mindes we take vpon vs this most noble conflicte because it otherwise happeneth in this then in other battayles for there hée alone is crowned which vanquisheth but y e ende of this battaile is such that euen hée which is vanquished so that hée acknowledge himselfe ouercome and imbrace the truth shal likewise bée crowned together with the victour And Augustine sayth that it is better to be ouercome of the truth then to be willing to ouercome the truth with falsehoode For whatsoeuer men practise against the truth yet this must they know to wit that veritie cannot be vanquished the which Augustine also calleth perpetuall victorie Furthermore this point of doctrine touching the which our disputation is is of so greate weight that it maye bée thought and that worthelye to bée the verie foundation of all Religion And therefore not without greate cause the Prophet Dauid doeth acknowledge the worde of GOD to bée a Lanterne the which except it lighten our féete of necessitie wée must walke in most horrible darkenesse yea also wée both stumble and fall But the defenders of the Popish Church doo so hotly striue and contende for mans Traditions and thinke them no lesse worthie to bée retayned then some precious Picture of Pallas the which béeing taken awaye they thinke it not possible any longer to defend or maintaine their pontificiall chaire wherein there haue bene so manye Vicars assaulted and nowe at the last Truth preuaylyng shall be quite ouerthrowen and brought vnto naught But that wée maye come to the matter this disputation shall be diuided into sixe parts First we will set downe our owne opinion and then the opinion of the aduersarie then we will trie them both so y â— thereby maye appeare what is the state of our controuersie Secondly we will confirme our opinion by manifest proofe of scriptures and by most sure and flat demonstrations grounded on those places so collected Thirdly we will refell the opinion of the other partie by negatiue disputations Fourthly we will wipe away the obiections of the aduersarie which they wrest out of the scriptures Fiftly we will take away y e foundations which they take out of the writings of the Doctors to ground their opinions on And sixtly we will heare the olde Doctors touching this point agreeing both with vs and the word of God â‚ THE FIRST CHAPTER ¶ At sundrie times and in diuers manners God spake in the olde time to our Fathers by the Prophets In these last dayes he hath spoken vnto vs by his sonne WHen Tertulian would enter into the conflict of disputation and ioyne with the aduersarie hée was woont to bonder the whole summe of the question with certain bondes for so himselfe saith whereby he might not swarue from the matter which he had in hand And that we also may doo the like we will first propone or set down our minde and opinion which is the opinion of each reformed Church touching the word of God by the testimonie of the same word of God which is this All necessarie principles of christiaÌ„ faith are contained in the holy Scriptures This our sentence or opinion we thus expound out of that place of y e Epistle to y e Hebrewes which ministreth vnto vs sufficieÌ„t matter for this disputation God spake in the time of the olde Testament in diuers and sundrie manners to our fathers to wit by oracles visions dreames by Vrim and Thummim finaly by y e prophets speaking by the motion or inspiration of the spirit of God and the same worde of God the spirit of God so commaunding was committed to writing both by Moyses and also by other Prophets and most holy men Now in these last dayes Iesus Christ the chiefe and most perfect Doctour and teacher of his Church being giuen to the world taught the Apostles by mouth ordained them teachers for his Church which did publish in writing the doctrine of the Gospell receiued from Christ by them taught by mouth Sith then y e word of God is the measure of our faith that that word of God remaineth in the most holy monuments or writings of the scriptures it followeth of necessitie that al the principles which are necessarie to faith and saluation of the Church are contayned in the holy Scriptures and whatsoeuer the Apostles haue taught we ought to looke for them in the holy Scriptures neither ought we to receiue any tradition in matter of faith And because matters are made more manifest by uÌ„militudes wée will take our similitude from a King which by mouth proclaimeth an Edict then willeth the same to be printed the which being done men are not wont curiouslye to enquire of others which eyther heard or wer present at the proclamation what is contained in the Kings Edict because the Edict is in print to y e which they must stand and the which they must also beléeue So then I affirme in as much as the word was proclaimed and declared by the Apostles and euangelists and by them committed to writing it were in vayne and foolish now a dayes anye other where to be sought then in the Scriptures what the Apostles and Euangelistes did teach by mouth But now the opinion of the aduersarie is this That all principles of Religion necessarye for our Christian faith are not contained in the holye Scriptures The which theyr opinion they thus expounde Although the worde of God be the measure of our faith yet the whole worde of God is not extant in the scriptures for many things were spoken by the Apostles Euangelists which they writ not Furthermore the Catholike church say they meaning the Church of Rome is so endowed with the spirite of God that she is able of hir selfe to deliuer those things which are necessarie both to faith saluation Wherefore that we may haue the whole word of God the Apostolicall and eccleâ—â—asticall traditions must bée added to the scriptures this is their opinion Now then you may sée manifestlye what is the state or issue of our controuersie for this is that which must be discussed whether the whole word of God deliuered by the Prophets and Apostles and necessary for our saluation be contained in the Scriptures which is the word written or not we affirme that it is they saye naye so then there â—anne bee but one of our opinions true as is manifest by the first groundes of Logicke In anye reasoning the affirmatiue or negatiue 〈◊〉 needes be true but before we goe about the confirmation of our opinion we will set downe the bounds limits of our question both briefely and shorte When we say the word of God we mean not that eternall Word the Sonne of the eternall and euerlasting father being the second person in Trinitie but that externall worde by the which God hath made manifest vnto men his will and pleasure and therefore we adde and say that worde
