made of this Indiuiduall to wit Isaacke This consequence is drawne from the text it selfe and the Apostle who alledgeth it neither addeth therunto nor presupposeth therein any tradition But such a spirit as our Bishop is of Heb 11 19 findeth more taste in the tradition of S. Siluester that raised vp a dead Bull Or in that of S. Germaine that raised vp an asse a calfe which they of his house had eaten From the words that God saith to Abraham Gen. 15. Gen. 15. I reason thus He which hath God for his reward hath immortality and life eternall But Abraham hath God for his reward Therefore he hath immortalitie and life eternal Du Perron saith That some of ours vnderstand this reward of earthly and temporall things true but they exclude not heauenly and eternall vnlesse he forge himselfe a God without immortalitie and without eternitie His answeres and ordinarie manners of arguing are to snatch one part thereby to exclude the other as if hee should say God framed Adam a bodie therefore hee gaue him not a soule Let vs set him downe the argument in this sort Whosoeuer hath God for reward hath more than an earthly and temporall thing But Abraham hath God for reward therefore hee hath more than an earthly and temporall thing But since the Bishoppe of Eureux receiueth the exposition of Oecolampadius vpon this place who vnderstandeth as if God said vnto Abraham If I bee for thee who shall be against thee If I be thy buckler and thy protection who shall hurt thee Let him receiue also this argument Hee whom nothing can hurt is immortall otherwise death should hurt him yea breake this buckler which is God and vanquish this protector which is the same God Now nothing may hurt Abraham therefore he is immortall and all the calamities that hee suffered did not hurt him to speake properly But if death had abolished his bodie his soule both together without hope of restitution resurrection then should the promise of God haue beene found vaine and frustrate From the exclamation that Iacob maketh at the point of death I drawe this argument Gen 49. â— Whosoeuer waiteth for the saluation of God at the houre of his death when he is going out of this life thinketh not to die wholly and altogether but Iacob at the point of his death waiteth for the Saluation of God therefore he thought not to die wholly and altogether for it behooueth that some thing of him should remaine for to receiue this saluation And though it should be vnderstood of some succours for his posteritie yet it behooueth that hee which waiteth and hopeth for that be not wholly extinguished brought to nothing So in the vulgar translation which is authentick in the Church of Rome there is in the future tense I will waite for thy saluation O Lord. If Du Perron reply that his Sadducie holdeth not that translation for authenticall No more doe we that of his pretended Rabbi that he alledgeth vnto vs. 〈◊〉 14 〈◊〉 49 29. 〈◊〉 15.55 〈◊〉 8 17 From this speach to be gathered to his fathers or people many times repeated in this first booke of Moses I conclude that if those to whom Abraham Isaack Iacob be gathered be not at all Moses speaketh vnaptly and falsely But this consequent is false therefore also the antecedent is so too Out of the second booke of Moses called Exodus â—â—d 3 6 This book furnisheth vs in the first place with the argumeÌ„t wherewith our Sauiour Christ stopped the mouthes of the Saduces proouing vnto them the resurrection of the dead the forme of it is this They of whom God calleth himselfe the God are liuing Now God calleth himselfe the God of Abraham the God of Isaacke and the God of Iacob Therefore they are liuing And seeing that according to the body they are not yet raised vp from the dead that must needes bee one day though in respect of God to whom all things are present they bee already raised vp and therefore he calleth himselfe their God speaking of a thing which shall infallibly be done as if it were alreadie done The Bishop of Eureux cryeth as lowde as hee can that Iesus Christ cited this place onely for to prooue the immortalitie of the soule and that it belongeth not to the Resurrection of the bodie I say though hee presuppose the immortalitie of the soule yet hee meaneth it necessarily of the Resurrection of the dead because it is the question that the Sadduces proposed to our Sauiour which of the seuen brethren in the resurrection should haue the woman to wife who had beene maried to theÌ„ all one after another is there any tradition that maketh mariages between soules without their bodies such a mariage would be another maÌ„ner of mysterie than that is which the Romish tradition hath made a Sacrament Bellarmine himselfe saith our Lord being about to prooue the Resurrection to the Saduces alleadged this testimony of Scripture I am the God of Abraham the God of Isaak and the God of Iacob and addeth God is not the God of the dead but of the liuing whence his intention is to inferre The dead therefore rise againe Now although the Saduces denyed also the Immortality