the purpose yet we may conclude out of the former part of the discourse as before Faith receiues in charitie doth not therefore they are not alwaies together The consequence is naught as if vertues of diuers effects could not be giuen by the spirit at one time and alwaies keepe together in the soule iustified and sanctified speaker D. B. P. Now Sir if they could not applie vnto themselues Christs righteousnes without fulfilling all duties of the first and second table they should neuer applie it to them for they hould it impossible to fulfill all those duties so that this necessarie linking of charity with faith maketh their saluation not only very euill assured but altogither impossible for charitie is the fulnes of the law which they hold impossible and then if the assurance of their saluation must needs be ioyned with such an impossibilitie they may assure themselues that by that faith they can neuer come to saluation speaker A. W. I will do the best I can to vnderstand and examine what you say in this discourse wherein me thinkes you would perswade vs that this linking of faith and charity together makes our saluation altogether impossible because it requires of vs the fulfilling of the law that we may thereby applie Christs righteousnes to our selues which we hold to be impossible Now vpon this impossibilitie it should follow in your opinion that we may assure our selues we can neuer come to saluation by this faith All the matter lies in this proposition that the ioyning of these vertues exacts the fulfilling of the law to applie Christ by which hath no kind of truth in it for first the hauing of charitie doth not bind vs to keepe the law but enables vs in some measure to that dutie which we were bound to before Secondlie it is not the lincking of these two that doth enable vs but the hauing of charitie that is of iustifying grace Lastlie though they come and stay together yet haue they as their seuerall natures and effects so their seuerall ends also faith seruing to obtaine iustification charity to cause a holy conuersation If I haue mistaken you it is against my willâ— if there be any thing else in it that may make for you or against vs let me know it and I will yeeld to it or answere it speaker D. B. P. Let vs annex vnto these plaine authorities of holy Scripture one euident testimonie of Antiquitie That most incorruptiâ—… S. Augustine saith flatly That faith may well be vvithout charitie but it cannot profile vs vvithout charitie And That one God is vvorshipped sometimes out of the Church but that vnskilfully yet is it he Also that one faith is had without charitie and that also out of the Church neither therfore is not faith For there is one God one Faith one Baptisme and one iâ—â—aculate Catholike Church in which God is not serued only but in which only he is truly serued neither in which alone faith is kept â—…n which only faith is kept with charitie So that faith and that only true faith of which the Apostle speaketh One God one faith may be and is an many without charitie speaker A. W. In the former place alleaged Augustine hath no such word and if he had the answere is easie that he speakes not of that faith wherby we trust in God for iustification but of that which is onelie an acknowledgement of the truth of Scripture In the later thus he writes As one God is worshipped ignorantly euen out of the Church neither therefore is not he so one faith is had without charity euen out of the Church neither therefore is not it For there is one God one faith one Baptisme one incorrupt Catholike Church not in which alone God is worshipped but in which alone one God is rightly worshipped nor in which alone one faith is held but in which alone one faith with charity is held nor in which alone one Baptisme is had but in which alone one Baptisme is healthfully had In which discourse any man may see that Austin speakes of such a faith as beleeues the truth of Scripture To which purpose a little before he shewed that the Diuels also had the same faith or at least beleeued the same things of Christ that we doe in the Church And this faith which is indeed the same the Apostle speakes of may be and is often without charitie And yet by your leaue a man may reasonablie doubt whether this assent to the Scripture be wrought by the spirit of God in euery one that professeth religion according to the truth of his perswasion and be not rather in many an opinion receiued from meÌ„ as for the most part amongst you Papists who rest vpon the authoritie of men vnder the name of the Church in this very point speaker D. B. P. The Protestants bold asseuerations that they cannot be parted are great but their proofes very slender and scarce worth the disprouing speaker A. W. It becomes a Christian to be bold in matters of faith especiallie when it is gaine-said What our proofes are it shall better be seene hereafter if it please God In the meane while how strong yours are set euery man iudge with indifferencie THAT FAITH MAY BE WITHOVT good Workes speaker D. B. P. THe first He that hath not care of his ovvne hath denied his faith therfore saith includeth that good vvorke of prouiding for our owne Ans. That faith there seemes to signifie not that faith whereby we beleeue all things reuealed or the Protestants the certainty of their saluation but for fidelity and faithfull performance of that which we haue promised in Baptiâ—me which is to keepe all Gods commandements one of the which is to prouide for our children and for them that we haue charge of so that he who hath no such care ouer his owne charge hath denied his faith that is violated his promise in Baptisme There is also another ordinary answere supposing faith to be taken there for the Christian beleefe to wit that one may deny his faith two waies either in flat denying any article of faith or by doing something that is contrary to the doctrine of our faith Now he that hath no care of his owne doth not deny any article of his faith but committeth a fact contrary to the doctrine of his faith so that not faith but the doctrine of faith or our promise in Baptisme includeth good workes speaker A. W. These reasons are such as to my best remembrance I neuer read in any Protestant to this purpose if you haue you should haue quoted the places But howsoeuer I thinke neither we nor you will be bound to maintaine all the arguments that haue been brought in all questions to proue the doctrines we seuerally hold If it had bin your purpose to deale throughly in this point you might haue found out better reasons then these though not better for your turne If
this gift the children of God are enabled or rather directed by the spirit of God to acknowledge those bookes to be scripture though they can not determine of euery particular among them Austins iudgement we reuerence in this and other matters though we cannot alwaies rest vpon it He calls the bookes Canonicall not properly but because they were vsed in the Church to be read as the Canonicall were but he makes them not of equall authoritie with the other because they were not then so generally receiued in which respect he made some doubt of those which were indeede Canonicall Thus we expound Austin that he may not be thought to contradict other fathers in this point speaker D. B. P. His second is that he who goeth about to discerne whether the booke be Canonicall or no must consider the Author who is God If he must at the first take God to be the Author of the booke what needs any further labour It must needs be Canonicall that hath God for the Author This mans wiâ—s were surely from home when he discoursed thus and therefore it should be but follie to stand vpon his particularities speaker A. W. Is there no difference trow you betwixt saying God is the professed Author and God is the Author Let a man consider God who is professed to be the author of these bookes and seeing how the things in them agree to that which is befitting God according as he hath learned by men and bin perswaded by the holy ghost he shall come to acknowledge them indeed to be from God wherein his glory is principally aymed at and in the penning whereof his diuine Maiestie cleerely shines speaker D. B. P. Let this one reason in generall serue to confute him all this manner put together serueth only to helpe particular men to discerne vvhich bookes are Canonicall who may easily after their dâ—lâ—gent inquirie erre and be deâ—â—iâ—ed in this point because euery man is a lyar And if there be 〈◊〉 more certaine meanes to assure them of this which is the ground of all their Religion then euery particular mans discretion and iudgement then out of doubt their whole Religion is most vnvvisely builded vpon meane mens inuentions and discretion who also for the most part doe neither vnderstand the language in which they were first penned nor the vsuall phrases of Scriptures translated that I say nothing of the figures parables prophecies and controueâ—sies which seeme to be and many other difficulties and yet these men need not doubt hauing learned some halfe-dozen-lines of Master Perkins but that reading any booke they shall be able presently to discerne whether 〈◊〉 be Canonicall or no. A goodly mocketie speaker A. W. If this reason be good since all men together are liers as well as euery man in particular and so may be deceiued though not so easily we are little the neerer at the least not sure for any help you can affoord vs. There is yet a better assurance by the holy ghosts directing the elect in this triall and teaching and assuring them so farre as shall serue for their necessarie instruction and saluation Men were not so taught in the Primitiue Church but the most skilfull and wisest in discerning Canonicall bookes trusted not vnto their ovvne iudgement but leaned alvvaies vpon Apostolicall Traditions So did Serapion an auncient holy vvriter as Euseâ—â—us reporteth reiect certaine bookes set out in the Apostles names because they had not receiued from their Predecâ—ssoâ—s any