truth requireth And againe wee must not agree to the Catholyke Bishoppes if at anie time they are deceiued taking opinion contrarie to the canonical scriptures And againe I haue learned to giue this honour and reuerence onely to those writinges which are called Canonicall that I faithfully beleeue the authours of them haue not in anie point at anie time erred in their writings but other mens writings I doo so reade that though they excell in sanctimonie or holynesse yet I doo not therefore thinke it true because they so affirme but because they are able to perswade mee either by Canonicall Scripture or by probable reason those thinges which dissent not from the truth Thus farre he These things haue our aduersaries themselues recorded amongest their Decretalls insomuch that they maie not denie this first rule least they seeme to denie their owne Decretalls The second Rule THE auncient Doctours doo oftentimes by the name of Traditious vnderstand the same doctrine that is cōtained in the Apostolical writing That this rule is true it shall appeare by that which followeth Irenaeus as it is reported by Eusebius doth saie That Policarpus taught these things which he had learned of the Apostles which things both the Church deliuered and are onely to bee accounted true thus much he He saith Tradit the Church doth deliuer that is doeth teach namely out of the writings of the Apostles If hée were not thus to be vnderstood how could that stand which he hath sayde And those things are onely true which thing is verie easie to be gathered of the forenamed Irenaeus whose wordes are by Eusebius reported Policarpus saith he did report those things which he had heard of the Apostles altogether agreeable to the holy Scriptures And the said Irenaeus saith in another place The Church of Rome wrote to the Church of Corinth shewing them the same tradition which they had receiued of the apostles to wit that there was one God almightie so consequently the doctrine contained in the bookes of Moses And a little after he saith Manie of the vnlearned and barbarous people beeing ignoraunt of the Scriptures doo diligently keepe the olde auncient traditions beleeuing in one God in Iesus Christ born of the virgin Marie Tertulian The Apostolicall doctrine doth allow nothing contrarie to the rule of Gods word namely those things which the Apostles haue taught and committed to writings The third Rule THE auncient Doctors do name that vnwritten traditions which in expresse words are not found in the holy Scriptures but notwithstanding if you diligently mark the effect thereof is contained in the Scriptures So Basil confesseth that he vsed certaine tearmes against heretikes which are not written but yet notwithstāding faith he are not contrarie to the true sence of the Scriptures And Nazianzenus refuteth the Macidonians which did denie the deitie of the holy Ghost because he is not tearmed with plaine words in the holy Scriptures to be the third person in the deitie saying y ◠ther are diuers things in the Scriptures which are not plainly expressed As for example If y ◠say twise two I will say saith he y ◠thou saist foure In like manner Augustine doth proue that the baptisme of infants is contained in holy Scriptures and that they shoulde not be rebaptised The like is to be sayde of the word or tearme Omoousion the trinitie such like concerning the which we haue spoken in the former chapter The 4. Rule THE auncient Doctors vnder the name of traditions do not meane anie certaine grounded opinion touching religion but ecclesiasticall ceremonies and to the end they may the more beautifie and set foorth the order of the Church they commonly ascribe the sayde ceremonies to the Apostles as if they were the principall authours of the same Now many and diuers y e rites and ceremonies of the Church haue béene with what studie and diligence the auncient fathers haue set foorth the same that by all meanes possible they might stoppe Schismes and diuisions in the Church It néedeth not héere perticularlye to declare sith the volumes of the Fathers doo euerie where abound with those things wherfore let the readers consider what Augustine hath written in two Epistles to Ianuarius Hierome hath thus set forth the order and ceremonies of the Church Let each Prouince sayeth he haue authōtrie to determine touching the Institutions of the elders and traditions of the Apostles which words of Hierome are diuersly to be considered And that manye and sundrie orders and institutions of the ancient Fathers are to bée altered and chaunged by reason of many circumstaunces euen our aduersaries themselues haue not denyed neither were it méete in this behalfe that the Ecclesiasticall ceremonies shoulde be made equall to the grounded doctrine of Religion And therefore hath Tertulian said That the onely lawe of sayth doth remaine immutable And Hierome himselfe doeth giue counsell that such orders and customes of the church are to be kept which saith he doo not hinder or hurt our faith The 5. Rule SOme of the olde Fathers hauing theyr faultes did ouermuch fauour these vnwritten traditions and therfore did sometime true consent to heretikes We haue heard afore out of Irenaeus that the auncient heretiks did defend their heresies by vnwritten traditions And Eusebius maketh mention of one Papias which brought in certaine straunge doctrine into the Church affirming the same to be deliuered as comming from the Apostles by tradition The like errour there was of the Chiliastians into y ◠which error Tertulian Iustinus Martire others haue fallen And therfore the works of the auncient Fathers are not to be read without great iudgement The 6. Rule MAnie and diuerse bookes haue beene put forth vnder the name and title of the ancient Fathers which notwithstanding are counterfait It hath come to passe through the fault of those who haue ben the writers printers of bookes y e diuerse bookes haue falsely borne the name of those auncient Doctors which antiquitie hath commended As for erāple the bookes intituled Rapsodiae were attributed to Clement S. Paules Disciple and also the booke of the Reuelation of S. Iohn Baptist his head is authorised vnder the name of Ciprian when notwithstanding there is mention made of Pipin king of Fraunce and to conclude there are diuerse volumes vnder the title and name of Augustine in the which the opinion of Augustine is refuted I néed not to make mētion of an infinit number like vnto these Wherefore that which Hierome did somtune speake of the bookes Apocripha may verie fitly bée spoken of the writinges of the olde Fathers Let a man take heede sayth hée of the bookes Apocripha and if at anie time he bee disposed to read them not for triall of truth but for examples sake of good manners let him knowe they are not bookes of them whose titles and
names they beare but that there are manie corrupt things mixed in them and therefore it is great wisdome how to choose out gold amongest dirt and claie thus much Hierome Now these foundations béeing laid it behooueth vs a little to search and sifte the obiections of our aduersaries which they take from the olde and auncient doctors Clemens Alexandrinus The workeman that is sent foorth into the Haruest of the Lord hath a double husbandrie to wit the vnwritten and the written Againe As the Philosophers had certain secrets touching their opinions which they deliuered by traditions so likewise the Apostles And therefore Paule saith We speake wisedome amongst those that are perfect To this I aunswere thus First that this Author hath not handled the question sincerely and purely and this fault is easely to be found euen by the authoritie of y e scriptures for Christ saith thus What soeuer I speak vnto you in secret that speak openly that you heard in the eare that preach vpon the house top c. Wherefore Alexandrinus is plainly deceiued when he goeth about to mixe the mysterie of Christian religion with the hid secrets of philosophie And Irenaeus and Tertulian doo both witnesse and testifie that the olde heretikes were of that minde which heere Alexandrinus doth hold and therefore abused those words of Paul saieng I speake wisdome amongst those that are perfect as Irenaeus as I haue before said doth affirm And Clemens doubted not to say y e euen y e Grecians were saued by Philosophy