of the soule yet the Resurrection of the body seemed vnto them much more absurde And vpon this pointe was grounded the most formall dissention betweene them and the Pharises as appeareth by that which Saint Luke saith of theÌ„ Act. 23.6.7 Also the three Euangelists qualifie the Saduces by this marke as the most notable that they beleeued not the ResurrectioÌ„ And if our Sauiour Christ by the Resurrection of the dead meant only of the coÌ„tinuaÌ„ce of souls not of the ResurrectioÌ„ of the flesh besides that he had done nothing by his argumeÌ„t takeÌ„ out of Moses that a Heathen Philosopher by naturall reasons might not haue done It would follow that he had then graunted that the soule dyeth or at the least sleepeth till the day of Iudgment for this tearme resurrection or rising againe can not agree but to that which before is fallen as it fareth in the body by death And when it is attributed to the soule it is but by figure like as sinne is called the death of the soule in as much as it depriueth it of the spirituall life which is in God yet without abolishing her substance But our Bishopp attributeth this opinion to Christ for to conforme it with that of one of his preteÌ„ded vicars Pope Iohn the 22. who was constrayned by a King of France to retract it and to vnsay himselfe by sound of Trumpet as Gerson witnesseth Now let vs see the Spirit of astoniednesse which possesseth him in saying Though Saint Mathew should say in expresse tearmes that Christ alledgeth this Text against the Sadduces vpon the question of the Resurrection of the bodie what can hee necessarily inferre thereupon I answere if Iesus Christ alledged this text for the
gather together in paper what hee had scattered in the ayre his distinctions would appeare to bee more prestigious in the one than they seeme to bee specious in the other and that it would bee as harde a thing for him to vnwrappe himselfe from selfe-contradictions by the pen as it is easie for him to dazell and entangle the ignorant by his tongue Hee made account also perhaps that his cause being grounded on the Word vnwritten it could not well be defended by the word written Notwithstanding hauing intelligence since that hee had compiled a little writing on this subiect in fauour of some whom hee was desirous to subuert I haue taken paynes to get a Copie of it to which I haue made this aunswere which may serue in stâ—ade of a Resultate or repetition of our Verball Conference at vvhich vvere present fevve others than his greatest friendes vvho then made such acclamations and since haue sovved such reportes thereof as pleased them But heere not beeing required the applause of men nor any tickeling conceipt of vanitie I entreate the Readeer to ayme vvith mee in this vvriting at the glorie of God onely and the manifestation of his truth for the teaching vvhereof Saint Athanasius vvitnesseth that the Scripture is sufficient Let vs acknovvledge it then for Iudge Athanas 〈…〉 and 〈◊〉 vs reuerence it as Mistres vvhilest our aduersaries take it for partie and pursue it as an enemie The answer of D. Daniell Tillenus to the Bishop of Eureux his treatice wherby he endeauoreth to proue the insufficiency and imperfection of the holy Scripture and the necessity authority of vnwritten traditions The bishop of Eureux THE vnwritten word of God The B. â— on which we call Apostolicke tradition is of the same force and authority as the written word is and without it the Scripture alone is not suffieient to confute all heresies The Iewes did beleeue when the body of the law of Moyses was giuen vnto them many things which either were not conteyned in the fiue bookes of Moyses or did not appeare vnto them to be therein conteined As the immortality of the soule the resurrection of the body the last iudgement Paradise Hell the Creation and distinction of the orders of Angells the being and creation of deuills and many other points which they could not know by humane science but it must needs be that they receiued them by reuelation from God and therefore that they had another way for to deriue and conserue the word of god besides that of the Scripture D. Tillenus his answer To him that would heare none but Fathers speake it may be answered in a word as one of the number saith Hillar iâ— Psalm 1â— Whatsoeuer is not conteined in the booke of the Law we ought not to know it He that speaketh so would not haue vs seeke that elsewhere which is not found in the Scripture We say that all that is necessary to saluation touching those and all other points is conteyned in the scripture either in expresse tearmes or in necessary consequence and true analogue Gen. 17â— Exod 6. â— Exod. 20â— In the writings of Moyses we find that God maketh a couenant with the Hebrews that he promiseth to be their God and the God of their seed to exercise mercy vpon them vnto thousand generations that is to say for euer to dwell in the middest of them 〈◊〉 10. 