surely you must needs according to this first part of your reason haue condemned the innocent and iustified the wicked For the Apostles Church was not one because it had varied from some opinions formerly held by it which the other companie still retained As for your odious manner of propounding the point according to the varietie of times and persons it is but a froth of words and might in regard of the change haue bin charged in like sort vpon the Apostles As for the dissent of learned men one from another neither was the Church euer so happie as to be without it and you acknowledge it among your owne writers though not in matters of faith the contrary whereof I will shew when I come to that place But if by matters of faith you meant such points as are fundamental I could somewhat the rather hearken to you And yet what shall it hinder a Church from being one that the learned men of it make question of such maine matters as long as the Church is not tainted with their priuate errors Did the Churches of Corinth or Galatia cease to be true Churches because some among them and as it should seeme no small number in the former denied the resurrection of the flesh in the other ioyned the workes of the law with faith to iustification yet were both these fundamētall errors the continuance wherin without repentance must needs bring certaine damnation But your matters of faith are all points though neuer so friuolous or false that your Church hath determined by her lawlesse tyrannie whereas many matters of farre greater importance not so decreed are left free for euery man to erre in or to be ignorant of without any danger of damnation or breach of vnitie This last point as you say is the principall matter appertaining to vnitie that there be meanes in the Church to end controuersies But why or how should this be so principall when as the Church may agree in the same points of doctrine though priuate men dissent from each other Indeed to the procuring of an outward peace it is very requisite that particular men be not suffered to preach or write one against another But neither is this peace so much worth as that for it the Church should be corrupted with errors and the chiefe power for the remedying of this inconuenience is in the hands of the chiefe Magistrate whose dutie it is to prouide that his subiects may leade a quiet and a peaceable life in all godlinesse and honestie Therefore neither doth this disagreement among the learned make the Church cease to be one though there be no meanes to end it which yet are not wanting in the true Churches Your minor also is false in euery part of it Variablenesse in points of faith according to the variety of times and persons is when in regard of these two the doctrine of the Church is altered Now who is so shamelesse as to charge vs with hauing altered and dayly altering our iudgements in respect of either of these What necessitie or occasion can varietie of time bring for the change of doctrine But for persons what sect profession church or companie in the world euer was or could be freer from depending on any mans person then we are who absolutely disclaime all mens authority ouer our faith Are not you they that charge vs with leauing the interpretation of Scripture and consequently the beliefe of euerie man to his owne priuate humour And yet you are not ashamed to accuse vs for variablenesse in our doctrine according to the varietie of persons If malice were not blind it were vnpossible you should slaunder vs with so manifest contrarieties You are the men whose faith dependeth vpon the persons of your Popes whom you follow blindfold whither soeuer any of them leadeth you We attribute to our teachers no impossibilitie of erring though we haue a reuerend opinion of their knowledge and faithfulnesse in regard whereof we do not lightly reiect any doctrine or exposition deliuered by them vnlesse it be apparently false Yet doe we not tie our selues to take whatsoeuer they teach as a matter of faith though we are readie to yeeld to any thing which is plainly prooued to vs out of the word of God how contrary soeuer it be to our former opinions For we know that men are subiect to error and that God doth not miraculously reueale all truth at once to any man but as it seemes good to his gracious wisedom peece by peece enlighteneth the vnderstanding of his seruants with the knowledge of his will and word according to their sinceritie in depending on him faith in calling vpon him diligence in searching the Scriptures the only sufficient meanes of instruction The second part of your slander is that our learned men so iarre in matters of faith that it is hard to find three in all points of one opinion Remember what you call matters of faith points of doctrine defined by the Church and forbeare blushing if you can when you reade this your accusation against vs. What other refutation shal I need to vse then the bare naming of the harmonie of our confessions wherein the most partial Reader of your side may discerne your shamelesse hyperbole that I may giue it a cleanlier terme then it deserueth To requite your kindnesse I challenge you to name me if you can any one of your schoole-men that hath not refuted some of his owne fellowes in some points or bene refuted by them I confesse there are many of them that I haue not read but I am so well acquainted with their courses and contradicting of one another that I may venture without aduenture to make this challenge Last of all your minor affirmes that our learned men haue no meanes to end their controuersies If you speake of the euent that our meanes are not sufficient de facto to make them that striue to agree in one opinion or to make all men to be of one mind I graunt that you say to be true but I adde withall that we may haue when we will as good meanes to this purpose as your Church hath For it is no more but to appoint some man to whose iudgement we will stand in all matters of controuersie What hereticall Church may not haue the same meanes of vnitie if it please But if you denie that de iure wee haue meanes sufficient for the ending of all questions I say your minor is vtterly false because we haue the Scriptures appointed and blessed to that end by God himselfe Now as the ministerie of the word is most sufficient for the begetting of faith and sauing of men though it haue not this excellent effect in all so the Scriptures are of absolute sufficiencie to cut off all controuersies howsoeuer men will not alwayes be ruled by them Your minor as we haue seene containes a grieuous accusation of vs in three points of no small importance To
Ambrose to enquire after the faith of the Church and that especially in which Church if Christ be a dweller it is doubtlesse to be made choise of But if the people be vnfaithful if an heretical teacher deforme the dwelling the communion of heretickes is to be auoided the congregation must be shunned And a little after If there be any Church that refuseth the faith and holds not the foundation of the Apostles preaching it is to be left lest it taint vs with some spot of vnbeliefe or vnfaithfulnesse Neither will it serue the turne that you referre vs to that which is generally holden by the Church for both the generall faith depends vpon the particular beliefe of the Church or Pope of Rome and is not to be taken for truth because it is generally receiued but because it agrees with the Romane faith as we learned before of your Monkes of Bourdeaux who make the Catholique Church to haue communion with the Church of Rome as the fountaine of truth and of greater authoritie in their iudgement then the Catholicke Church But let vs admit that you desire of beleeuing whatsoeuer is generally holden by the Church I am half afraid this conceit be it neuer so strong wil not procure the quietnes you promise vs. The causes of my feare are these two First I may doubt of such a point as is not yet determined by the Church for example I make question of the Popes authority aboue Councels or theirs aboue him How shall I most certainly be instructed in the truth of this question Enquire say you and find what is generally holden by the Church What if the Doctors of your Church cannot agree about this point That they cannot it appeares by your owne doubting where you make it questionable whether the Pope alone or the Pope with a general Councell be free from error And Bellarmine is faine to take a great deale of paines in answering the arguments of diuers Papists some of them equall to himselfe for learning iudgement and authoritie who make the Pope subiect to generall Councels But of this in due place Say it were generally agreed on Could I thereby be most certainly instructed what is truth in this point May not all saue the Pope be deceiued and perhaps he to without the aduice and assent of a general Councell at least if he haue not in his consistory vpon good deliberation resolued of the matter What shall it auaile me then to know that generally it is thought the Pope is aboue any Councell Supposing this point were generally held to be true though indeed as I said before it is denyed both by priuate men by 2. councels that of Basil the other of Constance which deposed two Popes Iohn the three and twentieth and Benedict the thirteenth And Bellarmine saith that to this day it remaines in question euen among the Catholikes Well put case all men thought as Bellarmine and all such Popish parasites would haue it what were I the nearer as long as there can be no certainty of truth in your opinion where nothing is iudicially determined by a Pope Coūcell The second resō of my doubt is that I know not how to find out either easily as you say euery man may or certainly though with some paines what is generally holdē by the Church for truth in al particular points wherof I doubt Shall I looke into the confessions of seuerall Churches Where are they to be found Shall I trauail into euery particular country to learne what they hold of this or that poynt What assurance can I get hereby but from some speciall men And it is a venture but they will not all agree in euery point What remaines Forsooth that which is all in all I must beleeue Watsō or Clarke or Blackwel the archpriest or if al these will not content me Gerrard Tesmond Hall or without all doubting Garnet the superior of the Iesuites who questionlesse is as void of error as the Pope himselfe Haue I not trow you a sound foundation to build my faith vpon when I haue the word of these equiuocating traitours Priests and Iesuits And yet this is the most I can haue in this case if I be a man vnlearned especially vnable to reade Is it possible any man should be so senslesse as to hazzard his euerlasting saluation vpon such an vncertainty to beleeue he knowes not what because a Priest or a Iesuit tels him that the Church generally doth so beleeue But what if it fall out as it may do that the Priests perswade him the Church holds one thing and the Iesuites affirme it maintaines the contrary how shall a poore soule either settle his iudgement or quiet his conscience Quid sequar aut quem Were it not a directer and certainer course to hold nothing for truth in religion but that which is proued to vs by plaine testimonies of Scripture or certaine consequence of reason drawne from principles euidently exprest or apparētly contained in the knowne word of God The difficulties of translation and interpretation shal be handled in their places which also as I shewed ere while accompany al your writings of priuate men Popes or Councels Now then if their be many particular points of cōtrouersies whereof I may doubt which are not resolued of by any iudgement of the Church nor agreed vpon by the learned of your owne side if I cannot certainly know what is generally held for truth by the Church but as I giue credit to the report of a Priest or Iesuit whom I know to be partiall in the matter because he is one of the Popes vassals subiect to erre because he is a priuate man likely enough to lye because he maintaines equiuocation what madnesse were it for me to forbeare searching and studying of the Scriptures where I am sure the truth of God is to be found and to lose my time and labour in seeking what the Church generally holds and that of those men who perhaps vnderstand not what is held but as they haue bene informed by others who may themselues haue mistaken the true meaning of the Church in that it holds A. D. §. 10. Of which points also If they be desirous they may haue sufficient authority and reason yeelded by the learned of the same Church though they should not so desire reason to be yeelded that without reason be giuen they would not beleeue at all or as grounding their faith vpon the reason giuen sith Christian beliefe ought onely to be grounded vpon the authoritie of God speaking by the mouth of the Church who ought to be beleeued in all matters without giuing any reason A. W. There is no sufficient authoritie for a man to ground his faith vpon but the truth of God reuealed Whatsoeuer is taught without that authoritie is as easily contēned as alleadged Therfore Iustine wils him that would be setled in
