hee needeth not produce the text for it The new Testament is Historicall Epistolar The diuision of the bookes ef the new Testament or Misticall which by their verie names and natures exclude all such exactnesse as of necessitie is required to a iudging law they being all written vpō speciall occasions and for particular ends manie things repeated manie things left out in one which are found in an other scarsely anie one knowing of an others writings Those things which are in the Historie and in the Epistles are expressed as was fitting for the vnderstanding of them to whō they were written or to whom the recited speech was made circumstances farr different to what is conuenient and accōmodated to our vnderstandings now And as an able mā saith of historie that because it must needes leane and rely vpon all circumstances euen of smale moment he that should gouerne him selfe by it must of necessitie be misled so in our case the want of knowing circumstances and not comprehending the true meaning of what was written in a particular occasion must of necessitie make vs apt and subiect to take our ayme and rule amisse The misticall booke which we call the Apocalips being a pure Allegorie is the most vnfitting of all This in my iudgment is so euident that if anie man of common sense would but reflect and really considere what is requisite to determine a litigious controuersie betwixt two men passionate of their owne opinions he would neuer saie that scripture is a booke ether intended by Allmightie God or anie waie fit for such a pourpose Besides a prudent and experienced man will tell you that who looketh in to the various dispositions of men's vnderstandings but especially of men's wills and seeth the varietie and miltiplicitie of men's interests and passions Which for the most part are publickly noted in euerie mā or at least so inwardly hidden and secretly couered that some times euen he who would and doth sweare and protest him self free from all such pre-occupations is neuerthelesse the most dangerously intangled that such an one I saie will neuer thinke to finde two in two thousand who left to their owne libertie will agree in the interpretatiō of anie law how plane soeuer where both are oppositly interressed But if wee put this law to be supernatural and Deuine full of misticall and sublime commandes wherevnto nature hath not the least inckling whereby to raise hir self to the knowledge thereof but must of necessitie wholy and precisely rely vpon authoritie and captiuate hir vnderstanding in obsequium fidei and this to the most obscure and darke points and articles that can be imagined shall wee saie that in this case euerie one is to gather this law and come to the knowledge of it as well as he can out of the scripture alone so full of infinite ambiguitie as you haue seene Were it not first to be proued that scripture was made and intended for this end which how possible it is to performe let anie indifferent mā iudge Whereas to remitte the iudgment of all quarells disputes and controuersies of Religiō vnto liuing men is more efficacious more sutable to nature and discretion and in a word conformable to the practize of our forefathers and to the principles of common sense and reason Nephew I must confesse I shall neuer thinke scripture was giuen for a iudge of controuersies For to make so large a booke and to mingle in it so manie things which ether appertaine not at all to the substance of our beliefe or be verie remotely cōnexed vnto it And then to leaue it to our ghessing what may be the meaning of the words doth plainely argue some other intention in the writer then to set downe a standing and authenticall text to decide quarells And although I heare the Protestants saie that a plaine passage cleareth an obscure so may it be said that an obscure passage darkeneth a cleere so that 's all one Wherefore I long to know for what vse the scripture was made Vncle. Haue yet a litle patience cozen Diuers substantiall points haue beene opposed by antient Heretickes and make a reflexion vpon some cheefe pointes which haue beene cōtrouerted in the church of God As by the Arrians how a spirituall ād indiuisible essēce such as God is coulde haue a natural sonne By the Trinitarians and Sabellians how the same indiuisible thing could bee three persons By the Nestorians and Eutychians how one person could subsiste in two natures By the Pelagians how God's foreknowledge and predestinatiō could stand with merits and freewill By the Iconoclasts how the adoration of Images tended and ended in the Archetype By the Berangarians how a naturall bodie can haue corporall presence otherwise then by it's quantitie By our Wicklefists how all things be not gouerned by a fatall necessitie And all these renewed by the libertie and confusion of our last ages Considere the subtilitie of these questions how they are aboue nature and aboue our comprehensiō how the truths of these disputes are like the passage betwixt Scylla and Charybdis limited betwixt two errours so narrowly as that when they are spoken of at large