aggregate of Iewes Manicheans Arians and other condemned sects which all good Christians ought to detest I hartily with their Conuersion yet if they will obstinately resist in despite of their inuentions the words of the Apostle will be verified Iesus Christ yesterday and to day Hebr. 13. â— the same also for euer And they shall giue a fearefull account for their contempt of al Churches and errours against Christian Fayth when repentance will nothing auaile Euen at that day when as S. Ambrose grauely sayth Lib. 5. de fide c. 7. The Iew shall perforce acknowledge whom he crucified when the Manichean shall adore whom he belieued not to haue come in flesh when the Arian shall confesse him to be omnipotent whom he denied And I may adde when all good Christians shall ioyfully behold him whose Fayth they laboured to Maintaine The Doctrines confuted in the ensuing Treatise THe first Doctrine That Fayth necessary to Saluation is not infallible Chap. 1. The grounds of this Doctrine lead to Atheisme Chap. 2. The second Doctrine That the assurance which we haue of Scriptures is but morall Chap. 3. The third Doctrine That the Apostles were not infallible in their Writings but erred with the whole Church of their tyme. Chap. 4. The fourth Doctrine Iniurious to the miracles of our Sauiour and of his Apostles Chap. 5. The fifth Doctrine By resoluing Fayth into Reason he destroyes the nature of Fayth and Beliefe of all Christian Verities Chap. 6. The sixt Doctrine Destructiue of the Theologicall Vertues of Christian Hope and Charity Chap. 7. The seauenth Doctrine Takes away the grounds of Rationall Discourse Chap. 8. The eight Doctrine Opens a way to deny the B. Trinity and other high mysteries of Christian Fayth Chap. 9. The ninth Doctrine Layes grounds to be Constant in no Religion Chap. 10. The tenth Doctrine Prouides for the impunity and preseruation of whatsoeuer damnable Errour against Christian Fayth Chap. 11. The Conclusion CHRISTIANITY MAINTAINED OR The discouery of sundry Doctrines tending to the Ouerthrow of Christian Religion The first Doctrine That Fayth necessary to Saluation is not Infallible CHAP. I. CHRISTIAN Fayth being the foundation of Hope the eye of Charity the lesser light appointed for the night of this world the Way to Heauen if this Foundation be faulty this Eye deceitfull this Light an Eclypse to it selfe this way erroneous our Hope Charity Light Happinesse and all Christianity must end Chap. 1. in worse then nothing in euerlasting vnhappines For as S. Thomas said to our Sauiour (a) Io. 14.5 We know not whither thou goest and how can we know the way So what will it auaile vs to know whither we goe if we follow a misleading way the Direction of a Fayth weake waueriug and subiect to Errour such is Christian Fayth in this man's iudgment deliuered in the Doctrine with which I thought fit to begin in regard it is the substance and summe of that which he deliuers and labours to prooue through his whole booke and is persuaded that it is of great and singular vse and demonstrable by vnanswerable arguments 2. I must confesse it is of great vse to ground Socinianisme which as the (b) Cap. 1. p. 7. Direction fortold reiecteth infallible supernaturall infused Fayth from being necessary to saluation and maketh our Christian Fayth of the Gospell and of Christ Iesus our Lord and Sauiour to be a meere human opinion resolued into the authority of men of no greater certainty then other human Traditions and Histories knowne by report Hence the saying in Charity Maintayned that an absolute certainty of Fayth is necessary to Saluation he taxeth deeply as (c) Pag. 328. most pernicious and vncharitable and els where (d) Pag. 325. n. 3. as a great errour of daungerous pernicious consequence yea pag. 37. thus he writeth Men being possessed with this false principle that Infallible Fayth is necessary and that it is in vaine to belieue the Gospell of Christ with such a kind or degree of assent as they yield to other matter of Tradition and finding that their Fayth of it is to them indiscernable from the beliefe they giue to the truth of other stories are in daunger not to belieue at all c. It is true that pag. 36. n. 8. he sayth We cannot ordinarily haue any rationall and acquired assent more then morall founded vpon credibilities wherby some may conceiue that besides human and rationall Fayth he supposes and requires Diuine Fayth which is a pure sincere firme adhesion to Gods word not caused by reason and discourse but infused by the Holy Ghost's inspiration into a belieuing soule But in truth he disclaimes from any necessity of Diuine Fayth or any diuine light aboue the light of meere reason and will haue men to be saued by the natiue forces of human rationall and fallible Fayth Men sayth he (f) Vbi supra pa. 36. n. 8. are vnreasonable God requires not any thing but reason They pretend that heauenly things cannot be seene to any purpose but