Ergo because some of the Apostles did recite some out of the Ethnicks bookes it must follow that the Apostles did attribute authoritie to those bookes in matters of faith which thing is absurde and contrarie to the opinion of all men Let vs tourne this obiection vppon our aduersaries after this sort If the Apostles did at anie time recite the traditions of auncient fathers but onelie to beautifie those things which wer established and confirmed by most firme testimonies of holie scriptures How much lesse then ought wee to recite the traditions of the olde fathers to the confirming of those things which want testimonie of the Scripture Thus therefore we may amend the errour of this their obiection and saye that the Apostles whereas they did applie thēselues to the capacitie of men that they might thereby the better stirre them vp or the more easily conuince them they vsed some times the bookes Apocripha as also sentences gathred from Ethincks to wit when they did dispute of those things the truth whereof was manifest in the holye scriptures The heretikes did wreast the writinges of Paule that in the verie time of the Apostles and also it is most manifest that the heretiks yea Sathan himselfe haue cloked their heresies euen with the Scriptures ergo we must not cleaue to the Scriptures alone The antecedent is proued 2. Pe. 3. as also by the Ecclesiasticall historie and also Math 4. If thou be the sonne of GOD cast thy selfe down headlong for it is written he shal giue his Angells charge ouer thee c. I admit their antecedent But I denie their consequent Neither doth Peter so conclude but rather calleth them vnto the writings of Paule then in anie part to abridge the same The error is as the Logitians say Secundum non causam vt causam The heretikes abused the Scriptures wrested the writings of the Apostles into a contrarie sence ergo saye they we ought to run other where then to the scriptures to the establishing of our faith The Scripture is not in fault but onely men themselues which doo wrest so worthie a matter vnto their owne errours Wherefore this is so farre from the Apostles minde that we should leaue the aide of the scripture because heretikes haue abused them that rather the heretikes are by the verie scriptures to be conuinced like as we haue alreadie proued out of the places of Paule 2. Tim. 3. Tit. 1. And when Sathan abused the Scriptures that he might weaken the faith of Christ truely Christ went not to traditions but with the Scriptures again ouerthrew the enimy For sathan obiecting and saying it is written Christ also on the other side answered it is written and not left in tradition And therefore we must bring them to this inconuenience saying If because the heretikes falsified the Scriptures we may not therefore only cleaue vnto the Scriptures then truely because the heretikes falsely fathered traditions to be Apostolike as wee haue prooued before both out of the writings of the Apostles as also out of Irenaeus and Eusebius therefore wee may not sticke onely to traditions And againe because heretikes abused both Scriptures and traditions therefore we must neyther cleaue to Scriptures nor to traditions the which is absurde and euen our aduersaries themselues yeeld to the same Let vs therefore turne their argument vpon themselues saying If like as Sathan abused the Scriptures against Christ so likewise the heretiks do against true Christians Then truly as Christ vsed the Scripture onely to repell Sathan so likewise the true Christians must vse onely the Scriptures in repelling of heretikes And therefore we may amend their error thus If such be the wickednes of the heretikes y e they abuse y e scriptures then ought we to giue al diligēce y t the scripture may kéepe both their authoritie and puritie the which will be if the heretiks be conuinced by the Scriptures alone and those places which shall séeme somewhat obscure maye take their interpretation from places more plaine But if our aduersaries hearken not vnto vs yet at the least waies let them giue eare euen vnto themselues in whose decretalls this sentence remaineth That from the Scriptures themselues the sence of truth must be taken The doctrine touching the baptisme of Infants is not found in the holy Scriptures neither these words Trinitie like substance persons manie such like all which words notwithstanding do appertaine vnto groūds and principles of faith Ergo all things appertaining vnto faith are not to be found in the Scriptures The antecedent is found true by reading of the Scriptures Now touching their antecedent I saie thus In that they affirme the doctrine concerning Baptisme of children not to be found in the Scriptures is most false like as our late writers haue taught in theyr learned workes against the Anabaptistes touching the which I will not héere make any longer disputation least I shuld séeme to wander without y e compasse of my proponed questiō Now touching these words Trinitie like substance and persons I confesse they are not found in the writings of the Apostles but yet I saie y ◠the verie doctrine which is signified by these words is deriued from the Scriptures for when certaine heretiks rose vp which denied y e veritie of y e doctrine then the godly Fathers which liued in those daies hauing care of y e circumstances added these wordes by the which they might the more easily explicate declare the doctrine touching y e trinitie y ◠which doctrine they had before confirmed by expresse and manifest testimonies of the holy Scriptures Now touching their consequence The error is Secundum fallaciam figurae dictionis These words Trinitie the baptisme of infants like substance are not found in the Scripture it is called Omonomos for the words indéede are not found in the holie Scriptures but the things signified by the words are there found And our christian faith consisteth not in the title of words but in substance of matter not in many volumes of bookes as S. Hierom saith but in the verye ground of reason And therefore Basil confesseth y ◠he vsed against the heretikes certaine termes which were not found written but yet notwithstanding saith he they were nothing contrary to the sence of the holy Scriptures And therfore our aduersaries reasoning thus we may wel bring them to an absurditie saying If because the persons the trinitie and such like words be not extant in the holy Scriptures it therfore followeth that all things necessarie to faith are not found in the holye scriptures Ergo these words are necessarie to faith and so by force of the consequent Sith this worde Omoousios that is like substance and such other wordes were onely found out by the godly Doctors after the heresie of Arius began to spring then wold it followe that the Church of Christ before the time
of Arius yea the Apostles theÌ„selues knew not al things necessarie vnto faith The which thing is most absurd sauouring of Athisme And therefore we may well turne this argument home againe vnto our aduersaries saying If such were the religion of the auncient fathers that they would not inuent anie one word to the intreating vpon anie principle of faith the which was not grounded vpon expresse places of scriptures as it is manifest by these words trinitie substance persons such like what shal we then think of our aduersaries which do not only inueÌ„t words but also eueÌ„ matter it self altogether abhorring contrarie to the Scriptures of God And therefore we may amend y e error of this their obiection saying That it is lawfull for the godly fathers of the church of God to vse inuent certaine words and tearmes whereby the matter contained in the scriptures may the better easier bée expressed If we must altogether beleeue the church in no part swarue from the credit of the church we beleeue the church in this part affirming that the scriptures came from the spirit of God theÌ„ truly we ought to beleeue the church likewise affirming that these such other like traditions came from the Apostles The antecedent is true and therfore it must follow that the coÌ„sequeÌ„t is also true The Maior hath two parts touching the which we will particularly speake And touching the first point I doe make a distinction of the Church which