of the new nor yet of these two Epistles which he had written to him of purpose for to instruct him how he should walke in the house of God which is the Church of the liuing God 1. Tâ—m 3 the pillar and foundation of truth Whereas I said that the Romish Church causeth an infinite number of thinges to be obserued as the lawes of God which we know by their owne histories to haue been instituted many ages after the Apostles he answereth two things 1 That the practise of certaine poynts is found haue beene in the Church a long time before them which we imagine to be the inuentors of it wherof he coteth afterwards seuen examples namely Prayer for the dead Lent Single life Confirmation the Mixture of water and wine Consecrations of Altars and the Oblation or Sacrifice of the Masse 2 That they confound not vnder the name of Apostolike Traditions all the Customes obserued in the Church but that they distinguish betweene the vniuersall and the particular And that euen among the vniuersall some onely are Apostolike to wit such as haue alwayes since the Apostles times beene vsed in the Church but the other that haue beene ordained in latter ages are Ecclesiasticall But the question is not howe they of the Romish Church distinstuish their Traditions But by what authoritie and power they cause men obserue as the lawes of God and as necessarie to saluation things that were not instituted by Christ nor his Apostles For those which they call Ecclesiasticall and which by their owne confession came not in vse nor yet into knowledge till many ages after the death of the Apostles are not lesse but much more rigorously commanded then those which they call Apostolicall It shall suffice to verifie and manifest this by one example It is generally knowne that the most solemne and most religious deuotion at this day in the Romish Church is that which they call Gods feast or Corpus Christi day to the obseruation wherof Pope Vrban the 4. attributeth remission of sins â—â—lla â—uck which is the knowledge of saluation according to the Gospel And the number of pardons granted onely to the beholders of the same is almost infinite And whether wee consider the seueritie of Prelates in commanding it and the magnificence in celebrating it or the deuotion of the people in preparing themselues thereunto and the efficacie they imagine of it We shall find that it is a thing that they pretend to be much more necessarie and more diuine than to say Requiescant in pace than to abstain from flesh and egges in Lent or any other points of the pretended Apostolike Tradition In the meane while our Bishop himselfe though he denie all cannot denie that this deuotion was instituted neer 12. huÌ„dred years after the death of the Apostles if he denie it Bellarmine wil reproue him â—acr Euch. 〈◊〉 30. who confesseth that Pope Vrban 4. is the first authour of it And no writer of the Romish Church denieth it though they agree not all touching the motiue of this institution For some wil haue that the cause of it was a certaine miracle happened in Italie of a Wafer cake that bled as a certaine Priest doubting of Transubstantiation helde it in his handes Others attribute it to a woman of the country of Liege whom the said Pope had familiarly knowne before his Popedome and who hauing giueÌ„ the Pope to vnderstande a Vision or Reuelation that she had touching the institutioÌ„ of this Feast he streight ordayned it and celebrated it first at Rome And afterwards Clement the fift made a most rigorous law concerning it confirmed euen by the Councill of Vienna Hereupon I demaund our Bishop to what vse is his distinction that he maketh betweene Apostolike and Ecclesiasticke Traditions seeing that these latter are commaunded for as much or more necessarie meritorious and diuine as the former Againe I demaund to what purpose hee taketh so much paines for to shewe that certaine things are verie auncient seeing there bee newer and latter things which haue more authoritie necessitie and efficacie than the olde And seeing it is sufficient that some Pope hath ordained a thing without enquiring of the antiquitie or noueltie of the same For the Pope now a daies attributeth as much yea much more power and authoritie to himselfe than they did that were seauen or eight hundred yeares agoe and requireth no lesse but much more obedience in that which at this day he commaundeth than in that which his predecessours commaunded a thousand yeares ago For as before the God of heauen a thousand yeares are as one day so before this God on earth one day is as a thousand years when there is question to make himself be obeyed Yea the time hath been when Popes thought they could not well establish their owne lawes vnlesse they did abolish the lawes of their predecessors that is vnlesse they displanted Antiquitie to plant in noueltie Moreouer if euerie thing that concerneth saluation as those doe that bring remission of sinnes ought to bee grounded on the worde of God either written or vnwritten as he graunteth and presupposeth throughout his Booke By what conscience could the Popes institute this newe meanes of saluation with manie other in which number are our Bishops graines If the worde of God be onelie found either in the Canonicall Scripture or in the pretended Apostolike Tradition conteyned in the writings of the ancient fathers doth it not follow that that which is found in neither of both these two Registers is by his owne confession the worde and inuention of man And therefore a vaine thing and displeasing to God by Iesus Christ his owne sentence Math. 15. But let vs heare Bellarmine on this poynt De Verb. â— l. 4. c. 9. Nothing is of the faith but onely that which God hath reuealed by the Apostles or by the Prophets or that which is euidently deduced from it For the Church is no more gouerned by newe Reuelations but persisteth in them which those men that haue beene Ministers of the word haue giuen by Tradition For therefore it is said Ephe. 2. Builded vpon the foâ—ndation of the Prophets and Apostles Wherefore all the thinges which the Church holdeth to be matters of faith haue been giuen by the Apostles and Prophets eyther by writing or by word of mouth After he addeth When the whole Church obserueth something that none could institute but onely God and which notwithstaÌ„ding is fouÌ„d no where writteÌ„ We must say it was giuen by the TraditioÌ„ of Iesus Christ himself and of his Apostles The reason is for that the vniuersall Church cannot erre not onely in that which it beleeueth but as little in that which it dooth and principally in CEREMONIE or Diuine worship Let vs conclude then by the confession of this great Rabbi who acknowledged that this ceremonie of Corpus Christi day was instituted well neere 1200. yeres after the Apostles by Pope Vrbane 4.
Moyses from Moyses to Dauid from Dauid to the captiuity of Babylon and from the captiuity of Babylon to Iesus Christ who was the light it selfe For this cause the time of the Iewish Church is called the time of Infancy ours on the contrary the fulnes of time If then the Scripture of the old Testament were a sufficient light to the Iewes though it was not so cleare as ours how much more ought we to content our selues with that light which we haue by the addition of the new Testament The B. of Eureux For as touching the booke of Iob to omitte that the most part of the Iewes and Mercerus with them and the principall Caluinists doe denie that the place that is there is to bee vnderstood of the Resurrection there is no assured testimonie that the booke of Iob was extant then when the Law of Moyses was giuen contrarywise most men thinke it was written since the Transmigration of Babylon which Ezechiell seemeth to confirme saying Noah Daniell Iob. As for Daniell and the other Prophets it is well enough knowne that they were more then seauen or eight hundred yeares since D. Tillenus his answer As for the booke of Iob in which the resurrection of the body and by consequent the immortality of the soule are found in expresse tearmes whatsoeuer Du Perron saith who wrongfully attributeth vnto vs the false exposition of some Anabaptists We learne indeed of the Iewes that Moyses hauing found this booke in the countrye of Madian where his father Law was brought into Egypt to propound it vnto the Iewes as an example of patience in their seruitude But when we say that this history hapned before Moyses wrote the Law wee are grounded on good consequence drawne from the scripture which teacheth vs that after the publishing of the law it was not lawfull to offer sacrifice else where than before the Arke or Tabernacle without speciall commaundement So that if Iob had liued after the law of Moyses neither woulde he haue transgressed the Law in offering sacrifice nor God haue approoued his sacrifice The age also that the scripture giueth to Iob maketh vs beleeue that he was before Moyses â— 10. who witnesseth that those of his time liued not so long Du Perrons coniecture who will haue him to haue liued before the captiuity of Babylon is friuolous he groundeth it on this that Ezechiell nameth together Daniell and Iob â— 14. whence it would follow also that Noah should haue liued in those times for the Prophet nameth him with the other The B. of Eureux And as for our sauiour Christes argument against the Saduces it prooueth indeede the immortality of the soule and not the other points But that argument till his time was vnknowne to the Iewes who for this cause did admire the infinitenesse of his wisedome And therefore it must needs follow that they had receiued the beleefe of it for to holde it for an article of faith by another meanes than by the reading of the bookes of Moyses to wit by Tradition from Abraham Isaack Iacob and other Fathers D. Tillenus his answer He sheweth heere that hee hath as little insight into the bookes of the Euangelists as in those of Moyses he saith that this argument prooueth indeed the immortality of the soule but not the other points that is to say the Resurrection of the body And notwithstanding Saint Matthew saith in expresse tearmes that our Lord cited that place of Moyses Math. 22 Exod. 3. â— for to prooue the Resurrection of the dead and that by this onely argument he stopped his enemies mouthes who chose rather to be silent than to continue to blaspheme Jf vntill then it had beene vnknowne to the Iewes as Du Perron saith Yet that sheweth not any vnsufficiency in the scripture rather indeede the ignoraunce of the Church till those times and the negligence of those that would not vouchsafe to trie and sound the depth of the scriptures Ioh. 5 3â— as our Lord Iesus Christ did therein exhort them I know not why he findeth so great obscuritie in this argument of our Sauior For so great a Philosopher as he shold haue better perceiued therein the light of that Philosophicall maxime which saith When the whole is propounded the parts of the same are also propounded Put then that God is the god of Abraham of Isaack and of Iacob as saith Moyses Exod. 3 â— Jt followeth therefore that hee is their god both in soule and Body which are the principall parts of euery man But seeing the Saduces could not find or would not searche the Resurrection of the dead in the bookes of Moyses wherefore then did they beleeue it as little by Tradition VVhy did not our Lord and Sauiour send them thereunto VVherefore did he draw so obscure an argument as Du Perron will haue it from the Scripture if there had bene any manifest reasons in Tradition â— 22.9.29 6.29 to â—d VVherefore doth he attribute the cause of their errour to their ignoraunce of the Scripture And truely Abraham referred the brethren of the wicked rich man to keepe them out of hell not onely to the Prophets but euen to Moyses also 15.1 â—s 12.3 where they might see how God had sayde to Abraham that he would be his buckler and his exceeding great reward that in his seede should all Nations be blessed Which doctrine conteyneth the foundation of the substance of the doctrine of saluation Now put case that the aboue named points could not be found so manifest in the bookes of Moyses yet could not that conclude any thing against the sufficiency and perfection of the Scriptures which we haue in the Christian church For as god reuealed his will to the first Patriarches by word of mouth for to instruct them in his knowledge before there was any Scripture so did he continue the same manner of reuelation in Moyses time speaking to him as familiarly as a man speaketh to his friend instructing him of all maters yet neuer giuing him this liberty to ordayne any thing concerning religion of his owne authority Also Moyses very religiously conteyned himselfe within the limits of obedience not onely in the least Ceremonies but also in the publicke administration or gouernement wherein notwithstanding it seems he might haue vsurped a little more power but we see he wold determine nothing against him that had brokeÌ„ the Sabbath but caused him to be put in prison till God had declared vnto him 15.34 with what manner of punishment the Transgressor should be punished Contrariwise the Romish Church presumeth to ordayne an infinite number of things as well in Religion as in Policy which they are not onely vnable to prooue by any Scripture but which also euen theyr pretended Apostolike Traditions cannot shew in defence whereof theyr mayntainers set foorth the aucthority of the Church which they say cannot erre Now although the Church of the Iewes had Oracles visions diuine dreams Vrim and Thummim
