Calu. l. 4â— Inst cap. 9. sect 13. acknowledge that there is no better or surer remedy to roote out and take away al heresies therfore eyther this is a certaine remedy or els there is none at all the which to affirme were to deny the prouidence of God and his loue to his Church 15. Moreouer that which our Aduersaries say to wit that the later Councels are not lawfull Assemblies because they haue not obserued due manner and forme is a false lye first because it doth not become euery priuate man to be iudge in this matter but it belongeth to the whole Church who hauing receyued for so many yeares all these as lawfull Councells we must not call them any more in question 16. And seing that our Aduersaries do imbrace and approue the six first Councels the lawfull forme to be obserued in Councells is to be fetched from them the which is exactly obserued in the later Councells as Baronius sheweth euidently in euery one of the first six Councells But Caluin acknowledgeth no Calu. c. 9. citato sect â— lawfull manner of any Synodicall assembly nor any such to be gathered togeather in the name of Christ but where all things are proued by Scripture only reiecting all Ecclesiasticall traditions but we haue already proued that the Traditions Goâ—t 1. c. 18. seq of the Church of God are as a principall and chiefest part of the word of God 17. Yea euen this was the only cause why S. Cyprian and so many other holy Byshops erred in the African Councells when they determined that all those who were christned by Heretikes should be baptized againe for they confirmed this their opinion very probably by many places of holy Scripture but they reiected the auncient tradition of the Lyrin lib. coÌ„tra Heraes c. 9. 10. S. Aug. Tom. 7. de baptism coÌ„tra Donatist l. 2. c. 7. in fine cap. 8. 9. S. Aug. Tom. 7. l. 3 de bapt coÌ„tra Donatist c. 4. l. 3. citato c. 2. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. loan 14. â— 9. Church the which they knew very well was opposite to this error as though it had byn contrary to the holy Scriptures as S. Vincentius Lyrinensis declareth very well and before him S. Augustine in many places 18. And that which is more S. Augustine manifestly writeth that he had byn of S. Cyprians opinion by reason of those probable reasons which were deduced out of holy Scripture but that the whole Catholike Church had defined the contrary And as the same holy Father teacheth at large they most of all oppugned the custome of the Church which were in the same error with S. Cyprian obiecting among other thinges that place of the holy Scripture the which our Aduersaries now adayes obiect against vsâ— God saith I am the truth he doth not say I am the custome Vnto whome S. Augustine answereth very well that the custome of the Church is not opposite to Truth but it is euen Truth it selfe 19. Our Aduersaries arguments are of small account or moment Caluin bringeth in the example of Caiphas and of the Iewish Councell wherin Christ was condemned The same argument Beza Bez. in 1. Tim. 2. v. 25. also alledgeth But who doth not know that this was neyther a generall Councell whereunto Christ was not called nor any â—ther true belieuer nor lawfull in it selfe seing that it was not assembled in the name and authority of Christ who was then the supreme head of the visible and militant Church as also because it was called togeather against the true Church of God by the wicked and cursed Synagogue of the Iewes For that was the true Church which adhered vnto Christ and belieued in him but that other which was altogeather depriued had lost the true faith of Christ was rather a fit Church for Sathan and other infernall spirits And I meruaile truly that Caluin and Beza do alledge that Councell as true and lawfull which was assembled against Christ himselfe as also by those who were not true belieuers â—o 15. v. 22. Psal 117. v. 21. Isa 9. v. 9. 10. Isa 6. v. 14. Dan. â— v. 26. Mat. vlt. â— vlt. in Christ yea who were filthily stained with the most heynous synne of infidelity as Christ humselfe witnesseth but we willingly leaue such a Church and Councell to our Aduersaries 20. It was also manifestly foretould by the Prophet that Christ should not be receyued by the Iewes and that the Synagogue of the Iewes should then fall from Ioa. 14. v 16. Calu. c. 9. citato sect 8. S. Aug. ToÌ„ 6. l. 3. contra Maxim Arian Episc c. 14. Beza volu 2. Tract Theol. Tract 3. de pace Christianorum Eccles constit cirâ— fineÌ„ pag. 118. iuxta edit GeÌ„ an 1558. Calu. sect citato Rupel Confess Art 5. in fine her faith But the holy Scriptures teach the plaine contrary of the true Church of Christ to wit that Christ and his spirit shall remayne with her for euer 21. But neyther is that other argument which Caluin and Beza vse any better to wit that S. Augustine would not vrge the authority of the Councell of Nice against Maximinus the Arian For neyther can we vrge the authority of the new testament against the Iewes not because we haue any doubt thereof but because the Iewes do not admit the new Testament In the same manner when that Arian would not admit the Councell of Nice but did plainly reiect it S. Augustine should in vayne haue vrged the authority therof for otherwise it is well knowne that S. Augustine neuer had any doubt of the fayth explicated in the Councell of Nice the which euen our Aduersaries imbrace as the most true word of God 22. Such as desire to see any more concerning this controuersy of the Generall Councells let them read Bellarmine in his first second booke of the Church militant and Coccius in his first Tome the seauenth booke the 21. 22. article CHAP. XI Of the Authority of the auncient Holy Fathers NOw it remaineth we say somewhat of the auncient holy Fathers and of their writinges both because they were in tymes past the chiefest members of the true Church of Christ euen by the confession of our Aduersaries as also because in the particuler controuersies we shall often vse the testimonies authorities of the holy Fathers 2. We know indeed well inough that they were men and that they might haue erred but neyther are they Gods nor Angells who accuse them of their errors We know also that one or more of the sayd holy Fathers haue sometymes erred when they left the more common opinion of others 3. But we affirme this constantly that the auncient holy Fathers receiued by the Church of God haue neuer written any thing with a common and vnanime consent that is eyther contrary to the holy Scriptures or to any point of fayth 4. Moreouer out of the writings of the holy Fathers in foure diuers
manners some forcible and conuincing arguments may be taken 5. First out of the common consent of all or at the least of the most part without any contradiction at all For if they had all erred in a necessary point of saluation the whole auncient Church should also haue erred the which euen our Aduersaries Cap. 7. huius â—oÌ„t acknowledge to be false as we haue declared before 6. Secondly that promise of Christ Matth. vâ—t v. penuit vit wherby he assured vs that he would be alwayes preseÌ„t with his Church was properly made to the Pastors and Doctors of the same for he promised that he would be present with those whom he sent to baptize and preach to wit the Pastors of the Church 7. Thirdly Pastors and Doctors Ad Ephes 4. v 11. 12. 13. 14. were ordained by God in his Church as the Apostle witnesseth to the end that we be not carried about with euery wind of Doctrine but that we may continue in the vnity of sayth till we meet with Christ in the last day But if all the Pastors and Doctors of the Church could erre we might easily be carried away with many blastes of strange doctrines neyther could the vnity of fayth alwayes continue and in this manner God should haue prouided very badly for his Church that it should neuer erre 8. Finally if all the Pastors and Doctors of the Church should teach any doctrine contrary to fayth there should no sincere and true preaching of the word of God remayne in the Church seeing that only Pastors and Doctors are lawfully called to the preaching of the true fayth of God But without the sincere preaching of the Suprac 8. huius controu §. 15 word of God it is impossible that the Church of Christ should consist as euen our Aduersaries confesse and as we haue declared before 9. Secondly we take arguments out of the auncient holy Fathers as out of most faythfull and true witnesses of that fayth which in their tymes was preached in the Catholike Church For our Aduersaries acknowledge that in their tyme the true and sincere fayth of Christ was preached We therefore alledge them as witnesses of that fayth for if we do not belieue them who lieued at that time whom will we belieue but they were both eye witnesses and nothing suspected of falshood as S. Augustine declareth very well disputing against the Pelagians 10. Thirdly we take arguments out S. Aug. Tom. 7. cont IulianuÌ„ Pelag. l. 2. cap. vlt. of the holy Fathers as out of those Doctors whose writings haue byn receiued and approued by the auncient Church of God For it was wont to impugne and condeÌ„ne those writers who wrote any thing contrary to the true fayth least their writings might be hurtfull to the future Church and on the other side it approued their writings who taught the true fayth There is yet extant a Decree of the Vide Tâ— 2. Concil inter Decreta S. Gelasij Papae Roman Councell set forth almost a thousand two hundred yeares agoe concerning these writings They therfore who haue beene approued by the auncient Church are most worthily to be belieued because the primitiue Church as our Aduersaries confesse hath neuer erred in iudgement concerning matters of fayth 11. Eourthly we take arguments out of the holy Fathers as out of the most holy and learned men and Blessed Saints of God For eyther they had the sincere true fayth and if it be so we should imbrace the same or they had it not and if it be so they were not Saynts of God nor could they be acceptable vnto him as the Apostle testifyeth 12. By this very argument the Catholiks Socrat. l. 5. c. 10. Soâ—oÌ„ l 8. c. 12. historiae Eccles in tymes past ouercame the Arians for they vrged them to receiue the holy Fathers who wrote before Arius his tyme or they should excommunicate them as Socrates and Sozomenus do testify 13. And to this purpose serue very fitly those words of S. Augustine wherein S. Aug. Tom 7. contra Iuli â—â—â— Peâ—agianuÌ„ l. 2. c. vlt. he declareth what was the iudgment of the primitiue Church concerning this matter For thus speaketh S. Augustine to the heretiks of his time whiles he vrgeth them with the testimony and authority of the auncient Fathers who were before him They had saith he no regard eyther to our friendship or to yours neyther were they enemies to either of vs they are neyther angry with you nor with vs they were not moued with pitty and compassion on eyther side what they found in the Church that they hâ—ld what they had learned that they taught they deliuered to their Children that which they had receiued from their owne Fathers VVe pleaded in our cause against you before these iudges and yet by them our cause was ended long since neyther we nor you were so much knowne to them and yet we bring sorth their sentences giuen in our fauour against you VVe had not as yet begunne any combat with you and yet so long agoe they proclaymed our victory So farre S. Augustine 14. Finally Vincentius Lyrinensis a French man who liued at the same tyme with S. Augustine proueth the same very well by many reasons and examples throughout all that most learned booke the which he wrote against the prophane Nouelties of all heresies And we will conclude and end this Chapter of the authority of Vide prâ—sertim c. 4 40. eiusdeÌ„ libelli holy Fathers and this our whole disputation of the Church of God with the same words wherewith he ended that his golden booke For thus he writeth in the end of it If neyther the Apostolicall definitions nor ecclesiasticall decrees be to be violated wherby according to the most holy and vniforme consent of all antiquity all heretikes and lastly Pelagius Celestius and Nestorius for these were the last Heretiks that liued in Vincentius his tyme haue bin alwayes most iustly condemned it is necessary in truth that all those Catholikes who will heereafter proue and shew themselues to be the true and lawfull children of our holy mother the Catholike Church should adhere and vnite themselues stedfastely as also dy in the profession of that sacred saith of those holy Fathers lastly that they should abhorre detest banish and persecute all the prophane nouelties of all most wicked Heretikes Hither to S. Vincentius The end of the second Controuersy THE faults escaped in printing it may please the gentle Reader to correct them of his courtesy FINIS
