God cannot properly be referred neyther to the honestie of maners nor to the tructh of faith must be knowne to be figuratiue Moreouer the ancient Fathers long agoe the Schoolemen of late time and the Popish writers at this day do teach that there be diâ—ers senses of Scripture And although all of them preferre the hystoricall and litterall sense yet Sixâ—â—s Senensis and Bellarmine doe make it double eyther proper and simple according to the first and naturall signification of the words or metaphoricall and figuratiue when the wordes are translated from their naturall signification to another and that there bee so many kindes of this sense as there bee kindes of figures Now what is preaching but expounding of Scripture and deliuering the true sense of it As appeareth by the practise of Ezra Nehe. 8.8 and the Leuites who reade the Lawe of God distinctly and then gaue the sense and caused the people to vnderstand what was read Those then who in their Sermons deliuer the true sense of the word written according to those seuerall kindes of expositions must needes deliuer the worde of GOD cuen the selfe same worde that is written Againe not onely the things expresly set downe in the Scriptures but likewise such thinges as by sound and necessarie consequence bee collected thence are taken for written truthes and not vnwritten traditions Aeonsus Viruestus a Popish Bishop and a bitter enemie to Luther Adners Luther doginat philippi c. 9. p. 147. acknowledgeth so much For hee saith That things may bee conteyned in the Scripture eyther formally and expresly or materially being drawâ—â— by a necessary collection from the contents And this he saith is called Virtualis continentâ—a To denie this saith hee is not Christian wisedome but Iewish superstition And then teacheth that wee are as much bound to giue assent to those thinges that be materially conteyned and drawne thence by a lawfull collection as to those that be formerly and expresly conteyned Bellarmine cannot deny but that Scoties taught De Eucharist lib. 3. c. 23 there was not any expresse place of Scripture to proue Transubstantiation without the declaration expositioÌ„ of the Church Neyther dare the Cardinall reiect that assertion but saith Quia colligitur ex scriptura diuina that Transubstantiation belongeth to the Catholicke faith because it is collected out of the diuine Scripture In his iudgement then that is a written trueth which is collected from the Scripture as well as that which is expressely set downe in the Scripture If therefore Preachers deliuer no other doctrines in their Sermons if they confute and condemne no other errors if they teach no other duties if they reproue no other sinnes if they minister no other consolations and if they vrge no other exhortations then they haue warrant in the written worde of God eyther by expresse testimonies or by necessary collections the worde which they preach is the very same in kind in nature and substance with the word written And so there is not one word written and another word preached as the Doctor woulde beare men in hand but one and the same word diuersly vsed So absurd is this his obseruation so voyde of reason so destitute of proofe and so discrepant from the doctrine of his owne Church that it may well bee thought that rather malice against vs then any warrant from the text caused him to set it downe And heere behold how farre malice doth carry your teachers euen to forsake their owne companions and to ouerthrow the coÌ„mon and receiued doctrine of their owne Church that so they may crosse and condemne vs. And to conclude with him hee that will regard what be writeth in the latter end of his obseruation may easilie perceiue how hee ouerthroweth his owne note obserued in the beginning For he produceth the Apostle Peter as an indifferent witnes in this case who saith that the Worde of God endureth for euer and this is the worde which is preached among you whose testimonie doth euidently prooue that the worde written and the worde preached then by the Apostles and other Ecclesiasticall persons was the very same worde For it is apparant by that verse which hee alleadged that the worde of God which endureth for euer and the worde which then was preached were one and the selfe same worde Now what was the word that endureth for euer was it not the worde written If anie will denye this let him reade the former verse in Peter and compare that verse and this Isaiah 40.6.7.8 with the wordes of the prophet Isaiah and hee shall finde it to be the worde written by the Prophet So as Peter maketh the worde written by the prophet and preached by the Apostles to bee the same Againe this great Doctor saith * Immutabile est in natura substancia sua etâ—i propagatione explicatione variâ— the Word is the Seede because it is vnchangeable in it owne nature and substance though diuers in explication and proueth it out of Basil and Vincentius Lyrenensis who make that agreemeÌ„t betweene the word written and the word preached that they are both one in