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
which they call Apostolike wée denie that they are the traditions of y e Apostles then they recite Tertulian Ireneus and especially one Clement I knowe not who which of late yeres hath stepped out of the Monkish Cloisters all these Doctors saie our aduersaries affirme the traditions to be the traditions of y e Apostles But if such kind of traditions are to be receiued w t like authoritie with the scriptures then it followeth that with like constancie of fayth we must beléeue that those traditions are the traditions of the 〈◊〉 euen as we beléeue that the hoye Scripture was â—witten by the commaundement of the holie Ghost The which if it bee true then it followeth againe that wée must euen giue the lyke credite to the writinges of Tertulian Irenaeus and Clement as we giue to the writinges of the Prophetes and Apostles But let it bée that sons demaundeth why I doe beleeue that the Apostles did preach by mouth that Christ was 〈◊〉 for our saluationâ— I â—â—â—swere that I beléeue because that the 〈◊〉 and Euangelisâ—e◠〈◊〉 so written But if I shouldâ— demaunde our 〈…〉 wherefore they beléeue that the Apostlâ—â— taâ—ght those 〈◊〉 by mouth whiâ—â— doe appertaine with their 〈◊〉 then they will aunswere they doe 〈◊〉 it because some of the olde Doctors 〈…〉 beléeue the writings of the 〈…〉 with the 〈…〉 belé the 〈…〉 Apostles I do not héere dispute 〈…〉 the mind opinion of the old fathers of which we wil speak in his proper place but héere only I am willing to maâ—â—e the consequent of our former proposition somewhat more plaine The Minor is manifest for what godly man did euer make the writings of the old fathers equiualent with the writings of y e Apostles Naie I suppose our aduersaries themselues will not say so except they bée altogether vnmindfull of their owne Canon taken out of Augustine And the force of the consequeÌ„t which we haue added vnto the end of the argument is manifest as it shall appeare in the argument heere following We maie not beleeue anie traditions touching the which there remaineth no certaintie But all traditions not written the which our aduersaries bring forth are euen such that there remaineth no certaintie touching them Ergo wee maye not beleeue anie traditions not written which our aduersaries bring or alleadge And by force of the consequent all traditions are to bee reiected and not to be receiued in causes of faith The truth of the Maior proposition is manifest of himselfe And the minor is prooued by these inductions following Clemens Alexandrinus affirmeth That the Apostles deliuered certaine secrets vnto some men as traditions from the apostles citeth this place of Paul 1. Cor. 2. We speak wisdome amongst those which are perfect Tertulian contrariwise refelleth that error with most graue arguments And Irenaeus saith That this was the opinion of the olde Heretikes and aunswereth that place of Paule which those Heretikes did corrupt Manie doo attribute the whole cannon of the Masse vnto the Apostles Contrariwise Saint Hierome and some other of the olde Fathers affirme that the Apostles were content with the Lordes praier Epiphanius saith That the Apostles did command both thursdaie and fridaie to be fasted through the whole yeare and that in the whole time of Lent onelie to vse bread salt and water Contrariwise Augustine saith That it was neuer determined by Christ nor his apostles what daies we should fast And Irenaeus writing to Eusebius saith That that fast of Lent was diuersly vsed in times past when some fasted one daye some two some more neither doth he call it a tradition of the Apostles but a custome of a simple and priuate institution Also Tertulian when he had made his reuolt from the Church vnto Montanus reckoning vp the obiections of the Catholikes which they vsed against the Montanists Because saith he we obserue the eating of drie meates they saie that the constituted fasting being worn out touching anie other we maie fast at our owne will not by the commaundement of anie lawe or discipline c. And in that controuersie touching Easter daie which a long time in times past troubled the Church those of the West saith Socrates referred their institution to Peter and Paule and those of the East to other of the Apostles but neither of theÌ„ broght foorth anie certaine or approued scripture for the profe thereof therefore I thinke it was a custome Tertulian saith That by traditioÌ„s of the Apostles milke and honnie was wont to be poured into the mouth of the infant in baptisme And Saint Hierome maketh mention onely of wine and not of honnie and calleth it custome Our aduersaries contrariwise obserue not theÌ„selues those rites ceremonies although they would bee accounted obseruers of the traditions which the Apostles left Tertulian in the former place maketh mention of oblations and offerings for birth daies to be amongst the rites and ceremonies which came from the Apostles Contrariwise the Church left this custome after the Nicene counsell for that it sauoured of Paganisme Manie of the olde Fathers referred these things vnto the Apostles first that it was not lawfull to kneele when they praied on the Sundaie And againe that it was not lawfull to decke the head with garlands and flowers and manie such like things Contrariwise our aduersaries themselues thinke these thinges maye bee obserued because they put garlands about the neckes heads of their Images c. Ciprian witnesseth that the Eucharist or Communion was wont to bée giuen to infants And contrariwise our aduersaries themselues thinke not this expedient to bee done Irenaeus sayth that by tradition Christ suffered when he was almost fiftie yeres old Contrariwise the Church hath most constantlye refused that saying Clemens referreth his Canon to the Apostles making them authors thereof On the other side euen the Church of Rome her selfe hath a long time reiected those Canons as if they had bene