〈◊〉 29. to keepe them as the apple of his eie In them is Israell called happie for that it was saâ—ed by the lord God 7.9 Iacob being ready to depart out of this life comforted himselfe in the expectation of the saluation of the lorde to shew that he went to take possession of a bâ—tter countrey He and his Father called themselues straungers in the land of Canaan which notwithstanding was promised them for inheritance Therefore they beleeued the true country that is to say Paradise This consequent is not onely necessary but also manifest by the testimony of the Apostle who draweth it from this place of Scripture not from any vnwritten Tradition 〈◊〉 1.9.13 when he saith that they which so speake shew playnly that they seek a Country which is the thing that Du Perron can not find in the bookes of Moyses although we find in them that the wicked and vnfaithfull that defended lyes against the trueth 〈◊〉 â— 11 did wish it For what else meaneth that false prophet Balaam when he sayth O that my soule might dye the death of the righteous or that my end might bee like theirs This wish expresseth clearly enough the appreheÌ„sioÌ„ he had of the last iudgment 〈◊〉 â— 1 When Moyses calleth the Israelites the children of the Lord their God forbidding them to sorrow for the dead as infidells he speaketh no lesse manifestly of the resurrection 〈◊〉 4.13 than S. Paul when he exhorteth the Thessalonians not to lament for the dead as they do that haue no hope 〈◊〉 3.2 VVhen Moyses saith that God holdeth all his saints in his hands he saith the same thing that is sayd by other that haue written after him That the soules of the righteous are in the hands of the Lord and that they commit their soules vnto him 〈◊〉 â— 1 19. 2.32 24. â— Iud. â— 29 â—0 19 as vnto a faithfull creator So when he speaketh of the book of life of the taking vp of Henoch which Tertullian calleth Candidatum aeternitatis when he saith that those that feare God and keepe his commaundements shall be happy for euer when he setteth before the Iewes life and death blessing and cursing when he threatneth them with the fire of the Lords wrath Deut. â— which shall burne euen to the bottome of hell shall consume the earth with her encrease and set on fire the foundations of the mountaines VVhen I say he writeth all these things he sheweth clearly enough the immortality of the soule the resurrection of the body the last iudgement Paradise and Heâ—l which points are vnseparably linked together Jf these testimonies seeme not cleare enough to the Bishop of Eureux who confesseth neuerthelesse that in Daniell and the other Prophets that haue written since Moyses there is some found Let him consider that they which among the Corinthians denied the resurrection 1. Corâ—â— shifted off the one as well as the other VVhich sheweth that if those that doo erre in some point will not suffer themselues to be vanquished by the scripture that commeth not through any obscurity and imperfection of which they falsely accuse it but from their owne malice and blindnes Moreouer it is to be noted that it hath pleased God orderly to distribute the reuelation of his will of his promises and of his couenant by certayne degrees increasing alwaies the measure of this reuelation as the age of the world increased This oeconomy is clearely obserued in the Scripture if we mark therein the degrees from Adam to Abraham from Abraham to
all the cuttings and pieces that came of this precious stone in hewing the tables and that Moses therewith made himselfe wonderfull rich c. This fabulous Tradition how vnworthie soeuer it be of the Maiestie of God of the grauitie of the Scripture of the ministerie of Moses of the beleefe of the Church yet is it nothing neere so detestable as that wicked exercise of those which ayme at and busie themselues now a daies in nothing but in clipping and scraping out the sufficiencie and perfection of the scripture by the same meanes taking away their owne saluation in the bloud of Iesus Christ since that by it wee are redeemed from our vaine conuersation â—at 1. â—8 receiued by Tradition from our Fathers Amongst other workmen which in these times employ themselues in this mysterie or ministery of iniquitie the Lord of Perron Bishop of Eureux wil make known vnto vs that before him none had sufficieÌ„tly manured tilled the ground of this TraditioÌ„ which conuerted Moses from a Prophet into a Lapidarie from a Lawgiuer into a Goldsmith and that like as this Minister of God enriched himselfe in hewing the Tables of the Lawe So the ministers of the Popes Gospell according to the true Anagogicall meaning of this Iewish Tradition cannot better inrich themselues and of Christians become Croesians or Crassians than in conuerting Diuinitie into such a Technologie in cutting of and clipping the Gospell of Iesus Christ â—ue 21 â—â—uel 17.3 c. That the more they take away from the luster of the precious stones wherewith the heauenly Ierusalem is builded the more splendour they giue to the countefeite stones of that woman cloathed in purple and scarlet which ruleth ouer the great Babylon For to couer the cunning that they vse they make no difficulty to doe some honour in shewe to the scripture euen to guild and adore outwardly the bookes which contain it euen theÌ„ when the mine it clip and pare it inwardly Like as at one time Iesus Christ was kissed and betrayed cloathed in purple as a king and buffeted as a foole crucified as a malefactor Or like as yet to this day the Iewes honour the scripture in shew and by gestures forbidding to sit in a place of equall height to that whereon the Bible is laid though in effect they set it infinitely vnder their Thalmud of which they dare with an execrable impudencie say That God himselfe studieth therein the three first houres of the day Lyr. in Luke cap 4. Lib. Benedict c. 1. 