VI. Wherin euen by the doctrine of our Aduersaries it is proued that there are Traditions THE fourth argument wherby we proue Traditions is taken out of the doctrine of our Aduersaries For all those things which our Aduersaries do affirme to be points of fayth against the Catholike doctrine they teach and belieue them without any expresse Scripture For it cannot be found expressely in Scripture that fayth only iustifyeth that there are only two Sacraments of the new law that none should pray for the deâ—d c. for all these things and many others which they teach against vs they gather only out of Scriptures and that by some false and very weake consequence but it is no where expressely written that fayth only iustifieth that there are only two Sacraments that we must not pray to Saynts or for the dead c. 2. Moreouer there can no Catholike be found who doth not receaue and assuredly belieue the whole authenticall text of the holy Scripture why do they therfore condemne vs when they affirme that nothing is to be belieued besiâ—â— the text of Scripture wheras the whole Controuersy betwixt them and vs is of the vnwritten points of fayth which we affirme they deny 3. Our Aduersaries being conuinced by this argument do now at the last confesse that not only that is to be admitted and belieued as the pure word of God Beza de nâ—â—iâ— Ec. pag. 137. voluÌ„ 2. Theol. Tract â—dit an 1581. which is expresly written in holy Scripture but all that also which by a necessary consequence may be gathered out of it 4. But when they answere thus they are forced to depart and forsake that their first principle wheâ— by they affirmâ—d that all the poynts of fayth are expresly conteyned in Scriptures and that they were set downe in writing by the Apostles 5. Furthermore not perâ—auing so much they ioyne in opinion with vs so that they must needes indeed confesse that the Traditions of the Church are altogeather necessary For such things as are gathered out of Scriptures do rather belong to Traditions then to expresse Scripture For that which only consequently by reasoning discoursing is gathered out of Scripture albeit it very well and necessarily may be deduced from thence is not expressely in Scripture but only obsâ—urly secretly or vertually is conteined therin For no man can truly say that the conclusion which is only inferred out of the premisses is expresly conteined in the same premisses for otherwise our discourse and arguing were vayne and to no purpose But therfore do we reason and discourse to the end that that which lieth hidden vertually in the premisses may be expresly manifested in the conclusion 6. And that we may alleadge an example out of the Scriptures themselues when God the Father sayd this is my welbeloued Matt. 17. v. 5. Sonne heare him Out of these wordes we may very well gather and by a necessary consequence that the whole doctrine of Christ our Lord is to be heard and receiued of all yet none will say that al the doctrine of Christ is conteyned expresly in these few wordes And truely the holy Scripture is so fertill plentifull that many points of faith do as yet lye hidden and vnknowne therin which hitherto haue neuer byn gathered togeather by any but these thinges are conteyned vertually and not expressely in it 7. Moreouer after so many debates and contentions after so many bookes set forth against vs after so many slaunders wherby our Aduersaries charge vs as though we taught that the Scriptures are imperfect they at the last returne to our opinion For we do not deny yea we willingly acknowledge that all those things which rightly and without errour are deduced or gathered out of the expresse wordes of the holy Scriptures do belong vnto the written word of God and are contayned in holy writ obscurely not expressely vertually and not plainly For in that God doth reueale any thing in expresse wordes consequently and vertually he reuealeth all things which necessarily and without any errour may be deduced from thence 8. We graunt also that the Scripture consequently mediatly vertually as in a generall principle conteyneth all things necessary to saluatioÌ„ yea in that one only article of the Creed I belieue the holy Catholike Church in those few words also of Christ Luc. 19. v. 16. he who heareth you heareth me if the collection be rightly framed as we haue also said before in the 25 Chapter But when these thinges are gathered togeather which are not expressely in Scripture there is scarse any of them which is not vncertayne doubtful without the authority and Traditions of the Church Wherefore these collections do manifestly conuince the necessity and authority of Traditions 9. But that these collections may be vncertâ—yne and deceytfull both experieÌ„ce reasoÌ„ teacheth vs experieÌ„ce because almost all Heresies haue had their begâ—nning not from the Scripture alone in it selfe but from these collections badly framed and made For there is not almost any one heresy which is only grounded on the expresse wordes of Scripture without some other collection seing that almost all Heretikes both in tymes past as now alâ—o go about to proue and gather their heresies from the Scripture by certayne deceytfull sophistical arguments Arius for example out of those wordes of Christ the Father is greater then I did gather Ioan. 14. v. 28. but badly that Christ euen according to his diuine Nature was inferiour to his Father The new Arians out of those words of the ten coÌ„mauÌ„demeÌ„ts thou shalt not haue straÌ„ge Gods before me do gather but foolishly that Exod. 20. v. 3. the SoÌ„ne is not God the holy Ghost is not God So the Diuell himself against Christ Matt. 4. v. 6. vsed this reason It is written God hath giuen his Angells chargâ— of thee therfore cast thy selfe downe headlong Lastly all the arguments indeed which our Aduersaries at this tyme alledge against vs out of Scriptures and all the errours which they haue inueÌ„ted do take their beginning and strength from their new illations and reasons and not out of the bare and playne words of Scripture as will manifestly appeare in euery one of these Controuersies 10. The reason also is manifest why these their collections and reasons are vncertaine and doubtfull For in nothing can one more easily or more often erre then in these illations The which may proceed of many causes eyther because the illation it selfe is bad and Sophisticall or because the place of Scripture from whence it is gathered is falsified by some false exposition therof or because the proposition which is assumed and adioyned to the wordes of Scripture is false and ambiguous or because one or more wordes in that collection are vsed doubtfully that is to say in one sense in the premises and in another in the conclusion or lastly because there hapneth some errour to be in the collection which maketh
9. Tract 98. in Euan loan subfinem which is in the holy Scripture For so S. Augustine speaketh in one place But in another he clearly explicateth himselfe by this word praeter to vnderstand contra because we must preach nothing contrary to the holy Scripture That this is the true sense and meaning of S. Augustine it is manifest by the words themselues wherby also he proueth that the word praeter in those words of the Apostle doth signify diuers but not contrary thinges For in this manner he writeth when he warneth his schollers to take heed of the opinions of the Manichaeans other heretikes Ad Gal. 1. v. 6. because these are not only distinct but also contrary to those which the Apostle taught Let the admonition sayth he of the holy Apostle neuer depart from your hart If any shall euangelize vnto you besids that which you haue receiued let him be Anathema He doth not say 1. Thess 3. v. 10. more then you haue receaued but besides that which you haue receaued For if he should say that he should be preiudiciall to himselfe who coueteth to come to the Thessalonians that he might supply that which was wanting to their sayth Now he which supplieth addeth that which is lacking taketh not away that which was But he which ouerposseth Ioan. 16. v. 11. the rule of fayth doth not goe on in the way but departeth froÌ„ the way That therfore which our Lord sayth I haue yet many things to say vnto you but you cannot beare them now were to be added to those things which they knew and not to be ouerthrowen by those they had already learned Hitherto S. Augustine CHAP. X. Whereinâ—other obiections of our Aduersaries against Traditions are refuted THE fourth argument is deduced out of these words of the Apocalyps Apoc. 22. v. 18. Confess Rupell Artic. 5. which they also cite and alledge in their ConfessioÌ„ at Rochell If any man shâ—ll adde to these things God shall adde vpon him the plagues written in this booke But who doth not see that S. Iohn speaketh expresly of the booke of the Apocalyps only and not of the whole Scripture for he sayth I testify to euery one hearing the words of the Prophesy of this booke if any man shall adde to these things c. and in the 19. verse following If any man shall diminish of the words of the booke of this prophesy c. He speaketh therfore only of the propheticall words of the Apocalyps For it is manyfest otherwise out of Ecclesiasticall histories that S. Iohn wrote his Ghospell after the Apocalyps and Hier. de script Eccles in Ioan. Apost consequently that he added many things besids the Apocalyps But let our Aduersaries take heed least they incurre those paynes which S. Iohn threatneth to those which adde or detract any thing from the Apocalyps seing that they so often and so bouldly wrest the prophesies of the Apocalyps to many strang senses against the Pope and the Catholike Church 2. Our Aduersaries alledge many other things but their arguments which be of lesse moment are taken out of those places of Scripture which commend vnto vs the great excellency of holy Scripture But Supra c. 2. all these are very easily confuted by that one ground which as we haue declared before euen our Aduersaries do admit to wit that to the end the holy Scripture be perfect in it selfe and sufficient to euerlasting saluation it is not necessary that it should expresly coÌ„teyne al points of fayth but it is sufficieÌ„t that all such poynts may be deduced by a good consequence out of it But all the Traditions of the Church which belong vnto fayth may be gathered Supra c. 2. as we haue sayd out of Scripture the which also we declare more at large in euery one of these controuersies Our Aduersaries therfore haue not reason to say that we teach the Scripture to be impersect or insufficient For as concerning this sufficiency and perfectioÌ„ of Scripture they are forced at least to yield and subscribe vnto our opinion here in but these their arguments whereof they make great account we haue therfore alledged to the end all may know how badly they interpret the holy Scriptures and by how friuolus reasons they are perswaded to forsake the Catholike fayth 3. But euen this sufficiency of Scripture which they preteÌ„d they proue very foolishly by those wordes of the Apostle wherein he teacheth that the Scripture Ad Tim. 3. v. penut is very profitable as though forsooth euery thing which is profitable for obtayning some particuler end or purpose were also absolutely sufficient then the which nothing can be spoken more absurdly The Head truely is not only profitable but also necessary that a man may liue but who I pray you will say that the head only without the rest of the body is sufficient for the lyfe of man But our late Aduersaries to the end they may make this their discourse or reason the stronger say that in humane thinges not euery thing which is profitable is also sufficient but in diuine matters whatsoeuer Iunius coÌ„tra Bell. controu 1. lib. 4. c. 10. notâ— 44. is profitable is also sufficient whervnto Iunius like a fine young stripling addeth that this can be ouerthrowne by no sophistry But who doth not see that the Eucharist by the diuine vertue thereof is profitable to the obtayning of eternall saluation and yet notwithstanding without Baptisme it is not sufficieÌ„t as also without faith and pennance the same may be sayd of Baptisme and of euery booke of Scripture Yea euen the Apostle doth not speake of the whole Scripture as our Aduersaries thinke he doth when he saith that euery Scripture is profitable but of euery particuler part thereof For how Hier. de Scrip. Eccles in â—oaÌ„ Apost 2. Tim. 1. v. penult could he speake of a thing which was not then extant But as then the Ghospell of S. Iohn was not yet written nor the Apocalyps For these were after S. Pauls death written by S. Iohn Hence it is that the Apostle S. Paul doth not say the whole Scripture but euen Scripture inspired by God is profitable For there is not one part of Scripture which is not profitable vnto vs if it be well vnsterstood Yet for all that notwithstanding euery one part precisely in it selfe abstracting from the rest of the Scripture as all do very well know is not sufficient 4. Finally it is also to be considered that all those places wherin the integrity perfection and vtility of the Scripture is commended vnto vs must nedes be vnderstood not of the bare wordes only but of the same well and rightly vnderstood But this true vnderstanding of the words cannot otherwise be had then by Tradition Supra c. 4. and the vnwritten doctrine of the Church it selfe as we haue already declâ—red Wherefore all those places which do commend vnto vs the holy Scriptures do also consequently coÌ„mend vnto vs Traditions and the vnwritten Word of God seing that therein consisteth the principal part of holy Scripture to
