Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
truth_n church_n faith_n tradition_n 1,984 5 9.0083 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A05123 A treatise touching the Word of God written, against the traditions of men handled both schoolelike, and diuinelike, where also is set downe a true method to dispute diuinely and schoolelike / made by A. Sadeele ; and translated into English, by Iohn Coxe ...; Locus de verbo Dei scripto, adversus humanas traditiones. English Chandieu, Antoine de, 1534-1591.; Coxe, John, fl. 1572. 1583 (1583) STC 15257; ESTC S106888 76,765 187

There are 8 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

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 notwithstāding this ou●●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 cōtain 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 vsualli●a●y vnwritten traditions then truelie our a●●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 cōsequēt is proued by this inductiō collected frō places of holy scripture Moses doth call them backe to the lawe written as S. Paule doth interprete it The same Moses cōmandeth 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 thē 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 consequēt 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 propos●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 ● 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 necessa●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 allea●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 appe●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 th●● we 〈…〉 not so perfect as the writings at the old Wherefore we wil 〈…〉 more to the pr●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 a●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 w●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 ● it is a will or a testament neither néedeth the●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 writtē 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 ignorāt 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 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
the truth of matters may be manifestly séene and as it were touched with our hands And this last way perchaunce is not so well welcome to those which are delighted in plesantnesse of speach but truly no lesse profitable to all those which are both louers of simplicitie and desirous of the truth For like as the view of mans bodie is a great deale more pleasaunt to beholde while it is clad with the flesh the bloud running in each veyne hauing a comelye colour yet notwithstanding if we come at any time to the Anatomie then the facultie of each part and the constitution of the whole bodie is a great deale better knowne so if any wil wisely diligently weigh those larger and pleasanter treatises and bring them to arguments as vnto Anatomies then without doubt he shal easily perceiue whether they be absolute perfect in euerie point or whether there be anye thing wanting and as the Phisition sheweth foorth euen as it wer with the finger the original and causes of diseases so shal he héere doo touching errors if there be any The former sort doeth indéede delyght the mindes as wll of those which are learned as those which are vnlearned but this latter manner of exercise sith it is occupied in that onely kinde of matter which appertaineth to doctrine is more méete for those which are best learned who are nothing moued with the floud of vain wordes if especially there be no force of matter contained in them because that speach without reason is not to be counted any thing worth Augustine Ciprian Hillarie Hieronimus and diuers olde learned Fathers haue vsed this kinde of disputing very much this also the schoolemen seemed to professe but with what successe I haue shewed alreadie But chieflye we must consider and haue great care on doth sides that when we dispute touching doctrine all our arguments be necessarye and pertaining to doctrine so that they bée grounded vppon most sure principles and infallible groundes of Diuinitie And aboue all things we must beware that we take not things which may be disputed on both sides for things necessarie things which be strange for those that are knowen falshoode for truth the which trulye dooth happen oftentimes in much lauishing out of speach the which y e aduersaries of the truth most commonly abuse where by they may the more conuenientlye hyde themselues vnder the couerte of manye words so that when they haue said much ●hey would also séeme to haue spokē truth The best chiefest for this mischiefe is if after the long circumstaunces that then there be● fet downe a briefe Logicall handling of those their wordes spoken before to be as it were an Anatomie and recapitualation of all subtil sophemes and craftie fallaces And when the falsehood of words is cleane taken away it wil bewray those things which are false it wil set truth against falshood and beare them both out yea finally it wil bring to passe euen as Augustine sometime said That each thing with other cause with cause and reason with reason may striue together And héere who séeth not that when errors are cleane taken awaye how easely the truth will ouercome and the same truth which the huge floud of words had ouer whelmed will euen willingly as it were aduaunce hir selfe vp againe Sith then that schoollike handeling of matters will bring so great profit so y e Logick be directed by the true rules of diuinitie I thē intreat beséech these learned diuines of this our age which are defēders of y e gospel y t they haue ●are héerof set down vnto vs some certain easie methode of this schoolike way how to handle each point y ● which we may follow and the which also may be both to vs present as also to y e posterities héereafter a most true touchstone wherby we may trie the sundry workes of diuers men which haue written of diuinitie y e which if they shall performe they shal greatly profit the Church of God especially in these times in which each man striueth in setting forth of bookes touching the principall pointes of diuinitie who may doo best For where as the Ciuilians only write touching their lawes the Phisitions of their facultie and so all others of those artes and sciences which they professe in y e which they are conuersant yet notwithstanding it commeth to passe I knowe not by what meanes that not onely diuines but also men cleane voide of diuinitie of all sorts are wont now euerie where to dispute in their bookes touching diuinitie so y t héerein I assent with Nazianzene which before time hath most gréeuously complained of this matter And we haue thought good to publish this our small labour abroad not y t we thinke we haue obteyned y e same methode whith we desire but that by this meanes we may at the least giue a testimonie that wée looke for a more exact methode from the learned diuines yea and earnestly desire them to performe the same Beholde then wée héere set downe a schoolelike treatise of diuinitie takē out of the first Chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrewes to wit touching the word of God written against mannes traditions about which matter there is great controuersie betwéene vs and the Papists And for this cause I omit the handling of this point at large because it may be easily séene in the writings of late set forth on both partes of which writings I wil make as it were a certaine resolution or anatomie in this schoole like treatise But before I come to this my purpose I am willing somewhat to admonish the Reader howe that these disputations touching y e Scriptures doth farre differ from all others For in disputations of Philosophie Phisicke ciuill gouernment and such other there eloquence sheweth it selfe there desire to excell doeth rule there oratorie pleading bursteth out yea oftentimes in such matters men desire nothing but to shew forth the brauenesse of their wits or else séeke after glorie and praise But in diuine disputations where as Augustine sayth Brauerie must not bée sought but good documentes and lessons and that with great reuerence yea and verie reuerently wée must dispute of holy things not as vpon the stage before men but as in the middest of the Church before the liuing God and his Angelles not for the desire of victorie but for the maintenaurce of the truth in as much as Paule forbiddeth the Pastours of the Church once to speake of vaine questions or contentions of wordes which can scarce be done without the detrument of the truth Wherfore praying aide at the hands of almightie God that he will direct and establish this our labour by his holy spirit let vs procéede into this most holy conflict in the which the worde of GOD is the place of combat God himselfe the chiefe Iudge truth the victorie saluation the garland of triumph And héereby with more valiant
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 ●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 saluation● I ●●●swere that I beléeue because that the 〈◊〉 and Euangelis●e● 〈◊〉 so written But if I should● demaunde our 〈…〉 wherefore they beléeue that the Apostl●● ta●ght those 〈◊〉 by mouth whi●● 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 ma●●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 consequēt 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 thē broght foorth anie certaine or approued scripture for the profe thereof therefore I thinke it was a custome Tertulian saith That by traditiōs 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 thēselues 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 ●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
of Arius yea the Apostles thēselues 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 inuēt words but also euē 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 thē 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 cōsequēt 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 circūstances of place time or persons yet notwithstāding we beleeue y ● 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 ● 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 ● wée must altogether beléeue the church in part swarue frō the credit of the same thē 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 frō 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 thē we may beléeue the same Sinagogue whereby she saith y ● 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 ● 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 thē 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 Nicēe coūsel 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 cōtraries But the Church of Rome affirmeth the scriptures to be the word of god which we ought to beleeue also affirmeth that traditions not writtē 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 frō hir in no part thē this foloweth by their argumēt 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 belée●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 Whē 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 attētiue 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 whē 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