faith or needfull to be followed And so from that place to pag. 57 I disputed that the Scripture ALONE is the rule of faith that is to say That rule which my Aduersary in his fourth ground had said God had prouided whereby euery man learned and vnlearned may sufficiently be instructed WHAT is to be holden for the true faith Now he complaines that the State is peruerted the question not being whether Scripture be the rule of faith but whether Scripture alone be the rule and meane ordained of God to breed all faith And he notes two points wherein it is peruerted First in that I so affirme and defend the Scripture to be the rule as if he and his sectaries excluded it from being the rule in any sort which he sayes they do not For they hold the Scripture as propounded by the Church to be part of it I answer that I knew well enough they confessed the Scripture to be part of the rule and the Diuine doctrine which is the whole rule to be some of it written But I knew also that they denied it to be the whole rule ioyning therewith vnwritten traditions and the Popes Decretals which they call Church authority I knew also they allowed it to be no part of the rule but as and in such sence as the Church of Rome should please to propound it and I saw his conclusion in termes denying the Scripture alone to be the rule whereby men may sufficiently be instructed WHAT the faith is therefore I disputed directly opposite to all this that the Scripture alone without traditions is the whole rule to shew vs WHAT is to be holden for faith and nothing but the Scripture this is close to the question For albeit he yeelds it to be the rule in a sort because as his Church propounds it it containes part of the rule yet he denies it to be that whole and entire rule that his conclusion inquires of and so is to be disputed against as well as if he denied it to be any part of the rule at all Againe he holds two things First affirmatiuely that the Scripture is one part of the rule then negatiuely that the Scripture alone is not all the rule Both these are contradictory to my assertion The Scripture alone is the rule My assertion therefore affirming what he denies and denying what he affirmes containes the true state of the question and his inuoluing the matter with all this cauilling tends onely to the couering of his doctrine the loathsome visage whereof he is ashamed should be seene 3 The second point wherein he sayes the question is peruerted is in that I take the rule of faith otherwise then he doth For whereas he by that word rule meanes such a rule as not onely is sufficient to REVEALE all diuine truths that are to be beleeued but also to BREED or produce in vs the faith whereby we beleeue them I he sayes vnderstand such a rule onely as is sufficient to reueale the diuine verities though it be not sufficient to breed in vs faith and assent thereunto And it is true that I vnderstand such a rule indeed the Church wherein I liue onely beleeuing the sufficiency of the Scripture to containe all the obiect of faith but not to enable vs to beleeue it or vnderstand it ordinarily without the ministry of the Church and other meanes But this peruerts not the question * The state of the question touching Scripture ALONâ— for about the meanes there is no question but the question is whether Scripture alone excluding all Church traditions and authority comprehend the whole obiect or matter of faith that is to say All that we are bound to know beleeue and doe for our saluation though it be granted that to breed or produce faith and knowledge of that which is in the Scripture the Ministry of the Church and the helpe of Gods Spirit and our owne industry must concurre For our Aduersaries deny this and hold their runagate traditions and Church authority to be necessary not onely for the expounding and confirming to vs that which is in the Scripture if any one chance to deny it or not to see it but for the supplying of infinite articles of faith which are no waies at all comprised in the Scripture but vpon the said authority are to be receiued as well as that which is reuealed in the Scripture The Iesuite speakes as if he thought his Church authority to consist more in breeding faith and leading men to beleeue what is written then in adding any thing to the measure of the diuine verities contained in the Scripture and indeed sometime there be of his side that will plainely say so He that writ the defence of the Censure a Def. of the Cens pag. 141. NOTE THIS and inquire whether all Papists will stand to it sayes it is to be noted that the question betweene vs and the Protestants is of EXPRESSE SCRIPTVRE ONELY and not of any far fet place which by interpretation may be applied to a controuersie For this contention began betweene vs vpon this occasion that when we alledged diuers weighty places and reasons out of the Scripture for proofe of inuocation of Saints praier for the dead Purgatory and some other controuersies our aduersaries reiected them for that they did not plainely and expresly decide the matter Whereupon came this question whether all matters of beleefe are plainely and expresly in Scripture or not which they affirme and we deny And this he sayes is is the true state of the question Gretser b Defens Bellar tom 1. l. 4. c. 4. p. 1598. sayes These things may be proued by Scripture but not sufficiently not effectually by Scripture alone without tradition but onely probably The which if my aduersary and his Church did hold constantly and in good earnest I would confesse I had peruerted the state of the question But they do not but hold many things belonging to faith to be wanting and no way at all neither openly nor expresly nor consequently contained in the Scripture Dominicus Bannes c D. Dann 22. Tho. p. 302. All things which pertaine to Catholicke faith are not contained in the Canonicall books either manifestly or obscurely nor all those things which Christ and his Apostles taught and ordained for the instructing of his Church and confirming of the faith were committed to the holy Scriptures and the contrary is open heresie Melchior Canus d Can. loc p. 151 There are many things belonging to the doctrine and faith of Christians which are contained in the sacred Scriptures neither manifestly nor obscurely Cardinall Hosius e Hos confess Polon p. 383. The greater part of the Gospell by a great deale is come to vs by tradition very little of it being written in the Scripture Peresius f Peres de tradit p. 4. Tradition is taken so that it is distinguisht against the doctrine which is found in the Canonicall bookes of the
Scripture Bellarmine g Bell. de verb. Dei lib. 4. c. 1. The name of tradition is applied by Diuines to signifie onely vnwritten doctrine Alphonsus h Alphons à Castr adu haer lib 1. c. 5. This is to be laid for a most sound foundation that the traditions of the vniuersall Church and the determinations thereof in things concerning faith are of no lesse authority then the sacred Scripture it selfe though there be no Scripture to proue them Hessels of Louan i Hessel expli symb c. 69. p. 38. The Apostles neuer intended by their writing to commit to writing the whole doctrine of faith but as necessity vrged them what in their absence they could not teach that they committed to writing Costerus the Iesuite k Coster enchirid p. 43. It was neuer the mind of Christ either to commit his mysteries to parchment or that his Church should depend on paper writings Lindane l Lind. panopl. pag. 4. We Catholickes teach that Christians are to beleeue many things which are to be acknowledged for Gods word that are not contained in the Scripture and many things finally to be receiued with the same authoritie wherewith those doctrines of faith are receiued which are contained in holy writ Rodericus Delgado m Roderic dosm de autor Script l. vlt. p. 63 Albeit these things are not found written in the Bible yet they must no lesse be obserued by the godly that they may fulfill the precepts and firmely beleeue the mysteries of the heauenly faith Doctor Stapleton n Staplet princip doctr l. 12. cap. 5. There both were among the Iewes and are among vs very many things religiously performed in the worship of God and also necessary to saluation and necessarily to be beleeued which yet are not comprehended in the Scriptures but are approued or commended to vs ONELY by the authority of the Church Gregory of Valentia o Valent. tom 3. p. 258. D. All the controuersie is whether the Apostles by word of mouth WITHOVT WRITING deliuered any such doctrines as now affoord an infallible argument for the determining of the controuersies of faith in the Church These wordes of our aduersaries make it more then plaine that the Church of Rome holds the Scriptures vnsufficient not onely in respect of breeding faith or bringing men to know and beleeue it ordinarily which we grant but also in respect of containing it in themselues which we deny And that my aduersary holds the same thing I will prone directly For ha-laid downe 4. grounds First that true faith is necessary Secondly that this faith is onely one Thirdly that this faith must be certaine Fourthly and entire in all points he addes the fift that it must not be doubted but God hath prouided and left some certaine rule and meanes whereby euery man may in all points and questions be sufficiently and infallibly instructed WHAT is to be holden for true faith and then immediately he puts the question what in particular may be assigned to be this rule wherto he answers in his first conclusion The Scripture alone especially as translated into English cannot be this rule Which I denied Therefore his question was touching the sufficiency of the Scripture as the said sufficiency is opposed to vnwrittē traditiō not as it is distinguished against the requisite condition of the meanes to be vsed for the vnderstanding of the Scripture And this I confirme for my aduersary saies they hold the Scripture to be part of the rule because it is part of the doctrine of the Church immediatly reuealed by God but yet there are many substantiall points of faith not contained in them Yea p Pag. 67. Reply his expresse words are The question is betwixt vs and Protestants whether God did reueale any thing to the Prophets and Apostles necessary to be beleeued which is not now expressed or so contained in the Scripture that by euident and necessary consequence excluding all tradition and Church authority it may be gathered out of some sentence expresly set downe in the Scripture I did not therefore peruert the state of the question but my Aduersary hauing nothing else to say thought good by this shift to rid himselfe from that which he saw could not be answered 4 Neuerthelesse pleasing himselfe with his owne conceite he concludes that conuicted with the euidence of truth I haue yeelded to his conclusion in that sence wherein he meant it That Scripture alone is not the rule of faith And therefore all my discourse is idle and impertinent I answer two things first if his conclusion The Scripture alone is not this rule which almighty God hath prouided whereby euery man may sufficiently be instructed WHAT is to be holden for true faith meane no more but onely to adde the Ministry of the Church and mens owne industry to the Scripture as the meanes for the ordinary vnderstanding and beleeuing that which is written in it in this sence the Scripture alone is the rule whereby to iudge whatsoeuer matter belongs to faith but Scripture alone is not the ordinary rule and meanes by it selfe to kindle in vs the true knowledge and faith of that which it containes without the Ministrie of the Church and other things be ioyned with it for the learning of it then I grant it and require the Iesuite againe in lieu thereof either to renounce his traditions or else confesse they haue no other vse but onely to helpe to expoūd and teach that which is wholly contained in the Scripture without any power to supply any defect of doctrine that may be supposed to be therein And when he hath done the next treatise of faith he writes to distinguish a little better betweene the Rule and the Meanes of applying it and not say that is no sufficient rule whereby to be instructed WHAT is faith and WHAT not which onely is not a sufficient meanes to bring men to faith without the subordinate condition of such meanes as is required in the application of any rule Secondly I answer that his conclusion meanes more viz. That Scripture alone is vnperfect and defectiue 2. waies The first in that without other meanes it doth not ordinarily breed or draw foorth in vs assent to that it reueales nor so much as make vs see the reuelation to be And therefore there needes the Church by her Pastor to teach and perswade vs and there needes the Spirit of God and industrie in our selues This way no Protestant euer denied The second is in that it alone containes not all Gods word or all such truth as he hath reuealed necessarily to be beleeued but onely one small and obscure part thereof the best part or at least some part being by Tradition onely vnwritten This way we deny with open mouth and the Iesuite holds it and in the place now controuerted hugges it in his armes and therefore I discoursed against him as I did and in no other sense and so consequently it is
sufficient for the vnderstanding of Latin because it is not sufficient vnlesse the learner go to schoole and heare his master teach him And though it be granted that the ministery of men and rules of art and knowledge of tongues be all subiect to error yet doth it not follow that by them we cannot attaine infallible assurance of our translations as I haue shewed in * THE WAY §. 6. n. 3. my answer to this argument where it was first propounded whither I referre my aduersary that if he would haue dealt really should not haue here repeated his old argument but haue ingenuously replied what he had to say to it but that had bene labour CHAP. XXIX 1. Touching the obscuritie of the Scripture 2. The necessitie of meanes to be vsed for the vnderstanding of the Scriptures proues not their obscuritie 3. Traditions debarred A Councell is aboue the Pope 4. 5. The Scripture of it selfe easie to all that vse it as they should 6. 7. The certen sence of the Scripture and the assurance thereof is not by Traditiō Pag. 183. A. D. § 2. That Scripture alone is obscure Concerning the second reason about the obscuritie of Scripture it is to be vnderstood that I do not speake of the obscuritie of Scripture as though I meant that it could not by any meanes be vnderstood Wottō pag. 74. as M. Wotton seemeth willing to mis-vnderstand me neither do I charge the Scripture it selfe with any fault or imperfection when I say it is obscure but do acknowledge rather that it is the perfection of Scripture the highnesse and maiestie of the matter and the strangenesse of the stile on the one side and the weaknesse and ignorance and sometimes peruersnesse of mens wits on the other side which maketh it obscure But whence soeuer the cause of obscuritie proceedeth which is impertinent to my purpose the onely thing which I am to proue is that de facto it is obscure or at least not so easie as the rule and meanes that should ordinarily breed infallible faith in all sorts ought to be And this my second reason conuinceth it being most euident that Scripture alone is not so easie neither to vnlearned nor learned men The which White pag. 25. 39. 36. M. White seemeth to grant when he requireth so many other euen outward meanes and helpes besides the inward spirit to the vnderstanding of the Scripture Among which outward meanes and helpes I enquire for one which is on the one side infallible and sufficient to breed infallible assurance and on the other side so easie to be determinately knowne and vnderstood of all sorts as that all men may grace supposed ordinarily direct themselues in matters of faith onely by diligent attending and yeelding assent vnto it For such is that which for the present I call the rule of faith or the rule and meanes by which all sorts may without other meanes ne detur processus in infinitum be sufficiently instructed in all matters of faith If M. Wotton and M White impertinently to this our purpose wil needs striue to haue the Scripture called in some other sence the rule of faith I will not striue with them but do freely grant it may be so called as good written lawes are or may be called the rule of manners in a commonwealth But as besides good written lawes in a commonwealth there are required ordinarily both good vnwritten customes and a good liuing Magistrate hauing authoritie to propound and interprete both written lawes and vnwritten customes without which the written lawes alone were not a sufficient rule and means to preserue good manners in a commonwealth in regard the lawes cannot be so plaine but that considering the weaknesse ignorance and peruersitie of men they may and would be misunderstood and wrested to a wrong sence which inconuenience is remedied partly by vnwritten customes which do best interprete the written lawes partly by the authoritie of the liuing magistrate who may by authoritie declare which is the right sence and may compell men to execute written lawes according to that sence Euen so in the Church besides the diuine infallible written Scriptures there must be admitted some diuine infallible vnwritten traditions and some alwayes liuing magistrate hauing infallible authoritie to propound and expound the Scriptures without which the written Scriptures alone were not a sufficient rule and meanes to preserue infallible faith in the Church because the Scriptures are not so plaine but that considering the weaknesse ignorance and peruersnes of men they may be and as experience ordinarily teacheth are misunderstood and wrested to a wrong sence which inconuenience without miracle cannot be remedied vnlesse we admit vnwritten traditions which are the best ordinary interpreters of Scripture and some liuing magistrate hauing infallible authoritie who may when controuersies arise infallibly declare which is the right sence and who by that authoritie may compell men to take them in that sence M. Wotton and M. White both grant the obscuritie of Scriptures in some places but they both affirme that in some other places the Scripture is perspicuous and plaine Wotton pa 70. White pag. 33. 36. in so much that M Wotton saith Many places of Scripture are so euident that a child cannot mistake the meaning of them And M. White saith citing S. Chrysost euery man of himself by reading may vnderstand To this I reply first that although some places of Scripture be more plaine then others and are and may be called absolutely plain partly for that they be set downe in proper and not figuratiue speech partly in that to them who haue once learned the true interpretation of the Church they seeme so plaine as they need nothing but reading or hearing to make them plaine partly for that some places are so plaine as they need nothing to make them plainly vnderstood of a very child but this generall rule told vs by the Church that the words in such places are to be plainly vnderstood as they sound yet this notwithstanding it doth not follow that the Scripture alone euen in those most plaine places is the rule and meanes which should instruct men in faith because sith some places seeming proper and plaine are not to be taken as the words sound but are oftentimes to be vnderstood by a figure what man without some infallible meanes besides seeming plainnesse of the words can be infalliby assured euen in most plaine places that he vnderstandeth the right sence especially when the most plaine places that are may be and ordinarily are either by weaknesse ignorance or peruersnesse of men wrested to a wrong sence as we see that most plaine place where our Sauiour pronounceth This is my bodie to be by Caluinists wrested to a figuratiue sence Besides therefore the bare letter of Scripture though neuer so plaine to haue infallible assurance of the sence there is required some other infallible rule and meanes to assure vs when and where the
HOC NOBIS SIT SATIS INDVBIVM APVD LITERATOS HABERI NVLLVM ESSE IN TERRIS IVDICIVM QVOD ERRARE LABI DECIPI NON POSSIT Pic. Mirand apolog pro Sauanarol l. 1. c. 1. infallible and sufficient to breed infallible assurance and so easie to be knowne and vnderstood of all sorts that all may ordinarily direct themselues thereby onely by diligent attending and assenting to it and this is the rule of faith that in this place he meanes wherein if he meane good earnest this question is at an end and the Scripture is granted to be the rule for he will allow that to be the rule which by the helpe of grace supposed is sufficient to direct all sorts onely by diligent attending and yeelding assent to it now such is the Scripture alone that the grace of God supposed onely by diligent attendance and assent vnto it it is sufficient and therefore also you see the necessitie and requisite condition of vsing diligence by my aduersaries owne words hinders not the Scriptures from being the rule of faith euen in his owne sence as himself vnderstands the rule of faith for such as is both infallible and sufficient to breed infallible assurance in vs and so easie to be knowne and vnderstood that all sorts of men may direct themselues in all points of faith onely by diligent attending and assenting to it because onely diligent attention and assenting being added on our behalfe to the helpe of Gods grace it may thereby be determinately vnderstood of all sorts in all things needfull to be knowne 3 But he sayes that as in a common wealth besides the written lawes there are vnwritten customes which interprete the written law and liuing magistrates that haue authoritie to interprete both written and vnwritten lawes and to compell men to his sence without which the written lawes were not a sufficient rule and meanes to preserue good order in the state because through the peruersnesse of men they would be misvnderstood so in the Church beside the written Scriptures there must be admitted some vnwritten traditions to interprete the Scriptures and some liuing magistrate the Pope to propound and expound the Scriptures and to compell men to take the sence that he giues because the Scriptures are not so plaine but they may be misvnderstood c. This comparison and the conclusion of it I denie for albeit meanes must be ioyned with the Scripture yet this Church-authoritie and these vnwritten traditions are none of the meanes but onely that which I haue named for there needs no meanes to supply any matter of faith that is wanting in the Scripture but onely to open our eyes that we may see what is therein whereas these traditions and this Church-magistracie are supposed to be necessarie for the adding of innumerable things to be beleeued that are not contained in the Scripture as I haue * Ch. 27. n. 3. shewed My aduersarie therefore plainly shewes the difference that is betweene vs and discouers what he meanes when he pretends the Church and her authoritie for this rule of faith he expounds transparently to be the Pope with his traditions and to him giues that which is denied in the Scriptures plenarie power partly out of the Scripture partly out of his Decretals to propound to all men the matter of their faith and compell them to take his sence be it true or false This is the Antichristian bondage whereinto the man of Rome will bring all the world and the hellish pride wherin he aduanceth himself to sit as God in the Church exalting his owne will lawes aboue the wil and lawes of the eternall God and subiecting Gods blessed word to his cursed will which his base a Coâ—ceruauâ—runt sibi magistros ad desideria sua non vâ— ab eu discerent quod facere deberent sed vt eorum studio calliditate iâ—â—â—niretâ—r ratio qua licereâ— id quod liberes Spoken of the Popes clawbacks by Concil delect Card. sub init Parasites for their backes and bellies so much striue for which we execrate as hell and leaue to the Diuell from whence it first appeared vnto the world ciuill states and the commonwealths of this world may haue such vnwritten customes and allow this authority to magistrates but God hath left no such traditions to his Church nor set any such head ouer it thus to expound the Scriptures or to determinate the sense thereof but all his whole will is written and out of the Scripture it selfe is to be reuealed imparted to particular men when any doubt arises by the ministry of the Church either in ordinary preaching or in the Councels of godly orthodoxall Bishops b That a Councel is the highest tribunall vpon earth and aboue the Pope affirmed by Iustinian in praetermiss per Anto. Cont. p. 11. Phot. Nomocan tit 9 c 1 6. The Councels of Pisa Const Basil and the Vniuersity of Paris to this day See to this purpose Card Florent tract de Scism Anto. de Rosell monarch tract de concil Mich. Cezen lit ad imperat part 12. sub sin Ioh. Fran. Pic. Mirand apol pro Sauanaro l. 1. c. 1. to the which the Pope and his rabble if they will know the truth and be saued ought to subiect themselues as well as the poorest Christian that liues and the written word is so absolute and sufficient to direct them herein and his spirit so infallibly ready to guide them if they will vse the meanes that there is no more to be required for the full manifestation of any thing needfull for any man whatsoeuer and c CertuÌ„ est quod possit errare etiam in ijs quae tangum fidem haeresim per suam determinationem aut decretalem asserendo Hadrian 4. de sacra consit p. 26. see below this authority of the Pope it selfe when all is done is faine to be reiected 4 Thirdly whereas I said out of Chrysostome that howsoeuer some part of the Scripture be obscure yet some places are so plaine and easie to vnderstand that euery man by reading may know the meaning which speech I extend to so many places as are sufficient to teach vs all things needfull to saluation in this sense that the whole rule of faith is set downe in plaine places of Scripture which any man of himselfe by reading may vnderstand requiring still the grace of God and diligence in searching he replies three things The which afore I answer the Reader must note that the words he opposes are Chrysostomes and what I said I proued by many arguments the last whereof was the testimonie of the ancient Fathers who say in expresse words as much as I. The which arguments he answers not a word to and therefore replying vpon my conclusion he opposes through me the plaine Scripture the ancient Church and his owne writers by all which I confirmed that I said 5 First he sayes that albeit some places are plaine yet it doth not
follow that the Scripture ALONE euen in those plaine places is the rule because no man without some other meanes besides the plainenesse of the words can be infallibly assured that he vnderstands them right the which he proues first because some places seeming plaine are vnderstood otherwise then they seeme Secondly because the plainest places that are may be wrested to a wrong sense as that plaine place This is my body is wrested by the Caluinists to a figuratiue sense I answer his reason why Scripture alone could not be the rule of faith was because it is not plaine the which obscurity I denied to be in that which is necessary to be knowne affirming the Scripture in such places to be plaine now he replies that though such places be plaine yet still it cannot be the rule Thus first he denies the Scripture to be the rule because it is not plaine and then allowing it againe to be plaine yet still he denies it to be the rule What will this man stand to I maruell But they be not plaine enough because without some other infallible meanes besides the seeming plainenes of the words no man can be infallibly assured that he vnderstands aright euen those plaine places This absurd cauill I haue answered twenty times first that the meanes whereby this is done are the helpe of Gods Spirit our owne diligence the Church-teaching the light of nature and these meanes are infallible And these meanes I admit either coniunctim or diuisim to be necessary as a condition and medium for the full assurance of vnderstanding these places but this condition takes not away the true motion and reasons of plainenesse from them for as I answered in my booke to this argument that is not obscure which by ordinary and easie meanes may be vnderstood but which either hath no meanes at all to open it or onely such as are not ordinary to his confirmation d THE WAY p. 36. n. 2. I answered likewise But to his instances of the Caluinists wresting a plaine place This is my body to a figuratiue sense I reply first it is plaine and euident that it is a figure by the circumstances of the place when he that said the words This is my body that is giuen for you at the same instant held nothing but bread in his hand and liued and was neither yet glorified nor crucified and spake of a sacrament wherein it is ordinary to speake figuratiuely Secondly the Papists do the same in the next words This cup is the new Testament and yet they hold them to be plaine words if my aduersary will be smattering about the exposition of these words let him giue a reall answer to the place of my booke e Digr 49. n. 8. where they are handled of purpose for him 6 Next he sayes though the letter of the Scripture be neuer so plaine yet to haue infallible assuraÌ„ce of the sence there is required some other rule and meanes the which rule is not in the bare letter of the Scripture but is to be learned of the Church as Vincentius saith The which being the same he said before without difference or augmentation let it briefly receiue the same answer That the requisite coÌ„dition of vsing ordinary easie meanes wherof the ministry of the Church truly expounded is one I neuer denied but this proues not the Scriptures to be obscure nor remoues infallible assurance froÌ„ the Scripture to the Church but onely shewes that the Scripture infallibly out of it selfe giues vs this assurance by this meanes and VinceÌ„tius his words affirme no more for by the rule of Ecclesiasticall and Catholicke sence according to the which he requires the line of propheticall and apostolicall interpretation to be directed he meanes no vnwritten church-Church-tradition or doctrine that is wanting in the Scripture for he holds the Scripture it selfe to be sufficient for euery thing but onely that that which is in the Scripture be so vnderstood as agrees with the rule of faith which the true Church hath alwaies holden now that which the Church hath alwaies holden is contained in the Scripture alone that the Reader may see the Iesuites treachery in alledging Vincentius against the sufficiency of the Scripture who in that very place which belike he neuer saw with his owne eyes begins thus Here possible one may demand when the rule of the Scripture is perfect and in it selfe more then enough sufficient vnto all things Note here whether he thinks as the Iesuite doth that many substantiall points of doctrine needfull to saluation are not contained in them and that it is but a part of the rule what need is there to ioyne vnto it the authority of the Churches sence and he answers as the Iesuite hath alledged that this is because all men do not take it in one sence therefore it is necessary that the line of interpretation be directed according to the rule of Ecclesiasticall and Catholicke sence In which manner he speakes also in f Diximus in superioribus hanc suisse semper esse hodie Catholicorum consuetudinem vt fidem veram duoâ—us his modis approbent Primum diuini canonis authoritate Deinde â—cclesiae catholicae traditione Non quia canon solus non sibi ad vniuersa sufficiat sed quia verba diuina pro suo plerique arburatis interpetantur cap. 41. another place not supposing any thing to be wanting in the Scripture so much as to giue infallible assurance of it owne sence much lesse any articles of faith needfull to saluation but onely supposing that some heretikes would not yeeld to that it gaue or possible through their owne default did not see it and thereupon aduises to oppose against them the rule and practise of the Church as a man by witnesses would conuince him that denies the truth the which practise as it hinders not the Scriptures to containe the perfect rule of faith so we will allow it and require no sence or exposition of the Scripture nor no point of religion to be receiued vnles it be thus directed 7 It is therefore vntrue that he concludes with one cannot infallibly be assured when the words of the Scripture are to be vnderstood properly and when not without the authority of the Church vnlesse it be by reuelation I say this is false vpon two points first because this assurance may be had as from the externall meanes by the Scripture it selfe though the Church say nothing Next because this Church authority he vnderstands to be the externall testimony of the Church reuealing if not making the said sence out of tradition which is not written and not out of the Scripture it selfe so that the vnderstanding which I haue of the sence and my perswasion that it is the true sence shall not be founded on the Scripture but on the authority of the Church of Rome that sayes it which g THE WAY §. 8. n. 7. digr 11. I confuted affirming that this
nos certos faciat Grego de Valent tom 3. pag. 117. c. Verus Scripturae sensus inest Scripturae sicut signatum signo sed media certa explorata infallibilia quibus sensus iste eruitur non est ipsa Scriptura sed traditio Ecclesiastica vox definitio Ecclesiae seu eius qui Ecclesiae vice Christi praesidet Grets defens Bellar. tom 1. p. 1970. c. This is the finall euasion that the Iesuites vse against this argument in defence of their traditions and Popes authority against the sufficiency of the Scripture that the Scriptures haue in them a shining light and are as the Protestants say able to proue themselues to be the word of God and containe their true sense in themselues but this light we see not and this true sense we know not and this assurance that they are Gods word or that this is the true sense we cannot haue in the Scripture it selfe but by the meanes of Traditions and the Popes authoritie shewing and propounding these things to vs. As a candle though hauing light in it selfe yet shewes light to none when it is hid vnder a bushell but when it is set vpon a Candlesticke I answer 2. things First as I haue often said this authority and teaching of the Church is not alway nor simply necessary to shew all men the light of the Scripture or so much as to point to it for either by the immediate light of Gods Spirit or by the light of nature it may be knowne to be Gods word as by the light of nature it is knowne that God is whereupon it followes plainely that the Scripture alone as the Rule hath this light in it selfe and from it selfe shewes it else it could not in this manner without Church proposition shine to any Secondly I grant that ordinarily for the seeing and discerning of the euidēce perfection purity power sence all this light that is in the Scripture the proposition of the Church is necessary as a candlesticke to hold it forth but then this proposition may be expounded two waies one way to signifie such authority as by and from it selfe induces me to beleeue afore I see any authority in the Scripture and together with the authority of the Scripture the twofold authority of the Church and Scripture concurring to the moouing of my vnderstanding as when two men concurre as one formall beginning to the carrying and moouing of a blocke This Church proposition thus expounded I vtterly deny to be either needfull or possible Secondly it may be expounded for the Ministry of the Church by her Pastors and people reuealing the Scriptures to them that know them not and teaching the nature sense and meaning thereof But this ministry is but a bare condition adding no light sense authority or matter to the Scripture but onely leading vs to see it Of which Ministery there is no question betweene vs for all Protestants grant The authority or ministery of the Church supposes no want of light in the Scripture and vse it but the question is whether all the articles and whole nature of faith be contained in Scripture alone excluding vnwritten traditions though the Ministery of the Church be needfull as an instrument to shew teach and expound the Scripture as a candlesticke is needfull to shew the candle For the vse of this Ministry and requisite condition of all other meanes that are to be vsed supposes no want or defect in the obiect whereabout they are applied but onely produces it to his operation as the setting of a candle vpon the socket addes no light to it that was wanting in it selfe but onely remoues some impediments that hinder the standers by from seeing and the opening of a window to let in light makes not the Sunne imperfect or but a partiall light And if our aduersaries intended no more but this there were an end of the controuersie for no Protestant euer denied the necessity of Church ministry in this sense but freely confesse it although the authority * See it expounded Chap. 35. n. 1. inde and here immediatly after in nu 4. mentioned we renounce 4 For the better explication of this my answer and that the Reader may see how impertinent it is that my Aduersary sayes Note FIRST that o The quest betweene vs the Papists about the Churches authority the question is not whether some meanes be ordinarily required to the vnderstanding of the Scripture and the producing of faith in such as reade and vse it nor whether the Scripture worke infallible assurance immediatly in all men for in some it doth without the operation and coming betweene of the Church ministery For we hold it doth not But the point is whether this authority of the Church supply any article of faith or matter needfull to saluation that is wanting in the Scripture so that it may be said as my Aduersary alway speaketh the Scripture alone is but a part of the rule of faith which God hath left to instruct men what is to be holden for faith and there be many substantiall points belonging to faith which are contained in Scripture alone nether expresly nor thence to be deduced by consequence but to be supplied by tradition and Church authority and so the question is not about the expediency or condition of the meanes but about the perfection and sufficiency of the thing it selfe Note SECONDLY that my aduersary from the necessity of the means concludes the insufficiency of the thing thus The light of the Scripture shines not to vs the true sense of the Scripture is not infallibly assured vnto vs without the meanes of the Church The Scripture therefore is vnsufficient not containing all things needfull not instructing vs WHAT is to be holden for matter of faith as if a man should say the light of the candle appeares not to vs but when it is set on a candlesticke therefore there is much light that is wanting in the candle and is supplied by the candlesticke Note THIRDLY what the things properly are which our aduersaries attribute to the Church in comparing it with the Scripture They are there first to be a meanes to reueale and expound the Scripture to vs and to breed the faith thereof in our consciences Secondly to be the Foundation of our faith in this sense that we do beleeue this to be Scripture and this to be the true sense of the Scripture and this to be the matter of faith onely because the Church expounds the Scripture so Thirdly to supply vnto vs many articles of faith absolutely needfull to saluation that are wanting in the Scripture out of tradition and by the said tradition to expound the Scripture These two latter points they infer on of the first which is the incroching consequence that I except against in that the authority wherein God hath placed his Church is not in respect of the Scripture but in respect of vs being a bare Minister to the
