it but by the scripture which we doe not hold to be sufficient to determrne controuersies without tradition So that I haue no more to saye to you but wish you may begine this new yeare with a good night's rest which God send vs both Whether scripture alone is fit and able to decide controuersies in Religion THis Dialogue containeth 15. parts or paragraphes 1. The Preface or introduction 2. That tradition for scripture is not of as great force as for pointes of Doctrine 3. That tradition for scripture is not more vniuersall then tradition for doctrine 4. That it is impossible the text of scripture should haue remained incorrupted 5. What vncertaintie the errors of writers and copists hath bredd in scriptures 6. What vncertaintie the multiplicitie of translations hath bredd in scripture 7. That the verie repeating and reciting of an others words breedeth a varietie and vncertaintie 8. The vncertaintie of EquiuocatioÌ„ which of necessitie is incident in all writings 9. That there riseth an vncertaintie out of this that the scripture was written in languages now ceased 10. The vncertaintie which followeth the particular languages of Hebrew and Greeke wherein the scripture was vritten 11. That the nature of the bookes of scripture is not fitting for deciding of controuersies 12. Two manners of iudging of Religion out of scripture 13. How scripture doth determine controuersies 14. what laws are requisite for disputation out of scripture 15. Of an other manner of disputing out of scripture §. 1 The Introduction VNCLE How now cozen what make's you so early this morning could you not sleepe this last night Nephew Yes indifferent well I thanke God but t' is not verie early Howsoeuer if I be trublesome I will expect your better leasure for I am come only to tell you a scrupule that I had yesternight which hath tormeÌ„ted me euer since And it is that we Catholikes who beare so great reuerence and veneration to the holy scripture receiue more of it then others write infinite volumes of commentaries vpon it as Paul's church yard can witnesse and are so exact to improue our selues I meane our learned men in the knowledge of it should neuerthelesse when wee come to ioyne in the maine point that is to the decision of controuersies in Religion seeme to fly of and recurre to other iudges though we acknowledge it to be Christ owne word and law And now I haue tould you my difficultie I will leaue you to your better imployments knowing how much you esteeme and how precious you accompt your mornings and therefore I will make bould to call for your answere an other time Vncle. Nay stay cozen God forbid I should thinke I could better imploy my time then in giuing you satisfaction in question of such importance or that you should be importune vnto me by desiring the knowledge of a thing so necessarie and so be seeming you I were to blame if I would not leaue euen my prayers to assist you in this point and perhaps an other time you will not be so earnest on it Although I must coÌ„fesse I am some what vnwilling to diue into this questioÌ„ for I see by experieÌ„ce that the one part seeketh by all meanes to destroy the authoritie of God's church and the other seemeth to lessen the power of scripture for the deciding of controuersies so that indifferent men and as yet vnsetled be left as it were without all meanes of coming to the truth How soeuer necessitie excuseth vs for were our Aduersaries able to performe what they promise that is to resolue pointes of controuersies by scripture we were worse theÌ„ beasts if we should refuse to be iudged thereby But if to stand to scripture only as they doe be but a plausible way to Atheisme and so the question will only be whether we must rely vpon a church or be Athiests for we thinke by scripture alone lefâ—t without the guard of the church nothing or at least not enough for the saluation of mankinde can be sufficiently prouued then euerie man wil see that we are forced by reasoÌ„ and Religion to make euident and knowne as farr as we caÌ„ the necessitie of relying vpon a church and to vse all our power to persuade men therevnto And if you remember we said yesternight that Christian Religion or the law of Iesus Christ cannot be learned by witt and studie but by authoritie and by receiuing it from Iesus Christ And that wee said likewise that he is no true Christian nor truly of the communitie of Christians what so euer be his materiall beliefe who doth not accept of that rule and meanes which Iesus Christ hath left and ordained for the receipt of his law and the like of him who should follow anie other rule which must needes be ether scripture or tradition or both it will therefore euiâ—â—ntly follow that ether we must be no Christians or accept and acknowledge tradition to be this rule if wee can shew that the scripture is not fitt nor hath the conditions requisite for the deciding of controuersies nor was made or left to the church for this end Nephew The greater is the necessitie of this question the more gladd am I that I haue moued it though me thinke's I my self might well see it is not fitt to make the scripture iudge of coÌ„trouersies because we finde by experience that after so manie disputations and so manie bookes written on ether side there is nothing resolued nor are we the nearer an end and therefore t' is euident that scripture alone will neuer decide and determine our quarells and disputes Vncle. Well cozen since you will haue it so our first question shall bee §. 