it but by the scripture which we doe not hold to be sufficient to determrne controuersies without tradition So that I haue no more to saye to you but wish you may begine this new yeare with a good night's rest which God send vs both Whether scripture alone is fit and able to decide controuersies in Religion THis Dialogue containeth 15. parts or paragraphes 1. The Preface or introduction 2. That tradition for scripture is not of as great force as for pointes of Doctrine 3. That tradition for scripture is not more vniuersall then tradition for doctrine 4. That it is impossible the text of scripture should haue remained incorrupted 5. What vncertaintie the errors of writers and copists hath bredd in scriptures 6. What vncertaintie the multiplicitie of translations hath bredd in scripture 7. That the verie repeating and reciting of an others words breedeth a varietie and vncertaintie 8. The vncertaintie of EquiuocatioÌ„ which of necessitie is incident in all writings 9. That there riseth an vncertaintie out of this that the scripture was written in languages now ceased 10. The vncertaintie which followeth the particular languages of Hebrew and Greeke wherein the scripture was vritten 11. That the nature of the bookes of scripture is not fitting for deciding of controuersies 12. Two manners of iudging of Religion out of scripture 13. How scripture doth determine controuersies 14. what laws are requisite for disputation out of scripture 15. Of an other manner of disputing out of scripture §. 1 The Introduction VNCLE How now cozen what make's you so early this morning could you not sleepe this last night Nephew Yes indifferent well I thanke God but t' is not verie early Howsoeuer if I be trublesome I will expect your better leasure for I am come only to tell you a scrupule that I had yesternight which hath tormeÌ„ted me euer since And it is that we Catholikes who beare so great reuerence and veneration to the holy scripture receiue more of it then others write infinite volumes of commentaries vpon it as Paul's church yard can witnesse and are so exact to improue our selues I meane our learned men in the knowledge of it should neuerthelesse when wee come to ioyne in the maine point that is to the decision of controuersies in Religion seeme to fly of and recurre to other iudges though we acknowledge it to be Christ owne word and law And now I haue tould you my difficultie I will leaue you to your better imployments knowing how much you esteeme and how precious you accompt your mornings and therefore I will make bould to call for your answere an other time Vncle. Nay stay cozen God forbid I should thinke I could better imploy my time then in giuing you satisfaction in question of such importance or that you should be importune vnto me by desiring the knowledge of a thing so necessarie and so be seeming you I were to blame if I would not leaue euen my prayers to assist you in this point and perhaps an other time you will not be so earnest on it Although I must coÌ„fesse I am some what vnwilling to diue into this questioÌ„ for I see by experieÌ„ce that the one part seeketh by all meanes to destroy the authoritie of God's church and the other seemeth to lessen the power of scripture for the deciding of controuersies so that indifferent men and as yet vnsetled be left as it were without all meanes of coming to the truth How soeuer necessitie excuseth vs for were our Aduersaries able to performe what they promise that is to resolue pointes of controuersies by scripture we were worse theÌ„ beasts if we should refuse to be iudged thereby But if to stand to scripture only as they doe be but a plausible way to Atheisme and so the question will only be whether we must rely vpon a church or be Athiests for we thinke by scripture alone lefâ—t without the guard of the church nothing or at least not enough for the saluation of mankinde can be sufficiently prouued then euerie man wil see that we are forced by reasoÌ„ and Religion to make euident and knowne as farr as we caÌ„ the necessitie of relying vpon a church and to vse all our power to persuade men therevnto And if you remember we said yesternight that Christian Religion or the law of Iesus Christ cannot be learned by witt and studie but by authoritie and by receiuing it from Iesus Christ And that wee said likewise that he is no true Christian nor truly of the communitie of Christians what so euer be his materiall beliefe who doth not accept of that rule and meanes which Iesus Christ hath left and ordained for the receipt of his law and the like of him who should follow anie other rule which must needes be ether scripture or tradition or both it will therefore euiâ—â—ntly follow that ether we must be no Christians or accept and acknowledge tradition to be this rule if wee can shew that the scripture is not fitt nor hath the conditions requisite for the deciding of controuersies nor was made or left to the church for this end Nephew The greater is the necessitie of this question the more gladd am I that I haue moued it though me thinke's I my self might well see it is not fitt to make the scripture iudge of coÌ„trouersies because we finde by experience that after so manie disputations and so manie bookes written on ether side there is nothing resolued nor are we the nearer an end and therefore t' is euident that scripture alone will neuer decide and determine our quarells and disputes Vncle. Well cozen since you will haue it so our first question shall bee §. 