it weake Sophisticall and erroneous 11. Besides that there are so many and so contrary illations of diuers men that the authority of the Church is altogeather necessary in maters of faith that there may arise a certayne and an vndoubted faith of these matters of which sort Traditions are that is to say the doctrine of the whole Church 12. But when one belieueth such an illation with a diuine or Catholike faith he must needes know two thinges the one is that the expresse place of Scripture from whence this conclusion is deduced must certainly be well vnderstood by him which disputeth the other is that he who maketh such a deduction and collection can neyther deceiue others nor be deceyued himselfe But none can know eyther of these without the Traditions of the Church seeing that otherwise there is none which may not be deceiued sometimes All collections therefore which produce or breed fayth in vs do most clearly conuince and shew the authority and necessity of Traditions CHAP. VII Wherein it is proued that there are Traditions by the absurdities which otherwise would follow THE fifth argument wherby we proue that many things are to be belieued which are not expressed in holy Scriptures is taken out of the absurdities which do ensue of the contrary doctrine For hauing once admitted that nothing is to be belieued which is not expressed in Scripture all old heresies are renewed and a great vncertainty and confusion of all things is brought into the Church of God yea euen the way to Atheisme is layd open because hauing once reiected despised the Traditions of the Church all the poynts of fayth from the Apostles tyme till now explicated and proued by the auncient Fathers against heretiks all those things also which were decreed and determined by all the generall Councâ—lls in times past against the said heretiks loose their chiefâ—st strength and authority the which notwithstanding our Aduersaries do acknowledge themselues to receiue and belieue 2. Neyther do we know by an assured Catholike faith whether there were euer any Fathers or Councells but by the Traditions of the Church But neyther do we know any other way but by fayth whether since the Apostles tyme till now there were any Catholikes or noâ— because of those things which were done since the tyme and death of the Apostles there is nothing extant in holy Scripture seeing that all the bookes thereof were written before the death of the Apostles But such things as haue bâ—n done since till now cannot otherwyse be knowne but by the Tradition of the Church 3. Neyther is it sufficient to say that we know these things by the Ecclesiasticall histories For that fayth which proceedeth of histories without the authority or Traditions of the Catholike Church is but an humane fayth which oftentimes deceaueth others and may be deceiued it selfe and therefore these kind of histories cannot produce a diuine fayth in vs this experience it selfe doth clearly teach vs. For our Aduersaries do somtymes doubt whether S. Peter was euer at Rome or no because forsooth this is not to be found expresly in holy Scripture wheras notwithstanding it is most assuredly proued and testified in many bookes both of the auncient Historiographers and holy Fathers Why may they not as lawfully call other matters in question which are notwithstanding expressely set downe in other auncient writers Our Aduersaries therfore do make all things very doubtfull and vncertayne whiles they will only belieue and admit the Scripture but now lâ—t vs answere their arguments CHAP. VIII Wherein the arguments of our Aduersaries taken out of the old Testament are confuted THE first argument wherby our Aduersaries oppugne Traditions and which they vse very often the which also as inuincible they haue added to the confession of their Rupell Confess Art 5. Deut. 4. v. 2. Deut 12. v. vlt. fayth they take out of these words of Deuteronomy Thou shalt not add any thing to the word which I speake vnto you nor shall you take any thing from it And againe that which I commaund thee do that only neyther add or diminish any thing from it By these places of Scriptures our Aduersaries do inferre that nothing is to be receiued as a point of fayth which is not expressely set downe in Scripture 2. But this argument is erroneous and the weaknes thereof is very great for many causes First because in those words there is no mention made of the Scripture nor of the written word of God but only of the word preached and deliuered viua voce Thou shalt not add sayth the Scripture to the word that I speake vnto you he doth not say that I write vnto you Againe Do only sayth he that which I commaund thee he doth not say that which I write vnto thee 3. Moreouer in these words the holy Scripture doth not only speake of matters of fayth to be belieued but also of ceremonies and customes to be done and obserued but our Aduersaries themselues confesse that these customes may be added by the authority of the Church yea they haue ordeined themselues very many the which they chang euen yet when they please Caluin also acknowledgeth that Calu. coÌ„tra 4 sess Concil Trident. many vnwritten customes were deliuered vnto vs by the Apostles 4. That also according to the phrase of Scripture is said to be added to the word of God which is contrary opposite vnit For Iosue did not transgresse this commaundement of Deuteronomy when he added his booke to the bookes of Moyses Nor did others transgresse it who added the bookes of the Iudges Ruth and of the Kinges which were not written by Moyses which are also to be belieued as contayning pointes of faith But in these bookes there is nothing contrary to that which Moyses wrote And the Hebrew text agreeth very well to this answere for in both places of Deuterâ—nomy this word Ghal is vsed which sigâ—â—tieth oâ—tentines contrary or against so that the sense is Do not add any thing contrary to the word which I commaund and againe yee shall not add any thing contrary to the word which I say vnto you For so is that particie Gâ—â—l taken in the 40. Psalme or according to the Hebrewes 41. in the 2. Psalme also the second verse And in the 14. of Numbers the 2. verse els where very often Euen as also in the new Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which answereth to the Hebrew Ghal signifieth also contrary or agâ—iâ—st when the Apostle writeth to the 1. ad Cor. 4. v. 6. Corinthians that in vs you may learne one not to be puffed vp against another aboue that is writteÌ„ that is to say against the Scripture the which saith we must not be puffed vp in pryde â—s S. Chrysostome and after him Theophilactus others do note vpon that place The which place some bouldly alledge against Traditions wheras the Apostle in that place doth not speake of the whole Calu in
â—lla verba 1. â—l Cor. 4. v. 6. word of God but of this one point that we must not be puffed vp in pryde as euen Caluin himselfe acknowledgeth 5. But to omit all such thinges as other Catholike Doctors haue very well and learnedly written of the proper and literall sense of these wordes yea that we may also graunt to our Aduersaries that this which they alledge is the true sense they erre very much in that they thinke that these wordes of Moyses belong vnto vs and that we are no lâ—sle now bound and obliged by them then the Ieues were in tymes past For these wordes do no more appertaine vnto vs then those of the same booke of Deuteronomy Câ—rsed be â—e that Devt 27. v. vâ—â— abideth not in the wordes of this Law and sâ—lfilâ—â—th them not in worke From which wordes S. Paul manifestly teacheth that we are deliuered Ad Gal. 3. l. 10. 1â— and freed by the grace of Christ Iesus But seing that in these wordes which they do heere alledge Moyses commaundeth that the ChildreÌ„ of Israel should obserue fulfill euery word which he had commaunded them for so it is expresly set downe Deuteronomy 12. the last verse in the Hebrew text and in all the Bibâ—s of our Aduersaries and he presently addeth that nothing is to be added or detracted from all these he manifestly commaundeth the keeping of the whole Moysaicall Law and of all the Sacraments Sacrifices and Ceremonies of the old Testament For he doth not only commaund that nothing should be added but also that nothing is to be detracted of all those thinges by him commauÌ„ded Wherefore if our Aduersaries obiect against vs that we adde any thing against this precept we may more iustly obiect vnto then that they detract farre more then we add seing that they neyther obserue the Circumcision nor the legall Sacrifices nor other Ceremonies which are so often and so straitely commaunded in Deuteronomy It cannot truly be denyed but that this is to detract somewhat from those thinges which Moyses commaunded and therâ—ore our Aduersaries must needes confesse that these are the wordes of the old Law and consequently do appertaine nothing vnto vs. Out of this which hath byn said it followeth that our Aduersaries do very indiscretly foolishly boast and bragge of those wordes of Moyses For in the exposition thereof they erre farre from the truth and a great deale more in the application when they go about to proue that we are also bound and obliged by them 6. Our Aduersaries take their second argument out of these wordes of Salomoâ—s Prouerb 30. v. 5. 6. prouerbâ— Euery word of God is fiery it is a sâ—ield of defence to those which hope in it do not add any thing to the words therof and thou shalt not be found and reprehended as a lyar I answere that this place maketh nothing against vs for in that place there is no mention made of Scripture only but of al the word of God And it is most true that nothing should be added to all the whole word of God the which is to be belieued with a Catholike faith as the true word of God For as we haue said before our faith relyeth only on the word of God but the Scripture only is not all the word of God because all Traditions also which contayne poynts of faith belong therunto as we haue sufficiently Supra c. 2. proued already But they add to the word of God are lyarâ— who affirme that God sayd this or that which indeed he neuer spake And of this sort â—re those false Prophets of whome God by the Prophet Ieremy complayneth saying They Hier. 23. v. 16. 21. speake the vision of their hartes not from the mouth of our Lord againe I did not speake vnto them and they did prophesy This place also may very well be vnderstood of those who add any thing contrary to the word of God For in the Hebrew text there is set downe that particle Ghal which often tymeâ— signifieth contrary or against as we haue already declared in our answere to the first argument CHAP. IX Wherin is examined that place of S. Pauls Epistle to the Galathâ—ans which our Aduersaries do obiect against Traditions THE third argument our Aduersaries take out of the first Confess Rupâ—lâ— Art 3. Chapter to the Galathians the which they haue also added to their confession of fayth as inuincible For they haue omitted their second argument as not strong inough for their purpose But thus they frame their argument The Apostle Gal. 1. v. 8. 9. sayth twice an Anathema to those who teach any thing besidâ— that which he hath taught therefore nothing is to be receiued or belieued but Scripture Our Aduersaries haue this place of the Apostle often in their mouthes wherefore it shal be exaâ—ined more exactly We answere therfore thaâ— our Aduersaries do erre heere for two reasons first because our whole controuersy is of the written word of God but in these words there is no mention made of the writteÌ„ word or of Scripture but only of the word preached and deliuered viâ—â— vâ—câ— to the Galathians by S. Paul And hence it is that S. Augustine farre otherwise August Tom. 7. de vnit Ecâ—les c. 24. then our Aduersaries disputing against the Donatists proueth by these words of the Apostle that we are bound to admit and belieuâ— the Traditions of the Church as for exaÌ„ple that those who are once orderly and lawfully christened by Heretiks are not to be baptized againe And well truly for that which is viua voce deliuered is a Tradition and not Scpriture Moreouer if the Scripture only conteyned expressely all the poynts of fayth the Apostle would rather haue proposed the Scripture as the rule of fayth then his owne preaching seing that the Scripture is manifestly well knowne to all Nations but his owne preaching to the Galathians only But our Aduersaries vrge againe and say that all that which the Apostle preached to the Galathians was written eyther before that tyme or afterward by S. Paul and the other Apostles they say this but they proue it not For this is no where written in holy Scripture and so whiles they goe about to perswade vs that all points of fayth are writteÌ„ they coyne inuent a new poynâ— which is no where extant in Scripture that is to say that all such thingâ— as S Paul viua voce taught the Galathians are written But we following herein S. Augustine do 3. Aug. Tom. 9. Tract 96. in Io. Tom 7. de â—nit Eccles c. 21. infine gather much better by these words and infer thus against them If there must be nothing belieued but that which S. Paul preached to the Galathians and that none knoweth certainly what are those things which he preached but by the Traditions and doctrine of the Church it followeth manifestly that besids the Scripture we must also belieue
wit the true sense of the wordes CHAP. XI Wherein is declared how we may know the Apostolicall Traditions AMONG the other argumentes of our Aduersaries this is one that we cannot know certainly which are the Traditions of the Apostles seing that many Heretikes in times past pretended also that their heresyes were agreing to Apostolicall Traditions Moreouer they obiect that Traditions may easily be corrupted and changed for this cause Scripture was ordayned that the doctrine deliuered by word of mouth might continue the longer without any falsification or corruption But we answere to this their reason that the auncient Heretikes also by supposed and false Scriptures which they attributed falsely to the Apostles did confirme and proue their heresies Aug. de ciu Dei l. 15 23. subfinem Many thinges saith S. Augustine were alleadged by heretikes as though they were the sayings of the Prophets and Apostles But yet for all that they were not iudged to be the most certaine and Canonicall Scriptures 2. But the Traditions of the Apostles may so certainly and easily be known from supposed and false Traditions as the Canonical Scriptures may be knowne from the Apocriphall for they are both knowne by the same meanes and authority that is to say by the authority doctrine and testimony of the Catholike Church which neyther can deceiue any nor be decevued her selfe 3. And albeit speaking of humane matters the Scripture is more certaine theÌ„ Tradition alone yet it happeneth otherwise in matters concerning God because in these there is the authority of God and the continuall assistance of the Holy Ghost hath place which doth not suffer the Church to erre and hence it is that the Tradition only of the Church which is not so much written in paper as printed 1. ad Cor. 5. v. 3. 