mindes we take vpon vs this most noble conflicte because it otherwise happeneth in this then in other battayles for there hée alone is crowned which vanquisheth but y e ende of this battaile is such that euen hée which is vanquished so that hée acknowledge himselfe ouercome and imbrace the truth shal likewise bée crowned together with the victour And Augustine sayth that it is better to be ouercome of the truth then to be willing to ouercome the truth with falsehoode For whatsoeuer men practise against the truth yet this must they know to wit that veritie cannot be vanquished the which Augustine also calleth perpetuall victorie Furthermore this point of doctrine touching the which our disputation is is of so greate weight that it maye bée thought and that worthelye to bée the verie foundation of all Religion And therefore not without greate cause the Prophet Dauid doeth acknowledge the worde of GOD to bée a Lanterne the which except it lighten our féete of necessitie wée must walke in most horrible darkenesse yea also wée both stumble and fall But the defenders of the Popish Church doo so hotly striue and contende for mans Traditions and thinke them no lesse worthie to bée retayned then some precious Picture of Pallas the which béeing taken awaye they thinke it not possible any longer to defend or maintaine their pontificiall chaire wherein there haue bene so manye Vicars assaulted and nowe at the last Truth preuaylyng shall be quite ouerthrowen and brought vnto naught But that wée maye come to the matter this disputation shall be diuided into sixe parts First we will set downe our owne opinion and then the opinion of the aduersarie then we will trie them both so y â— thereby maye appeare what is the state of our controuersie Secondly we will confirme our opinion by manifest proofe of scriptures and by most sure and flat demonstrations grounded on those places so collected Thirdly we will refell the opinion of the other partie by negatiue disputations Fourthly we will wipe away the obiections of the aduersarie which they wrest out of the scriptures Fiftly we will take away y e foundations which they take out of the writings of the Doctors to ground their opinions on And sixtly we will heare the olde Doctors touching this point agreeing both with vs and the word of God â‚ THE FIRST CHAPTER ¶ At sundrie times and in diuers manners God spake in the olde time to our Fathers by the Prophets In these last dayes he hath spoken vnto vs by his sonne WHen Tertulian would enter into the conflict of disputation and ioyne with the aduersarie hée was woont to bonder the whole summe of the question with certain bondes for so himselfe saith whereby he might not swarue from the matter which he had in hand And that we also may doo the like we will first propone or set down our minde and opinion which is the opinion of each reformed Church touching the word of God by the testimonie of the same word of God which is this All necessarie principles of christiaÌ„ faith are contained in the holy Scriptures This our sentence or opinion we thus expound out of that place of y e Epistle to y e Hebrewes which ministreth vnto vs sufficieÌ„t matter for this disputation God spake in the time of the olde Testament in diuers and sundrie manners to our fathers to wit by oracles visions dreames by Vrim and Thummim finaly by y e prophets speaking by the motion or inspiration of the spirit of God and the same worde of God the spirit of God so commaunding was committed to writing both by Moyses and also by other Prophets and most holy men Now in these last dayes Iesus Christ the chiefe and most perfect Doctour and teacher of his Church being giuen to the world taught the Apostles by mouth ordained them teachers for his Church which did publish in writing the doctrine of the Gospell receiued from Christ by them taught by mouth Sith then y e word of God is the measure of our faith that that word of God remaineth in the most holy monuments or writings of the scriptures it followeth of necessitie that al the principles which are necessarie to faith and saluation of the Church are contayned in the holy Scriptures and whatsoeuer the Apostles haue taught we ought to looke for them in the holy Scriptures neither ought we to receiue any tradition in matter of faith And because matters are made more manifest by uÌ„militudes wée will take our similitude from a King which by mouth proclaimeth an Edict then willeth the same to be printed the which being done men are not wont curiouslye to enquire of others which eyther heard or wer present at the proclamation what is contained in the Kings Edict because the Edict is in print to y e which they must stand and the which they must also beléeue So then I affirme in as much as the word was proclaimed and declared by the Apostles and euangelists and by them committed to writing it were in vayne and foolish now a dayes anye other where to be sought then in the Scriptures what the Apostles and Euangelistes did teach by mouth But now the opinion of the aduersarie is this That all principles of Religion necessarye for our Christian faith are not contained in the holye Scriptures The which theyr opinion they thus expounde Although the worde of God be the measure of our faith yet the whole worde of God is not extant in the scriptures for many things were spoken by the Apostles Euangelists which they writ not Furthermore the Catholike church say they meaning the Church of Rome is so endowed with the spirite of God that she is able of hir selfe to deliuer those things which are necessarie both to faith saluation Wherefore that we may haue the whole word of God the Apostolicall and eccleâ—â—asticall traditions must bée added to the scriptures this is their opinion Now then you may sée manifestlye what is the state or issue of our controuersie for this is that which must be discussed whether the whole word of God deliuered by the Prophets and Apostles and necessary for our saluation be contained in the Scriptures which is the word written or not we affirme that it is they saye naye so then there â—anne bee but one of our opinions true as is manifest by the first groundes of Logicke In anye reasoning the affirmatiue or negatiue 〈◊〉 needes be true but before we goe about the confirmation of our opinion we will set downe the bounds limits of our question both briefely and shorte When we say the word of God we mean not that eternall Word the Sonne of the eternall and euerlasting father being the second person in Trinitie but that externall worde by the which God hath made manifest vnto men his will and pleasure and therefore we adde and say that worde
which was deliuered taught by the Apostles and Prophets so that it may be more manifest what we meane by the word of God Also this word Tradition maye not onely be referred to the word taught by mouth but also to the word written as it is manifest in the second to the Thessalonians the second chapter where the Apostle saith Stand fast and keepe the traditions or instructiōs which you haue ben taught either by word or by Epistle And euen after this sort also haue the old fathers vsed to speake as we will shewe in the proper place notwithstanding in this question according to the manner of speaking it is restrained to that worde which is taught by mouth Furthermore we meane by the word of God necessary to our saluation al those things which God hath commaunded vs to beléeue with a most sure perswasion of faith so that we maye make a difference betwéene faith and opinion and betwéene the principles of Christian religion and the probable disputations and ordinaunces of men Last of all by y e name of the holy Scripture we vnderstand all the bookes Canonicall both of the new and olde testament And thus much I thought good to speak briefly touching the explication of our question The second Chapter HEther to we haue declared our minde opinion touching the worde of God nowe it resteth that wée confirme the same by most certaine proofes and arguments deriued and taken out of the same word of God and so at the last a flatte demonstratiue or most true argument being gathered from most true principles wée may rid the whole matter out of all obscuritie placing it in the most manifest lyght of truth And to bring this to passe we wil follow this order First to set downe certaine places of scripture from whence we will draw our arguments Secondly the places of Scripture being collected and brought together we will fet a true definition of the word of God the which definition also shall be y e proofe of our argument cutting away all exception doubt And although in the reciting of the places of scripture I doo not curiously labor touching the order thereof for each place of scripture is of sufficient authority to make anye conclusion yet notwithstanding I haue taken some care that the order of the places of scripture maye aunswere vnto each parts of the definition asmuch as may be Wherefore let vs begin with this place of the Apostle which hath ministred occasion vnto vs of this disputations The first place God at sundrie times and indiuers manners in the old times spake to our fathers by the Prophets but in these last daies he hath spoken vnto vs by his sonne Whereby we conclude thus If the word of God being sufficient or necessarie vnto the saluation of the church was deliuered first vnto vs by the Prophets and then by Christ and his Apostles and that worde of GOD so deliuered by the Prophettes is this daye onelye to bee sought for in the writings of the Prophets Then truly the word of God deliuered vnto vs by Christ and his Apostles must bee sought for onely in the writings of the Apostles except any good reason may be giuen to the contrarie But the word of God necessarie to the saluation of the Church was deliuered first vnto vs by the Prophets then by Christ his Apostles the same word of God deliuered by the Prophets is this day onely to be sought in the writings of the Prophets no wher els neither any good reson to the cōtrarie can be rendred why the like shuld not be touching the word of god deliuered by Christ and his Apostles Wherefore we conclude that the word of god necessarie to the saluatiō of the church is onely to be sought for in the writings of the Prophets and Apostles Now let vs trye our argument This syllogisme or argument is hypothetical or double y e vse wherof is verie necessarie so often as we shall be occupied in y e comparing of things together And y e hypothetical or double arguments are verie néedful in diuine disputations is manifest both by the old Doctors also by y e new schoolemen who most often vse them Wherefore I doubt not to vse these euen as well as the categoricall arguments because the matter or grounds of our disputations are not Topicall or standing on the inuention of art but grounded on expressse places of Scriptures and therefore those kind of arguments are not inferiour to others The ground or matter therefore of our argument is made manifest euen by the light of nature who biddeth vs of things like to iudge the like And these principles which we haue drawne from nature her selfe the Apostle teacheth vs that they are not to be reiected when as in the matter of regeneration he bringeth the Corinthians to the consideration of nature For being schooled by natures rule sayth Tertulian thou maist the easilier beléeue the Prophesie Now if wée marke the substance we shall finde the worde of God both in the olde testament and in the new to bée all one For the Apostle professeth saying That he hath spoken nothing but that which the Prophets and Moses had before spoken I confesse that the publishing of the word of God in y e new Testament was a great deale more excellent and fruitfull then before yea and that maketh for our cause and therefore farre wide is it that it shuld hurt vs or our matter as héereafter in our disputation we will more at large proue Let vs then make a comparison betwéene the olde and newe Testament as much as appertaineth to the word of God exhibited in them both after this sort If God spake by the Prophets in the old testament then also he hath spoken by the Apostles in the new testament And if the prophets taught the word of God by mouth the like so thē the apostles haue done And if the prophets committed to writing the word of God so also haue the Apostles Wherefore if the prophets comprehended the whole doctrine of y e old testament in their writings why should not we say y t the Apostles haue also comprised the whole doctrine of the gospel in their bookes Now let the defenders of the contrarie opinion bring foorth shewe some reason to disprooue this my assertion I say some good reason not borowed from the dreames of mens braines nor from topicall cauilling arguments but deriued from the word of God But this they cannot doo Furthermore I vrge this place of the Apostle which we haue in hand reason thus If the word of God deliuered after diuers manners waies and at manie times be now altogether to be found in y e writings of the prophets why should not we say the like of y e Gospell being y e word of god which as y e apostle witnesseth was not at sundrie times or in diuers manners
of God so we by the conduction of the same spirit beléeue that that is true which the Church affirmeth y t our faith may neuer rest vpō men but for euer vpon God alone The Apostles did adde vnto the lawe to wit the doctrine of the Gospell Ergo it is lawfull to adde vnto the worde of God To the antecedent I thus aunswere Although the doctrine of the Gospell bée more full and fruitfull then the writing of the olde Testament yet notwithstanding if ye well mark the matter in y e new and olde testament the selfe same doctrine of saluation is contained in them both for that is most true which Paule saith Acts 26. that he taught no other thing then that which the prophets and Moses had before taught And againe in the first to y e Rom. he sheweth y t the gospel was before promised by the Prophets therfore this is false which they say that the Apostles added to the law for it is one thing to adde to the lawe and another to erpound and referre it to his owne proper scope and purpose For let some man bring forth an obligation that we may vse this similitude and the payment being made he addeth at the ende that the Obligation is satisfied I pray you can he well be sayd to adde any thing to the same Obligation So when the Apostles gaue testimonie to the scriptures that Christ by his cōming had fulfilled both the lawe and the prophets they did not adde either to y e law or writings of the Prophets Now their consequent I denie for héere is an error Secundum figuram dictionis as it is manifest by these things which I haue alreadie spoken Yea also the argument cannot well procéed from the Apostles to other men for graunt this that God would adde vnto his lawe and that it was done by the ministerie of the Apostles which wrote by the influence motion of the spirit of God yet truly héereby can nothing happen whereby it shoulde be lawfull for other men to adde vnto y e same word of God Wherefore sithen by the argumentation of our aduersaries there would follow the ouerthrowe of this most noble excellent doctrine touching the similitude of the old and new Testament Therefore we may well amend their error by this most excellent saieng which is extant in the workes of Iustinus Matyre In interg resp wher he asketh this and saith What is the Lawe he aunswereth saith It is the Gospell foreshewed Againe he demaundeth What is the Gospell he auns wereth The Lawe fulfilled By which words it is manifest that the Gospell is not a newe doctrine added vnto the lawe but a new fulfilling of the olde promise And thus we suppose that we haue sufficiently disputed touching the obiections of our aduersaries which they haue wreasted out of the worde of God The 5. Chapter FOrasmuch as the aduersaries themselues sufficiently knowe how weake féeble those argumēts are which they take out of y e scripturs against the scriptures then at the last they flie to the testimonies of the auncient Fathers the which they very diligently endeuour to beate into our heads with Orations long and tedious to the ende that by the heape thereof they might ouer whelme vs. Wherefore it séemeth conuenient in this part of our treatise to set downe some thing whereby not onely the obiections of the Papists but also our aunsweres may the more easier be vnderstood Now therefore y t we maye gather most true and infallible principles let vs adde some certaine rules to this our disputation by whose helpe the mindes of the olde Doctors may be expounded and so by the conduction of those rules as by a clue of thred we may both enter into the many variable writings of the Doctours as into a most daungerous Laborynth and there also kéepe our selues occupied most safely and without hurt Let this therefore be the first Rule THe writings of the auncient Doctors for the establishing and confirmation of our faith are so farre foorth to be receiued as they agree with the holie and diuine scriptures Although this first rule be plain inough of himselfe especially to those that knowe the truth yet will I for the confirmation of the same lay downe certaine proofes If anie preach vnto you otherwise then that which we haue preached vnto you let him be accurssed saith S. Paule And againe Warne some that they teach no other doctrine And againe Marke them diligentlie which cause diuision and offences contrarie to the doctrine which ye haue learned and auoide them And again If anie man teach otherwise he is puffed vp and knoweth nothing And agayne Be not carried about with diuers and straunge doctrines with many more places to this effect Yet least happely our aduersaries shoulde say that these places repeted are to be vnderstood of the word deliuered by tradition and not of the word written leauing those things which in the former parte of this treatise are handeled copiously and at large I will aske them this Question whether they think y e Apostles to haue vttered spoken anie thing in their lectures sermons which doth disagrée with those things which they haue committed to writing I am sure they will in no wise confesse it Wherefore mauger their heades they must agrée with vs that this our first Rule is infallible and most true to wit that the writings of the auncient doctors are so far foorth to be receiued as they doe agrée with the sacred Scripture But if they shall perceiue the auncient Doctours themselues to be of our mind I hope then all doubt remooued they will together with vs agrée to our former rule This therefore is the minde of Origen It behooueth vs to bring the holie Scriptures for witnesses for because our senses and allegations without the witnesse of them are altogether voyde of credite And againe Euen as there is not anie golde sanctified without the temple so ther is no sence without the Scripture that is holie Tertulian What is there contrarie to vs in our writings hee speaketh of the holye Scriptures And againe The same that we are the same they be Chrisostome If anie thing bee spoken without the Scriptures the minde of the hearers is thereby brought into doubt Hierome Whatsoeuer heereafter shall be spoken besides the Apostolicall writings let it be abrogated of no value altogether without credit Agustine Doo thou not bring vs anie cauelles from the writinges of the Bishoppes as of Hillarie or Ciprian against the infallible testimonie of the diuine scriptures Because as it behooueth vs to put a difference betweene that kinde of writing and the Scriptures of GOD for the writings of men are not so to be read that it is not lawfull for vs to thinke the contrarie if at anie time they haue peraduenture thought otherwise then the