such The like doth element of Alexandria and that famous Origen of the same booke who obserue the Eâ—clesiasticall Canon as he had learned and receiued by Tradition So doth he deliuer his opinion of the foure Euangelists and other bookes of Canonicall Scripture and not relying on his owne wit which was excellent or learning which was singular in all manner of languages and matters That S. Augustine was of the same mind may be gathered out of these words of his * Contra Faustum Of what booke can there be any assurance if the letters which the Church propagated by the Apostles and by such excellencie declared throughout all Nations doth teach and hold to be the Apostles should be vncertaine whether they be the Apostles or no So that he maketh the declaratioÌ„ of the Church descended of the Apostles to be a sure pillar to rest vpon for the certaine knowledge of Canonical Scripture and other spirits whatsoeuer if they follow not that rule to be reiected so far is he off from encourageing euery sheepe of Christs fold to take that weighty matter vpon himselfe as M. Perkins doth And what can be more against the most prudent prouidence of the diuine wisdome than to permit euery one to be a iudge of the bookes of Canonicall Scripture For if all those books and no others should pasâ—e â—uâ—rant for Caâ—…call which any Christian taking vpon him the spirit of discerning would câ—nsure to be such then alway with all the Old Testament because diuers esteemed it to proceed of some euill spirits as witnesseâ—h Iâ—â—neus and Epâ—…s Yea not only all the Old must be abrogated but all the New also because it hath many falsehoods mixed with the truth as some prefuming greatly of their spirit and skill in dâ—…ning did teach so testifieth 〈◊〉 Augustine 〈◊〉 Faâ—…st Some would haue had but one of the foure Gospels some fiue some sixe some seauen some reiected all S. Pauls Epistles Many and those of the faithfull did not admit for Canonicall some of the other Apostles Epistles not the Reuelations If then the diuine fore-sight of our Sauiour had not preuented this most foule inconueniencie by instituting a more certaine meanes of â—iscerning and declaring which books were penned by inspiration of the holy Ghost which not then by leauing it vnto euery mans discretion he might be thought to haue had but slender care of our saluation which euery true Christian hart doth abhorre to thinke and therfore we must needs admit of this most holy and prouident Tradition of them from hand to hand as among the Protestants Brentius doth in his Prolegomenis and also Kemnitius handling the second kind of Traditions in his examination of the Councell of Trent albeit they reiect all other Traditions besides this one speaker A. W. Neither doth Master Perkins or any Minister teach the people now to rely on their owne wit or iudgement but to vse the meanes prescribed and by prayer and faith to call and to rest vpon the spirit of God for assurance in this case The iudgement of the Church wee are so farre from discrediting that we hold it for a very speciall ground in this matter condemning them as void of shame and reason that refuse those bookes vpon their owne iudgement which haue bin from time to time euen from the Apostles dayes counted Canonicall But it is vtterly from the question in hand to dispute this point and beside diuers other Doctor Whitacker hath handled this matter
of any one syllable in matter of faith you may be sure that we Catholikes cannot but carrie a verie base conceipt of your doctrine who goe about vnder the ouerworne and thredbare cloake of reformation to deface and corrupt the purer and greater part of Christian Religion especially when they shall perceiue the most points of your pretended reformation to be nothing else but olde rotten condemned heresies new scoured vp and furbushed and so in shew made more saleable vnto the vnskilfull as in this treatise shall be proued in euery Chapter speaker A. W. TO THE REFORMATION OF THE PREFACE THere are many necessarie heads of saluation wherein we and you agree 1. The Trinitie 2. Redemption by Christ against all Iewes and Heathen 3. The Godhead of Christ against Arius 4. The vnitie of his person against Nestorius 5. The truth of his Manhood though by consequence you ouerthrow it against Eutyches 6. The Godhead of the holy Ghost against Macedonius and many other Which I alleage not to make any Papist beleeue that the differences betwixt vs and you are few or small but to shew that Master Perkins speakes not against reason We are perswaded that no man may shrinke from the truth of that which is deliuered in Athanasius Creede though we dare not peremptorily condemne euery man that hath not a distinct knowledge and beleefe of euery one of the seuerall articles We are wholy of I asils iudgement that euery one ought rather to lose his life than to suffer any one syllable of Gods truth in the Scripture to be betrayed and therefore wee forbeare to ioyne with the Church of Antichrist which preferres a corrupt translation before the text it selfe speaker W. P. REVEL 18. 3. And I heard another voyce from heauen say Goe out of her my people that ye be not pertakers of her sinnes and receiue not of her plagues speaker D. B. P. ANSWERE TO THE Prologue THE learned know it to be a fault to make that the entrie vnto our discourse which may as properly fit him that pleadeth against vs but to vse that for our proeme which in true sence hath nothing for vs nay rather beareth stronglie for our aduersarie must needs argue great want of iudgement Such is the sentence aboue cited out of S. John by M. Perkins for it being trulie vnderstood is so farre off from terrifying any one from the Catholike Romane Church as it doth vehementlie exhort all to fire vnto it by forsaking their wicked companie that are banded against it speaker A. W. TO THE REFORMATION OF THE PROLOGVE IF it fall out as I make no question but it will doe that the place chosen by Master Perkins be prooued to belong to the Church of Rome where is the fault then speaker W. P. IN the former chapter S. Iohn sets downe a description of the whore of Babylon and that at large as he saw her in a vision described vnto him In the sixteenth verse of the same chapter he foretels her destruction and in the three first verses of this 18. chapter he goeth on to propound the sayd destruction yet more directly and plainely withall alleadging arguments to prooue the same in all the verses following Now in this fourth verse is set downe a caueat seruing to forewarne all the people of God that they may escape the iudgement shall befall the whore and the wordes containe two parts a commaundement and a reason The commaundement Come out of her my people that is from Babylon The reason taken from the euent least ye be partakers c. Touching the commaundement first I will search the right meaning of it and then set down the vse thereof and doctrine flowing thence In historie therefore are three Babylons mentioned one is Babylon of Assyria standing on the riuer Euphrates where was the confusion of Languages and where the Iewes were in captinitie which Babylon is in Scripture reproched for Idolatrie and other iniquities The second Babilon is in Egypt standing on the riuer Nilus and is now called Cayr of that mention is made 1. Pet. 5. v. 13. as some thinke though indeede it is as likely and more commonly thought that there is meant Babylon of Assyria The third Babylon is mystical whereof Babylon of Assyria was a tipe and figure and that is Rome which is without question here to be vnderstood And the whore of Babylon as by all circumstances may be gathered is the state or regiment of a people that are the inhabitants of Rome and appertaine thereto This may be prooued by the interpretation of the holy Ghost for in the last verse of the 17. chapter the woman that is the whore of Babylon is said to be a citie which raigneth ouer the kings of the earth now in the daies when S. Iohn penned this booke of Reuelation there was no citie in the world that ruled ouer the kings of the earth but Rome it then being the seate where the Emperour put in execution his Imperiall authoritie Againe in the seuenth verse shee is said to sit on a beast hauing seuen heads and tenne hornes which seuen heads bee seuen hils vers 9. whereon the woman sitteth and also they bee seuen kings Therefore by the whore of Babylon is meant a citie standing on seuen hills Now it is wel known not onely to learned men in the Church of God but euen to the heathen themselues that Rome alone is the citie built on seuen distinct hills called Caelius Auentinus Exquilinus Tarpeius or Capitolinus Viminalis Palatinus Quirinalis Papists to helpe themselues doe alleadge that old Rome stood on seuen hills but now is remooued further to the plaine of Campus Martins I answer that howsoeuer the greatest part of the citie in regard of habitation bee not now on seuen hils yet in regard of regiment and practise of religion it is for euen to this day vpon these hilles are seated certaine Churches and Monasteries and other like places where the Papall Authoritie is put in execution and thus Rome being put for a state and regiment euen at this day it stands vpon 7. hils And though it be come to passe that the harlot in regard of her latter dayes euē changed her seate yet in respect of her younger times in which she was bred and borne she sate vpon the 7. hills Others because they feare the wounding of their own heads labour to frame these words to another meaning say that by the whore is meant the company of all wicked men in the world whersoeuer the diuell being the head thereof But this exposition is flat against the text for she is opposed to the kings of the earth with whom she is said to commit fornication and in the last verse she is called a citie standing on seuen hils and raigning ouer the Kings of the earth as I haue said and therefore must needs be a state of men in some particular place speaker D. B. P. For by the
