The second thing he replies is that the reason why they hold something else beside Scripture to be the rule are two First because we learne so out of the Scripture which he sayes he hath shewed both in his Treatise and in this Reply This is false as appeares in my Answer to his Treatise and shall yet further be manifest in this Defence against his Reply Secondly because we finde it necessarie to admit some other infallible rule and meanes to assure vs both what bookes be Scripture and what interpretation is to be followed which meanes is the authoritie of the Church Fathers Councels and Pope This reason is answered b §. 9. n. 3. and there Digâ— 2â— in THE WAY and hereafter in this DEFENCE and albeit the true Church of Christ which is not the Pope and his Consistorie be a subordinate meanes out of the Scripture it selfe to teach and leade vs forward to the knowledge of the Scripture and the interpretation as a Iudge shewes and expounds the law yet this proues not the Scripture not to be the rule but shewes that God hath commanded the ministerie of his Church to teach and guide vs by that rule For let any Papist say is the Law it selfe but one part of the rule of our obedience to the King and the Iudge the other so that the Law and the Iudge both together make but one rule because we finde it necessarie to admit the Iudge as a meanes infallibly to assure vs both which is the Law and what interpretation thereof is to be followed Not the Law in respect of vs hath all his authoritie in it selfe from the King and is the complete rule of euery mans obedience for more is no man bound to then the Law requires and yet magistrates are vsed to expound and publish it So is it with the Scriptures and therefore the Protestants haue meanes sufficient to secure their faith 6 But where he sayes in the margent that this infallible meanes that must so necessarily be admitted to assure vs what bookes be Scripture and what interpretation is to be followed is the authoritie of the Church Fathers Councels Pope I must admonish him c See THE WAY digr 16. n. 4. and below chap. 35. n. 1. that the current doctrine of Rome is that neither Church Fathers nor Councels exercise this authoritie infallibly but onely the Pope and that his sole definitiue sentence is the last and highest authoritie to secure vs and therefore the Iesuite is bound out and all Papists with him for euer from pretending any other infallible meanes beside the Pope whose iudgement alone being their Load-starre they doe but flatter themselues and mocke vs to our faces when they talke of Church and Councels But because I said the Church Fathers Councels and Pope by themselues were yeelded to be subiect to error and so consequently could not secure them therefore he obiects that a few pages before I acknowledged that it is a principle of their owne that a generall Councell cannot erre If by their owne principles a Councell cannot erre which I confesse there then it is false that I say here the Church the Fathers a Councell the Pope are yeelded by themselues to be subiect to error I answer that in the Councell of d Epist synodal de author cuiuslibet concil general sup Papam Basill ann 1432. it was adiudged that a generall Councell cannot erre whether the Pope confirme it or no. Since which time e Alliac Gers Maior Panorm Almain Ludov. Rom. quos refert Azor. to 2. pa. 565. 575. Viri quidam doctissimi sentiunt ConciliuÌ„ generale legitimè congregatum etiam absente Papa solidâ—m certamque habere authoritatem priusquam à summo Pontifice confirmetur Can. loc pag. 257. very many of the best learned in the Papacie haue followed that opinion therupon I said it was a principle of their owne that a generall Councel cannot erre speaking nothing of the Church Fathers or Pope and yet forsomuch as f Iacobat de conc p. 347. Bellar. de conc c. 11. Turrecr sum l. 3 c. 58. concl 2. CaietaÌ„ apol par 2. c 21. Azor. par 2. l. 5. c. 12. fauer Can pag. 259 loc the Iesuits others hold the contrary that a Councell not authorized by the Pope may erre forsomuch as Councels receiue all their strength from the Pope and g Occham dial par 1. l. 5. c. 25. 26. fauet Waldenf doct princip l. 2. c. 19. some that they may erre though the Pope do confirm them h Hadr. 4. de sacram Euchar pag. 26. others that the Pope may erre euen in his authoratiue conclusions therefore I obiected here that themselues confesse all these may erre This is neither carelesnesse nor yet saying and vnsaying in me but in them that haue no principle but it is contradicted among themselues for what I said a few pages before I spake according to the opinion of some and what I say here according to the contrary opinion of othersome Let the Iesuite shew me an vnforme opinion touching this matter in his Church and he shall deliuer me hereafter from such quarrels and exceptions as this is In the meane time when there is no certaintie or agreement in his church touching that they hold against vs but some say this and some that he must giue vs leaue to charge it with both opinions or with neither vntill they are agreed vpon a certainty Pag. 30. A. D. On the contrarie side Protestants who will admit no rule but onely Scripture doe not this for pure friendship and good will to the Scripture but for enmitie or not very good will to the Church whose authoritie while they do not admit to be infallible they haue left themselues vtterly void of all meanes sufficient to secure their faith by and to finde out the diuine infallible truth contained in the Scripture as in the Treatise and Reply is largely shewed 7 The Protestants I grant and heare solemnly affirme admit no rule whereby to trie what is matter of faith and what is not but onely Scripture the Church hath her authority if it be the true Church and lawfull Councels godly Bishops whereof the Pope is none are the ordinance of God to propound this faith vnto vs but the whole rule of the Churches iudgment is onely Scripture which if the student wil I wil say ouer again in capitall letters ONELY SCRIPTVRE ONELY SCRIPTVRE and NOTHING but Scripture for the exposition and confirmation whereof I refer him to THE WAY which he lost when he made his Reply Digr 3. And this we doe for pure friendship and good will to the Scriptures and Church both lest vngratefully against the Scriptures perniciously against the Church by relying vpon men we should leaue our selues voide of sufficient meanes to secure our faith by For a Cyril Ierosol catech pag. 15. Graec. saith the ancient Church the securitie of our faith
d Luc. 1 70. God spake by the mouth of his holy Prophets therefore it is expresly written that all the bookes of Scripture are Gods word Any man may see this answer to be full his question being touching this Scripture that we vse and haue in our hand where therein it was written that it selfe is Gods word For I answer that it is written in these three places whereof he hath here rehearsed two Now he replies that he doth not onely enquire how we proue in generall that there is any diuine Scripture at all but how we proue these bookes which the Church now vses to be the same that those men writ whose titles they beare which he sayes cannot be proued by the Scriptures alledged because it may still be doubted whether these bookes that we vse as the Gospell of Matthew and Marke for example be part of that Scripture which the texts alledged affirme to be inspired of God and it must likewise be proued that these texts that affirme this are themselues the word of God Whereto I answer first that granting these places to proue some diuine Scripture to be and to be inspired of God it must be granted that the Scripture may be proued so to be by the Scripture it selfe For these sentences All Scripture is giuen by inspiration Holy men spake as they were moued by the holy Ghost and such like places could not proue so much as in generall that any bookes at all whether it were these that we vse or no are diuine Scripture if themselues were not diuine I say they could not proue it truly and effectually they might say it but they could not proue it because that which shall proue it must it selfe first be a diuine testimonie Secondly prouing some diuine Scripture to be and to be inspired they proue this that we vse to be such because they so mention the Scripture they speake of that it appeares to be this that we vse and it is agreed vpon of all hands that there is no scripture but this and therefore speaking of some scripture they speake of this This is my argument That Scripture whereof the sentences alledged speake is proued thereby to be diuine But the sentences alledged speake of the same Scripture that we vse For the Church hath alwayes vnderstood it so The sentences therefore alledged proue this Scripture that we vse to be diuine And so my aduersaries demaund is satisfied I enquire not onely how it is proued by Scripture that there is some diuine Scripture which is inspired by God but that these bookes in particular are that Scripture For if it giue any testimonie at all to any Scripture at all it is to these bookes in particular which are now vsed in that it describes these bookes neither are there or haue there bene any other nor dares the Church of Rome it selfe hitherto canonize any other howsoeuer some therein think it may 2 To this my aduersarie replies that before these sentences can sufficiently proue the Scripture to be diuine they must themselues be supposed to be diuine which cannot be proued by themselues if Tradition be excluded I answered this e Digr 12. in my Booke whereto he hath replied neuer a word but stands dumbe and offers the Reader that which I answered in stead of a Reply to my answer neuerthelesse I answer againe that all places in the Scripture which affirme the Scripture to be Gods word are proued to be Gods word by themselues and their owne light and not by Tradition or Church-authoritie which is but the ministerie whereby God reueales the proofe to vs and it selfe is iudged by the Scripture For if the Church-authoritie make them to be canonicall and diuine * For that is it properly that the Papists say Bellar. Stapl. Grego to vs then it is either by adding truth diuinitie authoritie to them which they had not before in themselues by diuine inspiration or onely by declaring and reuealing to vs that truth diuinitie and authoritie which they haue immediatly from God of themselues before the Church approued them that we might see and confesse it The former our aduersaries will not say or if they will it is Atheisme worse then blasphemie for so all our faith and the highest reason mouing vs to beleeue should not be diuine reuelation but humane authoritie and the Scripture which of it selfe had no truth or diuine inspiration should be canonized by men If the latter which our aduersaries dare not denie then who sees not that they proue themselues and in themselues haue diuine authoritie immediatly from God the Church-authoritie in approuing them being nothing else but bare ministerie in respect of the Scripture though in regard of vs it be authoritie in helping vs to see that which is in themselues When the King stampes coine and signes it with his image and superscription he puts that valew and currentnesse into it that was not there before Thus a small peece of copper of it selfe originally not worth a penie may be made worth sixe pence Thus the Church authorizes not the Scripture Stapleton f Staplet relect pag. 505. in explicat art sayes The Church approues not the Scripture the first way by making it sacred diuine for this approbation it hath onely from the holy Ghost the author thereof of whom alone it hath to be sacred and not humane nor the second way by making that through her iudgement it should be accepted for true and worthy credit because that which is in the Scripture is the diuine truth BY IT SELFE AND IS NOT MADE TRVE BY THE APPROBATION OF THE CHVRCH But the third way in that by the force of her approofe and iudgement they are accepted of the faithfull for sacred and diuine and infallible true And thus we beleeue these Scriptures to be Canonicall for the testimonie of the Church The King sends a commission vnder seale by a messenger this messenger giues no authoritie to the commission but is the Kings minister authorized to propound it to the subiects Thus the Church giues testimonie to the Scriptures that it is diuine and no otherwise and it selfe fetches this testimonie from the Scripture and all the authoritie thereof is lastly resolued into the testimonie of the Scripture 3 Next these Scriptures are proued to be diuine by their owne light shining and by their owne vertue shewing it selfe in them as sweetnesse is knowne by it owne taste and the Sunne seene by it owne light and as the Kings coine is knowne by his image vpon it and the fathers voice is knowne to his children by the sound and fashion thereof so are these Scriptures by the heauenly light image and sound inspired into them knowne to be the word of God The aduersaries against whom I deale haue here with Turks and Infidels debarred me from alledging Scripture to proue it selfe and therefore I will shew it otherwise Canus a Papist g Can. loc l. 2. c. 8. pag. 13.
THE DIVINE INSPIRED WORD OF GOD THAT IS THE RVLE OF FAITH And my aduersary is but a meane disputer if he thinke to disproue this by obiecting some verball errors For either they wil proue no errors at all or if they do D. Stapleton shall tell him they hinder nothing the truth of the matter nor the integritie of the text and I will giue him a whole legion of his owne writers that shall impute as foule errors to his Trent vulgar which yet he thinkes infallible Neuerthelesse his arguments in disproofe of that I say are three First the testimonies of Martin Reynolds and the Grounds of the new religion Secondly the testimonie of M. Broughton and Carlile Thirdly the diuersitie of translations in our Church Wherto I answer first in general that I satisfied these reasons sufficiently in my booke and gaue direct answer to them whereto he hath replied nothing but onely repeates his obiections He was therefore too hastie to call that bold blinde and false which he could not reply to me brazen faced that said no more but what himself giues experience of For I said Martin could not giue one instaÌ„ce of any sence corrupted in our traÌ„slations himself in stead of producing somwhat out of Martin breaks out into railing which is folly For cocks of the game are not allowed to crow til they haue beateÌ„ their mate for he that crowes and yet runnes away is a crauin and shall haue his necke wrung off or be turned to the dunghill to crow among hens Secondly I answer in particular to the first ad 1. it is but a foolish brag to be contemned To the second ad 2. it is reported a Protest apol tract 1. sect 10. subdiuis 4. on Briarlies credit who is an aduersary But allowing they said as much as is alledged the truth must be tried not by the hastie speeches of a discontented man but by the thing it selfe and I shewed in the 7. Digress how diuers Papists haue said worse of the Latin vulgar which yet is holden infallible by the Iesuite Mariana b Tract de vulg edit pag. 103. sayes Diuers learned men of France Italy and Germanie in their writings accuse the corruption of the vulgar edition and the negligence of the interpreter and that it containes many lies in things of smaller moment His third reason is ad 3. if our Translations were not erronious what need were there after so many varieties of translations to coine a new translation of the Bible different from all that haue bene before the which also when it comes will be of infallible authoritie no more then the former c. c Praef. before the new translated Bible The Translators haue answered this themselues so religiously and learnedly that it will content any godly minde onely our Iesuites of Momus race will carpe at any thing d Lucian Hermotim pag. 113 Graec. Aldi de vera hist l. 2. sub init Natal Com. They write of Momus that none of the gods could do any thing but he had a quarrell at it When Neptune had made a bull Vulcan a man and Minerua a house he quarrelled at the bull because the hornes stood on his head the man because he had not a window in his breast the house because it stood not on wheeles to remoue it when it stood not well And e Philocran ep ad vxor when Venus walked by smiling at his conceit he told her she was not well made neither * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pag. 384. and her shooe made too much creaking as she went My aduersary hath a spice of Momus in him His humour affirmes foure things first that the translation is coined This we denie for coining signifies translating otherwise then the originall languages intend which they haue not done for any thing the Iesuite knowes for he had not seene it when he wrote this and whensoeuer he sees it he hath not so much learning as to compare it with Greeke and Hebrew and the Reader may iudge the better of it by this that it agrees throughout with the translations of the learned in the Church of Rome Pagnine Vatablus Munster Erasmus Arias better then the vulgar doth of which translation many Romish Catholicke Doctors report d Refert Azor. part 1. sum mor l. 8. c. 3. pag. 639 §. Quarto that there be some corruptions in it and that things might haue bene translated more clearly significantly properly truly and better and things naughtily translated yea in a contrary sence and nothing to the purpose He that is bound to such a translation with an ill grace tels vs of coining Secondly he affirmes our new translation to be different from all that haue bene before this is stale and I vouchsafe it onely this answer How can he tell that saw it not before he writ this it not being then come forth Thirdly he sayes that with much cost care and scandall to our cause it is set forth For the care and cost he hath nothing to do his Highnesse and the State and learned of our Church he now begins to see will spare neither care nor cost to aduance Gods truth and impart the sacred Scripture to his people which the Pope and his Cleargie with so much care and cost haue laboured to destroy The scandall concernes him nearer but that he is a Pharisee and so can receiue no formall scandall from vs. Or if he will assume to himselfe so tender a conscience as to be afraid of scandall let him speake out and trifle not what scandall is it now when learning and meanes increase to make a new translation ouer it was in the primitiue Church when Lucian Ierom and others made their new translations the Church hauing many translations in it before What scandall is it more then was e See Cassand praef ord Rom. Gregories altering of the Liturgies when euen with generall contradiction increasing to mutinie he abolished the old to make roome for his new or more then is the infinite varietie of Liturgies Breuiaries and Missals in the Church of Rome at this day the varietie whereof is almost reached in the different editions of their translations in so much that THE TRENT COVNCEL HAVING AVTHORISED AND PREFERRED THE LATIN-VVLGAR YET NO PAPIST LIVING CAN TELL WHICH IS CERTAINLY IT whether the edition of the Goths or Complute or Louane or Clement or Sixtus or any other For as there be these and diuers other editions of the vulgar set forâ—h and allowed in the Church of Rome by the Pope so do they neuer a one of them agree with other which fully returnes the scandall into my aduersaries owne bosome and for euer debarres his sectaries from obiecting to vs the varietie of our translations wherein if there be any force it will pinch them as much as vs. 3 Fourthly he affirmes our new translation to be of infallible authoritie no more then the former were that