4. in the hartes of Christians is a most certayne and faithfull keeper of all the pointes of our diuine faith 4. Moreouer if euen Christ himself had with his owne hand writteÌ„ in brasse all the pointes of our faith they should notwithstanding not haue had so great certainty as now Ecclesiasticall Traditions haue vnlesse the same keeper of the diuine doctrine had byn also present For that which is imprinted in brasse may be rased and blotted out and the brasse it selfe may be consumed by fyre But those thinges which are imprinted in the hartes of Christians by the holy Ghost can neuer perish or be any way changed 5. And what we haue said of knowing the Apostolicall Traditions is to be vnderstood whether the Church assembled in a generall Councel declared it so or it became knowne and manifest by the continuall and generall custome of the whole Church Also whether the question be of Tradition belonging to faith or only belonging to rites and Ceremonyes For of the Tradition belonging to faith that is to say of not baptizing againe those which are baptized once before by heretikes are these wordes of S. Auguâ—tine Albeit indeed of this thing saith he S. Aug. Tom. 7. contra Cresâ—on Gram. l. 1. cap. penu t. tâ—ere can no example be alleadged out of Canonicall Scriptures yet notwithstanding we hould the truth of the same holy Scriptures in tâ—â—s matter when we do that which generally the whole Catholik Church holdeth the which euen the authority of the Scriptures themselues commend vnto vs so as because the holy Scripture cannot erre whosoeuer seareth to be deceaued by the difficulty or obscurity of this question let him go to the same Church for counsell the which the holy Scripture vâ—ry clearely sheweth and S. Aug. Tom. 7de bapt coÌ„t Donat. l. 4. cap. 14. demonstrateth vnto vs. Hitherto S. Augustine And disputing in another place against the Donatists concerning the baptisme of Infants That saith he which the whole Catholike Church holdeth nor was ordayned by generall Councells but yet alwaies kept and obserued by all is most truly to be belieued to haue byn deliuered vnto vs by Apostolicall authority S. Aug. Tom. 2. Epist 118. adâ—anuar c. 5. Calu. l. 4. Instit c. 4. sect vlt. sub fi l. 3. c. â— sect 10. in medio 6. But of the Ecclesiasticall rites and Ceremonies the same S. Augustine speaketh in this maÌ„ner Yf the Catholike Church through the whole world hold and practise any thing it is a signe of great madnesse to dispute whether it is to be done so or noe By which words of S. Augustine it may easily be vnderstood what was the opinion vniforme doctrine of the whole auncient Church concerning this point For our Aduersaries themselues do say that S. Augustine was a most faithfull witnesse of antiquity Vnto whome I referre the Readers if they desire to know certainly any more of the sense of Antiquity The end of the first Controuersy THE SECOND CONTROVERSY OF THE PROPERTIES OF OF THE TRVE CHVRCH The first Part of the second Controuersy CHAP. I. Of the Properties and Offices of the true Church of Christ in generall IN the disputation of the Church that first of all is to â—e obserued that whereas our Aduersaries haue â—rought in and do hold many erroneous opinions they do all proceed out of ignorance of the true definition and Nature of the Church It is a true saying of the Apostle that they which 1. Tim. v. 6. 7. erre and wâ—nder from the true faith are conuerted into vaine talke desirous to be Doctours of the Law not vnderstanding neyther what things they speake nor of what they affirme For if our Aduersaries did well vnderstand or could conceyue what is imported by the Name Nature of the Church they would neuer affirme so many absurdityes of the Church of Christ We will therfore first of all declare and explicate what is to be vnderstood properly by the name â—of the Church 2. But this best of all is declared by the Properties of the Church of Christ and by her Offices coâ—mended vnto vs in the holy Scripture it selfe and those we call Properties which do agree with the Church as she hath relation vnto Christ her chiefe head and Pastour But those we call her Offices which the Church exerciseth towards her Children There are indeed many properties of the Church assigned by holy Scripture but it shall suffice vs to alledge and note these fiue only 3. The first is that the Church is the spouse of Christ I will betroth thee vnto me Osee 2. 19. 20. for euer saith the Prophet Osee and againe I will betroth thee vnto me in saith And Isaias The bridegrome will reioyce in his bride and thy Isa 6â— v. 5. God she speaketh vnto the Church shall reioyce in thee Christ also by the Prophet Salomon sayth Come o my spouse from Libanus Cant. 4. v. 8. In the new Testament also the Church is called the spouse of Christ He
be very hard for them to discerne that which is true from that which is false Wherfore we will endeauour in euery particuler Controuersy to set downe the true state of the question Afterward we will lay open the foundation of the Catholike doctrine And lastly we will plainly and briefly answere the chiefe obiections of our Aduersaries whether they be drawne out of the Scriptures or taken from the Fathers 3. And because our Aduersaries euermore boast and brag of the written Word of God pretending out of it only to proue their doctrine impugne ours our chiefe care shal be to shew that the Catholike and Roman faith is both euidently and strongly to be confirmed out of the wrirten Word of God and the doctrine of our Aduersaries to haue no foundation at all in the holy Scriptures but is manifestly opposite repugnant therunto yet so as we will set downe the vniforme conseÌ„t of the auncient Church to be agreeing with vs in euery Controuersy leauing the more ample search of antiquity vnto others to whome we will referre the Reader setting downe their particuler names so loath we are that this booke of ours should grow too great and for the same reason we haue thought good to omit many arguments which might be drawne out of the holy Scriptures for confirmation of the Catholike faith contenting our selues to set downe only the more solide and euident proofes because we are resolued to be as briefe as may be CHAP. II. Of the Word of God in generall THE word of God if we speake of it in generall may be considered two wayes either for that One Eternall and Infinite Word which contayneth perfectly in it selfe whatsoeur is in the mind of Almighty God which is the same with the Sonne of God and Word of the Father of whome S. Iohn speaketh in his Ghospell saying In the beginning was the VVord and of this Word we are to say nothing heere but the Word of God may be other wise coÌ„sidered and taken for that Word which was not alwayes nor contayneth all thinges which are in the mind of God but a small part only of them to wit such thinges as God would haue vs know and belieue and of the Word of God in this sense we speake now For this Word is the proper and complete obiect of our faith 2. Moreouer this Word hath two conditions or properties the one is that the same be reuealed vnto vs for there are innumerable verities in the mind of God the which bâ—cause they are not reuealed to vs do not appâ—rtayne to this Word The other is that it be immediatly reuealed by God for such thinges as God manifesteth Rom. 2. v. 19. â—0 Heb. 11. v. 1. vnto vs by naturall reason appertayne not to this Word of God called therfore by the Deuines the reuealed Word of God 3. Of this Word of God so vnderstood there is no Controuersy betwene vs and our Aduersaries but only in wordes for wherâ—s our Aduersaries say that Catholikes affirme that we must with diuine fayth belieue the words of men or which is worse rather belieue the words of men then the Word of God it is a meere slaunder for there is no Catholike so ignorant but he knoweth that the Theologicall vertue Faith relieth altogeather vpon the pure sincere and certayne Word of God alone according to that of S. Paul VVhen you had receiued of vs the 1. Thes 2. v. 13. word of the hearing of God you receaued it not as the word of men but as the VVord of God as indeed it is Neyther can any man doubt but that the reuealed word of God is partly the written Word contayned in the Canonicall bookes of the old and new Testament partly vnwritten and deliuered by tradition and preaching of which vnwritten â— Thes c. 2. v. 14. 1. ad Cor. 15. v. 1. ad Gal. 1. v. â— 1. Pet. 1. v. vlâ— word the Scripture maketh mention in many places but we will first treat of the written Word CHAP. III. Of the written Word of God THE witten Word of God consisteth of two parts of the Letter which euery man may read in the books themselues and in the true seÌ„se of the Letter which is as it were the very soule and life thereof without which the Letter alone rather killeth theÌ„ quickneth or giueth life as we see euidently by experience in the Iewes Arians all other heretikes as well new as old for the Iewes hold theÌ„selues stiffely to the Letter of the old TestameÌ„t the Arians as also in a manner all other heretikes receiue eyther altogeather or for the greatest part the Letter of the new but because they will not acknowledge the true sense of the Letter Iewes they are Heretikes they are Catholikes they are not And surely the Letter alone without the true sense cannot truly and properly be called the Word of God no more then a body without a soule can truly and properly be called a man wherefore they which spoile the Letter of the true sense may be compared to them who beâ—eaue a man of his soule and life 2. But whosoeuer do substitute another contrary sense and meaning in place of the true do no otherwise then they who not only kill a man but by Art Magicke bring into the body of the man killed some other diabolicall spirit by which the dead body is so moued and stirred as it seemeth to many to be aliue all this is so manifest a truth as our Aduersaâ—ies themselues are not able to deny it 3. This to haue byn the doctrine of the auncient Church sufficiently appeareth Aug. ser â—8 de temp by the words of S. Augustine The vnhappy Iewes sayth he more vnhappy Heretikes whilst they attend only to the sound of the Letter as a body without a soule so they remayne dead and voyd of the spirit which quickneth And els where All Heretickes which receiue Aug Epist 22â— the Scriptures and their authority will seem to follow them wheras indeed they follow rather their owne errors and are therefore Heretikes not because they contemne them but because they do not vnderstand them And before him S. Hilary that honour of the French Nation RemeÌ„ber Hil. l. ad Constant Imperat. saith he that there is not one of the heretikes which doth not say that he preacheth now according to the Scriptures euen those thinges in which he blasphemeth albeit he lieth in so saying And a little after All of them speake Scriptures without the true sense meaning they preteÌ„d sayth without fayth indeed for the Scriptures consist not so much in the reading as in the vnderflaÌ„ding neither are they vnderstood of such as go into preuarication but continue and abide in charity Moreouer S. Hierome Let vs not thinke sayth Hieron in c. 1. ad Gal. he the Ghospell to be in the words of the Scripture but in the sense not in the out side but in the inside
or marrow not in the leauâ—s of the words but in the sappeâ—pâ—th or roote os reason And a little after otherwise Matt. 4. v. 6. euen the Diuell himselfe speaketh Scriptures and all heresies according to Ezechiel make vnto themselues pillowes which they may lay vnder the elbow oâ— euery age Ezec. 13. v. 18. 2. By that which hath byn sayd answere may be made to our Aduersaries when they obiect against vs that we affirme the Scripture to be imperfect obscure like a nose of wax which a man may writh which way he will and lastly the origen and spring in a manner of all heresies for we affirme this of the naked and dead letter alone destitute of the true sense or rather of the letter to which the Heretikes adde their owne peruerse sense and meaning neyther haue our Aduersaries any cause to wonder at this seeing S. Paul himselfe saith of the bare letter alone that it killeth and bringeth eternall death 1. Cor. â— v. 6. 7. 9. and damnation But neuer any Catholike did euer attribute any such thing to the liuing letter which hath conioyned with it the true and natiue sense and which alone is truly and properly the word of God CHAP. IIII. How we are to seeke out the true sense and meaning of the holy Scripture THERE is great contentioÌ„ beweene vs and our Aduersaries about the meanes how to finde out the true and naturall interpretation of the letter a thing so necessary to eternall saluation They teach diuers thinges concerning this matter but deliuer nothing that is certayne One assigneth more rules to this purpose another fewer but when they haue sayd all they confesse at last that there was neuer any which hath not at sometyme erred in seeking out the true interpretation of holy Scripture For they gyue not their assent either to the ancient Fathers or to their owne Maisters in all thinges they teach or write nay they cannot assigne any one whom they acknowledge not to haue erred sometyme nor dare affirme to be free from error seeing as they say Euery man is a lyar and so at last all Rom. 3. v. 4. thinges are left by them doubtfull and vncertayne 2. But the Catholikes do proceed after another manner who teach that the certayne vndoubted sense of the Letter is not to be taken from the iudgment of any particuler man but from the vniforme consâ—nt of the ancient Fathers and especially from the iudgment and interpretation of the Catholike Church to whome it appertayneth to iudge of the sense and meaning of the holy Scriptures as the holy and Oecumenicall Councell of TreÌ„t teacheth very well for there is no doubt Concil Trident. sess 4. but that it is more safe to follow such an interpreter as cannot erre then such a one as erreth somtymes or at leastwise may erre but the Church cannot erre in her iudgment seeing that Christ and the â—oly Ghost remayne with her to teach Matt. 28. c vlt. Ioan. 14 v. 16. â—oan 16. v. 13. â—er all truth wherof more herafter when we shall come to treat of the Church 3. It shall suffice to obserue and â—ote here that according to the doctrine of our Aduersaries nothing either solide or certayne is contayned in the holy Scriâ—ture for wheras all dependeth of the â—rue sense of the Letter and with them â—here is no certayne or sure meanes by which to finde out this sense it followeth â—hat they call all into doubt which is in â—he Scripture wherby who seeth not how much they iniure them But contrariâ—yse according to the Catholike doctrine all thinges are euident and cerâ—ayne which are contayned in the holy Scriptures appertayning eyther to faith or good manners the Catholikes hauing euer a certayne and faithful Interpreter to wit the Catholike Church And surely whosoeuer reiecteth the sense which the Church giueth and in place therof substituteth another altogeather repugnant to it doth all one with him who reiecting the holy Scripture should in place therof bring in a new Scripture of his owne forging the sense of the Scripture being no lesse a part of the word of God then the letter which in these few wordes Tertullian confirmeth out of the tradition of the auncient Church The sense adulterated or falsified is no lesse repugnant Tertul. de prâ—sc c. 17. to the truth then the letter or stile corrupted 4. And to conclude it may be inferred that saluation is to be found in the Roman Church only and none at all out Marc. vlt. vers 16. â—om 3. v. 1â— Heb. â—â— v. 9. of it which I proue thus Both the Scripture testifyeth all meÌ„ confesse that diuine fayth is necessary to saluation but such as forsake the RomaÌ„ Church cannot haue diuine faith which wholy relieth vpon the word of God only but meerly humane seing their fayth is founded not in the word of God interpreted by the Church which cannot errâ— but in the word and interpretation of Luther Caluin or some other priuate man who as they themselues graunt may erre and be deceiued such an humane fayth then so doubtfull and vncertayne and only warranted by mans authority cannot iustify or bring a man to eternall saluation CHAP. V. How we may know which is the true letter of the holy Scripture ALL such as forsake the Roman Church and make little account of her authority are not only doubtfull vncertayne which is the true sense of the Scripture but they can haue no assurance at all eyther of the whole or of any part of the letter therof For whilst they goe about to call in question and make doubtfull certayne bookes only of the old Testament before they are aware they take away all authority from all other bookes both of the old and new Testament For whereas there is but one certaine and vndoubted Canon of these bookes to wit that which is receaued and approued by the iudgment of the Catholike Church which cannot erre our Aduersaries reiecting this Canon make all the books doubtfull conteined therin for no certayne testimony can be had of these bookes but eyther by this Canon only or by the auncieÌ„t tradition of the Church but they neyther admit this Canon nor wil stand to this vnwritten TraditioÌ„ or acknowledge it for the true word of God 2. Now as for the Canons lately set out by themselues no man can safely belieue them seeing they neyther agree one with another nor with the auncient Canons of the Church nor are any where found in the writteÌ„ word of God which as they teach is only to be belieued neyther can they bring any thing eyther concerning the Canon of the Hebrewes or any other auncient Canon which they haue not taken from the writings of the auncient Fathers whose authority without the expresse written word of God they will haue to be in no wise sufficient to engender fayth so as euen by the iudgment of our Aduersaries none of all these