and not dogmatically specially before they be examined and before the speaker by mistrust of opposition is made warie it is almost impossible the speaker should be so iust and straight in his language as not to giue occasion to one who comes after him to pretende his fauour for the one or the other errour Considere farther that wrangling witts such as for the most part they are who first beginne a new factiō in the church haue this property that they reduce their questions by litle and litle to logicall and abstracted notiōs and force the Catholikes to follow them if they will not desert their antient truths so that after a while one knoweth not where the controuersie lyeth For example Simon Magus and the first authours of our last Breaches preached that faith did so iustifie as that good workes were not necessarie now their followers drawe the question to this whether faith or charitie be the forme of iustification which is all most pure Logicke Now if an Arrian come and tell you that the scripture saith Pater maior me est and therefore that Christ Iesus was not truly God nor consubstantiall to his father And the like maie be said of the rest of these heresies and euen of all the most substantiall and fundamentall points of Christian faith The Catholike maintaine's the cōtrarie now I saie is it possible that anie rationall man should thinke that these and the like questions can be diffinitiuely resolued by a criticall libratiō of dead and vncertaine words full of equiuocall ambiguitie their sense and meaning lying in the brest and minde of him who is not to be found but deceassed manie ages agone And if they cannot as it is more then euident they cannot shall wee thinke that Christ Iesus hath left and established no meanes
decision of controuersies it is not to bee expected that it should bee of it selfe without the churche's authoritie much profitable for that pourpose but to informe our liues by an ordinarie reading of it or by preaching singing and such like vses things recommended in the verie letter it self whereas wee are neuer seÌ„t to the word for the deciding of controuersies And now I hope you are fully satisfied Nephew I am so in deede and giue you manie thankes for I see that how few pointes soeuer the Protestants pretende to be necessarie yet caÌ„ there not anie thing be conuinced out of bare words inuoluing soe manie vncertainties as you haue tould me of Vncle. It is to litle pourpose for them to saie that some few substaÌ„tiall and necessarie pointes may bee proued out of scripture it were fitter they would first proue that the scripture is an instrument made to determine controuersies or anie other of those principles which I shewd you must of necessitie be true if scripture bee our rule But this they can neuer proue And therefore they seeke first to withdraw vs from a secure and naturall meanes of relying vpon our forefathers Which neuerthelesse in all ciuill and oeconomicall conuersation they them selues can not liue without and then to leaue vs to a labyrinth of voluntary and vnendable disputations Reflect then I pray cozen vpon what wee haue said and compare our yesternight's and this our morning's discourse together considering first how manie things are of necessitie to bee conserued in the church for the preseruation of faith and good life in hir subiects Then see how manie pointes haue beene and are quarelled and if anie haue escaped how all the rest may be caled in question with as much probabilitie and apparence as these are Then looke vpon the qualities of that Decider of controuersies where vnto all the Aduersaries of the Catholike church doe seeke to draw vs by which there can be no other end of controuersies but to leaue euerie man to his owne will And then conclude that these positions being put there will nether remaine gouerment in the church nor certaintie or constancie in beliefe nor anie thing to be taught and practized worthie God Allmightie's sending of a lawgiuer muchlesse of sending his owne sonne vpon those hard conditioÌ„s which wee appreheÌ„de of Iesus Christ and reade in the Ghospell Nephew It is verie true but if your leaue mee thus I shall bee like him who had fargot his Pater noster but not learned his Our father For you haue taught mee what I cannot rely vpon but not what I ought to rely vpon And there is so much said against the authoritie of the church by all hir Aduersaries that a man who hath beene euer beaten to those obiections cannot easily leaue them without some scrupule Vncle. You are in the right the most necessarie part is yet behinde for a litle building is better then a great deale of pulling downe Therefore when your leisure serueth you I will bee readie to giue you satisfaction to the best of my power But now this morning is too farr spent to beginne so large a discourse as that question doth require Take an other time and the sooner the more welcome But for the present God be with you I haue some prayers to save THE THIRD DIALOGVE By what meanes Controuersies in Religion may be ended This Dialogue containeth 15. parts