them of that neither much lesse that they should so continue vnto their liues end I omit his vnsauoury discourse of eating and beleeuing Christ and applying vnto vs his benefits which he might be ashamed to make vnto vs that admit no part of it to be true I confesse that therein faith hath his part if it be ioyned with charity and frequentation of the Sacraments speaker A. W. Master Perkins proues that faith is a particular assurance because it is a particular applying of Christ by euery man to himselfe That it is so he shewes in that it is a receiuing of Christ and all his benefits The place of Iohn is brought to proue that to beleeue in Christ and to receiue Christ is all one to which your answere is altogether impertinent So also is your exposition false for the holy Ghost speakes not of a power to be the sonnes of God but of a priuiledge whereby all true beleeuers are the sonnes of God Ye are all saith the Apostle the sonnes of God by faith in Christ Iesus That discourse so vnsauourie to your corrupt taste serues to manifest this point that to receiue or beleeue in Christ is to applie him particularly as meate and drinke are applied by eating and drinking If you could as easily haue disproued as disliked that discourse we should haue seene the one as we haue the other speaker D. B. P. This is it which S. Paul teacheth That not by the vvorkes of Moses law but by faith in Christ Iesus vve receiue the promises of the spirit and shall haue hereafter the performance if we obserue those things which Christ hath commaunded vs. But what is this to certeintie of Saluation S. Paul speakes of receiuing the spirit by faith and no where vouchsafes any such priuiledge to workes which indeed haue not to doe in that matter Receiued ye the spirit by the workes of the law or by the hearing of faith speaker D. B. P. To those of Augustine and such like authorities I answere that we find Christ we hold Christ we see Christ by faith beleeuing him to be the Sonne of God and redeemer of the world and Iudge of the quicke and the dead and we vnderstand and disgest all the mysteries of this holy word But where is it once said in any of these sentences that we are assured of our saluation we beleeue all these points and many more but we shall be neuer the neare our saluation vnlesse we obserue Gods commandements The seruant vvhich knovves his Masters will and doth it not shall be beaten vvith many stripes Then you are my friends saith our Sauiour when you shall doe the things which I commaund you which we being vncerteine to performe assure not our selues of his friendship but when to our knowledge we goe as neare it as we can and demaund pardon of our wants we liue in good hope of it speaker A. W. You seeme to grant as much concerning these places of Austin as Master Perkins desires but that you restraine this beleeuing against Austins words to a beleefe of the truth whereas the vse of eating and drinking Christ is not onely to establish our iudgement but also and that principally to confirme the assurance of our saluation by his death and sacrifice It is a strange kinde of answering to require the maine conclusion in euery pro syllogisme and not to vnderstand to what purpose euery seuerall reason is alleaged The beleeuing of neuer so many points brings neither assurance nor saluation but the resting vpon Christ for saluation giues vs assurance that wee are the children of God and shall continue so receiuing at the last the inheritance of sonnes because of our adoption not the wages of seruants for our imperfect labour in which we vse our best endeuour to doe the will of our father not the taske of our master speaker D. B. P. I answere first out of the place it selfe that there followeth a condition on our parts to be performed which M. Perkins thought wisdome to conceale For. S. Paul saith that the Spirit witnesseth with our spirits that we are the sonnes of God and coheires with Christ with this condition If yet vve suffer vvith him that vve may be glorified vvith him So that the testimonie is not absolute but conditionall and then if vve faile in performance of the condition God stands free of his promise and will take his earnest backe againe And so to haue receiued the earnest of it will nothing auaile vs much lesse assure vs of saluation speaker A. W. S. Paul sets downe no condition at all in the place alleaged by Master Perkins the next verse propounds the course that God hath appointed to bring his children to glorie which depends not vpon vs but vpon God himselfe who makes all his sonnes conformable to their eldest brother Christ according to his predestination and chastice all his children by one kinde of suffering or another speaker D. B. P. This is the direct answere to that place although the other be very good that the testimony of the spirit is but an inward comfort and ioy which breedeth great hope of saluation but bringeth not assurance there of This M. Perkins would refute by the authority of Saint Bernard in the place before cited see the place and my answere there speaker A. W. The witnes of the spirit the Apostle speakes of is that we are the children of God the comfort and ioy you mention is an effect arising from that testimonie of his and our feeling not the foundation of our assurance We reioyce because the spirit beares witnes that wee are the sonnes of God not contrariwise because we reioyce therefore wee haue hope that we are Gods children though this also be a secondarie proofe of our assurance speaker D. B. P. This Argument is so proper for their purpose that we returne it vpon their owne heads We must pray for saluation therefore we are not yet assured of it For who in his wits prayeth God to giue him that whereof he is assured alreadie And a godly act of faith it is in that prayer to beleeue that God wil giue that which he is assured of before hand such foolish petitions cannot please God and therefore after their doctrine it is to be denied that any faithfulman may pray for his saluation but rather thanke the Lord for it But to answere directly he who prayeth must beleeue he shall obtaine that which he prayeth for if he obserue all the due circumstances of praier which be many but to this purpose two are required necessarily the one that he who prayeth be the true seruant of God which first excludeth all those that erre in faith touched in these words VVhat you of the faithfull shall desire vvhen you pray shall be giuen you The other is when we request matters of such moment that we perseuere in prayer and continue our suit
as you haue heard out of the Councell of Trent in the beginning of this question that many actes of faith feare hope and charity do goe before our iustification preparing our soule to receiue into it from God through Christ that great grace speaker A. W. If the matter be not great it was but a small fault to be short in it yea the contrarie had been a fault indeed It is not handled by the way but propounded in plaine tearmes as a second difference betwixt vs and you speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins Doctor like resolueth otherwise That faith is an instrument created by God in the hart of man at his conuersion vvhereby he apprehendeth and receiueth Christs righteousnes for his iustification This ioyly description is set downe without any other probation then his owne authoritie that deliuered it and so let it passe as already sufficiently confuted And if there needed any other disprofe of it I might gather one more out of his owne explication of it where he saith that the couenant of grace is communicated vnto vs by the word of God and by the Sacraments For if faith created in our harts be the only sufficient supernaturall instrument to apprehend that couenant of grace then there needs no Sacraments for that purpose and consequentlie I would faine know by the way how little infants that cannot for want of iudgement and discretion haue any such act of faith as to lay hold on Christ his iustice are iustified Must we without any warrant in Gods word contrary to all experience beleeue that they haue this act of faith before they come to any vnderstanding speaker A. W. If it would haue serued your turne to cauil at you would haue found Master Perkins reason and not haue iested at his authoritie I will plainly propound it for all men to iudge of your dealing That whereby Christ is to be receiued is an instrument to applie Christ. But faith is that whereby Christ is to be receiued Therefore faith is an instrument to applie Christ. To this you answere nothing but frame an argument against the question as you would haue it thought out of Master Perkins his owne explication of it Your argument is If faith created in our hearts be the onely sufficient supernaturall instrument to apprehend the couenant of grace then there need no Sacraments You should adde as supernaturall instruments to that purpose But there is need of the Sacraments Therefore faith is not the onely sufficient supernaturall instrument to apprehend the couenant of grace First there is more in your conclusion than in the question The question is whether faith be a supernaturall instrument created to that purpose or no your conclusion is that faith is not that onely supernaturall instrument Secondly I denie the consequence of your proposition you may as well say for that Master Perkins sets downe too that if faith be the onely instrument then the word is needlesse The Word and Sacraments applie Christ outwardlie as meanes on Gods part faith receiues it in on our part the holie Ghost inlightening and inclining our hearts thereunto Little infants in my poore opinion haue no act of faith but are iustified without any thing done by them God for Christs sake according to his euerlasting election forgiuing their sinnes and adopting them for sonnes and heires of glorie speaker W. P. In this their doctrine is a twofold error I. that they make faith which iustifieth to go before iustification it selfe both for order of nature and also for time whereas by the word of God at the very instant when any man beleeueth first he is then iustified and sanctified For he that beleeueth eateth and drinketh the bodie and blood of Christ and is alreadie passed from death to life Ioh. 6. 