say ordinarily beget Faith work Repentance and breed sanctity and newnesse of life not so Reading May it please you then to tell vs for our better satisfaction what such coherence there is betwixt Sermons and Faith which is not betwixt it and Reading And what that intrinsicall and proper quality of Sermons is whereby Faith is begotten which is not also to be found in Reading Is it in the doctrine and matter of Sermons It is the very same which wee read Is it in the arguments and motiues whereby they perswade We read either the same or as forcible in the Scripture What then Is it in the vtterance voice gesture behauiour or credit of the Preacher Much lesse for then should we be beholding for our Faith to accidents more then substance to the plausible inticements of humane wisdome rather then the evidence demonstration of the spirit Wherein then lies the vertue Forsooth in Gods blessing for Preaching is the ordinance of God and he hath promised to blesse it But stay my bretheren is not Reading Gods ordinance also And doth God having imprinted in it such an aptnesse and fitnesse ordinarily to beget Faith either curse his owne ordinance or suspend the operation of it so as it shall never worke but only extraordinarily What shall I say When they haue answered what they can vnto the question the summe of all as Hooker obserueth will be this Sermons are and must be the only ordinary meanes but why and wherefore we cannot tell And so I passe from the first argument drawne from the aptnesse and fitnesse of Reading to produce all these kindes of Faith Now in the second place I dispute ex concessis from that which is yeelded and granted by the adversarie First it is granted by Hieron and we haue proued it by the testimonie of M. Fox to be true that many of our forefathers in the blinde time of Popery were converted to the true Faith by reading only This say they was extraordinary but I infer that therfore it was ordinary For if reading be excluded sermōs be the only ordinary means it will follow that the Church at that time was without the ordinary meanes for wholsome Sermons then were not to bee had But it is a strange point in Divinity that the Ordinary meanes should at any time fayle in the Church and I presume when that fayleth the Church of God will fayle also If so then is there some other ordinary meanes besides Sermons and what can that bee but the written word and the Reading thereof It is further granted and that rightly that whosoever readeth the Scriptures or heareth them read is therevpon bound to beleeue And this is so cleare a truth that Whitaker could not forbare to charge his adversary Stapleton with much folly for holding the contrary Sic tu planè desipis saith he Art thou so very a foole as to thinke that the word of God hath no authority or bindeth no man to beleeue but then when it is preached Certainely if the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles was to be beleeued when it was deliuered by them in their Sermons it is as much now to be beleeued when it is convayed vnto vs by way of writing and reading Wherevpon saith Caluin Although the Apostles be dead yet their doctrine liueth flourisheth and it is our dutie to profit by their writing as much as if themselues were now publikely speaking before our eyes Vnlesse therefore Gods word cease to bee his word when it is read an obligation in reading is laid vpon vs to yeeld all credence and obedience vnto it Now God bindeth not but by a commandement He commandeth therefore to beleeue by Reading What Doth he command vs to beleeue by a meanes that is vtterly vnable and vnfit to worke beleefe And doth hee daily and hourely tye our Faith vnto that which hee meanes not to blesse vnto that end but once as it were in an age and extraordinarily Questionlesse seeing God hath ordained that his holy Scriptures be ordinarily read both in publike and private and hath bound vs all to beleeue whensoeuer we either read them or heare them read it cannot be but that Reading is an ordinary meanes to beget faith and that God will alwaies vouchsafe to blesse his owne ordinance to the same end In the third place I vrge the testimonie and authoritie of holy writ But happily so doing I may be counted in the number of those vile men who like venomous spiders suck poyson out of the sweetest flowres 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the die is cast and angry speeches may not hinder me from maintaining truth by the word of truth When all Israell saith Moses is come to appeare before the Lord thy God in the place which he shall chuse thou shalt read this law before all Israell in their hearing Gather the people together men and women and children and thy stranger that is within thy gates that they may heare and that they may learne and feare the Lord your God and obserue to doe all the words of his Law Here in expresse tearmes the Reading of the law is commanded and it is particularly commanded to this end that men may learne thereby What the feare of God and obedience to the Law God therefore hath appointed Reading to be an Ordinary meanes of conversion It is answered that such Reading is meant as was accompanied with interpretation So they dreame indeed but in the text there is no mention of interpretation Neither is it likely seeing now the whole law was to be read at once as is aboue said and the scantling of time would hardly beare any exposition Howsoeuer sure I am the holy Ghost ascribeth the effect vnto Reading and I thinke hee both knewe and meant what hee said In the Prophecie of Ieremie God commandeth the Prophet to write all his Prophecies in a booke that all the house of Iudah might heare them read for it may bee saith God that hearing they may returne every man from his evill way that I may forgiue their iniquity and their sinne According to this commandement Ieremie dictates all the Prophecies vnto Baruch Baruch writes them and being written reads them in the house of the Lord. Here againe Reading is commanded by God and to the same end that the people thereby might bee moued to repentance To this they answer first that God speaketh after the manner of men True when he saith it may be as if he knewe no more then man what the effect would bee Yet is it plainely intimated that Reading is an ordinary meanes of repentance Secondly say they Ieremie had preached the same before and so they are Sermons that are commanded to be read Be it so Yet then the very Reading of Sermons may worke Repentance which the Preaching of them could not To say nothing that these Sermons written were Gods word both for matter and manner so that if the Reading of them might be
thing which is to teach commanded also the manners of teaching which are to preach with liuely voice and to set forth the doctrine in writing both of them being fit for teaching and this latter most fit for to continue and to transferre doctrines and instructions vnto posterity Daniel Chamier in his Panstratia Tomo 1. Lib. 1. c. 21. num 6. To teach comprehendeth as well the liuely voice as writing So Paul preached the Gospell vnto the Romanes no lesse by writing an epistle vnto thē then teaching them by liuely voice out of the prison And it is the solemne custome of the Fathers when they cite any thing out of the Apostles writings to expresse it in these words The Apostle teacheth yea St Paul ascribeth vnto the Scriptures that they make a man wise Ibid num 7. All men know that a thing may be related two waies both by liuely voice and by writing For as those things which are in the voice are signes of those things which are in the minde so those things which are in the writing are signes of those which are in the voice And therefore the same is both waies equally signified or related Ibid. cap. 22. num 2. Because the liuely voice is vsed to no other end saue to expresse the meaning of the speaker and Scripture doth evidently expresse the meaning of God speaking vnto vs therefore in this respect it is false that the Scriptures are dumb For we no lesse vnderstand that a man is justified by Faith when wee read it in Paul then when Paul himselfe pronounced it with his liuely voice Lib. 6. cap. 5. num 7. The written word is distinguished from the word preached by no substantiall difference For they differ neither in specie nor in genere nor in number but only in accident So for example that Sermon which first S. Peter made vnto the Iewes after the gift of the holy Ghost differeth not from that which we read Act. 2. related by S. Luke saue only as writing is not a liuely voice yet because writing is no other then the image of a liuely voice so little difference letteth not but that I may affirme the Sermon which I there read to bee the same which S. Peter then made Wherefore if it be the same Sermon in number why may not the same bee affirmed of the same and I truely avouch it to bee read in S. Luke Hauing heard these things they were pricked in heart These things I say which both Peter then deliuered by liuely voice and now S. Luke representeth vnto vs. Ibid. cap. 18. num 8. Vergerius an Italian Bishop who had negotiated many businesses for the Pope against Luther vndertaking to write a booke against the Apostates of Germanie for so he tearmed them and diligently seeking out their arguments to confute them was himselfe so overcome by the strength of them that rejecting his Bishopricke and the hope of a Cardinalship hee vtterly renounced all Popish tyranny Ibid. lib. 7. cap. 9. num 17. The meditation of the Scriptures is doubtlesse an Ordinary meanes ordained by God to procure Faith For these things are written that yee might beleeue Ioh. 20. Ibid. lib. 10. cap. 6. num 11. To preach comprehends not only the liuely voice but also writing so that those words Preach the Gospell are thus to be vnderstood intimate the Gospell vnto all nations by what meanes soever it may be rightly intimated whether it bee by liuely voice or by writing D. Davenant B. of Sarumon Coloss. 