comparison confirmeth the first part of our argument for such kinds of reasons hath both Christ and his Apostles vsed neither can our aduersaries deuie but that the writings of the new Testament are more excellent then the writings of the olde The other part of our argument is proued by the expresse words of Christ for so far was it from Christ that he wold reprooue the Iewes for searching the Scriptures but did himselfe rather reason after that manner The 7. place That ye may learne by vs that no man presume aboue that which is written c. If we ought not to presume to be wise aboue that which is written and the principles of faith appertain vnto true and perfect wisedome then trulie ought wee to be contented with the scriptures in causes and matters of faith The antecedent is true Therefore the consequent cannot be denied The first parte of our Argument is manifest of it selfe The other part is prooued by the place of the Apostle Yet héere I must allso confesse that this place of the Apostle Paule is otherwise expounded of certayne newe Writers to wit of those things which Paule himselfe had before written The which sence if anye man be willing to followe then thus make we our argument If Paule called backe the Corinthians vnto his owne writings how much more then ought we to be called backe vnto the writings of the whole Scriptures But because the olde writers whome our aduersaryes followe most doo expounde this place of Paule generallye I had rather to frame mine argument from the interpretation of them There maye be also framed an euident and plaine sylogisme in the second mode of the second figure flatlye denieng their assertion in this sort Whosoeuer groundeth anie Article of faith vpō traditions not writtē taketh vpon him to be wise aboue that which is written But no man truly obeying the Christian Apostolike doctrine doth take vpon him to be wise aboue that which is writtē Ergo No man truly obeying the christian apostolike doctrine doth groūd any principle of faith vpon traditions not written The 8. Place Manie other things did Iesus which are not written in this booke but these things are written that you might beleeue that Iesus Christ is the sonne of God and in beleeuing you might haue euerlasting lyfe through his name If the Apostles and Euangelists wrote those things which seemed sufficient and necessarie that we which beleeue may haue eternall life then truely the Articles of our faith are to be grounded vppon the Scriptures and not vpon traditions which are vnwritten which our aduersaries tearme Apostolike The Antecedent is true And therefore the consequent cannot be denied The truth of the first part of our Argument is manifest except peraduenture anie man would goe about to thinke himselfe wiser then either the Apostles or Euangelists the which God forbid that anie man should do The consequent is proued by the words of Iohn The 9. place The lawe of the Lord is perfect giuing life true wisdome vnto man yea the law of the Lord is right and iust more precious then golde sweeter then honnie the wisedome and vnderstanding of the Church he is blessed that meditateth or occupieth himselfe therein If the scriptures of the olde testament in their kinde were perfect because therein is contained true wisedome and made those blessed euen as manie as willinglie and constantlie did meditate therein then trulie after that the writings of the Apostles were ioyned vnto the olde testament the which writings of the Apostles doo explicate and teach the veritie and truth of the saide olde testament then I say by good right consequence the whole scriptures both of the olde and new testament may be called perfect as that which perfectlie containeth all necessarie doctrine for the church of Christ The antecedent is true And therefore the consequence must be also true The antecedent is manifest inough of it selfe The minor is prooued by the recited places For by the name and title of the law is often vnderstood y e whole scriptures of the olde testament as it is manifest by the Apostle Paule Gal. 4. ver 21. as also the circumstance of the afore alleaged place doth most manifestly proue Now frō these and such other places we will gather a true definition of the holye Scriptures after this sort The holie scripture is the word of God giuen by diuine inspiration from God and by the Prophets Apostles and Euangelists mooued by the spirit of God was written in the bookes Canonicall of the olde and new testament that the veritie and truth of God might be taken and set free from the obliuion and corruptings of men that the Church might be perfectlie instructed and confirmed in all those things the knowledge and faith whereof is necessarie to saluation This definition is most perfectly substancially true For it standeth vpon y e Genus differēce containeth al those causes both which y e Logitiās say belōg to y e Subiectū as also y ◠belōg vnto y e Attributū And especially it cōtaineth y e efficiēt cause vnder y e which is added y e instrumētal thē y e final cause which two causes in such kind of matters are especially to be considered The spirit of god is y e cause efficiēt who vsed y e prophets apostles as instrumēts y e cōīeruatiō of y e truth cōfirmation of the church is the end wherefore y e word of God was put in writing so this definition standeth vppon his full partes and the thing defined and the definition doo both agrée together Now from this definition as from a most perfect true ground we make thus our demonstratiue argument Whatsoeuer is the word of God giuen by inspiration from God and written by the Prophets Apostles and Euangelists by the motion of Gods spirit c. that contayneth all principles necessarie to christian faith But the holie Scripture is the word giuen by diuine inspiration c. Ergo the holie Scriptures containe al principles necessarie to the christian faith This argument is most euident and necessarie and standeth grounded vppon grounds of the former places and contayneth the veritie and truth of our whole question Wherefore doth the Scriptures containe all these things the knowledge faith whereof are necessarie vnto saluation Truely because the word of God was written by the Prophets and Apostles to this end that the Church should be perfectly instructed c. Againe whatsoeuer is spoken of the one partie may be sayde of the other Furthermore if anie doe aske what these things be the knowledge and faith whereof are necessarie to saluation I answere the Scriptures And againe when I name the Scriptures I name all those things the knowledge whereof is necessarie to saluation The like also may be said touching the ground
of our argument the which is the definition of the Scripture as is before said wherfore this our demonstration and argument is most manifest and hath brought the truth of our opinion out of all question or doubt to wit that the holy scriptures containe all those principles necessarie to Christian faith the which was our purpose to proue The third Chapter NOW after that the truth of our opinion is made manifest by the former demonstrations affirmatiue disputation as at the first we did determine so will we now come vnto the negatiue disputation which is to refell and refute the opinion of our aduersaries For although y e truth béeing made manifest y e falsehoode must néeds bée confuted ouerthrowen by this our affirmatiue disputation wée haue manifestly proued y t the scriptures do containe all those things the knowledge faith whereof is necessarye to saluation yet notwithstaÌ„ding this ouâ—â—egatiue disputation procéedeth as rising of necessarie consequence which is this That ther is nothing to be sought for out of the holie scriptures the knowledge and faith whereof is necessarie to saluation And by force of the consequence traditions not written by the Apostles are not to be receiued in anie Article and principle of faith yet notwithstanding it commeth to passe I know not by what meanes that we are more delighted in the confuting of errour and falsehoode then in confirming the truth Wherfore I could not let slip this kind of disputation wherby the reader may be throughly confirmed in the knowledge of y e truth This therefore is the opinion of our aduersaries which repugneth w t ours euen as it were Ex Diametro to wit That the holy scriptures do not coÌ„tain al things the knowledge faith whereof is necessarie to saluation The which error we thus confute If Moses the Prophets Christ the Apostles did alwaies confirme the principles of faith by the Scriptures and not by vnwritten traditions our aduersaries on the contrarie part will confirme the principles of faith verie seldome by the Scripture but most vsualliâ—aâ—y vnwritten traditions then truelie our aâ—â—ersaries doo otherwise teach the Church then either did Moses the Prophets Christ or the Apostles The Antecedent is true And so is the consequent And by force of the consequent our aduersaries are not to be allowed in y e manner of instructing y e church The antecedent is true the coÌ„sequeÌ„t is proued by this inductioÌ„ collected froÌ„ places of holy scripture Moses doth call them backe to the lawe written as S. Paule doth interprete it The same Moses coÌ„mandeth the law writen to be published before all the people Iosua exhorteth the Israelits that they do those things which are written in the booke of the lawe In the time of Iosia king of Israel the people sware to obserue those things which were written in the lawe The Prophets each where call the Israelites to the writings of Moses After the people returned from the captiuitie the lawe of Moses was recited the worshipping of God was taken from that lawe written Christ biddeth theÌ„ search the Scriptures Christ speaking to the 〈◊〉 saith yee erre because ye know not the Scriptures They haue Moses and the Prophets let them heare them And Christ opened the vnderstanding of the Apostles that they might vnderstand the Scriptures Paule preached Christ alleadging the law and the Prophets Appollos reproueth the Iewes proueth that Iesus is Christ by the Scriptures The Thessalonians or chiefe of Beraea are praised because they searched the Scriptures whether it were so yea or no as Paule had preached And thus I conclude that I may not bring in all those places of Scripture which Christ and the Apostles most often times alledged This kind of induction is most firme and cannot be refelled by any argument And y e force of y e consequeÌ„t to what end it is directed doth manifestly appeare for y e prophets apostles are ordeined of god to be instructers of y e church were inspired by the holy Ghost And Christ himselfe is the most perfect doctor of the Church wherby we sée y t they which teach y e church of Christ other wise then Christ himself his Apostles and Prophets haue taught that is not laieng those foundations which they layde but other that they instruct the Church of Christ amisse But our aduersaries teach otherwise inasmuch as they call y e church not to the Scriptures alone as is before said but to traditions not written And out of the former argument there ariseth this conclusion If the Apostles who although they wer indued with the spirit of God and taught by mouth yet notwithstanding did referre themselues vnto the Prophetical scriptures then a great deale more ought our aduersaries to referre their principles of doctrine vnto the holye Scriptures And sith they doo not so they are not to be heard The antecedent is true And therefore the consequent must be true The antecedent is manifest by comparison And the truth of the consequent is confirmed in the former argument If all things be not contained in the scriptures the knowledge and faith whereof is necessarie to saluation then it followeth that the spirit of God did not accomplish his effect when he gaue the scriptures vnto the Church But the consequent is most false blasphemous So likewise is the antecedent The consequent of the former proposâ—tion was prooued when we went to search out the causes of the scriptures in y e second chapter of this our disputation where wée affirmed y t the word of God was to this end purpose committed to writing that it might be freed and deliuered from the corruption of man and that it might help the memorie of the godly and finally that the Church might more and more bée instructed and confirmed in those things the knowledg faith whereof is necessarie to saluation Now if all those things be not contained in the scriptures then truly it followeth y â— the spirit of God did not perfectly but in part accomplish his effect the which God forbid And certainly if you graunt this which cannot be denied that the scriptures were giuen vnto the church not rashly nor in vaine but by the great prouidence and wisedome of God then I vrge this and say If the scriptures were giuen by God that the word of god shuld be set frée and deliuered from the corruption of men I pray you would the spirite of God then haue some certaine things necessarie to saluation to be set frée from the corruption of men and some things not If the Scriptures were giuen to helpe the memorie of the godly was it then giuen in part onely or shall we say that of those things which were necessarie to saluation that some things are to be committed to memorie and some things not or if the memorie of those things
traditions which they called Apostolike as the olde Doctors doo testifie And in the Acts of the Apostles chap. 15. ver 24. Luke séemth to touch the like And Paule in 2. Corint chap. 11. verse 13. saith That the olde heretiks were wont falsely to take vpon them the names and titles of the Apostles And in another place he exhorteth the Thessalonians cha 2. ver 2. not to suffer thēselues to be seduced frō y e faith neither by word neither yet by epistle as cōming saith he from vs The which last words I do not so restraine vnto this word Epistle but refer it vnto that that they shoulde not be deceiued by worde for there is no doubte but that the Heretikes would often times boast that they had hearde those thinges which they did teach euen from the Apostles whereby they might get vnto themselues credit This thing doth Ireneus testifie lib. 3. cap. 2. And Eusebius declareth y e one Papias did forge his errours as though saith hée they came from vnwritten traditions I will not héere speake anie thing of the Iewes Calaba which maintaine by their dreams vnwritten traditions as the chiefest piller of their religion as Elias in Thisbith as in the Radicall Kara Baruck appeareth If the traditions which repugne the writings of the Apostles are not Apostolyke and the traditions of our aduersaries are altogether such then truelie the traditions of our aduersaryes are not Apostolike The Antecedent is true Wherefore the consequent is also true The veritie of the Maior proposition is most plaine or else it would followe that the Apostles did not write by the same spirit by which they did speake the which God forbid that we should once thinke The Minor shall appeare by this induction which the reader shall most castly finde in the writings of the Doctors whereby it is manifest that those principles of Religion in controuersie betwéene vs which they refer vnto the vnwritten traditions of the Apostles doo manifestly repugne with the writings of the Apostles so that whether soeuer our aduersaries tourne them they shall be constrained to referre their principles of Religion vnto the writinges of the Apostles For I will vrge the former grounde and argument that if those principles repugne with the writings of the Apostles then they are not Apostolike If they confesse that they doo repugne then haue we our purpose if they denie it then of necessity they must turne to the writings of the Apostles that these their opinions whereof the question is may be tried by them whether