haue said A. D. Whereas I obiect that sectaries and the Diuell himselfe doth alledge words of Scripture Pag. 202. White pag. 64. M. White granteth it but saith he either they alledge not true Scripture or not truly applied as also they alledge the authority of the Church but either not the true Church or the true Church not truly Testimonium hoc verū est This which M. White granteth is the very truth and wanteth nothing but that he apply it to his priuate men Luther and Caluin and to his owne selfe Partiality will not suffer him to apply it thus but there is no reason that he should be iudge it is more fit that the iudgement of this matter be left to the Catholicke Church which he confesseth to be taught of God White pag. 63. 10 If my answer be true that when sectaries or the Diuell alledge Scripture or the Church they do it not truly let the Repliar giue ouer bragging and shew really that the Protestants haue not alledged these things truly And if it be no reason we be iudges our selues no more is it that the Pope and Papacy which k Nomine Ecclesiae intelligimus eius caput id est Romanum Pontificem Grego de Valent pag. 24. tom 3. Quod autem haec regula animata rationalis sit summus Pontifex non est hic locus proprius probandi Fra. Albertin Coroll p. 251. c. No maruell now though the Catholicke Church were so fast talked of he meanes by the Catholick Church be iudge but were it at that that we might haue a free Councell assembled and holden as Councels were of ancient time where the Pope and his faith might be tried as well as we it would soone appeare the Protestants haue not bene partiall in their cause when the late Trent Councell it selfe had come nearer vs then it did if it had not bene managed by Machiauellisme more then religion and the greatest tyranny and cosenage and villany vsed in it that euer stirred in any publicke busines CHAP. XXXIIII 1 The Papists pretending the Church haue a further meaning then the vulgar know 2 The Popes will is made the Churches act 3 Base traditions expounded to be diuine truth A. D. Concerning the tenth Chapter both my Aduersaries make maine opposition against the conclusion of this Chapter Pag. 202. one reason whereof is that they do not or will not rightly vnderstand what I meant when here I say the doctrine of the Church is the rule of faith note therefore first whereas the name Church may be taken seuerall waies Intro q. 3. according to that which I noted in the Introduction whereas also in euery one of these senses it may be taken either as it is generally in all ages or as it is particularly in this or that determinate age my Aduersaries omitting all other senses principally vnderstand me to meane by the name Church the Pope or Pastours of this present age whereas in this Chapter I do not at least ex professo or primarily intend to speake of the Church in this sense but rather do speake of the Church in a more generall indefinite and indeterminate sense as it signifieth one or other companie of men liuing either in all ages or in one or other age who in one or other sense may be called the Church the doctrine whereof say I is the rule and meanes ordained by God to instruct all sorts of men in all matters of faith Note secondly that by the doctrine of the Church I do not vnderstand any Friars dreames White pag. 3 as M. White dreameth nor humane traditions especially opposite to Scripture but diuine doctrine including therein both the written diuine Scripture and the vnwritten diuine traditions and the true diuine interpretation of them both as by word writing signes or otherwise it is or may be propounded and deliuered to vs by the authority of the Church all which although it may worthily be called diuine doctrine as being first reuealed by God here I call Church-doctrine because as it was first reuealed and committed to the keeping of Prophets and Apostles who in their time were chiefe and principall members of the militant Church so by Gods ordinance it was to be propounded and deliuered to other men by the same Prophets Apostles and others their successors as they are Doctors and Pastors of the same Church Note thirdly that by the rule of faith I meane such a rule as is also a sufficient outward meanes ordained and set apart by God to instruct all sorts of men in all points of faith which consequently must haue those three conditions or properties of the rule set downe and declared in the sixt Chapter viz that it must be infallible easie to be vnderstood of all sorts and vniuersall or such as may sufficiently resolue one in all points of faith Note fourthly that when I say the doctrine of the Church is the rule of faith I do not vnderstand that the doctrine as seuered from the Church or the Church as diuided from the doctrine is the rule of saith but that the doctrine as deliuered by the Church or the Church as deliuering doctrine is that rule and meanes which God hath ordained to instruct men in faith Note fifthly that to proue the doctrine of the Church to be the rule of faith in such sort as now I haue said it might suffice for this Chapter that it be shewed that at least once or in one age there were one or other company of liuing men in one or other sense called the Church who were ordained by God and set apart to instruct all sorts of men in all points of faith being for that purpose in their doctrine and teaching furnished with these three conditions which are requisite in the rule of faith for this being shewed in this Chapter I shall easily shew in the next that the same is to be said of some or other company continuing in all ages In this Chapter therefore I chiefly vndertake to proue that once or in one age there was a company of liuing men who in one sense may be called the Church whom God specially appointed as a meanes sufficient quantū ex se to instruct all men in all matters of faith being for that purpose furnished with the three conditions or properties of the rule of faith 1 THe conclusion of this Chapter was that the infallible rule which we ought obediently to follow in all points of faith is the doctrine and teaching faith and beleefe of the true Church his meaning wherein he saies I would not or did not rightly vnderstand Let vs therefore see how I vnderstood it My answer was that we would freely grant this conclusion if the meaning were no more but that the doctrine and faith of the vniuersall Church is the rule of faith but there is a higher matter meant First that the Churches word and authority without grounding the same on the Scripture is the rule
My aduersarie therefore maintaining the doctrine of the Church to be the rule of faith * Suarez the Iesuit shames not to tell the king of England in his late writing against him that The authoritie of the Trent Councell which all the world knowes was mooued by the Pope in the same manner that Puppet motions are mooued by such as shew them is the authoritie of the vniuersall Catholicke Church Defens fid Cathol adu Angl. sect lib. 1. c. 9. nu 7. meanes nothing by the Church but THE POPE HIMSELFE and they that yeeld themselues to be led by the Romane Church must depend solely vpon his will and word 3 To the second this diuine doctrine of the Church which the Repliar saies is the rule of our faith is by himselfe expounded to include not onely the written Scripture but vnwritten traditions also and such decrees and interpretations both of Scripture and tradition as the Pope shall reueale and propound hence it followes that any Friars dreame may be thrust vpon vs as an article of faith necessary to saluation because these traditions and interpretations and this authoritie of the Pope containe many such dreames that is to say the Pope and his Church vnder pretence that they are diuine traditions and all power to propose matters of faith belongs to him may and doth require vs to beleeue lyes and errors and albeit the Iesuite affirme these traditions and interpretations of his Church to be reuealed by God to the Apostles and their successors the Doctors and Pastors of the Church as part of that diuine and Church doctrine which he would haue receaued o Pari pietatis affectu ac reuerentia suscipit veneratur Conc. Trid. sess 4. with the same obedience and affection wherewith we receaue the Scripture yet this is false For the whole obiect of our faith is contained in the Scripture alone as I shewed in the third Digression and because he denies that any such dreames can be contained in the doctrine of his Church thus I reason For whatsoeuer the Pope shall definitiuely propound to be beleeued that is the doctrine of the Church But he may definitiuely propound the very dreames of a Friar this I proue The bookes of i Baro. an 159. n 4. ind expurg Hispa p. 149. d. 15. Sanct. Romana Hermes and k Phot. Biblioth p. 156. edit Graec. Haschel Balâ—am respon p. 363 in Iure Graeco Rom. tom 1. Zâ—onar in Apost can vlt. Perer. Ioh. 13. disp 30. Clemens Constitutions are Apochryphall counterfet and vnsound writings but D. Stapleton l Hos similes libros in canoneÌ„ sacrae Scripturae si praesens Ecclesia referret nulla ratio obstat quin eos pro Canonicis admittere debeamus Relect. pag. 514. saies he may put these bookes into the Canon of the Bible and so binde men to beleeue them by diuine faith therefore he may define and make to be matter of faith that which is vnsound and no better then a dreame Againe Canus and Caietan m Refert Fra. Suar. tom 2. p. 30. a. affirme the opinion of the virgine Maries conception without sinne to be godly and probable in shew but false and vncertaine indeede Yet n Suar. ibi Vas qu. in 3. part Tho. to 2. p. 45. the Iesuits say the Pope may define it when he will Thirdly o Grego Val. analys fid pag. 325. they hold the authority of the Church in defining to be in the Pope who may determine the things of faith whether he vse care and diligence therin or not but he that defines without any care taking or diligeÌ„ce vsed may chance specially if he be a Friar p To the number of 52. Azor institut moral tom 2. l. 5. c 44. as many Popes are to thrust his Friars dreames vpon the Church Fourthly the Canon law q Gl Marg. c quanto de translatione sayes He may make something of nothing and make that a sentence which is none Lastly r Suar vbi sup the Iesuites hold that a supernaturall truth may be so implicitely contained in tradition or Scripture that * Canisius reports that in Paris in the Vniuersities of Spaine and elsewhere no man is admitted to any degree in diuinitie vnlesse he sweare that he will hold the Immaculate conception of the virgine Marial lib. 1. c. 7. Such trickes as this will make this consent swell and increase as fast as the mountaine the common consent of the Church increasing whereby oftentimes the Holy Ghost expounds traditions and Scriptures the Church may at last bring in her definition which shall haue the force of a reuelation The two doores of sleepe Å¿ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hom. Odiss Ï„. mentioned so much in the Poets let not in more dreames then this doctrine doth lyes heresies into the world for whensoeuer the Church of Rome will bring in a new doctrine the implicite traditions and the increase of the Churches consent may be pretended 4 * Ad. 3. To the third he notes no more But what he said in his treatise and I granted in such sense as I layed downe in my answer And this noting it againe is needles and impertinent to the matter in hand which is not touching the quality but the quiddity of the rule 5 * Ad. 4. To the fourth we know well enough that the Church and the doctrine go together but it is false that the Church as deliuering doctrine is the rule For the doctrine is the rule and the Church that which teaches both vs and it selfe according to it as the Iudge expounding and executing the law is not the rule together with the law but the law is the rule it selfe and the iudge is the kings officer to apply it but hauing no authority ouer or beside it And yet allowing the contrary and all that the Repliar sayes still in his conceite the Pope with his definitions shall be this Church and this doctrine which he thus conioynes to be the rule 6 To the fift to proue the doctrine of the Church to be the rule of saith in such sort as the Repliar hath said Ad. 5. it is not sufficieÌ„t to shew that at least once or in some one age there hath bene a company of men called the Church in one sense or other ordained by God and furnisht with conditions to teach men the faith for the Repliar hath said that the doctrine of the Church is the rule of faith in such sort as it includes not onely the written Scriptures but vnwritten traditions and the interpretation of them both by Church authority Where two things are affirmed first that vnwritten traditions are part of the doctrine that is the rule Secondly that our faith is built t Non quid dicatur sed quis dicat attendendum Staplet Princ. pag. 364. Relect. p. 429. on the authority of the Church Neither of these is proued by shewing that which is
whether this doctrine of these succeeding Pastors shal need to be the same that the doctrine of the Apostles was but onely affirmes that as the Apostles doctrine for the time they liued was the rule so the doctrine of the succeeding Pastors is the rule leauing roome enough for this doctrine of these succeeding Pastors to vary from the doctrine of the Apostles that when we shew the present abuses in the Church of Rome and decrees of their latter Popes for these last 800. yeares to haue swarued from the Apostles doctrine and practise they may pleade the authoritie of their succeding Pastors And indeede it is true that the Church of Rome holds that it is not necessary the doctrine and teaching of the present and succeeding Pastors be the same in all things that it was in the Apostolicke and Primitiue Church but the Pope hath power to make a NEW CREED and NEW ARTICLES of faith For Iacobatius m De Concil p. 310. A. saies The Pope alone may make new articles of faith according to one acceptation of the word Article that is for such as must be beleeued which before needed not be beleeued and Zenzelin a Popish doctor n Gl. extr Ioh. 22. cum inter § doclaramus saies The Vicar of Christ may make an Article of faith taking an article not properly but in a large sense for that which must be beleeued when before by the precept of the Church it was not necessary to be beleeued Augustinus Triumphus writes o August Anconit sum de eccle potest q. â—9 art 1. that it belongs to the Pope alone to make a new Creed For in a Creed those things are put that vniuersally belong to Christian faith he therefore hath authority to make such a Creed who is the head of Christian faith and in whom as in the head all the members of the Church are vnited and by whose authoritie all things pertaining to faith are confirmed and strengthened And p Art 2. againe That the Pope may dispense in adding articles may be vnderstood 3. waies First in respect of the multiplication of the articles themselues Secondly in respect of expounding the things contained in the articles Thirdly in respect of the augmentation of such things as may be reduced to the articles ALL THESE WAIES the Pope may dispense in adding articles because as he may make a new Creed so he may MVLTIPY NEW ARTICLES OVER AND ABOVE THE OTHER Secondly he may by more articles explicate the articles already placed in the Creed Thirdly because peraduenture all things beleeued in the Creed may be reduced after the aforesaid articles and by such reduction may be increased so that vnder each article MORE THINGS NECESSARY TO BE BELEEVED MAY BE PVT THEN ARE YET PVT The which being done marke what they say touching their authority q Roder. Dosm de auth script l. 3. c. 12. The Popes assertions ascend to the height of diuine testimony as the assertions of the Apostles did and of such as made the holy Scripture and there be who contend that they belong to the sacred Scripture it selfe which is contained in the bookes of the Bible This doctrine whereof all our aduersaries bookes are full shewes plainely that they intend not that this their Church teaching so much magnified to be the rule should alway be one and the same but such as shall follow the Popes lust and be altered with the time that so this Antichrist of Rome might abolish the whole Testament of Christ this is the first thing to be noted that the reader may see what he meanes by his Church doctrine that is the rule 4 The next thing is his distinction about this doctrine of the Church that it was the rule in the Apostles dayes and is the rule in succeeding ages but not as contained in onely Scripture but as deliuered by these Pastors Which speech containes 2. things a Negatiue and an affirmatiue the negatiue is that the doctrine of the Church is not the rule as it is contained in onely Scripture Meaning as * Ch. 27. n. 3. I haue shewed that all diuine doctrine belonging to the rule is not contained in the Scripture but much or the most of it in tradition vnwritten and that which is contained is not the rule by vertue of writing but by vertue of the Church that makes it authenticall Panormitan r Panorm tom 2. de praesumptione c. Sicut noxius sayes The words of the text of Scripture are not the Popes words but the words of Salomon in the Prouerbs but because this text is made Canonicall it is to be beleeued and induceth necessity so to do as if the Pope had set it foorth himselfe Because we make all those things to bee ours whereto we might impart our authority But whether without Canonization the sayings of Salomon be approued in the Church seeing they are in the body of the Bible say as the glosse saith and Ierom holdeth who seemes to conclude that they are Apocrypha which is to be noted and that because of this as also because Salomon had no power to make Canons This also must be obserued that the Reader may know the meaning of his conclusion and what it is that we deny therein For NO DOCTRINE EITHER OF THE APOSTELS IN THEIR TIME OR OF THE SVCCEEDING PASTORS OF THE CHVRCH IN ANY TIME IS THE RVLE OF FAITH BVT ONELY THAT WHICH IS CONTAINED IN THE SCRIPTVRE As I haue Å¿ In the WAY digr 3. shewed His affirmatiue is that the doctrine of the Church is the rule as it is deliuered by the Pastors or the Pastours deliuering this doctrine are the rule which is the same that he said a little before the doctrine as deliuered by the Church or the Church as deliuering doctrine is the rule t Pars obiecti formalis fidei est vox Ecclesiae D. Stapler relect p. 484. Saltem aequalis est Ecclesiae Scripturae authoritas ibi pag. 494. His meaning is that the Churches testimony and authority mingles it selfe with the authority of the doctrine and is ioyntly with it or aboue it the rule of faith as when diuers simples haue their ingredience into one compound and two men equally carry betweene them one burthen Their doctrine this way is knowne wel enough how the Scriptures in regard of vs haue all their authority from the Church the sense of the Scripture is to be fetched from the Church whatsoeuer the Church of Rome shall teach is the word of God c. The which things being couched in the Iesuites conclusion as he vnderstands it we detest and spit vpon when he shall thus debarre the Scripture from being the rule to set vpon the bench his Papall Antichristian authority If the shame either of God or men or any respect of truth were with them they durst not thus presumptuously and basely steale the authority to themselues whereby both themselues and we and all the world
answered Digression 48. yet here I answer againe that the Protestant faith so far as it differeth from that which the Church of Rome holds against vs continued alwaies not in the aire but in men and those men were such as liued in the Church of Rome it selfe constantly holding the foundation of Christian Religion though the same men were corrupted also some more some lesse with those errors that we refuse The rest of this Chapter meddles with nothing I writ but is spent in prouing that the Church whose doctrine is the rule continues in all ages vnto the worlds end not onely the true Church abides for euer vnto the end but that Church doth so whose doctrine is the rule to teach vs as if there were a true Church of Christ whose doctrine were not the rule in such sense as I haue expounded the doctrine of the Church to be the rule This is partly to be saying somewhat when he could not reply to that I said and partly to perswade his people that we hold the contrary I detest his rudenesse and lament their bondage and slauery A. D. M. White granteth Pag. 233. White p. 63. that those Scriptures which I alledge in the treatise proue well Christs abiding alway with the Church whereupon is inferred the continuance of the Church in all ages therefore he will not or ought not deny but that they proue also that there is teaching of true doctrine of faith in the Church not onely for the Apostles time or for sixe or eight hundred yeares after but absolutely for all ages I grant all this and if he beg hard I will giue him more that the doctrine of the Church thus taught in all ages is the rule of faith that all men ought to follow But he is so far bankrupt and behind hand that no reasonable thing will helpe him For still this Church supposes not his Pope nor his Papacy and this doctrine meanes not his traditions nor any thing taught in the Church besides the Scripture nor doth this being the rule intend any such authority or soueraignty of the Church aboue the Scripture as he pleads for but only the Ministry of the Church vnder Christ and his Scriptures in propounding the faith to particular beleeuers and confirming the same to their hearts and consciences by the sole authority of the Scriptures themselues as I haue often touched CHAP. XXXVII Not the Church but the Scripture is the rule 2. The question touching the visiblenesse of the Church proceeds of the Militant Church 3. 4. 5. In what sense we say the Militant Church is sometime inuisible 5. The Papists thinke the Church shall be inuisible in the time of Antichrist Their contradictions touching Antichrist breefly noted A. D. Concerning the twelfth Chapter By that which hath bene said in the two precedent Chapters it is apparant enough Pag. 234. that there is in all ages a certaine company called the Church whose doctrine is the ordinary rule and meanes ordained by God to instruct all men in all matters of faith and that by the said doctrine and teaching of the true Church euery one is to learne what is and what is not to be holden for the true faith not doubting but that the doctrine of faith which is commended and caught vs by the said true Catholicke Church is the right faith The which being so euery one may see how necessary it is to seeke find and follow the iudgement of the true Church as being a most necessary meanes without which none can expect to attaine that one infallible entire faith which is necessary to saluation This seemeth in a sort to be granted by M. White For although he pleade hard to haue Scripture alone to be the (a) White p. 13. 14. 15. rule holding the letter it selfe to be the (b) Pag. 12. vessell which presenteth thu rule which he (c) Pag. 31. cōpareth to the Carpenters square to the precepts of art to the law of the Land yet as he cannot deny that a child cannot do any thing with the Carpenters square nor an vnlearned man with a booke wherein is contained precepts of art or with a lawbooke but the square must be applied by a cunning Carpenter the precepts of art must be expounded by a learned maister the law must be declared by a skilfull Lawier or propounded by an authorized Iudge Euen so he must grant that the Scripture it selfe although it be a good rule yet if it were as he would haue it the onely rule must be applied expounded declared and propounded not by euery man woman and child but by the authority as we say or by the Ministry as my Aduersaries say of the Church White p. 110. Pag. 93. and that so necessarily that euen as M. White affirmeth except in some extraordinary cases no man can of himselfe attaine to the knowledge of faith but as the Church teacheth him in regard as otherwhere he confesseth the Church is a subordinate meanes for the bringing of men to saluation in that God teacheth his elect by the ministry thereof Neither saith he can any man be the child of God except first he be conceiued in the wombe of the Church So we see euen in M. Whites opinion how necessary it is for euery one to seeke finde and follow the teaching of the true Church 1 THat which he sayes I granted in a sort I grant againe and yet will still pleade and proue the Scripture alone to be the rule and nothing else For though a child can do nothing with a square nor an vnlettered man with a booke yet still the square and contents of the booke are the rule and not the Carpenter and the Iudge they are onely Ministers to apply the rule and subordinate conditions requisite for the due vse of the rule and to be ruled by it themselues if at any time as sometime they may they erre in working So is it in few words with the Church and Scriptures And albeit I affirmed as he saith and it be my opinion that it is necessary to find and follow the teaching of the Church yet is it not my opinion that the vniuersall Church teaches any doctrine that is not written in Scripture or God by the Church teaches those vnwritten traditions or that the Church exceeds the condition of a bare Minister vnder the Scriptures Which Ministry being acknowledged M. White will allow it any authority and power to teach informe perswade correct represse particular men that my Aduersaries will demand but they require Church authority aboue the Scripture and make vnwritten traditions and the Popes Decretals equall with the Scripture and place all the power and faculty of the Church in the Pope and when they haue done allow no particular man or Church to call any of these things in question This is it the Repliars teeth water at and which by M. Whites concessions he would recouer but he shall neuer get it nor all the
the vnlearned know them to be sincere The new translation lately set foorth by the Kings authoritie defended Momus in his humor The subordination of meanes Chap. 29. Touching the obscuritie of the Scripture The necessitie of meanes to be vsed for the vnderstanding of the Scripture proues not the obscuritie Traditions debarred A Councell is aboue the Pope The Scripture of it selfe easie to all that vse it as they should The certaine sence of the Scripture and the assurance thereof is not by tradition Chap. 30. Touching the all-sufficiencie of Scripture to the matter of faith It shewes it selfe to be Gods word Luthers denying S. Iames epistle How the Papists expound the light of the Scripture What they and what we hold about the authoritie of the Church How expresse Scripture is required Chap. 31. Wherein the place 2. Tim. 3.15 alledged to proue the fulnesse and sufficiencie of the Scripture alone is expounded and vrged against the Iesuites cauils Chap. 32. Touching priuate spirits that expound against the Church Such priuate expositions refused by the Protestants And yet the Papists haue no other All teaching is to be examined euen by priuate men Certaine propositions shewing how the Church teaching may be or may not be examined and refused Chap. 33. How a priuate man is assured he vnderstands and beleeues aright touching the last and highest resolution of faith Luthers reiecting the Fathers Occhams opinion that no man is tied to the Pope or his Councels The Beraeans examined the doctrine that they were taught The faith of the beleeuer rests vpon diuine infused light M. Luther sought reformation with all humilitie Scripture is the grounds of true assurance Who the Pastors were of whom Luther learned his faith His conference with the Diuel By the Church the Papists meane onely the Pope Chap. 34. The Papists pretending the Church haue a further meaning then the vulgar know The Popes will is made the Churches act Base traditions expounded to be diuine truth Chap. 35. The Papists pretending the Church meane onely the Pope How and in what sence they vnderstand the doctrine of the Apostles to be the rule of faith They hold that the Pope may make new articles of faith And that the Scripture receiues authoritie from him Vnlearned men may see the truth when the Pope and his crew sees it not And they may iudge of that they teach The Iesuites dare not answer directly Chap. 36. An entrance into the question touching the visibilitie of the Protestant Church in the former ages Wherein it is briefly shewed where and in whom it was Chap. 37. Not the Church but the Scripture is the rule The question touching the visiblenesse of the Church proceeds of the Militant Church In what sence we say the Militant Church is sometime inuisible The Papists thinke the Church shall be inuisible in the time of Antichrist Their contradictions touching Antichrist breefly noted Chap. 38. The Papists cannot proue the Church to be alway visible in that sence wherein we denie it The diuerse considerations of the Church distinguished His quarrels made for our doctrine touching the Churches seuerall states answered The faithfull onely are true members of the Church Vpon what occasion the question touching the visiblenesse of the Church first began Chap. 39. The Papists are enforced to yeeld the same that we say touching the inuisiblenesse of the Church Their doctrine touching the time of Antichrists reigne And the state of the Militant Church at some times Arguments for the perpetuall visiblenesse of the Church answered In whom the true Church consisted before Luthers time Chap. 40. Againe touching the visiblenesse of the Church and in what sence we say it was inuisible Many things innouated in the Church of Rome The complaints of Vbertine and Ierome of Ferrara All the Protestants faith was preserued in the middest of the Church of Rome A iest of the Terinthians What religion hath bred desperation Chap. 41. A narration of a popish Doctor and professor of diuinitie in the Church of Rome translated out of Acosta de temp nouissimis lib. 2. cap. 11. and Maiolus dies canicul tom 2. pag. 89. and inserted for answer to that wherewith the Iesuite reproches our Church in the last words of his precedent replie Chap. 42. An obiection against the Repliars Catalogue Diuers articles condemned by the Fathers mentioned in the Catalogue that the Church of Rome now vses What consent there is betweene antiquitie and papistrie Chap. 43. Whatsoeuer the Fathers of the primitiue Church beleeued is expressed in their bookes The Repliar is driuen to say they held much of his religion onely implicitely What implicite faith is according to the Papists The death of Zeuxis The Fathers writ that which cannot stand with papistrie Chap. 44. The whole Christian faith deliuered to the Church hath succeeded in all ages yet many corruptions haue sometime bene added how and in what sence the Church may erre A Catalogue assigned of those in whom the Protestants faith alway remained What is required to the reason of succession Chap. 45. The Fathers are not against the Protestants but with them Touching the Centuries reiecting of the Fathers The cause of some errors in the Fathers Gregories faith and conuerting England The Papists haue bene formall innouators How they excuse the matter Chap. 46. The errors broached by the later Diuines of the Church of Rome Their errors maintained by that Church and their writings to good purpose alledged by Protestants How that which they speake for the Protestants is shifted of One reason why we alledge their sayings That which is said in excuse of their disagreement answered Chap. 47. Councels haue erred and may erre What manner of Councels they be that the Papists say cannot erre It is confessed that both Councels and Pope may erre Chap. 48. Touching the Councels of Neece the second and Frankford How the Nicene decreed images to be adored What kind of Councell it was And what manner of one that of Frankford was Frankford cōdemned the second Nicene Touching the booke of Charles the Great and of what credit it is Chap. 49. The ancient Church held the blessed Virgin to haue bene conceiued in sinne The now Church of Rome holds the contrary Chap. 50. Touching Seruice and praier in an vnknowne language The text 1. Cor. 14. expounded and defended against Bellarmine The ancient Church vsed praier in a knowe language Chap. 51. The Church of Rome against all antiquitie forbids the laie people the vse of the Scripture in the vulgar language The shifts vsed by the Papists against reading spitefull speeches against it Testimonies of antiquitie for it The Repliars reason against it Chap. 52. The mariage of Priests and Bishops lawfull and allowed by antiquitie Some examples hereof in the ancient Church The restraint hereof is a late corruption Priests were maried euen in these westerne parts a thousand yeares after Christ Chap. 53. Wherein is handled the doctrine of the Church of Rome touching the
