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
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
that name to the Morauians at their first Conuersion to the faith of Christ but this was 880. yeares after Christ and this custome was of no long continuance amongst them as appeareth Baron Tom. 10. an 880. n. 19. Tom. 11. an 1080. n. 1. by that which Pope Gregory the sâ—auenth writeth to the Duke of Bohemia is to be seene in Caesar Baronius 6. The third assertion To translate the Scripture into the vulgar tongue is neyther in it selfe vnlawfull nor forbidden by any Ecclesiasticall law so it be truly translated Nay such a translation serueth Preachers to great vse who are to cite and expound the Scriptures to the people in the vulgar tongue Hereticall translations are indeed forbidden especially of the new Testament because in them many places of holy Scripture are by false translating corrupted 7. The fourth assertion It is not a thing profitable to all to read the Scriptures in the vulgar tongue yea to many it is rather pernicious for we are taught by â— Pet. vlt. v. 26. the Apostle S. Peter that in the Scriptures are many thinges hard to be vnderstood which vnlearned and vnstayed persoÌ„s depraue to their owne destruction Many also there are vncapable of meate and solid sustenance who are therefore to be â— Cor. 3. v. 2. Heb. â— v. 12. fed with milke as the Apostle speaketh and for such it is more wholesome to be fed by the sermons and instructions of their Pastors then to feede themselues with reading the Bible It was therefore great prudence of the Church to forbid that the Bible though translated and set forth by Catholikes should be read of Index li. â—rohâ—â— Reg. 4. all indifferently and without the approbation and leaue of the Bishop Pastor or Ghostly Father 8. Our Aduersaries obiect certayne places of S. Chrysostome and S. Hierome in which they exhort to the reading of the Scripture but they should haue obserued that those Fathers speake of reading the Scripture in the Greek tongue then extant or in the Latin according to the old edition which was neuer forbidden to any by the Church whereas our Controuersy is about the translations of the holy Scripture out of the Hebrew Greek and Latin into the vulgar tongue which are all for the most part corrupted 9. And it is worthy the noting that our Aduersaries spend their tyme in vayne in gathering togeather arguments by which to perswade men that it is necessary for them to read the Scriptures in the vulgar tongue to the end they may learne out of them what they must necessarily know if they wil be saued for how truly or plainly soeuer they be translated no man shall euer receyue any fruite by them vnlesse he first belieue aright and be guided by the holy Ghost to whome it appertayneth to guide vs into the right Psal 142. v. 8. 1â— land to make knowne vnto vs the way in which we are to walke to teach vs the will of God which we are to fulfill VVhich is manifestly to be seene in the Iewes who vnderstaÌ„d the Hebrew text much better then Christians in which there is so ample and cleare mention of Christ and yet for all that they do not belieue in Christ Our Aduersaries therefore haue little reason to keep such ado about the wordes of Scripture or the translation of them let them first imbrace the true Faith which is in the Church only let them seeke after the holy Ghost who is not to be found out of the Church let them seeke out the true sense of the Letter which the Church only conserueth vncorrupteed and it will easily be graunted vnto them to haue the Scriptures in what tongue soeuer they will so they be truly and vncorruptedly translated and that they vse them to their owne saluation and not to their destruction as many do wherof we haue for witnesse not only the Scripture but dayly experience And this shall suffice concerning the translatioÌ„ of the Scripture into the vulgar toÌ„gue 10. For of the prayers in Latin eyther priuately made by the people or publikely offered by the Priest at masse and in the administratioÌ„ of the SacramoÌ„ts we wil treat hereafter in their proper places CHAP. XIII That our Aduersaries vse many sleightes in corrupting the Word of God OVR Aduersaries often require vs to proue all that which we say out of the written Word of God but when we cite the same in expresse tearmes they haue many wayes by which they depraue it Wherfore before I make an end of this Controuersy concerning the written Word it shall not be from the purpose briefly to detect such their corruptions partly to the end that no man be deceaued by them and partly that euery man may vnderstand nothing to be so plainely and clearely set downe in the written VVord which by the Commentaries of crafty and subtile wittes may not be weakned and made of little force if no regard be had to the authority and iudgment of the Church And that no man may thinke that I herin calumniate them or deale lesse sincerely with them I will set downe out of their owne writings some one or two exaÌ„pls of each manner of corrupting wherof many will occure in ech Controuersy 2. The first manner of shifting of places alleadged out of the written Word is to say that the originall text is corrupted and what is alleadged is crept out of the margent into the text whereof see many examples in the 12. and 18. Chapter of the Latin Edition of this CoÌ„ttouersy 3. Their second shift is to reiect the vulgar translation and insteed thereof to cite some new and corrupt translation of their owne It is euident inough that Luther in his first version of the new Testament into the German tongue set forth in the yeare 1522. hath more then a thousaÌ„d eâ—rors as many haue obserued amoÌ„gst Ioannes Cocl eus de actis Luther an 1522. which neyther the last nor the least is his presuming to add to the text of S. Paul the 3. Chapter and 28. verse the particle alone thereby the stronglier to establish his doctrine that Fayth alone iustifieth for this place of the Apostle VVe thinke a man iâ— Rom. 3. v. 28. iustifyed by fayth he traÌ„slateth by sayth alone when a certaine friend of his to whome the same was obiected by a Catholike asked the cause why he so translated it he no lesse ridiculously then proudly answereth in a certayne little booke set forth by him in the yeare 1530. vnder this title A certaine information or answere made to two questions proposed by a certayne good friend concerning the translation of Scripture and the inuocation of Saints In which he aduiseth his friend to answere the Catholikes obiection after this manner D. Martin Luther Luth. â—0 4. Germ. excuso VVittemb an 1551. fol. 475. will haue it so and sayth that a Papist and an Asse iâ— all one thing so I will so I command let my
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
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
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