they repugne with the writings of the Apostles yea or nay whereby it commeth to passe that our aduersaries after manie errors will they or nill they must néeds returne again within the compasse of the scriptures But least we should bée ouerlong in these our argumentes wée wil comprehend the summe of all our former arguments in this one sylogisme If that these Errors doo follow the opinion of our aduersaries touching traditions not writtē to wit that they otherwise teach in the Church then the Prophets and Apostles haue taught that the spirite of God hath not accomplished his effect in publishing of the scriptures that the Apostles neither ought neither could or would write all things necessarie to saluation that the writings of the old testament is more perfect then the writings of the new that the holy Bible is not correspondent to the title which is a Testament if it bee lawfull for men to adde to the will of God that the holy scriptures giuen after Christs incarnation and afterward the writings of the Apostles are not absolute in euerie point And that the same credite must bee giuen vnto the writings of the olde Doctors which is giuen vnto the scriptures of God that we must beleeue those things whereof there is no certaintie that the cause of the old heretikes was not a little holpen which leaned vnto vnwritten traditions and finally that the Apostles did not speak with that spirit with the which they did write If I saye these former absurdities doo followe the opinion of our aduersaries touching Traditions not written Then truely the minde and opinion of our aduersaries touching traditions not written is of all godlie and true Catholikes to bee vtterlie refused and reiected The antecedent is true And therefore the consequent cannot be false The maior proposition cannot be denyed The minor is made manifest in this our former negatiue disputation wherin we haue ouerthrowen the opinion of our aduersarie And héere we ende the third Chapter and now we will procéed to the wiping awaie of all the obiections which our aduersaries can make The 4. Chapter IN our former disputation we haue confuted the opinion of our aduersaries and haue euen as it were with our finger pointed out their manifolde errours in which they must néedes remaine so long as they doo obstinately striue for these their traditions which they call vnwritten And we affirme that they were neuer written of the Apostles neither yet to be written of anie others But because they maintaine their opinion by diuers and sundrie arguments so to hide the falshood thereof and to deceiue the simple I thinke it verye néedful to aunswere all their arguments so many as we know First of all therefore we wil sift out their obiections which they wrest out of the holy scriptures Then we will come vnto the testimonie of the doctors which they obiect against vs. Their first obiection is this The doctrine of the Gospel was not writen with inke but with the spirite of God not in Tables of stone but in the heart Ergo we must returne vnto the doctrine taught by the mouth of the Apostles Neither must we cleaue so precisely vnto the writings of the Apostles The antecedent is manifest by Ieremie chap. 31. This is the couenaunt which I will make with the house of Israel I will put my lawe into theyr minde and will write it in their heart and I will bee their God and they shall be my people Againe Paule 2. Cor. 3. It is manifest saith he that you are the Epistle of Christ ordained by vs not written with inke but with the spirit of the liuing god not in tables of stone but in the fleshie tables of the heart That we may orderly aunswere vnto each part First we will trie the antecedent then wil we come to the consequent and this order will we kéepe to helpe the memorie of the reader Now will I aunswere the antecedent concerning y ◠which I sée they cannot well agrée no not the Popish schoolmen among themselues for when the Apostle vnto the Heb. 8. had set downe a difference betwéen the old new testament he bringeth forth this place aboue recited of Ieremie where the schoolemen beginne to question what shuld be the cause wherfore it is said that the gospell shuld be written in the minde Some bring forth this reason
truth requireth And againe wee must not agree to the Catholyke Bishoppes if at anie time they are deceiued taking opinion contrarie to the canonical scriptures And againe I haue learned to giue this honour and reuerence onely to those writinges which are called Canonicall that I faithfully beleeue the authours of them haue not in anie point at anie time erred in their writings but other mens writings I doo so reade that though they excell in sanctimonie or holynesse yet I doo not therefore thinke it true because they so affirme but because they are able to perswade mee either by Canonicall Scripture or by probable reason those thinges which dissent not from the truth Thus farre he These things haue our aduersaries themselues recorded amongest their Decretalls insomuch that they maie not denie this first rule least they seeme to denie their owne Decretalls The second Rule THE auncient Doctours doo oftentimes by the name of Traditious vnderstand the same doctrine that is cōtained in the Apostolical writing That this rule is true it shall appeare by that which followeth Irenaeus as it is reported by Eusebius doth saie That Policarpus taught these things which he had learned of the Apostles which things both the Church deliuered and are onely to bee accounted true thus much he He saith Tradit the Church doth deliuer that is doeth teach namely out of the writings of the Apostles If hée were not thus to be vnderstood how could that stand which he hath sayde And those things are onely true which thing is verie easie to be gathered of the forenamed Irenaeus whose wordes are by Eusebius reported Policarpus saith he did report those things which he had heard of the Apostles altogether agreeable to the holy Scriptures And the said Irenaeus saith in another place The Church of Rome wrote to the Church of Corinth shewing them the same tradition which they had receiued of the apostles to wit that there was one God almightie so consequently the doctrine contained in the bookes of Moses And a little after he saith Manie of the vnlearned and barbarous people beeing ignoraunt of the Scriptures doo diligently keepe the olde auncient traditions beleeuing in one God in Iesus Christ born of the virgin Marie Tertulian The Apostolicall doctrine doth allow nothing contrarie to the rule of Gods word namely those things which the Apostles haue taught and committed to writings The third Rule THE auncient Doctors do name that vnwritten traditions which in expresse words are not found in the holy Scriptures but notwithstanding if you diligently mark the effect thereof is contained in the Scriptures So Basil confesseth that he vsed certaine tearmes against heretikes which are not written but yet notwithstāding faith he are not contrarie to the true sence of the Scriptures And Nazianzenus refuteth the Macidonians which did denie the deitie of the holy Ghost because he is not tearmed with plaine words in the holy Scriptures to be the third person in the deitie saying y ◠ther are diuers things in the Scriptures which are not plainly expressed As for example If y ◠say twise two I will say saith he y ◠thou saist foure In like manner Augustine doth proue that the baptisme of infants is contained in holy Scriptures and that they shoulde not be rebaptised The like is to be sayde of the word or tearme Omoousion the trinitie such like concerning the which we haue spoken in the former chapter The 4. Rule THE auncient Doctors vnder the name of traditions do not meane anie certaine grounded opinion touching religion but ecclesiasticall ceremonies and to the end they may the more beautifie and set foorth the order of the Church they commonly ascribe the sayde ceremonies to the Apostles as if they were the principall authours of the same Now many and diuers y e rites and ceremonies of the Church haue béene with what studie and diligence the auncient fathers haue set foorth the same that by all meanes possible they might stoppe Schismes and diuisions in the Church It néedeth not héere perticularlye to declare sith the volumes of the Fathers doo euerie where abound with those things wherfore let the readers consider what Augustine hath written in two Epistles to Ianuarius Hierome hath thus set forth the order and ceremonies of the Church Let each Prouince sayeth he haue authōtrie to determine touching the Institutions of the elders and traditions of the Apostles which words of Hierome are diuersly to be considered And that manye and sundrie orders and institutions of the ancient Fathers are to bée altered and chaunged by reason of many circumstaunces euen our aduersaries themselues haue not denyed neither were it méete in this behalfe that the Ecclesiasticall ceremonies shoulde be made equall to the grounded doctrine of Religion And therefore hath Tertulian said That the onely lawe of sayth doth remaine immutable And Hierome himselfe doeth giue counsell that such orders and customes of the church are to be kept which saith he doo not hinder or hurt our faith The 5. Rule SOme of the olde Fathers hauing theyr faultes did ouermuch fauour these vnwritten traditions and therfore did sometime true consent to heretikes We haue heard afore out of Irenaeus that the auncient heretiks did defend their heresies by vnwritten traditions And Eusebius maketh mention of one Papias which brought in certaine straunge doctrine into the Church affirming the same to be deliuered as comming from the Apostles by tradition The like errour there was of the Chiliastians into y ◠which error Tertulian Iustinus Martire others haue fallen And therfore the works of the auncient Fathers are not to be read without great iudgement The 6. Rule MAnie and diuerse bookes haue beene put forth vnder the name and title of the ancient Fathers which notwithstanding are counterfait It hath come to passe through the fault of those who haue ben the writers printers of bookes y e diuerse bookes haue falsely borne the name of those auncient Doctors which antiquitie hath commended As for erāple the bookes intituled Rapsodiae were attributed to Clement S. Paules Disciple and also the booke of the Reuelation of S. Iohn Baptist his head is authorised vnder the name of Ciprian when notwithstanding there is mention made of Pipin king of Fraunce and to conclude there are diuerse volumes vnder the title and name of Augustine in the which the opinion of Augustine is refuted I néed not to make mētion of an infinit number like vnto these Wherefore that which Hierome did somtune speake of the bookes Apocripha may verie fitly bée spoken of the writinges of the olde Fathers Let a man take heede sayth hée of the bookes Apocripha and if at anie time he bee disposed to read them not for triall of truth but for examples sake of good manners let him knowe they are not bookes of them whose titles and
that we follow not the similitude of truth for truth it selfe and so shoulde bee deceiued with a counterfaite probabilitie of truth which things sith they are so some man maie demaâ—nd wherefore that great Orator Tullie comparing Oratorie with this sharp and schoole like Disputation and peraduenture ouer-well liking his owne Arte saith thus As a flowing Riuer can scarce or not at all be corrupted or putrified but a standing water maie verie soone so likewise by the floud of eloquence the faults of the reprehender are soone wiped awaie when as niggishnes of speach and want of eloquence scarce can defend it selfe thus much Cicero The which as I confesse that it maie happen both in the sophisticall and probable kinde of disputing so do I denie that it can chaunce or agree with true and demonstratiueie Silogismes For as the Riuer that we maie not swarue from the similitude which wee haue propoâ—ed while it runneth afloate 〈◊〉 aboue his bankes doth gather most foule and filthie things of 〈◊〉 sort which 〈◊〉 and are couered while as the flouds are aloft so oftentimes great errors with copiousnesse of speach did are by true and briefe disputations declared laid open for the copie of eloquence taken awaie things doo appeare both naked and manifest as they are But heereof we will speake more in the Preface And now I set downe first a disputation touching the word of god writteÌ„ which as it is chiefe so ought it to be the verie fouÌ„dation of all disputations The other disputations as of the true humane nature of Christ of the presence of Christ in the sacrament of the true and lawfull making of Ministers touching which thinges I wrote some thing about two yeares past against Turrianus that false named Iesuit and will handle it more at large whensoeuer he shal giue anie newe occasion to write also free will Purgatorie and such lyke maye bee grounded on this sayde Disputation And this my bretheren I hope you will dooe either according to this methode which I haue followed or according to that which you shall better like of Wherefore I beseech the defenders of the Romish Church and chiefelye those which challenge vnto them such skill in disputing that they will bring the same from the darke shaddowe of the Schooles into the open and cleere light yea to the true point of disputing in deede and that all mallice put a parte all nipping tauntes set aside let them modestlye and with quiet mindes pursue this my treatise and when they haue entered into disputation with me let them first note what is worthie of reprehention and then let them giue solutions vnto my argumentes and on the other side let them confirme theyr opinions with plaine and euident Sylogismes and Argumentes and so I hope it shall at the last come to passe if GOD permit that when both our opinions are conferred together the truth will shewe it selfe and bee manifestly seene euen of those which bee almost blinde Let therefore those bookes which are repleat with nothing els but with bitter choler spotted stained with the sores of their mastersâ— yea and those seditious Sermons which blovve forth nothing else but fire sword let them I say cease be quite banished in steed hereof let there be meeknes tranquilitie yea let the loue inward affection of the truth beare swaie let those which so greatly affect that excellent name of Catholikes which so often with open mouthes repeat pronounce the same remember what S. Augustin hath written to wit that the Catholike Church doth teach that wee owe loue vnto all and iniurie to none But if there be anie such which go forward with shamelesse faces and obstinate mindes still to write and spread abroad their sichophanticall and infamous Libells or if there bee anie such which so farre degenerateth from men that they had rather obstinately to bark against the truth then to imbrace the same the vvhich amongest others I heare there is one especially vpon whom the fearful exaÌ„ple of Gods most iust iudgment is manifest not onlie for other his vngodlinesse but chiefly for his wicked Apostacie and backe sliding from the Gospell which sometime he professed If I say there bee anie such I vvish vnto them better mindes oppose this my vowe and wish against their shamelesse wickednesse and malitious railing professing that I will not vouchsafe to ansvvere such their pamphlets knowing right well that such their dooings may be vtterly wiped awaie euen with one little spark of patience Againe touching my selfe I professe that I will not reade those their vvritings in the vvhich they spue forth their foule poisoned choler because I haue determined to dispute and not to braule to contend vvith arguments and not vvith impious railings And you my reuerend brethren fight 〈…〉 of faith for I may lavvfully vse the Apostles exhortation vnto you fight 〈…〉 vvorthie battaile of faith and apprehend euerlasting life for vvhich cause you are called haue professed a good profession before manie vvitnesses And therefore regarding nothing at all this vvicked rable run your course vvith stout courage vnremoued constancie and inuincible patience in the truth of the Gospell of God as you haue begun that is that you go forvvard vvith exact diligence and integritie to fight against mans â—rrors that the course of your labours most manfully being finished yee may leaue vnto the posterities to come the puritie of 〈◊〉 and the true vse of ecclesiasticall discipline From my studie the 23 of Februarieâ— An Domini 1580. FINIS A COMMON PLACE TOVCHING THE WORD OF GOD WRITTEN AGAINST THE TRAditions of Men. Handled both Schoole like Diuinely Wherein is intreated of the true method of Disputing THE PREFACE THE Apostle Paule writing to Timothie affirmeth that the holie Scripture is profitable both to teach as also to reproue thereby shewing that men are not onely to be taught but also often times to be reproued For truly it is manifest that men are so corrupt that they doe not onely remaine in ignorance of the truth euen as it were in a palpable and thicke darknesse but also for the most part they hate flie the light of the same And although both are greatly to be lamented yet it is better to haue to doo with those which are ignorant and willing to learne then with them which are delighted with their blindnesse and ignorance because it is a great deale more tollerable to be ignorant then not to be willing to learne Whereby it commeth to passe that because the ministers and the instructors of the congregations must haue to doo with both these kind of men they are therefore willed by the Apostle to be such as shoulde holde fast the word of truth so that they shuld be able to instruct by wholsome doctrine and also to confute the gaine-saiers thereof And as touching these two points in y e true Preacher when Augustine had disputed and compared the