Apostles because they spake immediatly by the direction of the spirit and therefore could not possibly erre in any point whereas all other men are subiect to error and their doctrine to examination ere it need be credited Secondly we must remember it doth not follow that if our Sauiour said whosoeuer beleeued not the Apostles should be damned then he that beleeues not the Ministers now in all they propound to be beleeued should be therefore liable to condemnatiō I haue stood the more vpon this proposition because the consequence being true may breed an error in the conceit of many if the reason of it be not truly vnderstood Your Assumption or minor is thus to be limited according to that which I before deliuered He that beleeues the Apostles spake immediatly by the inspiration of the spirit of God and yet doubts of the truth of some things they preached cannot without reforming this error be saued because he holds that the holy Ghost may inspire an vntruth No more can he that doth not beleeue they spake by such inspiration For of them our Sauiour hath absolutely said He that despiseth you despiseth me The second limitation is about the things themselues The ignorance of some points deliuered by the Apostles vtterly excludes a man out of heauen some other again may be vnknowne and a man notwithstanding that his ignorance be saued Therefore though our Sauiour except no point nor distinguish betwixt matters of doctrine yet the not beleeuing of some is no farther damnable then a man doth wilfully refuse to beleeue that which he confesseth to be truth in his heart or at the least in which he thinkes the Apostles were deceiued or which he despiseth as needlesse and so condemnes the wisedome of God in propounding it to be beleeued A. D. §. 3. And this not without reason for not to beleeue any one point whatsoeuer which God by reuealing it doth testifie to bee true and which by his Church he hath commaunded vs to beleeue must needs be damnable as being a notable iniurie to Gods veritie and a great disobedience to his will But all points of faith are thus testified by God and commaunded to be beleeued otherwise they be not points of faith but of opinion or some other kinde of knowledge Therefore all points of faith must vnder paine of damnation be beleeued beleeued I say eyther expresly and actually as learned men may doe or implicite and virtually as vnlearned Catholicks commonly doe who beleeuing expresly those articles which euerie one is bound particularly to know doe not in the rest obstinately doubt or hold some errour against the Church but haue a minde prepared to submit themselues in all things to the authoritie of the Church which they are sure is taught and directed by the spirit of God and doe in generall hold for vndoubted truth whatsoeuer the Catholicke or vniuersall Church doth beleeue A. W. Now followeth the second proofe of your assumption in this manner Euerie notable iniurie to Gods veritie and disobedience to his will is damnable But misbeleeuing or absolutely not beleeuing any one point reuealed by God and propounded by his Church to be beleeued is a notable iniurie to Gods veritie and a great disobedience to his will Therefore misbeleeuing or obstinately not beleeuing any one point reuealed by God and propounded by his Church to be beleeued is damnable To let passe this craftie conueyance whereby you still shuffle in the Church whereas without it the matter is as true and the proposition as perfect I answer to your assumption that all misbeleeuing or obstinately not beleeuing is not a notable iniurie to Gods truth nor a great disobedience to his will where it proceeds simply of ignorance and not of wilfulnesse except in such cases as I shewed in the end of the last section which I speake not to excuse any man as if he did not sinne in misbeleeuing or as if there were some sinne not deadly according to your erroneous conceit but onely to distinguish notable iniuries and great disobedience from some kinde of misbeleeuing The conclusion is thus to be conceiued That misbeleeuing is in it selfe damnable not that no man can be saued which misbeleeueth This distinction of beleeuing expresly and implicitly as you terme it confirmes part of that which I haue hitherto said for by your confession there are some points to the beleefe whereof a general faith will not serue the turne but a man must know the particulars and assent actually to the truth of them For example it is not enough for a man to beleeue in grosse that he must be saued by such meanes onely as God hath reuealed and the Church hath propounded to be beleeued but it is absolutely necessarie to saluation that he know what the Church holdeth in this case concerning redemption by our Sauiour Christ and in his heart acknowledge the truth thereof Againe there are many other points which so a man neglect not the meanes to know them may be vnknowne and beleeued onely in generall without danger of damnation by reason of such ignorance Now this generall beleefe is not as you falsely say to be folded vp in the faith of the Church but to be tied to the Scripture all things wherein I acknowledge to be most true and beleeue all points whatsoeuer as they are eyther expressed or contained in Scripture howsoeuer I be ignorant what is true touching perhaps very many particulars To the authoritie of the Church I willingly submit my selfe thus farre as that I hold it a sinfull presumption for me or any man eyther to compare my priuate opinion with the generall iudgement of other Christians especially Ministers or to condemne or suspect that of falshood which they deliuer vnlesse I haue apparent proofe for the one and great likelihood for the other In which cases I set not my owne conceit against the doctrine of the Church but preferre the truth of God before the opinions of men As for any infallible authoritie in the Church vpon supposall of such a certaine direction by the spirit of God I hold it neither for true nor probable as shall appeare hereafter In the meane while I desire the Reader to consider these few testimonies cōcerning the authority of men Other writers saith Austin I reade with this prouiso that be their learning or holinesse neuer so great I will not thinke a matter true because they haue thought so but because they haue bene able to perswade me eyther by other Canonicall writers or by some likely reason In an other place We may not consent to Bishops though they be Catholicke if at any time they be deceiued so that they iudge contrarie to the Canonicall Scripture of God Of necessitie saith Origen must we call for the testimonie of the Scriptures for our senses and declarations without them as witnesses haue no credit And this charge Basil layeth vpon vs that when we heare we examine
therein What art what writing of any man is so bare Are the Scriptures onely that come immediatly from the author of true reason to be barred of that priuiledge which all other writings iustly challenge Is not a necessary consequence according to the rules of logicke and reason to be allowed of in Diuinitie as well as in the Mathematicks where consectaries are as certainly true as the theoremes out of which they are drawne Is it not as certaine by Scripture that there are three persons distinct each from other and all three but one God as if these verie words had bin expresly set downe But we must beare with you in this matter who learned this shift of your great Cardinal Bellarmine We say quoth Bellarmine where he deliuereth the opinion of your Church that the whole doctrine of faith and manners is not expresly contained in the Scriptures Expresly contained To be expressed and to be contained are at the least diuers if not contrary But I pray you who saith otherwise Not the Protestants doubtlesse whose opinion he propoundeth presently after this sort They preach saith Bellarmine speaking of vs that all things necessary to faith and manners are contained in the Scriptures What is become now of expresly For pure shame he was glad to leaue out that word though he had craftily stolen it in before Well this may serue to make good my deniall of your proposition A thing may be determinable by Scripture though the determination be not expresly set downe therein Take not aduantage of my words because I say determinable and you determined For the question is not what is determined that is set downe in plaine words but it is sufficient if the Scripture affoord vs the determination of matters by certain consequēce vpon truth therein deliuered Therefore whereas you adde by onely expresse Scripture onely and expresse are but meere shifts nothing at all against that we affirme who require besides onely expresse words of Scripture the ministery and industry of man to gather and conclude points of doctrine out of that which is written in the Scripture Your assumption is true that there are diuers questions not determinable by expresse Scripture and yet as I haue shewed the Scripture is sufficient for the determining of all points of faith necessary to saluation Concerning the particular question you bring for the proofe of your assumption First you seeme to grant and that grant is as much as we require that it may be gathered out of the Scripture by consequence that those books which we and you acknowledge to be the word of God are so indeed otherwise why say you that we shall not find it expresly set downe in a part of Scripture Secondly I demaund as before who moueth this question Not the Protestants who account it a kind of blasphemie to denie it and of infidelitie to doubt of it Your holy Church of Rome is she that hath buzzed this matter into Christian mens eares so that religion is thereby become a scorne to Atheists while you make no conscience of discrediting the word of God so you may by any meanes increase the reputation of your Apostaticall sea The truth is that this opinion is not a matter now a dayes first set abroach for Atheists such as Iulian haue from time to time obiected it therefore might you haue spared to mention it as a question now a dayes moued But it is new and strange yea almost incredible that Christians and those Diuines yea such as thinke religion resteth on their shoulders as the Poets faine heauen doth vpon Atlas should make a question whether the Scriptures be the word of God or no and so giue men occasion to doubt thereof Thirdly if this matter cannot be resolued of by the Scripture we shall be little the nearer for the infallible authoritie you haue deuised Christians need it not who are already perswaded that the bookes of the old and new Testament are the vndoubted word of God and with Christians onely to speake truly and properly hath the Church to do ordinarily But it falleth out sometimes that amongst those which make profession of Christianitie there are some found who are in doubt of this point If this doubt arise in the heart of a man that maketh conscience of religion he is to be taught that it is but a tentation of Satan and therefore not to be hearkened to Further we must demaund the reasons of his doubting shewing him how absurd and vnreasonable a matter it is to make question of that which generally both Protestants and Papists hold and which hath bene held by the space of 1500. yeares vnlesse he be able to giue very sufficient cause why he may doubt His arguments if he bring any must be answered and the Scriptures auowed by the matter and manner of writing which is such as will certainly if not conuert yet conuince any man in the world that man is not the deuiser of those bookes If he be an Atheist that derideth religion and withall so vnreasonable that the former and many other important proofes will not perswade him what remaines but that the magistrate whom God hath appointed to see true religion established cut off so corrupt a member by lawfull authoritie Where this course is not taken what meanes haue you to helpe the matter Will you tell him of an infallible authoritie in the Church He will laugh at your folly who instead of prouing beg the question I doe not beleeue saith he there is any such Church or authoritie If I doubt of the Scripture you proue it by the Church if I beleeue there is not any such Church or authoritie in the Church you will perswade me by Scripture To say the truth who can be so patient or foolish rather as to suffer himselfe to be led vp downe in a ring as it were a doore turning vpon hinges still in the same place The authoritie of the Church is an argument of such waight as that he is not to be counted either a Christiā or a man of reason that is not much moued therewithall yea so much as that he will not dissent from the continuall iudgement of it vnlesse he be driuen to it by certaine reason but yet this authoritie is not infallible Christ euermore iudgeth truly saith Austin but the Ecclesiasticall iudges as being men are very often deceiued And therefore he saith in another place that he is not bound to giue his consent without libertie to refuse to any thing but the Canonicall Scriptures And in an Epistle to Ierome I haue learned saith he to giue this reuerence and honour onely to those bookes that are called Canonicall that I constantly beleeue that no writer of any of them hath erred But to make an end of this needlesse question where both sides are agreed let vs heare Saint Austin speake to the Manichees If you aske vs saith he how we know that these