54. speaker D. B. P. But to returne vnto the sound doctrine of our Catholike faith M Perkins finds two faults with it one that we teach faith to goe before iustification whereas by the word of God saith he at the very instant when any man beleeueth first he is then both iustified and sanctified What word of God so teacheth Marry this He that beleeueth eateth and drinketh the body and blood of Christ and is alreadie passed from death to life I answere that our Sauiour in that text speaketh not of beleeuing but of eating his bodie in the blessed Sacrament which who so receiueth worthely obtaineth therby life euerlasting as Christ saith expressely in that place And so this proofe is vaine speaker A. W. If you had meant plainly you should haue reported Master Perkins reproofe of your opinion truly as he hath deliuered it that you make faith goe before iustification not onely in order of nature onely which we grant but in time also which we denie If I should onely say the contrarie that our Sauiour doth not speake there of the Sacraments I might conclude by as good reason as you doe and so this answere is vaine But I oppose to your authoritie not mine owne which is nothing worth but your owne writers yea the Councill of Trent which leaues it free to al men to expound that chapter either of the spirituall eating of Christ by faith only or of eating him really in the Sacrament And this libertie is grounded vpon the diuersitie of opinions among the Fathers concerning the sense of that chapter This is sufficient to make Master Perkins reason good against your deniall speaker D. B. P. Now will I proue out of the holy Scriptures that faith goeth before iustification first by that of S. Paul VVhosoeuer calleth on the name of our Lord shall be saued but how shall they call vpon him in vvhom they doe not beleeue hovv shall they beleeue vvithout a preacher c. Where there is this order set downe to arriue vnto iustification First to heare the preacher then to beleeue afterwards to call vpon God for mercy and finally mercie is graunted and giuen in iustification so that prayer goeth betweene faith and iustification speaker A. W. Prayer commeth betweene in nature but not in time for hee that rests vpon God for saluation in Christ doth withall call vpon God for pardon of his sinnes whereupon iustification followes immediatly though not alwaies in a mans owne feeling speaker A. W. This S. Augustine obserued when he said Faith is giuen first by which vve obtaine the rest And againe By the lavv is knovvledge of sâ—nne by faith vve obtaine grace and by grace our soule is cured The rest that Austin speakes of are graces of sanctification or as he calles them there good workes in which we liue and these are supplied euery day by God or at least the increase and vse of these vertues whereby wee liue godly in the world such is the cure of the soule by grace to the louing of righteousnes and doing the works of the law speaker D. B. P. If we list to see the practise of
by faith I beleeue Christ to be the Sauiour of all mankind by hope I trust to be made partaker of that saluation in him speaker A. W. None of these hath that aptnes that is in faith For the other haue more shew of desert in man but God purposeth to set out his loue to the soule he saueth Which can be done by no meanes so well as when the party to be iustified doth nothing but rest vpon God to receiue iustification at his mercifull hands Of the difference betwixt faith and hope I haue spoken otherwhere now I say only thus much that to hope without faith is vaine If I beleeue I may not hope alone but be sure I am iustified if I doe not beleeue I may be sure of the contrarie speaker D. B. P. But charitie doth yet giue me a greater confidence of saluation for by the rule of true charity as I dedicate and imploy my life labours and all that I haue to the seruice of God so all that God hath is made mine so farre forth as it can be made mine according vnto that sacred law of friendship Amicorum omnia sunt communia And therefore in true reason neither by faith nor any other vertue we take such hold on Christs merits nor haue such interest in his inestimable treasures as by charity speaker D. B. P. This were the way indeed to make God debtor to man and man a more speciall cause of his owne iustification than God yea to make man in equitie at the least deserue his iustification at Gods hands But what Prince would bee so dealt withall by a traytor especially if he meant to manifest the riches of his mercie in affoording fauour Would he trow you haue his traiterous subiect plead an interest to his loue kindnes and bountie by imploying his life and labours to do him seruice and so to receiue all benefits from him as a friend from a friend by the law of mutuall good will who seeth not how directly this runnes against the whole course of the new Testament speaker A. W. Which S. Augustine vnderstood well when he made it the modell and measure of iustification saying That Charity beginning was Justice beginning Charity encreased vvas Iustice encreased great Charity vvas great iustice and perfect Charity was perfect iustice Austin speakes not of iustification but of walking cheerefully in obedience to Gods commandements after we are iustified which we cannot doe vnlesse the loue wee beare to God make all difficulties that we shall meet with light and easie to vs. In this respect charitie beginning is iustice beginning because he that hath begun to loue hath also begun to walke in the way of righteousnes making light of all hindrances by reason of his loue and as his loue groweth so doth his righteousnes in his whole conuersation speaker W. P. Reason IV. The iudgement of the auncient Church Ambr. on Rom. 4. They are blessed to whom without any labour or worke done iniquities are remitted and sinne couered no workes or repentance required of them but onely that they beleeue And cap. 3. Neither working any thing nor requiting the like are they iustified but by faith alone through the gift of God And 1. Cor. 1. this is appointed of God that whosoeuer beleeueth in Christ shall be saued without any worke by faith alone freely receiuing remission of sinnes speaker D. B. P. To these and such like words I answere First that it is very vncertaine whether these Commentaries be Saint Ambroses speaker A. W. You that could so confidently thrust vpon vs those Commentaries on the Reuelation for Ambroses which were neuer heard of till within these last 80. yeres should not haue made a doubt of these on the Romanes that haue been receiued for his so many hundreds of yeeres But I will not striue about the matter Once this is out of doubt that they are very ancient and generally held to be orthodoxall speaker D. B. P. Secondly that that Author excludeth not repentance but only the workes of Moses law which the Iewes held to be necessary as circumcision and such like see the place and conferre with it that which he hath written in the same worke vpon the fourth to the Hebrews where he hath these vvords Faith is a great thing and vvithout it it is not possible to be saued but faith alone doth not suffice but it is necessary that faith worke by charitie and conuerse worthie of God speaker A W. Not repentance he names it expresly No workes or repentance required of them But he meanes not workes of the Ceremoniall law onely He meanes both Ceremoniall and Morall That law which the Gentiles had by nature which if a man keepe he shall liue Abraham had not whereof to boast because he was circumcised or because he abstained from sinne but because he beleeued To him that worketh that is to him that is subiect to the law of Moses or of nature To him that worketh not that is to him that is guiltie of sinne because he doth not that which the law commaunds In that place vpon the Hebrues he speaketh not of iustification as in the other but of our entring into rest or heauen to which no man shall come that doth not liue holily beautifying as he there speaketh his faith with workes speaker W. P. August There is one propitiation for all sinnes to beleeue in Christ. Hesyc on Leuit. lib. 1. cap. 2. Grace which is of mercie is apprehended by faith alone and not of workes speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins next authoritie is gathered out of S. Augustine There is one propitiation for all sinners to beleeue in Christ True but where is it that we need nothing else but to beleeue 3. Hesychius saith Grace vvhich is of mercy is apprehended by faith alone and not of vvorkes that is vve doe not merit by our vvorks done before grace any thing at Gods hand but of his mercie receiue both faith and iustification speaker A. W. This testimonie of Austin and the next of Hesychius are answered by roate and not by iudgement For they are both misquoted which he must needes haue obserued and then would haue reprooued if he had lookt for them in the places cited The former I cannot finde and therefore let it passe without any answere If this interpretation may goe for currant I know not what may be refused as counterfeit Grace which is of mercy is apprehended by faith alone and not of workes that is say you wee doe not merit by our workes done before grace any thing at Gods hand but of his mercie receiue both faith and iustification Hesychius saith that grace is apprehended by faith alone you make him say that we receiue both faith and iustification of Gods mercy he speaketh of attaining to grace by faith you expound him of receiuing faith by Gods mercie But indeed Hesychius in his owne