wher and ceremonies amongst the which hée â—â—â—koneth vp that most auncient custome whereby the Christians did alwaies stanâ— when they did praye from the time of Easter vntill Whitsontide In this disputation therefore Basil doubteth not to propone that which was commonlye spoken touching the Apostolike mysteries and this is it that our aduersaries so greatlye triumph against vs out of the wordes of Basil but truly as with all my heart I doo acknowledge the goodnesse of the cause wherevpon Basil then stood when he affirmed the holy ghost to be god yet not withstanding without offence of Basil be it spoken me thinketh hée did too curioustye séeke for straunge Argumentes when as that matter might be prooued by playne proper and true groundes of Scriptures The Deitie of the holye Ghost is in diuers places of the holye Scriptures to bée prooued to what ende then shoâ—â—d the Apostles delyuer by Tradition certaine secrete formes touching that matter and as it were as Basil sayeth whisper it into the eares of certayne men I praye you was there any thing to be kept close in this point of doctrine that behooued the Christians especially to know and professe Furthermore to call that thing secrete or hidde which was then publikelye taught almost in the whole worlde I knowe not well how Basil could doe it And inasmuch as this fained Apostolike mysteries was in times past the verie grounde of heresies as before it is shewed neyther furtherod the cause of Basil which otherwise is to bée prooued with most firme reasons I wish that Basil had reformed that kinde of Argument if it bée worthie to bee called an argument especially sith the olde Fathers verie wisely haue warned vs to foresée that many labours shuld not grow of one But howsoeuer the matter goeth our aduersaries haue nothing heere wherof they maye glorie or boast for when Basil affirmeth this hind of speaking of y e holy ghost That it hath sprong from the Apostles tradition By the name of Tradition héere hée vnderstandeth that which although not in manifest and flat words remaineth in the Scripture yet notwithstanding the sum and matter it selfe is there contained touching the which reade our third Rule What if our aduersaries themselues long time since haue not obserued and kept this kinde of speaking in their Churches And that I maye not vrge that that same custome is now growen out of vse forgotten amongst them whereby they héeretofore did stand when they did praye betwéene Easter and Whitsontide as is before sayd Wherefore let our aduersaries consider how properly they expounde the words of Basil which are these Which both are of like force effect to godlines and how well they agrée with Basil himselfe Chrisostome Heere it is manifest that they deliuered not all things by writing but manie things by tradition without writing and these are as worthie to bee beleeued as those which are written Therfore we think the traditions of the Church worthie to be beleeued It is a tradition therefore search no farther for the matter Chrisostome intreating of these wordes of Paule written to the Thessalonians the second Epistle and second chapter saieng Holde fast the Traditions which you haue learned either by word or by Epistle Hée gathereth that not only Paule but also the rest of the Apostles did not deliuer commit all things to writings the which how sure an argument it is wée haue declared in our former chapter But to let this thing passe least wée shoulde séeme to make a nèedlesse repetition I therefore saye that Chrisostome doeth speake touching those traditions which although they are not expressed by word in the holy Scriptures yet in substance are there contained for otherwise these wordes of Chrisostome could not stand saying It is a tradition thou maist seeke no farther thereofâ— For then it should followe that wée shoulde no more search in holy Scriptures the which God forbid that it should come in the minde of so godly a Father who doeth most often inculcate and beat into the minde the reading of the holy Scriptures Therefore I suppose by this worde Tradition of the Church by Chrisostome is meant that doctrine the which the Church being instructed by the writings of the Prophets Apostles doth deliuer ouer vnto the church that is to saie doeth teach instruct whatsoeuer she hath drawne out of y e most pure fountaine of y e Scriptures touching which matter séeke the second rule Nazianzene The doctrine of the Gospell is more excellent through the figures of the Church which beeing receiued by tradition wee haue kept euen vntill this time I expound this place as I did the other afore going to wit that hée speaketh of those traditions which maye bée prooued by the scriptures of the which sée the second and third rules for if that our aduersaryes shall say that the Gospell is made the better through their holie water and through such like trumperâ—es appertaining to their Masse they would make men laugh nay rather I should saie wéepe who reuerently thinke and are well affctioned toward the true worshipping of God Epiphanius Wee must also vse traditions for all thinges cannot bee taken from the holy Scripture Wherefore some things the holy Apostles deliuered vnto vs by the Scriptures and some thing by Tradition Héere Epiphanius disputeth touching certaine rites and ceremonies which the
Ergo because some of the Apostles did recite some out of the Ethnicks bookes it must follow that the Apostles did attribute authoritie to those bookes in matters of faith which thing is absurde and contrarie to the opinion of all men Let vs tourne this obiection vppon our aduersaries after this sort If the Apostles did at anie time recite the traditions of auncient fathers but onelie to beautifie those things which wer established and confirmed by most firme testimonies of holie scriptures How much lesse then ought wee to recite the traditions of the olde fathers to the confirming of those things which want testimonie of the Scripture Thus therefore we may amend the errour of this their obiection and saye that the Apostles whereas they did applie thēselues to the capacitie of men that they might thereby the better stirre them vp or the more easily conuince them they vsed some times the bookes Apocripha as also sentences gathred from Ethincks to wit when they did dispute of those things the truth whereof was manifest in the holye scriptures The heretikes did wreast the writinges of Paule that in the verie time of the Apostles and also it is most manifest that the heretiks yea Sathan himselfe haue cloked their heresies euen with the Scriptures ergo we must not cleaue to the Scriptures alone The antecedent is proued 2. Pe. 3. as also by the Ecclesiasticall historie and also Math 4. If thou be the sonne of GOD cast thy selfe down headlong for it is written he shal giue his Angells charge ouer thee c. I admit their antecedent But I denie their consequent Neither doth Peter so conclude but rather calleth them vnto the writings of Paule then in anie part to abridge the same The error is as the Logitians say Secundum non causam vt causam The heretikes abused the Scriptures wrested the writings of the Apostles into a contrarie sence ergo saye they we ought to run other where then to the scriptures to the establishing of our faith The Scripture is not in fault but onely men themselues which doo wrest so worthie a matter vnto their owne errours Wherefore this is so farre from the Apostles minde that we should leaue the aide of the scripture because heretikes haue abused them that rather the heretikes are by the verie scriptures to be conuinced like as we haue alreadie proued out of the places of Paule 2. Tim. 3. Tit. 1. And when Sathan abused the Scriptures that he might weaken the faith of Christ truely Christ went not to traditions but with the Scriptures again ouerthrew the enimy For sathan obiecting and saying it is written Christ also on the other side answered it is written and not left in tradition And therefore we must bring them to this inconuenience saying If because the heretikes falsified the Scriptures we may not therefore only cleaue vnto the Scriptures then truely because the heretikes falsely fathered traditions to be Apostolike as wee haue prooued before both out of the writings of the Apostles as also out of Irenaeus and