the vnlearned know them to be sincere The new translation lately set foorth by the Kings authoritie defended Momus in his humor The subordination of meanes Chap. 29. Touching the obscuritie of the Scripture The necessitie of meanes to be vsed for the vnderstanding of the Scripture proues not the obscuritie Traditions debarred A Councell is aboue the Pope The Scripture of it selfe easie to all that vse it as they should The certaine sence of the Scripture and the assurance thereof is not by tradition Chap. 30. Touching the all-sufficiencie of Scripture to the matter of faith It shewes it selfe to be Gods word Luthers denying S. Iames epistle How the Papists expound the light of the Scripture What they and what we hold about the authoritie of the Church How expresse Scripture is required Chap. 31. Wherein the place 2. Tim. 3.15 alledged to proue the fulnesse and sufficiencie of the Scripture alone is expounded and vrged against the Iesuites cauils Chap. 32. Touching priuate spirits that expound against the Church Such priuate expositions refused by the Protestants And yet the Papists haue no other All teaching is to be examined euen by priuate men Certaine propositions shewing how the Church teaching may be or may not be examined and refused Chap. 33. How a priuate man is assured he vnderstands and beleeues aright touching the last and highest resolution of faith Luthers reiecting the Fathers Occhams opinion that no man is tied to the Pope or his Councels The Beraeans examined the doctrine that they were taught The faith of the beleeuer rests vpon diuine infused light M. Luther sought reformation with all humilitie Scripture is the grounds of true assurance Who the Pastors were of whom Luther learned his faith His conference with the Diuel By the Church the Papists meane onely the Pope Chap. 34. The Papists pretending the Church haue a further meaning then the vulgar know The Popes will is made the Churches act Base traditions expounded to be diuine truth Chap. 35. The Papists pretending the Church meane onely the Pope How and in what sence they vnderstand the doctrine of the Apostles to be the rule of faith They hold that the Pope may make new articles of faith And that the Scripture receiues authoritie from him Vnlearned men may see the truth when the Pope and his crew sees it not And they may iudge of that they teach The Iesuites dare not answer directly Chap. 36. An entrance into the question touching the visibilitie of the Protestant Church in the former ages Wherein it is briefly shewed where and in whom it was Chap. 37. Not the Church but the Scripture is the rule The question touching the visiblenesse of the Church proceeds of the Militant Church In what sence we say the Militant Church is sometime inuisible The Papists thinke the Church shall be inuisible in the time of Antichrist Their contradictions touching Antichrist breefly noted Chap. 38. The Papists cannot proue the Church to be alway visible in that sence wherein we denie it The diuerse considerations of the Church distinguished His quarrels made for our doctrine touching the Churches seuerall states answered The faithfull onely are true members of the Church Vpon what occasion the question touching the visiblenesse of the Church first began Chap. 39. The Papists are enforced to yeeld the same that we say touching the inuisiblenesse of the Church Their doctrine touching the time of Antichrists reigne And the state of the Militant Church at some times Arguments for the perpetuall visiblenesse of the Church answered In whom the true Church consisted before Luthers time Chap. 40. Againe touching the visiblenesse of the Church and in what sence we say it was inuisible Many things innouated in the Church of Rome The complaints of Vbertine and Ierome of Ferrara All the Protestants faith was preserued in the middest of the Church of Rome A iest of the Terinthians What religion hath bred desperation Chap. 41. A narration of a popish Doctor and professor of diuinitie in the Church of Rome translated out of Acosta de temp nouissimis lib. 2. cap. 11. and Maiolus dies canicul tom 2. pag. 89. and inserted for answer to that wherewith the Iesuite reproches our Church in the last words of his precedent replie Chap. 42. An obiection against the Repliars Catalogue Diuers articles condemned by the Fathers mentioned in the Catalogue that the Church of Rome now vses What consent there is betweene antiquitie and papistrie Chap. 43. Whatsoeuer the Fathers of the primitiue Church beleeued is expressed in their bookes The Repliar is driuen to say they held much of his religion onely implicitely What implicite faith is according to the Papists The death of Zeuxis The Fathers writ that which cannot stand with papistrie Chap. 44. The whole Christian faith deliuered to the Church hath succeeded in all ages yet many corruptions haue sometime bene added how and in what sence the Church may erre A Catalogue assigned of those in whom the Protestants faith alway remained What is required to the reason of succession Chap. 45. The Fathers are not against the Protestants but with them Touching the Centuries reiecting of the Fathers The cause of some errors in the Fathers Gregories faith and conuerting England The Papists haue bene formall innouators How they excuse the matter Chap. 46. The errors broached by the later Diuines of the Church of Rome Their errors maintained by that Church and their writings to good purpose alledged by Protestants How that which they speake for the Protestants is shifted of One reason why we alledge their sayings That which is said in excuse of their disagreement answered Chap. 47. Councels haue erred and may erre What manner of Councels they be that the Papists say cannot erre It is confessed that both Councels and Pope may erre Chap. 48. Touching the Councels of Neece the second and Frankford How the Nicene decreed images to be adored What kind of Councell it was And what manner of one that of Frankford was Frankford cōdemned the second Nicene Touching the booke of Charles the Great and of what credit it is Chap. 49. The ancient Church held the blessed Virgin to haue bene conceiued in sinne The now Church of Rome holds the contrary Chap. 50. Touching Seruice and praier in an vnknowne language The text 1. Cor. 14. expounded and defended against Bellarmine The ancient Church vsed praier in a knowe language Chap. 51. The Church of Rome against all antiquitie forbids the laie people the vse of the Scripture in the vulgar language The shifts vsed by the Papists against reading spitefull speeches against it Testimonies of antiquitie for it The Repliars reason against it Chap. 52. The mariage of Priests and Bishops lawfull and allowed by antiquitie Some examples hereof in the ancient Church The restraint hereof is a late corruption Priests were maried euen in these westerne parts a thousand yeares after Christ Chap. 53. Wherein is handled the doctrine of the Church of Rome touching the
make them pale for feare and therefore he would affixe it though I for my part will thinke he doe it not so much to terrifie vs as to gull his owne with the name of the Church If he had in any good fashion defended the exposition and application he made of it k THE WAY § 15. Reply pag. 223 in his Treatise he might haue vsed it the better and it would haue made vs the more afraid but hauing left it in the lash where I answered it he is not worthy so faire a text should come vnder his title Neuerthelesse there is good vse to be made of it against himselfe For if the Church be the pillar of truth and the Papacie which he striues for in his Reply be the pillar of lies then it will follow the Papacie is not the Church The first proposition is his text The second neither his Reply nor Treatise can put by The conclusion therefore is the truth And so the Text may keep his place to good purpose 5 On the backside of the same page hee hath placed in Latin and English this sentence of Saint Austin de vtil cred c. 8. If thou seeme to thy selfe to be sufficiently tossed to wit in doubts questions or controuersies of faith and wouldest make an end of these labours follow the way of the Catholicke discipline which did proceed from Christ himselfe by the Apostles euen vnto vs and from hence shall be deriued to posteritie I guesse his minde was to allude to the title of my booke which I called THE WAY and because therein I defend the way of the Scripture followed by the vniuersall Church which he likes not therefore he brings S. Austin reuoking vs to the way of Catholicke discipline This man sure hath a strange apprehension * Denique addimus Ecclesiam quae nunc Pontifici Romano obtemperat ture ac merito Catholicae nomen sibi vendicare eademque ratio ne fidem eius Catholicam esse censendam appellandam Suar. de fens si◠Cathol aduers Anglic. sect err l. 1. c. 12. nu 9. to thinke that wheresoeuer the Fathers vse the word Catholicke they vnderstand thereby this New-Roman-Catholicke and when they speake of Catholicke discipline they vnderstand his Church proposition determined by the Pope when they affirme nothing else but the doctrine contained and written in the Scriptures to be Catholicke and the discipline whereby men are directed both in faith and manners So S. Austin expounds himselfe l Cap. 6. in the same place Beleeue me whatsoeuer is in those SCRIPTVRES is loftie and diuine THERE is altogether IN THEM the truth and discipline most accommodate for the renewing and repairing of our mindes and so qualified that there is NO MAN BVT FROM THENCE HE MAY DRAW THAT WHICH IS SVFFICIENT for him if to the drawing he come deuoutly and godly as true religion requires So also Theophilus Alexandrinus m Epist 1. Pas chal pag. 377. cals the medicines taken out of the holy Scriptures for the curing of heresies the ecclesiasticall discipline The WAY to the Church therefore and S. Austins WAY of Catholicke discipline are both one because they both are the way of the Scripture and that sufficient and easie way which the simplest that is may finde though the Pope with his authoritie and traditions intermeddle not and he that will seeke the Catholicke discipline by Saint Austins consent must do it in the SCRIPTVRE which I doubt will not greatly please this Iesuite who hath spent all his time in groping for it about the Popes stoole he being the man when all is done that must determine this discipline and * Cum Pontisex definit Ecclesia per caput suum loquitur Suar. vbi sup c. 2◠nu 7. the mouth whereby their Catholicke Church must vtter and expound it 6 In the next page followes a Table of the contents of his booke and after that a short Preface to the Reader wherein first he commends his booke that I confuted and his Method vsed therein to bring men to resolution and then shewes how he was vrged by our writing against it to this Reply excusing himselfe for the plainesse of his stile and concluding with a grieuous complaint of our vnsincere dealing which he proceeds to shew in that which followes The Commendation that he giues his Method may not be denied for we allow Apes to hugge their yong ones and heretickes to conceit their owne deuices and I must confesse it is good round Method indeed for the purpose and profitable for them to be followed For if you will see it this it is Good Eue for your soules health I were readie to shed my best bloud and therefore haue ventured my life as you see vpon the entertainment you know of such as I find in the hiding roomes to bring you home to the Catholicke Church your Method is this Close vp your eies and examine nothing but obstinately renouncing the Protestants and stopping your eares against the Scriptures in all things beleeue vs who on my owne word are the Church of God and submitting your selfe to the direction of your ghostly father without more adoe be resolute and you shall easily be perswaded of our Roman faith This is a good sure Method to resolution and makes many resolute indeed and the Iesuite hauing found by experience how kindly it works with good natures had reason to commend it though in any indifferent iudgement it be a poore one as will appeare The rest of his Preface is trash come we to that which is materiall 7 After the Preface to shew my vnsincere dealing whereof he complaines he makes a title of examples of grosse vntruths gathered out of M Woottons and M. Whites bookes by which the discreete reader may see how little sinceritie or care of truth they haue had and consequently how little credit is to be giuen to their writings and hauing dispatched M. Wootton he comes to me with these words Now to come to M. White whose booke is said to do much more harme among the simple then M. Woottons doth I hope I shall lay open such foule want of sinceritie and care of truth in him as it will plainly appeare that those which shall hereafter take harme by giuing credence to his words or writings shall shew themseluis to be very simple indeed So that in all probabilie he should haue some great matter to shew that makes so large an offer and yet euery one of these examples will proue in the scanning so many testimonies of his owne weaknesse and immodesty when hauing had the book foure yeares in his hands and so many of his consorts to ioyne with him in replying all which time their rage against it and desire to discredit it and vowes to confute it appeared well enough yet now at the last can obiect no other examples of vntruth then these And that we may know he comes furnished he cals for a railing roome to brawle in
whereof all this question rises 5 Our Aduersaries holding many points of religion which we refuse we require them to shew vs the said points in the Scriptures if they will either haue vs to beleeue them or free themselues from heresie their Tradition their Purgatory their Masse their Latine seruice their Transubstantiation their Images their seuen Sacraments their Inuocation of Saints and all the rest wherein we differ * This is shewed c. 28. n. 3. Their answer is that many diuine truthes and articles of faith are not contained in the Scriptures but reuealed by Tradition and Church authoritie which are to be receiued and beleeued as well as that which is written * The original cause why the Papists set a foot the question touching the insufficiency of the Scripture This is the originall reason why they stand thus against the sufficiency of the written word for their Church authoritie and to proue this they vse the Argument here propounded by the Reply and descant with it as you see Which is an impertinent kinde of proceeding when this point whether the Bookes contained in holy writ be Gods word is no question betweene vs but agreed vpon of all hands but the question is touching other speciall articles Images adoration halfe communion and such like a number more whether not being contained in the Scripture men are bound to beleeue them For touching these things it is properly that we say Nothing is necessary to be beleeued as a point of faith which cannot be prooued euidently by Scripture And therefore this argument is impertinent For where we affirme all points of faith to be comprised within the body of the Scripture we distinguish first of the things which we say are comprised for albeit we firmely hold the diuine truth and authoritie of these Bookes to be euident in themselues yet the points that we meane in this question are touching other matters for neither they nor we deny the Scripture but both they and we deny many things to be contained in it Secondly then againe of the manner how things are comprised for all other things are comprised in Scripture as the duty obedience of subiects is in the kings lawes and as true speaking is contained in Grammar or the right forme of resoluing in Logicke but this one point is so contained as light is in the Sunne or sweete in hony and according to the same notion whereby the authoritie of the Law and truth of Principles is contained in themselues This is it which very briefly I answered in * THE WAIE § 9. 3. digr 11. n. 17. two seuerall places of my Booke Now let us see what the Iesuite replies to it To this saith he I reply that principles insciences are either euident to vs and knowne by the onely light of nature and so neede no proofe but onely declaration of termes or words in which they be vttered or if they be not euident to vs they must be demonstrated either in the same science or in some superiour science by some other principle more euident to vs. But that these Bookes which are in the Bible are diuine Scripture is not euident therefore if M. Whites similitude be good it must be demonstrated by some other principle more euident to vs that these Bookes which are in the Bible be diuine Scripture The substance of his Reply is that all principles are either euident of themselues or not euident such principles as are euident he grants need no prouing but the Scriptures are principles of religiō not euident of themselues but such as need to be demonstrated to be Gods word by some other principle in a higher science more euident to vs both denying them to be euident and also to be made so by onely declaring the words wherein they are vttered And to proue this he saies in the margent if it were euident that these Bookes in the Bible are diuine Scripture how is it onely beleeued by faith for Saint Paule cals faith Argumentū non apparentium Heb. 11.1 1. My answer is that the Scriptures are principles euident of themselues to those that haue the Spirit of God and such as need not to be proued by Church authoritie but onely to be reuealed and expounded according to that which is in themselues This my answer to helpe the reader out of the Iesuits perplexed discourse I will lay downe and explicate in 3. propositions First the Scripture in diuinitie hath the same office that principles haue in sciences that as the rules and principles of Grammar teach all true speaking and as the elements of Arithmeticke teach all right numbring so the doctrine contained in the Scriptures teaches all true faith Secondly as they are the principles of religion and rule of faith so they enioy the same priuiledge that principles do in forren Professions that is to be receiued and assented to for themselues without discourse For e Atist Poster c. 1. no humane science proues it owne principles or disputes against him that denies them and although the principles of an inferiour science may be demonstrated in a superiour yet this befalles not that which is the highest as the Metaphysicks which hauing no superiour science neither stands to demonstrate it selfe nor to receiue demonstration from another but our vnderstanding assents immediatly to the principles thereof and so goes forward by them to discerne of other things In the same manner the Scripture hauing no superiour science or rule aboue it is like these principles receiued for it selfe and is not occupied in prouing it selfe and the principles therin contained but shewing other things by them it selfe must be assented to without discourse by faith before we can argue out of it Thirdly all demonstration and proofe of principles is onely voluntary not necessarie against him that denies them as in Musicke the Musitian demonstrates his precepts not thereby to teach his arte but to conuince him that denies it Hence appeares the insufficiency of my aduersaries reply First in that he saies principles are not euident but need demonstration that so the Scriptures being yeelded to be the principles of religion yet they should not be receiued vnlesse they proue themselues vntill the authoritie of the Church come There is no man acquainted with f Principia per seipsa nata sunt cognosci reliqua verò per principia Arist prio l. 2 c. 18. idem Procl in Euclid l. 2. c. 2. humane art will say so His owne Thomas g Tho. 1. part q. 1. art 8. sayes that like as other sciences do not argue to proue their owne principles but out of the principles argue to shew other things so the sacred doctrine doth not argue to proue the owne principles but from them proceeds to shew something The same is said by h Capreol prol in 1. part q. 1. pag. 24. Greg. Valent. tom 1. pag. 50. a. others Next it is false that the Scripture is like those principles which need
