followeth the word of God and as long as the ordinary vocation remaineth in her But in vayne do they adde these conditions because we haue already proued that the true Church alwayes followeth the word of God nor can depart or decline in any sort from it For otherwise Supr c. praecedent ad Ephes 4. v. 11. 13. she were not the true Church of God but the Synagogue of Sathan And the Apostlâ— also expresly saith that the ordinary vocatioÌ„ of Pastors their continuall successioÌ„ shall remaine alwayes in the Church oâ— God vntill we meete all with Christ in the end of the world By which wordeâ— of the Apostle Caluin also and Beza being Calu. Bez. inea verba ad Ephes â—tem Cal. l. 4. Inst c. 3. sect 4. conuinced do confesse that there must alwaies be Pastours and Doctours in the Church of God and that the said Church cannot consist without them The same also their Confession made at Rochell acknowledgeth in the 25. article 9. Some of our Aduersaries doe heere obiect vnto vs the example of Christ and his Apostles for say they their doctrine was neuer approued by the auncient Church of the Iewes wheras notwithstanding it was extraordinary But this is a very friuolus and odious comparison of Christ and his Apostles with their ministers For it was expressely foretould by the Prophets that Christ was to abrogate the old Law and the carnall vocation and succession thereof and that he was to ordayne another more excellent and spirituall the which he effected indeed Wherefore seing that now the Apostles had another farre more excellent vocation instituted by Christ there was no reason they should aske any vocation from Moyses But we read no where that the vocation ordained by Christ was to be abrogated by any other whosoeuer but contrarywise the holy Scriptures do plainely teach that the vocation ordained by Christ should endure till the end of Matt. 28. v. vlt. Ephes 4. v. 2. 13. the world wherefore our Aduersaries can proue nothing by this argument vnlesse they will bring in and establish another Messias and a new Law-maker who hath authority to abrogate and change the law and vocation of Christ which is the blasphemy of both Turkes and Iewes FINIS OF THE GROVND OF FAITH The second Part of the second Controuersy CHAP. I. Whether the Church be the foundation and ground of our faith IF the pertinacy of our Aduersaries were not so great it were an easy matter to define this question out of those few wordes of the Apostle affirming that the Churh is the Pillar and Ground of truth for seing that our faith relieth vpon truth that is to say vpon the most true word of God and that 1. ad Tim. 3. v. 15. the Church is the Pillar and Ground of this truth it must needes follow that the Church is the Pillar and Ground of our faith as afterward we will declare more at large But because our Aduersaries goe about to obscure this great and renowned prayse of our Church we will treat of this matter more exactly especially Cap. 13. seq §. 16. because this is a question of great importance seing that theron dependeth our whole faith For euery thing relyeth and dependeth of his foundation Moreouer heereby is declared the great excellency and authority of the Church Hence also other opinioÌ„s of our faith are to be proued which our Aduersaries deny their errors confuted and they themselues very easily conuinced And that the true state of this Controuersie may the better be vnderstood three thinges are to noted 2. The first is that euery science and doctrine hath her grounds principles out of which all other thinges are deduced proued and do depend wherefore we must heere diligently examine and search out the true principles of our faith least otherwise our faith become doubtfull and vncertaine 3. The second is that there are two principles of our faith the one that God is true and the Author of truth the other that these thinges which we belieue are spoken and reuealed vnto vs by God There is lesse difficulty of the former principle For all who conâ—eâ—â—e that there is a God may easily know euen by natural reason that he is true or rather the very Truth it selfe And seeing that he is the chiefest good he can deceiue no body and seing that he is Wisdome it selfe he Ad Heb. 6. v. 18. cannot be deceyued Hereupon the Apostle taketh this as a principle manifestly knowne by it selfe It is impossible for God to lye 4. But the doubts and difficulties which we coÌ„câ—yue concerning matters of faith do especially arise of the secoÌ„d principle to wit because we know not certainly that such things as we belieue are reuealed by God for hence ariseth the whole coÌ„trouersy with Iewes Turkes Heretikes For all do coÌ„fesse that God is true but the Turkes say that their AlcoraÌ„ was reuealed vnto theÌ„ by God the Iewes their Talmud the Anabaptists their bible corrupted maymed by them the Anti-trinitarians their blasphemies vttered against the Blessed Trinity the Lutherans their opinions the Caluinists theirs and the Catholikes theirs And hence it is that we need greatly some sure foundation principle rule and meanes whereby we may know certainly which is the doctrine indeed reuealed by God and which is not otherwise our fayth will alwayes remayne doubtfull and vncertayne 5. The third is that God is accustomed three wayes to assure his Church of this his reuelation The first way is when God himselfe appeareth froÌ„ heauen and speaketh to his Church for so in times past he spake vnto all the children of Israel when he gaue them the tables of Exod. 20. v. 22. his Law in the mount Sinay 6. The second is when God speaketh to one alone from heauen and he sendeth him to the Church that he may reueale vnto the whole Church such things as God hath spoken vnto him So in tymes past in the old Testament God spake by Exod. 24. v. 2. 3. Ad Gal. 2. v. 12. himselfe to Moyses and Moyses reuealed the same things to the people And in the new Testament Christ in this manner reuealed his Ghosptell to S. Paul which he afterward reuealed vnto others But these two wayes are extraordinary and are ceased as all do coÌ„fesse excepting only a few Anabaptists and Swenkfeldians whose madnesse and folly all men disproue 7. The third way is ordinary which alwayes remaineth in the Church and whereof the whole controuersy is For almost all Lutherans the purer sort of Caluinists will haue the sole Scripture to be the foundation and rule wherby we may certainly know the true reuelation of Cal. l 1. Iustit c. 7. sect 1. 2. God from the false But Caluâ—n himselfe at the first blush seemeth to attribute this to the sole Scripture and very coÌ„tumeliously inueygheth against Catholikes who deny it whome therfore he calleth brawling and sacrilegious persons yet
adde also some other naturall reasons and perwasions that they may be conuerted For there are many things in holy Scripture which seeme opposite to naturall reason as the mysteryes of the Blessed Trinity Incarnation Resurrection of the dead c. 9. Ninthly there wanteth last of all the tenth property for there is nothing extant of the Scripture in the Apostles Creed 10. The holy Scripture indeed is the ground and reason why we belieue many points of faith but not the ground why we belieue all Moreouer neyther is it the first ground of all that we belieue by it For the Scripture it self is proued by some other more generall ground to wit by the authority of the Church VVherfore the Scripture is only a particuler ground and not a generall a mediate and not immediate a secondary and not the first and chiefest rule of faith CHAP. IIII. That the priuate or particuler spirit of euery one is not the ground or rule of faith THAT no priuate spirit of any can be the ground of our Faith is farre more euident by the same properties now alledged For none of these ten properties doth agree with the priuate spirit of euery one that belieueth the which we declare by these arguments 1. First there wanteth the foresaid continuance For there is no priuate or particuler person who hath continued from the beginning of the world or shall endure till the end therof as faith hath continued 2. Secondly there wanteth truth because there is no priuate man to be found which cannot erre and be deceiued for as witnesseth the Apostle Euery man is Rom. 3. v. 4. a lyar 3. Thirdly there wanteth certainty in proposing matters of faith vnto vs because none can be certaine that any priuate person can haue such a spirit yea eueÌ„ in our Aduersaries iudgemeÌ„ts For the predestinate only in their opinion haue this spirit euen as they only in their iudgments haue the true fayth but the predestinate are knowen to none but only to God according to that of the Apostle God knoweth who are his The which Caluin 2. Tim. 2 v. 19. Cal. l. 4. Inst c. 1. sect 2. expressely teacheth 4. Fourthly the foresaid strength and immutability is wanting for that a priuate man hath not that strength and immutability of his doctrine Our Aduersaries themselues confesse and experience teacheth vs that they often times change their interpretations of Scriptures and at diuers tymes they teach plaine contraries yea they confesse that this their priuate spirit is not permaneÌ„t with them but often times 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 Vid disp Paris an 1566. in disp 1. diâ—i sub finem 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. Seauenthly there wanteth the seauenth property of the rule of faith 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 condemneth 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 oftentimes 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 faithfull soule wherof the Apostle speaketh when he saith that we haue the spirit of sayth is not the 2. Cor. 4. v. 13. ground or reason of fayth we heere speak of but it is the helpe of God or the supernaturall gift of fayth whereby our vnderstaÌ„ding is helped to belieue and it is in regard of our vnderstanding as it were the efficieÌ„t cause of the acts of faith But we speake in this place of the formall cause or reason of fayth as it appertaineth to the obiect of Faith 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 Eccles 19. v. 4. 