thinge deliuered in the worde CHAMP That is properlie an article of faith that is beleeued for diuine authoritie whether it be written or noe as were all these thinges the fathers beleeued before the lawe written And because we beleeue the bookes of Genesis for example and the rest of the holy Byble to be written by Gods reuelation therefore doe we beleeue them to be holy scripture and to containe gods worde Which therefore is properlie an article of faith no lesse then the misterie of the blessed trinitie beleeued for the same authoritie PILK Vppon this grounde I answere first in generall that none of these points are articles of faith CHAMP Vppon such a false grounde you are like to builde a good answere Is it no article of faith with you that the booke of Genesis is written by gods reuelation Tell me I pray you vnto what kinde of knowledge or assent you will reduce it I will confesse you a maister in diuinitie if you can make it well appeare by what other act of knowledge or vnderstandinge we assent vnto this veritie besides the act of faith Which if you cannot performe as assuredlie you cannott you must needes see this your first answere to be noe answere att all but a meere supposall of a manifest falsitie PILK Secondlie I answere to euerie one in particular I answere to the the first That all canonicall bookes and euerie parcell thereof be such is prooued out of themselues For besides that the ould testament prooueth the newe and the newe the old for whatsoeuer we read in the ould testament the same is founde in the gospell and whatsoeuer is founde in the gospell that is deduced from the authoritie of the ould testament as Hierome speaketh so in speciall euerie booke prooueth it selfe both by its owne light as formerlie was shewed and by the testimonie of Christ of the Prophets and Apostles that were the secretaries of the holy ghost The testimonie of our Sauiour Christ. Luc. 24. 44. These are the wordes which I spake vnto you while I was with you that all must needes be fulfilled which were written of me in the lawe of Moyses and in the prophetts and in the psalmes Of S. Paule 2. Tim. 3. 16. All scripture is geuen by the inspiration of God and is profitable to doctrine to reproofe to correction to instruction which is in righteousnes Of S. Peter the 2. epist 1. 21. The prophecie came not in olde tyme by the will of man but holy men of God spake as they were moued by the holy Ghost doe abundantlie prooue the bookes of the olde testament to be canonicall besides that there is not anie of them out of which some testimonie is not in the newe testament extant CHAMP Your second answere is as much to the purpose as your first Neither the old testament proouing the newe nor contrariwise vnles the one be beleeued before Yea you make your selfe ridiculous to all men by such a naturall or circulare proofe vnles you suppose the assured beleefe of some parte before For example if one shoulde demaunde of you how you knowe or why you doe beleeue those wordes of our Sauiour which you cite out of the 24 of S. Luke either to haue been spoken by him or written by S. Luke would you say that they euidentlie prooue themselues so to be surely this you must say both accordinge to your doctrine here and accordinge to the necessitie you putt your selfe into by denyinge the authority of tradition and of the churches testimonie And yett in sayinge that you shall euidently prooue your selfe to be senceles For there is noe such euidence of the thinge but anie man that is not moued with the authoritie of gods churche and tradition would esteeme it verie vncertaine and most doubtfull For vnles these wordes and that which I say of them I say of the rest of the scripture were God himselfe and spake to vs as imediatlie as he did to Moises and the rest of his prophetts they cannot be sayde to be knowne by theire owne light nor beleeued for theire owne truth Againe suppose you had certayne knoweledge of this by what meanes soeuer howe could you be certayne that he speaketh of those bookes of Moises psalmes and prophetts which we haue vnder those names This certainlie would be impossible for you to prooue seinge you reiect the authoritie of tradition and the churches iudgment by which onlie it is assuredlie prooued Furthermore you knowe that our Sauiour speakinge in his owne person required not to be beleeued but by the testimonie of his workes sayinge Nisi opera in eis fecissem 〈◊〉 nemo alius fecit peccatum non haberent Much lesse therefore doth he require that we shoulde beleeue a written booke to be his worde without other proofe then the selfe light of the booke which is not so greate as that of his owne liuelie worde◠The sayinge of S Hierome is nothinge to the purpose For he speaketh onlie of the mutuall consent and concord of the two testaments which to christians that alreadie beleeue them both to be the worde of God is no small confirmation of the veritie of the doctrine they both contayne PILK The Gospells of the Euangelists the Acts and Epistles of the Apostles the reuelation of S. Iohn prooue themselues out of themselues to be theires whose titles they beare And if we creditt the bookes of historians and Philosophers auncient and moderne diuine and humane to be theires whose names they carrie in theire foreheads what madnes were it to thinke the diuine scriptures not to be written by them who are said to be theire penmen after the defluxion of so manie ages wherein neuer anie good christian called them in question besides wicked Iesuits impure Manichees Cerdonians Marcionists and Ebionites CHAMP None of all these bookes say they were written by such and such as is manifest And thoughe they did yett were not this sufficient to prooue them theirs vnles it were certaine this were theire testimonie and that they were infallible in their testimonie As for the titles they beare there is the same difficultie For it is not otherwise knowne to be theirs then by faith and beleefe of which we seeke the grounde And if titles were sufficient proofes of the true gospells we should haue manie moe gospells then we haue as you cannot be ignorant Againe the Epistle to the Hebrues beareth not the name of anie of the Apostles and howe longe it was thought by diuerse not to be S. Paules you knowe vnles you be verie ignorant For the workes of other humane authors why doe you beleeue them to be theirs if it be not for the testimonie of all succeedinge ages brought vnto vs by tradition Giue some other sufficient grounde of your beleefe in this poynte if you can and if you cannot say you are senceles to reiect ecclesiasticall tradition in receiuinge the bookes of the Bible or else that your iudgment is foolishe and idle
especiallie to be beleeued Whereupon in another place speakinge of the faith wherewith we beleeue the scriptures he willeth vs to followe those who inuite vs first to beleeue that which we are not able to conceiue that beinge made more stroÌ„ge in faith we may attaine to vnderstande that which we beleeue God himselfe confirminge and inwardlie inligthenninge our mindes and not men This is sufficient to shewe that neither arte nor order requireth at your handes to prooue the scriptures as you disorderlie imagine CHAMP The scriptures or verities conteyned in them are confessed to be principles in respect of all Theologicall conclusions deduced from them and therefore in respect of them they neede no farther proofe to anie christian diuine that beleeueth them to be the worde of God But they are not principles in respect of the articles of our faith in generall but are themselues to be beleeued for the same authoritie of God reueylinge as all other articles of faith are And that they are not necessarie principles of the articles of our â—aith it is manifest by that before the scriptures were written the churche of God beleeued manie of the same articles which nowe it beleeueth Therfore when you say the scriptures or verities contained in them are primae veritatis if ignorance thoughe grosse and not to be excused in a doctour of diuinitie doth not excuse you you will make the scriptures not onlie to be gods worde but also to be God himselfe For besides him there is no prima veritas which is to be beleeued for it selfe as vppon better consideration I thinke you will not dare to denie Seeinge therefore the scriptures are not primae veritatis or first truthe but the testimonies wordes or verities reueiled by the first truthe they are not euen by