or marrow not in the leauâ—s of the words but in the sappeâ—pâ—th or roote os reason And a little after otherwise Matt. 4. v. 6. euen the Diuell himselfe speaketh Scriptures and all heresies according to Ezechiel make vnto themselues pillowes which they may lay vnder the elbow oâ— euery age Ezec. 13. v. 18. 2. By that which hath byn sayd answere may be made to our Aduersaries when they obiect against vs that we affirme the Scripture to be imperfect obscure like a nose of wax which a man may writh which way he will and lastly the origen and spring in a manner of all heresies for we affirme this of the naked and dead letter alone destitute of the true sense or rather of the letter to which the Heretikes adde their owne peruerse sense and meaning neyther haue our Aduersaries any cause to wonder at this seeing S. Paul himselfe saith of the bare letter alone that it killeth and bringeth eternall death 1. Cor. â— v. 6. 7. 9. and damnation But neuer any Catholike did euer attribute any such thing to the liuing letter which hath conioyned with it the true and natiue sense and which alone is truly and properly the word of God CHAP. IIII. How we are to seeke out the true sense and meaning of the holy Scripture THERE is great contentioÌ„ beweene vs and our Aduersaries about the meanes how to finde out the true and naturall interpretation of the letter a thing so necessary to eternall saluation They teach diuers thinges concerning this matter but deliuer nothing that is certayne One assigneth more rules to this purpose another fewer but when they haue sayd all they confesse at last that there was neuer any which hath not at sometyme erred in seeking out the true interpretation of holy Scripture For they gyue not their assent either to the ancient Fathers or to their owne Maisters in all thinges they teach or write nay they cannot assigne any one whom they acknowledge not to haue erred sometyme nor dare affirme to be free from error seeing as they say Euery man is a lyar and so at last all Rom. 3. v. 4. thinges are left by them doubtfull and vncertayne 2. But the Catholikes do proceed after another manner who teach that the certayne vndoubted sense of the Letter is not to be taken from the iudgment of any particuler man but from the vniforme consâ—nt of the ancient Fathers and especially from the iudgment and interpretation of the Catholike Church to whome it appertayneth to iudge of the sense and meaning of the holy Scriptures as the holy and Oecumenicall Councell of TreÌ„t teacheth very well for there is no doubt Concil Trident. sess 4. but that it is more safe to follow such an interpreter as cannot erre then such a one as erreth somtymes or at leastwise may erre but the Church cannot erre in her iudgment seeing that Christ and the â—oly Ghost remayne with her to teach Matt. 28. c vlt. Ioan. 14 v. 16. â—oan 16. v. 13. â—er all truth wherof more herafter when we shall come to treat of the Church 3. It shall suffice to obserue and â—ote here that according to the doctrine of our Aduersaries nothing either solide or certayne is contayned in the holy Scriâ—ture for wheras all dependeth of the â—rue sense of the Letter and with them â—here is no certayne or sure meanes by which to finde out this sense it followeth â—hat they call all into doubt which is in â—he Scripture wherby who seeth not how much they iniure them But contrariâ—yse according to the Catholike doctrine all thinges are euident and cerâ—ayne which are contayned in the holy Scriptures appertayning eyther to faith or good manners the Catholikes hauing euer a certayne and faithful Interpreter to wit the Catholike Church And surely whosoeuer reiecteth the sense which the Church giueth and in place therof substituteth another altogeather repugnant to it doth all one with him who reiecting the holy Scripture should in place therof bring in a new Scripture of his owne forging the sense of the Scripture being no lesse a part of the word of God then the letter which in these few wordes Tertullian confirmeth out of the tradition of the auncient Church The sense adulterated or falsified is no lesse repugnant Tertul. de prâ—sc c. 17. to the truth then the letter or stile corrupted 4. And to conclude it may be inferred that saluation is to be found in the Roman Church only and none at all out Marc. vlt. vers 16. â—om 3. v. 1â— Heb. â—â— v. 9. of it which I proue thus Both the Scripture testifyeth all meÌ„ confesse that diuine fayth is necessary to saluation but such as forsake the RomaÌ„ Church cannot haue diuine faith which wholy relieth vpon the word of God only but meerly humane seing their fayth is founded not in the word of God interpreted by the Church which cannot errâ— but in the word and interpretation of Luther Caluin or some other priuate man who as they themselues graunt may erre and be deceiued such an humane fayth then so doubtfull and vncertayne and only warranted by mans authority cannot iustify or bring a man to eternall saluation CHAP. V. How we may know which is the true letter of the holy Scripture ALL such as forsake the Roman Church and make little account of her authority are not only doubtfull vncertayne which is the true sense of the Scripture but they can haue no assurance at all eyther of the whole or of any part of the letter therof For whilst they goe about to call in question and make doubtfull certayne bookes only of the old Testament before they are aware they take away all authority from all other bookes both of the old and new Testament For whereas there is but one certaine and vndoubted Canon of these bookes to wit that which is receaued and approued by the iudgment of the Catholike Church which cannot erre our Aduersaries reiecting this Canon make all the books doubtfull conteined therin for no certayne testimony can be had of these bookes but eyther by this Canon only or by the auncieÌ„t tradition of the Church but they neyther admit this Canon nor wil stand to this vnwritten TraditioÌ„ or acknowledge it for the true word of God 2. Now as for the Canons lately set out by themselues no man can safely belieue them seeing they neyther agree one with another nor with the auncient Canons of the Church nor are any where found in the writteÌ„ word of God which as they teach is only to be belieued neyther can they bring any thing eyther concerning the Canon of the Hebrewes or any other auncient Canon which they haue not taken from the writings of the auncient Fathers whose authority without the expresse written word of God they will haue to be in no wise sufficient to engender fayth so as euen by the iudgment of our Aduersaries none of all these
can establish Fayth concerning this matter 3. Iohn Caluin indeed sayth that it Lib. 1. Inst c. 7. sect 2. in fine is as easy for a faithfull man to discerne Canonicall Scripture from that which is not Canonicall as to one that seeth it is easy to discerne light from darknes and white from black But in so saying See Beâ—l lib. 1. de ver Deic 17. 18 19. he contradicteth both reason and experience for it is euident that in old tyme there was no small controuersy amongst the faythfull yea and amongst learned and godly men concerning many bookes of the old and new Testament yea and also euen now amoÌ„gst such as our Aduersaries esteeme faithfull men which Caluin Calu. pros in Ep. lac Epist ad Heb. ante â— Petri. himself in many places confesseth 4. Moreouer Caluins owne followers well perceauing this fly vnto their owne peculiar spirit by which they say they are chiefly perswaded and moued and not by the only consent of the Church But these speake nothing to the purpose for Rupell Confess art 4. in faith two thinges concurre one is the cause or origen of fayth to wit God himselfe and the holy Ghost whereof there is no controuersy betweene vs and them for we all acknowledge the holy Ghost to be the principall cause of the assent we giue by fayth that is to say that it is the holy Ghost who chiefly perswadeth vs to belieue The other is the obiect of fayth or that which is to be belieued whereof we now dispute for the holy Ghost doth not induce vs to belieue the false vncertaine deuises of men but the puâ—e and sincere word of God only we aske therfore of our Aduersaries by what expresse word of God he reuealeth vnto them that there are so many Canonicall bookes and neyther fewer nor more for we read not this any where in the Scripture and they admit only the written Word of God how can the holy Ghost Calu l. 1. Instit c. 9. sect 1. then perswade theÌ„ to belieue that which is not the word of God For we are not now to expect new reuelations from God as do the Anabaptists and Libertines whom for this cause our Aduersaries condemne It is necessary therefore that if they will haue vs belieue that they are perswaded by the holy Ghost to belieue such books only to be authenticall as they do say are such that they first shew this to be a truth expressely contayned in holy Scripture which they will neuer be able to do Wherfore there is no certainty with them eyther of the sense of the holy InnoceÌ„t 1. ep 3. c. vlt. CoÌ„ il 3. Carthag caÌ„ 47. S. Aug. Epist 335. Câ—cil Trident. sess 4. Scripture or of the Letter nor euer wil be vntill they returne vnto the Church agayne But we Catholikes are certaine of both for we haue a most faythfull Canon receaued in the Church more theÌ„ a thousand and two hundred yeares agoe confirmed by a generall and Oecumenicall Councell 5. And this to haue beene the faith and doctrine of the auncient Church for the discerning of true and authenticall Lib. 4. Inst c. 1â— sect vlt. Scriptures that short but pithy sentence of S. Augustine whome Caluin acknowledgeth to haue byn the best and most faithfull witnes of antiquiy sufficiently testifyeth saying I for my part would not belieue the Ghospell vnlesse I were moued by the authority Aug. coÌ„ Epist Manich. c. 5. of the Church of which place I will say more herafter in the Controuersy of the Church And else where he saith VVe receaue the old and new TestameÌ„t in that nuÌ„ber of bookes which the authority of the holy Catholike Aug. serm 10 de temp Church deliuereth So S. Augustine 6. I know our Aduersaries obiect many thinges against many bookes contayned in our Ecclesiasticall Canon but their chiefe arguments do not only derogate authority from those bookes but also from many others which they receaue as Canonicall For they obiect that some Fathers did sometymes doubt of those bookes which they will not admit but they are not ignorant that some Fathers of old haue doubted of the Epistles of S. Iames and S. Iude of the second Epistle of S. Peter of the 2. and 3. of S. Iohn of the Epistle to the Hebrewes and of the Apocalyps of which bookes they dare Rupell Confess art 3. not now doubt especially Caluins followers as is manyfest by their confession of faith 7. They say further that in those bookes which they reiect there are many thinges obscure difficult and full of contradiction but what booke of Scripture in a manner is there in the which there do not occurre sometymes thinges 2. Pet. 3. v. 16. obscure and hard to be vnderstod did not S. Peter acknowledge as much But as for true contradictions there are none at al how soeuer there may be some things which at the first sight may seeme to imply contradiction yet indeed all thinges agree very well togeather such a contradiction is oftentymes found in those bookes which euen our Aduersaries receaue Aug. dâ— Doâ—t Christia l. 2. c. 41. de ser Dom. in mont l. 1. c. 3. yea euen in the Ghospells themselues which for all that are not to be reiected but humbly soberly and piously to be interpreted as S. Augustine many tymes admonisheth 8. To conclude all the arguments that our Aduersaries make against these bookes are fully answered by Catholike writers which haue set out Commentaries Bell. Greâ—s Contro 1 l. 1. c. 7. sequ 〈◊〉 in sâ—â— Coronol vpon those bookes to wit Cornelius I ansenius vpon Ecclesiasticus Ioannes Laurinus vpon the booke of VVisedome Ioannes Maldonatus and Chrisâ—ophâ—r à Castâ—o vpon Baruch and Nicolas Serarius vpon the rest of the bookes of the old Testament which our Aduersaries call Apocripall to omit the most Reuerend and famous Cardinall Bellarmine and his Champion Iacobus Gretserus as also Iames Gordon Lesmoreus For it is sufficient only to haue cited them seeing that I write only an abridgment of Controuersies not any long commentaries vpon the Scripture And therfore conteÌ„t my selâ—e to haue shewed in this place that our Aduersaries must either receaue the Canon of Scriptures approued be the Councell of Trent or be vtterly destitute of any certayne and assured Canon CHAP. VI. Of the Hebrew Text. OVR Aduersaries when they are vrged with Catholike argumeÌ„ts taken from the Scriptures are wont to fly to the Hebrew Text of the old Testament and to the Greeke text of the new perswading themselues by this meanes to attayne to the true and propter sense of the letter wherfore somthing is to be sayd in this place of the Hebrew Greeke text both which appertayne to the Letter of the holy Scripture 2. We grant indeed that when the Latin translation is either ambiguous or lesse playne the Hebrew text is well and profitably looked into as also that
it weake Sophisticall and erroneous 11. Besides that there are so many and so contrary illations of diuers men that the authority of the Church is altogeather necessary in maters of faith that there may arise a certayne and an vndoubted faith of these matters of which sort Traditions are that is to say the doctrine of the whole Church 12. But when one belieueth such an illation with a diuine or Catholike faith he must needes know two thinges the one is that the expresse place of Scripture from whence this conclusion is deduced must certainly be well vnderstood by him which disputeth the other is that he who maketh such a deduction and collection can neyther deceiue others nor be deceyued himselfe But none can know eyther of these without the Traditions of the Church seeing that otherwise there is none which may not be deceiued sometimes All collections therefore which produce or breed fayth in vs do most clearly conuince and shew the authority and necessity of Traditions CHAP. VII Wherein it is proued that there are Traditions by the absurdities which otherwise would follow THE fifth argument wherby we proue that many things are to be belieued which are not expressed in holy Scriptures is taken out of the absurdities which do ensue of the contrary doctrine For hauing once admitted that nothing is to be belieued which is not expressed in Scripture all old heresies are renewed and a great vncertainty and confusion of all things is brought into the Church of God yea euen the way to Atheisme is layd open because hauing once reiected despised the Traditions of the Church all the poynts of fayth from the Apostles tyme till now explicated and proued by the auncient Fathers against heretiks all those things also which were decreed and determined by all the generall Councâ—lls in times past against the said heretiks loose their chiefâ—st strength and authority the which notwithstanding our Aduersaries do acknowledge themselues to receiue and belieue 2. Neyther do we know by an assured Catholike faith whether there were euer any Fathers or Councells but by the Traditions of the Church But neyther do we know any other way but by fayth whether since the Apostles tyme till now there were any Catholikes or noâ— because of those things which were done since the tyme and death of the Apostles there is nothing extant in holy Scripture seeing that all the bookes thereof were written before the death of the Apostles But such things as haue bâ—n done since till now cannot otherwyse be knowne but by the Tradition of the Church 3. Neyther is it sufficient