2 Whether tradition for scripture be of as great force as it is for pointes of doctrine ANd first I pray you tell mee doe you thinke that the Apostles when they weÌ„t about the world to preach Christ Iesus carried with theÌ„ all the bookes of the ould and new Testament ether readie translated into the languages of the people whom they preached vnto or else caused them to be translated by the first Christians Nephew I neuer thought of this question before but I see well enough that they could not carie all with them for some parts certainely were not made before they went to to preach nay I a'm not assured whether anie part of the new testament was made before their dispersion from Hierusalem so that well may they haue caried the ould Testament with theÌ„ if they thought it sitting but for the new they could not if I be not mistakeÌ„ Vncle. It is verie true I will tell you therefore cozen how the authoritie of the scripture that is Now the neW Testament Was pro aga ted of the new Testament came into the church An Apostle or Disciple writing a booke or Epistle coÌ„municated it to that church or Countrie wherein he preached or to which he writte it that church coÌ„municated it to their neighbours as the worke
of such an Apostle so by litle and litle it grew froÌ„ one countrie to an other vntill it was spredd ouer the whole Christian world So that some countries had not the new Testament complete that is all the bookes of it for a long time Wherefore no wonder that some haue doubted of seuerall parts thereof being not able to auerre as not assured by reason of some accident that such bookes were truly the workes of such an Apostle or Disciple which not withstaÌ„ding Why the canon of scripture is cheefely to be had from Rome better intelligeÌ„ce being gotten might be afterwards receiued for scripture And here you may note by the way that the Roman church is that church to which in reason wee ought to giue most credit touching the canon of the scripture For Rome being at that time â—that is at least for the first 300 yeares to the Christian world or rather to all the Christians dispersed in diuers parts of the world as London is to England And that wee see the collection of things estimable dispersed in seuerall Prouinces of our Kingdome is sooner and better made in London then in anie other part of our Countrie it must needes follow that the collection of the Holy scripture or new Testament was more exactly faisable at Rome then at anie other place But this by the way For my ayme is to make you iudge whether anie one substantiall point The state of the questioÌ„ which the Apostles whith common conseÌ„t preached through the whole world compared to anie one booke of the new Testament which soeuer you thinke first or best receiued whether I say of these two haue descended vnto vs with more certaintie the one to be the Apostles doctrine the other to be such an Apostle's booke Nephew I should distinguish your question for ether it may be compared to that particular Prouince or church where the Apostle him selfe deliuered it both in word and writing or to the whole church And I confesse that in respect of the whole church that point of doctrine which is euerie where preached must needes haue more certaintie but where both are equaly deliuered by the same Apostle to the same church I should thinke the worke should haue more authoritie theÌ„ the word For t' is an easie matter to let slipp a word some times Whereas writing requireth a more setled consideration Vncle. If the question be but of a particular church or Prouince I doubt it will not be sufficient to giue vs a firme authoritie for ether one or the other vnlesse we add more circumstances then we haue declared And the reason is because one Prouince maye haue had Religion so ruinated in it by the incursion of infidells that recouering theÌ„ selues after a long time they may as well mistake one booke for an other as one doctrine for an other and so this point is not much to our pourpose Although euen in this case the doctrine taught by word of mouth hath these aduantages That it is deliuered to manie the booke to few or in some one place The doctrine heard and vnderstood by manie the booke only to such as can reade nor to all them nether but to such as are carefull The booke belonge's not much to the practize of the multitude the doctrine gouernes their whole liues The booke brought often times by some one maÌ„ as some messeÌ„ger if it be an Epistl or other wise sent from some other place or froÌ„ some one person as from Titus of Timotheus to whom it was first written and vpon whose authoritie only the whole veritie must originally rely But to returne to our case Doe you not see that the whole church trusteth some one particular man at the first vpon whom she buildeth hir beliefe tht this is such an Apostles worke that is scripture But for anie materiall point of doctrine she relyeth vpoÌ„ the vniuersall knowledge of theÌ„ who heard it preached in diuers parts of the world So that as I doe not intende to say the one is certaine the other not for a particular churche's authoritie may be certaine in some circonstances yet I must needes say that betwixt these two certainties there is such a differeÌ„ce that if the one were to bring in verdict vpon the other it would be