can establish Fayth concerning this matter 3. Iohn Caluin indeed sayth that it Lib. 1. Inst c. 7. sect 2. in fine is as easy for a faithfull man to discerne Canonicall Scripture from that which is not Canonicall as to one that seeth it is easy to discerne light from darknes and white from black But in so saying See Beâ—l lib. 1. de ver Deic 17. 18 19. he contradicteth both reason and experience for it is euident that in old tyme there was no small controuersy amongst the faythfull yea and amongst learned and godly men concerning many bookes of the old and new Testament yea and also euen now amoÌ„gst such as our Aduersaries esteeme faithfull men which Caluin Calu. pros in Ep. lac Epist ad Heb. ante â— Petri. himself in many places confesseth 4. Moreouer Caluins owne followers well perceauing this fly vnto their owne peculiar spirit by which they say they are chiefly perswaded and moued and not by the only consent of the Church But these speake nothing to the purpose for Rupell Confess art 4. in faith two thinges concurre one is the cause or origen of fayth to wit God himselfe and the holy Ghost whereof there is no controuersy betweene vs and them for we all acknowledge the holy Ghost to be the principall cause of the assent we giue by fayth that is to say that it is the holy Ghost who chiefly perswadeth vs to belieue The other is the obiect of fayth or that which is to be belieued whereof we now dispute for the holy Ghost doth not induce vs to belieue the false vncertaine deuises of men but the puâ—e and sincere word of God only we aske therfore of our Aduersaries by what expresse word of God he reuealeth vnto them that there are so many Canonicall bookes and neyther fewer nor more for we read not this any where in the Scripture and they admit only the written Word of God how can the holy Ghost Calu l. 1. Instit c. 9. sect 1. then perswade theÌ„ to belieue that which is not the word of God For we are not now to expect new reuelations from God as do the Anabaptists and Libertines whom for this cause our Aduersaries condemne It is necessary therefore that if they will haue vs belieue that they are perswaded by the holy Ghost to belieue such books only to be authenticall as they do say are such that they first shew this to be a truth expressely contayned in holy Scripture which they will neuer be able to do Wherfore there is no certainty with them eyther of the sense of the holy InnoceÌ„t 1. ep 3. c. vlt. CoÌ„ il 3. Carthag caÌ„ 47. S. Aug. Epist 335. Câ—cil Trident. sess 4. Scripture or of the Letter nor euer wil be vntill they returne vnto the Church agayne But we Catholikes are certaine of both for we haue a most faythfull Canon receaued in the Church more theÌ„ a thousand and two hundred yeares agoe confirmed by a generall and Oecumenicall Councell 5. And this to haue beene the faith and doctrine of the auncient Church for the discerning of true and authenticall Lib. 4. Inst c. 1â— sect vlt. Scriptures that short but pithy sentence of S. Augustine whome Caluin acknowledgeth to haue byn the best and most faithfull witnes of antiquiy sufficiently testifyeth saying I for my part would not belieue the Ghospell vnlesse I were moued by the authority Aug. coÌ„ Epist Manich. c. 5. of the Church of which place I will say more herafter in the Controuersy of the Church And else where he saith VVe receaue the old and new TestameÌ„t in that nuÌ„ber of bookes which the authority of the holy Catholike Aug. serm 10 de temp Church deliuereth So S. Augustine 6. I know our Aduersaries obiect many thinges against many bookes contayned in our Ecclesiasticall Canon but their chiefe arguments do not only derogate authority from those bookes but also from many others which they receaue as Canonicall For they obiect that some Fathers did sometymes doubt of those bookes which they will not admit but they are not ignorant that some Fathers of old haue doubted of the Epistles of S. Iames and S. Iude of the second Epistle of S. Peter of the 2. and 3. of S. Iohn of the Epistle to the Hebrewes and of the Apocalyps of which bookes they dare Rupell Confess art 3. not now doubt especially Caluins followers as is manyfest by their confession of faith 7. They say further that in those bookes which they reiect there are many thinges obscure difficult and full of contradiction but what booke of Scripture in a manner is there in the which there do not occurre sometymes thinges 2. Pet. 3. v. 16. obscure and hard to be vnderstod did not S. Peter acknowledge as much But as for true contradictions there are none at al how soeuer there may be some things which at the first sight may seeme to imply contradiction yet indeed all thinges agree very well togeather such a contradiction is oftentymes found in those bookes which euen our Aduersaries receaue Aug. dâ— Doâ—t Christia l. 2. c. 41. de ser Dom. in mont l. 1. c. 3. yea euen in the Ghospells themselues which for all that are not to be reiected but humbly soberly and piously to be interpreted as S. Augustine many tymes admonisheth 8. To conclude all the arguments that our Aduersaries make against these bookes are fully answered by Catholike writers which haue set out Commentaries Bell. Greâ—s Contro 1 l. 1. c. 7. sequ 〈◊〉 in sâ—â— Coronol vpon those bookes to wit Cornelius I ansenius vpon Ecclesiasticus Ioannes Laurinus vpon the booke of VVisedome Ioannes Maldonatus and Chrisâ—ophâ—r à Castâ—o vpon Baruch and Nicolas Serarius vpon the rest of the bookes of the old Testament which our Aduersaries call Apocripall to omit the most Reuerend and famous Cardinall Bellarmine and his Champion Iacobus Gretserus as also Iames Gordon Lesmoreus For it is sufficient only to haue cited them seeing that I write only an abridgment of Controuersies not any long commentaries vpon the Scripture And therfore conteÌ„t my selâ—e to haue shewed in this place that our Aduersaries must either receaue the Canon of Scriptures approued be the Councell of Trent or be vtterly destitute of any certayne and assured Canon CHAP. VI. Of the Hebrew Text. OVR Aduersaries when they are vrged with Catholike argumeÌ„ts taken from the Scriptures are wont to fly to the Hebrew Text of the old Testament and to the Greeke text of the new perswading themselues by this meanes to attayne to the true and propter sense of the letter wherfore somthing is to be sayd in this place of the Hebrew Greeke text both which appertayne to the Letter of the holy Scripture 2. We grant indeed that when the Latin translation is either ambiguous or lesse playne the Hebrew text is well and profitably looked into as also that
diuers mysteries which lye hidden in the Hebrew text and cannot sufficiently be explicated in Latin wordes may be the better vnderstood And lastly that we may the more fully attayne vnto the force and Emphasis of that holy tongue 3. But as for the Hebrew text now extant we do not acknowledge it to be of so great either authority or perspicuity as our Aduersaries pretend and we further deny that the vulgar EditioÌ„ wherinsoeuer it differeth from it is to be corrected by it and that for two reasons The first is for that the Hebrew text though neuer so incorrupt further then it is approued by the authority of the Church is much more doubtfull and vncertayne then the Latin The other reason is for that the Hebrew text which is now in vse is in maâ—y places corrupted and depraued in which the vulgar Edition is entire and vncorrupted Both these reasons shâ—lbe confirmed in the ensuing Chapters which the learned Reader may see in the Latin edition from the seauenth Chapter to the 14. all which I haue omitted to put into English because I intend to help the lesse learned who are not so capable of that so profouÌ„d and learned a discourse CHAP. VII Of our Aduersaries new Translation of the Bible THE Catholike Church of Christ not without good cause doth reiect and condemne our Aduersaries new Translations of the Bible and that for many reasons The first and most iust reason is because such their translations are replenished with errors which haue byn inuented eyther by Ieâ—â—es or Heretikes wherof see many examples in the precdent Chapters of the Latin edition but we in this Chapter will set downe three other causes or origens from whence these errors spring wherby it shall further appeare that our Aduersaries can set out no Translation which shall not be sound full of many great errors 2. The first cause is for that our Aduersaries eyther contemne or make little account of the translations and interpretations of the Fathers and imploy all their labour in finding out all the versions and interpretations and expositions of the Iewes which they highly extoll commend so as in their Commentaries vpon the old Testament you shall see them cite Thargus Rabins and such other Thalmudicall fictions but especially Rabbi Dauid Kimhi whom sometimes they call learned sometymes the most learned among the Hebrewes But of the auncient Fathers no mention at all for if there be it is for the most part eyther to taxe or manifestly to oppugne or euen to corrupt their writings 3. Now what can be more vnreasonable or absurd then to begge the true sense of the Scripture of the Iewes who 2. Cor. 3. v. 14. 1. Thess c. 2. v. 15. 16. lacke faith and who haue a veyle ouâ—r their hartes when they read the old Testament with whome God is not pleased and who are Aduersaries to all men vpon whom the Anger of God is come to the end who peruert all the oracles of the Prophets that appertayne to Christ and lastly who are the most malicious enemies of Christians And on the other side to despise the excellent Doctors of Christs Church who euen in the iudgment of our Aduersaries were indued with the Rom. 8. v. 9 Eph 4. v. 14. true faith full of the holy Ghost raâ—sâ—d by God and placed in the Church to the end we should not be carried about with euery wind of doctrine who haue dâ—fended the faith against all heâ—esies who haue sincerely instructed the faithfull people in the mysteries of the Christian faith who haue faithfully set downe to Posterity the sense and interpretation of the Scriptures which they receâ—ued froÌ„ the Apostles 4. Moreouer wheras no man can 2. Cor. 12. v. â—â— â—8 â— Pet. 1. v. 20. 21. rightly interprete the Scriptures who hath not recâ—aued from God the gift of the interpretation which is not giuen but to the members of Christ and his Church only it is apparent â—nough how much more salfe it is to follow such holy Doctors then the impious Iewes who are wrapt in the snares of the Diuell and hâ—ld 2. Tim. â— v. vâ—t Mat. 15. v. 14. captiue at his will And seeing that saying oâ— Christ is most true if the blind lead the blind they hoth fall into the ditch it cannot be but our Aduersaries blind and destitute of the light of faith and led by the bliâ—d Iewes must needes fall downe headlong and breake their neckes 5. Heerehence it is that our Aduersaries do insert into the new Translations almost all the places of Scripture corrupted by the Iewes and that they deny togeather with the Iewes many oracles of the prophets to be vnderstood of Christ and many wayes wrest euen those oracles which they caÌ„not deny to be vnderstood of Christ from that true sense in which they are cited in the new Testament by the Apostles Euangelists and Christ himselfe to prophane impious senses lately inuented by the Iewes out of their hatred to Christ 6. The second cause is that they desire nothing more then in their translations to depart from the vulgar edition the which seeing it is most sincere and correct they which almost in all thinges leane it must needes fall into many errors 7. The third cause is the malicious intention of our Aduersaries who set forth new Translations of the Scripture for no other end then by them to oppugne the Catholike doctrine and to establish and confirme their owne errors and heresies and therefore when any plain text occurreth which maketh manifestly against their erroneous doctrine they seeke to make obscure the true and proper sense by their peruerse translation but if they light vpon any place somewhat obscure which may seeme to sauour their doctrine they so depraue it by their new translation that the Scripture it selfe may seeme to confirme what they falsely teach and so by this meanes they must needes stuffe their translations with infinite corruptions For these three reasons therfore not without great reason Gretser tract de noua transtat in defen Bel. arm do we reiect our Aduersaries translations which so swarme with corruptions Many other reasons are both learnedly and largely set downe by Iames Gretser which we for breuity sake omit CHAP. VIII Of the Latin vulgar Edition OVR Aduersaries conuinced by the truth it selfe confesse sometymes that the vulgar Edition not only is to be preferred before all other latin Editions but euen before the Greeke text of the new Testament and the Hebrew text of the old for in many places reiecting them they follow our vulgar translation as may be seene in the Latin edition in the Chapters 8. 9. 10. 13. notwithstanding that in many other places they exceedingly inueigh against it and with great hostility oppugne it partily for that they see the same to contradict in many places their errors and partly also for that they labour by all meanes to peruert the text of the Scripture by their new