Pined in Iob 19 v. 26. nu 3. sayes a Iesuite when I see and heare some wise man of our age as Fran. Suarez a Iesuite for example and vpon occasion bring him into my Commentaries then when I cast mine eyes vpon many of the ancient Fathers Here antiquity must giue place to a Iesuite and yet if the Protestants do but one halfe of this they are audacious and impudent vpon their bold presumption This is that Erasmus l Annot in Hieron Praef. in Dan. tom 3. p. 28. noted of them long agoe When it is for our purpose the authority of Hierome is woorth any thing when otherwise it is not for our purpose it is worth nothing and afterward they condemne vs because we beleeue them not The examples how they cast off Fathers and Councels and all antiquity are innumerable they do it in euery question that fals out betweene vs whensoeuer they ioyne in the triall with vs and they confesse that they may be refused because they may erre Guido the Carmelite m Guido de Perpin de haeres c. 7. pag. 8. edit à Bad. Ascens an 1528. sayes Albeit the writings of the holy Doctors be to be handled and read and receiued with due reuerence yet is their authority neither so firme nor inuiolable but it may be lawfull to contradict them or doubt of them where they are not prooued and confirmed euidently and expresly by the holy Scripture and where the Church hath not determined their firme and vndoubted soothfastnes Whence it followes that an opinion cannot precisely be conuinced of heresie by the saying of the Doctors for where where is not infallible truth there is no certaine faith since certaine faith leanes vpon infallible truth yea there can be no infallible assent that a man should firmely cleaue to such things for when there is no infallible truth there can be no certaine and vndoubted faith But in the saying of the Doctors there is no infallible certaine or vndoubted truth partly because they sometime doubt themselues in their owne sayings whether they haue erred therein or no partly because their disagreement is a testimony of falsity and what disagreement there is among the Doctors no man doubts that hath read their writings It is not necessary therefore vndoubtingly to beleeue them but it is lawfull to THINKE AGAINST THEM DISALOW THEM AND REIECT THEM without any danger of heresie So he And yet you see how busily my aduersary taxes Protestants for neglecting the Fathers like the crabfish that chid her yong one for creeping backward and yet went backward her selfe it were an honester course and more relishing of piety for our aduersaries to spare our dissenting sometime from the Fathers as they do their owne onely inquire whether we dissent with reason as themselues sometimes do but this were labour and expence a Iesuites pen can afford railing and facing a great deale better cheape CHAP. XXI 2. Which is the Militant Church 3. And the Catholicke 4. The Church of the Elect inuisible 5. A rancid conceite of the Iesuite Pag. 113. A. D. This Church which consisteth of Professors M. White * White pag. â—9 100. calleth the Church Militant that which consisteth onely of the Elect he calleth the Catholicke Church but to keepe the Antithesis he should rather call it the Church Triumphant not Triumphant as we Catholickes take the name for the happiest part of the Church which is now glorious in heauen but as it being a Church inuisible in earth may triumph indeed as hauing no need to feare any persecutions in that none in time of persecutions can finde theÌ„ out nor can know them nor consequently can persecute or hurt theÌ„ for being members of Christs true Church But as in this respect it may be called the Church Triumphant so on the other side it may be called the Church Lamentant as hauing so iust cause to lament in that the members of it being vnknowne not onely to the world but to one another can haue no societie one with another requisite to the nature of a true Church nor can performe those offices which should be done in and onely in the true Church nor can tell whom to repaire to for instruction in faith or for counsaile in direction of manners or for the comfort of the holy Sacraments nor can haue any knowne Pastours to gouerne the Church nor any knowne sheepe to obey these Pastours nor can haue any Historiographer to write their actes thereby to edifie men with the vertues exercised by them or so much as to make it appeare to posterity that such a company hath bene according to Christs promise alwaies extant in the world In this respect it may be called a Church Lamentant or a Lamentable Church 1 MY Aduersary being in a deepe discourse about the persons and societies of men to whom alone God vouchsafes the assistance of his Spirit for the vnderstanding and beleeuing the things of faith thinks himselfe interrupted by a speech of mine in the place quoted touching the Church Militant and Triumphant the which if he had misliked he should haue confuted in it owne place where I vsed it to shew the true state of the question concerning the visiblenes of the Church saying the question is of the Militant Church though we say also that the Church mentioned in the Creed euery member whereof is saued be in some sort inuisible too in that the Church Triumphant in heauen which is one part of the Church mentioned in the Creed is to vs that liue here inuisible and onely beleeued This speech my Aduersary according to his disordered and cowardly Method vsed in all his booke durst not confute in it owne place where it lay but drawes in backwards by the taile into the den of his discourse as * Apollodo de orig deorum they say Cacus did the oxen he stole from Hercules that he might the better descant vppon it when his Reader by this his glancing at it cannot know the purpose whereto I intended it nor the ground whereupon I affirmed it 2 That which he sayes is foure things First that I call that which consists of Professours the Church Militant the which you see he mentions so that one would thinke he meant to condemne it yet he dares not but onely craftily repeats it to expose it to censure with the rest that followes for a Catech. Roman pag. 112. edit Colo. an 1507. Bellar. Eccl. mil. c. 1. his owne side speakes in the same manner D. Bannes b 22. pag 94. edit Venet. apud Dâ—mian Zâ—nar 1602. sayes The Church which VPON THE EARTH LIVES IN WARFARE is called Militant One way as it is a congregation of such as professe the faith of God another way as it is congregated not onely by faith but also by Baptisme In this therefore there is no fault but all is well for this part of the Church on earth that liues in the Camp warfaring with the
faith or needfull to be followed And so from that place to pag. 57 I disputed that the Scripture ALONE is the rule of faith that is to say That rule which my Aduersary in his fourth ground had said God had prouided whereby euery man learned and vnlearned may sufficiently be instructed WHAT is to be holden for the true faith Now he complaines that the State is peruerted the question not being whether Scripture be the rule of faith but whether Scripture alone be the rule and meane ordained of God to breed all faith And he notes two points wherein it is peruerted First in that I so affirme and defend the Scripture to be the rule as if he and his sectaries excluded it from being the rule in any sort which he sayes they do not For they hold the Scripture as propounded by the Church to be part of it I answer that I knew well enough they confessed the Scripture to be part of the rule and the Diuine doctrine which is the whole rule to be some of it written But I knew also that they denied it to be the whole rule ioyning therewith vnwritten traditions and the Popes Decretals which they call Church authority I knew also they allowed it to be no part of the rule but as and in such sence as the Church of Rome should please to propound it and I saw his conclusion in termes denying the Scripture alone to be the rule whereby men may sufficiently be instructed WHAT the faith is therefore I disputed directly opposite to all this that the Scripture alone without traditions is the whole rule to shew vs WHAT is to be holden for faith and nothing but the Scripture this is close to the question For albeit he yeelds it to be the rule in a sort because as his Church propounds it it containes part of the rule yet he denies it to be that whole and entire rule that his conclusion inquires of and so is to be disputed against as well as if he denied it to be any part of the rule at all Againe he holds two things First affirmatiuely that the Scripture is one part of the rule then negatiuely that the Scripture alone is not all the rule Both these are contradictory to my assertion The Scripture alone is the rule My assertion therefore affirming what he denies and denying what he affirmes containes the true state of the question and his inuoluing the matter with all this cauilling tends onely to the couering of his doctrine the loathsome visage whereof he is ashamed should be seene 3 The second point wherein he sayes the question is peruerted is in that I take the rule of faith otherwise then he doth For whereas he by that word rule meanes such a rule as not onely is sufficient to REVEALE all diuine truths that are to be beleeued but also to BREED or produce in vs the faith whereby we beleeue them I he sayes vnderstand such a rule onely as is sufficient to reueale the diuine verities though it be not sufficient to breed in vs faith and assent thereunto And it is true that I vnderstand such a rule indeed the Church wherein I liue onely beleeuing the sufficiency of the Scripture to containe all the obiect of faith but not to enable vs to beleeue it or vnderstand it ordinarily without the ministry of the Church and other meanes But this peruerts not the question * The state of the question touching Scripture ALONâ— for about the meanes there is no question but the question is whether Scripture alone excluding all Church traditions and authority comprehend the whole obiect or matter of faith that is to say All that we are bound to know beleeue and doe for our saluation though it be granted that to breed or produce faith and knowledge of that which is in the Scripture the Ministry of the Church and the helpe of Gods Spirit and our owne industry must concurre For our Aduersaries deny this and hold their runagate traditions and Church authority to be necessary not onely for the expounding and confirming to vs that which is in the Scripture if any one chance to deny it or not to see it but for the supplying of infinite articles of faith which are no waies at all comprised in the Scripture but vpon the said authority are to be receiued as well as that which is reuealed in the Scripture The Iesuite speakes as if he thought his Church authority to consist more in breeding faith and leading men to beleeue what is written then in adding any thing to the measure of the diuine verities contained in the Scripture and indeed sometime there be of his side that will plainely say so He that writ the defence of the Censure a Def. of the Cens pag. 141. NOTE THIS and inquire whether all Papists will stand to it sayes it is to be noted that the question betweene vs and the Protestants is of EXPRESSE SCRIPTVRE ONELY and not of any far fet place which by interpretation may be applied to a controuersie For this contention began betweene vs vpon this occasion that when we alledged diuers weighty places and reasons out of the Scripture for proofe of inuocation of Saints praier for the dead Purgatory and some other controuersies our aduersaries reiected them for that they did not plainely and expresly decide the matter Whereupon came this question whether all matters of beleefe are plainely and expresly in Scripture or not which they affirme and we deny And this he sayes is is the true state of the question Gretser b Defens Bellar tom 1. l. 4. c. 4. p. 1598. sayes These things may be proued by Scripture but not sufficiently not effectually by Scripture alone without tradition but onely probably The which if my aduersary and his Church did hold constantly and in good earnest I would confesse I had peruerted the state of the question But they do not but hold many things belonging to faith to be wanting and no way at all neither openly nor expresly nor consequently contained in the Scripture Dominicus Bannes c D. Dann 22. Tho. p. 302. All things which pertaine to Catholicke faith are not contained in the Canonicall books either manifestly or obscurely nor all those things which Christ and his Apostles taught and ordained for the instructing of his Church and confirming of the faith were committed to the holy Scriptures and the contrary is open heresie Melchior Canus d Can. loc p. 151 There are many things belonging to the doctrine and faith of Christians which are contained in the sacred Scriptures neither manifestly nor obscurely Cardinall Hosius e Hos confess Polon p. 383. The greater part of the Gospell by a great deale is come to vs by tradition very little of it being written in the Scripture Peresius f Peres de tradit p. 4. Tradition is taken so that it is distinguisht against the doctrine which is found in the Canonicall bookes of the
apparant I yeelded not his conclusion in the whole sence but onely in a part For view my words The Ministerie of the Church is the ordinary meanes whereby we may learne the faith of Christ And no man can of himselfe attaine to the knowledge thereof but as the Church teaches him except it be in some extraordinary cases How will my Iesuite conclude froÌ„ hence that therefore I yeeld his conclusion as it is vnderstood the second way which way I haue shewed immediately before both his Church and himselfe vnderstand it Doth he that saies the kings Iustices are tâ—â— ordinary meanes whereby to learne the matter of ciuill obedience and that no subiect can ordinarily attaine to the knowledge of the law vnlesse some body publish it yeeld therfore that the law alone is not the rule of the said obedience and subiection prescribing the measure and qualitie thereof but the Iustices also and such as acquaint vs with the law are part of the rule yea the greater and more certaine part No man will say so when all men see the Magistrate to be but the executioner and minister of the law to teach publish and execute that which is in the law it selfe and the Booke of the law to containe the whole and entire obiect of obedience that no subiect is bound to any obedience or to the doing of any thing whatsoeuer the Magistrate might happen to impose vpon him but that onely which is contained in the law either expressely or thence to be gathered by true consequence And so my Iesuits vaunt of our yeelding and impertinent discourses relishes but of the Souldier that created him and his vaunting Order though his putting vs ouer to his other Catholicke Authors be scarse souldier-like but tastes more of the Creeple He vses this often and I confesse it is a good short cutte home-wardes if a man be empty but it sinkes him that vses it into the lowest bottome of contempt to giue the onset with conclusions and principles and then to maintaine them with boasting and ignorance If we were not well acquainted with this transparent cowardlinesse in our busiest Aduersaries it would leauen the most setled patience that is among vs. CHAP. XXVIII Touching our English translations of the Bible Their sinceritie and infalliblenesse 2. How the vnlearned know them to be sincere The new Translation lately set foorth by the Kings authority defended Momus in his humor 4. The subordination of means Pag. 179. A. D. § 1. That English translations of Scripture are not infallible concerning my first reason it is to be obserued that I do not deny the true Scriptures either in the originall or in the translation to be infallible but onely I proue the ordinary English translations which ordinarily Protestants call the Scriptures not to be infallible nor consequently to be Wootton pag. 68. as some make them the onely sufficient rule and means to breed faith M. Wootton asketh what English Protestant euer affirmed that they were infallible or tooke them for the rule To this I reply first that I could wish these his questions could not be answered with affirming that many thousand poore soules that haue and can onely reade English Bibles think the texts which they reade in theÌ„ to be Gods word and consequently the infallible truth and so take them for a rule of their faith that wbat they finde written there they most firmly beleeue what they finde not there they will not beleeue Secondly if the English translation be not accounted infallible nor the rule of faith by some Protestants I aske first what M. White meaneth to say White pag. 25. the Scripture translated into English is infallibly true in respect of the matter Secondly I aske what infallible rule and meanes haue at least vnlearned Protestants whereupon to build their faith It cannot be said that the truth of the reuealed doctrine in it selfe is their rule For this is the thing that should be beleeued and is not the rule and meanes whereby men are to be directed to attain beliefe The first Hebrew or Greeke originall text immediatly written by the holy writers cannot be their rule For first where is this to be found or how shall they be sure if they find it that it is the very authenticall or originall and not a transumpt Or if a transumpt may also serue so that it be incorrupt how shall they know infallibly secluding Church-authoritie that that copie which they haue is incorrupt when they neuer saw the first authenticall nor euer did or are able to compare them together Finally suppose they had a copie well agreeing with the originall what nearer were they attaining faith by it since they cannot vnderstand it White pag. 25. M White is so farre from disclaiming from English translations as M. Wotton doth that he will needs defend them to be infallible in the matter contained in them in so much that with a bold brazen face he saith Martin cannot giue one instance of the sence corrupted Pag. 26. And although he seeme to leaue himselfe a starting hole by saying that he doth not defend tbis or that mans edition but the Scriptures wel and faithfully translated accounting it sufficient that there be some translations faithfull and agreeing with the originall in the Church Ibid. yet presently after he taketh vpon him to defend the varieties of translations saying that this varietie hath bene in words and stile and not in any materiall point of the sence Now how false this bold and blind answer is the Reader may easily perceiue if he will reade not onely M. Gregory Martins discouerie but also M. Reynolds refutation of M. Whitaker and the Grounds of the new Religion which bookes neither are or can so be answered by M. Fulke and his fellow Protestants to helpe him but still it wil be iustified and made plaine that not onely one but many instances may be giuen of the sence corrupted The which is not onely proued by our Diuines but also confessed by Protestants themselues One of which said Broughtons epistle to the Lords of the Councell Carlile in his booke that Christ went not downe into hell that the English Bible was full of errors And what errors Onely in stile or words Nay M. Carlile saith that our English Translators in many places detort the Scriptures from the right sence and that they haue corrupted and depraued the sence obscured the truth deceiued the ignorant Which their confession if it were not also acknowledged for truth by others what need were there after so many varieties of translations that with so much cost care and scandal to the Protestant cause they must needs haue order by publik authority to coine a new translatioÌ„ of the Bible different froÌ„ all English translatioÌ„s that haue bin before the which also when it cometh forth will not be of infallible authoritie more then the former neither can at least vnlearned men be infallibly assured that it