2 Whether tradition for scripture be of as great force as it is for pointes of doctrine ANd first I pray you tell mee doe you thinke that the Apostles when they weÌ„t about the world to preach Christ Iesus carried with theÌ„ all the bookes of the ould and new Testament ether readie translated into the languages of the people whom they preached vnto or else caused them to be translated by the first Christians Nephew I neuer thought of this question before but I see well enough that they could not carie all with them for some parts certainely were not made before they went to to preach nay I a'm not assured whether anie part of the new testament was made before their dispersion from Hierusalem so that well may they haue caried the ould Testament with theÌ„ if they thought it sitting but for the new they could not if I be not mistakeÌ„ Vncle. It is verie true I will tell you therefore cozen how the authoritie of the scripture that is Now the neW Testament Was pro aga ted of the new Testament came into the church An Apostle or Disciple writing a booke or Epistle coÌ„municated it to that church or Countrie wherein he preached or to which he writte it that church coÌ„municated it to their neighbours as the worke
of such an Apostle so by litle and litle it grew froÌ„ one countrie to an other vntill it was spredd ouer the whole Christian world So that some countries had not the new Testament complete that is all the bookes of it for a long time Wherefore no wonder that some haue doubted of seuerall parts thereof being not able to auerre as not assured by reason of some accident that such bookes were truly the workes of such an Apostle or Disciple which not withstaÌ„ding Why the canon of scripture is cheefely to be had from Rome better intelligeÌ„ce being gotten might be afterwards receiued for scripture And here you may note by the way that the Roman church is that church to which in reason wee ought to giue most credit touching the canon of the scripture For Rome being at that time â—that is at least for the first 300 yeares to the Christian world or rather to all the Christians dispersed in diuers parts of the world as London is to England And that wee see the collection of things estimable dispersed in seuerall Prouinces of our Kingdome is sooner and better made in London then in anie other part of our Countrie it must needes follow that the collection of the Holy scripture or new Testament was more exactly faisable at Rome then at anie other place But this by the way For my ayme is to make you iudge whether anie one substantiall point The state of the questioÌ„ which the Apostles whith common conseÌ„t preached through the whole world compared to anie one booke of the new Testament which soeuer you thinke first or best receiued whether I say of these two haue descended vnto vs with more certaintie the one to be the Apostles doctrine the other to be such an Apostle's booke Nephew I should distinguish your question for ether it may be compared to that particular Prouince or church where the Apostle him selfe deliuered it both in word and writing or to the whole church And I confesse that in respect of the whole church that point of doctrine which is euerie where preached must needes haue more certaintie but where both are equaly deliuered by the same Apostle to the same church I should thinke the worke should haue more authoritie theÌ„ the word For t' is an easie matter to let slipp a word some times Whereas writing requireth a more setled consideration Vncle. If the question be but of a particular church or Prouince I doubt it will not be sufficient to giue vs a firme authoritie for ether one or the other vnlesse we add more circumstances then we haue declared And the reason is because one Prouince maye haue had Religion so ruinated in it by the incursion of infidells that recouering theÌ„ selues after a long time they may as well mistake one booke for an other as one doctrine for an other and so this point is not much to our pourpose Although euen in this case the doctrine taught by word of mouth hath these aduantages That it is