truth requireth And againe wee must not agree to the Catholyke Bishoppes if at anie time they are deceiued taking opinion contrarie to the canonical scriptures And againe I haue learned to giue this honour and reuerence onely to those writinges which are called Canonicall that I faithfully beleeue the authours of them haue not in anie point at anie time erred in their writings but other mens writings I doo so reade that though they excell in sanctimonie or holynesse yet I doo not therefore thinke it true because they so affirme but because they are able to perswade mee either by Canonicall Scripture or by probable reason those thinges which dissent not from the truth Thus farre he These things haue our aduersaries themselues recorded amongest their Decretalls insomuch that they maie not denie this first rule least they seeme to denie their owne Decretalls The second Rule THE auncient Doctours doo oftentimes by the name of Traditious vnderstand the same doctrine that is cōtained in the Apostolical writing That this rule is true it shall appeare by that which followeth Irenaeus as it is reported by Eusebius doth saie That Policarpus taught these things which he had learned of the Apostles which things both the Church deliuered and are onely to bee accounted true thus much he He saith Tradit the Church doth deliuer that is doeth teach namely out of the writings of the Apostles If hée were not thus to be vnderstood how could that stand which he hath sayde And those things are onely true which thing is verie easie to be gathered of the forenamed Irenaeus whose wordes are by Eusebius reported Policarpus saith he did report those things which he had heard of the Apostles altogether agreeable to the holy Scriptures And the said Irenaeus saith in another place The Church of Rome wrote to the Church of Corinth shewing them the same tradition which they had receiued of the apostles to wit that there was one God almightie so consequently the doctrine contained in the bookes of Moses And a little after he saith Manie of the vnlearned and barbarous people beeing ignoraunt of the Scriptures doo diligently keepe the olde auncient traditions beleeuing in one God in Iesus Christ born of the virgin Marie Tertulian The Apostolicall doctrine doth allow nothing contrarie to the rule of Gods word namely those things which the Apostles haue taught and committed to writings The third Rule THE auncient Doctors do name that vnwritten traditions which in expresse words are not found in the holy Scriptures but notwithstanding if you diligently mark the effect thereof is contained in the Scriptures So Basil confesseth that he vsed certaine tearmes against heretikes which are not written but yet notwithstāding faith he are not contrarie to the true sence of the Scriptures And Nazianzenus refuteth the Macidonians which did denie the deitie of the holy Ghost because he is not tearmed with plaine words in the holy Scriptures to be the third person in the deitie saying y ◠ther are diuers things in the Scriptures which are not plainly expressed As for example If y ◠say twise two I will say saith he y ◠thou saist foure In like manner Augustine doth proue that the baptisme of infants is contained in holy Scriptures and that they shoulde not be rebaptised The like is to be sayde of the word or tearme Omoousion the trinitie such like concerning the which we haue spoken in the former chapter The 4. Rule THE auncient Doctors vnder the name of traditions do not meane anie certaine grounded opinion touching religion but ecclesiasticall ceremonies and to the end they may the more beautifie and set foorth the order of the Church they commonly ascribe the sayde ceremonies to the Apostles as if they were the principall authours of the same Now many and diuers y e rites and ceremonies of the Church haue béene with what studie and diligence the auncient fathers haue set foorth the same that by all meanes possible they might stoppe Schismes and diuisions in the Church It néedeth not héere perticularlye to declare sith the volumes of the Fathers doo euerie where abound with those things wherfore let the readers consider what Augustine hath written in two Epistles to Ianuarius Hierome hath thus set forth the order and ceremonies of the Church Let each Prouince sayeth he haue authōtrie to determine touching the Institutions of the elders and traditions of the Apostles which words of Hierome are diuersly to be considered And that manye and sundrie orders and institutions of the ancient Fathers are to bée altered and chaunged by reason of many circumstaunces euen our aduersaries themselues haue not denyed neither were it méete in this behalfe that the Ecclesiasticall ceremonies shoulde be made equall to the grounded doctrine of Religion And therefore hath Tertulian said That the onely lawe of sayth doth remaine immutable And Hierome himselfe doeth giue counsell that such orders and customes of the church are to be kept which saith he doo not hinder or hurt our faith The 5. Rule SOme of the olde Fathers hauing theyr faultes did ouermuch fauour these vnwritten traditions and therfore did sometime true consent to heretikes We haue heard afore out of Irenaeus that the auncient heretiks did defend their heresies by vnwritten traditions And Eusebius maketh mention of one Papias which brought in certaine straunge doctrine into the Church affirming the same to be deliuered as comming from the Apostles by tradition The like errour there was of the Chiliastians into y ◠which error Tertulian Iustinus Martire others haue fallen And therfore the works of the auncient Fathers are not to be read without great iudgement The 6. Rule MAnie and diuerse bookes haue beene put forth vnder the name and title of the ancient Fathers which notwithstanding are counterfait It hath come to passe through the fault of those who haue ben the writers printers of bookes y e diuerse bookes haue falsely borne the name of those auncient Doctors which antiquitie hath commended As for erāple the bookes intituled Rapsodiae were attributed to Clement S. Paules Disciple and also the booke of the Reuelation of S. Iohn Baptist his head is authorised vnder the name of Ciprian when notwithstanding there is mention made of Pipin king of Fraunce and to conclude there are diuerse volumes vnder the title and name of Augustine in the which the opinion of Augustine is refuted I néed not to make mētion of an infinit number like vnto these Wherefore that which Hierome did somtune speake of the bookes Apocripha may verie fitly bée spoken of the writinges of the olde Fathers Let a man take heede sayth hée of the bookes Apocripha and if at anie time he bee disposed to read them not for triall of truth but for examples sake of good manners let him knowe they are not bookes of them whose titles and
names they beare but that there are manie corrupt things mixed in them and therefore it is great wisdome how to choose out gold amongest dirt and claie thus much Hierome Now these foundations béeing laid it behooueth vs a little to search and sifte the obiections of our aduersaries which they take from the olde and auncient doctors Clemens Alexandrinus The workeman that is sent foorth into the Haruest of the Lord hath a double husbandrie to wit the vnwritten and the written Againe As the Philosophers had certain secrets touching their opinions which they deliuered by traditions so likewise the Apostles And therefore Paule saith We speake wisedome amongst those that are perfect To this I aunswere thus First that this Author hath not handled the question sincerely and purely and this fault is easely to be found euen by the authoritie of y e scriptures for Christ saith thus What soeuer I speak vnto you in secret that speak openly that you heard in the eare that preach vpon the house top c. Wherefore Alexandrinus is plainly deceiued when he goeth about to mixe the mysterie of Christian religion with the hid secrets of philosophie And Irenaeus and Tertulian doo both witnesse and testifie that the olde heretikes were of that minde which heere Alexandrinus doth hold and therefore abused those words of Paul saieng I speake wisdome amongst those that are perfect as Irenaeus as I haue before said doth affirm And Clemens doubted not to say y e euen y e Grecians were saued by Philosophy wher and ceremonies amongst the which hée â—â—â—koneth vp that most auncient custome whereby the Christians did alwaies stanâ— when they did praye from the time of Easter vntill Whitsontide In this disputation therefore Basil doubteth not to propone that which was commonlye spoken touching the Apostolike mysteries and this is it that our aduersaries so greatlye triumph against vs out of the wordes of Basil but truly as with all my heart I doo acknowledge the goodnesse of the cause wherevpon Basil then stood when he affirmed the holy ghost to be god yet not withstanding without offence of Basil be it spoken me thinketh hée did too curioustye séeke for straunge Argumentes when as that matter might be prooued by playne proper and true groundes of Scriptures The Deitie of the holye Ghost is in diuers places of the holye Scriptures to bée prooued to what ende then shoâ—â—d the Apostles delyuer by Tradition certaine secrete formes touching that matter and as it were as Basil sayeth whisper it into the eares of certayne men I praye you was there any thing to be kept close in this point of doctrine that behooued the Christians especially to know and professe Furthermore to call that thing secrete or hidde which was then publikelye taught almost in the whole worlde I knowe not well how Basil could doe it And inasmuch as this fained Apostolike mysteries was in times past the verie grounde of heresies as before it is shewed neyther furtherod the cause of Basil which otherwise is to bée prooued with most firme reasons I wish that Basil had reformed that kinde of Argument if it bée worthie to bee called an argument especially sith the olde Fathers verie wisely haue warned vs to foresée that many labours shuld not grow of one But howsoeuer the matter goeth our aduersaries haue nothing heere wherof they maye glorie or boast for when Basil affirmeth this hind of speaking of y e holy ghost That it hath sprong from the Apostles tradition By the name of Tradition héere hée vnderstandeth that which although not in manifest and flat words remaineth in the Scripture yet notwithstanding the sum and matter it selfe is there contained touching the which reade our third Rule What if our aduersaries themselues long time since haue not obserued and kept this kinde of speaking in their Churches And that I maye not vrge that that same custome is now growen out of vse forgotten amongst them whereby they héeretofore did stand when they did praye betwéene Easter and Whitsontide as is before sayd Wherefore let our aduersaries consider how properly they expounde the words of Basil which are these Which both are of like force effect to godlines and how well they agrée with Basil himselfe Chrisostome Heere it is manifest that they deliuered not all things by writing but manie things by tradition without writing and these are as worthie to bee beleeued as those which are written Therfore we think the traditions of the Church worthie to be beleeued It is a tradition therefore search no farther for the matter Chrisostome intreating of these wordes of Paule written to the Thessalonians the second Epistle and second chapter saieng Holde fast the Traditions which you haue learned either by word or by Epistle Hée gathereth that not only Paule but also the rest of the Apostles did not deliuer commit all things to writings the which how sure an argument it is wée haue declared in our former chapter But to let this thing passe least wée shoulde séeme to make a nèedlesse repetition I therefore saye that Chrisostome doeth speake touching those traditions which although they are not expressed by word in the holy Scriptures yet in substance are there contained for otherwise these wordes of Chrisostome could not stand saying It is a tradition thou maist seeke no farther thereofâ— For then it should followe that wée shoulde no more search in holy Scriptures the which God forbid that it should come in the minde of so godly a Father who doeth most often inculcate and beat into the minde the reading of the holy Scriptures Therefore I suppose by this worde Tradition of the Church by Chrisostome is meant that doctrine the which the Church being instructed by the writings of the Prophets Apostles doth deliuer ouer vnto the church that is to saie doeth teach instruct whatsoeuer she hath drawne out of y e most pure fountaine of y e Scriptures touching which matter séeke the second rule Nazianzene The doctrine of the Gospell is more excellent through the figures of the Church which beeing receiued by tradition wee haue kept euen vntill this time I expound this place as I did the other afore going to wit that hée speaketh of those traditions which maye bée prooued by the scriptures of the which sée the second and third rules for if that our aduersaryes shall say that the Gospell is made the better through their holie water and through such like trumperâ—es appertaining to their Masse they would make men laugh nay rather I should saie wéepe who reuerently thinke and are well affctioned toward the true worshipping of God Epiphanius Wee must also vse traditions for all thinges cannot bee taken from the holy Scripture Wherefore some things the holy Apostles deliuered vnto vs by the Scriptures and some thing by Tradition Héere Epiphanius disputeth touching certaine rites and ceremonies which the
that we follow not the similitude of truth for truth it selfe and so shoulde bee deceiued with a counterfaite probabilitie of truth which things sith they are so some man maie demaâ—nd wherefore that great Orator Tullie comparing Oratorie with this sharp and schoole like Disputation and peraduenture ouer-well liking his owne Arte saith thus As a flowing Riuer can scarce or not at all be corrupted or putrified but a standing water maie verie soone so likewise by the floud of eloquence the faults of the reprehender are soone wiped awaie when as niggishnes of speach and want of eloquence scarce can defend it selfe thus much Cicero The which as I confesse that it maie happen both in the sophisticall and probable kinde of disputing so do I denie that it can chaunce or agree with true and demonstratiueie Silogismes For as the Riuer that we maie not swarue from the similitude which wee haue propoâ—ed while it runneth afloate 〈◊〉 aboue his bankes doth gather most foule and filthie things of 〈◊〉 sort which 〈◊〉 and are couered while as the flouds are aloft so oftentimes great errors with copiousnesse of speach did are by true and briefe disputations declared laid open for the copie of eloquence taken awaie things doo appeare both naked and manifest as they are But heereof we will speake more in the Preface And now I set downe first a disputation touching the word of god writteÌ„ which as it is chiefe so ought it to be the verie fouÌ„dation of all disputations The other disputations as of the true humane nature of Christ of the presence of Christ in the sacrament of the true and lawfull making of Ministers touching which thinges I wrote some thing about two yeares past against Turrianus that false named Iesuit and will handle it more at large whensoeuer he shal giue anie newe occasion to write also free will Purgatorie and such lyke maye bee grounded on this sayde Disputation And this my bretheren I hope you will dooe either according to this methode which I haue followed or according to that which you shall better like of Wherefore I beseech the defenders of the Romish Church and chiefelye those which challenge vnto them such skill in disputing that they will bring the same from the darke shaddowe of the Schooles into the open and cleere light yea to the true point of disputing in deede and that all mallice put a parte all nipping tauntes set aside let them modestlye and with quiet mindes pursue this my treatise and when they haue entered into disputation with me let them first note what is worthie of reprehention and then let them giue solutions vnto my argumentes and on the other side let them confirme theyr opinions with plaine and euident Sylogismes and Argumentes and so I hope it shall at the last come to passe if GOD permit that when both our opinions are conferred together the truth will shewe it selfe and bee manifestly seene euen of those which bee almost blinde Let therefore those bookes which are repleat with nothing els but with bitter choler spotted stained with the sores of their mastersâ— yea and those seditious Sermons which blovve forth nothing else but fire sword let them I say cease be quite banished in steed hereof let there be meeknes tranquilitie yea let the loue inward affection of the truth beare swaie let those which so greatly affect that excellent name of Catholikes which so often with open mouthes repeat pronounce the same remember what S. Augustin hath written to wit that the Catholike Church doth teach that wee owe loue vnto all and iniurie to none But if there be anie such which go forward with shamelesse faces and obstinate mindes still to write and spread abroad their sichophanticall and infamous Libells or if there bee anie such which so farre degenerateth from men that they had rather obstinately to bark against the truth then to imbrace the same the vvhich amongest others I heare there is one especially vpon whom the fearful exaÌ„ple of Gods most iust iudgment is manifest not onlie for other his vngodlinesse but chiefly for his wicked Apostacie and backe sliding from the Gospell which sometime he professed If I say there bee anie such I vvish vnto them better mindes oppose this my vowe and wish against their shamelesse wickednesse and malitious railing professing that I will not vouchsafe to ansvvere such their pamphlets knowing right well that such their dooings may be vtterly wiped awaie euen with one little spark of patience Againe touching my selfe I professe that I will not reade those their vvritings in the vvhich they spue forth their foule poisoned choler because I haue determined to dispute and not to braule to contend vvith arguments and not vvith impious railings And you my reuerend brethren fight 〈…〉 of faith for I may lavvfully vse the Apostles exhortation vnto you fight 〈…〉 vvorthie battaile of faith and apprehend euerlasting life for vvhich cause you are called haue professed a good profession before manie vvitnesses And therefore regarding nothing at all this vvicked rable run your course vvith stout courage vnremoued constancie and inuincible patience in the truth of the Gospell of God as you haue begun that is that you go forvvard vvith exact diligence and integritie to fight against mans â—rrors that the course of your labours most manfully being finished yee may leaue vnto the posterities to come the puritie of 〈◊〉 and the true vse of ecclesiasticall discipline From my studie the 23 of Februarieâ— An Domini 1580. FINIS A COMMON PLACE TOVCHING THE WORD OF GOD WRITTEN AGAINST THE TRAditions of Men. Handled both Schoole like Diuinely Wherein is intreated of the true method of Disputing THE PREFACE THE Apostle Paule writing to Timothie affirmeth that the holie Scripture is profitable both to teach as also to reproue thereby shewing that men are not onely to be taught but also often times to be reproued For truly it is manifest that men are so corrupt that they doe not onely remaine in ignorance of the truth euen as it were in a palpable and thicke darknesse but also for the most part they hate flie the light of the same And although both are greatly to be lamented yet it is better to haue to doo with those which are ignorant and willing to learne then with them which are delighted with their blindnesse and ignorance because it is a great deale more tollerable to be ignorant then not to be willing to learne Whereby it commeth to passe that because the ministers and the instructors of the congregations must haue to doo with both these kind of men they are therefore willed by the Apostle to be such as shoulde holde fast the word of truth so that they shuld be able to instruct by wholsome doctrine and also to confute the gaine-saiers thereof And as touching these two points in y e true Preacher when Augustine had disputed and compared the