adde also some other naturall reasons and perwasions that they may be conuerted For there are many things in holy Scripture which seeme opposite to naturall reason as the mysteryes of the Blessed Trinity Incarnation Resurrection of the dead c. 9. Ninthly there wanteth last of all the tenth property for there is nothing extant of the Scripture in the Apostles Creed 10. The holy Scripture indeed is the ground and reason why we belieue many points of faith but not the ground why we belieue all Moreouer neyther is it the first ground of all that we belieue by it For the Scripture it self is proued by some other more generall ground to wit by the authority of the Church VVherfore the Scripture is only a particuler ground and not a generall a mediate and not immediate a secondary and not the first and chiefest rule of faith CHAP. IIII. That the priuate or particuler spirit of euery one is not the ground or rule of faith THAT no priuate spirit of any can be the ground of our Faith is farre more euident by the same properties now alledged For none of these ten properties doth agree with the priuate spirit of euery one that belieueth the which we declare by these arguments 1. First there wanteth the foresaid continuance For there is no priuate or particuler person who hath continued from the beginning of the world or shall endure till the end therof as faith hath continued 2. Secondly there wanteth truth because there is no priuate man to be found which cannot erre and be deceiued for as witnesseth the Apostle Euery man is Rom. 3. v. 4. a lyar 3. Thirdly there wanteth certainty in proposing matters of faith vnto vs because none can be certaine that any priuate person can haue such a spirit yea eueÌ„ in our Aduersaries iudgemeÌ„ts For the predestinate only in their opinion haue this spirit euen as they only in their iudgments haue the true fayth but the predestinate are knowen to none but only to God according to that of the Apostle God knoweth who are his The which Caluin 2. Tim. 2 v. 19. Cal. l. 4. Inst c. 1. sect 2. expressely teacheth 4. Fourthly the foresaid strength and immutability is wanting for that a priuate man hath not that strength and immutability of his doctrine Our Aduersaries themselues confesse and experience teacheth vs that they often times change their interpretations of Scriptures and at diuers tymes they teach plaine contraries yea they confesse that this their priuate spirit is not permaneÌ„t with them but often times leaueth and forsaketh them the which they proue out of that place of the 29. or 30. Psalme the eight verse Thou hast turned thy face from me and I became Vid disp Paris an 1566. in disp 1. diâ—i sub finem troubled For thus they affirmed in that famous disputation had at Paris Anno 1566. 5. Fiftly there wanteth that fulnesse sufficiency because no priuat man can define all poynts of fayth seeing that many were defined before he was borne against the ancient heretikes and there wil be many things defined in the Church after his death assoone as there shall arise any new heresies 6. Sixtly there wanteth necessity For before there was any priuate man which now liueth there was true fayth and the same fayth will continue after he is dead 7. Seauenthly there wanteth the seauenth property of the rule of faith seing that by this priuate spirit a Christian cannot be distinguished from an Infidell But in truth all heretikes do bragge and boast that they haue this priuate spirit wheras notwithstanding one condemneth or rather damneth another 8. Eightly there wanteth the eight property For no point of faith can be certainly deduced out of this priuate spirit only seeing that it is oftentimes vncertayne and deceitfull 9. Ninthly there wanteth the ninth property For it is a ridiculous thing for one to endeauour to conuert an infidell to the fayth by bragging only that he hath this priuate spirit the which none can eyther see or vnderstand 10. Tenthly there wanteth the tenth and last property because there is no mention made of this priuat and particuler spirit in the Apostles Creed 11. And the true spirit of faith which is in euery faithfull soule wherof the Apostle speaketh when he saith that we haue the spirit of sayth is not the 2. Cor. 4. v. 13. ground or reason of fayth we heere speak of but it is the helpe of God or the supernaturall gift of fayth whereby our vnderstaÌ„ding is helped to belieue and it is in regard of our vnderstanding as it were the efficieÌ„t cause of the acts of faith But we speake in this place of the formall cause or reason of fayth as it appertaineth to the obiect of Faith which is the word of God and by which we know what is the true reuealed word of God and what is not For albeit the holy Ghost and the gift of faith moue vs to belieue yet they do not rashly moue vs without any reason or ground Eccles 19. v. 4. For he as the wise man sayth who belieueth quickely is light of hart but with a solid and sure ground according to those words of 1. Ioan. 4. v. 1. S. Iohn do not dearely beloued belieue euery spirit but proue the spirits whether they be of God But this proofe and triall necessarily requireth some good reason and sure ground whereof we will speake in the next Chapter 12. Lastly it is to be considered that we do heere disâ—ute of the Catholik faith as it is necessary to al to attaine their eternall saluation not of the speciall faith of one or other the which we know very well may arise or proceede from some particuler or extraordinary reuelation of God but this is not the Catholike faith not an ordinary but an extraordinary fayth not to be admitted generally of all till it be approued and receyued by the Church as presently we will declare more at large CHAP. V. That the Catholike Church is the ground or rule of our Faith THAT the Catholike and visible Church is the most solide and true ground of our faith is manifestly proued by the former properties of the Ground of faith For all those ten properties do very well agree to the Church and to nothing els besides The Church hath the first property to wit a continuall and neuer-interrupted Supâ— cap. 3. huius Controu duration For the Church hath alwaies continued as we haue already proued euen by the testimony of our Aduersaries 2. The Church also hath the second property that is to say a most certaine Supr cap. 7. huius Controu and vndoubted truth because she can neuer erre in faith as we haue proued before 3. She hath also the third property that is to say the infallible certainty on our partes because in the doctrine of the Church we may haue the greatest certainty perspicuity and euidency that possibly we can
desire Seeing that the Church is alwaies present who explicateth alwaies her mâ—nd vnto vs in plaine and manifest wordes And if at any tyme there arise any doubt or Controuersy in her decâ—eâ—s she presently declareth it no otherwise then it the Prophets other writers of the ould and new Testament were yet aliue and would clearly explicate their mynds vnto vs in their owne proper words For it is the same Holy Ghost who in tymes past spake by the mouth of the Prophets and Apostles Matt. 10. v. 20. and who speaketh now by the mouth of the Church â—or it is not you that speake but the spirit of your Father that speaketh in you 4. The Church hath the fourth property For there is exceeding great streÌ„gth and immutability in the doctrine of the Church For this truly can neuer be corrupted falsified or chaunged because the Church is alwaies present who alwaies giueth most cleare and euident testimony of her owne doctrine This doctrine also of the Church remaineth alwaies constant and immoueable because the holy Ghost is alwaies present who will not permit the Church to erre according to those wordes of Christ I will Ioan. 14. v. 16. aske my Father and he will giue you another Comforter that he may remayne euerlastingly with you 5. The Church hath the fifth property that is to say the fulnesse and sufficiency of doctrine For the Church teacheth all thinges necessary to saluation according to that promise of Christ When the spirit of truth shall come he will teach you all truth So that the Ioan. 16. v. 13. Church hath hitherto condemned all heresies and heerafter also will condemne all errors arising and oppugning the Catholike faith In like manner she alwaies answereth to all doubtes and difficulties proposed vnto her because she is alwaies present and alwaies