of the Church to be necessarie for to beleue it For faith is said to be of hearing of the word of God lawfully preached The Church is called the pillar and ground of truth she is accounted Gods witnes her voice Christs voice her Pastors are accounted Gods Legats and apointed by God to keep men constant in faith Al which doe shew not onely that the Churches preaching is necessarie to beleue but that also her authoritie or testimonie is necessarie And al authoritie or testimonie is a formal cause of beleif becaus That we beleue Chilling c. 1. n. 7. we ow to authoritie And Protestants define faith to be an assent to diuine Reuelations vpon the authoritie of the Reuealer And doubtles à Reuealer is a liuing and intellectual person not a dead letter Whitaker also as I before cited Authoritie is the foundation of faith â—aith relieth vpon authoritie Herevpon S. Austin l. contra Epist Fundam c. 4. and 5. professeth that authoritie held him in the Catholik Church That Christ by miracles got authoritie and by Authoritie deserued beleef That religion can no way be rightly gotten but by authoritie And otherwhere De vtil cred c. 17. Epist 5. 6. that in the Church is the height the top the castle of authoritie and that her authoritie is most firme And l. 2. contra Crescon c. 32. I receaue not what Cyprian held of baptizing heretiks becaus the Church doth not receaue it l. 2. de Doctrin Christiana c. 8. The books of wisdom and Ecclesiasticus are to be accounted Prophetical becaus they haue been admitted into authoritie l. contra Epist Fund c. 5. Which books of the Acts I must needs beleue if I beleue the Gospel becaus both Books Catholiks authoritie doth alike commend vnto me In which places he plainly maketh the authoritie of the Catholik Church a sufficient external cause of his beleif or not beleif 9. Reason also sheweth the same For if God would haue vs to beleue his misteries it is most likelie he would apoint on earth some external authoritie subordinat to his supreme authoritie for which we should beleue them Whervpon S. Austin l. de vtilit Credendi c. 16. saied If God haue Prouidence of mankinde we ought not to despaire but that he hath apointed some authoritie on which we relying as on a sure step may mount to God And this authoritie he saieth is the authoritie of the Church But the authoritie on which we relie is doubtles some formal cause of our beleif Protestants also sometimes confess the same For thus Chillingworth c. 2. Scripture beleued for the Churches authoritie p. 96. It is vpon the authoritie of vniuersal tradition that we would haue them beleue Scripture The same he hath p. 69. Whitaker Contro 1. q. 3. c. 7. We are forced by the Churches Forced to beleue authoritie to beleue these books to be Canonical And if her authoritie can force vs to beleue it is a sufficient cause of beleef And l. 1. de Script p. 15. We may be forced by the authoritie of the Church to acknowledg the Scripture P. 72. The Church is Mistres and Guide of our faith P. 87. I am à Disciple of the Church I acknowledg her my Mother P. 46. We cannot beleue but by the testimonie of the Church as by the ordinarie meanes P. 62. We are led to beleue first by the authoritie of the Church P. 68. I most willingly grant the external iudgment of the Church to be the help and means ordained by God and necessarie for vs to engender nourish and confirme faith And l. 2. p. 234. The Authoritie of the Church is a certain introduction to beleue P. 289. Catholik authoritie commending both books Austin was necessarily induced to beleue both books The same we must doe For what book soeuer such authoritie shal commend to vs we must needs beleue it P. 320. I grant the Scripture is to be receaued becaus it is receaued of the Church Contr. 1. q. 3. c. 2. The Church is a witnes of holie writ C. 5. By tradition Tradition conuâ—nceth and authoritie of the Church it may be conuinced which books be Canonical C. 9. what other doe al those Fathers proue then that Scripture is to be receaued becaus it was alwaies receaued of the Church And doth not Becaus giue a cause of beleif And Hooker Laude Potter cited l. 1. c. 14. grant that the testimonie of the present Church is the key or dore that lets men into the Scripture Laude Relat sec 16. p. 102. euen to this knowledg of them that they are the word of God And Spalatensis and Chillingworth c. 10. libri primi add that such a book cannot be known to be Canonical Scripture but by the testimonie of the Church But authoritie testimonie iudgment are formal causes of beleif And if Protestants doe think that the authoritie Sâ—p l. 1. c. 14. of the Church is no formal cause of faith why should they teach that the Churches preaching is necessarie to faith and that the preaching teaching or proposing by priuat men would not suffice For priuat men may propose al the Church proposeth onely they cannot propose anie thing with such authoritie 10. And hence appeareth euidently that the true Church and her authoritie must alwaies in ordinarie course be beleued before Scripture becaus her authoritie is the formal external cause of the beleif of the Scripture And also that falsly wrote Whitaker l. 2. de Scrip. p. 235. The Church hath no authoritie in matters of faith Ibid. p. 228. The testimonie of the Church is no cause of faith And l. p. 122. The So Laude Relat. sec 1. p. 117. Taude sec 16. p. 106. Scripture is now the onely sufficient meaÌ„s to beleue And Contr. 2. q. 5. c. 18. Faith doth not depend vpon the authoritie of the Church And ibid. c. 20. The Scripture is more manifest then the Church And Chillingworth c. 2. p. 57. we say euerie man is to chuse his religion first and then his Church For beside what we haue proued Whitaker himself hath granted That the authoritie of the Church is an introduction to faith That we are first led to beleue by her authoritie and that her So laude sec 16. p. 89. Hooker l. 2. §. 7. Potter sect 5. testimonie is the ordinarie and necessarie means to engender faith That her authoritie causeth faith and therfore her authoritie must first of al be beleued becaus it is an introduction à first leader à necessarie means to ingender faith or as others say the key or dore to faith 1â— And out of that which hath been said in this Chapter is easily solued that question why is tradition Vvhy Traditionerodible of it self aâ—d not Scripture of itself Credible and not Scripture I answer That if we speak of tradition materially that is of the doctrin which we haue by tradition that is no more credible of itself then is the doctrin which we
scripture and diuine verities And ibid. p. 55. Whosoeuer â—ther wilfully opposeth anie Catholik veritie manteined by this Church of Saints or the Catholik visible Church as doe heretiks their Heretiks who oppose the visible Church condition is damnable Chillingworth in his preface n. 16. The doctrin of the Trinitie is supported by those pillars of the faith which alone are fit and able to support it I mean Scripture and consent of the ancient Doctors Behold the consent of ancient Doctors a pillar of faith and able to support euen the doctrin of the Trinitie And n. 28. what is held necessarie by the Catholik Church of this age I doe verily beleue Church of this age and embrace c. 1. n. 7. I grant that Christ founded a visible Church stored with al helps necessarie to saluation particularly with sufficient means to beget and mantein faith to conserue vnitie and compose schismes to discouer and condemn heretiks and to determin controuersies in religion which were necessarie to be determined And if Vniuersal tradition as infâ—lâ—ble as Scripture sufficient to these ends infallible to these ends as he there granteth c. 3. n. 45 we willingly grant the Church to be as infallible in heâ— vniuersal traditions as the scripture is n. 46. Make it appear that it is tradition and we wil seek no farther c. 2. n. 155. Vniuersal tradition is the rule to iudge al controuersies by Field l. 1. c. 13. Heretiks are they who obstinatly persist in error contrarie And rule to iudg al controuersiâ—s by to the Churches faith l. 4. c. 2. That the whole Church as it comprehendeth onely al those beleuers that are and haue been since the Apostles times hold err in anie thing conteined within the compass of reâ—cled truth is impossible seing error which is an aberration declining or swaruing from the truth once deliuered necessarily implieth a kinde of particularitie and noueltie Ibid. yea in Present Church erreth not in things not absolutly necessarie things that are not absolutly necessarie to be known and beleued expresly and distinctly we constantly beleue that this present Church can neuer err or doubt pertinaciously Item That the visible Church neuer falleth into heresie we most willingly grant c. 5. Al the Pastors of the Church since the Apostles can not err And as we shewed part 1. l. 2. c. 3 and l. 1. of the Author of Protestant religion c. 1. they commonly profess to exclude al heretikâ— out of the Church 4. If anie answer that these Protestants mean onely that the Church is infallible in fundamental points but not in proposing al points of faith I reply First that Lutheâ— saieth the Church can not err in the least article not in the least matters That Wesphalus she cannot err in doctrin that Feild saieth she cannot â—rr in things not absolutly necessarie Secondly that others say absolutly The Church cannot err and it is sophistical to interpret absolute words In parte or In some sorte Nether hindereth it that in other places they say the Church can err becaus it is vsual for heresiks to contradict themselues and to confess truth when they are pressed thervnto and at other times to denie it Thirdly that if the Church be infallible in fundamental points she must be also in al points sufficiently reuealed to her becaus al such are fundamental to her And also that there are no Not-fundamental points in their sense that is such as if they be sufficiently proposed may be not beleued withouâ— loss of sauing faith true Church and saluation but al are to be beleued actually if they be sufficiently proposed and to be virtually beleued though not so proposed And therfore if the true Church be infallible in fundamental points she is infallible in al points of faith or in al parts of Gods word sufficiently reuealed to her But it must be wel noted how plainly Protestants confess that the Church can not err in the least article in the least matter cannot err in doctrin not in things not absolutly necessarie in al points that they are sure of truth who are in the Church that the Church cannot fal into hereâ—ie that it is heresie and to be an heritik obstinatly to oppose the Churches faith Which if they would constantly hold al controuersies were ended in finding the Church 5. Secondly Protestants put pure sincere incorrupt and entire profession of Christs doctrin in their definition of the true visible Church as is shewed parte 1. l. 2. c. 6. And it implieth contradiction that there should be anie error where there is pure sincere incorrupt and entire profession of Christs doctrin If anie answer that they mean onely Pure sincere incorrupt and entire profession of Christs fundamental doctrin I replie as before to the former shift and also that this were to condemn their definition of the true Church of defect and obscuritie in not expressing such a necessarie particle as without which the definition were fals and would not agree to the thing defined For Puritie vnles In fundamentals be added wil not agree to a true Church erring in Not fundamentals I add also that as yet neuer durst anie Protestant define the true Church to be a companie professing the fundamental parte of Christs doctrin becaus the name of anie parte of his doctrin would shew that it is not his true Church absolutly but in parte onely and simply not his Church Like to this is that they giue Pure preaching of Gods word for an essential Note of the Church yea for the onely essential Note therof as saieth Whitaker contro 2. q. 5. c. 17. Morton l. 2. Apolog. c. 4. and others And Luther in â— 2. Isaiae Beza de nobis Eccles how can Pure preaching be anie Note if there may be error in al secondarie points of faith If therfore Riuer tract 1. sec 45. Daneusâ—ont 4. p. 141. Chilling c. 4. p. 221. they wil mantein their essential definition and their essential Note of the true Church they cannot say she can err in anie points of faith 6. Thirdly they sometimes grant that the Church is infallible in her vniuersal traditions and namely Vniuersal tradition as infallible as scripture and so a word of God that the scripture is the word of God Chillingworth c. 3. n. 45. you were to proue the Church infallible not in her traditions which we willingly grant if they be as vniuersal as the tradition of the vndoubted books of scripture is to be as infallible as the Scripture is For nether does being written make the word of God more infallible Protestants in Colâ—oq Ratisb sâ—ss 1. and 11. nor being vnwritten make it the less infallible Brentius in Prolegomenis contra Sotum p. 249. we speak not of that tradition by which the Scripture and what is conteined in it hath been deliuered to vs. For we affirme this tradition to be certain and vndoubted And Morton l. 1. Apolog. c. 32. and to 2. l. 1. c.