your owne grounde to be beleeued for themselues but for the truthe and authoritie of the first veritie God himselfe of whose reuelation we must haue sufficient grounde before we canne securelie and prudentlie beleeue the scriptures to be his worde That which you bringe out of S. Thomas maketh euidentlie against you so iudicious are you in your allegations For the scriptures beinge not God they are not the first truth and therefore not to be beleeued for themselues S. Aug. in the first place maketh also against you sayinge that the scriptures are to be beleeued to bee of gods spiritt and not to be knowne For to beleeue this he recurreth not to the scriptures themselues but to the authoritie which they had obtayned throughe the whole worlde The second authoritie of S. Aug. is wholie impertinent to your purpose as the reader thoughe but of meane iudgmeÌ„t will easilie discerne Hee sayinge nothinge that soundeth as if the scriptures were to be beleeued for themselues or without other authoritie And therfore thus farr haue you saide nothinge that may satisfie this assertion of the Manuall that in the orderlie proceedinge in this present poincte the scriptures shoulde first be prooued but you will peraduenture satisfie better hereafter PILK Yett further to satisfy you I answere that the scriptures doe sufficientlie prooue theÌ„selues and these and these bookes to be the scripture both by that inwarde light that is contained in them and that outwarde operation that they haue in vs. For first they are a lanterne to our feete and a light to our path a candle that shineth in a darke place And as a light doth discouer those thinges that are in darkenes and demonstrateth also it selfe vnto the eies saith Aug. so doth the holy scriptures by that connatur all light that is in them manifest themselues vnto those whose vnderstandinge is enlightened to behoulde them Which if you cannot perceiue desire God to remoue the scales from your eies as he did from Paules for this is a case so cleare that Stapleton graunteth it credenti scriptura seipsam probat commendat CHAMP All this proueth noe other thinge then that to christians and catholikes who belieue the scriptures to be the worde of God and vnderstand it in the sence of the churche they haue all these properties of light lampe and lanterne and this is it which Stapleton expreslie saith if hou had taken but verie ordinarie heede to his wordes But to say that either to a Pagan who beleeueth not the scriptures to be Gods worde or to an heretike who vnderstandeth them not in the sence of the churche but accordinge to his owne fancie they are such as doe manifest themselues to be the worde of God is a most sencelesse Paradox contradicted by manifest experience not onlie in Martin Luther and all his disciples who as you knowe reiect diuerse bookes receiued by Caluin and his followers but also of the auncient and holy fathers who did not vniuersallie receiue as Canonicall Scripture all such bookes of the newe testament as nowe are receiued by you And yett none of all these I suppose you will say wanted light to see that which is manifest of it selfe PILK Againe they are knowne by theire operation in vs for the worde of the Lorde is pure and conuerts the soule a two edged sworde Heb. 4. 12. a verie fierie worde psal 119. 14. which purifieth the soules inflameth the affections enlighteneth the vnderstandinge and so softeneth the heart of the hearer that it frameth it sitt to all goodnes Which noe other worde or worke deuised by the witt of men or Angells canne doe Where vppoÌ„ LactaÌ„tius speakinge of the differeÌ„ce betweene the doctrine of the gentills of the churche saith that the wisdome of the Philosophers doth not roote out vice but hide it whereas a fewe precepts of God so change the whole man and mould him a newe by castinge away the ould that one would not thinke him to be the same Geue me a man that is wrathfull euill tougued vnbridled by a fewe wordes of God I will make him meeke as a lambe Geue me a couetous auaritious and tenacious man I will restore him liberall and distributinge his money with his owne handes Geue me a man fearfull of sorrowe and death he shall contemne crosses fires dangers bulls c. By one lauer shall all malice be expelled such is the force of diuine wisdome that beinge powered into the brest of man it expelleth folly att one blowe that is the mother of all vices What man then that hath his hearte thus mollified his will rectified his vnderstandinge cleared and his whole course suddenlie altered can deliberatelie doubte of the scriptures seinge Christe himselfe teacheth vs thus to knowe them Is anie will performe the will of his father he shall knowe of the doctrine whether it be good or noe CHAMP In whome I pray you doth the scripture worke these effects you haue here so industriously numbred vp in those that beleeue them not to be true or to be the worde of God you will not say so I suppose Why doe you therefore bring these arguments to prooue the scriptures to be easily knowne to
be god worde that they are manifest of themselues and neede not to be prooued Because you will euer be impertinent not knowinge what you say nor what you shoulde prooue and yet are you so full of bable that you will still be be talkinge If one shoulde aske your aduise howe he might knowe good Phisicke and you shoulde say vnto him it is an easie thinge to knowe that For that phisike which coÌ„forteth nature expelleth disseases and restoreth health is certainlie good phisicke doe you thinke he shoulde be much wiser for your aduise whatsoeuer you thinke I knowe he shoulde be as wise as he was before Such is your directions to knowe the scripture vnto such as doe not alreadie knowe or beleeue them And seeinge our Sauiour himselfe prescribeth as a necessarie rule to knowe the scriptures the performance of his fathers will before his doctrine canne be vnderstoode as you well note but stil against your selfe it is euident that they are not so cleare of theÌ„selues nor yett so easie to be knowne as you pretend For that doctrine which must first be practised by humble obedience before it can be vnderstoode or knowne to be of God as our Sauiour saith of the scripture noe man that is not deuoyde of all iudgment wil say is easie to be knowne euen by it selfe PILK I might add all those arguments which both the fathers and schoolemen produce out of the scriptures themselues to prooue them the ofspringe of God which if they be stronge against gentiles I knowe not howe they should be weake against you vid. the maiestie of the doctrine the simplicitie and puritie of the stile antiquitie of the bookes truth of oracles and predictions that manie ages after held their complement with sundrie other to the like purpose but I passe by them and shutt vppe this pointe with that speeche of your Stewchus CHAMP You were well aduised to passe by all such arguments of the fathers and schoolemen as woulde nothinge serue your purpose I woulde you had been so aduised from the begininge for soe shoulde I not haue hadd the labour and paynes to transcribe so manie impertinencies of yours as I haue been forced to doe hitherto The arguments which you here mention taken by themselues are farr from makinge anie sufficient grounde to builde our faith vppon thoughe they are probable and prudent considerations and ioyned with the authoritie of the churche and tradition wherby â—e receiue the scriptures they are not without some force to persuade the bookes of the holy Bible to be gods worde and to be written by his inspiration But take you experience of them in your selfe and see whether they are sufficient to persuade that the bookes of Wisdome Ecclesiastious and the rest receiued generallie by the whole churche and namelie by the fathers and schoolemen whose authoritie here you seeme to vrge for canonicall are trulie gods worde and written by his holy spiritt And if you finde them not sufficient groundes for these why woulde you intrude them vppon vs as sufficient for the rest But lett vs heare what you bringe out of our Stewchus PILK They which thinke the authoritie of holy scriptures whereunto all the worlde nowe assenteth to depende vppon the readers faith and not to bringe with them certaine diuine and most potent reasons that drawe vnto them the iudgements of greate mindes are therefore deceiued because they are not of theire number whose mindes both by naturall goodnes and continuall exercitation of wisdome