chance some water is cast seeing they want the chiefe and principall condition which maketh a man be a matter and subiect capable of Baptisme namely Fayth That they that are Baptized as saith Saint Paule haue put on Christ That Christ cannot bee put on out of the Church which is called the fullnes of Christ that therfore Baptisme cannot be among hereticks That euery one of you sayth Saint Peter be Baptized for remission of sinnes And the Creed of Constantinople I beleeue one Baptisme for remission of sinnes Now among the haereticks there is no remission of sinnes For the Keyes were giuen to the Church and by consequent no Baptisme that when it was tolde Iohn Baptist that Christ Baptized he answered none can doe it vnles it be giuen him from heauen that no authority is giuen from heauen to the assemblies of hereticks and therefore that they cannot Baptize That Baptisme is done by the power of the holy Ghost that the holy Ghost is not resident out of the Church neither consequently Baptisme D. Tillenus his answer First I answere that the hearers of the Scripture learne that whosoeuer is Baptised in the name of the father of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost is well Baptised But the followers of the Romish tradition can neuer know whether they be well baptized or no For besides this instituti of Christ the Church of Rome requireth the intent of the Priest without which the Sacrament with theÌ„ is none Now there is no man that can be fully assured of another mans intent Secondly the scripture teacheth vs the difference betweene the outward sacrament the inward grace which is not inclosed within the other as a salue in a box as the Romish Tradition teacheth They that receiue the first receiue not alwaies the latter in what place soeuer it be as we see by the example of Iudas SymoÌ„ Magus For as saith S. Augustine 〈◊〉 5. de â—ont 〈◊〉 24 meÌ„ do put on Christ soÌ„times in participatioÌ„ of the sacrameÌ„t somtimes in sanctification of life the first is common to good and bad the other is peculiar onely to the good Neither hereticks nor orthodoxall can minister any thing but the outward sacrament the holy ghost onely giueth the internall grace that is fayth possessioÌ„ of Christ remissioÌ„ of sinnes All which is manifest in scripture But the Holy-ghost saith he is resident onely in the true Church and not among hereticks 2. J answere the scripture teacheth vs that the spirit blowes where it listeth if it were allwaies tyed to a visible church as the Pope to his seate of Rome â— 8 without distributing his graces elsewhere which is du Perrons meaning No infidell nor heretick borne out of the true church could euer enter thereinto by regeneration by which grace the holy ghost bringeth men thereunto 〈◊〉 17 Saint Paul persecuted the true Church so farre was hee from being a member of the same receiued notwithstanding the holy ghost out of the visible church Therfore it is not to speake properly the minister that giueth Baptisme but as the Scripture sayeth the heauenly father saueth vs by the washing of Regeneration through the renewing of the Holy Ghost 〈◊〉 5. 5 26 â— 1 16. Iesus Christ cleanseth sanctifieth his Church through the washing of water in his word And as the word of the Gospell when it is published according to the reuelation of God to saluation to all that beleeue though he that preacheth it do it of euill will without sincerity without zeale of enuy coÌ„tentioÌ„ as saith the Apostle that is though he haue no good intent So is it in the Sacrament which is a visible word so that the minister confer it according to the Lords institutioÌ„ his heresy or hypocrisy cannot hurt him that receiueth it For the question is not what is required in a pastour to approue his Ministery before God but what is requisit to the efficacy of the sacrameÌ„t according to the truth of god which the scripture teacheth vs caÌ„not be made voyde by the wickednes of men To which S Augustine agreeth saying that not only the good but also the wicked haue the ministery to Baptise but neither of theÌ„ both haue the power of baptism that Christ hath committed the ministery thereof to seruants but reserueth the power thereof to himselfe Thirdly J say that the scripture sheweth vs the correspondency of circumcision with Baptisme Ezech 1 23. Therfore as the circuÌ„cision giuen by the Apostataes of Samaria was availeable to the children that God acknowledged for his there being no need of reiterating it so as the Samaritans did reiterate that which had ben administred by the Iews as Epiphanius witnesseth So by like reason should not Baptism administred by a heretick be reiterate prouided that he keep the substaÌ„ce of the institution The Prophets indeed do exhort the Samaritanes to repeÌ„tance but neuer cal theÌ„ to a secoÌ„d circumcisioÌ„ though the first wer polluted by many abuses superstitioÌ„s The Bishop of Eureux Against these Arguments with greate apparaÌ„ce of scripture S. Augustine who 10 whole years haÌ„dled this question against the Donatists could not find any actuall and demonstratine proof in the scripture for the doctrine of the Church in this poynt and could oppose vnto them no other thing that would hold the place of an infallible proofe but the tradition authority of the Church Hoc saith he obseruandum est in rebus quod obseruat Ecclesia Dei Questio autem inter vos nos est vera sit Ecclesia Dei ergo à capite sumendum exordiuÌ„ cur schisma feceritis And in another place 〈◊〉 Proinde quamvis huius rei certè de Scripturis Canonicis non proferatur exemplum earundem tamen Scripturarum etiam in hac re a nobis tenetur veritas cum hoc facimus quod vniuersae iam placuit Ecclesiae quam ipsarum Scripturarum commendat autoritas vt quando S. Scriptura fallere non potest quisquis falli metuit huius obscuritate quaestionis eandem ecclesiam de illa consulat quam sine vlla ambiguitate S. Scriptura demonstrat And in another place Bap. â—on Sed illa consuetudo quam etiam tunc hominem sursum versum respicientes non videbant â posterioribus restitutam recte ab Apostolis tradita creditur Et talia multa sunt quae longum esset repetere Now saint Augustine declareth that the opinion of the Donatists was hereticall and the whole Church with him holdeth the Donatists for hereticks and our aduersaries themselues As also it must needs bee that either the Catholikes or the Donatists be hereticks For if Baptisme administred by hereticks bee not true Baptisme the Catholickes which receiue them without Baptizing theÌ„ doe violate this article One Fayth one Baptisme Also I beleeue one Baptisme for remission of sinnes If on the contrary it be true Baptisme the Donatists in rebaptizing them and reiterating and multiplying
contrarie the first intention of the Apostles was to deliuer the doctrines to the Church by tradition of liuely voice word vnwritten Also he saith that the Apostles wrote but by incident or chance Fol. 35. and vpon secondary occasions Let vs see this Enthymeme or imperfect argument of the PirrhoniaÌ„ Logicke The Apostles first taught by liuely voyce Ergo they pretended not to teach by their writings which succeeded their preaching The consequence is as good as who should say One eateth first for to nourish himselfe therfore drink serueth nothing to nourishment A non distributo ad distributum c. If he make an opposition between the coÌ„mandement of the spirit of God the incideÌ„t or the occasioÌ„s which moued the Apostles to write he blasphemeth in diuinitie denying the places of scripture 2. Tim. 3.1 2. Pet. 1.20 21. where it is called inspired of God and doteth in Logick excluding the efficient and principal cause because of the instruments and means that it vseth Also the Apostle saint Iude saith Iude. 3. that there was a necessitie of writing imposed vpon him And in the Reuelation we read that saint Iohn is more than ten times commaunded to write We know that to preach and to write are things verie accordant and which were comprehended in one and the same commaundement giuen to the Apostles â—ath 28 to teach all nations which yet to this day they teach by their writings He which commaunded them the thing which is to teach commaunded also the manners of teaching which are to preach with liuely voice and to set forth the doctrine in writing both of them being fit for teaching and this latter most fit for to continue and to transferre doctrines or instructions vnto posteritie â—enaeus li 3 p 1 So Irenaeus vnderstandeth it saying The Apostles after they had preached with liuely voice the Gospell afterwards gaue it vs in the scriptures by the will of God for to be the foundation and pillar of our faith So the booke intituled Manuale CuratoruÌ„ sheweth it saying there are three sorts of preachings One is by writing as saint Paule did writing to the Romanes Corinthians c. Another is by actions so euery action of Iesus Christ is our instruction the third is by word liuely voyce The Bishop of Eureux for to shew that hee is not alone in his opinion produceth foure places of foure ancient Fathers â—hat is by â—â—ose of our â—â—de often propounded and expounded namely that they shuld be vnderstood not of matters of faith but of the order gouernance of the Church which things being of their owne nature ambulatory subiect to change according to the diuersity of the circumstances of times places persons could not or should not be written Or if they speak of some doctrine not coÌ„teined in the scripture they meane it of the formal tearms which are not there as the words trinity coessentiall sacrameÌ„t the sense matter of which notwithstanding is therin found is drawen from thence either by analogy of faith or by necessary consequence Otherwise it would follow that they had gainsaid contradicted themselues a confess fid sum mor. 72 1. sum 80 22. ere 's to wit S. Basil wheÌ„ he saith that it is a most manifest marke of infidelity a most certain signe of pride to reiect any thing of that which is writteÌ„ or to bring in any thing which is not written S. Epiphanius All things are cleare in the scripture to those which by a holy vse of reasoÌ„ wil draw nere the word of god which haue not coÌ„ceiued an operation of the diuel such as they conceiue 〈◊〉 1. Timoth. â—om that accuse the scripture of imperfection endeuoring to cast themselues into the gulfe of death S. Chrysostome maketh saint Paule speake to Timothie in this manner In stead of mee thou hast the scriptures if thou desirest to learne any thing thou maist doe it from thence Then he addeth De doctrin Christ l. 2. c. If he wrote so to Timothie who was full of the holy Ghost how much more ought wee to thinke that it is spoken of vs. It is manifest that this Father thought that the intention of the Apostles was to leaue to the Churches their writings in stead of instructions by word of mouth which they could not continue after their death Saint Augustine saith In Psal 132 Among the things which are Openly declared in the scripture are All those which containe faith and manners that is Hope and Charitie There is to quitte his foure places and in pieces of the same coyne If hee will agree them let him bestirre himselfe better than he did in the answere he giueth to the place of saint Hilarie that hath these words That which is not conteined in the booke of the law we ought not so much as to know it Hee saith that this should be vnderstood of the Apocrypha books alledged in quality of Canonical What a mockery is this Is not the sentence of S. Hilarie generall or if it be not general is it not vnapt friuolous But the reply was ready That there be many other things to be knowne besides them which are coÌ„teined in the law which conteineth not so much as the principal points viz. the immortality of the soule the resurrection of the body c. What Apocrypha Logick is this to draw an vniuersall conclusion from particular premises And when the same father saith in another place It is good that we content our selues with the things which are written can that plaister cure or so much as couer the wound that this place maketh in his vnwritten Traditions And here let the reader be aduertised once for all That al the sentences of the Fathers how generall soeuer they be what vniuersall marke soeuer be set vpon them are euer shifted off by a restraining them to some particular deed As if the Hypothesis were not decided by the Thesis a particular case by a generall Law which is to make a laughing stocke of the Fathers and to depriue them euen of common sense in making them reason so vnaptly and in occasioning their aduersaries to make vnto them so easie and iust replies To returne to Hilarie the Bishop of Eureux opposeth to the aboue said place another of the same Father taken out of his Commentarie on the second Psalme where he saith That Moses after hee had written the words of the olde Testament consigned certaine more secret mysteries to the seuentie Elders c. which place he saith I haue not read and calleth me a bad scholler in skipping ouer the beginning of the booke for to studie at the end I answere hee sheweth that he himselfe hath not read the note set vpon the margeÌ„t of this place non credo which Hilar. Paris ex â—ffici Carol. Guillar anno 1544. with the authoritie of saint Hierome thinking that these commentaries vpon the Psalmes are for