Secundum ignorantiam Elenchi as the Schoolemen saie because they put in other words then the Apostle Paule vsed For thus Paule saith Yee are our Epistle not written with inke but with the spirite of God for he speaketh of the inuisible Scriptures neither doth he therfore vtterly take awaie the visible as his Epistle which he then wrote to the Cornthians is witnesse But our aduersaryes reason farre otherwise for they say the Epistle not written in Tables but deliuered by hand the which is farre both from the words and minde of the Apostle Now let vs ouerthrowe the consequence of our aduersaries being ful of absurdities and without reason If we must not absolutely stick vnto the writings of the Apostles because God hath written the Gospell in the mindes of the godly the should it followe that the writings of the Apostles are not necessarie for godlie men If all things as they saie are not written which are necessarie to saluation to what end then appertaineth the scriptures For all things saie they that are necessarie to saluation God hath written in the mindes of the godlie But this argument cannot bee concluded in one part onely for either it is vniuersallie true or els vniuersally false so the whole authoritie of the scriptures must bee vtterly abolished the which God forbid Againe If this consequence be of anie force that is to saye we must haue recourse to vnwritten traditions because GOD hath written the gospell in the minds of the godly then would it followe that the spirituall efficacie of God should be confounded with the externall and visible ministerie of the Apostles and that traditions deliuered by mouth are the inuisible Scriptures of God the which the holie Ghost did imprint in the mind of the faithfull the which thing is most false Againe if they make any good conclusion out of that place of Ieremie that all thinges are not written that appertaine to the Gospell because vnder the new testament God doth write his law in the minds of the faithfull when as it was written in tables vnder the old testament Ergo by the force of this opposition it followeth that God in the old testament did onely remit sinne in part and that he was the God of the Israelites but in part also because that Ieremie addeth saieng that it wil come to passe that in the new testamēt God will remit the sins of the people and be their God The which is too too absurde and contrarie to the opinion of all men Now finally let vs turne this argument of our aduersaries vpon themselues saie thus All the lawes of God are written in the hearts and minds of the faithfull as our aduersaries seeme to affirme by the former places cited for Paule saith it is not written with inke but with the spirit of God but none of the traditions of our aduersaries are written in the minds of the godly for they are written with inke and not with the spirit of God Ergo none of our aduersaries traditions are the lawes of God So that héereby it is most manifest as I suppose how foolish or rather no argumēt at al this argument of our aduersaries is y ◠which that we may correct we must saie with the word of God that the writings of the Apostles and Euangelists doth containe all that doctrine of the Gospell the which the Apostles and Euangelistes did teach and afterward put in writings the which also God by his spirit did write in the mindes of the godly thus much touching this obiection And now we come vnto the second The Church of Christ for the space of 20. yeares wanted the writings of the Apostles and was only contented with their traditions Ergo the writings of the Apostles are not absolutely necessarie vnto saluation neither is it needfull that al things appertaining to the doctrine of the Gospel shuld be contained in the writings of the Apostles The Antecedent is manifest by reading of histories Although I doo not meddle much with the antecedent neither doo dispute touching the number of yeares yet would I that the readers should call to their remēbraunce that the Church wanted not the scriptures before that the Gospell was extant by the writings of the Apostles Yea that Christ himselfe and the Apostles did preach the Gospell out of the writings of the Prophets as before in his proper place we haue shewed Wherefore the antecedent of our aduersaries is no other thing then a foundation laid vpon sand or water so that the conclusion which they bring cannot stand Therefore I denie the consequent for the errour is as the Logitians tearme it Secundum ignorantiam Elenchi for they chaunge the forme of affirmation come from the time past vnto the time present and the time to come The Church saye they wanted the gospel Be it so although the writings of the Prophets to contayne the promises of the Gospell insomuch that the Apostles did altogether depende vppon the sayd writings of the Prophets adde héer vnto also if it please you that the writings of the Apostles were not altogether necessarie what doo you héereof conclude That they are not now therfore necessarie or héereafter shall not bée What man is so ignorant to grant that This is the difference y ◠the Apostles ought first to haue preached by mouth before they committed anie thing to writing And when the Apostles did preach the gospell they did then publish by mouth those thinges which afterward they wrote But sithens the Apostles died coulde not by mouth instruct the Church without doubt their writings are now so necessarie vnto vs as their preching by mouth was in those dayes in stéede whereof their writinges doo nowe remaine Let vs bring them therfore to an absurditie If the consequence of our aduersaries be of force or value this is also of force or value the Church of the Isralites not twentie yeares but two thousande yeares or somewhat more wanted the law written therefore it was not necessarie to the Church that the lawe should be written or the law written contained not all those things y e wer necessarie to y e doctrine of y e old testamēt But this is very absurd Let vs turne the argument of our aduersaries against themselues after this manner If God being perfect wise hath not suffered the church of Christ long time to want the writings of the Apostles both that hee might maintaine the truth of the Gospell as also he might prouide for the safegarde of his church Ergo these men are blasphemous against the prouidence of god which denie that all things are contained in the apostolicall writings which are necessarie to the doctrine of the Gospell For to what end would God by his diuine prouidence that the Apostles should write the gospell which they by mouth did preach was it because they should deliuer an vncertain and imperfect doctrine Furthermore if
their antecedent yet I denye their consequent For these things hang not together Iohn had manye things to write Ergo they were principles of faith Ergo also they are not any wher extāt for otherwise this absurditie would followe That the same Ladie vnto the which Iohn wrote was not fullie instructed in christian religion therefore those hang not together with Iohns speeches whē as he commēdeth the faith of the same ladie as also of hir childrē whō he affirmeth to walk in the truth And therefore this argument may be turned vpon themselues as y e other before Manie other things did Iesus beside those which were written the which if they were euerie one written the whole world would not containe the bookes Ergo all things necessarie to faith are not written by the Apostles The antecedent is proued Iohn 21. I gaunt their antecedent yet I denye their consequent For the error is Secundum ignorantiam Elenchi for they wander héere without the compasse of our question Iohn speaketh in that place of miracles which Christ did our disputation is of doctrine necessarie to faith saluation For these are y e words of Iohn Christ did manie things therfore héerof commeth no consequent Al y e miracles y t Christ did are not written ergo say they all y ◠principles of christian religiō doctrin are not writē Now sée héere how our aduersaries beat themselues with their owne weapons For if our aduersaries refer their traditions vnto those things which Iohn faith are not written Ergo those traditions are infinit with out number so by the force of the consequent without the cōpasse of knowledge And truly I easely confesse that such kind of traditions are so greatly increased that the world now can scantly beare them We may therefore turne their argument vpon themselues thus Iohn saith Christ did manie other things which are not written but he also affirmeth That those things which are written are written to the ende we might beleeue haue eternall life Ergo those things which are written are sufficient to saluation The error therefore of our aduersaries may thus be amended saieng Iohn and the rest of the Euangelists did choose out of those things which Christ did being otherwise infinite those which séemed necessary whereby it commeth to passe y ◠we ought to be contented with the writings of the apostles The Apostles did often recite testimonies taken from the traditions of such auncient men as liued before their daies Ergo wee must not onelie sticke to the Scriptures The antecedent is manifest 2. Tim 3. As Iannes Iambris withstood Moses Againe Iude ver 9. Michael the Archangell disputed about the bodie of Moses And a little after he reciteth the Prophecie of Enoch Behold the Lord cōmeth with manie thousands of his saints To their antecedent I aunswere thus Indéede I confesse that the Apostles didde sometimes recite certaine sentences taken out of the bookes Apocripha And to aunswere the place of Paule in Timothie I doo not doubt but in his time y ◠some booke did remaine touching those Magis Iannes and Iambris for Plinie in his 30. booke of his naturall historie chap. 1. doth there recken vp Iannes amongst the auncient Magi the which he would not haue done except he had learned it out of some booke And furthermore I aunswere that those Ethnickes were not altogether to bée refused of the Apostles for so Paule reciteth certaine verses out of Aratus and Epiminides but I doo affirme that the Apostles did not therfore vse these testimonies that by them they wold confirme any principle of faith for when they would so doo they had alwaies readie expresse places taken out of the writings of the Prophets and those they did expounde according to the motion of the holy Ghost But when they would teach any doctrine touching manners or declare some thing touching the which very few or none did doubt thē if peraduēture they remembred any thing written in the bookes Apocripha or in the writings of those Ethinks they did not so dislike their sentences but that they wold apply them vnto their purpose yet notwithstanding the Apostles did not attribute so great authoritie vnto them that they should be of sufficient authoritie thēselues for god forbid we shuld once think so But they were willing by that meanes to mooue mens mindes the more that they might thereby the easier receiue their doctrine which notwithstanding was otherwise sufficiently confirmed euen by the word of God As for examples sake it is manifest in Exodus that the Magi or wise men of Aegipt withstood Moses what matter is it by what name those Magi were called or can those their names be applyed to any principle of faith No to none truly Also Michael woulde not vse railing words vnto the diuell as Saint Iude saith wherby we may learn much lesse to speak euil of Magistrates ordained of God This exhortation of Iude to the reuerencing of Magistrates is in many places to be found in the scriptures The like is that which Peter saith That the Angels doo not raile on those that haue authoritie 2. Pet. 2. Also the Lord will come saith Iude to rewarde the wicked the which threatnings is vsual in the holy scriptures Whereby we manifestly sée to what ende the Apostles culled out certaine sentences from the bookes Apocripha to the seruing of their own purpose Now we come vnto y e cōsequēt which I denie The Apostles did vse certain sentences taken out of the bookes Apocripha Ergo they vsed them to the confirmation of faith And againe therefore also we ought to runne to traditions so often as we dispute of faith as though the testimonies of the holy scriptures did faile vs. This is a false argument no good consequent can come héerof For the Apostles vsed not such testimonies to confirme principles of religion Yea and euen those testimonies them selues if you marke well the matter you shall sée them confirmed by many expres places of scriptures Wherfore our aduersaries séeme to be forgetful of our purposed questiō while they go about to obiect these things to vs for this is y e state of our questiō whē ther ariseth cōtrouersie touching faith whether we ought to sticke onelye to the testimonies of the Scriptures or els to adde thervnto traditions to the which we may giue the like credite as we maye to the scriptures But you shall finde no such thing in these testimonies which the Apostles vsed as I haue before shewed Yea and I may say that this argument is not rightly applied against vs in this cause taken from the Apostles Let vs retourne this absurditie on our aduersaries saieng thus If because the Apostles did recite certaine sentences out of bookes not Canonicall that therefore it followeth the Apostles did attribute authoritie to those bookes such like in matters of faith