liueth 6. The Church hath also the sixt property that is to say Necessity For no doctrine must be receyued as a point of faith vnlesse it be receiued and approued Suprac 8. huius Controu Gal. 1. v. 12. by the Church as we haue declared before by the example of S. Paul who although he receyued his Ghospell immediatly from God by the reuelation of Christ yet he was commaunded by reuelation to go the visible Church and to conferre the Ghospell which he preached with those who were in the visible Church least perhaps in vaine he should runne or had runne 7. Yea and others could not safely belieue him vnlesse his doctrine had byn approued by the Church as Tertulliâ—n S. Hierome and S. Augustine well note The Apostle S. Paul saith S. Augustine called from heauen if he had not found the Apostles with whome by conserring his Ghospell he might appeare to be of the same Society the Church would not at all belieue him Thus S. Augustine And much more the Ghospells of S. Marke and S. Luke who were not Apostles but only their disciples stood in need of this approbation of the Church Hereupon saith Tertullian If he from whom S. Luke receyued Tertul. l. 4. contra Marci c. 2. S. Hier Ep. 11. S. Aug. tom 6. cont Faustum Manich. l. 28. c. 4. Tert. loco cita Gal. 2. v. 2. his light desired to haue his faith and preaching authorized by his predecessors how much more reason haue I to desire the like for the Ghospell of S. Luke seeing the same was so necessary for the Ghospell of his Mayster Thus farre Tertullian 8. And hence it is that the reuelations of S. Brigit and S. Catherine of Siena albeit they were truly reuealed vnto them by God yet they do not appertayne to the Catholike faith because they are not approued by the Church as the vndoubted and certaine word of God 9. Euen as also in the Apostles tyme many before S. Luke wrote the acts of Christ as S. Luke himself testifyeth and yet notwithstanding the Ghospells only of Luc. 1. v. 1. two of them to wit S. Matthew and S. Mark are authenticall for it is well knowne that S. Iohn wrote his Ghospell long after S. Luke but the Ghospells of the rest who wrote before S. Luke do not appertayne vnto faith because they were neuer approued by the Church Wherby it sufficieÌ„tly appeareth how necessary the approbatioÌ„ authority of the Church is 10. The Church hath the seauenth property of the ground of faith for by the Church and her coniunction communioÌ„ a true belieuer may be distinguished from an Infidel for he who belieueth the Church and heareth her is a true belieuer but he who doth not heare her is an Infidell if he will not heare the Matt. 18. v 17. 1. IoaÌ„ 4. v. 6. Church saith our Lord let him be vnto thee as an heatheÌ„or publicaÌ„ And S. Iohn saith he which knoweth God heareth vs he which is not of God doth not heare vs. 11. The Church hath the eight property For whatsoeuer we belieue with our Catholike faith we belieue it because it is reuealed vnto vs from God by Calu. l. 4. Instit c. 9. sect 1. Beza c. 4. suae confess sect 17. the Church But God now reuealeth nothing to euery member of the Church immediatly by himselfe Yea euen our Aduersaries do well admonish vs to labour most of all that no way or leaue be graunted to such fantasticall reuelations 12. The Church hath the ninth property For the Church conuinceth also Turkes and Infidels by naturall reasons of which sort there are many extant in S. S. Thom. in 4 lib. contra Gentes insracap 19. huius Controu Thomas We proue also the Church by the very signes and markes of the Church which are manifest vnto all euen Turkes and Infidels wherof we will speake more hereafter 12. The Church hath also the tenth property because in the Apostles Creed there is expressed an article of the Church For presently after the faith of the true God the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost first of al is set downe this article I belieue the holy Catholike Church 14. Moreouer that the Church and her preaching is the ground of faith euidently appeareth by the wordes of holy Scripture For when S. Paul disputeth of that faith wherby all are to to be saued he reduceth this whole Faith to the preaching of the Church vnto her sending calling of others to her Ecclesiasticall offices 15. So this Apostle in another place declareth that God alwaies appointed some Pastors Rom. 10. v 14. seq and Doctors in his Church that we be not children wauering in faith and carried about with euery wynd of doctrine but that we may be stable and constant alwayes in one and the same faith and confession of the Sonne of God 16. Lastly those words of S. Paul are most euident wherein he affirmeth that the Church is the pillar and ground of 1. Tim. 3. â— 15. truth Where we are to consider that euery foundation of any bulding hath two offices that
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
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
confession for we do not separate S. Peter from his fayth or from the publike profession therof but we only affirme that the Church of Christ was built vpon the faith and confession of S. Peter alone and of no other 22. And hence it is that the same holy Fathers who in some places affirme that the Church was built vpon the faith and confession of S. Peter do els where S. Epiph. contra Haeres 50. quae est CatharoruÌ„ ChrysoÌ„st HoÌ„ 55. in Mat. S. Aug. Tom 1. l. retractat cap. 21. plainly testify that it was built vpon S. Peter himselfe Yea euen in the same place they sometymes say that it was built vpon the faith or confession of S. Peter and sometymes vpon S. Peter himselfe as appeareth by S. Epiphanius and S. Chrysostome 23. We know also very well that S. Augustine in some places vnderstood by this word Rocke Christ himselfe but he doth not reiect the common exposition of other holy Fathers yea he confirmeth the same by the authority of S. Ambrose and he testifieth himselfe that he held that opinion in other places For they are not to be reprehended but rather to be greatly commended who attribute many litterall senses to the same wordes of the holy Scripture so that they do not reiect and condemne the common and approued sense of the whole Church as we haue already declared out of S. Augustine Contro 1. c. 15. §. 7. seq 24. Truely euen our Aduersaries themselues confesse that the forsayd exposition of S. Augustine is both forced harsh in it selfe For seeing that neyther in the words of Christ which goe before nor in the confessioÌ„ it selfe of S. Peter there is any mention made of a rock the particle this cannot demonstrate that which is not in Calu. ad haec verba S. Mat. in sua harmonia Beza inc 16. Mat. ad v. 18. the whole sentence but violently Wherfore our Aduersaries leauing this exposition of S. Augustine they vnderstand by the rock eyther the fayth of S. Peter as Caluin doth or with Beza his confession And they both confesse that the word Cepha in the Syriacke tongue is the same in both places when Christ sayth Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke and the Greeke word also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do only differ in their terminations and not in substance 25. But albeit Caluin commendeth CaluÌ„ loco citato that deriuatioÌ„ of the word Peter which S. Augustine setteth down to wit that Petrus is named of Petrâ— as Christianus of Christo yet Beza loco citato Beza writeth more truely that Christ speaking in the Syriake toung vsed no deriuation of names but sayd Cepha in both places Our Aduersaries therefore do not well to obiect S. Augustines exposition against vs the which they themselues acknowledge not to be the litterall sense of the wordes CHAP. VII That the Church of Rome is the chiefest and head of all other is proued out of the ancient Fathers and euen by the confession of our Aduersaries theÌ„selues THE auncient holy Fathers do not only with vniforme consent affirme the Roman to be the true Church of Christ but also that it is the chiefest most principall Church of all in so much that they affirme it to be the head of the whole visible Church of Christ and many other things they do write in the prayse and commendation of the Roman Church and of the Pope the supreme Pastor thereof as may euidently be seene in Catholike writers Bell. l. 2. de Rom. pont c. 13. seq Coâ—c ToÌ„ 1 l. 7. art 5. 