the Catholik faith And himself addeth In al controuersies the Papists with whom we deale crie Plain euident manifest scripture P. 49. he citeth Bellarmin l. 1. de Verbo Dei c. 2. saying other means may deceaue me but nothing is more known nothing more certain then the scriptures that it were the greatest madnes in the world not to beleue them P. 64. some of them say the scripture is the rule and the principal Papists make Scripture a Rule rule too yea more as Bellarmin and others P. 15. Papists grant that al other authoritie is finally resolued into the authoritie of Scripture P. 17. We admit the Scripture on al hands and al the question between vs is about the Church In his Defense p. 162. Our Aduersaries Papists grant the last and highest resolutions of our faith to be into the authoritie of the Scripture Which he repeateth p. 309. 310. 3â—5 Laude sec 16. n. 24. The greatest vpholders of Tradition that euer were made the Scripture vâ—ry necessarie in al ages of the Church sec 20 n. 3. p. 120. The Roman Churches receâ—â—ues the scripture as Rule of faitâ— Iuâ—l Defense of A Rule the Apologie part 1. p. 65. p. 129. You Harding say the scriptures are so clear of your side Luther in psal 22. tom So clear on their side 3. fol. 343. We cannot ouercome the Papists bring a huge number of places of scripture for works Plessie in his preface to his book of the Church When in the time of our Fathers men began to protest openly against the abuses and traditions of the Romish Church by the authoritie of Gods word they that were then accounted famous for learning in that Church as Ecbius Cocleus Prierias and others laboured al they could to defend the said abuses by the holie scripture Behold how from the verie beginning of Protestancie Catholiks sought to defend their doctrin by Scripture Morton also tom 2. Apol l. 5. c. 21. relateth this words of Roffensis against Luther The words of the Gospel make most plainly for vs al fight for vs more clearly then More clearly then the sun the sun And ibid. l. 1. c. 37 citeth this Note of the Rhemist Testament Ioan. 4. This woman Mystically being the Church it is here signified that they which at the first beleue becaus the Church teacheth so afterward be much confirmed finding it in the Scripture also And ibid. Morton addeth yee see then that your last resolution is founded in the authoritie of the Scriptures Whitaker Contro 1. q. 1. c. 1. Papists extol the scriptures and we higly Papists extol the Scripture esteeme them and there is no controuersie that we ought to search the scriptures but how we should search them Kemnice in Epist dedicat 1. partis Exam. The Papists at this time put al the strenght and Defense of their cause in the matter of the scripture and Tradition Thus Catholiks esteem and speak of holie Scripture wheras far otherwise Luther postilla in Domin 8. post Trinitatem fol. 301. said The scripture is the book of Heretiks Christianus Protestants say Scripture is the book of Heretikr ad Portum l. contra Verronem tom 5. Rupellae p. 31 Luther said most truly that scripture is the book of heretiks The same Luther postilla in Epiphaniam It is true that Heretiks are made by occasion of scripture Daile in his Apologie c. 5. Papists reuerence the Gospels and Epistles of the Apostles as diuine bookes SECOND SECTION Sometimes denie it APologie of the Church of England parte 4. c. 18. d. 1. These men Papists alwaie abhor and flie the word of God euen as the theef flyes the gallowes Ibid. These men bid the holie scripture away as dum and fruitles Item They burn the scriptures and cal them the books of Heretiks The like hath Whitaker ad Rat. 5. 6. Campiani And Contro 1. q. 6. c. vlt. Contr. 2. q. 5. c. 6. And l. 2. de Scrip. c. 6 sec 3. And Morton tom 2. Apol. l. 1. c. 47. Martyr in 1. Cor. 15. Papists leaue no place ether to God or scripture Caluin in Gal. 1. v. 8. The Papists do furiously vex the pure and simple doctrin of the Gospel In Ioan. 4. v. 20. The Papists giue no place to Prophets or Apostles Act. 17. v. 2. Papists think nothing can be certainly gathered out of scripture Contra Anabapt p. 412. The Papists say that the holie scriptures Vide Caluin in â—oan 6. v. 60. c. 8. v. 12. 39. c. 17. v. 20. are to be let goe Luther in l. de Consilijs The Pope burieth the holie scripture in durt and dust Morton to 2. Apol. l. 1. c. 33. Cardinal Hosius was not ashamed to say impiously See his Appeal l. 5. c. 28. sâ—c 2. Tom 2. Apol. l. 5 c. 13. Potter sect 5. p. 3. It had been better if Scripture had not been written Yet ibid. confesseth This I haue read of Hosius but not in Hosius But he is ashamed to tel where he read it to wit in Iuels Apologie of the Church of England parte 4 where Iuels best excuse of a manifest lie is that some of his lying brethren had told that leud lie before him Read Cope Dial. 6. c. 19. of this faceles lie of Iuel And Hardings answer to the Apologie Hosius de Verbo Dei Bellarm. Praefat in tom 2. White in his Way p. 18. They know and confess the most and greatest points of their religion euen wel nigh al wherin they dissent from vs haue no foundation on the scripture And in his Epistle Dedicatorie Al their speâ—ch is of the Church no mention of the scriptures nor God their Father but their Mother the Church And in his Defense p. 61. accuseth Catholiks of Enmitie rebellion and contempt of scriptures Ibid. p. 346. The words of the scripture itself the Replier and his Complices despise and reuile But it is wel that both himself and his fellowes do giue him the lie herein as we saw in the former section Vshers Reionder p. 1. Papists flie from the Scripture euen as the dog flieth from the whip wherwith he is beaten they speak euil of it But now hauing shewed the manifold and main vncertainties and contradictions of Protestants touching Scripture let anie iudicious Reader iudge whether Protestants can rationally say or think that the Scripture is the onely Iudge or onelie Rule or onelie sufficient Proposer of points of faith apointed by God for to direct and guide vs assuredly and infallibly in matters of assured and infallible faith but now let vs set down Catholiks certain and constant doctrin concerning the same Onely let vs remember luthers word vpon the fift psalme No Heretiks were ouercomen by force or craft but by mutual dissension nether doth Christ fight otherwise with them then by sending amongst them the spirit of giddines and dissension FOVRTEENTH CHAPTER That Scripture taken by it self alone vvithout attestation of the Church that it is the
Preacher nor is in ordinarie course necessarie to engender diuine faith as we shal clearly proue hereafter neuertheless becaus the letter of Scripture is a Proposal of points of faith though we cannot properly enquire whither Scripture propose al points of faith becaus that is the parte of a Proposer yet we may wel enquire whether in Scripture or by Scripture al points of faith which are anie wayes necessarie te be beleued of anie kinde of men be sufficiently proposed as Protestants commonly affirme and Catholiks euer deny So that whether the letter of Scripture be a Proposal of points of faith or a Proposer of them we may enquire whether by Scripture al such necessarie points be sufficiently proposed or no. Yet before we enquire this we wil shew the vncertaintie of Protestants touching al things belonging to Scripture that euen therby it may clearly appeare that howsoeuer they say that the Scripture is the Iudge the entire Rule or Al-sufficient Proposer of al matter of faith they can indeed think nothing less FIRST CHAPTER VVhether S. Iames Epistle be Canonical Scripture and Gods vvord or no FIRST SECTION Protestants sometimes affirme CALVIN in praefat in epistolam â—acobi I doe willingly without controuersie embrace it Epistle of S. Iames becaus I finde no sufficient cause to reiect it Whitaker ad Rationem 1. Campiani We receaue it and number it among the Canonical books For whatsoeuer Luther or anie other thought of it yet our Churches doe willingly embrace it Contro 1. q. 1. c. 16. our Church receaueth al and onely those books of the New testament which the Councel of Trent receaued If Luther and others who follow Luther otherwise thought or wrote of some books of the New testament as the Epistles of Iames and Iude let them answer for themselues Nether need we cite anie more becaus both the French English and Holland Confessions account S. Iames Epistle Canonical SECOND SECTION Protestants sometimes denie LVther in c. 22. Genes to 6. fol. 282. Iames concludeth il It Luther said S. Iames dâ—ated followes not as Iames doateth Therfore the fruits doe iustifie Let therfore our aduersaries be packing with their Iames And praefat in Epistol Iacobi I doe not think this was written of anie Apostle for this cause For it is directly against S. Paul and al other Scripture it attributeth Iustification to works Melancthon de sacris Concionibus to 2. fol. 23. If it cannot be mitigated with some exposition as that of Iames you see c. such simply are not to be receaued Magdeburgians Cent. 1. c. 4. The Epist of Iames doth not a little stray S. Iames ascribeth iustification to workes from the Apostolical doctrin whiles it adscribeth iustification to works and not to faith alone And Cent. 2. c. 4. The Epistle of Iames adscribeth iustice to works against S. Paul and al other Scriptures Pomeranus the first Protestant Pastor of Wittenberg in c. 4. Epist S. Iames erreth ad Rom. By this place thou maiest espie the error of the Epistle of Iames in Iâ—â—erreth ridiculously which thou seest a wicked argument beside that he ridiculously inferreth he citeth Scripture against Scripture which the Spirit cannot suffer Wherfore it cannot be numbred among the books which preach iustice Confessio Heluetica c. 15. The same he S. Iames saied not contradicting the Apostle otherwise he were to be reiected Which they would neuer say if they were assured that it were Gods word For I suppose they would not reiect Gods word in anie caâ—e Musculus in locis Tit. de Iustificatione they obiect to vs the places of Iames. But whosoeuer he was though â—e taught differently from Paul he could not preiudice truth And he addeth Impertiâ—ently That he impertinently bringeth in the example of Abraham that he abuseth the word Faith and setteth down a sentence different from Apostolical doctrin And Tit. de Scripturis plainly aâ—uocheth that he holdeth it not for Authentical Hence it is euident that Protestants agree not about their Canon or Rule of their faith For Lutherans reiect S. Iames Epistle as also diuers others which Caluinists account parte of the Rule of their faith and parte of Gods word Euident also that Caluinists must iudge their brothers Lutherans to haue a most desperate cause For as Whitaker writeth Respon ad Rat. 1. Campiani who cannot defend their religion vnles they laie violent hands vpon the Scripture and break the sacred authoritie of diuine books they must needs haue a naughtie and desperate cause But so doe al Protestants who denie S. Iames Epist Morton to 2. Apol. l. 1. c. 1. Al corruption of Gods word deserueth Gods thunderbolt And the same Whitaker l. 2. de Script p. 218. It is most of al necessarie that the Sic etiam cont 1. q. 3. c. 3. A certain Canon most necessarie certain Canon of Scriptures be vndoubted among Christians But so it is among Protestants For they are not agreed about the certain Canon of Scriptures And yet as Laude saieth sec 38. n. 8. What scripture is Canonical is a great point of faith Sec. 3. n. 12. If she the Church at this day reckons vpmore books within the Canon then heretofore she did then she is changed in a main point of faith the Canon of scripture And Hooker l. 1. § 14. Of things necessarie the very chiefest is to know what books we are bound to esteeme holie See infra c. 15. n. 7. SECOND CHAPTER VVhether al things that are in Scripture be plain and easie to be vnderstood or no FIRST SECTION Protestants sometimes affirme LVther de seruo arbitrio to 2. fol. 426. It is published by the wicked Sophisters that some things in Scripture are hard and that al are not open Ibid. fol. 440. I say of al the No parte of Scripture obscure Scripture I wil not haue anie part of it to be saied obscure In psal 37. to 3. fol. 10. If anie of their Papists number appeal and say we need the exposition of Fathers the Scriptures are obscure Thou shalt answer that this is fals No book in al the world is more clearly written then the Scripture which if it be compared with al other books is like to the sun before al other light Whervpon said Tailor in his Epistle dedicat of his libertie of Prophesing p. 47. so confident Luther sometimes was as he said he could expound al Scripture Gerlachius to 1. Disp 1. p. 9. We say al the Scripture is so clear as it Al scripture clear needeth no interpretation at al. Zanchius de Scriptura to 8. col 408. How can the Scripture be called obscure in anie parte of it Et col 409. If the Scripture be not obscure in anie parte as we shewed before much less in In euerie parte those things which are necessarie to Saluation Whitaker contro 1. q. 4. p. 341. Al the Scripture The whole Scripture is plain and clear Plessie of the Church c. 5. p.