much more forcible and euident to conclude that this booke is scripture because it is according and conformable to the doctrine taught and preached then that this doctrine is the Apostle's because it is conformable to this booke For if it be true that the whole church once relyed vpon some one particular church for this veritie it can neuer come to passe that the certaintie of this booke proue greater then was the authoritie of that particular church at that time And consequently the same comparison which is to be made betwixt the authoritie of this particular church and of the vniuersall church the same I say is to be made betwixt the certaintie of this booke 's being scripture and of this point of doctrine's being catholike and Apostolike And for the inconuenience you were jealous of it falleth out quitt contrarie For whether we considere the inspiration and assistance of the holy ghost or the industrie aed carefullnesse of man you shall euer finde that the end is more principally aymed at then the meanes to compasse the end and likewise amongst diuers meanes the most immediate to the end is still most aymed at wherefore in our case the end both of writing and speaking being the deliuerie of this doctrine for the good of the people no doubt I say but that both the AssistaÌ„ce of the holy ghost and the care of man tendeth more principally to the deliuerie of this doctrine then to other things that came in by chance in which only there might be a slipp as you immagine Wherefore sithence tradition containeth not all the words the Apostles spoke but meerely what belong's to ChristiaÌ„ doctrine which was principally deliuered and the cheefe errand of the Apostles and that in the scriptute manie things are written vpon occasion and as it were by the bye no doubt but in both these respects to wit of the assistance of the holy ghost and of the care of man the certaintie will be greater of the doctrine deliuered by word of mouth theÌ„ of the holy writt Besides the slipps you speake of are when things are only once deliuered or spoken without great premeditation whereas this doctrine was a thing perpetually beaten on so as there can be no feare of such slipping HoW the old Testament came to Christians hands For the ould TestameÌ„t as I confesse t' is possible that the Apostles might haue deliuered it in all Countries where they preached so likewise I thinke t' is euident that they neuer did it being that the church hath no such memorie And that the Canon hath beene doubted of by some and the Iewish Canon alleadged whereof there had beene no vse nor neede if the
Apostles had left to all churches the booke it self It is likely therefore that the ould Testament was brought in by the first Christians ' of the CircuÌ„cision who accepted of those bookes which they saw the Apostles honnor and make vse of and from them it came to the Gentill Christians and so by litle and litle was accepted of by all the Christian church with the same veneration that the Apostles and Iewish Christians gaue vnto it But how soeuer shall wee not thinke at least §. 3 That tradition for scripture is more vniuersall then traditioÌ„ for doctrine NEphew Surely vncle for my part I caÌ„not thinke but that the scripture hath a more vniuersall tradition theÌ„ anie point of Christian doctrine or at least then anie of those which are disputed betwixt vs and the Protestants seeing that all Christians doe agree in the acceptation of the scripture and farr fewer in diuers pointes of doctrine For such churches as are in communion with the church of Rome are no such extraordinarie part of christendome if they were compared to all the rest Vncle. For the Extent of the churches I cannot certainely tell you the truth because I feare manie are caled ChristiaÌ„s who haue litle ether in their beliefe or liues to verifie that name But you know in witnesses the qualitie is to be respected as well and more theÌ„ the quantitie So that such couÌ„tries in which Christianitie is vigorous are to be preferred before a greater Extent of such as are where litle remaines more then the name But to come neerer to your difficultie suppose that in a suite in law one side had seuen lawfull witnesses the other had as manie and twentie knights of the post knowne periured knaues or vnlawfull witnesses more would you cast the other side for this wicked rable Nephew No truly for seing the law doth inualidate their testimonie I should wrong the partie to make anie accompt of them and therefore I should judge the parties equall Vncle. Why then you see that who will challenge a more vniuersall Tradition for scripture then for doctrine must first be certaine that there is no lawfull exception against those Christians whom he calleth to witnesse to witt against the Armans NestoriaÌ„s Eutychians and the like Now the Catholike church accounteth these men wicked in the highest degree that is guiltie of Heresie and schisme And therefore the partie which esteemeth of their witnesse must by taking of them for honnest men beare him self for their fellow and account the Roman church wicked and not fitt for testimonie from whom neuerthelesse he hath receiued what soeuer he hath of Christ Besides the witnesse and testimonie which these men giue is only that they receiued scripture from that church which excluded them from communion at their beginnings and euer continued in opposition against them to witt the Catholike Wherefore it is euident that their testimonie addeth nothing to the testimonie of the Catholike church but only declareth what the testifieth nor consequently maketh anie traditioÌ„ more vniuersal Let vs therefore now see whether §. 