of Nice to follow and which they accordingly followed The bookes of the Euangelists and Apostles and the Oracles of the old prophets plainly instruct vs quoth that worthie Emperour what we are to iudge of matters concerning God Therefore laying aside all enemie-like discord let vs debate ad determine the points in question by the testimonies of the Scriptures inspired by God These as we heard before Ierome makes the bounds of the Church within which she must keepe her selfe and Proclus Archbishop of Constantinople confineth faith to the same place Faith saith he must abide within the Euangelicall and Apostolicall bounds Paschasius a Cardinall of your Church as you say many yeares since tied Macedonius the hereticke to the Scriptures equiring him either to shew by euident testimonies of the word of God that we must beleeue in the Church or else to vrge the point no further For as Chrysostome truly affirmeth If there be any thing needfull to be knowen we shall learne it in the Scriptures I mightfil whole sides with testimonies out of the Fathers to this purpose but I let them passe as needlesse especially since your selfe before confessed that the word of God is infallible and therefore in that respect sufficient to be the rule of faith Now to your conclusion The first part of this first conclusion is false in regard of the infallibilitie of Scripture which it should seeme you saw well enough and therefore balkt that matter and deuised an other point concerning our translation to play withall For what is it but trifling when a man leaues the thing in question and busies him selfe about the refuting of that which besides himselfe no man euer dreamed of What English protestant euer affirmed that our translation was infallible that is such as had no error in it or might not be doubted of Or who euer tooke it for the rule of faith You make babies which you beate as you list Against the Scriptures being the rule of faith which we affirme you say nothing Against the infallibilitie of our translation which we grant not to be the rule of faith you discourse at large wherein I intreate the Reader to consider these few things with me That which he speakes in disgrace of our translation makes no more against it then against all other whatsoeuer For neither is any translation the language in which the Scripture was written and no translators euer had any such infallible assistance by the holy Ghost Sure the author of the vulgar Latin translation had not such help as the Hebrew and Greek originals which the translations of all the learned Papists themselues declare Pagnin Vatablus Isidorus Clarius c. As for Gregory Martins cauils they were answered long since by D. Fulke and I maruell that you can name them without blushing seeing neuer a one of you durst vndertake the defence of them for the space of these 23. yeares Nay which is worse you were not ashamed in the second edition of your Rhemish Testament to bleare your blind followers eyes with a table of hereticall corruptions in translating the Scriptures as if you had propounded some new matter whereas they were all taken out of that booke of Martins and had long before bene iustified by D. Fulke without any reply on your parts You demaund how any vnlearned man can be infallibly sure that in those places which do seeme to fauour our sect our translation doth not erre I answer that there are better meanes of assurance for vnlearned Protestants concerning the truth of our translation then any Papist can haue by your imagined authoritie for your vulgar Latin First it is no slender perswasion to any reasonable man that those places you speake of if not wholy yet for the most part are translated with the same sense in other toungs which they haue in ours as in Spanish French Italian Flemish Dutch Secondly it is a great confirmation of the truth that many of those texts which seeme most to fauor vs are the same in your vulgar and Rhemish editions that they are in ours Thirdly the truth of ours is yet more cleare because euery man may see that in bookes of controuersie betwixt vs our translations are seldome denied by the learned of your side though you condemne our expositions Fourthly who may not easily discerne how much more faithfull our translation of those places all others is then yours seeing we are readie to make triall of it by the originals the learned on your sides being iudges you are afraid of nothing more then to haue yours examined by the Hebrew and Greeke Fiftly in the places you speake of our translations deserue the more credit because we labour to make them plaine for euery mans vnderstanding and shew how they agree with the rest of the booke and chapter wheras your Rhemish Testament is so handled that an English man of good vnderstanding can hardly tell what to make of it for the very words themselues in many places as if you auoided nothing more then plainnesse Sixtly we perswade all men as much as we can to labour for the knowledge of the originall tongues that so they may be able to iudge of our translation you do all you can to keepe men in the mist of ignorance because you are afraid to haue your corruptions discouered Seuenthly though we allow not our ministers such an infinite authoritie as you giue your Cleargie yet we teach that it becoms Christian charitie and modestie neither to suspect a translation where the analogie of faith is kept and the plaine meaning of the holy Ghost not manifestly altered nor to rest vpon priuate conceit against the generall iudgement of the learned without very euident proofe of error These amongst other are reasonable grounds for a Christian to build vpon that he may haue some good assurance of the truth of our translation Now let vs examine yours We must say you admit an infallible authoritie in the Church to assure vs that such or such a translation doth not erre in any point First this is more then neeeds For if that authoritie can assure vs that the translation erreth not in any point needfull to saluation in regard of the sense it may be a sufficient ground for vs to build our faith vpon though it should mistake some words in many points and the sense too in matters of lesse importance Secondly though we do admit such an authoritie in the Church yet may we be farre enough from any such assurance For how shall I be sure that the Church hath so affirmed of this or that translation How shal I know what the Church is A company you say of men vpon earth infallibly taught by the holy Ghost what is the true faith in al points Is this teaching cōmon to euery one of this company seuerally or only annexed to them all ioyntly when they are together What if all what if the greater part assemble
that which a man deduceth by necessarie and certaine consequence through his wit and learning out of the Scriptures is as strong and sure a foundation of faith as that which is expressed there in plaine termes VVe may see by this it was not for nothing that Bellarmine and you by his example foyst in expressely into the question which is betwixt vs concerning the sufficiencie of the Scriptures to be the rule of faith But of this enough A. D. §. 3. This same reason I confirme yet againe more strongly For the rule of faith must be able to propose to vs vnfallibly not onely the letters and seeming sense but the true sense of Gods word and the sense intended by the holy Spirit of God the author of this word otherwise it cannot be a sufficient meanes to breed in vs an infallible Christian faith and beleefe which is onely grounded vpon the true sense intended by Almightie God the prime or first veritie the speaker of this word But no man nor no companie of men can by their natural wit and learning tel vnfallibly what especially in all points of faith is the true intended sense of Gods word For as S. Paul saith Quis cognouit sensum Domini Who hath knowne to wit by nature art or learning the sense of our Lord Quae Dei sunt saith the same S. Paul nemo cognouit nisi spiritus Dei those things which are of God no man hath knowne but the spirit of God And therefore that knowledge which himselfe had of diuine matters came not from any naturall wit of man but as he plainly affirmeth from the spirit of God Nobis reuelauit Deus per Spiritum suum God hath reuealed vnto vs saith he by his Spirit Therefore we may well conclude That no one man nor no companie of men without the assistance of Gods spirit can either by interpreting Scripture or otherwise be the rule of faith A. W. It seemeth the former reason did not fully satisfie your selfe because you make profession of a more strong confirmation thereof which lieth thus The rule of faith must be able to propose infallibly to vs the true sence of the word of God intended by the holy Ghost But no naturall wit or learning is able to propose infallibly that sence Therefore no naturall wit or learning can be the rule of faith I haue made bold to alter your proposition or maior a little as I perswade my selfe not without reason You make a kind of difference betwixt the true sense of Gods word and the sense intended by the holy Ghost These two in my poore opinion are all one for there is no sense of any peece of Scripture to be accoūted true but that vvhich deliuereth the holy Ghosts meaning in that place The reason is for that the vse of interpretatiō is nothing else but to make vs vnderstand what the Lord meant to teach vs or to say to vs by those words I deny not that a man may deliuer true and sound diuinitie though he misconceiue misinterprete a text of Scriptures but this is that I say that howsoeuer he teach true doctrine by his exposition yet he doth not giue vs the true sense of that word of God if he propound nor the sense which was there intended by the holy Ghost euerie truth of God is not the true sense of euery place of Scripture I will not except against your Syllogisme though you put