See Io. Marian. tract pro vulg edit c. 13 23. Matth. Aquar in Capreo prol pag 7. PERFORMED WITH AS GOOD ADVICE AND BY AS LEARNED AND GODLY MEN AS EVER IOYNED TOGETHER IN SVCH A WORKE SINCE TRANSLATION WAS VSED And if some priuate men skilfull in the learned tongues as Wickliffe or Tindall for example when better meanes failed translated the Bible of themselues so did Aquila Theodotion Symmachus Origen Ierom Lucian Isychius and d Fuere autem pene innume rabiles olim editiones Latinae Posseu appar v Biblia p. 223. innumerable others and diuers also lately in the Church of Rome Saint Austin e De Doct. Chr. l. 2. c. 11. sayes They which turned the Scripture out of the Hebrew tongue into Greeke may be reckoned but the Latin interpreters cannot by any meanes for in the first times of the faith as a Greeke booke of the Scriptures came into any mans hands that thought himselfe to haue some little facultie in both the tongues he would be bold to translate it the which thing truly did more helpe then hinder the vnderstanding c. In which words of Saint Austin besides the customes of those times in translating the Bible that in euery place the vulgar might vse it which I presume my Iesuite will grudge at we see they translated then as boldly and commonly and more then any among vs now do Or if the Iesuite will not allow vs the priuiledge of that time yet he may not for shame obiect that to our Church which is done in his owne where Vatablus Munster Pagnin Montanus and others men as priuate as any translator among vs haue translated or corrected the text out of the learned tongues and which I commend to the Iesuites good memorie and contemplation and to the consideration of all the Papists in England their translations agree with ours and differ from the vulgar Latin as much as ours Pag. 30. A.D. Now although we hold that Scripture is not the onely rule yet this doth not argue that we be enemies to the Scripture or that we are voide of all meanes to secure vs of the truth For first we hold the holy Scripture to be one rule yea a principall rule of our faith which we should not do if we were enemies to the Scripture And one reason why we hold something else besides Scripture to be with Scripture the rule of our faith is partly because so we learne out of the Scripture as in the Treatise and this my Reply will appeare partly because we find it necessarie to admit some other infallible rule and * This infallible meanes is the authoritie of the Church Fathers Councels and Pope which iâ— so farre from being yeelded by our selues to be subiect to error in any point of doctrine authoratiuely concluded that euen M. White himselfe who here affirmeth the Church Fathers Councels and Pope to be yeelded by our selues to be subiect to errour doth a few pages before acknowledge that it is a principle of our owne that a generall Councell cannot erre so carelesse this man was what he said or vnsaid so he might seeme to say something against vs. A.D. meanes which may infallibly assure vs both what Bookes be Scripture and what translation and what interpretation is to be followed for finding out the diuine truth contained in Scripture 4 This is his reason why the Church of Rome denies the Scripture to be the whole rule of faith for the vnderstanding whereof haue your eye vpon my words I said that one of their practises against the Scripture is their depriuing it from being the totall rule of faith and I added that hereby they left themselues vtterly voide of all meanes to secure their faith by and to finde the truth inasmuch as the Church the Fathers the Councels the Pope himselfe which is all the rule they can pretend are subiect to error and so by themselues confessed to be To this he replies three things first that they hold the Scripture to be one rule yea a principall rule of our faith which they would not do if they were enemies to the Scripture I answer distinctly three things first sometime some of them when they are pressed cannot shift theÌ„selues say as the Iesuit here doth the Scripture is the rule and the principall rule too yea more so Bellar. Tho. Antonine others whose words I haue reported in THE WAY Secondly howsoeuer some of them sometime speake thus yet againe others allow it to be but a part of the rule that is to say such as containes but one part of things belonging to faith Thus you see the Iesuit expounds himselfe in his next words we hold something else beside Scripture to be with Scripture the rule of faith Becan f Circ Caluin pag 278. sayes The totall and full rule of our faith is Scripture and Tradition both together and this is defined in g Sess 4. the Trent Councell And it is enough to shew their contempt and disdaine of the Scripture when thus they accuse it of imperfection and match base and vncertaine traditions with it Therefore vntill they can proue first that this defect is in the Scripture next that this defect is supplied by Traditions and then thirdly that these whereof they boast are the true Traditions proceeding from the same Spirit that the Scripture doth and left of God to supply this defect of the Scripture they can neuer shake off the imputation layed vpon them that they be enemies to the Scripture Thirdly they do not hold the Scripture to be a principall rule neither as the Iesuite speakes Would they did for their owne sakes but the Iesuite knowes it is holden to be the least part of the rule The Bishops of the Councell of Basil h Concil Basil p. 104. Bin. say The authoritie of an vniuersall Tradition or of a Councell is equall with the authoritie of the Scripture Caesar Baronius i An. 53. n. 11. Tradition is the foundation of the Scriptures and excels them in this that the Scriptures cannot subsist vnlesse they be strengthened by Tradition but Tradition hath strength enough without the Scriptures Cardinall Hosius k Conf Polon pag. 383. The least part of the Gospell is written and the greater part by farre is come to vs by Tradition Gregorie the 13. l D. 40. Si Papa in annot Men do with such reuerence respect the Apostolicall seate of Rome that they rather desire to know the ancient institution of Christian religion from the Popes mouth then from the holy Scriptâ—re and they onely enquire what is his pleasure and according to it they order their life and conuersation And if it be obserued how these Traditions in euery question and point of religion are preferred before the Scripture this that I say wil appeare to be true which they would not do if they were not mortall enemies to the Scripture and slaues to the Popes absolute will 5
infallible rule of faith as it is also the ordinary sufficient meanes ordained by God to breed faith in men My aduersaryes for their better aduantage take the question in the first sense whereas they ought to take it in the second sense in regard I so take it in the fift Chapter vnto which this Chapter hath reference For whereas in the foure first Chapters I had set downe for a certaine ground that one infallible entire faith was necessary to saluation in the first Chapter I proued that God had ordained some rule and meanes that is some such rule as was also a meanes sufficient to breed this one infallible entire faith in all sorts of men yea quantum ex se in all men In the sixt Chapter I set downe certaine conditions of this rule and meanes and consequently when in this seuenth Chapter I deny Scripture alone to be the rule I must needes meane that it is not the rule which is also a sufficient ordinary meanes of which all my speech went before Now in this true sense my aduersaries do not gainesay but conuicted by the euidence of truth yeeld that Scripture alone is not the rule taking the rule as it signifieth that which is so a rule as it is also the ordinary sufficient meanes to breed faith in men as here I take it The Scripture it selfe saith M. Wootton is a rule Wootton p. 66. or meanes made effectuall to some by reading without any outward helpe of man but this is not the ordinary course that God hath appointed for the instruction of the people Pag. 89. in the knowledge of his truth therefore if we say at any time Scripture alone is the rule of faith by ALONE we seuer it from the traditions and authoritie of men not from their Ministry and ascribe sufficiently vnto it in respect of the matter to be beleeued not simply of the meanes to bring men to beleeue And againe we require besides onely expresse wordes of Scripture the Ministry and industry of man together and conclude points of doctrine out of that which is written in Scripture White pag. 23. M. White although he seeme to make the doctrine it selfe of Scripture to be the rule the letter of the original or translation to be a meanes which like a vessell presenteth vnto vs this rule yet to the purpose of the question in my sense he granteth that the Ministry is the ordinary meanes Pag. 116. whereby we may learne the faith of Christ and that no man can of himselfe attaine the knowledge thereof but as the Church teacheth him excepting some extraordinary cases Whereby I euidently conclude that both M. Wootton and M. White yeeld to the principall conclusion of this Chapter to wit that Scripture alone whether taken for the originall or translation is not the rule of faith in such sense as I here speake of the rule of faith Idle therefore and impertinent is most of their long and tedious discourse vpon this Chapter which consequently I pretermit as vnworthie of any reply if any thing here brought by them and pretermitted by me seeme contrary to my conclusion it is such as is answered ordinarily by Catholicke Authors or such as these my aduersaries themselues if they wil not contradict this which is yeelded to by themselues ought to answer vnto as well as I. 1 HEre I must repeate my old complaint that I am forced to renew in euery question that falles out betweene vs that my aduersary omits and dissembles the whole substance of my writing and onely descants vpon some few remnants that he rends out here and there wisely foreseeing either that his cause would abide no triall or himselfe was not the man that was able to make the triall For though he could well enough translate and transcribe another man writing and patch it together when he had done to make a pamphlet yet the defence he must leaue to his Author being belike some student * A.D. Student in diuinitie as he professes himselfe that is proceeded no higher then translations and yet will serue the turne to beare the name of a Catholicke writer This abiect course which now adayes that side cleaues to as deuoutly as to their faith bewrayes the misery of their side to say no more and so I follow him whither the winde and the tide carrie me For he that rides a iade must take his owne pace or go afoote 2 First he sayes his Aduersaries either ignorantly or wilfully peruert the state of the question else they could haue had no colour to make so long discourse The which is no vnprofitable way when he cannot defend his question to picke a quarrel to the state And possible he hath learned it by poâ—ching in D. Stapletons bookes who in his time made good vse of this tricke But how was the question mistaken He saies his question was not whether Scripture be the rule of faith but whether Scripture alone be the rule and meanes to breed faith For the trial of this I must intreate the Reader to take knowledge how things stand betweene vs though I haue once or twise already vpon like occasions repeated it The Iesuite in his Treatise that I answered beginnes with certaine propositions which he sayes are to be supposed and set downe for certaine and assured grounds First that no man can be saued without the true faith Secondly that this faith is but one neither can men be saued in any other Thirdly that this faith must be infallible and certaine so that the beleeuer be fully perswaded of the truth thereof Fourthly that it must be whole and entire beleeuing rightly all points one as well as another Fifthly that God hath ordained a certaine rule or meane whereby all men learned and vnlearned may be instructed in this faith and infallibly taught WHAT is to be holden for the true faith and WHAT not Sixtly that this rule must haue three conditions First infallibility to be certaine without deceiuing vs. Secondly easines that it may be plainely knowne of all sorts of men Thirdly latitude that by it we may know absolutely all points needfull to be learned Then a In THE WAY §. 5. and in his printed treatise p. 17. concl 1. he proceeds to inquire what in particular is the thing which may be assigned to be this rule whereto he answers in foure conclusions the first whereof is this whereabout he now contends The Scripture alone especially as it is translated * In his printed copie it is Specially as it is by Protestants translated into the English tongue into the English tongue cannot he this rule This I denied in another conclusion opposite to it vsing the words of the publike articles of our Church The Scripture comprehended in the Canonicall bookes of the old and new Testament is the rule of faith so far that whatsoeuer is not read therein or cannot be proued thereby is not to be accepted as any point of
is so able as to worke that effect without any other meanes or helpes concurring with it but at the most doth import a great degree of profitablenesse Or if it import sufficiency it is not meant that alone sufficiency of which our questiō is but at the most sufficiency in suo genere in a certaine limited kind to wit of written Scripture Against the second part of my answer first M. White either had a corrupt copie of my treatise or else himselfe his writer or printer corrupteth euen my words and sense For I do not say as he maketh me the Scripture is sufficient because c. But I say onely that it is profitable the rather because it commendeth the authority of the Church By which corruption he maketh himselfe matter to worke vpon but very idlely most of his obiections being ouerthrowne only by reading my words aright as I set them downe His chiefe obiection is this The Scriptures are able to make the man of God perfect that is the Pastours the Pope Councell and all but it cannot send these to the Church because these be the Church I answer that it sendeth euen these also to the Church First in that it sendeth them to the interpretation of Councels and Fathers of the ancient Church Secondly it sendeth them as they are priuate men needing instruction to themselues as authorized Pastours who by the assistance of Gods Spirit shall be enabled as neede shall require for their owne and other mens instruction to define rightly which is the right doctrine of faith in any point wherein Controuersie shall arise The answer of his other obiections may without difficulty be gathered out of that which here I haue said already and which I am after to say when I do shew how Church authority is prooued out of Scripture Whence followeth not that other places of Scripture either are superfluous or not to be accounted part of the rule or that Church doctrine is to be opposed to Scripture or to be accounted humane traditions or doctrine of men The sentences of Fathers and others which M. White bringeth to proue alone sufficiency of Scripture either proue nothing against me to wit being explicated that the Scriptures with other meanes prouided by God namely the authority of the Church are able to instruct vs or else they proue against him and his fellow M. Wootton as well as against me if the Fathers words be taken without limitation that the Scriptures alone without any meanes ioyned to thē are able to instruct vs in all things And it is maruaile that these men haue so little iudgement to alledge such authorities which make no more againe Church-authority required by me then against Church-ministery which is required by themselues as the ordinary meanes to instruct men in faith 1 The Apostle 2. Tim. 3.15 hath these words The holy Scriptures are ABLE to make thee wise TO SALVATION through THE FAITH WHICH IS IN CHRIST IESVS For the whole Scripture is inspired of God and is profitable to TEACH to IMPROVE to CORRECT to INSTRVCT IN ALL RIGHTEOVSNESSE That the man of God may be ABSOLVTE and made PERFECT VNTO ALL GOOD WORKES This text we alledge to proue the sufficiency of the Scripture whereto my Aduersary in his discourse a In the WAY §. 11. answered two things First that the Apostle doth not say in these words that the Scripture is sufficient to instruct a man to perfection but that it is profitable but I shewed that he affirmes it to be SVFFICIENT by three reasons the first because the Apostle sayes They are able to make vs PERFECT and that to EVERY good worke now that which doth this is sufficient inasmuch as God requires no more at any mans hand but perfection to euery good worke My Aduersary in this his cōfused Reply wherin he durst not deale openly and distinctly that I might perfectly discerne which part of my argument his words properly concerne seemes to deny the consequence because S. Paul sayes also that Piety is profitable to euery thing and yet it is not sufficient in such sort that there needs no other helpe or meanes to be ioyned with it to attaine whatsoeuer thing Whereto I reply againe First that euen this Piety being the totall and whole effect that the study of the Scripture works in mē is sufficiēt without the ioyning of any thing else to it that is not Piety for it followes in the next words that this Piety hath the promises of this life and of the life to come that is to say whatsoeuer is promised vs in this world or in the next is obtained by Piety Therefore Piety is sufficient Therefore any thing in this example notwithstanding the Scriptures being affirmed to be profitable to euery thing are affirmed also to be sufficient Secondly we do not maintaine the Scripture to be sufficient in that sense that without all helpe and meanes to learne them they will suffice for who euer denied the ministery of the Church the illumination of Gods Spirit and a mans owne syncere indeuour to be also requisite But when we say they are sufficient we do it against the assertion that sayes they containe not the substāce of al things needful to be knowne but besides the meanes to vnderstand and learne them we need Church authority and vnwritten tradition to supply diuers articles of faith that they reueale not Thirdly my Aduersary may possibly finde some formes of speech where a thing is called profitable to all things yet other things are as necessary as it for the profitablenes of one thing excludes not the necessity of another thing But wheresoeuer it is said that any thing is profitable not simply to this or that purpose but to make persect to euery thing in the same kind there the sufficiency thereof is absolutely concluded and thus the Apostle speakes of the Scripture that it is profitable to make PERFECT to EVERY good worke The said perfection being an effect of their profitablenesse for that profitable thing is sufficient of it selfe that makes and produces the effect perfect 2 My second reason whereby I shewed the sufficiency of the Scripture was this All that we need to saluation is either to be taught or reproued or instructed or corrected but the Scripture alone doth all this Ergo they are sufficient to this he answers nothing 3 Thirdly I reasoned thus That is sufficient and containes all things needfull to be knowne which is able to make a man wise to saluation but the Scripture is able to doe this Ergo it is sufficient this argument he hath tumultuously repeated as he hath all the rest and answered I know not how First he sayes if the word alone had bene put in it would more plainely appeare how it proues nothing let the world therefore be put in That which alone is able to make a man wise to saluation is sufficient but such is the Scripture that alone it is able to make a man wise to
AND IN THE WRITINGS OF THESE MEN TOVCHING THE SCRIPTVRES SACRAMENTS CHVRCH POPE COVNCELS TRANSVBSTANTIATION IMAGES INVOCATION OF SAINTS IVSTIFICATION GOOD WORKS c. WAS THE DOCTRINE OF THE CHVRCH AND PROFESSED BY THE BISHOPS OF ROME FATHERS AND COVNCELS EXPRESSED IN THE FIRST 800 YEARES OF THIS CATALOGVE this is our obiection whereto the Replier answers that he can retort it more strongly against the Protestants c. But this is but wind and so let it passe and come we forward to the substance of his answer CHAP. XLIII 1. Whatsoeuer the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued is expressed in their bookes 2. The Replier is driuen to say they held much of his religion onely implicitely What implicite faith is according to the Papists The death of Zeuxis The Fathers write that which cannot stand with Papistrie Pag. â—67 A. D. Secondly I answer that to say there be diuers points held by vs whereof no mention is made in those ancient Fathers is no good argument to proue that which we hold was not holden by them For this is Argumentum ab authoritate negatiua which argument is of no force to proue this point vnles it be first proued that those Fathers held nothing explicitè or implicitè which is not expresly to be fouÌ„d in their writings But this my aduersaries will neuer be able to proue Now on the contrary side we can shew good reasons or at least probable presumptions sufficient to proue first that they held more then is expressed in their writings Secondly that they held explicitè or implicitè the same in all points of doctrine which we hold First I say we haue reason to thinke that they held more then is expressed in their writings because since ordinarily the writings of these Fathers were not by them set out of purpose to expresse in particular euery thing that they held implicitè or explicitè concerning all matters of faith but rather were written vpon some speciall occasion it is to be thought that their writings contain only some parts of the doctrine to wit so much of it as was that requisite to be written vpon that special occasion The which is confirmed euen by experience of these our times in which although learned men do ordinarily set downe more expresly in Catechismes bookes of controuersies c what the Catholik faith is in diuers points then formerly it hath bin set downe as they haue more occasion by reason of more heresies daily arising then learned men of former ages when those heresies were not haue had Yet no learned man now adaies writeth euery thing which explicitè or implicitè he beleeueth to be the Catholick faith For euery Catholicke man beleeueth explicitè or implicitè all that is contained in Scriptures and traditions in that he beleeueth whatsoeuer was reuealed by God to the Apostles deliuered by them in word or writing to the Catholicke Church and which the Church in Scriptures and vnwritten traditions propoundeth and deliuereth to vs diuers particulars whereof are not necessary to be expresly knowne to or written by any particular learned man of any age but are alwaies preserued at least in the implicite or infolded faith of the Church the which infolded faith of the Church may and shall be vnfolded the holy Ghost still assisting and suggesting all the aforesaid reuealed truth as necessitie shall require that the truth should be in any point expresly declared which necessitie chiefly is when some new heresie ariseth oppugning particularly the truth of that point 1 HEre he sayes the Fathers named in his Catalogue might hold what the church of Rome holds though there be no mentioÌ„ therof in their writings because they might hold that which is not expresly in their writings We had thought vntil now that this had bin a plain demonstration The ancient Fathers in all their writings make no mention of diuers points of the Popish religion Ergo they held them not Or thus What religion the Fathers held that they mention in their writings But the Popish religion they mention not in their writings Ergo they held not the Popish religion But he hauing good experience that the second proposition is true denies the first and will shew either by good reasons or probable presumptions that they held more then they mention and expresse in their bookes Wherein at once he hath destroyed his Catalogue and laid his religion open to the scorne of women and children For if the Fathers in all their writings handled nothing but the cause of religion teaching expounding and defending it against Iewes Gentiles hereticks schismatickes whereby they could not but mention what they held and yet neuer mentioned diuers points of Poperie it is plaine they neuer held them But the Iesuite sayes this is Argumentum ab authoritate negatiua which is not good they might hold either explicitè or implicitè that which they haue not expressed Wherein you must marke his tergiuersation For to shew a visible Church in all ages professing openly his Romane faith that all men may see it he tenders this catalogue But when we bid him proue that the Fathers of the first 600 or 800 yeares beleeued and professed that part of his Romane faith which the Church of England reiects that it may appeare so to vs and we may see it he sayes he can shew good reasons and presumptions that they beleeued more then is expressed in their writings whereas he should shew by their WRITINGS that they held and beleeued as the Romish Church now doth because it is impossible to shew what they held but by their writings and himselfe sayes in another place We cannot haue any certaintie of things past but by the writings of those times And if he will haue his Church to be so visible in the Fathers time and those Fathers to be so eminent members thereof good reason men see it yet see it they cannot by presumptions but by their writings 2 But he sayes We haue reason to thinke that they held more then expressed in their writings forsomuch as no man writes euery thing which explicitè or implicitè he beleeues I answer though it be granted that both they and we in all our writings may omit some things not belonging to faith or religion yet many articles of faith such as our aduersaries say theirs are the deniall whereof they call schisme and damnable herersie and persecute with fire sword and gun-powder cannot but be expressed for so much as such articles are simply needfull vnto saluation and are the grounds and conclusions of all theologicall writing and discourse Secondly it is impertinent to the obiection which denies the Fathers of the first 600 yeares to haue done that which the Catalogue sayes they did professed VISIBLY as the Romane Church now doth which obiection is not satisfied by saying they might explicitè or implicitè professe that they neuer writ because no man writes all he beleeues but by shewing in their writings this
which must be acknowledged when tyrants and such as feare not God by their euill gouernement and neglect of religion many times darken the aire and hinder the raine and make the fields barren and riuers empty Pliny enquiring the reason why the fields adioyning to Rome in old time were so fruitfull saies It was because they were tilled by the chiefe gouernours such as Fabritius and Cincinnatus were Ipsorum tunc manibus Imperatorum colebantur agri gaudente terra vomere laureato triumphali aratore Which your Maiesty doing so painefully with your owne hands in a more noble field the Church of God all godly minded shall bid God speed the plow and daily waite till the briars and thornes be rooted out and the dew of Gods grace fall on the barren part that the Plowman may neuer be wearie nor his hand weake nor his workmen vnfaithful to him but all that are about him and his Noble seruants by his example may giue ouer sleeping and put their hand without looking backe to the same worke that the enuious man that soweth tares may be driuen forth and their owne houses may be the greenest and cleanest part of the field till he come that shall giue end and rest to euery labour and recompence beyond all that can be thought the workmans trauell and binding the good corne in sheaues cast the tares into vnquenchable fire God euermore continue and increase his mercies to your Highnesse and lay your enemies at your feete that you may see an end of all dissentions and stablish peace and vnity in the Church Your Maiesties most humble subiect IOHN WHITE To the Reader IT is now fiue yeares since I published a booke called THE WAY TO THE TRVE CHVRCH wherein my purpose was nothing else but onely to shew the weakenesse and insufficiency of those Motiues which leade so many to Papistrie and to bring to triall such reasons as the Iesuites and Seminaries ground themselues vpon in perswading their people against vs making it more then plaine that the corruptions of the Church of Rome are maintained and the communion of our Church in the doctrine preaching and the Sacraments thereof is refused by such as follow the Papacy vpon weake and false grounds that cannot be defended This poore booke it seemes hath not a little incensed my Aduersary and discontented many that yet should follow reason and the truth of things and not be transported with rumor and common impression For man being a noble creature endued with reason and faculty to discourse and hauing a rule left him of God whereby to examine things should not tie his faith and conscience to the authority or person of any more then the truth and the reason and euidence of that be saies will beare him out It was neuer heard of in the world till now of late yeares that the Pope and his definitions were the rule of faith or that men were bound to follow whatsoeuer he should appoint but the Church of God euery where till tyranny oppressed it examined his doctrine accepting and allowing that which agreed with the sacred Scriptures and the first antiquity and reiecting the rest and albeit many errors had long prescription yet the godly still held them to that rule of our Sauiour BVT FROM THE BEGINNING IT WAS NOT SO. Mat. 19.8 Our Aduersaries therefore may in some points possible pretend antiquitie but PRIORITIE which is the first and best antiquitie they cannot in any one thing wherein they refuse vs and whether the zealous and resolued Recusants will beleeue it or no yet it is certainely true there is no one point of Papistry Catholicke that is to say such as hath bene from the beginning generally receiued as an article of faith by the vniuersall Church And though it be granted that many parts of his religion haue long continued in the world yet were they neuer the certaine or generall doctrines of the Church but the corruptions of some therein which in time and by degrees obtained that strength and credit which now they haue it being the easiest thing of a thousand for the Pope and his clergie sitting at the sterne when themselues had once imbraced them with their strength and learning to giue them authority in the world when Mahomet himselfe by policy and tyrannie was able in time to spread abroad and a vniuersally the doctrine of his Alchoran which now is 800 yeare old and is followed by many and great nations as close as Papistrie is either in England or Italy But whē the Scripture makes it plaine that FROM THE BEGINNING IT WAS NOT SO and the Histories and monuments of antiquity and the bookes of the elder Papists and such as were chiefe in the Church of Rome beare witnesse that these things were misliked and in all ages complained of and that which the Church of England now professes was the faith of most godly men and holy Bishops though the power of the gouernors in the Church of Rome increasing they were suppresed they do but deceiue themselues that thinke our faith a new faith or the points of Papistrie the old religion I haue as well as I haue bene able and as diligently as I could with an vnpartiall eie and many teares to God for his direction in the businesse and with a heart hating contention and possessed as much as any mans liuing with desire of peace and vnity whereof my 17 yeares residence in Lancashire can giue plentifull witnesse read the Scriptures and trauelled through the writings of the Fathers and obserued the course of former times and well aduised my selfe of that which the learned of the Church of Rome in later times haue written from the elder Schoolemen to the later Iesuites though with all humility I acknowledge my selfe to be the meanest of any that haue taken this course and much lament my owne weaknesse yet am I readie whensoeuer God the Iudge of all secrets and the terrible reuenger of falsehood and partiality shall call me foorth of this world to testifie that my faith and religion and the points thereof maintained in my writings and preaching is the truth agreeable to the first antiquity and the contrary defended by the Iesuites and followed by Romish Recusants error and vncatholicke And if any persons presumed to be learned on the other side haue either in their life or death shewed extraordinary zeale for their Roman faith I desire I may be allowed my owne knowledge both of some such persons and of their iudgement and outward cariage and not be importuned to follow that which vnskilfull and vnable and partiall friends haue apprehended rather then my owne cleare knowledge both of them and their cause And if the Church of Rome haue in it diuers learned betweene whom and vs my Aduersaries will indure no comparison that write against vs yet my certaine experience of their manner of writing one against another and against knowne antiquitie and their strange maintenance of the foulest and
side and checks the Pope and all his counsels thereby to inuite them to peace and vnity they know that we inuocate one God and beleeue all the articles of the Creed and rule of faith and preach and presse godlinesse of life without partiality punishing sinne and rewarding well doing as much as can be done in any kingdome or state that themselues allow they haue seene within the memory of man innumerable soules giuing their life for the testimony of that we beleeue onely we differ in diuers articles which potent and skilfull aduersaries at seuerall times in ages past brought into the Church let our writings be vnpartially weighed and the Scriptures be diligently read and the first Antiquity well considered and it will appeare they are in an error and kept in bondage thereto onely through the subtilty and cunning of their masse Priests God of his goodnesse open their eyes and eares that they may embrace the truth and come forth of Babylon and shaking off their superstition content themselues with the Testament of Iesus Christ to whom be all honour and power ascribed for euer Amen xij Maij 1614. A Table of the Questions and Controuersies either purposely and largely handled or by occasion briefly falling out betweene my Aduersary and me in this Defence A ANtichrist and his persecution with the time of his Reigne as the Papists hold it pag. 361. and 378. Apocrypha not Canonicall Scripture pag. 61. and 62. in the marg Assurance of grace and saluation Chap. 16. Antecedent and Consequent will of God pag. 212. Authoritie of the Church and Scripture Chap. 30. nu 4. B Baptisme of infants by Scripture pag. 151. nu 3. The Bull against Mich. Baius pag. 48. nu 5. C Catholicke discipline what pag. 5. Church defined and distinguished pag. 365. nu 2. The visiblenesse of the Church at large Chap. 37.38.39 In what sense the Church Militant is sometime inuisible pag. 355. 360. 373. Hypocrites not true members of the Church pag. 369. Where the Church was before Luther 386. 390. 394. How the Church is subiect to error pag. 421. nu 2. Councels subiect to error Chap. 47. Charles the Emperor his booke against Images pag. 458. nu 5. Conception of the B. Virgin in sin Chap. 49. Communion in one kinde Chap. 55. E Celebration of Easter pag. 150. nu 2. Erre the Church may erre pag. 421. nu 2. And how Councels Chap. 47. Errors came in by degrees into the Church pag. 519. nu 1. F Fathers their consent with Protestants pag. 410. and Chap. 45. They professed not Papistrie Chap. 43. The Papists manner of reiecting them pag. 177. Fundamentall and not Fundamentall points of faith Chap. 17. Frankford Councell against images Chap. 48. G Grace assurance of grace Chap. 16. Gregory what faith he taught pag. 433. H Hypocrites no true members of the Church pag. 369. Hildebrands doctrine touching the Popes power ouer Princes pag. 27. nu 2. inde I Iesuites when and to what purpose ordained pag. 13. The maintainers of turbulencie and treasons pag. 25. and 81. Charged with purging bookes pag. 56. and 72. with inhumanitie pag. 87. with training vp their people in ignorance pag. 54. and 92. Inuocation of Saints by praier Chap. 13. and 14 Implicite faith and all the doctrine of the Papists touching the same Chap. 23. Image worship and the doctrine of Rome touching the same pag. 453. and 528. and Chap. 53. Iustification of the Gentiles Chap. 22. nu 1. L The Laitie forbidden the Scripture pag. 479. Permitted in ancient time to reade them Chap. 51. Luther whence he had his assurance and who taught him pag. 320. nu 8. His reiecting the Fathers pag. 310. nu 2. He sought reformation with all humility pag. 317. Where the Church was afore his time pag. 386. and 390. and 394. M Marriage of Priests Chap. 52. and Chap. 58. nu 2. Masse Priests see Iesuites Masse pag. 74. and Chap. 58. nu 5. Merits Chap. 7. and Chap. 58. nu 4. N The second Nicen Councell Chap. 48. O Originall sin pag. 530. nu 6. P Peters being at Rome and being Bishop of Rome pag. 534. nu 2. Pope how many Princes he hath bin Traitor to pag. 34. nu 3. The Papists make him the rule of faith and iudge of all pag. 67. and 79. and 299. and Chap. 34. and 35. His supremacy chap. 54. and pag. 525. His succeeding of Peter pag. 537. nu 2. and 3. He hath erred and bene an Hereticke euen in Cathedra pag. 543. nu 7. Purging of bookes pag. 56. and 72. Praier to Saints Chap. 13. and 14. For the dead Chap. 57. nu 3. Protestant religion whether it bring men to desperation p. 401. nu 8. Pardons Chap. 57. nu 2. Purgatory Chap. 57. nu 2. Priests mariage Chap. 52. and Chap. 58. nu 2. Predestination whether for grace foreseene pag. 220. nu 10. inde Predetermination of mans will by Gods will pag. 236. nu 21. Papists cast off the Fathers pag. 177. maintaine saluation without the knowledge of Christ pag. 162. haue changed the ancient faith pag. 339. purged the ancient writings pag. 56. and 72. R Rome a whore pag. 11. n. 2. Romane Clergy their couetousnesse Ch. 4. nu 1. and Ch. 5. Their charity pag. 23. nu 3. Reall presence pag. 76. Rule of Faith and the properties thereof Ch. 26. and Ch. 35 nu 6. S Scripture put downe pag. 9. and 65. and 79. and 250. Translation thereof into the vulgar tongue pag. 63. and Ch. 51. Such translations forbidden the laity pag. 479. nu 2. Scripture proues and expounds it selfe Ch. 19. and 20. and 32. The sufficiency thereof against Traditions Ch. 27. and 30. and 31. and pag. 274. Obscurity and perspicuity of it Ch. 29. The light of it pag. 280. What certainty or infallibility there is in translations Ch. 28. How particular men are assured of the sense of the Scripture pag. 314. Spirits priuate Ch. 32. and pag. 315. Saints their inuocation Ch. 13. and 14. How they are supposed to heare vs. pag. 105. Sufficient grace whether giuen to all pag. 231. nu 15. Succession of the true Faith in the Church how it was Ch. 44. Succession of the Romish faith set forth in Catalogues how answered pag. 406. Seruice in an vnknowne language Ch. 50. T Transubstantiation Ch. 56. Traditions preferred and Scripture put downe pag. 9. 65. 79. 250. Treasonable doctrine and traiterous practises defended by Papists pag. 27. inde Translation of the Scripture into the mother tongues pag. 63. See Scripture V Vacancy in the Sea of Rome pag. 541. nu 5. Virginity of the B. virgine Mary pag. 149. nu 1. Woman Pope pag. 542. nu 6. Scripture expounded at large 1. Tim. 2.4 God will all men to be saued pag. 210. nu 4. 2. Tim. 3.15 All Scripture is inspired of God c. Chap. 31. 1. Cor. 14. Ch. 50. THE CONTENTS OF THE SEuerall Chapters of this Booke CHAP. 1. THe title of A. D. his Reply