to say that we know these things by the Ecclesiasticall histories For that fayth which proceedeth of histories without the authority or Traditions of the Catholike Church is but an humane fayth which oftentimes deceaueth others and may be deceiued it selfe and therefore these kind of histories cannot produce a diuine fayth in vs this experience it selfe doth clearly teach vs. For our Aduersaries do somtymes doubt whether S. Peter was euer at Rome or no because forsooth this is not to be found expresly in holy Scripture wheras notwithstanding it is most assuredly proued and testified in many bookes both of the auncient Historiographers and holy Fathers Why may they not as lawfully call other matters in question which are notwithstanding expressely set downe in other auncient writers Our Aduersaries therfore do make all things very doubtfull and vncertayne whiles they will only belieue and admit the Scripture but now lâ—t vs answere their arguments CHAP. VIII Wherein the arguments of our Aduersaries taken out of the old Testament are confuted THE first argument wherby our Aduersaries oppugne Traditions and which they vse very often the which also as inuincible they haue added to the confession of their Rupell Confess Art 5. Deut. 4. v. 2. Deut 12. v. vlt. fayth they take out of these words of Deuteronomy Thou shalt not add any thing to the word which I speake vnto you nor shall you take any thing from it And againe that which I commaund thee do that only neyther add or diminish any thing from it By these places of Scriptures our Aduersaries do inferre that nothing is to be receiued as a point of fayth which is not expressely set downe in Scripture 2. But this argument is erroneous and the weaknes thereof is very great for many causes First because in those words there is no mention made of the Scripture nor of the written word of God but only of the word preached and deliuered viua voce Thou shalt not add sayth the Scripture to the word that I speake vnto you he doth not say that I write vnto you Againe Do only sayth he that which I commaund thee he doth not say that which I write vnto thee 3. Moreouer in these words the holy Scripture doth not only speake of matters of fayth to be belieued but also of ceremonies and customes to be done and obserued but our Aduersaries themselues confesse that these customes may be added by the authority of the Church yea they haue ordeined themselues very many the which they chang euen yet when they please Caluin also acknowledgeth that Calu. coÌ„tra 4 sess Concil Trident. many vnwritten customes were deliuered vnto vs by the Apostles 4. That also according to the phrase of Scripture is said to be added to the word of God which is contrary opposite vnit For Iosue did not transgresse this commaundement of Deuteronomy when he added his booke to the bookes of Moyses Nor did others transgresse it who added the bookes of the Iudges Ruth and of the Kinges which were not written by Moyses which are also to be belieued as contayning pointes of faith But in these bookes there is nothing contrary to that which Moyses wrote And the Hebrew text agreeth very well to this answere for in both places of Deuterâ—nomy this word Ghal is vsed which sigâ—â—tieth oâ—tentines contrary or against so that the sense is Do not add any thing contrary to the word which I commaund and againe yee shall not add any thing contrary to the word which I say vnto you For so is that particie Gâ—â—l taken in the 40. Psalme or according to the Hebrewes 41. in the 2. Psalme also the second verse And in the 14. of Numbers the 2. verse els where very often Euen as also in the new Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which answereth to the Hebrew Ghal signifieth also contrary or agâ—iâ—st when the Apostle writeth to the 1. ad Cor. 4. v. 6. Corinthians that in vs you may learne one not to be puffed vp against another aboue that is writteÌ„ that is to say against the Scripture the which saith we must not be puffed vp in pryde â—s S. Chrysostome and after him Theophilactus others do note vpon that place The which place some bouldly alledge against Traditions wheras the Apostle in that place doth not speake of the whole Calu in
is to say to vphould the house to strengthen it The Apostle heere attributeth theÌ„ both to the Church the one when he calleth hâ—r the pillar of truth the othâ—r when â—â— calleth her the ground of the same truth For the pillar also of the earth according to the Hebrew Iob. â— v. 6. Psal 74. vel inxta Hebrâ—os 79. v. 4. phrase doth signify the lowest fouÌ„dations of the earth So God is sayd to shake the pillars of the earth elswhere to strengthen the pillars of the earth that is to say the very foundations thereof 17. These so manifest and perspicuous Calu. inâ— ad Tim. 3. v. 15. words of the Apostle do compell Caluin at the last to be of our opinion albeit after his accustomed maÌ„ner at the first he wrongfully slaundereth vs affirming that Catholiks hold or to vse his owne words do blab out this horrible blasphemy that is to say that the truth of God is not strong inough vnlesse it be vphoulden by the shoulders of men and that the word of God is vncertayne till by humble prayers as it were it borroweth some certaymy from men And afterward he affirmeth that the Apostle in this place would nothing els but that the truth of God is supported by the pure preaching of the Ghospell But that which he sayd first is a meere slaunder for we do not say that the truth or the word of God absolutly and considered precisely in it selfe receiueth it certainty and strength from the Church for in this sense it receyueth a most perfect strength and large authority from God himselfe but in regard of men and in consideration of our knowledge it receiueth it certainty froÌ„ the Church Infra hac Controu cap. 16. in fine as afterward we will declare more at large the which also Caluin in the words immediatly following acknowledgeth to be most true when he writeth in this Calu. loco citato Rom. 10. v 17. sorte S. Paul simply vnderstandeth sayth Caluin that which in other words he sayth in the tenth Chapter to the Romans because fayth is by hearing there wil be no fayth vnlesse there he some that preach Therfore in regard of men the Church supporteth the truth because it maketh it famous by her prayse and commendation because the retayneth it in sincerity and purity and because the deliuereth and sendoth it to her posterity Thus Caluin 18. But that which secondly he addeth that the truth of God is supported and vpholden by the pure preaching of the Church is indeed most true but he should haue considered that this pure preaching of the Ghospell cannot be fouÌ„d but only in the Church and that no others but men can preach the pure Ghospell Wherefore if the truth of God be sustayned by the pure preaching of the Ghospell it necessarily followeth also that the Church must be sustained by men and consequently that the Church of Christ is the gound of truth albeit not absolutly yet in regard of vs and our Beza in 1. ad Tim. 3. v. 15. knowledge So as Beza also is forced to coÌ„fesse the same exâ—licating those words of the Apostle the pillar and ground of truth Vnderstand this sayth Beza not simply in it selfe but in regard of vs. Thus he 19. It is therfore manifest as well out of Caluin as Beza that the Church in regard of vs is the ground of truth or of the word of God and consequently of our fayth which relyeth thereon But that which in regard of men is the ground of our fayth that is the true ground therof because our fayth cannot well nor must not be considered but in regard of men seeing that our fayth cannot be found but in men only if therfore in regard of men the Church be the ground of truth it is also most truly and necessarily the ground of our fayth 20. Furthermore that the ancient Church of the holy Fathers did coÌ„stantly hold the preaching and authority of the Catholike Church to be the ground of our fayth those excellent words of S. Augustine do manifestly declare when he S. Aug. Tom. 6. contra Epist Manich. cap. 5. Calu. l. 1. Instit sect 3. writeth thus disputing against the Maniches I sayth he would not belieue the Ghospell but that the authority of the Catholike Church moued me therunto this seÌ„teÌ„ce of S. Augustine vexeth our Aduersaries very much Caluin goeth about to perswade the ignoraÌ„t people that S. Augustin speaketh of himselfe yet remayning a Manichean Heretike and not of himselfe as being conuerted and made a Catholike But this is a ridiculous euasion for the words which follow a litle after do shew that this is a false interpretation of Caluin If thou doest hold thy selfe to the Ghospell S. Augustine speaketh vnto a Manichean heretike I would hold my selfe to those by whose commandment I beliued the Ghospell He speaketh therfore of himselfe as now being a Catholike and after a few words VVhose authority sayth he being infringed weakned I could not now euen belieue the Ghospel it selfe Where he sheweth plainly that our faith doth so depend of the authority of the Church that it being weakned or taken a way it could not remayne or continue by any fayth of the Ghospell Wherby it is manifest that it is false which Iunius writeth that S. Augustine did only speake of the accidentary and not of the necessary cause 21. Others say that S. Augustine did speake of this or that booke of the Gospell and not of the whole Gospell in generall but the very words of S. Augustine doe teach the contrary because he speaketh euery where of the Gospell it selfe in generall Moreouer one and the same reason is of one booke of the Ghospell and of all the rest as concerning fayth 22. Others lastly do answere that S. Augustine did not speake of the Church of his time but of the primitiue Church wherin were the Apostles who approued the Ghospell But this solution is also easily refuted out of the words next following to whom saith S. Augustin I haue obeied saying Belieue the Gospell why should I not obey them then saying vnto me Doe not belieue Manicheus But it is manifest that the primitiue Church spake nothing of Manicheus but that Church only which was in S. Augustines time sayd vnto him doe not belieue Manicheus For Manicheus liued many yeares 8. Aug. Tom. 6. contra FaustuÌ„ l. 13. c. 4. after the primitiue Church yea euen after S. Cyprian that is to say almost three hundred yeares after Christ as the same S. Augustine testifyeth and it is otherwise sufficiently well knowen that the Manichean heresy was vnknowne in the world before the yeare 277. See Baronius in his 2. Tome in the yeare 277. in the 2. number and others following CHAP. VI. The Arguments of our Aduersaries are confuted NOVV it remayneth we answere to the arguments of our Aduersaries for by our answers the difficulty of this whose controuersy wil be more
faith is the ground of the Church we speake of the generall faith of the whole Church 19. There are other arguments of our Aduersaries but we may easily answere Canus l. 2. de â—ocis Theol. c. 8. Bellar. l 3. deverbo Dei c. vlt. therunto by that whiâ—h hath byn already said the which Melâ—hior Canus and Bellarmine do prosecute and handle more at large vnto whom we referre the Reader For they are borrowed of the Anabaptists Libertines wherby the authority of the holy Scriptures themselues is no lesse diminished and infringed then that of the Church CHAP. VII That the Church doth not only giue a bare testimony but also authority to the Scripture THIS matter is heere briefly to be examined that it may more clearly be vnderstood how necessary the Churches approbation is to the establishing of the authority of the holy Scriptures But to the end that it may more clearely appeare wherof we dispute in this place it is to be considered that seing that our Aduersaries cannot deny but that the Church aâ—â—oardeth some testimony to the holy Scriptures they affime that this testimony of the Church is only a bare testimony and not a testimony of authority 2. For there are two kindes of testimonyes The one is called a testimony of authority because vpon it the truth of the things testified dependeth Yt is called also a necessary testimony because without it the thing in question is not sufficiently testified The other is called a bare testimony and not necessary that is to say when such a testimony is not so necessary because the matter is otherwise Ioan. 1. v. 7. sufficiently testified Such a testimony was that which S. Sohn Baptist gâ—ue of Christ For Christ had sufficient testimonies besides 3. Of the former testimony of authority Christ saith But I do not receyue my Ioan. 5. v. 34. 36. Ibid. testimony from men to wit the testimony of authority necessary For of the bare testimony he had spoken a little before You sent vnto Iohn and he hath giuen testimony to truth But this was a bare testimony wherfore Christ a little after said I haue a greater testimony then Iohn for the workes which the Father hath giuen me to profit them the very works which I do giue testimony of me that the Father hath sent me And the Father that sent me himselfe hath giuen testimony of me All which saith Christ of the testimony of authority Our Aduersaries therefore say that the Church giueth only a bare testimony to the Scriptures as S. Iohn gaue to Christ but she giueth not a necessary testimony or that of authority 4. But that the testimony of the Church is altogether necessary as that Matt. 3. v. vlt. Matt. 17. v. 5. wherof the authority of the Scriptures dependeth is very manifest by that which is said in the former Chapter And by that also which we alleadged in the first disputation where we shew that there is now no firme testimony wherby we may know certainly which booke is canonicall and which not besides the testimoniy of the Catholike Church For now neyther are the miracles wrought which God did in tymes past neyther doth God speake immediatly by himselfe as he spake in the baptisme and transfiguration of Christ VVherefore there remayneth only the third ordinary manner wherby God speaketh by the mouth of the Church The Church therfore doth not giue a bare testimony only to the holy Scriptures but the testimony of authority to wit that wherof the authority of the Scriptures dependeth as concerning vs and our knowledge 5. Moreouer if the doctrine of S. Paul stood in need of the Churches approbation as we haue already proued out of Supr c. 3. §. 