6. 7. which are related by Bellarmine and Coccius We for breuity sake will only alledge two of the holy Fathers by whom it may easily be gathered what was the iudgment and opinion of the rest concerning this matter 2. The first is that most ancient holy S. Irenaeus who liued euen in the Apostles S. Iren. l. â— aduâ—rs haeres cap. 3. tyme. Because saith he it would be too long to recount in this volume the succession of all Churches we proposing the tradition and â—ayth of the greatest most ancient and best knowne Church founded by the two glorious Apostles Peter and Paul which by preaching and succession of Bishops hath descended euen from the Apostles to vs do confound all those who by any meanes gather any thing contrary to that they should eyther by their owne foolish fancies or by vayne glory or by the great blindnesse of their vnderstanding or following any badde opinion For all other Churches that is to say all faythfull true belieuers threughout the whole world must needes come vnto this Church by reason of the most potent principality thereof Hitherto are the wordes of S. Irenaeus And afterward he recounteth the succession of all the Popes of Rome till S. Aug. Tom. 9. â— tract 56. in Euang. S. Ioan. his tyme. 3. The other is S. Augustine whom our Aduersaries also esteeme very much VVho knoweth not sayth he that blessed S. Peter was the chiefe and head of all the Apostles Thus S. August Tom. 2. Epist 162. ad Episc DonatistaruÌ„ S. Augustine of S. Peter But speaking of the Church of Rome he sayth In the Romane Church hath alwayes florished the chiefe power and authority of the Apostolicall chayre If we beliâ—ue S. Augustine nothing is more cleare and manifest 4. But it is not necessary to cite any more places of the holy Fathers For euen our Aduersaries confesse that this was the common opinion of all the auncient Fathers Bucerus in praeparator ad Concil concerning this matter Thus writeth Martin Bucer sometymes Caluins maister and chiefe Patron not only in his owne name but also of all the Lutheranes VVe confesse plainly with all â—ur harts sayth he that among the auncient Fathers of the Church the Church of Rome hath alwayes obteined the chiefest authority and supremacy aboue all others because it hath the chayre of S. Peter and whose Bishops haue alwayes byn accouÌ„ted the successors of S. Peter Thus Bucer 5. And Caluin albeit he inueigheth bitterly against the Church of Rome yet constrained to speake truth writeth in Calu. l. 4. Inst it c. â— sect 16. this manner I will first say this aforehand that I deny not but that the old writers doe euery where giue great honour to the Church of Rome and do speake reuerently of it And a little after he sayth thus For that same opinion which I wot not how was growne in force that it was founded Calu. l. 4. Instit c. 7. sect 11. Verba istornm actor cicantur ab ab ipsis Luth. in l. colloq Alâ—ing Extant etiaÌ„ apud Sand. l. 1. de â—ustif cap. 1. De Smalcald articul Philippi subscript habetur ibid. à facult VVitteÌ„b edito coÌ„tra Gâ—so PeuceruÌ„ an 1597. in princ c. 6. fol. 60. p. 1. and ordeined by the ministery of Peter much auailed to
these words Indeed saith he it was a vice or fault of his conuersation and not of his preaching And he answered very well for S. Peter might peraduenture theÌ„ haue svnned but he could not erre in fayth because he knew very well that the Moysaicall Law was not necessary to saluation for the Gentills neyther did he euer teach the same to be necessary Yea when there arose any controuersy about this matter he manifestly taught that the Gentills were not obliged by it as may be seen in the Acts of the Apostles Wherfore if S. Peter offeÌ„ded in any thing it was a synne of his Act. 15. v. 10. 11 â—ell l. 1. de RoÌ„ Pont. c. vlt. infine Baron Tom. 1. an 5 52. â— seq 1 Cor. 1 v. 13. 1. Cor. 1. v. 13. conuersation and not of his preaching doctrine wherof we now only dispute albeit there are many who thinke that S. Peter did not offende at all in any respect of whom see Bellarmine and Baronius 10. The fourth argument S. Paul reprehended those that said they belonged to S. Peter I answere that those men deuided Christ from S. Peter and S. Paul and they opposed them against Christ as eqalls vnto him making them as it were so many Christs The which S. Paul declareth in these wordes Is Christ deuided Moreouer they attributed to S. Peter and S. Paul the internall and inuisible giftes of 1. Cor. 1. v. 13 the holy Ghost and the effect of the Sacrament yea and our redemption also no otherwise then they did vnto Christ Hence are those wordes of S. Paul in the same place why was Paul crucified for you or were you baptized in the name of Paul 11. But we teach that the Pope of Rome is inferior and not equall vnto Christ wherupon he is also called the Vicar of Christ as subiect vnto him and not deuided from him Moreouer we teach that the Pope doth not giue the inward and spirituall gyftes of Fayth Hope and Charity but he is only the Vicar of Christ in the doctrine of fayth and exteriour gouernement of the Church 12. The first argument The Apostle to the Corinthians and Ephesians doth recount diuers offices of the Church and 1. Cor. 1. v. 18. Eâ—bes 4. v. 11. yet he sayth nothing of S Peter I answere first that it is not necessary that the Apostle make any mention of S. Peter in euery place for it is sufficient that in some one place or other he hath euidently declared that S. Peter was a chiefe member of the Châ—rch the which he did when he said that he came to Hierusalem to see S. Peter and tarryed with him fifteene Gal. 1 v. 18. dayes 13. Furthermore in these very places he manifestly maketh mention of S. Peter For euery where he putteth the Apostles in the first place and all Christians knew well inough that S. Peter was chiefe of all the apostles according to that of S. Matthew the first Simon who was called Peter Heer upon saith S. Augustin who knoweth not that S. Peter was the chiefe of the Apostles 14. Finally the Apostle himselfe doth not indeed speake in these places of the ordinary Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy but of those extraordinary giftes which were giuen to the members of the primitiue Church For he recounteth there also the Euâ—ngelists Prophets the grace of doing cures or helpes kindes of tongues c. which are certainely extraordinary gyftes as S. Chrâ—sostome Theophilactus Oecumenius and others expounding these wordes of the Apostle haue well noted 15. The sixt argument Many of the Bishops of Rome were wicked bad men and giuen to many kindes of synnes as all euen Catholike writers do testify As therfore they haue grieuously erred in manners so they might also erre in faith and doctrine I answere that this was S. Aug. Tom. 2. Epist 165. ad Gener. ToÌ„ 7. coÌ„tr literas Petil. Donatist â—ib 2. c. 5. 6. 