A wonder not farre from Rome Writers not putting their names to their bookes censured by the Iesuites The Popes Iester The name of Minister and Priest Church the pillar of truth The way of Catholicke discipline is the way of the Scripture The Iesuites Method in perswading to Papistry The manner of A. D. his Replying and his promise to raile Chap. 2. The Papists trampling of the Scriptures and preferring their Church The Church of Rome touched in her honesty and reputed for a whore The conditions of a whore Chap. 3. The order of the Iesuites why and to what purpose erected by the Pope they are that to the Pope that the Ianisaries are to the Turke Their aboadments Chap. 4 Some examples of the Iesuites rapine Touching the present Pope Paule 5. and his nephew Burghesi The Iesuites deuouring those that entertaine thē Chap. 5. Touching the rapine and couetousnesse of the Romish Cleargy And their single life and what the world hath thought thereof Chap. 6. Touching the turbulency of our Iesuites and Maspriests in the State and their vnthankefulnesse to the King The seditious doctrine of the Church of Rome leading to all disobedience against the Magistrate and rebellion whēsoeuer occasion shall serue Tyrones rebellion and the Spanish inuasion promoted by the Pope A Catalogue of about forty Emperors Kings and Princes destroyed or vexed by the Pope and his Cleargy A consideration vpon the doctrine of the Popes power to depose kings Chap. 7. Concerning the doctrine of Merits taught in the Church of Rome and touching the Bull of Pius and Gregory against Michael Bayus the Deane of Louane Chap. 8. The Papacy brought in by Sathan The Iesuits spirit of contradiction The Church of Rome reuolted The fiue Patriarkes were equall at the first Plaine Scripture against the Papacy The ignorance of Popish laity Corruption of writings by the Papists Reformation desired long before it came Aduice giuen to A.D. Chap. 9. The Apocrypha not accounted Canonicall Scripture Papists professing to expound against the Fathers The new English translation of the Bible Traditions equalled with the holy Scripture About the erring of Councels And the sufficiencie of the Scriptures Chap. 10. The practise of the Papists in purging bookes The sacrifice of the Masse and reall presence denied Points of Papists absurd The Pope Lords it ouer all Papists need pay no debts May be traitors to murder Princes Iesuites plots in the powder-treason The Popes dispensing with sinne A meditation for all Papists Chap. 11. The Papists manner of dealing with immodesty and vncharitablenesse Briarly and Walsinghams bookes noted Some reports of the Papists meeknesse and mildnesse Hunt a Seminary arraigned at Lancaster The dumbe cattle slaughtered in Lancash The generall desire of vs all to reduce them to charity Chap. 12. Touching the ignorance that Papistrie hath bred among people Their barbarous manner of praying auoched Of Iohn the Almoner a legend The manner how a certaine Priest baptised The Replies zeale for recusants of the better sort A Lancash gentleman alledged by the Reply A note of a French Knight The successe of preaching in Lancash Chap. 13. Touching prayer to Saints Mediation of redemption and intercession Bonauentures Psalter Christ the onely mediator of intercession Reasons why we desire not the dead to pray for vs as we do the liuing The prayers of a Friar and an Archbishop It cannot be shewed that the dead heare vs. Deuices of the Schoolemen to shew how they heare vs. God not like an earthly King In their Saint-inuocating they Platonize Men equalled with Christ Chap. 14. More touching the worship of Saints The same words vsed to Saints that are to God The formall reason of worship The harsh praiers made to Saints how excused Nauarres forme of deuotion Counterfeits bearing the name of Fathers S. Austines doctrine to vse no mediator but Christ Chap. 15. The Iesuits insolency censured Note bookes A relation shewing how the Iesuites traine vp their nouices to dispute The doctrine of the Iesuites touching formall lies and equiuocation The Repliars motion to Protestant Ministers answered Chap. 16. Touching assurance of grace and beleeuing a mans owne saluation Perfection of the Scripture and necessity of the Church Ministry How the iustified conclude their saluation from the Scripture The iustified haue the assurance of faith This is declared full assurance voide of doubting taught by the most in the Church of Rome Touching perseuerance Chap. 17. Concerning points fundamentall and not fundamentall the distinction expounded and defended Who shall iudge what is fundamentall and what not A iest at the election of Pope Leo the x. Chap. 18. Touching the perpetuall virginity of Marie The celebration of Easter The baptisme of infants The Iesuits halting And the Scriptures sufficiency Chap. 19. How the Church proues the Scripture The Iesuites plainely confesse that the Scripture alone proues it selfe to be Gods word The Scriptures are principles indemonstrable in any superior science All other testimonies resolued into the testimony of the Scripture Touching euidence and the compossibility thereof with faith Chap. 20 A continuation of the same matter touching the Churches authority in giuing testimony of the Scriptures The Scripture proues it selfe to be Gods word The light of the Scripture How we are assured of the Scripture by the Spirit The reason why some see not the light of the Scripture The Papists retyring to the Spirit And casting off the Fathers A Councell is aboue the Pope The Pope may erre Chap. 21. Which is the Militant Church And the Catholicke The Church of the elect inuisible A rancid conceite of the Iesuite Chap. 22. Reports made by Papists that the Protestants are without religion They hold the iustification of the Gentiles without the Gospell or knowledge of Christ No saluation but in one true religion The Repliars tergiuersation Chap. 23. Touching the implicit faith that is taught in the Church of Rome How defined by them In what sense the Protestants mislike or allow it Arguments made for it answered The ancient Church allowed it not Chap. 24. Touching the necessitie and nature of the Rule of faith And how it is reuealed and communicated to all men that none need to despaire Chap. 25. The text of 1. Tim. 2.4 God wils all men to be saued c. expounded The diuerse expositions that are giuen of those words Gods antecedent will as they call it is not his will formally The antecedent and consequent will of God expounded diuerse wayes Chap. 26. The properties of the rule of faith described None follow priuate spirits more then our aduersaries How the Rule must be vnpartial and of authority Chap. 27. The Repliars tergiuersation The state of the question touching the sufficiencie of the Scripture alone and the necessity of the Church ministery The speeches of diuers Papists against the perfection of the Scripture In what sence the Scripture alone is not sufficient Chap. 28. Touching our English translations of the Bible their sinceritie and infalliblenesse How
they to whom this was commanded The Apostles and their successors And who be these successors He that now holds the first sea of Rome he that holds the second of Constantinople he of Alexandria and Antioch and he of IerusaleÌ„ This is the fiuefold top that is the power of the fiue Patriarkes of the Church in their power is the iudgement of diuine doctrines This man and his name stands in l Menolog Grae Nouemb. 11. tom 4. Bibl. SS Patrum the Greeke Kalendar in his time to fit the controuersie depending betweene the student and me thought all the Patriarkes together to haue the right of iudgement and not he of Rome alone which shewes that it is true which the Cardinall of Cusa m Cusan conc l. 2. c. 12. writes that by custome of mens obeying him he hath gotten beyond the bounds of ancient obseruation And so the head being departed I hope the bodie stayed not behind A.D. And § 11. where he affirmeth Pag. 28. that Protestants haue the Scripture in manifest places free from all ambiguitie for their side 4 If this be not true say directly why do you teach most blasphemously that the Scripture is so obscure so defectiue so dangerous for the people to meddle with Why do you forbid the people the reading of it in the mother tongue What Protestant if he would studie to do it of purpose can speake plainer then they against n Exod. 20.4 Deut. 4.15 images o Apoc 19.10 22.8 the worshipping of Saints p Act. 10.25 the Popes pride q 1. Cor. 14. Latin prayers and Seruice r Luc. 17.10 Phil. 3.12 Merit and perfection of workes Å¿ Psal 37.37 Apoc. 14.13 Purgatorie t Luc. 22.25 the Popes primacie u 1 Cor. 10 16. Transubstantiation w 1. Sam. 26.8 Rom. 13.1 Deposing and murdering Kings x 1. Tim. 4.3 Distinction of meates for conscience what finally can be spoken plainer in defence of y 1. Tim. 3.2.11.12 Priests mariage or to shew the Pope and his crew to be z 2. Thesâ—â—3 Apoc. 17.18 that Antichrist c. The Scripture therefore is manifest enough for vs but a Hos de expr Dei verb. our aduersaries haue a rule that the Scripture as it is alledged by Protestants is the word of the diuell and therefore be it neuer so manifest yet it must not be manifest when we alledge it A.D. And againe Pag. 28. that Protestants haue the principles of religion contained in the Lords prayer the Creed the ten Commandements leading directly to euery point of Protestancie and that for this reason the Church of Rome forbiddeth the reading and exercise of these things to the people lest they should see so much 5 As for example to pray to God alone and to no other for the Lords prayer teacheth vs to pray to him that is our Father to whom it belongs to forgiue vs our trespasses and whose is the kingdome the power and the glorie all prayers being to be made after this forme we are directly lead from praying to Saints to whom these things agree not to call on God alone Secondly the second commandement leades directly against image-worship and that is the reason why the Papists haue not onely forbidden the reading of it but also a In their Catechismes Van. Canis Ledesm Office of our Lady and other put it cleane out in their ordinary Catechismes Thirdly the Creed saying that Christ being ascended into heauen sits at the right hand of God from whence he shall come to iudge the quicke and the dead teaches plainly to beleeue that he comes not downe euery day to be eaten in the Sacrament vnder the formes of bread and wine In like maner we affirme these three the Creed the Lords prayer and the ten Commandements to be such a rule as serues to conclude in true and perfect consequence whatsoeuer we hold against our aduersaries and whether the Church of Rome haue not forbidden the people to vse them I referre my selfe to the times of King Henrie the 8 what time the people with incredible ioy and admiration first heard them in the English tongue I referre me to the manner of their praying mentioned b Ch. 12. hereafter which had not bene if they had bene permitted the vse of these things And because the Iesuite denies this let him say truly what incouragement haue they giuen the common people to reade the Scriptures to vse the Lords prayer and the rest in their mother-tongue to exercise themselues diligently in these things Let them shew vs the time when the words wherewith the benefite that hath ensued thereby No they haue reuiled and reproched these things and bred a hatred of them in the people and all to keepe them in ignorance my selfe continued many yeares in a parish where there were not a few Recusants and in all the number I did not in the time though I made triall of many finde one that could say and pronounce these things in the English tongue vnlesse he were which few were book-learned Among many other I came to an aged womans house and desiring her to repeate vnto me the Creed she said it in fustian Latin of that sort which I haue expressed c Ch. 12. a litle below and assaying to teach it her in English she answered that seeing her Latin creed had serued her turne to this age she would now learne no new And when I asked her who Iesus Christ was that the Creed said was borne of the virgin Mary she answered she could not tell but by our deare Ladie it is sure some good thing or it should neuer haue bin put in the Creed but what it is I cannot tell you for I was neuer taught so much my selfe This woman afterward heard me willingly and reioyced to heare the vnderstanding of these things and reported strange things of the barbarous ignorance and irreligion of those times wherein she was brought vp The experience that we haue of these things shewes how and in what sort Papists exercise their people in the principles of Religion and my owne particular knowledge hereof obtained by conuersing diuers yeares among them is such that all the Seminary Priests and Iesuites in England if there were ten thousand of them shal neuer outstare it with their great lookes A.D. And againe Pag. 28. that the ancient Fathers are for Protestants in expresse termes in all things that they held constantly and certainly with one consent and that in the principall points touching Scripture Iustification Merit of workes Images and all the rest they write most clearely with Protestants 6 This I shewed throughout my writing in euery point I stood vpon and if it be not so shrinke not but answer why haue you corrupted the writing of the Fathers d De vnit eccl in the Rom. Antw. prints and in all that follow them Cyprian to auoide his euidence against the
The second thing he replies is that the reason why they hold something else beside Scripture to be the rule are two First because we learne so out of the Scripture which he sayes he hath shewed both in his Treatise and in this Reply This is false as appeares in my Answer to his Treatise and shall yet further be manifest in this Defence against his Reply Secondly because we finde it necessarie to admit some other infallible rule and meanes to assure vs both what bookes be Scripture and what interpretation is to be followed which meanes is the authoritie of the Church Fathers Councels and Pope This reason is answered b §. 9. n. 3. and there Digâ— 2â— in THE WAY and hereafter in this DEFENCE and albeit the true Church of Christ which is not the Pope and his Consistorie be a subordinate meanes out of the Scripture it selfe to teach and leade vs forward to the knowledge of the Scripture and the interpretation as a Iudge shewes and expounds the law yet this proues not the Scripture not to be the rule but shewes that God hath commanded the ministerie of his Church to teach and guide vs by that rule For let any Papist say is the Law it selfe but one part of the rule of our obedience to the King and the Iudge the other so that the Law and the Iudge both together make but one rule because we finde it necessarie to admit the Iudge as a meanes infallibly to assure vs both which is the Law and what interpretation thereof is to be followed Not the Law in respect of vs hath all his authoritie in it selfe from the King and is the complete rule of euery mans obedience for more is no man bound to then the Law requires and yet magistrates are vsed to expound and publish it So is it with the Scriptures and therefore the Protestants haue meanes sufficient to secure their faith 6 But where he sayes in the margent that this infallible meanes that must so necessarily be admitted to assure vs what bookes be Scripture and what interpretation is to be followed is the authoritie of the Church Fathers Councels Pope I must admonish him c See THE WAY digr 16. n. 4. and below chap. 35. n. 1. that the current doctrine of Rome is that neither Church Fathers nor Councels exercise this authoritie infallibly but onely the Pope and that his sole definitiue sentence is the last and highest authoritie to secure vs and therefore the Iesuite is bound out and all Papists with him for euer from pretending any other infallible meanes beside the Pope whose iudgement alone being their Load-starre they doe but flatter themselues and mocke vs to our faces when they talke of Church and Councels But because I said the Church Fathers Councels and Pope by themselues were yeelded to be subiect to error and so consequently could not secure them therefore he obiects that a few pages before I acknowledged that it is a principle of their owne that a generall Councell cannot erre If by their owne principles a Councell cannot erre which I confesse there then it is false that I say here the Church the Fathers a Councell the Pope are yeelded by themselues to be subiect to error I answer that in the Councell of d Epist synodal de author cuiuslibet concil general sup Papam Basill ann 1432. it was adiudged that a generall Councell cannot erre whether the Pope confirme it or no. Since which time e Alliac Gers Maior Panorm Almain Ludov. Rom. quos refert Azor. to 2. pa. 565. 575. Viri quidam doctissimi sentiunt ConciliuÌ„ generale legitimè congregatum etiam absente Papa solidâ—m certamque habere authoritatem priusquam à summo Pontifice confirmetur Can. loc pag. 257. very many of the best learned in the Papacie haue followed that opinion therupon I said it was a principle of their owne that a generall Councel cannot erre speaking nothing of the Church Fathers or Pope and yet forsomuch as f Iacobat de conc p. 347. Bellar. de conc c. 11. Turrecr sum l. 3 c. 58. concl 2. CaietaÌ„ apol par 2. c 21. Azor. par 2. l. 5. c. 12. fauer Can pag. 259 loc the Iesuits others hold the contrary that a Councell not authorized by the Pope may erre forsomuch as Councels receiue all their strength from the Pope and g Occham dial par 1. l. 5. c. 25. 26. fauet Waldenf doct princip l. 2. c. 19. some that they may erre though the Pope do confirm them h Hadr. 4. de sacram Euchar pag. 26. others that the Pope may erre euen in his authoratiue conclusions therefore I obiected here that themselues confesse all these may erre This is neither carelesnesse nor yet saying and vnsaying in me but in them that haue no principle but it is contradicted among themselues for what I said a few pages before I spake according to the opinion of some and what I say here according to the contrary opinion of othersome Let the Iesuite shew me an vnforme opinion touching this matter in his Church and he shall deliuer me hereafter from such quarrels and exceptions as this is In the meane time when there is no certaintie or agreement in his church touching that they hold against vs but some say this and some that he must giue vs leaue to charge it with both opinions or with neither vntill they are agreed vpon a certainty Pag. 30. A. D. On the contrarie side Protestants who will admit no rule but onely Scripture doe not this for pure friendship and good will to the Scripture but for enmitie or not very good will to the Church whose authoritie while they do not admit to be infallible they haue left themselues vtterly void of all meanes sufficient to secure their faith by and to finde out the diuine infallible truth contained in the Scripture as in the Treatise and Reply is largely shewed 7 The Protestants I grant and heare solemnly affirme admit no rule whereby to trie what is matter of faith and what is not but onely Scripture the Church hath her authority if it be the true Church and lawfull Councels godly Bishops whereof the Pope is none are the ordinance of God to propound this faith vnto vs but the whole rule of the Churches iudgment is onely Scripture which if the student wil I wil say ouer again in capitall letters ONELY SCRIPTVRE ONELY SCRIPTVRE and NOTHING but Scripture for the exposition and confirmation whereof I refer him to THE WAY which he lost when he made his Reply Digr 3. And this we doe for pure friendship and good will to the Scriptures and Church both lest vngratefully against the Scriptures perniciously against the Church by relying vpon men we should leaue our selues voide of sufficient meanes to secure our faith by For a Cyril Ierosol catech pag. 15. Graec. saith the ancient Church the securitie of our faith
they do to God I answer two things first granting that words and outward gestures are qualified and conditioned by the meaning of him that vses them as he that called the Prophet h 2. Reg. 2.12 13.14 my Father my Father meant not that hie degree of Honor that he did when he called God his Father and therefore I will not deny but Papists vsing these inuocations mentioned to the Saints may meane them otherwise then they do to God as for example calling the virgin Mary their Aduocate their Hope their Sauiour they may meane she is so not of her selfe but vnder Christ and not principally by her owne merits but subordinarily by the merits and grace of her Sonne This I will easily grant may be the meaning of their wordes but then I answer secondly that it doth not follow that therefore we may with such reseruation of our meaning in the same wordes inuocate and worship the Saints departed first because the said inuocation is diuine honour from what minde soeuer it proceed whether the Saint be called vpon as the supreme and eternal beginning or whether onely as the friend of God that by reason of his nearnesse to him can sooner intreate him then my selfe If he be inuocated with the titles of Aduocate Sauiour Redeemer though the intent be but onely to vse him as a friend to intreate yet this is diuine honour belonging to Iesus Christ For all prayer is diuine honour and such titles as are giuen them in their worship Mediator Hope Aduocate Confidence Sauiour Redeemer Ladie Queene of heauen c. exceed the measure of all ciuill reuerence and adoration whatsoeuer and therefore are not like the calling of our earthly parent father or kneeling to him Secondly the worshipping of a creature is idolatrie though he that worship it acknowledge it to be but a creature subordinate to God a thousand times because the commandement is i Mat. 4.10 Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him onely thou shalt serue When the diuell tempted our Sauiour to fall downe before him he did not require him to perswade himselfe that he was Iehouah or that he had those things of himselfe for he confessed vnto him k Luc. 4.6 he had receiued them but onely that he would kneele vnto him and accept those things at his hands And our Sauiour refused it not onely because he was the diuell but also because the commandement forbids the giuing diuine honour to a creature with any opinion estimation or iudgement whatsoeuer l Apoc. 19.10 22.8 When S. Iohn would haue fallen downe and worshipped the Angell he was not so ignorant or stupid as to thinke he was God or to intend him that highest honour that belongs to God but onely by that office he wold present his loue to the Angell and possible procure some fauour at his hand yet the Angell forbad him by a reason that proceeds vnanswerably against the inuocation of all Saints See thou do it not for I am thy fellow seruant and one of thy brethren which haue the testimonie of Iesus Worship God For it is a generall rule in the Scripture that no creature may with any estimation be worshipped with diuine honour A.D. If M. White insist and vrge Pag. 43. that outward words and actions are signes of inward meaning therefore where words and outward actions are the same towards Christ and towards his Saints at least ignorant people haue cause giuen them to thinke we haue the same inward meaning and so by our example are encouraged to commit formall idolatrie I answer that inward meaning is indeed gathered by outward words and actions ordinarily but not alwayes nor ordinarily by the bare outward shew of the action or by that precise sound of one or other word or sentence but by the whole connexion and circumstance of the matter and person about which the speech and action is and by the presupposed and knowne conceit of the partie which speaketh the said words or doth the action Now although in some of our prayers one or other word or sentence may seeme harsh as it is considered precisely in the outward sound especially to those that are not acquainted with the like as also to those who neuer had seen men kneele to any but to God himselfe nor to call any Father besides him it would seeme very harsh to see one kneele to his earthly parent and to call him Father yet when we consider the whole connexion of the words of our prayers hauing respect also to the different circumstances of the persons and matters spoken of and to the commonly knowne conceit of the speaker the sense of our prayers are found neither to be idolatrous nor superstitious nor scandalous none being ordinarily among vs so simple or ill instructed but they know that there is a different inward conceit and more estimation had reuerence done when the words are applied to our Sauiour Christ being God and man then when they are applied to Saints who are knowne to be not Gods but onely men 5 That which the Iesuite still assumes for his defence is still false He presumes that intending their prayers to the Saints no otherwise then they do they are lawfull And as long as God is confessed to be the first beginning of mercie and goodnesse and Christ the Mediator of redemption and the Saints no more but aduocates and friends to present our prayers all is well and those Saints may be inuocated as they are but the answer is that euen this kind of inuocation with no further opinion touching them is vnlawfull as I haue shewed And let the Reader alwayes remember that it is m Mat 6.9 Luc 11.1 Nam quaÌ„libet alia veil a dicamus nihil aliud dicimus quaÌ„ quod in ista Dominica oratione positum est si rectè congruenter oramus Quisquis auteÌ„ id dicit quod ad istam preceÌ„pertinere non possit etiamsi non illicitè orat carnaliter orat c. Aug. op 121. c. 12. Neque ensm propria tantuÌ„ orationis officia complexa cit venerationem Dei aut hominis petitionem sed om nem pene sermoneÌ„ Domini omnem commemorationeÌ„ disciplinae â—t â—â—â—era in oratione Breuiarium totius Euangelij comprehendatur Tertul. de orat c 1. no lawfull prayer that is not according to Christs rule When ye pray do it after this maner Our Father which art in heaueÌ„ c. Let your praiers be made to him that you may say is your Father that is in heauen who forgiues vs our sinnes and to whom belongs the kingdome and power and glorie for euer 6 But that which he chiefly intends in this place is to excuse the harshnesse and scandalousnesse of the words of their prayers albeit if a man should view them well he might maruell what excuse could be deuised for them Yet the Reply not onely excuses them that they must not be measured by their sound and outward
bad vnder pretence of aduancing the Gospell or the glory of God especially if they thinke that they may lawfully maintaine it by writing apparent and knowne vntruthes the better to defend it If I say there be any Protestant writers of such seared consciences I would wish they would plainely tell vs this their minds that so those poore soules who haue bene hitherto seduced may the better see how vnsound the Potestant Religion is which cannot be maintained but with apparent vntruths vttered by their writers either without due care of conscience or against their knowledge and conscience or with hauing such bad consciences as to thinke it lawfull to lie in this their cause pretended by them to be for the aduancement of Gods glory and of the Gospell or which is all one or worse to thinke one cannot lye too much in defence of this their Protestant cause or Gospell 5 This is a poore motion and proceeds from no great conceit yet I will satisfie it vpon condition he will rest satisfied with my answer Let this content you and beare not your selues in hand to the contrary we know our cause to be Gods owne truth which you haue corrupted with innumerable heresies patched thereunto and we not onely defend it as we do with a good conscience against you but wee would thinke it our greatest happines if the cause should so require to shed our blood in defence of it and it ioyes our hearts to see the weapons wherewith you fight against vs lying railing pride rage treason sedition fire and powder which is a signe that you are not of God this our cause we will maintaine with zeale and synceritie which shall be tried not by your calumnies but by the thing it selfe And I am so far from seduâ—ing any that I would giue my life for the reclaiming of those whom you haue seduced and bewitched with meere cozenage and impostures And as I hate lying to defend Gods truth so can I not but vpbraide them that run headily into Papistry afore they know how things stand betweene vs when vpon iust triall it will fall out that in the maine question betweene the Church of Rome and vs our aduersaries vphold themselues with meere imposture To the Reader HItherto reaches that which my Aduersary hath written against the Epistle and Preface of my booke now in the next place before he fall to replying vpon the booke it selfe he inserts an Introduction as he calles it containing a Declaration of the word Faith the which bebeginnes pag. 49. where his exceptions to the said Preface and epistle end And forasmuch as it is a new discourse intended * Since I see M. A Wotton to be either of so dull capacity of wit that he cannot conceiue or rather of so captious disposition of will that he will needes doubt and make a question what I meant by the word faith I haue thought good not onely to declare what I meant by the word but also by this action to set downe certaine points of doctrine pertaining to the thing signified by the word pag 49. of his Reply as it should seeme against M. Wotton and is no Reply to me but a superfluous and impertinent collection rudely and obscurely peeced together for the outfacing of that which he was not able formally to answer I would therefore cast away no time in medling with it but onely defend my selfe against such places thereof as touch my Booke because I will not be in his debt for a word Those places onely I haue here set downe in order as they lie in his Discourse with my Answer to them CHAP. XVI Touching assurance of Grace and Beleeuing a mans owne saluation 1. Perfection of the Scripture and necessitie of the Church Ministrie 2. 3. How the iustified conclude their saluation from the Scripture 4. The iustified haue the assurance of faith This is declared Full assurance voide of doubting taught by the most in the Church of Rome 5. Touching Perseuerance A. D. Now that it doth not at all appertaine to that kind of verities Pag. 57. which are to be beleeued by faith I proue out of the Protestants owne Principles to wit that * That this proofe must be by necessarie consequence without all authoritie of the Church is insinuated by White pag. 46 nothing is to be beleeued by faith but what is expressely set downe in Scripture or so contained that without all Church authoritie it may be euidently and by good consequence proued out of Scripture But the promise of Gods speciall mercie applied absolutely and in particular to Luther Caluine c. is neither expressed nor in manner aforesaid contained in Scripture Therefore it is not a verity to be beleeued by faith by the Protestants owne Principles 1 IN this Chapter where these words lye he discourses of the obiect of faith and inquires what the things are which belong to it and must be beleeued to no purpose intruding himselfe vpon an impertinent question touching the beleefe of a mans owne saluation and in this period he affirmes that it is against the Protestants owne Principles to beleeue it Because by their Principles nothing may be beleeued but what is set downe in Scripture either expressely or by good consequence which the saluation or remission of sinnes to Luther Caluine White or any particular man is not And to shew this to be our Principle he saies in the margent that M. White in such a place insinuats that nothing may be receiued as a point of faith vnlesse it can be proued by necessary consequence of Scripture without all authoritie of the Church meaning as I suppose that I require no Church authoritie to assure a man any thing but intend such things onely to be beleeued as may be proued at least by consequence of Scripture without the authoritie of the Church I answer 2. things First that in the place alleadged I deny no authority of the Church that is dâ—e vnto it but onely against them that charge the Scripture with insufficiency as if they wanted many things needfull to be beleeued which must be supplied by the Tradition and Authority of the Church I affirme that whatsoeuer is needfull to be knowne beleeued or done is contained in Scripture and by the same ALONE may absolutely be determined The meaning whereof is that what Ministrie and power soeuer the Church hath to teach and rule vs in the vse of the Scripture and points of faith which authority no Protestant will deny to belong to the true Church or to be needfull yet all things whatsoeuer belong to faith and the Church by any authoritie may propose vnto vs are contained in the Scripture and may be proued thereby alone the said Church authoritie being onely a requisite condition subordinate for the readier attaining to the sence and vse of the Scripture but no rule or principle either aboue or with the Scripture whereinto any mans faith in any point is resolued so that it