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 1. Ioan. 4. v. 1. S. Iohn do not dearely beloued belieue euery spirit but proue the spirits whether they be of God But this proofe and triall 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 disâ—ute of the Catholik faith as it is necessary to al to attaine their eternall saluation not of the speciall faith of one or other the which we know very well may arise or proceede from some particuler or extraordinary reuelation of God but this is not the Catholike faith not 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 Supâ— cap. 3. huius Controu 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 Supr cap. 7. huius Controu 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 mâ—nd vnto vs in plaine and manifest wordes And if at any tyme there arise any doubt or Controuersy in her decâ—eâ—s she presently declareth it no otherwise then it the Prophets other writers of the ould and new Testament were yet aliue and would clearly explicate their mynds vnto vs in their owne proper words For it is the same Holy Ghost who in tymes past spake by the mouth of the Prophets and Apostles Matt. 10. v. 20. and who speaketh now by the mouth of the Church â—or it is not you that speake but the spirit of your Father that speaketh in you 4. The Church hath the fourth property For there is exceeding great streÌ„gth and immutability in the doctrine of the Church For this truly can neuer be corrupted falsified or chaunged because the Church is alwaies present who alwaies giueth most cleare and euident testimony of her owne doctrine This doctrine also of the Church remaineth alwaies constant and immoueable because the holy Ghost is alwaies present who will not permit the Church to erre according to those wordes of Christ I will Ioan. 14. v. 16. aske my Father and he will giue you another Comforter that he may remayne euerlastingly with you 5. The Church hath the fifth property that is to say the fulnesse and sufficiency of doctrine For the Church teacheth all thinges necessary to saluation according to that promise of Christ When the spirit of truth shall come he will teach you all truth So that the Ioan. 16. v. 13. Church hath hitherto condemned all heresies and heerafter also will condemne all errors arising and oppugning the Catholike faith In like manner she alwaies answereth to all doubtes and difficulties proposed vnto her because she is alwaies present and alwaies liueth 6. The Church hath also the sixt property that is to say Necessity For no doctrine must be receyued as a point of faith vnlesse it be receiued and approued Suprac 8. huius Controu Gal. 1. v. 12. by the Church as we haue declared before by the example of S. Paul who although he receyued his Ghospell immediatly from God by the reuelation of Christ yet he was commaunded by reuelation to go the visible Church and to conferre the Ghospell which he preached with those who were in the visible Church least perhaps in vaine he should runne or had runne 7. Yea and others could not safely belieue him vnlesse his doctrine had byn approued by the Church as Tertulliâ—n S. Hierome and S. Augustine well note The Apostle S. Paul saith S. Augustine called from heauen if he had not found the Apostles with whome by conserring his Ghospell he might appeare to be of the same Society the Church would not at all belieue him Thus S. Augustine And much more the Ghospells of S. Marke and S. Luke who were not Apostles but only their disciples stood in need of this approbation of the Church Hereupon saith Tertullian If he from whom S. Luke receyued Tertul. l. 4. contra Marci c. 2. S. Hier Ep. 11. S. Aug. tom 6. cont Faustum Manich. l. 28. c. 4. Tert. loco cita Gal. 2. v. 2. his light desired to haue his faith and preaching authorized by his predecessors how much more reason haue I to desire the like for the Ghospell of S. Luke seeing the same was so necessary for the Ghospell of his Mayster Thus farre Tertullian 8. And hence it is that the reuelations of S. Brigit and S. Catherine of Siena albeit they were truly reuealed vnto them by God yet they do not appertayne to the Catholike faith because they are not approued by the Church as the vndoubted and certaine word of God 9. Euen as also in the Apostles tyme many before S. Luke wrote the acts of Christ as S. Luke himself testifyeth and yet notwithstanding the Ghospells only of Luc. 1. v. 1. two of them to wit S. Matthew and S. Mark are authenticall for it is well knowne that S. Iohn wrote his Ghospell long after S. Luke but the Ghospells of the rest who wrote before S. Luke do not appertayne vnto faith because they were neuer approued by the Church Wherby it sufficieÌ„tly appeareth how necessary the approbatioÌ„ authority of the Church is 10. The Church hath the seauenth property of the ground of faith for by the Church and her coniunction communioÌ„ a true belieuer may be distinguished from an Infidel for he who belieueth the Church and heareth her is a true belieuer but he who doth not heare her is an Infidell if he will not heare the Matt. 18. v 17. 1. IoaÌ„ 4. v. 6. Church saith our Lord let him be vnto thee as an heatheÌ„or publicaÌ„ And S. Iohn saith he which knoweth God heareth vs he which is not of God doth not heare vs. 11. The Church hath the eight property For whatsoeuer we belieue with our Catholike faith we belieue it because it is reuealed vnto vs from God by Calu. l. 4. Instit c. 9. sect 1. Beza c. 4. suae confess sect 17. the Church But God now reuealeth nothing to euery member of the Church immediatly by himselfe Yea euen our Aduersaries do well admonish vs to labour most of all that no way or leaue be graunted to such fantasticall reuelations 12. The Church hath the ninth property For the Church conuinceth also Turkes and Infidels by naturall reasons of which sort there are many extant in S. S. Thom. in 4 lib. contra Gentes insracap 19. huius Controu Thomas We proue also the Church by the very signes and markes of the Church which are manifest vnto all euen Turkes and Infidels wherof we will speake more hereafter 12. The Church hath also the tenth property because in the Apostles Creed there is expressed an article of the Church For presently after the faith of the true God the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost first of al is set downe this article I belieue the holy Catholike Church 14. Moreouer that the Church and her preaching is the ground of faith euidently appeareth by the wordes of holy Scripture For when S. Paul disputeth of that faith wherby all are to to be saued he reduceth this whole Faith to the preaching of the Church vnto her sending calling of others to her Ecclesiasticall offices 15. So this Apostle in another place declareth that God alwaies appointed some Pastors Rom. 10. v 14. seq and Doctors in his Church that we be not children wauering in faith and carried about with euery wynd of doctrine but that we may be stable and constant alwayes in one and the same faith and confession of the Sonne of God 16. Lastly those words of S. Paul are most euident wherein he affirmeth that the Church is the pillar and ground of 1. Tim. 3. â— 15. truth Where we are to consider that euery foundation of any bulding hath two offices that