of Pentecost according to Saint Cyrill and some other bee taken from Tradition â—â—al tom 1. Christ 32 Cardinal Baronius reproouing this opinion of the fathers reprehendeth also by the same meanes Tradition that is to say the word of God after our Bishop for Baronius saith that this affimatioÌ„ of the fathers is without reason And must needs be said that the Tradition which Saint Chrysostom followed was directly contrarie to that of S. Cyrill â—oan hom For he denieth that the mouing of the water was done in certaine time I told the Bishop of Eureux the occasion and institution of this miraculous healing according to the recitall of Lyranus and other Doctors of the Romish Church for to shew with what fables fed are such as are out of taste with the scripture but he called that a blind impudency and said that he sendeth vs to no other tradition than to the words of Saint Iohn which were a tradition before his Gospell was set forth But if he were not more impotent of braine than he whom Christ healed was of his armes legs he would iudge that the question that himselfe propoundeth is 〈◊〉 88 by what proofe it appeared that this miracle of the Poole was not a deceit of the diuell but a true miracle instituted of God Where is it that the beginning or institution of it appeareth in S. Iohn Is it not for this cause that Petrus Comestor hath recourse to the Tradition of them that said That the Queene of Saba hauing seene by the spirit the wood of the crosse of Christ in the house of Libanus aduertised Salomon Histor Euâ— cap. 81 that on it should one die after whose death the country and people of the Iewes should perish Which Salomon fearing buried it in the ground in that place where afterwards was made the Poole And as the time drew neere that Christ our Lord should suffer death and passion this wood floted or swomme aloft on the top of the water c. Lyran. in Iohan. c. 5 But if this tale bee no lesse fabulous than that of Lyranus why then doth not our bishop who is ignorant of othing teach vs the true historie of this true Tradition that we may know whereon was grounded the faith of the Iewes that had recourse to this Poole that we condemne not of superstition and idolatry as well such as vsed it as them that suffered it to wit the Priests Pastors of Ierusalem In the meane while we content our selues to know that almost alwaies so long as the temple stood there was some miracle or other whereby God testified to this people that he had a particular care of them as hauing chosen and adopted theÌ„ from among all other nations of the earth that by this meanes he might inuite theÌ„ to honour serue him as they ought not to haue any other Gods before him And that if some did put their confidence in this water or in the Angell that troubled it without lifting vp their hartes to him that gaue this charge to the Angell and this vertue to the water they must be put in the ranke of those who abusing the miracles which God for a certaine space of time wrought to the christiaÌ„ church for to giue testimonie to the doctrine that his Martyrs had coÌ„fessed sealed by their death for to moue the heatheÌ„ to embrace it haue reestablished a kinde of paganisme and brought in as many new succeeding Gods as there be Saints and places where any miracle is wrought to whome the people being instructed and exhorted by their Bishops and Curates without any warrant of the word of God either written or pronounced direct their vowes bring their offerings and make their prayers for to obtaine that which they should not aske of any but of the Saint of Saints or Holy of Holies I speake not of the frauds and filthie trumperies wherewith the Priests abuse the world and which stinke so abhominably that such among themselues as haue any shame left or any nose to smell are constrayned to stop it To these men belongeth fitly the mysticall Interpretation that Saint Hierome reciteth â—â—â—rom in 〈◊〉 c. 22 vpon the place of Isayah where is spoken of two pooles of Ierusalem and of a lake that he expoundeth from the Traditions of the Pharises which Du Perron and other such euill Angells troubling the water to fish the better endeauour to mende and make vp againe as a cesterne that cannot hold any more that stinking water wherewith they haue watered and bathed those whome the poyson of the Babilonian cuppe had made so lame withered deafe and blinde that they could not finde the issue or way forth of the porches of the Romish Church Now if it were behooufull to haue an expresse word of God conserue alwaies by meanes of Tradition for to vse with a good conscience this remedy of the Poole Behooued it not also to haue the like warraÌ„t for the bringing of sick folke to some Saint that hath the fame of working miracles Againe if the word of God after the doctrine of the Romish church be but of two sortes to wit that which is coÌ„tayned in the holy scripture that which the Apostles haue deliuered by word of mouth to their successors which is called Apostolick Tradition I would earnestly desire that the B. of Eureux to whome no thing is impossible would declare what Apostolick TraditioÌ„ can be alleadged for ground of the miracles done fiue hundred yea a thousand and twelue hundred yeares and more after the death of the last Apostle and if the Apostles did foretell of them before their death in what place are these predictions found namely That at such a time in such a place such a Saint should worke such miracles and that thereunto without daunger of superstition to offer and to pay vowes and to bring their sicke For thus farre wee both agree that for to doe these things with a good conscience it behooueth to be grounded on the word of God we agree also in this which the aduersaries themselues confesse with vs That the Church is no more gouerned by newe reuelations De verbo Dei l 4. c 9 these are the verie wordes of Bellarmine our difference is onely in regard of the meanes whereby this word of God hath beene conserued and in what place it is to be sought Whether it be onely in the olde and new Testament as wee maintaine or else as the Bishop of Eureux affirmeth in the Apostolike Tradition which he maketh double the one absolute the other he calleth subsidiarie If he vouchsafe to enlighten vs in this obscuritie I will confesse that he deserueth himselfe to be put in the number of the Saints and lightned with candles as great as his Croser staffe The instance of the custome the Iewes had to deliuer a malefactor at Easter is yet more impertinent than the former For it is to make tradition to
reckoning and by the testimony of the same warrant the Bishop bringeth all the curses and execrations which the Apostle S. Iude pronounceth are to fall vpon their heads that blaspheme the Scripture of vnsufficiencie and imperfection that is which blaspheme the old and new Testament Let him see if his Mytre be of proofe against these Apostolical fulminatioÌ„s which are of another manner of temper than those of his Iupiter Vatican For to diuert himself from these yrksome thoughts he gathereth certaine flowers out of Luthers booke against king Henry the eight and thinketh to couer therwith al the indignitie out-rage that euer the most impudent Pope or Monke did to Prince or Emperour either to tread them vnder-feet as was the Emperour Frederick the first Or to poison them as was the Emperour Henry the seuenth Or to chaine them and tye them like Dogges vnder their tables as a Duke of Venice was vsed Or to cannonize for saints the Parricides or murtherers of them 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 and â—â—â—le treâ—â—â—ose helâ—â—custs â—ere â—o exeâ— as of late were the murtherers of Henry the third king of France and William of Nassaw Prince of Orange Or to stirre vp dayly against them newe Parricides and murtherers as they often did against the late Queene of blessed memorie Elizabeth which the most shameles calumniator cannot reproach Luther so much as to haue thought of Or to raise and inuent new leagues and seditions for to ouer-flow all Christendome with blood c. Of all these goodly practises of the Apostolike tradition not of Saint Iude the seruant of Christ but of Iudas the betrayer of Christ the Byshop of Eureux esteemeth that the Church of Rome is not tyed to yeelde an accompt For saith he it is not to you fol. 132. that shee is to answere for her actions in this regard O insoluble Argument and ineuitable demonstration worthy the expected hatte which such an Aduocate hath reason to demaund that it may blush for him There remaineth the last Instance taken out of the same Epistle touching the Prophecie of Henoch wherof mentioÌ„ hath been made aboue the reason declared why the Apostle proueth not by scripture the point in question namely because they whom he discribeth in this Epistle as manifest contemners of Iesus Christ would haue made as little accompt of the Scripture so that it was more to purpose to alleadge a judgement described witnessed eueÌ„ by the heatheÌ„ for these profane persons hauing some remnant of shame left in them could not haue denied and reiected that which was confessed and acknowledged as well by strangers as by them of the Church Now it hath been often sayde vnto him that none of his Instances is receiuable for to shew the imperfection of the Scripture vnles he bring forth Instances vpon some points necessarie to saluation whereof is not found any proofe in the Scripture It hath beene shewed him aboue that this Article of the vniuersall judgement is found in Moses and by measure as the light of the world approched and drew neere the doctrine as well of this Article as of all others hath beene more cleerely expressed though the contentious neuer see this light A blind-man seeth as little the light and brightnes of the Sunne at noone-day as that of the morning star It is not for the coÌ„tentious but against theÌ„ that the Scripture is writteÌ„ those spirits that seeke issue of all the proofes of the same shall in the end finde entrance into hell To such Spirits we say that which the Scripture teacheth If any lust to be contentions we haue no such custom 〈◊〉 11.16 â—39 neither the churches of God But at least saith he though there shold be nothing like to it expressed in the Scripture or that the books that contained somthing of it were lost as diuers other writings of the Prophets yet this Oracle would not haue lost her authoritie nor ceased to be the word of God and Doctrine worthy of faith In very truth if all the Scripture were lost it were that which such as he would wish more then any thing in the world For then they would make vs beleeue goodly matters seeing that notwithstanding this light of the Scripture more resplendent now then it hath beene these many ages before they wold without blushing perswade vs that their graines Pictures and other like fopperies are meanes for to attaine to saluation are helps of the blood of Iesus Christ as wel as their Traditions are supplies of the Scripture But if Bellarmine speaking of what was to be doone â—oncil lib. 