Ergo because some of the Apostles did recite some out of the Ethnicks bookes it must follow that the Apostles did attribute authoritie to those bookes in matters of faith which thing is absurde and contrarie to the opinion of all men Let vs tourne this obiection vppon our aduersaries after this sort If the Apostles did at anie time recite the traditions of auncient fathers but onelie to beautifie those things which wer established and confirmed by most firme testimonies of holie scriptures How much lesse then ought wee to recite the traditions of the olde fathers to the confirming of those things which want testimonie of the Scripture Thus therefore we may amend the errour of this their obiection and saye that the Apostles whereas they did applie thēselues to the capacitie of men that they might thereby the better stirre them vp or the more easily conuince them they vsed some times the bookes Apocripha as also sentences gathred from Ethincks to wit when they did dispute of those things the truth whereof was manifest in the holye scriptures The heretikes did wreast the writinges of Paule that in the verie time of the Apostles and also it is most manifest that the heretiks yea Sathan himselfe haue cloked their heresies euen with the Scriptures ergo we must not cleaue to the Scriptures alone The antecedent is proued 2. Pe. 3. as also by the Ecclesiasticall historie and also Math 4. If thou be the sonne of GOD cast thy selfe down headlong for it is written he shal giue his Angells charge ouer thee c. I admit their antecedent But I denie their consequent Neither doth Peter so conclude but rather calleth them vnto the writings of Paule then in anie part to abridge the same The error is as the Logitians say Secundum non causam vt causam The heretikes abused the Scriptures wrested the writings of the Apostles into a contrarie sence ergo saye they we ought to run other where then to the scriptures to the establishing of our faith The Scripture is not in fault but onely men themselues which doo wrest so worthie a matter vnto their owne errours Wherefore this is so farre from the Apostles minde that we should leaue the aide of the scripture because heretikes haue abused them that rather the heretikes are by the verie scriptures to be conuinced like as we haue alreadie proued out of the places of Paule 2. Tim. 3. Tit. 1. And when Sathan abused the Scriptures that he might weaken the faith of Christ truely Christ went not to traditions but with the Scriptures again ouerthrew the enimy For sathan obiecting and saying it is written Christ also on the other side answered it is written and not left in tradition And therefore we must bring them to this inconuenience saying If because the heretikes falsified the Scriptures we may not therefore only cleaue vnto the Scriptures then truely because the heretikes falsely fathered traditions to be Apostolike as wee haue prooued before both out of the writings of the Apostles as also out of Irenaeus and Eusebius therefore wee may not sticke onely to traditions And againe because heretikes abused both Scriptures and traditions therefore we must neyther cleaue to Scriptures nor to traditions the which is absurde and euen our aduersaries themselues yeeld to the same Let vs therefore turne their argument vpon themselues saying If like as Sathan abused the Scriptures against Christ so likewise the heretiks do against true Christians Then truly as Christ vsed the Scripture onely to repell Sathan so likewise the true Christians must vse onely the Scriptures in repelling of heretikes And therefore we may amend their error thus If such be the wickednes of the heretikes y e they abuse y e scriptures then ought we to giue al diligēce y t the scripture may kéepe both their authoritie and puritie the which will be if the heretiks be conuinced by the Scriptures alone and those places which shall séeme somewhat obscure maye take their interpretation from places more plaine But if our aduersaries hearken not vnto vs yet at the least waies let them giue eare euen vnto themselues in whose decretalls this sentence remaineth That from the Scriptures themselues the sence of truth must be taken The doctrine touching the baptisme of Infants is not found in the holy Scriptures neither these words Trinitie like substance persons manie such like all which words notwithstanding do appertaine vnto groūds and principles of faith Ergo all things appertaining vnto faith are not to be found in the Scriptures The antecedent is found true by reading of the Scriptures Now touching their antecedent I saie thus In that they affirme the doctrine concerning Baptisme of children not to be found in the Scriptures is most false like as our late writers haue taught in theyr learned workes against the Anabaptistes touching the which I will not héere make any longer disputation least I shuld séeme to wander without y e compasse of my proponed questiō Now touching these words Trinitie like substance and persons I confesse they are not found in the writings of the Apostles but yet I saie y ◠the verie doctrine which is signified by these words is deriued from the Scriptures for when certaine heretiks rose vp which denied y e veritie of y e doctrine then the godly Fathers which liued in those daies hauing care of y e circumstances added these wordes by the which they might the more easily explicate declare the doctrine touching y e trinitie y ◠which doctrine they had before confirmed by expresse and manifest testimonies of the holy Scriptures Now touching their consequence The error is Secundum fallaciam figurae dictionis These words Trinitie the baptisme of infants like substance are not found in the Scripture it is called Omonomos for the words indéede are not found in the holie Scriptures but the things signified by the words are there found And our christian faith consisteth not in the title of words but in substance of matter not in many volumes of bookes as S. Hierom saith but in the verye ground of reason And therefore Basil confesseth y ◠he vsed against the heretikes certaine termes which were not found written but yet notwithstanding saith he they were nothing contrary to the sence of the holy Scriptures And therfore our aduersaries reasoning thus we may wel bring them to an absurditie saying If because the persons the trinitie and such like words be not extant in the holy Scriptures it therfore followeth that all things necessarie to faith are not found in the holye scriptures Ergo these words are necessarie to faith and so by force of the consequent Sith this worde Omoousios that is like substance and such other wordes were onely found out by the godly Doctors after the heresie of Arius began to spring then wold it followe that the Church of Christ before the time
names they beare but that there are manie corrupt things mixed in them and therefore it is great wisdome how to choose out gold amongest dirt and claie thus much Hierome Now these foundations béeing laid it behooueth vs a little to search and sifte the obiections of our aduersaries which they take from the olde and auncient doctors Clemens Alexandrinus The workeman that is sent foorth into the Haruest of the Lord hath a double husbandrie to wit the vnwritten and the written Againe As the Philosophers had certain secrets touching their opinions which they deliuered by traditions so likewise the Apostles And therefore Paule saith We speake wisedome amongst those that are perfect To this I aunswere thus First that this Author hath not handled the question sincerely and purely and this fault is easely to be found euen by the authoritie of y e scriptures for Christ saith thus What soeuer I speak vnto you in secret that speak openly that you heard in the eare that preach vpon the house top c. Wherefore Alexandrinus is plainly deceiued when he goeth about to mixe the mysterie of Christian religion with the hid secrets of philosophie And Irenaeus and Tertulian doo both witnesse and testifie that the olde heretikes were of that minde which heere Alexandrinus doth hold and therefore abused those words of Paul saieng I speake wisdome amongst those that are perfect as Irenaeus as I haue before said doth affirm And Clemens doubted not to say y e euen y e Grecians were saued by Philosophy wher and ceremonies amongst the which hée â—â—â—koneth vp that most auncient custome whereby the Christians did alwaies stanâ— when they did praye from the time of Easter vntill Whitsontide In this disputation therefore Basil doubteth not to propone that which was commonlye spoken touching the Apostolike mysteries and this is it that our aduersaries so greatlye triumph against vs out of the wordes of Basil but truly as with all my heart I doo acknowledge the goodnesse of the cause wherevpon Basil then stood when he affirmed the holy ghost to be god yet not withstanding without offence of Basil be it spoken me thinketh hée did too curioustye séeke for straunge Argumentes when as that matter might be prooued by playne proper and true groundes of Scriptures The Deitie of the holye Ghost is in diuers places of the holye Scriptures to bée prooued to what ende then shoâ—â—d the Apostles delyuer by Tradition certaine secrete formes touching that matter and as it were as Basil sayeth whisper it into the eares of certayne men I praye you was there any thing to be kept close in this point of doctrine that behooued the Christians especially to know and professe Furthermore to call that thing secrete or hidde which was then publikelye taught almost in the whole worlde I knowe not well how Basil could doe it And inasmuch as this fained Apostolike mysteries was in times past the verie grounde of heresies as before it is shewed neyther furtherod the cause of Basil which otherwise is to bée prooued with most firme reasons I wish that Basil had reformed that kinde of Argument if it bée worthie to bee called an argument especially sith the olde Fathers verie wisely haue warned vs to foresée that many labours shuld not grow of one But howsoeuer the matter goeth our aduersaries haue nothing heere wherof they maye glorie or boast for when Basil affirmeth this hind of speaking of y e holy ghost That it hath sprong from the Apostles tradition By the name of Tradition héere hée vnderstandeth that which although not in manifest and flat words remaineth in the Scripture yet notwithstanding the sum and matter it selfe is there contained touching the which reade our third Rule What if our aduersaries themselues long time since haue not obserued and kept this kinde of speaking in their Churches And that I maye not vrge that that same custome is now growen out of vse forgotten amongst them whereby they héeretofore did stand when they did praye betwéene Easter and Whitsontide as is before sayd Wherefore let our aduersaries consider how properly they expounde the words of Basil which are these Which both are of like force effect to godlines and how well they agrée with Basil himselfe Chrisostome Heere it is manifest that they deliuered not all things by writing but manie things by tradition without writing and these are as worthie to bee beleeued as those which are written Therfore we think the traditions of the Church worthie to be beleeued It is a tradition therefore search no farther for the matter Chrisostome intreating of these wordes of Paule written to the Thessalonians the second Epistle and second chapter saieng Holde fast the Traditions which you haue learned either by word or by Epistle Hée gathereth that not only Paule but also the rest of the Apostles did not deliuer commit all things to writings the which how sure an argument it is wée haue declared in our former chapter But to let this thing passe least wée shoulde séeme to make a nèedlesse repetition I therefore saye that Chrisostome doeth speake touching those traditions which although they are not expressed by word in the holy Scriptures yet in substance are there contained for otherwise these wordes of Chrisostome could not stand saying It is a tradition thou maist seeke no farther thereofâ— For then it should followe that wée shoulde no more search in holy Scriptures the which God forbid that it should come in the minde of so godly a Father who doeth most often inculcate and beat into the minde the reading of the holy Scriptures Therefore I suppose by this worde Tradition of the Church by Chrisostome is meant that doctrine the which the Church being instructed by the writings of the Prophets Apostles doth deliuer ouer vnto the church that is to saie doeth teach instruct whatsoeuer she hath drawne out of y e most pure fountaine of y e Scriptures touching which matter séeke the second rule Nazianzene The doctrine of the Gospell is more excellent through the figures of the Church which beeing receiued by tradition wee haue kept euen vntill this time I expound this place as I did the other afore going to wit that hée speaketh of those traditions which maye bée prooued by the scriptures of the which sée the second and third rules for if that our aduersaryes shall say that the Gospell is made the better through their holie water and through such like trumperâ—es appertaining to their Masse they would make men laugh nay rather I should saie wéepe who reuerently thinke and are well affctioned toward the true worshipping of God Epiphanius Wee must also vse traditions for all thinges cannot bee taken from the holy Scripture Wherefore some things the holy Apostles deliuered vnto vs by the Scriptures and some thing by Tradition Héere Epiphanius disputeth touching certaine rites and ceremonies which the
Scriptures Againe If anie of those men vvhich are reported to haue the holie spirit of God doo saie anie thing of himselfe vvhich may not be proued by the holie Scriptures beleeue him not Doth Manes the Heretike say that the summe or the monie worke anie thing of themselues Where hast thou read this If he haue not read it in the Scriptures but speaketh it of himselfe it is manifest that he hath not the spirit of God And againe those that are true Christians let them betake themselues to the Scriptures because there canne be no other proofe of true christianitie then the diuine and holy Scriptures Basil It is a manifest Argument of infidelitie a flat signe of pride if anie man will reiect anie of those thinges which are not vvritten or bring into the Church anie of those things vvhich are not vvritten sith the Lord himselfe sayth My sheep heare my voyce and follovve not a straunger Againe Whatsoeuer vve speake or doo that ought to be confirmed by the testimonie of the holie Scriptures Also the Apostle taking the example from men Gal. 3. doth most vehemently forbid that anie of those thinges which are in the holy Scripture should be put out or else vvhich God forbid that anie thing should be added Againe If vvhatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne and faith commeth by hearing and hearing by the vvorde of GOD Then vvithout doubt sith vvhatsoeuer is vvithout the scriptures is not of faith the same is sinne And in another place Let vs stande to the iudgement of the holy Scriptures proceeding from GOD and vvith vvhome so euer are founde pointes of religion agreeing to the holie Scriptures to them let the vvhole opinion of truth bee alotted Againe of all those things vvhich vve haue in vse both of vvords and deeds some are distinctly set dovvne in the Scriptures some omitted but those things which are contained in the scriptures by no meanes must be omitted but of those things which are not found in the scriptures we haue a flat rule deliuered vnto vs by Paule All things are lawful but all things are not necessarie Hierome The vniuersall Church of Christ hauing in possession all the Churches in the world is vnited together by the vnitie of the spirit and hath the words of the Lawe of the Prophets of the Gospell and of the Apostles and she may not passe hir bounds that is from the holie Scriptures Againe Those things which men faine with out authoritie of Scripture as comming frō the Apostles by Tradition the sworde of God which is his word doth cut away And also that which hath not the authoritie of the Scriptures is with the same facilitie contemned with