A TREATISE CONCERNING THE GROVND OF FAITH VVRITTEN In Latin by the Reuerend Father Iames Gordon Huntley of Scotland Doctour of Diuinity of the Society of IESVS And translated into English by I. L. of the same Society The second Part of the second Controuersy Permissu Superiorum M. DC XIV THE FIRST CHAPTER Whether the Church be the foundation and ground of our faith And of the true state of this Question IF the pertinacy of our Aduersaries were not so great it were an easy matter to define this questiō out of those few wordes of the Apostle affirming that the Church is the Pillar and ground of truth for seing that our faith relyeth vpon truth that is to say vpon the most true word of God and that 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 ob◅ure this great and renowned prayse of our Church we will treate of this matter more exactly especially 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 opiniōs of our faith are to be proued which our Aduersaries deny their errors confuted and they themselues very easily conuinced but 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 depende 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 confesse that there is a God may easily know euen by natural reason that he is true or rather the very Truth it selfe And seing that he is the chiefest good he can deceiue no body and seing that he is Wisdome it selfe he 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 cōceyue cōcerning matters of faith do especially arise of the secōd principle to wit because we know not certainly that such things as we belieue are reuealed by God for hence ariseth the whole cōtrouersy with Iewes Turkes Heretikes For all do cōfesse that God is true but the Turkes say that their Alcorā was reuealed vnto thē by God the Iewes their Talmud the Anabaptists their bible corrupted maymed by them the Antitrinitarians 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 frō heauen and speaketh to his Church for so in tymes past he spake vnto all the children of Israel when he gaue them the tables of 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 himselfe to Moyses and Moyses reuealed the same things to the people And in the new Testament Christ in this manner reuealed his Ghospell to S. Paul which he afterward reuealed vnto others But these two wayes are extraordinary and are ceased as all docōfesse excepting only a few Anabaptists and Swenkeldiani whose madnesse and folly all men disproue 7. The third way is ordinary which alwayes remayneth 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 God from the false But Caluin himselfe at the first blush seemeth to attribute this to the sole Scripture and very cōtumeliously inueygheth against Catholikes who deny it whome therefore he calleth brauling and sacrilegious persons yet a litle after he reduceth the principall and cheifest certaynty of Scriptures and of our whole fayth to the particuler and priuate spirit of euery belecuer The late Caluinists do put two grounds and rules of fayth to wit the Scripture and this priuate spirit But Catholikes do teach that neyther the Scripture alone is sufficient nor this priuate spirit togeather with the Scripture but moreouer the spirit and authority of the whole visible Church is necessary And this is the true state of of this question 8. We will therfore explicate foure things that this whole controuersy may more clearly be defined First what are the properties and conditions of the ground of fayth for by these the ground it selfe will easily be knowne For euen as by the properties of a man it may be knowen who is a true man and by the properties of any other thing the thing it selfe may be knowne So by the properties of the ground of fayth the ground it selfe wil be knowne Secondly it shal be proued that the Scripture alone is not a sufficient ground or rule of fayth Thirdly that neyther any priuate spirit will suffise Fourthly that the authority of the Catholike Church is the most true ground and rule of fayth CHAP. II. The properties of the ground and rule of our fayth are alledged THERE are ten properties of the ground or rule of fayth and they are so manifest and certayne that none can doubt thereof The first is the continuall and neuer interrupted duration thereof to the end of the world For euen as fayth and the Church do alwayes endure continue so must also the ground of fayth seing that nothing can consist without his foundation and ground 2. The second propertie is the most certayne and vndoubted truth thereof in so much that it neyther can deceyue any nor be deceaued in any thing appertayning necessarily to saluation for otherwise it should be vncertaine and doubtfull yea also the fayth it selfe should be false and hurtfull vnto vs. 3. The third propertie is the certaynty therof on our part For it is necessary that the true fayth be not only certayne in it selfe but also to vs. Because error and
but often tymes leaueth and forsaketh them the which they proue out of that place of the 29. or 30. Psalme the eight verse Thou hast turned thy face from me and I became troubled For thus they affirmed in that famous disputation had at Paris Anno 1566. 5. Fiftly there wanteth that fulnesse sufficiency because no priuat man can define all poynts of fayth seeing that many were defined before he was borne against the ancient heretikes and there wil be many things defined in the Church after his death assoone as there shall arise any new heresies 6 Sixtly there wanteth necessity For before there was any priuate man which now liueth there was true fayth and the same fayth will continue after he is dead 7. Seauently there wanteth the seauenth property of the rule of fayth seing that by this priuate spirit a Christian cannot be distinguished from an Infidell But in truth all heretikes do bragge and boast that they haue this priuate spirit wheras notwithstanding one cōdemneth or rather damneth another 8. Eightly there wanteth the eight property For no point of faith can be certainly deduced out of this priuate spirit only seeing that it is oftentymes vncertayne and deceitfull 9. Ninthly there wanteth the ninth property For it is a ridiculous thing for one to endeauour to conuert an infidell to the fayth by bragging only that he hath this priuate spirit the