is to say to vphould the house to strengthen it The Apostle heere attributeth theÌ„ both to the Church the one when he calleth hâ—r the pillar of truth the othâ—r when â—â— calleth her the ground of the same truth For the pillar also of the earth according to the Hebrew Iob. â— v. 6. Psal 74. vel inxta Hebrâ—os 79. v. 4. phrase doth signify the lowest fouÌ„dations of the earth So God is sayd to shake the pillars of the earth elswhere to strengthen the pillars of the earth that is to say the very foundations thereof 17. These so manifest and perspicuous Calu. inâ— ad Tim. 3. v. 15. words of the Apostle do compell Caluin at the last to be of our opinion albeit after his accustomed maÌ„ner at the first he wrongfully slaundereth vs affirming that Catholiks hold or to vse his owne words do blab out this horrible blasphemy that is to say that the truth of God is not strong inough vnlesse it be vphoulden by the shoulders of men and that the word of God is vncertayne till by humble prayers as it were it borroweth some certaymy from men And afterward he affirmeth that the Apostle in this place would nothing els but that the truth of God is supported by the pure preaching of the Ghospell But that which he sayd first is a meere slaunder for we do not say that the truth or the word of God absolutly and considered precisely in it selfe receiueth it certainty and strength from the Church for in this sense it receyueth a most perfect strength and large authority from God himselfe but in regard of men and in consideration of our knowledge it receiueth it certainty froÌ„ the Church Infra hac Controu cap. 16. in fine as afterward we will declare more at large the which also Caluin in the words immediatly following acknowledgeth to be most true when he writeth in this Calu. loco citato Rom. 10. v 17. sorte S. Paul simply vnderstandeth sayth Caluin that which in other words he sayth in the tenth Chapter to the Romans because fayth is by hearing there wil be no fayth vnlesse there he some that preach Therfore in regard of men the Church supporteth the truth because it maketh it famous by her prayse and commendation because the retayneth it in sincerity and purity and because the deliuereth and sendoth it to her posterity Thus Caluin 18. But that which secondly he addeth that the truth of God is supported and vpholden by the pure preaching of the Church is indeed most true but he should haue considered that this pure preaching of the Ghospell cannot be fouÌ„d but only in the Church and that no others but men can preach the pure Ghospell Wherefore if the truth of God be sustayned by the pure preaching of the Ghospell it necessarily followeth also that the Church must be sustained by men and consequently that the Church of Christ is the gound of truth albeit not absolutly yet in regard of vs and our Beza in 1. ad Tim. 3. v. 15. knowledge So as Beza also is forced to coÌ„fesse the same exâ—licating those words of the Apostle the pillar and ground of truth Vnderstand this sayth Beza not simply in it selfe but in regard of vs. Thus he 19. It is therfore manifest as well out of Caluin as Beza that the Church in regard of vs is the ground of truth or of the word of God and consequently of our fayth which relyeth thereon But that which in regard of men is the ground 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 be the ground 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 coÌ„stantly 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 S. Aug. Tom. 6. contra Epist Manich. cap. 5. Calu. l. 1. Instit sect 3. writeth thus disputing against the Maniches I sayth he would not belieue the Ghospell but that the authority of the Catholike Church moued me therunto this seÌ„teÌ„ce of S. Augustine vexeth our Aduersaries very much Caluin goeth about to perswade the ignoraÌ„t people that S. Augustin speaketh of himselfe 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 speaketh vnto a Manichean heretike I would hold my selfe to those by whose commandment I beliued 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 faith doth so depend of the authority of the Church that it being weakned or taken a way it could not remayne or continue by any fayth of the Ghospell 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 Gospell 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 time but of the primitiue Church wherin were the Apostles who approued the Ghospell But this solution is also easily refuted out of the words next following to whom saith 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 time sayd vnto him doe not belieue Manicheus For Manicheus liued many yeares 8. Aug. Tom. 6. contra FaustuÌ„ l. 13. c. 4. 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. Tome 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 whose 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 inculcate this argument vnto vs. I answeere that the same argument if it were any thing worth would also proue that we should not belieue Scriptures because althose who wrot the books of the Bibles were also men buâ—â—â— we do belieue their writinges not because they were men but because they had a certaine peculiar assistaÌ„ce of the holy Ghost who did so gouerne and direct them that they could not erre so in like manner we belieue the Church and make it the ground of our fayth not as it consisteth of men but as it hath a speciall and continuall assistance of the holy Ghost by whome she is continually gouerned and directed wherby it commeth to passe that she can neuer erre as we haue proued Cap. 7. praeced a little before 2. Wherefore to make the Church the ground of our fayth is nothing els then to make the holy Ghost and Christ himselfe the ground therof For it is he who speaketh vnto vs by the mouth of the Church according to that saying of S. Paul Seeke you an experiment of him that speaketh in me Christ And in another place speaking of his own 2. Cor. 13. v. 3. 1. Thess v. 8. doctrine he sayth therfore he that despiseth these things despiseth not man but God who also hath giueÌ„ his holy spirit in vs. But our Aduersaries do thinke speak too basely of the Church as though it consisted of men only as the Churches of Infidells and Heretikes seeing that the chiefe part of the true Church of Christ is the holy Ghost who is as it were the soule and spirit of the Church 3. But neither is this to make the Scripture or the holy Ghost subiect inferito our men as our Aduersaries are woÌ„t to cauil but oÌ„ly to shew that the holy Ghost is euery where conformable to himself that in all things he neuer differeth or disagreeth froÌ„ himselfe Whether he speak vnto vs by the holy Scripture or by the mouth of the Church as Caluin acknowledgeth Calu. l. 1. Instit c. 9. sect 2. disputing against the Anabaptists and Libertines who by such an argument went about to reiect the holy Scriptures to wit least the holy Ghost might be made subiect and inferiour vnto them 4. The second argument is that Christians may and ought to iudge and examine all things as the Apostle sayth therefore the spirit of euery Christian ought to be the grouÌ„d of al things I answere that by the same argumeÌ„t the Anabaptists Libertines 1. Cor. v. 15. reiectâ—d all the Scriptures that they might only retaine the spirit as witnesseth Caluin but badly for euen as Christians must discerne and iudge all things so must Calâ—â— c. 9. citat sect 1. they also obserue the rule and methode in iudging which the Scripture doth prescribe vnto them and which himselfe appointed but this rule is not euery ones priuate spirit but the spirit of the whole Church For it is altogeather necessary that the rule of fayth be most certayne free from all errors as the spirit of the whole Church is and not that of euery priuate man Hereupon sayth S. Iohn He 1. Ioan. 4. v. 6. which knoweth God heareth vs he who is not of God doth not heare vs in this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error We must tâ—erfore iudge of euery man by that they eyther heare or do not heare the Church c because they either agree or disagree from the spirit of the Catholike Church 5. The third argument is that Catholikes proue the Church and the authority thereof by the Scripture therfore Scripture is rather the ground of fayth then the Church I answere first that the proofe of the Church which is taken out of Scriptures when we dispute against heretikes is an argument called by Philosophers ad hominem and it is deduced out of the premises already graunted in which manner also the first principles or grounds of euery science may be proued and out of those thinges also which of themselues are not very strong and certayne So out of the old Testament agaynst the Iewes we proue the new Testament albeit this also is the ground of our fayth because the Iewes do admit and receiue the old Testament but not the new yea also euen out of the Iewish Talmud we proue many things against the Iewes because they admit and approue it as the word of God but yet their Talmud is not the ground of our fayth because this only is as I sayd an argument deduced out of such thinges as they graâ—â—t vnto vs. So in like maÌ„â—er because almost al heretikes admit the Scripture and reject the authority of the Church therefore when we dispute against them we proue the authority of the Church by the Scriptures as premisses already graunted by them But if we were to deale with Infidells or others who doe not admit the Scriptures then the sayd Scriptures were to be proued by the authority of the Church and not contrarywise For it is a thing farre better and more commonly knowne that there Infra 18. buius coÌ„ â—r §. 10. is a Church then that there are the holy Scriptures as afterward we will shew more clearly 6. Secondly I answere that there is so great connexion betwixt the Scripture and the Church that the Scripture may very well be proued by the authority of the Church and againe the church by the authority of the Scripture Neyther should this seeme strange to our Aduersaries For Logicians also know very well that that which by it owne nature is more certaine better knowne may be proued by that which is more certaine and beter knowne vnto vs by a demonstration called by them à posteriori And coÌ„trary wise that which is better knowne vnto vs may be proued by that which is better knowne and more certaine in his owne nature by a demonstration called à priori So the cause is proued by the effect the effect by the cause as fyre is proued by heate à posteriori and heate by the nature of fyre à priori So in like manner by the authority of the Church the which in regard of vs is more certayne and better knowne we proue the Scripture as it were à posteriori and by the authority of the Scripture which in it owne nature is more certaine we proue the true Church of Christ as it were à priori 7. The fourth argument S. Paul testifyeth that the Church is supported by the ground and foundation of the Prophets and Apostles that is to say by their Propheticall and Apostolicall doctrine but if the foresaid doctrine be the ground of the Church it necessarily followeth that this doctriue appeareth to
