or marrow not in the leauâ—s of the words but in the sappeâ—pâ—th or roote os reason And a little after otherwise Matt. 4. v. 6. euen the Diuell himselfe speaketh Scriptures and all heresies according to Ezechiel make vnto themselues pillowes which they may lay vnder the elbow oâ— euery age Ezec. 13. v. 18. 2. By that which hath byn sayd answere may be made to our Aduersaries when they obiect against vs that we affirme the Scripture to be imperfect obscure like a nose of wax which a man may writh which way he will and lastly the origen and spring in a manner of all heresies for we affirme this of the naked and dead letter alone destitute of the true sense or rather of the letter to which the Heretikes adde their owne peruerse sense and meaning neyther haue our Aduersaries any cause to wonder at this seeing S. Paul himselfe saith of the bare letter alone that it killeth and bringeth eternall death 1. Cor. â— v. 6. 7. 9. and damnation But neuer any Catholike did euer attribute any such thing to the liuing letter which hath conioyned with it the true and natiue sense and which alone is truly and properly the word of God CHAP. IIII. How we are to seeke out the true sense and meaning of the holy Scripture THERE is great contentioÌ„ beweene vs and our Aduersaries about the meanes how to finde out the true and naturall interpretation of the letter a thing so necessary to eternall saluation They teach diuers thinges concerning this matter but deliuer nothing that is certayne One assigneth more rules to this purpose another fewer but when they haue sayd all they confesse at last that there was neuer any which hath not at sometyme erred in seeking out the true interpretation of holy Scripture For they gyue not their assent either to the ancient Fathers or to their owne Maisters in all thinges they teach or write nay they cannot assigne any one whom they acknowledge not to haue erred sometyme nor dare affirme to be free from error seeing as they say Euery man is a lyar and so at last all Rom. 3. v. 4. thinges are left by them doubtfull and vncertayne 2. But the Catholikes do proceed after another manner who teach that the certayne vndoubted sense of the Letter is not to be taken from the iudgment of any particuler man but from the vniforme consâ—nt of the ancient Fathers and especially from the iudgment and interpretation of the Catholike Church to whome it appertayneth to iudge of the sense and meaning of the holy Scriptures as the holy and Oecumenicall Councell of TreÌ„t teacheth very well for there is no doubt Concil Trident. sess 4. but that it is more safe to follow such an interpreter as cannot erre then such a one as erreth somtymes or at leastwise may erre but the Church cannot erre in her iudgment seeing that Christ and the â—oly Ghost remayne with her to teach Matt. 28. c vlt. Ioan. 14 v. 16. â—oan 16. v. 13. â—er all truth wherof more herafter when we shall come to treat of the Church 3. It shall suffice to obserue and â—ote here that according to the doctrine of our Aduersaries nothing either solide or certayne is contayned in the holy Scriâ—ture for wheras all dependeth of the â—rue sense of the Letter and with them â—here is no certayne or sure meanes by which to finde out this sense it followeth â—hat they call all into doubt which is in â—he Scripture wherby who seeth not how much they iniure them But contrariâ—yse according to the Catholike doctrine all thinges are euident and cerâ—ayne which are contayned in the holy Scriptures appertayning eyther to faith or good manners the Catholikes hauing euer a certayne and faithful Interpreter to wit the Catholike Church And surely whosoeuer reiecteth the sense which the Church giueth and in place therof substituteth another altogeather repugnant to it doth all one with him who reiecting the holy Scripture should in place therof bring in a new Scripture of his owne forging the sense of the Scripture being no lesse a part of the word of God then the letter which in these few wordes Tertullian confirmeth out of the tradition of the auncient Church The sense adulterated or falsified is no lesse repugnant Tertul. de prâ—sc c. 17. to the truth then the letter or stile corrupted 4. And to conclude it may be inferred that saluation is to be found in the Roman Church only and none at all out Marc. vlt. vers 16. â—om 3. v. 1â— Heb. â—â— v. 9. of it which I proue thus Both the Scripture testifyeth all meÌ„ confesse that diuine fayth is necessary to saluation but such as forsake the RomaÌ„ Church cannot haue diuine faith which wholy relieth vpon the word of God only but meerly humane seing their fayth is founded not in the word of God interpreted by the Church which cannot errâ— but in the word and interpretation of Luther Caluin or some other priuate man who as they themselues graunt may erre and be deceiued such an humane fayth then so doubtfull and vncertayne and only warranted by mans authority cannot iustify or bring a man to eternall saluation CHAP. V. How we may know which is the true letter of the holy Scripture ALL such as forsake the Roman Church and make little account of her authority are not only doubtfull vncertayne which is the true sense of the Scripture but they can haue no assurance at all eyther of the whole or of any part of the letter therof For whilst they goe about to call in question and make doubtfull certayne bookes only of the old Testament before they are aware they take away all authority from all other bookes both of the old and new Testament For whereas there is but one certaine and vndoubted Canon of these bookes to wit that which is receaued and approued by the iudgment of the Catholike Church which cannot erre our Aduersaries reiecting this Canon make all the books doubtfull conteined therin for no certayne testimony can be had of these bookes but eyther by this Canon only or by the auncieÌ„t tradition of the Church but they neyther admit this Canon nor wil stand to this vnwritten TraditioÌ„ or acknowledge it for the true word of God 2. Now as for the Canons lately set out by themselues no man can safely belieue them seeing they neyther agree one with another nor with the auncient Canons of the Church nor are any where found in the writteÌ„ word of God which as they teach is only to be belieued neyther can they bring any thing eyther concerning the Canon of the Hebrewes or any other auncient Canon which they haue not taken from the writings of the auncient Fathers whose authority without the expresse written word of God they will haue to be in no wise sufficient to engender fayth so as euen by the iudgment of our Aduersaries none of all these
consequently coÌ„mend vnto vs Traditions and the vnwritten Word of God seing that therein consisteth the principal part of holy Scripture to wit the true sense of the wordes CHAP. XI Wherein is declared how we may know the Apostolicall Traditions AMONG the other argumentes of our Aduersaries this is one that we cannot know certainly which are the Traditions of the Apostles seing that many Heretikes in times past pretended also that their heresyes were agreing to Apostolicall Traditions Moreouer they obiect that Traditions may easily be corrupted and changed for this cause Scripture was ordayned that the doctrine deliuered by word of mouth might continue the longer without any falsification or corruption But we answere to this their reason that the auncient Heretikes also by supposed and false Scriptures which they attributed falsely to the Apostles did confirme and proue their heresies Aug. de ciu Dei l. 15 23. subfinem Many thinges saith S. Augustine were alleadged by heretikes as though they were the sayings of the Prophets and Apostles But yet for all that they were not iudged to be the most certaine and Canonicall Scriptures 2. But the Traditions of the Apostles may so certainly and easily be known from supposed and false Traditions as the Canonical Scriptures may be knowne from the Apocriphall for they are both knowne by the same meanes and authority that is to say by the authority doctrine and testimony of the Catholike Church which neyther can deceiue any nor be decevued her selfe 3. And albeit speaking of humane matters the Scripture is more certaine theÌ„ Tradition alone yet it happeneth otherwise in matters concerning God because in these there is the authority of God and the continuall assistance of the Holy Ghost hath place which doth not suffer the Church to erre and hence it is that the Tradition only of the Church which is not so much written in paper as printed 1. ad Cor. 5. v. 3. 4. in the hartes of Christians is a most certayne and faithfull keeper of all the pointes of our diuine faith 4. Moreouer if euen Christ himself had with his owne hand writteÌ„ in brasse all the pointes of our faith they should notwithstanding not haue had so great certainty as now Ecclesiasticall Traditions haue vnlesse the same keeper of the diuine doctrine had byn also present For that which is imprinted in brasse may be rased and blotted out and the brasse it selfe may be consumed by fyre But those thinges which are imprinted in the hartes of Christians by the holy Ghost can neuer perish or be any way changed 5. And what we haue said of knowing the Apostolicall Traditions is to be vnderstood whether the Church assembled in a generall Councel declared it so or it became knowne and manifest by the continuall and generall custome of the whole Church Also whether the question be of Tradition belonging to faith or only belonging to rites and Ceremonyes For of the Tradition belonging to faith that is to say of not baptizing againe those which are baptized once before by heretikes are these wordes of S. Auguâ—tine Albeit indeed of this thing saith he S. Aug. Tom. 7. contra Cresâ—on Gram. l. 1. cap. penu t. tâ—ere can no example be alleadged out of Canonicall Scriptures yet notwithstanding we hould the truth of the same holy Scriptures in tâ—â—s matter when we do that which generally the whole Catholik Church holdeth the which euen the authority of the Scriptures themselues commend vnto vs so as because the holy Scripture cannot erre whosoeuer seareth to be deceaued by the difficulty or obscurity of this question let him go to the same Church for counsell the which the holy Scripture vâ—ry clearely sheweth and S. Aug. Tom. 7de bapt coÌ„t Donat. l. 4. cap. 14. demonstrateth vnto vs. Hitherto S. Augustine And disputing in another place against the Donatists concerning the baptisme of Infants That saith he which the whole Catholike Church holdeth nor was ordayned by generall Councells but yet alwaies kept and obserued by all is most truly to be belieued to haue byn deliuered vnto vs by Apostolicall authority S. Aug. Tom. 2. Epist 118. adâ—anuar c. 5. Calu. l. 4. Instit c. 4. sect vlt. sub fi l. 3. c. â— sect 10. in medio 6. But of the Ecclesiasticall rites and Ceremonies the same S. Augustine speaketh in this maÌ„ner Yf the Catholike Church through the whole world hold and practise any thing it is a signe of great madnesse to dispute whether it is to be done so or noe By which words of S. Augustine it may easily be vnderstood what was the opinion vniforme doctrine of the whole auncient Church concerning this point For our Aduersaries themselues do say that S. Augustine was a most faithfull witnesse of antiquity Vnto whome I referre the Readers if they desire to know certainly any more of the sense of Antiquity The end of the first Controuersy THE SECOND CONTROVERSY OF THE PROPERTIES OF OF THE TRVE CHVRCH The first Part of the second Controuersy CHAP. I. Of the Properties and Offices of the true Church of Christ in generall IN the disputation of the Church that first of all is to â—e obserued that whereas our Aduersaries haue â—rought in and do hold many erroneous opinions they do all proceed out of ignorance of the true definition and Nature of the Church It is a true saying of the Apostle that they which 1. Tim. v. 6. 7. erre and wâ—nder from the true faith are conuerted into vaine talke desirous to be Doctours of the Law not vnderstanding neyther what things they speake nor of what they affirme For if our Aduersaries did well vnderstand or could conceyue what is imported by the Name Nature of the Church they would neuer affirme so many absurdityes of the Church of Christ We will therfore first of all declare and explicate what is to be vnderstood properly by the name â—of the Church 2. But this best of all is declared by the Properties of the Church of Christ and by her Offices coâ—mended vnto vs in the holy Scripture it selfe and those we call Properties which do agree with the Church as she hath relation vnto Christ her chiefe head and Pastour But those we call her Offices which the Church exerciseth towards her Children There are indeed many properties of the Church assigned by holy Scripture but it shall suffice vs to alledge and note these fiue only 3. The first is that the Church is the spouse of Christ I will betroth thee vnto me Osee 2. 19. 20. for euer saith the Prophet Osee and againe I will betroth thee vnto me in saith And Isaias The bridegrome will reioyce in his bride and thy Isa 6â— v. 5. God she speaketh vnto the Church shall reioyce in thee Christ also by the Prophet Salomon sayth Come o my spouse from Libanus Cant. 4. v. 8. In the new Testament also the Church is called the spouse of Christ He