〈◊〉 for the election of a Pope if in case all the Cardinalls should perish at once affirmeth that it is vnlikely euer to happen Truely wee haue more reason to hope and firmely to beleeue that Iesus Christ who as the Bridegroome hath ioyned to himselfe the Church with an indessoluble band will preserue for her also the contract of mariage the Indenture of the Couenant more necessarie to the Church than the Cardinals to the conclaue And so as that Antichrist with all his wiles endeuours shall neuer be able to abolish it no more than could in times past his predecessor or his figure King Antiochus The Byshoppe of Eureux by this hypothesis doth hee not confesse that if the Church which ought to bee the gardian of the Scriptures should loose them it should erre greatly And if Saint Iohn pronounceth so fearefull a curse against those that adde thereunto or dimish there-from what should become of them who hauing charge to keepe it should let it wholy be lost and should imagine neuertherlesse that they cannot erre But when all the rest should bee lost by what speciall priuiledge should this Epistle of Saint Iude be saued which by reason of the shortnesse of it might bee lost with the first As for the writings of the Prophets that haue beene lost when hee hath answered the place of Saint Augustine aboue alleadged we shall see what shall bee meet to reply thereto Aug. de ciâ— Dei l. 18. In the meane while hee persisteth in his trifling impertinences to alleadge vnto vs still the authoritie of our Doctors who doe not alwayes agree in the exposition of all places though they alwayes agree in the doctrine of all the pointes of Saluation That were good if wee held them in the same degree as they of his Church doe their Popes all whose Expositions notwithstanding they doe not alwayes receiue without exception but are constrained to shift them off by this distinction That they speake sometimes as Popes and sometimes as Doctours and that in the latter qualitie they may be deceiued in doctrine That is to say it is then they deceiue themselues most when they assay to performe some part of their Office that is to teach yea were they Apostles Nowe I demaund of our Byshop whether hee had rather condemne Cardinall Bellarmine who holdeth with Saint Hierome Saint Augustine and all Antiquitie
gather together in paper what hee had scattered in the ayre his distinctions would appeare to bee more prestigious in the one than they seeme to bee specious in the other and that it would bee as harde a thing for him to vnwrappe himselfe from selfe-contradictions by the pen as it is easie for him to dazell and entangle the ignorant by his tongue Hee made account also perhaps that his cause being grounded on the Word vnwritten it could not well be defended by the word written Notwithstanding hauing intelligence since that hee had compiled a little writing on this subiect in fauour of some whom hee was desirous to subuert I haue taken paynes to get a Copie of it to which I haue made this aunswere which may serue in stâ—ade of a Resultate or repetition of our Verball Conference at vvhich vvere present fevve others than his greatest friendes vvho then made such acclamations and since haue sovved such reportes thereof as pleased them But heere not beeing required the applause of men nor any tickeling conceipt of vanitie I entreate the Readeer to ayme vvith mee in this vvriting at the glorie of God onely and the manifestation of his truth for the teaching vvhereof Saint Athanasius vvitnesseth that the Scripture is sufficient Let vs acknovvledge it then for Iudge Athanas 〈…〉 and 〈◊〉 vs reuerence it as Mistres vvhilest our aduersaries take it for partie and pursue it as an enemie The answer of D. Daniell Tillenus to the Bishop of Eureux his treatice wherby he endeauoreth to proue the insufficiency and imperfection of the holy Scripture and the necessity authority of vnwritten traditions The bishop of Eureux THE vnwritten word of God The B. â— on which we call Apostolicke tradition is of the same force and authority as the written word is and without it the Scripture alone is not suffieient to confute all heresies The Iewes did beleeue when the body of the law of Moyses was giuen vnto them many things which either were not conteyned in the fiue bookes of Moyses or did not appeare vnto them to be therein conteined As the immortality of the soule the resurrection of the body the last iudgement Paradise Hell the Creation and distinction of the orders of Angells the being and creation of deuills and many other points which they could not know by humane science but it must needs be that they receiued them by reuelation from God and therefore that they had another way for to deriue and conserue the word of god besides that of the Scripture D. Tillenus his answer To him that would heare none but Fathers speake it may be answered in a word as one of the number saith Hillar iâ— Psalm 1â— Whatsoeuer is not conteined in the booke of the Law we ought not to know it He that speaketh so would not haue vs seeke that elsewhere which is not found in the Scripture We say that all that is necessary to saluation touching those and all other points is conteyned in the scripture either in expresse tearmes or in necessary consequence and true analogue Gen. 17â— Exod 6. â— Exod. 20â— In the writings of Moyses we find that God maketh a couenant with the Hebrews that he promiseth to be their God and the God of their seed to exercise mercy vpon them vnto thousand generations that is to say for euer to dwell in the middest of them 〈◊〉 10. 〈◊〉 29. to keepe them as the apple of his eie In them is Israell called happie for that it was saâ—ed by the lord God 7.9 Iacob being ready to depart out of this life comforted himselfe in the expectation of the saluation of the lorde to shew that he went to take possession of a bâ—tter countrey He and his Father called themselues straungers in the land of Canaan which notwithstanding was promised them for inheritance Therefore they beleeued the true country that is to say Paradise This consequent is not onely necessary but also manifest by the testimony of the Apostle who draweth it from this place of Scripture not from any vnwritten Tradition 〈◊〉 1.9.13 when he saith that they which so speake shew playnly that they seek a Country which is the thing that Du Perron can not find in the bookes of Moyses although we find in them that the wicked and vnfaithfull that defended lyes against the trueth 〈◊〉 â— 11 did wish it For what else meaneth that false prophet Balaam when he sayth O that my soule might dye the death of the righteous or that my end might bee like theirs This wish expresseth clearly enough the appreheÌ„sioÌ„ he had of the last iudgment 〈◊〉 â— 1 When Moyses calleth the Israelites the children of the Lord their God forbidding them to sorrow for the dead as infidells he speaketh no lesse manifestly of the resurrection 〈◊〉 4.13 than S. Paul when he exhorteth the Thessalonians not to lament for the dead as they do that haue no hope 〈◊〉 3.2 VVhen Moyses saith that God holdeth all his saints in his hands he saith the same thing that is sayd by other that haue written after him That the soules of the righteous are in the hands of the Lord and that they commit their soules vnto him 〈◊〉 â— 1 19. 2.32 24. â— Iud. â— 29 â—0 19 as vnto a faithfull creator So when he speaketh of the book of life of the taking vp of Henoch which Tertullian calleth Candidatum aeternitatis when he saith that those that feare God and keepe his commaundements shall be happy for euer when he setteth before the Iewes life and death blessing and cursing when he threatneth them with the fire of the Lords wrath Deut. â— which shall burne euen to the bottome of hell shall consume the earth with her encrease and set on fire the foundations of the mountaines VVhen I say he writeth all these things he sheweth clearly enough the immortality of the soule the resurrection of the body the last iudgement Paradise and Heâ—l which points are vnseparably linked together Jf these testimonies seeme not cleare enough to the Bishop of Eureux who confesseth neuerthelesse that in Daniell and the other Prophets that haue written since Moyses there is some found Let him consider that they which among the Corinthians denied the resurrection 1. Corâ—â— shifted off the one as well as the other VVhich sheweth that if those that doo erre in some point will not suffer themselues to be vanquished by the scripture that commeth not through any obscurity and imperfection of which they falsely accuse it but from their owne malice and blindnes Moreouer it is to be noted that it hath pleased God orderly to distribute the reuelation of his will of his promises and of his couenant by certayne degrees increasing alwaies the measure of this reuelation as the age of the world increased This oeconomy is clearely obserued in the Scripture if we mark therein the degrees from Adam to Abraham from Abraham to
31 is sufficient for vs to beleeue that Iesus is that Christ and that in beleeuinge we might haue life in his name I remember that in the verball conference the B. of Eureux accused those of our side of a most wicked falsifying of this place for hauing translated the word tavta these things in stead of referring it onely to miracles of which alone he maintained that S. Iohn meant And because I could not get from him any cleare answer as then on expositioÌ„s of S. Augustin and saint Cyrill that I alledged wholly agreeable vnto ours I will in this place rehearse them â—t Tract 〈◊〉 45. The first saith though Iesus had doon very many things yet all were not written but that which seemed sufficient for the saluation of beleeuers was chosen to be written The other speaketh yet more clearely 〈◊〉 lib. 2. in 〈◊〉 cap. vlt. All the things saith he that Iesus did are not written but only those things that the writers thought sufficient as well for doctrin as for manners c. The B. of Eureux The apostles do not onelie giue vs examples of the vse of traditions â—s 2 15. but also commaundement Obserue saith Saint Paul the traditions that you haue receiued of vs be it by worde or by our Epistle In which place those of Geneua haue takeÌ„ out of their Frenche Bible the word Tradition which is in the Greeke and in the Latine and haue put insteade thereof Instruction To which it cannot be answered that saint Paul restraineth the generality of this proposition to the traditions onely which haue since beene written For it is in consequence of a tradition that he had giuen them concerning the cause that hindred the comming of Antichrist which was neuer written that he frameth this generall law And in this sence also do saint Basill S. Epiphanius and saint Chrysostome interprete it D. Tillenus his answer When saint Paul wrote this Epistle there was scarce any scripture of the new Testament For after our aduersaries own account no Euangelists yet had written and saint Paule had than written but his former Epistle to the Thesâ—â—â—nians Seing then these two Epistles did not conteine al the doctrin of Christ necessary to be known the Apostle fitly exhorteth the Thessalonians to obserue not only what he had afore written vnto them but also what he had taught them by word of mouth But doth it follow therefore that none of that should afterward be written Du Perron saith it doth because it is in consequence of a Tradition that he had giuen them touching the cause that hindred the comming of Antichrist which was neuer written that he frameth this generall Law But that is altogether false 2. Thes 2. â— we need but looke into the text to know of what Traditions the Apostle speaketh We ought alwayes saith he giue thanks vnto God for you because he hath chosen you to saluation through the sanctification of the spirit and the faith of truth whereunto he hath called you by our Gospell to obtaine the glory of our Lord Iesus Christ VVhereupon he addeth Wherefore keepe the Traditions that is to say these instructions of truth which you haue learned and which I haue giuen you either by word of mouth or by our Epistle By the consequence Du Perron draweth it should folow that part of this tradition touching the hindring of Antichrists comming should be written which vvas doon and therefore he ouerthroweth his own exposition Furthermore though all he saith were of