wrong and damnify the chiefe parts of the Ghospel yea they euen as it were coÌ„tract or bring the whole preaching of the Ghospell to the bare name thereof 6. Many of our Aduersaries who deale more sincerely with vs conuinced by these arguments do acknowledge that these grounds or principles of our faith are only to be had by Traditions without any written word of God as Ioannes Brentius and Martin Kemnitius who adde also that those Traditions which doe not repugne to the written word of God are to be admitted and receiued and that those only are to be reiected which are opposit vnto the holy Scriptures 7. But whatsoeuer our Aduersaries do answere it is altogeather necessary that they confesse these three principles of our fayth do belong indeed to the very word of God it selfe They must also needs confesse these are not extant in plaine and expresse tearmes in any booke either of the old or new Testament out of which necessarily followeth that the whole intire word of God is not conteyned expresly in the holy Scripture CHAP. III. Wherein it is proued out of other particuler poynts of fayth that there are Traditions THE second argument whereby we proue Apostolicall Traditions is taken out of other particuler poynts of fayth the which almost all our Aduersaries belieue with vs albeit they be no where expressely conteyned in the Scriptures There are many poyntes oâ— sayth of this sort wherof for example sake we will alledge some few But to the end we may vse our accustomed breuity we will rehearse only those which do also manifestly shew out of this opinion of our Aduersaries that nothing appertayneth to the doctrine of fayth which is not expresly conteyned in holy Scripture there are many greeuous errours and heresies in this our age arisen 2. The first point is that in God there are three Persons really distinct among themselues and one only substance for this is now here extant in holy Scripture yea in it nothing is to be found expresly written eyther of the substance or of the person in that signification wherein these words are vsed when we speake of the Blessed Trinity 3. This indeed the Caluinists to their great losse and domage haue sufficiently learned by experience fourty yeares agoe in Transiluania For when one Iohn Huniades whom they called Iohn the secoÌ„d King of HuÌ„gâ—ry was then Gouernour in TraÌ„â—luania a CouÌ„try or Prouince of Hungary had ordained a publike disputatioÌ„ betwixt the Calâ—inists and the Anti-trinitarians that is to say those who oppugned the mystery of the Blessed Trinity and that according to the coÌ„mon doctrine on both syds they should dispute only out of the holy Scriptures the Caluinists could neuer proue out of the Scriptures alone that there is eyther a substance or person in God neyther could they by the Scriptures only declare what is a person or what is a substance 4. Wherefore at the last this was the end of the disputatioÌ„ that almost all those which were present iudged that the Antitrinitarians got the victory and that the Caluinists were shamefully ouercome wherupon it came to passe that the sayd Prince of Transiluania of a Caluinist became an Anti-trinitarian yea one of their chief friends in so much that he tooke some publike Churches from the Caluinists and gaue them to the Anti-trinitarians and he continued miserably in that wicked heresy euen till death which happened in the yeare 1571. the 14. of March 5. All which things are aboundaÌ„tly declared by one Ioannes Sommerus Pirnensis in the funerall Oration which he made at his death where in among other things he affirmeth that the chiefe cause why this Prince left the Caluinists and became an AntitrinitariaÌ„ was this because forsooth in the Scriptures he could fynd nothing of the Blessed Trinity and for that the Caluinists were forced to confesse that the words wherby the mystery of the Blessed Trinity is explicated are not extaÌ„t in the holy Scripture but because this funerall Oration is scarce any where to be found least some should thinke that I falsely coyned these things my selfe I will heare set downe his owne words For after he had most blaspemously spoken as the Anti-trinitarians are wont to doe against the Blessed Trinity the which he calleth heere and there the Roman Idolatry these things he addeth of his Prince 6. This funeral Orat of Ioan Sommer was printedat Claudiopolian Domini 1571. But this our Prince sayth he being instructed by God easily vnderstood what was the truth and with earnest desire imbraced it and with no lesse pleasure of mind defended it for being accustomed euen from his childhood to read the holy Scriptures he made them very familiar vnto him presently he found that such things which were contrary to the phrase of Christ and his Apostles were in the ensuing ages by a wicked curiosity brought into the Church and that they are not at all to be numbred amongst those things which adde any firmity or strength to the Author of our saluation especially seing that the Aduersaries themselues acknowledge that the words wherby these subtilties of this new opinion are explicated if not rather as I may well say more obscured are not to be found in the writings of the Apostles 7. And a little after Wherfore little regarding eyther the multitude of wranglers He meaneth Seruetus who was buâ—ned at Geneua an 1553 as Beza writeth in vita Caluini or the torments and paines which others had endured who first endeauoured to breake this yce he manifestly condemned the falsity of the Trinity freely professing his owne opinion therein And after a few words For what hath he not done what assemblies and disputations hath he not ordayned caused to be had about this matter both in Hungary and in Transiluania that the sense or meaning of the Scripture might the better be explicated by conferring those thinges togeather which were then said or spoken of where he would not only be present himselfe but also taking the place or office of the Iudge and vmpyre in the said disputations he very wisely and grauely confuted the great absurdities of that superstition warning often the Aduersaries that reiecting the fancies or fond expositions of men they should lesse impudently and more sincerly carry themselues in the explication of the heauenly doctrine Thus farre Sâ—â—â—merus of the great care diligence of the Prince of Transiluania in defending the heresy of the Anti trinitarians 8. Moreouer it is also manifest that out of this opinion of our Aduersaries to Seruetus l. 1. de erroribus Trinitat fol. 32. pag. 1. Edit an 1531. wit that we must not belieue any thing which is not expressed in Scriptures this wicked heresy of the Anti trinitariaÌ„s in these our dayes had her beginning For that Michael Seruetus who in our age was the first of them that by printed bookes presumed to oppugne the mystery of the Blessed Trinity doth plainely testify writing in
this manner For the solution saith he L. Item apud §. A it Prâ—tor ff dâ— iniurijs of all things which may heere be alledged by the Philosophers for thus he calleth the Catholikes thou must obserue this rule which is an axiome among Lawiers that those thinges which do not deserue any speciall note or marke are vnderstood and esteemed as things neglected vnlesse they be specially noted But I pray thee iudge whether this article of the Trinity deserue any speciall note or no seeing that it is the chiefest and first ground of all our faith whereof the whole knowledge of God and Christ dependeth And whether it be expressely noted or no may be seene by reading ouer the Scriptures seing that there is not one word to be fouÌ„d of the Trinity in the whole Bible nor of the persons therof nor of the essence or vnity of the supposition nor of the vnity of nature in many distinct thinges and such like Thus farre Seruetus By this it euidently appeareth that all these monstrous strange opinions of latter Arians who are also called Anti-trinitarians do proceed from this one principle of our Aduersaries to wit that we must only belieue Scriptures and by this they are encreased But let vs now see other matters 9. The second point of faith is that Infants are to be baptized But our Aduersaries will neuer shew this in the holy Ioan. 3. v. 1. Scriptures For that one place which doth clearly conuince this to wit vnlesse he be borne againe of water and the spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdome of God they wrest and expound it in another sense For they will Calu. in cap. 5. Ioan. v. 5. not haue this word water to signify the element of water but the holy Ghost so Caluin Hence arose that wicked sect of the