Paule calleth the house of God the piller foundation of truth which heareth y e voice of her spouse onely dependeth vpon his mouth and is alwaies gouerned by the spirit of God cannot be séene because shée is not tied to circuÌ„stances of place time or persons yet notwithstaÌ„ding we beleeue y â— the same church is vpholden by the word of God that she nothing estéemeth mans traditions But this or y e visible Church or the companie of many visible congregations may swarue from the truth as it is manifest touching the Churches in the East of which y â— most part haue turned to Mahumet I will not héere bring in the ancient counsells which haue both allowed brought into y e church great gréeuous errors And touching this church we may thus determine inasmuch as she is subiect to many errors she is not otherwise to be heard except shée speake those thinges which are agréeable to the Scriptures touching which matter I haue disputed more at large in another place wherefore this hath héere no place which they say affirme y â— wée must altogether beléeue the church in part swarue froÌ„ the credit of the same theÌ„ must we beléeue the visible Churches when as they propound nothing els vnto vs but the word of God on the other side we ought not to beléeue the visible churches when they swarue froÌ„ the word of God for I make my example by the Sinagogue which very religiously hath reserued the Cannons or bookes of the Scriptures yet notwithstanding she hath innumerable errors So theÌ„ we may beléeue the same Sinagogue whereby she saith y â— the Canonicall bookes haue sprong from y e spirit of God againe we may not beléeue her when she reiecteth casteth away the doctrine of Christ Therfore in y â— respect Christ saith The Scribes Pharesies sitting in Moses chaire are to be heard yet notwithstanding in another place he reprehendeth reproueth their traditions whereby wée sée proued that in one parte they ought to be heard on the other not Wherfore their Minor is not true so the consequence cannot stand because there is an error Secundum fallaciam figurae dictionis And they reasoning thus we may well bring theÌ„ to a great inconuenience saying In the time of Tertulian the church did affirme that an oblation for birth daies was a tradition receiued from the Apostles but in the time of the NiceÌ„e couÌ„sel the church did affirme that oblation for birth daies was not a tradition of the Apostles as in his proper place I haue proued ergo if wee must in all parts beleeue the Church and in no parte swarue from the Church then must we beleeue the things which are manifest opposit contarrie one to the other the which is impossible Wherefore we may turne their obiection vpon themselues after this sort saying Whosoeuer affirmeth the scripture to be the word of god the which we ought to beleeue likewise affirmeth that traditions not written are to be receiued speketh coÌ„traries But the Church of Rome affirmeth the scriptures to be the word of god which we ought to beleeue also affirmeth that traditions not writteÌ„ are to be receiued Ergo the church of Rome affirmeth contraries by force of the consequent we must beleeue hir in one part in another not if this be of anie force that we must beleue the church in all parts swarue froÌ„ hir in no part theÌ„ this foloweth by their argumeÌ„t that the Church may not wel be called the Church For y e truth of the maior proposition is proued thus If you did me beléeâ—e the scriptures truly I will beléeue y t there is nothing to be added thervnto because y t it is so commanded in them as I haue in diuers places of my booke proued therefore this sentence of Tertulian is highly to be imbraced WheÌ„ we beleeue saith he this first we must beleeue that there is nothing els that we ought to beleue Now if we wil consider the traditions of our aduersaries we shal easily perceiue y t they are not only added by inuentions but also contrarie to expresse places of scripture so ye sée y t we cannot beléeue the scriptures also the traditions of our aduersaries And therefore we may amend the error of the former obiection after this manner Sith we ought to beléeue God alone then most diligently ought we to take héede least vnder the shew of pietie we be seduced into errour and because the name of the Church is verie glorious therefore if anie thing be proposed vnto vs vnder the title of the Church we ought to giue atteÌ„tiue diligence whether it be y e voyce of the true church or not which we heare y t we may be able so to doo we must take counsell with the word of God set foorth vnto vs in the Scriptures from the which the true church of God neuer swerneth wheÌ„ therefore the Church affirmeth vnto vs that the scriptures are the word of God we acknowledge the same to be true not onely because the church so affirmeth but because of the inward efficacie of the spirite of God by the which the truth of the scriptures is sealed in our hearts lyke as the church by the conduction of the spirite of God affirmeth vnto vs y t the scripture is the word
one with the other It is an easie matter saith he to declare what wee ought to beleeue what wee ought to hope for and what we ought to loue but to defend the truth and refell the wicked opinions of others which thinke to the contrarie is the greater and better part of learning These are Augustines words The which 〈◊〉 they are experience it selfe long time since hath taught vs for what great troubles the godly fathers of the Church had in times past with the olde heretikes and chiefly with those which did excell in the sophisticall and litigious kinde of disputation we may easilye sée by the writings of the catholicke Doctors and those which on our part did enter into y t sharpe conflict of disputation better furnished to wit armed with weapons of good lerning dispersed without any great adoo the thick mystes of sophisticall disputation by the manifest light of y e truth Amongst which auncient Fathers Nazianzenus séemeth to giue the chiefest commendation to Basil for that he aboue all others excelled in the true science of disputation and reasoning the which praise we maye attribute also to Gregorius Nissenus And Augustine that I maye vse his owne wordes who was woont to reioyce of his disputations and therein delighted himselfe did fréely confesse that the Arte of Logicke was a very great ready helpe vnto him in the vnderstanding and vndooing of the Heretickes Sophisticall and subtill Arguments And Tertulian who was long time before Augustine doeth not denye in these his Bookes in which most happelye he contended with the heretikes that hée was often times driuen to dispute with them in Philosophie which things I héere bring in because I sée all for y e most part somewhat to mislike this Art of Logicke otherwise most profitable as though Paule had vtterly excluded the same from diuinitie wher he warneth that we must take héed least anie man spoile vs through Philosophie héere they gather much out of y e writings of the olde Fathers which they suppose maketh for them against Logicke and against the exact knowledge of disputation And therefore they willingly harken to Nazianzene in that place where he compareth the Logitians vnto the Moabites and Ammonites and now they snatch after that place of Basil where he tearmeth Logicke to bée the mother of contention sometimes they crie out with Tertulian saying O miserable Aristotle which first armed the heretiks w t Logick