the which it was allowed Augustine Neither ought I to alleadge the Nicene counsell neither thou the counsell of Aremineus as though we would determine causes therewith for neither I am boūd vnto the authoritie of the one neither thou of the other but let each thing with other each cause with cause reason with reason be tried by the authoritie of the scriptures And again Ther is cōstituted ordained one ecclesiasticall cannon or rule vnto the which belongeth the bokes of the Prophets and Apostles by whose writings we ought to iudge touching the writings of others whether they be faithfull or vnfaithfull Againe Our Lord wold that we shuld beleeue nothing against the confirmed authoritie of the Scriptures Againe Let vs bring foorth the diuine Ballaunce of the holie Scriptures and let vs weigh in them what so euer is of anie waight or value Damascene As a tree planted by the riuers of waters euen so doth the soule of man which is moistened by the heauenlie scriptures bring foorth timelie fruite which is true and perfect faith And againe Let vs receiue acknowledge and reuerence all those things which are deliuered vnto vs by the Lawe Prophets Apostles and Euangelists seeking nothing which is not contained in them And least we should seeme altogether to neglect and despise the Schoolemen heare what Scotus saith It is most manifest that the Scriptures sufficiently doo containe all doctrine necessarie to the pilgrime that trauaileth heere in the world Peter Stelliaco Wee must runne vnto the scriptures alone that we may attain eternall life And Gracianus in his decrees doeth repeat that sentence of Augustine which wee haue before rehersed And many more may be recited vnto the like effect but heere we cease because wee will wander no farther That we may now therefore make an ende of the obiections of our aduersaries which they gather from y e writings of the Doctors we will comprehend the effect of all those their obiections which they haue or can bring forth in an argument which is thus The Doctors of the Church haue thought that besides the holie Scriptures traditions not written ought also to be receiued Ergo all those things which are necessarie vnto faith and saluation are not contained in the Scriptures Let vs now trie their antecedent It is manifest by y e testimonies of the ancient Fathers which before wée haue alleadged y t those auncient fathers haue not written all alike touching traditions for first it behooued to knowe the minde and opinion of the olde Doctors before they obiect them to vs. But let this be the full summe of all those things which the auncient doctors who are most to be accounted of haue written touching Traditions All those things which are deliuered either appertaine to the principles of religion and constitution of manners or else vnto ecclesiasticall rites and orders of the Church but those thinges which appertaine to principles of faith and manners are most surely contained in the Scriptures neither is it anie hinderāce if certaine kinds of spéech to the easie explication of doctrine principles of religion be not found by expresse words in the holy Scriptures so that the matter it selfe the sence signified by these tearms be extant in the scriptures But as touching those things which appertain vnto rites ecclesiasticall order if they agrée with the Scriptures and serue to the edification of the Church Yea finally if they be receiued with the common consent of the whole Church then are they with greate reuerence to be receiued and that this was the opinion and minde of the auncient Fathers I thinke it is sufficiently made manifest by these things which haue bene alleadged before whereby we may sée that the ground and matter of our aduersaries is false Now therfore I denie their consequent for the errour is in forme of reasoning the Argument is grounded vpon the misvnderstanding of the fathers Another errour is this for that they take that to bée graunted which lyeth betwéene vs in controuersie For thus standeth the case betwéene vs whether in confirming principles of faith the scriptures alone be to bée harde yea or nay But our aduersaries
straight waies propone to vs the opinion of Doctours and thereby they by and by conclude that the Scriptures alone are not to be heard to wit being vnmindful that this selfe same thing is a controuersie betwéene vs. For if this opinion touching the which we doo dispute may be determined by the writings of the Doctors then it followeth that the scriptures alone are not to be heard in establishing articles of faith Wherefore our aduersaries doo not rightly dispute their first principle béeing not rightly applyed Wherefore the errour of their former conclusion is thus to be corrected In asmuch as the writings of all the Doctors must be brought vnto the rule of the holy scriptures both the word of God so commaunding it and also the Doctors themselues consenting therevnto and the olde Doctors of the Church themselues haue taught that euery article of our faith must be grounded vpon the scriptures only furthermore Ecclesiastical rytes and ceremonies if they agrée with the scriptures if they serue to the edification of the church yea finally if they be receiued with common consent of the whole Church that then they are to be receiued with great reuerence Now héere we must diligently search out whether that this opinion of the Doctours be agréeable to the word of god so that so farre it is to be receiued as it hath his confirmation by the Scriptures And because our whole Disputation is heere had onely touching principles of doctrine necessarie to faith and saluation that we may not seeme to wander from our proposed question we héere cease neyther will we take vppon vs the disputation of ecclesiasticall rites and ceremonies which disputatioâ— if the matter so require and God so permit vs we will take in hand But nowe we defer it vnto another time Thus haue I â—â—â—â—ding to the methode proposed to wit dâ—â—â—ely and schoolelike by the authoritie 〈◊〉 most learned Fathers disputed in defence of the word written against the traditions of men Whereby the truth of our cause appeareth and the obscure deceipts and errors of our aduersaries are brought into open show for in such sort haue we set down opened and confirmed our minde and iudgement and so confuted and dissolued the errours and arguments of our aduersaries both by the holy scriptures and also by the writings of the auncient fathers that euerie man may easily sée this doctrine which our reformed church by the word of God which is therfore the true Catholike Church doth hold and professe is most true which is That All doctrine necessarie to our Christian faith and Religion is contained in the holie Scriptures Laus Deo In Psa 43. Ios 6. Psa 54. Plut. in Cic. De doct Christ lib. 3. cap. 14 De nat deor lâ— 2. 2. Epist 3. The preacher ought to teach reproue Tit â— Aug Enc. ad Laure To reproue false doctrine the right vse of disputation is no small helpe In laud. Basil Epist 151 Contra Aca. li. 3 ca 13. 〈…〉 They are refuted vvhich wold not haue diuines me dle vvith the true art of disputing Col. 2. Aduer 159. Epis in cap. 2. Esa De praescri haer A similitude Ad 150. Epi in S ca. Esai The auncient Fathers coÌ„mended â— right vse of Logick Con. Acali 3 De ord li. 2. ca. 12 Touching the writings and disputations of y â— schoole Doctors In. 3. sent dist 24. quest 1. Great but vnprofitable is the labour of the schoole Doctors Certaine Errours which are to bee found in the disputations of the schoole Doctors The first errour to make their ground Logicke See Scotus and others who haue vvritten vpon the master of sentences and in their disputations called Quodlibets c. Lomb. li. 1. Sent. dist 34. li. 2. sent dist 9. c â— Error To reasoÌ„ probably on plaine truths Contra Aca. Apolog ad 〈◊〉 louin 3. Error They darken the truth Con. Aca. Error 4 Is theyr vaine questions 2. Tim. 2 Eâ—chi â—d Lauren. cap. 55. The Popish schol doctours of ouâ— time frame not such argumentes in their disputations as y â— auncient learned vvere vvont The method to dispute both diuinely schoole like necessatie in our time Dâ— doct Chri. lib. 2. cap. 40. Tvvo vvayes to intreat of diuinitie A similitude The brief school like treatises are as it vver an Anatomy of y e large and copious vvriting or speakings Cout Maâ— lib. 3. De mod in disp Ser. A treatise of y e word of God vvritten Hovv the disputations of diunitie differ froÌ„ others that they ought reuerently to bee handled De doct Chri. li. 4. cap. 19 1. Tim. 6. Quest ver 108. De Ciuie Dei li. 2. cap. 29. 1 The vse of this disputation Psal 119. The diuisioÌ„ of this vvorke He 1. ve â— Our opinion and mind touching the vvorde of God The declaration of our opinion or minde The opinion and minde of y e Papistâ— The declaration exposition of their opinion The state point of this coÌ„trouersie The tearms of this question expounded What the vvorde of God is What tradition is What is meant by this word Necessarie to saluation What is meant by holye Scripture A demonstratiue or euident disputation Heb. 1 The Sylogisme or argument The explication or proofe of the argument The confirmation of the coÌ„ference Tert. de resur car Act. 26. The confirmation of the second part of the argument Ioh 20. 17 Rom. 1. Lu. 16 Iohn 6. Act. 26. Lu. 24 2 Pet. 1. Act. 1 Iude. Philip. 3. 1. Iohn 1. 2. Pet. 3. 2. Pet. 1. The argument The explication or proofe of the argument Deu 4. Prou. 30. The argument The examining or triall of y e argument Exod. 24. Deu. 31. Deu. 28. Act. 24. Deu. 27. Gal. 3 Esa 8. The argument The examining or triall of the argument Act. 26. 2. Cor 3. c. 2. Tim. 3. The argument The examining or triail oâ— y e silogisme 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iohn 5. The argument The explication or triall of the argument Lu 23. 31. 1. Pet. 4. 17 c. 1. Cor. 4. The Sylogisme The exaaminatioÌ„ of the Silogisme An euideÌ„t argument Iohn 20. The argument The explication of the argument Psa 19 Psa 119 Deu. 4. Psa 4. The argument The explication of the argument Gal. 4. 21. * A definitioÌ„ of holy Scripture Heb. 1. 1 2. Ti. 3. 16 Heb 1. 1. 2. Pet. 1. 21 Lu. 1. 3 1. Iohn 1. 1. Ioh. 20. 31 c. The explicating of the definition 2. Pe. 3. 1. 2 Col. 3. 1 Pro. 30. 6 Esa 8. 20 c. Psa 1. 19. 1. 9 c 2. Tim. 3 16. 17. 2. Pe. 1. 12 Ioh. 20. 31 2. Tim. 3 15 Iohn 5. 39 The argument The vnfolding of y e former reason A disputation confutatiue vherein is refelled or confuted the opinioÌ„ or iudgement of y e Papistes The first argument against papistical traditions The vnfolding of
mindes we take vpon vs this most noble conflicte because it otherwise happeneth in this then in other battayles for there hée alone is crowned which vanquisheth but y e ende of this battaile is such that euen hée which is vanquished so that hée acknowledge himselfe ouercome and imbrace the truth shal likewise bée crowned together with the victour And Augustine sayth that it is better to be ouercome of the truth then to be willing to ouercome the truth with falsehoode For whatsoeuer men practise against the truth yet this must they know to wit that veritie cannot be vanquished the which Augustine also calleth perpetuall victorie Furthermore this point of doctrine touching the which our disputation is is of so greate weight that it maye bée thought and that worthelye to bée the verie foundation of all Religion And therefore not without greate cause the Prophet Dauid doeth acknowledge the worde of GOD to bée a Lanterne the which except it lighten our féete of necessitie wée must walke in most horrible darkenesse yea also wée both stumble and fall But the defenders of the Popish Church doo so hotly striue and contende for mans Traditions and thinke them no lesse worthie to bée retayned then some precious Picture of Pallas the which béeing taken awaye they thinke it not possible any longer to defend or maintaine their pontificiall chaire wherein there haue bene so manye Vicars assaulted and nowe at the last Truth preuaylyng shall be quite ouerthrowen and brought vnto naught But that wée maye come to the matter this disputation shall be diuided into sixe parts First we will set downe our owne opinion and then the opinion of the aduersarie then we will trie them both so y â— thereby maye appeare what is the state of our controuersie Secondly we will confirme our opinion by manifest proofe of scriptures and by most sure and flat demonstrations grounded on those places so collected Thirdly we will refell the opinion of the other partie by negatiue disputations Fourthly we will wipe away the obiections of the aduersarie which they wrest out of the scriptures Fiftly we will take away y e foundations which they take out of the writings of the Doctors to ground their opinions on And sixtly we will heare the olde Doctors touching this point agreeing both with vs and the word of God â‚ THE FIRST CHAPTER ¶ At sundrie times and in diuers manners God spake in the olde time to our Fathers by the Prophets In these last dayes he hath spoken vnto vs by his sonne WHen Tertulian would enter into the conflict of disputation and ioyne with the aduersarie hée was woont to bonder the whole summe of the question with certain bondes for so himselfe saith whereby he might not swarue from the matter which he had in hand And that we also may doo the like we will first propone or set down our minde and opinion which is the opinion of each reformed Church touching the word of God by the testimonie of the same word of God which is this All necessarie principles of christiaÌ„ faith are contained in the holy Scriptures This our sentence or opinion we thus expound out of that place of y e Epistle to y e Hebrewes which ministreth vnto vs sufficieÌ„t matter for this disputation God spake in the time of the olde Testament in diuers and sundrie manners to our fathers to wit by oracles visions dreames by Vrim and Thummim finaly by y e prophets speaking by the motion or inspiration of the spirit of God and the same worde of God the spirit of God so commaunding was committed to writing both by Moyses and also by other Prophets and most holy men Now in these last dayes Iesus Christ the chiefe and most perfect Doctour and teacher of his Church being giuen to the world taught the Apostles by mouth ordained them teachers for his Church which did publish in writing the doctrine of the Gospell receiued from Christ by them taught by mouth Sith then y e word of God is the measure of our faith that that word of God remaineth in the most holy monuments or writings of the scriptures it followeth of necessitie that al the principles which are necessarie to faith and saluation of the Church are contayned in the holy Scriptures and whatsoeuer the Apostles haue taught we ought to looke for them in the holy Scriptures neither ought we to receiue any tradition in matter of faith And because matters are made more manifest by uÌ„militudes wée will take our similitude from a King which by mouth proclaimeth an Edict then willeth the same to be printed the which being done men are not wont curiouslye to enquire of others which eyther heard or wer present at the proclamation what is contained in the Kings Edict because the Edict is in print to y e which they must stand and the which they must also beléeue So then I affirme in as much as the word was proclaimed and declared by the Apostles and euangelists and by them committed to writing it were in vayne and foolish now a dayes anye other where to be sought then in the Scriptures what the Apostles and Euangelistes did teach by mouth But now the opinion of the aduersarie is this That all principles of Religion necessarye for our Christian faith are not contained in the holye Scriptures The which theyr opinion they thus expounde Although the worde of God be the measure of our faith yet the whole worde of God is not extant in the scriptures for many things were spoken by the Apostles Euangelists which they writ not Furthermore the Catholike church say they meaning the Church of Rome is so endowed with the spirite of God that she is able of hir selfe to deliuer those things which are necessarie both to faith saluation Wherefore that we may haue the whole word of God the Apostolicall and eccleâ—â—asticall traditions must bée added to the scriptures this is their opinion Now then you may sée manifestlye what is the state or issue of our controuersie for this is that which must be discussed whether the whole word of God deliuered by the Prophets and Apostles and necessary for our saluation be contained in the Scriptures which is the word written or not we affirme that it is they saye naye so then there â—anne bee but one of our opinions true as is manifest by the first groundes of Logicke In anye reasoning the affirmatiue or negatiue 〈◊〉 needes be true but before we goe about the confirmation of our opinion we will set downe the bounds limits of our question both briefely and shorte When we say the word of God we mean not that eternall Word the Sonne of the eternall and euerlasting father being the second person in Trinitie but that externall worde by the which God hath made manifest vnto men his will and pleasure and therefore we adde and say that worde