1.9 pag. 64. They are not carried by an Apostolicall but Antichristian spirit who deny vnto Laicks the Ordinary meanes of begetting wisdome spirituall vnderstanding namely Reading and vnderstanding of Gods word For the law of the Lord is immaculate converting soules the testimonie of the Lord is faithfull giuing wisdome to the simple Psal. 19-7 Psal. 119.130 in English meeter When men first enter into the word They finde a light most cleare And very Idiots vnderstand When they it read or heare Phil Melancthon Enarrat Symboli Niceni In conversion these causes concurre the holy Ghost mouing the heart by the Gospell the voice of the Gospell weighed and considered either when it is heard or when it is read or in godly meditation and the will of man not resisting the voice of God but assenting although with some trepidation Ainsworth Counterpoison p. 116. The Gospell noted to bee the meanes of our calling 2. Thes. 2.14 hee maketh knowne vnto his people outwardly by his word 2. Cor. 5.19 spoken Act. 5.20 and written Ioh. 20.31 and inwardly by his holy spirit Neh. 9.20 1 Cor. 2 10.12 FINIS IOH. 17.1 c. These things spake IESVS and lift vp his eyes to Heaven and said c. ALL holy writ simply and in it selfe considered is of equall worth and dignity the Author the Matter and the Manner being in every part alike Divine Howbeit considered respectiuely and in relation vnto vs one Scripture without impeachment or derogation may iustly be preferred to another For as touching the Matter some Scriptures are more importing vs as containing doctrines of Absolute necessitie to bee beleeued whereas others are so only in the Disposition and Preparation of the Minde And as for the Manner whereas others are darkly and obscurely deliuered some are so attempered and proportioned vnto the weaknesse of our capacity that they are more easie and available for our instruction and edification In both these Respects this seventeenth Chapter of the Gospell after S. Iohn seemeth to me among all other to be the most eminent For if you regard the Matter it containes Doctrines of highest nature and consequence as being the very foundation of the Churches happinesse and the anchor of all her hope If the For me it is so heavenly and divine so powerfull and perswasiue that he must needs be destitute of all spirituall sense and tast whosoeuer with the naked and bare reading thereof is not extraordinarily ravished and affected The serious and due consideration of all which together with the vnspeakable benefit that might grow to the people of God by the right dividing and handling thereof hath at length ouercome and perswaded me to vndertake at times the interpretation of this whole Chapter in this place That so if it please God before I sing my nunc dimittis I may with these treasures satisfie some part of the debt I owe therevnto both for my birth breeding And because these first words now read seeme vnto mee not vnfitting the present occasion or to succeed what I haue already deliuered vpon the like occasions I haue thought good at this time to make entrance therevpon so as it is in the proverb Vnâ fideliâ duos dealbare parietes to dispatch two businesses at once For hauing heretofore vindicated the Dignitie of the Ministrie from the Contempt whereto it is subject by prescribing a soueraign Remedie Defensatiue against it as also hauing demonstrated the power and efficacie of Preaching
in such ascantling of time there could bee no expounding In the dayes of good King Iosiah the booke of the law which Hilkiah had found in the house of the Lord was read in the eares of all the people but of exposition not a word Ezra also the Priest read the law before the congregation from morning till midday but that his reading was interrupted by interpretation is not so cleare as you are borne in hand For first if any did interpret it was the Levites but that Ezra the Priest and a Scribe so learned should be put to the inferior and baser office of reading and the Levites but pettie ones in comparison advanced vnto the higher and worthier of interpreting seemes altogether improbable Secondly where it is said the Levites caused the people to vnderstand the law that it seemes was done not by way of expounding but by causing the people to stand still in their places and to giue due attention As for that which followes they gaue the sense and caused them to vnderstand the reading it is in the originall thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and may fitly be rendred they made attention and vnderstood the reading referring the distinct reading of the law vnto Ezra making of attention to the Levites vnderstanding to the people And thus doe sundry worthy Divines conceiue of this place All which not withstanding because diverse other great clarkes amongst the rest our late translators are of another mind I may not be too peremptorie herein Yet will I be bold to inferre that vnlesse they can proue that sermons were every Sabbath made in evey Synagogue which I thinke they will neuer proue Preaching in this place will be all one with Reading So will it be also vnlesse they can shew that whatsoever was read was expounded for it seemes by the text that whatsoever was read was preached But as with vs the Psalmes and Lessons and Epistles and Gospells with other parcells of Scripture read every Lords day in our Churches are not nor cannot all at once be expounded but only some small portion so the Petaroths or Sections of the law and the Prophets ordained by Ezra of old to be read in the Synagogues every Sabbath day are as they are set downe by the sonne of Maimonie so large that they could not possibly at leastwise conveniently bee interpreted at one time I presume therefore all was not interpreted which was read yet all was preached which was read wherefore Preaching cannot in this place bee interpreted but only Reading Besides these reasons least any should thinke I stand single and by my selfe alone it may please you to know that I am backed with the authority of sundry graue Divines of whom I will name two onlie with either of whom that one to whom we are referred is no way to be compared The one is reverend Whitgift late Archbishop of the See of Canterbury in his defence against Cartwright the other is learned and profound Hooker the hammer of our Schismatickes whose bookes they are afraid to looke vpon least they be confounded in his Ecclesiasticall Politie These both affirme Preaching in this place to be no other then Reading Whitgift addes that all expositors he could meet withall were of the same mind so that in effect I am warranted with a cloud of witnesses Against all which besides confident asseveration I find nothing opposed saue one only passage out of the second tome of Homilies wherein say they our church doth principallie fasten on this text to proue a distinction betweene Preaching and Reading Wherevnto I answere that the intent of the Homilie is to shew the right vse of Churches and that in them the word of God should be both read and interpreted and to this end are alledged sundry passages out of the Acts together with this text all which ioyntly but not severally conclude what was intended For Act. 13.5 speaketh only of Preaching this text only of Reading and Act. 13.14 of both But how soever the Homilie vnderstand this place sure I am both this booke and the Church of England account of Reading as an effectuall Preaching as shall anon in the due place be demonstrated In the meane season I hope I may be bold out of all these premises to inferre this conclusion that if any haue publikely said that whosoever collecteth out of this text Reading to be Preaching is no better then a seducing spirit giues the lye to his mother the Church of England yea to God himselfe and is mad with reason Hee himselfe at that time spake more out of Passion then reason For a seducing Spirit is not every one that erreth and delivereth what he conceiueth to be true but hee who out of the loue of errour endeavoureth to lead others astray from the truth And ô thou glorious Archangell of the Church of England Whitgift wert thou also a seducing Spirit Or was it true of our Church in thy time which the Prophet spake of his Doctores tui Seductores tui thy teachers are thy seducers And thou profound Hooker then whom never any man spake with more reason werst thou also mad with reason And yee both when yee vndertooke the defence of the Politie and government of your Mother did you vnder pretence thereof giue the lye vnto your Mother yea even to God your Father also What shall I say The Lord forgiue these intemperate speeches The best buckler to defend off such venimous arrowes is a good conscience and Christian patience And thus armed I passe to the second part The second Quere is whether Reading be a kinde of Preaching That Reading should be called or counted a kinde of Preaching there is a generation that at no hand can endure Such language they hold to be a foule Solecisme in divinity but the doctrine it selfe a great impeachment vnto Preaching What say they when our Saviour commanded his Apostles to goe into the World and to preach the Gospell vnto all creatures is it not a sottish thing to thinke hee meanes no more then this goe learne to read well then call the people together and read the word vnto them When St Paul saith to the Romans How can they preach except they bee sent doth not this imply that Preaching is more then bare Reading When the Prophet Esay said How beautifull vpon the mountaines are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings that publisheth peace c. Doe you thinke hee spake this of one that should come with a booke in his pocket and read vnto Sion Who saith S. Paul is sufficient for these things Now if Reading be Preaching who is not sufficient for these things Finally When S. Paul chargeth Timothy to preach the word to be instant in season out of season to reproue rebuke exhort withall long suffering and doctrine What meanes he no more then this goe take a care to read well These are their choicest objections out of