3. Vide Hieron a Sancta fide cont Iud. l. 1. in Biblioth S. Patrum tom 4. Also that hee which shall speake any thing of it sinisterly or in euill part shall bee damned in hell whereas hee that transgresseth the Law of God shall receiue none other punishment but to bee called a transgressour of the Lawe Now that none hath so deepely sounded the mysticall meaning of the Iewish Tradition aboue recited as the Bishop of Eureux hath done it is manifest because that not any of the new Besaleels which of later times haue laboured to plaister and to painte the Popes Tabernacle neyther Hosius nor Peresius nor Soto nor Lindanus nor Canus nor Canisius nor yet that Arch-Rabby Bellarmine not any I say had as yet so mightily clipped this spirituall coyne as Gerson calleth the Scripture nor obserued so much drosse nor so many defects in the pure Alley of the lawe of God written by Moses as the Lord of Perron doth who hauing learned this secret of Seruetus and some Anabaptists that the honour of this inuention be not taken from the true authors of it clippeth cutteth of from it not some smal things but the immortalitie of the soule the resurrection of the bodie the last iudgement Paradise and hell c. that he might discredit in like sort thereby and by Analogie â—ohn 15.15 the doctrine of the Gospel of our Lord Iesus Christ who though he protesteth in expresse tearmes to haue declared to his Apostles All things that he had heard of his father Yet notwithstanding this Bishop feareth not to say â—ol 15.8 That the things alone which he hath eyther done or declared with his owne mouth to his disciples are not sufficient to the institution of the Church VVhich is not to make the little mouth but liuely to couÌ„terfait that mouth â—euel 13.5.6 which as Saint Iohn saith vttereth great things Neyther is it to be a dumbe dogge but to barke boldly not against the Moone but euen against the Sunne of righteousnesse A certaine Sophister at Athens writing of the gods â—â—og Laert. â—ot g. declared in the beginning of his booke the doubtes that he had of their essence and the difficulties that he found in this matter of which the Athenians had such horrour that they burnt the booke and banished the Author The like irresolution and perplexitie witnessed a Heathen Philosopher to Saint Augustine â—â—gust Epi. 21. who had enquired of him what opinion he had of Iesus Christ But our Bishop who without difficultie doubt or scruple whatsoeuer peremptorily concludeth That wee are no more to hold Christ for the perfect and sufficient doctor of the Apostles than the Scripture for perfect and sufficient doctrine of all the faithful triumpheth amongst Christians yet against Christians and the Christian faith and findeth no matter fitter for his glorie nor more richer for his purse than such reproaches of the Scripture such blasphemies against Christ Cumanus gouernour of Iudea a heathen and a wicked man caused a souldier to be bee beheaded for tearing a copie of the Booke of the lawe of Moses which he had found at the sacke of a towne The Bishop of Eureux Ioseph Antiq lib. 20. c. which teareth and destroyeth not some copy only but the very original it selfe of this law from which he plucketh away as much as in him lieth the leaues which containe the principles and grounds of our saluation leauing therein nothing whole nothing perfect nothing wholesome nor so much as profitable without his subsidiarie as hee tearmeth it or helping tradition expecteth a Cardinals hat is heaped with spirituall honours and temporall goods so that one may say of him as Apuleius bearing the Idoll on the one side and many bribes on the other said of himselfe that he went as a Temple and a Barne both together But if a Sinon with his treason a Simon with his magicke Horreum â—imuâ— templum iâ—câ—die doe a hundred times more mischiefe the one within Troy the other within the Citie of God than ten thousand enemies than all the infidels could doe together without by open force shall we yet doubt that they which vnder sheepes cloathing yea with a shepheards hooke Ephes 2.20 and Bishopps Crosier staffe vndermining the foundations of the Church Aduer â—tul lib. 3. builded vpon the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles are not more pernicious and daungerous vnto Christendome than