13. huius Controu the Scriptures much more S. Lukes Ghospell who was oÌ„ly S. Pauls choller stood in need therof as Tertullian witnesseth especially because S. Luke receyued not those things which he wrot by reuelation from God Tertu l. 4. contra Marâ—â— 2. Luc. â— v. 2. as S. Paul did but by tradition from others as he hymselfe writeth And the same also may be said of S. Marke whose Ghospell as S. Hierome writeth the Apostle S. Peter approued and by his authority he commaunded it should be read in the Church 6. But neyther is it true that some say that the authority of approuing the Canonicall bookes was only resident in the Apostles and the primitiue Church but the ensuing Church hath it not For the Apostles did not approue all the Canonicall bookes of the new Testament For if they had donne so there had remained no doubt of many of them for many ages after the death of the Apostles euen among Catholike good men as we Supra ca. 5. Contr. 1. haue noted before But many yeares after the Apostles tyme by the generall Councells and Decrees of the Church some bookes were approued wherof there was before some doubt 7. Yea more then six hundred yeares after Christ there were many Catholikes who did not receyue the authority of the Toletan Concil c. 16. Apocalyps as appeareth out of the fourth Toletane Councell 8. And that which is more before the Councell of Trent ther were many Catholikes who thought that it was lawfull for them to doubt of all the bookes of the new Testament the which in tymes past S. Hierome seemed to iudge as doubtfull as are the Epistles of S. Iames the second of S. Peter the second and third of S. Iohn the Epistles of S. Iude the Epistles to the Hebrewes and the Apocalyps And if it had not byn for the Councell of TreÌ„t or some other new Decree of the Church none would as yet condemne them as Heretikes who called those bookes in question 9. By that which hath byn sayd it appeareth manifestly that the Canonicall Scriptures receiue their strength and authority not from the approbation of the primitiue Church but rather from the approbation of the Church succeeding yea euen of this present Church to wit of the Councell of Trent 10 Lastly albeit the present Church should not haue the authority of approuing Scriptures as these men say yet notwithstanding for three other reasons the authority testimony of this present Church is necessary First because we know not certainly what bookes the primitiue Church hath eyther written or not writen approued or reiected but by the testimony of the present Church Secondly neyther do we know whether those bookes came vncorrupted vnto vs or no but by the same testimony Thirdly because we cannot otherwise know which is the true sense of those bookes CHAP. VIII The Argumentes of our Aduersaryes are confuted THE first argument of our Aduersaries is The Church is grounded vpon the word of God and by the word also of God â—t is ingendred nourished and gouerned and it is subiect to the word of God as to the words of her spouse I answere our Aduersaries do in a manner coÌ„found the writen word of God
with the word of God in generall the which they should not doe for ther are three sorts of the word of God to wit that which is belieued preached and written The belieued word is in the hart of the Church that which is preached is in her mouth and that which is written is in her bookes Of the belieued and preached Word the Apostle sayth the word is in thy mouth and in thy hart this is the word of fayth which we preach We Rom. 20. v. 8. confesse that in the belieued and preached word the Church is founded because by the same it is ingendred nourished Rom. 10. v. 10. Ibid v. 14. and gouerned and that vnto this word it is subiect and obedient as vnto the Words of her spouse For indeed this kind of word is necessary for the Church For with our hart sayth the Apostle we belieue vnto Iustice but with the mouth confession is made to saluation And againe How shall they heare without a preacher 2. But the nature of the written word is farre different for this is neyther altogeather necessary for the Church seeing that the Church was without it more then two thousand yeares neyther can the written word be profitable to the Church vnlesse it be also rightly preached and belieued For what doth it profit a man to haue the Bible vnlesse he rightly belieue and vnderstand it 3. But the Scripture whereof we now dispute doth only conteyne the written word but the belieued and preached word is conteined in the visible Church as the necessary and essentiall parts therof seing the one is as it were the life in the hart of the Church the other as it were the speach in her mouth neither can they euer be separated from her according to that saying and promise of God The words which I haue put in thy mouth shall not Isa 59. v. vlt. depart from thy mouth nor from the mouth of thy seede nor from the mouth of thy seedes seede from henceforth for euermore 4. Wherefore this argument doth proue the quite coÌ„trary for seeing that the written word receiueth it profit and authority from the rightly belieued and preached word which are the partes of the Church it is necessary that the written word receiue that authority and vtility from the Church as that wherin only the word rightly preached and belieued is to be found 5. The second argument If the Church should teach any thing contrary to the Scriptures we were not to belieue the Church Therefore the Scripture doth not receiue that authority from the Church but rather the Church from the Scripture I answere that in the same maÌ„ner it may be said that if the Scripture should conteine any thing against truth we should not also belieue it if the holy Ghost should vtter and speake any lye we should not belieue him But thâ—se conditions are indeed impossible and blasphemous against God wherefore they are not only to be admitted but not euen to be proposed of Christians For it is impossible that the Church should teach any thing contrary to the Scriptures for then the holy Ghost should lye because he should teach one thing by the Church and the contrary by the Scriptures 6. The third argument if the Scripture receiue that authority from the Church then the Church should be aboue the Scripture which seemeth to be very absurd I answere That the Church is aboue the Scriptures may be vnderstood two wayes First because the Church exceedeth the Scripture in dignity and excellency and in this sense without all doubt the Church is about the Scripture for the Scripture is made for the Church and not contrary wise All things sayth the Apostles 1. Cor. 4. v. 51. are done for you Christ dyed for the Church and not for the Scriptures the Church belieueth hopeth loueth and prayseth God but the Scripture doth none of these The Church shall reigne and liue euerlastingly with Christ in heauen the Scripture shall perish after the day of Iudgement Lastly the Church conteineth in it the word of God rightly belieued preached and the Holy Ghost it selfe all which do farre exceede the written word in excellency and dignity 7. Secondly it may be vnderstood that the Church is aboue the Scripture so as she may change the Scripture or of Scripture make no Scripture or lastly she may teach some what contrary to Scripture or depart from the true sense of Scripture In which sense the Sectaries of this tyme say that we affirme the Church to be aboue the Scripture And thus it is false that the Church is aboue the Scripture but neyther is there any Catholike which in this sense will affirme that the Bellar. l. 3. de verbo Dei c. vlt. in resp ad 14. argum Church is aboue the Scripture as Bellarmine truly affirmeth For if the Church were in this sense aboue the Scripture the Church should erre and be opposite vnto her â—elfe because in that the Church hath once approued the Scripture she cannot any more reiect and disproue it vnlesse she contradict her selfe which is impossible 8. The fourth argument The holy Scripture receiueth her authority immediatly from God himselfe because he is the Author of the Scripture therefore it doth not receiue it authority from the Church I answere there be two kinds of certaynties the one of the thing in it owne Nature the other in respect of vs so also there are two kinds of authorityes the one of the thing considered in it selfe and this hath the Scripture from her principall Author to wit God himselfe the other is in respect of vs and this it hath from the Church as we haue Cap 13. praeced §. 17. 19. proued before out of Caluin and Beza For we know not otherwise that God is the Author of the Scripture with any certainty of fayth but by the testimony of the Church 9. And that which we haue sayd of the Scripture may also be euidently seene in Christ our Lord who is aboue the Scripture For Christ was forced to proue his authority by miracles that it might the better be knowen and allowed of men For otherwise the Iewes had not beene bound to haue admitted his authority Ioan. 15. v. 14. S. Aug. Tom. 9. Tract 91. in Ioan. Hereupon saith Christ speaking vnto his disciples of the Iewes If I had not done among them workes that no other man hath done they should not haue sinned that is to say of Infidelity not belieuing in Christ aâ— S. Augustine very well expoundeth And in another place speaking vnto the Iewes Ioan. 10. v. 17. he sayth If I doe not the workes of my Father belieue me not 10. But if the authority of Christ which was most exellent in it selfe and immediatly from God stood in need of those meanes wherby it might become knowne vnto vs to the end it might oblige vs to belieue it much more the authority of the Scripture will stand in need
Christ to S. Peter feed my sheep but the beginning proceeded from vnity The primacy was giuen to S. Peter to the end that one Church of Christ and one chayre might be made manifest and knowne Hitherto S. Cyprian 11. But now that these promises of Christ did not only belong to the person of S. Peter but also to all those who were to succeed him in the same office till the end of the world we do thus clearly proue and demonstrate First because S. Peter is heere made the foundation of the Church and the rocke wherupon it is buylded but the Church of Christ alwayes remayneth therfore the foundation therof must alwayes remayne seing that nothing can continue and be without it foundation 12. Moreouer those keyes which were giuen to S. Peter do remayne alwaies in the Church as all our Aduersaries confesse Ergo he also remayneth to whom these keyes were giuen For that authority or those keyes were not giuen for S. Peter alone but for the Church which is alwayes extant It therfore alwaies retayneth those keyes and that authority of bynding or loosing men from their sinnes in S. Peter and his successors till the end of the world 13. And this is that which S. Leo S. Leo Serm â— inaÌ„niu assump suae ad Pontif. saith when he writeth that S. Peter euen to this day gouerneth the Church of God that is to say by his successors insomuch that his dignity neuer fayleth euen in an vnworthy successor But hitherto there was neuer any successor of S. Peter acknowledged in the Church of Christ besides the Bishop of Rome He therefore is the only successor of S. Peter and the supreme Bishop of the Church And the Roman is not only the true Church of Christ but also perferred before all others euen by Christ himselfe 14. The second place is Feed my laÌ„bes Ioan. 21. v. 15. 16. 17. Euseb Emissen Serm in natiu S. Ioan. Euang feede my sheep In which wordes God coÌ„mended to S. Peter not only his lambes which signifieth the common sorte of people but also his sheepe to wit the Pastors and Fathers of his Church First saith Eusebius Emissenus he committed to S. Peter his lambes and then his sheep because he made him not only a Pastor but the Pastor of Pastors Peter therfore feedeth the lambes and also the sheepe He feedeth children and their mothers he ruleth Bern. de consiâ—er ad EugeÌ„ l. â— c. 8. S. Leo Serm. 3. de assump sua ad Pontif. Ioan. 21. v. 15. the people and their Prelates He is therfore the Pastor of all because besides lambes and sheepe there is nothing in the Church Hitherto Eusebius And S. Bernard My sheepe sayth Christ Vnto whome is it not â—layne and manifest that he did not assigne some but all nothing is excepted where there is no distinction made Thus S. Bernard And S. Leo Peter doth properly gouerne all whome principally Christ also gouerneth 15. Furthermore it is manifest that these wordes were spoken to S. Peter and not to the other Apostles seing that Christ asked him thrice Doest thou loue me And moreouer he added more then these that he might make a manifest distinction betwixt S. Peter and the other Apostles 16. Finally it is most certaine that this promise of Christ doth not only appertayne to the person of S. Peter but also to his successors which are to remayne in the Church till the end of the world Ephes 4. v 11. Calu. Beza ib. Confess Rupell Art 25. For both the Apostle doth plainly testify and our Aduersaries do also confesse that the office of a Pastor is ordinary and shall alwaies continue and be in the Church of God 17. And the chiefest reason thereof is because we stand in no lesse need now of a supreme Pastour then they which were in the primitiue Church whileâ— yet the Apostles were aliue yea we haue much more need therof besides that there are still and alwaies shal be some sheep of Christ therfore there shall also still continue their chiefe Pastours The Româ—n Church therfore is not only the true Church of Christ but also that wherein S. Peters successor and the supreme Pastour of the whole Church of Christ remayneth 18. But these two places are so manifest that they cannot be confuted or wrested to any other sense vnlesse we till reduce all wordes to a metaphoricall signification or other figuratiue speaches the which is a common tricke of our Aduersaries when they are vrged with plaine wordes of the holy scripture But against all these falsifications of our Aduersaries we must alwaies obserue that rule of the S. Aug. tom 3. de doctrin Christi l. 3. cap. 1â— Catholike Church taken out of S. Augustine to wit that we must neuer depart from the proper signification of the words of holy Scripture vnlesse we be forced by the authority of some more euident poynt of faith wherunto the proper significatioÌ„ of the wordes do manifestly repugne For otherwise if we might as often as we would refuse and lâ—aue the proper signification of the wordes there will be nothing lesse certayne in all the holy Scripture 19. Moreouer it will be an easy matter for euery one to fly to metaphors and improper significatioÌ„s when he is pressed with the playne words of holy Scripture but there is nothing heere that should force vs to depart from the true and proper sense of the wordes None therefore but desperate and carelesse of their owne saluation will giue credit and bâ—lieue these foolish toyes and dreames of our Aduersaries inuented only by them in hatred and contempt of the Bishop of Rome 20. Yea he will rather imbrace and follow the vniforme consent and vnderstanding of the auncient Fathers and of all the whole Church For the holy Fathers in many places do affirme that these Bellar. l. 1. de Rom. Pont. c. 10 14. Coccius To. 1. l. 7. Art 4. two places of the holy Scripture are to be vnderstood litterally of Saint Peter the which Bellarmine and Coccius haue diligently gathered togeather as many other Catholike Authors haue done before them But because this matter is so cleare and manifest that euen our Aduersaries cannot deny it as we will plainly shew in the next Chapter we wil not now spend any more tyme in alleadging of Authors 21. But our Aduersaries doe heere cry out and obiect against vs that the holy Fathers doe sometymes affirme that the Church was built vpon the fayth of S. Peter and sometymes vpon his confession As though forsooth there were any among vs so foolish as to thinke that the Church was built vpon S. Peters back or shoulders or vpon S. Peter as he was an Infidell or dumme and not rather vpon S. Peter as indued and replenished with the gift of faith confessing and professing openly the mysteries thereof Wherfore it is all one whether we say that the Church is built vpon S. Peter or vpon his faith and