Eusebius therefore wee may not sticke onely to traditions And againe because heretikes abused both Scriptures and traditions therefore we must neyther cleaue to Scriptures nor to traditions the which is absurde and euen our aduersaries themselues yeeld to the same Let vs therefore turne their argument vpon themselues saying If like as Sathan abused the Scriptures against Christ so likewise the heretiks do against true Christians Then truly as Christ vsed the Scripture onely to repell Sathan so likewise the true Christians must vse onely the Scriptures in repelling of heretikes And therefore we may amend their error thus If such be the wickednes of the heretikes y e they abuse y e scriptures then ought we to giue al diligēce y t the scripture may kéepe both their authoritie and puritie the which will be if the heretiks be conuinced by the Scriptures alone and those places which shall séeme somewhat obscure maye take their interpretation from places more plaine But if our aduersaries hearken not vnto vs yet at the least waies let them giue eare euen vnto themselues in whose decretalls this sentence remaineth That from the Scriptures themselues the sence of truth must be taken The doctrine touching the baptisme of Infants is not found in the holy Scriptures neither these words Trinitie like substance persons manie such like all which words notwithstanding do appertaine vnto groūds and principles of faith Ergo all things appertaining vnto faith are not to be found in the Scriptures The antecedent is found true by reading of the Scriptures Now touching their antecedent I saie thus In that they affirme the doctrine concerning Baptisme of children not to be found in the Scriptures is most false like as our late writers haue taught in theyr learned workes against the Anabaptistes touching the which I will not héere make any longer disputation least I shuld séeme to wander without y e compasse of my proponed questiō Now touching these words Trinitie like substance and persons I confesse they are not found in the writings of the Apostles but yet I saie y ◠the verie doctrine which is signified by these words is deriued from the Scriptures for when certaine heretiks rose vp which denied y e veritie of y e doctrine then the godly Fathers which liued in those daies hauing care of y e circumstances added these wordes by the which they might the more easily explicate declare the doctrine touching y e trinitie y ◠which doctrine they had before confirmed by expresse and manifest testimonies of the holy Scriptures Now touching their consequence The error is Secundum fallaciam figurae dictionis These words Trinitie the baptisme of infants like substance are not found in the Scripture it is called Omonomos for the words indéede are not found in the holie Scriptures but the things signified by the words are there found And our christian faith consisteth not in the title of words but in substance of matter not in many volumes of bookes as S. Hierom saith but in the verye ground of reason And therefore Basil confesseth y ◠he vsed against the heretikes certaine termes which were not found written but yet notwithstanding saith he they were nothing contrary to the sence of the holy Scriptures And therfore our aduersaries reasoning thus we may wel bring them to an absurditie saying If because the persons the trinitie and such like words be not extant in the holy Scriptures it therfore followeth that all things necessarie to faith are not found in the holye scriptures Ergo these words are necessarie to faith and so by force of the consequent Sith this worde Omoousios that is like substance and such other wordes were onely found out by the godly Doctors after the heresie of Arius began to spring then wold it followe that the Church of Christ before the time
straight waies propone to vs the opinion of Doctours and thereby they by and by conclude that the Scriptures alone are not to be heard to wit being vnmindful that this selfe same thing is a controuersie betwéene vs. For if this opinion touching the which we doo dispute may be determined by the writings of the Doctors then it followeth that the scriptures alone are not to be heard in establishing articles of faith Wherefore our aduersaries doo not rightly dispute their first principle béeing not rightly applyed Wherefore the errour of their former conclusion is thus to be corrected In asmuch as the writings of all the Doctors must be brought vnto the rule of the holy scriptures both the word of God so commaunding it and also the Doctors themselues consenting therevnto and the olde Doctors of the Church themselues haue taught that euery article of our faith must be grounded vpon the scriptures only furthermore Ecclesiastical rytes and ceremonies if they agrée with the scriptures if they serue to the edification of the church yea finally if they be receiued with common consent of the whole Church that then they are to be receiued with great reuerence Now héere we must diligently search out whether that this opinion of the Doctours be agréeable to the word of god so that so farre it is to be receiued as it hath his confirmation by the Scriptures And because our whole Disputation is heere had onely touching principles of doctrine necessarie to faith and saluation that we may not seeme to wander from our proposed question we héere cease neyther will we take vppon vs the disputation of ecclesiasticall rites and ceremonies which disputatioâ— if the matter so require and God so permit vs we will take in hand But nowe we defer it vnto another time Thus haue I â—â—â—â—ding to the methode proposed to wit dâ—â—â—ely and schoolelike by the authoritie 〈◊〉 most learned Fathers disputed in defence of the word written against the traditions of men Whereby the truth of our cause appeareth and the obscure deceipts and errors of our aduersaries are brought into open show for in such sort haue we set down opened and confirmed our minde and iudgement and so confuted and dissolued the errours and arguments of our aduersaries both by the holy scriptures and also by the writings of the auncient fathers that euerie man may easily sée this doctrine which our reformed church by the word of God which is therfore the true Catholike Church doth hold and professe is most true which is That All doctrine necessarie to our Christian faith and Religion is contained in the holie Scriptures Laus Deo In Psa 43. Ios 6. Psa 54. Plut. in Cic. De doct Christ lib. 3. cap. 14 De nat deor lâ— 2. 2. Epist 3. The preacher ought to teach reproue Tit â— Aug Enc. ad Laure To reproue false doctrine the right vse of disputation is no small helpe In laud. Basil Epist 151 Contra Aca. li. 3 ca 13. 〈…〉 They are refuted vvhich wold not haue diuines me dle vvith the true art of disputing Col. 2. Aduer 159. Epis in cap. 2. Esa De praescri haer A similitude Ad 150. Epi in S ca. Esai The auncient Fathers coÌ„mended â— right vse of Logick Con. Acali 3 De ord li. 2. ca. 12 Touching the writings and disputations of y â— schoole Doctors In. 3. sent dist 24. quest 1. Great but vnprofitable is the labour of the schoole Doctors Certaine Errours which are to bee found in the disputations of the schoole Doctors The first errour to make their ground Logicke See Scotus and others who haue vvritten vpon the master of sentences and in their disputations called Quodlibets c. Lomb. li. 1. Sent. dist 34. li. 2. sent dist 9. c â— Error To reasoÌ„ probably on plaine truths Contra Aca. Apolog ad 〈◊〉 louin 3. Error They darken the truth Con. Aca. Error 4 Is theyr vaine questions 2. Tim. 2 Eâ—chi â—d Lauren. cap. 55. The Popish schol doctours of ouâ— time frame not such argumentes in their disputations as y â— auncient learned vvere vvont The method to dispute both diuinely schoole like necessatie in our time Dâ— doct Chri. lib. 2. cap. 40. Tvvo vvayes to intreat of diuinitie A similitude The brief school like treatises are as it vver an Anatomy of y e large and copious vvriting or speakings Cout Maâ— lib. 3. De mod in disp Ser. A treatise of y e word of God vvritten Hovv the disputations of diunitie differ froÌ„ others that they ought reuerently to bee handled De doct Chri. li. 4. cap. 19 1. Tim. 6. Quest ver 108. De Ciuie Dei li. 2. cap. 29. 