containeth no materiall error For I would faine know how they who neither haue the authenticall originall or if they had cannot reade and much lesse vnderstand and compare the translation with it neither do admit infallible authoritie in the Church to assure them can be infallibly assured that the translation doth not containe any substantiall error To this M. White answereth White pag. 25. that we know this by the same infallible meanes wherby we know other articles of beliefe namely by the light of the doctrine translated the testimony of the Spirit the ministery of the word the rules of are the knowledge of tongues and such like Here is a faire flourish of words but answer me good M. White directly to the point Are all of these ioyntly or euery one seuerally or onely some of these necessary sufficient to breed in vs infallible assurance of an article of faith All are not necessary For else how shall poore vnlearned men do who want rules of art knowledge of tongues and such like Euery one seuerally is not sufficient For neither knowledge of tongues rules of art nor the Protestant ministery are of themselues infallible and consequently cannot be of themselues sufficient to breed such infallible assurance in vs as is requisite in an article of faith Well then it remaineth that onely some of these to wit the light of doctrine translated and the testimonie of the Spirit are euen according to the ordinary course the only necessary and of themselues the sole sufficient meanes to breed this assurance but this not For then it wold follow that euery one learned and vnlearned that had the Spirit of God by the onely light of the doctrine it self without any other help should infallibly vnderstand the Greeke and Hebrew text either read by themselues or pronounced by a Minister which is most false and yet that it followeth wel is apparent because true doctrine shineth as wel yea better if M. White say true in the Originall White pag. 26. then in the English Translations We saith M. White know the diuine doctrine to be one and the same Pag. 27. immediatly in the Originall more obscurely in the Translations and God as the same M. White saith directeth the children of light by the holy Ghost who openeth their hearts that they know his voice from all others and that the light of his truth may shine vnto them Now if the light of the diuine doctrine do shine as well and better in the Hebrew and Greeke text then in the English translations and that all which be children of light haue the eies of their heart so opened as they can discerne Gods voice froÌ„ all others and that the light of his truth shineth vnto theÌ„ what need is there then of any other either priuate or publick meanes to open their eies to see this light when the holy Ghost doth sufficiently open them Or if he say the holy Ghost doth not open them sufficiently without othâ—r meanes then the light of the doctrine and the testimony of the Spirit are not the onely necessary and alone sufficient meanes to assure vs infallibly of any article of faith namely that this or that means must be assigned sufficient to breed in vs infallible assuraÌ„ce which it self cannot do vnles it selfe be and be knowne or at least may be knowne to be infallible in it selfe and infallibly to open and direct our eyes to the seeing of the infallible truth which fallible ministery of meÌ„ fallible rules of art fallible knowledge of tongs or such like infallibly do not 1 HIs reason why the Scriptures traÌ„slated into English caÌ„not be the rule of faith is because our translations are full of errors Wherby he says his mind is not to deny the true Scripture in the originall or in the translation to be infallible but only the ordinary English translations My a THE WAY §. 5. nu 2 §. 6. nu 2. 4. 8. answer was the same that D. Stapleton b Relect. pag. 525. makes for the vulgar Latin that in respect of the words onely there might be some error but in respect of the sence there is none For if the words of the traÌ„slation be not so perfect as they might yet that hinders not the truth of the matter nor the integritie of the sence For the vulgar Latin canonized by c Sess 4. the Trent Councell and d In those words J do not denie the true Scripture either in the Originall or in the Translation to be infallible granted by the Iesuite himselfe to be infallible is not free from error and corruption in words Mariana e Tract pro edit vulg Multa superius in Hebraicis Graecis codicibus vtti esse ostendimus multae mendacia in rebus minutis eorum pars aliquae non exigua in nostra editione vulgata extat c. 21. pag. 103. says There be many corruptions in the Hebrew and Greeke bookes which are the originall and many lies in small matters no small part whereof is also in the vulgar It may safely therfore be yeelded that our English translations as all other translations in the world whatsoeuer are not infallible nor free from all errors in words and yet the sence and matter of the Scripture translated which is the rule be stil maintained to be infallible This my answer yeelding such a kind of erroniousnes in words my aduersary obiects to M. Wotton who belike in his answer to this argument demanding what English Protestant euer affirmed that our translations were infallible or tooke them for the rule He replies secondly what means M. White then to say the Scripture translated into English is infallibly true in respect of the matter M. White answers that his meaning in so saying was to accord with M. Wotton by distinguishing betweene the words and the contents of the translations M. Wotton denying the words to be the rule and I affirming the matter contained in the words so to be What contradiction is this when he grants our translatioÌ„s as al humane means are to be subiect to error in one sence and I deny them to be subiect in another 2 This my assertion that our English translations as touching the matter contained in them are infallible howsoeuer there be varietie among them in words stile he entertaines after his accustomed maner with some passioÌ„ For expouÌ„ding my self that I wold not maintain this or that mans editioÌ„ but the Scriptures wel and faithfully translated in such maner as our Church allows them he cals this a starting hole neuer remeÌ„bring how himself wil not defend this or that edition in his own Church but wil retire to those editions that are approued as also the primitiue Church permitted varietie of translations and yet followed the purest as neare as it could iudge of theÌ„ for the time being I wil therfore say it again that OVR ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS AS TOVCHING THE MATTER CONTAINED THEREIN ARE INFALLIBLE AND
may be more corrupt and defiled with the inuentions of men then the priuate retained by those that cannot or dare not reforme the abuses But then why doth he censure me all ouer his booke for holding this and scoffe at that I said the faithfull may sometime professe onely in secret among themselues And but that he will not let his stomacke come downe he should haue added f According to the doctrine of his Diuines Telelpho de Casent l. de magn Tribul pag. 32. Ouand 4. d. 18. prop. 3. Viega in Apoc. p 763. n. 12. Bozi de sig eccl l. 24. c. 10. Aquipontan de Antich cont Sohn p. 23. that the Sacrifice of the Masse also shall be abolished in the time of Antichrist and then his Church will be as inuisible as ours When it shall not onely be said in secret as Seminaries in England now adaies do it but by their leaue THEY DO NOT THAT ALONE IN SECRET but it shall not be sayed at all which these Catholickes would repine at now adaies in England FIFTHLY he sayes that howsoeuer the Church be not alway illustrious nor cannot alway practise the rites of Gods worship publikely yet it shall neuer want Pastors to gouerne nor altogether the vse of the Sacrament and other duties pertaining to diuine worship and the profession of faith at least in an INWARD estate The which is true and the Protestants say it as well as he expounding those Pastours to haue bene many of the ordinary Pastours liuing in the communion of the Church of Rome for certaine ages past and those Sacraments and rites pertaining to diuine worship to haue bene part of that which was exercised and this profession of Christian faith to haue bene the testimony that many in the said ages haue giuen against the corruptions of the Papacy partly by holding the substance of truth with their errors and partly by suffering persecution for misliking the Papacy And we confesse also that which he addes that this inward state and practise of the Church shall neuer be vniuersally so secret but that some notice shall be had of it euer by enemies and omitting his conceite of Antichrist to come which S. Austin in the place quoted affirmes not we shew for the time past sufficient records thereof both friends and foes testifying in their writings the resistance that in all ages was made against the Papacy as it grew on and the succession of our faith and religion in the middest of the Roman Church it selfe appearing in the books of the Schoolemen and Friars themselues which records and what would the Repliar haue more by diuine prouidence are preserued in the writings of all that liued in those ages euen such as embraced the Papacy though now g By a practise of purging bookes mentioned afore the Church of Rome do what it can to abolish them and certifie vs that the Protestant Religion hath continued in the Church in all ages since Christ Which Records if we wanted then might we as the Repliar speakes iustly misdoubt our case whether the diuine promises made to Gods Church haue bene fulfilled in vs. And though it be true that M. White said Things past cannot be shewed but by stories and many things belonging to the Church and religion no doubt for want of histories be forgotten the said histories being either suppressed or adulterated yet he addes that there is NO ARTICLE OF THE PROTESTANT RELIGION BVT WE CAN SHEW IT IMBRACED AND NO ARTICLE OF THE PAPACIE BVT WE CAN SHEW IT RESISTED EVEN IN THE WRITINGS AND RECORDS OF THE CHVRCH OF ROME IT SELFE and by these records we can shew that whatsoeuer wee mislike in our Aduersaries was not at the beginning but crept in and mingled it selfe with the truth through the faction and conueiance of priuate persons in the Church so the fulfilling of Gods promises touching the perpetuall continuance of the Church is knowne sufficiently and our hope confirmed as the Iesuite requires Though the Romish practise in razing and forging histories and antiquity be discouered to be such that were there no records in the world the testimonie of the Scripture alone whereto our faith agrees should suffice for our comfort and to confirme our faith and hope and perswade vs that the diuine promises haue bene fulfilled A. D. Note thirdly that not onely the Church de facto Pag. 244. hath not bene hitherto so visible as I haue sayed but also which chiefly is to be pondered the nature of the Church consisting of Professors of Christian faith is such that according to the ordinary course of Gods prouidence it cannot be altogether secret from the world at least for a long time especially for so long a time as Protestants are forced to pleade for an inuisible Church The reason of which is because the Church is bound to an outward actuall profession of faith White p. 96. Wootton pag. 190. 29. 1. first as my Aduersaries admit among the faithfull themselues in practising the rites and ceremonies of Seruice and Sacraments which may indeed be done in secret although hardly so secret as at least in continuance of time some kinde of generall notice is not giuen of it to others by one chance or other as experience hath of this present and former ages teacheth Secondly the Church is bound to another kind of actuall profession to wit before men of the world according to that of our Sauiour Let your light so shine before men Matth. 5. v. 16. that they may see your good workes and glorifie your Father which is in heauen and according to the example of the primitiue Christians who did not onely shine among themselues but were (a) Mat. 5. v. 14. the lights of the world (b) 1 Cor. 4. v. 9. being made a spectacle to the world (c) Philip. 2. v. 15 D. Thom. 2. 2. q. 3. art 2. as lightes in the world And although all the members in the Church are not bound at all times actually to shine in this manner yet so often as the notable glory of God and the good of soules necessarily requireth euery one is bound thus by wordes or workes to make profession of his faith in the sight of the world Now although Gods glory and the good of soules do not necessarily require that this or that priuate man should professe his faith at all times yet that some or other should professe is alwaies necessary both for the glory of God the good of soules for if for any notable time Isay 54. v. 1. 2. Malac. 1. v 11. Aug. orat aduers Iudaeos de vnitate Ecclesiae cap. 7. ep 48. there were no professing true Christians eminently knowne at least in generall in the world first it were a notable dishonor to God in that it should shew that all his seruants loued or feared the world more then him and that they had lesse regard to publish his honor in the world then the Diuels instruments
among them that will dispute if euer it were a time to leaue wording and fall to realitie this it is wherein our aduersaries by the glorious and vnlimited reports of their owne sinceritie haue raised vp the opinions of so many to the expectation of matter at their hands and indeed the distraction of so many peoples minds about religion require and euen cry for materiall and sound dealing and is this now the performance thereof with reuiling words to pester their bookes and to the matter to reply Hoc nihil inuariabile Grosse vntruths blockishly ignorant against his owne knowledge and conscience carelesly inconsiderate I might here make an end c. Was this all the Iesuite could say against that which M. White confirmed by plain authorities could he confute his writing no otherwise then thus Then M. White tels him again that as he hath written nothing but what all learned men know to be true and many haue obiected against the Church of Rome long ago to farre better purpose then himselfe is able to do so his knowledge and conscience and the conscience of thousands with him are the firmlier assured of these things in that his aduersary is able to say so little against them A.D. Yet because in the 12. Pag 29. § of his Preface he offereth as he saith certaine externall markes and sensible tokens whereby the falshood of the Romane Church may be discouered and the most resolute Papist that liueth moued to misdoubt of his owne religion I haue thought it not amisse to examine these his markes and tokens as supposing that if I finde him to faile of truth and sinceritie in these men will not expect to finde it in the rest of his booke in regard he intending to moue by these his marke and tokens euen as he saith the most resolute Papist that liueth to misdoubt of his religion it is like he would vse all his diligence and care that such a carelesse man in so bad a cause could not onely to bring sensible but also sound and substantiall matter and that very truly and sincerely set downe as knowing that such resolute Papists will not be easily moued to misdoubt of their so ancient and well grounded religion by any sleight markes or tokens though neuer so seeming sensible especially if they may sensibly perceiue them to be vnsincerely and vntruly propounded and vrged against them That therefore the Reader may better guesse what truth and sinceritie he may expect in the rest of M. White his booke I haue thought fit briefly to view and runne through these his markes and tokens 9 What Reader now but would imagine the Iesuite to be with child of some substantiall matter and yet it will proue but a tympanie of mind and therefore I desire the Reader diligently to obserue what passes betweene vs. For I say againe that if a man neuer looke further those very things which I mentioned as externall markes and sensible tokens of the Roman Churches iniquitie are sufficient of themselues to moue the hotest and zealousest Papist aliue yet once again to lay his hand vpō his heart and better to look into his religion And what account soeuer the Iesuits resolute Papists that will not so easily be moued make of that I said yet still I offer it to their a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Isid Pelusio ep 191. lib. 3. more retired and vnpreiudicate considerations especially now when this Iesuite hath studied out what he can to lay in against it and finding the demonstrations whereby though very briefly yet really I shewed euery Marke to be too hot for his mouth meddles not with them but passes them ouer and sayes not a word to them but onely repeates the motiue and making a face at it so lets it go not mentioning the arguments whereby I declare it b Chrysost This is the power of truth and the grace of innocencie when her enemie is her iudge and the diuell her accuser and wrath and furie and calumnie and hatred are impaneled against her yet she is quit and iustified CHAP. IX 1. The Apocrypha not accounted Canonicall Scripture 2. Papists professing to expound against the Fathers 3. The new English translation of the Bible 4. Traditions equalled with the holy Scripture 6. About the erring of Councels 7. And the sufficiencie of the Scriptures Pag. 29. A. D. The first marke is saith he their enmitie with the holy Scripture this is an euident vntruth proceeding either out of ignorance or out of enmitie and malice against vs. For who knoweth not that we be so farre from hauing enmitie with sacred Scriptures as we reuerence and respect them farre more then Protestants doe partly in that we accept all the bookes of them which the ancient Church hath deliuered to vs as sacred and canonicall whereas Protestants by their priuate spirit thrust some of them as it were by the head and shoulders out of the Canon and partly also for that we hold such reuerent regard to the diuine truth contained in them as that we do not presume either to translate or interprete them according to our priuate phansie or iudgement but conformably according to the approoued spirit and iudgement of the vniuersall Catholicke Church whereas the Protestants haue so little regard that they permit euery man to rush without reuerence into the sacred text to translate it if he haue skill in the learned tongues or to interprete it by his priuate spirit although he haue no skill in any besides the vulgar tongue 1 THe enmitie and rebellion of the Romane Church against the Scriptures is so apparent that the Iesuite thought it his best policie not to meddle with that whereby I shewed it more fully in the 22 Digr but to wrangle at that I here onely touched briefly by the way bearing the Reader in hand that I haue in this place vsed all the diligence and care I could and brought the soundest and substantiallest matter that I had when I onely in few words pointed at it First he sayes they be so farre from hauing enmitie with the Scriptures that they reuerence them more then we do His reasons to perswade this are two First they accept all the bookes of the Scriptures which the ancient Church hath deliuered vs for Canonicall whereas Protestants by their priuate spirit thrust some of them he meanes the Apocrypha out of the Canon by the head and shoulders I answer that we denie no part of the Canon which the ancient Church receiued and this bringing in of the Apocryphal books Wisd Ecclesiast Toby Iudith Maccab. and the rest into the Canon conuinces the Church of Rome of that contempt of the Scriptures which I mentioned when it exalts and aduances to the honour of diuine inspired Scripture that which is not so nor was esteemed so in the ancient Church For Rebels to place another in the same throne with the King and to giue him equall power and honour with him and to make