A SVMMARY OF CONTROVERSIES WHEREIN Are briefly treated the cheefe Questions of Diuinity now a dayes in dispute betweene Catholikes Protestants especially out of the holy Scripture WRITTEN IN LATIN By the R. Father Iames Gordon Huntley of Scotland Doctour of Diuinity of the Society of IESVS And translated into English by I. L. of the same SOCIEâ—Y The I. Tome deuided into two Controuersies THE SECOND EDITION IHS Permissu Superiorum M. DC XVIII THE CONTENTS OF THE ENSVING CONTROVERSIES CONTROVER I. The first Part of the first Controuersy treateth of the Written Word of God Of the Scope and Methode of this Treatise Chap. 1. Of the VVord of God in generall Chap. 2. Of the written VVord of God Chap. 3. How we are to seeke out the true sense meaning of the holy Scripture Chap. 4. How we may know which is the true letter of the holy Scripture Chap. 5. Of the Hebrew Text. Chap. 6. Of our Aduersaries new translations of the Byble Chap. 7. Of the Latin vulgar Edition Chap. 8. The place of Genesis She shall breake thy â—head is shewed to be well translated Chap. 9. Of the true sense of these wordes Ipsa coÌ„teret c. Chap. 10. That the written VVord is no fit Iudge of Controuersies concerning matters of fayth Chap. 11. VVhether the Scripture be obscure or hard to be vnderstood Chap. 12. VVhether the holy Scripture be to be translated into the vulgar tongue Chap. 13. That our Aduersaries vse many sleights in corrupting the VVord of God Chap. 14. The fourth fifth and sixt shift that our Aduersaries vse in deprauing the VVord of God Chap. 15. Of the seauenth and eight shift Chap. 16. Of the ninth and tenth shift Chap. 17. THE SECOND PART Of the first Controuersy handleth the vnwritten Word of God commonly called Traditions Of the true state of the Question Chap. 1. Out of the first and chiefest principles of faith it is clearly conuinced that three are Traditions Chap. 2. It is proued out of other particular points of saith that there are Traditions Chap. 3 VVhether there are any points of sayth to be alledged which are no where extant in the Bible Chap. 4. It is proued that there are Traditions by the testimonies of the holy Fathers Chap. 5. By the doctrine of our Aduersaries it is proued that there are Traditions Chap. 6. It is proued that there are Traditions by the absurdities which otherwise would follow Chap. 7. The Arguments of our Aduersaries taken out of the old Testament are confuted Chap. 8. That place of S. Pauls Epistle to the GalathiaÌ„s the which our Aduersaries do obiect against Traditions is examined Chap. 9. Other obiections of our Aduersaries against Traditions are refuted Chap. 10. It is declared how we may know the Apostolicall Traditions Chap. 11. CONTROVER II. The first part of the second CoÌ„trouersy treateth of the properties of the true Church of Christ Of the properties and offices of the true Church in generall Chap. 1. That out of the true Church of Christ there is no saluation Chap. 2. That the Church of Christ is to continue for euer Chap. 3. That this Church which hath alwayes continued hath alwayes byn visible Chap. 4. The arguments against the visible Church are confuted Chap. 5. Other arguments of our Aduersaries against the visible Church are confuted Chap. 6. That this visible true Church of Christ cannot erre in matters of sayth Chap. 7. That there is no lawfull calling of preachers or Pastours of the Church but by the visible Church Chap. 8. THE SECOND PART Of the second Controuersy treateth of the Ground of Fayth VVhether the Church be the foundation and ground of our fayth And of the true state of this Question Chap. 1. The properties of the ground and rule of our saith are alledged Chap. 2. That the Scripture alone is not the ground or rule of sayth Chap. 3. That the priuate or particuler spirit of euery one is not the ground or rule of sayth Chap. 4. That the Catholike Church is the ground or rule of our fayth Chap. 5. The arguments of our Aduersaries are confuted Chap. 6. That the Church doth not only giue a bare testimony but also authority to the Scripture Chap. 7. The Arguments of our Aduersaries are confuted Chap. 8. That the Church is the Iudge of all Controuersies in matters of Fayth Chap. 9. THE THIRD PART Of the second Controuersy treateth of the true Marks of the Church Of the false and true signes or Markes of the Church in generall Chap. 1. That the true Church of Christ is One Holy Catholike Apostolike Chap. 2. That the Roman Church only is the true Church of Christ is proued by the properties of the true Church Chap. 3. That the Church of Rome is the true Church of Christ is proued by the offices of true Church Ch. 4. By the signes of the true Church it is declared that the Roman is the true Church of Christ Cap. 5. That the Church of the Citty of Rome is the chiefest of all the visible Churches of Christ is clearly conuinced by the holy Scriptures Chap. 6. That the Church of Rome is the chiefest and head of all other is proued out of the auncient Fathers and euen by the confession of our Aduersaries themselues Chap. 7. The arguments of our Aduersaries against the Church of Rome are confuted Chap. 8. Of the Adoration of the Pope of Rome and of the kissing of his feete Chap. 9. Of Generall Councells Chap. 10. Of the Authority of the Auncient holy Fathers Chap. 11. THE FIRST CONTROVERSY OF THE WRITTEN WORD OF GOD. The first Part of the first Controuersy CHAP. I. Of the Scope and Methode of this Treatise ALL the Controuersyes of this tyme may be reduced to two heades for eyther they are certayne generall principles foundations of our faith and Religion or they are particuler questions appertayning to the same Amongst other generall Principles there be two about which is the greatest contention at this day the one is the Word of God the other the Church we will first speake of the word of God and afterwardes of the Church and lastly we will examine euery particuler Controuersy if God shall graunt vs life and health 2. Two things do now adayes hold many in errour The one is a false opinion that many haue who thinke it a matter of little importance whether they giue credit or no to many things taught by the Roman Church which daungerous perswasion may be taken out of the mindes of all faithfull people by that which we shall deliuer coÌ„cerning the word of God and the Church for thereby it shall euidently appeare that al thinges are firmely to be belieued which the Roman Church belieueth and that without this faith no man can hope to be saued The other is that such as desire to find out the true faith in euery particuler CoÌ„trouersy are oftentimes so hindred by the sleights and falshoods of our Aduersaryes as it will
will stand for a reason for we will not be the papists schollers but their Iudges Luther will haue it so he saith that he is a Doctor aboue all the popes Dâ—ctors So Luther concluding at last that the word alone shal remayne in his new Testament though it should make all his Aduersaries mad and he addeth further that he is only sory that he had not added two wordes more to the text and translated it after this manner we are iustifyed by only faith without any workes of any law 4. Zwinglius also who first in our age endeauored to perswade many that the body of Christ is not really contayned in the Sacrament of the Eucharist the better to establish this his error goeth about to Zuing. l. de vera falsa relig c. de Euchar. §. 202. in lib. excuso Tiguri 1555. proue that those words of Christ this is my bâ—dy are very well translated thus this signifieth my body with this his new translation he is so rauished as if he had receaued the same from heauen for these are his words So therefore hath Luke with whome we content our selues without citing any other Euangelist And hauing taken bread he gaue thankes brake it and gaue it them saying This signifyeth my body which is giuen for you do this in remembrance of me Thou seest O faithfull soule but yet wrapped in absurd opinions how all thinges heere agree and nothing is violently eyther taken away or added so as thou hast cause to wonder that thou hast not byn alwayes of this opinion and much more that any dare so boldly teare and rent the body of this speach so well ioyned together So Zwinglius in the praise of his new translation wherein he arrogates more authority to himselfe theÌ„ is due so as that of Cicero in his booke de diuinatione may well be applyed to him I neuer saw any man arrogate greater authority to himselfe and in the end say iust nothing 5. Moreouer concerning Caluins and Bezas errors in translating or rather peruerting the holy Scriptures whole books Calu l. 2. instit c. 16. in c. 26. Matt. v. 39. inc 27. â—â—aâ—th v. 46. Item in Catech. Dom. 10. Bez. in c. 5. ad Heb. v. 7. traÌ„ct Theol. pag. 657. iuxta edit Geneu 1582. are extant as also of the corruptions of the Geneua Bibles which are euery yeare increased but this shall much more commodiously be declared heerafter in the particuler CoÌ„trouersies We will only heere set downe one example of a corruption to be found in Caluins Bezas and all the Geneua Bibles And this coruption is forged of purpose by them to confirme a new and notable blasphemy against Christ and himselfe by some apparent testimony of Scripture for they teach in many places that Christ when he praied in the Garden was seized with an extreme feare least God being angry with him for our sinnes for which he had taken vpon him to satisfy should inflict vpon him eternall damnation neither did Christ feare without cause for they say he suffered vpon the Crosse the paynes of a damned person the torments of hell for these are the impioâ—s words of Caluin Christ suffered in his soule the torments of a forlorne and damned man and Beza saith at what tyme Christ hange vpon the Crosse he was in the middest euen of the torments of hell which is as much as to say that God himselfe was not only afraid of the torments of hell but that he suffered and endured them for it is euident that Christ was true God But against these absurd Paradoxes we are to dispute heerafter It shall suffice heere to shew that they haue depraued the holy Scripture to fortify this theyr impious assertion for wheras it is written in the fifth to the Hebrewes Heb. 5. v. 7. and 7. v. that Christ was heard of God for his reuerence Caluin first and after Beza and all the Geneua Bybles make the text to say Christ was heard by reason of his feare or because he was afraid but that in Bez. annot anni 1598. the last Edition Beza hath added more words to the text making it sound thus His prayer being heard he was deliuered frâ—Ì„ this feare Moreouer Caluin in his commentaries and Beza in his annotations seeke to proue out of this text that Christ feared eternall damnation that he was deliuered out of this feare by his prayers which he offered with teares true it is that in the French Bibles lately printed at Geneua in the yeare 1605. they haue put in the margent vel pro sua reuerentia where inforced by truth they manifestly contradict Caluin and Beza who plainly deny that this place is so to be traÌ„slated yet least their inconstancy should be noted they leaue the former words in the text ayant estè exaucé de ce qu' il craignoit that is in latin exauditus est ex â—o vel in eo quod timuit 6. But all others as well Catholikes as their Aduersaires who haue written before Caluin translate pro sua reuerentia vel pro pietate sua as Erasmus Bucer the Tigurines in their Bibles of the yeare 1542. Nay Sebastian Castalio for this cause sharply reprehendeth Castal in defen suae translat Bibl. in fine Castalio for this cause sharply reprehendeth Beza who glorieth that Caluin was the first that found out this new explication in a note of his vpon this 7. v. See his editions the yeare 1560. 1565. 7. The third shift is their false exposition of the text though neuer so truly translated for by diuers commentaries and little notes in the margent they goe about to perswade their Readers the clean contrary to that which is expressely in the text See examples hereof in this Chapter in the latin edition CHAP. XV. The fourth fifth and sixt shift that our Aduersaries vse in deprauing the Word of God THE fourth shift of our Aduersaries is to fly to figuratiue and metaphoricall speaches for it is most true that was Aug. l. 3 dedoct Christ cap. 10. wittily obserued by S. Augustine If sayth he the mind be preoccupated with any erroneous opinion whatsoeuer the Scripture saith to the contrary men take to be a figuratiue speach And surely there is no kind of figuratiue speaking to which our aduersaries at one tyme or another haue not recourse but there are three figures of which our Aduersaries doe oftenest serue themselues in deprauing the holy Scriptures which Matt. â—â— v. 26. Calâ— l. 4. Instit c. 17. sect 21. are these Metonymia Hyperbole and Ironia Metonymia is a figure very familiar with Caluin for by it he peruerteth many places of Scripture yea euen those plaine words of Christ this is my body for hauing disputed long about the sense of those words at last he concludeth thus I omit sayth he Allegories and Parables least any man should thinke that I seeke euasions and to go from the matter in