by the midday-light but God will be satisfyed if we receiue any degree of Light which makes vs leaue the works of darknesses They exact a certainty of Fayth aboue that of sense and science God desires only that we belieue the conclusion as the premisses deserue wherof in rationall Fayth one is euer weake credible and not infallible And againe pag. 112. n. 154. Neither God doth nor man may require of vs as our duety to giue a greater assent to the mysteries of our Fayth then the motiues of credibility which are fallible deserue This is his doctrine which he deliuers often makes vse thereof to reiect the infallible Authority of Gods Church so prophane impious vnchristian as I wonder that a man professing himselfe a Christian durst venture to vent the same in print in a Christian country For is the certainty of the Fayth which Christians yield to the truth of the Gospell to the life of Christ Iesus our Lord and Sauiour to the histories of holy Scripture of no greater discernable certainty then the beliefe we yield to humane traditions I appeale to the conscience of euery true Christian whether he do not most cleerely discerne his assent to the Truths of holy Scripture to be superiour and incomparably more firme then his beliefe of meere humane storyes That the Serpent spake vnto Eue and persuaded her to eat of the forbidden tree that our first Parents were naked and did not perceiue it till they had eaten of the forbidden apple these storyes other the like would any Christian belieue them yea would they not laugh at them as they doe at Aesops Fables were they not of more credit with them then Caesars Commentaries or Salusts histories as this man * Pag. 327. n. 5. saith they are not That God requires not any thing of vs but only reason That he exacts no more then that we belieue the misteries of Christian Fayth with
I cannot perceiue some fallacy in my reasons against it or neuer hereafter open your mouth in defence of it I answere it seemes to me that your reasons are already sufficiently prooued to be fallacyes since from them either nothing can be deduced for your purpose or else you must acknowledge your selfe to haue no certainty that there is a God that vertue is to be imbraced or that Christian Fayth is euen probable 7. And yet I adde that you must in another respect also solue your owne obiections Remember these your words (zz) Pag. 36.37 Yet all This I say not as if I doubted that the spirit of God being implored by deuout and humble prayer and sincere obedience may and will by degrees aduance his seruants higher and giue them a certainty of adherence beyond their certainty of euidence And elswhere (a) Pag. 112. Gods spirit if he please may work more a certainty of adherence beyond certainty of euidence Now you caÌ„not deny but that these men may be tempted against their Fayth by inuoluntary doubting that they may increase in it that they may commit some deliberat sinne and may make daily progresse in Charity and good workes euen by the greater increase of their Fayth and yet you graunt them a certainty of adherence beyond their certainty of euidence And so in this case your selfe must answere your owne arguments and confesse them to be but fallacies Euen your maine reason that Christian Fayth can be endued with no stronger certainty then the probable motiues on which it relyes by this selfe same instance is proued a Sopbisme For now you grant a certainty of Fayth not without probable arguments of credibility yet not for them it being more certaine then they are and therefore you are still put vpon a necessity of answering your owne arguments And whereas pag. 330. you make a shew of answering this particuler obiection really you do not answere but plainly contradict your self labouring to prooue that it is impossible that there should be a certainty of adherence beyond the certainty of euidence as the Reader may cleerly see and shall be demonstrated in due time 8. One thing more I must not let passe and it is That whereas you say We would fayne haue Christian Fayth belieued to be infallible that there might be some necessity of our Churches infallibility it seemes you are apt inough to yield infallibility to Gods Church if once it be granted that Christian Fayth is infallible And with good reason For seeing you teach that vniuersall Tradition and other arguments of credibility cannot produce an infallible beliefe of holy Scripture and of the mysteries belieued by Christians it must follow that some other infallible meanes must be found out for the propounding to vs the holy Scriptures which other infallible meanes euen according to your persuasion being not Scripture it selfe nor euery mans priuate spirit there remaynes only the authority of the Catholicke Church which as an instrument of the holy Ghost may be an infallible propounder both of Scripture and all diuine verities Wherein there is a large difference betweene