152. The word of God is perfect and easie to be vnderstood of those that desire their saluation as wel of it self as compared with it self c. 4. p. 111. S. Peter saieth not that there is anie obscuritie in the Epistles of S. Paul Brentius in his Prolegomenies contra Sotum They babble that the scripture is obscure and therfore needeth interpretation Sutclif in his Chalenge c. 3. p. 94. Papists slander the scriptures as if they were dark and hard to be vnderstood And thus they write when they exhort al men weemen and Children to read the Scripture or say that they know euerie parcel of the Scripture to be Gods words by the matter contained therin For how can they know euerie parte of the Scripture to be Gods word by the matter vnles they know the matter of euerie parte therof SECOND SECTION Sometimes denie it LVther praefat in psalmos It is Impudencie to brag of vnderstanding al Scripture most impudent rashnes to say one vnderstands anie book of scripture in al points Whitaker Contro 1. q. 4. c. 1. We neuer saied that al things in scripture are easie plain nothing obscure nothing hard to be vnderstood but we openly confess that manie places of scripture are obscure and hard Ibid. Luther was far from that madnes to say that nothing in the scriptures is hard and that it need no interpretation C. 3. p. 340. When the◠proue that there is great difficultie to vnderstand scripture they dispute not against vs. Et c. 4. p. 345. Nether did we euer say or think that al things in scripture be open Lib. 1. de Script p. 56. What man on earth canst thou finde who vnderstandeth al the Misteries of scriptures who is ignorant of nothing who can declare al See him p. 102. and 149. Potter sec 5. p. 19. How manie obscure texts of scriptures which she the Church vnderstands not Moulins of the Iudge of Controuersies c. 17. p. 281. Whosoeuer should vaunt of the vnderstanding al scripture shold vaunt of◠perfection to which the Angels are not comen as I think Chillingworth c. 3. § 25. some texts of scripture are so obscure and ambiguous that to say this and this is the certain sense of them were high presumption Morton tom High presumption 1. Apologiae l. 1. c. 19. denieth that this is the Controuersie betwixt Catholiks and Protestants Whether scripture be of it self so plain as it needeth no interpreter Plessie of the Church c. 4 p. 113. yea but yet are not there some places in Scripture plainly known to be hard Who can denie that Feild l. 4. Eccles c. 15. There is no question but there are manifold difficulties in the scripture Fulk against Heskins p. 7. who is so mad to deny but that there are diuers places both in the old and new testament which be obscure and hard to be vnderstood not onely of the ignorant but euen of the best learned Idem p. 12. And if it be impudencie and madnes for anie to say He vnderstands the Scripture in al points how can Protestants say they know the Scripture to be the word of God by the matter therof as diuers Protestants doe say who affirme that al the Scripture is infallibly known to be the word of God not by the authoritie or testimonie of the Church of God but by the matter therof THIRD CHAPTER VVhether al points necessarie to be belued be actually or expresly in scripture or no. FIRST SECTION Protestants sometimes affirme THe confession of Scotland c. 18. In which Canonical books we affirme al things to be Sufficiently expressed beleued for mans saluation are sufficiently expressed Luther in Postilla in ferias S. Stephani Nothing is to be affirmed but what is expressed in scripture Melancthon and Brentius in Hospin parte 2 Histor Sacram. fol. 107. Of Zuinglius his doctrin we cannot be certain seing of it we haue no clear and express word of God Smidelin l. contra Hosium p. 169. Faith is not faith but an vncertain opinion which doth not rely vpon some express testimonie of scripture Wigandus apud Schusselburg to 7. Catal. Heret p. 681. Onely those dogmes are to be auoched and taught Vvhose very words or equiualent are in Scripture in the Church whose verie words or equiualent are in Scripture Protestants in Conference at Ratisbone sess 10. p. 310. There cannot by the Churches testimonie anie new or peculiar dogme be deuised which afterward may be added to the other dogmes expressed in Scripture Caluin in Gratulat ad Praecentorem p. 337. Nothing is to be beleued which is not expressed in Scripture Contra Heshusium p. 844. where is the express word of God the touchstone Moulins l. contra Peron c. 45. We receaue no doctrin as necessarie to saluation vnles it be in Scripture ether in express termes or equiualent Epist Ether in express termes or equiualent 3. ad Episcopum Wintoniensem p. 183. The Principle by which our religion mainteineth it self against Papistrie is which are of diuine law are sufficiently and euidently conteined in Scripture And D Andrews answering admitteth this Principle For those things which belong to faith and manner of life Whitaker contr 1. q. 6. c. 6. we say Al things necessarie ether to faith or life are plainly and Abundantly expressed abundantly expressed in Scripture See him l. 3. de script c. 12. p. 419. Laude Relat. sec 33. p. 268. If the Popes decision be infallible legant Let them read it to vs out of the holie Scripture and we beleue it Morton in his Appeal l. 1. c. 2. sec 15. In al doctrins of faith we are to adheare precisely to the written word as vnto the sufficient and infallible rule of faith Tom. 2. Apol. l. 1. c. 46. The holie Scripture is to be held for the onely rule of faith The absolute rule of faith the total rule of the Church And c. 49 A most exact rule Tailor of Libertie of Prophesing sec 9. n. 4. In scripture al that is necessarie is plain King Iames in his speech to the Parlament An. 1603. My faith is grounded vpon the Scriptures and the express word of God Fulk in Acts c. 15. Al things necessarie to saluation are expressed in the holie Scripture Perkins contr 16. c. 2. we say that al things which belong to faith and good life and are necessarie to saluation are clearly expressed in Scripture Chillingworth in the praeface n. Clearly expressed 21. Moderate Protestants wil damne no man without express and certain warrant from Gods word See ib. n. 10. 30. 37. Item p. 18. Author Praefationis in to 5. Iesuiticae doctrinae impressae Rupellae 1596. calleth it a detestable lye That Scripture conteineth not al the misteries Explicitly of religion explicitly Vorstius Respons ad Sladum what is necessarie to be beleued is conteined word for word in Scripture Who wil see more Protestants that there is no necessarie point of faith which is not
expresly in Scripture may read Kemnitius 2. parte Exam. tit de Sacram. ibid. tit de Missa 3. parte tit de Inuocat Sanctor l. de duabus naturis c. 30. apud Hospin in concordia discordi c. 47. Gerlachius to 2. disput 24. Heshusius apud Hospin l. cit c. 46. and l de reali praesentia contra Caluinum Scusselburg to 8. Catalog p. 64. and 520 Heidelbergenses in Colloquio Mulbrunen si act 11. Sadeel praefat Respons ad art abiurat p. 403. Tract de sacrificio c. 3. King Iames in Basilicon Doron part 1. Morton 1. part Apol. l. 2. c. 9. Lobechius disp 23. And what they mean by Express termes Couel art 2. p. 20. declareth thus we cal that expressliteral mention Vvhat Protestants means by Express which is set down in plain termes and not inferred by way of consequence And the same is euident by the words of Hunnius Whitaker Fulk and King Iames which we shal presently citie So that nothing is express in Scripture if it needeth our inference and nothing matter of faith which needeth our inference out of Scripture if ether al points of faith be express in Scripture as the aforesaid Protestants teach or we beleue not anie one article of faith by fallible authoritie of humane deductions as Laude saieth Relat. sec 38. p. 345. or as Whitaker saieth l. 1. de script p. 50. That thou saiest our faith relieth vpon testimonies not arguments I grant And generally al Protestants when they refuse to beleue anie point or vrge vs to proue out of Scripture what they refuse to beleue not require and exact express words of Scripture as is to be seen in their writings about sacrifice Transubstantion Inuocation of Saints and the like In so much as Morton 1. parte Apol. l. 2. c. 9. alleadgeth these words of Bellarmin for to shew the consent of Protestant They al teach that al things necessarie to saluation are expresly conteined inscriptures And Morton addeth What Protestants think and how much they consent thou hast shewed But when themselues are to proue anie thing controuerted out of Scripture they sing an other song as shal by and by appear Besids manie Protestants argue that such a thing is not becaus it is not express in Scripture So Beza in Confess c. 5. sec 5. Heshusius l. de reali praesentiâ Iacobus Andreae contra Hosium p. 169. Kemnitius 2. parte Exam. p. 229. Gerlachius to 2. disput 24. Chilling Praeface n. 10. and others which plainly sheweth That sometimes they require to a point of faith that it be expresly in Scripture SECOND SECTION Sometimes denie it PRotestants in the Conference at Ratisbon sess 3. p. 95. This Rule shal stand against al the Gates of Hel Nothing is to be admitted as a dogme or article of religion but what is expressed in scripture or may be drawn from thence in good Consequence Sess 11. p. 356. Not onely those things are extant in scripture which are there in express words but also those which may be thence deduced by good Consequence Sess 13. p. 386. I finally conclude that Good consequence sufficeth nothing is to be beleued in worship articles and dogmes which is not ether expresly conteined in scripture or may in good consequence be drawn from it Wirtenbergenses Respon 1. ad Patriarcham Constantinop We embrace al those things which may be proued out of scripture in good Consequence Confession of England art 6. The holie scripture conteineth al things necessarie to saluation so that what is not read in it nor can be proued out of it is not to be required of anie to be beleued as an article of faith or as necessarie to saluation Pareusl 1. de Iustificat c 16. That we must vaunt of the express word of God and recal al our dogâ—nes to this one Express word of God not alwaies required head is an express lie King Iames Respon ad Cardinal Peron p. 401. We haue set down that only those things are to be thought necessarie to saluation which ether are expresly conteined in the word of God or haue been drawn from it by necessarie consequence And p. 392. The King calleth those simply necessarie which ether the word of God expresly commandeth to be beleued or done or which the ancient Church hath inferred out of the word of God by necessarie consequence Iuel in his Defense of the Apologie c. 9. p. 54. we say not that al Not al points plainly expressed cases of doubt are by manifest and open words plainly expressedin the Scriptures for so there should need no exposition But we say there is no cause in Religion so dark and doubtful but it may be necessarily proued or reproued by our collection and conference of the Scriptures Cartwrightin Whitgifts Defense p. 82. Manie things are both commanded and forbidden of the which there is no express mention in the word which Manie commanded things not expressed are as necessarie to be followed or auoided as those wherof express mention is made Which saieth Whitgift I take to derogate much from the perfection of the Scripture to be mere Papistical Whitaker Contro 1. q. 6. c. 9. Whatsoeuer is inferred or gathered out of Scripture though hardly al such the ancient Fathers most truly said was written And Controu 4. q. 4. c. 1. It is al one to be expresly in Scripture Alone to be expressed and infâ—rred and to be euidently inferred out of Scripture Fulk in answer to Clarks ouerthrow p. 659. We are willing to acknowledg and admit necessarie Collection to be of as great authoritie as Of as great authoriâ—â—e the express word of the Scripture In Reioinder to Bristow p. 97. Bristow slandereth me to affirme that in al matters onely euident scripture must be brought and heard which I neuer affirmed P. 88. I meane by onely Scripture whatsoeuer is taught by plain As good words or may be gathered by necessarie conclusion which is as good as express words So also 2. Thessal 2. not 19. and de Success p. 74. White in Defense of his way p. 288. No Protestant affirmes al things to be written expresly Laude in his Relation sec 38. p. 332. It is enough to ground beleef vpon necessarie consequence out of Scripture as wel as vpon express text As wel Potter sec 5. p. 3. That this diuine Reuelation for al necessarie points is sufficiently and clearly made in the Scriptures ether in express termes or by manifest deductions is the constant doctrin of Antiquitie euen til the latter times Chillingworth in his Preface n. 28. I beleue al things euidently conteined in them Scriptures al things euidently or euen probably deducible from them Morton to 2. Apol. l. 1. c. 41. Euen probably inferred Those things which are deriued from Scripture by necessarie consequence are to be held for written traditions See ib. l. 5. c. 9. Chamier l. 13. de fide c. 10. n 12. It is not the word of