deliuered to manie the booke to few or in some one place The doctrine heard and vnderstood by manie the booke only to such as can reade nor to all them nether but to such as are carefull The booke belonge's not much to the practize of the multitude the doctrine gouernes their whole liues The booke brought often times by some one maÌ„ as some messeÌ„ger if it be an Epistl or other wise sent from some other place or froÌ„ some one person as from Titus of Timotheus to whom it was first written and vpon whose authoritie only the whole veritie must originally rely But to returne to our case Doe you not see that the whole church trusteth some one particular man at the first vpon whom she buildeth hir beliefe tht this is such an Apostles worke that is scripture But for anie materiall point of doctrine she relyeth vpoÌ„ the vniuersall knowledge of theÌ„ who heard it preached in diuers parts of the world So that as I doe not intende to say the one is certaine the other not for a particular churche's authoritie may be certaine in some circonstances yet I must needes say that betwixt these two certainties there is such a differeÌ„ce that if the one were to bring in verdict vpon the other it would be much more forcible and euident to conclude that this booke is scripture because it is according and conformable to the doctrine taught and preached then that this doctrine is the Apostle's because it is conformable to this booke For if it be true that the whole church once relyed vpon some one particular church for this veritie it can neuer come to passe that the certaintie of this booke proue greater then was the authoritie of that particular church at that time And consequently the same comparison which is to be made betwixt the authoritie of this particular church and of the vniuersall church the same I say is to be made betwixt the certaintie of this booke 's being scripture and of this point of doctrine's being catholike and Apostolike And for the inconuenience you were jealous of it falleth out quitt contrarie For whether we considere the inspiration and assistance of the holy ghost or the industrie aed carefullnesse of man you shall euer finde that the end is more principally aymed at then the meanes to compasse the end and likewise amongst diuers meanes the most immediate to the end is still most aymed at wherefore in our case the end both of writing and speaking being the deliuerie of this doctrine for the good of the people no doubt I say but that both the AssistaÌ„ce of the holy ghost and the care of man tendeth more principally to the deliuerie of this doctrine then to other things that came in by chance in which only there might be a slipp as you immagine Wherefore sithence tradition containeth not all the words the Apostles spoke but meerely what belong's to ChristiaÌ„ doctrine which was principally deliuered and the cheefe errand of the Apostles and that in the scriptute manie things are written vpon occasion and as it were by the bye no doubt but in both these respects to wit of the assistance of the holy ghost and of the care of man the certaintie will be greater of the doctrine deliuered by word of mouth theÌ„ of the holy writt Besides the slipps you speake of are when things are only once deliuered or spoken without great premeditation whereas this doctrine was a thing perpetually beaten on so as there can be no feare of such slipping HoW the old Testament came to Christians hands For the ould TestameÌ„t as I confesse t' is possible that the Apostles might haue deliuered it in all Countries where they preached so likewise I thinke t' is euident that they neuer did it being that the church hath no such memorie And that the Canon hath beene doubted of by some and the Iewish Canon alleadged whereof there had beene no vse nor neede if the
things fitting for man's life that can be imagined of all disciplines and learnings possible that it leadeth into greater secrets of nature theÌ„ otherwise wee should euer reach vnto 〈◊〉 and exceedeth all the knowledge which made antient and moderne sages so proud If you had I saie this conceite of the true Religion you would be much more confirmed and strengthened in this persuasion But why doe you not thinke it impossible that the authoritie of one man should ouerswaye all the witts of the world Surely the Diuill him selfe would rather helpe the church then permitte so litle pride amongst meÌ„ Neuer yet anie great man wanted his Antagonist who had he such a flawe in is credit as this our subiect would giue him it would quiekly hinder the extent of his authoritie Not anie of our neuer so much esteemed fathers is receiued in all things nor is anie of their authoritie's receiued in such an eminent height as is necessarie for the effect we speake of Who was greater then Origen And