1 The vse of this disputation Psal 119. The diuisioÌ„ of this vvorke He 1. ve â— Our opinion and mind touching the vvorde of God The declaration of our opinion or minde The opinion and minde of y e Papistâ— The declaration exposition of their opinion The state point of this coÌ„trouersie The tearms of this question expounded What the vvorde of God is What tradition is What is meant by this word Necessarie to saluation What is meant by holye Scripture A demonstratiue or euident disputation Heb. 1 The Sylogisme or argument The explication or proofe of the argument The confirmation of the coÌ„ference Tert. de resur car Act. 26. The confirmation of the second part of the argument Ioh 20. 17 Rom. 1. Lu. 16 Iohn 6. Act. 26. Lu. 24 2 Pet. 1. Act. 1 Iude. Philip. 3. 1. Iohn 1. 2. Pet. 3. 2. Pet. 1. The argument The explication or proofe of the argument Deu 4. Prou. 30. The argument The examining or triall of y e argument Exod. 24. Deu. 31. Deu. 28. Act. 24. Deu. 27. Gal. 3 Esa 8. The argument The examining or triall of the argument Act. 26. 2. Cor 3. c. 2. Tim. 3. The argument The examining or triail oâ— y e silogisme 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iohn 5. The argument The explication or triall of the argument Lu 23. 31. 1. Pet. 4. 17 c. 1. Cor. 4. The Sylogisme The exaaminatioÌ„ of the Silogisme An euideÌ„t argument Iohn 20. The argument The explication of the argument Psa 19 Psa 119 Deu. 4. Psa 4. The argument The explication of the argument Gal. 4. 21. * A definitioÌ„ of holy Scripture Heb. 1. 1 2. Ti. 3. 16 Heb 1. 1. 2. Pet. 1. 21 Lu. 1. 3 1. Iohn 1. 1. Ioh. 20. 31 c. The explicating of the definition 2. Pe. 3. 1. 2 Col. 3. 1 Pro. 30. 6 Esa 8. 20 c. Psa 1. 19. 1. 9 c 2. Tim. 3 16. 17. 2. Pe. 1. 12 Ioh. 20. 31 2. Tim. 3 15 Iohn 5. 39 The argument The vnfolding of y e former reason A disputation confutatiue vherein is refelled or confuted the opinioÌ„ or iudgement of y e Papistes The first argument against papistical traditions The vnfolding of
the truth of matters may be manifestly séene and as it were touched with our hands And this last way perchaunce is not so well welcome to those which are delighted in plesantnesse of speach but truly no lesse profitable to all those which are both louers of simplicitie and desirous of the truth For like as the view of mans bodie is a great deale more pleasaunt to beholde while it is clad with the flesh the bloud running in each veyne hauing a comelye colour yet notwithstanding if we come at any time to the Anatomie then the facultie of each part and the constitution of the whole bodie is a great deale better knowne so if any wil wisely diligently weigh those larger and pleasanter treatises and bring them to arguments as vnto Anatomies then without doubt he shal easily perceiue whether they be absolute perfect in euerie point or whether there be anye thing wanting and as the Phisition sheweth foorth euen as it wer with the finger the original and causes of diseases so shal he héere doo touching errors if there be any The former sort doeth indéede delyght the mindes as wll of those which are learned as those which are vnlearned but this latter manner of exercise sith it is occupied in that onely kinde of matter which appertaineth to doctrine is more méete for those which are best learned who are nothing moued with the floud of vain wordes if especially there be no force of matter contained in them because that speach without reason is not to be counted any thing worth Augustine Ciprian Hillarie Hieronimus and diuers olde learned Fathers haue vsed this kinde of disputing very much this also the schoolemen seemed to professe but with what successe I haue shewed alreadie But chieflye we must consider and haue great care on doth sides that when we dispute touching doctrine all our arguments be necessarye and pertaining to doctrine so that they bée grounded vppon most sure principles and infallible groundes of Diuinitie And aboue all things we must beware that we take not things which may be disputed on both sides for things necessarie things which be strange for those that are knowen falshoode for truth the which trulye dooth happen oftentimes in much lauishing out of speach the which y e aduersaries of the truth most commonly abuse where by they may the more conuenientlye hyde themselues vnder the couerte of manye words so that when they haue said much â—hey would also séeme to haue spokeÌ„ truth The best chiefest for this mischiefe is if after the long circumstaunces that then there beâ— fet downe a briefe Logicall handling of those their wordes spoken before to be as it were an Anatomie and recapitualation of all subtil sophemes and craftie fallaces And when the falsehood of words is cleane taken away it wil bewray those things which are false it wil set truth against falshood and beare them both out yea finally it wil bring to passe euen as Augustine sometime said That each thing with other cause with cause and reason with reason may striue together And héere who séeth not that when errors are cleane taken awaye how easely the truth will ouercome and the same truth which the huge floud of words had ouer whelmed will euen willingly as it were aduaunce hir selfe vp againe Sith then that schoollike handeling of matters will bring so great profit so y e Logick be directed by the true rules of diuinitie I theÌ„ intreat beséech these learned diuines of this our age which are defeÌ„ders of y e gospel y t they haue â—are héerof set down vnto vs some certain easie methode of this schoolike way how to handle each point y â— which we may follow and the which also may be both to vs present as also to y e posterities héereafter a most true touchstone wherby we may trie the sundry workes of diuers men which haue written of diuinitie y e which if they shall performe they shal greatly profit the Church of God especially in these times in which each man striueth in setting forth of bookes touching the principall pointes of diuinitie who may doo best For where as the Ciuilians only write touching their lawes the Phisitions of their facultie and so all others of those artes and sciences which they professe in y e which they are conuersant yet notwithstanding it commeth to passe I knowe not by what meanes that not onely diuines but also men cleane voide of diuinitie of all sorts are wont now euerie where to dispute in their bookes touching diuinitie so y t héerein I assent with Nazianzene which before time hath most gréeuously complained of this matter And we haue thought good to publish this our small labour abroad not y t we thinke we haue obteyned y e same methode whith we desire but that by this meanes we may at the least giue a testimonie that wée looke for a more exact methode from the learned diuines yea and earnestly desire them to performe the same Beholde then wée héere set downe a schoolelike treatise of diuinitie takeÌ„ out of the first Chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrewes to wit touching the word of God written against mannes traditions about which matter there is great controuersie betwéene vs and the Papists And for this cause I omit the handling of this point at large because it may be easily séene in the writings of late set forth on both partes of which writings I wil make as it were a certaine resolution or anatomie in this schoole like treatise But before I come to this my purpose I am willing somewhat to admonish the Reader howe that these disputations touching y e Scriptures doth farre differ from all others For in disputations of Philosophie Phisicke ciuill gouernment and such other there eloquence sheweth it selfe there desire to excell doeth rule there oratorie pleading bursteth out yea oftentimes in such matters men desire nothing but to shew forth the brauenesse of their wits or else séeke after glorie and praise But in diuine disputations where as Augustine sayth Brauerie must not bée sought but good documentes and lessons and that with great reuerence yea and verie reuerently wée must dispute of holy things not as vpon the stage before men but as in the middest of the Church before the liuing God and his Angelles not for the desire of victorie but for the maintenaurce of the truth in as much as Paule forbiddeth the Pastours of the Church once to speake of vaine questions or contentions of wordes which can scarce be done without the detrument of the truth Wherfore praying aide at the hands of almightie God that he will direct and establish this our labour by his holy spirit let vs procéede into this most holy conflict in the which the worde of GOD is the place of combat God himselfe the chiefe Iudge truth the victorie saluation the garland of triumph And héereby with more valiant