which none can eyther see or vnderstand 10. Tenthly there wanteth the tenth and last property because there is no mention made of this priuat and particuler spirit in the Apostles Creed 11. And the true spirit of faith which is in euery faythfull soule wherof the Apostle speaketh when he sayth that we haue the spirit of fayth is not the ground or reason of fayth we heere speak of but it is the helpe of God or the supernaturall gift of fayth whereby our vnderstāding is helped to belieue and it is in regard of our vnderstanding as it were the efficiēt cause of the acts of faith But we speake in this place of the formall cause or reason of fayth as it appertayneth to the obiect of fayth which is the word of God and by which we know what is the true reuealed word of God and what is not For albeit the holy Ghost and the gift of faith moue vs to belieue yet they do not rashly moue vs without any reason or ground For he as the wise man sayth who belieueth quickely is light of hart but with a solid and sure ground according to those words of S. Iohn do not dearely beloued belieue euery spirit but proue the spirits whether they be of God But this proofe and tryall necessarily requireth some good reason and sure ground whereof we will speake in the next Chapter 12. Lastly it is to be considered that we do heere dispute of the Catholik faith as it is necessary to al to attaine their eternall saluation not of the speciall fayth of one or other ◅he which we know very well may arise or proceede from some particuler or extraordinary reuelation of God but this is not the Catholike fayth nor an ordinary but an extraordinary fayth not to be admitted generally of all till it be approued and receyued by the Church as presently we will declare more at large CHAP. V. That the Catholike Church is the ground or rule of our Faith THAT the Catholike and visible Church is the most solide and true ground of our faith is manifestly proued by the former properties of the Ground of faith For all those ten properties do very well agree to the Church and to nothing els besides The Church hath the first property to wit a continuall and neuer-interrupted duration For the Church hath alwaies continued as we haue already proued euen by the testimony of our Aduersaries 2. The Church also hath the second property that is to say a most certaine and vndoubted truth because she can neuer erre in faith as we haue proued before 3. She hath also the third property that is to say the infallible certainty on our partes because in the doctrine of the Church we may haue the greatest certainty perspicuity and euidency that possibly we can desire Seeing that the Church is alwaies present who explicateth alwaies her mynd vnto vs in plaine and manifest wordes And if at any tyme there arise any doubt or Controuersy in her decrees she presently declareth it no otherwise then if 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 and who speaketh now by the mouth of the Church for 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 strēgth 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 remayneth 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 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 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 recevued as a point of faith vnlesse it be receyued and approued 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 to 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 Tertullian S. Hierome and S. Augustine well note The Apostle S. Paul saith S. Augustine called frō heauen if he had not found the Apostles with whome by conferring 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
faith we 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 dumme 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 preached the pure word of God which kepeth and expoundeth the Scriptures most faithfully and which fittly applyeth them in Sermons Exhortations Amōg 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 groūd 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 whē 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 therefore 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 vnto the other I answere that heere there is no contrariety For there are 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 relyeth vpon the generall faith and profession and preaching thereof 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 faith is the ground of the Church we speake of the generall faith of the whole Church 18. There are other arguments of our Aduersaries but we may easily answere therunto by that which hath byn already said the which Melchior Canus and Bellarmine doth 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 affoardeth some testimony to the holy Scriptures they affirme 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 sufficiently testified Such a testimony was that which S. Iohn Baptist gaue of Christ. For Christ had sufficient testimonies besides 3. Of the former testimony of authority Christ saith But I do not receyue my 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 guien 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 altogeather necessary as that 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 testimonie 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 Scripturs 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 doctine of S. Paul stood need of the Churches approbation as we haue already proued out of the Scriptures much more S. Lukes Ghospell who was only S. Pauls scholler stood need therof as Tertullian witnesseth especially because S. Luke receyued not those things which he wrot by reuelation from God as S. Paul did but by tradition from others as he himselfe 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 is not For the Apostles did not