4 The text of scripture can haue remained incorrupted or no. FOr hitherto we haue only compare the and 〈◊〉 of scripture in itselfe to tradition now we will come a litle closser and compared it as we haue it to the same doctrine deliuered once 〈…〉 tradition I meane that hitherto we haue spoken as if we had those verie bookes which the canonicall writer made with their owne hande and of what authoritie they would be But now we will considere their since we haue but copies of them of what authoritie these copies ought to be Can you resolue this question Nâ—phew I doubt not sir but for that end which wee seeke that is to make a iudge of controuersies euerie word euerie letter and euerie title must be admitted of absolute and vncontrolable certainâ—ie And so I heare the vulgar edition in latine is commaÌ„ded to be held amongst vs. For I easily see that if anie one sentence may be quarrelled euerie one will incurre the same hazard all being equaly deliuered and equaly warranted with reason and authoritie Vncle. You saie verie well for where there is no lesse theÌ„ the soules of the whole world at the stake I see not what aduantage can giue sufficient securitie if there remaine anie notable vncertaintie Our sauiour saith what can all the world auaile anie man if he loose his soule So that where the question is soule or no soule saluation or damnation nothing lesse then certaintie can serue to proceede vpon And therefore no doubt but if the Apostles had intended to leaue the holy writt for the decider of controuersies in Religion they would also haue prouided that infalible copies should haue beene kept and come downe to the church to the end of the world For such care wee see that priuat men haue of conseruing their bargaines and couuenants by making their Indentures vncounterfeitable and enrolling them in publicke offices were they are to remaine vncorrupted the like care hath common wealths to conserue their recordes specially their laws keeping the verie originalls or authenticall copies with verie great care But what neede wee tooke into the examples of â—â—â—en seeing all mightie God in his owne person hath giuen vs a paterne commanding the Deuteronomie to be kept in the Arke which he would haue to be the authenâ—icall copie to iudge betwixt him and his people and this with the greatest veneratioÌ„ that could be imagined or that euer was giuen to anie thing But this was impossible for the Apostles to doe otherwise surely the would haue done it if they had intended that Christs written law should haue beene our iudge by reason of the multitudes of nations and languages which hindered that not anie one booke could be conserued with such securitie and incorruptibilitie as would be requisite in that case both because of the language and of the mutabilitie of the world euer subiect to a thousand accidents whereby such bookes might fall into the hands of those who would not only neglect them but ether willfully corrupt or seeke vtterly to destroy that which was to be the rule and paterne of Christian faith And for that which you saie is commaÌ„ded vs you conceiue amisse For no wise man thinketh that the vulgar edition is so well corrected that much may not be mended How the vulgar edition is to be receiued but t' is that the church hath secured vs that there is nothing against Christian faith or behauiour contained in those bookes which haue so long passed for scripture and are so in deede for the substance of the bookes and therefore hath commanded vs not to refuse this râ—â—â— in anie controuersie on disputation And this wee and wee only caÌ„ doe for the churche's securitie â—â—seth out of this that she hath an other more forcible ground of hir faith to witt tradition by which being assured what the truth is she can confidently pronunce that in
certainely knowne hitherto nor euer expressy belieued before Which how they may be reconciled amongst them selues or stand with this that tradition is our rule of faith I confesse I know not Vncle. Truly cozen your obiection is strong yet I hope to content you For the first part of it I see no great matter in the varietie of opinions amongst our Deuines for you see they seeke out the Decider of pointes of doctrine that is by whose mouth we are to know vpon occasions of dispute what and which be our pointes and articles of faith to wit whether the Pope or the Councell or both Which is not much materiall to our pourpose what euer the truth be supposing we acknowledge no articles of faith but such as haue descended vnto vs by tradition from Christ and his Apostles The second part of your obiection seeme's to be of greater force because some Deuines seeme to acknowledge an authoritie in the church which hath power not only to determine ether speculatiue or practicall points of doctrine new or ould in such manner as that the whole church is obliged to accepte or not oppose it's definition which euerie Catholike grante's and the reasons I tould you in our first conference doe euidently conuince But also that this authoritie can so determine euen a speculatiue pointe of doctrine which hitherto was euer vncertaine nor