which was deliuered taught by the Apostles and Prophets so that it may be more manifest what we meane by the word of God Also this word Tradition maye not onely be referred to the word taught by mouth but also to the word written as it is manifest in the second to the Thessalonians the second chapter where the Apostle saith Stand fast and keepe the traditions or instructiōs which you haue ben taught either by word or by Epistle And euen after this sort also haue the old fathers vsed to speake as we will shewe in the proper place notwithstanding in this question according to the manner of speaking it is restrained to that worde which is taught by mouth Furthermore we meane by the word of God necessary to our saluation al those things which God hath commaunded vs to beléeue with a most sure perswasion of faith so that we maye make a difference betwéene faith and opinion and betwéene the principles of Christian religion and the probable disputations and ordinaunces of men Last of all by y e name of the holy Scripture we vnderstand all the bookes Canonicall both of the new and olde testament And thus much I thought good to speak briefly touching the explication of our question The second Chapter HEther to we haue declared our minde opinion touching the worde of God nowe it resteth that wée confirme the same by most certaine proofes and arguments deriued and taken out of the same word of God and so at the last a flatte demonstratiue or most true argument being gathered from most true principles wée may rid the whole matter out of all obscuritie placing it in the most manifest lyght of truth And to bring this to passe we wil follow this order First to set downe certaine places of scripture from whence we will draw our arguments Secondly the places of Scripture being collected and brought together we will fet a true definition of the word of God the which definition also shall be y e proofe of our argument cutting away all exception doubt And although in the reciting of the places of scripture I doo not curiously labor touching the order thereof for each place of scripture is of sufficient authority to make anye conclusion yet notwithstanding I haue taken some care that the order of the places of scripture maye aunswere vnto each parts of the definition asmuch as may be Wherefore let vs begin with this place of the Apostle which hath ministred occasion vnto vs of this disputations The first place God at sundrie times and indiuers manners in the old times spake to our fathers by the Prophets but in these last daies he hath spoken vnto vs by his sonne Whereby we conclude thus If the word of God being sufficient or necessarie vnto the saluation of the church was deliuered first vnto vs by the Prophets and then by Christ and his Apostles and that worde of GOD so deliuered by the Prophettes is this daye onelye to bee sought for in the writings of the Prophets Then truly the word of God deliuered vnto vs by Christ and his Apostles must bee sought for onely in the writings of the Apostles except any good reason may be giuen to the contrarie But the word of God necessarie to the saluation of the Church was deliuered first vnto vs by the Prophets then by Christ his Apostles the same word of God deliuered by the Prophets is this day onely to be sought in the writings of the Prophets no wher els neither any good reson to the cōtrarie can be rendred why the like shuld not be touching the word of god deliuered by Christ and his Apostles Wherefore we conclude that the word of god necessarie to the saluatiō of the church is onely to be sought for in the writings of the Prophets and Apostles Now let vs trye our argument This syllogisme or argument is hypothetical or double y e vse wherof is verie necessarie so often as we shall be occupied in y e comparing of things together And y e hypothetical or double arguments are verie néedful in diuine disputations is manifest both by the old Doctors also by y e new schoolemen who most often vse them Wherefore I doubt not to vse these euen as well as the categoricall arguments because the matter or grounds of our disputations are not Topicall or standing on the inuention of art but grounded on expressse places of Scriptures and therefore those kind of arguments are not inferiour to others The ground or matter therefore of our argument is made manifest euen by the light of nature who biddeth vs of things like to iudge the like And these principles which we haue drawne from nature her selfe the Apostle teacheth vs that they are not to be reiected when as in the matter of regeneration he bringeth the Corinthians to the consideration of nature For being schooled by natures rule sayth Tertulian thou maist the easilier beléeue the Prophesie Now if wée marke the substance we shall finde the worde of God both in the olde testament and in the new to bée all one For the Apostle professeth saying That he hath spoken nothing but that which the Prophets and Moses had before spoken I confesse that the publishing of the word of God in y e new Testament was a great deale more excellent and fruitfull then before yea and that maketh for our cause and therefore farre wide is it that it shuld hurt vs or our matter as héereafter in our disputation we will more at large proue Let vs then make a comparison betwéene the olde and newe Testament as much as appertaineth to the word of God exhibited in them both after this sort If God spake by the Prophets in the old testament then also he hath spoken by the Apostles in the new testament And if the prophets taught the word of God by mouth the like so thē the apostles haue done And if the prophets committed to writing the word of God so also haue the Apostles Wherefore if the prophets comprehended the whole doctrine of y e old testament in their writings why should not we say y t the Apostles haue also comprised the whole doctrine of the gospel in their bookes Now let the defenders of the contrarie opinion bring foorth shewe some reason to disprooue this my assertion I say some good reason not borowed from the dreames of mens braines nor from topicall cauilling arguments but deriued from the word of God But this they cannot doo Furthermore I vrge this place of the Apostle which we haue in hand reason thus If the word of God deliuered after diuers manners waies and at manie times be now altogether to be found in y e writings of the prophets why should not we say the like of y e Gospell being y e word of god which as y e apostle witnesseth was not at sundrie times or in diuers manners
deliuered For otherwise who séeth not y ◠the apostles comparison in the recited text were of no force For if y e Apostle had saide thus then were our aduersaries opinion true to wit Like as in times past vnder y e old testamēt God spake at sundry times in diuers manners so now likewise hath he also spoken to vs in y e time of the new testamēt at sundry times in diuers manners that is by y e writings of the apostles by apostolicall traditiōs not writen also now speaketh by the traditions of y e church y e which how it repugneth is contrarie to y e mind of y e apostle euen our aduersaries thēselues cānot denie y e same thus much touching y e first part of our argument The minor which is y e secōd part of our argumēt containeth in it selfe thrée mēbers First y ◠the word of god necessary to y e saluation of y e Church was deliuered vnto vs first by y e prophets then after by Christ and his Apostles and this is manifest by this place of the Apostle in that he sayth In times past he spake by his Prophets but in these last dayes by his sonne And that this last speaking apperteineth also to the Apostles it is manifest by the words of the Apostle in his second chapter of this Epistle where he sayth y ◠the gospel was first preached vnto vs by Christ and then confirmed by those which heard him And againe Iohn the 20. and 17. Christ saieth As my Father sent me euen so send I you And it cannot be denied but that the Apostles published the Gospel in writing The second part of the minor is that the word of God deliuered by the Prophets is now only to be sought for in the writings of the Prophets And this is proued by the vsuall phrases of the Scriptures which by the Prophets meane the writings of the Prophets as Romanes the first where hée saith Put a part for the Gospell which he had promised before by his Prophets in the holy Scriptures And againe Luk. 16. They haue Moses and the Prophets Iohn 6. It is written in y e Prophets Acts. 26. Paule saith O king Agrippa beléeuest thou y e Prophets I know thou beléeuest Luke 24. And he began at Moses at all the Prophets and interpreted vnto them in all the Scriptures y e things which were written of him To conclude because I will not recite many places finally Peter by the wordes of the Prophets meaneth the writings of the Prophets 2. Epistle chapter 1. And in the last ende of the same chapter he saith thus For y e prophesie came not in olde time by y e wil of man but holie men of God spake as they were moued by y e holy Ghost Now if our aduersaries will not yéeld vnto vs let thē bring good proofe vnto vs to the contrarie but y ◠as I haue alreadie said they cannot doo Now the third and last member is that they of the contrarie part can bring forth no proofe to the contrarie but that we may conclude touching the word of God deliuered vnto vs by Christ and the Apostles y ◠it is wholy conteined in the writing of the Apostles as well as the word of God deliuered by the Prophets is contained in the writings of y e Prophets to wit so much as is necessarie for our faith saluation But if at any time our aduersaries affirme that they can bring some good reson to y e contrarie then they must bring such as must be both true and also agréeing to the Scripture And thus the parts of our argument béeing confirmed y e conclusion therof must néeds be true The second place It seemed good to me most noble Theophilus to write vnto thee thereof from point to point that thou mightest knowe the certaintie of those things whereof thou hast ben instructed To this purpose also these places maye serue I gaue my diligence saith he to write vnto you of the common saluation Philip chap. 3. It greeueth mee not to write the same things vnto you and it is profitable for you Iohn 1. Epistle chap. 1. We declare vnto you that which wee haue seene 2. Peter chap. 3. This second Epistle I now write vnto you beloued wherewith I sturre vp your pure mindes to call to your remēbrance the words which wer spoken before of the holie Prophets also the commandements of vs the Apostles of the Lorde and sauiour 2. Peter chap. 1. I will not cease to put you alwaies in remēbrance of these things although yee bee alreadie instructed therein From these and such other places we drawe this argument If the Apostles and Euangelists published in writing the Gospell to his end that the truth of those things which they taught by mouth might be the better knowne confirmed and that thereby also it should the better sinke into the mind and memorie of men then trulie the Apostles and Euangelists left all those things in writing which by mouth they had taught being necessarie to faith and saluation The Antecedent is true And therfore my conclusion is also true The ground of our argument which is y e first part cannot be denied for then y e middle would repugne with y e end the which far be it from vs y ◠we should once thinke especially in them which did both speake write y e gospel w t one the self same spirit As for y e secōd part of our argumēt it is cōfirmed by y e former places in plaine words The third place Thou shalt not adde to the word which I teach command thee And againe Thou maist not adde vnto his word least hee reproue thee and thou be found a liar Wherfore I saie if it be not lawful for mā to ad anie thing to the writings of Moses then truely after that the writings of the Apostles were ioyned to the writings of Moses and the Prophets we may plainly saie that the scriptures doo containe all those things the knowledge and faith whereof is necessarie and sufficient to saluation The antecedent is true Wherefore we ought not to doubt of the truth of the consequence The first part of our sylogisme is manifest not onely by the similitude but also by the often comparing of the worde of God deliuered by Moses as also by the Apostles as it is prooued in the first place Our Minor is prooued by the places before recited which prooueth that we may not adde vnto the word of God And least our aduersaries should say that that place of Moses is not tyed vnto the worde of God written by Moses we will recite certain places which shall cut off all shifts of our aduersaries Moses Exodus 24. Writ all these words of the Lord. Againe Deut. Moses wrote this law Again Deut. 28. All the words