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
of the Church let vs not therefore sayth S. Ambrose walke by loue and affection vpon the earth and the Serpent cannot hurt vs. In the first combat is that the Church ouercometh by open warre and therefore it is expressed by crushing of the head In the later combat in which a part of the Church is ouercome the enemy proceedeth by guiles and deceites and therefore that combat is signifyed by crushing the heele for the Hebrew word signifying calcaneum doth signify also properly insidiari Oleast iâ— c. 3. Gen. ex insidijâ— aggredi as appeareth by many places of Scripture And out of ignorance heerof Caluin without cause reprehendeth the vulgar Interpreter for otherwise explicating this combat in the later part of the seÌ„tence then he had in the formeâ— for the Emphasis or force of the Hebrew word required that he should interprete the later part as he did by these wordes tu insidiabâ—ris calcanâ—â—â—ius which is as much to say as thou shalt crush her heele not by open warre but by taking her at vnawares See further of this matter in this Chapter in the Latin Edition the 8. â— And you shall see that our Aduersaries make a great adoe about a matter of small moment if the wordes be rightly vnderstood For whether we reade ipsa and so referre it to the Church or ipsum that it may be referred to the children of the Church the seÌ„se is all one for it is all on to say the seed of the woman shall crush the heâ—â— of the Serpent or the Children of the Church shall doe it And heerehence it is that the auncient Fathers whether they read ipse as S. Hierome and S. Chrysostome do or ipse Hier in tradit Hebr. Hom. 17. in Gen. Amb. de fug â— saec e. 7. Greg. in Iob. c. 38. as read S. Ambrose S. Augustine S. Gregory and other Latin Fathers all of them expound this place of the Church 9. Howsoeuer it be the reading of the vulgar Edition is to be preferred before the other for this victory is rather to be attributed to the Church as to the Mother of all the faithfull and to her who continueth for euer according to that promise of Christ the gates of hell shall not preuail against her then to her children or meÌ„bers which are euery day changed for this promise is an explication of the promise made by God in Genesis for the head of the Serpent and the gates of hell signify Mat. 16. v. 18. one and the same thing And if the victory be attributed to the woman that is to the Church all thinges are better explicated for God first did foretell the emnity that was to be betweene the woman the Serpent and afterward he maketh mention of the seede of the woman and the Serpents seed so as the woman is opposed to the Serpent and the seede of the one to the seede of the other but the victory promsed is sayd to be gotten against the Serpent himselfe and not against the seed wherefore the same appertaineth rather to the woman her selfe then to her seede for the words following betweene thy seed and her seed do not properly signify any new combat but a continuance of that combat which was betweene the woman and the serpent and are put in by way of pareÌ„thesis for the combat of the Church and of her childreÌ„ is all one combat 10. But the chiefe cause that moued the Church to retayne at this tyme rather the word ipsa then ipsum or ipse was to controle the error of the Lutherans for if the reading had byn ipsum or ipse one might haue thought this promise to haue appertayned only to Christ as they though erroneously would haue it but by reading ipsa this promise must needes be vnderstood to haue byn made to the whole Church For such is the custome of the holy Church whether she interprete the Scripture or administer the Sacraments to do all as is most profitable and most for the edification of the faithfull Neyther is Christ hereby excluded but he is rather included in the name of the Church aâ— is also the holy Ghost for the true Church of Christ cannot consist or do any thing that is good without the help of her supreme head Christ and the assistance of his holy spirit That the reading according to the Hebrew text is ipsa or ipsissima and not ipsum or ipse is learnedly proued in the next Chapter of the Latin Edition of this Controuersy to which I referre the Reader and to the Chapters following in which other places of the vulgar Edition are defended CHAP. XI That the written Word is no fit Iudge of Controuersies concerning matters of Fayth OVR Aduersaries in the beginning did stifly mayntaine that the holy Scripture was to be the only iudge of all Controuersies which arise in matters of fayth but when they were told that to make the Scripture a iudge was as much as to say the Scripture did heare speake liue for all these appertayne to a iudge that nothing is more vnreasonable theÌ„ to assigne such a iudge of Controuersies as can neyther heare nor speak but is vtterly voyd of life changing their opinion they begin Iun. coÌ„tra Bell. Cont. 1. l. 3. c. 3. nota 9. c. 9. nota E. 10. now to say that the Scripture is improperly called a iudge and that to speake properly the holy Ghost only is the iudge And thus hauing for many yeares togeather spoken vnproperly now at last they fly to the holy Ghost of whome there is no doubt but that he is the supreme Robert Roâ—oc de vocat effic c. â—5â— iudge of all 2. But they should haue added further that the holy Ghost at this tyme doth not immediatly propose any new reuelations to any particuler man concerning points of fayth but only proposeth verities already reuealed and that by the mouth of the Church as shal be shewed heereafter in the next Controuersy where we shall haue occasion to say more of this matter Whosoeuer therefore contemneth the iudgment of the Church in so doing he despiseth the iudgment of Christ and of the holy Ghost for Christ himselfe saith Luc. 10. v. 16. he that despyseth you despyseth me Neyther doth the holy Ghost speake by the Scripture but when it is rightly vnderstood which is neuer but when we imbrace the interpretation of the Catholike Church as we haue already shewed in the fourth Chapter CHAP. XII Whether the Scriptures be obscure or hard to be vnderstood THE Word of God is eyther writen or vnwritten and preached Now certaine it is that the Word preached is not obscure for it is not hidden from such as perish the question therefore is of the written Word â— Cor. 4. v. 3. Our Aduersaries in the beginning did teach that the whole Scripture was easy and no part therof hard to be vnderstod but after that not only many obscure places but euen
whole Chapters out of the Canticle of Canticles out of Ezethiel and other Prophets were obiected by the Catholikes Beza de not Ecâ—l Vol. 3. p. 137. edit an 158. they changing their mind confesse that very many places of Scripture are obscure but that all points of doctrine necessary to saluation are be found in places plaine and easy 2. For resolution of this question we must answere with a distinction and say that if the word Scripture be taken for the bare Letter only then doubtlesse the â— Cor. 3. v. 6. 7. 9. Scripture is obscure or â—ls S. Paul would not haue said that it killeth and causeth death and damnation but if it be taken properly that is to say togeather with the true sense and meaning thereof then it is not obscure but plaine inough in al things necessary to saluation and in this sense speaketh S. Augustine as do also other Fathers l. 3. de doct Christ c. 7. 9. whom our Aduersaries cite wheÌ„ they say that al things necessary to saluatioÌ„ are manifestly conteyned in the holy Scripture 3. Moreouer the holy Scripture is both manifest and obscure but not in regard of the same persons It is passing obscure and not to be vnderstood of the proud such I meane as despise the sense and consent of the holy Fathers yea and of the whole Catholike Church but to little ones and such as are humble who follow in al things the foresayd sense coÌ„sent it is manifest Psal 18. v. 8. and perspicuous The testimony of our Lord is faythfull sayth the Psalmist giuing wisedome to the little ones that is to such as are humble and not proud and Christ our Lord sayth thou hast hidden these thinges from Matt. 11. v. 25. the wise and reuealed them to little ones that is to the humble The Scripture indeed is obscure to such as want fayth are destitute of the holy Ghost but easy playne to those which abide preseuere in the faith of the Church by that meanes are guided gouerned by the holy Ghost 4. The Word of God shineth brightly the Word of God I say not the word of men nor the word of the Diuell for that only is the true Word of God which is in the true sense not in the bare letter for the letter depraued by a false seÌ„se is not the Word of God but the word of men or rather the word of the Diuell the word of God doth illuminate the eyes but the 2. Cor. 4. v. 41. eyes of such as haue eyes to see and not their eyes whose mindes Satan hath blinded so as the light of the Ghospell cannot shine to them 5. In vaine therefore do our Aduersaries heape togeather so many places of Scripture in which it is said that the Word of God is said to be cleare ful of light perspicuous for this is not attributed by the Scripture to the bare letter but to the letter ioined with the true sense which true seÌ„se cannot be had out of the Catholike Church 6. Neyther doth the Scripture say that the Word of God is manifest to all indifferently but to such only as being indued with the true fayth are humble of hart and therefore inspired by the holy Ghost if therefore our Aduersaries will haue the Scripture to be full of light and easy to be vnderstood of them it it necessary that they returne againe to the true Church in which only is true faith true humility the true sense of the Scripture the true spirit of God without which the holy Scripture will neuer be plaine cleare and manifest for it is great imprudency I will not say impudency to contend so eagerly and with such hostility about the plainenes and perspicuity of the holy Scripture and to haue no will to returne into that way which only leadeth to plainenes and perspicuity CHAP. XIII Whether the holy Scripture be to be translated into the vulgar tongue THAT we may briefly dispatch that which hath beene so largely treated of by many concerning this matter we will reduce all vnto foure generall assertions The first is There is no doubt but the Word of God is to be preached to the people in the vulgar tongue so as the question is only of the bare written letter 2. The second assertion is Neyther the example of Christ nor of the Primitiue Church do coÌ„uince that the Scripture is to be translated into the vulgar tongue but rather the contrary for Christ neuer commaunded the Iewes to translate the Scriptures out of the Hebrew tongue into the Syâ—iac and yet in Christs tyme the aunâ—ient Hebrew tongue was to the Iewes as the Latin is to the Ereâ—ch Italians and Spaniards and only the Syriac tongue was in vse amongst the common people which euen our Aduersaries confesse such I meane as are the more skillfull in the Syriac and Hebrew tongues as namely these Sebastian Munster in his preface before his Syriacal Caldaical Grammer Francis Iunius in his preface before the new Testament in the Syriac tongue of Tremelius Peter Martin Morentine of Nauarre in the preface of his Caldaical Grammer printed aâ— Roâ—hel the yeare 1590. 3. Neyther did S. Paul write in Latin to the Romanes but in Greeke though Hier. de Script Eccles in Luc. See S. Aug. l. 2. de doct Christ c. 11. seq not the Greeke tongue but the Latin was their vulgar tongue So S. Luke did â—rite the actes of the Apostles at Rome in Greeke and not in Latin And euen to S. Augustines tyme foure hundred yeares after Christ the Byble was not extant but in the three learned tongues Hebrew Greeke and Latin no not in the tyme of Rabbanus Maurus who liued Rab. l. 5. de inst Cler. c. 8. eight hundred yeares after Christ as himselfe testifyeth in expresse words 4. Neyther can our Aduersaries alleadge any authenticall example of the auncient Church for the translation of the Scripture into the vulgar tongue they tell vs indeed of one Vulphilâ—s a Bishop of the Gothes who is sayd to haue translated the Scripture into the Gothish tongue but he was not a Catholike but an Arian Heretike as witnesse Theodoret Theod. l. 4. hist Ecc. cap. vlâ— Socr. lib. 4. c. 27. Sozom l. 6. c. 37. Cass in hist tripart l. 8. c. 13. Socrates Sozomenus and Cassiodorus 5. For as for that which certayne late writers alleadge of S. Clâ—ysostome his translating of the Scripture into the Armenian tongue as also of S. Hierome his translating of the same into the Dalmatical toÌ„gue there can no certayne proofe be brought thereof And they who write this do not affirme that all the Scripture was translated by them but certayne partes only vsed of old to be read in the prayers of the Church as the Psalmes Epistles Ghospels and Lessons which were song publickely at Masse in the Canonicall houres which we read to haue byn graunted by Pope Iohn the eight of
