be certaine in it selfe before the Church began to be The Church therefore must be that which giueth certainty to the doctrine or writings of the Apostles but rather their doctrine and writings do affoard sufficient certainty to the Church So Caluin Calu. lib. 1. â—nst c. 7 sect 2. Beza in 2. cap. ad Ephes v. 10. I answere first if we will follow the interpretation of this place alledged by Beza Caluins argument wil be nothing worth For Beza will haue this to be the sense of those words that the Church is built vpon Christ who is the ground and foundation of the Apostles and Prophets and he will haue only Christ to be the ground-worke and the Apostles and Prophets he saith were only as the Architects and builders of this Church as also all faythfull Ministers of Christ are at this day but not the ground it selfe Beza also addeth that he is truly Antichrist who attributeth that vnto himselfe which belongeth only to Christ that is to say to be the ground and foundation of the Church 8. Out of which doctrine of Beza it followeth manifestly that Caluin is truly Antichrist For he attributeth vnto all Ministers of the Church and to their doctrine and consequently vnto himselfe and his owne doctrine that they are the foundation of the Church but according to Beza whosoeuer attributeth this vnto himselfe is plainly Antichrist because he attributeth that vnto himselfe which only belongeth vnto Christ 9. Secondly I answere that yet whatsoeuer Beza sayth Caluins exposition is the trewer agreeing therin with S. Chrrsostome S. Chrys Hom. 6. inc 2. ad Ephes S. Aug. Tom. 8. in Psal 86. adv 1. Theoph in e. 2. Ephes S. Augustine Theophilact and other auncient Fathers that is to say that S. Paul in this place calleth the Apostles and Prophets the ground and foundation of fayth or that which is alone their doctrine for in the sameplace he compareth Christ to the chiese corner stone and the foundation of this spirituall building doth consist of many stones but there is one lowest and chiefest to wit Christ Iesus who supporteth all and who is that corner stone which vniteth Ephes 2. v. 14. the Iewes and Gentills togeather as S. Paul sayth in the same Chapter 10. Hence it is that S. Iohn in the Apocalyps affitmeth that this heauently Apoc. 2â— v. 14. Citty hath twelue foundations and not only one and Christ notwithstanding is S. Aug. Tom 8. in Psal 86. initio the chiefest of all the foundations and the foundation of foundations as S. Augustine sayth that is to say of all those twelue foundations he is the foundation 11 And heere the Apostle vseth tâ—e Hebrew phrase in which it is all one to say Vpon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets to say Vpon the Apostolicall and Propheticall foundation For the Hebrews Psal 5. v. 7. often vse the Genitiue case of the substantiue for the adiectiue as a man of bloud deceit in the fifth Psalme signifieth a blouby and deceitfull man 12. Furthermore that which Caluin sayth that the Apostolicall and Propheticall doctrine hath it certainty of it self before the approbation of the Church that indeed is true but this is the certainty which it hath of it owne nature from Cap. 13. praecedent §. 17. 19. God himselfe but in regard of vs it receiueth it certainty from the Church as Caluin and Bezâ— witnesse as we haue already declared 13. But Caluin erreth in this that he thinketh S. Paul to treate in this place of the Scripture only of the Apostles and Prophets For not only the Apostolicall Scripture is the ground of our faith but all the doctrine of the Apostles And few of the twelue Apostles to wit only fiue haue written any thing but of the other seauen there are no writings extant but yet they all taught the Apostle therfore speaketh of the Apostolicall doctrine and only of the Scripture 14. But neyther do we deny that fayth dependeth of the Apostles doctrine yea more then that we say that our faith dependeth of the doctrine of the present Church For when we affirme that the Church is the ground of our faith we ad Rom. 10. v. 17. do not vnderstand by the Church the shoulders or bodyes of them who are in her but their authority doctrine and preaching for by these thinges faith is ingendred and as the Apostle witnesseth faith is by hearing 15. But whensoeuer we treate of the true Church of Christ we do not speake of that which wanteth true faith which is deafe dumbe or foolish and which also eyther neglecteth or not vnderstandeth the Word of God or Scriptures for such a Church is not the true Church of Christ But we speake of that which belieueth which speaketh which preacheth the pure word of God which keepeth and expoundeth the Scriptures most faithfully and which fitâ—ly applyeth them in Sermons Exhoâ—tations AmoÌ„g vs therfore all these wordes haue one and the same signification the Church the faith of the Church the preaching and doctrine of the Church the word of God preached by the Church and the truth of God proposed vnto vs by the Church And we vnderstand all these thinges by the Name of the Church when we say that she is the grouÌ„d of our fayth For all these thinges are eyther properties actions or offices of the Church which cannot be separated from her 16. Wherefore our Aduersaries doe erre exceedingly wheÌ„ they separate euery one of these from the Church and oppose or obiect it against her as though it were a quite distinct thing from her nay of the true Church of Christ they make her the Sinagogue of Sathan Therfore the Apostolicall Propheticall doctrine must not be separated and made opposite vnto the Church as Caluin doth seeing that it is an essentiall part of the visible Church Caluin therfore disputeth as if one should make this argument A man without his soule neyther seeth speaketh nor vnderstandeth therefore a man neyther seeth speaketh nor vnderstandeth 17. But peraduenture some will say We haue said a little before that faith is the ground of the Church and now we say that the Church is the ground of faith wherof the one seemeth to be contrary to the other I answere that heerin there is no contrariety For there be two kindes of faith the one is the particuler faith of euery Christian wherby togeather with hope and charity euery one is iustified the other is the generall and common faith of the whole Church The particuler faith of ech one relyeth vpon the Church to wit vpon the faith preaching and authority of the whole Church But she her selfe relieth vpon the generall faith and profession and preaching therof in the whole Church which is an essentiall part of the visible Church When therfore we say that the Church is the ground of faith we speak of the particuler faith of euery Christian But when we say that
this office as we haue proued before 17. This continuall sucession is also a visible signe because in some parts or persons thereof it may be seene at all tymes as successiue and transitory things are wont to be seene for in this manner only can a riuer for example sake tyme it selfe be seene 18. Finally this signe is also certaine and euidently well knowne among the Infidells for vnlesse this succession be continuall the true Church of God shall altogeather perish and decay all honor worship of the true God wil be ouerthrowne and there will remayne no way for men to their eternall saluation But on the other side where there is a continuall succession and a neuer-interrupted continuance of the same Religion there appeareth sufficiently a great prouidence and a singular assistance of Almighty God towards men 19. Furthermore that which we haue hitherto sayd of these foure signes might suffice but that the pertinacy and inconstancy of our Aduersaries is so very admirable and great For albeit in one place they acknowledge themselues to receiue Râ—â—ell Confess Art 5 in fine the Nicen Creed wherein these foure signes of the Church are expresly conteined yet notwithstanding els where when they see themselues manifestly conuinced Extatbis lib. in 3. volumâ— Tract Theol. Bezae Tract 6. by these signes of perfidious dealing they do vterly reiect theÌ„ For Beza in his booke of the true visible signes of true Catholike Church wherin notwithstanding he goeth about nothing els but to establish those his inuisible markes of the Church albeit he affirmeth that his followers doe acknowledge all those Creedes which haue beene alwayes approued by the common HabeÌ„tur hâ—c p. 138. sub fin edit Geneu Anno. 1582. consent of the whole Church to wit that of the Apostles the Nicene that of S. Athanasius the Constantinopolitane and the Calcedon yet for all this he impugneth these markes of the Church of which he knoweth that he and his are altogether destitute and especially the fourth which is deduced from the Apostolicall succession 20. He therefore obiecteth these Ita Beza p. 137. in princip vbi supra signes that they are not proper vnto the Church quarto modo as Prophyrius and other Logitians define proprium quarto modo because they doe not agree to the true Church only For vnity and succession may also be found amongst wicked men as appeareth by the Iewes and Mahomets But these are easily answered For these signes are not alledged as properties quarto modo as Beza thinketh but rather as it were accidents by the collection wherof Indiuidua are distinguished one from another Porph. c. de specie inâ—â—â—e as the same Porphyrius teacheth for those accidents whereby Indiuidua are distinguished may be found separated one from another in diuers substances but not all gathered togeather in one 21. Wherfore seing that the Church is one singular and indiuisible we must not only alledge the properties thereof but also other signes as it were qualities and accidents whereby this true Church may be distinguished from all others For albeit some one or other of these signes may be found in some other things yet they cannot all fower togeather be found any where but in the true Church 22. Therefore any one of these signes considered by it selfe separateth the true Church from the false as for example the vnity of doctrine and continuall succession doth separate and distinguish her from any hereticall Church but all these signes or markes ioyned and vnited togeather do distinguish the Church of Christ altogeather from euery false Church and this is sufficient that they may be called most true signes in their kind Supr c. 1. huius coÌ„trouers 23. We surely haue already in the beginning of the precedent controuersy spoken of the true properties of the Church to wit wheÌ„ we declared that she is the spouse body Kingdome inheritance and citty of Christ for these are propria quarto modo and in this manner they all alwayes and only agree to the true Church of Christ 24. Moreouer seeing that these properties are so inuisible as that they cannot be perceyued by any sense but only by faith they are not sufficient to conuince Infidels Heretikes and others which want true fayth and for this cause other visible signes are also necessary which may be perceyued by all as also conuince them of which sort are these foure signes which we haue now alledged 25. That in the meane tyme we may omit that the late and new vpstart Churches of our Aduersaries are so much worse then the Churches of Iewes and Infidels because sometymes in these some one or other of the aforesayd signes may Infr. cap. 22. huius Controu be found But in our Aduersaries Church as we will shew herafter not one of them can be found CHAP. III. That the Roman Church only is the true Church of Christ is proued by the properties of the true Church HITHERTO we haue described out of holy Scripture the true Church of Christ and that by the properties offices and peculiar signes therof Now it remaineth that we by the same enquire and examine in what part or place of the world this true Church of Christ may be found the which will easily be done if we declare that all these propertyes offices and signes must needes agree to some one We therefore do affirme that all the offices properties and signes of the true Church do only agree to the Roman Church 2. It is heere notwithstanding to be considered least some perchance by the ambiguity or equiuocation of the word be deceyued that we doe not vnderstand by the Roman Church that which is only at Rome as our Aduersaries go about to perswade the ignorant but plainly euery Church which agreeth in the vnity of the same faith with the Roman and which obeyeth the Bishop of Rome whersoeuer that Church be whether at Rome or els where yea euen the furthest part of the Indyes Moreouer that this Roman Church thus vnderstood is the only true Church of Christ and consequently that out of her we cannot hope for eternall saluation seing that out of the true Church as we Cap. 1. buius Controuers haue sufficiently declared before we cannot be saued we will euidently demonstrate by all the properties offices and signes before alledged of the true Church And first we will speake of the properties to wit of those which agree vnto her quarto modo For all these do very well agree to the Roman Church and to no other The which we declare in this manner 3. First the Roman Church is the espouse of Christ For that she was betrothed and espoused vnto Christ by trueÌ„ faith those wordes of the holy Scripture do plainly testify Your faith saith the Apostle Rom. 1. v. 8. writing to the Romans is renowned in the whole world And a little after S. Paul professeth himselfe to agree in the vnity of faith
matters all should imbrace or follow besides that euery one teacheth what he listeth and euery one of them disdayneth to be reprehended or corrected by another wherby there must needes arise many iarres and contentions among them 4. But in the Roman Church it is far otherwise For if there arise any question or Controuersy which can be desined and determined by the word of God presently the Church of Rome endeth this Controuersy and forbiddeth vnder payne of excommunication any to teach the contrary and by this meanes euery Controuersy in matters of faith amongst Catholikes is forthwith ended But if the matter be obscure and cannot easily be gathered out of the word of God nor be very necessary to saluation then the Roman Church commaundeth both parties that one of them do not condemne the others opinion as we see practised concerning the Conception of the B. Virgin Mary And in this manner all matters of Controuersy are ended and taken away Vide Conc. Trid. sect 5. post Canon 5. The Lutherans being conuinced by â—his argument doe acknowledge that the â—opes Supremacy is very profitable and neâ—essary for the Church for the preseruatioÌ„â—f this vnity and good agreement in all â—inges as a little after we will euidentâ— Infr. cap. 24. §. 4. sequent Coccius l. â— â—itato Art 11. idem â—odâ— lib. Ar. 12. 13. 14. demonstrate out of their owne wriâ—ngs 5. Secondly as concerning the sanâ—tity and holinesse of the Church Coccius â—eclareth very well and briefly that euen â—rom the very first beginning till now â—â—re haue alwaies byn some holy and â—â—dly persons in the Church of Rome Yea that also there neuer wanted soâ—â— Calu. coÌ„c 10. Gall. in Epist ad Eph. coÌ„c 10. in cap. 11. Epist 1. ad Cor. con c. 9. sub fin in 1. ad Tim. who did very strange and miraculous things Moreouer in the same places he proueth manifestly the great impiety and wickednesse of our Aduersaries and that there were neuer any true miracles wrought by any of them Yea Caluin himselfe doth often confesse and acknowledge the dishonesty and wickednesse of his followers to be very great 6. That it cannot most certainly be the true Church of Christ which altogeather is destitute of the gift of miracles sufficiently appeareth by those words of Christ These signes shal follow those thaâ— Marc. vlt. c. 17. 18. belieue in my name they shall cast out Diuellâ— they shal speake with new tongues serâ—ents shall they take away and if they drinke any deadly thingâ— it shall not hurt them they shall impose hands vpon the sicke and they shal be whole And that this promise of Christ is not only to be restrained to the Apostles tyme we must needs confesse vnlesse we will say that the authority to preach the Ghospell to administer the Sacraments of Baptisme the which are coÌ„teyned in the same promise did only appertayne to the Apostles tyme. But that the Saâ—nts of God which liued in the Roman Church haue done all those miracles which Christ recounteth in the forsayd place is manifest by that which Cocc art 13. citat Coccius relateth of them 7. But heere it is diligently to be coÌ„sidered that the impiety or lacke of all holinesse in our Aduersaries is not casuall or accidentary vnto them as it is with vs that iâ— flowing from the malice of man but it proceedeth out of the very doctrine of our Aduesaries For they teach that none can truly haue their sinnes forgiuen them that none can haue any true holinesse before God that none can haue any freewill to doe good works that noe worke of a iust man caÌ„ be perfect or meriâ—â—rioâ—â— before God that all things aswell the bad as the good are done by a certayne necessary predestination of God that noe satisfaction for our sinnes is necessary that we need not confesse our sinnes that good workes are not necessary to saluation and life euerlasting that Gods commaundements are impossible and such other paradoxes wherof we will speake more heerafter All which doe vehemently incite and stirre vp men to all sinne and iniquity But on the other syde the whole doctrine of the Roman Church inflameth continually the harts of men with the loue of vertue and the exercise of good workes 8. Thirdly the Roman Church may truly be called Catholike and that it is no lesse Catholike now then it was in the tyme of the auÌ„cient holy Fathers both we haue sufficiently declared before and Thomas Bozâ—uâ— proueth at large For albeit Sâ—prac 10. huius Cont. §. 14. Bozius de signâ—s Eccles the Roman fayth may seeme to haue failed in some place of Europ yet notwithstanding it hath meruailously increased and still daily increaseth in Asia Africa and those wide countries of the East and VVest Indies But it is certayne that our Aduersaries Churches are wholy destitute of this marke and signe 9. Finally that the Roman Church may truly be called Apostolicall it appeareth sufficiently by the continuall succession of Pastours euer since S. Peters tyme to Paul the fift who is now the supreme Pastor of the Roman Church The which succession Cocc l. 8. citat art 2. is briefly related by Coccius but our Aduersaries can neuer shew the like 10. And Caluin cannot deny but that those holy Fathers Irâ—naeus Augustine Calu. l. 4. instit c. 2. Sect. â— subfinem Optatus and many others disputing with old heretikes vsed this argument the which is deduced from the continuall succession of the Popes of Rome But sayth he they did so because till their tyme there was nothing of the doctrine deliuered vnto them by the Apostles changed at Rome Neyther as yet is there any of that doctrine changed which was at Rome in S. Augustines tyme and besids the same succession Calu. â— â— cit sect 2. continueth still For we do not say as they falsely slaunder vs that the succession only of persons without true doctrine is sufficient but we vrge a continuall succession aswell of persons as of doctrine seeing that no doctrine can consist or remayne without those persons which teach it CHAP. VI. That the Church of the Citty of Româ— is the chiefest of all the visible Churches of Christ is clearly conuinced by the holy Scriptures BESIDES those arguments hitherto alledged out of the properties offices and signes of the true Church wherby we haue proued the Roman Church to be the true Church of Christ there are some other reasons which may be deduced out of holy Scriptures wherof see Bellarmine and Sanders Bell. SaÌ„der locis citat supr cap. 2◠§. 27. in fiâ—e we according to our accustomed breuity will only bring two principall places for this purpose wherby it is manifestly declared that the Roman Church is not only the true Church but that also that which is now in Rome is more eminent and famous then all other Churches of Christ as the successor of S. Peter the Prince of