written poynts of fayth it is manifest that no◠other Iudge but the Catholike Church hath ended or defined all these controuersyes 29. But in this iudgement of the Church there are two thinges to be considered the one that the Church doth not iudge of any part of the word of God out of her owne proper sense and iudgment or at her owne pleasure without the word of God as her Aduersaries and namely Caluin do wrongfully slaunder her but by one part of the word of God which is better knowen she iudgeth of that which is lesse knowen and manifest vnto vs as for example by the word of God deliuered by Traditions she iudgeth of the written word of God and of the true sense therof 30. The other thing to be considered is that when the Church doth iudge of these things they are not men only Act. 15. v. 28. which iudge as our Aduersaries pretend but the holy Ghost also himselfe who iudgeth and speaketh vnto vs by the Church It seemed good say the Apostles to the holy Ghost and vs. For euen as the actions of a mans body are not so properly the actions of the body as of the soule which quickneth and moueth the body so the actions of the whole Catholike Church are not so much to be attributed vnto men who are as it were the body of the visible Church as vnto the holy Ghost who is as it were the soule which giueth life and motion to the body of the Church They therfore who deny this iudgment of the Church are not only iniurious to the Church but also to the holy Ghost Hitherto of the properties offices and power of the true Church of Christ It Calu. in Antid cōtra 4. sess Concil Trid. in fine remayneth now we shew such a Church as the Scripture declareth and describeth vnto vs the which Caluin as we haue sayd before earnestly desired of vs. FINIS OF THE MARKES OF THE TRVE CHVRCH The third Part of the second Controuersy CHAP. I. Of the false and true Signes or Markes of the Church in generall HAVING in the precedent Controuersyes declared that Christ and all that good is can only be found in the true Church and that out of it there is nothing but euerlasting damnation now it remayneth that we inquire which is that true Church where it may be found and how it is described and set forth in holy Scripture for all the sectes of heresies go about to challenge her vnto themselues yea euen those who otherwise haue a very bad conceyt and opinion of her For they see very well that out of her they can expect or hope for no saluation But to the end we may not erre in matter of so great moment we will seeke out the true Markes and Signes whereby the true Church may be certainly knowne and discerned from euery false and counterfait Church 2. Our Aduersaries doe commonly Calu. l. 4. Inst c. 7. sect 9. 10. Bez. in sua confess c. 5. Art 7. Centuriatores 1. Centur. l. 1. c. 4. l. 2. cap. 4. set downe two signes or markes of the true Church to wit the sincere preaching of the word of God and the lawfull administration of the Sacraments Bez◠addeth a third signe to wit the Ecclesiasticall discipline practised agreable to the word of God The Lutherans annexed vnto these a fourth signe to wit an Obedience towards ministers Of this fourth signe we will speake a little after for it is reduced to the vnity of the Church But the three signes set downe by the Caluinists are altogeather foolish and friuolous the which we proue thus 3. First by the very nature of a signe For euery signe of it owne nature S. Aug. Tom. ◠l. 2. de doct Christ cap 1. 3. Calu. l. 4. Inst cap. 17. sect 11. is a sensilbe thing as all teach following therein S. Augustine and our Aduersaries confesse this to be true when they treate of the Sacraments Yea Caluin writeth that this was alwaies as it were a matter of faith in the Church And so do all teach now who are of vnderstanding Truly none will say that which is only belieued in the Sacrament is a signe but that which is seene But these signes of the Church prescribed by our Aduersaries can neyther be seen nor perceyued by any sense Yea not euen by our vnderstanding vnlesse it be illuminated by fayth For by faith only are they preceyued because none can know which is the sincere preaching lawfull administration of the Sacraments or Ecclesiasticall discipline prescribed by Christ but by faith wherefore they who say that these are the signes and markes of the Church do not indeed know what they say euen as if one should affirme that in the Sacrament of baptisme the ablution and the wordes are not signes but the effect of baptisme which is not seene which euery man seeth how absurd it is 4. The second reason Euery signe of any thing must be more manifest and better knowne then the thing it selfe whose signe it is because it is put for that end that it may be a signe or token wherby that other thing may be known but these signes of the Church alleadged by our Aduersaries are more obscure and vncertaine then the Church it self For the Church is at the least oftentymes visible as they thēselues confesse but these their signes be neuer visible but alwaies inuisible for they can only be knowne by faith as we haue already declared but that which is by faith declared is necessarily obscure because faith as witnesseth the Heb. 11. v. 1. Apostle is the argument of things not appearing hence it is that all sectes do bragge and boast that they haue these signes because indeed they cānot be clearly seene of any 5. The third reason Our Aduersaries do alledge in vayne these signes for therfore do we enquire for signes and Markes of the Church that they which are ignorant of her may therby come to know her for they who already know any thing do not need any signes as for example he who already knoweth very well this Citty needeth no marke or signe therof wherby he may know it But he stādeth in need of signes who neuer saw this Citty So in like manner they who are out of the Church and know her not do most of all need some signes and markes wherby to know her but these which our Aduersaries assigne can be knowne by none but by those who are already within the Church and know her very well hauing the true faith and beliefe therof but they cannot be vnderstood by those who know not the true Church to the end they may seeke and fynd her because they are only perceyued and knowne by faith they are therfore alleadged in vaine by our Aduersaries 6. But neyther can these signes be knowne of all those who are in the Church but only of the more learned in the Church For euery one of the common
this office as we haue proued before 17. This continuall sucession is also a visible signe because in some parts or persons thereof it may be seene at all tymes as successiue and transitory things are wont to be seene for in this manner only can a riuer for example sake tyme it selfe be seene 18. Finally this signe is also certaine and euidently well knowne among the Infidells for vnlesse this succession be continuall the true Church of God shall altogeather perish and decay all honor worship of the true God wil be ouerthrowne and there will remayne no way for men to their eternall saluation But on the other side where there is a continuall succession and a neuer-interrupted continuance of the same Religion there appeareth sufficiently a great prouidence and a singular assistance of Almighty God towards men 19. Furthermore that which we haue hitherto sayd of these foure signes might suffice but that the pertinacy and inconstancy of our Aduersaries is so very admirable and great For albeit in one place they acknowledge themselues to receiue Râ—â—ell Confess Art 5 in fine the Nicen Creed wherein these foure signes of the Church are expresly conteined yet notwithstanding els where when they see themselues manifestly conuinced Extatbis lib. in 3. volumâ— Tract Theol. Bezae Tract 6. by these signes of perfidious dealing they do vterly reiect theÌ„ For Beza in his booke of the true visible signes of true Catholike Church wherin notwithstanding he goeth about nothing els but to establish those his inuisible markes of the Church albeit he affirmeth that his followers doe acknowledge all those Creedes which haue beene alwayes approued by the common HabeÌ„tur hâ—c p. 138. sub fin edit Geneu Anno. 1582. consent of the whole Church to wit that of the Apostles the Nicene that of S. Athanasius the Constantinopolitane and the Calcedon yet for all this he impugneth these markes of the Church of which he knoweth that he and his are altogether destitute and especially the fourth which is deduced from the Apostolicall succession 20. He therefore obiecteth these Ita Beza p. 137. in princip vbi supra signes that they are not proper vnto the Church quarto modo as Prophyrius and other Logitians define proprium quarto modo because they doe not agree to the true Church only For vnity and succession may also be found amongst wicked men as appeareth by the Iewes and Mahomets But these are easily answered For these signes are not alledged as properties quarto modo as Beza thinketh but rather as it were accidents by the collection wherof Indiuidua are distinguished one from another Porph. c. de specie inâ—â—â—e as the same Porphyrius teacheth for those accidents whereby Indiuidua are distinguished may be found separated one from another in diuers substances but not all gathered togeather in one 21. Wherfore seing that the Church is one singular and indiuisible we must not only alledge the properties thereof but also other signes as it were qualities and accidents whereby this true Church may be distinguished from all others For albeit some one or other of these signes may be found in some other things yet they cannot all fower togeather be found any where but in the true Church 22. Therefore any one of these signes considered by it selfe separateth the true Church from the false as for example the vnity of doctrine and continuall succession doth separate and distinguish her from any hereticall Church but all these signes or markes ioyned and vnited togeather do distinguish the Church of Christ altogeather from euery false Church and this is sufficient that they may be called most true signes in their kind Supr c. 1. huius coÌ„trouers 23. We surely haue already in the beginning of the precedent controuersy spoken of the true properties of the Church to wit wheÌ„ we declared that she is the spouse body Kingdome inheritance and citty of Christ for these are propria quarto modo and in this manner they all alwayes and only agree to the true Church of Christ 24. Moreouer seeing that these properties are so inuisible as that they cannot be perceyued by any sense but only by faith they are not sufficient to conuince Infidels Heretikes and others which want true fayth and for this cause other visible signes are also necessary which may be perceyued by all as also conuince them of which sort are these foure signes which we haue now alledged 25. That in the meane tyme we may omit that the late and new vpstart Churches of our Aduersaries are so much worse then the Churches of Iewes and Infidels because sometymes in these some one or other of the aforesayd signes may Infr. cap. 22. huius Controu be found But in our Aduersaries Church as we will shew herafter not one of them can be found CHAP. III. That the Roman Church only is the true Church of Christ is proued by the properties of the true Church HITHERTO we haue described out of holy Scripture the true Church of Christ and that by the properties offices and peculiar signes therof Now it remaineth that we by the same enquire and examine in what part or place of the world this true Church of Christ may be found the which will easily be done if we declare that all these propertyes offices and signes must needes agree to some one We therefore do affirme that all the offices properties and signes of the true Church do only agree to the Roman Church 2. It is heere notwithstanding to be considered least some perchance by the ambiguity or equiuocation of the word be deceyued that we doe not vnderstand by the Roman Church that which is only at Rome as our Aduersaries go about to perswade the ignorant but plainly euery Church which agreeth in the vnity of the same faith with the Roman and which obeyeth the Bishop of Rome whersoeuer that Church be whether at Rome or els where yea euen the furthest part of the Indyes Moreouer that this Roman Church thus vnderstood is the only true Church of Christ and consequently that out of her we cannot hope for eternall saluation seing that out of the true Church as we Cap. 1. buius Controuers haue sufficiently declared before we cannot be saued we will euidently demonstrate by all the properties offices and signes before alledged of the true Church And first we will speake of the properties to wit of those which agree vnto her quarto modo For all these do very well agree to the Roman Church and to no other The which we declare in this manner 3. First the Roman Church is the espouse of Christ For that she was betrothed and espoused vnto Christ by trueÌ„ faith those wordes of the holy Scripture do plainly testify Your faith saith the Apostle Rom. 1. v. 8. writing to the Romans is renowned in the whole world And a little after S. Paul professeth himselfe to agree in the vnity of faith