of this law which is writen in this booke And Paule in the Act. 24. I beleeue saith he all those things which are written in the Lawe in the Prophets And that which Moses saith Deut. 27. Let each one be accursed which abideth not in all the words of this lawe Paule thus expoundeth Gal. 3. saieng In all things which are written in the booke of the lawe By which places we may easily perceiue that the word of God touching the which Moses speaketh is not to be interpreted the writings of Moses alone neither to be applied vnto certaine vnwritten verities deliuered onely by the mouth of Moses as the Iewes doctors doo falsly surmise whose errors haue long time since bene euen hissed out of the Church of Christ The 4. place Get thee to the lawe and testimonie If they say not after this worde there is no light in them Héereof we frame this argument If the people vnder the lawe ought to repaire to the Scriptures and nothing was to be receiued in matters of faith the which was not contained in the holy Scriptures then truly by greater reason afterward that the doctrine of the Gospell written of the Apostles was ioyned to the writings of the olde Testament the which Apostles did explicate and teach the true meaning of the law those things alone must be receiued in matters of faith which are contained in the writings of the olde and new testaments The antecedent is true Wherefore also the consequent must be true The first part of our argument is manifest of it selfe through the force of comparison Although if we haue respect to the ground and substaunce thereof the Apostles spake no other thing then y â— which was before spokeÌ„ by Moses the prophets as Paul affirmeth Act. 26. Yet no christian hath at anie time doubted but y â— the publishing of the word of God was far more excellent and plentifull after the Incarâ—ation of Christ then it was before lyke as y e apostles in diuers places haue taught Wherefore if before his incarnation they ought to be ruled by the word of god writen how much more then ought we now The minor is manifest by the recited places And hâ—re I am not ignorant that this afore recited place of the prophet is diuersly expounded of the learned but howsoeuer they expound these words it coÌ„meth to this effect that they liue in most horrible darknesse which despising the worde of God take vnto themselues the errors of inchanters witches and mans dreames The fift place Thou hast knowne the holie Scriptures of a childe which are able to make thee wise vnto saluation through the faith which is in Christ Iesus for the whole Scripture is giuen by inspiration of God and is profitable to teach to reproue to correct to instruct in righteousnesse that the man of God may be absolute beeing made perfect to euerie good worke If such be the force of the holie Scriptures that it maketh a man wise perfectlie instructed vnto saluation then ought we to be content with the holie Scriptures in causes and matters of faith The Antecedent is true And therefore the consequent must be the like The first part of our argument is manifest through the nature of perfection for if y e scriptures make vs perfect to what ende then serue traditions not written And vnto this ende serueth the saying of Paule before alleadged The minor is manifest and prooued by the place recited of Paule But peraduenture our aduersaries will héere obiect and saye that Paule spake héere onely of the scriptures of the olde Testament because Timothie was instructed from his youth But sith Paule héere addeth and saith Through the faith that is in Christ Iesus he doeth manifestly declare that the doctrine of the Gospell was ioyned with the knowledge of the old Testament But they may saye that the Gospell was not then published in writing but onely deliuered and taught by mouth First let them tell me whereby they gather this for it is manifest by the fourth Chapter of that his Epistle that Paule wrote this same Epistle verie néere about the time of his death And héere if you will make a good account of the times you shall easilye perceiue that then when this Epistle was sent vnto Timothie all the Epistles of the Apostles or well néere all were put in writing And furthermore what matter were it if then the doctrine of the Gospell had not bene published in writing inasmuch as it was afterward done Finally if ye would that Paule should héere speak touching the writing of the olde Testament onely then woulde I make mine argument of more force and reason thus If the writings of the olde Testament were of such force that they were able to make men wise vnto saluation how much more shall the whole Scripture of the olde and new Testament be able to perform the same But he which shall denie y â— this same excellent sentence of Paule touching the whole Scriptures to wit that it was giuen by inspiration of God and is profitable to teach doth appertaine vnto the writings of the new testament he is not onely to be thrust out of the number of diuines but is also to be banished out of the societie of Christians Neither yet let them goe about to cauill with vs for that the olde translation hath this word Prepared and not absolute Perfect to all good workes For truly that I maye not omit anie thing and so swarue from our argument the Gréeke word signifieth Perfection as in the Actes 21. ver 5. But when the daies were full perfected and ended we went on our iournie c. Where and in which place Luke vseth the same Gréeke word which Paule doth vse in the Texte to Timothie signifieng as you sée Absolute and Perfect Also the compounde of the same verbe in Gréeke hath the lyke signification As Mathew 21. ver 26. By the mouthes of babes and sucklings thou hast made perfect thy praise Againe 1. Thessa 3. ver 10. Night day praieng exceedingly that we might see your face and might accomplish or make perfect that which is wanting in your faith And again Heb. 13. ver 22. The 6. place Search the Scriptures for in them you thinke to haue eternall life If the people in times past vnder the lawe doo thinke and that not without good cause to haue eternall life in the Scriptures that is that all those things were contained in the Scriptures the knowledge and faith wherof attained euerlasting life then trulie by greater reason we ought to beleeue the selfe same being now vnder the Gospell after that to the scriptures of the old testament the writings of the Apostles was also ioyned which interprete and teach the veritie and truth of the olde testament The antecedent is true And therefore there is no doubt of the consequent The force of
could haue bene kept and preserued without the scriptures to what ende were the Scriptures for the spirite of God doth nothing in vaine If the Scriptures were written to the ende our memorie might be holpen who then can denie that our memorie must bée holpen by the Scriptures in all things necessarie to saluation Finally and to conclude If the Scripture were giuen by the spirite of God that thereby the Church might be the better instructed why then should not the Scriptures haue in them al those things which are necessarie to saluation Wherefore what starting holes so euer our aduersaries séeke yet the truth of our former proposition remaineth to wit that they goe about to frustrate the spirit of God of his effect in giuing the Scriptures except in them be contained whatsoeuer is necessarie to our saluation The consequent no Christian can deny If the Apostles were led into all truth by the spirit of God as it appeareth Ioh. 16 and wrote not all things that were necessarie to saluation that came to passe either because they ought not to write them or because they would not write or because they could not But to affirme that they ought not is false that they would not is absurd and that they could not is the part of one that disputeth like an Atheist Wherefore the antecedent is false absurd and altogether from Diuinitie The consequence of the former proposition is manisest except our aduersaries can bring any thing to the contrary For we dispute not héere of euerye man but only of y e Apostles whom y e spirit of God gouerned and directed in the writing of the Gospell The minor is manifest except our aduersaries can proue what reason there is of dissimilitude or vnlikenesse in things not onely like but also euen béeing the selfe same And this truly is most certaine and most vndoubted amongst all Christians that if the Apostles wrote not all things which are necessary to saluation that it was because they ought not so to doo Qur aduersaries of necessitie must proue some one of these causes or els them what was the cause that y e Apostles ought to write some things which were necessaâ—ie to saluation and to omit other some or else truly y t the Apostles themselues haue by manifest plaine words testified that they haue not written all things which appertaine vnto Christian faith and Religion for good and necessarye causes which God himselfe would not that men should know But vndoubtedly our aduersaryes can prooue neither of these and therefore the conclusion of this argument resteth most firme and vnuiolable If the Canonicall bookes of the old Testament doo containe all things which appertained vnto the olde testament And the Canonicall bookes of the new Testament doo not containe all such things as doo appertaine vnto the new testament then doeth it follow that the old testament is more perfect then the new The consequence is false And therefore the antecedent is false The consequent of the maior is thus prooued The bookes of the old testament are called the olde testament of Paule where as hée dooth intreate of the reading of the old testament To this maye be added that which Moses saith The couenant saith he which is written in the booke of the lawe and in the diuine and holy historie there is mention made of the booke of the couenaunt Wherefore there is no doubt but that the olde Testament that is the writings of the olde testament is agréeable to his title For nothing can be alleaâ—ged besides y t scripture which may rightly be said to appertaine to the old testament to wit the knowledge whereof were necessarie to the saluation of those godly fathers that liued vnder the olde testament Now if you say not the like of the newe testament who dooth not sée that the newe testament is more weake unperfect then the olde For it is as much as if you wold thus expound the title The newe testament that is to saie Some certain things appeâ—taining to the new testament The which how absurd it is I suppose I shall not néede with 〈◊〉 more arguments to prooud for no 〈◊〉 hath at anie time héeretofore affirmed that the Scriptures and writings of thâ—â— we 〈…〉 not so perfect as the writings at the old Wherefore we wil 〈…〉 more to the prâ—uing of our 〈◊〉 If the Scripture of the new testament be a couenaunt will or testament nothing must be added vnto a will or Testament then trulye it is not lawfull to aâ—de anye thing to the writinges of the newe Testament The Antecedent is true And the consequent is the like And by the force of the same consequent the traditions not wâ—tten of the Apostles are not to be receiued The antecedent is manifest The minor doth containe two parts the 〈◊〉 part is mainfest and prooued by the verie title to wit y â— it is a will or a testament neither néedeth theâ—e any other probation The latter part is prooued by Paule when hée sayeth That it is not lawfull to adde vnto a mannes Testament and from thence hée gathereth that we ought not to adde vnto the diuine Testament of God But if yée interpret it to bée a testament and not a rouenant then our conclusion remaineth of more sorce for dareth anie man adde vnto the Will and Testament of a man The which if it be not lawofull to doe in the Wil and Testament of a man how much lesse then is it lawfull so to doe in the Testament of God If till the later end and consumation of the world we ought not to looke for anie other bookes canonicalt besides these which we haue alreadie in the writings of the old new Testament Then it followeth that the Scripture is absolute and pefect in euerie part The antecedent is true And therfore so is the consequent by force of the saide consequent the Scripture hath no need of anie traditions not writteÌ„ The Maior is euident inough especially sith God is the author of the said scripture which would not suffer the same during the world to remaine vnperfect because he being the author is most perfect The Minor our aduersaries themselues cannot denie for they are not ignoraÌ„t that the time now after Christ is exhibited giuen to the world is called the fulnesse of time as the Apostle saith If traditions not written are as wel to be receiued as the Scriptures as our aduersaries would haue it then must wee beleeue the writings of the Doctors with the like perswasion of faith as we beleeue the writings of the Prophets and Apostles But the consequent is false And therefore the Antecedent cannot be true and by force of the consequent traditions not written are not to bee receiued in matters of faith The consequent of the maior proposition is thus proued For so often as our aduersaries propoue vnto the traditions of men
which also our aduersaries abuse 2. Thessa 3. We warne you bretheren in the name of the Lord Iesus Christ that you withdraw your selues from euerie brother that walketh inordinatelie and not after the traditions which he hath receiued of vs. And then followeth the very same tradition which Paule wrote Againe Actes 16. And as they went through the Cities they deliuered them decrees to keepe ordained of the Apostles Elders But yet notwithstanding euen those verie decrées of the Apostles were then written as it is manifest Actes 15. verse 23. and 24. Againe in the foresaid 11. chapter of the first Epistle of Saint Paule to the Corinthians That which I receiued of the Lord I deliuered vnto you Also in the same Epistle chapter 15. vers 3. he saith the like But yet notwithstanding all those things are writen wherefore he that doth thus conclude saying Paule taught by mouth Ergo he wrote not truelye hée is altogether ignoraunt of the right order of Disputation Let vs therefore now bring them to an absurditie If by reason that Paul taught by mouth traditions to the Corinthians it follow that those traditions be not written Ergo the traditions that women shoulde bee couered in Ecclesiasticall assemblies and touching prophecieng bare headded and manie such like are not written which is false as appeareth in the forenamed 1. Cor. 11. We will nowe therefore tourne theyr Argument vppon themselues saying thus If the traditions which Paule doth there dispute of to wit touching Propheciengs bare headed and touching women to bee couered are neglected euen of our Aduersaryes themselues because their Monkes preach not bare headed but couered with their hoods how much more shall it be lawful for vs to neglect those traditions which our aduersaries faine beeing not written in the word of God onelie falsely cloked vnder the names of the Apostles That we may therefore amend this error we must say that Paule doth in that Epistle put them in minde of those things which he had taught them by mouth whē as he had diligently considered how great the inconstancie and leuitie of man is Whereby we sée that wée must altogether cleaue to the writings of the Apostles least the forged deuices of men doe withdrawe vs from the truth of the gospell Paule biddeth the Thessalonians to keep the traditions which they had learned either by word or by Epistle Ergo Paule wrote not all Traditions necessarie to faith The antecedent is prooued 2. Thessa 2. vers 15. Now let vs trye the antecedent In these woordes of Paule Either by word or Epistle they are willing to make this word Either an absolute distunctiue to which their opinion I doo not agrée For I marke in the writings of the Apostles that I may héere speake nothing of other Authors this perticle or word so repeated to be a copulatiue rather then a disiunctiue I prooue it by these places 1. Cor. 13. ver 8. wher the Apostle saith Whether propheciengs be abolished whether tōgues cease and knowledge vanish away Againe 1. Cor. 15. ver 11. Whether I or they so wee haue preached and so yee haue beleeued that is both I and they haue preached c. Also to the Colloss 1. verse 20. Reconciling to himselfe all things by himselfe yea I say reconciling to himselfe all things whether they be in heauen whether they be in earth So also he vseth this word Mete in this Epistle in the same chapter verse 2. wherefore it is as though he shoulde saye stande ye fast in the doctrine which you haue learned both by our wordes when we were present as also after in our writings Therefore I deny their consequence for the errour as I haue said is Secundum fallatiam dictionis for first it followeth not if the Thessalonians were taught both by worde and Epistle that those thinges were taught by mouth were contrarie to those things which were taught by Epistle But secondly admit that other things were taught yet it hurteth vs nothing for if they were not written in the Epistle to the Thessalonians yet truely they might bée written in other his Epistles But admit y t Paule did not write them at all yet it doeth not therefore followe that they were not written of the other Apostles as of Baptisme the supper of the Lord c. Let vs now ouerwhelme them with an absurditie If it bee