Reading gathered by the Author since the Preaching of this Sermon Babington on the second petition TWo extremities there are which of all Gods chosen are to be eschewed the one is an estimation of Reading so great as that being had wee feele no want neither thinke it a want never or seldome to haue any Preaching The other is so farre to extoll Preaching as that wee vtterly contemne Reading yea exclude it from all power in the blessing of God to worke faith in vs or any The meane betwixt both which is a right and true conceit both of Reading and Preaching Know we therefore that in the word they are both commended yea commanded and ordained of the Lord as meanes to erect this kingdome of his in our hearts for which wee pray and of which we now speake And first for reading to name but a few places of a number marke what the Lord saith in his law laid downe for all his people Deut. 31.9 Act. 13.15 Luc. 4.16 Ier. 36.6 See and marke both the warrant of Reading and a profit hoped for by it of the godly So farre were they ever from either contemning this meanes or from denying it power in Gods blessing to worke Faith and repentance in the hearers Also a little after Let no Harding therefore in the name of all blasphemous Papists call reading of the Scripture to the people in the Church a spirituall dumbenesse and a thing vnprofitable but let vs euer with the chosen of the Lord receiue the good of it and blesse God for our liberty Dr Davenant B. of Sarum vpon the Epist. to the Collâ—ssians pag. 522. They erre who deny that the reading of the Scriptures doth not availe to the edifying of Christian people in Faith and Charity vnlesse at the same time there bee ioyned therewith an enarration or explication of them by a Preacher God forbid that we should extenuate the vtility or necessity of preaching yet wee affirme with the Psalmist touching the word of God studiously and devoutly read that the law of God is immaculate converting soules the testimony of the Lord is faithfull giuing wisdome to the simple Psal. 19.7 Dr Fulke against Heskins Pag. 6. The force of Christs word is as great by his spirit in the Scriptures which this dogge calleth the dead letters as it was in the voice when it was vttered Pag. 25. This to wit that the people must be taught and learne hard cases of the Priests shall be granted to the vttermost so that you will allow the people to Learne such things as are easie not only of the Priests but also of their owne reading studie and conference with them that are no Priests Dr Googe in his whole armour of God Pag. 217. Quest. Whether is the word preached only or the word read also a meanes of working Faith Ans. It may not be denyed but the holy Scriptures themselues and good commentaries on them and printed Sermons or other bookes laying forth the true doctrine of the Scripture being read and vnderstood may by the blessing of God worke faith But the speciall ordinary meanes and most powerfull vsuall meanes is the word Preached This is it which the Scripture layeth downe Rom. 10.14 1. Cor. 1.21 Mayer on Iames cap. 1. v. 18. Pag. 183. Quest. But is it necessarie that the word should bee Preached to the engendring of faith in vs or will it not suffice to read it Ans. It is not to be doubted but a man may be converted by the word read For Luther by reading was turned from Popery and Iohn Huske by reading of Wickliffes bookes And in the margent he noteth that Saint Augustine saith he was converted by reading Confes. lib. 8. cap. 12. whatsoeuer is set forth in Preaching the same is read also and the reading of the word in a large sence as Preaching is put for publishing Gods will to the hearer is said to be Preaching Act. 15.21 and such as read are pronounced blessed Rev. 1.3 yet notwithstanding when the word is preached as preaching in a more strict sence signifieth expounding teaching and exhorting out of the word of God it is more effectuall Wheatly in his new birth Pag. 17. There may be a question made whether the word of God read only may become effectuall to regenerate or whether it must want this efficacy vnlesse it be Preached as well as Read To which question mee thinkes that this should be a true answer that the instrumentall power of regenerating cannot bee denied to the Scriptures barely read though Preaching be not ioyned withall For why seeing the doctrine of the Gospell is called the ministration of the spirit and it is the doctrine of the Gospell when it is offered to the vnderstanding by bare reading therefore it must follow that in such case also it may become the power of God vnto salvation and the instrument of the spirit vnto regeneration The same precepts promises and threats are by reading delivered to the mind of the man that readeth or heareth the word read And why then should wee thinke that the Holy Ghost either cannot or will not worke together with them Yea doubtlesse hee can doe it when he will and will doe it then whensoeuer he doth not as oftentimes he doth not afford to men a possibility of enioying any other helpe then reading Vnlesse the not being preached could make the word not to be the law of God I see no reason that it should be thought vnable to convert soules without being preached And a little after It will not at all follow that because the word read is able to beget Faith either the Ministers may content themselues vsually to read it without preaching or the people vsually content themselues to heare it so and not be carefull to seeke for the preaching of it Amies in his Medulla Theologiae lib. 2. cap. 8. Numb 5. Hearing therefore in this place is any Perception whatsoeuer or comprehension of the words of God whether they be communicated by Preaching or reading or by any other meanes Numb 6. This word therefore of Hearing is not so narrowly and strictly to be vnderstood that either principally or necessarily it should alwaies include the outward sence of hearing but that it should denote any perception of the will of God Tilenus in his defence of the Perfection of Scripture Pag. 5. Let vs see this enthymeme or imperfect argument of Pyrrhonian Logicke The Apostles first taught by liuely voice Ergo they pretended not to teach by their writings which succeeded their preaching The consequence is as good as who should say one eateth first for to nourish himselfe therefore drinke serueth nothing to nourishmeÌ„t A non distributo ad distributum c. And a little after Wee know that to preach and to write are things very accordant and which are comprehended in one and the same commandement giuen to the Apostles teach all nations which yet to this day they teach by their writings He which commanded them the
Adam the tenour whereof runnes thus Hoc fac vives Doe this and thou shalt liue hee gaue it not vnto the person of Adam alone but vnto all those that were in his loines even to all his posterity who had the law printed in their hearts by nature In like manner when Christ commanded the Gospell of Faith and repentance to be preached he limited it not vnto a few but said vnto his Apostles Goe teach all nations and goe into all the world and preach the Gospell vnto every creature Neither from the law nor from the Gospell was any man excepted God is no accepter of persons the hand that swaies a scepter and that diggeth with the spade are both alike vnto him Idem ius Titio quod Seio one rule vnto all whether they be high or low noble or base rich or poore learned or vnlearned bond or free young or old of what state age sexe or condition soever they be God hath not strowed the way to Heaven with roses for great ones to dance vpon and with thornes for the meaner sort to tread vpon neither hath hee appointed a spacious and broad way for some and a strait narrow way for other some to passe vnto life everlasting by For the waies of the Lord are strait waies and as betweene two points there can be but one strait line drawne so can there bee but one strait way that leadeth vnto life Vno quisque modo bonus est mutisque nefandus a man may be wicked many waies but he can bee good only one way A thousand byâ—pathes are there which lead vnto destruction and but one only right path that leadeth to salvation For there is but one body and one spirit and one hope in which all are called one Lord one faith one baptisme one God and father of vs all in a word one Blessednesse which is the end and one Religion which is the way to that end through which way every man of necessity must passe that meaneth to arriue at that end Now I beseech you all that heare mee this day of what place soever you be whether high or low that you will be pleased every one to apply this individually and singularly vnto himselfe and to take notice that none of you can come after Christ but only by the same way Every one must deny himselfe every one must take vp his crosse daily every one must follow Christ or else yee cannot possibly come after him There is none of you so meane whom God overseeth or neglecteth none so great whom he priuiledgeth or exempteth And thus much of the generality of the Counsell The Forme of words in which the Counsell was deliuered is if any will let him which as wee haue said importeth the liberty of them that are counselled For it is as if our Saviour should thus haue said Behold I tell you all plainely no man can come after me vnlesse hee deny himselfe take vp his crosse daily and follow me Now if any will thus come after me I giue him good leaue let him doe so for my part I will neither force him from me nor after me if he come he shall come willingly If any will let him First therefore Christ putteth off and forceth no man from him For God would haue all men to be saved and to come vnto the knowledge of the truth neither is he willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance I haue no pleasure in the death of him that dieth saith the Lord God nay