them as if Christ should teach that we cold deserue life euerlasting by keeping the law And a litle after he concludeth saying This answere of Christ is according to the old law to wit that no man can be accounted iust before God but he who shall satify the law which is impossible And Calu. in 16. Luc. v. 28. Lâ—b 3. Instit c. 17. sect 7. vpon the later place he writeth thus It is impossible sayth he to fulfill what the law commaundeth yea it is a principall axiome with Caluin a coÌ„moÌ„ aÌ„swere to all such places A legal promise sayth he aÌ„nexed to a coÌ„dition impossible proueth nothing thus with sâ—ch impossibilities they dally with vs with the holy Scripture it selfe so far forth as they Calu. Beza in c. 2. ad Rom. dare affirme that the Apostle in one Chapter auoâ—cheth vnto vs seauen times thinges imâ—ossible For wheras the Apostle in the 2. cap. of the Ep. to the Rom. and 6. v. affirmeth Bez. in c. 2. ad Râ— v. 6. annot 6. edit an 1550. 1564. 1565. first that God will render to euery one according to his workes they interprete the place thus that God will indeed giue to meÌ„ according to their good works if there were any such but that no man can do any good worke before God Is there any man saith Beza that shal be able to bring these workes which the Apostle saith shal be rewarded with eternall life And wheras in the seaueÌ„th v. the Apostle saith that God doth render life euerlasting to such as seeke the same by the patience of good works their answere is that he insinuateth a thing impossible and that no man can do any good worke before God no not the iuslest man which is not worthy of eternall damnatioÌ„ Calu. l. 3. Instit c. 19. sect 4. VVhosoeuer saith Caluin haue made the greatest progresse before all others in the way of the Lord if they cast their eyes vpon the Lord God what worke soeuer they attempt or go about they see it to be accursed And surely I for my part could easily belieue that such is the progresse of our aduersarirs in the way of our Lord. See the rest of the Aposiles places in the latin edition 2. The tenth last shift is the wresting of diuers wordes to a wrong sense and to inuâ—nt sundrie different vnderstandings of the wordes to build vpon it many interpretations neuer heard of before and for a finall Conclusion to say the place is obscure and therefore proueth nothing For Luc. 22. v. 19. example hereof those most euident words of Christ This is my body with is giuen for you may suffice for some of theÌ„ wrest the pronowne hoc others the word est others the word corpus others the pronowne meum others the relatiue quod others the preposition pro others the pronowne vobis and others the Verbe datur and ech word they wrest diuers waies so as one more then Anno 1577. thirty yeares ago hath gathered out of their writings two hundred expositions of these few wordes of Christ of which Clâ—uâ—ius de Xainctes numbreth particulerly 84. And that they are both many and different yea repugnant wherwith they labour to make obscure these wordes of our Sauiour no man can doubt See another example in the latin edition And it is worthy of noting that in all these shifts they serue themselues of other places of Scripture to proue what they say whereby it may appeare how easy a thing it is to corrupt the Scripture by other places of Scripture but that the prouideÌ„t and dayly care of the holy Catholike 1. ad Tim. v. 15. Matt. 28. Church opposeth it self against such corruptions worthily therefore called the Pillar and Firmament of truth against which the gates of hell shall neuer preuaile FINIS OF TRADITIONS The second Part of the first Controuersy CHAP. I. Of the true state of the Question HAVING already in the precedent Treatise spoken of the written Word of God and of all other things thereunto belonging now it remaineth we speake a litle of the vnwritteÌ„ word coÌ„moÌ„ly called TraditioÌ„s But to the end that the state of this controuersy may more easily be vnderstood I will heere set downe foure things diligently to be considered in this matter we treate of The first is that by the vnwritten Word we only vnderstand that which is not written in the old oâ— new Testament for of the vnwritten word of God in this sense is our whole Controuersy in this place Wherefore that obiection of our Aduersaries is both friuolous and nothing worth to wit that the word of God which we cal the vnwritten word may be found extant eyther among the holy Fathers or in the books of the Councells or other Canons of the Church But this nothing belongeth vnto this purpose for it is sufficient for vs that this word of God is not written in any book eyther of the old or new Testament 2. The second is that a thing may be coÌ„teined in the holy Scripture 2. wayes The one way is implicite that is to say in some generall principle from whence this other may be certaynly deduced and in this sense we acknowledge that the whole word of God is conteined in holy Writ and not only in Scripture but also in the Apostles S. Aug. in 140. quaest vpon Exodus Tom. 4. Matt. 22. v. 40. Câ—eed yea euen in that one article I belieue the Catholike Church so that it be diligently examined and well vnderstood as S. Augustine very well noteth For so sayth Christ the whole Law and Prophets doe depend vpon two precepts of charity as in the same place S. Augustine noteth For seing that the holy Scripture teacheth that we are bound to beleeue the Church in all things that it can neither deceiue vsnor be deceiued as we will euidently proue in the next Controuersy in the 7. Chapter it consequently also teacheth the whole and entire word of God seing that all that which is not expressâ—d in the holy Scripture is conteyned expressy in the doctrine of the Church the which the Scripture commendeth vnto vs as infallible as S. augustine very well sayth and declareth S. Aug. Tom. 7. contra Crescon Gram. c. â—3 de vnit Eâ—cles c. 22. in fine-Matt 17 v. 5. Matt. 81. v. 17. Luc. 10. 16. in many places For euen as God the Father comprehended in these few words This is my wellbeloued Sonne heare him the whole word of God so Christ proposed vnto vs the whole word of God when he commaunded vs to heare the Church 3. And in this sense do the holy Fathers often tymes say that all the points of fayth are conteined in the holy Scriptures to wit in that generall principle in the which they admonish vs to bâ—lieue the Church but many of the holy Fathers sayings are falsifyed corrupted by Martin KeÌ„ nitius and some Caluinists as may be seene in
Iudocus Ruesten in his first tome defending the Councell of Trent against Kemnitius 4. Secondly a thing may be conteined in expresse words in the holy Scriptures as that Christ is borne suffered and risen againe c. And in this sense we deny that the whole word of God is conteined in the Scripâ—uâ—e That obiection of our Aduersaries by this may easily be answered when they say that we affirme that Traditions are the vâ—written word of God yet we goe about to proue theÌ„ by Scriptures For we do not proue euery particuler Tradition by expresse words of Scripture but we only deduce and gather them out of it and conuince in generall that there are Traditions 5. The third thing which is to be considered is that our Aduersaries being conuinced by truth doe acknowledge that many things were deliuered vnto vs by the Caluin coÌ„t 4. sess Con. Trident. in â—ntid Beza denotis Eccles tom 3. Tract Theoâ— p. 137. edit Anni 1582. Apostles besids those which are written But say they those were only externall rites and ceremonies seruing only for the ornament or discipline of the Church but nothing concerning doctrine of fayth was deliuered by the Apostles which they haue not set downe in writing So Caluin and some others which follow his opinion Wherfore it remayneth for vs to proue that not â—â—ly external ceremonies but also those which belong vnto the doctrine of fayth were deliuered vnto vs by the Apostles that they were neuer expressely â—et downe in writing 6. The fourth thing is that seing our Aduersaries cannot deny that which was obiected vnto them by Catholikes to wit that the Scripture in many places maketh expresse mentioÌ„ of the word of God preached deliuered and diuulged ouer the whole world as we haue already declared euen out of the holy Scriptures they are wont to answere that long since in the Apostles tyme this Word of God was deliuered preached and not written but the Apostles after wards set downe in writing all the preached word of God or at the least as much therof as was necessary vnto saluation The which solutioÌ„ albeit it be very weak and friuolous seing that it relieth vpoÌ„ no sure ground yet notwithstanding tâ—at it may more fully be confuted we will declare hereafter that many of the chiefest points of faith were not expressely set downe in writing by the Apostles And thus much of the state of this Question CHAP. II. Out of the first and chiefest principles of faith it is clearly conuinced that there are Traditions THE first argument wherby we proue Traditions is taken out of some of the chiefest principles of faith For there are three chiefe and most necessary points of faith yea the câ—ieâ—e grounds of our whole faith which are not to be found expressely in Scripture 2. The first that there must needes be some Catalogue or Canon of the sacred Bookes aswell of the old as of the new Testament the which all Christians with an assured faith should imbrace as a most certaine and an vndoubted truth and this is a very necâ—ssary point of faith yea of it dependeth the authority of all the bookes of holy Scripture because by this Canon the sacred and true books of Scripture are discerned and made knowne from all those which be Apocriphall especially because aswell in times past as in these our daies there hath bin so many and so great Controuersyes about the Canonicall and Apocriphall bookes of Scripture and such a Canon was altogeather necessary aswell in the auncient Church before Christ as in our present Church after Christes tyme the which also our Aduersaries themselues haue learned by experience For they haue also placed their new Canon of the books of holy Scripture in their Consession made at Confess Ruâ—ellana Act. 3. â—ochell and in the later end of some of their Bibles and yet neyther in the time of the old Testament nor in the tyme of the new Law was this CanoÌ„ euer written downe in the Bibles themselues 2. I know our Aduersaries that they may escape this argument do runne to the inward instinct of the holy Ghost wherby say they we know what book is Canonicall and what is not But this answere is refuted reiected before where we haue shewed that the holy Ghost doth not moue vs to belieue any thing with the Catholike faith which is not the word of God If Suprac 5. therfore the holy Ghost moue vs to belieue that some bookes are Canonicall and some are not it is necessary that this be the word of God We aske therefore of them whether this is the written word of God or the vnwritteÌ„ if it be the written word in what Booke or Chapter is it to befouÌ„d if it be no where to be found our Aduersaries must needs coÌ„â—esse that by the instinct of the holy Ghost they also belieue the vnwritten word of God or Traditions 3. The second principle of faith is that we must necessarily with an assured and firme faith belieue that all those Bookes eyther of the old or of the new Testament which we now retaine are safely deliuered vnto vs entyre aâ—d vncorrupted through so many handes so many ages so many vexations and persecutions of the Christians for otherwyse the whole credit and authority of those bookes will decay and perish But this is no where extant or written for neyther the Prophets or Apostles haue euâ—r written that their bookes should neuer be falsified or corrupted by any yea it appeareth sufficiently Supra c. 9. 10. 12. 13 by that which hath byn already said that they were falsified and corrupted in many bookes by the Iewes and Hâ—retâ—kes Let our Aduersaries therfore tell vs where it is written that this holy Scripture which we haue now is not corrupted or falsifyed 4. The third principle of fâ—yth is the true sense of the letter For the true word of God consisteth rather in the true sense or meaning of the words then in the words Supra cap. 3. themselues as we haue declared before But the true sense of the words that is to say in what sense or meaning the words are to be vnderstood eyther properly or figuratiuely cannot be had from the holy Scripture alone but also from the doctrine and Traditions of the Church as we haue sayd before in the fourth Chapter wherby it also followeth that the writteÌ„ word of God conteyneth in it the least part of the word of God to wit the bare letter only but the word of God preached and deliuered keepeth and professeth vnto vs the cheif part of the word of God that is to say the true natiue sense of the same S. Basil l. de Spir. sanct c. 27. Brent contra Petr. â— Soto in suis prologom Kemnit cont 4. sess Conc. Trid. cùm agiâ— de 2. gen Tradiâ— 5. And this is that which S. Basil sayth that those who reiect the vnwritten points of fayth as indiscreet persons do
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
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
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
faith is the ground of the Church we speake of the generall faith of the whole Church 19. There are other arguments of our Aduersaries but we may easily answere Canus l. 2. de â—ocis Theol. c. 8. Bellar. l 3. deverbo Dei c. vlt. therunto by that whiâ—h hath byn already said the which Melâ—hior Canus and Bellarmine do prosecute and handle more at large vnto whom we referre the Reader For they are borrowed of the Anabaptists Libertines wherby the authority of the holy Scriptures themselues is no lesse diminished and infringed then that of the Church CHAP. VII That the Church doth not only giue a bare testimony but also authority to the Scripture THIS matter is heere briefly to be examined that it may more clearly be vnderstood how necessary the Churches approbation is to the establishing of the authority of the holy Scriptures But to the end that it may more clearely appeare wherof we dispute in this place it is to be considered that seing that our Aduersaries cannot deny but that the Church aâ—â—oardeth some testimony to the holy Scriptures they affime that this testimony of the Church is only a bare testimony and not a testimony of authority 2. For there are two kindes of testimonyes The one is called a testimony of authority because vpon it the truth of the things testified dependeth Yt is called also a necessary testimony because without it the thing in question is not sufficiently testified The other is called a bare testimony and not necessary that is to say when such a testimony is not so necessary because the matter is otherwise Ioan. 1. v. 7. sufficiently testified Such a testimony was that which S. Sohn Baptist gâ—ue of Christ For Christ had sufficient testimonies besides 3. Of the former testimony of authority Christ saith But I do not receyue my Ioan. 5. v. 34. 36. Ibid. testimony from men to wit the testimony of authority necessary For of the bare testimony he had spoken a little before You sent vnto Iohn and he hath giuen testimony to truth But this was a bare testimony wherfore Christ a little after said I haue a greater testimony then Iohn for the workes which the Father hath giuen me to profit them the very works which I do giue testimony of me that the Father hath sent me And the Father that sent me himselfe hath giuen testimony of me All which saith Christ of the testimony of authority Our Aduersaries therefore say that the Church giueth only a bare testimony to the Scriptures as S. Iohn gaue to Christ but she giueth not a necessary testimony or that of authority 4. But that the testimony of the Church is altogether necessary as that Matt. 3. v. vlt. Matt. 17. v. 5. wherof the authority of the Scriptures dependeth is very manifest by that which is said in the former Chapter And by that also which we alleadged in the first disputation where we shew that there is now no firme testimony wherby we may know certainly which booke is canonicall and which not besides the testimoniy of the Catholike Church For now neyther are the miracles wrought which God did in tymes past neyther doth God speake immediatly by himselfe as he spake in the baptisme and transfiguration of Christ VVherefore there remayneth only the third ordinary manner wherby God speaketh by the mouth of the Church The Church therfore doth not giue a bare testimony only to the holy Scriptures but the testimony of authority to wit that wherof the authority of the Scriptures dependeth as concerning vs and our knowledge 5. Moreouer if the doctrine of S. Paul stood in need of the Churches approbation as we haue already proued out of Supr c. 3. §. 