God onely which is expressed in scriptures or preached in the Church but also what necessarily followeth out of it Gomarus apud Costerum in Apologia p. 75. There is no question between vs whether al things which are to be beleued are express in holie Scripture The like say Beza Respons ad Acta Colloq Montisbel part 2. p. 46. Morton to 2. Apol. l. 1. c. 41. 52. 53. l. 5. c. 9. Field l. 4. c. 20. Pareus l. 1. de Iustificat c 16. Riuet Contr. tract 1. sec 18. Moulins de fugis Arnoldi c. 1. and generally al Protestants when they themselues are put to proue anie point out of Scripture as is to be seen of the Caluinists in Colloq Frankendalensi art 12. fol. 549. 552. Particularly here I note What Fulk saieth that their Inferences out of Scripture are as Good and of as great authoritie are as Gods express words Laude That what is grounded vpon their Consequences is as wel as As wel vpon express text Which is to equalize their Inferences to Gods express words And White loco cit Are they not as wel conclusions of Scripture which are deduced By Protestants by true discourse as which are expressed verbatim Perkins of the Creed col 737. We must know that a lawful consequence drawn out of Scripture is as wel the word of God as that which is expressed Al wel in words Whitaker It is al one to be expresly and to be inferred They condemn vs for saying that Alone Gods word tradid is equal to his Written Potter sec 1. p. 14. To the word of God she Rom. Church addes and equals her own traditions Laude Relat. sec 16. p. 91. Equaling the tradition of the present Church to the written word of Gods Frets vpon the verie foundation it self by iustling with it And they wil haue their Consequences and Inferences as good as Gods express word When we say that the Churches traditions are equal to Gods word we mean nothing but that one word of God is equal to an other For we profess that both of them came immediatly from God one by tradition the other by writing But when they say that their inferences are equal to Gods word they must needs Protestants make fallible mens Inferences Gods word mean that fallible mens Inference and that out of one humane principle too is equal to Gods word For they cannot denie but their Inferences are fallible mens Inferences becaus they are not made by God but by fallible men onely Perkins also in his Reformed Catholik Controu 3. c. 3. and Caluin in Lucae 10. v. 16. make the Ministers word equiualent Confessio Bâ—â—em c. 14. Apologia Confess August c. de Poenitentia to Gods promise and a sufficient ground of faith And Peter Martyr praefat l. de Euchar professeth that the Base strength and foundation of his opinion of the Eucharist Make humane principles ground of their faith is That it is proper to the Deitie to be euerie where and to the humane nature to be in a certain place So the basis and ground of their faith concerning the Eucharist is partly their humane principle For express Scripture they can pretend none FOVRTH CHAPTER VVhether al necessarie points of faith be euidently or clearly conteined in Scripture FIRST SECTION Protestants sometimes affirme ONe thing it is to be conteined actually in Scripture an other to be conteined clearly For something may be conteined actually and yet obscurely and therfore we make these distinct Chapters Protestants in Colloq Ratisbon p. 20. We acknowledg that by Gods Plainely and clearly goodness whatsoeuer are necessarie to saluation are plainly enough and clearly put before our eies in both especially in the New Testament Caluin contra Versipellem p. 358. I stoutly affirme that Heretiks are ouercomen by open Scriptures l. de scandalis Clear p. 101. We receaue nothing but what is proued with clear and sound testimonies of Scripture Beza l. Quaestionum Resp vol. 1. Theol. p. 673. The dogmes of true religion are plainly enough and clearly Plainely and clearly explaned in holie writ In Confess c. 4. sec 25. The Apostles and Euangelists haue so written those things which they haue written as the dullest and most ignorant of al men may thence perceaue vnles themselues doe hinder whatsoeuer sufficeth for their Saluation Zanchius l. 1. Epistolarum p. 16. Whatsoeuer is necessarie to saluation al that is plainly conteined in holie writ And p. 98. The places of holie Scripture from whence the dogmes of Christian Need no clearer expression religion are taken are so clear and open as they need no more diligent or clearer expression Academia Nemausiensis Resp ad Iesuitas Tournonios Rupellae 1584. p. 531. Hence it followeth that al matters of faith are plainly and clearly conteined in that written word that is in the writings of the Prophets and Apostles Moulins in his Buckler sec 94. Al difficulties being set aside that which in Scripture remaineth clear and needeth no interpretation is sufficient to saluation Needeth no interpretation In his answer to Card. Peron l. 1. c. 1. The articles in which the substance of religion consisteth are proposed Need no interpretation in scripture in so clear termes as they need no Interpretation So also de Iudice Contro c. 17. Piscator in Thesibus l. 1. c. 1. we say that al dogmes of faith are clearly deliuered in scripture Whitgift in Defence c. p. 573. what is this els but together with the Papists to condemn the scriptures of Plainely and clearly expressed obscuritie as though al things necessarie to saluation were not plainly and clearly expressed in them p. 367. we are wel assured that Christ in his word hath fully and plainly comprehended al things requisite to faith and good life Fully Fulk Answer to the Preface of the Rhemes testament so manie partes of scriptures as are able to instruct vs to saluation are so plain and easie Vnderstood of euerie reader or hearer as they may be vnderstood ofeuerie one that readeth or heareth them Whitaker Contro 1. q. 4. c. 1. These are ouraxiomes First that scriptures are so plain as they may be read of the people and of the vnlearned with some fruit and profit Secondly that al things necessarie to saluation are proposed in scripture in plain words Ibid. Inplain words c. 4. Hence it followeth that al things necessarie to saluation are manifest in scripture which is the ground of our Defense which he often repeateth Manifest And q. 5. c. 7. We may gather the true As certainly as if God spoke to vs. sense out of scripture no less certainly then if god himself spake to vs. Morton to 2. Apol. l. 2. c. 19. That is the question whether al those things which are necessarie to saluation be so plain in Scripture as the Faithful Vven to the mostignorant euen the most ignorant may be
p. 376. and c. 14. p. 399. Contro The onelie sufficient means 2. q. 5. c. 6. 9. Chillingworth c. 2. n. 3. scriptures be the sole Iudge of Controuersies that is the sole rule for man to iudg them Sole Rule by And he inscribeth that Chapter thus scripture the onely rule wherby to iudg of Controuersies Where § 32. he saieth I cannot know anie doctrin to be a diuine and supernatural truth or a part of Christianitie but onely becaus the scripture saies so And where saieth the Scripture that it self is the word of God Who wil see more Protestants may read Zuinglius in Hospin part 2. Histor fol. 23. Bernenses ibid. fol. 52. Beza Apol. contra Sanitem p. 289. and in Colloq Montisbel p. 10. Whitaker l. 1 de Script p. 146. l. 3. p. 483. l. 9. contra Dureum sec 64. Morton to 2. Apologiae l. 1. c. 45. 46. 47. 49. l. 5. c. 12. he saieth Matters of faith must relie onely on the light of the letters of faith Martyr in Disput Oxon p. 143. and Pareus Colleg. Theol. 3. disp 2. affirme that Scripture is the onely Onelie external infallible means external infallible means to get faith and as necessarie to the saluation of the Church as meat to life as also Pareus before said and Whitaker also White in his Defense p. 69. The whole rule of the Churches iudgment Vvhole Rule is onely scripture onely scripture onely scripture and nothing but scripture SECOND SECTION Protestants sometimes denie it PRotestants doe diuers waies denie Scripture to be the sole or entire rule of faith First in formal termes For thus Chillinhworth c. 2. n. 8. p. 55. when Protestants affirme against Papists that the scripture is a perfect rule of faith their meaning is not that by scripture al things absolutly may be proued which are to be beleued For it can neuer be proued by scripture to Not al things absolutely a Gainsayer that there is a God or that the Book called the scripture is the word of God Ibid. n. 155. p. 114. scripture is not a Iudge of Controuersies but a Rule to iudge them by and that not an absolutly perfect Rule but as perfect Not an absolutey perfect Rule as a written Rule can be which must alwaies need something els which is ether euidently true oreuidently credible to giue attestation to it See also n. 156. Feild l 4. de Eccles c. 15. we doe not so make the scripture the Rule of our faith but that other things in their kinde are Rules likewise in such sort as it is not safe without respect had vnto Not safe by Sctipture alâ—ne them to iudg of things by Scripture alone Hooker l. 1 § 14. Albeit scripture doe profess to contein in it al things which are necessarie to saluation yet the meaning cannot be simply of al things Not simply al things necessarie which are necessarie Secondly they confess that Scripture is no sufficient Rule to beleue that it self is the word of God or who are Schismatiks Hooker l. 2. § 4. It is not the word of God which Scripture can not assure vs that it iâ— the word of God doth or possibly can assure vs that it is the word of God By what then are you infallibly assured Is it by the word of man Laude Relat. sec 16. p. 70. There is no place in scripture which tels vs that such books conteining such and particulars No place in Scâ—iptuâ—e are the Canon and infallible wil and word of God And p. 69. That scripture should be fully and sufficiently known as by diuine and infallible testimonie lumine proprio by resplendencie of that light which it hath in it self onely and by the witnes that it can so giue to it self I could neuer yet see cause to allow P. 80. The light which is in Scripture itself is not bright enough it cannot beare sufficient witnes to itself P. 88. Where he Hooker speaks so Can not bear witnes to it self sensibly that Scripture cannot beare witnes to it self nor one parte of it to an other that is grounded vpon nature which admits no created thing to be witnes to it self and is acknowledged by our Sauior Sec. 25. n. 6. The Iudge shal be the Scripture and the Primitiue Church Primitiue Church iudge Chillingworth c. 2. n. 11. p. 52. Scripture we say is the rule to iudge controuersies by yet not al simply but al the controuersies of Christians of those that are already agreed vpon this first Not al controuersies by Scripture principle That the Scripture is the word of God n. 27. When Scripture is affirmed to be the rule by which al controuersies of religion are to be decided those are to be excepted out of this generalitie which concern the Scripture it self Ibid. Your Negatiue Conclusion That these questions Not controuersies â—bâ—ut Scripture it self touching Scripture are not decidable by Scripture you needed not haue cited anie reason to proue it it is euident by itself Which he often repeateth as n. 29. 46. 52. 156. And n. 27. The question whether scuh or such a book be Onely by the Church Canonical scripture affirmatiuely cannot be decided but onely by the testimonie of the ancient Churches And n. 35. you demand whether that by the Churches Assured by the Church consent they are assured what scriptures are Canonical I answer yes they are so And wheras you infer from Church iudge of the Scripture hence This is to make the Church Iudge I haue told you already that of this controuersie we make the Church Iudge Feild l. 4 de Eccles c. 7. To him that doubteth of both old andnew Testament we must not alleadg the authoritie of ether of these but some other thing Morton to 2. Apol. l. 5. c. 14. It is that which we wold haue That Scripture is to be accounted Iudge of those who beleue the scripture Which is plainly to confess that it is not Iudge of al. And Ibid. c. 10. We account not scripture the onely but the supreme Interpreter Not onely Scripture And c. 57. Protestants doe not so make the scripture the supreme Iudge of Controuersies as therfore they refuse the iudgment of Councels And l. 3. de Missa c. 3. The Iudgment of sense in Sense a ground of Protest fâ—ith sensible obiects is a notable ground of faith Whitaker Contro 1. q. 5. c. 6. He leeseth his labor who out of scripture disputeth against those that denie the scripture Against such we must dispute out of the testimonie of the Church or vse other arguments l. 1. de Script p. 92. The Creed of the Apostles is the rule of faith Creed is the rule Plessie of the Church c. 3. The question with the Donatists was more for matter of fact then of right as who had first failed in Charitie offended the Schisme not decided by Scripture Communion opened the gate