intēded by the holy Ghost at the least in many places it cannot be the Apostles meaning that no man knoweth the sense of our Lord in the Scripture But the more you mistake the sense of the holy Ghost in Scripture the better you proue your opinion that no naturall wit or learning can bring a man to the vnderstanding thereof onely you must take heed of ouerweening your owne wit and learning and so of erring by drawing a generall conclusion against all men from your owne defect which also perhaps is not so much for want of wit or learning as for lacke of paines taking and because of a preiudicate conceit against the truth A. D. §. 4. Hence I inferre that those who for matters of faith relie wholy either vpon their owne priuate opinion or iudgement of the sense and meaning of Scripture or vpon the learning and iudgement of others who are but men not infallibly assisted by the holy Ghost nor by him vnfallibly preserued from errour as many or rather all Protestants do those I say cannot haue diuine and Christian faith but onely fallible opinion and humane faith As before I granted your conclusion that naturall wit and learning cannot be the rule of faith so I now acknowledge the truth of your illation which you bring in thereupon that he which relieth wholly vpon his owne priuate opinion or any other mans iudgement can haue no true faith Yet must I again remember that to rely vpon such opinion or iudgement is to take that for truth which is taught barely vpon the credit of the teacher For otherwise a man may haue a true faith that is a certain and infallible assent to the truth though he beleeue vpon euident reason those points interpretations which are proued to him by men without any infallible authoritie of the Church But whereas you charge many or rather all Protestants to rely so vpon the iudgement of men I hope you do it without the authoritie of your Church that cannot erre for I am sure you do it without any shew of truth No Protestant of any discretion not onely not all beleeueth the doctrine of the Gospell in generall or any one particular interpretation as a matter of faith vpon any mans credit whatsoeuer This reuerence indeed we giue to our teachers that we rather trust their iudgement then our owne and dare not dissent from them but where we haue great likelihood of reason at least to the contrary Howsoeuer we ground no point of faith vpon any interpretation which is not plaine and euident to any man that will take paines to examine it according to true reason A. D. CHAP. IX That a priuate spirit cannot be the rule of faith A. W. A man may easily perceiue that you chuse to say any thing rather then nothing and therefore you make your selfe worke Chapter after Chapter I shall not need to repeate that which I haue noted before this Chapter giueth sufficient euidence of that I say What a strange kind of speech is this that a priuate spirit is the rule of faith No spirit neither priuate nor publick is ordinarily the rule of faith no not the most holy spirit of God but onely as he speaketh in the Scripture who alwayes teacheth one and the same truth publickly and priuately A. D. §. 1. The third conclusion is that no priuate man who perswadeth himselfe to be singularly instructed by the spirit can be this rule of faith especially so farre forth as he beleeueth or teacheth contrary to the receiued doctrine of the Catholicke Church A. W. This is the interpretation of the title of your Chapter No priuate spirit that is no priuate man who perswadeth himselfe to be singularly instructed by the spirit c. I cannot tel whether I shold thinke you haue forgotten to speake English or purposely affect as strange doctrine so strange speech also To be singularly instructed with vs plaine Englishmen is to be taught in rare and excellent sort not to be apart or seuerally alone instructed which is your meaning I grant mens priuat opinions are called singular and the men themselues that haue such conceits are also so termed but he that professeth plainnesse to teach all kind of men should labour to speake so that all might vnderstand him But to the matter Whose opinion is it that any such man as you conceit or any man at all can be the rule of faith Sure not ours who as it hath often bene said giue this honour only to the word of God If any man hold that opinion vnlesse perhaps the senslesse Anabaptists with whom we haue nothing to do you are they who as it seemeth by the exception you adde grant that with limitation a man may be the rule of faith For you say he cannot be the rule of faith especially so farre forth as he beleeueth or teacheth contrary to the receiued doctrine of the Catholicke Church Do you not imply in this speech that so farre forth as he agreeth with the doctrine of the Catholick Church he may be the rule of faith But I obserue one rare thing in your course of disputing that you ordinarily propound your matter in such sort that you are faine presently after to make one exception or other Scripture alone say you cannot be the rule of faith is this all you meane No a limitation followeth Especially as it is translated by Protestants into English No naturall wit or learning can be the rule of faith What by no meanes except they be infallibly assisted by the holy spirit of God In this Chapter we haue the like course held by you But leaue we this and be take our selues to consider your proofe A. D. §. 2. This I proue first because Saint Paul saith Si quis vobis euangelizauerit praeter id quod accepistis Anathemasit pronouncing generally that whosoeuer teacheth or preacheth contrary to the receiued doctrine of the Catholicke Church should be held Anathematized or accursed A. W. Your reason is thus to be framed He that must be accursed for his teaching cannot be the rule of faith But a priuate spirit that teacheth contrary to the receiued doctrine of the Catholicke Church must be accursed for his teaching Therefore a priuate spirit that teacheth contrary to the receiued doctrine of the Catholicke Church cannot be the rule of faith First I desire all men to obserue that this argument of yours doth not proue that a priuate spirit cannot be the rule of faith but onely so farre forth as he doth disagree from the doctrine of the Church otherwise for all this reason he may be Wherein you speake absurdly and falsly Absurdly in propounding such a question to refute as neither we whom you professe to refute nor any reasonable man would euer once imagne viz. that a priuate spirit teaching an vntruth might be the rule of faith For how can that be but an vntruth which is contrary to that the Apostle deliuered by his preaching
are professedly against him Fourthly it may be that by the Church our Sauiour vnderstandeth according to the custome of the Iewes in those daies not any assemblie of the Cleargie about Church causes but generally the Councell of the Elders which had power to end diuers matters betwixt parties of their owne nation After which example the Apostle willeth the Corinthians to appoint Iudges amongst themselues that they might not dishonor God the professiō of christianity by going to law one with another vnder infidels If this course take not effect then saith our Sauiour deale with him as thou wouldest mightst deale with an heathen or Publican by following the Law against him in what Court thou thinkest best for thy aduantage And this exposition as farre as I can yet see seemeth agreeable to the text it selfe the purpose of our Sauiour who seemeth to speake onely or especially of priuat abuses and quarrels as might be shewed by diuers reasons and in part hath bene by a learned writer to whom I referre the Reader in this point Fiftly it is more then manifest that our Sauiour speaketh not of hearing or not hearing the word but of some quarell or sinfull action at the most which also is to be determined or corrected in each seuerall congregatiō as the testimonies of Chrysostome Theophylact Iansenius and Bellarmine declare Tell the Church not the vniuersall Church spread ouer the face of the earth but that particular Church in which euery man liueth and to which he is subiect saith Lucas of Bruges There is a treatise that goes vnder Cyprians name wherein the author out of this place concludeth that euery man must seeke to his owne Bishop All these things considered let euery one iudge whether this peece of scripture be fitly applied by you to proue that we must beleeue without doubting whatsoeuer the Church deliuereth But I wil propound the reason that all men may vnderstand and consider it If he that being proceeded withall first by admonition of one man alone then by the like with one or two witnesses lastly by the gouerners of the Church concerning some quarrell or matter of fact will not obey the voyce of the Church must be to vs as an heathen or a Publican then whosoeuer wil not beleeue whatsoeuer the Church teacheth is greatly threatned in the Scripture But he that being so proceeded against in such a matter will not obey is so to be accounted of Therefore he that will not beleeue whatsoeuer the Church teacheth is greatly threatned in the Scripture I haue framed this Syllogisme as euery man may see with the greatest aduantage that can reasonably be taken by this place to your purpose whereas I needed not haue allowed the interpretation on which the reason is grounded Al which notwithstanding who discerneth not the weaknesse of the consequence in the proposition What if such a man be so to be accounted of doth it follow therupon that euery one who beleeueth not the Church in all points is threatned First vnlesse the same course of proceeding be held why should the partie be threatned because where such a course is taken there a man is to be so reckoned of Secondly how doth it follow that if in iudgement concerning a matter of fact the Church must be hearkned to for reformation then in all matters whatsoeuer it is absolutely to be heard by all men Such are your proofes in points of greatest importance I refer the Reader to that which I answered before concerning this place to which I adde vpon the present occasion that our Sauiour sending forth his Ministers to preach the Gospell chargeth them to square their doctrine according to those things which they had receiued in commission from him therfore are they no farther to be obeyed then their preaching is warrantable for the particulars out of our Sauiours instructions giuen them which the Apostles directed by Gods spirit truly and faithfully deliuered first by word of mouth and after by writing to be the pillar as Irenaeus saith and foundation of our faith And if this place conuey any such authoritie to the Church it giueth the same to euery seuerall teacher as it did to euery one of the Apostles seuerally and so euery priest secular or regular must be heard and beleeued whatsoeuer he teach A. D. §. 9. Thus you see our Sauiour Christ hath promised to his Church the continuall presence of himselfe and of his holy Spirit to teach that companie all truth Whereof followeth that it is infallibly taught all truth Moreouer he hath giuen charge and commission to that Church to teach vs and hath warranted and commaunded vs in all points to heare and do according to the saying of this Church which proueth that it appertaineth to this church to instruct vs in all points of faith and that we ought to learne of it in all matters of religion what is the infallible truth and consequently that the doctrine of this Church is the rule of faith A. W. Neither we nor you can see any such thing if we looke no farther then the holy Ghost directeth vs who assureth vs of no more but that the Apostles should be so instructed and guided that they should not erre in their teaching either by word of mouth or by writing by reason of ignorance or any other peruerse affection and that all the childrē of God shall be so taught and protected that they shall neuer fall away from saluation by Christ As for your Church or certaine companie that is your Cleargie and Pope assembled in a generall Councell neither those places of Scripture you haue brought nor any other you can bring once make mention of any such promise to them Therefore haue we no warrant to heare and doe in all points according to the saying of any Church not onely not of yours but so far as that Church teacheth according to the doctrine of our Sauiour Christ in the Scripture which is the rule of faith A. D. §. 10. Worthily therefore doth S. Paul call this Church columnam firmamentū veritatis the pillar and ground of truth Worthily also saith S. Austin Scripturarum à nobis tenetur veritas cum id facimus quod vniuersae placet Ecclesiae quam earundem Scripturarum commendat authoritas vt quoniam Scriptura sancta fallere non potest quisquis falli metuit huius obscuritate quaestionis Ecclesiam de illa consulat quam sine vlla ambiguitate Scriptura sancta demonstrat The truth of the Scriptures is holden of vs when we do that which pleaseth the vniuersall or whole Church the which is commended by the authoritie of the Scriptures themselues that because the holy Scripture cannot deceiue whosoeuer feareth to be deceiued with the obscuritie of this question let him require the iudgement of the Church which without any ambiguitie the holy Scripture doth demonstrate by which words he sheweth plainly that the sentence of
maintained The Philosophers indeed as Thomas saith had a kind of notion of some points thereof but they had no certaintie as well because they were corrupted with errors as for that very few of them are found to haue agreed in the same truth But in the Church is certaine knowledge and truth Which as Caietan saith is vpheld aloft in it because it is auowed reuerenced and honored aboue all things and it is so founded in the Church that out of it it is not to be found This is the reason as they truly say why the Church is called a pillar Thomas addeth that it is termed the ground in respect of others because men cannot be confirmed in the truth but by the sacraments of the Church This testimonie of Austine is alledged by you otherwise then it was written by him For whereas he spake of that which had then alreadie bene resolued of by the whole Church you make him speake indefinitely of any thing that pleaseth the Church turning iam placuit into placet But we must vnderstand that he writing in that place concerning the rebaptizing of heretickes which question had bene agreed vpon as he saith in the former chapter before the hatching of Donatus heresie saith that the iudgement of the Church in that case is to be held as agreeable to the Scripture This might the Reader haue seene in his words if you had not changed the tense in placet and left out etiam in hac re in the beginning of the sentence The truth of the Scriptures saith Austin is held by vs euen in this thing If you reply farther that the reason which Austin vseth is generall for all questions whatsoeuer namely the authoritie of the Church commended by the Scriptures which cannot erre I answer you first that we haue seene Austins iudgement directly to the contrary viz. that whatsoeuer is of necessitie to saluation is plainly deliuered in the Scriptures and that the authoritie of men without Scripture is insufficient to propound any doctrine as a matter of faith and therefore if he should write otherwise in this place we might with good reason make question of his authoritie Secondly I answer that Austine speaketh here of those points onely which are not determinable by Scripture such as he taketh the question of rebaptizing heretickes to be as it appeareth in