memories which may often faile them especially in carrying away speeches of discourse and disputation speaker W. P. II. If the beleeuing of vnwritten traditions were necessary to saluation then we must beleeue the writings of the auncient Fathers as well as the writings of the Apostles because Apostolicall traditions are not elsewhere to be found but in their bookes And wee may not beleeue their sayings as the worde of God because they often crie beeing subiect to errour and for this cause their authoritie when they speake of traditions may be suspected and we may not alwaies beleeue them vpon their word speaker D. B. P. His otherreason is that if we beleeue vnwritten Traditions were necessary to saluatiō then we must aswel beleeue the writings of the ancient Fathers as the writings of the Apostles because Apostolicall Traditions are not elsewhere to be found but in their books but that vvere absurd for they might erre Ans. That doth not follovv for three causes First Apostolicall Traditions are aswell kept in the mind of the learned as in the auncient Fathers vvritings and therefore haue more credit then the Fathers vvritings speaker A. W. It may be they were kept in the mind of the learned till they were written but that afterward and to this day they are in mens minds otherwise then as they haue learned them by reading it is not very likely Beside how can traditions be kept without adding and altering if they haue no better guide then the memories of men speaker D. B. P. Secondly they are commonly recorded of more then one of the Fathers and so haue firmer testimonie than any one of their writings speaker A. W. What is that to Master Perkins reason vnlesse you will say that we are as well to beleeue the writings of the fathers where more then one writ the same thing as we are one of the Apostles or Euangelists alone which I perswade my selfe you will not affirme speaker D. B. P. Thirdly if there should be any Apostolicall Tradition related but of one auncient Father yet it should be of more credit than any other thing of his ovvne inuention because that vvas registred by him as a thing of more estimation And gaine some of the rest of those blessed and Godly personages vvould haue reproued it as they did all other falshoods if it had not binsuch indeed as it vvas tearmed Which vvhen they did not they gaue a secret approbation of it for such and so that hath the interpretatiue consent at least of the learned of that age and the follovving for Apostolicall Tradition it so because they were taught by our Lord yet Pauls case is proper to himselfe and altogether extraordinarie The third particular is somewhat more to purpose because S. Paul hauing prooued by many reasons that women might not come into the congregations bareheaded addes in the conclusion that it was enough to stop any contentions mans mouth that the Apostles and the Churches of God allowed of no such custome But first this hatescripture Papist must be put in minde that whereas he calles these wranglers scripturists as if they had alleaged scripture for their defence there is no such thing in the text nor any one obiection so much as signified by the Apostle Secondly this custome of the Church is not alleaged because as he seemes to presume by his conclusion afterward he wanted other reason to prooue the point For as Chrysostome and others haue obserued he hath in the former part of the chapter proued it to be against nature and against scripture too Thirdly he reasons not about any matter of doctrine but about the outward carriage of men and women in the assemblie of Gods seruice Lastly it doth no way follow that because the custome of the Church must ouer-way priuate mens fancies in things indifferent therefore the Scripture containes not all things necessarie to saluation but must be supplied therein by traditions Neither doth the Apostles example warrant his conclusion The Apostle hauing proued that he exhorts to by reason and Scripture last of all alleages custome against contentious men in a thing which they tooke to be indifferent therefore wee must alleage Scriptures when they be plaine for vs and when they are not plaine tradition euen in matters of saluation Who sees not that this followes not vpon that Obiections for Traditions speaker W. P. First they alleadge 2. Thess. 2. 15. where the Apostle bids that Church keepe the ordinances which he taught either them by word or letter Hence they gather that beside the written word there be vnwritten traditions that are indeede necessarie to be kept and obeyed Answ. It is very likely that this Epistle to the Thessalonians was the first that euer Paul writ to any Church though in order it haue not the first place and therefore at the time when this Epistle was penned it might well fall out that some thinges needefull to saluation were deliuered by word of mouth not beeing as yet written by any Apostle Yet the same things were afterward set downe in writing either in the second Epistle or in the Epistles of Paul speaker D. B. P. Obserue first that insteed of Traditions according to the Greek and Latin vvord they translate Ordinances euer flying the vvord Tradition vvhere any thing is spoken in commendation of them But if any thing sound against them then thrust they in the vvord Tradition although the Greeke vvord beare it not See for this their corruption and many other a learned Treatise named The Discouery of false translation penned by M. Gregorie Martin a man most singulerly conuersant in the Greeke and Hebrevv tongues speaker A. W. Gregory Martinus cauils were answered long since by Doctor Fulke and the answer neuer yet replied to that euer I heard of by any Papist Your old translation hath in steed of traditions precepts and in the Gospell euery where traditions and yet the former place is to the commendation of traditions and all in the Gospell to their dispraise Vatablus also vseth his libertie in translating this word sometimes Instituta sometimes Constitutio sometimes Institutio the difference in our translation as farre as I can perceiue is this that we call mens precepts traditions the Apostles doctrines ordinances speaker D. B. P. Secondly is it not plaine dotage to auouch that this second Epistle to the Thessalonians was the first that euer he wrote Surely if none of his otherwere written before it yet his first to the same Church must needs haue been written before it But let vs giue the man leaue to dreame sometimes speaker A. W. It is easie to see that Master Perkins compares not this epistle with the other to the same Church but with other that were written to other Churches and generally with the bookes of the new Testament among which if wee may beleeue Irenaeus it was the ancientest except the former and perhaps the Gospell of S. Matthew for it was written
that lookes into your Commentaries and bookes of controuersies shall finde very diuers and sometimes contrarie expositions Our Sauiour Christ hath prouided sufficientlie for his Church by deliuering in scripture the grounds of religion so plainely some here some there that any reasonable man may with small labour vnderstand them from which they that haue knowledge of the tongues and arts especiallie of Logick and Rhetorick may come to vnderstand the harder places though perhaps not euery one yet at the least so many and such as shall serue to instruct the people of God in the knowledge of his will for the obtaining of euerlasting life speaker D. B. P. To auoid then such garboyles and intestine contention there vvas neuer yet any Law-maker so simple but appointed some gouernour and Iudge who should see the due obseruation of his Lawes and determine all boubts that might arise about the letter and exposition of the Law who is therefore called the quicke and liuely law and shall we Christians thinke that our diuine Lavv-maker who in vvisdome care and prouidence surmounted all others more than the heauens doe the earth hath left his golden Lawes at randome to be interpreted as it should seeme best vnto euery one pretending some hidden knovvledge from we knovv not vvhat spirit no no It cannot be once imagined vvithout too too great derogation vnto the soueraigne prudence of the Son of God speaker A. W. For the auoiding of outward garboiles by force or preaching false doctrine our Sauiour hath appointed principallie the ciuill magistrate secondarily the gouernors of the Churches For the keeping of his children from perishing by error he hath ordeined beside the outward helps of Pastors and Doctors the most certaine direction of his vicegerent the holy spirit who preserues all that are Christs from falling away from the substance and foundation of truth to damnation Not that euery man may take vpon him to interpret scripture vpon pretence of I know not what spirit but that he may assure himselfe of being kept from all error that may ouerthrow his saluation by the direction of Gods spirit vpon whom he calls by prayer and rests by faith to this purpose as I said before sure and who therefore were appointed to be heard without exception This befals not any men nowadayes and therefore none can iustly claime any such credit The auncients that so wrot in this point of S. Pauls going to see Peter haue wholie mistaken the Apostle who denies that of himselfe which they affirme of him For he saith First that he was not an Apostle of men nor by man Secondly that he went vp to Ierusalem not to haue confirmation of his doctrine from them who were no way superior to him but that the Gentiles might know he taught the same things that the other Apostles did If he had done it for his owne assurance he had not beleeued the vision and discredited our Sauiours extraordinarie teaching of him and had taught for a time such things as he was not sure to be the truth of God But if this should be his case he had sinned grieuously in his former preaching and he had wholie ouerthrowne the authoritie of his ministrie which in these two Chapters he labors especially to vphold auouching that he neither learned any doctrine nor receiued any allowance of his authoritie from Iames Cephas and Iohn which were esteemed to be pillers yea he did openly reprooue Peter if not of error in doctrine yet of misbehauiour