diuers mysteries which lye hidden in the Hebrew text and cannot sufficiently be explicated in Latin wordes may be the better vnderstood And lastly that we may the more fully attayne vnto the force and Emphasis of that holy tongue 3. But as for the Hebrew text now extant we do not acknowledge it to be of so great either authority or perspicuity as our Aduersaries pretend and we further deny that the vulgar EditioÌ„ wherinsoeuer it differeth from it is to be corrected by it and that for two reasons The first is for that the Hebrew text though neuer so incorrupt further then it is approued by the authority of the Church is much more doubtfull and vncertayne then the Latin The other reason is for that the Hebrew text which is now in vse is in maâ—y places corrupted and depraued in which the vulgar Edition is entire and vncorrupted Both these reasons shâ—lbe confirmed in the ensuing Chapters which the learned Reader may see in the Latin edition from the seauenth Chapter to the 14. all which I haue omitted to put into English because I intend to help the lesse learned who are not so capable of that so profouÌ„d and learned a discourse CHAP. VII Of our Aduersaries new Translation of the Bible THE Catholike Church of Christ not without good cause doth reiect and condemne our Aduersaries new Translations of the Bible and that for many reasons The first and most iust reason is because such their translations are replenished with errors which haue byn inuented eyther by Ieâ—â—es or Heretikes wherof see many examples in the precdent Chapters of the Latin edition but we in this Chapter will set downe three other causes or origens from whence these errors spring wherby it shall further appeare that our Aduersaries can set out no Translation which shall not be sound full of many great errors 2. The first cause is for that our Aduersaries eyther contemne or make little account of the translations and interpretations of the Fathers and imploy all their labour in finding out all the versions and interpretations and expositions of the Iewes which they highly extoll commend so as in their Commentaries vpon the old Testament you shall see them cite Thargus Rabins and such other Thalmudicall fictions but especially Rabbi Dauid Kimhi whom sometimes they call learned sometymes the most learned among the Hebrewes But of the auncient Fathers no mention at all for if there be it is for the most part eyther to taxe or manifestly to oppugne or euen to corrupt their writings 3. Now what can be more vnreasonable or absurd then to begge the true sense of the Scripture of the Iewes who 2. Cor. 3. v. 14. 1. Thess c. 2. v. 15. 16. lacke faith and who haue a veyle ouâ—r their hartes when they read the old Testament with whome God is not pleased and who are Aduersaries to all men vpon whom the Anger of God is come to the end who peruert all the oracles of the Prophets that appertayne to Christ and lastly who are the most malicious enemies of Christians And on the other side to despise the excellent Doctors of Christs Church who euen in the iudgment of our Aduersaries were indued with the Rom. 8. v. 9 Eph 4. v. 14. true faith full of the holy Ghost raâ—sâ—d by God and placed in the Church to the end we should not be carried about with euery wind of doctrine who haue dâ—fended the faith against all heâ—esies who haue sincerely instructed the faithfull people in the mysteries of the Christian faith who haue faithfully set downe to Posterity the sense and interpretation of the Scriptures which they receâ—ued froÌ„ the Apostles 4. Moreouer wheras no man can 2. Cor. 12. v. â—â— â—8 â— Pet. 1. v. 20. 21. rightly interprete the Scriptures who hath not recâ—aued from God the gift of the interpretation which is not giuen but to the members of Christ and his Church only it is apparent â—nough how much more salfe it is to follow such holy Doctors then the impious Iewes who are wrapt in the snares of the Diuell and hâ—ld 2. Tim. â— v. vâ—t Mat. 15. v. 14. captiue at his will And seeing that saying oâ— Christ is most true if the blind lead the blind they hoth fall into the ditch it cannot be but our Aduersaries blind and destitute of the light of faith and led by the bliâ—d Iewes must needes fall downe headlong and breake their neckes 5. Heerehence it is that our Aduersaries do insert into the new Translations almost all the places of Scripture corrupted by the Iewes and that they deny togeather with the Iewes many oracles of the prophets to be vnderstood of Christ and many wayes wrest euen those oracles which they caÌ„not deny to be vnderstood of Christ from that true sense in which they are cited in the new Testament by the Apostles Euangelists and Christ himselfe to prophane impious senses lately inuented by the Iewes out of their hatred to Christ 6. The second cause is that they desire nothing more then in their translations to depart from the vulgar edition the which seeing it is most sincere and correct they which almost in all thinges leane it must needes fall into many errors 7. The third cause is the malicious intention of our Aduersaries who set forth new Translations of the Scripture for no other end then by them to oppugne the Catholike doctrine and to establish and confirme their owne errors and heresies and therefore when any plain text occurreth which maketh manifestly against their erroneous doctrine they seeke to make obscure the true and proper sense by their peruerse translation but if they light vpon any place somewhat obscure which may seeme to sauour their doctrine they so depraue it by their new translation that the Scripture it selfe may seeme to confirme what they falsely teach and so by this meanes they must needes stuffe their translations with infinite corruptions For these three reasons therfore not without great reason Gretser tract de noua transtat in defen Bel. arm do we reiect our Aduersaries translations which so swarme with corruptions Many other reasons are both learnedly and largely set downe by Iames Gretser which we for breuity sake omit CHAP. VIII Of the Latin vulgar Edition OVR Aduersaries conuinced by the truth it selfe confesse sometymes that the vulgar Edition not only is to be preferred before all other latin Editions but euen before the Greeke text of the new Testament and the Hebrew text of the old for in many places reiecting them they follow our vulgar translation as may be seene in the Latin edition in the Chapters 8. 9. 10. 13. notwithstanding that in many other places they exceedingly inueigh against it and with great hostility oppugne it partily for that they see the same to contradict in many places their errors and partly also for that they labour by all meanes to peruert the text of the Scripture by their new
of the Church let vs not therefore sayth S. Ambrose walke by loue and affection vpon the earth and the Serpent cannot hurt vs. In the first combat is that the Church ouercometh by open warre and therefore it is expressed by crushing of the head In the later combat in which a part of the Church is ouercome the enemy proceedeth by guiles and deceites and therefore that combat is signifyed by crushing the heele for the Hebrew word signifying calcaneum doth signify also properly insidiari Oleast iâ— c. 3. Gen. ex insidijâ— aggredi as appeareth by many places of Scripture And out of ignorance heerof Caluin without cause reprehendeth the vulgar Interpreter for otherwise explicating this combat in the later part of the seÌ„tence then he had in the formeâ— for the Emphasis or force of the Hebrew word required that he should interprete the later part as he did by these wordes tu insidiabâ—ris calcanâ—â—â—ius which is as much to say as thou shalt crush her heele not by open warre but by taking her at vnawares See further of this matter in this Chapter in the Latin Edition the 8. â— And you shall see that our Aduersaries make a great adoe about a matter of small moment if the wordes be rightly vnderstood For whether we reade ipsa and so referre it to the Church or ipsum that it may be referred to the children of the Church the seÌ„se is all one for it is all on to say the seed of the woman shall crush the heâ—â— of the Serpent or the Children of the Church shall doe it And heerehence it is that the auncient Fathers whether they read ipse as S. Hierome and S. Chrysostome do or ipse Hier in tradit Hebr. Hom. 17. in Gen. Amb. de fug â— saec e. 7. Greg. in Iob. c. 38. as read S. Ambrose S. Augustine S. Gregory and other Latin Fathers all of them expound this place of the Church 9. Howsoeuer it be the reading of the vulgar Edition is to be preferred before the other for this victory is rather to be attributed to the Church as to the Mother of all the faithfull and to her who continueth for euer according to that promise of Christ the gates of hell shall not preuail against her then to her children or meÌ„bers which are euery day changed for this promise is an explication of the promise made by God in Genesis for the head of the Serpent and the gates of hell signify Mat. 16. v. 18. one and the same thing And if the victory be attributed to the woman that is to the Church all thinges are better explicated for God first did foretell the emnity that was to be betweene the woman the Serpent and afterward he maketh mention of the seede of the woman and the Serpents seed so as the woman is opposed to the Serpent and the seede of the one to the seede of the other but the victory promsed is sayd to be gotten against the Serpent himselfe and not against the seed wherefore the same appertaineth rather to the woman her selfe then to her seede for the words following betweene thy seed and her seed do not properly signify any new combat but a continuance of that combat which was betweene the woman and the serpent and are put in by way of pareÌ„thesis for the combat of the Church and of her childreÌ„ is all one combat 10. But the chiefe cause that moued the Church to retayne at this tyme rather the word ipsa then ipsum or ipse was to controle the error of the Lutherans for if the reading had byn ipsum or ipse one might haue thought this promise to haue appertayned only to Christ as they though erroneously would haue it but by reading ipsa this promise must needes be vnderstood to haue byn made to the whole Church For such is the custome of the holy Church whether she interprete the Scripture or administer the Sacraments to do all as is most profitable and most for the edification of the faithfull Neyther is Christ hereby excluded but he is rather included in the name of the Church aâ— is also the holy Ghost for the true Church of Christ cannot consist or do any thing that is good without the help of her supreme head Christ and the assistance of his holy spirit That the reading according to the Hebrew text is ipsa or ipsissima and not ipsum or ipse is learnedly proued in the next Chapter of the Latin Edition of this Controuersy to which I referre the Reader and to the Chapters following in which other places of the vulgar Edition are defended CHAP. XI That the written Word is no fit Iudge of Controuersies concerning matters of Fayth OVR Aduersaries in the beginning did stifly mayntaine that the holy Scripture was to be the only iudge of all Controuersies which arise in matters of fayth but when they were told that to make the Scripture a iudge was as much as to say the Scripture did heare speake liue for all these appertayne to a iudge that nothing is more vnreasonable theÌ„ to assigne such a iudge of Controuersies as can neyther heare nor speak but is vtterly voyd of life changing their opinion they begin Iun. coÌ„tra Bell. Cont. 1. l. 3. c. 3. nota 9. c. 9. nota E. 10. now to say that the Scripture is improperly called a iudge and that to speake properly the holy Ghost only is the iudge And thus hauing for many yeares togeather spoken vnproperly now at last they fly to the holy Ghost of whome there is no doubt but that he is the supreme Robert Roâ—oc de vocat effic c. â—5â— iudge of all 2. But they should haue added further that the holy Ghost at this tyme doth not immediatly propose any new reuelations to any particuler man concerning points of fayth but only proposeth verities already reuealed and that by the mouth of the Church as shal be shewed heereafter in the next Controuersy where we shall haue occasion to say more of this matter Whosoeuer therefore contemneth the iudgment of the Church in so doing he despiseth the iudgment of Christ and of the holy Ghost for Christ himselfe saith Luc. 10. v. 16. he that despyseth you despyseth me Neyther doth the holy Ghost speake by the Scripture but when it is rightly vnderstood which is neuer but when we imbrace the interpretation of the Catholike Church as we haue already shewed in the fourth Chapter CHAP. XII Whether the Scriptures be obscure or hard to be vnderstood THE Word of God is eyther writen or vnwritten and preached Now certaine it is that the Word preached is not obscure for it is not hidden from such as perish the question therefore is of the written Word â— Cor. 4. v. 3. Our Aduersaries in the beginning did teach that the whole Scripture was easy and no part therof hard to be vnderstod but after that not only many obscure places but euen
whole Chapters out of the Canticle of Canticles out of Ezethiel and other Prophets were obiected by the Catholikes Beza de not Ecâ—l Vol. 3. p. 137. edit an 158. they changing their mind confesse that very many places of Scripture are obscure but that all points of doctrine necessary to saluation are be found in places plaine and easy 2. For resolution of this question we must answere with a distinction and say that if the word Scripture be taken for the bare Letter only then doubtlesse the â— Cor. 3. v. 6. 7. 9. Scripture is obscure or â—ls S. Paul would not haue said that it killeth and causeth death and damnation but if it be taken properly that is to say togeather with the true sense and meaning thereof then it is not obscure but plaine inough in al things necessary to saluation and in this sense speaketh S. Augustine as do also other Fathers l. 3. de doct Christ c. 7. 9. whom our Aduersaries cite wheÌ„ they say that al things necessary to saluatioÌ„ are manifestly conteyned in the holy Scripture 3. Moreouer the holy Scripture is both manifest and obscure but not in regard of the same persons It is passing obscure and not to be vnderstood of the proud such I meane as despise the sense and consent of the holy Fathers yea and of the whole Catholike Church but to little ones and such as are humble who follow in al things the foresayd sense coÌ„sent it is manifest Psal 18. v. 8. and perspicuous The testimony of our Lord is faythfull sayth the Psalmist giuing wisedome to the little ones that is to such as are humble and not proud and Christ our Lord sayth thou hast hidden these thinges from Matt. 11. v. 25. the wise and reuealed them to little ones that is to the humble The Scripture indeed is obscure to such as want fayth are destitute of the holy Ghost but easy playne to those which abide preseuere in the faith of the Church by that meanes are guided gouerned by the holy Ghost 4. The Word of God shineth brightly the Word of God I say not the word of men nor the word of the Diuell for that only is the true Word of God which is in the true sense not in the bare letter for the letter depraued by a false seÌ„se is not the Word of God but the word of men or rather the word of the Diuell the word of God doth illuminate the eyes but the 2. Cor. 4. v. 41. eyes of such as haue eyes to see and not their eyes whose mindes Satan hath blinded so as the light of the Ghospell cannot shine to them 5. In vaine therefore do our Aduersaries heape togeather so many places of Scripture in which it is said that the Word of God is said to be cleare ful of light perspicuous for this is not attributed by the Scripture to the bare letter but to the letter ioined with the true sense which true seÌ„se cannot be had out of the Catholike Church 6. Neyther doth the Scripture say that the Word of God is manifest to all indifferently but to such only as being indued with the true fayth are humble of hart and therefore inspired by the holy Ghost if therefore our Aduersaries will haue the Scripture to be full of light and easy to be vnderstood of them it it necessary that they returne againe to the true Church in which only is true faith true humility the true sense of the Scripture the true spirit of God without which the holy Scripture will neuer be plaine cleare and manifest for it is great imprudency I will not say impudency to contend so eagerly and with such hostility about the plainenes and perspicuity of the holy Scripture and to haue no will to returne into that way which only leadeth to plainenes and perspicuity CHAP. XIII Whether the holy Scripture be to be translated into the vulgar tongue THAT we may briefly dispatch that which hath beene so largely treated of by many concerning this matter we will reduce all vnto foure generall assertions The first is There is no doubt but the Word of God is to be preached to the people in the vulgar tongue so as the question is only of the bare written letter 2. The second assertion is Neyther the example of Christ nor of the Primitiue Church do coÌ„uince that the Scripture is to be translated into the vulgar tongue but rather the contrary for Christ neuer commaunded the Iewes to translate the Scriptures out of the Hebrew tongue into the Syâ—iac and yet in Christs tyme the aunâ—ient Hebrew tongue was to the Iewes as the Latin is to the Ereâ—ch Italians and Spaniards and only the Syriac tongue was in vse amongst the common people which euen our Aduersaries confesse such I meane as are the more skillfull in the Syriac and Hebrew tongues as namely these Sebastian Munster in his preface before his Syriacal Caldaical Grammer Francis Iunius in his preface before the new Testament in the Syriac tongue of Tremelius Peter Martin Morentine of Nauarre in the preface of his Caldaical Grammer printed aâ— Roâ—hel the yeare 1590. 