somewhat more into the Assumption then you propounded in the maior yet let me put you in mind that both naturall wit and learning can shew the true sense of Gods word in very many places and also that by your confession this may be done Whence it will follow that in all likelihood of reason many points of faith are so deliuered in Scripture that there needeth no infallible authoritie of the Church to teach vs what is true in those points what false To answer more directly to the Assumption I see no sufficient reason why a man by wit and learning may not be able to vnderstand and that infallibly what is true according to the letter of the Scripture in matters necessary to saluation I think I may truly say that many a man attaineth to this knowledge without any infallible assistance of the holy Ghost whose principall office it is so to sanctifie direct and preserue the children of God that they neuer fall away by any such opinion as shal make them lose their interest they haue to the kingdome of heauen Your proofe if it be sufficient sheweth your exception especially in all points to haue bin altogether needlesse For if the Apostle in the place alledged speake of vnderstanding the true sense of the Scripture no one place can be vnderstood by any natural wit or learning Who hath knowne the sense of our Lord Is not this speech generall as well of one place as of another But it is euident that the Apostle speaketh not of vnderstanding any or all places of Scripture For the spirituall man he speaketh of attaineth not to that height of knowledge no not in your owne iudgement vnlesse perhaps no man be spirituall but your Pope And yet a man may well doubt whether he be able to vnderstand the meaning of the holy Ghost in euery place or no though it be granted he cannot erre iudicially But Saint Paul thinketh not in that place of interpreting scripture Of what then Surely of acknowledging or assenting to the truth of the Gospell concerning saluation by Iesus Christ The things that God hath prepared for them that loue him viz. the meanes of saluation and glory by Christ are such as eye hath not seen nor eare heard yea such as neuer entred into any mans heart For who was able to haue deuised by any experience and obseruation to which the eye and eare are especiall helpes or by any discourse of reason wherein the heart is exercised that the Sonne of God should take our nature and procure forgiuenesse of sinnes and inheritance of heauen for all them that would beleeue in him This was onely Gods will and counsell which no man was priuie to no man could instruct him in or perswade him to These things God only knew these he reuealed by his spirit to the Patriarks Prophets and Apostles who without such reuelation could neuer haue suspected any such matter Now the question is not in the Apostles course of writing whether a man without reuelation can vnderstand the meaning of the Scripture but whether he could of himselfe know that there must be such a means of saluation or acknowledge the doctrine thereof to be true without the teaching of the holy Ghost The naturall man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 receiueth not these things for true or if you will perceiueth not that there are such meanes of his saluation As for vnderstanding of Scripture since it is more then manifest that a meere natural man may find the true sense
well make an end of answering to this treatise because I haue ouerthrowne the maine strength of your discourse and discouered to all men that will not be wilfully blind the weaknesse of your reason but for the better satisfaction of the vnlearned I will follow you from Chapter to Chapter that the truth may the more easily be discerned A. D. CHAP. XI That the Church whose doctrine must be to vs the rule of faith must alwayes continue without interruption from Christ his time till the worlds end A. W. That there alwayes hath bene since the beginning of the world excepting perhaps the time betwixt the fall of our first parents and their faith in the Messiah that there is and alwaies shal be a Church viz. certaine men that are predestinate to life and actually beleeue in Iesus Christ it neuer came into any of our minds to be doubted of that there should be such a companie as you conceipt all the Papists in the world cannot proue A. D. §. 1. Considering what hath bene proued in the former Chapter about the infallible authoritie of the doctrine of the true Church I hope no Christian will deny but that so long as this Church doth continue we haue of it a sure pillar and a firme foundation whereupon we may safely build our beleef For either a man must deny that euer our Sauiour did make any such promise gaue such charge and commission left any such warrant set forth such a commaundement or thundred out any such threats as before is rehearsed which were to denie the Scriptures which scriptures are generally receiued by all Christians no otherwise then as they are the vndoubted word of God or else he must wrest the interpretation thereof both from that which the words of themselues naturally yeeld and also from the common sense and vnderstanding either of all or the most learned and almost of the vnlearned also of the whole Christian world or else he shall be forced to confesse that which not I but Saint Paul hath said Ecclesia est columna firmamentum veritatis the Church is the pillar and ground of truth Onely it may perchance seeme to some of those that doe at this day oppose themselues against the authority of the Church that this was true for Saint Pauls time and perhaps for some three foure fiue or six hundred yeares after but not to be presumed vpon in latter times and namely when Luther began his reformation as they tearme it or now adaies A. W. Considering how weake your proofes haue bene as in the former Chapters so namely in the last about the infallible authoritie of the doctrine of the true Church I hope there is no reasonable man not only no Christian that will build his faith and saluation vpon so tottering a pillar and so slipperie a foundation But because you seeme to dote so much vpon your last Chapter I wil once againe be content to examine the substance of it as it is here repeated by you with some litle alteration Either we must denie that our Sauiour hath so promised charged warranted threatned or we must falsely interprete the scriptures or else we must grant that the authoritie of the Church is a sure pillar and firme foundation whereupon we may safely build our faith But we neither may denie that our Sauiour hath so promised charged warranted commaunded threatned neither may we falsely interpret the Scriptures Therefore we must grant that the authoritie of the Church is a sure pillar and firme foundation whereupon we may safely build our beleefe First in general for your whole syllogisme if the cōclusion you intend were no other thē that you pretēd propoūd that the Church is the pillar groūd of truth as S. Paul saith there would be no question in this matter betwixt vs. For we haue learned to acknowledge the truth of all and euerie part of the scripture But the beginning of this Chapter sheweth that you meane by the Churches being the pillar and ground of truth that we may safely build our beleefe vpon the Churches authority which as I prooued in my answer to that Chapter is no part of the Apostles meaning In this sense must we take your conclusion Secondly in particular I denie your Maior because your disiunction is naught presuming a necessitie where there is none For neither we need to denie that our Sauiour hath so promised charged warranted commanded threatned neither is there any cause why we should falsely interprete the Scriptures and yet we haue no reason to grant that our faith may safely be built vpon the authoritie of the Church No such thing as I haue shewed can follow vpon the words of scripture alledged by you Therefore we need not denie the promises charge warrant commandement or threatning of our Sauiour or else grant the Church such an vnlimited authority Neither will the true sense of those Scriptures either enforce or beare any such illation or conclusion touching the infallible authoritie of the Church And whereas you thinke to face out the matter with naming the common sense and vnderstanding either of all or the most learned and almost of the vnlearned also of the whole Christian world my answer propounding the iudgement of many excellently learned and ancient writers of those places prooueth that to be but a vaine popish brag without all likelihood of truth especially since you that spare not to heape vp testimonies of Fathers when they are needlesse and to quote their bookes and chapters sometimes for a bare phrase alledge not so much as the name of any one author for the proofe of your interpretation of twelue seuerall places of scripture Your proffered seruice in helping vs with this distinction hath more shew of kindnesse then good meaning For it is not brought in to confirme our answer but to giue your selfe occasion of vttering that which you are taught to vrge for proofe of this question But we neither need your aide and haue good cause to suspect your fauours In a word your distinction is such as none of vs euer brought or would bring to answer those places of scripture We confesse that whatsoeuer was promised to the Church in those texts was promised for continuance to the end of the world but we say that the first promise was not concerning the Churches not erring the three last are particular to the Apostles at least for such a measure of teaching But what should I repeat that which was deliuered in the verie last Chapter The thing you harpe vpon though vntunably is that your Romish church or rather the Church of the East West were indeed the pillar and ground of truth for the space of some 600. yeares after Christ but afterwards fell away from that soundnesse of doctrine which before it had cleaued vnto Such a matter there is acknowledged by our Diuines yet no man saith either that the Church erred not in any point during that