euer acknowledge as reueiled or esteemed as an article of faith that here after the vhole church shal be obliged to receiue acknowledge and belieue it as a reuealed and necessarie point of Christian doctrine and as an article of faith Which opinion you must knowe is but an opinion nor doe the authours of it oblige anie man to belieue it as certaine nor doe they condemne those who nether doe nor euer will acknowledge anie such positiō ād therefore this ought not to trouble you Nay contrariwise all Deuines will generally tell you that no new articles of faith can be made that there 's now no reuelations for new points of doctrine and that Christ Iesus was our only law maker in this kinde hauing suggested to his Apostles all that is necessarie of this nature and qualitie and the Apostles likewise taught their churches all that was necessarie to be knowne of this degree Wherefore you see all agree vpon tradition nor anie one ether denie it or doubt of it Whereas it appeare's by the diuersitie of their opinions that they doe not vniuersally and generally agree in anie other meanes or rule of faith though some admitte of another in waie of opinion Yet to giue you farther satisfaction in this busines I will teach you a point of philosophie which perhapps you neuer fully vnderstood I am sure you will not denie but t' is a differēt questiō to aske how an herbe or tree growe's and to aske how Aristole or Theophrastus saies it growe's for in the same growing there can be no varietie but in their opiniōs there may So in man t' is a differēt thing what he doth or is done in him and what he thinkes he doth or is done in him as in sicknesse disgestion and other naturall workes t' is euident yea and in voluntary actions too Which depende of corporall instruments as to goe runne turne our eyes speake cough spit or the like which we doe freely and voluntarily yet were we examined by what instruments and motiōs we doe thē peraduēture who seeme's to know most would be found short at least amongst manie there would be diuers opinions But doe you thinke the same happen's in our thoughts and iudgmēts which be purely spirituall Nephew I cannot tell yet me thinke's the soule should be so wel acquainted with hir owne actiōs as that she should not neede anie helpe to know them And all men agree that only man vpon earth can see his owne minde and therefore if it be not cleere to man what himself thinke's nothing is cleere Vncle. You are deceiued cosen for as long as we are in this world we cannot know anie thing of our owne thoughts and affections but as we reflect vpon the corporall motions which accompanie them and which because none feele but our selues none can knowe bur our selues though sometimes it happene's quite contrarie when these motiōs breake forth into outward apparence for thē others discrye our mindes and we our selues through the violēce of passiō are not so wel able ro iudge of them as others who see vs. But to speake of men free from passion and who vse to reflect much vpon their owne thoughts euen in them their internall actions proceede frō a principle directed by a superior guide then their owne reason as appeare's by this that they know nothing of their owne thoughts but by reflection and the reflection is a distinct act from the former vpon which the reflectiō is made so that nether the reflectiō it self is alwaise made by voluntarie designe nor anie act which is made without reflection Besides considere I pray how few know by what verue their vnderstandings are made certaine of those principles and positiōs which they cannot doubt of or by what vertue they adhere so strongly to the conclusion of a sylogisme not one of a thousand who doe these things euerie day Wherefore t' is euidēt that euen in our spirituall actions not all that we doe is done by our proper vnderstāding that is with knowing reflection and designe and therefore the same man may euē in these intellectuall acts doe one thing and thinke he doth an other and diuers men may agree in what they doe and yet disagree in their opinions of what it is they doe And now to close with your difficultie seeing faith is a persuasion or an agreeing in some points by reason af authoritie All the Doctors of the Catholike church may agree in beleeuing that is in acting and practizing their faith in the same manner and yet be deuided in their speculations by which they seeke to determine what it is they doe And it is their doeings which make's them Christians and not their sayings for they liue and beleeue as Christians but speake and deliuer their opinions as Doctors which be qualities farr different from being a Christian And doe you not see that these Doctors belieue after their speculations and framing of their opinions as they did before they thought of or studied this difficultie Nephew I doe not doubt but they doe for the faith of all Christians must needes be the same and consequently all must goe vpon the same motiue though one may vnderstand better and apprehende deeper that motiue then an other doth Vncle. You saie well Considere then that when these Doctors were yong men and had not yet studied Diuinitie and you shall finde that they had no other motiue of their belife but the authoritie of the present church and therefore how soeuer they discourse learnedly in their bookes the conclusion must be in their liues to rest vpon the authoritie of the