3. Neyther did S. Paul write in Latin to the Romanes but in Greeke though Hier. de Script Eccles in Luc. See S. Aug. l. 2. de doct Christ c. 11. seq not the Greeke tongue but the Latin was their vulgar tongue So S. Luke did â—rite the actes of the Apostles at Rome in Greeke and not in Latin And euen to S. Augustines tyme foure hundred yeares after Christ the Byble was not extant but in the three learned tongues Hebrew Greeke and Latin no not in the tyme of Rabbanus Maurus who liued Rab. l. 5. de inst Cler. c. 8. eight hundred yeares after Christ as himselfe testifyeth in expresse words 4. Neyther can our Aduersaries alleadge any authenticall example of the auncient Church for the translation of the Scripture into the vulgar tongue they tell vs indeed of one Vulphilâ—s a Bishop of the Gothes who is sayd to haue translated the Scripture into the Gothish tongue but he was not a Catholike but an Arian Heretike as witnesse Theodoret Theod. l. 4. hist Ecc. cap. vlâ— Socr. lib. 4. c. 27. Sozom l. 6. c. 37. Cass in hist tripart l. 8. c. 13. Socrates Sozomenus and Cassiodorus 5. For as for that which certayne late writers alleadge of S. Clâ—ysostome his translating of the Scripture into the Armenian tongue as also of S. Hierome his translating of the same into the Dalmatical toÌ„gue there can no certayne proofe be brought thereof And they who write this do not affirme that all the Scripture was translated by them but certayne partes only vsed of old to be read in the prayers of the Church as the Psalmes Epistles Ghospels and Lessons which were song publickely at Masse in the Canonicall houres which we read to haue byn graunted by Pope Iohn the eight of
that name to the Morauians at their first Conuersion to the faith of Christ but this was 880. yeares after Christ and this custome was of no long continuance amongst them as appeareth Baron Tom. 10. an 880. n. 19. Tom. 11. an 1080. n. 1. by that which Pope Gregory the sâ—auenth writeth to the Duke of Bohemia is to be seene in Caesar Baronius 6. The third assertion To translate the Scripture into the vulgar tongue is neyther in it selfe vnlawfull nor forbidden by any Ecclesiasticall law so it be truly translated Nay such a translation serueth Preachers to great vse who are to cite and expound the Scriptures to the people in the vulgar tongue Hereticall translations are indeed forbidden especially of the new Testament because in them many places of holy Scripture are by false translating corrupted 7. The fourth assertion It is not a thing profitable to all to read the Scriptures in the vulgar tongue yea to many it is rather pernicious for we are taught by â— Pet. vlt. v. 26. the Apostle S. Peter that in the Scriptures are many thinges hard to be vnderstood which vnlearned and vnstayed persoÌ„s depraue to their owne destruction Many also there are vncapable of meate and solid sustenance who are therefore to be â— Cor. 3. v. 2. Heb. â— v. 12. fed with milke as the Apostle speaketh and for such it is more wholesome to be fed by the sermons and instructions of their Pastors then to feede themselues with reading the Bible It was therefore great prudence of the Church to forbid that the Bible though translated and set forth by Catholikes should be read of Index li. â—rohâ—â— Reg. 4. all indifferently and without the approbation and leaue of the Bishop Pastor or Ghostly Father 8. Our Aduersaries obiect certayne places of S. Chrysostome and S. Hierome in which they exhort to the reading of the Scripture but they should haue obserued that those Fathers speake of reading the Scripture in the Greek tongue then extant or in the Latin according to the old edition which was neuer forbidden to any by the Church whereas our Controuersy is about the translations of the holy Scripture out of the Hebrew Greek and Latin into the vulgar tongue which are all for the most part corrupted 9. And it is worthy the noting that our Aduersaries spend their tyme in vayne in gathering togeather arguments by which to perswade men that it is necessary for them to read the Scriptures in the vulgar tongue to the end they may learne out of them what they must necessarily know if they wil be saued for how truly or plainly soeuer they be translated no man shall euer receyue any fruite by them vnlesse he first belieue aright and be guided by the holy Ghost to whome it appertayneth to guide vs into the right Psal 142. v. 8. 1â— land to make knowne vnto vs the way in which we are to walke to teach vs the will of God which we are to fulfill VVhich is manifestly to be seene in the Iewes who vnderstaÌ„d the Hebrew text much better then Christians in which there is so ample and cleare mention of Christ and yet for all that they do not belieue in Christ Our Aduersaries therefore haue little reason to keep such ado about the wordes of Scripture or the translation of them let them first imbrace the true Faith which is in the Church only let them seeke after the holy Ghost who is not to be found out of the Church let them seeke out the true sense of the Letter which the Church only conserueth vncorrupteed and it will easily be graunted vnto them to haue the Scriptures in what tongue soeuer they will so they be truly and vncorruptedly translated and that they vse them to their owne saluation and not to their destruction as many do wherof we haue for witnesse not only the Scripture but dayly experience And this shall suffice concerning the translatioÌ„ of the Scripture into the vulgar toÌ„gue 10. For of the prayers in Latin eyther priuately made by the people or publikely offered by the Priest at masse and in the administratioÌ„ of the SacramoÌ„ts we wil treat hereafter in their proper places CHAP. XIII That our Aduersaries vse many sleightes in corrupting the Word of God OVR Aduersaries often require vs to proue all that which we say out of the written Word of God but when we cite the same in expresse tearmes they haue many wayes by which they depraue it Wherfore before I make an end of this Controuersy concerning the written Word it shall not be from the purpose briefly to detect such their corruptions partly to the end that no man be deceaued by them and partly that euery man may vnderstand nothing to be so plainely and clearely set downe in the written VVord which by the Commentaries of crafty and subtile wittes may not be weakned and made of little force if no regard be had to the authority and iudgment of the Church And that no man may thinke that I herin calumniate them or deale lesse sincerely with them I will set downe out of their owne writings some one or two exaÌ„pls of each manner of corrupting wherof many will occure in ech Controuersy 2. The first manner of shifting of places alleadged out of the written Word is to say that the originall text is corrupted and what is alleadged is crept out of the margent into the text whereof see many examples in the 12. and 18. Chapter of the Latin Edition of this CoÌ„ttouersy 3. Their second shift is to reiect the vulgar translation and insteed thereof to cite some new and corrupt translation of their owne It is euident inough that Luther in his first version of the new Testament into the German tongue set forth in the yeare 1522. hath more then a thousaÌ„d eâ—rors as many haue obserued amoÌ„gst Ioannes Cocl eus de actis Luther an 1522. which neyther the last nor the least is his presuming to add to the text of S. Paul the 3. Chapter and 28. verse the particle alone thereby the stronglier to establish his doctrine that Fayth alone iustifieth for this place of the Apostle VVe thinke a man iâ— Rom. 3. v. 28. iustifyed by fayth he traÌ„slateth by sayth alone when a certaine friend of his to whome the same was obiected by a Catholike asked the cause why he so translated it he no lesse ridiculously then proudly answereth in a certayne little booke set forth by him in the yeare 1530. vnder this title A certaine information or answere made to two questions proposed by a certayne good friend concerning the translation of Scripture and the inuocation of Saints In which he aduiseth his friend to answere the Catholikes obiection after this manner D. Martin Luther Luth. â—0 4. Germ. excuso VVittemb an 1551. fol. 475. will haue it so and sayth that a Papist and an Asse iâ— all one thing so I will so I command let my
them as if Christ should teach that we cold deserue life euerlasting by keeping the law And a litle after he concludeth saying This answere of Christ is according to the old law to wit that no man can be accounted iust before God but he who shall satify the law which is impossible And Calu. in 16. Luc. v. 28. Lâ—b 3. Instit c. 17. sect 7. vpon the later place he writeth thus It is impossible sayth he to fulfill what the law commaundeth yea it is a principall axiome with Caluin a coÌ„moÌ„ aÌ„swere to all such places A legal promise sayth he aÌ„nexed to a coÌ„dition impossible proueth nothing thus with sâ—ch impossibilities they dally with vs with the holy Scripture it selfe so far forth as they Calu. Beza in c. 2. ad Rom. dare affirme that the Apostle in one Chapter auoâ—cheth vnto vs seauen times thinges imâ—ossible For wheras the Apostle in the 2. cap. of the Ep. to the Rom. and 6. v. affirmeth Bez. in c. 2. ad Râ— v. 6. annot 6. edit an 1550. 1564. 1565. first that God will render to euery one according to his workes they interprete the place thus that God will indeed giue to meÌ„ according to their good works if there were any such but that no man can do any good worke before God Is there any man saith Beza that shal be able to bring these workes which the Apostle saith shal be rewarded with eternall life And wheras in the seaueÌ„th v. the Apostle saith that God doth render life euerlasting to such as seeke the same by the patience of good works their answere is that he insinuateth a thing impossible and that no man can do any good worke before God no not the iuslest man which is not worthy of eternall damnatioÌ„ Calu. l. 3. Instit c. 19. sect 4. VVhosoeuer saith Caluin haue made the greatest progresse before all others in the way of the Lord if they cast their eyes vpon the Lord God what worke soeuer they attempt or go about they see it to be accursed And surely I for my part could easily belieue that such is the progresse of our aduersarirs in the way of our Lord. See the rest of the Aposiles places in the latin edition 2. The tenth last shift is the wresting of diuers wordes to a wrong sense and to inuâ—nt sundrie different vnderstandings of the wordes to build vpon it many interpretations neuer heard of before and for a finall Conclusion to say the place is obscure and therefore proueth nothing For Luc. 22. v. 19. example hereof those most euident words of Christ This is my body with is giuen for you may suffice for some of theÌ„ wrest the pronowne hoc others the word est others the word corpus others the pronowne meum others the relatiue quod others the preposition pro others the pronowne vobis and others the Verbe datur and ech word they wrest diuers waies so as one more then Anno 1577. thirty yeares ago hath gathered out of their writings two hundred expositions of these few wordes of Christ of which Clâ—uâ—ius de Xainctes numbreth particulerly 84. And that they are both many and different yea repugnant wherwith they labour to make obscure these wordes of our Sauiour no man can doubt See another example in the latin edition And it is worthy of noting that in all these shifts they serue themselues of other places of Scripture to proue what they say whereby it may appeare how easy a thing it is to corrupt the Scripture by other places of Scripture but that the prouideÌ„t and dayly care of the holy Catholike 1. ad Tim. v. 15. Matt. 28. Church opposeth it self against such corruptions worthily therefore called the Pillar and Firmament of truth against which the gates of hell shall neuer preuaile FINIS OF TRADITIONS The second Part of the first Controuersy CHAP. I. Of the true state of the Question HAVING already in the precedent Treatise spoken of the written Word of God and of all other things thereunto belonging now it remaineth we speake a litle of the vnwritteÌ„ word coÌ„moÌ„ly called TraditioÌ„s But to the end that the state of this controuersy may more easily be vnderstood I will heere set downe foure things diligently to be considered in this matter we treate of The first is that by the vnwritten Word we only vnderstand that which is not written in the old oâ— new Testament for of the vnwritten word of God in this sense is our whole Controuersy in this place Wherefore that obiection of our Aduersaries is both friuolous and nothing worth to wit that the word of God which we cal the vnwritten word may be found extant eyther among the holy Fathers or in the books of the Councells or other Canons of the Church But this nothing belongeth vnto this purpose for it is sufficient for vs that this word of God is not written in any book eyther of the old or new Testament 2. The second is that a thing may be coÌ„teined in the holy Scripture 2. wayes The one way is implicite that is to say in some generall principle from whence this other may be certaynly deduced and in this sense we acknowledge that the whole word of God is conteined in holy Writ and not only in Scripture but also in the Apostles S. Aug. in 140. quaest vpon Exodus Tom. 4. Matt. 22. v. 40. Câ—eed yea euen in that one article I belieue the Catholike Church so that it be diligently examined and well vnderstood as S. Augustine very well noteth For so sayth Christ the whole Law and Prophets doe depend vpon two precepts of charity as in the same place S. Augustine noteth For seing that the holy Scripture teacheth that we are bound to beleeue the Church in all things that it can neither deceiue vsnor be deceiued as we will euidently proue in the next Controuersy in the 7. Chapter it consequently also teacheth the whole and entire word of God seing that all that which is not expressâ—d in the holy Scripture is conteyned expressy in the doctrine of the Church the which the Scripture commendeth vnto vs as infallible as S. augustine very well sayth and declareth S. Aug. Tom. 7. contra Crescon Gram. c. â—3 de vnit Eâ—cles c. 22. in fine-Matt 17 v. 5. Matt. 81. v. 17. Luc. 10. 