may be said This I must or I may beleeue vpon the tradition and authority of the Church though it be not any way reuealed in the Scripture The which assertion of ours hath 2. parts the one affirmatiue that the Scripture alone and absolutely considered in it owne Latitude and extent containeth all things belonging to faith without defect This is proued a Digr 3. 1 2. in the way The other Negatiue that the Churches authoritie is neither needfull nor able to supply any necessary or new point of faith that is not contained in the Scripture I deny it not to be ordinarily a necessary condition for the knowing and beleeuing that which the Scripture reueales for b Ro. 10.14 How shall they heare that they may beleeue without a Preacher c Act. 8.31 How can we vnderstand except we haue a guide d Mal 3.7 for the Priests lips should preserue knowledge and at his mouth they should seeke the Law for he is the Messenger of the Lord of hoasts I onely deny it to be the rule and foundation of faith or so much as the last infallible and cleare ground whereupon the beleeuer in any point that he beleeues restes himselfe The which to hold proportion with the Iesuit in this place I onely proue by the Papists owne principles to wit that the proposition of the Church is e Grego Val. tom 3. disp 1. q. 1. punct 1. pag. 32. §. sit nunc Sexta neither the last and clearest motiue whereupon our faith staies but there are higher and clearer then it which can be nothing but the immediate supernaturall light of the verities beleeued themselues shining vpon our hearts from the Scripture whereunto the light of Church authority when it hath reuealed the doctrine contained in Scripture to vs giues place as all lesser lights do when a greater begins to shine 2 Secondly I answer that from this Principle of ours Nothing may be beleeued but what is set downe in Scripture expressely or may be gathered from thence by good consequence it doth not follow that a particular man as Luther or White cannot beleeue the promises of Gods speciall mercie touching his owne saluation because though Luther or Whites name be not expressely set downe in the promise yet that which is set downe is so offered to vs that being penitent beleeuers and iustified and standing in grace whereof there is an infallible assurance f THE WAIâ— Digr 43. by our aduersaries owne confession we may conclude our owne particular Saluation from thence and must indeuour to beleeue it This part of my answer affirmes 2. things First that a penitent sinner iustified and eleuated into the state of grace may infallibly proue or gather the assurance of his Saluation by good consequence from the Scripture Secondly that this assurance thus to be gathered appertaines to those verities which are beleeued by the habite of faith I do not say any man can at all times so firmely and without feare of the contrary beleeue his owne reconciliation with God as he can the first articles of faith that are expressely and immediately reuealed I onely affirme that he beleeues it by the habite of supernaturall faith and is bound to endeuour and vse the meanes that he may beleeue it 3 The first point I haue purposely shewed g Digr 40. n. 39. 4â— n. 10. in the THE WAIE and confirmed by the confession of diuers of our Aduersaries whither I referre the Iesuit that he may see how and in what manner this assurance is gathered Onely I will here admonish the reader that if the penitent beleeuer could not by necessary consequence of Scripture and true application of the generall promises of the Gospell to his owne particular person conclude his saluation he were in no wise bound to beleeue it but now when he hath receiued the Testimony of Gods Spirit within him crying Abba Father the power of the same Spirit in his body and soule renuing him and producing the effectes of sauing grace the Faith of Christ whereby he giues consent to the Gospell the life of Christ whereby he liues not himselfe but Christ liues in him the power of his death whereby he dies to the world and sinne when finally in truth and conscience he performes all the conditions that the Scripture requires and feeles within him those very signes whereby the Gospell describes the elect it may not be doubted but by good consequence both in matter and forme he may conclude his owne saluation It is no where written in the Bible that Luther or Caluine shall rise at the last day yet the Reply will allow them to beleeue it by consequence from that which is written All men shall rise It is no where written that this Iesuite shall come into Iudgement and giue an account of this his faith and the waies wherein he walkes yet I presume he beleeues it by faith in that by consequence it necessarily followes of that Article He shall come to iudge the quicke and the dead In the same manner a penitent sinner examining himselfe concludes his owne saluation from the Scripture that sayes h Marc. 16.16 Rom. 10.9 Euery one that repents and beleeues shall be saued Therefore if there be any certainty of a mans owne repentance of his being in Grace of the testimony of Gods Spirit and i Paret Lombarâ—um nec vâ—luâ—sse nec doâ—â—isse vt doâ—erentur Christian de peccatorum remissione gratia Dei vita aeterna perpetuo dubitare aut diffidere quemad modum re vera nec vllus Orthodoxus sani iudicij Ecclesiastes inter Pontificios quod equidem sciam vnquam illud docuit Mart. Eisengren defens Concil Trid. de cert grat p. 216. fie vpon that mouth that will say there is none when the Scripture k 2. Co. 13.5 biddes vs Try our selues touching them it must needes be yeelded that there is a certainty likewise of his saluation 4 The second point that the remission of our sinnes and eternall life is beleeued by Faith is cleare vpon 4. points 1. because in the Creed those 2. Articles are made the obiect of Faith therefore the penitent sinner applies them to himselfe by the same habit 2. l Aliqui Catholici existimarunt posse vnumquemque credete fide diuina sine peculiari reuelatione dimissa sibi esse peccata Vasqu 12. disp 200. n. 5. Many learned Papists confesse so much Fisher of Rochester m Roffenf opusc de fid miserecord dei axiom 10. If we will enter into heauen we must not come with a double heart or wauering Faith but with that which is ALTOGETHER VNDOVBTING and MOST CERTAINE For to doubting minds there is no way open Gropper and the Diuines of Collen n Antididag c. de iustif §. proditum est p. 29. We are iustified by Faith whereby WITHOVT DOVBTING we firmely beleeue that our sinnes who are truely penitent are forgiuen vs for Christ
Syllogisme here set downe Whereto I answered First granting the maior and acknowledging it to be a point of faith necessary to be beleeued that the Canonicall bookes which the Church vses are true diuine Scripture but I denied the second proposition that they cannot be proued so to be by themselues secluding Church authority and tradition And I distinguish for the Authority and direction of the Church is Gods outward ordinance to teach vs as a condition how to see the Scripture to be diuine but not the thing whereby they are prooued so to be and whereon our faith leaneth but this diuinity the Church as a bare Minister out of the Scripture it selfe prooues to be in the Scripture not by her owne authority that vpon her word and testimony either onely or particularly it should be taken for Scripture rather then the books of other men In the same manner that a man shewes a star giuing light to it selfe which yet another cannot see till the man point to it Or as a dead mans will kept in the Register of necessity must be sought there and thence receiued yet all the authority of that court which is great and ample specially in preseruing records neither makes nor prooues the will to be legitimate but is onely a requisite condition to bring it forth and vs to the sight and knowledge of it the will proouing it selfe by the hand and seale of him that made it affixed to it So it is with the word of God which we do not ordinarily see to be the word of God vntill the Church teach and traine vs vp therein But when it hath done the arguments whereby it is proued so to be and the authority whereupon I beleeue it are contained in the word it selfe which I expound and confirme by this that euermore and perpetually the Church by the Scripture it selfe and by no other argument prooues it to be diuine to those she teaches and vpon that ground at the first receiued them for such her selfe and many times it fals out as with some Atheists and Pagans that where no Church authority ministry or perswasion is vsed by onely reading of the Scripture it selfe in respect of the outward meanes a man coms to faith which could not be if the Scripture it selfe had not conuinced him forsomuch as an Atheist or vnbeleeuer will not be perswaded by any thing but that which he euidently sees to be Gods owne word and this perswasion arises in him from the very booke it selfe without Church authority 3 And this is yet confirmed by that which the Iesuites teach against the Anabaptists Swinkfieldians holding the motions of their inward spirit to be Gods word for Bellarmine c De verb. Dei l. 1. c. 1. 2. sayes that to the faithfull acknowledging the Scripture to be Gods word it may be prooued out of the Scripture it selfe that the Scripture is the word of God Molhusine and Gretsers d Gretser def Bellar. l. 1. c. 2. pag. 34. D. words are these It is manifest that Bellarmine onely affirmes that it may be prooued OVT OF THE SCRIPTVRES THEMSELVES and the Canonicall books thereof onely TO THE FAITHFVLL who receiue and reuerence them for such that the word of God is not the inward spirit whereof fantasticall men boast but the word of God is truly it which is contriued in those books which the faithfull hold for Canonicall In which words they say three things First that the faithfull who acknowledge the Scripture to be Gods word are they persons of whom they speake not such as receiue it not Secondly that to such it may be prooued that not the inward spirit of fantasticall men but the Canonicall Scripture is the word of God Wherein they affirme two things may be prooued A Negatiue that the inward spirit is not Gods word and an Affirmatiue that Gods word is truely it which is contained in the Canonicall books of the Scripture Thirdly that both this Negatiue and this Affirmatiue may be proued out of the Scriptures themselues Hence I reasō thus To the godly that receiue and acknowledge the Scripture this affirmatiue that Gods word is it which is contained in the Canonicall Bookes of the Scripture may be proued out of the Scriptures themselues therefore the Scripture it selfe can proue it selfe to be the word of God Therefore that the Scripture it the very word of God is contained in the Scripture because otherwise it could not be proued so to be out of the Scripture it selfe Therefore all things needfull are contained in this Scripture No wrangling can auoid this If to such as receiue them it may be proued out of themselues that these Bookes are the word of God then this point that these bookes are diuine Scripture is contained in Scripture and the cause why some see it not is their owne indisposition and vnbeleefe wherewith the Scripture must not be charged but to such as receiue these Bookes the Iesuits affirme it may be proued out of themselues that they are the word of God that is without all Church authoritie which is externall and not in the Scripture 4 Secondlie this being admitted that it is a a point of faith necessary to be beleeued that the Canonical Books are diuine and then againe that they could not be shewed so to be out of themselues yet doth it not follow ineuitably that all points of faith are not contained in them for the question is not whether the Scripture be Gods word or no which is granted of all hands but whether being confessed so to be it containe all such verities as a Christian man is bound to know in such measure that there is no point to be beleeued that is not contained therein The reason is because the Scriptures are the principles of diuine knowledge and the faith thereof * Not in nature but in proportion like the credite we yeed to the rules of humane sciences which are knowne and beleeued of themselues without any further demonstration And as the kings lawes containe all things whatsoeuer the subiect is bound to do and yet the said lawes not prouing themselues to be of authoritie but supposing it to be known before and otherwise are not thereby proued to be vnperfect or defectiue but being receiued then there is nothing wanting in them that is necessary for the common-wealth and as in all arts and sciences that we learne the rules and precepts thereof need not proue themselues for that which is the generall rule of other things is not ruled it selfe in the same kinde and yet it were folly to say they were therefore imperfect So may it be said to be in the Scripture supposing it had no more light thereby to authorize it selfe then Princes lawes and humane principles haue that it containes all points of faith though it were not expressed that it selfe is the word of God For the readier vnderstanding whereof let the Reader againe cast his eie vpon the occasion
whereof all this question rises 5 Our Aduersaries holding many points of religion which we refuse we require them to shew vs the said points in the Scriptures if they will either haue vs to beleeue them or free themselues from heresie their Tradition their Purgatory their Masse their Latine seruice their Transubstantiation their Images their seuen Sacraments their Inuocation of Saints and all the rest wherein we differ * This is shewed c. 28. n. 3. Their answer is that many diuine truthes and articles of faith are not contained in the Scriptures but reuealed by Tradition and Church authoritie which are to be receiued and beleeued as well as that which is written * The original cause why the Papists set a foot the question touching the insufficiency of the Scripture This is the originall reason why they stand thus against the sufficiency of the written word for their Church authoritie and to proue this they vse the Argument here propounded by the Reply and descant with it as you see Which is an impertinent kinde of proceeding when this point whether the Bookes contained in holy writ be Gods word is no question betweene vs but agreed vpon of all hands but the question is touching other speciall articles Images adoration halfe communion and such like a number more whether not being contained in the Scripture men are bound to beleeue them For touching these things it is properly that we say Nothing is necessary to be beleeued as a point of faith which cannot be prooued euidently by Scripture And therefore this argument is impertinent For where we affirme all points of faith to be comprised within the body of the Scripture we distinguish first of the things which we say are comprised for albeit we firmely hold the diuine truth and authoritie of these Bookes to be euident in themselues yet the points that we meane in this question are touching other matters for neither they nor we deny the Scripture but both they and we deny many things to be contained in it Secondly then againe of the manner how things are comprised for all other things are comprised in Scripture as the duty obedience of subiects is in the kings lawes and as true speaking is contained in Grammar or the right forme of resoluing in Logicke but this one point is so contained as light is in the Sunne or sweete in hony and according to the same notion whereby the authoritie of the Law and truth of Principles is contained in themselues This is it which very briefly I answered in * THE WAIE § 9. 3. digr 11. n. 17. two seuerall places of my Booke Now let us see what the Iesuite replies to it To this saith he I reply that principles insciences are either euident to vs and knowne by the onely light of nature and so neede no proofe but onely declaration of termes or words in which they be vttered or if they be not euident to vs they must be demonstrated either in the same science or in some superiour science by some other principle more euident to vs. But that these Bookes which are in the Bible are diuine Scripture is not euident therefore if M. Whites similitude be good it must be demonstrated by some other principle more euident to vs that these Bookes which are in the Bible be diuine Scripture The substance of his Reply is that all principles are either euident of themselues or not euident such principles as are euident he grants need no prouing but the Scriptures are principles of religiō not euident of themselues but such as need to be demonstrated to be Gods word by some other principle in a higher science more euident to vs both denying them to be euident and also to be made so by onely declaring the words wherein they are vttered And to proue this he saies in the margent if it were euident that these Bookes in the Bible are diuine Scripture how is it onely beleeued by faith for Saint Paule cals faith Argumentū non apparentium Heb. 11.1 1. My answer is that the Scriptures are principles euident of themselues to those that haue the Spirit of God and such as need not to be proued by Church authoritie but onely to be reuealed and expounded according to that which is in themselues This my answer to helpe the reader out of the Iesuits perplexed discourse I will lay downe and explicate in 3. propositions First the Scripture in diuinitie hath the same office that principles haue in sciences that as the rules and principles of Grammar teach all true speaking and as the elements of Arithmeticke teach all right numbring so the doctrine contained in the Scriptures teaches all true faith Secondly as they are the principles of religion and rule of faith so they enioy the same priuiledge that principles do in forren Professions that is to be receiued and assented to for themselues without discourse For e Atist Poster c. 1. no humane science proues it owne principles or disputes against him that denies them and although the principles of an inferiour science may be demonstrated in a superiour yet this befalles not that which is the highest as the Metaphysicks which hauing no superiour science neither stands to demonstrate it selfe nor to receiue demonstration from another but our vnderstanding assents immediatly to the principles thereof and so goes forward by them to discerne of other things In the same manner the Scripture hauing no superiour science or rule aboue it is like these principles receiued for it selfe and is not occupied in prouing it selfe and the principles therin contained but shewing other things by them it selfe must be assented to without discourse by faith before we can argue out of it Thirdly all demonstration and proofe of principles is onely voluntary not necessarie against him that denies them as in Musicke the Musitian demonstrates his precepts not thereby to teach his arte but to conuince him that denies it Hence appeares the insufficiency of my aduersaries reply First in that he saies principles are not euident but need demonstration that so the Scriptures being yeelded to be the principles of religion yet they should not be receiued vnlesse they proue themselues vntill the authoritie of the Church come There is no man acquainted with f Principia per seipsa nata sunt cognosci reliqua verò per principia Arist prio l. 2 c. 18. idem Procl in Euclid l. 2. c. 2. humane art will say so His owne Thomas g Tho. 1. part q. 1. art 8. sayes that like as other sciences do not argue to proue their owne principles but out of the principles argue to shew other things so the sacred doctrine doth not argue to proue the owne principles but from them proceeds to shew something The same is said by h Capreol prol in 1. part q. 1. pag. 24. Greg. Valent. tom 1. pag. 50. a. others Next it is false that the Scripture is like those principles which need
faith but the illumination of Gods Spirit whereof faith is an effect 2. Himselfe in those words the Spirit of God must assist and concur with mans vnderstanding not onely in generall to preserue the faculty thereof but in a speciall manner to enable it to apprehend and yeeld confesses as much as I said or could meane taking my words in all their latitude 3. If faith be taken in one particular sence as sometimes it is for the receiuing of diuine illumination into the heart as a darke roome when the window is opened or a candle is brought in receiues light then it is true * â—rgo ante fidem absque fide intelligi Scripturas posse affirmas Hoc si tibi absurdum non videtur plus quam Pelagia nus es D. Stapl. de author script c. 8. §. 16. that the heart must be endued with faith before any man can vnderstand the rule and yeeld his assent to it vnlesse he will hold Pelagianisme neither doth my Aduersaries argument conclude any thing against this for the vsing of the rule and this faith go together as the opening of the eye and light concur to seeing Therefore as he that seekes a thing in a blind roome first opens the window and lets in light and then applies his eye with the helpe of that meanes to the obiect so though it be supposed that faith cannot be had before the rule instruct vs yet this light of Gods Spirit which is the beginning of faith as the medium whereby the rule is vnderstood goes in order before it As in all our sences * Nihil agit in distans nisi primo agat in medium Allias â—â—â—ct de anim c. 8. part 3. the way from the sence to the obiect is disposed by the medium But if faith be taken in the whole extent for the knowledge and assent of all that which is reuealed then I grant the rule must go before 2 Thirdly touching illumination of the Spirit which we both agree is necessary for the vsing and vnderstanding of the Rule he will haue 2. things noted First that this is not the Protestants spirit Whereunto I answer it is neither the Protestant nor Romish nor any priuate spirit much lesse the Popes spirit a Shewed Ch. 35. whereby alone they breathe that thus charge others with priuate spirits but the Spirit of God that is b 1 Cor. 12.6 giuen to euery man to profit withal Secondly that this Spirit of God is ready to assist all men at least sufficiently to the attaining of the truth and that no maÌ„ whoÌ„ grace hath excited to vse the rule need feare any want thereof but all men rather had need feare least themselues be wanting to concurre with this Spirit and least in stead of following the Spirit of God they suffer themselues as all they do that follow the Church of Rome to be misled by the spirit of Satan transfiguring himselfe into an Angell of light c. The which I am also well pleased to note and commend backe againe to himselfe and all of his sect who refusing the light of the Scripture that so euidently detects their errors haue suffered themselues to be seduced by the spirit of Antichrist * Apoc. 13.13 who hath transfigured himselfe into an Angell of light and broaching his owne priuate conceits yet colours all with the stile of S. Peters successour and seeming authority and spirit of the Church when the Primum mobile of all Papistry is now become the Iesuited Popes sole instinct 3 Fourthly he mislikes that besides these 3. properties of the Rule I would haue other two Vnpartiality that it be addicted to no side and Authority to conuince that there might be no appeale from it But these conditions I added for the better explication of the rest and to exclude the Church of Rome which is so partiall that it begges to be it owne iudge and so vnable to support the cause since that the clearest definitions thereof are still called in question by themselues as c Digr 36. I made demonstration The which being the true reasons of his mislike he dissembles and onely replies that these conditions are either not necessary or else included in the other 3. the former of which is not true the latter that they be included in the condition of infalliblenesse I will not contend about onely I noted them for the more distinct and particular explication of that which must belong to the Rule And so in this point there shall be no variance CHAP. XXVII 1. The Repliers terginersation 2. 3. The state of the question touching the sufficiency of the Scripture alone and the necessity of the Church Ministrie 3. The speeches of diuers Papists against the perfection of the Scripture 4. In what sence Scripture alone is not sufficient Pag. 177. A. D. Concerning the seuenth Chapter if my aduersaries did not ignorantly or wilfully peruert the state of the question they could not haue had colour to make so long discourse about this Chapter as they do both make My question was not whether Scripture be the rule of faith but whether it alone be the rule and meanes ordained by God to breed in men that one infallible entire Faith which is necessary to saluation This my question my aduersaries peruert FIRST in that they would gladly as it seemeth make men beleeue that we exclude Scripture from being in any sort the rule of faith and thereupon * Pag. 10 11. M. Wootton maketh speciall opposition betwixt the Scripture which they assigne and the doctrine of the Church which we assigne for the rule of faith whereas we make no such opposition at all but hold the Scripture as propounded to vs by the Church to be part of that which in the tenth Chapter I call the rule of faith For by the doctrine of the Church which there I cal the rule of faith I do not meane any humane doctrine as humane is distinguished from Diuine but do account the same doctrine whether written or vnwritten which is called diuine because it was first immediatly reuealed by God to the Prophets and Apostles to be also Church doctrine because it is propounded interpreted and applyed in particular to vs by the Pastours of the Church This my aduersary might haue vnderstood euen by the very title of this Chapter in regard I said not the Scripture is not the rule of faith but Scripture ALONE is not the rule of faith SECONDLY they peruert the state of the question in that they take the rule of faith otherwise then I do and otherwise then according to the drift of the precedent Chapters wherupon this present Chapter doth depend they ought to do For whereas there may be distinguished in this matter First that which is a rule of faith but not the ordinary sufficient meanes ordained by God to breed faith in men viz the diuine reuealed verities as they are in themselues Secondly that which is so an
apparant I yeelded not his conclusion in the whole sence but onely in a part For view my words The Ministerie of the Church is the ordinary meanes whereby we may learne the faith of Christ And no man can of himselfe attaine to the knowledge thereof but as the Church teaches him except it be in some extraordinary cases How will my Iesuite conclude froÌ„ hence that therefore I yeeld his conclusion as it is vnderstood the second way which way I haue shewed immediately before both his Church and himselfe vnderstand it Doth he that saies the kings Iustices are tâ—â— ordinary meanes whereby to learne the matter of ciuill obedience and that no subiect can ordinarily attaine to the knowledge of the law vnlesse some body publish it yeeld therfore that the law alone is not the rule of the said obedience and subiection prescribing the measure and qualitie thereof but the Iustices also and such as acquaint vs with the law are part of the rule yea the greater and more certaine part No man will say so when all men see the Magistrate to be but the executioner and minister of the law to teach publish and execute that which is in the law it selfe and the Booke of the law to containe the whole and entire obiect of obedience that no subiect is bound to any obedience or to the doing of any thing whatsoeuer the Magistrate might happen to impose vpon him but that onely which is contained in the law either expressely or thence to be gathered by true consequence And so my Iesuits vaunt of our yeelding and impertinent discourses relishes but of the Souldier that created him and his vaunting Order though his putting vs ouer to his other Catholicke Authors be scarse souldier-like but tastes more of the Creeple He vses this often and I confesse it is a good short cutte home-wardes if a man be empty but it sinkes him that vses it into the lowest bottome of contempt to giue the onset with conclusions and principles and then to maintaine them with boasting and ignorance If we were not well acquainted with this transparent cowardlinesse in our busiest Aduersaries it would leauen the most setled patience that is among vs. CHAP. XXVIII Touching our English translations of the Bible Their sinceritie and infalliblenesse 2. How the vnlearned know them to be sincere The new Translation lately set foorth by the Kings authority defended Momus in his humor 4. The subordination of means Pag. 179. A. D. § 1. That English translations of Scripture are not infallible concerning my first reason it is to be obserued that I do not deny the true Scriptures either in the originall or in the translation to be infallible but onely I proue the ordinary English translations which ordinarily Protestants call the Scriptures not to be infallible nor consequently to be Wootton pag. 68. as some make them the onely sufficient rule and means to breed faith M. Wootton asketh what English Protestant euer affirmed that they were infallible or tooke them for the rule To this I reply first that I could wish these his questions could not be answered with affirming that many thousand poore soules that haue and can onely reade English Bibles think the texts which they reade in theÌ„ to be Gods word and consequently the infallible truth and so take them for a rule of their faith that wbat they finde written there they most firmly beleeue what they finde not there they will not beleeue Secondly if the English translation be not accounted infallible nor the rule of faith by some Protestants I aske first what M. White meaneth to say White pag. 25. the Scripture translated into English is infallibly true in respect of the matter Secondly I aske what infallible rule and meanes haue at least vnlearned Protestants whereupon to build their faith It cannot be said that the truth of the reuealed doctrine in it selfe is their rule For this is the thing that should be beleeued and is not the rule and meanes whereby men are to be directed to attain beliefe The first Hebrew or Greeke originall text immediatly written by the holy writers cannot be their rule For first where is this to be found or how shall they be sure if they find it that it is the very authenticall or originall and not a transumpt Or if a transumpt may also serue so that it be incorrupt how shall they know infallibly secluding Church-authoritie that that copie which they haue is incorrupt when they neuer saw the first authenticall nor euer did or are able to compare them together Finally suppose they had a copie well agreeing with the originall what nearer were they attaining faith by it since they cannot vnderstand it White pag. 25. M White is so farre from disclaiming from English translations as M. Wotton doth that he will needs defend them to be infallible in the matter contained in them in so much that with a bold brazen face he saith Martin cannot giue one instance of the sence corrupted Pag. 26. And although he seeme to leaue himselfe a starting hole by saying that he doth not defend tbis or that mans edition but the Scriptures wel and faithfully translated accounting it sufficient that there be some translations faithfull and agreeing with the originall in the Church Ibid. yet presently after he taketh vpon him to defend the varieties of translations saying that this varietie hath bene in words and stile and not in any materiall point of the sence Now how false this bold and blind answer is the Reader may easily perceiue if he will reade not onely M. Gregory Martins discouerie but also M. Reynolds refutation of M. Whitaker and the Grounds of the new Religion which bookes neither are or can so be answered by M. Fulke and his fellow Protestants to helpe him but still it wil be iustified and made plaine that not onely one but many instances may be giuen of the sence corrupted The which is not onely proued by our Diuines but also confessed by Protestants themselues One of which said Broughtons epistle to the Lords of the Councell Carlile in his booke that Christ went not downe into hell that the English Bible was full of errors And what errors Onely in stile or words Nay M. Carlile saith that our English Translators in many places detort the Scriptures from the right sence and that they haue corrupted and depraued the sence obscured the truth deceiued the ignorant Which their confession if it were not also acknowledged for truth by others what need were there after so many varieties of translations that with so much cost care and scandal to the Protestant cause they must needs haue order by publik authority to coine a new translatioÌ„ of the Bible different froÌ„ all English translatioÌ„s that haue bin before the which also when it cometh forth will not be of infallible authoritie more then the former neither can at least vnlearned men be infallibly assured that it
containeth no materiall error For I would faine know how they who neither haue the authenticall originall or if they had cannot reade and much lesse vnderstand and compare the translation with it neither do admit infallible authoritie in the Church to assure them can be infallibly assured that the translation doth not containe any substantiall error To this M. White answereth White pag. 25. that we know this by the same infallible meanes wherby we know other articles of beliefe namely by the light of the doctrine translated the testimony of the Spirit the ministery of the word the rules of are the knowledge of tongues and such like Here is a faire flourish of words but answer me good M. White directly to the point Are all of these ioyntly or euery one seuerally or onely some of these necessary sufficient to breed in vs infallible assurance of an article of faith All are not necessary For else how shall poore vnlearned men do who want rules of art knowledge of tongues and such like Euery one seuerally is not sufficient For neither knowledge of tongues rules of art nor the Protestant ministery are of themselues infallible and consequently cannot be of themselues sufficient to breed such infallible assurance in vs as is requisite in an article of faith Well then it remaineth that onely some of these to wit the light of doctrine translated and the testimonie of the Spirit are euen according to the ordinary course the only necessary and of themselues the sole sufficient meanes to breed this assurance but this not For then it wold follow that euery one learned and vnlearned that had the Spirit of God by the onely light of the doctrine it self without any other help should infallibly vnderstand the Greeke and Hebrew text either read by themselues or pronounced by a Minister which is most false and yet that it followeth wel is apparent because true doctrine shineth as wel yea better if M. White say true in the Originall White pag. 26. then in the English Translations We saith M. White know the diuine doctrine to be one and the same Pag. 27. immediatly in the Originall more obscurely in the Translations and God as the same M. White saith directeth the children of light by the holy Ghost who openeth their hearts that they know his voice from all others and that the light of his truth may shine vnto them Now if the light of the diuine doctrine do shine as well and better in the Hebrew and Greeke text then in the English translations and that all which be children of light haue the eies of their heart so opened as they can discerne Gods voice froÌ„ all others and that the light of his truth shineth vnto theÌ„ what need is there then of any other either priuate or publick meanes to open their eies to see this light when the holy Ghost doth sufficiently open them Or if he say the holy Ghost doth not open them sufficiently without othâ—r meanes then the light of the doctrine and the testimony of the Spirit are not the onely necessary and alone sufficient meanes to assure vs infallibly of any article of faith namely that this or that means must be assigned sufficient to breed in vs infallible assuraÌ„ce which it self cannot do vnles it selfe be and be knowne or at least may be knowne to be infallible in it selfe and infallibly to open and direct our eyes to the seeing of the infallible truth which fallible ministery of meÌ„ fallible rules of art fallible knowledge of tongs or such like infallibly do not 1 HIs reason why the Scriptures traÌ„slated into English caÌ„not be the rule of faith is because our translations are full of errors Wherby he says his mind is not to deny the true Scripture in the originall or in the translation to be infallible but only the ordinary English translations My a THE WAY §. 5. nu 2 §. 6. nu 2. 4. 8. answer was the same that D. Stapleton b Relect. pag. 525. makes for the vulgar Latin that in respect of the words onely there might be some error but in respect of the sence there is none For if the words of the traÌ„slation be not so perfect as they might yet that hinders not the truth of the matter nor the integritie of the sence For the vulgar Latin canonized by c Sess 4. the Trent Councell and d In those words J do not denie the true Scripture either in the Originall or in the Translation to be infallible granted by the Iesuite himselfe to be infallible is not free from error and corruption in words Mariana e Tract pro edit vulg Multa superius in Hebraicis Graecis codicibus vtti esse ostendimus multae mendacia in rebus minutis eorum pars aliquae non exigua in nostra editione vulgata extat c. 21. pag. 103. says There be many corruptions in the Hebrew and Greeke bookes which are the originall and many lies in small matters no small part whereof is also in the vulgar It may safely therfore be yeelded that our English translations as all other translations in the world whatsoeuer are not infallible nor free from all errors in words and yet the sence and matter of the Scripture translated which is the rule be stil maintained to be infallible This my answer yeelding such a kind of erroniousnes in words my aduersary obiects to M. Wotton who belike in his answer to this argument demanding what English Protestant euer affirmed that our translations were infallible or tooke them for the rule He replies secondly what means M. White then to say the Scripture translated into English is infallibly true in respect of the matter M. White answers that his meaning in so saying was to accord with M. Wotton by distinguishing betweene the words and the contents of the translations M. Wotton denying the words to be the rule and I affirming the matter contained in the words so to be What contradiction is this when he grants our translatioÌ„s as al humane means are to be subiect to error in one sence and I deny them to be subiect in another 2 This my assertion that our English translations as touching the matter contained in them are infallible howsoeuer there be varietie among them in words stile he entertaines after his accustomed maner with some passioÌ„ For expouÌ„ding my self that I wold not maintain this or that mans editioÌ„ but the Scriptures wel and faithfully translated in such maner as our Church allows them he cals this a starting hole neuer remeÌ„bring how himself wil not defend this or that edition in his own Church but wil retire to those editions that are approued as also the primitiue Church permitted varietie of translations and yet followed the purest as neare as it could iudge of theÌ„ for the time being I wil therfore say it again that OVR ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS AS TOVCHING THE MATTER CONTAINED THEREIN ARE INFALLIBLE AND