wherby like crafty artificers they might as they listed set vp destroie To whom in few words I doo thus answere The Apostle Paule did not reiect the good right knowledge of disputing which by certaine necessarie principles produceth and bringeth forth the knowledge of the truth but rather that vaine art of deceiuing with those sophisticall and deceitful snares the which the heretikes are wont full subtilly to folde together whereby they may deceiue the godly faithfull And that this was the mind of the Apostle it is manifest not onely by the order of the Apostles spéech but also by that he vseth this word Apates which is 〈◊〉 craft or circumuention by subtiltie Sith then the good vse of Logicke chiefly tends vnto this end to dispearse abroade the fallaces and subtill crafts of sophistrie to expell errours to reproue lies and to set before our eies most manifestly the light of the truth Who can with good conscience thinke that the Apostle at anie time did reiect this so worthie necessarie science For how can it be possible that hée which doth professe himselfe an enimie to false sophistications should not loue y e science of right disputing which is Logicke being altogether contrarie to false subtil reasoning and ordained to this end that by the helpe and aide therof we may more easily auoide the snares of those which are captious For as he which hateth darknes must of necessitie greatly reioyce in y e beutie of the light so he that will shut out of the church the false deâ—eits of arguments he I say must of necessitie leaue a place in the Church for sound and true reasoning by the which y e vaine deceits of those men may be the easier reproued and the better auoided Except peraduenture we thinke the science and art of phisicke is altogether to be reiected because it teacheth men to knowe those thinges which are hurtfull wherby to take heâ—d of them to vse onely those things which appertaine to y â— preseruation of health life Wherfore Nazianzene saith yea truly right excellent is his saying for somwhat the must answere to the former obiection y â— the Sophisters are like vnto the Moabites Ammonits which were prohibited the temple of God so y â— also we acknowledge this y t the true art of Logicke is not compared to the Morbites Ammonits but rather to them of Tyrc and Sidon by whose helpe Solomon was greatly furthered in building of the 〈…〉 also is worthie of great praises in y â— he saith y â— Sophistre is the mother of contentions so y â— thereby wée louâ— the more y e armour by which y â— forme of good learning maketh vs able to fight for the truth 〈◊〉 Finally we may hearken to Tertulian crying out against the same calling it the craftie art of setting vp plucking downe againe to wit euen indéede that parte of Logicke which is alwaies occupied in contentions and neuer maketh end But let vs reuerence the other part which giueth resolutions to false arguments seuereth things necessary from those which are not and doth so maintaine the truth and beat downe falsehood that it remaineth alwaies one because it is ioyned to the firme foundation of the truth And that this was the minde of the olde Fathers touching the right order of disputing whosoeuer shall diligently marke the auncient doctors wil easily agrée vnto vs. For what saith Nazianzenus whom those men so often cast in our téeth The truth saith he by Logicall disputations is filed and brought to light And furthermore what sayth Basil That the true force of Logicke is distinctly to diuide the nature of things whereby we may knowe those things which are of affinitie and distinguish those which are contrarie And Augustine seuering the true vse of Logicke from the abuse of Sophistrie saith If Logicke bee the knowledge of the truth so then it behooueth the wise to haue knowledge thereof that therby he may vtterly race out the malitious falsehod of the craftie disputers contemne the same But there cannot be a more excellent witnesse for this then the testimonie of S. Augustine where he saith that Logicke is the onely Science of all other which teacheth both how to teach and how to learne and doth shew a man how to perceiue and to make other to vnderstand Thus much Augustine Wherefore sith the case so standeth let this so worthie arte science haue hir condigne and due praise
which was deliuered taught by the Apostles and Prophets so that it may be more manifest what we meane by the word of God Also this word Tradition maye not onely be referred to the word taught by mouth but also to the word written as it is manifest in the second to the Thessalonians the second chapter where the Apostle saith Stand fast and keepe the traditions or instructiōs which you haue ben taught either by word or by Epistle And euen after this sort also haue the old fathers vsed to speake as we will shewe in the proper place notwithstanding in this question according to the manner of speaking it is restrained to that worde which is taught by mouth Furthermore we meane by the word of God necessary to our saluation al those things which God hath commaunded vs to beléeue with a most sure perswasion of faith so that we maye make a difference betwéene faith and opinion and betwéene the principles of Christian religion and the probable disputations and ordinaunces of men Last of all by y e name of the holy Scripture we vnderstand all the bookes Canonicall both of the new and olde testament And thus much I thought good to speak briefly touching the explication of our question The second Chapter HEther to we haue declared our minde opinion touching the worde of God nowe it resteth that wée confirme the same by most certaine proofes and arguments deriued and taken out of the same word of God and so at the last a flatte demonstratiue or most true argument being gathered from most true principles wée may rid the whole matter out of all obscuritie placing it in the most manifest lyght of truth And to bring this to passe we wil follow this order First to set downe certaine places of scripture from whence we will draw our arguments Secondly the places of Scripture being collected and brought together we will fet a true definition of the word of God the which definition also shall be y e proofe of our argument cutting away all exception doubt And although in the reciting of the places of scripture I doo not curiously labor touching the order thereof for each place of scripture is of sufficient authority to make anye conclusion yet notwithstanding I haue taken some care that the order of the places of scripture maye aunswere vnto each parts of the definition asmuch as may be Wherefore let vs begin with this place of the Apostle which hath ministred occasion vnto vs of this disputations The first place God at sundrie times and indiuers manners in the old times spake to our fathers by the Prophets but in these last daies he hath spoken vnto vs by his sonne Whereby we conclude thus If the word of God being sufficient or necessarie vnto the saluation of the church was deliuered first vnto vs by the Prophets and then by Christ and his Apostles and that worde of GOD so deliuered by the Prophettes is this daye onelye to bee sought for in the writings of the Prophets Then truly the word of God deliuered vnto vs by Christ and his Apostles must bee sought for onely in the writings of the Apostles except any good reason may be giuen to the contrarie But the word of God necessarie to the saluation of the Church