he sweares as he liues hee will not the death of a sinner but that the wicked turne from his way and liue And certainly seeing man is the creature of God and creation is the first emanation issue as it were of his loue it cannot be that hee should delight in his destruction He made not death as the wise man saith and when he inflicts it alienum opus facit he doth a worke not so pleasing him for he had rather shew mercy then execute iudgement Hence is it that he standeth at the doore of our heart and knocketh yea that he continueth knocking vntill his head be filled with dew and his lockes with the drops of the night that he requesteth vs so louingly to giue him entrance Open vnto mee my sister my loue my doue my vndefiled promising so bountifully that if wee shall open vnto him he will come in vnto vs and sup with vs and wee with him and threatning vs that as if we come vnto him wee shall finde refreshment so if wee draw backe his soule shall haue no pleasure in vs. Neither let vs thinke but that God meaneth seriously in all this for otherwise he should but mocke and deceiue vs pretending one thing and intending another and which I tremble to speake playing the hypocrite and dissembler with vs. Besides this he should make vs the ministers of the Gospell no better then false witnesses vnto him testifying things that are vntrue and which he never purposed whereas God being omnipotent needeth not our lye and being truth it selfe will not compasse his end by a lye Finally if Christ with his hands should push from him those whom by his word he inviteth to him then they that come not are the more excusable for every one may plead for himselfe that he suffered violence and Christ himselfe hindred him whose force no creature is able to withstand Christ then forceth no man from him If so whence then is it that many who are invited come not I answere the fault is in themselues they will not come I called saith Wisdome yee refused I stretched out my hand no man regarded yee set at naught all my counsells and would none of my reproofe And againe I called saith God and yee did not answere I spake and yee did not heare but did evill before mine eyes and did chuse that wherein I delighted not Wherefore he protesteth by the prophet Osea Perditio tua ex te Israell thy destruction is of thy selfe oh Israell and complaineth by the prophet Ezechiell why will ye dye ô house of Israell as if he should say if yee dye it is because yee will needs dye They refused to harken saith Zacharie and pulled away the shoulder and stopped their eares that they should not heare yea they made their hearts as an adamant stone least they should heare the law In like manner in the new testament How often would I haue gathered thy children together as the hen gathereth her chickens vnder her wings and yee would not Marke the words I would therefore Christ forceth no man from him yee would not therefore the fault is in our selues The Pharisees and Lawyers saith St Luke reiected the counsell of God against themselues our Saviour testifieth of the Iewes that they would not come vnto him that they might haue life
truth of which three questions while I endeavour to resolue not so much with heat and vehemence of passion as strength and evidence of reason let me entreat you all Right Worshipfull Reverend and beloued Christian brethren but for the space of one houre to lay aside all preiudice and to heare with indifference what I can say When I haue done if my resolutions appeare to be grounded vpon sound and convincing arguments I hope you will according to your duties readily yeeld vnto the truth if otherwise every one may still abound in his owne sense and yee haue free liberty to carry home the same opinion ye brought hither with you In the meane season I beseech the Lord to direct your hearts and to giue you a right iudgement in all things The first Quere is whether preaching in this place be distinguished from reading In resoluing whereof I will not be so peremptory as some are only I will shew what I conceiue and vpon what grounds This I conceiue that Preaching here is no other then the publike Reading of Moses and I conceiue so vpon these grounds because there appeareth nothing in the words to force a distinction but rather something importing an identity That there is nothing to enforce a distinction appeares if either yee consider the context and reason of the words or the text it selfe and the forme of words vsed therein First therefore as touching the Context It is manifest by this particle For that these words are inferred as a reason vpon some thing premised Thus. Some of the beleeuing Pharisees had taught the brethren at Antioch that except they were circumcised and together with the faith of Christ obserued the ceremonie of Moses they could not be saved Whereof after much altercation and dispute the Apostles being advertized they summon a counsell at Ierusalem to stint the quarrell In it Saint Peter expresly affirmeth that salvation is impossible by the law and that the grace of Christ is of it selfe every way sufficient which sentence Saint Iames hauing readily approved he adds withall that for the setling of the Churches peace it would not be amisse to write vnto the beleeuing Gentiles that they abstaine from pollutions of idols from fornication from things strangled and from blood For saith he Moses of old time hath in every Citty them that preach him being read in the Synagogues every Sabbath day Now how comes in this For and what is that conclusion whereof this is a reason Heere I finde difference of opinions but among them all three seeme to me to bee most probable Of them all take which you list and the publike Reading of Moses alone will bee a sufficient proofe thereof The first opinion is Saint Chrysostoms in whose iudgement Saint Iames would proue this conclusion that it is altogether needlesse to write vnto the beleeuing Iewes touching abstinence from these things And why is it needlesse Because they perfectly know these things already But how came they to the knowledge of them By hearing Moses publikely read in the Synagogues every Sabbath day for he in such cleare expresse tearmes hath deliuered the same that whosoeuer heareth cannot but take notice thereof as besides sundry other places you may see in Num. 25. and Lev. 17. which you may pervse at your better leasure The second opinion is of the French translators this Ye may not thinke that by this decree the law of Moses will be vilipended or disesteemed Why Because the Reading of Moses saith the marginall note will not be discontinued in the assemblies of the beleeuing Iewes neyther will the beleeuing Gentiles make scruple to assist them therein The third and last is the common opinion and carries with it best likelyhood this We must for a while condescend to the beleeuing Iew in observation of the ceremonie least wee scandall them and cause them to stagger in the faith The reason because they know by the weekely reading of Moses that it is his ordinance to whom they are so strongly addicted that they cannot yet without danger to their faith be weaned from him And thus take which of these conclusions you please and the sole reading of Moses is a sufficient proofe thereof You will say so is interpretation also I denie it not only I affirme that from the context or reason of the words yee cannot force a distinction betweene Preaching and Reading No more can you from the Text and the forme of words vsed therein Indeed if the words were in the originall as Hieron to whom wee are referred englishes them debellatum esset the warre were ended For thus he renders them Moses was both read and preached then which a plainer distinction cannot bee Whether so reading he intended the advantage of his cause I will not say Demortuis nil nisi bene he was while hee liued a graue and reverend preacher Howbeit the originall reads otherwise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hee hath them that preach him being read Beza turnes it thus cum legatur seeing he is read others thus in that or inasmuch as hee is read Which how it can inforce a distinction I see not rather it imports the contrary that Preaching here is no other then Reading So seemeth the Syriack also to vnderstand it Moses hath Caroze Haralds or Criers in the Synagogues who read him every Sabbath day And indeed the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here vsed whence also Caroze as Casauhon thinketh fetcheth its pettigree properly imports the art of a Praeco or Crier Now Praeco a crier as Whitaker obserueth Recitat edicta non exponit barely reads or recites his Princes edicts doth not expound them If then I should say the King hath in every towne those that preach or publish his proclamations being openly read by the Towneclarke vpon market dayes could any man of sense or vnderstanding distinguish the preaching or publishing of the proclamation from the publike reading thereof No more can he Preaching from reading in this place for the case is exactly the same Adde herevnto that such Preaching euen in the judgement of the adversarie is here meant as was ever performed in every Synagogue vpon every Sabbath day Now that Moses of old was read in the Synagogues every Sabbath day it is cleare in my text So is it also Act. 13.27 the voices of the Prophets are read every Sabbath day But that Moses in every Synagogue every Sabbath day was interpreted and Sermons made vpon him doth not appeare and I thinke will hardly be proued For as for those places where in mention is made of exhortation after reading they are to little purpose inasmuch as they only show what sometimes and vsually not what was alwaies done In the Sabbatticall yeare vpon the feast of Tabernacles the law was commanded to be read of expounding there is no mention at all Nay seeing then the whole law was intirely to be read it seemes very probable that