diuers mysteries which lye hidden in the Hebrew text and cannot sufficiently be explicated in Latin wordes may be the better vnderstood And lastly that we may the more fully attayne vnto the force and Emphasis of that holy tongue 3. But as for the Hebrew text now extant we do not acknowledge it to be of so great either authority or perspicuity as our Aduersaries pretend and we further deny that the vulgar EditioÌ„ wherinsoeuer it differeth from it is to be corrected by it and that for two reasons The first is for that the Hebrew text though neuer so incorrupt further then it is approued by the authority of the Church is much more doubtfull and vncertayne then the Latin The other reason is for that the Hebrew text which is now in vse is in maâ—y places corrupted and depraued in which the vulgar Edition is entire and vncorrupted Both these reasons shâ—lbe confirmed in the ensuing Chapters which the learned Reader may see in the Latin edition from the seauenth Chapter to the 14. all which I haue omitted to put into English because I intend to help the lesse learned who are not so capable of that so profouÌ„d and learned a discourse CHAP. VII Of our Aduersaries new Translation of the Bible THE Catholike Church of Christ not without good cause doth reiect and condemne our Aduersaries new Translations of the Bible and that for many reasons The first and most iust reason is because such their translations are replenished with errors which haue byn inuented eyther by Ieâ—â—es or Heretikes wherof see many examples in the precdent Chapters of the Latin edition but we in this Chapter will set downe three other causes or origens from whence these errors spring wherby it shall further appeare that our Aduersaries can set out no Translation which shall not be sound full of many great errors 2. The first cause is for that our Aduersaries eyther contemne or make little account of the translations and interpretations of the Fathers and imploy all their labour in finding out all the versions and interpretations and expositions of the Iewes which they highly extoll commend so as in their Commentaries vpon the old Testament you shall see them cite Thargus Rabins and such other Thalmudicall fictions but especially Rabbi Dauid Kimhi whom sometimes they call learned sometymes the most learned among the Hebrewes But of the auncient Fathers no mention at all for if there be it is for the most part eyther to taxe or manifestly to oppugne or euen to corrupt their writings 3. Now what can be more vnreasonable or absurd then to begge the true sense of the Scripture of the Iewes who 2. Cor. 3. v. 14. 1. Thess c. 2. v. 15. 16. lacke faith and who haue a veyle ouâ—r their hartes when they read the old Testament with whome God is not pleased and who are Aduersaries to all men vpon whom the Anger of God is come to the end who peruert all the oracles of the Prophets that appertayne to Christ and lastly who are the most malicious enemies of Christians And on the other side to despise the excellent Doctors of Christs Church who euen in the iudgment of our Aduersaries were indued with the Rom. 8. v. 9 Eph 4. v. 14. true faith full of the holy Ghost raâ—sâ—d by God and placed in the Church to the end we should not be carried about with euery wind of doctrine who haue dâ—fended the faith against all heâ—esies who haue sincerely instructed the faithfull people in the mysteries of the Christian faith who haue faithfully set downe to Posterity the sense and interpretation of the Scriptures which they receâ—ued froÌ„ the Apostles 4. Moreouer wheras no man can 2. Cor. 12. v. â—â— â—8 â— Pet. 1. v. 20. 21. rightly interprete the Scriptures who hath not recâ—aued from God the gift of the interpretation which is not giuen but to the members of Christ and his Church only it is apparent â—nough how much more salfe it is to follow such holy Doctors then the impious Iewes who are wrapt in the snares of the Diuell and hâ—ld 2. Tim. â— v. vâ—t Mat. 15. v. 14. captiue at his will And seeing that saying oâ— Christ is most true if the blind lead the blind they hoth fall into the ditch it cannot be but our Aduersaries blind and destitute of the light of faith and led by the bliâ—d Iewes must needes fall downe headlong and breake their neckes 5. Heerehence it is that our Aduersaries do insert into the new Translations almost all the places of Scripture corrupted by the Iewes and that they deny togeather with the Iewes many oracles of the prophets to be vnderstood of Christ and many wayes wrest euen those oracles which they caÌ„not deny to be vnderstood of Christ from that true sense in which they are cited in the new Testament by the Apostles Euangelists and Christ himselfe to prophane impious senses lately inuented by the Iewes out of their hatred to Christ 6. The second cause is that they desire nothing more then in their translations to depart from the vulgar edition the which seeing it is most sincere and correct they which almost in all thinges leane it must needes fall into many errors 7. The third cause is the malicious intention of our Aduersaries who set forth new Translations of the Scripture for no other end then by them to oppugne the Catholike doctrine and to establish and confirme their owne errors and heresies and therefore when any plain text occurreth which maketh manifestly against their erroneous doctrine they seeke to make obscure the true and proper sense by their peruerse translation but if they light vpon any place somewhat obscure which may seeme to sauour their doctrine they so depraue it by their new translation that the Scripture it selfe may seeme to confirme what they falsely teach and so by this meanes they must needes stuffe their translations with infinite corruptions For these three reasons therfore not without great reason Gretser tract de noua transtat in defen Bel. arm do we reiect our Aduersaries translations which so swarme with corruptions Many other reasons are both learnedly and largely set downe by Iames Gretser which we for breuity sake omit CHAP. VIII Of the Latin vulgar Edition OVR Aduersaries conuinced by the truth it selfe confesse sometymes that the vulgar Edition not only is to be preferred before all other latin Editions but euen before the Greeke text of the new Testament and the Hebrew text of the old for in many places reiecting them they follow our vulgar translation as may be seene in the Latin edition in the Chapters 8. 9. 10. 13. notwithstanding that in many other places they exceedingly inueigh against it and with great hostility oppugne it partily for that they see the same to contradict in many places their errors and partly also for that they labour by all meanes to peruert the text of the Scripture by their new
this Controuersy of the visible Church seing that Christ our Lord came into this world that he might make open and knowen the way to eternall sauation not to one Nation or age only but indeed to the whole world and all posterity it is a very absurd thing to thinke that this one only way to eternall saluatioÌ„ which is the true Church of Christ remayned hidden and vnknowen to all Nations for so many ages past CHAP. VII That this visible true Church of Christ cannot erre in matters of fayth NOTHING can be sayd more absurdly theÌ„ that the true Church of Christ can erre in matters of fayth and yet there is nothing which the Sectaries of this tyme do hold and defend with greater pertinacy not without iust cause for they see very well that it cannot be denyed but that the true Church of Christ hath for these many yeares past remayned still among Catholikes only visible as afterward we shall more clearly declare but if they should also graunt that this visible Church cannot erre they should ouerthow themselues by their owne confession Wherefore to the end they may still haue some corner or hole to slip out at they affirme that the true Church of Christ both hath erred still doth erre in points of faith Then the which nothing certainly is more absurd especially seing that they affirme that it hath erred not in things of small moment but in the principall and chiefest poynts of fayth which are playnly necesrary to eternall saluation yea also that it hath fallen into manifest Idolatry Moreouer that it hath not only fayled staggered in fayth hath publikely taught many errors against fayth but hath also compelled and forced by threats and torments all to Idolatry And lastly that it hath donne thus not only for the space of one yeare but for a thousand or at least 900. yeares All which how absurd they are we will now declare 2. But to the end that all which we are to say hereafter of this matter may be the better vnderstood we must note heere that when we affirme that the Church cannot erre in fayth that by this word fayth we vnderstand not only that inuisible fayth which is in our mind but also visible that is to say the publike doctrine of the whole Church which is proposed or set downe to be belieued of all Wherfore when we affirme that the Church cannot erre in matters of fayth we affirme also that the doctrine or points of fayth the which the Church of God setteth downe as the most certayne and vndoubted word of God cannot be false but the very word of God it selfe which I will clearly declare by these arguments 2. The first argument is deduced out Supr hâ— ipsa contro c. 1. of all those properties and offices of the true Church before alledged out of Scripture For the true fayth being once taken away all the foresayd properties of the Church must needes perish and all her offices must cease For the Church caÌ„ neyther be the spouse of Christ nor the bodâ— nor the Kingdome nor the inheritance nor the teÌ„ple of Christ without faith but neyther can the Church without faith the true doctrine therof eyther conceyue bring forth nouriâ—h gouerne or defend Christes flocke And in this manner the Church of Christ for so many ages had lost Supr c. 1. hâ—ius coÌ„tro all her properties had intermitted all her proper offices contrary to so many so cleare promises of holy Writ before alledged 4. The second argument is deduced out of most cleare testimonyes of holy Scripture which teach that the Church caÌ„not erre in faith For first Christ himself V. at 16. v. 18. affirmeth that the gates of hell shall not preuaile against the Church But if the Church could erre in faith the gates of hell for so many ages past had preuailed against her 5. Moreouer God speaketh thus by Isa 59. v. vlâ— his Prophet Isay of the Couenant of the new Testament This is my league with them saith our Lord my spirit which is in thee and my words which I haue put in thy mouth shall not departout of thy mouth out of the mouth of thy seed out of the mouth of thy seeds seed satthour Lord froÌ„ hence forth euen to the worlds end But in our Aduersaries opinioÌ„ the words which God hath put into the mouth of the Church had departed many ages out of her mouth 6. Lastly the Apostle affirmeth that the Church is the Pillar and stability of truth â— Tim. 1. v. 9. But if the Church could erre in faith and teach publikely against the word of God it should be the Pillar rather of falshood then of truth Some of our Aduersaries do aÌ„swere vnto this place that the church is called indeed the Pillar of truth because it doth not erre when it followeth and is agreable vnto the word of God yet neuerthelesse it erreth when it disagreeth from the word of God But this is a very friuolous answere For according vnto this interpretation euery Church of Heretikes of Iewes Turkes yea of the Diuels themselues should be the Pillar of truth For none of these erreth when it is agreable to the word of God But a Pillar is that which necessarily and alwaies vpholdeth that which it strengthneth and whose pillar it is wherfore the Church should not be the Pillar of truth vnlesse it alwaies sticke and be ioyned with the truth and vphould it Caluin therfore Calu. l. 4. Inst c. 2. sect 1. in fine coÌ„uinced by the euidence of the truth writeth that if the true Church be the Pillar of truth it is most certaine that the Kingdome where lyes falshood rargneth cannot be the true Church Thus Caluin 7. The third argument is deduced out of diuers Absurdities which ensue out of the doctrine of our Aduersaries The first absurdity is that the Apostles Creed were false wherin we belieue the holy Catholike Church For that Church cannot be holy which wanteth the true faith which reacheth falsities and wickednes which forceth all men to Idolatry 8. The second absurdity is that Christ himselfe and the holy Ghost should erre and teach thinges both false and wicked For the doctrine of the Church is not so Luc. 10. v. 16. Ioan. 14. v. 26. Act. 15. v. 28. much the doctrine of the Church as it is of Christ of the holy Ghost VVâ—o hear th you saith Christ heareth me and in another place The Paraclete the holy Ghost whom my Father will send you in my name he will teach you all thinges And tâ—e Apostles said It seemeth good to the holy Gâ—ost and to vs. Lastly God himself by his Prophet speaking vnto the Church affirmeth that his holy Spirit is in the Church and that he hath put his words into the mouth of the Church which shall neuer be taken out of her mouth from hence forth till the end of the world Wherefore if
the Church could erre in the doctrine of faith Christ also the holy Ghost and God himselfe should erre 6. The third absurdity is that a building could coÌ„sist stand without a fouÌ„dation For the fayth of Christ is the fouÌ„dation of the Church If yet sayth the Apostle you continue in the fayth grounded Colos 1. v. 19. and stable And in another place he teacheth that the Church is grounded vpon Ephes 2. v. 20. the doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets but the foundation being taken away the building must needs fall This absurdity is so manyfest that it forced Caluin to confesse this very truth which now we â—each to be euidently conuinced out of S. Pauls words If sayth he the doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets be the foundation of the Calu. l. 4. Instit c. 2. sect 1. Church take away that doctrine and how can the building stand Thus Caluin 10. The fourth absurditie is that the true Church should consist and be without her proper and essentiall forme no otherwise then if one should say that a true and liuing man might consist and be without his soule For the true faith and the true preaching thereof are as it were the essentiall formes of the Church Calu. l. 4. Inutit c. 2. sect 12. Caluin also acknowledgeth this absurdity when he writeth that the fayth of the Church being taken away there must needes follow the vtter ouerthrow of religion euen as the life of man is ouerthrowen and taken away if he be stabbed with a dagger or deadly wounded at the hart 11. The fourth argument is deduced out of the manifest contradictions which follow of the contrary doctrine For they who coÌ„â—eÌ„d that the true Church of Christ doth erre in fayth do not indeed know what they say for that is the only true Church of Christ which retayneth and kepeth still the name the sincere fayth of Christ but that is the false Church of Christ which only professeth the name of Christ but erreth in fayth Wherefore to say that the Church of Christ erreth in fayth is all one as to say that the true Church is not the true Church but the false which implieth a contradiction 12. The fift argument is deduced out of those things which our Aduersaries do graunt vnto vs. For the common Insraeâ— 18. huiuâ— Controu doctrine of our Aduersaries is as we will shew hereafter that the sincere preaching of the word of God and lawfull administration of Sacraments are the markes and signes of the true Church without which it cannot consist therfore it necessarily followeth that they must also admit that the true Church cannot erre in fayth and in the true preaching of the word of God For that Church caÌ„not sincerely preach the word of God who fouly erreth in points of fayth and in the Calu. l. 4. Instit cap. 2. sect â— cap. 8. sect 12. 13. true preaching therof Caluin also out of diuers places of Scripture doth proue that it is a false Church and not a true which erreth in the principall points of fayth and he acknowledgeth that the true Church cannot erre therein they being necessary to saluation Beza in like manner Bezain l. de Ecc. notis volum 3. Tract Theol. writeth that the true Church cannot erre in the chiefe poynts of fayth albeit he saith that it erreth in lesser matters the which distinction of poynts of fayth he hath takeÌ„ out of Caluin The Church therfore caÌ„not erre at the least in chiefe points Calu. l. 4. Instit c. 1. sect 12. of faith eueÌ„ in our Aduersaries iudgmeÌ„ts 12. Our Aduersaries heape togeather a great many of arguments but they are such as may easily be answered For whereas they know that their arguments are but weake and almost nothing wortâ— they endeauour by the multitude thereof to oppresse the truth or at the least to obscure hide it Many of them when they manifestly see that it is impossible that the true Church can consist or be without faith they craftily feygne that the Calu. l. 4. Instit cap. 2. sect 2. Controuersy betwixt vs is not of this matter but of some other far different that is to say of that vvhereof none euer doubteth so dealeth Caluin with vs. For when he had confessed that to be the false Church and not the true which erreth in principall poynts of fayth consequently that the true Church cannot erre herein as out of his owne words we haue already declared at the last he feigneth that the controuersy in this matter is not whether the Church can erre or no but whether she may erre if she take not for her companion the word of God Calu. l. 4. Instit c. 8. sect 13. 15. and that we affiâ—me that whatsoeuer she shall decree eyther without or besids the word of God that the same is to be accounted as a most certayne oracle of God But that he and his affirme that therfore the Church cannot erre because it permitteth it selfe to be directed and gouerned by the sayd word of God and because it teacheth nothing but out of the word of God But this is a meere slaunderâ— or there can no Catholike be found who doth not acknowledge that the Church permitteth it selfe to be directed in all things by the word of God Supra Contro 1. ca. 2. seing that the sole word of God is the obiect of faith as we haue sayd before wherfore the true Church proposeth nothing els vnto vs to be belieued with a Catholike fayth but the most sincere and true word of God But in this matter only is the controuersy betwixt vs and our Aduersaries that they acknowledg only the written word of the holy Scripture to be the true word of God but we not only Supr Contro 1. c. 25. sequen acknowledge the written word but also that which was preached and deliuered vnto vs by Christ and his Apostles Wherof we haue said inough in the precedent disputation 14. Some others by friuolous distinctions endeauour to hyde this their error and to obscure and darken most cleare perspicuous matters wheras notwithstanding in very truth they can say nothing cls but that which we haue already Philip de Moâ—nay Tract de Eccles c 2. taught For they inuent and imagine a twofold Church the one pure the other impure wherin they place euen Heretikes themselues this which is impure say they erreth in faith but not that which is pure But we acknowledge only one holy Catholik Church of Christ with the Creed of the Apostles that of the Councel of Nice we willingly yield vnto them their impure Church wherin the Heretiks are For none doubteth but that such a Church may erre But as this is a false not the true Church of Christ so of it is not this present Controuersy but only of the true and pure Church of Christ 15. Others distinguish the Church into
followeth the word of God and as long as the ordinary vocation remaineth in her But in vayne do they adde these conditions because we haue already proued that the true Church alwayes followeth the word of God nor can depart or decline in any sort from it For otherwise Supr c. praecedent ad Ephes 4. v. 11. 13. she were not the true Church of God but the Synagogue of Sathan And the Apostlâ— also expresly saith that the ordinary vocatioÌ„ of Pastors their continuall successioÌ„ shall remaine alwayes in the Church oâ— God vntill we meete all with Christ in the end of the world By which wordeâ— of the Apostle Caluin also and Beza being Calu. Bez. inea verba ad Ephes â—tem Cal. l. 4. Inst c. 3. sect 4. conuinced do confesse that there must alwaies be Pastours and Doctours in the Church of God and that the said Church cannot consist without them The same also their Confession made at Rochell acknowledgeth in the 25. article 9. Some of our Aduersaries doe heere obiect vnto vs the example of Christ and his Apostles for say they their doctrine was neuer approued by the auncient Church of the Iewes wheras notwithstanding it was extraordinary But this is a very friuolus and odious comparison of Christ and his Apostles with their ministers For it was expressely foretould by the Prophets that Christ was to abrogate the old Law and the carnall vocation and succession thereof and that he was to ordayne another more excellent and spirituall the which he effected indeed Wherefore seing that now the Apostles had another farre more excellent vocation instituted by Christ there was no reason they should aske any vocation from Moyses But we read no where that the vocation ordained by Christ was to be abrogated by any other whosoeuer but contrarywise the holy Scriptures do plainely teach that the vocation ordained by Christ should endure till the end of Matt. 28. v. vlt. Ephes 4. v. 2. 13. the world wherefore our Aduersaries can proue nothing by this argument vnlesse they will bring in and establish another Messias and a new Law-maker who hath authority to abrogate and change the law and vocation of Christ which is the blasphemy of both Turkes and Iewes FINIS OF THE GROVND OF FAITH The second Part of the second Controuersy CHAP. I. Whether the Church be the foundation and ground of our faith IF the pertinacy of our Aduersaries were not so great it were an easy matter to define this question out of those few wordes of the Apostle affirming that the Churh is the Pillar and Ground of truth for seing that our faith relieth vpon truth that is to say vpon the most true word of God and that 1. ad Tim. 3. v. 15. the Church is the Pillar and Ground of this truth it must needes follow that the Church is the Pillar and Ground of our faith as afterward we will declare more at large But because our Aduersaries goe about to obscure this great and renowned prayse of our Church we will treat of this matter more exactly especially Cap. 13. seq §. 16. because this is a question of great importance seing that theron dependeth our whole faith For euery thing relyeth and dependeth of his foundation Moreouer heereby is declared the great excellency and authority of the Church Hence also other opinioÌ„s of our faith are to be proued which our Aduersaries deny their errors confuted and they themselues very easily conuinced And that the true state of this Controuersie may the better be vnderstood three thinges are to noted 2. The first is that euery science and doctrine hath her grounds principles out of which all other thinges are deduced proued and do depend wherefore we must heere diligently examine and search out the true principles of our faith least otherwise our faith become doubtfull and vncertaine 3. The second is that there are two principles of our faith the one that God is true and the Author of truth the other that these thinges which we belieue are spoken and reuealed vnto vs by God There is lesse difficulty of the former principle For all who conâ—eâ—â—e that there is a God may easily know euen by natural reason that he is true or rather the very Truth it selfe And seeing that he is the chiefest good he can deceiue no body and seing that he is Wisdome it selfe he Ad Heb. 6. v. 18. cannot be deceyued Hereupon the Apostle taketh this as a principle manifestly knowne by it selfe It is impossible for God to lye 4. But the doubts and difficulties which we coÌ„câ—yue concerning matters of faith do especially arise of the secoÌ„d principle to wit because we know not certainly that such things as we belieue are reuealed by God for hence ariseth the whole coÌ„trouersy with Iewes Turkes Heretikes For all do coÌ„fesse that God is true but the Turkes say that their AlcoraÌ„ was reuealed vnto theÌ„ by God the Iewes their Talmud the Anabaptists their bible corrupted maymed by them the Anti-trinitarians their blasphemies vttered against the Blessed Trinity the Lutherans their opinions the Caluinists theirs and the Catholikes theirs And hence it is that we need greatly some sure foundation principle rule and meanes whereby we may know certainly which is the doctrine indeed reuealed by God and which is not otherwise our fayth will alwayes remayne doubtfull and vncertayne 5. The third is that God is accustomed three wayes to assure his Church of this his reuelation The first way is when God himselfe appeareth froÌ„ heauen and speaketh to his Church for so in times past he spake vnto all the children of Israel when he gaue them the tables of Exod. 20. v. 22. his Law in the mount Sinay 6. The second is when God speaketh to one alone from heauen and he sendeth him to the Church that he may reueale vnto the whole Church such things as God hath spoken vnto him So in tymes past in the old Testament God spake by Exod. 24. v. 2. 3. Ad Gal. 2. v. 12. himselfe to Moyses and Moyses reuealed the same things to the people And in the new Testament Christ in this manner reuealed his Ghosptell to S. Paul which he afterward reuealed vnto others But these two wayes are extraordinary and are ceased as all do coÌ„fesse excepting only a few Anabaptists and Swenkfeldians whose madnesse and folly all men disproue 7. The third way is ordinary which alwayes remaineth in the Church and whereof the whole controuersy is For almost all Lutherans the purer sort of Caluinists will haue the sole Scripture to be the foundation and rule wherby we may certainly know the true reuelation of Cal. l 1. Iustit c. 7. sect 1. 2. God from the false But Caluâ—n himselfe at the first blush seemeth to attribute this to the sole Scripture and very coÌ„tumeliously inueygheth against Catholikes who deny it whome therfore he calleth brawling and sacrilegious persons yet