to schisme which could not wel be decided by the holie scripture White in his way p. 48. The certaintie of the scripture is not written Certaintie of Scripture is not written indeed with letters in anie particular place or book therof Thirdly they grant that Scripture needeth interpretation for to decide Scripture needeth interpretation some controuersies of faith as before c. 4. sec 2. we cited out of Whitaker and others To Whome I ad that Morton to 2. Apol. l. 5. c. 9. saieth Not so as we haue the scripture the onely but the cheif Interpreter that is that in expounding scriptures we follow the iudgment of Pastors but weighed by the most clear Conference of scriptures And Laude Relat. sec 25. p. 157. Ether they Protestants and Papists must be iudged by the scripture they must ether both repaire to the exposition of the Primitiue Church and submit to that or both call and submit to a General Councel lawfully called Ibid. p. 166. The Iudge shal be the scripture and the Primitiue Church And sec Scripture not onelie â—udge 39. p. 386. The scripture interpreted by the primitiue Church and a lawful and free general Councel determining according to these is Iudge of Controuersies Sec. 16. p. 104. When the Fathers say we are to relie vpon scripture onely they are neuer to be vnderstood with exclusion of tradition in what case soeuer it may be had becaus it is deep and may be drawn into different senses and so Tradition not excluded mistaken if anie man wil presume vpon his own strenght and singly without the Church Fourthly al Protestants partly Scripture neeaeth some additions in words partly in fact doe confess that the Scripture needeth the addition of some humane principles for to proue both their special iustification In which they assume this Principle I beleue and also most or altheir points of faith which are opposit to ours As for to proue that the Eucharist is not substantially the bodie of Christ because the Scripture saieth it is a Commemoration of him They need to ad this humane Principle No Commemoration can be substantially the thing which is commemorated or to proue that Christ is not really in the Eucharist becaus the Scripture saieth He is in heauen they need to ad this humane principle No bodie can by the power of God be in two places at once And so of the like And if the Scripture need the attestation of the Church need the Interpretation of the Church need humane Principles it is euident that it is not the sole and entire Rule of faith For a sole and entire Rule needeth nether addition nor Interpretation S. Basil lib. contra Eunomium â—â—hat requisit to a Rule A Rule admitteth no addition For what wanteth something needeth addition but what are imperfect can neuer be rightly called rules or squares Theophilact in Philipens 3. A Canon or Rule suffereth nether addition nor suhstraction Protestants in Colloq Ratisbon sess 1. p. 36. In matters of faith religion and worship that onely is to be accounted and vsed for a Rule which admitteth nether addition nor subtraction Whitaker Contro 1 q. 4. c. 4. The scripture is called a Rule a square a scope exposed to the eyes of al therfore it must need be easie and open And ibid. q. 5. c. 7. Euerie rule must be certain and known Ibid. q 6. c. 16. Vnles the scripture be the entire and perfect rule it wil be no rule at al. Ibid. If it be a rule then perfect and adâ—â—quate And Chillingworth c. 2. n. 6. p. 54. I conclude that both these properties are requisit to a perfect Rule both to be so compleat as it need no addition and to be so euident as to need no interpretation White in his Way p. 15. The nature of a Rule is to be perfect Laude sec 26. n. 4. A Rule must be certain and known And I conclude that Scripture is no entire Rule of faith becaus in diuers matters of faith and religion according to Protestants plain confession it needeth both addition and interpretation Howsoeuer therfore Protestants in words auouch the Scripture to be the onelie and entire Protestants denieindeeds what they affirme in words rule of Christian faith indeed they deny it becaus they doe and must denie it to be such as an entire Rule must be But perhaps their meaning is that when Catholiks are to proue then Scripture is the onelie Rule of faith but when they are to proue it may need their expositions or their humane principles which is as much as to say sometimes it is a rule sometimes not or to Catholiks it must be an entire Rule but not to Protestants so that what they wil and when they wil is their Rule of faith And no maruel if their Rule be as variable as their faith is SIXT CHAPTER VVhether Scripture of it self doe sufficiently shevv or proue it self to be the vvord of God FIRST SECTION Protestants sometimes affirme CAluin 1. Institut c. 6. § 2. wheras they ask How shal â—e be perswaded that the Scriptures came from God vnles we fly to the decree of the Church it is as if one shold ask How shal we learn to discern light from darknes white from black sweet from Scripture as lear as light bitter For the Scripture of itself giueth no obscurer feeling of its truth than white and black things of their color sweet and bitter of their taste And Ioan. 10. v. 4. By the spirit of discretion the Elect do discern Gods truth from mens lies Iuel Defens Apol. c. 9. p. 404. When Harding asked How know you that the scriptures be scriptures How know you that the Gospel of Thomas Bartholmew and Nicodemus are no scriptures Answereth A man might wel demand the like question of M. Harding How know you that the sun As the sun is the sun or how know you that the moon is the moon Whitaker Contro 1. q. 3. c. 1. The summ of our opinion is that scripture is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is of it self hath al its authoritie and credit And l. 1. de Scrip. c. 9. p. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is which not onely of it self is true but which needeth no proof or demonstration Needeth no pâ—oof to confirme it See him ibid. p. 27. 93. 95. 102. 106. 65. 40. and contro 1. q. 6. c. 9. White in his way p. 27. The doctrin conteined in the scripture is a light and so abideth into what language soeuer it be translated and therfore the children of light know it and discern it For God directeth them by his holie spirit who openeth their hearts that they know his voice from al others and that the light of his truth may shine vpon them Which light is of this nature that it giueth testimonie to it self and receaueth authoritie from no other And in his way p. 48. The vertue and power which shewes it self in euerie
Chillingworth c. 2. § 3. p. 53. scriptures being the sole Iudge of Controuersies that is the sole Rule for man to Iudge them by For wee mean nothing els § 11. p. 57. To speak properly as Not properly a Iudge men shold speak when they write of Controuersies in religion the scripture is not a Iudge of Controuersies but a Rule onely and the onely Rule for Christians to iudge them by Ibid. § 10. We denie not but a Iudge and a law might wel stand together but we denie that No iudge apointed by God there is anie such Iudge of Gods apointment § 12. Which conclusion that though the Scripture may be a Rule it cannot be a Iudge I haue already granted § 23. There is not anie publikly authorized Iudge to determin Controuersies in religion nor anie necessitie there should be anie The same he hath § 85. And § 104. speaking Scripture cannot be a Iudge truly and properly The scripture is not a Iudge nor cannot be hut onely a sufficient Rule for those to Iudge by who beleue it to be the word of God § 155. This assertion That scripture alone is Iudge of al Controuersies in faith if it be taken properly is nether a fundamental nor an vnfundamental point of faith nor no point of faith at al but a plain falshood It is not a Iudge of Controuersies but a Rule to iudge them by Potter sec 2. p. 32. The Scripture is Iudge or rather Rule of Controuersies Whitaker Contro 1. q. 1. c. 2. The Scripture is the same in the Church which the law is in the common wealth Moulins de Iudice Contro c. 13. If our aduersaries think not that the title of Iudge ought to be giuen to the Scripture at least they shold not deny it title of Rule and this is that which we require namely that our faith be ruled by onely Gods word But nether wold this content them vnles Gods word be expounded as they would haue it which were to make themselues the rule of iudging EIGHTH CHAPTER VVhether Scripture be to beleued to be Gods vvord vvith diuine and infallible assurance FIRST SECTION Protestants sometimes affirme LAude Relat. sec 16. p. 72. suppose it aggreed vpon that there must be a diuine faith cui subesse non potest Scripture must be known with diuine faith falsum vnder which can rest no possible error That the books of scripture are the written word of God Ibid. p. 66. This is agreed on by me that scripture must be known to be scripture by a sufficient infallible diuine pro of See him p. 64. and p. 75. After a man once beleue his faith growes stronger then ether his reason or his knowledg p. 86. Beleif is firmer then anie knowledg can be becaus it rests vpon diuine authoritie which cannot deceaue See ibid. p. 105. and p. 114. 115. Likewise sec 33. p. 227. Moral certaintie is not Moral certaintie not sufficient strong enough in points of faith See him sec 19. p. 125. sec 16. cit p. 74. Reason without grace cannot see the way to heauen nor beleue this book Reason not sufficient in which God hath written the way Potter sec 5. p. 2. Faith is saied to be diuine and supernatural First in regard of the Author or efficient cause of the habit and act of diuine infused faith which is the special grace of God Secondly in regard of the obiect as things beleued which are aboue the reach of mere nature or reason Thirdly in regard of the formal reason or principal ground on which faith chiefly relyeth and into which it is finally resolued which is diuine Reuelation or authoritie of God If it faile in anie of these it is no diuine or supernatural faith P. 7. The assent of diuine faith is absolutly diuine which Faith is absolutly diuine requires an obiect and motiue so infallibly true as that it nether hath nor can possibly admit anie mixture of error or falshood p. 10. supernatural faith must be absolutly vndoubted and certain Sec. 6. p. 59. The assent of faith is more certain if it be possible then that of sense or science or demonstration becaus it rests on diuine authoritie which cannot possibly deceaue Sec. 5. cit p. 40. diuine faith must haue a diuine foundation that can not deceaue Caluin 1. Instit c. 7. § 5. Lightned by his vertue we beleue not by our own or other mens iudgment that the scripture is from God but aboue humane iudgment we resolue most assuredly euen as if we saw God there that it came from Gods own mouth by the ministerie of men See him ibid. § 4. and c. 6. § 2. And both he 3. Instit c. 2. § 6. 7. 16. in Cathechismo c. de fide Beza in Confes c. 4. sec 5. Luther in psalm 14. to 3. define faith to be Faith most certain and infallible A most certain assurance and Fulk in Rom. 8. Nota 9. to be an Infallible assurance White in his Way p. 2. Faith must be infallible or certain that is free from error and such as cannot deceau◠vs. P. 10. Our faith must be withful assurance and perswasion SECOND SECTION Sometimes they denie CHillingworth c. 1. § 8. p. 36. Of this hypothesis That al the articles of our faith were reuealed by God we cannot ordinarily haue anie rational and acquired certaintie more then moral But moral certaintie C. 2. § 3. p. 53 The controuersie wherin the scripture it self is the subiect of the question cannot be determined but by natural reason Ibid. § 32. p. 65. Natural reason built on principles common to Reason last resolution of Protest faith al men is the last resolution into which the Churches authoritie is but the first inducement Item § 24. p. 62. I know no other natural and rational means to be assured herof of the incorruption of Scripture then I haue of anie other books incorrupted For though I haue a greater degree of rational and humane Humane assurance assurance of that then this in regard of diuers considerations which make it more credible That the Scripture hath been preserued from anie material alteration yet my assurance of both is of the same Moral assurance kinde and condition both moral assurances and nether physical or mathematical Scripture no materia obiect of faith Ibid. § 32. p. 65. The Scripture is none of the material obiects of our faith but onely the means of conueying them vnto vs. § 35. p. 66. Of this controuersie which books be Canonical wemake the Church the Iudge but not the present Church but the consent and testimonie of the ancient and primitiue Church which though it be but a highly probable inducement and no demonstratiue enforcement yet me thinks you should not denie but it may be a sufficient Probabilitie a sufficient ground of Protest faith ground of faith Ibid. § 152. p. 112. The priuiledg of not being in possibilitie of erring