more waies then by Sermons Howbeit I deny not but in some sense it may be truely said where vocall Preaching is not there the people perish not for that they want the Ordinary meanes as long as they haue the written word but because of their negligence and retchlesnesse who of themselues will not search the Scripture nor seeke the truth vntill others bring it home vnto them Thirdly they object that of the Apostle It pleased God by the foolishnesse of Preaching to saue them that beleeue where say they Faith and Salvation are tied vnto Preaching But first I deny that Preaching is here the making of a Sermon for it is not in the Originall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imports not the act of Preaching but the object or thing preached Hence Whitaker expresseth it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which is preached and Zanchy yet more manifestly by Doctrina Evangelica the doctrine of the Gospell And this indeed seemes foolishnes vnto the naturall man yet being knowne by what way soeuer it worketh Faith and is the power of God to â—alvation Secondly suppose that preaching of Sermons were here meant yet what consequence is this Sermons breed Faith ergo Reading doth not For both may This is their solemne errour they labour to shew what vertue sermons haue but never shew that such vertue belongs to Sermons only Lastly they obiect that of S. Paul to the Romans How shall they call on him in whom they haue not beleeued How shall they beleeue in him of whom they haue not heard And how shall they heare without a Preacher Here Invocation is chained to Faith Faith to Hearing and Hearing to Preaching This is their Achilles and therefore will wee endeauour to giue it full satisfaction First then graunt that Faith dependeth vpon such Preaching as may bee heard yet this lets not but it may be the effect of reading for when the word is publikely read I hope it is heard also But I answere secondly and more roundly to the purpose that Hearing in this place betokeneth not onely the outward act or as Philosophers call it passion of the eare but whatsoever else is analogicall and proportionable therevnto as namely Reading and Seeing and the like And herein least any should thinke me singular or to maintaine a strange Paradoxe it may please you to knowe that I am warranted both by the language of holy Scripture and the judgement of our best Divines In scripture the heavens and the firmament are said to haue a speech and when by seeing and contemplating them we learne the invisible things of God wee are said to heare their voice The word written hath in like manner a mouth a voice a speech giuen vnto it whereby it speaketh it cryeth it testifieth and when we looke vpon it or read if for our instruction we are said to heare They haue Moses and the Prophets let them heare them saith Abraham in the Parable and S. Paul Doe yee not heare the Law Scriptum enim est for it is written And if as Cyprian saith When we read God speaketh vnto vs how can it bee but that in reading we heare the voice of God When we receaue a letter from our friend wee are said to heare from him why not from God also when wee read his letter For so the Fathers stile the Scriptures Certainely our worthiest Divines conceaue of hearing no otherwise in this place Learned Iunius It will bee said Faith commeth by hearing the answer is ready Hearing is of the word whether it be spoken or written And againe As the word spoken and written differ only in this that the one is sounded in the ayre the other is apparelled in white paper and garded with blacke lines to the end one may see it and hold it by the coat which pronounced only would fly away so hearing and seeing in regard of the effect is all one Writing to speaking and seeing the booke to Hearing is analogicall So Iunius Zanchie Legendo Scriptur as audimus In Reading we heare the Scriptures Dr Fulke S. Paul did preach the Gospell also by writing and the people did heare by reading D. Whitaker writing is the imitation of speech auditur ergo therefore it is heard And the same D. Whitaker interpreting these very words Faith commeth by Hearing limiteth it not vnto the outward eare but extendeth it thus ex auditu id est ex sensu Scripturae rectè percepto by Hearing that is by vnderstanding the right meaning of Scripture by what way soever This exposition Wotton approuing he further addes that it is not the Apostles purpose to disable the word Read but partly to shew that the meanes of salvation proceed from God alone partly that no man might excuse himselfe by ignorance God hauing sent his servants into all the world without which sending none might preach either by word or writing and without which preaching no man could beleeue And thus haue you both the true meaning of this place and a full answere vnto the objection Other passages besides these doe they vrge but being either of the same nature or of lesse moment I will not trouble you with them Now it remaineth breefly to resolue and confirme the truth Wherein to the end it may appeare that what I haue often maintained in private I am neither afraid nor ashamed publikely to professe in pulpit I here openly proclaime and confidently affirme that Reading is an ordinary meanes to beget Faith and convert a soule Which that I may the more clearely and distinctly demonstrate giue me leaue in few words to open the tearmes meaning of the Proposition First then by Faith I vnderstand not only that whereby wee yeeld assent vnto Scripture the Principle of Faith that it is Gods word to all those articles of Faith specially fundamentall established by this principle which we call Historicall or Dogmaticall Faith but that Faith also whereby we are justified and by which we accept Christ to be our Mediator King Priest and Prophet together with the effects thereof Repentance from dead workes and new obedience All this I comprehend vnder the name of Faith Secondly by Meanes I vnderstand such middle or secondary causes as come betweene the first cause and the effect for the producing of it And these meanes if they be praeter ordinem besides the perpetuall order placed in things there being no coherence betweene them and the effect or no aptnes in them to produce the effect then doe we call them Extraordinary and such was the feeding of Elias by Ravens and the curing of the blinde man by dawbing clay vpon his eyes But if they be secundum ordinem according to the perpetuall order established in things having in them an aptnesse and fitnesse to produce the effect then are they called Ordinary and such is the nourishing and sustaining of
fearfull ends And indeede to what end hath God put into the heart of man this passion of feare but to decline and avoid all such euills as would destroy him or afflict him Take away feare and men will 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 despise all danger and run headlong into all mischiefe but feare is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of a preseruing nature as saith the philosopher inclining and perswading man carefully to keepe himselfe from dangers If then to come to an issue yee will not worke mischiefe vnnaturally vnto your owne selues if yee will avoide the Magistrates fury if yee will not incurre the rigour of the law nor fall vpon the edge of the sword of justice yee must needs be subiect But what need will some man say so much to feare the Wrath of the Magistrate May not a man hide his counsells so deepe and carry his actions so cunningly that nor witnesse nor Iudge shall know them If they come to light and bee discouered doth not greatnesse breake through lawes as wasps doe through cobwebs May not judges jury witnesses by friends fauour bribes be corrupted Are pardons impossible to bee obtained from Princes Nay suppose the worst that the penalty of the law can by no meanes be escaped what care they for fines and amercements who are content to beggar themselues to enioy their pleasures What for shame and ignominy who are growne impudent in all wickednesse What for death who count it worse then death not to liue as they list and to bee barred from their desires For there haue beene who haue said moriar modo regnet let mee dye so he may be King and aut Caesar aut nihil an Emperour or nothing To all this I answere briefly first trust not vnto secrecy but remember what wise Solomon saith Curse not the King no not in thy thought neither the great one in thy bedchamber for the foule of the Heaven will carry the voyce and that which hath wings shall declare the matter Secondly hope not for impunity many as great as gratious as wealthy as thou haue failed thereof and how knowest thou but one time or other thou maist meete with one who will accept nor thy person nor thy fee but will say vnto thee with Saint Peter thy mony perish with thee Lastly if any haue so farre put off naturall affection as not to feare Wrath chusing rather to fall into the hands of justice then to be restrained from his wickednesse let such a one know that what Wrath cannot yet Conscience should worke in him For here it must freely bee confessed that Wrath of it selfe is not sufficient it striketh at the branches not the roote and endeavoureth to reforme outward actions but reacheth not vnto the cause which is inward corruption Which remaining in vs Wrath happily may make vs more wary in offending but cannot worke in vs a loue of goodnesse and a desire not to offend at all Wherefore God in his deepe wisdome hath thought it good to binde vs vnto subiection not by a single but double tie and vnto Wrath to adde Conscience Yee must needs be subiect not only for wrath but also for conscience Conscience is that facultie or power of the Practicall vnderstanding in man whereby he is priuy to all his actions whether they be immanent and conceaued within as thoughts or emanant and issuing forth as his words and workes This Conscience is then said to be bound when by him who hath power and authority ouer it it is charged to performe its dutie that is to beare witnesse