deliuered For otherwise who séeth not y ◠the apostles comparison in the recited text were of no force For if y e Apostle had saide thus then were our aduersaries opinion true to wit Like as in times past vnder y e old testamēt God spake at sundry times in diuers manners so now likewise hath he also spoken to vs in y e time of the new testamēt at sundry times in diuers manners that is by y e writings of the apostles by apostolicall traditiōs not writen also now speaketh by the traditions of y e church y e which how it repugneth is contrarie to y e mind of y e apostle euen our aduersaries thēselues cānot denie y e same thus much touching y e first part of our argument The minor which is y e secōd part of our argumēt containeth in it selfe thrée mēbers First y ◠the word of god necessary to y e saluation of y e Church was deliuered vnto vs first by y e prophets then after by Christ and his Apostles and this is manifest by this place of the Apostle in that he sayth In times past he spake by his Prophets but in these last dayes by his sonne And that this last speaking apperteineth also to the Apostles it is manifest by the words of the Apostle in his second chapter of this Epistle where he sayth y ◠the gospel was first preached vnto vs by Christ and then confirmed by those which heard him And againe Iohn the 20. and 17. Christ saieth As my Father sent me euen so send I you And it cannot be denied but that the Apostles published the Gospel in writing The second part of the minor is that the word of God deliuered by the Prophets is now only to be sought for in the writings of the Prophets And this is proued by the vsuall phrases of the Scriptures which by the Prophets meane the writings of the Prophets as Romanes the first where hée saith Put a part for the Gospell which he had promised before by his Prophets in the holy Scriptures And againe Luk. 16. They haue Moses and the Prophets Iohn 6. It is written in y e Prophets Acts. 26. Paule saith O king Agrippa beléeuest thou y e Prophets I know thou beléeuest Luke 24. And he began at Moses at all the Prophets and interpreted vnto them in all the Scriptures y e things which were written of him To conclude because I will not recite many places finally Peter by the wordes of the Prophets meaneth the writings of the Prophets 2. Epistle chapter 1. And in the last ende of the same chapter he saith thus For y e prophesie came not in olde time by y e wil of man but holie men of God spake as they were moued by y e holy Ghost Now if our aduersaries will not yéeld vnto vs let thē bring good proofe vnto vs to the contrarie but y ◠as I haue alreadie said they cannot doo Now the third and last member is that they of the contrarie part can bring forth no proofe to the contrarie but that we may conclude touching the word of God deliuered vnto vs by Christ and the Apostles y ◠it is wholy conteined in the writing of the Apostles as well as the word of God deliuered by the Prophets is contained in the writings of y e Prophets to wit so much as is necessarie for our faith saluation But if at any time our aduersaries affirme that they can bring some good reson to y e contrarie then they must bring such as must be both true and also agréeing to the Scripture And thus the parts of our argument béeing confirmed y e conclusion therof must néeds be true The second place It seemed good to me most noble Theophilus to write vnto thee thereof from point to point that thou mightest knowe the certaintie of those things whereof thou hast ben instructed To this purpose also these places maye serue I gaue my diligence saith he to write vnto you of the common saluation Philip chap. 3. It greeueth mee not to write the same things vnto you and it is profitable for you Iohn 1. Epistle chap. 1. We declare vnto you that which wee haue seene 2. Peter chap. 3. This second Epistle I now write vnto you beloued wherewith I sturre vp your pure mindes to call to your remēbrance the words which wer spoken before of the holie Prophets also the commandements of vs the Apostles of the Lorde and sauiour 2. Peter chap. 1. I will not cease to put you alwaies in remēbrance of these things although yee bee alreadie instructed therein From these and such other places we drawe this argument If the Apostles and Euangelists published in writing the Gospell to his end that the truth of those things which they taught by mouth might be the better knowne confirmed and that thereby also it should the better sinke into the mind and memorie of men then trulie the Apostles and Euangelists left all those things in writing which by mouth they had taught being necessarie to faith and saluation The Antecedent is true And therfore my conclusion is also true The ground of our argument which is y e first part cannot be denied for then y e middle would repugne with y e end the which far be it from vs y ◠we should once thinke especially in them which did both speake write y e gospel w t one the self same spirit As for y e secōd part of our argumēt it is cōfirmed by y e former places in plaine words The third place Thou shalt not adde to the word which I teach command thee And againe Thou maist not adde vnto his word least hee reproue thee and thou be found a liar Wherfore I saie if it be not lawful for mā to ad anie thing to the writings of Moses then truely after that the writings of the Apostles were ioyned to the writings of Moses and the Prophets we may plainly saie that the scriptures doo containe all those things the knowledge and faith whereof is necessarie and sufficient to saluation The antecedent is true Wherefore we ought not to doubt of the truth of the consequence The first part of our sylogisme is manifest not onely by the similitude but also by the often comparing of the worde of God deliuered by Moses as also by the Apostles as it is prooued in the first place Our Minor is prooued by the places before recited which prooueth that we may not adde vnto the word of God And least our aduersaries should say that that place of Moses is not tyed vnto the worde of God written by Moses we will recite certain places which shall cut off all shifts of our aduersaries Moses Exodus 24. Writ all these words of the Lord. Againe Deut. Moses wrote this law Again Deut. 28. All the words
which they call Apostolike wée denie that they are the traditions of y e Apostles then they recite Tertulian Ireneus and especially one Clement I knowe not who which of late yeres hath stepped out of the Monkish Cloisters all these Doctors saie our aduersaries affirme the traditions to be the traditions of y e Apostles But if such kind of traditions are to be receiued w t like authoritie with the scriptures then it followeth that with like constancie of fayth we must beléeue that those traditions are the traditions of the 〈◊〉 euen as we beléeue that the hoye Scripture was â—witten by the commaundement of the holie Ghost The which if it bee true then it followeth againe that wée must euen giue the lyke credite to the writinges of Tertulian Irenaeus and Clement as we giue to the writinges of the Prophetes and Apostles But let it bée that sons demaundeth why I doe beleeue that the Apostles did preach by mouth that Christ was 〈◊〉 for our saluationâ— I â—â—â—swere that I beléeue because that the 〈◊〉 and Euangelisâ—e◠〈◊〉 so written But if I shouldâ— demaunde our 〈…〉 wherefore they beléeue that the Apostlâ—â— taâ—ght those 〈◊〉 by mouth whiâ—â— doe appertaine with their 〈◊〉 then they will aunswere they doe 〈◊〉 it because some of the olde Doctors 〈…〉 beléeue the writings of the 〈…〉 with the 〈…〉 belé the 〈…〉 Apostles I do not héere dispute 〈…〉 the mind opinion of the old fathers of which we wil speak in his proper place but héere only I am willing to maâ—â—e the consequent of our former proposition somewhat more plaine The Minor is manifest for what godly man did euer make the writings of the old fathers equiualent with the writings of y e Apostles Naie I suppose our aduersaries themselues will not say so except they bée altogether vnmindfull of their owne Canon taken out of Augustine And the force of the consequeÌ„t which we haue added vnto the end of the argument is manifest as it shall appeare in the argument heere following We maie not beleeue anie traditions touching the which there remaineth no certaintie But all traditions not written the which our aduersaries bring forth are euen such that there remaineth no certaintie touching them Ergo wee maye not beleeue anie traditions not written which our aduersaries bring or alleadge And by force of the consequent all traditions are to bee reiected and not to be receiued in causes of faith The truth of the Maior proposition is manifest of himselfe And the minor is prooued by these inductions following Clemens Alexandrinus affirmeth That the Apostles deliuered certaine secrets vnto some men as traditions from the apostles citeth this place of Paul 1. Cor. 2. We speak wisdome amongst those which are perfect Tertulian contrariwise refelleth that error with most graue arguments And Irenaeus saith That this was the opinion of the olde Heretikes and aunswereth that place of Paule which those Heretikes did corrupt Manie doo attribute the whole cannon of the Masse vnto the Apostles Contrariwise Saint Hierome and some other of the olde Fathers affirme that the Apostles were content with the Lordes praier Epiphanius saith That the Apostles did command both thursdaie and fridaie to be fasted through the whole yeare and that in the whole time of Lent onelie to vse bread salt and water Contrariwise Augustine saith That it was neuer determined by Christ nor his apostles what daies we should fast And Irenaeus writing to Eusebius saith That that fast of Lent was diuersly vsed in times past when some fasted one daye some two some more neither doth he call it a tradition of the Apostles but a custome of a simple and priuate institution Also Tertulian when he had made his reuolt from the Church vnto Montanus reckoning vp the obiections of the Catholikes which they vsed against the Montanists Because saith he we obserue the eating of drie meates they saie that the constituted fasting being worn out touching anie other we maie fast at our owne will not by the commaundement of anie lawe or discipline c. And in that controuersie touching Easter daie which a long time in times past troubled the Church those of the West saith Socrates referred their institution to Peter and Paule and those of the East to other of the Apostles but neither of theÌ„ broght foorth anie certaine or approued scripture for the profe thereof therefore I thinke it was a custome Tertulian saith That by traditioÌ„s of the Apostles milke and honnie was wont to be poured into the mouth of the infant in baptisme And Saint Hierome maketh mention onely of wine and not of honnie and calleth it custome Our aduersaries contrariwise obserue not theÌ„selues those rites ceremonies although they would bee accounted obseruers of the traditions which the Apostles left Tertulian in the former place maketh mention of oblations and offerings for birth daies to be amongst the rites and ceremonies which came from the Apostles Contrariwise the Church left this custome after the Nicene counsell for that it sauoured of Paganisme Manie of the olde Fathers referred these things vnto the Apostles first that it was not lawfull to kneele when they praied on the Sundaie And againe that it was not lawfull to decke the head with garlands and flowers and manie such like things Contrariwise our aduersaries themselues thinke these thinges maye bee obserued because they put garlands about the neckes heads of their Images c. Ciprian witnesseth that the Eucharist or Communion was wont to bée giuen to infants And contrariwise our aduersaries themselues thinke not this expedient to bee done Irenaeus sayth that by tradition Christ suffered when he was almost fiftie yeres old Contrariwise the Church hath most constantlye refused that saying Clemens referreth his Canon to the Apostles making them authors thereof On the other side euen the Church of Rome her selfe hath a long time reiected those Canons as if they had bene forged by heretikes Furthermore Zepherius Bishoppe of Rome hath receiued sixtie of the same Canons and after the sixt Synode receiued 85 c. Finally that we may leaue infinit of such examples and come vnto our aduersaries those things which they referre vnto the Apostles histories attribute to others as Lent to Telephorus c. So that nowe by these examples the truth of our minor proposition is made manifest It the olde heretikes for the most part when the worde of God failed them did â—he vnto traditions falsely fathered them vpon the Apostles and our aduersaries doo thee same now at this time Then truly in this point they are to be accounted rather among the heretikes then with the true Catholikes The Antecedent is true Therefore the consequent is also true The Maior proposition is manifest of humselfe And the Minor is thus prooued They which vrged the ceremonies of the lawe did shroude themselues vnder
at anie time the Church was contented with the preaching of the Apostles to wit in the first primitiue church I beseech you why shall not she nowe at this time be contented with the writings of the Apostles y t which as is before said are now in stéed of the apostles prechings rather then to runne to the fained forged false traditions which wer neuer writtē by the Apostles Wherefore the argument of our aduersaries is false the which wée thus correct In the first primitiue Church the Apostles depending vpon the writings of the Prophets did first of all preach by mouth the Euangelicall doctrine out of the writings of the Prophets And afterwarde least that the doctrine by them preached should be either corrupted of men or els such is the infirmitie of man the remembrance thereof shoulde by little and little slide out of the hearts of men That therefore they might leaue y t holy veritie which they preached vnto vs most firme sure they committed y e same vnto writings by the working of y e holy ghost to be a pledge for y e posterities which after should come Christ being cōuersant with his apostles 40 daies after his resurrection taught thē those things which did appertain vnto the kingdōe of god neither are those things which he taught thē now extāt in anie writings Ergo al things appertaining to the kingdō of god are not writtē of the apostles therfore are to be sought for in traditions not writtē of the apostles The antecedent is manifest in the first chap. of the Acts of the Apo. ver 3 I admit the former part of the Antecedent but I denie the latter for the Error is in Fallacia petitionis principij as the Schoolemen saie I therefore denie the consequence For from whence haue they learned or rather dreamed that those things which Christ did then teach were not written of the apostles nay that dreame of our aduersaries is plainly and manifestly refelled and confuted Mathew 28. Marke 16. Luke 24. Iohn 20. and. 21. All which foure Euangelists doo shew vs things which Christ then taught And Luke in speciall wordes dooth witnes y e Christ did expound those things which were written of him so vnlikely it is that he should call vs backe to traditions not written But let vs bring them to an absurditie If Christ after his resurrection did teach all those things which did appertaine vnto the kingdome of God for that seemeth to be the verie sense meaning of the words of Saint Luke which are these Act. the first verse 3. He spake those things which appertaine to the kingdome of God And those things which he then taught are not written of the Apostles Ergo those thinges which are written of the Apostles doe not appertaine vnto the kingdome of God An absurde and a blasphemous argument Let vs turne it against themselues thus If the Apostles were fullie instructed and taught of Christ touching those things which appertaine to the kingdome of God And the holie Ghost inspiring them did write touching the same kingdome of God ergo they wrote all things most fully and omitted nothing whereby we should runne to fetch anie thing from traditions not written That therfore we may now correct and amend this their errour we saie y e Christ to the end hée might appoint his Apostles to be most perfect Doctors and teachers of the Church did after his resurrection for y e space of 40. daies most diligently instruct them touching all those points of doctrine which appertained vnto the Gospell that the Apostles being so instructed might not onely declare the same doctrine by mouth but also that they might commit all those thinges vnto writings which appertaine to the kingdome of God saluation of his Church Paule confesseth that he wrote in parte and not in whole ergo Paule wrote not all things which are necessarie to the saluation of the Church The antecedent is prooued Rom. 15. I haue written vnto you brethren somewhat boldly saith hee after a sort or as the verie Greeke is In part Now let vs make plaine the antecedent Paule saith that he hath written to y e Romanes in part and this word In part the which the olde interpreters haue translated worde by worde is not to be ioyned with this vearbe I haue written but this word More boldly the which the verie order of the text and the Gréeke phrase doo most manifestly shew for otherwise the Apostle must haue sayde Tomeros not haue added the Preposition Apio the like phrase is manifest in y e 2. Co. 2. c. 5. ve which is thus If any haue caused sorow y ◠same hath not made me sorrie but partly or in part lest it shuld more gréeue you al. I deny y e consequence of their argument The errour is secundū figuram dictionis their consequēce hangeth not w t their antecedent For Paul wrote not all to the Romanes say they ergo he wrote not all necessarie to saluatiō But Paul wrote more thē y t which he wrote to the Romanes so héere we sée y t their consequēt on cōclusiō agréeth not with their first proposition Paul wrote not all ergo al things necessary to saluation is not contained in the writings of the apostles This is too too absurd an argumēt and not worth the aunswering Christ said vnto his Apostles that he had many things to speake vnto thē which they could not beare away ergo the apostles haue not written all things necessarie to saluatiō The antecedent is proued in the 16. chapter of the Gospell after Iohn Now touching their antecedent first of al I do greatly wonder y t our aduersaries doo stick their ship vpon those rocks vpō which y e heretikes héertofore haue made so great shipwracks S. Augustine in his Tract 97. vpon Iohn doth testifie y t the heretiks were wont to take this place of Iohn to coulour their errours but Augustine himselfe doth handle those words of Christ with so great reuerēce y t if they wold heare him he wold easily withdraw our aduersaries frō their curiositie for Augustine vpon y e same saith Which of vs can declare those things that Christ would not speak which of vs can do that for which ther is not sufficiēt authoritie of prophets or Apostles Thus far August But let Augustine cease to inquire those things for the Papists are now growen to this point y t they rehearse vnto vs things which Christ neuer spake and that with great boldnesse when as they commend set forth vnto men the rites and ceremonies of their Masse and other like trumperie And I would to God that they would be perswaded that those their traditions that is to saie the foule filth of their errours and superstitions could neuer flow from so pure a fountain to wit as Christ But let vs returne vnto the exposition of