force as it is of none yet could he but prooue thereby the traditions of the Apostles and not an infinite number of others which the Church of Rome causeth to be obserued as the Lawes of god vvhich vve know by their histories vvere instituted many ages after the Apostles times If because Moyses had giuen som instructions by vvord of mouth to the Israelites the Cabalists and Ievvish Rabins vvould make vs receiue the Traditions of their Thalmud who would admit them And if du Perron beleeue the Fathers let him beleeue then Tertullian Chrysostome and saint Hierome who say that after the ruine of the Romane Empire the throne of Antichrist should be established 〈◊〉 â—ome Which therefore is fulfilled seeing that the ruine o◠〈◊〉 Empire is notorious to all the world The B. of Eureux 〈◊〉 â— 2 1 He saith also to Timothie Tu ergo fili confortare in gratia quae est in Christo Iesu quae audisti à me per multos testes haec commenda fidelibus qui idonei crunt alios docere Of which deposite there had bene no neede if all the word of god as our aduersaries pretend to proue by this same Chapter had beene sufficiently written or should haue been from the very time of the Apostles D. Tillenus his answer 〈◊〉 1 13 The apostle himselfe declareth what he meaneth by this deposite which he exhorteth Timothie to keepe namely the patterne of wholsom words he had heard of him which consisteth in faith and loue and it followeth in this very verse that he shoulde communicate it vnto faithfull men which should bee able to teache others But in the third chapter he sayth most plainly 〈◊〉 3 15 â— that by the Scripture not onely Laymen as they call them but also the man of God that is to say the Pastour or Doctor of the Church should and may bee taught and made wise vnto saluation and absolutely instructed and made perfect vnto euery good work VVhence it followeth that this deposite or matter committed of trust vnto Timothie is nothing else but the scripture which is sufficiente euen for the saluation of a Bishop and not of a Lay man onely which later du Perron in our conference was forced to confesse finding no other distinction to escape The B. of Eureux Moreouer there are fowr points which our aduersarie shoulde with vs and condemne as we doe of heresie those that repugne the same at least wise touching the three former namelye the trueth of Baptisme of little children that of the Baptisme of heretickes the proceeding of the holy Ghost from the Father and the Sonne and the translation of the feast from Saturday to Sondaye which can not bee concluded by any demonstraâ—â—â— proofe from any place of Scripture D. Tillenus his answer In al these articles if we beleue him the Scripture is no fouÌ„datioÌ„ pillar of our faith as Irenaeus sayd Irenaeuâ— c 1 Tertul. â— Hermoâ— And they that added them to Scripture need not fear the woe by Tertullian who reuereÌ„ced the fulnesse of the scriptures threatned after S. Iohn to those which cannot shew that that which they say is written nor the anthema of S. Augustin against those August Ecclesicâ— cont lit lib 3 cap Chrysosâ— Homil â— 20 cap â— that cannot reade in Scriptures the doctrine they teache nor the reproaches of Chrysostome who calleth them theeues that go vp by any other way into the fold than by the
Adam by whom they are sanctified and quickned If by faith imputed the B. of Eureux meaneth a quality without and foorth of children and if he say that they please God the Holy Ghost not making any reall change in them He destroyeth these principles of Scripture which say Reuel That none vncleane thing entreth into heauen Rom. 1 That the iust shall liue by his own faith That none hath accesse to the kingdom of heauen vnles he be regenerate That without faith it is vnpossible to please God Now faith and vnbeliefe are things immediatly contrary not that we would say that children do beleeue after the same manner as they that be of years with an actuall knowledge but that the Holy Ghost worketh in them an inclination and power to belieue taking away from their hart that which naturally repugneth VVhen saint Augustin saith that children are baptized in the faith of others as either of their parents or of them that present them or of the whole Church he excludeth not all operation of the Holy Ghost in the person of children which in another place he plainly confesseth to be in them As when he saith Aug. Ep ad Dar We say that the holy ghost dwelleth in litle children which are baptized though they know him not For in that they doo not know him it is no otherwise thē as they knovv not their reasonable soule yea their life Whereof notvvithstanding it doth not folow that they haue neither reasonable soule nor life This operation is as easy to god as to vs incomprehensible And the hart of an ould man before he be chaunged by regeneration is no lesse deaffe and vnable than the hart of a child the chaunge whereof is not none because it is vnknown likewise the disobedience and rebellion which is in them that be of years is a disposition contrary to faith which is not in litle ones who receiue oftentimes greater measure of grace than they that be of years vvho notwithstanding after our Aduersaries themselues are not vncapable of the externall sign though they ask it but of hypoctisy For he that administreth it vnto them can not knovv theyr fayth and capacity of grace seeing the Apostles themselues were therein deceiued Acts 8.1 as appeareth by the example of Simon Magus Seing then that the grace conferred to children by Baptism is a thing reall in their owne persons and not imputed only witnesse the examples of Ieremy and S. Iohn Baptist sanctified from their mothers womb an imputed signe is not sufficient no more than an imputatiue Paradise would suffice the possession wherof Iesus Christ promiseth vnto them so reall 8.3 as he affirmeth that none shall enter therinto vnles he receiue him as a little child Whereas he saith reason would that Baptisme should follow faith 〈◊〉 1 wherof it is a Sacrament that is altogether friuolous For Circumcision is also called the seale of the righteousnesse of faith and in another place the sign of repentance Let him therfore ask the reason of God why he did not defer Circumcision from children till such time as they were capable of such a faith and repentance as the Anabaptists require To that which he addeth that in the conuersion of Samaria men women ar only spoken of who were there baptized without any mention of litle ones though it cannot be doubted but that there wer som The answer hath bin made aboue namely that those were not born in the couenant therfore before they could be admitted thereunto by the sign of Baptism it behoued them to be instructed in the doctrine There needed not any speciall commandement touching the Baptism of little children to those that knew the foūdation of the new couenant by the correspondency of circumcision Children notwithstanding are comprehēded in the generall commandement of baptising all that shall be saued The B. of Eureux There is yet one reason that is very rife in the mouth of Catholicks being vnderpropped by the tradition of the church and by the interpretation which hath alwais run currant among catholicks namely Nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aqua Spiritu sancto non potest introire in regnum Dei But this in the mouth of Caluin those of this sect is of no force For hee interpreteth there Aqua not for the elementary water but for the holy ghost And when it is replyed that that were a repetition of the same thing vnder two diuerse words he opposeth Baptisabit vos Spiritusancto igne wher he will haue Ignis Spiritus sanctus to be one and the same thing which he doth for to exclude the necessity of Baptism But in a word to all that will haue this place serue their turn the Anabaptists who reiect the tradition interpretation of the church do answer that this propositiō is to be vnderstood of them that are capable of Baptism As when it is said in the same chapter He that beleueth not is already iudged It is vnderstood say they of them which are of years to beleeue D. Tillenus his answer He would bereaue vs of the argument taken out of Saint Iohn Except a man be borne againe of water c. Ioh. 3.5 because we take this word Water for the spirit as in another place the word Fire and spirit signifie one and the same thing Math. 3 But although from this place canot bee concluded the absolute necessity of Baptism yet neuertheles we ought to conclude frō thence the absolute necessity of regeneration The Anabaptists vnderstāding this word water of outward Baptism as the Church of Rome doth do reasō thus seing Baptism is expresly called regeneration seing that children are not capable of regeneration which is doon by faith Baptisme is not to be communicated vnto them To which we answer For as much as regeneration is absolutely necessary to saluation children vnles they will damn them all are partakers therof therfore the seale of this grace of regeneration is rightly applyed vnto them The reply that du Perron maketh for them that this sentence of S. Iohn is to be vnderstood only of them that are capable of baptisme through yeares of knowledge is nothing currāt against vs but against the church of Rome which interpreteth this place of the absolute necessity of externall baptism of which it cannot otherwise choose but that many children are depriued and therefore excluded from saluation after their doctrine The B. of Eureux Now against these arguments which they so easily by their solutions vndoe when they are not constrained with the authoritie of Tradition and the interpretation of the Church they haue many other for it in apparance stronger as that Baptism is a dependaunce and a seale of faith and therefore that those that are not capable of faith are not capable of Baptisme That baptisme is called the washing of Regeneration That Regeneration is made by the worde of God you are all the children of
god through faith saith saint Paul And saint Peter you are horne againe not of a corruptible seede but of an incorruptible by the word of god that our Lord saith he that shal beleeue and be baptized c. Saint Paul One faith one Baptisme saint Phillip to the Eunuch that asked him if he might be baptized If thou beleeue thou maist That the Sacraments are sensible signes to those to whome they are Sacraments that they are sacramentes to those to whome they are conferred that therefore they are to be sensible in the quality of signes otherwise they are not sacraments That Baptisme is not sensible to little children in this quality neither can afterward become so so that they must of necessity relie on the faith of others that they haue beene baptized and therefore it is not a sacrament vnto them That Iesus Christ did neuer baptize them neither himselfe nor his Apostles according to the recitall of Scriptures On the contrary that the scripture seemeth to haue excepted them expressing viros mulieres That if the Baptisme of little children be not true and lawfull besides that those that conferre it vnto them prophane the seale of the Couenant and pollute the blood of the Testament applying it to a matter vncapable they commit an other sacriledge in not reiterating it to them which afterwards are capable of it and to whome it is necessary if not by necessity of meanes at least after our aduersaries themselues by necessity of precept And therefore Seruet said that it were an impiety more then Turkish and diuelish And in a word if the Baptisme of little children be not true and lawfull our aduersaries Church who haue all in their infancy beene baptized hath no true Baptisme And therefore is not the true Church For saint Paul saith that Christ hath purified his Church by the washing of water in his word and themselues say that the true Church is that which hath the pure preaching of the word and the sincere administration of the sacraments And to conclude in a word this point either they or the Anabaptists are heretickes For it is an article of faith that there is one Baptisme one Faith as saith saint Paul and the symbole of the Church saith I beleeue one baptism for remission of sins Now if Baptisme of little children be not true Baptisme those which baptize them haue no Baptisme and therefore are heretickes violating this article of saith I beleeue one Baptisme And if it bee true Baptism the Anabaptists are hereticks who rebaptize them For they redouble Baptisme against that article of faith I beleeue one Baptisme It being then necessary that one of the two