doe prudentlie apprehend the highest and truest thinges whereas if anie haue that wisedome geuen him to esteeme the greatnes of thinges as they deserue he shall feele the weight of diuine oracies to be so greate that the pronunciation of them onlie would suffice to begett a most firme and suddaine faith CHAMP The whole space of a thousand and fiue hundred yeeres geuen you to take your testimonies out of might haue sufficed without alleaginge of moderne writers and those oâ— small note and lesse authoritie Stewchus is an author not wholly receiued and the booke cited by you is put in the index of bookes to be amended or corrected and therefore the testimonie thereof thoughe it were otherwise most formall as it is not is of noe authority against vs. And truelie I wounder you are not ashamed to bring such stuffe for the proofe of your faith and doctrine And that in such sorte as you haue lett passe all other and made choyce of this as of moste strength and force Lett the iudicious reader nowe iudge by that which hath been sayde both by you and me whether the scriptures are so clearelie knowne by themselues and by theire owne light that they neede no other proofe to be gods worde and written by his spiritt And whether it he a needles or disorderlie thinge for him that pretendeth to prooue all the points of his faith by holy scripture to prooue first that there is a holie scripture and then to prooue in what bookes it is contayned And lastlie whether because you refusinge traditions and the churches authoritie by which onlie the holy scriptures are knowne cannot prooue the scriptures to be such and therefore receiuinge them vpon the credit of your owne fancie which consequentlie must be the fundamentall rule of your whole Faith doe not recurre to that shifte to say that the scriptures are so euident of themselues that they neede noe other proofe or testimonie but themselues MANVALL SECTION 7. And here occur by the way two thinges worthy of note The one that the scripture cannot be an vniuersall rule of our faith seeinge somethinges are to be beleeued without proofe of scripture as are for example that there is an holy scripture contayninge gods worde and reuelation and that these these bookes be such therefore of necessitie must there be some other rule of our faith more vniuersall then the scriptures and consequentlie before the scriptures And this cannot be but the authoritie of gods churche which is clearely S. August doctrine who was not a frayde to say I woulde not beleeue the Gospell but that the authoritie of the church doth moue me Seeinge therefore the authoritie of the churche is a sufficient motiue for vs to beleeue what is scripture why shoulde it not haue the like authoritie with vs in other points of faith which is also S. Aug argument in the same place but I will notwithstandinge satisfie our aduersaries in theire owne humour PILK Your former grounde beinge a bedd of sande that scriptures cannott be prooued by scriptures these conclusions that you doe builde vppon it doe of themselues fall to the grounde CHAMP When you shall followinge your principles proue out of the scripture either that there is a scripture or in what bookes it is contayned without supposinge some scripture without proofe then may you terme my grounde to be a bedd of sande and I will also beleeue it so to be But till then I will esteeme it a rock that
Moreouer were it certainly knowne vnto vs that S. Mathewe wrote the gospell we haue vnder his owne name as it is nowe by tradition and the churches authoritie yett vnles it were further certaine that he wrote by diuine inspiration which without some diuine testimonie we knowe not it could not be certaine to vs that his gospell is the word of God Nowe if you had lefte out of the number of those that haue called the scriptures into questioÌ„ Iesuites and putt in theire place Lutherans or Protestants your wordes might haue passed for currant But tell me in the small honestie of a protestant minister did you euer knowe that anie Iesuite called anie booke of scripture into question or doubte you cannot thoughe you burst your selfe giue an instance Whereas you doe not onlie call manie bookes of the holy Byble into doubt but absolutlie reiect them as Apocripha and your Grand father Luther with his truer disciples doth manie moe euen of those which you say is madnes to call into question Hath malice so blinded you and wilfull rage against the truth made you so madd that you feele not the deadly woundes which you geue your selfe whilst you strike or at least thinke to strike your aduersarie PILK But what iuglinge is this we beleeue these bookes to be theirs whose names they carrie for the authoritie of the churche that is the Pope who is S. Peeters successour and holdeth all his authoritie from him and yett we cannot beleeue S. Peeter himselfe that this Epistle is his but because the present Pope hath so determined it CHAMP I cannot say that you iugle here you are so grossely impertinent and hoodle vppe so manie apparant absurdities in these fewe wordes Where learned you I pray you that the Pope is the churche or that he holdeth all his authoritie from S. Peter and not from Christ himselfe Againe where doth S Peter testifie that this is his Epistle haue you or anie of your reformed bretheren heard him say it no such thinge Seeing therefore neither you nor anie man nowe a liue euer heard him testifie anie such thinge what great iuglinge is it I pray you to beleeue a liuely and liuinge witnes assisted by the spiritt of truth and taught by those who lineallie descended from S. Peter testifiinge that these are S. Peters writinges rather then to beleeue a doombe paper or parchment which might be written by some other as well as other thinges that went a broade vnder the same Apostles name And by that which hath beeÌ„ hitherto sayde on both sides you may see if you will not shut your eies that you may not see that it is cleare notwithstandinge all your childishe ianglinge that all articles of faith are not contayned in scriptues otherwise then is mentioned in the position of the Manuall nowe lett vs see your answere to the other proofes of the same position PILK To your second instance we say with Saint August that we are not willinge to moue anie questions aboute the Mother of God for the honour we beare vnto her sonne Yett sith you stirre the coales we answere that it is an highe pointe of our faith and sufficientlie prooued in the scriptures that Christe was borne of an intemerat Virgin but whether after his birth shee were knowne of Ioseph thoughe the negatiue be a seemelie and reuerend truth yett we say with Basill that it toucheth not our faith CHAMP You woulde seeme to be religiouslie affected towardes the blessed Virgin but notwithstandinge you minse S. Aug wordes least you shoulde doe her too much honour his wordes are these De Maria propter honorem Saluatoris nullam cum de â—eccatis agitur habere volo quaestionem And in the end you are content rather to incline towardes the old heretike Heluidius then to beleeue with the holy catholike churche concerninge the perpetuall virginitie of the blessed Virgin Where is nowe I pray you your rule of faith before mentioned non credimus quia non legimus I coniure you vppon forfeiture of your honestie and integritie either to reiect that rule as noe sufficient grounde of faith in anie article or else to beleeue that the blessed Virgin was neuer knowne of anie man Take whether parte you please you shall geue sentence for me against your selfe PILK Your thirde instance is no article of faith but â— Canon of manners so in the number not of thinges to be beleeued but to be donne Wherein thoughe to the Apostles for the auoydinge of scandall for the eatinge of thinges strangled and blood yett when the offence was remoued the eatinge was allowed Rom. 14. 14. 1. Tim. 4. 4. and Saint August prooueth it out of S. Mathewe cap. 15. 17. 