of all our actions vnto God and according to the qualitie of them to excuse or accuse vs for that these are the duties of conscience plainely appeareth by that of S. Paul their conscience bearing witnesse and their thoughts accusing or excusing This charge is then laid vpon the Conscience after that by the same authority man himselfe is bound for man being free Conscience also is free but man being bound by a law Conscience stands bound also But who is the binder of the conscience God without question He is the Law-giuer saith S. Iames that can both saue and destroy and he as S. Iohn saith is greater then the conscience But can the Magistrate also by his lawes binde the conscience Papists attribute vnto vs the Negatiue that they cannot themselues hold the Affirmatiue that they can and warrant it by this my Text Yee must bee subiect for conscience Vpon this plaine song sundry of them descant very pleasantly but none plaies the wanton more then Doctor Kellison who inferres that we despoile Princes of authority and superiority and giue subjects good leaue to rebell and revolt that we bring Iudges and Tribunall seats and all lawes into contempt that no Prince can rely on his subjects no subjects on their Prince or fellow subjects in a word that wee take away all society and ciuill conversation To all which I answere breefly First suppose the maine ground were true yet neither can they proue it out of my Text nor doe such absurdities follow therevpon Out of my Text they cannot proue it for that only affirmes that the Conscience is bound but determines not that mans lawes bindeth it Neither doe such absurdities follow for albâ—it wee should deny man to be the binder yet doe wee freely professe that the Conscience is bound which is enough But we answer farther that they much abuse vs for we deny not rem that they binde onely wee differ from them in modo maintaining that they binde not in such manner as they teach They hold that mens lawes binde non minùs guà m lex divina equally with Gods lawes so that were there not any law of God binding to Subiection yet mans law of it selfe and of its owne power would binde This we deny teaching contrarily that humane lawes binde the Conscience not immediatly but mediatly not primarily but secundarily not in themselues of their owne power but in the force and vertue of Divine law Divine law I say whether that which is imprinted in the heart by nature or that which is revealed vnto vs by Scripture both which command Subiection This truth in fâ—w words thus I demonstrate First if mans law immediatly binde the Conscience then is euery transgression thereof without farther respect vnto Gods law a mortall sinne But so it is not for according to St Iohns definition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sin is a transgression of the law meaning not mans but Gods law only in regard whereof St Augustine saith more expresly Sin is dictum factum concupitum any saying doing or coueting against Gods law Besides if man of himselfe without respect vnto Gods law can binde the conscience then either is he Lord of the conscience and may himselfe conuent it examine it take its testimonie and accordingly proceed to sentence either of life or death both vpon body and soule or he hath power to command God to sit in
the best hand Games are but matters of Recreation I answere and first to the Maior negatiuely For although in Extraordinary lots wherein there is an expectation of Gods immediat providence for direction it is fit by prayer to craue the same of God yet in those Ordinary lots wherein it is not materiall which way they fall and no notable inconvenience can ensue thereof it is not necessary so to doe The confirmation which you bring for your Maior is authority negatiuely in point of Fact which is a meere Sophisticall Elench of no validity Wherein also you take for granted that which cannot bee yeelded without much folly nor demanded without much impudence namely that whatsoever the Saints did is recorded in Scripture which wee haue shewed to be farre otherwise Vnto the Minor and the proofe thereof I say no more but this that as all other our actions so our Gaming also is sanctified vnto vs by Prayer Not that at the commencement of every act a man is bound to put himselfe on his knees and to make his particular addresses vnto God for the morning sacrifice through the acceptation of God is sufficient to that end and stretcheth it selâ—e to all the daies actions Although I deny not but as at our meales so also in the beginning and closing vp of our play wee may with short eiaculations both craue a blessing vpon our recreation and praise him for the same But as touching the fall of the lot in our games because it is like hearb Iohn in a pot of broth doing neither good nor harme I hold it as inconvenient to pray for it as it is to pray for good successe at a match of bowles For as for those who adventure at play more then they can well spare without disabling themselues they passe beyond their bounds and offend against the rule of moderation in play Yet if such a one finding his rashnesse and sincerely resoluing not to commit such an errour againe shall in his heart entreat God to free him from the present danger I thinke such prayer should not be vnlawfull to him N. N. Fiftly a Lot is a thing that belongs to the art of Divinity and can be defined no where but there nor handled by any other way Wee may as I thinke sport our selues with any thing that belongs to any other art or recreate our selues in iest by any rules of any other art But thus wee must not doe with any thing or rule that belongs to Divinity we may not meddle with Divine things in light matters the Majesty of God and them requires more respect at the hands of Creatures The King nor any of his Lawes may not bee dallied with by the Subiect how much more is the Creature being but sinfull dust and ashes bound to his Creator being a consuming fire which wicked men make light of yea make sport with oathes vowes prayer the Sabbath the Sacraments and the Word of God For they will sweare vow pray without serious consideration they will for their pleasures sake breake the holy day of the Sabbath they vse the Sacraments as a matter of custome and fashion not of Conscience else the Dog would not so soone turne againe to his vomit And as for the Word of God he is commended for the best wit that can breake the most savory iests in the repeting of some phrase of Scripture We say it is no iesting with edgtooles and all say non est bonum ludere cum Sanctis yet what is wicked mens practise else with any Divine thing To follow whose example is farre vnbeseeming the humility and gravity of Gods professed servants DEFENCE Your reason is to be reduced into this forme or syllogisme That which belongs to the art of Divinity and can no otherwhere bee defined or handled may not bee sported withall or medled with in light matters But a lot belongs to the art of Divinity and can no otherwhere bee handled or defined Ergo it may not be sported withall or medled with in light matters In the proofe of the Maior you enlarge your selfe very much discoursing of the Maiesty of God and divine things and what respect is due to them from the creatures Then with many words you inveigh against all those wicked ones who make a Game of Oaths Vowes Prayer Sacraments Sabbath Scripture and what not In all which I readily joyne with you and had you prest it much farther and with more vehemence you could never haue offended mee The only thing that I dislike is that you bestow so much paines in maintaining that which no man denies and spare it there where it greatly needed I meane vpon the confirmation of your Minor What Did you thinke you should be taken for another Pythagoras Or that your owne bare 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 would be of sufficient authority Verily either it was great dimnesse of sight if you foresaw not the Assumption would be denied or if you foresaw it extreame negligence or weaknesse that you endeavoured not to proue it Your Assumption therefore I deny That a Lot belongs to the art of Divinity and is there to be defined handled If you aske a reason of the deniall you may know I am not bound to render it your place is not to aske questions but to proue what you affirme Neverthelesse the reason is this because the termes of the definition belong not vnto Divinity Not the Genus which is a Chance or Casuall event for that belongs vnto the Metaphysicks as also doth Necessity Not the Forme which is the applying of the chance to resolue a doubt for that belongs vnto Pollicie or Morality If you foist any other thing into the Definition whatsoever it be it is superfluous and impertinent But why should any man thinke that it pertaines to a Divine to define a lot Is it because there is in them a Divine providence So is there also in Chesse Bowles and all other things whether serious or lusory yet are they not therefore Theologicall Is it because there is in them an immediat providence So indeede you dreame but wee haue already clearly demonstrated the contrary Is it then because they haue beene vsed in holy and religious businesses So is bread and wine and water also vsed yet I hope you will not say that the Definition of these things is proper to Divinity or that wee may not play with them and vse them in light matters Every applying of a creature vnto a holy end is not by and by an appropriating thereof vnto that end neither doth God by his Extraordinary vsing of a thing barre vs ever after from the Ordinary and naturall vse thereof And thus you see that as good reason may be rendred to the contrary so iust reason for it you can render none why the defining of a lot should be so confined to Divinity Yet one word more with you ere I leaue this point For I must entreat leaue to plucke you by the eare