was deliuered first vnto vs by the Prophets then by Christ his Apostles the same word of God deliuered by the Prophets is this day onely to be sought in the writings of the Prophets no wher els neither any good reson to the cōtrarie can be rendred why the like shuld not be touching the word of god deliuered by Christ and his Apostles Wherefore we conclude that the word of god necessarie to the saluatiō of the church is onely to be sought for in the writings of the Prophets and Apostles Now let vs trye our argument This syllogisme or argument is hypothetical or double y e vse wherof is verie necessarie so often as we shall be occupied in y e comparing of things together And y e hypothetical or double arguments are verie néedful in diuine disputations is manifest both by the old Doctors also by y e new schoolemen who most often vse them Wherefore I doubt not to vse these euen as well as the categoricall arguments because the matter or grounds of our disputations are not Topicall or standing on the inuention of art but grounded on expressse places of Scriptures and therefore those kind of arguments are not inferiour to others The ground or matter therefore of our argument is made manifest euen by the light of nature who biddeth vs of things like to iudge the like And these principles which we haue drawne from nature her selfe the Apostle teacheth vs that they are not to be reiected when as in the matter of regeneration he bringeth the Corinthians to the consideration of nature For being schooled by natures rule sayth Tertulian thou maist the easilier beléeue the Prophesie Now if wée marke the substance we shall finde the worde of God both in the olde testament and in the new to bée all one For the Apostle professeth saying That he hath spoken nothing but that which the Prophets and Moses had before spoken I confesse that the publishing of the word of God in y e new Testament was a great deale more excellent and fruitfull then before yea and that maketh for our cause and therefore farre wide is it that it shuld hurt vs or our matter as héereafter in our disputation we will more at large proue Let vs then make a comparison betwéene the olde and newe Testament as much as appertaineth to the word of God exhibited in them both after this sort If God spake by the Prophets in the old testament then also he hath spoken by the Apostles in the new testament And if the prophets taught the word of God by mouth the like so thē the apostles haue done And if the prophets committed to writing the word of God so also haue the Apostles Wherefore if the prophets comprehended the whole doctrine of y e old testament in their writings why should not we say y t the Apostles haue also comprised the whole doctrine of the gospel in their bookes Now let the defenders of the contrarie opinion bring foorth shewe some reason to disprooue this my assertion I say some good reason not borowed from the dreames of mens braines nor from topicall cauilling arguments but deriued from the word of God But this they cannot doo Furthermore I vrge this place of the Apostle which we haue in hand reason thus If the word of God deliuered after diuers manners waies and at manie times be now altogether to be found in y e writings of the prophets why should not we say the like of y e Gospell being y e word of god which as y e apostle witnesseth was not at sundrie times or in diuers manners
deliuered For otherwise who séeth not y ◠the apostles comparison in the recited text were of no force For if y e Apostle had saide thus then were our aduersaries opinion true to wit Like as in times past vnder y e old testamēt God spake at sundry times in diuers manners so now likewise hath he also spoken to vs in y e time of the new testamēt at sundry times in diuers manners that is by y e writings of the apostles by apostolicall traditiōs not writen also now speaketh by the traditions of y e church y e which how it repugneth is contrarie to y e mind of y e apostle euen our aduersaries thēselues cānot denie y e same thus much touching y e first part of our argument The minor which is y e secōd part of our argumēt containeth in it selfe thrée mēbers First y ◠the word of god necessary to y e saluation of y e Church was deliuered vnto vs first by y e prophets then after by Christ and his Apostles and this is manifest by this place of the Apostle in that he sayth In times past he spake by his Prophets but in these last dayes by his sonne And that this last speaking apperteineth also to the Apostles it is manifest by the words of the Apostle in his second chapter of this Epistle where he sayth y ◠the gospel was first preached vnto vs by Christ and then confirmed by those which heard him And againe Iohn the 20. and 17. Christ saieth As my Father sent me euen so send I you And it cannot be denied but that the Apostles published the Gospel in writing The second part of the minor is that the word of God deliuered by the Prophets is now only to be sought for in the writings of the Prophets And this is proued by the vsuall phrases of the Scriptures which by the Prophets meane the writings of the Prophets as Romanes the first where hée saith Put a part for the Gospell which he had promised before by his Prophets in the holy Scriptures And againe Luk. 16. They haue Moses and the Prophets Iohn 6. It is written in y e Prophets Acts. 26. Paule saith O king Agrippa beléeuest thou y e Prophets I know thou beléeuest Luke 24. And he began at Moses at all the Prophets and interpreted vnto them in all the Scriptures y e things which were written of him To conclude because I will not recite many places finally Peter by the wordes of the Prophets meaneth the writings of the Prophets 2. Epistle chapter 1. And in the last ende of the same chapter he saith thus For y e prophesie came not in olde time by y e wil of man but holie men of God spake as they were moued by y e holy Ghost Now if our aduersaries will not yéeld vnto vs let thē bring good proofe vnto vs to the contrarie but y ◠as I haue alreadie said they cannot doo Now the third and last member is that they of the contrarie part can bring forth no proofe to the contrarie but that we may conclude touching the word of God deliuered vnto vs by Christ and the Apostles y ◠it is wholy conteined in the writing of the Apostles as well as the word of God deliuered by the Prophets is contained in the writings of y e Prophets to wit so much as is necessarie for our faith saluation But if at any time our aduersaries affirme that they can bring some good reson to y e contrarie then they must bring such as must be both true and also agréeing to the Scripture And thus the parts of our argument béeing confirmed y e conclusion therof must néeds be true The second place It seemed good to me most noble Theophilus to write vnto thee thereof from point to point that thou mightest knowe the certaintie of those things whereof thou hast ben instructed To this purpose also these places maye serue I gaue my diligence saith he to write vnto you of the common saluation Philip chap. 3. It greeueth mee not to write the same things vnto you and it is profitable for you Iohn 1. Epistle chap. 1. We declare vnto you that which wee haue seene 2. Peter chap. 3. This second Epistle I now write vnto you beloued wherewith I sturre vp your pure mindes to call to your remēbrance the words which wer spoken before of the holie Prophets also the commandements of vs the