the Church and other Iudges These in their sentences or determinations intend not to deliuer points of infallible Fayth as the Church must intend and do it if once it be granted that from her we must receiue holy Scriptures and belieue them with a certaine and infallible assent of Christian Fayth The second Doctrine Chap. 3. That the assurance which we haue of Scriptures is but morall CHAP. III. 1. THis man magnifies holy Scriptures in many places as the only thing on which he relyes his Saluation but whosoeuer shall walke along with him from place to place marke well his wayes will find that they lead to the quite contrary and shew that he neither doth value them to their right worth nor doth lay any other grounds but such as are more apt to breed disesteeme then esteeme of them This may be seene in that he teacheth (b) Pag. 141. 62. That our assurance that the Scripture hath been preserued from any materiall alteration and that any other booke of any profance writer is incorrupted is of the same kind and condition both morall assurances 2. If this may be allowed it must necessarily follow that the assurance which we haue of Scripture must in degree be much inferiour to the assurance which we haue of such bookes of prophane Authors as haue a more full testimony and tradition of all sorts of men to wit Atheists Pagans Iewes Turkes Christians wheras the bookes holy Scripture are either vnknowne or impugned by all except ChristiaÌ„s by some also who would beare of Christians and consequently the morall assurance of them and of the incorruptednesse of them is the much the lesse and of lesse morall credit And by so same reason whosoeuer builds vpoÌ„ this mans grouÌ„ds cannot haue so great assurance that there was a Iesus Christ that he had disciples and much lesse that he wrought wonderous things and lesse then this that those wonders were true miracles as that there was a Coesar Alexander Pompey c. or that they fought such battailes and the like For these things descend to vs by a more vniuersall tradition then the former (c) Pag. 116. Do not your selfe speake thus We haue as great reason to belieue there was such a man as Henry the Eight King of England as that Iesus Christ suffered vnder Pontius Pilate You should haue said we haue greater reason to belieue it if we consult humane inducements only and consequently if Christian Fayth be not absolutely infallible euen aboue the motiues of credibility we are more certaine that there was a King Henry then a Iesus Christ A thing which no true Christian can heare without detestation 3. That which followes out of the same 116. page is of the like nature laying a ground for vn wary people to reiect Scripture For hauing spoken of some barbarous Nations that belieued the doctrine of Christ and yet belieued not the Scripture to be the word of God (d) Pag. 116. for they neuer heard of it and Fayth comes by hearing you adde these words Neither doubt I but if the bookes of Scripture had byn proposed to them by the other parts of the Church where they had been before receiued and had been doubted of or euen reiected by thâ—se barbarous nations but still by the bare beliefe and practise of Christianity they might be saued God requiring of vs vnder paine of damnation only to belieue the verities therein contained and not the diuine authority of the bookes wherein they are contained 4. If this be granted why might not any Church haue reiected the Scriptures being proposed by other parts of the Church And why may not we do so at this day Nay seeing de facto we know the verities of Christian Fayth by Scripture only according to your doctrine we cannot be obliged to belieue the Scriptures
should subiugate their vnderstandings to the beliefe of contradictions which yet as I said before he iudgeth either impossible or at least vnreasonable (d) Ibid. And who I pray can vndertake against a cauilling wit to answere all arguments obiected against the Blessed Trinity Incarnation and other sublime verityes of Christian Fayth and compose all seeming repugnances after an intelligible manner Deuines are not ignorant what inexplicable difficulties offer themselues euen concerning the Deity it selfe for example his Immutability Freedom of will voluntary decrees knowledge of creatures and the like Must we then deny them because we are not able to compose all repugnances after an intelligible manner It may seeme that you are of opinion that we must to which persuasion if you adde another Doctrine of yours That there is no Christian Church assisted with Infallibility fit to teach any man euen such articles as are fundamentall or necessary to saluation but that euery one may and must follow the Dictates of his owne reason be he otherwise neuer so vnlearned what wil follow but a miserable freedome or rather necessity for men to reiect the highest and most diuine misteries of Christian Fayth vnlesse you can either