substaÌ„ce for they preached nothing but what was written yet the word writteÌ„ was made fruitfull by preaching SECT III. BVt to leaue the Docter and his obseruation It may be some others will acknowledge contrarie to his minde that whosoeuer preacheth nothing but such doctrines as are either expresly taught or necessarily gathered from the scriptures preacheth nothing but the written word And yet will likewise contradict me because they hold that there is another word of God besides the written word Bellarmine (1) De verho Dei nonscript lib. 4. c. 1. saith there is verbis Dei scriptrÌ„ verbum Dei non scriptum A word of God written namely the bookes of the old and new Testaments And a word of God not written namely the traditions of the Church which be not written in the scriptures Gregory de Valentia (2) Refutat falsar causar Herbrand cap. 1. holdeth it for a most certaine thing that the word of God is not onely conteyned in written letters as it pleaseth him to tearme the scriptures in way of disgrace but is also put in the voyce of the Church and there doth sound Coster the Iesuite speaketh more plainely and peremptorily (3) Et anteÌ„ scriptura ecclesiae catholicae consensies concors omnium Christianorum per tot uÌ„ terrarum orbem doctrina Huius scripturae praestantia multis partibus super scripturas quas nobis in membranis Apostoli reliquerunt Encherid cap. 1. So also saith Hosius Quod ecclesia docet expressum Dei verbum est De expresso Dei verbo fol. 119. in 106. That the consent of the Catholike Church and the consonant doctrine of all Christians throughout the world is the scripture And in many points excelleth the scriptures which the Apostles haue left vs in parchments And this he maketh the first and
(21) Euseb â—yst libâ— â— c. 2â— Epiphan hâ—resâ— 51. Hâ—ron Catâ—loâ—â—â—riptâ—r in loâ—â—â— most Authors 〈…〉 that when Iohn pereceyued how other Euangelists wrote onely the things of one yeare euen the yeare after Iohns imprisonment 〈…〉 1. 〈◊〉 5. cap 8. hee approued those and in his Gospell added the things done and taught in the former yeares And because some Heretickes denyed the God-head of CHRIST Sixt Senens Biblioth lib. 1. in Ioh vp 18. lib. 7. haerâ—sis 5. p. 583. he considering that other Euangelistes did at large describe his Humanitie but spake little of his God-head did in his Gospell write such thinges as proued him to be GOD. And added those Sermons which the rest had omitted And therevppon Sixtus Senensis (22) Exomnibus simul coniunctis cosonantissima ac perfectissima salutis nostrae hystoria resulâ—â—t lib. 7. haresis 5. saide against the Alogan Heretickes That from them all ioyned togetherâ— there ariseth a most Consonant and most perfect Hystorie of our saluation It is then to be examined whether the Euangelistes haue written that Christ taught any traditions receyued from men If they write no such matter it is certaine that hee taught none at all Let our Aduersaires runne thorough the whole Newe-Testament and they shall not bee able to finde any one of theyr Traditions recorded by the Euangelistes as a doctrine taught by Christ Seeing then Christ taught no traditions why should wee presume to teach any must wee not receiue from him the matter of our Doctrine and imitate him in the manner of teaching Saide not Ambrose well (23) Nos nona omnia quae Christus non docuit iurè damnamus quia fidelibus via est Christus Si igitur Christus non docuit quod docemus etiam nos id detestabile iudicamus De virginib li. 3. that wee doe iustly condemne all newe things which Christ hath not taught because Christ is the way to Belieuers If therefore Christ haue not taught that which wee teach euen we doe iudge it to be detestable 2. Againe the Apostle Paul was a painefull Sower and did sowe all the worde of God And therefore could (25) Act. 20 26. protest to his hearers that hee had kept nothing backe from them but had shewed them all the counsell of God Now what word taught he Did hee teach traditions and mans ordinances Did he not teach oâ—ly writteÌ„ truths Did he (26) Acts. 17.2 not proue his doctrine by the scriptures Did he not in his apologie before Festus (27) Act. 26 22. auouch that hee taught none other things then those which the Prophetes and Moses did say should come And how could the (28) Acts 17.10.11 Bereans haue examiâ—â—d his doctrine by the Scriptures if hee had deliuered anie thing not taught in the Scriptures Yea Saint Paul was so fâ—rre from preaching any other Doctrine then that which was wirtten (29) Galath 1.8.9 that hee denounced him to be accuâ—sed whether hee were man or Angell that should teach otherwise I knowe Bellarmine would elude that place by two seuerall answeres yet all in vaine First (30) De ver bo Des non script lib. 4. cap 10. he saith that the Apostle speaketh not onely of the word written but of euery word whether it be written oâ—â—t be by tradition But besidâ—â— that hee beggâ—th the question be hath the wordes of the Text and the testimonies of the â—athers and of 〈◊〉 Popish writers