18. CHAMP Are you so blockishe that you doe not or so peruerse that you will not see the difference betweene the practise of anie thinge and the doctrine of the lawfulnes of the same practise Whereby you might be taught that thoughe the first be not an article of faith yett the second may be For example thoughe it be not an article of faith for two single persons to marrie together but a matter of practise yett is it a matter of faith that they may lawfullie marrie together as I hope you will not denie and so in fiue hundreth more thinges That the Apostles did make that prohibition for a tyme onlie and not to continue euer where is it written or whence haue you it but by the churches authoritie interpretation The places of scriptures by you cited were they to the purpose as they are not woulde be sufficient arguments to make some of the bookes doubtfull as coÌ„tradictinge the one the other were there not a iudge to reconcile them and bringe them to attonement togeather And thus you see all the three instances brought in proofe of the catholike position in the Manuall to remaine firme and solide and your euasions to be childishe wranglings without truth or substance PILK Thus you see you fight against God when you warre against the perfection of holy worde Which that you may more plainlie perceiue in the last place I will sett downe the protestants doctrine not in such double tearmes as you deuised but theire owne wordes as they haue positiuelie deliuered with the seuerall authorities of holy scriptures whereby they confirme it and testimonies of fathers whereby they shewe the consanguinitie of it with the purest Christians For the positions sett downe by you are not by them acknowledged CHAMP If you deny my positions to be true as hauinge hitherto disputed against them you seeme to doe then must you of necessitie acknowledge the contradictorie to be true and maintaine them as yours vnles you will haue both contradictories to be false which no man yett euer hearde of But why doe you not put downe the positions which I call the protestants positions that the reader might see how iustlie you denie them to be yours I will supply your defect that the
breaketh all your batteries like as if they were balls of sande caste against a brasen wall And therefore the conclusions built vppon it will neither of themselues nor yett by all your forces fall to the grounde but will stande firme and stronge PILK First that the scriptures are not the vniuersall rule of faith a position so derogatorie to the testament of Christ and so contrarie to the doctrine of the auncient churche that I wounder howe you durst venture vppon it For the rule whereunto nothinge must be added nothinge detracted is an vniuersall and persecte rule such is the scripture which is Aquinas collection â— Tim. 6. For if anie addition or detraction might be made in the scriptures they could not be the rule att all As in a rule saith Photicus if yee adde or diminishe any thinge yee corrupte the whole And a rule saith Theophilact neither hath augmentation nor diminution soe is it in the scriptures which Chrisostome termeth the most experte rule Canon and Gnomon that can be if it admitte anie supplie it coulde not be the rule at all And if we must not be wise in matters diuine aboue that which is written then that which is written is the rule of our wisdome and faith But S. Paule forbiddeth that ranknes of witt to enquire further then that which is written This S. Aug. collecteth out of this place The holy scripture doth prefixe vnto vs the rule of our faith least we shoulde presume to be more wise then behoueth but as he saith let vs be wise vnto sobrietie as God hath diuided vnto euerie one the measure of faith Finallie if our faith doth lastlie resolue it selfe into the scriptures onlie then they alone are the rule and nothinge can be founde more vniuersall but this is graunted by your best diuines CHAMP Till it be prooued by expresse scripture that the scriptures are the vniuersall rule of our saith or that nothinge is to be beleeued but that which is prooued by scripture you cannot trulie say that my position is derogatorie to the Testament of Christ And because it can neuer be prooued by scripture that nothinge is to be beleeued but that which is prooued by expresse scripture your position is hereticall the contrarie thereof beinge clearelie testified by the scripture as shall appeare in the first and seconde controuersie vnto which places I will referr you for answere to your arguments which you there repeate as the more proper place Onlie I will not omitte to tell you here that you loose your creditt with al men by vtteringe such knowne vntruthes as that the best of our diuines doe graunte the â—ast resolution of our faith to â—ee into the scriptures onlie You shoulde haue named some one author att least to haue geuen creditt to your assertion PILK What then is the rule that is more vniuersall The authoritie of the churche say you Traditions saith Bellarmine the faith of the churche that is written in the heartes of the faithfull saith Stapleton soe friendlie doe the patrons of this errour accorde as if that curse wherewith God threatned the EgiptiaÌ„s had falleÌ„ vpon them I wil sett Egiptians against EgiptiaÌ„s they shal fight euerie one against his neighbour For if the authoritie of the churche doth make vppe the rule traditioÌ„s doe not beinge two thinges as different as the fountaine the streame the fruite and the tree For traditions flowe from the authoritie of the churche saith Stapleton Authoritie of the churche is the churches testimonie tradition is doctrine not a testimonie onlie This therefore is neither a more vniuersall rule nor yet before it which is your seconde conclusion and which if it were true the churche shoulde be summa prima veritas for that for which we must beleeue the Ghospell and it for it selfe is the highest and first truth but you papists say so of the churche therefore you haue deiâ—yed and changed it into the deitie and so made it of Bethâ—â—â—â— and house of God to be Bethanan the house of iniquitie CHAMP There is as much diuersitie or discorde betweene all these sayinges of ours as a goode Logician would finde betweene viuens â—enâ—â—â—ns 〈◊〉 inâ—eâ—â—â—â—ns which being â—ubalterna are not in anie mans brayne disparaâ—a or opposita vnles in yours which is often contrarie to it selfe Both tradtions therefore and the authority of the churche are more vniuersal rules theÌ„ the scriptures And thoughe the one of them is more vniuersall and before the other yet neither of them is summa or prima veritas as you most ignorantlie affirme in the precedent section of the scriptures for the which intollerable ignorance you are iustlie reprehended there nor either of them is beleeued for it selfe but for the testimonie of God reuelinge theire veritie who onlie is beleeued for himselfe and his owne essentiall truth and veritie And therefore your childishe inference of changinge Bethell into Bethanan is a ridiculous conclusion of your owne ignorant premisses or a dreame of your owne idle and emptie braine But you will bringe more solid stuffe hereafter lett vs heare the rest PILK Besides if it be demaunded from whence the churche hath anâ—e such authoritie it is answered from the scriptures for which are produced sundrie testimonies He that heareth you heareth me Goe teach all nations If then the life of this authoritie be maintayned and supported by the scriptures they are the rule and measure of her and so before her and not reciprocalliâ— measured by her CHAMP When it is demanded by such as pretend to beleeue the scriptures as you make shewe to doe and yett deny the churches Authoritie as you heretically doe what proofe there is of the churches authority the scriptures are rightlie produced for the proofe thereof not that thee hath her authoritie from the scriptures as you either ignorantlie or negligentlie say for her authoritie she hath from God The authour of all power and authoritie but that this authoritie iâ— testified by the scripture And maruell it is to me that you your selfe findinge and feelinge such testimonie of holy scripture for the churches authoritie as you cite in this place doe not yett cease to impugne it But the truth is you beleeue and follow the scriptures so farr as your selfe list onlie and noe farther On the other side when it is demaunded by such as belieue neither scriptures nor the churche but yett seeke some groundes of christian beliefe it woulde be a ridiculous thinge to prooue the church by the scriptures seinge they are written taught and preached by the ministrie of meÌ„ whereof the church consisteth and did consist many hundreds of yeeres before there were anie scriptures att all In this case therefor it is cleare that the church hath other proofe then from the scriptures and before the scriptures which in that case must be prooued by the churche But what this proofe is and whence it is taken pertayneth not to this place to say Yet whatsoeuer it