the words immediatly before those you alledge being also a peece of the sentence by you omitted Although saith Austin there be no example to be brought out of the Scriptures concerning this matter yet the truth of the same Scriptures is euen in this matter also held by vs when we do that which hath now alreadie pleased the whole Church c. Now in such cases as cannot by Scripture be decided who would or may be so presumptuous as to withstand or mislike the practise of the church in all places Surely the authoritie of the church is so far commended in the Scriptures that it ought in all things of such nature to ouerweigh our iudgement and incline our affection to the liking of that which is agreed on by so generall a consent of so many churches in all nations Therefore that which you gather out of Austins words of following the iudgement of the church in an obscure question is to be restrained to such questions as cannot be determined by the Scriptures and those are few or none of any importance of necessitie to saluation none at all or else your consequence will be nothing worth Austin saith that in questions not determinable by Scripture we must follow the iudgement of the church Therefore we must follow it in all obscure questions whatsoeuer Austins foundation will not beare your building Is it a good reason to say In cases not prouided for by law custome must beare sway therfore it must be followed in all cases So and so weakly do you dispute It is not enough for you to teach vs new diuinitie but you will driue vs to learne new Latin too Caesar could make men free of Rome but not words Credere Ecclesiam Catholicam to beleeue the Catholicke Church in ordinary Latin is to beleeue that there is a Catholicke Church Credo esse I beleeue there is but you would make the ignorant beleeue that credo Ecclesiam and credo Ecclesiae is all one For how else can this sentence reasonably depend vpon the former We must follow the iudgement of the Church Therfore worthily also do we all say Credo Ecclesiam Catholicam What can you meane by this but I beleeue that is I giue credit to the Catholick Church that is I beleeue that to be true which the Catholicke Church teacheth But the article of the Creed hath no such sense as it may appeare by the other that follow all being alike in respect of our beleefe I beleeue the communion of Saints the forgiuenesse of sinnes the resurrection of the bodie and life euerlasting To which of these foure dowe giue any such credit But we beleeue that there is a Church of Christ to which all these priuiledges belong He that translated Epiphanius into Latin more curiously then truly made a difference betwixt beleeuing the church and the other articles We beleeue saith he one holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church we confesse one baptisme for the forgiuenesse of sinnes and looke for the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come But the Greeke which Epiph. reciteth out of the Nicene creed is alike in all the articles in the Church in the baptisme of repentance in the resurrection of the dead And Paschasius doubteth not to say that the ignorance of some drew the preposition in from the former sentence concerning beleefe in the holy Ghost into the article of the church yet as he sheweth credere Deum in Deum greatly differ That there is a God the Apostle saith the diuel beleeueth but no mā is held to beleeue in God but he that religiously puts his trust in him Cyril also reciteth the articles after the same manner without any difference in the particulars yet with In to euerie one of them and in that sense in which we take them Ruffin as Paschasius before denieth that the Creed saith In the holy Church in the forgiuenesse of sinnes in the resurrection of the flesh Because that were to equall our beleefe of these points with our beleeuing in the Father the Son and the holy Ghost But of these articles we are to beleeue that they are true that there is a Church gathered vnto God that there is a remission of sinnes that there is a resurrection of the flesh So doth Austin if those Sermons be his read and vnderstand it I beleeue the Catholicke Church c. We must beleeue that God will vouchsafe the resurrection of bodies and the forgiuenesse of sinnes And whereas in an other Sermon he saith in the Church so doth he
well make an end of answering to this treatise because I haue ouerthrowne the maine strength of your discourse and discouered to all men that will not be wilfully blind the weaknesse of your reason but for the better satisfaction of the vnlearned I will follow you from Chapter to Chapter that the truth may the more easily be discerned A. D. CHAP. XI That the Church whose doctrine must be to vs the rule of faith must alwayes continue without interruption from Christ his time till the worlds end A. W. That there alwayes hath bene since the beginning of the world excepting perhaps the time betwixt the fall of our first parents and their faith in the Messiah that there is and alwaies shal be a Church viz. certaine men that are predestinate to life and actually beleeue in Iesus Christ it neuer came into any of our minds to be doubted of that there should be such a companie as you conceipt all the Papists in the world cannot proue A. D. §. 1. Considering what hath bene proued in the former Chapter about the infallible authoritie of the doctrine of the true Church I hope no Christian will deny but that so long as this Church doth continue we haue of it a sure pillar and a firme foundation whereupon we may safely build our beleef For either a man must deny that euer our Sauiour did make any such promise gaue such charge and commission left any such warrant set forth such a commaundement or thundred out any such threats as before is rehearsed which were to denie the Scriptures which scriptures are generally receiued by all Christians no otherwise then as they are the vndoubted word of God or else he must wrest the interpretation thereof both from that which the words of themselues naturally yeeld and also from the common sense and vnderstanding either of all or the most learned and almost of the vnlearned also of the whole Christian world or else he shall be forced to confesse that which not I but Saint Paul hath said Ecclesia est columna firmamentum veritatis the Church is the pillar and ground of truth Onely it may perchance seeme to some of those that doe at this day oppose themselues against the authority of the Church that this was true for Saint Pauls time and perhaps for some three foure fiue or six hundred yeares after but not to be presumed vpon in latter times and namely when Luther began his reformation as they tearme it or now adaies A. W. Considering how weake your proofes haue bene as in the former Chapters so namely in the last about the infallible authoritie of the doctrine of the true Church I hope there is no reasonable man not only no Christian that will build his faith and saluation vpon so tottering a pillar and so slipperie a foundation But because you seeme to dote so much vpon your last Chapter I wil once againe be content to examine the substance of it as it is here repeated by you with some litle alteration Either we must denie that our Sauiour hath so promised charged warranted threatned or we must falsely interprete the scriptures or else we must grant that the authoritie of the Church is a sure pillar and firme foundation whereupon we may safely build our faith But we neither may denie that our Sauiour hath so promised charged warranted commaunded threatned neither may we falsely interpret the Scriptures Therefore we must grant that the authoritie of the Church is a sure pillar and firme foundation whereupon we may safely build our beleefe First in general for your whole syllogisme if the cōclusion you intend were no other thē that you pretēd propoūd that the Church is the pillar groūd of truth as S. Paul saith there would be no question in this matter betwixt vs. For we haue learned to acknowledge the truth of all and euerie part of the scripture But the beginning of this Chapter sheweth that you meane by the Churches being the pillar and ground of truth that we may safely build our beleefe vpon the Churches authority which as I prooued in my answer to that Chapter is no part of the Apostles meaning In this sense must we take your conclusion Secondly in particular I denie your Maior because your disiunction is naught presuming a necessitie where there is none For neither we need to denie that our Sauiour hath so promised charged warranted commanded threatned neither is there any cause why we should falsely interprete the Scriptures and yet we haue no reason to grant that our faith may safely be built vpon the authoritie of the Church No such thing as I haue shewed can follow vpon the words of scripture alledged by you Therefore we need not denie the promises charge warrant commandement or threatning of our Sauiour or else grant the Church such an vnlimited authority Neither will the true sense of those Scriptures either enforce or beare any such illation or conclusion touching the infallible authoritie of the Church And whereas you thinke to face out the matter with naming the common sense and vnderstanding either of all or the most learned and almost of the vnlearned also of the whole Christian world my answer propounding the iudgement of many excellently learned and ancient writers of those places prooueth that to be but a vaine popish brag without all likelihood of truth especially since you that spare not to heape vp testimonies of Fathers when they are needlesse and to quote their bookes and chapters sometimes for a bare phrase alledge not so much as the name of any one author for the proofe of your interpretation of twelue seuerall places of scripture Your proffered seruice in helping vs with this distinction hath more shew of kindnesse then good meaning For it is not brought in to confirme our answer but to giue your selfe occasion of vttering that which you are taught to vrge for proofe of this question But we neither need your aide and haue good cause to suspect your fauours In a word your distinction is such as none of vs euer brought or would bring to answer those places of scripture We confesse that whatsoeuer was promised to the Church in those texts was promised for continuance to the end of the world but we say that the first promise was not concerning the Churches not erring the three last are particular to the Apostles at least for such a measure of teaching But what should I repeat that which was deliuered in the verie last Chapter The thing you harpe vpon though vntunably is that your Romish church or rather the Church of the East West were indeed the pillar and ground of truth for the space of some 600. yeares after Christ but afterwards fell away from that soundnesse of doctrine which before it had cleaued vnto Such a matter there is acknowledged by our Diuines yet no man saith either that the Church erred not in any point during that
of the Church so that we cannot see it vnlesse she open her mouth and deliuer it to vs nor certainely know it to be true but by giuing credit to her testimonie of it is not a good marke to know the true Church by But true doctrine is so shut vp in the belly of the Church that we cannot see it vnlesse she open her mouth and deliuer it to vs nor certainly know it to be true but by giuing credit to her testimonie of it Therefore true doctrine is no good marke to know the true Church by Your Minor is false in both parts of it First it is vntrue that true doctrine is so shut vp in the belly of the Church yea many a true Church may hold some errors and many an hereticall Church some truth onely the fundamentall points are necessarie to the being of a true Church Secondly though true doctrine be in the belly of the Church as indeed there is no true Church in which it is not yet is it not so shut vp in it as you imagine For it is first and principally in the Scriptures where it may be found without any such authoritie of the Church as you dreame of yea I haue shewed that the Apostles themselues did not beget faith in the hearts of them to whom they preached by any authoritie of the Church but by euidence of the truth it selfe which they taught Concerning your proofe from Austins authoritie I first answer that he expoundeth not that place according to the literal meaning of the Prophet who speaketh not of any belly of the Church but saith that those lewd men of whom he speaketh haue alwaies bene giuen to naughtinesse from their mothers wombe These wicked ones saith Vatablus haue gone astray euer since they came forth of the womb they they haue erred euer since they were borne Yea Austin himselfe as your Glosse saith sometimes expoundeth it otherwise then here God saith Austin foreknew sinners euen from the wombe as he said to Rebecca So doth Ierome also vnderstand it so Theodoret. But let vs take it as Saint Austin doth here mystically expound it what will you prooue by it That truth is so shut vp in the belly of the Church that we cannot see it vnlesse she deliuer it by her mouth There is no such word in him no such thing to be gathered out of him His conclusion is that therefore they which differ from the true Church in doctrine are in error which is certainly true concerning fundamentall points and verie probable in all other points whatsoeuer The other part of your Minor is that true doctrine is so shut vp within the Church that we cannot certainly know it to be true but by giuing credit to her testimonie of it For the disproouing whereof it shall be sufficient to call to minde that which I haue often answered concerning those who beleeued by the Apostles ministerie without any consideration or thought of their being sent by the true Church but onely being conuinced by the manifest truth of that which they deliuered concerning forgiuenesse of sinne by our Sauiour Iesus Christ Your proofe out of Austin is insufficient as it may appeare in this sort If Austin say that he should