perspicuously resolued Their first argument is if the authority of the Church were the ground of fayth then it would follow that our faith relied vpon men and not vpon God for the Church consisteth of men Our Aduersaries do often repeate and inculcate this argument vnto vs. I answeere that the same argument if it were any thing worth would also proue that we should not belieue Scriptures because althose who wrot the books of the Bibles were also men buâ—â—â— we do belieue their writinges not because they were men but because they had a certaine peculiar assistaÌ„ce of the holy Ghost who did so gouerne and direct them that they could not erre so in like manner we belieue the Church and make it the ground of our fayth not as it consisteth of men but as it hath a speciall and continuall assistance of the holy Ghost by whome she is continually gouerned and directed wherby it commeth to passe that she can neuer erre as we haue proued Cap. 7. praeced a little before 2. Wherefore to make the Church the ground of our fayth is nothing els then to make the holy Ghost and Christ himselfe the ground therof For it is he who speaketh vnto vs by the mouth of the Church according to that saying of S. Paul Seeke you an experiment of him that speaketh in me Christ And in another place speaking of his own 2. Cor. 13. v. 3. 1. Thess v. 8. doctrine he sayth therfore he that despiseth these things despiseth not man but God who also hath giueÌ„ his holy spirit in vs. But our Aduersaries do thinke speak too basely of the Church as though it consisted of men only as the Churches of Infidells and Heretikes seeing that the chiefe part of the true Church of Christ is the holy Ghost who is as it were the soule and spirit of the Church 3. But neither is this to make the Scripture or the holy Ghost subiect inferito our men as our Aduersaries are woÌ„t to cauil but oÌ„ly to shew that the holy Ghost is euery where conformable to himself that in all things he neuer differeth or disagreeth froÌ„ himselfe Whether he speak vnto vs by the holy Scripture or by the mouth of the Church as Caluin acknowledgeth Calu. l. 1. Instit c. 9. sect 2. disputing against the Anabaptists and Libertines who by such an argument went about to reiect the holy Scriptures to wit least the holy Ghost might be made subiect and inferiour vnto them 4. The second argument is that Christians may and ought to iudge and examine all things as the Apostle sayth therefore the spirit of euery Christian ought to be the grouÌ„d of al things I answere that by the same argumeÌ„t the Anabaptists Libertines 1. Cor. v. 15. reiectâ—d all the Scriptures that they might only retaine the spirit as witnesseth Caluin but badly for euen as Christians must discerne and iudge all things so must Calâ—â— c. 9. citat sect 1. they also obserue the rule and methode in iudging which the Scripture doth prescribe vnto them and which himselfe appointed but this rule is not euery ones priuate spirit but the spirit of the whole Church For it is altogeather necessary that the rule of fayth be most certayne free from all errors as the spirit of the whole Church is and not that of euery priuate man Hereupon sayth S. Iohn He 1. Ioan. 4. v. 6. which knoweth God heareth vs he who is not of God doth not heare vs in this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error We must tâ—erfore iudge of euery man by that they eyther heare or do not heare the Church c because they either agree or disagree from the spirit of the Catholike Church 5. The third argument is that Catholikes proue the Church and the authority thereof by the Scripture therfore Scripture is rather the ground of fayth then the Church I answere first that the proofe of the Church which is taken out of Scriptures when we dispute against heretikes is an argument called by Philosophers ad hominem and it is deduced out of the premises already graunted in which manner also the first principles or grounds of euery science may be proued and out of those thinges also which of themselues are not very strong and certayne So out of the old Testament agaynst the Iewes we proue the new Testament albeit this also is the ground of our fayth because the Iewes do admit and receiue the old Testament but not the new yea also euen out of the Iewish Talmud we proue many things against the Iewes because they admit and approue it as the word of God but yet their Talmud is not the ground of our fayth because this only is as I sayd an argument deduced out of such thinges as they graâ—â—t vnto vs. So in like maÌ„â—er because almost al heretikes admit the Scripture and reject the authority of the Church therefore when we dispute against them we proue the authority of the Church by the Scriptures as premisses already graunted by them But if we were to deale with Infidells or others who doe not admit the Scriptures then the sayd Scriptures were to be proued by the authority of the Church and not contrarywise For it is a thing farre better and more commonly knowne that there Infra 18. buius coÌ„ â—r §. 10. is a Church then that there are the holy Scriptures as afterward we will shew more clearly 6. Secondly I answere that there is so great connexion betwixt the Scripture and the Church that the Scripture may very well be proued by the authority of the Church and againe the church by the authority of the Scripture Neyther should this seeme strange to our Aduersaries For Logicians also know very well that that which by it owne nature is more certaine better knowne may be proued by that which is more certaine and beter knowne vnto vs by a demonstration called by them à posteriori And coÌ„trary wise that which is better knowne vnto vs may be proued by that which is better knowne and more certaine in his owne nature by a demonstration called à priori So the cause is proued by the effect the effect by the cause as fyre is proued by heate à posteriori and heate by the nature of fyre à priori So in like manner by the authority of the Church the which in regard of vs is more certayne and better knowne we proue the Scripture as it were à posteriori and by the authority of the Scripture which in it owne nature is more certaine we proue the true Church of Christ as it were à priori 7. The fourth argument S. Paul testifyeth that the Church is supported by the ground and foundation of the Prophets and Apostles that is to say by their Propheticall and Apostolicall doctrine but if the foresaid doctrine be the ground of the Church it necessarily followeth that this doctriue appeareth to
The third vnity is betwixt the faythfull people and their Pastours by obedience the which whosoeuer dissolue are also to be accounted schismatikes of Hebr. vlt. v. 17. this the same Apostle writeth thus Obey your Prelates be subiect to them this is that fourth marke of the Church assigned by Cap. praeâ—dent §. the Lutherans as we haue sayd in the precedent Chapter the second § 5. This threefold vnity is very sensible the which may easily be perceiued euen by any Infidell For the disagreement of doctrine concerning matter of fayth may easily be heard the dissentions of the people among themselues or with their Pastours may manifestly be perceiued 6. Finally euen naturall reason it selfe proueth this to be one of the most certaine signes of the true Church For God cannot teach contrary and opposite doctrin because he then should be a lyar Hebr. â— v. 18. which according to the apostle is impossible In like manner naturall reason sheweth that God which is goodnesse it selfe cannot be the author of schismes and dissentions but of concord peace and vnity 7. The second signe is Holinesse the holy Scripture is full of testimonies and authorities whereby this signe is most euidently proued and declared For S. Paul in the beginning of almost all his Epistles calleth the Churches vnto whom he writeth Holy as is to be seene in the beginning of the Epistles to the Romanes to the Corinthians to the Ephesians to the Philippians and to the Colossians and S. Peter called the 2. Petr. 2. v. 9. the true Church an holy Nation So also Christ himselfe sayth For then I doe sanctify Ioan. 17. v 1â— 1. Petr. 1. v. 16. my selfe that they also may be sanctifyed in truth Lastly that sentence is often repeated in the holy Scripture the which S. Peter citeth also out of the old testament be yee holy because I am holy 8. The signe also is visible vnto all first because this sanctity is to be seene Matt. 5. v. 16. by good workes that they may see saith Christ your good workes and may glorify your Father which is in heauen Secondly this sanctity Ad TituÌ„ 2. v. 1. 8. may be seene by their pious and holy doctrine For it is necessary that the true doctrine of God be holy sound and irreprehensible Thirdly this sanctity is seene by the miracles wherby God himselfe testifieth and confirmeth the sanctity of his Church And them that belieue saith Christ these signes shall follow in Marc. vlt. v. 17. my name they shall cast out Diuells 9. This signe also of Sanctity is euident to all euen by naturall reason For a good tree bringeth forth good fruit And contrariwise Matt. 7. v. 18. a bad tree bringeth forth ill fruite Moreouer wicked doctrine which is eyther against the Law of Nature or good manners cannot be of God on the other side the doctrine which is agreable to the Law of nature and good manners is of God Finally true miracles do conuince that there is the true Church of Christ where such miracles are done seing that true niracles can only be done by the power of God for euen as God alone hath made and ordayned all thinges so God only can change at his pleasure the Natures of thinges and the naturall order therof according to that saying of the Psâ—m 71 v. 18. Prophet Dauid Blessedbe our Lord God of Israell who can only worke miracles But God who is goodnesse it selfe cannot testify or approue any false doctrine by miracles 10. The third signe of the true Church Suâ—r c. â— huius CoÌ„trouers S. Aug. Tom. 7. pertotum lib. devni Eccles Gen. 12 v 3. Gen. 22. v. 8. Psal 2. v. 8. Psal 1. v. 8. 11. Act. 1. v. 8. Rom. 10. v. 18. Colos 1. v. 6. is that it is Catholike or Vniuersall and that two waies First because it continuethal waies as we haue proued already Secondly it is also Catholike or vniuersall because since the comming of Christ it is dilated and propagated ouer all the whole word 11. S. Augustine vseth this argument most of all against the Donatists to shew the true Church For first God promised Abraham that all Nations should be blessed in his seed and afterward he confirmed the same with an Oath So God the Father said vnto Christ Aske of me and I will giue thee Nations for thy inheritance the limits of the earth for thy possession Many such like places are in the Psalmes and in the new Testament 12. And this signe is also visible because that which is euery where and at all tymes may be seene of all men when it is a thing that can be seene as this is 13. Moreouer this signe is very certaine euen by the light of nature For naturall reason teacheth vs that the prouidence of God extendeth it selfe very carefully ouer all those which are his and that falsity cannot alwaies continue but must needes be ouercome by truth and that God is of greater power and able to do more then the Diuell Yea the beginning and progresse of all false religions Belâ—ar l. 4. de Eccles milit c. 5. 6. Act. 5. v. 38. 39. as Bellarmine well noteth are certainly knowne Finally the worke and counsell of men but not of God is quickely dissolued as Gamaliel saith in S. Luke 14. The fourth signe of the true Church of Christ is that it is Apostolicall to wit founded by the Apostles of Christ and that she hath continued euer since their tyme till these our dayes by a continuall succession For this signe as also the former is the proper marke of the Church of the new Testament for of it is all our Controuersie But that the Church of Christ was founded by the Ephes 2. v. 20. Cap. â— 4. 8 â—huius controu Isa 59. v. vl Ierem. 33. v. 17. 18. Apostles appeareth euidently by those wordes of S. Paul built vpon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets And we haue already proued the continuall succession of the Church by many testimonies of Scripture The same also the Prophets do testify in many places 15. Moreouer seeing that there are as the Apostle sayth alwayes Pastors and Doctors in the Church without whom she cannot consist and continue as our Aduersaries confesse it necessarily followeth as we haue declared before that there hath alwaies beene a continuall succession of these Pastors Doctors in the true Church of God 16. But that which many do say is both foolish and friuolous to wit that there hath beene alwayes a continuall succession of doctrine in the Church but not of persons For seeing that true doctrine must needes proceed from some persons and those of men for not Angells but men doe teach now adayes if the true doctrine continueth it is also necessary that the men which teach this doctrine Supra c. 8. huiuâ— controuersiâ— continue still and such also as are lawfully called to
East Indies to the VVest and they Malac. 1. v. 12. coÌ„pas the whole globe of the earth to the end they may preach the fayth of the Roman Church euery where Wherefore the fayth of the Roman Church is preached receiued in this ouâ— age in many more remote places of the world theÌ„ euer it was in the Apostles tyme the which is most assuredly testifyed by the letters and books euen of them who write what themselues haue seene 15. Fiftly the Church is the Citty of Christ placed vpon a mountaine which cannot be hidden so the Church of Rome Matt. 5. v. 14. hath alwayes byn visible euer since the Apostles tyme neither can it euer be hidden By these it appeareth that all the true properties of the Church of Christ agree to the Church of Rome 16. But that they cannot agree with any other it appeareth sufficieÌ„tly by that our Aduersaries can assigne no Church which can haue these properties Wherfore it is necessary that they confesse the Church of Rome to be the true Church of Christ or truly which is most absurd that Christ hath wanted and beene depriued of his spouse now for the space of a thousand yeares and more as also to haue wanted his body Citty Kingdome and Inheritance CHAP. IIII. That the Church of Rome is the true Church of Christ is proued by the offices of the true Church IN the precedent Chapter we haue Supr 18. huius Controuers § 3. 4. 5. proued that the Romane Church is the true Church of Christ by the properties of the same now it remayneth that we proue it by the peculiar offices and functions of the true Church many reasoÌ„s may by deduced out of these but we will briefly touch only the chiefest 2. The first reason is taken from those very signes which our Aduersaries assigne that is to say the true and sincere preaching of the word of God and the lawfull administration of the Sacraments which are indeed offices and not signes of the Church as we hane sayd before but whether they be signes or offices by them it is euidently proued that the Romane Church and no other is the true Church of Christ But for the space of a thousand yeares last past the Sacraments were no where lawfully administred nor the word of God sincerely preached but in the Church of Rome For our Aduersaries cannot name any Church wherein these things haue beene done Therefore eyther the Roman is the true Church or els Christ hath had no Church for the space of a thousand yeares and more Calu. l. 4. Inst c. 2. sect 11. 21. Beza de notis Eccles p. 145. in fine Geneu edit an 1582. 3. Neyther must our Aduersaries answere vs with Caluin and Beza that their Church indeed remained in the Popedome for they cannot find it any where els yet halfe destroied and filthily corrupted and defaced with many errors For heere we inquire after the true Church of Christ and not such a prophane and filthy Church which Caluin describeth wherein Christ as it were lyeth halfe dead and buried the Ghospel ouerthrowne Calu. sect 12. citat piety banished the worship of God almost quite abolished for such a Church is not indeed the true Church of Christ but a denne of Diuells 4. Moreouer they must not heere run to any inuisible Church altogeather vnknowen both to themselues and vs the which our Aduersaries seeme to establish For we haue sufficiently declared before Supr c. 4. huius cont that the true Church of Christ hath bene alwayes visible Wherefore it is necessary they shew vs some other visible besides the Roman Church wherin for a thousand yeares past the Gospell hath bin publikely preached in the same manner they preach it now and the Sacraments publikely administred as they are now and that continually also without interruption Or truely they must confesse that the Roman Church is the true Church of Christ For in this the old and new testament hath alwayes byn publikly preached without any intermission and all the Sacraments publikely administred and that sincerely and lawfully according to the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles as we wil here after declare in the CoÌ„trouersyes concerning the Sacraments 5. The Lutherans that they might auoid Vide câ—nsuram Orientalis Ecclesiae â— Stanislaâ— Socolonio Polono ex Graeco in LatinuÌ„ conuers this argument fled to the Grecian Church where they affirmed the true Church of Christ remayned But they were presently reiected and condemned by them as may be seene in the answere of Ieremy the Patriarch of Constantinople to the Germanes written in Greeke in the yeare 1576. Neyther do the Grecians disagree from the Roman Church in those pointes which are now adayes in Controuersy but in that one article of faith wherin they affirme that the holy Ghost doth only proceed from the Father and not the Sonne The which error euen all Rupell Confess Art 6. our Aduersaries which follow Luther and Caluin do condemne aswell as we 6. The which when the later Sectaries well perceaued they were forced at length to fly to those Heretikes which were in tymes past condemned by the whole Church amongst whome they seek for their Church Where we are to consider three thinges against the great boldnesse of these men 7. The first is that the true Church hath alwaies continued as we haue declared Cap. 3. huius Contâ— Geneb in Chron. Coccius Tom. 1. l. 8. art 2. Histor Magdeb. Luâ—heran before out of the Scriptures But these men can neuer shew a continuall succession of Heretikes of what religion soeuer they were but only an interrupted continuance and that sometymes for a great space togeather The which may easily be vnderstood by Genebrard Coccius and all other Ecclesiasticall writers of what religion soeuer they be 8. The second Our Aduersaries cannot proue all their pointes out of any one ancient Heretike but they borrow Lyndanus in tabulis Coccius Tom. 1. lib. 8. Art 3. one heresy condemned in tymes past of one and another of some other as Lindanus and Coccius very well declare at large 9. The third is that our Aduersaries must needes confesse that those of whome they haue begged and borrowed Sander lib. 7. dâ— visibili Monar Eccl. Prateol in Elench Hâ—ret Coccius Tom. 1. l. 8. Art 3. 4. their doctrine did erre fouly in many pointes of faith and therfore there could be no true Church among them Yea euen those ancient heretikes haue firmely and constantly belieued many points with vs against our Aduesaries as Doctor Sanders Gabriel Prateolus and Coccius do manifestly declare 10. The second reason The office of the true Church is to bring forth children to God that is to say to conuert Infidels and Gentills from their Idolatry to the Catholyke faith This the Râ—man Church hath performed not only in the first fiue or six hundred yeares after Christ as our Aduersaries confesse but in euery