for Titius as well as for Seius I assume but many Papists allow the sense I giue This if I would follow your course I might easily proue by all those Popish writers who acknowledge those words of the Fathers which we obiect against you without mentioning any of their Answers But so doing I should shew my selfe as ridiculous and vnconscionable as your Author Thus therefore Scotus Cameracensis Caietan Roffensis Biel Occam Durand Peter Lombard with some Iesuits and the Canon Law professe some of them that they could not finde Transubstantiation in the Scriptures and some that they could not in the Fathers Their expresse words you haue in mine Answere whether I referre you for it would be too long to transcribe them If so and all these were grand Papists I haue no reason to beleeue you or your Author rather then them nay great reason haue I to cleaue the faster vnto my opinion as better according both with Scripture Fathers N. N. Your second reason There are amongst vs differences even in many essentiall and fundamentall points as namely betweene Protestants and Puritans whatsoever D. Abbat Doue Willet Powel Sr Edward Hobby Rogers others say to the contrary And this you proue by Rogers Covel Ormrode Parks Willet Powel and sundry others I. D. That there are differences and dissentions amongst vs is too true and cannot bee denied This therefore wee grant But the Consequence which you inferre therevpon Ergo you may not yeeld vnto my iudgement or any of our side I deny For to make this follow you must of necessitie hold that where there are dissentions there you may not harken to any side A dangerous and desperate Position and the very Objection of the Iewes against Christianitie We may not beleeue because of your distractions By which reason as you may not heare vs so may not we you nor Turks and Infidels any of vs all how Orthodoxe soeuer because the Christian world is still full of contentions A man would thinke that diversitie of opinions especially in matters concerning soule and Salvation should rather quicken and stirre vp the minde diligently among all to search which is the truest then to cause it sit still and forbeare assent vntill all sides be accorded Neither let any pretend inabilitie for as Chrysostome saith Seeing we acknowledge the scriptures which are so true and plaine it will be an easie matter for to iudge And tell me hast thou any wit or iudgement For it is not a mans part barely to receaue whatsoever hee heareth Say not I am a learner and may be no iudge I can condemne no opinion this is but a shift c. And Gerson rendreth the true reason hereof The triall and examination of doctrines concerning Faith belongeth not only to the Councell Pope but also to every one that is sufficiently learned in the scriptures because every man is a sufficient iudge of that hee knoweth But ô yee miserable servitude and slauery of you the common sort of Papists your eyes are puld out of your heads neither are you allowed the vse of common sense and reason The Scriptures by which you should see are wrested out of your hands as a dangerous booke If you will see it must be by another mans eyes Your Faith must depend vpon the warrant of some equivocating Priest And whatsoever is said to the contrary though never so soundly proued you may in no case harken to it for why there are dissentions among you This reason being thus fully answered I might without more adoe passe on to the next but that I see by your spinning it to such a length you make great store of it Let vs therefore bestow a word or two more vpon it There are say you dissentions amongst vs. True And was there ever or will there ever be a Church so happy as to be altogether free of them If not why doe you vpbraid them vnto vs Is it because notwithstanding them we count one another brethren members of the same Church That is an Argument of our charity and that we dare not cut off and condemne as Hereticks every one that differeth though never so little from vs in opinion whereas you presently condemne to the pit of Hell all Christians whatsoever wheresoever and how many soever that will not vaile bonnet vnto the Popes Miter and beleeue all to bee true that hee resolues vpon But what May not brethren disagree and yet continue brethren Or doth every quarrell exclude out of the Church of God I trow not For then Paul and Barnabas Peter and Paul Victor and Polycrates Cyril and Theodoret Chrysostome and Theophilus Epiphanius and Chrysostome Hierome and Ruffin and sundry others should not be brethren Nay the East and West Churches dissenting about Easter and the Roman and African about Rebaptization should be no true Churches Yea but our differences are not in pettie matters but essentiall fundamentall points And such were also in the Churches of the Corinthians and Galathians for in the one they differed about the Resurrection of the dead in the other about the necessary observation of the law of Moses together with the Gospell And yet saith Bellarmine they were true Churches and they that so erred if they were ready to learne the truth and to beleeue it being taught were true members of them also But by your leaue sir your Author overlashes when he saith we differ in points Essentiall and Fundamentall neither doe our Divines only say it as you beare vs in hand but clearely demonstrate it also And indeed all the quarrell is rather about the shell then the kernell that is the outward gouernment ceremonies of the Church rather then the Faith of the Church or at the most it is rather about some deductions and conclusions in Divinitie then the Principles themselues and those truths that are necessary vnto salvation For as for the Article of Christs descent into Hell though your Author would insinuate the contrary yet there is not one of vs but willingly subscribes vnto it and acknowledgeth that Christ hath spoiled Hell and triumphed over Principalities and Powers and all the enimies of our salvation But whether he did this by descending locally in soule into the Hell of the Damned or Virtually and by the power of his Godhead is all the Question amongst vs whereby for ought I see we neither overturne the Article nor dissolue brotherhood And your selfe must needs confesse so much vnlesse you will disclaime brotherhood with Durandus and condemne him of a Fundamentall errour together with vs. For hee held that the soule of Christ descended into Hell not in the substance thereof but by certaine effects And heare the resolution of Suares the Iesuit touching this Article If by an article of faith saith he we vnderstand a truth which all the faithfull are bound explicitly to knowe and beleeue so I doe not thinke it necessary to reckon this among the Articles
els would not Calvin haue cavilled at those words Vnlesse a man be borne againe of Water c. Is not the doctrine of the blessed Sacrament necessary Yet how many expositions of this is my Body So is that of Iustification yet twenty expositions of Scripture about the formall cause thereof So also is the doctrine of the Trinity and of Christs Divinity and humanity yet Ebionits Arians Nestorians Eutychians Valentiâ—ians Monothelites and Apollinarists holding heresies against them proue them all to their thinking out of Scripture Ergò Scripture is not so easy as I make it For where all things are plaine there men commonly agree I. D. The truth is being demanded the rule of Faith I named the Scripture and being farther demanded a rule whereby to know the sense of Scripture I answered two things First that all things necessary to salvation are so expresly and plainly set downe that there needs no farther rule secondly that those places which are more obscure are to be expounded by those that are more plaine and that sense which disagreeth is to bee reiected that which agreeth may safely be admitted Safely I say for although haply it may not be the right yet dangerous it cannot be as long as it accords with the Analogy of Faith This I declared somewhat at large in the writing sent to Mr Bayly which I perceaue hath come to your hands also yet satisfies not Otherwise you would not thus dispute against it But know you against whom you dispute Certainly not against me only but the ancient Fathers who affirme the same that I doe For touching the Perspicuity of Scripture in things necessary thus St Augustine In those things which are openly laid downe in Scripture are to be found all things which containe Faith and manners of liuing to wit Hope and Charity And St Chrysostome All things necessary are open and manifest so that there needed not homilies or Sermons were it not through our owne negligence And Cyril of Alexandria To the end they might be knowne to all both small and great he hath delivered them vnto vs in such familiar speech that they exceed no mans capacity So the rest And this is so true that your Gregory of Valentia confesseth it Such verities saith he concerning our faith as are absolutely and necessarily to be knowne and beleeued of all men are plainly taught in the Scriptures themselues So Sixtus Senensis also and others of your side As touching the interpretation of darker places by the plaine thus Saint Basil those things which seeme to bee ambiguous and obscurely spoken in some places of holy writ are enlightned by those which in other places are open and perspicuous And St Augustine There is nothing almost among these obscurities but in other places one may finde it most plainly delivered And St Chrysostome The Scripture every where when it speaketh any thing obscurely interpreteth it selfe againe in another place And this is the common voice of all the rest So that the answere I gaue you being no other then that wich I had learned of the Fathers you cannot reiect it but you must reiect the Fathers with all But let vs heare your reason The Doctrine say you of Baptisme of the Eucharist of Iustification of Christs two natures are necessary yet some texts vpon which they are grounded be litigious Grant it be so yet some againe are clear and evident That Christians are to be baptized what more