13. huius Controu the Scriptures much more S. Lukes Ghospell who was oÌ„ly S. Pauls choller stood in need therof as Tertullian witnesseth especially because S. Luke receyued not those things which he wrot by reuelation from God Tertu l. 4. contra Marâ—â— 2. Luc. â— v. 2. as S. Paul did but by tradition from others as he hymselfe writeth And the same also may be said of S. Marke whose Ghospell as S. Hierome writeth the Apostle S. Peter approued and by his authority he commaunded it should be read in the Church 6. But neyther is it true that some say that the authority of approuing the Canonicall bookes was only resident in the Apostles and the primitiue Church but the ensuing Church hath it not For the Apostles did not approue all the Canonicall bookes of the new Testament For if they had donne so there had remained no doubt of many of them for many ages after the death of the Apostles euen among Catholike good men as we Supra ca. 5. Contr. 1. haue noted before But many yeares after the Apostles tyme by the generall Councells and Decrees of the Church some bookes were approued wherof there was before some doubt 7. Yea more then six hundred yeares after Christ there were many Catholikes who did not receyue the authority of the Toletan Concil c. 16. Apocalyps as appeareth out of the fourth Toletane Councell 8. And that which is more before the Councell of Trent ther were many Catholikes who thought that it was lawfull for them to doubt of all the bookes of the new Testament the which in tymes past S. Hierome seemed to iudge as doubtfull as are the Epistles of S. Iames the second of S. Peter the second and third of S. Iohn the Epistles of S. Iude the Epistles to the Hebrewes and the Apocalyps And if it had not byn for the Councell of TreÌ„t or some other new Decree of the Church none would as yet condemne them as Heretikes who called those bookes in question 9. By that which hath byn sayd it appeareth manifestly that the Canonicall Scriptures receiue their strength and authority not from the approbation of the primitiue Church but rather from the approbation of the Church succeeding yea euen of this present Church to wit of the Councell of Trent 10 Lastly albeit the present Church should not haue the authority of approuing Scriptures as these men say yet notwithstanding for three other reasons the authority testimony of this present Church is necessary First because we know not certainly what bookes the primitiue Church hath eyther written or not writen approued or reiected but by the testimony of the present Church Secondly neyther do we know whether those bookes came vncorrupted vnto vs or no but by the same testimony Thirdly because we cannot otherwise know which is the true sense of those bookes CHAP. VIII The Argumentes of our Aduersaryes are confuted THE first argument of our Aduersaries is The Church is grounded vpon the word of God and by the word also of God â—t is ingendred nourished and gouerned and it is subiect to the word of God as to the words of her spouse I answere our Aduersaries do in a manner coÌ„found the writen word of God
of it albeit it be immediatly from God to the end it be made manyfest vnto vs. For otherwise we should not be obliged by the authority therof But this is not done now by miracles nor by the immediate or extraordinary reuelation of God Therfore it resteth that we say it is done by the ordinary mediate reuelation of God that is to say by the Church or rather by the holy Ghost which speaketh vnto vs by the Church CHAP. IX That the Church is the Iudge of all Controuersies in matters of Faith SEING that there arise daily so many disputations and Controuersyes of matters of faith none can deny but that there must necessarily be some Iudge appointed who must define end and determine such Controuersyes for otherwise there will neuer be an end of such matters But it is a great difficulty who must be this Iudge The Sectaries of this tyme almost all refuse the Iudgment of the Church For they see very well that if they admit her as iudge all their errors wil be quite ouerthrowne Wherfore some of them affirme that the sole Scripture must be the Iudge of all Controuersies and this was the first doctrine of our Aduersaries to wit Luther Zuinglius 2. But our later Aduersaries when they consider that it is an absurd thing to make the Scripture being a thing Cap. 18. Controu 1. without life the Iudge as we haue declared before they fly vnto their priuate spirit the which they will haue the iudge of all Controuersies But least they may seeme to attribute too much vnto themselues they endeauour to colour their priuate spirit with the famous title or name of the holy Ghost affirming the holy Ghost to be the only iudge of all Controuersyes 3. Wherfore there are three thinges heere to be proued First that the Scripture cannot be Iudge Secondly that neyther the priuate spirit can be it Thirdly that the Catholike Church is the only and most true Iudge of all Controuersies 4. As concerning the first wheras our AduÌ„ersaries euery where teach that nothing is to be belieued which is not expressely to be found in holy Scripture it is a strange thing that they would perswade men that the Scripture is the Iudge of all Controuersies wheras we read no such thing in any place of holy Scripture 5. Yea euen in these testimony is only attributed to the Scriptures and not Iudgment Search the Scriptures saith Christ Ioan. 5. v. 19. and the same are they that giue testimony of me And hence it is that the law of God is often called in Scripture in the Hebrew phrase Eda or Eduth or Tenda that is to say Psalm 118. a Testimony yea euen in one Psalme it is called aboue twenty tymes by that name 6. Moreouer in the Prophet Isay in the same place falsely cited by our Aduersaries that they may proue therby the Scripture to be the iudge of Controuersies it is called a witnesse or a testimony and not a Iudge nay rather to the Isa 8. v. 20. Law saith the Prophet and to the testimony 7. Furthermore one thing is more absurd that in matters of such moment to appoint such a deafe and dumme iudge and who may also be corrupted for both parties and whose sentence eytâ—er party vseth indifferently But it is manifest that the Scripture is such a iudge for it can neyther speake nor heare and so in like manner do all Heretickes ancient and moderne also vse the Scriptures Lastly almost all our Aduersaries do see how absurd these things are and therfore they fly vnto their owne priuate spirit the which they call the holy Ghost Wherfore let vs come now to the second point 8. As concerning therfore this priuate spirit first there is none who doubteth but that the holy Ghost is the chiefe Iudge of all Controuersyes But the question is where this holy Spirit is to be found and in whome it remayneth 9. Moreouer it is certaine that the holy Ghost doth not remayne or is to be found in any booke least peraduenture our Aduersaries should send vs to their Bibles but in the hartes of the belieuers Now we aske whether this holy Ghost which is the Iudge of all be in the hart of euery belieuer or rather in the hart of the whole Catholike Church If they say in the hart of the Catholike Church we haue our desire if they say in the hart of euery priuate man it will follow that no priuate person can erre in his owne iudgment seeing that the holy Ghost cannot erre in his iudgment Heâ—re truly we seeke for that Iudge which caÌ„not erre 10. Furthermore euery priuate man shall be come the Iudge of the whole Church if euery such priuate person haue this spirit which is the Iudge of the whole Church whereupon there will ensue a great confusion in the Church of God 11. Besides that if euery belieuer be the Iudge theÌ„ our Aduersaries must needs admit the auncient Fathers as Iudges of all Controuersies the which they will neuer do for they dare not deny but that the auncient Fathers were true belieuers why therfore do they attribute vnto themselues that which they so vâ—hemently deny to all the auncient Fathers 21. Moreouer if euery belieuer cannot erre in his iudgment much lesse can a great many such erre and least of all can the Church of all belieuers erre Wherefore whatsoeuer our Aduersaries say they wil be forced to confesse and graunt that the holy Ghost is the Iudge as he remaineth in the whole Church speaking and iudging by the mouth therof and in this manner euen out of our Aduersaries doctrine we gather by a necessary consequence our opinion 13. Lastly that which they affirme that the priuate spirit of euery particuler person is Iudge is therby declared to be false that they themselues acknowledge that there is no priuate man which at some tymes cannot erre in his indgment but heere we inquire for a Iudge which cannot erre For otherwise in matters of such moment and of which our eternall saluation dependeth we should dangerously be forced to haue recourse to an erroneous Iudge whose iudgement is variable vncertaine deceitfull and oftentymes manifestly false 14. But now as concerning the third point that the Church is the iudge of all Controuersies we proue by these arguments First the Church hath all the properties of a fit iudge for first she hath an exact knowledge the holy Ghost shall teach you saith Christ all truth 15. Secondly the Church cannot be corrupted by any giftes or praiers For she is as the Apostle witnesseth the pillar and ground of truth 16. Thirdly the Church heareth 2. Tim. 3. v. 15. speaketh giueth her iudgment and examineth the testimonies of Scriptures and Fathers as experience it selfe teacheth vs. 17. Fourthly we are bound to stand to the iudgement of the Church VVho will not heare the Church saith our Lord let Matt. 18. v. 17. him be vnto thee as an â—eathen and
any inuisible and vnknowne Calu. l. 1. Inst c. 8. sect 9. in fine Church but from the visible Roman Church Wherefore sayth Caluin It is most certaine that all the writings of the Prophets and Apostles came no otherwise to all posterity but as it were from hand to hand deliuered vnto vs by the auncient Fathers continually from yeare to yeare Thus he But none hath deliuered the Bibles froÌ„ haÌ„d to hand but the RomaÌ„ Church Wherefore it is as certaine that the Roman Church is the true Church of Christ as that the holy Scripture is true Scripture seeing we do not know this which we haue to be true Scripture but by the authority tradition and testimony of the Roman Church 20. Vnto this that also belongeth Supr c. 5. huius coÌ„trouers which we haue proued before to wit that the true Church doth not only giue a bare testimony but also sufficient authority to the Scriptures for this the only Roman Church and no other aboundaÌ„tly performeth 21. The seauenth reason The office of the true Church is to iudge of all controuersies which do arise among Christians eyther in points of fayth or other Ecclesiasticall affayres But to the Roman Church only and to no other besides all controuersies were brought which arose in the Church eyther in fayth or other Ecclesiasticall matters For vnto this as to the seate Supr c. 7. huius coÌ„t of S. Peter and the supreme Church all had recourse who had any iniury or wrong done them So S. Athanasius Patriarch of Alexandria so Peter his successor so S. Iohn Chrysostome Patriarch of Constantinople and many others did of whom Bellarmine â—aron ToÌ„ 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Calu. l 4. Inst c. 8. sect 16. and Baronius more at large the which Caluin also cannot deny 22. Heâ—revnto also it belongeth that the Roman Church hath confirmed all generall Councels lawfully assembled as Bellarmine declareth and Baronius more Bellarm. l. 1. de Eccles â—nilit c. â—â— BaroÌ„ loc citaâ—â—â— at large in euery age 23. The eight reason The office of the true Church is to ordaine appoint lawfull Pastors and Ministers of the Sacraments and to conserue alwayes the ordinary vocatioÌ„ as we also proued before But our Aduersaries can assigne no other Church but the Roman which hath alwayes had this ordinary vocation and coÌ„â—inuall succession of Pastors and the ordinary authority to send and institute Pastors in the Church of God 24. The ninth reason The office of the true Church is to teach a true faith without any error so that in no one point Cap. 8. â—u conâ—rou of doctrine necessary to saluation she may erre as we haue already proued out of holy Scripture But our Aduersaries can shew no other Church besids the RomaÌ„ Cap. 7. â—uius coÌ„t which hath not often erred in fayth Neyther dare our Aduersaries affirme that Sand. dâ— visibili Monar Eccles pertotuÌ„ l. 7. Bell. in quinque lib. dâ— Rom. PoÌ„tif Coccius Tom. 1. l. 1. Artic. 11. seq Baron per omnes 12. Tomos Calu. l. 4. Instit c. â— sect 16. subfinem there is as yet among them any visible Church which cannot erre in fayth But Doctor Sanders Bellarmine Coccius Baronius do most euideÌ„tly demonstrate that the Roman Church neuer erred hitherto in doctrine concerning matters of faith 25. And heere it is to be considered that in all other Churches founded by the Apostles yea in the Patriarks seates themselues there haue not byn only heresies but also many Archbishops heretikes but only the Roman Church among them all hath alwaies byn free vnstained with any heresy The which Caluin doth plainly acknowledge when he writeth that the Roman Church in the tyme of old heresyes was not so troublesome as other Churches were and that it kept more exactly then the rest the doctrine once deliuered vnto her by the Apostles But he badly asâ—r beth this to the power and strengeth of nature or to the generous dispositioÌ„ of the Romans not to the prouidence and grace of God 26. Much better did the auncient Bishops of Rome referre it to the singular prouidence of God and to the praier of Christ of the which Christ himselfe speaketh Luc. 2â— v. 32. when he sayth But I haue prayed for thee Peter that thy fayth fayle not And indeed Bellarmine Bell l. 4. de Rom Pont. c. â— alledgeth seauen auncient Bishops of Rome which attribute this to the prayer of Christ 27. The tenth reason The proper and chiefest office of the true Church is to bring men to their eternall saluation so that without her helpe or without her we cannot hope to be saued as we proued before by our Aduersaries doctrine Supr c 2. â—uiuscoÌ„t We aske therfore of them whether our predecessors who liued vnder the Bishops of Rome these thousand yeares past were all damned or no they dare not affirme they were damned but out of the true Church of God we cannot hope for saluation the Roman Church therfore wherein they liued and obteined their saluation is the true Church of Christ CHAP. V. By the signes of the true Church it is declared that the Roman is the true Church of Christ. WE haue declared out of the holy Scriptures that there Cap. 19. huius Controu are foure most certaine signes of the true Church of Christ all which doe proue the Roman to be the same Church we speake of 2. First as concerning the vnity of faith and doctrine the Church of Rome hath the same faith in all and euery particular point therof with the primitiue Church as also with that Church which hath continued now for the space of almost a thousand six hundred yeares as Coccius clearely declareth out of the writings of all both auncient and late Historiâ—raphers Coccius induobus Tom. thesaur and that through euery article â—ow in Controuersy And we will hereâ—fter shew in euery one of them the conâ—ent and harmony of the Roman Church with the Scriptures and auÌ„cient Church But on the other side among our Aduerâ—aries there are many iarres and dissensions in points of Faith euery one of them condemning another of heresy as the forsaid Cocciuâ— manifestly sheweth euen by Coccius Tom. 1. l. 8. Art 7. 8. 9. 10. our Aduersaries owne writings wherfore it is most manifest that there is perfect vnity and agreement in the Roman Church concerning all matters of faith and that our Aduersaries doe differ and disagree almost in euery article therof 3. And heere it is diligently to be considered that this doth not happen vnto our Aduersaries by a meere chaunce only or by the malice of some few of them as they say it doth but euen necessarily out of the nature and condition of their doctrine For they teach that there should be no Superiour vnto whom all should be obedient and submit themselues no iudge of Controuersyes whose iudgment and definition in those
