mindes we take vpon vs this most noble conflicte because it otherwise happeneth in this then in other battayles for there hée alone is crowned which vanquisheth but y e ende of this battaile is such that euen hée which is vanquished so that hée acknowledge himselfe ouercome and imbrace the truth shal likewise bée crowned together with the victour And Augustine sayth that it is better to be ouercome of the truth then to be willing to ouercome the truth with falsehoode For whatsoeuer men practise against the truth yet this must they know to wit that veritie cannot be vanquished the which Augustine also calleth perpetuall victorie Furthermore this point of doctrine touching the which our disputation is is of so greate weight that it maye bée thought and that worthelye to bée the verie foundation of all Religion And therefore not without greate cause the Prophet Dauid doeth acknowledge the worde of GOD to bée a Lanterne the which except it lighten our féete of necessitie wée must walke in most horrible darkenesse yea also wée both stumble and fall But the defenders of the Popish Church doo so hotly striue and contende for mans Traditions and thinke them no lesse worthie to bée retayned then some precious Picture of Pallas the which béeing taken awaye they thinke it not possible any longer to defend or maintaine their pontificiall chaire wherein there haue bene so manye Vicars assaulted and nowe at the last Truth preuaylyng shall be quite ouerthrowen and brought vnto naught But that wée maye come to the matter this disputation shall be diuided into sixe parts First we will set downe our owne opinion and then the opinion of the aduersarie then we will trie them both so y â— thereby maye appeare what is the state of our controuersie Secondly we will confirme our opinion by manifest proofe of scriptures and by most sure and flat demonstrations grounded on those places so collected Thirdly we will refell the opinion of the other partie by negatiue disputations Fourthly we will wipe away the obiections of the aduersarie which they wrest out of the scriptures Fiftly we will take away y e foundations which they take out of the writings of the Doctors to ground their opinions on And sixtly we will heare the olde Doctors touching this point agreeing both with vs and the word of God â‚ THE FIRST CHAPTER ¶ At sundrie times and in diuers manners God spake in the olde time to our Fathers by the Prophets In these last dayes he hath spoken vnto vs by his sonne WHen Tertulian would enter into the conflict of disputation and ioyne with the aduersarie hée was woont to bonder the whole summe of the question with certain bondes for so himselfe saith whereby he might not swarue from the matter which he had in hand And that we also may doo the like we will first propone or set down our minde and opinion which is the opinion of each reformed Church touching the word of God by the testimonie of the same word of God which is this All necessarie principles of christiaÌ„ faith are contained in the holy Scriptures This our sentence or opinion we thus expound out of that place of y e Epistle to y e Hebrewes which ministreth vnto vs sufficieÌ„t matter for this disputation God spake in the time of the olde Testament in diuers and sundrie manners to our fathers to wit by oracles visions dreames by Vrim and Thummim finaly by y e prophets speaking by the motion or inspiration of the spirit of God and the same worde of God the spirit of God so commaunding was committed to writing both by Moyses and also by other Prophets and most holy men Now in these last dayes Iesus Christ the chiefe and most perfect Doctour and teacher of his Church being giuen to the world taught the Apostles by mouth ordained them teachers for his Church which did publish in writing the doctrine of the Gospell receiued from Christ by them taught by mouth Sith then y e word of God is the measure of our faith that that word of God remaineth in the most holy monuments or writings of the scriptures it followeth of necessitie that al the principles which are necessarie to faith and saluation of the Church are contayned in the holy Scriptures and whatsoeuer the Apostles haue taught we ought to looke for them in the holy Scriptures neither ought we to receiue any tradition in matter of faith And because matters are made more manifest by uÌ„militudes wée will take our similitude from a King which by mouth proclaimeth an Edict then willeth the same to be printed the which being done men are not wont curiouslye to enquire of others which eyther heard or wer present at the proclamation what is contained in the Kings Edict because the Edict is in print to y e which they must stand and the which they must also beléeue So then I affirme in as much as the word was proclaimed and declared by the Apostles and euangelists and by them committed to writing it were in vayne and foolish now a dayes anye other where to be sought then in the Scriptures what the Apostles and Euangelistes did teach by mouth But now the opinion of the aduersarie is this That all principles of Religion necessarye for our Christian faith are not contained in the holye Scriptures The which theyr opinion they thus expounde Although the worde of God be the measure of our faith yet the whole worde of God is not extant in the scriptures for many things were spoken by the Apostles Euangelists which they writ not Furthermore the Catholike church say they meaning the Church of Rome is so endowed with the spirite of God that she is able of hir selfe to deliuer those things which are necessarie both to faith saluation Wherefore that we may haue the whole word of God the Apostolicall and eccleâ—â—asticall traditions must bée added to the scriptures this is their opinion Now then you may sée manifestlye what is the state or issue of our controuersie for this is that which must be discussed whether the whole word of God deliuered by the Prophets and Apostles and necessary for our saluation be contained in the Scriptures which is the word written or not we affirme that it is they saye naye so then there â—anne bee but one of our opinions true as is manifest by the first groundes of Logicke In anye reasoning the affirmatiue or negatiue 〈◊〉 needes be true but before we goe about the confirmation of our opinion we will set downe the bounds limits of our question both briefely and shorte When we say the word of God we mean not that eternall Word the Sonne of the eternall and euerlasting father being the second person in Trinitie but that externall worde by the which God hath made manifest vnto men his will and pleasure and therefore we adde and say that worde
Secundum ignorantiam Elenchi as the Schoolemen saie because they put in other words then the Apostle Paule vsed For thus Paule saith Yee are our Epistle not written with inke but with the spirite of God for he speaketh of the inuisible Scriptures neither doth he therfore vtterly take awaie the visible as his Epistle which he then wrote to the Cornthians is witnesse But our aduersaryes reason farre otherwise for they say the Epistle not written in Tables but deliuered by hand the which is farre both from the words and minde of the Apostle Now let vs ouerthrowe the consequence of our aduersaries being ful of absurdities and without reason If we must not absolutely stick vnto the writings of the Apostles because God hath written the Gospell in the mindes of the godly the should it followe that the writings of the Apostles are not necessarie for godlie men If all things as they saie are not written which are necessarie to saluation to what end then appertaineth the scriptures For all things saie they that are necessarie to saluation God hath written in the mindes of the godlie But this argument cannot bee concluded in one part onely for either it is vniuersallie true or els vniuersally false so the whole authoritie of the scriptures must bee vtterly abolished the which God forbid Againe If this consequence be of anie force that is to saye we must haue recourse to vnwritten traditions because GOD hath written the gospell in the minds of the godly then would it followe that the spirituall efficacie of God should be confounded with the externall and visible ministerie of the Apostles and that traditions deliuered by mouth are the inuisible Scriptures of God the which the holie Ghost did imprint in the mind of the faithfull the which thing is most false Againe if they make any good conclusion out of that place of Ieremie that all thinges are not written that appertaine to the Gospell because vnder the new testament God doth write his law in the minds of the faithfull when as it was written in tables vnder the old testament Ergo by the force of this opposition it followeth that God in the old testament did onely remit sinne in part and that he was the God of the Israelites but in part also because that Ieremie addeth saieng that it wil come to passe that in the new testamēt God will remit the sins of the people and be their God The which is too too absurde and contrarie to the opinion of all men Now finally let vs turne this argument of our aduersaries vpon themselues saie thus All the lawes of God are written in the hearts and minds of the faithfull as our aduersaries seeme to affirme by the former places cited for Paule saith it is not written with inke but with the spirit of God but none of the traditions of our aduersaries are written in the minds of the godly for they are written with inke and not with the spirit of God Ergo none of our aduersaries traditions are the lawes of God So that héereby it is most manifest as I suppose how foolish or rather no argumēt at al this argument of our aduersaries is y ◠which that we may correct we must saie with the word of God that the writings of the Apostles and Euangelists doth containe all that doctrine of the Gospell the which the Apostles and Euangelistes did teach and afterward put in writings the which also God by his spirit did write in the mindes of the godly thus much touching this obiection And now we come vnto the second The Church of Christ for the space of 20. yeares wanted the writings of the Apostles and was only contented with their traditions Ergo the writings of the Apostles are not absolutely necessarie vnto saluation neither is it needfull that al things appertaining to the doctrine of the Gospel shuld be contained in the writings of the Apostles The Antecedent is manifest by reading of histories Although I doo not meddle much with the antecedent neither doo dispute touching the number of yeares yet would I that the readers should call to their remēbraunce that the Church wanted not the scriptures before that the Gospell was extant by the writings of the Apostles Yea