yet was he condemned euen wheÌ„ he was in greatest vogue But I neede not appeale to examples where nature by it's owne force strike's the stroke For ether this new doctrine is brought in openly by the strong and earnest endeauours of the author him self whose authoritie must swaye the world and of his followers And then by this verie negotiation it will discouer it's newnesse and being false the more it is haÌ„dled the more it will shew it's weaknesse and at length goe out like a snuffe of it self Or els it come's in neglectedly being written by the bye and the Innouator's authoritie vrged by others vpon occasion and then the verie manner beare's with it so litle likelyhood and smale efficacitie as that it would be euerie where chechked by reason of it's newnesse and therefore could neuer passe vncontrowled through anie great extent And if we put the case as before to be in the Catholike church where the truth is not to be handled by learned reasons as being aboue nature but by what our forefathers haue taught vs you see this great man's authoritie presently vanisheth into smoake being there 's no place for anie man's authoritie where the constant and vniuersall verdict of the present world is against it in respect whereof he is but a single man Concerning force or power you must suppose before you can make anie apparent argument of it 1. that this power is ouer the whole Christian world 2. to be so strong that it feareth not to giue distaste to the people 3. to be vehemently desirous to quell the ould faith and bring in a new one 4. that it hath zealous ministers for the same end And lastly that all these dure and continue vntill all the antient faith be extinct And when all is done yet will it remaine vpon record and be knowne when this new opinion began and the violence being ended there 's a roote in men's harts to reiect this new opinion and returne to the old supposing as we doe there 's more reason for the old then for the new So that in common sense and nature's principles the Pope had iust cause to write to the Emperor in these termes Niteris incassum nauem subâ—â—ergere Petri Fluctuat at namquam mergitur illaratis But to conclude this point tell me cosen what time thinke you is necessarie for the introducing of an error by litle and litle before it will passe for a thing deliuered by haÌ„d to haÌ„d from Christ For such an opinion we call a Tradition Nephew I see it must gaine this reputation you speake of by making it quitte forgotten that the other opinioÌ„ was euer ether generally held or practized For as loÌ„g as t' is knowne that the other opinion was antienter they striue in vaine 〈…〉 this was deliuered by 〈…〉 sâ—â—â— and so defecâ—â—â—d 〈…〉 to hand Wherefore 〈…〉 it can be 〈…〉 â—â—â—trarie was in vogâ—◠〈…〉 â—east aÌ„d some what more 〈◊〉 needes be the 〈…〉 broching and 〈…〉 if I remember we 〈…〉 for 4. or 600. yeares the generally practized 〈◊〉 of 〈…〉 church 〈…〉 certaine 〈…〉 aâ— I see that at 〈…〉 â—e iâ— necessarie and as much more as is 〈…〉 by 〈…〉 yet wil there still remaine writings of that time in which such a point was in dispute which will to sâ—â—â—â—e atleast in 〈◊〉 of the preuailing side 〈◊〉 such a controuersie 〈◊〉 hath 〈◊〉 and that the fallen side was antienter and consequeÌ„tly 〈◊〉 will sâ—â—ll be euidence 〈◊〉 there was an other faith 〈◊〉 doctrine deliuered by the Apostles before this came vp which in deede ought to be 〈◊〉 Vncle. Then cosen let vs put 200. yeares to be sufficieÌ„t for such an extinction which 〈◊〉 great a circuit and for a 〈◊〉 rooted in men's harts aâ—d practized in their actions is but a smale time and ioyne thâ—â— the 4. or 600 we speake of And considere whether anie violent mutation caÌ„ coÌ„tinue against nature for 6 or 800. yeares be it ether of Tyranie authoritie or what other occasion soeuer and this to oppresse the true faith grounded in nature Might we not as well saie there would be perpetuall faire wether for manie yeares together through a great part of the world â— as that there should be such a perpetuall disposition against reason and our naturall inclination to the vtter ruine and ouerthrow of our euerie where receiued faith Nephew You haue reason vncle For although when I considere the mutabilitie of mankinde alone and contriue with my self how this might be effected it seeme's plausible to saie that an other opinion might come in and destroy a receiued tenet yet when I deepely weigh what you saie against it and ballaÌ„ce the one with the other I see my frame is limited within a smale compasse and few yeares but reacheth not to the vniuersalitie and generall Dominion or Gouerment of nature For I could make the like argument for not raining blowing shyning and the like that is in deede for the destruction of nature And I doe not thinke you inteÌ„de to make