forged by heretikes Furthermore Zepherius Bishoppe of Rome hath receiued sixtie of the same Canons and after the sixt Synode receiued 85 c. Finally that we may leaue infinit of such examples and come vnto our aduersaries those things which they referre vnto the Apostles histories attribute to others as Lent to Telephorus c. So that nowe by these examples the truth of our minor proposition is made manifest It the olde heretikes for the most part when the worde of God failed them did â—he vnto traditions falsely fathered them vpon the Apostles and our aduersaries doo thee same now at this time Then truly in this point they are to be accounted rather among the heretikes then with the true Catholikes The Antecedent is true Therefore the consequent is also true The Maior proposition is manifest of humselfe And the Minor is thus prooued They which vrged the ceremonies of the lawe did shroude themselues vnder
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
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
which also our aduersaries abuse 2. Thessa 3. We warne you bretheren in the name of the Lord Iesus Christ that you withdraw your selues from euerie brother that walketh inordinatelie and not after the traditions which he hath receiued of vs. And then followeth the very same tradition which Paule wrote Againe Actes 16. And as they went through the Cities they deliuered them decrees to keepe ordained of the Apostles Elders But yet notwithstanding euen those verie decrées of the Apostles were then written as it is manifest Actes 15. verse 23. and 24. Againe in the foresaid 11. chapter of the first Epistle of Saint Paule to the Corinthians That which I receiued of the Lord I deliuered vnto you Also in the same Epistle chapter 15. vers 3. he saith the like But yet notwithstanding all those things are writen wherefore he that doth thus conclude saying Paule taught by mouth Ergo he wrote not truelye hée is altogether ignoraunt of the right order of Disputation Let vs therefore now bring them to an absurditie If by reason that Paul taught by mouth traditions to the Corinthians it follow that those traditions be not written Ergo the traditions that women shoulde bee couered in Ecclesiasticall assemblies and touching prophecieng bare headded and manie such like are not written which is false as appeareth in the forenamed 1. Cor. 11. We will nowe therefore tourne theyr Argument vppon themselues saying thus If the traditions which Paule doth there dispute of to wit touching Propheciengs bare headed and touching women to bee couered are neglected euen of our Aduersaryes themselues because their Monkes preach not bare headed but couered with their hoods how much more shall it be lawful for vs to neglect those traditions which our aduersaries faine beeing not written in the word of God onelie falsely cloked vnder the names of the Apostles That we may therefore amend this error we must say that Paule doth in that Epistle put them in minde of those things which he had taught them by mouth whē as he had diligently considered how great the inconstancie and leuitie of man is Whereby we sée that wée must altogether cleaue to the writings of the Apostles least the forged deuices of men doe withdrawe vs from the truth of the gospell Paule biddeth the Thessalonians to keep the traditions which they had learned either by word or by Epistle Ergo Paule wrote not all Traditions necessarie to faith The antecedent is prooued 2. Thessa 2. vers 15. Now let vs trye the antecedent In these woordes of Paule Either by word or Epistle they are willing to make this word Either an absolute distunctiue to which their opinion I doo not agrée For I marke in the writings of the Apostles that I may héere speake nothing of other Authors this perticle or word so repeated to be a copulatiue rather then a disiunctiue I prooue it by these places 1. Cor. 13. ver 8. wher the Apostle saith Whether propheciengs be abolished whether tōgues cease and knowledge vanish away Againe 1. Cor. 15. ver 11. Whether I or they so wee haue preached and so yee haue beleeued that is both I and they haue preached c. Also to the Colloss 1. verse 20. Reconciling to himselfe all things by himselfe yea I say reconciling to himselfe all things whether they be in heauen whether they be in earth So also he vseth this word Mete in this Epistle in the same chapter verse 2. wherefore it is as though he shoulde saye stande ye fast in the doctrine which you haue learned both by our wordes when we were present as also after in our writings Therefore I deny their consequence for the errour as I haue said is Secundum fallatiam dictionis for first it followeth not if the Thessalonians were taught both by worde and Epistle that those thinges were taught by mouth were contrarie to those things which were taught by Epistle But secondly admit that other things were taught yet it hurteth vs nothing for if they were not written in the Epistle to the Thessalonians yet truely they might bée written in other his Epistles But admit y t Paule did not write them at all yet it doeth not therefore followe that they were not written of the other Apostles as of Baptisme the supper of the Lord c. Let vs now ouerwhelme them with an absurditie If it bee true by this kinde of speaking either by word or by Epistle that therefore it should follow that Paule did not write all things necessarie to saluation ergo on the other side it woulde follow that Paule did not preach by mouth all things necessarie to saluation the which is absurde and false as I prooue by these places following The 2. Thessa 2. verse 13. and 14. You are elected vnto saluation through the santification of the holie Ghost and through the faith of the truth vnto the which yee were called by our Gospell Againe in the same Chapter verse 5. Doo you not remember that when I was with you I tolde you these things Againe the 1. Thessa 4. Yee knowe what commaundement