sides be hereticall and it not being possible by the scripture alone to verifie which of the two it is it followeth that all heresie cannot be confuted by the Scripture alone Out of which I frame this Syllogisme Whatsoeuer conteineth sufficientlie the principles of a science should also be able to prooue all the propositions pertaining to the said science and to confute all that repugn the same Now euery heresie repugneth the science of diuinitie and religion And the scripture alone cannot confute all heresies Therfore the scripture containeth not sufficiently all the principles of doctrine necessary to the science of diuinity and religion And therefore we must employ therein other principles conioyntly with the scriptures which cannot haue authority in this case if they bee not reuealed by the word of God It must therefore bee graunted that besides the word of god written ther is yet another part of the same word not written among which also saint Augustin against this heresie concerning the Baptisme of little children saith Cōsuetudo matris ecclesiae in baptisandis paruulis non est spernenda neque omnino recipienda nisi Apostolica esset Traditio D. Tillenus his answer Thus are easily confuted all the other reasons of the Anabaptists that he bringeth foorth after ours For they be but repetitions of the solutions he giueth to ours That Baptism is a seale of fath That it is called the washing of Regeneration That Regeneration is made by faith and by the incorruptible seed of Gods word That saint Phillip sayd to the Eunuch If thou beleeue thou maist be saued c. For it hath bin shewed that the children which enter into the kingdome of heauen are regenerate That this Regeneration is don otherwise in them that in such as be of years of knowledge That the sentences of Saint Peter and S. Phillip and other like are necessarily vnderstood of them that were capable of the hearing of the word as were all those with whom the Apostles had to do when they began to gather the Christian Church To apply to children that which is spoken only to such as be of years the consequence is as foolish as if a man should depriue children of corporall nourishment because the Scripture saith 〈◊〉 3.10 he that doth not worke should not eate which is necessarily meant of such as are of years to work How will his Syllogisme now stand which he frameth thus Whatsoeuer conteineth sufficiently the principles of a science should prooue all the propositions belonging to the sayd science and to confute all that repugne the same But euery heresie repugneth the science of Diuinity and the scripture alone can not confute all heresies Therefore it conteyneth not sufficiently all the principles necessary c. The assumption of this syllogisme is already aboue confuted by the testimonies euen of those very same from whom he pretendeth that the most part yea all the principles not conteyned in the Scripture must be taken I could heer adde a greate number of other proofes and testimonies but that J shunne prolixity I will therfore only oppose two other syllogisms I. In the diuine wisedom there is perfect knowledge of diuinity 〈◊〉 19.7.8 The holy holy scripture giueth this wisedom therfore it giueth the perfect knowledge of diuinity II. The principles of a science are not contrary one vnto another But the most part of the vnwritten principles of the Romish diuinity repugn and destroy those that are written in the ould and new Testament therefore they can not be true principles of true Diuinity The Bishop of Eureux The second heresy which cannot be refuted by the Scripture is that of the Rebaptizing of hereticks For there is no one place in the writings of the Prophets or Apostles that witnesseth that the Baptisme which is among hereticks is true Baptisme Contrariwise there are infinite places which seeme to repugne the same As the words of our Lord hee which shall beleeue and bee baptized c And that of sainte Paule one faith one Baptisme whereof is concluded that seeing there is no fayth among hereticks and that this vnity of fayth of which Saint Paule speaketh is not found among them there is no Baptisme So that they which haue beene Baptised by them are no more baptised then those on whose head by
side he hath learned of Cicero that faith is a truth constancie of that which one saith or doth on the other side the Councill of Constance forbiddeth him to keepe faith with heretickes VVhence he ingeniously concludeth â—els 19. that if he had not kept the truth of that was said and done in our conference he had not kept the Decree of the councill but had burst and let out the winde of that holy and sacred Canon considering withall that such frauds cannot be tearmed wicked but godly according to the doctrine of the same Church because they are done for a good intent As for me sith such Canons are not forged in our Church nor such distinctions in our schooles I am not permitted to vse the same liberty wherefore I will adde nothing to the bare recitall of that historie where I haue imitated neither his disguisements nor his inuectiues But if there be found any word somewhat free let him attribute that eyther to the necessitie of my defence or to the delicatenesse of the dayes and let him call to minde that he which saith whatsoeuer hee listeth shall in the end heare what he liketh not when the sharpenes of the truth beginneth to alter the sweetnesse of the delight And since he taketh a verie great pleasure when he reproacheth me that I would not continue the conference vnlesse it were written and signed on both parts so farre am I from repenting me of it or denying it that heere againe I confesse that I insisted vpon it with all endeuour that hee may see that when the truth permitteth me I oppose not my selfe any whit to his delight For it sufficeth me for my contentation to beleeue that the courteous Reader will make none other iudgement of this my iust and necessarie instance Epist 74. than that which S. Augustine hoped when Pascentius the Arrian hauing refused to write and to signe in a disputation that hee had with him neuerthelesse vaunted that hee had ouercome him knowing well that his falsehood could not be conuinced by any act For in that are the lurking holes saith S. Augustine which they seeke that are more desirous of contention than of the truth And as touching the vanities and lies of Pascentius he answereth It is easie to ouercome Augustine but heed is to bee taken whether it be by the truth or by exclamations If it hath not beene easie for the Bishop of Eureux to vanqâ—ish mee in the one sort yet hath it beene most easie for him to doe it in the other being in the middest of his Satellites or parasites who by their acclamations did reenforce his his cries and did like the birds of Psaphon sing his praises But this Psaphon proclamed great god by the chirping of birds Cool Rhod. antiqu Lact. l. 3. c. 5 was soone after declared great deceiuer by the iudgement of meÌ„ For conclusion I giue him the same aduertisement that S. Augustine gaue to Pascentius that he busie not himselfe in seeking how he may ouercome Tillenus which is but a man and the least of men but that he take heed how he may ouercome the truth Vbi sup the perfection of the scripture how with his hammer of winde he can spoyle breake or clippe the tables of the law of God more pure more hard than any Gold than any Diamond the least piece or shiuer of which is more than sufficient to pierce and breake in pieces the forehead of this Goliah though it be of brasse and shamefully to ouerthrow to the earth al this great Colossus which so proudly lifteth vp himselfe against heauen against the voyce which breaketh Cedars Psal 29. and which maketh the mountaines to quake ⧠An Aduertisement to the Reader THou shalt vnderstand Christian Reader that the Bishop wrote since a reply câ—ncerning onely some of the first pointâ— heerein touched priuily passing it into the hands of some of his frienâ—s and fauorites and some whom he laboured to peruert Wherein though his principall intent was secretly to disgrace both the sacred Scripture and this defender of it yet hath it turned wholy to his own disgrace by occasioning this learned man largely to answere it and so more fully to cleare the truth concerning the points touched in his reply VVhich aunswere of D. Tillenus I haue heere also for thy benefit added onely the Bishops reply I haue purposely omitted partly because the ground or as much as is needfull for the vnderstâ—nding of the matter is alreadie aboue at large set downe and partly because it being not meete to trouble thee with needlesse superfluities each word and matter of any moment or worth the answering is in the answere euerie where verbatim for the most part expressed A DEFENCE OF THE SVFFICIENCIE and perfection of the Holy Scripture Against the Cauillations of the Bishop of EVREVX by which he endeauoureth to maintaine his Treatise of the Vnsufficiencie and Imperfection of the holy Scripture THE first question betweene the Bishop of Eureux and I is general namely whether the holy Scripture be perfect and sufficient for to instruct vs in the knowledge of saluation or whether it be not sufficient for that effect The other is speciall namely whether these articles the Immortalitie of the soule the Resurrection of the bodie the last Iudgement Paradise Hell the Creation and distinction of the orders of Angels the Beeing and Creation of Diuels are contained in the bookes of Moses or no In these questions I had attributed the Negatiue to the Bishoppe of Eureux taking the Affirmatiue for my selfe He calleth that Deceiptes because he saith not that the Scripture is vnperfect or vnsufficient but that without Tradition it is not sufficient to refute all heresies And for that hee saith not that these things are not contained in the writings of Moses but either that they were not or did not appeare to the Iewes to bee therein conteined Let vs treate sincerely and leaue deceipts to those who beleeuing none of the foresaide points haue termed Moses a Deceiuer perhaps because he spake too euidently for their liking To the first deceipt he casteth on me is sufficiently answered by a discourse of purpose vpon the Iustification of the Title of his Treatise As touching the other we will first see whether these things be in Moses or no. Secondly we will dispute whether they doe appeare to be there or no. If they be there to what purpose doth hee frame InstaÌ„ce from it to shew the imperfection of the Scripture which is the only scope of his booke Why reiecteth he the places quoted to this purpose out of the fiue bookes of Moses Why are all the reasons brought for the affirmatiue but vaine cold coniectures with him Why sheweth hee not the proper formal places whence I should take them in which alone they are conteined But if they be not contained in the books of Moses wherefore is hee ashamed to confesse it Why am I a Deceiuer with