y e same place the which we will take and drawe from the verie place it selfe Christ his words are these I haue manie things to speake vnto you but you cannot beare them awaie nowe but when the spirit of truth shall come hee shall leade you into all truth Wherefore that we may now vse rather the wordes of Tertulian then our owne we saie thus Christ sayd plainly I haue manie things to saie vnto you but yet adding this When the spirit of truth shall come he shal lead you into all truth he héerby sheweth that the Apostles were not ignorāt of any thing c. Wherby it cōmeth to passe that the Apostles taught all those things which were necessarie to saluation as Tertulian saith did publish a sufficiēt rule vnto al men Therfore Christ in this place meaneth thus y t then y e Apostles should be fully perfectly instructed when they shuld be indowed with y e visible miraculous gifts of the holy ghost this our expositiō is easily gathered from Iohn Nowe I come to the consequence or conclusion in y e which truely I find not anie shew of truth nor any kind of tast of true diuinitie for their error is secundū ignorātiam elenchi as the schoolmen say inasmuch as y ◠like proportiō of time is not obserued The Apostles before y e resurrectiō of Christ before they had receiued the miraculous gifts of y e holy ghost were not able sufficiently to bere away al things which appertained to y e mysteries of christian religion ergo say they the Apostles were ignorant of those mysteries after the resurrection of Christ after the receiuing of the gifts of y e holy Ghost Truly a verie foolish kind of reasoning Christ had many things to declare vnto them ergo say our aduersaries they must be those which y e papistical massing prists do fondly dreame of No doubt of y t their consequence hangeth not with their antecedent therfore we may vrge thē to this absurditie If the Apostles wrote not all things which were necessarie to saluation because they could not beare awaie manie things which Christ had to speake before his resurrection and before the sending of the Holie ghost then would it followe that the Apostles were not led into all truth by the holie ghost after that he was sent vnto them The which is most false and reproued euen by the place of Iohn For he saith And he shal lead you into all truth Also it would folow that Paule did neuer declare the full counsel of god the which thing is most false as Paul himselfe affirmeth Act 20. and 27. Now therefore we will turne this their argument vpon their owne heads saieng thus If the apostles wrote not al things because they could not beare awaie all things thē trulie did they neuer teach all things by mouth And by force of the consequent this place of Iohn can nothing appertaine vnto traditions of the apostles not written But perchance they will say that those mysteries of saluation y e which Christ hid frō his apostles wer reueled to y e Bishops of Rome y ◠which if it wer true then truly the Bishops of Rome were no more to be called the successors of the Apostles onely but those who farre did excéede all the Apostles the which God forbid that wée once should thinke Let vs therfore amend this error in this sort and affirme that although the Apostles before the sending of the holie Ghost were not so fully capable of the mysteries of God which appertain vnto the doctrine of the Gospell yet notwithstanding after the comforter was sent and after they were led into all truth it is most vndoubted that the whole truth which appertaineth vnto our saluation was both taught by mouth by the Apostles as also published in writing Paule commendeth the Corinthians because they kept his traditions Ergo Paule taught manie things by mouth which hee wrote not The antecedent is prooued 1. Cor. 11. I praise you bretheren saith Paule that you remember all my things and keepe the traditions or ordinaunce as I haue deliuered them vnto you Nowe let vs come to the examining of theyr Antecedent This place of Paule is expounded by Chrisostome and Ambrose as also of many other learned of this our time not touching doctrine but touching ecclesiasticall rytes and ceremonies Others againe confesse indéede that Paule doth héere intreate of certaine rytes both appertaining to good order and comlinesse But yet notwithstanding our aduersaries denie that these wordes which they obiect vnto vs are to be restrained to those rytes and they rather vnderstande and interpret this place generally because Paule héere hath spoken it generally for he saith I commende you brethren for that you haue remembred all my thinges c. Also they adde this word Traditiō héere vsed indefinite or generally scarce sound in the writings of the Apostles restrained or tied only to traditions which appertain to orders and rytes of the Church Wherfore they expound Paules words after this sort You will keepe in memorie all those things which I haue taught therein truly I gretly praise you But because amongst other things which I deliuered vnto you to be obserued touching rytes and ceremonies in your Ecclesiastical assemblies and for that certaine are contencious amongst you which doo not so well lyke of them therfore I declare these my reasons by the which I was ledde to deliuer them vnto you this is theyr exposition of this place But after what sorte soeuer our aduersaries doo vnderstand it yet truly their conclusion shall neuer be of any force For if he dispute there touching rites and ceremonies only then is this place without the compasse of our disputation for we dispute touching those things which are necessarie to saluation and not of rites and ceremonies which may be chaunged for diuers causes Againe if they be willing héere that he should intreate of doctrine yet serueth it not anie thing for their purpose as I wil now declare for I denie the consequent Paule deliuered many things to the Corinthians Ergo some of them saye they are not written The consequent hereof is false Yet I confesse that this place hath deceiued Theophilact and some others Yet truly that I may speake it by the fauour of all the godly they haue héere fowlie stūbled in a plain leuel way For first Paul did write that same tradition touching the rytes of the which he there speketh Again although he had not written to the Corinthians yet he might write vnto others To conclude if they were not extant in the writings of Paul yet might they be found in the writings of the other Apostles But Paule saith Be followers of me as I follow Christ He therfore deliuered nothing that might in one iote be repugnaunt with Christ the which notwithstanding our aduersaries doo I will héere annexe certaine other places
which also our aduersaries abuse 2. Thessa 3. We warne you bretheren in the name of the Lord Iesus Christ that you withdraw your selues from euerie brother that walketh inordinatelie and not after the traditions which he hath receiued of vs. And then followeth the very same tradition which Paule wrote Againe Actes 16. And as they went through the Cities they deliuered them decrees to keepe ordained of the Apostles Elders But yet notwithstanding euen those verie decrées of the Apostles were then written as it is manifest Actes 15. verse 23. and 24. Againe in the foresaid 11. chapter of the first Epistle of Saint Paule to the Corinthians That which I receiued of the Lord I deliuered vnto you Also in the same Epistle chapter 15. vers 3. he saith the like But yet notwithstanding all those things are writen wherefore he that doth thus conclude saying Paule taught by mouth Ergo he wrote not truelye hée is altogether ignoraunt of the right order of Disputation Let vs therefore now bring them to an absurditie If by reason that Paul taught by mouth traditions to the Corinthians it follow that those traditions be not written Ergo the traditions that women shoulde bee couered in Ecclesiasticall assemblies and touching prophecieng bare headded and manie such like are not written which is false as appeareth in the forenamed 1. Cor. 11. We will nowe therefore tourne theyr Argument vppon themselues saying thus If the traditions which Paule doth there dispute of to wit touching Propheciengs bare headed and touching women to bee couered are neglected euen of our Aduersaryes themselues because their Monkes preach not bare headed but couered with their hoods how much more shall it be lawful for vs to neglect those traditions which our aduersaries faine beeing not written in the word of God onelie falsely cloked vnder the names of the Apostles That we may therefore amend this error we must say that Paule doth in that Epistle put them in minde of those things which he had taught them by mouth whē as he had diligently considered how great the inconstancie and leuitie of man is Whereby we sée that wée must altogether cleaue to the writings of the Apostles least the forged deuices of men doe withdrawe vs from the truth of the gospell Paule biddeth the Thessalonians to keep the traditions which they had learned either by word or by Epistle Ergo Paule wrote not all Traditions necessarie to faith The antecedent is prooued 2. Thessa 2. vers 15. Now let vs trye the antecedent In these woordes of Paule Either by word or Epistle they are willing to make this word Either an absolute distunctiue to which their opinion I doo not agrée For I marke in the writings of the Apostles that I may héere speake nothing of other Authors this perticle or word so repeated to be a copulatiue rather then a disiunctiue I prooue it by these places 1. Cor. 13. ver 8. wher the Apostle saith Whether propheciengs be abolished whether tōgues cease and knowledge vanish away Againe 1. Cor. 15. ver 11. Whether I or they so wee haue preached and so yee haue beleeued that is both I and they haue preached c. Also to the Colloss 1. verse 20. Reconciling to himselfe all things by himselfe yea I say reconciling to himselfe all things whether they be in heauen whether they be in earth So also he vseth this word Mete in this Epistle in the same chapter verse 2. wherefore it is as though he shoulde saye stande ye fast in the doctrine which you haue learned both by our wordes when we were present as also after in our writings Therefore I deny their consequence for the errour as I haue said is Secundum fallatiam dictionis for first it followeth not if the Thessalonians were taught both by worde and Epistle that those thinges were taught by mouth were contrarie to those things which were taught by Epistle But secondly admit that other things were taught yet it hurteth vs nothing for if they were not written in the Epistle to the Thessalonians yet truely they might bée written in other his Epistles But admit y t Paule did not write them at all yet it doeth not therefore followe that they were not written of the other Apostles as of Baptisme the supper of the Lord c. Let vs now ouerwhelme them with an absurditie If it bee true by this kinde of speaking either by word or by Epistle that therefore it should follow that Paule did not write all things necessarie to saluation ergo on the other side it woulde follow that Paule did not preach by mouth all things necessarie to saluation the which is absurde and false as I prooue by these places following The 2. Thessa 2. verse 13. and 14. You are elected vnto saluation through the santification of the holie Ghost and through the faith of the truth vnto the which yee were called by our Gospell Againe in the same Chapter verse 5. Doo you not remember that when I was with you I tolde you these things Againe the 1. Thessa 4. Yee knowe what commaundement I gaue you to abstaine from fornication Againe 1. Thessa 2. Wee did not onely desire to imparte vnto you the Gospell of GOD but our owne selues And in another place hee attributed vnto them a most sure perswasion of faith which they receiued by preaching Whereby it is proued that Paule did deliuer to the Thessalonians all thinges necessarie to saluation the which thinges could not bee if the argument of our aduersarie might preuaile Therefore we wil turne their argument vpon themselues saying If the Theslalonians were throughlye instructed in christian religion and that by the preaching of the Apostle which hee preached by mouth and neuerthelesse were to be confirmed by the writings of the Apostle howe much more ought wee to cleaue to the writinges of the Apostles which were not present at their Sermons neyther yet instructed or them by mouth Therefore the errour of our aduersaries must be amended and we must saye that Paule instructed the Thessalonians not onely by word but also by Epistle when he had séene of what great value his writings wer to confirme the faith of the godly And thereby also that the holy Scripture might be more highly commēded vnto vs. Paule praied that he might see the face of the Thessalonians and that he might accomplish or fulfill those things which were wanting in their faith Ergo hee reserued many things to traditions which hee spake by mouth beeing necessarie both to faith and saluation The Antecedent is prooued 2. Thes 3. I doo thus aunswere their antecedent Manie of the olde writers doe vnderstand this place touching doctrine For Chrisostome referreth it to the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead Ambrose to the trinitie Although Chrisostome séeme not to agrée with himselfe for thus he saith not as
of Arius yea the Apostles theÌ„selues knew not al things necessarie vnto faith The which thing is most absurd sauouring of Athisme And therefore we may well turne this argument home againe vnto our aduersaries saying If such were the religion of the auncient fathers that they would not inuent anie one word to the intreating vpon anie principle of faith the which was not grounded vpon expresse places of scriptures as it is manifest by these words trinitie substance persons such like what shal we then think of our aduersaries which do not only inueÌ„t words but also eueÌ„ matter it self altogether abhorring contrarie to the Scriptures of God And therefore we may amend y e error of this their obiection saying That it is lawfull for the godly fathers of the church of God to vse inuent certaine words and tearmes whereby the matter contained in the scriptures may the better easier bée expressed If we must altogether beleeue the church in no part swarue from the credit of the church we beleeue the church in this part affirming that the scriptures came from the spirit of God theÌ„ truly we ought to beleeue the church likewise affirming that these such other like traditions came from the Apostles The antecedent is true and therfore it must follow that the coÌ„sequeÌ„t is also true The Maior hath two parts touching the which we will particularly speake And touching the first point I doe make a distinction of the Church which Paule calleth the house of God the piller foundation of truth which heareth y e voice of her spouse onely dependeth vpon his mouth and is alwaies gouerned by the spirit of God cannot be séene because shée is not tied to circuÌ„stances of place time or persons yet notwithstaÌ„ding we beleeue y â— the same church is vpholden by the word of God that she nothing estéemeth mans traditions But this or y e visible Church or the companie of many visible congregations may swarue from the truth as it is manifest touching the Churches in the East of which y â— most part haue turned to Mahumet I will not héere bring in the ancient counsells which haue both allowed brought into y e church great gréeuous errors And touching this church we may thus determine inasmuch as she is subiect to many errors she is not otherwise to be heard except shée speake those thinges which are agréeable to the Scriptures touching which matter I haue disputed more at large in another place wherefore this hath héere no place which they say affirme y â— wée must altogether beléeue the church in part swarue froÌ„ the credit of the same theÌ„ must we beléeue the visible Churches when as they propound nothing els vnto vs but the word of God on the other side we ought not to beléeue the visible churches when they swarue froÌ„ the word of God for I make my example by the Sinagogue which very religiously hath reserued the Cannons or bookes of the Scriptures yet notwithstanding she hath innumerable errors So theÌ„ we may beléeue the same Sinagogue whereby she saith y â— the Canonicall bookes haue sprong from y e spirit of God againe we may not beléeue her when she reiecteth casteth away the doctrine of Christ Therfore in y â— respect Christ saith The Scribes Pharesies sitting in Moses chaire are to be heard yet notwithstanding in another place he reprehendeth reproueth their traditions whereby wée sée proued that in one parte they ought to be heard on the other not Wherfore their Minor is not true so the consequence cannot stand because there is an error Secundum fallaciam figurae dictionis And they reasoning thus we may well bring theÌ„ to a great inconuenience saying In the time of Tertulian the church did affirme that an oblation for birth daies was a tradition receiued from the Apostles but in the time of the NiceÌ„e couÌ„sel the church did affirme that oblation for birth daies was not a tradition of the Apostles as in his proper place I haue proued ergo if wee must in all parts beleeue the Church and in no parte swarue from the Church then must we beleeue the things which are manifest opposit contarrie one to the other the which is impossible Wherefore we may turne their obiection vpon themselues after this sort saying Whosoeuer affirmeth the scripture to be the word of god the which we ought to beleeue likewise affirmeth that traditions not written are to be receiued speketh coÌ„traries But the Church of Rome affirmeth the scriptures to be the word of god which we ought to beleeue also affirmeth that traditions not writteÌ„ are to be receiued Ergo the church of Rome affirmeth contraries by force of the consequent we must beleeue hir in one part in another not if this be of anie force that we must beleue the church in all parts swarue froÌ„ hir in no part theÌ„ this foloweth by their argumeÌ„t that the Church may not wel be called the Church For y e truth of the maior proposition is proued thus If you did me beléeâ—e the scriptures truly I will beléeue y t there is nothing to be added thervnto because y t it is so commanded in them as I haue in diuers places of my booke proued therefore this sentence of Tertulian is highly to be imbraced WheÌ„ we beleeue saith he this first we must beleeue that there is nothing els that we ought to beleue Now if we wil consider the traditions of our aduersaries we shal easily perceiue y t they are not only added by inuentions but also contrarie to expresse places of scripture so ye sée y t we cannot beléeue the scriptures also the traditions of our aduersaries And therefore we may amend the error of the former obiection after this manner Sith we ought to beléeue God alone then most diligently ought we to take héede least vnder the shew of pietie we be seduced into errour and because the name of the Church is verie glorious therefore if anie thing be proposed vnto vs vnder the title of the Church we ought to giue atteÌ„tiue diligence whether it be y e voyce of the true church or not which we heare y t we may be able so to doo we must take counsell with the word of God set foorth vnto vs in the Scriptures from the which the true church of God neuer swerneth wheÌ„ therefore the Church affirmeth vnto vs that the scriptures are the word of God we acknowledge the same to be true not onely because the church so affirmeth but because of the inward efficacie of the spirite of God by the which the truth of the scriptures is sealed in our hearts lyke as the church by the conduction of the spirite of God affirmeth vnto vs y t the scripture is the word
Scriptures Againe If anie of those men vvhich are reported to haue the holie spirit of God doo saie anie thing of himselfe vvhich may not be proued by the holie Scriptures beleeue him not Doth Manes the Heretike say that the summe or the monie worke anie thing of themselues Where hast thou read this If he haue not read it in the Scriptures but speaketh it of himselfe it is manifest that he hath not the spirit of God And againe those that are true Christians let them betake themselues to the Scriptures because there canne be no other proofe of true christianitie then the diuine and holy Scriptures Basil It is a manifest Argument of infidelitie a flat signe of pride if anie man will reiect anie of those thinges which are not vvritten or bring into the Church anie of those things vvhich are not vvritten sith the Lord himselfe sayth My sheep heare my voyce and follovve not a straunger Againe Whatsoeuer vve speake or doo that ought to be confirmed by the testimonie of the holie Scriptures Also the Apostle taking the example from men Gal. 3. doth most vehemently forbid that anie of those thinges which are in the holy Scripture should be put out or else vvhich God forbid that anie thing should be added Againe If vvhatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne and faith commeth by hearing and hearing by the vvorde of GOD Then vvithout doubt sith vvhatsoeuer is vvithout the scriptures is not of faith the same is sinne And in another place Let vs stande to the iudgement of the holy Scriptures proceeding from GOD and vvith vvhome so euer are founde pointes of religion agreeing to the holie Scriptures to them let the vvhole opinion of truth bee alotted Againe of all those things vvhich vve haue in vse both of vvords and deeds some are distinctly set dovvne in the Scriptures some omitted but those things which are contained in the scriptures by no meanes must be omitted but of those things which are not found in the scriptures we haue a flat rule deliuered vnto vs by Paule All things are lawful but all things are not necessarie Hierome The vniuersall Church of Christ hauing in possession all the Churches in the world is vnited together by the vnitie of the spirit and hath the words of the Lawe of the Prophets of the Gospell and of the Apostles and she may not passe hir bounds that is from the holie Scriptures Againe Those things which men faine with out authoritie of Scripture as comming frō the Apostles by Tradition the sworde of God which is his word doth cut away And also that which hath not the authoritie of the Scriptures is with the same facilitie contemned with the which it was allowed Augustine Neither ought I to alleadge the Nicene counsell neither thou the counsell of Aremineus as though we would determine causes therewith for neither I am boūd vnto the authoritie of the one neither thou of the other but let each thing with other each cause with cause reason with reason be tried by the authoritie of the scriptures And again Ther is cōstituted ordained one ecclesiasticall cannon or rule vnto the which belongeth the bokes of the Prophets and Apostles by whose writings we ought to iudge touching the writings of others whether they be faithfull or vnfaithfull Againe Our Lord wold that we shuld beleeue nothing against the confirmed authoritie of the Scriptures Againe Let vs bring foorth the diuine Ballaunce of the holie Scriptures and let vs weigh in them what so euer is of anie waight or value Damascene As a tree planted by the riuers of waters euen so doth the soule of man which is moistened by the heauenlie scriptures bring foorth timelie fruite which is