in such vnnecessarie and vnprofitable labour learninge of your selfe in the laste page of your booke that as to knowe the sea water to be salte it is not necessarie to drinke vppe the whole sea or to knowe an earthen statua guilded ouer not to be gold it is sufficient to scrape of one peece onlie of the guildinge So for anie man to discouer the absurditie and impertinencie of your booke it is not necessarie he shoulde goe thoroughe it whollie but it abundantlie sufficeth to haue examined one parte thereof onlie I would not lett it goe whollie without refutation least you shoulde haue interpreted my silence to haue proceeded from the difficultie there had been to confute your doctrine and least your lesse skilfull reader might thinke you had sayd something to the purpose in answere of the catholike doctrine or proofe of your owne I woulde not goe anie further in mine answer for the reason alreadie sett downe out of your owne wordes If you please to lay downe your wilfulnes to defend your errours and with some in differencie to consider the sinceritie of the catholike truthe I make no doubte but by this litle which hath been sayde in reply to your answere you will see the vanitie of your doctrine deliuered in this booke of yours But if you persiste in your obstinate will not to geue eare to the truth you may well be vanquished and ouercome as S. Hierome saith but you will neuer be perswaded Neither is my paynes herein bestowed so much out of hope to