Iudocus Ruesten in his first tome defending the Councell of Trent against Kemnitius 4. Secondly a thing may be conteined in expresse words in the holy Scriptures as that Christ is borne suffered and risen againe c. And in this sense we deny that the whole word of God is conteined in the Scripâ—uâ—e That obiection of our Aduersaries by this may easily be answered when they say that we affirme that Traditions are the vâ—written word of God yet we goe about to proue theÌ„ by Scriptures For we do not proue euery particuler Tradition by expresse words of Scripture but we only deduce and gather them out of it and conuince in generall that there are Traditions 5. The third thing which is to be considered is that our Aduersaries being conuinced by truth doe acknowledge that many things were deliuered vnto vs by the Caluin coÌ„t 4. sess Con. Trident. in â—ntid Beza denotis Eccles tom 3. Tract Theoâ— p. 137. edit Anni 1582. Apostles besids those which are written But say they those were only externall rites and ceremonies seruing only for the ornament or discipline of the Church but nothing concerning doctrine of fayth was deliuered by the Apostles which they haue not set downe in writing So Caluin and some others which follow his opinion Wherfore it remayneth for vs to proue that not â—â—ly external ceremonies but also those which belong vnto the doctrine of fayth were deliuered vnto vs by the Apostles that they were neuer expressely â—et downe in writing 6. The fourth thing is that seing our Aduersaries cannot deny that which was obiected vnto them by Catholikes to wit that the Scripture in many places maketh expresse mentioÌ„ of the word of God preached deliuered and diuulged ouer the whole world as we haue already declared euen out of the holy Scriptures they are wont to answere that long since in the Apostles tyme this Word of God was deliuered preached and not written but the Apostles after wards set downe in writing all the preached word of God or at the least as much therof as was necessary vnto saluation The which solutioÌ„ albeit it be very weak and friuolous seing that it relieth vpoÌ„ no sure ground yet notwithstanding tâ—at it may more fully be confuted we will declare hereafter that many of the chiefest points of faith were not expressely set downe in writing by the Apostles And thus much of the state of this Question CHAP. II. Out of the first and chiefest principles of faith it is clearly conuinced that there are Traditions THE first argument wherby we proue Traditions is taken out of some of the chiefest principles of faith For there are three chiefe and most necessary points of faith yea the câ—ieâ—e grounds of our whole faith which are not to be found expressely in Scripture 2. The first that there must needes be some Catalogue or Canon of the sacred Bookes aswell of the old as of the new Testament the which all Christians with an assured faith should imbrace as a most certaine and an vndoubted truth and this is a very necâ—ssary point of faith yea of it dependeth the authority of all the bookes of holy Scripture because by this Canon the sacred and true books of Scripture are discerned and made knowne from all those which be Apocriphall especially because aswell in times past as in these our daies there hath bin so many and so great Controuersyes about the Canonicall and Apocriphall bookes of Scripture and such a Canon was altogeather necessary aswell in the auncient Church before Christ as in our present Church after Christes tyme the which also our Aduersaries themselues haue learned by experience For they haue also placed their new Canon of the books of holy Scripture in their Consession made at Confess Ruâ—ellana Act. 3. â—ochell and in the later end of some of their Bibles and yet neyther in the time of the old Testament nor in the tyme of the new Law was this CanoÌ„ euer written downe in the Bibles themselues 2. I know our Aduersaries that they may escape this argument do runne to the inward instinct of the holy Ghost wherby say they we know what book is Canonicall and what is not But this answere is refuted reiected before where we haue shewed that the holy Ghost doth not moue vs to belieue any thing with the Catholike faith which is not the word of God If Suprac 5. therfore the holy Ghost moue vs to belieue that some bookes are Canonicall and some are not it is necessary that this be the word of God We aske therefore of them whether this is the written word of God or the vnwritteÌ„ if it be the written word in what Booke or Chapter is it to befouÌ„d if it be no where to be found our Aduersaries must needs coÌ„â—esse that by the instinct of the holy Ghost they also belieue the vnwritten word of God or Traditions 3. The second principle of faith is that we must necessarily with an assured and firme faith belieue that all those Bookes eyther of the old or of the new Testament which we now retaine are safely deliuered vnto vs entyre aâ—d vncorrupted through so many handes so many ages so many vexations and persecutions of the Christians for otherwyse the whole credit and authority of those bookes will decay and perish But this is no where extant or written for neyther the Prophets or Apostles haue euâ—r written that their bookes should neuer be falsified or corrupted by any yea it appeareth sufficiently Supra c. 9. 10. 12. 13 by that which hath byn already said that they were falsified and corrupted in many bookes by the Iewes and Hâ—retâ—kes Let our Aduersaries therfore tell vs where it is written that this holy Scripture which we haue now is not corrupted or falsifyed 4. The third principle of fâ—yth is the true sense of the letter For the true word of God consisteth rather in the true sense or meaning of the words then in the words Supra cap. 3. themselues as we haue declared before But the true sense of the words that is to say in what sense or meaning the words are to be vnderstood eyther properly or figuratiuely cannot be had from the holy Scripture alone but also from the doctrine and Traditions of the Church as we haue sayd before in the fourth Chapter wherby it also followeth that the writteÌ„ word of God conteyneth in it the least part of the word of God to wit the bare letter only but the word of God preached and deliuered keepeth and professeth vnto vs the cheif part of the word of God that is to say the true natiue sense of the same S. Basil l. de Spir. sanct c. 27. Brent contra Petr. â— Soto in suis prologom Kemnit cont 4. sess Conc. Trid. cùm agiâ— de 2. gen Tradiâ— 5. And this is that which S. Basil sayth that those who reiect the vnwritten points of fayth as indiscreet persons do
Scripture might seeme to be called in question he was not a shamed to write that Baptisme might be giuen in any liquour and by this meanes it wil be true and lawfull Baptisme though it be giuen in milke wyne yea in Inke or any other filthy liquour Thus are our Aduersaries forced to admit these absurdityes least they might be forced to depart from that their principle of belieuing only Scripture 6. Furthermore to the end that Beza might more easily perswade the ignorant common people to admit this his strang paradox he addeth presently a very grieuous slaunder against the Catholike Doctors Let water be wanting saith Beza Beza ib. Epist 2. and yet the Baptisme of any cannot be deferred with edification nor must not be I truly would as well and as lawfully baptize in any other liquour as in water neyther are the most superstitious Deuines of any other opinion in these matters Thus far Beza But these thinges which he writeth are most false For there is no Catholike nor Scholasticall Doctor Concil Trid. sess 7. car 2. de baptismâ— who hath euer eyther thought or written so yea the playne contrary is defined by the Catholike Church as a poynt of Fayth 7. The fixt poynt of fayth is that bread and wyne is only the necessary matter of the Blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist This poynt of faith is also very necessary for the Church least so great and so excellent a Sacrament should be prophaned yet our Aduersaries will neuer be able to proue it effectually out of Scripture only For by this word Bread any kind of meate is oftentymes signifyed in Scripture of wine it is fâ—â—re more doubtfull For the Scripture maketh only mention of the Chalice and not of the liquor which was in the Chalice and Luc. 22. â— 18. Cal ibid. in sua harmonia Beza Ep. 2. cit Caluin himselfe acknowledgeth that these words of the fruit of the vyne were spoken before the institution of this Sacrament 8. The which when Beza easily preceaued heere also be went about to bring in another error least indeed he should be fored to forsake his former principle of belieuing only Scripture For he was not afraid to write that he erred nothing from the institution of Christ who in the consecration of the Euchâ—rist should vse insteed of the bread appointed for that purpose any other vsuall meate and insteed of the wyne any other ordinary kind of drinke and by this meanes one may consecrate the Eucharist eyther in cheese flesh fish or egges as also in milke water beere or vinager or any other liquor which hitherto was neuer heard of in Gods Church And yet for all this Beza is not ashamed to attribute this most absurd error of his to all the Scholasticall Doctors For of both these errors he treateth in the words before alledged because when he sayth the Scholasticall Doctors were of no other opinion he speaketh as well coÌ„cerning the matter of the Eucharist as of the matter of Baptisme After this manner our Aduersaries do force so many and so great errors out of that their principle of belieuing only Scriptures wherof more might be alledged which for breuities sake we omit 9. But there is one thing I cannot let passe because therby we clearly conuince that the Traditions of the Church do not only contayne vn written points of fayth but that which is more euen in our Aduersaries iudgment they change and abolish such things as are expresly commaunded in Scriptures for euen in the Table of the Law of God which is sayd to be written by Gods owne hand in many and manyfest words the keeping of Exod. â—4 v. 1. Exod 20. v. 8 9. 10. 11. the Sabboth day is comaunded the which notwithstanding now all except a few Anabaptists do confesse to be abrogated by Ecclesiasticall Traditions only without any expresse testimony of Scripture The Anabaptists I say being also deceiued by that coÌ„mon principle of our Aduersaries of belieuing only Scriptures they go about to bring the obseruation of the Sabboth day into vâ—e and custome agayne and for this Viâ—e Prateolum V. Sabatharij cause they are called Sabatharians but not so much the Heresy as the madnesse of these men is condemned of all and namely of Luther in his booke against the Sabbatharians in the seauenth Tome CHAP. V. Wherin it is proued that there are Traditions by the testimonies of the holy Fathers THE third argument wherby we proue that all the points of our fayth are not set downe in writing by the Apostles is the authority Coâ—cius Tom. 1. l. â— Artic. vâ—timo Bellarm. Tom. 1. l. 4â— de verbo Dei c. 7. of the auncâ—eÌ„t Fathers who affirme and teach this in many places The which places of the holy Fathers as well the Greekes as the Latins â—odocus Coâ—cius hath very diligently gathered togeather in his booke intâ—tuled Thesâ—urus Catholicus and before him Bellarmine did the same But least we be longer then the order of Epitomes doth permit especially in a thing so manyfest it shall suffice vs to alledg one chiefe Doctor of the Greeke and another of the Latin Church 2. Among the Grecians S. Chrysostome is the most famous who doth not only affirme it but also manifestly proueth it out of holy Scripture For when he expoundeth those words of the later Epistle 2. Thes â— 2. v. 14. to the Thessalonians Therefore brethren stand and hold the Traditions which you haue learned whether it be by word or by our Epistle he writeth thus Hence it appeareth sayth S. Chrysostome that he did not deliâ—â—r all things vnto them by his Epistle but many things also without his letters but as well these as those other worthily deserue S. Chrys Hom. 4. in 2. ad Thes to be belieued therfore â—e esteeme the Tradition also of the Church to be worthy oâ— credit It is a Tradition seeke no further Thus S. Chrysostome But it is most certayne that the Calu. l. 4. Instit c. 14. sect vlt. S. Aug. Tom. 7. de baâ—t contra Donat. l. 2. cap 7. Apostle and consequently S. Chrysostome also who expouÌ„deth him doth not only speake of ceremonies and customes but also of poynts of Fayth 3. S. Augustine whom Calâ—in acknowledgeth to be the best and most â—aythfull witnesse of antiquity writeth in this manner Many things are not to be sound in the Apostles writings nor in the ensewing Councells and yet notwithstaÌ„ding because they are generally kept through out the whole Catholike Church they are iuged to haue byn deliuered and commended by none but by them Thus S. Augustine Neyther can it be sayd that S. Augustine speaketh of ceremonies and not of poynts of fayth For in that place he proueth against the Donatists that those which were baptized in the accustomed forme and matter by heretikes were not to be baptized againe but none vnlesse he be an Anabaptist will deny that this is a point of fayth CHAP.