comparison confirmeth the first part of our argument for such kinds of reasons hath both Christ and his Apostles vsed neither can our aduersaries deuie but that the writings of the new Testament are more excellent then the writings of the olde The other part of our argument is proued by the expresse words of Christ for so far was it from Christ that he wold reprooue the Iewes for searching the Scriptures but did himselfe rather reason after that manner The 7. place That ye may learne by vs that no man presume aboue that which is written c. If we ought not to presume to be wise aboue that which is written and the principles of faith appertain vnto true and perfect wisedome then trulie ought wee to be contented with the scriptures in causes and matters of faith The antecedent is true Therefore the consequent cannot be denied The first parte of our Argument is manifest of it selfe The other part is prooued by the place of the Apostle Yet héere I must allso confesse that this place of the Apostle Paule is otherwise expounded of certayne newe Writers to wit of those things which Paule himselfe had before written The which sence if anye man be willing to followe then thus make we our argument If Paule called backe the Corinthians vnto his owne writings how much more then ought we to be called backe vnto the writings of the whole Scriptures But because the olde writers whome our aduersaryes followe most doo expounde this place of Paule generallye I had rather to frame mine argument from the interpretation of them There maye be also framed an euident and plaine sylogisme in the second mode of the second figure flatlye denieng their assertion in this sort Whosoeuer groundeth anie Article of faith vpō traditions not writtē taketh vpon him to be wise aboue that which is written But no man truly obeying the Christian Apostolike doctrine doth take vpon him to be wise aboue that which is writtē Ergo No man truly obeying the christian apostolike doctrine doth groūd any principle of faith vpon traditions not written The 8. Place Manie other things did Iesus which are not written in this booke but these things are written that you might beleeue that Iesus Christ is the sonne of God and in beleeuing you might haue euerlasting lyfe through his name If the Apostles and Euangelists wrote those things which seemed sufficient and necessarie that we which beleeue may haue eternall life then truely the Articles of our faith are to be grounded vppon the Scriptures and not vpon traditions which are vnwritten which our aduersaries tearme Apostolike The Antecedent is true And therefore the consequent cannot be denied The truth of the first part of our Argument is manifest except peraduenture anie man would goe about to thinke himselfe wiser then either the Apostles or Euangelists the which God forbid that anie man should do The consequent is proued by the words of Iohn The 9. place The lawe of the Lord is perfect giuing life true wisdome vnto man yea the law of the Lord is right and iust more precious then golde sweeter then honnie the wisedome and vnderstanding of the Church he is blessed that meditateth or occupieth himselfe therein If the scriptures of the olde testament in their kinde were perfect because therein is contained true wisedome and made those blessed euen as manie as willinglie and constantlie did meditate therein then trulie after that the writings of the Apostles were ioyned vnto the olde testament the which writings of the Apostles doo explicate and teach the veritie and truth of the saide olde testament then I say by good right consequence the whole scriptures both of the olde and new testament may be called perfect as that which perfectlie containeth all necessarie doctrine for the church of Christ The antecedent is true And therefore the consequence must be also true The antecedent is manifest inough of it selfe The minor is prooued by the recited places For by the name and title of the law is often vnderstood y e whole scriptures of the olde testament as it is manifest by the Apostle Paule Gal. 4. ver 21. as also the circumstance of the afore alleaged place doth most manifestly proue Now frō these and such other places we will gather a true definition of the holye Scriptures after this sort The holie scripture is the word of God giuen by diuine inspiration from God and by the Prophets Apostles and Euangelists mooued by the spirit of God was written in the bookes Canonicall of the olde and new testament that the veritie and truth of God might be taken and set free from the obliuion and corruptings of men that the Church might be perfectlie instructed and confirmed in all those things the knowledge and faith whereof is necessarie to saluation This definition is most perfectly substancially true For it standeth vpon y e Genus differēce containeth al those causes both which y e Logitiās say belōg to y e Subiectū as also y ◠belōg vnto y e Attributū And especially it cōtaineth y e efficiēt cause vnder y e which is added y e instrumētal thē y e final cause which two causes in such kind of matters are especially to be considered The spirit of god is y e cause efficiēt who vsed y e prophets apostles as instrumēts y e cōīeruatiō of y e truth cōfirmation of the church is the end wherefore y e word of God was put in writing so this definition standeth vppon his full partes and the thing defined and the definition doo both agrée together Now from this definition as from a most perfect true ground we make thus our demonstratiue argument Whatsoeuer is the word of God giuen by inspiration from God and written by the Prophets Apostles and Euangelists by the motion of Gods spirit c. that contayneth all principles necessarie to christian faith But the holie Scripture is the word giuen by diuine inspiration c. Ergo the holie Scriptures containe al principles necessarie to the christian faith This argument is most euident and necessarie and standeth grounded vppon grounds of the former places and contayneth the veritie and truth of our whole question Wherefore doth the Scriptures containe all these things the knowledge faith whereof are necessarie vnto saluation Truely because the word of God was written by the Prophets and Apostles to this end that the Church should be perfectly instructed c. Againe whatsoeuer is spoken of the one partie may be sayde of the other Furthermore if anie doe aske what these things be the knowledge and faith whereof are necessarie to saluation I answere the Scriptures And againe when I name the Scriptures I name all those things the knowledge whereof is necessarie to saluation The like also may be said touching the ground
though vnto you saith he there were anie part of faith wanting or y t you ought or néed to learne anie thing And I sée this opinion of interpreters greatly to please certaine of the learned new writers But other expound the name of faith touching the constancie of faith as in the same chapter he sayth I sent that I might know your faith least Sathan had tempted you by anie kinde of meanes and that our labour had bene in vaine But our aduersaries stande vpon these points First there is attributed vnto the Thessalonians the fulnesse of faith as is before sayd Secondly there is no doubt but that they were baptised and therefore perfectly instructed in christian religion They bring forth many other argumēts vnto this end and chiefly y e whole 2. cha of y e first epistle vnto y e Thessaloniās But let our aduersaries choose which interpretation they will yet shal it not serue anie thing for their purpose Now concerning their consequent I deny it for if by this word faith they vnderstand a through perswasion or constancie of faith the error is in the diuers signification of the word But if they had rather expound it touching doctrine then their cōsequence is false For they doe not well conclude thus they say some thing was wanting to y e faith of y e Thessalonians ergo Paul did not declare by mouth all