any inuisible and vnknowne Calu. l. 1. Inst c. 8. sect 9. in fine Church but from the visible Roman Church Wherefore sayth Caluin It is most certaine that all the writings of the Prophets and Apostles came no otherwise to all posterity but as it were from hand to hand deliuered vnto vs by the auncient Fathers continually from yeare to yeare Thus he But none hath deliuered the Bibles froÌ„ haÌ„d to hand but the RomaÌ„ Church Wherefore it is as certaine that the Roman Church is the true Church of Christ as that the holy Scripture is true Scripture seeing we do not know this which we haue to be true Scripture but by the authority tradition and testimony of the Roman Church 20. Vnto this that also belongeth Supr c. 5. huius coÌ„trouers which we haue proued before to wit that the true Church doth not only giue a bare testimony but also sufficient authority to the Scriptures for this the only Roman Church and no other aboundaÌ„tly performeth 21. The seauenth reason The office of the true Church is to iudge of all controuersies which do arise among Christians eyther in points of fayth or other Ecclesiasticall affayres But to the Roman Church only and to no other besides all controuersies were brought which arose in the Church eyther in fayth or other Ecclesiasticall matters For vnto this as to the seate Supr c. 7. huius coÌ„t of S. Peter and the supreme Church all had recourse who had any iniury or wrong done them So S. Athanasius Patriarch of Alexandria so Peter his successor so S. Iohn Chrysostome Patriarch of Constantinople and many others did of whom Bellarmine â—aron ToÌ„ 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Calu. l 4. Inst c. 8. sect 16. and Baronius more at large the which Caluin also cannot deny 22. Heâ—revnto also it belongeth that the Roman Church hath confirmed all generall Councels lawfully assembled as Bellarmine declareth and Baronius more Bellarm. l. 1. de Eccles â—nilit c. â—â— BaroÌ„ loc citaâ—â—â— at large in euery age 23. The eight reason The office of the true Church is to ordaine appoint lawfull Pastors and Ministers of the Sacraments and to conserue alwayes the ordinary vocatioÌ„ as we also proued before But our Aduersaries can assigne no other Church but the Roman which hath alwayes had this ordinary vocation and coÌ„â—inuall succession of Pastors and the ordinary authority to send and institute Pastors in the Church of God 24. The ninth reason The office of the true Church is to teach a true faith without any error so that in no one point Cap. 8. â—u conâ—rou of doctrine necessary to saluation she may erre as we haue already proued out of holy Scripture But our Aduersaries can shew no other Church besids the RomaÌ„ Cap. 7. â—uius coÌ„t which hath not often erred in fayth Neyther dare our Aduersaries affirme that Sand. dâ— visibili Monar Eccles pertotuÌ„ l. 7. Bell. in quinque lib. dâ— Rom. PoÌ„tif Coccius Tom. 1. l. 1. Artic. 11. seq Baron per omnes 12. Tomos Calu. l. 4. Instit c. â— sect 16. subfinem there is as yet among them any visible Church which cannot erre in fayth But Doctor Sanders Bellarmine Coccius Baronius do most euideÌ„tly demonstrate that the Roman Church neuer erred hitherto in doctrine concerning matters of faith 25. And heere it is to be considered that in all other Churches founded by the Apostles yea in the Patriarks seates themselues there haue not byn only heresies but also many Archbishops heretikes but only the Roman Church among them all hath alwaies byn free vnstained with any heresy The which Caluin doth plainly acknowledge when he writeth that the Roman Church in the tyme of old heresyes was not so troublesome as other Churches were and that it kept more exactly then the rest the doctrine once deliuered vnto her by the Apostles But he badly asâ—r beth this to the power and strengeth of nature or to the generous dispositioÌ„ of the Romans not to the prouidence and grace of God 26. Much better did the auncient Bishops of Rome referre it to the singular prouidence of God and to the praier of Christ of the which Christ himselfe speaketh Luc. 2â— v. 32. when he sayth But I haue prayed for thee Peter that thy fayth fayle not And indeed Bellarmine Bell l. 4. de Rom Pont. c. â— alledgeth seauen auncient Bishops of Rome which attribute this to the prayer of Christ 27. The tenth reason The proper and chiefest office of the true Church is to bring men to their eternall saluation so that without her helpe or without her we cannot hope to be saued as we proued before by our Aduersaries doctrine Supr c 2. â—uiuscoÌ„t We aske therfore of them whether our predecessors who liued vnder the Bishops of Rome these thousand yeares past were all damned or no they dare not affirme they were damned but out of the true Church of God we cannot hope for saluation the Roman Church therfore wherein they liued and obteined their saluation is the true Church of Christ CHAP. V. By the signes of the true Church it is declared that the Roman is the true Church of Christ. WE haue declared out of the holy Scriptures that there Cap. 19. huius Controu are foure most certaine signes of the true Church of Christ all which doe proue the Roman to be the same Church we speake of 2. First as concerning the vnity of faith and doctrine the Church of Rome hath the same faith in all and euery particular point therof with the primitiue Church as also with that Church which hath continued now for the space of almost a thousand six hundred yeares as Coccius clearely declareth out of the writings of all both auncient and late Historiâ—raphers Coccius induobus Tom. thesaur and that through euery article â—ow in Controuersy And we will hereâ—fter shew in euery one of them the conâ—ent and harmony of the Roman Church with the Scriptures and auÌ„cient Church But on the other side among our Aduerâ—aries there are many iarres and dissensions in points of Faith euery one of them condemning another of heresy as the forsaid Cocciuâ— manifestly sheweth euen by Coccius Tom. 1. l. 8. Art 7. 8. 9. 10. our Aduersaries owne writings wherfore it is most manifest that there is perfect vnity and agreement in the Roman Church concerning all matters of faith and that our Aduersaries doe differ and disagree almost in euery article therof 3. And heere it is diligently to be considered that this doth not happen vnto our Aduersaries by a meere chaunce only or by the malice of some few of them as they say it doth but euen necessarily out of the nature and condition of their doctrine For they teach that there should be no Superiour vnto whom all should be obedient and submit themselues no iudge of Controuersyes whose iudgment and definition in those
procure fauour and estimation vnto it Therefore in the west partes it was for honours sake called the Sea Apostolike And in another place I graunt sayth he that there remayne also true Epistles of the old Bishops wherein they set forth the honour of their sea with glorious titles of which sort are some Epistles of Leo. 6. But the Lutherans in their Synodicall actes doe acknowledg that eueÌ„ in the tyme of the first Councell of Nice in the dayes of S. Cyprian S. Hierome and S. Augustine the Pope of Rome had the chiefe supremacy the which say they we willingly admit and imbrace to increase the good agreement in faith piety and Ecclesiasticall policy for they very well peâ—ceiued that this supremacy of the Pope of Rome did auaile much to keepe vnity and concord in doctrine and Ecclesiasticall policy 7. And hence it is that the sayd Lutheranes in their articles agreed vpon at Smalcalde the which they made in the yeare 1537. to be exhibited to the generall Councell which was reported to be holden at Mantua among other articles they approued this of the Popes authority and vnto these Philip Melancthon also subscribed Who also afterward in the yeare 1548. far more euideÌ„tly approued the Popes authority witing thus in his Epistle to the Lord HabeÌ„tur ista eodâ— c. 6. fol. 7. pag. 1. Embassadour Theophilus Besides these sayth he we reuerently honour and worship the authority of the Roman Bishop and all Ecclesiasticall policy so that the Bishop of Rome do not reiect vs. Thus Philip in that place 8. But what was the most true opinion of Melancthon concerning this matter appeareth more euidently by a certaine epistle he wrote in the yeare 1535. of the Extat integra ista Epist Philip. iâ— ceÌ„t Epist Theol. ad Io. Sâ—hunehelium ministr uÌ„ BipoÌ„tinuÌ„ est quam ista Epist inter caeteras ordine 74. iuxta edâ— Bipont Anno 1597. Ecclesiasticall iarres and the agreement which was made concerning the articles in controuersy wherein he alledgeth some reasons for the Popes Supremacy These are Philippes wordes speaking of some of his who did hinder resist the agreement which was to be made with Catholikes Some of them saith he do thinke that nothing els is demaunded but that hauing shaken of the Popes Monarchy and reiecting all the old Ecclesiasticall ordinances a certayne Barbarous liberty should be established And a little after Ours do grant that the Ecclesiasticall policy is a thing very lawfull in it selâ—l that is to say euen as there are some Bishops who haue charge or rule diuers Churches so also the Pope of Rome exceedeth all other Byshopes in authority This Canonicall policy as I think no wise man eyther can or should reiect if he desire to keepe himselfe within his owne limits And againe As concerning the riches and reuenewes they are the liber all and magnificent gystes of Kinges and Princes VVherfore as concerning this arâ—â—cle of the Popes supremacy and the authority of other Bishopes there is no Controuersy among vs. Foâ— both the Pope of Rome may easily retaine his authority and the other Byshops may also keepe theirs And there must needes be some gouernours in the Church of God who may ordayne those which are called to Ecclesiasticall offices and may exercise the authority of the sayd Church in all Iudiciall and diffiâ—ulte matters as also may examine the doctrine of the Priestes therof And that if there were no such Bishops yet there should be such ordayned for that purpose And a little after That Monarchy of the Pope is very good in my iudgment and necessary to the end that the vnâ—forme good agreement in doctrnie may be kept in many Nations VVherfore perfect good agreement in this one article concerning the Popes supremacy may easily be established if they could once agree about other articles Hitherto Philip. 9. Much like vnto these wrote Martin Bucer by the consent of Capito Hedio and Niger his confederates of the Church of Bezain vita Ca u. Anno. 1568. sâ—â—b finem Argentine who were as Beza saith great fauorits of Calum For in the same Century of Epistles there is one extant with this title Martin Bucer doth testify his agreemeÌ„t in all thinges with Philip MelaÌ„cthon both in his owne name and of the whole Church of Argentine And this Epistle of Centur. Epist Schuneb Epist 75. Bucer is next vnto the foresayd Epistle of Philip Melancthon 10. Moreouer in this very Epistle when Bucer treateth of this Ecclesiasticall Monarchy the which he calleth Policy he writeth thus But we desire nothing lesse then that the Kingdome of Christ should want her policy or authority to commaund No where should thinges be done in better and more certaine order no where should the obedience be greater the subiection more perfect the reuerent respect of authority more religiously obserued But now the outward power whatsoeuer it be is of God and he resisteth Gods ordination who is not obedient vnto this Finally towards the end of the same Epistle thus he concludeth VVe will therfore in no sorte hinder the small and perfect agreement of Churches The Pope of Rome and all the other Byshops may lawfully keepe their authority yea and their dominations also let them vse their authority only to the edification and not to the destruction of the Church seing that there is no authority at all the whith we do not account holy and we teach the same vnto them VVe seeke for nothing so diligently as for the discipline of the Church Hitherto Bucer with his companions who did euidently foresee that neyther any good agreement in doctrine nor Ecclesiasticall discipline can continue any long tyme without one supreme head and Monarch of the vâ—sible Church 11. Finally now also as many of our Aduersaries as haue any experience in matters of Policy and are well affected towards the monarchy of Kinges and Princes doe willingly acknowledge that there must needes be one supreme Byshop in the Church of God and that this is to be â—ustly graunted to the Pope of Rome if we could once agree among our selues about other matters in Controuersy For they see very well that all those arguments wherby the monarchy of secular Kinges and Princes is established do proue in the same manner also the Ecclesiasticall Monarchy And on the other syde all those arguments which do impugue the Ecclesiasticall Monarcy do no lesse ouerthrow the temporall Monarchy of all Christian Kinges and Princes CHAP. VIII Wherein the arguments of our Aduersaries against the Church of Rome are confuted THese are the chiefest arguments which our Aduersaries do obiect against vs ouâ— of holy Scripture The first Christ is the head of the Church the rocke foundation besides Cor. 11. v. 3. which no man can lay any other I answere that of one and the same thing there may be many heades so that one be subiect to another For the head of the woman is the man the head of
euery man is Christ and the head of Christ is God as the Apostle testifieth And so the woman hath three heades her Husband Christ and God but each one of them is subiect vnto another So S. Peter or the Pope of Rome is the head of the Church but vnder Christ and subiect vnto him Because Christ is the head Ephes 1. v. 22. of S. Peter and of the Byshop of Rome Moreouâ—r Christ is the head of the whole Church â—swell present as to come aswell of the old Testament as of othe new But S. Peter or his successor is only head of the Church in this world and of the new Testament only Hereupon sayd Matt. 16. v. 18. Christ vpon this rocke I will build my Church that is to say the Church of the new Testament which was then to be built 2. Yea euen by the nature of a head we way gather very well that besides Christ who is the head of all Churches aswell visible as inuisible as the Apostle saith there is also another visible head of Ephes 1. v. 22. the visible Church for otherwise it were a monster because it should be a visible body without a visible head Yt is necessary therfore that besides an inuisible head which is Christ there be also a visible heade in the visible Church to wit S. Peters successor 3. Furthermore the actions which Christ exerciseth in his Church are of two kindes some are inuisible as our vocation iustification sanctification c. and these Christ exerciseth and doth by himselfe Some other actions are visible as to preach administer Sacraments and to gouerne visibly the Church c. These Christ doth not exercise by himself alone but also by visible men which represent his person Wherfore euen as Christ should not be sayd truly to baptize any vnlesse there were sâ—me visible man who in the person of Christ should visibly baptize neyther can he be sayd truly to gouerne visibly euery particuler Church vnlesse in each of them some particuler persoÌ„ do visibly gouerne in Christs steed so also neyther should Christ be sayd truly to gouerne visibly the whole Church vnlesse there were some one who in his person migh visibly gouerne the whole Church But this person can be no other but the Byshop of Rome 4. And that which hath byn said 1. Cor. 3. v. â—1 before of the hâ—ad is also to be vnderstood of the rocke and foundation For Christ is indeed the chiefest foundation of all true belieuers but the secondary Ephes 2. â— 20. and subordinate foundation vnto Christ is also the doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets as the Apostle expressely saith to the Ephesians and Caluin also acknowledgeth it to be most true But if the doctrine Calu. ibid. l. 1. Inst cap. 7. sect 2. of all the Apostles be also the foundation of the Church why should not also S. Peters doctrine be the same For when we say that S. Peter is the foundation of the Church by S. Peter we doe vnderstand not his person only but also his doctrine preached in the Church of Rome 5. Moreouer seing that S. Iohn in his Apocalyps sayth that the Citty of God hath Apocal. 21. v. 14 twelue foundations and in them twelue names of the twelue Apostles of the lambe VVhat meruaile is it if S. Peter the first of the Apostles be called a rocke or foundation of the Citty of God 6. And heere it is to be considered that when the Apostle sayth that there is no other foundation besides Christ this word besides hath the same signification 1. Cor. v. 11. that contrary or against hath as appeareth by many other places of holy Scripture For otherwise all the Apostles are called the foundations of the Church as we haue sayd before but they are not contrary or against Christ but vnder Supra cap. 35. §. 2. Cotr. 1. Christ and subiect vnto him 7. Finally if we examine more exactely the true sense of those wordes of S. Paul to the Corinthians it will appeare manifestly 1. Contr. 3. v. 11. that our Aduersaries wrest the said wordes of the Apostle to a contrary sense and meaning For the Apostle doth not speake of the foundatioÌ„ of the whole building of the Church of Christ wherof â— Cor. 3. v. 11. only is our present CoÌ„trouersy but of the foundatioÌ„ of particuler priuate actions of euery true belieuer For S. Paul manifestly writeth that he layd that foundotion wherof he speaketh that euery one buildeth his owne proper worke vpon this foundation But there is a great difference among these foundations because heere Christ himselfe is the who made ordayned S. Peter to be a foundation I say Matt. 16. v. 18. vnto thee saith Christ to S. Peter that thou art Cephas there S. Paul is he who â—ogaâ—â—er â—aid that foundation wherof he speaketh as a wise worke mayster sayth he haue I layd the 1 Cor. 3. v. â—0 foundation Heere Christ himselfe is â—e who buildeth Vpon this rocke saith our Lord I will buyld There euery priuate man is he who buyldeth but let euery one looke saith the Apostle how he buildeth theron heere Matt. 16. v. 18. the Church is that which is built theron I will build saith our Lord my Church There the worke of euery priuate man is that which is built theron If any mans worke abide saith the Apostle that which he built 1. Cor. 3. v. 14. therupon shall receaue reward S. Paul therfore speaketh of the foundatioÌ„ of good workes which belong vnto iustice and life euerlasting wherof as we haue said Christ is the â—â— â—huius cap. only foundation We treat here of the founddation of the outward and visible gouernement of the Church and doctrine of sound faith Now S. Peter his successors were such a foundation Wherfore that which our Aduersaries alleadge out of S. Paul doth nothing concerne this our present disputation 8. The second argument S. Peter denyed Ioan. 18. v. 25. Christ thrice therfore be could not be the rocke against whome the gates of hell should neuer preuaile I answere that when S. Peter denyed Christ he was not as then the foundation of the Church For promise was made vnto him only Matth. 16. I will build c. I will giue thee c. speaking alwaies in the future tense but afterward Ioan. 21. the authority was Ioan. 21. v. 15. actually giuen which was before promised vnto him and that after that denyall of S. Peter as also after the resurrection of Christ feede my lambes saith Christ feede my sheepe 9. The third argument After that the forsayd authority was giuen Ioan. 21. S. Peter was reprehended by S. Paul Gal. 2. I answere that as witnesseth Tertullian the Tertull. l. 5. centra Maâ—ci c. 3. Tertull. de praesc aduersus Haeret. c. 23. infine Marcionists obiected this very same place against Catholikes vnto whome Tertullian answereth in
very well be applyed in this manner to the Roman Church I know saith he what is written in the holy and Canonicall Scriptures concerning the Church of Rome and the faith therof I know not what you say of her Apostacy or falling from her sayth Truly as we do reade in bookes the which you also do honour reuerence of the Roman Church and faith therof so also reade you vnto vs out of bookes the which we also do honour and reuerence how she forsooke and lost her faith Doth it please you that we should belieue euery slaunderous reproach of men vpon what occasion soeuer it was vttered and obiected against the Roman Church the which the holy Ghost hath both deliuered coÌ„mended vnto vs by his holy Scriptures this indeed is pleasing to you but whom also it should more iustly please you see well inough but you being ouercome by obstinacy will not yield to the truth And a little after Lo heere the Roman Church Rom. 1. v. 7. Rom. 1. v. 8. with whome I communicate where I reade thee her name there finde thou me her saultes if thou canst but if thou cryest and rehearsest them from some other place we following the voyce of our Pastour euidently declareth vnto vs by the mouth of the Apostle S. Paul do not admit belieue or heare Ioan. 10. v. 17. your wordes My sheepe saith our heauenly Pastour heare my voice and follow me His testimony of the Roman Church is not obscure but very cleare and manifest VVhosoeuer will not go astray or wander Rom 1. v. 7. 8. from his flock let him heare him let him follow him Hitherto S. Augustine 20. Finally it is heere diligently to be noted that our Aduersaries neuer durst be so bould as to affirme so strange and absurd things of the Church of Rome so auncient in it selfe and so commended by all the auncient holy Fathers yea and by the Apostle S. Paul himselfe but that they Rom. 1. v. 7. 8. falsely perswade themselues that she hath lost and forsaken the true doctrine of Christ Heereupon they say that Rome is Babylon and they are not ashamed to affirme the Pope to be Antichrist But if it were once proued manifestly that the Roman Church teacheth nothing which is not very agreable to the word of God all our Aduersaries weapons against the Church of Rome will easily be blunted and ouerthrowne and also they wil be forced to confesse with Caluin that the Calu. l. 4. Inst cap. 1. sect 10â— infine breach from this Church is the denyall of God and Christ or that there cannot be imagined any fault more heynous But this God willing shal be more euidently hereafter declared in euery Controuersy CHAP. IX Of the Adoration of the Pope of Rome of the kissing of his feete AMongst other Crimes wherewith the Roman Church is charged by our Aduersaries one at which many take offence is the adoration of the Pope and the kissing of his feete We will therefore in this Chapter say some what in iustification therof for if it shall appeare that nothing is done therein which is not warranted by the written word it will appeare how little reasoÌ„ they haue to tearme that impioâ—â— Idolatry which is nothing els indeed but Religious piety 2. Howbeit we are first to forwarne the Reader to the end he be not deceaued by the name of AdoratioÌ„ that AdoratioÌ„ in the holy Scripture hath two significations in 1. Paral. vlt. v. 28. Gen. 2. v. 7. Gâ—n 27. v. 28. Gen. 49. v. â— the one it appertayneth to God alone in the other it may without any sinne at all yea with great merit be giuen to men And of adoration in both senses are verified those wordes of the Scripture they adored first God and then the King Many other places of Scripture there are which approue this adoration of men of which only we now treate For this adoration only is exhibited to the Pope not that other which belongeth only to God and it is exhibited vnto him as the Vicar of Christ wheras the other cannot be exhibited but to the true God himselfe Now there are foure testimonies of holy Scripture which euidently prooue that the adoration of the Pope is not only lawfull but also dutifull 3. The first testimonie is that which the Phophet I say recordeth in these wordes Isaiae 45. v. 14. Thus saith our Lord the labour of Egipt the merchaÌ„dâ—ze of Ethiopia the eminent men of the Sabeans shall come vnto thee and they shal be thine they shall follow thee they shall go with their handes manacled or bound in chaines and they shall adore thee and make supplication vnto thee It is manistest that the Prophet in this place speaketh not to Christ but to the Church for all the verbes and pronownes in the Hebrew text are of the feminine gender and not of the masculine besides it appeareth euidently by all that goeth before these wordes and all that followeth that this promise was made to the Church of Christ The Prophet therfore saith that the labour negotiatioÌ„ that is the riches gotten togeather by labour and negotiation of Egipt and Ethiopia and the eminent persons of the Sabeans by whome are vnderstood the Princes of the Gentils shall passe ouer to the Church and they shâ—lbe the Churches and they shall walke after the Church in manacles by which are signified Ecclesiasticall lawes and that they shall adore the Church and make supplication to her 4. And it is to be obserued that the Hebrew word in the last coÌ„iugation as it is vsed heere and in a manner euery where els signifyeth to prostrate ones selfe before another not howsoeuer but by way of ador ation as all that are skilfull in the Hebrew tongue know in so much as the adoratioÌ„ done oÌ„ly to God is often expressed by this word This therfore is the true sense and meaning of this place they shall prostrate themselues before thee therby to exibite adoration vnto thee We haue therefore out of the Scripture that the Church and consequently Calu. eoÌ„ment in Isa 45. v. 14. edit ann 1559. GeÌ„ apuds Ioan. â—rispinum the Ministeriall head thereof not only may but must be adored vnlesse we will make God to faâ—sify his promise But the crafty dealing of Caluin heere is to be detected who to abuse the Reader leaueth out in his latin translation twice the Pronowne Te that this adoration may not seeme to be referred to the Church but eyther to God or to Christ for he translateth not adorabunt-te obsecrabunt ie but thus Adorabunt atque obsecrabunt whereas in the Hebrew the particle te is twice put in the â—â—â—â—inine gender so as this adoration and obsecration must needes be referred to the Church and therfore those of Genena durst not omit the same neyther in their French Bibles not in their corrupt translation which they call Vatublus no nor Culuin himselfe