Anabaptistes who affirme now adayes that it is an vnlaw full and prophane thing to baptize Infants seing that there is no solide reason heereof extant in the Scriptures 10. For that wherunto Caluin and his followers do fly for refuge to wit that in the old Law Infants were circuÌ„cised Genes 17. v. 10. the Anabaptistes do easily confuâ—e both because coÌ„cerning that there was an expresse precept of God but there was none of the baptisme of Infants and the similitude also betwixt circumcision and baptisme doth not hold in all thinges for otherwise S. Aug Tom. 6. de haer cap. 84. S. Hier. coÌ„tra Hel uid Author de Eccl. dogm cap. 69. S. Ambros in Epist 7. ad SiriciuÌ„ Papam Epiph. haer 78. lunius coÌ„tra Bellar Controu 1. lib. 4. c. 9. nota 5. women should not be baptized but only men 11. The third point of faith is that the Blessed Virgin Mary the mother of God remayned allwayes a Virgin euen after her childbyâ—th For this is extant no where in Scripture and yet Heluidius was condemned as an Heretike by the whole auncient Church because he presumed to deny it 12. When Card. Bellarmine had alleadged this vn writteÌ„ point of faith to proue that all such pointes of faith were not expresly set downe in holy Writ Francisâ—us Iunius to answere vnto this difficulty was forced to take and approue the condemned heresy of Heluidius For he denyeth that we ought to belieue as a point of faith the perpetuall Virginity of our B. Lady But the ancient Fathers had neuer condemned Heluidius aâ— an Heretike vnlesse he had denyed a point of faith But in this manner are our Aduersaries forced to renew the old heresies of tymes past to the end they may defend this their paradoxe that we must only belieue Scriptures CHAP. IIII. Whether there are any pointes of faith to be alleadged which are no where extant in the Bible THE fourth Point that our Aduersaries also belieue but without expresse Scripture for it is that Christians cannot lawfully Concil Trident. sess 24. c. 2. haue more wyues at once for the Councell of Trent hath very well defined this to be a point of faith against the heresy of these tymes wherof we will speake more presently But yet our Aduersaries can neuer proue this out of Scripture only abstracting from the authority of the Church albeit they also agree with vs in the beliefe heerof Yea the examples of holy Scripture do rather perswade the coÌ„trary For those most holy men Abraham Iacob Dauid and many others had more wyues at once yet neuer did God reprehend this in them albeit he often sâ—ake vnto them Beza Ep. 1. ad Andream Dudiâ—ium 2. When Bernardine Ochiâ—e one of Caluins schollers did consider this he was not afrayd to perswade both by word and writing that Polygamy was yet lawfull of whome and of his most wicked life Beza writeth at large â— But Ochinus grounded only this his heresy in that principle of our Aduersaries before alledged to wit that we must belieue nothing which is not expresly in Beza in lib de Poligamia extat in iâ—it voluminis 2. suarum Tract Theol. Scripture And whereupon Beza himself in his booke which he wrote against the same Ochinus doth testyfy that Ochinus vsed this argument where Beza also manifestly acknowledgeth that Polygamy is not forbidden in holy Scripture by any expresse Law The other argumenâ— saith Beza of Ochinus is that Polygamy is not forbidden by any expresse law to the contrary but I answere that there are not lawes written of all thinges Thus Beza 3. But after ward indeed Beza goeth about to proue that Poligamy is contrâ—ry to the Law of Nature but the same difficulty still remayneth For according to our Aduersaries doctrine all thinges necessary to saluation are expressed in holy Scripture but the obseruatioÌ„ of all things belonging to the Law of Nature is altogeather necessary to saluation therefore the obseruation of these thinges is expressed in Scriptures or els truly many thinges necessary to saluation must be sought for out of the Scriptures Moreouer that Poligamy is vnlawfull is a point of faith but this as Beza confesseth is not expressely contayned in Scriptures therfore all the pointes of faith are not expressely contained in Scriptures 4. The first point of faith is that the Sacrament of Baptisme may only be giuen in water For this point is also very necessary for the Church least so great and worthy a Sacrament be prophaned contrary to the institution of Christ and yet our aduersaries will neuer be able to proue this out of the Scriptures only who deny that the forsaid place of S. Iohn is to be vnderstood of true water as we haue said before in the second point For the examples of holy Scripture do proue indeed §. 9. cap. praeced Beza Epist 2. ad Tho. Tilium fratrem Symmistam suum that water is the fit matter of Baptisme but they do not proue that there can be no other matter 5. When Beza did consider this well least that his foresayd principle that we must belieue nothing but
a little after he reduceth the principall Cal. eodeÌ„ c. 7. sect 4. infine sect 5. and chiefest certaynty of Scriptures and of our whole fayth to the particuler and priuate spirit of euery beleeuer The late Caluinists do put two grounds or 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 wil easily be knowne For euen as by the properties of a man it may be be knowen who is a true man and by the propirties of any other thing the thing it selfe many be knowne so by the properties of the ground of sayth 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 suffice 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 therof 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 therof in so much that it neyther can deceyue any nor be deceyued 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 certainty 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 vncertaynty is ingendred in vs if the thing be ambiguously and obscurely proposed how certayne soeuer it be in it selfe 4. The fourth property is the strength immutability therof so that this ground can by no meanes be depraued changed or corrupted For otherwise truth will sometymes perish there will arise some error against fayth 5. The fifth property is the fullnesse sufficiency of those things which are to be belieued that is to say it must conteine all things appertayning to the Catholike fayth seeing that nothing can consist without his ground or foundation 6. The sixt property is the necessity therof that is to say it must necessarily be receaued of all who haue the true fayth and because without it true fayth cannot consist euen as the building cannot continue without the foundation 7. The seauenth property is that it is a manifest signe and token wherby Christians are distinguished from Infidells For he which wanteth the ground and rule of fayth is an Infidell but he who retayneth it is a true beleeuer 8. The eight property is that in euery article and conclusion of fayth this principle and ground is virtually conteyned seing that out of it all things are to be deduced they receiue their certaynty from it 9. The nâ—nth property is that it not only mooue Christians to belieue but that it also conuince the infidells For otherwise the way to faith and eternall saluation should not be knowne or open to Infidels 10. The tenth property is that it be conteyned expresly in the Apostles Creed wherein all the first groundes of our fayth are conteined for the Apostles after they had receiued the holy Ghost were not so forgetfull that in the Creed or Summary of fayth which they set downe to be belieued of all they would let passe the first and chiefest ground of fayth And thus much of the properties of the ground of fayth CHAP. III. That the Scripturealone is not the ground or rule of fayth THAT the Scripture alone is not the grouÌ„d of our fayth we haue already declared by the properties of the ground of fayth before alledged For of those ten properties the Scripture hath oÌ„ly one to wit Truth but al the other properties are waÌ„ting vnto it The which we clearly demoÌ„strate in this sort First of all a perpetuall duration and continuance is wanting For the holy Scripture began first vnder the old Law in Moyses tyme wheras two thousand yeares before there were both true beleeuers and a Church In like manner in the new law the Apostles began to write some yeares after they had receiued the holy Ghost 2. Secondly the certaynty on our part Supr coÌ„tro 1. c. 5. infra haccoÌ„t 6. cap. 15. is wanting seeing that we know not which is the Canonicall Scripture by the Scripture it selfe but by the authority of the Church as we haue proued before and will also more at large declare heereafter 3. Thirdly the foresaid strength immutability is wanting for euery part of the holy Scripture considered in it owne nature is subiect to many alterations and falsifications For it may be destroyed Supra Controu 1. cap. 4. it may be corrupted it may be wrested to contrary senses wherof we haue spoken before 4. Fourthly that fulnesse and sufficiency is wanting because all thinges necessary to saluation are not expressy coÌ„tained Supr CoÌ„trouers 1. c. 26. sequâ—nt in holy Scripture as we haue also declared before 5. Fiftly the foresaid necessity is wanting For without the holy Scripture there were in the law of Nature for the space of two thousand yeares many true belieuers And also long after Christ yea euen till the tyme of S. Irenaeus that is to say almost two hundred yeares there were many Nations who sincerely belieued Iren. lib. 3. cap. 4. in Christ without any holy Scripture as S. Irenaeus himselfe testifieth Lastly albeit Infidels should burne all the Bibles yet the faith of Christians should not therfore perish or be wholy ouerthrowne Therfore our faith doth not necessarily depend of the Scripture 6. Sixtly the seauenth property is also wanting for by the holy Scriptures the true Christians are not distinguished from Infidels because almost all Heretikes do both now receyue the holy Scriptures and in times past also receyued them 7. Seauenthly the eight propertie is wanting for there are many pointes of faith which rely vpon the Traditions of Supra Contr. 1. c. 26. 27. the Church only without any expresse Scripture at all as we haue declared before 8. Eightly the ninth property is wanting For Turkes and other Gentills who are only lead by naturall reason are very seldome or neuer conuerted by Scriptures only but we