16. in many places For euen as God the Father comprehended in these few words This is my wellbeloued Sonne heare him the whole word of God so Christ proposed vnto vs the whole word of God when he commaunded vs to heare the Church 3. And in this sense do the holy Fathers often tymes say that all the points of fayth are conteined in the holy Scriptures to wit in that generall principle in the which they admonish vs to bâ—lieue the Church but many of the holy Fathers sayings are falsifyed corrupted by Martin KeÌ„ nitius and some Caluinists as may be seene in
is to say to vphould the house to strengthen it The Apostle heere attributeth theÌ„ both to the Church the one when he calleth hâ—r the pillar of truth the othâ—r when â—â— calleth her the ground of the same truth For the pillar also of the earth according to the Hebrew Iob. â— v. 6. Psal 74. vel inxta Hebrâ—os 79. v. 4. phrase doth signify the lowest fouÌ„dations of the earth So God is sayd to shake the pillars of the earth elswhere to strengthen the pillars of the earth that is to say the very foundations thereof 17. These so manifest and perspicuous Calu. inâ— ad Tim. 3. v. 15. words of the Apostle do compell Caluin at the last to be of our opinion albeit after his accustomed maÌ„ner at the first he wrongfully slaundereth vs affirming that Catholiks hold or to vse his owne words do blab out this horrible blasphemy that is to say that the truth of God is not strong inough vnlesse it be vphoulden by the shoulders of men and that the word of God is vncertayne till by humble prayers as it were it borroweth some certaymy from men And afterward he affirmeth that the Apostle in this place would nothing els but that the truth of God is supported by the pure preaching of the Ghospell But that which he sayd first is a meere slaunder for we do not say that the truth or the word of God absolutly and considered precisely in it selfe receiueth it certainty and strength from the Church for in this sense it receyueth a most perfect strength and large authority from God himselfe but in regard of men and in consideration of our knowledge it receiueth it certainty froÌ„ the Church Infra hac Controu cap. 16. in fine as afterward we will declare more at large the which also Caluin in the words immediatly following acknowledgeth to be most true when he writeth in this Calu. loco citato Rom. 10. v 17. sorte S. Paul simply vnderstandeth sayth Caluin that which in other words he sayth in the tenth Chapter to the Romans because fayth is by hearing there wil be no fayth vnlesse there he some that preach Therfore in regard of men the Church supporteth the truth because it maketh it famous by her prayse and commendation because the retayneth it in sincerity and purity and because the deliuereth and sendoth it to her posterity Thus Caluin 18. But that which secondly he addeth that the truth of God is supported and vpholden by the pure preaching of the Church is indeed most true but he should haue considered that this pure preaching of the Ghospell cannot be fouÌ„d but only in the Church and that no others but men can preach the pure Ghospell Wherefore if the truth of God be sustayned by the pure preaching of the Ghospell it necessarily followeth also that the Church must be sustained by men and consequently that the Church of Christ is the gound of truth albeit not absolutly yet in regard of vs and our Beza in 1. ad Tim. 3. v. 15. knowledge So as Beza also is forced to coÌ„fesse the same exâ—licating those words of the Apostle the pillar and ground of truth Vnderstand this sayth Beza not simply in it selfe but in regard of vs. Thus he 19. It is therfore manifest as well out of Caluin as Beza that the Church in regard of vs is the ground of truth or of the word of God and consequently of our fayth which relyeth thereon But that which in regard of men is the ground of our fayth that is the true ground therof because our fayth cannot well nor must not be considered but in regard of men seeing that our fayth cannot be found but in men only if therfore in regard of men the Church be the ground of truth it is also most truly and necessarily the ground of our fayth 20. Furthermore that the ancient Church of the holy Fathers did coÌ„stantly hold the preaching and authority of the Catholike Church to be the ground of our fayth those excellent words of S. Augustine do manifestly declare when he S. Aug. Tom. 6. contra Epist Manich. cap. 5. Calu. l. 1. Instit sect 3. writeth thus disputing against the Maniches I sayth he would not belieue the Ghospell but that the authority of the Catholike Church moued me therunto this seÌ„teÌ„ce of S. Augustine vexeth our Aduersaries very much Caluin goeth about to perswade the ignoraÌ„t people that S. Augustin speaketh of himselfe yet remayning a Manichean Heretike and not of himselfe as being conuerted and made a Catholike But this is a ridiculous euasion for the words which follow a litle after do shew that this is a false interpretation of Caluin If thou doest hold thy selfe to the Ghospell S. Augustine speaketh vnto a Manichean heretike I would hold my selfe to those by whose commandment I beliued the Ghospell He speaketh therfore of himselfe as now being a Catholike and after a few words VVhose authority sayth he being infringed weakned I could not now euen belieue the Ghospel it selfe Where he sheweth plainly that our faith doth so depend of the authority of the Church that it being weakned or taken a way it could not remayne or continue by any fayth of the Ghospell Wherby it is manifest that it is false which Iunius writeth that S. Augustine did only speake of the accidentary and not of the necessary cause 21. Others say that S. Augustine did speake of this or that booke of the Gospell and not of the whole Gospell in generall but the very words of S. Augustine doe teach the contrary because he speaketh euery where of the Gospell it selfe in generall Moreouer one and the same reason is of one booke of the Ghospell and of all the rest as concerning fayth 22. Others lastly do answere that S. Augustine did not speake of the Church of his time but of the primitiue Church wherin were the Apostles who approued the Ghospell But this solution is also easily refuted out of the words next following to whom saith S. Augustin I haue obeied saying Belieue the Gospell why should I not obey them then saying vnto me Doe not belieue Manicheus But it is manifest that the primitiue Church spake nothing of Manicheus but that Church only which was in S. Augustines time sayd vnto him doe not belieue Manicheus For Manicheus liued many yeares 8. Aug. Tom. 6. contra FaustuÌ„ l. 13. c. 4. after the primitiue Church yea euen after S. Cyprian that is to say almost three hundred yeares after Christ as the same S. Augustine testifyeth and it is otherwise sufficiently well knowen that the Manichean heresy was vnknowne in the world before the yeare 277. See Baronius in his 2. Tome in the yeare 277. in the 2. number and others following CHAP. VI. The Arguments of our Aduersaries are confuted NOVV it remayneth we answere to the arguments of our Aduersaries for by our answers the difficulty of this whose controuersy wil be more
faith is the ground of the Church we speake of the generall faith of the whole Church 19. There are other arguments of our Aduersaries but we may easily answere Canus l. 2. de â—ocis Theol. c. 8. Bellar. l 3. deverbo Dei c. vlt. therunto by that whiâ—h hath byn already said the which Melâ—hior Canus and Bellarmine do prosecute and handle more at large vnto whom we referre the Reader For they are borrowed of the Anabaptists Libertines wherby the authority of the holy Scriptures themselues is no lesse diminished and infringed then that of the Church CHAP. VII That the Church doth not only giue a bare testimony but also authority to the Scripture THIS matter is heere briefly to be examined that it may more clearly be vnderstood how necessary the Churches approbation is to the establishing of the authority of the holy Scriptures But to the end that it may more clearely appeare wherof we dispute in this place it is to be considered that seing that our Aduersaries cannot deny but that the Church aâ—â—oardeth some testimony to the holy Scriptures they affime that this testimony of the Church is only a bare testimony and not a testimony of authority 2. For there are two kindes of testimonyes The one is called a testimony of authority because vpon it the truth of the things testified dependeth Yt is called also a necessary testimony because without it the thing in question is not sufficiently testified The other is called a bare testimony and not necessary that is to say when such a testimony is not so necessary because the matter is otherwise Ioan. 1. v. 7. sufficiently testified Such a testimony was that which S. Sohn Baptist gâ—ue of Christ For Christ had sufficient testimonies besides 3. Of the former testimony of authority Christ saith But I do not receyue my Ioan. 5. v. 34. 36. Ibid. testimony from men to wit the testimony of authority necessary For of the bare testimony he had spoken a little before You sent vnto Iohn and he hath giuen testimony to truth But this was a bare testimony wherfore Christ a little after said I haue a greater testimony then Iohn for the workes which the Father hath giuen me to profit them the very works which I do giue testimony of me that the Father hath sent me And the Father that sent me himselfe hath giuen testimony of me All which saith Christ of the testimony of authority Our Aduersaries therefore say that the Church giueth only a bare testimony to the Scriptures as S. Iohn gaue to Christ but she giueth not a necessary testimony or that of authority 4. But that the testimony of the Church is altogether necessary as that Matt. 3. v. vlt. Matt. 17. v. 5. wherof the authority of the Scriptures dependeth is very manifest by that which is said in the former Chapter And by that also which we alleadged in the first disputation where we shew that there is now no firme testimony wherby we may know certainly which booke is canonicall and which not besides the testimoniy of the Catholike Church For now neyther are the miracles wrought which God did in tymes past neyther doth God speake immediatly by himselfe as he spake in the baptisme and transfiguration of Christ VVherefore there remayneth only the third ordinary manner wherby God speaketh by the mouth of the Church The Church therfore doth not giue a bare testimony only to the holy Scriptures but the testimony of authority to wit that wherof the authority of the Scriptures dependeth as concerning vs and our knowledge 5. Moreouer if the doctrine of S. Paul stood in need of the Churches approbation as we haue already proued out of Supr c. 3. §. 13. huius Controu the Scriptures much more S. Lukes Ghospell who was oÌ„ly S. Pauls choller stood in need therof as Tertullian witnesseth especially because S. Luke receyued not those things which he wrot by reuelation from God Tertu l. 4. contra Marâ—â— 2. Luc. â— v. 2. as S. Paul did but by tradition from others as he hymselfe writeth And the same also may be said of S. Marke whose Ghospell as S. Hierome writeth the Apostle S. Peter approued and by his authority he commaunded it should be read in the Church 6. But neyther is it true that some say that the authority of approuing the Canonicall bookes was only resident in the Apostles and the primitiue Church but the ensuing Church hath it not For the Apostles did not approue all the Canonicall bookes of the new Testament For if they had donne so there had remained no doubt of many of them for many ages after the death of the Apostles euen among Catholike good men as we Supra ca. 5. Contr. 1. haue noted before But many yeares after the Apostles tyme by the generall Councells and Decrees of the Church some bookes were approued wherof there was before some doubt 7. Yea more then six hundred yeares after Christ there were many Catholikes who did not receyue the authority of the Toletan Concil c. 16. Apocalyps as appeareth out of the fourth Toletane Councell 8. And that which is more before the Councell of Trent ther were many Catholikes who thought that it was lawfull for them to doubt of all the bookes of the new Testament the which in tymes past S. Hierome seemed to iudge as doubtfull as are the Epistles of S. Iames the second of S. Peter the second and third of S. Iohn the Epistles of S. Iude the Epistles to the Hebrewes and the Apocalyps And if it had not byn for the Councell of TreÌ„t or some other new Decree of the Church none would as yet condemne them as Heretikes who called those bookes in question 9. By that which hath byn sayd it appeareth manifestly that the Canonicall Scriptures receiue their strength and authority not from the approbation of the primitiue Church but rather from the approbation of the Church succeeding yea euen of this present Church to wit of the Councell of Trent 10 Lastly albeit the present Church should not haue the authority of approuing Scriptures as these men say yet notwithstanding for three other reasons the authority testimony of this present Church is necessary First because we know not certainly what bookes the primitiue Church hath eyther written or not writen approued or reiected but by the testimony of the present Church Secondly neyther do we know whether those bookes came vncorrupted vnto vs or no but by the same testimony Thirdly because we cannot otherwise know which is the true sense of those bookes CHAP. VIII The Argumentes of our Aduersaryes are confuted THE first argument of our Aduersaries is The Church is grounded vpon the word of God and by the word also of God â—t is ingendred nourished and gouerned and it is subiect to the word of God as to the words of her spouse I answere our Aduersaries do in a manner coÌ„found the writen word of God