not beleeue the Gospell vnlesse he were mooued by the authoritie of the Church then true doctrine is so shut vp within the Church that we cannot certainly know it to be true but by giuing credit to her testimonie of it But Austin saith so Therefore true doctrine is so shut vp in the Church that we cannot certainly know it to be true but by giuing credit to her testimonie of it I denie the consequence of your Maior First because as Austin himselfe saith of Cyprian we are not bound by the authoritie of Austins iudgement as if his writings were Canonicall We do Cyprian no wrong saith Austin when we distinguish his writings whatsoeuer they be from the Canonicall authoritie of the diuine Scriptures And againe I take not Cyprians writings for Canonicall but consider of them according to the Canonicall and allow of that with his commendation which agreeth to Scripture but by his leaue refuse that which disagreeth from Scripture This minde carried Austin to other mens writings this minde he desired other men should carrie to his Secondly I denie the same consequence because Austin might be mooued by the authoritie of the Church to acknowledge the Gospell for true and yet without the same authoritie learne out of the Gospell so acknowledged which is true doctrine which false Concerning Austins testimonie first it is manifest that he deliuereth not a rule for all men to follow as if by should not beleeue he meant that a man ought not to beleeue the Gospell nor sheweth an impossibilitie of beleeuing it vnlesse a man be moued by the authoritie of the Church but at the most declareth that the authoritie of the Church preuailed with him so farre as to make him acknowledge the Gospell for true which else he had either not knowne or doubted of Secondly it is obserued according to the rest of his writings that the Latine word he vseth in the African dialect signifieth Had not beleeued so that the sense is I had not beleeued the Gospell as the truth of God if the authoritie of the Church had not moued me thereunto The first motiue was the authoritie that is the learning consent holinesse of so many worthie men as from time to time had held and did hold the Gospell to be the truth of God Vpon this ground Austin gaue himselfe to the studie of the Scriptures and by the euidence of truth deliuered in it discerned that it was the word of God according to the report and reputation commonly held of it This sense agreeth with Austins purpose who to refute the Manichees that tooke their master Manes for the Apostle of Christ thus reasoneth against them I beleeue not saith Austin that he is Christs Apostle and then demaundeth of the Manichee what course he would take to prooue it to him Perhaps saith he you will read the Gospell to me and assay to prooue Manichaeus person out of it But what if you should light vpon one that doth not yet beleeue the Gospell Then follow the words alledged by you I truly had not beleeued the Gospell if the authoritie of the Church had not moued me This is yet more cleare by that which Austin writeth afterward First saith he we beleeue that which yet we cannot discerne that being made stronger in faith we may attaine to the vnderstanding of that we do beleeue not men now but God himselfe confirming enlightening our minde within But howsoeuer we vnderstand it Austin speaketh not of true doctrine shut vp in the Church so that it cannot be knowne to be true but by giuing credit to the Churches testimonie which is the point in question but onely of acknowledging the Gospell to be the word
of God Now the same Church or partie which assureth vs that the Gospell is true may notwithstanding erre in the meaning of some points in it and a man may discerne these errours by the light which shineth in the Scriptures thus acknowledged First it is here confessed by your selfe that Austins speach is not of all fundamentall points of true doctrine but onely as I said of knowing the Scripture to be the word of God for so onely you reason out of it and thereby shew plainly to all that will see that it cannot prooue the matter for which you brought it Secondly you proceed farther to prooue the point by an other reason but faultie like the former If say you without the testimonie of the Church we could not haue bene infallibly sure that there is any Gospell at all nor haue knowne that the Gospels of Matthew Marke Luke and Iohn are true Canonicall Scripture rather then those of Nicodemus and Saint Thomas then we cannot know true doctrine to be true but by giuing credit to the Churches testimonie of it But we could not haue knowne those things without the testimonie of the Church Therefore we cannot know true doctrine to be true but by giuing credit to the Churches testimonie of it A man that is so full of his compound syllogismes as you are might learne to make better consequences in his Maior then you commonly bring vs. Let vs grant you that we could not know that there is any Gospell or which is the Gospell without the testimonie of the Church All that will follow thereupon is this that we cannot know these two points of doctrine to be true without giuing credit to the testimonie of the Church Yea if I were disposed to trouble you I would yet farther denie your said consequence because though we cannot know these matters without the Churches testimonie yet we might know them without resting vpon the Churches authoritie For the testimonie of the Church may be had by the ministerie thereof without any such absolute authoritie of enioyning beleefe or giuing credit to that she affirmeth as an vndoubted truth This Minor as the former in this chapter consisteth of two parts and is false in both of them as I will shew particularly First you say that without the testimonie of the Church we could not haue bene infallibly sure that there is any Gospell Your meaning is that we could not haue knowne this certainely but by giuing credit to the report of the Church as a certaine truth First for the doctrine of the Gospell to saluation it hath bene had and may be had without any testimonie of the Church at all taking the testimonie of the Church as you do for the preaching of men publickly authorised to this dutie by a companie of men so qualified as you before describe your Church I shall need no better proofe then to put you in minde againe of those nations many and great who attained to faith and saluation by the teaching of the Apostles seuerally without any such argument of the Churches absolute authority Secondly taking the Gospell for the 4. bookes of the Euangelists I answer that there may be true faith true Churches without the knowledge of those bookes yea without the verie being of them as it is manifest by the former example many thousands being conuerted and many Churches setled without the knowledge and before the publishing or penning of them But to come to the verie point I answer further that it is a grosse absurditie to make men beleeue that there can be no certaine knowledge had that there is any Gospell but by giuing credit to the Church whereas no man can know that there is any such authoritie in the Church or any Church at all but by the authoritie of the Scripture It is more then ridiculous for me to beleeue that there is a companie of men infallibly taught of God which is the truth with authority to enioyne obedience to all men in whatsoeuer they will teach if I haue no better proofe of it then their owne word For since God hath indued man with reason it is both simplenesse and sinne for him to beleeue that which is vtterly against the light of reason if he haue no warrant from God so to do But warrant he can haue none to beleeue such a conceit of any company but from the scriptures as it is euident by your own course who make a place of scripture the ground of your whole disputation Therefore whereas you teach men first to know the Church and then by the Church the Scriptures we say this course is vtterly vnwarrantable hauing no foundation either in reason or reuelation Yea contrariwise we truly affirme that the Scripture must first be knowne at the least in that point of the authoritie of the Church and then the Church by the Scripture And this is Austins iudgement directly Let vs not heare saith he this I say this you say but let vs heare this saith the Lord. There are the Lords bookes to the authoritie of which both of vs consent both of vs giue credit both of vs yeeld obedience there let vs seek the Church there let vs discusse our question And afterward I will not haue the Church to be shewed by mens doctrines but by the Oracles of God And againe Let vs seeke the Church in the Canonicall Scriptures The like speeches are euerie where in that booke Whether we be schismaticks or you saith the same Austin let neither you nor me but Christ be asked that he may shew vs his Church But where shall we know what our Sauiour saith concerning his Church and how he would haue it knowne but in the Scriptures Yet I denie not that the ministerie of men is necessarie to giue notice that there are certaine bookes in which it hath pleased God to reueale the meanes of saluation to mankinde though I acknowledge not any authority in the Church whereby men should be bound to beleeue this their report when as yet they are ignorant that there is any such Church You will say then what shall we doe or how shall we know that there is any Gospell If you will giue me leaue I will shew you what course is to be takē When you vnderstand that there hath bin and is still an opinion that there are certaine bookes written by Gods authoritie and appointment to teach men the way to saluation do as any reasonable man would do in a matter of such importance Get the bookes reade and studie them with a true desire to see whether they be such as they are reported to be or no. And because thou knowest by nature that there is a God and that he onely is all-sufficient to discouer the truth of his owne purpose touching the estate of his creature call vpon him though in ignorance and weaknesse that it would please him to direct thee in this enquiry after the means of thy saluation
or happinesse This done thou shalt be sure to find by the euidence of truth manifested in those bookes that they are sent from God and not deuised by man If thou liue in such a place as affoordeth the interpretation of these bookes by the ministery of men vse that singular blessing of God with reuerence and care to vnderstand and thou shalt by the mercifull teaching of God acknowledge these books to be the word of God ordained for the saluation of thy selfe and other This will some man say may perhaps breed a perswasion that these bookes are from God but how shall we come to be infallibly sure of it How else but by the worke of the spirit of God in thy heart What say you must we runne to reuelations Who knowes the secrets of God but the spirit of God The truth it selfe discerned by that light which the spirit kindleth in our hearts worketh assurance of beleefe to which the testimonie of the spirit is added for our further confirmation Neither is this any other reuelation then you Papists require in this case For according to your doctrine no man can be perswaded infallibly of the truth of the Scripture either for the text or the interpretation but by the especiall teaching of the spirit otherwise he hath not faith but opinion of these matters Onely herein stands the difference betwixt vs that you say the argument whereby the spirit perswades vs to acknowledge the Scripture is the authoritie of the Church we affirme it is the euidence of truth which he makes vs to discerne by our vnderstanding enlightened and to approue by our will thereto inclined through his mightie and gracious worke vpon our soules The second part of your minor is that we could not haue knowne the Gospels of the foure Euangelists to be canonicall Scripture rather then those of Nicodemus and Thomas if we had not the testimonie of the Church Of the falsnesse of which opinion I shall need to say little because it is refuted in my answer to the former part For this knowledge is not bred in vs by resting vpon the Churches authoritie but by yeelding to the euidence of the truth discouered to our hearts by the teaching of the holy Ghost Concerning the authoritie of the Church in this point it were a presumptuous and vnreasonable thing for any man without very good proof or great likelihood of reason to deny or doubt of that which hath bin auouched so many yeares by the whole Christian world But to make question of the bookes of Scripture whether they be the word of God or no and to denie that there is any meanes to know them for such but the authoritie of the Church is the next way to open a gap to Atheisme to lay open Religion to the scorne of the world Can I not know the Scripture to be of God but by the authoritie of the Church How shal I then know it at all since it is not reasonable to beleeue there is any Church that hath such authoritie but by the warrant of the Scripture They do all they can to turne reasonable creatures into beasts who teach vs that we must beleeue the Church cannot erre because the Scripture saith so and yet denie that we can know there is any Scripture but by beleeuing it because the Church saith so This is to dance in a circle as if a man were coniured that he could not get out of it How shall I know there is a Church by the Scripture How shall I know there are any Scriptures by the Church Would your proud Clergie thus make fooles of Christian men if they did not despise them as voyd of all reason I wonder how your Pope Cardinals Bishops and the rest of your Cleargie can for beare laughing when they looke one vpon another and remember how they cosen and if I may vse the word in a matter of such importance gull the world with such palpable fooleries But your strumpet of Babylon hath made the Kings of the earth and all nations drunke with the cup of her fornications exalting her selfe aboue all that is called God and making her selfe the God of her slauish vassals But the Lord is iust who according to the Apostles prophefie hath sent the world strong delusions that they should beleeue lies that all they might be damned which beleeued not the truth but had pleasure in vnrighteousnesse And certainly if there were not a great measure of 12. blindnesse and sottishnesse in the hearts of men that Gods purpose might take effect it were vnpossible that reasonable men should so be lead by the nose to errour and destruction A. D. §. 