be certaine in it selfe before the Church began to be The Church therefore must be that which giueth certainty to the doctrine or writings of the Apostles but rather their doctrine and writings do affoard sufficient certainty to the Church So Caluin Calu. lib. 1. â—nst c. 7 sect 2. Beza in 2. cap. ad Ephes v. 10. I answere first if we will follow the interpretation of this place alledged by Beza Caluins argument wil be nothing worth For Beza will haue this to be the sense of those words that the Church is built vpon Christ who is the ground and foundation of the Apostles and Prophets and he will haue only Christ to be the ground-worke and the Apostles and Prophets he saith were only as the Architects and builders of this Church as also all faythfull Ministers of Christ are at this day but not the ground it selfe Beza also addeth that he is truly Antichrist who attributeth that vnto himselfe which belongeth only to Christ that is to say to be the ground and foundation of the Church 8. Out of which doctrine of Beza it followeth manifestly that Caluin is truly Antichrist For he attributeth vnto all Ministers of the Church and to their doctrine and consequently vnto himselfe and his owne doctrine that they are the foundation of the Church but according to Beza whosoeuer attributeth this vnto himselfe is plainly Antichrist because he attributeth that vnto himselfe which only belongeth vnto Christ 9. Secondly I answere that yet whatsoeuer Beza sayth Caluins exposition is the trewer agreeing therin with S. Chrrsostome S. Chrys Hom. 6. inc 2. ad Ephes S. Aug. Tom. 8. in Psal 86. adv 1. Theoph in e. 2. Ephes S. Augustine Theophilact and other auncient Fathers that is to say that S. Paul in this place calleth the Apostles and Prophets the ground and foundation of fayth or that which is alone their doctrine for in the sameplace he compareth Christ to the chiese corner stone and the foundation of this spirituall building doth consist of many stones but there is one lowest and chiefest to wit Christ Iesus who supporteth all and who is that corner stone which vniteth Ephes 2. v. 14. the Iewes and Gentills togeather as S. Paul sayth in the same Chapter 10. Hence it is that S. Iohn in the Apocalyps affitmeth that this heauently Apoc. 2â— v. 14. Citty hath twelue foundations and not only one and Christ notwithstanding is S. Aug. Tom 8. in Psal 86. initio the chiefest of all the foundations and the foundation of foundations as S. Augustine sayth that is to say of all those twelue foundations he is the foundation 11 And heere the Apostle vseth tâ—e Hebrew phrase in which it is all one to say Vpon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets to say Vpon the Apostolicall and Propheticall foundation For the Hebrews Psal 5. v. 7. often vse the Genitiue case of the substantiue for the adiectiue as a man of bloud deceit in the fifth Psalme signifieth a blouby and deceitfull man 12. Furthermore that which Caluin sayth that the Apostolicall and Propheticall doctrine hath it certainty of it self before the approbation of the Church that indeed is true but this is the certainty which it hath of it owne nature from Cap. 13. praecedent §. 17. 19. God himselfe but in regard of vs it receiueth it certainty from the Church as Caluin and Bezâ— witnesse as we haue already declared 13. But Caluin erreth in this that he thinketh S. Paul to treate in this place of the Scripture only of the Apostles and Prophets For not only the Apostolicall Scripture is the ground of our faith but all the doctrine of the Apostles And few of the twelue Apostles to wit only fiue haue written any thing but of the other seauen there are no writings extant but yet they all taught the Apostle therfore speaketh of the Apostolicall doctrine and only of the Scripture 14. But neyther do we deny that fayth dependeth of the Apostles doctrine yea more then that we say that our faith dependeth of the doctrine of the present Church For when we affirme that the Church is the ground of our faith we ad Rom. 10. v. 17. do not vnderstand by the Church the shoulders or bodyes of them who are in her but their authority doctrine and preaching for by these thinges faith is ingendred and as the Apostle witnesseth faith is by hearing 15. But whensoeuer we treate of the true Church of Christ we do not speake of that which wanteth true faith which is deafe dumbe or foolish and which also eyther neglecteth or not vnderstandeth the Word of God or Scriptures for such a Church is not the true Church of Christ But we speake of that which belieueth which speaketh which preacheth the pure word of God which keepeth and expoundeth the Scriptures most faithfully and which fitâ—ly applyeth them in Sermons Exhoâ—tations AmoÌ„g vs therfore all these wordes haue one and the same signification the Church the faith of the Church the preaching and doctrine of the Church the word of God preached by the Church and the truth of God proposed vnto vs by the Church And we vnderstand all these thinges by the Name of the Church when we say that she is the grouÌ„d of our fayth For all these thinges are eyther properties actions or offices of the Church which cannot be separated from her 16. Wherefore our Aduersaries doe erre exceedingly wheÌ„ they separate euery one of these from the Church and oppose or obiect it against her as though it were a quite distinct thing from her nay of the true Church of Christ they make her the Sinagogue of Sathan Therfore the Apostolicall Propheticall doctrine must not be separated and made opposite vnto the Church as Caluin doth seeing that it is an essentiall part of the visible Church Caluin therfore disputeth as if one should make this argument A man without his soule neyther seeth speaketh nor vnderstandeth therefore a man neyther seeth speaketh nor vnderstandeth 17. But peraduenture some will say We haue said a little before that faith is the ground of the Church and now we say that the Church is the ground of faith wherof the one seemeth to be contrary to the other I answere that heerin there is no contrariety For there be two kindes of faith the one is the particuler faith of euery Christian wherby togeather with hope and charity euery one is iustified the other is the generall and common faith of the whole Church The particuler faith of ech one relyeth vpon the Church to wit vpon the faith preaching and authority of the whole Church But she her selfe relieth vpon the generall faith and profession and preaching therof in the whole Church which is an essentiall part of the visible Church When therfore we say that the Church is the ground of faith we speak of the particuler faith of euery Christian But when we say that
version to make theÌ„ speake in fauour of their error which they cannot do if the authority of the old Calu. in Antid Conâ— 4. sess Conc. Trident. interpreter continue in all thinges entire and vndâ—minished As for Caluin he is so deadly an enemy to the vulgar edition that with great excesse he declaimeth against it in this manner So farre off is it saith he that there is one entire lease as there are sâ—arse three verses togeather not defiled with some notable error But to proue this his impudent aâ—â—ertion he bringeth only one place out of the now Testament which a little after we will shew to haue byn exceedingly well translated out of the Greeke He bringeth no other places out of the old Testament then such as he taketh out of the Psalmes which as it is euident are translated word for word out of the Greeke version of the Septuagint Interpreters Nay in the same place Caluin acknowledgeth that the Latin Interpreter hath with all possible diligence expressed the Greeke translatioÌ„ And as for the Greeke interpretation of the Septuagint it is most learnedly defended by Genebraâ—d so as it Geneb in Psal superfluous to say any more Indeed Caluins Luthers disciples find fault with many other places in the vulgar edition both of the old and new Testament but we will lay foure generall grounds out of which all their arguments may be easyly answered 2. The first is If our Aduersaires will needes haue the now present Roman Church condemned for following and authorizing the vulgar Latin