the church stronger then the pillars of nature on which it stande's We ought not therefore to esteeme nature vniuersally defectible because we cannot reach to see fully how euerie particular encumbrance is auoided for t' is not that in ether of these subiects they causes are not certaine and infalible but that my discourse comprehende's them not Vncle. I doe not in deede intende to make the strength of faith greater theÌ„ the streÌ„gth of nature why faith is stronger then nature though perhapps I could supposing which is certaine that nature was created and built for the supernaturall guifts and goods which God bestowe's vpon it they which being greater and better then nature t' is fitting they should haue stronger mantenance and holds then nature it self And therefore t' is likely that nature is strengthened by principles and fundations aboue it's pitch to the end it may be a fit and sure proppe of faith and supernaturall
certainely knowne hitherto nor euer expressy belieued before Which how they may be reconciled amongst them selues or stand with this that tradition is our rule of faith I confesse I know not Vncle. Truly cozen your obiection is strong yet I hope to content you For the first part of it I see no great matter in the varietie of opinions amongst our Deuines for you see they seeke out the Decider of pointes of doctrine that is by whose mouth we are to know vpon occasions of dispute what and which be our pointes and articles of faith to wit whether the Pope or the Councell or both Which is not much materiall to our pourpose what euer the truth be supposing we acknowledge no articles of faith but such as haue descended vnto vs by tradition from Christ and his Apostles The second part of your obiection seeme's to be of greater force because some Deuines seeme to acknowledge an authoritie in the church which hath power not only to determine ether speculatiue or practicall points of doctrine new or ould in such manner as that the whole church is obliged to accepte or not oppose it's definition which euerie Catholike grante's and the reasons I tould you in our first conference doe euidently conuince But also that this authoritie can so determine euen a speculatiue pointe of doctrine which hitherto was euer vncertaine nor euer acknowledge as reueiled or esteemed as an article of faith that here after the vhole church shal be obliged to receiue acknowledge and belieue it as a reuealed and necessarie point of Christian doctrine and as an article of faith Which opinion you must knowe is but an opinion nor doe the authours of it oblige anie man to belieue it as certaine nor doe they condemne those who nether doe nor euer will acknowledge anie such positiō ād therefore this ought not to trouble you Nay contrariwise all Deuines will generally tell you that no new articles of faith can be made that there 's now no reuelations for new points of doctrine and that Christ Iesus was our only law maker in this kinde hauing suggested to his Apostles all that is necessarie of this nature and qualitie and the Apostles likewise taught their churches all that was necessarie to be knowne of this degree Wherefore you see all agree vpon tradition nor anie one ether denie it or doubt of it Whereas it appeare's by the diuersitie of their opinions that they doe not vniuersally and generally agree in anie other meanes or rule of faith though some admitte of another in waie of opinion Yet to giue you farther satisfaction in this busines I will teach you a point of philosophie which perhapps you neuer fully vnderstood I am sure you will not denie but t' is a differēt questiō to aske how an herbe or tree growe's and to aske how Aristole or Theophrastus saies it growe's for in the same growing there can be no varietie but in their opiniōs there may So in man t' is a differēt thing what he doth or is done in him and what he thinkes he doth or is done in him as in sicknesse disgestion and other naturall workes t' is euident yea and in voluntary actions too Which depende of corporall instruments as to goe runne turne our eyes speake cough spit or the like which we doe freely and voluntarily yet were we examined by what instruments and motiōs we doe thē peraduēture who seeme's to know most would be found short at least amongst manie there would be diuers opinions But doe you thinke the same happen's in our thoughts and iudgmēts which be purely spirituall Nephew I cannot tell yet me thinke's the soule should be so wel acquainted with hir owne actiōs as that she should not neede anie helpe to know them And all men agree that only man vpon earth can see his owne minde and therefore if it be not cleere to man what himself thinke's nothing is cleere Vncle. You are deceiued cosen for as long as we are in this world we cannot know anie thing