true and perfect faith And againe Let vs receiue acknowledge and reuerence all those things which are deliuered vnto vs by the Lawe Prophets Apostles and Euangelists seeking nothing which is not contained in them And least we should seeme altogether to neglect and despise the Schoolemen heare what Scotus saith It is most manifest that the Scriptures sufficiently doo containe all doctrine necessarie to the pilgrime that trauaileth heere in the world Peter Stelliaco Wee must runne vnto the scriptures alone that we may attain eternall life And Gracianus in his decrees doeth repeat that sentence of Augustine which wee haue before rehersed And many more may be recited vnto the like effect but heere we cease because wee will wander no farther That we may now therefore make an ende of the obiections of our aduersaries which they gather from y e writings of the Doctors we will comprehend the effect of all those their obiections which they haue or can bring forth in an argument which is thus The Doctors of the Church haue thought that besides the holie Scriptures traditions not written ought also to be receiued Ergo all those things which are necessarie vnto faith and saluation are not contained in the Scriptures Let vs now trie their antecedent It is manifest by y e testimonies of the ancient Fathers which before wée haue alleadged y t those auncient fathers haue not written all alike touching traditions for first it behooued to knowe the minde and opinion of the olde Doctors before they obiect them to vs. But let this be the full summe of all those things which the auncient doctors who are most to be accounted of haue written touching Traditions All those things which are deliuered either appertaine to the principles of religion and constitution of manners or else vnto ecclesiasticall rites and orders of the Church but those thinges which appertaine to principles of faith and manners are most surely contained in the Scriptures neither is it anie hinderāce if certaine kinds of spéech to the easie explication of doctrine principles of religion be not found by expresse words in the holy Scriptures so that the matter it selfe the sence signified by these tearms be extant in the scriptures But as touching those things which appertain vnto rites ecclesiasticall order if they agrée with the Scriptures and serue to the edification of the Church Yea finally if they be receiued with the common consent of the whole Church then are they with greate reuerence to be receiued and that this was the opinion and minde of the auncient Fathers I thinke it is sufficiently made manifest by these things which haue bene alleadged before whereby we may sée that the ground and matter of our aduersaries is false Now therfore I denie their consequent for the errour is in forme of reasoning the Argument is grounded vpon the misvnderstanding of the fathers Another errour is this for that they take that to bée graunted which lyeth betwéene vs in controuersie For thus standeth the case betwéene vs whether in confirming principles of faith the scriptures alone be to bée harde yea or nay But our aduersaries
A TREATISE TOVCHING THE WORD OF GOD WRITTEN against the Traditions of men Handled both Schoolelike and Diuinelike Where also is set downe a true Method to dispute Diuinely and Schoolelike Made by A. SADEELE And translated into English by Iohn Coxe Minister of the vvord of God Ephe. 5. Awake thou that sleepest stand vp from death and Christ shall giue thee life Imprinted at London for Iohn Harison are to be sold at the vvhite Greihound in Paules churchyard 1583. TO THE FAITHFVLL SERVANTS OF IESVS CHRIT THE GODLY AND learned Pastors and Doctors in the Churches of Fraunce professing the true doctrine of the Gospell his deere bretheren and faithfull fellowe Ministers ANTHONIE SADEELE wisheth all grace peace from GOD. CHRISOSTOM writing on the 34. Psalme compareth the Pastors of Christs Church vnto those Trumpets by whose sound the walls of Iericho were quite ouerthrowen The which saying my deere brethren the great diligence you vse in your function and office wherevnto you are called and your extreame labours which you haue susteyned of late yea and that not without greate fruite maketh mee applye the same vnto you For although the the Romish doctrine iâ— in anie place it preuailed most chiefly flourished it 〈◊〉 because there it was difended by the forces of men and as it were compassed about with most high and strong wallâ— yet notwithstanding by your voice preaching the Gospell it is at the last brought to passe that the whole foundation of the Popish doctrine throwen downe the Walls therof being â—ased the horrible corruption abuses errors there of is made manifest to the eies of all men Wherfore when I compare this our time with the time of the Israelites I cannot sufficiently accuse and condemne the sluggish slothful 〈…〉 This our age in respect of the greate 〈…〉 and watchfulnesse of the olde 〈…〉 they so soone as they sawe 〈…〉 â—ho ouerthrowen straight waies 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 the whole For Citie but 〈…〉 age although they haue seene yea and that now along time the heresies of the Pâ—pish 〈…〉 to be made manifest and brought into 〈…〉 notwithstanding so far from 〈…〉 and rase them 〈…〉 of their mindes that rather they helpe them with all their force But to you my brethren which haue suffred many and so greate stormes troubles and griefes euen to you I saie beholde new labours daily arise which must be ouercome with gret coÌ„staÌ„cie inuincible fortitude of minde For that I may omit diuers almost infinit other discommodities I perceiue that you are exercised chiefly in two kindes of battailes The one is for that daily wicked slaunderers to wit the ministers of lyes oppone themselues against the ministers of the truth which by their lying Libels go about to vexe and deface the innocencie of the godly Pastours of the Church with most horrible vntruths and impudent slaunders Of this sort are some whome the heate of persecution hath deuoured who by force and as it were with a storme and vehement tempest carried vnto the Popish heresies do now with most obstinate mindes cleaue vnto the same as it were vnto a most firme rocke Yea and that which is to be lamented they begging as it were thereby the popish prelates good will and fauour make no end of their malitious slaundering and wicked writings This kinde of conflict in my opinion you shall right well sustaine not by striuing against it but by calling to minde the faying of Dauid in his 54. Psalme to wit that it will at last come to passe that the slanderous tongue of these wicked slanderets will rebound fall vpon themselues For so it alwaies happeneâ—â— that the wicked wound themselues with their owne weapons and the innocencie of the godly remaineth vnspotted beeing deliuered from their vniust reports The other kind of conflict resteth in the which you must thinke to labour both earnestly and diligently as I know right wel ye do For about a few yeres past there hath risen vp certaine men who abusing liberall artes and sciences and chiefly that science which is ordained to the searching out of the truth to wit Logicke wherby they might coÌ„firme establish the Popish heresiesei and that they may the better carrie awaie the matter with craftie conueiaunce they turne the habite and forme of good learning into a certaine sophysticall and contentious manner of disputing and such are chiefely those false named Iesuits for so I tearme those Monkes which wickedly take vppon them that most holy name of Iesus attributing it to theyr diuelish sect and that not without greate blasphemie And these nowe of late haue stuffed Vniuersities which in times past were of great fame and doo euen as it were possesse them alone bearing an outwarde shew of greate learning and chiefly challenging vnto themselues the exact and right knowledge of disputing Whose enterprises sith I perceiue you goe aboute most chiefely and valiauntly to resist I thought it meete and conuenient to publish some thing according to the abilitie which is 〈◊〉 mee And I whome no force no tempest no distaunce of place coulde separate from you thought it good I saie to â—ee ioyned a fellowe companion with you in this conflict and most happie labour And furthermore I haue determined with my selfe to followe that method of disputation which seemeth to bee most fit for their purpose as Theologicall and therefore that kinde which most truely giueth resolutions to arguments And this shall not onely be voide of all subtill Argumentes and sophysticall falacies but also of all Rethorical exercise And I haue chosen rather to drawe this same methode of disputing as much as in mee 〈◊〉 from the pure fountaines of the 〈◊〉 Fathers then followe the filthie 〈…〉 of those which 〈◊〉 of late 〈…〉 kinde and order of disguâ—â—ing and touching this thing I expect both 〈…〉 and the iudgement of rather the best learned Diuines to 〈◊〉 I willinglie submit both this my opiniâ—â—â—â—â— and also my selfe and although I 〈…〉 short kinde of disputing 〈…〉 my purpose heereby 〈…〉 the 〈◊〉 of other mens large and copious are 〈◊〉 For as a certain man was â—ont to saie that the hande maie be spread abroadâ— and againe 〈◊〉 him together the â—ingers be broâ—ght 〈…〉 likewise one matter maie by copious eloquenâ—â— behand that 〈◊〉 and beeing drawen together by short 〈◊〉 maie as effeâ—â—â—llie be 〈◊〉 more briefe Let therfore each treatise whitâ— is written at large with copious slowing stile haue his 〈◊〉 honour so that it he â—at 〈◊〉 to coÌ„firme the truth For as Plutarke saith truth 〈◊〉 inuineible if it be trulie declared rightlie applied And to Augustine not without good cause eloquence seemeth so much the more to terrifie in how much the more it is plaintie pronounced Neuertheles when need requireth let vs also imbrace this short kinde of disputing which is verie profitable so ofte aâ— we be occupied in the searching out of the truth inasmuch as it draweth vs backe
one with the other It is an easie matter saith he to declare what wee ought to beleeue what wee ought to hope for and what we ought to loue but to defend the truth and refell the wicked opinions of others which thinke to the contrarie is the greater and better part of learning These are Augustines words The which 〈◊〉 they are experience it selfe long time since hath taught vs for what great troubles the godly fathers of the Church had in times past with the olde heretikes and chiefly with those which did excell in the sophisticall and litigious kinde of disputation we may easilye sée by the writings of the catholicke Doctors and those which on our part did enter into y t sharpe conflict of disputation better furnished to wit armed with weapons of good lerning dispersed without any great adoo the thick mystes of sophisticall disputation by the manifest light of y e truth Amongst which auncient Fathers Nazianzenus séemeth to giue the chiefest commendation to Basil for that he aboue all others excelled in the true science of disputation and reasoning the which praise we maye attribute also to Gregorius Nissenus And Augustine that I maye vse his owne wordes who was woont to reioyce of his disputations and therein delighted himselfe did fréely confesse that the Arte of Logicke was a very great ready helpe vnto him in the vnderstanding and vndooing of the Heretickes Sophisticall and subtill Arguments And Tertulian who was long time before Augustine doeth not denye in these his Bookes in which most happelye he contended with the heretikes that hée was often times driuen to dispute with them in Philosophie which things I héere bring in because I sée all for y e most part somewhat to mislike this Art of Logicke otherwise most profitable as though Paule had vtterly excluded the same from diuinitie wher he warneth that we must take héed least anie man spoile vs through Philosophie héere they gather much out of y e writings of the olde Fathers which they suppose maketh for them against Logicke and against the exact knowledge of disputation And therefore they willingly harken to Nazianzene in that place where he compareth the Logitians vnto the Moabites and Ammonites and now they snatch after that place of Basil where he tearmeth Logicke to bée the mother of contention sometimes they crie out with Tertulian saying O miserable Aristotle which first armed the heretiks w t Logick wherby like crafty artificers they might as they listed set vp destroie To whom in few words I doo thus answere The Apostle Paule did not reiect the good right knowledge of disputing which by certaine necessarie principles produceth and bringeth forth the knowledge of the truth but rather that vaine art of deceiuing with those sophisticall and deceitful snares the which the heretikes are wont full subtilly to folde together whereby they may deceiue the godly faithfull And that this was the mind of the Apostle it is manifest not onely by the order of the Apostles spéech but also by that he vseth this word Apates which is 〈◊〉 craft or circumuention by subtiltie Sith then the good vse of Logicke chiefly tends vnto this end to dispearse abroade the fallaces and subtill crafts of sophistrie to expell errours to reproue lies and to set before our eies most manifestly the light of the truth Who can with good conscience thinke that the Apostle at anie time did reiect this so worthie necessarie science For how can it be possible that hée which doth professe himselfe an enimie to false sophistications should not loue y e science of right disputing which is Logicke being altogether contrarie to false subtil reasoning and ordained to this end that by the helpe and aide therof we may more easily auoide the snares of those which are captious For as he which hateth darknes must of necessitie greatly reioyce in y e beutie of the light so he that will shut out of the church the false deâ—eits of arguments he I say must of necessitie leaue a place in the Church for sound and true reasoning by the which y e vaine deceits of those men may be the easier reproued and the better auoided Except peraduenture we thinke the science and art of phisicke is altogether to be reiected because it teacheth men to knowe those thinges which are hurtfull wherby to take heâ—d of them to vse onely those things which appertaine to y â— preseruation of health life Wherfore Nazianzene saith yea truly right excellent is his saying for somwhat the must answere to the former obiection y â— the Sophisters are like vnto the Moabites Ammonits which were prohibited the temple of God so y â— also we acknowledge this y t the true art of Logicke is not compared to the Morbites Ammonits but rather to them of Tyrc and Sidon by whose helpe Solomon was greatly furthered in building of the 〈…〉 also is worthie of great praises in y â— he saith y â— Sophistre is the mother of contentions so y â— thereby wée louâ— the more y e armour by which y â— forme of good learning maketh vs able to fight for the truth 〈◊〉 Finally we may hearken to Tertulian crying out against the same calling it the craftie art of setting vp plucking downe againe to wit euen indéede that parte of Logicke which is alwaies occupied in contentions and neuer maketh end But let vs reuerence the other part which giueth resolutions to false arguments seuereth things necessary from those which are not and doth so maintaine the truth and beat downe falsehood that it remaineth alwaies one because it is ioyned to the firme foundation of the truth And that this was the minde of the olde Fathers touching the right order of disputing whosoeuer shall diligently marke the auncient doctors wil easily agrée vnto vs. For what saith Nazianzenus whom those men so often cast in our téeth The truth saith he by Logicall disputations is filed and brought to light And furthermore what sayth Basil That the true force of Logicke is distinctly to diuide the nature of things whereby we may knowe those things which are of affinitie and distinguish those which are contrarie And Augustine seuering the true vse of Logicke from the abuse of Sophistrie saith If Logicke bee the knowledge of the truth so then it behooueth the wise to haue knowledge thereof that therby he may vtterly race out the malitious falsehod of the craftie disputers contemne the same But there cannot be a more excellent witnesse for this then the testimonie of S. Augustine where he saith that Logicke is the onely Science of all other which teacheth both how to teach and how to learne and doth shew a man how to perceiue and to make other to vnderstand Thus much Augustine Wherefore sith the case so standeth let this so worthie arte science haue hir condigne and due praise
the truth of matters may be manifestly séene and as it were touched with our hands And this last way perchaunce is not so well welcome to those which are delighted in plesantnesse of speach but truly no lesse profitable to all those which are both louers of simplicitie and desirous of the truth For like as the view of mans bodie is a great deale more pleasaunt to beholde while it is clad with the flesh the bloud running in each veyne hauing a comelye colour yet notwithstanding if we come at any time to the Anatomie then the facultie of each part and the constitution of the whole bodie is a great deale better knowne so if any wil wisely diligently weigh those larger and pleasanter treatises and bring them to arguments as vnto Anatomies then without doubt he shal easily perceiue whether they be absolute perfect in euerie point or whether there be anye thing wanting and as the Phisition sheweth foorth euen as it wer with the finger the original and causes of diseases so shal he héere doo touching errors if there be any The former sort doeth indéede delyght the mindes as wll of those which are learned as those which are vnlearned but this latter manner of exercise sith it is occupied in that onely kinde of matter which appertaineth to doctrine is more méete for those which are best learned who are nothing moued with the floud of vain wordes if especially there be no force of matter contained in them because that speach without reason is not to be counted any thing worth Augustine Ciprian Hillarie Hieronimus and diuers olde learned Fathers haue vsed this kinde of disputing very much this also the schoolemen seemed to professe but with what successe I haue shewed alreadie But chieflye we must consider and haue great care on doth sides that when we dispute touching doctrine all our arguments be necessarye and pertaining to doctrine so that they bée grounded vppon most sure principles and infallible groundes of Diuinitie And aboue all things we must beware that we take not things which may be disputed on both sides for things necessarie things which be strange for those that are knowen falshoode for truth the which trulye dooth happen oftentimes in much lauishing out of speach the which y e aduersaries of the truth most commonly abuse where by they may the more conuenientlye hyde themselues vnder the couerte of manye words so that when they haue said much â—hey would also séeme to haue spokeÌ„ truth The best chiefest for this mischiefe is if after the long circumstaunces that then there beâ— fet downe a briefe Logicall handling of those their wordes spoken before to be as it were an Anatomie and recapitualation of all subtil sophemes and craftie fallaces And when the falsehood of words is cleane taken away it wil bewray those things which are false it wil set truth against falshood and beare them both out yea finally it wil bring to passe euen as Augustine sometime said That each thing with other cause with cause and reason with reason may striue together And héere who séeth not that when errors are cleane taken awaye how easely the truth will ouercome and the same truth which the huge floud of words had ouer whelmed will euen willingly as it were aduaunce hir selfe vp againe Sith then that schoollike handeling of matters will bring so great profit so y e Logick be directed by the true rules of diuinitie I theÌ„ intreat beséech these learned diuines of this our age which are defeÌ„ders of y e gospel y t they haue â—are héerof set down vnto vs some certain easie methode of this schoolike way how to handle each point y â— which we may follow and the which also may be both to vs present as also to y e posterities héereafter a most true touchstone wherby we may trie the sundry workes of diuers men which haue written of diuinitie y e which if they shall performe they shal greatly profit the Church of God especially in these times in which each man striueth in setting forth of bookes touching the principall pointes of diuinitie who may doo best For where as the Ciuilians only write touching their lawes the Phisitions of their facultie and so all others of those artes and sciences which they professe in y e which they are conuersant yet notwithstanding it commeth to passe I knowe not by what meanes that not onely diuines but also men cleane voide of diuinitie of all sorts are wont now euerie where to dispute in their bookes touching diuinitie so y t héerein I assent with Nazianzene which before time hath most gréeuously complained of this matter And we haue thought good to publish this our small labour abroad not y t we thinke we haue obteyned y e same methode whith we desire but that by this meanes we may at the least giue a testimonie that wée looke for a more exact methode from the learned diuines yea and earnestly desire them to performe the same Beholde then wée héere set downe a schoolelike treatise of diuinitie takeÌ„ out of the first Chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrewes to wit touching the word of God written against mannes traditions about which matter there is great controuersie betwéene vs and the Papists And for this cause I omit the handling of this point at large because it may be easily séene in the writings of late set forth on both partes of which writings I wil make as it were a certaine resolution or anatomie in this schoole like treatise But before I come to this my purpose I am willing somewhat to admonish the Reader howe that these disputations touching y e Scriptures doth farre differ from all others For in disputations of Philosophie Phisicke ciuill gouernment and such other there eloquence sheweth it selfe there desire to excell doeth rule there oratorie pleading bursteth out yea oftentimes in such matters men desire nothing but to shew forth the brauenesse of their wits or else séeke after glorie and praise But in diuine disputations where as Augustine sayth Brauerie must not bée sought but good documentes and lessons and that with great reuerence yea and verie reuerently wée must dispute of holy things not as vpon the stage before men but as in the middest of the Church before the liuing God and his Angelles not for the desire of victorie but for the maintenaurce of the truth in as much as Paule forbiddeth the Pastours of the Church once to speake of vaine questions or contentions of wordes which can scarce be done without the detrument of the truth Wherfore praying aide at the hands of almightie God that he will direct and establish this our labour by his holy spirit let vs procéede into this most holy conflict in the which the worde of GOD is the place of combat God himselfe the chiefe Iudge truth the victorie saluation the garland of triumph And héereby with more valiant