or paragraphes 1. THe Preface or Introduction 2. What force the arguments of Protestants against Catholikes ought to haue 3. That standing in likelyhood the Catholike partie is greater more learned and more vertuous 4. Of what efficacitie is this argumeÌ„t 5. That it is no hard matter that Christ's law should haue desceÌ„ded entire vnto vs. 6. That if Christ's law could haue beene conserued it hath beene conserued 7. That no great errour could creepe in to the church of God 8. That the truth of the Catholike doctrine hath continued in the church 9. That the dissention of Catholike Doctours coÌ„cerning the rule of faith doth not hurt the certaintie of tradition 10. That the teaching of Christian doctrine without determining what of necessitie is to be belieued and what not hurte's not the progresse of tradition 11. That no errour can passe vniuersally through the church of God 12. That these precedente discourses beare an absolute certaintie 13. Some obiections are solued 14. The Examples of traditions which seeme to haue failed are examined 15. The conclusion of the whole discourse §. 1 The Introduction NEPHEW I am come vncle to challenge you of your promise for I cannot be quiet vntill you haue setled me in this so weightie a matter If the pointes which are in coÌ„trouersie be as you saie and as you haue clearly shewd me of great consequence and that by scripture we cannot decide them against contentious meÌ„ I see that ether wee must seeke some other meanes or els all Religion wil bee confounded and the truth of Christ's law vnknowne and neglected Wherefore I pray if you can giue mee a strong resolution in this point Vncle. Why nephew if this feruour continue you will not neede be a scholler but for a yeare aÌ„d a day I pray you coÌ„sidere it is a faire daie and you neuer want imployment for the afternoones when the wether 's faire if I should staie you now you would perhapps so repent it that I should not I feare see you againe this month be not so greedie as to take a surfeite Nephew I feare my owne inconstancie and therefore I pray refuse me not discontinuance may breede coaldnesse specially if what you haue alreadie taught me should bee sullyed with worse thoughts and then I should not be so capable of your instructions as I hope I am at this present Which I haue good reason to make great esteeme of Vncle. Well if you will haue it so you must giue me leaue to trench vpon a good part of your Afternoone for I may bee long in this point and I would be loath to breake of in the midle Yet I will bee as short as possibly I can Tell me then had Iesus Christ euer a church or no And I would haue you answere me what you thinke a iudicious Protestant would saie to the same demande Nephew I doubt not but anie Protestant of them all would answere you that at least in the Apostles time Christ had a visible church coÌ„sisting of the faithfull which adhered to the Apostles and such Bishopps as were made by them but that since that time it is fallen into great errours and ether mainely Apostated from the true doctrine of Christ or at least â—o deformed it that a reformation was necessarie euen in pointes of beliefe And this reforme their forefathers vndertooke Vncle. You are likewise persuaded I suppose cozen by the same euidence that in the Apostles time this church was a communion with the particular church of Rome and therefore I will goe a litle further and aske you
certainely knowne hitherto nor euer expressy belieued before Which how they may be reconciled amongst them selues or stand with this that tradition is our rule of faith I confesse I know not Vncle. Truly cozen your obiection is strong yet I hope to content you For the first part of it I see no great matter in the varietie of opinions amongst our Deuines for you see they seeke out the Decider of pointes of doctrine that is by whose mouth we are to know vpon occasions of dispute what and which be our pointes and articles of faith to wit whether the Pope or the Councell or both Which is not much materiall to our pourpose what euer the truth be supposing we acknowledge no articles of faith but such as haue descended vnto vs by tradition from Christ and his Apostles The second part of your obiection seeme's to be of greater force because some Deuines seeme to acknowledge an authoritie in the church which hath power not only to determine ether speculatiue or practicall points of doctrine new or ould in such manner as that the whole church is obliged to accepte or not oppose it's definition which euerie Catholike grante's and the reasons I tould you in our first conference doe euidently conuince But also that this authoritie can so determine euen a speculatiue pointe of doctrine which hitherto was euer vncertaine nor euer acknowledge as reueiled or esteemed as an article of faith that here after the vhole church shal be obliged to receiue acknowledge and belieue it as a reuealed and necessarie point of Christian doctrine and as an article of faith Which opinion you must knowe is but an opinion nor doe the authours of it oblige anie