I gaue you to abstaine from fornication Againe 1. Thessa 2. Wee did not onely desire to imparte vnto you the Gospell of GOD but our owne selues And in another place hee attributed vnto them a most sure perswasion of faith which they receiued by preaching Whereby it is proued that Paule did deliuer to the Thessalonians all thinges necessarie to saluation the which thinges could not bee if the argument of our aduersarie might preuaile Therefore we wil turne their argument vpon themselues saying If the Theslalonians were throughlye instructed in christian religion and that by the preaching of the Apostle which hee preached by mouth and neuerthelesse were to be confirmed by the writings of the Apostle howe much more ought wee to cleaue to the writinges of the Apostles which were not present at their Sermons neyther yet instructed or them by mouth Therefore the errour of our aduersaries must be amended and we must saye that Paule instructed the Thessalonians not onely by word but also by Epistle when he had séene of what great value his writings wer to confirme the faith of the godly And thereby also that the holy Scripture might be more highly commēded vnto vs. Paule praied that he might see the face of the Thessalonians and that he might accomplish or fulfill those things which were wanting in their faith Ergo hee reserued many things to traditions which hee spake by mouth beeing necessarie both to faith and saluation The Antecedent is prooued 2. Thes 3. I doo thus aunswere their antecedent Manie of the olde writers doe vnderstand this place touching doctrine For Chrisostome referreth it to the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead Ambrose to the trinitie Although Chrisostome séeme not to agrée with himselfe for thus he saith not as
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
that we follow not the similitude of truth for truth it selfe and so shoulde bee deceiued with a counterfaite probabilitie of truth which things sith they are so some man maie demaâ—nd wherefore that great Orator Tullie comparing Oratorie with this sharp and schoole like Disputation and peraduenture ouer-well liking his owne Arte saith thus As a flowing Riuer can scarce or not at all be corrupted or putrified but a standing water maie verie soone so likewise by the floud of eloquence the faults of the reprehender are soone wiped awaie when as niggishnes of speach and want of eloquence scarce can defend it selfe thus much Cicero The which as I confesse that it maie happen both in the sophisticall and probable kinde of disputing so do I denie that it can chaunce or agree with true and demonstratiueie Silogismes For as the Riuer that we maie not swarue from the similitude which wee haue propoâ—ed while it runneth afloate 〈◊〉 aboue his bankes doth gather most foule and filthie things of 〈◊〉 sort which 〈◊〉 and are couered while as the flouds are aloft so oftentimes great errors with copiousnesse of speach did are by true and briefe disputations declared laid open for the copie of eloquence taken awaie things doo appeare both naked and manifest as they are But heereof we will speake more in the Preface And now I set downe first a disputation touching the word of god writteÌ„ which as it is chiefe so ought it to be the verie fouÌ„dation of all disputations The other disputations as of the true humane nature of Christ of the presence of Christ in the sacrament of the true and lawfull making of Ministers touching which thinges I wrote some thing about two yeares past against Turrianus that false named Iesuit and will handle it more at large whensoeuer he shal giue anie newe occasion to write also free will Purgatorie and such lyke maye bee grounded on this sayde Disputation And this my bretheren I hope you will dooe either according to this methode which I haue followed or according to that which you shall better like of Wherefore I beseech the defenders of the Romish Church and chiefelye those which challenge vnto them such skill in disputing that they will bring the same from the darke shaddowe of the Schooles into the open and cleere light yea to the true point of disputing in deede and that all mallice put a parte all nipping tauntes set aside let them modestlye and with quiet mindes pursue this my treatise and when they haue entered into disputation with me let them first note what is worthie of reprehention and then let them giue solutions vnto my argumentes and on the other side let them confirme theyr opinions with plaine and euident Sylogismes and Argumentes and so I hope it shall at the last come to passe if GOD permit that when both our opinions are conferred together the truth will shewe it selfe and bee manifestly seene euen of those which bee almost blinde Let therefore those bookes which are repleat with nothing els but with bitter choler spotted stained with the sores of their mastersâ— yea and those seditious Sermons which blovve forth nothing else but fire sword let them I say cease be quite banished in steed hereof let there be meeknes tranquilitie yea let the loue inward affection of the truth beare swaie let those which so greatly affect that excellent name of Catholikes which so often with open mouthes repeat pronounce the same remember what S. Augustin hath written to wit that the Catholike Church doth teach that wee owe loue vnto all and iniurie to none But if there be anie such which go forward with shamelesse faces and obstinate mindes still to write and spread abroad their sichophanticall and infamous Libells or if there bee anie such which so farre degenerateth from men that they had rather obstinately to bark against the truth then to imbrace the same the vvhich amongest others I heare there is one especially vpon whom the fearful exaÌ„ple of Gods most iust iudgment is manifest not onlie for other his vngodlinesse but chiefly for his wicked Apostacie and backe sliding from the Gospell which sometime he