words seeming plaine are to be vnderstood properly as they sound and when they are to be taken in a figuratiue or improper sence This say I is not to be learned sufficiently in the bare letter of Scripture alone but is to be learned of the Church according to that worthy saying of Vincentius Lyrinensis Vincent Lyr. cont haeres c. 2. Because all men do not take the holy Scripture for the height of it in one and the same sence but diuers men interpret the sayings of it diuersly in so much that almost so many different sences may seeme possible to be drawne from it as there are diuers men c. Therefore it is very necessarie that the line of Propheticall and Apostolicall interpretation be directed according to the rule of Ecclesiasticall and Catholicke sence True it is that by other probable meanes viz. rules of art knowledge of tongues obseruation of circumstances conference of places c. one but not euery lay-man woman and childe euen of M Wotton and M. Whites owne parish may probably finde out when the words are and when they are not to be vnderstood properly but infallibly in such sort as to build thereupon infallible assent of faith one cannot without infallible interpretation had either immediatly by reuelation of the Spirit which is not ordinarily to be expected or by infallible authoritie of the Church True it is also that ordinarily Diuines hold it for a certaine rule that words of Scripture are to be vnderstood properly as they sound vnlesse to auoide some absurditie we be compelled to interprete by a figure But when such an absurditie occurreth that ought to compell vs to interprete plaine words of Scripture by a figure and when not although reason it selfe may probably know which probable knowledge may suffice for direction of manners yet infallibly in such sort as is required to the assent of faith reason alone not assisted by Church authoritie cannot at the least alwayes tell sith many things may seeme absurd to our priuate sence and reason which in truth are not absurd as in the mystery of the blessed Trinitie may plainly appeare and contrariwise many things may seeme in reason not absurd which in true Diuinitie are absurd and most false 1 HIs second reason against the Scriptures being the rule of faith was their obscuritie because they faile in the second condition of the rule being of themselues alone so obscure and vnknowne both to the vnlearned and learned that no man can thereby alone be sufficiently directed This reason was handled § 7 and 8. where I answered the argument whereby he prosecuted it and euery word also that he replies here which makes me to wonder with what conscience he followes his cause when that he sayes here being answered he shrinks from replying and onely repeates his old argument againe and yet intitles his booke a Reply when he replies nothing but conceales all from his Reader that I answered neuerthelesse that he sayes I will answer againe 2 First he tels in what sence he holds the Scripture to be obscure and how farre forth Not that it cannot by any meanes be vnderstood or that it is any imperfection in the Scripture to be obscure but the perfection rather the onely thing he goes about to proue being that de facto it is obscure or at the least not so easie as the ordinary rule of faith ought to be which is denied and confuted not denying some parts to be obscure as many prophecies and mysteries therein nor affirming any of it to be so effectuall to our vnderstanding that without the motion of Gods Spirit and vse of the meanes euery man can effectually vse it to his saluation for I neuer denied the requisite condition of Gods grace and the Churches teaching and our owne endeuour to open our vnderstanding euen in the plainest Scripture that is but I onely affirme all things concerning faith and good life needfull to be knowne to be so plainly set downe therein that the vnlearnedst man aliue vsing the meanes which is not the Church-authoritie intended by my aduersary and being enlightned with Gods Spirit may sufficiently vnderstand them to his saluation which is enough to make it a rule perfect entire and as easie as is possible for a rule to be for the finding out and deciding whatsoeuer matter belongs to faith For howsoeuer some things in the Scripture the knowledge whereof is not simply necessary to saluation be very obscure and doubtfull yet the whole rule of our faith needfull to all men is set downe so plainly that it may be vnderstood of all men allowing them some eleuation and onely supposing them to haue the light of grace and to take that paines in searching that is ordinarily required in the vse of any rule and in the execution of any meanes whatsoeuer It seemes my aduersarie would conclude from hence that therefore I grant Scripture alone not to be so easie as the rule of faith ought to be because I require so many euen outward meanes and helpes for the vnderstanding thereof beside the helpe of Gods Spirit within vs. But he is deceiued and deceiues his Reader for I expounded my selfe that it is not necessarie the rule be so easie and effectuall that no helpe shall be needfull for the applying it to our conscience but the perfection and easinesse of it stands in this that a man vsing diligence and eleuated by grace from his naturall ignorance shall finde therein absolutely and plainly all things whatsoeuer he is bound to know and beleeue and needs not that the Church by her authoritie and traditions should adde any thing to it that is not contained in it And that this condition of vsing meanes and outward helpes takes not away the reason of a rule he must confesse by his owne principles for let his Church-teaching and authoritie his owne Helena be the rule yet afore any man can determinately know it or vnderstand and yeeld to it he must I hope haue the grace of the Spirit and seeke it out and diligently attend what it teaches him which is as much as we require for the vnderstanding of the Scriptures This therefore is a vaste partialitie in my Iesuite that he will conclude a thing cannot be a sufficient rule or meanes that requires the helpe of grace and a mans owne industrie in the applying it when themselues holding their Church to be the rule yet confesse that no man can heare the voice thereof not vnderstand nor yeeld assent to it without the very same meanes that we require for the vnderstanding of the Scriptures What voice what complaint what querimonie shall we vtter against this peruersnesse against this spirit of contradiction But my aduersarie sayes that among these outward meanes and helpes which M. White requires to the vnderstanding of the Scripture besides the Spirit of God there must be one an outward meanes which is * There is no such outward infalible means in this life
c Orat. cont Gent. sub init saies The holy Scriptures are * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sufficient by themselues to shew the truth Isiodore Pelusiota d L. 2. Epist 369. The sacred volumes hauing the testimony of the diuine Scriptures are the stayres whereby we ascend to God All therefore brought out of them in the Church of God receiue as proued gold tried in the fire of the Spirit of Gods truth * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and whatsoeuer things without these volumes are carried about though they haue shew of probability leaue to those that plot the fables of heresies S. Basil e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 de fid pag. 394. edit Basil an 1551. It is manifest presumption and apostasie from the faith either to abrogate any of the things that are written or bring in any thing that is not written And Vincent Lirin f Monito c. 2. 41. The rule of the Scripture is perfect and in it selfe sufficient and more then sufficient vnto all things And g 3. d. 25. qu. vnic a. Gab. Biell his owne Schoolman All things necessary to be beleeued are contained in the Canonicall Scripture it belonges therefore to the perfection of the Scripture to containe all things 2. Against this he obiected the stale and threadbare argument it is not contained in the Scripture that it selfe is the word of God My answer was that the vertue and power that shewes it selfe in euery line and leafe of the Bible proclaimes it to be the word of God and the sheepe of Christ discerne the voice and light of it as men discerne sweete from sowre light from darkenesse Now he demandes in this Reply How then it chances that our illuminated Luther could not see the Epistle of S. Iames to be diuine Scripture I answer readily to the point if the Scripture be so easily and infallibly knowne to be Gods word by the authority of the Church how chances it that his illuminated Caietan h Catharin cont Nov. dog Caiet S xt Senens Biblio l. 6. annot 337. denied the same Epistle of S. Iames to be diuine Scripture how chances i Noted afore so many Papists deny the Apocrypha to be Canonicall as well as we how comes it about that Genebrard k Genebrard chronol p. 181. Posseuin appar verb. Gilb. Genebrard affirmes the third fourth Bookes of Esdras to be Canonicall Scripture which the Chuch denies Thus my Iesuit is fallen vnawares into the same pit he made for me Secondly my aduersarie l Verum est doctorem quidem Lutherū quosdam alios exemplum veteris Ecclesiae imitatos de libris modo dictis non ita praeclare sensisse sed tamen jidē postea re diligentius perpensa priorem sententiam mutare non dubitarunt Eckhard fascic pag. 21. cannot proue that M. Luther perseuered to the end in the deniall of this Epistle The iudgement of m Nonnul i antiquitus de epistolae huius authoritate dubitarunt Passeuin appar v. Iacob Apost see Euseb hist. Eccle l. 3 c. 25. Ieron Doroth de viris illust v. Iacobus so many in the Primitiue Church refusing it dazeled Luthers eyes and made him to doubt for a time but that he neuer saw and beleeued it to be Scripture to the end my aduersary will scarse be able to shew Thirdly Luthers not seeing this light proues not that there is no such light or voice in the Scripture for all faith thereof is not in an instant but successiuely and by degrees and all men at all times haue not eyes and disposition alike to see it as the Apostles at the first saw not Christ to be that he was though he were the light that came into the world Saint Austine n Tract 35. Ioh. sayes The Scriptures are lighted vp to be our Candle in this world that we walke not in darknesse Therefore they are seene by their owne light For the same Saint Austine n saies will you light a Candle to see a burning Candle for a burning Candle is able both to make manifest other things that are hidden in darkenesse and to shew it selfe to thy eyes The Scripture therefore by it owne light shewes it selfe as I said to be the word of God and if any see not this light the defect is in themselues and is remoued by no other light added but by the same light at such time as pleases God to open the eyes Theophilus Antiochenus o Orat. 1. ad Antolych sayes we must not say there is no light because the blind see it not but let them that see it not accuse their owne eyes For as in all other matters of faith it falls out among the children of God that p 1. Cor. 13.9 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost ibi hom 34. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Scol graec ibi some see and know more and some vnderstand and beleeue lesse then othersome yet the matters of faith themselues are one and the same and the beleeuers are inlightened with Gods Spirit though not all in the same measure so may it fall out about this obiect that some particular men may not at the first or alway perfitly see the light of euery part of Scripture or perfitly heare the voice of Christ founding therein for here in this life we know but in part and prophecy but in part though the light of the Scripture shine fully forth vnto all 3 This light of the Scripture my aduersary grants but yet to bring in his traditions and Church-authority marke how he replyes What light soeuer there be in the Scripture yet it shines not to our vnderstanding till it be illuminated with faith which the elect themselues at all times are not the which I grant and thereupon inferre that this light was neuerthelesse in the Scripture though Luther saw it not in one place thereof and the reason why he saw it not was because euery one of the elect is not at all times indued with all faith but my Iesuite addes that this light whereby the Scriptures shew themselues to be the word of God shines not to the vnderstanding illuminated with faith neither vnlesse it be propounded by the authority of the Church vpon which as vpon a Candlesticke the light of the Scripture must be set or else it will not sufficiently shine vnto vs to giue vs of it selfe infallible assurance that it is the word of God q Concedimus igitur sacras liteteras quae diuinae doctrinae continent lumen tanquam lucernam esse per seipsam splendidissimam atque fulgentissimam sed nobis tamen non in se lucidam sed quatenus est diuinitus in Ecclesiae Catholicae authoritate tanquam in candelabro positum vt luceat omnibus qui in domo sunt Errant igitur aduersarij cum scripturam esse lucernam ac illuminare nos idem esse existimant quod eam non egere Ecclesiae infallibili authoritate vt
Scripture D. Stapleton a Relect. p. 462. sayes The Church is the ground and pillar of truth in a higher kind then the Scripture namely in the kind of the efficient cause And b Pag. 494. in explicat qu. the authority of the Church may be vnderstood to be greater then the authority of the Scripture because it is not simply subiect or bound to it but may by it authority teach decerne something which the Scripture hath neither determined nor taught The things which the Church teaches do as much binde the faithfull as those things which the Scripture teacheth we Catholickes affirme that the Church is to be heard more certainely then the Scriptures because the doctrine thereof is more manifest and euident then the doctrine of the Scriptures or at the least equally with the Scriptures because the authority thereof is no lesse irrefragable and infallible The Scripture is the booke of the Church the testimonie of truth which the Church testifies the law of God which the Church hath publisht the rule of faith which the Church hath deliuered We had wont to maruell at the blasphemies c Illyric clau script p. 541. Hos de express verb. Dei of Cusanus Verratus Hosius That the Church hath authoritie aboue the Scripture The Scripture as it is produced by heretikes is the word of the Diuell A Councell is the highest tribunall and hath the same power to determine any thing that the Councell of the Apostles and Disciples had The things written in the Gospell haue no soundnesse but through the determination of the Church c. But now you see the same renewed in that Church to this day and the Iesuits in the midst of their learned subtilties to be as grosse as the grossest Friars preferring their Church authority farre aboue the Scriptures or any vse that a Candlesticke can haue in shewing the candle Note FOVRTHLY what it is that the Protestants say touching the authority of the Scripture and the Church so much as belongs to the present occasion First that the Scriptures haue in them a light and an authoritie of their owne sufficient to prooue themselues to be the word of God and to giue infallible assurance to all men of the true sense and this light and authority is not added increased or multiplied by the Ministry of the Church or any thing that it doth about the Scripture Secondly this light and authoritie of the Scripture shines in vs and takes effect in vs then onely when the Spirit of God opens our hearts to see it The defect of which heauenly illumination is the reason why some neuer and the elect themselues at all times do not see it but it argues no defect of light in the Scriptures Thirdly the means whereby God opens our eies and hearts to see this light and authoritie in the Scripture is the Ministry of the Church I expound my selfe it is the ordinary and publike meanes wherto he referres men And this Ministry is by preaching and expounding the Scripture out of it selfe and perswading and conuincing the consciences of men yet priuately and extraordinarily when and wheresoeuer this Ministry failes or ceasses the light and sense of the Scripture is obtained by the Scripture alone without this Church Ministry and the Scripture alone in this sort immediately at sundry times by it selfe giues full assurance and workes all other effects in our consciences that it doth when the Church propounds it Fourthly the Scripture is so sufficient of it selfe both to reueale whatsoeuer is needfull to be knowne and to establish and assure our heart in the infallible faith of that it reueales that the Church hath nether authority to adde so much as one article more then is contained therein nor power to giue this assurance from any thing but from the Scripture it selfe So farre forth that THE WHOLE TEACHING AND DOCTRINE AND AVTHORITIE OF THE CHVRCH IS TO BE ADMITTED AND YEELDED TO OR REFVSED ACCORDING AS IT CONSENTS OR DISAGREES WITH THE SCRIPTVRE the fountaine of truth the rule of faith Note FIFTLY what our aduersaries meane by the Church and the meanes whereby the Church executes her authority what the things are which by her authority she may do and what the proper effect is that this authority workes in vs. First by this Church d This is shewed c. 35. nu 1. c. 36. nu 1. they vnderstand the Church of Rome for the present time being and therein the Pope in whom they say the whole power and vertue of the Church abideth Secondly the meanes whereby it executeth her authority is vnwritten Tradition out of the which it supplies all things pretended to be needfull for the exposition of the Scripture or the defining of matters that must be beleeued Thirdly the things that she may do by her authoritie are all things that appertaine to the questions of religion 1 Cus epi. 2. 3. 7. to expound the Scripture after her owne iudgement 2 Conc. Trid. sess 24. can 3. to dispense against the Scripture 3 Stapl. princip l. 9. c. 14. relect pag. 514. to canonize new Scripture that before was none 4 Stapl. ibi relect p. 494. inde to giue authority to the Scripture 5 August de Ancon qu. 59. art 1. 2. to make new articles of faith 6 Gl. de transl episc Quanto §. veri to make that to be the sence of the Scripture that is not Lastly the effect of this power is the same that the Scripture breeds and more 7 Grets defens Bel. tom 1. pag. 1218. c. obedience in all that will be saued so that the world is bound as much to the Popes definitiue sentence as to the Scripture or the voice of God himselfe 8 The speech of all the canonists for Christ and the Pope make but one tribunal 9 Capistran de author Pap. pag 130. He is aboue al like him that came downe from heaueÌ„ 10 Capist ibi For with God and the Pope his will is sufficient reason and that which pleases him hath the vigor of a law 11 Palaeot de consist part 5. q 9. after his sentence pronounced no man must doubt or delay to yeeld 12 Petrisedes in Romano solâ—o collocata libertate plena in suis agendis per omnia poteri debet nec vlli subesse homini Gl. ibid. vbi sup yea all the CouÌ„cels and Doctors and Churches in the world must stoop to his determination 5 These fiue things thus obserued it is easie to se that our aduersaries attribute more to the Church then to be onely a meanes for the communicating of that which is in the Scripture to vs expounding the authority thereof that it exceedes the latitude of a Candlesticke and is turned into the Candle it selfe And so to returne to my aduersaries answer and to conclude I thus reason The Ministery and authority of the Church is required either
onely as a condition to instruct vs and leade vs to the knowledge and assurance of that which is contained in the Scripture it selfe or else as a meanes to reueale vnto vs some thing that is not conceiued in the Scripture But not of the latter for all articles of faith are in the Scripture Therefore the former Therefore the Scripture alone is the rule of faith 6 My aduersarie saies it troubles vs that he sayes there be diues questions of faith which are not expressely set downe nor determined in the Scripture Whereto I answered that this was not the question for if by expressely he meant written word for word in so many syllables then the rule is not bound to containe all things thus expressely it being sufficient if all things needefull were contained therein in respect of the sense so that it might be gathered from thence by consequence the question not being in what manner but whether any way at all the whole and entire obiect of our faith be reuealed in the Scripture though some part thereof be gathered but by Consequence from that which is written expressely in so many syllables To this my aduersary replyes that it troubles vs sore to be thus conuinced with the euidence of the matter that we cannot deny it but are driuen to confesse diuers sustantiall points not to be expressely set downe But he is deceaued it troubles vs not a whit would this hatefull guise of bragging and talking of Conuincing when nothing is graunted but that which belongs not to the question troubled vs no more For no Protestant affirms all things to be written expressely but onely that All things belonging to faith are written in such sort that we haue in the Canonicall bookes either expresse wordes as plaine as any man can speake or infallible sense which any man by vsing the meanes may vnderstand for euery article of faith whatsoeuer Neither did D. M. Luther or any of the learned Diuines of our Church whom my aduersary in his canting language calles his new Masters euer hold otherwise He sayes by our leaues this was the question first when our Grandfather Luther was so hoate to haue expresse Scripture that he would haue all expressed euen in words c. And biddes me see Gretser in his defence of Bellarmine But by his leaue Gretser and he both speake vntruly and he absurdly For he so quotes Gretser that a man would thinke Gretser had shewed out of Luthers writings some places wherein Luther required expresse Scripture euen in wordes which he doth not nor Bellarmine whō he defends could do but be reports in English what Gretser lied in Latine and then biddes see Gretser when there is as little in Gretser to this purpose as in himselfe If M. Luther and the Diuines of our Church confesse many things not to be written verbatim in expresse syllables as it is not thus written that infants must be baptized or that Christ is consubstantiall with his Father do they therefore confesse they are not written at all or will himselfe conclude the Scripture wants that which is not written in so many words Is the true sense and meaning of the words nothing are they not as well conclusions of Scripture which are deduced by true discourse as which are expressed verbatim doth not Picus e Theorem 5. sub sin say such are most properly conclusions of faith which are drawne out of the old and new Testament or by good connexion depend on those that are drawne doth not the Cardinall of Cambrey f 1. q. 1. art 3. p. 50 h. say They are conclusions of diuinity not onely which formally are contained in Scripture but also which necessarily follow of that which is so contained And before him g Prolog sent qu. 1. art 2 pag. 10. f. Rom. edit Aureolus another Cardinall In the second manner of proceeding when we goe forward from one proposition beleeued and another necessary or from both beleeued to inquire of any one that is doubtfull no other habite is obtained but the habite of faith the contrary whereof are heresies in which wordes we see he affirmes a going forward from that which is certainely beleeued because it is expresly written to that which is gathered by discourse and makes this latter also to belong to faith I know few of the schoolemen deny this whereupon it followeth manifestly that it is reputed to be within the contents of the Scripture not onely which is expressed in words but also which is so in sense and good consequence In which manner I haue prooued vnanswerably that all the whole obiect of faith is expressed CHAP. XXXI Wherein the place of 2. Tim. 3.15 alledged to proue the fulnes and sufficiencie of the Scripture alone is expounded and vrged against the Iesuites cauills A. D. To my answer of the Protestant obiection whereas I say Pag. 190. the Apostle affirming the Scripture to be profitable doth not auouch the alone sufficiency of it Whereas also secondly I say it is rather profitable in that it commendeth the authority of the Church which is sufficient M. White replieth against the first part of this my answer White pag. 55. that when the Apostle saith the Scripture is profitable c. he meaneth that it is so profitable that a man by vsing it may be made perfect to euery worke and thereupon thus he reasoneth We do not say Scripture is profitable Ergo sufficient but it is profitable to euery thing Ergo sufficient I answer that this consequence is not good Piety is by S. Paul said to be profitatable to euery thing doth it therefore follow that it is sufficient in such sort that there need no other helpe or meanes to be ioyned with it to attaine whatsoeuer thing M. Wootton and M. White seeme to reason more strongly yet weakely enough to this effect That is sufficient which is able to make a man wise to saluation and which is profitable taking the word profitable as expounded by the word able to make one absolute and perfect c. But the Apostle affirmeth Scripture to be able and profitable to the foresaid purposes Ergo. To this I answer that if they had put into the argument the word alone of which all the question is it would more plainly appeare how it proueth nothing Secondly I might say that the Apostle speaketh of the old Testament Wootton p. 97 as M. Wootton granteth yea of euery parcell thereof as the word Omnis signifieth yet I hope that neither M. Wootton nor M. White will say that now the old Testament without the new and much lesse euery parcell of the old is of it selfe alone sufficient for all the foresaid purposes For if so what need were there of the new Testament or of the other parts besides any one parcell of the old Thirdly I say that the word profitable is not to be expounded by the word able and if it were the word able doth not signifie that the Scripture
Scriptures make the Church perfect by cōmending it to it self for thē the Apostles should speak thus by my aduersaries exposition the Scriptures are profitable to make the Church perfect by commending to it the authority of the Church and yet he defendes it First because it sendes them Pastors Pope Councell and all to the interpretations of Councels and Fathers of the ancient Church But then I demand how did they make perfect the ancient Church it selfe the first Councels and Fathers of whom the Apostle speakes as well as of the latter for they had none to retire to but the Scripture onely Secondly because the Pastors of the Church sustaine two persons one as publike Pastors authorized to teach another as priuate men needing instruction themselues and so the Apostle saies the Scripture sends them as priuate men to themselues considered as publike men inabled as need shall require to define the truth in any point the which is an irkesome answer to any that shall consider it for although a Pastor be considered these 2. waies yet it is false that is assumed that he which as a priuate man erres and is ignorant yet as a publike person is able to direct himselfe and others and define the truth this I say is a trick to mocke an ape with though it be all the shift they haue to defend the Pope from being a formall hereticke and yet admitting it to be true that the Pastors of the Church considered as priuate men are sent to themselues considered as publike men yet it cannot be true that the Scripture makes thē perfect this way by sending and commending them to themselues because the perfection auouched is the effect of that teaching that reprouing that correcting that instructing which is contained in the Scripture it selfe and not in the authoritie of man whither the Scripture is imagined to send vs. For all that the Apostle in this text affirmes is of the Scripture alone as appeares 7 Besides my argument I alleadged some testimonies of Chrysostome and certaine Papists to iustifie my exposition wherein they affirme as much out of the text as I doe whereto he replies that the said testimonies must either be explicated to mean that the Scriptures are able to instruct vs with the meanes of Church authority or else be taken without limitation if they be thus explicated they proue nothing against him if they be taken without limitation they proue as much against vs as against him I answer to the first the testimonies are to be seene and the words thereof are so full that they cannot be thus explicated as for example Chrysostome in his words expounds S. Paul to distinguish the Scripture against his owne ministry Thou hast the Scripture to teach thee in steed of me if thou desire to know anything there thou maiest learne it that which can teach vs in steed of the Church Pastours can teach vs without their authority if God as Antonin says hath spokē but once that in the Scriptures that so fully that he speakes no more how can the meaning be that other authority should be ioyned with them for so God should speake twice once in the Scriptures another time in the Church and in the Scripture so far from fully that he needs speake againe in the Church The like may be said to the other testimonies but I refer the iudgement to the conscience of the Reader To the second if these words be taken without limitation that alone without any means ioyned to thē they are able to instruct vs they proue as much against me as against him that its maruell I should haue so little iudgement I demand and why so I pray because then they will make as much against our Church ministery as against his Church authority which had bene spoken to the point if we by Church ministry had meant either the same or as much as he doth by Church authority but when his Church authority intends a supply of that which is wanting in the Scripture by traditions our Church ministry no more but a simple cōdition of vsing the meanes to make vs see that which is contained in thē which ministry also we do not hold to be alway vnto all persons necessary he may let our iudgements alone and take a new reckoning of his owne that is so simple as to make alike things that are so far vnlike his Church authority and our Church ministry CHAP. XXXII Touching priuate spirits that expound against the Church 1. Such priuate expositions refused by the Protestants 2. And yet the Papists haue no other All teaching is to be examined euen by priuate men 5. Certaine propositions shewing how the Church teaching may be or may not be examined and refused Pag. 196. Wootton p. 110 White pag. 62. A.D. Concerning the ninth Chapter M. Wootton and M. White both seeme to disclaime from immediate teaching of priuate spirits and consequently seeme to grant the substance of the conclusion of this Chapter in such sense as it was principally intended by me yet wheresoeuer they be vrged to tell how they infallibly know that there is any Scripture at all and that these and no other bookes be Canonicall Scripture and that this or that is the true interpretation and sense of this or that text of holy Scripture vpon which questions well resolued the whole frame of their faith doth depend after alledging other reasons drawne from rules of art and knowledge of tongues c. which they know to be infallible they must be forced finally to flie for infallible assurance either to the immediate teaching of their priuate spirit or else to run the round betwixt Scripture and priuate spirit in such sort as I haue shewed in the Introduction Introd q. 6. and hence it seemeth to proceed that they both thought fit to make answer to my reasons which they needed not to haue done if the conclusion of this Chapter had no waies bene contrary to their doctrine White pag. 59. 60. M. White before he begin to answer my reasons distinguisheth a double meaning of the word priuate which I put in my conclusion and saith that if I meant it as it is opposed ô strange opposition to diuine and spirituall I said well but vsing it as we Catholickes do as it is opposed to common he saith that a priuate man may so be assisted with the Holy Ghost that he may interprete Scripture truely and infallibly against a company as big as the Roman Church 1 HIs third conclusion touching the rule of faith was that no priuate man who perswadeth himselfe to be specially instructed by the spirit can be this rule of faith specially so far foorth as he teaches or beleeues contrary to the receiued doctrine of the Catholicke Church the which I granted to be true but admonished the Reader withall that he had a further reach therein then yet he made shew of For his intent was to condemne all particular men and
iudge and i Gi. d. 19 Auast §. in concilio in a difficult cause whether of faith or right he must call a Councel where if the Councel he cannot agree in deciding but are contrary k AntoÌ„ de â—â—o â—eâ—â— Mon â—â—h â—â—ct de concil p 47. â—urtâ—â—eÌ„ d. 19. Sâ—cundum E câ— n. 6. then they of the two must be followed which haue the best reasoÌ„ l â—urâ—ecrem d. 40. Si â—â—pa n. 4. Simaâ—ch Cathol instit tit 12 n. 13. when the faith lies in danger the Cardinals or a CouÌ„cell may resist the Pope in all which cases how shall a priuate man or a whole nation be infallibly assured of truth the Pope may erre he may erre definitiuely against a CouÌ„cell he may be an hereticke he may be resisted the Councell also may erre the faith may be indangered therefore men must try their reasons all this is confessed Where now is this iudge that my aduersary talkes of neither the Pope nor a Councell is it for men must follow them of the two that had the best reasons who shall iudge of their reasons the Christian people whom the cause concernes And by what can they iudge but by some thing distinct from both Councell and Pope and aboue them both which is the m So Occham GersoÌ„ Panorm The Diuines now of Venice and Paris in their tractats of this matter Scripture or nothing And for so much as no man can vnderstand the Scripture without Gods Spirit therefore in the case propounded our aduersaries must allow both Pope and Councell to be tried by priuate spirits as much as we do the teaching of the Church Let the most zealous and learned Papist that liues consider this and he shall perceiue that what we meane when we say The Scripture is the supreme rule and the true sense thereof is assured vnto vs lastly and authoratiuely by the Spirit of God themselues are driuen to hold as well as we Therefore whatsoeuer my aduersary hath rabbled together in his Introduct it is no more a circle in vs to proue our spirit by the Scripture and againe to be assured of the Scripture by the Spirit then it is in discourse to go too and fro betweene causes and effects But * See D. R. Field 2. part Append. p. 12. § 5. 6. where this point is shewed effectually it is himselfe and his owne Diuines that runne the round 3 Thirdly he saies that I needed not haue answered the reasons of his conclusion if the conclusion had not bene against our doctrine but this is idle for I answered the reasons because of that which the conclusion intended Good wordes especially with equiuocators may haue a bad purpose in which case the sense must be distinguisht and that which is false confuted 4 Fourthly he saies 2. things about my distinguishing of the word priuate For the vnderstanding whereof note that his conclusion being No priuate man perswading himselfe to be instructed by the Spirit can be the Rule of faith I answered that if he meant priuate when he sayes so often in the proces of his argument priuate spirits as it is opposed to diuine and spirituall he said well but vsing it in another sense as it is opposed to common and vsuall his conclusion was vntrue To this he replies first ô strange opposition but this he doth onely by the way because he would not loose a Parenthesis His head being so full of mentall reseruations that it makes his booke breake out all ouer into Parentheses as if it were full of the Measels for when particular men and priuate spirits do not erre by reason of their small number but by holding against that which is diuine and spirituall what such strange opposition is it to oppose the priuate spirit against the diuine Spirit of God and a priuate man against him that is spirituall In this sense No priuate mans spirit can be the rule if by priuate he meane not that which is not so common but that which is not diuine and spirituall But this is not worth the standing on his second exception is against the matter of the distinction For I said a priuate man may be so assisted by the holy Ghost that he may interpret Scripture truely and infallibly against a company as bigge as the Romane Church To this he replies denying my supposition that it is not to be thought the holy Ghost assists any that expoundes the Scripture contrary to the vniuersall Catholicke Church the which I thinke too and therefore this is not the point in question when we both agree but the point is whether these priuate men and spirits being expounded to be Luther such as he was with the Churches that cast off the Papacy this Catholicke and vniuersall Christian Church being expounded as it is by our aduersary to be the Papacy or Roman Church theÌ„ whether the priuate coÌ„pany may not haue Gods Spirit and the great company want it and so consequently the said priuate company be able to haue the truth against that which A. D. calles the Catholicke vniuersall Church for we affirme it Not by saying that Luther or any of our side had Gods Spirit or saw any truth which the true Church did not see but that they had and saw the the truth in the middest of the Church against the Papacy which now ridiculously is stiled the Catholicke vniuersall Church And therefore my aduersay and all of his side do but trifle away time in opposing the vniuersall Church against M. Luther vntill they haue proued the Papacy to be it and Luther with such as followed him no part of it For he resisted not the Catholicke Church but the Papacy in the Catholicke Church A. D. I do not deny but that a priuate man Pag. 196. supposing he were indeede assisted by the holy Ghost might interpret Scripture truely and infallibly against a company as bigge as the Romane Church supposing this company were not so assisted But herein consisteth the chiefe point of the question whether it be to be thought that the holy Ghost doth indeed or not assist one or some few priuate men who presuming that they are so assisted do interpret the holy Scripture in such sense as is contrary to the sense of the holy Catholike or vniuersall Christian Church whether it be Romane or not I do not now dispute this we shall see hereafter which as I shall proue is vndoubtedly knowne by the promises of Christ to haue the assistance of the holy Ghost This being the point in question my conclusion in this Chapter is that no priuate man pretending neuer so much to be spiritual or specially inspired is to be thought indeede inspired by the holy Ghost when he interpreteth Scripture as Luther and his like did in a sense contrary to the vnanime interpretation of the precedent and then liuing Pastours of the Catholicke Church and consequently it is not to be thought that the priuate spirit