side he hath learned of Cicero that faith is a truth constancie of that which one saith or doth on the other side the Councill of Constance forbiddeth him to keepe faith with heretickes VVhence he ingeniously concludeth â—els 19. that if he had not kept the truth of that was said and done in our conference he had not kept the Decree of the councill but had burst and let out the winde of that holy and sacred Canon considering withall that such frauds cannot be tearmed wicked but godly according to the doctrine of the same Church because they are done for a good intent As for me sith such Canons are not forged in our Church nor such distinctions in our schooles I am not permitted to vse the same liberty wherefore I will adde nothing to the bare recitall of that historie where I haue imitated neither his disguisements nor his inuectiues But if there be found any word somewhat free let him attribute that eyther to the necessitie of my defence or to the delicatenesse of the dayes and let him call to minde that he which saith whatsoeuer hee listeth shall in the end heare what he liketh not when the sharpenes of the truth beginneth to alter the sweetnesse of the delight And since he taketh a verie great pleasure when he reproacheth me that I would not continue the conference vnlesse it were written and signed on both parts so farre am I from repenting me of it or denying it that heere againe I confesse that I insisted vpon it with all endeuour that hee may see that when the truth permitteth me I oppose not my selfe any whit to his delight For it sufficeth me for my contentation to beleeue that the courteous Reader will make none other iudgement of this my iust and necessarie instance Epist 74. than that which S. Augustine hoped when Pascentius the Arrian hauing refused to write and to signe in a disputation that hee had with him neuerthelesse vaunted that hee had ouercome him knowing well that his falsehood could not be conuinced by any act For in that are the lurking holes saith S. Augustine which they seeke that are more desirous of contention than of the truth And as touching the vanities and lies of Pascentius he answereth It is easie to ouercome Augustine but heed is to bee taken whether it be by the truth or by exclamations If it hath not beene easie for the Bishop of Eureux to vanqâ—ish mee in the one sort yet hath it beene most easie for him to doe it in the other being in the middest of his Satellites or parasites who by their acclamations did reenforce his his cries and did like the birds of Psaphon sing his praises But this Psaphon proclamed great god by the chirping of birds Cool Rhod. antiqu Lact. l. 3. c. 5 was soone after declared great deceiuer by the iudgement of meÌ„ For conclusion I giue him the same aduertisement that S. Augustine gaue to Pascentius that he busie not himselfe in seeking how he may ouercome Tillenus which is but a man and the least of men but that he take heed how he may ouercome the truth Vbi sup the perfection of the scripture how with his hammer of winde he can spoyle breake or clippe the tables of the law of God more pure more hard than any Gold than any Diamond the least piece or shiuer of which is more than sufficient to pierce and breake in pieces the forehead of this Goliah though it be of brasse and shamefully to ouerthrow to the earth al this great Colossus which so proudly lifteth vp himselfe against heauen against the voyce which breaketh Cedars Psal 29. and which maketh the mountaines to quake ⧠An Aduertisement to the Reader THou shalt vnderstand Christian Reader that the Bishop wrote since a reply câ—ncerning onely some of the first pointâ— heerein touched priuily passing it into the hands of some of his frienâ—s and fauorites and some whom he laboured to peruert Wherein though his principall intent was secretly to disgrace both the sacred Scripture and this defender of it yet hath it turned wholy to his own disgrace by occasioning this learned man largely to answere it and so more fully to cleare the truth concerning the points touched in his reply VVhich aunswere of D. Tillenus I haue heere also for thy benefit added onely the Bishops reply I haue purposely omitted partly because the ground or as much as is needfull for the vnderstâ—nding of the matter is alreadie aboue at large set downe and partly because it being not meete to trouble thee with needlesse superfluities each word and matter of any moment or worth the answering is in the answere euerie where verbatim for the most part expressed A DEFENCE OF THE SVFFICIENCIE and perfection of the Holy Scripture Against the Cauillations of the Bishop of EVREVX by which he endeauoureth to maintaine his Treatise of the Vnsufficiencie and Imperfection of the holy Scripture THE first question betweene the Bishop of Eureux and I is general namely whether the holy Scripture be perfect and sufficient for to instruct vs in the knowledge of saluation or whether it be not sufficient for that effect The other is