more subiect to errour nowe then shee was at that tyme. Therfore that which Driedo saith is that the primatiue churche by reason of the colledge of the Apostles had power to deliuer newe doctrine of faith which the succedinge church hath not but hath infallible authoritie to teache that faith which shee receaued of the Apostles And this you might easilie haue seene to haue been Driedoes Doctrine if you had taken but anie ordinarie heede to his wordes PILK Neuertheles to passe by this to graunte that S. Augustin a Catholicke and a Bishoppe woulde not beleeue the Gospell but that the authoritie of the churche moued him is euerie motiue to beleeue a rule of faith Nothinge lesse For the rule is that whereunto faith is lastlie resolued which is not into the authoritie of the churche as your best diuines teach but into the scriptures CHAMP You might well haue past by all this indeede and also that which followeth had you not rather chosen to fil your paper with your impertinencies to the publishinge of your owne small iudgement If you take the rule of â—aith so strictlie as it contayneth onlie that whereunto faith is lastlie resolued you will make onlie God reuelinge his verities to be the rule of faith and then you must exclude not onlie the churche but the scriptures also But if you take it for a true ground of beleefe then that testimonie which so moueth to faith as it ingendreth faith in vs may trulie be sayde to be a rule of faith such a motiue S. Aug saith the churche is PILK And there vppon Cameracensis speakinge of this place of S. Aug saith that it proueth not that he beleeued the gospell thoroughe the churches authoritie as by a Theologicall principle whereby the gospell might be prooued true but onlie as by a cause mouinge him to creditt it as if he shoulde say I woulde not beleeue the gospell vnles the holynes of the churche or Christes miracles did moue me In which sayinge thoughe some cause of his beleeuinge be assigned yet no former principle is touched whose creditt might be the cause why the gospell shoulde be beleeued CHAMP It appeareth well you vnderstande not what Cameracensis saith or else that you care not what you say so that you say somethinge He saith the scriptures are not prooued by the authority of the churche as by a Theologicall principle or argument ab intrinseco but as a motiue from authority or ab extrinseco which is that all men say and which I only desire to prooue by S. Augustines testimonie For if the church be a motiue to beleeue the scriptures it must necessarilie be before the scriptures and consequentlie be a more vniuersall rule cause or motiue of faith and beleefe then the scriptures PILK Bellarmine saith that S. Aug. speaketh these wordes of the authoritie of the churche as of a cause propoundinge what is to be beleeued and not of the foundation of faith But the proposition of the churche is not the rule and resolution of faith but onlie a condition requisite of beleeuinge as Valent. teacheth in 22. tom 3. de obiecto fidei CHAMP It is a most irkesome and importunate thinge to haue to doe with with an ignorant aduersarie that knoweth not what he shoulde either prooue or denie Such an one you shewe your selfe to be For if you take from the scripture which you trulie teache to be a rule of our faith the authoritie to propose manifest and testify articles of beleefe see howe you will make it a rule of faith Seeinge therefore you geue to the churche these thinges without which the scriptures are not a rule of faith why should you deny it to be also a rule of faith But the churche you say is not the foundation or resolution of faith I speake in your owne phrase thoughe improperlie that you may vnderstande and therfore is it not anie rule thereof If this argument conclude anie thinge it will also prooue the scriptures to be noe rule of faith For it is neither foundation nor resolution of faith if you vnderstande the first and chiefe foundation or last resolution as I tould you before vnles you will make it to be God himselfe But if you take foundation for that which doth grounde our faith in a certaine and sure kinde of infallible testimonie in which sence al men speake that knowe what they speake theÌ„ are both the scriptures and the churche also foundations and groundes of our faith PILK And surelie if S. Aug had meant that the authoritie of the churche had beene this rule which is your inference he had excluded all other rules For he that saith I would not beleeue excepte the authoritie of the churche moued me establisheth one cause remoueth the rest But this none of you dare accorde vnto is as farr from S. Aug. meaninge as your next wordes are from truth If therefore the authoritie of the churche be a sufficient motiue for a motiue it is which none of vs euer denyed but that it is a sufficient motiue neither canne you prooue nor yett S. August anie where auoucheth CHAMP S. Aug. wordes which are to be beleeued before your bare negation are most cleare that without the testimonie or authoritie of the churche he hadd not beleeued the Gospell and consequentlie that the churche was cause rule and motiue of his beleefe not in that degree that God is the rule or foundation of our faith for so we shoulde make S Aug. as sencelesse as Mr. Pilkinton but in the like kinde or degree that the scriptures are but yett before the scriptures because he beleeued them for the churches authoritie And therefore you see S. Aug. to say that which the Manuall saith that there is some other rule of faith before and more vniuersall then the scriptures seeinge that for it and by it the scriptures are beleeued MANVALL SECTIO 8. The second thinge to be noted is that they which beleeue nothinge but that which is prooued by scripture are euidentlie conuinced to beleeue nothinge at all For they that cannott beleeue that there is an holy scripture or what bookes be holy scripture cannott beleeue anie thinge because it is prooued by scripture for it is euident that before they beleeue anie thinge because it is prooued by scripture they must first beleeue that there is a holy scripture and what bookes are scripture But they that beleeue not anie thinge but that which is prooued by scripture cannot beleeue that there is a scripture nor what bookes are holy scripture For neither of these two canne be prooued by holy scripture Therefore they that beleeue not anie thinge but that which is prooued by scripture cannott beleeue anie thinge att all This argument is a playne demonstration and compelleth the protestants either to confesse that they haue noe faith att all or to acknowledge this their position to witt that nothinge ought or can rightlie be beleeued but that which may be prooued
taught moe thinges by worde oâ— mouth then he wrote which was my Position it nowe belongeth to you either to graunt my position to be true or to prooue by scriptures that the rest of the Apostles wrote that which he taught by worde of mouth and omitted to write For to say it only without proofe yea and such as you require of your aduersarie is to make your owne affirmation à lawe and rule of your faith Which though it appeareth well to be so to your selfe yett will it not be admitted of others And if I should here againe presse you with your owne rule non eredimus quia non â—egâ—nous you would find ei 〈…〉 your rule too strickt or your assertion here that the other Apostles committed to writinge that which S. Iohn taughte by worde and omitted to write to be false Choose whether parte you will You see therfore that my reasoninge was not loose but that your iudgment thereon was light Your reason followinge is a miserable begginge of that which is in question and which you should prooue and is more easilie and trulie denyed then affirmed And for your better instruction I wish you to marke a litle more diligentlie the wordes of the Apostle and you will as I suppose perceiue the argument to be of more force then you tooke it to be of vnles you dissembled For he giuinge the reason why he would not vse paper and inke to make knowne vnto them to whome he wrote those thinges which he had to teache them he saith not that it is for that either he himselfe or anie of the other Apostles had or woulde sett them downe in writinge but because he hoped to be with them and to speake vnto them mouth to mouth Manuall Proofe 2. And the rest I will dispose when I come Where the Apostle euidently sheweth that he reserued something more to be ordayneth by worde then he wrote PILK This is litle to the purpose for the Apostle doth not there speake of matters of faith which is our question but of such things as belonge to order and comelines as it is playne by the word in greeke which properlie signifieth orderinge of rites and matters of decencie not teachinge of doctrines and matters of faith as appeareth 〈◊〉 the same epist cap. 16. 