51. in tymes past the argument of the Donatists agaynst Catholikes wherunto S. Augustine hath often answered For there is a great difference betwixt their conuersation and doctrine because an error committed in our manner of conuersation only hurteth him which erreth but an error in doctrine is also hurtfull to many others yea euen to the whole Church of God Heâ—ce proceeded proceeded that admonition of Christ all thinges therefore whatsoeuer they shall say to you obserue yee and doe yee but according to their workes do ye not Caluin also refuteth this argumeÌ„t of our Aduersaries more at length as the foolish inuention or dreame of the Anabaptistes for he knew very well that among his Ministers there were many most wicked vngodly men Wherfore it is very strange that his followers will repeate and inculcate this argument so often 16. Our Aduersaries haue many other arguments besides these which need no confutation for they are not taken out or the word of God but all do rely and are grounded vpon lyes and meere fables forged by auncient Heretikes or Schismatikes or at the leaste by such as were no fauourits nor welwillers to the Sander l. 7. citat Baron in omnibus 12. â—oÌ„ 2. Tim. 4. v. 4. Church of Rome the which Doctor SaÌ„ders and Cardinall Baronius prosecute particulerly throughput all ages Wherfore that saying of the Apostle doth very well agree to our Aduersaries And from the truth certes they will auerse their hearing and to sables they will be conuerted 17. We will heere alledge one most certaine example of those Slaunders the Calu l. 4. Inst c. 7. sect 18. which our Aduersaries cast against the Church of Rome And that we may also omit that Caluin in few words hath no lesse then fiue manifest lyes of one only Byshop of Rome Iohn 22. as Bellarmine clearly proueth the same Caluin truly hath forged three most famous and markable lyes against the whole Church of Bellarm. l. 4. de RoÌ„ PoÌ„t cap. 14. cum agit de loan Papa Calu. lib. 4. inst c. 7. sect 27. S. Aug. Tom. 7. devnitate Eccles c. 2. 3. Rome for he saith that these are the three principle articles of that Diuinity which is taught by the Bishops and Cardinalls of Rome First that there is no God The second that all thinges which are written taught concerning Christ are lyes and sables The third that there is no lyse after this 18. But that one answere which S. Augustine gaue the Donatists slaundering wrongfully Catholikes in tymes past may suffice to confute all these reproachfull and iniurious lyes of our present Aduersaries Let vs not heare saith he what this or that man saith but what our Lord saith let vs not hâ—ere this say I thus sayest thou but thus saith our Lord and what the holy Scriptures say vnto vs concerning the Church 19. Moreouer that which in general S. Aug. Tom. 7. de vnitate Eccles c. 12. the same holy Father in another place saith against the lyes of the Donatists may now very well be applyed in this manner to the Roman Church I know saith he what is written in the holy and Canonicall Scriptures concerning
Calu. l. 4â— Inst cap. 9. sect 13. acknowledge that there is no better or surer remedy to roote out and take away al heresies therfore eyther this is a certaine remedy or els there is none at all the which to affirme were to deny the prouidence of God and his loue to his Church 15. Moreouer that which our Aduersaries say to wit that the later Councels are not lawfull Assemblies because they haue not obserued due manner and forme is a false lye first because it doth not become euery priuate man to be iudge in this matter but it belongeth to the whole Church who hauing receyued for so many yeares all these as lawfull Councells we must not call them any more in question 16. And seing that our Aduersaries do imbrace and approue the six first Councels the lawfull forme to be obserued in Councells is to be fetched from them the which is exactly obserued in the later Councells as Baronius sheweth euidently in euery one of the first six Councells But Caluin acknowledgeth no Calu. c. 9. citato sect â— lawfull manner of any Synodicall assembly nor any such to be gathered togeather in the name of Christ but where all things are proued by Scripture only reiecting all Ecclesiasticall traditions but we haue already proued that the Traditions Goâ—t 1. c. 18. seq of the Church of God are as a principall and chiefest part of the word of God 17. Yea euen this was the only cause why S. Cyprian and so many other holy Byshops erred in the African Councells when they determined that all those who were christned by Heretikes should be baptized againe for they confirmed this their opinion very probably by many places of holy Scripture but they reiected the auncient tradition of the Lyrin lib. coÌ„tra Heraes c. 9. 10. S. Aug. Tom. 7. de baptism coÌ„tra Donatist l. 2. c. 7. in fine cap. 8. 9. S. Aug. Tom. 7. l. 3 de bapt coÌ„tra Donatist c. 4. l. 3. citato c. 2. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. loan 14. â— 9. Church the which they knew very well was opposite to this error as though it had byn contrary to the holy Scriptures as S. Vincentius Lyrinensis declareth very well and before him S. Augustine in many places 18. And that which is more S. Augustine manifestly writeth that he had byn of S. Cyprians opinion by reason of those probable reasons which were deduced out of holy Scripture but that the whole Catholike Church had defined the contrary And as the same holy Father teacheth at large they most of all oppugned the custome of the Church which were in the same error with S. Cyprian obiecting among other thinges that place of the holy Scripture the which our Aduersaries now adayes obiect against vsâ— God saith I am the truth he doth not say I am the custome Vnto whome S. Augustine answereth very well that the custome of the Church is not opposite to Truth but it is euen Truth it selfe 19. Our Aduersaries arguments are of small account or moment Caluin bringeth in the example of Caiphas and of the Iewish Councell wherin Christ was condemned The same argument Beza Bez. in 1. Tim. 2. v. 25. also alledgeth But who doth not know that this was neyther a generall Councell whereunto Christ was not called nor any â—ther true belieuer nor lawfull in it selfe seing that it was not assembled in the name and authority of Christ who was then the supreme head of the visible and militant Church as also because it was called togeather against the true Church of God by the wicked and cursed Synagogue of the Iewes For that was the true Church which adhered vnto Christ and belieued in him but that other which was altogeather depriued had lost the true faith of Christ was rather a fit Church for Sathan and other infernall spirits And I meruaile truly that Caluin and Beza do alledge that Councell as true and lawfull which was assembled against Christ himselfe as also by those who were not true belieuers â—o 15. v. 22. Psal 117. v. 21. Isa 9. v. 9. 10. Isa 6. v. 14. Dan. â— v. 26. Mat. vlt. â— vlt. in Christ yea who were filthily stained with the most heynous synne of infidelity as Christ humselfe witnesseth but we willingly leaue such a Church and Councell to our Aduersaries 20. It was also manifestly foretould by the Prophet that Christ should not be receyued by the Iewes and that the Synagogue of the Iewes should then fall from Ioa. 14. v 16. Calu. c. 9. citato sect 8. S. Aug. ToÌ„ 6. l. 3. contra Maxim Arian Episc c. 14. Beza volu 2. Tract Theol. Tract 3. de pace Christianorum Eccles constit cirâ— fineÌ„ pag. 118. iuxta edit GeÌ„ an 1558. Calu. sect citato Rupel Confess Art 5. in fine her faith But the holy Scriptures teach the plaine contrary of the true Church of Christ to wit that Christ and his spirit shall remayne with her for euer 21. But neyther is that other argument which Caluin and Beza vse any better to wit that S. Augustine would not vrge the authority of the Councell of Nice against Maximinus the Arian For neyther can we vrge the authority of the new testament against the Iewes not because we haue any doubt thereof but because the Iewes do not admit the new Testament In the same manner when that Arian would not admit the Councell of Nice but did plainly reiect it S. Augustine should in vayne haue vrged the authority therof for otherwise it is well knowne that S. Augustine neuer had any doubt of the fayth explicated in the Councell of Nice the which euen our Aduersaries imbrace as the most true word of God 22. Such as desire to see any more concerning this controuersy of the Generall Councells let them read Bellarmine in his first second booke of the Church militant and Coccius in his first Tome the seauenth booke the 21. 