able to bring any place of Scripture in which the holy Ghost so speaketh of the church I deny not that all Christians agreeing in one profession may in some sort be said to be of one church but that the Church whereof the Scripture speaks and of which we therefore must speake if we will speake to any purpose is to be conceiued as any one such societie The same word the same sacraments the same kind of gouerners may be in diuers churches and yet not all these be one societie We may imagine the like in common wealths or kingdomes that seuerall states may haue the same kind of lawes customes and magistrates and yet not be all one kingdome or common wealth Your second fault is that vndertaking to define the true church you content your selfe with the same faith and the same sacraments whereas no company nor man can be of that church but they that hold the true faith of Christ and the right vse of the sacraments The third thing I will obserue is rather by way of explication then of refutation you require the gouernment of lawfull pastors as a thing essentiall to the church If you speake of that church to which our Sauiour makes those goodly promises in the Gospell it may be for a time without such gouerners the promises themselues not concerning the whole bodie in respect of their lawfull Pastors but euery particular in regard of his faith in Iesus Christ And indeed howsoeuer it be true that to the being of a Church as it is commonly taken it is necessary that there be both a pastor and a people yet a people depriued of their pastors by what meanes soeuer and hauing no dependance vpon any other congregation doth not cease to be such a Church as our Sauiour promiseth to protect from spiritual and bodily enemies yea a people so destitute hath power to chuse a pastor for themselues and therefore are still in some sort a Church because that power is no where out of a Church but is appropriated to the companies of beleeuers who make seueral Churches though not properly and fully Churches for want of lawfull gouerners In the last place I may not omit to note your craft in adding to your definition of the Church the gouernment of lawfull Pastors as if you would haue the ignorant imagine that there were certaine Pastors who had some ioynt gouernment of the Church for example perhaps your Pope and his Councell of Cardinals or a Councel of Bishops assembled by his authoritie and gouerned by his direction In this sense we vtterly denie that any gouernment of Pastors is necessary to the being of a Church though we gladly embrace the helpes of Synodall prouinciall nationall and generall Councels All true Churches properly so called are gouerned by their seuerall Pastors but this makes them not one church as long as there are not more or at the least one gouerner cōmō to thē al. This the learned of your side discerning though you cannot or wil not see it neuer define the Church without relation to one generall pastor the Pope of Rome As for the seuerall pastors be they neuer so lawful they do no more make their congregations one Church in respect of their gouernment then the Companies of London because they are gouerned by their Maister and Wardens seuerally make one bodie without respect of their common subiection to the Lord Mayor of that citie You wil then perhaps demand of me whether the Church be not a meere sound onely hauing nothing truly answerable thereunto indeed I answer to this question that the Church is more then a meere sound and hath a thing in nature truly answerable to the name and that in two respects For the Church may be taken for the whole multitude of them that in all places of the world professe the Gospell of Iesus Christ and in this sense it containes all saue the Iewes and the heathen Secondly the Church truly and properly is the companie of the elect that are called to true faith in Iesus Christ More particularly it signifieth such of the elect beleeuers as are liuing in the world And this is that Church to which those glorious and comfortable promises of our Sauiour do appertaine though there be also some promises of outward blessings which are common to all Churches and professors of Christian Religion Now these elect thus called are truly a Church because they are a companie linked together in the sound profession of the same true faith and members of the same mysticall bodie of Iesus Christ vnder the gouernment of the holy Ghost his Vicegerent I do not take vpon me exactly to define the Church but onely to shew in grosse what is necessary to the being of it nor perhaps all that but the especiall point where in you haue failed which is subiection to one and the same Lieutenant and Soueraigne not to diuers of the like kind seuerally as your definition seemeth to require But of this matter enough Now I answer to your minor that there was no necessitie of the Churches visibilitie that it might be such a societie as you imagine For there haue bin and easily may be such societies which may be and haue bin hid from all the world saue those of their owne companie Consider I pray what should hinder this Is it not possible for a companie of men to professe the same religion but other men must needs be priue to that their profession It is like enough that such a company growing to a great multitude and ordinarily holding the exercises of their Religion will in time be discouered as it fell out with the true Christians in the late persecution vnder Queene Marie But this proueth not that therefore there cannot be any such societie but the world must needs take knowledge of it Could your detestable traitors band them selues together in that monstrous plot of treason and murder by gunpowder yea and assemble so often and worke so hard in the diuels seruice without being descried and cannot God by his prouidence keepe his seruants meeting together for his worship but that Satan shall certainly discouer them It is more then manifest how long or short a while soeuer they may keepe themselues vnknowne that they may be such a companie and not by and by be knowne The second point in the first part of your minor is this and thus concluded If the Pastors were to know the sheepe and the sheepe the Pastors and this could not be vnlesse the Church were visible then was this one reason of the Churches being visible But the Pastors were to know the sheepe and the sheepe the Pastors and this could not be vnlesse the Church were visible Therefore this is one reason of the Churches being visible I may graunt you the whole Syllogisme in the termes it is propounded by you and yet neither I lose nor you get any thing For there is no more concluded by it but
may also thus vnderstand it that Christ appeared to be the word and the truth and wisedome frō the beginning of the creatiō of the world to the last writing of the Apostles that is from Genesis to the Apostles books after which there are none of like authoritie or beleef Or thus that the Law and the Prophets continued till Iohn in whom the brightnesse of truth was The East was the Law the West Iohn the end of the Law Now onely the Church neither takes away the word and sense of this brightnesse nor addes any thing else as propheticall The place you bring lieth thus Euery doctrine professing it selfe to be truth when it is not truth either among the Gentiles or among the Barbarians is in some sort Antichrist going about to seduce as truth and to seuer vs from him that said I am the truth Therefore we must not giue eare to them which say Behold here is Christ but do not shew him in the Church which is full of brightnesse from the East to the West which is full of the true light which is the pillar and ground of truth in which whole Church the whole comming of the Sonne of man is Now the comming of the Sonne of man is before expounded by him to be the word of truth Doubtlesse if you had not taken this proofe vpon Bellarmines or some other mans credit you would neuer haue brought it to proue the visibilitie of the Church to all men at all times What saith Cyprian in the place alledged but that the Church is dispersed ouer the whole world Doth this proue that it is at all times visible to all men Or hath Cyprian any such purpose in that place Is not his whole drift to shew that there is but one Church because the truth they professe is but one The title of his booke is Of the vnitie of the Church The place you bring concludes that howsoeuer the beames are scattered or spread here and there yet the light is but one The Church that is true beleeuers were in this land in the dayes of persecutiō and is now in Spaine Italy and perhaps in Rome it selfe This proues not a perpetuall visibilitie What need we any other answer to this testimonie of Chrysostome then that which your owne exposition affoords vs Chrysostoms meaning is that the Church cannot be quite without light say you What thē Must it needs be visible then to al men The Moone is neuer wholy darkened no not in the greatest eclipse nor in the change but is alwayes in the one halfe light and yet he were mad that would conclude hereupon that therefore it may be seene at all times of all men Indeed Chrysostome speaketh of the continuance of the Church not of the visiblenesse thereof That may appeare by his saying that the Church hath her roote in heauen rather then in the earth This argues stabilitie not visibilitie And what Church hath rooting in heauen but onely the Church of the elect The Church saith Chrysostome in the same place is more honorable then heauen because heauen is made for it not it for heauen Is heauen made for any Church but that of the elect Besides it was not the visibility but the being of the Church