the groūd of our fayth that is the true ground therof because our fayth cannot well nor must not be considered but in regard of men seeing that our fayth cannot be found but in men only if therfore in regard of men the Church is the gound of truth it is also most truly and necessarily the ground of our fayth 20. Furthermore that the ancient Church of the holy Fathers did cōstantly hold the preaching and authority of the Catholike Church to be the ground of our fayth those excellent words of S. Augustine do manifestly declare when he writeth thus disputing against the Manichees I sayth he would not belieue the Ghospell but that the authority of the Catholike Church moued me therunto this sētēce of S. Augustine vexeth our Aduersaries very much Caluin goeth about to perswade the ignorāt people that S. Augustin speaketh of himselfe as yet remayning a Manichean heretike and not of himselfe as being conuerted and made a Catholike But this is a ridiculous euasion for the words which follow a litle after do shew that this is a false interpretation of Caluin If thou doest hold thy selfe to the Ghospell S. Augustine soeaketh vnto a Manichean heretike I would hold my selfe to those by whose commandment I belieued the Ghospell He speaketh therfore of himselfe as now being a Catholike and after a few words VVhose authority sayth he being infringed weakned I could not now euen belieue the Ghospel it selfe Where he sheweth plainly that our fayth doth so depend of the authority of the Church that it being weakned or taken away it could not remayne or continue by any fayth of the Gospell Wherby it is manifest that it is false which Iunius writeth that S. Augustine did only speake of the accidentary and not of the necessary cause 21. Others say that S. Augustine did speake of this or that booke of the Gospell and not of the whole Ghospell in generall But the very words of S. Augustine doe teach the contrary because he speaketh euery where of the Gospell it selfe in generall Moreouer one and the same reason is of one booke of the Ghospell and of all the rest as concerning fayth 22. Others lastly do answere that S. Augustine did not speake of the Church of his tyme but of the primitiue Church wherin were the Apostles who approued the Ghospells But this solution is also easily refuted out of the words next following to whom faith S. Augustin I haue obeied saying Belieue the Gospell why should I not obey them then saying vnto me Doe not belieue Manicheus But it is manifest that the primitiue Church spake nothing of Manicheus but that Church only which was in S. Augustines tyme sayd vnto him doe not belieue Manicheus For Manicheus liued many yeares after the primitiue Church yea euen after S. Cyprian that is to say almost three hundred yeares after Christ as the same S. Augustine testifyeth and it is otherwise sufficiently well knowen that the Manichean heresy was vnknowne in the world before the yeare 277. See Baronius in his 2. Tom. in the yeare 277. in the 2. number and others following CHAP. VI. The arguments of our Aduersaries are confuted NOvv it remayneth we answere to the arguments of our Aduersaries for by our answers the difficulty of this whole controuersy wil be more 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 inculcat this argument vnto vs. I answere that the same argument if it were any thing worth would also proue that we should not belieue Scriptures because al those who wrot the books of the Bibles were also men but as we do belieue their writinges not because they were men but because they had a certaine peculiar assi◅āce of the holy Ghost who did so gouerne and direct the 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 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 doctrine he sayth therfore he that despiseth these things despiseth not man but God who also hath giuē 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 Insidells 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 Aduersarise are wōr to cauil but ōly to shew that the holy Ghost is euery where conformable to himselfe that in all things he neuer differeth or disgreeth frō himselfe Whether he speake vnto vs by the holy Scripture or by the mouth of the Church as Caluin acknowledgeth 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 groūd of al things I answere that by the same argumēt the Anabaptists Libertines reiected 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 they also obserue the rule and method 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 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 therfore iudge of euery man by that they eyther heare or do not heare the Church c because they either agree or disagree frō 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 against 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 â—… sayd an argument deduced out of such thinges as they graunt vnto vs. So in like maÌ„ner because almost al heretikes admit the Scripture and reiect 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 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 certayne better knowne may be proued by that which is more certaine and better 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 fyte 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 posteriorl 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 tosay by their Propheticall and Apostolicall doctrine but if the foresaid doctrine be the ground of the Church it necessarily followeth that this doctrine appeared to 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 I answere first if we will follow the inteÌ„rpretatioÌ„ 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 foundations 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. Chrysostome 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 al one their doctrine for in the same place he compareth Christ to the chiefe coner 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 cornerstone which vniteth the Iewes and Gentills togeather as S. Paul sayth in the same Chapter 10. Hence it is that S. Iohn in the Apocalyps affirmeth that this heauenly Citty hath twelue foundations and not only one and Christ notwithstanding is 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 the 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 often vse the genitiue case of the substantiue for the adiectiue as a man of bloud deceit in the fifth Psalme signifieth a bloudy 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 God himselfe but in regard of vs it receiueth it certainty from the Church as Caluin and Beza 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 not only of the Scripture 14. But neyther do we deny that faith 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