speciall namely whether these articles the Immortalitie of the soule the Resurrection of the bodie the last Iudgement Paradise Hell the Creation and distinction of the orders of Angels the Beeing and Creation of Diuels are contained in the bookes of Moses or no In these questions I had attributed the Negatiue to the Bishoppe of Eureux taking the Affirmatiue for my selfe He calleth that Deceiptes because he saith not that the Scripture is vnperfect or vnsufficient but that without Tradition it is not sufficient to refute all heresies And for that hee saith not that these things are not contained in the writings of Moses but either that they were not or did not appeare to the Iewes to bee therein conteined Let vs treate sincerely and leaue deceipts to those who beleeuing none of the foresaide points haue termed Moses a Deceiuer perhaps because he spake too euidently for their liking To the first deceipt he casteth on me is sufficiently answered by a discourse of purpose vpon the Iustification of the Title of his Treatise As touching the other we will first see whether these things be in Moses or no. Secondly we will dispute whether they doe appeare to be there or no. If they be there to what purpose doth hee frame InstaÌ„ce from it to shew the imperfection of the Scripture which is the only scope of his booke Why reiecteth he the places quoted to this purpose out of the fiue bookes of Moses Why are all the reasons brought for the affirmatiue but vaine cold coniectures with him Why sheweth hee not the proper formal places whence I should take them in which alone they are conteined But if they be not contained in the books of Moses wherefore is hee ashamed to confesse it Why am I a Deceiuer with
the scripture Acts â—7 2 1. Cor. 15 Titus 1 12 â—oâ—o 10 which verses got no authority amongst vs til since the time as they were sanctified by the Apostle as Tertullian speaketh though before they conteyned truth The Bishop of Eureux verie vnfitly confoundeth these two tearmes Truth and Authoritie as if euerie sentence and historie conteyning Truth had as much authoritie as a place of holy scripture And if the Apostles alleadge somtimes things not written it must be noted that hauing receiued the spirit in such abundance they discerned better the true traditions from the false than their pretended successours could any waies doe Also ordinarily it is but vpon some circumstance of historie and not for the substance as the names of the Magitians of Pharaoh Iacobs worshipping of God 2 Tim 3 8 Hebr. 11.2 Hebr. 12.2 as he leaned on his staffe certaine words of Moses propounded at the publishing of the Law The fastening of Iosephes feete in the stocks in prison The prophesie of Henoch alledged by S. Iude though it be taken from Tradition as touching the words 〈◊〉 105 18 yet the ground of it appeareth in Scripture which teacheth vs that the Patriarches were ordained for to teach those of their ages and to declare vnto them the iudgements of God And since we finde in Scripture that Henoch continually walked wirh God we gather from thence that he spared not to exhort the men of his time 〈◊〉 5 22.24 to repentance and to threaten them with the wrath of God Considering that the same Scripture teacheth vs that God doth nothing afore he hath reuealed his secrets to his seruants the Prophets â—â—us 2. It is also to be noted that this prophecie of Henoch may be more fitly vnderstood of the vniuersall Iudgement that God executed vpon the world by the flood than of the last Iudgement of the world And forasmuch as they of whom S. Iude speaketh were contemners of God It is to be beleeued that they made as little reckoning of the Scripture as of the authoritie of Iesus Christ â—â—se 4. whom they denyed And therfore the Apostle chooseth rather to alledge vnto them a historie witnessed not only by the Scripture but also by profane Authors who make mention of the Deluge as we learne by Iosephus Eusebius and S. Cyrill But this instance shall be examined more particularly in his place The second fraud whereof he accuseth me is That in stead of shewing the points in question by expresse Texts of Moses or by necessarie consequences and true analogie I shew them by some probable and coniecturall apparances or shewes The Reader which hath eyes to see shall iudge whether there be apparance or substance whether probability or necessity mean while I wil aduertise him of the methode that Du Perron keepeth in answering it 1. He opposeth some maimed exposition of one of our Doctours as if wee did attribute like authoritie to them as the Church of Rome doth to their popes or the like as to the ancieÌ„t fathers of whome the Glosse of the ciuill Canon saith Glos in dist Can Nolim that all their writings are to be held for authenticall euen to the least Iota or title Although sometimes he produce some out of the Rabbines yea euen from some Doctours of the Romish Church 2 He inuenteth one of his owne braine if he finde none in some Interpreter that repugneth mine 3 He