22. article CHAP. XI Of the Authority of the auncient Holy Fathers NOw it remaineth we say somewhat of the auncient holy Fathers and of their writinges both because they were in tymes past the chiefest members of the true Church of Christ euen by the confession of our Aduersaries as also because in the particuler controuersies we shall often vse the testimonies authorities of the holy Fathers 2. We know indeed well inough that they were men and that they might haue erred but neyther are they Gods nor Angells who accuse them of their errors We know also that one or more of the sayd holy Fathers haue sometymes erred when they left the more common opinion of others 3. But we affirme this constantly that the auncient holy Fathers receiued by the Church of God haue neuer written any thing with a common and vnanime consent that is eyther contrary to the holy Scriptures or to any point of fayth 4. Moreouer out of the writings of the holy Fathers in foure diuers
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
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
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
with the word of God in generall the which they should not doe for ther are three sorts of the word of God to wit that which is belieued preached and written The belieued word is in the hart of the Church that which is preached is in her mouth and that which is written is in her bookes Of the belieued and preached Word the Apostle sayth the word is in thy mouth and in thy hart this is the word of fayth which we preach We Rom. 20. v. 8. confesse that in the belieued and preached word the Church is founded because by the same it is ingendred nourished Rom. 10. v. 10. Ibid v. 14. and gouerned and that vnto this word it is subiect and obedient as vnto the Words of her spouse For indeed this kind of word is necessary for the Church For with our hart sayth the Apostle we belieue vnto Iustice but with the mouth confession is made to saluation And againe How shall they heare without a preacher 2. But the nature of the written word is farre different for this is neyther altogeather necessary for the Church seeing that the Church was without it more then two thousand yeares neyther can the written word be profitable to the Church vnlesse it be also rightly preached and belieued For what doth it profit a man to haue the Bible vnlesse he rightly belieue and vnderstand it 3. But the Scripture whereof we now dispute doth only conteyne the written word but the belieued and preached word is conteined in the visible Church as the necessary and essentiall parts therof seing the one is as it were the life in the hart of the Church the other as it were the speach in her mouth neither can they euer be separated from her according to that saying and promise of God The words which I haue put in thy mouth shall not Isa 59. v. vlt. depart from thy mouth nor from the mouth of thy seede nor from the mouth of thy seedes seede from henceforth for euermore 4. Wherefore this argument doth proue the quite coÌ„trary for seeing that the written word receiueth it profit and authority from the rightly belieued and preached word which are the partes of the Church it is necessary that the written word receiue that authority and vtility from the Church as that wherin only the word rightly preached and belieued is to be found 5. The second argument If the Church should teach any thing contrary to the Scriptures we were not to belieue the Church Therefore the Scripture doth not receiue that authority from the Church but rather the Church from the Scripture I answere that in the same maÌ„ner it may be said that if the Scripture should conteine any thing against truth we should not also belieue it if the holy Ghost should vtter and speake any lye we should not belieue him But thâ—se conditions are indeed impossible and blasphemous against God wherefore they are not only to be admitted but not euen to be proposed of Christians For it is impossible that the Church should teach any thing contrary to the Scriptures for then the holy Ghost should lye because he should teach one thing by the Church and the contrary by the Scriptures 6. The third argument if the Scripture receiue that authority from the Church then the Church should be aboue the Scripture which seemeth to be very absurd I answere That the Church is aboue the Scriptures may be vnderstood two wayes First because the Church exceedeth the Scripture in dignity and excellency and in this sense without all doubt the Church is about the Scripture for the Scripture is made for the Church and not contrary wise All things sayth the Apostles 1. Cor. 4. v. 51. are done for you Christ dyed for the Church and not for the Scriptures the Church belieueth hopeth loueth and prayseth God but the Scripture doth none of these The Church shall reigne and liue euerlastingly with Christ in heauen the Scripture shall perish after the day of Iudgement Lastly the Church conteineth in it the word of God rightly belieued preached and the Holy Ghost it selfe all which do farre exceede the written word in excellency and dignity 7. Secondly it may be vnderstood that the Church is aboue the Scripture so as she may change the Scripture or of Scripture make no Scripture or lastly she may teach some what contrary to Scripture or depart from the true sense of Scripture In which sense the Sectaries of this tyme say that we affirme the Church to be aboue the Scripture And thus it is false that the Church is aboue the Scripture but neyther is there any Catholike which in this sense will affirme that the Bellar. l. 3. de verbo Dei c. vlt. in resp ad 14. argum Church is aboue the Scripture as Bellarmine truly affirmeth For if the Church were in this sense aboue the Scripture the Church should erre and be opposite vnto her â—elfe because in that the Church hath once approued the Scripture she cannot any more reiect and disproue it vnlesse she contradict her selfe which is impossible 8. The fourth argument The holy Scripture receiueth her authority immediatly from God himselfe because he is the Author of the Scripture therefore it doth not receiue it authority from the Church I answere there be two kinds of certaynties the one of the thing in it owne Nature the other in respect of vs so also there are two kinds of authorityes the one of the thing considered in it selfe and this hath the Scripture from her principall Author to wit God himselfe the other is in respect of vs and this it hath from the Church as we haue Cap 13. praeced §. 17. 19. proued before out of Caluin and Beza For we know not otherwise that God is the Author of the Scripture with any certainty of fayth but by the testimony of the Church 9. And that which we haue sayd of the Scripture may also be euidently seene in Christ our Lord who is aboue the Scripture For Christ was forced to proue his authority by miracles that it might the better be knowen and allowed of men For otherwise the Iewes had not beene bound to haue admitted his authority Ioan. 15. v. 14. S. Aug. Tom. 9. Tract 91. in Ioan. Hereupon saith Christ speaking vnto his disciples of the Iewes If I had not done among them workes that no other man hath done they should not haue sinned that is to say of Infidelity not belieuing in Christ aâ— S. Augustine very well expoundeth And in another place speaking vnto the Iewes Ioan. 10. v. 17. he sayth If I doe not the workes of my Father belieue me not 10. But if the authority of Christ which was most exellent in it selfe and immediatly from God stood in need of those meanes wherby it might become knowne vnto vs to the end it might oblige vs to belieue it much more the authority of the Scripture will stand in need