of this law which is writen in this booke And Paule in the Act. 24. I beleeue saith he all those things which are written in the Lawe in the Prophets And that which Moses saith Deut. 27. Let each one be accursed which abideth not in all the words of this lawe Paule thus expoundeth Gal. 3. saieng In all things which are written in the booke of the lawe By which places we may easily perceiue that the word of God touching the which Moses speaketh is not to be interpreted the writings of Moses alone neither to be applied vnto certaine vnwritten verities deliuered onely by the mouth of Moses as the Iewes doctors doo falsly surmise whose errors haue long time since bene euen hissed out of the Church of Christ The 4. place Get thee to the lawe and testimonie If they say not after this worde there is no light in them Héereof we frame this argument If the people vnder the lawe ought to repaire to the Scriptures and nothing was to be receiued in matters of faith the which was not contained in the holy Scriptures then truly by greater reason afterward that the doctrine of the Gospell written of the Apostles was ioyned to the writings of the olde Testament the which Apostles did explicate and teach the true meaning of the law those things alone must be receiued in matters of faith which are contained in the writings of the olde and new testaments The antecedent is true Wherefore also the consequent must be true The first part of our argument is manifest of it selfe through the force of comparison Although if we haue respect to the ground and substaunce thereof the Apostles spake no other thing then y â— which was before spokeÌ„ by Moses the prophets as Paul affirmeth Act. 26. Yet no christian hath at anie time doubted but y â— the publishing of the word of God was far more excellent and plentifull after the Incarâ—ation of Christ then it was before lyke as y e apostles in diuers places haue taught Wherefore if before his incarnation they ought to be ruled by the word of god writen how much more then ought we now The minor is manifest by the recited places And hâ—re I am not ignorant that this afore recited place of the prophet is diuersly expounded of the learned but howsoeuer they expound these words it coÌ„meth to this effect that they liue in most horrible darknesse which despising the worde of God take vnto themselues the errors of inchanters witches and mans dreames The fift place Thou hast knowne the holie Scriptures of a childe which are able to make thee wise vnto saluation through the faith which is in Christ Iesus for the whole Scripture is giuen by inspiration of God and is profitable to teach to reproue to correct to instruct in righteousnesse that the man of God may be absolute beeing made perfect to euerie good worke If such be the force of the holie Scriptures that it maketh a man wise perfectlie instructed vnto saluation then ought we to be content with the holie Scriptures in causes and matters of faith The Antecedent is true And therefore the consequent must be the like The first part of our argument is manifest through the nature of perfection for if y e scriptures make vs perfect to what ende then serue traditions not written And vnto this ende serueth the saying of Paule before alleadged The minor is manifest and prooued by the place recited of Paule But peraduenture our aduersaries will héere obiect and saye that Paule spake héere onely of the scriptures of the olde Testament because Timothie was instructed from his youth But sith Paule héere addeth and saith Through the faith that is in Christ Iesus he doeth manifestly declare that the doctrine of the Gospell was ioyned with the knowledge of the old Testament But they may saye that the Gospell was not then published in writing but onely deliuered and taught by mouth First let them tell me whereby they gather this for it is manifest by the fourth Chapter of that his Epistle that Paule wrote this same Epistle verie néere about the time of his death And héere if you will make a good account of the times you shall easilye perceiue that then when this Epistle was sent vnto Timothie all the Epistles of the Apostles or well néere all were put in writing And furthermore what matter were it if then the doctrine of the Gospell had not bene published in writing inasmuch as it was afterward done Finally if ye would that Paule should héere speak touching the writing of the olde Testament onely then woulde I make mine argument of more force and reason thus If the writings of the olde Testament were of such force that they were able to make men wise vnto saluation how much more shall the whole Scripture of the olde and new Testament be able to perform the same But he which shall denie y â— this same excellent sentence of Paule touching the whole Scriptures to wit that it was giuen by inspiration of God and is profitable to teach doth appertaine vnto the writings of the new testament he is not onely to be thrust out of the number of diuines but is also to be banished out of the societie of Christians Neither yet let them goe about to cauill with vs for that the olde translation hath this word Prepared and not absolute Perfect to all good workes For truly that I maye not omit anie thing and so swarue from our argument the Gréeke word signifieth Perfection as in the Actes 21. ver 5. But when the daies were full perfected and ended we went on our iournie c. Where and in which place Luke vseth the same Gréeke word which Paule doth vse in the Texte to Timothie signifieng as you sée Absolute and Perfect Also the compounde of the same verbe in Gréeke hath the lyke signification As Mathew 21. ver 26. By the mouthes of babes and sucklings thou hast made perfect thy praise Againe 1. Thessa 3. ver 10. Night day praieng exceedingly that we might see your face and might accomplish or make perfect that which is wanting in your faith And again Heb. 13. ver 22. The 6. place Search the Scriptures for in them you thinke to haue eternall life If the people in times past vnder the lawe doo thinke and that not without good cause to haue eternall life in the Scriptures that is that all those things were contained in the Scriptures the knowledge and faith wherof attained euerlasting life then trulie by greater reason we ought to beleeue the selfe same being now vnder the Gospell after that to the scriptures of the old testament the writings of the Apostles was also ioyned which interprete and teach the veritie and truth of the olde testament The antecedent is true And therefore there is no doubt of the consequent The force of
comparison confirmeth the first part of our argument for such kinds of reasons hath both Christ and his Apostles vsed neither can our aduersaries deuie but that the writings of the new Testament are more excellent then the writings of the olde The other part of our argument is proued by the expresse words of Christ for so far was it from Christ that he wold reprooue the Iewes for searching the Scriptures but did himselfe rather reason after that manner The 7. place That ye may learne by vs that no man presume aboue that which is written c. If we ought not to presume to be wise aboue that which is written and the principles of faith appertain vnto true and perfect wisedome then trulie ought wee to be contented with the scriptures in causes and matters of faith The antecedent is true Therefore the consequent cannot be denied The first parte of our Argument is manifest of it selfe The other part is prooued by the place of the Apostle Yet héere I must allso confesse that this place of the Apostle Paule is otherwise expounded of certayne newe Writers to wit of those things which Paule himselfe had before written The which sence if anye man be willing to followe then thus make we our argument If Paule called backe the Corinthians vnto his owne writings how much more then ought we to be called backe vnto the writings of the whole Scriptures But because the olde writers whome our aduersaryes followe most doo expounde this place of Paule generallye I had rather to frame mine argument from the interpretation of them There maye be also framed an euident and plaine sylogisme in the second mode of the second figure flatlye denieng their assertion in this sort Whosoeuer groundeth anie Article of faith vpō traditions not writtē taketh vpon him to be wise aboue that which is written But no man truly obeying the Christian Apostolike doctrine doth take vpon him to be wise aboue that which is writtē Ergo No man truly obeying the christian apostolike doctrine doth groūd any principle of faith vpon traditions not written The 8. Place Manie other things did Iesus which are not written in this booke but these things are written that you might beleeue that Iesus Christ is the sonne of God and in beleeuing you might haue euerlasting lyfe through his name If the Apostles and Euangelists wrote those things which seemed sufficient and necessarie that we which beleeue may haue eternall life then truely the Articles of our faith are to be grounded vppon the Scriptures and not vpon traditions which are vnwritten which our aduersaries tearme Apostolike The Antecedent is true And therefore the consequent cannot be denied The truth of the first part of our Argument is manifest except peraduenture anie man would goe about to thinke himselfe wiser then either the Apostles or Euangelists the which God forbid that anie man should do The consequent is proued by the words of Iohn The 9. place The lawe of the Lord is perfect giuing life true wisdome vnto man yea the law of the Lord is right and iust more precious then golde sweeter then honnie the wisedome and vnderstanding of the Church he is blessed that meditateth or occupieth himselfe therein If the scriptures of the olde testament in their kinde were perfect because therein is contained true wisedome and made those blessed euen as manie as willinglie and constantlie did meditate therein then trulie after that the writings of the Apostles were ioyned vnto the olde testament the which writings of the Apostles doo explicate and teach the veritie and truth of the saide olde testament then I say by good right consequence the whole scriptures both of the olde and new testament may be called perfect as that which perfectlie containeth all necessarie doctrine for the church of Christ The antecedent is true And therefore the consequence must be also true The antecedent is manifest inough of it selfe The minor is prooued by the recited places For by the name and title of the law is often vnderstood y e whole scriptures of the olde testament as it is manifest by the Apostle Paule Gal. 4. ver 21. as also the circumstance of the afore alleaged place doth most manifestly proue Now frō these and such other places we will gather a true definition of the holye Scriptures after this sort The holie scripture is the word of God giuen by diuine inspiration from God and by the Prophets Apostles and Euangelists mooued by the spirit of God was written in the bookes Canonicall of the olde and new testament that the veritie and truth of God might be taken and set free from the obliuion and corruptings of men that the Church might be perfectlie instructed and confirmed in all those things the knowledge and faith whereof is necessarie to saluation This definition is most perfectly substancially true For it standeth vpon y e Genus differēce containeth al those causes both which y e Logitiās say belōg to y e Subiectū as also y ◠belōg vnto y e Attributū And especially it cōtaineth y e efficiēt cause vnder y e which is added y e instrumētal thē y e final cause which two causes in such kind of matters are especially to be considered The spirit of god is y e cause efficiēt who vsed y e prophets apostles as instrumēts y e cōīeruatiō of y e truth cōfirmation of the church is the end wherefore y e word of God was put in writing so this definition standeth vppon his full partes and the thing defined and the definition doo both agrée together Now from this definition as from a most perfect true ground we make thus our demonstratiue argument Whatsoeuer is the word of God giuen by inspiration from God and written by the Prophets Apostles and Euangelists by the motion of Gods spirit c. that contayneth all principles necessarie to christian faith But the holie Scripture is the word giuen by diuine inspiration c. Ergo the holie Scriptures containe al principles necessarie to the christian faith This argument is most euident and necessarie and standeth grounded vppon grounds of the former places and contayneth the veritie and truth of our whole question Wherefore doth the Scriptures containe all these things the knowledge faith whereof are necessarie vnto saluation Truely because the word of God was written by the Prophets and Apostles to this end that the Church should be perfectly instructed c. Againe whatsoeuer is spoken of the one partie may be sayde of the other Furthermore if anie doe aske what these things be the knowledge and faith whereof are necessarie to saluation I answere the Scriptures And againe when I name the Scriptures I name all those things the knowledge whereof is necessarie to saluation The like also may be said touching the ground
could haue bene kept and preserued without the scriptures to what ende were the Scriptures for the spirite of God doth nothing in vaine If the Scriptures were written to the ende our memorie might be holpen who then can denie that our memorie must bée holpen by the Scriptures in all things necessarie to saluation Finally and to conclude If the Scripture were giuen by the spirite of God that thereby the Church might be the better instructed why then should not the Scriptures haue in them al those things which are necessarie to saluation Wherefore what starting holes so euer our aduersaries séeke yet the truth of our former proposition remaineth to wit that they goe about to frustrate the spirit of God of his effect in giuing the Scriptures except in them be contained whatsoeuer is necessarie to our saluation The consequent no Christian can deny If the Apostles were led into all truth by the spirit of God as it appeareth Ioh. 16 and wrote not all things that were necessarie to saluation that came to passe either because they ought not to write them or because they would not write or because they could not But to affirme that they ought not is false that they would not is absurd and that they could not is the part of one that disputeth like an Atheist Wherefore the antecedent is false absurd and altogether from Diuinitie The consequence of the former proposition is manisest except our aduersaries can bring any thing to the contrary For we dispute not héere of euerye man but only of y e Apostles whom y e spirit of God gouerned and directed in the writing of the Gospell The minor is manifest except our aduersaries can proue what reason there is of dissimilitude or vnlikenesse in things not onely like but also euen béeing the selfe same And this truly is most certaine and most vndoubted amongst all Christians that if the Apostles wrote not all things which are necessary to saluation that it was because they ought not so to doo Qur aduersaries of necessitie must proue some one of these causes or els them what was the cause that y e Apostles ought to write some things which were necessaâ—ie to saluation and to omit other some or else truly y t the Apostles themselues haue by manifest plaine words testified that they haue not written all things which appertaine vnto Christian faith and Religion for good and necessarye causes which God himselfe would not that men should know But vndoubtedly our aduersaryes can prooue neither of these and therefore the conclusion of this argument resteth most firme and vnuiolable If the Canonicall bookes of the old Testament doo containe all things which appertained vnto the olde testament And the Canonicall bookes of the new Testament doo not containe all such things as doo appertaine vnto the new testament then doeth it follow that the old testament is more perfect then the new The consequence is false And therefore the antecedent is false The consequent of the maior is thus prooued The bookes of the old testament are called the olde testament of Paule where as hée dooth intreate of the reading of the old testament To this maye be added that which Moses saith The couenant saith he which is written in the booke of the lawe and in the diuine and holy historie there is mention made of the booke of the couenaunt Wherefore there is no doubt but that the olde Testament that is the writings of the olde testament is agréeable to his title For nothing can be alleaâ—ged besides y t scripture which may rightly be said to appertaine to the old testament to wit the knowledge whereof were necessarie to the saluation of those godly fathers that liued vnder the olde testament Now if you say not the like of the newe testament who dooth not sée that the newe testament is more weake unperfect then the olde For it is as much as if you wold thus expound the title The newe testament that is to saie Some certain things appeâ—taining to the new testament The which how absurd it is I suppose I shall not néede with 〈◊〉 more arguments to prooud for no 〈◊〉 hath at anie time héeretofore affirmed that the Scriptures and writings of thâ—â— we 〈…〉 not so perfect as the writings at the old Wherefore we wil 〈…〉 more to the prâ—uing of our 〈◊〉 If the Scripture of the new testament be a couenaunt will or testament nothing must be added vnto a will or Testament then trulye it is not lawfull to aâ—de anye thing to the writinges of the newe Testament The Antecedent is true And the consequent is the like And by the force of the same consequent the traditions not wâ—tten of the Apostles are not to be receiued The antecedent is manifest The minor doth containe two parts the 〈◊〉 part is mainfest and prooued by the verie title to wit y â— it is a will or a testament neither néedeth theâ—e any other probation The latter part is prooued by Paule when hée sayeth That it is not lawfull to adde vnto a mannes Testament and from thence hée gathereth that we ought not to adde vnto the diuine Testament of God But if yée interpret it to bée a testament and not a rouenant then our conclusion remaineth of more sorce for dareth anie man adde vnto the Will and Testament of a man The which if it be not lawofull to doe in the Wil and Testament of a man how much lesse then is it lawfull so to doe in the Testament of God If till the later end and consumation of the world we ought not to looke for anie other bookes canonicalt besides these which we haue alreadie in the writings of the old new Testament Then it followeth that the Scripture is absolute and pefect in euerie part The antecedent is true And therfore so is the consequent by force of the saide consequent the Scripture hath no need of anie traditions not writteÌ„ The Maior is euident inough especially sith God is the author of the said scripture which would not suffer the same during the world to remaine vnperfect because he being the author is most perfect The Minor our aduersaries themselues cannot denie for they are not ignoraÌ„t that the time now after Christ is exhibited giuen to the world is called the fulnesse of time as the Apostle saith If traditions not written are as wel to be receiued as the Scriptures as our aduersaries would haue it then must wee beleeue the writings of the Doctors with the like perswasion of faith as we beleeue the writings of the Prophets and Apostles But the consequent is false And therefore the Antecedent cannot be true and by force of the consequent traditions not written are not to bee receiued in matters of faith The consequent of the maior proposition is thus proued For so often as our aduersaries propoue vnto the traditions of men