his lawes equall to the Kings is as much as if they thrust the King out of the throne For a wife to yeeld those duties to a neighbour that are proper to her husband makes her an adulteresse though otherwise she denie him nothing And it is vntrue that the Iesuite sayes the Apocrypha was esteemed canonicall Scripture in the ancient Church for a Legit quidem Ecclesia sed eos inter canonicas Scripturas non recipit c. Iero praef in Prou. Non sunt in Canone Praef. in 1. Reg. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Conc. Laodic e vlt. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athan. synops p. 63. Athanasius reckoned the bookes of Scripture according to the mind of the Nicen Councell says Bâ—ron an 63. n. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Melito apud Euseb hist pag. 43. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Origen apud Euseb pag 65. Haec sunt quae Patres intra Canonem concluserunt ex quibus fidei nostrae assertiones constare voluerunt Sciendum tamen est quod alij libri sunt qui non Canonici sed Ecclesiastici à maioribus appellati sunt quae omnia legi quidem in Ecclesiis voluerunt non tamen proferri ad authoritatem ex his fiâ—ei confirmandam Cypr. exp symb n. 36. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Epiph. pag. 534. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cyril Ierosol pag. 30. Catech. Hic verissimus diuinitus datarum est Scripturarum Canon Amphiloch Icon. Iamb pag. 730. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Naz. Carm. p. 36. In viginti duo libros Lex Testamenti veteru deputetur Hilar. in Psal pag 615. Sunt autem libri veteris Testamenti 24. Victorin apocal pag. 718. Hij sunt libri qui in Ecclesia pro Canonicis habentur Veteris Scripturae libri sunt viginti duo Leont de sect pag. 1848. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Damasc orth fid l. 4. c. 18. pag. 348. all Antiquitie shewes the contrary that it was vsed but not to ground faith vpon and therefore the Papists putting it into the Canon abuse the Scripture and antiquitie and Protestants iudging it not to be Scripture follow not their priuate spirit but the publicke spirit of the ancient Church in the purest times And b Liber Judith Tobia Macchabaeorum Ecclesiasticus atque liber Sapientiae non sunt recipiendi ad confirmandum aliquid in fide Occham dial p. 212. Non sunt in Canone sanctorum librorum reputata siue confirmata nec inter libros Legis Prophetarum nic inter Hagiographos computantur sicut liber Sapientiae liber Judith liber Tobiae liber Maccabaor Turrecr c. Sancta Rom. d. 15. n. 19. d. 16. c. Apostolor n. 5. The Apocrypha denied to be Canonicall Scripture by Antonin sum mor. part 3. tit 18. c. 6. §. 2. Lyra Praef. in Tob. Hugo Cardin. praef in Ios Caietan in Hest c. vlt. Picus Mirandul de fid ordin cred theor 5. And many others the learnedst also of our aduersaries are of the same iudgement the Church of Rome neuer wanting those in it that in all ages gaue testimonie to the truth that it is not Canonicall Scripture whereby the Reader may see the Iesuites rashnesse and ignorance when he sayes the Protestants of their priuate spirit thrust the Apocrypha by the head and shoulders out of the Canon For the other bookes as Ierome saith the Church doth reade for example of life and instruction of manners but yet it doth not apply them to establish any doctrine say * Art 6. idem R. Iacob praef monitor pag. 39. the articles of our Church 2 His second reason to proue that the Church of Rome reuerences the Scripture more then we do is because they presume not to translate them or interprete them according to their owne priuate iudgement but conformably according to the spirit of the vniuersall Church whereas Protestants permit euery man to rush into the Text to translate or interprete it Both the parts of this reason are false First the Papists out of the reuerend regard to the diuine truth contained in theÌ„ presume not either to translate or interprete the Scripture according to their priuate iudgement but according to the iudgement of the vniuersall Church Here are three vntruths First that in their expositions and interpretations they follow the vniuersall Church for therein they follow onely the Popes will and practise of the present Romane Church which are not the vniuersall Church this is shewed in THE WAY Digr 16. And c Si quando occurrerit aliquis sensus textui consoâ—us quamuis à torrente doctorum alienus loctor aequum se prebeat censorem nullusque detestetur illum ex hoc quod dissonat à priscis Doctoribus Non enim alligauit Deus expositionem Scripturae priscorum Doctorum sensibus alioquin spes nobis tolleretur exponendi ScripturaruÌ„ Caietan pâ—â—oem in Gen defended and followed herein by Andrad pro concil l. 2. Communu opinio Doctorum non est attendenda quando altera contraria opinio fauet potestati clauium aut iurisdictioni Ecclesiae aut pâ—ae causae D. Marta de iurisd part 4 pag. 273. their learned men professe to follow new expositions that the ancient Fathers neuer vsed Secondly that in their Translations they follow the vniuersall Church For the vulgar Latin is not the Translation of the vniuersall Church neither was any man bound to it till the Councell of Trent and their translations into the mother tongues when they are inforced thereunto following the vulgar follow the vniuersall Church no more then it doth The corruption of that Translation I haue shewed in THE WAY Digr 7. Thirdly that they translate not the Scripture but according to the iudgement of the vniuersall Church as if they vsed translations into the mother tongue which is vntrue thus far that they vse them not but being inforced thereto by some extremitie but vtterly forbid them and crie out against them as I haue shewed elsewhere 3 The second part of his second reason is likewise false that Protestants permit euery man to rush without reuerence into the sacred Text to translate it if he haue skill in the learned tongues or to interprete it by his priuate spirit although he haue no skill in any besides the vulgar tongue for we mislike priuate spirits and expositions more then our aduersaries do who tie all to the Popes sole will when we allow no exposition afore it be squared to the rule of faith and the sence of the true Church And touching translating there is as much regard with vs as was when the Church was purest no mans priuate translation is canonized but that which is publickly vsed is done by publicke authoritie an example whereof we had these last yeares in the new Translation * The comparison will scarce please those that absurdly hold the Septuagint and the author of the Latin vulgar were Prophets infallibly guided in translating by Gods Spirit as the Apostles and Prophets them selues were
See Io. Marian. tract pro vulg edit c. 13 23. Matth. Aquar in Capreo prol pag 7. PERFORMED WITH AS GOOD ADVICE AND BY AS LEARNED AND GODLY MEN AS EVER IOYNED TOGETHER IN SVCH A WORKE SINCE TRANSLATION WAS VSED And if some priuate men skilfull in the learned tongues as Wickliffe or Tindall for example when better meanes failed translated the Bible of themselues so did Aquila Theodotion Symmachus Origen Ierom Lucian Isychius and d Fuere autem pene innume rabiles olim editiones Latinae Posseu appar v Biblia p. 223. innumerable others and diuers also lately in the Church of Rome Saint Austin e De Doct. Chr. l. 2. c. 11. sayes They which turned the Scripture out of the Hebrew tongue into Greeke may be reckoned but the Latin interpreters cannot by any meanes for in the first times of the faith as a Greeke booke of the Scriptures came into any mans hands that thought himselfe to haue some little facultie in both the tongues he would be bold to translate it the which thing truly did more helpe then hinder the vnderstanding c. In which words of Saint Austin besides the customes of those times in translating the Bible that in euery place the vulgar might vse it which I presume my Iesuite will grudge at we see they translated then as boldly and commonly and more then any among vs now do Or if the Iesuite will not allow vs the priuiledge of that time yet he may not for shame obiect that to our Church which is done in his owne where Vatablus Munster Pagnin Montanus and others men as priuate as any translator among vs haue translated or corrected the text out of the learned tongues and which I commend to the Iesuites good memorie and contemplation and to the consideration of all the Papists in England their translations agree with ours and differ from the vulgar Latin as much as ours Pag. 30. A.D. Now although we hold that Scripture is not the onely rule yet this doth not argue that we be enemies to the Scripture or that we are voide of all meanes to secure vs of the truth For first we hold the holy Scripture to be one rule yea a principall rule of our faith which we should not do if we were enemies to the Scripture And one reason why we hold something else besides Scripture to be with Scripture the rule of our faith is partly because so we learne out of the Scripture as in the Treatise and this my Reply will appeare partly because we find it necessarie to admit some other infallible rule and * This infallible meanes is the authoritie of the Church Fathers Councels and Pope which iâ— so farre from being yeelded by our selues to be subiect to error in any point of doctrine authoratiuely concluded that euen M. White himselfe who here affirmeth the Church Fathers Councels and Pope to be yeelded by our selues to be subiect to errour doth a few pages before acknowledge that it is a principle of our owne that a generall Councell cannot erre so carelesse this man was what he said or vnsaid so he might seeme to say something against vs. A.D. meanes which may infallibly assure vs both what Bookes be Scripture and what translation and what interpretation is to be followed for finding out the diuine truth contained in Scripture 4 This is his reason why the Church of Rome denies the Scripture to be the whole rule of faith for the vnderstanding whereof haue your eye vpon my words I said that one of their practises against the Scripture is their depriuing it from being the totall rule of faith and I added that hereby they left themselues vtterly voide of all meanes to secure their faith by and to finde the truth inasmuch as the Church the Fathers the Councels the Pope himselfe which is all the rule they can pretend are subiect to error and so by themselues confessed to be To this he replies three things first that they hold the Scripture to be one rule yea a principall rule of our faith which they would not do if they were enemies to the Scripture I answer distinctly three things first sometime some of them when they are pressed cannot shift theÌ„selues say as the Iesuit here doth the Scripture is the rule and the principall rule too yea more so Bellar. Tho. Antonine others whose words I haue reported in THE WAY Secondly howsoeuer some of them sometime speake thus yet againe others allow it to be but a part of the rule that is to say such as containes but one part of things belonging to faith Thus you see the Iesuit expounds himselfe in his next words we hold something else beside Scripture to be with Scripture the rule of faith Becan f Circ Caluin pag 278. sayes The totall and full rule of our faith is Scripture and Tradition both together and this is defined in g Sess 4. the Trent Councell And it is enough to shew their contempt and disdaine of the Scripture when thus they accuse it of imperfection and match base and vncertaine traditions with it Therefore vntill they can proue first that this defect is in the Scripture next that this defect is supplied by Traditions and then thirdly that these whereof they boast are the true Traditions proceeding from the same Spirit that the Scripture doth and left of God to supply this defect of the Scripture they can neuer shake off the imputation layed vpon them that they be enemies to the Scripture Thirdly they do not hold the Scripture to be a principall rule neither as the Iesuite speakes Would they did for their owne sakes but the Iesuite knowes it is holden to be the least part of the rule The Bishops of the Councell of Basil h Concil Basil p. 104. Bin. say The authoritie of an vniuersall Tradition or of a Councell is equall with the authoritie of the Scripture Caesar Baronius i An. 53. n. 11. Tradition is the foundation of the Scriptures and excels them in this that the Scriptures cannot subsist vnlesse they be strengthened by Tradition but Tradition hath strength enough without the Scriptures Cardinall Hosius k Conf Polon pag. 383. The least part of the Gospell is written and the greater part by farre is come to vs by Tradition Gregorie the 13. l D. 40. Si Papa in annot Men do with such reuerence respect the Apostolicall seate of Rome that they rather desire to know the ancient institution of Christian religion from the Popes mouth then from the holy Scriptâ—re and they onely enquire what is his pleasure and according to it they order their life and conuersation And if it be obserued how these Traditions in euery question and point of religion are preferred before the Scripture this that I say wil appeare to be true which they would not do if they were not mortall enemies to the Scripture and slaues to the Popes absolute will 5
demonstration by some other principle in a higher art more euident to vs. Here are two vntruths For first there is no higher art then themselues Thomas i Vbi supra sayes The sacred Scripture hath no higher science The setting vp of the Pope and his Church aboue it to giue it authoritie as a higher science giues to a lower is a blasphemous practise of Antichrist Bozius k Boz de sign eccl tom 2. pag. 439. writeth that the Scripture is not to be reckoned among such principles as before all things are to be credited but it is proued and confirmed by the Church as by a certaine principle which hath authoritie to reiect and allow Scripture Let the Reader by these words of Bozius a famous Papist conster my aduersaries meaning in this place if he chance to say he meanes not as I charge him Againe it is false that the Church is more euident to vs then the Scripture in that sense that belongs to this question I see indeed the Church that teaches me before I beleeue the Scripture to be diuine supposing I were a Pagan that as yet had not receiued the Scripture but I beleeue the Scripture to be diuine and am conuinced in my conscience that it is the word of God before I can beleeue the Church sayes true For I cannot beleeue it sayes true but vpon the grounds of Scripture which it offers me and therefore consequently the truth of the Scripture is more euident then the truth of the Church In which case it is as when a man stands in the doore with a torch in his hand to giue light to such as need where he holds out the torch indeed yet he puts no light into it nor does any thing but onely hold it before them The Church-authoritie in ministring to vs doth no more to the Scripture then this man doth to his torch I wil yet vse a more familiar conparison whereby the Reader shall see how absurdly my aduersary holds the Church to be more euident then the Scriptures and to giue them authoritie which they haue not of themselues because it propounds and perswades them vnto vs. Seius owes Caius mony vpon a bond that vpon trust and for the better keeping thereof is put into the hands of Titius For the proofe of this debt it is necessary that Titius bring forth the bond but when he hath done I demand whence hath the bond his credit How is it proued to be Seius his true deed rather then a counterfet Not by Titius his authoritie because he brings it forth but by it self in that the hand and seale thereof manifest themselues to be Seius his Titius that keeps it is but a means to bring it forth But what if Seius denie the debt that Caius be enforced to sue him and by law to cast him who giue Caius the right and makes Seius his debtor and who makes the bond of force doth the Iudge before whom the cause is tried The simplest man in the countrey will not say so for the bond both proues it self and giues Caius his right and make Seius a debtor when the Iudge onely giues it execution and declares no more but that which was in the bond before Let the Scripture be compared to this bond and let my aduersary put me to proue that it is the word of God as Caius is put to proue his bond and it wil manifestly appeare that though the Church haue some ministery in propounding it yet that ministery or authoritie call it what you will doth no more then the Iudge in this case doth It is not a principle aboue the Scripture or more euident whereby the truth thereof is proued as the Iudges authoritie proues not the bond 6 Our aduersaries when they haue wrangled what they can are inforced to confesse thus much in that they grant the last and highest resolution of our faith to be into the authoritie of the Scripture And let the Reader diligently obserue how it comes about In euery controuersie and article of faith they say they are moued by the authoritie of the Church they beleeue the Trinitie the Incarnation the Scripture to be Gods true word because God hath so reuealed by the infallible authoritie of the Church But how come they to know this authority to be infallible by what motiue doth the spirit of God induce them to beleeue it l Can loc p 48. Stapl princip doctr pag. 318. Tripl aduer Whica pag. 184 188. Greg. Val. tom 3. pag 31. Rodeâ— Delgad de auth Script pag. 51. Pezant comm in Tho. pag. 479. They confesse expresly it is the reuelation of the Scripture giuing testimonie to the Church which reuelation is beleeued for it selfe and for no other therfore the highest and last reason light authoritie mouing a man to beleeue the things of faith the sence of the Scripture the authority of the Church and al is contained in the Scripture it selfe For thus I reason The reuelation of the Scripture is beleeued for it selfe therefore the Scripture is a principle indemonstrable by any other and euident in it selfe therefore it is not beleeued by Tradition vpon the authoritie of the Church but for it selfe therfore this point that the Scripture is Gods word is contained in the scripture therfore the Scripture is al-sufficieÌ„t wants nothing that is needful to be beleeued 7 Hitherto I haue expounded the maner how the Scriptures are said to be Principles that are to be admitted immediatly without discourse of other arguments and how this their authoritie is not founded vpon nor demonstrated by the authoritie of the Church and how Church-authoritie is onely a condition and ministery to offer them vnto vs. Now I come to answer his argument wherby he would proue them not to be euident to vs the which is but a poore one For S. Paul doth not say Faith is the argument of things not euident as the vulgar Latin cited in the margent translates but of things that are not seene Now things may be euident and appeare manifestly to the vnderstanding though they be not seene when they are euident otherwise by any light or discourse to the vnderstanding The which kind of euidence and that also which is by sence may stand with faith for the declaration whereof note first that a thing is euident m Jn assensis principiorum scientiae humanitus inuentae est coactio propter euidentiam speculationis quia in eu intellectus euidenter conclusionem intuetur speculatur August Anconit q. â—9 arâ— 4. ad 1. when it moues the vnderstanding so sufficiently that it cannot chuse but assent vnto it note secondly that a thing may be euident three wayes first when it is sensible as that which we apprehend by our outward sense secondly when by the light of nature it is manifest by it selfe as two equall numbers put together make an equall Thus the first principles and notions of nature are euident Thirdly when it
sayes A minde well disposed discernes the doctrine of God as the mouth being in taste doth the difference of tastes Saint Austin h Aug. tract 35. in Ioh. In the night of this world the Scriptures as a candle are lighted vp vnto vs that we should not remaine in darknesse i Rob. Parsons in his Directorie sets downe against the Atheist how the certaintie of these Scriptures is layed before vs. 1. By the Antiquitie thereof pag. 63. 2. Their manner of writing Authoritie and Preseruation p. 65. 3. Their sinceritie and the vprightnesse of the writers pag. 67. 4. The Consent of the Writers one with another pag. 72. 5. The Scope whereto they tend pag 73. 6. The Simplicitie Profoundnesse and Maiestie of the writers pag. 76. 7. The Contents pag. 80. 8. The Testimonie giuen to them by heathens pag 100. c. Pars Christ Directorie printed ann 1585. This light and heauenly maiestie by all men with one consent affirmed of the Scriptures proues that they are the word of God If the light k Vbi priùs saith the same Saint Austin be able to shew those things that are not light shall we say it failes in it selfe doth not that open it selfe without which other things are not opened and do you light a candle to see a burning candle Is not the Sunne or a starre seene by his owne light to them that haue eyes And if the ministerie of the Church be required to propose and offer and expound them to vs as it were l Apoc. 1. vlt. a candlesticke * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Areth. ibi to hold vp the candle so that as the Iesuites vse to reply to this argument this light should not shine nor this diuinitie appeare in the Scripture vnlesse the Church proposed them m Possibâ—le est actu crâ—dere omma credendâ— per solam fidem infusam ABSQVE TEâ—TIMâ—Nâ—O Dâ—CTRINA â—T MAGâ—STâ—RIO ECCLESIAE Stapl. princip l 8. c. 3. PER ILLAM SOLAM Sp sancti persuasioneÌ„ quodlibet credendum credi queat TACENTE Pâ—ORSVS VEL NON AVDITA ECCLESIA fide priuata via extraordinaria testimonio interno Relect. in Adm. Whitak §. Iam quum doth this light and maiestie therefore arise from the Church doth the light of the candle arise from the socket that beares it Doth the man that carries a torch before his master giue light to the torch and not the light thereof rather from out of it selfe enlighten both his master and him This light hath immediatly conuerted Atheists enlightened Infidels reclaimed heretickes that neuer so much as receiued or knew this Church-authoritie and tradition Which propertie of the Scripture thus to eleuate it selfe aboue all Church-authoritie inuincibly shewes that they prooue themselues to be the word of God In all this that hath bene said I grant we beleeue the Scripture and the things of faith by the ministerie of the Church but not for the authoritie of the Church Pag. 111. A. D Thirdly they hold that by this Spirit they are made infâ—llibly sure of the diuine authoritie of the Scriptures insomuch that when they heare or reade any booke they can by their spirit discerne clearly and infallibly whether it be diuine Scripture or not holding the Scripture of it selfe to shine like a candle to them and that they discerne it from other writings and the true sense of it from false in matters necessary to saluation as the sense of taste discerneth sweet from sower Vpon this bold presumption of hauing and being taught by the Spirit proceedeth their audacious and impudent neglect of the authoritie of the ancient Fathers generall Councels or whatsoeuer else standeth against that which they imagine to be taught them by the Spirit especially when they haue seeming words of Scriptures to second that which is suggested by this their spirit Pag. 114. A. D. Againe M White saith pag. 126 that the publicke word of God speaketh in the Scripture openly though the children of God onely know and beleeue it 4 He sayes it is our doctrine that we are made infallibly sure of the diuine authoritie of the Scriptures by this spirit insomuch that reading the Scripture we can thereby discerne whether it be Scripture or no c and to shew this he alledges some words of mine M. White saith that the sheep of Christ know his voice To which purpose my other words also are vsed that he alledges three pages after M. White saith that the publicke word of God c. There is little hope of reducing our aduersary to any indifferencie when they will not so much as sincerely report nor ingenuously acknowledge that we hold for if they would there were an end and the world should see we hold the truth Yet I wil make all things plaine and let the Reader iudge for in the ordinary course of attaining to faith we do not in the first place referre men to their owne spirit but binde them to heare the Church and stoope to her ministery which hauing done then we bid them examine themselues and affirme that such as are led by the Spirit of God through the helpe and teaching of the Church going before are by this Spirit made sure of the diuine authoritie of the Scriptures and can discerne thereof as of the light c. This Spirit therfore neither goes before the Church teaching ORDINARILY nor is the priuate spirit of man but the Spirit of God * For Gods Spirit testifies to our spirit all truths that are beleeued giuing that light that infused faith immediatly rests vpon 1. Ioh. 2.20 27. witnessing with our spirit This being premised the Reply sayes we hold that by THIS spirit they are made infallibly sure of the diuine authoritie of the Scriptures insomuch that by THEIR spirit they can discerne c. This is vntrue For the spirit whereby the authoritie of the Scripture is assured vnto vs is neither this spirit nor their spirit nor yet n For in pâ—ocesse of time when the Church began to abound in temporals forgetting in a manner all conscience many rulers therein cloking the Scriptures with sundrie wiles feared not to falsifie the vpright iudgements of God therein We see persons hauing neither conscience nor science gouernâ— the spouse of Christ sayes Fascie rerum antiq an 1414. the vnsauorie spirit of the Pope and his cleargie but the Spirit of God testifying to our spirits that it is his word after the Church hath begun to teach vs. So that it giues not testimonie to euery one immediatly without al ministery of the Church but theÌ„ wheÌ„ the Church propounds and reueales the Scripture to such as know it not the Spirit of God by that ministery descending into their hearts and assuring them and then all the testimonie and authoritie of the Church in this her ministery giues place againe to this greater light of the Spirit of God in the beleeuers heart and is no part of that authoritie whereon