the Traditions and doctrine of the Church seing that without them we cannot certainly and without errour know what were those things which the Apostle taught the Galathians 2. Secondly our Aduersaries do erre in that they do not rightly expound that particle in the wordes of S. Paul praeter besides but rather contrary to the Apostles meaning For the Latin word praeter as also the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Hebrew Ghal haue two significations In the former it signifyeth all that which is not the selfe same thing whereof we doe speake in the later sense it signifieth that only which is contrary to that we speake of In which sense praeter signifieth the same that contra doth to wit against the former sense is manifest inough the later is proued by these places of Scripture Act. 18. v 13. where all do translate these Greeke words Calu in act Apoâ— an 1560. Beza ed. an 1560. 1565. 1598. Hemic Steph. in thes linguae Graecae Tom. 2. dictione 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be against the Law so hath not only the vulgar edition but also Caluin and Beza and all the French Bibles of Geneua Likewise in the first to the Romans the 26. vers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signyfieth against Nature so hath the vulgar edition and all the French Bibles of Geneua yea Cicero as witnesseth Henricus Stephanus doth thus translate this phrase out of Greeke Againe in the 4. to the Romanes the 18. verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth against as the vulgar edition and Beza hath in all editions Moreouer in the 11. to the Romans the 24. vers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth against as the vulgar edition and all the Bibles of Geneua haue finally in the last to the Romans the 17. vers aswell the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Latin word praeter in our interpreter signifieth the same thing that contra doth as manifestly appeareth by the precedent wordes for dissentions and scandals are contrary or against the doctrine of Christ and not only besides his doctrine Wherfore Caluin in his Commentaries set forth in the yeare 1557. vpon the Epistle to the Romanes and Sebastian Castalio and all the French Bibles of Geneua haue contrary or against the doctrine and albeit Beza translateth it besidâ— the doctrine yet in his last edition set forth in the yeare 1598. he translateth it contrary to the doctrine and in his Annotations he warneth that it is rather so to be translated It is not therfore strange or absurd that the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Latyne praeter should fignify the same that contra doth 3. But now that this word may not only be thus vsed but that also it must necessarily be so vnderstood and taken in this place we haue shewed by the absurdities which would otherwise follow The first is that S. Paul would haue sayd Anathema to S. Iohn Euangelist who many yeares after the preaching of S. Paul to the Galathians yea after his death wrote his Apocalyps wherein there are many new reuelations which S. Paul had not preached to the GalathaÌ„s because they were not theÌ„ reuealed by God 4. The second absurdity that S. Paul had pronounced Anathema vpon all those who in his tyme by a propheticall spirit 1. Cor 14. v. 2. 4. 16. 30. did dayly prophesy new things For in the Apostles tymes there were many such as appeareth by the first epistle to the Corinthians And S. Paul could not preach to the Galathians that which God had not yet reuealed 5. The third absurdity the Apostle for the same reason had pronounced Anathema against S. Luke who in the Acts of the Apostles relateth many thinges which happened long after S. Paul left Galatia 6. The fourth absurdity the Apostle for the same cause also had condemned himselfe with the sayd Aâ—athema For he wrote many Epistles after he had left Galatia wherein he reateth many thinges which hapned afterward vnto him eyther at Rome or in other places 7. Lastly it is an absurd thing to think either God after those wordes of S. Paul to the Galathians could reueale to men nothing more by an Angell sent from heauen or that the said Angell who by the commaundement of God should reueale any new thing but not contrary to faith should incurre that Anathema by S. Paul seing that this were to wrest the Anathema vpon God himselfe who commaunded the Angell to do so This place therefore cannot be vnderstood of diuers and distinct thinges from those which S. Paul taught the Galathians but only of contrary and opposite thinges vnto them But according to this sense of the word praeter all the foresayd Absurdities doe cease For neyther S. Iohn in his Apocalyps nor S. Luke in the Actes of the Apostles nor any other which did prophesy nor S. Paul himself euer wrote or taught any thing contrary to that which S. Paul taught the Galathians But euen God himself cannot Ad Heb. 16. v. â—8 reueale the contrary by an Angell because according to the Apostle It is impossible for God to lye 8. Neyther is it sufficient for me to say that those thinges which were afterward reuealed and written were not necessary pointes of faith to saluation For S. Paul did not say if any shall Euangelize vnto you any point necessary to saluation but absolutely if any shall Euangelize any thing contrary to that which you haue receyued Moreouer all those thinges which were afterward set downe in holy Scripture were true points of faith the which euery ChristiaÌ„ is necessarily bouÌ„d to belieue if not expressely yet at the least virtually and generally euery one is bouÌ„d to belieue if not expressely yet at the least virtually and generally euery one is bouÌ„d to belieue with an assured faith all those things which are in holy Writ to be most certaine and true 9. Finally euen our Aduersaries confession doth conuince this to be most true for now they acknowledge that all those thinges which by a necessary conseqeÌ„ce are deduced out of the Scriptures do belong vnto the word of God and are points of saith and therefore they may be lawfully preached vnto the people as we haue Suprac 3. said before But al these are distinct things from those which are expresly written in holy Scripture For the antecedent whereby some other thing may be inferred is distinct from that which is inferred For it were a ridiculous illation if one and the same thing should be inferred from it selfe But that which is inferred in a good collection is neuer contrary to the antecedent The Apostle therefore speaketh of doctrine contrary to his and not absolutly of any other distinct doctrine 10. And in this sense the Fathers doe often say that S. Paul affirmed in this place that nothing was to be taught besids that August Tom 7. contra lit Petil. Donat. l. 3. cap. 6. August Tom.