against which those tyrants whom Chrysostome there mentioneth so mightily laboured which yet continued in despight of them all These and such like places of Austin shew the flourishing estate of the Churches in those times and conuince the Donatists against whom Augustine writ of wofull blindnesse who would see no church but their owne heretical assembly in a part of Africa But they neither were intended not can with any reason be applied to proue that the church is alwayes visible to all men The former of the two places as I shewed before is interpreted by the Fathers of the Apostles That the Apostles saith Ierome should not hide themselues for feare but freely shew themselues he teacheth them to preach boldly when he saith A citie set vpon an hill cannot be hid But let vs take it to be meant of the Church It must needs be a monstrous hill that can shew a citie set vpon it to the whole world A citie standing on a hill is the easier and the farther to be seene but there is no hill high enough to be seene ouer the whole world I would farther know whether euery particular Church be not a citie vpon an hill or no. And yet is no such Church to be seene of all men Concerning the latter place Austin worthily cals them blind that could not or rather as he truly saith would not see that great mountaine vpon which the Church then stood but would shut their eyes against the light that shined vpon them Yet who is so ignorant that he knowes not or so shamelesse that he will not cōfesse that there were many aliue at that very time which had no knowledge that there was any Church in the world But there neither were nor could be any such among the Donatists or other like heretickes who forsooke the Church to follow their owne fantasies The candle is the Minister or the word shining by his ministery the candlesticke is the particular Church where that ministery is if any liuing in or neare the place where such a candle burneth bright will not see the light of it he may well be called wilfully blind So may not they which are so far that the beames of the light cannot shine vnto them Now the summe of that which hath bene answered concerning the perpetuall continuance and visiblenesse of the church is this that the church to which that continuance is promised is the number of the elect and not any one outward companie of men succeeding one another in a famous and visible profession of Christian Religion Yea farther though we do not vndertake to affirme that there hath not bin at all times some one companie or other of true Christians knowne to them among whom they liued to be professors of the Gospell yet we doubt not to say that there can be no sufficient proofe brought out of the Scriptures that there must of necessitie be alwayes such a company as if our Sauior Christs promises to his church were not performed vnlesse the world might at all times perceiue where such a companie were to be found A. D. CHAP. XIII How we should discerne and know which is the true visible Church of Christ A. W. It may perhaps seeme needlesse that I should proceed any further in the confutation of this treatise because still the maine point that there is such a Church is presupposed and not proued But howsoeuer it be true that there is indeed no one visible church of Christ which may challenge or beare the name of the whole church yet it will be worth the doing to finde out the markes or signes by which we may discerne which congregation is a true church of Christ and which is not
of the Church so that we cannot see it vnlesse she open her mouth and deliuer it to vs nor certainely know it to be true but by giuing credit to her testimonie of it is not a good marke to know the true Church by But true doctrine is so shut vp in the belly of the Church that we cannot see it vnlesse she open her mouth and deliuer it to vs nor certainly know it to be true but by giuing credit to her testimonie of it Therefore true doctrine is no good marke to know the true Church by Your Minor is false in both parts of it First it is vntrue that true doctrine is so shut vp in the belly of the Church yea many a true Church may hold some errors and many an hereticall Church some truth onely the fundamentall points are necessarie to the being of a true Church Secondly though true doctrine be in the belly of the Church as indeed there is no true Church in which it is not yet is it not so shut vp in it as you imagine For it is first and principally in the Scriptures where it may be found without any such authoritie of the Church as you dreame of yea I haue shewed that the Apostles themselues did not beget faith in the hearts of them to whom they preached by any authoritie of the Church but by euidence of the truth it selfe which they taught Concerning your proofe from Austins authoritie I first answer that he expoundeth not that place according to the literal meaning of the Prophet who speaketh not of any belly of the Church but saith that those lewd men of whom he speaketh haue alwaies bene giuen to naughtinesse from their mothers wombe These wicked ones saith Vatablus haue gone astray euer since they came forth of the womb they they haue erred euer since they were borne Yea Austin himselfe as your Glosse saith sometimes expoundeth it otherwise then here God saith Austin foreknew sinners euen from the wombe as he said to Rebecca So doth Ierome also vnderstand it so Theodoret. But let vs take it as Saint Austin doth here mystically expound it what will you prooue by it That truth is so shut vp in the belly of the Church that we cannot see it vnlesse she deliuer it by her mouth There is no such word in him no such thing to be gathered out of him His conclusion is that therefore they which differ from the true Church in doctrine are in error which is certainly true concerning fundamentall points and verie probable in all other points whatsoeuer The other part of your Minor is that true doctrine is so shut vp within the Church that we cannot certainly know it to be true but by giuing credit to her testimonie of it For the disproouing whereof it shall be sufficient to call to minde that which I haue often answered concerning those who beleeued by the Apostles ministerie without any consideration or thought of their being sent by the true Church but onely being conuinced by the manifest truth of that which they deliuered concerning forgiuenesse of sinne by our Sauiour Iesus Christ Your proofe out of Austin is insufficient as it may appeare in this sort If Austin say that he should not beleeue the Gospell vnlesse he were mooued by the authoritie of the Church then true doctrine is so shut vp within the Church that we cannot certainly know it to be true but by giuing credit to her testimonie of it But Austin saith so Therefore true doctrine is so shut vp in the Church that we cannot certainly know it to be true but by giuing credit to her testimonie of it I denie the consequence of your Maior First because as Austin himselfe saith of Cyprian we are not bound by the authoritie of Austins iudgement as if his writings were Canonicall We do Cyprian no wrong saith Austin when we distinguish his writings whatsoeuer they be from the Canonicall authoritie of the diuine Scriptures And againe I take not Cyprians writings for Canonicall but consider of them according to the Canonicall and allow of that with his commendation which agreeth to Scripture but by his leaue refuse that which disagreeth from Scripture This minde carried Austin to other mens writings this minde he desired other men should carrie to his Secondly I denie the same consequence because Austin might be mooued by the authoritie of the Church to acknowledge the Gospell for true and yet without the same authoritie learne out of the Gospell so acknowledged which is true doctrine which false Concerning Austins testimonie first it is manifest that he deliuereth not a rule for all men to follow as if by should not beleeue he meant that a man ought not to beleeue the Gospell nor sheweth an impossibilitie of beleeuing it vnlesse a man be moued by the authoritie of the Church but at the most declareth that the authoritie of the Church preuailed with him so farre as to make him acknowledge the Gospell for true which else he had either not knowne or doubted of Secondly it is obserued according to the rest of his writings that the Latine word he vseth in the African dialect signifieth Had not beleeued so that the sense is I had not beleeued the Gospell as the truth of God if the authoritie of the Church had not moued me thereunto The first motiue was the authoritie that is the learning consent holinesse of so many worthie men as from time to time had held and did hold the Gospell to be the truth of God Vpon this ground Austin gaue himselfe to the studie of the Scriptures and by the euidence of truth deliuered in it discerned that it was the word of God according to the report and reputation commonly held of it This sense agreeth with Austins purpose who to refute the Manichees that tooke their master Manes for the Apostle of Christ thus reasoneth against them I beleeue not saith Austin that he is Christs Apostle and then demaundeth of the Manichee what course he would take to prooue it to him Perhaps saith he you will read the Gospell to me and assay to prooue Manichaeus person out of it But what if you should light vpon one that doth not yet beleeue the Gospell Then follow the words alledged by you I truly had not beleeued the Gospell if the authoritie of the Church had not moued me This is yet more cleare by that which Austin writeth afterward First saith he we beleeue that which yet we cannot discerne that being made stronger in faith we may attaine to the vnderstanding of that we do beleeue not men now but God himselfe confirming enlightening our minde within But howsoeuer we vnderstand it Austin speaketh not of true doctrine shut vp in the Church so that it cannot be knowne to be true but by giuing credit to the Churches testimonie which is the point in question but onely of acknowledging the Gospell to be the word