compose all repugnances after a manner euen intelligible to euery ignorant and simple person which I hope you will confesse to be impossible or els say it is reasonable for men to belieue contradictions at the same time which by your confession were very vnreasonable 5. And here I appeale to your owne Conscience whether in true Philosophy the obiections which may be made against the mystery of the Blessed Trinity and the Incarnation of the sonne of God be not incomparably more difficult then any which can be brought against Trāsubstantiation Some one whom you know could say in some company where there was occasion of arguing Either deny the Trinity or admit of Transubstantiation and it was answered We will rather admit this then deny that And with good reason For if we respect human discourse there are more difficult obiections against that mistery then against this And if we regard Reuelation Scripture is more cleare for the reall presence and Transubstantiation then for the mystery of the Blessed Trinity But no wonder if they who reduce all certainty of Christian Fayth to the weight of naturall reason are well content vnder the name of Transubstantiation to vndermine the doctrine of the Blessed Trinity and all the prime verityes proper to Christian Fayth For which cause I haue some reason as I touched before (d) Chap. 6. n. 6. not to be satisfyed that this man for all his bragges of belieuing Scripture doth make that account of it which Christians doe and ought to doe but deludes the Reader with specious words as for example when speaking of the holy Scripture he sayes (e) Pag. 376. Propose me any thing out of this Booke and require whether I belieue it or not and seeme it neuer so incomprehensible to human reason I will subscribe it with hand and hart as knowing no demonstration can be stronger then this God hath said so Therefore it is true These are glorious words but contrary to his owne principles For resoluing Fayth into Reason he cannot belieue that which to his reason seemes contradictory but must thinke that the Motiues for which he receiues Scripture being but probable and subiect to falshood must of necessity yield to arguments more then probable and demonstratiue to human reason And how then can he subscribe to Mysteryes incomprehensible to human reason and capable of obiections which cannot alwayes be answered after a manner intelligible as he requires And consequently he must to vse his owne words giue me leaue to belieue that either he doth not belieue those misteryes or els that he subiugates his vnderstanding to the beliefe of seeming contradictions which he acknowledges to be vnreasonable and a thing which men should not doe according to his owne words (f) Pag. 217. And the Reader had need to take heed that he be not taken also with that protestation of his (g) Pag. 376. I know no demonstration can be stronger then this God hath said so Therefore it is true since he teaches that he knowes not that God hath said so otherwise then by probable inducements and only by a probable assent So that in fine this must be his strong demonstration Whatsoeuer God speakes or reueales is most certainly true But I am not certaine that God speakes in the Scripture Therefore I am certaine that whatsoeuer is in Scripture is true Behold his demonstration that is a very false Syllogisme according to his owne discourse in another place where he not only graunts but endeauours to prooue that the minor of this Demonstration exceedes not probability and consequently cannot inferre a conclusion more them probable Somewhat like to this is an other cunning speach of his (h) Pag. 225. n. 5. That he hartily belieues the Articles of our Fayth be in themselues Truths as certaine and infallible as the very common principles of Geometry or Metaphysicke Which being vnderstood of the Obiects or Truths of Christian Fayth in themselues is no priuiledge at all For euery Truth is in it selfe as certaine as the Principles of Geometry it being absolutely impossible that a Truth can be falshood But the point is that he does not certainely know or belieue these Truths as he does the Principles of Metaphysicke but onely with a probable assent and so to him the Truths cannot be certaine The like art also he vses pag. 357. saying in these wordes I doe belieue the Gospell of Christ as verily as that it is now day that I see the light that I am now writing for all this florish signifies only that he is certaine he belieues the Gospel of Christ with probable assent As for the argument it deserues no answere For who knowes not that contradictories inuolue two propositions but he who captiuates his vnderstanding assents to one part only Chap. 10. and therefore is sure inough not to belieue contradictories at the same time as he pretends All which considered the Reader will easily see that his Doctrines vndermine the chiefest mysteries of Christian Fayth and ouerthrow Christianity The ninth Doctrine Layes grounds to be constant in no Religion CHAP. X. I. I Said in the beginning that as we could not know the way vnlesse we first be told whither we goe so it could litle auayle vs to be put in a way if by following it we might be misled But suppose the end of our iourney be knowne and the right way found what better shall we be if withall we be continually harkning to some suggestions which neuer let vs rest till we haue abandoned that path by following other crosse-wayes as we chance to fall vpon them This is the case of the man with whome we haue to deale I will not build vpon his deeds I meane his changes first from Protestant to