thinges vnto them or else all thinges were not written by the apostles necessarie to faith For it is one thing to teach another to learne and ther may be a defect in the scholler whē as there is none in the master Therfore Paul saith Phil. 3. It is profitable for you not troublesōe vnto me to repeat those things againe vnto you But that we may return to y e Thessaloniās You know saith he what cōmaundements we gaue vnto you that you should abstein from fornication c. But let vs graunt this yet truly it followeth not because ther was some thing wāting vnto the faith of the Thessalonians that therfore Paule the rest of the Apostles wrote not all the things necessarie to the doctrine of y t gospell These arguments truely are of no value nor force neither yet scātly hang together Therfore we may wel bring thē to an absurditie saying If this argumēt of our aduersaries do preuaile that the apostles reserued many thinges which they taught by mouth vnto traditions beeing necessary to the saluation of the Church because Paule wished that hee might see the face of the Thessalonians that hee might supply those things which wer wanting to their faith thē it wold follow that Paule himselfe was all the apostles the Thessalonians the whole vniuersall church the which is too absurde And therefore wée may turne their argument vpō themselues saying◠If our aduersaries do heereby prooue their traditions because Paule desired to see the face of the Thessalonians that being present he might fully instruct them by mouth Then wold it follow that this appertaineth nothing vnto vs which a long time since could not see the face of Paule But perchance they wil say y ◠the olde fathers wrote those things which Paule then taught when he was present But because I will not say y ◠that is false I will make them this answere If those things were worth y ◠writing why did not Paule himselfe write thē If not why shuld y e old doctors write thē Therefore thus we may auoid their error saying That Paule did therfore desire to sée y ◠Thessalonians y t therby he might the more firmely establish their faith when as he did manifestly perceiue of what great efficacie y e presence of their techer was But séeing we cannot inioy this benefit we must plainly cleaue to the writinges of the Apostles and those their writings ought to bée of so great value vnto vs as if that the Apostles themselues were present to speak vnto vs so much the rather because in those writings we may heare euē y e voice of Christ Paule wrote vnto the Corinthians that when he came vnto them he would set the rest in order ergo he reserued many things to be taught by mouth The antecedent is proued 1. Cor. 11. Thus I answere their antecedent Paule doth not héere speak of the chiefe points of faith but of Ecclesiasticall order For the Gréeke word which he vseth signifieth to determine some matter according to some order As Paule to Tit. 1. chap. saith Ordain elders as I haue commaunded thee where Paule vseth the verie same Gréeke worde And againe 1. Cor. 16. Paule vseth the same word in the actiue voice touching the bestowing of their liberalitie saith because I haue commanded c. And speaketh of an order to be kept in the same matter so the french men say Ordonner in their tongue and we say Ordaine Now I denie their consequent for the error is Secundum figuram dictionis for y ◠proper signification of the worde signifieth another thing then they meane Also their consequence is false Paule would set in order certaine things amongest the Corinthians when hée was present Ergo saie they hée would constitute new principles of faith Againe they reason thus Paule deferred certaine things vntill his comming the which he woulde set in order among the Corinthians ergo hée neuer wrote them Also those things are they which the Prelates of Rome doo obtrude and thrust vppon vs as traditions springing from the Apostles All these arguments are foolish and false or worse if worse may be And therefore wée maye well bring them to an absurditie saying If that be true which our aduersaryes would to wit that Paule then when hee wrote that Epistle had not deliuered to the Corinthians al those things which wer necessarie to faith then would it come to passe which GOD forbid that those thing which followe in his Epistle were not true to wit that the Corinthians were made rich in all knowledge The 1. Corinth Also hee sayth I declare vnto you the Gospell the which I preached the which also ye haue receiued in the which yee stande and by the which also yee are saued 1. Cor. 15. And againe Ye aboūd in al things in faith in word in knowledge in all zeale and in all loue towardes vs euen so see that yee abound in this grace also 2. Cor. 8. And againe What is it in the which you are inferiour to other churches 2. Cor. 12. And manie such like examples Finally this their obiection may be turned vpon themselues and correted as wée haue done in the former arguments Iohn would not write much Ergo hee wrote not all things necessarie to faith The antecedent is proued in the 2. and 3. Epistles of Iohn wher he saith thus Whē I had manie things to write vnto you yet would I not write with paper and inke I admit
their antecedent yet I denye their consequent For these things hang not together Iohn had manye things to write Ergo they were principles of faith Ergo also they are not any wher extāt for otherwise this absurditie would followe That the same Ladie vnto the which Iohn wrote was not fullie instructed in christian religion therefore those hang not together with Iohns speeches whē as he commēdeth the faith of the same ladie as also of hir childrē whō he affirmeth to walk in the truth And therefore this argument may be turned vpon themselues as y e other before Manie other things did Iesus beside those which were written the which if they were euerie one written the whole world would not containe the bookes Ergo all things necessarie to faith are not written by the Apostles The antecedent is proued Iohn 21. I gaunt their antecedent yet I denye their consequent For the error is Secundum ignorantiam Elenchi for they wander héere without the compasse of our question Iohn speaketh in that place of miracles which Christ did our disputation is of doctrine necessarie to faith saluation For these are y e words of Iohn Christ did manie things therfore héerof commeth no consequent Al y e miracles y t Christ did are not written ergo say they all y ◠principles of christian religiō doctrin are not writē Now sée héere how our aduersaries beat themselues with their owne weapons For if our aduersaries refer their traditions vnto those things which Iohn faith are not written Ergo those traditions are infinit with out number so by the force of the consequent without the cōpasse of knowledge And truly I easely confesse that such kind of traditions are so greatly increased that the world now can scantly beare them We may therefore turne their argument vpon themselues thus Iohn saith Christ did manie other things which are not written but he also affirmeth That those things which are written are written to the ende we might beleeue haue eternall life Ergo those things which are written are sufficient to saluation The error therefore of our aduersaries may thus be amended saieng Iohn and the rest of the Euangelists did choose out of those things which Christ did being otherwise infinite those which séemed necessary whereby it commeth to passe y ◠we ought to be contented with the writings of the apostles The Apostles did often recite testimonies taken from the traditions of such auncient men as liued before their daies Ergo wee must not onelie sticke to the Scriptures The antecedent is manifest 2. Tim 3. As Iannes Iambris withstood Moses Againe Iude ver 9. Michael the Archangell disputed about the bodie of Moses And a little after he reciteth the Prophecie of Enoch Behold the Lord cōmeth with manie thousands of his saints To their antecedent I aunswere thus Indéede I confesse that the Apostles didde sometimes recite certaine sentences taken out of the bookes Apocripha And to aunswere the place of Paule in Timothie I doo not doubt but in his time y ◠some booke did remaine touching those Magis Iannes and Iambris for Plinie in his 30. booke of his naturall historie chap. 1. doth there recken vp Iannes