in his conuersation As for the controuersie of abrogating Moses law it was a case determined by scripture and no man might refuse to obey any one of the Apostles charge coÌ„cerning that point But that the Brethren might haue the better satisfaction it pleased the holy ghost that the Apostles should in a Councell decide the question by ioynt consent of themselues and the brethren there assembled which any one of them might of himselfe haue ended But because diuers parts of the Church were conuerted by diuers Apostles and each Church made most account of their owne Apostle the readiest and safest way was to conclude of the matter by common consultation so afterward in all lawfull Councels the written word was held sufficient for the consutation of the heresies that arose from time to time but for the better stopping of the heretikes mouths and satisfying of all men sometimes the consent of former Diuines Churches and Councels was added in good discretion for mens sake not for the matter which might be and was abundantlie prooued or discouered as occasion serued by the scriptures speaker D. B. P. See Cardinall Bellarmine I vvill only record tvvo noble examples of this recourse vnto Antiquity for the true sense of Gods vvord The first out of the Ecclesiastical History whereof Saint Gregorie Nazianzen and Saint Basil tvvo principall lights of the Greeke Church this is recorded They were both noble men brought vp together at Athens And aftervvard for thirteene yeares space laying aside all profane bookes imployed their studie vvholie in the holy Scriptures The sense and true meaning vvhereof they sought not out of their owne iudgement and presumption as the Protestants both do and teach others to do but out of their Predecessors writings and authoritie namely of such as vvere knovvne to haue receiued the rule of vnderstanding from the Tradition of the Apostles These be the very words speaker A. W. The examples you bring are nothing against vs in this question Nazianzen and Basil sought the true sense of the Scripture not out of their owne iudgement but out of their predecessors writings and authoritie What then Therefore the Scripture containes not all doctrine necessarie to saluation This consequence hath often been disprooued Neither is the Antecedent true if it be generally taken For their owne writings shew euery where that they vsed the help of learning and discourse to finde out the sense of scripture in many places and set downe that in their Commentaries which by study they came to vnderstand If any thing were doubtfull we presume they did as we are sure the Protestants now doe where they had not apparant reason to the contrarie rest vpon the authoritie of their predecessors rather than vpon their owne This reuerence wee giue to the Fathers writings and reade them with as great diligâ—… as they that make more bragges of thâ—ir knowledge in â—heâ— And if that rule which the storie 〈◊〉 and or you name not but it is Austin speakes of 〈◊〉 one of them which we follw in searching out thâ—… 〈◊〉 of the Scripture â—…treate â—ou to make 〈◊〉 to vs and you shall finde that we will take it 〈◊〉 and vse it diligently if we cannot shew you certaine reasons to the contrarie If the rule be to take for truth whatsoeuer the ancients haue deliuered how many things yea contrarie expositions shal we hold for true If you say the rule is to beleeue the ancientest what
shall we doe where they say nothing where their expositions are contraried by those you name and other about their time But this can be no rule of vnderstanding any more of the Scripture than that which they haue expounded which is very little and Origen one of the ancientest and greatest expositors is generally condemned for an Heretike by Epiphanius Ierome Austin and the best writers in Diuinitie Yea Bellarmine sheweth that Origen was seene in hell with Arius and Nestorius and affirmeth that the fift Synod cursed him amongst other Heretikes This rule if it be a rule will serue in very few places of the Scripture speaker D. B. P. The other example shall be the principal pillar of the Laten Church S. Augustine who not only exhorteth and aduiseth vs to follow the decree of the auncient Church if we will not be deceiued with the obscurity of doubtfull questions but plainly affirmeth That he vvould not beleeue the Gospell if the authoritie of the Church did not moue him vnto it Which words are not to be vnderstood as Caluine would haue them that S. Augustine had not bin at first a Christian if by the authority of the Church he had not bin thereunto perswaded but that when he was a learned and iudicious Doctor and did write against Heretikes euen then he would not beleeue these bookes of the Gospel to haue bin penned by diuine inspiration and no others and this to be the true sense of them vnlesse the Catholike Church famous then for antiquity generality and consent did tell him which and what they were So farre was he oft from trusting to his owne skill and iudgment in this matter which notwithstanding was most excellent This matter is so large that it requireth a whole question but being penned vp within the compasse of one obiection I wil not dwel any longer in it but here fold vp this whole question of Traditions in the authorities of the auncient Fathers out of whom because I haue in answering M. Perkins and else-where as occasion serued cited already many sentences I will here be briefe speaker A. W. Austin wils vs to consult with that Church which the holy Scripture shewes vs to be the Church without any ambiguitie the ancient Church hee names not but by the Church so commended hee vnderstandeth the vniuersall Church as he calles it that is he appeales in the question about Baptisme among the Donatists to the generall practise of the Church in the seuerall congregations which no doubt is of great force to perswade any reasonable man in any matter that cannot be decided by the scripture For in matters of indifferencie the Churches iudgement is a kinde of law so that he which in such things would not be deceiued cannot doe better than to follow it There is no word in that place of Austin to allow your interpretation of that sentence but rather the whole course of the speech makes for Caluin I will propound the matter let any indifferent man iudge Manes or Manicheus in his epistle of the foundation as he termed it called himselfe the Apostle of Christ Austin answeres that he did not beleeue him to be so and then demaunds of the Manichean what course hee would take to prooue it to him Perhaps saith Austin you will reade the Gospell to me and assay to prooue Manicheus person to me out of it But what if you should light vpon one that doth not yet beleeue the Gospell I truly had not beleeued the Gospell if the authoritie of the Church had not moued me why should I not obey them saith Austin when they will me not to beleeue Manicheus whom I obeyed when they willed me to beleeue the Gospell These are Austins words to which I will adde those that follow afterward that First wee beleeue that which as yet we cannot discerne that being made stronger in faith we may attaine to the vnderstanding of that we doe beleeue not men now but God himselfe confirming and enlightening our minde within speaker A. W. S. Ignatius the Apostles Scholler doth exhort all Christians To sticke fast vnto the Traditions of the Apostles some of which he committed to writing I shewed before what little credit many of the writings wee haue of Ignatius deserue Eusebius authoritie is more worth but hee is neither quoted nor alleaged truly The former I take to be the Printers fault the latter must needes be yours Ignatius saith Eusebius as he past through Asia vnder guard in euery Citie where he came by preaching and exhortation strengthened the parishes that they should especially take heed of heresies then first newly sprung vp and should cleaue fast to the Tradition of the Apostles which also for more suretie he thought it necessarie for him to write Now the heresies which at that time troubled the Church were those of the Simonians Menadcians Ebionites Nicolaitans Cerinthians Saturninians Basilidians for the refuting whereof the scripture is alsufficient to a reasonable man speaker D. B. P. Polycarpus by the authority of the Apostles words which he had receiued from their owne mouthes confirmed the 〈…〉 truth and ouerthrew the Heretikes speaker A. W. Polycarpus might well refute them by authoritie of the Apostles words which himselfe had heard if without the Scripture they would beleeue him that hee heard them of the Apostles But Eusebius reports of him in Irenaus words that he recited all things in that refutation agreeable to the holy Scriptures It was much for the perswading of the people to whom as Irenaeus saith he spake those things that he could truly say he had heard those things of the Apostles by word of mouth which they might finde written in the Scriptures speaker D. B. P. S. Ireneus who imprinted in his hart Apostolicall Traditions receiued from Policarp saith If there should be a controuersie about any meane question ought vve not to runne vnto the most auncient Churches in the vvhich the Apostles had conuersed and from them take that which is cleere and perspicuous to define the present question For vvhat if the Apostles had not vvritten any thing at all must vve not haue follovved the order of Traditions vvhich they deliuered to them to vvhom they deliuered the Churches speaker A. W. Irenaeus in his epistle to Florinus aboue mentioned saith that he imprinted in his heart the whole carriage and discourse of Polycarpus refuting the Heretikes but of Apostolicall traditions hee speakes neuer a word more than that Polycarpus had heard those things of the Apostles which he then deliuered agreeable to the Scriptures In any such meane question as is not resolued of in Scripture it was fit to haue recourse to those Churches in which the Apostles had liued yea if they had written nothing we must haue repaired to the books of the old Testament the knowne word of God for all matters of substance in things indifferent the iudgment of such