we challeng not Ibid. § 154. you content not yourselues with a moral certaintie of things you beleue p. 113. Moral certaintie sufficient Me thinks you should require onely a moral and modest assent to them points of faith and not a diuine as you cal it and infallible faith Ibid. § 159. p. 116. God requireth of vs vnder pain of damnation onely to beleue the verities therin Scripture conteined and not the diuine authoritie of the books wherin Not diuine authoritie of Scripture they are conteined We haue I beleue as great reason to beleue there was such a man as Henrie the Eight King of England as that Iesus Christ suffered vnder Pontius Pilat C 6. § 3. p. 325. That there is required of vs a As great reason for beleef of K. Hen. as of Christ. knowledg of them points of faith and an adherence to them as certain as that of sense or science that such a certaintie is required of vs vnder pain of damnation this I haue demonstrated to be a great error and of dangerous and pernicious consequence § 5. p. 327. Men may talke their pleasure of an absolute and most infallible certaintie but did they generally beleue that obedience to Christ were the onely way to present and eternal felicitie but as much as Caesars Commentaries or the historie of Salust I beleue the liues of most men Papists and Protestants would be better then they are And therfore it followes from your own reason that faith which is not a most certain and infallible knowledg may be true and sauing faith C. 7. § 7. p. 389. In requiring that this faith should be diuine and Dangerous that faith must be infallible infallible you cast your Credents into infinit perplexitie Erasmus on the 2. and 27. of Mathew There is no fear that al the authoritie of the Scripture shold fall if anie error were found in it Luther called the Scripture The books of Heretiks Protestants in Colloq Ratisbon sess 11. say that we must distinguish betwene the faith wherwith we beleue points necessarie to saluation and historical faith wherwith we beleue the Scripture to be the word of God And historical faith is not diuine faith vnles they wil make manie kinds of diuine faith And they add that there is not equal reason of beleuing that scripture is Gods word and that Christ is Incarnate And Whitaker l. 1. de Script p. 88. who haue no other faith but historical doe no more beleue Christ then the Diuels Moulins in his Bucler sec 4. p. 13. Properly speaking articles Scripture no doctrin of Christian religion of faith are doctrins of Christian religion and in this sense the Canon of Canonical books is no article of faith So that the Canon of Scripture is no doctrin of Christian religion White in his Defense c. 30. p. 282. scripture ether by the immediate light Scripture known by â—ight of nature of Gods spirit or by the light of nature may be known to be Gods word And if by the light of nature without diuine faith Hooker l. 3. § 8. we know by reason that the scripture is the word of God By reason Whitaker aforsaid l. 1. de Script p. 25. The most diuine character of the scripture doth most plainly tel al that ether haue receaued the Holie Ghost or are imbued with mean understanding By mean vnderstanding that it came from God And if mean vnderstanding suffice without the Holie Ghost there need no diuine faith to beleue it And ibid. p. 122. Who hath reason and wil vse it may therby most easily discern these diuine books from mens books P. 150. Scriptures By onelie reading may be known by onely reading And in praefat ad Staplet The Scripture giueth so clear a testimonie of its diuiniâ— tie that who read it with a smal attention and iudgment cannot be ignorant that it is diuine And p. 77. vnles he be doltish l. 2. p. 235. Scriptures may be acknowledged and held without the testimonie of the Spirit NINTH CHAPTER VVhether translated Scripture be authentical FIRST SECTION Protestants sometimes affirme WHite in his Way to the Church p. 12. I say the Scripture translated into English Translated Scripture rule of faith is the Rule of faith whervpon I relying haue not a humane but a diuine authoritie And p. 27. The doctrin conteined in the Scripture is a light and so abideth into what language soeuer it be translated and therfore the children of light know it and discern it Ibid. So the vnlearned man is secured not vpon the Churches credit and authoritie but by the ministerie which teacheth him he is directed to the light itself And this Ministerie we haue and vse for our Translations but they that obey it know the Translation and so proportionably The matter of Scripture sheweth it self al articles of faith to be infallible becaus the matter therof appeares to them as a candle in a lantern shewing it self in its own light And in his table before his book The Scriptures translated into English are the Rule of faith And in his Defense of his Way c. 28. p. 266. Though it be granted that the Ministerie of men and rules of art and knowledg of tonges be al subiect to error yet doth it not follow that by them we cannot obtein infallible assurance of our translations Chillingworth c. 2. § 32. we beleue the Scripture not finally Matter of Scripture known by it self and for itself but for the matter conteined in it And so al Protestants should say seing when they exhort the common people to the reading of their translated Bibles they bear them in hand that it is the word of God and that their translation of the word of God is authentical and worthie to be beleued for it self Besids they did the people beleue what they teach them becaus it is in their Bibles and so make their Bibles the rule and ground of their peoples faith And no other infallible rule of faith their common people can pretend to haue Moreouer if they make the matter or true sense of Scripture the rule of faith as commonly they doe they cannot denie but Scripture truly translated hath the same matter which the original hath SECOND SECTION Sometimes denie it WHitaker Contro 1. q. 2. c. 7. We make no edition of Scripture authentical but the Hebrew in the old and the Greek in the New Testament Translations if No translation authentical they agree we allow them if they differ we reiect them Ibid. c. 8. We doe doe not say that we must stand to our translations as authentical of themselues but we appeal to the fountaines onely as truly authentical C. 9. Authentical Scripture must come imediatly from the Holie Ghost C. 10. onely authentical is Canonical Et ibid. q. 5. c. 9. The ignorance of the original toungs Hebrew and Greek hath caused manie errors And thus al Protestants should say becaus
P. 76. Faith is of scriptures heard P. 108. Faith is begotten not of testimonie of the Church but onely out of scripture P. 122. The The â—â—elie sufficient means scripture is the most strong the most effectual I ad also now the onely sufficient means to beleue P. 130. Our faith relieth vpon the scriptures alone P. 165. scriptures are the foundations of our faith P. 167. The scripture is the beginning of beleuing The same he hath p. 168. P. 173. The formal cause of our Scripture the formal cause of beleef faith is not the voice of the Church but Gods word reuealed in the scriptures Potter sec 5 p. 8. The principal motiue and last obiect of beleif is the diuine last obiect authoritie of the scripture it self P. 10. The cheif principle ground on which faith rests and for which it firmely The ground of faith assents vnto those truths which the Church propounds is the diuine reuelation made in scripture sec 7. p. 95. The creed conteines onely the material The formal obiect obiect of faith The scripture is further the formal obiect of faith or the motiue and ground whervpon faith is grounded being both the obiectâ—m quod in respect of things therin reuealed and obiectum Obiectum quod and quâ— quo in respect of that diuine veritie and authoritie which reueals them Laude Relat. sec 16. p. 84. Tradition of the present Church is the first moral motiue to beleue but the beleif it self That the scripture is the word of God rests vpon the scripture P. 89. Doe Faith resolued into Scripture you grant as you ought to doe that we resolue our faith into scripture as the ground and we wil neuer denie that Tradition is the key that letts vs in Sec. 18. p. 123. The Prophets testimonie was diuine into which namely their writings the Iewes did resolue their faith Hooker l. 2. § 7. Scripture is The ground of al beleef the ground of al beleif Chillingworth c. 3. § 32. p. 149. I can not know anie doctrin to be a diuine and supernatural truthe but becaus the scripture saies so And where saies it that it is the word of God Vttermost formal cause of faith Morton to 2. Apol. l. 1. c. 37. Papists are forced against their wil to grant that thè vttermost formal cause of Catholik faith doth not consist in the authoritie of the Church but in scripture Ib. The diuine authoritie of the scripture by vertue of the holie Ghost doth imprint in the minds of the hearers the last formal Last formal cause cause of faith And l 5. c. 11. scripture is to the faithâ—ul the supreme Iudge euen concerning vs in which our consciences doe last rest In his Appeal l. Last rest and resolution 3. c 15. sec 5. In the doctrin of scripture mens consciences may take their last rest and resolution White in his Table before his way The last resolution of our faith is into the authoritie of the scripture And yet they cannot denie but the authoritie of the Scripture is create For they were written by men And so the formal cause the vttermost formal cause the last formal cause the last rest Create authoritie the vttermost formal cause of Protest faith the last resolution of their faith is create authoritie and not Prima veritas it self as they pretend and condemn Catholiks for onely saying that the create authoritie of the true formal cause but say not as Protestants say of Scripture the vttermost the last formal cause the last resolution of our faith Besids Protestants make Protestants inferences out of humane Principles the last resolution of their faith their own Inferences partly out of some humane principle to be equal and equiualent vnto express Scripture or word of God as is shewed before c. 3 sec 2. and so make their own Inferences and those partly out of humane Principles the formal cause the vttermost the last formal cause that into which their faith is last resolued and withal teach that L. 1. c. 18 n. 1. the Inference cannot be more certain then the Principle out of which it is inferred How then can their faith haue more certaintie then humane as Chillingworth confessed c. 8. sec 2. SECOND SECTION Sometimes denie it CHillingworth c. 2. n. 159. p. 116. For other reasons I conceaue this doctrin that Scripture is the rule of faith Not fundamental becaus if a man should beleue Christian religion Scripture no fâ—ndamental doctrin wholy and entirely and liue according to it such a man though he should not know or not beleue the Scripture to be a rule of faith no nor to be the word of God my opinion is he may be saued so that the books of Scripture are not so much the obiects of our faith as the instruments of conueying it to our vnderstanding and not so much of the being of Christian doctrin as requisit to the welbeing of it Ireneus tels vs of some barbarous nations that beleued the doctrin of Christ and yet beleued not the Scripture to be the word of God For they neuer heard of it and faith comes of hearing God requiring of vs vnder pain of damnation onely Not damnabâ—e not to beâ—eue the Scripture to beleue the verities therin conteined and not the diuine authoritie of the books wherin they are conteined Ibid. n. 32. p. 65. Which Scripture we beleue not finally and for it self but for the matter conteined in it We Scripture not last obâ—â—st of faith are to beleue it not as the last obiect of out faith but as the means of it Ibid. Natural reason built on principles common Natural â—eason last â—eâ—oluâ—◠〈◊〉 of â—rotest faith to al men is the last resolution of our faith of the Scripture into which the Churches authoritie is but the first inducement n. 115. p. 96. By you as wel as by Protestants al is finally resolued into reason Baro in his Apologie pro disput de obiecto fidei p. 48. Laicks beleue the doctrin which is proposed to them to be beleued to be in the Protest beleue Scripture but with 〈…〉 ne faith Scripture onely with humane faith Behold first That Scripture is the rule of faith is no fundamental doctrin Secondly one may be saued though the beleue not the Scripture to be the word of God Thirdly books of Scripture are not so much obiects of our faith as instruments therof Fourthly are not so much of the being of Christian faith as of the wel being of it Fiftly God requires not vnder pain of damnation to beleue the diuine authoritie of Scripture Sixtly we beleue not the Scripture finally and for it self Seauently It is not the last obiect of faith Eightly natural reason is the last resolution of Protestants faith of the Scripture Ninthly Laicks beleue their doctrin to be in the Scripture but with humane faith And can that which is such be the formal