reduceth the places of Moses in forme of a cornuted syllogisme in fashion of his miter to make himselfe be laughed at 4 He wresteth my conclusions for what pointe he listeth though I alleadge the places for proofe of another and this he doth that he might make my arguments be found the more absurd and giue himselfe subiect of exclayming that I speake not of all the pointes proposed 5 He saith in the end that the places are not so cleare but a conteÌ„tious spirite may finde some defect And if I confirme my exposition by the testimonie of the Fathers for to shew that others haue vnderstood as I doe the place in question and that I wrest it not to serue myne owne turne His ordinary answere is That the question is not whether some Father hath vnderstood it so or no but whether that can be verified by the onely text of Moses which is the heape of all peruersnes and Impudencie for if I bring but the bare text he saith I am alone of my opinion and that it may be taken otherwise at least by a contentious spirit In a word not onely the places of Moses but also those of Iob Daniel and Dauid most expresse for the Immortality of the soule the resurrection of the body the last iudgment and life Eternall are so feeble vnto him that he sheweth well that he beleeueth those pointes no better than the Saduces for whome he pleadeth And whereas Cicero said to a certaine Aduocate pleading faintly if thou didst not couÌ„terfeit thou wouldest not plead so coldly So contrariwise one may say vnto him that if he feyned he would not plead so eagerly for to imagine that he beleeueth these points by benefite of the inuentarie of Tradition is absurd sith that throughout his whole booke he coÌ„tinually demauÌ„deth insoluble ineuitable demonstrations which none in the world no not the most contentious spirit that is can be able to gainesay protesting that he will not admitt any proofe of Scripture vnlesse it be such Can he finde of this stampe in the treasorie of Tradition Is not his speach the speach of a heathen Atheist â—â—len de â—ll differ l c 4 most execrable which saith That in the Schoole of Moses and of Christ there be harde lawes which are not grounded on any demonstration Felix Gouernour of Iudea a heathen and a wicked maÌ„ when he heard S. Paul speake of the last Iudgment â—â—t 24.25 he trembled for feare and yet the Apostles discourse was onely taken from Moses â—â—t 26.22 and the Prophets if we beleeue him in that which he saith afterwards before Festus and King Agrippa But our Pyrrhonian Bishop findeth â—â—l 11. 22 25 that all that can be alleadged is but matter of mockery and that by Moses saying beasts and fishes are altogither as immortall in their soules as wel coÌ„prised in Gods couenaÌ„te capable of euerlasting life as the creatures which beare the Image of God The Saduces for whome he pleadeth found not the Resurrection of the bodie clearely enough expressed in the writings of Moses for to beleeue them but after that our Sauiour Christ had prooued it by the miraculous raysing vp of Lazarus did they beleeue it for that The Pharises which made profession to beleeue it beleeued they for that that Iesus Christ was the ResurrectioÌ„ the life No more truly theÌ„ an Epicure would haue beleeued the Imortality of the soule seeing Calanus ioccuÌ„dly cast himselfe into the fire although this act seemed to othersome a more pertinent proof for
or spirituall From the same chapter 39. verse one may produce a formall text to a Sadducie for the resurrection For God saith expresly that he killeth and restoreth to life Whence I conclude If God maketh the dead to liue againe they are then raised vp And to him that would alwaies haue expresse words may be alledged Chapter 33. verse 6. where it is said of Ruben let him liue and not dye whence one may conclude He that dyeth not is immortall or raised vp againe Ruben that is that whole tribe dyeth not therefore it is immortall or raised vp againe From the same chapter 29. verse where Israell is called blessed because he is saued by the Lord who is his buckler is framed this argument Whosoeuer is saued by the Lord cannot perish Israell is saued by the lord therefore he cannot perish Our Bishop replyeth to this place that God saueth as well beasts as it is written in 36. Psalme I answer that Moses declareth Israell blessed for that he is saued after a singular and not a common fashion Who is like vnto thee saith hee O people saued by the Lord Du Perron answereth these are beasts 1. Tim. 4 1â— One might shew him the diuerse significations of this word saue in the New Testament where God is called Sauiour that is to say preseruer of all men but especially of the faithfull But since he refuseth the authoritie of this booke in manner of a Sadducie hee shall better vnderstand it by a more familiar example When a murderer is escaped the hands of earthly Iustice men say he is saued but if a Sadducie will change this proposition from it owne proper natue to inferre that hee is therefore wholly saued it shall bee shewed