or happinesse This done thou shalt be sure to find by the euidence of truth manifested in those bookes that they are sent from God and not deuised by man If thou liue in such a place as affoordeth the interpretation of these bookes by the ministery of men vse that singular blessing of God with reuerence and care to vnderstand and thou shalt by the mercifull teaching of God acknowledge these books to be the word of God ordained for the saluation of thy selfe and other This will some man say may perhaps breed a perswasion that these bookes are from God but how shall we come to be infallibly sure of it How else but by the worke of the spirit of God in thy heart What say you must we runne to reuelations Who knowes the secrets of God but the spirit of God The truth it selfe discerned by that light which the spirit kindleth in our hearts worketh assurance of beleefe to which the testimonie of the spirit is added for our further confirmation Neither is this any other reuelation then you Papists require in this case For according to your doctrine no man can be perswaded infallibly of the truth of the Scripture either for the text or the interpretation but by the especiall teaching of the spirit otherwise he hath not faith but opinion of these matters Onely herein stands the difference betwixt vs that you say the argument whereby the spirit perswades vs to acknowledge the Scripture is the authoritie of the Church we affirme it is the euidence of truth which he makes vs to discerne by our vnderstanding enlightened and to approue by our will thereto inclined through his mightie and gracious worke vpon our soules The second part of your minor is that we could not haue knowne the Gospels of the foure Euangelists to be canonicall Scripture rather then those of Nicodemus and Thomas if we had not the testimonie of the Church Of the falsnesse of which opinion I shall need to say little because it is refuted in my answer to the former part For this knowledge is not bred in vs by resting vpon the Churches authoritie but by yeelding to the euidence of the truth discouered to our hearts by the teaching of the holy Ghost Concerning the authoritie of the Church in this point it were a presumptuous and vnreasonable thing for any man without very good proof or great likelihood of reason to deny or doubt of that which hath bin auouched so many yeares by the whole Christian world But to make question of the bookes of Scripture whether they be the word of God or no and to denie that there is any meanes to know them for such but the authoritie of the Church is the next way to open a gap to Atheisme to lay open Religion to the scorne of the world Can I not know the Scripture to be of God but by the authoritie of the Church How shal I then know it at all since it is not reasonable to beleeue there is any Church that hath such authoritie but by the warrant of the Scripture They do all they can to turne reasonable creatures into beasts who teach vs that we must beleeue the Church cannot erre because the Scripture saith so and yet denie that we can know there is any Scripture but by beleeuing it because the Church saith so This is to dance in a circle as if a man were coniured that he could not get out of it How shall I know there is a Church by the Scripture How shall I know there are any Scriptures by the Church Would your proud Clergie thus make fooles of Christian men if they did not despise them as voyd of all reason I wonder how your Pope Cardinals Bishops and the rest of your Cleargie can for beare laughing when they looke one vpon another and remember how they cosen and if I may vse the word in a matter of such importance gull the world with such palpable fooleries But your strumpet of Babylon hath made the Kings of the earth and all nations drunke with the cup of her fornications exalting her selfe aboue all that is called God and making her selfe the God of her slauish vassals But the Lord is iust who according to the Apostles prophefie hath sent the world strong delusions that they should beleeue lies that all they might be damned which beleeued not the truth but had pleasure in vnrighteousnesse And certainly if there were not a great measure of 12. blindnesse and sottishnesse in the hearts of men that Gods purpose might take effect it were vnpossible that reasonable men should so be lead by the nose to errour and destruction A. D. §. 5. Fourthly if the true doctrine of faith in all particular points must be foreknowne as a marke whereby to know the true Church then contrarie to that which hath bin proued the authoritie of the Church should not be a necessarie meanes whereby men must come to the knowledge of the true faith For if before we come to know which is the true Church we must by an other meanes haue knowne which is the true faith what need then is there for getting true faith already had to seeke or bring in the authoritie of the same Church A. W. This fourth reason and the next labour to proue that part of your first assumptiō in this Chapter which we deny not that the true doctrine of faith in euery particular point is not a good marke of the Church It would therefore be but lost labour to spend much time in the examining of them yet somewhat I must say and first to the former If the true doctrine of faith in all particular points must be foreknowne as a marke to know the true Church by then is not the autoritie of the true Church a necessary meanes to know the true doctrine of faith by But the authoritie of the true Church is a necessary meanes to know the true faith by Therefore the true doctrine of faith must not be foreknowne in all particular points as a marke to know the true Church by Your conclusion is no more then we grant the consequence of your maior about which you take some paines needs not your helpe for the proofe of it Your minor is false That which you brought before to prooue it before was answered A. D. §. 6. Fiftly if before we giue absolute and vndoubted credit to the true Church we must examine and iudge whether euery particular point of doctrine which it holdeth be the truth with authoritie to accept that onely which we like or which seemeth in our conceit right and conformable to Scripture and to reiect whatsoeuer we mislike or which in our priuate iudgement seemeth not so right and conformable then we make our selues examiners and iudges ouer the church and consequently we preferre our liking or disliking our iudgement and censure of the interpretation and sense of Scripture before the iudgement and censure of the
of this matter we must speake more at large hereafter A. D. CHAP. III. That this one faith necessarie to saluation is infallible A. W. If you had bene desirous that euery man should vnderstand you instead of infallible you would rather haue said certaine or without doubting especially since your selfe diuers times vsed the word in the passiue signification for that which may not be doubted of as being most certainly true In this sense you say afterward in this Chapter that the word of Christ is absolutely infallible and againe in the end of the Chapter that we must account the word of faith absolutely infallible A. D. §. 1. This one faith without which we cannot be saued must be infallible and most certaine This is cleare because faith is that credit or inward assents of minde which we giue to that which God who is the prime or first veritie which neither can deceiue nor be deceiued hath reuealed vnto vs by meanes of the preaching or teaching of the true Church as we may gather out of S. Paul when he saith Quomodo credent ei quem non audierunt quomodo audient sine praedicante quomodo praedicabunt nisi mittantur c. ergo fides ex auditu auditus autem per verbum Christi The sense of which words is that sith we cannot beleeue vnlesse we heare nor beare vnlesse some lawfully sent do preach vnto vs faith is bred in vs by hearing and yeelding assent or credit to the word of Christ made knowne vnto vs by the preaching of the true Church which onely is lawfully sent of God wherefore like as the word of Christ being God is absolutely infallible so also the credit giuen to this word which is our faith must needs be also most certaine and infallible A. W. The title and beginning of the Chapter speake of faith as it is a grace or qualitie but the conclusion of the Chapter is concerning the infallibilitie or certaintie of the word of faith as you call it that is the thing to be beleeued so do you run from one thing to another But I may say of this Chapter as I haue done in part of the former that we acknowledge the truth of both these points and thinke your labour in prouing them altogether vnnecessary only in the former there may be some doubt For though it be out of question that we are to endeuor for the perfection as of all other graces of God so of that faith wherby we assent to the truth of that which God hath reuealed yet it comes to passe sometimes by our infirmitie that our faith is accompanied with doubting And this as we heard before Sotus grants to be true of a Catholicke faith and prooues it by the prayer of the Apostles Lord increase our faith to which I may adde the like request of him that crying with teares said Lord I beleeue helpe my vnbeleefe But if any man desire to see a liuely patterne of this doubting let him looke vpon Dauid as he describes himselfe in the Psalme Certainly I haue cleansed my heart in vaine and washed my hands in innocency c. Then thought I to know this but it was too painfull for me And afterward so foolish was I and ignorant I was a beast before thee And yet the point he speaks of is a rulde case in Diuinitie propounded by him in the beginning of