man to belieue it as certaine nor doe they condemne those who nether doe nor euer will acknowledge anie such positiō ād therefore this ought not to trouble you Nay contrariwise all Deuines will generally tell you that no new articles of faith can be made that there 's now no reuelations for new points of doctrine and that Christ Iesus was our only law maker in this kinde hauing suggested to his Apostles all that is necessarie of this nature and qualitie and the Apostles likewise taught their churches all that was necessarie to be knowne of this degree Wherefore you see all agree vpon tradition nor anie one ether denie it or doubt of it Whereas it appeare's by the diuersitie of their opinions that they doe not vniuersally and generally agree in anie other meanes or rule of faith though some admitte of another in waie of opinion Yet to giue you farther satisfaction in this busines I will teach you a point of philosophie which perhapps you neuer fully vnderstood I am sure you will not denie but t' is a differēt questiō to aske how an herbe or tree growe's and to aske how Aristole or Theophrastus saies it growe's for in the same growing there can be no varietie but in their opiniōs there may So in man t' is a differēt thing what he doth or is done in him and what he thinkes he doth or is done in him as in sicknesse disgestion and other naturall workes t' is euident yea and in voluntary actions too Which depende of corporall instruments as to goe runne turne our eyes speake cough spit or the like which we doe freely and voluntarily yet were we examined by what instruments and motiōs we doe thē peraduēture who seeme's to know most would be found short at least amongst manie there would be diuers opinions But doe you thinke the same happen's in our thoughts and iudgmēts which be purely spirituall Nephew I cannot tell yet me thinke's the soule should be so wel acquainted with hir owne actiōs as that she should not neede anie helpe to know them And all men agree that only man vpon earth can see his owne minde and therefore if it be not cleere to man what himself thinke's nothing is cleere Vncle. You are deceiued cosen for as long as we are in this world we cannot know anie thing of our owne thoughts and affections but as we reflect vpon the corporall motions which accompanie them and which because none feele but our selues none can knowe bur our selues though sometimes it happene's quite contrarie when these motiōs breake forth into outward apparence for thē others discrye our mindes and we our selues through the violēce of passiō are not so wel able ro iudge of them as others who see vs. But to speake of men free from passion and who vse to reflect much vpon their owne thoughts euen in them their internall actions proceede frō a principle directed by a superior guide then their owne reason as appeare's by this that they know nothing of their owne thoughts but by reflection and the reflection is a distinct act from the former vpon which the reflectiō is made so that nether the reflectiō it self is alwaise made by voluntarie designe nor anie act which is made without reflection Besides considere I pray how few know by what verue their vnderstandings are made certaine of those principles and positiōs which they cannot doubt of or by what vertue they adhere so strongly to the conclusion of a sylogisme not one of a thousand who doe these things euerie day Wherefore t' is euidēt that euen in our spirituall actions not all that we doe is done by our proper vnderstāding that is with knowing reflection and designe and therefore the same man may euē in these intellectuall acts doe one thing and thinke he doth an other and diuers men may agree in what they doe and yet disagree in their opinions of what it is they doe And now to close with your difficultie seeing faith is a persuasion or an agreeing in some points by reason af authoritie All the Doctors of the Catholike church may agree in beleeuing that is in acting and practizing their faith in the same manner and yet be deuided in their speculations by which they seeke to determine what it is they doe And it is their doeings which make's them Christians and not their sayings for they liue and beleeue as Christians but speake and deliuer their opinions as Doctors which be qualities farr different from being a Christian And doe you not see that these Doctors belieue after their speculations and framing of their opinions as they did before they thought of or studied this difficultie Nephew I doe not doubt but they doe for the faith of all Christians must needes be the same and consequently all must goe vpon the same motiue though one may vnderstand better and apprehende deeper that motiue then an other doth Vncle. You saie well Considere then that when these Doctors were yong men and had not yet studied Diuinitie and you shall finde that they had no other motiue of their belife but the authoritie of the present church and therefore how soeuer they discourse learnedly in their bookes the conclusion must be in their liues to rest vpon the authoritie of the