that Christ himselfe and the Apostles did preach the Gospell out of the writings of the Prophets as before in his proper place we haue shewed Wherefore the antecedent of our aduersaries is no other thing then a foundation laid vpon sand or water so that the conclusion which they bring cannot stand Therefore I denie the consequent for the errour is as the Logitians tearme it Secundum ignorantiam Elenchi for they chaunge the forme of affirmation come from the time past vnto the time present and the time to come The Church saye they wanted the gospel Be it so although the writings of the Prophets to contayne the promises of the Gospell insomuch that the Apostles did altogether depende vppon the sayd writings of the Prophets adde héer vnto also if it please you that the writings of the Apostles were not altogether necessarie what doo you héereof conclude That they are not now therfore necessarie or héereafter shall not bée What man is so ignorant to grant that This is the difference y ◠the Apostles ought first to haue preached by mouth before they committed anie thing to writing And when the Apostles did preach the gospell they did then publish by mouth those thinges which afterward they wrote But sithens the Apostles died coulde not by mouth instruct the Church without doubt their writings are now so necessarie vnto vs as their preching by mouth was in those dayes in stéede whereof their writinges doo nowe remaine Let vs bring them therfore to an absurditie If the consequence of our aduersaries be of force or value this is also of force or value the Church of the Isralites not twentie yeares but two thousande yeares or somewhat more wanted the law written therefore it was not necessarie to the Church that the lawe should be written or the law written contained not all those things y e wer necessarie to y e doctrine of y e old testamēt But this is very absurd Let vs turne the argument of our aduersaries against themselues after this manner If God being perfect wise hath not suffered the church of Christ long time to want the writings of the Apostles both that hee might maintaine the truth of the Gospell as also he might prouide for the safegarde of his church Ergo these men are blasphemous against the prouidence of god which denie that all things are contained in the apostolicall writings which are necessarie to the doctrine of the Gospell For to what end would God by his diuine prouidence that the Apostles should write the gospell which they by mouth did preach was it because they should deliuer an vncertain and imperfect doctrine Furthermore if
of God so we by the conduction of the same spirit beléeue that that is true which the Church affirmeth y t our faith may neuer rest vpō men but for euer vpon God alone The Apostles did adde vnto the lawe to wit the doctrine of the Gospell Ergo it is lawfull to adde vnto the worde of God To the antecedent I thus aunswere Although the doctrine of the Gospell bée more full and fruitfull then the writing of the olde Testament yet notwithstanding if ye well mark the matter in y e new and olde testament the selfe same doctrine of saluation is contained in them both for that is most true which Paule saith Acts 26. that he taught no other thing then that which the prophets and Moses had before taught And againe in the first to y e Rom. he sheweth y t the gospel was before promised by the Prophets therfore this is false which they say that the Apostles added to the law for it is one thing to adde to the lawe and another to erpound and referre it to his owne proper scope and purpose For let some man bring forth an obligation that we may vse this similitude and the payment being made he addeth at the ende that the Obligation is satisfied I pray you can he well be sayd to adde any thing to the same Obligation So when the Apostles gaue testimonie to the scriptures that Christ by his cōming had fulfilled both the lawe and the prophets they did not adde either to y e law or writings of the Prophets Now their consequent I denie for héere is an error Secundum figuram dictionis as it is manifest by these things which I haue alreadie spoken Yea also the argument cannot well procéed from the Apostles to other men for graunt this that God would adde vnto his lawe and that it was done by the ministerie of the Apostles which wrote by the influence motion of the spirit of God yet truly héereby can nothing happen whereby it shoulde be lawfull for other men to adde vnto y e same word of God Wherefore sithen by the argumentation of our aduersaries there would follow the ouerthrowe of this most noble excellent doctrine touching the similitude of the old and new Testament Therefore we may well amend their error by this most excellent saieng which is extant in the workes of Iustinus Matyre In interg resp wher he asketh this and saith What is the Lawe he aunswereth saith It is the Gospell foreshewed Againe he demaundeth What is the Gospell he auns wereth The Lawe fulfilled By which words it is manifest that the Gospell is not a newe doctrine added vnto the lawe but a new fulfilling of the olde promise And thus we suppose that we haue sufficiently disputed touching the obiections of our aduersaries which they haue wreasted out of the worde of God The 5. Chapter FOrasmuch as the aduersaries themselues sufficiently knowe how weake féeble those argumēts are which they take out of y e scripturs against the scriptures then at the last they flie to the testimonies of the auncient Fathers the which they very diligently endeuour to beate into our heads with Orations long and tedious to the ende that by the heape thereof they might ouer whelme vs. Wherefore it séemeth conuenient in this part of our treatise to set downe some thing whereby not onely the obiections of the Papists but also our aunsweres may the more easier be vnderstood Now therefore y t we maye gather most true and infallible principles let vs adde some certaine rules to this our disputation by whose helpe the mindes of the olde Doctors may be expounded and so by the conduction of those rules as by a clue of thred we may both enter into the many variable writings of the Doctours as into a most daungerous Laborynth and there also kéepe our selues occupied most safely and without hurt Let this therefore be the first Rule THe writings of the auncient Doctors for the establishing and confirmation of our faith are so farre foorth to be receiued as they agree with the holie and diuine scriptures Although this first rule be plain inough of himselfe especially to those that knowe the truth yet will I for the confirmation of the same lay downe certaine proofes If anie preach vnto you otherwise then that which we haue preached vnto you let him be accurssed saith S. Paule And againe Warne some that they teach no other doctrine And againe Marke them diligentlie which cause diuision and offences contrarie to the doctrine which ye haue learned and auoide them And again If anie man teach otherwise he is puffed vp and knoweth nothing And agayne Be not carried about with diuers and straunge doctrines with many more places to this effect Yet least happely our aduersaries shoulde say that these places repeted are to be vnderstood of the word deliuered by tradition and not of the word written leauing those things which in the former parte of this treatise are handeled copiously and at large I will aske them this Question whether they think y e Apostles to haue vttered spoken anie thing in their lectures sermons which doth disagrée with those things which they haue committed to writing I am sure they will in no wise confesse it Wherefore mauger their heades they must agrée with vs that this our first Rule is infallible and most true to wit that the writings of the auncient doctors are so far foorth to be receiued as they doe agrée with the sacred Scripture But if they shall perceiue the auncient Doctours themselues to be of our mind I hope then all doubt remooued they will together with vs agrée to our former rule This therefore is the minde of Origen It behooueth vs to bring the holie Scriptures for witnesses for because our senses and allegations without the witnesse of them are altogether voyde of credite And againe Euen as there is not anie golde sanctified without the temple so ther is no sence without the Scripture that is holie Tertulian What is there contrarie to vs in our writings hee speaketh of the holye Scriptures And againe The same that we are the same they be Chrisostome If anie thing bee spoken without the Scriptures the minde of the hearers is thereby brought into doubt Hierome Whatsoeuer heereafter shall be spoken besides the Apostolicall writings let it be abrogated of no value altogether without credit Agustine Doo thou not bring vs anie cauelles from the writinges of the Bishoppes as of Hillarie or Ciprian against the infallible testimonie of the diuine scriptures Because as it behooueth vs to put a difference betweene that kinde of writing and the Scriptures of GOD for the writings of men are not so to be read that it is not lawfull for vs to thinke the contrarie if at anie time they haue peraduenture thought otherwise then the