plaine then that Goe teach all nations Baptizing them That the Eucharist is to be administred and receiued is clear by the institution of our Saviour and the practise of his Apostles That wee are iustified by Faith without the workes of the law wee haue the evident testimony of Saint Paul That Christ is God the very first words of Saint Iohns Gospell testifie In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and that word was God And lastly that hee is Man also what more expresse then those words of Saint Paul There is one God and one Mediator betweene God men the Man Christ Iesus If other places be not so plain they are to be expounded by these or the like But it may be your Doctrine of Baptisme is the absolute necessity thereof vnto salvation If so then certainely that place of S. Iohn is not cleare enough for it For it is not necessary it should be vnderstood of Christian Baptisme which was not yet instituted or it must be meant of those that are Adulti such as Nicodemus was to whom our Saviour spake In like manner if your doctrine of the Eucharist be Transubstantiation neither is that other place plaine enough for it For it is manifest both by the circumstances of the Text and the testimonie of the Fathers that the Relatiue This hath reference to Bread Now Bread in proper speech cannot bee Body as your owne men confesse Then is it so tropically and consequently no Transubstantiation The same doe I say of the errours about Iustification which should particularly haue beene shewed if you had quoted any particular place As for those Hereticks they were such as the Prophet speaketh of who in seeing saw and yet perceaued not hauing closed their eyes that they might not see And therefore it is a foule fault in you to excuse their obstinacy by charging the Scriptures with obscurity That Rule is sufficient which is able to convince the Conscience and satisfie all those who loue the truth and are ready to acknowledge it when it is made known though it stop not the mouths of refractary stubborne Hereticks This perhaps your living judge by vertue of fire and fagot may bee able to effect but the other if evidence of Scripture cannot nor he nor his Church will ever be able to performe More of this see in the Treatise sent to Mr Baylie N. N. If as I write to M. Baylie you may not relye too much on the authority of the Fathers because of their differences in opinions much lesse may you vpon the authority of our men being worse divided For they differ not in essential points we doe They wrote not so bitterly one against another as we doe Lastly they differed in matters as yet vndefined by a generall Councell and so not dangerous but wee haue no Councells nor any other meanes to decide our causes So that you cannot knowe which of vs giueth the true sense of Scripture I. D. That the Fathers are no way a sufficient ground of Faith I haue so strongly proued vnto M. Baylie that me thinkes none of you is in hast to answere it Among the rest of my reasons this I confesse was one that they varied so much in opinion one from another yea and are now made to vary from themselues through your intolerable abusing of them This I declared at large wherevnto for farther evidence I now adde an example or two S. Ambrose or whosoever is author of
tradition of the Fathers was no more but Memoriam facite keepe the memory as we may see evidently in Cyprian Nothing of all which I trow maketh any whit for your meaning N. N. Dr Morton citeth out of Bibliander that it was a most common opinion among the Iews that at the comming of the Messias all the legall sacrifices should cease but the sacrifice of Thoda in Bread and Wine should not cease Wherevpon he is forced against Mason and his directors to say The Protestants acknowledge in the Eâ—charist a sacrifice Eucharisticall He might as well haue acknowledged with those of Basil Frankford and Stancarus what this Sacrifice should be For they cite these words of the Rabbins the sacrifice that shall be made of wine shall not only be changed into the Substance of the bloud of the Messias but also into the substance of his Body And in the sacrifice that shall be made of bread notwithstanding it be white as milke the substance shall be turned into the Substance of the body of the Messias Thus R. Cahana who liued long before Christ and so R. Iuda R. Simeon and others whose testimonies saith Dr Morton are so direct for Transubstantiation as no Romish Doctor for a 1000 yeares after Christ is so expresse yea they are more pregnant then the sayings of Transubstantiaâ—ors themselues I. D. I am very sory that I haue not Dr Mortons booke now at hand by me For I am very confident that where your Author found his Obiection there I should also meete with a full solution In the meane season till I haue procured it which I hope will be ere long briefly thus First the Passage cited out of Bibliander maketh against you not vs. For if it be Bread and Wine which is sacrificed then they remaine after Consecration which overthroweth Transubstantiation If they doe not remaine and the Body and Bloud of Christ only be offered then were those Iewes false Prophets and foretold nothing but lies Secondly the Doctor acknowledging an Eucharisticall Sacrifice neither is forced therevnto by any such testimony nor is against Mason or any other Protestant for they all acknowledge the same together with him But I thinke you knew not that Eucharist signifieth Thankesgiuing or else you would never haue thought it strange he should acknowledge a Sacrifice of Thanksgiuing Lastly I am strongly perswaded that when these testimonies of R. Cahana R. Iuda R. Simeon and the rest shall come to the ripping they will proue Hippocentaurs and meere fictions For supposing you are in the right is it likely that such fellowes as these should either know or speake more clearly of the mysteries of our Faith then any of the ancient Prophets inspired of the holy Ghost and sent of purpose to foretell to them Or is it probable that your greatest Rabbins and among them Cardinall Bellarmine searching curiously into every corner to find witnesses of all sorts would yet carelesly omit these if they were so plaine and pregnant for you as you pretend Verily when the Doctor saith that no Doctor for a 1000 yeares after Christ no nor Transubstantiator almost ever spake more plainely it is a meere flout and argues how lightly he esteemes of the authority But of this enough vntill I bee more certainly informed Only thus to alleage Iewes is not to approue your sense of the Fathers N. N. The now Archb. of Canterbury saith and with him Midleton agreeth that Berengarius was called into question for denying Transubstantiation and he yeelded once or twice to recant and abiure the Doctrine he held Ergo hee assureth vs Transubstantiation was the Doctrine of the Church constant and generall hundreds of yeares before the Lateran councell defined it yea farther hee assureth vs that to deny it was Heresy to be recanted I. D. Had not your Author wanted or forehead or braine or both he would never haue made such a shamelesse senselesse inference If he had said Ergo many beleeued Transubstantiation before the Lateran councell hee had kept his tongue within compasse but saying Ergo it was the constant and generall doctrine for hundred of yeares before his mouth overfloweth it is a lye with a latchet For be it knowne vnto you the Church of England held it not as I haue already proued out of the Homily of Abbat Aelfrick Neither did the Waldenses hold it whose number yet was very great and they dispersed through all the countries of Christendome And if you thinke that Berengarius stood single by himselfe in this point you are much deceaued for hee had as many for him as were against him and it was nothing but the tyranny of the B. of Rome that bare him down Howbeit the French Churches still resisted both him and his Synods divers meeting together in Anjow and Turon resolue against him and subscribe vnto Berengarius But to put the matter out of all doubt it is reported of Pope Hildebrand that he appointed a Fast of three daies together with a solemn Procession to entreat of God some signe from heaven whereby he might be assured what he was to determine in this businesse If at that time the head of the Church himselfe staggered and doubted which way to resolue is it credible that the rest of the body could bee so setled therein as generally constantly for hundreds of yeares to maintaine it Apellas the Iew may beleeue it if hee list not I. Breefly Transubstantiation might well be disputed of some while before the Lateran Councell but held for an Article of Faith it was not vntill then as I haue elsewhere shewed out of Tonstal and Scotus N. N. The same Bishop and Dr Field tell vs that the Greeke Church is a true Church Yet their Patriarch Ieremie saith It is the iudgement of the Church that in the holy supper after consecration and benediction the bread passeth and is changed into his Body and the Wine into his Bloud I. D. Yet the same Bishop and Doctor tell you also that a true Church may erre so that Transubstantiation might be an errour though the Grecians held it But the truth is that the Greeke Church never held it as I haue aboue shewed out of the same Ieremie the Councell of Florence which you are bound to beleeue For though the Patriarch say Bread is changed into Body yet hee addeth by and by the flesh of the Lord which he carried about him was not giuen to the Apostles to eat nor his bloud to drinke nor is now in the divine celebration of those mysteries which directly overturneth your Change by Transubstantiation But of this see more aboue And thus much in answer vnto your first reason which before I passe vnto the next I must craue leaue to retort vpon you If you may not yeeld vnto the sense I giue the Fathers because some Protestants allow your sense neither may I yeeld to the sense you giue because many Papists allow mine For there is the same law