with the word of God in generall the which they should not doe for ther are three sorts of the word of God to wit that which is belieued preached and written The belieued word is in the hart of the Church that which is preached is in her mouth and that which is written is in her bookes Of the belieued and preached Word the Apostle sayth the word is in thy mouth and in thy hart this is the word of fayth which we preach We Rom. 20. v. 8. confesse that in the belieued and preached word the Church is founded because by the same it is ingendred nourished Rom. 10. v. 10. Ibid v. 14. and gouerned and that vnto this word it is subiect and obedient as vnto the Words of her spouse For indeed this kind of word is necessary for the Church For with our hart sayth the Apostle we belieue vnto Iustice but with the mouth confession is made to saluation And againe How shall they heare without a preacher 2. But the nature of the written word is farre different for this is neyther altogeather necessary for the Church seeing that the Church was without it more then two thousand yeares neyther can the written word be profitable to the Church vnlesse it be also rightly preached and belieued For what doth it profit a man to haue the Bible vnlesse he rightly belieue and vnderstand it 3. But the Scripture whereof we now dispute doth only conteyne the written word but the belieued and preached word is conteined in the visible Church as the necessary and essentiall parts therof seing the one is as it were the life in the hart of the Church the other as it were the speach in her mouth neither can they euer be separated from her according to that saying and promise of God The words which I haue put in thy mouth shall not Isa 59. v. vlt. depart from thy mouth nor from the mouth of thy seede nor from the mouth of thy seedes seede from henceforth for euermore 4. Wherefore this argument doth proue the quite coÌ„trary for seeing that the written word receiueth it profit and authority from the rightly belieued and preached word which are the partes of the Church it is necessary that the written word receiue that authority and vtility from the Church as that wherin only the word rightly preached and belieued is to be found 5. The second argument If the Church should teach any thing contrary to the Scriptures we were not to belieue the Church Therefore the Scripture doth not receiue that authority from the Church but rather the Church from the Scripture I answere that in the same maÌ„ner it may be said that if the Scripture should conteine any thing against truth we should not also belieue it if the holy Ghost should vtter and speake any lye we should not belieue him But thâ—se conditions are indeed impossible and blasphemous against God wherefore they are not only to be admitted but not euen to be proposed of Christians For it is impossible that the Church should teach any thing contrary to the Scriptures for then the holy Ghost should lye because he should teach one thing by the Church and the contrary by the Scriptures 6. The third argument if the Scripture receiue that authority from the Church then the Church should be aboue the Scripture which seemeth to be very absurd I answere That the Church is aboue the Scriptures may be vnderstood two wayes First because the Church exceedeth the Scripture in dignity and excellency and in this sense without all doubt the Church is about the Scripture for the Scripture is made for the Church and not contrary wise All things sayth the Apostles 1. Cor. 4. v. 51. are done for you Christ dyed for the Church and not for the Scriptures the Church belieueth hopeth loueth and prayseth God but the Scripture doth none of these The Church shall reigne and liue euerlastingly with Christ in heauen the Scripture shall perish after the day of Iudgement Lastly the Church conteineth in it the word of God rightly belieued preached and the Holy Ghost it selfe all which do farre exceede the written word in excellency and dignity 7. Secondly it may be vnderstood that the Church is aboue the Scripture so as she may change the Scripture or of Scripture make no Scripture or lastly she may teach some what contrary to Scripture or depart from the true sense of Scripture In which sense the Sectaries of this tyme say that we affirme the Church to be aboue the Scripture And thus it is false that the Church is aboue the Scripture but neyther is there any Catholike which in this sense will affirme that the Bellar. l. 3. de verbo Dei c. vlt. in resp ad 14. argum Church is aboue the Scripture as Bellarmine truly affirmeth For if the Church were in this sense aboue the Scripture the Church should erre and be opposite vnto her â—elfe because in that the Church hath once approued the Scripture she cannot any more reiect and disproue it vnlesse she contradict her selfe which is impossible 8. The fourth argument The holy Scripture receiueth her authority immediatly from God himselfe because he is the Author of the Scripture therefore it doth not receiue it authority from the Church I answere there be two kinds of certaynties the one of the thing in it owne Nature the other in respect of vs so also there are two kinds of authorityes the one of the thing considered in it selfe and this hath the Scripture from her principall Author to wit God himselfe the other is in respect of vs and this it hath from the Church as we haue Cap 13. praeced §. 17. 19. proued before out of Caluin and Beza For we know not otherwise that God is the Author of the Scripture with any certainty of fayth but by the testimony of the Church 9. And that which we haue sayd of the Scripture may also be euidently seene in Christ our Lord who is aboue the Scripture For Christ was forced to proue his authority by miracles that it might the better be knowen and allowed of men For otherwise the Iewes had not beene bound to haue admitted his authority Ioan. 15. v. 14. S. Aug. Tom. 9. Tract 91. in Ioan. Hereupon saith Christ speaking vnto his disciples of the Iewes If I had not done among them workes that no other man hath done they should not haue sinned that is to say of Infidelity not belieuing in Christ aâ— S. Augustine very well expoundeth And in another place speaking vnto the Iewes Ioan. 10. v. 17. he sayth If I doe not the workes of my Father belieue me not 10. But if the authority of Christ which was most exellent in it selfe and immediatly from God stood in need of those meanes wherby it might become knowne vnto vs to the end it might oblige vs to belieue it much more the authority of the Scripture will stand in need
people cannot discerne which is the sincere preaching of the word of God or the lawfull administration of the Sacraments and the Ecclesiasticall discipline prescribed by the word of God for it is necessary that he who knoweth all these things well should also vnderstand almost all the holy Scripture Moreouer there is as yet a very great controuersy among â—ur Aduersaries themselues concerning these three signes whiles that some of them doe contend striue that this is the sincere preaching of the word of God others that some doe say that this is the lawfull administration of the Sacraments others that some doe say this is the discipline prescribed by the word of God others assigne another quite different from this 7. But our Aduersaries do in very truth confound the offices of the Church with the signes therof For to preach sincerely to administer the Sacraments lawfully and to appoint the discipline of the Supr c. 1. buius coÌ„ §. 9. seq Church rightly are the offices of the Church as we haue declared before and not the signes therof these signes therfore being reiected which our Aduersaries do assigne it remayneth that we enquire out the true signes of the Church 8. But this is first to be presupposed as it were the ground of all that we are to speake of this matter That euen naturall reason it selfe doth clearly demoÌ„strat that there is some true Church of God heere vpon earth For this is one of those first principles of fayth which are as euidently proued by naturall reason as that there is a God Wherefore the Apostle placeth these two amoÌ„gst the first grounds of our faith he that commeth to God saith he must belieue that he is is a rewarder to theÌ„ that seeke Hebr. v. â— him But they which so seeke after God that they may be rewarded by him are without all doubt in the true Church 4. Moreouer naturall reason it selfe doth euideÌ„tly teach vs that it is an absurd thing to thinke that there is no way left by God for men to obteine their eternall saluation seing that this is quite opposite to the prouideÌ„ce of God to his infinite goodnesse but there is no other way besides the Church as we haue declared before Cap. 2â— huius coÌ„trouersiae but because there are so many so diuers opinioÌ„s of men coÌ„cerning this so necessary a way to saluatioÌ„ there are also certaine signes markes therof set downe that we may the better vnderstand which is indeed the certaine and most true way 10. Out of these which we haue now Supra c. 14. huius controu §. 5. in fine said followeth first that that which we haue insinuated before is most true to wit that it is more certaine euideÌ„t that there is the holy Scripture seeing that it is manifest by naturall reason that there must needs be some Church of God heere vpon earth the which is not so euident of the holy Scriptures 11. The second thing which ensueth is that to these signes of the true Church these two coÌ„ditious are altogeather necessary The first is that they must be such as that they may not only be perceiued by fayth and our vnderstanding but euen by sense it selfe for other wise they cannot be true signes as we haue already proued The other is that they be knowne and manifest to all men euen vnto Infidells seing that otherwise Isa 35. v 8. they cannot help them or conuince and bring them to the true Church For the Church of Christ as the Prophet testifieth is a direct way so that fooles that is to Bellarm per totuÌ„ l. 4. de Eccles militaÌ„te Bozius de signis Ecclesiae Coccius Tom. 1. per totum l. 8. say Infidells cannot erre by it 12. Of these signes of the true Church Bellarmine Coccius and Thomas Bozius Eugubinus discourse at large who hath gathered twenty fower signes in all of the true Church all which he manifestly proueth to agree to the Roman Church out of these Authors more signes may be required 13. But we regarding our intended breuity will only alledge foure which are set downe in the Nicene and Constantinopolitan Creed that is to say that this true Church is One Holy Catholike and Apostolicall For these foure signes are so certayne that they cannot be reiected euen by our Aduersaries First because they are expressely set downe in holy Scripture as we will shew in the next Chapter Moreouer our Aduersaries do professe that they admit and receiue three Creeds to wit the Apostles Creed the Nicene and Rupell CoÌ„fess Artic. 5. in fine that of S. Athanasius But in that which we call the Nicen Creed these foure signes of the Church are expressely set downe wherof we will now speake more particulerly CHAP. II. That the true Church of Christ is One Holy Catholike and Apostolicall S. Augustine very well admonisheth vs that when we dispute against S. Aug. Tom. 7. de vnit Eccles cap. 3. heretikes which do admit the holy Scriptures we should proue the true Church of Christ the signes thereof out of the sayd holy writ For as the same holy Father noteth in another place the Prophets had spoken more obscurely of Christ S. Aug. Tom. 8. coÌ„ 2. in Psal 30. super ea verba v. 12. qui videbant me foras fugerunt à me then they did of the Church because by their Propheticall spirit they did see that there would arise greater strife debate about the Church theÌ„ of Christ himselfe We will therfore heere proue these foure signes of the Church First out of the Scripture and secondly by naturall reason seeing that these signes must be such as may conuince those which do not admit the Scriptures as we haue declared in the precedent Chapter 2. The first signe of the true Church of Christ is Vnity For there is a threefold vnity necessarily preached in the Church of Christ The first is of all the members with Christ who is the supreme head of the Church the which is effected by fayth wherefore it necessarily followeth that there must be but one fayth of all the members of the Church One Lord and God saith the Apostle and one faith and againe vntill we all meete in the vnity Ephes 4. v. 5. Eph. 4. v. 13. of fayth 3. The second Vnity is of all the members among themselues for as he who dissolueth the first vnity is an heretike so he which violateth this is a schismatike wherefore Christ sayth in this all men shall know that you are my disciples if you haue loue one to another And the Apostle That there might be no schisme in the body but the members Ioan. 13. v. 15. 1. Cor. 1. v. 25. 1. Cor. 24. v. 33. togeather might be carefull one for another Finally God is not the God of dissention but of peace as also in all the Churches of the Saynts I teach sayth the same Apostle 4.