comparison confirmeth the first part of our argument for such kinds of reasons hath both Christ and his Apostles vsed neither can our aduersaries deuie but that the writings of the new Testament are more excellent then the writings of the olde The other part of our argument is proued by the expresse words of Christ for so far was it from Christ that he wold reprooue the Iewes for searching the Scriptures but did himselfe rather reason after that manner The 7. place That ye may learne by vs that no man presume aboue that which is written c. If we ought not to presume to be wise aboue that which is written and the principles of faith appertain vnto true and perfect wisedome then trulie ought wee to be contented with the scriptures in causes and matters of faith The antecedent is true Therefore the consequent cannot be denied The first parte of our Argument is manifest of it selfe The other part is prooued by the place of the Apostle Yet héere I must allso confesse that this place of the Apostle Paule is otherwise expounded of certayne newe Writers to wit of those things which Paule himselfe had before written The which sence if anye man be willing to followe then thus make we our argument If Paule called backe the Corinthians vnto his owne writings how much more then ought we to be called backe vnto the writings of the whole Scriptures But because the olde writers whome our aduersaryes followe most doo expounde this place of Paule generallye I had rather to frame mine argument from the interpretation of them There maye be also framed an euident and plaine sylogisme in the second mode of the second figure flatlye denieng their assertion in this sort Whosoeuer groundeth anie Article of faith vpō traditions not writtē taketh vpon him to be wise aboue that which is written But no man truly obeying the Christian Apostolike doctrine doth take vpon him to be wise aboue that which is writtē Ergo No man truly obeying the christian apostolike doctrine doth groūd any principle of faith vpon traditions not written The 8. Place Manie other things did Iesus which are not written in this booke but these things are written that you might beleeue that Iesus Christ is the sonne of God and in beleeuing you might haue euerlasting lyfe through his name If the Apostles and Euangelists wrote those things which seemed sufficient and necessarie that we which beleeue may haue eternall life then truely the Articles of our faith are to be grounded vppon the Scriptures and not vpon traditions which are vnwritten which our aduersaries tearme Apostolike The Antecedent is true And therefore the consequent cannot be denied The truth of the first part of our Argument is manifest except peraduenture anie man would goe about to thinke himselfe wiser then either the Apostles or Euangelists the which God forbid that anie man should do The consequent is proued by the words of Iohn The 9. place The lawe of the Lord is perfect giuing life true wisdome vnto man yea the law of the Lord is right and iust more precious then golde sweeter then honnie the wisedome and vnderstanding of the Church he is blessed that meditateth or occupieth himselfe therein If the scriptures of the olde testament in their kinde were perfect because therein is contained true wisedome and made those blessed euen as manie as willinglie and constantlie did meditate therein then trulie after that the writings of the Apostles were ioyned vnto the olde testament the which writings of the Apostles doo explicate and teach the veritie and truth of the saide olde testament then I say by good right consequence the whole scriptures both of the olde and new testament may be called perfect as that which perfectlie containeth all necessarie doctrine for the church of Christ The antecedent is true And therefore the consequence must be also true The antecedent is manifest inough of it selfe The minor is prooued by the recited places For by the name and title of the law is often vnderstood y e whole scriptures of the olde testament as it is manifest by the Apostle Paule Gal. 4. ver 21. as also the circumstance of the afore alleaged place doth most manifestly proue Now frō these and such other places we will gather a true definition of the holye Scriptures after this sort The holie scripture is the word of God giuen by diuine inspiration from God and by the Prophets Apostles and Euangelists mooued by the spirit of God was written in the bookes Canonicall of the olde and new testament that the veritie and truth of God might be taken and set free from the obliuion and corruptings of men that the Church might be perfectlie instructed and confirmed in all those things the knowledge and faith whereof is necessarie to saluation This definition is most perfectly substancially true For it standeth vpon y e Genus differēce containeth al those causes both which y e Logitiās say belōg to y e Subiectū as also y ◠belōg vnto y e Attributū And especially it cōtaineth y e efficiēt cause vnder y e which is added y e instrumētal thē y e final cause which two causes in such kind of matters are especially to be considered The spirit of god is y e cause efficiēt who vsed y e prophets apostles as instrumēts y e cōīeruatiō of y e truth cōfirmation of the church is the end wherefore y e word of God was put in writing so this definition standeth vppon his full partes and the thing defined and the definition doo both agrée together Now from this definition as from a most perfect true ground we make thus our demonstratiue argument Whatsoeuer is the word of God giuen by inspiration from God and written by the Prophets Apostles and Euangelists by the motion of Gods spirit c. that contayneth all principles necessarie to christian faith But the holie Scripture is the word giuen by diuine inspiration c. Ergo the holie Scriptures containe al principles necessarie to the christian faith This argument is most euident and necessarie and standeth grounded vppon grounds of the former places and contayneth the veritie and truth of our whole question Wherefore doth the Scriptures containe all these things the knowledge faith whereof are necessarie vnto saluation Truely because the word of God was written by the Prophets and Apostles to this end that the Church should be perfectly instructed c. Againe whatsoeuer is spoken of the one partie may be sayde of the other Furthermore if anie doe aske what these things be the knowledge and faith whereof are necessarie to saluation I answere the Scriptures And againe when I name the Scriptures I name all those things the knowledge whereof is necessarie to saluation The like also may be said touching the ground
traditions which they called Apostolike as the olde Doctors doo testifie And in the Acts of the Apostles chap. 15. ver 24. Luke séemth to touch the like And Paule in 2. Corint chap. 11. verse 13. saith That the olde heretiks were wont falsely to take vpon them the names and titles of the Apostles And in another place he exhorteth the Thessalonians cha 2. ver 2. not to suffer thēselues to be seduced frō y e faith neither by word neither yet by epistle as cōming saith he from vs The which last words I do not so restraine vnto this word Epistle but refer it vnto that that they shoulde not be deceiued by worde for there is no doubte but that the Heretikes would often times boast that they had hearde those thinges which they did teach euen from the Apostles whereby they might get vnto themselues credit This thing doth Ireneus testifie lib. 3. cap. 2. And Eusebius declareth y e one Papias did forge his errours as though saith hée they came from vnwritten traditions I will not héere speake anie thing of the Iewes Calaba which maintaine by their dreams vnwritten traditions as the chiefest piller of their religion as Elias in Thisbith as in the Radicall Kara Baruck appeareth If the traditions which repugne the writings of the Apostles are not Apostolyke and the traditions of our aduersaries are altogether such then truelie the traditions of our aduersaryes are not Apostolike The Antecedent is true Wherefore the consequent is also true The veritie of the Maior proposition is most plaine or else it would followe that the Apostles did not write by the same spirit by which they did speake the which God forbid that we should once thinke The Minor shall appeare by this induction which the reader shall most castly finde in the writings of the Doctors whereby it is manifest that those principles of Religion in controuersie betwéene vs which they refer vnto the vnwritten traditions of the Apostles doo manifestly repugne with the writings of the Apostles so that whether soeuer our aduersaries tourne them they shall be constrained to referre their principles of Religion vnto the writinges of the Apostles For I will vrge the former grounde and argument that if those principles repugne with the writings of the Apostles then they are not Apostolike If they confesse that they doo repugne then haue we our purpose if they denie it then of necessity they must turne to the writings of the Apostles that these their opinions whereof the question is may be tried by them whether they repugne with the writings of the Apostles yea or nay whereby it commeth to passe that our aduersaries after manie errors will they or nill they must néeds returne again within the compasse of the scriptures But least we should bée ouerlong in these our argumentes wée wil comprehend the summe of all our former arguments in this one sylogisme If that these Errors doo follow the opinion of our aduersaries touching traditions not writtē to wit that they otherwise teach in the Church then the Prophets and Apostles haue taught that the spirite of God hath not accomplished his effect in publishing of the scriptures that the Apostles neither ought neither could or would write all things necessarie to saluation that the writings of the old testament is more perfect then the writings of the new that the holy Bible is not correspondent to the title which is a Testament if it bee lawfull for men to adde to the will of God that the holy scriptures giuen after Christs incarnation and afterward the writings of the Apostles are not absolute in euerie point And that the same credite must bee giuen vnto the writings of the olde Doctors which is giuen vnto the scriptures of God that we must beleeue those things whereof there is no certaintie that the cause of the old heretikes was not a little holpen which leaned vnto vnwritten traditions and finally that the Apostles did not speak with that spirit with the which they did write If I saye these former absurdities doo followe the opinion of our aduersaries touching Traditions not written Then truely the minde and opinion of our aduersaries touching traditions not written is of all godlie and true Catholikes to bee vtterlie refused and reiected The antecedent is true And therefore the consequent cannot be false The maior proposition cannot be denyed The minor is made manifest in this our former negatiue disputation wherin we haue ouerthrowen the opinion of our aduersarie And héere we ende the third Chapter and now we will procéed to the wiping awaie of all the obiections which our aduersaries can make The 4. Chapter IN our former disputation we haue confuted the opinion of our aduersaries and haue euen as it were with our finger pointed out their manifolde errours in which they must néedes remaine so long as they doo obstinately striue for these their traditions which they call vnwritten And we affirme that they were neuer written of the Apostles neither yet to be written of anie others But because they maintaine their opinion by diuers and sundrie arguments so to hide the falshood thereof and to deceiue the simple I thinke it verye néedful to aunswere all their arguments so many as we know First of all therefore we wil sift out their obiections which they wrest out of the holy scriptures Then we will come vnto the testimonie of the doctors which they obiect against vs. Their first obiection is this The doctrine of the Gospel was not writen with inke but with the spirite of God not in Tables of stone but in the heart Ergo we must returne vnto the doctrine taught by the mouth of the Apostles Neither must we cleaue so precisely vnto the writings of the Apostles The antecedent is manifest by Ieremie chap. 31. This is the couenaunt which I will make with the house of Israel I will put my lawe into theyr minde and will write it in their heart and I will bee their God and they shall be my people Againe Paule 2. Cor. 3. It is manifest saith he that you are the Epistle of Christ ordained by vs not written with inke but with the spirit of the liuing god not in tables of stone but in the fleshie tables of the heart That we may orderly aunswere vnto each part First we will trie the antecedent then wil we come to the consequent and this order will we kéepe to helpe the memorie of the reader Now will I aunswere the antecedent concerning y ◠which I sée they cannot well agrée no not the Popish schoolmen among themselues for when the Apostle vnto the Heb. 8. had set downe a difference betwéen the old new testament he bringeth forth this place aboue recited of Ieremie where the schoolemen beginne to question what shuld be the cause wherfore it is said that the gospell shuld be written in the minde Some bring forth this reason