the Psalme namely that the prouidence of God watcheth ouer the righteous for their good and that he will be auenged of the wicked That faith which some Diuines call historicall is indeed such an assent goeth alwaies before iustifying faith at the least for the beleeuing of so much as is necessarie to iustification Which I note by the way that no man may be deceiued with an opinion that iustifying faith is an assent to the truth of Gods word whereas it is quite of another nature and hath place in the will rather then in the vnderstanding If you had said that God hath reuealed his truth to vs by the preaching of them that were in the true Church you had spokē more plainely and truely But how the true Church or any Church at all should be said to preach I professe I vnderstand not Neither can any such thing be gathered out of Saint Paule who speakes not a word of the Church true or false And to say the truth what a strange kind of speech is it to say The Church is sent to preach when as onely the Ministers preach and not the Church vnlesse perhaps Iohn Baptist only for a time was the Church whē he preached alone before our Sauiour was baptised But this same Church is a goodly faire word and couers a great many foule errours with the very name of it The Apostles who were they that God employed at the first beginning of the Gospell both in preaching and writing were vndoubtedly of the true Church both in respect of their election to euerlasting life and of the truth of the doctrine they held It is also true that God ordinarily begetteth faith in the hearts of men by the ministers of the true Church But it is not true that such an assent as you speake of cannot be wrought in a man by the ministery of Schismaticks or Hereticks though they be perhaps in neither respect any members of the true Church Did not Arius Macedonius Eutyches Nestorius and many other wretched hereticks assent in generall to the truth of God in Scriptures because they held it to be the very true word of God And might not men by their preaching be brought to the same faith For our parts we make no doubt but that in the middest of ignorance and superstition many came to this faith by the preaching of your Antichristian Priests and so do at this day yea we adde further that we doubt not many haue wee are sure they might and may attaine to the same faith what if I say to iustifying faith too without any preaching by the reading of the Scriptures For since it is partly the matter that must argue the Scripture to be the word of God partly the maiesty which any man may discerne in the manner of writing vnlesse it can be poooued out of the Scripture that the holy Ghost will not worke by these vpō the heart of him that readeth but only of him that heareth a man expound this word vnto him I see no sufficient reason why faith may not be had by reading where Gods ordinance of preaching is onely wanting and not wilfully neglected But you will say the Apostle tyeth faith to hearing First this is little aduantage for you Papists amongst whom til shame emulation draue you to it within these last fiftie or threescore yeares no man could ordinarily heare the word of God in any tongue that he vnderstood and so all your hearing was to no purpose Secondly if hearing be sufficient where there is nothing but reading without any
Peter as we heard Bellarmine say signifieth no more but that God keepes no man from being saued but hath vouchsafed the word and sacraments in common to all Your Glosse restraines that Any to them that are to be conuerted that is to the elect That other which are to be conuerted may be conuertea Thomas and Holkot interprete it de voluntate signi of that wil of God which we may gather by the signes he sheweth as for example God calleth all men from danger of damnation by precepts counsels threatnings rewards These are signes to vs that God would haue all men to be saued but there is another will called volunt as beneplaciti the good pleasure of God which is indeed truly that which God intendeth Thomas addeth also a second exposition out of Damascen but it can proue nothing because it cannot be necessarily enforced out of the text rather then the other which is also more warrantable for the truth of it as I will shew another time vpon more iust occasion if it please God Caietan alledgeth three seuerall interpretations that of Damascens a second of All kind of men whereof before and a third of the elect which also he doth exemplifie in the person of Peter Thus I haue shewed that the maine foundation you build vpon is but weak wanting ground of warrant from the word of God But admit it were neuer so true that God would haue euery man to be saued which in some sense as I haue said indeed is most true yet were not the consequence of your proposition proued For there might be sufficient meanes for euery mans saluation though there were no meanes to bring him to that same one infallible entire faith which you conceit but onely to so much faith and knowledge as is necessary to saluation by which he might be sufficiently instructed in matters of faith which is all that you craftily seeme to require in the conclusion of this section whereas before in your proposition no lesse would serue the turne then infallible instruction in all points questions and doubts of faith A. D. §. 2. To this purpose saith S. Austin Si Dei prouidentia praesidet rebus humanis non est desperandum ab eodem ipso Deo auctoritatem aliquam constitutam esse qua velut certo gradu nitentes attollamur in Deum If Gods prouidence saith he rule and gouerne humane matters as he proueth that it doth we may not despaire but that there is a certain authoritie appointed by the same God vpon which staying our selues as vpon a sure step we may be lifted vp to God Saint Austin therefore doth acknowledge some authoritie to be needfull as a meanes whereby we may be lifted vp to God The which lifting vp to God is first begun by true faith And because this authoritie is so needfull a meanes he would not haue vs doubt but that God whose prouidence stretcheth it selfe to all humane matters hath not failed to prouide this meanes for vs it being a principal matter and so principall as vpon which according to the ordinary course dependeth the summe of our saluation We are not therefore I say to doubt but that Almghtie God hath prouided a meanes whereby Animalis homo qui non percipit ea que sunt spiritus Dei a sensuall man who hath no vnderstanding of the diuine mysteries of faith may come to know them by a firme and infallible beleefe A. W. To what purpose doth Saint Austine bring this To proue that God hath appointed a rule by which all men may come to your infallible faith Nothing lesse but to shew that where truth is not euident as to men ordinarily it is not there God hath prouided meanes to stirre them vp to a diligent enquiry after it or rather as he plainly affirmeth to a ridding of themselues of the cares and pleasures of this life which he cals purging of the soule that so they may be fit to embrace the truth Authoritie saith Austin is at hand for a man that is not able to discerne the truth that he may be fitted to it and suffer himselfe to be purged What is this authoritie what is the vse of it Miracles multitude make vp this authoritie whereby men not able to see truth in it self are moued to a reuerend respect of the Church so to an examination of the doctrine which vpon triall is found true Thus doth the wisedome of God prouide for mens ignorance that authoritie of miracles and multitude may draw them to a consideration of the truth which whensoeuer it shewes it selfe so plainly that it cannot be doubted of is to be preferred before all other meanes of perswading a man to beleeue or holding him in beleefe whatsoeuer as the same Austin saith we denie not these to be good helpes and strong meanes to the searching and finding of the truth but to be sufficient and infallible grounds of religion that a man should relie vpon them without trying the doctrine by the truth of God reuealed in the Scriptures It is indeed out of doubt among Christians that God hath prouided some meanes by which a naturall man whom you absurdly call sensuall whereas the Apostle meaneth a man in his best natural estate since his fal who cānot discerne of Gods truth nor admit of it may come to the knowledge thereof Because it was impossible saith Irenaeus to learne God without God he teacheth men by his word his sonne to know God It is he that hath vouchsafed vs this knowledge by the ministery of men worke of the spirit in their hearts that beleeue according to the word of God in the Scriptures Let vs not heare saith Austin This I say This thou sayest but let vs heare This saith the Lord there are the Lords bookes extant to the authoritie whereof both of vs consent both of vs giue credit both of vs obey there let vs seeke the Church there let vs discusse our question Other meanes of triall then by the Scripture he accounteth and calleth deceitfull The Scriptures are the bounds of the Church beyond which she may not wander Whatsoeuer any man since the Apostles hath seene without warrant of Scripture let him be neuer so holy neuer so eloquent it is of no authoritie but onely to mooue vs to a consideration of that he saith A. D. §. 3. Onely the question is what manner of thing this meanes must be and where euerie man must seeke and finde it that hauing found it he may as S. Austen speaketh stay himselfe vpon it as vpon a sure step thereby to be lifted vp to a true faith and by faith to God The which question being of so great consequence that it being well determined a man need neuer make more question in matters of faith I wil God willing in the chapters following endeuor to resolue it as clearely as I can And this I purpose to do first by