of all this vehemencie against the authoritie of the Scripture it selfe is but vnder the name of Church-authoritie to make roome for their Antichristian tyrannie and by outfacing vs from that which we sensibly feele wrought in our conscience by the holy Ghost to abandon our selues ouer to the most hereticall and damnable authoritie of whatsoeuer the Pope and his creatures shall thrust vpon vs. 7 But that which my aduersarie infers vpon my speech that hence because we say the children of God and particular men are assured of the Scriptures and sense thereof by the Spirit of God for I said no more nor any way denie the iust authoritie of the true Church proceeds our audacious and impudent neglect of the authoritie of ancient Fathers generall Councels and whatsoeuer stands against vs I can scarce paste ouer with any reasonable patience for the Fathers and Councels in things that they held certainly and determinately with consent a THE WAY §. 44 p. 3. ibi D gr 47. I purposely shewed we allow and follow and in euery question will stand to but when our aduersaries themselues cannot denie that there is not onely the diuine truth but a heauenly light also whereby to see iâ— in the Scriptures themselues that is not put into them by any testimonie of the Church whereby a simple man may be able to discerne an error in any Father or Councell what fault is it in vs by this light to iudge of Fathers and Councels Occham b Dial. pag. 18â— sayes Catholicke men may learne many truths not knowne before by the sacred Scriptures although the Pope and Cardinals haue not formerly attempted to declare them And whereas possible some may say that the simple people are to beleeue nothing but what the Pope and Cardinals deliuer to be beleeued expresly nor ought to search the mysteries of the Scriptures but be content with common things not presuming of their owne vnderstanding to beleeue any thing expresly but what the Pope and Cardinals deliuer BVT HE THAT SHOVLD SAY THVS WERE AN INVENTER OF NEW ERRORS for though the simple people be not ordinarily bound to beleeue expresly any thing but that which by the Cleargie is already declared to be beleeued expresly yet these simple people BY READING THE SCRIPTVRES and THE SHARPNESSE OF THEIR REASON which simple people do not altogether want may finde something EVIDENTLY to follow of the diuine Scriptures which the Pope and Cardinals haue not declared in which case they may and must expresly beleeue it and are not bound to enquire of the Pope and Cardinals because they are bound to preferre the Scripture before them And the reason of this is for THE POPE AND CARDINALS ARE NOT THE RVLE OF OVR FAITH The Diuines of Venice in their late writing against the present Pope lay downe these conclusions c Tract de in terdict prop. 8. The law of God is the rule of the Popes power d Prop. 12. Christian men may not obey the Popes command vnlesse they first examine it and he that inconsiderately obeyes before such examination sinnes e Prop. 13. It excuses not a Christian man though the Pope constantly affirme his commandement to be iust but it behoues him to examine it and to direct himselfe according to the rule giuen aboue Gerson f Part. 2. recom licent pag. 832. sayes The spirit of a iust man now and then giues warning of the truth better then seuen watch-men set in a high place to watch Do not g Quis enim sant capitis diceret sententiam amplectendam solius Papae quae potest errori subesse postponendam sententiam Ecclesiae Anton. de Rosell monarch pag 67. Dico quod postqâ—am Concilium est congregatum Papae authoritas in teruenit authoritas Papae postea confundi tur cum Concilio remanet forma Concilij authoritas Papae congregantis finitur facta congregatione Iacobat de Conc. l. 10. art 6. pag. 614. D. Cum agitur de fide Synodus est maior quà m Papa Zabarell de schism pag. 701. A. The same is directly holden by Almain de author eccles cap. 7. pag. 725. F. Occham compend erro cap. vlt. sub fin And the Diuines of France at this day Lib. de eccl polit Pet. de Alliaco de eccles author part 3 cap. 2. pag. 924. Mariana sayes Multi viri prudentes graues eruditione maxima Pontifices Romanos Ecclesiae vniuersae subiecerunt de Reg. l. 1. cap. 8. pag. 74. Note the speech of Almain Determinatis per summum Pontificem non est necessario credendum quamuis non sit oppositum publicè dogmatisandum nisi manifestum sit ea sacris literis c. Quest in Vesperg pag. 133. the strongest champions the Church of Rome hath limit the Popes authoritie making it subiect to the Church and allowing men to examine it afore they obey it which shewes vnanswerably that in the Scripture it selfe for that also is granted at the last to be the the rule whereby to trie him is a light which may be seene by a priuate person against the Popes commandement and vnlesse they assume an vnlimited authoritie and such as is subiect to no triall to their Church and Pope which the violentest aduersary we haue dare not do they shall though they be wrangled till dooms day be enforced to grant the same authoritie and light in the Scripture that we affirme 8 Againe before my aduersary had charged vs with audacious and impudent neglect of Fathers and Councels he should haue answered the 47 Digression of my booke where I haue related those practises of Papists in contemning reiecting eluding purging abusing both Fathers and Councels that if they had any sparke of grace in them they would be ashamed to charge others with that impudency and audaciousnesse which none are guilty of so much as themselues I will rehearse nothing of that which there I writ but adde something to it whereby the Reader shall iudge who they be that most impudently and audaciously neglect antiquity D. Marta in a booke dedicated to the present Pope h D. Marta de iurisdict part 4. pag. 273. sayes the common opinion of the Doctors is not to be regarded when the other opinion contrary to them fauours the power of the Keyes or the Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction or a pious cause This man speakes plaine that one may vnderstand him the Fathers all of them must crouch to the Keyes and pious cause of the Pope which Keyes and cause when they come to scanning will prooue as partiall as any priuate spirit in the world And touching the interpretation of the Scripture Baron i An. 34. n. 213 sayes the Bishops all of them who succeeded in the roome of the Apostles attained not the sence and vnderstanding of the Scriptures for the Catholicke Church now turned Protestant and priuate doth not alway and in all things follow them How then I am no lesse delighted k
seemeth to yeeld me for he saith that the rule must be easie White pag. 10. and plaine to all sorts of men learned and vnlearned to wit which vse the meanes and are diligent in attending to it and be enlightened with the Spirit of God to all such saith he it is plaine be they neuer so vnlearned to the rest it is not Neither is it saith he a necessary condition of the rule so to be not because it is obscure at any time but for that sometimes men haue not eyes to see into it c. This which he hath said of being enlightened with the spirit had need to be declared If he meane that one must be first endued with faith and in that sence lightned with the Spirit before he can vnderstand the determinate sence and meaning of that which is appointed by God to be the ordinary rule and meanes to instruct men in faith then it is false that to be enlightened with the Spirit is required as a necessary condition for so one must be supposed to haue faith before he can by the ordinary meanes be first instructed in faith so the ordinary meanes were needlesse for the end to which it was appointed For what need were there of an outward ordinary meanes to instruct men first in faith when they are already supposed to be by the spirit sufficiently enlightned with faith If he meane onely that the Spirit of God must assist and concur with mans vnderstanding in a speciall manner to enable the vnderstanding to apprehend the instruction propounded by the meanes and to make it yeeld assent of faith so I shall not striue with him as hauing in * Introd q. 6. the Introduction affirmed as much Onely I would haue him note FIRST that it is not the Protestants spirit whose illumination is required to true faith as o Ibid. there I haue shewed SECONDLY that the true Spirit of God whose assistance is necessary is ready through the merits of our Sauiour Christ to assist all men sufficiently to the attaining of the truth and that no man who hath receiued exciting grace to moue him to seeke find and attend vnto the ordinary rule and meanes appointed by God for mens instruction in matters of faith need feare want of necessary assistance of Gods Spirit to concurre with him but rather had need to feare least himselfe be wanting to the gracious assistance of Gods Spirit in being negligent to concurre with it so much as he may and ought and least in steed of following Gods Spirit he suffers himselfe to be misled with the spirit of Sathan transfiguring himselfe into an Angell of light whose propertie is to withdraw men from the secure ordinary meanes of the doctrine of the Church to follow priuate instincts so coloured with seeming sentences of Scripture as though they were the very instincts of the holy Ghost The third propertie to wit vniuersality is meant that the rule and meanes doth extend it selfe to all points of faith so far as it is or may be necessary to saluation In which sence I do not perceiue my Aduersaries to gainesay Onely the question is WHETHER and HOW all points of faith be necessary to saluation The which question I haue resolued in the Introduction and in the fourth Chapter where I do determine all points of faith to be necessary to be beleeued explicitè or implicitè of all sorts and that none is indifferent or such as may be lawfully misbeleeued especially obstinately at any time by any persons and that although all be not necessary to be knowne at all times expresly by all persons yet they are or may be necessary so to be knowne at least at sometimes and by some persons in the Church and consequently there must be an vniuersall ordinary rule and meanes sufficient to instruct and to resolue all sorts of men in all points of faith at such times and in such sort as need shall require thereby to hinder men from misbeleeuing any and which may tell them determinately when controuersies arise whether this or that point be necessary to be knowne and beleeued expresly by all or onely some of the Church and by whom Besides these three properties of the rule and meanes White pag. 10. M. White would haue other two But either they are not necessary or else they be sufficiently included in these which I haue set downe For if the rule bee knowne to be infallible it little skilleth to our present purpose whether there be any higher rule whereupon it doth depend or no or whether the case which is to be ruled by it concerne the thing it selfe which is assigned for the rule or some other thing for where infallibility is partiality need not be feared neither need one seeke a higher rule when he knoweth the rule which he hath to be infallible 1 MY Aduersaries last conclusion was that the rule of faith must haue three properties 1 To be infallible that shall not deceiue vs. 2 Easie to be vnderstood of all sorts of men learned and vnlearned 3 Vniuersall to shew what is the truth in all points Touching my answer hereto he sayes foure thing FIRST that I grant these three properties to be required in the Rule in some sence The first that it must be infallible and the last that it must be vniuersall I grant simply without any limitation and this is true SECONDLY touching the second condition of being easie he expounds himselfe that he meanes so easie that without miraculous illumination or extraordinary and excessiue difficulty any sort of men may vnderstand the meaning of it and sayes M. White seemes also to yeeld him this The which I did in these words The rule is easie and plaine to all sorts of men learned and vnlearned that vse the meanes and are diligent in attending it and be inlightned by the Spirit of God to such it is plaine be they neuer so vnlearned to the rest it is not nether is it a necessary condition of the rule so to be not because it selfe is obscure at any time but for that sometimes men haue not eyes for want of diligence or Gods illumination to see into it for all meanes and rules are vaine vnles God giue eyes to see This exposition wherby I declared in what sence the rule must be vnderstood to be easie he distinguishes and sayes If I meane no more but that the Spirit of God must helpe our vnderstanding in a speciall manner to enable it to apprehend and yeeld to that which the rule propounds he will not contend with me But if my meaning be that a man must first haue faith and in that sence be inlightned before he can vnderstand the meaning of the rule then he sayes my saying is false and sets downe a proposition against it that to be endued with faith is not required as a necessary condition to the easines of the rule which is a needlesse limitation For first I mentioned not
our Church vsed This shall be granted him in respect of the matter and doctrine contained which in all translations that varie but in character of speech is alike certaine But how shall the vnlearned which can neither vnderstand the originall nor compare translations nor so much as reade nor will admit infallible authoritie in the Church to assure them be infallibly certaine the translation containes no substantiall error euen in the matter this he would faine know My answer * My answer was not touing the vnlearned alone but of the vnlearned and learned together per commodam distributionem was that we know this by the same meanes whereby we know other truths and discerne other articles of Christian faith namely by the light of the doctrine translated the testimonie of the Spirit the ministerie of the word the rules of art and such like My aduersarie replies this is but a flourish of words and bids me answer directly to the point and thus he reasons If these be the meanes whereby we are assured our translations containe no substantiall error the light of the doctrine translated the testimonie of the Spirit the ministerie of the word the rules of art the knowledge of tongues and such like then they are so either ioyntly altogether or euery one seuerally by it selfe or onely some of them But neither are all of them ioyntly nor euery one seuerally nor onely some of them Ergo these be not the meanes ergo some other meanes must be assigned and that is the authoritie of the Church I will answer directly to the point granting the first proposition and distinguishing the second which hath three members first that all of them ioyntly together are not necessarie which he proues because so the vnlearned that want tongues and art could not haue this assurance I answer they are all of them ioyntly together necessary by concurring all of them in the Church some in the learned some in the vnlearned to the working of this assurance in the learned and vnlearned for they are not ioyntly the means so that they need all of them immediatly touch euery one that shal be assured but it is sufficient that art and tongues ioyned with Gods Spirit be in the learned and the ministerie of the Spirit and the Church and the light of the doctrine translated be in the vnlearned all concurring to produce * Viz. this clear assurance that the translation cōtains at least nothing contrary to the analogie and rule of faith one effect in both though not all alike existing in them both The second member is that euery one of these seuerally is not sufficient and this I grant for no other meanes is sufficient if Gods Spirit be wanting to giue effect to it The third member is that onely some of these are not a sufficient meanes to breed this assurance this is false for the light of the doctrine translated the testimony of Gods Spirit are sufficient to assure the vnlearned that what is translated to them is true at least touching the doctrine in the same maner that Gods Spirit and the light of the truth assure vs that the things taught by word of mouth in preaching are the truth which light and testimony of the Spirit neuer go with translations or preaching which contain false doctrine His D. Stapleton * Triplic in admonit says it ouer that by the internall perswasion of the Spirit of God alone any matter of faith may be beleeued though the Church say nothing at all but the Iesuits reason to the contrary is then it would follow that an vnlearned man hauing that Spirit of God by the onely light of the doctrine shining in it without any other help should vnderstand Greeke and Hebrew because the Scriptures are written in them but this followes neuer a whit for though I grant the doctrine shines in the Scripture and God by his Spirit giues a full assurance yet he doth not this to the vnlearned but by translations which assurance I vnderstand according to the state and condition of him that is to be assured the learned seeing the heauenly doctrine in the learned tongues and translated both the vnlearned vulgar people in the translation onely and not in the originall as a man sees light by the opening of a window because that is the meanes to let it in I do not say the light of the doctrine and the testimonie of Gods Spirit giue the vnlearned assurance in the Scripture it selfe euery way but in the Scripture truly translated into the language they vnderstand neither doth the contrary follow of my words We know the diuine doctrine to be one and the same in all translations immediatly in the originall and more obscurely in the translations and God directeth the children of light by the holy Ghost who openeth their hearts that they know his voice from all others and that the light of his truth may shine vnto them for this light shineth and this testimonie of the holy Ghost worketh first not immediatly but by meanes secondly not by the same meanes in all but diuersly whiles to such as haue the light of the holy Ghost being learned it shines in the originall tongues but being vnlearned onely in translations as the words that are printed in a booke are plaine and legible of themselues without any other meanes to him that hath light and a perfect eye but if a man be dim sighted then to him they are onely legible through his spectacles and as it is necessary though the light be cleare of it selfe yet to open the window in case a man be shut vp in a house so my saying the doctrine is one and the same in all translations and God directs the children of the light to discerne it and makes the light of it shine vnto them hinders not but I may well say also the window or translation must be opened to let in this light when men are shut vp in ignorance of the tongues and so still some of the meanes I named alone are sufficient where all cannot concurre 4 My aduersary in the knitting vp replies against this that if the holy Ghost doth not sufficiently assure vs without other meanes then the light of the doctrine and the testimonie of the Spirit are not the onely necessary nor alone sufficient meanes to assure vs that the translation we vse is not corrupted By which reason he may say also that when the opening of a window is a necessary meanes to shew the light this light is not the onely necessary nor alone sufficient meanes to enlighten me for there is sufficient in the Scripture to assure me but still the helpe of Church-ministery and industry are necessary to worke it in me or else my aduersarie must proue that the subordination of the meanes where by causes are applied to their effects take away the sufficiencie and perfection of the said causes that is to say the Grammar containes not all things necessary and