against him For the Apostle speaketh of that wâ—â—de which hee and the rest of the Apoâ—â—â—â— preached and therefore he saith If was or 〈◊〉 Angell preach otherwise then that which wee haue preached And what worde hee preached I haue proued before not any traditions but the written word If it be true which Ireneus and Niâ—â—phâ—râ—s doe write Iren. li. 3. c. 1. Niâ—eph hist lib. 2. c. 34. that what the Apostles preached at first was afterward by the will of God set downe in the scripturâ—s it must be acknowledged that they preached no traditions seeing we can finde no traditions penned by theÌ„ in their Epistles And though they had bene traditious when they were preached yet they ceased to be traditions when once they were written by them Againe the Fathers restraine the words of the Apostle to the scriptures as if he were accuâ—sed that would preach any thing not coÌ„tained in them Vobis annâ—ciâ—â—erit preterqu quod inscripturâ—â—â—â—galâ—bus euangâ—licis accepiâ—tis anathâ—na sit Augustine is most plaine therein Whether concerning Christ or concerning his Church or any other thing that pertâ—ineth to our â—aith or life I will not say â—fâ—râ—e for we are not to be compared to him who 〈◊〉 weâ— but euen as he going forward added If â—n Angell from heauen shall preach vnto you besides that which ye haue receiued in the scriptures of the lawe and the Gospell let him be accursed Basill likewise teacheth Cont. lit Petilian lib. 3. cap. 6. that hearers who be skilfull in the scriptures ought to examine those things which bee deliuered of their teachers Sum. morea sum 72. cap. 1. And to receiue those things which be agreeable to the scriptures and to reiect those that be not And produceth this testimonie of the Apostle to proue it which had bene an impertinent proofe if the Apostle had spoken as well of a word not written as of a word written The Cardinall mentioneth both these testimonies Bellarm. de verbo dei non script lib. 4.10 and would auoyd them by saying that they doe not of purpose expound this place but doe proue by this place that it is not lawfull to auouch any thing contrary to the scriptures Yet caÌ„not he deny but that they doe alleadge this place of the Apostle And I hope he will not say but that they doe deliuer the true sense of it and doe alleadge it according to the true meaning of the Apostle Doth the Cardinall thinke that such learned fathers would giue one sense of it when purposely they expound it and another sense when they alleadged it to prooue a point which they haue in haÌ„d This were to wrest the scripture to make it serue their present turne I hope he will not so iudge of such reuerend men And to say that they onely proue thence that it is not lawful to auouch any thing contrary to scripture is to alter and inuert their words Doth not Augustine say Praeterquam quod accepistis besides that which you haue receiued but of that afterward And if by that place they proue that nothing must be taught contrary to the scriptures then must they not hold with the Cardinall that the Apostle speaketh of each word as well written as not written but onely of the written word And so the Cardinall maketh them to confute him In Galal 1. Chrysostome purposely expounding the place saith Paul preferreth the scriptures Si vel paulum euangeli zauerint praeter euangelium quod
accâ—pistis before angels comming from heaueÌ„ As also that Paul doth not say if they preach contrary things or if they subuert the whole Gospell but if they preach but euen a little beside the Gospell which ye haue recâ—â—â—ed let them be accursed Thomas Aquinas their Angelicall Doctor Quam illud quod conâ—inetur in euangâ—l 〈◊〉 apostolâ—s in sacra scripturaam â—â—ite vel expresse Thom. in Gal. 1. professedly expouÌ„ding that place doth write that nothing is to be preached but that which is conteyned in the Gospells and in the Epistles and in the holy scripture implâ—â—â—ely or expresly Will they say that their Traditions are conteyned in the scriptures either expresly or by way of implication or consequent then are they not vnwritten verities as they tearme them A second answere of the Cardinall is this that the Apostle by Praeter vnderstood Contra. And therefore did not forbid new doctrines and precepts which were besides those that were deliuered but onely doctrines and precepts contrarie to the former Yet will not this serue his turne For in matters of faith and religion prâ—ter and contra are both alike Whatsoeuer is taught as necessarie to saluation if it be besides the scripture must be condemned as well as that which is contrarie to the Scriptures The reason is because the Scriptures conteyne all thinges which Ministers are to teach as necessary to saluation And therefore Paul told Timothie 2. Tim. 3.15.10.17 that they were able to make him wise vnto saluation And were profitable to teach to improue to correct and to instruct in righteousnesse Two of which respect mens mindes what they are to know and â—â—â—eeue as the trueth and what they are to reiect as