true by this kinde of speaking either by word or by Epistle that therefore it should follow that Paule did not write all things necessarie to saluation ergo on the other side it woulde follow that Paule did not preach by mouth all things necessarie to saluation the which is absurde and false as I prooue by these places following The 2. Thessa 2. verse 13. and 14. You are elected vnto saluation through the santification of the holie Ghost and through the faith of the truth vnto the which yee were called by our Gospell Againe in the same Chapter verse 5. Doo you not remember that when I was with you I tolde you these things Againe the 1. Thessa 4. Yee knowe what commaundement I gaue you to abstaine from fornication Againe 1. Thessa 2. Wee did not onely desire to imparte vnto you the Gospell of GOD but our owne selues And in another place hee attributed vnto them a most sure perswasion of faith which they receiued by preaching Whereby it is proued that Paule did deliuer to the Thessalonians all thinges necessarie to saluation the which thinges could not bee if the argument of our aduersarie might preuaile Therefore we wil turne their argument vpon themselues saying If the Theslalonians were throughlye instructed in christian religion and that by the preaching of the Apostle which hee preached by mouth and neuerthelesse were to be confirmed by the writings of the Apostle howe much more ought wee to cleaue to the writinges of the Apostles which were not present at their Sermons neyther yet instructed or them by mouth Therefore the errour of our aduersaries must be amended and we must saye that Paule instructed the Thessalonians not onely by word but also by Epistle when he had séene of what great value his writings wer to confirme the faith of the godly And thereby also that the holy Scripture might be more highly commēded vnto vs. Paule praied that he might see the face of the Thessalonians and that he might accomplish or fulfill those things which were wanting in their faith Ergo hee reserued many things to traditions which hee spake by mouth beeing necessarie both to faith and saluation The Antecedent is prooued 2. Thes 3. I doo thus aunswere their antecedent Manie of the olde writers doe vnderstand this place touching doctrine For Chrisostome referreth it to the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead Ambrose to the trinitie Although Chrisostome séeme not to agrée with himselfe for thus he saith not as
of God so we by the conduction of the same spirit beléeue that that is true which the Church affirmeth y t our faith may neuer rest vpō men but for euer vpon God alone The Apostles did adde vnto the lawe to wit the doctrine of the Gospell Ergo it is lawfull to adde vnto the worde of God To the antecedent I thus aunswere Although the doctrine of the Gospell bée more full and fruitfull then the writing of the olde Testament yet notwithstanding if ye well mark the matter in y e new and olde testament the selfe same doctrine of saluation is contained in them both for that is most true which Paule saith Acts 26. that he taught no other thing then that which the prophets and Moses had before taught And againe in the first to y e Rom. he sheweth y t the gospel was before promised by the Prophets therfore this is false which they say that the Apostles added to the law for it is one thing to adde to the lawe and another to erpound and referre it to his owne proper scope and purpose For let some man bring forth an obligation that we may vse this similitude and the payment being made he addeth at the ende that the Obligation is satisfied I pray you can he well be sayd to adde any thing to the same Obligation So when the Apostles gaue testimonie to the scriptures that Christ by his cōming had fulfilled both the lawe and the prophets they did not adde either to y e law or writings of the Prophets Now their consequent I denie for héere is an error Secundum figuram dictionis as it is manifest by these things which I haue alreadie spoken Yea also the argument cannot well procéed from the Apostles to other men for graunt this that God would adde vnto his lawe and that it was done by the ministerie of the Apostles which wrote by the influence motion of the spirit of God yet truly héereby can nothing happen whereby it shoulde be lawfull for other men to adde vnto y e same word of God Wherefore sithen by the argumentation of our aduersaries there would follow the ouerthrowe of this most noble excellent doctrine touching the similitude of the old and new Testament Therefore we may well amend their error by this most excellent saieng which is extant in the workes of Iustinus Matyre In interg resp wher he asketh this and saith What is the Lawe he aunswereth saith It is the Gospell foreshewed Againe he demaundeth What is the Gospell he auns wereth The Lawe fulfilled By which words it is manifest that the Gospell is not a newe doctrine added vnto the lawe but a new fulfilling of the olde promise And thus we suppose that we haue sufficiently disputed touching the obiections of our aduersaries which they haue wreasted out of the worde of God The 5. Chapter FOrasmuch as the aduersaries themselues sufficiently knowe how weake féeble those argumēts are which they take out of y e scripturs against the scriptures then at the last they flie to the testimonies of the auncient Fathers the which they very diligently endeuour to beate into our heads with Orations long and tedious to the ende that by the heape thereof they might ouer whelme vs. Wherefore it séemeth conuenient in this part of our treatise to set downe some thing whereby not onely the obiections of the Papists but also our aunsweres may the more easier be vnderstood Now therefore y t we maye gather most true and infallible principles let vs adde some certaine rules to this our disputation by whose helpe the mindes of the olde Doctors may be expounded and so by the conduction of those rules as by a clue of thred we may both enter into the many variable writings of the Doctours as into a most daungerous Laborynth and there also kéepe our selues occupied most safely and without hurt Let this therefore be the first Rule THe writings of the auncient Doctors for the establishing and confirmation of our faith are so farre foorth to be receiued as they agree with the holie and diuine scriptures Although this first rule be plain inough of himselfe especially to those that knowe the truth yet will I for the confirmation of the same lay downe certaine proofes If anie preach vnto you otherwise then that which we haue preached vnto you let him be accurssed saith S. Paule And againe Warne some that they teach no other doctrine And againe Marke them diligentlie which cause diuision and offences contrarie to the doctrine which ye haue learned and auoide them And again If anie man teach otherwise he is puffed vp and knoweth nothing And agayne Be not carried about with diuers and straunge doctrines with many more places to this effect Yet least happely our aduersaries shoulde say that these places repeted are to be vnderstood of the word deliuered by tradition and not of the word written leauing those things which in the former parte of this treatise are handeled copiously and at large I will aske them this Question whether they think y e Apostles to haue vttered spoken anie thing in their lectures sermons which doth disagrée with those things which they haue committed to writing I am sure they will in no wise confesse it Wherefore mauger their heades they must agrée with vs that this our first Rule is infallible and most true to wit that the writings of the auncient doctors are so far foorth to be receiued as they doe agrée with the sacred Scripture But if they shall perceiue the auncient Doctours themselues to be of our mind I hope then all doubt remooued they will together with vs agrée to our former rule This therefore is the minde of Origen It behooueth vs to bring the holie Scriptures for witnesses for because our senses and allegations without the witnesse of them are altogether voyde of credite And againe Euen as there is not anie golde sanctified without the temple so ther is no sence without the Scripture that is holie Tertulian What is there contrarie to vs in our writings hee speaketh of the holye Scriptures And againe The same that we are the same they be Chrisostome If anie thing bee spoken without the Scriptures the minde of the hearers is thereby brought into doubt Hierome Whatsoeuer heereafter shall be spoken besides the Apostolicall writings let it be abrogated of no value altogether without credit Agustine Doo thou not bring vs anie cauelles from the writinges of the Bishoppes as of Hillarie or Ciprian against the infallible testimonie of the diuine scriptures Because as it behooueth vs to put a difference betweene that kinde of writing and the Scriptures of GOD for the writings of men are not so to be read that it is not lawfull for vs to thinke the contrarie if at anie time they haue peraduenture thought otherwise then the
christians in tunes past did obserue as in the fourth rule we haue spoken also reckoneth vp many more rites ceremonies all the which long time since haue ben out of vse euen in the Church of Rome So that héerein our aduersaries doo not onely contend with vs but euen with Epiphanius himselfe and with other whose obiections they vse against vs. For if those olde rytes and ceremonies be traditions of the Apostles or if they haue like force with the scripture or if they be worthie of the like credite together with the scripture If also sith they be traditions and therefore we must séeke no farther if faith ought to be the obseruer and kéeper of these traditions as the olde and auncient Doctors saye whom our aduersaries bring for the maintenaunce of their cause what impudent boldnesse were this then not onelye to neglect those traditions but also nowe that they haue bene these many yeres put cleane off from the Church and growen out of the memorie of man béeing forlorne with time so that they séeme to be altogether mouldie and couered with hoarinesse What shall they then which are aduersaries of traditions doo if they dare doo these things themselues which are the great defenders of traditions Hierome Doo you demaund where it is written I aunswere in the Acts of the Apostles yea also if it had no authoritie of Scripture yet the consent of the whole worlde in this parte obtaineth the like authoritie as a precept for many other things which are obserued and kept in the Church by tradition take vnto themselues the like authoritie as hath the lawe written as in baptisme three times to dippe the head vnder water of the tasting of Milke and honnie c. Héere Hierome disputed of the unposition of handes after Baptisme and of other rites and ceremonies touching the which thing we haue spoken in our fourth rule but we doo dispute now and in this place of those things which are necessarie and doo appertaine vnto faith and saluation among the which if you will number vâ—â—hose rites and ceremonies what will our aduersaries aunswere which admit vse not the tasting of milke and honnie which Hierome héere maketh mention of And also Hierome witnesseth that y â— was confirmed by the consent of the whole world which is now reiected by the like Augustine Touching those things wherof the Scripture hath not determined therin the custome of the people and ordinance of our fathers are to be obserued in steede of a lawe And againe Those things which are not vvritten but are kept by tradition vvhich are obserued throughout the vvhole vvorld it appeareth by the authoritie either of the Apostles or generall counsells vvhose authoritie in the Church is most profitable that those things ordained and constituted are to be kept and obserued as the passion of our Lord and his resurrection c. Augustine héere disputeth not touching principles of faith but of Ecclesiasticall rytes and ceremonies touching the which we haue spoken in the fourth rule And truly sith Augustine is lead onely by coniecture thereby it sufficientlye appeareth that he intreateth not of things necessarye to faith But the selfe same Augustine in his Epistle following doth greatly lament the cause that the Scriptures being neglected all the whole world was full of suppositions and giueth vs admonishment to submit our selues vnto the easie yoake of Christ I beséech you what wold he theÌ„ haue saide if he had séene that huge Chaos and mountaine of ceremonies and traditions a burden more gréeuous and heauier than Aetna hill wherewith the Bishoppes of Rome long time since haue oppressed the Church And peraduenture many other moe such like examples as these may be taken out of the old fathers and alleadged but the solution of them may easily be gathered had from the answeres which I haue alreadie set downe And lest the defenders of traditions shuld thinke that the auncient Doctours did so commend Traditions that thereby they would derogate the authoritie of the scriptures behold euen the old Doctors themselues as witnesses in this matter and shall declare their owne mindes what they thinke touching the Scriptures and touching traditions not written and wée our selues will say nothing And that the wound which by their former obiections they séeme to giue vs be euen by their owne handes healed vp againe That we maye lawfully affirme it much better to followe the Doctours with the Scriptures then the same Doctours wandering without the Scripture if it so happen at anie time and so to be carried from the truth which thing indeede doth rather deserue pardon theÌ„ foolish imitation But nowe let vs heare the Doctours themselues The sixt Chapter IRenaeus First the Apostles did preach the word of God and afterward by the will of God committed it to writings and deliuered it to vs that the same Gospell so written should be the foundation and piller of our faith Againe It behooueth vs to flie vnto the Church and to be fostered in her bosome and nourished by the word of God written The paradise of the Church is planted heere in this worlde thou maist eate of the tree of the Paradise saith the spirit of God that is feede you of euerie Scripture of God Tertulian Take awaie from the heretikes those things wherein they agree with the Ethnikes that they may ground their questions vppon the holye Scriptures alone then they cannot preuaile Thus did Tertulian in times past confute the Heretikes but nowe they are accounted Heretikes of the Bishoppes of the Romish Church which woulde confirme their opinions by the Scriptures And againe the sayde Tertulian We ought not to bee curious nowe after the comming of Christ Iesus neither ought wee to bee inquisitiue after the manifestation of the Gospell When we doo beleeue wee desire nothing else to beleeue for this first wee doo beleeue that there is nothing else that wee ought to beleeue but onelye faith And againe Let Hermogenes see that he teach that which is written but if it be not written let him feare that curse which is prepared for those that either adde too or diminish anie thing from the holy Scriptures Origen Wee must of necessitie call the holy Scriptures for witnesse for as well our senses as also our interpretations without the witnesse of the Scriptures are worthy of no credit Iustinus Martyre Iustinus did flye vnto the holye Scriptures that hee might bee safe in all things Athanasius The holie and diuine Scriptures of GOD are sufficient to the declaration and manifestation of the truth Hilarie It is sufficient for vs that we bee contented with the Scriptures Cyril All thinges which Christ did are not written but what thinges the writers thought sufficient both for manners doctrine are written Chrisostome If wee haue neede either to learne or to forsake anie thing let vs learne it in the holy