all the gates of hell not onely ouer the sayings of men though holy men or deceitful custom Gods word is ouer all The diuine Maiestie is of my side that I care not if a thousand Austins a thousand Cyprians a thousand King Harry-churches stood against me God can neither deceiue nor be deceiued Austin and Cyprian as all the elect may erre and haue erred In all these words there is nothing spoken simply against the Fathers but comparatiuely if a thousand Fathers were against the Scriptures he would rather stand to the Scripture wherein he speakes most godly and honestly that d Gal. 1. if an Apostle or an Angell from heauen farre greater then a thousand Austins and Cyprians should preach otherwise let him be accursed Neither Saint Paul nor Luther granted the Angels or Doctors of the Church to preach otherwise then they did but if any man would pretend and oppose their names and preaching against the Scripture let them be accursed the word of God is aboue all that I care not if a thousand Austins and a thousand Cyprians stood against me which is the truth and our aduersaries say as much themselues Baronius e An. 31. n. 213. Though the Fathers whom for their high learning we worthily call the Doctors of the Church were endued with the grace of the holy Ghost aboue others yet in expounding the Scripture the Catholicke Church doth not alway and in all things follow them D. Marta f De iurisdict part 1. pag. 273. The common opinion of the Doctors is not to be regarded when the contrary opinion fauours the power of the Popes keyes or a pious cause And I haue shewed g THE WAY digr 47. elsewhere that this is the common practise of our aduersaries They speake not alway so zealously and plainly as Luther doth but for substance they say the same that he doth h Yesterday Ecchius brought against me Gregory Ambrose Chrysostome to whom I then answered nothing I will therefore now say what I then forgot opposing the rule of diuine Augustine that the savings of all writers must be iudged by the sacred Scripture whose authoritie is greater then the authoritie of all men Not that I condemne the iudgement of the most illustrious Fathers but I imitate those that come nearest to the Scriptures and if the Scripture be plaine I embrace it before them all Tom. 1. disput Lips cum Ecch. pag 263. Wittemb I mention the opinion of Austin not to defame or detract froÌ„ that holy man but because it is good necessary that these holy Fathers be sometime found like our selues men that the glorie of God may stand firme c. Jâ— Genesc 21 pag. 255. tom 6. Wittemb who thought also as reuerently of the Fathers as any man is bound to do 3 But it was not Luthers going against the Fathers that discontented our aduersaries it was his resisting the Popes Canons and the faith of the Church of Rome which they shrowded vnder the name of the Fathers wherein by their owne diuinitie he might be guiltlesse Peraduenture i Dialog tract 2. part 2. c. vult pag. 180. col 3. edit Lugdun per Ioh. â—rech an 1494. saith Occham one might say that simple men ought to beleeue nothing but what the Pope and Cardinals deliuer to be beleeued explicately and should be content with things common not presuming vpon their owne vnderstanding to beleeue any thing explicitely but what the Pope and Cardinals deliuer vnto them but HE THAT SHOVLD AFFIRME THESE THINGS WERE AN INVENTOR OF NEW ERRORS For though simple men be not ordinarily tied to beleeue explicitely but onely those things which are by the Cleargie declared to be so beleeued yet SIMPLE MEN READING THE DIVINE SCRIPTVRE BY THE SHARPNES OF REASON MAY SEE SOME THING THAT THE POPE AND CARDINALS HAVE NOT DECLARED EVIDENTLY TO FOLLOW OF THE SCRIPTVRE in which case they can and must explicitely beleeue and ARE NOT BOVND TO CONSVLT WITH THE POPE AND CARDINALS FORASMVCH AS THEY ARE BOVND TO PREFERRE THE HOLY SCRIPTVRE BEFORE THEM ALL. If all the Papists in the world can shew Luther did any more then Occham here allowes euery simple man to do I am much deceiued And if he did no more then by their owne iudgements he might doe then away with these friuolous and emptie exclamations against Luther and let vs heare no more of them A. D. But saith M. White Scripture promiseth Pag 201. that euery doctrine is of God which consenteth to it and this consent a man may know infallibly or else in vaine had the Bereans searched c. I answer that I do not denie but a man may know doctrine to consent to Scripture but I aske how he may know this by onely Scripture interpreted by ones owne iudgment or priuate spirit I hope I haue shewed the contrary neither will M. White be euer able to proue that the 1 Act. 17.11 Beraeans had infallible certaintie onely by the Scripture interpreted by their owne priuate iudgement or that 2 Es 8.20 the Prophet sent any for infallible certaintie to the law and testimonie expounded onely by priuate iudgement or that 3 Luc 1 4. Saint Luke or f Col. 2.2 Saint Paul whom he alledgeth meant that men should haue infallible assurance by onely Scripture interpreted by priuate iudgement or spirit 4 I neuer intended that any man could haue infallible assurance of that he beleeues onely by Scripture interpreted by his owne priuate iudgement all that I affirme is that priuate men may examine any doctrine that is publickly taught by whosoeuer and by Scripture alone as by a certaine rule they may be assured of the truth This is plainly euinced by the texts alledged For the Beraeans hearing the Apostles preach yet searched the Scripture dayly whether those things were so and therefore beleeued In which example the matter examined is the things that the Apostles preached The rule whereby this was examined is the Scripture alone which in the text is distinguished from the Apostles preaching and ministery and authoritie and opposed against them for by it the Beraeans examined them The persons that did this were a priuate people subiect to the Pastors of the Church as much as any can be The end why they did thus examine the doctrine was to see if it consented with the Scripture The euent and issue of their examining was Therefore many of them beleeued Whereby it is cleare that a priuate man by the Scripture alone may be able to iudge of any thing that is publickly taught and by the Scripture alone be infallibly assured if he hold the truth Not the Scripture alone excluding the condition of the meanes whereby God makes the sense thereof knowne but the Scripture alone as the rule of faith excluding all authoritie of the Church and Pastors Nor the Scripture interpreted by a mans owne iudgement and priuate spirit but by it selfe truly according to the manifest rule
of faith contained and reuealed in Scripture it selfe 5 The difficultie is when I vpon the authoritie of the Scripture as I verily perswade my selfe beleeue contrary to the Church of Rome or any other presumed to be the true Church how it shall appeare to my selfe and others that I expound and vnderstand the Scriptures aright and not according to my own priuate spirit For answer whereto note first that this demand lies as well against the Beraeans and the rest of Gods people mentioned by Luke and Paul in the texts alledged as against the Protestants For they reiecting something that they were perswaded was not in the Scripture or receiuing that which they saw agreeable to the Scripture might be demanded how they were infallibly assured they had the true sence of the Scripture And a false Apostle when they should by the Scripture examine and reiect his doctrine might cauill as A.D. here doth and say they expounded it after their owne priuate spirit In which case the godly beleeuers could refer themselues to no other rule but onely leaue the truth still to be iudged by the Scripture by all such as would examine it Note secondly that the same difficultie presses our aduersaries For when they haue shewed and vrged the authoritie of the Church and their chiefe Pastor therin what they can yet this authoritie they cannot maintaine to be such as they hold but by the Scripture k Vbi sup liâ— b. Pezantius and k Vbi sup liâ— b. Greg. of Valence You wil ask how the proposition of the Church is known to be infallible Let him that is thus demanded answer He beleeues it by an infallible faith for the authoritie of the Scripture giuing witnesse to the Church which authoritie and reuelation he beleeues for it selfe albeit the proposition of the Church as a requisite condition be needfull thereunto I know not many of our aduersaries some l Durand 3 d 24. qu. 1. d. 25 q. 3. ibi Scot. Alm. Gabr. few Schoolmen excepted that hold the authoritie of the Church to be the formall reason of faith or the first and last cause of beleeuing but the authoritie of God himselfe reuealing these things which authoritie being something distinguished from the Church and aboue it can be no where manifested but in the Scripture Now when they alledge Scripture we may tell them againe they alledge it after their owne spirit which obiection may be multiplied as often as they multiply their discourses out of Scripture Thirdly therefore for satisfaction of the difficultie I beleeue and am assured of that I hold by infused faith God by a supernatural light reuealing and infusing the certaintie of that I beleeue partly by shewing to my vnderstanding out of the Scripture partly by stirring vp and inclining my will to assent vnto it and en brace it The which knowledge and assurance of mind when any man challenges as if it were but a priuate conceit subiect to error I can say no more but that which euery man sayes for his faith that so all true faith may be destroyed in that m For the beleeuer assents not by discourse to the matters of faith reuealed as by the formall reason of beleeuing but by simple cleaning adhering to theÌ„ faith neuer drawing forth her act by meanes of discourse but if discourse be vsed it is rather a conditioÌ„ helping to apply faith to it obiect Mat. 16.17 2. Cor. 10.5 Heb. 11.1 Fides secundùm se coÌ„siderata quod attinet ad causaÌ„ efficientem reuocanda est in motioneÌ„ diuinaeÌ„ lumenque diuinuÌ„ siue in habitum fidei Christiana fides etiam vt est in nobis reuocatur in DeuÌ„ mouentem diuinuÌ„que lumen Lud. Carb sum tom 3. c. 3. l. 1. pag. 6. no mans faith ascends aboue this infused illumination or can be demonstrated to be certaine by euident reasons n Tho. 1. part q 1. art 8 DuraÌ„ prolog sent qu. 1. pag 4. h. that shall conuince all gainsayers but onely there be forcible motiues to induce vnto it though when his reasons that thus beleeues shall be examined and his grounds of Scripture duly weyed by true Christians in a Councell or otherwise all that gainsay him may easily be confuted And this is the thing that we say for Luther and Scripture against the Papacie A. D. Yet saith M. White the Papists cannot denie but there is a heauenly light c. It is true Pag. 201. that Catholicks grant inward testimony of the Spirit to giue infallible assurance But what spirit is that which they thinke giueth this infallible assurance Not priuate spirit but the Spirit which is common to the Church the Spirit which inclineth men to humilâ—tie order and vnitie as in * Qu 6. the Introduction I haue shewed To whom also do they think infallible assurance to be giuen by the Spirit Not to euery one that presuming himselfe to be elect and to haue the Spirit shall rush without reuerence into the sacred text expounding it as he listeth or as it shall be suggested by priuate spirit but to such as with order humilitie and respect of vnitie reade and interprete Scripture as they learne it to be interpreted by the infallible authoritie of the Pastors of Gods Church Those that do otherwise though they may seeme to themselues to be infallibly sure yet indeed they are not as not hauing any substantiall ground to assure them which may not in like maner and with as probable colour be alledged by others whom although perswading themselues to be infallibly sure M. White himselfe wil grant to be deceiued in this their perswasion M. White * White pag. 62. 63. saith that his priuate men be assured by Scripture So say they M. White saith his men haue the witnesse of the holy Ghost So say they M. White saith his men were taught by the Pastors of the true Church This he saith indeed and so if they would be impudent they might say But whereas M White saith that his priuate men let Luther and Caluin be examples were taught by the Pastors if he meane they were taught by the Pastors those speciall points wherein they dissent from vs it is maruell that euen his owne blacke face blusheth not to vtter such a shamelesse vntruth Let M. White name if he can what Pastors those were that taught Luther and Caluin these new doctrines vnlesse he will allow the Diuell to be a Pastor whom Luther * Luth. de miss angul confesseth to haue taught him his doctrine against the Masse 6 If there be as the Replier grants a heauenly light in the things themselues that are beleeued and an inward testimonie of the Spirit that can giue infallible assurance to the beleeuer this is as much as we require for then this light and testimonie wheresoeuer and in whomsoeuer it be is sufficient as I said to assure the conscience of the truth of the things beleeued whosoeuer gainsay them and
Next that the Church of Rome is this vniuersall Church Thirdly that all the authority and efficacy of the Church is in the Pope alone And this to be the meaning I shewed in the 16. Digression whereto the Repiar hath wisely holden his tongue For it is the truth I said though he deny it for the odiousnesse and abhomination thereof For the question being What is the rule whereby all men at all times may be resolued in matters of faith he answers that the Church is it aske him againe what and which Church and he will answer The Romane Church in all ages past present and to come For a The WAY pag. 68. I shewed out of the Rhemists Bristo Posseuin and Baron that they admit no Catholicke Church but the Romane onely then aske him finally how a man may know which is the doctrine and teaching faith and beleefe of the Church and he will say againe as I shewed fully that WHAT THE POPE IVDICIALLY DETERMINES AND PROPOVNDS TO THE CHVRCH is it Did I therefore mistake when he said that by the Church he meant onely the Pope or was not himselfe rather vnable to defend the matter and therefore would auoid the very point of the question Did I not alleadge 9. Papists that all say the whole power and faculty of the Church is in the Pope Are not Gregory of Valenzaes b Pag. 24. tom 3. edit Venet. per Zal er an 1598 words plaine In this question by the Church we meant the Romane Bishops In whom resides the full authoritie of the Church when heple ases to determine matters of faith whether he do it with a Councell er without c Albertine a Iesuite sayes it expressely and in Terminis termâ—nantibus I say that besides the first verity there is an infallible rule liuing and indued with reason such as is the Church and this rule liuing and indued with reason is the chiefe Bishop of Rome this is no place to proue but you may see Valence Bell. Medina I say thirdly all the articles of our faith are lastly resolued into this rule tanquamin formalem rationem qua in proponendo Coral p. 251. edit Lugdun an 1610. apud Horat. Cardon Desiniendo arctat nos ad credendum prout ipse definiuerit Coquae exam p. 305. edit Friburg 1610. I say therefore againe that the Repliars Conclusion hath no other meaning then this The infallible rule which we ought obediently to follow is the doctrine and faith of THE POPE ALONE So himselfe writ in his d In the WAY §. 36. Treatise All Catholicke men must necessarily submit their iudgements and opinions either in expounding the Scripture or otherwise to the censure of the Apostolicke seate and God hath bound his Church to heare the chiefe Pastors in all things And all the places of Scripture that are vsed for the authoritie of the Church they applie and expound of the Pope To thee I will giue the keyes on this rock I will build Feede my sheepe c. Let vs see therefore in his next Reply how he will releeue himselfe That is meant by the Church whereto the chiefe promises made to the Church belong wherein the whole power of the Church resides whereby the Church it selfe is directed where the Church determinations begin But the Pope is he whereto the chiefe c. Ergo the Pope is meant by the Church 2 Neuerthelesse not answering these things when I obiected them he notes fiue things for the vnderstanding of his conclusion Which I answer in order To the first I grant our aduersaries distinguish the name of the Church into diuers senses by that distinguishing to gull the world but in this question when they say the teaching of the Church is the Rule they alway meane it of the Pope And the Repliar speakes vntruely that in his conclusion be meanes not the Pope but a company of men For either the company must first be taught by the Pope or else the Pope must be the mouth of that company Besides e Pag. 75. in his Introduction whither he referres himselfe hauing said that the name Church may be taken 4 waies either for the whole company of Christian professors consisting of sheepe and Pastors or for the more principall part to wit the whole company of Pastors either gathered together in a Councell or dispersed through the world or for Christs Vicar the Pope as he hath most ample authority either alone or with a Councell to propound the doctrine of faith or for euery particular Pastor as he is authorized vnder the Pope to feede the flocke committed to him he concludes that when he saies Church proposition is necessary it is not needfull for him to distinguish which of these waies he takes it because we the Protestants deny any such infallible authority to be in the Church at all in which sense soeuer he take it whereby it is plaine that he was ashamed to name in which sense he takes the Church For albeit we deny that which he cals the infallible authoritie of his Church all supreme and vnerring authoritie being in the Scripture alone yet the constant and certaine doctrine of the Church taken in the two first senses we allow to be the rule of faith because it is onely the contents of the Scripture as f The WAY § 13. n. 1. I answered to his conclusion but that he means the Church in the third sense alone appeares by this also that it is a principle among the Iesuits that the Church in the first second and fourth sense may erre and if at any time it do not it is through the guiding of the Pope who is the Church in the third sense Gregory of Valenza g In Tho. 22. tom 3. p. 247. d saies we must not distinguish betweene the Romane Church and the Romane Bishop so as if the iudgement of the Roman Church were infallible but not the iudgement of the Romane Bishop but rather these two are one and the same For THEREFORE THE APOSTOLICKE OR ROMANE CHVRCH IS SAID TO BE INFALLIBLE BECAVSE HE IS OVER IT WHO BY HIMSELFE HATH INFALLIBLE AVTHORITY Canus saies h Loc l. 6. c. 8. sub init when we come to the Apostolicke Sea to enquire the oracles of faith we do not enquire of all the faithfull in the Romane Church nor yet of the same Church assembled in a Councell see here the Church reiected in the first second and fourth senses but the Popes iudgement and sentence is it we exspect This is that I said that by the Church they meane THE POPE then he addes a reason which according to their former principles conuinces this that the firmenesse and certainety of truth must be auouched in Peter and his successors and then after in the Church whose head and foundation Peter is and therefore the more do I reprehend those which as the Repliar here by distinguishing the Apostolicke seate from the Pope thinke to ende the controuersie
here mentioned For though there be a Church in any sense that a true Church can be meant ordained to teach vs yet it followes not that it hath any such authority or any authority at all to propound vnwritten traditions and there may be a Church and yet the iudgement thereof not be the authority whereon our faith is grounded and the same Church may be ordained to teach vs yet not allowed to teach these vnwritten verities For God hath propounded all doctrine of faith in the Scriptures and appointed his Church to reueale and expound it to his people the which doctrine thus expounded inlightens the mind begets faith and is the rule of all mens iudgement through the worke of the Holy Ghost that confirmes it in the mind Granting therefore that which the Repliar so much desires that all his meaning is that once or in one age there was a company of men who in one sense or other may be called the Church whom God hath appointed and furnished to teach all men the things of faith yet it helps not his conclusion nor makes it true in that sense wherein he meanes it CHAP. XXXV 1 The Papists pretending the Church meane onely the Pope 2. How and in what sense they vnderstand the doctrine of the Apostles to be the rule of faith 3 They hold that the Pope may make new articles of faith 4 And that the Scripture receiues authority and credit from him 6Vnlearned men may see the truth when the Pope and his crew sees it not 7. And they may iudge of that they teach 8 The Iesuites dare not answer directly Pag. 204. White pag. 67. A. D. This being proued my Aduersaries may see how much they mistake when they thinke me to meane in this Chapter by the name Church onely the Pope or onely the present Pastours of the Church when as rather I meant to include these onely secondarily meaning here by the name Church principally the Apostles themselues who for the time they liued on earth were principall Doctours and Pastours of thâ— Church being by me therfore tearmed the Church which I said is the rule of faith not taking the verbe is so strictly as onely limited to this present time but â—â—ther indefinitely abstracting from all time or per ampliationem as it may extend it selfe to the by-past as well as to the present time This to be my meaning my Aduersaries might haue perceiued by the texts of Scripture which I bring for the proofe of my conclusion For those texts are by me here applied as they were by our Sauiour spoken and meant to wit principally to the Apostles being the primitiue Pastours and principall members of the Church and are onely secondarily or by consequence applied to other Pastours succeeding in their places Now taking my conclusion in this chiefly intended sense it cannot be denied to be true neither can the reason by which I proue it with any reason be denied to be good 1 IT is easie to see that he knownes not in what sense he should take his conclusion that it might be defended For if by the Church he meant no more but the Apostles and primitiue Pastours and by the doctrine of the Church no more but that which is the doctrine indeed contained in the Scripture no man would deny the doctrine and teaching faith and beleefe of the Apostles contained in the written word to be the rule of faith but he meant and still meanes otherwise that this Church which all men ought to follow is the B. of Rome alone for the time being wherein a See Chap. 34. nu 1. I mistooke him not For he meanes that which in all ages for the time being is the supreame iudge and hath subiectiuely in it all the Church authority But such is the Pope alone according to the principles of Papists Therefore he meanes the Pope alone againe he meanes that Church whereof he expounds the texts of Scripture alledged in that Chapter to proue the doctrine of the Church to be the rule but all those texts he expounds of the Pope alone for the time being Ergo. Thirdly I suppose the Repliar to be a Papist and in this place a maintainer of the Popish doctrine touching the rule of faith but that doctrine meanes the Church as I expound For the order which God hath left in his Church for the iudging and deciding of matters of faith according to the Iesuites doctrine b Staplet Princ. doctrin fid l. 6. praef 1 Bell. de Rom. Pont. l. 4. c. 1. 2 Staplet Princ. doctr l. 5. c. 1. 3 c. 2. 4 c. 5. 5 l. 6. c. 1. is this 1. That not the Scripture but the Church is this supreme iudgâ— of all controuersies and things of faith 2 Yet this Church as it is taken for the whole body iudges not 3. Nor lay priuate men therein 4. But the power of iudging belongs to the Bishops and Priests alone 5. And among them the B. of Rome alone as the successor of S. Peter is so the head of the whole Church and the primary and highest subiect of this Church iudgement that he hath power alone aboue all others whether Pastors or sheepe to pronounce 6 Grets def Bellar. tom 1 p. 1218. c. and determine touching the matters of faith 6. So that besides the Doctors and Pastors there must be in the Church some other supreme iudge and he is the B. of Rome either alone or with a Councell Here it is plaine that howsoeuer the name of the Church be pretended yet the whole power is limited and restrained to the Pope alone For they hold the gouernment and power of the Church not to be Aristocraticall placed in Councels or Bishops but Monarchicall where all the gouernment power and infalliblenesse is in the Pope alone Councels Bishops Priests and all other parts of the Church are but cyphers the power is eminently and infallibly and authoratiuely in the Pope alone either with them or without them Bellar. c De Rom. Pont l. 1. c. 9. §. sed nec sayes plainely Neither the Scripture nor secular princes nor priuate men are iudges of controuersies but Ecclesiasticall Prelates and Councels may iudge of the controuersies of religion but that iudgement is not firme or ratified till the Pope haue confirmed it and therefore the last iudgement belongs to him for either there must be no iudge among men at all or else he must be the iudge that is aboue the rest I haue alledged the words of Gregory of Valence diuers times d Tom. 3. in 22. pag. 24. When we say the Proposition of the Church is a condition necessary to the assent of faith by the name of Church we meane the head thereof that is to say the B. of Rome either alone by himselfe or with a Councell Syluester Prierias e In Luth. tom 1. pag. 159. fundam 1. The vniuersall Church essentially is the conuocation of all that beleeue in Christ but
virtually it is the Church of Rome and the Pope the Church of Rome representatiuely is the Colledge of Cardinals but virtually the Pope who is the head of the Church Pelaeottus f De consist part 1. qu. 3. pag. 19. The Pope alone may do not onely that which is granted to all and singular Prelates in the Church but also more then they all g Respons moral p. 44. n 4. Comitol The power of Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction is not in the vniuersality of the Church as in the true subiect but in the Prelates thereof and in the Bishops of Rome as in the fountaine whence it flowes vnto all other Ministers of the new Testament Albertine h Coroll pag. 251. saies The Bishop of Rome is the rule of faith into which Rule all the articles of our faith are lastly resolued as into the formall reason whereby they are propounded to vs. Gretser i Defens Bell. to 1. p. 1450. B. saies when we affirme the Church to be the iudge of all controuersies of faith by the Church we vnderstand the Bishop of Rome who for the time being gouernes the ship of the militant Church and by liuely voice doth clearely and expressely expound his iudgement to them that seeke to him Zumel k Disput var. tom 3. p. 49 D. saies I beleeue that the chiefe Priest and Bishop of the Church the Pope who is the master of our faith cannot but attaine the truth of faith nor can be deceaued or erre if as chiefe Bishop and master of the faith he set downe his determination so that vnlesse a man be afraid of the truth there is no cause why he should feare the Popes determination It is idle therefore and sordid that the Repliar saies by the Church he meant the Pope but secondarily as it is ridiculous to say the Church is the rule indefinitely and abstracting from all time or per ampliationem which are termes deuised onely to besot the ignorant that they should not smell his heresie for if his Church be the rule he must needes meane such a Church as he thinkes in all ages and times successiuely to haue bene inuested with that authority and that Church is the Pope alone that miserable iudge of whom their owne men say h Do. Bann to 3. p. 106. b. It is no Catholicke faith but an opinion very probable that he is S. Peters successor and the most iudicious confesse i Alph. l. 1. c. 4. Hadrian pag. 26. ad 2. he may erre * August Anconit sum qu. 5. art 1 Iacobat de conc l. 4. art 1. Occh Dialog 1. part l. 6. 2. part c. 69. inde Cusan de concord cath l. 2. c. 17. Panorm de elect C. signif not 7. Zabarell tract de schismat Gerson de auferibil Pap. consid 10. inde and be deposed for heresie A.D. § 1. Pag. 205. That the doctrine of the Apostles was for their life time the rule and meanes First I say that my conclusion being vnderstood as in this Chapter I principally meant cannot be denied to be true for it cannot be denied but that the doctrine as deliuered by the Apostles themselues being for the time they liued the Church in such sense as here I take the name Church was such a rule and meanes as here we seeke for For first it is knowne to be infallible Secondly it was easie to be vnderstood c. Thirdly it was vniuersall c. Since therefore these 3. conditions requisite in the rule of faith are found in the doctrine and teaching of the Apostles it cannot be denied but that the diuine doctrine as deliuered by them in their life time either by word or writing was the rule and meanes which God ordained to instruct men in faith Taking therfore my conclusion in the chiefely intended sense I suppose that my aduersaries will neither deny it to be true nor the reason by which I proue it to be good 2 This discourse needed not for no Protestant denies the doctrine of the Apostles to be the rule either for their time or the time succeeding to the world ende I graunt therefore the Repliar his assertion and inferre thereupon that his Popes determinations and the doctrine of his Romish Church is not the rule of faith because they agree not with that which he here confesses was the rule in the Apostles time vnlesse he will maintaine when he replies againe that the rule is not one and the same at all times as k Cusan ep 2.7 his Cardinall writes that the Scripture is fitted to the time and variably vnderstood so that at one time it is expounded according to the fashion of the Church and when that fashion is changed the sense of the Scripture is also changed Againe Magalian a Iesuite I thinke yet liuing l Magal op Hierarch in tit p. 61. n. 6. saies Though it were granted that the wordes of Paule Tit. 1.6 containe a precept to marrie yet seeing Paule gaue it by his owne authority it were no diuine but an Ecclesiasticall precept which the Church may change yea abrogate and much more dispense with Marke what trickes heretickes haue to change the Apostles doctrine when it fits not their Church then the Apostles gaue it by their owne authority which I note that the Reader may perceaue there is no sincerity in the Repliars words For albeit he grants here the Apostles doctrine be the rule yet he meanes it to be the rule but for their owne time because the Pope may vnder colourable pretences expound it that is in plaine English change it when he will as his Cardinall and Iesuite here affirme A D. § 2. That the doctrine of the succeeding Pastours of the Church Pag. 207. is the rule and meanes The chiefe controuersie is about my conclusion as in a secondary sense it may be meant of the succeeding Pastors of the Church In which sense I affirme that like as the diuine doctrine not as contained in onely Scripture or as gathered thence by natural wit or priuate spirit but as deliuered by the Apostles or the Apostles as deliuering this doctrine was the rule and meanes ordained by God to instruct all men liuing in their daies in all matters of faith So the same doctrine not as contained in onely Scripture nor as gathered thence by naturall wit or priuate spirit but as deliuered by Pastors of the succeeding Church or those Pastors as deliuering this doctrine is the rule and meanes ordained by God to instruct all men liuing in succeding ages in all points of faith 3 This assertion I will grant as I did the former namely that the doctrine of the Pastors of the true Church such as succeed the Apostles is the rule and meanes of faith but the reader shall note two trickes that the Iesuite puts vpon him in the Proposition hereof First that affirming the doctrine of the succeeding Pastors of the Church to be the rule he saies not