the Apostles is there resident and gouerneth the same as the supreme head thereof 2. The first place is taken out of S. Mat. 15. v. 18. 19. Mathew For he relateth the words which Christ spake to S. Peter which are these And I say vnto thee that thou art Peter and vpon this Rocke will I build my Church and the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it and I will giue to thee the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen And whatsoeuer thou shalt bind vpoÌ„ earth it shal be bound in heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose on earth it shal be loosed in heauen 3. First that Christ spake to S. Peter and not to the other Apostles appeareth euidently by the very words of the text For Io. 1. v. 24. Ioan 22. v. 15. first of all Christ setteth downe S. Peters old name Simon sayth he thou art blessed and then afterward he setteth downe the name of his father Baâ—-iona that is to say the sonne of Ionas or of Iohn as also the EuaÌ„gelist S. Iohn testifyeth He sheweth afterward that the reuelation was only made to S. Peter My father sayth he hath reuealed vnto thee he doth not say vnto you as he is woÌ„â— to say when he speaketh vnto them all He addeth moreouer because thou art Peter which certainly agreeth only to S. Peter for vpon him only was this Name imposed Ioan. 1. v. 42. 4. Moreouer Christ addeth And vpon this rocke I will build my Church in which words that particle and is a coniunction causall and not a copulatiue and it signifieth because and in this sense it is vsed oftentymes in holy Scripture as our Aduersaries cannot deny as for example in that place of Genesis Lo thou shalt dye for the woman Gen. 20. v. 3. Psal 59. veâ— 60. v. 13. 107. Psa vel 08 v. 13. Isaiae 46. v. vlt. Luc. 1. v. 42. that thou hast taken and hath a husband that is because she hath a husband So also Dauid in his Psalmes Giue vs thy helpe from our tribulation and vayne is the saluation of men that is to say because the saluation of men is but vayne In like manner the Prophet Isay saith Behould thou art angry and we haue sinned that is to say because we haue sinned In the same sense it is vsed in the new Testament Blessed art thou among women and blessed is the fruite of thy wombe that is to say because it is blessed as Caluin and Beza doe acknowledge all which places Caluin confesseth to be so vnderstood after Theophilact Also and none gaue him any thing that is to say because none gaue him See more examples of this in the latin edition 5. This therfore is the true sense of that place As thou hast sayd vnto me thou Ioan. 1. v. 42. art Christ the Sonne of the liuing God so I say vnto thee that I haue worthily called thee Peter because vpon this rocke which thou art I will build my Church For to what end should Christ haue said vnto him thou art Peter seeing that all knew well inough before that Peter was Peter but that he would therby declare that he was not called Peter without great cause that is to say because vpon him as vpon a sure and strong foundation and rocke Christ intended to build his Church Christ therfore Ioan. 1. v. 42. would haue S. Peter to remember the name which of late was giuen him and afterward he assigneth the reason and S. Hier. in c. 16. Matt. sup eaverba Quiatu es Petrus cause why he called him so to wit because vpon him as vpon a most strong rocke he would build his Church According to the metaphore os a rocke saith S. Hierome it was rightly said vnto him I will build my Church vpon thee 6. For the holy Scripture is accustomed when it speaketh of a name giuen vnto any by the interpretation of the word to adioyne also the reason and Gen. 17. v. 5 Gen. 22. v. 27. Gen. 4. v. 25. cause of the name so said our Lord vnto Abram Neyther shall thy name be called any more Abram but thou shalt be called Abraham and then he presently giueth a reason takeÌ„ from the etimology of the word because a Father of many Nations I haue made thee So also he did when Iacob was called Israel See more of this in the Latin edition pag. 280. 7. Lastly not without great reason Christ gaue vnto S. Peter this new name but no other cause is assigned in the holy Scripture but this Because vpon this rocke I will build my Church This therfore and no other was the cause of giuing him this new name Hereupon saith S. Hilary very well O happy foundation of Christes Church saith he in the imposition of a new name and o In c. 16. Matt. worthy rocke of that building the which should dissolue and breake the infernall Lawes the gates of hell and all the stronge barres of death So S. Hilary 8. Moreouer Christ said to S. Peter I will giue the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen vnto thee he doth not say vnto you In like manner he said in the singular number Mat. 16. v. 19. whatsoeuer thou hast bound vpon earth c. that thou shalt loose c. He spake therfore to S. Mat. 18. v. 18. Peter only and not to many 9. And albeit he promised this last authority of bynding or loosing men from their sinnes to the other Apostles also yet first of all in this place he promised this to S. Peter alone and then afterwardes to the rest to the end we might therby know that he made S. Peter the head of all the rest and that all their power and authority was subordinate to that of his For at this day all Catholike Bishops haue authority to bynd loose but subordinate to the Popes authority 10. All which thinges that holy martyr S. Cyprian declareth very well in Cypr. de vnit Ecc. circa principium Mat. 16. v. 18. 19. these wordes wherby it may easily be vnderstood what was the opinion and iudgment of the primitiue Church concerning this matter God speakâ—th vnto S. Peter saith S. Cyprian I say vnto thee because thou art Peter and vpon this rocke I will build my Church c. And againe after his resurrection Ioan. 20. v. 20. 21. 22. 23. he sayd feed my shepe vpon him alone he buyldeth his Church and he committeth vnto him to feede his sheepe and albeit he gaue the like authority to all the other Apostles saying As my Father sent me so c. whose sinnes yee forgiue c. yet to the end he might shew and declare an vnity he ordayned but one chayre he confirmed by his authority the beginning of that vnity proceeding from one The same indeed or equall in all other thinges were the other Apostles with S. Peter indued with the same power and authority to wit before those wordes of
Christ to S. Peter feed my sheep but the beginning proceeded from vnity The primacy was giuen to S. Peter to the end that one Church of Christ and one chayre might be made manifest and knowne Hitherto S. Cyprian 11. But now that these promises of Christ did not only belong to the person of S. Peter but also to all those who were to succeed him in the same office till the end of the world we do thus clearly proue and demonstrate First because S. Peter is heere made the foundation of the Church and the rocke wherupon it is buylded but the Church of Christ alwayes remayneth therfore the foundation therof must alwayes remayne seing that nothing can continue and be without it foundation 12. Moreouer those keyes which were giuen to S. Peter do remayne alwaies in the Church as all our Aduersaries confesse Ergo he also remayneth to whom these keyes were giuen For that authority or those keyes were not giuen for S. Peter alone but for the Church which is alwayes extant It therfore alwaies retayneth those keyes and that authority of bynding or loosing men from their sinnes in S. Peter and his successors till the end of the world 13. And this is that which S. Leo S. Leo Serm â— inaÌ„niu assump suae ad Pontif. saith when he writeth that S. Peter euen to this day gouerneth the Church of God that is to say by his successors insomuch that his dignity neuer fayleth euen in an vnworthy successor But hitherto there was neuer any successor of S. Peter acknowledged in the Church of Christ besides the Bishop of Rome He therefore is the only successor of S. Peter and the supreme Bishop of the Church And the Roman is not only the true Church of Christ but also perferred before all others euen by Christ himselfe 14. The second place is Feed my laÌ„bes Ioan. 21. v. 15. 16. 17. Euseb Emissen Serm in natiu S. Ioan. Euang feede my sheep In which wordes God coÌ„mended to S. Peter not only his lambes which signifieth the common sorte of people but also his sheepe to wit the Pastors and Fathers of his Church First saith Eusebius Emissenus he committed to S. Peter his lambes and then his sheep because he made him not only a Pastor but the Pastor of Pastors Peter therfore feedeth the lambes and also the sheepe He feedeth children and their mothers he ruleth Bern. de consiâ—er ad EugeÌ„ l. â— c. 8. S. Leo Serm. 3. de assump sua ad Pontif. Ioan. 21. v. 15. the people and their Prelates He is therfore the Pastor of all because besides lambes and sheepe there is nothing in the Church Hitherto Eusebius And S. Bernard My sheepe sayth Christ Vnto whome is it not â—layne and manifest that he did not assigne some but all nothing is excepted where there is no distinction made Thus S. Bernard And S. Leo Peter doth properly gouerne all whome principally Christ also gouerneth 15. Furthermore it is manifest that these wordes were spoken to S. Peter and not to the other Apostles seing that Christ asked him thrice Doest thou loue me And moreouer he added more then these that he might make a manifest distinction betwixt S. Peter and the other Apostles 16. Finally it is most certaine that this promise of Christ doth not only appertayne to the person of S. Peter but also to his successors which are to remayne in the Church till the end of the world Ephes 4. v 11. Calu. Beza ib. Confess Rupell Art 25. For both the Apostle doth plainly testify and our Aduersaries do also confesse that the office of a Pastor is ordinary and shall alwaies continue and be in the Church of God 17. And the chiefest reason thereof is because we stand in no lesse need now of a supreme Pastour then they which were in the primitiue Church whileâ— yet the Apostles were aliue yea we haue much more need therof besides that there are still and alwaies shal be some sheep of Christ therfore there shall also still continue their chiefe Pastours The Româ—n Church therfore is not only the true Church of Christ but also that wherein S. Peters successor and the supreme Pastour of the whole Church of Christ remayneth 18. But these two places are so manifest that they cannot be confuted or wrested to any other sense vnlesse we till reduce all wordes to a metaphoricall signification or other figuratiue speaches the which is a common tricke of our Aduersaries when they are vrged with plaine wordes of the holy scripture But against all these falsifications of our Aduersaries we must alwaies obserue that rule of the S. Aug. tom 3. de doctrin Christi l. 3. cap. 1â— Catholike Church taken out of S. Augustine to wit that we must neuer depart from the proper signification of the words of holy Scripture vnlesse we be forced by the authority of some more euident poynt of faith wherunto the proper significatioÌ„ of the wordes do manifestly repugne For otherwise if we might as often as we would refuse and lâ—aue the proper signification of the wordes there will be nothing lesse certayne in all the holy Scripture 19. Moreouer it will be an easy matter for euery one to fly to metaphors and improper significatioÌ„s when he is pressed with the playne words of holy Scripture but there is nothing heere that should force vs to depart from the true and proper sense of the wordes None therefore but desperate and carelesse of their owne saluation will giue credit and bâ—lieue these foolish toyes and dreames of our Aduersaries inuented only by them in hatred and contempt of the Bishop of Rome 20. Yea he will rather imbrace and follow the vniforme consent and vnderstanding of the auncient Fathers and of all the whole Church For the holy Fathers in many places do affirme that these Bellar. l. 1. de Rom. Pont. c. 10 14. Coccius To. 1. l. 7. Art 4. two places of the holy Scripture are to be vnderstood litterally of Saint Peter the which Bellarmine and Coccius haue diligently gathered togeather as many other Catholike Authors haue done before them But because this matter is so cleare and manifest that euen our Aduersaries cannot deny it as we will plainly shew in the next Chapter we wil not now spend any more tyme in alleadging of Authors 21. But our Aduersaries doe heere cry out and obiect against vs that the holy Fathers doe sometymes affirme that the Church was built vpon the fayth of S. Peter and sometymes vpon his confession As though forsooth there were any among vs so foolish as to thinke that the Church was built vpon S. Peters back or shoulders or vpon S. Peter as he was an Infidell or dumme and not rather vpon S. Peter as indued and replenished with the gift of faith confessing and professing openly the mysteries thereof Wherfore it is all one whether we say that the Church is built vpon S. Peter or vpon his faith and