the Apostles is there resident and gouerneth the same as the supreme head thereof 2. The first place is taken out of S. Mat. 15. v. 18. 19. Mathew For he relateth the words which Christ spake to S. Peter which are these And I say vnto thee that thou art Peter and vpon this Rocke will I build my Church and the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it and I will giue to thee the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen And whatsoeuer thou shalt bind vpoÌ„ earth it shal be bound in heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose on earth it shal be loosed in heauen 3. First that Christ spake to S. Peter and not to the other Apostles appeareth euidently by the very words of the text For Io. 1. v. 24. Ioan 22. v. 15. first of all Christ setteth downe S. Peters old name Simon sayth he thou art blessed and then afterward he setteth downe the name of his father Baâ—-iona that is to say the sonne of Ionas or of Iohn as also the EuaÌ„gelist S. Iohn testifyeth He sheweth afterward that the reuelation was only made to S. Peter My father sayth he hath reuealed vnto thee he doth not say vnto you as he is woÌ„â— to say when he speaketh vnto them all He addeth moreouer because thou art Peter which certainly agreeth only to S. Peter for vpon him only was this Name imposed Ioan. 1. v. 42. 4. Moreouer Christ addeth And vpon this rocke I will build my Church in which words that particle and is a coniunction causall and not a copulatiue and it signifieth because and in this sense it is vsed oftentymes in holy Scripture as our Aduersaries cannot deny as for example in that place of Genesis Lo thou shalt dye for the woman Gen. 20. v. 3. Psal 59. veâ— 60. v. 13. 107. Psa vel 08 v. 13. Isaiae 46. v. vlt. Luc. 1. v. 42. that thou hast taken and hath a husband that is because she hath a husband So also Dauid in his Psalmes Giue vs thy helpe from our tribulation and vayne is the saluation of men that is to say because the saluation of men is but vayne In like manner the Prophet Isay saith Behould thou art angry and we haue sinned that is to say because we haue sinned In the same sense it is vsed in the new Testament Blessed art thou among women and blessed is the fruite of thy wombe that is to say because it is blessed as Caluin and Beza doe acknowledge all which places Caluin confesseth to be so vnderstood after Theophilact Also and none gaue him any thing that is to say because none gaue him See more examples of this in the latin edition 5. This therfore is the true sense of that place As thou hast sayd vnto me thou Ioan. 1. v. 42. art Christ the Sonne of the liuing God so I say vnto thee that I haue worthily called thee Peter because vpon this rocke which thou art I will build my Church For to what end should Christ haue said vnto him thou art Peter seeing that all knew well inough before that Peter was Peter but that he would therby declare that he was not called Peter without great cause that is to say because vpon him as vpon a sure and strong foundation and rocke Christ intended to build his Church Christ therfore Ioan. 1. v. 42. would haue S. Peter to remember the name which of late was giuen him and afterward he assigneth the reason and S. Hier. in c. 16. Matt. sup eaverba Quiatu es Petrus cause why he called him so to wit because vpon him as vpon a most strong rocke he would build his Church According to the metaphore os a rocke saith S. Hierome it was rightly said vnto him I will build my Church vpon thee 6. For the holy Scripture is accustomed when it speaketh of a name giuen vnto any by the interpretation of the word to adioyne also the reason and Gen. 17. v. 5 Gen. 22. v. 27. Gen. 4. v. 25. cause of the name so said our Lord vnto Abram Neyther shall thy name be called any more Abram but thou shalt be called Abraham and then he presently giueth a reason takeÌ„ from the etimology of the word because a Father of many Nations I haue made thee So also he did when Iacob was called Israel See more of this in the Latin edition pag. 280. 7. Lastly not without great reason Christ gaue vnto S. Peter this new name but no other cause is assigned in the holy Scripture but this Because vpon this rocke I will build my Church This therfore and no other was the cause of giuing him this new name Hereupon saith S. Hilary very well O happy foundation of Christes Church saith he in the imposition of a new name and o In c. 16. Matt. worthy rocke of that building the which should dissolue and breake the infernall Lawes the gates of hell and all the stronge barres of death So S. Hilary 8. Moreouer Christ said to S. Peter I will giue the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen vnto thee he doth not say vnto you In like manner he said in the singular number Mat. 16. v. 19. whatsoeuer thou hast bound vpon earth c. that thou shalt loose c. He spake therfore to S. Mat. 18. v. 18. Peter only and not to many 9. And albeit he promised this last authority of bynding or loosing men from their sinnes to the other Apostles also yet first of all in this place he promised this to S. Peter alone and then afterwardes to the rest to the end we might therby know that he made S. Peter the head of all the rest and that all their power and authority was subordinate to that of his For at this day all Catholike Bishops haue authority to bynd loose but subordinate to the Popes authority 10. All which thinges that holy martyr S. Cyprian declareth very well in Cypr. de vnit Ecc. circa principium Mat. 16. v. 18. 19. these wordes wherby it may easily be vnderstood what was the opinion and iudgment of the primitiue Church concerning this matter God speakâ—th vnto S. Peter saith S. Cyprian I say vnto thee because thou art Peter and vpon this rocke I will build my Church c. And againe after his resurrection Ioan. 20. v. 20. 21. 22. 23. he sayd feed my shepe vpon him alone he buyldeth his Church and he committeth vnto him to feede his sheepe and albeit he gaue the like authority to all the other Apostles saying As my Father sent me so c. whose sinnes yee forgiue c. yet to the end he might shew and declare an vnity he ordayned but one chayre he confirmed by his authority the beginning of that vnity proceeding from one The same indeed or equall in all other thinges were the other Apostles with S. Peter indued with the same power and authority to wit before those wordes of
confession for we do not separate S. Peter from his fayth or from the publike profession therof but we only affirme that the Church of Christ was built vpon the faith and confession of S. Peter alone and of no other 22. And hence it is that the same holy Fathers who in some places affirme that the Church was built vpon the faith and confession of S. Peter do els where S. Epiph. contra Haeres 50. quae est CatharoruÌ„ ChrysoÌ„st HoÌ„ 55. in Mat. S. Aug. Tom 1. l. retractat cap. 21. plainly testify that it was built vpon S. Peter himselfe Yea euen in the same place they sometymes say that it was built vpon the faith or confession of S. Peter and sometymes vpon S. Peter himselfe as appeareth by S. Epiphanius and S. Chrysostome 23. We know also very well that S. Augustine in some places vnderstood by this word Rocke Christ himselfe but he doth not reiect the common exposition of other holy Fathers yea he confirmeth the same by the authority of S. Ambrose and he testifieth himselfe that he held that opinion in other places For they are not to be reprehended but rather to be greatly commended who attribute many litterall senses to the same wordes of the holy Scripture so that they do not reiect and condemne the common and approued sense of the whole Church as we haue already declared out of S. Augustine Contro 1. c. 15. §. 7. seq 24. Truely euen our Aduersaries themselues confesse that the forsayd exposition of S. Augustine is both forced harsh in it selfe For seeing that neyther in the words of Christ which goe before nor in the confessioÌ„ it selfe of S. Peter there is any mention made of a rock the particle this cannot demonstrate that which is not in Calu. ad haec verba S. Mat. in sua harmonia Beza inc 16. Mat. ad v. 18. the whole sentence but violently Wherfore our Aduersaries leauing this exposition of S. Augustine they vnderstand by the rock eyther the fayth of S. Peter as Caluin doth or with Beza his confession And they both confesse that the word Cepha in the Syriacke tongue is the same in both places when Christ sayth Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke and the Greeke word also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do only differ in their terminations and not in substance 25. But albeit Caluin commendeth CaluÌ„ loco citato that deriuatioÌ„ of the word Peter which S. Augustine setteth down to wit that Petrus is named of Petrâ— as Christianus of Christo yet Beza loco citato Beza writeth more truely that Christ speaking in the Syriake toung vsed no deriuation of names but sayd Cepha in both places Our Aduersaries therefore do not well to obiect S. Augustines exposition against vs the which they themselues acknowledge not to be the litterall sense of the wordes CHAP. VII That the Church of Rome is the chiefest and head of all other is proued out of the ancient Fathers and euen by the confession of our Aduersaries theÌ„selues THE auncient holy Fathers do not only with vniforme consent affirme the Roman to be the true Church of Christ but also that it is the chiefest most principall Church of all in so much that they affirme it to be the head of the whole visible Church of Christ and many other things they do write in the prayse and commendation of the Roman Church and of the Pope the supreme Pastor thereof as may euidently be seene in Catholike writers Bell. l. 2. de Rom. pont c. 13. seq Coâ—c ToÌ„ 1 l. 7. art 5. 6. 7. which are related by Bellarmine and Coccius We for breuity sake will only alledge two of the holy Fathers by whom it may easily be gathered what was the iudgment and opinion of the rest concerning this matter 2. The first is that most ancient holy S. Irenaeus who liued euen in the Apostles S. Iren. l. â— aduâ—rs haeres cap. 3. tyme. Because saith he it would be too long to recount in this volume the succession of all Churches we proposing the tradition and â—ayth of the greatest most ancient and best knowne Church founded by the two glorious Apostles Peter and Paul which by preaching and succession of Bishops hath descended euen from the Apostles to vs do confound all those who by any meanes gather any thing contrary to that they should eyther by their owne foolish fancies or by vayne glory or by the great blindnesse of their vnderstanding or following any badde opinion For all other Churches that is to say all faythfull true belieuers threughout the whole world must needes come vnto this Church by reason of the most potent principality thereof Hitherto are the wordes of S. Irenaeus And afterward he recounteth the succession of all the Popes of Rome till S. Aug. Tom. 9. â— tract 56. in Euang. S. Ioan. his tyme. 3. The other is S. Augustine whom our Aduersaries also esteeme very much VVho knoweth not sayth he that blessed S. Peter was the chiefe and head of all the Apostles Thus S. August Tom. 2. Epist 162. ad Episc DonatistaruÌ„ S. Augustine of S. Peter But speaking of the Church of Rome he sayth In the Romane Church hath alwayes florished the chiefe power and authority of the Apostolicall chayre If we beliâ—ue S. Augustine nothing is more cleare and manifest 4. But it is not necessary to cite any more places of the holy Fathers For euen our Aduersaries confesse that this was the common opinion of all the auncient Fathers Bucerus in praeparator ad Concil concerning this matter Thus writeth Martin Bucer sometymes Caluins maister and chiefe Patron not only in his owne name but also of all the Lutheranes VVe confesse plainly with all â—ur harts sayth he that among the auncient Fathers of the Church the Church of Rome hath alwayes obteined the chiefest authority and supremacy aboue all others because it hath the chayre of S. Peter and whose Bishops haue alwayes byn accouÌ„ted the successors of S. Peter Thus Bucer 5. And Caluin albeit he inueigheth bitterly against the Church of Rome yet constrained to speake truth writeth in Calu. l. 4. Inst it c. â— sect 16. this manner I will first say this aforehand that I deny not but that the old writers doe euery where giue great honour to the Church of Rome and do speake reuerently of it And a little after he sayth thus For that same opinion which I wot not how was growne in force that it was founded Calu. l. 4. Instit c. 7. sect 11. Verba istornm actor cicantur ab ab ipsis Luth. in l. colloq Alâ—ing Extant etiaÌ„ apud Sand. l. 1. de â—ustif cap. 1. De Smalcald articul Philippi subscript habetur ibid. à facult VVitteÌ„b edito coÌ„tra Gâ—so PeuceruÌ„ an 1597. in princ c. 6. fol. 60. p. 1. and ordeined by the ministery of Peter much auailed to