of no other Happines but the preseruation of their owne fortunes in this world for hauing punished Heretiques euen with death I leaue to be considered by higher Powers 2. Chap. 11. I grant he would seeme to mitigate his doctrine and confine it within certaine limits but such that his exception is worse then his generall Rule vnlesse I mistake his meaning therefore present his words as they lye to the Readers iudgment There is saith he no daunger to any State from any mans opinion vnlesse it be such an opinion by which disobedience to Authority or impiety is taught or licenced which sort I confesse may iustly be punished as well as other faults or vnlesse this sanguinary doctrine be ioyned with it That its lawful for him by human violence to enforce others to it Thus he As for his first limitation it either destroyes all that he said before or els it is but a verball glosse for his owne security For if he grant that euery Heresy is impiety and brings with it disobedience to Authority as certainly it does if it be professed against the lawes of the Kingdome or Decrees and Commaunds of the Church State Prelats where the contrary is maintained If I say his meaning be this then his former generall Doctrine vanisheth into nothing it will still remaine true that men may be punished for their opinions heresyes But if his meaning be that no opinion is to be punished except such as implyes disobedience to Authority or licenseth Impiety in things which belong meerely to Temporall affayres and concerne only the ciuill comportment of one man to another as theft murther and the like then he still leaues a freedome for men to belieue and professe what they please for matters of Religion And so if they iudge a thing to be vnlawfull which their Superiours affirme to be indifferent yet they may hold their opinion and disobey their Prelates and may be able to tel them from this mans doctrine that to enforce any man in points of this kind is vnlawfull Machiauillian Policy 3. His second limitation seemes to goe further telling vs that a maÌ„s opinion may be punished if this sanguinary doctrine be ioyned with it That it is lawfull for him by human violence to enforce others to it FroÌ„ whence for ought I can perceiue it cleerly followes that if any Church prescribe some forme of Beliefe and punish others for belieuing and professing the contrary the Prelats or others of that Church who coÌ„curre to enforce by punishment such contrary belieuers may themselues be iustly punished As if for example an Arian be punished with Death in any Kingdome the Prelats or other Persons of authority in that State may according to his doctrine be lawfully punished as holding it lawfull to enforce men against their conscience which he calles a sanguinary Doctrine How daungerous a position this might prooue if Arians or Socinians or any other sect or vnquiet spirit could preuaile in any Kingdome or Commonwealth where Hereticks are punished it is not fit for me to exaggerate being sufficient for my intention to haue made it cleere that the enemy of mankind could neuer haue inuented a more effectual meanes then this freedome of opinion and encouragement by impunity for the enlarging of his infernall Kingdome by Heresy Paganisme Atheisme and in a word by destroying whatsoeuer belongs to Christianity 4. As for punishing Heretiks with Excommunication in words he grants it may be done but I haue reason to suspect what his meaning is indeed whether he speake thus only for some respects For I know that a great Socinian hath printed the contrary Iren. Philal disp de Pace Eccles And if no man can be punished with temporall punishmeÌ„t for imbracing that which his Conscience persuades him to be Truth how can he be lawfully punished by Excommunication for doing that which to his vnderstanding he is obliged to do For not acknowledging any authority of Church or Prelats indued with infallibility he is still left to his owne reason Besides one effect of excommunication is to exclude the Person so censured from the ciuill conuersation with others other temporall punishments in all Courts being also consequent to it Seeing then he denyes that men are to be punished for their opinions by Temporall punishments he cannot