neuer tooke the liberty to ordaine any thing of his owne head not so much as in policie or ciuil gouernement He answereth that this is false obiecting vnto me the historie of Iethro will say that Moses practised the counsell that Iethro gaue him touching the establishmeÌ„t of Iudges ouer the people of Israell without any approbation from God which is one of the boldest falshoodes can bee made and such as hee is wont falsly to obiect vnto others For to conuince it do but see the text where the common latine translation saith If thou doe this thing thou shalt fulfil the commaundement of God Exod. 18 23 and the Hebrew If thou dost this thing and if God so commaund thee thou maist bee able to endure Now we grant that if we had alwaies such persons as the Apostles were or as Moses and the Prophets vnder the Lawe were for to instruct vs in euery point and not such as may leade millions of soules together into hell Dist 4â— si Papa as the Pope doth and may doe by vertue of his owne lawes We should not haue so much occasion to keepe our selues so strictly tyed to the Scripture though notwithstanding Act. 17 the first Christians examined the preaching of the Apostles by the Scripture of the old Testament by which themselues also prooued it though they had an immediate calling an infallible certainty and an incomparable authority but these gifts of God beeing but for a time for the beginnings and foundation of the Christian Church and we being aduertised by the Holy Ghost of the comming of wolues of false Prophets that shal rise vp in the middest of the Church We conclude that it is most necessary to keepe vs to their writings and that it is more dangerous to say Act. 20. â— 30. 1 Pet. 2. that they haue not written whatsoeuer is necessarie for vs than to say that they haue not taught all by word of mouth to euery particular Church for returning often to visite them that which they had not said at one time they might adde and supply it at another for which there would be no more any remedie after their death if wee found not in their writings that which is necessarie for our saluation And therefore though the points aboue prooued by Moses were not conteined in his writings yea though Moses had written nothing at all yet could not that any thing at all helpe the Bishop of Eureux his cause vnlesse hee shew first that the traditions of the Romish Church are naturally engrauen in the hearts of men as the immortalitie of the soule And secoÌ„dly that in al the Christian Church spread throughout all the nations of the world god had established the same form touching the oeconomie and gouernment and the dispensation of his mysteries as was established among this people only conducted by Moses afterwards taught by the Prophets extraordinarily raised vp immediately sent during the ordinary ministery of the Leuitical Priesthood And therfore since that the curate of euery particular Church that acknowledgeth the Pope 〈◊〉 ver 3 â— in the 〈◊〉 representeth the catholick Church as say the Doctours of the Romish Church it is to be beleeued that the grossest beast so that he beare the marke of the beast of Rome is holden in like estimation indued with the same gifts as was Moses Isaiah S. Paule For saith the B. of Eureux the Church is so assisted with the spirit of God according to the promises of Christ her spouse that whether it bee for grace or for interpretation of this word he neuer suffereth it to fal into errour And therupon he reproacheth me that I vnderstand not the meaning of this proposition The Church cannot err in matters of Saluation Let the Christian Reader iudge how I vnderstand it If we take this word Church for the vniuersall Church the bodie of Christ wherof part is tryuÌ„phant in heauen part stil militant on earth both being vnited to their head by the power of his spirit that proposition is most true If on the contrarie the Church be taken but for that part which is scattered on earth I say it is most false For that which is subiect to infirmitie to imperfection to errour and ignorance in euery one of his parts cannot make a whole which is perfect But there is not a man that sinneth not 〈◊〉 â—8 46. â—2 〈◊〉 13.9 â—4 7. saith Salomon and Saint Iames all of vs knowe but in part and Prophesie but in part Neither is there any one member which hath not neede to take euery day groweth according to the measure of the gift of Christ So that all the promises of the Spouse to the Church are to bee vnderstoode of that which hee daily worketh and encreaseth in his not of that which is alreadie perfected and finished And Du Perrons conclusion is no lesse false and vnapt than this GOD saith hee hath promised vs the beginning the progresse and the end therefore wee haue the end at the same instant as we haue the beginning The titles of perfection which are some times attributed to the children of GOD setteth before them rather the marke whereat they should ayme than any waies imprinteth in them an opinion of hauing already attained it So we cal a building a House thogh it be not yet finished If this perfection were wholly attained to there would remaine no more any thing to be builded and the power of God should not bee made perfect in our weaknes Iesus Christ washeth and cleanseth his Church euery day but it shall not be wholy cleane without spot or wrinkle till the day of the Lambes mariage when the Bridegrome shall bring his Spouse into his celestiall chamber Wee acknowledge the perpetuall assistance of Gods Spirit to his Church which is the soule of the Church and giueth spirituall life thereunto But life is one thing and perfect health without any infirmity is another thing It is one thing to haue a natural operation which is euer done after a fashion in which there is some necessitie an other thing to haue a-voluntarie operation which is done at discretion with liberty the holy Ghost assisteth the Church so far forth as to giue it life which is a thing wholy necessary for the accoÌ„plishmeÌ„t of the promises of her husband Christ for if the Spirit did in this sort faile the Church the Church would also faile Iesus Christ but this life this light of grace doth not abolish that of nature which is in euery meÌ„ber of the Church which maketh it often to faint to faile to fall though neuer vtterly to fall away The holy Ghost gouerneth it as well as reason gouerneth the will in man But as the will doth often swarue froÌ„ reason yet without loosing it wholy or altogither 1. Tim. 3.1 so the Church swarueth often from the spirit which notwithstanding doth not wholy forsake it for all that The Church remaineth also
him in attributing vnto him this opinion This new Gnostick hath hee forgot that first principle viz. Of euery thing either the affirmatiue is true or the Negatiue the one being immediatly opposed to the other as it must be in matter of disputation Againe if these points be not conteined in Moses can his writings bee other than vnsufficient imperfect especially after his own definition wherby he defineth an imperfect vnsufficient thing to be when it is not sufficient to the end for which it is destinated and according to the maner wherby it is ordained therunto Tim 3 16 â— The end office of the Scripture is to teach the man of God that he may be perfect absolutely instructed vnto euery good worke Now if the first principles fundamentall points of this instruction be wanting therin if we must deriue them from some other way as he saith besids the Scripture It followeth either that the maÌ„ of God may be perfectly instructed without beleeuing the imortality of the soule the resurrectioÌ„ of the body Paradise hel c. which is the perfection not of a Christian faith but of a Pirrhonian beleefe Or els that the bookes that should teach theÌ„ yet coÌ„teine theÌ„ not wholy are as imperfect as a humane body would be without a head without a hart yea without a soule or as a tutour or scool Mr for so S. Paul caleth the law Gal. 3.24 which sheweth not to his disciple so much as the .1 rudimeÌ„ts or principles without which notwithstaÌ„ding he should neuer be capable to learne or vnderstaÌ„d any thing Also if none of the foresaid points be contayned in Moses it followeth that S. Augustine did wrongfuly shew by so many reasons Cont. Cresâ— Gram. l. 1. c. 17. 18. that Iesus Christ was a good Logician it would follow also that he that put him in the rank of deceiuers with Moses Mahomet did him no wrong for euery Sophister is a deceiuer and he which alledgeth for a demonstratiue proofe that which is but a vaine cold coniecture is a Sophister now if the place of Moses that Christ alledged to the Saduces for to proue the resurrection of the dead Exod. 3 6. Matth. 22.32 be not a demonstratiue proofe it is the trick of a Sophister to haue alledged it for such Also it would follow that Christ in approouing the opinion of the Iewes who thought to haue life eternall in the scripture if it were erroneous did not the office of a faithful teacher for that by this scripture is vnderstood the bookes of Moses it is manifest by the 45 46. and 47. verses of the same chapter where our Sauiour saith Iohn 5.39 that the Iewes trusted in Moses that Moses accused theÌ„ that Moses wrote of him That they could not beleeue his wordes because they beleeued not Moses writings Of necessity then whosoeuer will not openly blaspheeme Iesus Christ declare himselfe an vnmasked Atheist must acknowledge that the foresaid points are conteyned in the bookes of Moses It remaineth now to shew how they be there whether they do apeare to be there or no. I say they do so appeare to be there as maÌ„ is able to se theÌ„ there but to discerne theÌ„ he must haue the eye of his soule opeÌ„ clensed like as for to see the Sun which is the clerest thing in the world the eye of the body must be open seeing Now the vnderstanding of the natural vnregenerate maÌ„ is obscured with darknes is but darknes ye is dead that is to say depriued aswel of life as of spiritual sight 1 Cor. 2.1 which is the cause he caÌ„not see the things that are of the Spirit of God finding but folly in them And so not onely the Lawe of Moses but also the Gospell of Iesus Christ notwithstanding the brightnesse of it is hid to them that perish Cot. 4.3 of whom the God of this world hath blinded the vnderstandings that the light of the Gospell of the glory of Christ should not shine in them Both the Lawe and the Gospell become cleare vnto men when the Spirit of God by the light of his grace expelleth inwardly the darkenesses of their nature and the darnesses that the Prince of darknesse hath added therunto Pet. 119. Cor 13.12 when hee outwardly sheweth the light of the Scripture shining in darke places vntil such time as we see face to face the things which in this world cannot be seene but in a glasse darkely Here he will reply Whence commeth then this diuersitie of interpretations Whence commeth it that whosoeuer is truely inlightned by the Spirit of God findeth not streight waies the true meaning of the Scripture I answer that it is one thing to be truely inlightned another thing to be perfectly inlightned in al things It is one thing to vnderstand all the points necessarie to saluation and another thing to be able rightly to expound all the places of the Scripture one by one It is one thing to erre in the exposition of a particular place another thing to erre in a generall point of Doctrine yea though all the points be not of like importance It is one thing to say that the Scripture is perfect in it selfe conteining perfectly al that is necessary to saluation and another thing to say that men comprehend perfectly this perfection The Apostle saith that In this life we knowe but in part Cor. 13.9 we prophecie but in part It belongeth vnto God alone to know all things and in all perfection Now as there be childreÌ„ of light which see but by glymse as it were because they receiue this light by little little by degrees as the blinde maÌ„ whose eyes Christ opened to whom at first men seemed like trees â—ark 8.24 these acknowledge their ImperfectioÌ„ weaknes of sight Also there are childreÌ„ of darknesse which presume to know al to see all which neuer feele their blindnes â—â—hn 9.41 whose sin as saith our Sauiour remaineth that is to say is incurable For he giueth sight to them that feele their want by his iust iudgemeÌ„t blindeth more more those that thinke they see most clearely which intitle themselues Leaders of the blinde a light to them which are in darknesse Rom. 2 which disdainfully reiect the light of the Scriptures which boast themselues of a greater wisedome than that which God hath in them reuealed which seeing themselues condemned by the Scripture refuse it for Iudge take it for an aduersarie and accuse it as guiltie of the errours of those which follow it It is the speach of the Bishop of Eureux that he said vnto me in the verball conference vpon the errour of saint Cyprian touching the rebaptizing of hereticks And heere he saith That the scripture is so farre from being instituted to serue onely for particuler instruction in all the contentious points of Religion that on the