matters all should imbrace or follow besides that euery one teacheth what he listeth and euery one of them disdayneth to be reprehended or corrected by another wherby there must needes arise many iarres and contentions among them 4. But in the Roman Church it is far otherwise For if there arise any question or Controuersy which can be desined and determined by the word of God presently the Church of Rome endeth this Controuersy and forbiddeth vnder payne of excommunication any to teach the contrary and by this meanes euery Controuersy in matters of faith amongst Catholikes is forthwith ended But if the matter be obscure and cannot easily be gathered out of the word of God nor be very necessary to saluation then the Roman Church commaundeth both parties that one of them do not condemne the others opinion as we see practised concerning the Conception of the B. Virgin Mary And in this manner all matters of Controuersy are ended and taken away Vide Conc. Trid. sect 5. post Canon 5. The Lutherans being conuinced by â—his argument doe acknowledge that the â—opes Supremacy is very profitable and neâ—essary for the Church for the preseruatioÌ„â—f this vnity and good agreement in all â—inges as a little after we will euidentâ— Infr. cap. 24. §. 4. sequent Coccius l. â— â—itato Art 11. idem â—odâ— lib. Ar. 12. 13. 14. demonstrate out of their owne wriâ—ngs 5. Secondly as concerning the sanâ—tity and holinesse of the Church Coccius â—eclareth very well and briefly that euen â—rom the very first beginning till now â—â—re haue alwaies byn some holy and â—â—dly persons in the Church of Rome Yea that also there neuer wanted soâ—â— Calu. coÌ„c 10. Gall. in Epist ad Eph. coÌ„c 10. in cap. 11. Epist 1. ad Cor. con c. 9. sub fin in 1. ad Tim. who did very strange and miraculous things Moreouer in the same places he proueth manifestly the great impiety and wickednesse of our Aduersaries and that there were neuer any true miracles wrought by any of them Yea Caluin himselfe doth often confesse and acknowledge the dishonesty and wickednesse of his followers to be very great 6. That it cannot most certainly be the true Church of Christ which altogeather is destitute of the gift of miracles sufficiently appeareth by those words of Christ These signes shal follow those thaâ— Marc. vlt. c. 17. 18. belieue in my name they shall cast out Diuellâ— they shal speake with new tongues serâ—ents shall they take away and if they drinke any deadly thingâ— it shall not hurt them they shall impose hands vpon the sicke and they shal be whole And that this promise of Christ is not only to be restrained to the Apostles tyme we must needs confesse vnlesse we will say that the authority to preach the Ghospell to administer the Sacraments of Baptisme the which are coÌ„teyned in the same promise did only appertayne to the Apostles tyme. But that the Saâ—nts of God which liued in the Roman Church haue done all those miracles which Christ recounteth in the forsayd place is manifest by that which Cocc art 13. citat Coccius relateth of them 7. But heere it is diligently to be coÌ„sidered that the impiety or lacke of all holinesse in our Aduersaries is not casuall or accidentary vnto them as it is with vs that iâ— flowing from the malice of man but it proceedeth out of the very doctrine of our Aduesaries For they teach that none can truly haue their sinnes forgiuen them that none can haue any true holinesse before God that none can haue any freewill to doe good works that noe worke of a iust man caÌ„ be perfect or meriâ—â—rioâ—â— before God that all things aswell the bad as the good are done by a certayne necessary predestination of God that noe satisfaction for our sinnes is necessary that we need not confesse our sinnes that good workes are not necessary to saluation and life euerlasting that Gods commaundements are impossible and such other paradoxes wherof we will speake more heerafter All which doe vehemently incite and stirre vp men to all sinne and iniquity But on the other syde the whole doctrine of the Roman Church inflameth continually the harts of men with the loue of vertue and the exercise of good workes 8. Thirdly the Roman Church may truly be called Catholike and that it is no lesse Catholike now then it was in the tyme of the auÌ„cient holy Fathers both we haue sufficiently declared before and Thomas Bozâ—uâ— proueth at large For albeit Sâ—prac 10. huius Cont. §. 14. Bozius de signâ—s Eccles the Roman fayth may seeme to haue failed in some place of Europ yet notwithstanding it hath meruailously increased and still daily increaseth in Asia Africa and those wide countries of the East and VVest Indies But it is certayne that our Aduersaries Churches are wholy destitute of this marke and signe 9. Finally that the Roman Church may truly be called Apostolicall it appeareth sufficiently by the continuall succession of Pastours euer since S. Peters tyme to Paul the fift who is now the supreme Pastor of the Roman Church The which succession Cocc l. 8. citat art 2. is briefly related by Coccius but our Aduersaries can neuer shew the like 10. And Caluin cannot deny but that those holy Fathers Irâ—naeus Augustine Calu. l. 4. instit c. 2. Sect. â— subfinem Optatus and many others disputing with old heretikes vsed this argument the which is deduced from the continuall succession of the Popes of Rome But sayth he they did so because till their tyme there was nothing of the doctrine deliuered vnto them by the Apostles changed at Rome Neyther as yet is there any of that doctrine changed which was at Rome in S. Augustines tyme and besids the same succession Calu. â— â— cit sect 2. continueth still For we do not say as they falsely slaunder vs that the succession only of persons without true doctrine is sufficient but we vrge a continuall succession aswell of persons as of doctrine seeing that no doctrine can consist or remayne without those persons which teach it CHAP. VI. That the Church of the Citty of Româ— is the chiefest of all the visible Churches of Christ is clearly conuinced by the holy Scriptures BESIDES those arguments hitherto alledged out of the properties offices and signes of the true Church wherby we haue proued the Roman Church to be the true Church of Christ there are some other reasons which may be deduced out of holy Scriptures wherof see Bellarmine and Sanders Bell. SaÌ„der locis citat supr cap. 2◠§. 27. in fiâ—e we according to our accustomed breuity will only bring two principall places for this purpose wherby it is manifestly declared that the Roman Church is not only the true Church but that also that which is now in Rome is more eminent and famous then all other Churches of Christ as the successor of S. Peter the Prince of
Christ to S. Peter feed my sheep but the beginning proceeded from vnity The primacy was giuen to S. Peter to the end that one Church of Christ and one chayre might be made manifest and knowne Hitherto S. Cyprian 11. But now that these promises of Christ did not only belong to the person of S. Peter but also to all those who were to succeed him in the same office till the end of the world we do thus clearly proue and demonstrate First because S. Peter is heere made the foundation of the Church and the rocke wherupon it is buylded but the Church of Christ alwayes remayneth therfore the foundation therof must alwayes remayne seing that nothing can continue and be without it foundation 12. Moreouer those keyes which were giuen to S. Peter do remayne alwaies in the Church as all our Aduersaries confesse Ergo he also remayneth to whom these keyes were giuen For that authority or those keyes were not giuen for S. Peter alone but for the Church which is alwayes extant It therfore alwaies retayneth those keyes and that authority of bynding or loosing men from their sinnes in S. Peter and his successors till the end of the world 13. And this is that which S. Leo S. Leo Serm â— inaÌ„niu assump suae ad Pontif. saith when he writeth that S. Peter euen to this day gouerneth the Church of God that is to say by his successors insomuch that his dignity neuer fayleth euen in an vnworthy successor But hitherto there was neuer any successor of S. Peter acknowledged in the Church of Christ besides the Bishop of Rome He therefore is the only successor of S. Peter and the supreme Bishop of the Church And the Roman is not only the true Church of Christ but also perferred before all others euen by Christ himselfe 14. The second place is Feed my laÌ„bes Ioan. 21. v. 15. 16. 17. Euseb Emissen Serm in natiu S. Ioan. Euang feede my sheep In which wordes God coÌ„mended to S. Peter not only his lambes which signifieth the common sorte of people but also his sheepe to wit the Pastors and Fathers of his Church First saith Eusebius Emissenus he committed to S. Peter his lambes and then his sheep because he made him not only a Pastor but the Pastor of Pastors Peter therfore feedeth the lambes and also the sheepe He feedeth children and their mothers he ruleth Bern. de consiâ—er ad EugeÌ„ l. â— c. 8. S. Leo Serm. 3. de assump sua ad Pontif. Ioan. 21. v. 15. the people and their Prelates He is therfore the Pastor of all because besides lambes and sheepe there is nothing in the Church Hitherto Eusebius And S. Bernard My sheepe sayth Christ Vnto whome is it not â—layne and manifest that he did not assigne some but all nothing is excepted where there is no distinction made Thus S. Bernard And S. Leo Peter doth properly gouerne all whome principally Christ also gouerneth 15. Furthermore it is manifest that these wordes were spoken to S. Peter and not to the other Apostles seing that Christ asked him thrice Doest thou loue me And moreouer he added more then these that he might make a manifest distinction betwixt S. Peter and the other Apostles 16. Finally it is most certaine that this promise of Christ doth not only appertayne to the person of S. Peter but also to his successors which are to remayne in the Church till the end of the world Ephes 4. v 11. Calu. Beza ib. Confess Rupell Art 25. For both the Apostle doth plainly testify and our Aduersaries do also confesse that the office of a Pastor is ordinary and shall alwaies continue and be in the Church of God 17. And the chiefest reason thereof is because we stand in no lesse need now of a supreme Pastour then they which were in the primitiue Church whileâ— yet the Apostles were aliue yea we haue much more need therof besides that there are still and alwaies shal be some sheep of Christ therfore there shall also still continue their chiefe Pastours The Româ—n Church therfore is not only the true Church of Christ but also that wherein S. Peters successor and the supreme Pastour of the whole Church of Christ remayneth 18. But these two places are so manifest that they cannot be confuted or wrested to any other sense vnlesse we till reduce all wordes to a metaphoricall signification or other figuratiue speaches the which is a common tricke of our Aduersaries when they are vrged with plaine wordes of the holy scripture But against all these falsifications of our Aduersaries we must alwaies obserue that rule of the S. Aug. tom 3. de doctrin Christi l. 3. cap. 1â— Catholike Church taken out of S. Augustine to wit that we must neuer depart from the proper signification of the words of holy Scripture vnlesse we be forced by the authority of some more euident poynt of faith wherunto the proper significatioÌ„ of the wordes do manifestly repugne For otherwise if we might as often as we would refuse and lâ—aue the proper signification of the wordes there will be nothing lesse certayne in all the holy Scripture 19. Moreouer it will be an easy matter for euery one to fly to metaphors and improper significatioÌ„s when he is pressed with the playne words of holy Scripture but there is nothing heere that should force vs to depart from the true and proper sense of the wordes None therefore but desperate and carelesse of their owne saluation will giue credit and bâ—lieue these foolish toyes and dreames of our Aduersaries inuented only by them in hatred and contempt of the Bishop of Rome 20. Yea he will rather imbrace and follow the vniforme consent and vnderstanding of the auncient Fathers and of all the whole Church For the holy Fathers in many places do affirme that these Bellar. l. 1. de Rom. Pont. c. 10 14. Coccius To. 1. l. 7. Art 4. two places of the holy Scripture are to be vnderstood litterally of Saint Peter the which Bellarmine and Coccius haue diligently gathered togeather as many other Catholike Authors haue done before them But because this matter is so cleare and manifest that euen our Aduersaries cannot deny it as we will plainly shew in the next Chapter we wil not now spend any more tyme in alleadging of Authors 21. But our Aduersaries doe heere cry out and obiect against vs that the holy Fathers doe sometymes affirme that the Church was built vpon the fayth of S. Peter and sometymes vpon his confession As though forsooth there were any among vs so foolish as to thinke that the Church was built vpon S. Peters back or shoulders or vpon S. Peter as he was an Infidell or dumme and not rather vpon S. Peter as indued and replenished with the gift of faith confessing and professing openly the mysteries thereof Wherfore it is all one whether we say that the Church is built vpon S. Peter or vpon his faith and