Churches is of great authoritie speaker A. W. Origen teacheth that the Church receiued from the Apostles by Tradition to baptize Infants Origen calles the tradition of the Apostles their practise of baptizing infants which hath sufficient ground of scripture though not in expresse words as your Church also holds and as Origen himselfe acknowledgeth by shewing the reason that moued the Apostles to baptise them as hee conceiues though indeede there is also other better warrant for it speaker A. W. Athanasius saith VVe haue proued this sentence to haue been deliuered from hand to hand by Fathers to Fathers but yee O new Iewes and sonnes of Caiphas vvhat Auncestors can yee shevv of your opinion speaker A. W. Where reason failed the Arians on their side and could not moue them in behalfe of the Church Athanasius addes this as a further proofe for their confutation that the doctrine of Christ being one with his Father had been held from time to time in the Church whereas they had no consent of antiquitie for their opinion Yet had he himselfe prooued the point by many certaine reasons out of the Scripture and brought this argument from the authoritie of men for confutation of their false assertion that the former Diuines were not of that iudgement This Athanasius refuteth by the testimonies of Theognostus Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria whom he calles eloquent and one other Dionysius Bishop of Rome and Origen whom he termes painfull S. Basil hath these words VVe haue the doctrine that is kept and preached in the Church partly vvritten and part vve haue receiued by Tradition of the Apostles in mysterie both vvhich be of the same force to godlines and no man opposeth against these vvho hath at the least but meane experience of the Lavves of the Church See Gregory Nazianzen Orat. 1. in Iulian If you will giue me leaue I will defend Basils speech by that which may be gathered out of him viz. that hee holds them things to be by tradition which are not exprest in the Scriptures My ground for this exposition are these words of his Out of what Scripture haue we saith Basil the very speaker D. B. P. S. Augustine some thousand two hundred yeares agoe recordeth the very forme of arguing which the Protestants vse now-a-daies in the person of Maximinus an Arrian in his first booke against him in the beginning Jf thou shalt saith this Heretike bring any thing out of the Scriptures vvhich is common to all vve must needs heare thee but these vvords vvhich are vvithout the Scriptures are in no sort to be receiued of vs when as the Lord himselfe hath admonished vs and said in vaine do they vvorship me teaching commaundements and precepts of men How S. Augustine opposed against them vnwritten Traditions hath been afore declared The like doth S. Bernard asfirme of certaine Heretikes of his time called Apostolici So that most truly it may be concluded that euen as we Catholikes haue learned of the Apostles and auncient Fathers our noble progenitors to stand fast and hold the Traditions which we haue receiued by word of mouth aswell as that which is written Euen so the Protestants haue receiued as it were from hand to hand of their ignoble predecessors old condemned Heretikes to reiect all traditions and to she vnto the only Scriptures speaker A. W. The Heretike Maximinus asked nothing but reason of Austin if he stood vpon the matter and not vpon the termes neither doth Austin find fault with this condition nor could he in reason because as I answered before himselfe appeales to that kind of triall in that very disputation Neither must I saith Austin to Maximinus alleage the Councell of Nice in preiudice of the matter nor you the Councell of Ariminum neither am I tyed with the authoritie of this Councell nor you with the authoritie of that let matter striue with matter 〈◊〉 with cause reason with reason by the authoritie of the scriptures which are not proper to you or me but common to vs both But will you heare him speake more like Maximinus Reade me this saith Austin out of a Prophet reade it out of a Psalme recite it out of the Lawe recite it out of the Gospell recite it out of an Apostle Thence recite I the Church disperst ouer the whole world and our Lord saying my sheepe heare my voyce And a little after away with mens papers let the voyce of God sound And in another place away with our papers let Gods bookes come forth heare Christ heare the truth speaking If these speeches be hereticall we confesse our selues to be Heretikes but so that we haue Austin on our side for an Arch-Heretike Bernard speakes of the Hereticks called Apostolicks not in his 62. but in his 66. sermon vpon the Canticles where he saith neuer a word of their reiecting Traditions No more hath Austin nor Epiphanius where they write of them And if they did reiect traditions it was because they would establish their owne hereticall bookes viz. the Acts of Thomas and Andrew and the gospell of the Egyptians which to say the truth are to be counted traditions because they haue no warrant of the scripture nor are any part of the Canon It were easie for me to turne your owne sentence against you and as all men may see with good reason but it shall suffice me that I haue refuted your slaunders and shewes with sound proofe of arguments and authoritie I consider loosers must haue leaue to speake The eighth point Of Vowes Our consent speaker W. P. Touching vowes this must bee knowne that wee do not condemne them altogether but onely labour to restore the purity of doctrine touching this point which by the Church of Rome from time to time hath beene corrupted and defaced We hold therefore that a vow is a promise made to God touching some duties to be performed vnto him and it is twofold generall or speciall The generall vow is that which concernes all beleeuers and it is made in the couenant both of the law and of the Gospell I will here onely speake of the vow which is made in the couenant of the Gospell in which there be two actions one of God the other of man God in mercy on his part promiseth to men the remission of sinnes and life euerlasting and man againe for his part promiseth to beleeue in Christ and to obey God in all his commaundements All men euer made this vow vnto God as the Iewes in circumcision which also they renewed so often as they receiued the Passeouer and in the newe Testament all that are baptized doe the like And in baptisme this vow is called the stipulation of a good conscience whereby wee purpose to renounce our selues to beleeue in Christ and to bring forth the fruites of true repentance and it ought to be renued so oft as wee are partakers of the supper of the Lord.
Tertullians testimonie is not worth the answering Not only because as I shewed before out of Hilary his heresie discredited all his writings but because this is the booke wherein he chiefly maintaines that his heresie and blasphemie too accompting Montanus the holy Ghost and Comforter whom our Sauiour promised to send Vpon his authoritie doth Tertullian forbid second marriages as vncleane and brings this place you alleage to that purpose Such conscience make you of citing authorities against the truth But I answere Tertullian that our Sauiour hath left it to no mans choise but to his that hath receiued the gift speaker D. B. P. Origen vpon the same place He that vvill take this vvord that is set dovvne of chastitie let him pray for it beleeuing â—…m that said aske and it shall be giuen you and he shall receiue it which doth plainely confute M. Perkins Who saith that although we aske neuer so much we cannot obtaine this gift speaker D. B. P. To Tertullian Origen may well be ioyned a man condemned of heresie or rather of many heresies by Ierome Austin Epiphanius Theophilus and a whole Councill Further it is strange that he should be reported to haue offered such violence to his owne bodie if he thought the gift of continencie so easie to be obtained More especially I say that Origen mistakes the matter For our Sauiour Christ bids not euery man pray for it that will haue iâ— but him to take it that can implying that euery one cannot The promise is of things needfull such is not continencie nor conuenient for all speaker D. B. P. With Origen agreeth S. Ierome vpon the same place who saith It is giuen vnto them vvho haue requested it vvho haue desired it and trauayled that they might receiue it speaker A. W. Ieromes authoritie is in it selfe more worth in this case not much because hee goes directly against our Sauiours words who makes it a gift particular to some and not once mentions any meanes of comming by it but bids them take it that can His reason is the same with Origens and answered before yet euen there he wils all men to consider their strength whether they be able to goe thorough with it or no. speaker D. B. P. The same Song chanteth Gregory Nazianzen which is of three kinds of Eunouchs Nazianzen goeth somwhat further making it no more but a matter of a mans owne inclination When thou hearest saith he to whom it is giuen adde it is giuen to them that are able and to them who are so carried by the inclination of their minde As if our Sauiour had said Take it who will not who can as if nothing wanted but resolution speaker D. B. P. S. Chrysostome saith it is possible to all them who make choyse of it and further addeth that our Sauiour Christ himselfe doth proue it there after this sort Thinke vvith thy selfe if thou haddest bin by nature an Eunuch or by the malice of men made one vvhat vvouldest thou then haue done vvhen thou shouldest both haue been depriued of that pleasure and yet not haue had any recompence for thy paine Therefore thanke God because thou shalt haue a great revvard and a glittering Crovvne if thou liue so as they must doe vvithout any revvard yet saith he thou maiest do it more easilie safely and pleasantly both because