of our owne thoughts and affections but as we reflect vpon the corporall motions which accompanie them and which because none feele but our selues none can knowe bur our selues though sometimes it happene's quite contrarie when these motiōs breake forth into outward apparence for thē others discrye our mindes and we our selues through the violēce of passiō are not so wel able ro iudge of them as others who see vs. But to speake of men free from passion and who vse to reflect much vpon their owne thoughts euen in them their internall actions proceede frō a principle directed by a superior guide then their owne reason as appeare's by this that they know nothing of their owne thoughts but by reflection and the reflection is a distinct act from the former vpon which the reflectiō is made so that nether the reflectiō it self is alwaise made by voluntarie designe nor anie act which is made without reflection Besides considere I pray how few know by what verue their vnderstandings are made certaine of those principles and positiōs which they cannot doubt of or by what vertue they adhere so strongly to the conclusion of a sylogisme not one of a thousand who doe these things euerie day Wherefore t' is euidēt that euen in our spirituall actions not all that we doe is done by our proper vnderstāding that is with knowing reflection and designe and therefore the same man may euē in these intellectuall acts doe one thing and thinke he doth an other and diuers men may agree in what they doe and yet disagree in their opinions of what it is they doe And now to close with your difficultie seeing faith is a persuasion or an agreeing in some points by reason af authoritie All the Doctors of the Catholike church may agree in beleeuing that is in acting and practizing their faith in the same manner and yet be deuided in their speculations by which they seeke to determine what it is they doe And it is their doeings which make's them Christians and not their sayings for they liue and beleeue as Christians but speake and deliuer their opinions as Doctors which be qualities farr different from being a Christian And doe you not see that these Doctors belieue after their speculations and framing of their opinions as they did before they thought of or studied this difficultie Nephew I doe not doubt but they doe for the faith of all Christians must needes be the same and consequently all must goe vpon the same motiue though one may vnderstand better and apprehende deeper that motiue then an other doth Vncle. You saie well Considere then that when these Doctors were yong men and had not yet studied Diuinitie and you shall finde that they had no other motiue of their belife but the authoritie of the present church and therefore how soeuer they discourse learnedly in their bookes the conclusion must be in their liues to rest vpon the authoritie of the
to conuince it by their testimonie take's a hard taske vpon him if he goe rigorously to worke and haue a conning Criticke to his Aduersarie How so euer t' is not a thing fitting for ordinarie and vnlearned people but only for such as haue time at will and great reading and vnderstanding Nephew You haue manie Aduersaries in this opinion for generally men seeke tradition out of the fathers and thinke they haue found it when in euerie age they finde seuerall fathers of the same opinion Vncle. I intende not to detract from their labours who haue taken paines in this kinde for they are profitable and necessarie for the church of God and excellent testimonies of Tradition but I nether thinke it to be the bodie of Tradition but only an effect and consequent of it nor that the multitude of Christians whose faith is to be regulated by Tradition neede to haue recourse to those learned workes Wherefore although diuers fathers in the same or different ages be found to contradict some point whereof the present church is in quiet and immemorable possession their authorities ought not to preuaile nor are they sufficiēt to proue there was not euen in their days a contrarie Tradion For our faith being in some sort naturally grafted in the harts of Christians learned men may now and then mistake some points of it as well as the causes and effects of their owne nature it self according as I tould you but now And as in other points so euen in this to wit in the resolution of faith wherein as our Doctors seeme to differ now a days so might the fathers also And in particular S. Cypriā seeme's to thinke that the resolution of faith was to be made into scripture and not into Tradition though in deede he opposed not scripture to Tradition but to custome wich is a farr different thing the one relying vpon the doctrine of the Apostles the other vpon the authoritie of priuat Doctors And supposing he was mistaken it were no