professed If I say there bee anie such I vvish vnto them better mindes oppose this my vowe and wish against their shamelesse wickednesse and malitious railing professing that I will not vouchsafe to ansvvere such their pamphlets knowing right well that such their dooings may be vtterly wiped awaie euen with one little spark of patience Againe touching my selfe I professe that I will not reade those their vvritings in the vvhich they spue forth their foule poisoned choler because I haue determined to dispute and not to braule to contend vvith arguments and not vvith impious railings And you my reuerend brethren fight 〈…〉 of faith for I may lavvfully vse the Apostles exhortation vnto you fight 〈…〉 vvorthie battaile of faith and apprehend euerlasting life for vvhich cause you are called haue professed a good profession before manie vvitnesses And therefore regarding nothing at all this vvicked rable run your course vvith stout courage vnremoued constancie and inuincible patience in the truth of the Gospell of God as you haue begun that is that you go forvvard vvith exact diligence and integritie to fight against mans â—rrors that the course of your labours most manfully being finished yee may leaue vnto the posterities to come the puritie of 〈◊〉 and the true vse of ecclesiasticall discipline From my studie the 23 of Februarieâ— An Domini 1580. FINIS A COMMON PLACE TOVCHING THE WORD OF GOD WRITTEN AGAINST THE TRAditions of Men. Handled both Schoole like Diuinely Wherein is intreated of the true method of Disputing THE PREFACE THE Apostle Paule writing to Timothie affirmeth that the holie Scripture is profitable both to teach as also to reproue thereby shewing that men are not onely to be taught but also often times to be reproued For truly it is manifest that men are so corrupt that they doe not onely remaine in ignorance of the truth euen as it were in a palpable and thicke darknesse but also for the most part they hate flie the light of the same And although both are greatly to be lamented yet it is better to haue to doo with those which are ignorant and willing to learne then with them which are delighted with their blindnesse and ignorance because it is a great deale more tollerable to be ignorant then not to be willing to learne Whereby it commeth to passe that because the ministers and the instructors of the congregations must haue to doo with both these kind of men they are therefore willed by the Apostle to be such as shoulde holde fast the word of truth so that they shuld be able to instruct by wholsome doctrine and also to confute the gaine-saiers thereof And as touching these two points in y e true Preacher when Augustine had disputed and compared the
one with the other It is an easie matter saith he to declare what wee ought to beleeue what wee ought to hope for and what we ought to loue but to defend the truth and refell the wicked opinions of others which thinke to the contrarie is the greater and better part of learning These are Augustines words The which 〈◊〉 they are experience it selfe long time since hath taught vs for what great troubles the godly fathers of the Church had in times past with the olde heretikes and chiefly with those which did excell in the sophisticall and litigious kinde of disputation we may easilye sée by the writings of the catholicke Doctors and those which on our part did enter into y t sharpe conflict of disputation better furnished to wit armed with weapons of good lerning dispersed without any great adoo the thick mystes of sophisticall disputation by the manifest light of y e truth Amongst which auncient Fathers Nazianzenus séemeth to giue the chiefest commendation to Basil for that he aboue all others excelled in the true science of disputation and reasoning the which praise we maye attribute also to Gregorius Nissenus And Augustine that I maye vse his owne wordes who was woont to reioyce of his disputations and therein delighted himselfe did fréely confesse that the Arte of Logicke was a very great ready helpe vnto him in the vnderstanding and vndooing of the Heretickes Sophisticall and subtill Arguments And Tertulian who was long time before Augustine doeth not denye in these his Bookes in which most happelye he contended with the heretikes that hée was often times driuen to dispute with them in Philosophie which things I héere bring in because I sée all for y e most part somewhat to mislike this Art of Logicke otherwise most profitable as though Paule had vtterly excluded the same from diuinitie wher he warneth that we must take héed least anie man spoile vs through Philosophie héere they gather much out of y e writings of the olde Fathers which they suppose maketh for them against Logicke and against the exact knowledge of disputation And therefore they willingly harken to Nazianzene in that place where he compareth the Logitians vnto the Moabites and Ammonites and now they snatch after that place of Basil where he tearmeth Logicke to bée the mother of contention sometimes they crie out with Tertulian saying O miserable Aristotle which first armed the heretiks w t Logick wherby like crafty artificers they might as they listed set vp destroie To whom in few words I doo thus answere The Apostle Paule did not reiect the good right knowledge of disputing which by certaine necessarie principles produceth and bringeth forth the knowledge of the truth but rather that vaine art of deceiuing with those sophisticall and deceitful snares the which the heretikes are wont full subtilly to folde together whereby they may deceiue the godly faithfull And that this was the mind of the Apostle it is manifest not onely by the order of the Apostles spéech but also by that he vseth this word Apates which is 〈◊〉 craft or circumuention by subtiltie Sith then the good vse of Logicke chiefly tends vnto this end to dispearse abroade the fallaces and subtill crafts of sophistrie to expell errours to reproue