Apostles of the Lorde and sauiour 2. Peter chap. 1. I will not cease to put you alwaies in remēbrance of these things although yee bee alreadie instructed therein From these and such other places we drawe this argument If the Apostles and Euangelists published in writing the Gospell to his end that the truth of those things which they taught by mouth might be the better knowne confirmed and that thereby also it should the better sinke into the mind and memorie of men then trulie the Apostles and Euangelists left all those things in writing which by mouth they had taught being necessarie to faith and saluation The Antecedent is true And therfore my conclusion is also true The ground of our argument which is y e first part cannot be denied for then y e middle would repugne with y e end the which far be it from vs y ◠we should once thinke especially in them which did both speake write y e gospel w t one the self same spirit As for y e secōd part of our argumēt it is cōfirmed by y e former places in plaine words The third place Thou shalt not adde to the word which I teach command thee And againe Thou maist not adde vnto his word least hee reproue thee and thou be found a liar Wherfore I saie if it be not lawful for mā to ad anie thing to the writings of Moses then truely after that the writings of the Apostles were ioyned to the writings of Moses and the Prophets we may plainly saie that the scriptures doo containe all those things the knowledge and faith whereof is necessarie and sufficient to saluation The antecedent is true Wherefore we ought not to doubt of the truth of the consequence The first part of our sylogisme is manifest not onely by the similitude but also by the often comparing of the worde of God deliuered by Moses as also by the Apostles as it is prooued in the first place Our Minor is prooued by the places before recited which prooueth that we may not adde vnto the word of God And least our aduersaries should say that that place of Moses is not tyed vnto the worde of God written by Moses we will recite certain places which shall cut off all shifts of our aduersaries Moses Exodus 24. Writ all these words of the Lord. Againe Deut. Moses wrote this law Again Deut. 28. All the words
truth requireth And againe wee must not agree to the Catholyke Bishoppes if at anie time they are deceiued taking opinion contrarie to the canonical scriptures And againe I haue learned to giue this honour and reuerence onely to those writinges which are called Canonicall that I faithfully beleeue the authours of them haue not in anie point at anie time erred in their writings but other mens writings I doo so reade that though they excell in sanctimonie or holynesse yet I doo not therefore thinke it true because they so affirme but because they are able to perswade mee either by Canonicall Scripture or by probable reason those thinges which dissent not from the truth Thus farre he These things haue our aduersaries themselues recorded amongest their Decretalls insomuch that they maie not denie this first rule least they seeme to denie their owne Decretalls The second Rule THE auncient Doctours doo oftentimes by the name of Traditious vnderstand the same doctrine that is cōtained in the Apostolical writing That this rule is true it shall appeare by that which followeth Irenaeus as it is reported by Eusebius doth saie That Policarpus taught these things which he had learned of the Apostles which things both the Church deliuered and are onely to bee accounted true thus much he He saith Tradit the Church doth deliuer that is doeth teach namely out of the writings of the Apostles If hée were not thus to be vnderstood how could that stand which he hath sayde And those things are onely true which thing is verie easie to be gathered of the forenamed Irenaeus whose wordes are by Eusebius reported Policarpus saith he did report those things which he had heard of the Apostles altogether agreeable to the holy Scriptures And the said Irenaeus saith in another place The Church of Rome wrote to the Church of Corinth shewing them the same tradition which they had receiued of the apostles to wit that there was one God almightie so consequently the doctrine contained in the bookes of Moses And a little after he saith Manie of the vnlearned and barbarous people beeing ignoraunt of the Scriptures doo diligently keepe the olde auncient traditions beleeuing in one God in Iesus Christ born of the virgin Marie Tertulian The Apostolicall doctrine doth allow nothing contrarie to the rule of Gods word namely those things which the Apostles haue taught and committed to writings The third Rule THE auncient Doctors do name that vnwritten traditions which in expresse words are not found in the holy Scriptures but notwithstanding if you diligently mark the effect thereof is contained in the Scriptures So Basil confesseth that he vsed certaine tearmes against heretikes which are not written but yet notwithstāding faith he are not contrarie to the true sence of the Scriptures And Nazianzenus refuteth the Macidonians which did denie the deitie of the holy Ghost because he is not tearmed with plaine words in the holy Scriptures to be the third person in the deitie saying y ◠ther are diuers things in the Scriptures which are not plainly expressed As for example If y ◠say twise two I will say saith he y ◠thou saist foure In like manner Augustine doth proue that the baptisme of infants is contained in holy Scriptures and that they shoulde not be rebaptised The like is to be sayde of the word or tearme Omoousion the trinitie such like concerning the which we haue spoken in the former chapter The 4. Rule THE auncient Doctors vnder the name of traditions do not meane anie certaine grounded opinion touching religion but ecclesiasticall ceremonies and to the end they may the more beautifie and set foorth the order of the Church they commonly ascribe the sayde ceremonies to the Apostles as if they were the principall authours of the same Now many and diuers y e rites and ceremonies of the Church haue béene with what studie and diligence the auncient fathers haue set foorth the same that by all meanes possible they might stoppe Schismes and diuisions in the Church It néedeth not héere perticularlye to declare sith the volumes of the Fathers doo euerie where abound with those things wherfore let the readers consider what Augustine hath written in two Epistles to Ianuarius Hierome hath thus set forth the order and ceremonies of the Church Let each Prouince sayeth he haue authōtrie to determine touching the Institutions of the elders and traditions of the Apostles which words of Hierome are diuersly to be considered And that manye and sundrie orders and institutions of the ancient Fathers are to bée altered and chaunged by reason of many circumstaunces euen our aduersaries themselues haue not denyed neither were it méete in this behalfe that the Ecclesiasticall ceremonies shoulde be made equall to the grounded doctrine of Religion And therefore hath Tertulian said That the onely lawe of sayth doth remaine immutable And Hierome himselfe doeth giue counsell that such orders and customes of the church are to be kept which saith he doo not hinder or hurt our faith The 5. Rule SOme of the olde Fathers hauing theyr faultes did ouermuch fauour these vnwritten traditions and therfore did sometime true consent to heretikes We haue heard afore out of Irenaeus that the