the truth of matters may be manifestly séene and as it were touched with our hands And this last way perchaunce is not so well welcome to those which are delighted in plesantnesse of speach but truly no lesse profitable to all those which are both louers of simplicitie and desirous of the truth For like as the view of mans bodie is a great deale more pleasaunt to beholde while it is clad with the flesh the bloud running in each veyne hauing a comelye colour yet notwithstanding if we come at any time to the Anatomie then the facultie of each part and the constitution of the whole bodie is a great deale better knowne so if any wil wisely diligently weigh those larger and pleasanter treatises and bring them to arguments as vnto Anatomies then without doubt he shal easily perceiue whether they be absolute perfect in euerie point or whether there be anye thing wanting and as the Phisition sheweth foorth euen as it wer with the finger the original and causes of diseases so shal he héere doo touching errors if there be any The former sort doeth indéede delyght the mindes as wll of those which are learned as those which are vnlearned but this latter manner of exercise sith it is occupied in that onely kinde of matter which appertaineth to doctrine is more méete for those which are best learned who are nothing moued with the floud of vain wordes if especially there be no force of matter contained in them because that speach without reason is not to be counted any thing worth Augustine Ciprian Hillarie Hieronimus and diuers olde learned Fathers haue vsed this kinde of disputing very much this also the schoolemen seemed to professe but with what successe I haue shewed alreadie But chieflye we must consider and haue great care on doth sides that when we dispute touching doctrine all our arguments be necessarye and pertaining to doctrine so that they bée grounded vppon most sure principles and infallible groundes of Diuinitie And aboue all things we must beware that we take not things which may be disputed on both sides for things necessarie things which be strange for those that are knowen falshoode for truth the which trulye dooth happen oftentimes in much lauishing out of speach the which y e aduersaries of the truth most commonly abuse where by they may the more conuenientlye hyde themselues vnder the couerte of manye words so that when they haue said much â—hey would also séeme to haue spokeÌ„ truth The best chiefest for this mischiefe is if after the long circumstaunces that then there beâ— fet downe a briefe Logicall handling of those their wordes spoken before to be as it were an Anatomie and recapitualation of all subtil sophemes and craftie fallaces And when the falsehood of words is cleane taken away it wil bewray those things which are false it wil set truth against falshood and beare them both out yea finally it wil bring to passe euen as Augustine sometime said That each thing with other cause with cause and reason with reason may striue together And héere who séeth not that when errors are cleane taken awaye how easely the truth will ouercome and the same truth which the huge floud of words had ouer whelmed will euen willingly as it were aduaunce hir selfe vp againe Sith then that schoollike handeling of matters will bring so great profit so y e Logick be directed by the true rules of diuinitie I theÌ„ intreat beséech these learned diuines of this our age which are defeÌ„ders of y e gospel y t they haue â—are héerof set down vnto vs some certain easie methode of this schoolike way how to handle each point y â— which we may follow and the which also may be both to vs present as also to y e posterities héereafter a most true touchstone wherby we may trie the sundry workes of diuers men which haue written of diuinitie y e which if they shall performe they shal greatly profit the Church of God especially in these times in which each man striueth in setting forth of bookes touching the principall pointes of diuinitie who may doo best For where as the Ciuilians only write touching their lawes the Phisitions of their facultie and so all others of those artes and sciences which they professe in y e which they are conuersant yet notwithstanding it commeth to passe I knowe not by what meanes that not onely diuines but also men cleane voide of diuinitie of all sorts are wont now euerie where to dispute in their bookes touching diuinitie so y t héerein I assent with Nazianzene which before time hath most gréeuously complained of this matter And we haue thought good to publish this our small labour abroad not y t we thinke we haue obteyned y e same methode whith we desire but that by this meanes we may at the least giue a testimonie that wée looke for a more exact methode from the learned diuines yea and earnestly desire them to performe the same Beholde then wée héere set downe a schoolelike treatise of diuinitie takeÌ„ out of the first Chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrewes to wit touching the word of God written against mannes traditions about which matter there is great controuersie betwéene vs and the Papists And for this cause I omit the handling of this point at large because it may be easily séene in the writings of late set forth on both partes of which writings I wil make as it were a certaine resolution or anatomie in this schoole like treatise But before I come to this my purpose I am willing somewhat to admonish the Reader howe that these disputations touching y e Scriptures doth farre differ from all others For in disputations of Philosophie Phisicke ciuill gouernment and such other there eloquence sheweth it selfe there desire to excell doeth rule there oratorie pleading bursteth out yea oftentimes in such matters men desire nothing but to shew forth the brauenesse of their wits or else séeke after glorie and praise But in diuine disputations where as Augustine sayth Brauerie must not bée sought but good documentes and lessons and that with great reuerence yea and verie reuerently wée must dispute of holy things not as vpon the stage before men but as in the middest of the Church before the liuing God and his Angelles not for the desire of victorie but for the maintenaurce of the truth in as much as Paule forbiddeth the Pastours of the Church once to speake of vaine questions or contentions of wordes which can scarce be done without the detrument of the truth Wherfore praying aide at the hands of almightie God that he will direct and establish this our labour by his holy spirit let vs procéede into this most holy conflict in the which the worde of GOD is the place of combat God himselfe the chiefe Iudge truth the victorie saluation the garland of triumph And héereby with more valiant
deliuered For otherwise who séeth not y ◠the apostles comparison in the recited text were of no force For if y e Apostle had saide thus then were our aduersaries opinion true to wit Like as in times past vnder y e old testamēt God spake at sundry times in diuers manners so now likewise hath he also spoken to vs in y e time of the new testamēt at sundry times in diuers manners that is by y e writings of the apostles by apostolicall traditiōs not writen also now speaketh by the traditions of y e church y e which how it repugneth is contrarie to y e mind of y e apostle euen our aduersaries thēselues cānot denie y e same thus much touching y e first part of our argument The minor which is y e secōd part of our argumēt containeth in it selfe thrée mēbers First y ◠the word of god necessary to y e saluation of y e Church was deliuered vnto vs first by y e prophets then after by Christ and his Apostles and this is manifest by this place of the Apostle in that he sayth In times past he spake by his Prophets but in these last dayes by his sonne And that this last speaking apperteineth also to the Apostles it is manifest by the words of the Apostle in his second chapter of this Epistle where he sayth y ◠the gospel was first preached vnto vs by Christ and then confirmed by those which heard him And againe Iohn the 20. and 17. Christ saieth As my Father sent me euen so send I you And it cannot be denied but that the Apostles published the Gospel in writing The second part of the minor is that the word of God deliuered by the Prophets is now only to be sought for in the writings of the Prophets And this is proued by the vsuall phrases of the Scriptures which by the Prophets meane the writings of the Prophets as Romanes the first where hée saith Put a part for the Gospell which he had promised before by his Prophets in the holy Scriptures And againe Luk. 16. They haue Moses and the Prophets Iohn 6. It is written in y e Prophets Acts. 26. Paule saith O king Agrippa beléeuest thou y e Prophets I know thou beléeuest Luke 24. And he began at Moses at all the Prophets and interpreted vnto them in all the Scriptures y e things which were written of him To conclude because I will not recite many places finally Peter by the wordes of the Prophets meaneth the writings of the Prophets 2. Epistle chapter 1. And in the last ende of the same chapter he saith thus For y e prophesie came not in olde time by y e wil of man but holie men of God spake as they were moued by y e holy Ghost Now if our aduersaries will not yéeld vnto vs let thē bring good proofe vnto vs to the contrarie but y ◠as I haue alreadie said they cannot doo Now the third and last member is that they of the contrarie part can bring forth no proofe to the contrarie but that we may conclude touching the word of God deliuered vnto vs by Christ and the Apostles y ◠it is wholy conteined in the writing of the Apostles as well as the word of God deliuered by the Prophets is contained in the writings of y e