in the beginning so that there was nothing made nor created before For if any creature had beene before this point then it is that that should haue beene made in the beginning by this meanes the creation of Angels is drawne out of Moses by a necessarie and ineuitable consequence And thus doth Thomas Aquinas vnderstand it That which the same Father saith in the same booke P. 1. q. 6â— art 1. â—â— ninth Chapter vpon which the Bishoppe of Eureux groundeth his replie doth not contradict it Hee saith their creation and their order is not euidently described in the constitution or creation of the world Let our Gnosticke learne that a consequence may bee euident though the Text bee not euident And the euidence of this consequence vpon this point is shewed as well in the place aboue said 〈◊〉 ciuit Dei 〈◊〉 1. C 9 as in the place of the 9 Chapter which our Sophister malitiously geldeth suppressing these words Now they were not omitted to wit Angels I Iudge it by this for that it is written that God rested the seuenth day from all his woorkes that hee had made seeing the booke it selfe heginneth thus In the beginning God created Heauen and Earth so that it is manifest that before the Heauen and the Earth there was not any other thing created And a little after Seeing all thinges were disposed by the creation which are said to haue beene finished in six daies how could the Angells haue beene omitted as if they were not of the workes of God from which he rested the seuenth day These consequences seeme necessarie and euident to Saint Augustine though the literall text of Moses seemed vnto him not euident Hee repeateth the verie same also in another place And euer his ground is It is written saith hee tradition teacheth so The last Doctour of the Rome Church which is Saint Gregorie â—ob li 33 â—4 speaking of the creation of Angels chooseth rather to drawe it from the consequence of some place of Scripture than from the pretended Tradition True it is that the Bishoppe of Eureux would haue mocked at it in good earnest if it were other than a Pope that had drawne it from that text But it sufficeth vs to obserue heere by the way 〈◊〉 33. the effect of subsidiarie Tradition without the weapons whereof our Bishoppe holdeth that the Text of the Scripture is laid open and naked to the malitious interpretation of particular Spirits for these publick and vniuersall Spirits though couered from top to toe with the armour of Tradition behaue themselues sometimes farre worse than simple particular men who finde themselues better armed with foure or fiue little stones taken out of the Scripture than with all the sumptuous armour of Saule that cumbred Dauid so 1. Sam. 17. that he could not goe much lesse fight Now to these foure principall Doctours of the Church I could adde many others which in this point of the Creation of Angels deriue nothing from Tradition but content themselues with the consequences drawne from the Scripture But I will content my selfe with one place of Epiphanius Haeres 65. cont P. Samos because hee is commonly alledged as a great defender of Tradition If the Angels saith hee had not beene created with the Heauen and the Earth the word had not said to Iob VVhen the Starres were made all my Angels praised mee with their voice Then hee bringeth in one asking this question Thou hast shewed that Angels were before the Starres hast said that they were made with the Heauen the earth tell vs whence hast thou made the demonstration of it were they made altogether before Heauen and Earth For the Scripture declareth no where clearely the time of the Creation of Angels In gr contextu corruâ—te legitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 proâ—◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And thou hast shewed that they were before the Starres for if they had not beene how could they haue praised GOD for the creation of the Starres Thereupon he answereth VVee cannot say by our owne discourse the solution of euery question 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But by CONSEQVENCE OF THE SCRIPTVRES For the word of God note that he maketh no distinction betwene the word of God the Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but take the one for the other sheweth clearely that the Angels were not made after the Starres nor before the Heauen and the earth that which is said beeing a thing manifestly vnchangeable that before the Heauen and the earth there was nothing created For in the beginning God created Heauen and Earth so that there was the beginning of the Creation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and there was nothing created afore then By this is manifest on which side is greatest surety and more certainty of the trueth in this point whether in following Tradition with Saint Ambrose Hierome and many Greekes who vnawares let themselues slide into the opinion of Aristotle in steade of the Apostolick Tradition Or in relying on the Scripture by the necessarie euident consequences drawne from it with Saint Augustine Epiphanius and some others Genebrarde notwithstanding the authoritie of the Scripture â—hro Aetat the exposition of these Doctours and the determination of the Church of Rome had rather follow the Greekes and others which hold that Angels are not of the number of the workes of the six daies yet he is not so desperate as Du Perron who denyeth that their creation can be shewed in Moses For hee affirmeth that Moses sheweth plaine enough that they were created of God when he calleth them Angels of the Lord when hee maketh them his ministers and seruants c. And it is by this onely consequence of Scripture Cyril ado â—ul that Saint Cyrill Alex. confuted the impudencie of Iulian the Apostata of whom our Bishoppe hath taken this instance And thus much be spoken concerning their Creation Now for their distinction The Bishop of Eureux saith that the Iewes knewe it by Tradition either absolute or subsidiarie as he calleth it Fol. 70 And Ignatius attributeth to himselfe the knowledge of the Orders of Angels Epist ad Tra. the differences of Archangels vertues Dominions Thrones Powers the Magnificences of principalities the excellencies of the Cherubins and Seraphins the sublimitie of the spirit the raigne of the Lord and the vncomparable Diuinitie of God the father almightie But S. Augustine confesseth here freely his ignoraÌ„ce Euch. ad Lau. c. 85. mocking at those that presume to knowe it without beeing able to proue it And in the Chapter following he sath that there is no need to affirme or deny the things with danger since they may be denied without crime Whence may bee concluded either that the Christian Church hath not beene so faithfull a keeper of the Tradition of the Apostles Fol 106. as Du Perron saith the Synagogue was of the tradition of the Patriarches Prophets which let not
so much as one word of Moses fall to ground Or that the knowledge of these distinctions and differences was not a thing so necessarie as the Bishoppe of Eureux would haue it If account is to bee made of this Epistle of Ignatius which wee holde supposed how commeth it to passe that so many high mysteries are so soone fallen to the ground and buried in the graue of forgetfulnesse as appeareth by the diuersity of opinions that the Greek and Latine Doctours haue vpon this question so that some of them deny flatly that the knowledge thereof can be attained to as being a thing exceeding both speech and vnderstanding Isid Pelus l. 2. ep 99. And what new reuelation hath beene shewed to Thomas Aquinas for to make these sharings and diuisions among the Angels when he disposeth angels for to gouerne particular men Archangels for the Prouinces Principalities for whole mankinde the Vertues for the celestiall bodies the Powers for to commaund wicked Spirits the Dominations for to haue care of the good Spirits Is it because he is called the Angelicall Doctour that hee was endowed with this Angelicall knowledge But why was the vniuersall Church depriued of it in the time of Saint Augustine and of so many other good Fathers What new Paracletus or comforter had reserued the manifestation of these secrets to the Schoolmen Now let vs see a little our Bishopps angelicall Logicke Saint Paul speaking of Angells nameth Principalities Powers Vertues Dominations Thrones therfore he setteth downe these distinctions by the orders degrees as did the Doctors of the Romish Church which doctrine the Iewes knew not before but by the tradition of the Sinagogue Eph 2.11.12 Col. 1.21 Againe S. Paul writing to the Ephesians Colossians who a little before had beene Heathen strangers from the coÌ„mon wealth of Israell and from the promises of the Testament being without Hope and without God in the world maketh mention of these names Therefore it was a doctrine vvhich was manifestly knowne vnto them and by consequent they knew it either by an absolute or subsidiarie Tradition Is it not happily from one of these twoe Traditions that Plato and Aristotle held also their Doctrine of the Genii and Intelligences â—ol 6 5. Gen. 2.1 He mocketh that I gather the creation of Angells from the place of Moses where he saith That the heauens and the earth were finished and all their hoste For that this hoste saith he signifieth nothing else in Moses but the Sun and the Moone with the Starres at least wise it can not be gathered by the litterall text of Moses his ArgumeÌ„t is this Deut. 4. Moses in a certaine place vnderstandeth by the army or hoste of heauen nothing else but the Sun and Moone with the starres Therfore he neuer meaneth any thing else by it throughout all his writings To omit that place of Genesis where the Angells that met Iacob at his returne from Mesopotamia Gen 32.2 are called the camp that is to say the Armie of God though Moses vse another tearme I will onely demauÌ„d him If this interpretatioÌ„ of the word hoste or army can not be had but by Tradition why the Cardinall Baronius â—nnal Eccles â—om 1. an Christ 60. who is farre nearer that spring than the Bishop of Eureux chooseth rather to take it out of the Scripture wheÌ„ speaking of the Idolatrie of the Iewes that worshiped the Angells and the starres which they thought to haue life note their goodly Platonicall not Propheticall Tradition he saith that Properly the scripture calleth Angells the Hoste of Heauen citing three places for this purpose whereof one is taken out of Moses himselfe Deut 17. I alleadged a place of Irenaeus that represseth the vaine curiositie of the Gnosticks who without any light of the Scripture rashly intrude theÌ„selues into matters that they haue not seene as the Apostle saith handling this pointe of Angells and condemning the superstition at this day crept into Tradition of seruing them religiously our Bishop exclaymeth thereupon what euening visions what dreames what imaginations and fantasies are these shewing that he hath his head so full of them that as Irenaeus saith of his Gnosticks all the Ellebore in the world would not suffice to purge him from it â—ib 2. c. 54. And it is no wonder if so many smoaky darke and subtill imaginations hinder him from seeing my conclusion which tendeth not in any fashion whatsoeuer to abolish the names and distinctions of Angells as he conceiteth but to shew first of all that Irenaeus prooued the creation of Angells by the scripture when he saith We will shew them by the scriptures that all these things as well visible as inuisible were created of God Also We forsake not Moses and the other Prophets Lib. 2. c 5 who preached the truth for to beleeue such as say nothing soundly but dote c. Whence is euident that he comprehendeth the writings of Moses vnder the Scriptures by which is shewed the creation of Angells Secondly to coÌ„demne the audacious boldnes of this pretended Dionysius Areopagita and the Schoolemen who presume to know all these mysteries vndertake to vnfold them and by vertue not of an Apostolicke Tradition but of a Maxime of naturall Philosophie determine that it is impossible that there be two Angells onely of one kinde and such is the Tradition of that prince of the Schoolemen Thomas Aquinas 1. P. qu. 5â— Ar. 4. So that we must haue many more names for them than the Tradition of the Synagogue or Saint Paul euer knew for to furnish specificall differences to so many Millions of these blessed Spirits which staÌ„d before the throne of the Lord for to execute his coÌ„maundements And wheÌ„ Irenaeus saith to the Gnosticks Let them declare vnto vs the nuÌ„ber of the Angells the order of the Archangells let them shew vnto vs the Sacraments of the thrones let them teach vs the diuersities of the Dominations Principalities powers and vertues But they can not so much as tell it There is no man that hath common sense L. 2. c. 47. but will conclude thence that Irenaeus propounded these things as most difficulte and secret since that in another place he proposeth the ouerflowing of Nilus Birds changing of countreys in springtime and in haruest the ebbing and flowing of the sea rayne snow thunder and other meteors as things hid from vs and of which saith he we may well babble but God onely who made them is true Let vs add a word or two of euill Spirits That the Serpent that spake to Eua was but an Instrument of a wicked spirit may be shewed a Sadducie by the effects which cannot proceede from a creeping thing nor from any other beast though it should go vpright like a rocke as the Serpent did before the seducing of Eue according to the ordinarie glose which conteyneth as well the literall expositions as the mysticall Traditions neyther needed Du Perron to