c Orat. cont Gent. sub init saies The holy Scriptures are * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sufficient by themselues to shew the truth Isiodore Pelusiota d L. 2. Epist 369. The sacred volumes hauing the testimony of the diuine Scriptures are the stayres whereby we ascend to God All therefore brought out of them in the Church of God receiue as proued gold tried in the fire of the Spirit of Gods truth * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and whatsoeuer things without these volumes are carried about though they haue shew of probability leaue to those that plot the fables of heresies S. Basil e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 de fid pag. 394. edit Basil an 1551. It is manifest presumption and apostasie from the faith either to abrogate any of the things that are written or bring in any thing that is not written And Vincent Lirin f Monito c. 2. 41. The rule of the Scripture is perfect and in it selfe sufficient and more then sufficient vnto all things And g 3. d. 25. qu. vnic a. Gab. Biell his owne Schoolman All things necessary to be beleeued are contained in the Canonicall Scripture it belonges therefore to the perfection of the Scripture to containe all things 2. Against this he obiected the stale and threadbare argument it is not contained in the Scripture that it selfe is the word of God My answer was that the vertue and power that shewes it selfe in euery line and leafe of the Bible proclaimes it to be the word of God and the sheepe of Christ discerne the voice and light of it as men discerne sweete from sowre light from darkenesse Now he demandes in this Reply How then it chances that our illuminated Luther could not see the Epistle of S. Iames to be diuine Scripture I answer readily to the point if the Scripture be so easily and infallibly knowne to be Gods word by the authority of the Church how chances it that his illuminated Caietan h Catharin cont Nov. dog Caiet S xt Senens Biblio l. 6. annot 337. denied the same Epistle of S. Iames to be diuine Scripture how chances i Noted afore so many Papists deny the Apocrypha to be Canonicall as well as we how comes it about that Genebrard k Genebrard chronol p. 181. Posseuin appar verb. Gilb. Genebrard affirmes the third fourth Bookes of Esdras to be Canonicall Scripture which the Chuch denies Thus my Iesuit is fallen vnawares into the same pit he made for me Secondly my aduersarie l Verum est doctorem quidem Lutherū quosdam alios exemplum veteris Ecclesiae imitatos de libris modo dictis non ita praeclare sensisse sed tamen jidē postea re diligentius perpensa priorem sententiam mutare non dubitarunt Eckhard fascic pag. 21. cannot proue that M. Luther perseuered to the end in the deniall of this Epistle The iudgement of m Nonnul i antiquitus de epistolae huius authoritate dubitarunt Passeuin appar v. Iacob Apost see Euseb hist. Eccle l. 3 c. 25. Ieron Doroth de viris illust v. Iacobus so many in the Primitiue Church refusing it dazeled Luthers eyes and made him to doubt for a time but that he neuer saw and beleeued it to be Scripture to the end my aduersary will scarse be able to shew Thirdly Luthers not seeing this light proues not that there is no such light or voice in the Scripture for all faith thereof is not in an instant but successiuely and by degrees and all men at all times haue not eyes and disposition alike to see it as the Apostles at the first saw not Christ to be that he was though he were the light that came into the world Saint Austine n Tract 35. Ioh. sayes The Scriptures are lighted vp to be our Candle in this world that we walke not in darknesse Therefore they are seene by their owne light For the same Saint Austine n saies will you light a Candle to see a burning Candle for a burning Candle is able both to make manifest other things that are hidden in darkenesse and to shew it selfe to thy eyes The Scripture therefore by it owne light shewes it selfe as I said to be the word of God and if any see not this light the defect is in themselues and is remoued by no other light added but by the same light at such time as pleases God to open the eyes Theophilus Antiochenus o Orat. 1. ad Antolych sayes we must not say there is no light because the blind see it not but let them that see it not accuse their owne eyes For as in all other matters of faith it falls out among the children of God that p 1. Cor. 13.9 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost ibi hom 34. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Scol graec ibi some see and know more and some vnderstand and beleeue lesse then othersome yet the matters of faith themselues are one and the same and the beleeuers are inlightened with Gods Spirit though not all in the same measure so may it fall out about this obiect that some particular men may not at the first or alway perfitly see the light of euery part of Scripture or perfitly heare the voice of Christ founding therein for here in this life we know but in part and prophecy but in part though the light of the Scripture shine fully forth vnto all 3 This light of the Scripture my aduersary grants but yet to bring in his traditions and Church-authority marke how he replyes What light soeuer there be in the Scripture yet it shines not to our vnderstanding till it be illuminated with faith which the elect themselues at all times are not the which I grant and thereupon inferre that this light was neuerthelesse in the Scripture though Luther saw it not in one place thereof and the reason why he saw it not was because euery one of the elect is not at all times indued with all faith but my Iesuite addes that this light whereby the Scriptures shew themselues to be the word of God shines not to the vnderstanding illuminated with faith neither vnlesse it be propounded by the authority of the Church vpon which as vpon a Candlesticke the light of the Scripture must be set or else it will not sufficiently shine vnto vs to giue vs of it selfe infallible assurance that it is the word of God q Concedimus igitur sacras liteteras quae diuinae doctrinae continent lumen tanquam lucernam esse per seipsam splendidissimam atque fulgentissimam sed nobis tamen non in se lucidam sed quatenus est diuinitus in Ecclesiae Catholicae authoritate tanquam in candelabro positum vt luceat omnibus qui in domo sunt Errant igitur aduersarij cum scripturam esse lucernam ac illuminare nos idem esse existimant quod eam non egere Ecclesiae infallibili authoritate vt
haue said A. D. Whereas I obiect that sectaries and the Diuell himselfe doth alledge words of Scripture Pag. 202. White pag. 64. M. White granteth it but saith he either they alledge not true Scripture or not truly applied as also they alledge the authority of the Church but either not the true Church or the true Church not truly Testimonium hoc verū est This which M. White granteth is the very truth and wanteth nothing but that he apply it to his priuate men Luther and Caluin and to his owne selfe Partiality will not suffer him to apply it thus but there is no reason that he should be iudge it is more fit that the iudgement of this matter be left to the Catholicke Church which he confesseth to be taught of God White pag. 63. 10 If my answer be true that when sectaries or the Diuell alledge Scripture or the Church they do it not truly let the Repliar giue ouer bragging and shew really that the Protestants haue not alledged these things truly And if it be no reason we be iudges our selues no more is it that the Pope and Papacy which k Nomine Ecclesiae intelligimus eius caput id est Romanum Pontificem Grego de Valent pag. 24. tom 3. Quod autem haec regula animata rationalis sit summus Pontifex non est hic locus proprius probandi Fra. Albertin Coroll p. 251. c. No maruell now though the Catholicke Church were so fast talked of he meanes by the Catholick Church be iudge but were it at that that we might haue a free Councell assembled and holden as Councels were of ancient time where the Pope and his faith might be tried as well as we it would soone appeare the Protestants haue not bene partiall in their cause when the late Trent Councell it selfe had come nearer vs then it did if it had not bene managed by Machiauellisme more then religion and the greatest tyranny and cosenage and villany vsed in it that euer stirred in any publicke busines CHAP. XXXIIII 1 The Papists pretending the Church haue a further meaning then the vulgar know 2 The Popes will is made the Churches act 3 Base traditions expounded to be diuine truth A. D. Concerning the tenth Chapter both my Aduersaries make maine opposition against the conclusion of this Chapter Pag. 202. one reason whereof is that they do not or will not rightly vnderstand what I meant when here I say the doctrine of the Church is the rule of faith note therefore first whereas the name Church may be taken seuerall waies Intro q. 3. according to that which I noted in the Introduction whereas also in euery one of these senses it may be taken either as it is generally in all ages or as it is particularly in this or that determinate age my Aduersaries omitting all other senses principally vnderstand me to meane by the name Church the Pope or Pastours of this present age whereas in this Chapter I do not at least ex professo or primarily intend to speake of the Church in this sense but rather do speake of the Church in a more generall indefinite and indeterminate sense as it signifieth one or other companie of men liuing either in all ages or in one or other age who in one or other sense may be called the Church the doctrine whereof say I is the rule and meanes ordained by God to instruct all sorts of men in all matters of faith Note secondly that by the doctrine of the Church I do not vnderstand any Friars dreames White pag. 3 as M. White dreameth nor humane traditions especially opposite to Scripture but diuine doctrine including therein both the written diuine Scripture and the vnwritten diuine traditions and the true diuine interpretation of them both as by word writing signes or otherwise it is or may be propounded and deliuered to vs by the authority of the Church all which although it may worthily be called diuine doctrine as being first reuealed by God here I call Church-doctrine because as it was first reuealed and committed to the keeping of Prophets and Apostles who in their time were chiefe and principall members of the militant Church so by Gods ordinance it was to be propounded and deliuered to other men by the same Prophets Apostles and others their successors as they are Doctors and Pastors of the same Church Note thirdly that by the rule of faith I meane such a rule as is also a sufficient outward meanes ordained and set apart by God to instruct all sorts of men in all points of faith which consequently must haue those three conditions or properties of the rule set downe and declared in the sixt Chapter viz that it must be infallible easie to be vnderstood of all sorts and vniuersall or such as may sufficiently resolue one in all points of faith Note fourthly that when I say the doctrine of the Church is the rule of faith I do not vnderstand that the doctrine as seuered from the Church or the Church as diuided from the doctrine is the rule of saith but that the doctrine as deliuered by the Church or the Church as deliuering doctrine is that rule and meanes which God hath ordained to instruct men in faith Note fifthly that to proue the doctrine of the Church to be the rule of faith in such sort as now I haue said it might suffice for this Chapter that it be shewed that at least once or in one age there were one or other company of liuing men in one or other sense called the Church who were ordained by God and set apart to instruct all sorts of men in all points of faith being for that purpose in their doctrine and teaching furnished with these three conditions which are requisite in the rule of faith for this being shewed in this Chapter I shall easily shew in the next that the same is to be said of some or other company continuing in all ages In this Chapter therefore I chiefly vndertake to proue that once or in one age there was a company of liuing men who in one sense may be called the Church whom God specially appointed as a meanes sufficient quantū ex se to instruct all men in all matters of faith being for that purpose furnished with the three conditions or properties of the rule of faith 1 THe conclusion of this Chapter was that the infallible rule which we ought obediently to follow in all points of faith is the doctrine and teaching faith and beleefe of the true Church his meaning wherein he saies I would not or did not rightly vnderstand Let vs therefore see how I vnderstood it My answer was that we would freely grant this conclusion if the meaning were no more but that the doctrine and faith of the vniuersall Church is the rule of faith but there is a higher matter meant First that the Churches word and authority without grounding the same on the Scripture is the rule
implicitè all points of faith that we hold This will appeare by these ensuing considerations First it is certaine that the Apostles taught the whole corpse of Christian doctrine partly by word partly by writing which as a sacred depositum was commended by S. Paul to S. Timothy and other succeeding Bishops and Pastors of the Church to be maintained alwaies in the Church against all profane innouation of heresies in these words O Timothy keepe the depositum auoiding the profane nouelties of voices oppositions of falsly called knowledge which diuers promising haue erred about the faith The which words * Aduers haer c. 17. Vincentius Lyrinensis expoundeth thus Who saith he at this day hath the place of Timothy but either the whole Church or especially the whole bodie of Prelats who ought themselues to haue the whole knowledge of diuine religion and also to instruct others And a litle after What is meant by this Depositum it is saith he that which is committed to thee not that which is inuented by thee that which thou hast receiued not that which thou hast deuised a thing not of wit but of learning not of priuate vsurpation but of publicke tradition a thing brought to thee not a thing brought forth of thee wherein thou must not be an author but a keeper not an institutor but a secretor not a leader but a follower Keepe the Depositum preserue the talent of the Catholicke faith pure and sincere that which is committed to thee let that remain with thee and that deliuer vnto the people To the same purpose S. Irenaeus saith * l. 3. c. 14. We must not seeke the truth among others which is easie to receiue from the Church when the Apostles haue most fully laid vp all the truth in it as in a rich treasure house Also the same Irenaeus saith * l. 4. c. 43. We must heare and obey those Priests who haue succession from the Apostles who with succession of their Episcopall function haue receiued the Charisma of truth Now supposing that this sacred depositum of the whole corpse of the reuealed truth is preserued in one or other succession of Pastors of one or other companie of Christians called the Church either it must be granted that it was preserued in that succession of Pastors which my catalogue sheweth or else I must require my aduersaries to set forth another catalogue of Pastors vnto whom this sacred depositum was committed and from whom we may receiue it as need shall require For to say that the diuine truth committed to the custody of the Pastors whom God hath appointed to be alwaies in the Church of purpose to preserue men from wauering in faith Eph. 4 v. 13.14 and from being caried about with euery wind of false doctrine did at any time wholy or in part by contrary error faile in them vniuersally in such sort that there should not in all ages be sound one or other company of Pastors and Priests whom we could know still to keep the Depositum inuiolate and entire and whom consequently according to Irenaeus his saying we ought to obey as being men l. 4. ◠4. who with succession of their Episcopall function receiued also the Charisma of truth if I say this were so that Gods truth all or in part had explicitè and implicitè perished from the mouth of all knowne Priests and Pastors Gods ordinance it selfe who for the generall good of the Church appointed these Pastors had bin deficient or had failed of the intended effect Eph. 4. v. 13.14 For how should men be preserued from wauering in faith or from being caried about with euery wind of false doctrine by Pastors appointed to be for that purpose vnto the worlds end if in some ages no such Pastors were or were not to be knowne or being knowne to be the Pastors yet did vniuersally faile to preserue the entire formerly receiued truth by beleeuing and teaching and so making the people beleeue contrary errors If this were so the holy Ghost had failed to teach the Church all truth and consequently Christs promise had not bin performed which said that the Spirit of truth shall teach all truth Ioh. 16. v. 13. Some Pastors therefore alwaies are in the Church who without spot or wrinkle of any error in faith shall preserue the entire truth and by the assistance of Christ and his holy Spirit shall be able as need shall require to vnfold and deliuer to the people the same truth thereby to preserue them from falling into error and from wauering in faith 1 THat the Apostles taught the whole bodie of Christian doctrine and commended the same to the succeeding Pastors of the Church to be alway maintained without innouation and that as Vincentius and Irenaeus speake the faithfull people of the Church were to be taught the truth by these Pastors shall be granted for what the Apostles reuealed and deliuered from Iesus Christ the same they intended should be continued for euer in the Church But this proues not that the ancient Fathers of the Primitiue Church held all things that the Church of Rome now holds vnlesse my aduersarie can shew that euery thing holden in the Church of Rome is part of the Bodie of that Christian doctrine which the Apostles commended to their successors For ouer besides the truth reuealed by the Apostles the church of Rome successiuely by degrees in these last 800 years especially hath brought in diuers pernicious and damnable errors and corruptions touching Traditions Transubstantiation Images Iustification the Masse the Popes primacie the worship of Saints innumerable other points wherin we haue forsaken it the which corruptions not belonging to the bodie of Christian doctrine which the Apostles taught but being a disease that bred in the body of the Church must not be said to haue bin the faith of the Fathers who receiued nothing from the Apostles but that doctrine which is contained in the canon of the Bible besides which doctrine if either the Fathers or Pastors of the Church succeeding taught any thing it must be reiected as no part of the Depositū mentioned Thus my answer is plain that the Apostles deliuered to their successors to be preserued against all innouation the whole Christian doctrine but the seuerall articles of the now Romish faith which we haue cast off are no part of that Christiā doctrine Secondly my aduersarie replies that it was the mind of the Apostles and the ordinance of God not onely that the whole bodie of the truth should be preserued in some successiō or other but also that it should be preserued so inuiolate and entire that no contrary error should be taught with it which being supposed he sayes it must be granted that it hath bin so preserued in that succession of Pastors which his Catalogue sheweth because the Protestāts are able to shew no other Pastors His whole discourse affirmes two things the first that the bodie of Christian