amongst the auncient Magi the which he would not haue done except he had learned it out of some booke And furthermore I aunswere that those Ethnickes were not altogether to bée refused of the Apostles for so Paule reciteth certaine verses out of Aratus and Epiminides but I doo affirme that the Apostles did not therfore vse these testimonies that by them they wold confirme any principle of faith for when they would so doo they had alwaies readie expresse places taken out of the writings of the Prophets and those they did expounde according to the motion of the holy Ghost But when they would teach any doctrine touching manners or declare some thing touching the which very few or none did doubt thē if peraduēture they remembred any thing written in the bookes Apocripha or in the writings of those Ethinks they did not so dislike their sentences but that they wold apply them vnto their purpose yet notwithstanding the Apostles did not attribute so great authoritie vnto them that they should be of sufficient authoritie thēselues for god forbid we shuld once think so But they were willing by that meanes to mooue mens mindes the more that they might thereby the easier receiue their doctrine which notwithstanding was otherwise sufficiently confirmed euen by the word of God As for examples sake it is manifest in Exodus that the Magi or wise men of Aegipt withstood Moses what matter is it by what name those Magi were called or can those their names be applyed to any principle of faith No to none truly Also Michael woulde not vse railing words vnto the diuell as Saint Iude saith wherby we may learn much lesse to speak euil of Magistrates ordained of God This exhortation of Iude to the reuerencing of Magistrates is in many places to be found in the scriptures The like is that which Peter saith That the Angels doo not raile on those that haue authoritie 2. Pet. 2. Also the Lord will come saith Iude to rewarde the wicked the which threatnings is vsual in the holy scriptures Whereby we manifestly sée to what ende the Apostles culled out certaine sentences from the bookes Apocripha to the seruing of their own purpose Now we come vnto y e cōsequēt which I denie The Apostles did vse certain sentences taken out of the bookes Apocripha Ergo they vsed them to the confirmation of faith And againe therefore also we ought to runne to traditions so often as we dispute of faith as though the testimonies of the holy scriptures did faile vs. This is a false argument no good consequent can come héerof For the Apostles vsed not such testimonies to confirme principles of religion Yea and euen those testimonies them selues if you marke well the matter you shall sée them confirmed by many expres places of scriptures Wherfore our aduersaries séeme to be forgetful of our purposed questiō while they go about to obiect these things to vs for this is y e state of our questiō whē ther ariseth cōtrouersie touching faith whether we ought to sticke onelye to the testimonies of the Scriptures or els to adde thervnto traditions to the which we may giue the like credite as we maye to the scriptures But you shall finde no such thing in these testimonies which the Apostles vsed as I haue before shewed Yea and I may say that this argument is not rightly applied against vs in this cause taken from the Apostles Let vs retourne this absurditie on our aduersaries saieng thus If because the Apostles did recite certaine sentences out of bookes not Canonicall that therefore it followeth the Apostles did attribute authoritie to those bookes such like in matters of faith
of Arius yea the Apostles theÌ„selues knew not al things necessarie vnto faith The which thing is most absurd sauouring of Athisme And therefore we may well turne this argument home againe vnto our aduersaries saying If such were the religion of the auncient fathers that they would not inuent anie one word to the intreating vpon anie principle of faith the which was not grounded vpon expresse places of scriptures as it is manifest by these words trinitie substance persons such like what shal we then think of our aduersaries which do not only inueÌ„t words but also eueÌ„ matter it self altogether abhorring contrarie to the Scriptures of God And therefore we may amend y e error of this their obiection saying That it is lawfull for the godly fathers of the church of God to vse inuent certaine words and tearmes whereby the matter contained in the scriptures may the better easier bée expressed If we must altogether beleeue the church in no part swarue from the credit of the church we beleeue the church in this part affirming that the scriptures came from the spirit of God theÌ„ truly we ought to beleeue the church likewise affirming that these such other like traditions came from the Apostles The antecedent is true and therfore it must follow that the coÌ„sequeÌ„t is also true The Maior hath two parts touching the which we will particularly speake And touching the first point I doe make a distinction of the Church which Paule calleth the house of God the piller foundation of truth which heareth y e voice of her spouse onely dependeth vpon his mouth and is alwaies gouerned by the spirit of God cannot be séene because shée is not tied to circuÌ„stances of place time or persons yet notwithstaÌ„ding we beleeue y â— the same church is vpholden by the word of God that she nothing estéemeth mans traditions But this or y e visible Church or the companie of many visible congregations may swarue from the truth as it is manifest touching the Churches in the East of which y â— most part haue turned to Mahumet I will not héere bring in the ancient counsells which haue both allowed brought into y e church great gréeuous errors And touching this church we may thus determine inasmuch as she is subiect to many errors she is not otherwise to be heard except shée speake those thinges which are agréeable to the Scriptures touching which matter I haue disputed more at large in another place wherefore this hath héere no place which they say affirme y â— wée must altogether beléeue the church in part swarue froÌ„ the credit of the same theÌ„ must we beléeue the visible Churches when as they propound nothing els vnto vs but the word of God on the other side we ought not to beléeue the visible churches when they swarue froÌ„ the word of God for I make my example by the Sinagogue which very religiously hath reserued the Cannons or bookes of the Scriptures yet notwithstanding she hath innumerable errors So theÌ„ we may beléeue the same Sinagogue whereby she saith y â— the Canonicall bookes haue sprong from y e spirit of God againe we may not beléeue her when she reiecteth casteth away the doctrine of Christ Therfore in y â— respect Christ saith The Scribes Pharesies sitting in Moses chaire are to be heard yet notwithstanding in another place he reprehendeth reproueth their traditions whereby wée sée proued that in one parte they ought to be heard on the other not Wherfore their Minor is not true so the consequence cannot stand because there is an error Secundum fallaciam figurae dictionis And they reasoning thus we may well bring theÌ„ to a great inconuenience saying In the time of Tertulian the church did affirme that an oblation for birth daies was a tradition receiued from the Apostles but in the time of the NiceÌ„e couÌ„sel the church did affirme that oblation for birth daies was not a tradition of the Apostles as in his proper place I haue proued ergo if wee must in all parts beleeue the Church and in no parte swarue from the Church then must we beleeue the things which are manifest opposit contarrie one to the other the which is impossible Wherefore we may turne their obiection vpon themselues after this sort saying Whosoeuer affirmeth the scripture to be the word of god the which we ought to beleeue likewise affirmeth that traditions not written are to be receiued speketh coÌ„traries But the Church of Rome affirmeth the scriptures to be the word of god which we ought to beleeue also affirmeth that traditions not writteÌ„ are to be receiued Ergo the church of Rome affirmeth contraries by force of the consequent we must beleeue hir in one part in another not if this be of anie force that we must beleue the church in all parts swarue froÌ„ hir in no part theÌ„ this foloweth