Prophets to wit so much as is necessarie for our faith saluation But if at any time our aduersaries affirme that they can bring some good reson to y e contrarie then they must bring such as must be both true and also agréeing to the Scripture And thus the parts of our argument béeing confirmed y e conclusion therof must néeds be true The second place It seemed good to me most noble Theophilus to write vnto thee thereof from point to point that thou mightest knowe the certaintie of those things whereof thou hast ben instructed To this purpose also these places maye serue I gaue my diligence saith he to write vnto you of the common saluation Philip chap. 3. It greeueth mee not to write the same things vnto you and it is profitable for you Iohn 1. Epistle chap. 1. We declare vnto you that which wee haue seene 2. Peter chap. 3. This second Epistle I now write vnto you beloued wherewith I sturre vp your pure mindes to call to your remēbrance the words which wer spoken before of the holie Prophets also the commandements of vs the Apostles of the Lorde and sauiour 2. Peter chap. 1. I will not cease to put you alwaies in remēbrance of these things although yee bee alreadie instructed therein From these and such other places we drawe this argument If the Apostles and Euangelists published in writing the Gospell to his end that the truth of those things which they taught by mouth might be the better knowne confirmed and that thereby also it should the better sinke into the mind and memorie of men then trulie the Apostles and Euangelists left all those things in writing which by mouth they had taught being necessarie to faith and saluation The Antecedent is true And therfore my conclusion is also true The ground of our argument which is y e first part cannot be denied for then y e middle would repugne with y e end the which far be it from vs y ◠we should once thinke especially in them which did both speake write y e gospel w t one the self same spirit As for y e secōd part of our argumēt it is cōfirmed by y e former places in plaine words The third place Thou shalt not adde to the word which I teach command thee And againe Thou maist not adde vnto his word least hee reproue thee and thou be found a liar Wherfore I saie if it be not lawful for mā to ad anie thing to the writings of Moses then truely after that the writings of the Apostles were ioyned to the writings of Moses and the Prophets we may plainly saie that the scriptures doo containe all those things the knowledge and faith whereof is necessarie and sufficient to saluation The antecedent is true Wherefore we ought not to doubt of the truth of the consequence The first part of our sylogisme is manifest not onely by the similitude but also by the often comparing of the worde of God deliuered by Moses as also by the Apostles as it is prooued in the first place Our Minor is prooued by the places before recited which prooueth that we may not adde vnto the word of God And least our aduersaries should say that that place of Moses is not tyed vnto the worde of God written by Moses we will recite certain places which shall cut off all shifts of our aduersaries Moses Exodus 24. Writ all these words of the Lord. Againe Deut. Moses wrote this law Again Deut. 28. All the words
of our argument the which is the definition of the Scripture as is before said wherfore this our demonstration and argument is most manifest and hath brought the truth of our opinion out of all question or doubt to wit that the holy scriptures containe all those principles necessarie to Christian faith the which was our purpose to proue The third Chapter NOW after that the truth of our opinion is made manifest by the former demonstrations affirmatiue disputation as at the first we did determine so will we now come vnto the negatiue disputation which is to refell and refute the opinion of our aduersaries For although y e truth béeing made manifest y e falsehoode must néeds bée confuted ouerthrowen by this our affirmatiue disputation wée haue manifestly proued y t the scriptures do containe all those things the knowledge faith whereof is necessarye to saluation yet notwithstaÌ„ding this ouâ—â—egatiue disputation procéedeth as rising of necessarie consequence which is this That ther is nothing to be sought for out of the holie scriptures the knowledge and faith whereof is necessarie to saluation And by force of the consequence traditions not written by the Apostles are not to be receiued in anie Article and principle of faith yet notwithstanding it commeth to passe I know not by what meanes that we are more delighted in the confuting of errour and falsehoode then in confirming the truth Wherfore I could not let slip this kind of disputation wherby the reader may be throughly confirmed in the knowledge of y e truth This therefore is the opinion of our aduersaries which repugneth w t ours euen as it were Ex Diametro to wit That the holy scriptures do not coÌ„tain al things the knowledge faith whereof is necessarie to saluation The which error we thus confute If Moses the Prophets Christ the Apostles did alwaies confirme the principles of faith by the Scriptures and not by vnwritten traditions our aduersaries on the contrarie part will confirme the principles of faith verie seldome by the Scripture but most vsualliâ—aâ—y vnwritten traditions then truelie our aâ—â—ersaries doo otherwise teach the Church then either did Moses the Prophets Christ or the Apostles The Antecedent is true And so is the consequent And by force of the consequent our aduersaries are not to be allowed in y e manner of instructing y e church The antecedent is true the coÌ„sequeÌ„t is proued by this inductioÌ„ collected froÌ„ places of holy scripture Moses doth call them backe to the lawe written as S. Paule doth interprete it The same Moses coÌ„mandeth the law writen to be published before all the people Iosua exhorteth the Israelits that they do those things which are written in the booke of the lawe In the time of Iosia king of Israel the people sware to obserue those things which were written in the lawe The Prophets each where call the Israelites to the writings of Moses After the people returned from the captiuitie the lawe of Moses was recited the worshipping of God was taken from that lawe written Christ biddeth theÌ„ search the Scriptures Christ speaking to the 〈◊〉 saith yee erre because ye know not the Scriptures They haue Moses and the Prophets let them heare them And Christ opened the vnderstanding of the Apostles that they might vnderstand the Scriptures Paule preached Christ alleadging the law and the Prophets Appollos reproueth the Iewes proueth that Iesus is Christ by the Scriptures The Thessalonians or chiefe of Beraea are praised because they searched the Scriptures whether it were so yea or no as Paule had preached And thus I conclude that I may not bring in all those places of Scripture which Christ and the Apostles most often times alledged This kind of induction is most firme and cannot be refelled by any argument And y e force of y e consequeÌ„t to what end it is directed doth manifestly appeare for y e prophets apostles are ordeined of god to be instructers of y e church were inspired by the holy Ghost And Christ himselfe is the most perfect doctor of the Church wherby we sée y t they which teach y e church of Christ other wise then Christ himself his Apostles and Prophets haue taught that is not laieng those foundations which they layde but other that they instruct the Church of Christ amisse But our aduersaries teach otherwise inasmuch as they call y e church not to the Scriptures alone as is before said but to traditions not written And out of the former argument there ariseth this conclusion If the Apostles who although they wer indued with the spirit of God and taught by mouth yet notwithstanding did referre themselues vnto the Prophetical scriptures then a great deale more ought our aduersaries to referre their principles of doctrine vnto the holye Scriptures And sith they doo not so they are not to be heard The antecedent is true And therefore the consequent must be true The antecedent is manifest by comparison And the truth of the consequent is confirmed in the former argument If all things be not contained in the scriptures the knowledge and faith whereof is necessarie to saluation then it followeth that the spirit of God did not accomplish his effect when he gaue the scriptures vnto the Church But the consequent is most false blasphemous So likewise is the antecedent The consequent of the former proposâ—tion was prooued when we went to search out the causes of the scriptures in y e second chapter of this our disputation where wée affirmed y t the word of God was to this end purpose committed to writing that it might be freed and deliuered from the corruption of man and that it might help the memorie of the godly and finally that the Church might more and more bée instructed and confirmed in those things the knowledg faith whereof is necessarie to saluation Now if all those things be not contained in the scriptures then truly it followeth y â— the spirit of God did not perfectly but in part accomplish his effect the which God forbid And certainly if you graunt this which cannot be denied that the scriptures were giuen vnto the church not rashly nor in vaine but by the great prouidence and wisedome of God then I vrge this and say If the scriptures were giuen by God that the word of god shuld be set frée and deliuered from the corruption of men I pray you would the spirite of God then haue some certaine things necessarie to saluation to be set frée from the corruption of men and some things not If the Scriptures were giuen to helpe the memorie of the godly was it then giuen in part onely or shall we say that of those things which were necessarie to saluation that some things are to be committed to memorie and some things not or if the memorie of those things