traditions which they called Apostolike as the olde Doctors doo testifie And in the Acts of the Apostles chap. 15. ver 24. Luke séemth to touch the like And Paule in 2. Corint chap. 11. verse 13. saith That the olde heretiks were wont falsely to take vpon them the names and titles of the Apostles And in another place he exhorteth the Thessalonians cha 2. ver 2. not to suffer thēselues to be seduced frō y e faith neither by word neither yet by epistle as cōming saith he from vs The which last words I do not so restraine vnto this word Epistle but refer it vnto that that they shoulde not be deceiued by worde for there is no doubte but that the Heretikes would often times boast that they had hearde those thinges which they did teach euen from the Apostles whereby they might get vnto themselues credit This thing doth Ireneus testifie lib. 3. cap. 2. And Eusebius declareth y e one Papias did forge his errours as though saith hée they came from vnwritten traditions I will not héere speake anie thing of the Iewes Calaba which maintaine by their dreams vnwritten traditions as the chiefest piller of their religion as Elias in Thisbith as in the Radicall Kara Baruck appeareth If the traditions which repugne the writings of the Apostles are not Apostolyke and the traditions of our aduersaries are altogether such then truelie the traditions of our aduersaryes are not Apostolike The Antecedent is true Wherefore the consequent is also true The veritie of the Maior proposition is most plaine or else it would followe that the Apostles did not write by the same spirit by which they did speake the which God forbid that we should once thinke The Minor shall appeare by this induction which the reader shall most castly finde in the writings of the Doctors whereby it is manifest that those principles of Religion in controuersie betwéene vs which they refer vnto the vnwritten traditions of the Apostles doo manifestly repugne with the writings of the Apostles so that whether soeuer our aduersaries tourne them they shall be constrained to referre their principles of Religion vnto the writinges of the Apostles For I will vrge the former grounde and argument that if those principles repugne with the writings of the Apostles then they are not Apostolike If they confesse that they doo repugne then haue we our purpose if they denie it then of necessity they must turne to the writings of the Apostles that these their opinions whereof the question is may be tried by them whether they repugne with the writings of the Apostles yea or nay whereby it commeth to passe that our aduersaries after manie errors will they or nill they must néeds returne again within the compasse of the scriptures But least we should bée ouerlong in these our argumentes wée wil comprehend the summe of all our former arguments in this one sylogisme If that these Errors doo follow the opinion of our aduersaries touching traditions not writtē to wit that they otherwise teach in the Church then the Prophets and Apostles haue taught that the spirite of God hath not accomplished his effect in publishing of the scriptures that the Apostles neither ought neither could or would write all things necessarie to saluation that the writings of the old testament is more perfect then the writings of the new that the holy Bible is not correspondent to the title which is a Testament if it bee lawfull for men to adde to the will of God that the holy scriptures giuen after Christs incarnation and afterward the writings of the Apostles are not absolute in euerie point And that the same credite must bee giuen vnto the writings of the olde Doctors which is giuen vnto the scriptures of God that we must beleeue those things whereof there is no certaintie that the cause of the old heretikes was not a little holpen which leaned vnto vnwritten traditions and finally that the Apostles did not speak with that spirit with the which they did write If I saye these former absurdities doo followe the opinion of our aduersaries touching Traditions not written Then truely the minde and opinion of our aduersaries touching traditions not written is of all godlie and true Catholikes to bee vtterlie refused and reiected The antecedent is true And therefore the consequent cannot be false The maior proposition cannot be denyed The minor is made manifest in this our former negatiue disputation wherin we haue ouerthrowen the opinion of our aduersarie And héere we ende the third Chapter and now we will procéed to the wiping awaie of all the obiections which our aduersaries can make The 4. Chapter IN our former disputation we haue confuted the opinion of our aduersaries and haue euen as it were with our finger pointed out their manifolde errours in which they must néedes remaine so long as they doo obstinately striue for these their traditions which they call vnwritten And we affirme that they were neuer written of the Apostles neither yet to be written of anie others But because they maintaine their opinion by diuers and sundrie arguments so to hide the falshood thereof and to deceiue the simple I thinke it verye néedful to aunswere all their arguments so many as we know First of all therefore we wil sift out their obiections which they wrest out of the holy scriptures Then we will come vnto the testimonie of the doctors which they obiect against vs. Their first obiection is this The doctrine of the Gospel was not writen with inke but with the spirite of God not in Tables of stone but in the heart Ergo we must returne vnto the doctrine taught by the mouth of the Apostles Neither must we cleaue so precisely vnto the writings of the Apostles The antecedent is manifest by Ieremie chap. 31. This is the couenaunt which I will make with the house of Israel I will put my lawe into theyr minde and will write it in their heart and I will bee their God and they shall be my people Againe Paule 2. Cor. 3. It is manifest saith he that you are the Epistle of Christ ordained by vs not written with inke but with the spirit of the liuing god not in tables of stone but in the fleshie tables of the heart That we may orderly aunswere vnto each part First we will trie the antecedent then wil we come to the consequent and this order will we kéepe to helpe the memorie of the reader Now will I aunswere the antecedent concerning y ◠which I sée they cannot well agrée no not the Popish schoolmen among themselues for when the Apostle vnto the Heb. 8. had set downe a difference betwéen the old new testament he bringeth forth this place aboue recited of Ieremie where the schoolemen beginne to question what shuld be the cause wherfore it is said that the gospell shuld be written in the minde Some bring forth this reason
Ergo because some of the Apostles did recite some out of the Ethnicks bookes it must follow that the Apostles did attribute authoritie to those bookes in matters of faith which thing is absurde and contrarie to the opinion of all men Let vs tourne this obiection vppon our aduersaries after this sort If the Apostles did at anie time recite the traditions of auncient fathers but onelie to beautifie those things which wer established and confirmed by most firme testimonies of holie scriptures How much lesse then ought wee to recite the traditions of the olde fathers to the confirming of those things which want testimonie of the Scripture Thus therefore we may amend the errour of this their obiection and saye that the Apostles whereas they did applie thēselues to the capacitie of men that they might thereby the better stirre them vp or the more easily conuince them they vsed some times the bookes Apocripha as also sentences gathred from Ethincks to wit when they did dispute of those things the truth whereof was manifest in the holye scriptures The heretikes did wreast the writinges of Paule that in the verie time of the Apostles and also it is most manifest that the heretiks yea Sathan himselfe haue cloked their heresies euen with the Scriptures ergo we must not cleaue to the Scriptures alone The antecedent is proued 2. Pe. 3. as also by the Ecclesiasticall historie and also Math 4. If thou be the sonne of GOD cast thy selfe down headlong for it is written he shal giue his Angells charge ouer thee c. I admit their antecedent But I denie their consequent Neither doth Peter so conclude but rather calleth them vnto the writings of Paule then in anie part to abridge the same The error is as the Logitians say Secundum non causam vt causam The heretikes abused the Scriptures wrested the writings of the Apostles into a contrarie sence ergo saye they we ought to run other where then to the scriptures to the establishing of our faith The Scripture is not in fault but onely men themselues which doo wrest so worthie a matter vnto their owne errours Wherefore this is so farre from the Apostles minde that we should leaue the aide of the scripture because heretikes haue abused them that rather the heretikes are by the verie scriptures to be conuinced like as we haue alreadie proued out of the places of Paule 2. Tim. 3. Tit. 1. And when Sathan abused the Scriptures that he might weaken the faith of Christ truely Christ went not to traditions but with the Scriptures again ouerthrew the enimy For sathan obiecting and saying it is written Christ also on the other side answered it is written and not left in tradition And therefore we must bring them to this inconuenience saying If because the heretikes falsified the Scriptures we may not therefore only cleaue vnto the Scriptures then truely because the heretikes falsely fathered traditions to be Apostolike as wee haue prooued before both out of the writings of the Apostles as also out of Irenaeus and Eusebius therefore wee may not sticke onely to traditions And againe because heretikes abused both Scriptures and traditions therefore we must neyther cleaue to Scriptures nor to traditions the which is absurde and euen our aduersaries themselues yeeld to the same Let vs therefore turne their argument vpon themselues saying If like as Sathan abused the Scriptures against Christ so likewise the heretiks do against true Christians Then truly as Christ vsed the Scripture onely to repell Sathan so likewise the true Christians must vse onely the Scriptures in repelling of heretikes And therefore we may amend their error thus If such be the wickednes of the heretikes y e they abuse y e scriptures then ought we to giue al diligēce y t the scripture may kéepe both their authoritie and puritie the which will be if the heretiks be conuinced by the Scriptures alone and those places which shall séeme somewhat obscure maye take their interpretation from places more plaine But if our aduersaries hearken not vnto vs yet at the least waies let them giue eare euen vnto themselues in whose decretalls this sentence remaineth That from the Scriptures themselues the sence of truth must be taken The doctrine touching the baptisme of Infants is not found in the holy Scriptures neither these words Trinitie like substance persons manie such like all which words notwithstanding do appertaine vnto groūds and principles of faith Ergo all things appertaining vnto faith are not to be found in the Scriptures The antecedent is found true by reading of the Scriptures Now touching their antecedent I saie thus In that they affirme the doctrine concerning Baptisme of children not to be found in the Scriptures is most false like as our late writers haue taught in theyr learned workes against the Anabaptistes touching the which I will not héere make any longer disputation least I shuld séeme to wander without y e compasse of my proponed questiō Now touching these words Trinitie like substance and persons I confesse they are not found in the writings of the Apostles but yet I saie y ◠the verie doctrine which is signified by these words is deriued from the Scriptures for when certaine heretiks rose vp which denied y e veritie of y e doctrine then the godly Fathers which liued in those daies hauing care of y e circumstances added these wordes by the which they might the more easily explicate declare the doctrine touching y e trinitie y ◠which doctrine they had before confirmed by expresse and manifest testimonies of the holy Scriptures Now touching their consequence The error is Secundum fallaciam figurae dictionis These words Trinitie the baptisme of infants like substance are not found in the Scripture it is called Omonomos for the words indéede are not found in the holie Scriptures but the things signified by the words are there found And our christian faith consisteth not in the title of words but in substance of matter not in many volumes of bookes as S. Hierom saith but in the verye ground of reason And therefore Basil confesseth y ◠he vsed against the heretikes certaine termes which were not found written but yet notwithstanding saith he they were nothing contrary to the sence of the holy Scriptures And therfore our aduersaries reasoning thus we may wel bring them to an absurditie saying If because the persons the trinitie and such like words be not extant in the holy Scriptures it therfore followeth that all things necessarie to faith are not found in the holye scriptures Ergo these words are necessarie to faith and so by force of the consequent Sith this worde Omoousios that is like substance and such other wordes were onely found out by the godly Doctors after the heresie of Arius began to spring then wold it followe that the Church of Christ before the time
christians in tunes past did obserue as in the fourth rule we haue spoken also reckoneth vp many more rites ceremonies all the which long time since haue ben out of vse euen in the Church of Rome So that héerein our aduersaries doo not onely contend with vs but euen with Epiphanius himselfe and with other whose obiections they vse against vs. For if those olde rytes and ceremonies be traditions of the Apostles or if they haue like force with the scripture or if they be worthie of the like credite together with the scripture If also sith they be traditions and therefore we must séeke no farther if faith ought to be the obseruer and kéeper of these traditions as the olde and auncient Doctors saye whom our aduersaries bring for the maintenaunce of their cause what impudent boldnesse were this then not onelye to neglect those traditions but also nowe that they haue bene these many yeres put cleane off from the Church and growen out of the memorie of man béeing forlorne with time so that they séeme to be altogether mouldie and couered with hoarinesse What shall they then which are aduersaries of traditions doo if they dare doo these things themselues which are the great defenders of traditions Hierome Doo you demaund where it is written I aunswere in the Acts of the Apostles yea also if it had no authoritie of Scripture yet the consent of the whole worlde in this parte obtaineth the like authoritie as a precept for many other things which are obserued and kept in the Church by tradition take vnto themselues the like authoritie as hath the lawe written as in baptisme three times to dippe the head vnder water of the tasting of Milke and honnie c. Héere Hierome disputed of the unposition of handes after Baptisme and of other rites and ceremonies touching the which thing we haue spoken in our fourth rule but we doo dispute now and in this place of those things which are necessarie and doo appertaine vnto faith and saluation among the which if you will number vâ—â—hose rites and ceremonies what will our aduersaries aunswere which admit vse not the tasting of milke and honnie which Hierome héere maketh mention of And also Hierome witnesseth that y â— was confirmed by the consent of the whole world which is now reiected by the like Augustine Touching those things wherof the Scripture hath not determined therin the custome of the people and ordinance of our fathers are to be obserued in steede of a lawe And againe Those things which are not vvritten but are kept by tradition vvhich are obserued throughout the vvhole vvorld it appeareth by the authoritie either of the Apostles or generall counsells vvhose authoritie in the Church is most profitable that those things ordained and constituted are to be kept and obserued as the passion of our Lord and his resurrection c. Augustine héere disputeth not touching principles of faith but of Ecclesiasticall rytes and ceremonies touching the which we haue spoken in the fourth rule And truly sith Augustine is lead onely by coniecture thereby it sufficientlye appeareth that he intreateth not of things necessarye to faith But the selfe same Augustine in his Epistle following doth greatly lament the cause that the Scriptures being neglected all the whole world was full of suppositions and giueth vs admonishment to submit our selues vnto the easie yoake of Christ I beséech you what wold he theÌ„ haue saide if he had séene that huge Chaos and mountaine of ceremonies and traditions a burden more gréeuous and heauier than Aetna hill wherewith the Bishoppes of Rome long time since haue oppressed the Church And peraduenture many other moe such like examples as these may be taken out of the old fathers and alleadged but the solution of them may easily be gathered had from the answeres which I haue alreadie set downe And lest the defenders of traditions shuld thinke that the auncient Doctours did so commend Traditions that thereby they would derogate the authoritie of the scriptures behold euen the old Doctors themselues as witnesses in this matter and shall declare their owne mindes what they thinke touching the Scriptures and touching traditions not written and wée our selues will say nothing And that the wound which by their former obiections they séeme to giue vs be euen by their owne handes healed vp againe That we maye lawfully affirme it much better to followe the Doctours with the Scriptures then the same Doctours wandering without the Scripture if it so happen at anie time and so to be carried from the truth which thing indeede doth rather deserue pardon theÌ„ foolish imitation But nowe let vs heare the Doctours themselues The sixt Chapter IRenaeus First the Apostles did preach the word of God and afterward by the will of God committed it to writings and deliuered it to vs that the same Gospell so written should be the foundation and piller of our faith Againe It behooueth vs to flie vnto the Church and to be fostered in her bosome and nourished by the word of God written The paradise of the Church is planted heere in this worlde thou maist eate of the tree of the Paradise saith the spirit of God that is feede you of euerie Scripture of God Tertulian Take awaie from the heretikes those things wherein they agree with the Ethnikes that they may ground their questions vppon the holye Scriptures alone then they cannot preuaile Thus did Tertulian in times past confute the Heretikes but nowe they are accounted Heretikes of the Bishoppes of the Romish Church which woulde confirme their opinions by the Scriptures And againe the sayde Tertulian We ought not to bee curious nowe after the comming of Christ Iesus neither ought wee to bee inquisitiue after the manifestation of the Gospell When we doo beleeue wee desire nothing else to beleeue for this first wee doo beleeue that there is nothing else that wee ought to beleeue but onelye faith And againe Let Hermogenes see that he teach that which is written but if it be not written let him feare that curse which is prepared for those that either adde too or diminish anie thing from the holy Scriptures Origen Wee must of necessitie call the holy Scriptures for witnesse for as well our senses as also our interpretations without the witnesse of the Scriptures are worthy of no credit Iustinus Martyre Iustinus did flye vnto the holye Scriptures that hee might bee safe in all things Athanasius The holie and diuine Scriptures of GOD are sufficient to the declaration and manifestation of the truth Hilarie It is sufficient for vs that we bee contented with the Scriptures Cyril All thinges which Christ did are not written but what thinges the writers thought sufficient both for manners doctrine are written Chrisostome If wee haue neede either to learne or to forsake anie thing let vs learne it in the holy