5. Fourthly if the true doctrine of faith in all particular points must be foreknowne as a marke whereby to know the true Church then contrarie to that which hath bin proued the authoritie of the Church should not be a necessarie meanes whereby men must come to the knowledge of the true faith For if before we come to know which is the true Church we must by an other meanes haue knowne which is the true faith what need then is there for getting true faith already had to seeke or bring in the authoritie of the same Church A. W. This fourth reason and the next labour to proue that part of your first assumptiō in this Chapter which we deny not that the true doctrine of faith in euery particular point is not a good marke of the Church It would therefore be but lost labour to spend much time in the examining of them yet somewhat I must say and first to the former If the true doctrine of faith in all particular points must be foreknowne as a marke to know the true Church by then is not the autoritie of the true Church a necessary meanes to know the true doctrine of faith by But the authoritie of the true Church is a necessary meanes to know the true faith by Therefore the true doctrine of faith must not be foreknowne in all particular points as a marke to know the true Church by Your conclusion is no more then we grant the consequence of your maior about which you take some paines needs not your helpe for the proofe of it Your minor is false That which you brought before to prooue it before was answered A. D. §. 6. Fiftly if before we giue absolute and vndoubted credit to the true Church we must examine and iudge whether euery particular point of doctrine which it holdeth be the truth with authoritie to accept that onely which we like or which seemeth in our conceit right and conformable to Scripture and to reiect whatsoeuer we mislike or which in our priuate iudgement seemeth not so right and conformable then we make our selues examiners and iudges ouer the church and consequently we preferre our liking or disliking our iudgement and censure of the interpretation and sense of Scripture before the iudgement and censure of the
Church of God But it is absurd both in reason and religion to preferre the iudgement of any priuate man be he neuer so wittie and learned or neuer so strongly perswaded in his owne minde that he is taught by the Spirit before the iudgement and definitiue sentence of the Church of God the which is a companie of men many of which both are and alwayes haue bene vertuous wise and learned and which is chiefe is such a companie as according to the absolute and infallible promises of our Sauiour hath vndoubtedly the holy spirit among them guiding them and teaching them all truth and not permitting them to erre as before hath bin proued A. W. There is the same fault in this fift argument which was in the former that it is brought to proue a proposition which we denie not If before we giue absolute credit to the Church we must iudge whether euery particular point it holdeth be true or no then we may make our selues iudges ouer the true Church But we may not make our selues iudges ouer the true Church Therefore we must not iudge whether euery particular point the Church holdeth be true or no before we giue absolute credit to the Church This conclusion supposeth that which can neuer be proued that we are first or last to giue absolute credit to the Church whereof in this Chapter there is no question The point you vndertake to disproue is that the true doctrine of faith in euery particular point is a good marke of a true Church This therfore you should haue concluded though indeed it make nothing against our opinion who require not for a marke of the true Church truth of doctrine in euery point but in all points fundamentall Your proposition is deceitfully propounded as if we granted a companie to be the true Church and yet would take vpon vs to receiue and reiect what we list whereas we hold that we cannot acknowledge any true Church but we must withall yeeld that it maintaineth all substantiall points of Religion from which we may not vary Secondly for a man to make himselfe iudge ouer the Church is to take authoritie vpon him to censure reproue and condemne the Church wheras all that we desire is that it may be free for vs to discerne that the doctrine held by this or that Church is agreeable to the Scriptures before we acknowledge it to be a true Church It is meere absurd and vnreasonable to prefer any priuate mans iudgement before the definitiue sentence of the church of God But it is agreeable both to reason and Religion that euery priuate man whose saluation lieth vpon his true or false beleeuing should consider whether that which he is enioyned by men to beleeue be warrantable by the word of God or no. The Scribes and Pharises were the leaders of the people in the matters of Religion yet were they blinde guides and the blind people by depending vpon their iudgement were caried headlong into the same pit of destruction with them Were not the men of Beroea commended by the holy Ghost for searching the Scriptures that they might see whether the doctrine deliuered by Paul were agreeable thereto or no And yet shall it be a fault in vs to enquire of the same Scripture concerning the doctrine of your Apostaticall synagogue I say farther it is against reason and Religion to prefer any one mans iudgement before the definitiue sentence of many wise vertuous and learned men such as the Church hath vsually some amongst the members thereof But it is most reasonable and religious to prefer the truth of God manifested by one simple man before the contrary determination of all that euer haue bin or shal be of the Church though neuer so wise vertuous and learned This is that which we teach concerning this matter First that no man is bound to take any thing for a matter of faith but that which is proued to him by the Scriptures the rule of faith Secondly that no man is to condemne any thing held by the Church vnlesse he haue euident proofe on his side out of the Scriptures Thirdly that euery man in matters not determinable by Scripture none of which are necessarie to saluation should yeeld to the iudgement of the Church whereof he is a member and euery Church to the iudgement of the Christian Churches other where vnlesse there be some good reason to the contrary It is very possible for wise vertuous and learned men to erre for your priuiledge of not erring hath bin found to be counterfait who oftentimes follow the opinion of some one man whose learning and pietie they cannot chuse but admire Domingo à Soto affoords vs an example of this matter where hauing alledged a sentence out of Austin he addeth these words By reason of this saying of Austin quoth Soto all the Fathers afterward and the whole multitude of Diuines haue by good right deliuered it as a truth that the glorious Virgin neuer committed any actuall sinne though Chrysostome auncienter then he were of another opinion Let it be then vnlawfull as it is for a priuate man to prefer his owne opinion before the iudgement of a whole Church and in this sense I graunt your minor yet is it not vnlawfull for him to examine what any or all Churches teach or to dissent from it if he haue the Scripture for his warrant A. D. §. 7. But you may perhaps say that in Scripture we are willed not to beleeue euery priuate spirit but to trie spirits whether they be of God or no and that therefore we must examine and trie the spirit of the Church by looking into euery particular point of doctrine which it teacheth I answer that in that place of Scripture it is not meant that it belongeth to euery particular man to trie all spirits but in generall the Scripture giueth the Church warning not to accept euery one that boasteth himselfe to haue the Spirit and willeth that they should trie those spirits not that euery simple or priuate man should take vpon him to trie them but that those of the Church to whom the office of trying spirits doth appertaine to wit the Doctors and Pastors which Almightie God hath put in his Church of purpose Vt non circumferamur omni vento doctrinae that we may not be caried away with euery wind of doctrine and Vt non simus paruuli fluctuantes that we may not be little ones wauering with euerie blast of those that boast themselues to be singularly taught by the spirit So that this trying of spirits is onely meant of those spirits of which men may well doubt whether they be of God or no and then also this triall belongeth to the Pastors of the true church But when it is certaine that the spirit is of God we neither neede nor ought doubtfully to examine or presumptuously to iudge of it but submitting obediently the iudgement of our owne sense
of Nice to follow and which they accordingly followed The bookes of the Euangelists and Apostles and the Oracles of the old prophets plainly instruct vs quoth that worthie Emperour what we are to iudge of matters concerning God Therefore laying aside all enemie-like discord let vs debate ad determine the points in question by the testimonies of the Scriptures inspired by God These as we heard before Ierome makes the bounds of the Church within which she must keepe her selfe and Proclus Archbishop of Constantinople confineth faith to the same place Faith saith he must abide within the Euangelicall and Apostolicall bounds Paschasius a Cardinall of your Church as you say many yeares since tied Macedonius the hereticke to the Scriptures equiring him either to shew by euident testimonies of the word of God that we must beleeue in the Church or else to vrge the point no further For as Chrysostome truly affirmeth If there be any thing needfull to be knowen we shall learne it in the Scriptures I mightfil whole sides with testimonies out of the Fathers to this purpose but I let them passe as needlesse especially since your selfe before confessed that the word of God is infallible and therefore in that respect sufficient to be the rule of faith Now to your conclusion The first part of this first conclusion is false in regard of the infallibilitie of Scripture which it should seeme you saw well enough and therefore balkt that matter and deuised an other point concerning our translation to play withall For what is it but trifling when a man leaues the thing in question and busies him selfe about the refuting of that which besides himselfe no man euer dreamed of What English protestant euer affirmed that our translation was infallible that is such as had no error in it or might not be doubted of Or who euer tooke it for the rule of faith You make babies which you beate as you list Against the Scriptures being the rule of faith which we affirme you say nothing Against the infallibilitie of our translation which we grant not to be the rule of faith you discourse at large wherein I intreate the Reader to consider these few things with me That which he speakes in disgrace of our translation makes no more against it then against all other whatsoeuer For neither is any translation the language in which the Scripture was written and no translators euer had any such infallible assistance by the holy Ghost Sure the author of the vulgar Latin translation had not such help as the Hebrew and Greek originals which the translations of all the learned Papists themselues declare Pagnin Vatablus Isidorus Clarius c. As for Gregory Martins cauils they were answered long since by D. Fulke and I maruell that you can name them without blushing seeing neuer a one of you durst vndertake the defence of them for the space of these 23. yeares Nay which is worse you were not ashamed in the second edition of your Rhemish Testament to bleare your blind followers eyes with a table of hereticall corruptions in translating the Scriptures as if you had propounded some new matter whereas they were all taken out of that booke of Martins and had long before bene iustified by D. Fulke without any reply on your parts You demaund how any vnlearned man can be infallibly sure that in those places which do seeme to fauour our sect our translation doth not erre I answer that there are better meanes of assurance for vnlearned Protestants concerning the truth of our translation then any Papist can haue by your imagined authoritie for your vulgar Latin First it is no slender perswasion to any reasonable man that those places you speake of if not wholy yet for the most part are translated with the same sense in other toungs which they haue in ours as in Spanish French Italian Flemish Dutch Secondly it is a great confirmation of the truth that many of those texts which seeme most to fauor vs are the same in your vulgar and Rhemish editions that they are in ours Thirdly the truth of ours is yet more cleare because euery man may see that in bookes of controuersie betwixt vs our translations are seldome denied by the learned of your side though you condemne our expositions Fourthly who may not easily discerne how much more faithfull our translation of those places all others is then yours seeing we are readie to make triall of it by the originals the learned on your sides being iudges you are afraid of nothing more then to haue yours examined by the Hebrew and Greeke Fiftly in the places you speake of our translations deserue the more credit because we labour to make them plaine for euery mans vnderstanding and shew how they agree with the rest of the booke and chapter wheras your Rhemish Testament is so handled that an English man of good vnderstanding can hardly tell what to make of it for the very words themselues in many places as if you auoided nothing more then plainnesse Sixtly we perswade all men as much as we can to labour for the knowledge of the originall tongues that so they may be able to iudge of our translation you do all you can to keepe men in the mist of ignorance because you are afraid to haue your corruptions discouered Seuenthly though we allow not our ministers such an infinite authoritie as you giue your Cleargie yet we teach that it becoms Christian charitie and modestie neither to suspect a translation where the analogie of faith is kept and the plaine meaning of the holy Ghost not manifestly altered nor to rest vpon priuate conceit against the generall iudgement of the learned without very euident proofe of error These amongst other are reasonable grounds for a Christian to build vpon that he may haue some good assurance of the truth of our translation Now let vs examine yours We must say you admit an infallible authoritie in the Church to assure vs that such or such a translation doth not erre in any point First this is more then neeeds For if that authoritie can assure vs that the translation erreth not in any point needfull to saluation in regard of the sense it may be a sufficient ground for vs to build our faith vpon though it should mistake some words in many points and the sense too in matters of lesse importance Secondly though we do admit such an authoritie in the Church yet may we be farre enough from any such assurance For how shall I be sure that the Church hath so affirmed of this or that translation How shal I know what the Church is A company you say of men vpon earth infallibly taught by the holy Ghost what is the true faith in al points Is this teaching cōmon to euery one of this company seuerally or only annexed to them all ioyntly when they are together What if all what if the greater part assemble