word read by a particular fallible man If anie answer that Reading to them is but à condition of their beleuing but the whole motiue is Gods word which is written I replie First that their beleif dependeth vpon this condition and how can infallible faith depend vpon à condition which is fallible Secondly that thus the word Read and not Written must be the formal cause of their beleif And so Scripture is not the formal cause of their faith For Scripture is onely the word written I ask therfore what is the external formal cause of the blinde and ignorant mens beleif of that which is in Scripture For some such external cause there must be as Whitaker l. 1. de Scrip. c. 6. p. 64. Potter and others grant not the doctrin it self For that is the material obiect of their faith and the thing which is beleued Nor the writing of it or letters of the Scripture For that they perceaue or vnderstand not Nor the Reading For that is fallible 3. If anie say that the doctrin is both the material and formal cause of their beleif becaus it is credible for itself I replie First that this Credibilitie for itself or internal light in the doctrin is feigned and refuted heretofore in that we said before c. 14. of the Scripture Secondly that assent to doctrin for itself cannot be faith becaus faith is an assent for authoritie of some that proposeth doctrin Thirdly that thus Scripture or writing is no formal cause of beleif as Protestants said before c. 11. sec 1. but meerly doctrin is that cause and that writing is but a conseruer or pointer to diuine doctrin but no cause at al of beleuing it Let them then not say that Scripture is the principal external formal cause of their beleuing what they beleue but confess that Scripture or writing of diuine doctrin serues them to no more then Reading serues the blind or ignorant who as they haue the same faith which the learned so must they haue the same external formal cause of faith which they haue but that al the formal cause of their beleuing what they finde in Scripture is the internal light of the doctrin it self and that they haue no external formal cause of their beleif of it and that writing or reading of it doth but point to the veritie or light of the doctrin as they say of the Churches testimonie of the Scripture that it doth but point at the word of God which is to destroie al formal faith which is an assent for authoritie and to become Enthusiasts and to make al Christian doctrin ridiculous to Infidels in telling them that Christians haue no external formal cause why they beleue ether the Scripture to be written by Gods inspiration or that which is in it to be Gods doctrin beside the Scripture or doctrin itself And that as the Church doth but point to the diuinitie of the Scripture but is no formal cause of our beleuing it to be diuine So the Scripture doth but point at the diuinitie of the doctrin which it conteineth but is no formal cause of beleuing it to be diuine doctrin Nether can they giue a good reason why they should say that Gods writing should be credible of be credible of itself to be Gods writing and need onely the Churches pointing to it for to beleue that it is Gods writing and that Gods doctrin should not be credible of itself to be his doctrin and need onely the Scriptures pointing to it that it is his doctrin For why should not Gods doctrin be as credible of itself to be his writing And so al external formal causing of beleif is gon and onely pointing to the obiect of beleeif is left And Protestants must not say that they beleue anie thing becaus it is in Scripture but onely pointeth to what they beleue as they say they beleue not Scripture to be the word of God becaus the Church testifieth that it is so but for it self being pointed to by the Church See Chillingworth supra c. 11. sec 2. SEAVENTENTH CHAPTER That the Scripture hath not proposed points of faith in al times vvhen faith vvas had 1. THat Scripture hath not proposed points of faith in al times when points of faith were beleued is euident For there was no Scripture til Moises and yet therewas true faith euer before since Adam Whitaker Contro 1. q. 6. c. 7. I grant that there is no Scripture ancienter then Moises books and that religion remained pure al that time without Scripture Ibid. c. 16 I grant that God from Adam to Moises kept Religion kept by tradition more then 2000. years doctrin deliuered by liuing voice that is traditions not written Item c. 7. cit Some barbarous men for a time wanted Scripture For a time doctrin may be kept entire without writing Item q. 3. c. 10. I grant there was a time when the word was not written and then was the Church Kemnice 1. parte Exam. tit de Scriptura p. 14. From the beginning of the world for 2450. yeares heauenly Moulins of Tradition c. 17. doctrin by diuine voice reuealed was proposed and from hand deliuered without Scripture diuinely inspired And ibid. p. 41. It is clear that the Apostles for some first yeares deliuered and spread Apostolik doctrin without anie writing of theirs by onely liuelie voice 2. Chillingworth c 2 n. 159. Ireneus tels vs of some barbarous Nations that beleued the doctrin of Christ and yet beleued not the Scripture to be the word of God For they neuer heard of it and faith comes of hearing 3. Dauenant de Iudice c. 5. We grant that before Moyses the word of God Before Moyses Tradition was sufficient not written and propagated to Posteritie by continual tradition was a sufficient Rule of faith Rainolds Conclus 1. God reuealed his wil without writing to Adam and from Adams time til Moises 4. And was the Church of God for 2400. years before Christ infallible in al points of faith and is she not after Christ infallible in the most fundamental point of al concerning Scripture was the tradition of the Church for al that time an infallible rule of faith and it is not now Is the Church since Christs Hebr. 7. time of worse condition then it was then or did men in that time ordinarily beleue ether without some external means or motiue which is Prophetical and miraculous or did they beleue infallibly for the tradition of the Church at that time which was fallible Whitaker l. 1. de Script p. 64. saieth We ask which is that external cause for which we must beleue For there must Some external cause infallible be some external cause seing faith is not bred in vs nor produced of the Holie Ghost without external causes vnles miraculously and is of hearing And l. 3. c. 10. p. 415. As the Doctrin and religion which we profess is heauenlie and diuine such also must be the reason and
needed he to interpret the places of Scripture which were of him if they had been of themselues clear enough to beget faith And yet the knowledg of Christ is a point most necessarie Fourthly holie Fathers frequently say that the Scripture is obscure or hard to be vnderstood whose testimonies I omit for breuities sake And to say they meane not of anie point of faith as Protestants say is mere voluntarie Fiftly if the Scripture were plain enough in al points of faith there would need no gift of Interpretation for points faith For to what end need Interpretation where there is claritie enough to breed faith 2. Finally this is so euident as Whitaker Contro 1. q. 4. c. 1. saieth When he Bellarmin maketh this See sup c. 〈◊〉 sect 2. the state of the question whether Scripture of itself be so clear as without Interpretation it sufficeth of itself to end and decide al Controuersies of faith he fighteth without an aduersarie For in this he hath not vs for Aduersaries And ibid. They say but falsly that we think that Scripture without interpretation sufficeth to decide al Controuersies Behould Scripture of itself and without Interpretation sufficeth not to end al Controuersies of faith Caluin also 4. Instit c. 7. § 25. being vrged that the words of the institution of the Eucharist did plainly teach the real and substantial presence of Christ answereth As if you could cast the gift of Interpretation out of the Church which giueth light to the word So that the Scripture doth not clearly enough teach what the Eucharist is without the light Interpretation And yet it is a great point of faith And the same is euident in the dissentions of Protestans about so manie points of faith For they being forsooth holie men would not gainsay clear Scripture At least true learned and holie men could hardly fal into anie errors in faith becaus al points therof were clearly set down in Scripture And yet S. Hierom. l. 2. contra Pelagium and S. Austin l. 2. de Baptis c. 1. 5. l. 3. c. 14. and De dono perseuerantiae c. 21. say it is hard euen for the best learned not to fal into some such errors And we see it in S. Cyprian and his Fellowes and in others 3. Protestants Confessions that al points of faith are not clear enough in Scripture may be seen supra c. 2. sec 2. and c. 4. sec 2. TWENTITH CHAPTER That the Scriptures proposal is not necessarie in ordinarie course to haue diuine faith 1. THat the Scriptures proposal of points of faith is not necessarie in ordinarie course to haue diuine faith is euident First becaus the Scripture no where saieth it Secondly becaus the Scripture is not the external formal cause of faith as we haue shewed that the authoritie of the Church is Thirdly becaus diuine faith was for more then a Caluin 1. Instit c. 6. §. 2. See supra c. 17. 18. 2000. yeares before there was anie Scripture Fourthly becaus euen after Scripture was there was in S. b L. 3. c. 7. Irenes time faith among some barbarous nations where was no Scripture And this is so euident that although Protestants must needs say the contrarie becaus commonly they teach as we saw c. 11. sec 1. that Scripture is the vtmost formal cause of their faith without which cause vndoubtedly there can be no formal faith yet sometimes they confess it Whitaker Contro 1. q 6. c. 7. Hence he concludeth Therfore scriptures are not simply necessarie Rightly And it is clear out of which Protestants grant that there was diuine faith in the world for 2000. yeares before anie Scripture was and since Christ also where there was no Scripture which conuinceth that Scripture nether of its nature nor of Gods institution is an absolutly necessarie means in ordinarie course to haue faith For then the Barbarians of whome L. 3. c. 4. S. Ireney speaketh could not haue had diuine faith And Chillingworth c. 2. n. 159. saieth scripture is not so much of the being of Christian doctrin as requisit to the wel being of it And Vvhy Scripture is not the sufficient Proposer out of al which we haue hitherto saied of Scripture it is euident that it is not the Al sufficient Proposer instituted by God for to beleue with diuine faith For first it is no intellectual person as doubtles a proper Proposer of points of faith is Secondly it proposeth not al points which God wil haue vs to beleue with diuine faith Thirdly it doth not propose clearly enough al the points of faith which it proposeth Fourthly it proposeth not points of faith to al kindes of men who are capable of external proposal Fiftly it hath not been in al times nor in al places when and where diuine faith was Sixtly in ordinarie course it is not necessarie to haue diuine faith Al which agree to the proper Proposer of points of faith instituted by God But now hauing seen what the Scripture is not let vs see what it is For though it be not the proper Proposer of faith instituted by God yet it hath manie excellent properties conducing to that end ONE AND TWENTITH CHAPTER That the Scripture conteineth the summ of Christian faith and al things that are necessarie to be beleued of al kinds of men explicitly 1. THat the Scripture conteineth the summe of Christian faith and al things necessarie to be explicitly beleued of al kinds of men is manifest First becaus it conteineth the misterie of the Trinitie the Incarnation and al the Articles of the Apostles Creed Secondly becaus the Scripture professeth this For Ioan. 20. v. 51. it is said These are written that you may beleue that Iesus is Christ the sonn of God and that beleuing you may haue life in his name And S. Luke c. 1. It seemed good vnto me hauing diligently attained to al things from the beginning to write to thee in order good Teophilus that thou maist know the veritie of those words wherof thou hast been instructed Where it seemes that both S. Ihon and S. Luke profess that they wrote in their Gospel the summe of Christian faith and al that is absolutly necessarie to saluation Rom. 15. v. 4. Whatsoeuer are written are written for our learning that by patience and comfort of scriptures we may haue hope And if we may haue hope why not faith 2. And this Fathers teach as we shal see in the next Chapter And this is al which some Protestants a Laude sect 17. p. 117. Potter sect 4. p. 96. Morton to 2. Apol. l. 1. c. 19 Vvhite Defense c 29. p. 270. Plessie de Eccles c. 4. p. 85. Sum of religion desire though in words they wil seem to say more Whitaker Contro 1. q. 6. c. 6. We affirme that the summe of our Religion is written Q. 4. c. 4. If he confess that the knowledg of Christ is manifest in Scripture surely we desire no more For this is as