1. concerninge the gaâ—â—â—â—inge for the Saincts as I haue geuen order to the churches of Galatia euen so doe yee The rest saith Aquinas videlicet these thinges that are not of such danger will I dispose of when I come howe you shall obserue them But lett it be graunted that he meaneth doctrines and matters of faith it is an inference without coherence that because he writte them not then therefore he did omitte them for euer or because he wrot them not therefore the rest were silent and writte them not When you consider of these consequences then you may see that it is as farr from your purpose as Gades is from Ganges CHAMP Your second answere to this testimonie is effectuallie frustrated in my reply to your answere of the precedent testimonie and therefore needeth no further confutation Your former answere admittinge it in your owne sence doth expresselie graunt traditions in matters to be obserued and practised in the churche which seeinge they concerne the vse of the Sacraments and other holy obseruations to be kept by all Christians established and ordayned by the Apostles by the expresse commaundement of our Sauiour Christ Matt. 28. 20. I would knowe of you some reason why you deny the authoritie of traditions in thinges to be beleeued and graunt them in matters to be donne and obserued will you say that they are more fallible in the one then in the other To say this onlie without some ground or reason will haue small grace or force Manuall Proofe 3. The Apostles were commanded to teache all nations to obserue all thinges which our Sauiour had commaÌ„ded Which doubtles they fulfilled but they were not commanded in anie place to write all the same neither doth it appeare by anie scripture that they did write all thinges which they taught men to beleeue and obserue This is a demonstration that they taught more then they wrote if nothinge be to beleeued but that which is contayned in holy scripture PILK That Christe charged the Apostles to teach all nations whatsoeuer he commanded which they fulfilled also but he charged them no where to write all The fathers shall answere We knowe not the dispensinge of our saluation from anie where then from them by whome the gospell came to vs which then they preached and after by the will of God deliuered vnto vs in the holy scriptures to be the foundation and piller of our saith S. Aug. saith that when the Euangelists and Apostles did write what God shewed and sayd we may not say that he writte it not for whatsoeuer he would haue vs to read either coÌ„cerninge his wordes or workes he commandeth them as his owne hands to write it If what the Apostles preached after they writte as Ireneus saith If what God commaunded them so to doe as S. August auoucheth Then it plainlie followeth that they writte as much as they preached and that not onlie by the allowance but by the commandment of our Sauiour Christ For they writte nothinge but that with which they were inspired Nowe inspiration is a commandement as Bellarmine confesseth CHAMP Stande to your grounde and doe not flinche from it you say nothinge is to be beleeued but that which is written If you will therefore that it should be beleeued that the Apostles wrot all things they taught shewe it written or acknowledge your ground to be false The scripture testifieth that the Aposties were commanded to teach all thinges necessarie to be obserued but that they were commaunded to write the same it no where appeareth If therefore they did it either they did it by Christs commaundement and then you must needes confesse something necessarie to be beleeued more then is written for it is no where written that he commaunded them to write all thinges they taught Or they did it without his commaundement And then it was not necessarie they shoulde doe it and consequentlie was it not necessarie there should be anie thinge written at all in the newe testament And thoughe they writte nothinge but that was inspired into them yea that they were inspired to write both which thinges you beleeue thoughe you finde neither of them written yett it no where appeareth that they were inspired to write all they had by inspiration You say the fathers shall answere for you but I receiue not theire answere as sufficient vnles you will stande to the fathers testimonie in all other points You promised scripture for all your positions performe therefore your promise or confesse your position of beleeuinge nothinge but that which is written to be false Notwithstandinge because the testimonie of the fathers is venerable with me I will not
writte that formerlie they had deliuered as Ireneus and August doe teach This beinge the true state of the question if the papists meane not these former secret matters that Bellarmine mentioneth and are not written his position is de non ente For that there is nothinge or faith nowe which the Apostles did not after they preached either finde or leaue in writinge vnto the churche and these beinge deliuered at first partely by liuelie voyce partely by letters were to be embraced with like acceptance and creditt But if he meane these secret doctrines deliuered a parte and only by worde neuer by them written then we denie that the Apostles left any such thinge equallie to be credited with the holy scriptures neither the allegations inferre anie such matter CHAMP You haue here multiplyed a greate heape of vnnecessarie wordes making the thinge obscure which of it selfe is cleare enough The question is not now as you say whether the Apostles taught not more by word of mouth whether in secret or in publicke that importeth not that hauinge been disputed before and prooued against you But of what authoritie the thinges deliuered only by worde of mouth are of which question you haue the beleefe of the catholicke churche sett downe directlie in the position of the Manuall and the proofe thereof out of expresse scripture whereunto lett vs heare your answere Manuall Proofe 1. Therefore brethren stand and holde the traditions which you haue learned whether it be by worde or by our Epistle S. Basill saith I account it Apostolike to continue firmelie in vnwritten traditions and alleageth this place of S. Paule S. Chrisost cited by fulke himselfe saith this Hereof it is manifest that they the Apostles deliuered not all by Epistles but manie things without letters and the one is of as great creditt as the other Therefore we thinke the traditions of the churche to be worthy of creditt it is tradition inquire noe more PILK To your first testimonie if I shoulde answere that S. Paule meaneth not he deliuered some thinges by writinge somethings by worde only but the very same by both first preachinge it and after writinge it would trouble you to prooue the contrarie For the disiunctiue whether argueth not diuersitie of thinges deliuered but diuers wayes of deliueringe the same as in other places Rom. 14. 8. whether we liue or whether we dye wee are the lordes it followeth not dying we are one and liuinge we are another 1. Cor. 5. 