him to the contrary in Moses in the chapter going before where the soueraigne Iudge saith Vengeance is mine I will repay it Also Deu. 32 3 39 vers There is none that can deliuer out of my hand Thereupon may be said to a Saducie that which experience constraineth him to confesse that God doth not alwaies execute vengeance in this life and therefore he must conclude that it is executed after this life else should this text of Moses be false And indeed this reason without any text of Scripture mooued the very heathen to beleeue a Iudgement to come â—om 12. Also the former of these two places seemed to Saint Paule so cleare and manifest that he chose not any other to proue the iudgement of God which this Bishop would faine not find at all neither in Moses nor else where I said in my writings that these fiue points are linked vnseparably together He maintaineth that of the foure last I durst not so much as open my mouth The reader shall iudge if there be not particular and distinct proofes for euery one of them And then he addeth that the question is not of the connexion that they haue in themselues but of that they haue in the minde knowledge of vulgar and ordinary men â—ohn 6.45 I answere that they haue the same connexion in the mindes of them that are taught of God as all the faithfull are as they haue in themselues For true knowledge is that which apprehendeth the true being also the true order of things Now God giueth true knowledge of saluation to them that be his therfore he giueth it vnto them conformably to the true being and order of things that is of the articles necessarie to saluation Yea he giueth it more ordinarily to vulgar and ordinarie men Mat 11 25. than to these high and extraordinarie Gnostickes as the Scripture witnesseth where Iesus Christ giueth thankes to God his father that hee had hid these things from the wise men of vnderstanding and reuealed them to babes The ordinarie meanes hee vseth for to reuele them is the scripture â— Tim. 3 16 â—7 which instructeth a maÌ„ to the making him absolut perfect yea euen the man of god that is to say the Pastor who consequently is to teach nothing else but this doctrin of perfectioÌ„ coÌ„tained in the scripture in which he may shew the connexion of the articles in question as for example in the place of Daniell aboue alledged the resurrection of the body which is there formally presupposeth the immortality of the soule The euerlasting life perpetual ignominie of which there is also there expresse meÌ„tion made are Paradise Hell the property of them both being therein briefly declared and that in forme of a sentence which presupposeth a Iudge to pronounce it a iudgment that he shall execute Now although there hath beene found euen among the heathen that haue perceiued in their minde the connexion of some of these things that this Bishoppe distructeth and diuideth as much as in him lyeth witnesse Plutarch who findeth the coherence betweene the Immortality of the soule and the IudgmeÌ„t of God yet I neither said nor thought that the connexion of all is found in euery Spirit as he would conclude by my discourse for to make himselfe way to surprise me For that were to make faith which is the gift of God a naturall thing Ephe. 2.8 as a certaine ancient hereticke named Basilides did who also denyed the Resurrection and since the Pelagians Clem. Aleâ—â— Strom. l. 4. Tert. de prâ—â— c. 46. from whome the Bishopp of Eureux differeth not much demaunding euer such demonstrations as no contentious Spirit should be able to gainsay and opening by this meanes a liberty to beleeue what one listeth yea to beleeue nothing at all of the things controuerted and gainsayed I said also that Abraham referred the rich mans brethren for to preserue them out of Hell not only to the prophets but also to Moses He answereth very pleasantly Luk. 16.19 21. Fol. 53. That he referred them not onely to Moses but also to the Prophets the knowledge they might haue from Moses not being sufficient to giue them any perfect assurance of it without the helpe light of the Prophets Let vs obserue here againe the vncertaintie and Pirrhonian perplexity of our Bishopp He dare not deny but that there is something of these articles in Moses for otherwise Abraham should haue mocked the brethren of the damned rich man referring them to a booke where there was nothing that was necessary for them and notwithstanding he is not ashamed to reiect as impertineÌ„t all the places produced out of it without quoting any other that is fitt and proper at least in his iudgment Moreouer seeing that the writings of the Prophets themselues without excepting that excellent place of Daniell which conteyneth in formall tearmes the Resurrection euerlasting life 〈◊〉 32. 〈◊〉 54. and perpetuall ignominie as aboue hath beene shewed are so obscure and improper to conuince a gainsayer as he affirmeth what shamefull contradiction is this to call them here a helpe and light to vnderstand the bookes of Moses He addeth further That Abraham