by their argumeÌ„t that the Church may not wel be called the Church For y e truth of the maior proposition is proued thus If you did me beléeâ—e the scriptures truly I will beléeue y t there is nothing to be added thervnto because y t it is so commanded in them as I haue in diuers places of my booke proued therefore this sentence of Tertulian is highly to be imbraced WheÌ„ we beleeue saith he this first we must beleeue that there is nothing els that we ought to beleue Now if we wil consider the traditions of our aduersaries we shal easily perceiue y t they are not only added by inuentions but also contrarie to expresse places of scripture so ye sée y t we cannot beléeue the scriptures also the traditions of our aduersaries And therefore we may amend the error of the former obiection after this manner Sith we ought to beléeue God alone then most diligently ought we to take héede least vnder the shew of pietie we be seduced into errour and because the name of the Church is verie glorious therefore if anie thing be proposed vnto vs vnder the title of the Church we ought to giue atteÌ„tiue diligence whether it be y e voyce of the true church or not which we heare y t we may be able so to doo we must take counsell with the word of God set foorth vnto vs in the Scriptures from the which the true church of God neuer swerneth wheÌ„ therefore the Church affirmeth vnto vs that the scriptures are the word of God we acknowledge the same to be true not onely because the church so affirmeth but because of the inward efficacie of the spirite of God by the which the truth of the scriptures is sealed in our hearts lyke as the church by the conduction of the spirite of God affirmeth vnto vs y t the scripture is the word
of God so we by the conduction of the same spirit beléeue that that is true which the Church affirmeth y t our faith may neuer rest vpō men but for euer vpon God alone The Apostles did adde vnto the lawe to wit the doctrine of the Gospell Ergo it is lawfull to adde vnto the worde of God To the antecedent I thus aunswere Although the doctrine of the Gospell bée more full and fruitfull then the writing of the olde Testament yet notwithstanding if ye well mark the matter in y e new and olde testament the selfe same doctrine of saluation is contained in them both for that is most true which Paule saith Acts 26. that he taught no other thing then that which the prophets and Moses had before taught And againe in the first to y e Rom. he sheweth y t the gospel was before promised by the Prophets therfore this is false which they say that the Apostles added to the law for it is one thing to adde to the lawe and another to erpound and referre it to his owne proper scope and purpose For let some man bring forth an obligation that we may vse this similitude and the payment being made he addeth at the ende that the Obligation is satisfied I pray you can he well be sayd to adde any thing to the same Obligation So when the Apostles gaue testimonie to the scriptures that Christ by his cōming had fulfilled both the lawe and the prophets they did not adde either to y e law or writings of the Prophets Now their consequent I denie for héere is an error Secundum figuram dictionis as it is manifest by these things which I haue alreadie spoken Yea also the argument cannot well procéed from the Apostles to other men for graunt this that God would adde vnto his lawe and that it was done by the ministerie of the Apostles which wrote by the influence motion of the spirit of God yet truly héereby can nothing happen whereby it shoulde be lawfull for other men to adde vnto y e same word of God Wherefore sithen by the argumentation of our aduersaries there would follow the ouerthrowe of this most noble excellent doctrine touching the similitude of the old and new Testament Therefore we may well amend their error by this most excellent saieng which is extant in the workes of Iustinus Matyre In interg resp wher he asketh this and saith What is the Lawe he aunswereth saith It is the Gospell foreshewed Againe he demaundeth What is the Gospell he auns wereth The Lawe fulfilled By which words it is manifest that the Gospell is not a newe doctrine added vnto the lawe but a new fulfilling of the olde promise And thus we suppose that we haue sufficiently disputed touching the obiections of our aduersaries which they haue wreasted out of the worde of God The 5. Chapter FOrasmuch as the aduersaries themselues sufficiently knowe how weake féeble those argumēts are which they take out of y e scripturs against the scriptures then at the last they flie to the testimonies of the auncient Fathers the which they very diligently endeuour to beate into our heads with Orations long and tedious to the ende that by the heape thereof they might ouer whelme vs. Wherefore it séemeth conuenient in this part of our treatise to set downe some thing whereby not onely the obiections of the Papists but also our aunsweres may the more easier be vnderstood Now therefore y t we maye gather most true and infallible principles let vs adde some certaine rules to this our disputation by whose helpe the mindes of the olde Doctors may be expounded and so by the conduction of those rules as by a clue of thred we may both enter into the many variable writings of the Doctours as into a most daungerous Laborynth and there also kéepe our selues occupied most safely and without hurt Let this therefore be the first Rule THe writings of the auncient Doctors for the establishing and confirmation of our faith are so farre foorth to be receiued as they agree with the holie and diuine scriptures Although this first rule be plain inough of himselfe especially to those that knowe the truth yet will I for the confirmation of the same lay downe certaine proofes If anie preach vnto you otherwise then that which we haue preached vnto you let him be accurssed saith S. Paule And againe Warne some that they teach no other doctrine And againe Marke them diligentlie which cause diuision and offences contrarie to the doctrine which ye haue learned and auoide them And again If anie man teach otherwise he is puffed vp and knoweth nothing And agayne Be not carried about with diuers and straunge doctrines with many more places to this effect Yet least happely our aduersaries shoulde say that these places repeted are to be vnderstood of the word deliuered by tradition and not of the word written leauing those things which in the former parte of this treatise are handeled copiously and at large I will aske them this Question whether they think y e Apostles to haue vttered spoken anie thing in their lectures sermons which doth disagrée with those things which they haue committed to writing I am sure they will in no wise confesse it Wherefore mauger their heades they must agrée with vs that this our first Rule is infallible and most true to wit that the writings of the auncient doctors are so far foorth to be receiued as they doe agrée with the sacred Scripture But if they shall perceiue the auncient Doctours themselues to be of our mind I hope then all doubt remooued they will together with vs agrée to our former rule This therefore is the minde of Origen It behooueth vs to bring the holie Scriptures for witnesses for because our senses and allegations without the witnesse of them are altogether voyde of credite And againe Euen as there is not anie golde sanctified without the temple so ther is no sence without the Scripture that is holie Tertulian What is there contrarie to vs in our writings hee speaketh of the holye Scriptures And againe The same that we are the same they be Chrisostome If anie thing bee spoken without the Scriptures the minde of the hearers is thereby brought into doubt Hierome Whatsoeuer heereafter shall be spoken besides the Apostolicall writings let it be abrogated of no value altogether without credit Agustine Doo thou not bring vs anie cauelles from the writinges of the Bishoppes as of Hillarie or Ciprian against the infallible testimonie of the diuine scriptures Because as it behooueth vs to put a difference betweene that kinde of writing and the Scriptures of GOD for the writings of men are not so to be read that it is not lawfull for vs to thinke the contrarie if at anie time they haue peraduenture thought otherwise then the