11. whether I or they so we preach and therefore Paule preached one gospell the Apostles another CHAMP You doe wiselie not to stand much vppon your newe inuention least to your owne companions you might become ridiculous neither though you should stande there vppon shoulde it putt me to much trouble to prooue the contrary vnles to establishe your noueltie you woulde thinke to inuert the common and vsuall manner of speakinge and vnderstandinge of all men For the disiunctiue whether doth alwayes signifie the diuersitie of the thinge ioyned with it as is manifest euen in your examples whether we liue or dye whether I or they but so as one and the same thinge is affirmed of them both so it is in our testimonie as also in these sayinges followinge retayne the goods you haue receiued whether in money or marchandise Keepe the present I sent you whether in Iewells or in plaie With fiue thousand moe And it is a ridiculous conceipt to thinke that the Apostle commended vnto his disciple the same thinges both written and preached in which sence his sayinge shoulde be no more disiunctiue but copulatiue in this manner hold those thinges which you haue learned both by worde and Epistle Which is not to interprett the Apostle but manifestly to corrupt him Seeinge therefore you dare not stand vppon this interpretation let vs heare your auowed answere PILK But I adde that if one vnderstand these thinges of diuerse pointes of Christian religion which S. Paule deliuered vnto the Thessalonâ—aÌ„s and writte them not it will not followe that other Apostles writte them not and still your thesis is de non ente this testimonie is to no purpose sith what point of doctrine Paule deliuered by voyce we finde recorded in the scriptures CHAMP It followeth right well that the other Apostles writte not these thinge which S. Paule deliuered onlie by worde if your rule be true non credimus quia non â—egimios For it is noe where written that they wrote those thinges therefore accordinge to your doctrine not to be beleeued Againe I hauinge prooued by expresse scripture interpreted by the fathers that the Apostle taught somethinge more then he wrote and commanded it to be beleeued equally with his writinge which is the position of the Manuall it behooueth you that maintayne the contrarie to prooue it by expresse scripture or else to confesse that the catholike doctrine hath better and more firme ground in the scripture then Protestantisme You prooue brauely my thesis to be de non enâ—e and the proofe thereof to be to no purpose by your ordinarie miserable absurde and ridiculous begginge of that which is in question supposinge that for true and graunted which is expresselie denyed But to such shameful shifts is falsitie worthely driuen Lett vs see the rest of your answere if it be anie better PILK The testimonie cited out of Basill is wrongfullie fathered on that worthy-Bishoppe and contradicteth that which he writeth in other places and are acknowledged on both sides to be his and namelie his sermon de fide where he saith that it is a manifest desection from faith to bringe in anie thinge that is not written Besides in this verie chapter mentioned by you he speakes of Meletus as a rare man that liued an dyed before his tyme as appeareth by diuers of his Epistles And if we creditt Baronius he dyed after Basill For Basill dyed 378. and Meletus 381. CHAMP Here indeede you goe roundlie to worke and like yourselfe for not knowinge howe to answere the authoritie you denie the author for two weighty reasons I wisse The first is a pretence of a contradiction which is as much a contradiction as to affirme Mr. Pilkinton to be a minister and a doctor For he affirminge it to be Apostolike to continue firmelie in vnwritten traditions saith it is infidelitie to adde any thinge to the scriptures that is contrarie vnto them The second is a weake coÌ„iecture that he liued after one Meletus who notwithstandinge is sayde to die after him PILK Chrisostome is the onlie man that seemeth to fauour your assertion but trulie vnderstood he helpeth it nothinge For he speaketh not of traditions that are not written at all but of such as are not written in so manie wordes And it is vsuall with the fathers to call them vnwritten traditions which are not verbatim sett downe in the scriptures and yett haue a true ground in them as formerlie I shewed out of S. Aug. who saith that
contradictinge your owne rule non credimu◠quia non legimus Agayne S. Paule exhortinge Timothie to teach others and not to write vnto them these thinges which he had hearde of him not read out of his writinges doth manifestly shewe that not onlie thinges writter◠but also thinges spoken yea these principallie are to be beleeued And therefore this arguinge is not wilde but that your witts were one wooll-gatheringe when you wrote this and sawe not the force of the argument vnles peraduenture you woulde be politike in dissembling the force thereof because you coulde not auoyde it And though S. Paule confirmed much of his doctrine by the authoritie of the oulde testament yett that he taught nothinge more then that which was written before I suppose you will not dare to say And if you thinke the commentarie of S. Thomas here alleaged by you to be true why doe you condemne the beleeuinge of thinges not written seeinge you finde not his comment written in all the whole Bible Or if you condemne it not in him why should you condemne it in vs or abhorr it in your selfe And thus you see you are forced which way soeuer you turne your selfe to admitte of vnwritten doctrine for good and canonicall when you haue spited all your canne against it PILK Nowe that you may knowe that protestants haue bothe a shielde to defend themselues and a sworde to wound theire aduersaries heare theire positions with the confirmation thereof CHAMP If your sworde be no sharper then your shielde is stronge it will no more wounde your aduersaries thē the other hath kept your doctrine whole Which hath been so often pierced as hadd your shoulders receiued so manie but drie blowes as your doctrine hath donne ouerthrowes they would geue you but small rest till you had taken some soueraigne Elixir to cure them And why doe you not put downe the protestants positions sett downe in the Manuall If you had disliked them you should haue tould vs why if you did not dislike them they had been more easily sett downe in theire owne wordes then in others Well I will here sett them downe that the reader may see them in theire owne shape Manuall protestant position 1. The holy Apostles deliuered not by worde of mouth moe thinges to be beleeued and obserued by the churche then they either found written or wrote themselues And therefore are there no traditions to be holden or beleeued Position 2. The catholike churche ought not to beleeue those thinges which the Apostles deliuered onlie by worde of mouth without writinge in the same degree of faith with those which are written Nowe lett vs heare yours PILK ANTITHESIS 1. The Apostles deliuered not by worde of mouth more thinges to be beleeued or obserued by the churche as necessarie to saluation then they wrote themselues or found writen Proofe 1. Acts. 26. 22. hauinge therefore obtayned helpe of God I continue vnto this day witnessinge both to greate and small sayinge none other thinges then those which the prophetts and Moses did say shoulde come Argument They that preached no other thinges then that which is in Moises and the prophets deliuered no more by worde of mouth then is written then was written you shoulde haue sayd but the Apostles did so Ergo. CHAMP Your argument if it did prooue anie thinge would conclude that the Apostles taught nothinge more then which was written in Moises and the prophets which if it be true what necessitie or profitt◠is there of the gospells and the rest of the bookes of the newe testament Whilst therefore you impugne traditions you ouerthrowe the whole newe testament S. Paule therefore taught nothinge contrarie to the lawe and prophetts yea those thinges which he preached to the Iewes of our Sauiour Christe he prooued to be conformable to theire owne prophetts Which kinde of proofe to the gentills would haue been of small moment and therefore you see your argument not to be effectuall nor to conclude vniuersallie Againe why doe you vse the like manner of reasoninge which you reprehended in me a litle before concludinge that because S. Paule at one tyme or in one audience preached nothinge without the lawe and prophetts that therefore neither he or anie other tymes nor anie other of the Apostles did preach anie thinge more then that which is contayned in them Which kinde of argument thoughe I may iustly maintaine against you as conformeable to your owne principles denyinge traditions and beleeuinge nothinge but that which is written yett are you ridiculous to vse it against me who professe to beleeue manie thinges not written And much more ridiculous you are to vse it for the impugninge of traditions assuminge that for the grounde of your proofe which you knowe is denyed you and which oughte firste to be prooued Further where doe you finde in all the prophetts or Moises the vision whereof S. Paule maketh a recitall in the chapter cited by you Certainlie no where And yett this he preached with much vehemencie in an assemblie of greate personages and himselfe thought it worthy of beleefe Somethinge therefore you see he preached more then that which was contayned in Moises and the prophetts And this I geue you for an example onlie and not as the sole thinge wherein instance may be made PILK Proofe 2. 