thou art fortifiâ—d vvith hope of recompence and also comforted vvith a vertuous conscience speaker A. W. Chrysostoms Rhetorike is better in this place than his Logicke Our Sauiour exhorts them that can to take it he saith not euery man that will may Those are they which haue made themselues chast who hauing the gift of continencie from God vse it accordingly and forbe are marriage that they may with more cheerefulnes and lesse incumbrance serue God yet is there no shadow of any proofe in this place that euery one may vow continencie speaker D. B. P. We will wrappe vp this point with S. Augustine who directly confuteth M. Perkins by many reasons and examplâ—… Lib. 2. De adaâ—…erinis coning cap. 12. Et de bono vidâ—â—â— â—ap â—0 speaker A. W. And vpon the Psalme an hundreth thirtie seauen he yeeldeth another reason why God will more really aâ—… them saying He that exhorteth thee to Voâ— will helpe thee to fulfill it All which heauenly Doctrine because it is spiritually iudged as the Apostle speaketh the Carnall man cannot vnderstand And therefore M. Perkins being perswaded that few can liue chastly except they marrie auoucheth that this Vovv doth bring forth innumerable abhominations in the World Not the hundreth part so many as the fleshly Heretikes imagine and out of flying and lying tales report and bruâ—te abroad Nay I dare affirme that let the authenticall Records of our Realme be well perused and you shall find more lewde filthie Lecherie to haue been practised by Ministers and their Wiues this last age than was in a thousand yeere before by all the Catholike Priests and Religious persons of the Land There is not a word of this place either in that twelfth Chapter or in any part of that booke how then doth Saint Austin directly confute Master Perkins by many reasons and examples The question propounded by Pollentius and there handled by Austin is whether the Apostle 1. Cor. 7. forbid her to marrie who is departed from her husband though not because of fornication In the other place Austin shewes no more but this that it is possible to refraine from fornication and adulterie which it neuer came into our minde to denie But this is not enough to chastitie and continencie If the ancient Fathers hereto fore and you now count al them chast that defile not their bodies with outward vncleannes of that kinde monstrous filthinesse may bee chastitie But admit which wee grant may be and like enough hath been in many carnall men yea is perhaps at this day in some Turkes and other Heathen that the outward act should be vtterly for borne yet may they that so forbeare burne in continuall lust and liue in the breach of Gods Commandements What doth this discourse of Austins then concerne that which Master Perkins affirmes when he is readie to grant as much as Austin saith and yet holds his former conclusion that chastitie and continencie are vertues of Gods speciall gift and not matters to be attained to by euery one that wil vow to continue vnmarried in hope to prooue able to keepe his vow This third place is like the first alleaged by you without any ground at all For there is no such speech in that Commentarie nor any occasion of it in the Psalme The likeliest place for it in his exposition of the Psalmes is vpon the 75. Psalme where hee discourses of the vow of continencie at large But there it is not so that it is not to be taken for Austins till you bring better proofe that it is his If I
for this fable writ 800. yeeres after Christ and setteth it downe but as a report as you might haue seene if you had looked in him which by the wrong quotation it should seeme you did not Eusebius who writ the Ecclesiasticall historie 400. yeeres before Damascen and set downe that matter out of the record of Abgarus owne countrey hath not one word of any such Image Yea in his epistle to the Empresse Constantine Augusta who writ to him for an image of Christ he sheweth that her desire is not warrantable and discourses that matter at large Euagrius another of your authors about sixe hundred yeeres after Christ telleth such a storie as you mention not vpō his own but Procopius credit who liued in the same age with him and writ that miracle by the report of I know not what old men It is enough to discredit it that Eusebius maketh no mentiō of any such Image though he writ the historie of that matter betwixt our Sauiour and Abgarus at large and that as I said before out of the records of Edessa where Abgarus ruled If these former authors cannot procure credit to that storie what should Simeon Metaphrastes doe who came some hundreds of yeeres after Procopius and Euagrius But of this and like miracles if they were indeed wrought we heard Biels iudgment before speaker D. B. P. The third Image representing our blessed Sauiour is said to haue bin made by Nicodemus his secret Disciple vvhich aftervvard vvas taken by the Ievves and in despight of Christ vvas crucified and to their confusion much blood issued out of it This history is in the ◅orke of S. Athanasius that sound piller of the Church intituled De passione imaginis and is either his or some other very auncient and graue vvriters For it is related in the seauenth generall councell Act. 4. speaker A. W. There is no likelihood that Athanasius would record any such storie his other writings are so directly against all Idolatrie But which of the two copies will ye ascribe to Athanasius For hee that reades them aduisedly will rather take them for two seuerall mens doings than thinke either of them to be written by Athanasius And therefore Nanius a great Doctor of Louaine makes no bones to place it amongst those writings which are none of Athanasiuses neither indeed was it euer knowne till that idolatrous second Councill of Nice eight hundred yeeres after Christ very neere Yea the storie it selfe seemes to haue bin yonger than Athanasius almost foure hundred yeeres For Sigibort affirmes it happened in the yeere 775 the historie of Lombardie in the yeere 750. speaker A. W. That S. Luke the Euangell drew the Picture of our blessed Ladie is registred by Theodorus Lector 1000. yeeres ago and Metaphrasies In vita Lucae and Nicephorus Those fragments of Theodorus gathering deserue no such credit that a thing done more than fiue hundred yeres before he was borne and recorded by none of his ancients that are knowne should vpon his bare word be held for true But let vs grant as much as you desire that S. Luke drew the Virgin Maries counterfeit What of that will it follow that therefore it is fit or lawfull to make Images now in this certaine daunger of Idolatrie when no man knowes any more of the Virgins fauour and feature than he doth of our great Grandmother Euahs It should seeme Nicephorus did not giue any great credit to the storie though Theodorus had written it long before him For he brings it in with a suspitious preface It is said And I marueile if you reade it in Nicephorus your selfe that you adde not the rest of his report in that place of the Euangelist Lukes picturing our Sauiour also and the chiefe of his Apostles Simeon Metaphrastes is too young to witnesse a matter done so many yeeres before his birth speaker D. B. P. Tertullian an author of the second hundreth yeere after Christ hath left writen that the Image of Christ in shape of a shepheard carrying a sheep on his shoulders was ingrauen vpon the holy Chalices vsed in the Church speaker A. W. Tertullian hath left this written that the image of a Shepheard carrying a sheepe was engrauen vpon the Cups or Chalices but he neuer giues any signification of the holinesse of those Cups nor approbation of the picture further than to make them serue his purpose to shew that by the sheep all kind of men are signified as well Heathen as Christians And surely he that reades his booke of Idolatrie and considers that hee makes Idols and Images all one for their nature will not thinke him any fauourer of Images speaker D. B. P. In the time of S. Chrysostom they were so common that they were carried in rings drawen on cups painted in Chambers See Theodoret. Jn histor relig in vita Simeonis Stelitae Aug. lib. 2. de cons. Euang. cap. 10. And the 7. Synod Act. 4. This briefly of Images in generall Now a word or two of the signe of the Crosse which our Protestants haue banished from all their followers Neuerthelesse it cannot be denied to haue been in most frequent vse among the best Christians of the Primitiue Church speaker A. W. We also as they had in Chrysostomes time and in all times and places where the Art of grauing and painting was vsed haue Images in Rings Cups Chambers But what Images or to what purpose you neither tell vs what they were nor quote the place that wee may looke and examine the matter Theodoret speakes not of Images in Rings Cups or Chambers but onely tels of a report that the people of Rome did set vp little Images of Simeon in all their shopdoores and walking places or galleries But Artificers are no fit iudges in such controuersies and yet it is but a report that they did so Austin iesting at them who say that our Sauiour Christ writ certaine books to his Apostles Peter and Paul wherein the art whereby he wrought his miracles was contained I belecue saith he they hit vpon these two Apostles as the men to whom he writ because they had seene him and them in many places painted together But what approbation giues he to the vse of these pictures So saith he they deserue to erre that seeke Christ and his Apostles not in the holy books but vpon painted walles As for that idolatrous Synod it is ridiculous to vrge the authoritie of that against vs when you know wee wholy disclaime it and pleade against it from the Councill of Franckford and the book of Charlemaigne the Emperour in both which it was refuted and condemned If you bring no better proofe for the Crosse in particular than you haue for mages in generall I doubt me the Protestants will not repeale the act of banishment made against it whatsoeuer you talke of the most frequent vse thereof