could haue bene kept and preserued without the scriptures to what ende were the Scriptures for the spirite of God doth nothing in vaine If the Scriptures were written to the ende our memorie might be holpen who then can denie that our memorie must bée holpen by the Scriptures in all things necessarie to saluation Finally and to conclude If the Scripture were giuen by the spirite of God that thereby the Church might be the better instructed why then should not the Scriptures haue in them al those things which are necessarie to saluation Wherefore what starting holes so euer our aduersaries séeke yet the truth of our former proposition remaineth to wit that they goe about to frustrate the spirit of God of his effect in giuing the Scriptures except in them be contained whatsoeuer is necessarie to our saluation The consequent no Christian can deny If the Apostles were led into all truth by the spirit of God as it appeareth Ioh. 16 and wrote not all things that were necessarie to saluation that came to passe either because they ought not to write them or because they would not write or because they could not But to affirme that they ought not is false that they would not is absurd and that they could not is the part of one that disputeth like an Atheist Wherefore the antecedent is false absurd and altogether from Diuinitie The consequence of the former proposition is manisest except our aduersaries can bring any thing to the contrary For we dispute not héere of euerye man but only of y e Apostles whom y e spirit of God gouerned and directed in the writing of the Gospell The minor is manifest except our aduersaries can proue what reason there is of dissimilitude or vnlikenesse in things not onely like but also euen béeing the selfe same And this truly is most certaine and most vndoubted amongst all Christians that if the Apostles wrote not all things which are necessary to saluation that it was because they ought not so to doo Qur aduersaries of necessitie must proue some one of these causes or els them what was the cause that y e Apostles ought to write some things which were necessaâ—ie to saluation and to omit other some or else truly y t the Apostles themselues haue by manifest plaine words testified that they haue not written all things which appertaine vnto Christian faith and Religion for good and necessarye causes which God himselfe would not that men should know But vndoubtedly our aduersaryes can prooue neither of these and therefore the conclusion of this argument resteth most firme and vnuiolable If the Canonicall bookes of the old Testament doo containe all things which appertained vnto the olde testament And the Canonicall bookes of the new Testament doo not containe all such things as doo appertaine vnto the new testament then doeth it follow that the old testament is more perfect then the new The consequence is false And therefore the antecedent is false The consequent of the maior is thus prooued The bookes of the old testament are called the olde testament of Paule where as hée dooth intreate of the reading of the old testament To this maye be added that which Moses saith The couenant saith he which is written in the booke of the lawe and in the diuine and holy historie there is mention made of the booke of the couenaunt Wherefore there is no doubt but that the olde Testament that is the writings of the olde testament is agréeable to his title For nothing can be alleaâ—ged besides y t scripture which may rightly be said to appertaine to the old testament to wit the knowledge whereof were necessarie to the saluation of those godly fathers that liued vnder the olde testament Now if you say not the like of the newe testament who dooth not sée that the newe testament is more weake unperfect then the olde For it is as much as if you wold thus expound the title The newe testament that is to saie Some certain things appeâ—taining to the new testament The which how absurd it is I suppose I shall not néede with 〈◊〉 more arguments to prooud for no 〈◊〉 hath at anie time héeretofore affirmed that the Scriptures and writings of thâ—â— we 〈…〉 not so perfect as the writings at the old Wherefore we wil 〈…〉 more to the prâ—uing of our 〈◊〉 If the Scripture of the new testament be a couenaunt will or testament nothing must be added vnto a will or Testament then trulye it is not lawfull to aâ—de anye thing to the writinges of the newe Testament The Antecedent is true And the consequent is the like And by the force of the same consequent the traditions not wâ—tten of the Apostles are not to be receiued The antecedent is manifest The minor doth containe two parts the 〈◊〉 part is mainfest and prooued by the verie title to wit y â— it is a will or a testament neither néedeth theâ—e any other probation The latter part is prooued by Paule when hée sayeth That it is not lawfull to adde vnto a mannes Testament and from thence hée gathereth that we ought not to adde vnto the diuine Testament of God But if yée interpret it to bée a testament and not a rouenant then our conclusion remaineth of more sorce for dareth anie man adde vnto the Will and Testament of a man The which if it be not lawofull to doe in the Wil and Testament of a man how much lesse then is it lawfull so to doe in the Testament of God If till the later end and consumation of the world we ought not to looke for anie other bookes canonicalt besides these which we haue alreadie in the writings of the old new Testament Then it followeth that the Scripture is absolute and pefect in euerie part The antecedent is true And therfore so is the consequent by force of the saide consequent the Scripture hath no need of anie traditions not writteÌ„ The Maior is euident inough especially sith God is the author of the said scripture which would not suffer the same during the world to remaine vnperfect because he being the author is most perfect The Minor our aduersaries themselues cannot denie for they are not ignoraÌ„t that the time now after Christ is exhibited giuen to the world is called the fulnesse of time as the Apostle saith If traditions not written are as wel to be receiued as the Scriptures as our aduersaries would haue it then must wee beleeue the writings of the Doctors with the like perswasion of faith as we beleeue the writings of the Prophets and Apostles But the consequent is false And therefore the Antecedent cannot be true and by force of the consequent traditions not written are not to bee receiued in matters of faith The consequent of the maior proposition is thus proued For so often as our aduersaries propoue vnto the traditions of men
for because the grace of God cannot be written Of which opinion is Thomas whom y e whole swarme of schoolemen and Questionarye Doctors doo most estéeme But some had rather this to be the cause for that y e doctrine of the Lawe began from writing for by and by the Tables of the Law being written were publyshed but the doctrine of the gospell began from the preching of Christ his Apostles Touching the which controuersie that we maye not wander out of our determined limits let the Reader looke Lira his eight chapter in the Epistle to the Hebrewes chap. 10. But for as much as appertayneth to the former Obiection wée saye that neyther Ieremie nor Paule doo there denie the writings of the newe Testament but that they onelye dispute there touching the esstcacie of the spirituall giftes of the holye Ghost which were farre greater in the time of the newe Testament then euer at any time before according to the Prophecie of Ioel which Peter expoundeth the second to the Acts. Wherefore those places must be vnderstoode by comparison for otherwise it would followe that the lawe of God was not written in the minde and heart of the godly which liued in the time of the olde Testament which thing these places of Scripture which héere we alleadge doo otherwise prooue Esa 51. Harken vnto me ye which know iustice the people in whose hart is my law And Psa 37. The law of the Lord is in his heart Also 51. Recreate a new heart within me O God and renue a right spirit within me Also Deut. 30. The Lord will circumcise the heart And againe Psal 1. His delight is in the lawe of the Lord doth meditate therein daie and night And in diuers other places doeth Dauid testifie that hée hath the lawe of the Lord euen as it were ingraffed within his minde And finally that I may passe ouer many such like places when Salomon sheweth forth precepts out of the law of God he biddeth that they should be written in the tables of y e heart And thus much touching the Anteredent where our aduersaries commit most great errour reasoning Secundum quid ad id quod impliciter Now therefore I denie their consequent the errours of the which I will perticularly recite The first errour is that y e consequent cannot follow for it followeth not to saie the doctrine of the lawe was written in Tables ergo the doctrine of the Gospell is not written at all Againe the Gospell is written in the heart ergo it is not written in Tables Who séeth not that these are friuolous argumentes and that their consequents are false Againe they bring in a new kind of reasoning and reason from an vniuersall affirmatiue to a particular negatiue for thus they say God wrote al the doctrine of the Gospell in the minde of the godly Ergo certaine things appertaining vnto the doctrine of the Gospell are not written by the Apostles The which kinde of concluding euen children would hisse at for of necessitie thus they must reason Nothing y t is written in the heart is written in tables but the whole doctrine of the Gospell is written in the heart ergo no part of the doctrine of the Gospel is written in tables The Maior is so false that euery man may sée it The second errour is Falacia in figura dictionis as y e Logitians terme it for they confound words of one signification with those of diuerse significations for to write in tables is a proper kinde of spéech but to write in the heart is a borowed kinde of spéech and therefore of diuers significations spoken by a Metaphore and similitude Whereby it commeth to passe that Paule vsed another kinde of speaking when hée sayde that the Corinthians were his Epistle for hée went forwarde with the argument he had in hande which was when false Apostles would haue crept into the mindes of the Corinthians by Letters of commendations then sayth he I haue no néed of such Epistles for you are mine epistle for my labor my diligence is manifest towards you euen in the eies of all men For all sée and as I may saie may reade in you the doctrine of Christ which I haue preached vnto you and to conclude this is the summe that the Corinthians were so perfectly instructed and so well taught in the doctrine of y e gospel y t they might well remaine therin Whosoeuer thefore doth gather by these words of y e apostle that the apostles did not write all things necessarie to saluation truly he may be thought not to be well in his wits The third errour is for that they make the efficient cause to repugne with the cause instrumentall For God is hée who writeth the Gospell in the heart but Mathew Paule and the rest write the doctrine of the Gospell in tables and were the instruments of the spirit of God Therefore Paule in that place sayd that the Corinthians were his Epistle the epistle of Christ ministred saith hée by vs Loe héere you may sée that hée maketh distinction betwéene his owne ministerie and the efficacie of the holie Ghost Wherefore our aduersaries conclude as if one should reason thus God hath restored