errors Two of them respect their maners what sinnes they are to auoyde what dutâ—es they are to performe Is there any things needfull to bee taught the people but these things And because the Cardinall answereth that the Scriptures are profitable for all these things but not sufficient Consider the wordes of the Apostle following where hee declareth the end of this profitablenes namely Verse 17 that the man of God may be absolute bâ—ing made perfect to all good works By the man of God he meaneth the Minister of the Gospell That tytle had he in his former Epistle giuen vnto Timothie 1. Tim. 6.11 And Lyra saith 1. Tim. 6.11 Homo dei 1. ad diuinum officium ordinatus qualis estu Lyra in 2. Tim. 3. the man of God was one ordeyned to the diuine office such a one as Timothie was If then the Scripture being profitable for those foure vses will thereby make a Minister of the Gospell absolute and perfect for each good worke belonging vnto him he is not to teach any things ouer and besides the Scripture Theophylact thus writeth on the former place In Gal. 1. Hee doth not inferre if they onely preach contrary things but if they preach that which is beside that which we haue preached that is if they shall adde any thing that is but a very little more they are subiect to the curse And indeed it may seeme strange that the Papists are so earnest to haue vnwritteÌ„ traditions as wel preached as written truthes seeing the things written are more cettaine more excellent and necessary and require a long time to bee all taught and learned They are more certaine because all men are more certainely assured that the Scriptures the doctrines conteyned in them bee the word of God then that vnwritten traditions be his worde De verbo Dei lib 1. cap. 2. Bellarmine confesseth that nothing is better knowne nothing more certaine then the sacred Scriptures which bee conteyned in the writings of the Prophets Apostles that he must needes be most foolish who denyeth that they are to be beleeued And produceth 5. inuincible and infallible proofes that they are the very word of God De verbo Dei noÌ„script lib. 4. cap. 5. WheÌ„ he commeth to speake of traditions he alleadgeth no such proofes but onely goeth about to prooue by 4. places of Scripture which haue bene long agoe answered that there are some traditions though neyther he nor any of his fellowes can tell what they are nor can make a perfit Catalogue of them so vncertain are they Indeede hee deliuereth fine rules De vero Dei noâ— srâ—pt liâ— 4. cap. 9. Ibib. lib. 4. cap. 2. whereby true traditions may bee discerned from false and counterfait traditions yet those rules are grounded on the authoritie of men and do not infallibly proue them to bee the word of God Yea he teacheth that al traditions haue not the like authoritie some haue diuine authoritie some haue Apostolical some ecclesiastical And therfore all of them cannot haue the same authority with the written word which himselfe before proued to haue diuine authoritie And how do they know any thing to bee a tradition but by humane writings and histories which as the Cardinall confesseth De effect suram lib. 2. cap. 25. sine can breede but humane beleefe wherein may be falshood Neither are they so necessarie and profitable as the Scripture It is able â—o make a man wife to saluation It iâ—â— the seede of regeneration It is the foode of our soules It is the sword of the spirit to defend vs from the Diâ—â—ell In bringeth vs to faith and saluation as before I proued Can such profite bee reaped from traditions Did eueâ— any approued authour ascribe such â—â—â—tue and efficacy to them Did â—uer any Christian obteyne these benefites by them Moreouer the thinges taught in the Scripture are not easily learned Augustine wrote that the profunditie of the Scripture is so great Epâ—st 3. that hee might hee might dayly prosâ—â—â—e in them if from the beginning of his childhood to his crooked old age be should with greatest leisure chiâ—fesâ— studie and better wit endeuour himself to learne them onely The Papists will not gain-say this seeing they hold the Scripture to be very obscure Pambo confessed that in 19. Socrat. hist. lib. 4. c. 18. yeeres hee had not learned to practise one lesson taught him out of Psal 39. to refraine his tongue from euill How many yeeres then may our people requiâ—e to learne the meaning and the practise of al things written in the Olde and New Testament I would therefore wish our Popish Priestes and people first to learne how to vnderstand and practise all thinges that bee written and when they haue learned all those then to begin with traditions It is no wisedome to contend much and busie themselues greatly about traditions before they haue learned and practised all things written which be farre more certaine more necessarie and profitable If they would take this course I am assured that there is not any one of them though he liued to be as old as Methuselah that would euer trouble eyther himselfe or vs with traditions Si rusticus â—redat suo epiâ—copo