auncient heretiks did defend their heresies by vnwritten traditions And Eusebius maketh mention of one Papias which brought in certaine straunge doctrine into the Church affirming the same to be deliuered as comming from the Apostles by tradition The like errour there was of the Chiliastians into y ◠which error Tertulian Iustinus Martire others haue fallen And therfore the works of the auncient Fathers are not to be read without great iudgement The 6. Rule MAnie and diuerse bookes haue beene put forth vnder the name and title of the ancient Fathers which notwithstanding are counterfait It hath come to passe through the fault of those who haue ben the writers printers of bookes y e diuerse bookes haue falsely borne the name of those auncient Doctors which antiquitie hath commended As for erāple the bookes intituled Rapsodiae were attributed to Clement S. Paules Disciple and also the booke of the Reuelation of S. Iohn Baptist his head is authorised vnder the name of Ciprian when notwithstanding there is mention made of Pipin king of Fraunce and to conclude there are diuerse volumes vnder the title and name of Augustine in the which the opinion of Augustine is refuted I néed not to make mētion of an infinit number like vnto these Wherefore that which Hierome did somtune speake of the bookes Apocripha may verie fitly bée spoken of the writinges of the olde Fathers Let a man take heede sayth hée of the bookes Apocripha and if at anie time he bee disposed to read them not for triall of truth but for examples sake of good manners let him knowe they are not bookes of them whose titles and
names they beare but that there are manie corrupt things mixed in them and therefore it is great wisdome how to choose out gold amongest dirt and claie thus much Hierome Now these foundations béeing laid it behooueth vs a little to search and sifte the obiections of our aduersaries which they take from the olde and auncient doctors Clemens Alexandrinus The workeman that is sent foorth into the Haruest of the Lord hath a double husbandrie to wit the vnwritten and the written Againe As the Philosophers had certain secrets touching their opinions which they deliuered by traditions so likewise the Apostles And therefore Paule saith We speake wisedome amongst those that are perfect To this I aunswere thus First that this Author hath not handled the question sincerely and purely and this fault is easely to be found euen by the authoritie of y e scriptures for Christ saith thus What soeuer I speak vnto you in secret that speak openly that you heard in the eare that preach vpon the house top c. Wherefore Alexandrinus is plainly deceiued when he goeth about to mixe the mysterie of Christian religion with the hid secrets of philosophie And Irenaeus and Tertulian doo both witnesse and testifie that the olde heretikes were of that minde which heere Alexandrinus doth hold and therefore abused those words of Paul saieng I speake wisdome amongst those that are perfect as Irenaeus as I haue before said doth affirm And Clemens doubted not to say y e euen y e Grecians were saued by Philosophy wher and ceremonies amongst the which hée â—â—â—koneth vp that most auncient custome whereby the Christians did alwaies stanâ— when they did praye from the time of Easter vntill Whitsontide In this disputation therefore Basil doubteth not to propone that which was commonlye spoken touching the Apostolike mysteries and this is it that our aduersaries so greatlye triumph against vs out of the wordes of Basil but truly as with all my heart I doo acknowledge the goodnesse of the cause wherevpon Basil then stood when he affirmed the holy ghost to be god yet not withstanding without offence of Basil be it spoken me thinketh hée did too curioustye séeke for straunge Argumentes when as that matter might be prooued by playne proper and true groundes of Scriptures The Deitie of the holye Ghost is in diuers places of the holye Scriptures to bée prooued to what ende then shoâ—â—d the Apostles delyuer by Tradition certaine secrete formes touching that matter and as it were as Basil sayeth whisper it into the eares of certayne men I praye you was there any thing to be kept close in this point of doctrine that behooued the Christians especially to know and professe Furthermore to call that thing secrete or hidde which was then publikelye taught almost in the whole worlde I knowe not well how Basil could doe it And inasmuch as this fained Apostolike mysteries was in times past the verie grounde of heresies as before it is shewed neyther furtherod the cause of Basil which otherwise is to bée prooued with most firme reasons I wish that Basil had reformed that kinde of Argument if it bée worthie to bee called an argument especially sith the olde Fathers verie wisely haue warned vs to foresée that many labours shuld not grow of one But howsoeuer the matter goeth our aduersaries haue nothing heere wherof they maye glorie or boast for when Basil affirmeth this hind of speaking of y e holy ghost That it hath sprong from the Apostles tradition By the name of Tradition héere hée vnderstandeth that which although not in manifest and flat words remaineth in the Scripture yet notwithstanding the sum and matter it selfe is there contained touching the which reade our third Rule What if our aduersaries themselues long time since haue not obserued and kept this kinde of speaking in their Churches And that I maye not vrge that that same custome is now growen out of vse forgotten amongst them whereby they héeretofore did stand when they did praye betwéene Easter and Whitsontide as is before sayd Wherefore let our aduersaries consider how properly they expounde the words of Basil which are these Which both are of like force effect to godlines and how well they agrée with Basil himselfe Chrisostome Heere it is manifest that they deliuered not all things by writing but manie things by tradition without writing and these are as worthie to bee beleeued as those which are written Therfore we think the traditions of the Church worthie to be beleeued It is a tradition therefore search no farther for the matter Chrisostome intreating of these wordes of Paule written to the Thessalonians the second Epistle and second chapter saieng Holde fast the Traditions which you haue learned either by word or by Epistle Hée gathereth that not only Paule but also the rest of the Apostles did not deliuer commit all things to writings the which how sure an argument it is wée haue declared in our former chapter But to let this thing passe least wée shoulde séeme to make a nèedlesse repetition I therefore saye that Chrisostome doeth speake touching those traditions which although they are not expressed by word in the holy Scriptures yet in substance are there contained for otherwise these wordes of Chrisostome could not stand saying It is a tradition thou maist seeke no farther thereofâ— For then it should followe that wée shoulde no more search in holy Scriptures the which God forbid that it should come in the minde of so godly a Father who doeth most often inculcate and beat into the minde the reading of the holy Scriptures Therefore I suppose by this worde Tradition of the Church by Chrisostome is meant that doctrine the which the Church being instructed by the writings of the Prophets Apostles doth deliuer ouer vnto the church that is to saie doeth teach instruct whatsoeuer she hath drawne out of y e most pure fountaine of y e Scriptures touching which matter séeke the second rule Nazianzene The doctrine of the Gospell is more excellent through the figures of the Church which beeing receiued by tradition wee haue kept euen vntill this time I expound this place as I did the other afore going to wit that hée speaketh of those traditions which maye bée prooued by the scriptures of the which sée the second and third rules for if that our aduersaryes shall say that the Gospell is made the better through their holie water and through such like trumperâ—es appertaining to their Masse they would make men laugh nay rather I should saie wéepe who reuerently thinke and are well affctioned toward the true worshipping of God Epiphanius Wee must also vse traditions for all thinges cannot bee taken from the holy Scripture Wherefore some things the holy Apostles deliuered vnto vs by the Scriptures and some thing by Tradition Héere Epiphanius disputeth touching certaine rites and ceremonies which the