or marrow not in the leauâ—s of the words but in the sappeâ—pâ—th or roote os reason And a little after otherwise Matt. 4. v. 6. euen the Diuell himselfe speaketh Scriptures and all heresies according to Ezechiel make vnto themselues pillowes which they may lay vnder the elbow oâ— euery age Ezec. 13. v. 18. 2. By that which hath byn sayd answere may be made to our Aduersaries when they obiect against vs that we affirme the Scripture to be imperfect obscure like a nose of wax which a man may writh which way he will and lastly the origen and spring in a manner of all heresies for we affirme this of the naked and dead letter alone destitute of the true sense or rather of the letter to which the Heretikes adde their owne peruerse sense and meaning neyther haue our Aduersaries any cause to wonder at this seeing S. Paul himselfe saith of the bare letter alone that it killeth and bringeth eternall death 1. Cor. â— v. 6. 7. 9. and damnation But neuer any Catholike did euer attribute any such thing to the liuing letter which hath conioyned with it the true and natiue sense and which alone is truly and properly the word of God CHAP. IIII. How we are to seeke out the true sense and meaning of the holy Scripture THERE is great contentioÌ„ beweene vs and our Aduersaries about the meanes how to finde out the true and naturall interpretation of the letter a thing so necessary to eternall saluation They teach diuers thinges concerning this matter but deliuer nothing that is certayne One assigneth more rules to this purpose another fewer but when they haue sayd all they confesse at last that there was neuer any which hath not at sometyme erred in seeking out the true interpretation of holy Scripture For they gyue not their assent either to the ancient Fathers or to their owne Maisters in all thinges they teach or write nay they cannot assigne any one whom they acknowledge not to haue erred sometyme nor dare affirme to be free from error seeing as they say Euery man is a lyar and so at last all Rom. 3. v. 4. thinges are left by them doubtfull and vncertayne 2. But the Catholikes do proceed after another manner who teach that the certayne vndoubted sense of the Letter is not to be taken from the iudgment of any particuler man but from the vniforme consâ—nt of the ancient Fathers and especially from the iudgment and interpretation of the Catholike Church to whome it appertayneth to iudge of the sense and meaning of the holy Scriptures as the holy and Oecumenicall Councell of TreÌ„t teacheth very well for there is no doubt Concil Trident. sess 4. but that it is more safe to follow such an interpreter as cannot erre then such a one as erreth somtymes or at leastwise may erre but the Church cannot erre in her iudgment seeing that Christ and the â—oly Ghost remayne with her to teach Matt. 28. c vlt. Ioan. 14 v. 16. â—oan 16. v. 13. â—er all truth wherof more herafter when we shall come to treat of the Church 3. It shall suffice to obserue and â—ote here that according to the doctrine of our Aduersaries nothing either solide or certayne is contayned in the holy Scriâ—ture for wheras all dependeth of the â—rue sense of the Letter and with them â—here is no certayne or sure meanes by which to finde out this sense it followeth â—hat they call all into doubt which is in â—he Scripture wherby who seeth not how much they iniure them But contrariâ—yse according to the Catholike doctrine all thinges are euident and cerâ—ayne which are contayned in the holy Scriptures appertayning eyther to faith or good manners the Catholikes hauing euer a certayne and faithful Interpreter to wit the Catholike Church And surely whosoeuer reiecteth the sense which the Church giueth and in place therof substituteth another altogeather repugnant to it doth all one with him who reiecting the holy Scripture should in place therof bring in a new Scripture of his owne forging the sense of the Scripture being no lesse a part of the word of God then the letter which in these few wordes Tertullian confirmeth out of the tradition of the auncient Church The sense adulterated or falsified is no lesse repugnant Tertul. de prâ—sc c. 17. to the truth then the letter or stile corrupted 4. And to conclude it may be inferred that saluation is to be found in the Roman Church only and none at all out Marc. vlt. vers 16. â—om 3. v. 1â— Heb. â—â— v. 9. of it which I proue thus Both the Scripture testifyeth all meÌ„ confesse that diuine fayth is necessary to saluation but such as forsake the RomaÌ„ Church cannot haue diuine faith which wholy relieth vpon the word of God only but meerly humane seing their fayth is founded not in the word of God interpreted by the Church which cannot errâ— but in the word and interpretation of Luther Caluin or some other priuate man who as they themselues graunt may erre and be deceiued such an humane fayth then so doubtfull and vncertayne and only warranted by mans authority cannot iustify or bring a man to eternall saluation CHAP. V. How we may know which is the true letter of the holy Scripture ALL such as forsake the Roman Church and make little account of her authority are not only doubtfull vncertayne which is the true sense of the Scripture but they can haue no assurance at all eyther of the whole or of any part of the letter therof For whilst they goe about to call in question and make doubtfull certayne bookes only of the old Testament before they are aware they take away all authority from all other bookes both of the old and new Testament For whereas there is but one certaine and vndoubted Canon of these bookes to wit that which is receaued and approued by the iudgment of the Catholike Church which cannot erre our Aduersaries reiecting this Canon make all the books doubtfull conteined therin for no certayne testimony can be had of these bookes but eyther by this Canon only or by the auncieÌ„t tradition of the Church but they neyther admit this Canon nor wil stand to this vnwritten TraditioÌ„ or acknowledge it for the true word of God 2. Now as for the Canons lately set out by themselues no man can safely belieue them seeing they neyther agree one with another nor with the auncient Canons of the Church nor are any where found in the writteÌ„ word of God which as they teach is only to be belieued neyther can they bring any thing eyther concerning the Canon of the Hebrewes or any other auncient Canon which they haue not taken from the writings of the auncient Fathers whose authority without the expresse written word of God they will haue to be in no wise sufficient to engender fayth so as euen by the iudgment of our Aduersaries none of all these
can establish Fayth concerning this matter 3. Iohn Caluin indeed sayth that it Lib. 1. Inst c. 7. sect 2. in fine is as easy for a faithfull man to discerne Canonicall Scripture from that which is not Canonicall as to one that seeth it is easy to discerne light from darknes and white from black But in so saying See Beâ—l lib. 1. de ver Deic 17. 18 19. he contradicteth both reason and experience for it is euident that in old tyme there was no small controuersy amongst the faythfull yea and amongst learned and godly men concerning many bookes of the old and new Testament yea and also euen now amoÌ„gst such as our Aduersaries esteeme faithfull men which Caluin Calu. pros in Ep. lac Epist ad Heb. ante â— Petri. himself in many places confesseth 4. Moreouer Caluins owne followers well perceauing this fly vnto their owne peculiar spirit by which they say they are chiefly perswaded and moued and not by the only consent of the Church But these speake nothing to the purpose for Rupell Confess art 4. in faith two thinges concurre one is the cause or origen of fayth to wit God himselfe and the holy Ghost whereof there is no controuersy betweene vs and them for we all acknowledge the holy Ghost to be the principall cause of the assent we giue by fayth that is to say that it is the holy Ghost who chiefly perswadeth vs to belieue The other is the obiect of fayth or that which is to be belieued whereof we now dispute for the holy Ghost doth not induce vs to belieue the false vncertaine deuises of men but the puâ—e and sincere word of God only we aske therfore of our Aduersaries by what expresse word of God he reuealeth vnto them that there are so many Canonicall bookes and neyther fewer nor more for we read not this any where in the Scripture and they admit only the written Word of God how can the holy Ghost Calu l. 1. Instit c. 9. sect 1. then perswade theÌ„ to belieue that which is not the word of God For we are not now to expect new reuelations from God as do the Anabaptists and Libertines whom for this cause our Aduersaries condemne It is necessary therefore that if they will haue vs belieue that they are perswaded by the holy Ghost to belieue such books only to be authenticall as they do say are such that they first shew this to be a truth expressely contayned in holy Scripture which they will neuer be able to do Wherfore there is no certainty with them eyther of the sense of the holy InnoceÌ„t 1. ep 3. c. vlt. CoÌ„ il 3. Carthag caÌ„ 47. S. Aug. Epist 335. Câ—cil Trident. sess 4. Scripture or of the Letter nor euer wil be vntill they returne vnto the Church agayne But we Catholikes are certaine of both for we haue a most faythfull Canon receaued in the Church more theÌ„ a thousand and two hundred yeares agoe confirmed by a generall and Oecumenicall Councell 5. And this to haue beene the faith and doctrine of the auncient Church for the discerning of true and authenticall Lib. 4. Inst c. 1â— sect vlt. Scriptures that short but pithy sentence of S. Augustine whome Caluin acknowledgeth to haue byn the best and most faithfull witnes of antiquiy sufficiently testifyeth saying I for my part would not belieue the Ghospell vnlesse I were moued by the authority Aug. coÌ„ Epist Manich. c. 5. of the Church of which place I will say more herafter in the Controuersy of the Church And else where he saith VVe receaue the old and new TestameÌ„t in that nuÌ„ber of bookes which the authority of the holy Catholike Aug. serm 10 de temp Church deliuereth So S. Augustine 6. I know our Aduersaries obiect many thinges against many bookes contayned in our Ecclesiasticall Canon but their chiefe arguments do not only derogate authority from those bookes but also from many others which they receaue as Canonicall For they obiect that some Fathers did sometymes doubt of those bookes which they will not admit but they are not ignorant that some Fathers of old haue doubted of the Epistles of S. Iames and S. Iude of the second Epistle of S. Peter of the 2. and 3. of S. Iohn of the Epistle to the Hebrewes and of the Apocalyps of which bookes they dare Rupell Confess art 3. not now doubt especially Caluins followers as is manyfest by their confession of faith 7. They say further that in those bookes which they reiect there are many thinges obscure difficult and full of contradiction but what booke of Scripture in a manner is there in the which there do not occurre sometymes thinges 2. Pet. 3. v. 16. obscure and hard to be vnderstod did not S. Peter acknowledge as much But as for true contradictions there are none at al how soeuer there may be some things which at the first sight may seeme to imply contradiction yet indeed all thinges agree very well togeather such a contradiction is oftentymes found in those bookes which euen our Aduersaries receaue Aug. dâ— Doâ—t Christia l. 2. c. 41. de ser Dom. in mont l. 1. c. 3. yea euen in the Ghospells themselues which for all that are not to be reiected but humbly soberly and piously to be interpreted as S. Augustine many tymes admonisheth 8. To conclude all the arguments that our Aduersaries make against these bookes are fully answered by Catholike writers which haue set out Commentaries Bell. Greâ—s Contro 1 l. 1. c. 7. sequ 〈◊〉 in sâ—â— Coronol vpon those bookes to wit Cornelius I ansenius vpon Ecclesiasticus Ioannes Laurinus vpon the booke of VVisedome Ioannes Maldonatus and Chrisâ—ophâ—r à Castâ—o vpon Baruch and Nicolas Serarius vpon the rest of the bookes of the old Testament which our Aduersaries call Apocripall to omit the most Reuerend and famous Cardinall Bellarmine and his Champion Iacobus Gretserus as also Iames Gordon Lesmoreus For it is sufficient only to haue cited them seeing that I write only an abridgment of Controuersies not any long commentaries vpon the Scripture And therfore conteÌ„t my selâ—e to haue shewed in this place that our Aduersaries must either receaue the Canon of Scriptures approued be the Councell of Trent or be vtterly destitute of any certayne and assured Canon CHAP. VI. Of the Hebrew Text. OVR Aduersaries when they are vrged with Catholike argumeÌ„ts taken from the Scriptures are wont to fly to the Hebrew Text of the old Testament and to the Greeke text of the new perswading themselues by this meanes to attayne to the true and propter sense of the letter wherfore somthing is to be sayd in this place of the Hebrew Greeke text both which appertayne to the Letter of the holy Scripture 2. We grant indeed that when the Latin translation is either ambiguous or lesse playne the Hebrew text is well and profitably looked into as also that
tyme can intimate vnto vs diuers things 6. The which thing is excellently declared by S. Augustin for hauing said that Aug. â— 12. â—onf c. vlt. he thought Moyses intended diuers senses in his words he correcteth himselfe saâ—ing that without all doubt God who is the principall author of the Scriptures did so O Lord sayth he seeing thou art God and not flesh and bloud if man he short sighted can it be hidden from thy spirit which will lead me into the right land whatsoeuer thou wast in those words to reueale to posterity howsoeuer he by whome they were spoken thought peraduenture but of one sense only amoâ—st many other no lesse true so S. Augustin Seeing therfore there are diuers litterall senses of one and the same place one Interpreter may follow one sense and another interpreter another so long as neyther of them do say any thing not agreeable to the word of God but both the one sense and the other is godly and conformable to other places of Scripture And this maketh much for the dignity of the Scriptures and profit of the Church according to that which S. Augustin writeth Lib. 3. de Doctrin Christ c. 27. else where How could God sayth he better commend vnto vs the plentifull fruite of his Deuine VVordes then by so disposing as the same words may be vnderstood diuers wayes 7. Nay we see moreouer the holy Scripture it selfe to shew very manifestly that there are diuers senses of the same wordes For there is no doubt but that commaundment of Deuteronâ—my Thou shalt Deut. 25. v. 4. not tâ—e the mouth of the Oxe that thresheth according to the litter all sense doth signify that the mouth of an oxe is not to be tyed whilst 〈◊〉 treadeth forth the corne in the floare for so according to the Letter the Iewes obserued it as indeed they were bound to do Neuertheles S. Paul manifestly teacheth that God the proper Author 2. Cor. 9. v. 9. 10. of the holy Scripture inteÌ„ded chiefly another sense Is God sayth he so carefull of Oxen or doth he not so say in regard of vs for indeed those things are written for vs hitherto it also appertayneth that in the Hebrew tongue one word hath many significations as hath beâ—ne shewed in the seaueÌ„th Chapter of the Latin Edition 8. Out of this ground we affirme that there is no repugnance betweene the Septuagint Interpreters and the Hebrew text and betweene the Hebrew text and the vulgar Edition or lastly betweene the interpretation of the vulgar Edition of the old Testament and that of the new how much soeuer the same wordes are diuersly translated to wit otherwise of the Septuagint and otherwise of the vulgar Latin interpreter or otherwise of the vulgar Edition of the old Testament and otherwise of the vulgar Edition of the new where in both places the same wordes are cited for the same places of Scripture are oftentimes otherwise cited by the Apostles in the new Testament then hath the Hebrew text of of the old But here is diuersity without any repugnance or contrariety And this hath place especially in the Hebrew text because in the Hebrew tongue there is so different reading of one and the same word See examples heereof in the Latin Edition of this Controuersy in this Chapter 9. It wil be easy out of that which hath byn said to answere that which our Aduersaries obiect against diuers places of the vulgar edition For albeit there be diuersity betweene it and the Hebrew text yet there is no repugnance or contrariety and if our Aduersaries think otherwise it procedeth from their ignorance of the Hebrew tongue which hath many wordes subiect to ambiguity and very many phrases much different from the Latin and Greeke phrase as in the Chapters that follow may be seene in the Latin Edition from the 16. to the 20. CHAP. IX The place of Genesis she shall breake thy head is shewed to be well translated IT wil be too long and little to my purpose to examine all the places of the vulgar Edition to which our Aduersaries take exceptions for many of them differ little or nothing from the Hebrew text of the old Testament or from the Greeke of new we will handle some few of greatest difficulty and which our Aduersaries do most often and with great bitternes vrge against vs that by them iudgment may be giuen of the rest which are of lesse importance 2. The first place which they say is depraued and of which they often and eagerly complaine is that of the third of Luther in Genes ib. Genesis v. 15. Ipsa centeret caput tuum for it is not ipsa in the Hebrew but ipsum as if it were spoken of the seed of the womaÌ„ and not of the woman her selfe The Lutherans crie out of great iniury done therby to Christ as to whome alone it appertayneth to bruze the head of the Diuell which we attrâ—bute to another to wit to the Blessed Virgin 3. Caluin also affirmeth that we Calu. in c. 3. Gen. v. 15. haue found out a sacrilegious Exposition whilst we accommodate that to the holy Mother of Christ which was spoken of the seed Christ himselfe And as for the Lutherans we haue lesse cause to blame thâ— for reprehending our version seeing they stoutly maintayne that by the seed â—â— the woman Chrill only is meant 4. But as for Caluin he sheweth the greedy appetite he hath to calumniate wheÌ„ he calleth our version a sacrilegious exposition for he conuinced by the truth coÌ„fesseth that by the seed of the woman not only Christ is meant but al his members yeâ— euen all maÌ„kind It is therefore woÌ„derfull that he saith it is a sacrilegious expesition to apply to the Blessed Virgin Mary that which was spoken of the seed vnlesse â—e will not that the Blessed Virgin be any meÌ„ber of Christ or to appertayne any thing to mankind For seeing that the promise of bruzing SathaÌ„s head appertayneth to Christ and euery member of his aâ— Caluin writeth in expresse wordes Calu. l. 1. Inst c. 14. sect 13â— it must doubtlesse principally apperthyne to the Blessed Virgin as who next after Christ hath most strongly crushed Sathans head VVherfore euen the Lutheranâ— Hun. in Caln IudaizaÌ„te in Anti. paraeo themselues obserue that Caluin hath no reason to obiâ—ct this vnto the Catholikes 5. But to the end we may the better vnderstand whether it be any fault at all that we retayne in the vulgar version the particle ipsâ— we are first to declare the litteral sense of this place and to examine after whether it be any error that we retayne the particle ipsa in our version For it was not out of any ignorance or drowsy carelesnes that the feminine gender crept in heâ—re iâ—stâ—â—d of the masculine or neuter as Caluin calumniateth but it was In Gen. loc cit done of purpose and for iust cause as shal be shewed CHAP. X. Of the