Gospell where the Pope is ignorant or erres it is manifest whose iudgement is to be preferred and in this case such a learned man if he were present at a generall Councell should oppose himselfe against it if he perceiued the maior part through malice or ignorance to go against the Gospell Occham k Occh. Dial. p 180. affirmes that THE POPE AND CARDINALS ARE NOT THE RVLE OF OVR FAITH because though a Catholicke Pope and Catholicke Cardinals ought to be the teachers of faith so that the faithfull should firmely beleeue whatsoeuer they teach and define according to the rule of faith yet if they presume to teach or dâ—fine any thing contrary to the rule of faith which the holy Scripture teaches then Catholickes are not to follow but reproue them These men affirme all things that I say First that the Scripture is the rule of faith Secondly that the Pope with his Councels and Cardinals may erre Thirdly that they may erre in faith and teach erroniously Fourthly that their teaching may be examined Fifthly that euen by priuate men Sixthly the Scripture being the rule whereby Seuenthly vpon which examination their teaching may be refused This is the limitation that I mentioned Let the Repliar and all of his minde open their eyes and confesse we hold nothing but that which the learnedst in his owne Church allow and teach His second exception How shall they relieue themselues who cannot reade nor vnderstand the Scripture l §. 7. pag. 30. I answered in the WAY whereto my aduersary hauing nothing to reply according to his Methode onely repeates his cauill againe but it doth him no good For such as cannot reade yet may heare them read or preached and propounded by others it being sufficient that they haue the knowledge of the Scriptures any way which are so plaine and easie in all things belonging to the substance of faith that as I haue shewed m Gregory the B. of Rome speaking of an vnlearned man saies Nequaquam literas nouerat sed Scripturae sacrae sibi met codices emerat religioso quosque in hospitalitatem suscipiens hos coraÌ„ se studiose legere faciebat Factum est vt iuxta modum suum plene sacram Scripturum disceret cum siâ—ut dixi literas funditus ignoraret Dial. l. 4. c. 14. ibi Graec. Zachar. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the simplest that are hauing the assistance of Gods Spirit to enlighten them which assistance is not tyed to the presense of the Church as my aduersary cauilles may vnderstand them And to omit the words of the Scripture it selfe which the Repliar and his complices despise and reuile let him say directly whether the Ancient Church taught not thus S. Austine n Epist 3. The Scripture like a familiar friend speakes those plaine things which it containes to the heart of learned and vnlearned Chrysostome o Hom. 1 in Matth. The Scriptures are easie to vnderstand and exposed to the capacity of euery seruant Plowman widow boy and him that is most vnwise Cyrill Alexand p Contr. Iulian. pag. 160. The Scripture that it might be knowne to all men as well small as great are profitably commended to vs in a familiar speech so that they exceede the capacity of no man Isidore Pelusiota q l 2. ep 5. Forasmuch as God gaue lawes to weake men and such as need plaine words therefore he tempered his heauenly doctrine * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with rude words fit for the simple That euery woman and child and the vnlearnedst among mortall men by THE VERY HEARING IT SELFE might get some good r Sixt. Senens Biblioth l 6. annot 152. §. quod autem Grego Valent. 22. pag. 118. §. iam quae Diuers of the learnedst of our aduersaries grant this to be true in that part of the Scripture which containes the principles of faith and the things that all men generally are bound to beleeue which is sufficient to vphold that I say for I will easily allow great obscurity to be in much of the rest according to that which Å¿ Act. 8.31 2. Pet. 3.16 the Scripture and t Basil de fid p. 394. Iren. l. 2. c. 47. August ep 3. the Fathers oftentimes obserue but the rule of faith contained in euident places will preserue the vnlearned from erring therein perniciously A.D. By which explication is answered that which M. White saith is vnanswerable Pag. 220. White p 76. to wit If we must not accept euery doctrine taught by Pastours then there must be another rule by which we must be directed in hearing For it is not necessary to admit another rule distinct from the doctrine of Pastours but it sufficeth that we can distinguish in this rule two distinct manners of teaching the one priuate and without authoritie which we are not bound to accept the other publike and with authority which we may not reiect in any point 7 To the text of Mathew 23.2 The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses chaire c. I answered u The WAY pag. 75. that our Sauiour bindes vs not to heare the Pastours of the Church further then they teach according to the truth This exposition I confirmed by the testimonies of * Fer. in Matth. l. 3 c. 23. Can. Loc. l. 5. c. 4 Iansen concord c. 120. Em. Sa. notat Mat. 23. 4. Papists to whom here I adde a fift Pope Adrian x Hadria quodl 6. art 2. p. 38. we are tyed to obey them in such things as they teach according to Moses chaire Hence I said it followes vnanswerably that there is another rule whereby I may be directed in hearing For else how should a man be able to distinguish those points wherein he must follow his teachers from those wherein he must not And indeed this reason is vnanswerable For if our Sauiour hath bound me to heare them that sit in Moses chaire no further then they teach true doctrine according to the chaire it must necessarily be said that there is some rule distinct from their teaching whereby I may infallibly discerne if they teach falsely against the chaire But the Reply sayes this needs not it being sufficient that we can distinguish two manners of teaching the one Priuate and without authority which we are not bound to accept the other publicke and with authoritie which we may not reiect in any point But for the making of this distinction it needes that there be a rule for though it be sufficient thus to distinguish that is to say by discerning and iudging betweene that which is taught by publicke and that which is taught by priuate authoritie a man may sufficiently guide himselfe in following his Pastors yet how shall I distinguish this which way shall I know the publicke teaching from the priuate without A RVLE Say plainely what is the RVLE to discerne that doctrine which is taught without authority from that which is taught with authoritie and if there be
such a rule say againe whether it be not something distinct from the teaching and authority of the teachers for so much as that wherby the teaching and authority is discerned and tried cannot be confounded with the teaching and if there be such a distinct rule what can it be but the Scripture which onely is the thing that all Church teaching must agree with Thus therefore I reason ad hominem In the doctrine taught by the Pastours of the Church it sufficeth that I can distinguish the priuate from the publicke that which is taught with authority from that which is without authority Therefore I MAY yea must thus distinguish I may DISTINGVISH therefore I may EXAMINE for by examining things we distinguish them We may examine therefore we must haue a RVLE whereby we do it we must haue a rule therefore it must either be the Scripture or the teaching it selfe of the Church that is examined for a third cannot be giuen But it cannot be the teaching of the Church for that is the thing it selfe examined It must of necessity therefore be the SCRIPTVRE ALONE And for so much as it belongs to euery priuate man thus to distinguish therefore it is true also that I said Euery priuate man inlightned with Gods grace which must alway be supposed and our aduersaries necessarily require it may be able to guide himselfe and to discerne of the Church teaching by the SCRIPTVRE Pag. 223. 1 Tim. 3. v 15. Wootton pag. 154. White p. 80. A. D. Wherefore it is not without cause that S. Paule called the Church the pillar and ground of truth not onely as my aduersaries expound that truth is found in it or fastened to it as a paper is fastened to Pasquin in Rome which is M. Whites grosse similitude but also in that it selfe is free from all error in faith and Religion and is to vs a sure although a secondary foundation of faith in that it doth truely yea infallibly propound to vs what is and what is not to be beleeued by faith it being therefore vnto vs a pillar and stay to leane vnto in all doubts of doctrine and an assured ground or establishment of verity whereupon we may securely stand against all heresies and errors It is not also without cause that S. Augustine said whosoeuer is afraid to be deceaued with the obscuritie of this question let him require the iudgement of the Church signifying that to require the iudgement of the Church is a good meanes to preserue one from being deceaued not onely as M. Wootton expoundeth in that particular question which there S. Augustine mentioneth and such like of lesser moment and much lesse doth he meane as M. White minceth the matter to wit in that particular question at this time but also and that à fortiori in other questions of greatest weight and most concerning saluation and at other times c. 8 I find 2. faults in this place with the Repliar 1. that he doth not report the whole expositions that I gaue to these places but onely part of them and yet tels me of mincing Next that hauing confirmed my exposition of the wordes of the Apostle by foure reasons and my exposition of Saint Austine by as many and hauing confuted his sense that here he repeates by manifest arguments he stands dumbe to all and onely repeates the places againe no otherwise then when I answered them I need not therefore trouble my selfe with confuting him here but referre * THE WAY §. 15. me to that I writ much accusing my selfe for medling with so base a trifler that hath neither heart nor strength to go forward in the argument nor wit nor grace to hold his tongue this one passage is the liuely image not onely of all this his Reply but of all his fellowes writings now in request to bring in authority of Scripture and Fathers as a Bride is led into the Church with state and ceremony and some grauity and furniture of words but when they should reply to that we answer and maintaine their expositions then to tergiuerfate and onely repeate that which is confuted CHAP. XXXVI An entrance into the question touching the visibility of the Protestant Church in the former ages Wherein it is briefly shewed where and in whom it was A. D. Concerning the eleuenth Chapter Hauing proued in the precedent Chapter that the doctrine of the Church is the rule Pag. 227. and meanes to instruct all men in faith in this Chapter I vndertake to shew that the Church whose doctrine is the rule and meanes White pag. 86. Wootton p. 104 White pag. 86. continueth in all ages Both my Aduersaries grant that the Church continueth in all ages M. White saith We confesse the Church neuer coased to be but continueth alwaies without interruption to the worlds end M. Wootton saith the truth of your assertion needeth no proofe and findeth great fault with me for making such a question as though Protestants did deny the Church to continue As concerning this their granting the continuance of the Church I gratefully accept it especially with M. Whites addition who yeeldeth that if we can proue that the very faith which Protestants now confesse hath not * If Protestants faith so far as they differ from vs continued alwaies I aske whether in the aire or in some faithfull men if in men who be those men successiuely continued in all ages since Christ or that it was interrupted so much as one yeare moneth or day it is sufficient to proue them no part of Gods Church For which he citeth in the Margent Dan. 7. ver 27. Psal 102. v. 26. Mat. 16.18 Luk. 1 v. 33. 1 AS no Protestant denies the doctrine of the Church to be the rule taking the Church for a So Waldens doctrinal tom 1. l. 2. c. 19. Haec est Ecclesia Symbolica Ecclesia Christi Catholica Apostolica mater credentiū per totum mundum dispersae à Baptismo Christi per Apostolos ceteros successores eorum ad haec tempora deuoluta quae vtique veram fidem continent c. pag. 99. the whole company of beleeuers which haue bene from Christ to this day so neither do they deny this Church to continue in all ages the which because I granted the Repliar in my answer to his booke you see how he ioyes in himselfe as if he had wonne the cause touching his visiblenesse of the Church But as I noted to him the question is not whether the Church continue in all ages to the worlds end for that we grant but whether the outward state thereof free from all corruption be alway so visible as the Papists say I shewed the Negatiue and in the 17. Digression made it plaine that our Aduersaries themselues cannot deny it the Repliar therefore in this place was to quit his owne D. D. whom I alledged and not to stand gratefully accepting that which no man denies The marginall question is
Church so vniuersally that there was no visible companie of people appearing to the world free from it and whether any company at all knowne or vnknowne were free from it wholy or not I neither determine nor greatly care All that I hold touching the inuisible Church being that the true Church being ouergrowne with heresie and corruption there hath not at all times bene therein a distinct company to be seene which in all points were free from the corruption though there may be shewed a company that held all the substantiall points simply necessary to saluation Had the Iesuite vnderstood my words in this sense which I often declared all ouer my Booke he would neuer haue trifled away time in prouing the Church whose doctrine is the rule to be visible which I deny not but he would haue gone roundly to worke in shewing the visible Church to be neuer so corrupted but there is some one or more speciall companies therein visibly to be seene by all and separated from the rest that is not defiled with the corruption For the Church is visible to be seene at all time more or lesse whose teaching in the sound part thereof is to be followed to the worlds ende Neuerthelesse first he excepts that I say the question is of the Church militant containing as part of it euill men and hypocrites whereas to speake precisely he makes not the Question that way but to cut off occasions of cauill he saies he desputes whether the Church whereof he spake in the precedent Chapters whose doctrin in all ages is the rule of faith whether I say this Church be in all ages visible or sometimes inuisible as if the Church whose doctrine is the rule in all ages were any other then the militant His conclusions whereby he taught his friend how to resolue himselfe in religion were these That there is a rule left by God whereby all men may be instructed This rule is not the Scripture but the doctrin of the true Church which Church is alway visible that all men at all times may see it wherein he affirmes as I do the militant Church to be visible because that onely is it that mortall men can heare and haue accesse to and this I shew distinctly to be the question For first his owne expresse words are c In THE WAY pag 99. It is euident that the Church militant consists of good and bad but this Church consisting of good and bad is the same that before in his conclusion he affirmed to be visible confuting our supposed ground wherupon we held it inuisible Secondly in this very passage he sayes it is true that the same Church he speakes of is the Church militant or part of it Thirdly he expounds himselfe to meane that Church whose doctrine is the rule to teach vs. But the doctrine of no Church teaches vs but that of the Militant liuing here vpon earth where they that liue are taught Fourthly he meanes that Church whereto euery one may haue accesse and repaire for instruction whereto also they may ioine themselues and wherein they may admonish their brethren and therefore precisely he speakes of the Militant church vpon earth and his words that to speake precisely he makes not the question this way but onely askes whether the Church whose doctrine is the rule be visible are so precise that a man would think his head-peece were not wel seasoned when either he must grant this his visible Church to be militant or confesse it to be none of Gods Church for so much as all the Church of God whose doctrine is the rule of faith is for the time being militant here on earth and part of that which is mentioned in the Creed where we say credo Ecclesiam Therefore the question betweene vs is whether the companie of those that professe and teach the true faith of Christ without mixture of corruption among whom possible many hypocrites and wicked men liue which companie is called the Militant-church be at all times visible The Reply sayes it is and must no more denie his assertion to be meant euen precisely of this companie 4 His second exception is about the words visible and inuisible where he sayes fiue things First that by a visible Church I make him to mean a company alway so illustrious that it may be knowne to all men liuing at all times Secondly that I make him to meane this companie also to be so illustrious that actually it is thus knowne Thirdly that he meanes not the word visible in this second sence Fouthly that he knowes the Church is sometime obscured and shines not actually through the whole world Fiftly that the Church is alway visible in this sence that alway euen in the greatest obscuritie it hath some eminent professors which either are actually knowne or may in particular be assigned The first is true for he sayes it expresly in the last And I suppose he will not denie it when so many of his owne Diuines hold it Dom. Bannes d Tom. 3. pag. 103. sayes the Church is so visible that it is palpable Bellarmine e De Eccl. l. 3. c. 13. God hath at all times a Church consisting not of a few people but of a great multitude as conspicuous as any earthly kingdome Greg. of Valence f Tom. 3 p. 143. Our assertion is that in all ages there may euidently be seene and discerned and as it were pointed out with the finger a companie of men whereof euery one may beleeue that it is the true Church The second is false For though it follow manifestly vpon his words and that which the Diuines of his church teach of the visâ—â—â—lenesse of their church yet I charged him not so farre but contented my selfe with confuting that which is contained in his first and last assertion Neuerthelesse it is true that he and all Papists must by their owne principles hold the Church to be euen actually visible to all men For he sayes g Repl. p. 170. God hath giuen sufficient meanes to all men for their saluation h In THE WAY §. 13. and the teaching of this his church is the meanes But no meanes is sufficient that is not actually reuealed as i Ch. 25. n. 15.16 I haue shewed heretofore out of the Repliers owne authors Therefore if sufficient meanes be onely that which is actually reuealed and the Church be the meanes it followes the Church must be actually visible or else let vs see how the Replier will quit himselfe The third is also false as I haue said but yet allowing it to be true I haue not peruerted the question because I affirme and dispute against the visiblenesse of the Church in that sâ—nce which he holds in the first and last assertion The fourth I accept as the truth and haue shewed in k Digr 17. THE WAY that as his owne Diuines expound it it vtterly destroyes his first and last assertions and yeelds as much as
obliging all sorts of men yet since it is affirmatiue it is not to be thought absolutely to obligue all in particular especially at all times and with whatsoeuer inconuenience of circumstances but rather to be limited to such particular persons times and circumstances as may make the obseruation of it necessary or at least conuenient as happeneth in other particular affirmatiue precepts Which limitation if my Aduersaries will not admit I aske how they will haue those to fulfill this precept who cannot reade at all Or who by onely reading can no more vnderstand the Scriptures in English then if they were in Hebrew How chance also that they do not obligue euery man to reade all the Scripture yea at all houres and to do nothing else but reade and search into the whole Scripture For 4 White p. 344. if because the words seeme absolute they will admit no limitation then these my questions must be satisfied which proceed vpon supposall that the precept be absolute and generall without all limitation 1 THe third instance c Digr 49. n. 3. that I gaue was the forbidding of the Laitie to reade or haue the Scripture in their mother tongue For when the ancient Church propounded in the first parts of his catalogue not onely permitted the reading of the Scripture indifferently to all but by prouiding translations tooke order that all sorts of people should freely haue them in their mother tongue what a manifest alteration is it in the Church of Rome now to prohibite this and practise the the contrary The Replie sayes there is no such GENERALL prohibition among vs. He grants then there is a prohibition which he cannot shew to haue bene in the first 600 yeares but it is not GENERALL This will we see presently First the law is expresse against it Whereas experience shewes that if the Bible be euery where without difference permitted in the vulgar tongue more hurt then good will arise thereby in this point let the iudgement of the Bishop or Inquisitor be followed that with the aduise of the parish Priest or confessor they may permit the reading of the Bible translated by Catholicke authors in the vulgar language to such as they shall vnderstand can take no hurt by such reading but increase in pietie The which licence of the Bishop let them haue in writing And if any presume without such a licence either to reade or haue it vnlesse he come in first and giue vp his Bible to his ordinarie let him not haue the pardon of his sinnes And the bookesellers without such licence selling or any way affoording Bibles in the vulgar Language shall forfeit the price of the books and be liable to such other punishments as the Bishop thinkes meete a Index lib. prohib Pij 4. regul 4. This order was set downe by the Pope the Councell of Trent wherein there is shew of liberty to reade and haue the Scripture in their mother tongue for such as are licenced which is the reason why the Replie saies there is no generall prohibition but marke the issue b Ib. obseru circa 4. Pope Clement 8 in his obseruation vpon this rule tells vs It is to be obserued concerning this rule of Pius 4 that by this impression and edition no new power is granted to Bishops or Inquisitours or superiors to licence the buying reading or keeping the Bible in the vulgar tongue Seeing hitherto by the commandement and practise of the holy Romane and vniuersall Inquisition the power of granting such licences to reade or keepe Bibles in the vulgar Language or any parts of the Scripture as well of the new as of the old Testament or any summes or historicall abridgements of the same in any vulgar Language hath bene taken from them There is therefore a generall prohibition the same that we obiect and the Reply puts but one of his ordinary trickes vpon me For first none may reade but that is licenced Secondly none may be licenced but obstinate and froward Papists such as are sure for starting for they onely are meant by * Eis concedere possint quos intellexerint ex huiusmodi lectione non damnum sed fidei atque pietatis augmentum capeâ—e posse reg 4. those that will take no hurt nor bring any detriment but increase to the faith by reading Thirdly which is the point to be noted the power of granting such licences also is taken away that whatsoeuer to blinde the eies of the world the Pope and his crew made shew of yet indeed nothing at all is permitted 2 Secondly the practise of the Church of Rome for many yeares past hath bene to restraine with fire and sword all such vse of the Scripture Neither did it euer till this other day that the Rhemists translated how and for what ends I will not now stand to say prouide or set forth any English translation but forbidding hereticall translations made by Protestants consequently forbad all that were And the doctrine of all Papists handling this matter confirmes that I say Peresius c De tradit p. 45. b. saies Shall no bounds be set to popular rude and carnall men Shall old men before they haue put off the filth of their mind and young men that yet speake like children be admitted to reade the Scripture I suppose verily and my opinion fails me not this ordinance vnder the pretence of pietie was inuented by the Diuel Azorius the Iesuite d Instit tom 1. l. 8 c. 26. §. Tertio quaeritur inde It is demanded whether the sacred Scriptures may be translated into the mother tongue of euery nation that euery one may the better reade and vnderstand them I answer that Lutherans and Caluinists are in that heresie that they affirme the sacred Scripture ought to be translated into the vulgar Languages of all nations against whom the Councell of Trent in the fourth rule thus hath And so repeats the constitution as I haue set it downe That constitution therefore forbids the translation and vse of the Scripture in the vulgar tongue as I haue said Then he goes forward The Gospells and Epistles which are read in the Church throughout the yeare may not be printed alone but with the expositions of the Catholicke authors vpon them and all praier bookes containing Psalms and canticles of the Scripture in the vulgar tongue are likewise forbidden But is it expedient and decent to haue the sacred volumes translated into the mother tongues I answer No. Because therby the vnity of beleeuers would sustaine detriment then much ignorance and folly would insue in the Church besides diuers causes of errors and heresies would arise Moreouer the vncertainetie and multitude of translations yet there is not more varietie and vncertainety in any translations then among their owne Latine ones would cause innumerable contentions quarrells and other discommodities and euils almost infinite Thus most immodestly and heretically they make those exceptions against the Scripture that
in their conscience they know the primitiue Church neuer made and raking into all the abuses of the Scripture that they can finde mens deprauing misexpounding misapplying them vsing them ouer boldly malepartly not with the respect they should hence most dishonestly they conclude the vtter suppressing of them not that they care how they are vsed for neuer any vsed them so vilely as themselues either * PRVRITANVS in applying reuiling or corrupting them but because they are mad at that which discouers their heresie 3 The Reply to salue the matter sayes that if the parties disposition be such that he may take benefit and no harme by reading then they permit the Scripture in the mother tongue both to laie men and women This is not true for how do they permit it to such where as in Spaine there is permitted no translation at all how it is permitted when the Pope sayes none may reade but such as are licenced by the Bishops and this power of licencing is taken from him by the Inquisition Againe euen by making this restraint they are gone from the primitiue Church which gaue rules had discipline to restraine such as abused the Scripture but the liberty of the booke it selfe they neuer restrained nor euer bound the rudest that was to go to the Bishop for a licence but by how much the more he was ignorant or transported with pride or indangered with heresie by so much the more they required him to reade the Scripture to reforme himselfe and if he did not they onely preached against his abuse and punisht the man but the translation they suppressed not And all the Papists in Europe in all the writings of the first 600 yeares cannot shew one period beyond this There are in the Fathers specially Nazianzen and Ierome sharpe speeches against abusers of the Scripture such as tosse turne thē to their owne lusts as Papists do but not a word against the translating and permitting them to all indifferently in the vulgar tongue to be read They neuer reproacht Gods people that desired his law with the name of dogges and swine as these * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eustat Centaurs do nor euer imagined the permission of the sacred Scripture to be casting of pearles before them It is easie enough to see that if the laity were dogges and hogs neuer so much it were impossible they should trāple Gods blessed word worse then this Grillus drencht with Cyrces cup at Rome hath by this his application trampled it And whereas it may be some will beleeue him that the restraint made is onely in dangerous times and where there is perill of falling into error as he seemes to speake let it be remembred that at all times and in all places this restraint is made euen when and where there is no danger of error or heresie but onely of that which they will stile heresie when men by the Scripture see the horrible errors of the Church of Rome It being the doctrine of that side that the Scriptures should not be translated at all Let the wordes of Rainolds and Gifford in their a L. 4. c. 7. pag. 824. inde Caluino Turcismus be a litle pondered I conclude therefore that it is much more honour to the Scripture and saffe for religion and wholesome for the people that this power of the people to reade the Scripture in the mother tongue were altogether taken away without which they might both beleeue piously and liue holily and by so doing much more saffely and easily attaine eternall life 2 P. 825. It seemes to me this profane reuealing of the diuine mysteries by translating the Scripture is odiously contrary to the will of God and to the nature of the mysteries themselues 3 P. 830. The Pastors of the Church are not tied true for they haue broke the bonds to translate the Scripture into vulgar tongues there being no Apostolike precept or councell or so much as any light signification of their will to haue it so 4 P. 831. The manifold and great mischiefes which by the translations of the Scripture haue risen against the maiestie of God against the holinesse of the Scripture its selfe against the tranquillity of states against the faith and good conuersation of men * Satis magnā vim habere de buit ad istas translationes penitus supprimendas etiamsi diuina vel Apostolica authoritate niterentur Thus Gods ordinance Christs Testament and the Apostles doctrine must giue place to the Popes lust should haue force enough vtterly to suppresse these translations yea ALBEIT THEY WERE SVPPORTED BY DIVINE OR APOSTOLICALL AVTHORITY Let the reader iudge by this if the Church of Rome do onely as the Reply blaunches it not promiscuously permit vulgar translations when they may be occasions of error by misinterpreting and not vtterly hate and condemne them as the causes of their discontent and desire the suppressing of them from all It s easie to discerne how pretiously they affect that which by reason onely of some abuse which also they multiply by their art many times a mote being in their eye when there is none in the skie they would haue vtterly taken away though by DIVINE AND APOSTOLIKE AVTHORITIE IT WERE SVPPORTED 4 To the testimonies alledged out of 1 Deut. 6.7 Moses 2 2. Tim. 3.15 S. Paule 3 Hom. 3. in Laz ho. 2. in Matthae S. Chrysostome 4 Epitaph Paul S. Ierom and 5 Cornel. Agrip. de vanit c. 100. the Councell of Neece whereby I shewed the doctrine of the Primitiue Church to be that lay people should reade the Scripture he answers nothing but contents himselfe hauing better helps for it with replying to the 5. of Iohn Search the Scriptures wherein I commend his discretion that falling so foule on this would let the rest alone First he saies the wordes were not spoken to all in generall but to the Pharisees and princes of the people because if they were spoken to the people he did wisely foresee that our Sauiour therein no longer counts them dogges and hogges but admonisheth them as Gods people bought with a price to the reading of the Scripture But how shall I be sure he speakes to none but the Pharisees and Priests when a V. 15. 18. the text saies he spake to the Iewes that sought to kill him whom the man healed at the poole of Bethesda had told of his healing which Iewes cannot be shewed to be the Priests and Doctors alone but some of the laity withall who were as eager in persecuting our Sauiour as the Priests and frequented the Temple and prouoked him in all places where he was as well as the Pharisees Or if it were granted he spake onely to the Priests yet how doth that auoide the argument when the Iewes had the Scriptures in their owne language neither Priests nor people vsing them in any other For it were too grosse to
say the people might not reade that which they had in their owne language b Act 15 21. which they daily heard read in their Synagogues and c Deut. 6.7 which they must rehearse continually to their families d 2. Tim. 3.15 and wherein they brought vp their children from their infancy Secondly he saies either they containe no precept or but a conditional precept or licence that when they would not beleeue Christ himselfe they might search the Scripture Faine he would say absolutely it is no precept because it would serue his turne better But belike he read in his Cyrill e In Ioh. l. 3 c. 4 that the common and receaued expopositionis that with a certen COMMAND our Sauiour stirres them vp to search the Scripture Athanasius f Tom 2 p. 248. Commelin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saies He COMMANDED them to search the Scripture g Aschet p. 599. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Basil wheÌ„ a COMMANDEMENT is giuen vs let vs obey our Lord saying Search the Scripture h Ho 40. 39. in Ioh. Chrysostome he COMMANDS to digge deepe into the Scripture he sends them away to the Scripture i Pag. 343. in Ioh. Euthymius He COMMANDS them to search k Iansen concord c. 36. Peter seleâ—â— disp to 4. in Ioh. 5. d. 20. Our aduersaries confesse this to be the commonest exposition and some of them the best l In Ioh. 5. Maldonat the Iesuite Cyrill thinkes the word SEARCH not to be the imperatiue but the indicatiue mood but Chrysostom Theophylact. Austine I thinke ALL GRAVE AVTHORS except Cyrill do BETTER thinke it to be the imperatiue And this is confirmed by manifest reason For in case of error the Iewes and all men are bound by precept to haue recourse to such meanes as can reforme them But the Repliar is content it be a precept so he may haue the hammering of it First therefore he saies It s but a conditionall precept or rather a licence that seeing they would not beleeue our Sauiour himselfe they might search the Scripture which they did beleeue This is transparently against the Fathers yet it will serue my turne and vtterly destroy his cause For such a licence the Pope and the Inquisitors will neuer grant as Clement 8. hath professed And if our Sauiour when the Iewes beleeued not him permitteâ— them to search the Scripture then by this text when the People beleeue not the Pope but misdoubt his doctrine he must giue licence to them to reade the Scripture which he will neuer do Gretser to helpe the Repliar a little m Tom. 1. pag. 893. c. answers There is not the same reason of Christians that there was of the Iewes and why so the Iewes beleeued not in Christ but opposed both his doctrine and person whereas he that is a true Christian beleeues Christ and honours him This is true that is said both of the Iewes and Christians but this difference is no reason why a beleeuing Christian may not search the Scripture as well as an vnbeleeuing Iew. For the Christian though he beleeue in Christ yet is ignorant of much of his wil or weake in faith or assailed with heresies increasing in the world or desirous to confirme himselfe and others in the truth in which cases let the Iesuite shew why Christ for the curing of the Iew should allow him to reade the Scripture and yet debar the Christian whose state needes the support of the Scripture one way as much as the state of the Iew doth another Nay this is a good argument against himselfe and my Repliar For if the reason why the laity may not reade the Scripture be because our Sauiour hath commanded vs not to giue holy things to dogges nor to cast pearles before hogges and the Iewes not beleeuing Christ but opposing his doctrine and person be more dogges and hogges then Christians hence it will follow roundly that the Scripture is to be permitted to Christians much more then to the Iewes because the Iewes were permitted to reade the Scriptures though they were dogges and hogges 5 Secondly he sayes that allowing it to containe an absolute precept which he doth as a child kisses the rod for he must do it if he wil follow the coÌ„sent of the Doctors yet being an affirmatiue precept it obliges not all meÌ„ nor at all times but may be limited to particular times as to the time of the Primitiue Church to particular persons as now only the Clergy and other circumstances which the Church of Rome shal think meet I answer affirmatiue precepts first binde all persons to whom they are giuen Secondly they binde at all such times as the matter therein contained agrees vnto Thirdly they receiue limitation or restraint from none but from the lawgiuer himselfe in all which properties they agree with negatiue commandemeÌ„ts therefore omitting all intricate discourse touching this matter the precept of searching the Scripture binding in this manner it is sufficient for the allowance thereof to the people For first they that cannot reade may fulfill it by hearing it read Searching being restrained no more to the one then to the other Secondly there is none but by searching that is to say by diligent labour may vnderstand them in their mother tongue better then in Hebrew Because I haue shewed many times ouer that the articles of faith and rules of good life are set downe so plainely that the simplest may vnderstand them vnlesse he will make lay people so sencelesse that they haue not the common light of nature Thirdly we binde not euery man to reade all the Scriptures and at all houres doing nothing else because there is no such thing in the precept Then I haue satisfied his questions and admit a limitation in things wherein the precept limits it selfe but how followes this Affirmatiue precepts haue their limitations therefore the Pope may limit them Or this Circumstances limit precepts therefore the Church of Rome vpon her Antichristian circumstances may restraine the precept of Christ Or this Some lawfull and legitimate circumstances may stay the execution of an affirmatiue precept therefore the malicious and desperate imputations layed vpon the people or some misdemeanors committed by them indeed may lawfully debarre the people from hauing the Scripture any more Away with these circumstances and giue vs substance CHAP. LII 1 The mariage of Priests and Bishops lawfull and allowed by Antiquitie 2 Some examples hereof in the ancient Church The restraint hereof is a late corruption Priests were married euen in these Westerne parts a thousand yeares after Christ Pag. 281. A. D. Fourthly touching the mariage of Priests M. White citeth * See Bellar. de cleric c. 19. Prot Apol. tract 1. sect 3. n. 1. sect 7. tract 2. c. 1. sect 3. a mistaken sentence out of the Apostle and boldly affirmeth after his fashion that mariage of Priests was ordinarily in the Primitiue Church But he