a sicke person vnto his former health ergo the Phisition prescribed nothing gaue him nothing to drinke neither yet vsed anie outwarde remedies Now if this conclusion be of anie force then this must néeds followe GOD wrote the Gospel in the minde ergo the Apostles wrote not the whole doctrine of the Gospell in Tables The fourth errour is because the consequent agréeth not with their antecedent for if in the antecedent they oppone y e inuisible Scriptures vnto y e visible then trulie they would bring this to pase y e one scripture being y e other caÌ„not be for vnto what other ende doe they applie their opposition opponing y e inuisible scriptures to the visible but y t they may coÌ„clude somwhat But in the consequent they come backe againe and say that certaine things are not written necessary to saluation when as they should haue said if so be they wold reason like logitians as before it is shewed y â— ther was nothing writteÌ„ necessary to saluatioÌ„ But the manifest truth in this point hath amased them And that they may sée howe vnhansomely they goe to worke in their â—pposition I demaund this whether the faithfull haue not all those things written in their hearts which are written in Tables being necessarie to faith and saluation Truly I thinke yes For Saint Iohn saith These things are written that ye might beleeue and in beleeuing haue eternall life So farre void is it therefore that the one being the other shuld be cleane taken awaie but rather the one is a helpe to the other to wit that the visible writings of the Apostles is a furtherance vnto the inuisible writings of the spirite of God The 5. Error is
y e same place the which we will take and drawe from the verie place it selfe Christ his words are these I haue manie things to speake vnto you but you cannot beare them awaie nowe but when the spirit of truth shall come hee shall leade you into all truth Wherefore that we may now vse rather the wordes of Tertulian then our owne we saie thus Christ sayd plainly I haue manie things to saie vnto you but yet adding this When the spirit of truth shall come he shal lead you into all truth he héerby sheweth that the Apostles were not ignorāt of any thing c. Wherby it cōmeth to passe that the Apostles taught all those things which were necessarie to saluation as Tertulian saith did publish a sufficiēt rule vnto al men Therfore Christ in this place meaneth thus y t then y e Apostles should be fully perfectly instructed when they shuld be indowed with y e visible miraculous gifts of the holy ghost this our expositiō is easily gathered from Iohn Nowe I come to the consequence or conclusion in y e which truely I find not anie shew of truth nor any kind of tast of true diuinitie for their error is secundū ignorātiam elenchi as the schoolmen say inasmuch as y ◠like proportiō of time is not obserued The Apostles before y e resurrectiō of Christ before they had receiued the miraculous gifts of y e holy ghost were not able sufficiently to bere away al things which appertained to y e mysteries of christian religion ergo say they the Apostles were ignorant of those mysteries after the resurrection of Christ after the receiuing of the gifts of y e holy Ghost Truly a verie foolish kind of reasoning Christ had many things to declare vnto them ergo say our aduersaries they must be those which y e papistical massing prists do fondly dreame of No doubt of y t their consequence hangeth not with their antecedent therfore we may vrge thē to this absurditie If the Apostles wrote not all things which were necessarie to saluation because they could not beare awaie manie things which Christ had to speake before his resurrection and before the sending of the Holie ghost then would it followe that the Apostles were not led into all truth by the holie ghost after that he was sent vnto them The which is most false and reproued euen by the place of Iohn For he saith And he shal lead you into all truth Also it would folow that Paule did neuer declare the full counsel of god the which thing is most false as Paul himselfe affirmeth Act 20. and 27. Now therefore we will turne this their argument vpon their owne heads saieng thus If the apostles wrote not al things because they could not beare awaie all things thē trulie did they neuer teach all things by mouth And by force of the consequent this place of Iohn can nothing appertaine vnto traditions of the apostles not written But perchance they will say that those mysteries of saluation y e which Christ hid frō his apostles wer reueled to y e Bishops of Rome y ◠which if it wer true then truly the Bishops of Rome were no more to be called the successors of the Apostles onely but those who farre did excéede all the Apostles the which God forbid that wée once should thinke Let vs therfore amend this error in this sort and affirme that although the Apostles before the sending of the holie Ghost were not so fully capable of the mysteries of God which appertain vnto the doctrine of the Gospell yet notwithstanding after the comforter was sent and after they were led into all truth it is most vndoubted that the whole truth which appertaineth vnto our saluation was both taught by mouth by the Apostles as also published in writing Paule commendeth the Corinthians because they kept his traditions Ergo Paule taught manie things by mouth which hee wrote not The antecedent is prooued 1. Cor. 11. I praise you bretheren saith Paule that you remember all my things and keepe the traditions or ordinaunce as I haue deliuered them vnto you Nowe let vs come to the examining of theyr Antecedent This place of Paule is expounded by Chrisostome and Ambrose as also of many other learned of this our time not touching doctrine but touching ecclesiasticall rytes and ceremonies Others againe confesse indéede that Paule doth héere intreate of certaine rytes both appertaining to good order and comlinesse But yet notwithstanding our aduersaries denie that these wordes which they obiect vnto vs are to be restrained to those rytes and they rather vnderstande and interpret this place generally because Paule héere hath spoken it generally for he saith I commende you brethren for that you haue remembred all my thinges c. Also they adde this word Traditiō héere vsed indefinite or generally scarce sound in the writings of the Apostles restrained or tied only to traditions which appertain to orders and rytes of the Church Wherfore they expound Paules words after this sort You will keepe in memorie all those things which I haue taught therein truly I gretly praise you But because amongst other things which I deliuered vnto you to be obserued touching rytes and ceremonies in your Ecclesiastical assemblies and for that certaine are contencious amongst you which doo not so well lyke of them therfore I declare these my reasons by the which I was ledde to deliuer them vnto you this is theyr exposition of this place But after what sorte soeuer our aduersaries doo vnderstand it yet truly their conclusion shall neuer be of any force For if he dispute there touching rites and ceremonies only then is this place without the compasse of our disputation for we dispute touching those things which are necessarie to saluation and not of rites and ceremonies which may be chaunged for diuers causes Againe if they be willing héere that he should intreate of doctrine yet serueth it not anie thing for their purpose as I wil now declare for I denie the consequent Paule deliuered many things to the Corinthians Ergo some of them saye they are not written The consequent hereof is false Yet I confesse that this place hath deceiued Theophilact and some others Yet truly that I may speake it by the fauour of all the godly they haue héere fowlie stūbled in a plain leuel way For first Paul did write that same tradition touching the rytes of the which he there speketh Again although he had not written to the Corinthians yet he might write vnto others To conclude if they were not extant in the writings of Paul yet might they be found in the writings of the other Apostles But Paule saith Be followers of me as I follow Christ He therfore deliuered nothing that might in one iote be repugnaunt with Christ the which notwithstanding our aduersaries doo I will héere annexe certaine other places
of Arius yea the Apostles theÌ„selues knew not al things necessarie vnto faith The which thing is most absurd sauouring of Athisme And therefore we may well turne this argument home againe vnto our aduersaries saying If such were the religion of the auncient fathers that they would not inuent anie one word to the intreating vpon anie principle of faith the which was not grounded vpon expresse places of scriptures as it is manifest by these words trinitie substance persons such like what shal we then think of our aduersaries which do not only inueÌ„t words but also eueÌ„ matter it self altogether abhorring contrarie to the Scriptures of God And therefore we may amend y e error of this their obiection saying That it is lawfull for the godly fathers of the church of God to vse inuent certaine words and tearmes whereby the matter contained in the scriptures may the better easier bée expressed If we must altogether beleeue the church in no part swarue from the credit of the church we beleeue the church in this part affirming that the scriptures came from the spirit of God theÌ„ truly we ought to beleeue the church likewise affirming that these such other like traditions came from the Apostles The antecedent is true and therfore it must follow that the coÌ„sequeÌ„t is also true The Maior hath two parts touching the which we will particularly speake And touching the first point I doe make a distinction of the Church which Paule calleth the house of God the piller foundation of truth which heareth y e voice of her spouse onely dependeth vpon his mouth and is alwaies gouerned by the spirit of God cannot be séene because shée is not tied to circuÌ„stances of place time or persons yet notwithstaÌ„ding we beleeue y â— the same church is vpholden by the word of God that she nothing estéemeth mans traditions But this or y e visible Church or the companie of many visible congregations may swarue from the truth as it is manifest touching the Churches in the East of which y â— most part haue turned to Mahumet I will not héere bring in the ancient counsells which haue both allowed brought into y e church great gréeuous errors And touching this church we may thus determine inasmuch as she is subiect to many errors she is not otherwise to be heard except shée speake those thinges which are agréeable to the Scriptures touching which matter I haue disputed more at large in another place wherefore this hath héere no place which they say affirme