Iudocus Ruesten in his first tome defending the Councell of Trent against Kemnitius 4. Secondly a thing may be conteined in expresse words in the holy Scriptures as that Christ is borne suffered and risen againe c. And in this sense we deny that the whole word of God is conteined in the Scripâ—uâ—e That obiection of our Aduersaries by this may easily be answered when they say that we affirme that Traditions are the vâ—written word of God yet we goe about to proue theÌ„ by Scriptures For we do not proue euery particuler Tradition by expresse words of Scripture but we only deduce and gather them out of it and conuince in generall that there are Traditions 5. The third thing which is to be considered is that our Aduersaries being conuinced by truth doe acknowledge that many things were deliuered vnto vs by the Caluin coÌ„t 4. sess Con. Trident. in â—ntid Beza denotis Eccles tom 3. Tract Theoâ— p. 137. edit Anni 1582. Apostles besids those which are written But say they those were only externall rites and ceremonies seruing only for the ornament or discipline of the Church but nothing concerning doctrine of fayth was deliuered by the Apostles which they haue not set downe in writing So Caluin and some others which follow his opinion Wherfore it remayneth for vs to proue that not â—â—ly external ceremonies but also those which belong vnto the doctrine of fayth were deliuered vnto vs by the Apostles that they were neuer expressely â—et downe in writing 6. The fourth thing is that seing our Aduersaries cannot deny that which was obiected vnto them by Catholikes to wit that the Scripture in many places maketh expresse mentioÌ„ of the word of God preached deliuered and diuulged ouer the whole world as we haue already declared euen out of the holy Scriptures they are wont to answere that long since in the Apostles tyme this Word of God was deliuered preached and not written but the Apostles after wards set downe in writing all the preached word of God or at the least as much therof as was necessary vnto saluation The which solutioÌ„ albeit it be very weak and friuolous seing that it relieth vpoÌ„ no sure ground yet notwithstanding tâ—at it may more fully be confuted we will declare hereafter that many of the chiefest points of faith were not expressely set downe in writing by the Apostles And thus much of the state of this Question CHAP. II. Out of the first and chiefest principles of faith it is clearly conuinced that there are Traditions THE first argument wherby we proue Traditions is taken out of some of the chiefest principles of faith For there are three chiefe and most necessary points of faith yea the câ—ieâ—e grounds of our whole faith which are not to be found expressely in Scripture 2. The first that there must needes be some Catalogue or Canon of the sacred Bookes aswell of the old as of the new Testament the which all Christians with an assured faith should imbrace as a most certaine and an vndoubted truth and this is a very necâ—ssary point of faith yea of it dependeth the authority of all the bookes of holy Scripture because by this Canon the sacred and true books of Scripture are discerned and made knowne from all those which be Apocriphall especially because aswell in times past as in these our daies there hath bin so many and so great Controuersyes about the Canonicall and Apocriphall bookes of Scripture and such a Canon was altogeather necessary aswell in the auncient Church before Christ as in our present Church after Christes tyme the which also our Aduersaries themselues haue learned by experience For they haue also placed their new Canon of the books of holy Scripture in their Consession made at Confess Ruâ—ellana Act. 3. â—ochell and in the later end of some of their Bibles and yet neyther in the time of the old Testament nor in the tyme of the new Law was this CanoÌ„ euer written downe in the Bibles themselues 2. I know our Aduersaries that they may escape this argument do runne to the inward instinct of the holy Ghost wherby say they we know what book is Canonicall and what is not But this answere is refuted reiected before where we haue shewed that the holy Ghost doth not moue vs to belieue any thing with the Catholike faith which is not the word of God If Suprac 5. therfore the holy Ghost moue vs to belieue that some bookes are Canonicall and some are not it is necessary that this be the word of God We aske therefore of them whether this is the written word of God or the vnwritteÌ„ if it be the written word in what Booke or Chapter is it to befouÌ„d if it be no where to be found our Aduersaries must needs coÌ„â—esse that by the instinct of the holy Ghost they also belieue the vnwritten word of God or Traditions 3. The second principle of faith is that we must necessarily with an assured and firme faith belieue that all those Bookes eyther of the old or of the new Testament which we now retaine are safely deliuered vnto vs entyre aâ—d vncorrupted through so many handes so many ages so many vexations and persecutions of the Christians for otherwyse the whole credit and authority of those bookes will decay and perish But this is no where extant or written for neyther the Prophets or Apostles haue euâ—r written that their bookes should neuer be falsified or corrupted by any yea it appeareth sufficiently Supra c. 9. 10. 12. 13 by that which hath byn already said that they were falsified and corrupted in many bookes by the Iewes and Hâ—retâ—kes Let our Aduersaries therfore tell vs where it is written that this holy Scripture which we haue now is not corrupted or falsifyed 4. The third principle of fâ—yth is the true sense of the letter For the true word of God consisteth rather in the true sense or meaning of the words then in the words Supra cap. 3. themselues as we haue declared before But the true sense of the words that is to say in what sense or meaning the words are to be vnderstood eyther properly or figuratiuely cannot be had from the holy Scripture alone but also from the doctrine and Traditions of the Church as we haue sayd before in the fourth Chapter wherby it also followeth that the writteÌ„ word of God conteyneth in it the least part of the word of God to wit the bare letter only but the word of God preached and deliuered keepeth and professeth vnto vs the cheif part of the word of God that is to say the true natiue sense of the same S. Basil l. de Spir. sanct c. 27. Brent contra Petr. â— Soto in suis prologom Kemnit cont 4. sess Conc. Trid. cùm agiâ— de 2. gen Tradiâ— 5. And this is that which S. Basil sayth that those who reiect the vnwritten points of fayth as indiscreet persons do
it weake Sophisticall and erroneous 11. Besides that there are so many and so contrary illations of diuers men that the authority of the Church is altogeather necessary in maters of faith that there may arise a certayne and an vndoubted faith of these matters of which sort Traditions are that is to say the doctrine of the whole Church 12. But when one belieueth such an illation with a diuine or Catholike faith he must needes know two thinges the one is that the expresse place of Scripture from whence this conclusion is deduced must certainly be well vnderstood by him which disputeth the other is that he who maketh such a deduction and collection can neyther deceiue others nor be deceyued himselfe But none can know eyther of these without the Traditions of the Church seeing that otherwise there is none which may not be deceiued sometimes All collections therefore which produce or breed fayth in vs do most clearly conuince and shew the authority and necessity of Traditions CHAP. VII Wherein it is proued that there are Traditions by the absurdities which otherwise would follow THE fifth argument wherby we proue that many things are to be belieued which are not expressed in holy Scriptures is taken out of the absurdities which do ensue of the contrary doctrine For hauing once admitted that nothing is to be belieued which is not expressed in Scripture all old heresies are renewed and a great vncertainty and confusion of all things is brought into the Church of God yea euen the way to Atheisme is layd open because hauing once reiected despised the Traditions of the Church all the poynts of fayth from the Apostles tyme till now explicated and proued by the auncient Fathers against heretiks all those things also which were decreed and determined by all the generall Councâ—lls in times past against the said heretiks loose their chiefâ—st strength and authority the which notwithstanding our Aduersaries do acknowledge themselues to receiue and belieue 2. Neyther do we know by an assured Catholike faith whether there were euer any Fathers or Councells but by the Traditions of the Church But neyther do we know any other way but by fayth whether since the Apostles tyme till now there were any Catholikes or noâ— because of those things which were done since the tyme and death of the Apostles there is nothing extant in holy Scripture seeing that all the bookes thereof were written before the death of the Apostles But such things as haue bâ—n done since till now cannot otherwyse be knowne but by the Tradition of the Church 3. Neyther is it sufficient to say that we know these things by the Ecclesiasticall histories For that fayth which proceedeth of histories without the authority or Traditions of the Catholike Church is but an humane fayth which oftentimes deceaueth others and may be deceiued it selfe and therefore these kind of histories cannot produce a diuine fayth in vs this experience it selfe doth clearly teach vs. For our Aduersaries do somtymes doubt whether S. Peter was euer at Rome or no because forsooth this is not to be found expresly in holy Scripture wheras notwithstanding it is most assuredly proued and testified in many bookes both of the auncient Historiographers and holy Fathers Why may they not as lawfully call other matters in question which are notwithstanding expressely set downe in other auncient writers Our Aduersaries therfore do make all things very doubtfull and vncertayne whiles they will only belieue and admit the Scripture but now lâ—t vs answere their arguments CHAP. VIII Wherein the arguments of our Aduersaries taken out of the old Testament are confuted THE first argument wherby our Aduersaries oppugne Traditions and which they vse very often the which also as inuincible they haue added to the confession of their Rupell Confess Art 5. Deut. 4. v. 2. Deut 12. v. vlt. fayth they take out of these words of Deuteronomy Thou shalt not add any thing to the word which I speake vnto you nor shall you take any thing from it And againe that which I commaund thee do that only neyther add or diminish any thing from it By these places of Scriptures our Aduersaries do inferre that nothing is to be receiued as a point of fayth which is not expressely set downe in Scripture 2. But this argument is erroneous and the weaknes thereof is very great for many causes First because in those words there is no mention made of the Scripture nor of the written word of God but only of the word preached and deliuered viua voce Thou shalt not add sayth the Scripture to the word that I speake vnto you he doth not say that I write vnto you Againe Do only sayth he that which I commaund thee he doth not say that which I write vnto thee 3. Moreouer in these words the holy Scripture doth not only speake of matters of fayth to be belieued but also of ceremonies and customes to be done and obserued but our Aduersaries themselues confesse that these customes may be added by the authority of the Church yea they haue ordeined themselues very many the which they chang euen yet when they please Caluin also acknowledgeth that Calu. coÌ„tra 4 sess Concil Trident. many vnwritten customes were deliuered vnto vs by the Apostles 4. That also according to the phrase of Scripture is said to be added to the word of God which is contrary opposite vnit For Iosue did not transgresse this commaundement of Deuteronomy when he added his booke to the bookes of Moyses Nor did others transgresse it who added the bookes of the Iudges Ruth and of the Kinges which were not written by Moyses which are also to be belieued as contayning pointes of faith But in these bookes there is nothing contrary to that which Moyses wrote And the Hebrew text agreeth very well to this answere for in both places of Deuterâ—nomy this word Ghal is vsed which sigâ—â—tieth oâ—tentines contrary or against so that the sense is Do not add any thing contrary to the word which I commaund and againe yee shall not add any thing contrary to the word which I say vnto you For so is that particie Gâ—â—l taken in the 40. Psalme or according to the Hebrewes 41. in the 2. Psalme also the second verse And in the 14. of Numbers the 2. verse els where very often Euen as also in the new Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which answereth to the Hebrew Ghal signifieth also contrary or agâ—iâ—st when the Apostle writeth to the 1. ad Cor. 4. v. 6. Corinthians that in vs you may learne one not to be puffed vp against another aboue that is writteÌ„ that is to say against the Scripture the which saith we must not be puffed vp in pryde â—s S. Chrysostome and after him Theophilactus others do note vpon that place The which place some bouldly alledge against Traditions wheras the Apostle in that place doth not speake of the whole Calu in
consequently coÌ„mend vnto vs Traditions and the vnwritten Word of God seing that therein consisteth the principal part of holy Scripture to wit the true sense of the wordes CHAP. XI Wherein is declared how we may know the Apostolicall Traditions AMONG the other argumentes of our Aduersaries this is one that we cannot know certainly which are the Traditions of the Apostles seing that many Heretikes in times past pretended also that their heresyes were agreing to Apostolicall Traditions Moreouer they obiect that Traditions may easily be corrupted and changed for this cause Scripture was ordayned that the doctrine deliuered by word of mouth might continue the longer without any falsification or corruption But we answere to this their reason that the auncient Heretikes also by supposed and false Scriptures which they attributed falsely to the Apostles did confirme and proue their heresies Aug. de ciu Dei l. 15 23. subfinem Many thinges saith S. Augustine were alleadged by heretikes as though they were the sayings of the Prophets and Apostles But yet for all that they were not iudged to be the most certaine and Canonicall Scriptures 2. But the Traditions of the Apostles may so certainly and easily be known from supposed and false Traditions as the Canonical Scriptures may be knowne from the Apocriphall for they are both knowne by the same meanes and authority that is to say by the authority doctrine and testimony of the Catholike Church which neyther can deceiue any nor be decevued her selfe 3. And albeit speaking of humane matters the Scripture is more certaine theÌ„ Tradition alone yet it happeneth otherwise in matters concerning God because in these there is the authority of God and the continuall assistance of the Holy Ghost hath place which doth not suffer the Church to erre and hence it is that the Tradition only of the Church which is not so much written in paper as printed 1. ad Cor. 5. v. 3. 4. in the hartes of Christians is a most certayne and faithfull keeper of all the pointes of our diuine faith 4. Moreouer if euen Christ himself had with his owne hand writteÌ„ in brasse all the pointes of our faith they should notwithstanding not haue had so great certainty as now Ecclesiasticall Traditions haue vnlesse the same keeper of the diuine doctrine had byn also present For that which is imprinted in brasse may be rased and blotted out and the brasse it selfe may be consumed by fyre But those thinges which are imprinted in the hartes of Christians by the holy Ghost can neuer perish or be any way changed 5. And what we haue said of knowing the Apostolicall Traditions is to be vnderstood whether the Church assembled in a generall Councel declared it so or it became knowne and manifest by the continuall and generall custome of the whole Church Also whether the question be of Tradition belonging to faith or only belonging to rites and Ceremonyes For of the Tradition belonging to faith that is to say of not baptizing againe those which are baptized once before by heretikes are these wordes of S. Auguâ—tine Albeit indeed of this thing saith he S. Aug. Tom. 7. contra Cresâ—on Gram. l. 1. cap. penu t. tâ—ere can no example be alleadged out of Canonicall Scriptures yet notwithstanding we hould the truth of the same holy Scriptures in tâ—â—s matter when we do that which generally the whole Catholik Church holdeth the which euen the authority of the Scriptures themselues commend vnto vs so as because the holy Scripture cannot erre whosoeuer seareth to be deceaued by the difficulty or obscurity of this question let him go to the same Church for counsell the which the holy Scripture vâ—ry clearely sheweth and S. Aug. Tom. 7de bapt coÌ„t Donat. l. 4. cap. 14. demonstrateth vnto vs. Hitherto S. Augustine And disputing in another place against the Donatists concerning the baptisme of Infants That saith he which the whole Catholike Church holdeth nor was ordayned by generall Councells but yet alwaies kept and obserued by all is most truly to be belieued to haue byn deliuered vnto vs by Apostolicall authority S. Aug. Tom. 2. Epist 118. adâ—anuar c. 5. Calu. l. 4. Instit c. 4. sect vlt. sub fi l. 3. c. â— sect 10. in medio 6. But of the Ecclesiasticall rites and Ceremonies the same S. Augustine speaketh in this maÌ„ner Yf the Catholike Church through the whole world hold and practise any thing it is a signe of great madnesse to dispute whether it is to be done so or noe By which words of S. Augustine it may easily be vnderstood what was the opinion vniforme doctrine of the whole auncient Church concerning this point For our Aduersaries themselues do say that S. Augustine was a most faithfull witnesse of antiquity Vnto whome I referre the Readers if they desire to know certainly any more of the sense of Antiquity The end of the first Controuersy THE SECOND CONTROVERSY OF THE PROPERTIES OF OF THE TRVE CHVRCH The first Part of the second Controuersy CHAP. I. Of the Properties and Offices of the true Church of Christ in generall IN the disputation of the Church that first of all is to â—e obserued that whereas our Aduersaries haue â—rought in and do hold many erroneous opinions they do all proceed out of ignorance of the true definition and Nature of the Church It is a true saying of the Apostle that they which 1. Tim. v. 6. 7. erre and wâ—nder from the true faith are conuerted into vaine talke desirous to be Doctours of the Law not vnderstanding neyther what things they speake nor of what they affirme For if our Aduersaries did well vnderstand or could conceyue what is imported by the Name Nature of the Church they would neuer affirme so many absurdityes of the Church of Christ We will therfore first of all declare and explicate what is to be vnderstood properly by the name â—of the Church 2. But this best of all is declared by the Properties of the Church of Christ and by her Offices coâ—mended vnto vs in the holy Scripture it selfe and those we call Properties which do agree with the Church as she hath relation vnto Christ her chiefe head and Pastour But those we call her Offices which the Church exerciseth towards her Children There are indeed many properties of the Church assigned by holy Scripture but it shall suffice vs to alledge and note these fiue only 3. The first is that the Church is the spouse of Christ I will betroth thee vnto me Osee 2. 19. 20. for euer saith the Prophet Osee and againe I will betroth thee vnto me in saith And Isaias The bridegrome will reioyce in his bride and thy Isa 6â— v. 5. God she speaketh vnto the Church shall reioyce in thee Christ also by the Prophet Salomon sayth Come o my spouse from Libanus Cant. 4. v. 8. In the new Testament also the Church is called the spouse of Christ He
predestinate 2. Tim. 2. v. 19. only to belong vnto this their inuisible Church as we haue now declared who are only knowne vnto God and vnknowne vnto all others 11. Hither also it belongeth that those could not be Saints predestinated who haue byn for these many ages past in that inuisible Church of our Aduersaries For those if perâ—â—uenture there were any neyther durst publikelâ— professe Christ nor preach openly the Ghospell but terrified with humane feare haue done all thinges by dissimulation and hypocrisy least they might be bewrayed and made knowne vnto others for otherwise they should haue byn visible not inuisible Luc. 9. v. 26. But Christ saith that he that shall be ashamed of me and that which I teach hym the sonne of man wil be ashamed oâ— when he shall come in his Maiesty 12. Lastly our Aduersaries being vrged with so many and inuincible reasons see well inough especially the wiser sort of them how absurd the doctrine of their inuisible Church is And therfore many of them now adayes acknowledge the Church of Christ to haue byn alwaies visible and moreouer that this visible Church remayned still in the Popedome as they speake For they caÌ„not assigne any other visible euer continuing Church besides that of Rome but least they be conuinced of falâ—hood by the authority of this visible Church they seeke out some other euasion for they say this visible Church may yea hath often erred in matters of faith The which error we will Cap. 7. seq confuâ—e a little after assoone as we haue answered the arguments obiected by our Aduersaries against this Chapter CHAP. V. The arguments against the visible Church are confuted MANY of our Aduersaries reasoÌ„s do not so much proue that Infr. c. 7. the visible Church hath perished decayed as that it hath erred in fayth the which therefore shal be confuted afterward when we declare that the Church cannot erre in matters of fayth The rest of their arguments are Tom. 2. Epi. 48. Tom. 7. de vni Eccles c. â—â— ad Donat. post col â—â— 20. in fine 3. Reg. 19. v. 10. Calu in â—râ—fâ— â—â—arum â—â—st Beza â— 5. suae Confes â—rt 9. almost all one with the old reasons of the Donatists For they in tymes past affirmed that the Church of Christ had perished through out the whole world but only in Africk Vnto whom S. Augustine answereth very well in many places But we will only heere briefly examine the more probable arguments and now a dayes more vsed by our Aduersaries 2. The first argument is taken out of those words of the Prophet Elias I am left alone and they seeke my lyfe I answere that this argument is of no moment albeit our Aduersaries Caluin and Beza do often vse it For Elias doth not speake of the whole Church but only of the Kingdome of Israel wherein the wicked King Achab 3. Reg. 16. v. 18. then reigned albeit in it also there were seauen thousand men who did not adore Baal and who made a visible Church Moreouer at that very time Iosaphat a very pious and godly King reigned there was also the temple of God and Priests and Sacrifice as also publike solemne and daily seruice of God yea out of the second book of ParalippomenoÌ„ we gather that King Iosaphat laboured very much to conserue 2. Paral. 19. v. 4. seq and increase the honour and worship of God neyther was the number of them litle who professed publikely the true Religion For in the same booke are accounted and numbred more then eleauen hundred thousaÌ„d strong souldiars besides women and others lesse sit for warre by which it appeareth that the Church of 2. Paral. 17. v. 14. seq God was not inuisible in Iosaphats Kingdome but rather very visible and coÌ„spicuous But Elias only complayned of the Kingdome of Israel they to wit the children of Israel and not the children of Iuda haue 3. Reg. 19. v. 10. forsaken thy Couenant Neyther do we deny but that in some one or other Kingdome there might sometymes peraduenture haue byn few or no Christians whiles in farre more places the Church of God was very manyfest and visible But that the Church of Christ was no where to be fouÌ„d in the whole world is most absurd and expresly against the holy Scriptures 3. The second argument is taken out of many places of Isay Ieremy wherin those Prophets complayne that all the Iewes did transgresse the Couenant made with God Moreouer they obiect the small number of those who were sometimes in the ancient Church before Christs tyme or euen in Christs time before the Gospell was promulgated and heere they make many digressions to Noë and Adam himselfe The very same argument the Donatists also vsed as the words of Bishop Pâ—â—iliâ—n testify related by S. Augustine But Vide S. August Tom. 7. de vnâ—t Eccl c. 13. S. Aug. Tom. 7. in lib. ad Don it post â—oll c. 20. in fine S. Augustine answereth very well to those generall complaints of the Prophets that the holy Scripture hath a peculiar phrase oâ— manner of speaking who so reprehendeth the euill as though euery one of that company of people were wicked men so coÌ„mendeth the good as if they were all such and this S. Augustine proueth in the same chapter out of diuers places of the holy Scripture 4. Our Aduersaries also who would seeme skillfull and cunning in the Hebrew and Greeke language should call to mind that aswell the generall particle amongst the Hebrews called col as that other which De voce Col vide Galat. l. 5. c. 4. Ioan. Fost Luth Io. Mer. Cal. in radicâ— Cal. in c. 2. Philip. v. 1â— Beza ib. in 1. Tim 2. v. 1. ed. An. 1565. in edit an 1598 v. 4. ibid. Isa 1. v. 1. Oze 1. v. 1. Amos. 1. v. 1. Mich 1. v. 1. Ierem. 1. v. 1. Ezechiel 1. v. 2. Dan 1. v. 2. Sophon 1 v. 1. answereth vnto it in the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is often vsed in holy Scripture not generally for euery thing without any exception but for that which commonly is wont to be done as also non pro singulis geâ—erum sed pro generibus singulorum the which not only the Hebrew Lexicons written by our Aduersaries themselues doe plainly demoÌ„strate but also their chiefe principall ringleaders Caluin Beza The later wherof addeth also that we haue obserued that a generall particle is almost in every leafe of holy Scripture vsed indefinitely It is therfore most true which S. Augustine sayth that this word all in these kind of places is taken for many or for that which was common euery where as Caluin and Beza say for otherwise it is well inough knowen that in the tyme of the Prophet Isay there were some holy Kings as Ozias and Ezechias in Iury as also those Prophets Ozeas