Interpretation they must needes also condemne the whole auncient Church and all the Fathers who liued the first some hundred yeares after Christ for they acknowledged no other interpretation of the old Testament as authenticall then that of the Septuagint Interpreters which much more departeth from the Hebrew text now extant then our vulgar Latin as our Aduersaries themselues confesse wherfore if the Roman Church be to be condemned for the vulgar Edition much more the Primitiue Church for the version of the Septuagint and heereof it followeth further that the Church is not to be condemned which followeth a translation of the Scripture which in some thinges may be amended so long as nothing is to be found in it which is repugnant eyther to fayth or good manners For otherwise the auncient Church had erred in retayning the version of the Septuagint which was corrupted in some places but those corruptions were not in Calu. l. 4. Instit c. 1. sect 12. any thing necessary to be knowne Moreouer Caluâ— himselfe confesseth that we must not depart from the Church for errors of little importance the ignorance whereof neyther doth violate Religion nor preiudice our saluation Wherfore albeit there should be some such errors in the vulgar Edition yet were not Rom. 1 v. ◠〈◊〉 Epist 57. ad Dam. the Roman Church which is so aunciâ—nt so highly commended by the mouth of the Apostle as speaketh S. Ierome to be condemned or forsaken And this may serue for answere to our Aduersaries arguments when they obiect certayne light faults of the vulgar Edition which haue crept into it eyther by the negligence of the printers or by any other accident As also what our Aduersaries obiect against the Psalter may heerby be coâ—uinced to be very weake for seeing that no other version is followed in it then that auncient version of the Septuagint they cannot condemne vs vnlesse they will condemne the whole primitiue Church togeather with vs yea the Apostles and Euangelists theÌ„selues who followed the same version is as shewed in the 11. Chapter of the Latin Edition of this Controuersy 3. The second ground A good Interpreter doth not tye himselfe to translate word for word seeing that euery tongue hath his proper phrases and manner of speach but contenteth himselfe to expresse the true sense and meaning of that which he translateth Wherefore all our Aduersaries argumeÌ„ts are nothing worth by which they proue that certayne places of the vulgar edition are somewhat otherwise in the Hebrew and Greeke so that the sense of the whole period be one and the same as most of the places are which they carpe â—â— in the vulgar Edition 4. The third ground The places of holy Scripture are of two sortes some are cleare manifest as almost all are which set downe the history of the old and new Testament Others are obscure and full of difficulty as are many places in the Psalmes and Prophets Now if the interpreter in such places as are euident and manifest do interprete rightly all of them and in such places of Scripture as are obscure expresse a sense and meaning agreable to the Letter though he come short of the best sense and that there might be a better giuen he is not therefore to be thought to haue â—rred or not to haue fulfilled the office of a good Interpreter For so plentifuâ—l and profound is the sense oâ— holy Scripture especially in such places as are obscure as it is not easy for any mâ—â— to iudge which is the best sense Nay if we must interprete a new vntill wee haue â—ound out the best sense there will neuer be an end of interpreting but we must euery yeare set forth a new interpretation or at least correct and amend the former as our Aduersaries haue done and Beza by name who hauing set out fiue diuers ediâ—ions of the new Testament Beza in Eâ—â—st aâ— lâ—â—t ante deti â—â— 1593. euery one much differing from the other as himâ—elfe freely confesseth yet he plainly acknowledgeth that in his first edition he â—ath neyther satisfyed eyther the greatnes of the worke or his owne desire Out of which ground we answere to that which our Aduersaries obiect to wit that there are many places of the vulgar Edition which might much better and much more cleerly haue been translated for it is sufficient that they are well and rightly translated 5. The fourth ground We are not to reprehend the translations of holy Scripture only because they differ one from another so long as they are not contrary the one to the other and in this the holy Scripture differeth from other prophane writings For euen as the holy Ghost in diuers places of holy Scripture teacheth thinges different but not repugnant so the same holy Ghost can in one place in the same words teach diuers things And heerhence it is that S. Thomas teacheth 1. p. q. 1. art vlt. well as did S. Augustine before him that of one the same place of Scripture there may be many litterall senses For where as the litterall sense is that which the author intendeth and the proper and chiefe author of the holy Scripture is God himselfe whose intention and meaning is not tied to one verity only as is mans vnderstanding but he in one and the same moment comprehendeth all things there is no doubt but that he in the same words and at the same
tyme can intimate vnto vs diuers things 6. The which thing is excellently declared by S. Augustin for hauing said that Aug. â— 12. â—onf c. vlt. he thought Moyses intended diuers senses in his words he correcteth himselfe saâ—ing that without all doubt God who is the principall author of the Scriptures did so O Lord sayth he seeing thou art God and not flesh and bloud if man he short sighted can it be hidden from thy spirit which will lead me into the right land whatsoeuer thou wast in those words to reueale to posterity howsoeuer he by whome they were spoken thought peraduenture but of one sense only amoâ—st many other no lesse true so S. Augustin Seeing therfore there are diuers litterall senses of one and the same place one Interpreter may follow one sense and another interpreter another so long as neyther of them do say any thing not agreeable to the word of God but both the one sense and the other is godly and conformable to other places of Scripture And this maketh much for the dignity of the Scriptures and profit of the Church according to that which S. Augustin writeth Lib. 3. de Doctrin Christ c. 27. else where How could God sayth he better commend vnto vs the plentifull fruite of his Deuine VVordes then by so disposing as the same words may be vnderstood diuers wayes 7. Nay we see moreouer the holy Scripture it selfe to shew very manifestly that there are diuers senses of the same wordes For there is no doubt but that commaundment of Deuteronâ—my Thou shalt Deut. 25. v. 4. not tâ—e the mouth of the Oxe that thresheth according to the litter all sense doth signify that the mouth of an oxe is not to be tyed whilst 〈◊〉 treadeth forth the corne in the floare for so according to the Letter the Iewes obserued it as indeed they were bound to do Neuertheles S. Paul manifestly teacheth that God the proper Author 2. Cor. 9. v. 9. 10. of the holy Scripture inteÌ„ded chiefly another sense Is God sayth he so carefull of Oxen or doth he not so say in regard of vs for indeed those things are written for vs hitherto it also appertayneth that in the Hebrew tongue one word hath many significations as hath beâ—ne shewed in the seaueÌ„th Chapter of the Latin Edition 8. Out of this ground we affirme that there is no repugnance betweene the Septuagint Interpreters and the Hebrew text and betweene the Hebrew text and the vulgar Edition or lastly betweene the interpretation of the vulgar Edition of the old Testament and that of the new how much soeuer the same wordes are diuersly translated to wit otherwise of the Septuagint and otherwise of the vulgar Latin interpreter or otherwise of the vulgar Edition of the old Testament and otherwise of the vulgar Edition of the new where in both places the same wordes are cited for the same places of Scripture are oftentimes otherwise cited by the Apostles in the new Testament then hath the Hebrew text of of the old But here is diuersity without any repugnance or contrariety And this hath place especially in the Hebrew text because in the Hebrew tongue there is so different reading of one and the same word See examples heereof in the Latin Edition of this Controuersy in this Chapter 9. It wil be easy out of that which hath byn said to answere that which our Aduersaries obiect against diuers places of the vulgar edition For albeit there be diuersity betweene it and the Hebrew text yet there is no repugnance or contrariety and if our Aduersaries think otherwise it procedeth from their ignorance of the Hebrew tongue which hath many wordes subiect to ambiguity and very many phrases much different from the Latin and Greeke phrase as in the Chapters that follow may be seene in the Latin Edition from the 16. to the 20. CHAP. IX The place of Genesis she shall breake thy head is shewed to be well translated IT wil be too long and little to my purpose to examine all the places of the vulgar Edition to which our Aduersaries take exceptions for many of them differ little or nothing from the Hebrew text of the old Testament or from the Greeke of new we will handle some few