y â— wée must altogether beléeue the church in part swarue froÌ„ the credit of the same theÌ„ must we beléeue the visible Churches when as they propound nothing els vnto vs but the word of God on the other side we ought not to beléeue the visible churches when they swarue froÌ„ the word of God for I make my example by the Sinagogue which very religiously hath reserued the Cannons or bookes of the Scriptures yet notwithstanding she hath innumerable errors So theÌ„ we may beléeue the same Sinagogue whereby she saith y â— the Canonicall bookes haue sprong from y e spirit of God againe we may not beléeue her when she reiecteth casteth away the doctrine of Christ Therfore in y â— respect Christ saith The Scribes Pharesies sitting in Moses chaire are to be heard yet notwithstanding in another place he reprehendeth reproueth their traditions whereby wée sée proued that in one parte they ought to be heard on the other not Wherfore their Minor is not true so the consequence cannot stand because there is an error Secundum fallaciam figurae dictionis And they reasoning thus we may well bring theÌ„ to a great inconuenience saying In the time of Tertulian the church did affirme that an oblation for birth daies was a tradition receiued from the Apostles but in the time of the NiceÌ„e couÌ„sel the church did affirme that oblation for birth daies was not a tradition of the Apostles as in his proper place I haue proued ergo if wee must in all parts beleeue the Church and in no parte swarue from the Church then must we beleeue the things which are manifest opposit contarrie one to the other the which is impossible Wherefore we may turne their obiection vpon themselues after this sort saying Whosoeuer affirmeth the scripture to be the word of god the which we ought to beleeue likewise affirmeth that traditions not written are to be receiued speketh coÌ„traries But the Church of Rome affirmeth the scriptures to be the word of god which we ought to beleeue also affirmeth that traditions not writteÌ„ are to be receiued Ergo the church of Rome affirmeth contraries by force of the consequent we must beleeue hir in one part in another not if this be of anie force that we must beleue the church in all parts swarue froÌ„ hir in no part theÌ„ this foloweth by their argumeÌ„t that the Church may not wel be called the Church For y e truth of the maior proposition is proued thus If you did me beléeâ—e the scriptures truly I will beléeue y t there is nothing to be added thervnto because y t it is so commanded in them as I haue in diuers places of my booke proued therefore this sentence of Tertulian is highly to be imbraced WheÌ„ we beleeue saith he this first we must beleeue that there is nothing els that we ought to beleue Now if we wil consider the traditions of our aduersaries we shal easily perceiue y t they are not only added by inuentions but also contrarie to expresse places of scripture so ye sée y t we cannot beléeue the scriptures also the traditions of our aduersaries And therefore we may amend the error of the former obiection after this manner Sith we ought to beléeue God alone then most diligently ought we to take héede least vnder the shew of pietie we be seduced into errour and because the name of the Church is verie glorious therefore if anie thing be proposed vnto vs vnder the title of the Church we ought to giue atteÌ„tiue diligence whether it be y e voyce of the true church or not which we heare y t we may be able so to doo we must take counsell with the word of God set foorth vnto vs in the Scriptures from the which the true church of God neuer swerneth wheÌ„ therefore the Church affirmeth vnto vs that the scriptures are the word of God we acknowledge the same to be true not onely because the church so affirmeth but because of the inward efficacie of the spirite of God by the which the truth of the scriptures is sealed in our hearts lyke as the church by the conduction of the spirite of God affirmeth vnto vs y t the scripture is the word
Scriptures Againe If anie of those men vvhich are reported to haue the holie spirit of God doo saie anie thing of himselfe vvhich may not be proued by the holie Scriptures beleeue him not Doth Manes the Heretike say that the summe or the monie worke anie thing of themselues Where hast thou read this If he haue not read it in the Scriptures but speaketh it of himselfe it is manifest that he hath not the spirit of God And againe those that are true Christians let them betake themselues to the Scriptures because there canne be no other proofe of true christianitie then the diuine and holy Scriptures Basil It is a manifest Argument of infidelitie a flat signe of pride if anie man will reiect anie of those thinges which are not vvritten or bring into the Church anie of those things vvhich are not vvritten sith the Lord himselfe sayth My sheep heare my voyce and follovve not a straunger Againe Whatsoeuer vve speake or doo that ought to be confirmed by the testimonie of the holie Scriptures Also the Apostle taking the example from men Gal. 3. doth most vehemently forbid that anie of those thinges which are in the holy Scripture should be put out or else vvhich God forbid that anie thing should be added Againe If vvhatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne and faith commeth by hearing and hearing by the vvorde of GOD Then vvithout doubt sith vvhatsoeuer is vvithout the scriptures is not of faith the same is sinne And in another place Let vs stande to the iudgement of the holy Scriptures proceeding from GOD and vvith vvhome so euer are founde pointes of religion agreeing to the holie Scriptures to them let the vvhole opinion of truth bee alotted Againe of all those things vvhich vve haue in vse both of vvords and deeds some are distinctly set dovvne in the Scriptures some omitted but those things which are contained in the scriptures by no meanes must be omitted but of those things which are not found in the scriptures we haue a flat rule deliuered vnto vs by Paule All things are lawful but all things are not necessarie Hierome The vniuersall Church of Christ hauing in possession all the Churches in the world is vnited together by the vnitie of the spirit and hath the words of the Lawe of the Prophets of the Gospell and of the Apostles and she may not passe hir bounds that is from the holie Scriptures Againe Those things which men faine with out authoritie of Scripture as comming frō the Apostles by Tradition the sworde of God which is his word doth cut away And also that which hath not the authoritie of the Scriptures is with the same facilitie contemned with the which it was allowed Augustine Neither ought I to alleadge the Nicene counsell neither thou the counsell of Aremineus as though we would determine causes therewith for neither I am boūd vnto the authoritie of the one neither thou of the other but let each thing with other each cause with cause reason with reason be tried by the authoritie of the scriptures And again Ther is cōstituted ordained one ecclesiasticall cannon or rule vnto the which belongeth the bokes of the Prophets and Apostles by whose writings we ought to iudge touching the writings of others whether they be faithfull or vnfaithfull Againe Our Lord wold that we shuld beleeue nothing against the confirmed authoritie of the Scriptures Againe Let vs bring foorth the diuine Ballaunce of the holie Scriptures and let vs weigh in them what so euer is of anie waight or value Damascene As a tree planted by the riuers of waters euen so doth the soule of man which is moistened by the heauenlie scriptures bring foorth timelie fruite which is true and perfect faith And againe Let vs receiue acknowledge and reuerence all those things which are deliuered vnto vs by the Lawe Prophets Apostles and Euangelists seeking nothing which is not contained in them And least we should seeme altogether to neglect and despise the Schoolemen heare what Scotus saith It is most manifest that the Scriptures sufficiently doo containe all doctrine necessarie to the pilgrime that trauaileth heere in the world Peter Stelliaco Wee must runne vnto the scriptures alone that we may attain eternall life And Gracianus in his decrees doeth repeat that sentence of Augustine which wee haue before rehersed And many more may be recited vnto the like effect but heere we cease because wee will wander no farther That we may now therefore make an ende of the obiections of our aduersaries which they gather from y e writings of the Doctors we will comprehend the effect of all those their obiections which they haue or can bring forth in an argument which is thus The Doctors of the Church haue thought that besides the holie Scriptures traditions not written ought also to be receiued Ergo all those things which are necessarie vnto faith and saluation are not contained in the Scriptures Let vs now trie their antecedent It is manifest by y e testimonies of the ancient Fathers which before wée haue alleadged y t those auncient fathers haue not written all alike touching traditions for first it behooued to knowe the minde and opinion of the olde Doctors before they obiect them to vs. But let this be the full summe of all those things which the auncient doctors who are most to be accounted of haue written touching Traditions All those things which are deliuered either appertaine to the principles of religion and constitution of manners or else vnto ecclesiasticall rites and orders of the Church but those thinges which appertaine to principles of faith and manners are most surely contained in the Scriptures neither is it anie hinderāce if certaine kinds of spéech to the easie explication of doctrine principles of religion be not found by expresse words in the holy Scriptures so that the matter it selfe the sence signified by these tearms be extant in the scriptures But as touching those things which appertain vnto rites ecclesiasticall order if they agrée with the Scriptures and serue to the edification of the Church Yea finally if they be receiued with the common consent of the whole Church then are they with greate reuerence to be receiued and that this was the opinion and minde of the auncient Fathers I thinke it is sufficiently made manifest by these things which haue bene alleadged before whereby we may sée that the ground and matter of our aduersaries is false Now therfore I denie their consequent for the errour is in forme of reasoning the Argument is grounded vpon the misvnderstanding of the fathers Another errour is this for that they take that to bée graunted which lyeth betwéene vs in controuersie For thus standeth the case betwéene vs whether in confirming principles of faith the scriptures alone be to bée harde yea or nay But our aduersaries