straight waies propone to vs the opinion of Doctours and thereby they by and by conclude that the Scriptures alone are not to be heard to wit being vnmindful that this selfe same thing is a controuersie betwéene vs. For if this opinion touching the which we doo dispute may be determined by the writings of the Doctors then it followeth that the scriptures alone are not to be heard in establishing articles of faith Wherefore our aduersaries doo not rightly dispute their first principle béeing not rightly applyed Wherefore the errour of their former conclusion is thus to be corrected In asmuch as the writings of all the Doctors must be brought vnto the rule of the holy scriptures both the word of God so commaunding it and also the Doctors themselues consenting therevnto and the olde Doctors of the Church themselues haue taught that euery article of our faith must be grounded vpon the scriptures only furthermore Ecclesiastical rytes and ceremonies if they agrée with the scriptures if they serue to the edification of the church yea finally if they be receiued with common consent of the whole Church that then they are to be receiued with great reuerence Now héere we must diligently search out whether that this opinion of the Doctours be agréeable to the word of god so that so farre it is to be receiued as it hath his confirmation by the Scriptures And because our whole Disputation is heere had onely touching principles of doctrine necessarie to faith and saluation that we may not seeme to wander from our proposed question we héere cease neyther will we take vppon vs the disputation of ecclesiasticall rites and ceremonies which disputatioâ— if the matter so require and God so permit vs we will take in hand But nowe we defer it vnto another time Thus haue I â—â—â—â—ding to the methode proposed to wit dâ—â—â—ely and schoolelike by the authoritie 〈◊〉 most learned Fathers disputed in defence of the word written against the traditions of men Whereby the truth of our cause appeareth and the obscure deceipts and errors of our aduersaries are brought into open show for in such sort haue we set down opened and confirmed our minde and iudgement and so confuted and dissolued the errours and arguments of our aduersaries both by the holy scriptures and also by the writings of the auncient fathers that euerie man may easily sée this doctrine which our reformed church by the word of God which is therfore the true Catholike Church doth hold and professe is most true which is That All doctrine necessarie to our Christian faith and Religion is contained in the holie Scriptures Laus Deo In Psa 43. Ios 6. Psa 54. Plut. in Cic. De doct Christ lib. 3. cap. 14 De nat deor lâ— 2. 2. Epist 3. The preacher ought to teach reproue Tit â— Aug Enc. ad Laure To reproue false doctrine the right vse of disputation is no small helpe In laud. Basil Epist 151 Contra Aca. li. 3 ca 13. 〈…〉 They are refuted vvhich wold not haue diuines me dle vvith the true art of disputing Col. 2. Aduer 159. Epis in cap. 2. Esa De praescri haer A similitude Ad 150. Epi in S ca. Esai The auncient Fathers coÌ„mended â— right vse of Logick Con. Acali 3 De ord li. 2. ca. 12 Touching the writings and disputations of y â— schoole Doctors In. 3. sent dist 24. quest 1. Great but vnprofitable is the labour of the schoole Doctors Certaine Errours which are to bee found in the disputations of the schoole Doctors The first errour to make their ground Logicke See Scotus and others who haue vvritten vpon the master of sentences and in their disputations called Quodlibets c. Lomb. li. 1. Sent. dist 34. li. 2. sent dist 9. c â— Error To reasoÌ„ probably on plaine truths Contra Aca. Apolog ad 〈◊〉 louin 3. Error They darken the truth Con. Aca. Error 4 Is theyr vaine questions 2. Tim. 2 Eâ—chi â—d Lauren. cap. 55. The Popish schol doctours of ouâ— time frame not such argumentes in their disputations as y â— auncient learned vvere vvont The method to dispute both diuinely schoole like necessatie in our time Dâ— doct Chri. lib. 2. cap. 40. Tvvo vvayes to intreat of diuinitie A similitude The brief school like treatises are as it vver an Anatomy of y e large and copious vvriting or speakings Cout Maâ— lib. 3. De mod in disp Ser. A treatise of y e word of God vvritten Hovv the disputations of diunitie differ froÌ„ others that they ought reuerently to bee handled De doct Chri. li. 4. cap. 19 1. Tim. 6. Quest ver 108. De Ciuie Dei li. 2. cap. 29. 1 The vse of this disputation Psal 119. The diuisioÌ„ of this vvorke He 1. ve â— Our opinion and mind touching the vvorde of God The declaration of our opinion or minde The opinion and minde of y e Papistâ— The declaration exposition of their opinion The state point of this coÌ„trouersie The tearms of this question expounded What the vvorde of God is What tradition is What is meant by this word Necessarie to saluation What is meant by holye Scripture A demonstratiue or euident disputation Heb. 1 The Sylogisme or argument The explication or proofe of the argument The confirmation of the coÌ„ference Tert. de resur car Act. 26. The confirmation of the second part of the argument Ioh 20. 17 Rom. 1. Lu. 16 Iohn 6. Act. 26. Lu. 24 2 Pet. 1. Act. 1 Iude. Philip. 3. 1. Iohn 1. 2. Pet. 3. 2. Pet. 1. The argument The explication or proofe of the argument Deu 4. Prou. 30. The argument The examining or triall of y e argument Exod. 24. Deu. 31. Deu. 28. Act. 24. Deu. 27. Gal. 3 Esa 8. The argument The examining or triall of the argument Act. 26. 2. Cor 3. c. 2. Tim. 3. The argument The examining or triail oâ— y e silogisme 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iohn 5. The argument The explication or triall of the argument Lu 23. 31. 1. Pet. 4. 17 c. 1. Cor. 4. The Sylogisme The exaaminatioÌ„ of the Silogisme An euideÌ„t argument Iohn 20. The argument The explication of the argument Psa 19 Psa 119 Deu. 4. Psa 4. The argument The explication of the argument Gal. 4. 21. * A definitioÌ„ of holy Scripture Heb. 1. 1 2. Ti. 3. 16 Heb 1. 1. 2. Pet. 1. 21 Lu. 1. 3 1. Iohn 1. 1. Ioh. 20. 31 c. The explicating of the definition 2. Pe. 3. 1. 2 Col. 3. 1 Pro. 30. 6 Esa 8. 20 c. Psa 1. 19. 1. 9 c 2. Tim. 3 16. 17. 2. Pe. 1. 12 Ioh. 20. 31 2. Tim. 3 15 Iohn 5. 39 The argument The vnfolding of y e former reason A disputation confutatiue vherein is refelled or confuted the opinioÌ„ or iudgement of y e Papistes The first argument against papistical traditions The vnfolding of
for because the grace of God cannot be written Of which opinion is Thomas whom y e whole swarme of schoolemen and Questionarye Doctors doo most estéeme But some had rather this to be the cause for that y e doctrine of the Lawe began from writing for by and by the Tables of the Law being written were publyshed but the doctrine of the gospell began from the preching of Christ his Apostles Touching the which controuersie that we maye not wander out of our determined limits let the Reader looke Lira his eight chapter in the Epistle to the Hebrewes chap. 10. But for as much as appertayneth to the former Obiection wée saye that neyther Ieremie nor Paule doo there denie the writings of the newe Testament but that they onelye dispute there touching the esstcacie of the spirituall giftes of the holye Ghost which were farre greater in the time of the newe Testament then euer at any time before according to the Prophecie of Ioel which Peter expoundeth the second to the Acts. Wherefore those places must be vnderstoode by comparison for otherwise it would followe that the lawe of God was not written in the minde and heart of the godly which liued in the time of the olde Testament which thing these places of Scripture which héere we alleadge doo otherwise prooue Esa 51. Harken vnto me ye which know iustice the people in whose hart is my law And Psa 37. The law of the Lord is in his heart Also 51. Recreate a new heart within me O God and renue a right spirit within me Also Deut. 30. The Lord will circumcise the heart And againe Psal 1. His delight is in the lawe of the Lord doth meditate therein daie and night And in diuers other places doeth Dauid testifie that hée hath the lawe of the Lord euen as it were ingraffed within his minde And finally that I may passe ouer many such like places when Salomon sheweth forth precepts out of the law of God he biddeth that they should be written in the tables of y e heart And thus much touching the Anteredent where our aduersaries commit most great errour reasoning Secundum quid ad id quod impliciter Now therefore I denie their consequent the errours of the which I will perticularly recite The first errour is that y e consequent cannot follow for it followeth not to saie the doctrine of the lawe was written in Tables ergo the doctrine of the Gospell is not written at all Againe the Gospell is written in the heart ergo it is not written in Tables Who séeth not that these are friuolous argumentes and that their consequents are false Againe they bring in a new kind of reasoning and reason from an vniuersall affirmatiue to a particular negatiue for thus they say God wrote al the doctrine of the Gospell in the minde of the godly Ergo certaine things appertaining vnto the doctrine of the Gospell are not written by the Apostles The which kinde of concluding euen children would hisse at for of necessitie thus they must reason Nothing y t is written in the heart is written in tables but the whole doctrine of the Gospell is written in the heart ergo no part of the doctrine of the Gospel is written in tables The Maior is so false that euery man may sée it The second errour is Falacia in figura dictionis as y e Logitians terme it for they confound words of one signification with those of diuerse significations for to write in tables is a proper kinde of spéech but to write in the heart is a borowed kinde of spéech and therefore of diuers significations spoken by a Metaphore and similitude Whereby it commeth to passe that Paule vsed another kinde of speaking when hée sayde that the Corinthians were his Epistle for hée went forwarde with the argument he had in hande which was when false Apostles would haue crept into the mindes of the Corinthians by Letters of commendations then sayth he I haue no néed of such Epistles for you are mine epistle for my labor my diligence is manifest towards you euen in the eies of all men For all sée and as I may saie may reade in you the doctrine of Christ which I haue preached vnto you and to conclude this is the summe that the Corinthians were so perfectly instructed and so well taught in the doctrine of y e gospel y t they might well remaine therin Whosoeuer thefore doth gather by these words of y e apostle that the apostles did not write all things necessarie to saluation truly he may be thought not to be well in his wits The third errour is for that they make the efficient cause to repugne with the cause instrumentall For God is hée who writeth the Gospell in the heart but Mathew Paule and the rest write the doctrine of the Gospell in tables and were the instruments of the spirit of God Therefore Paule in that place sayd that the Corinthians were his Epistle the epistle of Christ ministred saith hée by vs Loe héere you may sée that hée maketh distinction betwéene his owne ministerie and the efficacie of the holie Ghost Wherefore our aduersaries conclude as if one should reason thus God hath restored a sicke person vnto his former health ergo the Phisition prescribed nothing gaue him nothing to drinke neither yet vsed anie outwarde remedies Now if this conclusion be of anie force then this must néeds followe GOD wrote the Gospel in the minde ergo the Apostles wrote not the whole doctrine of the Gospell in Tables The fourth errour is because the consequent agréeth not with their antecedent for if in the antecedent they oppone y e inuisible Scriptures vnto y e visible then trulie they would bring this to pase y e one scripture being y e other caÌ„not be for vnto what other ende doe they applie their opposition opponing y e inuisible scriptures to the visible but y t they may coÌ„clude somwhat But in the consequent they come backe againe and say that certaine things are not written necessary to saluation when as they should haue said if so be they wold reason like logitians as before it is shewed y â— ther was nothing writteÌ„ necessary to saluatioÌ„ But the manifest truth in this point hath amased them And that they may sée howe vnhansomely they goe to worke in their â—pposition I demaund this whether the faithfull haue not all those things written in their hearts which are written in Tables being necessarie to faith and saluation Truly I thinke yes For Saint Iohn saith These things are written that ye might beleeue and in beleeuing haue eternall life So farre void is it therefore that the one being the other shuld be cleane taken awaie but rather the one is a helpe to the other to wit that the visible writings of the Apostles is a furtherance vnto the inuisible writings of the spirite of God The 5. Error is
Secundum ignorantiam Elenchi as the Schoolemen saie because they put in other words then the Apostle Paule vsed For thus Paule saith Yee are our Epistle not written with inke but with the spirite of God for he speaketh of the inuisible Scriptures neither doth he therfore vtterly take awaie the visible as his Epistle which he then wrote to the Cornthians is witnesse But our aduersaryes reason farre otherwise for they say the Epistle not written in Tables but deliuered by hand the which is farre both from the words and minde of the Apostle Now let vs ouerthrowe the consequence of our aduersaries being ful of absurdities and without reason If we must not absolutely stick vnto the writings of the Apostles because God hath written the Gospell in the mindes of the godly the should it followe that the writings of the Apostles are not necessarie for godlie men If all things as they saie are not written which are necessarie to saluation to what end then appertaineth the scriptures For all things saie they that are necessarie to saluation God hath written in the mindes of the godlie But this argument cannot bee concluded in one part onely for either it is vniuersallie true or els vniuersally false so the whole authoritie of the scriptures must bee vtterly abolished the which God forbid Againe If this consequence be of anie force that is to saye we must haue recourse to vnwritten traditions because GOD hath written the gospell in the minds of the godly then would it followe that the spirituall efficacie of God should be confounded with the externall and visible ministerie of the Apostles and that traditions deliuered by mouth are the inuisible Scriptures of God the which the holie Ghost did imprint in the mind of the faithfull the which thing is most false Againe if they make any good conclusion out of that place of Ieremie that all thinges are not written that appertaine to the Gospell because vnder the new testament God doth write his law in the minds of the faithfull when as it was written in tables vnder the old testament Ergo by the force of this opposition it followeth that God in the old testament did onely remit sinne in part and that he was the God of the Israelites but in part also because that Ieremie addeth saieng that it wil come to passe that in the new testamēt God will remit the sins of the people and be their God The which is too too absurde and contrarie to the opinion of all men Now finally let vs turne this argument of our aduersaries vpon themselues saie thus All the lawes of God are written in the hearts and minds of the faithfull as our aduersaries seeme to affirme by the former places cited for Paule saith it is not written with inke but with the spirit of God but none of the traditions of our aduersaries are written in the minds of the godly for they are written with inke and not with the spirit of God Ergo none of our aduersaries traditions are the lawes of God So that héereby it is most manifest as I suppose how foolish or rather no argumēt at al this argument of our aduersaries is y ◠which that we may correct we must saie with the word of God that the writings of the Apostles and Euangelists doth containe all that doctrine of the Gospell the which the Apostles and Euangelistes did teach and afterward put in writings the which also God by his spirit did write in the mindes of the godly thus much touching this obiection And now we come vnto the second The Church of Christ for the space of 20. yeares wanted the writings of the Apostles and was only contented with their traditions Ergo the writings of the Apostles are not absolutely necessarie vnto saluation neither is it needfull that al things appertaining to the doctrine of the Gospel shuld be contained in the writings of the Apostles The Antecedent is manifest by reading of histories Although I doo not meddle much with the antecedent neither doo dispute touching the number of yeares yet would I that the readers should call to their remēbraunce that the Church wanted not the scriptures before that the Gospell was extant by the writings of the Apostles Yea that Christ himselfe and the Apostles did preach the Gospell out of the writings of the Prophets as before in his proper place we haue shewed Wherefore the antecedent of our aduersaries is no other thing then a foundation laid vpon sand or water so that the conclusion which they bring cannot stand Therefore I denie the consequent for the errour is as the Logitians tearme it Secundum ignorantiam Elenchi for they chaunge the forme of affirmation come from the time past vnto the time present and the time to come The Church saye they wanted the gospel Be it so although the writings of the Prophets to contayne the promises of the Gospell insomuch that the Apostles did altogether depende vppon the sayd writings of the Prophets adde héer vnto also if it please you that the writings of the Apostles were not altogether necessarie what doo you héereof conclude That they are not now therfore necessarie or héereafter shall not bée What man is so ignorant to grant that This is the difference y ◠the Apostles ought first to haue preached by mouth before they committed anie thing to writing And when the Apostles did preach the gospell they did then publish by mouth those thinges which afterward they wrote But sithens the Apostles died coulde not by mouth instruct the Church without doubt their writings are now so necessarie vnto vs as their preching by mouth was in those dayes in stéede whereof their writinges doo nowe remaine Let vs bring them therfore to an absurditie If the consequence of our aduersaries be of force or value this is also of force or value the Church of the Isralites not twentie yeares but two thousande yeares or somewhat more wanted the law written therefore it was not necessarie to the Church that the lawe should be written or the law written contained not all those things y e wer necessarie to y e doctrine of y e old testamēt But this is very absurd Let vs turne the argument of our aduersaries against themselues after this manner If God being perfect wise hath not suffered the church of Christ long time to want the writings of the Apostles both that hee might maintaine the truth of the Gospell as also he might prouide for the safegarde of his church Ergo these men are blasphemous against the prouidence of god which denie that all things are contained in the apostolicall writings which are necessarie to the doctrine of the Gospell For to what end would God by his diuine prouidence that the Apostles should write the gospell which they by mouth did preach was it because they should deliuer an vncertain and imperfect doctrine Furthermore if