with coherence affirme that they may lawfully be excommunicated This certainly being a greater enforcement then death it selfe to such as vnderstand the spirituall benefits and aduantages of which men are depriued by that Censure The Conclusion 1. By that which hath been said in these few precedent Chapters it euidently appeares first how fitting it was for the good of our Country in these present circuÌ„stances that people should haue learned by some such Treatise as the Direction to beware of impious Doctrines such as were foreseene that this maÌ„ would vent vnder colour of defending the Protestant cause and answering Charity maintayned And that although nothing could be intended more disgracefull to Protestant Religion then to see a Champion a way chosen to defend it which openly destroyes all Religion yet Compassion could not but worke in a wel-wishing soule and mooue it to desire and to endeauour that such a way should not be taken which might make people more and more insensible of any Religion by blurring the common principles of Christianity and digging vp the foundation thereof to lay insteed of them the grounds of Atheisme 2. Secondly though this hath not taken the full effect which could haue been wished that notwithstaÌ„ding the warning giuen he hath interlacâ—d his whole booke with such stuffe as here you haue seene yet this we haue gotten further that it is discouered cleerly to the world how deeply Socinianisme is rooted in this man and as it is to be feared in many others with whome he must needes haue had much conference since his vndertaking the worke in regard that no timely aduise or Direction no force of reason no feare of shame or punishment no former impressions of Christianity could withdraw him from steeping his thoughts and pen in such vn-Christian inke nor the many Corrections endeauoured by the Approouers of his Booke blot out his errours though in respect of the alterations which haue been by report made in it by them it is quite another thing from the first platforme which he drew and put into their hands and consequently how iust reason the Directour had to suspect that his true intention was not to defend Protestantisme but couertly to vent Socinianisme 3. Now thirdly whether it be not high time that people should now at the least open their eyes vpon this second warning and take that order which may be conuenient to preuent the spreading of so pernicious a Sect I must leaue to the consideration of euery one whome it may concerne I do only for the present wish from my hart that the maintayning of that Blessed Title and State of Christianity of which our Countrey hath been for so many ages possessed may be the effect both of this mans wauering and wandering trauells and of these my labours FINIS Errata PRaesat pag. 10. lin 25. to our nation corrige of our nation Ibid. pag. 11. lin 26. with corrige with Pag. 32. lin 3. is the corrige is so Ibid. lin 4. by so corrige by the Pag. 53. lin 21. Christ is God lege is the Sonne of God In the margent pag. 11. ouer against S. Bernard eited line 3. put Bernard Epist. 87.
because the verities therein contained are necessary to be belieued for this very necessity you cannot belieue but by belieuing aforehand the Scripture but contrarily you may reiect the verities themselues if you be not preobliged to belieue the diuine authority of the bookes wherein they are contained 5. Againe you say that Scripture is the only Rule of Christian Fayth (e) Cap. 2 per totum yet it is not necessary to Saluation to belieue it to be a rule of Fayth no nor to be the Word of God The first part of this doctrine is the scope of your whole second Chapter The second is taught purposely and at large in the same Chapter (f) Pag. 116. pag. 116. n. 159. Ioyne these two assertions and the Conclusion will be That we are not obliged to receiue that which is the only ordinary meanes of attayning Christian Fayth namely the Scriptures And therefore in the ordinary way we cannot be bound to imbrace Christian Fayth seeing it cannot be compassed without the meanes to attaine to it For how can one be obliged to attayne an end and yet be left free to reiect the only meanes of atchieuing that end I am the freer to make this question because you concurre with me in the answere when you say (g) Pag. 16. It was necessary that God by his prouidence should preserue the Scripture from any vndiscernable corruption in those things which he would haue knowne otherwise it is apparent it had not been his will that these things should be knowne the only meanes of continuing the Knowledge of them being perished Now is it not in effect all one whether the Scripture haue perished or whether it be preserued if in the meane time we be not bound to belieue that it is the Rule of Fayth and word of God Nay seeing as things now stand we may find the verityes contayned in Scripture sufficiently expressed in innumerable