straight waies propone to vs the opinion of Doctours and thereby they by and by conclude that the Scriptures alone are not to be heard to wit being vnmindful that this selfe same thing is a controuersie betwéene vs. For if this opinion touching the which we doo dispute may be determined by the writings of the Doctors then it followeth that the scriptures alone are not to be heard in establishing articles of faith Wherefore our aduersaries doo not rightly dispute their first principle béeing not rightly applyed Wherefore the errour of their former conclusion is thus to be corrected In asmuch as the writings of all the Doctors must be brought vnto the rule of the holy scriptures both the word of God so commaunding it and also the Doctors themselues consenting therevnto and the olde Doctors of the Church themselues haue taught that euery article of our faith must be grounded vpon the scriptures only furthermore Ecclesiastical rytes and ceremonies if they agrée with the scriptures if they serue to the edification of the church yea finally if they be receiued with common consent of the whole Church that then they are to be receiued with great reuerence Now héere we must diligently search out whether that this opinion of the Doctours be agréeable to the word of god so that so farre it is to be receiued as it hath his confirmation by the Scriptures And because our whole Disputation is heere had onely touching principles of doctrine necessarie to faith and saluation that we may not seeme to wander from our proposed question we héere cease neyther will we take vppon vs the disputation of ecclesiasticall rites and ceremonies which disputatioâ— if the matter so require and God so permit vs we will take in hand But nowe we defer it vnto another time Thus haue I â—â—â—â—ding to the methode proposed to wit dâ—â—â—ely and schoolelike by the authoritie 〈◊〉 most learned Fathers disputed in defence of the word written against the traditions of men Whereby the truth of our cause appeareth and the obscure deceipts and errors of our aduersaries are brought into open show for in such sort haue we set down opened and confirmed our minde and iudgement and so confuted and dissolued the errours and arguments of our aduersaries both by the holy scriptures and also by the writings of the auncient fathers that euerie man may easily sée this doctrine which our reformed church by the word of God which is therfore the true Catholike Church doth hold and professe is most true which is That All doctrine necessarie to our Christian faith and Religion is contained in the holie Scriptures Laus Deo In Psa 43. Ios 6. Psa 54. Plut. in Cic. De doct Christ lib. 3. cap. 14 De nat deor lâ— 2. 2. Epist 3. The preacher ought to teach reproue Tit â— Aug Enc. ad Laure To reproue false doctrine the right vse of disputation is no small helpe In laud. Basil Epist 151 Contra Aca. li. 3 ca 13. 〈…〉 They are refuted vvhich wold not haue diuines me dle vvith the true art of disputing Col. 2. Aduer 159. Epis in cap. 2. Esa De praescri haer A similitude Ad 150. Epi in S ca. Esai The auncient Fathers coÌ„mended â— right vse of Logick Con. Acali 3 De ord li. 2. ca. 12 Touching the writings and disputations of y â— schoole Doctors In. 3. sent dist 24. quest 1. Great but vnprofitable is the labour of the schoole Doctors Certaine Errours which are to bee found in the disputations of the schoole Doctors The first errour to make their ground Logicke See Scotus and others who haue vvritten vpon the master of sentences and in their disputations called Quodlibets c. Lomb. li. 1. Sent. dist 34. li. 2. sent dist 9. c â— Error To reasoÌ„ probably on plaine truths Contra Aca. Apolog ad 〈◊〉 louin 3. Error They darken the truth Con. Aca. Error 4 Is theyr vaine questions 2. Tim. 2 Eâ—chi â—d Lauren. cap. 55. The Popish schol doctours of ouâ— time frame not such argumentes in their disputations as y â— auncient learned vvere vvont The method to dispute both diuinely schoole like necessatie in our time Dâ— doct Chri. lib. 2. cap. 40. Tvvo vvayes to intreat of diuinitie A similitude The brief school like treatises are as it vver an Anatomy of y e large and copious vvriting or speakings Cout Maâ— lib. 3. De mod in disp Ser. A treatise of y e word of God vvritten Hovv the disputations of diunitie differ froÌ„ others that they ought reuerently to bee handled De doct Chri. li. 4. cap. 19 1. Tim. 6. Quest ver 108. De Ciuie Dei li. 2. cap. 29. 1 The vse of this disputation Psal 119. The diuisioÌ„ of this vvorke He 1. ve â— Our opinion and mind touching the vvorde of God The declaration of our opinion or minde The opinion and minde of y e Papistâ— The declaration exposition of their opinion The state point of this coÌ„trouersie The tearms of this question expounded What the vvorde of God is What tradition is What is meant by this word Necessarie to saluation What is meant by holye Scripture A demonstratiue or euident disputation Heb. 1 The Sylogisme or argument The explication or proofe of the argument The confirmation of the coÌ„ference Tert. de resur car Act. 26. The confirmation of the second part of the argument Ioh 20. 17 Rom. 1. Lu. 16 Iohn 6. Act. 26. Lu. 24 2 Pet. 1. Act. 1 Iude. Philip. 3. 1. Iohn 1. 2. Pet. 3. 2. Pet. 1. The argument The explication or proofe of the argument Deu 4. Prou. 30. The argument The examining or triall of y e argument Exod. 24. Deu. 31. Deu. 28. Act. 24. Deu. 27. Gal. 3 Esa 8. The argument The examining or triall of the argument Act. 26. 2. Cor 3. c. 2. Tim. 3. The argument The examining or triail oâ— y e silogisme 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iohn 5. The argument The explication or triall of the argument Lu 23. 31. 1. Pet. 4. 17 c. 1. Cor. 4. The Sylogisme The exaaminatioÌ„ of the Silogisme An euideÌ„t argument Iohn 20. The argument The explication of the argument Psa 19 Psa 119 Deu. 4. Psa 4. The argument The explication of the argument Gal. 4. 21. * A definitioÌ„ of holy Scripture Heb. 1. 1 2. Ti. 3. 16 Heb 1. 1. 2. Pet. 1. 21 Lu. 1. 3 1. Iohn 1. 1. Ioh. 20. 31 c. The explicating of the definition 2. Pe. 3. 1. 2 Col. 3. 1 Pro. 30. 6 Esa 8. 20 c. Psa 1. 19. 1. 9 c 2. Tim. 3 16. 17. 2. Pe. 1. 12 Ioh. 20. 31 2. Tim. 3 15 Iohn 5. 39 The argument The vnfolding of y e former reason A disputation confutatiue vherein is refelled or confuted the opinioÌ„ or iudgement of y e Papistes The first argument against papistical traditions The vnfolding of