visible and inuisible and they say that the inuisible Church cannot erre but Supr hac ipsa cont cap. 4. the visible may erre But we haue now already declared that the true Church of Christ must needes be visible Wherfore this distinction is now sufficiently refuted And truly it importeth but a little whether that their inuisible Church can erre or not erre seing that it cannot be seene or knowne of any and consequently cannot be profitable vnto any 16. There are also some of the later Sectaries who distinguish and deuide the Church into the Church of the Saints which Iunius in Bellarm. Contr. 1. l. 4. c. 10. nota 8. are in Heauen and into that which remayneth fighting heere vpon earth And they say that the Church triumphaÌ„t of Saints cannot erre in faith or in the doctrine of faith but the Church militant may erre But this is a ridiculous distinction First Hebr. 21. v. 1. because the Saints hauen ot fayth but a cleare vision of God for as the Apostle witnesseth Fayth concerneth things which doe not appeare wherefore if at any tyme faith perished vpon earth without al doubt it could not be found in heauen neyther must we exprect the doctrine of fayth from heauen as the Anabaptists doe who seeke for reuelations from heauen but we must looke to receiue it from the Supr c. 1. huius controuersiae Church militant vpon earth Moreouer the properties and offices of the Church of Christ before alledged out of holy Scripture do not agree as is manifest to the Church triumphant of Saints but to the Church militaÌ„t vpon earth For neither is that Church of the Saints betrothed vnto Christ by fayth neyther are the Saynts those who preach vnto vs the word of God who administer the SacrameÌ„ts vnto vs who execute the other offices of the Church but men liuing vpoÌ„ earth wherfore they runne in vaine to this heauenly Church wherof we do not here dispute 17. Moreouer that is also a very weake reason wherby they thinke that Iunius ibid. nota 8. they conuince that the Church militant vpon earth may erre This Church sayth he militant vpon earth is imperfect and therfore she may erre euen in explicating the doctrine of sayth for otherwise a perfect effect might proceed 1. Cor. 13â— per totuÌ„ caput from an imperfect cause So â—e As though forsooth there could be no other imperfection in the Church besids infidelity or error in explicating the doctrine of fayth or as though the whole perfection of the Church consisted in fayth only and in the doctrine thereof and not also in charity and other gifteâ— of God as the Apostle declareth at large Or lastly as though this perfection of the Church which consisteth in a right fayth and a good explication of the doctrine thereof could proceede from the militant Church only and not rather from a most perfect cause to wit from the holy Ghost who continually ad Rom. 8. v. 26. gouerneth the Church and as the Apostle sayth helpeth her infirmity and imperfection 18. Lastly when our Aduersaries Ita Philip Mor. Tract de Eccles cap. 9. Genes 3. v. 6. can by no places of Scripture nor other reasons proue that the Church hath erred they gâ—e about to persuade iâ— by many examples And heere they beâ—in a discourse froÌ„ our first Father Adam till these our daâ—es For first they say that Adam lost his fayth and so lykewise his wyâ—e Eue when they both eate of the forâ—iddâ—n fruit consequently the wholy Church then erred in fayth Then they runne through all the old Testament till Christs tyme and heap togeather many places which say that those who liued in the tyme of the Naturall Moysaicall Laws forsooke God Lastly out of some Historiographers who haue writteÌ„ since Christs tyme they scrape togeather all such testimonies as sâ—eme to serue to this purpose in any sort 19. But they labour in vayne For if these kinds of argumeÌ„ts were good they would also proue that the Church it selfe also wholy perished and was not to be found in any place as in tymes past the Donatists contended the which euen our Aduersaries themselues acknowledge to by very absurd and against the holy Scriptures as hath beene declared before For if all haue lost their fayth then indeed the true Church could no longer be which without fayth cannot consist and thus the whole Church had perished 20. But that which they affirme of AdaÌ„ and â—ue to wit that they lost their fayth by sinning is of no moment at all For to omit that they do not so much proue by that argumeÌ„t that they lost their fayth then that after their sinne there remayned neyther any fayth nor Church in the world it is truly manifest inough that this belongeth nothing to this disputation we now handle For neyther do we heere dispute of the Church of Angells nor of that which was in Paradise before the fall of our first pareÌ„ts but of that only Gen. 3 v. 15. which ensued that promise made vnto all mankind after the sinne of Adam wherein God foretould that there should be perpetuall enmity betwixt the woman and the serpent that is to say betwixt the Church of Christ and Satan And wherein also God foretould that the Church should alwayes haue the victory Supra coÌ„trou 1. cap 16. 17. 18. ouer Satan as we haue declared more at large before Wherfore our Aduersaries must needes shew this promise to be frustrate if they desire to conclude any thing against vs. 21. But those examples which they Supra cap. 5. in solut 2. argumenti alledge our of the old Testament are the very arguments of the Donatists and other auncient Heretikes who by them went about to proue that the true Church was wholy decayed and perished wherunto we haue also sufficiently answered out of S. Augustine 22. And lastly those thinges which they haue takeÌ„ out of those Authors who wrote after Christs tyme are eyther corrupted by our Aduersaries or taken out of Apocriphall Authors and such as are Baron in 12. Tom. Annal. not worthy of credit as the worthy Cardinall Baronius declareth manifestly in euery age in his Ecclesiasticall histories and the same hath Bellarmine done before Bellarm. l. 3. de Eccles militante him more briefly vnto whome we refer the Reader because they do not appertaine to this present question but rather vnto that which is of the continuall duration of the Church the which now almost euery one doth acknowledge and Supr c. 3. 4. buius Controu which we haue sufficiently declared before wherefore these arguments are of so small worth that they need no longer a confutation CHAP. VIII That there is no lawfull Calling of Preachers or Pastours of the Church but by the visible Church ONE of the Offices of the true Church is to appoint lawfull preachers of the Ghospell and true administers of
desire Seeing that the Church is alwaies present who explicateth alwaies her mâ—nd vnto vs in plaine and manifest wordes And if at any tyme there arise any doubt or Controuersy in her decâ—eâ—s she presently declareth it no otherwise then it the Prophets other writers of the ould and new Testament were yet aliue and would clearly explicate their mynds vnto vs in their owne proper words For it is the same Holy Ghost who in tymes past spake by the mouth of the Prophets and Apostles Matt. 10. v. 20. and who speaketh now by the mouth of the Church â—or it is not you that speake but the spirit of your Father that speaketh in you 4. The Church hath the fourth property For there is exceeding great streÌ„gth and immutability in the doctrine of the Church For this truly can neuer be corrupted falsified or chaunged because the Church is alwaies present who alwaies giueth most cleare and euident testimony of her owne doctrine This doctrine also of the Church remaineth alwaies constant and immoueable because the holy Ghost is alwaies present who will not permit the Church to erre according to those wordes of Christ I will Ioan. 14. v. 16. aske my Father and he will giue you another Comforter that he may remayne euerlastingly with you 5. The Church hath the fifth property that is to say the fulnesse and sufficiency of doctrine For the Church teacheth all thinges necessary to saluation according to that promise of Christ When the spirit of truth shall come he will teach you all truth So that the Ioan. 16. v. 13. Church hath hitherto condemned all heresies and heerafter also will condemne all errors arising and oppugning the Catholike faith In like manner she alwaies answereth to all doubtes and difficulties proposed vnto her because she is alwaies present and alwaies liueth 6. The Church hath also the sixt property that is to say Necessity For no doctrine must be receyued as a point of faith vnlesse it be receiued and approued Suprac 8. huius Controu Gal. 1. v. 12. by the Church as we haue declared before by the example of S. Paul who although he receyued his Ghospell immediatly from God by the reuelation of Christ yet he was commaunded by reuelation to go the visible Church and to conferre the Ghospell which he preached with those who were in the visible Church least perhaps in vaine he should runne or had runne 7. Yea and others could not safely belieue him vnlesse his doctrine had byn approued by the Church as Tertulliâ—n S. Hierome and S. Augustine well note The Apostle S. Paul saith S. Augustine called from heauen if he had not found the Apostles with whome by conserring his Ghospell he might appeare to be of the same Society the Church would not at all belieue him Thus S. Augustine And much more the Ghospells of S. Marke and S. Luke who were not Apostles but only their disciples stood in need of this approbation of the Church Hereupon saith Tertullian If he from whom S. Luke receyued Tertul. l. 4. contra Marci c. 2. S. Hier Ep. 11. S. Aug. tom 6. cont Faustum Manich. l. 28. c. 4. Tert. loco cita Gal. 2. v. 2. his light desired to haue his faith and preaching authorized by his predecessors how much more reason haue I to desire the like for the Ghospell of S. Luke seeing the same was so necessary for the Ghospell of his Mayster Thus farre Tertullian 8. And hence it is that the reuelations of S. Brigit and S. Catherine of Siena albeit they were truly reuealed vnto them by God yet they do not appertayne to the Catholike faith because they are not approued by the Church as the vndoubted and certaine word of God 9. Euen as also in the Apostles tyme many before S. Luke wrote the acts of Christ as S. Luke himself testifyeth and yet notwithstanding the Ghospells only of Luc. 1. v. 1. two of them to wit S. Matthew and S. Mark are authenticall for it is well knowne that S. Iohn wrote his Ghospell long after S. Luke but the Ghospells of the rest who wrote before S. Luke do not appertayne vnto faith because they were neuer approued by the Church Wherby it sufficieÌ„tly appeareth how necessary the approbatioÌ„ authority of the Church is 10. The Church hath the seauenth property of the ground of faith for by the Church and her coniunction communioÌ„ a true belieuer may be distinguished from an Infidel for he who belieueth the Church and heareth her is a true belieuer but he who doth not heare her is an Infidell if he will not heare the Matt. 18. v 17. 1. IoaÌ„ 4. v. 6. Church saith our Lord let him be vnto thee as an heatheÌ„or publicaÌ„ And S. Iohn saith he which knoweth God heareth vs he which is not of God doth not heare vs. 11. The Church hath the eight property For whatsoeuer we belieue with our Catholike faith we belieue it because it is reuealed vnto vs from God by Calu. l. 4. Instit c. 9. sect 1. Beza c. 4. suae confess sect 17. the Church But God now reuealeth nothing to euery member of the Church immediatly by himselfe Yea euen our Aduersaries do well admonish vs to labour most of all that no way or leaue be graunted to such fantasticall reuelations 12. The Church hath the ninth property For the Church conuinceth also Turkes and Infidels by naturall reasons of which sort there are many extant in S. S. Thom. in 4 lib. contra Gentes insracap 19. huius Controu Thomas We proue also the Church by the very signes and markes of the Church which are manifest vnto all euen Turkes and Infidels wherof we will speake more hereafter 12. The Church hath also the tenth property because in the Apostles Creed there is expressed an article of the Church For presently after the faith of the true God the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost first of al is set downe this article I belieue the holy Catholike Church 14. Moreouer that the Church and her preaching is the ground of faith euidently appeareth by the wordes of holy Scripture For when S. Paul disputeth of that faith wherby all are to to be saued he reduceth this whole Faith to the preaching of the Church vnto her sending calling of others to her Ecclesiasticall offices 15. So this Apostle in another place declareth that God alwaies appointed some Pastors Rom. 10. v 14. seq and Doctors in his Church that we be not children wauering in faith and carried about with euery wynd of doctrine but that we may be stable and constant alwayes in one and the same faith and confession of the Sonne of God 16. Lastly those words of S. Paul are most euident wherein he affirmeth that the Church is the pillar and ground of 1. Tim. 3. â— 15. truth Where we are to consider that euery foundation of any bulding hath two offices that
faith is the ground of the Church we speake of the generall faith of the whole Church 19. There are other arguments of our Aduersaries but we may easily answere Canus l. 2. de â—ocis Theol. c. 8. Bellar. l 3. deverbo Dei c. vlt. therunto by that whiâ—h hath byn already said the which Melâ—hior Canus and Bellarmine do prosecute and handle more at large vnto whom we referre the Reader For they are borrowed of the Anabaptists Libertines wherby the authority of the holy Scriptures themselues is no lesse diminished and infringed then that of the Church CHAP. VII That the Church doth not only giue a bare testimony but also authority to the Scripture THIS matter is heere briefly to be examined that it may more clearly be vnderstood how necessary the Churches approbation is to the establishing of the authority of the holy Scriptures But to the end that it may more clearely appeare wherof we dispute in this place it is to be considered that seing that our Aduersaries cannot deny but that the Church aâ—â—oardeth some testimony to the holy Scriptures they affime that this testimony of the Church is only a bare testimony and not a testimony of authority 2. For there are two kindes of testimonyes The one is called a testimony of authority because vpon it the truth of the things testified dependeth Yt is called also a necessary testimony because without it the thing in question is not sufficiently testified The other is called a bare testimony and not necessary that is to say when such a testimony is not so necessary because the matter is otherwise Ioan. 1. v. 7. sufficiently testified Such a testimony was that which S. Sohn Baptist gâ—ue of Christ For Christ had sufficient testimonies besides 3. Of the former testimony of authority Christ saith But I do not receyue my Ioan. 5. v. 34. 36. Ibid. testimony from men to wit the testimony of authority necessary For of the bare testimony he had spoken a little before You sent vnto Iohn and he hath giuen testimony to truth But this was a bare testimony wherfore Christ a little after said I haue a greater testimony then Iohn for the workes which the Father hath giuen me to profit them the very works which I do giue testimony of me that the Father hath sent me And the Father that sent me himselfe hath giuen testimony of me All which saith Christ of the testimony of authority Our Aduersaries therefore say that the Church giueth only a bare testimony to the Scriptures as S. Iohn gaue to Christ but she giueth not a necessary testimony or that of authority 4. But that the testimony of the Church is altogether necessary as that Matt. 3. v. vlt. Matt. 17. v. 5. wherof the authority of the Scriptures dependeth is very manifest by that which is said in the former Chapter And by that also which we alleadged in the first disputation where we shew that there is now no firme testimony wherby we may know certainly which booke is canonicall and which not besides the testimoniy of the Catholike Church For now neyther are the miracles wrought which God did in tymes past neyther doth God speake immediatly by himselfe as he spake in the baptisme and transfiguration of Christ VVherefore there remayneth only the third ordinary manner wherby God speaketh by the mouth of the Church The Church therfore doth not giue a bare testimony only to the holy Scriptures but the testimony of authority to wit that wherof the authority of the Scriptures dependeth as concerning vs and our knowledge 5. Moreouer if the doctrine of S. Paul stood in need of the Churches approbation as we haue already proued out of Supr c. 3. §. 13. huius Controu the Scriptures much more S. Lukes Ghospell who was oÌ„ly S. Pauls choller stood in need therof as Tertullian witnesseth especially because S. Luke receyued not those things which he wrot by reuelation from God Tertu l. 4. contra Marâ—â— 2. Luc. â— v. 2. as S. Paul did but by tradition from others as he hymselfe writeth And the same also may be said of S. Marke whose Ghospell as S. Hierome writeth the Apostle S. Peter approued and by his authority he commaunded it should be read in the Church 6. But neyther is it true that some say that the authority of approuing the Canonicall bookes was only resident in the Apostles and the primitiue Church but the ensuing Church hath it not For the Apostles did not approue all the Canonicall bookes of the new Testament For if they had donne so there had remained no doubt of many of them for many ages after the death of the Apostles euen among Catholike good men as we Supra ca. 5. Contr. 1. haue noted before But many yeares after the Apostles tyme by the generall Councells and Decrees of the Church some bookes were approued wherof there was before some doubt 7. Yea more then six hundred yeares after Christ there were many Catholikes who did not receyue the authority of the Toletan Concil c. 16. Apocalyps as appeareth out of the fourth Toletane Councell 8. And that which is more before the Councell of Trent ther were many Catholikes who thought that it was lawfull for them to doubt of all the bookes of the new Testament the which in tymes past S. Hierome seemed to iudge as doubtfull as are the Epistles of S. Iames the second of S. Peter the second and third of S. Iohn the Epistles of S. Iude the Epistles to the Hebrewes and the Apocalyps And if it had not byn for the Councell of TreÌ„t or some other new Decree of the Church none would as yet condemne them as Heretikes who called those bookes in question 9. By that which hath byn sayd it appeareth manifestly that the Canonicall Scriptures receiue their strength and authority not from the approbation of the primitiue Church but rather from the approbation of the Church succeeding yea euen of this present Church to wit of the Councell of Trent 10 Lastly albeit the present Church should not haue the authority of approuing Scriptures as these men say yet notwithstanding for three other reasons the authority testimony of this present Church is necessary First because we know not certainly what bookes the primitiue Church hath eyther written or not writen approued or reiected but by the testimony of the present Church Secondly neyther do we know whether those bookes came vncorrupted vnto vs or no but by the same testimony Thirdly because we cannot otherwise know which is the true sense of those bookes CHAP. VIII The Argumentes of our Aduersaryes are confuted THE first argument of our Aduersaries is The Church is grounded vpon the word of God and by the word also of God â—t is ingendred nourished and gouerned and it is subiect to the word of God as to the words of her spouse I answere our Aduersaries do in a manner coÌ„found the writen word of God