Tertul. de paenitent c. 9. Priests and to kneele to the dearely beloued of God which is nothing â—lâ— but kneeling downe to adore And the same Tertullian els where saith that they were Tertul. de pudicit c. 13. wont to licke vp the footesteps of euery one that past where he seemeth to allude to those wordes of the Prophet Isay cited Isa 49. v. 23. Isa 60. v. 4. a little aboue they shall licke vp the dust of thy seete and adore the steppes of thy feete Now if it be so that they licked the footestepeâ— of all Christians much more doubtlesse the footesteps of the supreme Bishop who receaued them into the Church and who at that tyme was called the blessed Pope as the same Tertullian witnesseth 11. Neyther doth this adoration derogate any thing from the honour of God or Christ but rather much more illustrate and set it forth for this honour is exhibited to the Bishop of Rome not for his owne holines or any other quality with which he is adorned as a priuate person but only for that authority and spirituall power which he receaued from Christ and which indeed properly appertayneth to God and to Christ and therefore in him and by him Christ whose person he representeth is honored and adored according to those words of Tertullian VVhen Tertul. de pâ—niteÌ„t ceâ—o therefore saith he thou stretchest thy selfe sorth to the knees of thy brethreÌ„ thou layest hold on Christ and makest thy supplication to Christ And this Caluin himselfe by the force of truth confesseth when he speaketh of the AdoratioÌ„ of the Church For expounding those wordes of the Prophet Isay they shall adore the steppes of thy feete or as he translateth they shall bow themselues downe to the plantes of thy feete thus he writeth Heere some man Calu in c. 60. Matth. v. 14. will aske whether this honour of which the Prophet speaketh be not too much and greater then is to be exhibited to the Church for to how our selues down and prostrate our selues are signes of that honour which no man ought to admit I answere this honour is not exhibited to the meÌ„bers but to the head to wit Christ who is adored in the Church so Caluin which also those words of God in the Apocalyps manifestly declare to be true I will make them adore thee before thy feete and they shall know that I haue loued thee for therefore is this honour exhibited to the supreme Bishop because God hath so exalted the Roman Sea and bâ—ene so liberall towards it which is a signe of exceeding great loue And heere hence it is that the same veneration is exhibited to all Bishops of Rome as well to the bad as to the good for they are not honored for their owne goodnes but for the office which Christ bestoweth vpon them As also they are called holy and most holy not for their Act. 28. v. 15. owne personall holynes but for the holines of Christ whose person and place they susteine vpon earth and for the holynes of the office which they receaue from God euen as S. Paul called Festus President of Iury very good not for any goodnes of his Baron ToÌ„ 1. anno 58. num 13. owne for he was an Infidel and a wicked man but in regard of his office for so the Presidents of Proninces were wont to be stiled as well noteth Baronius 12. Moreouer whereas in the Scripture feet signify diuine mission and vocation which is most ample in the Bishop of Rome no meruaile Rom. 10. v. 15. if greater veneration be exhibited to his feet it is to be obserued that there is a Crosse vpon his shoe which all kisse to giue vs to vnderstand that the honor is not exhibited to him but to Christ crucified whom he representeth 13. To conclude heere hence is easily solued that which our obiect of S. Peters refusing to be adored by Corneleus Act. 10. v. 25. 26. the Centuâ—ion for Cornelius adored not S. Peter in respect of Christ whose Vicar he was but in respect of himselfe whom he took to be some God as did the Licaonians Act. 10. v. 10. Hieron aduers Vigil ep 53. n. 12. iuxta edit Marian victorij thinke of Paul Barnabas so S. Hierome or surely they thought Peter to be more theÌ„ a maÌ„ as manifestly appareth by S. Peters answere Arise for I also am a man therfore Cornelius was to be admonished corrected for adoration is eyther good or bad according to the cause or reason for which it is exhibited Now the cause for which Catholikes exhibite the same to the Bishop of Rome is very good to wit the excellent power of Christ or rather Christ himselfe gouerning ruling his Church in his Vicar Act. 16. v. 26. and therfore this adoration is good and gratefull to God but the cause of Cornelius adoration was fond and false and therfore his adoration was naught and worthily reprehended 14. I know our Aduersaries often obiect that Pope Alexander the third did insolently trample vnder his feete Frederike the Emperour but this foolish fable is soundly and copiously refuted by Baronius citing the testimonies of such as were present and haue commited to writing all that passed in which there was nothing vnusuall but the Pope admited from Frederike the accustomed adoration He that desireth more concerning the kissing of the Popes feet may read Ioseph Stephâ—nus who hath written a whole booke therof it is sufficient for vs to haue briefly proued the same by many euident testimonies of holy Scripture CHAP. X. Of Generall Councells GENERAL Councells doe represent the whole body of the Catholike Church wherefore we will now speake a little of them for seeing that we haue already spoken of the head of the Church it remayneth we treat of the body therof But this we will do briefly For our Aduersaries now adaies graunt many thinges concerning this matter which in tymes past they denyed To the end therfore that the true state of this Controuersy may the better be vnderstood three thinges are to be considered which our Aduersaries hauing now learned by experience to be true do willingly graunt vnto vs. 2. The first is that these Councells are very profitable that the authority therof is not to be despised For seing that Hebr. vlâ— vers 17. the Apostle warneth vs to obey euery true Pastor much more are we bound to obey many assembled togeather For which cause our Aduersaries would also that we should all obey their synodicall assemblies Hereupon sayth Caluin Truly Calu. l. 4. Inst c. 9. sect 13. we do willingly graunt that if there happen debate about any doctrine there is no better nor surer remedy then if a Synod of true Bishops assemble togeather where the doctrine in controuersy may be discussed Thus he And euen naturall reason it selfe conuinceth this to be true as Caluin also confesseth For it is an easieâ— matter for many
assembled togeather to Calu. eadeÌ„ sect 13. discerne the truth from falshood then if any one should attempt it at home 2. The second thing which our Aduersaries graunt is that Generall Councells Mat. 18. v. 20. Calu. c. 6. citato sect 2. 6. 9. sequeÌ„t Beza 3. volum Tract Theol. Tract 6. de Eccles notis pag. 1. 8. 〈◊〉 ann 19â—â— Calu. l. 4 Inst cap. 9. sect â— when they are assembled togeather in the name of Christ do not err in matters of faith for they consesse that Christ promised this to two or three assembled togeather in his name Thus Caluin and he addeth that they may erre when they are not callâ—d togeather in the name of Christ the which no Catholike did euer deny as will appeare hereafter 4. The third thing which they admit is that the first Generall Councells were lawfully assembled and that they did not erre in points of fayth Thus Beza expresly who admitteth also the fifth sixt generall Councell he sayth that all those of his Religion are of this opinion Caluin also of the auncient Councells writeth thus I reuerence them from my hart and with them to be had in their due honour Calu. eodâ— c. 9. sect 8. with all men And a little after wheÌ„ he treateth of the ancieÌ„t CouÌ„cells he saith that besides those foure first generall Councells to wit Nicâ—num CoÌ„stantinopolitanuÌ„ the 1. Ephesine Chalcedonerse he admitteth also such other auncient Councells the which cannot be vnderstood Eodem c. 9. sect 9. but of the fifth and sixt For a little after he plainly reiecteth the seaueÌ„th 5. Heere it is also to be noted that Luther in the beginning reiected wholly Luth. in l. contra Regem Angliae all generall Councells but the Caluinists afterward by reason of Seruetus and other Anti-trinitarians were forced to admit the first foure Councells Moreouer by reason of the Vbiquitarian Lutherans who confunded the properties of the two Natures of Christ they were coÌ„streined to admit also the fifth sixt And these things euen the Caluinists themselues do graunt vnto vs. 6. But Catholikes teach these fiue things of the generall Councells The first is that a generall Councell cannot without the word of God make any new articles of fayth but her office is to explicate clearly and propose the word of God to be belieued of all the which the Church hath receaued from Christ and his Apostles For a lawfull generall Councell defineth nothing in matters of fayth which eyther is not extant in the holy Scripture or Concil Trident. sess 4. may not be gathered by the traditions of the Apostles or lastly may not euidently be deduced out of both The which the Councell of Trent doth manifestly professe for now we must not expect new reuelations Calu. l. 4. Inst c 8. sâ—ct 10. in fine from heauen Wherfore it is a meere slaunder that Caluin sayth that Catholikes teach that the Church hath authority to make new articles of fayth and that Catholikes despising the word of God do coyne at their owne pleasure new points of fayth 7. The second is that we acknowledge S. Aug. ToÌ„ 7. de Baptis cont Donat l. 2. c. 3. that Generall Councells may erre in matters which do not belong vnto our fayth and in this sense sayd S. Augustine One full and perfect Councell may be corrected by another Not in fayth the which is neuer changed but in Ecclesiasticall Constitutions the which according to the diuersity of tymes both are and should often be changed Whereupon in the same place he writeth that things ordeined before may be changed by those which come after when we see by experience that is opened and made knowen which before was hidden and secret For the experience of new matters which happen may change or correct the Ecclesiasticall lawes Constitutious but it cannot alter and change matters of fayth 8. Wherefore Caluin wrongfully obiecteth against vs that S. Leo the Cal. l. 40. Iust c. 9. sect 11 Pope reprehended the Councell of Chalcedon seeing that Caluin himselfe acknowledgeth in the same place that to appertaine nothing to fayth which S. Leo reprehended And he also confesseth that Catholikes teach that Councells may erre in those thinges which nothing concerne fayth And no lesse foolishly Caluin reprehendeth the first Councell of Calâ— eodâ— c. 9. sect 17. Nice about matters which do not belong vnto fayth 9. The third is that we acknowledge those Councells may erre which eyther are not lawfully assembled or do not proceed lawfully in their busines they haue in hand For such Councells indeed are not assembled togeather in the name of Christ and of this sort was the Councell of the Arians holden at Ariminum that of the Eutichians at Ephesus the seauenth Constantinopolitane Councell of the Image-breakers the which therefore our Aduersaries doe in vayne obiect against vs. 10. The fourth is that albeit a Councell be lawfully assembled and seeme to proceede orderly the definitions notwithstanding thereof will not be altogeather certayne according to the opinion of many Catholikes vnlesse they haue their approbation from the Vide Bell. l. 2. de Eccles milit cap. 11. Bishop of Rome if he be not present at the Councell The reason is because before that the Councell be approued and allowed of by the Pope it is as yet an vnperfect body of Christ without any visible head and such a body may stumble Concil Trid. sess vlt. infine Conc. Nicaenumâ— dequo Baron ToÌ„ 3. Anno 325. n. 111. Chalced. Act 1. in fiâ—e in epist â—d Leonâ—m Papam Sexta Synod in ep adâ—dgathoâ—eÌ„ Papam Suprac 17. huius Controu fall 11. And hence it is that the Councell of Trent demanded her confirmation from Pius 4. who solemnely afterward confirmed it The which also the other auncient Councells demaunded yea euen those which our Aduersaries do admit as for example the first Nicene Councell that of Calcedon the sixt Synod to omit other later Councells 12. The fifth is that we affirme a Generall Councell approued by the Pope cannot erre in fayth The reason is because it is altogeather necessary that there be some supreme iudgment in the Church of God wherunto all should submit themselues and belieue assuredly in all matters in CoÌ„trouersy as we haue proued before but there can be no other supreme iudgment but this 13. Moreouer we see that euen froÌ„ the beginning of the Church till now all heresies and controuersies concerning matters of faith haue byn still ended and taken away by the generall Councels Wherfore they who deny this do open and make way for all old Heresies The which when our Aduersaries had learned by experience in the Anti-trinitarians Anabaptistes Vbiquitarians and such other sectes they were forced to admit §. 4. hâ—iuâ— cap. those six more auncient Councels as we sayd before but the authority of all Generall Councells is alike and equall 14. Finally our Aduersaries themselues