euery man is Christ and the head of Christ is God as the Apostle testifieth And so the woman hath three heades her Husband Christ and God but each one of them is subiect vnto another So S. Peter or the Pope of Rome is the head of the Church but vnder Christ and subiect vnto him Because Christ is the head Ephes 1. v. 22. of S. Peter and of the Byshop of Rome Moreouâ—r Christ is the head of the whole Church â—swell present as to come aswell of the old Testament as of othe new But S. Peter or his successor is only head of the Church in this world and of the new Testament only Hereupon sayd Matt. 16. v. 18. Christ vpon this rocke I will build my Church that is to say the Church of the new Testament which was then to be built 2. Yea euen by the nature of a head we way gather very well that besides Christ who is the head of all Churches aswell visible as inuisible as the Apostle saith there is also another visible head of Ephes 1. v. 22. the visible Church for otherwise it were a monster because it should be a visible body without a visible head Yt is necessary therfore that besides an inuisible head which is Christ there be also a visible heade in the visible Church to wit S. Peters successor 3. Furthermore the actions which Christ exerciseth in his Church are of two kindes some are inuisible as our vocation iustification sanctification c. and these Christ exerciseth and doth by himselfe Some other actions are visible as to preach administer Sacraments and to gouerne visibly the Church c. These Christ doth not exercise by himself alone but also by visible men which represent his person Wherfore euen as Christ should not be sayd truly to baptize any vnlesse there were sâ—me visible man who in the person of Christ should visibly baptize neyther can he be sayd truly to gouerne visibly euery particuler Church vnlesse in each of them some particuler persoÌ„ do visibly gouerne in Christs steed so also neyther should Christ be sayd truly to gouerne visibly the whole Church vnlesse there were some one who in his person migh visibly gouerne the whole Church But this person can be no other but the Byshop of Rome 4. And that which hath byn said 1. Cor. 3. v. â—1 before of the hâ—ad is also to be vnderstood of the rocke and foundation For Christ is indeed the chiefest foundation of all true belieuers but the secondary Ephes 2. â— 20. and subordinate foundation vnto Christ is also the doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets as the Apostle expressely saith to the Ephesians and Caluin also acknowledgeth it to be most true But if the doctrine Calu. ibid. l. 1. Inst cap. 7. sect 2. of all the Apostles be also the foundation of the Church why should not also S. Peters doctrine be the same For when we say that S. Peter is the foundation of the Church by S. Peter we doe vnderstand not his person only but also his doctrine preached in the Church of Rome 5. Moreouer seing that S. Iohn in his Apocalyps sayth that the Citty of God hath Apocal. 21. v. 14 twelue foundations and in them twelue names of the twelue Apostles of the lambe VVhat meruaile is it if S. Peter the first of the Apostles be called a rocke or foundation of the Citty of God 6. And heere it is to be considered that when the Apostle sayth that there is no other foundation besides Christ this word besides hath the same signification 1. Cor. v. 11. that contrary or against hath as appeareth by many other places of holy Scripture For otherwise all the Apostles are called the foundations of the Church as we haue sayd before but they are not contrary or against Christ but vnder Supra cap. 35. §. 2. Cotr. 1. Christ and subiect vnto him 7. Finally if we examine more exactely the true sense of those wordes of S. Paul to the Corinthians it will appeare manifestly 1. Contr. 3. v. 11. that our Aduersaries wrest the said wordes of the Apostle to a contrary sense and meaning For the Apostle doth not speake of the foundatioÌ„ of the whole building of the Church of Christ wherof â— Cor. 3. v. 11. only is our present CoÌ„trouersy but of the foundatioÌ„ of particuler priuate actions of euery true belieuer For S. Paul manifestly writeth that he layd that foundotion wherof he speaketh that euery one buildeth his owne proper worke vpon this foundation But there is a great difference among these foundations because heere Christ himselfe is the who made ordayned S. Peter to be a foundation I say Matt. 16. v. 18. vnto thee saith Christ to S. Peter that thou art Cephas there S. Paul is he who â—ogaâ—â—er â—aid that foundation wherof he speaketh as a wise worke mayster sayth he haue I layd the 1 Cor. 3. v. â—0 foundation Heere Christ himselfe is â—e who buildeth Vpon this rocke saith our Lord I will buyld There euery priuate man is he who buyldeth but let euery one looke saith the Apostle how he buildeth theron heere Matt. 16. v. 18. the Church is that which is built theron I will build saith our Lord my Church There the worke of euery priuate man is that which is built theron If any mans worke abide saith the Apostle that which he built 1. Cor. 3. v. 14. therupon shall receaue reward S. Paul therfore speaketh of the foundatioÌ„ of good workes which belong vnto iustice and life euerlasting wherof as we haue said Christ is the â—â— â—huius cap. only foundation We treat here of the founddation of the outward and visible gouernement of the Church and doctrine of sound faith Now S. Peter his successors were such a foundation Wherfore that which our Aduersaries alleadge out of S. Paul doth nothing concerne this our present disputation 8. The second argument S. Peter denyed Ioan. 18. v. 25. Christ thrice therfore be could not be the rocke against whome the gates of hell should neuer preuaile I answere that when S. Peter denyed Christ he was not as then the foundation of the Church For promise was made vnto him only Matth. 16. I will build c. I will giue thee c. speaking alwaies in the future tense but afterward Ioan. 21. the authority was Ioan. 21. v. 15. actually giuen which was before promised vnto him and that after that denyall of S. Peter as also after the resurrection of Christ feede my lambes saith Christ feede my sheepe 9. The third argument After that the forsayd authority was giuen Ioan. 21. S. Peter was reprehended by S. Paul Gal. 2. I answere that as witnesseth Tertullian the Tertull. l. 5. centra Maâ—ci c. 3. Tertull. de praesc aduersus Haeret. c. 23. infine Marcionists obiected this very same place against Catholikes vnto whome Tertullian answereth in
9. Tract 98. in Euan loan subfinem which is in the holy Scripture For so S. Augustine speaketh in one place But in another he clearly explicateth himselfe by this word praeter to vnderstand contra because we must preach nothing contrary to the holy Scripture That this is the true sense and meaning of S. Augustine it is manifest by the words themselues wherby also he proueth that the word praeter in those words of the Apostle doth signify diuers but not contrary thinges For in this manner he writeth when he warneth his schollers to take heed of the opinions of the Manichaeans other heretikes Ad Gal. 1. v. 6. because these are not only distinct but also contrary to those which the Apostle taught Let the admonition sayth he of the holy Apostle neuer depart from your hart If any shall euangelize vnto you besids that which you haue receiued let him be Anathema He doth not say 1. Thess 3. v. 10. more then you haue receaued but besides that which you haue receaued For if he should say that he should be preiudiciall to himselfe who coueteth to come to the Thessalonians that he might supply that which was wanting to their sayth Now he which supplieth addeth that which is lacking taketh not away that which was But he which ouerposseth Ioan. 16. v. 11. the rule of fayth doth not goe on in the way but departeth froÌ„ the way That therfore which our Lord sayth I haue yet many things to say vnto you but you cannot beare them now were to be added to those things which they knew and not to be ouerthrowen by those they had already learned Hitherto S. Augustine CHAP. X. Whereinâ—other obiections of our Aduersaries against Traditions are refuted THE fourth argument is deduced out of these words of the Apocalyps Apoc. 22. v. 18. Confess Rupell Artic. 5. which they also cite and alledge in their ConfessioÌ„ at Rochell If any man shâ—ll adde to these things God shall adde vpon him the plagues written in this booke But who doth not see that S. Iohn speaketh expresly of the booke of the Apocalyps only and not of the whole Scripture for he sayth I testify to euery one hearing the words of the Prophesy of this booke if any man shall adde to these things c. and in the 19. verse following If any man shall diminish of the words of the booke of this prophesy c. He speaketh therfore only of the propheticall words of the Apocalyps For it is manyfest otherwise out of Ecclesiasticall histories that S. Iohn wrote his Ghospell after the Apocalyps and Hier. de script Eccles in Ioan. Apost consequently that he added many things besids the Apocalyps But let our Aduersaries take heed least they incurre those paynes which S. Iohn threatneth to those which adde or detract any thing from the Apocalyps seing that they so often and so bouldly wrest the prophesies of the Apocalyps to many strang senses against the Pope and the Catholike Church 2. Our Aduersaries alledge many other things but their arguments which be of lesse moment are taken out of those places of Scripture which commend vnto vs the great excellency of holy Scripture But Supra c. 2. all these are very easily confuted by that one ground which as we haue declared before euen our Aduersaries do admit to wit that to the end the holy Scripture be perfect in it selfe and sufficient to euerlasting saluation it is not necessary that it should expresly coÌ„teyne al points of fayth but it is sufficieÌ„t that all such poynts may be deduced by a good consequence out of it But all the Traditions of the Church which belong vnto fayth may be gathered Supra c. 2. as we haue sayd out of Scripture the which also we declare more at large in euery one of these controuersies Our Aduersaries therfore haue not reason to say that we teach the Scripture to be impersect or insufficient For as concerning this sufficiency and perfectioÌ„ of Scripture they are forced at least to yield and subscribe vnto our opinion here in but these their arguments whereof they make great account we haue therfore alledged to the end all may know how badly they interpret the holy Scriptures and by how friuolus reasons they are perswaded to forsake the Catholike fayth 3. But euen this sufficiency of Scripture which they preteÌ„d they proue very foolishly by those wordes of the Apostle wherein he teacheth that the Scripture Ad Tim. 3. v. penut is very profitable as though forsooth euery thing which is profitable for obtayning some particuler end or purpose were also absolutely sufficient then the which nothing can be spoken more absurdly The Head truely is not only profitable but also necessary that a man may liue but who I pray you will say that the head only without the rest of the body is sufficient for the lyfe of man But our late Aduersaries to the end they may make this their discourse or reason the stronger say that in humane thinges not euery thing which is profitable is also sufficient but in diuine matters whatsoeuer Iunius coÌ„tra Bell. controu 1. lib. 4. c. 10. notâ— 44. is profitable is also sufficient whervnto Iunius like a fine young stripling addeth that this can be ouerthrowne by no sophistry But who doth not see that the Eucharist by the diuine vertue thereof is profitable to the obtayning of eternall saluation and yet notwithstanding without Baptisme it is not sufficieÌ„t as also without faith and pennance the same may be sayd of Baptisme and of euery booke of Scripture Yea euen the Apostle doth not speake of the whole Scripture as our Aduersaries thinke he doth when he saith that euery Scripture is profitable but of euery particuler part thereof For how Hier. de Scrip. Eccles in â—oaÌ„ Apost 2. Tim. 1. v. penult could he speake of a thing which was not then extant But as then the Ghospell of S. Iohn was not yet written nor the Apocalyps For these were after S. Pauls death written by S. Iohn Hence it is that the Apostle S. Paul doth not say the whole Scripture but euen Scripture inspired by God is profitable For there is not one part of Scripture which is not profitable vnto vs if it be well vnsterstood Yet for all that notwithstanding euery one part precisely in it selfe abstracting from the rest of the Scripture as all do very well know is not sufficient 4. Finally it is also to be considered that all those places wherin the integrity perfection and vtility of the Scripture is commended vnto vs must nedes be vnderstood not of the bare wordes only but of the same well and rightly vnderstood But this true vnderstanding of the words cannot otherwise be had then by Tradition Supra c. 4. and the vnwritten doctrine of the Church it selfe as we haue already declâ—red Wherefore all those places which do commend vnto vs the holy Scriptures do also