lies and to set before our eies most manifestly the light of the truth Who can with good conscience thinke that the Apostle at anie time did reiect this so worthie necessarie science For how can it be possible that hée which doth professe himselfe an enimie to false sophistications should not loue y e science of right disputing which is Logicke being altogether contrarie to false subtil reasoning and ordained to this end that by the helpe and aide therof we may more easily auoide the snares of those which are captious For as he which hateth darknes must of necessitie greatly reioyce in y e beutie of the light so he that will shut out of the church the false deâ—eits of arguments he I say must of necessitie leaue a place in the Church for sound and true reasoning by the which y e vaine deceits of those men may be the easier reproued and the better auoided Except peraduenture we thinke the science and art of phisicke is altogether to be reiected because it teacheth men to knowe those thinges which are hurtfull wherby to take heâ—d of them to vse onely those things which appertaine to y â— preseruation of health life Wherfore Nazianzene saith yea truly right excellent is his saying for somwhat the must answere to the former obiection y â— the Sophisters are like vnto the Moabites Ammonits which were prohibited the temple of God so y â— also we acknowledge this y t the true art of Logicke is not compared to the Morbites Ammonits but rather to them of Tyrc and Sidon by whose helpe Solomon was greatly furthered in building of the 〈…〉 also is worthie of great praises in y â— he saith y â— Sophistre is the mother of contentions so y â— thereby wée louâ— the more y e armour by which y â— forme of good learning maketh vs able to fight for the truth 〈◊〉 Finally we may hearken to Tertulian crying out against the same calling it the craftie art of setting vp plucking downe againe to wit euen indéede that parte of Logicke which is alwaies occupied in contentions and neuer maketh end But let vs reuerence the other part which giueth resolutions to false arguments seuereth things necessary from those which are not and doth so maintaine the truth and beat downe falsehood that it remaineth alwaies one because it is ioyned to the firme foundation of the truth And that this was the minde of the olde Fathers touching the right order of disputing whosoeuer shall diligently marke the auncient doctors wil easily agrée vnto vs. For what saith Nazianzenus whom those men so often cast in our téeth The truth saith he by Logicall disputations is filed and brought to light And furthermore what sayth Basil That the true force of Logicke is distinctly to diuide the nature of things whereby we may knowe those things which are of affinitie and distinguish those which are contrarie And Augustine seuering the true vse of Logicke from the abuse of Sophistrie saith If Logicke bee the knowledge of the truth so then it behooueth the wise to haue knowledge thereof that therby he may vtterly race out the malitious falsehod of the craftie disputers contemne the same But there cannot be a more excellent witnesse for this then the testimonie of S. Augustine where he saith that Logicke is the onely Science of all other which teacheth both how to teach and how to learne and doth shew a man how to perceiue and to make other to vnderstand Thus much Augustine Wherefore sith the case so standeth let this so worthie arte science haue hir condigne and due praise
and let vs be bold to say that they reason nothing wisely which in these our dayes start vp and foolishly speake against Logicke But héere peraduenture some man may demand of me whether this my commendation doth extend it selfe to the Schoolemen and chiefely vnto those which haue taken their originall from the Master of sentences and whether their writings doo appertaine to that good and true parte of Logicke which resolueth doubtfull arguments Truly as I am not willing at this time to set down my absolute opinion touching so many meâ— héerein for for my owne part let each one of them haue his due reuerence for his trauaile and labour so am I not afeard to speake both boldly fréely my minde what I thinke alwayes not withstanding kéeping my selfe within my compasse Iohn Duns Scotus commonly called the subtill Doctor saith that the Diuines haue in some places mixed Philosophie with Diuinitie that with great profit I truly confesse that they haue mingled it with diuinitie yea I adde they haue therewith confused Diuinitie but if he thinke it was done with any fruite I beséech master Doctor pardon me if I cannot héerein agrée with him for sithen the Schoolemen haue not followed that good part of disputing which giueth true resolutions to arguments as we shall héerafter declare but haue as it were dallied sported themselues in probabilities béeing for the most part vaine friuolous argumeÌ„ts me thinks they haue not brought into the Church of God the true vse but rather the abuse of Philosophie and truly I say it séemeth to me that into y e midst of y e Church the Schoolemen haue brought sophistication and shamelesse falshood decked and adorned with the colour name of Philosophie as of an honest matrone to the great detriment hurt of the Church But you will saye they haue not gotten this sharpe knowledge of disputing without great labour and paines I graunt it to be so for oftentimes when I sée these schoole men labouring sweating and as it were out of breath in these their subtill disputations they make me to remember the Troyans which with great labour and care brought into their Citie the counterfaite Grecian Horse whereby ensued the ruine of the whole Kingdome of Troy So these schoolemen with great industrie and labour haue brought into the church false Philosophie that therehence as from the Troyan horse might spring infinit errors by which while these who should haue ben the watchmen ouer the Church were euen ouer