a little after he reduceth the principall Cal. eodeÌ„ c. 7. sect 4. infine sect 5. and chiefest certaynty of Scriptures and of our whole fayth to the particuler and priuate spirit of euery beleeuer The late Caluinists do put two grounds or rules of fayth to wit the Scripture and this priuate spirit But Catholikes do teach that neyther the Scripture alone is sufficient nor this priuate spirit togeather with the Scripture but moreouer the spirit and authority of the whole visible Church is necessary And this is the true state of of this question 8. We will therfore explicate foure things that this whole controuersy may more clearly be defined First what are the properties and conditions of the ground of fayth for by these the ground it selfe wil easily be knowne For euen as by the properties of a man it may be be knowen who is a true man and by the propirties of any other thing the thing it selfe many be knowne so by the properties of the ground of sayth the ground it selfe wil be knowne Secondly it shal be proued that the Scripture alone is not a sufficient ground or rule of fayth Thirdly that neyther any priuate spirit will suffice Fourthly that the authority of the Catholike Church is the most true ground and rule of fayth CHAP. II. The properties of the ground and rule of our fayth are alledged THERE are ten properties of the ground or rule of fayth and they are so manifest and certayne that none can doubt thereof The first is the continuall and neuer interrupted duration therof to the end of the world For euen as fayth and the Church do alwayes endure continue so must also the ground of fayth seing that nothing can consist without his foundation and ground 2. The second propertie is the most certayne and vndoubted truth therof in so much that it neyther can deceyue any nor be deceyued in any thing appertayning necessarily to saluation for otherwise it should be vncertaine and doubtfull yea also the fayth it selfe should be false and hurtfull vnto vs. 3. The third propertie is the certainty therof on our part For it is necessary that the true fayth be not only certayne in it selfe but also to vs. Because error and vncertaynty is ingendred in vs if the thing be ambiguously and obscurely proposed how certayne soeuer it be in it selfe 4. The fourth property is the strength immutability therof so that this ground can by no meanes be depraued changed or corrupted For otherwise truth will sometymes perish there will arise some error against fayth 5. The fifth property is the fullnesse sufficiency of those things which are to be belieued that is to say it must conteine all things appertayning to the Catholike fayth seeing that nothing can consist without his ground or foundation 6. The sixt property is the necessity therof that is to say it must necessarily be receaued of all who haue the true fayth and because without it true fayth cannot consist euen as the building cannot continue without the foundation 7. The seauenth property is that it is a manifest signe and token wherby Christians are distinguished from Infidells For he which wanteth the ground and rule of fayth is an Infidell but he who retayneth it is a true beleeuer 8. The eight property is that in euery article and conclusion of fayth this principle and ground is virtually conteyned seing that out of it all things are to be deduced they receiue their certaynty from it 9. The nâ—nth property is that it not only mooue Christians to belieue but that it also conuince the infidells For otherwise the way to faith and eternall saluation should not be knowne or open to Infidels 10. The tenth property is that it be conteyned expresly in the Apostles Creed wherein all the first groundes of our fayth are conteined for the Apostles after they had receiued the holy Ghost were not so forgetfull that in the Creed or Summary of fayth which they set downe to be belieued of all they would let passe the first and chiefest ground of fayth And thus much of the properties of the ground of fayth CHAP. III. That the Scripturealone is not the ground or rule of fayth THAT the Scripture alone is not the grouÌ„d of our fayth we haue already declared by the properties of the ground of fayth before alledged For of those ten properties the Scripture hath oÌ„ly one to wit Truth but al the other properties are waÌ„ting vnto it The which we clearly demoÌ„strate in this sort First of all a perpetuall duration and continuance is wanting For the holy Scripture began first vnder the old Law in Moyses tyme wheras two thousand yeares before there were both true beleeuers and a Church In like manner in the new law the Apostles began to write some yeares after they had receiued the holy Ghost 2. Secondly the certaynty on our part Supr coÌ„tro 1. c. 5. infra haccoÌ„t 6. cap. 15. is wanting seeing that we know not which is the Canonicall Scripture by the Scripture it selfe but by the authority of the Church as we haue proued before and will also more at large declare heereafter 3. Thirdly the foresaid strength immutability is wanting for euery part of the holy Scripture considered in it owne nature is subiect to many alterations and falsifications For it may be destroyed Supra Controu 1. cap. 4. it may be corrupted it may be wrested to contrary senses wherof we haue spoken before 4. Fourthly that fulnesse and sufficiency is wanting because all thinges necessary to saluation are not expressy coÌ„tained Supr CoÌ„trouers 1. c. 26. sequâ—nt in holy Scripture as we haue also declared before 5. Fiftly the foresaid necessity is wanting For without the holy Scripture there were in the law of Nature for the space of two thousand yeares many true belieuers And also long after Christ yea euen till the tyme of S. Irenaeus that is to say almost two hundred yeares there were many Nations who sincerely belieued Iren. lib. 3. cap. 4. in Christ without any holy Scripture as S. Irenaeus himselfe testifieth Lastly albeit Infidels should burne all the Bibles yet the faith of Christians should not therfore perish or be wholy ouerthrowne Therfore our faith doth not necessarily depend of the Scripture 6. Sixtly the seauenth property is also wanting for by the holy Scriptures the true Christians are not distinguished from Infidels because almost all Heretikes do both now receyue the holy Scriptures and in times past also receyued them 7. Seauenthly the eight propertie is wanting for there are many pointes of faith which rely vpon the Traditions of Supra Contr. 1. c. 26. 27. the Church only without any expresse Scripture at all as we haue declared before 8. Eightly the ninth property is wanting For Turkes and other Gentills who are only lead by naturall reason are very seldome or neuer conuerted by Scriptures only but we