2. Tim. 3. 16. From a childe thou haste knowne the holy scriptures which are able to make thee wise vnto saluation thoroughe faith which is in Christe Iesus Argument The Apostles deliuered no more by worde nor writtinge but that which maketh a man wise to saluation But all this written CHAMP If you dare stand to this argument I will easilie prooue you to be more a Iewe then a christian by this Sillogisme He that holdeth al that which is able to make a man wise to saluation so that no other thinge is necessarie to be written in the oulde testament is more a Iewe then a Christian But Mr. Pilkinton holdeth this Ergo. The minor which onlie needeth proofe I shewe thus Maister Pilkinton holdeth the scripture which S. Timothie knewe from a childe to be able to make a man wise to saluation But this was onlie the olde testament Ergo. By that tyme that you shall haue quitte your selfe of this argument you will I suppose finde your owne not to deserue the name of an argument nor yett of a wittie Sophisme For to beleeue one only God is able to make a man wise to saluation because it maketh him wise in some thinge necessarie to saluation as no man of common sence will denie And yett that alone is not sufficient to saluation as I thinke you yourselfe will confesse PILK Proofe 3. Io. 20. 31. These are written that yee might beleeue that Iesus is the sonne of God and beleeuinge you might haue life thoroughe his name Argument They that writte all thinges whereby we might come to eternall life wrote all thinges necessarie vnto saluation and more they preached not But the
by scripture to acknowledge I say this position to be false which notwithstandinge is one mayne grounde of all theire religion PILK When a souldier that killed Marius came to cutt of his head he drewe out his sworde and told him hie est gladius quem ipse fecisti for Marius formerlie had been a cutter The groundes that you haue layde cutt the throate of your faith but raseth not the skinne of the protestants For I haue shewed before that scriptures doe sufficiently prooue themselues to be the worde of God and these and these bookes to be such whereon it followeth your conuincinge demonstration that protestants beleeue nothinge att all to be a windy friuoulous discourse whereas such conclusions may be drawne from your principles as will prooue vulnera in capite canis you will not easilie licke them hole CHAMP Remoue the sworde first from your owne throate whiâ—hâ—â— presseth to harde and after may you atteÌ„pt to pietie your aduersarie with it You haue hitherto made a 〈…〉 able shewe of anie proofe but of your owne in reâ—lible ignorance and impertinencie ioyned with wilfull stande to deâ—eâ—â—e your reader If you defend your proâ—estaâ—â—s no better then hitherto you â—â—â—ue they will be euidentlie concluded to belieue nothinge att all by the argument proposed which 〈…〉 e you cannott tell where to begin to solue oâ— anâ—weâ—e you make a Thrasonicall and glorious shâ—we of contempt of it as manie of yours 〈◊〉 and 〈…〉 elie your grand maister Calluine when 〈…〉 most prest and hath least to say for himselfe Are you nâ—â— ashamed to lett myne argument stand as a â—â—â—phey against you your heresie without saying one worde in answere of it idlie supposinge that you haue sayde somethinge to it before But seeinge you dare not sett vppon mine argument to satisfi it which you should first haue donne lett vs see what incurable woundes you geue vnto me out of myne owne principles PILK For they that relie theire faith vppon humane testimonies originallie are conuinced to haue no faith att all for faith commeth by hearinge and hearinge by the worde of God But you papists relie your faith vppon humane testimonies originallie when you ground it on the authoritie of the churche which you say is a more vniuersall rule and more auncient then the scriptures Now then make the conclusion as pleaseth you CHAMP I graunte your proposition or maior and deny your minor For where learned you to terme the authoritie of the churche humane testimonie seeinge the holy ghost stileth the churche the house of God the piller and grounde of truth your conclusion therefore is blowne away like a fether So that the wounde which you thought woulde prooue so grieuous is not so much as the blowe of a litle childe Spitt therefore vppon your handes take better hold and strike more manfullie or else geue your bill to another But so hoodewinkt you are either with ignorance or malice that strikinge at your aduersarie you hitt your selfe For whilst you say with S. Paule that faith commeth by hearinge hearinge by the worde of God you prooue that the scripture or the word written which is not hearde but reade is not the first meanes of our saith but the worde of God preached as S. Paule sayth in the same place which was before the scriptures PILK From hence commeth all this warr that we will not grounde our faith vppon the totteringe wall of humane authoritie as you doe but cleaue fast to the sacred scriptures beleeuinge nothinge as Paule taught but that which was written in Moises and the prophetts which we reioyce to haue made the meane grounde of our religion CHAMP A stoute Champion I wisse that after the first blowe and that a verie weake one casteth downe his armes and thinkinge to ouerthrowe his aduersarie with wordes falleth to raylinge as if he hoped to gaine the victorie rather by his stinkinge breath then by strength of hande stroakes You hauing been att the schoole of the father of all falsehoode haue learned to call the churche of God and the infallible authoritie thereof the totteringe wall of humane authoritie which the holy ghoste by the mouth of this Apostle stileth the piller and ground of truth wherby as by manie other passages you shewe what honour and respect you beare vnto the holy scriptures seeinge you dare so disdainfullie debase the house of God which they so highelie prise and extoll You farther glorie in that you beleeue nothinge but which is written in Moises and the prophettes whereby you prooue your selfe to be a Iewe and no Christian Either retract this Iewishe proposition of yours or blotte out of your Bibles the whole newe testament that you may be knowne to be noe Christian and that you may fill vppe the measure of your grande mayster Martin Luther who hath longe since cast out diuers bookes out of the newe testament besides those he hath reiected out of the oulde You seeme to father this your fowle doctrine vppon S. Paule thoughe you dayne him not the honour of S. Paule but why doe you not poynte att the place where he teacheth it If S. Paule had been of this minde that you woulde seeme to make him of in vayne did he write his Epistells in vayne did the rest of the Apostles and Euangelists write theire workes Againe suppose S. Paule had written anie such thinge in his letters or Epistles howe woulde you make anie man beleeue that Epistle to be his and therefore to be canonicall scriptures vnlesse you will vse the authoritie of tradition and the churches testimonie All the witt and cunning you haue yea thoughe you borrowed all that of the rest of the ministers in the worlde will not shape a sufficient answere to this question PILK And which if we coulde not prooue yett canne we not be conuinced to haue noe faith because they are principles against which none dare open his mouth that anie way woulde haue himselfe to be counted a Christian as S. Aug. spake For as other artes and sciences are sufficientlie knowne credited without proofe of theire principles so matters diuine are perfectlie and demonstratiuelie persuaded vnto vs from this indemonstrable principle of the holy scriptures saith Clemens and are not prooued by iudgment but comprehended by faith CHAMP Why doe you say which iâ— we coulde not prooue as thoughe you had some meane to prooue it without traditions and the churches authoritie But they are principle you say and therefore not to be prooued The scriptures are principles of faith in deede in a certayne degree but they are not prime principles which onlie are to be beleeued for themselues without anie further proofe vnles as I toulde you before you will make them to be God who onlie is to be beleeued for his owne proper veritie and all other verities for him And when you say out of S. Aug. that none dare open their mouth against them that will be counted a