whelmed in schoole ignoraunce those errors haue crept in corrupted and wasted the Church of God so as I maye vse the saieng of Esayas Except the Lord had left vs a smal remnant we had had no church at all A proofe héereof is the Church of Rome so depraued and corrupted that while we séeke the Church in the Church we are constrained not without great sorrow and teares onely to behold the ashes of the true Church But because I maye not séeme héere more willing to lament then to dispute mark what I say to wit that the schoolemen and questionarie Doctors haue neither followed the true manner of diuine disputations neither lawful vse of Logicke that this may the more euidently appeare out of diuers sundry their errors I will gather certaine by the which we may plainly sée that they haue â—rred not a little in their disputations from the true manner of diuine Disputing The first errour that the schoolemen admit in their disputations is this y t they are wont to dispute by the principles of Logicke and from thence to fetch their conclusions So questions being proposed they make the grounde thereof Logicke and not Diuinitie so that the Scriptures in these their Disputations are dumme and speachlesse for they oftentimes alleadge the Philosophers as Authoures in theyr Disputations but verye seldome the Apostles And if at anye time they bring in the Doctours they confusedlye mingle their authoritie with the authoritie of the Scriptures neither doubt they to tearme their writings by the name of the Scriptures But we haue learned and that out of diuinitie to take our principles from diuinitie when so euer we dispute thereof and that we ought so to doe it is manifest euen by Logicke which doth forbid to goe from the principles of one art to another or to wander without the compasse of the science wherein wée haue begun to dispute Sithen then diuinitie is farre aboue all other sciences it were not onely vâ—rie foolish but also impious and vngodly to make it subiect to the principles of Philosophie And also to make the Doctors equall with the Prophets and Apostles is altogether a thing intollerable Wherefore I thinke no man doubteth except hée wil reason like an Atheist but that I haue sufficiently proued this first errour of the Shoolemen The second errour is this that in matters of diuinitie which are most true and plaine they dispute both Pro and Contra as it were with probable argument vpon the grounds thereof when as they ought not so to doo in these pointes it béeing both from the vse of true reasoning as also from the nature of diuinitie for Topicall talke of disputations are to be left to common kinde and exercises But treatises or disputings standing vpon infallable grounds of which sort most chiefly are the disputations of diuinitie doe require demonstratiue plaine and euident disputatioÌ„s which ought to stand on most true necessarie and infallable Sylogismes or arguments Indéede the Philosophers were wont sometimes to dispute both Pro and Contra touching the principles of their artes and sciences that the truth might thereby more manifestly appeare But the diuines dispute not about the principles of diuinitie because they are of themselues most true and without all controuersie And furthermore ther is nothing more contrarie to the nature of faith then doubtfulnesse and that accademicall wauering in giuing consent the which being a long time a goe buryed and cleane wiped awaie by the most learned disputations of Saint Augustine and other the olde Fathers is nowe at last most vnluckely I know not by what meanes raised newe by the Schoole Doctors and euen as it were brought out againe from hell Verie sharply did Hierome taunt Iouinian for that hée disputed in a question of diuinitie after the manner of the Schooles and not according to the true vse of doctrine If then hée so taunted him how much more sharply would he inueigh against these our Schoole men which haue accustomed themselues to dispute no other wayes euen in the principles and grounds of diuinitie And moreouer it commeth to passe and often times happeneth to the Schoole men which are tossed nowe on this side and nowe on that side as in many and sundrie waues of Argumentes at the last I saie it commeth to passe y â— they themselues knowe not to what hauen as to a sure porte to betake themselues Yea euen so that
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 this law which is writen in this booke And Paule in the Act. 24. I beleeue saith he all those things which are written in the Lawe in the Prophets And that which Moses saith Deut. 27. Let each one be accursed which abideth not in all the words of this lawe Paule thus expoundeth Gal. 3. saieng In all things which are written in the booke of the lawe By which places we may easily perceiue that the word of God touching the which Moses speaketh is not to be interpreted the writings of Moses alone neither to be applied vnto certaine vnwritten verities deliuered onely by the mouth of Moses as the Iewes doctors doo falsly surmise whose errors haue long time since bene euen hissed out of the Church of Christ The 4. place Get thee to the lawe and testimonie If they say not after this worde there is no light in them Héereof we frame this argument If the people vnder the lawe ought to repaire to the Scriptures and nothing was to be receiued in matters of faith the which was not contained in the holy Scriptures then truly by greater reason afterward that the doctrine of the Gospell written of the Apostles was ioyned to the writings of the olde Testament the which Apostles did explicate and teach the true meaning of the law those things alone must be receiued in matters of faith which are contained in the writings of the olde and new testaments The antecedent is true Wherefore also the consequent must be true The first part of our argument is manifest of it selfe through the force of comparison Although if we haue respect