doctrine coÌ„mitted to the Pastors of the church doth not at any time faile either in whole or part but is preserued inuiolate and entire from all errors growing thereto The second that the Protestants can shew no other succession of Pastors whereto this doctrine was committed then is contained in his catalogue Hence he concludes that his now church of Rome holds nothing but what the ancient Fathers held I answer to the second touching the Catalogue that for the first 600 yeares we approue it confessing the Pastors and Christians mentioned therein to haue bin the true Church And for the rest of the ages to this day we will allow the Catalogue with three limitations first that the Pastors and people therein named be confessed to haue kept the faith lesse purely then they of the former ages so that the lower they succeeded the more they were corrupted Secondly that from the 800. yeare specially such Pastours and people be added euery one in their place as misliked and resisted the corruptions of the Church of Rome growing on and vpheld the purer doctrine in such manner as I briefly touched in THE WAY Digress 52 Thirdly that the legend Saints Antichristian Popeâ— lying stories and the Popes creatures whose succession we need not be wiped out and the ordinary Pastors liuing in communion with the Church of Rome Greece Armenia and such like though we allow not euery singular and speciall man be supplied Let the Catalogue be reformed and vndertaken in this manner and the Pastors and the people contained therein shall be yeelded to be the same that Christ and his Apostles committed the truth to and in the meane time the Repliar doth but trouble himselfe and seduce his Reader wheÌ„ he beares him in hand that we desire to shew other Pastors or people besides these all Protestants freely affirming their faith to haue succeeded euen in the Church of Rome it selfe though the errors thereof were no part of their faith but the inuentions of men added thereunto 2 But the first thing affirmed that the Christian doctrine committed to the Pastours of the Church cannot faile in any degree or part thereof but is alway preserued inuiolate and entire from all error is false For albeit it be the commandemeÌ„t of God and were the desire of the blessed Apostles that it should be so How the Church cannot erre yet as I haue shewed the euent teaches that sometime it falls out otherwise in the same manner that it is Gods ordinance that no man should sinne and yet all men do sinne So that all that can be said of the Church and the Pastors thereof by vertue of the promise is that neither it nor they shall vniuersally all of them at any time faile in the beleefe profession of those truths which are absolutely and simply necessary to saluation though many Pastors and people reputed for the best part of the Church may erre and sometime also persist in ioyning mortall errors with the truth many ages together what time no Pastors or people at all shall appeare to hold the faith so entire but some corruptions not hindering saluation shall be holden therewith the which assertion as it ouerthrowes all the Iesuites discourse in this place so is it true that our Aduersaries grant neither the whole nor any part of the Church to be free from error but so far forth as it followes the Pope who himselfe by their like confession may erre and be deposed for herâ—sie Beside if Gods ordinance or the Apostles intendiment did warrant the Pastors of the Church that they should not erre at least vniuersally how comes it to passe that euen euery Doctor in his Catalogue from Dyonisius and Ignatius to Stapleton and Bellarmine haue had their errors all his Councels haue had theirs and the most of his Popes haue decreed one against another and there is not one Diuine in all his Catalogue not his dearest Thomas of Aquin but he will confesse him to haue erred yet erre he should not if the prouidence of God were to preserue the Doctors of his Church from all error in the degree that the Replie sayes The truth therefore succeeds continually in the Church without ceasing but first Not alway in all nor in the highest Pastors Secondly Nor alway without corruption Thirdly Nor at all times entire and inuiolate from all error but sometime a vniuersall apostasy may so ouerflow the Church that nothing shall remaine free from error but onely the necessary and fundamentall points of faith the which points do not therefore lose their succession because many corruptions are receiued taught with theÌ„ much lesse do those corruptions succeed with the truth from the Apostles but the Pastors people thus corrupted shew themselues not to haue kept his couenant who will saue them that haue perseuered in the foundation and be merciful to them that haue erred of inuincible ignorance and forgiue them that haue repented of their errors and damme them whether Pastors or people that with tyranny and contumacy haue maintained the corruptions 3 The Iesuites reasons to proue that the Pastours of the Church cannot erre and that the true faith cannot be corrupted are answered already in THE WAY § 14. A.D. Wherefore if my Aduersaries will deny the catalogue of Pastors Pag. 270. which I haue set downe to be of such as haue alway preserued the foresaid sacred Depositum of the truth entire and inuiolate I require first that they will assigne another Catalogue of such as did continually preserue it whole and without change Also I require that they assigne the first Pastour of my Catalogue which failed in preseruing the truth setting downe â—hall the point of doctrine wherein he erred and naming other Pastâ—â—â—s who resisted and continued to resist Lastly I require that they assigne not as their manner is White digr 51. 52. and as M. White doth such particulars as they may see ordinarily answered and refuted by Catholicke Authors but some plaine instances which neuer were yet nor cannot be answered or refuted Which my demands if they cannot satisfie as I am sure they cannot euery discreet man carefull of his soule will see that it is not safe to forsake this reuerend ranke and orderly succession of knowne Pastours to follow such a phantasticall Platonicall Idaea of an inuisible company of professing Protestants White p. 338. which M. White imagineth to haue alwaies bene as euery other Hereticke might imagine the professors of his sect to haue bene or to run after such a rabble of ragged hereticks as the same M. White assigneth for emineÌ„t meÌ„bers of the ProtestaÌ„t Church White ib. pag. 394. the which neither haue interrupted succession or continuance in time or place nor vniformity in doctrine with the ancient Church or one with another or with the Protestants of his age This foresaid consideration may suffice to let any indifferent man see that the same doctrine of faith which the ancient
people liuing in mariage yet haue not their secret cohabitation much reported but whether they companied together or no the examples shew they were married they dwelt together in one house they had children and brought them vp together which liberty the Church of Rome now denies The Councell of Constantinople p Est auâ—em etiam vniuersalis Bals p. 194. which was vniuersall q See Simanch institut tit 4. n. 38. and the canons thereof legitimate r Can 13. allowes both the marriage and cohabitation and saies it is the ancient Apostolicall constitution Å¿ Socr. l 1. c. 11. gr Zozom l. 1. c. 23. gr the like did Paphnutius in the first Councell of Neece t The WAY 2. edit p. 344. I alledged a place in Zonaras vpoÌ„ the canons which here I will put into English The Apostles in the canon say that if a Priest vnder the pretence of religion put his wife he shall be excluded excommunicate till he receaues her againe but if he perseuere and will not receaue her againe he shall be degraded because it seems to be done in reproch of marriage as if the mixture of man and wife were vncleannesse Whereas the Scripture saies marriage is honourable and the bed vndefiled The cannon also mentions Bishops hauing wiues because AT THAT TIME THE LAVVFVLL COHABITATION OF BISHOPS WITH THEIR WIVES WAS NOT FORBIDDEN Our aduersaries answer that this custome was but in the Greeke Church and not in the West But what was not the Greeke Church especially in those times the Church of God and haue not they altered the ancient faith that haue altered that which was vniuersall in the most famous Churches of the world and hath not the Pope in the West hereby shewed himselfe to be an Antichristian hereticke that condemnes the vniuersall doctrine of so famous a Church But the West Church also allowed the same liberty till the tyranny of the Pope as u The WAY digr 51. n. 10. I shewed exstinguist it * Scot. 4. d. 47. Ios Angl. Flo. ril in 4 p. 386. Antidid Colon. p. 128. Coster Enchir. p. 517. Greg. Val tom 4. d. 9. q 5. punct 5. All Papists I thinke will grant that maried Ministers were ordained in the Apostles * Mariana pro edit vulg p. 47. times and after yea such as had bene twise maried So to maior y Comment in Tit. c. 1. §. vnius vxotis saies it must be confessed and graunted that of old in the Primitiue Church reason of the small number of Ministers maried Bishops and Priests were vsed by indulgence That indulgence is Sotoes conceit and not the truth as I haue shewed for it is true that the faction against Priests mariage began betimes as appeares by the story of Paphnutius and the Nicene Councell but it was resisted by the godly BB. Dionysius for example the famous Bishop of Corinth a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb p. 41. b. called it a heauy burtheÌ„ not to be imposed on the brethren And therefore b Non horruit illa Tempestate Deus thalamos cunabula taedas Mant Fast 1. and the example of Simplicius before alledged still they maried euen in the West vnder the Romane Patriarchate Marius a Papist c De schism Concil part 3. c. vlt. saies he knowes right well that in the time of Pope Formosus which was 800. yeares after Christ it was permitted and lawfull for Priests to marrie wiues and when the restraint came in he cannot tell though he haue most diligently inquired d Cromer de Orig. gest Polon l. 7. p. 517 In Poland they had their wiues till almost 1200. yeares after Christ e Henr. Hunting p 378. prohibuit ante non prohibitas In England as long f Auentin l. 5. see the WAY pag 377. In Germany France and Italy as long Which I presume the Christian world would not so stiffely haue mainetained if it had bene against the sounder practise of the g See 26. q. 2. sors Clictou de contin c. 4. Church But when they saw it was not forbidden by any law of God but onely opposed first by faction and then by tyrannie they stood as long as they could till they were oppressed by tyrannie Aureolus h 4. d. 37. p 185. saies the common way of holding is that Orders haue the vow of continency annexed by the institution of the Church This is somewhat to shew that God by no diuine law made it so but if he had added that the Church which made this institution had bene a faction first of superstitious persons and then of Antichristian heretickes conducted by the Pope he had said the truth and opened the whole pedigree of it but if he had added further that which i Istud onus quod adhuc quamplurima monstra fecit ab audaci sertur pietaâ—e repertum Mant. Fast l. 1. see Joh Mar. vbi sup not a few of his fellowes supply for him that by leading from Gods ordinance it hath filled their Clergy with all maner of vncleannesse and villanny he had said no more then all the world knowes to be true and will subscribe to CHAP. LIII Wherein is handled the doctrine of the Church of Rome touching the worship of images and the distinctions whereby the same is maintained are examined and our aduersaries finally conuicted of giuing Gods honour to their images The Ancient Church was against image worship A. D. Fiftly touching images whereas M. White * White pag. 344 of the first edit 345. in the second edition Where for shame he addeth a limitation saying some of them hauing in the first edition absolutely said without limitation The Church of Rome worshippeth c saith Pag. 281. that the Church of Rome worshippeth and coÌ„mandeth men to worship them with the very same diuine honour which is due to God himselfe first no man holdeth that the images of Saints are to beworshipped with the very same diuine honour which is due to God because the Saints themselues being more honoured of vs then their images are not honoured with diuine honour Secondly although some say that the image of Christ is to be worshipped with the same honour that the Prototypon is yet these be but some and that which is said by these some is not so to be vnderstood as M. White seemeth willing to make his Reader beleeue as though they meant that the verie honour due to our Sauiour should be giuen to the image it selfe which cannot be vnlesse we should be so foolish as to conceaue and iudge that the image it selfe were indeed Christ the Sonne of God which none that hath learned the first rudiments of Christianity can conceaue and iudge Those therefore that vse that manner of speech do onely meane that the image is worshipped with the same worship onely improperly and per accident or at the most Analogicè All which manners are farre from giuing any
epist de solit vit agent p. 647. graec Hieron catalog script in Fortunat. say that for feare of death he subscribed to the Arians Damasus i Damas vit Liberij saies that Vrsacius and Valence two Arian Bishops being sent to him by the Emperor he consented to him Diuers other examples are well knowne and commonly obiected Dominicus Bannes k Bann vbi sup pag. 115. saies the Pope as he is a Doctor and a priuate person may erre in matters of faith euen with pertinacy that he becomes an Hereticke And this conclusion he affirmes to be generally holden by all the ancient Bishops of Rome themselues and by all the schoole Doctors before Albertus Pighius and by the grauer sort of Doctors also since him And to what purpose should vniuersally all the Diuines of the Church of Rome till of late yeares so curiously debate the questions touching the Churches power ouer the Pope l Turre â—rem summ de eccl l. 2 c. 112. l. 4. part 2. c. 20. Caietan de author Pap. concil cap. 18. Anton. de Rosell Monarch tract de concil p. 67. Occham dialog l. 6. partis 1 c. 12. inde in case he should chance to be an Hereticke if they had thought with the Repliar that he could not be an Hereticke at all Alphonsus a Castro m Adu haeres l. 1. c. 4. saies euery man may erre in the faith although it be the Pope himselfe For touching Pope Liberius it is manifest he was an Arian and he that hath read histories doubts not but Anastasius fauoured the Nestorians I CANNOT BELEEVE THERE IS ANY MAN SO IMPVDENT A FLATTERER OF THE POPE AS TO SAY HE CANNOT ERRE or be deceiued in expounding the Scripture For when IT IS WELL KNOWNE THAT DIVERS OF THEM ARE SO VNLERANED THAT THEY ARE ALTOGETHER IGNORANT OF GRAMMAR how can they expound the sacred Scripture My Aduersarie therefore and his learned Cardinall are egregious flatterers and parasites to the Pope by Alphonsus verdict such as he presumed the world should neuer haue seene but he was deceiued we now see them and heare them and my Aduersary it seemes beleeues them n Aen. Sylu. comment in Panorm de dict fact Alph. l. 1. n. 3. Pope Iohn the 23 was woont to say when flatterers praised him though he knew they lied yet he felt himselfe something tickled with that they said Which humor of the Pope being now better knowne you must giue his seruants leaue to gratifie it 8 Secondly he saies All the best learned Catholicke Diuines agree that neuer any Pope did shall or can ex Cathedra define any error or heresie to be true faith or authoratatiuely teach the Church any thing contrary to the true faith Indeed this is the opinion of the most Papists now adaies deuised of late to put off the inconueniences that pressed them that whatsoeuer heresies and abhominations of the Pope were obiected they might be salued by this distinction that he taught them not out of the chaire but from his owne stoole But it is false that all the best learned Catholickes agree in it For very many of the ancienter sort held it not but the contrary whose learning will abide any comparison that can be made with the Iesuites that now so presumptuously assume from their predecessors all the learning to themselues Hadrian who himselfe was Pope o In 4. de sacra confirm sub finem affirmes it to be certaine that the Pope may erre euen in things touching the faith and auouch that which is heresie by his determination or decretall Turrecremata a Cardinall of that reputation for his learning p Catharin tract de certa sanct glor l. 1. that the Pope honoured him with the title of Protector of the faith assigning certaine cases wherein pertinacy or wilfulnesse in heresie lies q Turre crem sum de eccl l 4. part 2. c. 16. giues this for one The seuenteenth manner whereby the Pope specially may be conuinced of pertinacy in heresie is if he SOLEMNLY DEFINE THE ERROR and affirme it to be holden by Christians as Catholicke It was therefore r Azor. tom 2. moral l. 5. c. 4. his iudgement that the Pope might erre euen iudiciously è Cathedra Waldensis Å¿ Waldens doctrinal fid l. 2. c. 19 tom 1. affirmes that no Church or Councell no not the particular Church of Rome is free from error but onely the Catholicke Church dispersed all ouer the world from the times of Christ and his Apostles to this day If onely the Catholicke Church thus considered be free from error then he thought the Pope euery way howsoeuer might erre and his particular Church and colledge being allowed to helpe him yet they not being the Church mentioned in the creed in Waldens the innocent promoting the faithlesse defaming Catholicks exalting schismatickes hating good men oppressing the truth with all their power and by all meanes possible without feare aduancing forward hereticall prauitie The time alas is come whereof the blessed Apostle prophecied 2. Tim. 4. The time shall be when men will not abide wholesome doctrine but with itching eares shal heape to themselues teachers after their owne lusts and turning their eares from the truth shall giue heed to fables Which prophecie indeed is fulfilled in our dayes which I speake with griefe And that I may conclude in few words with a whores forehead and execrable boldnesse they hasten to subuert both King and law diuine and humane c. 9 The third thing the Reply sayes is that the Popes priuate errors cannot preiudice the Church But this is folly For who sees not that if his decrees be admitted to be infallible truths the Church shall be constrained by the consequence of this principle to receiue for such many of his errors the reason is because he cannot possibly decree otherwise then he priuatly thinkes and in decreeing he is not bound either to follow or vse the counsell of other Bishops in which case what hath he to leade him but his owne erronious priuate spirit They will say possible Gods promise and prouidence is to preserue him when he teaches the Church è Cathedra else the Church should be tied to an inconuenience and be bound to follow his errors I answer in a word that priuiledge shall be granted him when our aduersaries can shew vs where God hath made any such promise Those promises that are belong not to the Pope but to the vniuersall Church and the lawfull Councels thereof as the most ancient and learned Papists do for the most part expound Thus the Fathers of the Councels of Pisa Basil Constance Thus all the Diuines that hold a Councell to be aboue the Pope And this was the cause why in the ancient Church not the Bishop of Rome but a Councell was the highest iudge of all controuersies that fell out for which cause the Church in all ages hath vsed to call such Councels which needed