setting downe what cōditions or properties this rule of faith must haue afterwards by proouing particularly that neither Scripture alone not any natural wit or humane lerning nor priuat spirit can be this rule of faith And finally that this rule which all mē may safely must necessarily follow can be no other but the teaching of the Catholicke Church A. W. It is onely thus farre agreed betwixt vs that there must needs be meanes appointed by Almightie God whereby all sorts of men may come to such a measure of knowledge and faith as is necessarie to saluation not wherby euery man may be infalliblie instructed in all points of religion that he need neuer make more question in any matter of faith though we grant that there is such a meanes prouided by God howsoeuer we in our weaknesse cannot make such vse of it But that we may vnderstand matters aright as we go forward I must intreate the Reader to remember that if all things to come in this your Treatise be sufficiently prooued yet you faile much of your maine purpose For this last Syllogisme is the foundation of all yet behinde concerning one of the principall points which you propoūded in the beginning viz. That it was necessarie to admit such an infallible authoritie in the Catholicke Church Now the proposition of this Syllogisme I haue denied and refuted Therefore if the assumption therof were most certainly true as it is vndoubtedly false yet could your conclusion be nothing sure because the syllogisme failes in the proposition but let vs see how you prooue the assumtion If neither the Scripture alone nor naturall wit or learning nor a priuate spirit can be such a rule then God hath prouided no such rule vnlesse we admit an infallible authority in the Catholicke Church But neither the Scripture alone nor naturall wit or learning nor a priuate spirit can be such a rule Therefore God hath prouided no such rule vnlesse we admit an infallible authority in the Catholicke Church This proposition is not set downe by you in plaine termes but necessarily and certainly gathered out of the course you hold in the fiue next chapters wherein the assumption and conclusion are manifestly contained that in the foure former this in the tenth The consequence of your proposition is verie weake For what if none of these seuerally be such a rule may not all these together be Sure there is nothing brought by you to the contrary But if all these faile what can you say to the contrarie why a generall Councell without the Popes authority should not be such a rule Or to goe farther doe you not thinke that the Pope alone may serue the turne And yet in your opinion neither the Councell nor the Pope seuerally considered are the Church Therefore it seemes there may be such a rule though there be no companie of men that hath any such authoritie as you speake of Secondly your consequence is but feeble in an other respect For it presumeth that if there be such an authoritie there is such a rule Whereas many thousands in the world may be vtterly without meanes of knowing that there is such an authoritie and so the meanes as in regard of them insufficient Adde hereunto that although it were possible and easie for euery man to know and see the Church yet the meanes might be insufficient because there is no certaine reason to perswade them that they must beleeue this Church in all things so that still according to your doctrine the Lord must needs haue failed much in his prouidence though he haue giuen this authority to the Church because he hath prouided no meanes whereby euery man may certainly be perswaded that the Church hath such authoritie Will you say He hath appointed that all men should beleeue the Church What can that helpe when he hath not prouided meanes for all men to know that they must beleeue her Must we not come now to a priuate spirit that is to the teaching of Gods spirit in the hearts of particular men And if this must needs be in this one case how prooue you it may not be so in other To answer we must beleeue the Church is to beg the question against all reason A. D. CHAP. VI. VVhat conditions or properties must be found in the rule of Faith THis rule which Almightie God hath prouided as a sufficient meanes to direct men to the knowledge of true faith necessarie to saluation must haue three conditions or properties First it must be certaine and infallible for otherwise it cannot be a sufficient foundation whereupon to build faith which as is proued before is absolutely infallible Secondly it must be such as may be certainly and plainly knowne of all sorts of men For if to any sort it could not be knowen or not certainly knowen it could not be to them a rule or meanes whereby they might direct themselues to the certaine knowledge of the true faith Thirdly it must be vniuersall that it may not onely make vs know certainly what is the true faith in some one or two or moe points but absolutely in all points of faith For otherwise it were not a sufficient meanes whereby we may attaine to an entire faith which integritie of faith is necessarie to saluation in such wise as hath bene declared and prooued before A. W. Your assumption had three points and as it were parts making three seueral sentences or propositions which for the more plainnesse I will handle seuerally as you haue done First of the Scripture The rule of faith must be certaine and infallible certainly and plainly knowen and vniuersall The Scripture alone is not so Therefore the Scripture alone is not the rule of faith Ere I come to answer your Syllogisme giue me leaue to shew how obscurely and doubtfully these properties are deliuered by you First infallible is taken in two diuers senses Faith must be infallible The rule must be infallible In the former we must needs expound infallible not being deceiued by holding any errour or nor doubting of that which it beleeueth In the latter what can infallible signifie but either that which is certainly true or that which may not be doubted of Is it plaine dealing to speake so doubtfully Or is it a good kinde of reasoning to runne the ring and to dispute in a circle as they speake in the Schooles Before you would prooue the infallibility of faith by the infallibility of the word of God which it must beleeue now you conclude the infallibility of the rule from the infallibility of faith Is not this to trifle rather then to reason Would you not laugh at vs if we should dispute thus The elect cannot fall away because the holy Ghost that vpholds them is true God The holy Ghost is true God because the elect whom he vpholds cannot fall away View your selfe in this glasse Secondly what would a reasonable man conceiue by these words The rule must be
the scripture For how many points of doctrine are there not yet decreed of by your Church How many thousand places of scripture not yet expounded by it If then it be no hindrance to saluation for a man to be ignorant of the truth in many points and places of scripture may not the written word of God be the rule of faith though diuers things in it be not certainly vnderstood A. D. §. 3. Thirdly they faile in the third condition For the Scriptures are not so vniuersall as the rule of faith had need to be For this rule ought to be so vniuersall that it may be able absolutely to resolue and determine all doubts and questions of faith which eyther haue bene or may hereafter be in controuersie for otherwise there were not sufficient meanes prouided by which schisme and heresies might be auoided vnitie of faith so necessarie to saluation might be conserued among Christian men A. W. The last imperfection you note in the Scripture whereby you would make it insufficient to be the rule of faith is the scantnesse of it that it conteineth not all things necessarie to be beleeued which you go about to prooue thus The rule of faith must be able absolutely to resolue all doubts of faith that haue bene or may be The Scripture is not able absolutely to resolue all such doubts Therefore the Scripture is not the rule of faith I should haue let your proposition passe without any question but that I am so vsed to your craft in speaking doubtfully For feare whereof I would faine vnderstand what the reason is why you put in absolutely If your intent be to signifie that the resolution must be certainly true you might haue spoken plainly as you meant But it may be you vnderstand by resoluing absolutely such a kinde of resolution as shall take away all outward contention which sometimes is indeed brought to passe by the Decrees of your Popes no man daring for feare of his life once to open his mouth against them Such a resolution the scripture cannot giue neither is it to be looked for that the rule of faith should be of that nature It is enough that it shew plainly and certainly what is true in all matters of faith Secondly the controuersies of faith you speake of must be indeed matters that require beleefe otherwise the rule of faith is not to meddle with them To speake more plaine It is not to be held as a duetie of the rule of faith that it should be able to determine of euerie idle question that curious and contentious heads can deuise For example if any man will make question of the Virgin Marie whether she were as you teach fifteene yeare old or perhaps eighteene or nineteen when our Sauiour Christ her Sonne was borne whether she were threescore three whē she died or more or lesse In these a thousād such matters deliuered as points of faith by your Priests and Iesuits it is not to be expected that the rule of faith should affoord any resolution We grant that infinite questions of your schoolemen positiōs of your Diuines cannot be determined by the rule of faith but only thus that they may be cōuinced to be no matters of beleefe that a Christian must needs think thus or thus of thē because they cannot be prooued either one way or other by scripture your proposition therefore is true onely of those things that are needfull