to the ground and substaunce thereof the Apostles spake no other thing then y â— which was before spokeÌ„ by Moses the prophets as Paul affirmeth Act. 26. Yet no christian hath at anie time doubted but y â— the publishing of the word of God was far more excellent and plentifull after the Incarâ—ation of Christ then it was before lyke as y e apostles in diuers places haue taught Wherefore if before his incarnation they ought to be ruled by the word of god writen how much more then ought we now The minor is manifest by the recited places And hâ—re I am not ignorant that this afore recited place of the prophet is diuersly expounded of the learned but howsoeuer they expound these words it coÌ„meth to this effect that they liue in most horrible darknesse which despising the worde of God take vnto themselues the errors of inchanters witches and mans dreames The fift place Thou hast knowne the holie Scriptures of a childe which are able to make thee wise vnto saluation through the faith which is in Christ Iesus for the whole Scripture is giuen by inspiration of God and is profitable to teach to reproue to correct to instruct in righteousnesse that the man of God may be absolute beeing made perfect to euerie good worke If such be the force of the holie Scriptures that it maketh a man wise perfectlie instructed vnto saluation then ought we to be content with the holie Scriptures in causes and matters of faith The Antecedent is true And therefore the consequent must be the like The first part of our argument is manifest through the nature of perfection for if y e scriptures make vs perfect to what ende then serue traditions not written And vnto this ende serueth the saying of Paule before alleadged The minor is manifest and prooued by the place recited of Paule But peraduenture our aduersaries will héere obiect and saye that Paule spake héere onely of the scriptures of the olde Testament because Timothie was instructed from his youth But sith Paule héere addeth and saith Through the faith that is in Christ Iesus he doeth manifestly declare that the doctrine of the Gospell was ioyned with the knowledge of the old Testament But they may saye that the Gospell was not then published in writing but onely deliuered and taught by mouth First let them tell me whereby they gather this for it is manifest by the fourth Chapter of that his Epistle that Paule wrote this same Epistle verie néere about the time of his death And héere if you will make a good account of the times you shall easilye perceiue that then when this Epistle was sent vnto Timothie all the Epistles of the Apostles or well néere all were put in writing And furthermore what matter were it if then the doctrine of the Gospell had not bene published in writing inasmuch as it was afterward done Finally if ye would that Paule should héere speak touching the writing of the olde Testament onely then woulde I make mine argument of more force and reason thus If the writings of the olde Testament were of such force that they were able to make men wise vnto saluation how much more shall the whole Scripture of the olde and new Testament be able to perform the same But he which shall denie y â— this same excellent sentence of Paule touching the whole Scriptures to wit that it was giuen by inspiration of God and is profitable to teach doth appertaine vnto the writings of the new testament he is not onely to be thrust out of the number of diuines but is also to be banished out of the societie of Christians Neither yet let them goe about to cauill with vs for that the olde translation hath this word Prepared and not absolute Perfect to all good workes For truly that I maye not omit anie thing and so swarue from our argument the Gréeke word signifieth Perfection as in the Actes 21. ver 5. But when the daies were full perfected and ended we went on our iournie c. Where and in which place Luke vseth the same Gréeke word which Paule doth vse in the Texte to Timothie signifieng as you sée Absolute and Perfect Also the compounde of the same verbe in Gréeke hath the lyke signification As Mathew 21. ver 26. By the mouthes of babes and sucklings thou hast made perfect thy praise Againe 1. Thessa 3. ver 10. Night day praieng exceedingly that we might see your face and might accomplish or make perfect that which is wanting in your faith And again Heb. 13. ver 22. The 6. place Search the Scriptures for in them you thinke to haue eternall life If the people in times past vnder the lawe doo thinke and that not without good cause to haue eternall life in the Scriptures that is that all those things were contained in the Scriptures the knowledge and faith wherof attained euerlasting life then trulie by greater reason we ought to beleeue the selfe same being now vnder the Gospell after that to the scriptures of the old testament the writings of the Apostles was also ioyned which interprete and teach the veritie and truth of the olde testament The antecedent is true And therefore there is no doubt of the consequent The force of
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