more thē what wee now see to consiste with the vnitie of the Church There is one obiection and but only one of moment and t' is that S. Augustin and Innocentius with their Councells held that the communion of Children Was necessarie for their saluatiō and their words seeme to be apparent But who looketh into other passages of the same Authors will finde that their words are metaphoricall and that their meaning is that the effect of sacramentall Communion to witt an incorporation into Christ's misticall bodie which is done by Baptisme is of necessitie for Children's saluation I remember not at this present anie other obiection of monent which may not be easily solued out of these principles Nephew I will suggest you one or two if you please The one of Communion vnder both kindes wherein our Aduersaries saie we leaue a knowne and practised tradition for manie ages The other concerning the bookes of scripture where they saie we accept of a new scripture or rule of faith without tradition Vncle. I did thinke cosen you could answere these your selfe For the first there is two parts of it The one that the B. Sacrament was giuen vnder both kindes ordinarily the other that some times it was giuen in one kynd only And Catholikes being in possessiō of both parts by tradition those that will proue that Catholikes goe against Tradition must proue that it was neuer administred vnder one kinde only which our Aduersaries nether goe about nor cā performe but ply only that part which is granted them to witt that ordinarily it was administred vnder both kindes For the second t' is not sufficient to shew that some haue doubted of this or that part of the Canon vnlesse they can proue that those who did not doubt were not a sufficient partie to make a Tradition frō the Apostles time And so you see it fall's into the question we mentioned before that some fathers or Doctors being of a contrarie minde breake not the force of tradition Nephew I am loath to leaue you vncle because me thinke's I am not sufficiently armed to answere all obiections And yet what soeuer I call to minde falle's into some of these conditions you require Vncle. Let me see how skillfull you are I will try how you can answere me to §. 14 The examples of Tradition which seeme to haue failed FIrst therefore betwixt Adā's being cast out of Paradise and the Deluge there are accoūted about two thousand yeares which according to the long liues men enioyed at that time made not fully three descēts and yet in Noy's time the forgetting of God's law was so great that a generall floud was necessarie for the clēsing of the world Sem was Noy's sonne and before his death both the Diuisions of Nations happened because of their pride against God And as most Historians thinke the selecting of Abram's familie into God's seruice the rest of the world hauing abādoned it Likewise what is become of all antien Religions the most part of them deliuered by Tradition they are all gone and rooted out So that plaine experience is against those fine discourses you approued so higly What answere would you make to this Nephew Marry I would deny it to be true I meane I would saie that God's law was not forgotten but neglected before the floud And the like at the building of Babell And for Abraham's time we know that Abimelech and Pharao and Melchisedech and others as Iob when soeuer he liued obserued God's law As for heathen Religions they were written in bookes for anie thing I know and therefore preiudice tradition no more then a written law and consequently belong not to this cōtrouersie And thus I thinke I should quitte my self wel enough Vncle. Soone enough at least but let vs see if it be with as good speede as much haste For suppose they should reply that the neglect of God's law must of necessitie breede obliuion and therefore that ether God's law was forgottē or shortly would haue beene if the punishement of the Deluge had not preuēted it And for the men you cite of Abraham's time they were but few and though in that time God's law had yet some litle force looke but into Mose's time and you shall see all ouerrūne with Idolatrie For Heathen Religions t' is said of the Druides that their Ceremonies were not written but deliuered by memorie in verse from the Elder to the yonger and so conserued And the Histories of the welch ād Irish seeme to haue beene conserued in the like manner by the Bardes which how full of fables they were euerie man knowe's So that these things seeme sufficient to discredit Tradition Nephew I must intreat your helping hand to fasten me vpō this shaking flore otherwise I perceiue I am to weake to stand of my self Vncle. T' is not the flore you stand vpon but the want of confidence which make's you so vnsteadfast For tell me I pray if you remember whereon rely's