other bookes we may at this present in conformity to your doctrine reiect all the holy Scripture contenting our selues with the contents thereof taken from other Authors and not from the writers of the Bible 6. The Doctrine which he carryeth through his whole Booke but particularly insisteth vpon in his third Chapter that we cannot learne from Scripture it selfe that it is Canonicall but only from Tradition of men deliuering it from hand to hand is no lesse iniurious and derogatiue to holy Scripture then the former speaking of men in his sense that is not as endued with any infallible assistance of the holy Ghost which Catholicks belieue of the Church but only as wise or many men or for the like human qualifications for to this effect he sayth (h) Pag. 72. n. 51. Tradition is a principle not in Christianity but in Reason not praper to Christians but common to all men This is certainly the right course to blast the Authority of holy Scripture not to maintaine it For besides that which I haue touched already that by this meanes we are not so certaine of Scripture as of profane bookes he must come at length to resolue the beliefe of Scripture into the Tradition or Authority of Pagans Iewes Turkes or condemned Hereticks as well as of true Christiās For seeing errours against fayth or Heresies cannot in his principles be discerned but by Scriptures before they be receaued the testimony of one man concerning the admittance of them must weigh as much as of another and be considered only as prooceeding from a number of men be they faythfull or Infidels true Christians or condemned Hereticks 7. And further according to the same principles he must acknowledge that he belieueth some parts of Canonicall Scripture with a more firme assent then others to wit as they haue been deliuered with more or lesse generall consent or haue been more or lesse once questioned which is to depriue Canonical Scripture of all Authority For if once we giue way to more or lesse in the behalfe of Gods word we shall end in nothing And this hath the more force in this mans doctrine who professeth that the greatest certainty which he hath of any part of Scripture is within the compasse of probability What certainty then shall those Scriptures haue which participate of that probability in a lesse and lesse degree according as they haue been deliuered with different tradition and consent How this doctrine will sound in the eares of all true Christians I leaue to be considered contenting my selfe to oppose your Assertion with the discourse of D. King afterward Bishop of London in the beginning of his first Lecture vpon Ionas where amongst other things he sayes Comparisons betwixt Scripture and Scripture are both odious and daungerous The Apostles names are euenly placed in the writings of the holy foundation With an vnpartiall respect haue the children of Christs family from time to time receiued reuerenced imbraced the whole volume of Scriptures You on the other side speake in a different strayne and say thus (i) Pag. 67. n. 36. I may belieue euen those questioned Bookes to haue been written by the Apostles and to be Canonicall but I cannot in reason belieue this of them so vndoubtedly as of those bookes which were neuer questioned And elswhere The Canon of Scripture (k) Pag. 69. n. 45. as we receiue it is built vpon vniuersall Tradition For we do not professe our selues so absolutly and vndoubtedly certaine neither do we vrge others to be so of those Bookes which haue byn doubted as of those which neuer haue By this meanes what will become of the Epistle of S. Iames the second Epistle of S. Peter the second and third of S. Iohn the Epistle to the Hebrewes and the Apocalyps of S. Iohn And what part of Scripture hath not been questioned by some and those some so many as would haue made vs doubt of the works of Tully or Liuy c. if they had affirmed them not to haue been written by such Authours And the only doubting of Erasmus or some such other about the workes of some Fathers hath caused them to be questioned by diuers vpon much weaker grounds as difference of stiles or the like 8. In another place you tell vs (l) Pag. 68. n. 43. that to receiue a Booke for Canonicall it is inough to haue had attestation though not vniuersall yet at least sufficient to make considering men receiue them for Canonicall which were sometimes doubted of by some yet whose number and authority was not so great as to preuaile against the contrary suffrages Obserue vpon what inextricable passages and lesse degrees of probability this man doth put vs in our beliefe of holy Scripture First we must settle our Fayth on men then on considering men though the consent be not vniuersall thirdly vpon the greater and more preualent number and authority of suffrages as if the greater number alone without infallible assistance of the holy Ghost were a sufficient ground for Christian Fayth You deny pag.