Ergo because some of the Apostles did recite some out of the Ethnicks bookes it must follow that the Apostles did attribute authoritie to those bookes in matters of faith which thing is absurde and contrarie to the opinion of all men Let vs tourne this obiection vppon our aduersaries after this sort If the Apostles did at anie time recite the traditions of auncient fathers but onelie to beautifie those things which wer established and confirmed by most firme testimonies of holie scriptures How much lesse then ought wee to recite the traditions of the olde fathers to the confirming of those things which want testimonie of the Scripture Thus therefore we may amend the errour of this their obiection and saye that the Apostles whereas they did applie thēselues to the capacitie of men that they might thereby the better stirre them vp or the more easily conuince them they vsed some times the bookes Apocripha as also sentences gathred from Ethincks to wit when they did dispute of those things the truth whereof was manifest in the holye scriptures The heretikes did wreast the writinges of Paule that in the verie time of the Apostles and also it is most manifest that the heretiks yea Sathan himselfe haue cloked their heresies euen with the Scriptures ergo we must not cleaue to the Scriptures alone The antecedent is proued 2. Pe. 3. as also by the Ecclesiasticall historie and also Math 4. If thou be the sonne of GOD cast thy selfe down headlong for it is written he shal giue his Angells charge ouer thee c. I admit their antecedent But I denie their consequent Neither doth Peter so conclude but rather calleth them vnto the writings of Paule then in anie part to abridge the same The error is as the Logitians say Secundum non causam vt causam The heretikes abused the Scriptures wrested the writings of the Apostles into a contrarie sence ergo saye they we ought to run other where then to the scriptures to the establishing of our faith The Scripture is not in fault but onely men themselues which doo wrest so worthie a matter vnto their owne errours Wherefore this is so farre from the Apostles minde that we should leaue the aide of the scripture because heretikes haue abused them that rather the heretikes are by the verie scriptures to be conuinced like as we haue alreadie proued out of the places of Paule 2. Tim. 3. Tit. 1. And when Sathan abused the Scriptures that he might weaken the faith of Christ truely Christ went not to traditions but with the Scriptures again ouerthrew the enimy For sathan obiecting and saying it is written Christ also on the other side answered it is written and not left in tradition And therefore we must bring them to this inconuenience saying If because the heretikes falsified the Scriptures we may not therefore only cleaue vnto the Scriptures then truely because the heretikes falsely fathered traditions to be Apostolike as wee haue prooued before both out of the writings of the Apostles as also out of Irenaeus and Eusebius therefore wee may not sticke onely to traditions And againe because heretikes abused both Scriptures and traditions therefore we must neyther cleaue to Scriptures nor to traditions the which is absurde and euen our aduersaries themselues yeeld to the same Let vs therefore turne their argument vpon themselues saying If like as Sathan abused the Scriptures against Christ so likewise the heretiks do against true Christians Then truly as Christ vsed the Scripture onely to repell Sathan so likewise the true Christians must vse onely the Scriptures in repelling of heretikes And therefore we may amend their error thus If such be the wickednes of the heretikes y e they abuse y e scriptures then ought we to giue al diligēce y t the scripture may kéepe both their authoritie and puritie the which will be if the heretiks be conuinced by the Scriptures alone and those places which shall séeme somewhat obscure maye take their interpretation from places more plaine But if our aduersaries hearken not vnto vs yet at the least waies let them giue eare euen vnto themselues in whose decretalls this sentence remaineth That from the Scriptures themselues the sence of truth must be taken The doctrine touching the baptisme of Infants is not found in the holy Scriptures neither these words Trinitie like substance persons manie such like all which words notwithstanding do appertaine vnto groūds and principles of faith Ergo all things appertaining vnto faith are not to be found in the Scriptures The antecedent is found true by reading of the Scriptures Now touching their antecedent I saie thus In that they affirme the doctrine concerning Baptisme of children not to be found in the Scriptures is most false like as our late writers haue taught in theyr learned workes against the Anabaptistes touching the which I will not héere make any longer disputation least I shuld séeme to wander without y e compasse of my proponed questiō Now touching these words Trinitie like substance and persons I confesse they are not found in the writings of the Apostles but yet I saie y ◠the verie doctrine which is signified by these words is deriued from the Scriptures for when certaine heretiks rose vp which denied y e veritie of y e doctrine then the godly Fathers which liued in those daies hauing care of y e circumstances added these wordes by the which they might the more easily explicate declare the doctrine touching y e trinitie y ◠which doctrine they had before confirmed by expresse and manifest testimonies of the holy Scriptures Now touching their consequence The error is Secundum fallaciam figurae dictionis These words Trinitie the baptisme of infants like substance are not found in the Scripture it is called Omonomos for the words indéede are not found in the holie Scriptures but the things signified by the words are there found And our christian faith consisteth not in the title of words but in substance of matter not in many volumes of bookes as S. Hierom saith but in the verye ground of reason And therefore Basil confesseth y ◠he vsed against the heretikes certaine termes which were not found written but yet notwithstanding saith he they were nothing contrary to the sence of the holy Scriptures And therfore our aduersaries reasoning thus we may wel bring them to an absurditie saying If because the persons the trinitie and such like words be not extant in the holy Scriptures it therfore followeth that all things necessarie to faith are not found in the holye scriptures Ergo these words are necessarie to faith and so by force of the consequent Sith this worde Omoousios that is like substance and such other wordes were onely found out by the godly Doctors after the heresie of Arius began to spring then wold it followe that the Church of Christ before the time