the Church is of infallible and vndoubted truth and that the way not to be deceiued in an obscure question is to aske and follow the iudgement of the Church Wherefore worthily also do we all say Credo Ecclesiam Catholicam I beleeue the Catholicke Church and worthily also may I conclude that neither Scripture alone nor naturall wit and learning nor priuate spirit nor any other thing but onely the teaching of the true Church of Christ is that ordinarie meanes which Almightie God hath prouided whereby all men may learne that one infallible entire faith which I proued to be necessarie to saluation A. W. Saint Paul doth worthily call the Church the pillar and ground of truth but not as you would haue vs beleeue because it is the rule of faith The Greeke Scholiast taketh that speech of the Apostle to be vttered by way of comparison betwixt the Church of Christ and the Iewish Temple Not as the Iewish Temple saith Oecumenius but the pillar and ground of truth for the Temple was the ground of the shadowes of the truth Out of which we may gather that as the Iewish synagogue was the pillar and ground of those shadowes of the truth so is the Church of Christ the pillar and ground of the truth it selfe But that synagogue was not the rule of faith in that point because whatsoeuer it taught was to be held for infallible truth but for that to it were committed the oracles of God and the knowledge and vse of those ceremonies so hath the Church of Christ the truth of doctrine in the scripture and the exercises of Gods worship and religion Therfore is it called the pillar and ground of it because it constantly maintaineth that truth preaching and professing it in despight of all the practises and power of Satan and tyrants of the world As the thighs saith an ancient writer sustaine and beare vp the weight of the whole bodie so also the Apostles like pilars valiantly carry the vniuersall Church of Christians ouer the whole world being for the value of their inuincible courage and stedfastnesse of their holy purpose called marble pillars And a litle after They preached the Gospell with such wisedome and constancie that as if they had bene of marble or adamant they were afraid of no violence nor aduersitie but always continuing firme and inuincible against all the forces of men and diuels shining as it were in the darke by that light of their wisedome by preaching admonishing teaching and glistering with miracles at the last they most happily became conquerors To this effect speake your Glosses The ground of the truth of the Gospell which the Church constantly maintained euen in the greatest persecutions Well vpholding the truth in it self saith another Glosse That it may not fall to the ground though it be afflicted saith Lombard But let vs bring your reason into due frame The pillar and ground of truth is the rule of faith The Church is the pillar and ground of truth Therefore the Church is the rule of faith Your proposition or maior is false vnlesse you restraine it as I haue often said to the truth and then it is so far the rule of faith as it is the pillar and ground of truth Whatsoeuer it holdeth truly according to the scripture is the rule of faith for those points not because of the Churches authoritie but for the truth of the doctrine Yet may it easily come to passe that a Church maintaining the generall truth of the Gospell and all particulars necessary to soluation may faile in many other points of great importance and for all that continue both a true Church and the pillar and ground of truth though not the rule of faith Your minor also as you vnderstand it is vntrue First because the Apostle speaketh not of any such companie as you imagine Pope Bishop Councell but either of the Church of Ephesus in which Timothie to whom he writeth then abode or indefinitely of any and euery Church whatsoeuer where the true Religion of our Sauiour is or shall be professed according to the Gospell If Timothie were as you will not denie Bishop of Ephesus then it is apparent that the Apostle calleth the Church of Ephesus wherein Timothy liued taught and gouerned the pillar and ground of truth yet was it not the rule of faith for then had the rule of faith perished long since with that Church of Ephesus If he speake to him as to an Euangelist who was to follow him from place to place and to establish the Churches which the Apostle had planted then must euery one of those Churches wherein Timothy was to behaue himselfe as he had done in Ephesus be vnderstood to be the pillar and ground of truth and yet neither any nor all of them were the rule of faith which else must haue bene lost with them What remaines then Shall we expound it of all beleeuers in generall I grant it reacheth to all the faithfull but as to them considered in their seuerall Churches because among them so disposed of was Timothy to performe that dutie which the Apostle there enioyneth him But let vs so conceiue of the Church What shall it auaile you or endamage vs All beleeuers are not the companie you pleade for but onely the Pope and your Bishops whom you would haue taken for the rule of faith Secondly I denie your minor in respect of the sense you giue of those words the pillar and ground of truth For you so vnderstand them as if the truth of God depended vpon the verdict of the Church so that nothing may be held for truth but what the Church deliuereth for such and whatsoeuer she so propoundeth must so be receiued vpon paine of certaine damnation How contrary are you in this interpretation and doctrine to the auncient fathers The Apostles saith Irenaeus left vs the Scriptures to be the pillar and ground of our faith Nay say you they left vs the Church to be the pillar and ground of the Scriptures The Gospell and spirit of life saith the same father in the same booke is the pillar and ground of the Church Nay by your leaue reply you the Church is the pillar and ground of the Gospell But Chrysostome handling this place of the Apostle is not afraid to affirme that the truth is the pillar and ground of the Church not as if he would denie that which the Apostle saith for the Church indeed is the vpholder of the truth but to shew that although the Church maintaine and auow the truth yet it is built and founded vpon the truth which as Ierome saith vpholds the building Therfore to make short whē the Apostle saith that the Church is the pillar and ground of truth his meaning is that amongst Christians and among no other sort of men the truth is to be found and amongst and by them it is constantly and worthily
who was as able and as carefull to speake so that all whom it concerned might vnderstand him as the holiest of your Councels or Popes I can hardly perswade my selfe that any man of learning let him be neuer so Catholicke as you tearme him can beleeue that the Pope alone or the Pope and a Councell cannot erre But it is an opinion deuised and retained in politicke discretion to keepe things in an outward quietnesse to aduance the estate of your Cleargie I may not enter into the discussing of this priuiledge you claime for it would aske much time and a long discourse but I wil touch it as farre as you giue me necessarie occasion and so proceed to that which followeth And first concerning the Popes owne person which seemeth to be your best plea being alledged in the first place and almost wholly stood vpon you cannot be so ignorant as not to know that diuers learned men on your side confesse and maintaine that the Pope may erre Many Popes saith Lyra haue bene found to haue bene Apostataes from the faith The Pope saith Catharin may erre and fall vtterly from the faith And although in his second conclusion he tels vs that the Pope as Pope that is sitting you call it ex Cathedra out of his chaire and lawfully according to the rite of vsing the key of knowledge particularly committed to him determining a matter of faith cannot erre so that he shall define any thing against faith yet he addeth afterward that the Pope may decree by way of a commaundement or Law some false or vniust thing so that saith he there are many decrees of Popes found to be diuers and contrarie one to another And can euerie learned man thinke you iudge which decrees the Pope made as Pope and which as a man What idle and vncertaine fooleries are these distinctions I do not beleeue saith Alfousus that the Pope hath any flatterer so impudent to grant him this prerogatiue that he can neuer erre nor be deceiued in expounding Scripture I haue learned of the schoole Doctors saith a late Archbishop of yours that any Pope may erre as a Doctor or as a man but not as a Iudge And this he speaketh of a decree of Pope Eugenius the fourth which many Diuines as himselfe confesseth take to be a decree of the Councell of Florence Yet Bishop Catharin boldly affirmeth that there are many things in the said decree which if they be strictly taken and according to the proper meaning of the words wil be found to be false and therefore as he saith need a fauourable interpretation Yea the same Archbishop is not afraid to refute as he pretendeth by the authoritie of the Councell of Trent the iudgement and determination of three Popes Eugenius the fourth Clemens the eight and Pius the fift the two last hauing set out their Missals since the Councell of Trent and yet as he thinketh resoluing concerning the words of consecration contrarie to the iudgement of the Councell It may appeare also by his Epistle dedicatorie that a fourth Pope Sixtus the fift to whom he writeth that Treatise was of the same opinion in that matter with those his predeceslors from whom the Archbishop maketh bold to dissent as he doth from Thomas of Aquine and all his followers But what name I priuate men although excellently learned Let vs heare a whole generall Councell speake We condemne and depose saith the Councell of Basil Pope Eugenius a despiser of the holy Canons a disturber of the peace and vnitie of the Church of God a man notoriously scandalous to the vniuersall Church a Symoniack a for sworne man incorrigible aschismaticke fallen from the faith and an obstinate heretick And for the auowing of this their act they speake thus in another place We haue heard and read that many Popes haue fallen into error and heresie it is certaine that the Pope may erre The Councell hath often condemned and deposed the Pope both for his heresie in faith and his leudnesse in life I might adde hereunto the authoritie of the Councel of Constance which bindes the Pope to be obedient to the decrees of Councels But that which I haue said may suffice to shew that all learned Papists do not know the Pope cannot erre But you vndertake to proue they do know it because of certaine places of Scripture wherein our Sauiour makes a promise of not erring to Peter and his successors To all which I answer in generall that those learned men and Councels before alledged did know that these places were brought to proue the Popes priuiledge of not erring and notwithstanding held it for an vndoubted truth that he might erre you may beare with vs then though we make question of it In particular I answer to the places alledged concerning Saint Peters priuiledge The keyes signifie nothing but power to open and shut heauen to bind and loose by retaining or remitting the sins of men The plaine sense of those words saith Bellarmine is this that first the authoritie is promised or the power noted out by the keyes then the actions and office are expounded by those words to bind and loose And in the verse before he finds fault with Caietan for endeuouring to stretch that grant to I know not what farther matter I forbeare to set downe any proofe of this exposition because it is cleare enough of it selfe if we compare this promise with the performance of it in Iohns Gospell Receiue the holy Ghost saith our Sauiour whose sinnes soeuer ye remit they are remitted vnto them and whose sinnes soeuer ye retaine they are retained Secondly I say that this power was not peculiar to Peter but common to him with all the Apostles yea with all ministers who are their successors in preaching the Gospell shutting and opening binding and loosing Wee affirme saith Bellarmine that in those words Math. 18. which are of the same nature with the other Math. 16. nothing is graunted but onely it is there declared and foretold what power the Apostles and their successors were to haue Those things saith Maldonatus that are here promised to Peter agree not onely to him but to all Apostles Bishops and Priests Whereupon Theophylact saith that although it was said to Peter onely I will giue thee the keyes yet the keyes were granted to all the Apostles when when he said whose sins you forgiue Therefore this promise of giuing the keyes conueyes no other priuiledge to Peter then to all the Apostles yea to all true ministers of the Gospell by the iudgement of your owne Iesuits But Christ prayed especially for Peter that his faith might not faile And good reason not without need for he knew that Satan would tempt him shreudly and giue him a fouler foyle then euer he gaue any of his other Apostles Yet Austin brings in our Sauiour speaking in generall I haue prayed the Father
