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
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
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
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
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
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
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