of greatest difficulty and which our Aduersaries do most often and with great bitternes vrge against vs that by them iudgment may be giuen of the rest which are of lesse importance 2. The first place which they say is depraued and of which they often and eagerly complaine is that of the third of Luther in Genes ib. Genesis v. 15. Ipsa centeret caput tuum for it is not ipsa in the Hebrew but ipsum as if it were spoken of the seed of the womaÌ„ and not of the woman her selfe The Lutherans crie out of great iniury done therby to Christ as to whome alone it appertayneth to bruze the head of the Diuell which we attrâ—bute to another to wit to the Blessed Virgin 3. Caluin also affirmeth that we Calu. in c. 3. Gen. v. 15. haue found out a sacrilegious Exposition whilst we accommodate that to the holy Mother of Christ which was spoken of the seed Christ himselfe And as for the Lutherans we haue lesse cause to blame thâ— for reprehending our version seeing they stoutly maintayne that by the seed â—â— the woman Chrill only is meant 4. But as for Caluin he sheweth the greedy appetite he hath to calumniate wheÌ„ he calleth our version a sacrilegious exposition for he conuinced by the truth coÌ„fesseth that by the seed of the woman not only Christ is meant but al his members yeâ— euen all maÌ„kind It is therefore woÌ„derfull that he saith it is a sacrilegious expesition to apply to the Blessed Virgin Mary that which was spoken of the seed vnlesse â—e will not that the Blessed Virgin be any meÌ„ber of Christ or to appertayne any thing to mankind For seeing that the promise of bruzing SathaÌ„s head appertayneth to Christ and euery member of his aâ— Caluin writeth in expresse wordes Calu. l. 1. Inst c. 14. sect 13â— it must doubtlesse principally apperthyne to the Blessed Virgin as who next after Christ hath most strongly crushed Sathans head VVherfore euen the Lutheranâ— Hun. in Caln IudaizaÌ„te in Anti. paraeo themselues obserue that Caluin hath no reason to obiâ—ct this vnto the Catholikes 5. But to the end we may the better vnderstand whether it be any fault at all that we retayne in the vulgar version the particle ipsâ— we are first to declare the litteral sense of this place and to examine after whether it be any error that we retayne the particle ipsa in our version For it was not out of any ignorance or drowsy carelesnes that the feminine gender crept in heâ—re iâ—stâ—â—d of the masculine or neuter as Caluin calumniateth but it was In Gen. loc cit done of purpose and for iust cause as shal be shewed CHAP. X. Of the
the Sacraments But because there is no small Controuersy now a dayes concerning this Office we will briefly dispatch it But to the end that which is in Controuersy may the better be vnderstood heere are three thinges to be determined First that the calling of God is necessarily required to the end one may become a lawful preacher or administer of the Sacraments For those words of the Apostle are very cleare and manifest How shall they ad Rom. 10. v. 15. Hebr. 3. v. 4. 5. preach vnlesse they be sent And againe Neyther doth any man take the honour to himselfe but he that is cllaed of God as Aaron So Christ also did not glorify himselfe that he might be made a high Priest but he that spake to him My sonne art Psal 2. v. 7. thou c. Wherefore he who without this lawfull calling and mission dareth presume to intrude himself to meddle with these diuine offices preferreth himself before Christ our Lord. For Christ came not to these offices but called and sent by his eternall Father Lastly if in humane and worldly matters none dare meddle with the affaires or busynes of a Prince without his licence and consent much lesse must any deale with these supernaturall and diuine offices vnlesse he be called and sent for that purpose by God himselfe 2. The second is that there are two kinds of callings by God the one extraordinary the other ordinary The extraordinary calling is when God immediatly by himselfe calleth any in this manner God called Moyses the other Prophets Christ called his Apostles This is called extraordinary because it seldome hâ—apneth It is tearmed also an immediate vocation because it is done immediatly by God himselfe The ordinary vocation is that which coÌ„tinueth alwaies in the Church and is done immediatly by the Pastors of the Church and of God only by their meanes Hereupon also this is called a mediate vocatioÌ„ to wit in respect of God This diuision is taken out of S. Paul who writeth himselfe to be an Apostle not of men neyther by man but by Iesus Christ and God Gal. 11. v. 1. the Father For by these wordes he sheweth that some which are in the Church are called to the diuine offices by men and some by God himselfe 3. The third is that those who are taken to Ecclesiasticall offices by the ordinary vocation they receyue their calling and authority from the Church For this ordinary vocation is not done but by the ministers of the Church But the whole Controuersy is of the extraordinary vocation For those who in this age haue brought in new opinions seeing themselues destitute of the ordinary vocation they fly vnto the extraordinary the which say they must not be subiect to the censure and approbation of the Church wherof they know themselues to be destitute But we on the other side affirme that the extraordinary vocation also must necessarily be confirmed and approued by such as haue ordinary vocation in the Church of God And we know very well that our Aduersaries haue not truly this extraordinary vocation as afterward we will declare more at large But suppose we graunt them to haue this extraordinary calling neuerthelesse by these ensuing arguments we will manifestly proue that it must needs be confirmed and approued by those who haue their ordinary vocation in the Church of God 4. The first argument S. Paul was immediatly and extraordinarily called by Ad Galat 1. v. 1. God as he writeth himselfe and yet he was sent to Ananias who had the ordinary vocation that by him he might be instructed and baptized And afterwards Act. 9. v. 7. together with S. Barnabas he was ordained by the imposition of hands by those who were the ordinary Pastors of the Act. 13. v. 3. Church Lastely he writeth that according to the reuelation which he had he Ibid. v. 1. 2. went to Ierusalem and conserred the Ghospell which he preached with the visible Church and ordinary Pastor of the same least he might seeme to haue runne or laboured in vaine they therefore who refuse the approbation of the visible Church albeit they be neuer so extraordinarily called therunto they doe but labour in vayne 5. The second argument We must not easily beleeue euery one who affirmeth himselfe to be extraordinarily sent by God according to that admonition of S. Iohn Belieue not euery spirit but proue the 1. Ioan. 4. 4. 1. spirits whether they be of God because many false Prophets are gone out into the world But this proofe or triall cannot be better done then by Christs Church which is as S. Paul writeth the pillar and ground of truth The which also S. Iohn clearly sheweth by the words following when he sayth he that knoweth God heareth vs he that is not of God heareth vs not in this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error It is therefore a most certaine rule wherby this extraordinary vocation is examined to demaund whether it will submit it selfe to the approbation of the visible Church and will heare her or no For he who heareth the Church hath the spirit of truth and the true extraordinary vocation but he who will not heare the Church hath the spirit of error and the false extraordinary vocation 6. The third argument The holy Ghost neuer contradicteth himselfe for otherwise which God forbid he should not be the spirit of truth but of falshood for truth is neuer repugnant to truth but to falshood seeing that therfore it is manifest that the ordinary vocation is from the holy Ghost that extraordinary cannot be opposite vnto it which is truly from the holy Ghost For otherwise God should be opposite vnto himselfe which were impiety to thinke wherfore it necessarily followeth that the extraordinary vocation must agree with the ordidinary and be subiect vnto it as also it must establish and confirme but not impugne it Hereupon sayth the Apostle the spirit of the Prophets are subiect to the 1. ad Cor. 14. v. 32. Prophets if they be subiect to the Prophets much more to the whole Church of Christ 7. The fourth argument There would arise a greate confusion in the Church of God if euery one were permitted to preach and administer the Sacraments that should affirme himselfe to be extraordinarily called without any other examine or approbation of the Church For so euery phantasticall fellow might freely bragge and affirme himselfe to be extraordinarily called by God And vnder that pretence and title might preach administer the Sacraments and exercise all other Ecclesiasticall offices 8. By these arguments some more Calu. l. 4. Inst cap. 3. sect 14 Bez. c. 5. suae confess â—rtic 28. Bulling decad 5. serm 4. learned amongst our Aduersaries being conuinced do acknowledge that all extraordinary vocation should be examined and approued by the ordinary Pastors of Christs Church But they adde moreouer that this is true when the Church it selfe