the Church to preach to all nations For your Church is as I haue said your Bb. assembled in Councel not your Clergie men seuerally one by one And it is not our Sauiors meaning to haue such a kind of teaching A. D. §. 6. The warrant we haue in S. Luke Qui vos audit me audit He that heareth you heareth me By which words appeareth plainly that our Sauior Christ would haue vs to heare and giue credit to his church no lesse then to himselfe A. W Our Sauiour by this place hath warranted all men to heare them that teach those things which hee commaunded to be taught besides which if any man teach his owne fancies for matters of faith that of the Apostle belongeth to him Let him be accursed The Apostles were absolutely to be heard without exceptiō as Christ himself all other teachers only so far as they speake according to the word of God He teacheth by this saith Cyril that whatsoeuer the holy Apostles deliuer is to be receiued because he that heareth them heareth Christ Our Sauiour addeth this in the end saith Lyra to shew that the doctrine of his disciples is deuoutly and reuerently to be heard at the least for reuerence of God whose principally that doctrine is But what doth this concerne the church Surely if it may be enforced to make vs heare any besides the Apostles without limiting of our hearing we are bound so to heare at the least euery B. These words saith Bellarmine belong properly to the Apostles and to their successors neither may it be said that this was spoken to all of them ioyntly and not to euery one seuerally Now if it be absurd and worse to hold that we haue warrant to heare euery B. whatsoeuer he teach doubtlesse this place proueth nothing for hearing the Church For by vertue of this speech the Apostles were to be heard without any exception If then it belong to their successors which are as you say Bb. as fully as to them euery B. must be heard and beleeued teach he what he wil. I wil yet say more our Sauior speaketh this of the 72. disciples and of euery two of them at the least Now your opinion is that your ordinary Priests succeed them as Bishops do the Apostles Hence it will follow that whatsoeuer any two Priests preach that must be holden for as certaine a truth as if Christ himselfe had spoken it Do you not see then that this must needs be restrained either to the Apostles or to the doctrine taught He that heareth you preaching that which I haue charged you to preach heareth me So doth your Glosse limit the latter part of the sentence He that despiseth you that is He that will not beleeue in Christ Indeed he that refuseth to beleeue in Christ by the ministerie of men refuseth Christ himselfe whose doctrine it is that we should beleeue in him Therfore your minor is false also in regard of the third part thereof We haue no warrant to heare any man the Apostles being dead but so farre onely as he agreeth with the Scriptures A. D. §. 7. The commandement is expressed in S. Mathew Super Cathedram Moysi sederunt Scribae Pharisaei Omnia ergo quaecunque dixerint vobis seruate facite The Scribes and Pharisies haue sitten vpon the chaire of Moses All things therefore whatsoeuer they shall say vnto you obserue and do Out of which words we may gather that we are bound in all points to do according to the doctrine of the Prelates of the Catholicke Church yea although it should happen that their liues were not laudable but bad For although our Sauiour in this place doth onely in expresse words make mention of the chaire of Moses in which the Priests of the old Law did sit yet he is to be vnderstood to speake also of the chaire of S. Peter his owne Vicegerent in which the Priests of the new law do succeed And this à fortiori because we haue greater reason to thinke that our Sauiour intended in his doctrine to giue rules to the Priests and people of his new law which was presently to begin and to continue till the worlds end then onely to giue documents to those of the old Law considering he knew that it should so shortly cease Wherefore the auncient fathers do vnderstand that place to be meant of the Priests of the new Law and namely S. Augustine who saith thus In illum ordinem Episcoporum qui ducitur ab ipso Petro ad Anastasium qui nunc in eadem Cathedra sedet etiamsi quisquam traditor per illa tempora subrepsisset nihil praeiudicaret Ecclesiae innocentibus Christianis quibus prouidens Dominus ait de praepositis malis quae dicunt facite quae faciunt facere nolite Into that order of Bishops which is deriued from S. Peter himselfe vnto Anastasius who now sitteth vpon the same chaire although some traitor had crept in in those times he should nothing hurt the Church and the innocent Christians for whom our Lord prouiding saith of euill Prelates What they say do what they do do not A. W. This is the only point which is able to make good the consequence of your proposition and therefore if you faile in the proofe of this all is naught But out of doubt you faile here exceedingly and so your reason comes to nothing He that commaunds the Iewes to do whatsoeuer the Scribes and Pharisies who sit vpon Moses chaire say bindeth all to do in all things according to the saying of the Church But our Sauiour so commandeth the Iewes Therefore he bindeth all to do in all things according to the saying of the Church First I say of this syllogisme as of the two last points that if it giue any authoritie to your Church it giueth the same to euery particular teacher For the Scribes and Pharises did expound the law of Moses not in Councels onely but euery one seuerally in the synagogues where they were appointed to teach Therefore if it be absurd to conclude vpon this text that euery Scribe and Pharisey was then and euery Preacher lawfully called is now to be heard whatsoeuer he teach sure no such matter can be wrung out of this place for the Church Secondly this reason maketh the Scribes and Pharises the Church shutting out the high Priest himselfe and all other priests that were not either Scribes or Pharises yea it presumeth which is vtterly false that the Scribes and Pharises were successors to Moses in an ordinarie course of authoritie as you say your Church that is your Pope and Bb. succeed Peter and the rest of the Apostles Can such an argument proue a matter of such importance and doubt Your proposition implieth that our Sauiour intended to giue rules concerning Saint Peters authoritie whom you call his Vicegerent Who wold trifle so in a questiō of such weight First proue his office and your Popes
right to it and then frame such arguments otherwise any man of neuer so little iudgment may find more cause to pity or disdaine your proofe or presumption then to stagger at the force of your reason All things in the Scripture were indeed writtē for our learning and therfore belong to vs so far as the general doctrine reacheth the particular circumstances are alike Wherefore I grant your proposition not because of any succession which could not be in those Scribes and Pharises being of diuers tribes and as your Genebrard saith hauing thrust themselues into the chaire of Moses being empty but because they expoūded the law of Moses among the Iewes as the Ministers of Christ do the Gospell at this day to the Christians Ere I answer to your Assumption I must speake a word of your translation haue sitten The Greeke indeed is so but as Vatablus noteth the praeter tense is put for the present tense Therefore Pagnine doubteth not so to translate it sedent sit Which must needs be our Sauiours meaning For how were it agreeable to reason that he should charge vs to heare the Scribes and the Pharises because they did sometimes sit vpon Moses chaire if now they sit beside it It is our Sauiours purpose to signifie that the expositions of the former Pharisies and of those that taught in his time were not to be reiected or rather it is al one as if he had said do sit But let vs reade the place which way we list it is all one to your minor which I denie To the proofe of it out of the text I answer First the sitting vpon Moses chaire signifieth not succession but teaching the law of Moses For Moses calling was altogether extraordinarie from God both for gouerning and teaching In the former Iosua and the Iudges succeeded him till the people were wearie of Gods ruling of them The other part of his office was to be discharged ordinarily by the Priests and Leuits That ye may teach the children of Israel all the statutes which the Lord hath commaunded them by the hand of Moses The Priests lips should preserue knowledge and they should seeke the Law at his mouth Ieshua and Bani c. and the Leuites caused the people to vnderstand the law And they read in the booke of the Law of God distinctly and gaue the sense and caused them to vnderstand the reading It was one thing to succeed Aaron another to sit on Moses chaire The chaire of Moses saith Cyril signifieth power of doctrine They sit in Moses chaire saith Origen which interprete Moses sayings well and according to reason And a little after The Scribes and Pharises sit naughtily vpon Moses chaire they sat wel that well vnderstood the law What is the meaning of that saith Ambrose The Scribes sat but because letters are written whereupon the Scribes in Greeke are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 following the interpretation of the letter not the sense of the spirit And afterward Therefore they teaching those things that Moses wrote c. So doth Theophylact expound it They that sit in Moses chaire that is that teach the things that are in the law And immediately before They that exhort to euill life do not then teach out of Moses chaire nor out of the Law Therefore to sit vpon Moses chaire is nothing else but to haue authoritie to expound Moses Law as he himselfe did expound it So the Ministers of the Gospell may be said to sit vpon the Apostles chaire because they haue authority to interpret the Gospel which the Apostles themselues preached Secondly I denie that our Sauiour commanded the Iewes or doth now charge vs to beleeue whatsoeuer they that haue authority to teach vs deliuer or to do whatsoeuer they enioyne This is apparent because himselfe refuteth condemneth their interpretations and doctrines many times as Mat. 5. In many points of which that one is most cleare Ye haue heard that it hath bene said thou shalt loue thy neighbour hate thine enemie but I say vnto you loue your enemies c. In vaine do they worship me teaching for doctrines mens traditions And in the same place he calleth them blinde leaders of the blind and addeth further that if the blinde lead the blinde both fall into the ditch Now can any man be so impious I might say blasphemous as to say that our Sauiour commaunded the Iewes to take such a course as should certainely bring them to destruction Nay rather he warneth them to take heed of their doctrine Take heed and beware he doubleth his admonition to make them more carefull of the leauen of the Pharises And what was this leauen The doctrine of the Pharises saith the Euangelist But what need we go out of this chapter for the point in question Doth he not afterwards call them blinde guides vers 16. 24. fooles blind vers 17. 19 Doth he not in the same places condemne and confute their absurd and lewde doctrine of swearing A man would wonder that euer any man professing himselfe a scholler or teacher should bring such miserable proofes in matters of so great weight But alasse we must beare with you you bring such as you haue if you knew any better we should be sure to haue them But these serue to deceiue your deuoted followers who wilfully shut their eies against the truth The iudgements of God are past searching out and his mercie in opening our eies to see your grossnesse greater then we are able to conceiue Well yet perhaps you haue some colour from antiquitie to countenance your exposition withall You quote Austin what None but Austin in a matter of so great doubt But let vs see why you quote him If to prooue that the Pharisies were to be heard and obeyed in all things there is no such word in his sentence alledged by you For he saith no more then we grant that Our Sauiour prouided before hand that we should not refuse good doctrine because it was deliuered by wicked men Indeed that was the verie purpose of our Sauiour and to that doth Austin apply it otherwhere according to the true sense of it What saith he else but heare the voice of the sheepheard though by hirelings such as Austin in that place saith the Pharifies and Scribes were and such as our Sauiour proueth them to be by their hypocrisie ambition couetousnesse The Apostle sheweth saith Austin in an other place that men without charitie may teach somewhat that is wholsome of such our Lord speaketh They sit vpon Moses chaire c. Whereupon also the Apostle speaking of enuious and malitious men yet such as preached saluation by Christ saith Whether by occasion or in truth Christ be preached Ireioice And in a third place He that speaketh wisely and eloquently but liueth wickedly teacheth many that are desirous