of it albeit it be immediatly from God to the end it be made manyfest vnto vs. For otherwise we should not be obliged by the authority therof But this is not done now by miracles nor by the immediate or extraordinary reuelation of God Therfore it resteth that we say it is done by the ordinary mediate reuelation of God that is to say by the Church or rather by the holy Ghost which speaketh vnto vs by the Church CHAP. IX That the Church is the Iudge of all Controuersies in matters of Faith SEING that there arise daily so many disputations and Controuersyes of matters of faith none can deny but that there must necessarily be some Iudge appointed who must define end and determine such Controuersyes for otherwise there will neuer be an end of such matters But it is a great difficulty who must be this Iudge The Sectaries of this tyme almost all refuse the Iudgment of the Church For they see very well that if they admit her as iudge all their errors wil be quite ouerthrowne Wherfore some of them affirme that the sole Scripture must be the Iudge of all Controuersies and this was the first doctrine of our Aduersaries to wit Luther Zuinglius 2. But our later Aduersaries when they consider that it is an absurd thing to make the Scripture being a thing Cap. 18. Controu 1. without life the Iudge as we haue declared before they fly vnto their priuate spirit the which they will haue the iudge of all Controuersies But least they may seeme to attribute too much vnto themselues they endeauour to colour their priuate spirit with the famous title or name of the holy Ghost affirming the holy Ghost to be the only iudge of all Controuersyes 3. Wherfore there are three thinges heere to be proued First that the Scripture cannot be Iudge Secondly that neyther the priuate spirit can be it Thirdly that the Catholike Church is the only and most true Iudge of all Controuersies 4. As concerning the first wheras our AduÌ„ersaries euery where teach that nothing is to be belieued which is not expressely to be found in holy Scripture it is a strange thing that they would perswade men that the Scripture is the Iudge of all Controuersies wheras we read no such thing in any place of holy Scripture 5. Yea euen in these testimony is only attributed to the Scriptures and not Iudgment Search the Scriptures saith Christ Ioan. 5. v. 19. and the same are they that giue testimony of me And hence it is that the law of God is often called in Scripture in the Hebrew phrase Eda or Eduth or Tenda that is to say Psalm 118. a Testimony yea euen in one Psalme it is called aboue twenty tymes by that name 6. Moreouer in the Prophet Isay in the same place falsely cited by our Aduersaries that they may proue therby the Scripture to be the iudge of Controuersies it is called a witnesse or a testimony and not a Iudge nay rather to the Isa 8. v. 20. Law saith the Prophet and to the testimony 7. Furthermore one thing is more absurd that in matters of such moment to appoint such a deafe and dumme iudge and who may also be corrupted for both parties and whose sentence eytâ—er party vseth indifferently But it is manifest that the Scripture is such a iudge for it can neyther speake nor heare and so in like manner do all Heretickes ancient and moderne also vse the Scriptures Lastly almost all our Aduersaries do see how absurd these things are and therfore they fly vnto their owne priuate spirit the which they call the holy Ghost Wherfore let vs come now to the second point 8. As concerning therfore this priuate spirit first there is none who doubteth but that the holy Ghost is the chiefe Iudge of all Controuersyes But the question is where this holy Spirit is to be found and in whome it remayneth 9. Moreouer it is certaine that the holy Ghost doth not remayne or is to be found in any booke least peraduenture our Aduersaries should send vs to their Bibles but in the hartes of the belieuers Now we aske whether this holy Ghost which is the Iudge of all be in the hart of euery belieuer or rather in the hart of the whole Catholike Church If they say in the hart of the Catholike Church we haue our desire if they say in the hart of euery priuate man it will follow that no priuate person can erre in his owne iudgment seeing that the holy Ghost cannot erre in his iudgment Heâ—re truly we seeke for that Iudge which caÌ„not erre 10. Furthermore euery priuate man shall be come the Iudge of the whole Church if euery such priuate person haue this spirit which is the Iudge of the whole Church whereupon there will ensue a great confusion in the Church of God 11. Besides that if euery belieuer be the Iudge theÌ„ our Aduersaries must needs admit the auncient Fathers as Iudges of all Controuersies the which they will neuer do for they dare not deny but that the auncient Fathers were true belieuers why therfore do they attribute vnto themselues that which they so vâ—hemently deny to all the auncient Fathers 21. Moreouer if euery belieuer cannot erre in his iudgment much lesse can a great many such erre and least of all can the Church of all belieuers erre Wherefore whatsoeuer our Aduersaries say they wil be forced to confesse and graunt that the holy Ghost is the Iudge as he remaineth in the whole Church speaking and iudging by the mouth therof and in this manner euen out of our Aduersaries doctrine we gather by a necessary consequence our opinion 13. Lastly that which they affirme that the priuate spirit of euery particuler person is Iudge is therby declared to be false that they themselues acknowledge that there is no priuate man which at some tymes cannot erre in his indgment but heere we inquire for a Iudge which cannot erre For otherwise in matters of such moment and of which our eternall saluation dependeth we should dangerously be forced to haue recourse to an erroneous Iudge whose iudgement is variable vncertaine deceitfull and oftentymes manifestly false 14. But now as concerning the third point that the Church is the iudge of all Controuersies we proue by these arguments First the Church hath all the properties of a fit iudge for first she hath an exact knowledge the holy Ghost shall teach you saith Christ all truth 15. Secondly the Church cannot be corrupted by any giftes or praiers For she is as the Apostle witnesseth the pillar and ground of truth 16. Thirdly the Church heareth 2. Tim. 3. v. 15. speaketh giueth her iudgment and examineth the testimonies of Scriptures and Fathers as experience it selfe teacheth vs. 17. Fourthly we are bound to stand to the iudgement of the Church VVho will not heare the Church saith our Lord let Matt. 18. v. 17. him be vnto thee as an â—eathen and
manners some forcible and conuincing arguments may be taken 5. First out of the common consent of all or at the least of the most part without any contradiction at all For if they had all erred in a necessary point of saluation the whole auncient Church should also haue erred the which euen our Aduersaries Cap. 7. huius â—oÌ„t acknowledge to be false as we haue declared before 6. Secondly that promise of Christ Matth. vâ—t v. penuit vit wherby he assured vs that he would be alwayes preseÌ„t with his Church was properly made to the Pastors and Doctors of the same for he promised that he would be present with those whom he sent to baptize and preach to wit the Pastors of the Church 7. Thirdly Pastors and Doctors Ad Ephes 4. v 11. 12. 13. 14. were ordained by God in his Church as the Apostle witnesseth to the end that we be not carried about with euery wind of Doctrine but that we may continue in the vnity of sayth till we meet with Christ in the last day But if all the Pastors and Doctors of the Church could erre we might easily be carried away with many blastes of strange doctrines neyther could the vnity of fayth alwayes continue and in this manner God should haue prouided very badly for his Church that it should neuer erre 8. Finally if all the Pastors and Doctors of the Church should teach any doctrine contrary to fayth there should no sincere and true preaching of the word of God remayne in the Church seeing that only Pastors and Doctors are lawfully called to the preaching of the true fayth of God But without the sincere preaching of the Suprac 8. huius controu §. 15 word of God it is impossible that the Church of Christ should consist as euen our Aduersaries confesse and as we haue declared before 9. Secondly we take arguments out of the auncient holy Fathers as out of most faythfull and true witnesses of that fayth which in their tymes was preached in the Catholike Church For our Aduersaries acknowledge that in their tyme the true and sincere fayth of Christ was preached We therefore alledge them as witnesses of that fayth for if we do not belieue them who lieued at that time whom will we belieue but they were both eye witnesses and nothing suspected of falshood as S. Augustine declareth very well disputing against the Pelagians 10. Thirdly we take arguments out S. Aug. Tom. 7. cont IulianuÌ„ Pelag. l. 2. cap. vlt. of the holy Fathers as out of those Doctors whose writings haue byn receiued and approued by the auncient Church of God For it was wont to impugne and condeÌ„ne those writers who wrote any thing contrary to the true fayth least their writings might be hurtfull to the future Church and on the other side it approued their writings who taught the true fayth There is yet extant a Decree of the Vide Tâ— 2. Concil inter Decreta S. Gelasij Papae Roman Councell set forth almost a thousand two hundred yeares agoe concerning these writings They therfore who haue beene approued by the auncient Church are most worthily to be belieued because the primitiue Church as our Aduersaries confesse hath neuer erred in iudgement concerning matters of fayth 11. Eourthly we take arguments out of the holy Fathers as out of the most holy and learned men and Blessed Saints of God For eyther they had the sincere true fayth and if it be so we should imbrace the same or they had it not and if it be so they were not Saynts of God nor could they be acceptable vnto him as the Apostle testifyeth 12. By this very argument the Catholiks Socrat. l. 5. c. 10. Soâ—oÌ„ l 8. c. 12. historiae Eccles in tymes past ouercame the Arians for they vrged them to receiue the holy Fathers who wrote before Arius his tyme or they should excommunicate them as Socrates and Sozomenus do testify 13. And to this purpose serue very fitly those words of S. Augustine wherein S. Aug. Tom 7. contra Iuli â—â—â— Peâ—agianuÌ„ l. 2. c. vlt. he declareth what was the iudgment of the primitiue Church concerning this matter For thus speaketh S. Augustine to the heretiks of his time whiles he vrgeth them with the testimony and authority of the auncient Fathers who were before him They had saith he no regard eyther to our friendship or to yours neyther were they enemies to either of vs they are neyther angry with you nor with vs they were not moued with pitty and compassion on eyther side what they found in the Church that they hâ—ld what they had learned that they taught they deliuered to their Children that which they had receiued from their owne Fathers VVe pleaded in our cause against you before these iudges and yet by them our cause was ended long since neyther we nor you were so much knowne to them and yet we bring sorth their sentences giuen in our fauour against you VVe had not as yet begunne any combat with you and yet so long agoe they proclaymed our victory So farre S. Augustine 14. Finally Vincentius Lyrinensis a French man who liued at the same tyme with S. Augustine proueth the same very well by many reasons and examples throughout all that most learned booke the which he wrote against the prophane Nouelties of all heresies And we will conclude and end this Chapter of the authority of Vide prâ—sertim c. 4 40. eiusdeÌ„ libelli holy Fathers and this our whole disputation of the Church of God with the same words wherewith he ended that his golden booke For thus he writeth in the end of it If neyther the Apostolicall definitions nor ecclesiasticall decrees be to be violated wherby according to the most holy and vniforme consent of all antiquity all heretikes and lastly Pelagius Celestius and Nestorius for these were the last Heretiks that liued in Vincentius his tyme haue bin alwayes most iustly condemned it is necessary in truth that all those Catholikes who will heereafter proue and shew themselues to be the true and lawfull children of our holy mother the Catholike Church should adhere and vnite themselues stedfastely as also dy in the profession of that sacred saith of those holy Fathers lastly that they should abhorre detest banish and persecute all the prophane nouelties of all most wicked Heretikes Hither to S. Vincentius The end of the second Controuersy THE faults escaped in printing it may please the gentle Reader to correct them of his courtesy FINIS
â—lla verba 1. â—l Cor. 4. v. 6. word of God but of this one point that we must not be puffed vp in pryde as euen Caluin himselfe acknowledgeth 5. But to omit all such thinges as other Catholike Doctors haue very well and learnedly written of the proper and literall sense of these wordes yea that we may also graunt to our Aduersaries that this which they alledge is the true sense they erre very much in that they thinke that these wordes of Moyses belong vnto vs and that we are no lâ—sle now bound and obliged by them then the Ieues were in tymes past For these wordes do no more appertaine vnto vs then those of the same booke of Deuteronomy Câ—rsed be â—e that Devt 27. v. vâ—â— abideth not in the wordes of this Law and sâ—lfilâ—â—th them not in worke From which wordes S. Paul manifestly teacheth that we are deliuered Ad Gal. 3. l. 10. 1â— and freed by the grace of Christ Iesus But seing that in these wordes which they do heere alledge Moyses commaundeth that the ChildreÌ„ of Israel should obserue fulfill euery word which he had commaunded them for so it is expresly set downe Deuteronomy 12. the last verse in the Hebrew text and in all the Bibâ—s of our Aduersaries and he presently addeth that nothing is to be added or detracted from all these he manifestly commaundeth the keeping of the whole Moysaicall Law and of all the Sacraments Sacrifices and Ceremonies of the old Testament For he doth not only commaund that nothing should be added but also that nothing is to be detracted of all those thinges by him commauÌ„ded Wherefore if our Aduersaries obiect against vs that we adde any thing against this precept we may more iustly obiect vnto then that they detract farre more then we add seing that they neyther obserue the Circumcision nor the legall Sacrifices nor other Ceremonies which are so often and so straitely commaunded in Deuteronomy It cannot truly be denyed but that this is to detract somewhat from those thinges which Moyses commaunded and therâ—ore our Aduersaries must needes confesse that these are the wordes of the old Law and consequently do appertaine nothing vnto vs. Out of this which hath byn said it followeth that our Aduersaries do very indiscretly foolishly boast and bragge of those wordes of Moyses For in the exposition thereof they erre farre from the truth and a great deale more in the application when they go about to proue that we are also bound and obliged by them 6. Our Aduersaries take their second argument out of these wordes of Salomoâ—s Prouerb 30. v. 5. 6. prouerbâ— Euery word of God is fiery it is a sâ—ield of defence to those which hope in it do not add any thing to the words therof and thou shalt not be found and reprehended as a lyar I answere that this place maketh nothing against vs for in that place there is no mention made of Scripture only but of al the word of God And it is most true that nothing should be added to all the whole word of God the which is to be belieued with a Catholike faith as the true word of God For as we haue said before our faith relyeth only on the word of God but the Scripture only is not all the word of God because all Traditions also which contayne poynts of faith belong therunto as we haue sufficiently Supra c. 2. proued already But they add to the word of God are lyarâ— who affirme that God sayd this or that which indeed he neuer spake And of this sort â—re those false Prophets of whome God by the Prophet Ieremy complayneth saying They Hier. 23. v. 16. 21. speake the vision of their hartes not from the mouth of our Lord againe I did not speake vnto them and they did prophesy This place also may very well be vnderstood of those who add any thing contrary to the word of God For in the Hebrew text there is set downe that particle Ghal which often tymeâ— signifieth contrary or against as we haue already declared in our answere to the first argument CHAP. IX Wherin is examined that place of S. Pauls Epistle to the Galathâ—ans which our Aduersaries do obiect against Traditions THE third argument our Aduersaries take out of the first Confess Rupâ—lâ— Art 3. Chapter to the Galathians the which they haue also added to their confession of fayth as inuincible For they haue omitted their second argument as not strong inough for their purpose But thus they frame their argument The Apostle Gal. 1. v. 8. 9. sayth twice an Anathema to those who teach any thing besidâ— that which he hath taught therefore nothing is to be receiued or belieued but Scripture Our Aduersaries haue this place of the Apostle often in their mouthes wherefore it shal be exaâ—ined more exactly We answere therfore thaâ— our Aduersaries do erre heere for two reasons first because our whole controuersy is of the written word of God but in these words there is no mention made of the writteÌ„ word or of Scripture but only of the word preached and deliuered viâ—â— vâ—câ— to the Galathians by S. Paul And hence it is that S. Augustine farre otherwise August Tom. 7. de vnit Ecâ—les c. 24. then our Aduersaries disputing against the Donatists proueth by these words of the Apostle that we are bound to admit and belieuâ— the Traditions of the Church as for exaÌ„ple that those who are once orderly and lawfully christened by Heretiks are not to be baptized againe And well truly for that which is viua voce deliuered is a Tradition and not Scpriture Moreouer if the Scripture only conteyned expressely all the poynts of fayth the Apostle would rather haue proposed the Scripture as the rule of fayth then his owne preaching seing that the Scripture is manifestly well knowne to all Nations but his owne preaching to the Galathians only But our Aduersaries vrge againe and say that all that which the Apostle preached to the Galathians was written eyther before that tyme or afterward by S. Paul and the other Apostles they say this but they proue it not For this is no where written in holy Scripture and so whiles they goe about to perswade vs that all points of fayth are writteÌ„ they coyne inuent a new poynâ— which is no where extant in Scripture that is to say that all such thingâ— as S Paul viua voce taught the Galathians are written But we following herein S. Augustine do 3. Aug. Tom. 9. Tract 96. in Io. Tom 7. de â—nit Eccles c. 21. infine gather much better by these words and infer thus against them If there must be nothing belieued but that which S. Paul preached to the Galathians and that none knoweth certainly what are those things which he preached but by the Traditions and doctrine of the Church it followeth manifestly that besids the Scripture we must also belieue
the Traditions and doctrine of the Church seing that without them we cannot certainly and without errour know what were those things which the Apostle taught the Galathians 2. Secondly our Aduersaries do erre in that they do not rightly expound that particle in the wordes of S. Paul praeter besides but rather contrary to the Apostles meaning For the Latin word praeter as also the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Hebrew Ghal haue two significations In the former it signifyeth all that which is not the selfe same thing whereof we doe speake in the later sense it signifieth that only which is contrary to that we speake of In which sense praeter signifieth the same that contra doth to wit against the former sense is manifest inough the later is proued by these places of Scripture Act. 18. v 13. where all do translate these Greeke words Calu in act Apoâ— an 1560. Beza ed. an 1560. 1565. 1598. Hemic Steph. in thes linguae Graecae Tom. 2. dictione 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be against the Law so hath not only the vulgar edition but also Caluin and Beza and all the French Bibles of Geneua Likewise in the first to the Romans the 26. vers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signyfieth against Nature so hath the vulgar edition and all the French Bibles of Geneua yea Cicero as witnesseth Henricus Stephanus doth thus translate this phrase out of Greeke Againe in the 4. to the Romanes the 18. verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth against as the vulgar edition and Beza hath in all editions Moreouer in the 11. to the Romans the 24. vers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth against as the vulgar edition and all the Bibles of Geneua haue finally in the last to the Romans the 17. vers aswell the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Latin word praeter in our interpreter signifieth the same thing that contra doth as manifestly appeareth by the precedent wordes for dissentions and scandals are contrary or against the doctrine of Christ and not only besides his doctrine Wherfore Caluin in his Commentaries set forth in the yeare 1557. vpon the Epistle to the Romanes and Sebastian Castalio and all the French Bibles of Geneua haue contrary or against the doctrine and albeit Beza translateth it besidâ— the doctrine yet in his last edition set forth in the yeare 1598. he translateth it contrary to the doctrine and in his Annotations he warneth that it is rather so to be translated It is not therfore strange or absurd that the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Latyne praeter should fignify the same that contra doth 3. But now that this word may not only be thus vsed but that also it must necessarily be so vnderstood and taken in this place we haue shewed by the absurdities which would otherwise follow The first is that S. Paul would haue sayd Anathema to S. Iohn Euangelist who many yeares after the preaching of S. Paul to the Galathians yea after his death wrote his Apocalyps wherein there are many new reuelations which S. Paul had not preached to the GalathaÌ„s because they were not theÌ„ reuealed by God 4. The second absurdity that S. Paul had pronounced Anathema vpon all those who in his tyme by a propheticall spirit 1. Cor 14. v. 2. 4. 16. 30. did dayly prophesy new things For in the Apostles tymes there were many such as appeareth by the first epistle to the Corinthians And S. Paul could not preach to the Galathians that which God had not yet reuealed 5. The third absurdity the Apostle for the same reason had pronounced Anathema against S. Luke who in the Acts of the Apostles relateth many thinges which happened long after S. Paul left Galatia 6. The fourth absurdity the Apostle for the same cause also had condemned himselfe with the sayd Aâ—athema For he wrote many Epistles after he had left Galatia wherein he reateth many thinges which hapned afterward vnto him eyther at Rome or in other places 7. Lastly it is an absurd thing to think either God after those wordes of S. Paul to the Galathians could reueale to men nothing more by an Angell sent from heauen or that the said Angell who by the commaundement of God should reueale any new thing but not contrary to faith should incurre that Anathema by S. Paul seing that this were to wrest the Anathema vpon God himselfe who commaunded the Angell to do so This place therefore cannot be vnderstood of diuers and distinct thinges from those which S. Paul taught the Galathians but only of contrary and opposite thinges vnto them But according to this sense of the word praeter all the foresayd Absurdities doe cease For neyther S. Iohn in his Apocalyps nor S. Luke in the Actes of the Apostles nor any other which did prophesy nor S. Paul himself euer wrote or taught any thing contrary to that which S. Paul taught the Galathians But euen God himself cannot Ad Heb. 16. v. â—8 reueale the contrary by an Angell because according to the Apostle It is impossible for God to lye 8. Neyther is it sufficient for me to say that those thinges which were afterward reuealed and written were not necessary pointes of faith to saluation For S. Paul did not say if any shall Euangelize vnto you any point necessary to saluation but absolutely if any shall Euangelize any thing contrary to that which you haue receyued Moreouer all those thinges which were afterward set downe in holy Scripture were true points of faith the which euery ChristiaÌ„ is necessarily bouÌ„d to belieue if not expressely yet at the least virtually and generally euery one is bouÌ„d to belieue if not expressely yet at the least virtually and generally euery one is bouÌ„d to belieue with an assured faith all those things which are in holy Writ to be most certaine and true 9. Finally euen our Aduersaries confession doth conuince this to be most true for now they acknowledge that all those thinges which by a necessary conseqeÌ„ce are deduced out of the Scriptures do belong vnto the word of God and are points of saith and therefore they may be lawfully preached vnto the people as we haue Suprac 3. said before But al these are distinct things from those which are expresly written in holy Scripture For the antecedent whereby some other thing may be inferred is distinct from that which is inferred For it were a ridiculous illation if one and the same thing should be inferred from it selfe But that which is inferred in a good collection is neuer contrary to the antecedent The Apostle therefore speaketh of doctrine contrary to his and not absolutly of any other distinct doctrine 10. And in this sense the Fathers doe often say that S. Paul affirmed in this place that nothing was to be taught besids that August Tom 7. contra lit Petil. Donat. l. 3. cap. 6. August Tom.