to be beleeued all which may be certainly resolued by it What cannot is not of necessitie to be held by faith Your proposition you prooue as you thinke by this reason If there be no sufficient meanes prouided by which schismes and heresies may be auoided and vnitie among Christians conserued vnlesse the rule of faith be able to resolue all such doubts then it must be able to resolue them But there is no sufficient meanes prouided whereby schismes and heresies may be auoided and vnitic conserued vnlesse the rule be able to resolue all such doubts Therefore the rule of faith must be able to resolue them If the proposition be taken in that sense which the former may seeme to haue as I shewed then I denie the consequence therof that is I say it doth not follow that if there be no sufficiēt means prouided whereby schismes and heresies shall de facto and in euēt be auoided vnlesse the rule of faith be able to shew what is true what false in all questions that any man will mooue then the rule must be able so to doe The reason of my deniall is that as before I answered it is sufficient for the rule to shew what is true in matters of faith and let vs know that those are not needfull to be beleeued of the truth whereof it saith nothing anie way The assumption also is false though you speak not of actuall auoiding of heresie and schisme For there is sufficient meanes prouided for the auoiding of schisme because nothing must be held for certain truth which cannot be prooued to be according to the rule which is the onely measure of true vnitie among Christians A. D. §. 4. But the Scriptures be not thus vniuersall For there be diuers questions or doubts moued now a dayes and those also touching very substantiall matters which are not expresly set downe nor determined by onely Scripture For where haue we any expresse Scripture to proue that all those and onely those bookes which Catholickes or Protestants hold for Scripture are indeed Gods word and true Scripure This we shall not find expresly set downe in a part of Scripture This point therefore whereupon dependeth the certaintie of euery point proued out of Scripture cannot be made certaine to our knowledge or beliefe vnlesse we admit some other infallible rule or authoritie wherupon we may ground an vnfallible beleefe which infallible rule if we admit to assure vs that there is at all any Scripture and that those bookes and no other be Canonicall Scripture why should we not admit the same to assure vs vnfallibly which is the true sense and meaning of the same Scripture Hereupon S. Austin saith very well Cur non apud eos diligentissimè requiram quid Christus praeceperit quorum auctoritate commotus Christum aliquid praecepisse iam credidi Tune mihi meliùs expositurus es quid ille dixerit c. Why shold I not most diligently ask or learne of those he meaneth of the Catholicke Church what Christ hath commanded by whose authoritie I was moued to beleeue that Christ commanded any thing at all What wilt thou expound vnto me better what he hath said that is to say the meaning of his words Quae saith he ista tanta dementia est illis crede Christo esse credendum à nobis disce quid ille dixerit multo facilius mihi persuaderem Christo non esse credendum quà m de illo quidquam nisi ab ijs per quos
Church of God But it is absurd both in reason and religion to preferre the iudgement of any priuate man be he neuer so wittie and learned or neuer so strongly perswaded in his owne minde that he is taught by the Spirit before the iudgement and definitiue sentence of the Church of God the which is a companie of men many of which both are and alwayes haue bene vertuous wise and learned and which is chiefe is such a companie as according to the absolute and infallible promises of our Sauiour hath vndoubtedly the holy spirit among them guiding them and teaching them all truth and not permitting them to erre as before hath bin proued A. W. There is the same fault in this fift argument which was in the former that it is brought to proue a proposition which we denie not If before we giue absolute credit to the Church we must iudge whether euery particular point it holdeth be true or no then we may make our selues iudges ouer the true Church But we may not make our selues iudges ouer the true Church Therefore we must not iudge whether euery particular point the Church holdeth be true or no before we giue absolute credit to the Church This conclusion supposeth that which can neuer be proued that we are first or last to giue absolute credit to the Church whereof in this Chapter there is no question The point you vndertake to disproue is that the true doctrine of faith in euery particular point is a good marke of a true Church This therfore you should haue concluded though indeed it make nothing against our opinion who require not for a marke of the true Church truth of doctrine in euery point but in all points fundamentall Your proposition is deceitfully propounded as if we granted a companie to be the true Church and yet would take vpon vs to receiue and reiect what we list whereas we hold that we cannot acknowledge any true Church but we must withall yeeld that it maintaineth all substantiall points of Religion from which we may not vary Secondly for a man to make himselfe iudge ouer the Church is to take authoritie vpon him to censure reproue and condemne the Church wheras all that we desire is that it may be free for vs to discerne that the doctrine held by this or that Church is agreeable to the Scriptures before we acknowledge it to be a true Church It is meere absurd and vnreasonable to prefer any priuate mans iudgement before the definitiue sentence of the church of God But it is agreeable both to reason and Religion that euery priuate man whose saluation lieth vpon his true or false beleeuing should consider whether that which he is enioyned by men to beleeue be warrantable by the word of God or no. The Scribes and Pharises were the leaders of the people in the matters of Religion yet were they blinde guides and the blind people by depending vpon their iudgement were caried headlong into the same pit of destruction with them Were not the men of Beroea commended by the holy Ghost for searching the Scriptures that they might see whether the doctrine deliuered by Paul were agreeable thereto or no And yet shall it be a fault in vs to enquire of the same Scripture concerning the doctrine of your Apostaticall synagogue I say farther it is against reason and Religion to prefer any one mans iudgement before the definitiue sentence of many wise vertuous and learned men such as the Church hath vsually some amongst the members thereof But it is most reasonable and religious to prefer the truth of God manifested by one simple man before the contrary determination of all that euer haue bin or shal be of the Church though neuer so wise vertuous and learned This is that which we teach concerning this matter First that no man is bound to take any thing for a matter of faith but that which is proued to him by the Scriptures the rule of faith Secondly that no man is to condemne any thing held by the Church vnlesse he haue euident proofe on his side out of the Scriptures Thirdly that euery man in matters not determinable by Scripture none of which are necessarie to saluation should yeeld to the iudgement of the Church whereof he is a member and euery Church to the iudgement of the Christian Churches other where vnlesse there be some good reason to the contrary It is very possible for wise vertuous and learned men to erre for your priuiledge of not erring hath bin found to be counterfait who oftentimes follow the opinion of some one man whose learning and pietie they cannot chuse but admire Domingo à Soto affoords vs an example of this matter where hauing alledged a sentence out of Austin he addeth these words By reason of this saying of Austin quoth Soto all the Fathers afterward and the whole multitude of Diuines haue by good right deliuered it as a truth that the glorious Virgin neuer committed any actuall sinne though Chrysostome auncienter then he were of another opinion Let it be then vnlawfull as it is for a priuate man to prefer his owne opinion before the iudgement of a whole Church and in this sense I graunt your minor yet is it not vnlawfull for him to examine what any or all Churches teach or to dissent from it if he haue the Scripture for his warrant A. D. §. 7. But you may perhaps say that in Scripture we are willed not to beleeue euery priuate spirit but to trie spirits whether they be of God or no and that therefore we must examine and trie the spirit of the Church by looking into euery particular point of doctrine which it teacheth I answer that in that place of Scripture it is not meant that it belongeth to euery particular man to trie all spirits but in generall the Scripture giueth the Church warning not to accept euery one that boasteth himselfe to haue the Spirit and willeth that they should trie those spirits not that euery simple or priuate man should take vpon him to trie them but that those of the Church to whom the office of trying spirits doth appertaine to wit the Doctors and Pastors which Almightie God hath put in his Church of purpose Vt non circumferamur omni vento doctrinae that we may not be caried away with euery wind of doctrine and Vt non simus paruuli fluctuantes that we may not be little ones wauering with euerie blast of those that boast themselues to be singularly taught by the spirit So that this trying of spirits is onely meant of those spirits of which men may well doubt whether they be of God or no and then also this triall belongeth to the Pastors of the true church But when it is certaine that the spirit is of God we neither neede nor ought doubtfully to examine or presumptuously to iudge of it but submitting obediently the iudgement of our owne sense