much as we desire Ibid. If by al the scripture he mean the summe of doctrin necessarie to euerie one for saluation then we Knowledg of Christ Necessarie to euerie one acknowledg the argument and say it is al clear Againe If he confess that the scripture is like an open book for the misteries of our Redemption truly we haue not to demand anie more For thence wil follow that al things are manifest in scripture which are necessarie to saluation which is the ground of our Defense Morton to 1. Apol. l. 2. c. 9. after he had cited out of Coster these words We denie not but that the chiefest points of faith necessarie to euerie ones saluation are clearly enough set down in scripture saieth A pure and right doctrin of Protestants And in his Appeal l. 2. c. 28. scriptures be Al fundamental points the perfect treasurie of al fundamental Principles of faith Musculus in locis tit de Nomine Dei p. 425. Al things could not be namely expressed in scripture which desire of Gods glorie doth require it sufficeth that the summe of them Sum and general rules and certain general rules should be inserted in scripture to which we might frame al our life Humphrey ad Rat. 2 dam Campiani p. 114. We know that cases or points of law cannot be set down in lawes as Aristotle and Lawyers say wel yet the summ of al religion Summe of religion and al heads of faith are conteined in those writings out of which al our dogmes may be fully and abundantly drawn as out of fountaines Caluin l. 2. de lib. arbit p. 151. Not al sermons were taken word for word yet their Gospel was faithfully drawn into a summe which may fully suffice vs. 3. Now that Catholiks teach that Stat. leâ—on l 13. de Principijs c. 6. Bellar. l. 4. de Verbo Dei c. 11. Gordon Cont. 1. c. 21. 32. the summ of Christian religion and al things necessarily to be beleued explicitly of al men are conteined in Scripture Protestants themselues confess For thus Rainolds in the Preface to his Conclusions citeth out of the Preface of Gregorie 13. in Biblia Regia In these Books See Vvhitâ—k Cont 2 q. 5. c. 20. Morton to 2. Apol l. 1. c. 19. in 〈◊〉 p. 317. Châ—lling c. 〈◊〉 §. 80. are explaned al the Misteries of our religion And ibid saieth The Church of Rome itself doth acknowledg that the whole doctrin religion and faith which leadeth the Faithful to saluation and life by the true worship of God is conteined in Gods word Whitaker Contro 1. q. 6. c. vlt. Bellarmin confesseth Vvhole doctrin of religion Al dogmes simply necessarie to al. Vvhite Vvay p â—3 and in Defense 〈◊〉 35. Potter sect 4. p 95. that al Dogmes simply necessarie to al men are had in the Scripture Laude Relat. sec 11. n. 1. Bellarmin confesseth that al things simply necessarie for al mens saluation are in the Creed and the Decalogue See him sec 20. n. 3. See also Chillingworth c. 2. n. 144. c. 3. n. 80. Potter sec 4. p. 95. sec 5. p 4. 13. 4. Wherfore the true difference between vs is not whether al things simply necessarie to be explicitly beleued or al necessarie to euerie one be in Scripture but whether al things anie way necessarie or necessarie to anie men be in Scripture For they wil haue al points that are of faith to be ether actually conteined in Scripture or to be clearly inferred out of it as we shewed supra c. 9. sec 1. Nay Rainolds in his first Conclusion defendeth that the Scripture teacheth whatsoeuer is behooful for saluation which he often repeateth so that Vvhatsoeuer is behooful they wil haue not onely al things necessarie but also al things behooful to saluation to be conteined in Scripture And neuertheles they confess that it doth not teach that itself is the word of God which with them is the most fundamental point of al. Wheras we confess that it conteineth al which we acknowledg to be fundamental that is by Gods institution absolutly necessarie to saluation so that in effect we grant more to Scripture then they doe though they in words giue more to it then we 5. I add also that the Scripture sufficiently teacheth the far greater parte of points of faith This I proue becaus the Fathers heretofore and other Catholiks since haue confuted al most al the heresies that haue risen by plain testimonies of Scripture Herevpon Catholik writers as we heard Protestants Confess c. 13. sec 1. say they haue plain Scripture in al places for the Catholik faith an in al Controuersies crie Plain euident manifest Scripture And herevpon also both Fathers and Catholiks sometimes by the word Scripture vnderstand the whole word of God becaus it conteineth the far greater and principaller parte of the word of God Catholiks saieth Stapleton Act. 17. v. 2. expresly teach that the far greatest parte and in general In general al doctrin of faith al doctrin of faith may be and must be gathered out of Scriptuie 6. Moreouer I add that the Scripture teacheth mediatly euerie point of faith becaus it sendeth vs to the Church which teacheth vs al points of faith S. Austin l. 1. cont Crescon c. 33. Albeit of this matter there be no example brought out of holie Scriptures yet euen in this matter the truth of the same holic Scriptures is held when we doe what b Present Church now seemeth to the whole Church which the authoritie of the same Scriptures doth commend that seing the holie scripture cannot deceaue whosoeuer feareth to be deceaued by the obscuritie of this question let him of it ask the same Church which the holie Scripture sheweth without al doubt And the like he saieth in other places And Protestants in Colloq Ratisb sess 6. p. 144. confess That it seemeth a faire saying By means of the infallible authoritie of the Church al matters of faith or manners may be deduced out of scripture Hence appareth how vntruly D. Potter sec 5. p. 12. saied of vs They teach that much of the obiect or matter of faith is not conteined in Scripture anie way TWO AND TWENTITH CHAPTER That the Scripture teacheth plainly enough the summ of Christian faith and al things absolutly necessarie to be beleued explicitly 1. THat Scripture teacheth plainly enough the summ of Christian faith and al things absolutly necessarie to be beleued explicitly I proue becaus as is shewed in the former Chapter it teacheth al such points and that it teacheth them clearly enough appereth by that it teacheth them in the plain and vsual sense of these words which is to teach plainly enough as can be by writing And this may be shewed by Induction though al the Articles of the Apostles Creed which a Catechimus Trident p. 13. conteineth al the points which are absolutly necessarie to be beleued explicitly and is called of the b
August serm 194. de Temp. See more infâ—a c. 24. Laude sec 11. § 11. Plessie de Eccles c. 4. Leo Epist â—om 13. See him 〈◊〉 de vnit c. 1. 3. 5. 7. 10. 11. 16. 18. 20. Fathers Regula fidei And of ordination the Councel of Trent sess 23. c. 3. saieth that by the testimonie of Scripture it is manifest that grace is giuen by ordâ—nation And sess 13. c. 1. professeth that Christ gaue his Bodie to his Apostles in plain and express words and in a most manifest sense And proueth al most al its Decrees of faith by manifest places of Scripture The same also teacheth S. Austin l. 2. de peccatorum meritis c. vlt I beleue that herein the authoritie of scriptures would be most clear if man could not be ignorant of it without loss of promised saluation And l. 2 de Doctrina Christiana c. 9. In those things which are plainly set down in scripture are found al which contein faith and manner of life In which words I note those If man that is if man could not be ignorant of it without loss of Saluation which clearly shew that he speaketh of things necessarie to be actually beleued of al men And in the second place he saieth not which contein al faith but which is necessarie to saluation and which before he had called Regula credendi And l. 3. c. 2. he saieth the Rule of faith is gathered out of the plainer places of scripture And the Rule of faith or Rule of beleif conteineth not al faith but al that is absolutly necessarie to Saluation For a Rule is not to contein but to regulate al. Regula dicta est eo quod recte ducit nec aliquem trahit D. 3. apuâ— Gratian. aliorsum 2. Nether is this contrarie to that which Fathers and Catholiks say that the Scriptures are hard or obscure First becaus to say that the Scriptures are easie for the summ of Christian faith and points by Gods apointment absolutly necessarie to be beleued explicitly of al is not to say absolutly that the Scriptures are easie but onely that they are easie in some parte and that a smal one too Secondly becaus a way may be said dangerous if in some parte it be so though not in al partes so the Scripture may be said hard and obscure if in some parte it be such Thirdly becaus though the Scripture may be easie to be vnderstood yet it may be hard to be infallibly sure that we rightly vnderstand it without the assurance of the Church THREE AND TWENTITH CHAPTER That the Scripture is necessarie to the better being of Christian faith 1. THat Scripture is necessarie to the better being of Christian faith is euident both by what the Apostle saieth 2. Tim. 3. Al scripture diuinely inspired is profitable to teach to reproue to instruct c. and also by what hath been saied in the former Chapter that it teacheth al points fundamental or absolutly necessarie to be beleued explicitly of al that it teacheth the most points of Christian faith in sending vs to the Church which teacheth them al. Besids it helpeth to remember better what we are to beleue it describeth what is the true Church and which are the Notes and giueth testimonie to her And it is a main confirmation of the true Christian faith and a great confutation of heresies contrarie to it and the onely armes proper to Christians which they haue against most heretiks For they denying the Infallibilitie of the Church Councels or Fathers and reiecting al testimonie of miracles leaue the true Christian Church no proper armes to fight against them but the Scripture which God hath made to be of so great esteem among Christians as S. Austin saieth None wil refuse Scripture who wil be accounted in anie sort a Christian And otherwhere No Christian wil goe against scripture no quiet man against the Church no man in his wits against reason And Vincentius Lyrinensis c. 39. addeth we must ether impugne older heresies only with scripture or auoid them being condemned by General Councels Moreouer it is not likelie that ether the holie Writers would haue been so careful to write or the Church to conserue the holie Scripture if it had not been thought to haue been in some sorte necessarie to Christian faith And what great necessitie soeuer some Protestants pretend that there is of Scripture Whitaker confesseth that there is no absolute necessitie of it and that some parte of Scripture helpeth though not to the being yet to the better being of faith And Chillingworth that it is not so much of the being of Christian doctrin as requisit to the wel being of it as we shewed c. 11. sec 2. which is but in other termes to say as we doe that it is but necessarie to the better being of Christian faith and religion So that indeed they make no greater necessitie of Scripture then we doe whatsoeuer they pretend in words as we shewed before that they say that the Scripture conteineth not so much as we say nor is more clear then we say it is yet becaus sometimes they pretend the contrarie we wil now answer to their obiections FOVRE AND TWENTITH CHAPTER Protestants arguments out of Scripture that it conteineth al points of faith ansvvered 1. THeir chiefest place out of Scripture that it conteineth al points of faith is 2. Tim. 3. Al scripture diuinely inspired is profitable to teach to reproue to correct to instruct in iustice that the man of God be perfect instructed to euerie good work out of which they inferr that the Scripture sufficiently teacheth al points of faith Catholiks answer First that S. Paul speaketh onely of the old Testament is as euident becaus much of the Newâ— was not then written as also becaus he saieth that Timothy had known it from his Childhood and he had not known the New Testament from his Childhood And if Protestants wil say the Old testament sufficiently teacheth al points of faith they make the New Testament needles which none of them dare say at least it were not necessarie For how can the New testament be necessarie if the old be sufficient And I think they wil not say the New Testament is not necessarie And that S. Paul speaketh of the New testament Protestants nether proue nor can proue wheras we proue plainly that he speaketh onely of the old Testament 2. Their second answer is that the Apostle saieth not that the Scripture is sufficient but onely saieth profitable And a thing may be profitable which is not sufficient Their third is that the Apostle saieth not that the Scripture is profitable to teach al things to correct al things to reproue al things to instruct in al things but simply to teach to correct to reproue to instruct so that by to euerie good work he comprehendeth not euerie particular good work but al kinds of good works as are teaching correcting reprouing instructing And so three waies they answer sufficiently